Datasets:

kjappelbaum
/

chemnlp-arxiv

Dataset card Viewer Files Files and versions Community

Split (1)

train · 1.56M rows

text stringlengths 0 643k ⌀	meta stringlengths 137 151 ⌀
# Conclusion {#sec:conclusion} We study how people' online dating behaviors correlate with various user attributes using a large real-world dateset from a major online dating site in China. Many of our results align with notions in social and evolutionary psychology. In particular, males tend to look for younger females while females put more emphasis on the socioeconomic status (e.g., income, education level) of a potential date. Moreover, geographic distance between two users and the photo count of users play an important and different role in dating behaviors of males and females. Our results show that it is important to differentiate between users' true preferences and the results of random selection. Some user behaviors in choosing attributes in a potential date may be a result of random selection. Our results also show that there is significant discrepancy between a user's stated dating preference and his/her actual online dating behavior. Our study provides a firsthand account of the user online dating behaviors in China, a country with a large population and unique culture. These results on users' dating preference can provide valuable guidelines to the design of recommendation engine for potential dates. # Dataset Description {#sec:dataset} We report on a dataset taken from baihe.com, a major online dating site in China. It includes the profile information of 200,000 users uniformly sampled from users registered in November 2011. For each user, we have his/her message sending and receiving traces (who contacted whom at what time) in the online dating site and the profile information of the users that he or she has communicated with from the date that the account was created until the end of January 2012. A user's profile provides a variety of information including user's gender, age, current location (city and province), home town location, height, weight, body type, blood type, occupation, income range, education level, religion, astrological sign, marriage and children status, number of photos uploaded, home ownership, car ownership, interests, smoking and drinking behavior, self introduction essay, among others. Each user also provides his/her preferences for potential romantic partners in terms of age, location, height, education level, income range, marriage and children status, etc. Of the 200,000 sampled users, 139,482 are males and 60,518 are females, constituting 69.7% and 30.3% of the total number of sampled users respectively. The dataset includes people from 34 countries and all of the provinces and municipalities (cities directly under the jurisdiction of the central government including Beijing, Shanghai, Tianjin, Chongqing), and special administrative region (Hong Kong, Macau) in China. Figure [\[fig:baiheMessage\]](#fig:baiheMessage){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:baiheMessage"} illustrates the user geographical locations (at city level) within China and the inter-city communications between users. Intra-and inter-city messages constitute 46.5% and 53.5% of the total message volume in our data, respectively. To give a sense of the main user demographic attributes, we plot distributions of user reported age, education level, monthly income range and marriage status in Figures [\[fig:sample\]](#fig:sample){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:sample"}, [\[fig:sample\]](#fig:sample){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:sample"}, [\[fig:sample\]](#fig:sample){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:sample"} and [\[fig:sample\]](#fig:sample){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:sample"}, respectively. The youngest user is 19 years old and the largest fraction of users are in their early 20s. While there is a larger fraction of male users than female users below age 25, the fraction of female users starts to match that of male users for age range 25-35, and exceeds that of male users after age 35. The median ages of male and female users are 25 and 26, respectively. The fraction of female users is larger than that of male users for low income ranges (less than 3,000 Chinese Yuan per month). For higher income ranges, the trend becomes opposite. In general, males have larger incomes than females in our dataset. The median income ranges of male and female users are 3,000-4,000 and 2,000-3,000 Chinese Yuan, respectively. With respect to users' education level, females stated education levels tend to be higher than males. About 66.5% of females state that they have at least a community college degree in contrast with only 53.2% of the males. The fraction of users with stated doctoral and post-doctoral degrees is 0.61%. As shown in Figure [\[fig:sample\]](#fig:sample){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:sample"}, the majority of users in their early 20s are singles. As the user age increases, the ratio of single users decreases while the ratio of widowed users increases. The ratio of divorced users first increases with the user ages until mid-40s and then starts to decrease. In general, the ratios of widowed and divorced female users are larger than those of male users. Unlike online dating behaviors in US where race plays an important role when it comes to finding potential romantic partners , most of the users (98.9%) in our dataset are Han (ethnic majority in China), and all other ethnic groups comprise 1.1% of the users. Moreover, the majority of the users (97.0%) claim to be non-religious. Those claiming a religion (Buddhism, Taoism, Catholic, Islamism, etc) constitute only 3.0% of users. Note that the race and religion compositions in our dataset are significantly different from those of online dating sites in the US where there is more diversity . For each user in our sample, we have the time stamps of the messages as well as the profile information of users that this user has communicated with. In this paper we focus on the initial messages exchanged between users. Subsequent messages between the same pair of users do not represent a new sender-receiver pair and cannot be used as the only indicator for continuing relationship as users may choose to go off-line from the site and communicate via other channels (e.g., email, phone, or meet in person). # Temporal Behaviors {#sec:temporal} We are interested in how a user's online dating activity level changes over time after he or she registers an account on the online dating site. Since we only have eight full weeks' worth of online dating data for users who joined in November 30, 2011, we only consider the activities of each user during the first eight weeks of his/her membership. The following analysis is based on the activities of the 200,000 users in the dataset described in Section [2](#sec:dataset){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:dataset"}. Messages sent from sample users: During the eight-week period, 2,089,029 initial messages were sent by 76,654 males (55.0% of the males in the dataset) to 508,118 unique females, which in turn generated 156,774 replies (a reply rate of 7.5%). During the same time period, 1,217,672 initial messages were sent by 29,535 females (48.8% of the females in the dataset) to 440,714 unique male users, which in turn generated 112,696 replies (a reply rate of 9.3%). Messages sent to sample users: During the same time period, 328,645 initial messages were sent by 94,179 females to 44,509 males, which in turn generated 58,946 replies (a reply rate of 17.9%). 1,586,059 initial messages were sent by 288,602 males to 45,623 females, which in turn generated 150,917 replies (a reply rate of 9.5%). Note that males are more likely to initiate contact than females while messages from females are more likely to generate replies than those from males. The fraction of users from the dataset that sent out at least one message and the average number of messages sent by each user are shown in Figures [\[fig:weeklySend\]](#fig:weeklySend){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:weeklySend"} and [\[fig:weeklySend\]](#fig:weeklySend){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:weeklySend"}, respectively. We observe that while a considerable fraction of users (51.2 % of males and 43.0% of females) sent out at least one message during the first week of their memberships, the fraction decreases sharply in the second week (down to 11.3% for males and 12.8% for females) and further decreases in subsequent weeks. Except for the first week, females are slightly more likely to send out a message than males on average. The average number of messages a male sends out each week given that he sends at least one message lies between 15 and 20 messages per week. While the average number of messages a female sends given that she sends at least one message is more than twice that of a male in the first week, it decreases sharply in the second week and remains relatively stable at a much lower level than that of a male over the next seven weeks. For both males and females, we obtain the distribution of the number of messages sent by each user per week given that a user sends at least one message during the week, and plot its complementary cumulative density function (CCDF) in Figure [\[fig:messageCCDF\]](#fig:messageCCDF){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:messageCCDF"}. We observe that the distributions exhibit heavy tails. Most users only sent out a small number of messages: 94.6% of males and 96.5% of females sent out less than 100 messages during the first eight weeks of their membership. On the other hand, there are small fractions of users that sent out a large number of messages. According to the online dating site, most of these highly active users are likely to be fake identities created by spammers and their accounts have been quickly removed from the site. The fraction of users from the dataset that received at least one message and the average number of messages received by each user during the first eight weeks of his/her membership are shown in Figures [\[fig:weeklyReceive\]](#fig:weeklyReceive){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:weeklyReceive"} and [\[fig:weeklyReceive\]](#fig:weeklyReceive){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:weeklyReceive"}, respectively. We observe that the fractions of both males and females that receive at least one message each week gradually decreases over time, and that females are much more likely to receive messages than males. Also, for each week, the average number of messages a user received generally decreases over time for both genders, and the number of messages received by a female each week is much larger than that for a male. For those users that received at least one message during the first eight weeks of their membership, we show the complementary cumulative distribution function (CCDF) of the number of messages received by each user for both males and females in Figure [\[fig:messageCCDF\]](#fig:messageCCDF){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:messageCCDF"}. We observe that the distributions for both male and female users exhibit a log-normal-like behavior, and that females tend to receive more messages than male users. To investigate how long it takes a user to reply after receiving a message, we define the reply delay of a message to be the time elapsed from when the message is sent until the corresponding reply is generated when there is a reply. The reply delay may have certain psychological implications to some people and hence affect the progress of the communication. Thus it is an important metric to study. We obtained the reply delay distribution for 209,863 messages replied to by users within the dataset and plot it in Figure [\[fig:replyDelayCCDF\]](#fig:replyDelayCCDF){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:replyDelayCCDF"}. The reply delay distribution exhibits a log-normal behavior with a cut-off point around 79,424 minutes (approximately 56 days or 8 weeks). Note that the cut-off point is due to the fact that we only have the communication record for each user during the first eight weeks of his/her membership, so the obtained distribution is limited by this factor. There is little difference in the reply delay distribution for male and female users. The median reply delays of males and females are 8.9 hours and 9.0 hours, respectively. Most messages were replied to within a short time frame. Around 23.0% of the messages were replied to within one hour, and 72.6% of the messages were replied to within 24 hours. On the other hand, there is a small fraction of the messages with a long reply delay of tens of days. For example, about 6.3% of the messages required a week or more to generate a reply. # Introduction Computer-based matchmaking was pioneered by Operation Match at Harvard University and Contact at MIT in mid-1960s. Based on the responses to a personality questionnaire, a computer program tried to match a user with compatible dates. Three decades later, starting in the mid-1990s, with the increasing ubiquity of the Internet connectivity and wide-spread use of the World Wide Web, online dating sites have emerged as popular platforms for people to look for potential romantic partners. The rise of online dating has fundamentally altered the dating landscape and profoundly impacted people's dating life. It offers an unprecedented level of access to potential romantic partners that is otherwise not available through traditional means. According to a recent survey[^1], 40 million single people (out of 54 million) in the US have signed up with various online dating sites such as Match.com, eHarmony, etc, and around 20% of currently committed romantic relationships began online, which is more than through any means other than meeting through friends. An online dating site allows a user to create a profile that typically includes the user's photos, basic demographic information, behavior and interests (e.g., smoking, drinking, hobbies), self-description, and desired characteristics of an ideal partner. Some sites require a user to complete a personality questionnaire for evaluating the person's personality type and using it in the matching process. After creating a profile, a user can search for other people's profiles based on a variety of user attributes, browse other user profiles, and exchange messages with them. Many sites provide suggestions on compatible partners based on proprietary matching algorithms. There is often considerable discrepancy, or dissonance (a concept in social psychology), between a user's stated preference and his or her actual dating behavior. Therefore, it is important to understand users' true dating preferences in order to make better dating recommendations. The message send and reply actions of a user are strong indicators for what he/she is looking for in a potential partner and reflect the user's actual dating preferences. In this paper we study how user online dating behavior correlates with various user attributes using a real-world dateset obtained through a collaboration with baihe.com, one of the largest online dating sites in China with a total number of 60 million registered users. In particular, we address the following research questions: - Temporal behaviors: How often does a user send and receive messages and how does this change over time? How long does it take a recipient to reply to a message he/she received? - Send behaviors: What is the relationship between the attributes of initiators and recipients of the initial messages? How does user messaging behavior differ from random selection? How do users' actual online dating behaviors deviate from their stated preferences? - Reply behaviors: How does the reply probability of a message correlate with various attributes of the sender and receiver? How does the reply probability depend on the extent to which the sender's attributes match the receiver's stated preferences? Our study provides a firsthand account of the user online dating behaviors based on a large dataset obtained from a large online dating site (baihe.com) in China, a country with a very large population and unique culture. On average, a male sends out more messages but receives fewer messages than a female. A female is more likely to be contacted but less likely to reply to a message than a male. The number of messages that a user sends out and receives per week quickly decreases with time. Most messages are replied to within a short time frame with a median delay of around 9 hours. Many of our results on user messaging behavior align with notions in social and evolutionary psychology . Males tend to look for younger females while females place more emphasis on socioeconomic status such as the income and education level of a potential date. As a male gets older, he searches for relatively younger and younger women. A female in her 20's is more likely to look for older males, but as a female gets older, she becomes more open towards younger males. In addition to the above findings, we observe that geographic distance between two users plays an important role in online dating considerations: 46.5% of the initial messages occurred between users in the same city, and for messages that cross the city boundaries, the volume quickly decreases as users live farther apart. Females are more likely than males to send and reply to messages between distant big cities. Profile photos affect male and female's messaging behaviors differently. Females with a larger number of photos are more likely to invite messages and secure replies from males, but the photo count of males does not have as significant effect in attracting contacts and replies. Our results also show that it is important to differentiate between users' true preferences and random selection. Some user behaviors in choosing attributes in a potential date may be a result of random selection. For example, while it appears that a male tends to look for females shorter than he is and a female tends to look for males taller than she is, the message send and reply behaviors of both genders closely approximate those resulting from random selection, showing that these behaviors may result from random selection rather than users' true preferences. Our results also indicate a significant discrepancy between a user's stated dating preference and his/her actual online dating behavior. A fairly large fraction of messages are sent to or replied to users whose attributes do not match the sender or receiver's stated preferences. Females tend to be more flexible than males in deviating from their stated preferences when sending and replying to messages. For both males and females, out of the population of users that send messages, replies are more likely to go to users whose attributes come closest to the stated preferences of the receivers. In summary, our results reveal how user message send and reply behaviors correlate with various user attributes, how these behaviors differ from random selection, and how users' actual online dating behavior deviates from their stated preferences. These results on users' dating preferences can provide valuable guidelines to the design of recommendation engine for potential dates. The rest of the paper is structured as follows. Section [5](#sec:relatedWork){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:relatedWork"} presents an overview of previous studies on the data analysis of online dating sites. Section [2](#sec:dataset){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:dataset"} describes the dataset that we obtained from a major online dating site in China. Section [3](#sec:temporal){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:temporal"} describes the temporal characteristics of users' online dating behavior. Users' message send and reply behaviors are studied in Section [6](#sec:behavior){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:behavior"}. We discuss our main results in Section [7](#sec:discussions){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:discussions"}. Finally, we conclude the paper in Section [1](#sec:conclusion){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:conclusion"}. # Related Work {#sec:relatedWork} Hitsch et al. shows that in online dating there is no evidence for user strategic behavior shading their true preference. Both male and female users have a strong preference for similarity along many (but not all) attributes. U.S. users display strong same-race correlations. There are gender differences in mate preferences; in particular, women have a stronger preference than men for income over physical attributes. In their follow-up work they show that stable matches obtained through the Gale-Shapley algorithm are similar to the actual matches achieved by the dating site, which are also approximately efficient. Fiore et al. analyzes messaging behavior and find them consistent with predictions from evolutionary psychology, women state more restrictive preferences than men and contact and reply to others more selectively. Lin et al. studied how race, gender, and education jointly shape interaction among heterosexual Internet daters. They find that racial homophily dominates mate searching behavior for both men and women. This is not the case of Chinese online daters where the overwhelming majority of users are of the same race. Finkel et al. states that online dating has fundamentally altered the dating landscape by offering an unprecedented level of access to potential partners and allowing users to communicate before deciding whether to meet them face-to-face. On the other hand, the authors also argue that there is no strong evidence that matching algorithms promote better romantic outcomes than conventional offline dating. Part of the problem is that the main principles underlying these algorithms (typically similarity but also complementarity) are much less important to relationship well-being than online sites are willing to assume. Interesting on-the-fly statistics of OKcupid users is found at the OkTrends blog . # Message Sending and Replying Behaviors {#sec:behavior} After a user creates an account on the online dating site, he/she can search for potential dates based on information within the profiles provided by other users including user location, age, etc. Once a potential date has been discovered, the user then sends a message to him/her, which may or may not be replied to by the recipient. The message sending and replying behaviors of a user are strong indicators of what he/she is looking for in a potential partner and reflect the user's actual dating preferences. In this section, we first present the correlation between user send and reply behaviors with various user attributes including age, height, income, education level, distance, and photo count. We further examine how actual user behavior deviates from random selection where user attributes (e.g., age, height, income, etc) of the recipient of a message are randomly drawn from their respective distributions. When appropriate, error bars are provided with a 95% confidence interval. At the online dating site, a user can provide his/her preferences for potential dates in terms of age, location, height, education level, income range, marriage and children status, etc. In the design of a recommendation algorithm for potential dates, it is important to know whether and to what extent users follow their stated preferences in actual dating. The discrepancy between a user's stated preference and his or her actual dating behavior is often referred to as dissonance in social psychology, and has been previously observed. In this section, we examine the degree of dissonance of online dating in our dataset. In particular, we study to what extent users adhere to their stated preferences and how reply probability varies as a function of the number of user attributes that match receiver's stated preference. ## Age Figure [\[fig:age\]](#fig:age){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:age"} shows the distribution of the age difference between the sender and receiver of all messages sent by the sample users in the dataset. The age difference is computed as the sender's age less the receiver's age. While the age difference between senders and receives covers a wide range, the preferences of males and females are opposite of each other. Males tend to look for younger females and the distribution is skewed towards much younger females. On the other hand, females tend to look for older males and the distribution is skewed toward older males. The median age difference is two for messages sent from males to females and-4 vice versa. Male and female preferences are not random; they look for potential dates with a smaller age difference than predicted by random selection. Figure [\[fig:age\]](#fig:age){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:age"} plots the reply probability as a function of the age difference between the sender and receiver of a message. For both males and females, the reply probability deviates significantly from the result of random selection, exhibiting a bell shape mode at a age difference of ten years older and eight years younger, respectively. Males tend to reply to younger females while females tend to reply to older males within a certain range of age difference. Figure [\[fig:Heat_Mapt\]](#fig:Heat_Mapt){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:Heat_Mapt"} depicts the heatmap of the fraction of messages and reply probabilities between users of different age. As a male gets older, he searches for and replies to relatively younger females. A female in her 20's is more likely to communicate with older males, but as a female gets older, she becomes more open towards younger males. This is the cause for the reply probability increase in the age difference range from-3 to-10, as shown in Figure [\[fig:age\]](#fig:age){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:age"}. These results are consistent with observations made in. ## Height Figure [\[fig:height\]](#fig:height){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:height"} shows the distribution of height difference between the sender and receiver of all messages sent by sample users. The height difference is computed as the sender's height less the receiver's height. We observe that users' message sending behaviors with respect to height closely match those resulting from random selection. While it appears that a male tends to look for females shorter than him and a female tends to look for males taller than her, this is likely to be a result of random selection rather than users' preference. Figure [\[fig:height\]](#fig:height){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:height"} plots the message reply probability as a function of height difference between the senders and receivers. Similarly, user message reply behavior with respect to height closely match that of random selection, and are thus likely to be the result of random selection rather than user preference. ## Income Figure [\[fig:income\]](#fig:income){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:income"} shows the distribution of income difference between senders and receivers. A user reports monthly income within a range such as below 2,000, 2,000-3,000 (all in Chinese Yuan), etc. We take the median value of the reported income range as a user's income and the income difference between the sender and receiver of a message is computed as the difference sender income and receiver income. We observe that user message sending behavior with respect to income closely matches that resulting from random selection. While it appears that males tend to send messages to females with lower income and females tend to send messages to males with higher income, this is likely to be a result of random selection and the fact that male incomes are larger than female incomes rather than users' preference. Figure [\[fig:income\]](#fig:income){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:income"} shows how reply probability varies with sender income. The reply probability of female recipients increases with male sender income, deviating significantly from the flat line of random selection. There is a strong correlation coefficient of 0.90 between the reply probability and male sender income. On the other hand, the income of a female does not have as significant an effect on the likelihood of her messages being replied to. The reply probability fluctuates around the line of random selection. The correlation between the reply probability and female sender income is much weaker with a correlation coefficient of 0.50. ## Education level Figure [\[fig:education\]](#fig:education){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:education"} shows the fractions of messages sent to users of different education levels. We observe that male behavior closely matches that of random selection, while female behavior deviates considerably from that of random selection towards higher education levels. Figure [\[fig:education\]](#fig:education){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:education"} shows how reply probabilities vary with sender education levels for males and females. The higher the education level of a male sender, the more likely his messages will be replied to. The reply probability of a female user deviates significantly from a random selection. On the other hand, the education level of a female does not have as significant an effect on the likelihood of her messages being replied to. The reply probability of male users stays relatively flat across different eduction levels, similar to that resulting from random selection.\ ## Geographic distance The geographic distance between two users plays an important role in their online dating behavior. As mentioned in Section [2](#sec:dataset){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:dataset"}, a considerable portion (46.5%) of the communications occurred between users within the same city. For communications between users in different cities, we further study how message sending behavior and reply probability varies with the distance between users (computed as the straight line distance between the two cities). As shown in Figure [\[fig:distance\]](#fig:distance){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:distance"}, in general the fraction of messages decreases as the distance between users increases. The messages between users of at least 1,000 km apart constitutes only a small fraction (11.7%) of the total number of messages. Note that there is a small increase in the fraction of messages between distance 800 and 1,400km for female senders. Figure [\[fig:distance\]](#fig:distance){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:distance"} depicts how reply probability varies with distance between a sender and receiver. When a male receives a message from a female, the reply probability generally decreases with distance between them. For females, the reply probability first decreases with distance but increases in the range from 800 to 1,400km. The increase of the initial message ratio and reply probability of females for the distance range from 800 to 1,400km is due to the following. There is an increasing number of big cities (Shanghai, Beijing, Hong Kong, Chongqing, Guangzhou, Xi'an, etc) between many of which the distance falls into this range, and unlike males, females are more likely to send and reply to messages between these cities. ## Photo count On the dating site, a user can post photos on his/her profile page. Figure [\[fig:photo\]](#fig:photo){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:photo"} plots the distribution of the number of photos posted by a user. A large fraction of users did not post or posted only a small number of photos. In our dataset, about 69% of male users and 59% of female users did not post any photos. Female users tend to post more photos than male users. As shown in Figure [\[fig:photo\]](#fig:photo){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:photo"}, a user tends to receive more messages if he/she has posted more photos online, with the trend being more pronounced for females than for males. The number of received messages by a male user starts to level off after some point. Figure [\[fig:photo\]](#fig:photo){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:photo"} shows how message reply probability varies with the number of photos posted by the sender. We observe that male reply probability tends to increase with the number of photos posted by the female sender. Interestingly, when a female receives a message, the reply probability remains relatively stable as the number of photos of the male sender increases. ## Stated preference versus actual behavior On the online dating site in our study, a user can specify a set of attributes that he/she is looking for in a date, including age range, geographic location, height range, marriage status (never married, divorced), education level, income range, house ownership, and children status (no children, children living with user, children not living with user). There is often considerable discrepancy between a user's stated preference and his or her actual dating behavior. Therefore, it is important to understand users' true dating preferences in order to make better dating recommendations. In this section we study to what extent users adhere to their stated preferences and how reply probability varies as a function of the number of user attributes that match receiver's stated preference. Figure [\[fig:sampleReplyUnMatchWeekly\]](#fig:sampleReplyUnMatchWeekly){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:sampleReplyUnMatchWeekly"} shows the fraction of replied and unreplied messages whose senders do not satisfy the recipients' stated preference in at least one user attribute as a function of time. We refer to this fraction as the unmatch ratio. Among all replied messages, the unmatch ratio is around 55% for males and more than 70% for females. The discrepancy between a user's stated dating preference and his/her actual behavior is prevalent, with female users showing more flexibility than male users. Actually, during the eight week period since their memberships, only 17.0% of male users and 6.6% of female users had strictly followed their stated preferences when replying to a sender. We also observe that the unmatch ratio is larger for messages not replied to than those replied to. This indicates that out of the population of users that send messages, replies are more likely to go to those whose attributes come closest to the preferences of the receivers. Figures [\[fig:replyUnMatchAttributes\]](#fig:replyUnMatchAttributes){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:replyUnMatchAttributes"} and [\[fig:replyUnMatchAttributes\]](#fig:replyUnMatchAttributes){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:replyUnMatchAttributes"} show the unmatch ratio for each user attribute in a decreasing order for both male and female users, respectively. We observe that males and females share the same top-three most violated user attributes: age, location and height. For male users, the unmatch ratios of other attributes are all very low (below 5%), while female users are most strict with marriage and children status, as well as education level of the male senders. For each attribute, the unmatch ratio is larger for messages not replied to than those replied to, indicating that replies are more likely to go to users whose attributes come closest to the preferences of the receivers. Figure [\[fig:Rep_Num\]](#fig:Rep_Num){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:Rep_Num"} shows how male and female reply probabilities vary as a function of the number of sender attributes that match the receiver's stated preference. The margin of error is provided with a 95% confidence level. We observe that except for the case where is no matching attribute, the reply probability increases with the number of matched user attributes, indicating that both males and females tend to reply to senders whose attributes best match their stated preferences. Note that although the reply probability for zero matching user attribute is larger than that for one matching user attribute, the sample size of users with zero matching attribute is rather small and thus the corresponding margin of error is too large to make the calculation statistically sound. Figure [\[fig:reply_Feature\]](#fig:reply_Feature){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:reply_Feature"} and Figure [\[fig:reply_Feature\]](#fig:reply_Feature){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:reply_Feature"} compare the reply probabilities of two different scenarios where a sender's attribute matches or does not match the receiver's stated preference, respectively. As expected, we observe that for both males and females, the reply probability is larger when the sender's attribute matches the receiver's stated preference. # Discussion {#sec:discussions} Part of our results on user messaging behavior align with notions in social and evolutionary psychology . Males tend to look for younger females but do not seem to care much about the socioeconomic status such as income and education level of a potential date. On the other hand, females tend to look for older males and place more emphasis on the socioeconomic status of a potential date. Moreover, we observe that as a male gets older, he searches for relatively younger females. A female in her 20's is more likely to look for older males, but as a female gets older, she becomes more open towards younger males. Online dating sites significantly increase the level of access to potential dates in terms of geographic locations from traditional means. In our dataset, a considerable fraction (53.5%) of the initial messages traversed across city boundaries while the remaining 46.5% occurred between users in the same city. Users still prefer dates in close proximity. For inter-city messages, the sending volume and reply rate quickly decrease as users live farther apart. Compared to male users, females are more likely to send and reply to messages between distant big cities (e.g., Beijing, Shanghai, Hong Kong, Guangzhou, Xi'an, etc). On the online dating site, a user can post his/her own photos and view other users' photos. But profile photos affect male and female's messaging behaviors differently. Females with a larger number of photos are more likely to invite messages and secure replies from males, but the photo count of males does not have as significant effect in attracting contacts and replies. In the analysis of users' dating preferences, our results show that it is important to differentiate between user dating preferences and the results of random selection. Some user behaviors in choosing attributes in a potential date may largely explained by random selection. For example, while it appears that a male tends to look for females shorter than him and a female tends to look for males taller than her, the message sending and replying behaviors of both genders closely approximate those resulting from random selections, showing that these may be partly due to random selection rather than users' true preferences. Similar observations have been made for the behaviors of male users in terms of choosing the income and education level of a potential date, while the corresponding female behaviors deviate significantly from the random selection and thus reflect their true preferences. Our results also show that there is significant level of discrepancy between a user's stated dating preference and his/her actual online dating behavior. A fairly large fraction of messages are sent to or replied to users whose attributes do not match the sender or receiver's stated preferences. Females tend to be more flexible than males in following their stated preferences when sending and replying to messages. Both male and female users share the same top-three most violated user attributes: age, location and height. For male users, the unmatch ratios of other attributes are all very low (below 5%), while female users are most strict with marriage and children status, as well as the education level of the male senders. For both males and females, out of the population of users that send messages, replies are more likely to go to users whose attributes come closest to the preferences of the receivers. [^1]: http://statisticbrain.com/online-dating-statistics	{'timestamp': '2014-01-23T02:10:20', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5710', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5710'}
null	null
null	null
# Introduction A nonzero permanent electric dipole moment (EDM) of a nondegenerate state of a system with spin $J \neq 0$ violates time reversal invariance as well as invariance under parity operation. The time reversal invariance violation implies a CP violation through the $CPT$ theorem. Given the smallness of the standard model CP violating contributions induced by quark mixing, an EDM is a sensitive probe of new physics. A new experiment to search for the permanent EDM of the neutron, based on the method proposed by Golub and Lamoreaux , is being developed to be mounted at the Spallation Neutron Source at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, with a sensitivity goal of $\sim 5\times 10^{-28}$ $e\cdot$cm, an improvement of roughy two orders of magnitude over the current limit . For more details of the current status of this SNS nEDM experiment, see e.g. Ref. . A schematic of the apparatus for the SNS nEDM experiment is shown in Fig. [\[fig:SNSnEDM\]](#fig:SNSnEDM){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:SNSnEDM"}. # HV requirements The SNS nEDM experiment requires that a high, stable electric field ($\sim 75$ kV/cm) be applied in the region inside the two measurement cells that are sandwiched between electrodes. The measurement cells and electrodes are immersed in 0.4 K liquid helium (LHe). The measurement cells, which store ultracold neutrons, are filled with isotopically pure liquid $^4$He at $\sim 0.4$ K (the relative $^3$He concentration $\sim 10^{-10}$). The measurement cells are made of PMMA and are 10.16 cm$\times$ 12.70 cm $\times$ 42 cm in outer dimension with a wall thickness of 1.2 cm. The electrodes, roughly $10$ cm $\times$ 40 cm$\times$ 80 cm in size, are made of PMMA coated with a material that needs to meet various requirements related to electrical resistivity, neutron activation properties, and magnetic properties, etc. The leakage current along the cell walls need to be minimized. # Some general remarks on electrical breakdown in LHe Electrical breakdown in LHe, or more in general electrical breakdown in any dielectric liquid, is rather poorly understood. Data exist on electrical breakdown in LHe for temperatures of $1.2-4.2$ K (with the bulk of data being taken at 4.2 K) mostly at the saturated vapor pressure (SVP) for various electrode geometries, including sphere-to-sphere, sphere-to-plane, and plane-to-plane. However, there is little consistency among the data, and therefore there is no consistent theoretical interpretation. However, a rather simple consideration of the mean free path of ions in LHe (electron bubbles and snow balls) and the electric field strength necessary to accelerate them to an energy sufficiently high to generate subsequent ionization leads to a conclusion that the intrinsic dielectric strength of bulk LHe is greater than 10 MV/cm, a field much higher than breakdown fields experimentally observed. This leads to the following generally-accepted picture for the mechanism of generation of electrical breakdown in LHe: 1. A vapor bubble is formed on the surface of the electrode, e.g. by field emission from roughness on the cathode 2. The vapor bubble grows, presumably by heating of the gas by accelerated electrons and evaporation of the liquid as a result, and forms a column of gas reaching from one electrode to the other 3. Electrical breakdown occurs through the gas column It follows that the parameters that can affect the breakdown field strength include: (i) electrode material, in particular the surface properties,and (ii) LHe temperature and pressure. In addition, because electrical breakdown is a stochastic process, the size of the system affects the breakdown field strength and its distribution. See e.g. Ref. . # R&D approach The consideration given above indicates that the R&D for the SNS nEDM experiment requires a study of electrical breakdown in LHe in a condition (i.e. temperature, pressure, size) as close as possible to that expected for the SNS nEDM experiment, using suitable candidate materials. It is also very important to study the effect of the presence of a dielectric insulator sandwiched between electrodes, as such will be the geometry for the SNS nEDM experiment. Note that even in a room temperature vacuum system, electric fields exceeding a few 100 kV/cm are possible when there is no insulator between the two electrodes. In a study performed using a room temperature vacuum aparatus similar to those used in the previous nEDM experiments (such as Ref. ), the electric field was limited to $\sim 30$ kV/cm due to the presence of the UCN confining wall that was sandwiched between the two electrodes [^1]. Field emission at the cathode-insulator junction is thought to be responsible for initiating breakdown , which we expect to be suppressed at cryogenic temperatures. In order to study the relevant aspects of electrical breakdown in LHe with a goal of establishing the feasibility of the SNS nEDM experiment as well as guiding the design of the apparatus, we constructed an apparatus called Medium Scale HV (MSHV) Test Apparatus, which is described below. # Medium scale HV test apparatus The purpose of the MSHV system is to study electrical breakdown in LHe in a condition approximating that of the SNS nEDM experiment using suitable electrode candidate materials. The lowest operating temperature of the MSHV system is designed to be 0.4 K, corresponding to the operating temperature of the SNS nEDM experiment. Since we expect that the pressure is an important parameter affecting the breakdown field strength in LHe, the MSHV system is designed so that the pressure of the LHe volume in which the electrodes are placed can be varied between the SVP and 1 atm. Note that the SVP is $\sim 10^{-6}$ torr at 0.4 K. The size of the LHe volume was determined as a compromise between the following two competing factors: - Short turnaround time of the system ($\sim 2$ weeks) to allow multiple electrode material candidates to be tested. - Size large enough to give information relevant for the SNS nEDM experiment. The electrodes are 12 cm in diameter. The gap size is adjustable between 1 and 2 cm. Each dimension is within a factor of 10 of the SNS nEDM experiment's HV system. A schematic of the MSHV system is shown in Fig. [\[fig:schematic\]](#fig:schematic){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:schematic"}. The Central Volume (CV), a 6-liter LHe volume that houses the electrodes, is cooled by a $^3$He refrigerator. HV between $-50$ kV and $+50$ kV can be provided to each electrode through a HV feed line. The HV feed lines are made of thin wall stainless steel tubing and are thermally anchored at the LN2 heat shield and at the 4 K heat shield, in order to minimize the heat leak to the HV electrodes. Heat leak to the HV electrodes can cause vapor bubbles to be created on the surface of the electrodes, which in turn can initiate electrical breakdown, potentially leading to erronoues results. Commercially available models are used for all the HV feedthroughs. For the air-to-vacuum feedthroughs, CeramTec Model 6722-01-CF feedthroughs, rated for 100 kV, are used. For all other feedthroughs, including ones on the CV that need to be superfluid tight, CeramTec Model 21183-01-W, rated for 50 kV and for LHe temperature operation, were chosen because the spatial limitations did not allow larger sized feedthroughs. In an offline test of these 50 kV feedthroughs, we found that, after proper cleaning, they can withstand a HV up to $\sim 90$ kV with a leakage current of less than 1 nA in vacuum when cooled to 77 K. Most of HV components were tested in a separate system for holdoff voltage before being installed into the MSHV system. Our experience is that a component that functions in a room temperature vacuum generally functions in LHe. The initial electrodes are made of electropolished stainless steel and have the so-called Rogowski profile , which provides a uniform electric field in the gap and ensures that the gap has the highest field in the system (see Fig. [\[fig:electrodes\]](#fig:electrodes){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:electrodes"}). # Progress to date We have successfully constructed and commissioned the MSHV system. We have demonstrated that the CV can be cooled to 0.4 K with it filled with LHe. We have also demonstrated that the pressure inside the CV can be varied and controlled easily. In addition, we have demonstrated that an electric field exceeding 100 kV/cm can be stably applied in a 1-cm gap between the two 12-cm diameter electrodes made of electropolished stainless steel for a wide range of pressures (see Fig. [\[fig:results\]](#fig:results){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:results"}). The achievable field was limited by the performance of the HV leads. No breakdown was observed in the gap between the two electrodes. Also the leakage current between the two electrodes was measured to be less than 1 pA at a 50 kV potential difference. This was measured with one of the HV electrodes set to the ground potential to avoid the leakage current in the HV cable and feedthroughs dominating the measurement. # Summary For the HV R&D for the SNS nEDM experiment, we have constructed a new HV test apparatus to study electrical breakdown in LHe. Initial results demonstrated that it is possible to apply fields exceeding 100 kV/cm in a 1 cm gap between two electropolished stainless steel electrodes 12 cm in diameter for a wide range of pressures. [^1]: In the actual nEDM experiment, the achievable field was further lowered due to other factors	{'timestamp': '2014-01-22T02:12:03', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5435', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5435'}
null	null
null	null
# Introduction In the last few years, our research group AGNIFS (AGN Integral Field Spectroscopy) has been mapping the gas kinematics of the inner kiloparsec of nearby active galaxies in search of signatures of gas inflows to the nucleus. This work was motivated by the finding of that there is a marked difference in the dust and gas content of this regions in early-type active galaxies when compared to non-active ones: while the first always have dusty structures, in the form of spiral and filaments at hundred of parsec scales, only 25% of the non-active ones have such structures. This indicates that a reservoir of gas and dust is a necessary condition for the nuclear activity and suggests that the dusty structures are tracers of feeding channels to the Active Galactic Nuclei (hereafter AGN). Previous studies by our group using integral field spectroscopy of the inner kiloparsec in nearby active galaxies in the optical have revealed inflows in ionised gas in NGC 1097, NGC 6951 and M 81. In the particular case of M 81, we could obtain not only the gas kinematics, but also the stellar kinematics, which was compared to that of the gas in order to isolate non-circular motions, instead of relying solely on the modelling of the gaseous kinematics as we did for NGC 1097 and NGC 6951. In the near-infrared, our group observed inflows in the central few hundred of parsecs of the galaxies NGC 4051, NGC 4151, Mrk 1066, Mrk 1157 and Mrk 79. In this work, we present a new case of inflows observed in the inner kiloparsec of a nearby active galaxy: NGC 7213, a Sa galaxy harbouring a Seyfert 1 AGN, using integral field spectroscopic observations in the optical. NGC 7213 is located at a distance of 23.6 Mpc (from NED[^1]), corresponding to a scale of 115 pc arcsec$^{-1}$. Its nucleus was classified as Seyfert 1 by and later included in the LINER class by. The optical continuum image of the galaxy is dominated by an almost featureless bulge with no apparent sign of a recent interaction. Observations of neutral and ionised gas, however, reveal a different picture: H$\alpha$ observations show a ring of H II regions at $\approx$ 2 kpc from the nucleus and a filament, with no counterpart in optical continuum images, 18.6 kpc south of the nucleus. In addition, H I observations show that the filament is part of a larger H I tail, and that the overall morphology and kinematics in H I is highly disturbed, indicating the galaxy has undergone a recent merging event. The present paper is organised as follows. In Section [2](#Observations){reference-type="ref" reference="Observations"} we describe the observations and data reduction. In Section [3](#Results){reference-type="ref" reference="Results"} we present the procedures used for the analysis of the data and the subsequent results. In section [4](#Discussion){reference-type="ref" reference="Discussion"} we discuss our results and present estimates of the mass inflow rate using two distinct methods and in Section [5](#Conclusion){reference-type="ref" reference="Conclusion"} we present our conclusions. # Observations and Data Reduction {#Observations} The observations were obtained with the Integral Field Unit of the Gemini Multi Object Spectrograph (GMOS-IFU) at the Gemini South telescope on the night of September 27, 2011 (Gemini project GS-2011B-Q-23). The observations consisted of two adjacent IFU fields (covering 7 $\times$ 5 arcsec$^{2}$ each) resulting in a total angular coverage of 7 $\times$ 10 arcsec$^{2}$ around the nucleus. Six exposures of 350 seconds were obtained for each field, slightly shifted and dithered in order to correct for detector defects after combination of the frames. The seeing during the observation was 0, as measured from the FWHM of a spatial profile of the calibration standard star. This corresponds to a spatial resolution at the galaxy of 58 pc. The selected wavelength range was 5600-7000 Å, in order to cover the H$\alpha$+\[N II\] $\lambda\lambda$`<!-- -->`{=html}6548,6583 Å and \[S II\] $\lambda\lambda$`<!-- -->`{=html}6716,6731 Å emission lines, observed with the grating GMOS R400-G5325 (set to central wavelength of either $\lambda$ 6500 Å or $\lambda$ 6550 Å) at a spectral resolution of R $\approx$ 2000. The data reduction was performed using specific tasks developed for GMOS data in the [gemini.gmos]{.smallcaps} package as well as generic tasks in [iraf]{.smallcaps}[^2]. The reduction process comprised bias subtraction, flat-fielding, trimming, wavelength calibration, sky subtraction, relative flux calibration, building of the data cubes at a sampling of 0$\,\times\,$`<!-- -->`{=html}0, and finally the alignment and combination of the 12 data cubes. # Results {#Results} In Fig. [\[figure1\]](#figure1){reference-type="ref" reference="figure1"} we present, in the upper left panel, the acquisition image of NGC 7213, where a ring of star-forming regions can be observed surrounding the nucleus at a radius $\approx$ 20 (thus beyond the field-of-view--hereafter FOV--of our observations). In the upper right panel we present an image of the inner 22 $\times\,$`<!-- -->`{=html}22 of the galaxy obtained with the WFPC2 (Wide Field Planetary Camera 2) through the filter F606W aboard the Hubble Space Telescope (hereafter HST). In the middle left panel we present a structure map of this image (see ), where the presence of nuclear dusty spirals is revealed. The rectangle shows the FOV covered by the IFU observations. In the middle right panel we present a continuum image obtained from our IFU observations by integrating the flux within a spectral window from $\lambda$`<!-- -->`{=html}6470 Å to $\lambda$`<!-- -->`{=html}6580 Å. The dashed line indicates the position of the kinematic major axis of the galaxy (position angle PA=-4$^\circ$), obtained from our measurements and model fit of the stellar kinematics (see section [4.2](#gaskinexc){reference-type="ref" reference="gaskinexc"}). In the lower panel we present three spectra from the locations marked as N (nucleus), A and B, in the IFU image and extracted within apertures of 0 $\times\,$`<!-- -->`{=html}0. The nuclear spectrum (identified by N in Fig. [\[figure1\]](#figure1){reference-type="ref" reference="figure1"}) shows a broad, double-peaked H$\alpha$ component, which has led to the classification of NGC 7213 as a Seyfert 1 galaxy, and also narrow \[O I\] $\lambda\[\lambda$ 6300,6363 Å, \[N II\] $\lambda\]\lambda$`<!-- -->`{=html}6548,6583 Å, H$\alpha$ and \[S II\] $\lambda\[\lambda$`<!-- -->`{=html}6717,6731 Å emission lines. The spectra from locations A and B shows only fainter emission in the \[N II\], H$\alpha$ and \[S II\] emission lines. In these extranuclear spectra, many absorption features from the stellar population are also clearly seen. We adopt as the nucleus of the galaxy the position of the peak flux of the continuum, which corresponds also to the centroid of the emission in the broad double-peaked line. ## Measurements The gaseous centroid velocities, velocity dispersions and emission-line fluxes were obtained through the fit of Gaussians to the \[N II\], H$\alpha$ (narrow component), \[O I\] and \[S II\] emission lines. In our fit we adopted the following physically motivated constraints: 1. Flux$_{[N\,II]\,\lambda6583}$/Flux$_{[N\,II]\,\lambda6548}=3$; 2. The \[N II\] $\lambda$`<!-- -->`{=html}6583 and \[N II\] $\lambda$`<!-- -->`{=html}6548 lines have the same centroid velocity and FWHM; 3. The narrow H$\alpha$ component and the \[N II\] lines have the same centroid velocity. One can argue that the H$\alpha$ and \[N II\] centroid velocity may not be the same, so we tested our assumption: in fits in which the H$\alpha$ centroid velocity was a free parameter, the difference between the H$\alpha$ and \[N II\] centroid velocities was always smaller than the error in the measurements. Considering this, we adopted the assumption (iii) above as it allowed a better measurement of the FWHM and flux at locations where H$\alpha$ was faint (having lower signal-to-noise ratio). The flux distribution of the H$\alpha$ line was corrected for the contribution of underlying stellar absorption assuming an equivalent width of the stellar H$\alpha$ absorption line of 1.75 Å. This value was obtained measuring the equivalent width of the H$\alpha$ absorption in old stellar population models from, convolved with a Gaussian with $\sigma$ = 180 km s$^{-1}$, a typical value of the stellar velocity dispersion in the centre of this galaxy (see section [3.3](#stellarkinematics){reference-type="ref" reference="stellarkinematics"}). As the Point-Spread Function (PSF) has a width of 0, within a radius of this order, the broad H$\alpha$ component is also present in the spectra. In order to isolate the narrow emission line, we have fitted and subtracted this broad component. In order to do that, four Gaussians were necessary: a "blue" and a "red" Gaussian to fit the blue and red peaks of the profiles, and another two to fit the central part of the profile. The fit is illustrated in Fig. [\[figure2\]](#figure2){reference-type="ref" reference="figure2"}. The total flux of the central broad component is 8.9 $\times$ 10$^{-12}$ erg cm$^2$ s$^{-1}$. Errors in all the measurements were estimated from Monte Carlo simulations in which Gaussian noise was added to the spectra; one hundred iterations were performed. In order to measure the stellar kinematics, we employed the Penalized Pixel Fitting technique (pPXF). The models were used as template spectra. These models have a spectral resolution ($\sigma$) of 61 km s$^{-1}$ at 6300Å, very similar to our value of 66 km s$^{-1}$, so no corrections were made. Monte Carlo simulations based on the best-fitting absorption spectra obtained from the Penalized Pixel Fitting technique were also carried out to estimate the errors in the kinematic parameters. ## Line fluxes and excitation of the emitting gas {#fluxgas} In Fig.[\[figure3\]](#figure3){reference-type="ref" reference="figure3"} we present the integrated flux distributions in the \[N II\] $\lambda$`<!-- -->`{=html}6583 Å, H$\alpha$, \[O I\] $\lambda$`<!-- -->`{=html}6300 Å and \[S II\] $\lambda$`<!-- -->`{=html}6716 Å emission lines. The flux distributions show the highest values within the inner 2(230 pc) around the nucleus and extend somewhat farther from the nucleus (4--460 pc) to the SE, following one of the nuclear spiral arms seen in the structure map shown in Fig. [\[figure1\]](#figure1){reference-type="ref" reference="figure1"}. There is also an elongation observed to the north, at the beginning of the other spiral arm. In Fig.[\[figure4\]](#figure4){reference-type="ref" reference="figure4"} we present the \[N II\]/H$\alpha$ and \[O I\]/H$\alpha$ line ratios and the gas density map, obtained from the \[SII\] $\lambda\lambda$`<!-- -->`{=html}6717/6731 Å line ratio assuming an electronic temperature of 10000K. The gas density reaches a peak value of 1000 cm$^{-3}$ at the nucleus, decreasing to 600--800 cm$^{-3}$ at 1 from the nucleus and to 200--400 cm$^{-3}$ at 2from the nucleus. The \[N II\]/H$\alpha$ line ratio presents values of 1.2--2.0 within the inner 2 (230 pc) and within a region extending from 2to 4to the SE of the nucleus, which are values typical of LINERs. The line ratio values decreases to 0.8--1.0 beyond these regions. The \[O I\]/H$\alpha$ ratio present values between 0.8--1.2 in the inner 0 (90pc) and between 0.2--0.5 in the other regions. Errors in the flux distribution of the \[N II\] emission line are of the order of 5% in the inner 1 and $\approx$ 10% elsewhere. Errors in the flux distribution of H$\alpha$ are between 10--15%. Errors in the flux distribution of the \[O I\] emission line are $\approx$ 10% in the inner 1 and 20% elsewhere. Errors in the flux distribution of the \[S II\] lines are of the order of 10% in the inner 1 and between 15--20% elsewhere. ## The stellar kinematics {#stellarkinematics} The stellar velocity field V$_{}$ is shown in the left panel of Fig. [\[figure5\]](#figure5){reference-type="ref" reference="figure5"}. It displays a rotation pattern reaching small amplitudes of $\approx$ 50 km s$^{-1}$ within our field of view, with the line of nodes oriented approximately along the North--South direction, with the S side approaching and the N side receding. The stellar velocity dispersion is shown in the right panel of Fig. [\[figure5\]](#figure5){reference-type="ref" reference="figure5"}. It varies between 140 km s$^{-1}$ and 200 km s$^{-1}$ across the FOV. Inspection of the nuclear spiral structure shows stronger obscuration to the West than to the East, and we thus conclude that W is the near side of the galaxy. In the inner 0 it was not possible to measure the stellar kinematics due to strong emission from the AGN continuum. Uncertainties in the centroid velocities and velocity dispersion are of the order of 20 km s$^{-1}$. Uncertainties in the Gauss-Hermite moments h$_{3}$* and h$_{4}$ are of the order of 0.04, higher than the measured values, so we do not considered them in our analysis. ## The gas kinematics {#gaskinematics} Centroid velocity maps for the emission lines are shown in Fig. [\[figure6\]](#figure6){reference-type="ref" reference="figure6"} along with the structure map. The gas velocity field is completely different from the stellar one. And from the comparison between the leftmost and rightmost panels of Fig. [\[figure6\]](#figure6){reference-type="ref" reference="figure6"}, it can be concluded that there is a correlation between the velocity field and the nuclear spiral seen in the structure map. Mostly blueshifts are observed to the East, the far side of the galaxy, and mostly redshifts are observed to the West, the near side, with the highest velocities following the spiral pattern seen in the structure map. Velocities of up to $\approx$`<!-- -->`{=html}200 km s$^{-1}$ are observed in the \[N II\] and \[S II\] velocity maps to the NW and SE, up to $\approx$ 3 from the nucleus. Maps of the H$\alpha$ and \[N II\] velocity dispersions (hereafter $\sigma_{H\alpha}$ and $\sigma_{[N\,II]}$) are shown in Fig. [\[figure7\]](#figure7){reference-type="ref" reference="figure7"}. The $\sigma_{H\alpha}$ and $\sigma_{[N\,II]}$ maps present similar structures, in spite of the fact that $\sigma_{H\alpha}$ present lower values than $\sigma_{[N\,II]}$ over the whole FOV. We attribute this difference to the underlying stellar absorption in H$\alpha$, which makes part of the H$\alpha$ emission "fill" this absorption resulting in an observed narrower profile. In the nucleus, both $\sigma_{[N\,II]}$ and $\sigma_{H\alpha}$ reach $\approx$ 140 km s$^{-1}$, decreasing to 100 km s$^{-1}$ at a radius of 0. $\sigma_{[N\,II]}$ quickly decreases to $\approx$ 80 km s$^{-1}$ to the NE and N directions while values of $\approx$ 100 km s$^{-1}$ are still observed at a 2 radius in other directions. A similar pattern is observed in $\sigma_{H\alpha}$ and $\sigma_{[S\,II]}$. Errors in the centroid velocity and velocity dispersion measurements for the \[N II\] emission line vary in the range 5--15 km s$^{-1}$. For H$\alpha$ they vary between 5 and 20 km s$^{-1}$. Errors in the \[O I\] centroid velocity and velocity dispersion are of the order of $\approx$ 10 km s$^{-1}$ in the inner 1 and between 15 and 20 km s$^{-1}$ elsewhere. For \[S II\] they are $\approx$ 5 km s$^{-1}$ in the inner 1 and between 10 and 20 km s$^{-1}$ elsewhere. # discussion {#Discussion} ## The stellar kinematics {#the-stellar-kinematics} Estimates of the position angle of the photometric major axis of NGC 7213 in the literature range from 65$^\circ$ to 148$^\circ$ as the small inclination of the galaxy--practically face on--makes its precise determination difficult. Our data allows us to obtain the PA of the kinematic major axis, or line of nodes, via the modelling of the stellar velocity field. We have thus fitted a circular rotation model to the stellar velocity field, obtaining also the systemic velocity of the galaxy. Assuming circular orbits in a plane and a spherical potential, the observed radial velocity at a position ($R,\psi$) in the plane of the sky is given by: \]V=V_{s}+\frac{ARcos(\psi-\psi_{0})sin(\theta)cos^{p}\theta}{\{R^{2}[sin^{2}(\psi-\psi_{0})+cos^{2}\theta cos^{2}(\psi-\psi_{0})]+c^{2}cos^{2}\theta \}^{p/2}}\[ where $\theta$ is the inclination of the disk (with $\theta$ = 0 for a face-on disk), $\psi_{0}$ is the position angle of the line of nodes, $V_{s}$ is the systemic velocity, $R$ is the radius and $A$, $c,$ and $p$ are parameters of the model. We assumed the kinematical centre to be cospatial with the peak of the continuum emission and the inclination of the disk to be 25$^\circ$, obtained from the apparent axial ratio (from NED[^3]) under the assumption of a thin disk geometry. The model velocity field and residuals are shown in Fig. [\[figure8\]](#figure8){reference-type="ref" reference="figure8"}. The resulting parameters $A$, $c$, and $p$ are $133\,\pm$`<!-- -->`{=html}7 km s$^{-1}$, $1\arcsec\pm0.1$ and $1.5\,\pm0.1$ respectively. The systemic velocity corrected to the heliocentric reference frame is $1648\,\pm$`<!-- -->`{=html}6 km s$^{-1}$ (taking into account both errors in the measurement and the fit) and the PA of the kinematic major axis is-4$^\circ$ $\pm$`<!-- -->`{=html}1. We can compare our derived orientation for the kinematic major axis with previous determinations from the literature. lists the photometric major axis position angle as 124$^\circ$ and as 45$^\circ$. An inspection of the H$\alpha$ image presented in suggests an orientation of the inner gas disk of $\approx$ 40$^\circ$. The 2MASS catalogue lists the photometric major axis PA as 20$\ensuremath{^\circ}$, in agreement with the orientation of the kinematic major axis obtained by from the modelling of the large scale ionised gas velocity curve. As one can see, these different determinations are discrepant, which illustrates the difficulty in determining the orientation of the photometric major axis of NGC 7213 due to its low inclination. Besides, the gaseous kinematics of NGC 7213 is highly disturbed, thus a modelling of the large-scale ionised gas velocity curve does not lead to a reliable determination of the orientation of the kinematic major axis. Considering this, we argue that our determination of the kinematic major axis PA based on the stellar kinematics is the most reliable. We assume the stellar velocity dispersion of the bulge to be the average stellar velocity dispersion in our FOV, corrected for the instrumental resolution of 66 km s$^{-1}$, which is 177 km s$^{-1}$. This value is in good agreement with previous measurements. Using the M-$\sigma$ relation from, we obtain a black hole mass of M$_{BH}$ = 8 $_{-6}^{+16}\times$`<!-- -->`{=html}10$^{7}$ M$_{\odot}$. ## The gas kinematics {#gaskinexc} As pointed out above, a comparison between the gas and stellar velocity fields (Fig. [\[figure6\]](#figure6){reference-type="ref" reference="figure6"}) shows that the two are completely distinct. The stellar velocity field has a line of nodes along PA = -4$^\circ$, and maximum amplitude of $\approx$ 40 km s$^{-1}$, while the gas velocity field has the largest velocity gradient along PA $\approx$`<!-- -->`{=html}305$^\circ$ (thus at an angle of 50$^\circ$ with the stellar line of nodes) and much larger amplitudes, of $\approx$ 200 km s$^{-1}$. Also, velocities of $\approx$ 100 km s$^{-1}$ are observed in the gaseous velocity field along the stellar minor axis (PA 266$^\circ$), and thus it can be concluded that the gas kinematics is dominated by non-circular motions. Our gaseous kinematics can be compared with that obtained in previous observations. Long-slit spectroscopy along PA = 50$^\circ$ of the inner 4 kpc of NGC 7213 presented in (see Fig. 15 in their paper) also has shown that, in the inner $\approx$`<!-- -->`{=html}1.5 kpc, the ionised gas velocity curve is highly disturbed. Long-slit observations on larger scales--over the inner 40 (4.6 kpc)--were obtained by along PA's 34$^\circ$ and 124$^\circ$, and show that the stellar and ionised gas velocity curves at these larger scales continue to be distinct and to have different amplitudes; they also point out that along PA 124$^\circ$ the gaseous velocity curve is highly disturbed up to 40. H I observations have shown that the large scale neutral gas kinematics (which extends well beyond the optical disk) is also highly disturbed, what they attribute to a previous merging event. All the available observations-- ours and the previous ones discussed above --thus show that the ionised and neutral gas velocity fields are disturbed in all scales. And if the gas we are observing was acquired in a previous merging event, as indicated by the H I data, it is not surprising that the gaseous kinematics is distinct from the stellar one. In order to try to understand the gas kinematics, a relevant question is if the gas is in the plane of the galaxy. A clue to answer this question is the observation of the 2 kpc ring of H II regions, which was probably formed due to the capture of gas in the merging event. This ring is almost circular and its apparent geometry follows that of the galaxy continuum image. Under the assumption that it is circular in the plane of the galaxy, estimated an inclination of the H II ring of i = 30$^\circ$, just a little larger than our estimate of i = 25$^\circ$ (from the photometric major and minor axes diameters). We thus assume that the gas is indeed contained in the plane of the galaxy. Although the gaseous velocity field seems to be dominated by non-circular motions, if the gas is contained in the plane of the galaxy, its kinematics may include a rotation component. Under the assumption that the stellar model velocity field is a good representation of the rotation component, we illustrate, in Fig. [\[figure9\]](#figure9){reference-type="ref" reference="figure9"}, the result of the subtraction of the model from the gas velocity field. From left to right, the panels show the gas velocity field, the model and the residuals between the two, as well as the structure map, for comparison. The largest residuals are observed along the two spiral arms (see also the structure map) to the NW and SE of the nucleus. Assuming that the gas is in the plane of the galaxy and considering that the residuals in the NW arm are observed in redshift in the near side of the galaxy, and that the residuals in the SE arm are observed in blueshift in the far side, we conclude that we are observing inflows towards the nucleus in these two regions. The increase in the gas velocity dispersion near the borders of the spiral arms (Fig [\[figure7\]](#figure7){reference-type="ref" reference="figure7"}) can be interpreted as due to shocks in the gas as it streams towards the centre of the galaxy. ## Estimating the mass inflow rate in ionised gas ### Method 1 {#inflow1} The gas kinematics suggests that the ionised gas is flowing towards the nucleus. In order to estimate the mass inflow rate, we assume that both spiral arms channel gas towards the nucleus. Assuming a similar geometry for the two arms, the mass inflow rate will be two times that along one arm. We estimate the ionised gas mass inflow rate which crosses a section of one spiral arm as: \]\dot{M}_{in}\,=\,N_{e}\,v\,\pi\,r^{2}\,m_{p}\,f\[ where $N_{e}$ is the electron density, $v$ is the velocity of the inflowing gas, $m_{p}$ is the mass of the proton, $r$ is the cross section radius of the spiral arm and $f$ is the filling factor. The filling factor can be estimated from: \]L_{H\alpha}\,\sim\,f\,N_{e}^{2}\,j_{H\alpha}(T)\,V\[ where $j_{H\alpha}(T)$ = 3.534$\,\times\,10^{-25}$ erg cm$^{-3}$ s$^{-1}$ and $L_{H\alpha}$ is the H$\alpha$ luminosity emitted by a volume $V$. Substituting Eq. 2 into Eq. 1 and assuming the volume of the spiral arms in the inner 1 can be approximated by the volume of a cone with a radius $r$ (at the base of the cone) and height $h$, we have: \]\dot{M}_{in}\,=\frac{3\,m_{p}\,v\,L_{H\alpha}}{j_{H\alpha}(T)\,N_{e}\,h}\[ We adopt as the inflow velocity that observed in the redshifted NW arm (Fig. [\[figure9\]](#figure9){reference-type="ref" reference="figure9"}) after correction for the inclination of i = 25$^\circ$), that results in $v=130$ km s$^{-1}$ in the plane of the galaxy. We consider the approximate conical region extending from the nucleus to $h\approx$ 1 NW, with a base radius of $r=0\farcs6$. We use the average gas density of 472 cm$^{-3}$ and the total H$\alpha$ flux of this region of 8.7$\,\times\,$`<!-- -->`{=html}10$^{-14}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$. Considering a distance to NGC 7213 of 23.6 Mpc, we obtain $L_{H\alpha}$ = 5.8$\,\times\,$`<!-- -->`{=html}10$^{39}$ erg s$^{-1}$. For h = 1 (115 pc), we obtain a rate of mass inflow of $\dot{M}_{in}$ $\approx$ 0.07 M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$. ### Method 2 In this section we describe a new method to estimate the mass flow rate towards the nucleus: we integrate the ionised gas mass flow rate through concentric rings in the plane of the galaxy (around the whole perimeter). In order to do this, we consider that the observed line-of-sight velocity, $v_{LOS}$ is the result of the projection of three velocity components in a cylindrical coordinate system at the galaxy. The cylindrical coordinates are: $\varpi$--the radial coordinate; $\varphi$--the azimuthal angle; $z$--the coordinate perpendicular to the plane. The galaxy inclination relative to the plane of the sky is $i$. We assume that gas vertical motions in the disc are negligible, i.e. $v_z= 0$, and then we consider two possibilities, as follows. - We first consider that the azimuthal velocity component $v_\varphi$ can be approximated by the model fitted to the stellar rotation described in section [4](#Discussion){reference-type="ref" reference="Discussion"}, and subtract it from $v_{\rm LOS}$ in order to isolate the radial velocity component. As the deprojection of the resulting radial component into the plane of the galaxy is not well determined along the galaxy line of nodes due to divisions by zero, we have masked out from the velocity field a region of extent 0 to each side of the line of nodes in the calculations. The gas mass flow rate is given by: \]\label{eq:mass_flow_v.A} \dot{M} = \rho f \ \mathbf{v}\cdot\mathbf{A},\[ where $\rho$ is the ionised gas mass density, $f$ is the filling factor (determined via Eq. 2), $\mathbf{v}$ is the radial velocity vector and $\mathbf{A}$ is the area vector through which the gas flows. Since we are interested in the radial flow, the area we are interested in is perpendicular to the radial direction, and thus $\mathbf{v}\cdot\mathbf{A} = v_\varpi\, A$, the product between the area crossed by the flow and the radial velocity component. The filling factor $f$ is obtained via Eq. 2 considering a volume $V$ = $A\,d\varpi$, of a thick ring sector with width $d\varpi$ and cross-section area A, the same as above. Replacing $f$ obtained via Eq. 2 into Eq. 4, we finally have: \]\dot{M}(\varpi) = \frac{m_p \, v_{\varpi} \, L_{\rm H\alpha}}{j_{H\alpha}(T)\, N_e \,d\varpi}. \label{eq:dotm}\[ Integrating Eq. [\[eq:dotm\]](#eq:dotm){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:dotm"} all around the ring of radius $\varpi$, and taking into account the radial and azimuthal dependence of $v_{\varpi}$, $L_{\rm H\alpha}$ and $N_e$, we obtain the gas mass flow rate $\dot{M}$ as a function of the radius $\varpi$. It is worth noting that the mass flow rate as calculated above does not depend on $A$ and $d\varpi$, as these quantities cancel out in Eq. [\[eq:dotm\]](#eq:dotm){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:dotm"}, when we use $L_{\rm H\alpha}$ as the gas luminosity of a volume $V$ = $A\,d\varpi$. We have evaluated $\dot{M}(\varpi)$ through concentric Gaussian rings (rings whose radial profile is a normalised Gaussian) from the galaxy centre up to the maximum radius of 700 pc (in the galaxy plane). The result is shown in Fig.[\[figure10\]](#figure10){reference-type="ref" reference="figure10"}. The negative values mean that there is inflow from the largest radius covered by our measurements down to the centre, with the mass inflow rate being largest between 400 pc and 300 pc, and decreasing inwards. - A second approach is to calculate the inflow rate without subtracting the rotational component. One might indeed question if the subtraction of the stellar velocity field from the gaseous one is adequate to isolate non-circular motions, as the stellar velocity field is subject to asymmetric drift and the gas is not. In addition, the gaseous velocity field seems to be dominated by non-circular motions. Another argument in favour of not subtracting the rotational component is to consider that its contribution to $v_{\rm LOS}$ may cancel out in the integration of the mass flow rate around the ring if the gas density and filling factor have cylindrical symmetry, as by definition, the rotational component has cylindrical symmetry. We have thus repeated the calculation of the mass inflow rate without subtracting the circular velocity field. The results are shown as a dashed line in Fig. [\[figure10\]](#figure10){reference-type="ref" reference="figure10"}). The difference between the mass inflow rates at any given radius between the two calculations (subtracting the rotation component and without subtracting it) is, on average, 10-15%, showing that the resulting mass inflow rate is practically independent from the subtraction of the rotation component, supporting the assumption that the gas density and filling factor indeed approximately have cylindrical symmetry. We can now compare the values of the mass flow rates obtained with methods 1 and 2: at a distance of 1(115 pc) from the nucleus, the net mass inflow rate using Method 2 is $\approx$ 0.2$\,M_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$, about three times larger than the estimated $\approx$ 0.07 M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ using Method 1. In Method 1 we have to rely on the observed morphology of the flow, which is not always clear, while in Method 2 we do not need to make assumptions, and just integrate the mass flow through a closed perimeter around the nucleus. For this reason, we consider Method 2 more robust than Method 1. Finally, we point out that our calculations refer only to the ionised gas mass. If there is mass inflow in neutral and molecular gas as well, our calculated mass inflow rates can be considered lower limits to the actual mass inflow rate to the nuclear region. We now compare the above ionised gas mass inflow rates to the accretion rate to the AGN in NGC 7213, calculated as follows: \]\dot{m}\,=\,\frac{L_{bol}}{c^{2}\eta} where $\eta$ is the efficiency of conversion of the rest mass energy of the accreted material into radiation. For LINERs it has been concluded that, in most cases, the accretion disk is geometrically thick, and optically thin. This type of accretion flow is known as RIAF (Radiatively Inefficient Accretion Flow ), and has a typical value for $\eta$ of $0.01$ ($1\%$), although it can be as low as $0.001$ ($0.1\%$). The bolometric luminosity of the active nucleus was estimated by as $L_{bol}$ = 1.7 $\times\,$`<!-- -->`{=html}10$^{43}$ erg s$^{-1}$. We use these values to derive an accretion rate of $\dot{m}$ = 3$\,\times\,$`<!-- -->`{=html}10$^{-2}$ M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ for an efficiency of $1\%$ and $\dot{m}$ = 3$\,\times\,$`<!-- -->`{=html}10$^{-1}$ M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ for an efficiency of 0.1$\%$. The ionised gas mass inflow rate at 1 from the nucleus, as estimated from Method 2, ranges between seven times larger to the approximate value of the accretion rate. Our observations may imply that the accretion rate to the AGN will increase in the future. Nevertheless, gas at these distances has to lose 99.99$\%$ of its angular momentum before it reaches the central BH. This may result in the accumulation of gas in the circumnuclear region and the subsequent triggering of star formation. Recent simulations support this scenario. Previous integral field observations by our group and others, have indeed revealed the presence of nuclear rings (at hundreds of parsecs from the nucleus) with stellar population dominated by young to intermediate-age stars in a number of active galaxies. These rings suggest the association of the formation of stars tens to hundred million years ago with the onset of the nuclear activity, favouring the evolutionary scenario proposed by and/or that of. At an inflow rate of 0.2 M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$, a reservoir of $\approx$ 2$\,\times\,$`<!-- -->`{=html}10$^{6}$ M$_{\odot}$ in ionised gas alone can be built up in just 10$^7$yr, and can fuel the formation of new stars in the bulge. # conclusions {#Conclusion} We have measured the gaseous kinematics in the inner 0.8 $\times$ 1.1 kpc$^2$ of the LINER/Seyfert 1 galaxy NGC 7213, from optical spectra obtained with the GMOS integral field spectrograph on the Gemini South telescope at a spatial resolution of $\approx$ 60 pc. The main results of this paper are: - The stellar velocity field shows high velocity dispersions of up to 200 km s$^{-1}$ and circular rotation with an orientation for the line of nodes of $\approx$ -4$^\circ$ ($\approx$ N). On the basis of the dust distribution, it can be concluded that the near side of the galaxy is the W and the far side is the E; - The stellar velocity dispersion of the bulge is 177 km s$^{-1}$, leading to a black hole mass of M$_{BH}$ = 8 $_{-6}^{+16}\times$`<!-- -->`{=html}10$^{7}$ M$_{\odot}$; - The gaseous velocity field is completely distinct from the stellar one, being dominated by non-circular motions. Velocities of up to $\approx$ 200 km s$^{-1}$ are observed in two spiral structures extending from the nucleus to $\approx$ 4 (460 pc) NW and SE, which are correlated with spiral arms seen in a structure map of a continuum image of the region; - Redshifts are observed along the NW spiral arm--on the near side of the galaxy, while blueshifts are observed along the SE spiral arm--on the far side; as the observations also suggest that the gas is in the galaxy plane, we conclude that the gas is inflowing towards the centre along the spiral arms. An observed increase in the gas velocity dispersion, cospatial with the nuclear spiral--interpreted as shocks in the inflowing gas-- supports this conclusion; - We estimate the ionised gas mass flow rate towards the nucleus using two methods. In the first method, we use an approximate geometry for the flow along the spiral arms and obtain a mass flow rate of $\approx$ 0.07 M$_{\odot}$ year$^{-1}$ at a distance of 1 (115 pc) from the nucleus. In the second method we calculate the net gas mass flow rate across a series of concentric rings around the nucleus, obtaining a mass flow rate ranging from 0.4 M$_{\odot}$ year$^{-1}$ at 400 pc from the nucleus down to 0.2 M$_{\odot}$ year$^{-1}$ at 100 pc. We conclude that the second method is more robust as it does not depend on the exact geometry of the flow, which is not that clear from the data; - As our observations are only of the ionised emitting gas, and the inflow should include also neutral and molecular gas, the inflow rates quoted above are actually lower limits of a probably much larger gas mass inflow rate; - Considering that gas at 100 pc scales needs to lose more than 99% of its angular momentum to reach the accretion disk, most of the gas will probably accumulate in the circumnuclear region, where episodes of star formation may occur. This is supported by previous studies in which circumnuclear rings of young to intermediate age stars are observed around AGN, and may be the process leading to the so-called co-evolution of the galaxy and its SMBH.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-23T02:08:42', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5650', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5650'}
null	null
null	null
# Introduction Statistical manifolds, which consist of probability distribution functions, are the main objects in information geometry. In order to describe their geometric structures, a series of concepts such as $\alpha$-connections, dual connections, and particularly Fisher metric, which makes statistical manifold Riemannian manifold, are introduced and studied. As a special example, normal distribution manifolds, defined in Definition5.1, are of great importance. When S. Amari initiated the theory of information geometry, he found that the sectional curvature of the monistic normal distribution manifold is $-\frac{1}{2}$, which is recalled in the proof of Lemma 5.7, implying its isometry to a hyperbolic space. Rather than an amazing result, it is also the trigger for Amari to develop information geometry. Some basic defintions and results on information geometry are presented in Section 2. Around 1926, É. Carten introduced holonomy groups in order to study and classify symmetric spaces. Indeed, he has classified irreducible symmetric spaces by considering holonomy groups. As part of the generalization of parallel tranpotations, holonomy could be defined on any vector boudle with connections. Hence, as S. S. Chern believed, it plays an important role in the theory of connections. However there are seldom brilliant results except for Ambrose-Singer holonomy theorem. When coming to Riemannian holonomy groups, the classification for irreducible cases was solved in $1955$ by M. Berger and J. Simons. After introducing defintions and propsitions on holonomy groups in Section 3, several useful results on classification are presented in terms of theorems and corollaries in Section 4 and also in terms of two tables in Appendix. Although, holonomy group fails to classify non-isometric manifolds due to its small number of classes, it is still essential and is applied to many fields including string theory. In this paper, we concentrate on the Riemannian holonomy groups of statistical manifolds, especially the normal distribution manifolds. After calculating the holonomy groups of normal distribution manifolds in Theorem 5.3, Theorem 6.3 follows as a generalization on exponential family. # Information Geometry on Statistical Manifolds We call \[S:=\left\{ p\left(x;\theta\right)\|\theta\in\Theta\right\}\] a statistical manifold if $x$ is a random variable in sample space $X$ and $p\left(x;\theta\right)$ is the probability density function, which satisfies certain regular conditions. Here, $\theta=\left(\theta_{1},\theta_{2},\dots,\theta_{n}\right)\in\Theta$ is an $n$-dimensional vector in some open subset $\Theta\subset\mathbb{R}^{n}$, and $\theta$ can be viewed as the coordinates on manifold $S$. # Holonomy Groups ## Holonomy of a Connection in a Vector Bundle As a result, we shall always omit the base point and denote the group by $H(\nabla)$. While only considering one connection $\nabla$, we could further reduce the notation for the group by $H$. Now, here are several properties for the holonomy groups. ## Riemannian Holonomy In another word, the Riemannian holonomy is a special case. # Classification of Riemannian Holonomy Groups Hence, we only need to consider symmetric spaces. We begin with the de Rham decomposition theorem. By de Rham decomposition, simply connected irreducible symmetric spaces are essential. The holonomy of a symmetric space can be derived by the holonomy of its factors. Therefore, we only need to find all simply connected irreducible symmetric spaces and their holonomy groups. In fact, all simply connected irreducible symmetric spaces $M$ are of the form $M\cong G/K$, where $G$ is the group of isometric transformations on $M$ and $K$ is its isotropy subgroup. There are three types of such spaces( where $\kappa$ denotes the curvature of $M$):\ (1) Euclidean type: $\kappa=0$ and $M$ is isometric to a Euclidean space;\ (2) compact type: $\kappa\geqslant0$(not identically 0);\ (3) non-compact type: $\kappa\leq0$(not identically 0).\ In all cases there are two classes:\ Class A: $G$ is a real simple Lie group;\ Class B: $G$ is either the product of a compact simple Lie group with itself (compact type), or a complexification of such a Lie group (non-compact type). All these types are completly classified by É. Cartan. Please also see for details. We only give one of the four tables of symmetric spaces. Based on Theorems 4.1-4.4, the holonomy groups of a locally symmetric Riemannian manifold are completely classified. The remaining problem is to classify all non-locally symmetric Riemannian manifolds with an irreducible holonomy group. This problem is solved by M. Berger() in 1955 and J. Simons() in 1962 in terms of the following theorem. From Berger's list, several direct corollaries follow. Actually, all the cases on Berger's list occur, which means for every group $H$ on the list, there exists a manifold that admits $H$ as its holonomy group. # Holonomy Groups of Normal Distribution Manifolds Obviously, $N^{d}$ is also an exponential family as in Definition 2.1. Our main result is the following theorem. Since some preparation is needed to prove the theorem, we first start with several lemmas. A direct corollary follows. Based on all preparations, we could show the proof of theorem 5.3. In fact, part of our results about the normal distribution manifolds can be generalized to the exponential family. # Holonomy Group of Exponential Family Let $S$ be an exponential family with dimension $n$ and $H$ be its holonomy group. Now, after ruling out several cases, the following theorem holds Since almost all common examples of exponential families are not Einstein, the holonomy groups of almost all exponential families are $SO(n)$. There is only one exception, the monistic normal distribution manifold $N^{1}$, which is Einstein. However, $H^{1}=SO(2)=SO\left(\dim N^{1}\right)$ (Proposition 5.9) which coincides with our results. # Conclusion After some preliminaries about information geometry and holonomy groups, two main results, Theorem 5.3 and Theorem 6.3 are proved. Theorem 5.3 shows that the holonomy groups of normal distribution manifolds are special orthogonal groups for all dimensions. In addition, a list of possible holonomy groups for general exponential families is presented in Theorem 6.3. # Appendix We presents two tables mentioned in Section 4 on classification of Riemannian holonomy groups and the geometric structure of $N^d$ used in Section 5 here.	{'timestamp': '2014-04-29T02:15:19', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5706', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5706'}
null	null
# Introduction {#se:sec1} Quantification of uncertainty in the geologic properties of the subsurface is essential for optimal management and decision-making in subsurface flow applications such as nuclear waste disposal, geologic storage of CO$_2$ and enhanced-oil-recovery. The environmental impact of these applications, for example, cannot be properly assessed without quantifying the uncertainty in geologic properties of the formation. However, typical uncertainty of a priori geologic information often results in large uncertainty in the flow predictions. This uncertainty is, in turn, detrimental to optimally managing the process under consideration. A common strategy to reduce uncertainty and improve our ability to make decisions is to incorporate (or assimilate) data, typically corrupted by noise, that arise from the flow response to the given geologic scenario. Because of the prior uncertainty in geological information, and because of the noise in the data, this assimilation of data into subsurface flow models is naturally framed in a Bayesian fashion: the aim is to characterize the posterior (conditional) probability of geologic properties given the observed data . The Bayesian framework is therefore a statistical approach for solving the inverse problem of identifying unknown geologic parameters given noisy data from the flow model. However, in contrast to deterministic approaches, the Bayesian framework provides a quantification of the uncertainty via the posterior; this in turn allows an assessment of the uncertainty arising in the corresponding model predictions. The goal of this paper is to study a class of inverse problems, arising in subsurface flow, in which both the geometry and the physical characteristics of the formation are to be inferred, and to demonstrate how the full power of the Bayesian methodology can be applied to such problems. We study existence and well-posedness of the posterior distribution, describe Markov Chain-Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods tailored to the specifics of the problems of interest, and show numerical results based on this methodology. We work within the context of a steady single-phase Darcy flow model, but the mathematical approach, and resulting algorithms, may be employed within more complex subsurface flow models. ## Literature Review: Computational and Mathematical Setting The first paper to highlight the power of the Bayesian approach to regularization of inverse problems is, where linear inverse problems, including heat kernel inversion, were discussed. The theory of Bayesian inversion for linear problems was then further developed in whilst the book demonstrated the potential of the approach for a range of complex inverse problems, linear and nonlinear, arising in applications. Alongside these developments was the work of Lasanen which lays the mathematical foundations of Bayesian inversion for a general class of nonlinear inverse problems. The papers demonstrate approximation results for the posterior distribution, employing Kullback-Leibler divergence and total variation metric respectively, for finite dimensional problems. The paper demonstrated how the infinite dimensional perspective on Bayesian inversion leads to a well-posedness and approximation theory, and in particular to the central role played by the Hellinger metric in these results. The papers demonstrated application of these theories to various problems arising in fluid mechanics and in subsurface flow. Most of this work stemming from concerns the use of Gaussian random field priors and is hence limited to the reconstruction of continuous fields or to fields with discontinuous properties where the positions of the discontinuities are known and can be built in explicitly, through the prior mean, or through construction of the inverse covariance operators as in. The article introduced Besov priors in order to allow for the solution of linear inverse problems arising in imaging where edges and discontinuities are important and this work was subsequently partially generalized to nonlinear inverse problems arising in subsurface flow. However none of this work is well-adapted to the geometrical discontinuous structures observed in subsurface formations, where layers, faults and channels may arise. In this paper we address this by formulating well-posed nonlinear Bayesian inverse problems allowing for such structures. The computational approach highlighted in is based primarily on the "discretize first then apply algorithm" approach with, for example, MCMC methods used as the algorithm. The work highlighted in shows the power of an approach based on "apply algorithm then discretize", leading to new MCMC methods which have the advantage of having mixing rates which are mesh-independent; the importance of mesh-independence is also highlighted in the work. However the work overviewed in is again mainly aimed at problems with Gaussian priors. In this paper we build on this work and develop MCMC methods which use Metropolis-within-Gibbs methodologies to separate geometric and physical parameters within the overall MCMC iteration; furthermore these MCMC methods require only solution of the forward problem and no linearizations of the forward operator, and are hence suitable in situations where no adjoint solvers are available and only black-box forward simulation software is provided. We use the resulting MCMC methodology to solve some hard geometric inverse problems arising in subsurface modelling. ## Literature Review: Subsurface Applications While standard approaches for data assimilation in subsurface flow models are mainly based on the Bayesian formalism, most of those approaches apply the Bayesian framework to the resulting finite-dimensional approximation of the model under consideration. However, recent work has shown the potential detrimental effect of directly applying standard MCMC methods to approximate finite-dimensional posteriors which arise from discretization of PDE based Bayesian inverse problems. For standard subsurface flow models, the forward (parameter-to-output) map is nonlinear, and so even if the prior distribution is Gaussian, the posterior is in general non-Gaussian. Therefore, the full characterization of the posterior can only be accomplished by sampling methods such as Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC). On the other hand, unknown geologic properties are in general described by functions that appear as coefficients of the PDE flow model. Then, the Bayesian posterior of these discretized functions is defined on a very high-dimensional space (e.g $10^{5}\sim 10^{6}$) and sampling with standard MCMC methods becomes computationally prohibitive. Some standard MCMC approaches avoid the aforementioned issue by parametrizing the unknown geologic properties in terms a small number of parameters (e.g. $10\sim 20$). Some others, however, consider the full parameterization of the unknown (i.e. as a discretized function) but are only capable of characterizing posteriors from one-dimensional problems on a very coarse grids. While the aforementioned strategies offer a significant insight into to the solution of Bayesian inverse problems in subsurface models, there remains substantial opportunity for the improvement and development of Bayesian data assimilation techniques capable of describing the posterior distributions accurately and efficiently, using the mesh-independent MCMC schemes overviewed in and applied to subsurface applications in. In particular we aim to do so in this paper in the context of geometrically defined models of the geologic properties. The petrophysical characterization of complex reservoirs involves the identification of the geologic facies of the formation. For those complex geologies, prior knowledge may include uncertain information of the interface between the geologic facies as well as the spatial structure of each of the rock types. In addition, prior knowledge of complex reservoirs may also include information of potential faults. Moreover, if the depositional environment is known a priori, then geometrical shapes that characterize the petrophsyical properties of the formation may constitute an integral part of the prior information. Whenever the aforementioned information is part of the prior knowledge, the conditioning or assimilation of data should accommodate the geologic data provided a priori. This can be accomplished with the proper parameterization of the geologic properties so that different facies are honored. In for example, a channelized structure was parameterized with a small number of unknowns and a deterministic history matching (data assimilation) was conducted on a two-phase flow model. More sophisticated parameterization of geologic facies involves the level-set approach for history matching used by in a deterministic framework. Recently, in the level-set approach is combined with the Bayesian framework to provide a characterization of the posterior. This Bayesian application is constructed on the finite-dimensional approximation of the flow-model and is therefore subject to the computational limitations previously indicated, namely mesh-dependent convergence properties. While the work of provides an upscaling to provide computational feasibility, the computations reported involved a limited number of samples, potentially insufficient for the proper characterization of the Bayesian posterior. There are also several facies estimation approaches based on ad hoc Gaussian approximations of the posterior. For example, in a pluri-Gaussian model of the geologic facies was used with an ensemble Kalman filter (EnKF) approach to generate an ensemble of realizations. In a randomized likelihood method was used to estimate the parameters characterized with channels. In a level-set approach was used with EnKF to generate an ensemble of updated facies. Although the aforementioned implementations are computationally feasible and may recover the truth within credible intervals (Bayesian confidence intervals), the methods may provide uncontrolled approximations of the posterior. Even for simple Gaussian priors, in numerical evidence has been provided of the poor characterization that ensemble methods may produce when compared to a fully resolved posterior. It is also worth mentioning the recent work of where the Bayesian framework was used for facies identification in petroleum reservoirs. This work considers a parametrization of the geologic facies in terms of piecewise constant permeabilities on a multiphase-flow model. The paper demonstrates the need to properly sample multi-modal posterior distributions for which the standard ensemble-based methods will perform poorly. ## Contribution of This Work We develop a mathematical and numerical framework for Bayesian inversion to identify geometric and physical parameters of the permeability in a steady Darcy flow model. The geometric parameters aim at characterizing the location and shape of regions where discontinuities in the permeability arise due to the presence of different geologic facies. The physical parameters represent the spatial (usually continuous) variability of the permeability within each of the geologic facies that constitute the formation. We make three primary contributions: (i) we demonstrate the existence of a well-posed posterior distribution on the geometric and physical parameters including both piecewise constant (finite dimensional) and piecewise continuous (infinite dimensional) representations of the physical parameters; (ii) we describe appropriate MCMC methods which respect both the geometry and the possibly infinite dimensional nature of the physical parameters and which require only forward flow solvers and not the adjoint; (iii) we exhibit numerical studies of the resulting posterior distributions. Clearly piecewise continuous fields will be able to represent more detailed features within the subsurface than piecewise constant ones. On the other hand we expect that piecewise constant fields will lead to simpler Bayesian inference, and in particular to speed-up of the Markov chains. There is hence a trade-off between accuracy and efficiency within geometric models of this type. The decision about which model to use will depend on the details of the problem at hand and in particular the quantities of interest under the posterior distribution. For this reason we study both piecewise continuous and piecewise constant fields. Continuity of the forward mapping from unknown parameters to data, which is a key ingredient in establishing the existence of the posterior distribution, is not straightforward within classic elliptic theories based on $L^{\infty}$ permeabilities, because small changes in the geometry do not induce small changes in $L^{\infty}$. Nonetheless, one can prove that the forward mapping is continuous with respect to the unknown parameters, which allows us to show that the posterior distribution is well-defined. Furthermore, well-posedness of the inverse problem is established, namely continuity of the posterior distribution in the Hellinger and total variation metrics, with respect to small changes in the data. In the piecewise constant case, for log-normal and uniform priors on the values of the permeability, the data to posterior mapping is Lipschitz in these metrics, whilst for exponential priors it is Hölder with an exponent less than $1/2$ (resp. $1$) in the Hellinger (resp. total variation) metrics; problems for which the dependence is Hölder but not Lipschitz have not been seen in the examples considered to date, such as those in, and hence this dependence is interesting in its own right and may also have implications for the rate of convergence of numerical approximations. In the case of log-normal permeability field, the posterior is Lipschitz continuous with respect to data in both of these metrics. A novel Metropolis-within-Gibbs method is introduced in which proposals are made which are prior-reversible, leading to an accept-reject determined purely by the likelihood (or model-data mismatch) hence having clear physical interpretation, and in which the geometric and physical parameters are updated alternately, within the Gibbs framework. Finally some numerical examples are presented, for both multiple layers and fault models, demonstrating the feasibility of the methodology. We develop a rigorous application of the Bayesian framework for the estimation of geologic facies parametrized with small number of parameters, together with a finite or infinite dimensional set of physical parameters within each of the facies. Regarding the geometry we consider a general class of problems that includes stratified reservoirs with a potential fault, similar to the model used in. In addition, we consider a simple channelized structure parameterized with small number of parameters, similar to the one described in. The content of this paper is organized as follows. In , we provide a simplified description of the the forward model, with piecewise continuous permeabilities, and prove the continuity of the forward and observation map with respect to the geometric and physical parameters. is devoted to the resulting Bayesian inverse problem from the geometric and physical parameters. The prior model is built both for the geometry and the values of permeability. We then show that the posterior measure is well defined and prove well-posedness results with respect to the data under this prior modeling. In , we introduce the novel Metropolis-within-Gibbs MCMC method to probe the posterior distribution. Some numerical results are shown in to illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed methods. # Forward Model {#sec:forward} In this section we introduce the subsurface flow model that we employ for application of the Bayesian framework. In subsection [2.1](#ssec:fp){reference-type="ref" reference="ssec:fp"} we describe the underlying Darcy flow PDE model, in subsection [2.2](#ssec:geo){reference-type="ref" reference="ssec:geo"} we introduce the family of geometrically defined permeabilities employed within the PDE and in subsection [2.3](#ssec:pd){reference-type="ref" reference="ssec:pd"} we describe the observation model and the permeability to data map. ## Darcy Flow Model {#ssec:fp} We are interested in characterizing the geologic properties of an aquifer whose physical domain is denoted by $D$. We assume that $D$ is a bounded open subset of $\mathbb{R}^2$ with Lipschitz boundary $\partial D$. We define the Hilbert spaces $H:=(L^2(D),\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle,\\|\cdot\\|)$, $V:=(H^1_0(D),\langle\nabla\cdot,\nabla\cdot\rangle,\\|\nabla\cdot\\|)$, where $H^1_0(D)$ is the usual Sobolev space with zero trace. Let $V^$ be as the dual space of $V$. We denote by $X$ the subset of strictly positive $L^{\infty}$ functions on $D$ that $X:=\{L^{\infty}(D;\mathbb{R})\|\rm{ess}\inf_{x \in D} f(x)>0\}$. We consider steady-state single-phase Darcy-flow described by, \[\begin{aligned} -\nabla\cdot(\kappa\nabla p)& =f,\quad x \in D,\nonumber\\ \phantom{-\nabla\cdot(\kappa(\nabla}p & =0,\quad x \in \partial D, \label{eq:elliptic} \end{aligned}\] where $p$ denotes the hydraulic head and $\kappa$ the permeability (proportional to hydraulic conductivity) tensor. For simplicity, the permeability tensor is assumed to be isotropic and hence represented as a scalar field. The right hand side $f$ accounts for groundwater recharge. For simplicity we consider Dirichlet boundary conditions where the hydraulic head is prescribed. The forward Darcy flow problem is, given $\kappa\in X$, to find a weak solution $p\in V$ of ([\[eq:elliptic\]](#eq:elliptic){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:elliptic"}) for any $f\in V^$. This forward problem is well-posed by the Lax-Milgram Lemma: if $\kappa_{min}=\rm{ess}\inf_{x \in D} \kappa(x)>0$ then there exists a unique weak solution $p\in V$ satisfying \[\\|p\\|_V \leq \\|f\\|_{V^}/\kappa_{min}, \label{eq:lax-mil}\] which enables us to define a forward map $G:X \rightarrow V,$ by \[\label{eq:G} G(\kappa)=p.\] We concentrate on cases where $\kappa(x)$ is a piecewise function defined by a geometrical parameterization designed to represent layers and faults or channels. We now describe how we do this. ## Permeability Model {#ssec:geo} We are interested in permeability functions $\kappa(x)$ which are either piecewise constant or piecewise continuous function on different subdomains $D_i$ of $D$, each of which represents a layer or a facies. Thus we write \[\kappa(x)=\sum_{i=1}^n \kappa_i \chi_{D_i}(x), \label{eq:k_piecewise}\] where $\{D_i\}_{i=1}^n$ are open subsets of $D$, moreover $D_i\cap D_j=\varnothing, \forall i\neq j$ and $\cup_{i=1}^n\overline{D_i}=\overline{D}$. Choices of the $D_i$ will be specified for two different geometric models in what follows and we use these models throughout the paper for both our analysis and our numerical experiments. They are illustrated in Figure [\[Figure1\]](#Figure1){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure1"}(a) and Figure [\[Figure1\]](#Figure1){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure1"}(b). To completely specify the models we need to parameterize the geometry $\{D_i\}_{i=1}^n$, and then describe the variability of the permeability within each subdomain $D_i.$ We now describe how these are both done. ### Geometric Parameterization In the layer model of Figure [\[fig:test2_fault\]](#fig:test2_fault){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:test2_fault"}, we assume that the interfaces between the layers are straight lines. The slope of the interface is determined by the thickness of each layer on the two sides. Hence, we use the layer thicknesses on the two sides to parameterize the geometry of the piecewise permeability function $\kappa(x)$. Furthermore, to describe potential faults, we introduce an additional parameter which determines the displacement of a vertical fault, whose horizontal location is specified. In the channel model, shown in Figure [\[fig:test3_channel\]](#fig:test3_channel){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:test3_channel"}, we simply assume the channel to be sinusoidal as in; the geometry can then be parameterized by the amplitude, frequency and width together with parameters defining the intersection of the channel with the boundaries. All of these models are then parameterized by a finite set of real numbers as we now detail, assuming that $D=(0,1)^2$ and letting $(x,y) \in D$ denote the horizontal and vertical respectively. - Test Model $1$ (Layer Model with Fault):* Given a fixed number $n$ of layers, the geometry in is determined by $\{a_i\}_{i=0}^n$ and $\{b_i\}_{i=0}^n$ and the slip $c$ that describes the (signed) height of the vertical fault at a specified location (for simplicity fixed at $x=\frac12$). The geometry for the case of three layers is displayed in Figure [\[Figure1A\]](#Figure1A){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure1A"}. All the layers on the left hand side slip down$(c>0)$ or up $(c<0)$ with the same displacement $c$. Moreover because of the constraint that the layer widths are positive and sum to one we can reduce to finding the $2n-1$ parameters $a=(a_1,\cdots,a_{n-1})$, $b=(b_1,\cdots,b_{n-1})$, each in \[A:=\{\textbf{x}\in \mathbb{R}^{n-1}\|\sum_{i=1}^{n-1}x_i\leq 1, x_i \geq 0\} \subset \mathbb{R}^{n-1},\] and $c\in C:=[-c^\star,c^\star]$. For this case we then define the geometric parameter $u_{g}$ and the space of geometric parameters $U_{g}$ by \[u_{g}= (a,b,c),\qquad U_{g}= A^2\times C\] This geometric model thus has $2n-1$ parameters and $n$ domains $D_i$. Note that a particular case of this model is the layered model shown in Figure [\[fig:test1_layer\]](#fig:test1_layer){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:test1_layer"} where we take $c=0$ as a known parameter. - Test Model $2$ (Channelized Model): Test model $2$ is shown in . We assume that the lower boundary of the channel is described by the sinusoid \[y=d_1\sin(d_2x)+\tan(d_3)x+d_4\] and we employ width parameter $d_5$. In this case, we characterize the geometric with \[u_{g}= (d_1,\cdots,d_5) \in \mathbb{R}^5,\qquad U_{g}= \prod_{i=1}^5[{d_i^-},d_i^+].\] This geometric model thus has $5$ parameters and two domains $D_1$ and $D_2$ denoting the interior and exterior of the channel respectively, which gives $n=2$; note that $D_2$ contains disjoint components. We now introduce an hypothesis that will be useful when we discuss the continuity of the forward map. Let $u_{g}^{\varepsilon}$ represent perturbations of $u_{g}$ and let the $D_i^{\varepsilon}$ be the corresponding induced perturbations of the domains $D_i$. Thus $\{D_i^{\varepsilon}\}_{i=1}^n$ is also a set of open subsets of $D$ such that $D_i^{\varepsilon}\cap D_j^{\varepsilon}=\varnothing$, for all $i\neq j$ and $\cup_{i=1}^n\overline{D_i^{\varepsilon}}=\overline{D}$. It is clear that this hypothesis holds true for all the test models. ### Permeability Values Throughout the paper, we use $u_{\kappa}$ to denote the unknown parameters describing $\kappa_{i}$ in ([\[eq:k_piecewise\]](#eq:k_piecewise){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:k_piecewise"}) and $U_{\kappa}$ as the admissible set for the parameters. We will consider two parameterizations of the functions $\kappa_i$ appearing in ([\[eq:k_piecewise\]](#eq:k_piecewise){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:k_piecewise"}): as constants and as continuous functions. - Piecewise constant: Each $\kappa_i$ is a positive constant. We then have the following choices: \[\begin{aligned} u_{\kappa}=(\kappa_1,\cdots,\kappa_{n}), \qquad U_{\kappa}= (0,\infty)^n \end{aligned}\] - Continuous: We consider each $\kappa_i$ to be defined on the whole of $D$. We work with $\log \kappa$ as the exponential of this will always give a positive continuous function as required for the existence of solution to ([\[eq:elliptic\]](#eq:elliptic){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:elliptic"}). This induces the following choices for $u_{\kappa}$ and $U_{\kappa}$: \[\begin{aligned} u_{\kappa}=(\log \kappa_{1},\dots, \log \kappa_{n}), \qquad U_{\kappa}= C({\overline{D}};\mathbb{R}^n) \end{aligned}\] We may consider Test Models $1$ or $2$ with either constant or continuous $\kappa_i$, leading to four different models of the permeability. In all four cases we define the unknown parameter and associated space by \[\begin{aligned} u= (u_{g},u_{\kappa}), \qquad U= U_{g}\times U_{\kappa}. \end{aligned}\] For the cases of defined above, $U$ is a subset of a separable Banach space $\bigl(\mathcal B,\\|\cdot\\|_{{\mathcal B}} \bigr)$. ## Observation Model {#ssec:pd} Given the parameterizations described at the end of the previous section, we define the function $F:U\rightarrow X$ as an abstract map from parameter space to the space of the permeabilities, by \[\label{eq:F} F(u)=\kappa.\] Let $L$ denote a bounded linear observation operator on $V$, comprising a finite number of linear functionals $l_j\in V^, j=1,\cdots, J$ that $L(p)=(l_1(p),\cdots,l_{J}(p))^T$. The measurements are some noisy observations from \[y_j=l_j(p)+\eta_j,\] where $\eta_j$ represents the noise polluting the observation. Let $y:=(y_1,\cdots,y_J)^T\in Y,$ where $Y:=\mathbb{R}^J$, equipped with Euclidean norm $\|\cdot\|$ and similarly for $\eta$; then, given ([\[eq:G\]](#eq:G){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:G"},[\[eq:F\]](#eq:F){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:F"}), we define the observation operator $\mathcal G: U\rightarrow Y$ by $\mathcal G=L\circ G\circ F$. We then have \[y=\mathcal G(u)+\eta. \label{eq:ips}\] In remaining sections of the paper we study the inverse problem of using $y$ to determine the unknown parameter $u \in U$. A key foundational result underlying our analysis is the the continuity of $\mathcal G$. # Bayesian Inverse Problems {#sec:ips} The inverse problem of interest here is to estimate the parameter $u$ from $y$ given by ([\[eq:ips\]](#eq:ips){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:ips"}). We adopt a Bayesian approach. The pair $(u,y) \in \mathcal B \times \mathbb{R}^J$ is modeled as a random variable: we put a prior probability measure $\mu_0$ for $u$ viewed as an element of the separable Banach space $\mathcal B$, and define the random variable $y\|u$ by assuming that $\eta \sim N(0,\Gamma)$ independently of $u$. The Bayesian solution to the inverse problem is then the posterior measure $\mu^y$ on the random variable $u\|y.$ We thereby define the probabilistic information about the unknown $u$ in terms of the measurements $y$, forward model and prior information. The paper and lecture notes describe a mathematical framework for Bayes' Theorem in this infinite dimensional setting. We define the priors and likelihood and then use this mathematical framework to establish the existence and well-posedness of the posterior distribution; here well-posedness refers to continuity of the posterior measure $\mu^y$, in the Hellinger or total variation metrics, with respect to the data $y$. ## Prior Modeling {#ssec:prior} The unknown parameter $u$ is viewed as an element of the separable Banach space $\mathcal B$ defined for each of the four permeability models. Under the prior we assume that the physical parameter $u_{\kappa}$ is independent of the geometric parameter $u_{g}$. Therefore we can build up a prior measure $\mu_0$ by defining the geometric prior distribution density $\pi^G_0$ and the permeability (or log permeability) prior measure $\mu_0^i$ respectively. ### Geometric Prior In the layer model with a fault, the geometry variables $a, b$ satisfy the geometric constraint $a, b \in A$. In addition, we consider the case where there is no preference that the thickness of a certain layer is larger than another one. In other words, we consider the case where $a$ and $b$ are i.i.d random vector drawn from uniform distribution with a density $\pi_0^{A,g}(x)$ such that \[\label{pi0} \pi_0^{A,g}(x)=\left\{ \begin{array}{cc} \frac{1}{\|A\|} & x \in A,\\ 0 & x \notin A. \end{array} \right.\] In addition, the slip parameter $c$ is drawn uniformly from $C= [-c^\star,c^\star]$, and independently of $(a,b)$. Then, the prior density for this geometric model is \[\pi_0^{G}(u_{g})= \pi_0^{A,g}(a)\pi_0^{A,g}(b)\pi_0^{C,g}(c)\] For the Channel Model we assume the geometric parameter $u_{g}$ is drawn uniformly from the admissible set $U_{g}$. Therefore, we consider the prior \[\pi_0^{G}(u_{g})= \Pi_{i=1}^{5}\pi_0^{[d_{i}^{-},d_{i}^{+}]}(d_{i})\] ### Permeability Prior We first discuss the case where the $\kappa_i$ are constant. Under the prior we assume that they are all independent and that each component $\kappa_i$ is drawn from a measure $\mu_0^i$ with Lebesgue density $\pi_0^i$, $i=1,\cdots,n$, defined by one of the following three cases: - Lognormal: $\log \kappa_i$ has the Gaussian distribution $N(m_i,\sigma_i^2)$. - Uniform: $\kappa_i$ has the uniform distribution in $[\kappa^{i,-},\kappa^{i,+}]$, where $\kappa^{i,-}>0$. - Exponential: $\kappa_i$ has the exponential distribution with parameter $\lambda_i$. In the case of variable $\kappa_i$ we will assume that each $\log \kappa_i$ is independent of the others and is distributed according to a random field prior $\mu_0^i=N(m_i,C_i)$ where the mean and covariance are chosen so that $\mu_0^i\Bigl(C({\overline{D}};\mathbb{R})\Bigr)=1$; that is, so that draws from $\mu_0^i$ give rise to continuous functions almost surely. ### The Prior Combining the foregoing we obtain, in the case of piecewise constant permeabilities, the following Lebesgue density of the prior for the Layer Model with fault: \[\label{prioreq1} \pi_0(u)=\pi_0^{A,g}(a)\pi_0^{A,g}(b)\pi_0^{C,g}(c)\prod_{i=1}^{n}\pi_0^i(\kappa_i).\] This may be viewed as the Lebesgue density of a probability measure $\mu_0$ on $U$; here $U$ is finite dimensional. In the piecewise function case we have a prior measure $\mu_0$ on the infinite dimensional space $U$ and it is given by \[\label{prioreq2} \mu_0(du)=\pi_0^{A,g}(a)da \otimes \pi_0^{A,g}(b)db\otimes \pi_0^{C,g}(c)dc\otimes \prod_{i=1}^n\mu_0^i(d \alpha_i),\] where $\alpha_i=\log \kappa_i.$ Thus in both cases we have constructed a measure $\mu_0$ in the measure space $\mathcal B$ equipped with the Borel $\sigma-$algebra. Furthermore the measure is constructed so that $\mu_0(U)=1.$ By similar arguments, we may construct the prior measure for the Channelized Models with the same properties. We omit the details for brevity. ## Likelihood We assume the noise $\eta$ in ([\[eq:ips\]](#eq:ips){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:ips"}) is independent of $u$, and drawn from the Gaussian distribution $N(0,\Gamma)$ on $Y$, with $\Gamma$ a self-adjoint positive matrix. Thus $y\|u \sim N(\mathcal G(u),\Gamma)$. We define the model-data misfit function $\Phi(u;y):U\times Y\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ by \[\Phi(u;y)=\frac{1}{2}\|y-\mathcal G(u)\|^2_\Gamma, \label{eq:potential}\] where $\|\cdot\|_\Gamma=\|\Gamma^{-\frac{1}{2}}\cdot\|$. The negative log likelihood is given, up to a constant independent of $(u,y)$, by $\Phi(u;y).$ ## Posterior Distribution We now show that the posterior distribution is well-defined by applying the basic theory in. Let $\mathbb{Q}_0$ be the Gaussian distribution $N(0,\Gamma)$. Define $\nu_0$ as a probability measure on $U \times Y$ by \[\nu_0(du,dy)=\mu_0(du)\otimes\mathbb{Q}_0(dy).\] The following Proposition [\[thm:bayes\]](#thm:bayes){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:bayes"} is a infinite dimensional version of Bayes Theorem, which implies the existence of a posterior distribution. We establish this Bayes theorem for our specific problem to show the well-definedness of the posterior distribution $\mu^y$. The key ingredient is the continuity of the forward and observation map $\mathcal G(u)$ (and hence $\Phi(\cdot;y)$) on a full $\mu_0$ measure set $U$; this may be used to establish the required measurability. We state two theorems, one concerning the case of piecewise constant permeability and the other concerning the case of variable permeability within each subdomain $D_i.$ ## Well-Posedness Now we study the continuity property of the posterior measure $\mu^y$ with respect to $y$. We recall definitions of the total variation metric $d_{TV}$ and Hellinger metric $d_{Hell}$ on measures, and then study Lipschitz and Hölder continuity of the posterior measure $\mu^y$, with respect to the data $y$, in these metrics. Let $\mu$ and $\mu'$ be two measures, and choose a common reference measure with respect to which both are absolutely continuous (the average of the two measures for example). Then the Hellinger distance is defined by \[d_{{Hell}}(\mu,\mu')=\left(\frac{1}{2} \int_U\left(\sqrt{\frac{d\mu}{d\nu}}-\sqrt{\frac{d\mu'}{d\nu}}\right)^2d\nu\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\] and the Total variation distance $d_{TV}$ is defined by \[d_{{TV}}(\mu,\mu')=\frac{1}{2} \int_U\left\|\frac{d\mu}{d\nu}-\frac{d\mu'}{d\nu}\right\|d\nu.\] Furthermore, the Hellinger and total variation distance are related as follows: \[\label{eq:tv_hell} \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}d_{TV}(\mu,\mu')\leq d_{{Hell}}(\mu,\mu') \leq d_{{TV}}(\mu,\mu')^{\frac{1}{2}}.\] The Hellinger metric is stronger than total variation as, for square integrable functions, the Hellinger metric defines the right order of magnitude of perturbations to expectations caused by perturbation of the measure; the total variation metric does this only for bounded functions. See, for example,, section 6.7. The nature of the continuity result that we can prove depends, in general, on the metric used and on the assumptions made about the prior model that we use for the permeability $\kappa$. This is illustrated for piecewise constant priors in the following theorem. As for the piecewise function case, we have a similar well-posedness result, which shows Lipschitz continuity with respect to data. # MCMC Algorithm {#se:MCMC} We have demonstrated the existence and well-posedness of the posterior distribution, which is the Bayesian solution to the inverse problem ([\[eq:ips\]](#eq:ips){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:ips"}). We now demonstrate numerical methods to extract information from this posterior distribution; one way to do this, which we focus on in this paper, is to generate samples distributed according to the posterior distribution. These can be used to approximate expectations with respect to the posterior and hence to make predictions about, and quantify uncertainty in, the permeability. In this section we construct a class of MCMC methods to generate such samples, using a Gibbs splitting to separate geometric and physical parameters, and using Metropolis (within Gibbs) proposals which exploit the structure of the prior. We thereby generate samples from the posterior given by ([\[eq:post\]](#eq:post){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:post"}) or ([\[eq:post_function\]](#eq:post_function){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:post_function"}) in Theorems [\[thm:existence_constant_case\]](#thm:existence_constant_case){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:existence_constant_case"} and [\[PC\]](#PC){reference-type="ref" reference="PC"}, respectively. The resulting accept-reject parts of the algorithm depend only on differences in the log-likelihood at the current and proposed states, or alternatively on differences of the misfit function $\Phi$ given by ([\[eq:potential\]](#eq:potential){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:potential"}). Similar methods have been identified as beneficial for Gaussian priors in for example and here we extend to the non-Gaussian prior measure on the permeability values (uniform distribution and exponential distribution) and on the geometry. ## Prior Reversible Proposals {#ssec:rev_pro} We start by demonstrating how prior reversible proposals lead to a simple accept-reject mechanism, depending only on differences in the model-data misfit function, within the context of the Metropolis-Hasting algorithm applied to Bayesian inverse problems. When the target distribution has density $\pi$ defined on $\mathbb{R}^d$ this algorithm proceeds by proposing to move from current state $u$ to proposed state $v$, drawn from Markov kernel $q(u,v)$, and accepting the move with probability \[a(u,v) = \frac{\pi(v) q(v,u)}{\pi(u) q(u,v)} \wedge 1. \label{MH}\] Crucial to this algorithm is the design of the proposal $q(u,v)$; algorithm efficiency will increase if we use a proposal which leads to low integrated correlation in the resulting Markov chain. When we have piecewise constant permeabilities then the posterior density $\pi^y$ is given by ([\[eq:post_density\]](#eq:post_density){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:post_density"}) with $\Phi$ defined in ([\[eq:potential\]](#eq:potential){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:potential"}). If we chose a prior-reversible proposal density which then satisfies \[\label{detbal} \pi_0(u) q(u,v) = \pi_0(v) q(v,u) \quad u, v \in \mathbb{R}^d.\] then the acceptance probability from ([\[MH\]](#MH){reference-type="ref" reference="MH"}) becomes \[\begin{aligned} \fl a(u,v) &= \frac{\pi^y(v) q(v,u)}{\pi^y(u) q(u,v)} \wedge 1= \frac{\pi_0(v)\exp(-\Phi(v;y))q(v,u)}{\pi_0(u)\exp(-\Phi(u;y)) q(u,v)} \wedge 1 \end{aligned}\] so that \[a(u,v)= \exp(\Phi(u;y)-\Phi(v;y)) \wedge 1. \label{eq:ap}\] Thus, if the proposed state $v$ corresponds to a lower value of the model-data misfit function $\Phi(v;y)$ than the current state $\Phi(u;y)$, it will accept the proposal definitely, otherwise it will accept with probability $a(u,v)<1.$ Hence, the accept-reject expressions depend purely on the model-data mismatch function $\Phi(u;y)$, having clear physical interpretation. ## Prior Reversible Proposal on $\mathbb{R}^d$ {#ssec:rev_pro} We now construct prior reversible proposals for the finite dimensional case when the permeability is piecewise constant. In this case $u_{\kappa}$ lives in a subset $U$ of $\mathbb{R}^n$ where $n$ is the number of parameters to be determined. The prior distribution $\pi_0$ constrains the parameters to the admissible set $U$, that is $\pi_0(x)=0$ if $x\notin U$. Given current state $v$ we then construct a prior reversible proposal kernel $q$ as follows: we let \[v = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} w & w \in U \\ u & w \notin U \end{array} \right., \label{eq:gen_v}\] where $w$ is drawn from kernel $p(u,w)$ that satisfies \[\pi_0(u) p(u,w) = \pi_0(w) p(w,u)\quad \forall u, w \in U. \label{eq:rev_p}\] Note that the previous expression is constrained to $U$, rather than $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ as in ([\[detbal\]](#detbal){reference-type="ref" reference="detbal"}). Note, however, that we have not assumed that $p(u,v)$ is a Markov kernel on $U \times U$; it may generate draws outside $U$. Therefore, in ([\[eq:gen_v\]](#eq:gen_v){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:gen_v"}) we just simply accept or reject the proposal $w$ based on whether $w$ is in $U$ or not. The reversibility with respect to the prior of the proposal $q(u,v)$ given by ([\[eq:gen_v\]](#eq:gen_v){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:gen_v"}) follows from: For a uniform prior $\pi_0(u)$, $p(u,w)$ may be any symmetric function that satisfies $p(u,w)=p(w,u)$. For example, we can use a Gaussian local move such that $p(u,w) \propto \exp \left(-\frac{1}{2\varepsilon^2} \|w-u\|^2 \right)$ or we can also propose $w$ by a local move drawn uniformly from an $\epsilon$ ball around $u$. An analogous discussion also applies when the geometric parameter is uniform (as before) but the permeability values are exponential. For the exponential permeability prior $\exp(\lambda)$, with support $[0,\infty)$, we may choose $w=u-\lambda\delta+\sqrt{2\delta} \subsection{Prior Reversible Proposal on $C({\overline D};\mathbb{R}^n)$} \label{ssec:rev_pro} For the case of continuous permeabilities, we recall that$u\_,i=\_i$has prior Gaussian measure$\_0\^(du\_)= (m,C)$with covariance and mean chosen so that it charges the space$C(D;\^n)$with full measure. In this case a prior reversible proposal is given by \begin{equation} v_{\kappa}=m+\sqrt{1-\beta^2}(u_{\kappa}-m)+\beta \end{equation} This is the pCN-MCMC method introduced in (see the overview in ) and the acceptance probability is again given by (\ref{eq:ap}) in this infinite dimensional context. \subsection{Metropolis-within-Gibbs: Separating Geometric and Physical Parameters} In practice the geometric and physical parameters have very different effects on the model-data misfit and efficiency can be improved by changing them separately. Using the independence between the geometric parameter$u\_g$and the physical parameters (permeabilities)$u\_$this can be obtained by employing the following Metropolis-within-Gibbs algorithm. \begin{algorithm}[Metropolis-within-Gibbs]\label{MwG}{~} Initialize$u\^(0)=(u\_\^(0),u\_g\^(0))U$. \\ For$k=0,...$\begin{enumerate} \item[(1)] Propose$v\_g$from$q\_g(u\_g\^(k),v\_g)$\subitem(1.1) Draw$w\^d$from$p\_g(u\^(k)\_g,w)$. \subitem(1.2) Let$v\_g U\_g$defined by \begin{equation} v_{g} = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} w & w \in U \\ u_{g}^{(k)} & w \notin U \end{array} \right.. \end{equation} \item[(2)] Accept or reject$v=(u\_\^(k),v\_g)$: \begin{equation} (u_{\kappa}^{(k)},u_{g}^{(k+1)}) = \left\{ \begin{array}{cc} v & \mathrm{with~probability}~a(u^{(k)},v) \\ u^{(k)} & \mathrm{otherwise} \end{array} \right.. \nonumber \end{equation} where$u\^(k)(u\_\^(k),u\_g\^(k))$and with$a(u,v)$defined by (\ref{eq:ap}). \item[(3)] Propose$v\_$from$q\_(u\_\^(k),v\_)$:\\ In the constant permeabilities case, propose$v\_$from$q\_(u\_\^(k),v\_)$as follows \subitem(3.1) Draw$w\^d$from$p\_(u\_\^(k),w)$. \subitem(3.2) Let$v\_ U\_$defined by \begin{equation} v_{\kappa} = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} w & w \in U_{\kappa} \\ u_{\kappa}^{(k)} & w \notin U_{\kappa} \end{array} \right.. \end{equation} In the continuous permeabilities case we propose$v\_$according to \begin{equation} \label{eq:pcn2} v_{\kappa}=m+\sqrt{1-\beta^2}(u_{\kappa}^{(k)}-m)+\beta \end{equation} \item[(4)] Accept or reject$v=(v\_,u\_g\^(k+1))$: \begin{equation} (u_{\kappa}^{(k+1)},u_{g}^{(k+1)}) = \left\{ \begin{array}{cc} v & \mathrm{with~probability}~a(\hat{u}^{(k)},v) \\ \hat{u}^{(k)} & \mathrm{otherwise} \end{array} \right.. \nonumber \end{equation} where$\^(k)(u\_\^(k),u\_g\^(k+1))$and with$a(u,v)\(defined by (\ref{eq:ap}). \end{enumerate} \end{algorithm} Furthermore, in the experiments which follow we sometimes find it advantageous to split the geometric parameters into different groupings, and apply the Metropolis-within-Gibbs idea to these separate groupings; again the independence of the parameters under the prior allows this to be done in a straightforward fashion, generalizing the preceding Algorithm \ref{MwG}. In particular, by using the independence of the geometric parameters under the prior, together with prior-reversibility of the proposals used, it again follows that the accept-reject criterion for each Metropolis-within-Gibbs step is given by (\ref{eq:ap}). In addition, we generate multiple parallel MCMC chains to sample the posterior in the subsequent experiments. For some of those chains we often find that a low probability mode is explored for a very large number of iterations. In order to accelerate the convergence of these chains, within the Metropolis step of the aforementioned algorithm, we implement proposals where the local moves described earlier are replaced, with probability 1/2, by independent samples from the prior. \section{Numerical Experiments} \label{se:Numer} We present some numerical examples to demonstrate the feasibility of our methodology. Specifically, the performance is illustrated by application to three examples derived from our Test Models of \Sref{sec:forward}. For these examples, the forward model consists of the elliptic equation on a domain\)D=\[0,1\]$discretized with the finite difference method on a mesh of size$`<!-- -->`{=html}50$. In addition,$J$measurement functionals$\_j(p)$are defined by \begin{equation}\label{meas_func} \ell_j(p)=\frac{1}{2\pi\sigma^2}\int_D\exp\left(-\frac{\|x-x_j\|^2}{2\sigma^2}\right)p(x)dx, \qquad j\in\{1,\cdots,J\} \end{equation} which can be understood as a smooth approximation of pressure evaluations at certain locations$x_j$'s in the domain$D$. This is because the kernel under the integrand approaches a Dirac measure at$x_j$as$.$Note that$\_jV\^\$, the dual space of$V$, as required for the analysis of \Sref{sec:forward}. In all of the numerical experiments reported\[takes the value$`<!-- -->`{=html}0.01.$For the subsequent experiments we generate synthetic data by first computing$p\^$, the solution to the elliptic equation with a ``true'' permeability$\^(x)$associated to the true parameters$u\^$. Then, synthetic data is defined by$y_j=\_j(p\^)+\_j$, where$\_j$are i.i.d. Gaussian noise from$(0,\^2 )$. Our choices of$u\^$and\]are described below. In order to avoid the inverse crime, the synthetic data is computed from the true permeability defined on a domain discretized on$`<!-- -->`{=html}100$cells while the Bayesian inversions are performed on a$`<!-- -->`{=html}50$grid. It is important to remark that the effect of the observational noise, at the scale we introduce it, is sufficient to induce significant inversion challenges even in this perfect model scenario. Furthermore, if model error is to be studied, it is perhaps more pertinent to study the effect of modelling the geometry through a small finite set of parameters, when real interfaces and faults will have more nuanced structures, or the effect of modelling spatially varying fields as constants. We leave the detailed study of these and other grid-based model errors for separate study. \subsection{Example. A Three-layer Model With Fault} For this experiment we consider a permeability of the form \begin{equation}\label{eq:num1} \kappa(x)=\kappa_1 \chi_{D_1}(x)+\kappa_2 \chi_{D_2}(x)+\kappa_3 \chi_{D_3}(x) \end{equation} where${D_i}\_i=1\^3$are the open subsets defined by the geometric parameters$a=(a\_1,a\_2)$,$b=(b\_1,b\_2)$and$c$as in Figure \ref{Figure1A}. Therefore, the unknown parameter is$u=(a\_1,a\_2,b\_1,b_2,c,\_1,\_2,\_3)\^8$. We consider the true$\^(x)$shown in Figure \ref{Figure2} (top-left) which corresponds to (\ref{eq:num1}) for the true values$u\^$of \Tref{Table1}. \begin{table}[!ht] \centering \begin{tabular}{\|cc\|rl\|cc\|} \hline parameter & true value & data set 1& data set 1& data set 2& data set 2\\ & & mean & variance & mean& variance\\ \hline$a_1$&$`<!-- -->`{=html}0.39$& 0.386&$`<!-- -->`{=html}3.4\^-3$& 0.394&$`<!-- -->`{=html}2\^-4$\\ $b_1$&$`<!-- -->`{=html}0.18$&0.174&$`<!-- -->`{=html}4.6\^-3$& 0.177&$`<!-- -->`{=html}7\^-4$\\ $a_2$&$`<!-- -->`{=html}0.35$&0.486&$`<!-- -->`{=html}6.9\^-3$& 0.400&$`<!-- -->`{=html}6\^-4$\\ $b_2$&$`<!-- -->`{=html}0.6$&0.618&$`<!-- -->`{=html}8.9\^-3$& 0.637&$`<!-- -->`{=html}3.5\^-3$\\ $c$&$`<!-- -->`{=html}0.15$&0.239&$`<!-- -->`{=html}1.04\^-2$& 0.192&$`<!-- -->`{=html}1.2\^-3$\\ $\_1$&$`<!-- -->`{=html}12$&11.718 & 1.796& 11.337&$`<!-- -->`{=html}1.0128$\\ $\_2$&$`<!-- -->`{=html}1$&1.228&$`<!-- -->`{=html}4.57\^-2$& 1.177&$`<!-- -->`{=html}9.5\^-3$\\ $\_3$&$`<!-- -->`{=html}5$&5.148&$ 6.65\^-1$& 4.55&$`<!-- -->`{=html}1.378\^-1$\\ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{Data relevant to the experiment with the 3-layers model} \label{Table1} \end{table} We consider 16 measurement functionals defined by (\ref{meas_func}) with measurement locations distributed as shown in Figure \ref{Figure2} (top-right). Synthetic data (data set 1) is generated as described above with$\^-3$. According to subsection \ref{ssec:prior}, the prior distribution for this parameter is defined by \begin{equation} \pi_0(u)=\pi_0^{A,g}(a)\pi_0^{A,g}(b)\pi_0^{C,g}(c)\pi_0^1(\kappa_1)\pi_0^2(\kappa_2)\pi_0^3(\kappa_3) \label{eq:prior_layer} \end{equation} where each of the$\_0\^i(\_i)$and$\_0\^C,g(c)$is a uniform distribution on a specified interval. The uniform prior associated to the geometrical parameters$a$and$b$is defined with support everywhere on the edges of the squared domain. However, specific restricted intervals are specified for the construction of the uniform priors corresponding to the values of the permeabilities and, in particular, we choose intervals which do not include the origin. The reason for selecting these restrictive priors for the values of the permeabilities is motivated by the subsurface flow application where prior knowledge of a range of nominal values of permeabilities for each rock-type are typically available from geologic data. The densities$\_0\^A,G(a)$and$\_0\^A,G(b)$are defined according to expression (\ref{pi0}) where$A={x\^\\|x_1+x_2, x_1 , x_2 }$. In the top row of Figure \ref{Figure3} we display some permeabilities defined by (\ref{eq:num1}) for parameters$u$drawn from the prior distribution defined by the previous expression. The forward model, the prior distribution and the synthetic data described above define the posterior measure given by (\ref{eq:post}), Theorem \ref{thm:existence_constant_case}, that we sample with a variant of the MCMC method of Algorithm \ref{MwG}. In concrete, we implement the outer Gibbs loop by considering groupings of the unknown$u=(a\_1,a\_2,b\_1,b_2,c,\_1,\_2,\_3)$as follows: (i) the high permeabilities$\_1$and$\_3$, (ii) the low permeability$\_2$, (iii) the slip$c$, (iv) the right-hand lengths$a=(a\_1,a\_2)$and (v) the left-hand lengths$b=(b\_1,b\_2)$. This separation of the unknown results in short decorrelation times compared to the ones when more variables of the unknown are updated simultaneously within the Metropolis part of Algorithm \ref{MwG}. We consider 20 different chains started with random draws from the prior. Trace plots from the first$`<!-- -->`{=html}10\^5$steps of one of the chains is presented in Figure \ref{Figure4}, together with the running mean and standard deviations. We monitor the convergence of the multiple chains with the multivariate potential scale reduction factor (MPSRF). Once approximate convergence has been reached, all chains are merged and the samples from the combined chains are used for the subsequent results. In the middle row of Figure \ref{Figure3} we show permeabilities (defined by (\ref{eq:num1})) for some samples$u$of the posterior distribution. In \Tref{Table1} we display the values of the mean\[and the variance of the posterior measure characterized with a total of$`<!-- -->`{=html}1.5\^7$samples from our MCMC chains. The permeability that results from (\ref{eq:num1}) for the mean parameter\]of the posterior is presented in Figure \ref{Figure2} (bottom-left). We now repeat this experiment with a different set of synthetic data (data set 2) generated as before but with a smaller error with standard deviation$\^-4$. This set of synthetic data defines a new posterior measure that we characterize with the MCMC Algorithm \ref{MwG} used for the previous experiments (using exactly the same parameters in the proposal generators). The corresponding values of$u\(are also displayed in \Tref{Table1} and the resulting permeability is displayed in Figure \ref{Figure2} (bottom-right). Some permeabilities associated to the samples of the posterior are presented in Figure \ref{Figure3} (bottom row ). For both experiments, the marginals of the posterior distribution are displayed in \Fref{Figure5} along with the marginals of the prior. The marginals of the posterior pushed forward by the forward operator are displayed in Figure \ref{Figure6}. In Figure \ref{Figure7} we display the integrated autocorrelation for each of the components of the unknown for both posterior that arise from the data set 1 (top) and the data set 2 (bottom). From Table \ref{Table1} we observe that, for both experiments, the mean of the parameters are in very good agreement with the truth. In fact, the corresponding permeabilities from Figures \ref{Figure2} produce very similar results. However, it comes as no surprise that more accurate synthetic data (data set 2) result in a posterior density that is more peaked around the truth ( see Figure \ref{Figure5}). In other words, the posterior associated with smaller error variance quantifies less uncertainty in the unknown parameters. While both estimates provide a good approximation of the truth, the associated uncertainties are substantially different from one another. Indeed, from Figure \ref{Figure3} we observe a larger variability in the samples of the posterior that we obtain from the data set 1. From Figure \ref{Figure7} we note that the correlation of the samples is larger for observational error with smaller covariance. Indeed, during the MCMC algorithm for sampling of the posterior, the local move in the proposal is more likely to be rejected for smaller values of\[(recall we are using the same MCMC algorithm for both experiments). \clearpage \subsection{Example. Two-layer Model With Spatially-varying Permeabilities} This is an infinite-dimensional example where the permeability is described by \begin{equation}\label{eq:num3} \kappa(x)=\kappa_{1}(x) \chi_{D_1}(x)+\kappa_2(x) \chi_{D_2}(x) \end{equation} where\)D\_1$and$D\_2$are the subsets defined by$a$and$b$as shown in Figure \ref{fig:test1_layer}. For this case we consider the case that$c=0$is a known parameter. The unknown parameter in this case is$u=(a,b,\_1, \_2)\^2C(;\^2)$. We consider a prior measure of the form \begin{equation}\label{eq:num4} \mu_{0}(du)= \pi_0^{A,g}(a)da~\pi_0^{A,g}(b)db~\delta(c)\otimes N(m_1,C_{1}) N(m_2,C_{2}) \end{equation} where\]is the Dirac distribution ($c=0$is known) and where$A=\[0,1\]$and$C\_1$and$C\_2$are covariance operators defined from correlation functions typical in geostatistics. In concrete the correlation functions of$C\_1$(resp.$C\_2$) is spherical (resp. exponential) and its maximum correlation is along$/4$(resp.$`<!-- -->`{=html}3/4$). It is convenient, both conceptually and computationally, to parameterize the log permeabilities via their Karhunen-Loeve (KL) expansions of the form \begin{equation}\label{eq:num5} \log(\kappa_{i}(x)) =m_i+\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\sqrt{\lambda_{j,i}} v_{j,i}(x) \end{equation} where$\_j,i$and$v\_j,i(x)$are the eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of$C\_i$and$ limiting Bayesian inverse problem in which the series is not truncated and the PDE is solved exactly. The theory of paper may be used to quantify the error arising from the truncation of the KL expansion and the approximation of the solution of the PDE; this gives a distinct advantage to the "apply then discretize" approach advocated here since all sufficiently resolved computations are approximating the same limiting problem. In Figure [\[Figure8\]](#Figure8){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure8"} (top row) we show log-permeabilities computed with ([\[eq:num3\]](#eq:num3){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:num3"}) with parameter $u$ sampled from the prior ([\[eq:num4\]](#eq:num4){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:num4"}). There is substantial variability in these samples. The true log-permeability $\log \kappa^{\dagger}$, shown in Figure [\[Figure9\]](#Figure9){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure9"} (top-left), is obtained from ([\[eq:num3\]](#eq:num3){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:num3"}) with $\log \kappa_{1}^{\dagger}$ displayed in Figure [\[Figure10\]](#Figure10){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure10"} (top-left) $\log \kappa_{2}^{\dagger}$ shown in Figure [\[Figure10\]](#Figure10){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure10"} bottom-left and from $a^{\dagger}=0.11$ and $b^{\dagger}=0.86$. The functions $\log \kappa_{1}^{\dagger}$ and $\log \kappa_{2}^{\dagger}$ are draws from the Gaussian measures $N(m_1,C_{1})$ and $N(m_2,C_{2})$ that we use to define the prior ([\[eq:num3\]](#eq:num3){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:num3"}). However, in order to avoid the inverse crime, these priors that we use to generate $\log \kappa_{1}^{\dagger}$ and $\log \kappa_{2}^{\dagger}$ (and so $u^{\dagger}$) are defined on a discretized domain (of $100\times 100$ grids) that is finer than the one used for the inversion. Synthetic data (data set 1) is generated by using the true permeability in the elliptic PDE and applying the measurement functional with 9 measurement locations as displayed in Figure [\[Figure9\]](#Figure9){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure9"} (bottom-left). Gaussian noise of standard deviation $\gamma=1.0\times 10^{-3}$ is added to the observations. For this case, we sample the posterior with the MCMC Algorithm [\[MwG\]](#MwG){reference-type="ref" reference="MwG"} using the following splitting of the unknown $u=(a,b,\log \kappa_{1}, \log \kappa_{2})$ for the outer Gibbs loop: (i) $\log \kappa_{1}$, (ii) $\log \kappa_{2}$ and (iii) $(a,b)$. Similar to the previous experiment, splitting the unknown yields the best performance in terms of decorrelation times. As before, 20 parallel chains were generated and the MPSRF was computed for assessing the convergence of the independent chains. Trace plots from one of these chains are presented in Figure [\[Figure11\]](#Figure11){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure11"}. The samples from all chains were combined to produce the mean and variance of the unknown. The mean and variance of $\log \kappa_{1}$ and $\log \kappa_{2}$ are shown in Figure [\[Figure10\]](#Figure10){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure10"} (second column) and Figure [\[Figure12\]](#Figure12){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure12"}, respectively (first column). The mean for the geometric parameters are $\hat{a}=0.198$ and $\hat{b}=0.639$. The corresponding variances are $\sigma_{a}=1.03\times 10^{-2}$ and $\sigma_{b}=9.5\times 10^{-3}$, respectively. The permeability ([\[eq:num3\]](#eq:num3){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:num3"}) corresponding to the mean $\hat{u}$ is displayed in Figure [\[Figure9\]](#Figure9){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure9"} (top-middle). We repeat this experiment with a synthetic data (data set 2) that we now generate from a configuration of 36 measurement locations as specified in Figure [\[Figure9\]](#Figure9){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure9"} (bottom-right). Mean and variance of $\log \kappa_{1}$ and $\log \kappa_{2}$ are displayed in Figure [\[Figure10\]](#Figure10){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure10"} (third column) and Figure [\[Figure12\]](#Figure12){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure12"} (second column), respectively. The mean and variances for the geometric parameters are $\hat{a}=0.088$ and $\hat{b}=0.822$ and $\sigma_{a}=8\times 10^{-4}$ and $\sigma_{b}=7\times 10^{-4}$, respectively. The permeability ([\[eq:num3\]](#eq:num3){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:num3"}) corresponding to the mean $\hat{u}$ is displayed in Figure [\[Figure9\]](#Figure9){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure9"} (top-right). For both experiments, Figure [\[Figure13\]](#Figure13){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure13"} shows the autocorrelation of the geometric parameters as well as the KL-coefficients $\clearpage \subsection{Channelized Permeability} In this experiment we consider channelized permeabilities of the form (\ref{eq:num3}) where$D\_1$and$D\_2$are the domains corresponding to the interior and exterior of the channel, respectively. These domains are parametrized with five parameters as shown in Figure \ref{Figure1B}. Two fields for$\_i$are considered as in the previous experiments. The unknown parameter in this case is$u=(d\_1,...,d\_5,\_1, \_2)\^5C(;\^2)$. We consider a prior distribution of the form \begin{equation}\label{eq:num4B} \fl \mu_{0}(du)= \Pi_{i=1}^{5}\pi_0^{B_{i},g}(d_{i})\otimes N(m_1,C_{1}) N(m_2,C_{2}) \end{equation} where the set$B\_i$in the definition of$\_0\^B\_i,g()$(for each parameter) is a specified interval in\[, and$C\_1$and$C\_2$are covariance operators as in the previous experiment. The true log-permeability$\^$, shown in Figure \ref{Figure16} (left), is obtained from (\ref{eq:num3}) with$\_1\^$displayed in Figure \ref{Figure17} (top-left)$\_2\^$shown in Figure \ref{Figure17} (bottom-left) and from the geometric parameters specified in Table \ref{Table3}. The true fields$\_i\^$are generated as described in the preceding subsection. We consider the measurement configuration displayed in Figure \ref{Figure16} (right) and generate synthetic data as before. For the present example, the measurements are corrupted with noise with standard deviation of$\^-4$. Algorithm \ref{MwG} is applied to characterize the posterior distribution with 20 parallel chains that passed Gelman-Rubin MPSRF diagnostic. For this experiment, we use an outer Gibbs loop in which we update each of the geometric parameters independently; then, both log-permeabilities field are updated simultaneously. Combined samples from all chains are used to compute the mean and variance of the unknown. Trace plots can be found in Figure \ref{Figure19}. In Figure \ref{Figure18} we show log-permeabilities with parameter$u$sampled from the prior (\ref{eq:num4B}) (top row) and the posterior (bottom row) respectively. In Figure \ref{Figure17} we show the posterior mean and variance for the fields$\_1$(second column) and$\_2$(third column), respectively. The mean and variance for the geometric parameters are reported in Table \ref{Table3}. The permeability (\ref{eq:num3}) corresponding to the mean\]is displayed in Figure \ref{Figure16} (middle). The autocorrelation of the geometric parameters and KL-coefficients$ # Conclusion The Bayesian framework provides a rigorous quantification of the uncertainty in the solution to the inverse problem of estimating rock properties given data from the subsurface flow. A key aspect of the proposed Bayesian approach is to incorporate prior knowledge that honors geometric features relevant to the characterization of complex geologic properties of the subsurface. Although other authors have considered geometrically defined priors, see for example, this is the first paper to give a rigorous function-space based Bayesian formulation for such problems. Such formulations lead to the development of improved algorithms and allow for rigorous estimation of the various approximation errors that necessarily enter into the Bayesian approximation of inverse problems. In the present work we establish the existence and well-posedness of the Bayesian posterior that arises from determination of permeability within a Darcy flow model, define function-space MCMC methods, which therefore have convergence rates independent of the level of mesh-refinement used, and demonstrate the efficacy of these methods on a variety of test problems exhibiting faults, channels and spatial variability within different parts of the rock formations. Particular highlights of the work include: (i) the introduction of a novel Metropolis-within-Gibbs methodology which separates the effect of parameters describing the geometry from those describing spatial variability to accelerate convergence and does not require adjoint solves, only forward model runs; (ii) demonstration of choices of prior on the permeability values which lead to Hölder, but not Lipshitz, continuity of the posterior distribution with respect to perturbations in the data. Our results indicate that the mean of the posterior often produce parameters whose permeabilities resemble the truth. However, substantial uncertainty in the inverse problem arises from the observational noise and the lack of observations. Increasing the accuracy in the data or increasing the measurement locations resulted in a significant decrease in the uncertainty in the inverse problem. In other words, we obtained posterior densities concentrated around the truth. In contrast to deterministic inverse problems where a variational optimization method is implemented to recover the truth, the proposed application of the Bayesian framework provides a derivative free method that produces a reasonable estimate of the truth alongside with an accurate estimate of its uncertainty. The present study indicates that the Bayesian framework herein, and resulting algorithmic approaches, have the potential to be applied to more complex flow models and geometries arising in subsurface applications where uncertainty quantification is required. There are a number of natural directions in which this work might be extended. As mentioned earlier in the text, the study of model error is potentially quite fruitful: there is substantial gain in computational expediency stemming from imposing simple models of the geometry; determining how this is balanced by loss of accuracy when the actual data contains more subtle geometric effects, not captured our models, is of interest. It is also of interest to consider implementation of reversible jump type algorithms, in cases where the number of geometric parameters (e.g. the number of layers) is not known. And finally it will be of interest to construct rigorous Bayesian formulation of geometric inverse problems where the interfaces are functions, and require an infinite set of parameters to define them. We also highlight the fact that although we emphasize the importance of MCMC methods which are mesh-independent this does not mean that we have identified the definitive version of such methods; indeed it would be very interesting to combine our mesh-independent approach with other state-of-the art ideas in MCMC sampling such as adaptivity and delayed acceptance, which are used in the context of geophysical applications in, and Riemannian manifold methods, which also give rise to a natural adaptivity. # Appendix	{'timestamp': '2014-06-17T02:11:19', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5571', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5571'}
null	null
null	null
null	null
# INTRODUCTION Molecular collisional excitation rate coefficients are important as they contribute to level excitation (and quenching or deexcitation) in competition with radiative processes. In cold environments such as the ISM, the dominant collision partners are often H$_2$ and He, except in photodissociation regions (PDRs) and diffuse gas where collisions with electrons and H can become important. Precise laboratory data including collisional (de)-excitation rate coefficients are required, for a range of temperatures, to interpret the complicated interstellar spectra of molecular gas not in local thermodynamic equilibrium (LTE). Because of the complexity and difficulty in direct measurements, only limited state-to-state collision rate coefficients have been obtained for systems of astrophysical interest. Therefore modeling astrophysical systems rely heavily on theoretical estimates . Here we consider the hydrogen halide HCl, which has been detected in the atmospheres of some planets, as well as in interstellar clouds. It is an important tracer of chlorine and can be used to constrain the chlorine elemental abundance and isotope ratios. observed it toward the Sagittarious B2 complex and modeled its non-LTE spectrum. Further, HCl was recently detected in the circumstellar envelope of IRC+10216 by Herschel. It has also been surveyed throughout the interstellar medium (ISM) via its rotational line emission by. It appears that HCl is a particularly good tracer of molecular cloud cores of the highest density; however, the density estimates are limited by the uncertainty in collision rates. The HCl-He collision system has been investigated theoretically and experimentally in a variety of studies. The first reliable potential energy surface (PES) for the HCl-He complex was presented by and used to theoretically fit experimental helium pressure broadening cross sections of DCl at very low temperature and at 300 K. computed HCl-He rate coefficients for temperatures between 10 K and 300 K on the potential by, but their calculations were limited to $j<8$, where $j$ is the rotational quantum number. In their calculations, collision cross sections were computed using the MOLSCAT scattering code within the essentially exact close-coupling (CC) formalism. For total energies above 1200 K, the coupled-states (CS) approximation was used. Two newer PESs for HCl-He have been reported. The two-dimensional (rigid monomer) PES of was developed from ab initio calculations using symmetry-adapted perturbation theory (SAPT) with an ($spdfg$) basis set plus midbond functions. This SAPT potential is in good agreement with the semiempirical PES of predicting that the global minimum is on the Cl side. The accuracy of the SAPT potential was tested by performing rovibrational bound states calculations of the HCl-He complex, which show that the calculated transition frequencies were in excellent agreement with the measurements of. also pointed out that the dissociation energy predicted by the SAPT potential for the complex is probably more accurate than the experiment. presented another two-dimensional HCl-He potential using the coupled-cluster with single, double, and triple excitations (CCSDT) method. This potential is very similar to the SAPT PES, but gives better agreement with the experimental dissociation energy and rotational energy levels of the HCl-He complex. Very recently three-dimensional and two-dimensional PESs were presented by and by, which used the supermolecular approach based on the CCSD(T) method, but at different levels of theory. These new potentials were also used in CC calculations of pure rotational excitation of HCl by He by these authors. Cross sections for transitions among the first 11 rotational states of HCl were calculated for total energy of up to 3000 cm$^{-1}$ using MOLSCAT with the log-derivative propagator of. Rate coefficients were presented from 5 to 300 K. In this work, we performed explicit quantum scattering calculations of rotational quenching of HCl by He to higher levels of rotational excitation using the SAPT potential of. HCl-He rate coefficients are presented for a large range of temperature (0.1-3000 K) which will aid in modeling rotational spectra of HCl in various astrophysical and atmospheric environments. We discuss the computational method in Section 2 and the results in Section 3. In Section 4, an estimate of the uncertainty in the cross sections and rate coefficients is presented, while Section 5 briefly discusses application of the current results to astrophysics. # COMPUTATIONAL METHOD The theory developed by for atom-diatom scattering is adopted. HCl was treated as a rigid-rotor with bond length equal to the equilibrium distance $r_e=1.275$ Å. The calculations presented here were performed by applying the CC method and the CS approximation. The HCl-He interaction potential is expressed by $V(R,\theta)$, where $R$ is the distance from the HCl center of mass to the He atom, and $\theta$ is the angle between $\vec{R}$ and the HCl molecular axis, with $\theta = 180 ^{\circ}$ defined for the collinear arrangement He-H-Cl. The potential $V(R, \theta)$ was expanded in the form \[V(R,\theta)=\sum_{\lambda=0}^{\lambda_{\textrm{max}}}v_{\lambda}(R)P_{\lambda}(\textrm{cos} \theta),\] where $P_{\lambda}$ are Legendre polynomials and $v_{\lambda}(R)$ expansion coefficients of the potential. For a transition from an initial rotational state $j$ to a final rotational state $j'$, the integral cross section can be expressed in terms of the scattering matrix $S$, within the CC formalism by \[\sigma_{j\rightarrow j'}(E_{j}) =\frac{\pi}{(2j+1)k_{j}^2}\sum_{J=0}(2J+1)\sum_{l=\|J-j\|}^{J+j} \sum_{l'=\|J-j'\|}^{J+j'}\|\delta_{jj'}\delta_{ll'}-S_{jj'll'}^J(E_j)\|^2,\] where the total angular momentum $\bf{\vec{J}=\vec{l}+\vec{j}}$, is composed of the rotational angular momentum $\bf{\vec{j}}$ of the HCl molecule and the orbital angular momentum $\bf{\vec{l}}$ of the collision complex. $k_{j}=\sqrt{2\mu E_{j}}/\hbar$ is the wave vector for the incoming channel, $E_j$ the center-of-mass kinetic energy for the incoming channel corresponding to the initial rotational state $j$ of HCl, and $\mu$ the collision system reduced mass. All reported scattering calculations were performed using the quantum-mechanical scattering code MOLSCAT. The propagation was carried out from an intermolecular separation $R=1.0$ to $R=100$ Å. To ensure the accuracy of the state-to-state rate constants for temperatures from $10^{-4}$ to 3000 K, kinetic energies between $10^{-5}$ cm$^{-1}$ and 15,000 cm$^{-1}$ were used in our state-to-state cross section calculations. The angular dependence of the interaction potential was expanded in Legendre polynomials shown in Eq. (1) with $\lambda_{\textrm{max}}$=22. 24 points in $\theta$ from Gauss-Legendre quadrature were used to project out the potential expansion coefficients. Sufficient number of partial waves necessary for convergence of the cross sections were used; in the higher collision energy region the maximum value of $J$ employed was 360. The CS approximation was adopted for collision energies greater than 2000 cm$^{-1}$, while the CC method was used for all lower energies, the agreement between the CS and CC calculations is within 5%. # RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ## State-to-state and total deexcitation cross sections State-to-state quenching cross sections were computed for initial HCl rotational levels of $j=1, \ 2, \ \cdots, \ 20$. Rotational energy levels are presented in Table 1 for the basis set adopted in the current calculation, which were obtained using rotational constant $B_0$=10.5933 cm$^{-1}$ and centrifugal distortion constant $D_0$=0.00053 cm$^{-1}$. As examples, the state-to-state quenching cross sections from initial levels $j$=5 and 15 are presented in Fig. [\[fig1\]](#fig1){reference-type="ref" reference="fig1"}(a) and [\[fig1\]](#fig1){reference-type="ref" reference="fig1"}(b), respectively.[^1] Cross sections using the CS approximation begin at 2000 cm$^{-1}$ and are seen to be in excellent agreement with those obtained with the CC method. The cross sections display resonances in the intermediate energy region from $\sim$`<!-- -->`{=html}0.1 cm$^{-1}$ to $\sim$`<!-- -->`{=html}10 cm$^{-1}$ due to quasibound levels supported by the attractive part of the interaction potential. The $\|\Delta j\|=\|j'-j\| = 1$ transition dominants the quenching for all $j$ (shown here for $j=5$ and $j=15$), with the cross sections generally increasing with increasing $j'$ with that for $j'=0$ being the smallest. The total deexcitation cross section from an initial state $j$ can be obtained by summing over all final states $j'$. Fig. [\[fig2\]](#fig2){reference-type="ref" reference="fig2"} displays the total deexcitation cross section for quenching from selected initial levels $j$=2, 4, 6, $\cdots$, 18, and 20. Generally, the total quenching cross sections have similar behavior, but differences result for small $j$ at high energy due to a limited number of final exit channels. Each of the cross sections exhibits the behavior predicted by Wigner (1948) threshold laws at ultra-low collision energies below $\sim$`<!-- -->`{=html}10$^{-4}$ cm$^{-1}$, where only $s$-wave scattering contributes and the cross sections vary inversely with the relative velocity. Except for $j$=2 the total deexcitation cross sections decrease to a global minimum near 500 cm$^{-1}$. ## State-to-state deexcitation rate coefficients The state-to-state thermal rate coefficients can be calculated by thermally averaging the appropriate state-to-state cross sections over Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution of kinetic energy $E_j$. To our knowledge, there has been no published experimental rate coefficients available for rotational transitions of HCl by collisions with He. Therefore, we compare our rate coefficients with the theoretical results of, , and, which were obtained over a limited temperature range of 10 to 300 K. As examples, Figs. [\[fig3\]](#fig3){reference-type="ref" reference="fig3"} and [\[fig4\]](#fig4){reference-type="ref" reference="fig4"} show selected transitions for state-to-state deexcitation rate coefficients from initial HCl levels $j$=1, 3, and 7. Generally, our results show very good agreement with that of and, which were computed using different potentials. For initial state $j=1$, Fig. [\[fig3\]](#fig3){reference-type="ref" reference="fig3"}(a) shows that the present rate coefficients are larger than those of, , and in the temperature range from 10 to 300 K, but their rate coefficients approach our results with increasing temperature. Fig. [\[fig3\]](#fig3){reference-type="ref" reference="fig3"}(b), which displays state-to-state deexcitation rate coefficients from initial level $j=3$, shows that the results of, , and agree well with the present rate coefficients, except that for quenching to $j'$=0 the rate coefficients of both and are larger than the present results. State-to-state rate coefficients from initial state $j=7$ are given in Fig. [\[fig4\]](#fig4){reference-type="ref" reference="fig4"} where comparison of the present results with the rate coefficients of show excellent agreement. Except for the transition $j=5 \rightarrow j'=3$, the rate coefficients of generally show good agreement with present results. These differences are likely related to differences in the adopted PESs (see below). For illustration, in Fig. [\[fig5\]](#fig5){reference-type="ref" reference="fig5"} we also present the state-to-state deexcitation rate coefficients for temperatures from 0.1 K to 3000 K for initial levels $j$=10 and 20. Over the whole temperatures range considered, the rate coefficients generally increase with increasing temperature for all transitions. Further, one can clearly see that the rate coefficients decrease with increasing $\|\Delta j\|=\|j'-j\|$ with the $\Delta j=-1$ transitions dominant. # Uncertainty in Scattering Calculations One essential prerequisite for accurate cross section and rate coefficient calculations is the availability of a PES with high accuracy. However the quality of the PES depends not only on the methods used for the interaction energy calculation, but also the accuracy and reliability of the potential fitting and extension to long range. Convergence testing was performed in our calculations by using sufficiently large basis sets and adjustment of other calculation parameters. Consequently, the uncertainty associated with our cross section calculation is related primarily to the uncertainty in the adapted PES. In this work, the SAPT PES of was applied. As discussed by the main features of the HCl-He PES are a minimum in the linear configuration He-H-Cl, global minimum at the He-Cl-H configuration, and a saddle point close to the T-shaped configuration. This also applies to PESs of and. However, the major difference between the three potentials is the well depth of the global minimum. To estimate the uncertainty of the cross sections and rate coefficients calculated from the PES of, a simple approach is to scale the SAPT PES by the largest and smallest ratio of the well depths of the three PESs. Of course, the cross section and rate coefficients depend on the detailed structure of the potential including the shape, well depth, and position of the minumum which relies heavily on the methods applied in the HCl-He potential calculaltion. Here, the well depth is used to illutrate the uncertainty in scattering calculations. We calculated the deexcitation cross section and rate coefficient for the $j=1 \rightarrow j'=0$ transition using the SAPT PES scaled by factors of 1.0322 and 0.9688, respectively, i.e., a variation of $\pm 3\%$. In Fig. [\[fig6\]](#fig6){reference-type="ref" reference="fig6"} we compare the $j=1 \rightarrow j'=0$ quenching cross sections and rate coefficients obtained using the scaled SAPT potential with the results obtained from the original SAPT potential. Due to differences in the PES well-depths, it can be seen that the cross sections and rate coefficients show evident disagreement at low collision energy and low temperature, $T\le 20$ K. In the van der Waals interaction-dominated regime, the rate coefficients exhibit an oscillatory temperature dependence due to the presence of resonances. The magnitudes, widths, and positions of the resonances are sensitive to the details of the PES. However for high collision energy and high temperature, the cross sections and rate coefficients from the scaled and original SAPT PES generally converge. In another words, the uncertainty due to the accuracy of the SAPT PES is negligible at high temperatures. We estimate the uncertainty in the computed rate coefficients to be 12%, 4%, and 1.3% at 1, 10, and 100 K, respectively. # Astrophysical Applications Rate coefficients for collisional excitation and deexcitation are of importance in describing the dynamics of energy transfer processes in interstellar objects. In particular, accurate rotational and vibrational excitation rates are needed to interpret microwave and infrared observations of the interstellar gas for non-LTE line formation. Further, the thermal balance of interstellar gas is partly determined by cooling processes involving molecular collisional excitation followed by radiative decay. Despite some progress in laboratory measurements of state-to-state collisional rate coefficients and cross sections, astrophysical models depend almost exclusively on theoretical data. Experiments do provide, when available, some confidence in the theoretical rate coefficients. As discussed in the Introduction, HCl has been observed in emission and absorption in a variety of astronomical environments. Agúndez et al. (2011) reported observations of the $j$=1-0, 2-1, and 3-2 rotational lines of H$^{35}$Cl and H$^{37}$Cl in the carbon star envelope IRC+10216 using the Herschel/HIFI instrument. It was inferred that HCl is produced in the inner layers of the envelope close to the asymptotic giant branch (AGB) star. Recently, by observing the H$^{37}$Cl and H$^{35}$Cl 1-0 transitions with the HIFI spectrometer, Codella et al. (2012) presented the first detection of HCl towards protostellar shocks. It is expected that more highly excited rotational lines may be observed with SOFIA in the future. However, except for the set of calculations done for temperatures between 10 and 300 K and $j<7$ by, , and, no other computations of the He excitation rate coefficients have appeared. Therefore, the current rate coefficient calculations, which extend from 0.1 to 3000 K, are the most comprehensive to date for He and can be utilized in a variety of applications augmenting the datasets developed for He, H$_2$ and electrons. The rate coefficients for molecular scattering with para-H$_2$ are often estimated using available rate coefficients with He by the application of a constant reduced-mass scaling factor of 1.4. However, calculated the rate coefficients for SiS scattering with para-H$_2$ and compared their results to the SiS-He rate coefficients scaled by the H$_2$/He reduced-mass factor and found significant differences. In much earlier work, Schaefer (1990) found large deviations at temperatures of 100 K and below when comparing directly calculated rotational excitation rate coefficients for HD due to H$_2$ and those obtained by reduced-mass-scaling of HD-He rates. Applying such a procedure to the current HCl-He rates coefficients to estimate rate coefficients for H$_2$ is therefore not recommended. The hyperfine structure splitting of HCl occurs due to its non-zero nuclear spin. Though hyperfine transitions are not considered here, the hyperfine excitation cross sections can be estimated from the current results using an infinite-order sudden approximation approach. # CONCLUSION Cross sections and rate coefficients for rotational quenching of HCl due to He collisions have been studied using the close-coupling method and the coupled-states approximation on the PES of for excited initial rotational levels of HCl up to $j$=20. State-to-state rate coefficients are obtained over a wide temperature range from 0.1 to 3000 K and available in tables formatted for astrophysical applications. The very good agreement with the results of and, computed on different PESs confirms the accuracy of the present calculations of the rate coefficients. The uncertainty in the current rate coefficient calculation, deduced by scaling the adopted potential, is less than 4% at temperatures of astrophysical interest, comparable to the divergence in the well depth of recently available PESs. This work was supported by NASA under Grant No. NNX12AF42G. [^1]: All state-to-state deexcitation cross sections and rate coefficients are available on the UGA Molecular Opacity Project website (www.physast.uga.edu/ugamop/). The rate coefficients are also available in the BASECOL and the Leiden Atomic and Molecular Database (LAMDA) formats.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-23T02:12:11', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5788', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5788'}
null	null
null	null
null	null
null	null
# Introduction Spin foam models have in recent years arisen to prominence as a possible candidate formulation for the quantum theory of spacetime geometry (see for a thorough review). Their formalism derives mainly from topological quantum field theories , Loop Quantum Gravity and discrete gravity, e.g., Regge calculus . On the other hand, spin foam models may also be seen as a generalization of matrix models for 2d quantum gravity via group field theory . For 3d quantum gravity, the relation between spin foam models and canonical quantum gravity has been fully cleared up. In particular, it is known that the Turaev--Viro model is the covariant version of the canonical quantization (à la Witten ) of 3d Riemannian gravity with a positive cosmological constant, while the Ponzano--Regge model is the limit of the former for a vanishing cosmological constant (see also on incorporating the cosmological constant in 3d LQG and for further work on relating 3d gravity to Chern--Simons theory and quantum group structures). In this case, the spin foam 2-complexes have been rigorously shown to arise as histories of LQG spin network states, as initially suggested in , while the correspondence between LQG states and the Ponzano--Regge boundary data had been already noted in . However, in 4d the situation is less clear. Several different spin foam models for 4d Riemannian quantum gravity have been proposed in the literature, such as the Barrett--Crane model , the Freidel--Krasnov model , a model based on the flux representation , and one based on the spinor representation , while in the Lorentzian case the Engle--Pereira--Rovelli--Livine model represents essentially the state of the art (see also for a review of the new 4d models). These 4d models differ specifically in their implementation of the necessary simplicity constraints on the underlying topological BF theory, which should impose geometricity of the 2-complex corresponding to a discrete spacetime manifold and give rise to local degrees of freedom. Thus, a further study of the geometric content of the different spin foam models is certainly welcome. In particular, one might hope to recover discrete Regge gravity in the classical limit of the model, since this would imply an acceptable imposition of the geometric constraints at least in the classical regime. Moreover, classical general relativity can be obtained from the Regge gravity by further taking the continuum limit, which allows for some confidence that continuum general relativity may be recovered also from the continuum limit of the full quantum spin foam model. The Regge action is indeed known to arise as the stationary phase solution in the 3d case in the large-spin limit for handlebodies . In 4d, Regge action was recovered asymptotically first for a single 4-simplex and later for an arbitrary triangulation with a fixed spin labeling, when both boundary and bulk spin variables are scaled to infinity . Recently, in , an asymptotic analysis of the full 4d partition function was given using microlocal analysis, which revealed some worrying accidental curvature constraints on the geometry of several widely studied 4d models. This work considered only the strict asymptotic regime of the spin variables, without further scalings of the parameters of the theory. The work of on the other hand dealt with the large-spin asymptotics of the EPRL model considering also scaling in the Barbero--Immirzi parameter, with interesting results. In particular, the analysis of used also the discrete curvature as an expansion parameter and identified an intermediate regime of large spin values (dependent on the Barbero--Immirzi parameter) that seems to lead to the right Regge behavior of the amplitudes in the small curvature approximation. Classically, spin foam models, as discretizations of continuum theories, are based on a phase space structure, which is a direct product of cotangent bundles over a Lie group that is the structure group of the corresponding continuum principal bundle (e.g., ${\rm SU}(2)$ for 3d Riemannian gravity)[^1]. The group part of the product of cotangent bundles thus corresponds to discrete connection variables on a triangulated spatial hypersurface, while the cotangent spaces correspond to discrete metric variables (e.g., edge vectors in 3d, or face bivectors in 4d, which correspond to discrete tetrad variables due to the simplicity constraints). Accordingly, the geometric data of the classical discretized model is transparently encoded in the cotangent space variables. However, when one goes on to quantize the system to obtain the spin foam model, the cotangent space variables get quantized to differential operators on the group. Typically (for compact Lie groups), these geometric operators possess discrete spectra, and so the transparent classical discrete geometry described by continuous metric variables gets replaced by the quantum geometry described by discrete spin labels. This corresponds to a representation of the states and amplitudes of the model in terms of eigenstates of the geometric operators, the spin representation --hence the name 'spin' foams. The quantum discreteness of geometric variables in spin foams, i.e., the use of quantum numbers as opposed to phase space variables, although very useful to make contact with the canonical quantum theory, makes the amplitudes lose a direct contact with the classical discrete action and the classical discrete geometric variables. The use of such classical discrete geometric variables, on the other hand, has been prevented until recently by their non-commutative nature. However, recently, a new mathematical tool was introduced in the context of 3d quantum gravity, which became to be called the 'group Fourier transform' . This is an $L^2$-isometric map from functions on a Lie group to functions on the cotangent space equipped with a (generically) non-commutative $\star$-product structure. In , the transform was generalized to the 'non-commutative Fourier transform' for all exponential Lie groups by deriving it from the canonical symplectic structure of the cotangent bundle, and the non-commutative structure was seen to arise from the deformation quantization of the algebra of geometric operators. Accordingly, the non-commutative but continuous metric variables obtained through the non-commutative Fourier transform correspond to the classical metric variables in the sense of deformation quantization. Thus, it enables one to describe the quantum geometry of spin foam models and group field theory (and Loop Quantum Gravity ) by classical-like continuous metric variables. The aim of this paper is to initiate the application of the above results in analysing the geometric properties of spin foam models, in particular, in the classical limit ($\hbar \rightarrow 0$). We will restrict our consideration to the 3d Ponzano--Regge model to have a better control over the formalism in this simpler case. However, already for the Ponzano--Regge model we discover non-trivial properties of the metric representation related to the non-commutative structure, which elucidate aspects of the use of non-commutative Fourier transform in the context of spin foam models. In particular, we find that in applying the stationary phase approximation one must account for the deformation structure of the phase space in the variational calculus in order to recover the correct geometric constraints for the metric variables in the classical limit of the phase space path integral. Otherwise, the classical geometric interpretation of metric boundary data depends on the ambiguous choice of quantization map for the algebra of geometric operators, which seems problematic. Nevertheless, once the deformed variational principle adapted to the non-commutative structure of the phase space is employed, the non-commutative Fourier transform is seen to facilitate an unambiguous and straightforward asymptotic analysis of the full partition function via a non-commutative stationary phase approximation. In Section [2](#sec:GFT){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:GFT"} we will first outline the formalism of non-commutative Fourier transform, adapted from to the context of gravitational models. In Section [3](#sec:PR){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:PR"} we introduce the Ponzano--Regge model, seen as a discretization of the continuum 3d BF theory. In Section [4](#sec:PRNC){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:PRNC"} we then apply the non-commutative Fourier transform to the Ponzano--Regge model to obtain a representation of the model in terms of non-commutative metric variables, and write down an explicit expression for the quantum amplitude for fixed metric boundary data on a boundary with trivial topology. In Section [5](#sec:asymp){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:asymp"} we further study the classical limit of the Ponzano--Regge amplitudes for fixed metric boundary data, and find that the results differ for different choices of non-commutative structures unless one accounts for the deformation structure in the variational calculus. When this is taken into account, the resulting semi-classical approximation coincides with what one expects from a discrete gravity path integral. In particular, if one considers only the partial saddle point approximation obtained by varying the discrete connection only, one finds that the discrete path integral reduces to the one for 2nd order Regge action in terms of discrete triad variables. In Section [6](#sec:6j){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:6j"} we consider in more detail the Ponzano--Regge amplitude with non-commutative metric boundary data for a single tetrahedron. We recover the Regge action in the classical limit of the amplitude, and explain the connection of our calculation to the previous studies of spin foam asymptotics in terms of coherent states. Section [7](#sec:cc){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:cc"} summarizes the obtained results and points to further research. # Non-commutative Fourier transform for SU(2) {#sec:GFT} Our exposition of the non-commutative Fourier transform for ${\rm SU}(2)$ in this section follows , adapted to the needs of quantum gravity models. Originally, a specific realization of the non-commutative Fourier transform formalism for the group ${\rm SO}(3)$ was introduced in by Freidel & Livine, and later expanded on by Freidel & Majid and Joung, Mourad & Noui to the case of ${\rm SU}(2)$. (More abstract formulations of a similar concept have appeared also in .) In our formalism this original version of the transform corresponds to a specific choice of a quantization of the algebra of geometric operators, which we will refer to as the Freidel--Livine--Majid quantization map, and treat it as one of the concrete examples we give of the more general formulation in Subsection [\[subsec:examples\]](#subsec:examples){reference-type="ref" reference="subsec:examples"}.[^2] Let us consider the group ${\rm SU}(2)$, the Lie algebra $\textrm{Lie}({\rm SU}(2)) =: \mathfrak{su}(2)$ of ${\rm SU}(2)$, and the associated cotangent bundle $\mathcal{T}^{\rm SU}(2) \cong {\rm SU}(2) \times \mathfrak{su}(2)^$. As it is a cotangent bundle, $\mathcal{T}^{\rm SU}(2)$ carries a canonical symplectic structure. This is given by the Poisson brackets \[\begin{gathered} \label{eq:poisson} \{O,O'\} \equiv \frac{\partial O}{\partial X_i} \tilde{\mathcal{L}}_iO'-\tilde{\mathcal{L}}_iO \frac{\partial O'}{\partial X_i} + \lambda \epsilon_{ij}^{\phantom{ij}k} \frac{\partial O}{\partial X_i} \frac{\partial O'}{\partial X_j} X_k, \end{gathered}\] where $O,O' \in C^\infty(\mathcal{T}^{\rm SU}(2))$ are classical observables, and $\tilde{\mathcal{L}}_i:= \lambda\mathcal{L}_i$ are dimensionful Lie derivatives on the group with respect to a basis of right-invariant vector fields. $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}_+$ is a parameter with dimensions $[\frac{\hbar}{X}]$, which determines the physical scale associated to the group manifold via the dimensionful Lie derivatives and the structure constants $[\tilde{\mathcal{L}}_i,\tilde{\mathcal{L}}_j] = \lambda\epsilon_{ij}^{\phantom{ij}k}\tilde{\mathcal{L}}_k$. $X_i$ are the Cartesian coordinates on $\mathfrak{su}(2)^$.[^3] Let us now introduce coordinates $\zeta:{\rm SU}(2)\backslash \{-e\} \rightarrow \mathfrak{su}(2) \cong \mathbb{R}^3$ on the dense subset ${\rm SU}(2)\backslash \{-e\} =: H \subset {\rm SU}(2)$, where $e \in {\rm SU}(2)$ is the identity element, which satisfy $\zeta(e) = 0$ and $\tilde{\mathcal{L}}_i\zeta^j(e) = \delta_i^j$. The use of coordinates $\zeta$ on $H$ can be seen as a sort of 'one-point-decompactification' of ${\rm SU}(2)$. We then have for the Poisson brackets of the coordinates[^4] \[\begin{gathered} \{\zeta^i,\zeta^j\} = 0, \qquad \{X_i,\zeta^j\} = \tilde{\mathcal{L}}_i\zeta^j, \qquad \{X_i,X_j\} = \lambda\epsilon_{ij}^{\phantom{ij}k}X_k. \end{gathered}\] The Poisson brackets involving $\zeta^i$ are, of course, well-defined only on $H$. We see that the commutators $\{X_i,\zeta^j\}$ of the chosen canonical variables are generically deformed due to the curvature of the group manifold. They coincide with the usual flat commutation relations associated with Poisson-commuting coordinates only at the identity. Moreover, let us define the deformed addition* $\oplus_\zeta$ for these coordinates in the neighborhood of identity as $\zeta(gh) =: \zeta(g) \oplus_\zeta \zeta(h)$. It holds $\zeta(g) \oplus_\zeta \zeta(h) = \zeta(g) + \zeta(h) + \mathcal{O}(\lambda^0,\|\ln(g)\|,\|\ln(h)\|)$ for any choice of $\zeta$ complying with the above mentioned assumptions. Indeed, the parametrization is chosen so that in the limit $\lambda \rightarrow 0$, while keeping the coordinates $\zeta$ fixed, we effectively recover the flat phase space $\mathcal{T}^\mathbb{R}^3 = \mathbb{R}^3 \times \mathbb{R}^3 \cong \mathfrak{su}(2) \times \mathfrak{su}(2)^$ from $\mathcal{T}^{\rm SU}(2) = {\rm SU}(2) \times \mathfrak{su}(2)^$. This follows because keeping $\zeta$ fixed implies a simultaneous scaling of the class angles $\|\ln(g)\|$ of the group elements. Accordingly, the group effectively coincides with the tangent space $\mathfrak{su}(2)$ at the identity in this limit, and $\zeta$ become the Euclidean Poisson-commuting coordinates on $\mathfrak{su}(2) \cong \mathbb{R}^3$ for any initial choice of $\zeta$ satisfying the above assumptions. Thus, $\lambda$ can also be thought of as a deformation parameter already at the level of the classical phase space. For the above reasons, we will call the limit $\lambda \rightarrow 0$ the abelian limit. Let us then consider the quantization of the Poisson algebra given by the Poisson bracket [\[eq:poisson\]](#eq:poisson){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:poisson"}. In particular, we consider the algebra $\mathfrak{H}$ generated by the operators $\hat{\zeta}^i$ and $\hat{X}_i$, modulo the commutation relations \[\begin{gathered} \label{eq:comrel} [\hat{\zeta}^i,\hat{\zeta}^j] = 0, \qquad [\hat{X}_i,\hat{\zeta}^j] = i\hbar\widehat{\tilde{\mathcal{L}}_i\zeta^j}, \qquad [\hat{X}_i,\hat{X}_j] = i\hbar\lambda\epsilon_{ij}^{\phantom{ij}k}\hat{X}_k. \end{gathered}\] These relations follow from the symplectic structure of $\mathcal{T}^{\rm SU}(2)$ in the usual way by imposing the relation $[\mathfrak{Q}(O),\mathfrak{Q}(O')] \stackrel{!}{=} i\hbar\mathfrak{Q}(\{O,O'\})$ with the Poisson brackets of the canonical variables, where by $\mathfrak{Q}: C^\infty(\mathcal{T}^{\rm SU}(2)) \rightarrow \mathfrak{H}$ we denote the quantization map specified by linearity, the ordering of operators, and $\mathfrak{Q}(\zeta^i) =: \hat{\zeta}^i$, $\mathfrak{Q}(X_i) =: \hat{X}_i$. We wish to represent the abstract algebra $\mathfrak{H}$ defined by the commutation relations [\[eq:comrel\]](#eq:comrel){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:comrel"} as operators acting on a Hilbert space. There exists the canonical representation in terms of smooth functions on $H \subset {\rm SU}(2)$ with the $L^2$-inner product \[\begin{gathered} \langle\psi\|\psi'\rangle:= \frac{1}{\lambda^3} \int_{H} \textrm{d} g\, \overline{\psi(g)} \psi'(g), \end{gathered}\] where $\textrm{d} g$ is the normalized Haar measure, and the action of the canonical operators on is given by \[\begin{gathered} \hat{\zeta}^i \psi \equiv \zeta^i \psi, \qquad \hat{X}_i \psi \equiv i\hbar\tilde{\mathcal{L}}_i\psi. \end{gathered}\] However, we would like to represent our original configuration space ${\rm SU}(2)$ rather than $H$, and therefore we will instead consider smooth functions on ${\rm SU}(2)$, whose restriction on $H$ is clearly always in $C^\infty(H)$. Since the coordinates are well-defined only on $\mathcal{H} = {\rm SU}(2) \backslash \{-e\}$, the action of the coordinate operators should then be understood only in a weak sense: Even though strictly speaking the action $\hat{\zeta}^i \psi \equiv \zeta^i \psi$ is not well-defined for the whole of ${\rm SU}(2)$, the inner products $\langle\psi\|\hat{\zeta}^i\|\psi'\rangle$ are, since we may write \[\begin{gathered} \langle\psi\|\hat{\zeta}^i\|\psi'\rangle = \frac{1}{\lambda^3} \int_{{\rm SU}(2)} \textrm{d} g \, \overline{\psi(g)} \zeta^i(g) \psi'(g) \equiv \frac{1}{\lambda^3} \int_{H} \textrm{d} g\, \overline{\psi(g)} \zeta^i(g) \psi'(g) \end{gathered}\] for smooth $\psi$, $\psi'$. It is easy to verify that the commutation relations are represented correctly with this definition of the action, and the function space may be completed in the $L^2$-norm as usual. However, there is also a representation in terms of another function space, which is obtained through a deformation quantization procedure applied to the operator algebra corresponding to the other factor of the cotangent bundle, $\mathfrak{su}(2)^$ (see for a thorough exposition). Notice that the restriction of $\mathfrak{H}$ to the subalgebra generated by the operators $\hat{X}_i$ is isomorphic to a completion of the universal enveloping algebra $\overline{U(\mathfrak{su}(2))}$ of ${\rm SU}(2)$ due to its Lie algebra commutation relations. A $\star$-product for functions on $\mathfrak{su}(2)^$ is uniquely specified by the restriction of the quantization map $\mathfrak{Q}$ on the $\mathfrak{su}(2)^$ part of the phase space via the relation $f \star f':= \mathfrak{Q}^{-1}(\mathfrak{Q}(f)\mathfrak{Q}(f'))$, where $f,f' \in C^\infty(\mathfrak{su}(2)^)$ and accordingly $\mathfrak{Q}(f),\mathfrak{Q}(f') \in \overline{U(\mathfrak{su}(2))}$. One may verify that the following action of the algebra on functions $\tilde{\psi} \in L^2_\star(\mathfrak{su}(2)^)$ constitutes another representation of the algebra: \[\begin{gathered} \hat{\zeta}^i \tilde{\psi} \equiv-i\hbar\frac{\partial \tilde{\psi}}{\partial X_i}, \qquad \hat{X}_i \tilde{\psi} \equiv X_i \star \tilde{\psi}. \end{gathered}\] The non-commutative Fourier transform* acts as an intertwiner between the canonical representation in terms of square-integrable functions on ${\rm SU}(2)$ and the non-commutative dual space $L^2_\star(\mathfrak{su}(2)^)$ of square-integrable functions on $\mathfrak{su}(2)^$ with respect to the $\star$-product. It is given by \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\psi}(X) \equiv \int_{H} \frac{\textrm{d} g}{\lambda^3} \overline{E(g,X)} \psi(g) \in L^2_\star(\mathfrak{su}(2)^), \qquad \psi \in L^2({\rm SU}(2)), \end{gathered}\] where the integral kernel \[\begin{gathered} E(g,X) \equiv e_\star^{\frac{i}{\hbar\lambda}k(g)\cdot X}:= \sum\limits_{n=0}^\infty \frac{1}{n!} \left(\frac{i}{\hbar\lambda}\right)^n k^{i_1}(g) \cdots k^{i_n}(g) X_{i_1} \star \dots \star X_{i_n} \end{gathered}\] is the non-commutative plane wave, and we denote $k(g):=-i\ln(g) \in \mathfrak{su}(2)$ taken in the principal branch of the logarithm. The inverse transform reads \[\begin{gathered} \psi(g) = \int_{\mathfrak{su}(2)^} \frac{\textrm{d} X}{(2\pi\hbar)^3} E(g,X) \star \tilde{\psi}(X)\in L^2({\rm SU}(2)), \qquad \tilde{\psi} \in L_\star^2(\mathfrak{su}(2)^), \end{gathered}\] where $\textrm{d} X:= \textrm{d} X_1\textrm{d} X_2\textrm{d} X_3$ denotes the Lebesgue measure on the Lie algebra dual $\mathfrak{su}(2)^\cong\mathbb{R}^3$. Let us list some important properties of the non-commutative plane waves that we will use in the following: \[\begin{gathered} E(g,X) = e_\star^{\frac{i}{\hbar\lambda}k(g)\cdot X} \equiv c(g)e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\zeta(g)\cdot X}, \qquad \text{where} \qquad c(g):= E(g,0), \label{eq:Eform} \\ \overline{E(g,X)} = E\big(g^{-1},X\big) = E(g,-X), \nonumber \\ E(\ad_hg,X) = E(g,\Ad_h^{-1}X), \label{eq:Ead} \\ E(gh,X) = E(g,X) \star E(h,X), \label{eq:Eprod} \\ \int_{\mathfrak{su}(2)^}\frac{\textrm{d} X}{(2\pi\hbar\lambda)^3} E(g,X) = \delta(g), \label{eq:Edelta} \\ \tilde{\psi}(X) \star E(g,X) = E(g,X) \star \tilde{\psi}(\Ad_g X), \label{eq:Eperm} \end{gathered}\] where $\ad_hg:= hgh^{-1}$ and $\Ad_hX:= hXh^{-1}$. Notice that from [\[eq:Eform\]](#eq:Eform){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Eform"} and [\[eq:Ead\]](#eq:Ead){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Ead"} it follows that $c(\ad_hg) = c(g)$ and $\zeta(\ad_hg) = h\zeta(g)h^{-1} =: \Ad_h\zeta(g)$. In addition, we find that the function \[\begin{gathered} \delta_\star(X,Y):= \int_H \frac{\textrm{d} g}{(2\pi\hbar\lambda)^3} \overline{E(g,X)} E(g,Y) \end{gathered}\] acts as the delta distribution with respect to the $\star$-product, namely, \[\begin{gathered} \int_{\mathfrak{su}(2)^}\textrm{d} Y\, \delta_\star(X,Y) \star \tilde{\psi}(Y) = \tilde{\psi}(X) = \int_{\mathfrak{su}(2)^}\textrm{d} Y \, \tilde{\psi}(Y) \star \delta_\star(X,Y). \end{gathered}\] More generally, $\delta_\star$ is the integral kernel of the projection \[\begin{gathered} \mathcal{P}(\tilde{\psi})(X):= \int_{\mathfrak{su}(2)^}\textrm{d} Y\, \delta_\star(X,Y) \star \tilde{\psi}(Y) \end{gathered}\] onto the image $L_\star^2(\mathfrak{su}(2)^)$ of the non-commutative Fourier transform. In the following, we will also occasionally slightly abuse notation by writing \[\begin{gathered} \delta_\star\left(\sum\limits_i X_i\right):= \int_H \frac{\textrm{d} g}{(2\pi\hbar\lambda)^3} \prod\limits_i E(g,X_i) \end{gathered}\] for convenience, although this is not a function of the linear sum $\sum\limits_i X_i$ if $c(g)\neq 1$ for some $g\in H$. Finally, we wish to emphasize that the non-commutative coordinate variables of the dual representation are unambiguously identified with the corresponding classical conjugate momenta to the group elements via deformation quantization. This follows directly from the construction. Indeed, it is a key advantage of the above construction for the non-commutative representation that it retains a direct relation to the classical phase space quantities, thus helping to make the interpretation of the quantum expressions more intuitive and straightforward, especially in the semi-classical regime. Our primary goal in this paper is exactly to use this clear-cut relation to our benefit in analysing and interpreting in discrete geometric terms the leading order semi-classical behavior of the Ponzano--Regge model. # 3d BF theory and the Ponzano--Regge model {#sec:PR} The Ponzano--Regge model can be understood as a discretization of 3-dimensional Riemannian BF theory. In this section, we will briefly review how it can be derived from the continuum BF theory, while keeping track of the dimensionful physical constants determining the various asymptotic limits of the theory. Let $\mathcal{M}$ be a 3-dimensional base manifold to a frame bundle with the structure group ${\rm SU}(2)$. Then the partition function of 3d BF theory on $\mathcal{M}$ is given by \[\begin{gathered} \label{eq:BFaction} \mathcal{Z}_{\rm BF}^{\mathcal{M}} = \int \mathcal{D} E \mathcal{D} \omega \exp\left(\frac{i}{2\hbar\kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} \tr \big(E \wedge F(\omega) \big) \right), \end{gathered}\] where $E$ is an $\mathfrak{su}(2)^$-valued triad 1-form on $\mathcal{M}$, $F(\omega)$ is the $\mathfrak{su}(2)$-valued curvature 2-form associated to the connection 1-form $\omega$, and the trace is taken in the fundamental spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ representation of ${\rm SU}(2)$. $\hbar$ is the reduced Planck constant and $\kappa$ is a constant with dimensions of inverse momentum. The connection with Riemannian gravity in three spacetime dimensions gives $\kappa:= 8\pi G$, where $G$ is the gravitational constant. Since the triad 1-form $E$ has dimensions of length and the curvature 2-form $F$ is dimensionless, the exponential is rendered dimensionless by dividing with $\hbar\kappa \equiv 8\pi l_p$, $l_p \equiv \hbar G$ being the Planck length in three dimensions. Integrating over the triad field in [\[eq:BFaction\]](#eq:BFaction){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:BFaction"}, we get heuristically \[\begin{gathered} \label{eq:BFdelta} \mathcal{Z}_{\rm BF}^{\mathcal{M}} \propto \int \mathcal{D} \omega\, \delta\big(F(\omega)\big), \end{gathered}\] so we see that the BF partition function is (at least nominally) nothing but the volume of the moduli space of flat connections on $\mathcal{M}$.[^5] Generically, this is of course divergent, which (among other things) motivates us to consider discretizations of the theory. However, since BF theory is purely topological, that is, it does not depend on the metric structure of the base manifold, such a discretization should not affect its essential properties. Now, to discretize the continuum BF theory, we first choose a triangulation $\Delta$ of the manifold $\mathcal{M}$, that is, a (homogeneous) simplicial complex homotopic to $\mathcal{M}$. The dual complex $\Delta^$ of $\Delta$ is obtained by replacing each $d$-simplex in $\Delta$ by a $(3-d)$-simplex and retaining the connective relations between simplices. Then, the homotopy between $\Delta$ and $\mathcal{M}$ allows us to think of $\Delta$, and thus $\Delta^$, as embedded in $\mathcal{M}$. We further form a finer cellular complex $\Gamma$ by diving the tetrahedra in $\Delta$ along the faces of $\Delta^$. In particular, $\Gamma$ then consists of tetrahedra $t \in \Delta$, with vertices $t^ \in \Delta^$ at their centers, each subdivided into four cubic cells. Moreover, for each tetrahedron $t \in \Delta$, there are edges $tf \in \Gamma$, which correspond to half-edges of $f^ \in \Delta^$, going from the centers of the triangles $f \in \Delta$ bounding the tetrahedron to the center of the tetrahedron $t$. Also, for each triangle $f \in \Delta$, there are edges $ef \in \Gamma$, which go from the center of the triangle $f \in \Delta$ to the centers of the edges $e \in \Delta$ bounding the triangle $f$. See Fig. [\[fig:tetrasubdiv\]](#fig:tetrasubdiv){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:tetrasubdiv"} for an illustration of the subdivision of a single tetrahedron in $\Delta$. To obtain the discretized connection variables associated to the triangulation $\Delta$, we integrate the connection along the edges $tf \in \Gamma$ and $ef \in \Gamma$ as \[\begin{gathered} g_{tf}:= \mathcal{P} e^{i \int_{tf} \omega} \in {\rm SU}(2) \qquad \text{and} \qquad g_{ef}:= \mathcal{P} e^{i \int_{ef} \omega} \in {\rm SU}(2), \end{gathered}\] where $\mathcal{P}$ denotes the path-ordered exponential. Thus, they are the Wilson line variables of the connection $\omega$ associated to the edges or, equivalently, the parallel transports from the initial to the final points of the edges with respect to $\omega$. We assume the triangulation $\Delta$ to be piece-wise flat, and associate frames to all simplices of $\Delta$. We then interpret $g_{tf}$ as the group element relating the frame of $t \in \Delta$ to the frame of $f \in \Delta$, and similarly $g_{ef}$ as the group element relating the frame of $f \in \Delta$ to the frame of $e \in \Delta$. Furthermore, we integrate the triad field along the edges $e \in \Delta$ as \[\begin{gathered} \label{eq:Xdef} X_e:= \int_{e} \Ad_{G_e} E \in \mathfrak{su}(2)^. \end{gathered}\] Here, $G_e$ denotes the ${\rm SU}(2)$-valued function on the edge $e$ that parallel transports via adjoint action the pointwise values of $E$ along $e$ to a fixed base point at the center of $e$. An orientation for the edge $e$ may be chosen arbitrarily. $X_e$ is interpreted as the vector representing the magnitude and the direction of the edge $e$ in the frame associated to the edge $e$ itself. In the case that $\Delta$ has no boundary, a discrete version of the BF partition function [\[eq:BFdelta\]](#eq:BFdelta){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:BFdelta"}, the Ponzano--Regge partition function, may be written as \[\begin{gathered} \mathcal{Z}_{\rm PR}^\Delta = \int \bigg[\prod\limits_{tf} \textrm{d} g_{tf}\bigg] \prod\limits_{e \in \Delta} \delta(H_{e^}(g_{tf})), \end{gathered}\] where $H_{e^}(g_{tf})\in {\rm SU}(2)$ are holonomies around the dual faces $e^\in\Delta^$ obtained as products of $g_{tf}$, $f^\in \partial e^$, and $\textrm{d} g_{tf}$ is again the Haar measure on ${\rm SU}(2)$. Mimicking the continuum partition function of BF theory, the Ponzano--Regge partition function is thus an integral over the flat discrete connections, the delta functions $\delta(H_{e^}(g_{tf}))$ constraining holonomies around all dual faces to be trivial. Now, we can apply the non-commutative Fourier transform to expand the delta functions in terms of non-commutative plane waves by equation [\[eq:Edelta\]](#eq:Edelta){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Edelta"}. This yields \[\begin{gathered} \mathcal{Z}_{\rm PR}^\Delta = \int \bigg[\prod\limits_{tf} \textrm{d} g_{tf}\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{e} \frac{\textrm{d} X_e}{(2\pi\hbar\lambda)^3}\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{e \in \Delta} c(H_{e^}(g_{tf})) \bigg] \exp\bigg\{\frac{i}{\hbar} \sum\limits_{e\in\Delta} X_e \cdot \zeta(H_{e^}(g_{tf})) \bigg\}.\!\!\! \label{discreteBFpathint} \end{gathered}\] Comparing with [\[eq:BFaction\]](#eq:BFaction){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:BFaction"}, this expression has a straightforward interpretation as a discretization of the first order path integral of the continuum BF theory. We can clearly identify the discretized triad variables $X_e$ in [\[eq:Xdef\]](#eq:Xdef){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Xdef"} with the non-commutative metric variables defined via the non-commutative Fourier transform. We also see that, from the point of view of discretization, the form of the plane waves and thus the choice for the quantization map is directly related to the choice of the precise form for the discretized action and the path integral measure. In particular, the coordinate function $\zeta: {\rm SU}(2) \rightarrow \mathfrak{su}(2)$ and the prefactor $c:{\rm SU}(2)\rightarrow\mathbb{C}$ of the non-commutative plane wave are dictated by the choice of the quantization map, and the coordinates specify the discretization prescription for the curvature 2-form $F(\omega)$. Similar interplay between $\star$-product quantization and discretization is well-known in the case of the first order phase space path integral formulation of ordinary quantum mechanics . Moreover, on dimensional grounds, we must identify $\lambda\equiv\kappa=8\pi G$, so that the coordinates $\zeta$ have the dimensions of $\frac{1}{\kappa}F(\omega)$. Therefore, the abelian limit of the non-commutative structure of the phase space corresponds in this case also physically to the no-gravity limit $G\rightarrow 0$. We will denote this classical deformation parameter associated with the non-commutative structure of the phase space collectively by $\kappa$ in the following. # Non-commutative metric representation of the Ponzano--Regge model {#sec:PRNC} If the triangulated manifold $\Delta$ has a non-trivial boundary, we may assign connection data on the boundary by fixing the group elements $g_{ef}$ associated to the boundary triangles $f \in \partial\Delta$. Then, the (non-normalized) Ponzano--Regge amplitude for the boundary can be written as \[\begin{gathered} \label{eq:boundamp} \mathcal{A}_{\rm PR}(g_{ef}\|f\in\partial\Delta) = \int \bigg[\prod\limits_{tf} \textrm{d} g_{tf}\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{ef \\ f\notin\partial\Delta}} \textrm{d} g_{ef}\bigg] \prod\limits_{e \in \Delta} \prod\limits_{i=0}^{n_e-1} \delta\big(g_{ef_{i+1}^e} g_{t_i^ef_{i+1}^e}^{-1} g_{t_i^ef_i^e} g_{ef_i^e}^{-1} \big). \end{gathered}\] The delta functions are over the holonomies around the wedges of the triangulation pictured in grey in Fig. [\[fig:tetrasubdiv\]](#fig:tetrasubdiv){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:tetrasubdiv"}. For this purpose, the tetrahedra $t^e_i$ and the triangles $f^e_i$ sharing the edge $e$ are labelled by an index $i=0,\ldots,n_e-1$ in a right-handed fashion with respect to the orientation of the edge $e$ and with the identification $f_{n_e}\equiv f_0$, as in Fig. [\[fig:tetrasubdiv\]](#fig:tetrasubdiv){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:tetrasubdiv"}. Let us introduce some simplifying notation. We will choose an arbitrary spanning tree of the dual graph to the boundary triangulation, pick an arbitrary root vertex for the tree, and label the boundary triangles $f_i \in \partial\Delta$ by $i \in \mathbb{N}_0$ in a compatible way with respect to the partial ordering induced by the tree, so that the root has the label $0$ (see Fig. [\[fig:treeholos\]](#fig:treeholos){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:treeholos"}). Moreover, we denote the set of ordered pairs of labels associated to neighboring boundary triangles by $\mathcal{N}$, and label the group elements associated to the pair of neighboring boundary triangles $(i,j)\in\mathcal{N}$ as illustrated in Fig. [\[fig:treeholos\]](#fig:treeholos){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:treeholos"}. The group elements $g_{tf}$, $f \notin \partial\Delta$, will be denoted by a collective label $h_l$. As we integrate over $g_{ef}$ for $f \notin \partial\Delta$ in [\[eq:boundamp\]](#eq:boundamp){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:boundamp"}, we obtain \[\begin{gathered} \label{eq:BFdeltas} \mathcal{A}_{\rm PR}(g_{ij}) = \int \bigg[\prod\limits_{l} \textrm{d} h_{l}\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta} \delta(H_{e^}(h_l))\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} \delta\big(g_{ij} h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i} g_{ji}^{-1}\big) \bigg]. \end{gathered}\] Here $h_i$ is the group element associated to the dual half-edge going from the boundary triangle $i$ to the center of the tetrahedron with triangle $i$ on its boundary, and $K_{ij}(h_l)$ is the holonomy along the bulk dual edges from the center of the tetrahedron with triangle $j$ to the center of the tetrahedron with triangle $i$ (see Fig. [\[fig:treeholos\]](#fig:treeholos){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:treeholos"} for illustration). There is a one-to-one correspondence between the pairs $(i,j)$ of neighboring boundary triangles and faces of the dual 2-complex touching the boundary. Notice that we have chosen here as the base point of each holonomy the boundary dual vertex with a smaller label. By expanding the delta distributions in [\[eq:BFdeltas\]](#eq:BFdeltas){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:BFdeltas"} with boundary group variables into non-commutative plane waves, we get \[\begin{gathered} \mathcal{A}_{\rm PR}(g_{ij})=\int \bigg[\prod\limits_l\textrm{d} h_l\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta}\delta(H_{e^}(h_l)) \bigg] \nonumber \\ \phantom{\mathcal{A}_{\rm PR}(g_{ij})=} \times\Bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} \int\frac{\textrm{d} Y_{ji}}{(2\pi\hbar\kappa)^3}E\big(g_{ij}h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i} g_{ji}^{-1},Y_{ji}\big) \Bigg]. \label{eq:deltaexp} \end{gathered}\] To obtain the expression for metric boundary data, we employ the non-commutative Fourier transform, \[\begin{gathered} \label{eq:metricreps} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) = \int \bigg[\prod\limits_{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N}} \frac{\textrm{d} g_{ij}}{\kappa^3}\bigg] \mathcal{A}_{\rm PR}(g_{ij}) \prod\limits_{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N}} E\big(g_{ij}^{-1},X_{ij}\big). \end{gathered}\] Here the variable $X_{ij}$ is understood geometrically as the edge vector shared by the triangles $i$, $j$ as seen from the frame of reference of the triangle $j$. We note that the exact functional form of the amplitude, as that of the non-commutative plane wave, depends on the particular choice of a quantization map. From [\[eq:deltaexp\]](#eq:deltaexp){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:deltaexp"} and [\[eq:metricreps\]](#eq:metricreps){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:metricreps"} the amplitude for metric boundary data is obtained by expanding the delta functions as \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij})=\int \bigg[\prod\limits_{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N}} \frac{\textrm{d} g_{ij}}{\kappa^3}\bigg] \left[\frac{\textrm{d} Y_{ji}}{(2\pi\hbar\kappa)^3}\right] \bigg[\prod\limits_l\textrm{d} h_l\bigg] \left[\frac{\textrm{d} Y_{e}}{(2\pi\hbar\kappa)^3}\right] \bigg[\prod\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta} E(H_{e^}(h_l),Y_e) \bigg] \nonumber \\ \phantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij})=} \times \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} E\big(g_{ij} h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i} g_{ji}^{-1},Y_{ji}\big) \bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N}} E\big(g_{ij}^{-1},X_{ij}\big) \bigg]. \label{eq:NCpwmetricreps} \end{gathered}\] We emphasize that here $X_{ij}$'s are the fixed boundary edge vectors, while $Y_{ji}$'s are auxiliary boundary edge vectors, which are the Lagrange multipliers imposing the triviality of holonomies around dual faces touching the boundary. We will see that the two are identified (up to orientations and parallel transports) in the classical limit. Importantly, equation [\[eq:NCpwmetricreps\]](#eq:NCpwmetricreps){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:NCpwmetricreps"} is nothing else than the simplicial path integral for a complex with boundary, and a fixed discrete metric on this boundary represented by $X_{ij}$'s. This can be seen by writing the explicit form of the non-commutative plane waves, thus obtaining a formula like [\[discreteBFpathint\]](#discreteBFpathint){reference-type="eqref" reference="discreteBFpathint"}, augmented by boundary terms. We will use this expression in the next section to study the semi-classical limit. ## Exact amplitudes for metric boundary data on a sphere {#exact-amplitudes-for-metric-boundary-data-on-a-sphere .unnumbered} By integrating over all $Y_e$ and using the property [\[eq:Eprod\]](#eq:Eprod){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Eprod"} for the non-commutative plane waves, we may write [\[eq:NCpwmetricreps\]](#eq:NCpwmetricreps){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:NCpwmetricreps"} as \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) \propto \int \bigg[\prod\limits_{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N}} \frac{\textrm{d} g_{ij}}{\kappa^3}\bigg] \left[\frac{\textrm{d} Y_{ji}}{(2\pi\hbar\kappa)^3}\right] \bigg[\prod\limits_l\textrm{d} h_l\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta} \delta(H_{e^}(h_l)) \bigg]\label{eq:alice} \\ \times \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} \big(E(g_{ij},Y_{ji})E\big(g_{ij}^{-1},X_{ij}\big)\big) \star E(h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i},Y_{ji}) \star \big(E\big(g_{ji}^{-1},Y_{ji}\big) E\big(g_{ji}^{-1},X_{ji}\big)\big) \bigg],\nonumber \end{gathered}\] where the $\star$-product acts on $Y_{ji}$. For simplicity, we often do not include explicitly the finite proportionality constants in front of amplitudes, because they are immaterial for our results, and will eventually be cancelled by normalization. Further integrating in [\[eq:alice\]](#eq:alice){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:alice"} over all $g_{ij}$ gives \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) \propto \int \left[\frac{\textrm{d} Y_{ji}}{(2\pi\hbar\kappa)^3}\right] \left[\prod\limits_l\textrm{d} h_l\right] \left[\prod\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta} \delta(H_{e^}(h_l)) \right] \\ \phantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) \propto}{} \times \left[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} \delta_\star(Y_{ji},X_{ij}) \star E\big(h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i},Y_{ji}\big) \star \delta_\star(Y_{ji},-X_{ji}) \right], \end{gathered}\] where now the $\delta_\star$-functions impose the identifications of boundary edge vector variables, up to parallel transport. Indeed, the non-commutative plane wave takes care of the parallel transport between the frames of $X_{ij}$ and $X_{ji}$, as we may easily observe using the property [\[eq:Eperm\]](#eq:Eperm){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Eperm"} of the plane wave as we permute the first $\delta_\star$-function with the plane wave to obtain \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) \propto \int \left[\frac{\textrm{d} Y_{ji}}{(2\pi\hbar\kappa)^3}\right] \bigg[\prod\limits_l\textrm{d} h_l\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta} \delta(H_{e^}(h_l)) \bigg] \nonumber \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) \propto}{} \times \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} E\big(h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i},Y_{ji}\big) \star \delta_\star\big(\Ad_{h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i}} Y_{ji},X_{ij}\big) \star \delta_\star(Y_{ji},-X_{ji}) \bigg]. \end{gathered}\] We may further integrate over all $Y_{ji}$ to get \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) \propto \int \bigg[\prod\limits_l\textrm{d} h_l\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta} \delta(H_{e^}(h_l)) \bigg] \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) \propto}{} \times \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} E\big(h_{i}^{-1} K_{ij}(h_l) h_{j},X_{ji}\big) \star \delta_\star\big(\Ad_{h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i}} X_{ji},-X_{ij}\big) \bigg]. \end{gathered}\] We see that the edge vectors $X_{ij}$, $X_{ji}$ corresponding to the same edge (with opposite orientations) in different frames of reference are identified up to a parallel transport by $h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i}$ through the non-commutative delta distributions $\delta_\star(\Ad_{h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i}} X_{ji},-X_{ij})$. We wish to further integrate over the variables $h_i$. To this aim, we employ the change of variables $X_{ji} \mapsto \Ad_{h_{i}^{-1} K_{ij}(h_l) h_{j}} X_{ji}$, i.e., we parallel transport the variables $X_{ji}$ to the frames of $X_{ij}$ to get a simple identification of the boundary variables, and move all $h_i$-dependence to the plane waves. We thus get \[\begin{gathered} \begin{split} & \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) \propto \int \bigg[\prod\limits_l\textrm{d} h_l\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta} \delta(H_{e^}(h_l)) \bigg] \\ & \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) \propto}{} \times \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} E\big(h_{i}^{-1}K_{ij}(h_l)h_{j},X_{ji}\big) \bigg] \star \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} \delta_{\star}(X_{ij},-X_{ji}) \bigg], \end{split} \end{gathered}\] Note that for every vertex $i$ there is a unique path via the edges $(j_{n-1},j_n)_{n=1,\ldots,l}$, s.t. $j_{0}=0$, $j_l=i$, from the root to the vertex $i$ along the spanning tree. Now, by making the changes of variables \[\begin{gathered} h_i \mapsto \left[\mathop{\overleftarrow{\prod}}\limits_{n=0}^{l} K_{j_{n-1}j_{n}}^{-1}(h_l) \right] h_i, \end{gathered}\] where by $\overleftarrow{\prod}$ we denote an ordered product of group elements such that the product index increases from right to left, we obtain \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) \propto \int \bigg[\prod\limits_l\textrm{d} h_l\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta} \delta(H_{e^}(h_l)) \bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j) \in \textrm{tree} \\ i<j}} E(h_{i}^{-1}h_{j},X_{ji}) \bigg] \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) \propto}{} \times \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j) \notin \textrm{tree} \\ i<j}} E(h_{i}^{-1}L_{ij}(h_l)h_{j},X_{ji}) \bigg] \star \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} \delta_{\star}(X_{ij},-X_{ji}) \bigg] \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) }{} =\int \bigg[\prod\limits_l\textrm{d} h_l\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{e \notin\partial\Delta} \delta(H_{e^}(h_l)) \bigg] \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) \propto}{} \times \Bigg[\rsprod{i}{} \bigg(E(h_{i},\sum\limits_{j} \epsilon_{ij} X_{ji}) \star \!\prod\limits_{\substack{j \\ (i,j) \notin \textrm{tree}}} E(L_{ij}(h_l),X_{ji}) \bigg) \Bigg] \!\star \!\bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} \! \delta_{\star}(X_{ij},-X_{ji}) \bigg]. \end{gathered}\] Here, $\epsilon_{ij}:= \sgn(i-j)A_{ij}$, where $A_{ij}$ is the adjacency matrix of the dual graph of the boundary triangulation. Moreover, $L_{ij}(h_l) \equiv G_{ij}^{-1}(h_l)H_{ij}(h_l)G_{ij}(h_l)$, where $H_{ij}(h_l)$ is the product of $K_{kl}(h_l)$'s around the unique cycle of the boundary dual graph formed by adding the edge $(i,j)$ to the spanning tree, and $G_{ij}(h_l)$ is the product of $K_{kl}(h_l)$'s along the unique path from the root of the spanning tree to the cycle. The cycles formed from the spanning tree of a graph by adding single edges span the loop space of the graph. Thus, $H_{ij}(h_l)$ are trivial for a trivial boundary topology, if the product of $K_{kl}(h_l)$'s around all boundary vertices are trivial. On the other hand, the product of $K_{kl}(h_l)$'s around a boundary vertex is constrained to be trivial by the flatness constraints for the bulk holonomies only if the neighborhood of the vertex is a half-ball, since only in this case is the loop around the vertex contractible along the faces of the 2-complex. Thus, given that the neighborhoods of all boundary vertices have trivial topology, the flatness constraints impose $L_{ij}(h_l)$ to be trivial, if the boundary has a trivial topology, i.e., $\partial\Delta \cong S^2$. Accordingly, we have \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) \propto \int \bigg[\prod\limits_l\textrm{d} h_l\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta} \delta(H_{e^}(h_l)) \bigg] \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) \propto}{} \times\left[\rsprod{i}{} E(h_{i},\epsilon_{ij} X_{ji}) \right] \star \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} \delta_{\star}(X_{ij},-X_{ji}) \bigg], \end{gathered}\] where we used the notation $\star\!\!\!\!\overrightarrow{\prod}$ for the ordered star product of plane waves. Integrating over $h_i$ then yields the closure constraints for the boundary triangles, and we end up with \[\begin{gathered} \label{eq:metricBF} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) \propto [\delta(0)]^{d} \left[\rsprod{i}{} \delta_{\star}\Big(\sum\limits_j \epsilon_{ij} X_{ji}\Big) \right] \star \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} \delta_{\star}(X_{ij},-X_{ji}) \bigg], \end{gathered}\] where the sum is over vertices $j$ connected to the vertex $i$, and $d$ is the degree of divergence arising from the redundant delta distributions over the dual faces $e^* \in \Delta^$, $e \notin \partial\Delta$. It is clear that in the abelian limit $\kappa\rightarrow 0$, where the $\star$-product coincides with the pointwise product and $\delta_\star \rightarrow \delta$, the above amplitude imposes closure and identification of the edge vectors. However, the case of the classical limit $\hbar\rightarrow 0$ is more subtle: The whole notion of a non-commutative Fourier transform breaks down in this limit, since the non-commutative plane wave becomes ill-defined, having no well-defined limit. We will see in the following the effects of these complications and how to take them into account in studying the classical limit. # Semi-classical analysis for metric boundary data {#sec:asymp} In this section we will study the classical limit of the first order phase space path integral [\[eq:NCpwmetricreps\]](#eq:NCpwmetricreps){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:NCpwmetricreps"} for the Ponzano--Regge model obtained through the non-commutative Fourier transform. In particular, we will study the classical limit via the stationary phase approximation, first by using the usual 'commutative' variational method. However, we discover that the resulting classical geometricity constraints on the classical metric variables depend on the initial choice of quantization map --a rather problematic outcome. Therefore, we are compelled to adopt the non-commutative* variational method for the stationary phase approximation in order to obtain the correct classical equations of motion, as in the analogous case of quantum mechanics of a point particle on ${\rm SO}(3)$, considered previously in . We will again see that the non-commutative method leads to the correct and unambiguous classical geometricity constraints on the simplicial metric variables, and offer some further justification for the use of the non-commutative variational calculus. Moreover, the analysis shows how subtle the notion of "classical limit" is for the Ponzano--Regge amplitudes, which are in the end convolutions of non-commutative planes waves, in the flux representation. We would expect similar subtleties to be relevant for 4d gravity models as well. Let us begin by bringing the path integral [\[eq:NCpwmetricreps\]](#eq:NCpwmetricreps){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:NCpwmetricreps"} into a form suitable for stationary phase approximation via variational calculus. We may use the expression [\[eq:Eform\]](#eq:Eform){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Eform"} for the non-commutative plane wave to express [\[eq:NCpwmetricreps\]](#eq:NCpwmetricreps){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:NCpwmetricreps"} as \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) = \int \bigg[\prod\limits_{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N}} \frac{\textrm{d} g_{ij}}{\kappa^3}\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}}\frac{\textrm{d} Y_{ij}}{(2\pi\hbar\kappa)^3}\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_l\textrm{d} h_l\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{e\notin\partial\Delta}\frac{\textrm{d} Y_{e}}{(2\pi\hbar\kappa)^3}\bigg] \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) =}{} \times \bigg[\prod\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta} c(H_{e^}(h_l)) e^{\frac{i}{\hbar} Y_e \cdot \zeta(H_{e^}(h_l))}\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N}} c\big(g_{ij}^{-1}\big) e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}X_{ij}\cdot \zeta(g_{ij}^{-1})}\bigg] \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) =}{} \times \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} c\big(g_{ij} h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i} g_{ji}^{-1}\big) e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}Y_{ij}\cdot \zeta(g_{ij} h_{j}^{-1}K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i} g_{ji}^{-1})} \bigg], \end{gathered}\] and by further combining the exponentials we obtain \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) = \int \bigg[\prod\limits_{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N}} \frac{\textrm{d} g_{ij}}{\kappa^3} c\big(g_{ij}^{-1}\big)\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}}\frac{\textrm{d} Y_{ij}}{(2\pi\hbar\kappa)^3}\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_l\textrm{d} h_l\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{e\notin\partial\Delta}\frac{\textrm{d} Y_{e}}{(2\pi\hbar\kappa)^3}\bigg] \nonumber \\ \qquad \times \bigg[\prod\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta} c(H_{e^}(h_l)) \bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} c\big(g_{ij} h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i} g_{ji}^{-1}\big) \bigg] \label{eq:PRamplitude} \\ \times \exp\bigg\{\frac{i}{\hbar} \bigg[\sum\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta} \! Y_e \cdot \zeta(H_{e^}(h_l)) + \!\sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} \! Y_{ij}\cdot \zeta\big(g_{ij} h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i} g_{ji}^{-1}\big) + \!\sum\limits_{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N}}\! X_{ij}\cdot \zeta(g_{ij}^{-1}) \bigg]\bigg\}. \nonumber \end{gathered}\] In this form the amplitude is amenable to a stationary phase analysis through the study of the extrema of the exponential \[\begin{gathered} \mathcal{S}_{\rm PR}:= \sum\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta} \! Y_e \cdot \zeta(H_{e^}(h_l)) + \sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} \! Y_{ij}\cdot \zeta\big(g_{ij} h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i} g_{ji}^{-1}\big)+\sum\limits_{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N}}\! X_{ij}\cdot \zeta\big(g_{ij}^{-1}\big).\!\!\! \label{eq:PRaction} \end{gathered}\] We stress that this is just the classical action of discretized BF theory in its first order variables, the edge vectors $Y_{e}$ and the parallel transports $h_l$, augmented by boundary terms. Therefore, we expect to obtain in the classical limit the classical BF 'equations of motion', that is, geometricity constraints imposing flatness of holonomies around dual faces and closure of edge vectors for all triangles (up to the appropriate parallel transports). ## Stationary phase approximation via commutative variational method We first proceed to consider the usual 'commutative' stationary phase approximation of the first order Ponzano--Regge path integral [\[eq:NCpwmetricreps\]](#eq:NCpwmetricreps){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:NCpwmetricreps"} by studying the extrema of the action [\[eq:PRaction\]](#eq:PRaction){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PRaction"}. There are five different kinds of integration variables in [\[eq:NCpwmetricreps\]](#eq:NCpwmetricreps){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:NCpwmetricreps"}: $Y_e$ for $e \notin \partial\Delta$, $Y_{ij}$, $h_l$ in the bulk, $h_i$ touching the boundary and $g_{ij}$, whose variations we will consider in the following. Variation of $Y_e$: : Requiring the variation of the action with respect to $Y_e$ to vanish simply gives \[\begin{gathered} \zeta(H_{e^}(h_l)) = 0 \ \Leftrightarrow \ H_{e^}(h_l) = \mathbbm{1} \end{gathered}\] for all $e\notin\partial\Delta$, i.e., the flatness of the connection around the dual faces $e^$ in the bulk. Variation of $Y_{ij}$: : Similarly, variation with respect to $Y_{ij}$ gives \[\begin{gathered} \zeta(g_{ij} h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i} g_{ji}^{-1}) = 0 \ \Leftrightarrow \ g_{ij} h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i} g_{ji}^{-1} = \mathbbm{1} \end{gathered}\] for all $(i,j)\in\mathcal{N}$, $i<j$, i.e., the triviality of the connection around the faces $e^$ dual to boundary edges $e\in\partial\Delta$. Variation of $h_l$ in the bulk: : The variations for the group elements are slightly less trivial. Taking left-invariant Lie derivatives of the exponential with respect to a group element $h_{l'} \equiv g_{tf}$ in the bulk, we obtain \[\begin{gathered} \sum\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta} Y_e \cdot \mathcal{L}^{h_{l'}}_k\zeta(H_{e^}(h_l)) + \sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} Y_{ji}\cdot \mathcal{L}^{h_{l'}}_k\zeta\big(g_{ij} h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i} g_{ji}^{-1}\big) = 0 \qquad \forall\, k. \end{gathered}\] Here, only the three terms in the sums depending on the holonomies around the boundaries of the three dual faces, which contain $l':= tf$ are non-zero. (Each dual edge $f^$ belongs to exactly three dual faces $e^$ of $\Delta^$, since $\Delta^$ is dual to a 3-dimensional triangulation.) Now, using the fact uncovered through the previous variations that the holonomies around the dual faces are trivial for the stationary phase configurations, and the property $\zeta(\ad_gh) = \Ad_g\zeta(h)$ of the coordinates, we obtain \[\begin{gathered} \sum\limits_{\substack{e \in \Delta \\ e^\ni f^}} \epsilon_{fe}(\Ad_{G_{fe}} Y_e) = 0, \end{gathered}\] where $\Ad_{G_{fe}}$ implements the parallel transport from the frame of $Y_e$ to the frame of $f$, and $\epsilon_{fe}=\pm 1$ accounts for the orientation of $h_l$ with respect to the holonomy $H_{e^}(h_l)$ and thus the relative orientations of the edge vectors. Clearly, this imposes the metric closure constraint for the three edge vectors of each bulk triangle $f \notin \partial\Delta$ in the frame of $f$. This same condition gives the metric compatibility of the discrete connection, which in turn, if substituted back in the classical action, before considering the other saddle point equations, turn the discrete 1st order action into the 2nd order action for the triangulation $\Delta$. Variation of $h_i$: : Varying a $h_i$ we get \[\begin{gathered} \sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} Y_{ij}\cdot \mathcal{L}^{h_i}_k \zeta\big(g_{ij} h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i} g_{ji}^{-1}\big)\\ \qquad{} + \sum\limits_{\substack{(j,i)\in\mathcal{N} \\ j<i}} Y_{ji}\cdot \mathcal{L}^{h_i}_k \zeta\big(g_{ji} h_{i}^{-1} K_{ij}(h_l) h_{j} g_{ij}^{-1}\big) = 0 \qquad \forall\, k. \end{gathered}\] Again there are three non-zero terms in this expression, which correspond to the boundary triangles $f_j\in\partial\Delta$ neighboring $f_i$, i.e., such that $(i,j)\in\mathcal{N}$. We obtain the closure of the boundary integration variables $Y_{ij}$ as \[\begin{gathered} \sum\limits_{\substack{f_j\in\partial\Delta \\ (i,j)\in\mathcal{N}}} \epsilon_{ji} \big(\Ad_{g_{ji}}^{-1}Y_{ij}\big) = 0, \label{eq:Yboundclosure} \end{gathered}\] where $\Ad_{g_{ji}}^{-1}$ parallel transports the edge vectors $Y_{ji}$ to the frame of the boundary triangle $f_i$, and $\epsilon_{ji}= \pm 1$ again accounts for the relative orientation. Variation of $g_{ij}$: : Taking Lie derivatives of the exponential with respect to a $g_{ij}$, we obtain \[\begin{gathered} Y_{ij}\cdot \mathcal{L}_k^{g_{ij}}\zeta\big(g_{ij} h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i} g_{ji}^{-1}\big) + X_{ij}\cdot \mathcal{L}_k^{g_{ij}}\zeta\big(g_{ij}^{-1}\big) = 0 \qquad \forall \, k \nonumber \\ \Leftrightarrow \quad \Ad_{g_{ij}}^{-1} Y_{ij}-D^{\zeta}(g_{ij}) X_{ij} = 0 = \Ad_{g_{ij}}^{-1} Y_{ij} + D^{\zeta}(g_{ji}) X_{ji} \label{eq:Y=X} \end{gathered}\] for all $i<j$, where we denote $(D^{\zeta}(g))_{kl}:= \tilde{\mathcal{L}}_k\zeta_l(g)$. We see that this equation identifies the boundary metric variables $X_{ij}$ with the integration variables $Y_{ij}$, taking into account the orientation and the parallel transport between the frames of each vector, plus a non-geometric deformation* given by the matrix $D^{\zeta}(g_{ij})$.[^6] Thus, we have obtained the constraint equations corresponding to variations of all the integration variables. In particular, by combining the equations [\[eq:Y=X\]](#eq:Y=X){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Y=X"} with the boundary closure constraint [\[eq:Yboundclosure\]](#eq:Yboundclosure){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Yboundclosure"}, we obtain \[\begin{gathered} \label{eq:defXclosure} \sum\limits_{\substack{f_j\in\partial\Delta \\ (i,j)\in\mathcal{N}}} D^{\zeta}(g_{ij}) X_{ij} = 0 \qquad \forall\, i, \end{gathered}\] which gives, in general, a deformed closure constraint for the boundary metric edge variables $X_{ij}$. In addition, from [\[eq:Y=X\]](#eq:Y=X){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Y=X"} alone we obtain a deformed identification \[\begin{gathered} \Ad_{g_{ij}} \big(D^\zeta(g_{ij})X_{ij}\big) =-\Ad_{g_{ji}} \big(D^\zeta(g_{ji})X_{ji}\big), \end{gathered}\] naturally up to a parallel transport, of the boundary edge variables $X_{ij}$ and $X_{ji}$. Accordingly, we obtain for the amplitude \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) \propto \int \bigg[\prod\limits_{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N}} \frac{\textrm{d} g_{ij}}{\kappa^3} c\big(g_{ij}^{-1}\big)\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{v\in\partial\Delta} \delta(H_v(g_{ij})) \bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{f_i \in\partial\Delta} \delta_\star\bigg(\sum\limits_{\substack{f_j\in\partial\Delta\$i,j)\in\mathcal{N}}} D^{\zeta}(g_{ij}) X_{ij}\bigg) \bigg] \nonumber \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) \propto}{} \star \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N}\\i<j}} \delta_\star\bigg(\Ad_{g_{ij}} \big(D^\zeta(g_{ij})X_{ij}\big) + \Ad_{g_{ji}} \big(D^\zeta(g_{ji})X_{ji}\big)\bigg) \bigg] \nonumber \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) \propto}{} \star \exp\bigg\{\frac{i}{\hbar}\sum\limits_{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N}}X_{ij}\cdot\zeta\big(g_{ij}^{-1}\big)\bigg\} \big(1+\mathcal{O}(\hbar)\big). \label{eq:0thPRamp} \end{gathered}\] The proportionality constant is given by the configuration space volume for the geometric configurations in the bulk, which is generically infinite but is cancelled by normalization. The delta functions impose the constraints on boundary data discussed above. In particular, \(H_v(g_{ij})$ are the holonomies around the boundary vertices $v\in\partial\Delta$, whose triviality follows from the triviality of the bulk holonomies. Notice that one must write the integrand in terms of $\star$-products and $\star$-delta functions in order for the constraints to be correctly imposed, since the amplitude acts on wave functions through $\star$-multiplication. The exact form of the deformation matrix $D^\zeta_{kl}(g) \equiv \{X_k,\zeta_l\}(g) = \delta_{kl} + \mathcal{O}(\kappa,\|\ln(g)\|)$, and accordingly the geometric content of these constraints, depends on the coordinates $\zeta$, which are determined by the discretization of the continuum BF action or, equivalently, the initial choice of the quantization map. We see that only in the abelian limit $\kappa\rightarrow 0$, $\|\zeta\|=\const$, do the different choices agree in general, producing the undeformed discrete geometric constraints \[\begin{gathered} \sum\limits_{\substack{f_j\in\partial\Delta \\ (i,j)\in\mathcal{N}}} X_{ij} = 0 \qquad \forall \, f_i\in\partial\Delta \qquad \text{and} \qquad \Ad_{g_{ij}} X_{ij} = \Ad_{g_{ji}} X_{ji} \qquad \forall \, (i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \end{gathered}\] for the discretized boundary metric variables $X_{ij}\in\mathfrak{su}(2)^$. ### Some examples {#subsec:examples .unnumbered} Before we go on to consider the stationary phase boundary configurations obtained through the ordinary commutative variational calculus for some specific choices of the coordinates $\zeta$, and thus the associated quantization maps, let us make a few general remarks on the apparent dependence of the limit on this choice. As we have already emphasized above, the exact functional form of the non-commutative plane waves, and thus the coordinate choice, is determined ultimately by the choice of the quantization map and the $\star$-product that we thus obtain. We have found the general expression for the plane wave as a $\star$-exponential \[\begin{gathered} E(g,X) = e_\star^{\frac{i}{\hbar\kappa}k(g)\cdot X} = \sum\limits_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{1}{n!} \left(\frac{i}{\hbar\kappa}\right)^n k^{i_1}(g) \cdots k^{i_n}(g) X_{i_1} \star \dots \star X_{i_n}. \end{gathered}\] From this expression we may observe that the way the Planck constant $\hbar$ enters into the plane wave is very subtle. There are negative powers of $(\hbar\kappa)$ coming from the prefactor in the exponential, while from the $\star$-monomials arise positive powers of $(\hbar\kappa)$. The way these different contributions go together determines the explicit functional form of the non-commutative plane wave, and accordingly the behavior in the classical limit $\hbar \rightarrow 0$. Therefore, it is not too surprising that we may eventually find different classical limits for different choices of plane waves through the application of the ordinary stationary phase method. In particular, it is important to realize that the non-commutative plane wave itself is purely a quantum object with an ill-defined classical limit, and therefore has no duty to coincide with anything in this limit. For this reason, the stationary phase solutions corresponding to different $\star$-products may also differ from each other, even though the $\star$-product itself coincides with the pointwise product in this limit. On the contrary, in the abelian limit $\kappa\rightarrow 0$ we also scale the coordinates $k^i$ on the group, so that $k^i/\kappa$ stay constant, since $\kappa$ determines the scale associated to the group manifold. Therefore, the non-commutative plane wave agrees with the usual commutative plane wave in this limit. Only in the abelian limit may one expect the different choices of non-commutative structures lead to unambiguous results, when one applies the commutative variational calculus. Symmetric & Duflo quantization maps.* The symmetric quantization map $\mathfrak{Q}_{\textrm{\tiny S}}: \Pol(\mathfrak{su}(2)^) \rightarrow U(\mathfrak{su}(2))$ is determined by the symmetric operator ordering for monomials \[\begin{gathered} \mathfrak{Q}_{\textrm{\tiny S}}(X_{i_1}X_{i_2}\cdots X_{i_n}) \stackrel{!}{=} \frac{1}{n!}\sum\limits_{\sigma\in \Sigma_n} \hat{X}_{i_{\sigma(1)}} \hat{X}_{i_{\sigma(2)}} \cdots \hat{X}_{i_{\sigma(n)}}, \end{gathered}\] where $\Sigma_n$ is the group of permutations of $n$ elements, and extends by linearity to any completion of the polynomial algebra $\Pol(\mathfrak{su}(2)^)$. In particular, we have \[\begin{gathered} \mathfrak{Q}_{\textrm{\tiny S}}^{-1}(e^{\frac{i}{\hbar\kappa}k(g)\cdot \hat{X}}) = \sum\limits_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{i^n}{n!(\hbar\kappa)^n} k^{i_1}(g) \cdots k^{i_n}(g) \mathfrak{Q}_{\textrm{\tiny S}}^{-1}(\hat{X}_{i_1} \cdots \hat{X}_{i_n}) = e^{\frac{i}{\hbar\kappa}k(g)\cdot X} \equiv E_{\textrm{\tiny S}}(g,X) \end{gathered}\] and accordingly to this quantization prescription is associated a non-commutative plane wave with $c_{\textrm{\tiny S}}(g)=1$, $\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}(g) =-\frac{i}{\kappa}\ln(g) \in \mathfrak{su}(2)$, where the value of the logarithm is taken in the principal branch . The Duflo quantization map $\mathfrak{Q}_{\textrm{\tiny D}}$ is defined as \[\begin{gathered} \mathfrak{Q}_{\textrm{\tiny D}} = \mathfrak{Q}_{\textrm{\tiny S}} \circ j^{\frac{1}{2}}(\vec{\partial}_x), \end{gathered}\] where $j^{\frac{1}{2}}(\vec{\partial}_x)$ is a differential operator associated to the function $j:\mathfrak{su}(2) \rightarrow \mathbb{C}$ given by \[\begin{gathered} j^{\frac{1}{2}}(X):= \det\left(\frac{\sinh(\frac{1}{2}\ad_X)}{\frac{1}{2}\ad_X} \right)^{\frac{1}{2}}. \end{gathered}\] The definition is such that $\mathfrak{Q}_{\textrm{\tiny D}}$ restricts to an isomorphism from the $g$-invariant functions on $\mathfrak{su}(2)^$ to $g$-invariant operators (i.e., Casimirs) in $\overline{U(\mathfrak{su}(2))}$, and therefore the Duflo map can be considered as algebraically the most natural choice for a quantization map. In the Duflo case we obtain $c_{\textrm{\tiny D}}(g)=\kappa\|\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}(g)\|/\sin(\kappa\|\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}(g)\|)$, but the coordinates are the same $\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny D}} \equiv \zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}$ as for the symmetric quantization map, so the amplitudes have the same stationary phase behavior in both cases. In this respect it is important to note that even though the Duflo factor $c_{\textrm{\tiny D}}(g)=\kappa\|\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}(g)\|/\sin(\kappa\|\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}(g)\|)$ diverges for $\kappa\|\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}(g)\| = \pi$, the path integral measure is still well-behaved, since $c_{\textrm{\tiny D}}(g)\textrm{d} g=(\sin(\kappa\|\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}\|)/\kappa\|\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}\|) \textrm{d}^3\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}$ remains finite. We obtain from the equation [\[eq:BCHder\]](#eq:BCHder){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:BCHder"} in Appendix [\[sec:infBCH\]](#sec:infBCH){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:infBCH"} for the deformation matrix as a function of the coordinates \[\begin{gathered} \label{eq:DS} D^{\textrm{\tiny S}}_{kl}(\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}) = \left(\frac{\kappa\|\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}\|}{\sin(\kappa\|\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}\|)}\right)\! \left[\cos(\kappa\|\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}\|) \delta_{kl} + \left(\frac{\sin(\kappa\|\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}\|)}{\kappa\|\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}\|}-\cos(\kappa\|\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}\|) \right) \!\frac{\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S},k} \zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S},l}}{\|\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}\|^2}-\kappa\epsilon_{klm}\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}^m \right].\!\!\!\! \end{gathered}\] This deformation matrix has the following nice property: $D_{kl}^{\textrm{\tiny S}}(k)k^l = k_k$. This implies, in particular, that when the edge vectors are stable under the dual connection variables, $\Ad_{g_{ij}}X_{ij} = X_{ij}$ $\Leftrightarrow$ $k(g_{ij}) \propto X_{ij}$, we have $D^{\textrm{\tiny S}}(g_{ij})X_{ij} = X_{ij}$, and therefore recover the undeformed closure constraints from [\[eq:defXclosure\]](#eq:defXclosure){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:defXclosure"}. Accordingly, classical geometric boundary data with $\Ad_{g_{ij}}X_{ij} = X_{ij}$, $X_{ij} =-X_{ji}$ and $\sum\limits_{j}X_{ij}=0$ satisfies the constraint equations for the symmetric quantization map. Except for the stability ansatz $\Ad_{g_{ij}}X_{ij} = X_{ij}$, however, there are undoubtedly other solutions to the constraint equations that do not satisfy this stability requirement, but we have not explored the possibilities in this general case. It is nevertheless clear that these additional solutions do not correspond to simplicial geometries, since for them the closure constraint is again deformed. Freidel--Livine--Majid quantization map.* We will then consider the popular choice of Freidel--Livine--Majid quantization map , which can be expressed in terms of the symmetric quantization map $\mathfrak{Q}_{\textrm{\tiny S}}$ and a change of parametrization $\chi: \mathfrak{su}(2) \rightarrow \mathfrak{su}(2)$ on ${\rm SU}(2)$ as \[\begin{gathered} \mathfrak{Q}_{\textrm{\tiny FLM}} = \mathfrak{Q}_{\textrm{\tiny S}} \circ \chi, \end{gathered}\] where $\chi(k) = \frac{\sin^{-1}\|k\|}{\|k\|} k$. The inverse coordinate transformation $\chi^{-1}(k) = \frac{\sin\|k\|}{\|k\|}k$, however, is two-to-one: it identifies the coordinates of the antipodes $g$ and $-g$ as \[\begin{gathered} \chi^{-1}(k(g)) = \chi^{-1}\left(k(g)-\frac{\pi}{2}\frac{k(g)}{\|k(g)\|}\right) = \chi^{-1}(k(-g)) \qquad \forall\, g\in {\rm SU}(2)\backslash \{e\}. \end{gathered}\] Therefore, the coordinates $\chi^{-1}(k)$ only cover the upper hemisphere ${\rm SU}(2)/\mathbb{Z}_2 \cong {\rm SO}(3)$, and the resulting non-commutative Fourier transform is applicable only to functions on ${\rm SO}(3)$. The FLM quantization map yields \[\begin{gathered} \mathcal{Q}_{\textrm{\tiny FLM}}^{-1}\big(e^{\frac{i}{\hbar\kappa} k(g)\cdot\hat{X}}\big)=e^{\frac{i}{\hbar\kappa}\frac{\sin\|k(g)\|}{\|k(g)\|} k(g)\cdot X} \equiv E_{\textrm{\tiny FLM}}(g,X). \end{gathered}\] Accordingly, it leads to a form of the non-commutative plane wave with $c_{\textrm{\tiny FLM}}(g)=1$, $\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny FLM}}(g) = \frac{1}{\kappa}\frac{\sin\|k(g)\|}{\|k(g)\|} k(g) =-\frac{i}{2\kappa}\tr_{\frac{1}{2}}(g\sigma^k)\sigma_k \in \mathfrak{su}(2)$, where $\tr_{\frac{1}{2}}$ denotes the trace in the fundamental spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ representation of ${\rm SU}(2)$. Due to the linearity of the trace, it is straightforward to calculate the deformation matrix \[\begin{gathered} D^{\textrm{\tiny FLM}}_{kl}(g) = \frac{1}{2}\tr_{\frac{1}{2}}(g)\delta_{kl}+\frac{i}{2}\tr_{\frac{1}{2}}\big(g\sigma^j\big)\epsilon_{jkl} \equiv\sqrt{1-\kappa^2 \|\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny FLM}}(g)\|^2}\delta_{kl}-\kappa\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny FLM}}^j(g) \epsilon_{jkl}. \end{gathered}\] Thus, according to our general description above, the classical discrete geometricity constraints are satisfied by the deformed boundary metric variables \[\begin{gathered} D^{\textrm{\tiny FLM}}(g_{ij})X_{ij} = \sqrt{1-\kappa^2 \|\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny FLM}}(g_{ij})\|^2} X_{ij}-\kappa (\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny FLM}}(g_{ij}) \wedge X_{ij}). \end{gathered}\] We have not solved these constraints explicitly, which would generically impose relations between the stationary phase boundary connection $g_{ij}$ and the given boundary metric data $X_{ij}$. However, one can easily confirm that data corresponding to generic classical discrete geometries does not satisfy the constraints, and therefore the geometry resulting from the constraints does not, in general, describe discrete geometries. In fact, the deformed and the undeformed closure constraints are compatible only for $g_{ij}\equiv \mathbbm{1}$, or equivalently, in the abelian limit. Therefore, we conclude that the non-commutative metric boundary variables do not have a classical geometric interpretation in the case of FLM quantization map outside the abelian approximation, when one studies the commutative variation of the action. ## Stationary phase approximation via non-commutative variational method We emphasize that in the above variation of the amplitude we did not take into account the deformation of phase space structure, which appeared crucial for obtaining the correct classical equations of motion in in the case of quantum mechanics of a point particle on ${\rm SO}(3)$. This could be guessed to be the origin of the discrepancies between the amplitudes corresponding to different choices of quantization maps in the semi-classical limit. Indeed, we may define the non-commutative variation $\delta_\star S$ of the action $S$ in the amplitude via \[\begin{gathered} e_\star^{i\delta_\star S + \mathcal{O}(\delta^2)} \equiv e_\star^{-iS} \star e_\star^{iS^\delta}, \end{gathered}\] where the $\star$-product acts on the fixed boundary variables $X_{ij}$, $\mathcal{O}(\delta^2)$ refers to terms higher than first order in the variations, and $S^\delta\equiv S(g_{ij}\delta g_{ij},X_{ij} + \delta X_{ij})$ is the varied action. It is easy to see that the non-commutative variation so defined undeforms the above identification [\[eq:Y=X\]](#eq:Y=X){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Y=X"} of $X_{ij}$ and $Y_{ij}$ (up to orientation and parallel transport), simply because we have \[\begin{gathered} E\big(g^{-1},X\big) \star E\big(ge^{i\epsilon Z},X\big) = \underbrace{E\big(g^{-1},X\big) \star E(g,X)}_{=1} \star E\big(e^{i\epsilon Z},X\big) = e^{\frac{i}{\hbar\kappa}\epsilon (Z\cdot X) + \mathcal{O} (\epsilon^2 )} \end{gathered}\] for any $Z\in \mathfrak{su}(2)$ and $\epsilon \in \mathbb{R}$ implementing the variation of $g$, so that $\delta g = e^{i\epsilon Z}$. Then, all the above results for variations remain the same by requiring the non-commutative variation $\delta_\star S$ of the action to vanish except for equation [\[eq:Y=X\]](#eq:Y=X){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Y=X"}, which becomes undeformed, i.e., we obtain the geometric identification $\Ad_{g_{ij}}X_{ij} = Y_{ij} =-\Ad_{g_{ji}}X_{ji}$. Thus, the non-geometric deformation of the constraints does not appear, and we recover exactly the simplicial geometry relations for the boundary metric variables, regardless of the choice of a quantization map. The non-commutative geometric interpretation of the leading order contribution to the amplitude obtained through the non-commutative variation is largely an open question at the moment --and a very interesting one as well. Clearly, the non-commutative leading order is different from the ordinary commutative result, because we are not considering the usual commutative limit, but another kind of limit that takes into account the non-commutative structure of the phase space. Indeed, this difference is more than welcome, because the commutative result depends on the choice of a quantization map, which is unacceptable, as we have emphasized. Our calculations below show, in fact, that the application of the commutative variational method to an integral kernel that is a function of non-commutative variables leads to a result that does not represent the leading order in $\hbar$: We confirm in Section [6](#sec:6j){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:6j"} that the results obtained (only) by the non-commutative stationary phase analysis agree with those obtained through the indisputable commutative analysis in the coherent state representation. We still lack a complete understanding of the non-commutative variations, but we suspect that the need for the non-commutative variational method arises, because the amplitude $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij})$ acts as the integral kernel for the propagator with respect to the $\star$-product and not the pointwise product. As the $\star$-product itself exhibits $\hbar$-dependence, this may modify the asymptotic behavior. The classical constraint equations that we recover via the non-commutative variations are presumably the ones that are imposed on the boundary states by the propagator (again, acting with the $\star$-product) in the classical limit. However, this needs to be substantiated by further research. To begin with, let us consider the partially 'off-shell' amplitude, where we only substitute the identifications $\Ad_{g_{ij}}X_{ij} = Y_{ij} =-\Ad_{g_{ji}}X_{ji}$ arising from the variations of the boundary connection $g_{ij}$. The substitution is done, again, by multiplying the amplitude by $\star$-delta functions imposing the identities, and integrating over $Y_{ij}$. We also integrate over $X_{ji}$ for $i<j$ in order to explicitly impose the identifications $\Ad_{g_{ij}}X_{ij} =-\Ad_{g_{ji}}X_{ji}$ on the boundary variables. Using the properties of the non-commutative plane waves, and denoting by $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{\star {\rm lo}}(X_{ij})$ the leading order contribution in $\hbar$ to the amplitude obtained via the non-commutative stationary phase method, we find from [\[eq:PRamplitude\]](#eq:PRamplitude){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PRamplitude"} through a simple substitution \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{\star {\rm lo}}(X_{ij}) \propto \!\int\! \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}}\! \frac{\textrm{d} g_{ij}}{\kappa^3} c\big(g_{ij}^{-1}\big) c\big(g_{ij}^{-1}g_{ji}g_{ij}\big) \bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_l\textrm{d} h_l\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{e\notin\partial\Delta}\!\frac{\textrm{d} Y_{e}}{(2\pi\hbar\kappa)^3}\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta}\! c(H_{e^}(h_l)) \bigg] \nonumber \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{\star {\rm lo}}(X_{ij}) \propto}{} \times \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} c\big(h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i} g_{ji}^{-1}g_{ij}\big) \bigg] \exp\bigg\{\frac{i}{\hbar} \sum\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta} Y_e \cdot \zeta(H_{e^}(h_l))\bigg\} \nonumber \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{\star {\rm lo}}(X_{ij}) \propto}{} \times \exp\bigg\{\sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} X_{ij}\cdot \zeta\big(h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i} g_{ji}^{-1}g_{ij}\big)\bigg\} \nonumber \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{\star {\rm lo}}(X_{ij}) \propto}{} \star \exp\bigg\{\sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} X_{ij}\cdot \zeta\big(g_{ij}^{-1}g_{ji}g_{ij}\big)\bigg\} \star \exp\bigg\{\sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} X_{ij}\cdot \zeta\big(g_{ij}^{-1}\big)\bigg\} \nonumber \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{\star {\rm lo}}(X_{ij}) }{} = \int \bigg[\prod\limits_l\textrm{d} h_l\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{e\notin\partial\Delta}\textrm{d} Y_{e}\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} c\big(h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i}\big) \bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta} c(H_{e^}(h_l)) \bigg] \nonumber \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{\star {\rm lo}}(X_{ij}) \propto}{} \times \exp\bigg\{\frac{i}{\hbar} \bigg[\sum\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta} Y_e \cdot \zeta(H_{e^}(h_l)) + \sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} X_{ij}\cdot \zeta\big(h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i}\big) \bigg]\bigg\}. \label{eq:whoop} \end{gathered}\] In fact, there is a subtlety in this calculation in choosing the correct ordering of the non-commutative plane waves, which depend on the same non-commutative edge vector after integrating over the $\star$-delta functions, in the first expression of [\[eq:whoop\]](#eq:whoop){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:whoop"}. We were guided here in the choice by the appropriate geometric form of the result. Indeed, the exponential clearly reflects the typical structure of a 3d discrete gravity action: (i) It contains bulk terms $Y_e \cdot \zeta(H_{e^}(h_l))$, which couple bulk edge vectors and the holonomies around the dual faces, thus associated with deficit angles. (ii) It has boundary terms $X_{ij}\cdot \zeta(h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i})$, which couple boundary edge vectors with the group elements that represent parallel transports between adjacent boundary triangles to the edge, thus associated with dihedral angles. To make the connection to Regge calculus even clearer, let us adopt the non-commutative structure arising from the symmetric quantization map, and set $H_{e^}(h_l) \equiv \exp(i\theta_e \hat{n}_e\cdot\vec{\sigma})$ and $h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i} \equiv \exp(i\theta_{ji}\hat{n}_{ji}\cdot\vec{\sigma})$ in the spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ representation, where $\theta_e,\theta_{ji}\in [0,\pi]$ are now the class angles of the group elements and $\hat{n}_e,\hat{n}_{ji}\in S^2$ unit vectors. Then, we may write \[\begin{gathered} Y_e \cdot \zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}(H_{e^}(h_l)) = \|Y_e\| \frac{\theta_e}{\kappa} \left(\frac{Y_e}{\|Y_e\|}\cdot\hat{n}_e\right), \qquad X_{ij}\cdot \zeta\big(h_{j}^{-1} K_{ji}(h_l) h_{i}\big) = \|X_{ij}\|\frac{\theta_{ji}}{\kappa}\left(\frac{X_{ij}}{\|X_{ij}\|}\cdot\hat{n}_{ji}\right). \end{gathered}\] Considering then variations in the unit vectors $\hat{n}_e$ and $\hat{n}_{ji}$, it is immediate to find that the stationary phase of the amplitude is given by $\hat{n}_e = \pm \frac{Y_e}{\|Y_e\|}\cdot\hat{n}_e$ and $\hat{n}_{ji} = \pm \frac{X_{ij}}{\|X_{ij}\|}$, the signs corresponding to the two opposite orientations of the edge vectors or, equivalently, the dual faces. Now, if a configuration of edge vectors satisfies the constraints for a given discrete connection, it does so also for the oppositely oriented configuration obtained by reversing the orientations of all the dual faces. For the oppositely oriented configuration the holonomies around dual faces are also inverted, which gives opposite signs for $\hat{n}_e$ and $\hat{n}_{ji}$ with respect to the original configuration. Therefore, choosing $\hat{n}_e$ and $\hat{n}_{ji}$ to have positive signs for one of the orientations and thus negative signs for the other, we may further write for the Ponzano--Regge amplitude in the semi-classical limit \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{\star {\rm lo}}(X_{ij}) \propto \int \bigg[\prod\limits_l\textrm{d} h_l\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{e\notin\partial\Delta}\textrm{d} Y_{e}\bigg] \cos\bigg(\frac{i}{\hbar\kappa} \bigg[\sum\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta} \|Y_e\| \theta_e + \sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} \|X_{ij}\|\theta_{ji} \bigg]\bigg), \end{gathered}\] where the cosine arises from summing the contributions from both orientations of the triangulation. The argument of the cosine is exactly the first order Regge action, well-known from discrete gravity. Notice, however, that the deficit angles $\theta_e$ and the dihedral angles $\theta_{ji}$ still depend on the discrete bulk connection given by the group elements $h_l$, which are integrated over in the amplitude. Also, we have not yet imposed the closure constraints on the edge vectors, which arise from the variations of the bulk connection. These constraints impose the closure of edge vectors for each triangle, taking account orientations and parallel transports. At the same time they impose the metricity of the discrete connection and restrict the integrals over $Y_e$ to the geometric configurations, as in Regge gravity[^7]. Solving for the discrete connection $h_l$ in terms of the edge vectors from the constraint equations (when possible, i.e., for non-degenerate configurations) leads to the second order Regge action and to the form \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{\star {\rm lo}}(X_{ij}) \propto \bigg[\prod\limits_{e\notin\partial\Delta}\textrm{d} Y_{e}\bigg] \cos\bigg(\frac{i}{\hbar\kappa} \bigg[\sum\limits_{e \notin \partial\Delta} \|Y_e\| \theta_e + \sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} \|X_{ij}\|\theta_{ji} \bigg]\bigg) \end{gathered}\] for the Ponzano--Regge amplitude, where now the deficit and dihedral angles are functions of the edge vectors, and only geometric configurations of the edge vectors are integrated over. Finally, we emphasize that for other choices of non-commutative structures, other than the one associated with the symmetric quantization map, we may obtain more complicated dependence on the dihedral and deficit angles. For example, the Freidel--Livine--Majid map leads to the compactified Regge action considered in . However, all choices of non-commutative structures result in the same form as above in the regime of small deficit and dihedral angles. We thus see that the Regge action naturally arises in the semi-classical limit of the Ponzano--Regge model in terms of the proper phase space variables. Let us then move on to consider the 'on-shell' case, where we impose all the classical constraints on the path integral arising from the (non-commutative) stationary phase analysis. In this case the leading order semi-classical contribution to the Ponzano--Regge amplitude [\[eq:0thPRamp\]](#eq:0thPRamp){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:0thPRamp"} reads in detail before integrating out the bulk variables \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{\star {\rm lo}}(X_{ij}) \propto \int \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}}\textrm{d} g_{ij}\textrm{d} g_{ji} \, c\big(g_{ij}^{-1}g_{ji}\big)\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_l \textrm{d} h_l\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{e\notin\partial\Delta} \textrm{d} X_e\bigg] \Bigg[\prod\limits_{e\notin\partial\Delta} \delta(H_{e^}(h_l))\Bigg] \nonumber \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{\star {\rm lo}}(X_{ij})\propto}{} \times \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} \delta\big(g_{ij}h_j^{-1}K_{ji}(h_l)h_ig_{ji}^{-1}\big)\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{f\notin\partial\Delta} \delta_\star\bigg(\sum\limits_{e\in f} \epsilon_{fe}\Ad_{h_{fe}}X_e\bigg) \bigg] \nonumber \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{\star {\rm lo}}(X_{ij})\propto}{} \star \bigg[\prod\limits_i \delta_\star\bigg(\sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ j>i}}\! X_{ij}-\sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ j<i}} \!\Ad_{g_{ij}^{-1}g_{ji}}X_{ji}\bigg)\bigg] \star \exp\bigg\{\frac{i}{\hbar} \sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}}\! X_{ij} \cdot \zeta\big(g_{ij}^{-1}g_{ji}\big) \!\bigg\}, \end{gathered}\] where we have identified $Y_{ij}:= \Ad_{g_{ij}}X_{ij} =-\Ad_{g_{ji}}X_{ji}$ for all $(i,j)\in\mathcal{N}$ such that $i<j$. Here, the delta functions on the group impose triviality of the holonomies, which implies flatness of the discrete connection. The $\star$-delta functions impose closure of the edge vectors $e\in f$ belonging to the bulk and boundary triangles $f\in\Delta$, which in the discrete gravity context corresponds to the metricity of the discrete connection. The action is reduced due to the imposition of the flatness constraints to a simple boundary term. Since the amplitude depends only on $G_{ij}$ and not the individual $g_{ij}$, we may further apply a change of variables by denoting $G_{ij}:= g_{ji}^{-1}g_{ij}$ and $G_{ji} = G_{ij}^{-1}$ for all $i<j$. These are the group elements that represent parallel transports between centers of boundary triangles, and are therefore naturally related to the dihedral angles of Regge calculus. By also integrating over the bulk variables, we obtain \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{\star {\rm lo}}(X_{ij}) \propto \int \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}}\textrm{d} G_{ij}\, c(G_{ij})\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{v\in\partial\Delta} \delta(H_v(G_{ij})) \bigg] \nonumber\\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{\star {\rm lo}}(X_{ij})\propto}{} \times \bigg[\prod\limits_i \delta_\star\bigg(\sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ j>i}} X_{ij}-\sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ j<i}} \Ad_{G_{ij}}^{-1}X_{ji}\bigg)\bigg] \nonumber \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{\star {\rm lo}}(X_{ij})\propto}{} \star \exp\bigg\{\frac{i}{\hbar} \sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} X_{ij} \cdot \zeta\big(G_{ij}^{-1}\big) \bigg\}. \label{eq:PRG} \end{gathered}\] The integrations over the bulk connection result in the delta functions imposing flatness of the boundary holonomies $H_v(G_{ij})$ around all boundary vertices $v\in\partial\Delta$. In addition, the integrations over the bulk variables yield the volume of geometric bulk configurations, which contributes only to the normalization factor. The result of the calculation is exactly as we would expect from a first order 3d discrete gravity action, namely, it is expressed as a function of edge vectors, where parallel transports are integrated over flat connections, which allow the edge vectors to satisfy the closure constraints. One may further decompose the integrals in [\[eq:PRG\]](#eq:PRG){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PRG"} over group elements $G_{ij}$ into integrals over dihedral class angles $\theta_{ij}:= \|k(G_{ij})\|$, where $k(g):=-i\ln(g) \in \mathfrak{su}(2) \cong \mathbb{R}^3$, and integrals over unit vectors $\hat{n}_{ij}:= k(G_{ij})/\|k(G_{ij})\| \in S^2$, such that $G_{ij} \equiv \exp(i\theta_{ij} \hat{n}_{ij}\cdot \vec{\sigma})$ in the spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ representation. Adopting again the symmetric quantization map, we then have for the exponent \[\begin{gathered} \sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} X_{ij} \cdot \zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}(G_{ij}^{-1}) =-\frac{1}{\kappa}\sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} \|X_{ij}\| \theta_{ij} \left(\frac{X_{ij}}{\|X_{ij}\|}\right) \cdot \hat{n}_{ij}. \end{gathered}\] The stationary phase with respect to the integrals over $\hat{n}_{ij}\in S^2$ is given by $\frac{X_{ij}}{\|X_{ij}\|} \cdot \hat{n}_{ij} = \pm 1$. Now the two solutions correspond to opposite orientations of the boundary, both contributing to the dominant phase with opposite signs, again turning the exponential into a cosine. Thus, we obtain \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{{\rm lo}}(X_{ij}) \propto \int \Bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} \textrm{d} \theta_{ij}\left(\frac{\sin\theta_{ij}}{\theta_{ij}}\right)^2 \Bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{v\in\partial\Delta} \delta(H_v(G_{ij})) \bigg] \nonumber \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{{\rm lo}}(X_{ij}) \propto}{} \times \bigg[\prod\limits_i \delta_\star\bigg(\sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ j>i}} X_{ij}-\sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ j<i}} \Ad_{G_{ij}}^{-1}X_{ji}\bigg) \bigg] \star \cos\bigg(\frac{i}{\hbar\kappa} \sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} \|X_{ij}\| \theta_{ij}\bigg),\!\!\! \label{eq:PRregge} \end{gathered}\] where $G_{ij} \equiv \exp(-i\theta_{ij} (X_{ij}/\|X_{ij}\|)\cdot\vec{\sigma})$ and the $(\sin\theta_{ij}/\theta_{ij})^2$ factors arise from the Haar measure. The second order expression may be obtained by solving the constraint equations for the boundary dihedral angles $\theta_{ij}$ in terms of the edge vectors $X_{ij}$, and substituting into the above formula. This leads to an expression of the form \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{{\rm lo}}(X_{ij}) \propto \cos\bigg(\frac{i}{\hbar\kappa} \sum\limits_{\substack{i,j \\ i<j}} \|X_{ij}\| \theta_{ij}(X_{kl})\bigg). \end{gathered}\] This is the second order Regge action in terms of only the boundary metric data. Thus, we have verified that the non-commutative variational method for the stationary phase approximation leads to the correct classical geometric constraints for the Ponzano--Regge model and agrees with the exact analysis of the amplitude. A similar result was obtained by us for the dual non-commutative representation of quantum mechanics on the group ${\rm SO}(3)$ previously in . The use of such a non-commutative variational method may be motivated by noting that, in calculating transition amplitudes for boundary states, $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij})$ acts as an integral kernel with respect to the $\star$-product, and not with respect to the commutative pointwise product. However, more work on this point is certainly needed in order to achieve a better understanding that would definitely settle the issue. Granting the use of the non-commutative stationary phase method, we have thus shown that the phase space path integral for the Ponzano--Regge model obtained through the non-commutative Fourier transform facilitates a straigthforward asymptotic analysis of the classical limit of the model. We also showed that the semi-classical approximation to the amplitude is given by the cosine of the Regge action, in agreement with previous studies . Finally, we would like to comment on our saddle point analysis in comparison with the existing ones in the literature . Besides not having a real-valued contribution to the exponent (that is, an imaginary contribution to the classical action), and thus having a simpler variational principle given by a standard (albeit non-commutative) saddle point approximation, we also do not have any logarithmic term. In other words, the flux representation of the spin foam model gives a discrete BF path integral in terms of the standard classical action. The choice of quantization map affects the exact form of such discrete classical action, but in a rather minor way. In fact, it leads to a discretization of the continuum curvature in terms of either the holonomy of the connection (a group element), for the FLM map, or its logarithm (a Lie algebra element), for the Duflo map. In general, the analysis appears to be more straightforward, than the one based on the spin (or coherent state) representation, as one would expect from a straightforward path integral representation. We will exemplify this comparison in the simple case of a triangulation formed by a single tetrahedron. # Semi-classical limit for a tetrahedron {#sec:6j} To conclude our asymptotic analysis, we consider in this section the relation of the classical limit of Ponzano--Regge amplitudes in terms of non-commutative boundary metric variables to the usual formulation of spin foam asymptotics as the large spin limit in the spin representation. We will restrict our treatment to the case of a single tetrahedron, since in this case the asymptotics for the Ponzano--Regge amplitude is simple and well-known in the literature. In particular, it has been found that (for non-degenerate boundary data) the amplitude of a tetrahedron is approximated in the large spin limit by the cosine of the Regge action . We derive this result from the asymptotic behavior obtained through the non-commutative phase space path integral, and thus establish a firm connection between the two asymptotic analyses. For a single tetrahedron the Ponzano--Regge amplitude with boundary connection data reads \[\begin{gathered} \label{eq:PRtetra} \mathcal{A}_{\rm PR}(g_{ij}) = \int \bigg[\prod\limits_i \textrm{d} h_i\bigg] \prod\limits_{\substack{i,j \\ i<j}} \delta(g_{ij}h_j^{-1}h_ig_{ji}^{-1}) \end{gathered}\] where $i,j=1,\ldots,4$ label the boundary triangles, and the notation is chosen as in Fig. [\[fig:treeholos\]](#fig:treeholos){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:treeholos"}.[^8] The deltas impose flatness of the connection around all six wedges of the tetrahedra (see Fig. [\[fig:tetrasubdiv\]](#fig:tetrasubdiv){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:tetrasubdiv"}, where wedges are illustrated in grey). Now, this amplitude may be transformed into other representations described by other types of boundary data using different bases of functions on ${\rm SU}(2)$. In particular, as already explained above, one may transform the amplitude into the basis given by the non-commutative plane waves, in which case the amplitude is expressed as a function of non-commutative boundary edge vectors. Adopting for convenience the symmetric quantization map, this yields \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) = \int \bigg[\prod\limits_{i,j} \textrm{d} g_{ij} E(g_{ij},X_{ij}) \bigg] \mathcal{A}_{\rm PR}(g_{ij}) = \int \bigg[\prod\limits_{i,j} \textrm{d} g_{ij}\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{i} \textrm{d} h_{i}\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{i,j \\ i<j}} \textrm{d} Y_{ji}\bigg] \nonumber \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}) =}{} \times \exp\bigg\{\frac{i}{\hbar} \bigg(\sum\limits_{\substack{i,j \\ i<j}} Y_{ij} \cdot \zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}\big(g_{ij}h_j^{-1}h_ig_{ji}^{-1}\big)-\sum\limits_{i,j} X_{ij} \cdot \zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}(g_{ij})\bigg)\bigg\}. \end{gathered}\] We emphasize that this is again nothing but the first order action for discrete 3d gravity with boundary terms. Let us briefly sketch the asymptotic analysis for the Ponzano--Regge amplitude for a tetrahedron in non-commutative boundary metric variables. As before, by studying the non-commutative variations of the action \[\begin{gathered} \mathcal{S}_{\rm PR} = \sum\limits_{\substack{i,j \\ i<j}} Y_{ij} \cdot \zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}\big(g_{ij}h_j^{-1}h_ig_{ji}^{-1}\big)-\sum\limits_{i,j} X_{ij} \cdot \zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}(g_{ij}) \end{gathered}\] we recover as stationary phase solutions in the classical limit the constraint equations - Wedge flatness[^9]: $g_{ij}h_j^{-1}h_ig_{ji}^{-1} = \mathbbm{1}$ for all $i<j$, - Identification of boundary edge vectors: $\Ad_{g_{ij}} X_{ij} = Y_{ij} =-\Ad_{g_{ji}} X_{ji}$ for all $i<j$, and - Closure of the boundary edge vectors: $\sum\limits_{j\neq i} \epsilon_{ij}X_{ji} = 0$ for all $i$. We then substitute these identities into the amplitude, whereby we find \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{{\rm lo}}(X_{ij}) \propto \int \bigg[\prod\limits_{i,j} \textrm{d} g_{ij}\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{v\in\partial\Delta} \delta(H_v(g_{ij})) \bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_i \delta_\star\bigg(\sum\limits_{j> i} X_{ij}-\sum\limits_{j<i} \Ad_{g_{ij}^{-1}g_{ji}} X_{ji}\bigg) \bigg] \nonumber \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{{\rm lo}}(X_{ij}) \propto}{} \star \exp\bigg\{\frac{i}{\hbar} \sum\limits_{\substack{i,j \\ i<j}} X_{ij} \cdot \zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}\big(g_{ij}^{-1}g_{ji}\big)\bigg\} \label{eq:PRtetrag} \end{gathered}\] as the leading order contribution in $\hbar$ to the amplitude. Here, $\delta(H_v(g_{ij}))$ impose flatness of holonomies around all boundary vertices $v\in\partial\Delta$ of the tetrahedron, which arise from the delta functions $\delta(g_{ij}h_j^{-1}h_ig_{ji}^{-1})$ by integrating over all $h_i$. More precisely, we obtain the constraint only for three of the four vertices, which already imposes flatness for the fourth vertex as well. These conditions are nothing else than the Hamiltonian constraint of 3d gravity, generating the simplicial diffeomorphisms at each vertex of the triangulation (see, for example, ). We may further apply a change of variables by denoting $G_{ij}:=g_{ji}^{-1}g_{ij}$ and $G_{ji} = G_{ij}^{-1}$ for all $i<j$. Again, these are the group elements that represent parallel transports between centers of boundary triangles, and are therefore naturally related to the dihedral angles of Regge calculus. As before in the more general case, one may further decompose the integrals over group elements $G_{ij}$ into integrals over dihedral class angles $\theta_{ij}:= \kappa \|\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}(G_{ij})\|$ and integrals over unit vectors $\hat{n}_{ij}:= \zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}(G_{ij})/\|\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}(G_{ij})\| \in S^2$. The stationary phase equations for the unit vectors $\hat{n}_{ij}$ lead to the expression \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{{\rm lo}}(X_{ij}) \propto \!\int\! \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{i,j \\ i<j}} \textrm{d} \theta_{ij}\left(\frac{\sin\theta_{ij}}{\theta_{ij}}\right)^2 \bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{v\in\partial\Delta} \delta(H_v(G_{ij})) \bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_i \delta_\star\bigg(\sum\limits_{j> i}\! X_{ij}-\sum\limits_{j<i} \!\Ad_{G_{ij}}^{-1} X_{ji}\bigg) \bigg] \nonumber \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}^{{\rm lo}}(X_{ij}) \propto}{} \star \cos\bigg(\frac{i}{\hbar\kappa} \sum\limits_{\substack{i,j \\ i<j}} \|X_{ij}\| \theta_{ij}\bigg), \label{eq:PRtetraregge} \end{gathered}\] which is just the formula [\[eq:PRregge\]](#eq:PRregge){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PRregge"} for a single tetrahedron. The argument of the cosine in [\[eq:PRtetraregge\]](#eq:PRtetraregge){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PRtetraregge"} is the first order Regge action for a tetrahedron. As the Regge action has previously been recovered in the semi-classical limit of the Ponzano--Regge model in the spin representation by using coherent states, we wish to link our calculation to the spin basis, which is given by the ${\rm SU}(2)$ Wigner $D$-matrices $D^{j}_{kl}(g)$. We find for the Ponzano--Regge amplitude in the spin basis \[\begin{gathered} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(j_{ij};k_{ij},l_{ij}) = \int \bigg[\prod\limits_{i,j} \textrm{d} g_{ij}\, D^{j_{ij}}_{k_{ij}l_{ij}}(g_{ij})\bigg] \mathcal{A}_{\rm PR}(g_{ij}) \nonumber \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(j_{ij};k_{ij},l_{ij}) }{} = \left\{\begin{matrix} j_{12} & j_{13} & j_{14} \\ j_{23} & j_{24} & j_{34} \end{matrix} \right\} \bigg[\prod\limits_{i<j} \delta^{j_{ij}j_{ji}} \delta_{k_{ij}k_{ji}}\bigg] \left( \begin{matrix} j_{21} & j_{31} & j_{41} \\ l_{21} & l_{31} & l_{41} \end{matrix} \right) \left( \begin{matrix} j_{21} & j_{32} & j_{42} \\-l_{12} & l_{32} & l_{42} \end{matrix} \right) \nonumber \\ \hphantom{\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(j_{ij};k_{ij},l_{ij}) =}{} \times \left( \begin{matrix} j_{31} & j_{32} & j_{43} \\-l_{13} &-l_{23} & l_{43} \end{matrix} \right) \left( \begin{matrix} j_{41} & j_{42} & j_{43} \\-l_{14} &-l_{24} &-l_{34} \end{matrix} \right), \label{eq:PRspin} \end{gathered}\] where we introduced the ${\rm SU}(2)$ $6j$-symbol and the $3jm$-symbol, familiarly denoted as \[\begin{gathered} \left\{ \begin{matrix} j_{1} & j_{2} & j_{3} \\ j_{4} & j_{5} & j_{6} \end{matrix} \right\} \qquad \text{and} \qquad \left( \begin{matrix} j_1 & j_2 & j_3 \\ m_1 & m_2 & m_3 \end{matrix} \right), \end{gathered}\] respectively, which are the basic building blocks of Ponzano--Regge model in the spin representation. Typically, to study the asymptotics of spin foams one considers the formula for the square of the $6j$-symbol expressed in terms of integrals over ${\rm SU}(2)$ characters $\chi^j:{\rm SU}(2) \rightarrow \mathbb{C}$ as \[\begin{gathered} \label{eq:6j} \left\{ \begin{matrix} j_{12} & j_{13} & j_{14} \\ j_{23} & j_{24} & j_{34} \end{matrix} \right\}^2 = \int \bigg[\prod\limits_{i,j} \textrm{d} g_{ij}\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{i} \textrm{d} h_{i}\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{i<j} \chi^{j_{ij}}\big(g_{ij}h_j^{-1}h_{i}g_{ji}^{-1}\big) \bigg], \end{gathered}\] where $g_{ij}$ correspond to boundary connection variables, and $h_i$ correspond to parallel transports from the boundary triangles to the center of the tetrahedron, as before. This corresponds to the Ponzano--Regge amplitude for a tetrahedron with fixed quantized edge lengths, since by fixing the boundary connection $g_{ij}$ and summing over all $j_{ij}$ (with weights $(2j_{ij}+1)$) we arrive again at [\[eq:PRtetra\]](#eq:PRtetra){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PRtetra"}. More accurately, from [\[eq:PRspin\]](#eq:PRspin){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PRspin"} we find \[\begin{gathered} \left\{ \begin{matrix} j_{12} & j_{13} & j_{14} \\ j_{23} & j_{24} & j_{34} \end{matrix} \right\}^2 = \sum\limits_{\substack{j_{ji} \\ i<j}} \sum\limits_{k_{ij},l_{ij}} \bigg[\prod\limits_{i<j}\delta_{l_{ij}l_{ji}}\bigg] \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(j_{ij};k_{ij},l_{ij}). \end{gathered}\] Thus, denoting still by $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(j_{ij};k_{ij},l_{ij})$ the amplitude, where we have set $j_{ji}=j_{ij}$, $k_{ij}=k_{ji}$ and $l_{ij}=l_{ji}$, we may write \[\begin{gathered} \label{eq:6jspin} \left\{ \begin{matrix} j_{12} & j_{13} & j_{14} \\ j_{23} & j_{24} & j_{34} \end{matrix} \right\}^2 = \sum\limits_{k_{ij},l_{ij}} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(j_{ij};k_{ij},l_{ij}). \end{gathered}\] Let us define functions \[\begin{gathered} D_{\hat{m}\hat{n}}^{j}(g):= \big\langle j,\hat{m}\| D^{j}(g) \|j,\hat{n}\big\rangle \equiv \big\langle {\tfrac{1}{2}},\hat{m} \| D^{\frac{1}{2}}(g) \|{\tfrac{1}{2}},\hat{n}\big\rangle^{2j}, \end{gathered}\] where $D^j(g)$ are the SU(2) Wigner matrices of spin-$j$ representation, and $\|j,\hat{m}\rangle$ are Perelomov coherent states on ${\rm SU}(2)$ labelled by a representation $j \in \{\frac{n}{2}:n\in \mathbb{N}\}$ and a unit vector $\hat{m}\in S^2$. By applying the decomposition of unity in terms of the Perelomov coherent states \[\begin{gathered} (2j+1)\int_{S^2} \frac{\textrm{d} \hat{m}}{4\pi} \|j,\hat{m}\rangle \langle j,\hat{m}\| = \mathbbm{1}_j, \end{gathered}\] it is easy to show that $D_{\hat{m}\hat{n}}^{j}(g)$ constitute an over-complete basis of functions on ${\rm SU}(2)$, as we have \[\begin{gathered} \delta(g^{-1}g') = \sum\limits_j (2j+1)^3 \int_{S^2} \frac{\textrm{d} \hat{m}}{4\pi} \int_{S^2} \frac{\textrm{d} \hat{n}}{4\pi}\, \overline{D_{\hat{m}\hat{n}}^{j}(g)} D_{\hat{m}\hat{n}}^{j}(g'). \end{gathered}\] Similarly, for the ${\rm SU}(2)$ character function we may write \[\begin{gathered} \label{eq:coherentcharacter} \chi^j(g) = \tr (D^j(g)) = (2j+1) \int_{S^2} \frac{\textrm{d} \hat{m}}{4\pi} D^j_{\hat{m}\hat{m}}(g). \end{gathered}\] In the following, without a serious danger of confusion, we will denote the spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ representation Wigner matrices and coherent states simply by $D^{\frac{1}{2}}(g) =: g$ and $\|\frac{1}{2},\hat{m}\rangle =: \|\hat{m}\rangle$, respectively, so in our notation $D_{\hat{m}\hat{n}}^{j}(g) \equiv \langle \hat{m}\|g\|\hat{n}\rangle^{2j}$. Using [\[eq:coherentcharacter\]](#eq:coherentcharacter){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:coherentcharacter"}, the $6j$-symbol [\[eq:6j\]](#eq:6j){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:6j"} may be re-expressed as \[\begin{gathered} \left\{ \begin{matrix} j_{12} & j_{13} & j_{14} \\ j_{23} & j_{24} & j_{34} \end{matrix} \right\}^2 = \Bigg[\prod\limits_{i,j} (2j_{ij}+1)^2 \int \frac{\textrm{d} \hat{m}_{ij}}{4\pi} \frac{\textrm{d} \hat{n}_{ij}}{4\pi} \Bigg] \hat{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(j_{ij};\hat{m}_{ij},\hat{n}_{ij}). \label{eq:6jcoh} \end{gathered}\] This is simply the equation [\[eq:6jspin\]](#eq:6jspin){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:6jspin"} transformed into the coherent state basis. Here, $\hat{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(j_{ij};\hat{m}_{ij}$, $\hat{n}_{ij})$ is indeed the Ponzano--Regge amplitude for a single tetrahedron with the coherent state labels as boundary metric data, which may be written as \[\begin{gathered} \hat{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(j_{ij};\hat{m}_{ij},\hat{n}_{ij}) = \int \bigg[\prod\limits_{i,j} \textrm{d} g_{ij}\, D^{j_{ij}}_{\hat{m}_{ij}\hat{n}_{ij}}(g_{ij})\bigg] \mathcal{A}_{\rm PR}(g_{ij}) \nonumber \\ \hphantom{\hat{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(j_{ij};\hat{m}_{ij},\hat{n}_{ij})}{} = \left\{ \begin{matrix} j_{12} & j_{13} & j_{14} \\ j_{23} & j_{24} & j_{34} \end{matrix} \right\} \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{i,j \\ i<j}} \delta_{j_{ij}j_{ji}} \delta^{j_{ij}}_{\hat{m}_{ij},-\hat{m}_{ji}} \bigg] \prod\limits_i \left( \begin{matrix} j_{ij_1} & j_{ij_2} & j_{ij_3} \\ \hat{n}_{ij_1} & \hat{n}_{ij_2} & \hat{n}_{ij_3} \end{matrix} \right), \label{eq:Ahat1} \end{gathered}\] where we denote $\delta^{j_{ij}}_{\hat{m}_{ij},-\hat{m}_{ji}}:= \langle \hat{m}_{ij}\|-\hat{m}_{ji}\rangle^{2j_{ij}}$, and \[\begin{gathered} \left( \begin{matrix} j_{1} & j_{2} & j_{3} \\ \hat{n}_{1} & \hat{n}_{2} & \hat{n}_{3} \end{matrix} \right):= \sum\limits_{k_i} \left( \begin{matrix} j_{1} & j_{2} & j_{3} \\ k_{1} & k_{2} & k_{3} \end{matrix} \right) \langle j_1,k_1\|j_1,\hat{n}_1\rangle \langle j_2,k_2\|j_2,\hat{n}_2\rangle \langle j_3,k_3\|j_3,\hat{n}_3\rangle \end{gathered}\] is the Wigner $3jm$-symbol in the coherent state basis. On the other hand, we may write the same amplitude [\[eq:Ahat1\]](#eq:Ahat1){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Ahat1"}, transformed from the non-commutative variables, as \[\begin{gathered} \hat{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(j_{ij};\hat{m}_{ij},\hat{n}_{ij}) = \int \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{i,j \\ i<j}} \frac{\textrm{d} X_{ij}}{(2\pi\hbar)^3} \widetilde{D^{j_{ij}}_{\hat{m}_{ij}\hat{n}_{ij}}}(X_{ij}) \bigg] \star \tilde{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(X_{ij}), \label{eq:Ahat2} \end{gathered}\] where, adopting for convenience the non-commutative structure associated to the symmetric quantization map, we denote by \[\begin{gathered} \widetilde{D^{j}_{\hat{m}\hat{n}}}(X):= \int \frac{\textrm{d} g}{\kappa^3} \overline{E(g,X)} D^{j}_{\hat{m}\hat{n}}(g) = \int \frac{\textrm{d} g}{\kappa^3}\exp\left\{\frac{i}{\hbar} \left[-2i\hbar j \ln \langle \hat{m}\|g\|\hat{n}\rangle-\zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}(g)\cdot X \right] \right\} \label{eq:Dhat} \end{gathered}\] the non-commutative Fourier transform of $D^{j}_{\hat{m}\hat{n}}(g)$. Now, let us consider the stationary phase approximation of the expression [\[eq:Ahat2\]](#eq:Ahat2){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Ahat2"}. The exponential in [\[eq:Dhat\]](#eq:Dhat){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Dhat"} has real and imaginary parts, both of which must be taken into account in the stationary phase approximation. For the non-commutative stationary phase equations of this expression in the classical limit $\hbar \rightarrow 0$, $j\rightarrow\infty$, $\hbar j=\const$, we obtain by a straightforward calculation $\hat{n} = \Ad_g\hat{m}$ and $2\hbar j\hat{m} = \frac{1}{\kappa}X$. Note that, since we had already understood the $X$ variables as the classical discrete BF variables, this result confirms that the coherent state variables acquire the correct geometric interpretation in the classical limit. Then, from [\[eq:PRtetrag\]](#eq:PRtetrag){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PRtetrag"} and $2\hbar\kappa j_{ij}\hat{m}_{ij}=X_{ij}$, $\hat{n}_{ij}=\Ad_{g_{ij}}\hat{m}_{ij}$, we have for the classical limit of [\[eq:Ahat2\]](#eq:Ahat2){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Ahat2"} the expression \[\begin{gathered} \hat{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(j_{ij};\hat{m}_{ij},\hat{n}_{ij}) \propto \int \bigg[\prod\limits_{i,j} \textrm{d} g_{ij}\bigg] \bigg[\prod\limits_{v\in\partial\Delta} \delta(H_v(g_{ij})) \bigg] \\ \hphantom{\hat{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(j_{ij};\hat{m}_{ij},\hat{n}_{ij}) \propto}{} \times \bigg[\prod\limits_i \delta\bigg(\sum\limits_{j> i} j_{ij}\hat{m}_{ij}-\sum\limits_{j<i} \Ad_{g_{ij}^{-1}g_{ji}} j_{ji}\hat{m}_{ji}\bigg) \bigg] \\ \hphantom{\hat{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(j_{ij};\hat{m}_{ij},\hat{n}_{ij}) \propto}{} \times \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} \delta(\hat{n}_{ij}-\Ad_{g_{ij}}\hat{m}_{ij}) \bigg] \exp\bigg\{\frac{i}{\hbar} \sum\limits_{\substack{i,j \\ i<j}} 2\hbar j_{ij}\hat{m}_{ij} \cdot \zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}\big(g_{ij}^{-1}g_{ji}\big)\bigg\}\\ \hphantom{\hat{\mathcal{A}}_{\rm PR}(j_{ij};\hat{m}_{ij},\hat{n}_{ij}) \propto}{} \times (1+\mathcal{O}(\hbar)), \end{gathered}\] where the variation with respect to $X_{ij}$ gives the identification of the group elements of the two asymptotic expressions. Equating the above with the classical limit of the expression [\[eq:Ahat1\]](#eq:Ahat1){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Ahat1"} and integrating on both sides over all $\hat{m}_{ij}$, $\hat{n}_{ij}$ as in [\[eq:6jcoh\]](#eq:6jcoh){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:6jcoh"} yields \[\begin{gathered} \left\{ \begin{matrix} j_{12} & j_{13} & j_{14} \\ j_{23} & j_{24} & j_{34} \end{matrix} \right\}^2 \propto \int \bigg[\prod\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} \textrm{d} \hat{m}_{ij} \textrm{d} G_{ij}\bigg] \exp\bigg\{\frac{i}{\hbar}\sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} 2\hbar j_{ij}\hat{m}_{ij}\cdot \zeta_{\textrm{\tiny S}}(G_{ij}) \bigg\} \big(1 + \mathcal{O}(\hbar)\big), \end{gathered}\] where the integral is over sets of unit vectors $\{\hat{m}_{ij}\}$ such that the edge vectors $2\hbar\kappa j_{ij}\hat{m}_{ij}$ satisfy the closure constraints for each triangle $f_i \in \partial\Delta$ up to parallel transports given by $G_{ij}$. As above leading to [\[eq:PRtetraregge\]](#eq:PRtetraregge){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PRtetraregge"} and the first order Regge action, we may further decompose the integrals over $G_{ij}$ into integrals over dihedral class angles and unit vectors. The stationary phase of the exponential of the above amplitude in this limit is again given by the first order Regge action \[\begin{gathered} S_{\textrm{\tiny Regge}} = \sum\limits_{\substack{(i,j)\in\mathcal{N} \\ i<j}} 2\hbar j_{ij}\theta_{ij}, \qquad \theta_{ij} \in (-\pi,\pi), \end{gathered}\] but now in terms of the coherent state variables. In essence, the result follows simply because in the classical limit the combination $2\hbar\kappa j_{ij}\hat{m}_{ij}$ of coherent state variables gets identified with the true phase space variables, the edge vectors $X_{ij}$. This identification is due to the asymptotic behavior of the function $\widetilde{D^{j}_{\hat{m}\hat{n}}}(X)$ defined in [\[eq:Dhat\]](#eq:Dhat){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Dhat"}, which mediates the transformation between the coherent state basis and the non-commutative basis. # Conclusions and comments {#sec:cc} Let us then summarize our results. We applied the non-commutative Fourier transform to express the Ponzano--Regge spin foam amplitude as a first order phase space path integral, which took the form of a discrete BF theory with standard classical action in terms of non-commutative metric boundary data. The choice of the quantization map for the geometric observables was seen to be intimately connected to the choice of a discretization for the 3d BF theory. The path integral reformulation then allowed us to study conveniently the classical approximation to the full amplitude. We discovered that depending on the choice of a non-commutative structure arising from the deformation quantization applied to the geometric observables, different limiting behaviors appear for the boundary data in the classical limit, when we apply the ordinary 'commutative' variational calculus to find the stationary phase solutions. Furthermore, in this case, the constraints that arise as the classical equations of motion generically do not correspond to discrete geometries, since the edge vectors in the constraint equations are deformed due to the non-linearity of the group manifold. We verified our observation by considering as explicit examples the non-commutative structures that arise from symmetric, Duflo and Freidel--Livine--Majid quantization maps. Accordingly, we were led to consider a non-commutative variational method to extract the stationary phase behavior, which was motivated by the fact that the amplitude for non-commutative metric boundary data acts as the integral kernel in the propagator with respect to the corresponding $\star$-product, and not the commutative product. We showed that the non-commutative variations produce the correct geometric constraints for the discrete metric boundary data in the classical limit. Thus, we concluded that only by taking into account the deformation of phase space structure in studying the variations, we find the undeformed and unambiguous geometric constraints, independent on the choice of the quantization map. Finally, we considered the asymptotics of the ${\rm SU}(2)$ $6j$-symbol, which is related to the Ponzano--Regge amplitude for a tetrahedra with fixed quantized edge lengths. We found the Regge action, previously recovered in the large spin limit of the $6j$-symbol, in the classical limit. Our calculations thus not only verify the previous results, but also allows for a better understanding of them due to the clear-cut connection to the phase space of classical discretized 3d gravity. This concrete example also illustrates the use of the non-commutative path integral as a computational tool. On the other hand, the full agreement of the results obtained via the non-commutative method with those obtained via ordinary commutative stationary phase method in the coherent state representation further validates the use of the non-commutative variations in extracting the asymptotic behavior of the amplitude in the classical limit. There are several conclusions and further directions of research pointed to by our results. First and foremost, we have seen that the non-commutative metric representation obtained through the non-commutative Fourier transform facilitates a full asymptotic analysis of spin foam models, when proper care is taken in applying variational methods to the first order path integral. In particular, by studying the non-commutative variations one may recover the classical geometric constraints for all cases of non-commutative structures. The need for a non-commutative variational method requires further analysis, and must be taken into account in any future application of the non-commutative methods to spin foam models. Our consideration of the $6j$-symbol asymptotics further illustrates the usefulness of the non-commutative methods. As the non-commutative Fourier transform formalism has recently been extended to all exponential Lie groups , in particular the double-cover ${\rm SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$ of the Lorentz group, we look forward to extending the asymptotic analysis to the 4d spin foam models in future work, now equipped with the improved understanding of the methods involved. In particular, it will be interesting to see how the simplicity constraints turn out to be imposed on the non-commutative metric variables in the phase space path integral measure for the different spin foam models proposed in the 4-dimensional case. The current formulation of 4d models uses the non-commutative Fourier transform for the BF variables (based on ${\rm SO}(4)$, but extendable to Lorentzian models with ${\rm SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$), on which the simplicity constraints are imposed. The advantages of the non-commutative formulation are twofold: First, the simplicity constraints may be imposed in a very geometrically transparent and natural way via insertions of non-commutative delta functions in the amplitudes, as one would expect. Secondly, in such variables, the spin foam amplitudes take again, as in the 3d case, the explicit form of simplicial gravity path integrals. As we have shown in this paper, this will greatly facilitate the semi-classical analysis, which would proceed in entirely the same fashion as the one performed here. Such an analysis may help to elucidate the differences between the geometric properties of the current 4d models, and even to propose new models with improved geometric behavior in the semi-classical limit. [^1]: In this paper, we are concerned exclusively with the case of topological spin foam models with vanishing cosmological constant. For non-topological models, such as 4d quantum gravity models, the physical configuration space is a homogeneous subspace (or, including the Barbero--Immirzi parameter, a more general subspace) of a Lie group, instead of a Lie group. Likewise, for a non-vanishing cosmological constant, the configuration space is a quantum group. Therefore, in these cases the structure of the physical phase space is, strictly speaking, more involved than what is implied above. [^2]: In addition, another realization of the non-commutative Fourier transform for ${\rm SU}(2)$ relying on spinors was formulated by Dupuis, Girelli & Livine in , but we will not consider it here. [^3]: Here it seems we are giving dimensions to coordinates, which is usually a bad idea in a gravitational theory, to be considered below. The point here is that the coordinates $X_i$ turn out to have a geometric interpretation as discrete triad variables, which is exactly what one would like to give dimensions to in general relativity. [^4]: Strictly speaking, the coordinates are not observables of the classical system, but we may consider them defined implicitly, since any observable may be parametrized in terms of them, and they may be approximated arbitrarily closely by classical observables. [^5]: The volume of a moduli space can be defined via its natural symplectic structure, and in some 2-dimensional cases has been rigorously related to a QFT partition function, see . [^6]: Also, in varying $g_{ij}$ we must assume that the measure $c(g)\textrm{d} g$ on the group is continuous, which should be true for any reasonable choice of a quantization map, as it indeed is for all the cases we consider below. [^7]: We note that for some choices of a quantization map, such as the Duflo map, the $\star$-delta function does not depend on a simple linear combination of its arguments, and thus the closure constraints must be non-linear outside the strict classical regime to match the exact result [\[eq:metricBF\]](#eq:metricBF){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:metricBF"}. However, for the symmetric quantization map we consider here the closure constraints remain undeformed in all orders. [^8]: Of course, in the case of a single tetrahedron $K_{ij}=\mathbbm{1}$ for all $i$, $j$, since the paths along which $K_{ij}$ parallel transport (as in Fig. [\[fig:treeholos\]](#fig:treeholos){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:treeholos"}) are of length 0. [^9]: This is basically the condition enforcing the piece-wise flat situation, i.e., the flatness of the tetrahedron.	{'timestamp': '2014-06-27T02:03:45', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5819', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5819'}
null	null
# [\[section:intr\]]{#section:intr label="section:intr"}Introduction Many complex systems can be abstracted as networks or graphs, where the elementary parts of a system and their mutual interactions are nodes and edges (or links), respectively. A key property of many networks is their community structure: nodes with similar properties or functions have more edges than random pairs of nodes and tend to be gathered into distinct subgraphs, which are called communities (also modules or clusters). Such examples occur in many complex systems, including sociology, biology, and computer science. In reality, a node may belong to multiple communities. For example, a researcher may be active in several areas; a person usually has connections to several social groups like family, friends, colleagues, and so on. Overlapping algorithms aim to discover a cover, which is defined as a set of communities in which each node belongs to at least one community. Local expansion and optimization is a common scheme for many methods to find overlapping communities. The detecting process consists of two steps: selecting seeds and expanding the seeds to form communities. The following two paragraphs give an overview of common methods for seed selecting and expanding, respectively. The quality of seeds has an important impact on the final detection performance. For example, Lee et al. indicate that the performance gap between Greedy Clique Expansion (GCE) and Local Fitness Maximization (LFM) is largely due to the different seed selecting method, because they use the same expanding process. When replacing a selecting method with a better one, the quality of detecting communities can be improved. Lancichinetti et al. also gave an example to show how seeding methods affect the expectation and maximization (EM) method proposed by Newman et al. In addition, the conclusion above is also proved by our experimental results. There are three kinds of methods that are most often used for seed selecting: random, maximal cliques, and ranking. Random methods often lead to unstable performance due to arbitrariness. Using maximal cliques as seeds is another commonly used method to get better community structures at the cost of a loss of scalability. The Bron-Kerbosch algorithm used to find all maximal cliques is exponentially complex ($O(3^{n/3})$, where n is the number of nodes of the network). In practice, the Bron-Kerbosch algorithm may run fast on networks with nodes less than $10^5$ due to skills such as pruning technologies, but it is difficult to scale to even larger networks. Ranking methods give each node or edge a rank; a removing or appending strategy is used to select seeds. For its reputation, Pagerank is often used to compute rank values. Rank Removal (RaRe) assumes nodes with high rank do a significant amount of communication, so it sequentially removes high-rank nodes until some "cores" are left as seeds. The above assumption is improper because many high-rank nodes are authorities of their communities and suitable as seeds. For example, selecting node 34 in figure [\[fig:karate\]](#fig:karate){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:karate"} as a seed will make the community detection process easier. On the other end of the spectrum, appending methods such as Link Aggregate (LA) select seeds in decreasing rank order. The drawback of appending methods is that many hub nodes in networks have high ranks. For example, nodes 12 and 49 in figure [\[fig:seeding\]](#fig:seeding){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:seeding"} are hubs, and expanding from them will result in poor communities. Another drawback of appending methods is that they prefer to select seeds from major communities to minor ones, so diversity of seeds cannot be guaranteed. We believe that the dilemma of ranking methods is rooted in their globally ranking behavior. This paper proposes an efficient seeding method that overcomes the drawbacks of the three kinds of methods mentioned above by first ranking edges locally and then selecting seeds globally. Most expanding methods use a local fitness function to decide whether a node should be included in a community. Yang et al. summarize 13 functions based on the intuition that links in communities are dense while links between communities are sparse. An advantage of these functions is that they only use local (or neighborhood) information to decide the belonging of a node, so the expanding speed is fast. On the other hand, these functions are all heuristic and lack principled support, so they are not qualified to be used on a wide range of synthetic and empirical networks. Lee noted, "Just as there is no universally correct concept of community that spans all domains, one cannot argue that any given fitness function will be appropriate for all types of network data." As another drawback, each community expands independently without any negotiation with others, which may lead to highly similar communities that share a large number of nodes. Though a post-merging process can merge these communities together, the criterion of merging is difficult to decide. In this paper, a new expanding method is proposed that replaces the local fitness function with a global optimization function to infer the belonging community of an edge. Naturally, negotiations are introduced by the global function. By virtue of the wide applicability of Bayesian inference, the new method can also be applied on diverse networks. This paper proposes an algorithm called ITEM, which uses information theory and an EM process to discover communities in a network. ITEM first transforms a network into a corpus where edges and nodes are treated as documents and terms, respectively. Then it classifies each edge into a community, and two endpoints of the edge are naturally assigned to the community. The contributions of the paper are as follows: 1. The concept of the Jaccard matrix of a network is proposed. Using the Jaccard matrix, the topic (i.e., the belonging community) of an edge can be extracted easily. 2. An efficient and effective seeding method is proposed that overcomes the drawbacks of traditional methods. 3. A principled expanding method is proposed. By treating seeds selected as a training set, the semi-supervised learning technology is used to classify edges into communities. We conducted experiments on a wide range of synthetic and empirical networks, and the experimental results show that ITEM significantly improves clustering performance. The total computational complexity of ITEM is linear to the number of edges, which renders ITEM scalable to large networks. The organization of the paper is as follows: section 2 introduces the skeleton of the ITEM algorithm and the most used terminologies. The seeding and expanding methods are given in sections 3 and 4, respectively. In section 5, we introduce the experimental setup, including benchmark networks and the related algorithms. Experiment results are evaluated and analyzed in section 6. Finally, conclusions and suggestions for future research are provided. To reproduce the results, we published ITEM's code on the web [^1]. # Terminology and skeleton of ITEM Algorithm {#sec:skeleton} In this section, some terminology used in the paper is given in table [1](#tab:terms){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:terms"}. There are two notations to denote an edge, so when its two endpoints (e.g., $v_i$ and $v_j$) must be explicitly given, double subscript notation (e.g., $e_{i-j}$) is used; otherwise, we prefer single subscript notation (e.g., $e_i$ denotes the $i$th edge). To clearly illustrate these terminologies, the Karate network in figure [\[fig:karate\]](#fig:karate){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:karate"} is used as an example. The skeleton of ITEM is also explained to help readers rapidly understand the main idea of ITEM. ITEM exploits text-mining technologies to discover the communities of a network. We propose the concept of the Jaccard matrix of a network by observing that the community of an edge can be largely determined by its two endpoints and their shared neighbors, just as the topic of a document can be identified by a few key terms or features. The origin of the Jaccard matrix is motivated by the Jaccard index, which is a statistic commonly used to measure the similarity of two endpoints of an edge. For the similarity between two endpoints of $e_{i-j}$, the Jaccard index is defined as $J(v_i, v_j)=\frac{Nb(v_i) \cap Nb(v_j)}{Nb(v_i) \cup Nb(v_j)}$. The Jaccard matrix of a network $G$ is denoted as $M$ and is an $m \times n$ matrix (for meanings of $m$ and $n$, please see table [1](#tab:terms){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:terms"}). For each item $M_{ij}$ where $i \in \{1,2,\cdots m\}$ and $j \in \{1,2,\cdots n\}$, \[M_{ij} = \left\{ \begin{array}{l l} 0 & \quad \text{if $v_j \notin Nb(e_i)$ }\\ w_{j} & \quad \text{if $v_j \in Nb(e_i)$ }\\ \end{array} \right.\] $w_{j}$ can simply be assigned a value of 1 or using the $tf\cdot idf$ method. Table [2](#tab:jaccard){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:jaccard"} displays a fraction of entries of Karate's Jaccard matrix. The following lists the features of the Jaccard matrix. First, a document $e_{i-j}$ only includes terms in $Nb(e_{i-j})$; all other neighbors of $v_i$ and $v_j$ are discarded. The discarding operation resembles the preprocessing step in text mining that removes low-frequency words from a document. After the discarding operation, the topic of document $e_{i-j}$ is easier to identify. The clarity comes from the fact that edges are more specific to a certain community or topic than nodes. Second, because of the increased density of a community and the more common neighbors shared by its edges, this produces many similar documents in the Jaccard matrix. Based on the similarity, we can cluster the edges in the same community together. ITEM resorts to semi-supervised learning technology to classify edges into different communities. Many machine learning researchers have found that semi-supervised learning can considerably improve learning accuracy because it exploits both labeled and unlabeled information. As for the classifier, NB (Naı̈ve Bayes) is used for its simplicity and effectiveness in text classification. ITEM first selects some seeds as a training set, then an EM process is used to expand edges into communities. In each expectation step, some edges previously unlabeled get new labels (i.e., communities), and some edges change their belonging communities. Because the above unlabeled edges are then poured into the maximization step to model or refine the NB classifier, in this sense, ITEM uses semi-supervised learning to expand communities. The EM iterations are stopped until a predefined condition is matched. # The seeding process {#section:seed} ITEM uses two steps to select seeds. In the first step, to avoid the high computational complexity and the drawbacks of global ranking methods, a local ranking method called RSS (Reputation, Strength, Specificity) is proposed. "Local" has two meanings: first, RSS gives each edge a score by only using its local information (i.e., the neighbors' information). Second, edges compare their RSS scores locally. More specifically, $e_i$ only compares its score with its incident edges (i.e., $Ic(e_i)$). If there exists any one incident edge whose score is higher than $e_i$, then $e_i$ is filtered out and cannot be selected as a seed. If two edges have equal scores, then the edge with the small index is left, and the large one is filtered out. In the second step, the candidate seeds selected by RSS are fed to the maximizing global information gain (MGIG) method, which is used to select distinctive and representative seeds from candidates from a global view. ## Selecting candidate seeds with the RSS method The LM network in figure [\[fig:seeding\]](#fig:seeding){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:seeding"} is a bit more complicated than Karate. In this subsection, we mainly use it is to explain the motivations of the RSS method. When selecting seeding nodes, completely using or ignoring reputation values is improper because both hub nodes and specificity nodes may have high reputations. Reputation and specificity also make sense for edges, and edges have another property that is lacking in nodes. We define strength to measure the link intensity between two endpoints of an edge. Intuitively, $e_{12-49}$ in figure [\[fig:seeding\]](#fig:seeding){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:seeding"} is not suitable as a seed because it has a high reputation but low specificity. $e_{63-65}$ is more suitable as a seed than $e_{74-75}$ because $e_{63-65}$ is more reputable and stronger than $e_{74-75}$. But what causes the above intuition to emerge? In fact, the number of common neighbors between two endpoints of an edge is a good indicator to measure the extent to which the edge is suitable as a seed. In the following, the formal definitions of reputation, strength, and specificity are given, all of which exploit the common neighbors concept directly or indirectly. The seeds selected by using reputation, strength, and specificity scores are listed in figure [\[fig:seeding\]](#fig:seeding){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:seeding"}. To get the RSS score of each edge, the similarity of two incident edges must be calculated in advance. SimHash is a common technology used to evaluate the similarity between the two documents. This paper uses the SimHash technology to convert document $e_i$ to a 64-bit binary number, which is denoted as $fp_i$ and called the fingerprint of $e_i$. We do not explain SimHash in detail due to space constraints. For more information, please see. For each $e_i$, where $i\in \{1,2,\cdots,m \}$, its reputation score is defined as follows: \[reputation(e_i)=\frac{1}{64}\sum_{\{j\|if\ e_j \in Ic(e_i)\}}{64-hd(fp_i,fp_j)} \label{reputation}\] where $fp_i$ and $fp_j$ are the fingerprints of $e_i$ and $e_j$ respectively and $hd(fp_i,fp_j)$ evaluates the hamming distance between $fp_i$ and $fp_j$. Equation ([\[reputation\]](#reputation){reference-type="ref" reference="reputation"}) gives a high reputation score to $e_i$ if a large number of nodes are shared between $Nb(e_i)$ and $Nb(e_j)$ (which makes $hd(fp_i,fp_j)$ small) or if $\|Ic(e_i)\|$ is large. The strength for $e_{i-j}$ is defined as follows: \[strength(e_{i-j})=\frac{\|Nb(e_{i-j})\|-1}{max(deg(v_i),deg(v_j))} \label{strength}\] The $strength(e_{i-j})$ measures the intensity of the connection between $v_i$ and $v_j$. For each node, its specificity score is defined as follows: \[specificity(v_i)=\frac{\sum_{\{j\|if \ e_j\in Ic(v_i)\}}{strength(e_j)}}{\|Ic(v_i)\|} \label{nodespecificity}\] $specificity(v_i)$ measures the average similarity between $v_i$ and its neighbors. The following gives the specificity definition of an edge: \[specificity(e_{i-j}) =min(specificity(v_i), specificity(v_j)). \label{edgespecificity}\] For $\forall e_i \in E$, its reputation, strength, and specificity scores are all in $(0,1]$. Now, the RSS score of $e_i$ can be achieved: \[\begin{split} RSS(e_{i}) =reputation(e_{i}) \times strength(e_{i}) \times specificity(e_{i}). \end{split}\] The computational complexity of RSS is $O(dm)$, where $d$ is the average degree of nodes. The low computational complexity mainly contributes to the locality of RSS. On the other hand, only comparing with its incident edges makes an edge easy to select as a seed. As a result, some similar edges appear. For example, $e_{60-62}$, $e_{63-65}$, and $e_{64-66}$ are similar, so using them as seeds may split an integral community apart. As another side effect, an edge may be thrashed among its adjacent communities, which will slow the convergence process of the subsequent EM process. To overcome this drawback, similar edges should be filtered out. In section [3.2](#mgigsection){reference-type="ref" reference="mgigsection"}, how to select final edges is explained in detail. In the following, we call the edges selected by RSS candidate seeds because the final seeds are selected from them. ## Selecting final seeds with the MGIG method {#mgigsection} MGIG is an efficient feature selection method for text classification that effectively selects distinctive and representative terms. Due to the duality between terms and documents, MGIG is used to select dissimilar edges (documents) in the paper. The idea behind MGIG is very simple. In table [2](#tab:jaccard){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:jaccard"}, the document representations of $e_{2-3}$ and $e_{2-4}$ are identical, so the information lost when merging them as a virtual document (i.e., the document that includes all terms in $e_{2-3}$ and $e_{2-4}$) is 0. Splitting the virtual document apart also releases no information. On the other hand, there is more information released when splitting $e_{2-3}$ and $e_{24-30}$ apart because they are dissimilar. MGIG tries to select edges that release the maximum information. MGIG selects seeds one by one. Suppose $l$ is the number of candidate seeds. If $k-1$ ($1 \leq k-1 < l$) edges have been selected, then MGIG selects the $k$th edge from unselected candidates, which creates the following maximum: \[p(\tilde{e}_{\mathbb{S}_{k}}) H(\mathbf{p}(V\|\tilde{e}_{\mathbb{S}_{k}})) -p(e_{k}^) H(\mathbf{p}(V\|e_{k}^)) \ , \label{selectiontj}\] Noting $e_k^$ represents the $k$th edge selected from $l$ candidates. Where $H(\mathbf{p}(V\|e_{k}^))$ is the entropy of $\mathbf{p}(V\|e_{k}^)$, and $\mathbf{p}(V\|e_i^)=(p(v_1\|e_i^),p(v_2\|e_i^),\cdots,p(v_n\|e_i^))$ is the node distribution for a given edge, $e_i^$. $\mathbb{S}_k=\left\{e_1^,e_2^,\cdots,e_k^* \right\}$ is the set of candidates already selected, and $\tilde{e}_{\mathbb{S}_k}$ is just a virtual edge if we view all $k$ selected edges in $\mathbb{S}_k$ as a whole. Hence, \[p(\tilde{e}_{\mathbb{S}_k}) = \sum_{i=1}^k p(e_i^) \ , \label{eq:ibweight}\] and \[p(v_j\|\tilde{e}_{\mathbb{S}_k}) = \sum_{i=1}^k \frac{p(e_i^)}{p(\tilde{e}_{\mathbb{S}_k})} p(v_j\|e_i^) \ . \label{eq:ibconprob}\] For $p(v_j\|e_i^)$, it is as follows: \[p(v_j\|e_i^) = \left\{ \begin{array}{l l} 0 & \quad \text{if $v_j \notin Nb(e_i^)$ }\\ 1/\|Nb(e_i^)\| & \quad \text{if $v_j \in Nb(e_i^)$ }\\ \end{array} \right.\] Because criterion ([\[selectiontj\]](#selectiontj){reference-type="ref" reference="selectiontj"}) does not apply to $k=1$, we select the first edge which makes $H(\mathbf{p}(V\|e_{1}^))$ maximum. After $e_k^$ is selected, each unselected candidate edge $e^u$ is checked. $Nb(e^u)-Nb(e_k^)$ is the set of nodes that are included in $Nb(e^u)$ but not included in $Nb(e_k^)$. Clearly, the greater $\|Nb(e^u)-Nb(e_k^)\|/\|Nb(e^u)\|$, the more likely $e^u$ is to qualify as a seed. We introduce a scaling parameter $th \in \{0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1.0\}$ to control whether $e^u$ should be filtered out. If $\|Nb(e^u)-Nb(e_k^)\|/\|Nb(e^u)\| < th$ is met, $e^u$ is filtered out. There is no universal value for $th$ because of the diversity of networks and multiple scales of community structure for a network, but for a specific network, the effective range of $th$ is typically narrow. In the right subfigure of figure [\[fig:seeding\]](#fig:seeding){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:seeding"}, the bold color edges are the final seeds selected by using the MGIG method with $th=0.3$. Now we get a training set that has 5 seeds, but it is too few because it contains only one training example for each community. To make the subsequent semi-supervised learning process more reliable, the training set is enlarged as follows: suppose $e^$ is a final seeding edge, for $\forall v_i, v_j \in Nb(e^)$; if $\exists e_{i-j} \in E$, then $e_{i-j}$ is added in the training set and labeled with a community of $e^$. In the same subfigure, these added edges are displayed in thin color lines. We call edges of the same color a committee. In the expanding process, committees are expanded to form communities. In the following, $K$ is denoted as the final number of communities. For the LM network in figure [\[fig:seeding\]](#fig:seeding){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:seeding"}, $K=5$. Suppose $p=\frac{1}{m}\sum_{i=1}^m\|Nb(e_i)\|$; the average number of neighbors for an edge. To select $K$ seeds, the computational complexity of using MGIG is $O(plK)$. If taking the RSS into account, the total computational complexity of the seeding process is $O(dm+plK)$, where $p \leq d+1$ and $l \ll m$. Clearly, our seeding method is more to scale than the method of finding all maximal cliques. # The Expanding process {#section:expand} The expanding process resorts to an EM algorithm to classify edges into communities. Details about the expectation and maximization steps are given below. ## The expectation step {#section:exp} The expectation step exploits both topological and topic information to decide the most suitable community for $e_i$. We first use the topological information to judge whether $e_i$ is a potential edge of $C_k$. The potential edges of a community $C_k$ are the edges that are not included in $C_k$ currently but that may be added into $C_k$ in the expectation step. If $e_i$ is a potential edge of $C_k$, then the topic information is used to evaluate the posterior probability $p(C_k\|e_i)$. Lastly, $e_i$ is assigned to the community that makes $p(C_k\|e_i)$ the maximum. The community is denoted as $C^(e_i)$. Suppose $Nd(C_k)=\cup_{e_{i-j}\in C_k}\{v_i,v_j\}$ is the set of nodes included in $C_k$ at present. Clearly, if neither $v_i$ nor $v_j$ is included in $Nd(C_k)$, then $e_{i-j}$ isn't adjacent to $C_k$ and cannot be a potential edge. On the other hand, if both $v_i$ and $v_j$ are included in $Nd(C_k)$ but $e_{i-j}$ isn't included in $C_k$, $e_{i-j}$ is destined to be a potential edge of $C_k$. As the third status, $e_{i-j}$ may sit between the two extremes. That is to say, $Nd(C_k)$ only includes one endpoint of $e_{i-j}$. Without loss of generality, we assume that $v_i$ is included in $Nd(C_k)$ but $v_j$ isn't. In this case, $e_{i-j}$ is treated as a potential edge of $C_k$ if it matches any condition below: 1. $od(e_{i-j})>0$ and $\|Nb(e_{i-j}) \cap Nd(C_k)\| \geq 2$, 2. $od(e_{i-j})=0$ and $od(v_j)=0$ and $\|Nb(e_{i-j}) \cap Nd(C_k)\| \geq \frac{1}{2} deg(v_j)$, where $od(e_{i-j})$ is the order of $e_{i-j}$ and is defined as $od(e_{i-j})=\|Nb(e_{i-j})\|-2$, which is the number of triangles that include $e_{i-j}$ as one edge. As examples in figure [\[fig:karate\]](#fig:karate){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:karate"}, $od(e_{20-34})=0$, $od(e_{1-18})=1$, and $od(e_{2-3})=4$. $od(v_j)=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{e_i \in Ic(v_j)}od(e_i)$ is the order of $v_j$, which is the number of triangles that use $v_j$ as a vertex, so 0 order nodes are not included in any triangles. Conditions 1 and 2 above give the constraints for non-zero order edges and zero order edges, respectively. Condition 1 indicates that at least 2 sponsors want to pull $v_j$ into $C_k$. In addition, these 2 sponsors and $v_j$ are the three vertexes of a triangle. Condition 2 imposes a rigorous requirement on a zero-order edge. If $od(e_{i-j})=0$ but $od(v_j)>0$, it means $v_j$ has other more intimate neighbors than $v_i$, so $v_j$ more likely will be pulled into a community (not necessarily $C_k$) by other links but not by $e_{i-j}$. If $od(e_{i-j})=0$ and $od(v_j)=0$, $v_j$ treats its neighbors equally, then $\|Nb(e_{i-j}) \cap Nd(C_k)\| \geq \frac{1}{2} deg(v_j)$ ensures that only for at least half the neighbors of $v_j$ included in $C_k$ can $e_{i-j}$ be viewed as a potential edge of $C_k$. After ensuring $e_i$ is a potential edge of $C_k$, the posterior probability $p(C_k\|e_i)$ is evaluated by using an NB classifier, and the final belonging community of $e_i$ is as follows: \[\begin{split} &C^(e_i)=\argmax_{C_k} {p(C_k\|e_i)} \\ =&\argmax_{C_k} p(C_k) \underset{v_j \in Nb(e_i)}\Pi p(v_j\|C_k)^{w_j} \ , \end{split} \label{eq:probedge}\] where $w_j$ is the weight of $v_j$; its value is set using the $tf \cdot idf$ method. $p(C_k)$ and $p(v_j\|C_k)$ will be evaluated in the maximization step. Suppose $W_{e_i}= \sum_{ \{j\|if \ v_j \in Nb(e_i) \}} w_j$; then ([\[eq:probedge\]](#eq:probedge){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:probedge"}) can be written in the following form by taking logarithms, dividing by $W_{e_i}$, and adding $H(\mathbf{p}(V\|e_{i}))$: \[\begin{split} &C^(e_i) \\ =&\argmin_{C_k} KL(\mathbf{p}(V\|e_i), \mathbf{p}(V\|C_k))-\frac{1}{W_{e_i}}log(p(C_k)) \end{split} \label{eq:probedgekl}\] where $KL(\mathbf{p}(V\|e_i), \mathbf{p}(V\|C_k))$ is the Kullback-Leibler divergence between $\mathbf{p}(V\|e_i)$ and $\mathbf{p}(V\|C_k)$. Hence, our expanding method resembles the K-means algorithm by using ([\[eq:probedgekl\]](#eq:probedgekl){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:probedgekl"}) to measure distances and tries to minimize a global objective function as follows: \[\sum_{e_i \in PS} KL(\mathbf{p}(V\|e_i), \mathbf{p}(V\|C^(e_i)))-\frac{1}{W_{e_i}}log(p(C^(e_i))) \. \label{kmeansfunc}\] Where $PS$ denotes the set of potential edges. ## The maximization step {#section:max} In the maximization step, the unknown parameters are evaluated based on all the currently labeled edges. $p(C_k)$ is just the proportion of edges in $C_k$ versus edges in all current communities. $p(v_j\|C_k)$ is evaluated as follows: \[p(v_j\|C_k)=\frac{w_{jk}}{\underset{\{t\|if\ v_t \in Nd^{}(C_k)\}} \sum w_{tk}} \. \label{eq:probclass}\] In the above equation, $Nd^{}(C_k)$ is indeed the set of terms occurring in the documents of $C_k$, which is defined as $Nd^{}(C_k)=\cup_{e_i \in C_k} Nb(e_i)$. Clearly, $Nd(C_k) \subseteq Nd^{}(C_k)$. $w_{tk}$ is the weight of $v_t$ in $C_k$. A simple way is to set $w_{tk}$ to $pr(v_t\|C_k)$, where $pr(v_t\|C_k)$ is the conditional probability of $v_t$ occurring given $C_k$. For example, in the right subfigure of figure [\[fig:seeding\]](#fig:seeding){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:seeding"}, $pr(v_{12}\|C_{red})=6/24$ ($C_{red}$ indicates the red community) because term $v_{12}$ occurs in 6 documents, and there are 24 total occurrences for terms $v_{1}, v_{3}, v_{4}$, and $v_{12}$. Unfortunately, directly using $pr(v_t\|C_k)$ has a drawback because hub nodes may have higher weights than more specific nodes. For example, for the community of a dark goldenrod color in the same subfigure, the weight of $v_{12}$ will be higher than $v_{28}$'s. To bias the weights to the high-specificity nodes, a probability ratio is introduced to assign a value to $w_{tk}$: \[w_{tk}=\frac{pr(v_t\|C_k)}{pr(v_t\|\overline{C_k})}\] Above, $\overline{C_k}$ represents all other communities except $C_k$. $pr(v_t\|C_k)$ and $pr(v_t\|\overline{C_k})$ are the conditional probabilities of $v_t$ occurring given the "positive" community $C_k$ and the "negative" community $\overline{C_k}$, respectively. # Experimental setup This section consists of 2 parts. We explain the synthetic and empirical networks and performance measures in subsection 1. In subsection 2, we give a brief introduction of ITEM's comparing algorithms. ## The synthetic and empirical networks {#sectionsetupnetwork} Synthetic networks are commonly used to evaluate the performance of community detection algorithms because the ground truth communities are clear. We use the Lancichinetti-Fortunato-Radicchi (LFR) benchmark to construct synthetic networks, which provides a rich set of parameters to control the network topology. Throughout the experiments, the maximum degree of LFR networks is set at 50; node degrees and community sizes are governed by power law distributions with exponents $\tau_1=2$ and $\tau_2=1$. The network sizes can be 5000 or 1000, which are denoted as G (great) or L (little) communities, respectively. The community sizes of a network can vary in small range \[10,50\] or big range \[20, 100\], denoted as S and B, respectively. For other parameters such as the mixing parameter $\mu$, which is the expected ratio between the number of boundary edges (edges whose two endpoints aren't in same community) and the number of incident edges for each node, the average degree $k$, the number of memberships of the overlapping nodes $om$, and the fraction of overlapping nodes $on$; their values are explicitly given in figure [\[fig:om\]](#fig:om){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:om"}. For each parameter setting above, we generated 10 instances. Hence, the results in figures [\[fig:om\]](#fig:om){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:om"} are the averages over 10 LFR networks. To measure the similarity of ground truth communities and found communities, normalized mutual information (NMI) is used. The NMI value is between 0 and 1, with 1 corresponding to a perfect match between the true community and the found community. For empirical networks, we use the Facebook100 dataset, which includes 100 friendship networks. These networks have meta-data such as year and dorm for nodes. Evaluating these networks is difficult because the ground truth communities are unknown, so NMI cannot be used on the Facebook100 dataset. Recently, Lee and Cunningham proposed a machine learning framework to measure how well communities were detected based on the assumption that "if a community detection algorithm is functioning well, then a classifier should be able to use the set of detected communities to infer missing values of a node attribute that is closely related to community structure." So when a classifier gives a higher accuracy score, it indicates the found communities are better. ## The comparing algorithms Many algorithms are devoted to discovering overlapping communities. Some algorithms use the domain or prior knowledge to promote final detection of communities. For example, uses view counts of videos to find the most popular videos as seeds. But this information is not always available, and this paper selects algorithms that only use adjacent information of the detecting networks. We also tried to compare algorithms proposed by, but these codes were difficult to deploy on our platform. Xie et al. conduct a good survey of overlapping algorithms and indicate that GCE, Speaker-listener Label Propagation Algorithm (SLPA), Community Overlap PRopagation Algorithm (COPRA), Order Statistics Local Optimization Method (OSLOM), and LFM achieve higher performance on larger networks. This paper only compares ITEM with GCE and SLPA, while the other three algorithms are filtered out for their higher computational complexity compared with GCE and SLPA. Clique Percolation Method (CPM) is also included for its high reputation. Lastly, we compare ITEM with the Poisson Model (PM) algorithm, which is considered a state-of-the-art method. CPM first finds all $k$-cliques, then rolls one clique to another clique if they share $k-1$ nodes. The rolling process stops only when no adjacent cliques sharing $k-1$ nodes exist. All nodes covered by rolling $k$-cliques in the process form a community. GCE uses maximal cliques as seeds, then expands the nodes by maximizing the fitness function $f(C_i)=2 \times m_{in}^{C_{i}}/(2 \times m_{in}^{C_{i}}+m_{out}^{C_{i}})$, where $m_{in}^{C_{i}}$ is the number of edges in community $C_i$, and $m_{out}^{C_{i}}$ is the number of edges on the boundary of $C_i$. SLPA uses label propagation to discover overlapping communities, and nodes send and receive labels according to the sending and receiving rules. SLPA uses a threshold variable $r$ to filter out labels whose probability is lower than $r$. PM evaluates a set of parameters $\theta_{ik}$, which measure the extent of belonging for node $i$ to community $C_k$. Comparing ITEM with GCE, SLPA, CPM, and PM can show whether ITEM is superior to them, but cannot tell where the superiority comes from if it does exist. We design another algorithm to see the effects of our seeding and expanding method. As the expanding process of GCE is equal to minimizing the conductance between $C_i$ and the rest of the network, a mixing algorithm called Seeding and Minimizing Conductance (SMC) is built that uses the seeding process of ITEM with the expanding process of GCE. It is clear that SMC and GCE are identical except for their seeding methods, and SMC and ITEM are also identical except for their expanding methods. So from the performance difference between GCE and SMC, or the difference between SMC and ITEM, the effects of our seeding and expanding method can be concluded. To run CPM, GCE, ITEM, and SMC, at least one parameter must be provided. For CPM and GCE, the clique level $k$ can range from 3 to 6, and the other parameters for GCE are set to their default values. The $th$ value for ITEM and SMC is in {0.2, 0.3, 0.4} for LFR networks; for Facebook100 networks, $th$ is set to 1.0. The $r$ value for SLPA is set in {0.01, 0.05, 0.1, 0.15, 0.2, 0.25, 0.3, 0.35, 0.4, 0.45, 0.5}. To run PM, the number of communities must be given. Hence, we only evaluate PM on LFR synthetic networks by providing the true number of communities to it. A threshold value $\theta_{th} \in \{ 0.6, 0.8, 1.0, 1.2, 1.4 \}$ is also used to filter out communities $C_k$ of $v_i$ if $\theta_{ik} < \theta_{th}$. For each network, all algorithms are run multiple times by iterating through their parameters and picking the best result. # Experiments and analyses We conduct a wide range of experiments on the LFR networks. Figure [\[fig:om\]](#fig:om){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:om"} shows the performances of algorithms when changing the number of memberships of nodes. For each subfigure in figure [\[fig:om\]](#fig:om){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:om"}, there is a corresponding parameter setting generating it. We use double subscript notation to clearly cite a subfigure. A colon is used to cite all subfigures in a row or column. For example, fig[\[fig:om\]](#fig:om){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:om"}\[2,3\] is used to refer the subfigure at the $2$nd row and $3$rd column of figure [\[fig:om\]](#fig:om){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:om"}, fig[\[fig:om\]](#fig:om){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:om"}\[2,:\] refers to the four subfigures in the $2$nd row, and fig[\[fig:om\]](#fig:om){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:om"}\[:,3\] refers to the eight subfigures in the $3$rd column. We first compare ITEM with GCE, SLPA, CPM, and PM. From figure [\[fig:om\]](#fig:om){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:om"}, it can be seen that no silver-bullet algorithm can surpass others over all 32 subfigures because of the diversity of the 32 parameter settings. But in most experiments, ITEM performs better than the other four algorithms. To see whether there is a statistical difference among ITEM, GCE, SLPA, CPM, and PM, we perform a Friedman test on an NMI result set that has 5 treatments (ITEM, GCE, SLPA, CPM, and PM) and 224 blocks (32 parameter settings and 7 options of $om$). The p-value (2.2e-16) of the Friedman test shows that statistical differences exist among 5 algorithms. To further identify which algorithms are different, we carry out post hoc analyses using the paired Wilcoxon test; the results are shown in the left subfigure of figure [\[fig:statis\]](#fig:statis){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:statis"}. It can be seen that both ITEM and PM are significantly different from GCE, SLPA, and CPM. More specifically, ITEM can improve NMI more than 0.1 in about half of experiments; for PM, 0.05 improvement is achieved. The 32 subfigures in figure [\[fig:om\]](#fig:om){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:om"} also demonstrate the wide applicability of ITEM. Compared with other algorithms, ITEM always gives decent performances in more subfigures. Then we compare ITEM with GCE and SMC. The same statistical analysis is carried out, except the original treatments are replaced with ITEM, GCE, and SMC. The results are shown in the right subfigure of figure [\[fig:statis\]](#fig:statis){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:statis"}. By comparing SMC with GCE, the effectiveness of our seeding method can be evaluated by comparing the method used by GCE, which is considered the best method for seeding. The right subfigure indicates that the qualities of seeds selected by SMC and GCE are comparable because there is no statistical difference between SMC and GCE. But the computational complexity of finding committees is lower than for finding all cliques. As committees are often dense sub-graphs that are similar to cliques, finding committees as seeds implies relaxing the seeding criteria but reaping the high efficiency. As for the effectiveness, we believe it should be attributed to the following reasons: first, the local ranking method of RSS overcomes the dilemma of the global ranking method. Second, MGIG selects seeds from a bird's eye perspective. Third, using committees as seeds is more proper than using cliques because clique criteria are too strict. A significant difference exists between ITEM and SMC. The difference indicates that the expanding method using semi-supervised learning and Bayesian inference is superior to the heuristic method used by GCE. The following lists the differences between the former (i.e., ITEM's expanding method) and the latter (i.e., GCE's), and may explain where the superiority comes from: first, Bayesian inference gives the former a chance to promote the weights of authoritative nodes and suppress the weights of hub nodes. The heuristic functions used by the latter and other methods in treat all nodes equally. The universality of Bayesian inference also renders the former wide applicability. Second, semi-supervised learning uses both labeled and unlabeled edges to model the NB classifier. Though unlabeled edges may theoretically decrease the performance of an NB classifier, the high similar document presentation of edges in the same communities, plus the conservative strategy of only adding potential edges in each iteration, render an ideal scenario for applying semi-supervised learning. Third, by trying to minimize the global objective function ([\[kmeansfunc\]](#kmeansfunc){reference-type="ref" reference="kmeansfunc"}), competition is introduced by the former. In other words, each belonging is determined by the consultations of multiple communities, not only by a local fitness function. We also conduct experiments using the Facebook100 dataset. Forty networks with the fewest nodes are used to evaluate communities found by ITEM, GCE, and SLPA. CPM is excluded because it cannot finish running in 48 hours. For each combination of network and algorithm, figure [\[fig:year\]](#fig:year){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:year"} and figure [\[fig:dorm\]](#fig:dorm){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:dorm"} display the accuracy given by the training classifier when using "year" and "dorm" attributes as labels, respectively. Each value of the bar is averaged over three times. Figure [\[fig:year\]](#fig:year){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:year"} indicates that ITEM is consistently better than GCE and SLPA on all 40 networks. For figure [\[fig:dorm\]](#fig:dorm){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:dorm"}, GCE performs better than ITEM and SLPA on most networks. We also probe the reasons why ITEM performs better than GCE when using "year" as a label but performs worse when using "dorm" as a label. This happens first because ITEM tends to generate larger found communities than GCE. Second, the true communities with "year" attributes are larger than the true communities with "dorm" attributes. When combining these two reasons, it can be seen that communities found by ITEM are more suitably used to infer the "year" attribute, while GCE is more suitable for the "dorm" attribute. The second reason also explains why both ITEM and GCE get higher accuracy in figure [\[fig:year\]](#fig:year){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:year"} than in figure [\[fig:dorm\]](#fig:dorm){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:dorm"} for most networks. This is because the benchmark classifier has more training examples when using "year" to infer. The different behaviors of GCE and ITEM also enlighten us that combining multiple orthogonal algorithms may be a good choice to discover more true communities in a network. It is also worth comparing ITEM with Linkcomm because they both cluster edges into communities. But there is an important difference between ITEM and Linkcomm. we called ITEM a partitioning method because of the resemblance between K-means and our expanding method. Linkcomm uses the hierarchical agglomerative algorithm to cluster edges. As a consequence, it inherits two shortcomings of the hierarchical agglomerative algorithm. First, the greedy nature of agglomerating algorithms will yield sub-optimal clusters as compared with partitioning algorithms, because partitioning algorithms explore collective information to generate edge clusters, while agglomerating algorithms merely exploit two clusters' information at each agglomeration step. Second, one edge cannot change its belonging community once it is assigned to that community (most expanding methods also have this drawback). We believe these reasons can partly explain why Linkcomm gives poor performances. The computational complexity of ITEM's expanding method is $O(tpm)$, where $t$ is the number of iterations of the EM algorithm. The value of $t$ may be associated with $log(n)$ because the average path length is proportional to $log(n)$ for "small-world" networks. In our experiments, the expanding process is stopped when only a few edges change labels. The overall computational complexity of ITEM is about $O(tpm)$ because its seeding complexity can be ignored in most cases when compared with its expanding complexity. Hence, ITEM is a proper choice to detect communities for large networks. Table [3](#tab:runtimes){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:runtimes"} lists the running times of ITEM on some empirical networks [^2]. All experiments are conducted on a workstation that has 8 Intel Xeon 2.27GHz cores and 12G RAM. ITEM is paralleled running on 8 cores using openMP. It can be seen that ITEM can process Dblp network in 12 minutes. By virtue of the ideal parallel parallelism of K-means, we believe ITEM can process even larger networks with more machines efficiently. # Conclusion and future works In this work, an overlapping community detection algorithm called ITEM has been presented. ITEM is devoted to solve the problems of how to efficiently select high-quality seeds and to make the expanding method applicable to a wide range of networks. To solve the first problem, seeds are selected using local and global methods. For the second problem, we resort to the semi-supervised learning and NB classifier. The experimental results show the advantage of our seeding and expanding methods. The statistical analysis further demonstrates that ITEM improves performance significantly when compared with most existing algorithms. ITEM can only run on unweighted and undirected networks now. In the future, we will extend it on weighted and directed networks. ITEM may be treated as a preparatory step for other tasks, such as link prediction and key point detection, because after ITEM finishes we can get parameters such as $p(v_j\|C_k)$ and $p(C_k\|v_j)$. Lastly, it is also worth making ITEM available to incremental or dynamic networks.	{'timestamp': '2014-09-18T02:08:30', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5888', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5888'}
# Introduction [\[intro\]]{#intro label="intro"} The problem studied in this note is motivated by a special feature of the ordering process of a fashion discounter with many branches: For each product that hits the shelves, the internal stock-turnover has to distribute around 10 000 pieces among the around 1 000 branches, correctly assorted by size. This would mean 10 000 picks with high error probability in the central-warehouse (in our case in the high-wage country Germany). In order to reduce the handling costs and the error proneness in the central warehouse, all products are ordered in multiples of so-called lot-types from the suppliers who in general are located in extremely low-wage countries. A lot-type specifies a number of pieces of a product for each available size, e.g., (2,2,2,2,2) if the sizes are (S, M, L, XL, XXL) means two pieces of each size. A lot of a certain lot-type is a foiled pre-pack that contains as many pieces of each size as specified in its lot-type. The number of different lot-types is bounded by the supplier. So we face an approximation problem: which (integral) multiples of which (integral) lot-types should be supplied to a branch in order to meet a (fractional) mean demand as closely as possible? We call this specific demand approximation problem the lot-type design problem (LDP). A detailed version of this work appeared in , where also references to related work can be found. # The lot-type design problem[\[sec_lottype\]]{#sec_lottype label="sec_lottype"} Formally, the problem can be stated as follows: Consider a fashion discounter with branches $b \in \mathcal{B}$ who wants to place an order for a certain product that can be obtained in sizes $s \in \mathcal{S}$ and that can be pre-packed in lot-types $l \in \mathcal{L}$. Each lot-type is a vector $(l_s)_{s \in \mathcal{S}}$ specifying the number of pieces of each size contained in the pre-pack. Only $\ensuremath{k}$ different lot-types from $\mathcal{L}$ are allowed in this order, and each branch receives only lots of a single lot-type. We are given lower and upper bounds $\underline{I}, \overline{I}$ for the total supply of this product. Moreover, we assume that a the branch and size dependent mean demand $\ensuremath{d}_{b, s}$ for the corresponding type of product is known to us. The original goal is to find a set of at most $\ensuremath{k}$ lot-types, an order volume for each of these chosen lot-types, and a distribution of lots to branches such that the revenue is maximized. In order to separate the order process from the sales process (which involves mark-downs, promotions, etc.), we restrict ourselves in this paper to the minimization of the distance between supply and mean demand defined by a vector norm. The Lot-Type Design Problem (LDP) is the following optimization problem: The LDP can be formulated as an Integer Linear Program if we restrict ourselves to the $L^1$-norm for measuring the distance between supply and demand. This norm is quite robust against outlies in the demand estimation. We use binary variables $x_{b,l,m}$, which are equal to $1$ if and only if lot-type $l$ is delivered with multiplicity $m$ to Branch $b$, and binary variables $y_l$, which are $1$ if and only if at least one branch in $\mathcal{B}$ is supplied with Lottype $l$. The deviation of the demand from the supply if Branch $b$ is supplied by $m$ lots of lot-type $l$ is given by $\ensuremath{c}_{b,l,m} := \sum_{s \in \mathcal{S}} \lvert \ensuremath{d}_{b, s}-m \cdot l_s \rvert$. The following integer linear program models the LDP with $L^1$-norm. \[\begin{aligned} \label{OrderModel_Target} \min && \sum_{b\in\mathcal{B}}\sum_{l\in\mathcal{L}}\sum_{m=1}^M \ensuremath{c}_{b,l,m}\cdot x_{b,l,m}\\ \label{OrderModel_EveryBranchOneLottype} s.t. && \sum_{l\in\mathcal{L}}\sum_{m=1}^M x_{b,l,m} &= 1 && \forall b\in\mathcal{B}\\ \label{OrderModel_UsedLottypes} && \sum_{l\in\mathcal{L}} y_l & \le \ensuremath{k}\\ \label{OrderModel_Binding} && \sum_{m=1}^M x_{b,l,m} & \le y_l && \forall b\in\mathcal{B}, \forall l\in\mathcal{L}\\ && \label{OrderModel_Cardinality} \underline{I} \le \sum_{b\in\mathcal{B}}\sum_{l\in\mathcal{L}}\sum_{m=1}^M \sum_{s \in \mathcal{S}} m \cdot l_s \cdot x_{b,l,m} &\le \overline{I}\\ && x_{b,l,m} & \in\{0,1\} && \forall b\in\mathcal{B}, \forall l\in\mathcal{L}, \forall m = 1,\dots,M\\ && y_l & \in\{0,1\} && \forall l\in\mathcal{L} \end{aligned}\] The objective function [\[OrderModel_Target\]](#OrderModel_Target){reference-type="eqref" reference="OrderModel_Target"} computes the $L^1$-distance of the supply specified by $x$ from the demand. Condition [\[OrderModel_EveryBranchOneLottype\]](#OrderModel_EveryBranchOneLottype){reference-type="eqref" reference="OrderModel_EveryBranchOneLottype"} enforces that each branch is assigned a unique lot-type and a unique multiplicity. Condition [\[OrderModel_UsedLottypes\]](#OrderModel_UsedLottypes){reference-type="eqref" reference="OrderModel_UsedLottypes"} models that at most $\ensuremath{k}$ different lot-types can be chosen. Condition [\[OrderModel_Binding\]](#OrderModel_Binding){reference-type="eqref" reference="OrderModel_Binding"} forces the selection of a lot-type whenever it is assigned to some branch with some multiplicity. Finally, Condition [\[OrderModel_Cardinality\]](#OrderModel_Cardinality){reference-type="eqref" reference="OrderModel_Cardinality"} ensures that the total number of pieces is in the desired interval--the total capacity constraint. Our ILP formulation can be used to solve all real world instances of our business partner in at most 30 minutes by using a standard ILP solver like `CPLEX 11`. Interestingly, the model seems quite tight--most of the time is spent in solving the root LP. Although 30 minutes may mean a feasible computation time for an offline-optimization in many contexts, this is not fast enough for our real world application. The buyers of our retailer need a software tool which can produce a near optimal order recommendation in real time on a standard laptop. For this reason, we present a fast anytime-heuristic, which has only a small gap compared to the optimal solution on a test set of real world data of our business partner. We briefly sketch the idea of the heuristic Score-Fix-Adjust (SFA): It 1. sorts all lot-types according to certain scores, coming from a count for how many branches the lot-type fits best, second best, ...(Score); 2. fixes $\ensuremath{k}$-subsets of lot-types in the order of decreasing score sums (Fix); 3. greedily adjusts the multiplicities so as to achieve feasibility w.r.t. the total capacity constraint (Adjust). Details can be found in. Since in the case $\ensuremath{k} = 1$ we can very often loop over all feasible lot-types, it is interesting that in this case SFA always yields an optimal solution (for any norm). In order to substantiate the usefullness of our heuristic, we have compared the quality of the solutions, given by this heuristic after one second of computation time (on a standard laptop: Intel$^{\textregistered}$ Core$\texttrademark\ $`<!-- -->`{=html}2 CPU with 2 GHz and 1 GB RAM) with respect to the solution given by `CPLEX 11` (after solving to optimality). Our business partner has provided us with historic sales information for nine different commodity groups, each ranging over a sales period of at least one-and-a-half years. From this we estimated mean demands via aggregating over products in a commodity group. By normalizing the lengths of the products' sales periods to the point in time when half of the product was sold out, we were able to mod out the effects of any product's individual success or failure. Prior to each test calculation, the resulting demands were scaled so that the total mean demand was in the center of the total capacity interval given by the management for a new order of a product in that commodity group. For each commodity group we have performed a test calculation for $\ensuremath{k}\in\{2,3,4,5\}$ distributing some amount of items to almost all branches. The crucial parameters are given in Table [1](#table_parameters){reference-type="ref" reference="table_parameters"}, the results are presented in Table [2](#table_gap){reference-type="ref" reference="table_gap"}. ::: We can see that--given the uncertainty in the data--the performance of SFA is more than satisfactory. # Conclusions We identified the lot-type design problem in the supply chain management of a fashion discounter. It can be modeled as an ILP, and real-world instances can be solved by commercial-of-the-shelf software like CPLEX in half an hour whenever the number of lot-types is not too large. Our SFA-heuristics finds solutions with a gap of mostly under 1 % in a second, also for instances with a large number of lot-types. Given the volatility of the demand estimation, these gaps are certainly tolerable. Meanwhile, the model and SFA have been put to operation by our business partner with significant positive monetary impact.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-23T02:05:18', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5572', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5572'}
null	null
null	null
# Introduction $175706$ 1996 FG3 (hereafter, 1996 FG3) is a binary near-Earth asteroid (NEA) belonging to the Apollo type, which has a very low $\Delta$v value $\sim$ $5.16\rm~kms^{-1}$. This asteroid was originally chosen as the target for a proposed sample return mission, called MarcoPolo-R. Eclipse events have been observed in the binary system 1996 FG3 in optical wavelengths. The period of mutual orbit is $16.14\pm0.01\rm~hr$, and the diameter ratio $D_{2}/D_{1}$ is $0.28^{+0.01}_{-0.02}$. The primary is assumed to be an oblate ellipsoid with a major axis ratio $a/b\sim1.2$, while the secondary is prolate with a major axis ratio about 1.4. Furthermore, showed the rotation period of the primary is $\sim3.6\rm~hr$, and the mass density $1.4^{+1.5}_{-0.6}$ g cm$^{-3}$, where 1996 FG3 is generally classified as a complex C-type. The optical magnitude and phase coefficient are derived as $H=17.76\pm0.03$ and $G=-0.07\pm0.02$ by, while used additional data to derive $H=17.833\pm0.024$ and $G=-0.041\pm0.005$. obtained an area-equivalent diameter of $1.8^{+0.6}_{-0.5}\rm~km$ and a geometric albedo of $p_{v}=0.04^{+0.04}_{-0.02}$ for 1996 FG3, based on thermal observations (3.6 and $4.5\rm~\mu m$) from the \"Warm Spitzer\" space telescope. Furthermore, measured the effective diameter and geometric albedo of the asteroid to be $D_{\rm eff}=1.68\pm0.25\rm~km$, $p_{v}=0.046\pm0.014$, $\eta=1.15$ for a solar phase angle $11.7^{\circ}$ from an NEATM procedure. In addition, using NEATM method, also obtained 1996 FG3's effective diameter and geometric albedo of $D_{\rm eff}=1.90\pm0.28\rm~km$, $p_{v}=0.039\pm0.012$, beaming parameter $\eta=1.61\pm0.08$, for a phase angle $67.4^{\circ}$. modeled the formation of the binaries to be a history of rotation acceleration due to the YORP mechanism. Generally, the asymmetric reflection of sunlight and asymmetric thermal emission from an asteroid's surface produces a net force and a net torque. The net force causes the orbit of the asteroid to drift, i.e., Yarkovsky effect, and the net torque alters its rotation period and direction of its rotation axis, i.e., YORP effect. The asymmetric shape of an asteroid, as well as the existence of its finite rotation period and thermal inertia, plays a major role in affecting Yarkovsky and YORP effects. Thermal inertia is an important parameter that controls temperature distribution over the surface and sub-surface of the asteroid, and it is defined by $\Gamma=\sqrt{\rho c\kappa}$, where $\rho$ is the mass density, $\kappa$ the thermal conductivity, and $c$ the specific heat capacity. According to the definition, thermal inertia depends mainly on the regolith particle size and depth, degree of compaction, and exposure of solid rocks and boulders within the top few centimeters of sub-surface. Therefore, thermal inertia may act as a vital indicator to infer the presence or absence of loose material on the asteroid's surface. The thermal inertia of an asteroid may be evaluated by fitting mid-infrared observations by applying a thermal model to reproduce mid-IR emission curves. proposed a so-called thermophysical model (TPM), which is adopted to calculate infrared emission fluxes as a function of the asteroid's albedo, thermal inertia, correction factor and so on. For example, we provide several values of $\Gamma$ for the targets of complete/future asteroid missions. On the basis of TPM, measured the thermal inertia of asteroid (25143) Itokawa to be $\sim$ $750\rm~Jm^{-2}s^{-0.5}K^{-1}$. Again, showed that the $\Gamma$ of 1999 JU3 is likely to be in the range of $200\sim600\rm~Jm^{-2}s^{-0.5}K^{-1}$. The average thermal inertia of 1999 RQ36 is estimated to be $\sim$ $650\rm~Jm^{-2}s^{-0.5}K^{-1}$. Recently, proposed an advanced thermophysical model (ATPM) to extensively investigate the thermal nature of the asteroid. Subsequently, obtained a best-fit thermal inertia $\Gamma=120\pm50\rm~Jm^{-2}s^{-0.5}K^{-1}$ for 1996 FG3 with ATPM. The structure of the paper is as follows. Firstly, Section 2 gives a brief introduction to the thermophysical model developed by. In Section 3, we concentrate our study on deriving a new 3D shape model for the primary of 1996 FG3 from the known optical lightcurves. The rotation period and spin axis of the primary are again updated in this work but they appear to be slightly different from those of. Subsequently, in Section 4, we independently develop computation codes that duplicates ATPM, and then carry out extensive fittings using three sets of mid-infrared observations of 1996 FG3 to investigate the primary's surface physical properties, such as the average thermal inertia, geometric albedo and roughness. The results show that this asteroid may have a very rough surface, in the meanwhile the thermal inertia and geometric albedo seem to be relatively low, indicative of the existence of loose material or regolith spreading over the asteroid's surface. Moreover, Section 5 deals with the global surface and sub-surface temperature distribution at the aphelion and perihelion, and the minimum depth of regolith layer over the very surface of the primary from the simulations. In final, Section 6 presents the primary results of this work and gives a concise discussion. # Theory Method ## Advanced Thermophysical Model An asteroid is assumed to be a polyhedron composed of N triangle facets in ATPM. For each facet, the conservation of energy leads to the surface boundary condition \[\begin{aligned} (1-A_{B})(s_{i}\psi_{i}F_{Sun}+F_{scat})+(1-A_{th})F_{red}= \nonumber\\ \varepsilon\sigma T^{4}\big\|_{z=0}+(-\kappa\frac{dT}{dZ})\Big\|_{z=0}, \label{surbc} \end{aligned}\] where $A_{B}$ is the Bond albedo, $s_{i}$ indicates whether facet $i$ is illuminated by the Sun, $\varepsilon$ is the thermal emissivity, $\sigma$ the Stefan-Boltzmann constant, $\kappa$ the thermal conductivity, and $z$ the depth below the surface, respectively. $\psi_{i}$ means a function that returns the cosine of the sunlight incident angle. $F_{Sun}$ is the integrated solar flux at the distance of the asteroid, which can be approximated by \[F_{Sun}=\frac{F_{\odot}}{r_{\odot AU}^{2}},\] where $F_{\odot}$ is the solar constant, about $1367.5Wm^{-2}$, and $r_{\odot AU}$ is the heliocentric distance in AU. $F_{scat}$ and $F_{red}$ are the total multiple-scattered and thermal-radiated fluxes incident onto the facet from other facets, respectively. $A_{th}$ is the albedo of the surface at thermal-infrared wavelengths. Temperature $T$ can be written as a function of time $t$ and depth $z$, i.e., $T(t,z)$. It can be described by one-dimension (1D) heat diffusion equation \[\rho c\frac{\partial T}{\partial t}=\kappa\frac{\partial^{2}T}{\partial z^{2}}, \label{heat}\] For the asteroid, which may have a regolith layer over its surface, the temperature below the surface regolith is supposed to be constant. Thus an internal boundary condition could be given by \[\frac{\partial T}{\partial z}\Big\|_{z\rightarrow\infty}\rightarrow0 ~. \label{inbc}\] Theoretically, the temperature distribution can be directly obtained by solving equation ([\[heat\]](#heat){reference-type="ref" reference="heat"}) and the boundary conditions of equations ([\[surbc\]](#surbc){reference-type="ref" reference="surbc"}) and ([\[inbc\]](#inbc){reference-type="ref" reference="inbc"}). However, the surface boundary condition is a nonlinear equation, thus we will attempt to solve them with numerical methods. In order to simplify the solution of this problem, it is useful to introduce a standard transformation as follows: \[\begin{aligned} x &= &\frac{z}{l_{s}} ,\\ \tau&=&\omega t ,\\ u&=&\frac{T}{T_{e}}, \end{aligned}\] where \[l_{s}=\sqrt{\frac{\kappa}{\rho c\omega}}\] is referred to as skin depth. And \[T_{e}=\left(\frac{(1-A_{B})F_{Sun}}{\varepsilon\sigma}\right)^{1/4} ~,\] is called effective temperature. Thus, the 1D heat diffusion equation is rewritten as \[\frac{\partial u}{\partial \tau}=\frac{\partial^{2}u}{\partial x^{2}}, \label{tf}\] while the surface boundary condition and internal boundary condition are converted into \[u^{4}\big\|_{x=0}-\Phi\frac{du}{dx}\Big\|_{x=0}=p_{1}+p_{2}+p_{3}, \label{sbc}\] \[\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}\Big\|_{x\rightarrow\infty}\rightarrow0 \label{ibc}\] where \[\begin{aligned} p_{1}&=&s\cdot\psi ,\\ p_{2}&=&(1-A_{B})\frac{F_{scat}}{\varepsilon\sigma T^{4}_{e}} ,\\ p_{3}&=&(1-A_{th})\frac{F_{red}}{\varepsilon\sigma T^{4}_{e}}, \end{aligned}\] and \[\Phi=\frac{\Gamma\sqrt{\omega}}{\varepsilon\sigma T^{3}_{e}}\] $\Gamma$ is the thermal inertia, and $\Phi$ is the thermal parameter. By numerically solving equation ([\[tf\]](#tf){reference-type="ref" reference="tf"}) with boundary condition equations ([\[sbc\]](#sbc){reference-type="ref" reference="sbc"}) and ([\[ibc\]](#ibc){reference-type="ref" reference="ibc"}), we can acquire the global temperature distribution over the surface and sub-surface of the asteroid. According to the theory, the program codes are also developed for investigation. In the following, we will introduce the results based on numerical calculations. ## Emission Flux On the basis of surface temperature distribution calculated from ATPM, we may estimate thermal infrared fluxes from the asteroid for a given phase angle $\alpha$ and geocentric distance $\Delta$. First of all, a body-fixed coordinate system is established (see Figure 1), where the origin $O$ locates at the center of asteroid, z-axis is parallel to its spin axis, and x-axis is chosen to remain in a plane determined by z-axis and the line of sun-asteroid, directing towards the Sun. The direction vector of Earth in the body-fixed system is calculated from the asteroid's orbit, expressed as $\vec{n}_{\oplus}$. Normal vector of each facet $\vec{n}_{i}$ is determined from the shape model of the asteroid. Hence, the view factor of each facet relative to Earth can be evaluated by \[f(i)=v(i)A(i)\frac{\vec{n}_{i}\cdot\vec{n}_{\oplus}}{\pi\Delta^{2}}\] where $v(i)=1$ indicates that facet $i$ can be seen from Earth, otherwise $v(i)=0$, and $A(i)$ is the area of facet $i$. The flux emitted by each facet is described by the Plank function \[B(\lambda, T_{i})=\frac{2\pi hc^{2}}{\lambda^{5}}\frac{1}{\exp\big(\frac{hc}{\lambda kT_{i}}-1\big)}\] Consequently, the total fluxes observed from Earth are fully integrated over each facet \[F_{\lambda}=\sum^{N}_{i=1}\varepsilon f(i)B(\lambda, T_{i})\] # Shape Model According to direct images from space missions and radar measurements, the asteroids in small-size have an irregular shape, while those larger objects appear to be relatively regular shape. For instance, Vesta seems to be more circular than Eros. Considering the asteroid's rotation, the observed lightcurves change with a lot of extrema, which provide key information on modeling its shape and morphology. Hence, the substantial shape and spin status of the asteroid can be derived from the observations. and developed the lightcurve inverse scheme, and in their model, the inverse problem is perfectly solved using modern deconvolution method and optimization techniques. With the assistance of the optical data, a convex shape of asteroid will be obtained. After repeating the fitting of the convex shape and additional observations, an improved shape of the asteroid will be better constructed. The relative chi-square is defined as \[\chi^2_{rel}=\sum_{i}\\|\frac{L^{(i)}_{obs}}{\bar{L}^{(i)}_{obs}}-\frac{L^{(i)}}{\bar{L}^{(i)}}\\|^2,\] where $L^{(i)}$ and $L^{(i)}_{obs}$ are the modeled and observed brightness from lightcurves, respectively. $\bar{L}^{(i)}_{obs}$ and $\bar{L}^{(i)}$ are the averaged brightness of the observed data and the model, respectively. At the end of iteration, chi-square will approach a tiny value. Usually, for an asteroid, there are a great many of observations with respect to various solar angles at different epochs. Therefore, such method will yield a reliable result for the shape model. As 1996 FG3 is a binary asteroid, the values of the brightness in the lightcurves consist of dual contributions coming from the primary and secondary. Similar characteristic of the lightcurves is shown by 1994 AW1 and 1991 VH. Thus, it is clear that one cannot directly utilize the original data to construct the primary's shape model. From the point of view of shape reconstruction, we should retrieve the short-period component from the observations in the very beginning. In the following, we describe the method that detaches the short-period and long-period components. By taking outside the deep minima from the long-period component, the short-period component can be obtained. Then, applying the Fourier fitting of the lightcurves to only short-period component, the rotational profile for the primary can be detached. The Fourier series is in the form of \[R(t)=C_0+\sum^m_{n=1}\left(C_n \cos\frac{2\pi n}{P}(t-t_0)+S_n \sin\frac{2\pi n}{P} (t-t_0)\right),\] where $R$ is the magnitude computed at time $t$, the period $P=3.5942\pm 0.0002$ h, $t_0$ is the epoch, $C_0$, $C_n$ and $S_n$ are the mean magnitude and the Fourier coefficients of the $n$th order, respectively. Subtracting the short-period component from the observation data by assuming the long-period added to the short-period linearly in irradiance, two kinds of components can be gained. By subtracting short-period data, the long-period measurements show the information of eclipses/occultations which is not enough for the shape reconstruction of the secondary. Herein, we simply make use of the short-period data presented by the measurements that have been published already to precisely reconstruct the shape of the primary. We have already collected all optical data from 1996 to now, where there are 14 lightcurves of 1996 FG3 (see Table [1](#lightcurve){reference-type="ref" reference="lightcurve"}) in total. From the observation data of one to seven lightcurves, the best-fit fifth-order Fourier series separates the short-period component and the r.m.s residual is comparable to the observation errors. We can obtain the short-period data of the first seven lightcurves, where the first four lightcurves are adopted from Figure 1 of, while the data of the fifth to seventh lightcurves are from Figures 1 to 3 of. The short-period component of the first seven lightcurves has already obtained in the published papers. In the observation interval of the remaining lightcurves, no eclipsed or occultations occurred with an analysis of amplitude of the data. Note that Table [1](#lightcurve){reference-type="ref" reference="lightcurve"} summarizes all measurements that we employed in the shape model, the data number in the table is simply referred to short-period data. Among them, seven lightcurves (labled from No.1 to No.7) are in good quality to perform the fitting to model 3D shape of this asteroid, while the remaining data of each lightcurve from 8 to 14 are so short in the observation time, less than one rotation period of the primary, that we cannot get the short component from the total data, especially No.8 to No.12. The short-period component of lightcurves observed by (No.13 and No.14) can be obtained through Fourier fitting. However, we still use the data of No.13 and No.14 to perform additional investigation over the shape model, which is referred to cases A1 and A2, respectively. The detailed analysis will be given in the end of this section. In what follows we simply employ the data of the first seven lightcurves for exploring the physical properties of 1996 FG3, including the shape model inversion and the determination of the rotation period and the pole orientation for the primary. We deal with the lightcurve data as the input format for deriving a shape model. All of data in the seven lighcurves are different, thus we first convert them to relative brightness. Using the observation epoch in JD, we calculate the ecliptic astrocentric cartesian coordinates of the Sun and Earth. Firstly we determine the rotation period of the primary by scanning in an interval of rotation period space. Secondly, the rotation period is fixed at the determined value and with free pole orientation parameters, the pole orientation and shape model are obtained. At last, in order to examine our results, we scan the $\chi^2$ value in the range of the orientation uncertainties. Based on optical observations, the rotation period of 1996 FG3 is estimated to be $\sim 3.595\pm 0.002$ h. Firstly, we confirm this spin period of primary using the methods of Kaasalainen et al. (2001 b) and. In addition, we will find out a best-fit period on the basis of the published lightcurves, i.e., in search of a global minimum of $\chi^2$ in the fitting. In the parameter scanning process, six random pole directions are chosen. Using Levenberg-Marquardt, for each pole the shape model and rotation period are simultaneously optimized to fit the observed lightcurves. In this work, we choose a scanning range of period in \[3.593, 3.597\] h, based on the former outcomes. Then, we carry out the calculations after iterating 50 steps for each run, and have a clearly minimum $\chi^2=0.005$ corresponding to the best-fitting rotation period of 3.5935 h for the primary which is consistent with that of. Furthermore, to determine the asteroid's orientation, we then remain the rotation period as 3.5935 h, but let the orientation be free parameters. Herein, we adopt the initials of $\lambda =242^\circ$ and $\beta=-84^{\circ}$ to perform searching of orientation. For the simulation, we choose the convexity regularization weight to be 0.1, the laplace series expansion to be $l=6$ and $m=6$, the light scattering parameters to be $a=0.5$, $d=0.1$, $k=-0.5$, and $c=0.1$, where $a,~d,~k,~c$ means amplitude, width, slope and Lambert's coefficient, respectively. From this method, we are able to evaluate the orientation of 1996 FG3, the rotation period and a convex polyhedron shape model that consists of the coordinates of the vertices and the number of the facets of the polyhedron. After running many fittings, we finally obtain one of the best-fit solutions for the shape model of 1996 FG3, which is composed of 1022 vertices and 2040 facets (Table [\[phpa\]](#phpa){reference-type="ref" reference="phpa"}). Figure [\[shape\]](#shape){reference-type="ref" reference="shape"} shows the convex 3D shape from four view angles, north pole (top left), south pole (bottom left), equator (top right and bottom right), respectively. From Figure [\[shape\]](#shape){reference-type="ref" reference="shape"}, in the left panels, we observe that north and south poles are both relatively flat within current resolution. The right panels show the equatorial views, where the equator of the asteroid seems to be most widest region and the south pole looks to be narrower than the north pole. And the left side is narrower than the right side shown in the bottom right panel in Figure [\[shape\]](#shape){reference-type="ref" reference="shape"}. Thus from the shape model, Table [2](#result){reference-type="ref" reference="result"} lists the initial conditions and the outcomes of the simulation for its shape. According to the calculation, the best-fit orientation of the target is determined to be $\lambda =237.7^\circ$ and $\beta=-83.8^{\circ}$ with the $\chi^2=0.025$. Figure [\[light\]](#light){reference-type="ref" reference="light"} shows the comparison results of the observation data in black dot and the modeled data in red solid line in panel (a) to (g). In Figure [\[light\]](#light){reference-type="ref" reference="light"}, the x-axis means the rotation phase and the y-axis represents the relative magnitude. From the figure, we conclude that the first seven lightcurves fit is good. In order to ascertain whether the orientation is the most likely solution, we again scan the orientation in the range of its uncertainty for $\lambda =242^{\circ} \pm 96^{\circ}$ and $\beta={-84^{\circ}}^{+14^\circ}_{-5^\circ}$. Figure [\[chi\]](#chi){reference-type="ref" reference="chi"} shows the results, while the x-axis and y-axis represent the orientation $\lambda$ and $\beta$. The contour shows the value of $\chi^2$ by the colorbar index. In the figure, the yellow color corresponds to a small value of $\chi^2$ while the blue color is related to a larger value. The red cross in the figure represents the very orientation that we obtain from the shape model inversion programme. From the Figure, we can see that the value of $\chi^2<0.0251$ locates at the position of $\lambda=[231^\circ, 238^\circ]$ and $\beta=[-85^\circ,-81^\circ]$, which is shown in yellow region in Figure 4. The red cross just falls into the yellow region. However, the chi-squared values are very low over the scanning pole orientation space (Figure 4), indicating that the uncertainty in the position of the pole appears to be high as shown by. As a result, we may come to the conclusion that the derived orientation is the best-fit solution in the range of the observation uncertainties. Furthermore, we perform additional fitting and inverse the shape models with all of fourteen lightcurves (case A1) in Table 1 and eight lightcurves (case A2), which consist of the first seven and No.14 lightcurves. In both cases, we apply the Fourier fitting to deal with the observations given by. We repeat similar simulation process using fourteen lightcurves (case A1) and eight lightcurves (case A2), respectively. In case A1, the rotation period of the primary is determined to be 3.5943 h. Given the unaltered period and free pole orientation, we retrieve the shape model with the best-fit pole orientation at $\lambda=238.8^\circ$ and $\beta=-87.6^\circ$. In case A2, we employ eight lightcurves that has been analyzed by Fourier fitting. In this case, the best-fit solution of the spin period and pole orientation is determined to be 3.5947 h, $\lambda=234.5^\circ$ and $\beta=-82.0^\circ$, respectively. In comparison with three groups of solutions, we note that the outcomes of pole orientation and spin period do not vary dramatically. However, as the data in 2009 and 2011 appear to be sparse, simply covering the primary's spin period much shorter than one rotational period, thus it is hard to precisely derive the short-period component using Fourier fitting with these data. Therefore, in this work we finally utilize the first seven lightcurves case to determine the shape model of 1996 FG3 (see Figure 2). Recently, Arecibo and Goldstone completed the radar measurements for 1996 FG3, where both primary and the secondary are revealed. Compared with the radar images, we find that our derived shape model from optical observations bears a resemblance in some directions, which gives an indication of that the resultant shape of 1996 FG3 herein is reasonable. It is worth noting that the equatorial ridge of the primary revealed by the radar images is clearly seen in Figure [\[shape\]](#shape){reference-type="ref" reference="shape"}. Moreover, the upper section in the bottom right panel seems to be consistent with the radar images. # Simulation ## Observation Data In this work, three sets of thermal-IR data of 1996 FG3 are utilized, summarized in Tables [3](#obs1){reference-type="ref" reference="obs1"}, [4](#obs2){reference-type="ref" reference="obs2"} and [5](#obs3){reference-type="ref" reference="obs3"}. These three groups of published data are provided by and, respectively. In addition, the observation geometry at three epochs are also described in Table [6](#obsgeo){reference-type="ref" reference="obsgeo"}, which are adpoted to be input parameters in the calculation of thermophysical model. ## Model Parameters For a thermophysical model like ATPM, several physical parameters are required in the computation, such as the shape model, roughness, albedo, thermal inertia, thermal conductivity, thermal emissivity, heliocentric distance, geocentric distance, solar phase angle and so on. As the orbit of 1996 FG3 is accurately measured by optical observations, thus the heliocentric distance, geocentric distance and phase angle are not difficult to obtain. Although the shape model of 1996 FG3 is derived from its lightcurves, we still do not know the actual physical size of 1996 FG3, because the shape model simply shows the relative dimensions of the asteroid. However, fortunately, the effective diameter $D_{\rm eff}$, geometric albedo $p_{v}$, and absolute visual magnitude $H_{v}$ of an asteroid can be evaluated by the following equation: \[D_{\rm eff}=\frac{1329\times 10^{-H_{v}/5}}{\sqrt{p_{v}}}~(\rm km) ~, \label{Deff}\] thus if two of the parameters are available, the third is easy to achieve. However, the temperature distribution over the surface of an asteroid depends mainly on rotation state, thermal inertia, albedo and roughness, while the temperature distribution of sub-surface is greatly affected by thermal conductivity. Therefore, we will make use of surface temperature to derive a mean thermal inertia for 1999 FG3, and further to estimate a profile for thermal conductivity, so as to obtain a more accurate subsurface temperature distribution, then the regolith depth may be estimated more accurately. All required parameters are summarized in Table [\[phpa\]](#phpa){reference-type="ref" reference="phpa"}, except free parameters. Herein, we actually have three free parameters---thermal inertia, albedo or effective diameter and surface roughness, which are investigated in the fitting process. ## Fitting Procedure As 1996 FG3 is a binary system, and the rotation period of the secondary is 16.14 h, different from that of the primary, the flux of the secondary is modeled independently in the fitting procedure. The overall thermal flux predictions is a summation of that from both the primary and the secondary. Actually, the consideration of the flux of the secondary has no significant affect on the result, despite a very slight influence on the effective diameter. Thus, to simplify fitting process, we assume that the secondary shares an identical shape model with the primary. On the other hand, the observations do not spatially resolve 1996 FG3. In this sense, the ATPM-derived diameter $D_{\rm eff}$ is simply considered to be an effective diameter of a sphere with the combined cross-sectional area of two components. Thus, we suppose that the component diameters $D_{1}$ and $D_{2}$ are related to $D_{\rm eff}$ via $D_{1}^{2}+D_{2}^{2}=D_{\rm eff}^{2}$. Surface roughness could be modeled by a fractional coverage of hemispherical craters, symbolized by $f_{\rm R}$, while the remaining fraction, $1-f_{\rm R}$, represents a smooth flat surface on the asteroid. In this work, we adopt a low resolution hemispherical crater model that consists of 132 facets and 73 vertexes, following a similar treatment as shown in. As well-known, the sunlight is fairly easier to be scattered on a rough surface than a smooth flat region, thus the roughness can decrease the effective Bond albedo. For the above-mentioned surface roughness model, the effective Bond albedo $A_{\rm eff}$ of a rough surface can be related to the Bond albedo $A_{\rm B}$ of a smooth flat surface and the roughness $f_{\rm R}$ by \[A_{\rm eff}=f_{\rm R}\frac{A_{\rm B}}{2-A_{\rm B}}+(1-f_{\rm R})A_{\rm B}~. \label{aeffab}\] On the other hand, the effective Bond albedo $A_{\rm eff}$ is related to geometric albedo $p_{v}$ by \[A_{\rm eff}=p_{v}q_{\rm ph}~, \label{aeffpv}\] where $q_{\rm ph}$ is a phase integral that can be approximated by \[q_{\rm ph}=0.290+0.684G~, \label{qph}\] where $G$ is the slope parameter in the $H, G$ magnitude system of, we chose $H=17.833\pm0.024$, $G=-0.041\pm0.005$ in our fitting process. Thus each surface roughness and effective diameter leads to a unique $A_{\rm eff}$ and $A_{\rm B}$. In order to simplify our modeling process, a set of thermal inertia are selected in the range $0\sim500\rm~Jm^{-2}s^{-0.5}K^{-1}$. And for each thermal inertia case, a series of surface roughness and effective diameter are calculated to examine which may act as best-fit parameters with respect to the observations. As ATPM requires a Bond albedo $A_{B}$ for each facet element to simulate temperature distribution, thus an $A_{B}=0.01$ is herein assumed to be initials for two components of 1996 FG3. For each thermal inertia $\Gamma$, effective diameter $D_{\rm eff}$ and surface roughness $f_{\rm R}$ case, a flux correction factor $FCF$ is defined as \[FCF=\frac{1-A_{B,now}}{1-A_{B,initial}}~,\] where $A_{B,now}$ is calculated by inversion of equation ([\[aeffab\]](#aeffab){reference-type="ref" reference="aeffab"}), to fit the observations, and then an error-weighted least-squares fit is defined as \[L^{2}=\sum^{n}_{i=1}\Big(\frac{FCF(f_{\rm R},D_{\rm eff})F_{\rm model} -F_{\rm obs}(\lambda_{n})}{\sigma_{\lambda_{n}}}\Big)^{2}~, \label{l2}\] which can be obtained to evaluate the fitting degree of our model results to the observations. It should be noticed that the predicted model flux $F_{\rm model}=F_{\rm model}(\Gamma,f_{\rm R},D_{\rm eff},\lambda_{n})$ is a rotationally averaged profile, because the rotation phase of 1996 FG3 was unknown at the time of observations. The fitting outcomes are summarized in Table [\[fitl2\]](#fitl2){reference-type="ref" reference="fitl2"}. In the table, the $L^{2}$ values are relevant to each thermal inertia, roughness fraction and effective diameter. Roughly speaking, the $L^{2}$ values imply a thermal inertia in the range $0\sim150\rm~Jm^{-2}s^{-0.5}K^{-1}$. To acquire a likely solution from Table [\[fitl2\]](#fitl2){reference-type="ref" reference="fitl2"}, the minimum error-weighted least-squares $L^{2}$ value need to be determined and an uncertain range of the minimum $L^{2}$ is then taken into account. Firstly, the $\Gamma\sim L^{2}$ curves are drawn to understand how $L^{2}$ alters with free parameters, including thermal inertia, roughness fraction and effective diameter according to Table [\[fitl2\]](#fitl2){reference-type="ref" reference="fitl2"} (see Figure [\[frl2\]](#frl2){reference-type="ref" reference="frl2"}). Secondly, the minimum $L^{2}$ is determined from a cubic spline interpolation curve for each lowest $L^{2}$ and the related free parameter in Figure [\[frl2\]](#frl2){reference-type="ref" reference="frl2"}. Furthermore, the minimum $L^{2}$, symbolized as $L_{\rm min}^{2}$, arises at the case $f_{\rm R}=0.8$, $\Gamma=80\rm~Jm^{-2}s^{-0.5}K^{-1}$ and $D_{\rm eff}=1.69\rm~km$. As the outcomes are derived from a combined fit to three observation epochs, the $L^{2}$ profiles thereby vary in a relatively broader range. If a range of $50\% ~ L_{\rm min}^{2}$ is assumed, then a significant uncertainty can be obtained. Hence, the final adopted best-fit parameters for 1996 FG3 are summarized in Table [7](#outcome){reference-type="ref" reference="outcome"}. In the following section, we will then utilize the above derived parameters to evaluate the surface thermal environment of 1996 FG3 at its aphelion and perihelion respectively. # Surface Thermal Environment ## Temperature Distribution On the basis of the derived shape model from the observations, the physical parameters in Table [\[phpa\]](#phpa){reference-type="ref" reference="phpa"}, and the thermal inertia determined from the ATPM fitting process, we attempt to simulate the temperature variation of 1996 FG3 over a rotation period. In Figures [\[aph-per\]](#aph-per){reference-type="ref" reference="aph-per"} and [\[gtemp\]](#gtemp){reference-type="ref" reference="gtemp"}, we show the equatorial temperature and global surface temperature distribution for the primary at aphelion and perihelion, respectively. Figure [\[aph-per\]](#aph-per){reference-type="ref" reference="aph-per"} shows the equatorial temperature distribution of 1996 FG3 at its aphelion and perihelion respectively. The maximum temperature does not appear at the solar point, but delays about $24^\circ$, and the minimum temperature occurs just a little after the local sunrise, delaying about $18^\circ$. Such delay effect between absorption and emission is actually caused by the non-zero thermal inertia and the finite rotation speed of the asteroid. On the other hand, according to Figure [\[aph-per\]](#aph-per){reference-type="ref" reference="aph-per"}, the equatorial temperature of 1996 FG3 may range from $180$ to $480\rm~K$ over a whole orbit period. Figure [\[gtemp\]](#gtemp){reference-type="ref" reference="gtemp"} shows the global surface temperature distribution of 1996 FG3 at its aphelion (left) and perihelion (right) respectively. In this figure, z-axis represents the asteroid's spin axis, and x-axis points to the Sun in the framework of an asteroid center body-fixed coordinate system. The profile of temperature in Figure [\[gtemp\]](#gtemp){reference-type="ref" reference="gtemp"} is shown by the index of color-bar, and the red region represents the facets are sunlit, while the blue facets are referred to relatively low temperature. ## Regolith As mentioned previously, 1996 FG3 is chosen to be a backup target for MarcoPolo-R sample return mission. Hence, we still show great interest in the surface feature of the asteroid whether there exists a regolith layer on its surface. Apparently, thermal inertia is associated with the surface properties, where it will be helpful to infer the presence or absence of loose material on the surface. As known to all, fine dust has a very low thermal inertia about $30\rm~Jm^{-2}s^{-0.5}K^{-1}$, lunar regolith owns a relatively low value about $50\rm~Jm^{-2}s^{-0.5}K^{-1}$, a sandy regolith like Eros' soil bears a value of $100-200\rm~Jm^{-2}s^{-0.5}K^{-1}$, but coarse sand occupies a higher thermal inertia profile $\sim$ $400\rm~Jm^{-2}s^{-0.5}K^{-1}$ (e.g., Itokawa's Muses-Sea Regio). In comparison with the above materials, bare rock has an extremely higher thermal inertia more than $2500\rm~Jm^{-2}s^{-0.5}K^{-1}$. In this work, the thermal inertia of 1996 FG3 is estimated to be $80\pm40\rm~Jm^{-2}s^{-0.5}K^{-1}$. Consequently, it is quite natural for one to suppose that the surface of 1996 FG3 may be covered by loose materials, perhaps a mixture of dust, fragmentary rocky debris and sand. In other word, there may exist a regolith layer on the surface of 1996 FG3, according to the above derived thermal inertia. Theoretically, the so-called \"skin depth\": \[l_{s}=\sqrt{\frac{\kappa}{\rho c\omega}}\] is usually used to characterize the grain size of regolith. According to the definition of thermal inertia $\Gamma=\sqrt{\rho c\kappa}$. The profiles of mass density $\rho$, thermal conductivity $\kappa$, and specific heat capacity $c$ may be estimated from the above derived thermal inertia. Since the thermal conductivity $\kappa$ depends on particle size and temperature much more than $\rho$ and $c$, we attempt to assume a constant value for $\rho$ and $c$, and then estimate $\kappa$ from the above derived thermal inertia. Next, the estimation of skin depth will be easily acquired. has derived the mass density to be $1.4^{+1.5}_{-0.6}$ g cm$^{-3}$. Since the above derived value $\Gamma=80\pm40\rm~Jm^{-2}s^{-0.5}K^{-1}$ is similar to that of the Moon despite a little higher, we assume the specific heat capacity of 1996 FG3 is similar to that of the Moon, about $1000\rm~Jkg^{-1}K^{-1}$. Then the thermal conductivity $\kappa$ is estimated to be $0.001\sim0.01\rm~Jkg^{-1}K^{-1}$ and $l_{s}$ is $1.3\sim3.9\rm~mm$. Such small $\kappa$ and $l_{s}$ obviously support the possible existence of loose material or regolith over the surface of 1996 FG3. However, the depth of the regolith layer, covered on the asteroid's surface, attracts our great attention. We carried out simulations to explore the regolith depth versus temperature distribution of sub-surface for $\Gamma=40$, $80$ and $120\rm~Jm^{-2}s^{-0.5}K^{-1}$, respectively (see Figure [\[regolith\]](#regolith){reference-type="ref" reference="regolith"}). The left panels show the results are obtained when the asteroid moves at aphelion, while the right panels exhibit those at perihelion. In each panel, two profiles, which are respectively, plotted by solid line (local midday) and dashed line (local midnight), show that the sub-surface temperature changes with the depth (the distance from the surface). In these panels, the temperature goes down as the depth increases at local noon, while it goes up as the depth increases at local midnight until a certain depth, where two curves are overlapped. This phenomenon results from the internal boundary equation [\[inbc\]](#inbc){reference-type="ref" reference="inbc"}. The figure shows the temperature distribution of the very loose regolith layer, the thermal conductivity of which may be in the range of $0.001\sim0.01\rm~Jkg^{-1}K^{-1}$. And the minimum depth of this layer may be estimated from Figure [\[regolith\]](#regolith){reference-type="ref" reference="regolith"}. Herein the regolith depth of the very surface of 1996 FG3 is reckoned to be $5\sim20\rm~mm$. This minimum value of regolith depth may be considered as a reference for the design of a spacecraft if a lander is equipped. On the other hand, the existence of regolith over the surface of the primary of 1996 FG3 actually does good to a sample return mission. # Discussion and Conclusion In this work, we have derived a new 3D convex shape model of the primary of 1996 FG3 from the published lightcurves, where the best-fit orientation of its spin axis is determined to be $\lambda =237.7^\circ$ and $\beta=-83.8^{\circ}$, with a rotation period of $\sim$ 3.5935 h. On the basis of the numerical codes independently developed according to thermophysical model, we apply the shape model and the required input physical parameters to fit three sets of mid-infrared measurements for 1996 FG3. Herein we summarize the major physical properties obtained for the asteroid as follows: the geometric albedo and effective diameter are, respectively, $p_{v}=0.045\pm0.002$ and $D_{\rm eff}=1.69^{+0.05}_{-0.02}\rm~km$; the diameters of the primary and secondary are calculated to be $D_{1}=1.63^{+0.04}_{-0.03}\rm~km$ and $D_{2}=0.45^{+0.04}_{-0.03}\rm~km$, respectively. Moreover, the thermal inertia $\Gamma$ is also determined to be a low value of $80\pm40\rm~Jm^{-2}s^{-0.5}K^{-1}$, whereas the roughness fraction $f_{\rm R}$ is estimated to be $0.8^{+0.2}_{-0.4}$. From the simulations, we find that low thermal inertia ($<100\rm~Jm^{-2}s^{-0.5}K^{-1}$) would make a perfect fitting to the VISIR observations on 19 January, 2011 (with respect to a low phase angle), whereas the observations obtained at higher phase angles (Table 3 and 4) are very sensitive to $f_{\rm R}$, thereby leading to a best-fit solution with the case of large roughness fraction. Given that we simultaneously perform the computation using the combination data (Tables 3,4 and 5), a broad range of $L^{2}$ profiles are obtained in the fitting. Furthermore, to acquire a significant uncertainty for the outcomes, we finally choose a $50\%$ range of the minimum $L^{2}$ to determine the best-fit solution for thermal inertia of 1996 FG3. On the other hand, via the simultaneous fitting with these observations at different solar phase angles, the degeneracy of solutions between thermal inertia and roughness is removed, making it capable to determine the estimation for thermal inertia and roughness separately. The ratio of \"observation/model\" (see Figures [\[rphase\]](#rphase){reference-type="ref" reference="rphase"} and [\[rspectra\]](#rspectra){reference-type="ref" reference="rspectra"}) is a good indicator that examines how the results from the model match the observations at various phase angles and wavelengths. Hence, this enables us to conclude that the fitting process is correct and the derived results are reliable. According to the ATPM fitting results shown in Table [7](#outcome){reference-type="ref" reference="outcome"}, the evaluated large roughness fraction $f_{\rm R}=0.8^{+0.2}_{-0.4}$ for 1996 FG3 may suggest a rough surface on the asteroid. However, the asteroid's mean surface thermal inertia is estimated to be a relative low value. Then the question arises--why this asteroid bears such a low thermal inertia with a very rough surface. As the adopted roughness model in the ATPM is assumed to be an irregularity degree of a surface at scales smaller than the global shape model resolution (like a facet area) but larger than the thermal skin depth. Therefore, 1996 FG3 would be likely to have a rough surface, which may or may not include craters of any size, and a porous or dusty material. The recent work of suggested the surface of 1996 FG3 may be a compact one, with the existence of regions showing different roughness, similar to that of Itokawa. Hence, there would be possible for an asteroid to possess a large roughness fraction and low thermal inertia. However, the NEA binaries may have a high averaged thermal inertia of $\Gamma\approx480\pm70\rm~Jm^{-2}s^{-0.5}K^{-1}$, indicating that high thermal inertia could be supportive to the binary formation scenario due to YORP mechanism. In this work, we have derived thermal inertia $\Gamma=80\pm40\rm~Jm^{-2}s^{-0.5}K^{-1}$ for 1996 FG3, and it appears below their estimation. Nevertheless, it is still likely for a rubble-pile asteroid to have a low thermal inertia, thereby remaining a rough surface during a long dynamical evolution due to space-weathering and regolith migration. In this sense, the binary 1996 FG3 may also be produced via the YORP rotation acceleration effect at a very earlier time, but retain a roughness surface from then, resulting in the distribution of a great many meter-size (or even smaller) craters on the surface. Thus, these tiny craters might be covered or surrounded by loose materials, making it appear a low thermal inertia. showed that the average thermal inertia for NEAs may be $\Gamma=200\pm40\rm~Jm^{-2}s^{-0.5}K^{-1}$. Figure [\[inertia-size\]](#inertia-size){reference-type="ref" reference="inertia-size"} exhibits the variation of mean thermal inertia with the size of asteroids from the observations. From this figure, we observe that the value of thermal inertia for 1996 FG3 given in this work (labeled in red) deviates a little from the prediction profile. In addition, our outcome for the binary system is a bit lower than that of. This results from that we perform the combination fitting with additional thermal-IR observations (Tables 3 and 4), which may provide new insight for the thermal study of binary asteroids. In conclusion, the surface of 1996 FG3's primary may be a very rough surface, on which loose materials such as fine dust, fragmentary rocky debris, sands or most likely a stuff of their mixture are covered, composing a kind of regolith. The depth of the possible regolith layer is evaluated to be approximately $5\sim20\rm~mm$. Such implication may provide substantial information for engineering of the sample return mission, for example, a selection of landing area. However, we should place special emphasis on that this estimation is simply a roughly minimum value of the regolith layer over the very surface of the asteroid rather than a sort of megaregolith below the layer. Since the thermal conductivity $\kappa$ of the megaregolith has a complicated relationship with the depth below the surface, thereby we cannot simulate the temperature distribution accurately from a one-dimension thermophysical model. On the other hand, the formation mechanism for 1996 FG3 is still a mystery, which the YORP acceleration mechanism may play a role in producing its shape and orbital configuration. In short, the investigations by future space missions will throw new light on the formation scenario for this asteroid.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-22T02:10:25', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5357', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5357'}
# Introduction To a large part, marketing can be summarized as giving consumers what they want. In the right contexts, a proven method is to do this informally. While informal, heard it through the grapevine communication channels have always been important to marketing niche products and in conquering new markets, social media enables marketers to use word of mouth propagation for more established mainstream products as well. Since word of mouth is a very powerful vehicle to transport marketing messages, marketers seek to harness the power of social media to enlist users not only as consumers but as propagators and endorsers of products, to e.g. make them partners in the co-creation process of a brand. As Kitchen demonstrates, social media can be used very cost effectively, enabling marketers to reach millions of users with only a negligible amount of resources. It is therefore tempting to use social media marketing efforts to spread across traditional borders and reach for new markets. However, there is a risk associated with this: communication needs to be careful when crossing borders venturing into the realms of other cultures. A lot has been written about the need for culturally-aware communication and the management of global brands in a globalized economy. It is generally recommended, to develop culturally similar markets when moving one's brand abroad. This is, because culturally accurate (i.e. functioning) translations of marketing and branding messages are very complex to produce. In this paper we seek to examine how the access to word of mouth propagation changes across cultures. To answer this question we employed data and sentiment mining techniques to the social media posts of two brands (BMW and Audi) in two countries (Germany and the US) and compared the factors that contributed to these posts being endorsed by users. This paper is organized as follows. We will first review the literature on social media, our target platform Google+ and how marketing is done there. We then turn our attention to cultural aspects of communication and marketing. We complete this paper's theoretical part with a concise review of sentiment mining methodology. We then present the method behind our data harvest/generation and introduce the statistical models we optimized. Finally, we discuss our findings and close with some concluding remarks that point to further research. # Social Media Marketing In this section we focus on a rather novel arena of marketing: social media marketing. To this end we will give a short run-down on social media and then introduce a recently becoming increasingly popular social media platform: Google+. Because of its comparably young age, Google+ has not yet received widespread attention in academia, apart from its technical aspects. This is perhaps due to its somewhat differing implementation of classical social media. Social media and online social networks refer to a rather new phenomenon in human, internet-based communication. Diverging from a dogma that had been valid for about two decades, users themselves started out using blogs to regularly provide content themselves. While blogs were and still are appealing to users interested in writing longer texts, social media as a mass phenomenon took off only after the introduction of communities centered around profiles, frequent status updates and shared content creation. Today, leading examples of social media platforms are Facebook, Twitter, vKontakte and Google+, to name but a few. While the implementation details differ from a technical point of view, there is a common theoretical framework. In the center of social media are user following relationships. They can be thought of as (directed) graphs linking up users. From a network theoretical point of view, this graph has small world properties and has a node distribution that follows a power law, thus being very similar to actual, offline human behavior. This relationship is called following and implies that messages sent by a user will be pushed into the stream of news all of her followers receive. While some social media platforms require reciprocal fellowship relations (e.g. Facebook, LinkedIn), others don't (e.g. Google+). Once a message gets pushed to a user, that user can decide on how to further treat the message. Besides the obvious ignoring, a user has two levels of endorsement to choose from: liking and resharing. Endorsements are then pushed further downstream the user's network. The lesser form of endorsement, liking, does usually not contain the endorsed message but only the fact that a message from the original author was endorsed and a link to that message. User interfaces will also show likes not as prominently as reshares. With reshares the entire original message gets pushed into the streams of the user's followers, just as if the user had posted the message herself. Another corner stone of social media are profile pages. There individuals and companies can maintain a presence with information related to them. Most platforms distinguish between profiles for humans and pages for businesses and brands. However, conceptually, they are the same. Google's implementation of a social media platform, termed Google+ and albeit being quite young, is increasing rapidly in popularity. Here, following relationships are organized in circles, that act like address books or friend lists and allow for a more targeted resharing. While implementing a lesser form of endorsement (+1ing), it is not quite clear how that endorsement functions. For one, it is used in Google's main business of information retrieval by allowing users to discover search results that have been endorsed by the people they follow. +1s also contribute to Google internal popularity metrics, i.e. recommending the circling of possible contacts based on similar +1ing behavior. Finally, +1ed posts might show up in a user's stream, if Google deems them algorithmically interesting. However, the exact mechanics have not yet been published by Google. Using social media for marketing purposes is an obvious choice: being able to interact with consumers in channels usually associated with friends and interesting people we follow, makes for a very attractive marketing context. This turns marketing presence into consumer activation. A priceless achievement. Added to this is the possibility of marketing messages being reshared, thus profiting from traditional offline word-of-mouth benefits. Under these terms, marketers must aim to maximize the resharing of their messages. It is useful to think of the individual user as a filter through which a message must pass in order to reach further into the network of users. A lot of research effort has been put into finding predictors for the expected reshare count of a message. Message sentiment is identified by as crucial predictors for resharing counts as is message length. Temporal proximity and time of day are factors named in 's contribution. # Cultural Aspects of Marketing Starting with Geert Hofstede's massive and groundbreaking survey of intercultural communication, cultural aspects quickly became important when adapting marketing messages to local audiences of consumers. Applying Hofstede's insights to marketing, come to the conclusion that marketing messages must be adapted to the cultural expectations of consumers for them to function. When looking at marketing in social media, this should also be true. Consumers organized into localized brand pages should differ in their preferences on marketing messages, just as they would differ in offline communication. From Hofstede's difference matrix, it is to be expected to find different marketing message preferences in the dimensions of Individuality and Uncertainty avoidance for our cases of Germany and the US. These differences should express themselves in terms of the importance of the filtering criteria per country, as introduced above. In the next section we will review how sentiment mining can help in providing message characteristics for discriminating along the lines of cultural preferences. ## Sentiment Mining Sentiment analysis and opinion mining are sub-fields of the area of text mining, see e.g.. It is a classification task and represents the computational study of sentiments, subjectivity, appraisal, and emotions expressed in text. Companies usually spend huge amounts of money to find consumer opinions using consultants, surveys, and focus groups. A cleverly implemented sentiment mining tool supports such companies to save money. An opinion is simply a positive or negative sentiment, view, attitude, emotion, or appraisal about an entity or an aspect of the entity from an opinion holder. The sentiment orientation (sentiment polarity) of an opinion can be positive, negative, or neutral (no opinion). Besides in the (sentiment) polarity of a respective Google+ post, we are interested in the emotionality of a posting. However there is no agreed set of basic emotions of people among researchers. Parrott identifies six main emotions, i.e. love, joy, surprise, anger, sadness, and fear, whereby the strengths of opinions and sentiments are sometimes related to certain emotions, e.g., joy, anger. We apply the R package `sentiment` to compute the following emotions: anger, disgust, fear, joy, sadness, and surprise. ## Data & Methods The generation of the data set used in this analysis started out with the identification and designation of Google+ company pages. We settled for two German companies in the automotive industry, BMW and Audi, as German car brands in different countries make a good middle ground between niche and mainstream markets. Measuring culture of a company or any individual can be elusive. It is possible to use proxies like country of residence or nationality to locate an individual culturally. We are following a similar path by looking at the companies' respective local Google+ pages. We therefore chose the localized variants of the Google+ pages of Audi and BMW for Germany and the US.[^1] The following Table [2](#tab:followers){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:followers"} shows the popularities of the respective companies' local Google+ pages. Google offers two metrics to measure the popularity of a page. One is the circle count, i.e. the number of people that have subscribed to push updates of that page. The other one is the +1 count that aggregates the circle count with people +1ing the page or interacting with it in other ways.[^2] In order to build up a data base of marketing messages, the last 100 posts of each of these pages were retrieved. Due to different posting frequencies, the extent of the data's retrospection varies. Table [3](#tab:ages){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:ages"} summarizes these differences. From these figures it is obvious, that English language content for the US versions of the G+ presences is provided far more frequently than for their German counterparts. In the following we will describe the data set in greater detail. Table [4](#tab:sumTab){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:sumTab"} gives an overview of directly measured message properties. The variable Age describes how many days in the past the message had been posted. This obviously influences the number of reshares a message received or could receive. Message length is a property that in the past has often been used successfully to predict message reshare counts. As mentioned above, another aspect that--potentially--influences the frequency with which a message is being reshared is the time of day of the original post and the day in the week. For this analysis we recorded the date and time of the original post (and converted the UTC timezone reported by Google to EST for the US and CET for Germany) and distilled the day of week from it as well as the discrete factorization of the time of day part that is given in Table [5](#tab:todf){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:todf"}. While we did record the number of comments and +1s every message received, these forms of interaction and propagation are not considered any further in this analysis for their ambiguous meaning in marketing contexts as detailed above. Aside from these directly measured attributes of a message, we also computed every message's sentiment. German language messages (from the local German G+ pages) were automatically translated using the Google Translate API[^3]. While automatic translation might not always work perfectly, wrong translations would only increase statistical variation and thus lead to conservative hypothesis test results. Therefore, effects that can be found using automatic translation are very likely to indeed occur in the sample population. All computations (and indeed the harvesting for that matter) were done using R version 3.0.2 and the `plusser` extension package. Computation and visualization was aided by the R packages `ggplot2` and `MASS`. As detailed above, sentiment analysis extends into two distinct areas: polarity and emotions. The used software package offers to compute the positive---negative ratio, the ratio of the absolute log-likelihoods of the message expressing a positive or negative sentiment, to measure polarity of a message. A value of 1 indicates a neutral statement, while values smaller than 1 point towards a negative statement. Measuring the involved emotions is a little bit more complicated. Here, six dimensions of frequently occurring emotions have been identified and for every message the log-likelihood of it reflecting these emotions is computed. Table [6](#tab:senTab){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:senTab"} gives an overview of the distribution of the sentiment variables across the entire data set. There is a considerable difference in the frequency and volume of messages being reshared between both countries, as is demonstrated by Fig. [\[fig:nR-diffs-abs\]](#fig:nR-diffs-abs){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:nR-diffs-abs"}. In order to explain--at least partially--these differences, we use negative binomial models with a logistic link function. The negative binomial model is an extension to the more familiar Poisson regression model. The latter frequently suffers from overdispersion, that is its sample variance exceeds its sample mean. It is possible to justify the appropriateness of a negative binomial model over a Poisson regression model, using a $\chi^2$-test. In order to model the reshare rate of a message (as opposed to raw counts of reshares), one has to take into account the potential exposure of a message. This is directly affected by the number of followers a G+ page has and the age of the message: the more followers to a page and the longer the message has been online, the more people are likely to have come across it. These measurement windows or base references are included as log offset terms in the models. For developing the model, we combine model enhancement with backward selection based on AIC. We start out with a simple model using the classical covariates as described above and optimizing it using backward selection (M1). In a next step, we introduce Country (US being the reference category) as an interaction variable and employ backward selection again (M2). Finally, we include the variables from our sentiment analysis (M3). All models were tested for the appropriateness of a negative binomial specification using aforementioned $\chi^2$-test. In all models, the logarithm of message age is used as an offset to model exposure. For models that do not contain the variable country, the logarithm of the number of followers of a G+ page is included as an additional offset. # Results In this section we present the results of our analysis. Tables [8](#tab:m1){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:m1"} through [10](#tab:m3){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:m3"} list the estimated parameters, their standard errors, and p-values for all three models. Note however, that the p-values are given for reference purposes only. We are aware that we are not working with a random sample here and p-values are therefore ultimately meaningless. This is not problematic, as we are following a data mining approach (as opposed to a classical inferential statistics approach) and are interested in real observations and real differences and not estimates that generalize towards a larger population. In a first step we sought to assess the classical covariates established in the literature. Stepwise selection found that only time-and date-related covariates are important parameters at this step. When allowing the stepwise selection algorithm to choose from interaction terms with the country of the G+ page, the daytime related term in the model becomes dependent on the country. The change in sign is a clear indication for the plausibility of the additional interaction. Model fit increased as well with $AIC_{M2} = 3004$ compared to $AIC_{M1} = 3113$. The addition of the message sentiment variables improves the fit only marginally: $AIC_{M3} = 2994$. However, two sentiment variables' effects on the reshare rate differ across countries: Anger and Surprise. # Discussion These models allow for a number of insights. Foremost, we find in line with most literature on message propagation in social networks, that time of day has a highly significant effect on the number of rebroadcasts a message will receive. It is noteworthy, however, that the size of the effect changes with the country of the observation. Apparently, German G+ pages don't benefit from nighttime posts as much as Americans do. Table [11](#tab:eff.tod){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:eff.tod"} presents the marginal effects of posting time across country. Day of week also has a very significant influence here. Messages sent out on Tuesdays or Saturdays will receive increased attention. This effect is consistent across all models and does not depend on country. Finally, there is another effect here that is dependent on culture: the role of emotion, more precisely of Anger and Surprise. There is a rather strong effect testifying to the German distaste of surprises. The expected count of reshares for a message increases with its notion of surprise in the US, while in Germany surprises slightly decrease these chances. A similar observation holds for Anger. Fig. [\[fig:eff.plot.both\]](#fig:eff.plot.both){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:eff.plot.both"} exhibits the sizes of these effects. In light of the differences in culture observed by Hofstede, we found evidence for message traits that are consistent across diverse cultures differing in the individuality and uncertainty domains. This is chiefly the preference of certain weekdays and the perhaps obvious rejection of disgusting emotions embedded in advertising messages. Other message and communication properties, time of day when the message was sent and angry or surprising sentiments, differ between the two cultures. Consumers in the US seem to prefer messages that are being sent out at nighttime, while their German counterparts are rather indifferent in that regard. This might be a sign for America's highly valued individualism and work ethics that would postpone past-time activities like checking Google+ pages to the nighttime. German distaste of surprises and angry messages can as well be explained in terms of Hofstede's cultural dimensions: Uncertainty is something that is immanent to surprises and also anger poses certain risks. Germany's high level of uncertainty avoidance might explain the increased resharing of messages exhibiting neither anger nor surprise. # Conclusion In light of these findings, it becomes clear that marketers must consider the culture of their audience even in an online arena. Alas, as Kitchen puts it: > "Social media can be a proxy for consumer ethnography, the anthropological approach of understanding a culture by becoming part of it, because they provide virtual access to an often unguarded engagement with quite intimate aspects of consumer experience." And who would not be cautious when treading with marketing intentions in intimate places? Cross-cultural communication might be hindered by a number of factors: ethnocentrism (i.e. ignoring other cultures), parochialism (focusing too much on local peculiarities) and stereotyping (because reality can be to complex to model). While it has become clear in the last few decades that ethnocentrism is a deadly sin for marketers and parochialism equally hinders effective campaigns, stereotyping is still all too familiar in marketing endeavors. After all, segmented target groups are defined by broad averages that marketers seek to please. And indeed, to avoid stereotyping, one needs not only to know the culture of a market, but to respect and adapt to individual consumers, wherever possible. We believe that this adaption is easier to be had than previously thought: with the massive amounts of data available from social media platforms, marketers can seek to understand consumers more directly, away from cultural considerations, and just watch them forwarding and endorsing messages. It is this observation that empowers us to learn from consumers what they want. [^1]: Even though Audi and BMW are both German brands, their main Google+ pages are international fronts. So both localized version are comparable in catering to local audiences. [^2]: C.f. <http://googleblog.blogspot.co.at/2011/12/google-few-big-improvements-before-new.html>. [^3]: C.f. <https://developers.google.com/translate/>.	{'timestamp': '2014-04-17T02:09:33', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5726', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5726'}
# Introduction {#sec:Introduction} In flux-limited synoptic surveys, a few percent of all discovered supernovae (SNe) show narrow-to intermediate-width ($\sim 30$--$3000$ km s$^{-1}$) hydrogen and helium emission lines. These are dubbed Type IIn SNe (Schlegel 1990; Filippenko 1997; Kiewe et al. 2012) and probably have massive progenitors (e.g., Gal-Yam & Leonard 2009). Their emission lines likely originate from relatively abundant circumstellar material (CSM) around the SN progenitor star (e.g., Chevalier & Fransson 1994; Chugai & Danziger 1994; Chugai et al. 2003; Ofek et al. 2007, 2010, 2014a; Smith et al. 2008, 2009), ejected only a short time (of the order of months to decades) prior to the SN explosion (Dessart et al. 2009; Gal-Yam & Leonard 2009; Ofek et al. 2010; Ofek et al. 2013b). Several theoretical mechanisms have been suggested to explain this high mass loss in the final stages of stellar evolution (e.g., Rakavy et al. 1967; Woosley et al. 2007; Arnett & Meakin 2011; Chevalier 2012; Quataert & Shiode 2012; Shiode & Quataert 2013; Soker & Kashi 2013). Recently, five SNe with candidate pre-explosion outbursts (precursors) have been detected a few months to years prior to the SN explosion (Foley et al. 2007; Pastorello et al. 2007; Mauerhan et al. 2013a; Pastorello et al. 2013; Ofek et al. 2013b; Corsi et al. 2013; Fraser et al. 2013). In most cases these precursors were detected from SNe IIn, or closely related events. The frequency and properties of these precursors are critical for pinpointing the eruption mechanisms and understanding their effect on the eventual SN optical display, and may change our view of the final stages of massive star evolution. Therefore, we have conducted a search for precursor events in a sample of nearby SNe IIn for which we have pre-explosion observations from the Palomar Transient Factory (PTF[^1]; Law et al. 2009; Rau et al. 2009). Our sample contains 16 SNe IIn and we found precursors events for five of the SNe in our sample. For the first time, we estimate the rate of such events and show that they are common. Furthermore, we investigate possible correlations between the properties of the precursors and the SNe. The paper is organized as follows. We describe the SN sample in §[2](#sec:sample){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:sample"}, while the observations are presented in §[3](#sec:Observations){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:Observations"}. The methodology of precursor selection is discussed in §[4](#sec:selection){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:selection"} and our candidates are presented in §[5](#sec:Indiv){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:Indiv"}. We give our control-time estimate in §[6](#sec:Control){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:Control"}, and the precursor rate in §[7](#sec:rate){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:rate"}. The CSM mass estimate is discussed in §[8](#sec:CSM){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:CSM"}, the correlations between the SNe and precursor properties in §[9](#sec:Corr){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:Corr"}, and the results in §[10](#sec:Disc){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:Disc"}. # Sample {#sec:sample} Our sample is based on SNe IIn that show intermediate-width Balmer emission lines. From inspection of many SNe spectra obtained by PTF, we find that some SNe show this hallmark of SNe IIn at early times (a few days after the explosion), but these lines disappear on a time scale of a week. It is possible that these SNe also suffer from a moderate mass-loss rate prior to the explosion (e.g., Gal-Yam et al. 2014; Yaron et al. 2014). However, we exclude from our sample objects for which the spectra evolve into those of normal SNe II a few weeks after explosion. Examples for such objects include PTF 11iqb and PTF 10uls (Ofek et al. 2013a). Another important criterion for our SNe selection is that they have a large number of pre-explosion images from the PTF survey (Law et al. 2009; Rau et al. 2009). The existence of a large number of images is critical, as precursors may be relatively faint and it is desirable to coadd images in order to get a limiting magnitude that is deeper than that of the nominal survey. The SNe in our sample were found by the PTF as well as amateur astronomers, the Lick Observatory SN Search (LOSS; Li et al. 2000; Filippenko et al. 2001), and the Catalina Real-time Transient Survey (CRTS; Drake et al. 2009). We selected only nearby SNe, found within 400 Mpc, for which we have a decent number of pre-explosion observations. Table [\[tab:Samp\]](#tab:Samp){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:Samp"} list the 16 SNe in our sample. # Observations {#sec:Observations} We used PTF observations of the SNe in our sample. The PTF data reduction is described by Laher et al. (in prep.), and the photometric calibration is discussed by Ofek et al. (2012a, 2012b). Our search is based on image subtraction, and the flux residuals in the individual image subtractions for all the SNe in our sample are listed in Table [\[tab:MagFlux\]](#tab:MagFlux){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:MagFlux"}. Figures [\[fig:LCall1\]](#fig:LCall1){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:LCall1"}--[\[fig:LCall2\]](#fig:LCall2){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:LCall2"} show the light curves before explosion (first and third columns) and after explosion (second and fourth columns) of all the SNe in our sample. The pre-explosion light curve shows the median flux, relative to the reference image flux, in 15-days bins. Only bins containing $\ge6$ measurements are presented. The "+" signs shows the lower and upper 5$\sigma$ error relative to the reference image, while the solid lines connect consecutive bins. The errors where calculated using the bootstrap error on the mean. The vertical dashed lines show the estimated explosion time and time of maximum light (see Table [\[tab:Samp\]](#tab:Samp){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:Samp"}). We obtained spectra of our SNe using various telescopes, and the log of selected observations is presented in Table [\[tab:LogSpec\]](#tab:LogSpec){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:LogSpec"}. Some of the spectra are presented in this paper, while the rest are available electronically from the WISeREP website[^2] (Yaron & Gal-Yam 2012). # Precursor Candidate Selection {#sec:selection} In this section we describe the methods we used to find the precursor candidates. In §[4.1](#sec:Method){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:Method"} we present the search methods, while in §[4.2](#sec:tests){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:tests"} we discuss the reliability of our methodology and the false-alarm probability of the precursor candidates. ## Detection Methods {#sec:Method} Our candidate precursor selection is based on two channels. The first channel identifies precursors that were detected in a single image prior to the SN explosion, at the 6$\sigma$ level, without the need to coadd data. The second channel identifies precursors that were detected in the coadd data at the 5$\sigma$ level, using 15-day bins and using only bins that contain more than five flux measurements. The second channel significantly increases the sensitivity of PTF to precursor events by effectively coadding images of a SN location in time bins of 15 days. These time bins often include a large number of observations, extending to depths beyond the nominal PTF survey limiting magnitude, and reaching an $R$-band limiting magnitude of $< 23.5$. However, coadding images themselves in arbitrary time bins, and then conducting image-subtraction analysis on each trial bin, is a relatively expensive operation. Instead, we carefully apply image subtraction to individual images, and for each image we save the flux residual (negative or positive) at the location of the SN. We can then coadd the scalar flux residuals in any temporal combination we desire. This method was used in the case of SN 2010mc (PTF 10tel; Ofek et al. 2013b) and PTF 11qcj (Corsi et al. 2013). In the first channel, the uncertainty (i.e., $\sigma$) was estimated based on the Poisson noise propagated through the image-subtraction pipeline, while for the second channel, we calculated errors in each bin using the bootstrap technique (Efron 1982). We note that in most cases the bootstrap errors are consistent with the uncertainties derived based on the standard deviation of the points in each bin, and the expected Poisson noise. Therefore, our bootstrap error estimate suggests that the statistical uncertainties produced by the subtraction pipeline are realistic. In order to keep our search uniform we use only the PTF $R$-band data for our search and analysis, as PTF was primarily an $R$-band search. However, we also show the $g$-band data in the various plots where available; the amount of $g$-band data is small in comparison to the $R$-band. Candidate precursor events detected via one of the channels are discussed in §[5](#sec:Indiv){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:Indiv"}. In the initial search we do not attempt to use different time bins. This decision was made in order to limit the number of statistical experiments, which may affect the significance of our results. We note, however, that careful examination of specific events with longer time bins may contain precursor events that are not discussed here. For example, in Corsi et al. (2013) we report on a possible faint (absolute magnitude $-13$), several months long, brightening in the light curve of the Type Ic PTF 11qcj about 2.5 yr prior to its explosion. We note that several objects show points that are marginally below the lower 5$\sigma$ error threshold. It is possible that this is caused by real variability of the progenitor (e.g., Szczygieł et al. 2012), but here we concentrate on the outbursts rather than possible dimmings (see also §[5.6](#sec:PTF12cxj){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:PTF12cxj"}). ## Tests {#sec:tests} We performed several tests to verify the reliability of our methodology, especially against false alarms. In order to test detections made by the first channel (i.e., precursors detected in single images) we extracted the light curves at random positions on top of the same host galaxy, but shifted in position relative to the SN. We found that typically the probability to get a 6$\sigma$ detection is less than 0.1% per image. This is because the noise is not distributed normally (e.g., there are outliers) owing to occasional subtraction artefacts, cosmic rays, or asteroids in the field of view. For some SNe we have hundreds of images, and therefore the probability for a detection is on the order of a few percent per SN. Therefore, we consider as good candidates only events which have two consecutive detections (see §[5](#sec:Indiv){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:Indiv"}). Figure [\[fig:FakePositions_Res\]](#fig:FakePositions_Res){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:FakePositions_Res"} illustrates the histogram of "random"-position flux residuals in units of the flux-residual errors (i.e., $\sigma$) for the case of random positions around PTF 12cxj. It is apparent that even though there is a small excess around positive residuals, the probability of getting residuals which are bigger than 6$\sigma$ is small. In order to test detections made using the second channel (coadding flux residuals in 15-day time bins), for each SN we run 100 bootstrap simulations in which we mixed the flux residuals and times, and binned the data again in 15-day bins with the same selection criteria. The probability to have a single detection, based on these simulations, is listed in column FAP (false-alarm probability) in Table [\[tab:Samp\]](#tab:Samp){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:Samp"}. This probability may approach several percent for the entire sequence of images. However, after passing the selection criteria, each candidate is tested using various binning schemes, and only sources that show two consecutive independent detections are considered as good candidates (see §[5](#sec:Indiv){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:Indiv"}). We also search for correlations between the flux residuals and airmass, and flux residuals and the amplitude of the expected atmospheric refraction. Indeed, we find marginally significant correlations between these properties; however, they are too small to affect our results. To summarize, tests of our methodology suggest that the false-alarm probability for a single-point precursor detection, in an entire SN dataset, is $\sim5\%$ per object. In order to avoid false detections, we consider as precursor candidates only cases which show at least two detections clustered in time (i.e., assuming the noise is not correlated). # Candidate Precursor Events {#sec:Indiv} Our search yielded several SNe with candidate precursors. The precursors of PTF 10bjb, SN 2010mc, and SN 2011ht were clearly detected in individual images (first channel), while PTF 12cxj and PTF 10weh are weakly detected in coadded images (second channel). Although these two weak events pass all our tests and we consider them to be real, given the low signal-to-noise ratio of the detections, we also discuss our results assuming these two events are not real. Images of all the precursors are presented in Figure [\[fig:pre_image\]](#fig:pre_image){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:pre_image"}. ## PTF 10tel PTF 10tel is discussed in detail by Ofek et al. (2013b). For completeness, here we summarize the main properties of this event. The observations of PTF 10tel show an outburst about 40 days prior to the probable explosion. This precursor is detected via both the first and second channels. Our photometric and spectroscopic observations suggest that this event is produced by an energetic outburst releasing $\sim10^{-2}$ M$_{\odot}$ at typical velocities[^3] of 2000 km s$^{-1}$, and powered by at least $6\times10^{47}$ erg of energy. For completeness we show in Figure [\[fig:PTF10tel_LC\]](#fig:PTF10tel_LC){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:PTF10tel_LC"} the light curve of PTF 10tel from Ofek et al. (2013b). The physical parameters of this SN and precursor are listed in Table [\[tab:PrecProp\]](#tab:PrecProp){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:PrecProp"}. ## SN 2011ht SN 2011ht was discovered by Boles (2011) on 2011 Sep. 29.2 (UTC dates are used throughout this paper), at apparent magnitude 17.0. Based on a spectrum obtained on 2011 Sep. 30, Pastorello et al. (2011) suggested that it is a SN impostor sharing some similarities with the eruption of the luminous blue variable UGC 2773-OT (Smith et al. 2010). The spectrum shows narrow lines of H, Ca II (H&K and the near-infrared triplet, with P-Cyg profiles), and a forest of narrow Fe II absorption features. Also, prominent Na I D, Sc II, and Ba II features are detected in absorption. Prieto et al. (2011) obtained a further spectrum on 2011 Nov. 11.5. They reported substantial evolution with respect to the initial classification, with strong Balmer and weaker He I and Fe II emission lines superposed on a blue continuum. Based on the spectrum and the SN absolute magnitude, they suggested that it is likely a SN IIn. This is supported by Roming et al. (2012), who reported on the Swift-UVOT observations of this SN, detecting a 7 mag rise in the $UVW2$ band over 40 days, peaking at a $u$-band magnitude of about $-18$. Fraser et al. (2013) reported on an outburst peaking at a $z$-band absolute magnitude of $-11.8$ detected $\sim 9$ months prior to the explosion, and with the last detection $\sim 4$ months before the explosion. The event was detected by both PanSTARRS-1 and the Catalina Sky Survey. The duration of the outburst is not well constrained, and it can be either a single event that lasted for more than 4 months or multiple shorter events. PTF observations detected the outburst in individual images, suggesting that the outburst was already active 11 months prior to the explosion. All of the PTF photometric measurements are listed in Table [\[tab:MagFlux\]](#tab:MagFlux){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:MagFlux"}. We note that PTF did not observe the SN itself. Assuming there was a single precursor, the properties and energetics of this event are listed in Table [\[tab:PrecProp\]](#tab:PrecProp){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:PrecProp"}. ## PTF 10bjb PTF 10bjb was discovered by PTF on 2010 Feb. 16, and the only spectrum obtained on 2010 Mar. 7 resembles those of luminous blue variables and SNe IIn. Close inspection of the light curve suggests that the SN was discovered while in a pre-explosion high state, and that the spectrum was obtained prior to the explosion. The spectrum shows Balmer emission lines, the broader component of which has a velocity ($\sigma$) of about 600 km s$^{-1}$. Also detected are emission lines of He I and Ca II. The He I $\lambda$`<!-- -->`{=html}5876 line shows a narrow P-Cygni profile with a velocity of $\sim 600$ km s$^{-1}$, while the H$\alpha$ line shows a P-Cygni profile with a velocity of $\sim 300$ km s$^{-1}$. The spectrum of this event is presented in Figure [\[fig:PTF10bjb_spec\]](#fig:PTF10bjb_spec){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:PTF10bjb_spec"}. The light curve of PTF 10bjb is shown in Figure [\[fig:PTF10bjb_LC_all\]](#fig:PTF10bjb_LC_all){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:PTF10bjb_LC_all"}. Between $\sim 80$ days up to 0 days prior to the assumed explosion time of this SN, which is based on the fast rise in the SN light curve, we detect a significant excess in the flux residuals. This excess had a peak absolute magnitude of $-15.1$ and it lasted for $\sim 110$ days. Two years after $t_{{\rm rise}}$, the SN is detected at a flux level which is a factor of $\sim 5$ dimmer than the pre-explosion outburst. Assuming zero bolometric correction, the peak bolometric luminosity of this outburst is $\sim 3\times10^{41}$ erg s$^{-1}$, and its radiated energy is $\sim 2.6\times10^{48}$ erg. In addition, there is a possible detection of the progenitor at an absolute magnitude of roughly $-14$ about a year prior to the SN explosion. However, given that there is a single detection at this time, we do not consider this to be a good precursor candidate (see §[4.2](#sec:tests){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:tests"}). The physical parameters of the SN and the precursor are listed in Table [\[tab:PrecProp\]](#tab:PrecProp){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:PrecProp"}. ## SN 2011hw SN 2011hw was discovered by Dintinjana et al. (2011) on 2011 Nov. 18.7, at apparent magnitude 15.7. Valenti et al. (2011) reported that a spectrum obtained on 2011 Nov. 19.8 shows it to be similar to the transitional Type IIn/Ibn SN 2005la (Pastorello et al. 2008). The spectrum is blue and exhibits emission lines of H and He I. The most prominent He I lines compete in strength with H$\alpha$. The FWHM velocity of H$\alpha$ is 2700 km s$^{-1}$, while that of He I $\lambda$`<!-- -->`{=html}5876 is $\sim 2000$ km s$^{-1}$. We note that the apparent magnitude of this SN reported by Dintinjana & Mikuz (2011) corresponds to an absolute magnitude of about $-19.3$. Our initial search suggested that there is a detection of an outburst $\sim 3$ months prior to the SN explosion. However, since this is based on a single detection, we do not consider this to be a good candidate. ## PTF 10weh PTF 10weh was discovered by PTF on 2010 Sep. 22.14. The SN brightened to a peak absolute magnitude of about $-20.7$ over $\sim 40$ days. A spectrum taken on 2010 Oct. 10 exhibits a blue continuum together with Balmer emission lines as well as He I and He II. The widest component of the H$\alpha$ line has a velocity ($\sigma$) of $\sim1000$ km s$^{-1}$. The first two spectra of this source are shown in Figure [\[fig:PTF10weh_spec\]](#fig:PTF10weh_spec){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:PTF10weh_spec"}. The light curve of this SN and the candidate precursor event is shown in Figure [\[fig:PTF10weh_LC_all\]](#fig:PTF10weh_LC_all){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:PTF10weh_LC_all"}. There is a possible precursor $\sim 3$ months prior to the SN rise, lasting for $\sim40$ days. A close-up view of the precursor light curve is presented in Figure [\[fig:PTF10weh_LC_all_zoom\]](#fig:PTF10weh_LC_all_zoom){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:PTF10weh_LC_all_zoom"}. Figure [\[fig:PTF10weh_diffstats_R\]](#fig:PTF10weh_diffstats_R){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:PTF10weh_diffstats_R"} gives another version of the precursor light curve, showing all of its individual flux measurements, along with flux measurements at random positions in the host galaxy and other nearby galaxies. Inspection of the data reveals that the detection depends on the binning scheme. However, given that there are four temporally adjacent points that deviate by more than 5$\sigma$, we consider this to be a good precursor candidate. The absolute magnitude of this precursor is about $-17$. Assuming zero bolometric correction, this corresponds to a luminosity of $\sim 1.9\times10^{42}$ erg s$^{-1}$. The lower limit on the radiated energy of the precursor is $\sim 5\times10^{48}$ erg. The physical parameters of the SN and its outburst are listed in Table [\[tab:PrecProp\]](#tab:PrecProp){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:PrecProp"}. In addition, the pre-explosion light curve of this SN reveals additional possible detections 11--14 months prior to the SN explosion. However, given that these detections are not consecutive in time, we do not regard them as good precursor candidates. ## PTF 12cxj {#sec:PTF12cxj} PTF 12cxj was discovered by PTF on 2012 Apr. 16.14. The SN rose to an $R$-band absolute magnitude of $-17.2$ over two weeks. The spectrum of the SN, presented in Figure [\[fig:PTF12cxj_spec\]](#fig:PTF12cxj_spec){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:PTF12cxj_spec"}, was obtained on 2012 Apr. 18 during the early rise of the SN. The spectrum has Balmer and He I lines in emission. Fitting a two Gaussian model to the H$\alpha$ line shows that, the widest component has a velocity width ($\sigma$) of 1200 km s$^{-1}$. This SN has a large number of pre-explosion observations, and it shows a single detection $\sim 384$ days prior to its $t_{{\rm rise}}$. Closer inspection reveals that this detection depends on the binning scheme, and that with shorter bins of four days, multiple detections at an absolute magnitude of about $-13.5$ are seen. Moreover, inspection of the $g$-band data shows a marginal detection around $-435$ days prior to $t_{{\rm rise}}$. The full $R$-band light curve is illustrated in Figure [\[fig:PTF12cxj_LC_all\]](#fig:PTF12cxj_LC_all){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:PTF12cxj_LC_all"}. The most convincing precursor candidate events are detected about two weeks and 700 days prior to $t_{{\rm rise}}$. Given the large number of observations of this SN field, the light curve in this plot utilized 2-day bins and 4$\sigma$ upper limits. A close-up view of the light curve of the two precursors is shown in Figure [\[fig:PTF12cxj_LC_all1\]](#fig:PTF12cxj_LC_all1){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:PTF12cxj_LC_all1"}. The $R$-band peak absolute magnitudes of these candidate precursors are $-14.8$ and $-13$. However, the candidate precursor two weeks prior to the explosion is very close in time to the SN fast rise and therefore may be regarded as part of the SN rise. As seen in Figure [\[fig:PTF12cxj_LC_all1\]](#fig:PTF12cxj_LC_all1){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:PTF12cxj_LC_all1"}, the two detections are followed by a nondetection which is about a magnitude deeper than the possible detection at $-8$ days prior to $t_{{\rm rise}}$. Furthermore, a $t^{2}$ extrapolation to the SN rise flux suggests that the SN started its rise after this candidate precursor. We cannot rule out the possibility that this precursor is part of the SN light curve (e.g., similar to SN 2011dh; Arcavi et al. 2011). As before, Figure [\[fig:PTF12cxj_diffstats_R\]](#fig:PTF12cxj_diffstats_R){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:PTF12cxj_diffstats_R"} shows another version of the precursor light curve, with all of the individual flux measurements, along with flux measurements in random positions on nearby galaxies and the same host galaxy. The second candidate precursor is detected $\sim 700$ days prior to the SN explosion, and it is also based on two marginal detections separated by about two weeks. If real, the peak absolute $R$-band magnitude of this precursor is about $-13$. For all of the SNe in our sample, we also calculated the autocorrelation function of the flux residuals prior to $t_{{\rm rise}}$. The only SNe which exhibited significant (at the 3$\sigma$ level) auto-correlation at lag one (i.e., corresponding to two successive measurements) are PTF 12cxj (4.7$\sigma$) and PTF 10tel (3.2$\sigma$). Figure [\[fig:PTF12cxj_ACFresid\]](#fig:PTF12cxj_ACFresid){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:PTF12cxj_ACFresid"} presents the discrete autocorrelation function (Edelson & Krolik 1988) of all the flux residuals of PTF 12cxj, measured before $t_{{\rm rise}}$. The figure shows significant autocorrelation on time scales of a few days to ten days. This may indicate that the flux residuals are not pure uncorrelated noise, but contain a fraction of the progenitor light. Moreover, it is possible that the progenitor is variable on time scales of a few days. An alternative explanation to the variability is that this signal is caused by the lunar synodic period (i.e., the limiting magnitude is better during dark time). Nevertheless, this means that the progenitor of PTF 12cxj is likely detected in several binned images, and that its absolute $R$-band magnitude is about $-13$, brighter even than the possible progenitor of SN 2010jl/PTF 10aaxf (Smith et al. 2011). Given the detection of a signal in the autocorrelation, we consider the two precursor events as real, and their properties are listed in Table [\[tab:PrecProp\]](#tab:PrecProp){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:PrecProp"}. # Control time {#sec:Control} In order to calculate the rate of SN precursors, we need to estimate the "control time"---that is, for how long each SN location was observed (prior to its explosion) to a given limiting magnitude. Table [\[tab:Table_ControlTime\]](#tab:Table_ControlTime){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:Table_ControlTime"} lists, for each SN, the time bin windows (of 15 days) prior to the SN explosion and the 5$\sigma$ sensitivity depth at each window for bins with more than five measurements (second channel), or the median 6$\sigma$ limiting magnitude at windows with fewer than six measurements (first channel). To calculate the control time as a function of absolute magnitude, we sum over all the SNe the number of time bins (in Table [\[tab:Table_ControlTime\]](#tab:Table_ControlTime){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:Table_ControlTime"}) in which the limiting absolute magnitude is deeper than the absolute magnitude of interest, and multiply by the bin size (i.e., 15 days). Figure [\[fig:ControlTime\]](#fig:ControlTime){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:ControlTime"} displays the sample cumulative control time as a function of absolute $R$-band magnitude. Specifically, this plot shows for several time ranges (e.g., 0 to 2.5 yr prior to the SN explosion; black line) the total number of years, within a time range, in which we are able to detect a precursor event brighter than a given absolute magnitude. Figure [\[fig:ControlTimeFraction\]](#fig:ControlTimeFraction){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:ControlTimeFraction"} shows the sample cumulative control time fraction as a function of absolute $R$-band magnitude. This is defined as the total amount of time (given in Fig. [\[fig:ControlTime\]](#fig:ControlTime){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:ControlTime"}) divided by the size of the time window (listed in the legend). This fraction represents the equivalent number of SNe observed during the entire time window as a function of absolute limiting magnitude. The plot demonstrates that the highest efficiency is available for relatively short periods prior to the SN explosion. This is due to the fact that PTF switches many of the observed fields typically every 3--4 months, thereby probably explaining why many of the precursors we find are within 100 days before the SN explosion. # Precursor Rate {#sec:rate} Given the cumulative control time $t_{{\rm search}}(<M_R)$ over all SNe as a function of absolute magnitude ($M_R$), and the cumulative control time fraction \[f_{{\rm search}}(<M_R)= \frac{t_{{\rm search}}(<M_R)}{t_{{\rm win}}}, \label{eq:fmr}\] where $t_{{\rm win}}$ is the length of the search window considered (e.g., $1/3$ yr prior to the explosion), we can calculate the average (over all SNe) rate of precursors. The mean precursor rate per SN, in units of events per unit time, is \[R_{{\rm prec}} = \frac{N_{{\rm prec}} }{(t_{{\rm search}}[<M_R])}, \label{eq:Rp}\] where $N_{{\rm prec}}$ is the total number of precursor events detected in the sample within $t_{{\rm win}}$ (this can be more than one precursor per SN). The fraction of SNe IIn that show at least one precursor event within $t_{{\rm win}}$ is given by \[f_{{\rm prec}} = \frac{N_{{\rm SN,prec}} }{(f_{{\rm search}}[<M_R])}. \label{eq:fp}\] Here, $N_{{\rm SN,prec}}$ is the number of SNe that show at least one precursor event within $t_{{\rm win}}$ (i.e., each SN with detected precursors is counted once regardless of the number of precursor events). Remarkably, we find that the fraction of SNe IIn that have precursors is of order unity. Assuming a homogeneous population, at the one-sided 99% confidence level, more than $52\%$ ($98\%$) of SNe IIn have at least one pre-explosion outburst brighter than an absolute magnitude of $-14$, and that takes place up to 1/3 (2.5) yr prior to the SN explosion. Furthermore, our results suggest that, typically, SNe IIn exhibit more than one precursor on a time scale of 1 yr prior to the explosion. Specifically, during this final year prior to the explosion, the average rate of precursors brighter than absolute magnitude $-14$, is $\mathcal{R}\[=7.5_{-3.6,-5.5}^{+5.9,+12.0}$ yr$^{-1}$ (1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ errors). We note that this estimate contains only Poisson errors, and does not include the prior that the number of events cannot exceed one year divided by the typical duration of each event. Furthermore, even if we assume that the precursors of PTF 10weh and PTF 12cxj are not real (i.e., excluding events detected only in coadded images), the derived rate is $\mathcal{R}\]=3.8_{-2.4,-3.3}^{+4.9,+10.0}$ yr$^{-1}$, still likely above unity. Our analysis also suggests that fainter precursors are even more common, and that the cumulative luminosity function of precursors is roughly $\mathcal{R}\[(>L_{{\rm peak}})\propto L_{{\rm peak}}^{-0.7\pm0.5}$, where $\mathcal{R}\](>L_{{\rm peak}})$ is the rate of precursors brighter than peak luminosity $L_{{\rm peak}}$. We note that these statistical results are in accord with individual well-studied cases like SN 2009ip, in which several precursors were documented (e.g., Prieto et al. 2013; Margutti et al. 2013). The derived precursor rate and fraction of SNe with precursors, along with their 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ errors (Gehrels 1986), are listed in Table [\[tab:FreqPrec\]](#tab:FreqPrec){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:FreqPrec"}; it suggests that the rate of precursors is larger than unity. This may indicate that on average, each SN has more than one precursor event in the few years prior to their explosion. This is supported by cases like SN 2009ip in which several precursors were documented (e.g., Prieto et al. 2013). A disadvantage of using the combined control time of all the SNe is that it assumes that the precursor properties are universal among all SNe IIn. Another caveat is that our search is mostly sensitive to events with a duration longer than about two weeks. Shorter events can be detected but their control time suffers from additional uncertainties. In any case, our approach still gives us an estimate for the rate of precursors. # CSM Mass Estimate {#sec:CSM} A possible scenario is that the precursors are associated with mass-loss events. Two scenarios can then be considered. In the first scenario, part of the CSM kinetic energy is converted into luminosity. We therefore assume that up to an efficiency factor $\epsilon$, the kinetic energy of the CSM is equivalent to its radiated energy. In this case, \[M_{{\rm CSM}} \approx \epsilon \frac{2L_{{\rm prec}}\delta{t}}{v^{2}}. \label{eq:Mcsm}\] Here $L_{{\rm prec}}$ is the mean luminosity of the outburst, $\delta{t}$ is its duration, and $v$ is the velocity of the CSM. We estimated the CSM velocity based on the width of the wide component of the H$\alpha$ emission line detected in the SN spectra (Table [\[tab:PrecProp\]](#tab:PrecProp){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:PrecProp"}). In an alternative scenario, the CSM and precursor can still be related, but in an opposite way. Instead of transferring energy from the CSM to the precursor, the CSM could be the result of the precursor luminosity. This is naturally obtained if the CSM was accelerated through a continuum-driven wind, such that \[M_{{\rm CSM,cont}} \approx W \frac{L_{{\rm prec}}\delta{t}}{c_{{\rm s}}c}. \label{eq:Mcsm_cont}\] Here $c_{{\rm s}}$ is the speed of sound at the base of the optically thick wind ($\sim60$ km s$^{-1}$), $c$ is the speed of light, and $W\approx5$ is an empirically derived constant (Shaviv 2000; 2001). Although the flow of energy in the two scenarios is opposite, we note that the second scenario is equivalent to the first with a universal velocity and it does not depend on the CSM velocity via the measured line widths. # Correlation Between the Precursor and SN Properties {#sec:Corr} The properties of the candidate precursors and their corresponding SN light curves are presented in Table [\[tab:PrecProp\]](#tab:PrecProp){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:PrecProp"}. We also added to this table SN 2009ip, for which similar outbursts were detected and characterized. If these SN light curves are powered by shock breakout followed by interaction of the SN ejecta with a dense CSM, then we expect that some of the outburst and SN properties will be correlated (Ofek et al. 2010; 2014a; 2014b; Svirski et al. 2012). If a substantial fraction of the SN radiated energy originates from the interaction of the SN ejecta with the CSM, then this material mass will determine the total (and peak) radiated luminosity of the SN. Moreover, the CSM mass will determine the diffusion time scale and therefore the SN rise time. Given this prediction, we search for such correlations. To estimate the CSM mass, we used Equations [\[eq:Mcsm\]](#eq:Mcsm){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:Mcsm"} or [\[eq:Mcsm_cont\]](#eq:Mcsm_cont){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:Mcsm_cont"}. We note that this approach assumes that $\epsilon$ is of the same order of magnitude for all the precursors in our sample. The three panels in Figure [\[fig:Mcsm_corr\]](#fig:Mcsm_corr){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:Mcsm_corr"} show (from top to bottom) the precursor-ejected CSM mass based on Equation [\[eq:Mcsm\]](#eq:Mcsm){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:Mcsm"}, as a function of the SN $R$-band peak luminosity, rise time, and integrated $R$-band energy. At the top of each panel, we also provide the Spearmann rank correlation coefficient and the probability of getting this correlation by chance. Figure [\[fig:Mcsmcont_corr\]](#fig:Mcsmcont_corr){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:Mcsmcont_corr"} shows the same, but for the CSM mass estimated based on Equation [\[eq:Mcsm_cont\]](#eq:Mcsm_cont){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:Mcsm_cont"}. The clearest possible correlations we find are between (i) Equation [\[eq:Mcsm\]](#eq:Mcsm){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:Mcsm"} estimated CSM mass and the SN peak luminosity; and (ii) Equation [\[eq:Mcsm_cont\]](#eq:Mcsm_cont){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:Mcsm_cont"} estimated CSM mass and the total SN radiated energy. The false-alarm probabilities for these correlations are lower than 2%. However, these correlations are based on a small sample of objects whose properties were roughly measured. Therefore, a confirmation of this correlation requires a larger sample for which the properties of both SNe and precursors are accurately measured. At this time, our observations cannot distinguish between scenarios in which the radiation drives a vigorous wind or an explosion drives a mass ejection. Nevertheless, these correlations imply that at least the early optical light curves of SNe IIn are powered by shock breakout in an optically thick CSM followed by interaction of the SN ejecta with the CSM (Ofek et al. 2010; Chevalier & Irwin 2011). The correlations we find between the SN and precursor properties also suggest that precursors are indeed accompanied by mass-loss events larger than $\sim10^{-2}$ M$_\odot$ (Figure [\[fig:Mcsm_corr\]](#fig:Mcsm_corr){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:Mcsm_corr"}). Finally, we caution that given the small size of the sample, the reality of these correlations requires a verification based on a larger and better sample. # Discussion {#sec:Disc} We present the first systematic search for precursors prior to the explosion of Type IIn SNe. Our search yeilds five SNe for which at least one precursor is detected. Based on the sample control time, we are able to calculate the precursor rate. Our observations suggest that the rate of precursors brighter than an absolute magnitude of $-14$ in the last year prior to the SN IIn explosion is $\gtorder 1$ yr$^{-1}$. However, an important caveat is that some of our putative SN explosions might not actually be terminal events in which the star ends its life. Indeed, for the case of SN 2009ip, there have been some suggestions that the latest detected outburst is not the final SN explosion (e.g., Pastorello et al. 2013). We note that it will be possible to test this hypothesis using HST imaging by checking if the progenitor is still visible. Next, we discuss some of the implications of this survey, assuming that the SNe in our sample do indeed represent the terminal explosion of their progenitors. Observations of SN 2010mc (Ofek et al. 2013b) suggest that, given the short period between the precursor and the explosion of SN 2010mc, the two events are probably causally connected, in the sense that the precursor is not random but instead deeply related to the late stages of stellar evolution. Following Ofek et al. (2013b), the remarkable rate of these precursors can be used to relate their nature to physical processes taking place during the final stages of stellar evolution. Naively, assuming that each outburst releases $\sim10^{-2}$ M$_{\odot}$ (see §[8](#sec:CSM){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:CSM"}; Ofek et al. 2013b, 2013c) and that the mass of the progenitor is on the order of 50 M$_{\odot}$, no more than $\sim5000$ outburst events can occur during the life of the star. For a progenitor lifetime of $\sim10^{7}$ yr, if the outbursts occur regularly during the star's life, then the average time interval between outbursts would be less than $\sim2000$ yr. However, two observations make this scenario unlikely. The first is that if every SN IIn has 5000 precursors, then the observed rate in nearby galaxies would be two orders of magnitude higher than the SN rate. Such a high rate of precursors (e.g., "SN impostor"; Van-Dyk & Matheson 2012) is not seen, so it is likely that the number of precursors per SN is much lower. The second is that our results suggest that on order unity of these progenitors have precursors within a year prior to explosion, which means that the outbursts are much more likely to be physically connected to a process occurring near the end of a star's life, and probably not more than $\sim5000$ yr ($1/2000$ of their lifetime) prior to the SN explosion. For massive stars this is related to processes that occur after the beginning of carbon burning (Woosley et al. 2002). Furthermore, if each progenitor generates only a few outbursts (rather than the strict upper limit of $\sim5000$), then the physical process that is responsible for these outbursts likely takes place after the beginning of neon or oxygen burning (a few months to a few years prior to the explosion). Finally, we note that mass-loss events are likely not limited to Type IIn SN progenitors; there is some evidence that other kinds of SNe have precursors prior to the explosion. For example, Corsi et al. (2013) reported on a possible eruption of the Type Ic SN PTF 11qcj about 2 yr prior to the SN explosion. Gal-Yam et al. (2014) and Yaron et al. (in prep.) show that spectra of some SNe obtained hours after the explosion reveal narrow, high-excitation emission lines that likely originate from a CSM that was ejected months to years prior to the SN explosion. The main difference is probably that in SNe IIn, the ejected mass is larger than in other classes of events. E.O.O. thanks Orly Gnat and Ehud Nakar for many discussions. This paper is based on observations obtained with the Samuel Oschin Telescope as part of the Palomar Transient Factory project, a scientific collaboration between the California Institute of Technology, Columbia University, Las Cumbres Observatory, the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center, the University of Oxford, and the Weizmann Institute of Science. Some of the data presented herein were obtained at the W. M. Keck Observatory, which is operated as a scientific partnership among the California Institute of Technology, the University of California, and NASA; the Observatory was made possible by the generous financial support of the W. M. Keck Foundation. We are grateful for excellent staff assistance at Palomar, Lick, and Keck Observatories. E.O.O. is incumbent of the Arye Dissentshik career development chair and is grateful for support by a grant from the Israeli Ministry of Science and the I-CORE Program of the Planning and Budgeting Committee and The Israel Science Foundation (grant No 1829/12). A.V.F.'s group at UC Berkeley has received generous financial assistance from Gary and Cynthia Bengier, the Christopher R. Redlich Fund, the Richard and Rhoda Goldman Fund, the TABASGO Foundation, and NSF grant AST-1211916. [^1]: http://ptf.caltech.edu/iptf/ [^2]: http://www.weizmann.ac.il/astrophysics/wiserep/ [^3]: This is the larger $\sigma$ of a two-component Gaussian fit.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-23T02:00:20', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5468', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5468'}
# Introduction Massless particles are rare in nature, the only--observable and observed-- free massless particle being the photon. In particular charged massless particles do not seem to exist at all, although apparently there is no fundamental theoretical principle that prohibits their existence. Actually in general the presence of a massless particle in classical as well as quantum theories gives rise to infrared long range--or equivalently low energy--singularities, that may undermine the consistency properties of the theory itself. Nevertheless in quantum field theory, according to the Kinoshita-Lee-Nauenberg theorem, collinear infrared divergences caused by massless charged particles, that plague a priori the transition amplitudes, cancel from cross sections if an appropriate sum over degenerate external initial and final states is performed. There are, however, still open questions regarding the complete cancellation of these divergences related to the initial states, and it is still unclear whether or not the traditionally considered set of states furnishes a complete set of physical observables. In absence of a clear-cut answer regarding the possible existence of massless charged particles in the framework of quantum field theory, in this paper we examine the question of the theoretical consistency of such particles from the point of view of classical Electrodynamics, addressing the problem of exact solutions of Maxwell's equations. Obviously the consistency of a classical theory does in general not imply the consistency of the related quantum theory, and vice-versa, but a profound analysis of the former may entail a better understanding of the latter. Solving Maxwell's equations $\eqref{MaxEq}$ for a charged point-like particle, in which case the current involves a $\delta$-function, amounts to solve those equations in the distributional sense-- the only framework where they make sense. For massive particles, or equivalently for time-like trajectories, the solution of this problem has been provided long ago by A.M. Liénard and E.J. Wiechert, while for massless particles, or equivalently for light-like trajectories, due to the aforementioned singularities it is almost impossible to solve Maxwell's equations relying on conventional techniques, as the Green function method, see Section [2.2](#GreenFail){reference-type="ref" reference="GreenFail"}. The Green function method can fail in two respects: i) because the convolution between two distributions is not defined; ii) because the formal solution--represented by the convolution--does not satisfy the equation one wants to solve, although the Green's function satisfies the proper equation. In absence of standard tools for solving partial differential equations we will rely on two different limiting procedures in the space of distributions. A massless charged particle travels at the speed of light and, as long as its energy is not directly involved in the physical process one considers, it appears natural to regard it as the limiting case of a particle traveling along a time-like regularized trajectory at a speed $V<1$. With this respect a speed $V<1$ in some sense plays a role similar to the mass $m>0$ used frequently in quantum field theory to regularize infrared divergences. For a time-like trajectory the potentials and fields are the ones derived by Liénard and Wiechert and accordingly our first limiting procedure consists in deriving the potentials and fields we search for, through appropriate distributional limits of the formers as $V\ra 1$. This procedure entails three crucial ingredients: a) the proof that the envisaged limits exist and that the corresponding potentials and fields represent, hence, well-defined distributions; b) the proof that the so derived fields satisfy Maxwell's equations; c) the explicit evaluation of the fields. As we will see, the advantage of this limiting procedure is that it is universally applicable, while its main--but merely technical--drawback is that at intermediate stages it breaks manifest Lorentz-invariance, although it leads to manifest Lorentz-invariant results. Our second distributional limiting procedure relies on a manifestly Lorentz-invariant regularization of the massless Green function, see $\eqref{Geps}$, and involves the same three steps mentioned above. The main advantage of this procedure is obviously its manifest Lorentz-invariance at all stages, while its principal drawback is its reduced applicability, in that it works only for bounded trajectories. A part from this the two procedures entail different technical advantages but, most importantly, when both can be applied, for uniqueness reasons they lead to the same results. Due to their conceptual and practical relevance in Electrodynamics, especially for what concerns the solution of the Bianchi identity $\partial_{[\alpha}F_{\beta\gamma]}=0$ and the reduction of Maxwell's equations to the simplified equation $\square A^{\mu}=J^{\mu}$, throughout the paper we will devote particular attention to the construction of potentials, a delicate issue since--due to gauge invariance--contrary to the fields they can, and will, entail unphysical singularities. Indeed--contrary to what is often stated in the literature-- even the limit for $V\ra 1$ of the simple Liénard-Wiechert potential $\eqref{AURV}$ of a uniform linear motion with speed $V<1$, is not a distribution and does not satisfy Maxwell's equations, although the corresponding Liénard-Wiechert field admits a well-defined distributional limit satisfying them (see Section [\[limAUR\]](#limAUR){reference-type="ref" reference="limAUR"}). Nonetheless the construction of well-defined potentials, although subtle, is an extremely fruitful task, since it simplifies extremely the construction of well-defined fields, reducing it essentially to the evaluation of distributional derivatives. The results of this paper can be summarized as follows. We prove that Maxwell's equations for light-like trajectories admit unique causal solutions in the sense of distributions and we determine the resulting electromagnetic fields analytically. These fields entail qualitatively different, in some sense unexpected, expressions according to the qualitative form of the trajectory, involving in any case Dirac $\delta$-like contributions supported on curves or surfaces. For a linear motion (the unique exactly solved case available in the literature, see also ) the field is a $\delta$-like planar shock-wave traveling at the speed of light together with the particle. For accelerated motions the field becomes singular along a kind of observable Dirac-like string $\gamma$, with one endpoint attached to the particle. For accelerated bounded motions the second endpoint of $\gamma$ stays at infinity and the field is made out of two terms, each carrying exactly one half of the electric flux: the first term is a principal-part type "regular" distribution diverging on $\gamma$, representing the radiation field, and the second term is a $\delta$-distribution supported on $\gamma$. For accelerated unbounded motions, that we choose to tend for $t\rightarrow-\infty$ asymptotically to a straight line ${\cal L}$, the second endpoint of $\gamma$ ends on ${\cal L}$ and--apart from the two terms appearing for bounded motions--the field acquires an additional term represented by a $\delta$-like shock-wave traveling along ${\cal L}$ at the speed of light, as if it were due to a virtual massless particle in linear motion along ${\cal L}$. This last feature may appear rather unexpected and we will return to its physical interpretation in the concluding Section [6](#conclusions){reference-type="ref" reference="conclusions"}. As anticipated above, for each kind of trajectory we derive distribution valued well-defined four-potentials, from which we recover the fields. The paper is structured as follows. In Section [2](#urm){reference-type="ref" reference="urm"} we illustrate the failure of the Green function method for massless charges and apply our first limiting procedure to a linear motion. It turns out that even in this simple case the Liénard-Wiechert potential admits a limit for a light-like trajectory only after a suitable gauge transformation. In Section [\[bm\]](#bm){reference-type="ref" reference="bm"} we derive potentials and fields for bounded motions, relying on the covariant limiting procedure. In Section [\[LWreg\]](#LWreg){reference-type="ref" reference="LWreg"}--that creates a bridge between bounded and unbounded trajectories--we introduce the alternative Liénard-Wiechert limiting procedure and illustrate its drawbacks and virtues again in the case of bounded trajectories. This section contains also the derivation of the distributional limit for $V\ra 1$ of a certain current $K^\m$--the source of the Liénard-Wiechert radiation field--that will play a crucial role in the subsequent Section [\[ubm\]](#ubm){reference-type="ref" reference="ubm"}. In this final section we consider unbounded accelerated trajectories and rely now, for the reasons explained above, on the Liénard-Wiechert limiting procedure to construct potentials. The analysis of this case is more complex, first because the regularized potential, as for a linear motion, admits a limit only after a suitable gauge transformation, and second, because of the appearance of an unexpected shock-wave along the asymptotic straight line ${\cal L}$ mentioned above. The concluding Section [6](#conclusions){reference-type="ref" reference="conclusions"} is devoted to the physical interpretation of our results and to outlooks. More involved proofs and derivations are relegated to appendices, Section [7](#app){reference-type="ref" reference="app"}. The present paper furnishes in particular the proofs not given in. # Liénard-Wiechert fields and linear light-like trajectories {#urm} Before facing the solution of Maxwell's equations for light-like trajectories we recall some basic facts about the standard Liénard-Wiechert fields and potentials of time-like trajectories, that will play a crucial role in the derivation of the electromagnetic field for light-like trajectories as well. ## Liénard-Wiechert fields and potentials We consider a generic time-like world-line $Y^{\mu}(\lambda)$ and denote its four-velocity and four-acceleration respectively by $U^{\mu}(\lambda)= dY^{\mu}/d\lambda$ and $W^{\mu}(\lambda)= dU^{\mu}/d\lambda$. We denote the three-dimensional velocity with $\vec V=\vec U/U^0= d\vec Y/dt$ and we will also use the notation ${\mathcal V}^\m=dY^\m/dt= (1,\vec V)$. Maxwell's equations for a point particle with charge $e$ read then \[\partial_{\mu}F^{\mu\nu}= e\!\int\!\delta^{4}(x-Y(\lambda))\,dY^\m\equiv J^{\mu},\quad \quad\partial_{[\m}F_{\n\rho]}=0.\label{MaxEqV}\] We have chosen to define the four-velocity $dY^\m/d\la$ as the derivative of $Y^\m$ with respect to an arbitrary parameter $\la$, since for light-like trajectories, to be considered below, the proper time parameter $s$ is not defined. Due to the appearance of the $\dl$-function in the current $J^\m$, the solution of Maxwell's equations can be faced consistently only in the space of distributions. In what follows we will employ the space of tempered distributions ${\cal S}'({\mathbb R}^4)\equiv \mathcal{S}'$ (see Appendix I for some details). Solving the Bianchi identity in through $F^{\m\n}=\pa^\m A^\n-\pa^\n A^\m$, and resorting to the Lorenz gauge $\partial_{\mu}A^{\mu}=0$, the system $\eqref{MaxEqV}$ is equivalent to \[\square{A}^{\mu}={J}^{\mu}.\label{boxAUR}\] Relying on the Green function method this equation entails the standard (retarded) causal solution[^1] \[{A}^{\mu}=G{J}^{\mu},\quad\quad G(x)=\frac{1}{2\pi}\,H(x^{0})\,\delta(x^{2}),\quad\quad\square G(x)=\delta^{4}(x),\label{greenEq}\] where $H$ denotes the Heaviside function. Proceeding formally one gets the Liénard-Wiechert potential ($(UL)\equiv U^\m L_\m$ etc.) \[\begin{aligned} {1} {A^{\mu}}(x)=G{J}^{\mu} & =\frac{e}{2\pi}\int \!H(x^{0}- & =\frac{e}{2\pi}\int\! H(x^{0}-Y^0(\la))\,\delta\!\left((x-Y(\lambda))^{2}\right) \! U^{\mu}(\la) \, d\lambda\label{AV0}\\ &=\frac{e}{4\pi} \left.\frac{U^{\mu}}{(UL)}\right\|_{\lambda=\lambda(x)},\label{AV} \end{aligned}\] where $\lambda(x)$ is the retarded parameter determined uniquely by the relations \[\left(x-Y(\lambda)\right)^{2}=0,\quad\quad x^0\ge Y^{0}(\lambda),\label{lret}\] and \[L^{\mu}\equiv x^{\mu}-Y^{\mu}(\lambda(x)),\quad\quad L^{2}=0.\label{LV}\] In the following it is understood that the kinematic variables $Y^{\mu}$, $U^{\mu}$ and $W^{\mu}$ are evaluated at $\lambda(x)$. It is easy to check that for time-like world-lines the potential constitutes a distribution. To this order we apply it to complex test function $\vp(x)$ belonging to the Schwarz space ${\cal S}({\mathbb R}^4)\equiv {\cal S}$ (see Appendix I). From the equivalent form , integrating over $x^0$ and parameterizing the world-line with time, $Y^0(\la)= \la$, we obtain \[\begin{aligned} {1} {A}^{\mu}(\varphi)&=\frac{e}{2\pi}\!\int\! H(x^{0}-\la) \, \delta\!\left((x-Y(\la))^{2}\right)U^\m(\lambda)\,\varphi(x)\,d^4x\,d\la\label{ABconv}\\ &=\frac{e}{4\pi}\int \frac{{\mathcal V}^{\mu}(\la)}{\big\|\vec{x}-\vec{Y}(\la)\big\|}\,\varphi\big(\la+ \|\vec{x}-\vec{Y}(\la)\|,\vec{x}\,\big)\,d^3x\,d\la. \end{aligned}\] Through the shift $\vec{x}\rightarrow\vec{x}+\vec{Y}(\la)$ this integral becomes eventually \[{A^{\mu}}(\varphi)=\frac{e}{4\pi}\!\int\frac{{\mathcal V}^{\mu}(t)}{r}\, \varphi\big(t+r,\vec{x}+\vec{Y}(t)\big)\,d^{4}x,\label{ABnoRet1}\] where now $d^{4}x\equiv dtd^{3}x$, $r\equiv\left\|\vec{x}\right\|$ and, we recall, ${\mathcal V}^\m(t)=(1,\vec V(t))$. Since the world-line is time-like it is a textbook exercise[^2] to show that the linear functionals represent indeed distributions, that is that they can be dominated by a finite sum of semi-norms, see . The Liénard-Wiechert field derived from $\eqref{AV}$ can be written as the sum \[F^{\mu\nu}=C^{\mu\nu}+R^{\mu\nu},\label{FVdec}\] where $C^{\mu\nu}$ represents the Coulomb field \[C^{\mu\nu}=\frac{e}{4\pi}\frac{(L^{\mu}U^{\nu}-L^{\nu}U^{\mu})U^{2}} {\left(UL\right)^{3}},\label{CV}\] decreasing as $1/r^2$ at large distances from the particle, and the second term represents the radiation field \[R^{\mu\nu}=\frac{e}{4\pi}\frac{L^{\mu}((UL)W^{\nu}-(WL) U^{\nu})}{(UL)^{3}}-(\mu\leftrightarrow\nu),\label{RV}\] that at large distances decreases as $1/r$. These fields satisfy the equations \[\partial_{[\mu}C_{\nu\rho]}=0,\quad\quad\partial_{[\mu}R_{\nu\rho]}=0,\label{CRVBianchi}\] \[\partial_{\mu}C^{\mu\nu}=J^{\nu}+K^{\nu},\quad\quad\partial_{\mu}R^{\mu\nu}=-K^{\nu}, \label{CRVMaxwell}\] where we introduced the vector field \[K^{\mu}=\frac{e}{2\pi}\frac{(WL)U^2}{(UL)^{4}}\,L^{\mu}.\label{K}\] In these derivations a crucial role is played the identity, implied by $L^2=0$, [\[idl\]]{#idl label="idl"} =. Notice that the fields $C^{\mu\nu}$ and $R^{\mu\nu}$ fulfill the Bianchi identity separately, see , while only their sum satisfies the equation $\pa_\m F^{\m\n}=J^\n$. ## Linear light-like trajectories and failure of the Green function method {#GreenFail} We turn now to our main topic, i.e. the solution of Maxwell's equations \[\partial_{\mu}\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}=\mathcal{J}^{\nu},\quad\quad \partial_{[\m}\mathcal{F}_{\n\rho]}=0,\label{MaxEq}\] for a massless charged particle moving along a light-like world-line $y^{\mu}(\lambda)$ with current \[\mathcal{J^{\mu}}(x)= e\!\int\!\delta^{4}(x-y(\lambda))\, dy^{\mu}.\label{LLCurrent}\] In analogy to the time-like case we define the four-velocity-- subject now to the light-like condition $u^2=0$ as well as to $u^0>0$--through $u^{\mu}={dy^{\mu}}/{d\lambda}$ and the four-acceleration through $w^\m=du^\m/d\la$. We will denote the three-dimensional velocity and acceleration of the particle respectively by $\vec v=d\vec y/dt=\vec u/u^0$ and $\vec a=d\vec v/dt$ and we will also use the notation $v^{\mu}={dy^{\mu}}/{dt}=\left(1,\vec{v}\right)$. Solving the Bianchi identity in in terms of a potential $\mathcal{A}^{\mu}$ leads to ${\cal F}^{\m\n}=\pa^\m {\cal A}^\n-\pa^\n {\cal A}^\m$ and, in the Lorenz gauge $\partial_{\mu}\mathcal{A}^{\mu}=0$, equations $\eqref{MaxEq}$ reduce again to the standard form \[\square\mathcal{A}^{\mu}=\mathcal{J}^{\mu}.\label{boxAURR}\] In principle one could now rely again on the Green function method, based formally on the equations \[\mathcal{A}^{\mu}=G\mathcal{J}^{\mu},\quad\quad G(x)=\frac{1}{2\pi}\,H(x^{0})\,\delta(x^{2}).\label{greenEqq}\] However--and this is one of the main observations of the present paper--if $\mathcal{J}^{\mu}$ is the current of a massless particle traveling along a light-like* trajectory, in general the convolution $G\mathcal{J}^{\mu}$ is not a distribution--contrary to what happens for time-like trajectories. We illustrate this feature for a particularly simple, but relevant, trajectory, i.e.* for a linear motion (which is necessarily uniform) with world-line \[y^{\mu}(\lambda)=u^{\mu}\lambda,\quad\quad u^{2}=0.\label{URwline}\] Starting from the general expression one obtains now, formally, \[\begin{aligned} {1} \mathcal{A^{\mu}}(x)=G\mathcal{J}^{\mu} & =\frac{eu^{\mu}}{2\pi}\int \!H(x^{0}-u^{0}\lambda)\,\delta\!\left((x-u\lambda)^{2}\right) d\lambda\nonumber =\left.\frac{eu^{\mu}H(ux)}{4\pi\big\|(x-u\lambda)^{\alpha}u_{\alpha}\big\|} \right\|_{\lambda=x^{2}/2\left(ux\right)}\nn\\ & =\frac{ev^{\mu}}{4\pi} \frac{H(vx)}{(vx)}.\label{aline} \end{aligned}\] Due to the singularity along the line $(vx)= t-\vec v\cdot\vec{x}=0$ this potential is not a locally integrable function and, consequently, it is not* a distribution. A fortiori it is not a solution of equation --as is often stated erroneously in the literature. As will become clear in Section [\[ubm\]](#ubm){reference-type="ref" reference="ubm"}, the reason for this pathology is that the trajectory is unbounded in the past. In conclusion, for light-like trajectories in general the Green function method fails to provide a solution to Maxwell's equations $\eqref{MaxEq}$. ## Potential from a limiting procedure: shock-wave[\[limAUR\]]{#limAUR label="limAUR"} A general alternative approach to solve Maxwell's equations for light-like trajectories consists in adopting an appropriate limiting procedure, starting from the potential of a convenient time-like trajectory with constant regulator speed $V<1$. More precisely, given an arbitrary light-like world-line $y^\m(\la)$ we introduce a time-like regularized world-line $Y^{\mu}(\lambda)$ defined by \[Y^{0}(\lambda)=\frac{y^{0}(\lambda)}{V},\quad\quad \vec{Y}(\lambda)=\vec{y}(\lambda). \label{YVUR}\] The velocity of this regularized world-line is given by \[\vec V(t)=\frac{d\vec Y}{dY^0}=V\vec v\left(Vt\right)\] and the regularized motion occurs, thus, at the subluminal constant speed $\|\vec V(t)\|=V<1$, along the same orbit of the light-like trajectory. In the particular case of the linear motion we get the regularized world-line $Y^0(\la)=u^0\la/V$, $\vec Y(\la)=\vec u\la$, corresponding to a linear motion with the constant velocity $\vec V=V\vec v$. For such a time-like world-line the solution of is given by the potential , that for a constant velocity reduces to the standard result \[A^{\mu}(x)=\frac{e}{4\pi}\frac{\cal V^{\mu}}{\sqrt{({\cal V}x)^{2}-x^{2}{\cal V}^{2}}},\quad\quad {\cal V}^\m=(1,\vec V).\label{AURV}\] Observe now that one has the, trivial but important, distributional limit \[\LimV J^{\mu}=\mathcal{J}^{\mu},\label{LimVJ}\] that, we recall, amounts to the ordinary limits in $\mathbb{C}$ [\[lims\]]{#lims label="lims"} \_V J\^()=\^(), for every test function $\vp$. Throughout this paper we denote the distributional limit with the capital symbol $\mathrm{Lim}_{V\rightarrow1}$, to distinguish it from the ordinary point-wise limit in $\mathbb{C}$, denoted by $\lim_{V\rightarrow1}$. Due to one might expect that the distributional limit of the potential --which by construction satisfies $\square A^\m=J^\m$--in the limit $V\rightarrow1$ becomes a solution $\mathcal{A}^{\mu}$ of equation $\eqref{boxAURR}$. This expectation is, however, spoiled by the fact that, while the functions admit the point-wise limits [\[V1\]]{#V1 label="V1"} \_VA\^(x)= , they do not admit distributional limits. At the same footing of the functions at the r.h.s. of are, in fact, not distributions[^3]. To overcome this difficulty we take advantage from the fact that $A^{\mu}$ is defined up to a gauge transformation $A^{\mu}\rightarrow A^{\mu}+\partial^{\mu}\Lambda.$ Choosing as gauge function \[\Lambda=\frac{e}{4\pi}\ln\left\|({\cal V}x)-\sqrt{({\cal V}x)^{2}-x^{2}{\cal V}^2}\,\right\|, \label{gaugeT}\] the transformed potential reads \[\widetilde{A}^{\mu}=A^{\mu}+\partial^{\mu}\Lambda= \frac{ex^\m}{4\pi}\bigg(\!1+\frac{({\cal V}x)} {\sqrt{({\cal V}x)^{2}-x^{2}{\cal V}^{2}}} \bigg) \mathcal{P}\!\left(\frac{1}{x^{2}}\right)\!,\label{AURVreg}\] where $\mathcal{P}$ stands for the principal part. We have obviously \[F^{\mu\nu}= \partial^{\mu}{A}^{\nu}-\partial^{\nu}{A}^{\mu}=\partial^{\mu}\widetilde{A}^{\nu}-\partial^{\nu}\widetilde{A}^{\mu}, \label{FVURaltGauge}\] but now the distributional limit \[\mathcal{A}^{\mu}\equiv\LimV\widetilde{A}^{\mu}=\frac{ex^\m}{2\pi}\,H(vx)\,\mathcal{P}\! \left(\frac{1}{x^{2}}\right)\! \label{AUR}\] exists and correspondingly $\mathcal{A}^{\mu}$ is a distribution. Since in the space of distributions derivatives are continuous operators, the distributional limit of the second expression in $\eqref{FVURaltGauge}$ exists too and, moreover, we can exchange limits with derivatives: \[\LimV F^{\mu\nu}=\partial^{\mu}\LimV\widetilde{A}^{\nu}-\partial^{\nu} \LimV\widetilde{A}^{\mu}=\partial^{\mu}\mathcal{A}^{\nu}-\partial^{\nu}\mathcal{A}^{\mu} \equiv\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}.\label{LimVF}\] Given the limits $\eqref{LimVJ}$ and , applying the distributional limit for $V\rightarrow1$ to the system $\eqref{MaxEqV}$ we conclude, therefore, that $\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}$ satisfies indeed Maxwell's equations $\eqref{MaxEq}$. The procedure we have just outlined--appropriately generalized--will be applied throughout this paper to derive exact solutions of Maxwell's equations for more general trajectories. Computing the curl of the potential one obtains eventually the known electromagnetic field of a shock-wave--proportional to a $\dl$-function-- \[\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}=\frac{e}{2\pi}\frac{v^{\mu}x^{\nu}-v^{\nu}x^{\mu}}{x^{2}}\,\delta (vx),\label{FUR}\] vanishing everywhere, except on a plane perpendicular to the trajectory and passing through the particle's position. The plane moves thus together with the particle at the speed of light. Notice eventually that the potential $\eqref{AUR}$ does not satisfy the Lorenz gauge. This gauge can however be restored through a further gauge transformation, in that from one obtains (see also ) [\[lorg\]]{#lorg label="lorg"} \^'\^-\^(H(vx)\\|x\^2\\|) =-\\|x\^2\\| (vx),\_ \^'=0. Notice that ${\mathcal{A}}^{'\!\mu}$ looks rather different from the (wrong) Lorenz-gauge potential --derived with the Green function method--although both are proportional to the constant vector $v^\m$. ## The field from a distributional limit [\[secDistLimR\]]{#secDistLimR label="secDistLimR"} An alternative way to solve Maxwell's equations consists in applying the distributional limit directly to the system , that is solved by the field strength $F^{\m\n}=\partial^{\mu}A^{\nu}-\partial^{\nu}A^{\mu}$ of the regularized potential , that is \[F^{\mu\nu}=\frac{e}{4\pi}\frac{(x^{\mu}{\cal V}^{\nu}-x^{\nu}{\cal V}^{\mu}){\cal V}^{2}} {\left(({\cal V}x)^{2}-x^{2}{\cal V}^{2}\right)^{3/2}}.\label{FURV}\] If this field admits a distributional limit [\[fomn\]]{#fomn label="fomn"} \^F\^, then, thanks to and to the continuity of derivatives in the space of distributions, the field $\mathcal{F}^{\m\n}$ satisfies automatically Maxwell's equations . To prove we must establish the existence of the ordinary limits \[\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}(\varphi)= \lim_{V\rightarrow1}F^{\mu\nu}(\varphi),\quad\quad\forall \,\varphi\in\mathcal{S}. \label{limFV}\] Without loss of generality we may set $\vec{v}=\left(0,0,1\right)$ so that ${\cal V}^\m=(1,0,0,V)$, see . From we get then \[\begin{aligned} {1} F^{\mu\nu}(\varphi) & =\int \!F^{\mu\nu}(x)\,\varphi(x)\,d^{4}x =\frac{(1-V^{2})\,e}{4\pi}\int\!\frac{x^{\mu}\mathcal{V}^{\nu}-x^{\nu} \mathcal{V}^{\mu}}{\big((\mathcal{V}x)^{2}-(1-V^{2})x^{2} \big)^{3/2}}\,\varphi(x)\, d^{4}x\\ &=\frac{(1-V^{2})\,e}{4\pi}\int\!\frac{x^{\mu}\mathcal{V}^{\nu}-x^{\nu} \mathcal{V}^{\mu}}{\big((z-Vt)^{2}-(1-V^{2}) (x^{2}+y^{2})\big)^{3/2}}\,\varphi(x)\, d^{4}x. \end{aligned}\] Performing the shift $z\rightarrow z+Vt$ and rescaling $z\rightarrow\sqrt{1-V^{2}}z$ this integral becomes \[F^{\mu\nu}(\varphi)=\frac{e}{4\pi}\int\!\frac{ \mathcal{V}^{\mu}}{\left(z^{2}+x^{2}+y^{2}\right)^{3/2}}\, \varphi(t,x,y,\sqrt{1-V^{2}}z+Vt)\, d^{4}x,\label{limURFmid}\] where $Resorting to the {\it dominated convergence theorem}\footnote{To apply this theorem one must show that the integrand in \eref{limURFmid} can be uniformly (in $V$) dominated by an integrable function. This procedure is standard, although sometimes a bit cumbersome, and consequently throughout the paper we will usually apply it without furnishing the details. For the physically meaningful case of the potential of an unbounded motion, however, we present the details in Appendix V.}, see Appendix I, we can now take the limit$V$under the integral sign--in this limit we have in particular$\^v\^$and$ The result can be written in the form \[\lim_{V\rightarrow1}F^{\mu\nu}(\varphi) =\frac{e}{2\pi}\int\frac{\left(v{}^{\mu}x^{\nu}-v{}^{\nu}x^{\mu}\right)}{x^\rho x_\rho}\, \delta(t-z)\,\varphi(x)\, d^{4}x,\] that matches with $\eqref{FUR}$. # Bounded motion[\[bm\]]{#bm label="bm"} In this section we solve equations $\eqref{MaxEq}$ for a generic time-like bounded motion, that is a trajectory for which $\left\|\vec y(t)\right\|<M$, $\forall \,t$. As we will see, in this case the potential $\mathcal{A}^{\mu}$ derived through the Green function method defines indeed a distribution. The resulting field is then given by \[\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}=\partial^{\mu}\mathcal{A}^{\nu}-\partial^{\nu}\mathcal{A}^{\mu}, \label{FbFromA}\] where--we insist--the derivatives must be computed in the sense of distributions. Although a distribution admits always partial derivatives, in the presence of singularities, as the ones entailed by $\mathcal{A}^\m$, see below, their explicit evaluation may not be that straightforward. To compute them we shall adopt a regularization procedure--playing a role similar to the Liénard-Wiechert regularization employed in Sections [\[limAUR\]](#limAUR){reference-type="ref" reference="limAUR"} and [\[secDistLimR\]](#secDistLimR){reference-type="ref" reference="secDistLimR"}--replacing $\mathcal{A^{\mu}}$ with a regularized potential $\mathcal{A_{\varepsilon}^{\mu}}$ of class $C^\infty$ ($\ve>0$ being a constant regulator with the dimension of length) that under the distributional limit $\ve\ra 0$ tends to $\mathcal{A}^{\mu}$. Since the potential $\mathcal{A_{\varepsilon}^{\mu}}$ is of class $C^\infty$, we will be allowed to evaluate its curl $\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}_\ve\equiv \partial^{\mu}\mathcal{A}^{\nu}_\ve-\partial^{\nu}\mathcal{A}^{\mu}_\ve$ in the sense of functions. The actual field $\eqref{FbFromA}$ can then be recovered as the distributional limit of the field $\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}_\ve$ as $\ve\ra 0$. Contrary to the shock-wave field $\eqref{FUR}$ of a linear (unbounded) motion, the field $\eqref{FbFromA}$ will show up $\dl$-like singularities supported on a manifold of lower dimensions: the planar shock-wave will in fact be replaced by a $\dl$-function supported on a string attached to the particle. As anticipated in the introduction, even if the Green function method furnishes a potential $\mathcal{A}^\m$ that is a well-defined distribution, due to the singularities involved it is by no means guaranteed that it satisfies Maxwell's equations: the computation \[\square{ \cal A}^\m=\square(G{\cal J^\m})=(\square G) {\cal J}^\m=\dl^4* \cal J^\m=\cal J^\m\] has indeed only formal validity, when the distributions $G$ and/or ${\mathcal J}$ are too singular. This means that in general one must prove a posteriori that the potential $\mathcal{A}^\m$ derived with the Green function method solves Maxwell's equations. ## Singularities of light-like trajectories {#singl} The Liénard-Wiechert fields and are singular only on the world-line itself, i.e. if $x^\m=Y^\m(\la_0)$ for some $\la_0$. Although the expressions and are valid only for time-like world-lines, we can use them to infer the locations of the singularities of the field generated by particles traveling along light-like trajectories. As long as $U^{\mu}$ is time-like, the denominators $(UL)^{3}$ in $\eqref{CV}$ and $\eqref{RV}$ vanish only on the trajectory, since the contraction between a non-vanishing light-like and a time-like vector never vanishes. This is no longer true when the particle moves along a light-like world-line $y^{\mu}(\lambda)$, with four-velocity $u^{\mu}(\lambda)=dy^{\mu}/d\lambda$ satisfying $u^{2}=0$. In this case the quantity $(UL)$ is replaced by $(ul)$, where \[l^\m=x^\m-y^\m(\la),\] and now the scalar product $(ul)=u^0\,l^0-\vec u\cdot\vec l =\|\vec u\|\,\|\vec l\|-\vec u\cdot\vec l$ vanishes, indeed, also when the three-vectors $\vec{u}$ and $\vec{l}=\vec x-\vec y(\la)$ are aligned, i.e. when [\[alig\]]{#alig label="alig"} v()==. Parameterizing the word-line with time, that is setting $y^\m(\la)=(\la,\vec y(\la))$, the relations amount now to \[\left\|\vec{x}-\vec{y}(\lambda)\right\|=t-\lambda,\] so that furnishes the singularity locus \[\vec{x}=\vec{y}(\lambda)+(t-\lambda)\vec{v}(\lambda), \quad \quad t-\la\ge0.\label{prgamma}\] Setting $b=t-\lambda$ we obtain the singularity-string at time $t$ \[\vec{\gamma}\left(t,b\right)\equiv\vec{y}(t-b)+b\vec{v}(t-b), \quad\quad b\ge0,\label{gamma}\] along which the field of a massless particle is thus expected to be singular. Due to the condition $b\ge 0$ the string has one endpoint at the particle's position, $\vec{\gamma}(t,0)=\vec{y}(t)$, and as the particle moves the string $\eqref{gamma}$ sweeps out a two-dimensional singularity-surface, that after a rescaling of $b$ can be rewritten in the covariant form \[\Gamma^{\mu}(\lambda,b)=y^{\mu}(\lambda)+bu^{\mu}(\lambda), \quad\quad b\ge0.\label{Gamma}\] Poincaré-duality. In the following a special role will be played by a particular distribution proportional to a $\delta$-function supported on the surface $\Gamma^\m$. In the same way as one associates to a world-line $y^{\mu}(\lambda)$ the distribution-valued vector field $\mathcal{J}^{\mu}$ $\eqref{LLCurrent}$, to an arbitrary regular surface $\Gamma^{\mu}(\lambda,b)$ one can associate the antisymmetric reparameterization invariant (distribution-valued) field \[Q^{\mu\nu}(x)=e\int\frac{\partial\Gamma^{\mu}(\lambda,b)} {\partial b}\frac{\partial\Gamma^{\nu}(\lambda,b)}{\partial\lambda}\, \delta^4(x-\Gamma(\lambda,b)) \,db\,d\lambda-(\mu\leftrightarrow\nu).\label{pmn}\] The corresponding map, that in general associates to a $p$-submanifold an antisymmetric tensor field of rank $p$ supported on that submanifold, goes under the name of Poincaré-duality[^4]. In the particular case of the surface $\eqref{Gamma}$ the field $\eqref{pmn}$ becomes \[Q^{\mu\nu}(x)=e\!\int\! bH(b)\big(u^{\mu}(\la)w^{\nu}(\la)-u^{\nu}(\la)w^{\mu}(\la)\big)\, \delta^{4}\big(x-\Gamma(\lambda,b)\big)db d\lambda,\label{P}\] that applied to a test function gives \[\begin{aligned} {1} Q^{i0}(\vp)&=-e\int_0^\infty\!b db\int_{-\infty}^\infty dt\,a^i\vp(t+b,\vec y+b\vec v),\label{pi0}\\ Q^{ij}(\vp)&=e\int_0^\infty \!bdb\int_{-\infty}^\infty dt\,(v^ia^j-v^ja^i)\,\vp(t+b,\vec y+b\vec v),\label{pij} \end{aligned}\] where the variables $\vec y$, $\vec v$ and $\vec a$ are evaluated at $t$. A particular feature of Poincaré-duality is that it associates to the boundary of a manifold the divergence of the field associated to the manifold. If the trajectory $\vec y(t)$ is bounded, the boundary of the surface $\Gamma^\m$ in $\eqref{Gamma}$ is precisely the world-line $y^{\mu}(\lambda)$. In fact, in this case from one sees that $\vec\gamma(t,0)=\vec y(t)$, while under $b\ra \infty$ $\vec \gamma(t,b)$ tends to a point at infinity. We have thus \[\partial_{\mu}Q^{\mu\nu}=\mathcal{J}^{\nu},\label{dpmn}\] an identity that will prove to be useful later. If, on the contrary, the trajectory is unbounded, the boundary of the surface $\Gamma^\m$ may acquire an additional component and equation will then be modified, see equation . ## A distribution-valued potential[\[ABProof\]]{#ABProof label="ABProof"} For a generic light-like trajectory the Green function method --see and --formally gives the potential [\[amuf\]]{#amuf label="amuf"} \^=G\\^=. \\|\_=(x), where we proceeded as in -. This time $l^\m(x)\equiv x^\m-y^\m(\la(x))$ and $\la(x)$ is determined by the conditions [\[llcaus\]]{#llcaus label="llcaus"} (x-y())\^2=0,x\^0\>y\^0(). To check whether or not the four functions are distributions we must apply them to a test function $\vp$. With computations analogous to those that led from to we obtain \[\mathcal{A^{\mu}}(\varphi)=\frac{e}{4\pi}\!\int\frac{v^{\mu}(t)}{r}\, \varphi(t+r,\vec{x}+\vec{y}(t))\,d^{4}x,\quad \quad v^\m(t)=(1,\vec v(t)),\quad r=\|\vec x\|.\label{ABnoRet}\] We can now show that these integrals obey the following theorem. 0.2truecm The four linear functionals on ${\cal S}(\mathbb{R}^{4})$ given in represent distributions. 0.2truecm . By definition we must prove that the integrals $\eqref{ABnoRet}$ satisfy the bound $\eqref{distDef}$ in terms of semi-norms. Since for each $\m$ we have $\|v^{\mu}(t)\|\leq1\;\forall \,t$, performing the shift $t\rightarrow t-r$ we get the estimate \[\begin{aligned} {1} \left\|\mathcal{A^{\mu}}(\varphi)\right\| & \leq\frac{e}{4\pi}\int\frac{\|\,\varphi(t,\vec{x}+\vec{y})\|}{r}\,d^{4}x\\ & =\frac{e}{4\pi}\int\frac{(1+t^{2})\big(1+\|\vec{x}+\vec{y}\|^{2} \big)^{2}\|\,\varphi(t,\vec{x}+\vec{y})\|}{r(1+t^{2})\big(1+\|\vec{x}+\vec{y}\|^{2}\big)^{2}}\,d^{4}x, \end{aligned}\] where from now on $\vec{y}\equiv\vec{y}(t-r)$. For a bounded* motion we have moreover the uniform estimate \[\left\|\vec{x}+\vec{y}\right\|\geq\left\|\vec{x}\right\|-\left\|\vec{y}\right\|\geq r-M,\label{ABDistProof1}\] so that [\[aint\]]{#aint label="aint"} \\|()\\| r(1+t\^2)(1+(r-M)\^2H(r-M))\^2 d\^4x, where \[\Vert\vp \Vert \equiv \sup_{x\in\mathbb{R}^{4}}\left((1+t^{2}) \big(1+\|\vec{x}+\vec{y}\|^{2}\big)^{2}\|\,\varphi(t,\vec{x}+\vec{y})\|\right)\] is a finite linear combination of semi-norms of $\varphi$ and the (converging) integral in is a positive constant. The bound is therefore of the form . $\square$\ For an unbounded light-like motion $\eqref{ABDistProof1}$ is no longer valid. Even worse, in that case the integral $\eqref{ABnoRet}$ is in general divergent. Consider, for example, a trajectory that for $t\rightarrow-\infty$ becomes asymptotically linear: $\vec{y}(t)\approx\vec{v}_{\infty}t$, where $\vec{v}_{\infty}$ is a constant velocity with $\left\|\vec{v}_{\infty}\right\|=1$. For such a world-line the test function in $\eqref{ABnoRet}$ for large negative values of $t$ behaves as $\varphi(t+r,\vec{x}+\vec{v}_{\infty}t)$ and along the line $\vec{x}=-\vec{v}_{\infty}t$, for which $r=\left\|\vec{x}\right\|=-t$, in general it does not vanish for any $r$--in that its arguments remain always finite-- while the rest of the integrand, in polar coordinates, grows as $r$, leading to a divergence. In particular for a linear trajectory we retrieve that the potential is not a distribution. ## Derivation of the electromagnetic field ### Covariant regularization {#covreg} As we pointed out previously (Section [3.1](#singl){reference-type="ref" reference="singl"}), on the surface $\Gamma$ $\eqref{Gamma}$ the potential is singular and correspondingly the evaluation of the field strength $\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}=\partial^{\mu}\mathcal{A}^{\nu}-\partial^{\nu}\mathcal{A}^{\mu}$ requires to compute the derivatives in the sense of distributions. As anticipated in the introduction of this section, to this order it is helpful to resort to a regularized potential $\mathcal{A}_{\varepsilon}^{\mu}$ of class $C^\infty$. Before presenting our regularization we notice, however, that in the complement of $\Gamma$--where the potential is of class $C^\infty$--its derivatives can actually be computed in the ordinary sense of functions. With a standard calculation, based on the relation $\pa_\m\la(x)=l_\m/(ul)$ following from , we find the expected result (\^\^-\^\^)\\|\_R\^4\\=-()\^\_reg. [\[RBpointWise\]]{#RBpointWise label="RBpointWise"} This means that the actual field $\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}$ can differ from the "regular" distribution $\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}_{reg}$ only through terms supported on $\Gamma$. The presence (or absence) of such terms can, however, be revealed only through a distributional calculation. A convenient regularization is obtained replacing the Green function $G(x)$ of the d'Alembertian by \[G_{\varepsilon}(x)=\frac{1}{2\pi}\,H(x^{0})\,\delta(x^{2}-\varepsilon^{2}),\label{Geps}\] where $\ve>0$ is a regulator with the dimension of length. Proceeding as in - one obtains then the $C^\infty$-potential [\[ame\]]{#ame label="ame"} = G\_\^=. \\|\_=\_(x), where the function $\lambda_{\varepsilon}(x)$ is determined by the conditions \[l^2=\left(x-y(\lambda_{\varepsilon})\right)^{2}=\varepsilon^{2},\quad \quad x^{0}\geq y^{0}(\lambda_{\varepsilon}),\label{lretEps}\] replacing . Notice that, since $l^\m\equiv x^\m-y^\m(\la_\ve(x))$ is time-like and $u^\m$ light-like, the denominator $(ul)=u^\m l_\m$ never vanishes, not even on the world-line: this ensures that the potential is indeed of class $C^\infty$. Employing calculations similar to those performed in -, from we obtain the regularized functionals, obviously defining distributions, \[\mathcal{A_{\varepsilon}^{\mu}}(\varphi)=\frac{e}{4\pi}\int\frac{v^{\mu}(t)} {r_{\varepsilon}}\,\varphi(t+r_{\varepsilon},\vec{x}+\vec{y}(t))\,d^{4}x,\label{ABepsNoret}\] which differ from only through the replacement $r\ra r_{\varepsilon}=\sqrt{r^{2}+\varepsilon^{2}}$. Correspondingly it is straightforward to show that one has the distributional limits \[\LimE\mathcal{A}_{\varepsilon}^{\mu}=\mathcal{A}^{\mu},\label{LimABeps}\] so that the potential represents indeed a regularization of the potential . From it follows in particular that this regularization has the advantage of being manifestly Lorenz-covariant. On the other hand, as we will see in Section [\[LWreg\]](#LWreg){reference-type="ref" reference="LWreg"}, it is suitable only for bounded motions, and consequently for unbounded trajectories we have to resort to the alternative Liénard-Wiechert-regularization . The distributional derivatives of showing up in the regularized Maxwell field [\[freg\]]{#freg label="freg"} \^\_=\^\^\_-\^\^\_can now be computed as ordinary derivatives and accordingly the result can be retrieved from $\eqref{FVdec}$-. However, since in this case we have $u^{2}=0$, the regularized Coulomb field vanishes-- and of course also its distributional limit is zero! We are therefore left only with the regularized radiation field \[\mathcal{F}_{\varepsilon}^{\mu\nu}=\frac{e}{4\pi}\left.\frac{l^{\mu}((ul)w^{\nu}-(wl)u^{\nu})}{(ul)^{3}}\right\|_{\lambda=\lambda_{\varepsilon}(x)}-(\mu\leftrightarrow\nu).\label{FBeps}\] It is also straightforward to check that the potential preserves the Lorenz-gauge $\pa_\m {\cal A}^\m_\ve=0.$ Eventually we define the regularized current as \[\mathcal{J}_{\varepsilon}^{\nu}\equiv \partial_{\mu}\mathcal{F}_{\varepsilon}^{\mu\nu}.\label{Jeps}\] A direct, although a bit lengthy, calculation from furnishes the explicit expression (see ) \[\mathcal{J}_{\varepsilon}^{\mu}=\frac{\varepsilon^{2}e}{4\pi}\left(\!\frac{ b^\m(ul)-u^{\mu}(bl)}{(ul)^{4}} +\frac{3(wl)}{(ul)^{5}}\big((wl)u^{\mu}-(ul) w^{\mu}\big)\!\right)\!, \quad b^\m\equiv \frac{dw^\m}{d\la}. \label{Jreg}\] Notice that this current is proportional to $\ve^2$, implying that its limit under $\ve\ra 0$ is supported necessarily on (a subset of) the singularity surface . ### Solving Maxwell's equations Equations $\eqref{LimABeps}$ and imply that the distributional limit of the field under $\ve\ra 0$ exists and, moreover, that \[\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}\equiv\partial^{\mu}\mathcal{A}^{\nu}-\partial^{\nu}\mathcal{A}^{\mu} = \LimE\mathcal{F}_{\varepsilon}^{\mu\nu}.\label{FBfromLim}\] Consequently from the definition it follows that also the limit $\LimE\mathcal{J}_{\varepsilon}^{\mu}$ exists, and in Appendix II we prove that moreover \[\LimE\mathcal{J}_{\varepsilon}^{\mu}=\mathcal{J}^{\mu},\label{LimJeps}\] as one might expect[^5]. Applying the distributional limit $\ve\ra 0$ to equation we conclude then that $\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}$ satisfies the first Maxwell equation in , and from it follows that it satisfies also the second Maxwell equation, i.e. the Bianchi identity. It remains now to determine $\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}$ explicitly. ### Determination of the field[\[lof\]]{#lof label="lof"} To evaluate the electromagnetic field we have to perform the limit $\eqref{FBfromLim}$ explicitly, i.e. for every test function we must compute the ordinary limits \[\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}(\varphi)=\lim_{\varepsilon\rightarrow0}\mathcal{F}_{\varepsilon}^{\mu\nu} (\varphi),\] with $\mathcal{F}_{\varepsilon}^{\mu\nu}(x)$ given in . As this function is of the form $f(x,\la_\ve(x))$ we consider the identity ($l^\m\equiv x^\m-y^\m(\la_\varepsilon)$) [\[fxe\]]{#fxe label="fxe"} f(x,\_(x))=(-\_(x))f(x,) d H(l\^0) (l\^2-\^2)(u\^()l\_)f(x,) d. When applying such a function, as , to a test function $\vp(x)$ we may successively perform the shift $x\ra x+y(\la)$ getting \[\begin{aligned} {1}\nn \mathcal{F}_{\varepsilon}^{\mu\nu}(\varphi)&=\frac{e}{2\pi} \!\int\! \! H(x^0)\,\dl(x^2-\ve^2)\,\frac{x^{\mu}((ux)w^{\nu}-(wx)u^{\nu})}{(ux)^{2}}\,\vp(x+y) \,d^4x\,d\la-(\mu\leftrightarrow\nu)\\ &=\frac{e}{4\pi} \!\int \frac{X^{\mu}((uX)w^{\nu}-(wX)u^{\nu})}{r_\ve(uX)^{2}}\,\vp(X+y) \,d^3x\,d\la-(\mu\leftrightarrow\nu),\label{feps} \end{aligned}\] where we have set $X^\m=(r_\ve,\vec x)$ and \[r_\ve=\sqrt{r^2+\ve^2}.\] For definiteness we evaluate now the limit ${\mathcal F}^{i0}= \LimE {\cal F}^{i0}_\ve$ regarding the electric field, the procedure for the magnetic field ${\cal F}^{ij}_\ve$ being completely analogous. Taking advantage from reparametrization invariance to choose $\la=y^0(\la)\equiv t$ gives \[{\cal F}^{i0}_\ve(\varphi)=\frac{e}{4\pi}\!\int\frac{ (x^i-r_{\varepsilon}v^{i})\,\vec{a}\cdot\vec{x}-r_{\varepsilon}(r_{\varepsilon}-\vec{v}\cdot\vec{x})\,a^{i}} {r_{\varepsilon}(r_{\varepsilon}-\vec{x}\cdot\vec{v})^{2}}\, \varphi(t+r_{\varepsilon},\vec{x}+\vec{y})\,d^3x\,dt,\label{EBProof1}\] where the kinematical variables $\vec y$, $\vec v$ and $\vec a$ are now evaluated at $t$. As $\varepsilon$ approaches $0$, the denominator in $\eqref{EBProof1}$ vanishes along the half-line $\vec{x}=b\vec{v}$, $b>0$, this half-line being precisely the image in these coordinates at fixed $t$ of the string $\eqref{gamma}$, where the field becomes indeed singular. To isolate this string we change coordinates from $\vec x$ to $(b,q_a)$, $a=1,2$, according to \[\vec{x}=b\vec{v}+q_{a}\vec{N}_{a},\label{bqVar}\] where we introduced the orthonormal basis $\{\vec{v},\vec{N}_a\}$ at fixed time: [\[bq\]]{#bq label="bq"} \_a\_b=\_ab,vv=1,\_a=0, N\^i_aN\^j_a+v\^iv\^j=\^ij. In this way the position of the singularity string amounts now to $q_a=0$. We evaluate the limit of explicitly in Appendix III the result being \[{\cal F}^{i0}(\varphi)= \lim_{\ve\ra0}{\cal F}^{i0}_\ve(\varphi) =\frac{1}{2}\,Q^{i0}(\varphi)+\!\int\! H^{i}(b,q,t)\,\varphi(t+r,b\vec{v}+q_{a}\vec{N}_{a}+\vec{y})\,dtdbd^{2}q, \label{EBProof5}\] where [\[hi\]]{#hi label="hi"} H\^i(b,q,t)=(\--) and \[\Pi_{ab}=q_{a}q_{b}-\frac{q^{2}}{2}\,\delta_{ab},\quad \quad r=\sqrt{b^2+q^2},\quad\quad q=\sqrt{q_1^2+q_2^2}.\] The integral in $\eqref{EBProof5}$ is conditionally convergent, in the sense that--by definition--one must first integrate over the polar angle of $q_a$ and then over its radius $q$. In this way the traceless matrix $\Pi_{ab}$ guarantees the convergence of the integral over $q_a$ around $q_a=0$, i.e. around the singularity-string. The distribution $Q^{i0}$ in is the $\dl$-function supported on the singularity surface $\Gamma$. The second term in arises from the point-wise limit of ${\cal F}^{i0}_\ve$ and represents thus--by construction--the regular field $\mathcal{F}^{i0}_{reg}$ . According to our integration prescription we indicate then this term as the "principal part" $\mathcal{P}(\mathcal{F}^{i0}_{reg})(\vp).$ Thanks to the manifest Lorentz-invariance of our procedure--that permits us to avoid the analogous computation for the magnetic components ${\mathcal F}^{ij}$--we can then write our final result in the form \[\mathcal{F^{\mu\nu}}=\frac{1}{2}\,Q^{\mu\nu}+\mathcal{P}(\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}_{reg}).\label{FB}\] ### Properties of the field Analyzing the meaning of the field we see first of all that there is, indeed, a non-vanishing contribution supported on $\Gamma$, whose structure $Q^{\m\n}$ is essentially determined by Lorentz-invariance. The interpretation of the factor $1/2$ is, instead, less obvious. From $\pa_\m\mathcal{F^{\mu\nu}}={\cal J}^\n=\pa_\m Q^{\mu\nu}$ we derive \[\begin{aligned} \label{demo1} \pa_\m\!\left(\frac12\,Q^{\m\n}\!\right)&=\frac12\,\mathcal{J}^\n,\\ \pa_\m\big(\mathcal{P}(\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}_{reg})\big) &=\frac12\,\mathcal{J}^\n.\label{demo2} \end{aligned}\] This means that the flux through a closed surface of the electric field $E^i={\cal F}^{i0}$, i.e. [\[defe\]]{#defe label="defe"} E= E\_sing+\_reg,\^i\_sing Q\^i0,\^i\_reg (\^i0\_reg), is equally distributed between the field $\vec{ E}_{sing}$, supported on the singularity-string, and the regular field $\vec{E}_{reg}$: \[\begin{aligned} \vec\nabla\cdot\vec { E}_{sing}&=\frac12\,\mathcal{J}^0, \label{dive0}\\ \vec\nabla\cdot\vec { E}_{reg}&=\frac12\,\mathcal{J}^0.\label{dive} \end{aligned}\] While relation , we repeat, follows directly from and Poincaré-duality, the relation is less obvious in that above we gave an indirect derivation. Correspondingly we provide a direct, and independent, proof of this rather unexpected result in Appendix VIII. Actually the flux through a closed surface $S$ of a field like $\vec{ E}_{reg}$, being a distribution, can not be defined through a simple surface integral like $\int_S { E}_{reg}^i\,d\Sigma^i$, if $S$ intersects the singularity curve[^6]. In this case to define the flux one has to proceed as follows. Denote the characteristic function of the volume $V$ with boundary $S$ by $\chi(\vec x)$ and introduce a smooth deformation $\chi_\gamma(\vec x)\in {\mathcal S}(\mathbb R^3)$--vanishing away from $V$ and equal to 1 well inside $V$--that for $\gamma\ra 0$ tends point-wise to $\chi(\vec x)$. Using that the distribution ${ E}^i_{reg}$, i.e. the second term in , at fixed time defines a distribution in ${\mathcal S}'(\mathbb R^3)$, we can introduce the formal test function $\varphi_\gamma(t,\vec x)=\delta(t-t_0)\chi_\gamma(\vec x)$ and define the flux of $\vec{ E}_{reg}$ through $S$ at time $t_0$ as[^7] \[\begin{aligned} \label{flu} \Phi_S(t_0)=\lim_{\gamma\ra 0}{ E}^i_{reg}\big(\!-\pa_i\vp_\gamma\big). \end{aligned}\] From it follows indeed, see the equality in , \[{ E}^i_{reg}\big(\!-\pa_i\vp_\gamma\big)=\frac12\,\mathcal{J}^0(\vp_\gamma)=\frac e2\,\chi_\gamma(\vec y(t_0)).\] As $\gamma\ra 0$ the r.h.s. of gives thus $e/2$ or $0$, according to whether at time $t_0$ the particle is in $V$ or not, which is the expected result[^8]. We emphasize that the probably most striking feature of the result is the vanishing of the Coulomb field--that is, the field that for a massive particle in uniform motion carries the entire electric flux. We will come back to these issues, and to the physical meaning of , in the concluding Section [6](#conclusions){reference-type="ref" reference="conclusions"}. # Liénard-Wiechert regularization[\[LWreg\]]{#LWreg label="LWreg"} Unfortunately for unbounded trajectories the "regularized" potential is not a distribution. To see it notice that for large $r$ and large $t$ the integrands of and become asymptotically identical and, consequently, as the latter functional for unbounded trajectories does not represent a distribution (see the end of Section [\[ABProof\]](#ABProof){reference-type="ref" reference="ABProof"}), so does the former: both are indeed divergent. To face the solution of Maxwell's equations for unbounded trajectories we resort therefore to the Liénard-Wiechert regularization, introduced in Section [\[limAUR\]](#limAUR){reference-type="ref" reference="limAUR"}. Correspondingly we replace the light-like word-line $y^\m(\la)$ with the time-like world-line $Y^\m(\la)$ , which--when parametrized with time--reads Y\^(t)=(t,(Vt)), V\<1.[\[YVB\]]{#YVB label="YVB"} The corresponding Liénard-Wiechert field $F^{\mu\nu}$ $\eqref{FVdec}$ satisfies then the Maxwell equations or, equivalently, the potential $A^\m$ satisfies the equation . Since the current $J^{\mu}= e\int\delta^{4}(x-Y(\lambda))\,dY^\m$ associated to the world-line satisfies the (trivial) distributional limit \[\LimV J^{\mu}= e\!\int\!\delta^{4}(x-y(\lambda))\,dy^\m =\mathcal{J}^{\mu},\] we conclude that, ${\it if }$ the field $\eqref{FVdec}$ admits a limit \[\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}\equiv\LimV F^{\mu\nu}= \LimV(C^{\m\n}+R^{\m\n})\equiv {\mathcal C}^{\m\n}+{\mathcal R}^{\m\n}, \label{FBFromLimV}\] the limiting field $\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}$ is automatically a solution of the Maxwell equations . In writing we used that, if the field $F^{\mu\nu}$ admits a limit as a whole, the Coulomb and radiation fields will always admit limits separately[^9], that we called ${\mathcal C}^{\m\n}$ and ${\mathcal R}^{\m\n}$. ## Distributional limits of fields and currents[\[limCB\]]{#limCB label="limCB"} If the limit exists, important information about the fields ${\mathcal C}^{\m\n}$ and ${\mathcal R}^{\m\n}$ can be gained enforcing the distributional limits of equations and $\eqref{CRVMaxwell}$. A crucial step for this purpose is the determination of the distributional limit of the "current" $K^\m$ defined in \[\mathcal{K}^{\mu}\equiv\LimV K^{\mu}.\label{limK}\] In Appendix IV, see , we show that this limit exists -- for bounded as well as unbounded trajectories--its general expression being \^()=e v\^(t-b) (t,b(t-b)+(t-b)) dt \\|\_b=0\^b=.[\[KB1\]]{#KB1 label="KB1"} However, as we will see in the following, the general form will give rise to different analytical expressions according to whether the trajectory is bounded or unbounded. Applying the limit $V\ra 1$ to equations and $\eqref{CRVMaxwell}$ we conclude that the fields ${\mathcal C}^{\m\n}$ and ${\mathcal R}^{\m\n}$ satisfy the Maxwell equations \[\partial_{\mu}\mathcal{C}^{\mu\nu}= \mathcal{J}^{\nu}+\mathcal{K}^{\nu},\quad\quad \partial_{[\mu}{\mathcal C}_{\nu\rho]}=0,\quad\quad \partial_{\mu}\mathcal{R}^{\mu\nu}=-\mathcal{K}^{\nu},\quad\quad \partial_{[\mu}{\mathcal R}_{\nu\rho]}=0. \label{divCB}\] As observed previously, while the Liénard-Wiechert regularization has a clear physical meaning-- i.e. the "regularized particle" runs on the same orbit as the massless particle, but at a speed $V$ less than one--it has the drawback of not being manifestly covariant; nevertheless it will lead to manifestly Lorentz-covariant fields. We stress, once more, that the entire procedure relies on a--yet to be furnished--proof that the limit exists. ## Coulomb and radiation fields for bounded motions For a bounded motion both our regularizations are available, so that we can use it to test and explore the power of the Liénard-Wiechert regularization. Given and , for a bounded motion we have trivially \[\LimV {A}^\mu= \mathcal A^\m,\] so that the existence of the limit --see -- is guaranteed. We stress that this fact ensures that the fields $\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}$ derived with the two regularizations necessarily coincide--equalling in fact --because they derive from the same potential . For a bounded trajectory the current gains no contribution from $b=\infty$--because for $b\ra \infty$ the spatial argument of the test function tends to infinity--while the contribution from $b=0$ gives \[\mathcal{K}^{\mu}(\varphi)=-e\!\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}v^\m\varphi(t,\vec{y}(t))\,dt=-{\mathcal J}^\m(\vp).\] This means that for a bounded motion we have the, a priori rather unexpected, result [\[kmn1\]]{#kmn1 label="kmn1"} \^=-\^. From we see, indeed, that in this case the limiting Coulomb field $\mathcal{C}^{\mu\nu}$ satisfies homogeneous Maxwell equations and, actually, it vanishes, as we have already established in the framework of the covariant regularization in Section [3.3.1](#covreg){reference-type="ref" reference="covreg"}. Correspondingly the "source" of the radiation field $\mathcal{R}^{\mu\nu}$ in is the total current $\mathcal{J}^{\mu}$. ## Vanishing of the Coulomb field[\[vcf\]]{#vcf label="vcf"} As a primary test of the Liénard-Wiechert regularization we cross-check explicitly the disappearance of the Coulomb field [\[cmn\]]{#cmn label="cmn"} C\^= C\^=0, where $C^{\m\n}$ is the field $\eqref{CV}$ produced by the regularized trajectory . This will be instructive also because for an unbounded trajectory the limiting Coulomb field will be no longer zero, and hence this test will allow us to better understand the mechanism of its appearance for such a trajectory--where the covariant regularization is no longer available. Starting from the world-line we set \[\mathcal{V}^{\mu}(t)\equiv\frac{dY^{\mu}(t)}{dt}=\big(1,V\vec{v}(Vt)\big).\label{vmuV}\] Performing the analogous manipulations that led from through and to $\eqref{EBProof1}$, from $\eqref{CV}$ we find now \[C^{\mu\nu}(\varphi)= \frac{(1-V^2)\,e}{4\pi} \int\frac{X^{\mu}\mathcal{V}^{\nu}-X^{\nu} \mathcal{V}^{\mu}}{r\left(r-V\vec{v}\cdot\vec{x}\right)^{2}}\, \varphi\big(t+r,\vec{x}+\vec y\,\big)\,dtd^{3}x,\label{CBint}\] where $\vec v$ and $\vec y$ are evaluated at time $Vt$ and $X^{\mu}\equiv\left(r,\vec{x}\right)$. Performing again the change of variables this integral turns into \^ ()= (t+r,b+q\_a\_a+ )d\^2qdtdb.[\[VRegProof3\]]{#VRegProof3 label="VRegProof3"} For $b<0$ the denominator $(r-Vb)^2$ never vanishes, so that restricted to this region the integral multiplying $(1-V^2)$ in converges in the limit $V\ra1$. Restricted to this region we have therefore $\lim_{V\ra1} C^{\mu\nu}(\vp)\big\|_{b<0}=0$. In the complementary region $b\ge0$, as $V\ra1$, for small values of $q_a$ the denominator vanishes as $(r-Vb)^2\ra (r-b)^2\approx (q^2)^2/4b^2$. Accordingly for $b\ge0$ we perform the rescaling $q_{a}\rightarrow\sqrt{1-V^{2}}\,q_{a}$ getting [\[cmn0\]]{#cmn0 label="cmn0"} C\^()\\|\_b=\_b (r+Vb)\^2 (t+r,bv+ q\_a\_a+ ) d\^2qdtdb, where now \[r=\sqrt{b^2+(1-V^{2})q^{2}},\quad\quad X^{\mu}=\big(r,b\vec{v}+\sqrt{1-V^{2}}\,q_{a}\vec{N}_{a}\big).\label{VRegProof2}\] At this point we can use again the dominated convergence theorem (Appendix I) to take in the limit $V\ra 1$ inside the integral. Since from and $\eqref{VRegProof2}$ for $b\ge0$ we get $\lim_{V\rightarrow1}X^{\mu}=b\left(1,\vec{v}\right)=bv^{\mu}$ and $\lim_{V\rightarrow1}{\mathcal V}^{\mu}=v^\m$, it follows that \[\lim_{V\rightarrow1} (X^{\mu}\mathcal{V}^{\nu}-X^{\nu}\mathcal{V}^{\mu})=0.\] Consequently we have \[\lim_{V\ra1} C^{\mu\nu}(\vp)=0\] for all $\vp$, which amounts to . Let us underline the point in the proof where we used that the trajectory is bounded. As $V\ra 1$ the test function in , that cures the large distance divergences of the rest of the integrand, goes over in $\varphi(t+b,\vec y(t)+b\vec v(t))$. If the trajectory were unbounded in the past, for example asymptotically linear, i.e. $\vec y(t)\approx \vec v_\infty t$ for $t\ra-\infty$, then the test function for large negative $t$ would take the translation invariant form $\varphi(t+b,(t+b)\vec v_\infty)$, implying that the large distance divergences of the integrand could no longer be cured; consequently no function dominating uniformly the integrand--needed for the validity of the dominated convergence theorem--could be found. Considering, on the other hand, the distributional limit for $V\ra 1$ of the radiation field , by construction we get back the field [\[rmn\]]{#rmn label="rmn"} \^= R\^= Q\^+(\^\_reg). Due to the relevance that this limit will acquire in the case of unbounded trajectories, we perform it explicitly in Appendix VI. # Unbounded accelerated motion[\[ubm\]]{#ubm label="ubm"} In this section we consider a massless particle performing an unbounded motion, that in the infinite past is free. This is a common, and realistic, motion since all physically realizable macroscopic electromagnetic fields vanish at infinity, being actually of compact support. Correspondingly we suppose that the trajectory approaches for large negative times sufficiently fast a straight line ${\cal L}$--say $\vec y_\infty(t)=\vec v_\infty t$--the constant asymptotic velocity being obviously constrained by $\|\vec v_\infty\|=1$. More precisely, setting [\[asym\]]{#asym label="asym"} y(t)=v_t+ (t), we impose that--shifting in case the origin of time--for $t<0$ we have \\|(t)\\|\< a\\|t\\|\^2,\\|(t)\\|\< b\\|t\\|\^2,\\|(t)\\|\< c\\|t\\|\^3,[\[limUBv\]]{#limUBv label="limUBv"} where $a$, $b$ and $c$ are positive constants. This means that for $t\ra-\infty$ the kinematical quantities $\vec y(t)$, $\vec v(t)$ and $\vec a(t)$ fall off to their asymptotic values--respectively $\vec v_\infty t$, $\vec v_\infty$ and $0$--according to an inverse power law. In the following we denote the constant asymptotic four-velocity (w.r.t. time) with \[v_{\infty}^{\mu} \equiv(1,\vec v_{\infty}).\] We do not require any particular behavior of the trajectory for $t\ra+\infty$, as it will have no qualitative influence on the form of the electromagnetic field. The main qualitative new feature of such an unbounded trajectory, with respect to a bounded one, is the modified form of the singularity-string $\vec\gamma(t,b)$ : its end points at fixed time $t$ are now \[\vec\gamma(t,0)=\vec y(t),\quad\quad \vec\gamma(t,\infty)=\vec{v}_{\infty}t,\] and hence, contrary to the bounded case, the string has a finite extension. Consequently during time evolution the singularity-string sweeps out a surface whose boundary is composed by the world-line of the particle and by the world-line of a virtual massless particle traveling along the straight $\mathcal{L}$ [\[ymui\]]{#ymui label="ymui"} y\^\_()=v\_\^. Correspondingly, according to Poincaré-duality, the divergence of the field $Q^{\m\n}$ in , supported on the singularity surface, satisfies--instead of --the modified equation [\[upmn\]]{#upmn label="upmn"} \_Q\^=J\^-J\_L\^, where ${\mathcal J}_{\mathcal L}^\m$ is the current associated to the world-line [\[jl\]]{#jl label="jl"} J\_L\^(x)=e v\^\_ \^4(x-v\_) d. ## The potential[\[cop\]]{#cop label="cop"} Since for an unbounded trajectory the trial functional is not a distribution, to construct a well-defined potential we rely now on the Liénard-Wiechert regularization. According to we introduce the regularized time-like world-line $Y^\m(t)=(t,\vec y(Vt))$ and consider the related Liénard-Wiechert potential , i.e. \[\begin{aligned} {1} A^{\mu}(\varphi) & =\frac{e}{4\pi}\int\frac{\mathcal{V}^{\mu}(t)}{r}\,\varphi\big(t+r,\vec{x}+\vec{y}(Vt)\big)\,d^{4}x, \quad\quad \mathcal{V}^\m(t)=(1,V\vec v(Vt)). \label{AUBV} \end{aligned}\] This potential, however, does not converge as $V\ra 1$ in the distributional sense, in that the candidate limit for unbounded trajectories is not a distribution. To overcome this difficulty we introduce a "compensating" Liénard-Wiechert potential $A_\infty^{\mu}$, produced by a virtual particle traveling along $\mathcal{L}$ with speed $V$, i.e. with world-line $Y^\m_\infty(t)=(t,V\vec v_\infty t)$, given by (see $\eqref{AURV}$) \[\label{aasym} A^{\mu}_\infty(x)=\frac{e}{4\pi}\frac{\cal V^{\mu}_\infty}{\sqrt{({\cal V}_\infty x)^{2}-x^{2}{\cal V}^{2}_\infty}}, \quad\quad \mathcal{V}_{\infty}^{\mu}\equiv(1,V\vec{v}_{\infty}).\] As a distribution it is given by A\_\^() = (t+r,+V_t) d\^4x.[\[AUBVr\]]{#AUBVr label="AUBVr"} The world-lines $Y^\m(t)$ and $Y^\m_\infty(t)$ entail the same "pathological" behavior as $t\ra-\infty$, but from Section [\[limAUR\]](#limAUR){reference-type="ref" reference="limAUR"} we know how to cure the pathologies of the latter: before taking the limit $V\ra1$ we must perform a gauge transformation with gauge function , that in the present case becomes \[\Lambda(x)=\frac{e}{4\pi}\ln\left\|(\mathcal{V}_{\infty}x)-\sqrt{(\mathcal{V}_{\infty}x)^{2}- x^{2}\mathcal{V}_{\infty}^2 }\,\right\|.\] This suggests to a define a potential as [\[unb\]]{#unb label="unb"} A\^(A\^+\^) and, indeed, we can prove the following theorem. 0.2truecm If the unbounded trajectory $\vec y(t)$ for $t\ra-\infty$ entails the asymptotic flatness conditions , the distributional limit exists and is given by \[\begin{aligned} \label{unbp1} {\mathcal A}^\m(\vp)=&\frac{e}{4\pi}\int\!\frac1r\,\Big(v^{\mu}(t)\, \varphi\big(t+r,\vec{x}+\vec{y}(t)\big)-v_{\infty}^{\mu}\, \varphi\big(t+r,\vec{x}+\vec{v}_{\infty}t\big)\!\Big)d^{4}x\\ &+\frac e{2\pi} \int\! \frac {x^\m}{x^2}\,H(v_\infty x)\,\vp(x)\,d^4x,\label{unbp2} \end{aligned}\] where the principal-part integration prescription for the factor $1/x^2=1/(x^\n x_\n)$ is understood. 0.2truecm . We write \[A^{\mu}+\pa^\m\Lambda=A_{1}^{\mu}+A_{2}^{\mu},\quad\quad\mbox{where}\quad A_{1}^{\mu}\equiv A^{\mu}-A_\infty^{\mu},\quad\quad A_{2}^{\mu}\equiv A_\infty^{\mu}+\partial^{\mu}\Lambda.\] As we have shown in Section [\[limAUR\]](#limAUR){reference-type="ref" reference="limAUR"}, the limit of $A_{2}^{\mu}$ as $V\ra 1$ in the sense of distributions exists and is given by $\eqref{AUR}$--the potential generated by a particle in light-like linear motion along $\mathcal{L}$, with world-line . This limit corresponds hence to the term . As for $A_{1}^{\mu}$ from $\eqref{AUBV}$ and $\eqref{AUBVr}$ we get \[A_{1}^{\mu}(\varphi)=\frac{e}{4\pi}\int\!\frac1r \,\Big(\mathcal{V}^{\mu}(t)\, \varphi\big(t+r,\vec{x}+\vec{y}(Vt)\big)-\mathcal{V}_{\infty}^{\mu}\, \varphi\big(t+r,\vec{x}+V\vec{v}_{\infty}t\big)\!\Big)d^{4}x.\label{A1}\] As we will prove in Appendix V, when considering the limit of this expression for $V\ra 1$ we can swap the limit with the integral sign and the result is therefore simply . The main point of the proof is that, as the two terms in have the same singular behavior as $r\rightarrow\infty$ (along the direction of $\vec v_\infty$) and simultaneously $t=-r\rightarrow-\infty$, in the limit $V\rightarrow1$ the divergences cancel out from their difference--if the asymptotic conditions are satisfied. $\square$\ As in the case of a linear motion it is again possible to construct a potential $\mathcal{A}'^\mu$ satisfying the Lorenz gauge. The four-divergence of the term is, in fact, zero, since it is the distributional limit for $V\rightarrow 1$ of the potential $A_{1}^{\mu}$ that--being the difference of two potentials obeying the Lorenz gauge-- satisfies $\partial_{\mu}A_{1}^{\mu}=0$. The term corresponds to the potential of a massless particle in linear motion with four-velocity $v_{\infty}$ and has, instead, a non-vanishing divergence. In order to restore the Lorenz gauge it is thus sufficient to perform the same gauge transformation of Section [\[limAUR\]](#limAUR){reference-type="ref" reference="limAUR"}, this time in the form \[\mathcal{A}'^\mu=\mathcal{A}^\mu-\partial^{\mu}\!\left(\frac{e}{4\pi}H(v_{\infty}x) \ln\|x^{2}\|\right),\quad\quad \pa_\m\mathcal{A}'^\mu=0. \label{LGaugeUB}\] ## Solution of Maxwell's equations According to the field strength $\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}= \partial^{\mu}\mathcal{A}^{\nu}-\partial^{\nu}\mathcal{A}^{\mu}$ can be computed as the limit under $V\ra 1$ of the field $F^{\mu\nu}=\partial^{\mu}A^{\nu}-\partial^{\nu}A^{\mu}$, with $A^{\mu}$ the Liénard-Wiechert potential $\eqref{AUBV}$. This means that we have, once more, \[\label{limun} \mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}=\LimV F^{\mu\nu}= \LimV(C^{\m\n}+R^{\m\n})={\mathcal C}^{\m\n}+{\mathcal R}^{\m\n},\] where $F^{\mu\nu}$ is again the Liénard-Wiechert field $\eqref{FVdec}$- relative to the regularized trajectory . What we have shown in the previous section is, actually, that the limit exists--although the (apparently natural) potential does not admit a distributional limit. To evaluate the limit explicitly we consider the Coulomb and radiation fields separately. Useful information will then be gained again from the Maxwell equations , that we know to be satisfied automatically by the limiting fields ${\mathcal C}^{\m\n}$ and ${\mathcal R}^{\m\n}$. ### Currents[\[loc\]]{#loc label="loc"} As shown in Appendix IV, the "current" $\mathcal{K}^\m$ showing up in has the general expression . But now--contrary to the bounded case--by virtue of and the asymptotic behaviors $\eqref{limUBv}$ we have \[\lim_{b\rightarrow\infty}\big(\vec{y}(t-b)+b\vec{v}(t-b)\big)= \lim_{b\rightarrow\infty}\big((t-b)\vec{v}_{\infty}+b\vec{v}_{\infty}\big)= t\vec{v}_{\infty}.\label{limgammaUB}\] Consequently both terms in survive and we obtain (see ) \^() =e v\_\^ (t,t\_) dt-e v\^(t) (t,(t)) dt= \_\^()-\^(). We have thus [\[dRUB\]]{#dRUB label="dRUB"} \^= \^\_L-\^. Equations imply then that the sources of the Coulomb and radiation fields are both non vanishing, being given by [\[maxcr\]]{#maxcr label="maxcr"} \_\^=\_\^, \_\^= \^- \_\^. For the particular case of a particle in linear motion along $\mathcal{L}$ we have $\mathcal{J}^\m= \mathcal{J}_{\mathcal{L}}^\m$, and equations are thus in agreement with the shock-wave solution , for which we have indeed $\mathcal{R}^{\mu\nu}=0$. ### Electromagnetic field To determine the solution of Maxwell's equations explicitly it remains to evaluate the limits for an unbounded motion where, we recall, the fields $C^{\m\n}$ and $R^{\m\n}$ are given in , . The limit of the radiation field $R^{\m\n}$ can be evaluated in exactly the same way as for the bounded motion, see Appendix VI. The only delicate point is again the swapping of the limit $V\ra 1$ with the integrals, but this time this can be done thanks to the bound on the acceleration $\vec a(t)=\ddot{\vec \Delta}(t)$. The result for $\mathcal{R}^{\mu\nu}$ is thus again . For what concerns the limit of the Coulomb field $\mathcal{C}^{\mu\nu}$ we observe that, from and , it must satisfy the equations \[\partial_{\mu}\mathcal{C}^{\mu\nu}=\mathcal{J}_{\mathcal{L}}^{\nu},\quad\quad \partial_{[\mu}{\mathcal C}_{\nu\rho]}=0,\] where the current $\mathcal{J}_{\mathcal{L}}^\m$ is that of a virtual particle moving with constant light-like four-velocity $v^\m_\infty$ along $\mathcal{L}$. For uniqueness reasons $\mathcal{C}^{\mu\nu}$ is then the shock-wave field , that is [\[csw\]]{#csw label="csw"} \^= (v_x). In conclusion, a light-like particle following an unbounded motion that is asymptotically linear in the past, creates the electromagnetic field \[\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}=\mathcal{P}(\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}_{reg})+ \frac{1}{2}\,Q^{\mu\nu} +\mathcal{C}^{\mu\nu}. \label{Fug}\] The first term is a regular distribution, that corresponds essentially to the point-wise limit of the Liénard-Wiechert radiation field; the second term is a $\dl$-function supported on the dynamical singularity-string , that has now, however, a finite extension. The field $\mathcal{P}(\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}_{reg})$ diverges on the same singularity-string, too. The term $\mathcal{C}^{\mu\nu}$-- a remnant of the Coulomb field--is a $\dl$-function supported on a plane shock-wave that moves at the speed of light. We stress that all these fields--being the limits of (causal) Liénard-Wiechert fields--respect automatically causality, representing thus phenomena that propagate at the speed of light. In particular all points of the singularity-string can be seen to move at the speed of light, see. From equations and it follows that the currents carried by the three fields in are (compare with and of the bounded case) \[\begin{aligned} \label{curd1} \pa_\m\!\left(\!\frac{1}{2}\,Q^{\mu\nu}\!\right)&= \frac12\,({\mathcal J}^\n-{\mathcal J}_{\mathcal L}^\n),\\ \pa_\m\big(\mathcal{P}(\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}_{reg})\big)&= \frac12\,({\mathcal J}^\n-{\mathcal J}_{\mathcal L}^\n),\label{curd2}\\ \pa_\m \mathcal{C}^{\mu\nu}&={\mathcal J}_{\mathcal L}^\n, \end{aligned}\] and obviously sum up to give $\mathcal{J}^\n$. Only the sum of the first two fields satisfies the Bianchi identity, while $\mathcal{C}^{\mu\nu}$ satisfies it independently. With respect to a bounded motion the new ingredient in is the (re)appearance of the shock-wave--a feature that might by itself seem unexpected. The reason for the presence of this shock-wave is clearly that the particle in the infinite past approaches a straight line: although not being strictly linear, the almost infinite duration of the linear motion compensates the never strictly vanishing acceleration, giving rise to a kind of coherent "non-perturbative" shock-wave--as if the particle moved in the infinite past on a straight line. Obviously the presence of this field is also needed to give rise to a consistent solution of Maxwell's equations. In fact, since the boundary of the singularity surface is given by the world-line $y^\m(\la)$ and by ${\mathcal L}$, the divergence of the first two terms in equals ${\mathcal J}^\n-{\mathcal J}_{\mathcal L}^\n$, rather than ${\mathcal J}^\n$: the shock-wave is precisely needed to cure this mismatch. With this respect equation may look rather unexpected--remember that $\mathcal{P}(\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}_{reg})$ corresponds to the naiv limit of the radiation field, often presented in the literature erroneously as the "true" field of a massless particle-- and we give an independent proof of it in Appendix VIII. A peculiar feature of the field is that it vanishes "in front of" the shock-wave , i.e. for fixed $t$ it vanishes for any $\vec x$ such that $\vec x\cdot\vec v_\infty>t$. For the field $Q^{\m\n}/2$, supported on the singularity surface, this is obvious since for fixed $t$ the singularity-string starts from the particle's position and ends on the center $\vec v_\infty t$ of the shock-wave, lying always behind it. For the regular field $\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}_{reg}$ this follows instead from the fact that for points such that $\vec x\cdot\vec v_\infty>t$, the retarded-time conditions admit no solution for $\la$ (for the proof see Appendix VII). The reason for this is that the total field begins its life in the infinite past, originating from a linear motion that produces first of all a shock-wave propagating linearly at the speed of light. Since the field $\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}_{reg}$--a true radiation field--arises from acceleration, this field is thus created "after" the shock-wave and propagates non-linearly: it can therefore never reach the shock-wave and lies, hence, always behind it. ### Shock-wave in an idealized trajectory Since the appearance of the shock-wave represents an important new physical feature of the solution for an unbounded trajectory--for a bounded trajectory in Section [\[vcf\]](#vcf){reference-type="ref" reference="vcf"} we showed explicitly how in the Liénard-Wiechert regularization the Coulomb field vanishes --to achieve a more direct understanding of the reappearance of this field, we derive it explicitly as the limit for $V\ra 1$ of for an idealized trajectory, where the conditions are "strongly" satisfied, i.e. for a trajectory that is a straight line until a certain time, say $t=0$, [\[ylin\]]{#ylin label="ylin"} y(t)= v_t, fort. We start again from the general expression \^ ()= (t+r,b+q\_a\_a+ )d\^2qdtdb,[\[VRegProof3a\]]{#VRegProof3a label="VRegProof3a"} where, we recall, $X^\m=(r,b\vec v+q_a\vec N_a)$, $r=\sqrt{b^2+q^2}$, $\mathcal{V}^{\m}=(1,V \vec v)$ and the variables $\vec y$, $\vec v$ and $\vec N_a$ are evaluated at time $Vt$. We analyze the limit under $V\ra 1$ of this integral considering separately the regions $t>0$ and $t<0$. For $t>0$ we may proceed in the same way as in Section [\[vcf\]](#vcf){reference-type="ref" reference="vcf"}--even if the trajectory is unbounded in the future--since, as we explained at the end of that section, the procedure fails only for trajectories unbounded in the past. For $t>0$ the limit of for $V\ra 1$ is thus again zero. For $t<0$ the trajectory is linear and we proceed in a different way, resembling in some sense the procedure that allowed in Section [\[secDistLimR\]](#secDistLimR){reference-type="ref" reference="secDistLimR"} to derive the shock-wave for an infinite linear motion. We perform the change of variables $(t,b)\ra (t',b')$ \[t'=t+r,\quad\quad b'=\frac{b-Vr}{\sqrt{1-V^{2}}},\] with inverse transformations \[b=\frac{b'+VR}{\sqrt{1-V^{2}}},\quad\quad t=t'-\frac{R+Vb'}{\sqrt{1-V^2}},\quad\quad\mbox{where}\,\,\, R\equiv\sqrt{b'^2+q^2}.\] In particular we have \[r=\frac{R+Vb'}{\sqrt{1-V^{2}}}, \quad\quad r-Vb=\sqrt{1-V^2}R,\quad\quad \frac{\partial b}{\partial b'}=\frac{r}{R}.\] The variable $t'$ ranges now from $-\infty$ to $r$, while $b'$ ranges again from $-\infty$ to $\infty$. Inserting these elements, as well as , in , we obtain (for $t<0$ the vectors $\vec N_a\perp \vec v_\infty$ are time-independent) \[{C}^{\mu\nu}(\varphi)\big\|_{t<0}=\frac{e}{4\pi}\int_{t'<r} \frac{\left(X'^{\mu}\mathcal{V}^{\nu}-X'^{\nu}\mathcal{V}^{\mu}\right)} {R^{3}}\,\varphi\big(t',q_{a}\vec{N}_{a}+\big(Vt'-b'\sqrt{1-V^{2}}\,\big)\vec{v}_{\infty}\big) d^{2}qdt'db',\label{idealProof4}\] where \[X'^{\mu}= \Big(\sqrt{\frac{1-V}{1+V}}\,(R-b'),q_{a}\vec{N}_{a}\Big).\] Since for $V\ra 1$ we have $r\ra \infty$, swapping in the limit with the integral, and omitting the primes, we get \[\mathcal{C}^{\mu\nu}(\varphi)=\lim_{V\ra1} C^{\mu\nu}(\vp) =\frac{e}{4\pi}\int\frac{m{}^{\mu}v_\infty^{\nu}-m{}^{\nu} v_\infty^{\mu}}{(b^2+q^2)^{3/2}}\,\varphi\big(t,t\vec{v}_{\infty}+q_{a}\vec{N}_{a}\big)d^{2}qdtdb,\] where $m^{\mu}\equiv(0,q_{a}\vec{N}_{a})$. Integrating over $b$ we obtain eventually \[\mathcal{C}^{\mu\nu}(\varphi)=\frac{e}{2\pi}\int\frac {{m{}^{\mu}v_\infty^{\nu}-m{}^{\nu} v_\infty^{\mu}}}{q^2}\,\varphi\big(t,t\vec{v}_{\infty}+q_{a}\vec{N}_{a}\big)d^{2}qdt,\] in agreement with . Notice that for a trajectory satisfying the terms $\mathcal{P}(\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}_{reg})+ Q^{\mu\nu}/2$ of for $t<0$ vanish, so that for negative times the field is a pure shock-wave. # Conclusions and interpretation {#conclusions} We have shown that Maxwell's equations for massless particles--traveling at the speed of light--admit exact and explicit solutions in the space of distributions. The corresponding fields are uniquely determined and respect causality: they represent, therefore, the correct generalizations of the Liénard-Wiechert fields from time-like to light-like trajectories. Unlike the time-like case, bounded and unbounded light-like motions produce radically different electromagnetic fields. With respect to the field of a bounded motion, the field of an unbounded motion is, in a certain sense, less singular. The former contains in fact a $\dl$-function $Q^{\m\n}$ supported at fixed time on an infinitely extended singularity-string, while the singularity-string of the latter has a finite extension. This feature can be interpreted observing that the former is produced by a particle that is bounded for all times and hence eternally accelerated: the field keeps memory of this acceleration and reaches at each time in each direction spatial infinity. Notice, in particular, that the regular field $\mathcal{P}(\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}_{reg})$ in --that encodes, properly speaking, the radiation--entails the same singularity locus as $Q^{\m\n}$. On the contrary a particle performing an unbounded motion is free in the infinite past, where it does not produce radiation, and correspondingly the singularity locus of $\mathcal{P}(\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}_{reg})+ Q^{\mu\nu}/2$ is at each time a bounded region, i.e. a bounded string. In addition to this field entails a shock-wave--at fixed time a $\dl$-function on a two-dimensional surface--and in this sense the total field is more singular than the field of a bounded motion. In some sense the shock-wave represents the counterpart of the Coulomb field of a massive particle, in that it does not carry radiation. We constructed for all physical situations considered--linear, bounded and unbounded accelerated motions--well-defined four-potentials, a more delicate task since potentials are in general more singular then the field strengths. While for bounded motions the potential can be constructed as the point-wise limit of the potential of a time-like trajectory, for unbounded motions before taking the (distributional) limit one must consider an appropriate gauge transformation. In this way for unbounded motions one obtains a potential that does no longer satisfy the Lorenz-gauge $\pa_\m \mathcal{A}^\m =0$, which can, however, be restored by the gauge transformation While the mathematical significance of our results is transparent, their physical interpretation and consequences are largely to be investigated. In particular there are some peculiar aspects of the structure of our basic results and , that call for a physical explanation. One such feature is the "democratic" partition of the total electric flux between the two fields of , see equations , : the first field is semi-integer, in the sense that its flux through an arbitrary surface, closed or not, equals $Ne/2$ with $N\in \mathbb{Z}$, while the flux of the second field through an arbitrary closed surface equals $0$ or $e/2$. It would be rather surprising if these features had no direct physical counterpart, still to be discovered. Once the electromagnetic field of a massless particle in generic motion is known, one can eventually face the radiation problem (for a preliminary analysis see ). To settle this issue one must first of all construct a distribution-valued energy-momentum tensor[^10] of the electromagnetic field, $\mathcal{T}^{\m\n}_{em}$, that in the complement of the singularity locus $\Sigma$--i.e. the singularity surface and the shock-wave position $\vec v_\infty \cdot \vec x=t$--equals the standard energy-momentum tensor: \[\mathcal{T}^{\m\n}_{em}\big\|_{\mathbb{R}^4 \backslash \Sigma}=\mathcal{F}^{\m\a} \mathcal{F}_\a{}^\n+\frac14\,\eta^{\m\n}\mathcal{F}^{\a\beta}\mathcal{F}_{\a\beta}.\] Once such a tensor has been constructed one can determine its distributional divergence $\pa_\m\mathcal{T}^{\m\n}_{em}$, and check whether there exists an equation of motion for a time-like world-line $y^\m(\la)$, such that the total energy-momentum tensor $\mathcal{T}^{\m\n}=\mathcal{T}^{\m\n}_{em}+\int\! u^\m u^\n\dl^4(x-y(\la))\,d\la$ is conserved: $\pa_\m\mathcal{T}^{\m\n}=0$. If no such equation of motion exists, we must conclude that classical Electrodynamics of massless charged particles is inconsistent, in that energy is not conserved. This would imply, in particular, that the analysis of the "emitted radiation" of such a particle is meaningless, since the emitted energy would not equal the energy lost by the particle. In this way the results of the present paper open the possibility to check whether classical Electrodynamics of massless charged particles is consistent or not. This problem will be addressed elsewhere. # Appendices {#app} ## Appendix I {#appendix-i .unnumbered} Distributions. The Schwarz space of test functions $\mathcal{S}$ is the set of complex functions $\varphi\in\mathcal{C}^{\infty}\left(\mathbb{R}^{4}\right)$ such that \[\left\Vert \varphi\right\Vert _{\mathcal{P},\mathcal{Q}}<\infty,\quad\mbox{for all polynomials $\mathcal{P}$ and $\mathcal{Q}$},\label{testFuncProp}\] where \[\left\Vert \varphi\right\Vert _{\mathcal{P},\mathcal{Q}}\equiv \sup_{x\in\mathbb{R}^{4}} \left\|\mathcal{P}(x)\mathcal{Q}(\partial)\varphi\left(x\right)\right\|\] are semi-norms of $\varphi$, and $\mathcal{P}$ and $\mathcal{Q}$ are generic polynomials of coordinates and derivatives respectively. The space of tempered distributions $\mathcal{S}'$ is the space of linear continuous functionals on $\mathcal{S}$. It can be shown that these functionals are characterized by the property \[F\in\mathcal{S}'\quad\Leftrightarrow\quad \left\|F(\varphi)\right\|\leq\sum_{\mathcal{P},\mathcal{Q}} C_{\mathcal{P},\mathcal{Q}}\left\Vert \varphi\right\Vert _{\mathcal{P},\mathcal{Q}},\,\,\forall\varphi\in\mathcal{S},\label{distDef}\] where the sum must contain a finite number of terms and the coefficients $C_{\mathcal{P},\mathcal{Q}}$ must be independent of $\vp$. In the text we use several times the following theorem that allows, through the corollary stated below, to interchange limits with integrals. 0.2truecm Let $\{f_n\}$ be a sequence of functions belonging to $L^1(\mathbb{R}^D)$. If there exists a function $f(x)$ and a positive function $g\in L^1(\mathbb{R}^D)$ such that - $\lim_{n\ra\infty}f_n(x)=f(x)$, - $\|f_n(x)\|\le g(x),\quad\forall n,\,\forall x$, then \[{L^1}\!-\!\lim_{n\ra\infty}f_n=f.\] \ Corollary. If the sequence $f_n$ satisfies the hypotheses $a)$ and $b)$ of the dominated convergence theorem then \[\lim_{n\ra\infty}\int\! f_n(x)\,d^Dx=\int\! f(x)\,d^Dx,\] i.e.* the limit can be swapped with the integral sign.* ## Appendix II {#appendix-ii .unnumbered} In this appendix we derive the limit $\eqref{LimJeps}$ with $\mathcal{J}_{\varepsilon}^{\mu}$ given in $\eqref{Jreg}$. Thanks to manifest Lorentz-invariance it is sufficient to establish this limit for the time component $\mu=0$, meaning that we must prove the ordinary limits, see $\eqref{LLCurrent}$, \[\lim_{\varepsilon\rightarrow0}\mathcal{J}_{\varepsilon}^{0}(\varphi)=\mathcal{J}^{0}(\varphi) =e\!\int\!\varphi(t,\vec{y}(t))\, dt\label{limj0}\] for an arbitrary test function $\varphi$. By construction the expression $\eqref{Jreg}$ is invariant under reparametrization of the world-line, so that we can choose as parameter $\lambda= y^{0}(\lambda)\equiv t$. In this way the kinematic quantities simplify to $u^{\mu}=(1,\vec{v})$, $w^{\mu}=(0,\vec{a})$ and $b^\m=(0,\dot{\vec{a}}\,)$. Using the identity and proceeding as in and , the application of the time component of $\eqref{Jreg}$ to a test function reads \_\^0() = r\_(r\_-)\^4 (t+r\_,+) d\^3xdt, where the kinematic quantities $\vec y$, $\vec v$ and $\vec a$ are evaluated at time $t$ and $r_\ve=\sqrt{r^2+\ve^2}$. Performing the change of variables $\vec{x}=b\vec{v}+q_{a}\vec{N}_{a}$ this expression turns into \_\^0() = (t+r\_,b+q\_c\_c+) dtdbd\^2q,[\[j02\]]{#j02 label="j02"} where now $r_{\varepsilon}=\sqrt{b^{2}+q^{2}+\varepsilon^{2}}$. As $\varepsilon\rightarrow0$, in the region $b<0$ the integrand develops no singularities around $q_{a}=0$ and the limit vanishes. We can therefore restrict the integration over $b$ to the half line $b>0$. To perform the limit we write \[\frac{1}{r_{\varepsilon}-b}=\frac{r_{\varepsilon}+b}{q^{2}+\varepsilon^{2}}\] and rescale the variable $q_{a}\rightarrow\varepsilon q_{a}$. Taking into account the rescaling of the numerator and of the measure $d^{2}q$ in $\eqref{j02}$, as $\varepsilon\rightarrow0$ the integral develops a priori terms that diverge as $1/\varepsilon^{2}$ and terms that diverge as $1/\varepsilon$. By inspection one sees that the poles $1/\varepsilon^{2}$ cancel each other out, while the poles $1/\varepsilon$ cancel individually thanks to symmetric integration over $q_{a}$. These cancelations are obviously due to the fact that by construction the limit $\eqref{LimJeps}$ exists. To compute the finite terms of $\eqref{j02}$ as $\varepsilon\rightarrow0$, after the rescaling $q_{a}\rightarrow\varepsilon q_{a}$, due to the prefactor $\varepsilon^{2}$ we must expand the integrand in powers of $\varepsilon$ keeping only terms of order $1/\varepsilon^{2}$. After the expansion of the numerator and the denominator, as well as of the test function $\varphi$, the resulting integrals over $q_{a}$ are elementary and, using the identities $\eqref{qId}$, one gets \[\lim_{\varepsilon\rightarrow0}\mathcal{J}_{\varepsilon}^{0}(\varphi)=\frac{e} {2}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dt \int_{0}^{\infty}\!db\left(b^{3}a^{i}a^{j}\partial_{i}\partial_{j}+b^{2}(a^{2}\partial_{0} +\dot{a}^{i}\partial_{i}+ a^{2}v^{i}\partial_{i})+2ba^{2}\right)\varphi(t+b,b\vec{v}+\vec{y}).\] Making repeated use of the identities ($\varphi\equiv\varphi(t+b,b\vec{v}+\vec{y})$) \[\frac{\partial\varphi}{\partial b}=(\partial_{0}+v^{i}\partial_{i})\varphi,\quad\quad\frac{\partial\varphi}{\partial t}=\left(\partial_{0}+(v^{i}+ba^{i})\partial_{i}\right)\!\varphi,\] and integrating several times by parts, one sees that the three terms proportional to $a^{2}$ cancel each other, while the remaining two can be rewritten as \[\begin{aligned} {1} \lim_{\varepsilon\rightarrow0}\mathcal{J}_{\varepsilon}^{0}(\varphi) & =\frac{e}{2}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dt\int_{0}^{\infty}db\,(b^{3}a^{i}a^{j} \partial_{i}\partial_{j}+b^{2}\dot{a}^{i}\partial_{i})\,\varphi(t+b,b\vec{v}+\vec{y})\\ & =\frac{e}{2}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dt\int_{0}^{\infty}db\, b^{2}\!\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial t}-\frac{\partial}{\partial b}\right)\!\left(a^{i}\partial_{i}\varphi(t+b,b\vec{v}+\vec{y})\right)\\ & =e\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dt\int_{0}^{\infty}db\, ba^{i}\partial_{i}\varphi(t+b,b\vec{v}+\vec{y})\\ & =e\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dt\int_{0}^{\infty}db\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial t}-\frac{\partial}{\partial b}\right)\!\varphi(t+b,b\vec{v}+\vec{y})=e\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\varphi(t,\vec{y})\,dt, \end{aligned}\] which is $\eqref{limj0}$. ## Appendix III {#appendix-iii .unnumbered} In this appendix we derive the limit with ${\cal F}^{i0}_\ve(\vp)$ given in . Performing in the latter the change of variables , and using that the constraint $\|\vec v\|^2=1$ implies $\vec v\perp \vec a$, we obtain \[{\cal F}^{i0}_\ve (\varphi)=\frac{e}{4\pi}\int\!\frac{\big(\vec{a}\cdot q_{c}\vec{N}_{c}\big)\big((b-r_{\varepsilon})v^{i}+q_{b}N_{b}^{i}\big)-r_{\varepsilon}(r_{\varepsilon}-b)a^{i}}{r_{\varepsilon} (r_{\varepsilon}-b)^{2}}\,\varphi(t+r_{\varepsilon},b\vec{v}+q_{a}\vec{N}_{a} +\vec{y})\,dtdbd^{2}q,\] where \[r_{\varepsilon}=\sqrt{b^{2}+q^{2}+\varepsilon^{2}},\quad\quad q^{2}= q_1^2+q_2^2.\] Adding and subtracting in the numerator the term $q^{2}a^{i}/2$, after some rearrangements this integral can be split into \[{\cal F}^{i0}_\ve (\varphi)=\int\!(G_{\varepsilon}^{i}+H_{\varepsilon}^{i})\, \varphi(t+r_{\varepsilon},b\vec{v}+q_{a}\vec{N}_{a}+\vec{y})\,dtdbd^{2}q,\label{EBProof3}\] where \[\begin{aligned} {1} G_{\varepsilon}^{i}&=-\frac{e}{4\pi}\frac{\varepsilon^{2}(r_{\varepsilon}+b)a^i} {\left(q^{2}+\varepsilon^{2}\right)^{2}},\label{gei}\\ H_{\varepsilon}^{i}&=\frac{e}{4\pi}\left( \frac{\Pi_{ab}N_{a}^{j}N_{b}^{i}(r_{\varepsilon} +b)^{2}a^{j}}{r_{\varepsilon}(q^{2}+\varepsilon^{2})^{2}}-\frac{q^{2}a^i}{2r_{\varepsilon}(q^{2} +\varepsilon^{2})}-\frac{\big(\vec{a}\cdot q_{c}\vec{N}_{c}\big)(r_{\varepsilon}+b)v^{i}}{r_{\varepsilon}(q^{2}+ \varepsilon^{2})}\right)\!,\label{hei}\\ \label{proj} \Pi_{ab}&=q_{a}q_{b}-\frac{q^{2}}{2}\,\delta_{ab}. \end{aligned}\] To compute the limit [\[fi0\]]{#fi0 label="fi0"} F\^i0 ()=\_F\^i0\_() we will always exchange the limit with the integral sign, resorting to the dominated convergence theorem. We will treat the two terms in $\eqref{EBProof3}$ separately. We start with the contribution involving $G_{\varepsilon}^{i}$, performing the rescaling ${q}_a\ra\varepsilon{q}_a$, [\[ge\]]{#ge label="ge"} G\_\^i (t+r\_,b+q\_a\_a+) dtdbd\^2q=- (q\^2+1)\^2 a\^i(t+R\_,b+q\_a\_a+) dtdbd\^2q, where $R_{\varepsilon}=\sqrt{b^{2}+\varepsilon^{2}(q^{2}+1)}$. Since we have \[\lim_{\varepsilon\rightarrow0}\,(R_{\varepsilon}+b)=2bH(b),\] with $H$ the Heaviside function, the integral over $q_a$ in becomes elementary and we obtain, see , \_G\_\^i (t+r\_,b+q\_a\_a+) dtdbd\^2q=-bH(b) a\^i(t+b,b+) dtdb= [\[pio\]]{#pio label="pio"} Q\^i0(). For what concerns, instead, $H_{\varepsilon}^{i}$ one has the point-wise limit [\[pw\]]{#pw label="pw"} \_V H\_\^i= H\^i, with $H^i$ given in . It is straightforward to check that, as $\varepsilon\ra 0$, the second and third terms of lead in to convergent $q_a$-integrals. For what concerns the first term, adopting two-dimensional polar coordinates $\left(q,\vartheta\right)$ instead of $\left(q_{1},q_{2}\right)$, as $\varepsilon\ra 0$ the integral is asymptotic to $d^2q/q^2$ for $q\rightarrow0$ and seems, therefore, to produce a logarithmic divergence. However, if--before taking the limit $\ve\ra 0$--we integrate first over $\vartheta$ and then over $q$, the traceless factor $\Pi_{ab}$ makes the integral convergent as $\ve\ra0$: for this reason it is said to be conditionally convergent, that is, convergent for a specific order of integrations. In conclusion the limit amounts to the expression $\eqref{EBProof5}$. ## Appendix IV {#appendix-iv .unnumbered} This appendix is devoted to the computation of the limit $\eqref{limK}$, whose result is , with $K^\m$ given in . We will suppose that the world-line $\vec y(t)$ is either bounded, or unbounded but fulfills the asymptotic conditions , . In both cases we can resort to the dominated convergence theorem to swap the limit $V\ra 1$ with the integral sign: in the first case this can be done thanks to the uniform bound $\|\vec y(t)\|<M$, and in the second thanks to the bound on the acceleration in \[\|\vec a(t)\|=\|\ddot{\vec \Delta}(t)\|< \frac {c}{\|t\|^3}.\] Applying to the same operations that led from $\eqref{CV}$ to $\eqref{VRegProof3}$, see in particular the change of variables , we get \[{K}^{\mu}(\varphi)=-\frac{e(1-V^2)V^2}{2\pi}\int\!\frac{ \vec{a}\cdot q_{a}\vec{N}_{a}}{r(r-Vb)^{3}}\,\big(r,b\vec{v}+q_{d}\vec{N}_{d}\big)\, \varphi\big(t+r,b\vec{v}+q_{c}\vec{N}_{c}+\vec{y}\big)\,dtdbd^{2}q,\] where the kinematical quantities $\vec y$, $\vec v$ and $\vec a$ are evaluated at time $Vt$ and $r=\|\vec x\|$. Performing the rescaling $q_{a}\rightarrow\sqrt{1-V^{2}}q_{a}$ we come to \[\begin{aligned} {K}^{\mu}(\varphi)=-\frac{eV^2}{2\pi\sqrt{1-V^{2}}} \int&\frac{\vec{a}\cdot q_{a}\vec{N}_{a}(r+Vb)^{3}}{r(q^{2}+b^{2})^{3}} \,\big(r,b\vec{v}+\sqrt{1-V^{2}}q_{d}\vec{N}_{d}\big)\cdot\nn\\ &\varphi\big({t}+r,b\vec{v}+\sqrt{1-V^{2}} q_{c}\vec{N}_{c}+\vec{y}\big)\,dtdbd^{2}q,\label{KProof1} \end{aligned}\] where from now on $r=\sqrt{b^2+(1-V^2)q^2}$. Setting \[I\equiv-\frac{eV^2}{2\pi\sqrt{1-V^{2}}} \frac{\vec{a}\cdot q_{a}\vec{N}_{a}(r+Vb)^{3}}{r(q^{2}+b^{2})^{3}},\] and adding and subtracting from $\eqref{KProof1}$ the same term, we can write \[\begin{aligned} {1} {K}^{\mu}(\varphi) & =\int \! I\cdot\big(r,b\vec{v}+\sqrt{1-V^{2}}q_{a}\vec{N}_{a}\big)\cdot\nonumber \\ & \quad\quad\quad\left(\varphi\big({t}+r,b\vec{v}+\sqrt{1-V^{2}}q_{c}\vec{N}_{c}+\vec{y}\big)-\varphi\big({t}+r,b\vec{v}+\vec{y}\big)\!\right)\!dtdbd^{2}q\label{KProof2}\\ & +\int \! I\cdot\big(r,b\vec{v}+\sqrt{1-V^{2}}q_{a}\vec{N}_{a}\big)\,\varphi\big({t}+r,b\vec{v}+\vec{y}\big) dtdbd^{2}q.\label{KProof3} \end{aligned}\] We evaluate first the limit for $V\ra 1$ of the term $\eqref{KProof3}$. The contribution proportional to the four-vector $\left(r,b\vec{v}\right)$ drops out, since by symmetric integration over $d^{2}q$ we have \[\int\frac{\vec{a}\cdot q_{a}\vec{N}_{a}(r+Vb)^3}{r(q^{2}+b^{2})^{3}}\, \big(r,b\vec{v}\big)\varphi\big({t}+r,b\vec{v}+\vec{y}\big)\,dtdbd^{2}q=0.\] We are therefore left with the limit of the contribution proportional to $\big(0,\sqrt{1-V^{2}}q_{a}\vec{N}_{a}\big)$, that we call \[H^{\mu}\equiv\lim_{V\rightarrow1}\int \! I\cdot\big(0,\sqrt{1-V^{2}}q_{a}\vec{N}_{a}\big)\varphi\big({t}+r,b\vec{v}+\vec{y}\big) \,dtdbd^{2}q.\] Swapping the limit $V\ra 1$ with the integral sign we get (using that $\lim_{V\ra 1}r=\|b\|$) \[\begin{aligned} {1} H^{i} & =-\frac{e}{2\pi}\lim_{V\rightarrow1}\int\frac{a^{j}q_{a}N_{a}^{j}\,(r+Vb)^{3}} {r(q^{2}+b^{2})^{3}}\, q_{c}N_{c}^{i}\,\varphi\big({t}+r,b\vec{v}+\vec{y}\big)\,dtdbd^{2}q\\ &=-\frac{e}{2\pi}\int_{0}^{\infty}\!db\int\frac{a^{j}q_{a}N_{a}^{j}\left(2b\right)^{3}} {b(q^{2}+b^{2})^{3}}\,q_{c}N_{c}^{i}\,\varphi\big(t+b,b\vec{v}+\vec{y}\big)\,dtd^{2}q\\ & =-\frac{4e}{\pi}\int_{0}^{\infty}\!db\int\!\frac{b^2q_{a}q_{c}}{(q^{2}+b^2)^{3}}\, a^{j}N_{a}^{j}N_{c}^{i} \,\varphi\big(t+b,b\vec{v}+\vec{y}\big)\,dtd^{2}q. \end{aligned}\] Integrating over $d^{2}q$, and using \[\int\frac{q_{a}q_{c}\,d^{2}q}{(q^{2}+b^2)^{3}}=\frac{\pi}{4b^2}\,\delta_{ac},\quad \quad N_{a}^{i}N_{a}^{j}=\delta^{ij}-v^{i}v^{j},\quad\quad\vec{a}\cdot\vec{v}=0,\label{qId}\] through the shift $t\rightarrow t-b$ we get [\[hii\]]{#hii label="hii"} H\^i =-e\_0\^db a\^i(t-b) (t,b(t-b)+(t-b)) dt. Applying the limit $V\ra 1$ to , we get then, swapping in again the limit with the integral sign \[\begin{aligned} {1} \mathcal{K}^{\mu}(\varphi)=\lim_{V\ra1}K^\m(\vp)&= H^{\mu}-\frac{4e}{\pi}\!\int_{0}^{\infty}\!db\!\int\frac{a^{j}q_{a}N_{a}^{j}\,b^{3}} {(q^{2}+b^{2})^{3}}\, (1,\vec{v})\,q_{c}N_{c}^{i}\,\partial_{i}\varphi\big(t+b,b\vec{v}+\vec{y}\big) \,dtd^{2}q\nonumber \\ &=H^{\mu}-e\!\int_{0}^{\infty}\!db\!\int\!(1,\vec{v})\,ba^{i}\partial_{i}\varphi\big(t+b,b\vec{v} +\vec{y}\big)\,dt\nonumber \\ & =H^{\mu}-e\!\int_{0}^{\infty}\!db\!\int\!(1,\vec{v}(t-b))\,ba^{i}(t-b)\,\partial_{i} \varphi\big(t,b\vec{v}(t-b)\!+\!\vec{y}(t-b)\big)dt.\nn \end{aligned}\] We insert now and notice that--omitting the arguments of the test function--we have [\[KB0\]]{#KB0 label="KB0"}-ba\^i(t-b) \_i=. In this way we obtain eventually \[\begin{aligned} \mathcal{K}^{\mu}(\varphi)&=e\int_{0}^{\infty}\!db\int\!\left(\frac{\pa}{\pa b},-\vec a(t-b)+\vec{v}(t-b)\frac{\pa}{\pa b}\right)\!\varphi\big(t,b\vec{v}(t-b)+\vec{y}(t-b)\big)dt\nn\\ &=e\!\int \! v^{\mu}(t-b)\,\varphi\big(t,b\vec{v}(t-b)+\vec{y}(t-b)\big)\,dt \Big\|_{b=0}^{b=\infty}.\label{KB2} \end{aligned}\] ## Appendix V {#appendix-v .unnumbered} In this appendix we prove that in the integral , that we write as \[A^\m_1(\vp)=\frac{e}{4\pi V}\!\int\!\big(f^\m_V(x)+g^\m_V(x)\big)\,d^4x,\] with \[\begin{aligned} f^\m_V(x)&=\frac{W^{\mu}(t)-\mathcal{V}_{\infty}^{\mu}}{r}\, \varphi\big(r+ t/V,\vec{x}+\vec{y}(t)\big),\nn\\ g^\m_V(x)&= \frac{\mathcal{V}_{\infty}^{\mu}}{r}\,\big( \varphi\big(r+ t/V,\vec{x}+\vec{y}(t)\big)- \varphi\big(r+t/V,\vec{x}+\vec{v}_{\infty}t\big)\big),\label{gmu}\\ W^\m(t)&=(1,V\vec v(t)),\label{wm} \end{aligned}\] we can swap the limit $V\ra 1$ with the integral sign, if $\vec y(t)$ satisfies the asymptotic conditions , . To do this we resort to the dominated convergence theorem, that requires to find integrable functions that dominate $f^\m_V$ and $g^\m_V$ uniformly in $V$. Since it is straightforward to find such functions in the integration region $r=\|\vec x\|<1$, we consider only the region $r>1$ and have thus $1/r<1$. We consider first $f^\m_V$. Recalling , and , we perform in the corresponding integral the shift $\vec x\ra \vec x-\vec y(t)$ and, calling the new variable again $\vec x$, we have for each $\m$[^11] [\[fmm\]]{#fmm label="fmm"} \\|f\^\_V(x)\\|\\|(t)\\| \\|(+ t/V,)\\| , where we multiplied the numerator as well as the denominator with ${\big(1+\|\vec x\|^2\big)^2}$, and $\Vert\vp\Vert$ is a combination of semi-norms. Thanks to the second bound in the last function in is integrable (as well as $V$-independent). For what concerns $g^\m_V$ we distinguish the regions $t>0$ and $t<0$ and use that for each $\m$ we have $\|{\cal V}^\m_\infty\|\le1$. For $t>0$ we multiply the numerator as well as the denominator of both terms of $g_V^\m$ with $(r+t/V)^6$, obtaining \[\big\|g^\m_V(x)\big\|_{t>0}\le \frac{\Vert\vp\Vert}{(r+t/V)^6}\le \frac{\Vert\vp\Vert}{(r^2+t^2)^3},\] where $\Vert\vp\Vert$ indicates again a combination of semi-norms. The last function is, once more, integrable and $V$-independent. In the region $t<0$ we perform in both terms of the shift $\vec x \ra \vec x-\vec v_\infty t$ and resort then to the mean value theorem to write ($R\equiv\sqrt{\|\vec x-\vec v_\infty t\|^2}$) \[g^\m_V(x)=\frac{{\cal V}^\m_\infty}{R} \, \vec{\Delta}(t)\cdot\vec{\nabla}\varphi\big(R+t/V,\vec{x}+\lambda\vec{\Delta}(t)\big),\] where $0\le\la\le1$. Multiplying and dividing this expression by $\big(1+\|\vec x+\la \vec\Delta(t)\|^2\big)^2$ and remembering that $r=R>1$, we obtain the estimate \[\big\|g^\m_V(x)\big\|_{t<0}\le \frac{\|\vec\Delta(t)\|\cdot\!{\Vert\vp\Vert}}{\big(1+\|\vec x+\la \vec\Delta(t)\|^2\big)^2},\] where $\Vert\vp\Vert$ is now a combination of semi-norms involving also derivatives of $\vp$. The first bound in ensures that for $t<0$ the "trajectory" $\vec \Delta(t)$ is bounded and we have thus $\|\lambda\vec \Delta(t)\|<M$, for some constant $M$. Proceeding as in and we get therefore the uniform estimate \[\big\|g^\m_V(x)\big\|_{t<0}\le \frac{\|\vec\Delta(t)\|\cdot\!{\Vert\vp\Vert}}{\big(1+(\|\vec x\|-M)^2H(\|\vec x\|-M)\big)^2}.\] Thanks to the first bound in the r.h.s of this estimate is integrable. ## Appendix VI {#appendix-vi .unnumbered} In this appendix we rederive the field --produced by a bounded motion--performing the distributional limit for $V\ra 1$ of the radiation field , relying on the Liénard-Wiechert regularization . Using and proceeding as in we get R\^()= (X+Y) d\^3x d-(), where $X^\m=(r,\vec x)$ and $r=\|\vec x\|$ and the world-line $Y^\m(\la)$ is given by or, equivalently, by . Considering again the electric field we obtain \[R^{i0}(\varphi)=\frac{eV^2}{4\pi}\!\int\frac{(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{x}) (x^i-rV v^{i})-r(r-V\vec{v}\cdot\vec{x})\,a^{i}} {r(r-V\vec{x}\cdot\vec{v})^{2}}\, \varphi(t+r,\vec{x}+\vec{y})\,d^3x\,dt,\] where the kinematical variables $\vec y$, $\vec v$ and $\vec a$ are evaluated at time $Vt$. With the change of variables this expression can be brought to the form \[R^{i0} (\varphi)=\int\!(G_V^{i}+H_V^{i})\, \varphi(t+r,b\vec{v}+q_{a}\vec{N}_{a}+\vec{y})\,dtdbd^{2}q,\label{ri0}\] where \[\begin{aligned} {1} G_V^{i}&=-\frac{eV^2}{4\pi}\,\frac{(1-V^2)(r+Vb)b^2a^i} {\left(q^{2}+(1-V^2)b^2\right)^{2}}, \nn\\ H_V^{i}&=\frac{eV^2}{4\pi}\left( \frac{\Pi_{ab}N_{a}^{j}N_{b}^{i}a^{j}}{r(r-Vb)^{2}}-\frac{q^{2}a^i}{2r(q^{2} +(1-V^2)b^2)}-\frac{\big(\vec{a}\cdot q_{c}\vec{N}_{c}\big)(Vr-b)v^{i}}{r(r-Vb)^2}\right)\!,\nn \end{aligned}\] and $\Pi_{ab}$ is given in . Taking advantage of the similarities between these formulae and -, we can proceed in the same manner as after . In the integral containing $H_V^i$ in we can take the limit $V\ra 1$ under the integral sign, the resulting (conditionally convergent) integral giving rise to the second term in . In the integral involving $G_V^i$ we perform the rescaling $q_a\ra \sqrt{1-V^2}q_a$--instead of $q_a\ra \ve q_a$--and send then $V\ra 1$, the result being again . From we obtain hence \[\lim_{V\ra 1}R^{i0}(\varphi)=\frac{1}{2}\,Q^{i0}(\vp)+\mathcal{P}(\mathcal{F}^{i0}_{reg})(\vp).\] The same calculation for ${ R}^{ij}$ leads to an analogous result and we retrieve thus . ## Appendix VII {#appendix-vii .unnumbered} We prove here that for a particle moving on a trajectory $\vec y(t)$ that in the infinite past becomes linear (see and ) at each time $t$ the regular contribution of the total field , i.e. the field $\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}_{reg}$ in , vanishes "in front of" the shock-wave , that is it vanishes for any $\vec x$ such that $\vec x\cdot\vec v_\infty>t$. To this order we must show that the retarded-time equation for these $\vec x$ does not admit a solution for $\la$. We begin writing the trajectory , in the form \[\vec{y}(t)=(t-\varepsilon(t))\,\vec{v}_{\infty}+\vec{T}(t),\label{NoSolProof3}\] where $\vec{T}(t)\perp\vec{v}_{\infty}$ and [\[limte\]]{#limte label="limte"} \_t-(t)=0,\_t-(t)=0. Since $\|\vec v(t)\|=\|d\vec y(t)/dt\|=1$ we have, moreover, $\varepsilon(t)\geq0$. This means in particular that the particle at each time $t$ stays always behind the shock-wave, located on the plane $\vec x\cdot\vec v_\infty=t$. Parameterizing the trajectory with time, $y^0(\la)=\la$, we write the conditions in the form \[t-\la=\|\vec x-\vec{y}(\la)\|\label{NoSolProof2}\] and choose a generic point $\vec x$ in front of the shock-wave: \[\vec{x}=(t+l)\vec{v}_{\infty}+\vec{N},\quad \quad l>0,\quad\quad\vec{N}\cdot\vec{v}_{\infty}=0.\label{NoSolProof1}\] Equation becomes then t-= [\[NoSolProof4\]]{#NoSolProof4 label="NoSolProof4"} \>\\|t-\\|, and has thus no solution. Considering, on the other hand, a point $\vec x$ behind the shock-wave--given by with $l<0$--equation takes again the form , that can be written also as \[f(\la)\equiv 2(t-\la)L-L^{2}-\big(\vec{N}+\vec{T}(\la)\big)^2=0,\] where we have set $L\equiv-l-\varepsilon(\la)$. Since we have $f(t)<0$ and (thanks to $\lim_{\la\ra-\infty}L=-l>0$ and to ) $\lim_{\la\ra-\infty}f(\la)=+\infty$, due to continuity there exists a $\la_0<t$ such that $f(\la_0)=0$. This means that behind the shock-wave the field $\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}_{reg}(t,\vec x)$ is generically non-vanishing. ## Appendix VIII {#appendix-viii .unnumbered} In this appendix we furnish an independent proof that the regular field $\mathcal{P}(\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}_{reg})$ satisfies for bounded trajectories the equation , and for unbounded ones the equation . Thanks to manifest Lorentz-invariance we may restrict ourselves to the time-component of these equations-- respectively $\vec\nabla\!\cdot\!\vec { E}_{reg}=\mathcal{J}^0/2$ and $\vec\nabla\!\cdot\!\vec { E}_{reg}=(\mathcal{J}^0-\mathcal{J}^0_{\mathcal L})/2$-- involving only the electric field $E_{reg}^i= \mathcal{P}(\mathcal{F}^{i0}_{reg})$ given by the second term in . We write this field as \[{E}_{reg}^i(\vp)=\int \!H^i(b,q,t) \,\vp(t+r,\vec x+\vec y(t))\, dbd^2qdt,\] where we may look at the function $H^i$ also as a function of $\vec x= b\vec v + q_c \vec N_c$ (see ) and $t$; in this case we have $dbd^2q=d^3x$. Away from the singularity-string (and hence also away from the position of the particle) i.e. at $q^a\neq 0$, this function obeys the identities [\[trans\]]{#trans label="trans"} x\^i H\^i=0,\_iH\^i=0. The first identity follows by inspection from and represents the standard result that the radiation field--of a massive as well as of massless particle--is always orthogonal to the "retarded" radial direction. The second identity follows from the fact that away from the singularity-string we have $\vec\nabla\!\cdot\!\vec{ E}_{reg}=0$; the dependence of $\vp$ on $\vec x$ through the time variable $t+r$ has no effect with this respect, since $\pa_i (t+r) =x^i/r$ and $x^iH^i=0$. To evaluate $\vec\nabla\!\cdot\!\vec{ E}_{reg}$ we must apply it to a test function \[\big(\vec\nabla\!\cdot\!\vec{ E}_{reg}\big)(\vp)=-{E}_{reg}^i(\pa_i\vp)=-\int \!H^i(\vec x,t) \,\pa_i \vp(t+r,\vec x+\vec y(t))\,d^3xdt.\] Due to the singularities of $H^i$ at $q^2= r^2-(\vec v\cdot\vec x)^2=0$ we are not allowed to integrate the derivatives $\pa_i$ by parts. We may do so, however, if we insert the step function ($H$ denotes the Heaviside function) \[\Theta_\ve(\vec x)\equiv H\big( r^2-(\vec v\cdot\vec x)^2-\ve ^2\big),\] excluding a tubular neighborhood around the singularity-string, and take eventually the limit $\ve\ra 0$ [\[dee\]]{#dee label="dee"} (\_reg)()=-\_ \_(x) H\^i(x,t) \_i (t+r,x+y(t)) d\^3xdt. In integrating by parts, thanks to the identities , only the step function contributes, \[\pa_i \Theta_\ve(\vec x)= 2\big(x^i-(\vec v\cdot\vec x)v^i \big) \delta\big(r^2-(\vec v\cdot\vec x)^2-\ve ^2\big),\] where the term proportional to $x^i$ drops out from . Switching back to the coordinates $(b,q_a)$ we get therefore \[\big(\vec\nabla\!\cdot\!\vec{ E}_{reg}\big)(\vp)=-2\lim_{\ve\ra 0}\int \!b v^i \delta(q^2-\ve^2)\,H^i(b,q,t)\,\vp(t+r,\vec y+b\vec v+q_c\vec N_c)\,dbd^2qdt,\] where it is understood that all kinematical variables are evaluated at time $t$. Looking at one sees that only the third term of $H^i$ has a non-vanishing projection along $v^i$ and, thanks to $\delta(q^2-\ve^2)=\delta(q-\ve)/2\ve$, one arrives at [\[dive1\]]{#dive1 label="dive1"} (\_reg)()= \_ (q-) (t+r,y+bv+q_cN_c) dbd\^2qdt, where now $r=\sqrt{b^2+\ve^2}$. Being conditionally convergent, see Section [\[lof\]](#lof){reference-type="ref" reference="lof"}, the integral must be evaluated integrating first over the polar angle of $q_a$. This implies that, as $\ve\ra 0$, in expanding $\vp$ in powers of $q\equiv\ve$ it is only the first-order term that contributes, \[\vp(t+r,\vec y+b\vec v+q_c\vec N_c)= \vp(t+\|b\|,\vec y+b\vec v) + q_c N_c^j \pa_j \vp(t+\|b\|,\vec y+b\vec v)+o(q^2).\] Taking into account that $\lim_{\ve\ra 0}(r+b)=2bH(b)$ and using , through symmetric integration over $q_a$ from one obtains finally (performing the shift $t\ra t-b$ and applying the identity ) \[\begin{aligned} \nn \big(\vec\nabla\!\cdot\!\vec{ E}_{reg}\big)(\vp)&=\frac {e}{2}\int\!\left( \int_0^\infty \!ba^i(t-b)\pa_i \vp(t,\vec y(t-b)+b\vec v(t-b))\,db\right)dt\\ &=\frac {e}{2}\int\!\vp(t,\vec y(t))\,dt-\frac {e}{2}\int\!\left(\lim_{b\ra\infty}\vp(t,\vec y(t-b)+b\vec v(t-b))\!\right)dt.\label{check} \end{aligned}\] The first term equals $\mathcal{J}^0(\vp)/2$. The second term is zero for bounded trajectories, while it equals $-\mathcal{J}^0_{\cal L}(\vp)/2$ for unbounded ones, see . Equation reduces thus just to the $\n=0$ components of and . [^1]: Even for time-like trajectories a priori the convolution in --between two distributions--is not well-defined. [^2]: For bounded trajectories the proof is rather straightforward, see e.g. Section [\[ABProof\]](#ABProof){reference-type="ref" reference="ABProof"}. For unbounded (asymptotically linear) trajectories one may use that for large negative $t$ one has $\vec Y(t)\approx t\vec V_\infty$, with $\|\vec V_\infty\|<1$. [^3]: The difference between and is meaningless, since both are ill-defined as distributions. [^4]: Actually in the framework of Differential Geometry Poincaré-duality associates to a $p$-submanifold in $D$ dimensions a $(D-p)$-form, that is the Hodge dual of the rank-$p$ tensor , with $e=1$. [^5]: As a short-cut we note the following: from it follows that the vector field $\LimE\mathcal{J}_{\varepsilon}^{\mu}$ has vanishing divergence and, as observed in the text, its support must belong to the singularity surface . Thanks to Lorentz-invariance it must then be proportional to $\mathcal{J}^{\mu}$. [^6]: The same is obviously also true for $\vec{ E}_{sing}$, but in that case there is a "natural" definition of $\int_S { E}_{sing}^i\,d\Sigma^i$, provided by Poincaré-duality, that is in agreement with the formal rules used by physicists to integrate Dirac-$\delta$ distributions. [^7]: It is not necessary to regularize the $\delta$-function $\delta(t-t_0)$, since it can be seen that the distributions $\mathcal{P}(\mathcal{F}^{\mu\nu}_{reg})$--belonging to ${\mathcal S}'({\mathbb R}^4)$--at fixed time define elements of ${\mathcal S}'({\mathbb R}^3)$. [^8]: If $S$ does not intersect the singularity-string one can perform the limit in trivially, obtaining the standard flux expression \[\Phi_S(t_0)=\int_S {E}^i_{reg}(t_0,\vec x)\,d\Sigma^i,\] which is then actually zero, since in this case the particle stays outside $V$. [^9]: The reason for this is that, thanks to equations , where ${\mathcal J}^\m$ and ${\mathcal K}^\m$ are well-defined distributions, possible "divergent" contributions to ${\mathcal C}^{\m\n}$ and ${\mathcal R}^{\m\n}$, i.e. distributions multiplying coefficients that diverge as $V\ra 1$, must satisfy homogeneous Maxwell equations. But since, on the other hand, these contributions must be supported on the world-line $y^\m(\la)$ and/or on the singularity surface $\Gamma^\m(\la,b)$, they are necessarily zero. [^10]: The techniques to construct such a tensor developed in for massive particles should apply also to massless ones. [^11]: Actually $f^0_V(x)$ is identically zero.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-23T02:10:34', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5721', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5721'}
# Introduction SEDs of galaxies contain a lot of information regarding their physical properties, such as the SFR, star formation history (SFH), metallicity, age of the stellar population, stellar mass, and the amount of dust. These quantities can be extracted by fitting SEDs of galaxies with SPS models. SPS modeling is currently one of the most popular and powerful methods to study the SFHs and stellar mass build-up of galaxies over cosmic time. SPS models are generally combined with a dust model to account for dust attenuation of the stellar light. However, modeling just the attenuated stellar emission results in significant uncertainties on the derived dust content and consequently, other properties. Extending the stellar SEDs to IR wavelengths improves the constraints on the dust parameters, which in turn yields more accurate stellar population properties. The inclusion of IR data has primarily resulted in empirical SFR indicators. To obtain the sum of the unobscured and obscured SFR of a galaxy, the uncorrected UV SFR is combined with the IR luminosity. The IR luminosity is often only measured at $24\micron$ and the total IR luminosity is estimated using a template spectrum. However, as this method is comparable to fitting two photometric data points by a single galaxy template with only the amount of dust as a free parameter, it will likely result in large uncertainties. To derive accurate stellar population properties from UV-to-IR SEDs, it is important to explore the full possible range in stellar populations. Fortunately, SPS models that incorporate both the attenuated stellar and dust emissions have recently become available. These models assume that the energy of the attenuated stellar light is reradiated in the IR. In this Letter, we extend the UV-to-NIR composite SEDs by to MIR wavelengths, and simultaneously fit the stellar and dust emission with the updated Flexible SPS (FSPS) models by. We adopt the following cosmological parameters: $(\Omega_{\rm m}, \Omega_{\Lambda}, h) =$ (0.27, 0.73, 0.7). # Data In this work we make use of the composite NUV-to-NIR SEDs by, which were constructed using the photometric catalogs from the NMBS. The NMBS is a survey in the COSMOS and AEGIS fields, which uses five medium-bandwidth NIR filters in the wavelength range $1-1.8 \micron$ designed for NEWFIRM on the Mayall 4-m telecope. The NIR medium-band photometry has been combined with the publicly available data at NUV-to-NIR wavelength as described in. The original composite SEDs were constructed as follows. First, galaxies at $0.5\lesssim z\lesssim 2.0$ with S/N$_{\rm K-band} > 25$ were classified into spectral types based on similarities in their NUV-to-NIR rest-frame SEDs. The number of galaxies in each type varies between 22 and 455. Next, the SEDs of individual galaxies in each type were de-redshifted and scaled to the same reference frame. Finally, the flux was averaged in wavelength bins. See for more details on the procedure. This technique resulted in 32 composite SEDs, which include $\sim3500$ galaxies. Here, we extend these SEDs to rest-frame MIR wavelengths by adding MIPS $24\micron$ data. Galaxies with active galactic nuclei (AGNs) tend to have a warm dust component at MIR wavelengths. Since we are interested in studying dust emission from reprocessed stellar light, we want to avoid contamination by AGNs. Therefore, any galaxies that have detected $L_X \geq 10^{42}$ erg/s in the Chandra COSMOS Survey have been removed. Furthermore, we reject galaxies which are identified to host obscured AGNs based on their IRAC colors, following the criteria by. As a result, our sample has been reduced by $\sim$`<!-- -->`{=html}3%. The simplest method to extend the composite SEDs is taking the average of the scaled $24\micron$ fluxes from the NMBS catalogs. However, many sources are undetected, and thus, we stack the images per SED type to obtain deeper photometry. For this purpose, we use the archival mosaic image from the MIPS S-COSMOS Survey. In order to remove contamination by surrounding sources, the MIPS image of each individual galaxy has been cleaned before stacking, using the following steps. First, a model is constructed for all surrounding sources, using the higher resolution K-band image. The K-band image is convolved by a convolution curve derived from the point spread functions (PSFs) of the K-band and MIPS data. Next, we subtract the modeled fluxes of all surrounding sources, to get clean images with a radius of $\sim40\arcsec$. This technique is illustrated in Figure [\[fig:deblending\]](#fig:deblending){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:deblending"}. The remaining background has been removed by subtracting the average flux within a $7-13\arcsec$ annulus (yellow circles in Figure [\[fig:deblending\]](#fig:deblending){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:deblending"}) from these cleaned images. Then, the cleaned images for each type are stacked into one image, weighted by the scaling factors that are used in the NUV-to-NIR SEDs. We perform a final background subtraction from the stacked image. The total flux is measured for each stacked image inside a $3.5\arcsec$ aperture (red circles in Figure [\[fig:deblending\]](#fig:deblending){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:deblending"}) and is corrected for missing flux outside the $3.5\arcsec$ aperture using the aperture correction factor from the MIPS instrument handbook. The flux errors are derived using bootstrap resampling of the individual galaxies within the bins. The stacked MIPS fluxes (spanning $\sim 8-15 \micron$ rest-frame) are combined with the NUV-to-NIR data to construct NUV-to-MIR composite SEDs. Composite filter curves are constructed for the added $24 \micron$ data points, by adding the normalized and de-redshifted $24 \micron$ filter curves for each individual galaxy. Errors on the effective wavelengths are derived by bootstrap resampling the individual galaxies within the bins. # SED Fitting {#sec:fitting} In order to derive physical properties, we fit the composite SEDs with the FSPS models. We use the BaSeL spectral library, Padova isochrones, and dust emission models of. Motivated by the work by, which was based on the same composite SEDs, we assume a dust attenuation curve with $R_V = 4.05$ and a UV dust bump which is 20% of the strength of the Milky Way bump. The three parameters of the dust emission model; $U_{\rm min}$ (specifies the minimum radiation field strength in units of the Milky Way value), $\gamma$ (specifies the relative contribution of dust heated at $U_{\rm min}$ and at $U_{\rm min}\le U\le U_{\rm max}$), and $q$ (the fraction of grain mass in Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) form), are set to their default values, i.e. 0.01, 1.0, and 3.5%, respectively. We also assume a delayed-$\tau$ SFH of the form SFR $\propto t \ {\rm exp}(-t/\tau)$ and a initial mass function (IMF). The star formation timescale ($\tau$), age, and dust extinction ($A_V$) are left as free parameters, with a minimum log ($\tau$/yr) and log (age/yr) of 7.5. The metallicity is assumed to be Solar. The fitting is done by minimizing \[\chi^2 = \sum_i \frac{(F_i-a T_i)^2}{{\delta F_i}^2},\] where \[a = \frac{\sum F_i T_i / {{\delta F_i}^2}}{\sum T_i^2 / {{\delta F_i}^2}}\] is the scaling factor between the observed flux $F_i$ and the template flux $T_i$ of the model libraries. The template flux is calculated by convolving the flux with the composite filter curves. The flux errors ${\delta F_i}$ are set to be 5% of the fluxes $F_i$, to avoid that very small flux errors dominate the fit, and to ensure that all data points have equal weight in the $\chi^2$-calculations. We calibrate the confidence intervals using Monte Carlo simulations, where the fluxes are perturbed according to a Gaussian distribution, and determine the best-fit parameters. We run 200 simulations and determine the $\chi^2$-level that encloses 68% of the simulation's best-fits. Error bars in all figures correspond to these confidence intervals. In order to get the absolute SFR, we multiply the instantaneous specific SFR, derived from the SED-fitting, by the average stellar mass of the galaxy type. The average mass is derived by assuming the same M/L for all individual galaxies within one type. The results are shown in Figure [\[fig:fitting\]](#fig:fitting){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:fitting"} for a selection of SED types which range from star-forming, to post-starburst, to quiescent galaxy types. The SEDs are fitted in two ways; by excluding and including the MIPS fluxes. We refer to the former as 'stellar fitting' and the latter as 'stellar+dust fitting'. For few star-forming and young galaxy types, the NUV region does not have an excellent fit. As shown in better fits can be obtained by allowing both the dust slope and the UV bump strength to vary. However, as this would not significantly change the results of this paper, and would make the fitting impractical, we have decided to fix the dust attenuation law. We compare the observed $24\micron$ fluxes with the expected fluxes, based on the best-fit stellar and stellar+dust models. The ratios of the observed to expected fluxes are shown in Figure [\[fig:excess_flux\]](#fig:excess_flux){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:excess_flux"}. The top panel of Figure [\[fig:excess_flux\]](#fig:excess_flux){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:excess_flux"} illustrates that the observed MIPS fluxes become larger than the expected stellar fit model fluxes with decreasing star formation activity. The difference between the observed and modeled fluxes is much smaller ($<0.2$ dex) for the stellar+dust fit (bottom panel of Figure [\[fig:excess_flux\]](#fig:excess_flux){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:excess_flux"}). There is no correlation with $A_V$. This result demonstrates the importance of including dust emission while modeling galaxy SEDs, as just modeling the stellar emission may lead to systematic biases in the derived stellar population properties. # Star Formation Rates {#sec:sfr} With the introduction of MIPS, it has become practice to measure SFRs using both the unobscured light from young stars in the UV and the dust obscured and reprocessed stellar light at IR wavelengths. As MIPS is most sensitive at $24 \micron$, the full IR luminosity is often derived by extrapolating this one data point using a single average galaxy template. Here, we assess these SFRs using our best-fit models to the dust and stellar emission. We use the monochromatic conversion template by to infer $L_{\rm IR}$ from $24\,\micron$ flux. This template is a luminosity independent template, derived by taking the log average of the exponents of the interstellar radiation field strength in the templates. found that this template is well matched with the SFR of star-forming galaxies based on UV+PACS data in the range of $0 < z < 3$. However, the accuracy of this template for quiescent and transition galaxies has not been assessed. Next, the total SFR based on both UV+IR can be calculated by: \[\label{eq:sfr} {\rm SFR}_{\rm UV+IR} \ [M_\odot{\rm /yr}] = 9.8 \times 10^{-11} \ (L_{\rm IR} + 2.2 \ L_{\rm UV}),\] assuming a IMF and luminosity in $L_{\odot}$. Here, $L_{\rm UV}$ is defined as $1.5 \ \nu L_{\nu}$ at 2800 Å, which is a rough estimate of the total integrated $1216-3000$ Å UV luminosity, and the factor of 2.2 accounts for the unobscured light of young stars that is emitted outside the $1216-3000$ Å band. Note that $L_{\rm UV}$ is derived using the flux interpolation at 2800 Å. Thus, this method basically fits two data points of the full SED with one star-forming galaxy template, with only the amount of obscuration as a free parameter. While this method has been calibrated using active star-forming galaxies, it would not be surprising if it breaks down for galaxies that have different stellar populations. The comparison between (S)SFR$_{\rm SED}$ and (S)SFR$_{\rm UV+IR}$ are shown in Figure [\[fig:sfr\]](#fig:sfr){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:sfr"}. Generally, for galaxies with older stellar populations (i.e., lower SSFR), SSFR$_{\rm UV+IR}$ is higher than SSFR$_{\rm SED}$, while younger and higher SSFR galaxies lie closer to one-to-one relation. In order to assess whether this discrepancy may be due to the fact that we use 2800 Å instead of 1600 Å, we calculate the expected SFRs using 1600 Å best-fit model fluxes and 24$\micron$ observed flux, but still find similar results. found that ${\rm SFR}_{\rm UV+IR}$ overestimates SFR$_{\rm SED}$, in particular for high SFRs, when short star formation timescales were allowed. Our results do not change significantly when we restrict the star formation timescale to log $\tau > 8.5$ or when we assume an exponentially declining SFH. Thus, we argue that SSFR$_{\rm UV+IR}$ overestimates SSFR$_{\rm SED}$ for galaxies with log SSFR $\lesssim-10$, and the discrepancy becomes larger with decreasing SSFR. # Discussion We find that SFR$_{\rm UV+IR}$ overestimates SFR$_{\rm SED}$ by more than $\sim 1$ dex for quiescent galaxies, while for the most active star-forming galaxies in our sample the two SFRs are broadly consistent (Figure [\[fig:sfr\]](#fig:sfr){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:sfr"}). Our results are consistent with recent findings by and. In order to investigate the cause of the difference between SSFR$_{\rm SED}$ and SSFR$_{\rm UV+IR}$, we dissect the SSFR$_{\rm UV+IR}$ in SSFR$_{\rm UV}$ and SSFR$_{\rm IR}$. We also plot the ratio between the latter two and compare it with the ratio between SSFR$_{\rm UV+IR}$ and SSFR$_{\rm SED}$ (Figure [\[fig:excess\]](#fig:excess){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:excess"}). No dust correction was applied to derive SSFR$_{\rm UV}$. For the majority of types, the SSFR excess is dominated by the MIR flux, while for a few, it is dominated by the UV flux. This SSFR excess can be caused by the contribution of old and/or intermediate-age stars to the MIR and UV light, which explains the strong correlation with SSFR. This finding is not surprising, as we only use a single star-forming galaxy template (by ) when estimating SFRs from UV+IR. Therefore, only young and star-forming galaxies with SSFR $\gtrsim 10^{-10}$ yr$^{-1}$ lie close to one-to-one relation (see also ). In this case, $L_{\rm UV+IR}$ is a robust estimator of the SFR. However, there might be an upper limit where the agreement between the two methods breaks down again, as found that SFR$_{\rm UV+IR}$ overpredicts SFR$_{\rm SED}$ at high redshift ($z \gtrsim 2.5$) and at the high-SFR-end ($\gtrsim 100\,M_{\odot}$/yr). Compton-thick AGNs with $L_X \gtrsim 10^{43}$ erg/s could also explain the discrepancy between SSFR$_{\rm SED}$ and SSFR$_{\rm UV+IR}$, due to their MIR excess. However, we removed AGNs identified by their strong X-ray flux or by an IRAC upturn. Nonetheless, we cannot rule out contributions from low luminosity AGNs, and X-ray stacks of the same composite SED sample indeed indicate low levels of black hole accretion. also reported that MIR excess galaxies have $L_{\rm IR} \gtrsim 10^{11} L_{\odot}$. We check this possibility, but we do not find such trend in our data (Fig. [\[fig:excess\]](#fig:excess){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:excess"}). proposed that the discrepancy between SFR$_{\rm SED}$ and SFR$_{\rm UV+IR}$ is due to excess in PAH emission, rather than obscured AGNs. We conduct a test for this hypothesis by varying $\gamma$, $U_{\rm min}$, and $q$. We find that the SFR$_{\rm SED}$ is not sensitive to these variations, but SFR$_{\rm UV+IR}$ can be affected due to the used monochromatic conversion template. Therefore, higher observed-frame $24\micron$ fluxes due to variations in PAH emission can lead to discrepancies between SFR$_{\rm SED}$ and SFR$_{\rm UV+IR}$. Lastly, we mention that circumstellar dust around AGB star is not yet included in the FSPS models, but is subject of ongoing work. In this context, it is interesting to note that the post-starburst galaxy types (6 & 7), for which we expect the highest contribution from AGB stars, have an MIR excess, though it is not larger than for the other quiescent galaxy types. # Summary In this letter, we use NUV-to-MIR composite SEDs to simultaneously model the stellar and dust emission in distant galaxies. NUV-to-NIR composite SEDs had previously been constructed from the NMBS photometry of $\sim3500$ galaxies at $0.5\lesssim z\lesssim 2$, by matching galaxies with similar SED shapes. In this work, we extend the SEDs with a stacked MIPS 24 $\micron$ datapoint, resulting in multi-wavelength SEDs spanning from $\sim0.2$ to $15\micron$ in rest-frame wavelength. Stellar population properties are derived by fitting the composite SEDs with the FSPS models, which include both stellar and dust emission. Consistent with previous studies, we find that the predicted MIPS flux, based on fitting just the stellar emission, is inconsistent with the observed MIPS flux for most galaxy SED types. We use the best-fit SFRs from the full stellar and dust fitting to assess SFRs determined from the UV and IR luminosities, currently the most popular method to determine SFRs. We find that (S)${\rm SFR}_{\rm UV+IR}$ overpredicts (S)${\rm SFR}_{\rm SED}$ for galaxies with log ${\rm SSFR}\lesssim-10$, and the discrepancy becomes increasingly larger for lower SSFR. The discrepancy is due to both UV and MIR luminosities, though the MIR is the dominant contributor for most SED types. Contributions from obscured and unobscured old and/or intermediate-age stellar populations to the MIR and UV luminosities are the likely explanation for the overestimated SFR$_{\rm UV+IR}$. Based on our results, we conclude that SFRs should be determined from modeling stellar and dust emission simultaneously, instead of just measuring the UV and MIR luminosities. An important implication of our work is that quiescent galaxies have even lower SFRs than what was previously found, based on UV and IR luminosities. However, young star-forming galaxies with SSFR $\gtrsim 10^{-10}$ ${\rm yr}^{-1}$ lie close to one-to-one relation, and thus $L_{\rm UV+IR}$ is a robust SFR estimator. The composite SEDs currently only extend to MIR wavelengths, and thus the SFRs derived from the modeled dust and stellar emission may still suffer from systematics. In future studies we will extend the SEDs to FIR wavelengths, to measure the full bolometric luminosity and more accurately measure the total SFR. We thank the NMBS and COSMOS collaborations for making their catalogs publicly available, and Marijn Franx and Edward Taylor for useful discussions.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-23T02:00:27', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5472', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5472'}
# Introduction. In economics, a production function is a non-constant positive function that specifies the output of a firm, an industry, or an entire economy for all combinations of inputs. Almost all economic theories presuppose a production function, either on the firm level or the aggregate level. In this sense, the production function is one of the key concepts of mainstream neoclassical theories. Let $\mathbb E^{m}$ denote the Euclidean $m$-space, i.e., the Cartesian $m$-space ${\bf R}^{m}$ endowed with the Euclidean metric. To visualize a production function $f:D\subset {\bf R}^n\to {\bf R}$ defined on a domain $D$ of ${\bf R}^n$, we usually embed this $n$-space as $(x_1,\ldots,x_n)$-space into ${\mathbb E}^{n+1}$ and consider the corresponding graph hypersurface \[\begin{aligned} \label{1.1}\Phi(f):=\{(x_1,\ldots,x_n,f(x_1,\ldots,x_n))\in {\mathbb E}^{n+1}: (x_1,\ldots,x_n)\in D\}.\end{aligned}\] With respect to the metric induced from the Euclidean metric on $\mathbb E^{n+1}$, [\[1.1\]](#1.1){reference-type="eqref" reference="1.1"} defines an isometrically embedded hypersurface in $\mathbb E^{n+1}$. It is well known that the study of the shape and the properties of the production possibility frontier is a subject of great interest in economic analysis. G. E. Vı̂lcu proved in that a Cobb-Douglas production function has constant return to scale if and only if the corresponding graph hypersurface in $\mathbb E^{n+1}$ is flat. Later, this result was extended to CES production function in. Both Cobb-Douglas and CES production functions are homogeneous. More general geometric studies of production models were given in-and. Minimality condition of production hypersurfaces was first studied by the first author in. It is proved in that a 2-input homogenous production function is a perfect substitute if and only if the production surface is minimal. Recently, minimality condition of Cobb-Douglas and CES production functions was investigated by X. Wang and Y. Fu in. Besides Euclidean geometry on ${\bf R}^m$, there is another important geometry on ${\bf R}^{m}$, called isotropic geometry. Isotropic geometry provides one of the 27 Cayley-Klein geometries on ${\bf R}^3$. It is the product of the Euclidean space and the isotropic line equipped with a degenerate parabolic distance metric. The isotropic space ${\bf I}^{n+1}$ is derived from ${\mathbb E}^{n+1}$ by substituting isotropic distance for usual Euclidean distance. Given $p,q\in {\bf R}^{n+1}$ the isotropic distance $d(p,q)$ is either the Euclidean distance of the orthographic projections onto ${\bf R}^n\times \{0\}$ if the projections are distinct, or otherwise simply the Euclidean distance. In several applied sciences, e.g., computer science and vision, it is natural to view the graph hypersurface $\Phi(f)$ in [\[1.1\]](#1.1){reference-type="eqref" reference="1.1"} as a hypersurface in $\Phi(f)\times{\bf R}$ instead of $\mathbb E^{n+1}$, which treat $\Phi(f)$ as a subset of the isotropic space ${\bf I}^{n+1}$ (see ). For an $n$-input production function $f$, the metric on $\Phi(f)$ induced from ${\bf I}^{n+1}$ is given by $g_{}=dx_1^2+\cdots +dx_n^2$. Thus $(\Phi(f),g_)$ is always a flat space. So, its Laplacian is given by \[\begin{aligned} \label{1.2}\Delta=\sum_{j=1}^n \frac{\partial^2}{\partial^2 x_j}.\end{aligned}\] Recently, it was suggested by the second and third authors in to study production models via isotropic geometry. The purpose of this paper is thus to investigate production models from the viewpoint of isotropic geometry. Several classification results in this respect are obtained. # A brief review of isotropic geometry For later use, we provide a brief review of isotropic geometry from (see also ). Let $f:D\subset {\bf R}^n\to {\bf R}$ be a function defined on a domain $D$ of ${\bf R}^n$. Consider the graph hypersurface $\Phi(f)$ defined by \[\begin{aligned} \label{2.1}\{(x_1,\ldots,x_n,f(x_1,\ldots,x_n))\in {\bf R}^{n+1}: (x_1,\ldots,x_n)\in D\}.\end{aligned}\] In this paper we use the following terminology. Lines in the $x_{n+1}$-direction are called isotropic lines. $k$-planes containing an isotropic line are called isotropic $k$-planes. The projections in the isotropic $x_{n+1}$-direction onto ${\mathbb E}^n$ are called top views. Via this projection, the top views of isotropic lines and $k$-planes are points and $(k-1)$-planes, respectively. In isotropic geometry, it is convenient to represent a point $p\in {\bf I}^{n+1}$ with the coordinate vector $X=(x_1,\ldots,x_{n+1})\in {\bf R}^{n+1}$ by its top view $x=(x_1,\ldots, x_n)$ and the last coordinate $x_{n+1}$. We will use $i=(0,\ldots,0,1)\in {\bf R}^{n+1}$ for the isotropic direction and we write \[X=x+x_{n+1}i\] with the understanding that in this combination $x=(x_1,\ldots, x_n,0)$. A curve $X(s)\subset {\bf I}^{n+1}$ without isotropic tangents can be represented by \[\begin{aligned} \label{2.2}X(s)=x(s)+x_{n+1}(s)i\end{aligned}\] with $s$ as isotropic arclength, which is the Euclidean arclength of its top view curve $x(s)$. The derivative vectors $X'(s)$ and $x'(s)$ satisfy $\|\|X'(s)\|\|_i =\|\|x'(x)\|\|=1$, where $\|\|\cdot \|\|_i$ denotes the isotropic norm. Second derivative with respect to $s$ yields the curvature vector $X''(s)=x''(s)+x''_{n+1}(s)i$. Thus we have \[\begin{aligned} \label{2.3}\kappa(s):=\|\|X''(s)\|\|_i =\|\|x''(s)\|\|,\end{aligned}\] which is the curvature of the isotropic curve at $X(s)$. In fact, $\kappa(s)$ is nothing but the Euclidean curvature of the top view $x(s)$. .05in (1): $\kappa\ne 0$. The principal normal vector is defined as $E_2:={X''(s)}/{\|\|X''(s)\|\|_i}$ in this case, which is isotropically orthogonal to $E_1:=X'(s)$ and satisfies $E'_1=\kappa E_2$. .05in (2): For $s_o$ with $\kappa(s_o)=0$. We define the $s$-curvature as $\kappa_s(s_o):= x''_{n+1}(s_0)$. .1in The curvature theory of hypersurfaces in ${\bf I}^{n+1}$ can be found in which is analogous to the Euclidean counterpart. For a function $f:D\subset {\bf R}^n\to {\bf R}$, consider the graph hypersurface $\Phi(f)=\{x+f(x)i: x\in D\}$. Let $X(s) = x(s) + f(x(s) )i$ be a curve on $\Phi(f)$ which is parameterized by an isotropic arclength s. For its tangent vectors $E_1(s)=T(s)$, we have \[\begin{aligned} \label{2.4} T(s) = X'(s) =x'(s) + \left<x'(s),\nabla f(x(s))\right>i, \end{aligned}\] where $\left<\,\cdot \,,\cdot\,\right>$ denotes the scalar product on $\mathbb E^n$ and $\nabla f$ is the gradient of $f$. In the following, we suppress the argument $s$ whenever there are no confusion. The curvature vector is \[\begin{aligned} \label{2.5}X'' = x'' + \left<x'',\nabla f(x)\right>i + ( x'^T\cdot (D^2 f(x)) x')i, \end{aligned}\] where $D^2 f$ is the Hessian of $f$. The first two terms in [\[2.5\]](#2.5){reference-type="eqref" reference="2.5"} form a vector $\tilde S$ in the tangent hyperplane $T(s_o)$ of $\Phi(f)$ at $X(x_o)$. The isotropic length of this vector is considered as the geodesic curvature $\kappa_g$ of the curve at $X(s_o)$. Because of $\|\|\tilde S\|\|_i=\|\|X''\|\|_i$, $\kappa_g$ is the same as the isotropic curvature $\kappa$ of the curve $X(s)$ at $X(s_o)$ and the Euclidean curvature of its top view. For $\kappa_g\ne 0$, we normalize $\tilde S$ to the side vector $S=\tilde S/\kappa_g$, and for $\kappa_g=0$, we set $S=i$. The third term in [\[2.5\]](#2.5){reference-type="eqref" reference="2.5"} is the "normal", i.e., isotropic component of $X''$. Its $s$-length is called the normal curvature $\kappa_n$. Denoting the top view $x'(s)$ of the tangent vector $T$ by $t$. Consequently, one has \[\begin{aligned} \label{2.6} &X''=\kappa_g S+\kappa_n i,\\ & \kappa_g=\kappa =\|\|X''\|\|_i =\|\|x''\|\|,\;\; \kappa_n=t^T\cdot (D^2 f(x)) t.\end{aligned}\] It is well known that the extremal values of the normal curvatures at point $p\in \Phi(f)$ are the eigenvalues of the Hessian $D^2 f(p)$. The corresponding directions are the associated normalized eigenvectors. Since the Hessian is symmetric, all principal curvatures $\kappa_1,\ldots,\kappa_n$ are real and there is an orthonormal basis of main directions $t_1,\ldots,t_n$ in $\mathbb E^n$. From $t_1,\ldots,t_n$ we have the principal curvature directions of $\Phi(f)\subset {\bf I}^{n+1}$ given by $T_j=t_j+\left<t_j,\nabla f(p)\right>i,\, j=1,\ldots,n$. Without solving the characteristic equation $\det( D^2 f -\lambda E) = 0$, one can read off the elementary symmetric functions of the principal curvatures from the coefficients of the characteristic polynomial. This leads to $n$ fundamental curvatures $K_1,\ldots,K_n$. If we denote by $H^{i_1,\ldots ,i_s}$ the determinant of the quadratic submatrix of $D^2f(p)$ obtained by taking in $D^2f$ only rows and columns with indices $i_1,\ldots,i_s$, then we have \[\begin{aligned} \label{2.7} K_j &=\frac{1}{\binom{n}{j}}\big(\kappa_1\cdots \kappa_j+\kappa_1\cdots \kappa_{j-1}\kappa_{j+1}+\cdots +\kappa_{n-j+1}\cdots \kappa_n\big), \\ & =\frac{1}{\binom{n}{j}}\big(H^{1,\ldots, j}+H^{1,\ldots, j-1,j+1}+\cdots +H^{n-j+1,\ldots, n}\big).\end{aligned}\] In particular, one has the isotropic mean curvature \[\begin{aligned} \label{2.8} K_1(p)=\frac{1}{n}{\rm trace}\,(D^2f(p))=\frac{1}{n}\Delta f(p),\end{aligned}\] and the analogue of the Gaussian-Kronecker curvature, the relative curvature \[\begin{aligned} \label{2.9} K_n(p)=\det\,(D^2f(p)).\end{aligned}\] # Some important production functions in economics There are two special classes of production functions that are often analyzed in microeconomics and macroeconomics; namely, homogeneous and homothetic production functions. A production function $f(x_{1},\cdots,x_{n})$ is said to be homogeneous of degree $d$ or $d$-homogeneous, if \[\begin{aligned} \label{3.1}f(tx_{1},\ldots,tx_{n}) = t^{d}f(x_{1},\ldots,x_{n})\end{aligned}\] holds for each $t\in \mathbb R$ for which [\[3.1\]](#3.1){reference-type="eqref" reference="3.1"} is defined. A homogeneous function of degree one is called linearly homogeneous. If $d>1$, the homogeneous function exhibits increasing returns to scale, and it exhibits decreasing returns to scale if $d<1$. If it is homogeneous of degree one, it exhibits constant returns to scale. Constant returns to scale is the in-between case. A homothetic function is a production function of the form: \[\begin{aligned} \label{3.2} f=F(h(x_1,\ldots,x_n)),\end{aligned}\] where $h(x_1,\ldots,x_n)$ is a homogeneous function of any given degree and $F$ is a monotonically increasing function. In economics, an isoquant is a contour line drawn through the set of points at which the same quantity of output is produced while changing the quantities of two or more inputs. Homothetic functions are functions whose marginal technical rate of substitution (the slope of the isoquant) is homogeneous of degree zero. The $n$-input Cobb-Douglas production function can be expressed as \[\begin{aligned} \label{3.3} f =\gamma x_{1}^{\alpha_{1}}\cdots x_{n}^{\alpha_{n}},\end{aligned}\] where $\gamma$ is a positive constant and $\alpha_{1},\ldots,\alpha_{n}$ are nonzero constants. The Cobb-Douglas production function is especially notable for being the first time an aggregate or economy-wide production function was developed, estimated, and then presented to the profession for analysis. It gave a landmark change in how economists approached macroeconomics. The $n$-input CES production functions (or ACMS production function ) are given by \[\begin{aligned} \label{3.4} f=\gamma \left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}a_{i}^{\rho}x_{i}^{\rho}\right)^{\! \frac{d}{\rho}},\end{aligned}\] where $a_{i},d,\gamma, \rho$ are nonzero constants. The CES production functions are of great interest in economy because of their invariant characteristic; namely, the elasticity of substitution between the parameters is constant on their domains. Obvious, both Cobb-Douglas and CES production functions are homogeneous. In economics, goods that are completely substitutable with each other are called perfect substitutes. They may be characterized as goods having a constant marginal rate of substitution. Mathematically, a production function is a perfect substitute if it is of the form \[\begin{aligned} \label{3.5} f(x_{1},\ldots,x_{n})= \sum_{i=1}^{n}a_{i}x_{i}\end{aligned}\]for some nonzero constants $a_{1},\ldots,a_{n}$. # Minimality of production models. For a production function $f: D\subset {\bf R}^n\to {\bf R}$, the study of minimality of the graph hypersurface \[\begin{aligned} \label{4.1}\Phi(f):=\{(x_1,\ldots,x_n,f(x_1,\ldots,x_n))\in {\mathbb E}^{n+1}: (x_1,\ldots,x_n)\in D\}\end{aligned}\] in $\mathbb E^{n+1}$ with respect to the Euclidean metric on ${\mathbb E}^{n+1}$ was initiated by the first author in and later in by Wang and Fu. The following results were proved in. Next, we discuss the minimality condition of production models in the isotropic space ${\bf I}^{n+1}$, instead of ${\mathbb E}^{n+1}$. For 2-input functions, we give the following simple geometric characterization of perfect substitute via isotropic geometry. Theorem 4.2 states that there do not exist minimal Cobb-Douglas production hypersurfaces in $\mathbb E^{n+1}$. On the other hand, the next result states that there do exist isotropic minimal Cobb-Douglas production models in ${\bf I}^{n+1}$. Analogous to Theorem [\[T:4.3\]](#T:4.3){reference-type="ref" reference="T:4.3"}, we have the following simple geometric characterization of $n$-input perfect substitute in term of isotropic minimality. # Remarks on production models in ${\bf I}^{n+1}$ with null relative curvature It follows from [\[2.9\]](#2.9){reference-type="eqref" reference="2.9"} that the graph hypersurface $\Phi(f)$ of a production function $f$ has null relative curvature if and only if the production function is a solution to the homogeneous Monge-Ampère equation. Hence, by, the results given in the last section of can be rephrased as the following. For Cobb-Douglas and CES production models, we have the following. For 2-input homothetic production functions, we have the following. # Remark on flat production models in ${\bf I}^{n+1}$ Homogeneous production functions with flat graph hypersurfaces in ${\mathbb E}^{n+1}$ were classified by the first author and G. E. Vı̂lcu as follows. Finally, we discuss isotropic flat production models in ${\bf I}^{n+1}$. First, we remark that for an $n$-input production function $f$, it follows from [\[2.6\]](#2.6){reference-type="eqref" reference="2.6"} that all curves on $\Phi(f)$ passing through a given point with a given tangent have the same normal curvature. For a 2-dimensional subspace $\pi$ of the tangent space $T_p(\Phi(f))$ of the graph hypersurface $\Phi(f)$ at a point $p$, we define the isotropic sectional curvature $K_i(\pi)$ to be the product of the maximum and minimum normal curvatures with respect to the directions in $\pi$. A graph hypersurface $\Phi(f)$ in ${\bf I}^{n+1}$ is said to be isotropic flat if its isotropic sectional curvatures vanish identically. Analogous to Theorem [\[T:6.1\]](#T:6.1){reference-type="ref" reference="T:6.1"} we have the following. # Concluding remarks By imposing various curvature conditions on graph hypersurfaces, we observe in the last three sections several differences and similarities between graph hypersurfaces in $\mathbb E^{n+1}$ and graph hypersurfaces in ${\bf I}^{n+1}$. In the following, we discuss some differences between graph hypersurfaces in $\mathbb E^{n+1}$ and graph hypersurfaces in ${\bf I}^{n+1}$ from the viewpoint of finite type theory in the sense of the first author. Analogous to the theory of finite type submanifolds in $\mathbb E^{n+1}$ (cf. ), we call a graph hypersurface $\Phi(f)$ in ${\bf I}^{n+1}$ to be of finite type if all coordinate functions of $\Phi(f)$ in ${\bf I}^{n+1}$ are finite sums of eigenfunctions of the Laplacian $\Delta$ on $\mathbb E^n$. It is clear from [\[2.1\]](#2.1){reference-type="eqref" reference="2.1"} that a graph hypersurface $\Phi(f)$ in ${\bf I}^{n+1}$ is of finite type if and only if the function $f$ is of finite type. Since there exist many finite type functions, there are abundant examples of finite type graph hypersurfaces in ${\bf I}^{n+1}$, a phenomenon contrast to finite type hypersurfaces in Euclidean spaces (cf. ). Similar to Euclidean submanifolds, we call a graph hypersurface $\Phi(f)$ in ${\bf I}^{n+1}$ isotropically biharmonic if the position function ${\bf x}$ of $\Phi(f)$ in ${\bf I}^{n+1}$ is biharmonic, i.e., it satisfies the biharmonic equation: \[\begin{aligned} \label{7.1} \Delta^2 {\bf x}=0.\end{aligned}\] It follows from [\[2.1\]](#2.1){reference-type="eqref" reference="2.1"} and [\[7.1\]](#7.1){reference-type="eqref" reference="7.1"} that a graph hypersurface $\Phi(f)$ in ${\bf I}^{n+1}$ is isotropically biharmonic if and only if the function $f$ is biharmonic. Obviously, there exist many biharmonic functions which are not harmonic. Consequently, there are many graph hypersurfaces in ${\bf I}^{n+1}$ which are isotropically biharmonic, but not harmonic. This phenomenon is quite different from Euclidean biharmonic submanifolds. In fact, the first author conjectured in 1981 that minimal submanifolds are the only biharmonic submanifolds in Euclidean spaces. This biharmonic conjecture remains unsettled after more than three decades (see for the most recent development on biharmonic conjecture).	{'timestamp': '2014-01-22T02:11:38', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5415', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5415'}
null	null
# Supplemental Material # Derivation of the Lamb shift To reveal the impact of the Lamb shift expression given in Eq. (4) in the main text, we present here its full derivation, starting with the time-independent Floquet master equation (for further details follow the steps in, e.g., Refs. ) written in the basis of Floquet modes $\|\Phi_{\alpha}(t)\rangle = \|\Phi_{\alpha}(t+\frac{2\pi}{\Omega})\rangle$ and in the Schrödinger picture \[\dot{\rho}_{\alpha\beta}(t) =-i (\omega_{\alpha\beta}-\delta\omega_{\alpha\beta})\,\rho_{\alpha\beta}(t)+ \sum_{\gamma,\delta}\mathcal{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\,\rho_{\gamma\delta}(t)\,, \label{eq:standardnotation}\] where \[\mathcal{R}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}=\Gamma^{+}_{\alpha\gamma\beta\delta} + \Gamma^{-}_{\alpha\gamma\beta\delta}-\delta_{\delta,\beta}\sum_{\mu}\Gamma^{+}_{\mu\gamma\mu\alpha}-\delta_{\gamma,\alpha}\sum_{\mu}\Gamma^{-}_{\mu\beta\mu\delta} \label{eq:Redfieldtensor}\] represents the Redfield tensor and \[\Gamma^{+}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}=\frac{1}{\hbar}\sum_k \mathcal{S}(\Delta_{\alpha\beta, k})X_{\alpha\beta,k}^{(r)}(X_{\gamma\delta,k}^{(r)})^{\ast}, \,\,\Gamma^{-}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}=\frac{1}{\hbar}\sum_k \mathcal{S}(\Delta_{\gamma\delta,k})X_{\alpha\beta,k}^{(r)}(X_{\gamma\delta,k}^{(r)})^{\ast} \label{eq:Gammarates}\] the effective relaxation and dephasing rates, respectively. A crucial point in deriving the result [\[eq:standardnotation\]](#eq:standardnotation){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:standardnotation"} is that we have performed the so-called partial secular approximation (PSA) . It consists in retaining all terms which oscillate with $\epsilon_{\alpha}\neq \epsilon_{\beta}$ (in contrast to the usual rotating wave approximation, RWA) and neglecting only those with multiple integers $k_{\alpha},k_{\beta}$ of $\hbar\Omega$ where $k_{\alpha}\neq k_{\beta}$. The PSA imposes the constraint $\Omega\gg \eta\,\|\omega_{\alpha\beta}\|$ which is a much weaker condition than that for a full RWA which requires $\|\omega_{\alpha\beta}\|\gg \Gamma$ with a typical relaxation time scale $1/\Gamma$. For details see. The Lamb shift contributions $\delta\omega_{\alpha\beta}$ arise from principal value terms via $\int_0^{\infty} dt\, {\rm e}^{i\omega t}=\pi\delta(\omega) + i\,\mathcal{P}(1/\omega)$ in the Floquet master equation in the basis of Floquet states $\|\Psi_{\alpha}(t)\rangle$ following the procedure outlined in Refs. . The matrix elements \[X_{\alpha\beta,k}^{(r)}= \frac{\Omega}{2\pi}\int_{0}^{2\pi/\Omega} dt\, {\rm e}^{-ik\Omega t}\langle \Phi_{\alpha}(t)\|S(r)\|\Phi_{\beta}(t)\rangle\] with the driving frequency $\Omega$ contain the system operator $S$ coupling to the reservoir and obey the symmetry relation $X_{\alpha\beta, k}^{(r)}=X^{\ast \;(r)}_{\beta\alpha,-k}$. The latter one helps to simplify the Lamb shift terms. Transition energies are given by \[\hbar \Delta_{\alpha\beta,k} = \epsilon_{\alpha}-\epsilon_{\beta} + k\hbar\Omega \label{eq:transition}\] with $\epsilon_{i}(t), i=\alpha, \beta$ playing the role of a dressed state energy. The quantity $\omega_{\alpha\beta}=(\epsilon_{\alpha}-\epsilon_{\beta})/\hbar$ thereby expresses the Floquet quasienergy gap which is a non-dissipative contribution of the driven quantum system. In the above formulas we have also used the abbreviation \[\begin{aligned} \mathcal{S}(\omega)=\theta(\omega)J(\omega)n_{\rm th}(\omega) + \theta(-\omega)J(-\omega)[n_{\rm th}(-\omega)+1] \label{eq:Sterm} \end{aligned}\] containing the spectral bath density $J(\omega)$ in units of an energy. Here, $\theta(\omega)$ denotes the Heavyside function and $n_{\rm th}(\omega)$ is the usual Bose-Einstein distribution. In the above derivation principal value corrections to the rates in Eq. [\[eq:Gammarates\]](#eq:Gammarates){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Gammarates"} are neglected as they provide higher order corrections only. In the singular coupling regime to be of main interest here, the Lamb shift provides the leading order contribution. To evaluate it explicitly, one has to consider integrals of the form \[G^{\pm}(\Delta_{\alpha\beta,k})=\mathcal{P}\int_0^{\infty} d\omega\, \frac{J(\omega)n_{\rm th}(\pm\omega)}{\omega-\Delta_{\alpha\beta,k}}\,. \label{eq:PVintegral}\] This leads us to the following expression \[\begin{aligned} \delta\omega_{\alpha\beta}=\frac{1}{\pi\hbar}\sum_{\mu, k}\hspace{-0.3cm}&\bigl[\|X_{\beta\mu,k}^{(r)}\|^2\{G^+(\Delta_{\mu\beta,-k})+G^-(\Delta_{\beta\mu,k})\} \nonumber\\ &-\|X_{\mu\alpha,k}^{(r)}\|^2\{G^+(\Delta_{\mu\alpha,k})+G^-(\Delta_{\alpha\mu,-k})\} \bigr]\. \label{eq:lscompact} \end{aligned}\] The above results apply to arbitrary spectral density of the bath $J(\omega)$. Now, for a TLS ($\mu=1,2$) at zero temperature (only zero-point fluctuations) $n_\beta(\omega>0)\to 0$, the $G^+$-contributions drop out. Applying the symmetry relations $X_{\alpha\beta, k}^{(r)}=X^{\ast \;(r)}_{\beta\alpha,-k}$ as well as $X_{11,k}^{(r)}=-X_{22,k}^{(r)}$ for a traceless noise operator (which is true for all combinations of Pauli matrices) and orthogonal Floquet modes at all times, only terms with different indices in the coupling matrix elements survive in ([\[eq:lscompact\]](#eq:lscompact){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:lscompact"}). This leads to Eq. (4) in the main text. For an Ohmic-type distribution with exponential cut-off $J(\omega)=\eta\hbar\omega \exp(-\omega/\omega_c)$ with a dimensionless coupling constant $\eta$ and a large cut-off frequency $\omega_c$, one obtains \[G(\Delta_{\alpha\beta,k})\equiv G^-_{T=0}(\Delta_{\alpha\beta,k})=-\eta\hbar\omega_c+\eta\hbar\Delta_{\alpha\beta,k}\, {\rm e}^{-\Delta_{\alpha\beta,k}/\omega_c}\, {\rm Ei}(\Delta_{\alpha\beta,k}/\omega_c) \label{eq:Iminus}\] with ${\rm Ei}(z)=-\int_{-z}^\infty dy\, {\rm e}^{-y}/y$, where the integral is understood in the principal value sense. The terms linear in $\omega_c$ in [\[eq:Iminus\]](#eq:Iminus){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Iminus"} describing the static effect of the bath do not contribute to the Lamb shift as they cancel each other. Finally, the Lamb shift ([\[eq:lscompact\]](#eq:lscompact){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:lscompact"}) reduces for a TLS in the zero temperature limit to \[\begin{aligned} \label{lamb1} \delta\omega_{\alpha\beta}^{T=0}=\frac{\eta}{\pi}\sum_{\mu, k}\bigl[\Delta_{\beta\mu,k} f(\Delta_{\beta\mu,k}/\omega_c)\|X_{\beta\mu,k}^{(r)}\|^2-\Delta_{\alpha\mu,-k} f(\Delta_{\alpha\mu,-k}/\omega_c)\|X_{\mu\alpha,k}^{(r)}\|^2\bigr]\,, \end{aligned}\] where we have introduced the function $f(x)={\rm Ei(x)} {\rm exp}(-x)$ with the property $f(x) \to C_{\gamma} + \ln(x)$ for $x \ll 1$ with the Euler constant $C_{\gamma}$. For the Rabi model discussed in the main text, this yields the expressions in (5) together with $\Lambda^{(r)}=\sum_k g(\Delta_{21,k}/\omega_c) \|X_{21,k}^{(r)}\|^2$, where $g(x)=x\,[f(x)+ f(-x)]$. Thermal corrections to these zero temperature results tend to play a role for dressed transition frequencies with $\hbar\beta\Delta_{12, k} \lesssim O(1)$, while they are suppressed exponentially for $\hbar\beta\Delta_{12, k}\gg 1$. We discuss details for the Rabi model below. In principle, there is also a constraint on temperature corresponding to the Markov-approximation associated with ([\[eq:standardnotation\]](#eq:standardnotation){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:standardnotation"}), namely, that bath correlation functions decay sufficiently fast compared to a typical system relaxation time scale $1/\Gamma$. However, in a steady state situation, the time-independence of the density guarantees that non-Markovian effects are of no relevance. They may only play a role when one is interested in time-dependent correlation functions. # Semiclassical Rabi model We consider here details of the semiclassical Rabi model which, despite its simplicity, describes recent experimental realizations, see below and, e.g.,. The Hamiltonian is given by \[H(t)=\twobytwo{-\frac{E}{2}}{A^*\,{\rm e}^{i\Omega t}}{A\,{\rm e}^{-i\Omega t}}{\frac{E}{2}}=-\frac{E}{2}\sigma_z + A\,\{\cos(\Omega t)\sigma_x-\sin(\Omega t) \sigma_y\}\,, \label{eq:Rabihamiltonian1}\] where for simplicity the driving amplitude $A$ is taken as real-valued and $E$ is the bare energy level spacing. To find the solution of the Schrödinger equation, we follow a standard procedure: First, moving to a rotating frame reveals a time-independent Hamiltonian which we diagonalize. In a second step, we revert to the laboratory frame and cast the solutions finally in Floquet form. The so-found quasienergies are $\epsilon_{1,2}=(\Delta\pm\hbar\omega_R)/2$ with detuning $\Delta=E-\hbar\Omega$ and $\omega_R=\frac{1}{\hbar}\sqrt{\Delta^2 + 4\|A\|^2}$ being the Rabi frequency.\ The corresponding Floquet modes are: \[\ket{\phi_1(t)}= \begin{pmatrix} \cos \theta \\-\,{\rm e}^{-i\Omega t}\,{\rm e}^{i\phi}\sin\theta \end{pmatrix} \label{eq:Floqmode1}\] \[\ket{\phi_2(t)}= \begin{pmatrix} {\rm e}^{-i\phi}\sin\theta \\ \,{\rm e}^{-i\Omega t} \cos\theta \end{pmatrix} \label{eq:Floqmode2}\] where $\phi=-\arg A$ and $\tan(2\theta)=\frac{2\|A\|}\Delta$. As we have chosen $A$ to be real, one has $\phi=0$. The coupling matrix elements $X_{\alpha \beta, k}^{(r)}$ are obtained in the following way: For $\sigma_z$-noise only terms with $k=0$ survive with \[\begin{aligned} \label{mat1} X_{11,0}^{(0)} &= \cos^2 \theta-\sin^2\theta = \cos 2 \theta =-X_{22,0}^{(0)}\nonumber\\ X_{21,0}^{(0)} &= 2\sin\theta \cos \theta = \sin 2\theta = X_{12,0}^{\ast \;(0)}\. \end{aligned}\] Together with $\Lambda^{(r)}$ specified in the preceding section, this then leads to $\Lambda^{(0)}$. For $\sigma_x$-noise, the non-zero contributions $k=\pm1$ provide the coefficients \[\begin{aligned} \label{mat2} X_{11,-1}^{(\pi/2)} &=-\frac{1}{2} \sin 2\theta = X_{11,1}^{(\pi/2)}\, &X_{22,-1}^{(\pi/2)} &= X_{22,1}^{(\pi/2)} =-X_{11,1}^{(\pi/2)} \nonumber\\ X_{12,-1}^{(\pi/2)} &= \cos^2\theta = X_{21,1}^{\ast\;(\pi/2)}\, &X_{21,-1}^{(\pi/2)} &=-\sin^2\theta = X_{12,1}^{\ast\;(\pi/2)}\, \end{aligned}\] which yields $\Lambda^{(\pi/2)}$ \[Eq. (5) in the main text\]. Thermal fluctuations in the master equation ([\[eq:standardnotation\]](#eq:standardnotation){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:standardnotation"}) and the Lamb shift ([\[lamb1\]](#lamb1){reference-type="ref" reference="lamb1"}) are important if $(-\omega_R\pm \Omega)\hbar\beta \lesssim 1$ ($\sigma_x$-coupling) or $\omega_R\hbar\beta\lesssim 1$ ($\sigma_z$-coupling). In actual experiments, close to resonance one typically has $\Omega\gg \eta \|A\|$ so that thermal fluctuations can be sufficiently suppressed for $\sigma_x$-noise, where this coincides with the optimal regime to detect a Lamb shift (see main text). For $\sigma_z$-coupling the constraint is in general harder to fulfill. However, since a corresponding Lamb shift close to resonance is particularly pronounced in the range of stronger driving ($\|A\|/E\gtrsim 0.3$), for realistic values $E\beta\approx 10$ the condition $\omega_R\hbar\beta\approx (2\|A\|/E) (E\beta)\approx 6$ is sufficiently obeyed as well. # Single mode case While it makes in general no sense to derive a master equation such as in ([\[eq:standardnotation\]](#eq:standardnotation){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:standardnotation"}) for a single mode reservoir, the result derived in Eq. (4) of the main text for the Lamb shift can also be applied to analyze this limiting case. It is only based on zero temperature second order perturbation theory. To illustrate the enhanced Lamb shift for dressed states we thus consider here a TLS interacting with such a single mode reservoir with frequency $\omega_0$. With the distribution $J_1(\omega)=\eta\hbar\omega_0^2\, \delta(\omega-\omega_0)$ the integrals ([\[eq:PVintegral\]](#eq:PVintegral){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:PVintegral"}) are easily evaluated and based on the coupling matrix elements ([\[mat1\]](#mat1){reference-type="ref" reference="mat1"}), ([\[mat2\]](#mat2){reference-type="ref" reference="mat2"}), one obtains for $\sigma_z$-noise \[\delta\omega_{12}^{\rm (single, z)}= \frac{\eta}{\pi} \, 2\omega_R \sin(2\theta)\, \frac{ \omega_0^2}{\omega_0^2-\omega_R^2}\.\] For $\sigma_x$-noise, we have \[\delta\omega_{12}^{\rm (single, x)}=\frac{\eta\omega_0^2}{\pi}\left[\frac{(\omega_R+\Omega)\cos^4(\theta)}{\omega_0^2-(\omega_R+\Omega)^2} +\frac{\Omega\sin^2(\theta)/4}{\omega_0^2-\Omega^2}\right]\,.\] In the static situation (no driving) the so-called dispersive limit ($E$ and $\omega_0$ far detuned) has been considered in. It yields \[\delta\omega_{12}^{(\rm static)}\approx \frac{\eta}{\pi} \frac{\omega_0^2}{(E/\hbar)-\omega_0}\,.\] While this static Lamb shift leads to shifts in bare transition frequencies of a few % only, apparently, by properly tuning $A$ and $\Omega$ the dressed Lamb shift can be significantly enhanced. # Mapping to the Rabi model As discussed in the main text, recent experiments with driven CPBs are described with \[\label{hamcpb} H_{S, \rm CPB}(t)=-\frac{1}{2} E_{C}\tau_z-\frac{1}{2} E_J \tau_x-\lambda \cos(\omega t) \tau_z\] with tunable charging energy $E_C$ and Josephson energy $E_J$. The coupling to the reservoir is dominated by charge noise and thus proportional to $\tau_z$. Here, we show how in limiting cases this setup reduces to the Rabi model ([\[eq:Rabihamiltonian1\]](#eq:Rabihamiltonian1){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:Rabihamiltonian1"}) with either transversal or longitudinal coupling to the bath. Transversal coupling: Close to charge degeneracy $E_C=0$, in the eigenstate representation of the CPB, i.e., $\tau_x\to \sigma_z$ and $\tau_z\to-\sigma_x$, one has $E=E_J$ and the coupling to the bath is transversal with $S(r=\pi/2)=\sigma_x$. Close to resonance $\hbar\omega\approx E_J$ a RWA in $H_{\rm CPB}$ can be applied which is consistent with the PSA used to derive the Floquet master equation ([\[eq:standardnotation\]](#eq:standardnotation){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:standardnotation"}) if $\hbar\omega/\|\lambda\|\gg 1\gg \eta$. The drive parameters then read $A=\lambda$ and $\Omega=-\omega$. Longitudinal coupling: For $E_C\neq 0$ and for strong driving $\lambda, \hbar\omega\gg E_J$, a dressed tunneling picture applies. Accordingly, a unitary transformation $U(t)=\exp[-i\phi(t)\tau_z/(2\hbar)]$ with $\dot{\phi}(t)=2\lambda \cos(\omega t)$ leads to \[\begin{aligned} \tilde{H}_{S,\rm CPB}(t) &=&U^\dagger H_{S, \rm CPB}(t) U(t)+i\hbar U^\dagger(t)\dot{U}(t)\nonumber\\ &=&-\frac{1}{2} E_{C}\tau_z-\frac{1}{2} E_{J}\left[ {\rm e}^{i\phi(t)/\hbar}\tau_+ + {\rm e}^{-i\phi(t)/\hbar}\tau_-\right] \end{aligned}\] with $\tau_\pm=(\tau_x\pm i\tau_y)/2$. By decomposing the time-dependent phase factors in terms of Bessel functions using the Jacobi-Anger expansion $\exp(i z \sin \varphi)=\sum_{-\infty}^{\infty} J_n(z) \exp(in\varphi)$, near the $n$-photon resonance $E_C=n\hbar\omega$ one may put ${\rm e}^{i\phi(t)/\hbar}\approx J_n(2\lambda/\hbar \omega)\, {\rm e}^{in\omega t}$. This RWA is consistent with the PSA provided $\hbar\omega/E_J\gg 1$ as assumed. Accordingly, one obtains the Rabi model with $E=E_C$ and drive parameters $A=-(E_J/2)\, J_n(2\lambda/\hbar\omega), \Omega=n\omega$. As the transformation $U(t)$ commutes with the CPB-bath coupling operator $\tau_z$, one arrives at pure dephasing (longitudinal coupling).	{'timestamp': '2014-05-07T02:08:39', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5396', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5396'}
null	null
null	null
# Introduction Given a computer network with links representing pathways through which computer viruses can propagate, how should one distribute protection resources to minimize the impact of a new piece of malware? The network structure and the location of infected computers play a key role on how quickly the malware will spread. Conversely, the location of protection resources within the network can dramatically improve the efficiency of protection resources aiming to contain malware spread. Usual approaches to distribute protection resources in a network of agents are heuristics based on network centrality measures. The main idea behind these approaches is to rank agents according to different measures of importance based on their location in the network and greedily distribute protection resources based on the rank. For example, Cohen et al. proposed a simple vaccination strategy called acquaintance immunization policy in which the most connected node of a randomly selected node is vaccinated. This strategy was proved to be much more efficient than random vaccine allocation. Hayashi et al. proposed a simple heuristic called targeted immunization consisting on greedily choosing nodes with the highest degree (number of connections) in scale-free graphs. Chung et at. studied a greedy heuristic immunization strategy based on the PageRank vector of the contact graph. Tong et al. and Giakkoupis et al. proposed greedy heuristics based on immunizing those agents that induce the highest drop in the dominant eigenvalue of the contact graph. Recently, Prakash et al. proposed several greedy heuristics to contain spreading processes in directed networks when nodes can be partially immunized (instead of completely removed, as assumed in previous work). These heuristics, as those in, are based on eigenvalue perturbation analysis. Recently, an optimization-based approach have been developed in-to solve exactly--without relaxations or heuristics--the optimal immunization problem in polynomial time. In particular, in, the authors proposed a convex formulation to find the optimal allocation of protective resources in an undirected network using semidefinite programming (SDP). In, the authors solve the optimal immunization problem in weighted and directed networks of nonidentical agents using Geometric Programming (GP). Also, in a linear-fractional (LF) optimization program was proposed to compute the optimal investment on disease awareness over the nodes of a social network to contain a spreading process. Based on the exact solution to the immunization problem developed in, we propose worst-case scenarios in which the heuristics previously proposed in the literature perform very poorly. In our analysis, we derive the exact optimal solution for certain directed networks and compare with those solutions obtained using previous heuristics. Our results show how previous heuristics can perform arbitrarily poorly in certain directed graphs. # The Network Protection Problem The susceptible-infected-susceptible model (SIS) is a popular stochastic epidemic model first introduced by Weiss and Dishon,. A discrete time variation of this model for networked populations is explored by Wang et al. in. A continuous time version called the N-intertwined SIS model was proposed and extensively analyzed by Van Meighem et al. in. An extension of the N-intertwined SIS (NiSIS) model including heterogenous agents (HeNiSIS) is presented in Preciado et al., and an exact solution to a family of network protection problems is also presented. The network protection problem addressed in this work is allocation of preventative resources given a fixed budget with the goal of maximizing the rate at which the epidemic is expunged. The exact solution presented in are leveraged to characterize the worst case behavior of common simple heuristics which greedily allocate resources within a network based on centrality measures. ## Preliminaries Before proceeding with the model we introduce some notation. A weighted directed graph (digraph) is defined as $G = (V, E,W)$ where $V$ is the set of n nodes, $E \subseteq V \times V$ is a set of ordered pairs of nodes indicating directed edges and edge weights $W\in \mathbb{R}_{+}^{n\times n}$ defined as weighted incidence matrix, $W_{ij} = 0$ for all $(i,j) \not\in E$. The neighbor set of node $i$ is defined $N_i = \{ j: (i,j)\in E\}$. For an $n \times n$ matrix $M$, the eigenvalues $\lambda_i(M)$ are ordered such that $\mathbb{R}(\lambda_1) \ge \mathbb{R}(\lambda_2) \ge \dots \ge \mathbb{R} (\lambda_n)$ where $\mathbb{R}(y)$ denotes the real part of $y\in \mathbb{C}$. ## Virus spreading model The HeNiSIS model is a continuous time networked Markov process where each node in the network can be in one of two states: infected or susceptible. The state is defined $X_i(t) = \{0,1\}$ for agent $i$ at time $t$ with $X_i(t)=1$ indicates the infected state. Two types of state transitions occur in this model. The probability of these transitions are defined over an infinitesimal time interval $[t, t+\Delta t).$ 1. A node in the susceptible state may become infected with a probability determined by that nodes infection rate $\beta_i$ state of its neighbors $\{X_j(t), \forall j\in N_i\}$ and the strength of the connections, $\{w_{ji}, \forall j\in N_i\}$: \[\begin{aligned} Pr(X_i(t+\Delta t)& =1 \| X_i(t) =0)=\\ &\sum_{j\in N_i} W_{ji} \beta_i X_j(t) \Delta t + o(\Delta t)\nonumber\end{aligned}\] 2. A node in the infected state may recover from the infection based on the recovery parameter $\delta$: \[Pr(X_i(t+\Delta t) = 0 \| X_i(t) = 1) = \delta \Delta t + o(\Delta t)\] Analysis under this model is done using the mean field approximation. The state variable becomes $p_i(t)$, the probability that node $i$ is infected at time $t$. This quantity evolves according to the $n$ ordinary differential equations: \[\frac{d\mathbf{p} (t)}{dt} = (BW-\delta I)\mathbf{p}(t)-P(t) BW\mathbf{p}(t)\] where $\mathbf{p}(t)$ is the stacked vector of probabilities $p_i(t)$, $P(t) =$diag$(\mathbf{p}(t))$ and $B$ is the diagonal matrix with $B_{ii} = \beta_i$. This system has stable disease free equilibrium $\mathbf{p}^=0$. From Proposition 1 in, the system stability is globally exponentially stable (with rate $\epsilon$) if $\mathbb{R} ( \lambda_1 (BW-\delta I)) \le-\epsilon$ for some $\epsilon>0$. Introducing a budget $C$ and a cost function over the protection resources $f: [\underline\beta, \bar\beta]\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$, the network protection problem maximizes the rate at which the virus is killed off. Cost is incurred when decreasing the infection rate so it is assumed that $f(\beta)$ is monotonically non-increasing. This problem can be solved exactly via convex optimization when the function $f(\cdot)$ is a log-convex function,. Knowledge of the optimal solution of problem [\[prob\]](#prob){reference-type="ref" reference="prob"} is a new development. This work proceeds to evaluate common simple heuristics in light of this knowledge. ## Greedy, Centrality Based Strategies Before addressing types of greedy heuristics, we define some additional notation. Monotonicity and continuity of the function $\epsilon({\beta})$ guarantee that fixing any feasible $\beta$ and maximizing over $\epsilon$ always causes the constraint $\field{R}[\lambda_1(BW-\delta I)] \le-\epsilon$ to become tight. At the optimal point $(\beta^,\epsilon^)$ of Problem [\[prob\]](#prob){reference-type="ref" reference="prob"} satisfies \[\epsilon^=-\field{R}[\lambda_1(\hbox{diag}(\beta^*)W-\delta I)].\] Thus, when solving the resource allocation $\beta$, $\epsilon(\beta)$ is treated as the effective objective in Problem [\[prob\]](#prob){reference-type="ref" reference="prob"}. The effective objective $\epsilon(\beta)$ and the costs functions $f(\beta_i)$ are monotonically non-increasing in the resource allocations $\beta_i$ at each node, therefore $\bar\beta$ trivially achieves the minimum over the set of feasible resource allocations $\beta$. Common centrality measures used for heuristics are degree and eigenvector centrality,. Page rank centrality is used as in place of eigenvector centrality in the case of general digraphs,. While Page rank depends on a parameter $\alpha$, we drop the $\alpha$ from our notation because our results hold for the whole family of Page rank vectors generated by non-trivial choices of $\alpha\in (0,1)$.\ # Analytical Results Theorem [\[counterex\]](#counterex){reference-type="ref" reference="counterex"} tells us that for a general digraph, the greedy allocation strategy can be arbitrarily bad. However, common network resource allocations take the basic assumption that the graph is strongly connected. Since the proof constructs a graph which is weakly, but not strongly connected we develop a related theorem for strongly connected digraphs. Lemma [\[lemma\]](#lemma){reference-type="ref" reference="lemma"} characterizes the greedy resource allocation strategies on the family of digraphs $G_\gamma'$. Specifically, the infection rate profiles achieved $\hat\beta_{DEG}$ and $\hat\beta_{PR}$ do not depend on $\gamma$. For any $\gamma$ nodes in $S_n$ are fully immunized until all resources are expended. Theorem [\[digraph\]](#digraph){reference-type="ref" reference="digraph"} shows that having a strongly connected digraph does not remove the possibility that greedy centrality based networks will perform very poorly. The digraph family constructed in the proof is only one method to produce a worst-case digraph. Other worst case digraphs may be constructed but few are so easily analyzed. # Computational Results {#demos} We consider a simple application in which such a worst case network might arise naturally. Nodes are computers belonging to individuals in a work environment. Edges indicate access to files on another persons computer. $C_m$ consists of a group of workers and $S_n$ a group of administrators who can access files on all works computers. Workers have limited access to each others computers but do not have access to files on the administrator's computers. We assume the virus may spread when an uninfected computer accesses an infected computer. Protection resources take the form of antivirus software with updates on a variable time interval, software updated more frequently providing a smaller infection rate $\beta$ but updates incurring a greater cost $f(\beta)$. The cost function \[f(\beta_i) = \frac{\underline\beta(\frac{\bar \beta}{\beta_i}-1)}{\bar\beta-\underline \beta }\] is chosen to satisfy $f(\bar\beta)=0$, $f(\underline\beta)=1$ and $f(\beta) \propto 1/\beta$. This allows us to choose capacity $C$ equal to the number of nodes we wish to be able to allocate maximum protection. In our example the infection rate with outdated anti-virus software is $\bar\beta =.5$ while the maximum update rate achieves an infection rate of $\underline\beta =.01$. Choosing a budget of $C=3$ for a network with $n=3$ and $m=6$ (such as in G or A shown in Fig. [\[nets\]](#nets){reference-type="ref" reference="nets"}), the fraction of nodes that can be maximally protected is $r=1/3$. An infected machine has recovery rate $\delta= 0.3$, based on curative resources which are uniformly available. In the example, four heuristic algorithms based on greedily allocating resources with respect to centrality measures are considered. The centrality measures are out degree, total degree, Page rank with $\alpha=.1$ and symmetrized Page rank with $\alpha=.1$. Symmetrized Page rank is computed by allowing the random walk move over a directed edge in either direction. The worst case networks are products of extreme asymmetry between $C_m$ and $S_n$, the symmetric centrality measure show that even symmetric centrality measure don't overcome the potential for arbitrarily poor behavior. In Fig. [\[data\]](#data){reference-type="ref" reference="data"} the top table shows all of the centrality vectors for the example problem in the networks $A$ and $G$. The network $G$ is the network constructed in our analytical proofs. The network $A$ is an example of a less structured employee collaboration network which we include to demonstrate two points: (i) our constructed network G is not unique and (ii) symmetrizing heuristics are less fragile than heuristics that respect edge direction. In $G$ and $A$ the out degree and Page rank heuristics allocate all resources to the admins, $S_n$. This is ineffective because even though the admins are the most likely to become infected the worker group, $C_m$ cannot access their files and become infected. Fig. [\[data\]](#data){reference-type="ref" reference="data"} (bottom) shows the infection rate profiles generated by the various heuristics and the optimal solution. A strategy is ineffective if the convergence rate epsilon is negative because this corresponds to unstable dynamics and the probability of infection becoming one for all machines. Figure [\[plots\]](#plots){reference-type="ref" reference="plots"} demonstrates the dynamic under each of the strategy profiles stated in Figure [\[data\]](#data){reference-type="ref" reference="data"}. # conclusion We have proven that for common centrality measures there exist networks for which greedy allocation of protection resources is completely ineffective. Furthermore, these worst case networks are not completely unreasonable pathological cases. An application in which this network structure could arise naturally is presented. In practice, if the information and computational power to solve the optimization via GP are available, this method should always be used. Restrictions on computational power or complete information may still lead to use of heuristics. Degree can be computed locally and Page rank can be approximated iteratively. When using these heuristics, we suggest using symmetric variants; while we showed that even the symmetric heuristics can be arbitrarily inefficient, we found the symmetric variants to be more robust [^1]: Total degree centrality may be substituted for out degree by imposing the condition $m>n+2$. Such an $(n,m)$ pair exists and is chosen for demonstrations in section [4](#demos){reference-type="ref" reference="demos"}.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-23T02:11:22', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5753', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5753'}
# Introduction Lamb waves, which interact with delaminations are useful for the inspection of laminated composites and sandwich materials. Scanning laser Doppler interferometric methods were introduced and used for non-contact sensing of Lamb waves excited in a structure. It was shown that flaw maps can be obtained by exploiting the local vibrational contrast between a delaminated area and the surrounding structure. Analysis methods of time-domain laser Doppler measurements were introduced to reveal local damage contrasts. Among them, spatial and temporal discrete Fourier transform approaches and computation of the local energy from temporal wave fields have proven their usefulness. However, scanning laser Doppler vibrometry is a time-consuming process which hinders high spatial resolution measurements in real-time.\ Non-destructive imaging of structural integrity can also be achieved by speckle pattern shearing interferometry (shearography) , speckle interferometry , and holography , which are suitable experimental methods to reveal local delaminations, especially in time-averaged recording conditions . In shearing interferometry, if the image of the object is sampled on the sensor, interference fringes correspond to the partial derivative of the object's out-of-plane vibrational motion in the direction of the shear, or isoclines. In speckle interferometry and holography, an image of the local out-of-plane vibrational motion is obtained; interference fringes correspond to constant vibration amplitudes, or contour lines.\ In the reported work, wide-field structural health monitoring of locally-damaged sandwich composite plates is performed at video rate by frequency-tunable time-averaged holographic vibrometry. Holographic vibrometry was previously reported to enable wide-field surface acoustic wave monitoring in sinusoidal regime and compared to scanning laser Doppler for this purpose . We demonstrate experimentally that delamination defects can be observed from local narrowband measurements of out-of-plane vibration amplitudes in an aluminum honeycomb core sandwich composite plate. The size of the defect is estimated from the first resonance frequencies of the flexural wave.\ An optical Mach-Zehnder interferometer (Fig. [\[fig_SetupHealthMonitoringOfComposites\]](#fig_SetupHealthMonitoringOfComposites){reference-type="ref" reference="fig_SetupHealthMonitoringOfComposites"}) was developed to monitor out-of-plane vibrations. Narrowband imaging is achieved with a frequency-tunable time-averaged laser Doppler holographic imaging scheme on a sensor array. This method enables robust and quantitative mapping out-of-plane vibrations of nanometric amplitudes at radiofrequencies. A high temporal coherence green laser (Cobolt Samba-TFB-150, linewidth $< 1 \, \rm MHz$, wavelength $\lambda$ = 532 nm) was used to illuminate the composite plate in wide field over $\sim$ 20 cm $\times$ 20 cm with a total optical power of $\sim$ 30 mW. This plate is excited by a piezoelectric actuator. Narrowband recording of the map of out-of-plane vibration amplitudes was enabled by holographic interferometry in time-averaging conditions by a 20 Hz frame rate CCD camera. In such experimental conditions, retrieval of nanometric amplitude oscillations is achieved. The detection process involves both spatial and temporal modulation of the interference pattern through off-axis and frequency-shifting holography, frequency-division multiplexing of the optical local oscillator ensures simultaneous measurement of two modulation sidebands at distinct beating frequencies of the recorded interferogram. Robust imaging of out-of-plane vibration amplitudes at a given frequency is achieved by pixel-to-pixel division of two sideband holograms.\ The composite is a symmetric sandwich, whose core is a $2.5 \, {\rm cm}$-thick aluminum honeycomb with 3/8\" cells. The skin is a $1.1 \, \rm mm$-thick \[0 45 90-45\]s stack of woven carbon fiber plies with epoxy resin of density $\rho = 1.7 \, \rm g/cm^3$. Its standard mechanical properties, reported in Tab. [\[tab_rendering\]](#tab_rendering){reference-type="ref" reference="tab_rendering"} for one woven ply are used to calculate the dispersion relation of the first antisymmetric Lamb mode $A_0$ by the semi-analytical finite element (SAFE) method. This dispersion relation is plotted in Fig. [\[fig_DispersionRelationAluminiumA0\]](#fig_DispersionRelationAluminiumA0){reference-type="ref" reference="fig_DispersionRelationAluminiumA0"}. The composite was impacted at 1 J on the monitoring side to provoke a local detachment of the skin from the honeycomb, invisible to the naked eye. In order to create steady-state Lamb waves in the carbon/epoxy plate, a piezo-electric transducer was fixed to the plate as shown in the bottom of Fig. [\[fig_CompositePlateInVibration\]](#fig_CompositePlateInVibration){reference-type="ref" reference="fig_CompositePlateInVibration"}(a). The piezo disc ($2 \, {\rm cm}$ diameter) is supplied with a sinusoidal signal whose angular frequency $\omega$ is swept. Monitoring of resonant Lamb waves is performed by holographic vibrometry.\ $C =\begin{pmatrix} 60 & 15 & 7 & 0 & 0 & 0\\ & 60 & 7 & 0 & 0 & 0\\ & & 14 & 0 & 0 & 0\\ & & & 4 & 0 & 0\\ \multicolumn{3}{c}{\rm sym.} & & 4 & 0\\ & & & & & 7 \end{pmatrix}$ To characterize the local delamination defect, we assume that its geometry is circular and we show that the modification of the boundary conditions in the carbon fiber epoxy plate results in the creation of local resonances of anti-symmetric Lamb waves at low frequencies, which are related to the defect size. The motion of flexural $A_0$ Lamb waves in an isotropic plate is given by the Kirchhoff--Love equation \[\label{eq_PlateFlexuralMotion} \frac{\partial^2z}{\partial t^2} + \frac{Eh^2}{12\rho\left(1-\nu^2\right)}\nabla^4z = 0\] where $z$ is the out-of-plane motion, $\nabla$ is the gradient operator, $h$ is the thickness of the plate, $E$ is the Young modulus of the material, $\rho$ its density, and $\nu$ its Poisson's ratio. In polar coordinates $(r, \theta)$, the harmonic solutions of eq.[\[eq_PlateFlexuralMotion\]](#eq_PlateFlexuralMotion){reference-type="ref" reference="eq_PlateFlexuralMotion"} take the form $z = Z \left(r,\theta\right) \exp(i\omega t)$, where $i$ is the imaginary unit. The Rayleigh-Lamb dispersion relation of the $A_0$ mode in the low frequency approximation is introduced to derive the steady-state solutions $Z(r,\theta)$ \[\label{eq_DispersionRelationship} \omega = {1 \over \sqrt{12}}k^2c_p h\] where $k$ is the wave vector and $c_p = \sqrt{E/{\rho\left(1-\nu^2\right)}}$ is the velocity of propagation of longitudinal oscillations in the isotropic thin plate (referred to as \"plate\" velocity). In our case, this expression of $c_p$ is not valid in an anisotropic material. Nevertheless, in the monitored frequency range, from 10 kHz to 60 kHz, we show that the composite can be assimilated to be a quasi-isotropic ply for which $c_p$ can be assessed from a fitting procedure of dispersion relationships. Slowness curves for Lamb modes at 17 kHz and 34.5 kHz were calculated from the values of the mechanical properties of the plate (stiffness tensor, thickness, angles between woven plies). These polar curves, which indicate a quasi-isotropic behavior of the material at these frequencies, are reported in Fig. [\[fig_DispersionRelationAluminiumA0\]](#fig_DispersionRelationAluminiumA0){reference-type="ref" reference="fig_DispersionRelationAluminiumA0"}. From the values of the mechanical parameters, we derive an equivalent velocity $c_p = 5150 \, \rm m/s$ by fitting the dispersion relation calculated from the SAFE method and reported in Fig. [\[fig_DispersionRelationAluminiumA0\]](#fig_DispersionRelationAluminiumA0){reference-type="ref" reference="fig_DispersionRelationAluminiumA0"} (dots), with Eq.[\[eq_DispersionRelationship\]](#eq_DispersionRelationship){reference-type="ref" reference="eq_DispersionRelationship"} (plotted as a line).\ The steady-state equation of flexural waves $\left(\nabla^2-k^2\right)\left(\nabla^2 + k^2\right)Z = 0$ is derived from Eq. [\[eq_DispersionRelationship\]](#eq_DispersionRelationship){reference-type="ref" reference="eq_DispersionRelationship"} and the harmonic solutions of Eq. [\[eq_PlateFlexuralMotion\]](#eq_PlateFlexuralMotion){reference-type="ref" reference="eq_PlateFlexuralMotion"}. Its solutions $Z_m$, in a circular plate clamped at its borders, are linear combinations of Bessel functions multiplied by an angular function \[\label{eq_PlateGeneralSolution} Z_m = \left( A_m J_m \left( kr\right) + C_m I_m \left( kr\right) \right) \cos( m\theta + \phi )\] where $A_m$ and $C_m$ are constants. Here, $J_m$ are the ordinary Bessel functions and $I_m$ are the hyperbolic Bessel functions of the first kind: $I_m(kr) = i^{-m}J_m(ikr)$. For a circular plate of radius $a$, clamped at its edge $r = a$, the boundary conditions are $Z(a)= 0$ and $\partial_r Z(a) = 0$. Which provide a condition on $ka$ for solutions to be non-trivial. Using the recursive relationships of the Bessel functions, this condition takes the form $J_m(ka) I_{m+1}(ka) + I_m(ka) J_{m+1}(ka) = 0$ where the eigenvalues $ka$ determine the resonant frequencies $\omega$ via Eq. [\[eq_DispersionRelationship\]](#eq_DispersionRelationship){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq_DispersionRelationship"}. The resulting allowed values are labeled \[\label{eq_gamma} \gamma_{mn} = k_{mn}a\] where $m$ is the number of nodal diameters and $n$ is the number of nodal circles in the corresponding normal mode. Using Eq. [\[eq_DispersionRelationship\]](#eq_DispersionRelationship){reference-type="ref" reference="eq_DispersionRelationship"} and Eq. [\[eq_gamma\]](#eq_gamma){reference-type="ref" reference="eq_gamma"}, the vibration's angular frequency, $\omega_{mn} = 2 \pi f_{mn}$, is related to the radius $a$ of the delamination defect by \[\label{eq_ftoadisperse} \omega_{mn} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{12}}\frac{\gamma^2_{mn}}{a^2}c_p h\] The first three solutions $\gamma_{mn}$ that will be used for the interpretation of the experimental results satisfy $\gamma_{01} = \sqrt{10.22}$, $\gamma_{11} = \sqrt{21.26}$, and $\gamma_{21} = \sqrt{34.88}$.\ Holographic images of the amplitude of the out-of-plane vibration at different frequencies are shown in Fig. [\[fig_CompositePlateInVibration\]](#fig_CompositePlateInVibration){reference-type="ref" reference="fig_CompositePlateInVibration"}. A frequency scan of the narrowband detection was performed from 10 kHz to 60 kHz for vibration monitoring. The total acquisition time for each image was 0.5 s. We assumed visually that (i) Fig. [\[fig_CompositePlateInVibration\]](#fig_CompositePlateInVibration){reference-type="ref" reference="fig_CompositePlateInVibration"}(c) corresponds to the vibration mode $(m,n) = (0,1)$ of the delamination defect, (ii) Fig. [\[fig_CompositePlateInVibration\]](#fig_CompositePlateInVibration){reference-type="ref" reference="fig_CompositePlateInVibration"}(d) corresponds to the mode $(m,n) = (1,1)$, and (iii) Fig. [\[fig_CompositePlateInVibration\]](#fig_CompositePlateInVibration){reference-type="ref" reference="fig_CompositePlateInVibration"}(e) corresponds to the mode $(m,n) = (2,1)$. Two regions, (1) and (2), were defined in Fig. [\[fig_CompositePlateInVibration\]](#fig_CompositePlateInVibration){reference-type="ref" reference="fig_CompositePlateInVibration"}(b), in the delamination region and in a typical healthy part respectively. Vibration amplitude spectra in these two zones are compared in Fig. [\[fig_AmplitudeVersusFrequency\]](#fig_AmplitudeVersusFrequency){reference-type="ref" reference="fig_AmplitudeVersusFrequency"}. The observed resonance frequencies of the geometrical modes (0,1), (1,1), and (2,1) allowed us to estimate the value of the radius $a$ of the damaged region, derived from Eq. [\[eq_ftoadisperse\]](#eq_ftoadisperse){reference-type="ref" reference="eq_ftoadisperse"}. We obtained $a_{01} = 12.5 \, {\rm mm}$, $\ a_{11} = 14.1 \, {\rm mm}$, and $a_{21} = 16.2 \, {\rm mm}$, from the known parameters $h$ and $c_p$. These radius values are of the same order of magnitude. To validate this theoretical approach of delamination vibrations, we compared the lateral extension of the vibrating region for the mode $(m,n) = (0,1)$ and mode $(m,n) = (2,1)$, which exhibit a good signal-to-noise ratio, contrary to the mode $(m,n) = (1,1)$ (Fig. [\[fig_AmplitudeVersusFrequency\]](#fig_AmplitudeVersusFrequency){reference-type="ref" reference="fig_AmplitudeVersusFrequency"}). In Figure [\[fig_ImageAndProfile\]](#fig_ImageAndProfile){reference-type="ref" reference="fig_ImageAndProfile"}, we reported images of the local out-of-plane vibration amplitude measured, respectively on (a) and (b), and of the simulated solutions of the steady-state modes $Z$, for the eigenvalues $\gamma_{01}$ (c) and $\gamma_{21}$ (d), calculated from Eq. [\[eq_PlateGeneralSolution\]](#eq_PlateGeneralSolution){reference-type="ref" reference="eq_PlateGeneralSolution"}. Both coefficients $A_m$ and $C_m$ for each mode were estimated using the boundary condition $Z(a_{mn}) = 0$ and the maximum amplitude measured on the experimental data. Figures [\[fig_ImageAndProfile\]](#fig_ImageAndProfile){reference-type="ref" reference="fig_ImageAndProfile"} (e) and (f) show measured profiles of the vibration amplitude against calulated ones, for which good agreement is observed.\ In conclusion, we have presented a real-time and wide-field structural health monitoring method for revealing delamination defects in composite plates of sandwich type. Low frequency flexural waves were generated in the plate with an ultrasound actuator and non-contact vibrometric measurements were performed with time-averaged heterodyne holography with a dual local oscillator. This scheme was used for quantitative vibration monitoring by sampling of two optical modulation sidebands within the camera bandwidth. Coupling of flexural waves with delamination defects were observed at the excitation frequency in an aluminum honeycomb core sandwich composite plate. Vibration spectra inside and away from the defect were measured by sweeping the excitation and detection frequencies. Local delaminations appeared to be the cause of the presence of local resonances at low frequencies in a the composite plate. The size of the defect was estimated from the first resonance frequency of the flexural wave and the mechanical parameters of the observed layer of the plate. Experimental results agree well with the reported analytical relationship between the vibration frequency of a local delamination of the composite and its lateral extension.\ We gratefully acknowledge support from Fondation Pierre-Gilles de Gennes (FPGG014), Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-09-JCJC-0113, ANR-11-EMMA-046), région Île-de-France (C'Nano, AIMA).	{'timestamp': '2014-01-22T02:11:55', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5430', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5430'}
# Introduction Quantum Chromo-Dynamics (QCD) is considered to be the theory of the strong interaction, however, is accessable to perturbation theory only in the limit of short distances or high momentum transfer, respectively. Thermodynamical properties of hadronic or partonic matter at finite temperature $T$ and/or chemical potential $\mu_q$ involve large distance interactions and can rigorously only be addressed by lattice QCD (predominantly at vanishing chemical potential) in Euclidean space. Alternatively, one might employ effective field theories that share the symmetry properties of QCD and fix the couplings to reproduce field expectation values and correlators. In fact, the knowledge about the phase diagram of strongly interacting hadronic/partonic matter has been increased substantially in the last decades. At vanishing (or low) chemical potentials lattice QCD (lQCD) calculations have provided reliable results on the equation of state and given a glance at the transport properties (or correlators ) in particular in the partonic phase. Recent studies of 'QCD matter' in equilibrium--using lattice QCD calculations or partonic transport models in a finite box with periodic boundary conditions --have demonstrated that the ratio of the shear viscosity to entropy density $\eta/s$ should have a minimum close to the critical temperature $T_c$, similar to atomic and molecular systems. On the other hand, the ratio of the bulk viscosity to the entropy density $\zeta/s$ should have a maximum close to $T_c$ or might even diverge at $T_c$. Indeed, the minimum of $\eta/s$ at $T_c \approx$ 160 MeV is close to the lower bound of a perfect fluid with $\eta/s= 1/(4\pi)$ for infinitely coupled supersymmetric Yang-Mills gauge theory (based on the AdS/CFT duality conjecture). This suggests the 'hot QCD matter' to be the 'most perfect fluid' . On the other hand the transport studies in Refs. have provided results for the shear and bulk viscosity as well as the electric conductivity that are very close to lattice QCD results, however, employ the notion of a strongly interacting gas of quasiparticles with a dynamically generated mass that is sufficiently larger than the width of their spectral functions. These studies have been based on the Dynamical QuasiParticle Model (DQPM) that incorporates effective propagators for the partons with a finite width of the spectral functions $A_i (\omega_i, {\bf p}_i)$, i.e. for scalar fields (${\tilde p} = (\omega, {\bf p})$) \[A_i (\omega_i, {\bf p}_i) \ = \frac{\gamma_i}{2\tilde{E}_i} \biggl(\frac{1}{(\omega_i-\tilde{E}_i)^2 + \gamma_i^2}- \frac{1}{(\omega_i + \tilde{E}_i)^2 + \gamma_i^2} \biggr)\] \[\label{eq1} = \frac{2 \omega_i \gamma_i}{(\omega_i^2-{\bf p}_i^2-M_i^2)^2 + 4 \gamma_i^2 \omega_i^2},\] with $\tilde{E}_i^2 ({\bf p}_i) = {\bf p}_i^2 + M_i^2-\gamma_i^2$ and $i \in [g, q, \bar{q}]$. The spectral functions $A_i (\omega_i)$ are antisymmetric in $\omega_i$ and normalized as: \[\label{equ:Sec2.3} \int_{-\infty}^{+ \infty} \frac{d \omega_i}{2 \pi} \ 2\omega_i \ A_i (\omega_i, {\bf p}) = 1 ,\] where $M_i$ and $\gamma_i$ are the dynamical quasiparticle mass (i.e. pole mass) and width of the spectral function for particle $i$, respectively. They are directly related to the real and imaginary parts of the related self-energy, e.g. $\Pi_i = M_i^2-2 i \gamma_i \omega_i$,. In the off-shell approach, $\omega_i$ is an independent variable and related to the "running mass" $m_i$ by: $\omega_i^2 = m_i^2 + {\bf p}_i^2$. In case of vector fields or fermion fields the following retarded propagators are employed that differ from the 'free' massive case only by the additional $(2 \gamma_V \omega)^2$ or $\pm i \gamma_F$ in the denominator and corresponding matrices in the numerator : \[\label{eq2} A_V^{\mu \nu}(\omega, {\bf p},\gamma_V)= \gamma_V \frac{2 \omega (g^{\mu \nu}-p^\mu p^\nu/M_V^2)}{(\omega^2-{\bf p}^2-M_V^2)^2 + 4 \gamma_V^2 \omega^2},\] and \[\begin{aligned} && A_F(\omega, {\bf p},\gamma_F) = \frac{1}{4 E_F} \label{eq3} \\ && \times \left( \frac{E_F\gamma^0 + {\bf p} \cdot {\mathbf \gamma} + m_F}{\omega-E_F-i \gamma_F }-\frac{-E_F\gamma^0 + {\bf p} \cdot {\mathbf \gamma} + m_F}{\omega+E_F-i \gamma_F } \right. \nonumber\\ && \left.-\frac{E_F\gamma^0 + {\bf p} \cdot {\mathbf \gamma} + m_F}{\omega-E_F + i \gamma_F } + \frac{-E_F\gamma^0 + {\bf p} \cdot {\mathbf \gamma} + m_F}{\omega+E_F + i \gamma_F } \right) \nonumber \end{aligned}\] with $E_F= {\bf p}^2+m_F^2$ in obvious notation. As is seen e.g. from the spectral function ([\[eq1\]](#eq1){reference-type="ref" reference="eq1"}) it is non-vanishing for time-like (${\tilde p}^2 >0$) as well as for space-like (${\tilde p}^2< 0$) four-momenta such that the question emerges if the theoretical concept behind the DQPM (or other effective approaches) conserves microcausality, i.e. that the spectral function transformed to space-time has only support on and within the lightcone. We recall that the Fourier transform of the spectral function $A(\omega, {\bf p})$ is proportional to the commutator of the fields at different space-time point and its integration over energy $\omega$ ensures a proper quantization (see below). This is of particular importance since a transport realization can only propagate 'quasiparticles' within or on the lightcone. More importantly, in the DQPM spectral contributions are separated into time-like (${\tilde p}^2 >0$) and space-like (${\tilde p}^2< 0$) four-momentum parts and the additional question arises if the contributions separately conserve microcausality. The layout of our study is as follows: In Section II we briefly present the basic definitions and relations between retarded and advanced propagators and recall the analytic proof for microcausality in case of the spectral functions ([\[eq1\]](#eq1){reference-type="ref" reference="eq1"}),([\[eq2\]](#eq2){reference-type="ref" reference="eq2"}),([\[eq3\]](#eq3){reference-type="ref" reference="eq3"}). In Section III the actual problem is set up for time-like (${\tilde p}^2 >0$) and space-like (${\tilde p}^2< 0$) four-momentum parts of the spectral function and its numerical realization. Furthermore, we present the actual numerical results for strong coupling and investigate the aperiodic limit as well as the case $\gamma > M$. A summary and discussion of results is given in Section IV. # Propagators and spectral functions In this work we will concentrate on the model case of a massive scalar field coupled e.g. to an external fermion field ( $\sim \partial_\mu \Phi({x}) {\bar \Psi}({x}) \gamma^\mu \Psi({x})$ with a vanishing three-current, i.e. the field equation \[\left(\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial t^{2}}-\bigtriangleup+M^{2} +2\gamma\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\right)\Phi({x})=0, \label{eq:KleinGordon}\] where $\gamma$ stands for the strength of the coupling (e.g. $g_s <\Psi^\dagger \Psi>/2$). Eq. ([\[eq:KleinGordon\]](#eq:KleinGordon){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:KleinGordon"}) has the algebraic solution \[\widetilde{G}(\mathbf{p})=\frac{-1}{\omega^{2}-\boldsymbol{p}^{2}-M^{2}+2i\gamma\omega} , \label{eq:G(p)AlgebraischGewonnen}\] which leads to the retarded Green-function $G_{\mathrm{ret}}$ obeying \[G_{\mathrm{ret}}({x}-{y})=0\ \mathrm{for}\ x^{0}-y^{0}<0 \label{eq:retardierteRandbedingung}\] by a 4-dimensional Fourier transformation of ([\[eq:G(p)AlgebraischGewonnen\]](#eq:G(p)AlgebraischGewonnen){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:G(p)AlgebraischGewonnen"}), \[\label{eq5} G_{\mathrm{ret}}({x})= \int \frac{d^4 {\tilde p}}{(2 \pi)^4} \ \widetilde{G}({\tilde p})\ \exp(-i {\tilde p} x).\] We point out that $\Im {\tilde G}({\tilde p})$ is identical to ([\[eq1\]](#eq1){reference-type="ref" reference="eq1"}). We recall, furthermore, that solutions of the Kadanoff-Baym equations for $\Phi^4$-theory in 2+1 dimensions have lead to spectral functions that are very close to ([\[eq1\]](#eq1){reference-type="ref" reference="eq1"}) also for strong coupling. ## Analytical results The integration over $d\omega = dp^0$ in ([\[eq5\]](#eq5){reference-type="ref" reference="eq5"}) can be carried out by contour integration and the angular integration in three-momentum is straight forward. With $\mu=\sqrt{M^{2}-\gamma^{2}}$ the remaining integral kernel reads ($p=\|{\bf p}\|$) \[\begin{aligned} K(x):= & \frac{1}{\left\|\boldsymbol{x}\right\|}\intop_{0}^{\infty} p \frac{\sin(t\sqrt{\mu^{2}+p^{2}})}{\sqrt{\mu^{2}+p^{2}}} \sin(\left\|\boldsymbol{x}\right\|p)\,\mathrm{d}p\\ = & \frac{1}{2\left\|\boldsymbol{x}\right\|}\intop_{-\infty}^{\infty} p \frac{\sin(t\sqrt{\mu^{2}+p^{2}})}{\sqrt{\mu^{2}+p^{2}}}\sin(\left\|\boldsymbol{x}\right\|p)\,\mathrm{d}p\nonumber , \end{aligned}\] which has a singular contribution on the lightcone and a regular part on and within the lightcone. The remaining integration over $dp$ gives for the retarded Green-function (using $x=(t,\boldsymbol{x})=(x^0,\boldsymbol{x})$) \[G_{\mathrm{ret}}({x})=\frac{e^{-\gamma t}\Theta(t)}{2\pi} \delta\left(t^{2}-\boldsymbol{x}^{2}\right)\] \[-\frac{e^{-\gamma t}\Theta(t)}{4\pi} \Theta\left(t^{2}-\boldsymbol{x}^{2}\right) \frac{\mu}{\sqrt{t^{2}-\boldsymbol{x}^{2}}} J_{1}\left(\mu\sqrt{t^{2}-\boldsymbol{x}^{2}}\right)\] for $\mu^2 \ge 0$. With \[\delta\left(t^{2}-\boldsymbol{x}^{2}\right)\Theta(t) =\delta\left((t-\left\|\boldsymbol{x}\right\|)(t+\left\|\boldsymbol{x}\right\|)\right)\Theta(t) = \frac{\delta(t-\left\|\boldsymbol{x}\right\|)}{2\left\|\boldsymbol{x}\right\|}\] one arrives at the final result \[G_{\mathrm{ret}}(\boldsymbol{x})=\left(\frac{\delta\left(t- \left\|\boldsymbol{x}\right\|\right)}{4\pi\left\|\boldsymbol{x}\right\|}- R(t^{2}-\boldsymbol{x}^{2}) \right) e^{-\gamma t}\Theta(t) \label{eq:TheorieErgebnis}\] with \[\label{regular1} R(t^{2}-\boldsymbol{x}^{2})=\Theta\left(t^{2}-\boldsymbol{x}^{2}\right)\frac{\mu}{4\pi\sqrt{t^{2}-\boldsymbol{x}^{2}}} J_{1}\left(\mu\sqrt{t^{2}-\boldsymbol{x}^{2}}\right) ,\] where $J_1$ is the Bessel function. In the actual calculations the $\delta$-distribution term on the lightcone will be subtracted and we will address the regular part ([\[regular1\]](#regular1){reference-type="ref" reference="regular1"}) including the overall exponential decay in time, i.e. \[\label{regular} {\tilde R}(t^{2}-\boldsymbol{x}^{2})=R(t^{2}-\boldsymbol{x}^{2}) \ e^{-\gamma t}\Theta(t).\] We note in passing that the related results for massive vector fields and Dirac fields read \[\label{GV} G_{\mathrm{ret}}^{\mu \nu}({x}) = \left( {g^{\mu \nu} + \frac{1}{M_V^2} \partial^\mu \partial^\nu } \right) G_{\mathrm{ret}}({x})\] and \[\label{GF} G_{\mathrm{ret}}^F(x) = \left( {m_F \cdot 1_4+i \gamma^\mu \partial_\mu } \right) G_{\mathrm{ret}}({x}).\] Eqs. ([\[GV\]](#GV){reference-type="ref" reference="GV"}) and ([\[GF\]](#GF){reference-type="ref" reference="GF"}) demonstrate that it is sufficient to investigate microcausality for the scalar case since microcausality for the scalar field implies microcausality for the corresponding vector and fermion fields. The retarded Green-function ([\[eq:TheorieErgebnis\]](#eq:TheorieErgebnis){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:TheorieErgebnis"}) is close to the solution of the free massive Klein-Gordon-field except for the factor $e^{-\gamma t}$ describing the decay of the propagator in time and the reduced mass $\mu=\sqrt{M^{2}-\gamma^{2}}$ that incorporates a downward shift of the mass $M$ as in case of the damped harmonic oscillator. Similar relations hold for the advanced Green-function which is obtained by replacing $\gamma \rightarrow-\gamma$ and a multiplication by $-1$ due to the opposite contour integration: \[G_{\mathrm{av}}(x)=\left(-\frac{\delta\left(t+\left\|\boldsymbol{x}\right\|\right)}{4\pi\left\|\boldsymbol{x}\right\|} +R\left(t^{2}-\boldsymbol{x}^{2} \right) \right) e^{+\gamma t}\ \Theta(-t)\] following $G_{\mathrm{av}}({x}-{y})=0\ \mathrm{f\ddot{u}r}\ x^{0}-y^{0}>0$. In four-momentum space the advanced propagator is given by ([\[eq:G(p)AlgebraischGewonnen\]](#eq:G(p)AlgebraischGewonnen){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:G(p)AlgebraischGewonnen"}) replacing $\gamma$ by $-\gamma$. Accordingly, ${\tilde G}_{ad}({\tilde p})-{\tilde G}_{ret}({\tilde p}) =-2 i A({\tilde p})$ is purely imaginary and equal to twice the spectral function ([\[eq1\]](#eq1){reference-type="ref" reference="eq1"}). ## Spectral functions Of central interest in our study is the scalar spectral function $A(\omega, {\bf p})$ ([\[eq1\]](#eq1){reference-type="ref" reference="eq1"}), i.e. the imaginary part of the retarded propagator. The commutator between the fields at different space-time points can also be written as the difference of advanced and retarded propagators (due to opposite signs of the imaginary parts in the propagators ): \[\left[\Phi({x}),\,\Phi^{\dagger}(\mathbf{0})\right]=i\Delta^{\star}({x}) =i\left(G_{\mathrm{av}}({x})-G_{\mathrm{ret}}({x})\right) =: C(x). \label{eq:ZusammenhangKommutatorGreen}\] Except for a factor $\exp(-\gamma t)$ the quantity $\Delta^*$ is identical to the Schwinger $\Delta$-function $\Delta(x,\mu)$ with effective mass $\mu$, \[\Delta^{\star}({x})=\Delta({x},\,\mu)\cdot e^{-\gamma\left\|t\right\|} ,\] \[\label{Delta} \Delta({x},\, \mu)=-\frac{i}{(2\pi)^{3}}\int \epsilon({\tilde p}) \delta({\tilde p}^{2}-\mu^{2})\ e^{-i {\tilde p}\cdot {x}}\,\mathrm{d}^{4}{\tilde p},\] with $\epsilon({\tilde p})=1$ for $\omega > 0$ and $\epsilon({\tilde p})=-1$ for $\omega < 0$. Since $\Delta({x},\,\mu)$ vanishes for space-like distances $x^2 < 0$ we find that microcausality is fulfilled also in the interacting case (cf. Ref. ). Since the DQPM-as an effective approach to QCD-employs spectral functions of the type ([\[eq:TheorieErgebnis\]](#eq:TheorieErgebnis){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:TheorieErgebnis"}) (or ([\[GV\]](#GV){reference-type="ref" reference="GV"}) and ([\[GF\]](#GF){reference-type="ref" reference="GF"})) we may conclude that the model approach conserves microcausality strictly [^1]. # Space-like and time-like momentum contributions We now come to the central question of our study: Is microcausality fulfilled in the four-momentum integral \[\label{timel} C(x)=\int \frac{d\omega}{2 \pi} \frac{d^3 p}{(2 \pi)^3} \ \Im(G_{ret}(\omega,{\bf p}))\ \exp(-i(\omega t-{\bf p} \cdot \boldsymbol{x}))\] when restricting to time-like $\Theta(\omega^2-{\bf p}^2)$ or space-like $\Theta({\bf p}^2-\omega^2)$ four-momenta? To answer this question we can no longer perform the contour integration over $d\omega$ due to the $\Theta$-functions in four-momentum and have to evaluate the integrals ([\[timel\]](#timel){reference-type="ref" reference="timel"}) numerically exploiting the antisymmetry of the integrand ([\[eq1\]](#eq1){reference-type="ref" reference="eq1"}) in $\omega$ and carrying out the angular integration in the three-momentum. This leads to \[\label{int1} C({x})= -\frac{i \gamma}{2 \pi^3 \left\|\boldsymbol{x}\right\|} \intop_{0}^{\infty} dp \intop_{0}^{\infty} d\omega \ \sin(\omega t) \sin(\left\|\boldsymbol{x}\right\|p)\] \[\times \frac{ p}{{\tilde E}} \biggl(\frac{1}{(\omega-\tilde{E})^2 + \gamma^2}-\frac{1}{(\omega + \tilde{E})^2 + \gamma^2} \biggr) \,\] using ([\[eq1\]](#eq1){reference-type="ref" reference="eq1"}) which can be 'solved' on a numerical grid as well as by analytical integration (cf. Section II). As mentioned before the integral ([\[int1\]](#int1){reference-type="ref" reference="int1"}) has a singular part ($\delta(t-r)/(4\pi r)$ using $r=\left\|\boldsymbol{x}\right\|$) as well as a regular part given by ([\[regular\]](#regular){reference-type="ref" reference="regular"}). The singular part can be subtracted in the integral ([\[int1\]](#int1){reference-type="ref" reference="int1"})-to achieve a better convergence-by considering \[\label{int2} C({x})- \frac{\delta(t-r)}{4\pi r} e^{-\gamma t} = -\frac{i}{2 \pi^3 r} \intop_{0}^{\infty} dp \intop_{0}^{\infty} d\omega \ \sin(\omega t) \sin(r p)\] \[\times \frac{8 p \omega (M^2-\gamma^2) \left[ \omega^2-p^2- (\gamma^2+M^2)/2 \right]} {\left[(\omega^2-p^2-M^2)^2+4\omega^2 \gamma^2 \right] \left[(\omega^2-p^2-\gamma^2)^2+4\omega^2 \gamma^2 \right]}.\] In this way the $\delta$-distribution on the light-cone (decaying exponentially in time) is subtracted explicitly on the same computational grid. In order to demonstrate the validity of this numerical subtraction scheme we show in Fig. [\[fig1\]](#fig1){reference-type="ref" reference="fig1"} a comparison of the analytical result ([\[regular\]](#regular){reference-type="ref" reference="regular"}) with the corresponding numerical evaluation of ([\[int2\]](#int2){reference-type="ref" reference="int2"}) for $M$ = 1 GeV and $\gamma=0.3$ GeV at $t=15$/GeV. Indeed, both results agree within the linewidth and are identical to zero for $r > t$. In Fig. [\[fig2\]](#fig2){reference-type="ref" reference="fig2"} we show the regular part ([\[regular\]](#regular){reference-type="ref" reference="regular"}) for a width $\gamma$=0.045 GeV (a) and $\gamma$ = 0.3 GeV (b). The signal decays exponentially in time ($\sim \exp(-\gamma t)$) and shows hyperbolic oscillations within the lightcone while being zero outside the lightcone. The numerical results and the analytical expression ([\[regular\]](#regular){reference-type="ref" reference="regular"}) are identical on the level of three digits for both cases. We now turn to the numerical results for strong coupling when gating on time-like and space-like four momenta in ([\[int2\]](#int2){reference-type="ref" reference="int2"}) separately. The results are displayed in Fig. [\[fig2b\]](#fig2b){reference-type="ref" reference="fig2b"} for $\gamma$ = 0.3 GeV when including only time-like momenta (a) or only space-like momenta (b). Note that the numerical results in Fig. [\[fig2b\]](#fig2b){reference-type="ref" reference="fig2b"} have been multiplied by $\exp( \gamma t)$ in order to compensate for the exponential decay in time. It is seen that both results do not vanish for $r > t$ and thus violate microcausality. This is shown more explicitly in Fig. [\[figg1\]](#figg1){reference-type="ref" reference="figg1"} (a) as a function of time $t$ and $r-t$ in the space-like region and demonstrates that both contributions are nonvanishing but of opposite sign such that their sum becomes identically zero. In Fig. [\[figg1\]](#figg1){reference-type="ref" reference="figg1"} (b) we display the same quantities as in (a) but multiplied by $\exp(\gamma t)$ which demonstrates that both contributions do not decay exponentially in time as seen from the full analytical solution ([\[eq:TheorieErgebnis\]](#eq:TheorieErgebnis){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:TheorieErgebnis"}). This clearly demonstrates that a restriction to either space-like or time-like momentum parts of the spectral function violates causality while both parts together conserve microcausality in line with the analytical result in Section II. The violation of microcausality is tiny in case of $\gamma \ll M$ but becomes sizeable for $\gamma >$ 0.1 GeV. When considering the 'aperiodic' limit $\gamma \rightarrow M$, i.e. $\mu \rightarrow 0$, we find from ([\[regular1\]](#regular1){reference-type="ref" reference="regular1"}) that ${\tilde R}(t^2-r^2)$ vanishes identically for $\mu =0$ and the commutator ([\[eq:ZusammenhangKommutatorGreen\]](#eq:ZusammenhangKommutatorGreen){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:ZusammenhangKommutatorGreen"}) only has support on the lightcone. Furthermore, in the limit $\mu \rightarrow 0$ the oscillations in $R(t^2-r^2)$ vanish as can be extracted from a Taylor expansion of ([\[regular\]](#regular){reference-type="ref" reference="regular"}) (with $J_1(z) \approx z/2 \pm \cdots$) \[\begin{aligned} && R(t^{2}-r^{2})\approx \Theta\left(t^{2}-r^{2}\right) \frac{\mu}{8\pi\sqrt{t^{2}-r^{2}}} (\mu\sqrt{t^{2}-r^{2}}) \cdots \nonumber\\ && =\Theta\left(t^{2}-r^{2}\right) \frac{\mu^2}{8\pi} \cdots .\label{Taylor} \end{aligned}\] For $\gamma > M$ (overdamped fields) we no longer find oscillations of the regular part ([\[regular\]](#regular){reference-type="ref" reference="regular"}) within the lightcone but only an exponentially decaying signal as seen from Fig. [\[fig7\]](#fig7){reference-type="ref" reference="fig7"} for $\gamma =$ 1.25 GeV. We close in pointing out that our numerical scheme allows to employ almost arbitrary spectral functions in ([\[int1\]](#int1){reference-type="ref" reference="int1"}) and to check if microcausality holds. Without explicit representation we note that using a three-momentum width $\gamma({\bf p}^2)$ in the spectral function ([\[eq1\]](#eq1){reference-type="ref" reference="eq1"}) the commutator ([\[int1\]](#int1){reference-type="ref" reference="int1"}) no longer vanishes for $r > t$ since the individual momentum modes decay on different time scales and the field equation ([\[eq:KleinGordon\]](#eq:KleinGordon){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:KleinGordon"}) becomes non-local in this case. Nevertheless, the normalization condition ([\[equ:Sec2.3\]](#equ:Sec2.3){reference-type="ref" reference="equ:Sec2.3"}) still is fulfilled. Furthermore, the commonly adopted form, \[\label{eq11} A (\omega, {\bf p})= \frac{2 M \gamma}{(\omega^2-{\bf p}^2-M^2)^2 + 4 \gamma^2 M^2},\] also violates microcausality. # Summary In this study we have examined effective propagators of the type ([\[eq:G(p)AlgebraischGewonnen\]](#eq:G(p)AlgebraischGewonnen){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:G(p)AlgebraischGewonnen"}) as used e.g. in the Dynamical QuasiParticle Model (DQPM) for an approximation to QCD propagators at temperatures above the critical temperature $T_c$ for deconfinement. It could be shown analytically that their spectral functions (or imaginary parts) do not lead to a violation of microcausality, i.e. to a vanishing commutator of the interacting fields outside the lightcone. However, when restricting to only space-like or time-like four-momentum contributions of the spectral function a violation of microcausality is found numerically which becomes severe in case of strong coupling. Moreover, the space-like or time-like four-momentum contributions separately no longer decay exponentially in time as in case of the full solution ([\[eq:TheorieErgebnis\]](#eq:TheorieErgebnis){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:TheorieErgebnis"}). Furthermore, we have found that using a three-momentum dependent width $\gamma({\bf p}^2)$ in the spectral function ([\[eq1\]](#eq1){reference-type="ref" reference="eq1"}) the commutator ([\[int1\]](#int1){reference-type="ref" reference="int1"}) no longer vanishes for $r > t$ since the individual momentum modes decay on different time scales and the field equation ([\[eq:KleinGordon\]](#eq:KleinGordon){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:KleinGordon"}) becomes non-local in space in this case. This also holds for the spectral function ([\[eq11\]](#eq11){reference-type="ref" reference="eq11"}) which is often employed in phenomenological models. Our findings imply that the modeling of effective field theories for strongly interacting systems has to be considered with great care and restrictions to time-like four momenta in case of broad spectral functions have to be ruled out.\ The authors acknowledge valuable discussions with B.-J. Schaefer, L. von Smekal and T. Steinert. [^1]: Note also that the spectral function ([\[eq1\]](#eq1){reference-type="ref" reference="eq1"}) corresponds to a Breit-Wigner representation of the integrand $\epsilon({\tilde p}) \delta({\tilde p}^{2}-\mu^{2})$ in ([\[Delta\]](#Delta){reference-type="ref" reference="Delta"}) for a finite width $\gamma$.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-22T02:10:56', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5381', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5381'}
null	null
null	null
null	null
# Introduction {#sec:introduction} To read the genetic information encoded in the base sequence, hidden in the helical structure of a DNA, it is necessary to break the hydrogen bonds of the base pairs. The mechanism for doing so is the unzipping by a force of a double stranded DNA (dsDNA), or a thermal melting. In the melting transition, the hydrogen bonds of base pairing are broken by thermal energy, while in the unzipping transition, it is by a pulling force at one end of the DNA. In both cases, the strands remain intact. While there is a long history of experimental studies of the melting transition, the investigations of the unzipping transition or responses to external forces are of more recent origin. Pioneering calorimetric studies were done over a large range of temperature ($T$) from 2K to 400K under different solution conditions. So far as force is concerned, isotherms of DNA, like the response under a force have been obtained in many different types of single molecule experiments. Nevertheless, calorimetry in presence of a force is still not available. It is known from various theoretical models that, for both melting and unzipping, the nature of the transition depends on the aspects of the DNA captured in a model. Any natural DNA, because of its large length, is expected to show the characteristic features of the transitions; however, the situation is not so clear on the experimental front. In-vitro experiments are generally restricted to short chains. Consequently, very little is known about the role of sequence variation, e.g., as seen across species, vis-a-vis the true transition behaviour expected of long chains. As a matter of fact, we even lack a clear experimental answer about the order of the melting transition. The co-operativity in melting comes from the entropy ($S$) of the DNA through the correlations introduced by the strands as long polymers. The unzipping transition is due to the competition between the pairing of the strands and the stretching of the unbound strands. The work done in stretching the free polymers provides the cost of unpairing the strands. This cost at zero temperature is only the pairing energy, but, because of entropy, the critical unzipping force vanishes as one approaches the melting temperature. The thermodynamic conjugate pair for the transition is $g$, the unzipping force, and $x$, the separation of the two strands at the point of application of force (see Fig. [\[fig:1\]](#fig:1){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:1"}). It transpires that gross quantities like the entropy, the specific heat, and the response function for force, are the relevant thermodynamic quantities to study, especially as the transition point is approached. The advantage in the thermodynamic approach is that the results obtained are valid under quite general conditions without getting into the microscopic details of DNA. Besides the conjugate pairs ($T, S$), and $(g,x)$, there could be other types of external forces, e.g., isotropic hydrostatic or osmotic pressure affecting the volume of the polymer, and a stretching force (${\bf f}$) that distorts and elongates the chain. Although there are evidences of hydrostatic or osmotic pressure affecting protein-DNA interaction, there is only a very weak effect on the melting of DNA. In contrast, a stretching force may lead to an "overstretching" transition where the length of the DNA increases by a factor of 1.7. Whether it is an equilibrium (meaning thermodynamic) transition is still debated. The unzipping transition was first established in a continuum model in Ref.. It was also proved by studying the dynamics of pulling in Ref. and by several exactly solvable models. Various aspects of the unzipping transition, and in that context the corresponding melting transition, have been studied. These include the effects of randomness in interaction, or force, semiflexibility, and finite length. Many details of the transition have also been studied, like various distributions, temperature dependence, different types of noise, role of ensembles. The dependence of melting on the nature of the space has also been studied via the choice of different fractal lattices, showing the possible variations in the melting transition. The mapping of the DNA melting problem to a quantum problem revealed the connection between the bubble entropy of DNA and the quantum transition, and to the Efimov-physics. Biological applications have also been considered, especially the motion of the interface or the Y-fork. Our purpose in this paper is to consider the melting and the unzipping transitions from a purely thermodynamic point of view, without any consideration of any microscopic models. This way we derive the relevant thermodynamic relations applicable to these transitions. Obviously such predictions are independent of the microscopic details. Our basic hypothesis is that the bound double-stranded state of DNA is a thermodynamic phase that does not allow penetration of an unzipping force. In other words, the linear response function for a weak force in the zipped state is strictly zero. (The words "zipped" and "bound" are to be used as synonymous.) We start with the definitions and standard relations in terms of the DNA variables in Sec. [2](#sec:therm-descr){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:therm-descr"}. The case of a first order unzipping transition is discussed in Sec. [3](#sec:first-order-unzipp){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:first-order-unzipp"}. Here we consider the case of no penetration of force in the bound state. In other words the bound state remains the same till the critical unzipping force is reached. The thermodynamic predictions are then compared, in Sec. [4](#sec:exact-results){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:exact-results"}, with the known exact solutions in certain class of models. Although all theoretical studies based on simple coarse-grained models predict a first-order unzipping transition, there is a proposal that local penetration of forces may lead to a continuous transition. Thermodynamics does not rule out any continuous unzipping transition, but, instead, allows a different phase with partial penetration of force. A thermodynamic analysis of such a case of a continuous transition is discussed in Sec. [5](#sec:cont-unzipp-trans){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:cont-unzipp-trans"}. In this case we assume that for a range of force $g_{c1}\le g \le g_{c2}$, there is a change in the DNA bound state by the external force. A few details can be found in the Appendices. The additions of other forces like hydrostatic pressure and a stretching force are discussed in Appendix A. The relevant Maxwell relations for DNA unzipping are listed in Appendix B. The specific heat relation for a continuous transition can be found in Appendix C. # Thermodynamic description {#sec:therm-descr} Our main concern is in the unzipping transition and therefore we restrict ourselves to the $g$ and $x$ pair. In absence of any other information, we may allow both the unzipping and the melting transition to be either first order or continuous. Both cases are discussed here. What makes the problem different from others is the fact that the unzipping force does not affect the bound state for small forces. In fact only other system that shows similar thermodynamic relations is a superconductor with the Meissner phase not allowing the external magnetic field to penetrate. In that analogy, a parallel scenario for DNA would be the case where the force penetrates for an intermediate range of force, leading to a continuous transition. One may consider two mutually exclusive situations, either $g$ or $x$ is fixed. These correspond to the two possible ensembles in the statistical mechanical approach. The fixed-force case described by the Helmholtz free energy $F(T,x)$ and the fixed-distance ensemble, described by the Gibbs free energy $G(T,g)$. These are in addition to the usual canonical (fixed-$T$) and micro-canonical (fixed-$S$) ensembles. The free energies are given by where $U$ is the internal energy. Henceforth, we use $F,G,U,S$ to mean the corresponding quantities per monomer or base pair. The differential form for $G$ is \[dG=-S\;dT-x\; dg.\label{eq:3}\] It is possible to extend the thermodynamic formulation to include other external forces. Some details may be found in Appendix A. By integrating Eq. [\[eq:3\]](#eq:3){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:3"} at constant temperature, one gets the Gibbs free energy at a force $g$ as \[\label{eq:8} G(T,g)=G(T,0)-\int_0^g x\; dg.\] This form is valid for equilibrium with $x=x(g)$ as the equilibrium isotherm of a DNA and is used extensively in this paper. The formula for work done in Eq. [\[eq:8\]](#eq:8){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:8"} is different from the mechanical definition of work ($\int g dx$). A justification is as follows. In a nonequilibrium situation, to change the force from zero to $g$, the work done on the DNA is $\int_0^g x dg$ for a trajectory. For example, an instantaneous change in force would require a work $w=xg$ if the distance remains fixed at $x$. Then the histogram transformation in statistical mechanics gives us the free energy difference as \[\label{eq:39} G(T,g)-G(T,0)=-k_BT \ln \;\langle \exp(-\beta w)\rangle,\] where $\beta=(k_BT)^{-1}$, and the angular bracket indicates averaging over all possible trajectories starting with the equilibrium distribution at zero force. In this particular case of instantaneous increase, the averaging is over all values of $x$ with the equilibrium probability distribution $P_{T,g}(x)$ at the initial force. For an infinitesimal increment $dg$, from $g$ to $g+dg$, we may expand $\exp(-\beta x dg)\approx 1-\beta (x \;dg)$. Therefore, for small $dg$, the equivalent of Eq. [\[eq:39\]](#eq:39){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:39"} is \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:40} \Delta G(T,g)&=&-k_BT \ln \left(1-\beta\int dx \; (x\; dg)\; P_{T,g}(x)\right )\nonumber\\ &=& x(g)\ dg, \end{aligned}\] where the average value of $x$ is denoted by $x(g)$. On successive integration, one recovers the thermodynamic formula of Eq. [\[eq:8\]](#eq:8){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:8"} (with no angular bracket). Incidentally, the mechanical work done in stretching or unzipping has been used in other contexts too, as, e.g., to obtain and use the hysteresis around the transition for thermodynamic free energies and associated dynamic transitions. The notations we are using are as follows. The zero force thermal melting temperature is denoted by $T_c$. The unzipping transition by a force $g$ at temperature $T$ takes place at a temperature dependent force $g=g_c(T)$ so that $g_c(T_c)=0$. # First order Unzipping transition {#sec:first-order-unzipp} For the unzipping transition, $G(T,g)$ is continuous across the phase boundary. This implies \[\label{eq:41} G_{\rm z}(T,g_c)=G_{\rm u}(T,g_c),\] where subscripts z and u indicate the zipped and the unzipped phases. Eq. [\[eq:8\]](#eq:8){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:8"} therefore allows us to write \[\label{eq:9} G_{\rm z}(T,0)-G_{\rm u}(T,0)=\int_0^{g_c} (x_{\rm z}-x_{\rm u})\; dg.\] Here $G_{\rm u}(T,0)$ is the free energy of the unzipped phase in zero force if it had existed. One way of obtaining $G_{\rm u}(T,0)$ is by extrapolation of the high force free-energy, assuming that the extrapolation is thermodynamically admissible, or from the free energy of a single stranded DNA. It is known that for the first order unzipping transition (Fig. [\[fig:5\]](#fig:5){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:5"}a), the force does not penetrate the bound state for $g<g_c(T)$. As mentioned in the introduction, we take this as the starting hypothesis in the thermodynamic analysis. Therefore, effectively, $x_{\rm z}=0$, and \[\label{eq:7} G_{\rm z}(T,g)=G_{\rm z}(T,0), \quad(g\le g_c).\] This equation is valid at $g=g_c$ because of coexistence of phases. At this point the force-dependent unzipped phase has the same $G$ as the zipped phase. In the linear response regime, $x_{\rm u}=\chi_T\; g$ where $\chi_T$, the extensibility, may be taken to be a constant. (See Appendix B for definitions.) Eq. [\[eq:9\]](#eq:9){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:9"} then simplifies to \[\label{eq:20} G_{\rm z}(T,0) = G_{\rm u}(T,0)-\frac{1}{2} \chi_T \; g_c^2,\] where the last term is the work $W(g_c)$. A more useful form is obtained by combining Eqs. [\[eq:8\]](#eq:8){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:8"}, [\[eq:7\]](#eq:7){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:7"}, and [\[eq:20\]](#eq:20){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:20"}, as \[\label{eq:10} G_{\rm z}(T,g) = G_{\rm u}(T,g) +\frac{1}{2} \chi_T \; (g^2 -g_c^2),\] in principle, valid for all $g$. This shows that for $g<g_c$, the zipped phase is more stable than the unzipped one and vice versa. ## Entropy {#sec:entropy} The entropy difference, from Eq. [\[eq:20\]](#eq:20){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:20"}, (see Appendix B) comes out to be \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:11} S_{\rm z}(T,g_c)-S_{\rm u}(T,g_c)&=& \chi \;g_c(T)\ \frac{\partial g_c(T)}{\partial T}\\ &=& x(g_c)\ \frac{\partial g_c(T)}{\partial T}, \end{aligned}\] where the second form, a more general one, follows by noting that $\partial W(g)/\partial g= x$. For notational simplicity, we omit the subscripts of $\chi$. The entropy difference is related to the latent heat $L=T (S_{\rm z}-S_{\rm u})$ at the transition. Except for $g=0$, energy is required to unzip a DNA. In real situations this energy is supplied by nonthermal sources like ATP etc. The continuity of the Gibbs free energy at the unzipping transition point in a fixed force ($dG_{\rm z}=dG_{\rm u}$ along the phase boundary), gives the Clausius-Clapeyron equation as \[\label{eq:13} \frac{\partial g_c}{\partial T}=\frac{S_{\rm u}-S_{\rm z}}{x_{\rm u}-x_{\rm z}},\] where all the quantities on the right hand side are on the phase boundary. The impenetrability condition, $x_{\rm z}=0$ with the linear response relation $x_{\rm u}= \chi g_c$, yields the entropy relation of Eq. [\[eq:11\]](#eq:11){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:11"}. The sign of the right hand side in Eq. [\[eq:11\]](#eq:11){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:11"}, i.e., the slope of the phase boundary, is not fixed a priori. This is important for identification of the state which is more ordered. In a temperature driven transition, the entropy increases as one crosses a phase transition line from the low to the high temperature side. If the zipped phase is more ordered then $S_{\rm z}<S_{\rm u}$ requiring $\partial g_c/\partial T <0$. ## Specific heat {#sec:specific-heat} The specific heat relation for $g=0$ follows from Eq. [\[eq:11\]](#eq:11){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:11"} as \[\label{eq:16} C_{\rm z}(T_c,0)-C_{\rm u}(T_c,0)= T\; \chi\left( \frac{\partial g_c(T)}{\partial T}\right)_{g=0}^2,\] where $\chi$ is the extensibility of the unzipped chain at the melting point $T=T_c$. Eq. [\[eq:16\]](#eq:16){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:16"} gives the discontinuity in the specific heat expected at the melting point, provided $\partial g_c/\partial T$ is finite. If the entropy change is finite, there is a latent heat which contributes a $\delta$-function peak at the transition point. Eq. [\[eq:16\]](#eq:16){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:16"} is a special case of the general formula valid for all $g$, viz., \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:42} \lefteqn{ C_{\rm z}(T,g_c)-C_{\rm u}(T,g_c)}\nonumber\\ &=& T \left[\chi\left( \frac{\partial g_c}{\partial T}\right)^ + x(g_c) \frac{\partial^2 g_c}{\partial T^2} + \frac{\partial \chi}{\partial T} g_c \frac{\partial g_c}{\partial T}\right], \end{aligned}\] with an extra latent heat contribution. The derivatives appearing in Eq. [\[eq:42\]](#eq:42){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:42"} may conspire to make the RHS zero. The specific heat curve will then have only a delta function at the transition point superposed on a continuous specific heat curve. ## Phase boundary {#sec:phase-boundary} The shape of the unzipping phase boundary near the zero force melting point can be described asymptotically by (Fig. [\[fig:3\]](#fig:3){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:3"}) \[\label{eq:12} g_c(T)\sim \|T-T_c\|^{\kappa}, \ {\rm for}\ g_c(T)\to 0,\ T\to T_c.\] Depending on the value of $\kappa$, a few cases can be considered as $g_c \partial g_c/\partial T\sim \|T-T_c\|^{2\kappa-1}$. 1. If $\kappa>1/2$, then $\frac{\partial g_c(T)}{\partial T}$ remains finite. At the zero force melting point, there is no change in entropy or no latent heat. In this situation, the melting transition is continuous. 2. If $\kappa = 1/2$, there is a latent heat and the melting transition is first order. 3. Since infinite latent heat is not possible, there is a strict lower bound: $\kappa\geq 1/2$. The shape of the phase boundary, as determined by the exponent $\kappa$, is linked to the order of the melting transition. Away from melting, in general, the right hand side of Eq. [\[eq:11\]](#eq:11){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:11"} is not zero, unless $\partial g_c/\partial T =0$. The force induced unzipping transition is necessarily first order. The extremum of the phase boundary (Point C at $(T_m, g_m)$ in Fig. [\[fig:4\]](#fig:4){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:4"}) is a special case. In absence of any nonanalyticity in the phase boundary, both phases will have same entropy but with a discontinuity in the specific heat as per Eq. [\[eq:42\]](#eq:42){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:42"}. Since both $g$ and $T$ are intensive variables, every point in the $T$-$g$ plane represents a unique phase of the DNA, except on the transition line. Along a path ACB, there is no real change in phase and no latent heat is expected. There is however the possibility of occurrence of the zipped phase at C. One may therefore measure either $C_{\rm u}$ or $C_{\rm z}$. If $T$ is kept constant at $T_m$, specific heat will show a discontinuity as we cross C in the phase diagram vertically. This looks like a continuous transition. When $\partial g_c/\partial T >0$, the unzipped phase becomes more ordered than the zipped phase. This counter-intuitive behaviour is an example of a re-entrant phase transition. It occurs because the unzipping force acts as stretching forces on the two unbound chains, orienting them at low temperatures in the direction of the force reducing the entropy, while the flexibility of the zipped phase, because of the impenetrability of the force, contributes to the entropy. # Comparison with Exact results {#sec:exact-results} There are several models for which exact solutions for the unzipping transition are known. We compare the thermodynamics results with a few such cases. ## Continuum Gaussian models {#sec:cont-gauss-models} The unzipping transition was first proved in Ref. for Gaussian polymers interacting with same monomer index as in DNA. The transition line in $(d+1)$-dimensions is given by $g_c(T)\sim \|T-T_c\|^{1/(d-2)}$, i.e., $\kappa=\frac{1}{d-2}$ for $2\le d\le 4$. The zero force melting is continuous but the unzipping transition is first order. For $d>4$, the melting transition is first order and there is a $\kappa=1/2$ behaviour, as also found in the lattice modes of Ref. discussed below. The model showed that the bound, zipped state does not allow the force to penetrate and after the unzipping transition the strands are stretched by the pulling force. $\partial g_c/\partial T <0$. A necklace model analysis shows that $\kappa$ is determined by the size exponent of the polymer provided there is no other length scale, i.e., $\kappa=\nu$, where $\nu$ is the size exponent. For a first order melting point, since all other length scales remain finite the relevant length scale is the size of the polymer. For Gaussian polymers $\nu=1/2$, giving $\kappa=1/2$, as we saw above for $d>4$. For continuous melting. the thermal correlation length is going to play an important role, giving a different $\kappa$. ## Lattice models with bubbles: continuous melting {#sec:with-bubbl-cont} The unzipping transition problem can be solved exactly for a class of lattice models involving directed polymers in $d+1$ dimensions. For the model with bubbles, there is a continuous melting transition in dimensions $d<4$ as for the continuum case. ### d=1 {#sec:d=1-} For the $1+1$ dimensional model if the two strands are not allowed to cross, the free energies are where $\beta=(k_BT)^{-1}$. We choose $k_B=1$. Here $G_{\rm z}$ is independent of $g$ because of the impenetration of the force. The melting transition ($g=0$) at $T_c=[\ln(4/3)]^{-1}$ is continuous with a finite discontinuity of the specific heat. The unzipping phase boundary is given by \[\label{eq:15} g_c(T)=T \cosh^{-1}(p(\beta)-1),\quad p(\beta)=(2 z_{\rm z})^{-1},\] obtained by equating the two free energies at the unzipping transition, i.e., from $G_{\rm z}(T,g_c)=G_{\rm u}(T,g_c)$. Close to $T_c$ where $z_{\rm u}\to 1/4$, and $g_c\to 0$. The shape is \[\label{eq:23} g_c(T)\approx \frac{2 e^{-1/{T_c}}}{\sqrt{1-e^{-1/{T_c}}}{T_c}}\ (T_c-T),\] i.e., $\kappa=1$ (see Fig. [\[fig:3\]](#fig:3){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:3"}). The extensibility comes from the derivative of $G_{\rm u}$ as \[\label{eq:36} \chi=\frac{1}{2T}\; {\rm sech}^2(g/2T).\] Linear response is expected in the small force limit, when $x= g/(2T)$. At the transition \[x_c=\tanh \left(\frac{g_c}{2 T}\right).\] The free energy near an unzipping point $(T,g_c)$ can be written as \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:17} G_{\rm z}(T,g)&=& G_{\rm u}(T,g)-T\; \ln \frac{z_{\rm u}(T,g)}{z_{\rm z}(T)}\\ &=& G_{\rm u}(T,g)-T\; \ln \frac{z_{\rm u}(T,g)}{z_{\rm u}(T,g_c)}, \end{aligned}\] by the continuity of the free energy at the transition point. Close to the melting point $T=T_c$, $g_c$ is small. In this region, for a small $g$, an expansion gives \[\label{eq:19} G_{\rm z}(T,g)= G_{\rm u}(T,g) +\frac{1}{2} \chi(T_c) (g^2-g_c^2),\] consistent with Eq. [\[eq:20\]](#eq:20){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:20"} based on thermodynamic work. For specific heat, the discontinuity at $T=T_c$ for $g=0$ is just the specific heat of the bound state because the unbound state at $g=0$ has zero specific heat. A differentiation of Eq. [\[eq:14\]](#eq:14){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:14"} shows the agreement with the RHS of Eq. [\[eq:16\]](#eq:16){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:16"}. Ref. shows the behaviour of specific heat for a force that shows reentrance. For a nonzero force, the latent heat from Eq. [\[eq:11\]](#eq:11){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:11"} can be verified directly. The phase diagram shows reentrance and an extrema as in Fig. [\[fig:4\]](#fig:4){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:4"}, recovering the features discussed in the previous section. Fig. [\[fig:6\]](#fig:6){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:6"} shows the specific heat as we go through the peak C in the vertical direction keeping $T=T_m$ and horizontally by keeping $g=g_m$. The entropy is continuous. The specific heat shows a discontinuity along the vertical direction. Along the horizontal direction of the phase diagram, the entropy is continuous but the specific heat has one single point for the zipped phase. There is no identifiable critical region. The results are fully consistent with our discussions in Sec. II. ## Y-model: first order melting {#sec:y-model:-first} A model of DNA that does not allow any bubble is also exactly solvable. The thermal melting corresponds to an all or none type behaviour, all base pairs are either formed or broken. In the bound state, the number of configurations is $2^N$ for $N$ bonds, while it is $2^N$ for each strand in the unzipped state. The free energies are of the form of Eqs. [\[eq:14\]](#eq:14){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:14"}, [\[eq:15\]](#eq:15){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:15"}, except \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:22} p(\beta)=\exp(-\beta). \end{aligned}\] The all-or-none melting transition is first order with a latent heat at $k_BT_c=1/\ln 2$. Near the melting at $p(\beta)=2$, the phase boundary behaves as $g_c(T)\approx 2 \sqrt{T_c-T}$, matching with $\kappa=1/2$ behaviour of Fig. [\[fig:3\]](#fig:3){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:3"} for a first order transition. Eq. [\[eq:19\]](#eq:19){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:19"} is valid with appropriate $T_c$ and $g_c$. Other relations like specific heat, entropy and latent heat can be directly verified. ## Other special cases {#sec:other-special-cases} Ref. considers several exactly solvable models. Reentrance is observed in all situations considered except for the case of two strands with crossing in $1+1$ dimensions. In this case $\partial g_c/\partial T>0$ for all $T$ with $T_c\to\infty$. Therefore, as in Eq. [\[eq:11\]](#eq:11){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:11"}, by increasing temperature under a force, it is possible to get a double stranded bound state at high temperatures from an unzipped state. Another special situation is the $2+1$ dimensional model without crossing of chains. The phase boundary is $g_c(T)\sim \exp[-a/(T-T_c)]$ with $\partial g_c/\partial T\to 0$ as $T\to T_c$. It is possible to unzip for $T$ close to but below $T_c$ by an arbitrarily small force. Even though this case does not correspond to the power law form of Eq. [\[eq:12\]](#eq:12){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:12"}, the thermodynamic relations can still be verified including the reentrance behaviour and the behaviour near the extrema of the phase boundary. ## Summary of model comparison {#sec:summ-model-comp} As mentioned exact results are available for a large class of models in various dimensions. In all these cases, we find that the general thermodynamic predictions based on impenetrability of the force below the unzipping transition are consistent with the extant results. This lends credence to a general thermodynamic analysis of various thermodynamic functions near the transition and phase boundary. # Continuous unzipping transition {#sec:cont-unzipp-trans} Thermodynamics, by itself, does not exclude the possibility of a continuous transition under force of the type shown in Fig. [\[fig:5\]](#fig:5){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:5"}(b). In this section we obtain the thermodynamic relations for such a continuous transition. We here assume that the force affects the bound state over a range $g_{c1}\le g\le g_{c2}$, but leaves the bound state as it is for smaller forces. In other words, a DNA in its bound state is resilient to small forces but allows it to penetrate and alter its nature over a range of forces. Instead of a jump discontinuity in the isotherm, we allow a continuous transition at a force $g_{c1}$ where the DNA goes from the bound to a phase different from the unzipped phase. The intermediate phase is further assumed to undergo a transition to the unzipped phase at $g_{c2}$. In case, $g_{c2}\to \infty$, there is only one phase in the high force regime. However, since single stranded DNA under a force is a stable thermodynamic system, we expect $g_{c2}$ to remain finite. There is therefore a range of forces $g_{c1}<g<g_{c2}$ for which the DNA is affected in a nontrivial way by the force. Such a scenario was considered in Ref.. The intermediate state is called a mixed state. Near the two transition points, we take the isotherm to behave as \[\label{eq:18} x \approx \left\{\begin{array}{lcc} a_1 \;(g-g_{c1})^{\beta},&{\rm for}& g\to g_{c1}+,\\ \chi\; g-a \;(g_{c2}-g), &{\rm for}& g \to g_{c2}-, \end{array}\right.\] with $\beta,a,a_1>0$ ($\beta$ is not to be confused with $1/k_BT$). The unzipped phase for $g>g_{c2}$ is taken, for simplicity, to be in the linear response regime, $x=\chi g$. The exponent $\beta$, by universality, is same along the transition line. With the help of the formula for work at a constant temperature from $g$ to $g_{c2}$, the Gibbs free energy, Eq. [\[eq:9\]](#eq:9){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:9"}, can be written as \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:24} G_{\rm m}(T,g)&=& G_{\rm m}(T,g_{c2})+ \frac{1}{2} \chi (g_{c2}^2-g^2)\nonumber\\ &&\quad-\frac{1}{2} a\;(g_{c2}-g)^2, \end{aligned}\] where the subscript m indicates the mixed or the intermediate state. By continuity, $G_{\rm m}(T,g_{c2})=G_{\rm u}(T,g_{c2})$, and therefore, \[\label{eq:25} G_{\rm m}(g,T)= G_{\rm u}(g,T)-\frac{1}{2} a\;(g_{c2}-g)^2,\] for $g$ close to but smaller than $g_{c2}$. This form not only shows that the mixed state has a lower free energy than the unzipped state, but also gives the specific heat behaviour at $g_{c2}$, as (see Eq. [\[eq:33\]](#eq:33){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:33"}) \[\label{eq:26} C_{\rm m}(T,g_{c2})- C_{\rm u}(T,g_{c2}) =-T a \left(\frac{\partial g_{c2}}{\partial T}\right)^2.\] The specific heat relation derived in the appendix is also applicable for the z to m transition. In this case the zipped phase has zero extensibility and therefore \[\label{eq:35} C_{\rm m}(T,g_{c1})- C_{\rm z}(T,g_{c1}) =-T \left(\frac{\partial g_{c1}}{\partial T}\right)^2 a_1 \beta (g-g_{c1})^{\beta-1},\] indicating the possibility of a diverging specific heat if $\beta<1$. # Conclusion {#sec:conclusion} In this paper the thermodynamic description of the DNA unzipping phase transition is discussed. Without considering any microscopic details, we show that the thermodynamic relations in the fixed force ensemble have all the important features of the phase transition. Here we concentrate only on the force induced unzipping by pulling the two strands apart. A linear response has been used for evaluating the work by force, but the analysis can be carried out keeping the full form. Although a first order phase transition is observed in various models, the possibility of a continuous transition did not get much attention. Thermodynamics does not discard this possibility, and hence we extend our study to the case of continuous transition. The only information we use as an input to our analysis is that the zipped phase does not allow the force to penetrate below a certain critical force in the first order phase transition. The behaviour of the change in entropy and the specific heat go in accordance with the observed features in some known models. Various cases of the phase boundary line near the melting point are also analyzed. For the continuous transition there is an additional region in the phase diagram, showing a possible mixed phase, which allows the force to penetrate. We proceed with the general forms of the isotherms. This phenomenon of partial penetration of force looks very much like type II superconductors. Even though the variables and the microscopic origins are different in the two cases, there is a striking similarity between the relations obtained here for DNA and thermodynamic relations for superconductors. Lastly, we restricted ourselves to the unzipping force here but similar analysis can be done for the other forces like stretching force and pressure. It would be interesting to observe the effect of these forces on such transitions.	{'timestamp': '2014-04-23T02:11:29', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5451', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5451'}
null	null
# Introduction The investigation of frustrated magnetic systems is currently a field of active theoretical and experimental research. Systems with competing nearest-neighbor (NN) exchange coupling $J_1$ and next nearest-neighbor (NNN) exchange coupling $J_2$ can serve as model systems to study the interplay of quantum effects, thermal fluctuations and frustration. The quantum $J_1$-$J_2$ Heisenberg models on the square-lattice exhibit several ground-state phases including non-classical non-magnetic ground states, see, e.g.,. The corresponding Hamiltonian reads \[\label{hamiltonian} H=J_1\sum_{\langle i,j\rangle} {\bf S}_i \cdot {\bf S}_j+J_2\sum_{[i,j]} {\bf S}_i\cdot {\bf S}_j ,\] where $({\bf S}_i)^2=s(s+1)$, and $\langle i,j\rangle$ denotes NN and $[i,j]$ denotes NNN bonds. For antiferromagnetic NNN bonds, $J_2>0$, the spin system is frustrated irrespective of the sign of $J_1$. Due to frustration the theoretical treatment of this model is challenging. The numerous theoretical studies of the ground state phase diagram so far did not lead to a consensus on the nature of the quantum ground state and on the nature of the quantum phase transitions present in the model, see, e.g., and references therein. Interestingly there are also various compounds well described by square-lattice $J_1$-$J_2$ Heisenberg models, such as oxovanadates and iron pnictides. In experiments, typically temperature-dependent quantities are reported. Hence reliable (and flexible) tools are desirable to calculate thermodynamic quantities such as the uniform magnetic susceptibility $\chi$. In this paper we present two methods, namely the full exact diagonalization, see, e.g.,, and the high-temperature expansion to calculate the temperature dependence of the magnetic susceptibility for the square-lattice $J_1$-$J_2$ spin-$s$ Heisenberg model with both ferromagnetic (FM) and antiferromagnetic (AFM) NN coupling $J_1$ and AFM NNN bonds $J_2$ for arbitrary spin quantum number $s$. In particular, we analyze the position and the height of the maximum in the susceptibility in dependence on $J_1$, $J_2$ and $s$. # Methods The full exact diagonaliazion (ED) yields numerical exact results at arbitrary temperature $T$, but it is typically limited to about $N=22$ sites for $s=1/2$ models. For larger spin quantum numbers $s$ the system size $N$ accessible for ED shrinks significantly. Hence, ED is used preferably for $s=1/2$ and $s=1$. In the present study we exploit the special symmetry properties of the finite square-lattice of $N=8$ sites and perform full ED for the $J_1$-$J_2$ model for $s=1/2,1..,9/2$, thus allowing to study the role of the spin quantum number. Since the ED approach suffers from the finite-size effect, the ED calculations do not yield quantitatively correct results for the thermodynamic limit. Nevertheless, they will give insight into the qualitative behavior of the susceptibility. The high-temperature expansion (HTE) for the $J_1$-$J_2$ model up to 10th order was presented in , however, restricted to $s=1/2$. This restriction can be overcome by using our general HTE scheme for Heisenberg models with arbitrary exchange patterns and arbitrary spin quantum number $s$ up to order 8. The scheme is encoded in a simple C++-program and can be downloaded and freely used by interested researchers. Very recently the present authors have extended this general HTE scheme up to 10th order. Here we use this 10th order HTE as an alternative method to the ED. We use here three different subsequent Padé approximants, namely Padé \[4,6\], \[5,5\], and \[6,4\], see e.g.. Such a Padé approximant extends the region of validity of the HTE series down to lower temperatures. Since the HTE approach is designed for infinite systems the HTE data for the susceptibility maximum, in principle, can be quantitatively correct, if the maximum is not located at too low temperatures. Indeed, it was found that for the unfrustrated ($J_2=0$) square-lattice spin-$1/2$ Heisenberg antiferromagnet the Padé \[4,4\] approximant of the 8th order HTE series yields correct data for the susceptibility maximum located at $T \approx 0.94 J_1$. However, it may happen that a certain Padé approximant does not work for some particular values of $J_1$, $J_2$, and $s$, since Padé approximants may exhibit unphysical poles for temperatures in the region of interest. Hence we show in the next section only those Padé data not influenced by poles. # Results First we present the temperature dependence of the susceptibility $\chi$ in Fig. [\[fig1\]](#fig1){reference-type="ref" reference="fig1"} for a particular value of $J_2$ and both FM and AFM $J_1$. In this paper the symbol $\chi$ means $\chi\|J_1\|/Ng^2\mu_B^2$, where $N$ is the number of spins and $\mu_B$ is the Bohr magneton. The temperature is measured in terms of $\|J_1\|$, i.e. the symbol $T$ means $T/\|J_1\|$. The qualitative behavior of $\chi(T)$ shown in Figs. [\[fig1\]](#fig1){reference-type="ref" reference="fig1"}(a-d) is similar, there is the broad maximum in $\chi(T)$ that is typical for a two-dimensional antiferromagnet (note that for $J_2/\|J_1\|=1$ the system is in the AFM ground state irrespective of the sign of $J_1$). The various $\chi(T)$ curves give an impression on the finite-size effects, the effect of the sign of the NN exchange $J_1$, and the influence of spin quantum number $s$. The height, $\chi_{max}$, and the position, $T_{max}$, of the maximum in the $\chi(T)$ curve are interesting features for the comparison with experimental data, in particular to get information on the ratio $J_2/\|J_1\|$ from susceptibility measurements, see e.g.. Therefore we will discuss $\chi_{max}$ and the $T_{max}$ now in more detail. We present our data for the susceptibility maximum for both FM and AFM NN exchange $J_1$ in Figs. [\[fig2\]](#fig2){reference-type="ref" reference="fig2"} (ED data) and [\[fig3\]](#fig3){reference-type="ref" reference="fig3"} (HTE and ED data). For FM $J_1$, $\chi_{max}$ ($T_{max}$) becomes larger (smaller) upon lowering $J_2$. Finally, when approaching the critical value $J_2^c$, where the transition to the ferromagnetic ground state takes place, $\chi_{max}$ diverges and $T_{max}$ goes to zero. The critical point for $s=1/2$ is $J^c_2=0.333\,\|J_1\|$ for $N=8$ (but it is $J^c_2 \approx 0.4\|J_1\|$ for $N \to \infty$ ). It increases with growing $s$ and becomes $J^c_2=0.5 \|J_1\|$ for $s \to \infty$. The data for $N=8$ and $N \to \infty$ are in qualitative agreement. Although the finite-size effects are obviously large, the general features of $\chi_{max}$ and $T_{max}$ as functions of $J_2$ and $s$ are quite similar. Naturally the HTE fails when approaching $J^c_2$, since in this limit low temperatures become relevant. Note that the HTE data for FM $J_1$ and $s=1/2$ are also in qualitative agreement with recently reported data calculated by second-order Green's function approach. We discuss now the case of AFM $J_1$ (right panels in Figs. [\[fig2\]](#fig2){reference-type="ref" reference="fig2"} and [\[fig3\]](#fig3){reference-type="ref" reference="fig3"}). For large $J_2$ the behavior of $\chi_{max}$ and $T_{max}$ is very similar to that for FM $J_1$, i. e. the sign of $J_1$ becomes irrelevant, cf. Ref. . On the other hand, for smaller values of $J_2$ naturally both cases behave completely different, since $J_1$ dominates the physics. We find a well pronounced minimum in $T_{max}$ in the region of strongest frustration around $J_2=0.5$. For the finite system $\chi_{max}$ exhibits a maximum in this region, whereas for the infinite system $\chi_{max}$ is almost constant in the region $0 \le J_2 \le 0.5$. To take a closer look on the role of the spin quantum number $s$ we present in Fig. [\[fig4\]](#fig4){reference-type="ref" reference="fig4"} the quantities $\chi_{max}$ and $T_{max}$ as a function of $1/s$ for particular values of $J_2$. Obviously, there is monotonous increase (decrease) of $\chi_{max}$ ($T_{max}/s(s+1)$) with growing $s$. For FM $J_1=-1$ the increase of $\chi_{max}$ is particular strong for $J_2=0.7$ (see the insets in panels a and c), since for large $s$ this value of $J_2$ becomes quite close to the transition point to the FM ground state. From Figs. [\[fig4\]](#fig4){reference-type="ref" reference="fig4"}(a-d) it is also seen that the position $T_{max}$ of the maximum for $J_2 \gtrsim 0.7\|J_1\|$ is almost independent of the sign of $J_1$, whereas the height $\chi_{max}$ strongly depends on the sign of the NN coupling. Let us finally mention the special $s$-dependence of the maximum in $\chi(T)$ for $J_1=1$ and $J_2=0.5$, where the classical ground state exhibits a large non-trivial degeneracy. The position $T_{max}/s(s+1)$ of the maximum shifts to zero in the limit $s \to \infty$, whereas the height remains finite. This behavior is quite similar to that found for the pyrochlore AFM, where the classical ground state is also highly degenerate. # Summary {#secIV} Using high-temperature expansion and full exact diagonalization we have calculated the uniform susceptibility $\chi$ of the spin-$s$ $J_1$-$J_2$ square-lattice Heisenberg magnet in a wide parameter regime of FM and AFM $J_1$ and frustrating AFM $J_2$. Especially, we have studied the height and the position of the maximum in the $\chi(T)$ curve as functions of $J_2/J_1$ and the spin quantum number $s$. These data can be used to get information on the ratio $J_2/\|J_1\|$ from susceptibility measurements, e.g. on oxovanadates which are well described by the square-lattice $J_1$-$J_2$ model. The work at Ames Laboratory was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC02-07CH11358.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-23T02:09:28', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5692', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5692'}
null	null
null	null
# Introduction The class of Symbiotic star was first introduced by Merill (1958), who presented the characteristic spectrum showing a combination of the giant star continuum with molecular absorption features and ionized emission lines. These stars are nowadays generally understood as interacting binary system comprising of a cool late-type star, which is a red giant (RG) or asymptotic giant branch (AGB) star, and a hot compact companion, usually a white dwarf or in a few cases of a low-mass main-sequence star. Phenomena caused by interaction between the components in symbiotic stars, such as accretions of the stellar material around the hot component with nova-like thermonuclear outburst, mass-loss from a giant star with colliding wind process, formation of bipolar photo-ionized planetary nebulae, and collimation of a jet-like feature, give unique astrophysical laboratories to investigate the evolution of binary systems (Kenyon 1986). R Aquarii (R Aqr) is one of the most studied symbiotic stars composed of a Mira, a long period variable, with a pulsation period of about 387 days and a white dwarf companion as well as an ionized nebulae around the system. Unusually, R Aqr exhibits an astronomical jet feature that is probably powered by an accretion disk around a white dwarf companion. This jet has been extensively observed in optical, radio, UV, and X-ray wavelengths and is known to extend up to about 2500 AU in a NE-SW direction with a shock speed of about 235-285 km s$^{-1}$ (Nichols & Slavin 2009). The large-scaled, extended inner and outer nebulae are also known in R Aqr. Solf & Ulrich (1985) carried out an extensive study of the nebulae using optical spectroscopy observations, and revealed that both nebulae had the same geometric structure resembling a bipolar, hourglass-like shape extending about two arcmin in an East-West direction for the outer nebula with an equatorial velocity of 55 km s$^{-1}$ and about one arcmin in a North-South direction for the inner nebula with an equatorial velocity of 32 km s$^{-1}$, respectively. An orbital period of 44 years for R Aqr was proposed by Willson et al. (1981), who interpreted that the depressions of the optical light curve from 1928 to 1934 and from 1974 to 1978 could be attributed to the obscuration of the Mira variable by an extended cloud of dust. A wide-range of radial velocity data were collected by McIntosh & Rustan (2007) in visual, Near-IR, and radio wavelengths from 1940. They extracted the orbital period of 34.6 years with an eccentricity of 0.52, and a projected semi-major axis of 3.5 AU. Subsequently, Gromadzki & Mikołajewska (2009) also extracted the orbital period of 43.6 years with an eccentricity of 0.25 modifying the radial velocity data collected by McIntosh & Rustan (2007) complemented by additional radial velocity data. They obtained a consistent orbital period with Willson et al. (1981). In addition, R Aqr is one of three symbiotic stars that have circumstellar masers associated with Mira variables. Since the first detection of an SiO maser toward R Aqr by Lépine et al. (1978), there have been several single-dish observational studies of 43/86/128 GHz SiO masers (Zuckerman 1979; Cohen & Ghigo 1980; Spencer et al. 1981; Martínez et al. 1988; Jewell et al. 1991; Schwarz et al. 1995; Cho et al. 1996; Alcolea et al. 1999; Pardo et al. 2004; Kang et al. 2006) as well as 22/321 GHz H$_{2}$O maser (Seaquist et al. 1995; Ivison et al 1994, 1998). Moreover, high-resolution VLBI observations were also performed with VLBA presenting a ring-like structure of the 43 GHz SiO maser with an approximated diameter of 30 mas (Boboltz et al. 1997; Hollis et al. 2001; Cotton et al. 2004, 2006). VLBI monitor observations of SiO masers toward R Aqr were carried out since 2004 by Kamohara et al. (2010) with VERA. They observed both $v=1$ and $v=2$, $J=1-0$ SiO maser transitions, and confirmed that both maser emissions appear in similar regions. However, each transition of maser spots were not exactly coincident within the spatial and spectral resolutions, so that new theoretical studies were required for looking into the finer details of both maser distributions in the inner shells around the central AGB star. They also estimated an annual parallax of $4.7 \pm 0.8$ mas assuming that the position of the star is coincident with the center of circular fitting of both SiO maser distributions, because of the short lifetime of individual SiO maser spots. A typical lifetime of an SiO maser feature is on the order of one hundred days, but a few cases of the SiO maser features persist for a period of one year. The best example is high-resolution VLBA monitoring observations for the SiO maser in Mira variable of TX Cam (Diamond & Kemball 1999, 2003; Gonidakis et al. 2010). According to the results by Diamond & Kemball (2003) and Gonidakis et al. (2010), the lifetime of the SiO maser components around the Mira variable was suggested to be between 150 and 200 days, but sometimes long-lived maser components persisted over 350 days. Moreover, McIntosh & Bonde (2010) reported that the average lifetime of the SiO maser features was 171 days, but also reported the existence of long-lived SiO maser features over 171 days. The VERA array of the National Astronomical Observatory of Japan (NAOJ) is a Japanese VLBI array aimed at obtaining 10 micro-arcsecond-level accuracy of parallaxes and proper motions of H$_{2}$O, SiO, and CH$_{3}$OH maser sources using its unique dual-beam phase-referencing technique. In past years, VERA has successfully measured parallaxes for maser sources in our galaxy including AGB stars, such as S Crt (Nakagawa et al. 2008), SY Scl (Nyu et al. 2011), and RX Boo (Kamezaki et al. 2012). Accurate measurements of distances for AGB stars would be useful for calibrating the Period-Luminosity relation precisely, which provides a fundamental basis of a distance ladder of nearby galaxies. In this paper, we report phase-referencing observations of the SiO maser toward the symbiotic star R Aqr using VERA, and present the result of the most accurate parallax measurement. # Observations and Data Reduction The observations of the $v=1$ and $v =2$, $J=1-0$ SiO maser transitions were performed using the four stations of VERA from September 2005 to October 2006. We reanalyzed these data which were published by Kamohara et al. (2010). Rest frequencies of 43.122079 GHz and 42.820582 GHz were adopted for the $v=1$, $J=1-0$ and $v=2$, $J=1-0$ in this paper, respectively. The target source of the SiO masers around R Aqr ($\alpha_{\mathrm{J2000}}$ = , $\delta_{\mathrm{J2000}}$ = ) and the phase-referencing source J2348$-$`<!-- -->`{=html}1631 ($\alpha_{\mathrm{J2000}}$ = , $\delta_{\mathrm{J2000}}$ = ) were observed simultaneously using the VERA dual-beam system. The separation angle between the target and reference source is about 1.6 degrees. A bright continuum source, 3C454.3, was also observed every 80 minutes as a calibrator. The instrumental phase difference between the two beams was measured in real time during the observations, by correlating random signals from artificial noise sources injected into both beams at each station (Honma et al. 2008a). The data were recorded onto magnetic tapes at a rate of 1024 Mbps with the VERA DIR2000 recording system, providing a total bandwidth of 256 MHz with 2-bit digitization. The 256 MHz bandwidth data were divided into 16 IF channels (16 MHz each), and two of them were assigned to the $v=1$ and $v=2$, $J=1-0$ SiO maser transitions of the target source, while others were assigned to continuum spectrum of the reference and calibrator source. Correlation processing was carried out on the Mitaka FX correlator located in NAOJ, Mitaka. The spectral resolution of the maser lines was set to be 31.25 kHz, corresponding to a velocity resolution of 0.21 km s$^{-1}$ for observation epochs of 2005/270, 2006/207, 242, 286 (year/day of year) and 15.625 kHz, corresponding to a velocity resolution of 0.11 km s$^{-1}$ for 2005/327, 358, 2006/045, 062, 128. All the data reductions were performed using the National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO) Astronomical Image Processing System (AIPS). The amplitude and the bandpass calibrations for the target source and the reference source were made independently. For phase-referencing analysis, we calibrated the clock parameters using the calibrator, 3C454.3, and the fringe fitting was made on the position reference source, J2348-1631, to obtain residual fringe phase. These solutions were applied to the target source, R Aqr. The dual-beam phase-calibration data and the modified delay-tracking model were also applied to the target data in order to obtain accurate astrometry with VERA. Then, using AIPS task IMAGR, we obtained the $v=1$ and $v=2$ maser images which consist of 2048 pixels $\times$ 2048 pixels in size with a pixel spacing of 0.05 mas. From these images, we searched maser spots with S/N ratio larger than six as detection criterion, and measured their positions by elliptical Gaussian fitting using AIPS task SAD. Selected maser spots were considered as real if maser spots existed in more than two adjacent channel maps within the beam size. # Parallax Measurement In order to estimate a parallax, we assumed that the motion of the SiO maser spot is the summation of a parallax motion and a linear proper motion. The linear proper motion includes an individual motion of the maser spot in the maser-emitting region and a secular motion of the central star as well as a binary motion. However, an accelerating or decelerating factor of the binary motion is negligible and considered as the linear for one year of a 44-year orbit. Then, the motion of the maser spot on the sky plane is simply described by following equations (Seidelmann 1992): \[\alpha(t)\cos{\delta} = \alpha_{0} + \mu_{\alpha}^{}(t-t_0) + \pi P_{\alpha},\] \[\delta(t) = \delta_{0} + \mu_{\delta}(t-t_0) + \pi P_{\delta},\] where ($\alpha_{0}$, $\delta_{0}$) are the initial positions at $t = t_0$, ($\mu_{\alpha}^{}$, $\mu_{\delta}$) are the linear proper motions for the direction of right ascension and declination (Note that $\mu_{\alpha}^{} = \mu_{\alpha}\cos\delta$), $\pi$ is the parallax, ($P_{\alpha}$, $P_{\delta}$) are the parallax factors, which are sinusoidal functions of the parallactic ellipse for a certain time in right ascension and declination due to the motion of the Earth around the Sun. Parallax factors are computed as follows : \[P_{\alpha} = X_{\odot}\sin{\alpha_{\star}}-Y_{\odot}\cos{\alpha_{\star}},\] \[P_{\delta} = X_{\odot}\cos{\alpha_{\star}}\sin{\delta_{\star}} + Y_{\odot}\sin{\alpha_{\star}}\sin{\delta_{\star}}-Z_{\odot}\cos{\delta_{\star}},\] where ($X_{\odot},Y_{\odot},Z_{\odot}$) are the Cartesian coordinates of the Earth relative to the barycenter of the solar system at the time of observation. These values are taken by NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Solar System ephemeris (e.g. DE405). ($\alpha_{\star}, \delta_{\star}$) are the position of the target (the nominal position) in right ascension and declination, respectively. Unknown parameters, parallax ($\pi$), linear proper motions ($\mu_{\alpha}^{}$, $\mu_{\delta}$) and initial positions ($\alpha_{0}$, $\delta_{0}$) were fitted independently with respect to right ascension and declination directions by reduced $\chi^{2}$ fittings. The astrometric position errors were set so that the reduced $\chi^{2}$ becomes unity. Then, combined fit with both directions was conducted by giving uniform weights of $\sigma_{\mathrm{RA}}$ and $\sigma_{\mathrm{Dec}}$ in right ascension and declination, respectively. Among all the observations, we used an SiO maser ($v=2$, $J=1-0$) spot with the $V_{\mathrm{LSR}}=-20.7$ km s$^{-1}$ to estimate parallax. Figure [\[fig:1\]](#fig:1){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:1"} shows the phase-referenced image of the target maser spot, and this spot was found to be persistent. We detected this spot in eight epochs at 2005/270, 327, 358, 2006/045, 062, 128, 207, and 286, covering a period of about one year in the same velocity channel. In Figure [\[fig:2\]](#fig:2){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:2"}, we present position variations of the traced SiO maser spot with the best-fitting parallax and proper motion results presented by solid curve. Table [1](#tab:LT1){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:LT1"} shows the summary of the parallax and the linear proper motion results with uniform weights in right ascension and declination. By setting position errors of $\sigma_{\mathrm{RA}}=0.430$ mas and $\sigma_{\mathrm{Dec}}=0.434$ mas obtained by reduced $\chi^{2}$ fitting, we obtained the parallax of $\pi = 4.59 \pm 0.24$ mas, corresponding to a distance of $218_{-11}^{+12}$ pc. The proper motions are also obtained to be $\mu_{\alpha}^{}=37.13 \pm 0.47$ mas yr$^{-1}$ and $\mu_{\delta}=-28.62 \pm 0.44$ mas yr$^{-1}$, respectively. Note that we detected another maser spot other than the target maser spot in the velocity channel with $V_{\mathrm{LSR}}=-20.7$ km s$^{-1}$ on the observation epochs of 2005/358 and 2006/286. Two maser spots were closely located within 0.51 mas on 2005/358, but separated by about 6.33 mas on 2006/286. To avoid misidentification of the target maser spot, we tried estimating parallax with each individual maser spots. For the maser spots on 2005/358, measured parallaxes for each cases presented practically the same result. On the other hand, the fitting result was significantly worse for 2006/286 when we misidentified the one of the maser spots detected on this epoch as shown in Figure [\[fig:2\]](#fig:2){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:2"}. Thus, we concluded that two maser spots on 2006/286 fall into distinct two maser features, and one of worse fitting maser spot is excluded for parallax measurement. # Discussions ## Distance toward R Aqr Previously, distance measurements toward R Aqr had mostly been done by using three methods: (1) the kinematic method using the nebulae around the system, (2) the Period-Luminosity method, and (3) the direct distance measurement by parallax. We summarize the distance measurements toward R Aqr in Table [2](#tab:LT2){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:LT2"} including the result of the present study. The first kinematic distance measurement toward R Aqr was introduced by Baade (1943, 1944). He deduced a distance of 260 pc based on a constant expansion velocity for the outer nebula of between 80 and 100 km s$^{-1}$ with an expansion age of about 600 years. In addition, Solf & Ulrich (1985) described the two nebulae as having dense equatorial ring structures with equatorial expansion velocities of 32 and 55 km s$^{-1}$ for the inner and outer nebula, respectively. By adopting the expansion age for the outer nebula of 600 years and the inner nebula of 180 years from Baade (1944) and Sopka et al. (1982) respectively, they deduced the distance of 180 pc and 185 pc for the outer and the inner nebula respectively. Recently, Korean historical records provided two irregular outbursts called "Guest Star"epochs in A.D. 1073 and 1074 (Yang et al. 2005). Based on the records, they estimated the kinematic distance of about 273 pc with a constant expansion velocity of 55 km s$^{-1}$ from Solf & Ulrich (1985). In pulsating stars, one noticeable and useful property is the Period-Luminosity relation. This relation has been an important indicator of distances toward pulsating stars. The recent Period-Luminosity relations in AGB stars was provided by Whitelock et al. (2008), who reanalyzed the revised Hipparcos parallaxes and compared them with VLBI parallax measurements. They established the Period-Luminosity relation in the infrared K-band magnitude: \[M_{K}= \rho (\log P-2.38) + \delta,\] where they obtained a slope of $\rho=-3.51\pm0.20$ and a zero point of $\delta=-7.25\pm0.05$ for the O-rich Mira variables in our Galaxy. Using their Period-Luminosity relation, Whitelock et al. (2008) presented a distance of 250 pc for R Aqr. According to Hipparcos observations (Perryman 1997), a parallax of R Aqr was $5.07\pm3.15$ mas, which corresponds to a distance of $197_{-75}^{+323}$ pc. More accurate parallax measurement was achieved by Kamohara et al. (2010) using the SiO maser distributions around Mira variable in R Aqr with VERA observations. They followed the center of circular ring fitting of the SiO maser distributions, and yielded an annual parallax of $\pi=4.7\pm0.8$ mas, corresponding to a distance of $214_{-32}^{+45}$ pc. Our parallax measurement of $\pi = 4.59\pm0.24$ mas ($D = 218_{-11}^{+12}$ pc) is consistent with previous parallax measurement results, but yields the distance with the highest accuracy of about 5% level. Compared with the distance measurements from other methods, our result is smaller than the distance obtained by the Period-Luminosity relation. According to the Period-Luminosity relation by Whitelock et al. (2008), expected absolute K-band magnitude for R Aqr is $M_{\mathrm{K}} =-7.98 \pm 0.09$ with the pulsation period of 387 days. Adopting an apparent K-band magnitude of $m_{\mathrm{K}} =-1.02$ obtained from SAAO (South African Astronomical Observatory) by Whitelock et al. (2000), our distance measurement provides the absolute magnitude of $M_{\mathrm{K}} =-7.71 \pm 0.11$. Although this value does not include the error in apparent K-band magnitude, our distance result presents a lower K-band absolute magnitude than that provided by the Period-Luminosity relation in Whitelock et al. (2008). On the other hand, Whitelock et al. (2008) also presented that the Period-Luminosity relation estimated by only VLBI parallaxes of 5 OH-Mira provides the zero point of $\delta =-7.08 \pm 0.17$. This relation yields the absolute K-band magnitude of $M_{\mathrm{K}} =-7.82 \pm 0.16$, which is consistent with our result. However, more VLBI parallax measurements are needed to establish a reliable Period-Luminosity relation in the future since the number of VLBI parallax measurements for Mira variables are only five in their relation. Moreover, kinematic distances for R Aqr have a large range from 180 to 270 pc based on the nebula properties such as an angular size, an expansion age, and an expansion velocity of the nebula. In the case of the inner nebula, kinematic properties with the equatorial shell radius of 6.5 arcsec and the equatorial expansion velocity of 32 km s$^{-1}$ were derived using a kinematic model from Solf & Ulrich (1985). Applying our distance to their properties, the equatorial shell radius for inner nebula corresponds to the scale of $1494^{+78}_{-70}$ AU. We assumed that the inner nebula have a constant expansion rate with the velocity from Solf & Ulrich (1985), and then estimated that the expansion age of the inner nebula is about 240 years, corresponding to about the year 1773. On the other hand, outer nebula is suggested to have been formed in A.D. 1073 and 1074 from the outburst record found by Yang et al. (2005). Recently, a nitrate ion recorded in the Antarctic ice core also supported a nova eruption of R Aqr between A.D 1060 and 1080 (Tanabe & Motizuki 2012). In the case of the outer nebula, kinematic properties with the equatorial shell radius of 42 arcsec and the expansion velocity of 55 km s$^{-1}$ were also reported by Solf & Ulrich (1985). The outburst record with our distance measurement suggested that the assumed constant expansion velocity for outer nebula is about $48 \pm 2$ km s$^{-1}$ with an angular size of 42 arcsec. This suggests that the expansion velocity of the outer nebula might be smaller than 55 km s$^{-1}$ or expansion of the outer nebula might be accelerated. ## Proper motion of the maser spot Along with the parallax measurement, tracing the maser spot also presents the linear proper motion of $\mu_{\alpha}^{}=37.13 \pm 0.47$ mas yr$^{-1}$ and $\mu_{\delta}=-28.62 \pm 0.44$ mas yr$^{-1}$ in right ascension and declination, respectively. By converting to a physical scale, the proper motion of the maser spot is equivalent to about 48.45 km s$^{-1}$ in the Southeast direction (1 mas yr$^{-1}$ corresponds to 1.03 km s$^{-1}$ at the distance of 218 pc). According to the result from Kamohara et al. (2010), the linear proper motion of R Aqr was $\mu_{\alpha}^{*}=32.2 \pm 0.8$ mas yr$^{-1}$ and $\mu_{\delta}=-29.5 \pm 0.7$ mas yr$^{-1}$, which includes the secular motion and the binary motion of the central star. Our linear proper motion of the maser spot is also composed of the secular motion and the binary motion as well as individual motion of the maser spot, so that the subtracted proper motion vector from the result of Kamohara et al. (2010) indicates the internal individual motion of the maser spot in the maser-emitting region. The subtracted motion of the maser spot with respect to the motion of the central star is $4.93\pm1.27$ mas yr$^{-1}$ and $0.88\pm1.14$ mas yr$^{-1}$ in right ascension and declination respectively. A magnitude of the proper motion is about 5.17 km s$^{-1}$ in an eastward direction with a position angle of about 280 degrees. Obtained distributions of the $v=1$ and $v=2$, $J=1-0$ SiO maser spots and proper motion vectors are displayed in Figure [\[fig:3\]](#fig:3){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:3"}. We also presented a result of circular fitting to the both transitions of SiO maser spots in Figure [\[fig:3\]](#fig:3){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:3"}. In the maser distributions, the traced maser spot by denoting a black circle in Figure [\[fig:3\]](#fig:3){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:3"} is likely to show a motion along the maser-emitting shell that corresponds to the circle of SiO maser distribution. Overall motion of the SiO maser shell was suggested to be contracting by Kamohara et al. (2010), who estimate the infall velocity of 3.1 $\pm$ 0.6 km s$^{-1}$. However, in our result, the proper motion of the traced maser spot does not seem to have any inward motion. Although overall motions of maser features have a radial motion of expansion or contraction following the motion of the SiO maser-emitting region in the circumstellar envelope, some cases of maser components appear to move arbitrarily due to complex dynamics of the circumstellar SiO maser shell. In the previous VLBI observations by Boboltz et al. (1997), they also provided an average inward motion of individual maser components with mean infall speed of 4.2 $\pm$ 0.9 km s$^{-1}$. However, some of the components appeared to move arbitrarily with respect to inward motion. Individual SiO maser components in TX Cam also presented complex motions not only in the plane of the sky, but also along the line of sight. These motions are thought to be attributable to turbulence in the maser shell, and also to changes in the conditions conducive to maser emission (Gronidakis et al. 2010). A rotating SiO maser shell proposed by Hollis et al. (2000, 2001) was also a proposal considered for our proper motion result. However, velocity gradients of the SiO maser distributions were inconsistent with Hollis et al. (2001), and no observation epochs were compatible with the rotating maser shell. We would like to thank all the VERA staff members for their assistance concerning the array operations and data correlations. This work was supported in part by The Graduate University for Advanced Studies (Sokendai).	{'timestamp': '2014-01-23T02:05:30', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5574', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5574'}
# Introduction {#sec:intro} In order to explain the elliptic flow parameter, $v_2$, extracted from data collected at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) [@PHENIX1; @STAR1; @PHENIX2; @STAR2; @BRAHMS; @PHOBOS; @PHENIX3], hydrodynamical calculations as well as some transport calculations suggest that the matter produced in the collisions is likely to have a very small ratio of shear viscosity to entropy density, $\eta/s$. Recent studies have shown that $\eta/s$ may reach a minimum in the vicinity of a phase transition-for earlier studies, see e.g. Ref. . In this context, the smallness of this minimum value with respect to its lower bound, $\eta/s=1/4\pi$, commonly known as the KSS bound , assumes particular significance. Again from the recent work of Niemi et al. , the transverse momentum $p_T$ dependence on elliptic flow parameter extracted from RHIC data is highly sensitive to the temperature dependence of $\eta/s$ in hadronic matter, and is almost independent of the viscosity in the QGP phase. This result attributes extra importance to the microscopic calculations of viscosity of hadronic matter in recent years [@Dobado1; @Dobado2; @Muronga; @Nakano; @Nicola; @Itakura; @Gorenstein; @Greiner; @SPal; @Toneev; @Prakash_2012; @Buballa; @Weise; @SSS; @Mitra; @Prakash_2013], though these investigations began some time ago . Calculations based on kinetic theory (KT) approaches in Refs. predict a shear viscosity $\eta$ of pionic matter that increases with $T$, whereas using a Kubo approach, Lang et al. predict $\eta$ to decrease with $T$. For the interaction of pions in the medium, Lang et al. used lowest order chiral perturbation theory ($\chi$PT), which describes well experimental data on $\pi-\pi$ cross sections up to center-of-mass energies of $\sqrt s = 0.500$ GeV. For higher energies, resonances, particularly $\sigma$ and $\rho$, become important and iteration of the amplitude (unitarization) is necessary to describe data. In the $\chi$PT approach, $\sigma$ and $\rho$ resonances in $\pi-\pi$ scattering can be generated dynamically under unitarization. Fernandez-Fraile et al. showed that under unitarization, $\chi$PT predicts $\eta$ increasing with $T$ in both Kubo and KT approaches-without unitarization, $\eta$ decreases with $T$. Again in Ref. , it was shown that a KT approach leads to an $\eta$ of pionic medium that increases with $T$ when a phenomenological interaction used, while a decreasing function of $T$ is obtained when using $\chi$PT in that same approach. An increasing trend of $\eta$ with $T$ has also been observed by Mitra et. al. , who have incorporated a medium dependent $\pi-\pi$ cross-section in the transport equation for a pion gas. They also found a significant effect of a temperature dependent pionic chemical potential . Again, the question of magnitude of $\eta$ is also an unsettled issue. For example, near the critical temperature, $T_c \simeq 0.175$ GeV, Refs. predict an $\eta \approx 0.001$ GeV$^3$; in Refs. , $\eta = 0.002-0.003$ GeV$^3$; and in Refs. , $\eta = 0.4$ GeV$^3$. From these considerations, it is evident that the issue of the temperature dependence of hadronic shear viscosity is still a matter of debate and warrants further investigation. Motivated by this, we have calculated $\eta$ of a pion gas using an effective Lagrangian for $\pi\pi\sigma$ and $\pi\pi\rho$ interactions which may be treated as an alternative way to describe $\pi-\pi$ cross sections up to the $\sqrt{s}=1$ GeV beside unitarization technique . Using real-time thermal field theory we have calculated the in-medium pion correlator to obtain the thermal width, a necessary ingredient to calculate $\eta$. We have also estimated the temperature dependence of the shear viscosity to entropy density ratio $\eta/s$ of the pionic gas and compared our results to others of the recent literature. Although the hadronic matter that is formed in heavy-ion collisions at RHIC is comprised of more hadrons than pions only, our study nevertheless is of relevance to the real situation as, at least in the central rapidity region, pions are the dominant component of the hadronic fluid. In the next Section, we present the formalism used to evaluate the shear viscosity of a pion gas. Our numerical results are presented in Sec. [3](#sec:num){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:num"} and in Sec. [4](#sec:concl){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:concl"}, we present the summary and conclusions. # Formalism {#sec:form} Let us start with the standard expression of the shear viscosity for pion gas: \[\eta = \frac{\beta}{10\pi^2}\int\frac{d^3k\,\boldsymbol{k}^6}{\Gamma_{\pi}(\boldsymbol{k},T)\,\omega_k^2 } \, n(\omega_k)\left[1+n(\omega_k)\right], \label{eta1_final}\] where \[n(\omega_k) = \frac{1}{e^{\beta\omega_k}-1}, \label{BEdist}\] is the Bose-Einstein distribution function for a temperature $T = 1/\beta$, with $\omega_k = (\boldsymbol{k}^2 +m_\pi^2)^{1/2}$, and $\Gamma_\pi(\boldsymbol{k},T)$ is the thermal width of $\pi$ mesons in hadronic matter at temperature $T$. We note that this expression can be derived either with the Kubo formalism using retarded correlator of the energy-momentum tensor, or with a kinetic approach using the Boltzmann equation in the relaxation-time approximation . In both approaches, to evaluate $\Gamma_\pi(\boldsymbol{k},T)$ one needs the interactions of the pions in medium. Here, we pursue the use of retarded correlators. As mentioned previously, from the lowest order $\chi$PT, the estimated $\pi-\pi$ cross section in free space is well in agreement with the experimental data up to the center-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s}= 0.5$ GeV. Beyond this value of $\sqrt{s}$, the $\sigma$ and $\rho$ resonances play an essential role to explain the data. On unitarization, the $\sigma$ and $\rho$ resonances are generated dynamically in the amplitude. An alternative way, which we follow in the present paper, is to incorporate these resonances by using the effective interaction for $\pi\pi\sigma$ and $\pi\pi\rho$ interactions: \[{\cal L} = g_\rho \, \boldsymbol{\rho}_\mu \cdot \boldsymbol{\pi} \times \partial^\mu \boldsymbol{\pi} + \frac{g_\sigma}{2} m_\sigma \boldsymbol{\pi}\cdot\boldsymbol{\pi}\,\sigma, \label{Lag}\] where the coupling constants $g_\rho$ and $g_\sigma$ are fixed from their experimental decay widths. We use this effective Lagrangian to calculate the contributions of the $\pi\rho$ and $\pi\sigma$ loops to the self-energy of $\pi$ meson at finite temperature. The contributions coming from the interactions of the pions in medium, which are the relevant ones for $\Gamma_\pi(\boldsymbol{k},T)$ in Eq. ([\[eta1_final\]](#eta1_final){reference-type="ref" reference="eta1_final"}), can be obtained from the imaginary part of the retarded pion correlator $\Pi_{\pi}^R(k)$ evaluated at the $\pi$-meson pole, $k=(k_0=\omega_k,\boldsymbol{k})$. In real-time thermal field theory, this relationship can be expressed as : \[\begin{aligned} \Gamma_\pi(\boldsymbol{k},T) &=&-\frac{1}{m_\pi} {\rm Im}\,{\Pi}_{\pi}^R(k)\vert_{k_0=\omega_k} \nonumber\\[0.2true cm] &=&-{\rm tanh}\left(\frac{\beta k_0}{2}\right) \frac{1}{m_\pi} {\rm Im}\,\Pi^{11}_{\pi}(k)\vert_{k_0=\omega_k}. \label{R_bar_11} \end{aligned}\] For clarity of presentation, we start considering the correlator in the narrow-width approximation, in which the widths of the $\sigma$ and $\rho$ resonances are neglected. At one-loop order-see Fig. [\[Leading_kind\]](#Leading_kind){reference-type="ref" reference="Leading_kind"}-one can write: \[\Pi^{11}_{\pi}(k) = \Pi^{11}_{\pi}(k,\sigma) + \Pi^{11}_{\pi}(k,\rho), \label{Pi11-pi}\] with \[\Pi^{11}_{\pi}(k,u) =-i\int\frac{d^4l}{(2\pi)^4} \, L(k,l) \, D^{11}(l,m_l) \, D^{11}(u,m_u), \label{Pi11}\] for each loop ($\pi \sigma$ or $\pi \rho$), where $m_l = m_\pi$, $u=k-l$, and $m_u = m_\sigma$ for the $\pi\sigma$ loop and $m_u=m_\rho$ for the $\pi\rho$ loop; the propagators $D^{11}(l)$ are given by: \[D^{11}(l) = \frac{-1}{l^2-m^2_l + i\eta} + 2\pi i \, n(\omega_l)\, \delta(l^2-m^2_l), \label{D11}\] where $n(\omega_l)$ is the Bose-Einstein distribution given in Eq. ([\[BEdist\]](#BEdist){reference-type="ref" reference="BEdist"}); and \[L(k,l) =-\frac{g^2_\sigma m_\sigma^2}{4},\] for the $\pi\sigma$ loop, and \[\begin{aligned} L(k,l) &=&-\frac{g^2_\rho}{m_\rho^2} \, \Bigl\{ k^2 \left(k^2-m^2_\rho\right) + l^2 \left(l^2-m^2_\rho\right) \nonumber\\ &&-\, 2\left[ \left(k\cdot l\right) \, m^2_\rho + k^2 \,l^2 \right] \Bigr\}, \end{aligned}\] for the $\pi\rho$ loop. Using Eq. ([\[D11\]](#D11){reference-type="ref" reference="D11"}) in Eq. ([\[Pi11\]](#Pi11){reference-type="ref" reference="Pi11"}), one can perform the $l_0$ integration and, from the relation between ${\rm Im}\,\Pi^R$ and ${\rm Im}\,\Pi^{11}$ in Eq. ([\[R_bar_11\]](#R_bar_11){reference-type="ref" reference="R_bar_11"}), one obtains: The Dirac delta functions provide branch cuts in the $k_0$ - axis, identifying the different kinematic regions where the imaginary part of the pion self-energy acquires non-zero values. The relevant term for the in-medium decay width is the one proportional to $n(\omega_l)-n(\omega_u)$, which is due to the interactions of in-medium pions only and vanishes in vacuum. The relevant branch cut, the Landau cut, is the region $-[\boldsymbol{k}^2 + (m_u-m_\pi)^2]^{1/2} \leq k_0 \leq [\boldsymbol{k}^2 + (m_u-m_\pi)^2]^{1/2}$; it gives: \[\begin{aligned} \Gamma^{\rm nw}_\pi(\boldsymbol{k},T,u) &=& \frac{1}{16\pi\|\boldsymbol{k}\| m_\pi} \int^{\omega_-}_{\omega_+} d\omega \, L(\omega) \nonumber \\[0.25true cm] && \times \, \left[n(\omega)-n(\omega_k + \omega)\right], \label{gm_int} \end{aligned}\] where the superscript ${\rm nw}$ indicates that this expression is obtained in the narrow-width approximation, and \[\omega_\pm = \frac{R^2}{2m_\pi^2} \left(-\omega_k \pm \|\boldsymbol{k}\| \, W \right),\] with $R^2=2m_\pi^2-m_u^2$ and $W = \left(1-{4m_\pi^4}/{R^4}\right)^{1/2}$, and \[L({\omega}) = L(k_0=\omega_k,\boldsymbol{k},l_0 =-\omega,\|\boldsymbol{l}\|=\sqrt{\omega^2-m_\pi^2}).\] The physical interpretation of the Landau cut contributions is straightforward . During propagation of $\pi^+$, it may disappear by absorbing a thermalized $\pi^-$ from the medium to create a thermalized $\rho^0$ or $\sigma$. Again the $\pi^+$ may appear by absorbing a thermalized $\rho^0$ or $\sigma$ from the medium as well as by emitting a thermalized $\pi^-$. $n_l(1+n_u)$ and $n_u(1+n_l)$ are the corresponding statistical probabilities of the forward and inverse scattering respectively. By subtracting them, one gets the factor $(n_l-n_u)$ in Eq. ([\[gm_int\]](#gm_int){reference-type="ref" reference="gm_int"}). Next, to take into account the widths of the resonances, we use the spectral representations of the $\sigma$ and $\rho$ propagators in Eq. ([\[Pi11\]](#Pi11){reference-type="ref" reference="Pi11"})-see e.g. Refs. . This results in a folding of the narrow-width expression for $\Gamma_{\pi}(\boldsymbol{k},T,m_u)$: \[\Gamma_{\pi}(\boldsymbol{k},T,m_u) = \frac{1}{N_u} \int^{(m^+_u)^2}_{(m^-_u)^2} dM^2 \, \rho_u(M) \, \Gamma^{\rm nw}_\pi(\boldsymbol{k},T;M), \label{gm_mu}\] where $\Gamma^{\rm nw}(\boldsymbol{k},T;M)$ is the narrow-width expression given in Eq. ([\[gm_int\]](#gm_int){reference-type="ref" reference="gm_int"}), with $m_u$ replaced by $M$; $\rho_u(M)$ is the spectral density: \[\rho_u(M) = \frac{1}{\pi}{\rm Im}\left[\frac{-1}{M^2-m_u^2+iM\Gamma_u(M)}\right], \label{rho_u}\] and $N_u$ is the normalization \[N_u = \int^{(m^+_u)^2}_{(m^-_u)^2} dM^2\;\rho_u(M).\] $\Gamma_u(M)$, $u=\sigma,\rho$, are the spectral widths of the mesons: \[\begin{aligned} \Gamma_\sigma (M) &=& \frac{3g_\sigma^2m_\sigma^2}{32\pi M} \left(1-\frac{4m_\pi^2}{M^2}\right)^{1/2}, \label{s-width} \\[0.25true cm] \Gamma_\rho(M) &=& \frac{g_\rho^2M}{48\pi} \left(1-\frac{4m_\pi^2}{M^2}\right)^{3/2}. \label{r-width} \end{aligned}\] In the integration limits, $m^\pm_u = m_u \pm 2\,\Gamma^0_u$, with $\Gamma^0_\sigma = \Gamma_\sigma(M=m_\sigma)$ and $\Gamma^0_\rho =\Gamma_\rho(M=m_\rho)$. In view of Eq. ([\[Pi11-pi\]](#Pi11-pi){reference-type="ref" reference="Pi11-pi"}), the total pionic width is the sum \[\Gamma_\pi(\boldsymbol{k},T) = \Gamma_\pi(\boldsymbol{k},T,\rho) + \Gamma_\pi(\boldsymbol{k},T,\sigma). \label{totalGam}\] A quantity closely related to the thermal width is the mean free path: \[\lambda_\pi(\boldsymbol{k},T) = \frac{\|\boldsymbol{k}\|}{\omega_k \, \Gamma_\pi(\boldsymbol{k},T)}.\] Phenomenologically, analysis of this quantity is interesting for getting further insight in the propagation of pions in medium; in particular, it allows to know the values of typical pion momenta that are responsible for dissipation in medium, as we shall discuss in the next section. On the theoretical side, this quantity is interesting as $\lambda_\pi \equiv 1/\Gamma_\pi$ in the chiral limit, $m_\pi =0$; as such, the $m_\pi$ dependence of $\lambda_\pi$ provides insight on effects due to explicit chiral symmetry breaking . # Results and Discussion {#sec:num} Let us first consider the separate contributions of the $\pi\rho$ and $\pi\sigma$ loops to the imaginary part of the pion self-energy as a function of the invariant mass $m^2=k_0^2-\|\boldsymbol{k}\|^2$ for fixed values of temperature, $T = 0.150$ GeV, and three-momentum, $\|\boldsymbol{k}\| = 0.300$ GeV-results are shown in Fig. [\[fig:g_M\]](#fig:g_M){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:g_M"}. We have used here the following set of parameters: $m_\pi = 0.140$ GeV, $m_\rho = 0.770$ GeV, $\Gamma^0_\rho = 0.150$ GeV, and $g_\rho = 6$. The parameters for the $\sigma$ resonance are those of Set 1 in Table [1](#tab){reference-type="ref" reference="tab"}. In Fig. [\[fig:g_M\]](#fig:g_M){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:g_M"}, the dashed lines clearly indicate the sharp-ends of the Landau cuts at $m = m_\rho-m_\pi = 0.630$ GeV for the $\pi\rho$ loop (upper panel) and at $m = m_\sigma-m_\pi = 0.250$ GeV for the $\pi\sigma$ loop (lower panel). These sharp ends turn into smooth falloffs at large values of $m$ due to the folding with the spectral functions of the $\sigma$ and $\rho$ resonances. This large-$m$ effect does not affect $\Gamma_\pi(\boldsymbol{k},T)$ as this quantity is calculated at $m = m_\pi$. However, folding does affect $\Gamma_\pi(\boldsymbol{k},T)$ via a large effect induced by the $\pi\sigma$ channel; at $m = m_\pi$, folding decreases the contribution of the $\pi\sigma$ loop by $50$% as compared to the corresponding contribution in the narrow-width approximation. This does not come as a surprise, as the $\sigma$ resonance has a large width, while the width of the $\rho$ is not as large. One should also notice that numerically, the contribution of the $\rho$ resonance to $\Gamma_\pi$ is one order of magnitude larger than the one from the $\sigma$ loop at $m = m_\pi$. However, as we shall see shortly, this does not mean that one can neglect the $\sigma$ resonance altogether. Next, we consider the momentum dependence of thermal width and of the mean free path for a fixed temperature. Results are shown in Fig. [\[fig:gm_pvec\]](#fig:gm_pvec){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:gm_pvec"}. First of all, one sees that the effects of folding are not big when considering the joint contributions of the $\pi\rho$ and $\pi\sigma$ loops-this is due to the combined facts that the width of $\rho$ has only a mild effect and the dominance of the $\pi\rho$ loop over the $\pi\sigma$ loop. One also sees that the value of $\lambda_\pi$ is very big for momenta $0.100$ GeV $\le\|\boldsymbol{k}\| \le 0.300$ GeV, but for $\|\boldsymbol{k}\| \ge 0.400$ GeV the value of mean free path varies very little, reaching an average value of $\lambda_\pi \simeq 25$ fm. In a typical relativistic heavy ion collision at RHIC, the size of the hadronic systems produced after freeze-out varies between $20$ fm and $40$ fm. Therefore, scattering processes with center of mass momenta larger than $\|\boldsymbol{k}\| = 0.400$ GeV are those responsible for dissipation in the medium, at least for the chosen temperature $T = 0.15$ GeV. In Fig. [\[fig:gm_T\]](#fig:gm_T){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:gm_T"} we present results for the temperature dependence of the thermal width (upper panel) and of the mean free path (lower panel) for a fixed value of momentum $\|\boldsymbol{k}\|=0.300$ GeV. Clearly, folding does not affect much the temperature dependence of these quantities; the reason for this is the same as for their momentum dependence: the dominance of the contribution of the $\pi\rho$ loop over that from $\pi\sigma$ loop. The figure also shows that only temperatures larger than $T = 0.120$ GeV give a mean free path smaller than the typical size of the hadronic system produced in a typical heavy ion collision at RHIC. Of course, the viscosity of the pion gas is determined not only by the value of $\Gamma_\pi$ (or $\lambda_\pi$), which is given basically by the $\pi-\pi$ interaction; it depends also on the momentum distribution of the in-medium pions, which is determined by the temperature in the Bose-Einstein distribution. In Fig. [\[fig:eta_T\_rs\]](#fig:eta_T_rs){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:eta_T_rs"} we present the results for the temperature dependence of $\eta$. Interestingly we see that the $\pi\rho$ and $\pi\sigma$ contributions play a complementary role in $\eta$ to be non-divergent in the higher ($T > 0.100$ GeV) and lower ($T<0.100$ GeV) temperature regions respectively. The lesson here is that consideration of both resonances in $\pi-\pi$ scattering is strictly necessary to obtain a smooth, non divergent $\eta$ for temperatures below the critical temperature, $T_c \simeq 0.175$ GeV. Moreover, though $\eta$ at very low temperatures ($T<0.020$ GeV) tends to become very large in the narrow-width approximation (upper panel), this trend disappears after taking into account the the widths of the resonances (lower panel). We have compared our results with the earlier results in Kubo approach by Fernandez-Fraile et al. and Lang et al. , along with previous results obtained by some of us in a KT approach. In the KT approaches of Refs. , the predicted $\eta$ is a monotonically increasing function of temperature in the temperature range 0.100 GeV $< T <$ 0.175 GeV and vanishing baryon chemical potential ($\mu=0$). The results of Lang et al. obtained with the Kubo approach indicate an $\eta$ decreasing in that same temperature range. Similar trends are obtained by Fernadez-Fraile et al. with the Kubo-approach without unitarization of $\Gamma$, but the trend is reversed when dynamically generated (through unitarization) $\rho$ and $\sigma$ resonances come into play. Our calculations, based on an effective Lagrangian taking into account the low-mass $\sigma$ and $\rho$ resonances, found a similar trend of an increasing $\eta$ with $T$ for $T > 0.100$ GeV, although smaller in magnitude and slope, lending support to other calculations which take into account those resonances. Now we concentrate on the sensitivity of our predictions associated with phenomenological uncertainty of the parameters of the $\sigma$ resonance. The results presented above have been obtained by choosing (arbitrarily) the parameters of Set 1 shown in Table [1](#tab){reference-type="ref" reference="tab"}. Although longstanding controversies about the properties of this resonance seem to be settling to a consensus , recent literature still shows conflicting values for those properties, as one can see in Table [1](#tab){reference-type="ref" reference="tab"}. We have explored the impact of the different values for the $\sigma$ parameters; the results are shown in Fig. [\[eta_T\_band\]](#eta_T_band){reference-type="ref" reference="eta_T_band"}. As can be seen, all sets predict $\eta$ to be small, although parameter sets with smaller widths predict smaller $\eta$'s at low temperatures; for $T > 0.1$ GeV, all sets predict essentially the same result.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-22T02:11:17', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5392', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5392'}
null	null
null	null
# Introduction Atomic clocks based on coherent population trapping (CPT) resonance with a vertical-cavity surface-emitting laser (VCSEL) have attracted attention as a means of fabricating very small atomic references, such as chip-scale atomic clocks (CSACs). CPT atomic clocks are in great demand for many applications, such as telecommunications, navigation systems, and synchronization of networks. Such atomic clocks are requrired for their high frequency stability, small volume and low power consumption. In particular, short-term frequency stability is an important parameter. Short-term frequency stability, described as the Allan standard deviation $\sigma_y(\tau)$, is estimated as \[\sigma _y (\tau) \propto \frac{\Delta f}{f_0}\frac{1}{\mbox{\it SNR}} \tau^{-1/2} \label{eq:short}\] where $\Delta f$ is the resonance linewidth, $f_0$ is the resonance frequency, and $\mbox{\it SNR}$ is the signal-to-noise ratio. Contrast, which is used as a measure of $\mbox{\it SNR}$, is defined as the amplitude of CPT resonance over the background signal level. Therefore, short-term stability is determined from contrast and linewidth. A high-contrast CPT resonance can easily be obtained in a high-intensity laser field; however, the resonance linewidth broadens as a result of the power broadening effect . It is difficult to both enhance contrast and sharpen the linewidth simultaneously. To resolve this issue, a number of methods have been developed (e.g. double-lambda CPT , push-pull pumping ). These methods increase the population of the clock transition through using the unique polarization of the incident laser beam to enhance the amplitude of CPT resonance signal. For example, the double-lambda CPT is generated by exciting with two lin$\perp$lin polarized lasers. And, push-pull pumping is a method to excite atoms using laser light of orthogonal linear polarizations with the time-delayed optical components. These optical systems requires several optics (e.g. beam splitter, mirrors, retarders) to generate the unique polarization. Therefore, because the optical system is complex and occupies a large volume, it is difficult to use these methods for CPT atomic clocks requiring small volumes such as CSACs. In contrast, dispersion detection methods have been reported to decrease the background signal level. This method regulates the light incident on a photo detector by selecting the light contributing to the resonance to reduce background signal. Recently, the method was applied in the field of high sensitive magnetometry. And, it was reported that by decreasing the background signal level it improved the Allan deviation by one order of magnitude in comparison with absorption detection employing pulsed optical pumped atomic clocks. The dispersion signal can be obtained by simply placing a polarizer or retarder in front of a photo detector along the same axis. As the dispersion detection is a simple optical system, it enables enhancements in the frequency stability of small volume CPT atomic clocks. In this paper, we focus on the Faraday effect in CPT and propose a method based on crossed polarizers for observing high-contrast CPT. Firstly, we calculate the Faraday rotation in CPT under a linearly polarized light field (lin$\parallel$lin) using the two pairs of a $\Lambda$ system model. The CPT lineshape can be estimated by calculating the Faraday rotation angle. Both the resonance amplitude and linewidth behavior of the magnetic field are estimated. Secondly, we show the results of an experiment using a $^{133}$Cs gas cell and the D$_1$-line VCSEL. The contrast and linewidth were measured by varying the magnetic field and the relative transmission angle of the polarizers. A comparison of the experimental and calculated results showed that they had the same tendency, and the difference between experiment and calculation was no more than 20 %. Finally, on the basis of the measurement and calculation data, we determine the optimal condition for enhancing the short-term stability of CPT atomic clocks. # Theory ## Magneto optical effect under CPT resonance Faraday rotation is a magneto-optical phenomenon, that is, an interaction between light and a magnetic field in a medium. The resonant Faraday rotation is known as the Macaluso-Corbino effect. Though the Faraday rotation in CPT is classified as such an effect, the way to calculate it in CPT has not been reported yet. In this section, we describe the Faraday rotation in CPT in a lin$\parallel$lin light field. Figure [\[fig:scheme\]](#fig:scheme){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:scheme"} (a) shows the excitation scheme using a lin$\parallel$lin light field on the $^{133}$Cs-D$_1$ line. In CPT phenomenon under lin$\parallel$lin light field, two schemes can be formed with two pairs of ground-state hyperfine sublevels simultaneously: $\|F=3,m_F=1\rangle$,$\|F=4,m_F=-1\rangle$ indicated by the label $\Lambda_a$ ,and $\|F=3,m_F=-1\rangle$,$\|F=4,m_F=1\rangle$ indicated label $\Lambda_b$ coupled with the common excited states $\|F'=3,m_F=0\rangle$ or $\|F'=4,m_F=0\rangle$. Therefore, four wave waves that result from a combination of two $\Lambda$ scheme and circularly polarization contribute the CPT phenomena under lin$\parallel$lin light field. Figure [\[fig:scheme\]](#fig:scheme){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:scheme"} (b) shows a simple $\Lambda$-type three level system of the $\Lambda_a$ scheme. Here, the energy eigenstates $\|1\rangle$ and $\|2\rangle$ correspond to two ground states $\|F=3,m=-1\rangle$ and $\|F=4,m=1\rangle$, and the excited state $\|3\rangle$ correspond to $\|F'=3,m=0\rangle$ or $\|F'=4,m=0\rangle$. Assuming equal Rabi frequencies $\Omega = \Omega_p = \Omega_c$ and decay rates $\Gamma_{31} =\Gamma_{32}$, the line shape for CPT resonance is Lorentzian. In the presence of a magnetic field (C axis direction), the two resonances shift in opposite frequency directions because of the Zeeman effect. The Zeeman shift of the two pairs in a weak magnetic field ($<$ 50 mT) is as follows: \[f_{a,b} = \\ f_0 \pm \\ \frac{2g_{I}^{}\mu_{B}^{}}{h}B+\frac{15g_{J}^{2}\mu_{B}^{2}}{32f_{0}h^2}B^2 \label{eq:zeeman-shift}\] where $B$ is the magnetic field, and $f_0$ is the hyperfine splitting frequency of the ground states in the absence of the magnetic field, $g_I$ is the nuclear $g$-factor, $g_J$ is the Landé $g$-factor, $\mu_B$ is the Bohr magneton, and $h$ is Planck's constant. The absorption index $\alpha$ and refractive index $n_+,n_-$ of the four light waves as a function of the normalized frequency detuning $d$ (= $\delta/\gamma$) is shown in Fig. [\[fig:spectrum_abs_ref\]](#fig:spectrum_abs_ref){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:spectrum_abs_ref"}. All functions of absorption and refractive indices are shown in Table [1](#tab:abs_and_ref){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:abs_and_ref"}, where $\chi_0$ represents the amplitude of linear susceptibility, $\delta$ the frequency detuning of ground state, and $\gamma$ the resonance linewidth (at half width at half maximum). The absorption index is zero at the center of the CPT resonance because the atoms do not interact with the light when the atoms fall into the dark state. The absorptions $\sigma^-$ and $\sigma^+$ vanish simultaneously under CPT resonance. Therefore, the absorption of left-circular-polarized light $\alpha_+$ equals that of right-circular-polarized light $\alpha_-$. From the Kramers-Kronig relation, the refractive index is an odd function of frequency detuning because the absorption index is even function. If $\delta_p$ and $\delta_c$ are both much less than $\gamma_f$, we obtain $\delta_p=-\delta_c =\delta/2$. Because $\delta_p$ and $\delta_c$ have opposite signs and the dispersion spectra are odd functions of the detuning $\delta$, the refractive index $n_+$ and $n_-$ have opposite signs ($n_+=-n_-$). The refractive indices for the two schemes $n_{\Lambda_a}$ and $n_{\Lambda_b}$ also have opposite signs ($n_{\Lambda_a}=-n_{\Lambda_b}$), because the direction of the circular-polarized light $\sigma^+$ and $\sigma^-$ is changed in the $\Lambda_a$ and $\Lambda_b$ schemes. ## Crossed Polarizers method The short-term stability of laser-pumped vapor cell atomic clocks is often limited by a combination of light source AM noise and FM-AM conversion noise on the atomic absorption. The AM noise is caused by the power fluctuation of the light source. And FM-AM conversion noise is caused by the effect that laser frequency fluctuations have on the absorption. It is known that these noises are proportional to the background signal level (DC level) of the photo detector. Therefore, to enhance the short-term stability of CPT atomic clocks, it is necessary to reduce the DC level. The crossed polarizers method is a way of measuring the birefringence of the optical medium. It has high sensitivity for birefringence detection because it suppresses the background signal level. The schematic optical layout is shown in Fig. [\[fig:schematic-cp\]](#fig:schematic-cp){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:schematic-cp"}. Two linear polarizers are placed on both sides of the gas cell, and the transmission axes are set nearly orthogonal to each other. The first polarizer and the second polarizer are called the polarizer and analyzer, respectively. The transmission axes between the polarizer and analyzer are defined by the relative angle $\theta$. In this paper, $\theta$ is defined as zero when the polarizers are orthogonal to each other. Here, let the Faraday rotation angle induced by the gas cell be denoted $\phi$; the transmitted light $I_s$ can be written as \[\begin{aligned} \frac{I_s}{I_0}=&\frac{1}{4}(e^{-2\pi\alpha_+ l/\lambda}-e^{-2\pi\alpha_-l/\lambda})^2\\ &+e^{-2\pi(\alpha_+ +\alpha_-) l /\lambda}\sin^2 (\theta + \phi )\\ & \because \phi = \pi(n_+-n_-)\frac{l}{\lambda}\\ \end{aligned} \label{eq:dichroism_birefringence}\]where $I_0$ is the incident light intensity, $l$ the sample length, and $\lambda$ wavelength of light. In general, the two terms in Eq. ([\[eq:dichroism_birefringence\]](#eq:dichroism_birefringence){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:dichroism_birefringence"}) give comparable contributions to the forward-scattering signal. The first term refers to the differential absorption of the $\sigma^+$ and $\sigma^-$ components (circular dichroism) and the second term to the differential dispersion. Because $\alpha_+$ equals $\alpha_-$ at CPT resonance under lin$\parallel$lin field, there is no difference in the absorption between $\sigma^+$ and $\sigma^-$. Therefore, the dichroism term vanishes at CPT resonance. Moreover, because the absorption coefficient $\chi_0 l / \lambda$ is small, taking into account that the conventional resonance contrast is no more than 10% , we can assume that $e^{-2\pi(\alpha_+ +\alpha_-) l /\lambda}\approx 1$. Eq.([\[eq:dichroism_birefringence\]](#eq:dichroism_birefringence){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:dichroism_birefringence"}) can be rewritten \[\begin{aligned} I_s=I_0\sin^2 (\theta + \phi ). \end{aligned}\] The refractive index under CPT resonance is the same as the resonant Faraday effect. The Faraday rotation angle $\phi$ is wrriten as \[\begin{aligned} &\phi=\pi(n_+-n_-)\frac{l}{\lambda}\\ &= \frac{\pi\chi_0l}{\lambda}\Bigl(\frac{(\delta-\frac{2g_I\mu_B B}{\hbar})\gamma}{(\delta-\frac{2g_I\mu_B B}{\hbar})^2+\gamma^2}-\frac{(\delta+\frac{2g_I\mu_B B}{\hbar})\gamma}{(\delta+\frac{2g_I\mu_B B}{\hbar})^2+\gamma^2}\Bigr), \end{aligned} \label{eq:faraday_rotation}\] and by using a normalized detuning $d \equiv \delta/\gamma$ and normalized Zeeman shift $b \equiv (2g_I\mu_B B/\hbar)/\gamma$, Eq.([\[eq:faraday_rotation\]](#eq:faraday_rotation){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:faraday_rotation"}) can be simplifiled into \[\phi = \frac{\pi\chi_0\l}{\lambda}\frac{2 b(1+b^2-d^2)}{(1+b^2+d^2)^2-4b^2d^2}. \label{eq:n-faraday-cpt}\] ## CPT resonance characteristics with crossed polarizers method The polarization of wavelength components contributing CPT is rotated while passing through the cell. On the other hand, the polarization of wavelength components not contributing CPT is not rotated. Therefore, total transmitted light intensity $I$ can be expressed as \[\begin{aligned} I&=I_s + I_{nc} \sin^2(\theta)\\ &=I_c\sin^2 (\theta + \phi)+I_{nc} \sin^2(\theta) \end{aligned} \label{eq:i_trans}\] where $I_c$ is the sum of light intensities contributing to CPT, and $I_{nc}$ is the sum of light intensities not contributing to CPT. Taking into account that the conventional resonance contrast is no more than 10%, the relation between $I_c$ and $I_{nc}$ is $I_c < I_{nc}$. Therefore, the DC level is dominated by the relative angle $\theta$. When the relative angle $\theta$ is set larger than the phase shift $\phi$, which enables us to ignore the phase shift $\phi$, the DC level $I_{dc}$ is given as \[I_\mathrm{\it dc} \approx I_c \sin^2(\theta) + I_{nc} \sin^2(\theta). \label{eq:i_dc}\] And the resonance amplitude $I_s$ is \[I_s \approx \frac{\partial I_c}{\partial \theta} \phi = I_c \sin(2\theta)\phi \label{eq:i_s}\] From Eq. ([\[eq:i_s\]](#eq:i_s){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:i_s"}), as the resonance amplitude is maximized by setting the relative angle $\theta$ to $\pi/4$. However, since the DC level increases with $\theta$ (from Eq. ([\[eq:i_dc\]](#eq:i_dc){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:i_dc"})), the highest contrast resonance can be obtained around $\theta \approx 0$. When the relative angle $\theta$ is close to zero, the approximation that leads to Eq. ([\[eq:i_s\]](#eq:i_s){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:i_s"}) cannot be made because it relies on theta being much larger than $\phi$. Instead, from Eq. ([\[eq:i_trans\]](#eq:i_trans){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:i_trans"}) and using a small rotation approximation, the resonance amplitude $I_s$ is given as \[I_s \simeq I_c \phi^2. \label{eq:i_s2}\] Next, we calculate the spectrum characteristics of the transmitted light. Figure [\[fig:lineshape-crossed polarizer\]](#fig:lineshape-crossed polarizer){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:lineshape-crossed polarizer"} shows the resonance lineshape calculated from Eq. ([\[eq:n-faraday-cpt\]](#eq:n-faraday-cpt){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:n-faraday-cpt"}) and Eq. ([\[eq:i_s2\]](#eq:i_s2){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:i_s2"}) when $\theta$ is set so as to minimize the DC level. It is clear that the both the resonance amplitude and linewidth increase with increasing normalized magnetic field $b$. The resonance amplitude $I_{pp}$, which is defined as the maximum change in the $I_s$ as a function of detuning, can be gotten from Eq. ([\[eq:n-faraday-cpt\]](#eq:n-faraday-cpt){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:n-faraday-cpt"}) and Eq. ([\[eq:i_s2\]](#eq:i_s2){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:i_s2"}): \[I_{pp} = I_c\frac{\pi^2 l^2\chi_0^2}{\lambda^2}\Big(\frac{(b^2+\sqrt{b^2+1}-1)(\sqrt{b^2+1}+2)}{2b(b^2+1)}\Big)^2 \label{eq:i_pp}\] Figure [\[fig:signal-magnetic\]](#fig:signal-magnetic){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:signal-magnetic"} plots the resonance amplitude as a function of the magnetic field using Eq. ([\[eq:i_pp\]](#eq:i_pp){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:i_pp"}). In the weak magnetic field ($b\ \leq 0.2$), the resonance amplitude is small because the Faraday rotation is small. In the range of $0.2< b \leq 1.16$, the resonance amplitude significantly increases with increasing magnetic field. The maximum resonance amplitude is obtained at $b= 1.16$. For magnetic fields $b$ over 1.16, the resonance amplitude tends to decrease because the two resonances separate from each other. Figure [\[fig:linewidth-magnetic\]](#fig:linewidth-magnetic){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:linewidth-magnetic"} shows the linewidth with the crossed polarizers method $\gamma_{cp}$ normalized by the conventional linewidth $\gamma$ as a function of normalized magnetic field strength. The polynomial approximation of the normalized linewidth $\gamma_{cp}/\gamma$ is \[\gamma_{cp}/\gamma \approx \sum_{n=0}a_n b^{2n} \label{eq:gamma_cp}\] where $a_n$ are constant values shown in Table [2](#tab:an){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:an"} in the $n$ range from 0 to 3. The linewidth with the proposed method increases with increasing magnetic field. Moreover, since the linewidth is the sum of even functions and has a positive second derivative, the linewidth has a minimum value in the absence of the magnetic field. The minimum linewidth is the conventional one of 36.8%. The linewidth of the proposed method is equal to that of the conventional one at a $b$ of 1.27. From Fig. ([\[fig:signal-magnetic\]](#fig:signal-magnetic){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:signal-magnetic"}) and Fig. ([\[fig:linewidth-magnetic\]](#fig:linewidth-magnetic){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:linewidth-magnetic"}), we can obtain the relation between $b\|_{I_{pp}=\max}$ and $b\|_{\gamma_{cp}/\gamma=1}$: \[b\|_{I_{pp}=\max}<b\|_{\gamma_{cp}/\gamma=1} \label{eq:b-inequality}\] Thus, the linewidth of the proposed method is narrower than that with the conventional method in the magnetic field range from 0 to $b\|_{I_{pp}=\max}$. # Experimental setup Figure [\[fig:setup\]](#fig:setup){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:setup"} shows the experimental setup of the proposed observation method. The two polarizers were near-infrared sheet polarizers. A parallel linear beam (lin$\parallel$lin light field) was incident on the gas cell. The analyzer selected the optical polarization of wavelength components incident on the photodiode. The photodiode signal was connected to the oscilloscope. A single-mode VCSEL fabricated by Ricoh Company, Ltd was used as the laser source. The 894.6 nm wavelength of the VCSEL excites $^{133}$Cs at the D$_1$-line. The VCSEL was driven by a DC injection current using a bias T and was modulated at 4.6 GHz using an analog signal generator to generate the first-order sidebands around the laser carrier. The absorption profile of the Cs-D$_1$ line using the VCSEL modulated at 4.6 GHz is shown in Fig. [\[fig:absorption\]](#fig:absorption){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:absorption"}. Since the incident light contains first-order sidebands and high-order sidebands, the plot shows some of the absorption lines. The two center absorption lines are excited by the first-order sidebands. Moreover, the minimum and second minimum peak correspond to two excited levels: $\|F'=4\rangle$ and $\|F'=3\rangle$. The frequency difference between the two excited states is wide enough that we can select either $\|F'=3\rangle$ or $\|F'=4\rangle$ as the absorption line. In this experiment, we selected $\|F'=3\rangle$ as the excited state to stabilize the wavelength of the VCSEL. A Pyrex gas cell containing a mixture of $^{133}$Cs atoms and Ne buffer gas at a pressure of 4.0 kPa was used. The gas cell was cylindrical, it had a diameter of 20 mm and optical length of 22.5 mm. The gas cell temperature was maintained at 42.0 $^\circ$C. The gas cell and Helmholz coil were covered with a magnetic shield to prevent an external magnetic field from affecting the magnetic field inside the cell. The internal magnetic field of the gas cell was created by the Helmholz coil. The internal magnetic field was calibrated using the frequency difference between magnetic-field sensitive and insensitive transitions by using $\rm \sigma$-$\rm \sigma$ excitation. The axis of the magnetic field was set to be parallel to the direction of the laser light (C-axis direction). # Experimental Results and Discussion ## Line shape of CPT resonance Figure [\[fig:lineshape\]](#fig:lineshape){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:lineshape"} shows the observed CPT resonance with the crossed polarizers method. A good reduction in DC level was achieved because the transmission axis of the analyzer was optimized. Considering the transmitted light intensity, we estimate that the peak rotation angle is few tens of milli-radians. Since the signal was greater than the DC level, the conventional contrast, which was simply defined as the signal over the DC level, exceeded 100 %. In this paper, contrast is defined so as not to exceed 100% as follows. \[\mbox{Contrast} := \frac{\mbox{Signal}}{\mbox{Signal} + \mbox{DC level}} \label{eq:fhfs}\] Although the DC level was suppressed with the crossed polarizers method, weak light leakage was picked up by the photo detector. Since the leakage could not be reduced below the DC level by varying the relative angle $\theta$, the leakage was dependent on the extinction ratios of the polarizers. Owing to the DC level reduction, the proposed method yielded a contrast of 88.4% with under a static magnetic field of 93 $\mu$T. Since the conventional contrast was 3.3 % under a static magnetic field of 5.0 $\mu$T when using the neutral density filter instead of the analyzer, the crossed polarizers method obtained about 25 times better contrast than the conventional method did. In addition, the linewidth obtained with the crossed polarizers method was 1.15 kHz, which was about twice as narrow as the conventional method's value of 2.15 kHz. This result means that the resonance with the crossed polarizers method has not only higher contrast but also a narrower linewidth. ## Contrast as a function of the relative angle $\theta$ Figure [\[fig:DClevel trans angle\]](#fig:DClevel trans angle){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:DClevel trans angle"} shows the DC level as a function of the relative angle $\theta$. The square dot is the measured data, and the solid line is the fitting curve calculated from Eq. ([\[eq:i_dc\]](#eq:i_dc){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:i_dc"}). The relative angle $\theta$ giving the minimum DC level is shifted from 0$^\circ$. This shift is caused by misalignment between the scale of the polarizer's mount and the transmission axis of polarizers. The extinction ratio of the polarizers was estimated to be about 40 dB. Figure [\[fig:Signal trans angle\]](#fig:Signal trans angle){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:Signal trans angle"} shows the signal of the resonance as a function of the relative angle $\theta$. The square dot is the measured data, and the solid line is the fitting curve calculated from Eq. ([\[eq:i_s\]](#eq:i_s){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:i_s"}). The calculated curve is in good agreement with the experimental data. By comparing the signal and DC level, it can be seen that the behavior of the signal was different from that of the DC level. Therefore, this is proof that the polarization of the wavelength components contributing to CPT is rotated. Figure [\[fig:contrast trans angle\]](#fig:contrast trans angle){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:contrast trans angle"} shows the contrast as a function of the relative angle $\theta$ from the measurements. Since the signal has a high value despite the DC level reduction, the contrast significantly increased near 0$^\circ$. A resonance contrast over 10% was obtained in the range from-15 to 5$^\circ$. ## Characteristics as a function of magnetic field Figure [\[fig:SD magnetic field\]](#fig:SD magnetic field){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:SD magnetic field"} shows the signal and DC level as a function of magnetic field. The relative angle $\theta$ was optimized in order to maximize contrast. In weak magnetic fields ($<$ 15 $\mu$T), the signal was so small that we could not observe CPT resonance, and the maximum magnetic field (93 $\mu$T) was limited by the current source output supplying the Helmholz coil. The signal linearly increased with increasing magnetic field. On the other hand, the DC level was constant regardless of the change in the magnetic field. The results are evidence that the Faraday rotation affected only the wavelength components contributing to CPT. The solid line is a fitting curve of Eq. ([\[eq:i_pp\]](#eq:i_pp){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:i_pp"}). The experimental signal has the same tendency as the theoretical curve. Figure [\[fig:contrast magnetic field\]](#fig:contrast magnetic field){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:contrast magnetic field"} shows the contrast estimated from the measurement results in Fig. [\[fig:SD magnetic field\]](#fig:SD magnetic field){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:SD magnetic field"}. The contrast increased with increasing magnetic field. We assume that nearly 100 % contrast can be obtained in a larger magnetic field. The DC level is independent of the magnetic field, and this indicates that the resonance contrast has reached a peak value. From Eq. ([\[eq:i_pp\]](#eq:i_pp){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:i_pp"}), it is estimated that the maximum contrast of 94.0% can be obtained at 224 $\mu$T. The linewidth as a function of the magnetic field is shown in Fig.[\[fig:linewidth magnetic field\]](#fig:linewidth magnetic field){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:linewidth magnetic field"}. The linewidth broadened with increasing magnetic field and was approximately proportional to it. The linewidth obtained with the crossed polarizers method is less than 2.15 kHz of the linewidth with the conventional excitation method in this range of magnetic field. At a magnetic field of 15 $\mu$T, the narrowest linewidth obtained was 760 Hz, which is about three times narrower than the conventional one. The solid line in Fig. [\[fig:linewidth magnetic field\]](#fig:linewidth magnetic field){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:linewidth magnetic field"} is calculated data based on Eq. ([\[eq:gamma_cp\]](#eq:gamma_cp){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:gamma_cp"}). The difference between the measurement and calculation is no more than 20 %. Figure [\[fig:figure of merit magnetic field\]](#fig:figure of merit magnetic field){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:figure of merit magnetic field"} shows the figure of merit (FoM) as a function of magnetic field. Since short-term stability is determined by the contrast and linewidth from Eq. ([\[eq:short\]](#eq:short){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:short"}), the FoM is defined as follows. \[\mbox{FoM} := \frac{f_0}{\Delta f}\cdot \mbox{Contrast} \label{eq:fhfs}\] In small magnetic fields ($<$ 40 $\mu$T), the FoM increased because the increase in contrast was dominant. However, in large magnetic fields ($>$ 60 $\mu$T), the FoM decreased with broadening linewidth. This shows that the FoM of the CPT resonance has a peak value with respect to the magnetic field. In this experiment, the maximum value of FoM was obtained at 55 $\mu$T, and this value is 58 times better than the conventional one. # Conclusion We developed a new method based on crossed polarizers for observing high-contrast CPT resonance. Firstly, we calculated the Faraday rotation in CPT under a lin$\parallel$lin light field by using two pairs of $\Lambda$ system models. The calculated results indicated that the resonance amplitude has a peak value with respect to the magnetic field, and the resonance linewidth increases with increasing magnetic field. The minimum linewidth obtained with the crossed polarizers method is 36.8% that of the conventional method in the absence of the magnetic field. Secondly, we measured the resonance characteristics with crossed polarizers method using a $^{133}$Cs gas cell and the D$_1$-line VCSEL. It was shown that the background signal level of the photodetector is suppressed by the crossed polarizers method and a high contrast resonance can be obtained. As the relative angle $\theta$ and magnetic field were optimized, the observed resonance had a contrast of 88.4% and linewidth of 1.15 kHz. The measurement data was in good agreement with the theoretical data and the difference between experiment and theory was no more than 20%. Finally, we investigated the optimal conditions for enhancing short-term stability. The figure of merit has a peak value with respect to magnetic field. By optimizing the relative angle $\theta$ of the analyzer and magnetic field, the figure of merit was 58 times better than the conventional one. Since a high contrast and narrow linewidth resonance can be obtained with such a simple optical system, the crossed polarizers method is an attractive means of enhancing the frequency stability of CPT atomic clocks.	{'timestamp': '2014-12-16T02:11:14', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5566', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5566'}
# Introduction Long ago Brinn made an appeal for introducing algebraic coding theory in the undergraduate curriculum. This goal is more urgent now than ever with the ubiquity of computers and communication devices. This article is still worth reading though it was written thirty years ago. The aim of this note is to write Hamming's paper in symbolic form. Hamming used the deceptively simple idea of interleaving parity check which helps to locate and hence correct errors. This note will enable readers to move on to the now classic books by V. Pless and Berlekamp. Hamming's classic paper is difficult to read because the mathematics is written in words and tables. This was because the audience of mathematicians and engineers in those days who worked in applied fields preferred to avoid symbolic notation and algebra as far as possible. This situation has completely changed due to various reforms in the curriculum. In the books by Birkhoff and Pless, a more sophisticated approach is used where the group property of the codes is emphasized as this leads to the more recent developments. The parity check bits are not interleaving but an identity matrix appended to the end. Our simple minded approach of translating Hamming's paper into symbolic form is to enable undergraduate students to understand the elegance and simplicity of Hamming's construction which is a mix of engineering thinking and mathematical thinking. The concepts of interleaving and parity check have their origin in engineering. The idea of coding belongs more to pure mathematics. Understanding Hamming's paper is essential for reading the book "From error correcting codes through sphere packings to simple groups\" by Thomas M. Thompson which is a delightful mix of history and pedagogy. This would enable undergraduate students to appreciate the unity of pure and applied mathematics, interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary research through this concrete example given in historical form. It would also enable them to take the more standard route for pursuing further developments in algebraic coding theory. # Hamming's construction Parity bits are an engineering trick to detect errors in a string of $0$'s and $1$'s. In its simplest form the number of $1$'s is counted and then computed modulo 2. The answer would be $0$ if the number of $1$'s is even and $1$ if the number of $1$'s is odd. This is appended to one end of the binary string. In Hamming's case he interleaves the parity check bits in a clever way for error correction. This is a conceptual leap beyond error detection which was well known then. Let $m$ be the number of information bits, $k$ the number of error correction bits and $n=m+k$. Since any $k$ bits represent numbers from $0$ to $2^k-1$, we need the condition that $2^k-1\ge n=m+k$. Hence if a single error has occurred, one can determine its position from the $k$-bit binary representation of its position number (Hamming calls it Checking number.) Hamming interleaves the $k$ check bits in positions $x_{2^0}, x_{2^1},\cdots x_{2^{k-1}}$. He places the $m=n-k$ information bits at the remaining positions. Hamming analyzed the case of $(7,4)$ code with the rate $\frac{4}{7}\sim 0.571$ in the modern notation. In the notation given above, $k=3$, $m=4$ and $n=7$. The $k$ check bits are calculated as follows. At the encoding end, $x_1=x_{2^0}$ is determined by the partial parity check equation \[x_1+x_3+x_5+x_7+\cdots =0\] Notice that all these bits have their position numbers $1, 3, 5, 7 \cdots$ which when they are written in their binary representation have the least significant bit equal to 1. Hence if the single error has occurred in any one of the odd positions, then at the decoding end, the partial parity check equation will give \[x_1+x_3+x_5+x_7+\cdots =1\] Next, $x_2$ is determined (at the encoding end) by the equation \[x_2+x_3+x_6+x_7+\cdots =0\] Notice that the binary representations ($10, 11, 110, 111, \cdots$) of the position numbers of $2, 3, 6, 7, \cdots$ have $1$ as their second bit from the right and $2$ is the smallest of these numbers. Hence if the single error has occurred in a position whose second bit is $1$, then at the decoding end, we would get \[x_2+x_3+x_6+x_7+\cdots =1\] Similarly $x_{2^2},\dots x_{2^{k-1}}$ are determined by the corresponding partial parity check equations. Notice that $1, 2, 4, 8, \cdots, 2^{k-1}$ ($1, 10, 100, 1000, \cdots 100\cdots 0$)are the smallest numbers having $1$ in the first, second, third, fourth, $\cdots k^{th}$ positions in their binary representations. Thus the position number of the error bit is determined bit by bit from right to left. The least significant bit is zero if (1)is true and $1$ if (2) is true. Similarly the previous bit is zero if (3) is true and $1$ if (4) is true and so on. Once the position of the error bit is found, the bit can be corrected as a bit can take only two values: $0$ or $1$. At this point we would encourage the reader to look at the classic paper of Hamming paper which is freely down loadable from the Internet and then read the standard books listed below. # Pedagogical and historical comments uses symbolic notation for bits with parity check matrix but the idea of interleaving is missed. also does not talk about interleaving parity check bits. and discuss Hamming codes as a special case of group codes.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-24T02:05:57', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5919', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5919'}
# Introduction {#sec:intro} consider the discrete-time memoryless Poisson channel whose input $x$ is in the set $\Reals_0^+$ of nonnegative reals and whose output $y$ is in the set $\Integers_0^+$ of nonnegative integers. Conditional on the input $X=x$, the output $Y$ has a Poisson distribution of mean $(\lambda+x)$, where $\lambda\ge 0$ is called the "dark current" and is a constant that does not depend on the input $X$. We denote the Poisson distribution of mean \[\_ \]\Poisson_\[ With this notation the channel law $W(\cdot\|\cdot)$ is \]\label{eq:channel_law} W(y\|x) = \Poisson_{\lambda+x}(y),\quad x\in\Reals_0^+,y\in\Integers_0^+.\[ This channel models pulse-amplitude modulated optical communication where the transmitter sends light signals in coherent states (which are usually produced using laser devices), and where the receiver employs direct detection (i.e., photon counting) . The channel input $x$ describes the expected number of signal photons (i.e., photons that come from the input light signal rather than noise) to be detected in the pulse duration, and is proportional to the light signal's intensity,[^1] the pulse duration, the channel's transmissivity, and the detector's efficiency; see for details. The channel output $y$ is the actual number of photons that are detected in the pulse duration. The dark current $\lambda$ is the average number of extraneous counts that appear in $y$. We note that, although the name "dark current" is traditionally used in the Poisson-channel literature, these extraneous counts usually include both the detector's "dark clicks" (which are where the name "dark current" comes from) and photons in background radiation. We impose an average-power constraint[^2] on the input \]\label{eq:ave} \E{X} \le \ave\[ for some $\ave>0$. In applications like free-space optical communications, the cost of producing and successfully transmitting photons is high, hence high photon-information efficiency---amount of information transmitted per photon, which we henceforth call simply "photon efficiency"---is desirable. As we later demonstrate, this can be achieved in the wideband regime, where the pulse duration of the input approaches zero and, assuming that the continuous-time average input power is fixed, where $\ave$ approaches zero proportionally with the pulse duration. Note that in this regime the average number of detected background photons or dark clicks also tends to zero proportionally with the pulse duration. Hence we have the linear relation \]\label{eq:lambdac} \lambda = c \ave,\[ where $c$ is some nonnegative constant that does not change with $\ave$. In practice, asymptotic results in this regime are useful in scenarios where $\ave$ is small and where $\lambda$ is comparable to or much smaller than $\ave$. Scenarios where $\ave$ is small but $\lambda$ is much larger is better captured by the model where $\lambda$ stays constant while $\ave$ tends to zero; see. We denote the capacity (in nats per channel use) of the channel [\[eq:channel_law\]](#eq:channel_law){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:channel_law"} under power constraint [\[eq:ave\]](#eq:ave){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:ave"} with dark current [\[eq:lambdac\]](#eq:lambdac){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:lambdac"} by $C(\ave, c)$, then \]\label{eq:defC} C(\ave,c) = \sup_{\E{X}\le \ave} I(X;Y),\[ where the mutual information is computed from the channel law [\[eq:channel_law\]](#eq:channel_law){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:channel_law"} and is maximized over input distributions satisfying [\[eq:ave\]](#eq:ave){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:ave"}, with dark current $\lambda$ given by [\[eq:lambdac\]](#eq:lambdac){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:lambdac"}. As we shall see, our results on the asymptotic behavior of $C(\ave,c)$ hold irrespectively of whether a peak-power constraint \]\label{eq:peak} X \le \mathcal{A} \quad \textnormal{with probability }1\[ is imposed or not, as long as $\mathcal{A}$ is positive and does not approach zero together with $\ave$. We now formally define the maximum achievable photon efficiency $C_\textnormal{PE}(\ave,c)$, where the subscript notation services a reminder that this quantity is photon efficiency and not capacity: \]C_\textnormal{PE}(\ave,c) \triangleq \frac{C(\ave,c)}{\ave}. \label{eq:defPE}\[ Various capacity results for the discrete-time Poisson channel have been obtained. Among them, considers the same scenario as the present paper and asserts that \]\label{eq:lsvw} \lim_{\ave\downarrow 0} \frac{C(\ave,c)}{\ave\log\frac{1}{\ave}} = 1,\quad c\in[0,\infty).\[ In other words, the maximum photon efficiency satisfies \]C_\textnormal{PE}(\ave,c) = \log\frac{1}{\ave} + o\left(\log\frac{1}{\ave}\right), \quad c\in[0,\infty). \label{eq:PE_1st}\[ Furthermore, the proof of shows that the limit [\[eq:lsvw\]](#eq:lsvw){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:lsvw"} is achievable using on-off keying. In the Appendix we provide a proof for the converse part of [\[eq:lsvw\]](#eq:lsvw){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:lsvw"} that is much simpler than the original proof in.[^3] The approximation in [\[eq:PE_1st\]](#eq:PE_1st){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PE_1st"} can be compared to the maximum photon efficiency achievable on the pure-loss bosonic channel. This is a quantum optical communication channel that attenuates the input optical signal, but that does not add any noise to it. The transmitter and the receiver of this channel may employ any structure permitted by quantum physics. When the transmitter is restricted to sending coherent optical states, and when the receiver is restricted to ideal direct detection (with no dark counts), the pure-loss bosonic channel becomes the Poisson channel [\[eq:channel_law\]](#eq:channel_law){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:channel_law"} with $\lambda=0$. We denote by $C_{\textnormal{PE-bosonic}}(\ave)$ the maximum photon efficiency of the pure-loss bosonic channel under an average-power constraint that is equivalent to [\[eq:ave\]](#eq:ave){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:ave"}. The value of $C_{\textnormal{PE-bosonic}}(\ave)$ can be easily computed using the explicit capacity formula, which yields \]\label{eq:PE_bosonic} C_{\textnormal{PE-bosonic}}(\ave) = \log\frac{1}{\ave}+1+o(1).\[ Comparing [\[eq:PE_1st\]](#eq:PE_1st){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PE_1st"} and [\[eq:PE_bosonic\]](#eq:PE_bosonic){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PE_bosonic"} shows the following: - For the pure-loss bosonic channel in the wideband regime, coherent-state inputs and direct detection are optimal up to the first-order term in photon efficiency (or, equivalently, in capacity). For example, they achieve infinite capacity per unit cost - The dark current does not affect this first-order term. In the present paper, we refine the analysis in in two aspects. First, we provide a more accurate approximation for $C_\textnormal{PE}(\ave,c)$ that contains higher-order terms, and that reflects the influence of the dark current, i.e., of the constant $c$. Second, we identify near-optimal modulation schemes that facilitate code design for this channel. Some progress has been made in improving the approximation [\[eq:PE_1st\]](#eq:PE_1st){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PE_1st"}. It is noticed in that the photon efficiency achievable on the Poisson channel [\[eq:channel_law\]](#eq:channel_law){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:channel_law"} with $\lambda=0$ may be of the form \]\label{eq:PE_2nd} \log\frac{1}{\ave}-\log\log\frac{1}{\ave}+O(1),\[ which means that restriction to coherent-state inputs and direct detection may induce a loss in the second-order term in the photon efficiency on the pure-loss bosonic channel. For practical values of $\ave$, this second-order term can be significant. For example, for $\ave=10^{-5}$, the difference between the first-order term in [\[eq:PE_1st\]](#eq:PE_1st){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PE_1st"} and the first-and second-order terms in [\[eq:PE_2nd\]](#eq:PE_2nd){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PE_2nd"} is about $20\%$. The analysis in (whose main focus is not on the Poisson channel itself) is based on certain assumptions on the input distribution.[^4] It is therefore unclear from if [\[eq:PE_2nd\]](#eq:PE_2nd){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PE_2nd"} is the maximum photon efficiency achievable on the Poisson channel [\[eq:channel_law\]](#eq:channel_law){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:channel_law"} with $\lambda=0$ subject to constraint [\[eq:ave\]](#eq:ave){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:ave"} alone, i.e., if [\[eq:PE_2nd\]](#eq:PE_2nd){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PE_2nd"} is the correct expression for $C_{\textnormal{PE}}(\ave,0)$. In the present paper, we prove that this is indeed the case. Recent works such as often ignore the dark current in the Poisson channel. It has been unknown to us whether the dark current, i.e., whether the constant $c$ influences the second term in [\[eq:PE_2nd\]](#eq:PE_2nd){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PE_2nd"} and, if not, whether it influences the next term in photon efficiency. We show that the constant $c$ does not influence the second-order term in $C_\textnormal{PE}(\ave,c)$, but does influence the third-order, constant term. It has long been known that that infinite photon efficiency on the Poisson channel with zero dark current can be achieved using pulse-position modulation (PPM) combined with an outer code. Further, observes that PPM can achieve [\[eq:PE_2nd\]](#eq:PE_2nd){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PE_2nd"} on such a channel. PPM greatly simplifies the coding task for this channel, since one can easily apply existing codes, such as a Reed-Solomon code, to the PPM "super symbols"; while the on-off keying scheme that achieves [\[eq:PE_2nd\]](#eq:PE_2nd){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PE_2nd"} has a highly skewed input distribution and is hence difficult to code. The question then arises: how useful is PPM when there is a positive dark current? This question has two parts. First, is PPM still near optimal in terms of capacity (or photon efficiency) when there is a positive dark current? Second, does PPM still simplify coding when there is a dark current? We answer the first part of the question in the affirmative in our main results. We cannot fully answer the second question in this paper, but we shall discuss it in the concluding remarks in Section [7](#sec:conclusion){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:conclusion"}. The rest of this paper is arranged as follows. We introduce some notation and formally define PPM in Section [2](#sec:notation){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:notation"}. We state and discuss our main results in Section [3](#sec:main){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:main"}. We then prove the achievability parts of these results in Sections [4](#sec:achievability){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:achievability"} and [5](#sec:achievability2){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:achievability2"}, and prove the converse parts in Section [6](#sec:converse){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:converse"}. We conclude the paper with numerical comparison of the bounds and some remarks in Section [7](#sec:conclusion){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:conclusion"}. # Notation and PPM {#sec:notation} We usually use a lower-case letter like $x$ to denote a constant, and an upper-case letter like $X$ to denote a random variable. We use natural logarithms, and measure information in nats. We use the usual $o(\cdot)$ and $O(\cdot)$ notation to describe behaviors of functions of $\ave$ in the limit where $\ave$ approaches zero with other parameters, if any, held fixed. Specifically, given a reference function $f(\cdot)$ (which might be the constant $1$), a function described as $o(f(\ave))$ satisfies \]\lim_{\ave\downarrow 0} \frac{o(f(\ave))}{f(\ave)} = 0,\[ and a function described as $O(f(\ave))$ satisfies \]\varlimsup_{\ave\downarrow 0} \left\|\frac{O(f(\ave))}{f(\ave)}\right\| < \infty.\[ We emphasize that, in particular, we do not use $o(\cdot)$ and $O(\cdot)$ to describe how functions behave with respect to $c$. We adopt the convention \]0 \log 0 = 0.\[ We next formally describe what we mean by PPM. On the transmitter side: - The channel uses are divided into frames of equal lengths; - In each frame, there is only one channel input that is positive, which we call the "pulse", while all the other inputs are zeros; - The pulses in all frames have the same amplitude. On the receiver side, we distinguish between two cases, which we call simple PPM and soft-decision PPM, respectively. In simple PPM, the receiver records at most one pulse in each frame; if more than one pulse is detected in a frame, then that frame is recorded as an "erasure", as if no pulse is detected at all. In soft-decision PPM, the receiver records up to two pulses in each frame; frames containing no or more than two detected pulses are treated as erasures. # Main Results and Discussions {#sec:main} The following theorem provides an approximation for the photon efficiency $C_\textnormal{PE}(\ave,c)$ in the high-photon-efficiency regime. Our second theorem shows that PPM is nearly optimal in the regime of interest. The achievability part of Theorem [\[thm:main\]](#thm:main){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:main"} follows from Theorem [\[thm:coding\]](#thm:coding){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:coding"}. To prove the latter, we need to show two things: first, that the largest photon efficiency that is achievable with simple PPM, which we henceforth denote by $C_\textnormal{PE-PPM}(\ave,c)$, satisfies \]\label{eq:lower} C_\textnormal{PE-PPM}(\ave,c) \ge \log\frac{1}{\ave}-\log\log\frac{1}{\ave} + O(1),\quad c\in[0,\infty);\[ and second, that the maximum photon efficiency that is achievable with soft-decision PPM, which we henceforth denote by $C_\textnormal{PE-PPM(SD)}(\ave,c)$, satisfies \]\label{eq:lower2} \varliminf_{c\to\infty} \varliminf_{\ave\downarrow 0} \frac{\displaystyle C_\textnormal{PE-PPM(SD)}(\ave,c)-\log\frac{1}{\ave} + \log\log\frac{1}{\ave}}{\log c} \ge-1.\[ To prove the converse part of Theorem [\[thm:main\]](#thm:main){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:main"}, we note that the capacity of the channel is monotonically decreasing in $c$, and hence so is the photon efficiency. It thus suffices to show two things: first, that, in the absence of dark current, the largest photon efficiency achievable with any scheme satisfies \]\label{eq:upper1} C_\textnormal{PE}(\ave,0) \le \log\frac{1}{\ave}- \log\log\frac{1}{\ave} + O(1);\[ and second, that \]\label{eq:upper} \varlimsup_{c\to\infty} \varlimsup_{\ave\downarrow 0} \frac{\displaystyle C_\textnormal{PE}(\ave,c)-\log\frac{1}{\ave} + \log\log\frac{1}{\ave}}{\log c} \le-1.\[ We prove [\[eq:lower\]](#eq:lower){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:lower"} in Section [4](#sec:achievability){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:achievability"}, [\[eq:lower2\]](#eq:lower2){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:lower2"} in Section [5](#sec:achievability2){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:achievability2"}, and [\[eq:upper1\]](#eq:upper1){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:upper1"} and [\[eq:upper\]](#eq:upper){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:upper"} in Section [6](#sec:converse){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:converse"}. To better understand the capacity results in Theorem [\[thm:main\]](#thm:main){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:main"}, we make the following remarks. - Choosing $c=0$ in [\[eq:main\]](#eq:main){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:main"} confirms that [\[eq:PE_2nd\]](#eq:PE_2nd){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PE_2nd"} is the correct asymptotic expression up to the second-order term for $C_{\textnormal{PE}}(\ave,0)$. Compared to [\[eq:PE_bosonic\]](#eq:PE_bosonic){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PE_bosonic"} this means that, on the pure-loss bosonic channel, for small $\ave$, restricting the receiver to using direct detection induces a loss in photon efficiency of about $\log\log\frac{1}{\ave}$ nats per photon. Note that the capacity of the pure-loss bosonic channel can be achieved using coherent input states only, so this loss is indeed due to direct detection, and not due to coherent input states. Attempts to overcome this loss by employing other feasible detection techniques have so far been unsuccessful . - The expression on the right-hand side of [\[eq:main\]](#eq:main){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:main"} does not depend on $c$, so the value of $c$ affects neither the first-order term nor the second-order term in $C_{\textnormal{PE}}(\ave,c)$. In particular, these two terms do not depend on whether $c$ is zero or positive. - The first term in $C_\textnormal{PE}(\ave,c)$ that $c$ does affect is the third, constant term. Indeed, though we have not given an exact expression for the constant term, the asymptotic property [\[eq:logc\]](#eq:logc){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:logc"} shows that $c$ affects the constant term in such a way that, for large $c$, the constant term is approximately $-\log c$. - Theorem [\[thm:main\]](#thm:main){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:main"} suggests the approximation \]\label{eq:approx} C_\textnormal{PE}(\ave,c) \approx \log\frac{1}{\ave}-\log\log\frac{1}{\ave}-\log c.\[ The terms constituting the approximation error, roughly speaking, are either vanishing for small $\ave$, or small compared to $\log c$ for large $c$. Note that if we fix the dark current, i.e., if we fix the product $c\ave$, then the first and third terms on the right-hand side of [\[eq:approx\]](#eq:approx){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:approx"} cancel. This is intuitively in agreement with, which asserts that, for fixed dark current, photon efficiency scales like some constant times $\log\log (1/\ave)$ and hence not like $\log(1/\ave)$. We note, however, that [\[eq:logc\]](#eq:logc){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:logc"} cannot be derived directly using [\[eq:main\]](#eq:main){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:main"} together with, because we cannot change the order of the limits. In [\[eq:logc\]](#eq:logc){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:logc"} we do not let $\ave$ tend to zero and $c$ tend to infinity simultaneously. Instead, we first let $\ave$ tend to zero to close down onto the constant term in $C_\textnormal{PE}(\ave,c)$ with respect to $\ave$, and then let $c$ tend to infinity to study the asymptotic behavior of this constant term with respect to $c$. - The approximation [\[eq:approx\]](#eq:approx){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:approx"} is good for large $c$, but diverges as $c$ tends to zero. We hence need a better approximation for the constant term, which behaves like $-\log c$ for large $c$, but which does not diverge for small $c$. As both the nonasymptotic bounds and the numerical simulations we show later will suggest, $-\log(1+c)$ is a good approximation: \]\label{eq:log1c} C_\textnormal{PE}(\ave,c) \approx \log\frac{1}{\ave}-\log\log\frac{1}{\ave}-\log (1+c).\[ For modulation and coding considerations, we make some remarks following Theorem [\[thm:coding\]](#thm:coding){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:coding"}. - Theorem [\[thm:coding\]](#thm:coding){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:coding"} shows that PPM is optimal up to the second-order term in photon efficiency when $c=0$. Hence, compared to the restriction to the receiver using direct detection, the further restriction to PPM induces only a small additional loss in photon efficiency. - Furthermore, for the third-order, constant term, (soft-decision) PPM is also not far from optimal, in the sense that it achieves the optimal asymptotic behavior of this term for large $c$. - In Section [4](#sec:achievability){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:achievability"} we show that ::: {.IEEEeqnarray} rCl \ & & - -c-(1+c)- + o(1).[\[eq:PPM_strong\]]{#eq:PPM_strong label="eq:PPM_strong"} ::: A careful analysis will confirm that the bound [\[eq:PPM_strong\]](#eq:PPM_strong){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PPM_strong"} is tight in the regime of interest, in the sense that simple PPM cannot achieve a constant term that is better than linear in $c$ (while being second-order optimal). This is in contrast to soft-decision PPM, which can achieve a constant term that is logarithmic in $c$. In particular, simple PPM is clearly not third-order optimal.[^5] - In the PPM schemes that achieve [\[eq:lower\]](#eq:lower){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:lower"} and [\[eq:lower2\]](#eq:lower2){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:lower2"}, which we describe in Sections [4](#sec:achievability){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:achievability"} and [5](#sec:achievability2){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:achievability2"}, the pulse has amplitude $1/\bigl(\log(1/\ave)\bigr)$, which depends on $\ave$, and which tends to zero as $\ave$ tends to zero. An on-off keying scheme having the same amplitude for its "on" signals can also achieve these lower bounds, because the dependence between the channel inputs introduced by PPM can only reduce the total mutual information between channel inputs and outputs. These (PPM and on-off keying schemes) are different from the on-off keying scheme used in where the "on" signal has a fixed amplitude that does not depend on $\ave$. The latter on-off keying scheme, as well as any PPM scheme with a fixed pulse amplitude (with respect to $\ave$), is not second-order optimal on the Poisson channel. - Because in the PPM schemes to achieve [\[eq:lower\]](#eq:lower){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:lower"} and [\[eq:lower2\]](#eq:lower2){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:lower2"} the pulse tends to zero as $\ave$ tends to zero, we know that, as claimed in Section [1](#sec:intro){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:intro"}, both our theorems hold if a constant (i.e., not approaching zero together with $\ave$) peak-power constraint as in [\[eq:peak\]](#eq:peak){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:peak"} is imposed on $X$ in addition to [\[eq:ave\]](#eq:ave){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:ave"}. We next proceed to prove our main results, and leave further discussions to Section [7](#sec:conclusion){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:conclusion"}. # Proof of the Simple-PPM Lower Bound [\[eq:lower\]](#eq:lower){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:lower"} {#sec:achievability} Assume that $\ave$ is small enough so that ::: To meet the average-power constraint [\[eq:ave\]](#eq:ave){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:ave"} with equality, we require \]\label{eq:beta} \eta = b\ave.\[ - The $b$ output symbols $y_1,\ldots,y_b$ are mapped to one "super output symbol" $\tilde{y}$ that takes value in $\{1,\ldots,b, {?}\}$ in the following way: $\tilde{y}=i$, $i\in\{1,\ldots,b\}$, if $y_i$ is the unique nonzero term in $\{y_1,\ldots,y_b\}$; and $\tilde{y}={?}$ if there is more than one or no nonzero term in $\{y_1,\ldots,y_b\}$. where $b$ and $\eta$ are given in [\[eq:b\]](#eq:b){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:b"} and [\[eq:beta\]](#eq:beta){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:beta"}, respectively. We now have, irrespective of the distribution of $\tilde{X}$, Denote the capacity of this super channel by $\tilde{C}(\ave,c,b,\eta)$, then \]\label{eq:Ctild} \tilde{C}(\ave,c,b,\eta) = \max_{P_{\tilde{X}}} I(\tilde{X};\tilde{Y}).\[ Note that the total input power (i.e., expected number of detected signal photons) in each frame equals $\eta$. Therefore we have the following lower bound on $C_{\textnormal{PE-PPM}}(\ave,c)$: \]\label{eq:super} C_{\textnormal{PE-PPM}} (\ave, c) \ge \frac{\tilde{C}(\ave,c,b,\eta)}{\eta}.\[ It can be easily verified that the optimal input distribution for [\[eq:Ctild\]](#eq:Ctild){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Ctild"} is the uniform distribution \]P_{\tilde{X}}(i) = \frac{1}{b},\quad i \in\{1,\ldots,b\},\[ which induces the following marginal distribution on $\tilde{Y}$: Next note that $p_0$ can be upper-bounded as where the last step follows from [\[eq:exp\]](#eq:exp){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:exp"}. It can also be lower-bounded as where the last inequality follows from [\[eq:exp\]](#eq:exp){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:exp"} and [\[eq:exp2\]](#eq:exp2){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:exp2"}, and from the fact that the first multiplicand on its right-hand side is (in fact, both multiplicands are) nonnegative for $\ave$ satisfying [\[eq:lower1_conditions\]](#eq:lower1_conditions){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:lower1_conditions"} and other parameters chosen accordingly. Also note that $p_1$ can be upper-bounded as Using [\[eq:p0\]](#eq:p0){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:p0"}, [\[eq:p02\]](#eq:p02){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:p02"} and [\[eq:p1\]](#eq:p1){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:p1"} we can continue the chain of inequalities [\[eq:Ctilde\]](#eq:Ctilde){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Ctilde"} to further lower-bound $\tilde{C}(\ave,c,b,\eta)$ as Here, [\[eq:Ctilde_2ndlast\]](#eq:Ctilde_2ndlast){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Ctilde_2ndlast"} follows from the fact that, for all $\alpha\ge 0$ and $\beta\ge 1$, \]\log (1+\alpha\beta) \le \log(\beta+\alpha\beta) =\log \beta + \log(1+\alpha),\[ with the choices which indeed satisfy $\alpha\ge 0$ and $\beta\ge 1$; and [\[eq:Ctilde_last\]](#eq:Ctilde_last){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Ctilde_last"} follows by dropping the term $\frac{1}{2}bc\ave\eta^2\log b$, which is positive. Combining [\[eq:beta\]](#eq:beta){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:beta"}, [\[eq:super\]](#eq:super){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:super"}, and [\[eq:Ctilde_last\]](#eq:Ctilde_last){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Ctilde_last"} yields [\[eq:prp1\]](#eq:prp1){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:prp1"}. where $b$ and $\eta$ are given in [\[eq:b\]](#eq:b){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:b"} and [\[eq:beta\]](#eq:beta){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:beta"}, respectively. This immediately yields [\[eq:lower2\]](#eq:lower2){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:lower2"}. where $p_0$ and $p_1$ are given in [\[eq:defp0\]](#eq:defp0){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:defp0"} and [\[eq:defp1\]](#eq:defp1){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:defp1"}, respectively. For the remaining elements of the transition matrix we have We now have, irrespective of the distribution of $\tilde{X}$, Choosing a uniform $\tilde{X}$ (which is optimal as in Section [4](#sec:achievability){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:achievability"}), we have the following distribution on $\hat{Y}$ Therefore Using [\[eq:HYhatX\]](#eq:HYhatX){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:HYhatX"} and [\[eq:HYhat\]](#eq:HYhat){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:HYhat"} we have At this point, note that the first two summands on the right-hand side of [\[eq:IYhat\]](#eq:IYhat){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:IYhat"} constitute $I(\tilde{X};\tilde{Y})$, which we analyzed in Section [4](#sec:achievability){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:achievability"}. It remains to find lower bounds on the last two summands. We lower-bound the third term on the right-hand side of [\[eq:IYhat\]](#eq:IYhat){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:IYhat"} as We lower-bound the fourth term on the right-hand side of [\[eq:IYhat\]](#eq:IYhat){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:IYhat"} as Using [\[eq:exp\]](#eq:exp){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:exp"} and [\[eq:exp2\]](#eq:exp2){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:exp2"} we have the upper bound on $p_2$ the lower bound on $p_2$ and the upper bound on $p_3$ From [\[eq:IYhat\]](#eq:IYhat){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:IYhat"}, [\[eq:PPM2third\]](#eq:PPM2third){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PPM2third"}, [\[eq:PPM2fourth\]](#eq:PPM2fourth){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PPM2fourth"}, [\[eq:p2up\]](#eq:p2up){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:p2up"}, [\[eq:p2low\]](#eq:p2low){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:p2low"}, and [\[eq:p3up\]](#eq:p3up){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:p3up"} we obtain a lower bound on the additional mutual information that is gained by considering output frames with two detection positions: Dividing the above by $\eta$ and plugging in [\[eq:beta\]](#eq:beta){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:beta"} we obtain a lower bound on the additional photon efficiency: Adding the right-hand side of [\[eq:horror\]](#eq:horror){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:horror"} to the right-hand side of [\[eq:prp1\]](#eq:prp1){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:prp1"} yields [\[eq:prp2\]](#eq:prp2){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:prp2"}. Hence We can lower-bound $H(Y\|X=x)$ as Using this and [\[eq:lower2_104\]](#eq:lower2_104){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:lower2_104"}, we upper-bound $D\bigl( \bigl.W(\cdot\|x)\bigr\\| R(\cdot) \bigr)$ as Using [\[eq:duality\]](#eq:duality){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:duality"} and [\[eq:long\]](#eq:long){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:long"} together with constraint [\[eq:ave\]](#eq:ave){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:ave"} we have Hence the maximum achievable photon efficiency satisfies We next upper-bound the expectation on the right-hand side of [\[eq:CPE23\]](#eq:CPE23){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:CPE23"} as follows where \]\label{eq:127} \phi(x) \triangleq \frac{1-\e^{-x}}{x}\log\frac{x+c\ave}{(1+c)\ave\log\frac{1}{\ave}},\quad x\ge 0.\[ We claim that, if $\ave$ is small enough to satisfy all of the conditions in [\[eq:upper_con_all\]](#eq:upper_con_all){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:upper_con_all"}, then \]\label{eq:12log} \sup\phi(x) = \phi(x^) \quad \textnormal{for some }x^ \le \frac{12}{\log\frac{1}{\ave}}.\[ To show this, we compute the derivative of $\phi(x)$ (with respect to $x$) as \]\label{eq:derivative} \frac{\d \phi(x)}{\d x} = \frac{(1+x)\e^{-x}-1}{x^2}\log\frac{x+c\ave}{(1+c)\ave\log\frac{1}{\ave}} + \frac{1-\e^{-x}}{x(x+c\ave)}\[ which exists and is continuous for all $x>0$. Further note that it is negative for large enough $x$, and is positive for small enough $x$. Hence $x^$ must be achieved at a point where \]\frac{\d \phi(x)}{\d x} = 0.\[ To prove [\[eq:12log\]](#eq:12log){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:12log"}, it thus suffices to show that, under the assumptions [\[eq:upper_con_all\]](#eq:upper_con_all){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:upper_con_all"}, \]\frac{\d \phi(x)}{\d x} <0,\quad x >\frac{12}{\log\frac{1}{\ave}}.\[ We do this separately for two cases. In this case the logarithmic term in the derivative is positive: where the last step follows because [\[eq:upper_cona\]](#eq:upper_cona){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:upper_cona"} and [\[eq:upper_conc\]](#eq:upper_conc){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:upper_conc"} together imply \]\label{eq:upper_cond} \ave\left(\log\frac{1}{\ave}\right)^2 < \frac{12\e^{-\frac{1}{2}}}{1+c}.\[ Next, using Taylor's theorem with Cauchy remainder, we have where $x' \in [0,x]$. The underbrace in [\[eq:cauchy1\]](#eq:cauchy1){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:cauchy1"} follows because $x'\le x< 1$. We also have \]\label{eq:case1_3} \frac{1-\e^{-x}}{x(x+c\ave)} \le \frac{x}{x(x+c\ave)} \le \frac{1}{x}.\[ Plugging [\[eq:case1_1\]](#eq:case1_1){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:case1_1"}, [\[eq:case1_2\]](#eq:case1_2){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:case1_2"} and [\[eq:case1_3\]](#eq:case1_3){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:case1_3"} into [\[eq:derivative\]](#eq:derivative){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:derivative"} we have where the last step follows from [\[eq:upper_conc\]](#eq:upper_conc){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:upper_conc"}. We have now shown \]\label{eq:case1} \frac{\d \phi(x)}{\d x} < 0,\quad \frac{12}{\log\frac{1}{\ave}} < x < 1.\[ In this case the logarithmic term in the derivative is still positive: \]\label{eq:case2_1} \log\frac{x+c\ave}{(1+c)\ave\log\frac{1}{\ave}} \ge \log\frac{1}{(1+c)\ave\log\frac{1}{\ave}} > 0,\[ where the last step follows from [\[eq:upper_conb\]](#eq:upper_conb){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:upper_conb"}. We bound the other terms as \]\label{eq:case2_2} \frac{(1+x)\e^{-x}-1}{x^2} \le-\frac{1-2 \e^{-1}}{x^2}\[ which is negative, and \]\label{eq:case2_3} \frac{1-\e^{-x}}{x(x+c\ave)} \le \frac{1}{x^2}.\[ Using [\[eq:case2_1\]](#eq:case2_1){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:case2_1"}, [\[eq:case2_2\]](#eq:case2_2){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:case2_2"} and [\[eq:case2_3\]](#eq:case2_3){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:case2_3"} together with [\[eq:derivative\]](#eq:derivative){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:derivative"} we have where the last step follows from [\[eq:upper_conb\]](#eq:upper_conb){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:upper_conb"}. Hence we have shown \]\label{eq:case2} \frac{\d \phi(x)}{\d x} < 0,\quad x\ge 1.\[ Combining [\[eq:case1\]](#eq:case1){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:case1"} and [\[eq:case2\]](#eq:case2){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:case2"} proves [\[eq:12log\]](#eq:12log){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:12log"} for all $\ave$ satisfying [\[eq:upper_con_all\]](#eq:upper_con_all){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:upper_con_all"}. We now proceed to upper-bound $\sup \phi(x)$: Now note that, due to [\[eq:upper_conb\]](#eq:upper_conb){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:upper_conb"}, we have \]c\ave \le \frac{1}{\log\frac{1}{\ave}}.\[ We can now continue the chain of inequalities [\[eq:upper147\]](#eq:upper147){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:upper147"} as Here [\[eq:upper_45\]](#eq:upper_45){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:upper_45"} follows because conditions [\[eq:upper_cona\]](#eq:upper_cona){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:upper_cona"} and [\[eq:upper_conc\]](#eq:upper_conc){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:upper_conc"} imply [\[eq:upper_cond\]](#eq:upper_cond){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:upper_cond"}. Combining [\[eq:CPE23\]](#eq:CPE23){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:CPE23"}, [\[eq:E121\]](#eq:E121){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:E121"} and [\[eq:upper_140\]](#eq:upper_140){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:upper_140"}, and noting $\e^{-c\ave}\le 1$ (together with the fact that the right-hand side of [\[eq:upper_140\]](#eq:upper_140){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:upper_140"} is positive), we obtain where $\phi(\cdot)$ is given in [\[eq:127\]](#eq:127){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:127"} and $\sup \phi(x)$ is computed numerically. The on-off-keying lower bound is obtained by computing the mutual information of the channel with "on" signal equaling $\eta$, and with the receiver ignoring multiple detected photons. This is given by where $H_\textnormal{b}(\cdot)$ denotes the binary entropy function \]H_\textnormal{b}(a) = a\log\frac{1}{a} + (1-a)\log\frac{1}{1-a},\quad a\in[0,1],\[ and where \]q \triangleq \frac{\ave}{\eta}\e^{-\eta-c\ave} + \left(1-\frac{\ave}{\eta}\right) \e^{-c\ave}. The simple-PPM lower bound is computed using [\[eq:super\]](#eq:super){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:super"} and [\[eq:PPM_exact\]](#eq:PPM_exact){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PPM_exact"}: The soft-decision-PPM lower bound is computed using [\[eq:IYhat\]](#eq:IYhat){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:IYhat"} and is given by In all these lower bounds, the parameters $b$ and $\eta$ are chosen as in [\[eq:b\]](#eq:b){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:b"} and [\[eq:beta\]](#eq:beta){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:beta"}, and $p_0$, $p_1$, $p_2$, $p_3$, and $p_4$ are given in [\[eq:defp0\]](#eq:defp0){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:defp0"}, [\[eq:defp1\]](#eq:defp1){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:defp1"}, [\[eq:defp2\]](#eq:defp2){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:defp2"}, [\[eq:defp3\]](#eq:defp3){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:defp3"}, and [\[eq:defp4\]](#eq:defp4){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:defp4"}, respectively. We plot these bounds for $c=0.1$, $c=1$, and $c=10$ in Figure [\[fig:1\]](#fig:1){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:1"}. The figure shows the following. - The approximation [\[eq:log1c\]](#eq:log1c){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:log1c"} is reasonably accurate for small enough $\ave$. - The on-off-keying and the soft-decision-PPM bounds are consistently close to the approximation [\[eq:log1c\]](#eq:log1c){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:log1c"}. - As $c$ increases, the simple-PPM bound deviates significantly from the other lower bounds, and hence also from the actual value of $C_\textnormal{PE}(\ave,c)$. The capacity bounds as well as the asymptotic results in this paper provide insights to how technical restrictions and device or channel imperfections influence the communication rates in optical channels in the wideband regime. Our results and techniques can also be applied to secret communication and key distribution over optical channels. It would be interesting to see if these are further extendable, e.g., to multiple-mode optical channels and optical networks. As we have demonstrated, PPM is nearly optimal on the Poisson channel in the high-photon-efficiency regime. When $c$ is small, the simple-PPM super channel has high erasure probability but low "error" (by which we mean the receiver detects a single pulse at a position that is different from the transmitted signal) probability. In this case, Reed-Solomon codes can perform rather close to the theoretical limit. However, when $c>1$, Reed-Solomon codes can no longer achieve any positive rates on this channel. Nevertheless, we believe that, for $c>1$, PPM still has its advantages over on-off keying in terms of code design. This is because the optimal input distribution for (both simple and soft-decision) PPM is uniform, whereas the optimal input distribution for on-off keying for this channel is highly skewed. The uniformity of PPM inputs allows the usage of more structured codes, in particular linear codes. One possible direction, for instance, is to employ the idea of multilevel codes* on this channel. [^1]: We assume that the pulses are square, which is usually the case in practice. If they are not square, the light signal's intensity should be averaged over the pulse duration. [^2]: Here "power" is in discrete time, means expected number of detected signal photons per channel use, and is proportional to the continuous-time physical power times the pulse duration. [^3]: For the achievability part of [\[eq:lsvw\]](#eq:lsvw){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:lsvw"}, we note that its proof can be simplified by letting the decoder ignore multiple photons, rather than considering all possible values of $Y$ as in. This can be seen via the achievability proofs in the current paper, which do ignore multiple photons at the receiver, and which yield stronger results than those in. [^4]: According to conversation with the authors. [^5]: A scheme between simple and soft-decision PPM is the following. When detecting multiple pulses in a frame, the receiver randomly selects and records one of the positions (possibly together with a "quality" flag). This scheme outperforms simple PPM in photon efficiency, but its third-order term is still linear in $c$: it scales like $-c/2$ instead of $-c$.	{'timestamp': '2014-04-25T02:00:37', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5767', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5767'}
# Introduction Gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) are the brightest electromagnetic explosions in the universe (for a recent review, see Gehrels et al. 2009). Because of their very high luminosity, GRBs can be detected out to the edge of the visible Universe (Ciardi & Loeb 2000; Lamb & Reichart 2000; Bromm & Loeb 2002, 2006). The farthest GRB to date is GRB 090429B with a photometric redshift $z=9.4$ (Cucchiara et al. 2011), significantly larger than those of the most distant quasars. This property makes GRBs indispensable beacons to study the early universe, including the star formation rate (Totani 1997; Wijers et al. 1998; Porciani & Madau 2001; Bromm & Loeb 2002,2006), the intergalactic medium (IGM) (Barkana & Loeb 2004; Inoue et al. 2007; McQuinn et al. 2008), and the metal enrichment history (Savaglio 2006; Wang et al. 2012). In addition, GRBs have been used as standard candles to constrain cosmological parameters and dark energy (Dai, Liang & Xu 2004; Schaefer 2007; Wang, Qi & Dai 2011). The most popular theoretical model of long-duration GRBs is the collapse of a massive star to a black hole (Woosley 1993). Observations also show that GRBs are associated with Type Ib/c supernovae (Stanek et al. 2003; Hjorth et al. 2003). So GRBs provide a complementary technique for measuring the SFR history (Totani 1997; Wijers et al. 1998; Porciani & Madau 2001). Recent studies show that Swift GRBs are not tracing the star formation history measured by traditional means exactly but including an additional evolution (Le & Dermer 2007; Salvaterra & Chincarini 2007; Kistler et al. 2008; Yüksel et al. 2008; Wang & Dai 2009; Wanderman,& Piran 2010; Qin et al. 2010; Cao et al. 2011; Robertson & Ellis 2012; but see Elliott et al. 2012). The SFR inferred from the high-redshift ($z>6$) GRBs seems to be too high in comparison with the one obtained from some high-redshift galaxy surveys (Kristler et al. 2009; Bouwens et al. 2009). Kistler et al. (2008) found that there are about four times as many GRBs at redshift $z\sim 4$ than expected from star formation measurements. They claimed that some unknown mechanism is leading to an enhancement about $(1+z)^{\delta}$ ($\delta=1.5$) in the observed rate of high-redshift GRBs. Using more Swift data, Kistler et al. (2009) found a slightly lower value of enhancement about $(1+z)^{1.2}$. Robertson & Ellis (2012) found the value of $\delta$ is about $0.5$ by comparing the cumulative redshift distribution of GRBs and SFR. But on the other hand, Elliott et al. (2012) found that the value of $\delta$ is about zero using a small sample of GRBs. In order to explain this discrepancy, many models have been proposed. Li (2008) explained the observed discrepancy between the GRB rate history and the star formation rate history as being due to cosmic metallicity evolution (Langer & Norman 2006), by assuming that long GRBs tend to occur in galaxies with low metallicities. Cheng et al. (2010) suggested that this discrepancy could be solved if some high-redshift GRBs are produced by superconducting cosmic strings. Wang & Dai (2011) used an evolving initial mass function (IMF) of stars to explain the GRB redshift distribution. Virgili et al. (2011) discussed the possibility that the evolution of the GRB luminosity function break with redshift may explain this discrepancy. Observations also show differences in the population of GRB host galaxies compared to expectations for an unbiased star-formation tracer (Tanvir et al. 2004; Fruchter et al. 2006; Svensson et al. 2010). In this paper, we study the star formation rate history derived from GRBs. First we use the Swift GRB sample to test the evolution of GRB rate relative to SFR. If GRBs trace star formation in the universe without bias, the ratio of the GRB rate to the SFR would not be expected to vary with redshift. We find that this ratio is proportional to $(1+z)^{0.5}$. The index is smaller than the value of Kistler et al. (2009). We also derive the high-redshift SFR using Swift GRB sample by correcting this evolution. Then, we consider the rapidly rotating metal-poor stars with masses smaller than critical mass $M_{\rm cri}\sim 30 M_\odot$ to see if they can produce GRBs to explain the discrepancy between high-redshift SFR and GRB rate. The collapsar model indicates that stars with mass larger than $30M_{\odot}$ can produce GRBs (Woosley 1993; Bissaldi et al. 2007; Raskin et al. 2008). Observation also shows that the progenitor of GRB 060505 has a mass above $30M_\odot$ (Thöne et al. 2008). Yoon & Langer (2005) investigated the evolution of rotating single stars in the mass range $12M_\odot<M<60M_\odot$ at low metallicity. They found that if the initial spin rate is high enough, the time scale for rotationally induced mixing becomes shorter than the nuclear time scale. The star may evolve in a quasi-chemically homogeneous way. In particular, for low enough metallicity, this type of evolution can lead to retention of sufficient angular momentum in cores to produce GRBs according to the collapsar scenario. Last, we calculate the impact of this GRB-inferred star formation rate on the reionization history, including the optical depth of electron scattering to the cosmic microwave background. The structure of this paper is arranged as follows. In the next section, we compile the Swift GRB sample till GRB 110403 and test the evolution of GRB rate. The SFR derived from GRBs is given in section 3. We show the model of GRBs from chemically homogeneous evolution scenario and the influence on high-redshift SFR derived from GRBs in section 4. We compute the reionization history with this GRB-inferred SFR in section 5. We conclude with a summary in section 6. # The latest GRB sample The expected redshift distribution of GRBs is \[\frac{d N}{d z}=F(z) \frac{\varepsilon(z)\dot{\rho}_(z)}{\langle f_{\rm beam}\rangle} \frac{dV_{\rm com}/dz}{1+z},\] where $F(z)$ represents the ability both to detect the trigger of burst and to obtain the redshift, $\varepsilon(z)$ accounts for the fraction of stars producing GRBs, $\dot{\rho}_(z)$ is the SFR density. The $F(z)$ can be treated as constant when we consider the bright bursts with luminosities sufficient to be detected within an entire redshift range, so $F(z)=F_0$. GRBs that are unobservable due to beaming are accounted for through $\langle f_{\rm beam}\rangle$. The $\varepsilon(z)$ can be parameterized as $\varepsilon(z)=\varepsilon_0(1+z)^\delta$, where $\varepsilon_0$ is an unknown constant that includes the absolute conversion from the SFR to the GRB rate in a given GRB luminosity range. Kistler et al. (2008) found the index $\delta=1.5$ from 63 Swift GRBs. A little smaller value $\delta=1.2$ was inferred using 119 Swift GRBs (Kistler et al. 2009). In a flat universe, the comoving volume is calculated by \[\begin{aligned} \frac{dV_{\rm com}}{d z} = 4\pi D_{\rm com}^2 \frac{dD_{\rm com}}{d z} \;, \end{aligned}\] where the comoving distance is \[\begin{aligned} \label{com} D_{\rm com}(z) \equiv \frac{c}{H_0} \int_0^z \frac{dz^\prime}{\sqrt{ \Omega_m(1+z^\prime)^3 + \Omega_\Lambda}} \;. \end{aligned}\] In the calculations, we use $\Omega_m=0.27$, $\Omega_\Lambda=0.73$ and $H_0$=71 km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$ from the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) seven-year data (Komatsu et al. 2011). We use the latest Swift long-duration GRB sample till GRB 110403. The data is taken from Butler et al. (2007,2010) and website[^1]. The isotropic-equivalent luminosity of a GRB can be obtained by \[L_{\rm iso}=E_{\rm iso}(1+z)/T_{90}.\] The distribution of $L_{\rm iso}$ for 157 GRBs in the sample is shown in Figure [\[GRBnum\]](#GRBnum){reference-type="ref" reference="GRBnum"}. We use the same luminosity cuts in these redshift bins as Kistler et al. (2009). The shaded area approximates the detection threshold of Swift BAT, which can be calculated as follows. The luminosity threshold can be approximated by a bolometric energy flux limit $F_{\lim} = 1.2 \times 10^{-8}$erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$. The luminosity threshold is then \[\begin{aligned} L_{\lim} = 4\pi D_L^2 F_{\rm lim} \;, \label{lum_lim} \end{aligned}\] where $D_L$ is the luminosity distance to the burst. In order to test the GRB rate relative to the SFR, we must choose bursts with high luminosities, because only bright bursts can be seen at low and high-redshifts, so we choose the luminosity cut $L_{\rm iso}> 10^{51}$ erg s$^{-1}$ (Yüksel et al. 2008) in the redshift bin $0-4$. This removes many low-redshift, low-$L_{\rm iso}$ bursts that could not have been seen at higher redshift. Because the SFR at high redshift is poorly known (Bouwens et al. 2012; Oesch et al. 2013; Coe et al. 2013), so we choose the redshift range $0<z<4$, in which SFR is well measured. We have 92 GRBs in this subsample. We use the SFR history from Hopkins & Beacom (2006). We compare the predicted and observed cumulative GRB distributions in Figure [\[cum\]](#cum){reference-type="ref" reference="cum"}. We find that the Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistic is minimized for $\delta=0.5$, which is consistent with Robertson & Ellis (2012). At the $2\sigma$ confidence level, the value of $\delta$ is in the range $-0.15<\delta<1.6$. Our result is smaller than the values in Kistler et al. (2009). This may be account for the different GRB sample. The GRB sample observed by Swift during 2005-2012 is used in this paper. This bias must be taken into account when one relates the GRB rate to the SFR. # The SFR derived from GRBs In this section, we use the same method as Yüksel et al. (2008) to calculate the SFR rate from GRBs. Because only very bright bursts can be seen from all redshifts, we use the same luminosity cuts as Kistler et al. (2009), as shown in Figure [\[GRBnum\]](#GRBnum){reference-type="ref" reference="GRBnum"}. The number counts in redshift bins $z=4-5$, $5-6$, $6-7$, $7-8.5$ and $8.5-10$ are $10$, $4$, $2$, $1$ and $1$ respectively. In the redshift bin of $8.5-10$, there is only one GRB named GRB 090429B with photometric redshift $z\sim 9.4$, although there is a low-probability tail to somewhat lower redshifts (Cucchiara et al. 2011). The bin choice of this work is different with those of Robertson & Ellis (2012). In this work, we choose redshift bins uniform in $z$, and also ensure that the number of GRBs in each bins is equal or larger than one. We also calculate the SFR using bin choice of Robertson & Ellis (2012), and find that the result is a little difference compared with current bin choice. The GRBs in $z = 1-4$ act as a "control group" to constrain the GRB to SFR conversion, since this redshift bin has both good SFR measurements and GRB counts. We calculate the theoretically predicated number of GRBs in this bin as \[\begin{aligned} N_{1-4}^{\rm the} & = & \Delta t \frac{\Delta \Omega}{4\pi} \int_{1}^{4} dz\, F(z) \, \varepsilon(z) \frac{\dot{\rho} _(z)} {\left\langle f_{\rm beam}\right\rangle} \frac{dV_{\rm com}/dz}{1+z} \nonumber \\ & = & A \, \int_{1}^{4} dz\, (1+z)^\delta \, \dot{\rho} _(z) \, \frac{dV_{\rm com}/dz}{1+z}\,, \label{N1-4} \end{aligned}\] where $A = {\Delta t \, \Delta \Omega \, F_0} / 4\pi {\left\langle f_{\rm beam} \right\rangle}$ depends on the total observed time of Swift, $\Delta t$, and the angular sky coverage, $\Delta \Omega$. The theoretical number of GRBs in redshift bin $z_1-z_2$ can be written by \[\begin{aligned} N_{z_1-z_2}^{\rm th} & = & \left\langle \dot{\rho} _* \right\rangle_{z_1-z_2} A \, \int_{z_1}^{z_2} dz\, (1+z)^\delta \, \frac{dV_{\rm com}/dz}{1+z}\,, \label{Nz1-z2} \end{aligned}\] where $\left\langle \dot{\rho}_* \right\rangle_{z_1-z_2}$ is the average SFR density in the redshift range $z_1-z_2$. Representing the predicated numbers, $N_{z_1-z_2}^{\rm th}$ with the observed GRB counts, $N_{z_1-z_2}^{\rm obs}$, we obtain the SFR in the redshift range $z_1-z_2$, \[\left\langle \dot{\rho}_* \right\rangle_{z_1-z_2} = \frac{N_{z_1-z_2}^{\rm obs}}{N_{1-4}^{\rm obs}} \frac{\int_{1}^{4} dz\, \frac{dV_{\rm com}/dz}{1+z}(1+z)^\delta \dot{\rho}_(z)\, }{\int_{z_1}^{z_2} dz\, \frac{dV_{\rm com}/dz}{1+z}(1+z)^\delta }\. \label{zratio}\] In the calculation, we assume that the value of $\delta$ is constant at all redshift range. The derived SFR from GRBs are shown as filled circles in Figure [\[SFR\]](#SFR){reference-type="ref" reference="SFR"}. Error bars correspond to 68% Poisson confidence intervals for the binned events (Gehrels 1986). The high-redshift SFRs obviously decrease with increasing redshifts, although an oscillation may exist. We find that the SFR at $z>4.48$ is proportional to $(1+z)^{-3}$ using minimum $\chi^2$ method, which is shown as solid line in Figure [\[SFR\]](#SFR){reference-type="ref" reference="SFR"}. Because we use different cosmological parameters comparing to Hopkins & Beacom (2006) ($\Omega_m=0.3$, $\Omega_\Lambda=0.7$ and $H_0$=70 km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$), SFR conversion between different cosmology models must be considered. The conversion factor for a given redshift range can be expressed as (Hopkins 2004) \[\dot{\rho}_(z)\propto \frac{D_{\rm com}^2(z)}{D_{\rm com}^3(z+\Delta z)-D_{\rm com}^3(z-\Delta z)},\] where $D_{\rm com}$ is given in equation ([\[com\]](#com){reference-type="ref" reference="com"}). At the redshift range $z=4-5$, the value of conversion factors in these two cosmological models are very similar. The relative error is less than 4%. So our results are insensitive to the choice of WMAP7 cosmology. The new determination of SFR is slight smaller than the result given by Kistler et al. (2009). There are two reasons for this situation. First, we derive a smaller evolution factor index $\delta$. Second, we update the Swift GRB sample. In past three years, Swift has observed much more GRBs with medium redshifts than GRBs with high redshifts. So the ratio ${N_{z_1-z_2}^{\rm obs}}/{N_{1-4}^{\rm obs}}$ is smaller compared with Kistler et al. (2009). Ishida et al. (2011) used the principal component analysis method to measure the high-redshift SFR from the distribution of GRBs and found that the SFR at $z\sim 9.4$ could be up to $0.01M_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-3}$. Robertson & Ellis (2012) constrained the SFR using GRBs by considering the contribution of "dark" GRBs. They found that the high-redshift SFR derived from GRBs can vary a factor of 4 using different values of $\delta$. Their results for $\delta=0.5$ are shown as open circles in Figure [\[SFR\]](#SFR){reference-type="ref" reference="SFR"}. Our results can be marginally consistent with the open dots. Elliott et al. (2012) chose 43 GRBs by selecting GRBs that have been detected by GROND within 4 hours after the Swift BAT trigger and that exhibited an X-ray afterglow. They found that the linear relationship between GRB rate and SFR using this small sample. Johnson et al. (2013) used high-resolution cosmological simulations to study the high-redshift SFR. Our result is consistent with that of Johnson et al. (2013) at $z\leq 10$. But at $z\geq 10$, they found the SFR is reduced by up to an order of magnitude due to the molecule-dissociating stellar radiation. # GRBs from rapidly rotating metal-poor stars and influence on SFR The collapsar model explains GRB formation via the collapse of a rapidly rotation massive iron core into a black hole (Woosley 1993). This collapse model requires the initial mass of the massive stars with masses larger than about $30M_{\odot}$ (Woosley 1993; Bissaldi et al. 2007). Yoon & Langer (2005) and Woosley & Heger (2006) showed that at low metallicity, quasi-chemically-homogeneous evolution of rapidly rotating stars with low masses can lead to the formation of rapidly rotating helium stars which satisfy all the requirements of the collapsar scenario. Because the rotation affects the evolution of stars significantly, especially through rotationally induced chemical mixing (Maeder & Meynet 2000; Heger et al. 2000). The star remains chemically homogeneous evolution scenario (CHES). The CHES is recognized as a promising path towards collapsars in connection with long GRBs. Yoon, Langer & Norman (2006) showed that at low metallicity ($Z\leq 0.004$), quasi-chemically-homogeneous evolution of rapidly rotating stars with masses larger than 12$M_\odot$ can lead to long GRBs[^2]. We call this type of GRBs as chemically homogeneous GRBs (CHG) below. If stars in the same mass range have high metallicities and slow rotation, they will die as type II supernovae (see Figure 3 of Yoon et al. 2006). This picture has also been confirmed by observation (Fruchter et al 2006). We study the rate of CHG from chemically homogeneous evolution scenario as follows. The most widely used functional form for the initial mass function (IMF) is that proposed by Salpeter (1955): \[\phi(M)=A_{\rm Salpeter}M^{-2.35},\] where $A_{\rm Salpeter}=0.06$ is the normalization constant derived from, \[\int_{m_{\rm low}}^{m_{\rm up}}\phi(M)dM=1.\] We use $m_{\rm low}=0.1M_\odot$ and $m_{\rm up}=120M_\odot$. We consider stars with masses between $12M_\odot$ and $30M_\odot$. Because the stars with masses $M\geq30M_\odot$ can produce GRBs through conventional collapse model (Woosley 1993). So the rate of CHG is \[\begin{aligned} R_{\rm CHG} &=& k_{\rm CHG}\Sigma (Z_{\rm th},z)\dot{\rho}_(z)P(x>x_{cr})\int_{12M_\odot}^{30M_\odot}\phi(M)dM, \end{aligned}\] where $k_{\rm CHG}$ with value about $10^{-5}$ is the CHGs formation efficiency, $\Sigma (Z_{\rm th},z)$ and $P(x>x_{cr})$ are discussed below. According to Langer & Norman (2006), the fractional mass density belonging to metallicity below a given threshold $Z_{\rm th}$ is \[\Sigma (Z_{\rm th},z)=\frac{\hat{\Gamma}[\alpha_1+2,(Z_{\rm th}/Z_{\odot})^2 10^{0.15\beta z}]}{\Gamma(\alpha_1+2)},\] where $\hat{\Gamma}$ and $\Gamma$ are the incomplete and complete gamma functions, $\alpha_1=-1.16$ is the power-law index in the Schechter distribution function of galaxy stellar masses (Panter, Heavens & Jimenez 2004) and $\beta=2$ is the slope of the galaxy stellar mass-metallicity relation (Savaglio et al. 2005; Langer & Norman 2006). We extrapolate the metallicity evolution up to redshift $z\sim 9.4$. Observation shows that this metallicity evolution cab be used up to $z\sim 3$ (Kewley & Kobulnicky 2007). This extrapolation has been widely used in literature (Langer & Norman 2006; Li 2008; Robertson & Ellis 2012). We set $Z_{\rm th}=0.004$. As discussed by Yoon, Langer & Norman (2006), the GRB production in CHES is limited to metallicity $Z_{\rm th}\leq 0.004$. Within the CHES, the fraction of stars which forms a long GRB depends on the semi-convective mixing, and the distribution function of initial stellar rotation velocities, $D(v_{\rm init}/v_K)$, where $v_{\rm init}$ is the initial rotation velocity and $v_K$ is the Keplerian velocity. We use the $v_{\rm init}/v_K$ distribution from Yoon, Langer & Norman (2006) \[D(x)=B\frac{\lambda^\nu}{\Gamma(\nu)}x^{\nu-1}\exp(-\lambda x), \label{gdis}\] where $\lambda=9.95$, $\nu=2$ and $x\equiv v_{\rm init}/v_K$. The normalization constant $B=3.2\times 10^5$ is derived from $\int_0^\infty D(x)dx=1$. They found that this distribution can fit well with the observational data from Mokiem et al. (2006). Figure [\[rotation\]](#rotation){reference-type="ref" reference="rotation"} shows the numerical value of equation ([\[gdis\]](#gdis){reference-type="ref" reference="gdis"}). In order to produce GRBs, the value of $x$ should be larger than $0.4$ (Yoon, Langer & Norman 2006), so $P(x>x_{cr})=\int_{0.4}^\infty D(x)dx=0.09$. So the expected number of CHG between redshifts $z$ and $z+\delta z$ can be calculated as \[N_{\rm CHG}^{\rm exp}(>L)=F\Delta t \frac{\Delta \Omega}{4\pi}\int_{z}^{z+\delta z} dz \int_{L}^{\infty}dL \Phi(L) R_{\rm CHG}\frac{dV_{\rm com}/dz}{1+z}, \label{CHG}\] where $\Phi(L)$ is the luminosity function of GRBs. We use the Schechter-function form \[\Phi (L) = \frac{1}{{L_ \star }}\left( {\frac{L}{{L_ \star }}} \right)^\beta \exp (-L/L_ \star ),\] where $\beta=-1.12$ and $L_\star=9\times 10^{52}$erg s$^{-1}$ (Wang & Dai 2011). The integral $\int_{L}^{\infty}dL \Phi(L)$ equals to $\Gamma(1+\beta, \frac{L}{L_\star})$, where $\Gamma$ is the incomplete gamma function. Because $1+\beta \rightarrow 0$, we can approximate $\Gamma(1+\beta, \frac{L}{L_\star}) \rightarrow-(\frac{L}{L_\star})^{1+\beta}/(1+\beta)$. We define an effective SFR $\dot{\rho}_{}^{\rm eff}$, due to the CHG, as \[\begin{aligned} { N^{\rm exp}_{\rm CHG}(>L_{ })\over N_{1-4}^{\rm obs}(>L_{ })}={\int_{z}^{z+\delta z} \varepsilon \dot{\rho}_{}^{\rm eff} dV_{\rm com}(z')/(1+z') \over \int_{1}^{4}\varepsilon \dot{\rho}_dV_{\rm com}(z')/(1+z')}\label{rateeqn}. \end{aligned}\] We consider the star formation history from Hopkins & Beacom (2006), \[\dot{\rho}_(z)\propto\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} (1+z)^{3.44},&z<0.97,\\ (1+z)^{-0.26},&0.97<z<4.48,\\ (1+z)^{-7.8},&4.48<z. \end{array}\right.\label{sfr1}\] with $\dot{\rho}_(0)=0.02~{\rm M_{\odot}yr^{-1}Mpc^{-3}}$. For convenience, here we fit the data by $N_{1-4}^{\rm obs}(>L_{ })\sim60 L_{ 52}^{-\alpha}$ with $\alpha\sim0.50$. Substituting Eq. ([\[CHG\]](#CHG){reference-type="ref" reference="CHG"}) into Eq. ([\[rateeqn\]](#rateeqn){reference-type="ref" reference="rateeqn"}), we can obtain the effective SFR as \[\begin{aligned} \dot{\rho}_^{\rm eff}&=&{ F_0\Delta t (\frac{L_{\rm th}}{L_\star})^{1+\beta}\int_{1}^{4}\dot{\rho}_(1+z)^{\delta-1} {dV_{\rm com}}\over (-1-\beta) (1+z)^{\delta} N_{1-4}^{\rm obs}(>L_{ \rm th})}{\Delta \Omega\over 4\pi}{{R_{\rm CHG}(>L_{ \rm th})}}\nonumber\\ &=&C ~{\rm M_{\odot}yr^{-1}Mpc^{-3}}\int_{12M_\odot}^{30M_\odot}\phi(M)dM~\rho_(z)(1+z)_1^{1+\alpha-\delta+\beta} \nonumber\\ &&\times\left({(1+z)^{1/2}-1\over2}\right)^{2(\alpha+\beta+1)},\label{effsfr} \end{aligned}\] where the factor $C \sim 125~F_0k_{\rm CHG,-5}F_{\rm lim,-8}^{1+\alpha+\beta}$. The luminosity threshold at redshift $z$ can be calculated as $L_{ \rm th}=4\pi D_L(z)^2F_{\rm lim}$ for a given flux sensitivity $F_{\rm lim}$. For the Swift* satellite, we adopt the angular sky coverage of $\Delta \Omega/4\pi\sim 0.1$, and the observation period $\Delta t\sim 7.5$ yr. In equation ([\[effsfr\]](#effsfr){reference-type="ref" reference="effsfr"}), the integral $\int_{12M_\odot}^{30M_\odot}\phi(M)dM$ is proportional to $(12M_\odot^{-1.35}-30M_\odot^{-1.35})/1.35=0.026$. Although there are many factors in equation (19) may subsume the effect in change the IMF integral for GRB production. The evolution of $\dot{\rho}_^{\rm eff}$ is shown as the dotted line in Figure [\[SFR\]](#SFR){reference-type="ref" reference="SFR"}. Bouwens et al. (2009,2011) measured high-redsihft SFR using color-selected Lyman break galaxies (LBGs) method. Their results are shown as triangular points in Figure [\[SFR\]](#SFR){reference-type="ref" reference="SFR"}. But LBG studies mainly probe the brightest galaxies. If the integration of UV luminosity functions down to $M_{UV}\simeq-10$, the SFR inferred from LBG is consistent with that derived from GRBs (Kistler et al. 2013). GRBs are found to favor sub-luminosity galaxies (Fynbo et al. 2003), so a larger fraction of the SFR within such hosts would be revealed by GRBs (Kistler et al. 2009). We can see that the SFR inferred from high-redshift GRBs can be well explained by combining equation ([\[sfr1\]](#sfr1){reference-type="ref" reference="sfr1"}) with equation ([\[effsfr\]](#effsfr){reference-type="ref" reference="effsfr"}) for $C\sim 125$. The overall conventional long GRB formation efficiency from massive stars is about $< 10^{-6}$ (Zitouni et al. 2008; Li 2008), which is smaller than $k_{\rm CHG}$. This indicates that the subclass of massive stars with low metallicity and chemical homogeneity may produce long GRBs more efficiently. # Implications for the cosmic reionization Determining when and how the universe was reionized by early sources have been important questions for decades (Gunn & Peterson 1965; Robertson et al. 2010). It is established that intergalactic medium (IGM) reionization may be completed by $z \approx 6.5$, based on strong Ly$\alpha$ absorption from neutral hydrogen along lines of sight to quasars at $z>6$ (Fan et al. 2001). As a measure of ionization, we follow the evolution of the HII volume filling factor $Q_{\rm HII}=n_e/n_H$, versus redshift, using the SFR derived from GRBs (the solid line in Figure [\[SFR\]](#SFR){reference-type="ref" reference="SFR"}). The average evolution of $Q_{\rm HII}$ is found by numerical integration of the rate of ionizing photons minus the rate of radiative recombinations (Madau et al. 1999; Barkana & Loeb 2001; Wyithe & Loeb 2003; Yu et al. 2012) \[\frac{dQ_{\rm HII}}{dz} = \left( \frac {\dot{N}_{\rm ion}} { n_H }- \alpha_B C n_H Q_{\rm HII}\right) \frac{dt}{dz} \; . \label{eq:ionization_history}\] Here, \[\dot{N}_{\rm ion} =(1+z)^3 \dot{\rho}_(z)N_\gamma f_{\rm esc}/m_p\] is the rate of ionizing UV photons escaping from the stars into the IGM, $N_\gamma$ is the number of ionizing UV photons released per baryon of the stars, $(1+z)^3$ converts the comoving density into proper density, $\dot{\rho}_(z)$ is proportional to $(1+z)^{-3}$ at $z>4.48$ and $f_{\rm esc}$ is the escape fraction. The escape fraction is not well constrained. At low redshifts, observations show that the escape fraction from GRB hosts is about a few percent (Chen et al. 2007; Fynbo et al. 2009). But at high redshifts, the $f_{\rm esc}$ is larger (Inoue et al. 2005; Robertson et al. 2010). Recent estimates suggest that the clumping factor $C\approx 1-6$ (Bolton & Haehnelt 2007; Pawlik et al. 2009). We adopt $C=3$ in this paper. $n_H$ is the proper density of hydrogen, and $\alpha_B=1.63\times 10^{-13}\rm cm^{3}~s^{-1}$ is the recombination rate for an electron temperature of about $10^4$K. Because the mass in collapsed objects is still small at high redshift, the IGM contains most of the cosmological baryons, at mean density \[\rho_b = \Omega_b \rho_{\rm cr} (1+z)^3 = 4.24 \times 10^{-31}(1+z)^3~{\rm g~cm}^{-3} \;.\] We adopt the parameters from WMAP seven-year, $\Omega_b h^2 = 0.02255\pm0.00054$ and $\Omega_m h^2 = 0.1352\pm0.0036$ (Komatsu et al. 2011). The critical density is $\rho_{\rm cr} = 1.8785 \times 10^{-29}~h^2$ g cm$^{-3}$. The mean hydrogen number density, \[n_H = \frac {\rho_b (1-Y)}{m_H} = 1.905 \times 10^{-7}(1+z)^3~{\rm cm}^{-3} \; ,\] where $Y = 0.2477\pm0.0029$ is the helium mass fraction (Peimbert et al. 2007). After the values of $N_\gamma$ and $f_{\rm esc}$ are given, the evolution of the HII volume filling factor $Q_{\rm HII}$ can be numerically calculated from equation ([\[eq:ionization_history\]](#eq:ionization_history){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:ionization_history"}). In Figure [\[zre\]](#zre){reference-type="ref" reference="zre"}, we show the evolution of $Q_{\rm HII}$ as a function of redshift. For $N_\gamma=4000$ and $f_{\rm esc}=0.2$, the IGM was completely ionized at $z_{\rm rei}\sim 8.5$. The cosmic microwave background (CMB) optical depth back to redshift $z$ can be written as the integral of $n_e \sigma_T d \ell$, the electron density times the Thomson cross section along proper length, \[\tau_e(z) = \int _{0}^{z} n_e(z) \sigma_T (1+z')^{-1} \; [c/H(z')] \; dz' \; .\] So after we obtain the redshift evolution of $n_e(z)$, the CMB optical depth as a function of redshift can be calculated. More recently, the Planck team has released the latest result on cosmological parameters (Plack Collaboration 2013). In the calculation, we extrapolate the SFR as $(1+z)^{-3}$ to $z\sim 30$. The first stars, so-called Population III (Pop III) stars are predicated to have formed at $z>20$ in minihalos (Tegmark et al. 1997; Yoshida et al. 2003). Heger et al. (2003) and Mészáros & Rees (2010) show that Pop III stars can die as GRBs. The formation rate of Pop III GRBs has been extensively studied (Campisi et al. 2011; de Souza et al. 2011). The high luminosities of GRBs make them detectable out to the edge of the visible universe (Bromm & Loeb 2002, 2006; Wang et al. 2012). So GRBs may provide the information of SFR out to $z>20$ in future. The extrapolation of SFR to high redshifts may be reasonable. The optical depth is shown in Figure [\[tau\]](#tau){reference-type="ref" reference="tau"}. The WMAP nine-year data gives $\tau_e=0.089\pm 0.014$ (Hinshaw et al. 2012), which is shown as the shaded region. The combination of Plack and WMAP data also gives $\tau_e=0.089_{-0.014}^{+0.012}$ (Plack Collaboration 2013). So our GRB-inferred SFR can reproduce the CMB optical depth. # Summary Using the GRB catalogs, we have constructed the cumulative redshift distribution of 110 luminous ($L_{\rm iso} > 10^{51} \rm erg~s^{-1}$) GRBs out to redshift $z\sim 9.4$. We find that the Swift* GRBs during 2005-2012 are biased toward tracing the SFR, including a factor of about $(1+z)^{0.5}$. Correcting this evolution, we derive the star formation history up to $z\sim 9.4$ using Swift GRB sample. Our results show that no steep drop exists in the SFR up to at least $z\sim 9.4$. In order to explain the high-redshift GRB rate excess, the GRBs produced by rapidly rotating metal-poor stars with low mass are considered. The collapsar model explains GRB formation via the collapse of a massive star with $M>30M_\odot$ into a black hole. We consider that at low metallicity, quasi-chemically homogeneous evolution of rapidly rotating stars with mass larger than $12M_\odot$ can lead to the formation of GRBs. The low metallcity and rapid rotation can lead to efficiently produce GRBs in two ways. First, rapid rotation keeps the stars chemically homogeneous and thus avoids the formation of a massive envelope, so stellar core is free of spin-down due to magnetic core-envelope coupling. Second, the stellar wind is weak at low metallicity, so this reduces spin-down due to stellar winds. Our fitting results confirm this idea. We also calculate the reionization history using the GRB-inferred SFR, and find that this SFR can maintain cosmic reionization over $6<z<10$ and reproduce the observed optical depth of Thomson scattering to the cosmic microwave background. We thank the anonymous referee for very useful comments and suggestions. We thank K. S. Cheng and Z. G. Dai for fruitful discussion. We acknowledge the use of public data from the Swift data archive. This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant 11103007 and 11033002). [^1]: $\rm http://astro.berkeley.edu/\sim nat/Swift/bat\_spec\_table.html$ [^2]: Although the lower limit mass of a star with low metallicity that can collapse to GRB is uncertain. But this value is unimportant in our analysis. The best fitting parameters will shift slightly when the lower limit mass is changed.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-24T02:03:35', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5864', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5864'}
null	null
null	null
null	null
null	null
null	null
# Introduction Let $V$ be an irreducible $N$-dimensional representation $V$ of one of the quantum groups $U_q\g_N$ for $q$ an indeterminate (see ) where $\g\in\{\sl_N,\so_N,\sp_N\}$, and denote by $\B_n$ the braid group on $n$-strands. For a natural number $n>0$, the centralizer algebras $\End_{U_q\g}(V^{\ot n})$ each have complete descriptions in terms of semisimple quotients of braid group algebras $\C(q)\B_n$, namely Hecke and BMW-algebras (, ). For $q=e^{\pi \i/\ell}$ the representation categories $Rep(U_q \g)$ are not semisimple, but have semisimple sub-quotients $\Ca(\g,\ell)$ via a process called "purification" in. Continuing to denote by $V$ the image of $V$ in the sub-quotient $\Ca(\g,\ell)$, the centralizer algebras $\End({V}^{\ot n})$ in the fusion category $\Ca(\g,\ell)$ are quotients of Hecke or BMW-algebras, so that the description in terms of the braid group algebra persists. Moreover, the representations of $\B_n$ so obtained are (usually) unitary. Indeed, the categories $\Ca(\g,\ell)$ in these cases are themselves unitary braided fusion categories (see ). The (closure) of the image of these braid group representations were analyzed in ,, which provided evidence for the following conjecture (see ): Here $\FPdim(X)\in\R$ is the Frobenius-Perron dimension, which coincides with the categorical dimension for unitary fusion categories. Categories with $\FPdim(X)^2\in\Z$ for all simple objects $X$ are called weakly integral. One large class of weakly integral braided fusion categories for which this conjecture has been verified are the so-called group theoretical categories related to the (doubles of) finite groups (see ). The main difficulty in verifying Conjecture [\[mainconj\]](#mainconj){reference-type="ref" reference="mainconj"} for arbitrary objects $X$ in a braided fusion category is that a sufficiently explicit description of the braid group action on $\End(X^{\ot n})$ is usually lacking. The "only if\" part of the conjecture has been confirmed for a set of generating objects in the categories associated with quantum groups at roots of unity (see ), and the "if\" part for all such quantum group categories except for two infinite families: $\Ca(\so_N,2N)$ for $N$ odd and $\Ca(\so_N,N)$ for $N$ even. We will adopt the uniform notation $SO(N)_2$ for these two families (this notation conforms with the physics literature, where the subscript $2$ is the level). For $N$ odd, the (fundamental) spinor object $S\in SO(N)_2$ has dimension $\sqrt{N}$, whereas for $N$ even the two (fundamental) spinor objects $S_\pm\in SO(N)_2$ have dimension $\sqrt{N/2}$. In particular, Conjecture [\[mainconj\]](#mainconj){reference-type="ref" reference="mainconj"} predicts that the $\B_n$ representations associated with these have finite image. This has been verified for $N\leq 8$ using low rank coincidences and when $\sqrt{N}$ or $\sqrt{N/2}$ are integral, by appealing to the results of, see. For general $N$, the braid group representations are not explicitly described--while one does have an action of $\B_n$ on any centralizer algebra $\End(X^{\ot n})$ there is no braid group algebra description for $X=S$ or $X=S_{\pm}$. Indeed such a description is not possible since the braid group image does not in general generate these centralizer algebras. We overcome these difficulties by the following approach: We denote by $S$ the quantum version of the spinor representation of $U_q\so_N$ (for $N$ odd) as well as its image in $S\in SO(N)_2$ and by $S_{\pm}$ the analogous fundamental spinor objects for $N$ even and their images in $SO(N)_2$. For $N$ even we consider a semidirect (smash) product $U_q\so_N\rtimes \Z_2$ and we will also denote by $S$ the irreducible $U_q\so_N\rtimes \Z_2$-module whose restriction to $U_q\so_N$ is $S_-\oplus S_+$. For generic parameter $q$, the centralizer algebras $\End_\U(S^{\ot n})$ are described () in terms of a non-standard deformation $U_q^\prime \so_n$ of $U\so_n$, for both $N$ odd and even. Although $\Rep(\U)$ carries a braiding, the image of $\B_n$ inside $\End_{\U}(S^{\ot n})$ does not generate these algebras. On the other hand, for $q$ a $2N$th root of unity, we show that the algebra $U_q^\prime \so_n$ admits a homomorphism into the quantum $(n-1)$-torus $T_q(n)$, which contains an isomorphic copy of $\End(S^{\ot n})$. Moreover, using the representation theory of $U'_q\so_n$, we show that the $\B_n$-representations on $\End(S^{\ot n})$ for the braided fusion category $SO(N)_2$ are equivalent to so-called Gaussian braid representations (so named because the coefficients are Gaussian functions of the form $Ke^{2\pi \i a^2/\ell}$, defined in Proposition [\[identifiedBnreps\]](#identifiedBnreps){reference-type="ref" reference="identifiedBnreps"}(a)) which live in the quantum torus. These explicitly realized braid representations can be shown to have finite images, which implies the conjecture for $SO(N)_2$. Even for $SO(N)_2$, the $\B_n$ image does not typically generate $\End(S^{\ot n})$, so identifying the braid group representations requires some careful analysis of the characters. Here is a more detailed outline of the contents of this article. In Section [2](#section: duality){reference-type="ref" reference="section: duality"} we review results about the centralizer algebras $\End(S^{\otimes n})$ where $S$ is a spinor representation of $U_q\so_N$ respectively $U_q\so_N\rtimes \Z_2$, or the corresponding object in one of the associated fusion categories. Most of these results have already more or less appeared before in ,. In Section [3](#section: rep. theory){reference-type="ref" reference="section: rep. theory"}, we reprove and extend several results by Klimyk and his coauthors concerning the representation theory of $U'_q\so_n$. In contrast with loc. cit., we use a Verma module approach which also has the advantage of proving (crucial, for our paper) uniqueness results at roots of unity, for certain types of modules. In Section [4](#section: quantum torus){reference-type="ref" reference="section: quantum torus"} we construct representations of $U'_q\so_n$ into algebras called quantum tori. The main result of this section is the identification of these representations with those in $\End(S^{\otimes n})$ for fusion categories $SO(N)_2$ ($N$ odd) and $O(N)_2$ ($N$ even). This allows us to describe the corresponding tower of centralizer algebras in terms of the quantum tori using Jones' basic construction. Finally, we identify the braid group representations corresponding to the object $S$ in $SO(N)_2$ (respectively $O(N)_2$) for $N$ odd (respectively $N$ even) with the Gaussian braid representations first encountered in the work of Jones and Goldschmidt, for $N$ odd. The easy generalization to $N$ even is worked out in. The From this one easily verifies Conjecture [\[mainconj\]](#mainconj){reference-type="ref" reference="mainconj"} in our case. # Duality for spinor representations {#section: duality} ## Deformations of $U\so_n$ The algebra $U'_q\so_n$ is defined (see ) via generators $B_1,\ldots, B_{n-1}$ satisfying the relations $B_iB_j=B_jB_i$ for $\|i-j\|\neq 1$ and the $q$-Serre relations: \[\label{quantumSerre} B_i^2B_{i\pm 1}-(q+q^{-1})B_iB_{i\pm 1}B_i +B_{i\pm 1}B_i^2= B_{i\pm 1}.\] It is well-known that in the classical limit $q=1$ we obtain a presentation of the universal enveloping algebra $U\so_n$ of the orthogonal Lie algebra $\so_n$, and for this reason $U'_q\so_n$ is sometimes called the non-standard deformation of $U\so_n$. It follows from the definitions that the elements $B_1, B_3, \ldots, B_{n-1}$ (for $n$ even, respectively $B_{n-2}$ for $n$ odd), generate an abelian subalgebra $A$ of $U_q'\so_n$. We define a weight vector of a $U_q'\so_n$-module $V$ to be a common eigenvector of the generators of $A$. We call a weight regular if all the eigenvalues of generators $B_{2i-1}$ of $A$ are of the form $[r]$ with $r$ an integer or a half integer, and $[r]=(q^r-q^{-r})/(q-q^{-1})$ the usual $q$-number. In the following we denote by $\U$ a semidirect product of the (standard) Drinfeld-Jimbo quantum group $U_q\so_N$ with $\Z_2$. For $N$ odd, $\U$ is just the direct sum of the corresponding $\C$-algebras, while in the $N$ even case, the nontrivial element $t$ of $\Z_2$ acts via the obvious type $D_{N/2}$ graph automorphism. This completely determines the defining relations for $\U$. It is also easy to check that the map $\Delta(t)=t\otimes t$ extends the bialgebra structure of $U_q\so_N$ to $\U$. Indeed, by $\U$ (called the smash product algebra in loc. cit.) is a ribbon Hopf algebra as the action of $t$ preserves the braiding. For $N$ odd, it is clear that $\Rep(\U)\cong \Rep(U_q\so_N)\boxtimes \Rep(\Z_2)$ (Deligne tensor product) as ribbon categories. Note that by $\Rep(\U)$ is the $\Z_2$-equivariantization of $\Rep(U_q\so_N)$. We shall also be interested in the case where $q$ is a root of unity. In this case we consider the subcategory of tilting modules in $\Rep(\U)$ which is again a ribbon category (see e.g. for details). As such, we may consider the quotient category by negligible morphisms (see ) to obtain ribbon fusion categories $SO(N)_r$ and $O(N)_r$, which we describe below. The algebra $\U$ should be viewed as a quantum version of $Pin(N)$. Indeed, $\U$ is well-defined in the classical limit $q=1$, and its finite dimensional simple representations are in 1-1 correspondence with the simple representations of $Pin(N)$. It is easy to see that we obtain a well-defined quantum version of the spinor $Pin(N)$-module $S$ for $\U$ (where the matrices of the generators $E_i$, $F_i$ and $t$ do not depend on $q$). As any finite-dimensional simple $Pin(N)$-module does appear in some tensor power of $S$, we can also make it into a $\U$-module. This deformation also works for roots of unity. It is well-known and easy to check that if the restriction of a simple $U_q\so_N\rtimes \Z_2$-module to $U_q\so_N$ does not remain simple, it decomposes into the direct sum of two irreducible $U_q\so_N$-modules with the same $q$-dimension. Hence we also obtain a well-defined fusion tensor category associated to $U_q\so_N\rtimes \Z_2$, with the usual restriction rules to $U_q\so_N$. Recall the construction of spinors in the classical setting: Consider a simple module of the Clifford algebra on $V=\C^N$. It is well-known that for $N$ even we get an irreducible representation $S$ of $Pin(N)$ which decomposes as a $Spin(N)$-module into a direct sum $S\cong S_+\oplus S_-$ of two non-isomorphic irreducible representations. If $N$ is odd, we have two non-isomorphic simple modules of the Clifford algebra, say $S_0$ and $S_1$, both of which restrict to the same irreducible $Spin(N)$-module. We will just denote them (both) as $S$, consistent with the notation above. For $N$ odd, we will also need the (reducible) $Pin(N)$-module $\tilde S=S_0\oplus S_1$ at some point. The relationships between the spinor representations of $\U$ and $U_q\so_N$ are analogous to those of $Pin(N)$ and $Spin(N)$. That is, for $N$ even, we have a $\U$-module $S$ which is irreducible and decomposes as $S\cong S_+\oplus S_-$ as a $U_q\so_N$-module. For $N$ odd, there are two non-isomorphic $\U$-modules $S_0$ and $S_1$ which are isomorphic upon restriction to $U_q\so_N$ ($S_0$ and $S_1$ differ only on the $\Z_2$-action). ## Classical case We first check some well-known identities in the classical case, where $\U$ is replaced by $Pin(N)$ and $U_q'\so_n$ is replaced by $SO(n)$. Most of these results have already more or less explicitly appeared, as special cases of a more general approach, see. We consider the case where $Pin(N)$ representations are also $O(N)$ representations. We remark that our symmetric bilinear form on the root lattice is normalized so that $\langle\beta,\beta\rangle=2$ for long roots for all $N$, for uniformity's sake. Recall (see e.g. ) that simple $O(N)$ representations are labeled by the Young diagrams $\la$ for which $\la_1'+\la_2'\leq N$ (here $\la_i'$ denotes the number of boxes in the $i$-th column). The representations of the Lie algebra $\so_n$ for $n=2j$ are labeled by the dominant integral weights $\mu=(\mu_i)_i$ such that $\mu_1\geq \mu_2\geq\...\ \mu_{j-1}\geq \|\mu_j\|$, where either all $\mu_i$ are integers or all $\mu_i\equiv 1/2$ mod $\Z$. Then it is easy to check that the map \[\label{corresp} \la\mapsto \bar\la,\quad{\rm where}\ \bar\la_i=N/2-\la'_{j+1-i}\] defines a bijection between the set of simple representations $V_\la$ of $O(N)$ for which $\la_1\leq n/2=j$ and the set of simple $\so_n$ representations $V_{\bar\la}$ for which $\bar\la_1\leq N/2$ and $N/2-\bar\la_i$ is an integer for $1\leq i\leq n/2$. Now consider the obvious action of $O(N)\times SO(n)$ on $\C^N\otimes \C^n$. This induces commuting actions of $O(N)$ and $SO(n)$ via automorphisms on $Cliff(\C^N\otimes \C^n)$, and hence to projective actions of these groups on a simple module $S_{Nn}$ of $Cliff(\C^N\otimes \C^n)$ i.e. proper actions of the corresponding covering groups, the spinor groups. $Proof.$ It suffices to calculate the $Pin(N)\times Spin(n)$ characters of the various modules. Let $n=2k$ and $\i=(i_1,\ldots,\ i_k)\in \Z_{\geq 0}^k$. We denote by $\om(\i)$ the $Spin(n)$ weight given by the vector $(i_j-N/2)_j$. Then we claim that the $Spin(n)$ character of a simple $Cliff(\C^N\otimes \C^n)$ module is given by \[\label{scharacter} \chi^{S_{Nn}}=\sum_{i_1=0,\ldots,\ i_k=0}^N (\prod_{j=1}^k \chi_{i_j}) e^{\om(\i)},\] where $\chi_i$ is the $O(n)$ character for the $i$-th antisymmetrization $\wedge^i V$ of the vector representation of $O(N)$, for $0\leq i\leq N$. This can be seen as follows: As $Nn$ is even by assumption, we can describe the character of the full spinor representation of $O(Nn)$ (which is a simple $Cliff(Nn)$-module) by \[(z_1z_2\cdots z_{Nn/2})^{-1/2}\sum_{j=0}^{Nn/2} e_j(z),\] where $e_j(z)$ is the $j$-th elementary symmetric function in the variables $z_1,\ldots ,z_{Nn/2}$. To view this as a character of $Spin(n)$ we replace the $z$-variables by variables $x_iy_j$, $1\leq i\leq n/2$, $1\leq j\leq N$. We regard the result as a polynomial in the $x_i$ variables over the ring of polynomials in the $y_i$ variables. As every $x_i$ variable comes with all possible $y_j$ variables, and our formula is obviously symmetric in the $z$-variables, and hence also in the $x$ and $y$ variables, a monomial in the $x$-variables containing the variable $x_i$ with the power $m_i$ must also have the factor $e_{m_i}(y)$, the elementary symmetric function in the variables $y_1,\ldots, y_N$. Now it is well-known that the elementary symmetric functions are the characters of the antisymmetrizations of the vector representation which remain irreducible as $O(N)$-modules. This proves Eq [\[scharacter\]](#scharacter){reference-type="ref" reference="scharacter"}. We can now prove statement (a) by induction with respect to inverse alphabetical order of the weights $\om(\i)$. It is clear that the highest possible weight occurring in Eq [\[scharacter\]](#scharacter){reference-type="ref" reference="scharacter"} is $\om=N\ve$. Then the coefficient of $e^\om$ is equal to the trivial character, which proves (a) for $\la=0$. The general claim follows by induction, using the formula \[\prod\chi_{i_j}=\chi_\la+ lower\ characters,\] where $i_j$ is a nonincreasing sequence of integers, $\la$ is the Young diagram whose $j$-th column has exactly $i_j$ boxes, and lower characters refers to a sum of simple $O(N)$ characters labeled by Young diagrams smaller than $\la$ in alphabetical order. To prove the corresponding formulas for the tensor product representations, we check it first for $n=2$. Here for $N$ even, the second tensor product of the spinor representation $S$ is a direct sum of all possible antisymmetrizations of the vector representation $\C^N$. For $N$ odd, we similarly get that $\tilde S^{\otimes 2}$ decomposes into the direct sum of two copies of the exterior algebra of $\C^N$. It was shown in that the $i$-th antisymmetrization in $S^{\otimes 2}$ (respectively in $\tilde S^{\otimes 2}$, where it appears with multiplicity 2) is an eigenspace of the $\so_2$ generator $B_1$ with eigenvalue $N/2-i$. This proves that the $\so_2$ character of $S^{\otimes 2}$ (respectively of $\tilde S^{\otimes 2}$) is given by Eq [\[scharacter\]](#scharacter){reference-type="ref" reference="scharacter"} for $N$ even (respectively by twice the value of Eq [\[scharacter\]](#scharacter){reference-type="ref" reference="scharacter"} for $N$ odd). For $n=2k>2$, we write $S^{\otimes n}=(S^{\otimes 2})^{\otimes k}$ and observe that the $i$-th factor $S^{\otimes 2}$ gives us the eigenspaces of $B_{2i-1}$, to which we can apply the same arguments as before. Comparing with Eq [\[scharacter\]](#scharacter){reference-type="ref" reference="scharacter"} (with the $\chi_{i_j}$ evaluated at the identity element) we see that the $SO(n)$ character of $S^{\otimes n}$ is the same as the one for $S_{Nn}$ for $N$ even, and the $SO(n)$ character of $\tilde S^{\otimes n}$ is $2^{n/2}$ times the character of $S_{Nn}$ for $N$ odd. From this follow statements (b) and (c) (for $n$ even). For $n$ odd, the corresponding statements follow from the results for $n+1$ from the restriction rules of representations of $\so_{n+1}$.0◻ ## Quantum and fusion cases By the main result of, we have commuting actions of $\U=U_q\so_N\rtimes \Z/2$ and $U'_q\so_n$ on $S^{\otimes n}$ (for $N$ even) and $\tilde S^{\otimes n}$ for $N$ odd. Not surprisingly, the decomposition in the Lemma [\[comparison\]](#comparison){reference-type="ref" reference="comparison"} carries over to this setting if $q$ is not a root of unity. If $q$ is a primitive $2\ell-$th root of unity, we have a similar relationship in the corresponding ribbon fusion category $O(N)_r$ where $r=\ell+2-N$ is the level. This is the quotient category of the (ribbon) category of tilting modules in $\U=U_q\so_N\rtimes \Z_2$ by negligible morphisms. Adopting the notation from the affine Lie algebra literature, we denote this category by $O(N)_r$ where $r=\ell+2-N$. In the case $N$ is odd, we have $O(N)_r\cong SO(N)_r\boxtimes \Rep(\Z_2)$, whereas in the case $N$ is even $O(N)_r$ is the $\Z_2$-equivariantization of $SO(N)_r$. The simple objects in $O(N)_r$ corresponding to $O(N)$-representations are labeled by Young diagrams $\la$ satisfying $\la_1'+\la_2'\leq N$ and $\la_1+\la_2\leq \ell +2-N$ and the additional Young diagram $\la=[\ell-N+1,1^{n-1}]$. The objects with half-integer spin can be described by similar inequalities. A more explicit description is given below in the case $r=2$. We will again denote the images of the corresponding tilting modules in $\U$ by $S$ (respectively $\tilde S$) in the fusion category $O(N)_r$. We have the following results, most of which were already proved in : $Proof.$ Part (a) follows from Lemma [\[comparison\]](#comparison){reference-type="ref" reference="comparison"}, using the explicit representations in and the fact that for $q$ not a root of unity the representation theory of Drinfeld-Jimbo quantum groups is essentially the same as for the corresponding Lie algebra. For part (b) we just use the fact that tensor powers of $S$ and $\tilde S$ can be written as a direct sum of indecomposable tilting modules; the objects in the fusion category are obtained by taking the quotient module by the tensor ideal generated by those tilting modules which have $q$-dimension equal to 0. The representations of $U'_q\so_n$ into these tensor powers are still well-defined at a root of unity, and they factor over the fusion quotient. As these $U'_q\so_n$ modules usually have smaller dimensions at a root of unity than in the generic case, we still need to check that they have the same highest weight vector. But this follows from the restriction rule: restricting the action to $\so_{n-1}$, the highest weight vector is again a highest weight vector in an $\so_{n-1}$-module which also exists in the fusion category. The explicit combinatorics can be checked either directly by using Gelfand-Tseitlin bases for the orthogonal case (see e.g. ), or by using the tensor product rules for spinor representations (see e.g. ) via the correspondence [\[corresp\]](#corresp){reference-type="ref" reference="corresp"}.0◻We use the notation $\ve=(1/2,1/2,\ldots,1/2)\in \R^j$ and $\e_i$ for the $i$-th standard basis vector of $\R^j$. We associate these vectors with weights of $\so_n$ for $n=2j$ or $n=2j+1$ in the usual way. Let $\rho$ be half the sum of the positive roots of $\so_n$, and let $q^{2\rho}$ be the operator on a finite dimensional $\U$-module defined by $q^{2\rho}v_\mu=q^{(2\rho, \mu)}v_\mu$ for a weight vector $v_\mu$ of weight $\mu$. We define, as usual, the $q$-dimension of a $\U$-module $V$ by $\dim_q V=Tr(q^{2\rho})$. As we have commuting actions of $\U$ and $U'_q\so_n$ on $S^{\otimes n}$ (respectively $\tilde S^{\otimes n}$), we can define the virtual $U'_q\so_n$ character $\chi^\rho_n$ by \[\chi^\rho_n(u)=Tr(uq^{2\rho}),\] where $u$ is in the Cartan algebra of $U'_q\so_n$, and $Tr$ is the usual trace of $S^{\otimes n}$ (respectively $\tilde S^{\otimes n}$). The following lemma follows from the multiplicativity of the trace for tensor factors, using a similar argument as in the proof of Lemma [\[comparison\]](#comparison){reference-type="ref" reference="comparison"}. ## Weakly Integral Cases In the rest of this paper we will mostly focus on the case $q=e^{\pi \i/N}$ corresponding to $O(N)_2$. The special cases $O(N)_2$ correspond to the quotient by negligible morphisms of the categories of tilting $\U$-modules for $q$ a $2N$th root of unity. These $O(N)_2$ are weakly integral unitary ribbon fusion categories, i.e. $(\dim_q V)^2\in\Z$ for simple objects $V$. The related categories $SO(N)_2$ (see e.g. ) obtained from $U_q\so_N$ at $q=e^{\pi \i/N}$ are also weakly integral modular categories and have simple objects labeled by highest weights for $\so_N$. We will describe these categories in some detail. Setting $N=2k+1$ for $N$ odd and $N=2k$ for $N$ even, we denote the fundamental weights for $\so_N$ by $\Lambda_1,\ldots,\Lambda_k$. No confusion should arise as we deal with $N$ even and $N$ odd separately. For later use we define for $0\leq j\leq k$ the highest weight $\gamma_j=(1,\ldots,1,0,\ldots,0)$ with the first $j$ entries equal to $1$. For $N$ odd $\Lambda_k=(1/2,\ldots,1/2)$ labels the simple object $S$ associated with the fundamental spin representation for $\so_N$ and $\Lambda_j=(1,\ldots,1,0,\ldots,0)$ for $1\leq j\leq k-1$. For $N$ even the two fundamental spin objects $S_{\pm}$ are labeled by $\Lambda_k=(1/2,\ldots,1/2)$ and $\Lambda_{k-1}=(1/2,\ldots,1/2,-1/2)$, while $\Lambda_j=(1,\ldots,1,0\ldots,0)$ for $1\leq j\leq k-2$. ### $N$ odd {#ss:nodd} The fusion category $SO(N)_2$ for $N$ odd has two simple (self-dual) objects $S=V_{\Lambda_k}$ and $S^\prime=V_{\Lambda_k+\Lambda_1}$ of dimension $\sqrt{N}$, 2 simple objects $\1=V_{\gamma_0}$ and $V_{2\Lambda_1}$ of dimension $1$, and $\frac{N}{2}$ simple objects $V_{\gamma_s}$ of dimension $2$ where $1\leq s\leq \frac{N-1}{2}$. Thus, for $N$ odd, the rank of $SO(N)_2$ is $\frac{N-1}{2}+4$ and the categorical dimension is $4N$. As we have noted above, for $N$ odd $O(N)_2\cong SO(N)_2\boxtimes \Rep(\Z_2)$ as ribbon fusion categories, so that the structure of $O(N)_2$ is easily determined from that of $SO(N)_2$. Here $\Rep(\Z_2)$ is regarded as the ribbon category with trivial twists and symmetric braiding. We will denote the two objects in $\Rep(\Z_2)$ be $\one$ and $-\one$ where $-\one$ corresonds to the non-trivial representation of $\Z_2$. In particular we have a $\Z_2$ grading of $O(N)_2$ with components corresponding to $(V,\pm\one)$. In this notation we have $S_0=(S,\one)$ and $S_1=(S,-\one)$. For example we have $\tilde{S}^{\ot 2}=[(S,\one)\oplus (S,-\one)]^{\ot 2}\cong 2[(S^{\ot 2},\one)\oplus (S^{\ot 2},-\one)]$. Moreover, the (forgetful) functor $F:O(N)_2\rightarrow SO(N)_2$ by $F(V,\pm\one)\rightarrow V$ is obviously faithful and is braided since the braiding on $\Rep(\Z_2)$ is symmetric. ### $N$ even For $N$ even the fusion category $SO(N)_2$ has $4$ simple objects $S_{\pm}$ (labeled by $\Lambda_k$ and $\Lambda_{k-1}$) and $S_{\pm}^\prime$ (labeled by $\Lambda_k+\Lambda_1$ and $\Lambda_{k-1}+\Lambda_1$) of dimension $\sqrt{N/2}$, $4$ simple objects $\1,V_{2\Lambda_1},V_{2\Lambda_k}$, and $V_{2\Lambda_{k-1}}$ of dimension $1$ and $\frac{N}{2}-1$ simple objects $V_{\gamma_s}$ of dimension $2$ where $1\leq s\leq \frac{N}{2}-1$. Thus, for $N$ even, the rank of $SO(N)_2$ is $\frac{N}{2}+7$ and the categorical dimension is $4N$. The simple objects in $O(N)_2$ are the images (under purification) of the simple $U_q\so_N\rtimes \Z_2$-tilting modules with non-zero $q$-dimension. Using we find that the simple objects in $O(N)_2$ are: $S$ and $S^\prime$ of dimension $2\sqrt{N/2}$; $\1,V_{[2]},V_{[1^N]}$ and $V_{[1^{N-1},1]}$ of dimension $1$; and $V_{[1^s]}$ of dimension $2$ with $1\leq s\leq N-1$. The restriction map $\Rep(U_q\so_N\rtimes \Z_2)\rightarrow \Rep(U_q\so_N)$ induces a braided tensor functor $F:O(N)_2\rightarrow SO(N)_2$ with images: \[\begin{aligned} F(S)&=&S_+\oplus S_-\\ F(S^\prime)&=& S_+^\prime\oplus S_-^\prime\\ F(V_{[2]})&=&F(V_{[1^{N-1},1]})=V_{2\Lambda_1}\\ F(V_{[1^N]})&=&F(\1)=\1\\ F(V_{[1^s]})&=&F(V_{[1^{N-s}]})=V_{\gamma_s}, \quad 1\leq s\leq k-1 \end{aligned}\] Observe that the objects $S$ and $S^\prime$ in $O(N)_2$ are self-dual, although $S_{\pm}$ are not. We now can proof the following corollary to Theorem [\[duality\]](#duality){reference-type="ref" reference="duality"}(b). $Proof.$ This follows from Theorem [\[duality\]](#duality){reference-type="ref" reference="duality"}(b) and from the restriction rules for representations of $U'_q\so_n$ (see ) and tensor product rules of $O(N)_2$. The surjectivity for $N$ even follows from a dimension count (simply compute the Bratteli diagram for the object $S$).0◻ ## $\B_n$ representations on $\End(S^{\ot n})$ {#quantugroupeigs} Denote by $\gamma_S:\B_n\rightarrow \Aut(S^{\ot n})$ the representations of the braid group associated with the object $S$ in $SO(N)_2$ for $N$ odd or $O(N)_2$ for $N$ even. Explicitly, $\gamma_S$ is defined on generators by $\sigma_i\rightarrow Id_S^{\ot(i-1)}\ot c_{S,S}\ot Id_S^{\ot (n-i-1)}$. For later use we compute the eigenvalues for the braiding operator $c_{S,S}$ for $SO(N)_2$ when $N$ is odd and $O(N)_2$ for $N$ even. For $N=2k+1$ odd, we have \[S^{\ot 2}\cong\bigoplus_{j=0}^{k} V_{\gamma_j}.\] The eigenvalues of $c_{S,S}$ are easily computed, and we record them in: $Proof.$ It follows from Reshetikhin's formulas (see e.g. ) that, up to an overall factor, $c_{S,S}$ acts on the projection onto $V_{\lambda}$ by the scalar $\varsigma(\lambda)x^{\frac{c_{\lambda}}{2}}$ where $c_\lambda=\langle \lambda+2\rho,\lambda\rangle$ for any weight $\lambda$ and the sign $\varsigma(\lambda)=1$ if the corresponding $\so_N$ representation appears in the symmetric tensor square of the fundamental spin representation and $-1$ otherwise. Observe that here $\langle\;,\;\rangle$ is twice the usual Euclidean inner product and $2\rho=(2k-1,\ldots,1)$. We compute $c_{\gamma_s}=2(Ns-s^2)$ and note that \[\varsigma(\gamma_s)=\begin{cases} -1 & (k-s)\equiv 1,2\pmod{4}\\ 1 & (k-s)\equiv 0,3\pmod{4} \end{cases},\] from which the result follows.0◻In the case $N=2k$ is even we have: \[S^{\ot 2}=\bigoplus_{s=0}^N V_{[1^s]}\] and the eigenvalues of $c_{S,S}$ are given in: $Proof.$ Since the functor $F:O(N)_2\rightarrow SO(N)_2$ is a braided tensor functor we can compute the eigenvalues of $c_{S,S}$ from $F(c_{S,S})$. Up to signs these are just the eigenvalues of $c_{S_\pm,S_\pm}$ and the square roots of the eigenvalues of $c_{S_+,S_-}c_{S_-,S_+}$. These can be computed up to an overall factor using Drinfeld's quantum Casimir (since $\langle \Lambda_k+2\rho,\Lambda_k\rangle=\langle \Lambda_{k-1}+2\rho,\Lambda_{k-1}\rangle$) as $q^\frac{c_\lambda}{2}$ with $q=e^{\pi \i /N}$ for any $V_\lambda\in F(S^{\ot 2})$. Up to signs, the eigenvalues corresponding to $V_{[1^s]}$ and $V_{[1^{N-s}]}$ are (both) $q^{\frac{c_{\gamma_s}}{2}}$ for $0\leq s\leq N/2$. We compute $c_{\gamma_s}=\langle \gamma_s+2\rho,\gamma_s\rangle=Ns-s^2$ and set $f(s)=q^{\frac{Ns-s^2}{2}}=i^se^{-\pi \i s^2/(2N)}$. Observe that $f(N-s)=f(s)$ so that $c_{S,S}$ has eigenvalue $\eta(s)f(s)$ on the projection onto $V_{[1^s]}$ for all $0\leq s\leq N$, where $\eta(s)$ is a sign. By continuity, it is enough to determine the signs for the classical case $q=1$ for which the braiding is symmetric. One way to do this goes by induction on the dimension $N$, for $N$ even (a similar argument also works for the slightly easier case $N$ odd). One first observes that for $N=4$ the signs are given by $\eta(0)=\eta(1)=\eta(4)=-1$ and $\eta(2)=\eta(3)$, using the fact that $Spin(4)\cong SU(2)\times SU(2)$. The crucial observation now is that the sign for the representations $V_{[1^{N/2-s}]}\subset S_N^{\otimes 2}$ are the same as the ones for the representations $V_{[1^{N/2-s-1}]}\subset S_{N-2}^{\otimes 2}$, for $0\leq \|s\|<N/2$; here $S_{2k}$ is the spinor representation in connection with $O(2k)$. This follows from the fact that $S_N$ decomposes as a $Pin(N-2)$ module into the direct sum of two modules isomorphic to $S_{N-2}$, see e.g. the discussion in, Lemma 2.1. Using the eigenspace decomposition of the permutation $R_S\in\End(S^{\otimes 2})$, we obtain for the normalized trace $tr$ on $\End(S^{\otimes 2})$ \[\label{traceformula} \frac{1}{2^{N/2}}=tr(R_S)=\frac{1}{2^{N}}\sum_{s=0}^N \eta(N/2-s)\dim\ V_{[1^{N/2-s}]}.\] We remark that a similar formula also holds for the odd-dimensional case $Spin(N+1)$, where now the summation only goes until $s=N/2$ and we have the antisymmetrizations of the $(N+1)$-dimensional vector representations on the right hand side. By induction assumption, $\eta(N/2-s)$ is known for $s<N/2$, and $\dim V_{[1^{N/2-s}]}$ is equal to $\binom{N}{N/2-s}$. In the odd-dimensional case, we can now easily calculate the missing sign $\eta(0)$ from Eq [\[traceformula\]](#traceformula){reference-type="ref" reference="traceformula"}, as adjusted for the odd-dimensional case. To calculate the two remaining signs in the even-dimensional case, we consider $Pin(N)$ as a subgroup of $Spin(N+1)$, which acts irreducibly via its spinor representation on the same vector space $S$; in particular, we can also identify the trivial subrepresentation in $S^{\otimes 2}$ for both groups, which hence has the same sign $\eta(0)$ for the permutation $R_S$ at $q=1$. One now calculates $\eta(N)$ from Eq. [\[traceformula\]](#traceformula){reference-type="ref" reference="traceformula"}. It is now easy to check that the signs can be given by the formula $\eta(s)=e^{\frac{(N-2s)(N-2s+2)\pi \i }{8}}$. 0◻ # Representation theory of $U_q'\so_n$ {#section: rep. theory} We review and (re)prove certain results of the representation theory of $U_q'\so_n$. Many of these results have already appeared in one form or another in work of Klimyk and his coauthors, see e.g. ,. However, in our case, we need these results for roots of unity where the situation is more complicated. Hence we have decided to give our own, quite different proofs by mimicking a Verma module construction. We will do this here only for what is called the classical series in, i.e. for representations which are deformations of representations of $U\so_n$, and those only for $n\leq 5$. It is planned to give a more complete study of these representations in a separate paper. ## Definitions We identify roots and weights of $U_q'\so_n$ with vectors in $\R^k$, where $k=n/2$ or $(n-1)/2$ depending on the parity of $n$, as usual. So if $\ep_i$ is the $i$-th standard unit vector for $\R^k$, the roots are given by $\pm \ep_i\pm \ep_j$, $1\leq i<j\leq k$, and, if $n=2k+1$ is odd, also by $\pm \ep_i$, $1\leq i\leq k$. Here the analog of the Cartan subalgebra is the algebra $\h$ generated by $B_1, B_3,\ldots, B_{2k-1}$ for $n=2k$ or $n=2k+1$. A vector $v$ in a $U_q'\so_n$-module is said to have weight $\la$ if $B_{2i-1}v=[\la_i]v$ for all $B_{2i-1}\in \h$; we shall often identify $\la$ with the vector $(\la_i)$. As usual, $[n]=(q^n-q^{-n})/(q-q^{-1})$. Let us first recall the following theorem, which has been proved in ; it also follows from the results in, as quoted in Theorem [\[duality\]](#duality){reference-type="ref" reference="duality"}. $Proof.$ These are straightforward calculations. E.g. for (a) we have \[\begin{aligned} B_{2i-1}^2B_{2i}v\ &=\ ([2]B_{2i-1}B_{2i}B_{2i-1}-B_{2i}B_{2i-1}^2+B_{2i})v\cr &=\ [2][\mu_i]B_{2i-1}B_{2i}v-([\mu_i]^2-1)B_{2i}v. \end{aligned}\] We now get the claimed factorization in (a) using the identities $[2][\mu_i]=[\mu_i+1]+[\mu_i-1]$ and $[\mu_i]^2-1=[\mu_i+1][\mu_i-1]$. For part (b) observe that a similar calculation also holds with $i$ replaced by $i+1$. The claim follows from this.0◻For a given weight $\la$ we define the left ideal \[\label{Ilambdadef} I_\la=U'_q\so_n\langle (B_{2i-1}-[\la_i]1), (B_{2i-1}B_{2i}-[\la_i-1]B_{2i})\rangle\] for all values of $i$ for which the indices $2i-1$ and $2i$ are between (including) 1 and $(n-1)$. Observe that one can show as in Lemma [\[weightshift\]](#weightshift){reference-type="ref" reference="weightshift"} that now $B_{2i}$ is an eigenvector of $B_{2i-1}$ with eigenvalue $[\la_i-1]$ mod $I_\la$. Moreover, if $[\la_{i+1}+1]\neq [\la_{i+1}-1]$, we can write $B_{2i}$ as a linear combination of the two vectors $(B_{2i+1}-[\la_{i+1}\pm 1])B_{2i}$ of weights $\la-(\ep_i\pm\ep_{i+1})$ mod $I_\la$; observe that these are weights of the form $\la-\al$ with $\al$ a positive root of $U'_qso_n$. ## Spanning property It has already been observed in that a PBW type theorem holds for the algebra $U'_q\so_n$, using its embedding into the quantum group $U_q\sl_n$. One can also prove the existence of an analogue of a Verma module. This, and more results, are planned to appear in a separate paper by the second named author. For this paper, we will only give (or outline) ad hoc proofs for the special cases needed for our purpose. $Proof.$ The proof can be done via elementary, albeit somewhat tedious, calculations. A more general result will be proved in. We give a fairly detailed outline for a proof of this lemma for the skeptical reader as follows: For $n=5$, the idea is to move the generators $B_4$ as far to the right as possible. To make this mathematically precise, we define an order on words in the generators $B_i$ first by the length of the word, and then by reversed alphabetical order e.g. $B_4^2<B_3B_4<B_4B_3$ etc. We first prove that the claim holds if we only apply generators $B_i$, $2\leq i\leq 4$, to the highest weight vector. As a first step one shows that any vector generated this way is a linear combination of vectors of the form $w(B_4B_3B_2)^{e_3}B_4^{e_4}v_0$, with the word $w\in \langle B_2, B_3\rangle$. This follows by moving generators $B_4$ as far to the right as possible, using the relation \[B_4(B_4B_3B_2)\ =\ [2](B_4B_3B_2)B_4-B_3B_2B_4^2+B_3B_2.\] It is not hard to show that one can express $B_3B_4^jv_0$ as a linear combination of vectors $B_4^iv_\la$, see Lemma [\[sothreeVerma\]](#sothreeVerma){reference-type="ref" reference="sothreeVerma"} for details. Moreover, we also have the relation \[B_3(B_4B_3B_2)\ =\ (B_4B_3B_2)B_3+[B_3,B_2B_3B_4].\] Using it, not only can we prove our claim, but we can also show that $w$ may be assumed to end with a $B_2$, by induction on $e_4$ and $e_3$. It is now an easy induction on the number of $B_3$s in $w$ to prove that it can be expressed as a linear combination of words of the form $B_2^{e_1}(B_3B_2)^{e_2}$ by moving the $B_3$s as far to the right as possible (taking into account that a $B_3$ on the right end of $w$ will be absorbed, as just mentioned). To finish the proof for $n=5$, it suffices to show that multiplying any of the words as in the statement by $B_1$ again results in a linear combination of words without a $B_1$; this follows by a similar induction on the order of the words. The claims for $n=4$ and $n=3$ are proved similarly, with the proofs being much easier. 0◻ $Proof.$ We give an outline of the proof for the most difficult case $n=5$. As $N_\la$ is a quotient of $\Vl$, it suffices to prove the statement for the latter module. It is standard to check that the elements $B_2,B_3B_2, B_4$ and $B_4B_3B_2$ form a basis of $(\so_5 +I_\la)/I_\la$ for $q=1$. Hence their ordered polynomials form a basis for $\Vl=U\so_n/I_\la$. Let us consider the subspaces $\Vl(f_1,f_2)$ spanned by all the monomials in the generators with at most $f_1$ and $f_2$ factors equal to $B_2$ and $B_4$ respectively. It follows from Lemma [\[lemrelations\]](#lemrelations){reference-type="ref" reference="lemrelations"} and its proof that any such element can be written as a linear combination of words which also contain $\leq f_1$ factors equal to $B_1$ and $\leq f_2$ factors equal to $B_{3}$. Hence this space is a module of the Cartan algebra generated by $B_1$ and $B_3$. By Lemma [\[weightshift\]](#weightshift){reference-type="ref" reference="weightshift"}, the zeroes of the characteristic polynomial of $B_{2i-1}$ acting on $\Vl(f_1,f_2)$ can only be of the form $[\la_i-j]$ for some integer $j$. Specializing at $q=1$ gives us the estimates on the multiplicities of the zeroes (In fact, with a little more effort, one could show that our basis for $q=1$ extends to a basis for general $q$, which proves equality for the multiplicities). The general claim now follows by letting $f_1$ and $f_2$ go to infinity. 0◻ ## Invariant forms We call a sesquilinear form $(\ ,\ )$ on a $U'_q\so_n$ module $M$ invariant if $(B_iv,w)=(v,B_iw)$ for all $v,w\in M$ and $1\leq i<n$. A $U'_q\so_n$ module $M$ is called unitarizable if it admits a positive definite invariant form. In the following, we will denote a highest weight module with highest weight $\la$ by $N_\la$. If $q$ is a root of unity, the action of the operators $B_i$ on $N_\la$ may no longer be diagonalizable. However, we only have finitely many (generalized) weight spaces. For a weight $\mu$ we let $N_\la[\mu]$ be the generalized weight space of $N_\la$, i.e. the set of all vectors $v$ such that $(B_{2i-1}-[\mu_i]1)^kv=0$ for sufficiently large $k$. Finally, if $q$ is a primitive $2\ell$-th root of unity, with $\ell\geq n$, we say that $\la$ is a restricted dominant weight for $U'_q\so_n$ if $\la_1\leq \ell/2$. $Proof.$ Part (a) follows from a standard argument, which we omit. It follows from invariance that \[(a_1v_\la,a_2v_\la)\ =\ (v_\la, a_1^ta_2v_\la).\] If $q$ is not a root of unity, all the weight spaces are mutually orthogonal with respect to an invariant bilinear form. Hence the value of $(a_1v_\la,a_2v_\la)$ is given by the scalar of $v_\la$ in the expansion of $a_1^ta_2v_\la$ as a linear combination of weight vectors, times $(v_\la,v_\la)$. Part (b) is proved the same way. 0◻ ## $\so_3$ We now give a detailed classification of certain $U'_q\so_3$ modules as these results will be used later for $q$ a root of unity. $Proof.$ Let us first consider a vector space $V$ with a basis denoted by $(\tilde v_j)$. We define an action of $B_1$ and $B_2$ on $V$ by substituting $v_j$ by $\tilde v_j$ in the claim, i.e. by $B_1\tilde v_j=[\la-j]\tilde v_j$ and by \[B_2\tilde v_j= \tilde v_{j+1}+\al_{j-1,j}\tilde v_{j-1}.\] It is straightforward to check that this action indeed defines a representation of $U'_q\so_3$; just apply both sides of the given relation to a basis vector $\tilde v_j$. It also follows directly that the map $b\mapsto bv_0$ factors over the ideal $I_\la$ of $\in U'_q\so_3$. Hence we obtain a map from $\Vl$ onto $V$ which maps $v_j$ to $\tilde v_j$. This shows that the $v_j$ are linearly independent. As $B_2^jv_0=v_j+\sum_{i=0}^{j-2} \beta_iv_i$, it follows that also the vectors $B_2^jv_0$ are linearly independent. If $\la$ is a half-integer, one checks easily that $v_{2\la +1}$ generates an ideal spanned by the vectors $v_j$ with $j\geq 2\la +1$. As $\Vl$ has a basis of weight vectors, the maximality of this ideal follows from a well-known standard argument. To prove the statement about eigenvalues, we use the representations of $U'_q\so_3$ in. They are given by mapping $B_1$ to $B\otimes1$ and $B_2$ to $1\otimes B$, where $B\in\End(S^{\ot 2})$ and $1$ stands for the identity of $S$, with $S$ the spinor representation as described in previous sections. It is well-known that $B_1$ and $B_2$ are conjugated via certain braiding morphisms, and these braiding morphisms are in the algebra generated by $B_1$ and $B_2$ (see Section [2.5](#quantugroupeigs){reference-type="ref" reference="quantugroupeigs"}). Let $(\ ,\ )$ be an invariant form on $\Vl$. If $q$ is not a root of unity, then $[\la-j]\neq [\la-i]$ for $i\neq j$. Hence, by invariance, the $v_j$ are pairwise orthogonal. But then we also have \[(v_{j+1},v_{j+1})=(B_2v_j-\al_{j-1,j}v_{j-1},v_{j+1})=(v_j,B_2v_{j+1})= (v_j, v_{j+2}+\al_{j,j+1}v_j).\] The claim now follows from the fact that $(v_{j-1},v_{j+1})=(v_j,v_{j+2})=0$.0◻ $Proof.$ The proof goes along the lines of Lemma [\[sothreeVerma\]](#sothreeVerma){reference-type="ref" reference="sothreeVerma"} by showing that any module as in the statement induces a unique form on $\Vl$. The main problem now is that $B_1$ has large eigenspaces on $\Vl$. First assume $\la<\ell/2$. Then we can construct vectors $v_j$, $0\leq j\leq 2\la +1$ with the same inner products as before. In particular, we have $(v_{2\la+1}, v_{2\la+1})=0$. As the pullback of the form $(\ ,\ )$ on $\Vl$ is positive semidefinite, it follows that $v_{2\la+1}$ is in its annihilator ideal. Hence also the vectors $\tilde v_{2\la+1+j}=B_2^jv_{2\la+1}$ are in the annihilator ideal. As the vectors $v_j$ respectively $\tilde v_j$ are of the form $B_2^jv_0 +$ lower terms, the form is uniquely determined on $\Vl$. The same strategy also works for $\la=\ell/2$ until the construction of $v_{\ell}$. We know from the generic case that, in $\Vl$, we have $v_{2\la+1}=\prod_{j=0}^{2\la} (B_2-[\la-j])v_0$, see Lemma [\[sothreeVerma\]](#sothreeVerma){reference-type="ref" reference="sothreeVerma"}. As $B_2$ acts via a diagonalizable matrix in a unitary representation $W$, $v_{2\la +1}$ must be in the annihilator ideal of the pull-back of the positive definite form on $W$. So, in particular, also $(v_{\ell+1},v_{\ell-1})=0$ if $\la=\ell/2$. Using this, we can prove the claim as before for $\la<\ell/2$. 0◻ ## $\so_4$ and $\so_5$ First recall the weight structures for Verma modules for $\so_4$. We have seen in the last subsection that there exist polynomials $P_j$ of degree $j$ such that $v_j=P_j(B_2)v_0$ is a weight vector of weight $\la-j$, where $v_0$ is the highest weight vector of the Verma module of $U'_q\so_3$ with highest weight $\la$. Then also $B_3^kP_j(B_2)v_\la$ is an eigenvector of $B_1$ with eigenvalue $[\la_1-j]$, where $v_\la$ is the highest weight vector of a $U'_q\so_4$ highest weight module. In view of Lemma [\[weightshift\]](#weightshift){reference-type="ref" reference="weightshift"}, it follows by induction on $j$ that the eigenvalues of $B_3$ are of the form $[\la_2-j+2i]$, $0\leq i\leq j$. This can be written as \[\prod_{i=0}^j(B_3-[\la_2-j+2i])P_j(B_2)v_\la=0.\] Now leaving out the factor for a fixed $i=i_0$ gives us a weight vector of weight $(\la_1-j,\la_2-j+2i_0)$, or, possibly the zero vector. As $(\la_2-1,\la_1+1)$ and $(-\la_2-1,-\la_1-1)$ are not weights of the simple $U'_q\so_4$ module with highest weight $\la=(\la_1,\la_2)$, the just mentioned expressions for these vectors have to be in an ideal of the Verma module. This means they are in the annihilator ideal of any invariant form in the generic case. Indeed, it follows from Harish-Chandra's theorem (see e.g., Theorem 4.7.3) that these vectors generate the maximal ideal in the classical case. In view of our explicit basis, this can also be checked directly for $U'_q\so_4$ in the generic case. If $q$ is a primitive $2\ell$-th root of unity, and $0\leq\la_2\leq \la_1\leq \ell/2$, it is straightforward to check that the weight vectors mentioned in the last paragraph are also in the annihilator ideal of any invariant form, using Lemma [\[bilinunique\]](#bilinunique){reference-type="ref" reference="bilinunique"}, except possibly if $\la_1=\ell/2$ and $\|\la_2\|$ is equal to $\ell/2$ or $\ell/2-1$. In the first case, we basically have a $U'_q\so_3$ module, as, e.g. for $\la_2=\ell/2$ we have $B_3B_2v_\la=[\la_2-1]B_2v_\la$ and the claim follows from the previous section. Similarly, if $\la_2=\ell/2-1$, one considers the quotient of $\Vl$ modulo the vector of weight $(\ell/2-2,\ell/2+1)$. It is not hard to check that it is the sum of two $U'_q\so_3$ modules with highest weights $\ell/2$ and $\ell/2-1$, and the claim again follows from Lemma [\[sothreeunity\]](#sothreeunity){reference-type="ref" reference="sothreeunity"}. We have shown most of the following lemma: $Proof.$ After the previous discussion, it only remains to check the claim for the two $U'_q\so_5$ modules. This can be done by a straightforward inspection as follows: One first checks that all the inner products for $U'_q\so_4$ highest weight vectors are uniquely determined by the value of $(v_\la,v_\la)$, by Lemmas [\[bilinunique\]](#bilinunique){reference-type="ref" reference="bilinunique"} and [\[sothreeunity\]](#sothreeunity){reference-type="ref" reference="sothreeunity"}. To do this, one deduces from the character formulas in Lemma [\[comparison\]](#comparison){reference-type="ref" reference="comparison"} and Theorem [\[duality\]](#duality){reference-type="ref" reference="duality"} that for $\la=(\ell/2,\ell/2)$, the corresponding $U'_q\so_5$ module decomposes as a direct sum of simple $U'_q\so_4$-modules with highest weights $(\ell/2,j)$ and highest weight vectors $P_j(B_4)v_\la$, for which the inner products are known by Lemma [\[sothreeunity\]](#sothreeunity){reference-type="ref" reference="sothreeunity"}. The same method works for $\la=(\ell/2,\ell/2-1)$, except for the submodules with highest weights $(\ell/2-1,\pm(\ell/2-1))$. In the latter exceptional cases, the uniqueness of the norm can be deduced using Lemma [\[bilinunique\]](#bilinunique){reference-type="ref" reference="bilinunique"}. The claim now follows from this and and the already proven claim for unitary $U'_q\so_4$ modules. 0◻ # Quantum torus and braid representations {#section: quantum torus} ## Quantum torus Let $n>1$ and let $A$ be an $(n-1)\times (n-1)$ integer matrix defined by $a_{ij}=(j-i)$ if $\|i-j\|=1$ and by $a_{ij}=0$ otherwise. The quantum $(n-1)$-torus associated with $A$ is: \[T_q(n) := \C\langle u_1^{\pm 1},\...\ u_{n-1}^{\pm 1},\ : u_iu_j = q^{a_{ij}}u_ju_i\rangle.\] For $q\in\C^$ we may specialize $T_q(n)$ at $q$. In this situation we can give $T_q(n)$ the structure of a $$-algebra by setting $u_i^=u_i^{-1}$. We have the following elementary lemma: $Proof.$ The spanning property is easy to check, using the fact that the generators $u_i$ commute up to multiplication by a power of $q$. To prove linear independence, we define an action of $u_i$ on the space of Laurent polynomials $\C[x_1^{\pm 1}, x_2^{\pm 1},\ldots, x_{n-1}^{\pm 1}]$ by \[u_ix^{\vec m}=q^{m_{i-1}}x_ix^{\vec m},\] where $\vec m\in \Z^{n-1}$ and $x^{\vec m}=x_1^{m_1}x_2^{m_2}\... x_{n-1}^{m_{n-1}}$. We leave it to the reader to check that this is indeed a representation of $T_q(n)$. The linear independence follows from $u^{\vec m}1=x^{\vec m}$ and the linear independence of the vectors $x^{\vec m}$.0◻ ## Finite dimensional representations {#fdreps} If $(\rho,V)$ is a $d$-dimensional representation of $T_q(n)$ for $n\geq 3$ then $u_iu_{i+1}u_i^{-1}=qu_{i+1}$ implies that $\Spec(\rho(u_i))$ is invariant under multiplication by $q$. This, in turn, implies that $q^k=1$ for some $k$ dividing $d$. Moreover, it is easy to check that $q^k=1$ if and only if $u_i^k$ is in the center of $T_q(n)$. We define for any $\vec z\in S^{n-1}$, where $S=\{ z\in \C, \|z\|=1\}$, the quotient $T^k_q(n,\vec z)$ of $T_q(n)$ (specialized at a primitive $k$th root of unity) via the additional relations $u_i^k=z_i^k$, $1\leq i\leq n-1$. $Proof.$ Part (a) has been proved already. It also follows easily that the dimension of $T_q(n,\vec z)$ is at most as stated in (b). To prove the remainder of (b), suppose first that $n$ is odd so that $T^k_q(n,\vec z)$ has an even number of generators: $u_1,\ldots,u_{n-1}$. Let $V$ be a $k^{(n-1)/2}$-dimensional vector space with basis $v(\vec i)$, where $\vec i\in \{0,1,\ldots, k-1\}^{(n-1)/2}$. The action of $u_{2s-1}$ on $V$ is defined by $u_{2s-1}v(\vec i)=z_{2s-1}q^{i_s}v(\vec i)$. The action of $u_{2s}$ is given by the rule (indices modulo $k$): \[u_{2s}(v(i_1,\ldots,i_{s},i_{s+1},\ldots,i_{\frac{n-1}{2}}))=z_{2s}v(i_1,\ldots, i_s+1, i_{s+1}-1,i_{s+2},\ldots,i_{\frac{n-1}{2}});\] in other words, the even indexed generators $u_{2s}$ permute the vectors $v(i_1,\ldots,i_{\frac{n-1}{2}})$ by shifting the $s$th index up by 1 and the $(s+1)$th index down by 1, except for $s=(n-1)/2$ where there is no index left for shifting down. It is straightforward to check that $V$ is a $T^k_q(n,\vec z)$-module. Standard arguments show that if $W$ is a submodule of $V$, it must contain at least one common eigenvector of the elements $u_{2s-1}$, $1\leq s<n/2$, i.e. one of our basis vectors. It then follows for $n$ odd that $W$ contains all basis vectors, i.e. $W=V$ is simple. It follows that the image of $T_q(n,\vec z)$ is the full matrix ring on $V$. This proves all the statements in (b) for $n$ odd. For $n$ even, we look at the restriction of the just constructed representation of $T^k_q(n+1,\vec z)$ to $T^k_q(n,\vec z)$. It obviously must be faithful. On the other hand, it decomposes into the direct sum of $V_r$, $0\leq r<k$ of $T^k_q(n,\vec z)$-modules, where each $V_r$ is the span of vectors $v(\vec i)$ for which the sum of the indices $i_1+i_2+\cdots+i_{(n-1)/2}$ is congruent to $r$ mod $k$. From this follow the remaining statements of (b) for $n$ even. 0◻In what follows we will only need to deal with the special case $\vec z=(1,\ldots,1)$ for which we set $T^k_q(n)=T^k_q(n,(1,\ldots,1))$. ## $U'_q\so_n$ representations into the quantum torus Let $B_i, 1\leq i<n$ be the generators of $U'_q\so_n$, as before. $Proof.$ Part (a) is a straight-forward calculation: the case $n=3$ is sufficient since far-commutation is obvious, and writing out the $q$-Serre relations with $B_i=x(u_i\pm u_i^{-1})$ gives the specified values of $x$. Part (b) is obvious since $q^2\neq 1$. For (c) first observe that for $-\frac{N}{2}\leq j\leq \frac{N}{2}$ the $N+1$ numbers $[j]$ are distinct since $\sin(x)$ is increasing on $[-\pi,\pi]$. We have $u_i^{2N}=1$ so $\Spec(u_i)=\{q^j:0\leq j\leq 2N-1\}$, where $q=e^{\pi \i/N}$ and $\i=q^{\frac{N}{2}}$. Thus $\Spec(b_i)=\{q^{N/2}\frac{(q^j+q^{-j})}{q-q^{-1}}:0\leq j\leq 2N-1\}$. Since $q^{N/2}q^{-j}=-q^{-j-N/2}$ and \[\{j+N/2\pmod{2N}:0\leq j\leq 2N-1\}=\{j\pmod{2N}:0\leq j\leq 2N-1\}\] we have $\Spec(b_i)=\{[j]:-N/2\leq j\leq N/2\}$. Since $b_i^=-b_i$ the minimal polynomial of $b_i$ is a product of distinct (linear) factors. For (d) we note as above that $\{[j+1/2]:-k-1\leq j\leq k\}$ is a set of $2k+2$ distinct numbers and $\{[j+1/2]^2:0\leq j\leq k\}$ is a set of $k+1$ distinct numbers (since $[j+1/2]=-[-j-1/2]$). We have $u_i^{2N}=1$ so $\Spec(u_i)=\{q^{j}:0\leq j\leq 2N-1\}$ (where $q=e^{2\pi \i/(2N)}$) and $\i=q^{N/2}$. Thus $\i(q^j+q^{-j})=q^{j+N/2}-q^{-j-N/2}$, and $\{j+N/2 \pmod{2N}:0\leq j\leq 2N-1\}=\{j+1/2\pmod{2N}:0\leq j\leq 2N-1\}$ so we have $\Spec(b_i)=\{[j+1/2]:-k-1\leq j\leq k\}$. As in (c), the minimal polynomials of $b_i$ and $b_i^2$ are products of distinct linear factors. 0◻ ## Basics from subfactor theory In order to compare the representations defined in this section with the ones defined before in connection with fusion categories we shall need a few basic results from Jones' theory of subfactors (see ). Let $\A\subset \B$ be finite or infinite dimensional unital von Neumann algebras with the same identity. Assume that $\B$ has a finite trace $tr$ satisfying $tr(1)=1$ and $(b,b)=tr(b^*b)>0$ for $b\neq 0$. Let $L^2(\B,tr)$ be the Hilbert space completion of $\B$ under the inner product $(\ ,\ )$, and let $e_A$ be the orthogonal projection onto $L^2(\A,tr)\subset L^2(\B,tr)$. It can be shown that it maps any element $b\in\B$ to an element $\epsilon_\A(b)\in\A$. The algebra $\langle \B, e_A\rangle$ is called Jones' basic construction for $\A\subset \B$. If $\A\subset\B\subset \Ca$ are finite dimensional algebras and $e\in\Ca$ is such that $ebe=\epsilon_\A(b)e$ for all $b\in\B$ and the map $a\mapsto ae$ defines an algebra isomorphism between $\A$ and $\A e$, one can show that $\langle \B,e\rangle \cong \B e\B\oplus \B'$, where $\B e\B$ is isomorphic to a Jones basic construction for $\A\subset\B$, and $\B'$ is isomorphic to a subalgebra of $\B$. ## Algebra isomorphisms We consider the following set-up: Let $A_i$, $i\in\N$ be a sequence of self-adjoint operators acting on a Hilbert space, satisfying the following conditions: 1. We have $[A_i,A_j]=0$ for $\|i-j\|>1$, and $\A_{i,j}=\langle A_i, A_{i+1},\ldots, A_{j-1}\rangle$ is a finite-dimensional algebra for all $i<j$. 2. The map $A_i\mapsto A_{i+1}$, $1\leq i\leq j-2$ induces an isomorphism between $\A_{1,j-1}$ and $\A_{2,j}$. 3. There exists a unital trace on the algebra $\A$ generated by the elements $A_i$, $i\in\N$, and an $m>0$ such that $\A_{i,j+1}=\langle A_{i,j},e_{j}\rangle$ is isomorphic to a Jones basic construction for $\A_{i,j-1}\subset \A_{i,j}$ whenever $j-i\geq m$, where $e_i$ is an eigenprojection of $A_i$. $Proof.$ It follows from our conditions that we can extend $\Phi$ to an algebra isomorphism between $\A_{1,\infty}$ and $\tilde\A_{1,\infty}$ by mapping $e_i$ to $\tilde e_i$ for $i>m$, by uniqueness of the basic construction. It remains to show that it maps $A_i$ to $\tilde A_i$ for $i>m$. We show this for the algebras $\A_{1,j}$ by induction on $j$, with $j\leq m+1$ established by assumption. For the induction step $j\to j+1$, we extend $\Phi$ to $\A_{1,j+1}$ by mapping $e_j$ to $\tilde e_j$. This also defines an injective homomorphism from $\A_{2,j+1}$ into the algebra generated by $\tilde \A_{2,j}$ and $\tilde e_j$, which is a subalgebra of $\tilde \A_{2,j+1}$. By injectivity and dimension count, the image actually is $\tilde\A_{2,j+1}$. On the other hand, using the induction assumption and the isomorphisms of condition (2), there exists an isomorphism between $\A_{2,j+1}$ and $\tilde\A_{2,j+1}$ which maps $A_i$ to $\tilde A_i$ for $2\leq i\leq j$. As it also maps $e_j$ to $\tilde e_j$, it must coincide with the restriction of $\Phi$ to $\A_{2,j}$. This shows the claim. 0◻ ## Identifying the representations We use the notation $\ve=(1/2,1/2,\ldots, 1/2)\in \R^j$ and $\e_i$ for the $i$-th standard basis vector of $\R^j$. We associate these vectors with weights of $\so_n$ for $n=2k$ or $n=2k+1$ in the usual way. $Proof.$ Parts (a) and (b) are proved by checking that conditions (1)-(3) of Subsection [4.2](#fdreps){reference-type="ref" reference="fdreps"} and Lemma [\[algextensions\]](#algextensions){reference-type="ref" reference="algextensions"} are satisfied for $A_i=\Phi(B_i)$ and for $\tilde A_i=\Psi(B_i)$. Conditions (1) and (2) are easy to check, using Remark [\[checkconditions\]](#checkconditions){reference-type="ref" reference="checkconditions"} and the fact that $u_i\mapsto u_{i+1}$ also induces a homomorphism in the quantum torus with $q$ a root of unity. Indeed, $\tilde S$ is a self-dual object in $O(N)_2$ and the element $A_1\in\End(S^{\ot 2})$ generates the image of $\Phi(U^\prime_q\so_2)$. Observe that the representation $\Psi$ of $U'_q\so_n$ into $T^{2N}_q(n)$ for $q=e^{2\pi \i/(2N)}$ in the previous section has the same simple components (though not with the same multiplicities) as its representation $\Phi$ into $\End(S^{\otimes n})$ respectively $\End(\tilde S^{\otimes n})$ in Corollary [\[fusion2\]](#fusion2){reference-type="ref" reference="fusion2"} for $n\leq 5$. Indeed, for $n=2$ it suffices to calculate the eigenvalues of $B_1$, which was done in Lemma [\[qtorusrep\]](#qtorusrep){reference-type="ref" reference="qtorusrep"}. They coincide with the ones in the fusion representation, see. It is now easy to check that the usual trace for the standard representation of the quantum torus satisfies the same conditions as the functions $\chi^\rho_n$ of Lemma [\[rhocharacter\]](#rhocharacter){reference-type="ref" reference="rhocharacter"}. Hence the same irreducible characters of $U'_q\so_n$ for $n$ even appear in its representation into the quantum torus as in its representation into $\End(S^{\otimes n})$ respectively $\End(\tilde S^{\otimes n})$. But as unitary representations are uniquely determined by their highest weights for $n\leq 5$, with the additional condition on the restriction for $n=5$ by Lemma [\[sofourunique\]](#sofourunique){reference-type="ref" reference="sofourunique"} (observe that all entries $\mu_i$ of our weights have absolute value $\leq \ell/2$), thus the irreducible representations of $U'_q\so_n$ in the quantum torus coincide with the ones in the fusion category, for $n\leq 5$. Finally, condition (3) of Subsection [4.2](#fdreps){reference-type="ref" reference="fdreps"} holds for the algebras $\A_{i,j}$ with $m=4$ by Remark [\[checkconditions\]](#checkconditions){reference-type="ref" reference="checkconditions"} and it was verified by Jones for the algebras $\tilde\A_{i,j}$, see. But now the conditions of Lemma [\[algextensions\]](#algextensions){reference-type="ref" reference="algextensions"} are satisfied for $A_i$ and $\tilde A_i$ with $m=4$, and parts (a) and (b) follow. Now suppose $N$ is odd. Denote by $\Da\subset U^\prime_q\so_n$ the algebra generated by the $(B_i)^2$. Clearly the inclusion-respecting isomorphism of (b) restricts to $\Phi(\Da)\cong\Psi(\Da)$. Now it is an easy exercise in computing Bratteli diagrams (cf. ) to see that $\dim\Psi(\Da)=\dim\End(S^{\ot n})$. It follows from this and Remark [\[nosurjrem\]](#nosurjrem){reference-type="ref" reference="nosurjrem"}(b) that $\Phi(\Da)\cong\End(S^{\ot n})$.0◻ ## Braid representations into quantum torus The isomorphism in the last theorem transports the braid representations from the fusion categories to braid representations into the quantum torus. We determine precisely the images of the braid generators in these representations, up to an overall scalar factor. $Proof.$ Clearly $\psi(\sigma_i)$ must be a polynomial in $b_i=\frac{u_i+u_i^{-1}}{q-q^{-1}}$ for $N$ even and $b_i^2$ for $N$ odd. Since the isomorphisms of Theorem [\[centralizercor\]](#centralizercor){reference-type="ref" reference="centralizercor"} respect inclusions it is enough to prove that $\psi(\sigma_1)=R_o:=\frac{\gamma}{\sqrt{N}}\sum_{j=0}^{N-1}Q^{j^2}u_1^{2j}\in T^{2N}_q(n)$ for $N$ odd and $\psi(\sigma_1)=R_e:=\frac{\gamma}{\sqrt{2N}}\sum_{j=0}^{2N-1}\tau(x)^{j^2}u_1^j\in T^{2N}_q(n)$ for $N$ even (for some scalars $\gamma$ and some $\tau\in\Aut_\Q(\Q(x))$). Comparing the coefficients of $u_1^j$ and $u_1^{-j}$ one sees that $R_o$ and $R_e$ are indeed polynomials in $b_1^2$ respectively $b_1$. Since the number of distinct eigenvalues of $b_1$ and $b_1^2$ is equal to the dimension of $\End(S^{\ot 2})$ (for $N$ even, respectively odd) it is enough to verify that the eigenvalues of $R_o$ and $R_e$ coincide with those of $c_{S,S}$ in Lemmas [\[Neveneigs\]](#Neveneigs){reference-type="ref" reference="Neveneigs"} and [\[Noddeigs\]](#Noddeigs){reference-type="ref" reference="Noddeigs"} on each $B_1$-eigenspace. The eigenvalues of $B_1$ are computed in: the eigenvalue of $B_1$ on the projection onto $V_{[1^{N/2-j}]}$ is $[j]$ (note that in the Young diagram in the subscript has a typo: $2k$ should be replaced by $k=N/2$ as we have here). For $N$ odd, we must verify that $R_ov=\i^{(N/2-s)^2+s}e^{\frac{-s^2\pi \i}{2N}}v$ for any eigenvector $v$ of $b_1^2$ with eigenvalue $[N/2-s]^2$, for $0\leq s\leq (N-1)/2$ (up to a scalar independent of $s$) and for $N$ even $R_ev=\eta(N/2-s)f(N/2-s)v$ for any eigenvector $v$ of $b_1$ with eigenvalue $[s]$, for $-N/2\leq s\leq N/2$ where $\eta$ and $f$ are functions defined in Lemma [\[Neveneigs\]](#Neveneigs){reference-type="ref" reference="Neveneigs"} (up to a scalar, independent of $s$, and some choice of $\tau$). We will give the details in the $N$ even case and leave the $N$ odd case to the reader. For $N$ even and $-N/2\leq s\leq N/2$, $u_1$ acts on the $[s]$-eigenspace of $b_1$ by $x^{\pm(2s-N)}$. The corresponding eigenvalue of $\frac{1}{\sqrt{2N}}\sum_{j=0}^{2N-1}(x)^{j^2}u_1^j$ is: \[\frac{1}{\sqrt{2N}}\sum_{j=0}^{2N-1}x^{j^2\pm(2s-N)j}.\] Completing the square we have: \[\frac{x^{-(s-N/2)^2}}{\sqrt{2N}}\sum_{j=0}^{2N-1}x^{(j\pm (s-N/2))^2}.\] Since $x$ is a $4N$th root of unity and the set of residues modulo $4N$ of $(j\pm (s-N/2))^2$ is the same for $0\leq j\leq 2N-1$ and $2N\leq j\leq 4N-1$ we double the sum to obtain: \[\frac{x^{-(s-N/2)^2}}{2\sqrt{2N}}\sum_{j=0}^{4N-1}x^{j^2}=\frac{x^{-(s-N/2)^2}(1+\i)}{\sqrt{2}}.\] using Dirichlet's improvement on Gauss' result (see e.g. ). Rescaling (independent of $s$) we obtain the eigenvalue $f(N/2-s)(-\i)^{(N/2-s)}$ for $R_e$ on these spaces. The result now follows by verifying, for $\alpha=1-N(-1)^{N/2}$, that \[\frac{[f(N/2-s)(-\i)^{(N/2-s)]^\alpha}}{(\eta(N/2-s)f(N/2-s))}\] is independent of $s$.0◻ As a consequence we can prove (a generalized version of) : $Proof.$ In the Gaussian representations are shown to have finite image. Hence for $N$ odd, the claim is immediate from Proposition [\[identifiedBnreps\]](#identifiedBnreps){reference-type="ref" reference="identifiedBnreps"}. For $N$ even the same analysis implies that the braid group representation on $\End_{O(N)_2}(S^{\ot n})$ for $N$ even is a finite group. Since the forgetful functor $F:O(N)_2=(SO(N)_2)^{\Z_2}\rightarrow SO(N)_2$ is a braided tensor functor and the braiding is functorial we conclude that the image of the braid group acting on $\End_{SO(N)_2}(S_\pm^{\ot n})$ is a (finite) subquotient of the image of the braid group acting on $\End_{O(N)_2}(S^{\ot n})$. 0◻	{'timestamp': '2014-09-05T02:11:02', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5329', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5329'}
# Introduction The trans-Neptunian objects (TNOs) are thought to be composed mainly of the less processed material from the proto-solar nebula. The study of their surface composition and their dynamical and physical properties provides important information to understand the conditions of the early solar system environment. Investigation of visible and near-infrared spectra of TNOs and Centaurs (a population of icy objects related to the TNOs and the Jupiter family comets) show a wide range in compositions. Some objects are covered by dark irradiation mantles showing a mostly featureless and neutral to reddish spectrum in the visible and near-infrared. Some other objects have retained large amounts of ices (e.g. $CH_4$, $N_2$, $H_2O$) on their surfaces. The spectra of these objects are characterized by clear absorption bands that appear over the entire wavelength range from the visible to the NIR. However, most of the objects show intermediate surface compositions, i.e., a mixture of ices and irradiated mantles. Most of these objects are not able to retain volatiles, but water ice can be present on their surface. Barucci et al. () and Brown et al. () study the possibility of water ice on the surfaces of TNOs and Centaurs from extensive collections of spectra of these minor bodies. Both works are in agreement on the broad results. Most of the objects brighter than an absolute magnitude of H = 3 have deep water ice absorption. For those fainter than an absolute magnitude of H = 5, deep water ice absorption is never seen. For the intermediate objects, those with a diameter $\sim$ 650 km, only one (2003 AZ$_{84}$) shows a deep water ice absorption band. TNOs and Centaurs with a clear detection of water ice are found on all the taxonomic groups, except for the IR (objects with a red intermediate slope, Barucci et al., ). Moreover, they are found on all the dynamical classes, except the cold classical population (Barucci et al., ) According to the Minor Planet Center (MPC), (20000) Varuna (hereafter Varuna) is a classical TNO ($a,e,i = 43.189\ AU,0.053,17.1^{\circ}$) with a magnitude $H= 3.6$. It has an estimated diameter of $668^{+154}_{-86}$km (Lellouch et al., ). Its surface composition has been studied through NIR spectroscopy by Licandro et al. () and Barkume et al. (). These authors, however, reach different conclusions. Licandro et al. () find a hint of an absorption of water ice around 2.0 $\mu m$ on a reddish NIR spectrum, while Barkume et al. () show a featureless spectrum with a blue slope at the H band. They interpret these contradictory results as an indication of surface heterogeneity. In this work, we present the results of a observational campaign designed to study the surface composition of Varuna at different rotational phases. The purpose of this work is to investigate the possibility of inhomogeneity suggested in previous studies. # Observations and Data In January 2011 we observed Varuna during two consecutive nights using the $3.58\ m$ Telescopio Nazionale Galileo (TNG), situated at the "Roque de los Muchachos" observatory in La Palma, Canary Islands, Spain. We used the high-throughput low resolution mode of the Near-Infrared Camera and Spectrometer (NICS), with an Amici prism disperser and the $1''$ slit. This mode yields a $0.8-2.5\ \mu m$ spectrum with a constant resolving power of $R \simeq 50$. The slit was oriented at the parallactic angle (and updated during the night), and the tracking of the telescope was set to compensate the non-sideral motion of the TNO. We observed the object each night during several hours, in order to cover entirely its rotation period $Pr = 6.34\ hr$ (Thirouin et al., ). The series of spectra consisted of consecutive exposures of $90\ s$ following an ABBA scheme, where A is the position of the object in the slit during the first acquisition and B is a position shifted of $10''$ along the slit. The ABBA scheme was repeated several times in order to increase the signal to noise ratio (S/N) and to cover the whole rotation period. To study possible spectral variations with the rotational phase, we divided the AB pairs in four groups, each group covering a quarter of the rotation. Then we combined each AB pairs to remove the sky contribution from the spectra. After discarding those spectra with low S/N (probably due to non-photometric conditions), we kept 114 spectra for Phase 1, 36 for Phase 2, 48 for Phase 3 and 68 for Phase 4, for total exposure times of 10260, 3240, 4320 and 6120 seconds respectively (see Tab. [1](#obs){reference-type="ref" reference="obs"}). We combined all the spectra of each group, obtaining a spectrum for each phase that we extracted and calibrated using IRAF standard packages as described in Licandro et al. (). In order to correct for telluric absorptions and to obtain the relative reflectance, we observed each night three stars chosen from this short list: P330E (Colina & Bohlin, ), Landolt (SA) 93-101, Landolt (SA) 102-1081 and Landolt (SA) 107-998 (Landolt, ). All of them are usually used as solar analogs and they were observed at different times in order to cover an airmass range similar to that covered by the object (1.01-2.07). Before comparing the spectra of the target with the spectra of the solar analogs to remove the signature of the Sun, we analyzed the spectra of the standard stars with a view to detect small differences in colors, introduced during the observations, i.e. by inconsistent centering of the star in the slit. These differences could propagate into the spectrum of the target through the reduction process. To quantify these errors, we extracted all pairs of stars acquired during the run. Then we divided, for each night, all of the spectra of the solar analogs by one that we take as reference (Landolt (SA) 102-1081). Notice that the resulting of dividing the spectrum of a solar analogs against another should result in a straight line with spectral slope $S'= 0$. An example is shown in Fig. [\[stand\]](#stand){reference-type="ref" reference="stand"} where small differences in spectral slope can be detected over all the adopted wavelength range. Some spectral structure appears also close to the wavelength regions affected by telluric absorptions; these are typical of variation of the atmospheric conditions. Calculating the slope of these ratios and averaging them, we estimate that the systematic errors are no larger than $0.65\%/1000$ Å. After analyzing the small variation among all the pairs of each standard, we averaged all of them and used the resulting spectrum of each solar analog to extract the relative reflectance of the target at the four rotational phases. We show in the top panel of Fig. [\[fases\]](#fases){reference-type="ref" reference="fases"} the four final scaled reflectances normalized to unity at $1.6 \ \mu m$ and shifted by $0.5$ in relative reflectance for clarity. We do not show the values around the two large telluric bands ($1.35-1.46$ and $1.82-1.96 \ \mu m$) as the S/N is very low and the difference between the spectrum of the object and those of the solar analogues could introduce false features even in rather stable atmospheric conditions. # Analysis of the spectra In comparing the four spectra, we first note that they are all similar within the S/N (Fig. [\[fases\]](#fases){reference-type="ref" reference="fases"} top panel). This is more clear in Fig. [\[fases\]](#fases){reference-type="ref" reference="fases"} (bottom panel), where we show the ratio between each of the spectra and the average of all of them, showing all of them a deviation from unity lower than $2\sigma$. We see that all the spectra are reddish (Fig. [\[fases\]](#fases){reference-type="ref" reference="fases"}, top panel) signaling the presence on the surface of Varuna of materials more absorbent at the shorter wavelengths. Moreover, the four spectra display an absorption band centered at 2.0 $\mu m$, where the water ice has a deep band. As suggested in Licandro et al. (), the low depth of the 2.0 $\mu m$ band and the non-detection of the water-ice band at 1.5 $\mu m$ suggest that the fraction of water ice in the surface is not high (we will come back to this in section 4). These results are consistent regardless how we define the four phases. In order to quantify any possible variation in the slope with the rotation phase, we compute, for each spectrum, the normalized reflectivity gradient $S'[\% /1000$ Å\] in the $0.8-1.8\ \mu m$ range, where the continuum can be fitted by a straight line (Jewitt, ). Results are shown in Tab. [2](#results){reference-type="ref" reference="results"}. Note that the errors in this table are computed from the fit, taking into account the dispersion of data in relative reflectance. However, as mentioned in the previous section, the systematic errors introduced in the slope is not smaller than $0.65\% /1000$ Å. Hereafter we will use this value for all measurement except those for which the computed errors are larger. The S' values obtained indicate that the slope does not vary with the rotation within the errors. Considering the similarity of the four spectra corresponding to the four phases, both in the slope and in the presence of the water ice absorption band, we have finally combined them to increase the S/N, obtaining an average spectrum for Varuna with a S/N of $\sim35$ in H band. The resulting spectrum of Varuna is shown in Fig. [\[rot_med\]](#rot_med){reference-type="ref" reference="rot_med"}. The average spectrum has a normalized reflectivity gradient of $S'=2.94\pm0.65\ \%/1000$ Å in the $0.8-1.8\ \mu m$ range, and a water ice absorption band at 2.0 $\mu m$ with a depth $D= 1-R_b/R_c=21.0 \pm 6.6 \%$, where $R_b$ is the reflectance in the center of the band and $R_c$ is the reflectance of the continuum in the same wavelength, calculated by fitting a cubic spline on the left and the right sides of the band. Finally, we rank the models using the $\chi^{2}$ value, always using the estimated value for the albedo in the visible as a constraint (p$_{v}=12.7^{+4.0}_{-4.2}\%$, Lellouch et al., ). The final-best-model consists of an intimate mixture of 25% water ice (17 $\mu$m), 15% olivine (50 $\mu$m), 10% pyroxene (50 $\mu$m), 35% tholin (6 $\mu$m) and 15% carbon. The albedo of this model is 10.7%, compatible with value estimated in Lellouch et al. (). The amount of water ice resulting from our theoretical model (25%) is consistent with previous results (Licandro et al., ) that suggested that water ice could be present on the surface of Varuna, even if the amount might be not very abundant. The model and spectrum are shown in Fig. [\[modelo\]](#modelo){reference-type="ref" reference="modelo"}. This composition is typical of objects covered by a mantle formed by a mixture of silicates, processed materials (complex organics) and water ice. Water ice lifetime on the surface of these Centaurs and TNOs is comparable to the age of the solar system, so it could be primordial. No refreshing mechanism is needed in this case to explain the surface composition of this Varuna. ## Models with methane ice Some of the large TNOs (Makemake, Licandro et al.; Eris, Brown et al., Licandro et al.; Pluto, Cruikshank et al. ) are covered by large amounts of methane and other volatiles. The molecule of methane ice is optically very active so, although the surface of these bodies may not be dominated by this material, their visible and near-infrared spectra are dominated by absorption bands caused by the molecules of methane ice. Other medium-size TNOs have surfaces that contain or could contain a certain amount of light hydrocarbons such as methane ice (e.g. Quaoar, Schaller et al. and 2007 OR$_{10}$, Brown et al. ). However this ice is not expected to be common on the surface of most of the TNOs as their temperatures are sufficiently high and masses are sufficiently low that all the volatiles would have been removed from the surface over solar system timescales (Schaller & Brown, and Brown et al. ) Because of its mass and distance from the Sun, Varuna is expected to have already lost all its original inventory of methane ice from the surface. However some fresh methane could have been exposed to the surface by collisions strong enough to break the mantle and expose fresh material from the interior of the body. This mechanism has been suggested as a mechanism to refresh the surface of TNOs with fresh materials from the interior of the bodies. To investigate if methane ice could be present on the surface of Varuna we run a final test. We turn our final 5-component model into a 6-component model, slightly changing the relative abundances to accommodate some amount of methane. We use the optical constants of methane ice at 40 K from Grundy et al.,. The fact that we do not see any of the stronger absorption bands in the wavelength range covered by our data (e.g. the 2$\nu_{3}$ transition at 1.67 $\mu m$; the $\nu_{2}+\nu_{3}+\nu_{2}$ at 1.72 $\mu m$, the $\nu_{3}+$`<!-- -->`{=html}2$\nu_{4}$ at 1.8 $\mu m$ or the $\nu_{2}+\nu_{3}$ at 2.21 $\mu m$) puts a strong constraint on the abundance and particle size of the methane in our model. Furthermore, small amounts of methane considerably increase the albedo, which reduces the number of possible solutions, given the albedo constraint described above. We find that the addition of small abundances of methane ice improves (but not strongly affects) the chi-square of our fit. Models could contain up to 10% of methane ice on the surface with a particle size of 20 $\mu m$ by decreasing the amount of water ice to 20% (20 $\mu m$) and the amount of amorphous carbon down to 10 %, giving a surface albedo in the visible of 11.3 % (Figure. [\[modelo\]](#modelo){reference-type="ref" reference="modelo"}). Our best result with methane ice is not unique (spectral models of mineral/ice mixtures are rarely unique, (Emery & Brown, ) but in this case we have some evident restrictions that limit valid ranges for the relative abundances and particle sizes of the different materials. Larger amounts of methane, and/or larger particles make the bands (specially those at 1.72 and 2.21 $\mu m$) more evident so that they would be detectable in our data. Smaller amounts of silicates or complex organics change the shape of the continuum, and models are also strongly constrained by the depth of the band of water ice at 2.02 $\mu m$. Larger amounts of high albedo materials (water ice + methane) would immediately increase the albedo in the visible of model above the valid value. But how could we explain the presence of methane ice on the surface of an object like Varuna that should be depleted of volatiles? One explanation for any possible CH$_4$ would be is that Varuna suffered from a collision in the past. The mean probability that a object like Varuna suffers from a collision with other TNOs is $<P_{i}>=1.60\times10^{-22} Km^{-2}yr^{-1}$, with medium impact velocity of $<\|U\|>=2.24\pm1.08\ Kms^{-1}$. This probabilty is even larger if we consider collisions between classical TNOs (Dell'Oro et al., ). These kind of energetic impacts can bring fresh ices to the surface of a TNO (Gil-Hutton & Brunini, ), as less energetic impacts only erode the irradiation mantle. As a result of this collision, the irradiation mantle was eroded and some ice from the interior (methane and water ice) was sublimated and globally redeposited on the surface. The timescale to distribute vapor globally is of tens of hours, (Stern, ), which is longer than the rotational period of Varuna, so the material was globally redeposited over the all surface, offering a possible explanation for the homogeneity. The presence of water and methane ices on the surface however is not large enough to mask the irradiation mantle, as it has been suggested for other TNOs with a higher content of water ice on the surface e.g.1999 TO$_{66}$ (Brown et al., ) and 2002 TX$_{300}$ (Licandro et al., ). According to Gil-Hutton et al. () thin layers of ices ($\sim$ 10-100 $\mu m$) are not able to mask an irradiation mantle below them. # Conclusions We observed Varuna during two consecutive nights, covering twice the rotational period ($\sim 6.34\ hr$). We show four averaged relative reflectance spectra (0.8-2.4 $\mu m$), each of them corresponding to a fourth of the rotation. Comparing their features (slope and absorption bands) we do not find any indication of surface heterogeneity within the signal to noise of our data (larger than the S/N of previously published spectra). All our spectra show a reddish slope with an $S'$ ranging from $2.95 \pm 0.31$ to $3.52 \pm 0.16 \% /1000$ Å and an absorption $\sim2$ $\mu m$ that is indicative of water ice. This absorption was previously detected by Licandro et al. () in a single spectrum of Varuna. The depth and shape of this band is consistent in the four spectra, its medium depth being $21.0 \pm 6.6 \%$. In this case, no refreshing mechanism is needed to explain the surface composition of Varuna. Our fits of the spectral reflectance using models for the scattering of light indicate that Varuna has a processed surface with some ice content, showing that highly processed materials (complex organics) and silicates coexist with water ice. This composition is homogeneous over all the surface of the body at the spatial scale covered by our data. Water ice lifetime on the surface of these bodies is comparable to the age of the object, so the ice could be primordial. Our data do not show any indication of other volatiles (such as methane ice) on the surface, although the S/N is not high enough to discard their presence. In fact, models show that 10% of methane ice with a particle size of 20 $\mu m$ improves the fit while still keeping the value of the albedo compatible with value estimated by Lellouch et al. (). The presence of this ice would indicate that Varuna had suffered a recent energetic impact that would be the responsible of the break up of the mantle of silicates and organics and of the replenishment of the surface with fresh material from the interior. This kind of impact also results in homogeneous surfaces as the one we observe for Varuna. More observations in the H and K band, specifically designed to detect methane ice would be optimum to disentangle the various scenarios for the recent history of Varuna.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-24T02:08:19', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5962', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5962'}
# Introduction Termination is arguably the single most interesting correctness property of a program. Research on proving termination can be divided according to three (interrelated) topics, namely: practical tools , decidability questions , and constraint-based synthesis of termination arguments . The work in this paper falls under the research on the third topic. The general goal of this research is to investigate how one can derive a constraint from the program text and compute a termination argument (of a restricted form) through the solution of the constraint, i.e., via constraint solving. In this paper, we present a method for the synthesis of termination arguments for a specific class of programs that we call lasso programs. As the name indicates, the control flow graph of a lasso program is of a restricted shape: a stem followed by a loop. Lasso programs do not appear as stand-alone programs. Lasso programs appear in practice whenever one needs a finite representation of an infinite path in a control flow graph, for example in (potentially spurious) counterexamples in a termination analysis, non-termination analysis, stability analysis, or cost analysis. Importantly, the termination argument for a lasso program is a pair of a ranking function and an invariant (the rank must decrease only for states that satisfy the invariant). shows an example of a lasso program. The class of lasso programs lies between two classes of programs for which constraint-based methods have been studied extensively. For the first, more specialized class, methods can be based on linear arithmetic constraint solving . For the second, more general class, all known methods are based on non-linear arithmetic constraint solving . The contribution of our method can be phrased, alternatively, as the generalization of the applicability of the 'linear methods', or as the optimization of the 'non-linear method' to a 'linear method' for a subproblem. The step from 'non-linear' to 'linear' is interesting for principled reasons (non-linear arithmetic constraint solving is undecidable in the case of integers). As we will show the step is also practically interesting. The reader may wonder how practical tools presently handle the situation where one needs to compute termination arguments for lasso programs. One possibility is to resort to heuristics. For example, instead of computing a termination argument for the lasso program in Figure 1, one would compute the ranking function $f(x)=x$ for the program `while(x>=0){x:=x-23;}`. The key to our method is a constraint transformation that replaces a disjunction by a sum. We apply the 'or-to-plus' transformation in the context of Farkas' Lemma. Following , we apply Farkas' Lemma in order to eliminate the universal quantifiers in the arithmetic constraint whose solution is the termination argument. If we apply Farkas' Lemma to the constraint after the 'or-to-plus' transformation, we obtain a linear arithmetic constraint. The effect of the 'or-to-plus' transformation to the constraint is a restriction of its solution space. The restriction seems strong; i.e., in some cases, the solution space becomes empty. We can characterize those cases. In other words, we can characterize when the 'or-to-plus' transformation leads to the loss of an termination argument, and when it does not. The characterization is formulated as a completeness theorem for which we will present the proof. This characterization allows us to establish that, even though we use only linear (as opposed to non-linear) constraint solving, we are able to compute termination arguments in several interesting cases. A possible explanation for this (perhaps initially surprising) fact is that, for synthesis, we are interested in the mere existence of a solution, and the loss of many solutions does not necessarily mean the loss of all solutions of the constraint. We have implemented our method and we have used our implementation to illustrate the applicability and the efficiency of our method. Our implementation is available through a web interface, together with a number of example programs (including the ones used in this paper).[^1] # Preliminaries: Linear Arithmetic We use $\vec x$ to denote the vector with entries $x_1,\dots,x_n$, and $\tr{\vec x}$ to denote the transposed vector of $\vec x$. As usual, the expression $A\cdot\vec x \leq \vec b$ denotes the conjunction of linear constraints $\bigwedge\limits_{j=0}^m ( \sum\limits_{i=0}^n a_{ij}\cdot x_i)\leq b_j$. We call a relation $\tau(\vec x,\vec x')$ a if $\tau$ is defined by a conjunction of linear constraints over the variables $\vec x$ and $\vec x'$, i.e., if there is a matrix $A$ with $m$ rows and $2n$ columns and a vector $\vec b$ of size $m$ such that the following equation holds. \[\tau(\vec x,\vec x')=\{(\vec x,\vec x')\mid A\cdot\abovebelow{\vec x}{\vec x'}\leq \vec b\}\] We call a function $f(\vec x)$ an , if $f(\vec x)$ is defined by an affine linear term, i.e., there is a vector $\tr{\vec r}$ and a number $r_0$ such that the following equation holds. \[f(\vec x) = \tr{\vec r}\cdot \vec x + r_0.\] We call a predicate $I(\vec x)$ a , if $I(\vec x)$ is defined by a linear inequality, i.e., there is a vector $\tr{\vec s}$ and a number $s_0$ such that following equivalence holds. \[I(\vec x)=\{\vec x\mid \tr{\vec s}\cdot \vec x+s_0\geq 0\}.\] #### Farkas' Lemma. We use the affine version of Farkas' Lemma which is also used in and states the following. Given - a satisfiable conjunction of linear constraints $A\cdot \vec x\leq \vec b$ - and a linear constraint $\tr{\vec c}\cdot \vec x \leq \delta$, the following equivalence holds. # Lasso Program To abstract away from program syntax, we define a lasso program directly by the two relations that generate its execution sequences. We use constraints over primed and unprimed variables to denote a transition relation (see ). In order to avoid cumbersome technicalities, we consider only lasso programs that have an execution that contains at least three states. This means we consider only programs where the relational composition of $\tau_\mathsf{stem}$ and $\tau_\mathsf{loop}$ is non-empty, i.e., \[\tau_\mathsf{stem} \circ \tau_\mathsf{loop}\neq\emptyset.\] Since Turing, a termination argument is based on an ordering which does not allow infinite decreasing chains (such as ordering on the natural numbers). Here, we use the ordering over the set of positive reals which is defined by some value $\delta>0$, namely #### Ranking Function. We call a function $f$ from the states of the lasso program $P$ into the reals $\mathbb{R}$ a for $P$ if there is a positive number $\delta>0$ such that for each consecutive pair of states $(\vec x_i, \vec x_{i+1})$ of a loop transition ($i \geq 1$) in every execution of $P$ - the value of $f$ is decreasing by at least $\delta$, i.e., \[\begin{aligned} f(\vec x_i)-f(\vec x_{i+1})\geq\delta, \end{aligned}\] - and the value of $f$ is non-negative, i.e., \[\begin{aligned} f(\vec x_i)\geq 0. \end{aligned}\] If there is a ranking function for the lasso program $P$, then $P$ is terminating. #### Inductive Invariant. We call a state predicate ${\color{siGreen} I(\vec x)}$ an of the lasso program $P$ if - the predicate holds after executing the stem, i.e., \[\forall \vec x\;\forall \vec x'\quad \tau_\mathsf{stem}(\vec x,\vec x') \rightarrow {\color{siGreen} I(\vec x')}, \tag{$\varphi_\mathsf{invStem}$}\label{inv-stem1}\] - and if the predicate holds before executing the loop, then the predicate holds afterwards, i.e., \[\forall \vec x\;\forall \vec x'\quad{\color{siGreen} I(\vec x)} \;\land\;\tau_\mathsf{loop}(\vec x,\vec x') \rightarrow {\color{siGreen} I(\vec x')}.\tag{$\varphi_\mathsf{invLoop}$}\label{inv-loop1}\] #### Ranking Function with Supporting Invariant. We call a pair of a ranking function ${\color{rkBlue}f(\vec x)}$ and an inductive invariant ${\color{siGreen} I(\vec x)}$ of the lasso program $P$ a ranking function with supporting invariant if the following holds. - There exists a positive real number $\delta>0$ such that, if the inductive invariant holds then an execution of the loop decreases the value of the ranking function by at least $\delta$, i.e., \[\exists\delta>0\forall \vec x\;\forall \vec x'\quad{\color{siGreen} I(\vec x)} \;\land\; \tau_\mathsf{loop}(\vec x,\vec x') \rightarrow {\color{rkBlue}f(\vec x)-f(\vec x')}\geq \delta.\tag{$\varphi_\mathsf{rkDecr}$}\label{rk-decr1}\] - In states in which the inductive invariant holds and the loop can be executed, the value of the ranking function is non-negative, i.e., \[\forall \vec x\;\forall \vec x'\quad{\color{siGreen} I(\vec x)} \;\land\; \tau_\mathsf{loop}(\vec x,\vec x') \rightarrow {\color{rkBlue}f(\vec x)\geq 0}.\tag{$\varphi_\mathsf{rkBound}$}\label{rk-bound1}\] For example, the lasso program depicted in has the ranking function ${\color{rkBlue}f(x,y)=x}$ with supporting invariant ${\color{siGreen} y\geq 1}$. #### Linear lasso programs. Linear lasso programs. For the remainder of this paper we consider only linear lasso programs, linear ranking functions, and linear inductive invariants which we will define next. The variables of the programs will range over the reals until we come to Section 9 where we turn to programs over integers. We use the expression $A_\mathsf{stem}\cdot(^{\vec x}_{\vec x'})\leq \vec b_\mathsf{stem}$ to denote the relation $\tau_\mathsf{stem}$ of $P$. We use the expression $A_\mathsf{loop}\cdot(^{\vec x}_{\vec x'})\leq \vec b_\mathsf{loop}$ to denote the relation $\tau_\mathsf{loop}$ of $P$. #### Linear Ranking Function. If a ranking function $f:\mathbb{R}^n\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$ is an (affine) linear function, we call $f$ a . We use $r_1,\dots,r_n$ as coefficients of a linear ranking function, $\vec r$ as their vector, \[f: \mathbb{R}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \qquad {\color{rkBlue}f(\vec x)}={\color{rkBlue}\tr{\vec r} \cdot \vec x + r_0}.\] #### Linear Invariant. If an inductive invariant $I(\vec x)$ is a linear predicate, we call $I$ a . We use $s_1,\dots,s_n$ as coefficients of the term that defines the linear predicate, $\vec s$ as their vector, \[{\color{siGreen}I(\vec x)}\;\equiv\; {\color{siGreen}\tr{\vec s} \cdot \vec x + s_0\geq 0}.\] # The Or-to-Plus Method Our constraint-based method for the synthesis of linear ranking functions for linear lasso programs consists of three main steps: Step 1. : Set up four (universally quantified) constraints whose free variables are the coefficients of a linear ranking function with linear supporting invariant. Step 2. : Apply Farkas' Lemma to the four constraints to obtain equivalent constraints without universal quantification. Step 3. : Obtain solutions for the free variables by linear constraint solving. The particularity of our four constraints in Step 1 is that the application of Farkas' Lemma in Step 2 yields constraints that are linear. Instead of presenting our constraints immediately, we derive them in three successive transformations of constraints. We start with the four constraints [\[inv-stem1\]](#inv-stem1){reference-type="eqref" reference="inv-stem1"}, [\[inv-loop1\]](#inv-loop1){reference-type="eqref" reference="inv-loop1"}, [\[rk-decr1\]](#rk-decr1){reference-type="eqref" reference="rk-decr1"}, and [\[rk-bound1\]](#rk-bound1){reference-type="eqref" reference="rk-bound1"}. Below, we have rephrased the four constraints for the setting where the ranking function is linear and the supporting invariant is linear. We marked them [\[inv-stem2\]](#inv-stem2){reference-type="eqref" reference="inv-stem2"}, [\[inv-loop2\]](#inv-loop2){reference-type="eqref" reference="inv-loop2"}, [\[rk-decr2\]](#rk-decr2){reference-type="eqref" reference="rk-decr2"}, and [\[rk-bound2\]](#rk-bound2){reference-type="eqref" reference="rk-bound2"} in reference to Bradley, Manna and Sipma \[5\] who were the first to use them in the corresponding step of their method. ### The Bradley--Manna--Sipma constraints [^2] \[\begin{aligned} \forall \vec x\;\forall \vec x'\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad \tau_\mathsf{stem}(\vec x, \vec x') & \rightarrow {\color{siGreen}\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x' + s_0 \geq 0}\tag{$\varphi^\mathsf{\text{\tiny\textsc{BMS}}}_1$}\label{inv-stem2}\\ \forall \vec x\;\forall \vec x'\quad {\color{siGreen}\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x + s_0 \geq 0} \;\land\; \tau_\mathsf{loop}(\vec x, \vec x') & \rightarrow {\color{siGreen}\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x' + s_0 \geq 0}\tag{$\varphi^\mathsf{\text{\tiny\textsc{BMS}}}_2$}\label{inv-loop2}\\ \exists\delta>0\;\forall \vec x\;\forall \vec x'\quad {\color{siGreen}\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x + s_0 \geq 0} \;\land\; \tau_\mathsf{loop}(\vec x, \vec x') & \rightarrow {\color{rkBlue}\tr{\vecr}\cdot\vec x}-{\color{rkBlue}\tr{\vecr}\cdot\vec x'}\geq \delta\tag{$\varphi^\mathsf{\text{\tiny\textsc{BMS}}}_3$}\label{rk-decr2} \\ \forall \vec x\;\forall \vec x'\quad {\color{siGreen}\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x + s_0 \geq 0} \;\land\; \tau_\mathsf{loop}(\vec x, \vec x') & \rightarrow {\color{rkBlue}\tr{\vecr}\cdot\vec x+r_0\geq 0} \tag{$\varphi^\mathsf{\text{\tiny\textsc{BMS}}}_4$}\label{rk-bound2} \end{aligned}\] The free variables of $\varphi^\mathsf{\text{\tiny\textsc{BMS}}}_1\land\varphi^\mathsf{\text{\tiny\textsc{BMS}}}_2\land\varphi^\mathsf{\text{\tiny\textsc{BMS}}}_3\land\varphi^\mathsf{\text{\tiny\textsc{BMS}}}_4$ are ${\color{rkBlue}\vecr}$, ${\color{rkBlue}r_0}$, ${\color{siGreen}\vecs}$, and ${\color{siGreen}s_0}$. ### Transformation 1: Move supporting invariant to right-hand side. We bring the conjunct ${\color{siGreen}\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x + s_0 \geq 0}$ in three of the four constraints [\[inv-stem2\]](#inv-stem2){reference-type="eqref" reference="inv-stem2"}, [\[inv-loop2\]](#inv-loop2){reference-type="eqref" reference="inv-loop2"}, [\[rk-decr2\]](#rk-decr2){reference-type="eqref" reference="rk-decr2"}, and [\[rk-bound2\]](#rk-bound2){reference-type="eqref" reference="rk-bound2"} to the right-hand side of the implication, according to the following scheme. \[\phi_1\land\phi_2\rightarrow\psi \;\;\equiv\;\; \phi_2\rightarrow\psi\lor\neg\phi_1\] We obtain the following constraints. \[\begin{aligned} \forall \vec x\;\forall \vec x'\quad\tau_\mathsf{stem}(\vec x, \vec x') & \rightarrow {\color{siGreen}\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x' + s_0 \geq 0}\tag{$\psi_1$}\label{inv-stem3}\\ \forall \vec x\;\forall \vec x'\quad \tau_\mathsf{loop}(\vec x, \vec x') & \rightarrow {\color{siGreen}\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x' + s_0 \geq 0} \;\lor\; {\color{siGreen}-\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x-s_0 > 0}\tag{$\psi_2$}\label{inv-loop3} \\ \exists\delta>0\;\forall \vec x\;\forall \vec x'\quad \tau_\mathsf{loop}(\vec x, \vec x') & \rightarrow {\color{rkBlue}\tr{\vecr}\cdot\vec x}-{\color{rkBlue}\tr{\vecr}\cdot\vec x'}\geq \delta \;\lor\; {\color{siGreen}-\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x-s_0 > 0} \tag{$\psi_3$}\label{rk-decr3}\\ \forall \vec x\;\forall \vec x'\quad \tau_\mathsf{loop}(\vec x, \vec x') & \rightarrow {\color{rkBlue}\tr{\vecr}\cdot\vec x+r_0\geq 0} \;\lor\; {\color{siGreen}-\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x-s_0 > 0} \tag{$\psi_4$}\label{rk-bound3} \end{aligned}\] ### Transformation 2: Drop supporting invariant in fourth constraint. We strengthen the fourth constraint [\[rk-bound3\]](#rk-bound3){reference-type="eqref" reference="rk-bound3"} by removing the disjunct ${\color{siGreen}-\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x-s_0 > 0}$. A solution for the strengthened constraint defines a ranking function whose value is bounded from below for all states (and not just those that satisfy the supporting invariant). ### Transformation 3: Replace disjunction by sum. We replace the disjunction on the right-hand side of the implication in constraints [\[inv-loop3\]](#inv-loop3){reference-type="eqref" reference="inv-loop3"} and [\[rk-decr3\]](#rk-decr3){reference-type="eqref" reference="rk-decr3"} by a single inequality, according to the scheme below. (It is the disjunction which prevents us from applying Farkas' Lemma to the constraints [\[inv-loop3\]](#inv-loop3){reference-type="eqref" reference="inv-loop3"} and [\[rk-decr3\]](#rk-decr3){reference-type="eqref" reference="rk-decr3"}.) \[\begin{aligned} m\geq 0 \lor n> 0 \qquad \rightsquigarrow \qquad m+n\geq 0 \end{aligned}\] In the second constraint [\[inv-loop3\]](#inv-loop3){reference-type="eqref" reference="inv-loop3"}, we replace the disjunction \[{\color{siGreen}-\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x-s_0 > 0} \;\lor\; {\color{siGreen}\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x' + s_0 \geq 0}\] by the inequality \[{\color{siGreen}\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x' + s_0}{\color{siGreen}\;-\;\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x-s_0}\geq 0.\] In the third constraint [\[rk-decr3\]](#rk-decr3){reference-type="eqref" reference="rk-decr3"}, we replace the disjunction \[{\color{siGreen}-\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x-s_0 > 0} \;\lor\; {\color{rkBlue}\tr{\vecr}\cdot\vec x}-{\color{rkBlue}\tr{\vecr}\cdot\vec x'}\geq\delta\] by the inequality \[{\color{rkBlue}\tr{\vecr}\cdot\vec x}-{\color{rkBlue}\tr{\vecr}\cdot\vec x'} {\color{siGreen}-\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x-s_0}\geq\delta.\] We obtain the following four constraints. ### The Or-to-Plus constraints \[\begin{aligned} \forall \vec x\;\forall \vec x'\quad \tau_\mathsf{stem}(\vec x, \vec x') & \rightarrow {\color{siGreen}\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x' + s_0 \geq 0}\tag{$\varphi_1$}\label{inv-stem4}\\ \forall \vec x\;\forall \vec x'\quad \tau_\mathsf{loop}(\vec x, \vec x') & \rightarrow {\color{siGreen}\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x' + s_0}{\color{siGreen}\;-\;\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x-s_0} \geq 0\tag{$\varphi_2$}\label{inv-loop4}\\ \exists\delta>0\;\forall \vec x\;\forall \vec x'\quad \tau_\mathsf{loop}(\vec x, \vec x') & \rightarrow {\color{rkBlue}\tr{\vecr}\cdot\vec x}-{\color{rkBlue}\tr{\vecr}\cdot\vec x'} {\color{siGreen}-\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x-s_0} \geq \delta\tag{$\varphi_3$}\label{rk-decr4}\\ \forall \vec x\;\forall \vec x'\quad \tau_\mathsf{loop}(\vec x, \vec x') & \rightarrow {\color{rkBlue}\tr{\vecr}\cdot\vec x+r_0\geq 0}\tag{$\varphi_4$}\label{rk-bound4} \end{aligned}\] The free variables of the conjunction $\varphi_1\land\varphi_2\land\varphi_3\land\varphi_4$ are ${\color{rkBlue}\vecr}$, ${\color{rkBlue}r_0}$, ${\color{siGreen}\vecs}$, and ${\color{siGreen}s_0}$. Since we consider linear lasso programs, the relations $\tau_\mathsf{stem}$ and $\tau_\mathsf{loop}$ are given as conjunctions of linear constraints. \[\begin{aligned} \tau_\mathsf{stem}(\vec x, \vec x') & \quad\equiv\quad A_\mathsf{stem}\cdot(^{\vec x}_{\vec x'})\leq \vec b_\mathsf{stem}\\ \tau_\mathsf{loop}(\vec x, \vec x') & \quad\equiv\quad A_\mathsf{loop}\cdot(^{\vec x}_{\vec x'})\leq \vec b_\mathsf{loop} \end{aligned}\] We have now finished the description for the three transformation steps that lead us to the the or-to-plus constraints. We are now ready to introduce our method. After setting up the four or-to-plus constraints $\varphi_1$, $\varphi_2$, $\varphi_3$, $\varphi_4$ in Step 1, we apply Farkas' Lemma to each of the four constraints in Step 2. We obtain four linear constraints. E.g., by applying Farkas' Lemma to the constraint [\[rk-decr4\]](#rk-decr4){reference-type="eqref" reference="rk-decr4"} we obtain the following linear constraint. \[\begin{aligned} \exists\delta>0\quad\exists \vec\lambda \quad \vec\lambda\geq 0 \quad\land\quad \tr{\vec\lambda}\cdot A_\mathsf{loop} = {\color{rkBlue}\tr{\abovebelow{{\color{siGreen}\vec s}-\vecr}{\phantom{-}\vecr}}} \quad\land\quad \tr{\vec\lambda} \cdot \vec b_\mathsf{loop}\leq-\delta-{\color{siGreen} s_0} \end{aligned}\] We apply linear constraint solving in Step 3. We obtain a satisfying assignment for the free variables in the resulting constraints. The values obtained for ${\color{rkBlue}\vecr}$, ${\color{rkBlue}r_0}$, ${\color{siGreen}\vec s}$ and ${\color{siGreen}s_0}$ are the coefficients of a linear ranking function ${\color{rkBlue}f(\vec x})$ with linear supporting invariant ${\color{siGreen}I(\vec x})$. The or-to-plus method inherits its soundness from method of Bradley--Manna--Sipma. Step 1 is an equivalence transformation on the Bradley--Manna--Sipma constraints, Step 2 and Step 3 strengthen the constraints, and the application of Farkas' Lemma is an equivalence transformation. Thus, a satisfying assignment of the or-to-plus constraints obtained after the application of Farkas' Lemma is also a satisfying assignment of the Bradley--Manna--Sipma constraints. # Completeness of the Or-to-Plus Method In the tradition of constraint-based synthesis for verification, we will formulate completeness according to the following scheme: the method `X` applied to a program $P$ in the class `Y` computes (the coefficients of) a correctness argument of the form `Z` whenever one exists (i.e., whenever a correctness argument of the form `Z` exists for the program $P$). Here, `X` is the or-to-plus method, `Y` is the class of lasso programs, and `Z` is a termination argument consisting of a linear ranking function and an invariant of a form that we we define next. In we give examples which may help to convey some intuition about the meaning of 'non-decreasing', examples of those terminating programs that do have a linear ranking function with a non-decreasing linear supporting invariant, and examples of those that don't. To prove this theorem we use the following lemma. # Examples {#sec:examples} [\[fig-other\]]{#fig-other label="fig-other"} The prerequisite of is the existence of a non-decreasing supporting invariant. There are linear lasso programs that have a linear ranking function with linear supporting invariant, but do not have a linear ranking function with a non-decreasing linear supporting invariant. E.g., for the lasso programs depicted in and our or-to-plus method is not able to synthesize a ranking function for these programs. The linear lasso program $P_\mathsf{zeno}$ depicted in has the linear ranking function ${\color{rkBlue}f(x,y)=x}$ with the linear supporting invariant ${\color{siGreen}y\geq 1}$. However this inductive invariant is not non-decreasing; while executing the loop the value of the variable ${\color{siGreen}y}$ converges to $1$ in the following sequence. $2,\; 1+\frac{1}{2},\; 1+\frac{1}{4},\; 1+\frac{1}{8},\dots$. The statement `havoc y;` in the lasso program $P_\mathsf{wild}$ is a nondeterministic assignment to the variable $y$. The relations $\tau_\mathsf{stem}$ and $\tau_\mathsf{loop}$ of this lasso program are given by the constraints $y'\geq 1$ and $x\geq 0 \;\land\; x'=x-y \;\land\; y'\geq 1$. $P_\mathsf{wild}$ has the ranking function ${\color{rkBlue}f(x,y)=x}$ with the supporting invariant ${\color{siGreen}y\geq 1}$, however this inductive invariant is not non-decreasing in each execution of the loop the variable ${\color{siGreen}y}$ can get any value greater than or equal to one. The next example shows that nondeterministic updates are no general obstacle for our or-to-plus method. In the linear lasso program $P_\mathsf{array}$ the loop iterates over an array of positive integers. The index accessed in the next iteration is the sum of the current index, the current entry of the array, and an offset. The relations $\tau_\mathsf{stem}$ and $\tau_\mathsf{loop}$ of this lasso program are given by the constraints $\mathit{offset}'= 1 \;\land\; i'=0$ and $i\leq \mathit{a.length} \;\land\; \mathit{curVal}'\geq 0 \;\land\; i'=i+\mathit{offset}+\mathit{curVal}'$. The variable $\mathit{curVal}$ which represents the current entry of the array `a[i]` can get any value greater than or equal to one in each loop iteration. The or-to-plus method finds the linear ranking function ${\color{rkBlue}f(i,\mathit{offset})=i-\mathit{a.length}}$ with the linear supporting invariant ${\color{siGreen}\mathit{offset}\geq 1}$. # Lasso Programs over the Integers In the preceding sections we considered lasso programs over the reals. In this section we discuss the applicability of the or-to-plus method to linear lasso programs over the integers, i.e., programs where the set of states $\Sigma$ is a subset of $\mathbb{Z}^n$. We still use real-valued ranking functions. We obtain the constraints for coefficients of a linear ranking function with linear supporting invariant by restricting the range of the universal quantification in the constraints [\[inv-stem4\]](#inv-stem4){reference-type="ref" reference="inv-stem4"}, [\[inv-loop4\]](#inv-loop4){reference-type="ref" reference="inv-loop4"}, [\[rk-decr4\]](#rk-decr4){reference-type="ref" reference="rk-decr4"}, and [\[rk-bound4\]](#rk-bound4){reference-type="ref" reference="rk-bound4"} to the integers. E.g., the constraint [\[rk-decr4\]](#rk-decr4){reference-type="ref" reference="rk-decr4"} for linear lasso programs over the integers is \[\begin{aligned} \exists\delta>0\;\forall \vec x\in\mathbb{Z}^n\;\forall \vec x'\in\mathbb{Z}^n\quad \tau_\mathsf{loop}(\vec x, \vec x') & \rightarrow {\color{rkBlue}\tr{\vecr}\cdot\vec x}-{\color{rkBlue}\tr{\vecr}\cdot\vec x'} {\color{siGreen}-\tr{\vecs}\cdot\vec x-s_0} \geq \delta \end{aligned}\] where the domain of the coefficients ${\color{rkBlue}\vecr}$, ${\color{rkBlue}r_0}$, ${\color{siGreen}\vec s}$, and ${\color{siGreen}s_0}$ and the quantified variable $\delta$ are the reals. Now, Farkas' lemma is not an equivalence transformation, its application results in weaker formulas. This means the or-to-plus method is still sound, but we loose the completeness result of . An example for this is the program $P_\mathsf{nonIntegral}$, depicted in that has the following transition relations. \[\begin{array}{ll} \tau_\mathsf{stem}: & 2y'\geq 1 \;\land\; x'=x\\[2mm] \tau_\mathsf{loop}: & x\geq 0 \;\land\; x'=x-2y + 1 \;\land\; y'=y; \end{array}\] Over integer variables, $P_\mathsf{nonIntegral1}$ has the linear ranking function ${\color{rkBlue}f(x,y)=x}$ with the linear supporting invariant ${\color{siGreen}y\geq 1}$. Over real-valued variables, $P_\mathsf{nonIntegral1}$ does not terminate. If we add the additional constraint $y'\geq 1$ to $\tau_\mathsf{stem}$, the programs' semantics over the integers is not changed, but we are able to synthesize a linear ranking function with a linear supporting invariant. Adding this additional constraint gives the constraints a property that we formally define as follows. #### Integral constraints. A conjunction of linear constraints $A\cdot \vec x\leq \vec b$ is called if the set of satisfying assignments over the reals $S := \{\vec r \in \mathbb{R}^n \mid A\cdot \vec r\leq \vec b\}$ coincides with the integer hull of $S$ (the convex hull of all integer vectors in $S$). For each conjunction of $m$ linear constraints there is an equivalent conjunction of at most $2^m$ linear constraints that is integral . We add an additional step to the or-to-plus method in which we make the constraints in the stem transition $\tau_\mathsf{stem}$ and loop transition $\tau_\mathsf{loop}$ integral. That we find more solutions after making the linear constraints $\tau_\mathsf{stem}$ and $\tau_\mathsf{loop}$ integral is due to the following lemma which was stated in . We present our proof for the purpose of self-containment. [\[fig-onlyInt2\]]{#fig-onlyInt2 label="fig-onlyInt2"} As mentioned in the introduction, the class of lasso programs is motivated by the fact that they are a natural way (and, it seems, the only way) to represent an (infinite) counterexample path in a control flow graph. It is a topic of future research to explore the different scenarios in practical tools that use a module to find a ranking function and a supporting invariant for a lasso program (e.g., in ) and to compare the performance of our---theoretically motivated---synthesis method in comparison with the existing---heuristically motivated---approach used presently in the module. [^1]: <http://ultimate.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/LassoRanker> [^2]: In the authors use more general general constraints that can be used to synthesize lexicographic linear ranking functions together with a conjunction of linear supporting invariants for programs that can also contains disjunctions.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-22T02:10:11', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5347', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5347'}
# INTRODUCTION Over the last several decades, with new evidence, the objects we call "galaxies\" have become much larger. Extended dark-matter "halos\" were proposed to produce flat rotation curves at large radii in disk galaxies (Rubin 1980), and a "corona\" of hot interstellar gas at the galaxy's virial temperature was predicted by Spitzer (1956) to provide pressure confinement of high-latitude clouds. More recently, astronomers have observed Galactic kinematic tracers (blue horizontal branch stars, globular clusters, satellite galaxies) to distances of 50-250 kpc, and X-ray absorption-line () spectroscopy and stacked soft X-ray emission have provided evidence of large reservoirs of hot ionized gas in Milky Way halo (Miller & Bregman 2013) and the outskirts of external galaxies (Soltan 2006; Anderson 2013). In ultraviolet spectroscopy, the Cosmic Origins Spectrograph (COS) on the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) has recently detected extended (100-150 kpc) reservoirs of highly ionized oxygen () around star-forming galaxies (Tumlinson 2011, 2013; Stocke 2013) likely created by outflows of metal-enriched gas from star formation. Thus, our picture of galaxies has evolved to a system of stars and gas embedded in an extended dark-matter halo, often associated with an even larger gaseous circumgalactic medium (CGM). Galaxies must also be viewed in a cosmological context, in which most of the baryonic matter in the universe is unseen (Persic & Salucci 1992) and likely distributed through the intergalactic medium (IGM) in a "cosmic web\" shaped by dark-matter structure and inefficient galaxy formation (Cen & Ostriker 1999; Davé 1999; Smith 2011). Observations and modeling (Shull 2012) suggest that 60-80% of the cosmological baryons reside in the low-redshift, multi-phase IGM, with perhaps 20% in collapsed form (galaxies, groups, clusters). Although these baryon fractions have some uncertainty, current research is devoted to understanding the physical conditions, spatial extent, and evolution of the gas at distances of 100 kpc to a few Mpc from galaxies. At low redshift ($z \leq 0.4$) the influence of galactic winds and metal injection out to $\sim1$ Mpc has been inferred from the association of QSO absorption systems of and with nearby galaxies (Penton 2002; Prochaska 2011; Stocke 2006, 2013). Galactic outflows have been detected in absorption toward intermediate-redshift galaxies (Steidel 2004; Martin 2012; Tripp 2011), while at higher redshifts, $z \approx 2.0-2.8$, Rudie (2012) found an enhancement of circumgalactic ($\leq300$ kpc) absorbers in a sample of 886 star-forming galaxies probed by 15 background QSOs. Thus, the connection between galaxies and extended absorption systems seems secure. Perhaps because of the recent nature of these discoveries, a semantic problem has arisen regarding the proposed structures: halo, CGM, IGM. When does gas cease to be circumgalactic and become intergalactic? Are the edges of galaxies defined by gravity or gas outflows? Are quasar absorption lines the extended halos of intervening galaxies (Bahcall & Spitzer 1969) or filaments of intergalactic gas (Sargent 1980)? Similarly, the phrase "circumgalactic medium\" appears to have replaced the concept of a "gaseous halo\" or "galactic corona\" of hot interstellar gas at the galaxy's virial temperature. Ionized gas with high covering factor has been detected above the Galactic disk in UV absorption-line surveys in metal ions such as (Sembach 2003) and (Shull 2009; Lehner & Howk 2011) and in soft X-ray absorption lines of or at $z \sim 0$ (Nicastro 2002; McKernan 2005; Wang 2005). The UV absorbers appear to come primarily from gas within 2-10 kpc of the disk plane, elevated by supernovae and star formation in the disk. The Galactic X-ray absorption suggests hot gas at $T \approx 10^{6.3\pm0.2}$ K, but its radial extent is controversial. It may come from a 50-kpc halo (Anderson & Bregman 2010; Gupta 2012) although absorption toward background AGN (Fang 2006; Hagihara 2010) and X-ray binaries (Yao & Wang 2005; Hagihara 2011) suggests that much of the absorption comes within several kpc of the disk. The disk model is consistent with both X-ray observations and total mass considerations (Collins 2005; Fang 2006). The intent of this paper is to improve the definition of galaxy halos as regions of strong gravitational influence, using dynamical principles and observational constraints. Section 2 discusses physical measures of the spatial extent of large ($\sim L^$) galaxies including the Milky Way and Andromeda. We discuss the somewhat arbitrary and occasionally misused definition of "virial radius\". Somewhat better defined are the "gravitational radius\", $GM^2/\vert W \vert$, derived from galactic mass and potential energy, the gravitational sphere of influence, accretion radius, and tidal radius. Section 2.3 develops a physically realistic definition of $R_{\rm vir} (M_h, z_a)$ for halos of mass $M_h$, assembled primarily at redshifts $z_a \approx 0.7-1.3$ with further mass accretion down to the present epoch. These new virial radii are typically 50-60% the sizes used to analyze hot halo gas with HST/COS. Section 3 discusses four estimates of galaxy extent: (1) recent kinematical studies of the Milky Way and Andromeda (M31); (2) the "galactopause\" where outflow ram pressure balances thermal pressure of the CGM; (3) QSO absorber cross sections derived from metal absorption-line frequency in redshift; and (4) virial radii and halo masses obtained from galaxy abundance-matching. We also discuss recent estimates of the mass and size of the Milky Way and Andromeda halos from kinematics of stars, galactic satellites, and the Local Group. Most of our estimates suggest a smaller spatial extent ($\sim200$ kpc) for galaxies of mass $\sim 10^{12}~M_{\odot}$, comparable to the Milky Way and M31. Section 4 concludes with applications of the new definition of virial radius to observations of extended gas around galaxies made with HST/COS, and to recent mass and size measurements for the Milky Way and M31. # DEFINITIONS OF GALAXY EXTENT This section begins with an overview of the cosmological context, in which galaxies form from density perturbations that turn around from the Hubble expansion background and collapse into dynamical (virial) equilibrium, but with continued infall of dark matter and gas. The environment of these structures will be influenced by "feedback\" from star formation within galaxies, through outflows that escape to the IGM or become stalled and return to the galaxy. Both infall and outflow processes depend on the gravitational attraction of the galaxy and its halo, as measured by parameters such as escape velocity, accretion radius, and tidal radius. Below, these measures of gravitational influence are explored, leading to a practical definition of virial radius, consistent with collapse in the past ($z \approx 1$) with continued mass infall to the present. The classic overdensity $\Delta_{\rm vir} = 18 \pi^2 \approx 178$ (often rounded to 200) was originally derived analytically for a spherical top-hat density perturbation in an Einstein-deSitter universe. The mean background density, $\bar{\rho}(t) \propto t^{-2}$, following the behavior of the expansion parameter $a(t) \propto t^{2/3}$. The perturbation begins its collapse at a "turn-around\" density, $\bar{\rho}_{\rm turn} = (9 \pi^2/16) \bar{\rho}_m \approx 5.55 {\bar{\rho}}_m$, at a redshift $z_{\rm turn}$. For example, if all the matter in the Local Group were associated with a spherically distributed mass $M_h$, the proper size of the mass perturbation at turnaround would be \[R_{\rm turn} \approx \left[ \frac {M_h} { (4 \pi/3) \, (5.55) \, {\bar{\rho}}_m(z) } \right] ^{1/3} \approx (1.2~{\rm Mpc}) \left( \frac {M_{\rm LG}} {5\times10^{12}~M_{\odot} } \right) ^{1/3} \left[ \frac {1.5}{ 1+z_{\rm turn} } \right] \;.\] Here, we have scaled to the local group mass, $M_{\rm LG} \approx 5\times10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ at a turnaround redshift $z_{\rm turn} \approx 0.5$, corresponding to the recently measured dynamical history of the Milky Way and Andromeda system (van der Marel 2012). These galaxies turned around from the Hubble flow even earlier, perhaps at $z \approx 2-3$, and had correspondingly smaller radii, probably $0.25-0.30$ Mpc. The fact that a given galaxy halo is assembled over a range of redshifts suggests an improved definition of virial radius, $R_{\rm vir} (M_h, z, z_a)$, for a galaxy observed at redshift $z$ but assembled primarily at redshift $z_a > z$, when half its halo mass had collapsed. This change in definition increases the background matter density, $\rho_m(z_a)$, and makes the virial radii smaller. We return to this new formalism in Sections 2.3 and 3.4. ## Gravitational Radius For extended self-gravitating systems without a sharp boundary, it is useful to define a characteristic "gravitational radius\" (Binney & Tremaine 2008) as $r_g = GM^2/ \vert W \vert$, where $W$ is the gravitational potential energy, \[W = \frac{1}{2} \int \, d^3 \mathbf{x} \, \rho(\mathbf{x}) \, \Phi(\mathbf{x}) = -4 \pi G \int_{0}^{\infty} \rho(r) \, M(r) \, r \, dr \; .\] The gravitational radius also bears a close relation to the "half-light radius\", $r_h$, defined by Spitzer (1969) for spherical stellar systems. For many mass distributions, $r_h/r_g = 0.4-0.5$, so that $r_h \approx 0.45 (GM^2/ \vert W \vert)$ and $\langle v^2 \rangle \approx GM/r_g$. For example, a homogeneous sphere of mass $M$ and radius $R$ has $W =-3GM^2/5R$ and $r_g = 5R/3$. For the density distribution of Plummer's model, $\rho(r) = (3M/4 \pi b^3)[1 + (r/b)^2]^{-5/2}$, $W =-(3 \pi GM^2 / 32 b)$ and $r_g \approx 3.40 b$, where $b$ is the Plummer scale length. The structure of collapsed halos has been well studied through cosmological N-body simulations (Navarro, Frenk, & White 1997; Springel 2005; Klypin 2011). These numerical experiments show that dark-matter halos collapse into structures with cuspy cores and extended halos. The collapsed structures in these simulations have been fitted to various radial profiles, such as NFW (Navarro, Frenk, & White 1997), for which the density, potential, and enclosed mass are, \[\begin{aligned} \rho(r) &=& \frac {\rho_0} {(r / r_s ) \left[ 1 + (r / r_s ) \right] ^2 } \\ \Phi(r) &=&-\left( 4 \pi G \rho_0 r_s^2 \right) \frac { \ln (1 + r/r_s)} {r/r_s} \\ M(r) &=& \left( 4 \pi \rho_0 r_s^3 \right) \left[ \ln \left( 1 + \frac{r}{r_s} \right)-\frac {r / r_s}{1+ r / r_s} \right] \;. \end{aligned}\] Here $r_s$ is a characteristic radius defined by the break in slope and related to the virial radius through $r_s = R_{\rm vir}/c$, with the "concentration parameter\", $c$, typically between 5--20. The mass enclosed with the virial radius is written as \[M_{\rm vir} \equiv M(R_{\rm vir}) = \left( 4 \pi \rho_0 r_s^3 \right) \left[ \ln (1+c)-\frac {c}{1+c} \right] \; ,\] where $M_{\rm vir}$ and $c$ are found to be correlated in cosmological simulations (Navarro 1997; Prada 2012). Increasing the concentration, $c$, adds mass and extent to the halo. For example, changing $c$ from 5 to 20 doubles the enclosed mass, $M_{\rm vir}(c = 20) / M_{\rm vir}(c = 5) \approx 2.18$. The circular velocity, $V_c^2(r) = G M(r)/r$, reaches a maximum $V_{\rm max}$ at radius $r = 2.1626 r_s = 2.1626 R_{\rm vir}/c$, and equal to \[V_{\rm max}^2 = \left( \frac {GM_{\rm vir}}{R_{\rm vir}} \right) \frac {0.2162 \, c} { \left[ \ln (1+c)-\frac {c}{1+c} \right] } \;.\] For the NFW model, the mass diverges logarithmically with radius, and the gravitational radius is formally undefined without a cut-off. By integrating Equation (2) out to the virial radius, $R_{\rm vir} = c r_s$, we can define a finite NFW potential energy and gravitational radius, \[\begin{aligned} W_{\rm vir} ^{\rm (NFW)} &=&-\left( \frac {GM_{\rm vir}^2} {2 \, r _s} \right) \frac { \left[ 1-\frac {\ln (1+c)} {(1+c)}-\frac {1}{(1+c)} \right] } { \left[ \ln (1+c)-\frac {c}{1+c} \right]^2 } \\ r_g ^{\rm (NFW)} &=& GM_{\rm vir}^2 / \vert W_{\rm vir} \vert = (2 r_s) \; \frac { \left[ \ln (1+c)-\frac {c}{1+c} \right]^2 } { \left[ 1-\frac {\ln (1+c)} {(1+c)}-\frac {1}{(1+c)} \right] } \;. \end{aligned}\] This NFW gravitational radius ranges from $r_g = 3.44r_s = 0.69 R_{\rm vir}$ (for $c = 5$) to $r_g = 10.8 r_s = 0.54R_{\rm vir}$ (for $c = 20$). Table 1 summarizes the ratio of gravitational radius to characteristic scale lengths for several commonly used density distributions. ## Gravitational Radius of Influence and Accretion Radius Another observationally useful characteristic radius is the gravitational "radius of influence\" (Ferrarese & Ford 2005; Binney & Tremaine 2008) defined as the radius at which the Kepler velocity around a central mass $M$ equals the transverse velocity dispersion, $\sigma_{\parallel}$, of surrounding stars, \[R_{\rm infl} = \frac {GM} {\sigma_{\parallel}^2} = (191~{\rm kpc}) M_{12} \, \sigma_{150}^{-2} \;.\] In the galactic context of this paper, we assume that $M$ is the total mass of the galaxy within radius $R_{\rm infl}$, scaled as $M = (10^{12}~M_{\odot}) M_{12}$. The gravitational influence of this mass can traced by luminous halo stars or galaxy satellites with dispersion $\sigma_{\parallel} = (150~{\rm km~s}^{-1}) \sigma_{150}$. The dynamical dependence of $\sigma$ (observed in the stellar component) on $M$ will soften the linear dependence of $R_{\rm infl}(M)$. In the Milky Way, radial velocity dispersions, $\sigma_r \approx 110$ , of different halo populations have been measured out to 80 kpc (Xue 2008; Gnedin 2010). From radial velocities of blue horizontal branch stars between 100-150 kpc, Deason (2012) find even lower dispersions, $\sigma_r = 50-70$ , although values for satellites are somewhat larger. Thus, depending on assumptions about the ratio, $\sigma_{\parallel} / \sigma_r$, the value of $R_{\rm infl}$ for the Milky Way halo may be somewhat larger than 200 kpc. This formula is analogous to that used in Bondi accretion of gas with isothermal sound speed $c_s$, for which one defines an "accretion radius\" \[R_{\rm accr} = \frac {2GM} {c_s^2} = (202~{\rm kpc}) M_{12} \, T_{6.5}^{-1} \;.\] Here again, we have scaled to a $10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ galaxy surrounded by a gaseous halo at its virial temperature $T = (10^{6.5}~{\rm K}) T_{6.5}$ with $c_s = (kT/ \mu)^{1/2} = (207~{\rm km~s}^{-1}) T_{6.5}^{1/2}$ for mean atomic weight $0.61 m_H$ appropriate for a fully ionized plasma with $n_{\rm He}/n_{\rm H} = 0.1$ by number. The fact that these two raidii are similar is a consequence of the chosen gas temperature and stellar velocity dispersion, which are expected to be in near equilibrium. ## Virial Radius In standard cosmological terminology, the virial radius, $R_{\rm vir}$, is defined such that the mean density of a halo of mass $M_h$ equals the "virial overdensity\" (variously denoted as $\Delta_{\rm vir}$ or $\Delta_c$) times the mean density of the universe. Unfortunately, some confusion has arisen in the proper value of $\Delta_{\rm vir}$, much of it over convention: whether the overdensity is expressed relative to the critical (closure) density, $\rho_{\rm cr} = (3 H_0^2 / 8 \pi G)$, or to the matter density, $\rho_m = \Omega_m \rho_{\rm cr}$. Both conventions are used in the literature, but if one is not careful in using a consistent definition of $\Delta_{\rm vir}$, the estimated virial radius will be too small by a factor $\Omega_m^{1/3} \approx 0.67$ and the mean matter density of the halo too large by $\Omega_m^{-1} \approx 3.3$. There are other misapplications of the virial radius because the initial collapse to dynamical equilibrium occurred in the past, when $\rho_m$ was higher, followed by additional infall during galaxy assembly. For these reasons, we develop a physically motivated definition of $R_{\rm vir}(M_h, z, z_a)$ for a halo of mass $M_h$, observed at redshift $z$ but assembled at an earlier epoch, $z_a > z$. The redshift of halo assembly $z_a$ is taken as the epoch of major virialization ($z_{\rm vir}$) when half the halo mass had collapsed, a useful convention introduced by Tacchella, Trenti, & Carillo (2013) hereafter denoted TTC13. The basic concept of virialization follows from the assumption of conservation of kinetic energy and potential energy during collapse ($T + W = {\rm constant}$) together with the virial theorem ($2T =-W$). The gravitating system is assumed to collapse to half its turnaround radius at twice the turnaround time for cycloidal collapse. The collapsed system has then increased in mean density by a factor of 8 since turnaround. In an Einstein-deSitter universe ($\Omega_0 = 1$), the expanding background density, $\bar{\rho}(t) \propto t^{-2}$, has dropped by a factor of 4 for an expansion parameter $a(t) \propto t^{2/3}$. Thus, one obtains the classic virial overdensity, $\bar{\rho}_{\rm vir} = 32 {\bar \rho}_{\rm turn} = (18 \pi^2) {\bar{\rho}}$, where $\bar{\rho}_{\rm turn}$ and $\bar{\rho}_{\rm vir}$ are evaluated at the times of turnaround and virialization, respectively. Cole & Lacey (1996) explored the structure of halos in N-body simulations of clustering in an $\Omega_0 = 1$ universe. They found that the radius, $r_{178}$ enclosing a mean overdensity of 178, accurately separated the virialized halo interior, in approximate dynamic equilibrium, from the exterior where matter was still falling in. This property was noted by Binney & Tremaine (2008), who recommended using $\Delta_{\rm vir} = 200$. The situation changes in a flat $\Lambda$CDM cosmology ($\Omega_m + \Omega_{\Lambda} = 1$) where both the expanding background and collapse dynamics differ from the $\Omega_0 = 1$ case. Eke (1996) studied virialization dynamics for flat models with $\Omega_m < 1$, but they defined overdensity relative to closure* density. For values of $\Omega_m \approx 0.3$ at $z \approx 0$, they found $\Delta_c \equiv {\bar \rho}_{\rm vir} / \rho_{\rm cr} \approx 100$. In Figure 1 of their paper, they plotted the dependence of $\Delta_c$ on $\Omega_m$, which serves as a proxy for higher redshift, since $\Omega_m(z)$ approaches 1 at the higher redshifts when most systems collapsed. Bryan & Norman (1998) provided an approximate fit, $\Delta_{\rm vir} (z) = [18 \pi^2 + 82x-39 x^2]$ where $x = (\Omega_m-1)$. This expression must be divided by $\Omega_m(z)$ to be consistent with the convention that overdensity is relative to matter density. We define $R_{\rm vir}$ through the relation $M_h = (4 \pi R_{\rm vir}^3 /3) \Delta_{\rm vir} (z_{\rm vir} ) {\bar \rho}_m (z_{\rm vir})$, where the mean matter density at the virialization (or assembly) redshift is ${\bar \rho}_m (z_{\rm vir}) = \Omega_{m,0} (1+z_{\rm vir})^3 \rho_{\rm cr,0}$, and the parameters $\Omega_{m,0}$ and $\rho_{\rm cr,0}$ are defined at the current epoch ($z = 0$). Further discussion is given by Klypin (2011) and van der Marel (2012), both of whom follow the convention that $\Delta_{\rm vir}$ is relative to the mean matter density. Their expressions are scaled to a product, $\Omega_m \, \Delta_{\rm vir} \approx 97.2$, evaluated at $z = 0$ for which $\Delta_{\rm vir} = 360$ and $\Omega_{m,0} = 0.27$. However, many papers in the literature do not account for the fact that virial collapse occurred at earlier times, at redshift $z_{\rm vir}$ when $\Omega_{m}(z) > \Omega_{m,0}$. For a flat $\Lambda$CDM universe with $\Omega_{m,0} = 0.27-0.30$ at $z \approx 0$, one finds $\Delta_{\rm vir} \approx 350\pm10$ (relative to $\rho_m$) and a product $\Omega_m \Delta_{\rm vir} \approx 100$. For the more typical collapse at higher redshifts, the product $\Omega_m \, \Delta_{\rm vir} \approx 200$, appropriate for the decrease in $\Delta_{\rm vir}(z)$ as $\Omega_m(z) \rightarrow 1$. This overdensity of 200 is slightly above the classical value $\Delta_{\rm vir} \approx 178$ for dynamical reasons discussed by Binney & Tremaine (2008). Consider a galaxy observed at redshift $z$, associated with halo mass $M_h = (10^{12} M_{\odot}) M_{12}$ and assembled (at $z_a$) with half its current mass. The virialization redshift $z_{\rm vir}$ is taken to be $z_a$, determined from standard cosmological collapse criteria (Lacey & Cole 1993; Sheth & Tormen 1999) and computed as in Trenti, Perna, & Tacchella (2013). Table 2 lists the assembly redshifts, which range from $z_a \approx 1.35$ (at $M_h = 10^{11}~M_{\odot}$) to $z_a \approx 0.81$ (at $M_h = 10^{14}~M_{\odot}$) for various galaxies observed at $z \approx 0.2-0.3$ with stellar masses $M_$. Based on these new criteria for galaxy collapse and assembly, the virial radius is: \[R_{\rm vir} (M_h, z_a) = (206~{\rm kpc}) \, h_{70}^{-2/3} \, M_{12}^{1/3} \left[ \frac {\Omega_m (z_{\rm a}) \, \Delta_{\rm vir} (z_{\rm a})} {200} \right] ^{-1/3} \left( 1+z_a \right)^{-1} \; .\] Although the relation between $z_a(M_h)$ exhibits a small anti-correlation (Table 2), it does contain some numerical scatter which should be kept in mind. This expression differs from often-used formulae by the over-density scaling and by the factor $(1+z_{\rm a})^{-1}$, reflecting the fact that most galaxies underwent virialization in the past, not at $z = 0$. After this initial (half-mass) assembly, their proper size changes gradually because of continued mass infall into the halo. To lowest order, this slight growth in $R_{\rm vir}$ ($2^{1/3} \approx 1.26$) is captured in Eq. (12) by using the current* halo mass ($M_h$). Second-order effects of late infall or adiabatic compression may occur in the radial mass distribution, which in the NFW formalism changes the scale parameter $r_s$ and concentration $c$. Some of the infalling matter may not attain virial equilibrium, as the orbital timescale is quite long, $t_{\rm orb} = 2 \pi R_{\rm vir}^{3/2}/(GM_h)^{1/2} \approx (8.64~{\rm Gyr}) (1+z_a)^{-3/2}$. This formalism assumes spherical infall and a constant density profile; both approximations change in more realistic collapse scenarios. For example, after accounting for central condensation of the collapsed structure, Rubin & Loeb (2013) find a reduced virial overdensity. ## Escaping Stars Injected into the Halo In addition to infall, galaxy halos can be probed by fast stars injected radially outward. We therefore discuss the radius at which the fastest galactic stars reach maximum apogalactic distance in a dark matter halo potential. As a simple model that illustrates the basic effect, we assume an isothermal sphere distribution in density, $\rho(r) = (\sigma^2 / 2 \pi G r^2)$ and enclosed mass, $M(r) = (2 \sigma^2/G)r$ leading to a constant circular velocity $V_c^2 = G M(r)/r = 2 \sigma^2$. For this density and mass distribution, the equation of motion is $\ddot{r} =-G M(r)/r^2$, for a star launched with radial velocity $\dot{r} = v_0$ from radius $r = r_0$, leading to the first integral, \[\frac {1}{2} \left[ v^2-v_0^2 \right] =-(2 \sigma^2) \ln (r / r_0) \; .\] If the star coasts to rest ($v = 0$ at $r = r_{\rm max}$) one has $v_0^2 = 4 \sigma^2 \ln (r_{\rm max}/r_0)$ and thus \[r_{\rm max} = r_0 \exp \left[ (v_0 / 2 \sigma)^2 \right] \; .\] Equation (14) illustrates the sensitivity of $r_{\max}$ to launching conditions ($v_0$ and $r_0$) and halo mass (velocity dispersion $\sigma$). For example, a star with $v_0 = 500$ injected radially from $r_0 = 8.3$ kpc into a halo with $\sigma = 200$ would have a maximum extent of just 40 kpc. The stellar ejection distance doubles ($r_{\rm max} \approx 79$ kpc) if the launch velocity $v_0 = 600$ . These distances are not surprising for velocities comparable to the escape speed from the solar circle within the Milky Way ($r_0 = 8.28$ kpc), recently estimated from RAVE stellar survey data to be $V_{\rm esc} = 533^{+54}_{-41}$ (Piffl 2014). Repeating the above calculation for the maximum radius in an NFW mass distribution and potential (Equations 3, 4, 5) we find, \[v_0^2 = \left( \frac {G M_{\rm vir}} {R_{\rm vir}} \right) \frac {2c} { \left[ \ln (1+c)-\frac {c}{1+c} \right] } \left[ \frac {\ln \left( 1 + r_0 / r_s \right) } {r_0 / r_s}- \frac {\ln \left( 1 + r_{\rm max} / r_s \right) } {r_{\rm max} / r_s} \right] \;.\] This equation can be solved for the velocity $v_0$ required for a star to reach radius $r_{\rm max}$ from initial radius $r_0$. Combined with equation (7) for the maximum circular velocity, $V_{\rm max}$, in an NFW halo, we can write the velocity $v_0$ needed to escape to $r \rightarrow \infty$ as \[v_0 = V_{\rm max} \left[ \frac {2} {0.2162} \; \frac { \ln \left( 1 + r_0 / r_s \right)} { (r_0 / r_s)} \right] ^{1/2} \;,\] independent of $c$. If we take $r_0 = 2.1626 \, r_s$ as the radius at $V_{\rm max}$, we find $v_0 = 2.219 V_{\rm max}$. This agrees reasonably well with the Milky Way values, if we assume $V_{\rm max} \approx 240$ and obtain an escape velocity $v_0 \approx 533$ . A related size estimate comes from the hypothetical radius, $r_{\rm flat}$, to which one must extend an isothermal density distribution to maintain a constant (flat) circular velocity, \[r_{\rm flat} = r_0 \exp \left[ \frac {V_{\rm esc}^2}{2 V_{\rm c}^2}-1 \right] \; .\] Of course, rotation curves do not remain flat at large radii, but $r_{\rm flat}$ provides a lower limit on the extent of the isothermal model, as noted by Smith (2007). For $V_{\rm esc} = 533^{+54}_{-41}$ and $V_{\rm c} = 220$ , one finds a truncation radius $r_{\rm flat} \approx 60$ kpc for $r_0 = 8.3$ kpc, with a large range (40 to 110 kpc) arising from uncertainties in determining $V_{\rm esc}$ and $V_c$. At larger radii, the circular velocity, $V_c(r)$ likely declines, particularly if the halo density distribution falls off as $r^{-3}$ as in the NFW model. The total (virial) masses of galaxies include substantial mass beyond 50-80 kpc, particularly for halos with $c \geq 10$. Extra mass accretion may account for the discrepancy between low and high values for the Milky Way mass estimates. It is also consistent with the physically motivated revision to the method in which the virial radius is calculated at the "galaxy assembly time\" at redshift $z_a > z$ (Section 2.3). We return to these observational issues in Section 3.4. With the current state of observations, these kinematic constraints suggest halo sizes of 150-200 kpc for $L^$ galaxies. Future observations of rotation curves, $V_c(r)$, and more distant kinematic tracers (blue horizontal branch stars, hypervelocity stars, globular clusters, and satellites) will be of great help. The RAVE survey data will be greatly improved by the Gaia* mission, leading to better determinations of escape velocity from the solar circle, and later with LSST, through studies of galaxy satellites, BHB stars, and RR-Lyrae stars. # OBSERVATIONS OF GALAXY EXTENTS ## The Milky Way and Andromeda System Despite their proximity, the Milky Way (MW) and Andromeda (M31) galaxies remain surprisingly uncertain in their inferred mass and extent. Recent MW mass estimates range from just under $10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ (Smith 2007; Xue 2008; Gnedin 2010; Deason 2012) to values between $(1.2-2.0)\times10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ (Boylan-Kolchin 2013; Nesti & Salucci 2013). Some of the lower masses are inferred for stellar tracer distances well within $R_{\rm vir}$. For example, Gnedin et al. (2010) use hypervelocity stars at distances beyond 25 kpc to find $M(\leq 80~{\rm kpc}) = 6.9^{+3.0}_{-1.2} \times 10^{11}~M_{\odot}$. Xue (2008) use 2400 blue horizontal branch stars to estimate $M(\leq 60~{\rm kpc}) = (4.0 \pm 0.7) \times 10^{11}~M_{\odot}$. However, they extrapolate to find a virial mass $M_{\rm vir} = (1.0-1.2) \times 10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ for two models of the circular velocity curve. Busha (2011) use LMC and SMC kinematics to infer $M_{\rm MW} = (1.2^{+0.7}_{-0.4}) \times 10^{12}~M_{\odot}$. Boylan-Kolchin (2013) provide a thorough discussion of the previous MW mass measurements, both large and small, but they base their mass on the high probability that the Leo I satellite is gravitationally bound. For a Leo I distance ($D = 261\pm13$ kpc) and Galactocentric space velocity (200 ), they find a median Milky Way virial mass $M_{\rm MW} = 1.6 \times 10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ with an asymmetric 90% confidence interval of $[1.0-2.4]\times10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ and $R_{\rm vir} \approx 300$ kpc for the median mass. Nesti & Salucci (2013) use dark-matter halo models to estimate $M_{\rm vir} \approx (1.1-1.5) \times 10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ but with substantial uncertainties for both Burkert and NFW density profiles. Piffl (2014) use the inferred escape speed at the solar circle, $533^{+54}_{-41}$ from the RAVE survey, to estimate $M_{\rm MW} = (1.6^{+0.5}_{-0.4}) \times 10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ and a virial radius $R_{200} = 225\pm20$ kpc. Watkins (2010) find $M_{\rm MW} = (1.4\pm0.3)\times10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ within 300 kpc from 26 satellite galaxies, and McMillan (2011) proposes a mass model with $M_{\rm vir} = (1.26\pm0.24) \times 10^{12}~M_{\odot}$. Based on the recent dynamical estimates out to larger distances, we conclude that the Milky Way virial mass is likely close to $1.6 \times 10^{12}~M_{\odot}$. Mass estimates for the Andromeda (M31) galaxy include $(1.4\pm0.4)\times10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ within 300 kpc from 23 satellite galaxies (Watkins 2010) and $(1.2-1.5) \times10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ within 200 kpc from kinematics of 53 globular clusters (Veljanoski 2013). Tamm (2012) used photometry and the M31 rotation curve, together with several mass distributions, to find a dark-matter halo mass $M_{200} = (0.8-1.1) \times 10^{12}~M_{\odot}$, stellar mass $M_* = (1.0-1.5) \times 10^{11}~M_{\odot}$, and virial radius 189-213 kpc. Fardal (2013) used Bayesian simulation models of the giant southern stream around Andromeda to derive $\log (M_{\rm M31} / M_{\odot}) = 12.3\pm0.1$. They note that this mass, and those recently inferred for the Milky Way, alleviate the tension between virial mass estimates and the Local Group timing mass, recently estimated at $(4.93\pm1.63 )\times10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ (van der Marel 2012). Because both the Milky Way and Andromeda halos have likely accreted substantial mass beyond their observable radii (60-80 kpc), their virial masses are taken here to be $M_{\rm MW} = (1.6 \pm 0.4) \times10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ and $M_{\rm M31} = (1.8 \pm 0.5) \times10^{12}~M_{\odot}$, with a sum, $(3.4 \pm 0.6) \times 10^{12}~M_{\odot}$, close to the inferred timing mass of the Local Group. Simulations suggest that the remaining mass may consist of "diffuse dark matter\" produced by the destruction of sub-halos (Gao 2004). Cosmic scatter could reduce the Local Group mass from the value above, as has been suggested by van der Marel (2012) and Gonzalez, Kravtsov, & Gnedin (2013). Another measure of gravitational influence is from tidal effects between nearby galaxies. We define the characteristic tidal distance in terms of masses and densities of the two galaxies, treated as deformable fluid spheres (Chandrasekhar 1963) of masses ($M_M$, $M_m$) and radii ($R_M$, $R_m$), \[d_{\rm tide} = 2.44 \left( \frac {\rho_M} {\rho_m} \right)^{1/3} R_M = 2.44 \left( \frac {M_M} {M_m} \right)^{1/3} R_m \;.\] In the case of the Milky Way (MW) and Andromeda (M31) system, internal tidal influences are seen in the form of large-scale streams of stars (Fardal 2013; Ibata 2014), but no obvious tails or bridges produced by external tides are detected. Ibata et al. (2014) find a smooth stellar-light halo in M31 out to 150 kpc, with internal streams from tidally stripped satellites. Usually the Roche formula is applied to situations with $M_M \gg M_m$. However, in the case of the MW-M31 system, we assume $M_M \approx M_m$ to estimate that $d_{\rm tide} \approx 2.44 R_M$ for each galaxy. Here, $R_M$ can be regarded as the effective radius of either galaxy, each of mass $(1-2)\times 10^{12}~M_{\odot}$. If the distance between the two galaxy centers is $D = 770 \pm 40$ kpc (van der Marel 2012), the absence of strong mutual tidal effects limits their tidal radius to $d_{\rm tide} < D/2$. Equation (18) then implies that most of the stellar and gaseous matter in the two galaxies is confined within radius $R_M < (D/2)/2.44 \approx 160$ kpc. The fluid approximations in making this estimate are large, and more accurate, time-dependent models and searches for external tidal effects would be helpful to set a better limit. ## Gaseous Outflows Many galaxies undergoing active star formation have been spectroscopically observed at $1.4 \leq z \leq 2.5$ (Steidel 2004) to have large-scale outflows with bulk velocities of 200-300 . For a sample of over 200 star-forming galaxies at redshifts $0.4 < z < 1.4$, blueshifted absorption at greater than 100 is seen toward 20% of the population (Martin 2012). Because the outflows are collimated, the "outflow fraction\" must be signiifcantly higher than the "blueshifted fraction\". Some 2.5% have velocities greater than 200 , with the largest doppler components suggesting velocities up to 500 . The outflow fraction depends on the observed star-formation rate (SFR) and is three times higher for galaxies with SFR $\approx 20-100~M_{\odot}~{\rm yr}^{-1}$ compared to those at $1-10~M_{\odot}~{\rm yr}^{-1}$. If these outflows persist at the observed rates for $\sim1$ Gyr, as Martin (2012) suggest, they could remove a large mass of baryons, up to $10^{10}~M_{\odot}$. Such metal-enriched outflows could be responsible for the large baryon reservoirs of gas and metals around star-forming galaxies observed in absorption as part of the COS-Halos project. Tumlinson (2011, 2013) found substantial column densities, $N_{\rm OVI} \geq 10^{14.3}$ cm$^{-2}$ out to distances of 100-150 kpc, toward a sub-sample of 28 galaxies with active star formation. These -bearing halos surround galaxies with SFRs of $1-10~M_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ and specific SFRs greater than $10^{-11}$ yr$^{-1}$. How far will these galactic winds expand before stalling? Several simulations (Furlanetto & Loeb 2003; Oppenheimer & Davé 2008) estimate that these outflows expand to $\sim100$ kpc, distances inferred observationally in metal-line auto-correlation of absorbers (Martin 2010). A simple estimate illustrates the main effects, as winds encounter surrounding gas in the CGM and produce a "galactopause\" where the wind ram pressure, $P_w = \rho_w V_w^2 = (\dot{M}_w V_w / \Omega_w r^2)$, equals the confining gas pressure of the CGM, $P_{\rm CGM} = n_{\rm tot} \, k T = 2.17 n_H k T_{\rm CGM}$. Here, $\dot{M}_w = \Omega_w r^2 \rho_w V_w$ is the mass-loss rate of a conical outflow into total solid angle $\Omega_w$, $\rho_w$ is the mass density, and $V_w$ is the wind velocity. Observers and modelers typically relate $\dot{M}_w$ to the SFR through a "mass-loading factor\", defined here as $\beta_m = \dot{M}_w / {\rm SFR}$. This mass loading has been inferred from optical and X-ray data to lie in the range $\beta_m = 1-3$ (Strickland & Heckman 2009). In a careful study of the dwarf starburst galaxy NGC 1569, Martin, Kobulnicky, & Heckman (2002) use observations of the SFR, H$\alpha$ emission, metallicities, and X-ray emission from the outflow to estimate $M_X / M_{\rm ejecta} \approx 6-36$ for the mass ratio of X-ray emitting wind to stellar ejecta. With standard assumptions about the ratio of ejecta mass to star formation, this range corresponds to mass loading factors $\beta_m \approx 1-6$. For the CGM gas pressure in low-redshift, actively star-forming galaxies, we use the observed column densities ($10^{14.5}$ ) and spatial impact parameters (100-150 kpc) from COS-Halos data, which suggest total hydrogen column densities $N_H \approx (5-10)\times10^{18}$ for solar oxygen abundances, (O/H) $\approx 5 \times10^{-4}$, and ionization fractions $f_{\rm OVI} \approx 0.1-0.2$. Stocke (2013) estimated a mean pressure $\langle P/k \rangle \approx 10$ cm$^{-3}$ K (with a range from 3 to 60 cm$^{-3}$ K) for warm clouds in the CGM of low-redshift galaxies. Using X-ray absorption through the Galactic halo, Miller & Bregman (2013) modeled thermal pressures $P/k \approx [41, 24]$ cm$^{-3}$ K for halos with characteristic scales of \[50, 100\] kpc and gas temperature $\log T = 6.1$. Thus, in the inner portions of the CGM that would initially confine the outflows, the gas pressure is scaled to $P_{\rm CGM} / k = 2.17 n_H T = (40~{\rm cm}^{-3}~{\rm K}) P_{40}$, appropriate for hydrogen number density $n_H \approx 10^{-5}~{\rm cm}^{-3}$, halo virial temperature $T_{\rm CGM} \approx 2 \times10^6~{\rm K}$, and fully ionized gas with He/H $= 0.0833$ by number. For wind speeds $V_w = (200~{\rm km~s}^{-1}) V_{200}$, the approximate radius of the galactopause is \[R_{\rm wind} = \left( \frac {\dot{M}_w V_w } {\Omega_w P_{\rm CGM} } \right)^{1/2} = (140~{\rm kpc}) \left( \frac {{\rm SFR} }{10~M_{\odot}~{\rm yr}^{-1} } \right)^{1/2} \, \left( \frac {\Omega_w}{4 \pi} \right) ^{-1/2} \left( \frac { \beta_m \, V_{200} } { P_{40} } \right) ^{1/2} \; .\] The combination of parameters ($\beta_m \, V_{200} / P_{40}$) is expected to be of order unity, while bipolar wind solid angles $\Omega_w$ typically cover 10-40% of $4\pi$ sterradians for starburst galaxies (Veilleux, Cecil, & Bland-Hawthorn 2005). If the galaxy wind breaks through the higher-density CGM, the IGM pressure will be considerably lower, and the metal-enriched winds will expand well beyond 200 kpc, depending on the duration of the starburst outflow. Simulations of the low-redshift IGM (e.g., Smith 2011) find a wide range of intergalactic gas pressures in the forest ($P/k \approx 0.1-2~{\rm cm}^{-3}~{\rm K}$) and hotter -bearing gas ($P/k \approx 3-30~{\rm cm}^{-3}~{\rm K}$). In the above estimate, the star-formation rates were scaled to $10~M_{\odot}~{\rm yr}^{-1}$. In the sample of active star-forming galaxies at $z \sim 1$ (Martin 2012), the observed SFRs range from 20-100 $M_{\odot}~{\rm yr}^{-1}$, while in the sample of 28 active COS-Halos galaxies at $z \approx 0.15-0.35$ (Tumlinson 2013) the SFRs are 1--10 $M_{\odot}~{\rm yr}^{-1}$. These rates likely reflect the general decline in SFR history among all galaxies, from $z = 1-2$ to the present epoch. ## Local Environment: Intervening Absorbers and Galaxies Indirect estimates of the sizes of extended gaseous halos and metal-enriched outflows around galaxies can be made from observations of QSO absorption lines. In a pioneering paper, Bahcall & Spitzer (1969) proposed that these absorbers are produced in "extended halos of normal galaxies\" and used the line frequency, $d{\cal N}/dz$, the number of absorbers per unit redshift, to constrain the halo cross section. Their estimate, $R_0 \approx 100$ kpc, for the radius of a spherical halo is comparable to recent estimates from UV spectra of low-redshift QSO absorbers obtained from HST (Shull 1996; Stocke 2006; Prochaska 2011). Those UV studies related line frequency of absorbers in () or the doublet (1032, 1038 Å) to the absorber cross section and space density, $\phi_{\rm gal}$, of galaxies, using a luminosity function to extrapolate to dwarf galaxy scales. In this formalism, the IGM absorbers are associated with the nearest-neighbor galaxy, a procedure expected to be correct statistically, even though some absorbers have alternate possible galaxies within 200--600 kpc (Stocke 2013). At redshifts $z \leq 0.4$ and ignoring cosmological effects, the number of of absorbers per unit redshift is $d{\cal N} / dz \approx (c/H_0) ( \pi R_0^2) \phi_{\rm gal}$, from which one infers an absorber size \[R_0 = \left[ \frac { d{\cal N}/dz } { \left( c / H_0 \right) \pi \, \phi_{\rm gal} } \right] ^{1/2} \approx \left( 157~{\rm kpc} \right) \left[ \frac {d{\cal N} / dz} {20} \right]^{1/2} \left[ \frac {\phi_{\rm gal}} {0.06~{\rm Mpc}^{-3} } \right] ^{-1/2} \\ \;.\] This formula uses the observed $d {\cal N} / dz \approx 20$ down to 10 mÅ equivalent width for the 1032 Å absorption line in low-redshift absorber surveys (Danforth & Shull 2008; Tilton 2012). We adopt a Hubble constant $H_0 = (70~{\rm km~s}^{-1}~{\rm Mpc}^{-1}) h_{70}$, a Hubble length $(c/H_0) = (4286~{\rm Mpc}) \, h_{70}^{-1}$, and a galaxy luminosity function, \[\phi(L) \, dL = \frac {\phi_}{L^} \left( \frac {L} {L^} \right) ^{\alpha} \exp (-L/L^) \, dL \\ \; ,\] with normalization $\phi_* = (6.07 \pm 0.51)\times 10^{-3} \, h_{70}^3~{\rm Mpc}^{-3}$ at B-band absolute magnitude $M^* =-20.37\pm0.04$ and faint-end slope $\alpha \approx-1.13 \pm 0.02$ given by the Millennium galaxy catalog (Driver 2005) and converted to $h_{70} = 1$ scale. The galaxy space density is scaled to 0.06 Mpc$^{-3}$, a value appropriate for extrapolation of $\phi(L)$ down to dwarf galaxies of luminosity $L \geq 0.1 L^$, which have $\sim10$ times the space density of galaxies with $L \geq L^$ for $\alpha =-1.1\pm0.1$. These sizes are consistent with surveys that attempt to match the nearest-neighbor galaxy, in 3D space, to low-redshift absorbers (Stocke 2006, 2013). The galaxy spatial distributions in the surveys suggest that the nearest galaxies to absorbers lie at distances $\sim1$ Mpc from an $L^$ galaxy and at $\sim200$ kpc from a galaxy at $0.1L^$. ## Halo Masses and Virial Radii from Galaxy Abundance Matching Observers often lack direct measurements of galaxy masses. Instead, they estimate halo mass, $M_{\rm h}$, from the inferred stellar mass $M_$ or galaxy luminosity $L$ (Shankar 2006) using the technique of "abundance matching\" (Behroozi 2010; Moster 2010, 2013). By matching the abundance of dark-matter halos in simulations to observed galaxy distributions in stellar mass and luminosity, they attempt to characterize the relationship between the stellar masses of galaxies and the masses of the dark matter halos in which they live. Moster (2010) obtain a parameterized stellar-to-halo mass relation by populating halos and subhalos in an N-body simulation with galaxies and requiring that the observed stellar mass function be reproduced. In a different approach, Tacchella, Trenti, & Carollo (TTC13) assume that the rest-frame UV luminosity and stellar mass of a galaxy are related to its dark-matter halo assembly and gas infall rate. Galaxies are assumed to experience a burst of star formation at the halo assembly time (redshift $z = z_a$) followed by a constant star formation rate sustained by steady gas accretion that provides the dominant contribution to the UV luminosity at all redshifts. The model is calibrated by constructing a galaxy luminosity versus halo mass relation at $z = 4$ via abundance matching. After this luminosity calibration, the model naturally fits the $z = 4$ stellar mass function and correctly predicts the evolution of both luminosity and stellar mass functions from $z \approx 8$ to $z \approx 0$. Generically, halo-matching methods have many similarities, including the flattening at high $M_$ of the relation that maps stellar mass $M_$ into halo mass $M_h$. The similar relation between luminosity $L$ of the central galaxy and the dark-matter halo has been explained (Cooray & Milosavljevic 2005) as the result of a decline in merging efficiency for the accretion of satellites. Flattening of the $M_$ curve at high $M_h$ predicts that ($z \approx 0$) galaxies with $M_* > 10^{11}~M_{\odot}$ reside in very massive halos, $M_h > 10^{13}~M_{\odot}$, although errors in $M_$ (or $L$) can create large uncertainties in the inferred $M_h$. A more subtle effect is that scatter in $M_$ is amplified asymmetrically in $M_h$; simply adopting the mean relation for $M_h(M_)$ leads to errors (Behroozi 2010). Various halo-matching methods differ in specific details, including the redshift evolution of the ratio $M_ / M_h$. Here, we adopt the TTC13 formalism, which has a clear physical basis for mass assembly and rest-frame UV luminosity evolution. The COS-Halos study (Tumlinson 2013; Werk 2013) used the Moster (2010) technique, whereas this paper adopts the TTC13 formalism. Both methods find that galaxies with $L > L^$ correspond to large halo masses. However, as seen in Table 3, there are differences between the two methods in the estimated halo masses and virial radii of the 44 galaxies in the COS-Halos sample. The inferred values of $M_h$ and $R_{\rm vir}$ are particularly uncertain for galaxies with $L > L^$. Comparing values in Columns (5)--(8), one sees that the new method gives virial radii smaller by factors 0.4-0.8. Statistically, the ratio of mean virial radii computed with the two methods is $\langle R_{\rm vir}^{\rm (new)} \rangle / \langle R_{\rm vir}^{\rm (old)} \rangle = 0.63 \pm 0.04$, with the largest change occurring for lower-mass halos, $\log M_* = 10.0-10.4$ (all masses are expressed in $M_{\odot}$ units). Table 4 summarizes the statistical differences for the 44 galaxies in this sample, including subsets of galaxies at low, moderate, and high stellar masses. This decrease in $R_{\rm vir}$ occurs primarily because we evaluate the galaxy collapse and virialization at overdensity, $\Delta_{\rm vir}$, at the redshifts of galaxy assembly, $z_a \approx 0.74-1.29$, rather than at the observed redshifts $z \approx 0.2-0.3$. In addition, the conversion from $M_$ to $M_h$ using modeling or abundance matching differs between methods, particularly in its dependence on redshift. Another difference is that we define $\Delta_{\rm vir}$, relative to the matter* density rather than the critical density. In a few instances with $L > L^$ and large stellar masses, $\log M_ \geq 11.3$, we find large virial radii, $R_{\rm vir} > 400$ kpc, and anomalously large massive halos, $\log M_h > 13.8$. This result occurs because halo-matching algorithms and simulated luminosity functions find large stellar masses to be rare and associate them with very massive halos. Applied to the large Local Group galaxies, halo-matching gives high values for the Milky Way ($\log M_h = 12.55^{+0.18}_{-0.16}$ and $R_{\rm vir} = 153^{+25}_{-16}$ kpc for $\log M_* = 10.7\pm0.1$) and M31 ($\log M_h = 13.35^{+0.24}_{-0.22}$ and $R_{\rm vir} = 303^{+69}_{-52}$ kpc for $\log M_* = 11.1\pm0.1$). Unfortunately for CGM studies, halo-matching for $L > L^$ (high $M_$) galaxies remains an uncertain technique, as demonstrated in Figure 1 of Stocke (2013). # CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION This paper reviews current observations and inferences about the spatial extent of galaxies, and the extent of their gravitational influence. These included several dynamical measures: the "gravitational radius\" $r_g = GM^2/ \vert W \vert$, the "radius of influence\" $R_{\rm infl} = GM / \sigma_{\parallel}^2$, and the "accretion radius\" $R_{\rm accr} = 2GM /c_s^2$. Clearly, these definitions are related for systems near dynamical equilibrium in the gravitational potential of the galactic halo. For example, in Section 2.1 and Table 1, we found a ratio $r_g / R_{\rm vir} = 0.54-0.69$ for NFW halos with concentrations ranging from $c = 20$ to $c = 5$. Various estimates of radial extent from rotation curves and injection of fast stars into extended halos suggest 150-200 kpc extents for halo masses of $10^{12}~M_{\odot}$. Kinematic observations of the Milky Way and M31 give masses $\sim10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ within 60-80 kpc. The inferred Galactic escape velocity, $V_{\rm esc} = 533^{+54}_{-41}$ , together with the local circular velocity $V_c = 220$ , is consistent with halos extending beyond 80-100 kpc. Somewhat larger halo masses, $\log M_{\rm MW} = 12.2\pm0.1$ and $\log M_{\rm M31} = 12.3\pm0.1$ (all masses in $M_{\odot}$ units) have been inferred for the Milky Way and M31 out to larger radii, using globular clusters, satellite galaxies, and stellar streams. Their mass sum, $\log M \approx 12.55\pm0.14$, is comparable to recent estimates of the timing mass of the Local Group, $\log M_{\rm LG} = 12.69^{+0.13}_{-0.19}$ (van der Marel 2012), although a recent study (Gonzalez 2013) used cosmological simulations of halo pairs and a likelihood correction to find a lower value, $\log M_{\rm LG} = 12.38^{+0.09}_{-0.07}$. For either of these masses, the Milky Way and Andromeda are likely to have radial extents $\sim200$ kpc. The answer to the question posed in the title to this paper depends on how one wishes to define or observe the "edge of a galaxy\". Does a galaxy end because of gravity or outflows? This paper suggests that the best definition of $R_{\rm vir}$ is in terms of gravitational binding. Dark matter halos have very large extents, but galactic outflows can drive gas out of the stellar disk, into the (bound) halo, and often into the (unbound) CGM and IGM. We have formulated a new definition of virial radius in this spirit, based on galaxy assembly in the past, when the background density was higher. As a result, we find virial radii smaller by factors of 0.5-0.6, with important consequences for assessing whether the extended absorption seen with COS is bound halo gas, or unbound gas on its way to the IGM. The main conclusions of this paper are as follows: - A revised formulation of virial radius, $R_{\rm vir}(M_h, z_a)$, expresses the critical overdensity $\Delta_{\rm vir}$ relative to the background matter density, ${\bar \rho}_m(z_a)$, evaluated at $z_a$, the redshift of galaxy assembly when half the halo mass had collapsed. Here, $z_a$ depends on $M_h$ and is inferred from stellar mass $M_$. For dynamical consistency, the circumgalactic medium of large galaxies is defined by their gravitationally bound regions, estimated from the virial radius or gravitational radius, $r_g(M_h, c) \approx (0.54-0.69)R_{\rm vir}$. - For galaxies with halo mass $11.0 \leq \log M_h \leq 14.0$ observed by HST/COS at redshifts $0.14 < z < 0.35$, the assembly redshifts are $1.35 > z_a > 0.81$. Because virialization was largely determined by early collapse, when the background density was higher, we adopt $\Delta_{\rm vir} \Omega_m \approx 200$ and $R_{\rm vir}$ is reduced by a factor $(1+z_a)$ compared to $z \approx 0$. - Halo masses can be estimated from stellar masses by halo-matching based on a physically motivated model (TTC13) for galaxy assembly consistent with rest-frame UV luminosity functions from $z = 0-8$. Applied to 44 COS-Halos galaxies, this formalism yields virial radii smaller by factors of 0.5-0.6. Galaxies with $L \approx L^$ ($\log M_h \approx 12.5$) have $R_{\rm vir} \approx 200$ kpc, consistent with their observed radial extent. - If confined by CGM gas pressure, the wind galactopause is predicted to occur at distances $R_{\rm wind} \approx 100-200$ kpc for SFR = 10-30 $M_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$, mass-loading factors $\beta_m \approx 1-3$, and the observed range of CGM gas pressures and wind velocities. Stronger galaxy winds could break out into the lower density IGM, with radial extents beyond 200 kpc determined by the strength, collimation, and duration of the outflow. - For dynamical masses of the large Local Group galaxies, we adopt: Milky Way ($\log M_h \approx 12.2\pm0.1$) and M31 ($\log M_h \approx 12.3\pm0.1$) with (gravitational) radial extents of 150-200 kpc. In our new formalism, the Milky Way stellar mass, $\log M_* = 10.7 \pm 0.1$, would correspond to somewhat higher halo mass $\log M_h = 12.55^{+0.18}_{-0.16}$ and virial radiius $R_{\rm vir} = 153^{+25}_{-16}$ kpc for assembly at $z_a = 1.06\pm0.03$. The inferred $M_h$ for M31 is anomalously high ($\log M_h = 13.35^{+0.24}_{-0.22}$), which suggests caution in using halo-matching to obtain $M_h$ and $R_{\rm vir}$ for massive, luminous galaxies ($L > L^$). As noted earlier, the new definition of $R_{\rm vir}$ is important in deciding whether gas in the vicinity of galaxies is gravitationally bound or unbound. Whether galaxies are "open or closed boxes\" helps to determine the metal evolution of galaxies and the extent of metal-pollution of the IGM. It also suggests that astronomers should be careful in making interchangeable use of the terms CGM and Halo. Matter in the galactic halo is gravitationally bound, while the circumgalactic (gaseous) medium may in fact be unbound outflows* that will merge into the IGM. What many observers are calling the CGM is probably gas at the CGM--IGM interface. In observations of large metal-enriched reservoirs around star-forming galaxies (Tumlinson 2013; Stocke 2013), the radial offset distances $R$ of the QSO sight lines were normalized to $R_{\rm vir}$, with much of the metal-enriched gas within $R < R_{\rm vir}$. With the revised (smaller) virial radii (Table 3 and Figure 1) some of this metal-enriched gas extends beyond the region of strong gravitational influence, probably on its way out to the IGM. This trend is seen in the 28 actively star-forming galaxies in the COS-Halos sample, whereas the undetected around 16 passive galaxies all had sight lines with $R < R_{\rm vir}$. In future work, both data sets will be examined carefully with the new formalism. I thank Crystal Martin, Michele Trenti, Massimo Ricotti, John Stocke, Brian Keeney, Blair Savage, and Vasily Belokurov for helpful discussions, and Evan Tilton and Joshua Moloney for comments on the manuscript. This research was supported by the Astrophysical Theory Program at the University of Colorado Boulder (grant NNX07-AG77G from NASA). I am grateful to the Institute of Astronomy at Cambridge University for their stimulating scientific environment and support through the Sackler Visitor Program.	{'timestamp': '2014-02-26T02:08:43', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5799', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5799'}
null	null
# Introduction Tracing the motion of sunspot groups has a long history and is still used frequently today for studies of solar rotation and related phenomena. In this work we used daily motion of sunspot groups from GPR (Greenwich Photographic Result) and SOON/USAF/NOAA (Solar Observing Optical Network/United States Air Force/National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) databases combined into a single dataset. The key parameter we will investigate is horizontal Reynolds stress which might explain the transfer of angular momentum toward the equator. In a review by, the author advocated the use of sunspot data since both components of horizontal Reynolds stress can be measured separately. GPR dataset complemented by SOON/USAF/NOAA is the longest homogeneous sunspot catalogue and presents a unique opportunity to study long term average properties of the solar velocity field as well as its variations on time scale of a century. The GPR dataset we used was digitised in the frame of several projects and it is not identical to the on-line version[^1]. Various analyses were carried out by using whole or parts of our GPR dataset (@Balthasar1980 [@Balthasar1981; @Arevalo1982; @Arevalo1983]; @Balthasar1986a [@Balthasar1987]; @Brajsa2000 [@Wohl2001; @Brajsa2002; @Brajsa2004; @Ruzdjak2004; @Ruzdjak2005; @Brajsa2006; @Brajsa2007]). A very comprehensive analysis of cycle to cycle variations of rotation velocity for GPR dataset is given in and. The same authors analysed also rotation velocity variations with respect to phase of the solar cycle. Recently, a comprehensive project of revising the GPR dataset was undertaken to correct a number of erroneous measurements and typos which illustrates the importance of the GPR dataset. Various aspects of solar rotation and related phenomena are used to quantify and constrain solar models. Usually the main focus of such investigations are meridional motions and rotation residual velocity. Correlation between two velocities and their covariance are of even greater significance. All of these quantities play an important part in understanding the solar cycle and its variations from one cycle to another. Series of numerical simulations and theoretical works regarding the transfer of angular momentum toward the equator has been carried out by many authors [@Canuto1994; @Chan2001; @Rudiger2004; @Kapyla2004; @Hupfer2006]. Studies of meridional flows show wide discrepancy in their results both qualitatively and quantitatively. By analysing sunspot groups data obtained at Mount Wilson found that for lower solar latitudes ($b<\pm$`<!-- -->`{=html}15) meridional motion is negative, i.e. toward the equator. The magnitude of the effect being $\omega_{mer}\approx$`<!-- -->`{=html}0.02day$^{-1}$. Above mentioned latitude, the flow is toward the poles with a possible hint that at even higher latitudes it changes sign again. studied meridional motion of stable recurrent sunspot groups and they also found that the average flow is equatorward for lower latitudes, while poleward motion occurs at latitudes higher than latitude of the centre of activity. Moreover, the magnitude of the effect is the same as that of. But their data does not provide any indication that the flow might change to equatorward at even higher latitudes. By studying sunspot drawings obtained at National Astronomical Observatory of Japan during the years 1954-1986, found that meridional flow is equatorward for latitudes in the range-20 to +15. They also found an indication of a solar-cycle dependence of meridional motions. found that sunspot groups move away from the average latitude of activity while plages move toward it. By using Doppler line shifts, observed roughly constant poleward flow on the order of $v_{mer}=$`<!-- -->`{=html}20 m s$^{-1}$ in the whole range of studied latitudes (10). mentions the same value, but referring only to higher latitudes. By analysing Doppler velocity data obtained with the Global Oscillating Network Group (GONG) instruments, concluded that the flow is poleward at all latitudes with typical values being about $v_{mer}=$`<!-- -->`{=html}20 m s$^{-1}$, but with episodes of much stronger flows (60 m s$^{-1}$). In contrast to the above, found equatorward motion of $v_{mer}\approx$`<!-- -->`{=html}20 m s$^{-1}$. studied meridional plasma motions using Doppler line shifts covering the period from 1982 until 1986, covering about a half of the solar cycle. The authors concluded that systematic meridional motion, if even present at all, can not be larger than $v_{mer}=$`<!-- -->`{=html}10 m s$^{-1}$ toward solar equator for latitudes below $b=\pm$`<!-- -->`{=html}35 in both hemispheres. Using high-resolution magnetograms taken from 1978 to 1990 with the NSO Vacuum Telescope on Kitt Peak, observed poleward flow of the order of $v_{mer}=$`<!-- -->`{=html}10 m s$^{-1}$ in both hemispheres. The flow increased in amplitude from 0 m s$^{-1}$ at the equator, reached a maximum at mid-latitude and slowly decreased at even higher latitudes. By applying time-distance helioseismology, found poleward meridional flows of the order of $v_{mer}=$`<!-- -->`{=html}20 m s$^{-1}$. In addition they found meridional circulation cells converging toward the activity belts in both hemispheres. Apart from evolutionary loss of angular momentum, the Sun also exhibits changes of the rotational profile on much smaller time scales. A cyclic pattern with a period of $\approx$`<!-- -->`{=html}11 years of alternating faster and slower rotational bands is called torsional oscillations. Existence of torsional oscillations on the Sun were first reported by. They were further confirmed by, , , and others. At latitudes below $b\approx\pm$`<!-- -->`{=html}40 bands propagate equatorward while each band is about 15 wide in latitude. The amplitude of the effect is about $\Delta v_{rot}=$`<!-- -->`{=html}5-10 m s$^{-1}$. showed an interesting analysis of rotation velocity residuals versus phase of the solar cycle in their Fig. 6 showing variations of $\Delta\omega_{rot}\approx$`<!-- -->`{=html}0.05 $\degr$ day$^{-1}$ corresponding to $\Delta v_{rot}\approx$`<!-- -->`{=html}7 m s$^{-1}$ at the equator. Transfer of the angular momentum from higher to lower latitudes can be revealed by studying the correlation and covariance between azimuthal and meridional flows. Covariance, denoted as $Q=<\Delta v_{rot}v_{mer}>$, is a horizontal Reynolds stress. Reynolds stress is thought to be the main generator of maintaining current differential rotation profile. Indeed, observations seems to show that the correct value of $Q$ was observed. In addition, some authors investigated latitudinal dependence of Reynolds stress, and found that it mainly decreases with higher latitudes with a possible minimum around $b=\pm30$. # Data and reduction methods We limited the data to $\pm$`<!-- -->`{=html}58 in Central Meridian Distance (CMD) which corresponds to about 0.85 of projected solar radius. With such cutoff we obtained a sample of 92091 data pairs from GPR to obtain rotation rates and meridional velocities. We used two subsequent measurements of individual sunspot group to get one velocity value. Using the same CMD cutoff, we ended up with a sample of 43583 data pairs from observations found in SOON/USAF/NOAA database in the period from 1977 until 2011. Combining these samples into a single dataset the total amount of data points for sunspot groups was 135674 spanning from year 1878 till 2011. In the rest of this work we will refer to this combined dataset as EGR (Extended Greenwich Result). In the GPR era (until 1977), positions of sunspot groups are given with accuracy of 0.1$\degr$ in both coordinates while subsequent measurements were usually taken 1 day apart. After 1977 the positions are usually given with the accuracy of 1.0$\degr$. When observed by tracers, solar rotation and related phenomena should be treated statistically which requires large number of measurements for proper analysis. While solar rotation velocity has large signal to noise ratio, ($S/N$), solar rotation residuals, meridional velocities and Reynolds stress are significantly weaker effects with lower $S/N$. So, in this paper we will mostly concentrate to identify basic net effect in various relationships between mentioned phenomena. Meridional motion and angular rotation velocity were calculated from two subsequent measurements of position. Since most of the measurements in our dataset are one day apart, velocities are calculated from daily shifts of sunspot groups. To obtain rotation velocity residuals it is necessary to subtract the actual velocity measured from the average rotation velocity at given latitude. Synodic angular velocities were calculated by using the daily motion of sunspot groups and converted to sidereal angular velocities using the procedure described in and. Due to latitudinal distribution of sunspots it is sufficient to use only the first two terms in the standard solar differential rotation equation: \[\omega(b) = A + B\sin^{2}b,\] where $b$ is the heliographic latitude and $\omega(b)$ is sidereal angular velocity. For the EGR dataset we obtained $A = 14.499\pm 0.005$ per day and $B =-2.64\pm0.05$ per day that we calculated by fitting the above equation to all points in the dataset ($n=135674$). After the subtraction was carried out angular velocity residuals have been transformed to linear velocities residuals ($\Delta v_{rot}$) in meters per second, taking into account latitudes of the tracers. Solar radius used for conversion from angular velocities to linear velocities was $R_{\odot}= 696.26\cdot10^{3}$ km. We limited calculated sidereal rotation velocity to 8-19 per day in order to eliminate any gross errors usually resulting from misidentification of sunspot groups or typos. Angular meridional velocities were also transformed to linear velocities in m s$^{-1}$. In the following section we will present several map plots of various quantities depending on latitude, $b$, and phase of the solar cycle, $\phi$. Therefore, it is useful to show latitudinal distribution of sunspots from EGR dataset with respect to phase of the solar cycle, $\phi$, in order to indicate where the results are more reliable (Fig. [\[Fig_butterfly\]](#Fig_butterfly){reference-type="ref" reference="Fig_butterfly"}). We folded all the data into one solar hemisphere. In order to determine the phase we used times of minima and maxima of solar activity found in Table 1 from. All points that belong after the minimum of the solar cycle and before maximum were mapped to $[0,0.5]$ phase range. Points after the maximum, but before the minimum of the next cycle, were assigned phase in $[0.5,1]$ range. Phase was calculated in a linear scale: \[\phi_{i} = \frac{t_{i}-t_{min/max}}{t_{max/min}-t_{min/max}}.\] Since distribution of sunspots in latitude is not uniform, some precaution must be used in order not to detect false motion. Calculated velocities need to be assigned to some latitude. Considering we have two measurements of position for one velocity, we have to decide to which latitude we should assign the velocity. showed that false flow can arise if average latitude of the two values is used, since the gradient of sunspot latitudinal distribution will pollute the result. They also showed that this false meridional flow is of the right order of magnitude and in the right direction as the results obtained by many authors using tracers to detect surface flows on the sun. However, there is a simple solution to this problem: if we assign the velocity to the latitude of the first measurement of position, there is no net flow into the latitude bin from other latitudes and we don't have to worry about the non-uniform distribution of sunspots in latitude. also concluded the same. # Results ## Meridional flow We used the convention that negative meridional velocity reflects equatorward motion: $v_{mer} =-\partial b/\partial t$ for southern hemisphere, where we have defined southern latitudes as negative values. In this section we investigate the properties of $v_{mer}$ depending on latitude, $b$, and phase of the solar cycle, $\phi$. In Fig. [\[mapchart_vmer\]](#mapchart_vmer){reference-type="ref" reference="mapchart_vmer"} we show a map plot of $v_{mer}$ versus cycle phase and latitude, $b$, for EGR dataset. All points were folded into one phase diagram and both solar hemispheres were folded together according to our convention above. The map plot is constructed first by binning the data into square bins of width 0.1 in phase of the cycle, $\phi$ and height 1in latitude. Then we calculated the average values of velocity in each bin, discarding all the bins where the number of data points was less than 10 (see Fig. [\[Fig_butterfly\]](#Fig_butterfly){reference-type="ref" reference="Fig_butterfly"}). Finally we calculated smoothed averages of each bin with weight given by $w(d) = 1/(1 + d^{2})$, where $d$ is a distance of each data point from the map grid point. Brighter shades of grey depict polewards motion ($v_{mer} > 0$), while darker shades show motion toward the solar equator ($v_{mer} < 0$). On the same plot we show a contour line of $v_{mer} = 0$ with a solid line which clearly separates the two regions of opposite meridional flow. Such distinct appearance can be easily confirmed by plotting average values of $v_{mer}$ in bins 2 wide in latitude (Fig. [\[vmer_b\_aver\]](#vmer_b_aver){reference-type="ref" reference="vmer_b_aver"}). This is similar to Fig. [\[mapchart_vmer\]](#mapchart_vmer){reference-type="ref" reference="mapchart_vmer"} only integrated in phase of the solar cycle, $\phi$, or in other words integrated in time. In the same Fig. we show a linear fit of $v_{mer}(b)$ through individual data points, given by equation: \[v_{mer}=(-0.571\pm0.038)\ \mathrm{m\ s}^{-1}\mathrm{(\degr)}^{-1}\cdot b + (8.61\pm0.64)\ \mathrm{m\ s}^{-1}. \label{vmer_b_lin_fit}\] From the above equation we get the intersect with x-axis, $v_{mer}(b) = 0$, for $b\approx$ 15. In the inset to Fig. [\[vmer_b\_aver\]](#vmer_b_aver){reference-type="ref" reference="vmer_b_aver"} we show average values of $v_{mer}$ separately for the two solar hemispheres. We can see that for very low latitudes $v_{mer}$ goes back to zero and reverses sign when crossing the solar equator. We also divided the data into 10 bins in phase, $\phi$, each being 0.1 wide. Then we calculated $v_{mer}(b)$ linear fits for those 10 bins. The coefficients, given by equation: \[v_{mer}=c_{1} b + c_{2}, \label{Eq_c1_c2}\] are shown in Table [1](#linFitCoeffs){reference-type="ref" reference="linFitCoeffs"}. ::: # Summary and Conclusion The most important results can be summarised as follows: - Meridional motion of sunspot groups clearly shows poleward motion for all latitudes bellow the centre of activity and motion toward the equator for higher latitudes. This is valid for all phases of the solar cycle with a very strong correlation. - The variations of $v_{mer}$ with latitude, $b$, are approximately in the range of $v_{mer}=\pm 10$ m s$^{-1}$. - Rotation velocity residuals show unusual torsional oscillation pattern. The actual values of rotation residual velocity rarely exceed $\Delta v_{rot}=$`<!-- -->`{=html}5 m s$^{-1}$. Rotation velocity residuals map plots in different epochs show a changing pattern which we are unable to explain. It is possible that we see only a pattern resulting from random errors. - Meridional velocities are similar to residual meridional velocities found with time-distance helioseismology. - Reynolds stress is negative at all available latitudes which, in our convention, corresponds to equatorward transport of angular momentum. This supports the idea that observed rotational profile is actually driven by the Reynolds stress. - Latitudinal dependence of Reynolds stress suggests a minimum at about $b\approx 30^{\circ}$. The value of covariance being $q\approx$-0.15 ()$^{2}$ day$^{-2}$ ($q\approx$-3000 m$^2$ s$^{-2}$). This is consistent with. - Phase and latitudinal dependence of covariance, $q$, seems to be fairly uniform in all phases of the solar cycle with possible exception at phases very late in the solar cycle. Most authors who used tracers to track the meridional flow found meridional velocities to be opposite to ours. We believe that this is a consequence of improper assignment of latitude to measured velocities. In the approach we used (assigning velocities to the starting latitude), latitudinal distribution of tracers is irrelevant because calculation of averages (and even fit functions) does not need to take into account the number of tracers at specific latitude ($n(b)$ is the same for all of them for each particular $b$). If we were to use average latitude between two successive measurement of position, we would have to calculate weighted averages by taking into account from which latitude the tracer actually started and assign weight accordingly. As a test, we have also made an analysis with assigning the second latitude of two successive measurements and calculated average meridional motions and got the results very similar to, for example, and. Assigning second latitude or average latitude suffers from exactly the same problem; we would need to take into account the first latitude in order to properly calculate weighted averages. By using the starting latitude as the relevant one, we simply defined the flow as flow from certain latitude instead of flow into some latitude. There is no loss of generality in doing so and no difference in physical interpretation. Similar result for meridional velocity to ours was obtained by who pointed out the solution to this problem and used starting latitudes of the tracers. As a point of interest, even when we used the second latitude in our test, calculated correlation and covariance of meridional and residual rotation velocities was very similar to the results we obtained in this paper by using the first latitude. This also explains why our results, regarding correlation and covariance, are similar to the results of other authors who used tracers even if they found different average meridional flow than we did. We can see a clear increase of uncertainties at latitudes larger than 30 which is a consequence of sunspot latitudinal distribution. Therefore, it is of great importance to use other methods or tracers (for example CBPs) to extend the analysis to higher latitudes. The absence in our data of predominant poleward meridional flow which is found in helioseismology might be explained by several possibilities. The first one is that sunspots are anchored at depth below the surface showing sub-photospehric flow. Another possibility is that on longer time-scales the flow changes from poleward to equatorward and consequently averages out in our analysis. And finally, it is possible that the flow in active regions is different than in the rest of the solar disk, so in our analysis we see only this localised flow. Future work might shed some light on these opened questions.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-24T02:06:16', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5641', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5641'}
null	null
# Introduction A sequence over a ring $R$ is denoted by $\underline{a}=(a(t))_{t\ge 0}$ with each $a(t)$ belonging to $R$. Moreover, if there are elements $c_0,\ c_1,\ldots,\ c_{n-1}$ in $R$ such that \[a(i+n)=c_{n-1}a(i+n-1)+\cdots+c_1a(i+1)+c_0a(i)\] holds for all $i \ge 0$, then the sequence is called a linear recurring sequence of degree $n$ over $R$, generated by $f(x)=x^n-c_{n-1}x^{n-1}-\cdots-c_1x-c_0$. Let $p$ be a prime number, $e$ a positive integer and $\mathbb{Z}/(p^e)$ the integer residue ring modulo $p^e$. We identify the elements of $\mathbb{Z}/(p^e)$ with the corresponding representatives in $\{0,1,2,\ldots, p^e-1\}$. For two integers $m$ and $n$, the notation $[n]_{\lmod m}$ represents the least nonnegative integer of $n$ modulo $m$ and $[\underline{a}]_{\lmod m}=([a(t)]_{\lmod m})_{t \ge 0}$. These notations were used by Zheng, Qi and Tian in. Then a recurring sequence over $\mathbb{Z}/(p^e)$ generated by $f(x)=x^n-c_{n-1}x^{n-1}-\cdots-c_1x-c_0$ means that for all $i \ge 0$, $a(i) \in \{0,1,2,\ldots, p^e-1\}$ and \[a(i+n)=[c_{n-1}a(i+n-1)+\cdots+c_1a(i+1)+c_0a(i)]_{\lmod p^e}.\] Usually, the set of all sequences generated by $f(x)$ over $\mathbb{Z}/(p^e)$ is denoted by $G(f(x),p^e)$. Let $f(x)$ be a monic polynomial of degree $n$ over $\mathbb{Z}/(p^e)$. If $[f(0)]_{\lmod p}\neq 0$, then there exists a positive integer $T$ such that $x^T-1$ is divisible by $f(x)$ in $\mathbb{Z}/(p^e)[x]$. The smallest such positive $T$ is called the least period of $f(x)$ and denoted by $\per(f(x), p^e)$. Ward proved that $\per(f(x), p^e)\le p^{e-1}(p^n-1)$. Polynomials reaching this bound are called primitive polynomials. A sequence $\underline{a}$ is called a primitive sequence of order $n$ if $\underline{a}$ is generated by a primitive polynomial of degree $n$ and $[\underline{a}]_{\lmod p}$ is not the all zero sequence. It can been shown that primitive sequences of order $n$ have least period $p^{e-1}(p^n-1)$. For $e=1$, primitive sequences are just the well known m-sequences over prime field $\mathbb{Z}/(p)$. The set of all primitive sequences generated by primitive polynomial $f(x)$ is usually denoted by $G'(f(x), p^e)$. More details of linear recurring sequences over integer residue rings can be found in. Let $\underline{a}=(a(t))_{t\ge 0}$ be a sequence over $\mathbb{Z}/(p^e)$. Each $a(t)$ has a unique $p$-adic expansion as \[a(t)=a_0(t)+a_1(t)\cdot p+\cdots+a_{e-1}(t)\cdot p^{e-1},\] with $a_i(t) \in \{0,1,\ldots,p-1\}$ for all $0 \le i \le e-1$. The sequence $\underline{a_i}=(a_{i}(t))_{t\ge 0}$ is called the $i$th-level sequence of $\underline{a}$, and \[\underline{a}=\underline{a_0}+\underline{a_1}\cdot p+\cdots+\underline{a_{e-1}}\cdot p^{e-1}\] is called the $p$-adic expansion of $\underline{a}$. Let $f(x)$ be a primitive polynomial over $\mathbb{Z}/(p^e)$ and $\phi(x_0,x_1,\ldots,x_{e-1})$ be an $e$-variable polynomial over $\mathbb{Z}/(p)$. We can induce a map from the set of primitive sequences $G'(f(x), p^e)$ to the set of sequences over $\mathbb{Z}/(p)$ by the polynomial $\phi$. The new map is also denoted by $\phi$ and defined by \[\begin{aligned} \phi :\quad & G'(f(x), p^e) \rightarrow (\mathbb{Z}/(p))^{\infty} \\ & \underline{a} \mapsto \phi(\underline{a_{0}}, \underline{a_1},\ldots, \underline{a_{e-1}}) =\big(\phi(a_0(t), a_1(t),\ldots, a_{e-1}(t))\big)_{t \ge 0}. \end{aligned}\] The map $\phi$ is called a compressing map and $\phi(\underline{a_{0}}, \underline{a_1},\ldots, \underline{a_{e-1}})$ is called a compressing sequence. $\phi(x_0,x_1,\ldots,x_{e-1})$ is called an injective function if $\phi$ is injective. Huang and Dai in and Kuzmin and Nechaev in independently proved that $\phi(x_0,x_1,\ldots,x_{e-1})=x_{e-1}$ is an injective function. Their result is presented as the following theorem. The above theorem means that the sequence $\underline{a_{e-1}}$ over $\mathbb{Z}/(p)$ contains all the information of the sequence $\underline{a}$ over $\mathbb{Z}/(p^e)$. Theoretically, one can recover $\underline{a}$ when given $\underline{a_{e-1}}$. The cryptographic properties of such compressing sequences have been studied in. From then on, more compressing maps have been proved to be injective. Especially, when $f(x)$ is a strongly primitive polynomial(Definition [\[Def:StronglyPrimitive\]](#Def:StronglyPrimitive){reference-type="ref" reference="Def:StronglyPrimitive"} in the next section), the following results are obtained for $p=2$ and odd prime $p$ respectively. For $p=2$, Qi, Yang and Zhou proved that almost all $e$-variable boolean functions containing $x_{e-1}$ are injective. For odd prime $p$, the following theorem has been proved in. The distribution properties of compressing sequences are also interesting. Now we recall some definitions in. In and, Zhu and Qi proved that when $e>1$, $\underline{a}=\underline{b}$ iff $\underline{a_{e-1}}$ and $\underline{b_{e-1}}$ are $0$-uniform. Later, the same authors obtained a further result that $\underline{a}=\underline{b}$ iff $\underline{a_{e-1}}$ and $\underline{b_{e-1}}$ are $0$-uniform with a certain sequence $\underline{\alpha}$(definition given before Definition [\[Def:StronglyPrimitive\]](#Def:StronglyPrimitive){reference-type="ref" reference="Def:StronglyPrimitive"} in the next section). In, under the condition that $f(x)$ is a strongly primitive polynomial, Zheng and Qi extended the result to the following more general one. Let \[\phi(x_0, x_1, \ldots, x_{e-1})=x_{e-1}+\eta(x_0, x_1,\ldots, x_{e-2})\] with the coefficient of $x_{e-2}^{p-1}\cdots x_1^{p-1}x_0^{p-1}$ in $\eta$ is not equal to $(-1)^e\cdot\tfrac{p+1}{2}$. Then their result is $\underline{a}=\underline{b}$ if and only if there exist $s\in \mathbb{Z}/(p)$ such that $\phi(\underline{a_{0}}, \underline{a_1},\ldots, \underline{a_{e-1}})$ and $\phi(\underline{b_{0}}, \underline{b_1},\ldots, \underline{b_{e-1}})$ are $s$-uniform with $\underline{\alpha}$. Recently, the same author proved a stronger result which is stated in the following. In this article, we will investigate that if $x_{e-1}$ is replaced by a general polynomial $g(x_{e-1})$ in the above theorem, whether or not similar results can still hold. Unfortunately, the answer is negative. We obtain that if there exists $k \in (\mathbb{Z}/(p))^{}$ such that $\phi(a_0(t), a_1(t), \ldots, a_{e-1}(t))=\phi(b_0(t), b_1(t), \ldots, b_{e-1}(t))$ for all $t$ satisfying $\alpha(t)=k$, then $\underline{a}=\underline{b}$. This result is stronger than Theorem [\[Thm:CompressingMap\]](#Thm:CompressingMap){reference-type="ref" reference="Thm:CompressingMap"}, and we devote Section 3 to prove it. In Section 4, we consider that for some $g(x_{e-1})$ and different $\underline{a}$ and $\underline{b}$, $\phi(\underline{a_{0}}, \underline{a_1},\ldots, \underline{a_{e-1}})$ and $\phi(\underline{b_{0}}, \underline{b_1},\ldots, \underline{b_{e-1}})$ can be $s$-uniform for how many elements in $\mathbb{Z}/(p)$. In the next section, we recall some facts about primitive sequences modulo odd prime powers. # Preliminaries In this section, we will introduce some facts about sequences over integer residue rings. we only consider the case that $p$ is an odd prime. For sequences $\underline{a}=(a(t))_{t\ge 0}$, $\underline{b}=(b(t))_{t \ge 0}$ over $\mathbb{Z}/(p^e)$, and $c\in \mathbb{Z}/(p^e)$, we have the following operation: \[\underline{a}+\underline{b}=([a(t)+b(t)]_{\lmod p^e})_{t\ge 0}, \quad c\cdot\underline{a}=([c\cdot a(t)]_{\lmod p^e})_{t\ge 0},\] \[x^k\underline{a}=(a(t+k))_{t\ge 0}.\] Then the operation of a polynomial $g(x)=\sum_{k=0}^{n}c_{k}x^k \in \mathbb{Z}/(p^e)[x]$ on the sequence $\underline{a}$ as \[g(x)\underline{a}=\sum_{k=0}^{n}c_k\cdot x^k\underline{a}.\] If $f(x)$ is a primitive polynomial of degree $n$ over $\mathbb{Z}/(p^e)$, it is known that there exist polynomials $h_{i}(x)$ of degree less than $n$ over $\mathbb{Z}/(p^e)$ such that for $1\le i\le e$, \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:period} x^{p^{i-1}T}\equiv 1+p^i\cdot h_i(x)\mod {f(x)}, \end{aligned}\] where $T=p^n-1$ and $h_1(x)\equiv h_2(x)\equiv\cdots\equiv h_e(x)\not\equiv 0\mod p$. For a given $f(x)$, denote by $h_{f}(x)$ the polynomial of $h_1(x)$ modulo $p$. The sequence $\underline{\alpha}$ over $\mathbb{Z}/(p)$ mentioned in the last section is defined to be $[h_{f}(x)\underline{a_0}]_{\lmod p}$. The following definition is given in. It is used to deal with carries. For an element $u$ in $\mathbb{Z}/(p)=\{0,1,\ldots,p-1\}$, the function $C_1$ can induce a map from $\mathbb{Z}/(p)$ to itself by $x\mapsto C_1(u+x)$. By Lagrange interpolation, each such function has a unique polynomial representation, and we have the following result. Let the equality [\[eq:period\]](#eq:period){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:period"} operates on a sequence $\underline{a}$ generated by $f(x)$ over $\mathbb{Z}/(p^e)$. The following results can be proved. For details see and. The following statements about periods of linear recurring sequences over $\mathbb{Z}/(p^e)$ can be proved similarly as in. For m-sequences over $\mathbb{Z}/(p)$, The following results are well known. # Distribution at $\alpha(t)=k$ In this section we always assume $p$ is an odd prime and $e \ge 2$. Let $f(x)$ be a strongly primitive polynomial over $\mathbb{Z}/(p^e)$, $\underline{a}, \underline{b}\in G'(f(x), p^e)$ and $\underline{\alpha}=[h_{f}(x)\underline{a_0}]_{\lmod p}$. Assume $g(x_{e-1})\in\mathbb{Z}/(p)[x_{e-1}]$ and $\eta_{e-2}(x_0, x_1, \ldots, x_{e-2}) \in \mathbb{Z}/(p)[x_0, x_1, \ldots, x_{e-1}]$. Let \[\phi(x_0, x_1, \ldots, x_{e-1})=g(x_{e-1})+\eta_{e-2}(x_0, x_1, \ldots, x_{e-2}).\] We will prove that for sequences $\underline{a}$, $\underline{b}\in G'(f(x), p^e)$, $\underline{a}=\underline{b}$ if and only if there exists some $k \in (\mathbb{Z}/(p))^$ such that the compressing sequences $\phi(a_{0}(t), a_1(t),\ldots, a_{e-1}(t))= \phi(b_{0}(t), b_1(t),\ldots, b_{e-1}(t))$ at $t$ with $\alpha(t)=k$. We depart the proof into two cases: ($1$) $\deg g=1$ and ($2$) $2 \le \deg g \le p-1$. ## Case $\deg g=1$ When $\deg g=1$, we can assume $g(x_{e-1})=x_{e-1}$ without loss of generality. In this case, we do not need $f(x)$ to be a strongly primitive polynomial. In the following, most equalities are regarded as over $\mathbb{Z}/(p)$. we have ## Case $2\le \deg g\le p-1$ In this subsection, we will prove the result for $2\le \deg g\le p-1$. We prove the following lemmas first. From Theorem [\[Thm:deg=1\]](#Thm:deg=1){reference-type="ref" reference="Thm:deg=1"} and Theorem [\[Thm:degge2\]](#Thm:degge2){reference-type="ref" reference="Thm:degge2"}, we have proved what we state at the beginning of this section. # $s$-uniform Let $f(x)$ be a strongly primitive polynomial of degree $n$ over $\mathbb{Z}/(p^e)$ with odd prime $p$ and $e\ge 2$. Assume $\underline{a}, \underline{b}\in G'(f(x), p^e)$. Let \[\phi(x_0, x_1, \ldots, x_{e-1})=g(x_{e-1})+\eta_{e-2}(x_0, x_1, \ldots, x_{e-2})\] with $\eta_{e-2}$ an $(e-1)$-variable polynomial over $\mathbb{Z}/(p)$. In Theorem [\[Thm:s-uniform\]](#Thm:s-uniform){reference-type="ref" reference="Thm:s-uniform"}, Zheng, Qi and Tian prove that when $g(x_{e-1})=x_{e-1}$ and the coefficient of $x_{e-2}^{p-1}\cdots x_1^{p-1}x_0^{p-1}$ in $\eta_{e-2}$ is not equal to $(-1)^e\cdot\frac{p+1}{2}$, then $\underline{a}=\underline{b}$ if and only if there exist $s\in \mathbb{Z}/(p)$ and $k\in (\mathbb{Z}/(p))^{*}$ such that $\phi(\underline{a_{0}}, \underline{a_1},\ldots, \underline{a_{e-1}})$ and $\phi(\underline{b_{0}}, \underline{b_1},\ldots, \underline{b_{e-1}})$ are $s$-uniform with $\underline{\alpha}\|_{k}$. In this section, we will discuss the $s$-uniform property for general $g(x_{e-1})$. If the image of polynomial $\phi$ is not $\mathbb{Z}/(p)$, i.e., there is some $s$ in $\mathbb{Z}/(p)$ such that $\phi(x_0, x_1,\ldots, x_{e-1})\neq s$ for all $e$-tuples in $(\mathbb{Z}/(p))^e$, then it is obvious that for any $\underline{a}$ and $\underline{b}$, $\phi(a_{0}(t), a_1(t),\ldots, a_{e-1}(t))=s$ if and only if $\phi(b_{0}(t), b_1(t), \ldots, b_{e-1}(t))=s$. Thus we only consider the case that $s$ is an image of $\phi$. Since when $\alpha(t)=k$, $a(t)$ can be any element in $\{0,1, \ldots, p^e-1\}$ by the proof of Lemma [\[Lem:highestlevel\]](#Lem:highestlevel){reference-type="ref" reference="Lem:highestlevel"}, $s$ is an image of $\phi$ if and only if there is some $t$ with $\alpha(t)=k$ such that $\phi(a_0(t), a_1(t), \ldots, a_{e-1}(t))=s$. We first consider the case that $g(x_{e-1})$ is a permutation polynomial. We define a function $\psi_{z, w}$ from $(\mathbb{Z}/(p))^{e-1}$ to $\mathbb{Z}/(p)$ by \[\begin{aligned} \psi_{z, w}(x_0, \ldots, x_{e-2})=\begin{cases} z, & \text{if } (x_0, \ldots, x_{e-2})=(0, \ldots, 0),\\ w, & \text{if } (x_0, \ldots, x_{e-2})\neq (0, \ldots, 0). \end{cases} \end{aligned}\] The polynomial representation of $\psi_{z, w}$ is \[\psi_{z, w}(x_0, \ldots, x_{e-2})=(z-w)(1-x_0^{p-1})\cdots(1-x_{e-2}^{p-1})+w.\] We have the following theorem. When $g(x_{e-1})$ is not a permutation polynomial and satisfies an additional condition in the following theorem, there exist many choices of $\eta_{e-2}$ such that for different $\underline{a}, \underline{b}\in G'(f(x), p^e)$, $\phi(\underline{a_{0}}, \underline{a_1},\ldots, \underline{a_{e-1}})$ and $\phi(\underline{b_{0}}, \underline{b_1},\ldots, \underline{b_{e-1}})$ are $s$-uniform. For a nonempty subset $W$ of $\{0, 1, \ldots, p-1\}$, we use $\psi_{z, W}$ to denote any function from $(\mathbb{Z}/(p))^{e-1}$ to $\mathbb{Z}/(p)$ satisfying \[\begin{aligned} \psi_{z, W}(x_0, \ldots, x_{e-2})=\begin{cases} z, & \text{if } (x_0, \ldots, x_{e-2})=(0, \ldots, 0),\\ w\in W, & \text{if } (x_0, \ldots, x_{e-2})\neq (0, \ldots, 0). \end{cases} \end{aligned}\] Given $s$ and $W$, when $W$ is a singleton $\{w\}$, $\psi_{z, W}$ is uniquely determined and equal to $\psi_{z, w}$. But when $W$ has more than one element, there exist many such $\psi_{z, W}$, especially when the cardinality of $W$ is large. We give an example of $g(x_{e-1})$ which satisfies the two conditions in the above theorem. We discuss for a certain $\phi(x_0, \ldots, x_{e-1})$ and different $\underline{a}, \underline{b}\in G'(f(x), p^e)$, $\phi(\underline{a_{0}}, \underline{a_1},\ldots, \underline{a_{e-1}})$ and $\phi(\underline{b_{0}}, \underline{b_1},\ldots, \underline{b_{e-1}})$ can be $s$-uniform for how many $s$. The following lemma about the sum of Legendre symbols can be found in. # Conclusions In this article, we consider the distribution properties of compressing sequences derived from primitive sequences modulo odd prime powers. For strongly primitive polynomial $f(x)$ and compressing map \[\phi(x_0, x_1, \ldots, x_{e-1})=g(x_{e-1})+\eta_{e-2}(x_0, x_1, \ldots, x_{e-2})\] with $1\le \deg g\le p-1$, primitive sequences $\underline{a}=\underline{b}$ if and only if the compressing sequences $\phi(a_0(t), \ldots, a_{e-1}(t))=\phi(b_0(t), \ldots, b_{e-1}(t))$ for all the $t$ with $\alpha(t)=k$. When $\deg g=1$, we do not need $f(x)$ to be a strongly primitive polynomial. This result improves the result in. For $s$-uniform property, when $g(x_{e-1})$ is a permutation polynomial, for a certain $\phi(x_0, \ldots, x_{e-1})$, the compressing sequences of $\underline{a}$ and $-\underline{a}$ are $s$-uniform. When $g(x_{e-1})$ is not a permutation polynomial, there may exist many $\phi(x_0, \ldots, x_{e-1})$ such that the compressing sequences of $\underline{a}$ and $\lambda\cdot\underline{a}$ are $s$-uniform. For $g(x_{e-1})=x_{e-1}^2$, we can construct a compressing map $\phi(x_0, \ldots, x_{e-1})$ such that the compressing sequences of $\underline{a}$ and $-\underline{a}$ are $s$-uniform for $[\tfrac{p}{4}]+1$ different $s$ in the image of $\phi$.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-24T02:04:08', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5874', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5874'}
null	null
null	null
# Introduction The modern study of random $3$-manifolds, and their relationship to random elements of the mapping class group was initiated by N. Dunfield and W. Thurston in their foundational paper (they studied "random Heegaard splittings"). Their work spurred on considerable progress in the field, which lies at the crossroads of three-manifold topology, surface topology, dynamics, ergodic theory, number theory, algebraic groups, and the study of Kleinian groups. In addition, while Dunfield and Thurston were motivated by the Virtual Haken Conjecture, in the interim Agol, Groves and Manning extended the work of Dani Wise and collaborators (see, e.g., ) to resolve the (much stronger) Virtual Fibering Conjecture, which makes $3$-manifolds fibering over $S^1$ even more interesting than in the past. With this in mind, in this paper we undertake the study of random manifolds fibering over $S^1,$ and discover that much can be said, and much remains mysterious. Let $S$ be a surface of genus $g,$ and let $\phi:S\righttoleftarrow$ be an automorphism of $S.$ For such a map $\phi,$ we can define the mapping torus $M_\phi,$ which will be a three-dimensional manifold fibering over the circle $S^1.$ It is clear that the properties of $\phi$ are reflected in the topology of $M_\phi,$ and, consequently, an understanding of the properties of "random" surface automorphisms leads to an understanding of "random" manifolds fibering over the circle. The word "random" is in quotes because there are a number of possible ways we can define what it means--see the author's survey. In this note we will define a random element of the mapping class group (or a subgroup thereof) as a \"long\" random product of generators (the generating set is assumed to be symmetric), though all of our results hold with a somewhat more general definition using symmetric recognizing automata for permitted words. Here is a list of some of our observations, we will denote the set of random products of length $n$ by $W_n.$ In fact, it is not necessary we take random products of generators of the whole mapping class group, so the list below is only to give the flavor of the results we find. In all statements, $\phi$ is a uniformly chosen random element of $W_n.$ - The map $\phi$ is pseudo-Anosov, with probability approaching $1$ exponentially fast in $n.$ - The mapping torus $M_\phi$ is a hyperbolic manifold with probability approaching $1$ exponentially fast in $n.$ - The hyperbolic volume of the mapping torus $M_\phi$ grows linearly in $n.$ - The first Betti number of the mapping torus $M_\phi$ of $\phi$ is $1,$ with probability approaching $1$ exponentially fast in $n.$ - The expected value of the logarithm of the order of the torsion subgroup of $H_1(M_\phi, \mathbb{Z})$ grows linearly in $n.$ Furthermore, this logarithm is asymptotically normally distributed. - The probability that the rank of $H_1(M_\phi, \mathbb{Z}/p \mathbb{Z})$ for a prime $p$ is greater than $k$ asymptotically approaches $c_k/p^k,$ where $c_k$ are universal constants. - The rank of the fundamental group of $M_\phi$ is generically $2g+1.$ - The injectivity radius of $M_\phi$ goes to zero with $n.$ - The smallest positive eigenvalue $\lambda_1(M_\phi)$ goes to zero between linearly and quadratically as a function of $n.$ We also study manifolds which fiber over the circle with fiber a cusped surface. We study the generic behavior of the cusp of the resulting (generically hyperbolic) manifold, and use it to show that for a generic such manifold all the Dehn fillings are hyperbolic. In addition, by varying the model somewhat, we get large families of integer homology spheres with control on the Casson invariants. We also make the following conjectures (coming from computational experiments): - The expected hyperbolic volume of a surface bundle grows linearly in the length of the monodromy as a word in the mapping class group. - The expected growth rates of both volume and logarithm of the torsion subgroup of homology of a mapping torus approach finite limits as the genus of the fiber becomes large. We also give a number of results on the Dunfield-Thurston model of random Heegaard splittings. - The cardinality of the first homology group of a random Heegard splitting grows exponentially with the length of the gluing map, and there are precise limit theorems for its size (this is true if the gluing map is chosen from a nonelementary subgroup of the mapping class group, whose Torelli image is Zariski dense in $\Sp(2g, \mathbb{Z}).$ - Under the same assumptions as above, the Kneser-Matve'ev complexity of the manifold grows linearly. - Under the same assumptions, the probability that the manifold has a Galois cover with Galois group $Q$ (which is assumed to be solvable) and positive first Betti number goes to zero with the length of the gluing map. - The volume of a random Heegard splitting goes to infinity linearly with the length of the defining word (resolving a conjecture of Dunfield-Thurston), while - The Cheeger constant, the injectivity radius, and the bottom eigenvalue of the Laplacian go to zero with the length of the word (this is true for any nonelementary subgroup). We also conjecture that the probability that the random manifold is Haken goes to zero with the length of the gluing map. The plan of the rest of the paper is as follows: In Section [2](#background){reference-type="ref" reference="background"} we will recall some background. In Section [3](#matprods){reference-type="ref" reference="matprods"} we study the homology of random mapping tori. In Section [5](#volsec){reference-type="ref" reference="volsec"} we study the hyperbolic volumes and other geometric invariants of random mapping tori. In Section [6](#prehom){reference-type="ref" reference="prehom"} we find many hyperbolic manifolds fibering over the circle with bounded volume and prescribed structure of the first integral homology group. In Section [7](#randsubgp){reference-type="ref" reference="randsubgp"} we discuss the structure of a random subgroup of the mapping class group. In Section [8](#cusped){reference-type="ref" reference="cusped"} we study fibered manifolds with punctured fiber, and their Dehn fillings. In Section [9](#experiments){reference-type="ref" reference="experiments"} we will describe some experimental results and conjectures. In Section [11](#randomh){reference-type="ref" reference="randomh"} we address random Heegaard splittings a la Dunfield-Thurston. # Some background {#background} In this section we will recall some (fairly diverse) background facts. ## Homology {#homosec} The following result is shown (as Example 2.48) in A. Hatcher's Algebraic Topology: In the case of interest to us, $X$ is closed connected surface, so letting $n=1,$ we have $H_0(X)\simeq \mathbb{Z},$ and the map $\phi_$ is identity on zeroth homology, so we have: \[\begin{CD} \dots \rightarrow H_1(X,\mathbb{Z}) @>\phi_-\iota_>> H_1(X,\mathbb{Z}) @>\iota_>> H_1(M_\phi,\mathbb{Z}) @>>> \mathbb{Z} @>>> 0 \end{CD}\] Since $\mathbb{Z}$ is a free $\mathbb{Z}$ module, we have the following corollary: In the sequel we will need the following result, which can be proved in a number of ways. ## Geometric structures {#gstructs} The foundational result for mapping tori is Thurston's theorem: The obvious question raised by (already highly non-trivial) Theorem [\[thurstonfiber\]](#thurstonfiber){reference-type="ref" reference="thurstonfiber"} is: what can we say about the hyperbolic geometry of $M_\phi$ if we have some information about $\phi.$ The simplest (in some ways) invariant of a hyperbolic manifold is its volume, and the basic result is Jeff Brock's theorem: # Random matrix products and homology {#matprods} Consider a real semisimple algebraic group $G,$ and consider products of elements of the set $S=\{M_1, \dotsc, M_k\}.$ Consider a random such product $P$ of length $n.$ Using the $KAK$ decomposition (known in the numerical linear algebra circles as the Singular Value Decomposition), we can ask about the distribution of the ordered set of singular values of $P,$ which is the same as the distribution of the main diagonal of $A.$ The fundamental result here is the following theorem of Y. Guivarc'h (the paper is the culmination of other work of Y. Guivarc'h with his collaborators I. Goldsheid and A. Raugi, see; the first paper, together with the classic paper of Goldsheid and Margulis are required reading in the subject): We will also use some of our own results (we are stating a special case, for the more general case, see ) and also # Applications to homology of fibered manifolds Results of sections [2.1](#homosec){reference-type="ref" reference="homosec"} and [3](#matprods){reference-type="ref" reference="matprods"} lead, essentially immediately, to the following results.Below, a random $(\Gamma, n)$ manifold is one whose (symplectic monodromy) is obtained by a random product of a symmetric generating set of a Zariski dense subgroup $\Gamma$ of $\Sp(2g,\mathbb{Z}).$ See E. Hironaka's nice paper for a discussion of the other situation (where there are many fiberings)--of course, there are many of those produced randomly as well, as long as we take a non-elementary subgroup of the mapping class group whose Torelli image is not Zariski-dense in the symplectic group. Note that Theorems [\[homrank2\]](#homrank2){reference-type="ref" reference="homrank2"} and [\[torsionord\]](#torsionord){reference-type="ref" reference="torsionord"} are in some sense opposite. The first states that it is unlikely to have more than the "standard" amount of $p$ torsion, for any given $p,$ the second states that the amount of torsion grows exponentially, which, together indicates that the number of prime divisors of the torsion $T$ satisfies a prime number theorem (that is, grows like $n/\log n.$) # Statistics of volume and related quantities {#volsec} ## Volume the hard way {#volumehard} By Brock's theorem, the volume of a surface bundle is quasi-the-same as the Weil-Petersson translation distance of the monodromy. Note that, as observed by S. Kojima in, it is not necessary for the bundle to actually be hyperbolic for this statement to make sense-we define volume as simply the volume of the hyperbolic pieces in the JSJ decomposition of the mapping torus. Now, we have the following version of the multiplicative ergodic theorem (due to A. Karlsson and G. Margulis ): We can now state the next result: In fact, since all the results apply without change to cosets of our nonelementary group $\Gamma,$ we have the following corollary (which will be useful in the sequel): ## Volume the easy way {#volumeeasy} We note that the results of Namazi-Souto described in Section [11.4](#heegeom){reference-type="ref" reference="heegeom"} apply (and are much easier) in the case of surface bundles over the circle, so the proof in that section works verbatim here. This still uses the machine of bi-Lipschitz models, but none of the dynamics machinery used above. Of course, using the results of in the opposite direction shows that the Weil-Petersson translation distance of random surface automorphisms has positive drift (without using the deep results of Maher). ## Rank of the fundamental group The fundamental group of the mapping torus of an automorphism of a surface of genus $g$ has a generating set of cardinality $2g+1,$ The following result has been claimed by Ian Biringer and Juan Souto: Theorem [\[bsthm\]](#bsthm){reference-type="ref" reference="bsthm"} together with J. Maher's result shows that a generic mapping torus of automorphisms in any nonelementary subgroup $\Gamma$ (or a coset thereof) of the mapping class group has maximal rank of fundamental group. Unfortunately, while by the work of Kapovich and Weidmann it is possible to decide what the rank is, there is no remotely efficient algorithm to do so (and since, as discussed above), we can construct a coset of a nonelementary subgroup of the mapping class group in such a way as to get prescribed homology, we know that the abelianization tells us very little about the rank of the fundamental group. ## Injectivity radius {#injrad} It is known that a generic (in almost any sense) measured lamination does not have bounded complexity, and this implies that the injectivity radius of a generic mapping torus will go to zero with the length of the monodromy. What is less clear is how fast it will go to zero. It turns out that one can get intuition for this question from the case of the punctured torus (which is not a closed surface, but this is not relevant for our purpose). This has been studied in the classical work by Yair Minsky. It follows from Equation 4.4 in Minsky's paper that: Now, in if we look at the generating set $\tau, \sigma$ for $\SL(2, \mathbb{Z},$ where \[\tau = \begin{pmatrix}1 & 1\\ 0 & 1\end{pmatrix}, \quad \sigma = \begin{pmatrix}0 &-1\\ 1 & 0\end{pmatrix},\] we see that the convergents (or "digits") of the continued fraction correspond to runs of $\tau$ in the monodromy words. By the celebrated Erdős-Renyi Theorem (see also \[Chapter 7\], the length of the maximal such run in a string of length $n$ is almost surely equal to $c \log n,$ so for that generating set we see that the injectivity radius for a random mapping torus with monodromy of length $n$ is bounded above by $c/\log^2 n,$ and we conjecture that this is true in general: In fact, Minsky's methods generalize to higher genus (where our $\tau$ is now replaced by a Dehn twist around some curve), so the only question is whether there are any accidental short lo ## Bottom of the spectrum of the Laplacian {#lapspec} Consider the mapping torus $M_\phi$ of a generic element of length $n$ (with respect to your favorite coset of your favorite nonelementary subgroup of the mapping class group), and consider $\lambda_1(M_\phi).$ What can we say? On the one hand, by Schoen's result, for any hyperbolic manifold $N^3,$ we know that there exists a universal (and explicit) constant $C$ such that \[\lambda_1(N^3) > \frac{C}{V(N^3)}.\] Schoen's argument uses Cheeger's inequality. On the other hand, it is a celebrated result of P. Buser, that for any such $N^3,$ we have an upper bound: \[\lambda_1(N^3) < 4 h(N^3) + 10 h^2(N^3),\] where $h(N^3)$ is the Cheeger constant of $N^3.$ Another ingredient is the following estimate due to M. Lackenby (see ,) based on the work of Pitts-Rubinstein which is still not entirely written up. Luckily, the requisite bound can be produced using harmonic sweepouts, as in the beautiful paper of J. Hass, A. Thompson, and W. P. Thurston ): Putting all of these results together with Corollary [\[volcor\]](#volcor){reference-type="ref" reference="volcor"}, we get: Corollary [\[lambdacor\]](#lambdacor){reference-type="ref" reference="lambdacor"} is obviously not entirely satisfying, and the author conjectures (following some conversations with Juan Souto): It should be noted that if we pick some $\epsilon$ and $r$ and consider hyperbolic $3$-manifolds $N^3$ of injectivity radius bounded below by $\epsilon$ and the rank of fundamental group bounded above by $r,$ then, in the beautiful paper, Nina White shows: \[\frac{C_1}{V^2(N^3)} < \lambda_1(N^3) < \frac{C_2}{V^2(N^3)}.\] In our situation, the rank is bounded, but the injectivity radius is not. ## Dilatation of a random pseudo-Anosov Since the log dilatation of a random pseudo-Anosov automorphism is just the top Lyapunov exponent of its derivative cocycle (this follows from the ergodicity of the action), it follows from the Oseledec ergodic theorem that the log dilatation of a random product grows linearly with the length. From this, we get the following result: The relationship between dilatation and volume has received a fair amount of attention, and it is known that without a lower bound on the injectivity radius of $M_\phi,$ one has families of examples where the ratio of volume to log of the dilatation is arbitrary small (see ) In the paper the authors study this ratio and prove upper bounds in some families of cases. We finally remark that the dilatation comes up some quite unexpected settings, in particular that of symplectic topology, as can be gleaned from the very nice papers. ## Essential surfaces Every mapping torus $M_\phi(S)$ contains at least one class of essential surfaces--those isotopic to a fiber $S.$ In the case where the rational rank of the first homology of $M_\phi(S),$ Thurston's theory of the norm on homology tells us that there are infinitely many ways to fiber $M_\phi(S),$ which gives infinitely many distinct essential surfaces. However, not all fibers are alike. There is the following result of Bachman and Schleimer (which is analogous to Kevin Hartshorn's theorem (see ) in the setting of Heegaard splittings with large Heegaard distance: Theorem [\[basthm\]](#basthm){reference-type="ref" reference="basthm"} immediately implies the following corollary: # Fibered manifolds with prescribed homology {#prehom} Suppose we want a mapping torus with $b_1=1,$ and a prescribed structure of the homology group. This is easy to arrange: we find an $f\in \Sp(2g, \mathbb{Z}),$ with the elementary divisors of $f-I$ having the requisite structure (this is possible by Theorem [\[snfthm\]](#snfthm){reference-type="ref" reference="snfthm"}), take an $F$ whose image under the Torelli homomorphism is $f$ (that this can be done is a standard fact, see and multiply it by some map in the Torelli subgroup. A generic map in the Torelli subgroup is pseudo-Anosov (see ), and, by the work of Tiozzo, has north-south dynamics, so the same is true of a generic element in a coset (see Theorem [\[volcor\]](#volcor){reference-type="ref" reference="volcor"}). Furthermore, by the work of Kaimanovich and Masur on the nontriviality of the Poisson boundary of the mapping class group, we obtain the following counting result: # Random subgroups {#randsubgp} In this section we remark the following: # Fibered cusped manifolds and Dehn filling {#cusped} In this section we look at mapping tori of automorphisms of cusped hyperbolic surfaces. Most of the results for closed surfaces carry over essentially verbatim, so here we will focus only on results specific to cusped surfaces. The first result we need is the nice result of D. Futer and S. Schleimer on the size of the cusp of mapping tori (we state here the slightly simpler version of their result where the surface has one cusp only). In the statement of Theorem [\[futerschleimer\]](#futerschleimer){reference-type="ref" reference="futerschleimer"}, $\overline{d(\phi)}$ refers to the stable translation length of $\phi$ in the arc complex of $F.$ As for the height of a torus, there is a preferred direction in $\partial C,$ corresponding to the cusp of $F.$ Call the length of the geodeisc in this direction $\lambda.$ Then the height of $\partial C$ is simply \[\height (\partial C) = \dfrac{\area(\partial C)}\lambda.\] For our purposes, all we need to know about stable translation distance in the arc complex is that it is bounded below by a multiple of the curve complex translation distance, and bounded above by a multiple of the pants complex translation distance. Combined with the results in Section [5](#volsec){reference-type="ref" reference="volsec"}, we get: Corollary [\[fscor\]](#fscor){reference-type="ref" reference="fscor"} has a somewhat surprising consequence: In the case when $F$ is the punctured torus, Theorem [\[dehnhyp\]](#dehnhyp){reference-type="ref" reference="dehnhyp"} does not apply. However, we have the following result: ## Integer homology spheres Using Theorem [\[snfthm\]](#snfthm){reference-type="ref" reference="snfthm"} and the observations in Section [6](#prehom){reference-type="ref" reference="prehom"}, we see that we can construct a coset $H$ of the Torelli subgroup of $F$ such that for any $\phi \in H,$ $H_1(M_\phi(F), \mathbb{Z}) = \mathbb{Z}),$ and the generic such $M_\phi(F)$ is a hyperbolic manifold, and all Dehn surgeries are hyperbolic. In particular, this is true for all integral Dehn surgeries. Since any nontrivial integral Dehn surgery on this class of manifolds will give an integer homology sphere, we see that By the defining property of Casson's invariant (see, for example, ), for each generic $M_\phi(F),$ the integral homology spheres described in Theorem [\[intdehn\]](#intdehn){reference-type="ref" reference="intdehn"} will be hyperbolic, and their Casson invariants will form an infinite arithmetic progression. Not only that, their volumes will be bounded above by the volume of $M_\phi(F)$ (see, for example, The step of this progression is equal to the second derivative of the Alexander polynomial (evaluated at $1$). Since the volume is (eventually) strictly increasing, almost all of these integer homology spheres are pairwise non-homeomorphic. However, it is possible that they all have the same Casson invariant, since there appears to be no easy condition which confirms that the above-mentioned $\Delta^{\prime\prime}(1)$ is not equal to zero. Luckily, in our case we can finesse this point, using the following fact: Since we know that there are fibered knots in $\mathbb{S}^3$ with $\Delta^{\prime\prime}(1) = 1$ (the trefoil knots leaps to mind), we know that we can construct the requisite monodromy, and thus, just as in the beginning of this section, a non-elementary subgroup with that monodromy, and we can, therefore, conclude with: ## Essential surfaces {#esssurf} It is an interesting, and completely open, in general, question whether a generic bundle contains any non-fiber essential surface. Luckily, thanks to the work of Floyd and Hatcher and Culler, Jaco, Rubinstein, the answer is completely understood in the case where the fiber is a punctured torus. Their classification immediately implies the following counting result: # Experimental results {#experiments} In this section we report on some experimental results, obtained with Mathematica and Twister. The setup was as follows: we looked at bundles of a genus 2 surface over the circle, by taking random positive products of the Humphries generators for the mapping class group (described below in Section [9.4](#humphries){reference-type="ref" reference="humphries"}). The experiment consisted of taking $1000$ random products of each of the lengths $100, \dotsc, 1000,$ in increments of $10.$ ## Homology {#homology} In the first experiment we computed the natural logarithm of the order of torsion in the homology of the bundle. In the first figure (Fig. [\[fig:homomean\]](#fig:homomean){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:homomean"}), we plot the means of the log of the order of the torsion: We see that the experimental results bear out our theoretical results better than we could have hoped (since we have no convergence speed estimates, it would have been conceivable that we would need to go a lot further to get this sort of linear fit). In case the reader is wondering what the slope of the straight line is, Mathematica reports that the line of best fit is: \[\boxed{ \mbox{$\log$ of torsion} = 0.023474 + 0.15187 \mbox{\ word length} }\] Next, we plot the variance in Figure [\[fig:homovar\]](#fig:homovar){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:homovar"}. We have claimed that the logs of torsion should be normally distributed for random words of the same length. Let's see if that is true. As you see in Figure [\[fig:homohist\]](#fig:homohist){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:homohist"}, the distribution looks kind of normal, but to convince ourselves more, let's do a quantile-quantile plot against the normal distribution (see Figure [\[fig:homoqq\]](#fig:homoqq){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:homoqq"}). We see that the fit is quite good. ## Volume Now, we look at the distribution of hyperbolic volumes of mapping tori of automorphisms of a surface of genus $2.$ We should remind the reader that in this setting our results are a lot weaker: we can show that the volume grows roughly linearly, but there is certainly no "multiplicative ergodic theorem", and, indeed, since the proofs of such are usually based on subadditivity properties of the functions considered, while hyperbolic volumes are not subadditive[^2], the proof of any such result for hyperbolic volume would require a new idea.Listing [\[schleimerlst\]](#schleimerlst){reference-type="ref" reference="schleimerlst"}, for which the author would like to thank Saul Schleimer, gives an example of non-subadditivity. ``` {#schleimerlst caption="Non-subadditive volume" label="schleimerlst"} sage: S = snappy.twister.Surface('S_1_1') sage: w = 'abbbbb' sage: W = w.swapcase(); W 'ABBBBB' sage: M = snappy.twister.Surface.bundle(S, w); M.volume() 2.02988321282 sage: M = snappy.twister.Surface.bundle(S, W); M.volume() 2.0298832128 sage: w + W 'abbbbbABBBBB' sage: M = snappy.twister.Surface.bundle(S, w + W); M.volume() 6.0669922401 ``` With these caveats in mind, let's look at some picture (the experimental setup is the same as before: we do $1000$ experiments with each (non-reduced) word length from $100$ to $1000,$ in steps of $10.$ Firs, in Figure [\[fig:volmean\]](#fig:volmean){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:volmean"} we study the expectation of the hyperbolic volume. A single look should be enough to convince us that, submultiplicativity or no, there is a result there. A regression give the following empirical relationship: \[\boxed{\mbox{expected hyperbolic volume} =-0.105385 + 0.665259 \mbox{\ word length}}\] Let's now look at the variances (to see if we should be ambitious, and try to prove a central limit theorem, as well). This is the content of Figure [\[fig:volvar\]](#fig:volvar){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:volvar"}, which shows that a central limit theorem may well be in the cards. Finally, let's look at the distribution of volumes for a fixed word length. First, a histogram (Figure [\[fig:volhist\]](#fig:volhist){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:volhist"}), which should bolster our confidence, and then a quantile-quantile plot (Figure [\[fig:volqq\]](#fig:volqq){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:volqq"}). The results seem to indicate that there is an ergodic and a central limit theorem to be discovered. We state this as a conjecture: ## Volume and homology Wolfgang Lück in and N. Bergeron and A. Venkatesh in conjecture that for towers of congruence covers, the ratio of log of the torsion in homology divided by the volume approaches a limit. We see that (at least empirically) a similar phenomenon holds for random mapping tori with \"complicated\" monodromy. In particular, for such a mapping torus, the ratio of volume to log of the size of the torsion in the first homology group approaches around $4.381$ for genus 2 bundles. In Table [1](#tab:volhom){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:volhom"} below, we compute the growth rates for volume and log of torsion as a function of growth rates. It seems (though is not completely clear) that both the growth rates approach a limit as genus goes to infinity, and so, consequently, does their ratio. We will boldly state this as a conjecture: ## The Humphries generators for the Mapping Class Group of a closed surface {#humphries} Steve Humphries showed in that one has the following set of generators for the mapping class group of a surface of genus $g.$ First, we use the notation in Figure [\[fig:humph\]](#fig:humph){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:humph"} With the notation introduced in Figure [\[fig:humph\]](#fig:humph){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:humph"}, the Humphries generating set is the set of Dehn twists $\beta_1, \dotsc, \beta_g, \gamma_1, \dotsc, \gamma_{g-1}, \alpha_1, \alpha_2.$ With a little bit of work, we can figure out the action of the Humphries generators on the first homology of the surface (Joan Birman had previously showed (see ) that these matrices generated $\Sp(2g, \mathbb{Z})$). We give the corresponding matrices below in Mathematica code: Ematrix[i_, j_, n_] := Table[If[(k == i && j == l) \|\| k == l, 1, 0], {k, 1, n}, {l, 1, n}] BirmanY[g_, i_] := Table[If[k == l, 1, If[k == i && l == g + i,-1, 0]], {k, 1, 2 g}, {l, 1, 2 g}] BirmanU[g_, i_] := Table[If[k == l, 1, If[l == i && k == g + i, 1, 0]], {k, 1, 2 g}, {l, 1, 2 g}] BirmanZ[g_, i_] := Table[If[k == l, 1, If[k == i && l == g + i,-1, If[k == i + 1 && l == g + i + 1,-1, If[k == i && l == g + i + 1, 1, If[k == i + 1 && l == g + i, 1, 0]]]]], {k, 1, 2 g}, {l, 1, 2 g}] BirmanHump[g_] := Union[Table[BirmanU[g, i], {i, 1, g}], Table[BirmanZ[g, i], {i, 1, g-1}], {BirmanY[g, 1], BirmanY[g, 2]}] The command `BirmanHump[g]` produces the full list of images of the Humphries generators. # Other generating sets The fact that the growth rate of torsion seems to be asymptotically independent of genus would seem to be more a statement about linear groups than about surfaces, and it would seem useful to conduct the experiment with other natural generating sets for the symplectic group, as well as for the special linear group (where the more natural quantity to study is the sum of the positive Lyapunov exponents). We conduct the study with the small generating sets for both groups: for the special linear group, the natural generating set is the one of cardinality $2$ discovered by Hua and Reiner. For the symplectic group, the natural generating set is the one discovered by Stanek. To keep the presentation consistent, we give Mathematica code to generate both generating sets, and then give our experimental results in Tables [2](#tab:sln){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:sln"} and [3](#tab:sp2n){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:sp2n"}.The results in those two tables are for the random products of positive powers of the generators. First, the Hua and Reiner ( generators: HRU2[n_] := Table[If[i == j \|\| (i == 1 && j == 2), 1, 0], {i, 1, n}, {j, 1, n}] HRU5[n_] := Table[If[i-j == 1, 1, If[i == 1 && j == n, (-1)^(n-1), 0]], {i, 1, n}, {j, 1, n}] hrgenlist[n_] := {HRU2[n], HRU5[n]} The last command `hrgenlist[n]` produces the pair of Hua-Reiner generators for the special linear group. Now, the Stanek generators (see ): R21[n_] := Table[ If[i == j, 1, If[i == 2 && j == 1, 1, If[i == n + 1 && j == n + 2,-1, 0]]], {i, 1, 2 n}, {j, 1, 2 n}] Tk[n_, k_] := Table[If[i == j, 1, If[i == n + k && j == k, 1, 0]], {i, 1, 2 n}, {j, 1, 2 n}] Dd[n_] := Table[ If[j-i == 1 && (i < n \|\| (i >= n + 1 && i < 2 n)), 1, If[i == n && j == n + 1,-1, If[ i == 2 n && j == 1, 1, 0]]], {i, 1, 2 n}, {j, 1, 2 n}] stanekgens[n_] := If[n == 2 \|\| n == 3, {R21[n], Tk[n, 1], Dd[n]}, If[n == 1, hrgenlist[2], {R21[n]. Tk[n, 1], Dd[n]}]] The command `stanekgens[n]` produces the Stanek generators of the symplectic group. for $\Sp(2, \mathbb{Z})$ and $\Sp(3, \mathbb{Z})$ the generating set has cardinality $3,$ and otherwise cardinality $2.$ Interestingly, the sum of the to $n$ Lyapunov exponents of the Stanek generators seems to quickly increase to the asymptote in the case of $\Sp(2n, \mathbb{Z}),$ while the sum of the positive Lyapunov exponents is decreasing (not obviously to any asymptotic lower bound) for the Hua-Reiner generators. # Random Heegard Splittings {#randomh} As mentioned in the Introduction, this work has its genesis in the foundational paper of N. Dunfield and W. P. Thurston. Let us recall Dunfield and Thurston's setup. We first pick an integer $g>1.$ Then, we take two handlebodies $H_1$ and $H_2$ of genus $g,$ and identify the boundary of $H_1$ to that of $H_2$ via a map $\phi$--it is well-known that the topology of the resulting $3$-manifold $H_\phi^3$ depends only on the isotopy class of $\phi,$ so we can produce random manifolds by generating random elements $\phi$ from $\mcg_g,$ which is, indeed, what Dunfield and Thurston do. They then study a number of questions (they work in much lesser generality than we do in this paper, and their questions are for the whole mapping class group. Below, we will try to indicate the appropriate level of generality. ## Homology {#homology-1} To compute the homology of $H_\phi^3,$ Dunfield and Thurston note that if $\iota_: H_1(\partial H_g, \mathbb{Z}) \rightarrow H_1(H_g, \mathbb{Z})$ is the natural map on homology induced by the inclusion map of the surface $\partial H_g$ into the handlebody, then, if the two copies of $H_g$ are identified by the map $\phi$ to produce a three-manifold $H_\phi^3,$ then the homology of $H_\phi^3$ is the quotient of $H_1(\partial H_g, \mathbb{Z})$ by the subspace generated by $J=\ker \iota_$ and $\phi_^{-1}(J).$ They note that, with respect to the intersection pairing on $H_1(\partial H_g, \mathbb{Z}),$ the subspace $J$ is Lagrangian (since $J$ is generated by the $g$ meridians, which are pairwise disjoint). Dunfield and Thurston then use this observation and some hand-counting of Lagrangian subspaces to compute the asymptotic behavior of $H_1(H_\phi^3, \mathbb{F}_p),$ and thus deduce that the first Betti number of $H_\phi^3$ is generically equal to zero (so that $H_\phi^3$ is generically a rational homology sphere), while it is generically not* an integer homology sphere. Here we note that, by using somewhat more sophisticated methods we can get a much stronger result: An amusing corollary of Theorem [\[expgrowthDT\]](#expgrowthDT){reference-type="ref" reference="expgrowthDT"} is the following: Recall that the complexity of a hyperbolic $3$-manifold $M^3$ is defined as the minimal number of simplices in a (semi-simplicial) triangulation of $M.$ ## Betti numbers of covering spaces Dunfield and Thurston raise the following question: Dunfield and Thurston show that the probability tends to $0$ for a random gluing map $\phi$ under the (obviously restrictive) conditions that the genus of the handlebody equals $2$ and the deck group $Q$ is abelian--their proof is an elaboration of their argument that a random Heegard splitting is a homology sphere, and is an explicit bare-hands argument. A refinement of the proof of Theorem [\[expgrowthDT\]](#expgrowthDT){reference-type="ref" reference="expgrowthDT"} gives the result in much greater generality: ## Other topological invariants In their foundational paper H. Namazi and J. Souto show that a manifold $M_{f^n}^3$ obtained by gluing two handlebody of genus $g$ by a (sufficiently high) power of a "generic pseudo-Anosov" has Heegaard genus $g$ and rank of fundamental group equal to $g.$ Since a random map $\phi$ given by a sufficiently long word in (some) generators of $\mcg(g)$ has arbitrary high power of any given element $f$ as a subword, we have Another natural question (closely related to Dunfield and Thurston's set of questions) is whether a random Heegaard splitting is Haken. Unfortunately, this seems to be a hard problem, but what we can say is that if an incompressible surface exists, it is of a very high genus. This follows from two facts. The first, is the following theorem of Kevin Hartshorn: The second is J. Maher's result that the translation distance of a random automorphism $\phi$ increases linearly with the combinatorial length of $\phi.$ Put together, these imply: Theorem [\[nonhakthm\]](#nonhakthm){reference-type="ref" reference="nonhakthm"} invites the obvious conjecture: ## Geometric quantities {#heegeom} The central geometric quantity is clearly the hyperbolic volume. Dunfield and Thurston conjecture that volume grows linearly in the length of the gluing map. The results of H. Namazi and J. Souto tell us since a random gluing map has "blocks" of the form $f^k$ for some (actually, every possible short enough) $f,$ and each such block looks like a cover of the mapping torus of $f,$ we have the following theorem, which resolves the conjecture of Dunfield-Thurston: ## Experimental Results {#experimental-results} The proof of Theorem [\[geomheeg\]](#geomheeg){reference-type="ref" reference="geomheeg"} only shows that volume grows "coarsely linearly", but of course it is natural to ask what the truth is. The author has conducted extensive experiments, and below are two sample graphs (for genus equal $2$ and $5.$) The experiment consisted of computing one thousand random splitting of each of the lengths consider (roughly from $200$ to $1000$ in multiples of $10$), and plotting the mean. The reader can see that the graphs are about as linear as one could wish for, which leads us to strengthen the Dunfield-Thurston conjecture: To convince the reader that the conjecture is plausible we include also the graph of the variances for each length, and the histograms of the empirical distributions. # In conclusion It is fair to say that we now have good (though far from perfect) understanding of both random mapping tori and random Heegaard splittings. The first question is: what do we do with it? In combinatorics, the probabilistic method uses the understanding of random objects to use them as building blocks to construct particularly interesting examples. We have not yet done this in the setting of $3$-dimensional manifolds, but it is not inconceivable that this would be a promising way to go about proving the virtual fibering theorem, which would be, quite likely, more constructive than the Agol-Wise machine (this was almost certainly the intent of Dunfield and Thurston, but new ideas are needed). It is also clear that at the moment the most natural model of random manifolds (via random triangulations) is completely out of reach--it is not even clear what tools are needed. There has been some very nice work on random complexes and hypergraphs (see ,) but the methods clearly do not extend to the manifold setting (even to the setting of two-dimensional manifolds, where the theory of random triangulations is quite well-developed). [^1]: The author is indebted to R.P. Stanley for this construction [^2]: The author would like to thank Jeff Brock for alerting the author this might be true [^3]: Stefan Friedl tells the author that there are good reasons to believe that the answer should, indeed, be $3\pi,$ though the evidence of Table [1](#tab:volhom){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:volhom"} is certainly not definitive.	{'timestamp': '2014-04-30T02:03:31', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5736', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5736'}
# Introduction Scale symmetry has been an interesting subject both in formal quantum field theory and in particle physics phenomenology . The most important example is the scale invariance (Weyl invariance or conformal invariance) in string theory, which is nothing but 2-dimensional quantum field theories for the string world sheet in target spacetime of spacetime dimensionality $d$. The condition of vanishing quantum scale anomaly constrains possible perturbative string theories to be defined only in $d=26$ spacetime for bosonic string theory and $d=10$ spacetime for superstring theory. However, implementing scale symmetry to particle physics has not been so successful compared with string theory for various reasons. First of all, scale symmetry is always broken by quantum radiative corrections through renormalization effects. Even if we start from a theory with classical scale symmetry (namely, no dimensional parameters in ${\cal L}_{\rm classical}$), the corresponding quantum theory always involves hidden scales, the cutoff scale ($\Lambda$) in cutoff regularization or Pauli-Villars regularization, and the renormalization scale $\mu$ in dimensional regularization. In either case, scale symmetry is explicitly broken by quantum effects, and scale symmetry is anomalous. If the couplings do not run because of vanishing $\beta$ function, we would have truly scale invariant (or conformal symmetric) theory, and $N=4$ super Yang-Mills theory is believed to be such an example. Secondly, scale symmetry may be spontaneously broken by some nonzero values of dimensionful order parameters due to some nonperturbative dynamics, very often involving some strong interaction. For example, we can consider massless QCD with classical scale invariance. In this case there could be nonzero gluon condensate $\langle G_{\mu\nu}^a G^{a\mu\nu} \rangle \sim \Lambda_{G^2}^4$ and chiral condensate $\langle \bar{q} q \rangle \sim \Lambda_{\bar{q}q}^3$, where new scales $\Lambda_{G^2}$ and $\Lambda_{\bar{q}q}$ are generated dynamically and they would be roughly of order of the confinement scale $\Lambda_{QCD}$. Since scale symmetry is spontaneously broken, there would appear massless Nambu-Goldstone (NG) boson, which is often called dilaton related to dilatation symmetry. If scale symmetry were not anomalously broken by quantum effects, dilaton could be exactly massless. However, scale symmetry is usually broken explicitly by renormalization effects, and dilaton would acquire nonzero mass which is related to the size of quantum anomaly, in a similar way to the pion as a pseudo Nambu-Goldstone boson in ordinary QCD. If the dilaton mass is too large compared with the spontaneous scale symmetry breaking scale, it is not meaningful to talk about dilaton as a pseudo NG boson. On the other hand, if dilaton is light enough, then we can use the nonlinear realization of scale symmetry with built-in quantum scale anomaly. Whether dilaton can be light enough or not is a very difficult question to address. The answer would depend on the underlying theories with classical scale symmetry, without which we cannot say for sure about pseudo NG boson nature of dilaton. Let us note that there have been longtime questions about generating the masses of (fundamental) particle only from quantum dynamics. A good example is getting proton mass from massless QCD. Since the contributions of current quark masses to proton mass are negligible, we can say that proton mass is mostly coming from quantum dynamics between (almost massless) quarks and gluons. Another well-known example is radiative symmetry breaking à la Coleman-Weinberg mechanism . In fact, a number of recent papers address generating particle masses along this direction. There are two different ways to getting mass scales from scale invariant classical theories: one from new strong dynamics in a hidden sector and the other by CW mechanism . If there are no mass parameters in classical Lagrangian, the theory would have classical scale symmetry. And all the mass scales would have been generated by quantum effects, either nonperturbatively or perturbatively. Before the Higgs boson was discovered, dilaton (denoted as $\phi$ in this paper) has been considered as an alternative to the Higgs boson from time to time, since dilation couplings to the SM fields are similar to the SM Higgs field at classical level, except that the overall coupling scale is given by the dilaton decay constant $f_\phi$ instead of the Higgs vacuum expectation value (VEV) $v$. At quantum level, dilaton has couplings to the gauge kinetic functions due to the quantum scale anomaly , a distinct property of dilaton which is not shared by the SM Higgs boson. The radion in Randall-Sundrum (RS) model has the similar properties as the dilaton, in that it couples to the trace of the energy-momentum tensor too just like the dilaton [^1]. The interest in dilaton physics has been renewed recently [@Cheung:2011nv; @Matsuzaki:2012gd; @Matsuzaki:2012vc; @Matsuzaki:2012mk; @Matsuzaki:2012xx; @Elander:2012fk; @Hong:2013eta; @Chacko:2012sy; @Chacko:2012vm; @Bellazzini:2012vz; @Coriano:2012nm; @Abe:2012eu; @Cao:2013cfa], since the LHC announced discovery of a new boson of mass around 126 GeV (which we call $H$ in this letter) . Radion-Higgs mixing scenarios have also been extensively studied in the light of the LHC results . The current data still suffer from large uncertainties, but the observed new particle has properties that are consistent with the SM predictions, although there is a tendency that the $\gamma \gamma \left(Z Z^* \right)$ mode is enhanced over the SM predictions at ATLAS detector. The other modes are consistent with the SM predictions, but within a large uncertainty. The effective interaction Lagrangian for a dilaton $\phi$ to the SM field can be derived by using nonlinear realization: $\chi={\rm e}^{\frac{\phi}{f_\phi}}$. With the trace of the energy momentum tensor, which is the divergence of dilatation current, the interaction terms which are linear in $\phi$ cast into where $m_h$ is the Higgs mass in the broken phase of the SM gauge group. We argue that this form of dilaton interaction to the SM fields may not be proper, since only the unbroken subgroup of the SM gauge symmetry has been imposed on $T_{~\mu}^\mu$. If we imposed the full SM gauge symmetry on $T_{~\mu}^\mu$, the more proper form of the dilaton couplings to the SM should be described by Eq. (3) below, which is completely different from Eq. (1). The SM Lagrangian is written as where $G$, $f$ and $H$ denote the SM gauge fields, fermions and Higgs field in a schematic way. In this form, scale symmetry is explicitly broken by a single term, $\mu_H^2 H^\dagger H$ in the SM. Also quantum mechanical effects break scale symmetry anomalously. In the end, the trace of energy-momentum tensor of the SM, which measures the amount of scale symmetry breaking, is given by \[T^\mu_{~\mu} ({\rm SM}) = 2\mu_H^2 H^\dagger H + \sum_G \frac{\beta_G}{g_G} G_{\mu\nu} G^{\mu\nu}.\] This form of $T_{~\mu}^\mu$ respects the full SM gauge symmetry $G_{\rm SM} = SU(3)_C \times SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y$. This form is clearly different from the usual form, Eq. (1), which is constructed after EWSB and respects only the unbroken subgroup of the SM, $H_{\rm SM} = SU(3)_C \times U(1)_{\rm em}$. We claim that one has to use the form before EWSB, since we do not know the scale of spontaneous scale symmetry breaking. If $v_{\rm EW} < f_\phi$, it would be more reasonable to impose the full SM gauge symmetry with Eq. (3) [^2]. This point should be even more evident for the radion in the Randall-Sundrum scenario, since the existence of the radion $\phi$ is independent of EWSB, and thus it should couple to the $T_{~\mu}^\mu$ of the SM fields with the full SM gauge symmetry $G_{\rm SM}$, Eq. (3), and not to the form with the unbroken subgroup $H_{\rm SM}$ of the SM. It is the purpose of this paper to analyze the Higgs-dilaton system using the dilaton couplings to the SM fields which respects the full SM gauge interactions, and compare the results with the most recent LHC data on the Higgs boson. In Sec. II, we derive the effective Lagrangian for dilaton coupled to the SM fields, and derive the interactions between them. Then we perform phenomenological analysis in Sec. III, comparing theoretical predictions based on Eq. (3) with the LHC data on the Higgs boson, and derive the constraints on the mass of the 2nd scalar boson and the mixing angle, as well as the deviations of quartic and triple couplings of the Higgs bosons. The results are summarized in Sec. IV, and the $\beta$ functions for dimensionless couplings in the SM are collected in Appendix for convenience. # Model for the Higgs-dilaton(radion) system ## Model Lagrangian Let us assume that there is a scale invariant system where scale symmetry is spontaneously broken at some high energy scale $f_\phi$, with the resulting Nambu-Goldstone boson which is called dilaton $\phi$. In terms of $\chi (x) \equiv {\rm e}^{\phi (x) / f_\phi}$, the Lagrangian for the SM plus a dilaton would be written as where $S(x)$ is the conformal compensator, which is put to 1 at the end of calculation. Keeping the linear term in $\phi$, we recover the Eq. (1) with $T^\mu_{~\mu}$ being given by Eq. (3). Note that the dilaton coupling to the SM fields in this work is different from other works in the literature. In most works, the dilaton is assumed to couple to the SM fields in the broken phase with unbroken local $SU(3)_c \times U(1)_{\rm em}$ symmetry. However if scale symmetry breaking occurs at high energy scale, it would be more reasonable to assume that the dilaton couple to the SM Lagrangian as given in the above form with the full SM gauge symmetry $SU(3)_c \times SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y$ imposed. The ground state of the potential for the classical Lagrangian is given by either $\langle H \rangle = 0, \langle \chi \rangle = 1$ for the unbroken EW phase, and $\langle H \rangle = (0, v/\sqrt{2})^T, \langle \phi \rangle = \bar{\phi}$ for EWSB into $U(1)_{\rm em}$, ignoring the contributions from the vacuum expectation values of the scale anomaly, such as $\langle G_{\mu\nu}^a G^{a\mu\nu}\rangle$ etc. The vanishing tadpole conditions for the correct vacua are given by \[\begin{aligned} \lambda v^2 & = & \mu^2 {\rm e}^{2 \frac{\bar{\phi}}{f_\phi}}, \\ \mu^2 v^2 & = & f_\phi m_\phi^2 \bar{\phi}~{\rm e}^{2 \frac{\bar{\phi}}{f_\phi}}. \end{aligned}\] We have used the $\mu^2=-\mu_H^2 > 0$, for convenience. From these two conditions, one can derive \[v^2 = \frac{\mu^2}{\lambda} {\rm e}^{2 \bar{\phi}/f_\phi} ~~~ {\rm or}~~~\mu^4 = \lambda \bar{\phi} f_\phi m_\phi^2 \,\] which solves for $\bar{\phi}$ for given $\mu^2, \lambda, f_\phi$ and $m_\phi^2$. Note that the Higgs VEV $v$ is fixed by the weak gauge boson masses $m_W$ and $m_Z$ to be $246$ GeV. We will consider the EWSB vacuum, and calculate the (mass)$^2$ matrix for the field fluctuation around the VEV: $H = (0, (v+h(x))/\sqrt{2})^T$ and $\bar{\phi} + \phi$. Note that rescaling of the quantum fluctuation $\phi$ around $\bar{\phi}$ is necessary, i.e. $\phi~{\rm e}^{\frac{\bar{\phi}}{f_\phi}} \rightarrow \phi$. After rescaling the mass matrix should be \[\begin{aligned} {\cal M}^2 (h,\phi) & = & \left( \begin{array}{cc} m^2_{hh} & m^2_{h\phi} \\ m^2_{\phi h} & m^2_{\phi\phi} \end{array} \right) = \left( \begin{array}{cc} 2 \lambda v^2 &-2 \frac{\lambda v^3}{f_\phi} {\rm e}^{-2\frac{\bar{\phi}}{f_\phi}} \\ -2 \frac{\lambda v^3}{f_\phi} {\rm e}^{-2\frac{\bar{\phi}}{f_\phi}} & m_\phi^2 {\rm e}^{2 \frac{\bar{\phi}}{f_\phi}} \left( 1 + 2\frac{\bar{\phi}}{f_\phi} \right) \end{array} \right) \nonumber \\ & \equiv & \left( \begin{array}{cc} m_h^2 &-m_h^2 \frac{v}{f_\phi} {\rm e}^{-2\frac{\bar{\phi}}{f_\phi}} \\ -m_h^2 \frac{v}{f_\phi} {\rm e}^{-2\frac{\bar{\phi}}{f_\phi}} & \tilde{m}_\phi^2 {\rm e}^{2 \frac{\bar{\phi}}{f_\phi}} \end{array} \right), \end{aligned}\] where we define \[\begin{aligned} \tilde{m}_\phi^2 = m_\phi^2 \left( 1 + 2\frac{\bar{\phi}}{f_\phi} \right). \end{aligned}\] One can diagonalize this matrix by introducing two mass eigenstates $H_1$ and $H_2$ and the mixing angle $\alpha$ between the two states, with the following transformation: Here we use the basis \[\left( \begin{array}{c} H_1 \\ H_2 \end{array} \right) = \left( \begin{array}{cc} \cos \alpha &-\sin \alpha \\ \sin \alpha & \cos \alpha \end{array} \right) \left( \begin{array}{c} h \\ \phi \end{array} \right).\] Now the interaction Lagrangian between dilaton and the SM fields can be derived in terms of $H_1$ and $H_2$. ## Interaction Lagrangian for dilaton(radion) and the SM Fields In this subsection, we derive the interaction Lagrangian between the dilaton(radion) and the SM fields both in the interaction and in the mass eigenstate basis. Let us first discuss the interactions of the dilaton(radion) with the SM fermions and the SM Higgs boson with the full $G_{\rm SM}$: \[{\cal L} (f,\bar{f}, H_{i=1,2} ) =-\frac{m_f}{v} \overline{f} f h =-\frac{m_f}{v} \overline{f} f ( H_1 c_\alpha + H_2 s_\alpha ),\] with $s_\alpha \equiv \sin \alpha$ and $c_\alpha = \cos \alpha$. The first equality is in the interaction basis, whereas the second one is in the mass basis. Note that there is no direct coupling of the dilaton(radion) ($\phi$) to the SM chiral fermion at the classical level, namely when we ignore the quantum scale anomaly of Yukawa interactions. This is because we have imposed the full SM gauge symmetry, Eq. (3). On the other hand, earlier literature uses the following dilaton couplings to the SM fermions assuming the unbroken subgroup $H_{\rm SM} = SU(3)_C \times U(1)_Y$: \[{\cal L} (f,\bar{f}, \phi ) =-\frac{m_f}{f_\phi} \bar{f}f \phi~{\rm e}^{-\bar{\phi}/f_\phi}.\] Note that there is no proper limit where the earlier result (14) based on $T_{~\mu}^\mu$ with unbroken subgroup of the SM gauge symmetry $H_{\rm SM} = SU(3)_C \times U(1)_{\rm em}$ approaches our result (13) based on $T_{~\mu}^\mu$ with the full SM gauge symmetry $G_{\rm SM} = SU(3)_C \times SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y$. This shows that it is very important to impose which gauge symmetry on the fundamental Lagrangian. It should be the full SM gauge symmetry $G_{\rm SM} = SU(3)_C \times SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y$ rather than its unbroken subgroup $H_{\rm SM} = SU (3)_C \times U(1)_{\rm em}$ that has been widely used in earlier literature, when we consider new physics at EW scale and the new physics scale is not known [^3]. The same argument applies to other interactions of the dilaton(radion) with the SM gauge bosons or the SM Higgs boson. We list them below for completeness: \[\begin{aligned} {\cal L} (g,g,H_{i=1,2}) & = &-\frac{ {\rm e}^{-\bar{\phi} /f_\phi}}{f_\phi}~\frac{\beta_3 (g_3)}{2 g_3} G_{\mu\nu} G^{\mu\nu} \phi \nonumber \\ & = & -\frac{ {\rm e}^{-\bar{\phi} /f_\phi}}{f_\phi}~\frac{\beta_3 (g_3)}{2 g_3} G_{\mu\nu} G^{\mu\nu} (-H_1 s_\alpha + H_2 c_\alpha ). \\ {\cal L} (W,W,H_{i=1,2}) & = & \frac{2 m_W^2 }{v} W_\mu^+ W^{-\mu} h-\frac{ {\rm e}^{-\bar{\phi} /f_\phi}}{f_\phi}~\frac{\beta_2 (g_2)}{2 g_2} W_{\mu\nu} W^{\mu\nu} \phi \nonumber \\ & = & \frac{2 m_W^2 }{v} W_\mu^+ W^{-\mu} \left( H_1 c_\alpha + H_2 s_\alpha \right) \nonumber \\ &-& \frac{ {\rm e}^{-\bar{\phi} /f_\phi}}{f_\phi}~\frac{\beta_2 (g_2)}{2 g_2} W_{\mu\nu} W^{\mu\nu} (-H_1 s_\alpha + H_2 c_\alpha ). \\ {\cal L} (Z,Z,H_{i=1,2}) & = & \frac{m_Z^2 }{v} Z_\mu Z^{ \mu} h-\frac{ {\rm e}^{-\bar{\phi} /f_\phi}}{f_\phi}~\left\{c_W^2\frac{\beta_2 (g_2)}{2 g_2} +s_W^2 \frac{\beta_1 (g_1)}{2 g_1}\right\}Z_{\mu\nu} Z^{\mu\nu} \phi \nonumber \\ & = & \frac{m_Z^2 }{v} Z_\mu Z^{ \mu} \left( H_1 c_\alpha + H_2 s_\alpha \right) \nonumber \\ &-& \frac{ {\rm e}^{-\bar{\phi} /f_\phi}}{f_\phi}~\left\{c_W^2 \frac{\beta_2 (g_2)}{2 g_2} +s_W^2 \frac{\beta_1 (g_1)}{2 g_1}\right\}Z_{\mu\nu} Z^{\mu\nu} (-H_1 s_\alpha + H_2 c_\alpha ). \\ {\cal L} (\gamma,\gamma,H_{i=1,2}) & = & -\frac{ {\rm e}^{-\bar{\phi} /f_\phi}}{f_\phi}~\left\{s_W^2\frac{\beta_2 (g_2)}{2 g_2} +c_W^2\frac{\beta_1 (g_1)}{2 g_1} \right\} F_{\mu\nu} F^{\mu\nu}\phi \nonumber \\ & = &-\frac{ {\rm e}^{-\bar{\phi} /f_\phi}}{f_\phi}~\left\{s_W^2\frac{\beta_2 (g_2)}{2 g_2} +c_W^2\frac{\beta_1 (g_1)}{2 g_1} \right\} F_{\mu\nu} F^{\mu\nu} (-H_1 s_\alpha + H_2 c_\alpha ). \\ {\cal L} (\gamma,Z,H_{i=1,2}) & = & -\frac{ {\rm e}^{-\bar{\phi} /f_\phi}}{f_\phi}~2s_W c_W\left\{\frac{\beta_2 (g_2)}{2 g_2} -\frac{\beta_1 (g_1)}{2 g_1} \right\} Z_{\mu\nu} F^{\mu\nu}\phi \nonumber \\ &=&-\frac{ {\rm e}^{-\bar{\phi} /f_\phi}}{f_\phi}~2s_W c_W\left\{\frac{\beta_2 (g_2)}{2 g_2} -\frac{\beta_1 (g_1)}{2 g_1} \right\} Z_{\mu\nu} F^{\mu\nu}(-H_1 s_\alpha + H_2 c_\alpha ). \end{aligned}\] The $\beta$ functions for the SM gauge groups are listed in the Appendix A for convenience. The SM Higgs field $h$ will interact with gluons or photons just as in the standard model case, and we have to add these to the above interaction Lagrangian. The offshoot of our approach is that the dilaton $\phi$ mixes with the SM Higgs boson $h$, and couples to the SM fields through quantum scale anomaly in addition to the classical scale symmetry breaking term, i.e. $\mu^2_H H^\dagger H$. Since the dilaton $\phi$ and the SM Higgs boson $h$ mix with each other to make two scalar bosons $H_1$ and $H_2$, their couplings to the SM fermions will be reduced by a universal amount due to the mixing effects , while their couplings to the SM gauge bosons, especially to gluons, could be further modified by quantum scale anomalies. This observation has a very tantalizing implication for Higgs signals at the LHC, which will be elaborated in the following. Since there are two scalar bosons, we take one of them to be 126 GeV resonance that was observed recently at the LHC. Since the dilaton(radion) $\phi$ couplings to the trace anomaly of the SM fields (Eq. (3)) are distinctly different from the interactions between the SM fields and other singlet scalar bosons appearing in various extensions of the SM , phenomenological consequences of the Higgs-dilaton mixing are analyzed separately in this paper. # Implications on the LHC Higgs data ## Analysis Strategy Compared with the SM Higgs boson, the Higgs-dilaton system considered in this paper has only two more parameters ($m_{\phi}$ and $f_\phi$), which makes phenomenological analysis feasible. Two scalars $\phi$ and $h$ mix with each other after EWSB, leading to two mass eigenstates $H_1$ and $H_2$. Fixing one Higgs boson mass to be $126$ GeV, all other parameters in the Lagrangian such as the other Higgs boson mass, the mixing angle $\alpha$, triple and quartic couplings of $H_1$ and $H_2$, are all expressed as functions of $m_\phi$ and $f_\phi$. Likewise, their decay widths and branching ratios are completely fixed as functions of $m_\phi$ and $f_\phi$. In the numerical analysis, we assume $f_\phi \geq v$, following our spirit that the spontaneous scale symmetry breaking scale occurs before electroweak symmetry breaking. As mentioned in the previous section, the interactions of the Higgs boson to the SM particles are modified in two different ways compared with the SM, via mixing with dilaton and the quantum scale anomalies. Note that the modification due to quantum scale anomalies are very small that their effects are negligible in most cases, except for the gluon-gluon and $\gamma\gamma$ couplings to the Higgs boson through scale anomaly associated with $SU(3)_C \times U(1)_{\rm em}$ gauge interaction. Therefore the branching ratios of physical Higgs bosons decaying into the SM fermions are suppressed relative to those of the SM Higgs boson by mixing angle, whereas those into the SM gauge bosons could be modified through quantum scale anomaly. For a given $( m_\phi, f_\phi )$, we calculate the signal strength of each scalar boson into a specific final state: \[\mu_i (f.s.) = \frac{\sigma_H (production) \times B (H_i \rightarrow f.s.) }{ \sigma_H (production)_{SM} \times B (H_i \rightarrow f.s.)_{SM} },\] where '$f.s.$' means a specific 'final states', $WW^, ZZ^, \gamma \gamma, f\bar{f}$, etc. The subscript $i =1,2$ represents two scalar bosons in the mass eigenstates, and the 'production' denotes the production mechanisms such as gluon-gluon fusion (ggF), vector boson fusion (VBF), Higgs production associated with vector boson (VH), and top quark pair production associated with Higgs boson (ttH). In case of decays of two physical scalar bosons, the dominant effect of dilaton results in the coupling suppression via the mixing between $h$ and $\phi$. On the other hand, in their production parts, there are further modifications on the ggF generated by quantum scale anomaly associated with color $SU(3)_C$ gauge fields. This kind of modification by scale anomaly is small in other production channels, i.e., VBF, VH and ttH. Consequently, we can expect that the ggF initiated processes can be significantly modified by quantum scale anomaly but other channels are suppressed just by the mixing angle. ## Confronting the LHC Higgs data and predictions for the Higgs self-couplings and the mass of the extra boson We perform the analyses for two distinct cases. The first case is that the heavy mode $H_2$ is identified as observed 126 GeV boson, with extra light mode. The other case is that the light mode $H_1$ is identified as observed 126 GeV boson, with extra heavy mode. The CMS and ATLAS Collaborations reported the results based on five-and seven-different channels, respectively .(See Table 1.) The most recent CMS results are consistent with the SM even including the diphoton decay channel , which was larger than the SM value in the previous analysis . The enhancement in diphoton mode is still there in the ATLAS report, and also in the $ZZ^$ mode with less significance. Considering the current situation of conflicting data on $H\rightarrow \gamma\gamma$, we consider two separate cases reported by CMS and ATLAS Collaborations. For each case, we perform the $\chi^2$ analysis and select the parameter sets within the $3\sigma$ range around the each $\chi^2$ minimum. ### Case I: $126$ GeV $H_2$ and extra light $H_1$: $m_{H_1} < m_{H_2}=126~{\rm GeV}$ Let us start with the case that heavier $H_2$ is the observed $126$ GeV boson. All the physical observables are functions of $(m_\phi,f_\phi)$, which can be traded with the mixing angle $\alpha$ and the second Higgs mass $m_{H_1}$. In Fig.[\[fig:mf-s\]](#fig:mf-s){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:mf-s"}, we show that the mixing angle $\alpha$ and the extra light boson mass $m_{H_1}$ are fully determined in the $(m_\phi,f_\phi)$ plane. With the identification of the observed Higgs boson as $m_{H_2}=126$ GeV, we also put the constraints of $3\sigma$ range around the minimum $\chi^2$. In addition to that, we also consider the experimental constraint for the light scalar particle that is determined by the LEP experiment. Considering these three constraints, the allowed parameter region is shown in Fig.[\[fig:s-AA\]](#fig:s-AA){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:s-AA"} in the $( m_{H_1}, \sin \alpha )$ plane. The colored columns denote the signal strengths. As noted in Sec. 3.1, the dilaton production from gluon fusion ($gg\rightarrow \phi$) can be enhanced due to the QCD scale anomaly and thus can compete with the SM Higgs production from gluon fusion ($gg \rightarrow h$). Therefore the Higgs signal strengths depend mainly on the production channels rather than the decay channels, and we present the $\gamma\gamma$ channel only in Fig. 1. One can see that the ggF initiated process can be modified significantly compared to the SM value. On the other hand, the VBF initiated one is suppressed by the mixing angle only, so that its signal strength is always smaller than one. Also note that the allowed region for the mixing angle $\alpha$ is highly constrained around $\alpha \sim-\frac{\pi}{2}$. This means that the observed $126$ GeV boson is largely SM-like and the extra light mode is dilaton-like, namely $H_2 \simeq h$ and $H_1 \simeq \phi$. Even though the mixing angle is close to $-\pi/2$ and $H_2 \simeq h$, rather large modification is possible from the mixing with the dilation through the tuning of the input parameters $m_\phi$ and $f_\phi$. There should be an extra light scalar mode $H_1$ whose mass is constrained to be in the range $m_{H_1} \sim [58,104]$ GeV, which is a prediction of our model. Since the model has only two more input parameters $(m_\phi, f_\phi)$, some observables are highly correlated, which make the generic signals of the model. In Fig.[\[fig:s-corr\]](#fig:s-corr){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:s-corr"}, we show two such correlations with the contours of $m_{H_1}$ in different colors. The left plot shows a strong correlation between the ggF-initiated signal strengths $WW^(ZZ^*)$ and $\gamma\gamma$ production process. The correlation is almost linear, since the scale anomaly contribution to the ggF initiated process is dominant. The slope of the correlation slightly deviates from one '1' because of the small difference between the $SU(2)_W$ and $U(1)_{em}$ scale anomalies. The yellow and purple boxes are showing the $1\sigma$ observations by CMS and ATLAS. The right plot shows the correlation between the signal strengths of different initial states but the same final states, the diphoton channels. Though the correlation is not that strong as the left plot, the ATLAS data tends to prefer the larger value of $m_{H_1}$ [^4]. Triple and quartic couplings for the $H_2 (m_{H_2}=126~{\rm GeV})$ are completely determined within this model, making distinct discriminators for this model. In the allowed parameter region, the predictions for triple and quartic couplings of the SM-like Higgs boson $H_2$ are shown in Fig.[\[fig:s-34\]](#fig:s-34){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:s-34"}. One can see that triple and quartic couplings are suppressed compared with the SM values, depending on the $H_1$ mass. Especially for the triple coupling it gives relative minus sign compared to the SM value, which would result in the constructive interference between the box diagram and the triangle diagram with the $s-$channel $H_2$ propagator, and thus increase the $H_2$ pair production in $gg\rightarrow H_2 H_2$. In addition, we observe a strong correlation between triple and quartic couplings, which is presented in Fig.[\[fig:s-34corr\]](#fig:s-34corr){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:s-34corr"}. Along with the $H_1$ mass, the triple and quartic couplings are highly inter-related. This will be the strong distinctive signal for testing the model, which could be probed at the upcoming LHC run and at the ILC. ### Case II: $126$ GeV $H_1$ and extra heavy $H_2$: $m_{H_1}=126~{\rm GeV} < m_{H_2}$ Let us move to the other case where the observed $126$ GeV boson is lighter one, $H_1$. In this case there is an extra heavy mode named $H_2$. As before, we first show in Fig. [\[fig:mf-h\]](#fig:mf-h){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:mf-h"} the contour plots of the mixing angle $\alpha$ and the extra heavy scalar boson mass $m_{H_2}$ in the $(m_\phi,f_\phi)$ plane. We select the allowed parameter region by $3\sigma$ range from the $\chi^2$ minima for CMS and ALTAS results. In this case there are another experimental exclusion bounds on the Higgs-like heavy mode by CMS and ATLAS with range up to $\sim 1000$ GeV. In this case, the allowed range for the mixing angle $\alpha$ is severely restricted around the SM values, $\alpha \simeq 0$ (see Fig.[\[fig:AA\]](#fig:AA){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:AA"}). For both cases the signal strengths are very close to 1, the SM values. This means that the experimental data strongly favor the SM case and the dilaton should be heavy enough to decouple from the theory. Compared to the SM, only the surviving region for the heavier scalar mass $m_{H_2}$ is relatively relaxed compared with the constraints on the SM-like Higgs boson, which can be expected because of the mixing between the SM Higgs boson $h$ and the dilation $\phi$ depending on the $( m_\phi, f_\phi )$ parameter values. As a result, other observables as triple and quartic couplings are also strongly restricted around the SM values. As a result, unlike the Case I, it is not sufficient just to look into the observed $H_1 (m_{H_1}=126~{\rm GeV})$ sector to discriminate the model from the SM, since the model is pointing to the almost exact SM values for it. The heavier scalar boson mass is constrained to be larger than $\sim$ 367 GeV from the Higgs signal strengths of the observed 126 GeV boson and the heavier Higgs searches (see Fig. 5). This is a distinctive feature of our model compared with the SM. So the more detailed studies on the possible extra heavy scalar boson are necessary in the future $14$ TeV LHC and tentative International Linear Collider (ILC) to test this model more completely. # Conclusions In this letter, we considered the SM coupled with some spontaneously broken scale symmetric sector with light dilaton (pseudo Nambu-Goldstone boson) (or the radion in the RS scenario) using the $SU(3)_C \times SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y$ invariant form of the trace of the energy momentum tensor of the SM fields, Eq. (3). Our approach is different from others in that most earlier studies used the $T_\mu^\mu$ which is invariant under $SU(3)_C \times U(1)_{\rm em}$ invariant form \[ Eq. (1) \], not the form which is invariant under the full SM gauge symmetry. The SM Higgs boson and the dilaton $\phi$ mix with each other after EWSB. Since the original dilaton is coupled to the SM fields only through the Higgs mass parameter $\mu_H^2$ term and the quantum scale anomalies, two scalar bosons after the mixing carry the nature of the original dilaton and the SM Higgs boson. Considering the $3\sigma$ ranges around the $\chi^2$ minima and experimental constraints on the extra light/heavy mode by LEP/LHC, the allowed region on the mixing angle and extra scalar mass is highly restricted. For the case of $126$ GeV boson and extra light scalar particle, we can give robust prediction for the mass of the extra light scalar and mixing angle. Also the correlations between the various signal strengths could be the good distinctive signals of our model. The triple and quartic couplings and their correlation give the impressive testbed for the model, which can be further studied in the 14 TeV LHC and ILC. On the other hand, if we identify the observed scalar particle with mass $126$ GeV as light mode $H_1$, with the constraints upon the extra heavy SM-like scalar mode searched by CMS and ATLAS, the remaining parameter sets become severely confined around the SM expectations. This means that it is not enough to discriminate the model from the SM just by looking into the $126$ GeV sector. In this case, the more detailed study on the extra heavy mode will be necessary to test the model completely. [^1]: For this reason, we will use the terminology "dilaton\" for both dilaton in spontaneously broken scale symmetric theory and the radion in the RS scenario in this paper. [^2]: This form of the trace of energy-momentum tensor was considered in Refs. . In these papers, the dilaton mass parameter was fixed by the scale symmetry breaking effect, i.e., non-zero value of divergence of dilatation current. In our case, dilaton mass is considered as free parameter and that can be justified when the tentative dark matter contributions are included, for instance. [^3]: Similar observation was made in Ref. in the context of singlet fermion dark matter model with Higgs portal. There it was shown that the effective Lagrangian approach gives us completely wrong answer in direct detection cross section for dark matter and nucleon and Higgs boson phenomenology. The same conclusion would apply even if one assumes that the interaction between the SM Higgs boson $h$ and the fermion DM $\psi$ is given by dim-4 operator $h \bar{\psi} \psi$, which in fact respects only the unbroken SM gauge group $H_{\rm SM}$ and not the full gauge symmetry $G_{\rm SM}$. When we construct the renormalizable model with the full SM gauge symmetry, we would recover the model presented in Ref. , and the model based on $H_{\rm SM}$ would give wrong physics. More detail will be described elsewhere. [^4]: Note that the CMS did not report the results depending on the initial production channels.	{'timestamp': '2014-04-22T02:09:45', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5586', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5586'}
# Introduction This document records the results of a comparison the interferometer simulation [Finesse]{.smallcaps} the alignment sensing signals of a Fabry Perot cavity. This task was started during the commissioning workshop at the LIGO Livingston site between the 28.1.2013 and 1.2.2013 with the aim of creating a reference example for validating numerical simulation tools. The FFT based simulation OSCAR joined the battle later. # The test setup The basic setup is a linear Fabry Perot cavity and a phase modulated input beam. The reflected light is detected by two wavefront sensors (WFSs). WFS1 is located directly at the input mirror's front surface, a second beam is directed via a pick-off mirror, a lens and a 5 km distance towards WFS2. The setup is shown in figure [\[fig:setup\]](#fig:setup){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:setup"} and the main parameters are given in table [1](#tab:params){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:params"}. # Field amplitudes for the aligned and resonant case In order to confirm that the test setup as described above has been implemented correctly we record the amplitude or power of the light fields in several locations, see table [\[tab:powers\]](#tab:powers){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:powers"}. # Longitudinal error signal for small mirror offset As a first test of sensing and control signals we investigate the behavior of a Pound-Drever-Hall sensing: The ETM is moved off-resonance by $0.1$ nm. We compute the error signal from the photo diode located in front of ITM, demodulated at 9 MHz, in the I-quadrature (defined by maximum signal). [Finesse]{.smallcaps} for demodulated signals are multiplied by 2 to compensate the built-in 'mixer gain' of 0.5. # Tilt of optical fields for small mirror misalignment Before we start computing wavefront sensor (WFS) signals, we want to make sure that the tilt of the carrier and the sideband fields are as expected. ## Wavefront tilt Compute the tilt of the wavefront on both WFSs as follows: \[\phi_{\rm tilt}=\phi_{\rm sb}-\phi_{\rm carier}\] with $\phi$ being the phase of the respective field as the function of position on the WFS. Compute the slope of this for both WFSs, for the upper and lower sideband, using a) a misalignment of ITM by 0.1 nrad and b) a misalignment of ETM by 0.1 nrad. The tilt of the wavefront at the mirrors itself should be given by \[2 k \frac{180\,\mathrm{deg}}{\pi}\,0.1\,\mathrm{nrad}=6.7669173 \cdot 10^{-2 }\,\mathrm{deg/m}\] [Finesse]{.smallcaps} at the workshop, to avoid sign flips upon reflection. a\) ITM tilt\ b\) ETM tilt\ ## Beam propagation tilt {#sec:beamtilt} We can also estimate the tilt of the optical fields by comparing the beam centers at two locations on the optical axis. For this we compute the beam center on the WFSs and at temporary detectors, located (without any optical components in the path) 1 km behind the respective WFS. The beam center is estimated computing the 'center of mass' of the beam intensity on the detectors. The results are shows in table [\[tab:tilt2\]](#tab:tilt2){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:tilt2"} # Wavefront sensor signal for mirror misalignment Now we compute the I and Q quadrature of WFS1 and WFS2 for the same misalignments as above. The optimised demodulation phases are shown in table [\[tab:ASC_demod\]](#tab:ASC_demod){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:ASC_demod"}.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-23T02:10:39', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5727', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5727'}
# Tunable hexagonal lattices Optical lattices are commonly created by the interference of counter-propagating laser beams that form standing waves with defined knots at retro-reflecting mirrors. In contrast, the tunable optical lattices described here are generated by superimposing three traveling waves which intersect in the $xy$-plane at angles of $120^\circ$ as depicted in Fig. [\[Figure01\]](#Figure01){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure01"}a. The corresponding wave vectors of the beams are $\mathbf{k}_1=2\pi(0,1,0)/\lambda_L$, $\mathbf{k}_2=\pi(\smash{\sqrt{3}},-1,0)/\lambda_L$ and $\mathbf{k}_3=\pi(-\smash{\sqrt{3}},-1,0)/\lambda_L$. The recoil energy is given by $E_\mathrm{R}=h^2/(2m\lambda_L^2)$, where $m$ is the atomic mass. Throughout the paper we use as an example ultracold $^{87}\text{Rb}$ atoms and a laser wavelength of $\lambda_L=830\,\text{nm}$ as in Ref. . For this wavelength the lattice laser detuning relative to the atomic transitions is still of the order of the fine structure splitting. In addition to the intensity modulation $V_\text{int}(\mathbf{x})$ of the resulting light field, this gives rise to a reasonably strong polarization-induced Stark shift of the magnetic Zeeman substates $\|\mathrm{F},m_\mathrm{F}\rangle$, which adds to the intensity modulation. The total optical potential can be expressed as a sum of a state-independent and a state-dependent part: \[V(\mathbf{x})=-V_0\big[V_{\text{int}}(\mathbf{x}) + V_{\text{pol}}(\mathbf{x})\big].\] $V_0$ denotes the corresponding lattice depth created by two equivalent counter-propagating laser beams. Considering all beams being linearly polarized at an angle $\theta$ with respect to the $xy$-plane (see Fig. [\[Figure01\]](#Figure01){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure01"}a), the state-independent potential reads \[\label{eq:IntPotential} V_\text{int}(\mathbf{x}) = 6+\big[ 1-3\cos(2\theta) \big]\sum_i\cos(\mathbf{b}_i\mathbf{x}),\] where each two reciprocal lattice vectors $\mathbf{b}_i = \varepsilon_{ijk}(\mathbf{k}_j-\mathbf{k}_k)$, span the reciprocal Bravais lattice. The state-dependent part of the optical potential can be obtained by calculating the projection of the light field onto the polarization basis vectors $\boldsymbol\varepsilon_{\mathcal{P}}$, with polarization $\mathcal{P}=\{\pi,\sigma^+,\sigma^-\}$. This basis is determined by the orientation of the system's quantization axis, which can be easily controlled in experiment by a homogeneous magnetic field. In case of the quantization axis pointing along the $z$-axis, the $\boldsymbol\varepsilon_{\mathcal{P}}$ are the (three-dimensional) Jones vectors $\boldsymbol\varepsilon_\pi=(0,0,1)$ and $\boldsymbol\varepsilon_{\sigma^\pm}=(1,\pm \mathrm{i},0)/\smash{\sqrt{2}}$. For an arbitrary orientation of the quantization axis, the basis has to be transformed, such that $\boldsymbol\varepsilon_\pi$ remains parallel to the quantization axis: $\boldsymbol\varepsilon_{\mathcal{P}} \rightarrow R_z(\gamma) R_x(\beta) R_y(\alpha) \boldsymbol\varepsilon_{\mathcal{P}}$. Here, $\alpha, \beta, \gamma$ denote the Euler angles, defining the orientation of the quantization axis and the $R_i$ are the Cartesian rotation matrices. Without loss of generality, we restrict the following considerations to $\beta=0$. The general form of the resulting state-dependent part of the potential reads \[\label{eq:PolPotential} V_\text{pol}(\mathbf{x}) = \sqrt{3}(-1)^{\mathrm{F}}m_\mathrm{F}\eta\cos(\theta)\sum_iC_i\sin(\mathbf{b}_i\mathbf{x}),\] where the coefficients $C_i$ are given by \[\begin{aligned} {5} \label{eq:C1} &C_1&&=\cos\theta\cos\alpha-2&&\sin\theta\sin\alpha\cos\gamma\\ &C_{2,3}&&=\cos\theta\cos\alpha \phantomas[r]{-2}{+}&&\sin\theta\sin\alpha\big[\cos\gamma\pm\sqrt{3}\sin\gamma\big].\label{eq:C2} \end{aligned}\] The dimensionless proportionality factor $\eta = 0.13$ is solely determined by the detuning of the lattice laser (for, e.g. $\lambda_L=1064\,\mathrm{nm}$, $\eta = 0.03$). Equations [\[eq:IntPotential\]](#eq:IntPotential){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:IntPotential"} and [\[eq:PolPotential\]](#eq:PolPotential){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:PolPotential"} point out the central role of the lattice beam polarization angle $\theta$. Three fundamentally different scenarios will be discussed in the following. For $\theta = 90^\circ$ the state-dependent part of the potential vanishes. The remaining state-independent potential forms a triangular lattice with deep confinement at each lattice site due to a strong intensity modulation. As depicted in Fig. [\[Figure01\]](#Figure01){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure01"}b, the polarization throughout this system is $\pi$ and the orientation of the quantization axis has no effect on the potential. In contrast, for $\theta=\arccos(1/3)/2\approx 35.3^\circ$, the modulation of the state-independent potential $V_\mathrm{int}$ vanishes completely, leaving only a constant energy offset and a weak, state-dependent potential (see Fig. [\[Figure01\]](#Figure01){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure01"}c). In other words, atoms with $m_\mathrm{F}\neq0$ are either trapped on $\sigma^+$ or $\sigma^-$ sites, while atoms with $m_\mathrm{F}=0$ remain untrapped. In a spin-mixture of atoms with $m_\mathrm{F} \neq 0$ and $m_\mathrm{F} = 0$, the periodically modulated density distribution of the atoms with $m_\mathrm{F} \neq 0$ presents an interaction lattice for those with $m_\mathrm{F}=0$. The orientation of the quantization field has a strong impact on the geometry of such a system: rotating the quantization axis from $\alpha=0^{\circ}$ towards the lattice plane at $\alpha = 90^{\circ}$ shifts the lattice basis vectors. Such a configuration allows for the realization of a microscopic stack of stirring spoons, each covering the area of only one lattice plaquette. Indeed, as depicted in Fig. [\[Figure02\]](#Figure02){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure02"}, a rotation of the quantization axis in the lattice plane by the angle $\gamma$ leads to a rotation of the lattice wells around each other. By emulating the effect of the Lorentz force, this stirring offers a novel scheme to create artificial gauge fields. This rotation could also be applied to a spin mixture in order to study interaction induced momentum exchange. Atoms with $m_\mathrm{F}\neq0$, trapped in the rotating polarization lattice, shall induce a rotating interaction lattice onto the $m_\mathrm{F}=0$ atoms, leading to a transfer of vortices. In analogy to the purely state-dependent potential, the honeycomb lattice depicted in Fig. [\[Figure01\]](#Figure01){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure01"}d, created for $\theta=0^{\circ}$ and $\alpha = 0^{\circ}$, exhibits an alternating pattern of circular polarization. While the potential becomes very large in the center of each hexagon, tunneling processes take place in the shallow channel structure connecting nearest-neighbor lattice sites with contributions of next-nearest neighbor tunneling within each sublattice (see the thin dashed lines in Fig. [\[Figure01\]](#Figure01){reference-type="ref" reference="Figure01"}d). Despite the still relatively small proportionality factor $\eta$, this occurrence of only small potential barriers between nearest-neighbor lattice sites causes the state-dependent part of the potential to lift the degeneracy of the two fold atomic basis for atoms with non-vanishing magnetic quantum number. Atoms seeking $\sigma^+$ light are predominantly trapped at the sublattice A, while $\sigma^-$ seeking states occupy the sublattice B and atoms with zero magnetic quantum number still experience a fully symmetric honeycomb potential. As a central aspect here, the control over the quantization axis allows for a continuous adjustment of the symmetry of the potential from triangular to honeycomb. By rotating the quantization field into the lattice plane, the projection of the circular polarization onto the atomic spin-states vanishes in compliance with equations ([\[eq:C1\]](#eq:C1){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:C1"}) and ([\[eq:C2\]](#eq:C2){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:C2"}), which truncate to $C_{1,2,3}=\cos\alpha$. Rotating the magnetic field beyond the lattice plane, or $\alpha>90^{\circ}$, leads to an exchanged pattern of circular polarizations and, thus, a deeper trapping on the respectively other sublattice as depicted in Fig. [\[Waves\]](#Waves){reference-type="ref" reference="Waves"}a. This behavior is equivalent to the realization of an effective magnetic quantum number \[m=(-1)^{\mathrm{F}+1}m_\mathrm{F}\cos\alpha \label{eq:m}\] of which we make use in the following calculations. Here, the sign-term used earlier in equation ([\[eq:PolPotential\]](#eq:PolPotential){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:PolPotential"}) accounts for the respective Landé g-factor. Thus, scaling the effective magnetic quantum number $m$ is sufficient to transfer the presented results to an arbitrary atomic species and detuning. All results presented in the following will be focused on this case of the state-dependent honeycomb lattice ($\theta=0$). In this part, we have discussed a versatile state-dependent optical lattice setup. The orientations of the polarization vector and of the quantization field allow to realize various lattice geometries, which can be dynamically modified. This gives access to novel experimental schemes such as the creation of stirring patterns or interaction lattices. In the following the special case of the honeycomb lattice with tunable offset energy is investigated in detail. # Band structure and Wannier functions {#sec:BandStructureAndWannierFunctions} ## Band structure and Bloch functions The band structure and the Bloch functions are obtained by diagonalizing the single-particle Hamiltonian $\hat H_0=\mathbf{p}^2/2m+V(\mathbf{x})$, where $m$ is the mass of the atoms and $V(\mathbf{x})$ is the non-separable two-dimensional honeycomb potential for $\theta=0$. The solutions are found by expanding both the periodic lattice potential and the wave functions in two-dimensional plane waves $c_{k_a,k_b} \exp(\mathrm{i}k_a a + \mathrm{i}k_b b)$, spanned by the two lattice vectors $a$ and $b$ and the respective quasi-momenta $k_a$ and $k_b$. Applying the Bloch theorem, the Schrödinger equation can be solved for all quasi-momenta $\mathbf{k}=(k_a,k_b)$. The four lowest bands of the band structure are depicted in for various values of $m$. For $m=0$, the two lowest bands ${\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{g}}$ and ${\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{u}}$ show the typical back-folded band structure of a honeycomb lattice. The respective Bloch waves $\ket{\phi^{(n)}_\mathbf{k}}$ (b) are even and odd combinations of s-wave-type solutions of the individual sublattices A and B. The relative weight of both solutions depends on the effective magnetic quantum number $m$ and is equal for $m=0$. In the latter case, the inversion symmetry is reflected by the existence of Dirac cones at $\mathbf{k}=\text{K}$ corresponding to massless Dirac particles as in graphene. When increasing $m$ the symmetry is lifted introducing an energy offset $\epsilon$ between the minima of the sublattices. As a consequence, a gap opens between the Dirac cones (b) and the Dirac particles obtain a finite mass. Therefore, the lattice offers the possibility to study the continuous transition from a graphene-like lattice to a gapped band structure, which is well accessible experimentally. For $m=1$ the site offset is rather large and the densities of $\ket{\phi^{({\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{g}})}_\mathbf{k}}$ and $\ket{\phi^{({\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{u}})}_\mathbf{k}}$ differ strongly on A and B sites (c). Figure [\[Bands\]](#Bands){reference-type="ref" reference="Bands"} reveals another Dirac point connecting the fourth and fifth band. A special feature of the third band is the extremely flat energy dispersion allowing for Wigner crystallization. In the following, we will focus on the lower two bands and neglect the occupation of higher bands. ## Definition of Wannier functions Since the unit cell of the honeycomb lattice has two lattices sites, the definition of Wannier functions $\ket{w_\mathrm{A}}$ and $\ket{w_\mathrm{B}}$ for the respective sublattices is in general not straight forward. However, we show in the following that for the spin-independent case $m=0$ with equal sublattices, the Wannier problem is solved directly by an equal superposition of $\ket{\phi^{({\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{g}})}_\mathbf{k}}$ and $\ket{\phi^{({\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{u}})}_\mathbf{k}}$ bands. Recently, the Wannier functions have been calculated for honeycomb optical lattices using the Marzari-Vanderbilt method in Ref. and in Ref. for the tight-binding approximation as well as in Ref. using the eigenstates of band-projected position operators. The general goal of the definition of Wannier functions is to provide a Hubbard model that is well suited for the description of the many-body problem. For this purpose, the amplitudes of the leading-order neglected processes must be negligibly small. This includes, e.g., off-site interactions, next-nearest neighbor tunneling and density-induced tunneling. Maximally localized generalized Wannier functions for lattices with multi-atomic unit cells are highly non-unique. In fact, for the honeycomb lattice, an infinite number of orthonormal basis sets exist that are more or less well localized on individual lattice sites. The usual attempt is to minimize the so-called spread function in order to define Wannier functions localized to individual lattice sites. However, it is a priori not clear, that these Wannier functions also lead to a Hubbard model that is the best possible description of the system. This is of particular importance for optical lattices aiming to realize pure model systems. The preferable approach is to define the Wannier functions in a way that the neglected processes with largest amplitude are minimized. The choice of the localization criterion is crucial for the validity of the resulting model. In the Hubbard processes (a-d) and the most important neglected beyond-Hubbard processes (e-h) are illustrated. The Hubbard model incorporates the tunneling $J=-\bra{w_\mathrm{A}} \hat H_0 \ket{w_\mathrm{B}}$, the site offset energy $\epsilon_\mathrm{B}=\bra{w_\mathrm{B}} \hat H_0 \ket{w_\mathrm{B}}-\bra{w_\mathrm{A}} \hat H_0 \ket{w_\mathrm{A}}$, as well as the on-site interaction on either site $U_{\mathrm{A}} \propto \int\! d^2{x}\ \|w_{\mathrm{A}}\|^4$ and $U_{\mathrm{B}} \propto \int\! d^2{x}\ \|w_{\mathrm{B}}\|^4$ using the Wannier function $w_{\mathrm{A} / \mathrm{B}}$ on neighboring sites $\mathrm{A}$ and $\mathrm{B}$ (see ). In the case of optical lattices the density-induced tunneling ${\Delta J}_{\mathrm{A}/\mathrm{B}} \propto \int\! d^2{x}\ w_{\mathrm{A}}^* \|w_{\mathrm{A} / \mathrm{B}}\|^2 w_{\mathrm{B}}$ is the dominant correction of the Hubbard model whereas next-neighbor interaction $U_{\mathrm{A}\mathrm{B}}$ and next-nearest neighbor tunneling $J_{\mathrm{A}\A}$ and $J_{\mathrm{B}\B}$ are usually small (see ). Minimizing the squared sum of ${\Delta J}_{\mathrm{A}/\mathrm{B}}$ and $U_{\mathrm{A}\mathrm{B}}$ guaranties that the system is optimally described by tunneling, on-site interactions and site offsets. Since the parameters for off-site processes are derived from the wave function overlap between neighboring lattice sites, their minimization leads to the localization of the Wannier functions on individual sites. Note that perpendicular to the plane of the honeycomb lattice, a deep additional one-dimensional lattice ($V_z=44 E_\mathrm{R}$) is applied, which is described by conventional one-dimensional Wannier functions for the sinusoidal potential. For the honeycomb lattice with a bi-atomic unit cell one can construct Wannier functions from the lowest two s-bands ${\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{g}}$ and ${\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{u}}$. The Wannier functions $w_\mathrm{A}$ and $w_\mathrm{B}$ on sublattices A and B can be constructed by the summation \[\ket{w^{i}_{\mathrm{A}/\mathrm{B}}}\! =\! {\frac{1}{\sqrt{N_\text{s}}} } \sum _{{\mathbf{k}}\in\text{BZ}}\!\! \e{-\mathrm{i}{\mathbf{k}} \mathbf{G}_i } \big[ \nu^{\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{g}}_{{\mathbf{k}}, {\mathrm{A}/\mathrm{B}}} \ket{\phi^{\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{g}}_{\mathbf{k}}} + \nu^{\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{u}}_{{\mathbf{k}}, {\mathrm{A}/\mathrm{B}}} \ket{\phi^{\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{u}}_{\mathbf{k}} } \big].\] over the Bloch functions of $N_\text{s}$ reciprocal lattice vectors in the Brillouin zone (BZ). The lattice vector $\mathbf{G}_i=i_1 \mathbf{a} + i_2 \mathbf{b}$ determines the two-site unit cell where the Wannier function is localized. The complex coefficients $\nu$ of the Bloch functions $\ket{\phi^{\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{g}}_{\mathbf{k}}}$ and $\ket{\phi^{\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{u}}_{\mathbf{k}}}$ can be written as \[\begin{split} \nu^{\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{g}}_{{\mathbf{k}},\mathrm{A}} =\sqrt{s}\ e^{-\mathrm{i}\theta^{\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{g}}_{{\mathbf{k}},\mathrm{A}}}, &\quad \nu^{\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{u}}_{{\mathbf{k}},\mathrm{A}}=\sqrt{1\!-\!s}\ e^{-\mathrm{i}\theta^{\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{u}}_{{\mathbf{k}},\mathrm{A}}} \\ \nu^{\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{g}}_{{\mathbf{k}},\mathrm{B}} =\sqrt{1\!-\!s}\ e^{-\mathrm{i}\theta^{\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{g}}_{{\mathbf{k}},\mathrm{B}}}, &\quad \nu^{\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{u}}_{{\mathbf{k}},\mathrm{B}}=\sqrt{s}\ e^{-\mathrm{i}\theta^{\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{u}}_{{\mathbf{k}},\mathrm{B}}}. \end{split}\] for sublattice A and B, respectively, with phases $\theta_{{\mathbf{k}},\mathrm{A}/\mathrm{B}}$ and a band-mixing parameter $s$. The phases must be chosen in a way that the Bloch functions at the center $\mathbf{r}_{\mathrm{A}/\mathrm{B}}$ of the respective lattice site are positive real. This constructive summation is achieved by \[\theta^{(n)}_{{\mathbf{k}},\mathrm{A} / \mathrm{B}}=\arg \phi^{(n)}_{\mathbf{k}} (\mathbf{r}_\text{A/B}),\] where $n$ denotes the band index (${\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{g}}$ or ${\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{u}}$). This is the usual procedure for the definition of Wannier functions of a one-dimensional lattice with equivalent lattice sites. The choice of $\mathbf{r}_\text{A/B}$ must obey both the orthonormality \[\sum_{\mathbf{k},n} \|\nu^{(n)}_{{\mathbf{k}},\mathrm{A}/\mathrm{B}}\|^2=1 \quad\ \text{and} \quad\ \sum_{\mathbf{k},n} \nu^{{(n)}}_{{\mathbf{k}},\mathrm{A}} \nu^{(n)}_{{\mathbf{k}},\mathrm{B}}=0.\] and spatial three-fold rotational symmetry of the Wannier functions. Due to the translational invariance with respect to the lattice vectors, it is sufficient to determine the Wannier functions $\ket{w_\mathrm{A}}$ and $\ket{w_\mathrm{B}}$ within the unit cell at the origin $i=(0,0)$. Only the single variational parameter $s$ must be optimized in order to fulfill the localization criterion. This band mixing parameter describes the individual contributions of the lowest two bands to the Wannier functions $\ket{w_\mathrm{A}}$ and $\ket{w_\mathrm{B}}$ on sublattices A and B and is crucial to obtain maximally localized Wannier functions. Figure [\[SPlot\]](#SPlot){reference-type="ref" reference="SPlot"}i and [\[SPlot\]](#SPlot){reference-type="ref" reference="SPlot"}j show the dependence of the amplitudes for all relevant processes on the variational parameter $s$ for the cases $m=0$ and $m=0.02$. For this small value of $m$, the offset energy $\epsilon$ is already on the order of the on-site energy $U$. The band mixing parameter ranges from an equal superposition with $s=\nicefrac{1}{2}$ to the limits $s\to 0$ and $s\to 1$. In the latter cases, the Wannier functions for A and B sites are constructed entirely from ${\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{g}}$ and ${\mathrm{s}_\mathrm{u}}$ Bloch waves, respectively, and therefore their tunneling matrix element vanishes. Note also that the on-site interaction energy $U$ and site offset energy $\epsilon$ are relatively robust, while the tunneling $J$ and in particular off-site interaction processes are strongly influenced by the applied localization criterion. It is in general not possible to minimize the parameters of all beyond-Hubbard processes simultaneously. However, in our case the density-induced tunneling processes (gray and black lines) represent the dominating corrections and their minimization leads to optimal* Wannier functions for the definition of the Hubbard model [\[eq:SimpleHubbardModel\]](#eq:SimpleHubbardModel){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:SimpleHubbardModel"} restricted to $U$, $J$, and $\epsilon$. Only in the superfluid regime of shallow lattices, the next-nearest neighbor tunneling represents a significant contribution and one could use the squared sum of all neglected processes as a localization criterion. The resulting Wannier functions for $m=0$ and the strongly asymmetric case $m=1$ are plotted in . For the important case of equivalent sublattices ($m=0$) the variational parameter is simply $s=\nicefrac{1}{2}$ as follows from symmetry arguments. The logarithmic plot in a shows that Wannier functions are well localized even for very shallow lattices ($V_0=3E_\mathrm{R}$). Note that very similar results are obtained using the (numerical expensive) minimization of the spread function as performed very recently for the honeycomb optical lattice in Refs. and. The situation is however more subtle for the strongly asymmetric case $m=1$. Here, the two lowest bands are not energetically well separated from higher bands (see a). In fact, the second band is already strongly hybridized with the $\text{p}_\text{uu}$ band and hence an admixture of the forth band with a second band mixing parameter is necessary. The contribution of the $\text{p}_\text{gg}$ band is still negligible due to symmetry arguments. In conclusion, we have presented an efficient construction scheme for Wannier functions of the honeycomb lattice. It is based on the general goal to define maximally localized Wannier functions in a way that the amplitudes of processes that are neglected in the Hubbard model are minimized. This approach results in the optimal Hubbard model for the description of the many-body problem. Furthermore, the method is applicable to other lattice geometries with multi-atomic unit cells and is numerically inexpensive. ## The Hubbard model {#sec:TheHubbardModel} The standard Hubbard model using the tight binding approximation is restricted to the nearest neighbor tunneling $J$, on-site interaction $U$ and site offset energy $\epsilon$. By means of the Wannier functions the tunneling matrix elements between neighboring sites can be calculated using \[J=-\bra{w_\mathrm{A}} \hat H_0 \ket{w_\mathrm{B}}=-\frac{1}{N_\text{s}} \sum_{\mathbf{k},n} \nu^{{(n)}}_{{\mathbf{k}},\mathrm{A}} \nu^{(n)}_{{\mathbf{k}},\mathrm{B}} E^{(n)}_{\mathbf{k}}\] where $\hat H_0=\mathbf{p}^2/2m+V(\mathbf{x})$ denotes the single-particle Hamiltonian. The on-site interaction reads \[U_{\mathrm{A} / \mathrm{B}}=g \int\! d^3{x}\ \|w_{\mathrm{A} / \mathrm{B}}(x_1,x_2)\|^4 \, \|w_\perp(x_3)\|^4\] using the interaction parameter $g=\frac{4\pi\hbar}{m}a_\mathrm{s}$ and the Wannier function $\ket{w_\perp}$ of the perpendicular one-dimensional lattice. For concreteness, we use $^{87}\mathrm{Rb}$ parameters with a scattering length $a_\mathrm{s}\approx101\, a_0$. The energy offsets for the sublattices are given by $\epsilon_\mathrm{A}=0$ and \[\epsilon_{\mathrm{B}}= \frac{1}{N_\text{s}} \sum_{\mathbf{k},n} \left( \|\nu^{{(n)}}_{{\mathbf{k}},{\mathrm{B}}}\|^2-\|\nu^{{(n)}}_{{\mathbf{k}},{\mathrm{A}}}\|^2 \right) E^{(n)}_{\mathbf{k}}.\] These parameters allow to write the Hubbard Hamiltonian in the common way. Instead of labeling the sites by a unit cell vector $(i_1,i_2)$ and a sublattice index $\mathrm{A}$ or $\mathrm{B}$, it is more convenient to use a joint vector $j$. This way we can map the honeycomb lattice to a square lattice with a reduced number of bonds (see e and f). We will use square brackets to recover the sublattice index $\mathrm{A}$ or $\mathrm{B}$ from the joint index $j$, i.e., \[\mapsto \{\mathrm{A},\mathrm{B} \}.\] Using this definition, the Hubbard Hamiltonian can be written as \[\hat H_\mathrm{BH}=-J \sum_{\expect{j,j'}} \bd{j} \hat{b}_{j'}^{\phantom{\dagger}} + \frac{1}{2} \sum_j U_{[j]} \hat n_j (\hat n_j-1) + \sum_j \epsilon_{[j]} \hat n_j \label{eq:HubbardModel}\] with ${\expect{j,j'}}$ indicating the sum over nearest neighbors. The Hubbard parameter $J$, $U_\text{A/B}$, and $\epsilon=\epsilon_\mathrm{B}$ for the optimized Wannier function are shown in for the different effective magnetic quantum numbers $m=0$, $0.02$ and $1$. In the following we discuss processes beyond the tight binding approach and the dependence of all parameters on the effective magnetic quantum number $m$. ## The extended Hubbard model {#sec:TheExtendedHubbardModel} As discussed above, several off-site processes are already neglected in the Hubbard model. These processes are illustrated in e-h. The natural question arises how important these processes are for the phase diagram of the honeycomb lattice. From it is clear that the first order corrections to the standard Hubbard model are the density-induced tunneling and next-nearest neighbor tunneling, whereas next-neighbor interaction and pair-tunneling are negligible. The extended Hubbard Hamiltonian with first order corrections can be written as \[\begin{split} \hat H_\mathrm{EBH}=&-J \sum_{\expect{j,j'}} \bd{j} \hat{b}_{j'}^{\phantom{\dagger}} -\sum_{\expect{\expect{j,j'}}} J_{[j][j']} \bd{j} \hat{b}_{j'}^{\phantom{\dagger}} \\ &+ \frac{1}{2} \sum_j U_{[j]} \hat n_j (\hat n_j-1) + \sum_j \epsilon_{[j]} \hat n_j \\ &-\sum_{\expect{j,j'}} \bd{j} ( {\Delta J}_{[j]} \hat n_j + {\Delta J}_{[j']} \hat n_{j'}) \hat{b}_{j'}^{\phantom{\dagger}}.\\ \label{eq:ExtendedHubbardModel} \end{split}\] Here, $\expect{\expect{j,j'}}$ sums over all pairs of next-nearest neighbors with next-nearest neighbor tunneling matrix elements $J_{\mathrm{A}\A}$ and $J_{\mathrm{B}\B}$. These matrix elements can be calculated using \[J_{\mathrm{A}\A }=-\bra{w^j_{\mathrm{A}}} \hat H_0 \ket{w^{j'}_{\mathrm{A}}}=-\frac{1}{N_\text{s}} \sum_{\mathbf{k},n}\|\nu^{{(n)}}_{{\mathbf{k}},{\mathrm{A}}}\|^2 \e{i {\mathbf{k}} \mathbf{G}} E^{(n)}_{\mathbf{k}}\] and analogously for $J_{\mathrm{B}\B}$, where $\mathbf{G}=\mathbf{G}_j-\mathbf{G}_{j'}$ is a lattice vector between neighboring unit cells. The density-induced tunneling ${\Delta J}$ stems from the two-particle interaction. It describes the tunneling of a single particle to a neighboring site induced by the interaction on either site. The process is therefore intrinsically occupation-number-dependent and scales linearly with $n_j\!+\!n_{j'}\!-\!1$. The matrix element for density-induced tunneling is \[{\Delta J}_{\mathrm{A} / \mathrm{B}}=-g \int\! d^3{x}\ w_{\mathrm{A}}^({\mathbf{r}}) \|w_{\mathrm{A} / \mathrm{B}}({\mathbf{r}})\|^2 w_{\mathrm{B}}({\mathbf{r}}) \ \|w_\perp(x_3)\|^4,\] with ${\mathbf{r}}=(x_1,x_2)$. Other processes stemming from the two-particle interaction, namely, the next-neighbor interaction $U_{\mathrm{A}\mathrm{B}}$ and pair tunneling, are given by \[U_{\mathrm{A}\mathrm{B}}= g \int\! d^3{x}\ \|w_{\mathrm{A}}({\mathbf{r}})\|^2 \|w_{\mathrm{B}}({\mathbf{r}})\|^2 \ \|w_\perp(x_3)\|^4\] and $J_\text{pair}=U_{\mathrm{A}\mathrm{B}}/2$. They are typically smaller than the density-induced tunneling and thus are neglected here (see ). This is characteristic for the optical lattice and can be different for other potentials, e.g., solid-state materials. For the case $m=0$ with equivalent sublattices $\mathrm{A}$ and $\mathrm{B}$, the extended Hubbard parameters (a) have qualitatively a similar dependency as for cubic lattices. It is worth noticing that the density-induced tunneling ${\Delta J}$ (black line) is about one tenth of the conventional tunneling $J$ (blue) for a wide range of parameters and can thus strongly influence the behavior of the system. For an average filling of three ($\rho=(n_\mathrm{A}+n_\mathrm{B})/2=3$), this corresponds to an increase of the effective tunneling by $50\%$. Furthermore, the ratio ${\Delta J}/J$ depends on the transversal lattice depth and the scattering length. The next-nearest-neighbor tunneling couples anti-ferromagnetically and is an important contribution for shallow lattices. For intermediate and deep lattices, the next-nearest-neighbor tunneling (purple) and the next-neighbor interaction (green) have small contributions. As shown in c, for $m=1$ the site offset $\epsilon_\mathrm{B}$ is the dominating energy. Already for relatively shallow lattices, it is larger than all other matrix elements, which causes a depopulation of the sublattice $\mathrm{B}$ as discussed in detail below. Another feature arising from the inequivalent sublattices is a splitting of the on-site interactions $U_\mathrm{A}$ and $U_\mathrm{B}$, density-induced tunneling ${\Delta J}_{\mathrm{A} / \mathrm{B}}$, and in particular the next-nearest neighbor tunneling $J_{\mathrm{A}\A}$ and $J_{\mathrm{B}\B}$. The absolute values of $J_{\mathrm{B}\B}$ are considerably larger than for $J_{\mathrm{A}\A}$ due to the larger spatial extend of the $\ket{w_\mathrm{B}}$. This also causes the on-site interaction on $\mathrm{B}$ sites to be smaller than on $\mathrm{A}$ sites. For $m=1$, the next-nearest neighbor tunneling $J_{\mathrm{A}\A}$ couples ferromagnetically and $J_{\mathrm{B}\B}$ anti-ferromagnetically. ## Tunable lattice site offsets {#sec:TunableOffsets} As mentioned above, $m$ can be continuously tuned by tilting the magnetic field axis with respect to the lattice plane (Eq. [\[eq:m\]](#eq:m){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:m"}). While the case of $m=0$ corresponds to equivalent sublattices $\mathrm{A}$ and $\mathrm{B}$, a value of $m=1$ already causes a depopulation of the sublattice $\mathrm{B}$. The tunability of $m$ also allows to address the more interesting situation where the offset energy is comparable with the tunneling or the on-site interaction. The resulting competition leads to a rich phase diagram with a multitude of insulating phases with fractional fillings. Figure [\[Offset\]](#Offset){reference-type="ref" reference="Offset"}b shows that the offset $\epsilon_\mathrm{B}$ is approximately a linear function of the parameter $m$. Importantly, the tunneling and the on-site interaction (a) have only a weak dependence on $m$ in the plotted region, i.e., $J(m)\approx J$ and $U_{\mathrm{A}}(m) \approx U_{\mathrm{B}}(m) \approx U$. Neglecting other contributions, the tuning of $m$ allows therefore to implement a Hubbard model with adjustable offset of sublattice $\mathrm{B}$ as illustrated in c. The model Hamiltonian can be written as \[\begin{split} \hat H_\mathrm{BH}(m)=&-J \sum_{\expect{j,j'}} \bd{j} \hat{b}_{j'}^{\phantom{\dagger}} + \frac{1}{2} \sum_j U \hat n_j (\hat n_j-1)\\ &+ \sum_j \epsilon_{[j]}(m) \hat n_j. \label{eq:SimpleHubbardModel} \end{split}\] As an important result, in the spirit of quantum simulation, the tuning of the effective quantum number $m$ represents an additional tool for engineering many-body Hamiltonians. In the case of equivalent sublattices ($m=0$), the density-induced tunneling is the leading order correction of the model Hamiltonian [\[eq:SimpleHubbardModel\]](#eq:SimpleHubbardModel){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:SimpleHubbardModel"}, whereas for larger values of $m$ the next-nearest neighbor tunneling can have a similar amplitude (d). We determine the impact of these additional processes in . # Phase diagrams {#sec:PhaseDiagrams} In the following, the phase diagrams of bosonic atoms in the tunable state-dependent honeycomb lattice are discussed. We consider the general case of Hubbard models for hexagonal lattices superimposed with a bi-atomic superlattice structure with arbitrary site offsets. Mean-field calculations in Ref. only allow for approximative results due to the small number of nearest-neighbors in the honeycomb lattice. Therefore, we apply a bosonic cluster mean-field approach. It has been shown that this approach gives accurate results for the Bose-Hubbard model for hexagonal lattices. Furthermore, we discuss the phase diagrams for experimental parameters in dependence on the effective magnetic quantum number $m$ and the influence of extended Hubbard processes such as density-induced tunneling and next-nearest neighbor tunneling. Finally, by using the improved Wannier functions from Section [\[sec:DefWannier\]](#sec:DefWannier){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:DefWannier"} and accurate numerics to calculate the phase diagram we show that the theoretical predictions match very well with the experimental results in Ref. . ## Cluster Gutzwiller method We briefly review the cluster Gutzwiller method applied in the following. The idea is to solve the many-particle problem for a cluster of lattice sites which is coupled to the mean-field at its boundary. The exactly treated cluster is decoupled from the surrounding lattice by replacing all operators that act on sites outside the cluster with their expectation values. In a self-consistent procedure, the mean-field is determined from the solution of the previous iteration. This is a natural extension of the conventional Gutzwiller approach, where a single lattice site is decoupled from the lattice. The striking advantage is that intersite correlations can be captured, enhancing the precision significantly and giving access to correlated quantum phases such as so-called loophole insulators. For the extended Hubbard model, the cluster Gutzwiller method requires the two different mean-field parameters $\expect{\hat b}$ and $\expect{\hat n\hat b}$, where the latter is introduced by the density-induced tunneling process. In the many-particle cluster basis $\ket{N}$ the Hamiltonian matrix elements \[\hat H_{MN}=\bra{M} \hat H_\text{cluster} + \hat H_\text{boundary} \ket{N} \label{eq:HamiltionanMatrix}\] decompose in two parts describing the cluster and its boundary. For the general case of the extended Hamiltonian [\[eq:ExtendedHubbardModel\]](#eq:ExtendedHubbardModel){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:ExtendedHubbardModel"}, we have $\hat H_\text{cluster}= \hat H_\mathrm{EBH}-\mu \sum_j \hat n_j$, where $\mu$ is the chemical potential. The Hamiltonian $\hat H_\text{boundary}$ describes the coupling of sites at the boundary of the cluster to sites outside the cluster. For an infinite system, we can obtain the expectation values for sites outside the cluster from two innermost sites in the cluster, i.e., target sites $\text{a}$ and $\text{b}$ of the sublattice $\mathrm{A}$ and $\mathrm{B}$, respectively. Consequently, a site $j$ of sublattice $\mathrm{A}$ (B analogously) couples via \[\begin{split} \hat H_\text{boundary} ^j =&-J\ \nu_j\ \bd{j} \expect{\hat{b}_{b}^{\phantom{\dagger}}} -J_{\mathrm{A}\A}\ \nu^{\text{NN}}_j\ \bd{j} \expect{\hat{b}_{b}^{\phantom{\dagger}}} \\ &-{\Delta J}_\mathrm{A}\ \nu_j\ \bd{j} \hat n_j \expect{\hat{b}_{b}^{\phantom{\dagger}}} -{\Delta J}_\mathrm{B}\ \nu_j\ \bd{j} \expect{\hat n_b\hat{b}_{b}^{\phantom{\dagger}}} \\ & + c.c. , \end{split}\] where $\nu_j$ ($\nu^{\text{NN}}_j$) denotes the number of nearest (next-nearest) neighbors outside the cluster. For the Bose-Hubbard model we have $J_{\mathrm{A}\A}={\Delta J}_\mathrm{A}={\Delta J}_\mathrm{B}=0$ and the expression above simplifies drastically. For the calculations, we use a cluster of $18$ sites as shown in f, where periodic boundary conditions are applied along the horizontal direction (see Ref. for further details). The latter reduces the number of bonds to the mean-field, where in this case the finite-size scaling parameter measuring the ratio of internal cluster bonds to total bonds is $\lambda=0.8$ ($\lambda=0$ corresponds to a single-site, $\lambda=1$ to an infinite cluster). ## State-dependent phase diagrams The quantum phase diagram of the state-dependent honeycomb lattice strongly depends on the effective quantum number $m$. The general feature is the transition from a superfluid state in shallow lattices (large values of $J/U$) to strongly correlated Mott-insulating states in deep lattices. The latter is defined by vanishing superfluid order parameters $\expect{\hat{b}_{a}^{\phantom{\dagger}}}=\expect{\hat{b}_{b}^{\phantom{\dagger}}}=0$ and fixed particle numbers per unit cell $(n_\mathrm{A},n_\mathrm{B})$. For the state-independent case $m=0$, the insulating phases are characterized by the same integer occupation of both sublattices A and B, i.e., $n_\mathrm{A}=n_\mathrm{B}=\rho$. The site-offset energy $\epsilon$ introduces an imbalance between the two sublattices, leading to insulating phases with uneven fillings $n_\mathrm{A} \neq n_\mathrm{B}$. In a-d the phase diagrams are shown for different effective magnetic quantum numbers $m$ in dependence on the lattice depth $V_0$ and the chemical potential $\mu/U_\mathrm{A}$. The Mott lobes are shown for the standard Hubbard model Eq. [\[eq:SimpleHubbardModel\]](#eq:SimpleHubbardModel){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:SimpleHubbardModel"} (solid lines) as well as for the extended Hubbard model Eq. [\[eq:ExtendedHubbardModel\]](#eq:ExtendedHubbardModel){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:ExtendedHubbardModel"} including off-site processes (dashed lines). The density-induced tunneling increases the total tunneling energy and thereby shifts the transition to deeper lattices. This is in particular strong for higher filling factors which reflects the occupation-dependency of the density-induced tunneling. The results of the cluster method for $m=0$ differ strongly from those of the conventional mean-field approach (see Refs. ) predicting $J/U=0.0572$ for the lowest Mott lobe with $(n_\mathrm{A},n_\mathrm{B})=(1,1)$. The large discrepancy is caused by the small number of nearest neighbors in the honeycomb lattice. In the case of the standard Hubbard model, the phase diagrams depend only on the ratio $J/U$ plotted at the top of each figure. However, other parameters such as site offsets or density-induced tunneling also depend on the effective magnetic quantum number $m$. The possibility of tuning the site offset $\epsilon=\epsilon_\mathrm{B}$ as described in leads to an interesting competition of site offset and on-site interaction. When the site-offset exceeds the on-site energy, a population imbalance is imprinted on each of the unit cells. For $m=0.02$ (b), where the site offset $\epsilon_\mathrm{B}$ is on the order of the $U/2$, this criticality is reflected by alternating Mott lobes with half-integer and integer filling $\rho$, e.g., the Mott states $(1,0)$ and $(1,1)$. Depending on the chemical potential $\mu$ transitions to both Mott configurations from the superfluid are possible. In , we discuss in detail how the site offset $\epsilon_ \mathrm{B}$ affects the Mott transition and how the critical point can be determined for a given offset. In deep lattices, the boundaries between both Mott phases are strongly bent and separated by a very narrow superfluid region. The latter is triggered by the increase of $\epsilon_\mathrm{B}$ with the lattice depth (see b). By increasing the effective magnetic quantum number ($m=0.1$ and $m=1$), a depopulation of the $\mathrm{B}$ lattice sites occurs due to the large energy offsets. For $m=0.1$, the phase diagram for the higher Mott lobes is rather complex and surprisingly the $(2,1)$ Mott phase is completely surrounded by the superfluid phase, which is further elaborated in . In the extended Hubbard model, where the density-induced tunneling causes in general smaller Mott phases, the $(2,1)$ Mott insulator is not a ground state for $m=0.1$. For the case $m=1$, corresponding to $m_\mathrm{F}=1$ atoms at a perpendicular magnetic field, only $(n,0)$ Mott insulator phases can be observed (d). However, in the superfluid phase the $\mathrm{B}$ sites are nonetheless important as they induce the fluctuations between the $\mathrm{A}$ sites via second order tunneling on the order of $J^2/\epsilon_\mathrm{B}$. Direct next-nearest neighbor hopping between the $\mathrm{A}$ sites contributes only to a minor degree which can be deduced from the small difference between standard and extended Hubbard model (solid and dashed lines). Due to the large value of $\epsilon_\mathrm{B}$ the Mott transition to $(1,0)$ occurs at high values of $J/U\approx 0.4$ and therefore already in very shallow lattices. ## Universal $\epsilon$--$J$--$U$ phase diagram {#sec:Universal} While in the phase diagrams for specific values of effective magnetic quantum number $m$ are discussed, we show in the following the results for the standard Hubbard model [\[eq:SimpleHubbardModel\]](#eq:SimpleHubbardModel){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:SimpleHubbardModel"} \[\hat H_\mathrm{BH}=-J\sum_{\expect{j,j'}} \bd{j} \hat{b}_{j'}^{\phantom{\dagger}} + \frac{U}{2} \sum_j \hat n_j (\hat n_j-1) + \sum_j \epsilon_{[j]} \hat n_j \label{eq:SimpleHubbardModelRepeated}\] in dependence on the site offset $\epsilon$. The positions of the tips of the Mott lobes in are of particular interest, since they mark the transitions into the insulating phases at (half) integer filling. Fixing the chemical potential $\mu$ to the corresponding value allows to draw the universal phase diagram in the $\epsilon/U$--$J/U$ plane as depicted in Fig. [\[EpsilonLobes\]](#EpsilonLobes){reference-type="ref" reference="EpsilonLobes"}. In this representation, lobes of Mott phases $(n_\mathrm{A},n_\mathrm{B})$ with filling $\rho=(n_\mathrm{A}+n_\mathrm{B})/2$ emerge. Mott phases with a given imbalance $\Delta n=n_\mathrm{A}-n_\mathrm{B}$ exist for $n_\mathrm{B}>0$ in a range $\Delta n-1 < \epsilon/U < \Delta n+1$ reflecting the competition between the on-site energy $U$ and offset energy $\epsilon$. The dashed lines in represent the site offset $\epsilon/U$ for different values of $m$ as a function of $J/U$. For specific $m$, the superfluid to Mott insulator transitions with $(n_\mathrm{A},n_\mathrm{B})$ particles are given by the intersection with the respective Mott lobe (open circles). They correspond to the tips of the lobes for $m=0$, $0.02$, and $0.1$ in Figs. [\[SFMIHom\]](#SFMIHom){reference-type="ref" reference="SFMIHom"}a-c, where $\epsilon$ is solely determined by $m$ and the optical lattice potential. In c, where even and odd fillings are plotted, we can determine the critical values for $m=0$ and $m=0.02$. It is clear that for $m=0$ only transitions to $(n,n)$ Mott phases exist, whereas for $m=0.02$ both $(n,n)$ and $(n,n-1)$ lobes can be found with comparable transition points (see b). In a the ratio $\epsilon/U$ for $m=0.1$ (purple line) has two intersections with the $(2,1)$ Mott lobe, which indicates that this phase only exists in the range of $0.026 \lesssim J/U \lesssim 0.04$. For lower values of $J/U$ the site offset $\epsilon/U$ increases and the superfluid phase is reentered. As a result a Mott insulator island appears in the phase diagram in c. Note that for the extended Hubbard model the insulator phases are in general smaller and the $(2,1)$ Mott phase only appears for values $m<0.1$. In conclusion, the representation in allows us to predict the possible Mott phases for arbitrary site offsets by drawing the line ${\epsilon}/{U}$. This ratio is determined by the Wannier function computed in for given values of $m$ and $V_0$. The critical values $J/U$ for entering the Mott phases (and possibly reentering the superfluid phase) are given by the intersections of the phase boundaries with the respective line $\epsilon/U$. ## Comparison with experimental data In we compare the theoretical predictions for $m=0$ and $1$ with the experimental data in Ref. . In this experiment, the described state-dependent honeycomb lattice was realized and loaded with $^{87}$Rb atoms in the hyperfine ground-state manifold $F=1$ and $F=2$. This allows to study the superfluid to Mott insulator transition with different magnetic quantum numbers $m_F$. However, without the proposed rotation of the magnetic field axis only integer effective magnetic quantum numbers are accessible. The experimental data in shows the visibility of the atomic cloud after time-of-flight expansion, which vanishes in the Mott insulator phase. However, in the experiment the additional confinement leads to a slowly decreasing local chemical potential from the trap center, which increases the overall visibility close to the Mott transition due to the coexistence of Mott plateaus and superfluid rings. Our calculation for the critical points is plotted as vertical lines, where the solid lines depict the standard Hubbard and the dashed lines the extended model. For $m=0$, the critical value $V_0^\text{c}\approx10.5E_\mathrm{R}$ for the filling $\rho=1$ matches well with the experimental result (blue line). As discussed above for filling $\rho=1$ the correction in the extended Hubbard model is relatively small. For $\rho=2$, the correction with about $1E_\mathrm{R}$ is much larger, since the density-induced tunneling as the leading-order correction scales with $2\rho-1$. Note that the previous theoretical prediction is $V_0\approx13E_\mathrm{R}$-$19E_\mathrm{R}$ for a filling $\rho=1$-$2$ is much larger and does not agree well with the measurement. In contrast, the same calculation for $m=1$ predict a much lower value than in experiment, namely $V_0\approx4E_\mathrm{R}$-$5E_\mathrm{R}$ for $\rho=1$-$2$ although the single-site Gutzwiller approach should overestimate the critical lattice depth. Our approach for Wannier functions in combination with the cluster Gutzwiller method predicts the transition at about $6E_\mathrm{R}$ for $\rho=1$, which agrees well with the experimental data. Thus, the results for $m_F=0$ and $m_F=1$ both indicate an average filling of $\rho=1$. # Conclusions We have presented a versatile setup for the generation of optical lattices with three-fold symmetry where the polarization of the light and an external magnetic field can be used to realize a manifold of lattice geometries. This offers promising opportunities for new optical lattice setups and grants access to completely new quantum physics. For the case of the honeycomb lattice, a tunable site-offset energy between the sublattices A and B introduces a new degree of freedom to engineer more complex lattices topologies. Here, the precise knowledge of system parameters--Wannier functions and contributing interaction processes--is essential for the interpretation of the experimental results. Using the cluster mean-field method and a well-suited localization criterion for the Wannier states, we have been able to compute accurate phase diagrams. The cluster mean-field method has proven to be an efficient and precise tool for the determination of the phase diagrams of both the standard and the extended Hubbard models, especially for lattices with small coordination numbers. With our results we were able to pinpoint the influence of beyond-Hubbard processes, i.e., density-induced tunneling and next-nearest neighbor tunneling. A universal representation of the phase diagrams for arbitrary site offset energies has been introduced. In general, the presented results provide a major improvement on previous theoretical predictions and show excellent agreement with the experimental data in Ref. . We find that the next-nearest neighbor tunneling does not appear to cause the large discrepancy between experiment and theory in as proposed. The presented methods, especially the efficient construction scheme for optimal Wannier states, can be easily extended to other lattice geometries. We acknowledge funding by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (grants SFB 925 and GRK 1355).	{'timestamp': '2014-10-23T02:12:34', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5961', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5961'}
null	null
null	null
null	null
# Introduction The study of the interaction of quantum systems with gravitational fields goes back to the beginning of the last century, when the generalization of quantum mechanics to curved spaces was discussed, motivated by the idea of constructing a theory combining quantum physics and general relativity. Along this line of research the investigation of solutions of the Klein-Gordon equation in some gravitational fields as well as their consequences has been discussed in the literature. It is worth emphasizing that the study of the behavior of scalar fields in black hole backgrounds could be used, in principle, to understand the physics of these objects. Therefore, it is important to find solutions of the Klein-Gordon equation for real as well for complex fields and analyze the phenomena related to them, as for example, the radiation of scalar particles. In a recent paper, we obtained the exact solutions of the Klein-Gordon equation for a massive real scalar field in the Kerr-Newman spacetime, valid in the whole space that corresponds to the black hole exterior, which means between the exterior event horizon and infinity. They are given in terms of the confluent Heun functions. Thus, we extended the range in which the solutions are valid as compared with the ones obtained by Rowan and Stephenson, which is valid near the exterior horizon and at infinity. Hawking radiation is an interesting phenomenon concerning the emission of any types of particles by black holes. In order to study this phenomenon, many different methods has been proposed. In particular, the emission of scalar particles has also been discussed in the literature. Recently, Zhang and Zhao studied the Hawking radiation of a Kerr-Newman black hole by introducing a very particular coordinate system. The coordinates have some attractive properties: the time direction is a Killing vector, the metric is smooth at the horizons, among others. Huaifan et al. introduced the tortoise coordinates and extended the classical Damour-Ruffini method to discuss the general radiation spectrum. Umetsu studied the Hawking radiation by using the tunneling mechanism process and the dimensional reduction near the horizon. In our present paper we obtain the exact solutions of the Klein-Gordon equation for a charged massive scalar field in the background under consideration, valid in the whole spacetime that corresponds to the black hole exterior, which means between the exterior event horizon and infinity. Using the radial solution which is given in terms of the confluent Heun functions and taking into account their properties, we study the Hawking radiation of charged massive scalar particles. A similar result concerning massless scalar particles in the Kerr-Newman background is already in the literature. These were obtained using the Teukolsky equation which describes the dynamical scalar perturbations, as well as gravitational, electromagnetic and spinor, of a rotating black hole. For the scalar perturbation, the solutions of the Teukolsky equation, which can be mapped into the Klein-Gordon equation for a massless field, are also given in terms of the confluent Heun functions. This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we present some features of the Kerr-Newman spacetime and some elements relevant to study the Hawking radiation. In Section 3, we introduce the Klein-Gordon equation for a charged massive scalar field in a curved background and write down this equation in the Kerr-Newman spacetime, separate the angular and radial parts, and we present the exact solution of both angular and radial equations. In section 4, we obtain the solutions for ingoing and outgoing waves, near to the exterior horizon of the black hole. In section 5, we extend the wave solutions from the outside of the black hole into the inside of the black hole. In Section 6, under the condition that the spacetime total energy, total charge and total angular momentum are conserved, we derive the black hole radiation spectra taking into account the reaction of the radiation to the spacetime. Finally, in section 7 we present our conclusions. # Kerr-Newman spacetime The metric generated by a black hole with angular momentum per unit mass $a=J/M$, electric charge $Q$, and mass (energy) $M$ is the Kerr-Newman metric, whose line element, in the Boyer-Lindquist coordinates, is given by \[\begin{aligned} ds^{2} & = & \frac{\Delta}{\rho^{2}}\left(dt-a\sin^{2}\theta\ d\phi\right)^{2}-\frac{\rho^2}{\Delta}dr^{2}-\rho^{2}\ d\theta^{2}\nonumber\\ &-& \frac{\sin^2\theta}{\rho^2}\left[\left(r^2+a^2\right)d\phi-a\ dt\right]^{2}\ , \label{eq:metrica_Kerr-Newman} \end{aligned}\] where \[\Delta=r^{2}-2Mr+a^{2}+Q^{2}\ , \label{eq:parametros_metrica_Kerr-Newman}\] and \[\rho^{2}=r^{2}+a^{2}\cos^{2}\theta\.\] We can write the metric tensor of the Kerr-Newman spacetime as \[\begin{aligned} (g_{\sigma\tau})\!=\! \end{aligned}\] \[\begin{aligned} \left(\! \begin{array}{cccc} \frac{\Delta\!-\!a^{2}\sin^{2}\theta}{\rho^{2}} & 0 & 0 & \frac{a\sin^{2}\theta\left[\!\left(\!r^{2}\!+\!a^{2}\!\right)\!-\!\Delta \!\right]}{\rho^{2}}\\ 0 & \!-\!\frac{\rho^{2}}{\Delta } & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & \!-\!\rho^{2} & 0\\ \frac{a\sin^{2}\theta\left[\!\left(\!r^{2}\!+\!a^{2}\!\right)\!-\!\Delta \!\right]}{\rho^{2}} & 0 & 0 & \!-\!\frac{\sin^{2}\theta\left[\!\left(\!r^{2}\!+\!a^{2}\!\right)^{2}\!-\!\Delta a^{2}\sin^{2}\theta\!\right]}{\rho^{2}} \end{array} \!\right)\ , \label{eq:metrica_matriz_Kerr-Newman} \end{aligned}\] from which we obtain \[g \equiv \det(g_{\sigma\tau})=-\rho^{4}\sin^{2}\theta\. \label{eq:g_metrica_Kerr-Newman}\] Thus, the contravariant components of $g_{\sigma\tau}$ are given by \[\begin{aligned} (g^{\sigma\tau})\!=\!\left(\! \begin{array}{cccc} \frac{\left(\!r^{2}\!+\!a^{2}\!\right)^{2}\!-\!\Delta a^{2}\sin^{2}\theta}{\rho^{2}\Delta } & 0 & 0 & \frac{a\left[\! \left(\!r^{2}\!+\!a^{2}\!\right)\!-\!\Delta \!\right]}{\rho^{2}\Delta }\\ 0 & \!-\!\frac{\Delta }{\rho^{2}} & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & \!-\!\frac{1}{\rho^{2}} & 0\\ \frac{a\left[\! \left(\!r^{2}\!+\!a^{2}\!\right)\!-\!\Delta \!\right]}{\rho^{2}\Delta } & 0 & 0 & \!-\!\frac{\Delta \!-\! a^{2}\sin^{2}\theta}{\rho^{2}\Delta \sin^{2}\theta} \end{array} \!\right)\. \label{eq:var_contra_metrica_Kerr-Newman} \end{aligned}\] From Eq. ([\[eq:parametros_metrica_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:parametros_metrica_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:parametros_metrica_Kerr-Newman"}), we have that the horizon surface equation of the Kerr-Newman spacetime is obtained from the condition \[\Delta=(r-r_{+})(r-r_{-})=0\. \label{eq:superficie_hor_Kerr-Newman}\] The solutions of Eq. ([\[eq:superficie_hor_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:superficie_hor_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:superficie_hor_Kerr-Newman"}) are \[r_{+}=M+\left[M^{2}-\left(a^{2}+Q^{2}\right)\right]^{1/2}\ , \label{eq:sol_padrao_Kerr-Newman_1}\] \[r_{-}=M-\left[M^{2}-\left(a^{2}+Q^{2}\right)\right]^{1/2}\ , \label{eq:sol_padrao_Kerr-Newman_2}\] and correspond to the event and Cauchy horizons of the Kerr-Newman black hole. The gravitational acceleration on the black hole horizon surface $r_{+}$, and the Hawking radiation temperature are, respectively, \[\kappa_{+} \equiv \frac{\Delta'(r_{+})}{2\left(r_{+}^{2}+a^{2}\right)}=\frac{r_{+}-r_{-}}{2\left(r_{+}^{2}+a^{2}\right)}\ , \label{eq:acel_grav_ext_Kerr-Newman}\] and \[T_{+}=\frac{\kappa_{+}}{2\pi}\. \label{eq:temp_Hawking_Kerr-Newman}\] The thermodynamic quantities associated with the black hole, such as the entropy at event horizon, $S_{+}$, the dragging angular velocity of the exterior horizon, $\Omega_{+}$, the angular momentum, $J$, and the electric potential, $\Phi_{+}$, are given by \[S_{+}=\pi\left(r_{+}^{2}+a^{2}\right)\ , \label{eq:entropia_Kerr-Newman}\] \[\Omega_{+}=\frac{a}{r_{+}^{2}+a^{2}}\ , \label{eq:vel_ang_Kerr-Newman}\] \[J=M a\ , \label{eq:parametros_Kerr-Newman_1}\] \[\Phi_{+}=\frac{Qr_{+}}{r_{+}^{2}+a^{2}}\. \label{eq:parametros_Kerr-Newman_2}\] These quantities obtained given by Eqs. ([\[eq:entropia_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:entropia_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:entropia_Kerr-Newman"})-([\[eq:parametros_Kerr-Newman_2\]](#eq:parametros_Kerr-Newman_2){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:parametros_Kerr-Newman_2"}) for the black hole event horizon satisfy the first law of thermodynamics \[dE=T_{+}\ dS_{+}+\Omega_{+}\ dJ+\Phi_{+}\ dQ\. \label{eq:1_lei_termo_Kerr-Newman}\] # The Klein-Gordon equation in a Kerr-Newman spacetime Now, let us consider the covariant Klein-Gordon equation for a charged massive scalar field in a curved spacetime and in the presence of an electromagnetic field. In this case, we can write the Klein-Gordon equation as \[\begin{aligned} & & \left[\frac{1}{\sqrt{-g}}\partial_{\sigma}\left(g^{\sigma\tau}\sqrt{-g}\partial_{\tau}\right)-ie(\partial_{\sigma}A^{\sigma})-2ieA^{\sigma}\partial_{\sigma}\right.\nonumber\\ &-& \left.\frac{ie}{\sqrt{-g}}A^{\sigma}(\partial_{\sigma}\sqrt{-g})-e^{2}A^{\sigma}A_{\sigma}+\mu_{0}^{2}\right]\Psi=0\ , \label{eq:Klein-Gordon_gauge_Kerr-Newman} \end{aligned}\] where $\mu_{0}$ is the mass of the scalar particle, and $e$ is the charge of the particle. The units $G \equiv c \equiv \hbar \equiv 1$ were chosen. The 4-vector electromagnetic potential is given by \[A_{\sigma}=\frac{Qr}{\rho^{2}}\left(1,0,0,-a\sin^{2}\theta\right)\. \label{eq:potencial_EM_Kerr-Newman}\] Substituting Eqs. ([\[eq:g_metrica_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:g_metrica_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:g_metrica_Kerr-Newman"}), ([\[eq:var_contra_metrica_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:var_contra_metrica_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:var_contra_metrica_Kerr-Newman"}), and ([\[eq:potencial_EM_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:potencial_EM_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:potencial_EM_Kerr-Newman"}) into Eq. ([\[eq:Klein-Gordon_gauge_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:Klein-Gordon_gauge_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:Klein-Gordon_gauge_Kerr-Newman"}), we obtain \[\begin{aligned} & & \left\{\frac{1}{\Delta}\left[\left(r^{2}+a^{2}\right)^{2}-\Delta a^{2}\sin^{2}\theta\right]\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial t^{2}}-\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\left(\Delta\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\right)\right.\nonumber\\ &-& \frac{1}{\sin\theta}\frac{\partial}{\partial\theta}\left(\sin\theta\frac{\partial}{\partial\theta}\right)-\frac{1}{\Delta \sin ^{2}\theta}\left(\Delta-a^{2}\sin^{2}\theta\right)\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial\phi^{2}}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{2 a}{\Delta }\left[\left(r^{2}+a^{2}\right)-\Delta \right]\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial t\ \partial\phi}\nonumber\\ & + & 2ie\frac{Qr}{\Delta}\left[\left(r^{2}+a^{2}\right)\frac{\partial}{\partial t}+a\frac{\partial}{\partial\phi}\right]\nonumber\\ & + & \left.\mu_{0}^{2}\rho^{2}-e^{2}Q^{2}r^{2}\frac{1}{\Delta }\right\}\Psi=0\. \label{eq:mov_Kerr-Newman} \end{aligned}\] In order to solve Eq. ([\[eq:mov_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:mov_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_Kerr-Newman"}), we assume that its solution can be separated as follows \[\Psi=\Psi(\mathbf{r},t)=R(r)S(\theta)\mbox{e}^{im\phi}\mbox{e}^{-i\omega t}\. \label{eq:separacao_variaveis}\] Substituting Eq. ([\[eq:separacao_variaveis\]](#eq:separacao_variaveis){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:separacao_variaveis"}) into ([\[eq:mov_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:mov_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_Kerr-Newman"}), we find that \[\begin{aligned} & & \frac{1}{\Delta}\left[\left(r^{2}+a^{2}\right)^{2}-\Delta a^{2}\sin^{2}\theta\right]\left(-\omega^{2}\right)-\frac{1}{R}\frac{d}{dr}\left(\Delta\frac{dR}{dr}\right)\nonumber\\ &-& \frac{1}{S}\frac{1}{\sin\theta}\frac{d}{d\theta}\left(\sin\theta\frac{dS}{d\theta}\right)\nonumber\\ &-& \frac{1}{\Delta \sin ^{2}\theta}\left(\Delta-a^{2}\sin^{2}\theta\right)\left(-m^{2}\right)\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{2 a}{\Delta }\left[\left(r^{2}+a^{2}\right)-\Delta \right](-i\omega)(im)\nonumber\\ & + & 2ie\frac{Qr}{\Delta}\left[\left(r^{2}+a^{2}\right)(-i\omega)+a(im)\right]\nonumber\\ & + & \mu_{0}^{2}\rho^{2}-e^{2}Q^{2}r^{2}\frac{1}{\Delta }=0\. \label{eq:mov_separavel} \end{aligned}\] This equation can be separated according to \[\begin{aligned} & & \frac{1}{\sin\theta}\frac{d}{d\theta}\left(\sin\theta\frac{dS}{d\theta}\right)\nonumber\\ & + & \left(\lambda_{lm}+c_{0}^{2}\cos^{2}\theta-\frac{m^{2}}{\sin^{2}\theta}\right)S=0\ , \label{eq:mov_angular} \end{aligned}\] where $c_{0}^{2}=a^{2}(\omega^{2}-\mu_{0}^{2})$, and \[\begin{aligned} & & \Delta\frac{d}{dr}\left(\Delta\frac{dR}{dr}\right)+\left\{\omega^{2}\right.\left(r^{2}+a^{2}\right)^{2}-4Ma\omega mr+2Q^{2}a\omega m\nonumber\\ &-& \mu_{0}^{2}r^{2}\Delta+m^{2}a^{2}-\left(\omega^{2}a^{2}+\lambda_{lm}\right)\Delta\nonumber\\ &-& \left.2eQr\left[\left(r^{2}+a^{2}\right)\omega-am\right]+e^{2}Q^{2}r^{2}\right\}R=0\. \label{eq:mov_radial_1} \end{aligned}\] Note that in the $e=0$ case, Eqs. ([\[eq:mov_angular\]](#eq:mov_angular){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_angular"}) and ([\[eq:mov_radial_1\]](#eq:mov_radial_1){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_radial_1"}) reduce to Eqs. (7) and (8), respectively, of our paper. In this separation, we have used the identity $\sin^{2}\theta=1-\cos^{2}\theta$ in the second term in square brackets of Eq. ([\[eq:mov_separavel\]](#eq:mov_separavel){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_separavel"}). However, as can be seen in, this separation gives us solutions of the radial equation in terms of the confluent Heun functions, in which its parameters contain terms proportional to $M$, the mass of the black hole, which is a result not suitable to study the Hawking radiation. Then, for convenience, instead of adopting the procedure of our paper, we will keep $\sin^{2}\theta$ in the second term in square brackets of Eq. ([\[eq:mov_separavel\]](#eq:mov_separavel){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_separavel"}). Thus, we can separate this equation according to \[\begin{aligned} & & \frac{1}{\sin\theta}\frac{d}{d\theta}\left(\sin\theta\frac{dS}{d\theta}\right)\nonumber\\ & + & \left[-\left(\omega a\sin\theta-\frac{m}{\sin\theta}\right)^{2}-\mu_{0}^{2}a^{2}\cos^{2}\theta+\lambda\right]S=0\ , \label{eq:mov_angular_Kerr-Newman} \end{aligned}\] \[\begin{aligned} & & \frac{d}{dr}\left(\Delta\frac{dR}{dr}\right)+\{-\left(\lambda+\mu_{0}^{2}r^{2}\right)\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{1}{\Delta}\left[\omega\left(r^{2}+a^{2}\right)-am-eQr\right]^{2}\}R=0\ , \label{eq:mov_radial_1_Kerr-Newman} \end{aligned}\] where $\lambda$ is the separation constant, $\omega$ is the energy of the particle, and $m$ is the azimuthal quantum number. In what follows we will solve the angular and radial parts of the Klein-Gordon equation, whose solutions are given in terms of the confluent Heun functions and use these solutions to study the Hawking radiation. ## Angular equation Now, let us obtain the exact and general solution for the angular part of the Klein-Gordon equation given by Eq. ([\[eq:mov_angular_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:mov_angular_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_angular_Kerr-Newman"}), which can be rewritten as \[\begin{aligned} & & \frac{1}{\sin\theta}\frac{d}{d\theta}\left(\sin\theta\frac{dS}{d\theta}\right)\nonumber\\ & + & \left(\Lambda_{lm}+c_{0}^{2}\cos^{2}\theta-\frac{m^{2}}{\sin^{2}\theta}\right)S=0\ , \label{eq:mov_angular_Kerr-Newman_2} \end{aligned}\] where $c_{0}^{2}=a^{2}(\omega^{2}-\mu_{0}^{2})$, and the constant $\Lambda_{lm}$ is defined by \[\Lambda_{lm} \equiv \lambda-a^{2}\omega^{2}+2a \omega m\. \label{eq:cte_sep_Kerr-Newman_2}\] In the literature, the solutions of Eq. ([\[eq:mov_angular_Kerr-Newman_2\]](#eq:mov_angular_Kerr-Newman_2){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_angular_Kerr-Newman_2"}) are the oblate spheroidal harmonic functions $S_{lm}(ic_{0},\cos\theta)$ with eigenvalues $\Lambda_{lm}$, where $l,m$ are integers such that $\|m\|\leq l$ . We will show that the solutions of Eq. ([\[eq:mov_angular_Kerr-Newman_2\]](#eq:mov_angular_Kerr-Newman_2){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_angular_Kerr-Newman_2"}) can be expressed in terms of the confluent Heun functions. To do this, let us rewrite Eq. ([\[eq:mov_angular_Kerr-Newman_2\]](#eq:mov_angular_Kerr-Newman_2){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_angular_Kerr-Newman_2"}) in the form which resembles a Heun equation by defining a new angular coordinate, $x$, such that \[x=\cos^{2}\theta\. \label{eq:coord_ang_Kerr-Newman_2}\] Thus, we can write Eq. ([\[eq:mov_angular_Kerr-Newman_2\]](#eq:mov_angular_Kerr-Newman_2){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_angular_Kerr-Newman_2"}) as \[\begin{aligned} & & \frac{d^{2}S}{dx^{2}}+\left(\frac{1/2}{x}+\frac{1}{x-1}\right)\frac{dS}{dx}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{1}{x(x-1)}\left[-\frac{c_{0}^{2}x}{4}-\frac{\Lambda_{lm}}{4}-\frac{m^{2}}{4(x-1)}\right]S=0\ , \label{eq:mov_angular_x_Kerr-Newman_2} \end{aligned}\] which has singularities at $x=0,1$ and $x=\infty$. Equation ([\[eq:mov_angular_x\_Kerr-Newman_2\]](#eq:mov_angular_x_Kerr-Newman_2){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_angular_x_Kerr-Newman_2"}) can also be written as \[\begin{aligned} & & \frac{d^{2}S}{dx^{2}}+\left(\frac{1/2}{x}+\frac{1}{x-1}\right)\frac{dS}{dx}\nonumber\\ & + & \left[\frac{A_{1}}{x}+\frac{A_{2}}{x-1}+\frac{A_{3}}{(x-1)^{2}}\right]S=0\ , \label{eq:mov_angular_x_Kerr-Newman_3} \end{aligned}\] where the coefficients $A_{1}$, $A_{2}$, and $A_{3}$ are given by: \[A_{1}=\frac{\Lambda_{lm}-m^{2}}{4}\ ; \label{eq:A1_mov_angular_x_Kerr-Newman_3}\] \[A_{2}=-\frac{\left(\Lambda_{lm}-m^{2}+c_{0}^{2}\right)}{4}\ ; \label{eq:A2_mov_angular_x_Kerr-Newman_3}\] \[A_{3}=-\frac{m^{2}}{4}\. \label{eq:A3_mov_angular_x_Kerr-Newman_3}\] Defining a new function, $S(x)$, by $S(x)=Z(x)x^{-1/4}(x-1)^{-1/2}$, we can write Eq. ([\[eq:mov_angular_x\_Kerr-Newman_3\]](#eq:mov_angular_x_Kerr-Newman_3){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_angular_x_Kerr-Newman_3"}) in the following form \[\frac{d^{2}Z}{dx^{2}}+\left[\frac{B_{2}}{x}+\frac{B_{3}}{x-1}+\frac{B_{4}}{x^{2}}+\frac{B_{5}}{(x-1)^{2}}\right]Z=0\ , \label{eq:mov_angular_x_heun}\] where the coefficients $B_{2}$, $B_{3}$, $B_{4}$, and $B_{5}$ are given by: \[B_{2}=\frac{1+4A_{1}}{4}\ ; \label{eq:B2_mov_angular_x_Kerr-Newman_3}\] \[B_{3}=\frac{-1+4A_{2}}{4}\ ; \label{eq:B3_mov_angular_x_Kerr-Newman_3}\] \[B_{4}=\frac{3}{16}\ ; \label{eq:B4_mov_angular_x_Kerr-Newman_3}\] \[B_{5}=\frac{1+4A_{3}}{4}\. \label{eq:B5_mov_angular_x_Kerr-Newman_3}\] Now, consider an equation in the standard form \[\frac{d^{2}U}{dz^{2}}+p(z)\frac{dU}{dz}+q(z)U=0\. \label{eq:EDO_forma_padrao}\] Changing the function $U(z)$, using the relation \[U(z)=Z(z)\mbox{e}^{-\frac{1}{2}\int p(z)dz}\ , \label{eq:U}\] Eq. ([\[eq:EDO_forma_padrao\]](#eq:EDO_forma_padrao){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:EDO_forma_padrao"}) turns into the normal form \[\frac{d^2Z}{dz^2}+I(z)Z=0\ , \label{eq:EDO_forma_normal}\] where \[I(z)=q(z)-\frac{1}{2}\frac{dp(z)}{dz}-\frac{1}{4}\left[p(z)\right]^2\. \label{eq:I}\] Now, let us consider the confluent Heun equation \[\begin{aligned} & & \frac{d^{2}U}{dz^{2}}+\left(\alpha+\frac{\beta+1}{z}+\frac{\gamma+1}{z-1}\right)\frac{dU}{dz}\nonumber\\ & + & \left(\frac{\mu}{z}+\frac{\nu}{z-1}\right)U=0\ , \label{eq:Heun_confluente_forma_canonica} \end{aligned}\] where $U(z)=\mbox{HeunC}(\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta,\eta;z)$ are the confluent Heun functions, with the parameters $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$, $\delta$ and $\eta$, which are related to $\mu$ and $\nu$ by the following expressions \[\mu=\frac{1}{2}(\alpha-\beta-\gamma+\alpha\beta-\beta\gamma)-\eta\ , \label{eq:mu_Heun_conlfuente_2}\] \[\nu=\frac{1}{2}(\alpha+\beta+\gamma+\alpha\gamma+\beta\gamma)+\delta+\eta\ , \label{eq:nu_Heun_conlfuente_2}\] according to the standard package of the Maple17. Using Eqs. ([\[eq:EDO_forma_padrao\]](#eq:EDO_forma_padrao){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:EDO_forma_padrao"})-([\[eq:I\]](#eq:I){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:I"}), we can write Eq. ([\[eq:Heun_confluente_forma_canonica\]](#eq:Heun_confluente_forma_canonica){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:Heun_confluente_forma_canonica"}) in the normal form as \[\frac{d^{2}Z}{dz^{2}}+\left[D_{1}+\frac{D_{2}}{z}+\frac{D_{3}}{z-1}+\frac{D_{4}}{z^{2}}+\frac{D_{5}}{(z-1)^{2}}\right]Z=0\ , \label{eq:Heun_confluente_forma_normal}\] where the coefficients $D_{1}$, $D_{2}$, $D_{3}$, $D_{4}$, and $D_{5}$ are given by: \[D_{1} \equiv-\frac{1}{4}\alpha^{2}\ ; \label{eq:D1_Heun_confluente_forma_normal}\] \[D_{2} \equiv\frac{1}{2}(1-2\eta)\ ; \label{eq:D2_Heun_confluente_forma_normal}\] \[D_{3} \equiv \frac{1}{2}(-1+2\delta+2\eta)\ ; \label{eq:D3_Heun_confluente_forma_normal}\] \[D_{4} \equiv \frac{1}{4}(1-\beta^{2})\ ; \label{eq:D4_Heun_confluente_forma_normal}\] \[D_{5} \equiv \frac{1}{4}(1-\gamma^{2})\. \label{eq:D5_Heun_confluente_forma_normal}\] The angular part of the Klein-Gordon equation for a charged massive scalar particle in the Kerr-Newman spacetime in the exterior region to the event horizon, given by ([\[eq:mov_angular_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:mov_angular_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_angular_Kerr-Newman"}), can be written as ([\[eq:Heun_confluente_forma_normal\]](#eq:Heun_confluente_forma_normal){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:Heun_confluente_forma_normal"}), and therefore, its solution is given by \[Z(z)=U(z)\mbox{e}^{\frac{1}{2}\int\left(\alpha+\frac{\beta+1}{z}+\frac{\gamma+1}{z-1}\right)dz}\ , \label{eq:solZ}\] where $U(z)$ is a solution of the confluent Heun equation ([\[eq:Heun_confluente_forma_canonica\]](#eq:Heun_confluente_forma_canonica){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:Heun_confluente_forma_canonica"}), and the parameters $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$, $\delta$, and $\eta$ are obtained from the following relations: \[-\frac{1}{4}\alpha^{2}=0\ ; \label{eq:D1_mov_angular_x_heun}\] \[\frac{1}{2}(1-2\eta)=\frac{1+4A_{1}}{4}\ ; \label{eq:D2_mov_angular_x_heun}\] \[\frac{1}{2}(-1+2\delta+2\eta)=\frac{-1+4A_{2}}{4}\ ; \label{eq:D3_mov_angular_x_heun}\] \[\frac{1}{4}(1-\beta^{2})=\frac{3}{16}\ ; \label{eq:D4_mov_angular_x_heun}\] \[\frac{1}{4}(1-\gamma^{2})=\frac{1+4A_{3}}{4}\. \label{eq:D5_mov_angular_x_heun}\] Thus, from the above relations, we find that: \[\alpha=0\ ; \label{eq:alpha_mov_angular_x_HeunC_Kerr-Newman_3}\] \[\beta=\frac{1}{2}\ ; \label{eq:beta_mov_angular_x_HeunC_Kerr-Newman_3}\] \[\gamma=m\ ; \label{eq:gamma_mov_angular_x_HeunC_Kerr-Newman_3}\] \[\begin{aligned} \delta & = &-\frac{c_{0}^{2}}{4}\nonumber\\ & = & \frac{1}{4}\left(a^{2}\mu_{0}^{2}-a^{2}\omega^{2}\right)\ ; \label{eq:delta_mov_angular_x_HeunC_Kerr-Newman_3} \end{aligned}\] \[\begin{aligned} \eta & = & \frac{1}{4}\left(1+m^2-\Lambda_{lm}\right)\nonumber\\ & = & \frac{1}{4}\left(1+m^2-\lambda+a^{2}\omega^{2}-2a \omega m\right)\. \label{eq:eta_mov_angular_x_HeunC_Kerr-Newman_3} \end{aligned}\] The general solution of Eq. ([\[eq:mov_angular_x\_Kerr-Newman_3\]](#eq:mov_angular_x_Kerr-Newman_3){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_angular_x_Kerr-Newman_3"}) over the entire range $0 \leq x < \infty$ is obtained with the use of Eq. ([\[eq:solZ\]](#eq:solZ){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:solZ"}). It is given by \[\begin{aligned} S(x) & = & (x-1)^{\frac{1}{2}\gamma}x^{\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{1}{2}+\beta\right)}\nonumber\\ & \times & \{C_{1}\ \mbox{HeunC}(\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta,\eta;x)\nonumber\\ & + & C_{2}\ x^{-\beta}\ \mbox{HeunC}(\alpha,-\beta,\gamma,\delta,\eta;x)\}\ , \label{eq:solucao_geral_mov_angular_x_Kerr-Newman_3} \end{aligned}\] where $C_{1}$ and $C_{2}$ are constants, and the parameters $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$, $\delta$, and $\eta$ are fixed by relations ([\[eq:alpha_mov_angular_x\_HeunC_Kerr-Newman_3\]](#eq:alpha_mov_angular_x_HeunC_Kerr-Newman_3){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:alpha_mov_angular_x_HeunC_Kerr-Newman_3"})-([\[eq:eta_mov_angular_x\_HeunC_Kerr-Newman_3\]](#eq:eta_mov_angular_x_HeunC_Kerr-Newman_3){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:eta_mov_angular_x_HeunC_Kerr-Newman_3"}). These two functions form linearly independent solutions of the confluent Heun differential equation provided $\beta$ is not integer. ## Radial equation Now, let us obtain the exact and general solution for the radial part of the Klein-Gordon equation given by Eq. ([\[eq:mov_radial_1\_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:mov_radial_1_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_radial_1_Kerr-Newman"}). Indeed, we can generalize the results obtained in our previous work. Therefore, to solve the radial part of the Klein-Gordon equation, we use Eq. ([\[eq:superficie_hor_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:superficie_hor_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:superficie_hor_Kerr-Newman"}) and write down Eq. ([\[eq:mov_radial_1\_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:mov_radial_1_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_radial_1_Kerr-Newman"}) as \[\begin{aligned} & & \frac{d^{2}R}{dr^{2}}+\left(\frac{1}{r-r_{+}}+\frac{1}{r-r_{-}}\right)\frac{dR}{dr}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{1}{(r-r_{+})(r-r_{-})}\left\{\right.r^{2}\left(\omega^{2}-\mu^{2}\right)\nonumber\\ & + & r\left[\omega^{2}(r_{+}+r_{-})-2eQ\omega\right]\nonumber\\ & + & e^{2}Q^{2}-\lambda-2am\omega-2eQ\omega(r_{+}+r_{-})+2a^{2}\omega^{2}\nonumber\\ & + & \omega^{2}\left(r_{+}^{2}+r_{+}r_{-}+r_{-}^{2}\right)\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{\left(-a m-e Q r_{+}+a^2 \omega +r_{+}^2 \omega \right)^2}{(r-r_{+}) (r_{+}-r_{-})}\nonumber\\ &-& \frac{\left(-a m-e Q r_{-}+a^2 \omega +r_{-}^2 \omega \right)^2}{(r-r_{-}) (r_{+}-r_{-})}\left.\right\}R=0\. \label{eq:mov_radial_2_Kerr-Newman} \end{aligned}\] This equation has singularities at $r=(a_{1},a_{2})=(r_{+},r_{-})$, and at $r=\infty$. The transformation of ([\[eq:mov_radial_2\_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:mov_radial_2_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_radial_2_Kerr-Newman"}) to a Heun-type equation is achieved by setting \[x=\frac{r-a_{1}}{a_{2}-a_{1}}=\frac{r-r_{+}}{r_{-}-r_{+}}\. \label{eq:homog_subs_radial}\] Thus, we can written Eq. ([\[eq:mov_radial_2\_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:mov_radial_2_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_radial_2_Kerr-Newman"}) as \[\begin{aligned} & & \frac{d^{2}R}{dx^{2}}+\left(\frac{1}{x}+\frac{1}{x-1}\right)\frac{dR}{dx}\nonumber\\ & + & \left[D_{1}+\frac{D_{2}}{x}+\frac{D_{3}}{x-1}+\frac{D_{4}}{x^{2}}+\frac{D_{5}}{(x-1)^{2}}\right]R=0\ , \label{eq:mov_radial_2_Kerr-Newman_x} \end{aligned}\] where the coefficients $D_{1}$, $D_{2}$, $D_{3}$, $D_{4}$, and $D_{5}$ are given by: \[\begin{aligned} D_{1} & = & \left(\omega^{2}-\mu^{2}\right)(r_{+}-r_{-})^{2}\ ; \label{eq:D1_mov_radial_x_normal} \end{aligned}\] \[\begin{aligned} D_{2} & = & \frac{2 a^4 \omega ^2-4 a^3 m \omega-2 a^2 e Q r_{+} \omega-2 a^2 e Q r_{-} \omega +2 a^2 m^2}{(r_{+}-r_{-})^2}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{4 a^2 r_{+} r_{-} \omega ^2+2 a e m Q r_{+}+2 a e m Q r_{-}-4 a m r_{+} r_{-} \omega }{(r_{+}-r_{-})^2}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{2 e^2 Q^2 r_{+} r_{-}+2 e Q r_{+}^3 \omega-6 e Q r_{+}^2 r_{-} \omega +\mu ^2 r_{+}^4}{(r_{+}-r_{-})^2}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{-2 r_{+}^4 \omega ^2-2 \mu ^2 r_{+}^3 r_{-}+4 r_{+}^3 r_{-} \omega ^2+\lambda r_{+}^2+\mu ^2 r_{+}^2 r_{-}^2}{(r_{+}-r_{-})^2}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{-2 \lambda r_{+} r_{-}+\lambda r_{-}^2}{(r_{+}-r_{-})^2}\ ; \label{eq:D2_mov_radial_x_normal} \end{aligned}\] \[\begin{aligned} D_{3} & = & \frac{-2 a^4 \omega ^2+4 a^3 m \omega +2 a^2 e Q r_{+} \omega +2 a^2 e Q r_{-} \omega }{(r_{+}-r_{-})^2}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{-2 a^2 m^2-4 a^2 r_{+} r_{-} \omega ^2-2 a e m Q r_{+}-2 a e m Q r_{+}}{(r_{+}-r_{-})^2}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{-2 a e m Q r_{-}+4 a m r_{+} r_{-} \omega-2 e^2 Q^2 r_{+} r_{-}}{(r_{+}-r_{-})^2}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{6 e Q r_{+} r_{-}^2 \omega-2 e Q r_{-}^3 \omega-\lambda r_{+}^2-\mu ^2 r_{+}^2 r_{-}^2+2 \mu ^2 r_{+} r_{-}^3}{(r_{+}-r_{-})^2}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{-4 r_{+} r_{-}^3 \omega ^2+2 \lambda r_{+} r_{-}-\mu ^2 r_{-}^4+2 r_{-}^4 \omega ^2-\lambda r_{-}^2}{(r_{+}-r_{-})^2}\ ; \label{eq:D3_mov_radial_x_normal} \end{aligned}\] \[\begin{aligned} D_{4} & = & \frac{a^4 \omega ^2-2 a^3 m \omega-2 a^2 e Q r_{+} \omega +a^2 m^2+2 a^2 r_{+}^2 \omega ^2}{(r_{+}-r_{-})^2}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{2 a e m Q r_{+}-2 a m r_{+}^2 \omega +e^2 Q^2 r_{+}^2+e^2 Q^2 r_{+}^2}{(r_{+}-r_{-})^2}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{-2 e Q r_{+}^3 \omega +r_{+}^4 \omega ^2}{(r_{+}-r_{-})^2}\ ; \label{eq:D4_mov_radial_x_normal} \end{aligned}\] \[\begin{aligned} D_{5} & = & \frac{a^4 \omega ^2-2 a^3 m \omega-2 a^2 e Q r_{-} \omega +a^2 m^2+2 a^2 r_{-}^2 \omega ^2}{(r_{+}-r_{-})^2}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{2 a e m Q r_{-}-2 a m r_{-}^2 \omega +e^2 Q^2 r_{-}^2+e^2 Q^2 r_{-}^2}{(r_{+}-r_{-})^2}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{-2 e Q r_{-}^3 \omega +r_{-}^4 \omega ^2}{(r_{+}-r_{-})^2}\. \label{eq:D5_mov_radial_x_normal} \end{aligned}\] Defining a new function, $R(x)$, by $R(x)=Z(x)[x(x-1)]^{-1/2}$, we can write Eq. ([\[eq:mov_radial_2\_Kerr-Newman_x\]](#eq:mov_radial_2_Kerr-Newman_x){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_radial_2_Kerr-Newman_x"}) in the following form \[\frac{d^{2}Z}{dx^{2}}+\left[E_{1}+\frac{E_{2}}{x}+\frac{E_{3}}{x-1}+\frac{E_{4}}{x^{2}}+\frac{E_{5}}{(x-1)^{2}}\right]Z=0\ , \label{eq:mov_radial_x_heun}\] with the coefficients $E_{1}$, $E_{2}$, $E_{3}$, $E_{4}$, and $E_{5}$ given by: \[\begin{aligned} E_{1} & = & \left(\omega^{2}-\mu^{2}\right)(r_{+}-r_{-})^{2}\ ; \label{eq:E1_mov_radial_x_normal} \end{aligned}\] \[\begin{aligned} E_{2} & = & \frac{\left(4 e^{2} Q^{2}-8 a m \omega+8 a^{2} \omega^{2}\right) r_{+} r_{-} }{2 \left(r_{+}-r_{-}\right)^{2}}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{-4 e Q r_{-} \omega\left(a^{2}+3r_{+}^{2}\right)-4 \omega ^{2}r_{+}^{3}\left(r_{+}-2 r_{-}\right)}{2 \left(r_{+}-r_{-}\right)^{2}}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{4 a^{2}\left(m-a \omega\right)^{2}+4 a e m Q \left(r_{+}+r_{-}\right)}{2 \left(r_{+}-r_{-}\right)^{2}}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{\left(2 \lambda+1+2 r_{+}^{2} \mu ^{2}\right)\left(r_{+}-r_{-}\right)^{2}}{2 \left(r_{+}-r_{-}\right)^{2}}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{4 e Q r_{+} \omega\left(r_{+}^{2}-a^{2}\right)}{2 \left(r_{+}-r_{-}\right)^{2}}\ ; \label{eq:E2_mov_radial_x_normal} \end{aligned}\] \[\begin{aligned} E_{3} & = & \frac{-\left(4 e^{2} Q^{2}-8 a m \omega+8 a^{2} \omega ^{2}\right)r_{+} r_{-} }{2 \left(r_{+}-r_{-}\right)^{2}}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{4 e Q r_{+} \omega\left(a^{2}+3r_{-}^{2}\right)+4 \omega ^{2}r_{-}^{3}\left(r_{-}-2 r_{+}\right)}{2 \left(r_{+}-r_{-}\right)^{2}}\nonumber\\ &-& \frac{4 a^{2}\left(m-a \omega\right)^{2}+4 a e m Q \left(r_{+}+r_{-}\right) }{2 \left(r_{+}-r_{-}\right)^{2}}\nonumber\\ &-& \frac{\left(2 \lambda+1+2 r_{-}^{2} \mu ^{2}\right)\left(r_{+}-r_{-}\right)^{2}}{2 \left(r_{+}-r_{-}\right)^{2}}\nonumber\\ &-& \frac{4 e Q r_{-} \omega\left(r_{-}^{2}-a^{2}\right)}{2 \left(r_{+}-r_{-}\right)^{2}}\ ; \label{eq:E3_mov_radial_x_normal} \end{aligned}\] \[\begin{aligned} E_{4} & = & \frac{\left(4 e^{2} Q^{2}-8 a m \omega+8 a^{2} \omega ^{2}\right) r_{+}^{2}-8 e Q r_{+} \omega\left(a^{2}+r_{+}^{2}\right) }{4 \left(r_{+}-r_{-}\right)^{2}}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{4 r_{+}^{4} \omega ^{2}+4 a^{2}\left(m-a \omega\right)^{2}+8 a e m Q r_{+}}{4 \left(r_{+}-r_{-}\right)^{2}}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{1}{4}\ ; \label{eq:E4_mov_radial_x_normal} \end{aligned}\] \[\begin{aligned} E_{5} & = & \frac{\left(4 e^{2} Q^{2}-8 a m \omega+8 a^{2} \omega ^{2}\right) r_{-}^{2}-8 e Q r_{-} \omega\left(a^{2}+r_{-}^{2}\right) }{4 \left(r_{+}-r_{-}\right)^{2}}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{4 r_{-}^{4} \omega ^{2}+4 a^{2}\left(m-a \omega\right)^{2}+8 a e m Q r_{-}}{4 \left(r_{+}-r_{-}\right)^{2}}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{1}{4}\. \label{eq:E5_mov_radial_x_normal} \end{aligned}\] The radial part of the Klein-Gordon equation for a charged massive scalar particle in the Kerr-Newman spacetime in the exterior region of event horizon, given by Eq. ([\[eq:mov_radial_1\_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:mov_radial_1_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_radial_1_Kerr-Newman"}), can be written as ([\[eq:Heun_confluente_forma_normal\]](#eq:Heun_confluente_forma_normal){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:Heun_confluente_forma_normal"}). Therefore, the general solution of Eq. ([\[eq:mov_radial_2\_Kerr-Newman_x\]](#eq:mov_radial_2_Kerr-Newman_x){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:mov_radial_2_Kerr-Newman_x"}) over the entire range $0 \leq x < \infty$ is obtained with the use of Eq. ([\[eq:solZ\]](#eq:solZ){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:solZ"}). It is given by \[\begin{aligned} R(x) & = & \mbox{e}^{\frac{1}{2}\alpha x}(x-1)^{\frac{1}{2}\gamma}x^{\frac{1}{2}\beta}\nonumber\\ & \times & \{C_{1}\ \mbox{HeunC}(\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta,\eta;x)\nonumber\\ & + & C_{2}\ x^{-\beta}\ \mbox{HeunC}(\alpha,-\beta,\gamma,\delta,\eta;x)\}\ , \label{eq:solucao_geral_radial_Kerr-Newman_gauge} \end{aligned}\] where $C_{1}$ and $C_{2}$ are constants, and the parameters $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$, $\delta$, and $\eta$ are given by: \[\alpha=2(r_{+}-r_{-})\left(\mu^{2}-\omega^{2}\right)^{1/2}\ ; \label{eq:alpha_radial_HeunC_Kerr-Newman}\] \[\beta=\frac{2 i \left[\omega (r_{+}^{2}+a^{2})-a m-e Q r_{+}\right]}{r_{+}-r_{-}}\ ; \label{eq:beta_radial_HeunC_Kerr-Newman}\] \[\gamma=\frac{2 i \left[\omega (r_{-}^{2}+a^{2})-a m-e Q r_{-}\right]}{r_{+}-r_{-}}\ ; \label{eq:gamma_radial_HeunC_Kerr-Newman}\] \[\delta=(r_{+}-r_{-})\left[2 e Q \omega +(r_{+}+r_{-})\left(\mu ^{2}-2 \omega ^{2}\right)\right]\ ; \label{eq:delta_radial_HeunC_Kerr-Newman}\] \[\begin{aligned} \eta & = & \frac{-2 a^{2}\left(m-a \omega\right)^{2}-2 a e m Q (r_{+}+r_{-})}{(r_{+}-r_{-})^{2}}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{-\left(\lambda +r_{+}^{2} \mu ^{2}\right)(r_{+}-r_{-})^{2}}{(r_{+}-r_{-})^{2}}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{-(2 e^{2} Q^{2}-4 a m \omega+4 a^{2} \omega^{2}) r_{+} r_{-} }{(r_{+}-r_{-})^{2}}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{-2 e Q r_{-} \omega\left(a^{2}-3r_{+}^{2}\right)}{(r_{+}-r_{-})^{2}}\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{2 \omega ^{2} r_{+}^3 (r_{+}-2 r_{-})-2 e Q r_{+} \omega\left(r_{+}^{2}-a^{2}\right)}{(r_{+}-r_{-})^{2}}\. \label{eq:eta_radial_HeunC_Kerr-Newman} \end{aligned}\] These two functions form linearly independent solutions of the confluent Heun differential equation provided $\beta$ is not integer. However, there is not any specific physical reason to impose that $\beta$ should be integer. If we consider the expansion in power series of the confluent Heun functions with respect to the independent variable $x$ in a vicinity of the regular singular point $x=0$, we can write \[\begin{aligned} \mbox{HeunC}(\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta,\eta;x) & = & 1\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{(\beta+1)}(-\alpha\beta+\beta\gamma+2\eta-\alpha\nonumber\\ & + & \beta+\gamma)x\nonumber\\ & + & \frac{1}{8}\frac{1}{(\beta+1)(\beta+2)}\left(\alpha^{2}\beta^{2}\right.\nonumber\\ &-& 2\alpha\beta^{2}\gamma+\beta^{2}\gamma^{2}-4\eta\alpha\beta\nonumber\\ & + & 4\eta\beta\gamma+4\alpha^{2}\beta-2\alpha\beta^{2}-6\alpha\beta\gamma\nonumber\\ & + & 4\beta^{2}\gamma+4\beta\gamma^{2}+4\eta^{2}-8\eta\alpha\nonumber\\ & + & 8\eta\beta+8\eta\gamma+3\alpha^{2}-4\alpha\beta\nonumber\\ &-& 4\alpha\gamma+3\beta^{2}+4\beta\delta+10\beta\gamma\nonumber\\ & + & \left.3\gamma^{2}+8\eta+4\beta+4\delta+4\gamma\right)x^2\nonumber\\ & + &...\ , \label{eq:serie_HeunC_todo_x} \end{aligned}\] which is a useful form to be used in the discussion of Hawking radiation. # Hawking radiation We will consider the charged massive scalar field near the horizon in order to discuss the Hawking radiation. From Eqs. ([\[eq:homog_subs_radial\]](#eq:homog_subs_radial){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:homog_subs_radial"}) and ([\[eq:serie_HeunC_todo_x\]](#eq:serie_HeunC_todo_x){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:serie_HeunC_todo_x"}) we can see that the radial solution given by Eq. ([\[eq:solucao_geral_radial_Kerr-Newman_gauge\]](#eq:solucao_geral_radial_Kerr-Newman_gauge){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:solucao_geral_radial_Kerr-Newman_gauge"}), near the exterior event horizon, that is, when $r \rightarrow r_{+} \Rightarrow x \rightarrow 0$, behave asymptotically as \[R(r) \sim C_{1}\ (r-r_{+})^{\beta/2}+C_{2}\ (r-r_{+})^{-\beta/2}\ , \label{eq:exp_0_solucao_geral_radial_Kerr-Newman_gauge}\] where we are considering contributions only of the first term in the expansion, and all constants are included in $C_{1}$ and $C_{2}$. Thus, considering the time factor, near the black hole event horizon $r_{+}$, this solution is \[\Psi=\mbox{e}^{-i \omega t}(r-r_{+})^{\pm\beta/2}\. \label{eq:sol_onda_radial_Kerr-Newman_gauge}\] From Eq. ([\[eq:beta_radial_HeunC_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:beta_radial_HeunC_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:beta_radial_HeunC_Kerr-Newman"}), for the parameter $\beta$, we obtain \[\frac{\beta}{2}=i\left[\omega\frac{r_{+}^{2}+a^{2}}{r_{+}-r_{-}}-\left(m\frac{a}{r_{+}-r_{-}}+e\frac{Q r_{+}}{r_{+}-r_{-}}\right)\right]\. \label{eq:beta/2_solucao_geral_radial_Kerr-Newman_gauge}\] From Eq. ([\[eq:acel_grav_ext_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:acel_grav_ext_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:acel_grav_ext_Kerr-Newman"}), we have \[\frac{1}{2\kappa_{+}}=\frac{r_{+}^{2}+a^{2}}{r_{+}-r_{-}}\ \Leftrightarrow\ r_{+}-r_{-}=2\kappa_{+}\left(r_{+}^{2}+a^{2}\right)\. \label{eq:rel_2_solucao_geral_radial_Kerr-Newman_gauge}\] Then, substituting Eq. ([\[eq:rel_2\_solucao_geral_radial_Kerr-Newman_gauge\]](#eq:rel_2_solucao_geral_radial_Kerr-Newman_gauge){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:rel_2_solucao_geral_radial_Kerr-Newman_gauge"}) into Eq. ([\[eq:beta/2_solucao_geral_radial_Kerr-Newman_gauge\]](#eq:beta/2_solucao_geral_radial_Kerr-Newman_gauge){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:beta/2_solucao_geral_radial_Kerr-Newman_gauge"}), we get \[\begin{aligned} \frac{\beta}{2} & = & \frac{i}{2\kappa_{+}}\left[\omega-\left(m\frac{a}{r_{+}^{2}+a^{2}}+e\frac{Q r_{+}}{r_{+}^{2}+a^{2}}\right)\right]\nonumber\\ & = & \frac{i}{2\kappa_{+}}[\omega-(m\Omega_{+}+e\Phi_{+})]\nonumber\\ & = & \frac{i}{2\kappa_{+}}(\omega-\omega_{0})\ , \label{eq:expoente_rad_Hawking_Kerr-Newman_gauge} \end{aligned}\] where $\omega_{0}=m\Omega_{+}+e\Phi_{+}$. Therefore, on the black hole exterior horizon surface the ingoing and outgoing wave solutions are \[\Psi_{in}=\mbox{e}^{-i \omega t}(r-r_{+})^{-\frac{i}{2\kappa_{+}}(\omega-\omega_{0})}\ , \label{eq:sol_in_1_Kerr-Newman_gauge}\] \[\Psi_{out}(r>r_{+})=\mbox{e}^{-i \omega t}(r-r_{+})^{\frac{i}{2\kappa_{+}}(\omega-\omega_{0})}\. \label{eq:sol_out_2_Kerr-Newman_gauge}\] Thus, we obtained the solutions for ingoing and outgoing waves near to the exterior horizon $r_{+}$ of a Kerr-Newman black hole. These solutions for the scalar fields near the horizon will be useful to investigate Hawking radiation of charged massive scalar particles. It is worth calling attention to the fact that we are using the analytical solution of the radial part of the Klein-Gordon equation in the spacetime under consideration, differently from the calculations usually done in the literature. For consistency and completeness, we will show that our solution is exactly the same one obtained by other methods, unless a change of variable. Using the definitions of the tortoise and Eddington-Finkelstein coordinates, given by \[dr_{}=\frac{1}{\Delta}\left(r^{2}+a^{2}\right)dr\ \Rightarrow \label{eq:coord_tortoise_1.1}\] \[\ln(r-r_{+})=\frac{1}{r_{+}^{2}+a^{2}}\left.\frac{d\Delta}{dr}\right\|_{r=r_{+}}r_{}=2\kappa_{+}r_{}\ , \label{eq:coord_tortoise_1}\] \[\hat{r}=\frac{\omega-\omega_{0}}{\omega}r_{}\ , \label{eq:hatr}\] \[v=t+\hat{r} \label{eq:coord_Eddington-Finkelstein}\ ,\] we have the following ingoing wave solution: \[\begin{aligned} \Psi_{in} & = & \mbox{e}^{-i \omega v}\mbox{e}^{i \omega \hat{r}}(r-r_{+})^{-\frac{i}{2\kappa_{+}}(\omega-\omega_{0})}\nonumber\\ & = & \mbox{e}^{-i \omega v}\mbox{e}^{i (\omega-\omega_{0}) r_{}}(r-r_{+})^{-\frac{i}{2\kappa_{+}}(\omega-\omega_{0})}\nonumber\\ & = & \mbox{e}^{-i \omega v}(r-r_{+})^{\frac{i}{2\kappa_{+}}(\omega-\omega_{0})}(r-r_{+})^{-\frac{i}{2\kappa_{+}}(\omega-\omega_{0})}\nonumber\\ & = & \mbox{e}^{-i \omega v}\. \label{eq:sol_in_1_Kerr-Newman_tortoise} \end{aligned}\] The outgoing wave solution is given by: \[\begin{aligned} \Psi_{out}(r>r_{+}) & = & \mbox{e}^{-i \omega v}\mbox{e}^{i \omega \hat{r}}(r-r_{+})^{\frac{i}{2\kappa_{+}}(\omega-\omega_{0})}\nonumber\\ & = & \mbox{e}^{-i \omega v}\mbox{e}^{i (\omega-\omega_{0}) r_{}}(r-r_{+})^{\frac{i}{2\kappa_{+}}(\omega-\omega_{0})}\nonumber\\ & = & \mbox{e}^{-i \omega v}(r-r_{+})^{\frac{i}{2\kappa_{+}}(\omega-\omega_{0})}(r-r_{+})^{\frac{i}{2\kappa_{+}}(\omega-\omega_{0})}\nonumber\\ & = & \mbox{e}^{-i \omega v}(r-r_{+})^{\frac{i}{\kappa_{+}}(\omega-\omega_{0})}\. \label{eq:sol_out_2_Kerr-Newman_tortoise} \end{aligned}\] The solutions ([\[eq:sol_in_1\_Kerr-Newman_tortoise\]](#eq:sol_in_1_Kerr-Newman_tortoise){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:sol_in_1_Kerr-Newman_tortoise"}) and ([\[eq:sol_out_2\_Kerr-Newman_tortoise\]](#eq:sol_out_2_Kerr-Newman_tortoise){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:sol_out_2_Kerr-Newman_tortoise"}) are exactly the solutions obtained by Zhang & Zhao and Huaifan et al.. # Analytic extension In this section, we obtain by analytic continuation a real damped part of the outgoing wave solution of the scalar field which will be used to construct an explicit expression for the decay rate $\Gamma$. This real damped part corresponds (at least in part) to the temporal contribution to the decay rate found in the tunneling method of Hawking radiation. From Eq. ([\[eq:sol_out_2\_Kerr-Newman_tortoise\]](#eq:sol_out_2_Kerr-Newman_tortoise){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:sol_out_2_Kerr-Newman_tortoise"}), we see that this solution is not analytical in the exterior event horizon $r=r_{+}$. By analytic continuation, rotating $-\pi$ through the lower-half complex $r$ plane, we obtain \[(r-r_{+}) \rightarrow \left\|r-r_{+}\right\|\mbox{e}^{-i\pi}=(r_{+}-r)\mbox{e}^{-i\pi}\. \label{eq:rel_3_Kerr-Newman}\] Thus, the outgoing wave solution on the horizon surface $r_{+}$ is \[\Psi_{out}(r<r_{+})=\mbox{e}^{-i\omega v}(r_{+}-r)^{\frac{i}{\kappa_{+}}(\omega-\omega_{0})}\mbox{e}^{\frac{\pi}{\kappa_{+}}(\omega-\omega_{0})}\. \label{eq:sol_1_out_4_Kerr-Newman}\] Now, using Eq. ([\[eq:coord_tortoise_1\]](#eq:coord_tortoise_1){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:coord_tortoise_1"}), the solution given by Eq. ([\[eq:sol_1\_out_4\_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:sol_1_out_4_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:sol_1_out_4_Kerr-Newman"}) can also be written in the following form \[\Psi_{out}(r<r_{+})=\mbox{e}^{-i\omega v}\mbox{e}^{2i(\omega-\omega_{0})r_{*}}\mbox{e}^{\frac{\pi}{\kappa_{+}}(\omega-\omega_{0})}\. \label{eq:sol_2_out_4_Kerr-Newman}\] Eqs. ([\[eq:sol_out_2\_Kerr-Newman_tortoise\]](#eq:sol_out_2_Kerr-Newman_tortoise){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:sol_out_2_Kerr-Newman_tortoise"}) and ([\[eq:sol_2\_out_4\_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:sol_2_out_4_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:sol_2_out_4_Kerr-Newman"}) describe the outgoing wave outside and inside of the black hole, respectively. Therefore, for an outgoing wave of a particle with energy $\omega$, charge $e$ and angular momentum $m$, the outgoing decay rate or the relative scattering probability of the scalar wave at the event horizon surface $r=r_{+}$ is given by \[\Gamma_{+}=\left\|\frac{\Psi_{out}(r>r_{+})}{\Psi_{out}(r<r_{+})}\right\|^{2}=\mbox{e}^{-\frac{2\pi}{\kappa_{+}}(\omega-\omega_{0})}\. \label{eq:taxa_refl_Kerr-Newman}\] This result was formally obtained in the literature in different contexts. # Radiation spectrum After the black hole event horizon radiates particles with energy $\omega$, charge $e$ and angular momentum $m$, in order to consider the reaction of the radiation of the particle to the spacetime, we must replace $M,Q,J$ by $M-\omega,Q-e,J-m$, respectively, in the line element of Kerr-Newman spacetime ([\[eq:metrica_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:metrica_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:metrica_Kerr-Newman"}). Doing these changes, we must guarantee that the total energy, angular momentum and charge of spacetime are all conserved, that is, \[\begin{array}{r}-\omega=\Delta E\ ,\\-e=\Delta Q\ ,\\-m=\Delta J\ , \end{array} \label{eq:param_cons_Kerr-Newman}\] where $\Delta E$, $\Delta Q$, and $\Delta J$ are the energy, charge, and angular momentum variations of the black hole event horizon, before and after the emission of radiation, respectively. Substituting Eqs. ([\[eq:1_lei_termo_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:1_lei_termo_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:1_lei_termo_Kerr-Newman"}) and ([\[eq:param_cons_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:param_cons_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:param_cons_Kerr-Newman"}) into Eq.([\[eq:taxa_refl_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:taxa_refl_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:taxa_refl_Kerr-Newman"}), we obtain the outgoing decay rate at the event horizon surface $r=r_{+}$: \[\begin{aligned} \Gamma_{+} & = & \mbox{e}^{-\frac{2\pi}{\kappa_{+}}(-\Delta E-m\Omega_{+}-e\Phi_{+})}\nonumber\\ & = & \mbox{e}^{-\frac{2\pi}{\kappa_{+}}(-\Delta E+\Omega_{+}\Delta J+\Phi_{+}\Delta Q)}\nonumber\\ & = & \mbox{e}^{-\frac{2\pi}{\kappa_{+}}(-T_{+}\Delta S_{+})}\nonumber\\ & = & \mbox{e}^{\Delta S_{+}}\ , \label{eq:taxa_refl_param_Kerr-Newman} \end{aligned}\] where we have used Eq. ([\[eq:temp_Hawking_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:temp_Hawking_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:temp_Hawking_Kerr-Newman"}). $\Delta S_{+}$ is the change of the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy, compared before and after the emission of radiation, and obtained from the expressions for the entropy ([\[eq:entropia_Kerr-Newman\]](#eq:entropia_Kerr-Newman){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:entropia_Kerr-Newman"}) and for the exterior event horizon ([\[eq:sol_padrao_Kerr-Newman_1\]](#eq:sol_padrao_Kerr-Newman_1){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:sol_padrao_Kerr-Newman_1"}), as follows: \[\begin{aligned} \Delta S_{+} & = & S_{+}(M-\omega,Q-e,J-m)-S_{+}(M,Q,J)\nonumber\\ & = & \pi\left[r_{+}^{2}(M-\omega,Q-e,J-m)+a^{2}(M-\omega,J-m)\right]\nonumber\\ &-& \pi\left[r_{+}^{2}(M,Q,J)+a^{2}(M,J)\right]\nonumber\\ & = & \pi[2(M-\omega)^{2}-(Q-e)^{2}\nonumber\\ & + & 2(M-\omega)\sqrt{(M-\omega)^{2}-a_{\omega}^{2}-(Q-e)^{2}}\nonumber\\ & + & Q^{2}-2M^{2}-2M\sqrt{M^{2}-a^{2}-Q^{2}}]\ , \label{eq:entropia_Bekenstein-Hawking_Kerr-Newman} \end{aligned}\] where $a=a(M,J)=J/M$ and \[a_{\omega}^{2}=\left(\frac{J-m}{M-\omega}\right)^{2}\. \label{eq:a_omega_Kerr-Newman}\] According to the Damour-Ruffini-Sannan method, a correct wave describing a particle flying off of the black hole is given by \[\begin{aligned} \Psi_{\omega}(r) & = & N_{\omega}\ [\ H(r-r_{+})\ \Psi_{\omega}^{out}(r-r_{+})\nonumber\\ & + & H(r_{+}-r)\ \Psi_{\omega}^{out}(r_{+}-r)\ \mbox{e}^{\frac{\pi}{\kappa_{+}}(\omega-\omega_{0})}\ ]\ , \label{eq:solucao_geral_onda_out_Kerr-Newman} \end{aligned}\] where $N_{\omega}$ is the normalization constant, such that \[\left\langle \Psi_{\omega_{1}}(r) \| \Psi_{\omega_{2}}(r) \right\rangle=-\delta(\omega_{1}-\omega_{2})\ , \label{eq:cond_norm}\] where $H(x)$ is the Heaviside function and $\Psi_{\omega}^{out}(x)$ are the normalized wave functions given, from Eq. ([\[eq:sol_out_2\_Kerr-Newman_tortoise\]](#eq:sol_out_2_Kerr-Newman_tortoise){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:sol_out_2_Kerr-Newman_tortoise"}), by \[\Psi_{\omega}^{out}(x)=\mbox{e}^{-i \omega v}x^{\frac{i}{\kappa_{+}}(\omega-\omega_{0})}\. \label{eq:sol_out_2_Kerr-Newman_tortoise_x}\] Thus, from the normalization condition \[\left\langle \Psi_{\omega}(r) \| \Psi_{\omega}(r) \right\rangle=1=\left\|N_{\omega}\right\|^{2}\left[\mbox{e}^{\frac{2\pi}{\kappa_{+}}(\omega-\omega_{0})}-1\right]\ , \label{eq:norm_onda_out_Kerr-Newman}\] we get the resulting Hawking radiation spectrum of charged scalar particles \[\left\|N_{\omega}\right\|^{2}=\frac{1}{\mbox{e}^{\frac{2\pi}{\kappa_{+}}(\omega-\omega_{0})}-1}=\frac{1}{\mbox{e}^{\frac{\hbar(\omega-\omega_{0})}{k_{B}T_{+}}}-1}\. \label{eq:espectro_rad_Kerr-Newman_2}\] Therefore, we can see that the resulting Hawking radiation spectrum of scalar particles has a thermal character, analogous to the blackbody spectrum, where $k_{B}T_{+}=\hbar\kappa_{+}/2\pi$, with $k_{B}$ being the Boltzmann constant. Note that Planck and Boltzmann's constants were introduced into Eq. ([\[eq:espectro_rad_Kerr-Newman_2\]](#eq:espectro_rad_Kerr-Newman_2){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:espectro_rad_Kerr-Newman_2"}) in order to have the correct dimension. # Conclusions In this paper, we presented analytic solutions for both angular and radial parts of the Klein-Gordon equation for a charged massive scalar field in the Kerr-Newman spacetime. These solutions are analytic in whole spacetime, namely, in the region between the event horizon and infinity. The radial part of the obtained solutions generalizes a previous result in the sense that now we are considering a charged massive scalar field coupled to the electromagnetic field associated with the gravitational source. The solution is given in terms of the confluent Heun functions, and is valid over the range $0 \leq x < \infty$. From these analytic solutions, we obtained the solutions for ingoing and outgoing waves near the exterior horizon of a Kerr-Newman black hole, and used these results to discuss the Hawking radiation effect. We considered the properties of the confluent Heun functions to obtain the results. This approach has the advantage that it is not necessary the introduction of any coordinate system, as for example, the particular one or tortoise and Eddington-Finkelstein coordinates.	{'timestamp': '2014-08-01T02:10:02', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5397', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5397'}
# Introduction {#S1} In the recent years, the charmless three-body decays of $B$ mesons have attached a great deal of attention, because by studying them one can determine the Cabibbo-Kabayashi-Maskawa (CKM) parameters or search for the possible new physics effect beyond the standard model. For example, the Dalitz-plot analysis combined with flavor $\mathrm{SU}(3)$ symmetry allows us to extract the angle $\gamma$ cleanly from $B \to K \pi\pi$ and $B \to KKK$ decays. However, the three-body decays of $B$ mesons are more complicated than the two-body cases, because both resonant (vector or scalar) and nonresonant contributions involve the hadronic matrix elements. The interference between resonant and nonresonant amplitudes makes it rather hard to disentangle these distinct contributions and extract the nonresonant one, so it is very difficult to measure the direct three-body decays experimentally. Over the recent years, thanks to the two $B$ factories and LHCb experiment, remarkable progress in measuring the branching fractions and direct $CP$ asymmetries of the three-body decays has been made by using the Dalitz-plot analysis (for a review see ref. ). On the theoretical side, the charmless three-body decays of heavy mesons have been studied within the different approaches, such as the factorization approach (FA) [@Deshpande:1995nu; @Fajfer:1998yc; @Bajc:1998bs; @Fajfer:2004cx; @Cheng:2002qu; @Cheng:2005bg; @Cheng:2005ug; @Cheng:2007si; @Cheng:2013dua], diagrammatic approach combined with $\mathrm{SU}(3)$ symmetry [@Gronau:2003ep; @Gronau:2005ax; @Lorier:2010xf; @Bhattacharya:2013cvn], perturbative QCD approach, and other approaches. FA, based on the phenomenological factorization model, has been applied in calculating three-body decays of heavy meson widely, although factorization has not been proved in the three-body decays. Within the FA, most predicted branching fractions and direct $CP$ asymmetries of $B \to PPP$ decays [@Cheng:2002qu; @Cheng:2005bg; @Cheng:2005ug; @Cheng:2007si; @Cheng:2013dua] agree with the experimental data well, except for decay $\overline B^0 \to K^+K^-\pi^0$. Here, we will review the FA briefly by taking $B^-\to \pi^+\pi^-\pi^-$ as an example. Under the FA, the amplitude of decay $B^-\to \pi^+\pi^-\pi^-$ is usually split into three distinct factorizable terms: (i) the current-induced process with a meson emission, $\langle B^-\to \pi^+\pi^-\rangle\times \langle 0\to \pi^-\rangle$, (ii) the transition process, $\langle B^-\to \pi^-\rangle\times \langle 0\to \pi^+\pi^-\rangle$, and (iii) the annihilation process $\langle B^-\to 0\rangle\times \langle 0\to \pi^+\pi^-\pi^-\rangle$, where $\langle A\to B\rangle$ stands for an $A\to B$ transition matrix element. One of the nonresonant contributions due to $\langle B^-\to \pi^+\pi^-\rangle$ has been studied on the basis of the heavy meson chiral perturbative theory (HMChPT), although applicability of this framework in the whole kinematics region is still controversial. However, it could lead to large branching fraction (${\cal O}(10^{-5})$), which disagrees with the experimental data ($5.3 \times10^{-6}$) from BaBar. In fact, this issue can be understood considering the applicability of the HMChPT. When the HMChPT is applied to three-body decays, two of the final-state pseudoscalars should be soft. If the soft meson result is assumed to be the same in the whole Dalitz plot, the decay rate will be greatly overestimated. To overcome this issue, Cheng et al. proposed in refs to parameterize the momentum dependence of nonresonant amplitudes $\langle B \to PP\rangle$ in an exponential form $e^{-\alpha_{_{\rm NR}}p_B\cdot(p_i+p_j)}$ so that the HMChPT results are recovered in the soft pseudoscalar meson limit. The tree-dominated $B^-\to\pi^+\pi^-\pi^-$ decay data is used to fix the unknown parameter $\alpha_{_{\rm NR}}$. Besides from the current-induced process, the matrix elements $\langle \pi^+\pi^-\|\bar q\gamma_\mu q\|0\rangle$ and $\langle \pi^+\pi^-\|\bar d d\|0\rangle$ also receive nonresonant contributions. In principle, the weak vector form factor of the former matrix element can be related to the charged pion electromagnetic (e.m.) form factors. However, unlike the kaon case, the time-like e.m. form factors of the pions are not measured well enough allowing us to determine the nonresonant parts. Therefore, the nonresonant contribution to $\langle \pi^+\pi^-\|\bar q\gamma_\mu q\|0\rangle$ is always ignored. The matrix element $\langle \pi^+\pi^-\|\bar d d\|0\rangle$ is related to $\langle K^+K^-\|\bar ss\|0\rangle$ via SU(3) flavor symmetry. As for the resonant contributions to three-body decays, vector and scalar resonances contribute to the two-body matrix elements $\langle P_1P_2\|V_\mu\|0\rangle$ and $\langle P_1P_2\|S\|0\rangle$, respectively. They can also contribute to the three-body matrix element $\langle P_1P_2\|V_\mu-A_\mu\|0\rangle$. Resonant effects are described in terms of the usual Breit-Wigner formalism. In this manner, the relevant resonances which contribute to the 3-body decays of interest could be figured out. In conjunction with the nonresonant contribution, the total rates for three-body decays are well calculated. Very recently, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of $1.0~\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ recorded at a centre-of-mass energy of 7 TeV, LHCb collaboration published their first measurements of the branching fractions of three-body decays of $B_s^0$ meson as follows: \[\begin{aligned} Br{(B_s^0 \to K^0\pi^+\pi^-)} &=& (14.3 \pm 2.8 \pm 1.8 \pm 0.6)\times10^{-6} \,,\\ Br{(B_s^0 \to K^0K^\pm\pi^\mp)} &=& (73.6 \pm 5.7 \pm 6.9 \pm 3.0)\times10^{-6} \,,\\ Br{(B_s^0 \to K^0K^+K^-)} &\in& [0.2;3.4] \times10^{-6} \; {\rm at \;\; 90\% \; CL} \. \end{aligned}\] Since these decays have never been explored before, we will calculate the branching fractions in this work using the FA proposed by Cheng et.al. so as to test FA in $\overline B^0_s$ decays. The resonant and nonresonant contributions of these decays will be studied, which are important in measuring the branching fractions of $\overline B^0_s \to K V$ and $\overline B^0_s \to K S$ experimentally. Furthermore, we will calculate the $CP$ asymmetries of these decays, which may be helpful to extract the CKM angle $\gamma$. All results could be checked in the current LHCb experiment and Super-b factory in the future. In the following work, we will systematically use the FA to calculate the $\overline B_s ^0 \to K^0 h^+h^{\prime-}$ and present the formulas in Sec.[2](#S2){reference-type="ref" reference="S2"}. The numerical results and some discussions are given in Sec. [3](#S3){reference-type="ref" reference="S3"}. We will summarize this work in Sec. [4](#S4){reference-type="ref" reference="S4"} lastly. # Analytic Formalism {#S2} ## The Effective Hamiltonian Under the factorization hypothesis, the matrix elements of the decay amplitudes are given by \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:factamp} \langle P_1P_2P_3\|{\cal H}_{\rm eff}\| \overline B_s ^0 \rangle =\frac{G_F}{\sqrt2}\sum_{p=u,c}\lambda_p^{(r)} \langle P_1P_2P_3\|T_p^{(r)}\| \overline B_s ^0 \rangle, \end{aligned}\] where $\lambda_p^{(r)}\equiv V_{pb} V^_{pr}$ with $r=d,s$. For $K\pi\pi$ and $KKK$ modes, $r=d$; and for $KK\pi$ channels, $r=s$. The Hamiltonian $T_p^{(r)}$ has the expression \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:Tp} T_p^{(r)}&=& a_1 \delta_{pu} (\bar u b)_{V-A}\otimes(\bar r u)_{V-A} +a_2 \delta_{pu} (\bar r b)_{V-A}\otimes(\bar u u)_{V-A} +a_3(\bar r b)_{V-A}\otimes\sum_q(\bar q q)_{V-A} \nonumber\\ &&+a^p_4\sum_q(\bar q b)_{V-A}\otimes(\bar r q)_{V-A} +a_5(\bar r b)_{V-A}\otimes\sum_q(\bar q q)_{V+A} \nonumber\\ &&-2 a^p_6\sum_q(\bar q b)_{S-P}\otimes(\bar r q)_{S+P} +a_7(\bar r b)_{V-A}\otimes\sum_q\frac{3}{2} e_q (\bar q q)_{V+A} \nonumber\\ &&-2a^p_8\sum_q(\bar q b)_{S-P}\otimes\frac{3}{2} e_q (\bar r q)_{S+P} +a_9(\bar r b)_{V-A}\otimes\sum_q\frac{3}{2}e_q (\bar q q)_{V-A}\nonumber\\ &&+a^p_{10}\sum_q(\bar q b)_{V-A}\otimes\frac{3}{2}e_q(\bar r q)_{V-A}, \end{aligned}\] with $(\bar q q')_{V\pm A}\equiv \bar q\gamma_\mu(1\pm\gamma_5) q'$, $(\bar q q')_{S\pm P}\equiv\bar q(1\pm\gamma_5) q'$ and a summation over $q=u,d,s$ being implied. For the effective Wilson coefficients at the renormalization scale $\mu=2.1$ GeV, we shall follow and use \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:ai} && a_1\approx0.99+0.037 i,\quad a_2\approx 0.19-0.11i, \quad a_3\approx-0.002+0.004i, \quad a_5\approx 0.0054-0.005i, \nonumber \\ && a_4^u\approx-0.03-0.02i, \quad a_4^c\approx -0.04-0.008i,\quad a_6^u\approx-0.06-0.02i, \quad a_6^c\approx-0.06-0.006i, \nonumber\\ &&a_7\approx 0.54\times 10^{-4} i,\quad a_8^u\approx (4.5-0.5i)\times 10^{-4},\quad a_8^c\approx (4.4-0.3i)\times 10^{-4}, \nonumber\\ && a_9\approx-0.010-0.0002i,\quad a_{10}^u \approx (-58.3+ 86.1 i)\times10^{-5},\quad a_{10}^c \approx (-60.3 + 88.8 i)\times10^{-5}, \end{aligned}\] In the above coefficients, the strong phases are from vertex corrections and penguin contractions, which have been calculated within the QCD factorization approach. ## $\overline B_s^0\to K^0\pi^+\pi^-$ With the effective Hamiltonian and the equation of motion, we obtain the $\overline B_s^0\to K^0\pi^+\pi^-$ decay amplitude as \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:AKpipi} \langle K^0 \pi^+ \pi^-\|T_p\|\overline B_s^0\rangle &=& \langle K^0\pi^+ \|(\bar u b)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \langle \pi^-\|(\bar d u)_{V-A}\|0\rangle \left[a_1 \delta_{pu}+a^p_4+a_{10}^p-r_\chi^\pi(a^p_6+a^p_8)\right] \nonumber\\ && + \langle \pi^+ \pi^-\|(\bar s b)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \langle \pi^-\|(\bar d s)_{V-A}\|0\rangle \left[a^p_4-\frac{1}{2}a_{10}^p-r_\chi^K(a^p_6-\frac{1}{2}a^p_8)\right] \nonumber \\ && + \langle K^0\|(\bar db)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle\langle\pi^+\pi^-\|(\bar uu)_{V-A}\|0\rangle\Big[a_2\delta_{pu}+a_3+a_5+a_7+a_9\Big] \nonumber \\ && + \langle K^0\|(\bar db)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle\langle\pi^+\pi^-\|(\bar dd)_{V-A}\|0\rangle\Big[a_3+a_4^p+a_5-{1\over 2}(a_7+a_9+a_{10}^p)\Big] \nonumber \\ && + \langle K^0\|(\bar db)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle\langle\pi^+\pi^-\|(\bar ss)_{V-A}\|0\rangle\Big[a_3+a_5-{1\over 2}(a_7+a_9)\Big] \nonumber \\ && +\langle K^0\|\bar db\|\overline B_s^0\rangle\langle\pi^+\pi^-\|\bar dd\|0\rangle\Big[-2a_6^p+a_8^p\Big] \nonumber \\ && +\langle K^0 \pi^+ \pi^-\|(\bar sd)_{V-A}\|0\rangle \langle0\|(\bar sb)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \Big[a_4^p-{1\over 2}a_{10}^p\Big] \nonumber \\ && +\langle K^0 \pi^+ \pi^-\|\bar s(1+\gamma_5)d\|0\rangle\langle0\|\bar s\gamma_5b\|\overline B_s^0\rangle\Big[2a_6^p-a_8^p\Big], \end{aligned}\] where $r_\chi^\pi(\mu)={2m_\pi^2\over m_b(\mu)(m_d(\mu)-m_u(\mu))}$. It should be noted that $\langle \pi^+\pi^-\|(\bar dd)_{V-A}\|0\rangle=-\langle \pi^+\pi^-\|(\bar uu)_{V-A}\|0\rangle$ because of isospin symmetry. Besides, the matrix element $\langle \pi^+\pi^-\|(\bar ss)_{V-A}\|0\rangle$ is suppressed heavily by the Okubo-Zweig-Iizuka (OZI) rule. Moreover, there exist two weak annihilation contributions, where the $\overline B_s^0$ meson is annihilated into vacuum and a final state with three mesons is then created, as the last two term are shown in the above equation. However, from the results of $B \to PPP$ decays, the contributions from annihilations are fairly small because of power and $\alpha_s$ suppressions, so we will ignore them in the numerical calculations in the current work. [^1] For the current-induced process, the three-body matrix element $\langle K^0\pi^+ \|(\bar u b)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle$ could be parameterized as \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:romegah} \langle K^0(p_1)\pi^+ (p_2) \|(\bar u b)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0(p_B)\rangle &=&i r (p_B-p_1-p_2)_\mu+i\omega_+(p_2+p_1)_\mu+i\omega_-(p_2-p_1)_\mu \nonumber\\ &&+h\,\epsilon_{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}p_B^\nu (p_2+p_1)^\alpha(p_2-p_1)^\beta. \end{aligned}\] The form factors $\omega_\pm$ and $r$ have the expressions as \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:r&omega} \omega_+ &=&-{g\over f_\pi f_K}\,{f_{B^}m_{B^}\sqrt{m_{B_s}m_{B^}}\over s_{23}-m_{B^}^2}\left[1-{(p_B-p_1)\cdot p_1\over m_{B^}^2}\right]+{f_{B_s}\over 2f_\pi f_K}, \nonumber \\ \omega_-&=& {g\over f_\pi f_K}\,{f_{B^}m_{B^}\sqrt{m_{B_s}m_{B^}}\over s_{23}-m_{B^}^2}\left[1+{(p_B-p_1)\cdot p_1\over m_{B^}^2}\right], \nonumber \\ r &=& {f_{B_s}\over 2f_\pi f_K}-{f_{B_s}\over f_\pi f_K}\,{p_B\cdot(p_2-p_1)\over (p_B-p_1-p_2)^2-m_{B_s}^2}+{2gf_{B^}\over f_\pi f_K}\sqrt{m_{B_s}\over m_{B^}}\,{(p_B-p_1)\cdot p_1\over s_{23}-m_{B^}^2} \nonumber \\ &&-{4g^2f_{B_s}\over f_\pi f_K}\,{m_{B_s}m_{B^}\over (p_B-p_1-p_2)^2-m_{B_s}^2}\,{p_1\!\cdot\!p_2-p_1\!\cdot\!(p_B-p_1)\,p_2\!\cdot\! (p_B-p_1)/m_{B^}^2 \over s_{23}-m_{B^}^2 }, \end{aligned}\] where $s_{ij}\equiv (p_i+p_j)^2$. $g$ is a heavy-flavor independent strong coupling which has been extracted from the CLEO measurement of the $D^{+}$ decay width, $\|g\|=0.59\pm0.01\pm0.07$. In this work, we also follow and adopt its sign as negative. Thus, we drive the current-induced amplitude as: \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:AHMChPT} &&A_{\rm current-ind}\equiv\langle \pi^-(p_3)\|(\bar du)_{V-A}\|0\rangle \langle K^0(p_1)\pi^+ (p_2)\|(\bar u b)_{V-A}\|B^-\rangle \nonumber\\ && =-\frac{f_\pi}{2}\left[2 m_3^2 r+(m_B^2-s_{12}-m_3^2) \omega_+ +(s_{23}-s_{13}-m_2^2+m_1^2) \omega_-\right]\,e^{-\alpha_{NR} p_B\cdot(p_{1}+p_{2})}e^{i\phi_{12}}. \end{aligned}\] As stated in Sec.[1](#S1){reference-type="ref" reference="S1"}, the exponential form $e^{-\alpha_{\rm NR} p_B\cdot(p_{1}+p_{2})}$ is introduced so that the HMChPT results are recovered in the soft meson region and \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:alphaNR} \alpha_{\rm NR}=0.081^{+0.015}_{-0.009}\,{\rm GeV}^{-2}, \end{aligned}\] which is constrained from the tree dominated decay $B^-\to \pi^+\pi^-\pi^-$ [^2]. The unknown strong phase $\phi_{12}$ is set to be zero for simplicity. In this decay mode, vector meson ($K^$) and scalar resonances ($K_{0}^(1430)$) also contribute to the three-body matrix element $\langle K^0(p_1)\pi^+ (p_2) \|(\bar u b)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0(p_B)\rangle$, whose effects are described in terms of the usual Breit-Wigner formalism. So, we have the expression as \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:m.e.pole} \langle K^0(p_1)\pi^+(p_2)\|(\bar ub)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle^R & =& {g^{K^{+}\to K^0\pi^+}\over s_{12}-m_{K^{+}}^2+im_{K^{+}}\Gamma_{K^{+}}}\sum_{\rm pol} \varepsilon^\cdot (p_1-p_2)\langle K^{+}\|(\bar ub)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \nonumber \\ &-& {g^{{K_0^{+}}\to K^0\pi^+}\over s_{12}-m_{K_0^{+}}^2+im_{K_0^{+}}\Gamma_{K_0^{+}}}\langle K_0^{+}\|(\bar ub)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle, \end{aligned}\] where we have ignored the contribution of $K^(1410), K^(1680),\cdots$. Hence, \[\begin{aligned} \label{3formfactor} && \langle K^0(p_1)\pi^+(p_2)\|(\bar ub)_{V-A}\|\overline B^0_s\rangle^R ~\langle \pi^-(p_3)\|(\bar du)_{V-A}\|0\rangle \nonumber \\ &=&{-f_\pi}\,{g^{K^{+}\to K^0\pi^+}\over s_{12}-m_{K^}^2+im_{K^}\Gamma_{K^}}\left\{\Big[s_{13}-s_{23}+\frac{(m_{B_s}^2-m_\pi^2)(m_\pi^2-m_K^2)} {m_{K^}^2}\Big]\Big[ m_{K^}A_0^{B_sK^}(q^2)\right.\nonumber \\&&+\frac{A_2^{B_sK^}(q^2)}{2(m_{B_s}+m_{K^})}(s_{12}-m_{K^}^2) \Big]+\left (m_\pi^2-m_K^2\right)\left (1-\frac{s_{12}}{m_{K^}^2} \right)\Big[ m_{K^}A_0^{B_sK^}(q^2) \nonumber\\&&\left.-(m_{B_s}+m_{K^})A_0^{B_sK^}(q^2) +\frac{A_2^{B_sK^}(q^2)}{2(m_{B_s}+m_{K^})}(s_{12}-m_{K^}^2) \Big]\right\}\nonumber\\&& + f_K{g^{K_{0}^\to K^-\pi^+}\over s_{12}-m_{K_{0}^}^2+im_{K_{0}^}\Gamma_{K_{0}^}}\Big[(m_{B_s}^2-m_{K_{0}^}^2)F_0^{B_sK_0^}(q^2) +(m_{K_{0}^}^2-s_{12})F_1^{B_sK_0^}(q^2)\Big]. \end{aligned}\] with $q^2=(p_B-p_1-p_2)^2=p_3^2$. In the above formulaes, the definitions of decay constants and form factors are referred to Refs.. For the transition processes that are penguin induced or color suppressed, because the time-like e.m. form factors of two pions have not been measured well enough, we will thus ignore the nonresonant contributions and only consider the contributions from the vector and scalar mesons. Hence, the amplitude of the transition process is read as \[\begin{aligned} && \langle \pi^+(p_2)\pi^-(p_3)\|(\bar uu)_{V-A}\|0\rangle^R \langle K^0(p_1)\|(\bar d b)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle =-F_1^{B_sK}(s_{23})F^{\pi^+\pi^-}_R(s_{23})\left(s_{12}-s_{13}\right), \nonumber \\ && \langle \pi^+(p_2)\pi^-(p_3)\| \bar dd\|0\rangle^R \langle K^0(p_1)\| \bar db\|\overline B_s^0\rangle=-{m_{B_s}^2-m_K^2\over m_b-m_d} F_0^{B_sK}(s_{23})\sum_{i}\frac{m_{{f_0}_i} \bar f^d_{{f_0}_i} g^{{f_0}_i\to \pi^+\pi^-}}{s_{23}-m_{{f_0}_i}^2+i m_{{f_0}_i}\Gamma_{{f_0}_i}}, \end{aligned}\] with the definition of the form factor $F^{\pi^+\pi^-}_R$: \[\begin{aligned} F^{\pi^+\pi^-}_R(s)={1\over\sqrt{2}}\sum_i{m_{\rho_i}f_{\rho_i}g^{\rho_i\to \pi^+\pi^-}\over s-m_{\rho_i}^2+im_{\rho_i}\Gamma_{\rho_i}}, \end{aligned}\] where $\rho_i=\rho,\rho(1450),\cdots$ and $f_0=f_0(980),f_0(1370),f_0(1500),\cdots$. The scalar decay constant $\bar f_{{f_0}_i}^q$ is defined by $\langle {f_0}_i\|\bar q q\|0\rangle=m_{{f_0}_i} \bar f^q_{{f_0}_i}$, and $g^{{f_0}_i\to \pi^+\pi^-}$ is the strong coupling of the ${f_0}_i\to \pi^+\pi^-$ decay. In the practical numerical calculations, the higher excited states of vector mesons have been ignored for their negligible contributions. For the scalar meson $f_0(980)$, we will consider it as the conventional $q\bar q$, though the quark structure of the light scalar mesons below or near 1 GeV has been quite controversial. Because some experimental evidences indicate that $f_0(980)$ is not purely an $s\bar s$ state, we write the flavor wave functions of the $f_0(980)$ as: \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:fsigmaMix} \|f_0(980)\rangle = \|s\bar s\rangle\cos\theta+\|n\bar n\rangle\sin\theta, \end{aligned}\] with $n\bar n\equiv (\bar uu+\bar dd)/\sqrt{2}$. Experimental implications for the mixing angle have been discussed in detail in. By assuming 2-quark bound state for $f_0(980)$, the observed large rates of $B \to f_0(980)K$ and $f_0(980)K^$ modes can be explained in QCDF with the mixing angle $\theta$ in the vicinity of $20^\circ$. So, we use $\theta=20^\circ$ in this work. ## $\overline B_s^0\to K^0 K^+ K^-$ The factorizable $\overline B_s^0\to K^0 K^+ K^-$ decay amplitude is given by \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:AKKK} \langle K^0 K^+K^-\|T_p\|\overline B_s^0\rangle &=& \langle K^+K^-\|(\bar sb)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \langle K^0\|(\bar ds)_{V-A}\|0\rangle \left[a^p_4-{1\over 2}a_{10}^p-r_\chi^K(a^p_6-{1\over 2}a^p_8)\right] \nonumber\\ && + \langle K^0\|(\bar db)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \langle K^+K^-\|(\bar uu)_{V-A}\|0\rangle\Big[a_2\delta_{pu}+a_3+a_5+a_7+a_9\Big] \nonumber \\ && + \langle K^0\|(\bar db)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \langle K^+K^-\|(\bar dd)_{V-A}\|0\rangle\Big[a_3+a_4^p+a_5-{1\over 2}(a_7+a_9+a_{10}^p)\Big] \nonumber \\ && + \langle K^0\|(\bar db)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \langle K^+K^-\|(\bar ss)_{V-A}\|0\rangle\Big[a_3+a_5-{1\over 2}(a_7+a_9)\Big] \nonumber \\ &&+\langle K^+\|(\bar u b)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \langle K^-K^0\|(\bar d u)_{V-A}\|0\rangle \Big[a_1\delta_{pu}+a_4^p+a_{10}^p\Big]\nonumber\\ && +\langle K^0\|\bar db\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \langle K^+K^-\|\bar dd\|0\rangle \Big[-2a_6^p+a_8^p\Big] \nonumber \\ &&+\langle K^+\|\bar u b\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \langle K^-K^0\|\bar d u\|0\rangle \Big[-2a^p_6-2a^p_8\Big]\nonumber\\ && +\langle K^0 K^+K^-\|(\bar ds)_{V-A}\|0\rangle \langle0\|(\bar sb)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle\Big[a_4^p-{1\over 2}a_{10}^p\Big] \nonumber \\ && +\langle K^0 K^+K^-\|\bar d(1+\gamma_5)s\|0\rangle \langle0\|\bar s\gamma_5b\|\overline B_s^0\rangle\Big[2a_6^p-a_8^p\Big]. \end{aligned}\] For the current-induced process with a kaon emission, the form factors $r$ and $\omega_\pm$ for the three-body matrix element $\langle K^+K^-\|(\bar sb)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle$ evaluated in the framework of HMChPT are similar to that of Eq.([\[eq:r&omega\]](#eq:r&omega){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:r&omega"}) except that $f_\pi$ is replaced by $f_K$. This process also receives the contributions of vector ($\phi$) and scalar ($f_0$) resonants by \[\begin{gathered} \langle K^+(p_2)K^-(p_3)\|(\bar sb)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle^R ~\langle K^0(p_1)\|(\bar ds)_{V-A}\|0\rangle \\= -{f_K\over 2}\,{g^{\phi\to K^+K^-}\over s_{23}-m_{\phi}^2+im_{\phi}\Gamma_{\phi}}(s_{12}-s_{13})\Big[ (m_{B_s}+m_{\phi})A_1^{B_s\phi}(q^2)-{A_2^{B_s\phi}(q^2)\over m_{B_s}+m_{\phi}} (m_{B_s}^2-s_{23})\\-2m_{\phi}[A_3^{B_s\phi}(q^2)-A_0^{B_s\phi}(q^2)]\Big] + f_K\sum_i{g^{f_{0i}\to K^+K^-}\over s_{23}-m_{f_{0i}}^2+im_{f_{0i}}\Gamma_{f_{0i}}}F_0^{B_sf_{0i}^s}(q^2)(m_{B_s}^2-s_{23}). \end{gathered}\] For the transition amplitude, in addition to the $b\to u$ tree transition, we need to consider the nonresonant contributions to the $b\to s$ penguin amplitude \[\begin{aligned} A_1 &=& \langle K^{0}(p_1)\|(\bar d b)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \langle K^+(p_2) K^-(p_3)\|(\bar qq)_{V-A}\|0\rangle, \\ A_2 &=& \langle K^+(p_2)\|(\bar u b)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \langle K^0(p_1) K^-(p_3)\|(\bar d u)_{V-A}\|0\rangle, \\ A_3 &=& \langle K^{0}(p_1)\|\bar d b\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \langle K^+(p_2) K^-(p_3)\|\bar dd\|0\rangle, \\ A_4 &=& \langle K^+(p_2)\|\bar u b\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \langle K^0(p_1) K^-(p_3)\|\bar d u\|0\rangle. \end{aligned}\] We firstly calculate the two-kaon creation matrix element $A_1$, which could be expressed in terms of the time-like kaon current form factors as \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:KKweakff} \langle K^+(p_2) K^-(p_3)\|\bar q\gamma_\mu q\|0\rangle = (p_{K^+}-p_{K^-})_\mu F^{K^+K^-}_q. \end{aligned}\] The weak vector form factor $F^{K^+K^-}_q$ is related to the kaon electromagnetic (e.m.) form factors $F^{K^+K^-}_{\rm em}$. Phenomenologically, the e.m. form factors receive resonant and nonresonant contributions and can be expressed by \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:KKemff} F^{K^+K^-}_{\rm em}= F^{KK}_\rho+F^{KK}_\omega+F^{KK}_\phi+F_{NR}. \end{aligned}\] It follows from Eqs. ([\[eq:KKweakff\]](#eq:KKweakff){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:KKweakff"}) and ([\[eq:KKemff\]](#eq:KKemff){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:KKemff"}) that \[\begin{aligned} &&F^{K^+K^-}_u=F^{KK}_\rho+3 F^{KK}_\omega+\frac{1}{3}(3F_{NR}-F'_{NR}), \nonumber\\ &&F^{K^+K^-}_d=-F^{KK}_\rho+3 F^{KK}_\omega, \nonumber\\ && F^{K^+K^-}_s=-3 F^{KK}_\phi-\frac{1}{3}(3 F_{NR}+2F'_{NR}), \label{eq:FKKisospin} \end{aligned}\] where the isospin symmetry has been used. The resonant and nonresonant terms can be parameterized as $F_{h}(s_{23})$ and $F^{(\prime)}_{NR}(s_{23})$, respectively. Since their expressions have been given explicitly in Refs. [@Cheng:2005bg; @Cheng:2005ug; @Cheng:2007si; @Cheng:2013dua], we will not list them here. With the equation of motion, we therefore obtain: \[\begin{aligned} A_1 &=& (s_{12}-s_{13}) F_1^{B_sK}(s_{23}) F^{K^+K^-}_q(s_{23}). \end{aligned}\] In $A_3$, although the nonresonant contribution vanishes as both $K^+$ and $K^-$ do not contain the valence $d$ or $\bar d$ quark, this matrix element does receive the contribution from the scalar $f_0$ pole, \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:KKddme} \langle K^+(p_2) K^-(p_3)\|\bar dd\|0\rangle^R \equiv f^{K^+K^-}_d(s_{23})=\sum_{i}\frac{m_{{f_0}_i} \bar f^d_{{f_0}_i}g^{{f_0}_i\to K^+K^-}}{m_{{f_0}_i}^2-s_{23}-i m_{{f_0}_i}\Gamma_{{f_0}_i}}, \end{aligned}\] which leads to \[\begin{aligned} A_3 &=& {m_B^2-m_K^2\over m_b-m_s}F_0^{B_sK}(s_{23})f_d^{K^+K^-}(s_{23}). \end{aligned}\] For the equations $A_2$ and $A_4$, the contributions from nonresonant could be parameterized as $F_{NR}$ and $f_d^{NR}$ respectively by using $SU(3)$ symmetry The formulae of $f_d^{NR}$ is expressed and discussed in detail in. After calculation, we obtain \[\begin{aligned} A_2 &=& (s_{12}-s_{23}) F_1^{B_sK}(s_{13}) F_{NR}(s_{13}),\\ A_4 &=& {m_B^2-m_K^2\over m_b-m_s}F_0^{B_sK}(s_{13})f_d^{NR}(s_{13}). \end{aligned}\] ## $\overline B_s^0\to K^0 K^-\pi^+$ and $\overline B_s^0\to \overline K^0 K^+\pi^-$ The factorizable amplitudes of the $\overline B_s^0 \to K^0 K^-\pi^+$ and $\overline B_s^0 \to \overline K^0 K^+\pi^-$ are given as: \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:AK0Kmpip} \langle K^0 K^-\pi^+\|T_p\|\overline B_s^0\rangle &=& \langle K^0\pi^+ \|(\bar u b)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \langle K^-\|(\bar s u)_{V-A}\|0\rangle \left[a_1 \delta_{pu}+a^p_4+a_{10}^p-r_\chi^K(a^p_6+a^p_8)\right] \nonumber\\ && + \langle K^0\|(\bar db)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \langle K^-\pi^+\|(\bar sd)_{V-A}\|0\rangle\Big[a_4^p-{1\over 2}a_{10}^p\Big] \nonumber \\ && +\langle K^0\|\bar db\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \langle K^-\pi^+\|\bar dd\|0\rangle \Big[-2a_6^p+a_8^p\Big] \nonumber \\ && +\langle K^0 K^-\pi^+\|(\bar uu)_{V-A}\|0\rangle \langle0\|(\bar sb)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle\Big[a_2\delta_{pu}+a_3+a9\Big] \nonumber \\ && +\langle K^0 K^-\pi^+\|(\bar dd)_{V-A}\|0\rangle \langle0\|(\bar sb)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle\Big[a_3-{1\over 2}a_9\Big] \nonumber \\ && +\langle K^0 K^-\pi^+\|(\bar ss)_{V-A}\|0\rangle \langle0\|(\bar sb)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle\Big[a_3+a_4^p-{1\over 2}a_{9}-{1\over 2}a_{10}^p\Big] \nonumber \\ && +\langle K^0 \pi^+ \pi^-\|\bar s(1+\gamma_5)s\|0\rangle \langle0\|\bar s\gamma_5b\|\overline B_s^0\rangle\Big[2a_6^p-a_8^p\Big], \end{aligned}\] \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:AK0barKppim} \langle \overline K^0 K^+\pi^-\|T_p\|\overline B_s^0\rangle &=& \langle K^+\pi^-\|(\bar db)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \langle \overline K^0\|(\bar sd)_{V-A}\|0\rangle \left[a^p_4-{1\over 2}a_{10}^p-r_\chi^K(a^p_6-{1 \over 2}a^p_8)\right] \nonumber\\ && + \langle K^+\|(\bar ub)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \langle \overline K^0\pi^-\|(\bar su)_{V-A}\|0\rangle\Big[a_1\delta_{pu}+a_4^p+a_{10}^p\Big] \nonumber \\ && +\langle K^+\|\bar ub\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \langle \overline K^0\pi^-\|\bar su\|0\rangle \Big[-2a_6^p-2a_8^p\Big] \nonumber \\ && +\langle \overline K^0 K^+\pi^-\|(\bar uu)_{V-A}\|0\rangle \langle0\|(\bar sb)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle\Big[a_2\delta_{pu}+a_3+a_9\Big] \nonumber \\ && +\langle \overline K^0 K^+\pi^-\|(\bar dd)_{V-A}\|0\rangle \langle0\|(\bar sb)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle\Big[a_3-{1\over 2}a_9\Big] \nonumber \\ && +\langle \overline K^0 K^+\pi^-\|(\bar ss)_{V-A}\|0\rangle \langle0\|(\bar sb)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle\Big[a_3+a_4^p-{1\over 2}a_{9}-{1\over 2}a_{10}^p\Big] \nonumber \\ && +\langle \overline K^0 K^+\pi^-\|\bar s(1+\gamma_5)s\|0\rangle \langle0\|\bar s\gamma_5b\|\overline B_s^0\rangle\Big[2a_6^p-a_8^p\Big], \end{aligned}\] For the current-induced processes, the three-body matrix elements $\langle K\pi \|(\bar q b)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle$ have the similar expressions as Eqs.([\[eq:r&omega\]](#eq:r&omega){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:r&omega"}) and ([\[eq:AHMChPT\]](#eq:AHMChPT){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:AHMChPT"}). Furthermore, these processes also receive resonant contributions, which is similar to Eq.([\[3formfactor\]](#3formfactor){reference-type="ref" reference="3formfactor"}) except that the symbols of the final mesons are exchanged. For the two-body matrix element $\langle K^-\pi^+\|(\bar sd)_{V-A}\|0\rangle$, we note that \[\begin{aligned} \langle K^-(p_1)\pi^+(p_2)\|(\bar sd)_{V-A}\|0\rangle= (p_1-p_2)_\mu F_1^{K\pi}(s_{12}) + {m_K^2-m_\pi^2\over s_{12}}(p_1+p_2)_\mu\Big[-F_1^{K\pi}(s_{12})+F_0^{K\pi}(s_{12})\Big], \end{aligned}\] The resonant contributions are expressed by: \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:m.e.pole2} \langle K^-(p_1)\pi^+(p_2)\|(\bar sd)_{V-A}\|0 \rangle^R &=& \sum_i {g^{K^_i\to K^-\pi^+}\over s_{12}-m_{K^_i}^2+im_{K^_i}\Gamma_{K^_i}}\sum_{\rm pol}\varepsilon^\cdot (p_1-p_2)\langle K^_i\|(\bar sd)_{V-A}\|0\rangle \nonumber \\ &-& \sum_i{g^{{K^_{0i}}\to K^-\pi^+}\over s_{12}-m_{K^_{0i}}^2+im_{K^_{0i}}\Gamma_{K^_{0i}}}\langle K^_{0i}\|(\bar sd)_{V-A}\|0\rangle. \end{aligned}\] Hence, form factors $F_1^{K\pi}$ and $(-F_1^{K\pi}+F_0^{K\pi})$ receive the following resonant contributions \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:F1Kpi} (F^{K\pi}_{1}(s))^R &=& \sum_i{m_{K_i^}f_{K_i^}g^{K_i^\to K\pi}\over m_{K_i^}^2-s-im_{K_i^}\Gamma_{K_i^}}, \nonumber \\ (-F^{K\pi}_1(s)+F^{K\pi}_0(s))^R &=& \sum_i{f_{K_{0i}^}g^{K_{0i}^\to K\pi}\over m_{K_{0i}^}^2-s-im_{K_{0i}^}\Gamma_{K_{0i}^}}\,{s_{12}\over m_K^2-m_\pi^2} -\sum_i{m_{K_i^}f_{K_i^}g^{K_i^\to K\pi}\over m_{K_i^}^2-s-im_{K_i^}\Gamma_{K_i^}}{s_{12}\over m^2_{K_i^}}. \end{aligned}\] As a result, the amplitude $\langle K^-\pi^+\|(\bar sd)_{V-A}\|0\rangle$ $\langle K^0\|(\bar d b)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle$ has the expression \[\begin{gathered} \label{eq:KpiBpi} \langle K^-(p_1)\pi^+(p_2)\|(\bar s d)_{V-A}\|0\rangle \langle K^0(p_3)\|(\bar d b)_{V-A}\|\overline B_s^0\rangle\\ =F_1^{BsK}(s_{12})F_1^{K\pi}(s_{12})\left[s_{23}-s_{13}-{(m_B^2-m_K^2)(m_K^2-m_\pi^2) \over s_{12}}\right] + F_0^{BsK}(s_{12})F_0^{K\pi}(s_{12}){(m_B^2-m_K^2)(m_K^2-m_\pi^2) \over s_{12}}, \end{gathered}\] where the momentum dependence of the weak form factor $F^{K\pi}(q^2)$ is parameterized as \[\begin{aligned} \label{Kpi} F^{K\pi}(q^2)=\,{F^{K\pi}(0)\over 1-q^2/{\Lambda_\chi}^2+i\Gamma_R/{\Lambda_\chi}}, \end{aligned}\] with $\Gamma_R= 200$ MeV being the width of the relevant resonance and $\Lambda_{\chi}=0.83 \mathrm{GeV}$ being a chiral symmetry breaking scale. For the term $\langle K \pi\|\bar s d\|0\rangle$, it receives contributions of both resonant and nonresonant, the expression of which is shown as \[\begin{aligned} \langle K^-(p_1) \pi^+(p_2)\|\bar s d\|0\rangle = \frac{m_{{K^_0}} \bar f_{{K^_0}} g^{{K^_0}\to K^-\pi^+}}{m_{{K^_0}}^2-s_{12}-i m_{{K^_0}}\Gamma_{{K^_0}}}+\langle K^-(p_1) \pi^+(p_2)\|\bar s d\|0\rangle^{NR}. \end{aligned}\] In the above equation, the unknown two-body matrix elements of scalar densities $\langle K\pi\|\bar s q\|0\rangle$ are related to $\langle K^+K^-\|\bar ss\|0\rangle$ via SU(3) symmetry, e.g. \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:Kpim.e.SU3} \langle K^-(p_1) \pi^+(p_2)\|\bar sd\|0\rangle^{NR}=\langle K^+(p_1)K^-(p_2)\|\bar ss\|0\rangle^{NR}=f_s^{NR}(s_{12}), \end{aligned}\] with the expression of $f_s^{NR}$ given as \[\begin{aligned} \label{fNR} f_s^{NR}=\langle K^-(p_1) \pi^+(p_2)\|\bar s d\|0\rangle^{NR}=\frac{m_K^2-m_\pi^2}{m_s-m_d} (F_{NR}+\frac{2}{3}F'_{NR})+\sigma_{_{\rm NR}} e^{-\alpha s_{12}}, \end{aligned}\] where $\sigma_{_{\rm NR}} = e^{i\pi/4} (3.36^{+1.12}_{-0.96}) \mathrm{GeV}$ is fixed from data of $\overline B^0 \to K_S K_S K_S$. If we adopt this value directly, we will get unexpected large branching fractions of $\overline B_s^0 \to K_SK^\mp\pi^\pm$, which means that final states interaction and $SU(3)$ symmetry violation may be important. Thus, we phonologically introduce a factor $\beta=0.8\pm0.1$, which stands for the effects of final states interaction and $SU(3)$ symmetry violation. While in Ref., a strong phase has been also introduced in order to describe this effect. As a result, we could obtain: \[\begin{aligned} \langle K^0\|\bar db\|\overline B_s^0\rangle \langle K^-\pi^+\|\bar sd\|0\rangle = {m_{B_s}^2-m_K^2\over m_b-m_d} F_0^{B_sK}(s_{12})\Big[\frac{m_{{K^_0}} \bar f_{{K^_0}} g^{{K^_0}\to K^-\pi^+}}{m_{{K^_0}}^2-s_{12}-i m_{{K^_0}}\Gamma_{{K^_0}}}+\beta f_s^{NR}\Big]. \end{aligned}\] # Numerical Results {#S3} To proceed with the numerical calculations, we firstly specify the parameters used in this work. For the CKM matrix elements, we use the updated Wolfenstein parameters $A=0.823$, $\lambda=0.22457$, $\bar \rho=0.1289$ and $\bar \eta=0.348$. The corresponding CKM angles are $\sin2\beta = 0.689\pm0.019$ and $\gamma=(69.7^{+1.3}_{-2.8})^\circ$. The form factors used in this work are calculated within the covariant light-front quark model, which are summarized as follows \[\begin{aligned} &&V^{B_s\to \phi}(0)=0.23, A_0^{B_s\to\phi}(0)=0.31, A_1^{B_s\to \phi}(0)=0.25, A_2^{B_s\to \phi}(0)=0.22, \nonumber \\ &&V^{B_s\to K^}(0)=0.23,A_0^{B_s\to K^}(0)=0.25,A_1^{B_s\to K^}(0)=0.19, A_2^{B_s\to K^}(0)=0.16,\nonumber \\ && F_{0}^{B_s \to K}(0)=0.24,F_{0}^{Bs \to K_0^(1430)}(0)=0.25, F_{0}^{Bs \to f_0^s}(0)=0.28. \end{aligned}\] The momentum dependence of form factors in the spacelike region can be well parameterized and reproduced in the following three-parameter form: \[\begin{aligned} F(q^2)=\frac{F(0)}{1-a(q^2/m_{B_s}^2)+b(q^2/m_{B_s}^2)^2} \end{aligned}\] where $F$ stands for the relevant form factors and parameters $a$ and $b$ have been given explicitly in ref.. In practical calculation, we shall assign the form factor error to be $0.03$. For the strong coupling constants, most of them have been determined from the measured partial width in refs., which are shown as \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:g} && g^{\rho(770)\to\pi^+\pi^-}=6.0, \, g^{K^(892)\to K^+\pi^-}=4.59, \, g^{f_0(980)\to\pi^+\pi^-}=1.18\,{\rm GeV},\, g^{K_0^(1430)\to K^+\pi^-}=3.84\,{\rm GeV},\nonumber \\ &&g^{\phi\to K^+K^-}=-4.54,\,g^{f_0(980)\to K^+K^-}=3.7~\mathrm{GeV},\,g^{f_0(1500)\to K^+K^-}=0.69 ~\mathrm{GeV},\,g^{f_0(1710)\to K^+K^-}=1.6 ~\mathrm{GeV}.\nonumber\\ \end{aligned}\] For the running quark masses we shall use \[\begin{aligned} \label{eq:quarkmass} && m_b(m_b)=4.2\,{\rm GeV}, \qquad~~~~ m_b(2.1\,{\rm GeV})=4.94\,{\rm GeV}, \qquad m_b(1\,{\rm GeV})=6.34\,{\rm GeV}, \nonumber \\ && m_c(m_b)=0.91\,{\rm GeV}, \qquad~~~ m_c(2.1\,{\rm GeV})=1.06\,{\rm GeV}, \qquad m_c(1\,{\rm GeV})=1.32\,{\rm GeV}, \nonumber \\ && m_s(2.1\,{\rm GeV})=95\,{\rm MeV}, \quad~ m_s(1\,{\rm GeV})=118\,{\rm MeV}, \nonumber\\ && m_d(2.1\,{\rm GeV})=5.0\,{\rm MeV}, \quad~ m_u(2.1\,{\rm GeV})=2.2\,{\rm MeV}. \end{aligned}\] With above parameters and formulas in Sec.[2](#S2){reference-type="ref" reference="S2"}, we calculated the branching fractions of resonant and nonresonant contributions to the decay modes concerned and presented them in Table.[\[tab:branching\]](#tab:branching){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:branching"}. The theoretical errors are from the uncertainties in (i) the parameter $\alpha_{_{\rm NR}}$ which governs the momentum dependence of the nonresonant amplitude, (ii) the strange quark mass $m_s$, the form factors, the nonresonant parameter $\sigma_{_{\rm NR}}$ and $SU(3)$ asymmetry violation parameter $\beta$, and (iii) the unitarity angle $\gamma$. From Table. [\[tab:branching\]](#tab:branching){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:branching"} we see that the decay $\overline B_s^0\to K^0\pi^+\pi^-$ is tree dominated and its main contribution arises from the $K^{+}$ meson, while the nonresonant contribution is less important. Compared with experimental data, the calculated branching fraction agrees well with the recent LHCb measurement. As for $\overline B_s^0\to K^0K^+K^-$, although it receives the color-suppressed tree contribution, it is dominated by transition $b \to d \bar qq$. Consequently, it has a small branching fraction $(2.29^{+0.01+1.17+0.05}_{-0.01-0.78-0.05})\times 10^{-6}$, which is much smaller than that of $\overline B_s^0\to K^0\pi^+\pi^-$. Note that this decay is governed by the nonresonant background dominated by $\sigma_{\rm NR}$. Hence this decay mode could be an ideal plat for constraining the unknown parameter $\sigma_{\rm NR}$ in turn. Experimentally, however, no significant evidence of this decay mode has been obtained, and its branching fraction is described in $(0.2-3.4) \times 10^{-6}$ at $90\%$ confidence level (CL) based on the CL inferences in Ref.. Obviously, the result we predicted is falling into the experimental range. We hope this decay will be measured precisely in the current LHCb experiment. The results of above two decay modes also confirm the conclusion that nonresonant decays play a prominent role in the penguin-dominated three-body $B$ meson decays in Ref.. For the decay $\overline B_s^0 \to K^0K^-\pi^+$, the current-induced process with a $K^-$ emission is tree dominated, while the transition processes $\langle \overline B_s^0 \to K^0\rangle \times\langle 0 \to K^-\pi^+\rangle$ are induced by penguin operators. On the contrary, the current-induced process of decay $\overline B_s^0 \to \overline K^0K^+\pi^-$ with a neutral kaon emission is induced by penguin, and the transition processes receive the effects not only from tree but from penguin operators. In these two decays, the nonresonant contributions arise dominantly from the transition process via the scalar density $\langle K\pi\|\bar s q\|0\rangle$, and slightly from the current-induced process. Thus, the nonresonant contributions are sensitive to the matrix elements of scalar densities $f_s^{\rm NR}$, as shown in Table.[\[tab:branching\]](#tab:branching){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:branching"}. For the resonant contributions, both of them are dominated by the scalar particles $K_0^(1430)$. Considering the parameter $\beta$ standing for effects of the $SU(3)$ symmetry violation and the final states rescattering, the sum of two branching fractions is $(67.95^{+0.38+42.04+0.09}_{-0.54-23.88-0.08}) \times 10^{-6}$, which could accommodate data of the recent LHC measurement well. We hope these two decays could be measured individually in the future experiment. In QCD calculations based on a heavy quark expansion, one faces uncertainties arising from power corrections such as annihilation and hard-scattering contributions. For example, in QCD factorization, there are large theoretical uncertainties related to the modelling of power corrections corresponding to weak annihilation effects and the chirally enhanced power corrections to hard spectator scattering. Even for two-body $B$ decays, power corrections are of order $(10-20)\%$ for tree-dominated modes, but they are usually bigger than the central values for penguin-dominated decays. Needless to say, $1/m_b$ power corrections for three-body decays may well be larger. However, in the current work we use the phenomenological factorization model rather than in the established theories based on a heavy quark expansion. Consequently, uncertainties due to power corrections, at this stage, are not included in our calculations, by assumption. In view of such shortcomings we must emphasize that the additional errors due to such model dependent assumptions may be sizable. In this work, the $CP$ asymmetries of these four decays are also calculated, and the results are summarized in Table.[1](#tab:CP){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:CP"}. We see from the table that the decay $\overline B_s^0 \to K^0 K^+K^-$ has large $CP$ asymmetries with and without resonant contributions. Note that the two asymmetries have the same sign, as this decay is dominated by the nonresonant background, which can also be read from Table.[\[tab:branching\]](#tab:branching){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:branching"}. For other three decays, the sizable resonant contributions may affect the $CP$ asymmetries by taking large strong phases. In fact, the strong phases could arise from the effective Wilson coefficients, the Breit-Wigner formalism for resonances and the penguin matrix elements of scalar densities. Besides, the final states interactions may take new phases, which cannot be calculated directly up to now. Although the $CP$ asymmetries of $B \to K K K \,, KK\pi$ [@LHCb:Kppippim; @LHCb:pippippim] have been measured in LHCb recently, the $CP$ asymmetries of three-body of $B_s^0$ have not been explored till now. The $CP$ asymmetries of these four decays are hoped to be measured in the current LHCb experiment or Super-b in the future, and they might be helpful to test the factorization approach in $B_s^0$ meson three-body decays. ::: # Summary {#S4} Recently, LHCb collaboration published their first measurements of charmless three-body decays of $B_s^0$ meson, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of $1.0~\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ recorded at a centre-of-mass energy of 7 TeV. Motivated by this, we calculated the branching fractions of $\overline B_s ^0 \to K^0 \pi^+\pi^-$, $\overline B_s ^0 \to K^0 K^+K^-$, $\overline B_s ^0 \to K^0 \pi^+K^-$ and $\overline B_s ^0 \to \overline K^0 K^+\pi^-$ decay modes within the factorization approach, which is generalized by Cheng et al. Both nonresonant contributions and resonant contributions have been studied in detail. For the decays $\overline B_s ^0 \to K^0 \pi^+\pi^-$ and $\overline B_s ^0 \to K^0 K^+K^-$, our results agree well with experimental data. Especially, the former mode is dominated by the $K^$ and $K_0^(1430)$ poles, while the latter is dominated by the nonresonant contribution. By adding the effects of the flavor $SU(3)$ symmetry violation, the sum of branching fractions of $\overline B_s ^0 \to K^0 \pi^+K^-$ and $\overline B_s ^0 \to \overline K^0 K^+\pi^-$ could accommodate the data. It should be emphasized that the branching fractions are very sensitive to the scalar density $\langle K\pi\| \bar s q\|0\rangle$. We hope these branching fractions could be measured individually in the experiments so as to test the factorization approach in three-body decays of $\overline B^0_s$ mesons. Moreover, the direct $CP$ asymmetries of these decays have been also explored, and the sizable results could be measured in the running LHCb experiment and Super-b factory in the future.	{'timestamp': '2014-09-23T02:14:13', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5948', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5948'}
# # Introduction Lower and upper bounds of $P\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^N A_i\right)$ in terms of the individual event probabilities $P(A_i)$'s and the pairwise event probabilities $P(A_i\cap A_j)$'s can be seen as special cases of the Boolean probability bounding problem, which can be solved numerically via a linear programming (LP) problem involving $2^N$ variables. Unfortunately, the number of variables for Boolean probability bounding problems increases exponentially with the number of events, $N$, which makes finding the solution impractical. Therefore, some suboptimal numerical bounds are proposed in order to reduce the complexity of the LP problem, for example, by using the dual basic feasible solutions. On the other hand, analytical lower bounds are particularly important. The Kuai-Alajaji-Takahara (KAT) bound is one of the analytical lower bounds that has been shown to be better than the Dawson-Sankoff (DS) bound and D. de Caen's bound. These analytical bounds are later investigated in other works (e.g., see ). As in, the KAT lower bound for $P\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^N A_i\right)$ is expressed in terms of only $\sum_{j:j\neq i} P(A_i\cap A_j)$'s and $P(A_i)$'s, and hence knowledge of the individual pairwise event probabilities $P(A_i\cap A_j)$ is not required. In this paper, we revisit and investigate the same problem that lower bounds are established in terms of only the sums of the pairwise event probabilities, i.e., $\sum_{j:j\neq i} P(A_i\cap A_j)$, and the individual event probabilities $P(A_i)$'s, without the use of the $P(A_i\cap A_j)$'s. Our contributions are the following. First, in the class of all lower bounds that are expressed in terms of only the $P(A_i)$'s and the $\sum_{j:j\neq i} P(A_i\cap A_j)$'s, the optimal lower bound is proposed numerically by solving an LP problem, which has only $N^2-N+1$ variables. Here optimality means that any lower bound for $P\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^N A_i\right)$ in terms of only $\sum_{j:j\neq i} P(A_i\cap A_j)$'s and $P(A_i)$'s cannot be sharper than the proposed optimal lower bound. This is proven by showing that the proposed optimal lower bound can always be achieved by constructing $\{A_i, i=1,\ldots,N\}$ that satisfy all known information on the $\sum_{j:j\neq i} P(A_i\cap A_j)$'s and $P(A_i)$'s. The computational complexity of the optimal lower bound is low since the number of variables are not exponentially increasing in $N$. Next, a suboptimal analytical lower bound is established by solving a relaxed LP problem. The new analytical bound is proven to be at least as good as the existing KAT bound. Finally, we analyze the performance of the new bounds by comparing them with the KAT bound and other existing bounds. In particular, numerical results show that the Gallot-Kounias (GK) bound, which was recently revisited in, is not necessarily sharper than the proposed lower bounds as well as the KAT bound (see also for another example), even though it exploits full information of all $P(A_i\cap A_j)$'s and $P(A_i)$'s. # Main Results Consider a finite family of events $A_1,\ldots,A_N$ in a general probability space $(\Omega ,\mathscr{F},P)$, where $N$ is a fixed positive integer. Note that there are only finitely many Boolean atoms[^1] specified by the $A_i$'s. For each atom $\omega\in\mathscr{F}$, let $p(\omega):= P(\omega)$, and let the degree of $\omega$, denoted by $\deg(\omega)$, be the number of $A_i$'s that contain $\omega$. Define \[\label{def_aik} a_i(k):= P(\{\omega\subseteq A_i: \deg(\omega)=k\}),\] where $i=1,\ldots,N$ and $k=1,\ldots,N$. Then from, we know that \[\label{} P\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^N A_i\right)=\sum_{i=1}^N\sum_{k=1}^N\frac{a_i(k)}{k}.\] In this paper, using the same notation as in, lower bounds on $P\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^N A_i\right)$ are established only in terms of $\alpha_i:= P(A_i)$ and $\beta_i:= \sum_{j: j\neq i} P(A_i\cap A_j)$, $i=1,\ldots,N$. For simplicity, we denote $\gamma_i:=\alpha_i+\beta_i$. Then it is easy to verify that the following equalities hold: \[\label{} P(A_i)=\sum_{k=1}^N a_i(k)=\alpha_i,\quad \sum_{j} P(A_i\cap A_j)=\sum_{k=1}^N k a_i(k)= \gamma_i,\quad i=1,\ldots,N.\] Let $\mathscr{L}$ denote the set of all lower bounds that are established in terms of only $\{\alpha_i, i=1,\ldots,N\}$ and $\{\gamma_i, i=1,\ldots,N\}$. Then any lower bound in $\mathscr{L}$, say $\ell\in\mathscr{L}$, is a function of only $\{\alpha_i\}$'s and $\{\gamma_i\}$'s. Also, claiming that $\ell\in\mathscr{L}$ is a lower bound on $P\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^N A_i\right)$ means that for any events $\{A_i, i=1,\ldots,N\}$ that satisfy $P(A_i)=\alpha_i,i=1,\ldots,N$ and $\sum_{j} P(A_i\cap A_j)=\gamma_i, i=1,\ldots,N$, we must have $P\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^N A_i\right)\ge \ell$. We first define an optimal lower bound in a general class. Assume that each collection $\{A_1,\ldots ,A_N\}$ of $N$ sets, $A_i\in\mathscr{F}$, is represented by a vector $\theta =(\theta _1,\ldots ,\theta _m)\in\mathbb{R}^m$, which represents partial probabilistic information[^2] about the union $\bigcup_{i=1}^N A_i$. Let $\Theta$ denote the set of all possible $\theta$ and $\mathscr{L}_{\Theta}$ the set of all lower bounds on $P\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^N A_i\right)$ that are functions of only $\theta$. For bounds in $\mathscr{L}_{\Theta}$, the following lemma shows that achievability is equivalent to optimality. Clearly, in our problem, we have $\theta=(\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_N, \gamma_1,\ldots,\gamma_N)$ and $\mathscr{L}_{\Theta}=\mathscr{L}$. We herein state the following lemma regarding the existing KAT bound. Denoting $\lKAT$ as the KAT bound in ([\[KAT_bound\]](#KAT_bound){reference-type="ref" reference="KAT_bound"}), we can see that the KAT bound is a lower bound which is established in terms of only $\{\alpha_i\}$'s and $\{\gamma_i\}$'s. Thus, $\lKAT\in\mathscr{L}$. One should note that for a given family of events $\{A_i, i=1,\ldots,N\}$, the $a_i(k)$'s can be obtained from their definition in ([\[def_aik\]](#def_aik){reference-type="ref" reference="def_aik"}). However, this does not mean that for each feasible point $\{a_i(k)\}$ of the LP problem ([\[LP_KAT\]](#LP_KAT){reference-type="ref" reference="LP_KAT"}), there exists a corresponding family of events $\{A_i, i=1,\ldots,N\}$. In particular, for the solution of ([\[LP_KAT\]](#LP_KAT){reference-type="ref" reference="LP_KAT"}), it is possible that a family of events $\{A_i, i=1,\ldots,N\}$ can never be constructed. ## Optimal Numerical Lower Bound In order to get a better lower bound than the KAT bound, we herein introduce more constraints on the $a_i(k)$'s in ([\[LP_KAT\]](#LP_KAT){reference-type="ref" reference="LP_KAT"}) so that the feasible set of $a_i(k)$'s becomes smaller, thus resulting in a sharper lower bound. By Lemma [\[optimality_lemma\]](#optimality_lemma){reference-type="ref" reference="optimality_lemma"}, if a family of events $\{A_i\}$ can always be constructed for any feasible point of the resulting LP problem, then the solution must be the optimal lower bound. We establish the numerically computable optimal lower bound in the following theorem. With the construction described above, it can be readily checked that the constructed $\{A_i\}$ satisfy $P(\{\omega\subseteq A_i: \deg(\omega)=k\})=a_i(k)$ for all $i=1,\ldots,N$. Since $\lOPT'$ is achieved at one feasible point of ([\[LP_optimal\]](#LP_optimal){reference-type="ref" reference="LP_optimal"}), by the proposed construction method a family of events, say $\{A_i^\}$, can be constructed so that $P\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^N A_i^\right)=\lOPT'$. Since the first two constraints of ([\[LP_optimal\]](#LP_optimal){reference-type="ref" reference="LP_optimal"}) are also satisfied, we have $P(A_i^)=\alpha_i$ and $\sum_{j}P(A_i^\cap A_j^*)=\gamma_i$ for all $i$. Finally, the optimality of $\lOPT'$ directly follows by Lemma [\[optimality_lemma\]](#optimality_lemma){reference-type="ref" reference="optimality_lemma"}. ◻ ## New Analytical Lower Bound In this subsection, we derive a new analytical lower bound, which is given in the following theorem. # Comparison of the new analytical bound with the KAT Bound In this section, we give a lower bound on $\lYAT-\lKAT$ which is given in the following lemma. # Numerical Examples In this section, we evaluate the new lower bounds using eight numerical examples. The first four examples are the same as in. The last four examples, Systems V to VIII, are new and are shown in Table [\[table_sysV\]](#table_sysV){reference-type="ref" reference="table_sysV"}-[\[table_sysVIII\]](#table_sysVIII){reference-type="ref" reference="table_sysVIII"}, respectively. As a reference, the existing DS bound, de Caen's bound, the KAT bound ([\[KAT_bound\]](#KAT_bound){reference-type="ref" reference="KAT_bound"}) are included for comparison. Furthermore, the GK bound, which exploits full information of all $P(A_i\cap A_j)$'s and $P(A_i)$'s, is also compared with the new bounds. The results are shown in Table [\[table_examples\]](#table_examples){reference-type="ref" reference="table_examples"}. The gap of $\lYAT-\lKAT$ and the derived lower bound ([\[YA_KAT_gap\]](#YA_KAT_gap){reference-type="ref" reference="YA_KAT_gap"}) are shown in Table [\[table_gap\]](#table_gap){reference-type="ref" reference="table_gap"}. One can see that the KAT bound is at least as good as the DS and de Caen's bounds as already shown in. The new bounds are at least as good as the KAT bound in all the examples, as expected. More specifically, the new numerical bound ([\[LP_optimal\]](#LP_optimal){reference-type="ref" reference="LP_optimal"}) is sharper than the KAT bound in all examples, and the new analytical bound ([\[YA_bound\]](#YA_bound){reference-type="ref" reference="YA_bound"}) is sharper than the KAT bound for Systems V to VIII and identical to the KAT bound for Systems I to VI. Concerning the gap of new analytical bound and the KAT bound, the equality of ([\[YA_KAT_gap\]](#YA_KAT_gap){reference-type="ref" reference="YA_KAT_gap"}) holds for Systems V, VII and VIII. Moreover, from the numerical examples, we note that the GK bound, which requires more information (all the information of individual $P(A_i\cap A_j)$ as well as $P(A_i)$'s), is not guaranteed to be sharper than the KAT bound[^3] and the new bounds. For example, the GK bound is worse than the KAT bound as well as the new bounds in Systems V and VIII. It is better than the KAT bound but worse than the new bounds in System VI, better than the KAT bound and the new analytical bound but worse than the new numerical bound in System VII. Finally, we note that all lower bounds considered in this paper can be sharpered algorithmically by optimizing over subsets (e.g., see ). [^1]: The problem can be directly reduced to the finite probability space case. Thus, through the numerical examples in this paper, we will consider finite probability spaces where $\omega\in\Omega$ denotes an elementary outcome instead of an atom. [^2]: The partial information represented by $\theta$, in which we are interested in this paper, is any $m$-dimensional linear function of degree-$K$ probabilities of $A_1,\ldots,A_N$, $K=1,\ldots,N$. Here a degree-$K$ probability is defined as $P(A_{i_1}\cap A_{i_2}\cap\ldots\cap A_{i_K})$ where $i_1,\ldots,i_K$ are $K$ distinct integers in $\{1,2,\ldots,N\}$. [^3]: Another example in which the GK bound is looser than the KAT bound is given in.	{'timestamp': '2014-06-20T02:03:45', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5543', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5543'}
# Introduction Brown dwarfs are objects with mass intermediate between stars and planets. No steady nuclear fusion takes place in their core, except for deuterium burning in the core of relatively massive and young ($\la10^6$ yr) brown dwarfs. Hence, they simply cool off after the initial heating by gravitational energy / deuterium burning, and thermonuclear processes do not dominate their evolution (@Burrows_2001). The first genuine brown dwarf, Gl 229B, was discovered by, and studies of brown dwarfs are dramatically evolved in the last two dicades thanks to the development of instruments and models . The atmospheres of brown dwarfs are dominated by molecules and dust. Many photometric/spectroscopic observations have been made in the near-infrared wavelength range shorter than 2.5 $\mu$m for studying the brown dwarf photosphere, because this wavelength range contains the spectral peaks of L dwarfs and is relatively easy to be observed. This wavelength range has features of various molecular species (e.g. TiO, VO, FeH, $\mathrm{H_{2}O}$ and $\mathrm{CH_4}$) and effects of dust (e.g. Fe, Al$_2$O$_3$, MgSiO$_3$) extinction (@Burrows_2001 [@Tsuji_1996a; @Tsuji_2002; @Cushing_2006; @2008MNRAS.391.1854H]). Thus spectroscopic observations in the infrared regime are the most powerful tools to obtain physical and chemical information of brown dwarf photospheres. The radiation from inner photosphere becomes weaker by the dust extinction. The effect is different between spectral types, L and T. Dust in the photosphere contributes to the spectra directly by dust extinction as well as indirectly by changing the structure of the photosphere. The effect of dust appears mainly at $J$ and $H$ bands in the spectra of L dwarfs (@Tsuji_1996b [@Nakajima_2001]). Meanwhile, the spectra of T dwarfs are less affected by the dust opacity. This indicates that the dust settles lower in the photosphere of T dwarfs. In this manner, we understand the internal chemistry and physics with near-infrared spectral data shorter than 2.5 $\mu$m. However, many critical questions related to broader wavelength range spectra remain unanswered. reported that their model spectra result only poorly fits the observed spectra in the 0.95--14.5 $\mu$m for the mid-to late-L dwarfs and the early-T dwarfs. They used data observed by IRTF/SpeX (0.9--2.5 $\mu$m and 3.0--4.0 $\mu$m) and Spitzer/IRAC (5.0--14.5 $\mu$m). They concluded that the relatively poor fits at the L/T boundary, where dust contribution becomes smaller toward late type, are most likely due to the limitations of their simple cloud model. In particular, the 3.0--4.0 $\mu$m range spectra resulted in the poorest fits. Observation in a wavelength range between 2.5 and 5.0 $\mu$m is difficult from the ground because of the Earth's atmospheric effects. Therefore, little spectral data has been obtained so far. AKARI, a Japanese infrared astronomical satellite, obtained the spectral data of this wavelength range for 27 known brown dwarfs, and we got 16 good quality data with ratio of signal to noise better than 3 (@Sorahana_2012). They carried out the model fitting to each spectral data. They used shorter wavelength spectra (1.0--2.5 $\mu$m of IRTF/SpeX or UKIRT/CGS4; hereafter SpeX/CGS4[^1]) supplementary in their analysis to derive the most probable physical parameter set (effective temperature, $T_{\rm{eff}}$, surface gravity, log g, and critical temperature, $T_{\rm{cr}}$, indicating the thickness of the dust layer) in the model fitting. By using Unified Cloudy Model, we search for the model atmosphere that simultaneously explains both the AKARI and the SpeX/CGS4 spectra of each object reasonably well. However, we found that any combinations of the model parameters cannot give a reasonable fit to the observed data in the entire wavelength range (1.0--5.0 $\mu$m) of each object simultaneously, and any model spectra are always somewhat deviated from the observed spectrum in either the AKARI or the SpeX/CGS4 wavelength. The discrepancy implies that we are missing something important in the atmospheres of the brown dwarfs when constructing the model atmospheres. In previous studies, X-ray, H${\alpha}$, and radio emissions, which indicate the presence of high temperature regions, from some brown dwarfs (@Stelzer_2006 [@Tsuboi_2003; @Mohanty_2003; @Schmidt_2007; @Reiners_2008; @Berger_2010; @Hallinan_2007; @Hallinan_2008]). Their observations show that the $L_{\rm{x}}/L_{\rm{bol}}$ ratio declines with $T_{\rm{eff}}$, where $L_{\rm{x}}$ is X-ray luminosity and $L_{\rm{bol}}$ is bolometric luminosity. However, relatively high X-ray luminosities $L_{\rm{x}}$ were observed in brown dwarfs whose spectral types are earlier than mid-L. In addition, H${\alpha}$ at 6563 Å were observed (@Mohanty_2003 [@Schmidt_2007; @Reiners_2008]). The radio emissions from brown dwarfs were also detected (Hallinan et al., 2008). and proposed that the origin of radio emissions may be electron cyclotron maser emission originating in the polar regions of a large-scale magnetic field. From these observational results, the temperatures may increase somewhere in the upper atmospheres. In this paper, we call the heating region chromosphere, instead of photosphere whose temperature structure follows radiative equilibrium. Thus we need to reconsider the thermal structures of brown dwarf atmospheres. In this paper, we investigate how the broadband spectra of the observed brown dwarfs are affected by increases of the temperatures in the upper atmospheres assuming the existence of chromospheric and coronal activities. We introduce the observational data of selected brown dwarfs in Section [2](#Data){reference-type="ref" reference="Data"}. We carry out model fittings in Section [3](#MF){reference-type="ref" reference="MF"} without (§[3.1](#nonheat){reference-type="ref" reference="nonheat"}) and with (§[3.2](#heat){reference-type="ref" reference="heat"}) chromospheric heating. Then, we discuss possible heating mechanism in Section [4](#discussion){reference-type="ref" reference="discussion"}. # Observational Data {#Data} ## The AKARI Sample {#sample} In this study, we focus on mid-L dwarfs from L4 to L7.5 types. The physics of early-L dwarfs may be different from brown dwarfs later than mid-L because they are placed at the threshold of hydrogen burning. On the other hand, the chromospheric activity decreases toward later type dwarfs (@Gizis_2000 [@Mohanty_2003; @Berger_2010]). These authors statistically analyzed X-ray and H${\alpha}$ luminosities with spectral types, and concluded that the ratio of X-ray and H${\alpha}$ luminosities to the bolometric luminosity appears to decrease in the later spectral types. We therefore analyze the following mid-L dwarfs; 2MASS J0036+1821 (L4), 2MASS J2224--0158 (L4.5), GJ 1001B (L5), SDSS J1446+0024 (L5), SDSS J0539--0059 (L5), 2MASS J1507--1627 (L5), 2MASS J0825+2115 (L6) and 2MASS J1632+1904 (L7.5). We summarize these objects in Table [\[radmasslist\]](#radmasslist){reference-type="ref" reference="radmasslist"}. They are nearby and bright, thus generally well studied. ## IRTF/SpeX Spectra {#spex} Almost all brown dwarfs except for SDSS J1446+0024 in our sample of this analysis have been observed by @Burgasser_2004 [@Burgasser_2006; @Burgasser_2008; @Burgasser_2010; @Burgasser_2007; @Cushing_2004] with SpeX. SpeX is the medium-resolution 0.8--5.4 $\mu$m spectrograph mounted on the NASA Infrared Telescope Facility (IRTF), which is a 3.0 meter telescope at Mauna Kea, Hawaii. The data have been obtained using its low-resolution prism-dispersed mode with the resolutions of 75--200, depending on the used slit-width for three objects, 2MASS J0036+1821, GJ1001B and 2MASS J1632+1904. We retrieve these data from the SpeX Prism Spectral Libraries built by Adam Burgasser and Sandy Leggett[^2]. Only SDSS J0539--0059 spectrum was unpublished, and we obtained from Mike Cushing (2010, private communication)[^3]. Other three sources have been observed by SpeX using its short wavelength cross-dispersed mode (SXD) with the resolutions of 1200--2000, depending on the slit-width used. We get these data from the IRTF Spectral Library maintained by Michael Cushing[^4]. ## UKIRT/CGS4 Spectra {#CGS4} SDSS J1446+0024 has not been observed with SpeX. A spectrum in 1.0--2.5 $\mu$m of SDSS J1446+0024 was observed with UKIRT/CGS4 (@Geballe_2002). CGS4 is the multi-purpose grating spectrometer equipped on the 3.8 m United Kingdom Infrared Telescope(UKIRT), which is also sited on Hawaii Mauna Kea. CGS4 has four gratings. The data for SDSS J1446+0024 was observed using the 40 line/mm grating that provided the resolution of 300--2000 or $400\times\lambda$ $\mu$m. The spectrum was taken by adopting two broad band filters for the low and the medium resolution gratings in use with CGS4, namely B1 and B2, and the wavelength range of these filters are 1.03--1.34 $\mu$m and 1.43--2.53 $\mu$m, respectively. We get the spectral data of SDSS J1446+0024 from Dagny Looper (2010, private communication). # Model Fitting {#MF} In our previous study, we searched for the model atmospheres that explain both the AKARI and the SpeX/CGS4 spectra of the brown dwarfs reasonably well (@Sorahana_2012). While the wavelength range of AKARI reflects the condition of relatively upper atmospheres (Sorahana et al. 2013 in preperation), that of SpeX/CGS4 is sensitive to the inner atmosphere including the effect of dust lying in the inner atmospheres (where $\tau\sim1$). In this paper, we take a different fitting strategy from to investigate the temperature structures of the upper atmospheres affected by the presence of chromospheres. In order to pin down the thermal structures in the inner atmospheres, we first carry out the model fittings to the only SpeX/CGS4 spectral data (§[3.1.1](#fitting){reference-type="ref" reference="fitting"}). We call the model atmospheres determined in this way "non-heating best-fit models". As shown in §[3.1.2](#fitresult){reference-type="ref" reference="fitresult"}, none of the non-heating best-fit models shows perfect fit to the observed spectrum in the entire wavelength range. As the second step, we modify the temperature structures in the upper atmospheres assuming the presence of chromospheres/coronae and seek model atmospheres that give better fits to the observations (§[3.2.1](#revisedmodel){reference-type="ref" reference="revisedmodel"}). We call the model atmospheres derived by the second step "heating best-fit models". In Figures [\[fig1\]](#fig1){reference-type="ref" reference="fig1"} and [\[fig2\]](#fig2){reference-type="ref" reference="fig2"} we display the spectra synthesized from the non-heating best-fit models (green lines) and those from the heating best-fit models (red lines)[^5] in comparison with the observed spectra (black lines). We classify the eight brown dwarfs into two groups: In the first group consisting of three objects (Figure [\[fig1\]](#fig1){reference-type="ref" reference="fig1"}) the heating model spectra give reasonable fits to the observed spectra, while in the second group consisting of the others (Figure [\[fig2\]](#fig2){reference-type="ref" reference="fig2"}) the heating models still give poor fits to the observations (§[3.2.2](#result){reference-type="ref" reference="result"}). ## Non Heating Models {#nonheat} ### Fitting Procedure {#fitting} We derive physical parameters of the AKARI objects, namely effective temperature $T_{\rm{eff}}$, surface gravity log g and critical temperature $T_{\rm{cr}}$ by model fitting to the only SpeX/CGS4 spectral data with Unified Cloudy Model (UCM; @Tsuji_2002 [@Tsuji_2005]). $T_{\rm{cr}}$ is given as an additional parameter in UCM that controls the dust dissipation thus the thickness of the dust layer. The UCM applies a simple concept with phase-equilibrium, and does not include the detail of cloud formation and growth mechanisms associated with hydrodynamic processes (@Woitke_2003 [@Woitke_2004; @Helling_2006; @2008A&A...485..547H]). $T_{\rm{cr}}$ cannot be determined from the physical theory but must be determined from observations empirically. For $T_{\rm{cr}}\[<T<T_{\rm{cond}}$, dust condensation and sublimation are balanced. This means that the dust would exist only in the layer of $T_{\rm{cr}}\]<T < T_{\rm{cond}}$. We follow and evaluate the goodness of the model fitting to the only shorter wavelength spectra by the statistic $G_k$ defined as \[\label{gk} G_{k} = \frac{1}{n-m}\sum_{i=1}^n \omega_{i} \left( \frac{f_{i}-C_{k}F_{k,i}}{\sigma_{i}} \right)^2,\] where $n$ is the number of data points; $m$ is degree of freedom (this case $m=3$); $\omega_{i}$ is the weight for the $i$-th wavelength points (we give the equal weight as $\omega_{i}$ = 1 for all data points because of no bias within each observed spectrum); $f_{i}$ and $F_{k, i}$ are the flux densities of the observed data and $k$-th model, respectively; $\sigma_{i}$ are the errors in the observed flux densities and $C_{k}$ is the scaling factor given by \[\label{scalingfactor} C_{k} = \frac{\sum \omega_{i} f_{i} F_{k,i}/\sigma_{i}^2}{\sum \omega_{i} {F_{k,i}}^2/{\sigma_{i}}^2}.\] $G_{k}$ is equivalent to reduced $\chi ^{2}$, since we adopt $\omega_{i}$ = 1 in our analysis. This method is same with that in, except for fitting wavelength range. ### Results {#fitresult} We show the model spectra of the non-heating best-fit models (green lines), which use the only SpeX/CGS4 data for the fittings, in Figures [\[fig1\]](#fig1){reference-type="ref" reference="fig1"} & [\[fig2\]](#fig2){reference-type="ref" reference="fig2"}. We see that the non-heating best-fit models well explain the SpeX/CGS4 spectra, but the model spectra do not match with the observations in the AKARI wavelength range well. The principal differences between the observed and model spectra from the non-heating best-fit models are seen in the flux levels in the $\mathrm{CH_4}$ at the 3.3 $\mu$m band and around the 4.0 $\mu$m region. For instance, the $\mathrm{CH_4}$ bands of the three brown dwarfs, 2MASS J2224--0158, GJ 1001B and 2MASS 1632+1904, cannot be explained. The model spectrum of GJ 1001B contradictorily exhibits the $\mathrm{CH_4}$ absorption feature at the 3.3 $\mu$m band, whereas it can reprocuce the overall observed spectrum from 1.0 to 5.0 $\mu$m. There are also differences at 2.7 $\mu$m $\mathrm{H_{2}O}$ and 4.6 $\mu$m CO bands in the spectrum of 2MASS J2224--0158. For other four objects, SDSS J1446+0024, SDSS J0539--0059, 2MASS J1507--1627 and 2MASS J0825+2115, the entire AKARI spectra cannot be explained by the non-heating best-fit models especially the flux levels around 4.0 $\mu$m. The deviation of 2MASS J0036+1821 shows a different trend from other objects; i.e., the flux level around 4.0 $\mu$m in the observed spectrum is lower than that in the model spectrum, even if 2.7 $\mu$m $\mathrm{H_{2}O}$ and 4.6 $\mu$m CO bands reasonably fit well to the observation. These results indicate that the SpeX/CGS4 data cannot solely constrain the physical parameters of the upper atmospheres of these observed brown dwarfs. ## Heating Models {#heat} ### Revising Thermal Structure {#revisedmodel} The temperature calculated from UCM as well as other models assuming the radiative equilibrium that decreases monotonically with an increasing altitude. On the other hand, some brown dwarfs exhibit activities regarding chromospheres, coronae, and flares, as discussed in §[1](#introduction){reference-type="ref" reference="introduction"}. In such objects, the temperatures eventually stop decreasing and turn to increase somewhere in the upper atmospheres. There are several possibilities to account for the temperature inversion, which is discussed later in §[4](#discussion){reference-type="ref" reference="discussion"}. In this section, leaving the detailed heating mechanisms aside, we adopt a very simple procedure to take into account the effect of the modified temperature structures. Since the temperature structures of the non-heating best-fit models are derived mainly from the $J$ and $H$ band features, which are sensitive to the effect of dust, we can reasonably assume that the temperature structures in the dust layers located in the inner photospheres are reliable even in the non-heating best-fit models. Thus we change the temperature structures only above the dust layers. We put a floor value, $T_{\rm const}$, for the temperature structure of each object in the following way: \]\label{eq1} T(r) = \max(T(r),T_{\rm const})=\max(T(r),f_{\rm const}T_{\rm eff}),\[ where $f_{\rm{const}}$ is a parameter which is tuned by comparing the observed spectrum of each object(§[3.2.2](#result){reference-type="ref" reference="result"}). In other words, the surface temperature structure is replaced with a constant value following equation [\[eq1\]](#eq1){reference-type="ref" reference="eq1"}, instead of that based on the radiative equilibrium (see also middle panel of Figure [\[fig3\]](#fig3){reference-type="ref" reference="fig3"} for example). The gas pressure remains unchanged to keep the hydrostatic equilibrium by reducing the density compared with the case without $T_{\rm{const}}$, following the equation of state for an ideal gas, $p=(\rho/\mu m)kT$, where $p$, $\rho$, $\mu$, $m$, $k$, and $T$ are pressure, density, mean molecular weight, atomic mass unit, Boltzmann constant, and temperature, respectively. We do not take into account the inversion of the temperatures but see how the model spectra are modified when the temperatures do not decrease in the upper atmosphere. In a sense this is a minimal requirement to consider a chromosphere and/or corona. Using this heating model atmosphere, we solve the chemical equilibrium and then calculate the radiative transfer. ### Results {#result} We explore how the inclusion of $T_{\rm const}$ improves the model spectra. By varying $f_{\rm const}$, we seek for the heating best-fit model for each object. We show the photosphere structure in Figure [\[fig3\]](#fig3){reference-type="ref" reference="fig3"} for the model of ($T_{\rm{cr}}$/log g/$T_{\rm{eff}}$) = ($1800K/5.0/1700K$) corresponding to the atmosphere of 2MASS J2224--0158. The top panel of this figure shows the spectra of best-fit models without (green) and with (red) heating between 1.0 and 5.0 $\mu$m. The middle panel shows the temperature structures of these model atmospheres as a function of total gas pressure. The bottom panel shows the partial pressures of each molecule versus total gas pressure. We can see that the spectral shape in the range shorter than 2.5 $\mu$m, including $J$, $H$ and $K$ bands, does not change significantly, but that of AKARI wavelength range, 2.5 to 5.0 $\mu$m, changes appreciably. From the bottom panel, we find that the $\mathrm{CH_4}$ abundance in the upper region changes dramatically by introducing $T_{\rm const}$. This fact is reflected in the spectral feature around 3.3 $\mu$m shown in the top panel; i.e., the absorption feature of the 3.3 $\mu$m $\mathrm{CH_4}$ band is diminishing. In addition, the absorption bands of 2.7 $\mu$m $\mathrm{H_{2}O}$ and 4.6 $\mu$m CO in the heating model spectra tend to become weak. In general, the strengths of the absorption bands are a result of radiative transfer in which many factors such as number densities of molecules, excitation, velocity structure, and relation to the continuum source. Hence it is often difficult to identify a unique reason for the variation. In the current case, the higher temperature in the upper photosphere cancels the effects of increased abundance of the molecules and make the absorption even weaker. We find that three of the eight objects, 2MASS J2224--0158, GJ 1001B and 2MASS 1632+1904, can be explained by this new treatment, but the others cannot be improved sufficiently. For the three successful objects, the best-fit values of $T_{\rm{const}}$ are 1445 K ($T_{\rm{eff}} \times 0.85$), 1440 K ($T_{\rm{eff}} \times 0.70$), and 1280 K ($T_{\rm{eff}} \times 0.80$) for 2MASS J2224--0158, GJ 1001B, and 2MASS J1632+1904, respectively. We show the results in Figure [\[fig1\]](#fig1){reference-type="ref" reference="fig1"} and Table [\[table2\]](#table2){reference-type="ref" reference="table2"}. In the case of 2MASS J2224--0158, the non-heating best fit model cannot reproduce the AKARI spectrum, except for 3.8 to 4.3 $\mu$m. On the other hand, the heating best-fit model of 2MASS J2224--0158 can explain the entire observation perfectly within the error. For GJ 1001B, there is small deviation between the heating and non-heating best-fit model spectra, except for $\mathrm{CH_4}$ absorption band at 3.3 $\mu$m (also see Section [3.1.2](#fitresult){reference-type="ref" reference="fitresult"}). If we consider the additional heating at upper atmosphere, the $\mathrm{CH_4}$ band strength fits better to observation. Although 2MASS J1632-1904 has less S/N than the other two objects, we see that its entire spectra of the heating model fits to the observation better than that of the non-heating model. Figure [\[fig2\]](#fig2){reference-type="ref" reference="fig2"} shows an example of the comparison between the observations and the heating models with $f_{\rm{const}}$ of 0.8 for the other five objects. As shown in this figure, it is seen that the heating model spectra (red) fit better than the non-heating model spectra (green) especially for 4.6 $\mu$m CO band, except for 2MASS J0036+1821. However, the flux levels around 4.0 $\mu$m do not improve even in the heating model spectra. Thus, these objects with a deviation around 4.0 $\mu$m between the observation and the non-heating model cannot be explained by the modified temperature structure. The trend of change for the revised model spectra for any stellar parameter for mid-L brown dwarfs is almost the same; i.e., only spectral features around 3.3 $\mu$m, 2.7 $\mu$m, and 4.6 $\mu$m change. In other words, the spectra shorter than 2.5 $\mu$m do not change. This is because wavelengths shorter than 2.5 $\mu$m are sensitive to the relatively inner photosphere which we do not change at all in our current analysis. As shown in, model fitting using narrow wavelength range spectra provide better fits than using wide wavelength range spectra at the same time. analysed wide wavelength range spectra from 1.0 to 5.0 $\mu$m for model fitting to derive the most probable physical parameters for each object. They found that there are always some deviations between the observed and model spectra. For example, 2MASS J2224--0158 (L4.5), which is explained completely by our current heating model, has a large deviation at the $K$ band, which is located in wavelength range shorter than 2.5 $\mu$m. Thus, when we start with the stellar parameters derived in, the heating model spectrum cannot reproduce the observed spectrum. # Discussion As shown in Figure [\[fig1\]](#fig1){reference-type="ref" reference="fig1"}, the model spectra of the three mid-L dwarfs are considerably improved to match the observed spectra. These models take into account the temperature floors, $T_{\rm const}$, in the upper atmosphere. However, the other five objects cannot be well fitted only by including $T_{\rm const}$ (Figure [\[fig2\]](#fig2){reference-type="ref" reference="fig2"}). The motivation to introduce $T_{\rm const}$ is to minimally take into account the effect of the heating in the upper atmosphere concerning chromospheric and coronal activity. Thus it is considered that the three successful objects may have chromospheric and/or coronal activities, and the other objects do not have such strong activities. Each object could potentially be in a different state of enhanced activity, e.g., a flare, or have different effective temperatures or different ages. For example, discussed that X-ray luminosity decreases towards later spectral types. They suggest that this trend is caused by the dissipation of magnetic field at later spectral types. We discuss in the following section firstly from an observational side and then from a theoretical side. ## Relation with Chromospheric Activities X-rays (@Stelzer_2006 [@Tsuboi_2003]) and H${\alpha}$ emissions (@Mohanty_2003 [@Schmidt_2007; @Reiners_2008]) are detected in some brown dwarfs. These observations suggest that at least some brown dwarfs have hot regions implicating chromospheres and/or hot coronae in their upper atmospheres. We investigate the relation between our result and observed H${\alpha}$ emissions, which can be used as an indicator of chromospheric activity, of several brown dwarfs. In Table [\[table2\]](#table2){reference-type="ref" reference="table2"} we list H${\alpha}$ emission normalized by the bolometric luminosity, $L_{\rm{H\alpha}}/L_{\rm{bol}}$, by and; see also who compiled some H${\alpha}$ observations including. Among the eight objects, two are available in and five are included in. GJ 1001B is in the both papers. No data is available for the rest of two objects. The values for GJ 1001B in the two papers are different by two orders of magnitude. A possible explanation is that this object is very active and exhibits large time-variability related to flares. While the $L_{\rm{H\alpha}}/L_{\rm{bol}}$ generally decreases toward later type objects (@Reiners_2008), the latest one (2MASS 1632+1904) among the eight shows rather large $L_{\rm{H\alpha}}/L_{\rm{bol}}$, which might be caused by high time-variability. Among the six objects with $L_{\rm{H\alpha}}/L_{\rm{bol}}$, we first discuss the five objects except for 2MASS J0036+1821. The three objects, 2MASS J2224--0158, GJ 1001B and 2MASS J1632+1904, are inferred to possess high chromospheric activity from their relatively large $L_{\rm{H\alpha}}/L_{\rm{bol}}$. Interestingly enough, they are the objects whose spectra are well reproduced by the heating models. On the other hand, other two objects, 2MASS J1507--1627 and 2MASS J0825+2115, which have much lower $L_{\rm{H\alpha}}/L_{\rm{bol}}$, cannot be explained even though the temperature floors are considered. We should consider alternative effect for these unsuccessful objects. The final one of the six objects, 2MASS J0036+1821, with $L_{\rm{H\alpha}}/L_{\rm{bol}}$ appears to be an outlier. The deviation of the non-heating best-fit model spectrum from the observed spectrum appeared in 2.5 to 5.0 $\mu$m is the opposite direction from the other objects; the flux level of the model spectrum is higher than that of the AKARI observed spectrum. Apart from the absolute magnitude flux level, the spectral shape in the AKARI wavelength range itself seems to be improved, which might imply that our revised model partly makes sense in some respects in this object. ## Magnetic Heating We conclude that the additional heating in an upper atmosphere is important to understand observed spectra of brown dwarfs. So far we have not specified mechanisms that account for the heating to keep the temperatures in the upper atmospheres. The surface region of a brown dwarf is convectively unstable, and it is considered that the energy is upwardly transported by the convection . We expect that magnetic fields are generated by dynamo actions, similarly to what takes place in the Sun and stars with a surface convective layer. Various types of magnetic waves are generated and a fraction of them propagates upwardly to heat up upper regions of the atmospheres and drive the stellar winds. The Alfvén wave, among others, is a promising candidate that transfers the energy of the convection to upper regions, and leads to various magnetic activities such as chromospheres, coronae, and stellar winds, under the conditions of the Sun and other stars with surface convection. One of the authors of the present paper has studied various objects with surface convection, including the Sun, red giants, active solar-type stars, and hot jupiters. Surface convection triggers the processes introduced here. Since brown dwarfs posses a surface convective layer, the similar processes could operate in their atmospheres. Here, we demonstrate how the temperature structure of the model of ($T_{\rm{cr}}$/log g/$T_{\rm{eff}}$) = (1800 K/5.0/1700 K) corresponding to the non-heating best-fit model for 2MASS J2224--0158 is affected by magnetic heating with a MHD (magnetohydrodynamical) simulation. We use the same simulation code originally developed for the Sun. We dynamically solve the structure of the atmosphere without assuming hydrostatic equilibrium. The temperature and density (accordingly gas pressure) dynamically change with time by the propagation and dissipation of waves; since Alfvén waves accompany Poynting flux, their dissipation leads to the heating of the ambient gas. We do not solve radiative transfer but use a simplified radiation cooling rate empirically determined from observation of the solar chromosphere . We also adopt the ideal MHD approximation; we assume that the magnetic field is well-coupled with the gas component. The validity of the assumption is discussed later in this subsection. We replace the Sun by 2MASS J2224--0158 as the central object. We take the mass, $M_{\star}=0.05M_{\odot}$, as a typical brown dwarf mass, where $M_{\odot}$ is the solar mass. We adopt the parameters of the non-heating best-fit model, $\log g=5.0$ and $T_{\rm eff}=1700$ K. The stellar radius is derived as $R_{\star}=0.12R_{\odot}$ from $M_{\star}$ and $\log g$. We set the inner boundary ($r=R_{\star}$) of the simulation at the top of the surface convection zone located at the position with the gas pressure $=10^{7.08}$ dyn cm$^{-2}$ from our model atmosphere. We set up an open magnetic flux tube which is similar to those on the Sun. Recent HINODE observations show that open magnetic flux tubes in coronal holes are anchored at very strong magnetic field regions with $\sim$ kilo-Gauss , which is nearly equipartition to the ambient gas pressure. These flux tubes open quite rapidly and the average field strength is reduced to an order of 1-10 G in the corona. In the present simulation for a brown dwarf, we adopt similar properties for our underlying flux tube, namely a super-radially open flux tube emanating from an equipartition kG patch. We inject velocity perturbations at the inner boundary. In particular, transverse fluctuations with respect to the radial magnetic field excite Alfvén waves travelling upwardly. We adopt an amplitude of 20 % of the sound speed at the surface with a wide-band spectrum in proportion to the inverse of frequency ranging from period of 5 to 250 seconds, by referring to HINODE observation of the solar surface; the spectrum is logarithmically centered at a period of 30-40 seconds, which can be scaled with $H/c_s\sim c_s/g \sim 1/10$ of the solar value ($=5$ minutes oscillation), where $H$ and $c_s$ are the pressure scale height and the sound speed. Figure [\[fig4\]](#fig4){reference-type="ref" reference="fig4"} compares the temperature structures versus total gas pressure; the temperature derived from the simulation is averaged over sufficiently long time compared to the typical timescale of the wave propagation. The numerical simulation (blue line) shows that the temperature is nearly constant $\approx 2000$ K from $p=10^7$ to $10^4$ dyn cm$^{-2}$, and rapidly increases in $p \la 10^3$ dyn cm$^{-2}$. The temperature actually reaches several hundred thousand K by the heating as a result of the dissipation of Alfvén waves in the upper region. This case might be an extreme one because we are assuming the ideal MHD approximation and the more or less large velocity perturbation at the inner boundary. If the ideal MHD approximation is not satisfied, the amplitude of generated waves will be smaller because of magnetic diffusion . Injecting smaller perturbations, the numerical simulation would give lower temperature, approaching to that of the simple model with $T_{\rm const}$ (red line). Although our treatment of the heating models with $T_{\rm const}$ is quite a simple one, we expect that it could give meaningful results. We here examine the validity of our assumption of the ideal MHD approximation for the numerical simulation. The evolution of magnetic field is determined by an induction equation, \]\frac{\partial\mbf{B}}{\partial t} = \mbf{\nabla} \times [\mbf{v\times B}-\eta (\mbf{\nabla \times B}) ], \label{eq:ind}\[ where $\eta$ is resistivity. Although in our simulations $\eta=0$ is assumed, if the second term on the right hand side dominates the first term, magnetic field is not well coupled to ambient gas and diffuses away. In the situation of a brown dwarf atmosphere, the collision between electrons and neutrals, which corresponds to the "decoupled diffusion" term in, is the dominant mechanism that accounts for the resistivity. This can be expressed as \]\eta \approx 200 \frac{\sqrt{T}}{x_{\rm e}} ({\rm cm^2s^{-1}}) \label{eq:restv}\[ , where $x_e$ is an ionization degree and temperature, $T$, is in units of Kelvin. By using this expression, we estimate whether the magnetic diffusion becomes significant or not. We introduce a magnetic Reynolds number, \]R_{\rm m} = v L / \eta,\[ which is a nondimensional variable that measures the frozen-in condition of magnetic field; $R_{\rm m}$ is the ratio of the first term to the second term on the right-hand side of Equation ([\[eq:ind\]](#eq:ind){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:ind"}) by replacing the rotation derivative $(\mbf{\nabla \times})$ via a simple division by a typical length, $L$. The ideal MHD condition is valid if $R_{\rm m}$ is significantly larger than unity. As a representative quantity for $L$, we can reasonably use the wavelength of the typical Alfvén wave we are injecting: \]L \sim v_{\rm A} \tau \sim c_{\rm s}\tau = 120\; {\rm km}\left(\frac{c_{\rm s}} {3\;{\rm km\; s^{-1}}}\right)\left(\frac{\tau}{40\;{\rm s}}\right), \label{eq:wvlg}\[ where $\tau$ is the wave period normalized by the logarithmically centered value, 40 s, and $v_{\rm A}$ is the Alfvén velocity, which is comparable to the sound speed, $c_{\rm s}$, because we consider the equipartition magnetic flux tube. Here the normalization of $c_{\rm s}=3$ km s$^{-1}$ corresponds to $T=1500$ K. Using Equations ([\[eq:restv\]](#eq:restv){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:restv"}) & ([\[eq:wvlg\]](#eq:wvlg){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:wvlg"}), we can estimate \]R_{\rm m} = 1 \left(\frac{v}{0.6\;{\rm km\;s^{-1}}}\right) \left(\frac{\tau}{40\;{\rm s}}\right)\left(\frac{x_{\rm e}}{10^{-8}}\right) \label{eq:Reyval}\[ where we normalize $v$ by the velocity amplitude ($=0.2 c_{\rm s}$ ) of the injected Alfvén waves near the inner boundary. This is a conservative estimate because the amplitude of the Alfvén waves is amplified as they propagate through the density decreasing atmosphere. Note also that the dependence on temperature (Equations [\[eq:restv\]](#eq:restv){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:restv"} & [\[eq:wvlg\]](#eq:wvlg){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:wvlg"}) is canceled out because $c_{\rm s} \propto \sqrt{T}$. Equation ([\[eq:Reyval\]](#eq:Reyval){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:Reyval"}) shows that the magnetic diffusion is not so significant for low-frequency ($\tau=40$ s) Alfvén waves, even though the ionization degree is not so high, $x_{\rm e} > 10^{-8}$. The ionization degrees of the non-heating best-fit model, the heating best-fit model, and the MHD simulation of 2MASS J2224--0158 as a function of total gas pressure are shown in Figure [\[fig4\]](#fig4){reference-type="ref" reference="fig4"} (b). The ionization degree of the non-heating model monotonically decreases with elevating height (decreasing total gas pressure). On the other hand, those of the heating model and the MHD simulation tend to increase, because these model atmospheres have higher temperature and lower density than non-heating model. The ionization degree of the heating model decreases with elevating height (the same as the non-heating model) until reaching the region with $T=\]T_{\rm{const}}$, and then increases toward the upper region. The ionization degree resulting from the MHD simulation is larger than those of the other two cases and exceeds 10$^{-8}$ in the almost entire region except for the location around log$P_g \sim 6.5$. Therefore, the ideal MHD approximation is marginally acceptable for this case. In more elaborated studies, we should solve resistive MHD equations by using derived an ionization degree in a self-consistent manner. In the above estimate, we only take into account thermal ionization. However, additional ionization processes are supposed to work in the atmosphere of brown dwarfs. Helling and her collaborators have proposed various ionization mechanisms, e.g. collision between charged dust grains, inter-grain electrical discharge, ionization by external cosmic rays, and Alfvén ionization. If these processes actually work, the ionization degree will be larger than the above estimate, leading to better coupling between gas and magnetic field. Observations show that the ratio of X-ray and H${\alpha}$ luminosities to bolometric luminosity appears to decrease with later spectral type, while the ratio of radio luminosity to bolometric luminosity increase with later spectral type @Berger_2010 [@Hallinan_2007] If we take into account magnetic diffusivity in our MHD simulations, we expect that the tendency of X-ray and H${\alpha}$ will be interpreted at least in a qualitative sense by decreasing $x_{\rm e}$ with decreasing atmospheric temperature. In contrast, the radio luminosity is supposed to be emitted from non-thermal electrons, which is beyond the scope of our MHD simulations that handle the thermal component only. ## Dust effects For the "unsuccessful" four objects in Figure [\[fig2\]](#fig2){reference-type="ref" reference="fig2"} excluding 2MASS J0036+1821, the flux levels around 4.0 $\mu$m differ between the observations and the model spectra. In this study, we focus the only upper temperature structure; i.e., we do not modify inner atmospheric structure affected by dust. However, the mid-L dwarfs are supposed to be most affected by the dust in their photosphere, thus their atmospheres should be complicated. Our study shows the flux level of the 4.0 $\mu$m region is affected by dust volume (Sorahana et al. 2013 submitted to ApJ). Therefor we may need to consider some additional dust effects along with $T_{\rm{cr}}$ in UCM, for example, changing abundances, distributions, providing size distribution, and adding other dust species. compared five models of brown dwarf atmospheres. The other models constructed by Marley, Ackerman & Lodders, Allard & Homeier and Helling & Woitke consider vertical mixing efficiency. showed that for L dwarfs a vertical mixing in the surface of the photosphere does not affects to molecular abundances in that region, thus spectral features also does not change. Grain size distributions calculated by comparing between time-scales for mixing due to convective overshooting and condensation and gravitational settling are not implemented in the UCM. We also need to consider additional effects such as hydrodynamic processes including meteorological aspect. # Conclusions To solve the discrepancy between observed and model spectra between 1.0 and 5.0 $\mu$m, we consider the additional effects concerning chromospheric activity, coronae, and flares which possibly affect the temperature structure in an upper atmosphere. First, we carry out the model fittings to the only SpeX/CGS4 spectra to pin down the temperature structures in the deeper atmospheres. After that, we change the upper thermal structure in the derived model photosphere with a temperature floor, $T_{\rm const}$, to take into account the effect of the chromosphere. Then we compare the heating model spectra with the observed spectra for eight brown dwarfs taken by AKARI. We validate that the spectrum of 2.5--5.0 $\mu$m reflects the structure of the upper photosphere; in particular, the 3.3 $\mu$m $\mathrm{CH_4}$, 2.7 $\mu$m $\mathrm{H_{2}O}$ and 4.6 $\mu$m CO bands are sensitive to the thermal structure of the upper photosphere region. From the comparison between the observed and heating model spectra, we find that three objects with relatively strong $H{\alpha}$ emission are consistently explained by the model spectra with $T_{\rm const}$ owing to the additional heating. We carry out the MHD simulation for a brown dwarf atmosphere by extending the simulation code originally developed for the Sun. The numerical simulation indeed shows that the temperature is kept nearly constant in the atmosphere and eventually increases in the upper region. Other four mid-L objects cannot be explained by our current heating model, especially the flux levels around 4.0 $\mu$m. We may need to reconsider inner atmospheric structure with additional dust effects or some hydrodynamic processes.	{'timestamp': '2014-03-12T01:05:11', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5801', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5801'}
null	null
# Introduction Gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) are the ultimate cosmic lighthouses, capable of illuminating the universe at its earliest times. They have now been detected at $z =$ 9.4, $z =$ 8.26 [GRB 090423; @salv09], and $z =$ 6.7. Besides tracing star formation rates over cosmic time, GRBs can also constrain the metallicity and reionization history of the early IGM [e.g., @i03; @tot06; @wang12], the dark energy equation of state, and the properties of host galaxies [see also @bl06b for a concise discussion of GRB cosmology]. Could GRBs also probe the properties of the first stars, and the environments in which they form? Population III (Pop III) stars are the key to understanding early cosmological reionization and chemical enrichment, the properties of primeval galaxies and the origins of supermassive black holes. Although numerical models and the fossil abundance record [@bc05; @fet05; @jet09b; @jw11; @caffau12; @keller14] both suggest that Pop III stars are 30-500 ${M}_{\odot}$, there are, for now, no direct observational constraints on their masses. Pop III GRBs might signal the deaths of the first stars because they are visible at very high redshifts. Gamma rays from long-duration GRBs can be detected by Swift out to $z \gtrsim$ 20. Analytical models suggest that GRB afterglows, which are required to pinpoint their redshifts, may be visible at $z \sim$ 15-30 [@cl00; @gou04; @im05; @inoue07; @ds11; @nak12; @kash13]. These studies either did not have complete afterglow physics or only examined jets in uniform densities, like those of the regions of Pop III stars [but see @edo14 for a $z \sim$ 6 GRB that is thought to have occurred in a uniform density]. But the processes that produce a GRB likely reset its local environment, creating far more complicated structures than those in which GRB jets have been modeled to date. These structures, such as multiple shocks and dense shells, can greatly affect the luminosity of the afterglow and hence the redshift at which it can be detected. The latest work has focused on the very energetic bursts of 1000 ${M}_{\odot}$ Pop III stars. However, Pop III stars this massive have been rendered much less likely by the most recent primordial star formation models, and it is not clear if the proto-black holes of such stars have the energy densities required to launch GRB jets, given their large radii. To obtain more realistic light curves for Pop III GRBs in the near infrared (NIR), X-rays, and radio, and to determine more accurate limits in redshift for their detection, we have modeled the afterglows of these explosions for a variety of progenitors and ambient media. We also determine if the environment of the burst, and thus the properties of its progenitor, can be extracted from its light curves. These calculations span the usual energies for both merger and single-star events, and our afterglow model produces light curves for relativistic jets in any density profile, not just the regions of earlier studies. Our simulation code is the one used in (hereafter M12) but with significant improvements that include the contribution to the flux by inverse Compton scattering and reverse shocks, and the effects of beaming and the spherical nature of the blast wave. We also revisit the question of whether or not collisions of GRB jets with large density jumps, like those associated with the massive structures ejected by some stars prior to the burst, can produce flares. Standard afterglow models predict flares for some collisions that are consistent with those observed in past events. Until recently, such features have usually been attributed to delayed energy injection from the central engine, not collisions. But some contend that collisions cannot produce flares because the extended emission region behind the blast wave and effects from reverse shocks tend to wash out bumps in the light curve. In this paper, we explore this problem in greater detail. As shown later, these effects (which our improved algorithm captures) mitigate flares but do not eliminate them, and some Pop III GRBs do exhibit prominent flares. In Section 2 we review likely pathways for Pop III GRBs, and in Section 3 we examine the circumburst environments they create. We lay out our grid of simulations in Section 4 and in Section 5 we present x-ray, NIR, and radio light curves for Pop III GRBs in all of these environments and revisit the production of flares in some of these events. Detection strategies for Pop III GRBs are examined in Section 6. Our GRB light curve model is described in detail in the Appendix. # Pop III GRB Progenitors Long duration (LD) GRBs have been shown to be connected to the deaths of massive stars and to Type Ib/c supernovae in particular, whose progenitors have lost their hydrogen envelopes. The leading contender for the central engines of LD GRBs is the collapsar model , in which the core of a massive star collapses to a black hole (BH) accretion disk system that drives a relativistic jet through the outer layers of the star and into the surrounding medium. Besides the ejection of the hydrogen envelope, which is usually necessary for the jet to break out of the star, collapsars require stellar cores with unusually high angular momenta. In principle, any star that creates a black hole can make a GRB, but given the steep decline in the stellar IMF in galaxies today, most GRB progenitors are thought to be 40-60 ${M}_{\odot}$. Two primary channels have been proposed for LD GRBs. In the first, a single rapidly rotating star sheds its outer envelope in some type of outburst, like a luminous blue variable (LBV) ejection, a Wolf-Rayet (WR) phase, or a pulsational pair instability. In the second, the progenitor is in a binary when it becomes a red giant. The two stars enter a common envelope phase in which the second star is engulfed by the first and slowly spirals into its center, ejecting its outer envelope and spinning up its core in an exchange of angular momentum. About a dozen pathways have been proposed in which a tightly-coupled binary system can collapse to form a BH accretion disk that powers a GRB, but they generally fall into two categories. In the first, the binary companion is another star and in the second it is a BH or neutron star (NS) . The key difference between the two is the time between the ejection of the envelope and the GRB. In the first, the H layer can be ejected as a dense shell up to several hundred kyr before the death of the star and have a radius of several pc at the time of the burst. In most cases, this shell will be beyond the reach of the jet. In the second, a slower, more massive shell is ejected only a few years before the orbit of the BH decays into the center of the star and forms an accretion disk. The shell may only be a few AU in radius at the time of the burst. In both cases, strong winds usually precede and follow the expulsion of the envelope. The latest simulations suggest that Pop III GRBs may be produced by these pathways more frequently than previously thought. The discovery that fragmentation and UV breakout [@hos11; @stacy12] in primordial halos may limit the masses of some Pop III stars to $\lesssim$ 50 ${M}_{\odot}$ implies that more of them may fall into the mass range for GRBs than previously expected. It is also now known that Pop III stars can die as compact blue giants that are susceptible to outbursts or as red supergiants that can enter a common envelope phase, depending on the degree of convective mixing or rotational mixing [@yoon05; @yoon06] over the life of the star. The fact that some Pop III stars are now known to form in binaries also improves the chances that some may enter a common envelope phase, a crucial ingredient for most collapsar scenarios. Finally, if many Pop III stars form with rotation rates that approach the breakup limit, as suggest, more GRBs may have occurred relative to the number of massive stars at very high redshifts than today [although studies have shown that even at the critical velocity the cores of massive stars must often be spun up to even higher rates by a common envelope phase to produce collapsars; @fh05]. # The Environments of Pop III GRBs Because Pop III stars are very massive, they usually ionize the halos that gave birth to them, creating regions 2.5-5 kpc in radius and driving all the gas from the halo in shocked flows on timescales of $\sim$ 2 Myr [e.g., @wan04]. In Figure 1 we show the region of a 100 ${M}_{\odot}$ star in a 8.0 $\times$ 10$^5$ ${M}_{\odot}$ halo at $z =$ 16.8 that was simulated with the Enzo code. These flows create uniform density profiles with $n \sim$ 0.1-1 cm$^{-1}$ that extend 50-100 pc from the star, as shown in Figure [\[fig:HIIprof\]](#fig:HIIprof){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:HIIprof"}. For this reason, and because Pop III stars are not thought to drive strong winds because they lack metals, previous studies have taken the GRB jet to propagate into uniform region densities. In the past, with less detailed observations, such profiles have yielded afterglow light curves that are in reasonable agreement with those of GRBs in the local universe. In reality, the ejection of the envelope and the fast winds that accompany most GRBs reset the environment in the vicinity of the star. This holds true even for Pop III stars because the ejection of the envelope is driven by kinematics, not metallicity, and the He core would still drive a wind after the ejection because rotational and convective mixing enrich the core with metals. If the progenitor is a single star with an LBV outburst, the envelope would be a fast wind driving a slow shell into a uniform region. Collimated flows can complicate this picture. If less mass is blown along the axis of the star (and hence the jet) than its equator, the density along the axis will be intermediate to those of the region and the shell. Typical LBV outbursts expel 1-10 ${M}_{\odot}$ shells. If the GRB is instead created by a merger in which the companion is a star, the envelope would just be a power-law wind profile, since in most cases the shell will be driven beyond the reach of the jet by the time of the burst. If the companion is a BH or NS, the shell will be much closer to the star at the time of the burst. Indeed, population synthesis models predict the average radius of shells expelled by He mergers to be 1-2 AU [see Figure 11 of @fb13 for $Z =$ 0.1 $Z_\odot$ stars]. However, the bulk of the envelope tends to be ejected along the equatorial plane of the progenitor in such events, so the density profile can again be intermediate to that of the region and a fast wind pushing a massive shell. We note that the jet can encounter clumps even if little of the envelope is expelled along the axis of the burst because violent instabilities can form in the region of the star that leave dense fragments in its vicinity at the time of its death . In sum, the environments of Pop III GRBs fall into four basic categories: 1. the power-law density profile of a fast wind in which a shell has been driven beyond the reach of the GRB jet: \[\rho_\mathrm{w}(r) = \frac{\dot{m}}{4 \pi r^2 v_\mathrm{w}}, \vspace{0.05in}\] where $\dot{m}$ is the mass loss rate of the wind and $v_\mathrm{w}$ is its speed. This profile is formed in most binary mergers between two stars and some single collapsars. 2. a fast wind driving a massive shell into a Pop III region, where the shell is at $\sim$ 0.2 pc at the time of the burst. This profile is created by some single collapsars and the relatively few mergers between two stars that place a shell within the range of the jet at the time of the burst. 3. a fast wind pushing into a massive shell in an region in which the inner surface of the shell is at 1-2 AU at the time of the burst. This is the profile of a He merger. 4. a diffuse, uniform region profile that a jet might encounter along certain lines of sight, such as in a toroidal mass ejection. This envelope is also appropriate for the much more massive and energetic GRBs considered by and, in which the star collapses without ejecting a shell. # Pop III GRB Models ::: We consider GRBs in 12 density profiles. Three are simple winds, with $\dot{m} =$ 10$^{-4}$, 10$^{-5}$ and 10$^{-6}$ ${M}_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$. Three are profiles in which a 5 ${M}_{\odot}$ shell is driven by a 10$^{-5}$ ${M}_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ wind out to $\sim$ 0.2 pc in region densities of 0.1, 1.0 and 10 cm$^{-3}$. Three are profiles for He mergers, in which a 5 ${M}_{\odot}$ shell is driven by a 10$^{-5}$ ${M}_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ wind into the same 3 regions above but only to a distance of $\sim$ 1.5 AU. The last three profiles are just the 3 regions themselves. In all cases, we take $v_\mathrm{w} =$ 2000 km s$^{-1}$, $v_{\mathrm{shell}}$ = 200 km s$^{-1}$, and the composition of the envelopes to be primordial, 76% H and 24% He by mass. We show density profiles for all our models in Figure [\[fig:env\]](#fig:env){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:env"}. Much higher energies ($E_{\mathrm{iso},\gamma} =$ 10$^{55}$-10$^{57}$ erg) are sometimes invoked for Pop III GRBs in part because the mass of the star, and hence the reservoir of gas that is available to the central engine, is thought to be much greater than in stars today. and also find that such energies are required for the jet to punch through the outer layers of very massive stars that do not shed their hydrogen envelopes. We proceed under the assumption that most Pop III GRBs are similar to those today and consider the usual energies for such events, 10$^{51}$, 10$^{52}$, and 10$^{53}$ erg. There are thus a total of 36 models in our simulation campaign. For simplicity, we take the initial Lorentz factor of the jet, $\Gamma_0$, to be 500, and the duration of the burst in the Earth frame to be 100 seconds. We take all the explosions in our study to occur at $z =$ 20. ## ZEUS-MP Outburst Models We calculate density profiles for outbursts in Pop III regions with ZEUS-MP in the same manner as in M12. We treat stellar winds and outbursts as time-dependent inflows at the inner boundary of a one-dimensional (1D) spherical grid: \[\rho \, = \, \frac{\dot{m}}{4 \pi {r_{\mathrm{ib}}}^2 v_{\mathrm{w}}}, \vspace{0.05in}\] where $r_{\mathrm{ib}}$ is the radius at the inner boundary and $v_{\mathrm{w}}$ is the wind velocity. Outbursts are generated by increasing $\dot{m}$ and lowering $v_{\mathrm{w}}$. At the beginning of a run the grid is initialized with one of the 3 region densities. The mesh has 32,000 uniform zones and extends from 3.084 $\times$ 10$^{10}$ cm to 9.252 $\times$ 10$^{14}$ cm ($\sim$ 60 AU) for He merger simulations and from 10$^{-5}$ pc to 0.2 pc for other mergers. We impose outflow conditions on the outer boundary, and the grid is domain decomposed into 8 tiles, with 4000 zones per tile and one tile per processor. Radiative cooling can flatten shells into cold, dense structures that strongly affect the evolution of the GRB jet. Although there are no metals or dust in our primordial ejections the shell can still cool by x-ray emission and H and He lines in the shocked gas. Our ZEUS-MP models include collisional excitation and ionization cooling by H and He, recombinational cooling, H$_2$ cooling, and bremsstrahlung cooling, with our nonequilibrium H and He reaction network providing the species mass fractions (H, H$^{+}$, He, He$^{+}$, He$^{2+}$, H$^{-}$, H$^{+}_{2}$, H$_{2}$, and e$^{-}$) needed to calculate these collisional cooling processes. The hydrodynamics in our models is always evolved on the lesser of the cooling and Courant times to capture the effect of cooling on the structure of the flow. We neglect the effect of ionizing radiation from the progenitor on winds and shells. This treatment is approximate, given that the star illuminates the flow and that its luminosity evolves over time. However, the energy deposited in the flow by ionizations is small in comparison to its bulk kinetic energy and is unlikely to alter its properties in the vicinity of the burst. One important difference between our shell profiles and those of M12 is that a fast wind does not precede the ejection of the envelope and later detach from its outer surface to create a very low-density rarefaction zone ahead of the shell. The outburst instead plows up the much higher density region, as shown in Figure [\[fig:env\]](#fig:env){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:env"}. Note that there are significant differences in the structures of shells ejected just before the burst and ejections 2000 yr before the burst. Radiative cooling has inverted the density profile inside the shell at later times and created a much larger density jump at the interface between the shell and the termination shock due to the wind that piles up at its inner surface. These structural differences, together with the distance of the shell from the explosion, have important consequences for GRB light curves as we discuss below. # Pop III GRB Light Curves We tabulate frequency bands and sensitivities for current and proposed radio, NIR, and X-ray instruments in Table [\[tab:instr\]](#tab:instr){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:instr"}. The radio instruments include the Long Wavelength Array, the Low Frequency Array (LOFAR)[^1], the Very Large Array (VLA)[^2], the Square Kilometer Array (SKA)[^3], and the Atacama Large Millimeter Array (ALMA)[^4]. The NIR instruments are the GRB Investigation via Polarimetry and Spectroscopy Infrared Telescope, the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) NIR Camera (NIRCam)[^5], the Wide-Field Infrared Survey Telescope, the Joint Astrophysics Nascent Universe Satellite NIR Telescope [JANUS NIRT; @Burrows10], and the Energetic X-ray Imaging Survey Telescope Infrared Telescope. The X-ray instruments include the Space-based Variable Objects Monitor (SVOM) Micro-channel X-ray Telescope (MXT) and ECLAIRs, the Large Angle Observatory with Energy Resolution (LOBSTER) Wide-Field X-ray Telescope, the JANUS X-ray Flash Monitor, the EXIST High-Energy Telescope, and the Swift Burst Alert Telescope (BAT) and Fermi Gamma-ray Burst Monitor (GBM)[^6]. ## Regions We show afterglow light curves for Pop III GRBs in uniform-density regions at $z =$ 20 in Figure [\[fig:HII\]](#fig:HII){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:HII"}. In all three plots sensitivity limits are shown for the appropriate instruments, beginning at the minimum integration time for each one that would result in a detection. The peak flux occurs at later times for lower frequencies. Fluxes are highest in the NIR, reaching $\sim$ 10 mJy for a $10^{53}$ erg burst in an $n = 10$ cm$^{-3}$ region. They are somewhat lower in the radio and X-ray, although the radio flux falls off only gradually after reaching its peak. In the NIR and X-ray, the flux scales roughly with the burst energy, but in the radio the flux increases by a factor of $\sim$ 50 with each decade in energy. Also, the NIR and X-ray afterglows are brightest in the highest densities at early times, but after a few hours this trend is reversed. There is much less variation in flux with ambient density in the radio afterglows. The peak flux at a given frequency is greatest in the NIR at $\sim$ 3 $\mu$m, and it decreases monotonically above and below this frequency. Pop III GRB afterglows in regions will thus most easily be detected in current and proposed NIR instruments. The afterglow reaches a peak at or before $\sim 10^{-1}$ days but falls off gradually enough that instruments such as GRIPS and WFIRST could detect a $10^{51}$ erg burst for up to about two days and a $10^{53}$ erg burst for up to 10 days. The JANUS NIRT would detect a $10 ^{53}$ erg burst for about ten days, while a $10^{51}$ erg burst would be just at the threshold of detectability. The EXIST IRT would see NIR afterglows for 0.5-25 days at $z \sim$ 20, and JWST could detect these events for 2-80 days, depending on energy and region density. In the radio portion of the spectrum, the VLA could just barely detect a $10^{51}$ erg burst in a $0.1$ cm$^{-3}$ region, while the the same burst would be visible to the SKA for about an hour. At the opposite extreme, a $10^{53}$ erg GRB in a $10$ cm$^{-3}$ region would be detectable by the VLA for nearly 80 days while SKA would see the same afterglow for $\sim 200$ days. Because the peak flux is reached earlier at higher frequencies, it will be difficult for ALMA to detect even the brightest afterglow for more than about a day. LOFAR will not see these explosions because its sensitivity falls below their peak fluxes. At $80$ MHz, the peak flux only reaches $\sim10^{-2}$ mJy, well below the LOFAR $5 \sigma$ sensitivity of $80$ mJy for an eight hour integration. GRBs in regions do not produce very bright X-ray afterglows. The X-ray instruments that are sensitive to the lowest frequency X-rays will be the most suitable for detecting these events. The MXT, HET, and WFI aboard SVOM, EXIST, and LOBSTER, respectively, plus the GBM on Fermi, with their high sensitivities and low minimum observable frequencies, will most easily detect Pop III GRBs. Only the bursts with the highest energies would be visible. A $10^{51}$ erg GRB would reach a maximum flux of only $\sim10^{-4}$ mJy at $3 \times 10^9$ GHz, well below the detection thresholds of every current and proposed X-ray mission except for the Fermi GBM. But a $10^{53}$ erg event could produce an afterglow with a flux of $\sim10^{-1}$ mJy at $10^9$ GHz immediately after the end of the prompt emission phase. This flux would then fall off slowly enough for SVOM, EXIST, and LOBSTER to detect the afterglow for nearly a day. We note that the FERMI LAT is not well suited to hunting for high-redshift GRB afterglows because of its high threshold frequency, $4.8\times10^{12}$ GHz, and modest sensitivity. ## Winds Light curves for GRBs in $r^{-2}$ winds are shown in Figure [\[fig:winds\]](#fig:winds){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:winds"}. As noted earlier, these environments are expected in many binary merger scenarios in which the hydrogen envelope of the star has been driven by stellar winds to radii that are beyond the reach of the jet before its afterglow dims below visibility. Like GRBs in regions, afterglows from explosions in stellar winds are brightest in the NIR at about 3.0 $\mu$m, with peak fluxes falling off above and below this frequency. However, due to the higher densities at smaller radii, afterglow fluxes at frequencies above the radio are greater in winds than in regions for a given burst energy. But fluxes in the radio are dimmer in winds than in regions because they peak at later times, when the jet is at larger radii and lower densities than the regions. All three fluxes scale roughly with the energy of the burst after a few hours, when the brightest afterglows are generally in the most diffuse envelopes. A $10^{53}$ erg burst in a $10^{-4}$ ${M}_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ wind reaches a maximum NIR flux of $\sim1$ Jy 100 seconds after the burst, making it readily detectable for up to 10 days with EXIST. GRIPS and WFIRST could extend this window out to 10-20 days, and this event would be visible to JANUS NIRT for almost a day. JANUS, however, with its somewhat lower sensitivities, would not be able to see the lowest energy bursts in the NIR because their fluxes fall so quickly after the burst. But EXIST would see these GRBs for up to half a day. The most sensitive of the instruments, the JWST NIRCam, could observe the least energetic GRBs for a day and the most energetic ones for 100 days, providing detailed followup to an initial detection in X-rays. Besides being somewhat dimmer than in regions, radio afterglows in winds reach peak fluxes at later times, 1-30 days instead of 0.1-3 days. The radio flux also peaks at later times in higher mass loss rates. A $10^{ 53}$ erg burst in a $10^{-6}$ ${M}_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ stellar wind reaches a peak flux of $\sim$ 1 mJy at 5 GHz after 0.8 days. It would be possible to detect such an afterglow with the VLA from about 0.1-80 days after the burst, and SKA would extend this range out to 200 days. Neither ALMA nor LOFAR would be able to detect a Pop III GRB afterglow at $z = 20$ in a stellar wind. The least energetic GRBs in the strongest winds are marginally detectable by VLA for a day and would be visible to SKA for about 10 days. X-ray afterglows for GRBs in stellar winds are much brighter than those regions. A $10^{53}$ erg GRB at $z = 20$ produces fluxes greater than $20$ mJy at $10^9$ GHz for 2.5 hours. This emission would be easily detectable by SVOM, EXIST, LOBSTER, JANUS, Swift, and the Fermi GBM. The afterglow would be visible to the JANUS XRFM for nearly a half an hour and to Fermi for almost two hours. At the other extreme, a $10^{51}$ erg GRB in a $10^{-6}$ ${M}_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ wind would produce an afterglow that would only reach $\sim5\times10^{-3}$ mJy at $10^9$ GHz. This event would only be detectable for $\sim200$ seconds with the Fermi GBM, and would likely not be found by other instruments. ## He Mergers We show X-ray, NIR and radio light curves for Pop III GRB jets crashing into massive shells ejected by helium merger events in Figure [\[fig:HeM\]](#fig:HeM){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:HeM"}. In each case the 5 ${M}_{\odot}$ shell, which has been driven into region densities of 0.1, 1, or 10 cm$^{-3}$ by a stellar wind with $\dot{m} =$ 10$^{-3}$ ${M}_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$, has a radius of $\sim$ 2 AU. The GRB jet breaks out into the $r^ {-2}$ wind before colliding with the shell. The high densities in the wind at these small radii decelerate the jet to mildly-relativistic speeds in $\sim10$ minutes in the local frame. Because the time between the ejection of the shell and the burst is short, the wind has not had time to pile up and form a termination shock at the inner layer of the shell. The jet therefore transitions directly from the wind to the hydrogen shell. A mildly relativistic reverse shock forms at the contact discontinuity between the wind and the shell, which then steps back through the jet in the frame of the jet. A new forward shock develops with a lower Lorentz factor than that of the original forward shock but that is still, in general, mildly relativistic. The new forward shock advances into the shell and immediately encounters another density jump, where it produces another pair of forward and reverse shocks. This cycle continues, with several to dozens of shock pairs eventually being formed. By the time the first forward shock reaches the interior of the shell, where the density is nearly constant and no more shocks are produced, all forward shocks have become non-relativistic and all reverse shocks have retreated through the forward shocks that created them. The jet remains in the shell for the entire 100 day simulation. When it finally emerges, there may be a slight re-collimation of the jet due to the low density of the surrounding medium. Any rebrightening of the light curve would be minimal however, due to the low density of the medium. We find that the region density beyond the shell has essentially no effect on the afterglow light curve because the structure of the shell has not yet been altered by the relic region. Light curves for Pop III GRBs in He merger shells are quite different from those in winds and regions. Their structure in a given band varies strongly with the energy of the burst and also across the bands themselves. They also exhibit much more variation over time, with sharp drops that are sometimes preceded by flares. The peak flux is again in the NIR, but there is also a large initial X-ray flux. Radio emission is suppressed by synchrotron self-absorption in the high densities in the shell, so detecting He merger GRBs at any frequency below the IR will be nearly impossible with current or proposed instruments. The flux at all frequencies is essentially quenched a short time after the jet enters the shell. The high densities in the shell (black plot in the left panel of Figure [\[fig:env\]](#fig:env){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:env"}) produce a large NIR flux. A $10^{51}$ erg GRB reaches a peak flux of $10$ mJy at 150 seconds at 3.0 $\mu$m, while a $10^{53}$ erg GRB peaks at nearly $100$ mJy. Although they are visible to all the NIR detectors in Table [\[tab:instr\]](#tab:instr){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:instr"}, they will probably only be detected by satellites whose onboard X-ray instruments are triggered by the event because their NIR fluxes are so short-lived. There would not be enough time to slew any ground-based instruments to capture the NIR afterglows of GRBs due to He mergers. This problem would be mitigated in cases in which there is more time between the ejection and the burst, since delays of up to several days would not alter the structure of the shell but would allow followup in the NIR from the ground. Note that fluxes from more energetic bursts are quenched sooner because the jet reaches the shell in less time. Higher burst energies imply larger ejecta masses for a given Lorentz factor, and they are not decelerated by the wind as much as jets with lower masses. At 83 keV, the flux from a $10^{53}$ erg burst reaches $10$ mJy just after the end of the prompt emission phase. This GRB would be visible to SVOM, JANUS, LOBSTER, EXIST, and Fermi until the jet collides with the shell at $t_\text{obs} \lesssim 0.1$ days. The flux then drops by many orders of magnitude, in some cases after producing a flare that lasts for a few seconds to a few minutes. GRB afterglows with strong, transient X-ray and IR fluxes that end within a few hours would be clear signatures of a Pop III GRB from a He merger, particularly if there are flares. ## Binary Mergers We plot afterglow light curves for Pop III GRBs in dense shells ejected in binary mergers in Figure [\[fig:BM\]](#fig:BM){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:BM"}. The hydrogen shell has a mass of 5 ${M}_{\odot}$ and is driven to a radius of $\sim$ 0.2 pc by a 10$^{-5}$ ${M}_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ wind in region densities of 0.1, 1, and 10 cm$^{-3}$. The jet initially breaks out into the wind and then reaches the termination shock at about 10 days, where the wind has piled up at the inner surface of the shell. By this time the jet has decelerated to $\Gamma \sim 10$. A mildly relativistic reverse shock forms at the interface of the free-streaming and shocked winds and then propagates back into the jet. At the same time, a mildly relativistic forward shock advances into the shocked wind. As with the He merger shell, a series of forward and reverse shock pairs form at the interface between the free-streaming and shocked winds until the leading forward shock has fully advanced into the piled-up wind at the inner surface of the shell. The jet, now only mildly relativistic, reaches the shell itself at several hundred to 1000 days, at which time it becomes non-relativistic. A series of shock pairs are again created as the jet enters the shell as in the He merger case. The jet eventually breaks out of the hydrogen shell and into the region, but only after several thousand days. As shown in Figure [\[fig:BM\]](#fig:BM){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:BM"}, the afterglow light curves are similar to those in stellar winds out to 20-50 days. Although the jet collides with the shocked wind after $\sim5$ days, the effect on the light curve is minimal. Only when the jet reaches the hydrogen shell at 20-50 days does the light curve deviate from that of a simple wind. In the X-ray band, the afterglow falls below the detection limits of current and proposed instruments before the jet collides with the shell. In the IR, the flux is only $10^{-5}-10^{-4}$ mJy when the shell is reached, making the transition into the shell barely detectable with JWST or perhaps WFIRST, and then only for the most energetic bursts. Likewise, at 5 GHz the afterglow flux is only $\sim10^{-2}$ mJy when the jet crashes into the shell. The VLA may barely be able to detect the sudden drop in flux when the jet collides with the shell, but the SKA will detect it. Note that in some cases the drop in flux will be preceded by a flare in the radio. Pop III GRBs due to binary mergers would look like events in simple winds, even when the shell is relatively close to the progenitor because the X-ray and NIR fluxes would fall below detectability before plummeting when the jet reaches the shell. However, they could still be distinguished from GRBs in winds by followup observations in the radio at later times, which could capture the abrupt drop in flux. Even the least energetic Pop III GRB from a binary merger will be visible in the NIR to all the instruments in Table [\[tab:instr\]](#tab:instr){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:instr"} for at least a day. Our models show that what primarily governs the light curves of Pop III GRBs due to He and binary mergers for a given energy are the mass loss rates after the ejection (and hence the density of the wind envelope) and the time between the ejection and the burst. The mass of the shell does not matter, as long as it can fully quench the jet. ## Flares At least half of GRBs with observed afterglows exhibit some sort of flaring in their light curves. The leading contender for the origin of these flares is late-time central engine activity. The collision of the relativistic jet with strong density features has also been suggested as the cause of some flares, like those in our He and binary merger models (M12). But some have questioned if flares really occur when a GRB jet collides with a dense shell. When the jet encounters the shell, a pair of forward and reverse shocks is formed, as noted earlier. The new forward shock continues into the shell while the reverse shock steps back through the old forward shock in the frame of the shock. Material swept up by the new forward shock does not mix with material that was swept up prior to the collision because of the contact discontinuity between the reverse shock and the new forward shock. The M12 afterglow model, which employs the swept mass approximation to model jet evolution, may therefore overestimate the mass that radiates at the post-collision Lorentz factor. argue that this could lead to overestimates of the flux at the interface between the shocked wind and the hydrogen shell, and hence a flare when none should exist. The model accounts for the radial structure of the jet when modeling the passage of the reverse shock through the original forward shock during a collision with a density jump. But their model does not resolve the density structure at the inner surface of a shell. It instead treats the inner surface as a single density jump of factor $a = 10^5$. The radial structure of a jet that has collided with a single jump $a$ is not the same as for a jet that has traversed a series of smaller jumps that sum up to $a$. Indeed, when we apply our model to the jets and density profiles in, it does not produce any flares either. Figure [\[fig:jet\]](#fig:jet){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:jet"} shows the radial structure of a jet after it has crashed into the 5 ${M}_{\odot}$ He merger shell in our study. The jet does not instantaneously transition into the shell, but instead encounters a series of density jumps over $\sim 2$ hours. Consequently, the structure of the jet becomes highly complex, with the vast majority of the swept-up mass being confined to a narrow region at the leading edge of the jet. The potential smearing out of flares due to the radial extent of the jet is therefore far less than that predicted by the @gatEA13 model. A relativistic blast wave colliding with this massive shell will thus produce a flare, even though the reverse shock and the curvature of the blast wave may reduce its amplitude. # Conclusion Pop III GRBs, together with other primordial SNe [@wet08a; @fwf10; @kasen11; @tomin11; @hum12; @tet12; @mw12; @pan12a; @fet12; @moriya12; @wet12b; @wet12e; @wet12d; @wet12a; @wet12c; @jet13a; @wet13a; @jlj12a; @wet13b; @ds13; @ds14; @wet13c; @wet13e; @chen14a; @chen14b; @chen14c], will soon directly probe the properties of the first stars in the universe in X-rays, the NIR, and radio. GRBs will be easily distinguished from other SNe at this epoch by their prompt gamma emission, afterglow X-rays, relatively short-lived NIR profiles, and their appearance at later times in the radio. Their environments, and hence their progenitors, can be deduced to some degree from the structures of their light curves. The detection of Pop III GRB afterglows is crucial to pinpointing their redshifts, since at $z \sim$ 20 there is no host galaxy from which to infer a redshift, and even at $z \sim$ 10-15 the protogalaxy would probably be too dim to be observed. Our algorithm produces afterglow light curves that are in good agreement with past work but goes well beyond them, giving realistic afterglow profiles for GRBs due to He mergers and binary mergers, which have not been modeled until now. Bursts in winds are easily separated from GRBs in regions by their much brighter NIR and X-ray fluxes at early times. They also peak in the radio at much later times, 1-30 days versus at most $\sim$ 1 day. GRBs from He mergers have unique light curves that are characterized by prominent flares and abrupt quenching at less than a day across all bands. GRBs from binary mergers have light curves that are similar to those in winds except at later times, when their flux is abruptly cut off by the collision of the jet with the shell. This feature will generally only be visible in the radio because the X-ray and NIR fluxes will have fallen below the detection threshold of all current and proposed missions before they are cut off. The sudden drop in radio flux in this type of event is sometimes preceded by a flare. There is some degeneracy in energy and local environment with light curves across progenitor type that can complicate their classification, but in many cases it will still be possible to identify their progenitors. Although Pop III GRBs at $z \sim$ 20 can be detected by Swift and VLA today, identifying them as being primordial can be problematic because: 1. a Pop III GRB cannot necessarily be distinguished from an event at low redshift from the duration of its prompt gamma emission, which would be cosmologically dilated in time by factors of up to 20. These times can still fall well within the wide range of prompt emission times found for GRBs in the local universe today. 2. even if prompt emission is suspected to be from a primordial event, its NIR afterglow, which could confirm its redshift, would not be visible to most facilities today, and may be too transient to be captured by those that can detect them. 3. if prompt gamma emission is suspected to be from a Pop III GRB, it may not be accompanied by a radio afterglow that is strong enough to determine its redshift (only $\sim$ 10% of GRBs have measurable radio signatures). Some of these problems would persist even with the next generation of NIR and radio observatories. For example, if Swift detected a burst that was thought to be Pop III, its NIR signature would disappear before JWST or a ground-based extremely large telescope could be tasked to observe it if it is a He merger event. Indeed, in spite of its extreme sensitivity in the NIR, JWST will probably not be used to follow up on future GRBs because doing so would rapidly deplete its limited fuel supply. GRB rates at $z \sim$ 20 would also be so low that it is highly unlikely that the narrow JWST fields would encounter one in routine surveys over its mission lifetime. Future successors to Swift such as EXIST and JANUS will be the best equipped to hunt for Pop III GRBs for two reasons: 1. they will be all-sky X-ray and NIR missions whose wide fields will partly compensate for the low GRB rates at $z \gtrsim$ 10 predicted by some studies. 2. their onboard telescopes will be able to measure the NIR flux of a Pop III GRB from the moment of the burst, thereby determining its redshift and, in some cases, progenitor type. For example, GRBs due to He mergers would, in all likelihood, only be detected by missions with onboard NIR telescopes. Our models show that NIR instruments with the sensitivity of the EXIST IRT would detect even the least energetic events at $z \sim$ 20 but that the JANUS NIRT in some cases would not. Our simulations also show that Pop III GRBs would appear in future NIR and radio surveys, regardless of prompt gamma emission. Radio afterglows at $z \sim$ 20 would appear in ground-based campaigns by VLA and SKA with an appropriate cadence. These events could be easily be separated from the radio signatures of Pop III SNe, which evolve on much longer timescales [@mw12]. Further studies are needed to determine if Pop III GRBs and SNe can be distinguished from the many foreground sources of synchrotron emission that could contaminate their signal. Equally important, most Pop III GRBs are bright enough to appear in all-sky surveys at $z \sim$ 20 by WFIRST and the Wide-Field Imaging Surveyor for High Redshift (WISH). The large search areas of these missions could compensate for the low event numbers at such redshifts. It should be noted that although Pop III GRBs may be more visible in the NIR than in the radio, radio facilities exist that are capable of seeing them now. Hypernovae (HNe), highly energetic Type Ib/c SNe, may be associated with some Pop III GRBs. But new studies show that if the GRB is visible, it will completely outshine the HN. If not, the HN itself will only be visible to JWST out to $z \sim$ 10-15, the era of first galaxy formation, and to WFIRST at $z \sim$ 4-6, the end of reionization. In the upper limit that there is a HN with every GRB, the HN rate would be $\sim$ 100 times the detected GRB rate at a given redshift for typical opening angles for the jet. Even at these rates, it is unlikely that the HN would be found by JWST or the next generation of ELTs without its GRB first being detected, and they lie beyond the reach of all-sky NIR missions at $z \gtrsim$ 6, which might otherwise have detected them because of their wide fields. But if the GRB is detected at $z \lesssim$ 15, followup observations might reveal a HN. Our suite of Pop III GRB light curves is not comprehensive. First, they do not account for multidimensional structures in the vicinity of the burst. Massive shells ejected in mergers are prone to dynamical instabilities that could fracture them into clumps, and emission from a relativistic jet crashing into a clump would be quite different than if it were piercing a crack in the shell. Second, as noted earlier, the ambient medium of the burst could be intermediate to the four canonical cases considered here. Clumps might exist in regions in the absence of winds, and GRB jets could break out along an axis perpendicular to the plane of a toroidal ejection. Finally, new models such as high-resolution special-relativistic hydrodynamics and particle-in-cell (PIC) simulations are needed to better probe the microphysical processes that contribute to the afterglow flux. Future multidimensional simulations in this vein can also address the imprint of realistic circumburst structures on the afterglows of Pop III GRBs. RM was supported by LANL IGPP grant 10-150. D.J.W. was supported by the European Research Council under the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) via the ERC Advanced Grant \"STARLIGHT: Formation of the First Stars\" (project number 339177). Work at LANL was done under the auspices of the National Nuclear Security Administration of the U.S. Department of Energy at Los Alamos National Laboratory under Contract No. DE-AC52-06NA25396. All ZEUS-MP simulations were performed with allocations from Institutional Computing (IC) on the Pinto cluster at LANL. [^1]: http://www.astron.nl/radio-observatory/astronomers/lofar-imaging-capabilities-sensitivity/sensitivity-lofar-array/sensiti [^2]: https://science.nrao.edu/facilities/vla/docs/manuals/propvla/ determining/source [^3]: http://www.astron.nl/radio-observatory/astronomers/lofar-imaging-capabilities-sensitivity/sensitivity-lofar-array/sensiti [^4]: http://almascience.eso.org/proposing/sensitivity-calculator [^5]: http://www.stsci.edu/jwst/instruments/nircam/sensitivity [^6]: http://fermi.gsfc.nasa.gov/science/mtgs/symposia/2012/ program/tue/PJenke.pdf	{'timestamp': '2015-10-16T02:03:01', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5565', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5565'}
# Introduction Recently, there is a strong interest in semiconductor hybrid structures, which consist of a metal and a low-dimensional semiconductor structure with strong spin-orbit (SO) coupling. The general interest is devoted to the modification of transport in the low-dimensional structure caused by the proximity with a metal, which is characterized by a macroscopic order parameter. In the case of a superconducting metal, the interest is mostly stimulated by the search for Majorana fermions. As a superconductor, also a ferromagnet (F) is characterized by a macroscopic order parameter. In the case of a ferromagnet, there is the possibility of injection and detection of spin-polarized electrons. This is important, e.g., for investigations of the spin-Hall effect, which manifests itself as finit spin accumulation at the sample edges, generated by an electric field in a low-dimensional system with strong SO coupling . The existence of the spin-Hall effect was firstly confirmed in transport investigations of thin metallic films and much later in optical experiments in semiconductors. On the other hand, a more general problem can be formulated: the mutual influence of two systems at the interface between them. In the case of a superconducting metal close to a two-dimensional electron gas (2DEG), Andreev reflection is suppressed because the strong SO coupling affects pairing near the interface . In the case of a ferromagnet, spin-dependent transport through the F-2DEG interface defines the current-induced magnetization dynamics in a ferromagnetic contact , e.g. magnetization torque . The latter effect was mostly investigated in multilayer systems , which consist of a set of normal and ferromagnetic layers. A 2DEG realized in a semiconductor quantum well, differs significantly from a thin metallic film. In particular, a 2DEG edge is well-known to exhibit a very specific one-dimensional behavior both in quantizing and in zero magnetic fields. Thus, it is quite reasonable to study spin transport in a F-2DEG planar device located at the edge of a 2DEG with strong Rashba-type SO coupling. Here, we experimentally investigate electron transport through the interface between a permalloy ferromagnet and the edge of a two-dimensional electron system with strong Rashba-type spin-orbit coupling. We observe strongly non-linear transport around zero bias at millikelvin temperatures. The observed nonlinearity is fully suppressed above some critical values of temperature, magnetic field, and current through the interface. We interpret this behavior as a result of spin accumulation at the interface and its current-induced absorption as a magnetization torque. # Samples and technique Our samples are grown by solid source molecular beam epitaxy on semi-insulating GaAs (100) substrates. The active layer is composed of a 20-nm thick $In_{0.75}Ga_{0.25}As$ quantum well sandwiched between a lower 50-nm thick and an upper 120-nm thick $In_{0.75}Al_{0.25}As$ barrier. Details on the growth parameters can be found elsewhere . A two dimensional electron gas, confined in a narrow asymmetric $In_{0.75}Ga_{0.25}As$ quantum well, is characterized by strong Rashba-type SO coupling . For our samples, the 2DEG mobility at 4K is about $5 \cdot 10^{5}$cm$^{2}$/Vs and the carrier density is $4.1 \cdot 10^{11}$cm$^{-2}$, as obtained from standard magnetoresistance measurements. A sample sketch is presented in Fig. [\[sample\]](#sample){reference-type="ref" reference="sample"}. A 200 nm high mesa is formed by wet chemical etching. In our $In_{0.75}Ga_{0.25}As$ structure, a high quality contact to a 2DEG edge can be realized by evaporation of a metal over the mesa edge, without annealing procedure . We fabricate two Ohmic contacts to the 2DEG by thermal evaporation of 100 nm Au (with few nm Ni to improve adhesion). These Ohmic contacts are characterized by a constant ($\approx 1 k\Omega$) resistance. In addition, we use rf sputtering to deposit 50 nm thick ferromagnetic $Fe_{20}Ni_{80}$ permalloy stripes to overlap the mesa edge. The initial magnetization of the permalloy is oriented along the mesa edge, see Fig. [\[sample\]](#sample){reference-type="ref" reference="sample"}. The stripes are formed by lift-off technique, and the surface is mildly cleaned by Ar plasma before sputtering. To avoid any 2DEG degradation, the sample is not heated during the sputtering process. A planar F-2DEG junction is formed between the ferromagnetic electrode and the 2DEG at the mesa edge. We study electron transport across one particular F-2DEG junction in a three-point configuration: a current is applied between one of the Au Ohmic contacts and a ferromagnetic electrode which is grounded (contact 1 in Fig. [\[sample\]](#sample){reference-type="ref" reference="sample"}) while the other Au contact measures the 2DEG potential. To obtain $dV/dI(V)$ characteristics, we sweep the dc current through the interface from-5 $\mu$A to +5 $\mu$A. This dc current is modulated by a low (0.85 nA) ac (110 Hz) component. We measure both the dc ($V$) and ac ($\sim dV/dI$) components of the 2DEG potential by using a dc voltmeter and a lock-in amplifier, respectively. We have checked, that the lock-in signal is independent of the modulation frequency in the range 50 Hz--300 Hz. This range is defined by applied ac filters. Because of the relatively low in-plane 2DEG resistance (about 100 $\Omega$ at present 2DEG concentration and mobility), and the low resistance of the metallic permalloy electrode, the measured $dV/dI(V)$ curves reflect the behavior of the F-2DEG interface. To extract features specific to the SO coupling, the measurements were performed at a temperature of 30 mK. Similar results were obtained from different samples in several cooling cycles. # Single F-2DEG junctions ## Results Examples of $dV/dI(V)$ characteristics are presented in Fig. [\[IVterm\]](#IVterm){reference-type="ref" reference="IVterm"}(a) for three different F-2DEG junctions, depicted in Fig. [\[sample\]](#sample){reference-type="ref" reference="sample"}. All three experimental curves in Fig. [\[IVterm\]](#IVterm){reference-type="ref" reference="IVterm"}(a) look quite similar: they only differ by a constant and bias-independent offset. The offset absolute value does not correlate with the junction position along the mesa edge: the measured resistance is maximum for the junction 2, which is not the closest one to the current or voltage Ohmic contacts. This is another experimental verification that the measured resistance is a characteristics of one particular F-2DEG interface, see also Section [4](#double){reference-type="ref" reference="double"}. Each curve in Fig. [\[IVterm\]](#IVterm){reference-type="ref" reference="IVterm"}(a) demonstrates strongly non-linear behavior, which is shown in detail in Fig. [\[IVterm\]](#IVterm){reference-type="ref" reference="IVterm"}(b) for the junction 1. The curve is slightly asymmetric with respect to voltage and is characterized by a strictly linear dependence of $dV/dI(V)$, except in the narrow region around zero bias. A temperature increase suppresses the zero-bias non-linearity. The non-linearity disappears completely at 0.88 K. In contrast, the linear branches of the $dV/dI(V)$ curve are invariant in this temperature range. Similarly to temperature, the zero-bias nonlinearity in $dV/dI$ can be suppressed by a magnetic field, as shown in Fig. [\[IVmag\]](#IVmag){reference-type="ref" reference="IVmag"}. The full suppression occurs at quite high $B=2$ T for an in-plane oriented field while it occurs at much lower field ($B=0.67$ T) for the perpendicular field orientation. The linear branches of the $dV/dI(V)$ curves demonstrate bias-independent magnetoresistance, which is positive (a) or negative (b), depending on the magnetic field orientation. ## Discussion Let us start the discussion with the $dV/dI(V)$ curves with suppressed zero-bias nonlinearity, i.e. from Fig. [\[IVterm\]](#IVterm){reference-type="ref" reference="IVterm"}(b) at higher temperature ($0.88K$) or from Fig. [\[IVmag\]](#IVmag){reference-type="ref" reference="IVmag"}(a) above 1.5 T. The linear dependence of $dV/dI(V)$, outside the zero bias region as well as the clear asymmetry of the curve, differs significantly from usual Ohmic behavior with constant $dV/dI(V)$. This behaviour indicates the presence of a (narrow) potential barrier at the interface between the ferromagnet and the 2DEG, e.g. due to depletion at the 2DEG edge . From the constant slope of the linear branches in Figs. [\[IVterm\]](#IVterm){reference-type="ref" reference="IVterm"} and [\[IVmag\]](#IVmag){reference-type="ref" reference="IVmag"} we can conclude that in our experiment the barrier is roughly independent of temperature and magnetic field. Apart from the barrier, the junction resistance is affected by single-particle scattering due to 2DEG disorder in the vicinity of the interface. The disorder is responsible for different offset values observed for different junctions as shown in Fig. [\[IVterm\]](#IVterm){reference-type="ref" reference="IVterm"}(a). Both barrier and disorder define a single-particle transmission of the interface which we can estimate to be $T\approx 0.1$ from the junction resistance and width. This $T$ value is slightly different (below 10%) for different junctions, which is in agreement with the disorder variation observed in Ref. for similar samples. However, both disorder and potential barrier are junction-specific values, so they cannot be responsible for the quite universal zero-bias nonlinearity in $dV/dI$ at low temperature. On the other hand, characteristic values of the non-linearity suppression ($T\approx$ 1 K and $B\approx$ 1.5-2 T in-plane field) are well known for the 2DEG in our $In_{0.75}Ga_{0.25}As$ quantum well: the spin-orbit splitting $\Delta_{SO}$ is about 0.1 meV in zero magnetic field , while Zeeman splitting exceeds $\Delta_{SO}$ for in-plane $B > 1.5$ T. For this reason and because the observed non-linearity is quite universal for different junctions, it seems to be reasonable to connect the observed nonlinearity with spin effects due to the Rashba SO coupling. The spin effects are expected to be quite sophisticated in the vicinity of the interface . At zero magnetic field, the electric field $E_x$, which originates from flowing current, is expected to cause a non-zero spin current $j^z_y$ in a clean, infinite and homogeneous 2DEG , which is well known as a spin-Hall effect. However, the spin current is not measurable directly, so its physical meaning is obscure . A more meaningful quantity is spin polarization (spin accumulation) rather than a spin current. Calculations that included scattering resulted in $j^z_y=0$, and $j^z_y=0$ has been also proven directly even in absence of scattering . Despite this fact, spin polarization $S_z$ near the edges even in absence of spin current has been found in a number of theoretical papers, see, e.g., Refs. . Thus, out-of-plane spin polarization $S_z$ is accumulated around the corners , see Fig. [\[spin\]](#spin){reference-type="ref" reference="spin"}. Since the permalloy film has in-plane magnetization, transport of out-of-plane polarized electrons to the contact is difficult because the necessary absorption of a polarization component perpendicular to the permalloy magnetization. The junction width is effectively diminished, which gives rise to the increased differential resistance $dV/dI$ around zero bias as shown in Fig. [\[IVterm\]](#IVterm){reference-type="ref" reference="IVterm"}. When we increase the current through the interface, this out-of-plane spin polarization can be transferred to the permalloy magnetization as a magnetization torque . This restores the contact effective width, so the differential resistance is diminished exactly to the same values as obtained by a temperature increase as shown in Fig. [\[IVterm\]](#IVterm){reference-type="ref" reference="IVterm"}(b). The current-induced polarization absorption is characterized by some critical current value, which can be estimated from Fig. [\[IVterm\]](#IVterm){reference-type="ref" reference="IVterm"}(b) as $\approx 1 \mu$A. This relatively low value originates from the specific geometry: the planar junction is formed by a thin permalloy film at vertical mesa edge. If we consider the finite 2DEG thickness, we obtain quite reasonable critical current density of $10^{4}-10^{5}$ A/cm$^2$. The above picture is essentially based on the presence of a strong Rashba-type spin-orbit coupling in the 2DEG. If the temperature exceeds the value of the spin-orbit splitting $\Delta_{SO} \approx 0.1$ meV, all the effects of the spin polarization disappear in the 2DEG, and the interface resistance is diminished, as we do observe in Fig. [\[IVterm\]](#IVterm){reference-type="ref" reference="IVterm"}(b) at $T\approx 1$ K. The nonlinearity observed in Fig. [\[IVterm\]](#IVterm){reference-type="ref" reference="IVterm"} is indeed induced by the current, because the nonlinearity bias range in Fig. [\[IVterm\]](#IVterm){reference-type="ref" reference="IVterm"}(b) (about 4 mV) exceeds significantly the characteristic suppression temperature $T\approx 1$ K. An in-plane magnetic field has a similar effect: when the Zeeman splitting exceeds $\Delta_{SO}$ at $B\approx 1.5$ T, the spin-Hall effect disappears, and the interface resistance is diminished, as can be seen in Fig. [\[IVmag\]](#IVmag){reference-type="ref" reference="IVmag"}(a). A positive, bias-independent magnetoresistance of the linear branches of the $dV/dI(V)$ curves reflects the spin-polarization of the 2DEG and is not sensitive to spin-orbit effects. The primary effect of a perpendicular magnetic field is different. It easily aligns already at lower magnetic field values ($B\approx 0.67$ T) the magnetization of the soft permalloy ferromagnet to the field direction, i.e. in the $S_z$ direction in this case. The transport through the F-2DEG interface does not require the perpendicular magnetization component absorption. Thus, the junction resistance is reduced, as we see in Fig. [\[IVmag\]](#IVmag){reference-type="ref" reference="IVmag"}(b). Negative magnetoresistance of the linear branches of $dV/dI(V)$ curves is defined by the 2DEG orbital effects in a perpendicular field. # Double F-2DEG-F junctions {#double} The above arguments are supported by the magnetic field behavior of F-2DEG-F junctions. We measured the bias-dependent differential resistance of F-2DEG-F junctions in a two-point configuration, by grounding one ferromagnetic stripe in Fig. [\[sample\]](#sample){reference-type="ref" reference="sample"} and using another to apply a current and to measure a voltage drop simultaneously. First we will show that the non-linearity is determined by the interface, see Fig [\[IV2p\]](#IV2p){reference-type="ref" reference="IV2p"}. The contacts 1 and 2 are separated by a distance of 2 $\mu$m, which is below the 10 $\mu$m mean free path in the 2DEG. It is thus not surprising that the $dV/dI(V)$ curve in Fig [\[IV2p\]](#IV2p){reference-type="ref" reference="IV2p"}(a) at $B=0$ is exactly the sum of the two corresponding $dV/dI(V)$ characteristics from Fig. [\[IVterm\]](#IVterm){reference-type="ref" reference="IVterm"}(a). The positive magnetoresistance is very weak in this case, because the ballistic transport is less sensitive to the 2DEG between the two ferromagnetic contacts. For the long (400 $\mu$m) F-2DEG-F junction, see Fig [\[IV2p\]](#IV2p){reference-type="ref" reference="IV2p"}(b), the $dV/dI(V)$ curve contains a noticeable (about 100 $\Omega$) 2DEG resistance even in zero magnetic field (compare the corresponding values in Figs. [\[IVterm\]](#IVterm){reference-type="ref" reference="IVterm"}(a) and [\[IV2p\]](#IV2p){reference-type="ref" reference="IV2p"}(b)). In this case the positive magnetoresistance is practically restored. However, in both cases, the zero-bias nonlinearity suppression by the in-plane magnetic field is exactly the same as in the case of a single junction. We can thus conclude that the non-linearity is determined by the interface. Next, ballistic, spin-dependent transport in the vicinity (about 2 $\mu$m) of a junction is demonstrated in Fig. [\[R2p\]](#R2p){reference-type="ref" reference="R2p"}. For larger distance (400 $\mu$m) between the leads (red line), the $dV/dI (B)$ curve is a sum of $xx$ and $xy$ magnetoresistance components, as expected for a quantum Hall two-point measurements. However, the $dV/dI (B)$ demonstrates a clear Hall (xy) behavior for the short (2 $\mu$m) distance between the leads (blue line) already at very low magnetic fields, see inset to Fig. [\[R2p\]](#R2p){reference-type="ref" reference="R2p"}. In a quantizing magnetic field, the bulk spectrum of a 2DEG is a Landau ladder with additional Zeeman (spin) sub-splitting. Current-carrying edge states at the sample edge are therefore characterized by the out-of-plane spin projection. A perpendicular magnetic field easily aligns the magnetization of the soft permalloy ferromagnet to the field direction. In the case of two-point measurements, (out-of-plane) spin-polarized electrons are injected into the edge state with the same spin projection. For the short F-2DEG-F junction, electrons travel along the edge states and are absorbed in the other ferromagnetic electrode with the same spin projection. In the case of a long junction, charge redistribution takes place between the edge states, which is accompanied by a spin-flip. Thus, only part of the electrons can be absorbed at the end. Therefore, for the short F-2DEG-F junction, we have a perfect quantum Hall behavior even for the two-point measurements, while in the larger junction we have the usual sum of the xx and xy resistance components. This behavior demonstrates ballistic, spin-dependent transport in the close vicinity of the F-2DEG interface. # Conclusion We experimentally investigate electron transport through the interface between a permalloy ferromagnet and the edge of a two-dimensional electron system with strong Rashba-type spin-orbit coupling. We observe strongly non-linear transport around zero bias at millikelvin temperatures. The observed nonlinearity is fully suppressed above some critical values of temperature, magnetic field, and current through the interface. We interpret this behavior as a result of spin accumulation at the interface and its current-induced absorption as a magnetization torque. We wish to thank V.T. Dolgopolov for fruitful discussions, and Stefan Heun for critical reading of the manuscript. We gratefully acknowledge financial support by the RFBR (project No. 13-02-00065) and RAS.	{'timestamp': '2014-02-14T02:05:07', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5719', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5719'}
## Coherent Imaging Spectroscopy We measure the energy splittings in our spin system using a weakly modulated transverse field as a probe, B(t) = B_0 + B_p (2\_p t). When the probe frequency $\nu_{p}$ is matched to the energy difference $\|E_a-E_b\|$ between two eigenstates $\ket{a}$ and $\ket{b}$, the field will drive transitions between the two states if there is a nonzero matrix element $\bra{b} B(t) \sum_i \sigma_i^y \ket{a} \neq 0$. For example, in the weak-field regime $B(t)\ll J_0$, the eigenstates of the Hamiltonian are symmetric combinations of the $\sigma^x$ eigenstates, and the matrix element $\bra{b} B(t) \sum_i \sigma_i^y \ket{a}$ is nonzero only when $\ket{a}$ and $\ket{b}$ differ by the orientation of exactly one spin. In the weak-field regime, a transition at a single frequency can easily be monitored, and its stability can provide a good proxy for the entire Hamiltonian. Each splitting depends on multiple spin-spin couplings--for example, a transition from $\ket{1111\cdots}$ to $\ket{0111\cdots}$, where $\ket{1}$ ($\ket{0}$) denotes the $\sigma^x$ eigenstate $\ket{\uparrow}_x$ ($\ket{\downarrow}_x$), requires energy \[\label{eqn:DeltaE} \Delta E = 2(J_{1,2} + J_{1,3} + \cdots + J_{1,N})\] These splittings are therefore sensitive to changes in the motional mode structure or the laser intensities at each of the ions. We demonstrate the mapping of individual energy splittings in the weak-field regime $B(t)/J_0\ll 1$ in Figure [\[fig:spectroscopy1flip\]](#fig:spectroscopy1flip){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:spectroscopy1flip"}. The spins are prepared along the $x$ direction in $\ket{111\cdots}$ and a probe field of $B(t) = (100$ Hz)$\sin (2\pi \nu_{p} t)$ is applied for 3 ms, which is sufficient to transfer more than 50% of the population between states, before measuring along $x$. These parameters allow resolution of the energy differences in an 8 spin system while still accommodating the few ms decoherence timescale in our system. Population transfer is clearly seen when $\nu_{p}$ is resonant with an energy splitting. We quantify the energy of a particular state relative to the initial state by fitting the spectra to Lorentzians (see Supplementary Information). The spectral positions are insensitive to measurement error and loss of population in the initial state, which affects only the contrast of these resonances, as we show in Figure [\[fig:spectroscopy1flip\]](#fig:spectroscopy1flip){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:spectroscopy1flip"}(g) with $N=18$ spins. A sequence of multiple probe frequencies (shown in Figure [\[fig:multipleExcitations\]](#fig:multipleExcitations){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:multipleExcitations"}) can be used to populate any desired spin configuration with a global beam in no more than $\lfloor N/2 \rfloor$ pulses. We have demonstrated the ability to transfer population into any of the 32 eigenstates of a 5 spin system by starting in either the $\ket{11111}$ or $\ket{00000}$ and applying at most two pulses of the transverse field. This system is small enough to also measure the entire relative energy spectrum, which scales exponentially with system size. Starting from the states $\ket{11111}$, $\ket{00000}$, $\ket{10101}$, and $\ket{01010}$ (the last two of which are prepared using an adiabatic ramp of a transverse field ), we use single and multiple frequency drives to measure all possible energy splittings. Figure [\[fig:fullspectrum\]](#fig:fullspectrum){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:fullspectrum"} shows the measured spectrum of this 5-spin system, obtained by direct addition of the measured energy splittings, compared to that given by the interactions estimated from the same data (as detailed below). An examination of the full spectrum of a many-body quantum system is generally difficult to achieve, and shows the versatility of this form of many-body spectroscopy.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-23T02:11:21', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5751', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5751'}
null	null
null	null
# Introduction Cold dark matter (CDM) is a standard paradigm in modern cosmology (for a review, see ). The CDM model predicts a hierarchical structure formation which is strongly favored by observations of large scale structures. However, some predictions of CDM model based on recent N-body simulations seem to conflict with a number of observations on small scales (see for a recent review). One example is the so-called missing satellite problem: the number of observed satellite galaxies accompanying the Milky Way is significantly smaller than the number seen in N-body simulations . Another example is the so-called cusp-core problem: in simulations, dark matter halos have cuspy density profiles , that is, the density sharply increases at the center, while observations suggest the flat density profile around the center . Although these apparent discrepancies may originate from astrophysical phenomena including baryon physics whose effects are not understood very well, these might be suggesting DM properties different from the standard CDM. Warm dark matter (WDM) with mass $m_{\rm WDM}\gtrsim 1$ keV has been paid particular attention as a potential solution of these discrepancies. In a WDM model, since WDM particles remain ultra-relativistic after the decoupling from the rest of the particles in the early universe, structure formation is suppressed on small scales due to free-streaming of WDM particles . As long as their mass is not very light, the WDM particles become highly non-relativistic in the late universe and end up to be similar to CDM particles. The free-streaming length of a WDM particle can be approximately given by \[\lambda_{\rm fs}=0.1\,{\rm Mpc} \left( \frac{\Omega_{\rm WDM}h^2}{0.11} \right)^{1/3} \left( \frac{m_{\rm WDM}}{\rm keV} \right)^{-4/3}.\] Within this scale, matter fluctuations are significantly suppressed. This affects the formation of small dark matter halos and may decrease the number of satellite dwarf galaxies [@Schaeffer:1988; @SommerLarsen:1999jx; @White:2000sy; @Colin:2000dn]. At the same moment, nonzero thermal velocity of WDM particles may make the cusps of the density profile shallower than in the CDM model as claimed in Ref. . On the other hand, WDM can be constrained by various observations. In particular, the suppression of density fluctuations on small scales due to WDM makes the Lyman-alpha forest observation a powerful tool to constrain $m_{\rm WDM}$ . The current observations of Lyman-alpha provide the constraint $m_{\rm WDM} \gtrsim 2.5$ keV at $2\sigma$ for a thermal relic WDM particle . In addition, high redshift observations of gamma-ray bursts can also place the constraint $m_{\rm WDM} \gtrsim 1.6$ keV at 95% CL . The cosmic weak lensing has the potential to probe the small-scale suppression induced by WDM. Future surveys like Euclid are expected to put the constraint $m_{\rm WDM} \gtrsim 2.5$ keV . There are also some works about the constraint on WDM mass in the context of the cosmological reionization . Some specific models of WDM can be constrained further via their particle properties. For instance, sterile neutrino is a well-known particle candidate for WDM. In this case, a sterile neutrino decays into active ones, which leads to tighter constraints on its mass. Observations of the X-ray background give an upper bound $m_{\rm WDM}< 4$ keV for sterile neutrino mass (see also reference ). In this paper, we focus on 21 cm line fluctuations induced by minihalos. In Ref. , 21 cm line fluctuations from intergalactic medium (IGM) prior to the epoch of reionization have been suggested as a promising probe of WDM. Recently, Ref. investigated the WDM effect on 21 cm signals from IGM during the epoch of reionization, by taking into account that WDM delays formation of halos of mass $M\gtrsim 10^7M_\odot$ needed for star-formation. However minihalos of mass $M\lesssim10^7M_\odot$, which are not large enough to activate star formation, can also significantly contribute to 21 cm line signals around the epoch of reionization . Future 21 cm surveys such as SKA[^1] and FFTT will potentially observe these signals. Since formations of small halos should depend on the amplitude of matter fluctuations at corresponding scales, 21 cm line fluctuations should also reflect matter fluctuations on these small scales, which are difficult to be measured by CMB observations, large scale structure observations and Lyman-alpha surveys. Indeed, in Refs. , it is shown that 21 cm line fluctuations from minihalos can be a powerful probe of isocurvature perturbations with blue-spectrum whose amplitude is large only at very small scales. The 21 cm fluctuations due to minihalos can also probe the primordial non-Gaussianity and structure formations due to cosmic strings . Although suppression in matter fluctuations is confined to very small scales $\lambda_{\rm fs}= \mathcal O(0.01)$Mpc for a WDM model with rather large mass $m_{\rm WDM}\gtrsim 10$ keV, it may substantially affect 21 cm line fluctuations from minihalos through alternation of their abundance. In this paper, for simplicity we assume that WDM is fermion with internal degrees of freedom $g=2$ and has a thermal phase-space distribution. We also assume that dark matter consists only of WDM (or CDM) and do not consider mixed dark matter. With this setup, the WDM model is parametrized by its mass $m_{\rm WDM}$ alone. As rough estimation, we however remark that our results for thermal WDM would be translated into a variety of models of non-thermal WDM by replacing the relation between $\lambda_{\rm fs}$ and $m_{\rm WDM}$. This paper is organized as follows. In the next section, we discuss effects of WDM on the matter power spectrum and the halo mass function. Density and temperature profiles of minihalos are also discussed here. Then in Section [3](#sec:21cm){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:21cm"}, we study 21 cm line fluctuations in WDM model and constraints on $m_{\rm WDM}$ expected for future 21 cm surveys. We also examine impact of various effects of WDM on formation and profile of halos due to its thermal velocity in Section [4](#sec:profile){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:profile"}. The final section is devoted to summary and discussion. # Effects of WDM on mass function and inner profile of minihalos {#sec:effects} ## Mass function {#sec:massf} In a WDM model, the linear matter power spectrum is suppressed on small scales via free-streaming of WDM particles, compared to the one in the CDM model. According to Ref. , the matter power spectrum in a WDM model can be approximately given in terms of that in the CDM model as[^2] \[P_{\rm WDM}(k,z)=P_{\rm CDM}(k,z) \left(1+(\alpha k)^{2\mu}\right)^{-10/\mu}, \label{eq:mpk}\] where $\mu=1.12$ and $\alpha$ is given by \[\alpha=0.07\, {\rm Mpc} \left(\frac{m_{\rm WDM}}{\rm keV}\right)^{-1.11} \left(\frac{\Omega_{\rm WDM}h^2}{0.11}\right)^{0.11}.\] Fig. [\[fig:mpk\]](#fig:mpk){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:mpk"} shows the linear matter power spectra in WDM models with $m_{\rm WDM}=3$, 10, 30 keV in comparison with that in the CDM model. To compute $P_{\rm CDM}(k)$, the `CAMB` code is adopted here. One can see that suppression from $P(k)$ in the CDM model occurs even on larger scales as $m_{\rm WDM}$ becomes smaller, which represents the effect of WDM free-streaming. Given a matter power spectrum or statistics of initial density perturbations, we can obtain the mass function of halos based on the Press-Schechter formalism, \[\frac{dn}{d\ln M}=\bar\rho_m f(\nu)\frac{d\nu}{dM},\] where $\bar \rho_m$ is the mean energy density of matter and $f(\nu)$ is the multiplicity function with significance of the critical overdensity $\delta_{\rm cr}\simeq1.67$ being denoted as $\nu\equiv (\delta_{\rm cr}/\sigma_M)^2$. Here, $\sigma_M$ is the rms of matter fluctuations in a sphere of radius $R$ satisfying $M=\frac{4\pi}3\bar\rho_m R^3$. Assuming a matter power spectrum $P(k,z)$, we can write $\sigma_M$ as \[\sigma_M^{2}= \int\frac{k^{2}dk}{2\pi^{2}} W^{2}(kR)P(k), \label{sigma8}\] where $W(kR)$ is a top-hat window function with radius $R$, \[W(kR)\equiv \dfrac{3\left(\sin(kR)-kR\cos (kR) \right)}{\left( kR \right)^{3}}.\] Regarding the multiplicity function $f(\nu)$, we adopt the one proposed by Sheth and Tormen , \[\nu f(\nu)=A\left(1+(q\nu)^{-a}\right)\left(\frac{q\nu}{2\pi}\right)^{1/2}\exp\left[-\frac{q\nu}2\right], \label{eq:occ}\] where $a=0.3$, $q=0.75$ and $A\simeq0.32$ are chosen to fit numerical results. Mass functions in WDM and CDM models are plotted in Fig. [\[fig:massf\]](#fig:massf){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:massf"}. We here also indicate the mass range contributing to 21 cm fluctuations from minihalos (See Eqs. [\[eq:m\\]](#eq:m){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:m"}-[\[eq:mj\]](#eq:mj){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:mj"}). The figure explicitly shows that the abundance of halos are suppressed prominently at smaller masses. We can also see that for $m_{\rm WDM}\gtrsim10$ keV, while the abundance of halos which the star-formation $M\gtrsim10^7M_\odot$ is little affected, that of minihalos are still significantly suppressed. This may indicate minihalos would be a more promising probe of WDM than halos which can host ionizing sources. We should however note that the derivation of mass function above is based on the hierarchical formation of halos, which may break down in WDM models. This breakdown may lead that low mass halos form even further less. This issue will be discussed in section [4](#sec:profile){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:profile"}. ## Halo profile Our aim is to calculate the 21 cm signals from minihalos. The 21 cm signal from a minihalo depends on the hydrogen density, temperature and velocity dispersion. In this paper, we assume that a minihalo is modeled as a nonsingular, truncated isothermal sphere "TIS" of dark matter and baryons in hydrostatic equilibrium . In the TIS model, physical radius, gas temperature, dark matter velocity dispersion and density profiles are respectively given as functions $r_t(M, z_{\rm coll})$, $T_K(l,M, z_{\rm coll})$, $\sigma_{\rm V}(l,M)$ and $\rho(l,M)$ where $l$ is the distance from the center of a minihalo and $z_{\rm coll}$ is the redshift of the minihalo collapsing. An overdense region with volume mass $M$ whose density contrast is $\delta _M(z)$ at redshift $z$ collapses to a halo with mass $M$ at the redshift given by \[1+z_{\rm coll}=\frac{\delta_M(z)}{\delta_c}(1+z),\] where we use the fact that the growth factor of matter density fluctuations is proportional to $1/(1+z)$. Since $\delta_M(z)$ fluctuates with the dispersion $\sigma_M$, $z_{\rm coll}$ is also a random variable and has a probability distribution. Then the mean $z_{\rm coll}$ of halos with $M$ which have already formed at redshift $z$ should be given by \[\begin{aligned} \langle 1+z_{\rm coll}\rangle (M,z) &=&(1+z) \frac{\int^\infty_{\delta_c} d\delta_M \frac{\delta_M}{\delta_c} \frac1{\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma_M(z)} \exp\left[-\frac{\delta_M^2}{2\sigma_M(z)^2}\right]} {\int^\infty_{\delta_c} d\delta_M \frac1{\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma_M(z)} \exp\left[-\frac{\delta_M^2}{2\sigma_M(z)^2}\right]} \notag\\ &=&(1+z) \left. \frac{e^{-x^2}}{\sqrt{\pi}{x}\,{\rm erfc}(x)} \right\|_{x=\delta_c/\sqrt{2}\sigma_M(z)}, \label{eq:fluc_delta} \end{aligned}\] where ${\rm erfc}(x)=\frac2{\sqrt\pi}\int^\infty_xdt\,e^{-t^2}$ is the complementary error function. To understand Eq. ([\[eq:fluc_delta\]](#eq:fluc_delta){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:fluc_delta"}) intuitively, let us consider two opposite limits. For $\delta_c/\sigma_M(z)\to \infty$, where only a tiny fraction of density fluctuations $\delta_M$ has collapsed, one obtains $\langle 1+z_{\rm coll}\rangle\to1+z$, which shows that most of existing such halos have just formed at $z$. On the other hand, for $\delta_c/\sigma_M(z)\to 0$, where a large fraction of $\delta_M$ has already collapsed, $\langle 1+z_{\rm coll}\rangle\to\sqrt{\frac2\pi}\frac{\sigma_M(z)}{\delta_c}(1+z)\gg1+z$, which shows that most of existing halos have already formed earlier. We note that $1+z$ in the above argument should be in general replaced with inverse of the growth factor $1/D(z)$ in the $\Lambda$CDM cosmology. Since, in a WDM model, $\sigma_M(z)$ is lower than in the CDM model, density fluctuations $\delta_M$ take more time to grow and reach the critical overdensity $\delta_c$. Accordingly $\langle 1+z_{\rm coll}\rangle$ is smaller than in the CDM model, that is, the formation of halos effectively delays in a WDM model. This formation delay makes halos in WDM model less concentrated. As a result, the gas density and temperature inside decrease, while the sizes of halos broaden. Along with the change in mass function, these changes in halo profiles can also affect 21 cm line fluctuations from minihalos. # 21 cm fluctuations {#sec:21cm} Now we discuss 21 cm line fluctuations from minihalos whose mass is not large enough to host a galaxy. While minihalos are not luminous objects, minihalos can make observable 21 cm line signals . To calculate the 21 cm signals from a minihalo, we follow the analysis in Refs. . We also note that in this section, any parameter dependences of quantities are significantly abbreviated. We calculate the brightness temperature with rest-frame frequency $\nu'$ at a distance $r$ from the centre of a minihalo with mass $M$. The brightness temperature is provided by \[T_b(\nu',z,r,M)=T_{\rm CMB}(z)e^{-\tau_{\rm 21cm}} +\int dR~T_{\rm s}(l)e^{-\tau_{\rm 21cm}(R)} \frac{d\tau_{\rm 21cm}(R)}{dR}. \label{eq:Tb}\] Here $\nu_0$ is the frequency of 21 cm line emission in the rest frame, $\nu_0=1.4$ GHz, $\tau_{\rm 21cm}(R)$ is the 21 cm optical depth along the photon path at $R$, which is given by[^3] \[\tau_{\rm 21cm}(R)=\frac{2c^2A_{10}T_}{32\pi\nu_0^2} \int^R_{-\infty} \frac{n_{\rm HI}(l')\phi(\nu',l')}{T_{\rm s}(l')}dR', \label{eq:tau_halo}\] where $l'=\sqrt{R^{\prime2}+r^2}$, $A_{10}=2.85\times 10^{-15}$ s$^{-1}$ and $k_BT_=h\nu_0=5.9\times10^{-6}$ eV are respectively the spontaneous decay rate and emitted energy of the 21 cm hyperfine transition, and $n_{\rm HI}$ is the number density of neutral hydrogen atoms. As the line profile $\phi(\nu',l')$, we adopt the thermal Doppler-broadening model, i.e. $\phi(\nu',l')=\left(\sqrt{\pi}\Delta \nu(l') \right)^{-1} \exp[-(\frac{\nu'-\nu_0}{\Delta \nu(l')})^2]$ with $\Delta \nu=(\nu_0/c)\sqrt{2k_BT_K(l')/m_H}$, where $m_H$ is the hydrogen mass. The optical depth $\tau_{\rm 21cm}$ in Eq. [\[eq:Tb\]](#eq:Tb){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Tb"} is given as $\tau_{\rm 21cm}=\tau_{\rm 21cm}(R\to\infty)$. In 21 cm observations, observation signals are measured in terms of the differential brightness temperature \[\delta T_b(\nu;z,r,M)=T_b(\nu',z,r,M)/(1+z)-T_{\rm CMB}(0). \label{eq:dTb}\] Therefore, the differential line-integrated flux from this halo is given by \[\delta F = \int d\nu'~ 2 \nu'^2 k_B \langle \delta T_b \rangle(\nu';z,M) A(M,z),\] where $\langle \delta T_b \rangle(\nu';z,M)$ is the mean surface brightness temperature for a halo with mass $M$ at $z$ is obtained from \[\langle \delta T_b \rangle (\nu;z,M) = \frac{1}{A(M)} \int dr~ 2\pi r \delta T_b(\nu;z,r,M),\] where $A(M, z)$ is the geometric cross-section of a halo with mass $M$ at $z$, $A=\pi r_t^2$. Let's consider an observation with a finite bandwidth $\Delta \nu$ and beam width $\Delta \theta$. The mean differential flux per unit frequency is written as \[\frac{d \delta F}{d \nu} = \frac{\Delta z(\Delta\Omega)_{\rm beam}}{\Delta\nu} \frac{d^2V(z)}{dz\,d\Omega} \int^{M_{\rm max}(z)}_{M_{\rm min}(z)} dM \delta F \frac{dn}{dM}(M,z), \label{eq:dif_flux}\] where $(\Delta\Omega)_{\rm beam}=\pi(\Delta\theta/2)^2$, and $\Delta\nu/\Delta z=\nu_0/(1+z)^2$. In Eq. ([\[eq:dif_flux\]](#eq:dif_flux){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:dif_flux"}), $M_{\rm min}(z)$ and $M_{\rm max}(z)$ are respectively the minimum and maximum masses of minihalos. We assume that $M_{\rm min}(z)$ corresponds to the Jeans mass \[M_{\rm J}(z)=5.73\times 10^3\left(\frac{\Omega_mh^2}{0.15}\right)^{-1} \left(\frac{\Omega_bh^2}{0.022}\right)^{-3/5} \left(\frac{1+z}{10}\right)^{3/2}M_\odot. \label{eq:mj}\] Halos with mass larger than $M_{\rm max}(z)$ can host stars or galaxies and most of the hydrogen in the halos is ionized. Therefore, such halos cannot contribute to 21 cm line signals. We set $M_{\rm max}(z)$ to the virial mass $M_(z)$ with a virial temperature $10^4$K which corresponds to the critical temperature for hydrogen atomic cooling. According to Ref. , $M_(z)$ can be approximately given as \[M_(z)=3.95\times 10^7\left(\frac{\Omega_mh^2}{0.15}\right)^{-1} \left(\frac{1+z}{10}\right)^{-3/2} M_\odot. \label{eq:m*}\] Defining the beam-averaged "effective" differential antenna temperature $\overline{\delta T}_b$ by $d \delta F /d \nu=2\nu^2k_B \overline{\delta T_b}(\Delta\Omega)_{\rm beam}$, we finally obtain \[\overline{ \delta T_b}(\nu)\approx 2\pi c\frac{(1+z)^4}{H(z) \nu_0}\int^{M_{\rm max}(z)}_{M_{\rm min}(z)} dM~\frac{dn}{dM}(M,z) \Delta\nu_{\rm eff}(z) A(M,z)\langle \delta T_b \rangle(z,M). \label{eq:dTbbar}\] In future observations, important observable values are the fluctuations of $\overline{\delta T_b}(\Delta\Omega)_{\rm beam}$. Since a minihalo is a biased tracer of density fluctuations, the number density contrast of minihalos are given by \[\delta _N (M) = b(M) \delta,\] where $\delta_N(M)$ is the number density contrast of halos with mass $M$ and $b(M)$ is bias. Given the multiplicity function in Eq. [\[eq:occ\]](#eq:occ){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:occ"}, we adopt the following $b(M)$ : \[b(M) = 1+\frac{q\nu-1}{\delta_{\rm cr}} + \frac{2a}{\delta_{\rm cr}[1+(q\nu)^p]}.\] This clustering causes fluctuations in $\overline{ \delta T_b}(\nu)$. Because the rms density fluctuations in a beam can be written as \[\sigma_p^2(\nu, \Delta \nu, \Delta \theta) = \int \frac{d^3k}{(2\pi)^3}W(\vec k; \nu,\Delta\nu, \Delta \theta)^2P(k),\] where $W$ is a pencil beam window function at frequency $\nu$ with band width $\Delta \nu$ and beam width $\Delta\theta$ (see e.g. Ref. ), the rms fluctuations of the halo number density with mass $M$ in a beam is provided by \[\sigma_N(M) = b(M) \sigma_p(\bar \nu, \Delta \nu, \Delta \theta).\] Accordingly, we can obtain the rms fluctuations of $\delta T_b(\nu)$ from \[\sigma_{\delta T_b}=\langle \delta T_b(\nu)^2 \rangle^{1/2} \approx \overline{\delta T_b}(\nu) \beta(z) \sigma_p(\bar \nu, \Delta \nu, \Delta \theta), \label{eq:rms_dTb}\] where $\beta(z)$ is the effective bias of the minihalos weighted by their 21 cm line fluxes, defined as \[\beta(z)\equiv \frac{\int^{M_{\rm max}(z)}_{M_{\rm min}(z)} dM \frac{dn}{dM}(M,z) \mathcal F(z,M) b(M,z)} {\int^{M_{\rm max}(z)}_{M_{\rm min}(z)} dM \frac{dn}{dM}(M,z) \mathcal F(z,M)},\] where $\mathcal F(z,M)\equiv\int d^2b~\delta T_b(z,b,M)\propto T_br_t^2 \sigma_V$ is the flux from a minihalo. ::: In Fig. [\[fig:diff\]](#fig:diff){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:diff"}, we plot fractional differences in $\sigma_{\delta T_b}^2$ for three variant cases against the baseline one. It is clearly seen that the fractional differences tend to be larger as $m_{\rm WDM}$ becomes small. However, even if we take $m_{\rm WDM}=3$ keV, which roughly corresponds to the current lower limits, these effects change $\sigma_{\delta T_b}^2$ at most a few tens of percents. On the other hand, if we consider $m_{\rm WDM}=30$ keV, which is roughly the lower bounds expected for SKA and FFTT, the fractional differences are merely of a few percents. As far as we are concerning 21 cm observations whose sensitivities are comparable or better than SKA, detailed effects of WDM on formation and structures of halos are not relevant. As a closing remark of this section, let us comment about precise prediction on the density profiles of small halos and halo temperature. Note that, roughly speaking, halos whose profiles can be drastically changed by WDM have masses comparable or smaller than $M_{\rm fs}$. By comparing Cases II and III, we can see contributions of such small halos with smoothed profiles. The difference between these two cases can be recognized only for small $m_{\rm WDM}\lesssim 3$ keV and at high redshifts ($z\gtrsim10$), which is difficult to be observed (see the sensitivity levels of SKA and FFTT in Fig. [\[fig:rms\]](#fig:rms){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:rms"}). At lower redshifts, or for larger $m_{\rm WDM}$, we can hardly see the difference. Therefore we conclude that precise predictions on smoothed profile of small halos are not important in rms of 21 cm line fluctuations. We however note that if we want to probe $m_{\rm WDM}\lesssim 3$ keV, precise predictions would be important. As to the halo temperature, while we only consider the modification of density profiles due to WDM, the temperature is fixed at the one in a "TIS" model of CDM. Because the temperature depends on the matter density profile, the smoothing of density profiles also change the halo temperature. In order to obtain the temperature appropriate to the smoothing, it is required to solve the hydrostatic condition with smoothed matter density profile, but this is beyond the scope of this paper. However, since the modification on 21 cm fluctuations due to the smoothed density profile is negligible for mass range of our interest ($m_{\rm WDM} >10$ keV), the temperature effect could be small. # Summary and discussions {#sec:summary} In this paper, we have investigated 21 cm line fluctuations from minihalos in WDM models. The linear matter power spectrum in a WDM model is suppressed on small scales due to the free-streaming of WDM. Therefore, we have found that WDM with $m_{\rm WDM}\simeq10$ keV significantly reduces abundance of minihalos and delay their formation. Having seen this, we have computed 21 cm line fluctuations from minihalos and shown that, compared with the CDM model, they are suppressed in WDM models. We also have investigated the feasibility to constrain the mass of WDM particle by future 21 cm surveys. We have found that the deviation from the CDM model can be observed by future 21 cm surveys, and SKA and FFTT can respectively give lower bounds $m_{\rm WDM}>24$ keV and 31 keV, if the minihalo signal can be observable above $z=5$. On the other hand, for larger mass, it would be difficult to distinguish WDM models from the CDM one using the rms of 21 cm line fluctuations from minihalos. Interesting WDM mass range to solve so-called small-scale problems in the structure formations is $m_{\rm WDM}=\mathcal O(1)$ keV. Therefore, WDM models might be ruled out as a solution of small-scale problems by future 21 cm surveys. We have also examined other effects which are unique to WDM models, such as the presence of a cut-off in a mass function at the free-streaming mass and smoothing of halo profiles due to the non-negligible thermal velocity of WDM. However, we have found that the modification due to these effects on 21 cm fluctuations are small. In particular, for $m_{\rm WDM}>10$ keV, these effects are negligible. In our analysis, we omitted masses of active neutrinos, whose effects can in principle degenerate with those of WDM as both of them affect structure formation through free-streaming. However, as far as one considers masses of neutrinos allowed by current observational constraints, say, $m_\nu\lesssim$`<!-- -->`{=html}0.3 eV[^5], their effects on 21 cm line emission are not very significant. This is because energy density of massive neutrinos in the late-time universe is at most a few tenth of percents of that of DM and suppression on structure formation within their free-streaming scales are much less prominent than of WDM; they do not create a cut-off, but only a small step-like feature in the matter transfer function. Lacking significant suppression on matter fluctuations on scales of minihalos, massive active neutrinos cannot significantly affect 21 cm line fluctuations from minihalos. Therefore we conclude that there should not be a significant degeneracy between masses of WDM and active neutrinos in a pure WDM model. Regarding the choice of a prescription for mass function, we have adopted the Sheth-Tormen mass function throughout this paper, while precise mass function of minihalos is still under debate. Refs. have studied the effect of mass function on 21 cm fluctuations due to minihalos, although they have done in context other than WDM. They have shown that the Sheth-Tormen mass function tends to give moderate signals of 21 cm line fluctuations from minihalos. Therefore, adopting other mass functions, such as the extended Press-Schechter one, would give larger signals, which leads to tighter constraints on $m_{\rm WDM}$. We would also like to comment on dependence of halo profiles. Here we adopted the TIS profile, which is smooth at centers of halos even in the CDM model. On the other hand, if one adopt other profiles which are steeper at halo centers, e.g., the NFW profile , the smoothing effects of WDM would appear more prominent. To this respect, our analysis may have underestimated the improvement of the bounds on $m_{\rm WDM}$ due to the smoothing effects on profile of WDM. We save this issue for future studies. Our analysis is fully based on analytical computation and the results presented in this paper may be more or less modified by more detailed studies based on numerical simulations. For instance, in Ref. it is suggested that the regeneration mechanism due to the nonlinear evolution of matter perturbations can blunt the suppression in the matter power spectrum due to the free-streaming of WDM to greater extent at lower redshifts. However, the abundance of halos and hence the 21 cm rms from minihalos may be more tolerant than the matter power spectrum to the regeneration mechanism . Although more detailed analyses are necessary prior to derive constraints from actual observations, our results demonstrate a remarkable potential of 21 cm line fluctuations from minihalos in probing unknown nature of dark matter. TS is supported by the Academy of Finland grant 1263714. HT is supported by the DOE at ASU. [^1]: http://www.skatelescope.org [^2]: We refer to Ref. for more detailed calculation of a linear transfer function in a WDM model. [^3]: Here we omitted the optical depth arising from the IGM. Effects of the optical depth from the IGM in the brightness temperature (Eq. [\[eq:Tb\]](#eq:Tb){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:Tb"}) are significant only for very small minihalo masses, whose contributions in the total brightness temperature in Eqs. [\[eq:dTbbar\]](#eq:dTbbar){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:dTbbar"} and [\[eq:rms_dTb\]](#eq:rms_dTb){reference-type="eqref" reference="eq:rms_dTb"} are irrelevant. [^4]: This issue seems not completely settled yet. See also Ref. . [^5]: For recent review, we refer to e.g. Ref.	{'timestamp': '2014-08-07T02:06:02', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5563', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5563'}
# Introduction The thermodynamics of isolated, bound, self-gravitating stellar systems (systems of $N$ point particles interacting only through gravitational forces) is notoriously pathological. The infinite volume of physical space forbids maximum-entropy states and the short-range singularity in the potential makes for an unbounded energy, hence undermining the construction of microcanonical ensembles (for reviews see @pad90 and @katz03). To make progress, the usual approach is to introduce artificial cutoffs by confining the N-body system in a spherical box, and/or regularizing or "softening" the short-range singularity. With these artifices, canonical and microcanonical equilibria of the self-gravitating gas can be constructed. There are regimes with negative heat capacity in the microcanonical equilibria, and these are associated with phase transitions of the corresponding canonical equilibrium (@th70 [@dlb77; @katz78]; see @chavanis06 for a relatively recent review). Even simpler toy models are constructed with a view to isolating and analyzing what is thought to be generic behavior, e.g., the Hamiltonian Mean Field (HMF), the Self-Gravitating Ring (SGR) model, slab models in which point particles are replaced by infinite sheets, and cylindrical models in which point particles are replaced by infinite wires. A large body of literature has evolved around these models, studying their equilibria, phase transitions, dynamical stability and metastability, and connections to the actual systems they are meant to model. Although instructive and elegant, these models leave one with the nagging question of what all of this has to do with actual self-gravitating systems in the real world. What remains at the end of the day are robust results on the thermodynamics of artificially imprisoned and mutilated self-gravitating systems, more tentative and largely numerical results on the evolution of realistic systems, and heuristic rules relating the properties of the former to the latter. # The Keplerian disk and ring Here, we bridge the gap between tractable and realistic self-gravitating systems by examining a system that arises naturally (in the study of protoplanetary disks, stellar disks around supermassive black holes, etc.), and in which the pathologies of systems with long-range interactions are naturally resolved. We start with an infinitesimally thin disk composed of $N\gg1$ identical point particles, each of mass $m$. The particles orbit a central point mass $M_\star\gg Nm \equiv M_{\rm disk}$. The disk is flat; nevertheless particles may orbit in the prograde or retrograde direction (i.e., the inclinations are 0 or $180^\circ$)[^1]. Since $M_{\rm disk}\ll M_\star$, the particle orbits are nearly Keplerian. In such disks the dominant relaxation process is resonant relaxation, involving secular interactions between particles that cause the orbits to evolve on time-scales of order $M_\star/M_{\rm disk}$ times the orbital period. Relaxation can be studied by averaging over the fast orbital time-scale (the orbital period), that is, replacing each particle by a so-called Gaussian wire (a closed wire following the Keplerian orbit, with linear mass density inversely proportional to velocity). In interactions of this kind the angular momenta or eccentricities of the wires relax, but their energies or semi-major axes do not. Since each wire has a constant semi-major axis, it is completely specified by its mass $m$, sense of rotation $s$ ($+1$ for prograde and $-1$ for retrograde), eccentricity $e$, and azimuth of periapsis $\varpi$, or instead of the last two the eccentricity vector ${\bf e}\equiv (k,h)\equiv e(\cos\varpi,\sin\varpi)$, which points towards periapsis[^2]. The eccentricity vector rotates slowly due to the orbit-averaged force field of the other wires, and varies stochastically due to the even slower effect of resonant relaxation. Note that the conservation of Keplerian energy (semi-major axis) leaves us with a compact $(e,\varpi)$ phase space for the wires to relax in, hence removing the need for artificial confinement. Alternatively, a particle orbit can be specified by the Poincaré variables ${\bf E} \equiv (K,H)\equiv \big(1-\sqrt{1-e^2}\,\big)^{1/2}(\cos\varpi,\sin\varpi)$; these are canonical coordinate-momentum pairs when multiplied by $\sqrt{2m} (G M_\star a)^{1/4}$ (see Appendix [\[sec:hamxx\]](#sec:hamxx){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:hamxx"}). Note that $\|{\bf E}\|$ and $\|{\bf e}\|$ both range from 0 to 1, with ${\bf E}\to{\bf e}$ as $\|{\bf e}\|\to1$ and ${\bf E}\to {\bf e}/\surd 2$ as $\|{\bf e}\|\to 0$. We shall sometimes call $E=\|{\bf E}\|$ the Poincaré eccentricity, and shift between eccentricity and Poincaré eccentricity as needed to keep the formulae as simple as possible. In the models described in this paper, which we call Keplerian rings, all particles are further assumed to share a common (and conserved) semi-major axis $a$. Such a limit is reasonable in disks where the fractional spread in semi-major axes is smaller than the typical orbital eccentricity, but is chosen here mostly for simplicity, as the methods we describe are applicable to disks with any distribution of semi-major axes. Last but not least, we require the orbit-averaged gravitational potential energy between two particles in the disk: $\Phi({\bf e},{\bf e}')=-Gm^2\langle\|{\bf r}-{\bf r}'\|^{-1}\rangle \equiv(Gm^2/a) \phi({\bf e}, {\bf e}')$, where $\langle\cdot\rangle$ denotes a time average over both orbits (see Appendix [\[sec:pot\]](#sec:pot){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:pot"}). When eccentricities are small, the averaged potential can be evaluated analytically, $\phi({\bf e},{\bf e}')=\phi_L({\bf e},{\bf e}')\equiv-4\log 2/\pi+(2\pi)^{-1}\log({\bf e}-{\bf e}')^2$ plus terms that are $\mbox{O}(e^2,e^2\log e)$. For eccentricities that are not small, $\phi({\bf e},{\bf e}')$ must be evaluated numerically by a double integral over the two orbital phases. Most of the calculations described below have been carried out both with the logarithmic potential $\phi_L({\bf e},{\bf e}')$ and with a numerical evaluation of $\phi({\bf e},{\bf e}')$ on a grid, and the main conclusions are qualitatively and quantitatively unaffected. Therefore for simplicity we present mostly the results with the logarithmic potential[^3], except for a brief discussion associated with Figure [\[fig:four\]](#fig:four){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:four"}. In the continuum limit, let $n_\pm({\bf e})d{\bf e}=f_\pm({\bf E})d{\bf E}$ be the number of prograde or retrograde particles on orbits in the eccentricity range $({\bf e},{\bf e}+d{\bf e})$ or $({\bf E},{\bf E}+d{\bf E})$. The total number of prograde and retrograde particles is $n({\bf e})\equiv n_+({\bf e})+n_-({\bf e})$ or $f({\bf E})=f_+({\bf E})+f_-({\bf E})$. In transforming between these we use the relation between phase-space area elements, $d{\bf E}=dKdH={\textstyle{1\over2}} dk\,dh/\sqrt{1-e^2}={\textstyle{1\over2}} d{\bf e}/\sqrt{1-e^2}$, to write $n_\pm({\bf e})={\textstyle{1\over2}} f_\pm({\bf E})/\sqrt{1-e^2}$. We define a dimensionless mean-field potential of the disk by \[\Gamma({\bf e})=\frac{1}{N}\int n({\bf e}')\phi({\bf e},{\bf e}') d{\bf e}'=\frac{1}{N}\int f({\bf E}')\phi({\bf e},{\bf e}')d{\bf E}', \label{eq:wwqq}\] with $N =\int n({\bf e})\,d{\bf e}=\int f({\bf E})\,d{\bf E}$. This potential is the mean-field Hamiltonian, in the sense that (see eq. [\[eq:hameq\]](#eq:hameq){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:hameq"}) \[\frac{dK}{d\tau}=s\frac{\partial \Gamma}{\partial H}, \ \frac{dH}{d\tau}=-s\frac{\partial \Gamma}{\partial K} \ \ \mbox{with}\ \ \tau=\frac{M_{\rm disk}}{2M_\star}\left(\frac{GM_\star}{a^3}\right)^{1/2}\!\!t. \label{eq:ham}\] The disk's entropy is defined by \[S =-\int [f_+({\bf E})\log f_+({\bf E})+ f_-({\bf E})\log f_-({\bf E})]\,d{\bf E}. \label{eq:entropy}\] Our aim is to extremize the entropy subject to the conservation of the number of particles $N \equiv \int n({\bf e})\,d{\bf e}=\int f({\bf E})\,d{\bf E}$; the energy $U=\-{\textstyle{1\over2}} (Gm^2/a)\int n({\bf e})n({\bf e}')\phi({\bf e},{\bf e}')\,d{\bf e}\,d{\bf e}'$; and the angular momentum $L=m\sqrt{GM_\star a}\int [n_+({\bf e})-n_-({\bf e})]\sqrt{1-e^2}\,d{\bf e} =m\sqrt{GM_\star a}\int [f_+({\bf E})-f_-({\bf E})](1-E^2)\,d{\bf E}$. We denote the resulting distribution functions and potential $f_\pm^0({\bf E})$ and $\Gamma^0({\bf E})$. Using Lagrange multipliers this optimization problem can be solved to give \[\begin{aligned} f_s^0({\bf E})&=\frac{N\alpha}{\beta}\exp[-\beta\Gamma^0({\bf e})+s\gamma(1-E^2)], \nonumber \\ n_s^0({\bf e})&=\frac{N\alpha}{2\beta\sqrt{1-e^2}}\exp\big[-\beta\Gamma^0({\bf e})+s\gamma\sqrt{1-e^2}]\big], \label{eq:df} \end{aligned}\] where $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$ are dimensionless constants and as usual $s=\pm1$ for prograde or retrograde particles. We must have $\alpha/\beta>0$ (the distribution function cannot be negative). The parameter $\beta$ is an inverse temperature, which can be either positive or negative since the phase space is compact. Setting $\Psi({\bf e})\equiv \beta\Gamma^0({\bf e})$, Poisson's equation ([\[eq:wwqq\]](#eq:wwqq){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:wwqq"}) may now be written \[\Psi({\bf e})=2\alpha\int d{\bf E}'\phi({\bf e},{\bf e}')\exp[-\Psi({\bf e}')]\cosh\gamma\big(1-{E'}^2\big), \label{eq:thermal}\] with ${\bf E}=\big(1-\sqrt{1-e^2}\,\big)^{1/2}{\bf e}/e$. This is a nonlinear integral equation for the dimensionless potential $\Psi({\bf e})$, whose solution depends on the parameters $\alpha$ and $\gamma$. The inverse temperature $\beta$ is determined from the solution of ([\[eq:thermal\]](#eq:thermal){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:thermal"}) by substituting equation ([\[eq:df\]](#eq:df){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:df"}) into the relation $N=\int d{\bf E}\,[f_+({\bf E})+f_-({\bf E})]$: \[\beta=2\alpha \int d{\bf E} \exp[-\Psi({\bf e})]\cosh\gamma(1-E^2). \label{eq:nbeta}\] Throughout this paper we shall approximate the potential $\phi({\bf e},{\bf e}')$ by the logarithmic potential $\phi_L({\bf e},{\bf e}')$, and since $\nabla_{\bf e}^2\phi_L=2\delta({\bf e}-{\bf e}')$ the integral equation can be replaced by a differential one[^4], \[\nabla_{\bf e}^2\Psi=\frac{2\alpha}{\sqrt{1-e^2}}\exp[-\Psi({\bf e})]\cosh\gamma\sqrt{1-e^2}. \label{eq:thermalde}\] Rather than total angular momentum or energy, we shall work with the dimensionless quantities \[\begin{aligned} \ell&\equiv\frac{L}{Nm\sqrt{GM_\star a}} =\frac{\int d{\bf E}\,(1-E^2)\exp[-\Psi({\bf e})]\sinh\gamma(1-E^2)}{\int d{\bf E} \exp[-\Psi({\bf e})]\cosh\gamma(1-E^2)}, \nonumber \\ u&\equiv\frac{aU}{G(Nm)^2}= \frac{\int d{\bf E}\,d{\bf E}'\,W({\bf e})W({\bf e}')\phi({\bf e},{\bf e}')}{2\left[\int d{\bf E} \exp[-\Psi({\bf e})]\cosh\gamma(1-E^2)\right]^2}, \end{aligned}\] where $W({\bf e})\equiv\exp[-\Psi({\bf e})]\cosh\gamma(1-E^2)$. These, together with the integral equation ([\[eq:thermal\]](#eq:thermal){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:thermal"}), determine the potential $\Psi({\bf e})$ and the parameters $\alpha$ and $\gamma$, given the conserved quantities $u$ and $\ell$; thus, all thermodynamic equilibria can be parametrized by their dimensionless energy and angular momentum. The dimensionless energy cannot exceed $u=-2\log 2/\pi=-0.44127$, corresponding to particles uniformly distributed on the circle $\|{\bf e}\|=1$ (see Appendix [\[sec:axi\]](#sec:axi){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:axi"}); the absolute value of the dimensionless angular momentum cannot exceed unity, and without loss of generality we can restrict $\ell$ to the range $[0,1]$. States that are entropy extrema according to equation ([\[eq:thermalde\]](#eq:thermalde){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:thermalde"}) can be either axisymmetric (i.e., depending on ${\bf E}$ only through $E=\|{\bf E}\|$) or non-axisymmetric. If they are non-axisymmetric the figure is stationary in a frame rotating at the pattern speed given by equation ([\[eq:pattern\]](#eq:pattern){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:pattern"}). # Thermodynamics of the Keplerian ring We first study axisymmetric entropy extrema, which we construct by solving the differential equation ([\[eq:thermalde\]](#eq:thermalde){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:thermalde"}) (see Appendix [\[sec:axi\]](#sec:axi){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:axi"}). We plot the results in Figure [\[fig:one\]](#fig:one){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:one"}. The four colored curves show solutions with dimensionless angular momentum $\ell=0,0.5,0.8,0.95$, as functions of the dimensionless energy $u$. The four panels show the mean eccentricity $\langle e \rangle$, fraction of prograde particles, inverse temperature $\beta$, and entropy $S$ (the last of these is for the normalization $N=1$; more generally $S(N)=NS(1)-N\log N$). Each constant angular-momentum sequence terminates at a point marked by a cross. Sequences of models with non-zero angular momentum terminate at a mean eccentricity less than unity (as they must, since orbits with $e=1$ have zero angular momentum). The small open triangles in the left part of each panel show the predictions of the low-eccentricity analytic limit (eqs. [\[eq:ost\]](#eq:ost){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:ost"}--[\[eq:sss\]](#eq:sss){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:sss"}), which agree well with the numerical solutions. Remarkably, the curves of mean eccentricity versus energy (top left panel) almost coincide for the whole range of angular momenta shown. The axisymmetric entropy extrema become increasingly prograde with increasing energy and mean eccentricity, as they should to maintain a constant angular momentum. The family of axisymmetric solutions includes regions of negative heat capacity ($d\beta/du >0$) and negative temperature $\beta<0$. The sequence of models with zero angular momentum has $S\to-\infty$ as $\langle e\rangle\to 1$; in this limit the distribution function approaches a singular form in which all the particles have $e=1$. For a given non-zero angular momentum the sequence terminates at finite entropy. We now investigate the response of these equilibria to small non-axisymmetric perturbations, $\Psi=\Psi^0(e)+\epsilon\psi_m(e)\exp(im\varpi)$, $m>0$, where $\Psi^0(e)$ defines the potential of the unperturbed axisymmetric system (see Appendices [\[sec:bif\]](#sec:bif){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:bif"} and [\[sec:saddle\]](#sec:saddle){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:saddle"}). We substitute this form into the differential equation ([\[eq:thermalde\]](#eq:thermalde){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:thermalde"}) and linearize in the small parameter $\epsilon$. The existence of a solution to the linearized equation implies a bifurcation to a sequence of non-axisymmetric disks that initially have $m$-fold symmetry. We find numerically that (i) bifurcations exist for $m=1$ only; (ii) there is one and only one bifurcation point along the sequence of axisymmetric equilibria at fixed angular momentum $\ell$ for $0\le\ell<0.83356$ (see derivation at the end of Appendix [\[sec:saddle\]](#sec:saddle){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:saddle"}), and none for $\ell>0.83356$; (iii) these bifurcations are associated with a transition from entropy maxima, hence thermally stable equilibria, to entropy saddle points which are thermally unstable. In Figure [\[fig:one\]](#fig:one){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:one"}, we distinguish the regions in which each sequence is stable or unstable by solid and dotted lines, respectively, and mark the locus of bifurcation points by a heavy solid line[^5]. The axisymmetric systems are thermally unstable at small mean eccentricity and stable at large mean eccentricity. This result is surprising, since in the limit of small mean eccentricity the equilibrium disks are identical to the isothermal cylinder (eq. [\[eq:thermff\]](#eq:thermff){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:thermff"}), which is known to be an entropy maximum, and therefore stable (@klb78 [@aly94]; see @aly99 for a generalization to unbounded systems with angular momentum constraint). The explanation is that any isolated system such as the isothermal cylinder is neutrally stable to displacements---in other words, the differential equation governing the density distribution is autonomous---whereas the differential equation ([\[eq:thermalde\]](#eq:thermalde){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:thermalde"}) governing the eccentricity distribution contains terms involving $\sqrt{1-e^2}$ that can make the neutral mode slightly unstable, no matter how small the mean eccentricity. We next construct non-axisymmetric disks using the nonlinear optimization methods described in Appendix [\[sec:num\]](#sec:num){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:num"}. The results are shown in Figure [\[fig:two\]](#fig:two){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:two"}. The top left and bottom right panels show the same quantities as in Figure [\[fig:one\]](#fig:one){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:one"}. The top right panel shows a measure of the strength of the non-axisymmetry, \[I_{\rm max}-I_{\rm min}\equiv \ffrac{5}{2}\sqrt{(\langle k^2\rangle-\langle h^2\rangle)^2+4\langle kh\rangle^2}, \label{eq:nonaxi}\] where $\langle k^2\rangle=\int d{\bf E} f({\bf E}) k^2/\int d{\bf E} f({\bf E})$, etc.[^6] The bottom left panel shows the pattern speed ([\[eq:pattern\]](#eq:pattern){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:pattern"}) for the non-axisymmetric disks, defined to be those with $I_{\rm max}-I_{\rm min}>0.01$. First consider the magenta triangles, which outline the locus of models with zero angular momentum and equal fractions of prograde and retrograde particles. The models begin near mean eccentricity $\langle e\rangle=1$ and energy $u=-0.44127$, corresponding to an axisymmetric disk composed of radial orbits. As the energy is reduced the models initially follow the axisymmetric sequence shown in Figure [\[fig:one\]](#fig:one){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:one"}. At the bifurcation point, marked by a solid circle at $u=u_b=-0.478$, $\langle e\rangle=0.670$, the models leave the axisymmetric sequence, which is no longer an entropy maximum beyond this point, to follow a non-axisymmetric sequence with growing mean eccentricity. This sequence terminates in a disk composed of particles on radial orbits with aligned eccentricity vectors, $\langle e\rangle=1$ and $I_{\rm max}-I_{\rm min}=\frac{5}{2}$. The numerical models terminate at $u=-1.1$ due to the limited resolution of our grid but we believe that the non-axisymmetric sequence should extend to $u\to-\infty$. The behavior of models with angular momentum $\ell=0.5$ (blue triangles) is qualitatively similar, in that the axisymmetric sequence bifurcates to a non-axisymmetric sequence as the energy is decreased (at energy $u_b=-0.508$ and mean eccentricity $\langle e\rangle=0.549$). However, neither the axisymmetric nor the non-axisymmetric sequence can achieve $\langle e\rangle=1$ since such a system would be composed entirely of radial orbits, which have zero angular momentum. Instead, as the energy $u$ becomes more negative, the orbits cluster more and more tightly around a single value of the eccentricity vector, with magnitude given by $\langle e\rangle=e_f\equiv\sqrt{1-\ell^2}$. The numerical models terminate at $u\simeq-0.94$ but we believe this is because of the limited resolution of our grid, and the sequence should asymptote to a horizontal line at $e_f$ that extends to $u\to-\infty$. For $\ell=0.8$ (green triangles), our earlier analysis of the thermal stability of axisymmetric systems implies that there is a bifurcation to a non-axisymmetric sequence at $u_b=-0.675$, $\langle e\rangle=0.200$, but the numerical models remain on the axisymmetric sequence for all energies. This is presumably an artifact of our limited resolution, since (i) a bifurcation point exists only for $\ell<0.83356$, which is close to $\ell=0.8$; (ii) the entropy curves in the bottom right panel of Figure [\[fig:three\]](#fig:three){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:three"} are very close together once $\ell\gtrsim 0.5$ so it is difficult for the optimization code to settle onto the non-axisymmetric sequence. For $\ell=0.95$ no bifurcation is expected or observed. # Thermal and dynamical stability We come now to the relation between thermal and dynamical instability. In the orbit-averaged dynamics described here, dynamical instability typically proceeds on the secular time-scale, which is longer than the orbital period $2\pi(a^3/GM_\star)^{1/2}$ by a factor $\sim M_\star/NM=M_\star/M_{\rm disk}$ (i.e., $\tau\sim 1$ in the notation of eq. [\[eq:ham\]](#eq:ham){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:ham"}). We do not consider possible dynamical instabilities on the time-scale of the orbital period; on this time-scale the disks should be stable since their mass is much smaller than the central mass. Thermal instability proceeds on the resonant relaxation time-scale, which is expected to be longer than the secular time by a factor $\sim N$. Thermal stability implies dynamical stability, but thermal instability need not imply dynamical instability since the collisionless Boltzmann equation conserves phase-space density and the thermal instability may not. For similar reasons, a dynamically unstable initial state does not normally evolve towards a maximum-entropy final state on the secular time. Thus, we expect that dynamical instability leads in a timescale $\tau=\mbox{O}(1)$ to an "intermediate" state that is a time-independent solution of the collisionless Boltzmann equation, and that the intermediate state then evolves on a timescale $\tau=\mbox{O}(N)$ to the maximum-entropy state. Analyses of the dynamical stability of collisionless near-Keplerian stellar disks, with or without a range of semi-major axes, generally find that if there is a sufficient number of counter-rotating particles (sufficiently small total angular momentum) the disks are dynamically unstable and settle into lopsided states on a secular time-scale. To determine whether these conclusions apply to the disks studied in this paper, we have solved the linearized collisionless Boltzmann equation for the axisymmetric models shown in Figure [\[fig:one\]](#fig:one){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:one"} (see Appendix [\[sec:dyn\]](#sec:dyn){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:dyn"}). We find that dynamical instabilities are present in some models, and the onset of dynamical instability occurs at the same bifurcation points at which the disk becomes thermally unstable and the sequence of non-axisymmetric maximum-entropy models begins (to within 0.3% in energy $u$). In other words, it appears that the axisymmetric models are dynamically unstable if and only if they are thermally unstable. To explore further the relation between dynamical and thermal instability in these systems, we simulated the dynamical evolution of ensembles of Gaussian wires selected from the distribution functions of axisymmetric thermal equilibria. We call these N-wire simulations in analogy to N-body simulations. Ensembles with 128, 256 and 512 wires were simulated at $\ell=0, 0.5$ and $0.8$, at energies above and below the bifurcation points identified in Figure [\[fig:one\]](#fig:one){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:one"}. In the top left panel of Figure [\[fig:three\]](#fig:three){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:three"}, we display the mean eccentricity and norm of the mean eccentricity vector for an initially axisymmetric system with $\ell=0$ and $u =-0.55$, which is thermally unstable according to Figures [\[fig:one\]](#fig:one){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:one"} and [\[fig:two\]](#fig:two){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:two"}. The mean eccentricity shows a rapid departure from its equilibrium value in the axisymmetric system ($\langle e\rangle=0.42$) through an (overstable) cycle, which saturates after a sequence of oscillations of gradually decreasing amplitude at a mean eccentricity $\langle e\rangle= 0.81$. The mean eccentricity vector follows suite, departing from $\langle{\bf e}\rangle=0$ and saturating in a lopsided configuration with $\|\langle{\bf e}\rangle\|\simeq 0.59$. We identify these configurations with the "intermediate" equilibria described above. On timescales $\tau=\mbox{O}(N)$ we expect that the intermediate equilibria should evolve toward maximum-entropy equilibria. We have not been able to detect this evolution, simply because the macroscopic properties of the intermediate equilibria are already close to those of the maximum-entropy equilibria when they first appear. For example, the mean eccentricity and mean eccentricity vectors in the intermediate state at $\tau=20$--40 ($\langle e\rangle=0.81$ and $\|\langle {\bf e}\rangle\|= 0.59$) are within a few percent of the corresponding quantities in the maximum-entropy state with the same energy and angular momentum ($\langle e\rangle=0.78$ and $\|\langle {\bf e}\rangle\|= 0.61$). Similarly, the non-axisymmetry parameter $I_{\rm max}-I_{\rm min}$ (eq. [\[eq:nonaxi\]](#eq:nonaxi){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:nonaxi"}) fluctuates around 1.0 in the simulation, close to but 10% larger than its value of 0.91 in the maximum-entropy state. In the top right panel of Figure [\[fig:three\]](#fig:three){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:three"}, we superpose the eccentricity vectors of the 256 wires in the N-wire simulation (circles) at $\tau=182$ onto a 256-point sample of the eccentricity vectors in the maximum-entropy state with the same energy and angular momentum (magenta crosses). The distributions are similar, but the mean eccentricity vector of the maximum-entropy state is smaller and its spread around the mean is broader. We have carried out N-wire simulations of zero angular momentum ($\ell=0$) axisymmetric equilibria at other energies, both below and above the bifurcation value $u_b =-0.478$, and these were equally robust in converging in the mean to states close to the expected maximum-entropy states of Figure [\[fig:two\]](#fig:two){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:two"}. The case $\ell=0.5$ is more complex. As expected, the N-wire simulations showed stability and instability for values of the energy larger and smaller, respectively, than the bifurcation energy $u_b =-0.508$. However the dynamical evolution was far more tortuous. In the bottom left panel of Figure [\[fig:three\]](#fig:three){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:three"}, we follow the mean eccentricity of an ensemble of 128 wires sampling an initially axisymmetric (and thermally unstable) equilibrium with $\ell=0.5$ and $u=-0.533$. The cluster transitions rather fast to a lopsided state with mean eccentricity $\langle e\rangle\simeq 0.53$ then undergoes a further transition around $\tau \sim 500$ to a more lopsided state with $\langle e\rangle\simeq 0.6$, almost exactly the value in the maximum-entropy state ($\langle e\rangle=0.59$). In both states the mean eccentricity exhibits fluctuations with an amplitude of about 0.08. By $\tau =5000$, the lopsided system is precessing with a mean pattern speed $\omega_p = 0.22$, close to the value $\omega_p = 0.20$ expected in the maximum-entropy state with the same energy and angular momentum. The evolution over nearly 200 mode precession periods ($\tau=6000$) shows a number of intermittent transitions to states with lower mean eccentricity and few signs of settling down to a maximum-entropy configuration; in general states with lower mean eccentricity have higher pattern speeds and vice versa. A larger N-wire simulation ($N=256$) showed similar transitions over the same time-scale so these are unlikely to be an artifact of small $N$. A simulation with $\ell=0.5$ and $u=-0.735$, further from the bifurcation energy, lingers around the nearly axisymmetric initial state until about $\tau=2000$, before it undergoes a series of transitions to larger mean eccentricity, eventually (by $\tau=7500$) attaining $\langle e \rangle \simeq 0.77$ (with fluctuations of about 0.15), close to the mean eccentricity of the maximum-entropy state ($\langle e \rangle =0.78$). The pattern speed settled after a series of ups and downs to a mean value $\omega_p = 0.29$, close to the value $\omega_p = 0.31$ expected in the maximum-entropy state with the same energy and angular momentum. Models with $\ell=0.8$ revealed in dynamical simulations some of the same pathologies displayed by their counter-parts in the search for maximum entropy non-axisymmetric states: in particular, states that are predicted to go unstable seemed stuck in the neighborhood of their initial near-equilibrium configuration, even in relatively lengthy simulations with $N=256$ wires. The final states of all of these simulations are displayed as solid squares with error bars in the bottom right panel of Figure [\[fig:three\]](#fig:three){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:three"}), along with the maximum-entropy equilibria shown in the top left panel of Figure [\[fig:one\]](#fig:one){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:one"}. We conclude that in some of our models dynamical instability leads to "intermediate" states that are close to maximum-entropy states; other models, particuarly those with significant angular momentum, often seem to linger in, or oscillate between, metastable states. Possibly this behavior is associated with the small difference in entropy between the axisymmetric and non-axisymmetric entropy extrema (compare the lower-right panels of Figures [\[fig:one\]](#fig:one){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:one"} and [\[fig:two\]](#fig:two){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:two"}). # Discussion We have examined the maximum-entropy states of a razor-thin disk of collisionless masses orbiting a massive central body. The disks may contain particles on both prograde and retrograde orbits and particles are allowed to flip between prograde and retrograde orbits, but the total energy and angular momentum of the disk are conserved. The disk mass is assumed to be much smaller than the mass of the central body, so the interaction potential between two particles can be approximated by its orbit-averaged value. This approximation is appropriate if the disk age is shorter than the time-scale for two-body relaxation due to close encounters. The orbit-averaged interaction between particles leads to resonant relaxation, in which the angular momenta and eccentricities of the particles relax, but the semi-major axes remain fixed. For simplicity, we focus in this paper on the somewhat artificial case in which all the particles have the same semi-major axis ("Keplerian rings"), although our methods are easily adapted to more general disk models. Although the Keplerian rings described here are artificial systems intended mainly as aids in exploring the dynamics and statistical mechanics of self-gravitating stellar systems, it is useful to relate them to the properties of a real astrophysical system to which they may offer insight. The center of the Milky Way galaxy contains a black hole surrounded by a near-Keplerian stellar system, with the following properties (taken from @kt11): black-hole mass $M_\bullet=4\times 10^6\,M_\odot$; number of stars within 0.1 pc $N=5\times 10^4$; orbital period at 0.1 pc $1.5\times10^3\,\mbox{yr}$; age $\sim 10^{10}\,\mbox{yr}$; resonant relaxation time $\sim 5\times10^7\,\mbox{yr}$. We construct the maximum-entropy equilibria that should be the end-state of resonant relaxation. The natural expectation is that such disks should be axisymmetric, with an eccentricity distribution given approximately by the analytic solution in, at least so long as the mean eccentricity is not too large. This expectation is not correct: for a given angular momentum we find that the maximum-entropy state has a minimum mean eccentricity (top left panel of Figure [\[fig:two\]](#fig:two){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:two"}) which is achieved at a critical value of the energy, $u_b$. The maximum-entropy state is axisymmetric for energy $u > u_b$ and lopsided for $u<u_b$. For $u<u_b$ the axisymmetric equilibrium is an entropy extremum but not a maximum. Both the pattern speed and the temperature of the lopsided disks are generally positive. Essentially, as the disk is cooled to lower and lower energies the stellar orbits concentrate around a single eccentricity vector ${\bf e}_0$ whose magnitude is determined by the angular momentum, $e_0=\sqrt{1-\ell^2}$. The results presented in this paper are based on a logarithmic approximation to the orbit-averaged potential energy between two particles, an approximation that is valid only in the limit of small eccentricities. The mean eccentricities of the non-axisymmetric equilibria are large enough to cast doubt on the validity of this approximation. However, we have repeated our calculations using the exact orbit-averaged potential (computed on a three-dimensional grid in ${\bf e}_1$--${\bf e}_2$) and we found that the maximum-entropy states produced with the logarithmic potential and the exact potential have all the same qualitative features (bifurcation points, minimum mean eccentricity, lopsided equilibria, etc.). Maximum-entropy models computed in this way are shown in Figure [\[fig:four\]](#fig:four){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:four"}, which should be compared with Figure [\[fig:two\]](#fig:two){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:two"}. The numerical methods we have used need to be improved. At present we find the entropy maxima using sequential quadratic programming, defining the distribution function on a 4096-point grid in eccentricity space. In a few cases we find suspicious numerical artifacts (e.g., the small discontinuity near $u=-1.05$, $\langle e\rangle=0.03$ in the top left panel of Figure [\[fig:two\]](#fig:two){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:two"}), and in most cases convergence is quite slow. This said, we have confirmed our main results with Markov-chain Monte Carlo simulations, basis-function expansions of the central integral equation (see Appendix [\[sec:basis\]](#sec:basis){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:basis"}), numerical solutions of the analogous differential equation ([\[eq:thermalde\]](#eq:thermalde){reference-type="ref" reference="eq:thermalde"}) for axisymmetric states, and nonlinear optimization using smaller grids. We have also examined possible dynamical instabilities in axisymmetric Keplerian rings, which are expected to occur on the secular times-scale, that is, a times-scale longer than the orbital period by the ratio of the central mass to the disk mass. We find that the rings are dynamically unstable if and only if they are thermally unstable. We showed via N-wire simulations that dynamical instability in these disks produces lopsided states. We observe that in some but not all of our experiments these are close to the maximum-entropy solutions in mean eccentricity, distribution of eccentricity vectors, and precession rates or pattern speeds; we do not have an explanation for this similarity nor do we know whether it has an illuminating physical explanation. The presence of this instability is in line with earlier findings of generic dynamical instabilities in disks containing a retrograde stellar population [^7]. However, we do not know why the final state of the dynamical instability is so similar to the maximum-entropy state resulting from thermal instability, since this is not generally true in self-gravitating systems (e.g., in collapse of spherical systems that are not initially in virial equilibrium, where there is no maximum-entropy state)---perhaps part of the answer is that the phase space of the systems examined here is compact. Our results on the equilibria of self-gravitating systems with logarithmic two-body potentials in eccentricity space have a strong kinship with the far more extensive body of work on the statistical mechanics of point vortices in compact domains (see Appendix [\[sec:vortex\]](#sec:vortex){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:vortex"}). The interaction potential for vortices is logarithmic in physical space, so physical space for vortices maps into eccentricity space for wires, and conserved circulation in point vortices to conserved semi-major axes in the secular dynamics of wires. Of course there are obvious and important differences: in self-gravitating wires the potential energy does not depend on the direction of motion---prograde or retrograde---of the particles, whereas it does depend on the sign of circulation of vortices; wires can evolve between prograde and retrograde, while vortices cannot change their circulation; negative-temperature states in vortices are prone to phase transitions, whereas negative-temperature rings appear perfectly stable in axisymmetric configurations. This said, much of the analytic machinery developed to study the existence and stability of solutions in the point vortex case should extend quite naturally to our problem. We have found remarkable and unexpected complexity in the thermodynamics of near-Keplerian stellar disks. These results are of interest both for exploring the thermodynamics of systems with long-range forces and because they suggest that many near-Keplerian, nearly collisionless, astrophysical disks (disks near supermassive black holes, debris disks around young stars, etc.) may naturally develop a lopsided configuration. This research was supported in part by NASA grant NNX11AF29G. JT acknowledges the support of an Arab Fund Research Fellowship for the year 2013--2014, which allowed him an extended stay at the IAS and a briefer one at the IHP (Paris), the hospitality of both institutes being greatly appreciated. [^1]: It might seem more natural to model a disk containing only prograde orbits. However, the orbit-averaged gravitational torque on an eccentric orbit does not approach zero as the eccentricity approaches unity. Thus if the phase space is restricted to prograde orbits, there will be a loss of particles through the boundary at zero angular momentum or $e=1$. [^2]: For retrograde particles, our definition of $\varpi$ differs from the usual convention (because $\varpi$ is always measured counter-clockwise from the origin of azimuth rather than in the direction of orbital motion); the advantage of our convention is that prograde and retrograde orbits with the same eccentricity vector occupy the same locus in space. [^3]: An alternative approximation is that the potential is logarithmic in the distance between the Poincaré eccentricities, $\phi_P=(2\pi)^{-1}\log({\bf E}-{\bf E}')^2+\mbox{const}$. We have experimented with this approximation and find that the rich behavior described here---bifurcation points, lopsided equilibria, etc.---is present with the exact potential $\phi$ and the approximate potential $\phi_L$ but not with $\phi_P$. [^4]: Apart from the factor $\sqrt{1-e^2}$, when $\gamma=0$ this is the equation for the self-gravitating isothermal cylinder. [^5]: The properties of the system at the bifurcation are continuous functions of the energy in a microcanonical setting. Our preliminary exploration of the thermodynamics of our model disks in the canonical ensemble reveals a richer behavior, including a first-order phase transition at zero angular momentum, which transitions into a second-order transition with increasing angular momentum. The study of the canonical ensemble will take us too far afield in an already lengthy exploration of the microcanonical states and is relegated to future work. [^6]: It is straightforward to show that $I_{\rm max}-I_{\rm min}$ is the difference between the larger and smaller of the two principal moments of inertia of the disk when the disk has unit semi-major axis and unit mass. Thus $I_{\rm max}-I_{\rm min}=0$ for axisymmetric disks and $I_{\rm max}-I_{\rm min}=\frac{5}{2}$ for a disk in which all the eccentricity vectors have $e=1$ and are aligned or anti-aligned. [^7]: In both N-wire and N-body simulations of unstable counter-rotating disks, stellar orbits experience large-amplitude oscillations in inclination when their eccentricity increases beyond a critical value. Such eccentricity-inclination instabilities may operate in the disks we consider here if given the freedom to do so, and make it imperative to generalize our results to three-dimensional maximum-entropy equilibria. In addition to endowing our models with greater physical realism, the extra degree of freedom provides a natural way to resolve the otherwise singular transition from the prograde to the retrograde sector of phase space.	{'timestamp': '2014-09-12T02:12:32', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5534', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5534'}
# Introduction In this paper, we prove effective upper bounds for effective sections of line bundles on projective varieties and hermitian line bundles on arithmetic varieties in terms of intersection numbers. They are effective versions of the Hilbert--Samuel formula and the arithmetic Hilbert--Samuel formula. The treatments are high-dimensional generalizations of. Similar results are obtained independently by Huayi Chen with less explicit error terms. The initial motivation for our first paper is to obtain some arithmetic version of the classical Noether inequality on minimal surfaces. We have achieved the goal by a rescaling method. As the project goes on, it turns out that this rescaling method, naturally arising from Arakelov geometry, can be also used to prove new results in the geometric setting. For example, we have treated fibered surfaces in. Moreover, by constructing fibrations, such an idea can be used to treat projective varieties of arbitrary dimensions by inductions. These geometric results in turn are the basis of the arithmetic versions in arbitrary dimension. These are the main ideas of the current paper. ## Geometric case Let $X$ be a projective variety of dimension $n$ over a field $k$, and let $L$ be a line bundle on $X$. The volume of $L$ is defined to be \[\vol(L): = \limsup_{N \to \infty} \frac{h^0(NL)}{N^n/n!}.\] Here we write $NL$ for $L^{\otimes N}$. In fact, we take the convention of writing tensor products of line bundles additively throughout this paper. It is known that the "$\limsup$\" on the right hand side is actually a limit. See for example. Then we have the following expansion: \[h^0(NL) = \frac{1}{n!} \vol(L)N^n + o(N^n), \quad N \to \infty.\] The goal of this paper in the geometric case is to provide an effective version of the expansion in the "$\leq$" direction. To introduce the result, we first introduce a basic invariant $\varepsilon(L)$ of $L$. Recall that a line bundle $M$ on $X$ is pseudo-effective if \[M\cdot A_1 \cdots A_{n-1} \ge 0\] for any nef line bundles $A_1, \cdots, A_{n-1}$ on $X$. Let $B$ be any big and base-point-free line bundle on $X$. Denote by $\lambda_{L, B}$ the smallest non-negative real number such that \[\lambda_{L, B} B-L\] is pseudo-effective. We define \[\varepsilon(L, B) := (\lambda_{L, B}+1)^{n-1} B^n.\] Define \[\varepsilon(L) := \inf_B \varepsilon({\mathcal{L}}, B),\] where the infimum is taken over all big and base-point-free line bundles $B$ on $X$. The main result in the geometric case is as follows. When $n=1$, the theorem is just the classical $h^0(L)\leq \deg(L)+1$. When $n=2$, it generalizes the classical Noether inequality on surfaces. One can also compare it with the result of Shin, which is quoted as Theorem [\[Sh\]](#Sh){reference-type="ref" reference="Sh"} in our current paper. We refer to the introductions of for more historical accounts. The theorem is an effective version of the asymptotic expansion of $h^0(N L)$. In fact, it is easy to have \[\varepsilon(N L) \le N^{n-1} \varepsilon(L).\] Then the result for $NL$ gives \[h^0(NL) \leq \frac{1}{n!} \vol(N L) + n\ \varepsilon(N L) \leq \frac{1}{n!} \vol(L) N^n+ n\ \varepsilon(L) N^{n-1}.\] This gives an effective version of the asymptotic expansion. If $L$ is big and base-point-free, then $\vol(L)=L^n$ and \[\varepsilon(N L) \leq \varepsilon(N L, L)=(N+1)^{n-1} L^n.\] It follows that the theorem becomes \[h^0(NL) \leq \frac{1}{n!} N^n L^n+ n(N+1)^{n-1} L^n.\] This is an effective version of the Hilbert--Samuel formula. One can compare it with the main result of Kollár--Matsusaka in and. Under similar assumptions on $L$ and assuming that $k$ has characteristic zero, their result asserts that \[\left\|h^0(NL)-\frac{1}{n!} N^n L^n\right\| \leq Q_n(L^n, L^{n-1}K_X, N),\] where $Q_n$ is a (universal) polynomial of three variables whose degree in the third variable is at most $n-1$. Our result here gives an explicit and simple form of $Q_n$ for the upper bound part, which does not involve $L^{n-1}K_X$, as expected by them. The result of Kollár--Matsusaka is generalized by Luo to the case that $L$ is big and nef, where $Q_n$ is replaced by a polynomial in $N$ of degree at most $n-1$, whose coefficients are determined by $L^{n}$ and $L^{n-1}K_X$. To compare our result with it, we raise the question whether $\varepsilon(L)$ can be bounded in terms of $L^{n}$ and $L^{n-1}K_X$ if $L$ is big and nef. On the other hand, it is worth noting that our theorem is true for any line bundle $L$, which does not restrict to multiples of the same line bundle. The theorem is accurate when $L$ is "large," but it is not so when $L$ is "small." In the latter case, we propose a more delicate bound. When $n=1$, the theorem is essentially Clifford's theorem \[h^0(L)\leq \frac12\deg(L)+1\] for special line bundles. When $n=2$, it is very close to the main theorem of. We still refer to loc. cit. for more historical accounts. The theorem is also proved in the recent work by one of our authors, but with a more complicated "error term." As in loc. cit., one can apply the above result to prove Severi's conjecture in high dimensions. Besides the major assumption that $\omega_X-L$ is pseudo-effective, there are two extra assumptions in the theorem. First, the assumption of characteristic zero is made to use Hironaka's resolution of singularities. Second, the assumption that $X$ is smooth can be weakened to that $X$ has canonical singularities by applying resolution of singularities. Because resolution of singularities is known for algebraic 3-folds of positive characteristics (cf. ), the theorem is true in the case that $\mathrm{char}(k)>0$ and $n=3$. ## Arithmetic case Now we describe our arithmetic versions of the above theorems. Let $K$ be a number field. Let ${\mathcal{X}}$ be an arithmetic variety of dimension $n$ over $O_K$, i.e, ${\mathcal{X}}$ is an $n$-dimensional normal scheme, projective and flat over $O_K$ such that the generic fiber ${\mathcal{X}}_{K}$ is geometrically connected. We assume that $\dim {\mathcal{X}} \geq 2$ throughout this paper. By a hermitian line bundle on ${\mathcal{X}}$, we mean a pair $\lb=({\mathcal{L}}, \\| \cdot \\|)$, where ${\mathcal{L}}$ is an invertible sheaf on ${\mathcal{X}}$, and $\\| \cdot \\|$ is a continuous metric of the line bundle ${\mathcal{L}}({\mathbb{C}})$ on ${\mathcal{X}} ({\mathbb{C}})$, invariant under the complex conjugation. For any hermitian line bundle $\lb=({\mathcal{L}}, \\| \cdot \\|)$ on ${\mathcal{X}}$, denote the set of effective sections as follows: \[\widehat H^0(\lb): = \{s \in H^0({\mathcal{X}}, {\mathcal{L}}): \\| s \\|_{\sup} \le 1 \}.\] Define \[\hhat(\lb): = \log \# \widehat H^0(\lb)\] and the arithmetic volume function \[\volhat(\lb): = \limsup_{N \to \infty} \frac{\hhat(N\lb)}{N^n/n!}.\] Recall that a hermitian line bundle $\lb$ is called big if $\volhat(\lb)>0$. Recall that a hermitian line bundle $\lb$ over ${\mathcal{X}}$ is called nef if it satisfies the following conditions: - $\widehat{\deg}(\lb\|_Z) \ge 0$ for any integral one-dimensional subscheme $Z$ on ${\mathcal{X}}$; - The metric of $\lb$ is semipositive, i.e., the curvature current of the pull-back $j^\lb$ via any holomorphic map $j:\Omega\to {\mathcal{X}} ({\mathbb{C}})$ from an open complex ball $\Omega$ of dimension $n-1$ is positive. The arithmetic nefness, introduced by Moriwaki, generalizes the arithmetic ampleness of S. Zhang. In fact, it is the limit notion of the arithmetic ampleness. Many results in the geometric case have been proved in the current setting (under substantially more efforts). The following is a list of them (in chronological order) that are most related to the subject of this paper. - If $\lb$ is ample, then $\volhat(\lb) = \lb^n$. In other words, one has the arithmetic Hilbert--Samuel formula \[\hhat(N\lb) = \frac{N^n}{n!} \lb^n + o(N^n), \quad N \to \infty.\] This is essentially due to Gillet-Soulé and S. Zhang. See for a brief account. - Moriwaki proves the continuity of $\volhat$, and extends the result $\volhat(\lb) = \lb^n$ to any nef line bundle $\lb$. - Chen proves that the "$\limsup$\" in the definition of $\volhat$ is a limit. Thus we have the following expansion: \[\hhat(N\lb) = \frac{1}{n!} \volhat(\lb) N^n + o(N^n), \quad N \to \infty.\] See Yuan for a proof in terms of Okounkov bodies. - Chen and Yuan proves the arithmetic Fujita approximation theorem for big hermitian line bundles. - Chen proves the differentiability of the arithmetic volume function, based on the bigness theorem of Yuan, the log-concavity of Yuan, and the arithmetic Fujita approximation theorem above. - On arithmetic surfaces, the arithmetic Zariski decomposition is proved by Moriwaki. To state our main theorem in the arithmetic setting, we need to introduce one more invariant. Let ${\mathcal{X}}$ be an arithmetic variety of dimension $n$ over $O_K$, and $\lb$ be a hermitian line bundle on ${\mathcal{X}}$. Define the volume derivative* \[\dvol(\lb)= \sup_{({\mathcal{X}} ', \overline{\mathcal{A}})}\deg(\mathcal A_K)= \sup_{({\mathcal{X}} ', \overline{\mathcal{A}})}\mathcal A_K^{n-1},\] where the supremum takes over every pair $({\mathcal{X}}',\overline{\mathcal{A}})$ consisting of an arithmetic variety ${\mathcal{X}} '$ endowed with a birational morphism $\pi:{\mathcal{X}} '\to {\mathcal{X}}$ and a nef ${\mathbb{Q}}$-line bundle $\overline{\mathcal{A}}$ on ${\mathcal{X}} '$ such that $\pi^\lb-\overline{\mathcal{A}}$ is effective. Some basic property of the volume derivative is as follows: - $\dvol(\lb)>0$ if $\lb$ is big. - If $\lb$ is nef, then $\dvol(\lb)=\mathcal L_K^{n-1}.$ - If $\dim{\mathcal{X}}=2$ and $\lb$ is big, then $\dvol(\lb)=\deg(\mathcal P_K)$, where $\overline{\mathcal P}$ is the positive part of $\lb$ as in the arithmetic Zariski decomposition of Moriwaki. The definition of $\dvol$ sits in the setting of the arithmetic Fujita approximation of Chen and Yuan. Furthermore, in the sense of Chen, the definition is actually a positive intersection number, and thus \[\dvol(\lb) =\frac{1}{n[K:{\mathbb{Q}}]} \lim_{t\to 0} \frac1t \left(\volhat(\lb(t))-\volhat(\lb)\right),\] where $\lb(t)$ denotes the hermitian line bundle obtained by multiplying the hermitian metric of $\lb$ by the constant $e^{-t}$ (at every archimedean place). This is the reason for the name "volume derivative." One can also interpret $\dvol(\lb)$ as some volume function of some graded linear series on the generic fiber ${\mathcal{X}}_K$ encoding certain arithmetic property of $\lb$. See Lemma [\[limit\]](#limit){reference-type="ref" reference="limit"}. For more properties of $\dvol(\lb)$, we refer to §[3.2](#section dvol){reference-type="ref" reference="section dvol"}. Finally, we are ready to state our first main theorem in the arithmetic case. During the preparation of this paper, similar upper bounds of $h^0(L)$ and $\hhat(\lb)$ are obtained by Huayi Chen independently. In comparison, the error terms in our Theorem [\[main1\]](#main1){reference-type="ref" reference="main1"} and Theorem [\[main3\]](#main3){reference-type="ref" reference="main3"} are more explicit than those in and. In comparison with, our proof also gives \[\sum_{i=1}^r \max\{\lambda_i(H^0({\mathcal{X}},{\mathcal{L}}), \\|\cdot\\|_{\sup}),0\} \leq \left(\frac {1}{n!} + \frac{(n-1) \varepsilon({\mathcal{L}}_K)}{\dvol(\lb)}\right) \volhat(\lb).\] To keep this paper as accessible as possible, we do not write our treatment in this setting but leave it to interested readers. Note that in the theorem, the term $\varepsilon({\mathcal{L}}_K)$, introduced in the geometric case, depends only on the generic fiber ${\mathcal{L}}_K$ on ${\mathcal{X}}_K$. Furthermore, if $\lb$ is nef, then the term $\dvol(\lb)$ also depends only on the generic fiber ${\mathcal{L}}_K$ on ${\mathcal{X}}_K$. Let us see the asymptotic of Theorem [\[main3\]](#main3){reference-type="ref" reference="main3"}. For any integer $N > 0$, by $\varepsilon(N {\mathcal{L}}_K) \le N^{n-2} \varepsilon({\mathcal{L}}_K)$ and $\dvol(N\lb)=N^{n-1}\dvol(\lb)$, the theorem gives \[\hhat(N\lb) \le \left(\frac {1}{n!} + \frac{(n-1) \varepsilon({\mathcal{L}}_K)}{N\cdot\dvol(\lb)}\right) \volhat(\lb) N^n + 4r_N \log (3r_N).\] Here $r_N=h^0(N {\mathcal{L}}_{\mathbb{Q}})$ can also be effectively bounded by Theorem [\[main1\]](#main1){reference-type="ref" reference="main1"}. Hence, we see the effectivity of the theorem. If $\lb$ is big and nef with a base-point-free generic fiber ${\mathcal{L}}_K$, then as in the geometric case, the theorem gives \[\hhat(N\lb) \le \frac {1}{n!} N^n \lb^n + (n-1) N (N+1)^{n-2} \lb^n + 4r_N \log (3r_N),\] where \[r_N/[K:{\mathbb{Q}}] \leq \frac{1}{(n-1)!} N^{n-1} {\mathcal{L}}_K^{n-1}+ (n-1)(N+1)^{n-2} {\mathcal{L}}_K^{n-1}\] by Theorem [\[main1\]](#main1){reference-type="ref" reference="main1"}. When $n=2$, if the generic fiber of ${\mathcal{X}}$ has positive genus, with a minor assumption, actually gives \[\hhat(\lb) \le \frac {1}{2} \volhat(\lb) + 4r \log (3r).\] In another word, the "error term" disappears here. However, Theorem [\[main3\]](#main3){reference-type="ref" reference="main3"} applies to any big line bundles in any dimensions. It is a philosophy that appropriate assumptions of general type should make the "error term" cleaner, but it is really complicated to carry it out for high dimensions. However, in dimension three, see the clean result in Theorem [\[3fold\]](#3fold){reference-type="ref" reference="3fold"}. Similar to Theorem [\[main2\]](#main2){reference-type="ref" reference="main2"}, we have the following more delicate bound when $\lb$ is "small" (on the generic fiber). It is a generalization of. At last, we present a clean theorem for arithmetic 3-folds (under more assumptions). ## Ideas of proofs The major ideas to prove the theorems are still the rescaling method in. However, we do have many innovations to overcome the difficulties in high dimensions. ### The rescaling method {#the-rescaling-method .unnumbered} For convenience of readers, we first sketch the rescaling method here. Take Theorem [\[main1\]](#main1){reference-type="ref" reference="main1"} for example. Assume that $\lb$ is nef for simplicity here, and we will come back to discuss the extension to the general case later. We need to give a suitable upper bound of \[\Delta(\lb)=\widehat h^0_{\rm sef}(\lb)-\frac1{n!} \lb^n.\] Here $\widehat h^0_{\rm sef}(\lb)$ counts the strictly effective sections, which is very close to but more convenient than $\hhat(\lb)$. We first find the largest constant $c\geq 0$ such that \[\lb(-c) = (\mathcal L, e^c\\| \cdot \\|)\] is still nef on ${\mathcal{X}}$. It is easy to control $\Delta(\lb)$ by $\Delta(\lb(-c))$. Then the problem is reduced to $\lb(-c)$. The key is that $\widehat H^0_{\rm sef}(\lb(-c))$ is never base-point-free. By blowing-up the base locus, we obtain a birational morphism $\pi:{\mathcal{X}}_1\to {\mathcal{X}}$ with a decomposition \[\pi^\lb(-c)= \lb_1+\overline{\mathcal{E}}_1.\] Here $\overline{\mathcal{E}}_1$ is an effective hermitian line bundle associated to the base locus of $\pi^\lb(-c)$, and $\lb_1$ is base-point-free whose strictly effective sections are bijective to those of $\lb(-c)$. Then it is easy to control $\Delta(\lb(-c))$ by $\Delta(\lb_1)$. And the problem is reduced to $\lb_1$. Keep the reduction process. We obtain $\lb_2, \lb_3, \cdots.$ The key property for the construction is the strict inequality \[\widehat h^0_{\rm sef}(\lb)>\widehat h^0_{\rm sef}(\lb_1)>\widehat h^0_{\rm sef}(\lb_2) >\cdots.\] It follows that the process terminates after finitely many steps. We eventually end up with $\lb_n$ such that $\lb_n(-c_n)$ has no strictly effective sections. It leads to the proof of the theorem. ### New ingredients {#new-ingredients .unnumbered} The following are some major innovations in this paper. - The interaction between the geometric case and the arithmetic case. Our proofs of the geometric case are inspired by the rescaling method from the arithmetic case. To apply the method to the geometric case, we construct a fibration of the ambient projective variety over a curve, which mimics the arithmetic setting. To pass from the fibers to the ambient variety, an induction argument is used naturally. On the other hand, the proofs in the arithmetic case use the results in the geometric case. - We introduce the invariant $\varepsilon(L)$ to bound the "error terms." It really simplifies the estimates and makes it possible to write down the final inequalities in very general settings in high dimensions. - In the arithmetic case, the proofs of Theorem [\[main3\]](#main3){reference-type="ref" reference="main3"} and Theorem [\[main4\]](#main4){reference-type="ref" reference="main4"} for nef $\lb$, based on Theorem [\[main1\]](#main1){reference-type="ref" reference="main1"} and Theorem [\[main2\]](#main2){reference-type="ref" reference="main2"}, are more or less similar to the proofs in. However, the proofs for general $\lb$ are more subtle. In fact, even formulations of the theorems are not obvious. Our new idea is to introduce the derivative volume $\dvol(\lb)$, as a basic invariant of $\lb$. Then the proof is extended to the general case by the arithmetic Fujita approximation of Chen and Yuan and differentiation theorem of the arithmetic volume function of Chen. Acknowledgments.* The authors would like to thank Huayi Chen and the anonymous referees of our article, who bring insights of the current high-dimensional setting. The first author is supported by the NSF grant DMS-1330987. The second author is supported by an NSERC discovery grant. # Geometric case The goal of this section is to prove Theorem [\[main1\]](#main1){reference-type="ref" reference="main1"} and Theorem [\[main2\]](#main2){reference-type="ref" reference="main2"}. After introducing the filtration of line bundles, we finish the proofs by collecting the numerical inequalities. By passing to the algebraic closure, we can assume that $k$ is algebraically closed everywhere in this section. ## Filtration of line bundles This section is a high-dimensional analogue of the construction in. We include all the details here for completeness. ### Basic construction {#basic-construction .unnumbered} Let $L$ be any line bundle on a projective variety $X$ with $h^0(L)>0$. There is a canonical way to separate $L$ from its base locus by blow-up $X$, which is essential in our proof. So we recall it here. Let $Z$ be the base locus of $L$ in $X$, i.e., the closed subscheme defined by the ideal sheaf given by the image of the composition \[H^0(X,L)\times L^\vee \longrightarrow L\times L^\vee \longrightarrow {\mathcal{O}}_X.\] Note that $Z$ has positive codimension by $h^0(L)>0$. Let $\pi: X_1\to X$ be the normalization of the blow-up of $X$ along $Z$. Let $Z_1$ be the exceptional divisor on $X_1$, which is the zero locus of the inverse image of the ideal sheaf of $Z$. Define a line bundle $L_1=(\pi^L)\otimes {\mathcal{O}}_{X_1}(-Z)$ on $X_1$. By abuse of notation between line bundles and divisors, we write \[\pi^ L = L_1+Z_1.\] By definition, the base locus of $\pi^L$ is $Z_1$. We have the following properties: - There is a canonical isomorphism \[H^0(X_1, L_1) \longrightarrow H^0(X_1, \pi^L).\] - The line bundle $L_1$ is base-point-free on $X_1$, and thus it is nef. - If furthermore $X$ is normal, then the pull-back map gives an isomorphism \[H^0(X, L) \longrightarrow H^0(X_1, \pi^L).\] For the last property, the right-hand side is equal to $H^0(X, \pi_\pi^L)$, but $\pi_\pi^L=L\otimes \pi_{\mathcal{O}}_{X_1}=L$. The construction is trivial if $L$ is base-point-free. In the following, we are going to use fibrations to get non-trivial constructions. ### The filtration {#the-filtration .unnumbered} By a fibration over a field $k$, we mean a projective, flat, and geometrically connected morphism $f: X \to C$, where $C$ is a smooth projective curve over $k$, and $X$ is a projective variety over $k$. Let $f: X \to C$ be a fibration over an algebraically closed field $k$. For any nef line bundle $L$ on $X$, denote by $e_L$ the positive integer such that - $L-e_LF$ is not nef; - $L-eF$ is nef for any integer $e<e_L$. Here $F$ denotes a general fiber of $X$ over $C$, and we write $L-eF$ for the line bundle $L(-eF)$. Note that $L-e_LF$ is not base-point-free since it is not nef. So we can perform the basic construction to get a base-point-free line bundle $L_1$, which has "the same" global sections as $L$. Keep doing the process on $L_1$, we have the following iterated process. ### Numerical inequalities {#numerical-inequalities .unnumbered} Resume the notations in Theorem [\[algdecomposition\]](#algdecomposition){reference-type="ref" reference="algdecomposition"}. Denote $n=\dim X_0$. Denote \[L'_i=L_i-a_iF_i, \quad r_i=h^0(L_i\|_{F_i}), \quad d_i=(L_i\|_{F_i})^{n-1}\] for $i=0, \cdots, N$. In the following, we give a bound of $L_0^n$ in terms of just $d_0$. ## Proofs of the main theorems Here we prove Theorem [\[main1\]](#main1){reference-type="ref" reference="main1"} and Theorem [\[main2\]](#main2){reference-type="ref" reference="main2"}. We are going to prove them by induction on $n=\dim X$. Note that the case $n=1$ is known. Assume $n\geq 2$ in the following. ### Nef line bundles and fibrations {#nef-line-bundles-and-fibrations .unnumbered} Recall that Theorem [\[main1\]](#main1){reference-type="ref" reference="main1"} asserts that \[h^0(L) \leq \frac{1}{n!} \vol(L) + n\ \varepsilon(L).\] First, it is easy to reduce the problem to the case that $L$ is nef. Assume $h^0(L)>0$, or there were nothing to prove. By the basic construction, we have a birational morphism $\pi: X_1\to X$ and a decomposition \[\pi^L=L_1+Z_1\] with $L_1$ nef and $Z_1$ effective. Furthermore, \[h^0(L)\leq h^0(\pi^ L)=h^0(L_1), \quad \vol(L) = \vol(L_1+Z_1) \geq \vol(L_1) \geq L_1^n\] and \[\varepsilon(L) \geq \varepsilon(\pi^L) \geq \varepsilon(L_1).\] It follows that the result on $L_1$ implies that on $L$. Second, it is also easy to reduce it to the case that there is a fibration on $X$. Let $B$ be any big and base-point-free line bundle on $X$. We need to prove \[h^0(L) \leq \frac{1}{n!} \vol(L) + n\ \varepsilon(L,B).\] We will reduce it to the case that there is fibration $f:X \to C$, such that \[(B-F)\cdot L^{n-1}=(B-F)\cdot B^{n-1}=0,\] where $F$ denotes a general fiber of $X$ above $C$. In fact, since $B$ is big and base-point-free, the map $X \to \mathbb P(H^0(X,B))$ is a generically finite morphism. Take two different irreducible elements $W_1,W_2\in \|B\|$, and let $\sigma: X' \to X$ be the blow-up of $X$ along the intersection $W_1\cdot W_2$. Denote by $T$ the exceptional divisor. Then the divisors $\sigma^W_1-T, \sigma^W_2-T\in H^0(X',D)$ are disjoint. Denote $D=\sigma^B\otimes {\mathcal{O}}_{X'}(-T)$, and denote by $s_1$ and $s_2$ the sections of $H^0(X', D)$ defining $\sigma^W_1-T, \sigma^W_2-T$. These two sections define a morphism $f:X'\to \mathbb P^1$, which is the fibration. By construction, $D$ is the linear equivalence class of fibers of $f$, and $\sigma^B-D=T$ is effective. Replace $(X, L, B)$ by $(X', \sigma^L, \sigma^B)$. Then we have the desired fibration on $X$. ### General case {#general-case .unnumbered} By the above argument, Theorem [\[main1\]](#main1){reference-type="ref" reference="main1"} is reduced to the following statement: Let $f:X \to C$ be a fibration over an algebraically closed field $k$. Let $L$ be a nef line bundle on $X$, and $B$ be a big and base-point-free line bundle on $X$. Denote $n=\dim X$ and denote by $F$ a general fiber of $X$ above $C$. Assume $(B-F) L^{n-1}=(B-F) B^{n-1}=0$. Then \[h^0(L) \leq \frac{1}{n!} L^n + n\ \varepsilon(L,B).\]* Now we prove this statement by induction on $n$. Apply the construction in Theorem [\[algdecomposition\]](#algdecomposition){reference-type="ref" reference="algdecomposition"} to $(X,C, L, F)$. Still use the same notations as the theorem. By Proposition [\[algcase1\]](#algcase1){reference-type="ref" reference="algcase1"}, \[\begin{aligned} L^n_0 & \ge & n\sum_{i=0}^N a_{i} d_i-nd_0, \\ h^0(L_0) & \le & \sum_{i=0}^N a_{i} r_{i}. \end{aligned}\] Here we recall $r_i=h^0(L_i\|_{F_i})$ and $d_i=(L_i\|_{F_i})^{n-1}$. The difference gives \[\begin{aligned} h^0(L_0)-\frac{1}{n!}L^n_0 & \le & \sum_{i=0}^N \left(r_i-\frac{d_i}{(n-1)!}\right) a_i + \frac{d_0}{(n-1)!}. \end{aligned}\] By induction on $n$, we have \[r_i\leq \frac{d_i}{(n-1)!} + (n-1)\varepsilon(L_i\|_{F_i}).\] Therefore, \[\begin{aligned} h^0(L_0)-\frac{1}{n!}L^n_0 & \le & (n-1) \sum_{i=0}^N a_i\ \varepsilon(L_i\|_{F_i})+ \frac{d_0}{(n-1)!}. \end{aligned}\] It suffices to estimate $\varepsilon(L_i\|_{F_i})$. Let $\lambda\geq 0$ be the smallest real number such that $\lambda B-L$ is pseudo-effective. By definition, \[\varepsilon(L,B)=(\lambda +1)^{n-1}B^n.\] Denote by $B_i$ the pull-back of $B=B_0$ from $X=X_0$ to $X_i$. Note that $\lambda B_i-L_i$ is pseudo-effective, and so is $\lambda (B_i\|_{F_i})-L_i\|_{F_i}$. Thus \[\varepsilon(L_i\|_{F_i}) \le \varepsilon(L_i\|_{F_i}, B_i\|_{F_i}) \le (\lambda +1)^{n-2} (B_i\|_{F_i})^{n-1} = (\lambda +1)^{n-2} B^n = \frac{\varepsilon(L, B)}{\lambda +1}.\] Therefore, we have \[\begin{aligned} h^0(L_0)-\frac{1}{n!}L^n_0 & \le & (n-1)\frac{\varepsilon(L, B)}{\lambda +1} \sum_{i=0}^N a_i + \frac{d_0}{(n-1)!}. \end{aligned}\] It remains to bound $a_0+\cdots+a_N$ and $d_0$. We first treat the case $L^n>0$. The pseudo-effectiveness of $\lambda B-L$ has the following consequences: - It implies $L^n\le \lambda L^{n-1} B = \lambda d_0$, and thus $d_0>0$. By Lemma [\[algsumai\]](#algsumai){reference-type="ref" reference="algsumai"}, \[\sum_{i=0}^N a_i \leq \frac{L^n_0}{d_0} + 1 \leq \lambda +1.\] - It implies that \[d_0 = L^{n-1}B \le \lambda L^{n-2} B^2 \le \cdots \le \lambda ^{n-1} B^n.\] Therefore, if $L^n >0$, we have \[\begin{aligned} h^0(L_0)-\frac{1}{n!}L^n_0 \le (n-1) \varepsilon(L, B)+ \frac{\lambda ^{n-1} B^n}{(n-1)!} \le n\ \varepsilon(L, B). \end{aligned}\] Next, we treat the case $L^n=0$. Denote by $W$ an irreducible element of $\|B\|$. Consider the exact sequence \[0\longrightarrow H^0(L-B) \longrightarrow H^0(L) \longrightarrow H^0(L\|_W).\] Since $L$ is not big, we have $H^0(L-B)=0$. It follows that \[h^0(L) \le h^0(L\|_{W}).\] By induction, we have \[\begin{aligned} h^0(L)-\frac{L^n}{n!} & \le & h^0(L\|_{W}) \le \frac{L^{n-1}B}{(n-1) !} + (n-1) \varepsilon(L\|_{W}, B\|_{W}) \\ & \le & \frac{\lambda ^{n-1}B^n}{(n-1)!} + (n-1) (\lambda +1)^{n-2} B^n \le n\ \varepsilon(L, B). \end{aligned}\] This completes the proof. ### Small case in characteristic zero {#small-case-in-characteristic-zero .unnumbered} The above proof can be easily modified to prove Theorem [\[main2\]](#main2){reference-type="ref" reference="main2"}. Recall that we have extra conditions that $X$ is smooth and $k$ is of characteristic zero, and the crucial assumption that $\omega_X-L$ is pseudo-effective. We need to strengthen the above result to \[h^0(L) \leq \frac{1}{2(n!)} \vol(L) + n\ \varepsilon(L).\] Still use the induction method. If $n=1$, then the assumption that $\omega_X-L$ is pseudo-effective is just $\deg(L)\leq \deg(\omega_X)$. The inequality becomes \[h^0(L) \leq \frac{1}{2} \vol(L) + 1.\] This is Clifford's theorem. It is well known to be true in the case that $L$ is special, i.e., both $h^0(L)>0$ and $h^0(\omega_X-L)>0$. But the case $h^0(\omega_X-L)=0$ can be proved by the Riemann--Roch theorem. To mimic the above induction method for general $n\geq 2$, we need to keep track of the pseudo-effectivity of $\omega_X-L$ under blow-up's and fibrations. For any birational morphism $\pi:X'\to X$ with both $X$ and $X'$ smooth, it is a basic result that the ramification divisor $\omega_{X'}-\pi^\omega_X$ is effective (or zero). It follows that the pseudo-effectivity of $\omega_X-L$ implies that of $\omega_{X'}-\pi^L$. Hence, we can always replace $(X,L)$ by $(X', \pi^L)$ for any smooth variety $X'$ with a birational morphism to $X$. With this property, we can still reduce the problem to the case that $L$ is nef. As before, we can assume that $X$ is endowed with a fibration $f:X \to C$. Here $X$ is assumed to be smooth by resolution of singularity. Now we are in the situation to perform the reduction process. Proposition [\[algcase1\]](#algcase1){reference-type="ref" reference="algcase1"} implies \[\begin{aligned} h^0(L_0)-\frac{1}{2(n!)}L^n_0 & \le & \sum_{i=0}^N \left(r_i-\frac{d_i}{2(n-1)!}\right) a_i + \frac{d_0}{2(n-1)!}. \end{aligned}\] Note that the general fiber $F$ of $f$ is also smooth, and the adjunction formula gives $\omega_{F}=\omega_{X}\|_F$. It follows that the pseudo-effectivity of $\omega_X-L$ implies that of $\omega_{F}-L\|_F$. Thus the induction assumption applies to the line bundle $L\|_F$ on $F$. The rest of the proof goes through without any extra difficulty. # Arithmetic case The goal of this section is to prove Theorem [\[main3\]](#main3){reference-type="ref" reference="main3"}, Theorem [\[main4\]](#main4){reference-type="ref" reference="main4"} and Theorem [\[3fold\]](#3fold){reference-type="ref" reference="3fold"}. The plan of this section is as follows. In §3.1, we recall some basic results in Arakelov geometry. In §3.2, we study the basic invariant $\dvol$ and give the new interpretation in terms of the arithmetic Fujita approximation, which will be needed to prove the main theorems. In §3.3, we introduce the filtration construction of hermitian line bundles, which are high-dimensional version of that in. In §3.4, we prove Theorem [\[main3\]](#main3){reference-type="ref" reference="main3"} and Theorem [\[main4\]](#main4){reference-type="ref" reference="main4"}. In §3.5, we prove Theorem [\[3fold\]](#3fold){reference-type="ref" reference="3fold"}. ## Notations and preliminary results This section is essentially a reproduction of some part of. But we would like to list the results here for readers' convenience. ### Normed modules {#normed-modules .unnumbered} By a normed $\mathbb Z$-module, we mean a pair $\mbar=(M,\\|\cdot\\|)$ consisting of a $\mathbb Z$-module $M$ and an $\mathbb R$-norm $\\| \cdot \\|$ on $M_{\mathbb R}=M \otimes_{\mathbb Z} \mathbb R$. We say that $\mbar$ is a normed free $\mathbb Z$-module of finite rank, if $M$ is a free $\mathbb Z$-module of finite rank. This is the case which we will restrict to. Let $\mbar=(M,\\|\cdot\\|)$ be a normed free $\mathbb Z$-module of finite rank. Define \[\widehat H^0(\mbar)=\{m \in M: \\| m \\| \le 1\}, \quad \widehat H^0_{\rm sef}(\mbar)=\{m \in M: \\| m \\| <1\},\] and \[\hhat(\mbar)= \log \# \widehat H^0(M), \quad \hhat_{\rm sef}(\mbar)= \log \# \widehat H^0_{\rm sef}(M).\] The Euler characteristic of $\mbar$ is defined by \[\chi(\mbar)=\log \frac{\mathrm{vol}(B(M))}{\mathrm{vol}(M_{{\mathbb{R}}}/M)},\] where $B(M) = \{ x \in M_\mathbb R: \\| x \\| \le 1 \}$ is a convex body in $M_{{\mathbb{R}}}$. For any $\alpha \in \mathbb R$, define \[\mbar(\alpha)=(M, e^{-\alpha} \\| \cdot \\| ).\] Since $\hhat_{\rm sef}(\mbar)$ is finite, it is easy to have \[\hhat_{\rm sef}(\mbar)= \lim_{\alpha\to 0^{\text{-}}} \hhat(\mbar(\alpha)).\] Then many results on $\hhat$ can be transfered to $\widehat h^0_{\rm sef}$. The following filtration version is based on the successive minima of Gillet--Soulé. ### Effective sections {#effective-sections .unnumbered} Let ${\mathcal{X}}$ be an arithmetic variety, and $\lb=({\mathcal{L}}, \\| \cdot \\|)$ be a hermitian line bundle over ${\mathcal{X}}$. We introduce the following notation. Recall that the set of effective sections* is \[\widehat H^0({\mathcal{X}} ,\lb)= \{ s \in H^0({\mathcal{X}}, \mathcal L): \\| s \\|_{\sup} \le 1\}.\] Define the set of strictly effective sections to be \[\widehat H^0_{\rm sef}({\mathcal{X}} ,\lb)= \{ s \in H^0({\mathcal{X}}, \mathcal L): \\| s \\|_{\sup} < 1\}.\] Denote \[\hhat({\mathcal{X}} ,\lb)= \log\# \widehat H^0({\mathcal{X}} ,\lb), \quad \hhat_{\rm sef}({\mathcal{X}} ,\lb)= \log\# \widehat H^0_{\rm sef}({\mathcal{X}} ,\lb).\] We say that $\lb$ is effective (resp. strictly effective) if $\hhat({\mathcal{X}} ,\lb)\neq 0$ (resp. $\hhat_{\rm sef}({\mathcal{X}} ,\lb)\neq0$). We usually omit ${\mathcal{X}}$ in the above notations. For example, $\widehat H^0({\mathcal{X}} ,\lb)$ is written as $\widehat H^0(\lb)$. Note that $\overline M=(H^0({\mathcal{X}}, \mathcal L), \\| \cdot \\|_{\sup})$ is a normed ${\mathbb{Z}}$-module. The definitions are compatible in that \[\widehat H^0(\lb),\quad \widehat H^0_{\rm sef}(\lb), \quad \hhat(\lb), \quad \widehat h^0_{\rm sef}(\lb)\] are identical to \[\widehat H^0(\mbar),\quad \widehat H^0_{\rm sef}(\mbar), \quad \hhat(\mbar), \quad \widehat h^0_{\rm sef}(\mbar).\] Hence, the results in last section can be applied here. For example, Proposition [\[norm1\]](#norm1){reference-type="ref" reference="norm1"} gives \[\hhat_{\rm sef}(\lb)\leq \hhat(\lb) \leq \hhat_{\rm sef}(\lb) + h^0({\mathcal{L}}_{\mathbb{Q}})\log 3.\] Note that if ${\mathcal{X}}$ is also defined over $\mathrm{Spec} \, O_K$ for some number field $K$, then we obtain two projective varieties ${\mathcal{X}}_{\mathbb{Q}}={\mathcal{X}} \times_{{\mathbb{Z}}}{\mathbb{Q}}$ and ${\mathcal{X}}_K={\mathcal{X}} \times_{O_K}K$, and two line bundles ${\mathcal{L}}_{\mathbb{Q}}$ and ${\mathcal{L}}_K$. It is easy to have \[h^0({\mathcal{L}}_{\mathbb{Q}})=[K:{\mathbb{Q}}]h^0({\mathcal{L}}_K).\] Moreover, we can define the degree of ${\mathcal{L}}_{\mathbb{Q}}$ on ${\mathcal{X}}_{\mathbb{Q}}$ to be $d_{\mathbb{Q}}=\deg({\mathcal{L}}_{\mathbb{Q}})={\mathcal{L}}^{n-1}_{\mathbb{Q}}$. Similarly, we have \[d_{\mathbb{Q}} = [K: {\mathbb{Q}}] d_K.\] ### Change of metrics {#change-of-metrics .unnumbered} For any continuous function $f: {\mathcal{X}} (\mathbb C) \rightarrow \mathbb R$, denote \[\lb(f)=(\mathcal{L}, e^{-f}\\| \cdot \\|).\] In particular, $\overline{\mathcal{O}}(f)=(\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{X}}, e^{-f})$ is the trivial line bundle with the metric sending the section 1 to $e^{-f}$. The case $\overline{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathcal{X}} =\overline{\mathcal{O}}(0)$ is exactly the trivial hermitian line bundle on ${\mathcal{X}}$. If $c>0$ is a constant, one has \[\hhat(\lb(-c))\leq \hhat(\lb) \leq \hhat(\lb(-c))+h^0({\mathcal{L}}_{\mathbb{Q}})(c+\log 3),\] \[\hhat_{\rm sef}(\lb(-c))\leq \hhat(\lb) \leq \hhat_{\rm sef}(\lb(-c))+h^0({\mathcal{L}}_{\mathbb{Q}})(c+\log 3).\] These also follow from Proposition [\[norm1\]](#norm1){reference-type="ref" reference="norm1"}. ### Base loci {#base-loci .unnumbered} Let $H$ denote $\widehat H^0(\lb)$ or $\widehat H^0_{\rm sef}(\lb)$ in the following. Consider the natural map \[H \times {\mathcal{L}}^\vee \longrightarrow {\mathcal{L}} \times {\mathcal{L}}^\vee \longrightarrow \mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{X}}.\] The image of the composition generates an ideal sheaf of ${\mathcal{O}}_{\mathcal{X}}$. The zero locus of this ideal sheaf, defined as a closed subscheme of ${\mathcal{X}}$, is called the base locus of $H$ in ${\mathcal{X}}$. The union of the irreducible components of codimension one of the base locus is called the fixed part of $H$ in ${\mathcal{X}}$. ### Absolute minima {#absolute-minima .unnumbered} For any irreducible horizontal arithmetic curve $D$ of ${\mathcal{X}}$, define the normalized height \[h_{\lb}(D)=\frac{\widehat\deg(\lb\|_ D)}{\deg D_{\mathbb Q}}.\] Define the absolute minimum $e_{\lb}$ of $\lb$ to be \[e_{\lb}=\inf_{D} h_{\lb}(D).\] It is easy to verify that \[e_{\lb(\alpha)}=e_{\lb}+\alpha, \quad \alpha\in{\mathbb{R}}.\] If $\lb$ is nef, the absolute minimum $e_{\lb}\geq 0$, and $\lb(-e_{\lb})$ is a nef line bundle whose absolute minimum is zero. It is a very important fact in our treatment in the following. We refer to for more results on the minima of $\lb$ for nef hermitian line bundles. ## Volume derivative {#section dvol} Let $\lb$ be a hermitian line bundle on an arithmetic variety ${\mathcal{X}}$ of dimension $n$ over $O_K$. Recall that the volume derivative is defined by \[\dvol(\lb)= \sup_{({\mathcal{X}} ', \overline{\mathcal{A}})}\mathcal A_K^{n-1},\] where ${\mathcal{X}} '$ is any arithmetic variety endowed with a birational morphism $\pi:{\mathcal{X}} '\to {\mathcal{X}}$, and $\overline{\mathcal{A}}$ is any nef ${\mathbb{Q}}$-line bundle on ${\mathcal{X}} '$ such that $\pi^\lb-\overline{\mathcal{A}}$ is effective. The goal here is to give more interpretations of this basic invariant. ### Derivative of the arithmetic volume function {#derivative-of-the-arithmetic-volume-function .unnumbered} The first result is the following interpretation. The lemma is an example of the differentiation of the arithmetic volume function of Chen. We start with some general notations to introduce the result. Denote by $\widehat{\mathrm{Pic}}({\mathcal{X}} )$ the group of hermitian line bundles on ${\mathcal{X}}$, and by $\widehat{\mathrm{Pic}}({\mathcal{X}} )_{\mathbb{Q}}=\widehat{\mathrm{Pic}}({\mathcal{X}} )\otimes_{{\mathbb{Z}}}{\mathbb{Q}}$ the group of hermitian ${\mathbb{Q}}$-line bundles on ${\mathcal{X}}$. Denote by \[\widehat{\mathcal{P}{ic}}({\mathcal{X}} )_{\mathbb{Q}}= \varinjlim_{{\mathcal{X}} '}\widehat{\mathrm{Pic}}({\mathcal{X}} ')_{\mathbb{Q}},\] where the direct limit is taken over all arithmetic varieties ${\mathcal{X}} '$ with a birational morphisms ${\mathcal{X}} '\to {\mathcal{X}}$, and the transition maps between different $\widehat{\mathrm{Pic}}({\mathcal{X}} ')$ as just the pull-back of line bundles. An element of $\widehat{\mathcal{P}{ic}}({\mathcal{X}} )_{\mathbb{Q}}$ is said to be effective (resp. big or nef) if some positive multiple of it can be represented by an effective (resp. big or nef) hermitian line bundle on ${\mathcal{X}} '$. Denote by $\widehat{\mathcal{N}{ef}}({\mathcal{X}} )_{\mathbb{Q}}$, $\widehat{\mathcal{B}{ig}}({\mathcal{X}} )_{\mathbb{Q}}$ and $\widehat{\mathcal{E}{ff}}({\mathcal{X}} )_{\mathbb{Q}}$ respectively the cone of nef, big, and effective elements of $\widehat{\mathcal{P}{ic}}({\mathcal{X}} )_{\mathbb{Q}}$. For two elements $\lb_1$ and $\lb_2$, we say that $\lb_1$ dominates $\lb_2$ if $\lb_1-\lb_2$ is effective. In that case, we write $\lb_1\succ\lb_2$ or $\lb_2\prec\lb_1$. The volume function extends to $\widehat{\mathcal{P}{ic}}({\mathcal{X}} )_{\mathbb{Q}}$ by homogeneity, and the intersection pairing extends to $\widehat{\mathcal{P}{ic}}({\mathcal{X}} )_{\mathbb{Q}}$ naturally. In particular, $\volhat(\overline{\mathcal{A}})=\overline{\mathcal{A}}^n$ for any $\overline{\mathcal{A}}\in \widehat{\mathcal{N}{ef}}({\mathcal{X}} )_{\mathbb{Q}}$. Let $\lb$ be an element of $\widehat{\mathcal{B}{ig}}({\mathcal{X}} )_{\mathbb{Q}}$. The arithmetic Fujita approximation of Chen and Yuan asserts that \[\volhat(\lb)=\sup_{\overline{\mathcal{A}}\in \widehat{\mathcal{N}{ef}}({\mathcal{X}} )_{\mathbb{Q}}, \ \overline{\mathcal{A}}\prec \lb} \volhat(\overline{\mathcal{A}})\] The main result of Chen is the following theorem is as follows. For any $\lb\in\widehat{\mathcal{B}{ig}}({\mathcal{X}} )_{\mathbb{Q}}$ and $\overline{\mathcal M}\in \widehat{\mathcal{P}{ic}}({\mathcal{X}} )_{\mathbb{Q}}$, the derivative \[\lim_{t\to 0} \frac1t \left(\volhat(\lb+t\overline{\mathcal{M}})-\volhat(\lb)\right)= n\ \langle\lb^{n-1}\rangle\cdot \overline{\mathcal M}.\] Here the positive intersection number* for $\overline{\mathcal M}\in \widehat{\mathcal{E}{ff}}({\mathcal{X}} )_{\mathbb{Q}}$ is defined by \[\langle\lb^{n-1}\rangle\cdot \overline{\mathcal M} :=\sup_{\overline{\mathcal{A}}\in \widehat{\mathcal{N}{ef}}({\mathcal{X}} )_{\mathbb{Q}}, \ \overline{\mathcal{A}}\prec \lb} \overline{\mathcal{A}}^{n-1} \cdot \overline{\mathcal M}.\] It turns out that the positive intersection number is additive in $\overline{\mathcal M}$, and thus extends to any $\overline{\mathcal M}\in \widehat{\mathcal{P}{ic}}({\mathcal{X}} )_{\mathbb{Q}}$ by linearity. Go back to the volume derivative. Take $\overline{\mathcal{M}}=\overline{\mathcal{O}}(1)$. We immediately have \[\lim_{t\to 0} \frac1t \left(\volhat(\lb(t))-\volhat(\lb)\right)= n\ \langle\lb^{n-1}\rangle\cdot \overline{\mathcal{O}}(1),\] where \[\langle\lb^{n-1}\rangle\cdot \overline{\mathcal{O}}(1) = [K:{\mathbb{Q}}] \sup_{\overline{\mathcal{A}}\in \widehat{\mathcal{N}{ef}}({\mathcal{X}} )_{\mathbb{Q}}, \ \overline{\mathcal{A}}\prec \lb} \mathcal A_K^{n-1}.\] This proves the lemma. ### Interpretation by algebraic linear series {#interpretation-by-algebraic-linear-series .unnumbered} We can also interpret $\dvol$ as the volume function of certain graded linear series on the generic fiber ${\mathcal{X}}_K$. In the following, denote by $\langle \widehat H^0(\lb)\rangle_K$ the $K$-linear subspace of $H^0({\mathcal{L}}_K)$ generated by $\widehat H^0(\lb)$. This essentially follows from the construction of the arithmetic Fujita approximation by Chen. Here we give another interpretation in the terminology of Boucksom--Chen, since it contains more information. We first introduce some notations. For any $t\in {\mathbb{R}}$, denote \[R(t)= \bigoplus_{N= 0}^\infty \langle \widehat H^0( N\lb_{-t} )\rangle_K.\] Here we write $\lb_{-t}$ for $\lb(-t)$ to avoid the confusion by the multiplication by $N$. Then $R(t)$ is a graded subring of the section ring \[R({\mathcal{L}}_K)= \bigoplus_{N= 0}^\infty H^0( N{\mathcal{L}}_K ).\] Fix an algebraic point of $X$ and a local coordinate at this point. By the construction in Lazarsfeld--Mustaţǎ, we obtain the Okounkov body $\Delta({\mathcal{L}}_K)$ of ${\mathcal{L}}_K$, which is a convex body in ${\mathbb{R}}^{n-1}$. Furthermore, we also have an Okounkov body $\Delta(t)$ for each graded ring $R(t)$. Note that $\Delta(t)\subset \Delta({\mathcal{L}}_K)$ by definition. From the construction of $\Delta(t)$, we can see that \[\vol(\Delta(0))=\lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{\dim_K \langle \widehat H^0( N\lb )\rangle_K}{N^{n-1}}.\] A property hidden in the equality is that the right-hand side converges. As in, define a function \[G_{\lb}: \Delta({\mathcal{L}}_K) \longrightarrow {\mathbb{R}}\] by \[G_{\lb}(x):= \sup \{t\in {\mathbb{R}}: x\in \Delta(t)\}.\] Then the main result of gives \[\frac{1}{n![K:{\mathbb{Q}}]}\volhat(\lb)=\int_{\Delta({\mathcal{L}}_K)} \max\{G_{\lb}(x),0\}\ dx.\] By definition, \[\Delta(0)=\{ x\in \Delta({\mathcal{L}}_K): G_{\lb}(x)\geq 0 \}.\] It follows that we can just write \[\frac{1}{n![K:{\mathbb{Q}}]}\volhat(\lb)=\int_{\Delta(0)} G_{\lb}(x) \ dx.\] By definition, $G_{\lb(t)}(x)=G_{\lb}(x)+t$. It follows that \[\begin{aligned} \frac{1}{n![K:{\mathbb{Q}}]}\volhat(\lb(t)) &=&\int_{\Delta(-t)} (G_{\lb}(x)+t) dx\\ &=&\int_{\Delta} G_{\lb}(x) dx + \vol(\Delta(0)) t+o(t). \end{aligned}\] Hence, \[\frac{1}{n![K:{\mathbb{Q}}]} \lim_{t\to 0} \frac1t \left(\volhat(\lb(t))-\volhat(\lb)\right) =\vol(\Delta(0)),\] which is essentially the equality in the proposition. ## Filtration of hermitian line bundles This section is the high-dimensional analogue of the construction in. One difference is that we need blow-ups to finish the decomposition in high-dimensional case. ### The basic construction {#the-basic-construction .unnumbered} Our goal of this section is to introduce a basic decomposition of hermitian line bundles on arithmetic varieties, as high-dimensional generalizations of. It is a decomposition keeping $\widehat H^0_{\rm sef}(\lb)$. The above result is a generalization of for the arithmetic surface case. One can also obtain a similar decomposition keeping $\widehat H^0(\lb)$, as a generalization of . The proof of the theorem is very similar to that of, except that we need to blow-up the base loci in the high-dimensional case to make them Cartier divisors. In the following, we sketch it briefly. Denote by $Z$ the base locus of $\widehat H^0_{\rm sef}({\mathcal{X}}, \lb)$ on ${\mathcal{X}}$. Let $\pi: {\mathcal{X}}_1 \to {\mathcal{X}}$ be the normalization of the blow-up of ${\mathcal{X}}$ with center $Z$. Denote by ${\mathcal{E}}_1$ the line bundle on ${\mathcal{X}}_1$ associated to $Z$, and by $e \in H^0({\mathcal{X}}_1, {\mathcal{E}}_1)$ the section defining $Z$. Define the line bundle ${\mathcal{L}}_1$ on ${\mathcal{X}}_1$ by the decomposition \[\pi^{\mathcal{L}}={\mathcal{L}}_1+{\mathcal{E}}_1.\] Define the metric $\\|\cdot\\|_{{\mathcal{E}}}$ of ${\mathcal{E}}$ at $x \in {\mathcal{X}}_1({\mathbb{C}})$ by \[\\|e(x)\\|_{{\mathcal{E}}}=\max \{ \\|s(x)\\|/\\| s\\|_{\sup}: s\in \widehat H^0_{\rm sef}({\mathcal{X}}_1,\pi^\lb), \ s\neq 0 \}.\] It is easy to see that $\\|e\\|_{{\mathcal{E}}, \sup}= 1$. Define the metric $\\|\cdot\\|_{{\mathcal{L}}_1}$ on ${\mathcal{L}}_1$ by the decomposition \[\pi^\lb=({\mathcal{E}},\\|\cdot\\|_{{\mathcal{E}}})+({\mathcal{L}}_1,\\|\cdot\\|_{{\mathcal{L}}_1}).\] Set $\overline{\mathcal{E}}=({\mathcal{E}},\\|\cdot\\|_{{\mathcal{E}}})$ and $\lb_1=({\mathcal{L}}_1,\\|\cdot\\|_{{\mathcal{L}}_1})$. Then the decomposition $\pi^\lb=\overline{\mathcal{E}}+\lb_1$ satisfies the theorem. The proof is similar to that of, and we omit it here. ### The filtration {#the-filtration-1 .unnumbered} In this section, the plan is to write down a filtration of hermitian line bundles by performing the above decomposition repeatedly. Let $\lb$ be a nef hermitian line bundle. We are going to apply Theorem [\[degred1\]](#degred1){reference-type="ref" reference="degred1"} to reduce $\lb$ to "smaller" nef line bundles. The problem is that the fixed part of $\lb$ may be empty, and then Theorem [\[degred1\]](#degred1){reference-type="ref" reference="degred1"} is a trivial decomposition. The idea is to enlarge the metric of $\lb$ by constant multiples to create base points. To keep the nefness, the largest constant multiple we can use gives the case that the absolute minimum is 0. The following proposition says that the situation exactly meets our requirement. From the above proposition, we have the following total construction. ### Numerical inequalities {#numerical-inequalities-1 .unnumbered} Recall that Theorem [\[degred\]](#degred){reference-type="ref" reference="degred"} starts with a nef line bundle $\lb_0$ and constructs the sequence \[({\mathcal{X}}_i, \lb_i, \overline{\mathcal{E}}_i,c_i), \quad i=0, \cdots, N.\] Here $\lb_i$ is nef and $\overline{\mathcal{E}}_i$ is effective, and $c_i=e_{\lb_i}\geq 0$. In particular, $\lb_{i}(-c_{i})$ is still nef. For any $i=0,\cdots, N-1$, the decomposition \[\pi^_i \lb_{i}(-c_i)= \lb_{i+1}+ \overline{\mathcal{E}}_{i+1}\] gives a bijection \[\widehat H^0_{\rm sef}(\lb_{i+1}) \longrightarrow \widehat H^0_{\rm sef}(\pi^_i \lb_{i}(-c_{i})),\] which is given by tensoring some distinguished element $e_{i+1} \in \widehat H^0 (\overline{\mathcal{E}}_{i+1})$. It is very important that the bijection keeps the supremum norms. In the following, we denote \[\lb_{i}'=\lb_{i}(-c_i), \quad i=0,\cdots, N.\] We also denote $d_{i}=\deg({\mathcal{L}}_{i, \mathbb Q})={\mathcal{L}}^{n-1}_{i, {\mathbb{Q}}}$ and $r_i=h^0({\mathcal{L}}_{i,{\mathbb{Q}}})$. Similar to Lemma [\[algsumai\]](#algsumai){reference-type="ref" reference="algsumai"}, we still have the following result. ## Proofs of the main theorems In this section, we prove Theorem [\[main3\]](#main3){reference-type="ref" reference="main3"} and [\[main4\]](#main4){reference-type="ref" reference="main4"}. ### Nef case {#nef-case .unnumbered} Here we start to prove Theorem [\[main3\]](#main3){reference-type="ref" reference="main3"}. To illustrate the idea, we first treat the nef case. Assume that $\lb$ is nef (and big). Recall that Theorem [\[main3\]](#main3){reference-type="ref" reference="main3"} asserts \[\hhat(\lb) \le \left(\frac {1}{n!} + \frac{(n-1) \varepsilon({\mathcal{L}}_K)}{d/[K:{\mathbb{Q}}]}\right) \lb^n + 4r \log (3r).\] Here $d={\mathcal{L}}_{\mathbb{Q}}^{n-1}$ and $r=h^0({\mathcal{L}}_{{\mathbb{Q}}})$. Apply the construction of Theorem [\[degred\]](#degred){reference-type="ref" reference="degred"} to $({\mathcal{X}}_0,\lb_0)=({\mathcal{X}} ,\lb)$. Resume the notations of the theorem. By Proposition [\[onestep\]](#onestep){reference-type="ref" reference="onestep"}, we have \[\begin{aligned} \lb^n & \geq & n \sum_{i=0}^{N} d_i c_i , \\ \widehat h^0_{\rm sef}(\lb) & \leq & \sum_{i=0}^{N} r_{i} c_i +4r_0 \log r_0+ 2r_0 \log 3. \end{aligned}\] It follows that \[\widehat h^0_{\rm sef}(\lb)-\frac{\lb^n}{n!} \le \sum_{i=0}^N \left(r_i-\frac{d_i}{(n-1)!}\right) c_i + 4r_0\log{r_0}+2r_0\log 3.\] The key is to apply Theorem [\[main1\]](#main1){reference-type="ref" reference="main1"}, the effective bound in the geometric case. For any $i=0, \cdots, N$, \[r_i-\frac{d_i}{(n-1)!} \le (n-1) \varepsilon({\mathcal{L}}_K) [K:{\mathbb{Q}}].\] It follows that \[\begin{aligned} \widehat h^0_{\rm sef}(\lb)-\frac{\lb^n}{n!} & \le & (n-1) \varepsilon({\mathcal{L}}_K) [K:{\mathbb{Q}}] \sum_{i=0}^N c_i + 4r_0\log{r_0}+2r_0\log 3. \end{aligned}\] To bound $c_0+\cdots+c_N$, by Lemma [\[sumci\]](#sumci){reference-type="ref" reference="sumci"}, we get \[\sum_{i=0}^N c_i \leq \frac{1}{d_0} \lb^n.\] It follows that \[\begin{aligned} \widehat h^0_{\rm sef}(\lb)-\frac{\lb^n}{n!} & \le & (n-1) \varepsilon({\mathcal{L}}_K) [K:{\mathbb{Q}}] \frac {\lb^n}{d_0} + 4r_0\log{r_0} + 2r_0\log 3. \end{aligned}\] Finally, by Proposition [\[norm1\]](#norm1){reference-type="ref" reference="norm1"}, \[\hhat(\lb) \le \widehat h^0_{\rm sef}(\lb) + r_0 \log 3.\] This finishes the proof. We remark that the denominator $d_0>0$ in the current setting. In fact, ${\mathcal{L}}_K$ is nef and big following the assumption that $\lb$ is nef and big. The nef part is trivial, and the big part is a result of Yuan. ### General case {#general-case-1 .unnumbered} Here prove Theorem [\[main3\]](#main3){reference-type="ref" reference="main3"} in the full case (that the line bundle is big). The major difficulty to carry the above proof is to seek a good formulation of Lemma [\[sumci\]](#sumci){reference-type="ref" reference="sumci"}. Our idea is to use the arithmetic Fujita approximation to overcome the difficulty. Recall that the theorem asserts that, for any big hermitian line bundle $\overline{\mathcal{M}}$ on ${\mathcal{X}}$, \[\hhat(\overline{\mathcal{M}}) \le \left(\frac {1}{n!} + \frac{(n-1) \varepsilon({\mathcal{M}}_K)}{\dvol(\overline{\mathcal{M}})}\right) \volhat(\overline{\mathcal{M}}) + 4s \log (3s).\] Here $s=h^0({\mathcal{M}}_{{\mathbb{Q}}})=[K:{\mathbb{Q}}] h^0({\mathcal{M}}_K)$. Here we deliberately switch the notation for the line bundle in consideration from $\lb$ to $\overline{\mathcal{M}}$, in order to accommodate the notations in Theorem [\[degred\]](#degred){reference-type="ref" reference="degred"} and afterwards. Assume that $\hhat(\overline{\mathcal{M}})>0$. Note that $\overline{\mathcal{M}}$ is not necessarily nef, so our first step is to use the key decomposition to make it nef as in the geometric case. Applying Theorem [\[degred1\]](#degred1){reference-type="ref" reference="degred1"} to $\overline{\mathcal{M}}$, we have a decomposition \[\pi^\overline{\mathcal{M}}=\lb_0+\overline{\mathcal{E}}\] based on a birational morphism $\pi: {\mathcal{X}}_0 \to {\mathcal{X}}$. Here $\overline{\mathcal{E}}$ is effective, $\lb_0$ is nef, and $\hhat(\overline{\mathcal{M}})=\hhat(\lb_0)$. Note the change of notations again. Next, apply Theorem [\[degred\]](#degred){reference-type="ref" reference="degred"} to the nef bundle $\lb_0$ over ${\mathcal{X}}_0$. As in the theorem, we get a sequence of quadruples \[\{({\mathcal{X}}_i, \lb_i, \overline{\mathcal{E}}_i, c_i): \ i=0,1, \cdots, N\}.\] By the above argument, we still have \[\begin{aligned} \widehat h^0_{\rm sef}(\lb_0)-\frac{\lb_0^n}{n!} & \le & (n-1) \varepsilon({\mathcal{L}}_K) [K:{\mathbb{Q}}] \sum_{i=0}^N c_i + 4r_0\log{r_0}+2r_0\log 3. \end{aligned}\] It is easy to see that it implies \[\begin{aligned} \widehat h^0_{\rm sef}(\overline{\mathcal{M}})-\frac{1}{n!} \volhat(\overline{\mathcal{M}}) & \le & (n-1) \varepsilon({\mathcal{M}}_K) [K:{\mathbb{Q}}] \sum_{i=0}^N c_i + 4s\log{s}+2s\log 3. \end{aligned}\] It suffices to prove \[\sum_{i=0}^N c_i \leq \frac{1}{[K:{\mathbb{Q}}]\dvol(\overline{\mathcal{M}})} \volhat(\overline{\mathcal{M}}).\] Note that Lemma [\[sumci\]](#sumci){reference-type="ref" reference="sumci"} gives \[\sum_{i=0}^N c_i \leq \frac{1}{d_0} \lb_0^n,\] which is not strong enough. However, the result is actually true for "bigger" nef line bundles, and the limit will give what we need. Resume the notations in §[3.2](#section dvol){reference-type="ref" reference="section dvol"}. Let $\lb_{-1} \in \widehat{\mathcal{N}{ef}}({\mathcal{X}} )$ be an element such that \[\overline{\mathcal{M}}\succ \lb_{-1} \succ \lb_0.\] Set $c_{-1}=0$. Add $(\lb_{-1}, c_{-1})$ to the beginning of the sequence $\{(\lb_{i}, c_{i})\}_i$. It is easy to see that Lemma [\[sumci\]](#sumci){reference-type="ref" reference="sumci"} can be applied to the sequence \[(\lb_{-1}, c_{-1}), \ (\lb_{0}, c_{0}), \ (\lb_{1}, c_{1}), \cdots, (\lb_{N}, c_{N}).\] It is crucial that the lemma only involves intersection numbers (without $\hhat$). Hence, we have \[\sum_{i=0}^N c_i=\sum_{i=-1}^N c_i \leq \frac{1}{(\lb_{-1,{\mathbb{Q}}})^{n-1}} (\lb_{-1})^n.\] Note that elements $\lb_{-1}$ of $\widehat{\mathcal{N}{ef}}({\mathcal{X}} )$ satisfying $\overline{\mathcal{M}}\succ \lb_{-1} \succ \lb_0$ exist by. In fact, the loc. cit. implies that we can find an increasing sequence $\{ \lb_{-1,m} \}_m$, such that \[\lim_{m\to \infty} (\lb_{-1,m,{\mathbb{Q}}})^{n-1} = [K:{\mathbb{Q}}]\dvol(\overline{\mathcal{M}}), \quad \lim_{m\to \infty} (\lb_{-1,m})^{n} = \volhat(\overline{\mathcal{M}}).\] This finishes the proof of Theorem [\[main3\]](#main3){reference-type="ref" reference="main3"}. ### Small case {#small-case .unnumbered} The proof of Theorem [\[main4\]](#main4){reference-type="ref" reference="main4"} in the nef case is very similar, except that we use Theorem [\[main2\]](#main2){reference-type="ref" reference="main2"} instead of Theorem [\[main1\]](#main1){reference-type="ref" reference="main1"} to bound $r_i$ in terms of $d_i$. Note that we can assume every ${\mathcal{X}}_i$ to have smooth generic fiber by a further generic resolution of singularities. We leave the details to interested readers. ## Arithmetic 3-folds In this section, we will prove Theorem [\[3fold\]](#3fold){reference-type="ref" reference="3fold"}. Let us resume the general setting. Here ${\mathcal{X}}$ is an arithmetic 3-fold over $O_K$, and $\lb$ is a nef hermitian line bundle on ${\mathcal{X}}$ such that \[\phi_{{\mathcal{L}}_K}: {\mathcal{X}}_K \dashrightarrow \mathbb P (H^0({\mathcal{L}}_K))\] is a generically finite rational map. ### Linear series on algebraic surfaces {#linear-series-on-algebraic-surfaces .unnumbered} Let $S$ be an algebraic surface over an algebraically closed field $k$. We always use $\kappa(S)$ to denote the Kodaira dimension of $S$. Let $L$ be a line bundle on $S$. Assume $h^0(L) > 1$. Hence we have the rational map \[\phi_L: S \dashrightarrow \mathbb P (H^0(L)).\] We say $\phi_L$ is generically finite* if $\dim \phi_L(S)=2$. Otherwise, $\dim \phi_L(S)=1$, and in this case we say $\phi_L$ is composed with a pencil. This result is cleaner than the surface case of Theorem [\[main1\]](#main1){reference-type="ref" reference="main1"}, under more assumptions. ### Proof of Theorem [\[3fold\]](#3fold){reference-type="ref" reference="3fold"} {#proof-of-theorem-3fold .unnumbered} Now we proof Theorem [\[3fold\]](#3fold){reference-type="ref" reference="3fold"}. Apply Theorem [\[degred\]](#degred){reference-type="ref" reference="degred"} to $({\mathcal{X}}_0,\lb_0)=({\mathcal{X}} ,\lb)$. Resume the notations in the theorem. Then we have the quadruples \[({\mathcal{X}}_i, \lb_i, \overline{\mathcal{E}}_i, c_i), \quad i=0, \cdots, N.\] We first analyze the proof of Theorem [\[main3\]](#main3){reference-type="ref" reference="main3"}. Proposition [\[onestep\]](#onestep){reference-type="ref" reference="onestep"} in this case gives \[\widehat h^0_{\rm sef}(\lb)-\frac{\lb^3}{6} \le \sum_{i=0}^N \left(r_i-\frac{1}{2}d_i\right) c_i + 4r_0\log{r_0}+2r_0\log 3.\] If $\phi_{{\mathcal{L}}_{i,K}}$ is generically finite, then Theorem [\[Sh\]](#Sh){reference-type="ref" reference="Sh"} gives \[r_i-\frac{1}{2}d_i \leq 2,\] which is exactly what we need in the proof. However, this inequality fails if $\phi_{{\mathcal{L}}_{i,K}}$ is not generically finite, in which case $d_i=0$. So we need to bound $r_i$ in this case by a different method. Since $\phi_{{\mathcal{L}}_K}$ is generically finite, we can find the biggest $j \in \{0,1,\cdots, N\}$ such that $\phi_{{\mathcal{L}}_{j,K}}$ is generically finite. Then $\phi_{{\mathcal{L}}_{i,K}}$ is not generically finite for $i=j+1,\cdots, N$. We will bound $r_i$ by a variant of $d_i$ for such $i$. For any $i = j,j+1,\cdots, N$, denote \[d'_i = \mathcal {\mathcal{L}}_{j, {\mathbb{Q}}} \cdot {\mathcal{L}}_{i, {\mathbb{Q}}}.\] Here by abuse of notation, the right-hand side denotes the intersection of ${\mathcal{L}}_{i, {\mathbb{Q}}}$ with the pull-back of ${\mathcal{L}}_{j, {\mathbb{Q}}}$ to ${\mathcal{X}}_{i,{\mathbb{Q}}}$. In the following, we still use this method to simplify our notations. Now we are ready to finish the proof. By Proposition [\[onestep\]](#onestep){reference-type="ref" reference="onestep"}, \[\begin{aligned} \lb_0^3 & \geq & \lb_j'^3 + 3 \sum_{i=0}^{j} d_i c_i, \\ \widehat h^0_{\rm sef}(\lb_0) &\leq& \sum_{i=0}^{N} r_{i} c_i +4r_0 \log r_0+ 2r_0 \log 3. \end{aligned}\] Note that the first inequality concerns the filtration from $0$ to $j$, while the second inequality concerns the filtration from $0$ to $N$. By Proposition [\[onestep1\]](#onestep1){reference-type="ref" reference="onestep1"}, the first inequality implies \[\begin{aligned} \lb_0^3 & \geq & 3 \sum_{i=0}^{j} d_i c_i+ 2 \sum_{i=j+1}^{N} d'_i c_i. \end{aligned}\] Then the difference gives \[\widehat h^0_{\rm sef}(\lb_0)-\frac16 {\lb_0^3} \le \sum_{i=0}^{j} \left(r_{i}-\frac 12 d_i \right) c_i +\sum_{i=j+1}^{N} \left(r_{i}-\frac 13 d'_i \right) c_i + 4r_0 \log r_0+ 2r_0 \log 3.\] By assumption, $\kappa({\mathcal{X}}_K)\geq 0$ and ${\mathcal{X}}_K$ has no elliptic or hyperelliptic pencil. Theorem [\[Sh\]](#Sh){reference-type="ref" reference="Sh"} and Theorem [\[castelnuovo\]](#castelnuovo){reference-type="ref" reference="castelnuovo"} give \[\begin{aligned} r_{i}-\frac 12 d_i &\le& 2[K: {\mathbb{Q}}], \quad i=0,\cdots, j,\\ r_{i}-\frac 13 d'_i &\le& [K: {\mathbb{Q}}], \quad i=j+1,\cdots, N. \end{aligned}\] Hence, \[\begin{aligned} \widehat h^0_{\rm sef}(\lb)-\frac{1}{6}\lb^3 & \le & 2 [K: {\mathbb{Q}}] \sum_{i=0}^N c_i + 4 r_0 \log r_0 + 2r_0 \log 3. \end{aligned}\] Apply Lemma [\[sumci\]](#sumci){reference-type="ref" reference="sumci"} again. We have \[\begin{aligned} \widehat h^0_{\rm sef}(\lb)-\frac{1}{6}\lb^3 &\leq& \frac {2}{d_K} \lb^n + 4 r_0 \log r_0 + 2 r_0 \log 3. \end{aligned}\] Combining with \[\hhat(\lb) \le \widehat h^0_{\rm sef}(\lb) + r_0 \log 3,\] the proof is complete.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-23T02:11:48', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5772', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5772'}
null	null
null	null
# Abstract {#abstract .unnumbered} We consider a mechanism design problem for energy procurement, when there is one buyer and one seller, and the buyer is the mechanism designer. The seller can generate energy from conventional (deterministic) and renewable (random) plants, and has multi-dimensional private information which determines her production cost. The objective is to maximize the buyer's utility under the constraint that the seller voluntarily participates in the energy procurement process. We show that the optimal mechanism is a menu of contracts (nonlinear pricing) that the buyer offers to the seller, and the seller chooses one based on her private information. Keywords: integration of renewable energy, optimal contract, energy procurement, multi-dimensional private information, mechanism design. # Conclusion We proposed a model for energy procurement that captures the current approach for integration of modern renewable and conventional energy resources and takes into account the fact that renewable energy producers behave strategically and may have different production technologies. We analyzed an arbitration between a strategic energy buyer and a strategic energy seller who has the ability to generate energy from a conventional plant and a modern renewable plant and has private information about her production technology and cost. We showed that the optimal contract/mechanism for energy procurement is a nonlinear pricing scheme. The originally proposed mechanism guarantees interim voluntary participation of the seller. By modifying the seller's payment so as to be weather-dependent we achieved ex-post voluntary participation of the seller. We also presented an alternative payment to the seller that divides the risk (due to the uncertainty in the weather) between the buyer and the seller. # Discussion The optimal mechanism/contract for the energy procurement problem formulated in this paper is a nonlinear pricing scheme. The nonlinearity is due to three factors. First, the buyer's utility function $\mathcal{V}(q)$ is not linear in the quantity $q$. Second, for each type of the seller, the cost of production is a nonlinear function of the amount of produced energy. Third, the seller has private information about her technology and cost (seller's type). The uncertainty about the production from the non-conventional plant makes the total expected production cost function nonlinear even with a fixed marginal cost of production for conventional and renewable plants. The buyer has to pay information rent (monetary incentive) to the seller to incentivize her to reveal her true type. Therefore, the payment the buyer makes to the seller includes the cost of production the seller incurs plus the information rent, which varies with the seller's type; the better the seller's type, the higher is the information rent. The optimal contract/mechanism discovered in this paper can be implemented indirectly (without reporting the seller's private information) as follows: the buyer offers the seller a menu of contracts (nonlinear pricing scheme); the seller chooses one of these contracts based on her type, and there is no need for an implausible and unnecessary information exchange stage between the seller and the buyer. The multi-dimensionality of the seller's private information could be due to the different types of energy generators that she owns, or because of a complex cost function with more than one parameter (even with one type of energy generator). The solution approach presented in this paper can be used to solve problems with multi-dimensional private information with similar structure. The optimal contract defined by Theorem 1 also induces some incentives for investment in infrastructure and technology development. From Lemma 1, the seller with the higher type has a higher utility. Therefore, there is an incentive for the seller to improve her technology and decrease her cost of generation. It is well-known that in the presence of private information and strategic behavior, in general, there exists no mechanism/contract that is (1) individually rational, (2) incentive compatible, and (3) efficient (Pareto-optimal generally). In the optimal contract/mechanism given by Theorem 1, the allocation for the seller's different types is not ex-post efficient (Pareto-optimal) except for the seller's worst type who gets zero utility. # Example Consider a seller with a conventional plant and a wind turbine. The wind turbine's output power curve $g(w)$ is as in figure 1. We assume that for wind speeds between $v_{ci}$ and $v_r$ the energy generation is given by $\gamma w^3$, where $\gamma$ captures the technology and size of the turbine. Energy generation remains constant for wind speeds between $v_r$ and $v_{co}$, and is zero otherwise. We assume that there is a fixed marginal operational cost $\theta_w$ for the wind turbine and a fixed marginal operational cost $\theta_c$ for the conventional plant. There is a no-production cost $c_0$ that captures the start-up cost for both plants and the capital cost for the seller. Therefore, the seller's type $x\hspace{-2pt}=\hspace{-2pt}(c_0,\theta_w,\theta_c,v_{ci},v_{r},\hspace{-1pt}v_{co},\hspace{-1pt}\gamma)$ is 7-dimensional and her total cost is given by \[\begin{aligned} C(q,w,\hspace{-1pt}x)\hspace{-2pt}=\hspace{-2pt}c_0\hspace{-2pt}+\hspace{-2pt}\theta_w\hspace{-2pt}\min\hspace{-2pt}\left\{\hspace{-1pt}q,g(w)\hspace{-1pt}\right\}\hspace{-3pt}+\hspace{-1pt}\theta_c\hspace{-2pt}\max\hspace{-2pt}\left\{\hspace{-1pt}q\hspace{-2pt}-\hspace{-2pt}g(w),\hspace{-1pt}0\hspace{-1pt}\right\}\hspace{-3pt},\hspace{-4pt} \end{aligned}\] where $g(w)$ is as in figure [\[curve\]](#curve){reference-type="ref" reference="curve"}. The wind profile is a class $k\hspace{-2pt}=\hspace{-2pt}3$ Weibull distribution with average speed $5m/s$. We only consider 6 types for the seller here: \[\begin{aligned} &a&\hspace{-10pt}=\hspace{-2pt}(c_0\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}4,\theta_w\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}0.2,\theta_c\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}1.2,v_{ci}\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}3,v_{r}\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}13,v_{co}\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}20,\gamma\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}1),\nonumber\\ &b&\hspace{-10pt}=\hspace{-2pt}(c_0\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}4,\theta_w\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}0.2,\theta_c\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}1.2,v_{ci}\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}3,v_{r}\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}13,v_{co}\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}20,\gamma\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}2),\nonumber\\ &c&\hspace{-10pt}=\hspace{-2pt}(c_0\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}5,\theta_w\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}0.1,\theta_c\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}1.2,v_{ci}\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}3,v_{r}\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}13,v_{co}\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}20,\gamma\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}1),\nonumber\\ &d&\hspace{-10pt}=\hspace{-2pt}(c_0\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}5,\theta_w\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}0.2,\theta_c\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}1.0,v_{ci}\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}1,v_{r}\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}17,v_{co}\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}28,\gamma\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}2),\nonumber\\ &e&\hspace{-10pt}=\hspace{-2pt}(c_0\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}6,\theta_w\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}0.1,\theta_c\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}1.0,v_{ci}\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}1,v_{r}\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}17,v_{co}\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}28,\gamma\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}1),\nonumber\\ &f&\hspace{-10pt}=\hspace{-2pt}(c_0\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}6,\theta_w\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}0.1,\theta_c\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}1.0,v_{ci}\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}1,v_{r}\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}13,v_{co}\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}28,\gamma\hspace{-4pt}=\hspace{-4pt}2),\nonumber \end{aligned}\] where the cost unit is $\$1000$ and the energy unit is $MWh$, and there is no worst type. The optimal contract from Theorem 1 is depicted in Figure [\[example2\]](#example2){reference-type="ref" reference="example2"}. It is a nonlinear pricing scheme. The marginal price varies between $0.33$ and $0.45\$/KWh$. The variation in the marginal price is of the same order as the variation in the expected marginal production cost across the seller's different types. Since there is no complete order among the different seller's types, we can not compare the seller's types based on the expected revenue or amount of production prior to the design of the mechanism. However, wherever we have a partial order and can rank a subset of types, we can utilize Lemmas 1 and 3 to predict a ranking a priori. For instance, the seller with type $(b)$ is better than the one with type $(a)$, and we can say a priori that the former has a higher production and revenue. However, we cannot order types $(b)$ and $(c)$. For the setup of our example, according to the optimal contract, type $(c)$ gets a higher expected revenue than type $(b)$ but produces a lower amount of energy than type $(b)$. # Further Considerations ## Commitment and Ex-post Voluntary Participation The voluntary participation constraint imposed in problem (P1) is interim. That is, the expected profit with respect to the weather for each type of the seller must be non-negative. By assumption (A9), once the seller agrees on the contract (this agreement takes place before the realization of the weather) she is fully committed to following the agreement, even if the realized profit is negative (because of the realization of the weather)[^1]. To ensure that the seller's realized profit is non-negative for all weather realizations, we impose an ex-post voluntary participation constraint. We replace the interim VP constraint (7) by \[\begin{aligned} &\hspace{-20pt}\text{Ex-post VP:}&\hspace{-5pt}t(m^)-C(q,w,x)\geq 0,\forall w,\;\forall x\hspace{-2pt}\in\hspace{-2pt}\chi. \label{P1'-VP} \end{aligned}\] To obtain an ex-post voluntary participation constraint, we modify the payment function of the mechanism given by Theorem 1 as follows: \[\begin{aligned} \tilde{t}(q,w)\hspace{-2pt}=\hspace{-2pt}t(q)-t(q(\underline{x}))+C(q(\underline{x}),w,\underline{x}). \end{aligned}\] We have $\mathbb{E}_W\hspace{-3pt}\left\{\tilde{t}(q,w)\hspace{-1pt}\right\}\hspace{-3pt}=\hspace{-3pt}t(q)$, and therefore, the seller always chooses the same quantity $q$ under the modified payment function $\tilde{t}(\cdot)$ as under the original payment function $t(q)$ given by ([\[optt-gen\]](#optt-gen){reference-type="ref" reference="optt-gen"}). Note that for the seller's worst type, we have $\tilde{t}(q(\underline{x}),\hspace{-1pt}w)\hspace{-2pt}=\hspace{-2pt}C(q(\underline{x}),\hspace{-1pt}w,\underline{x})$, and therefore, the total utility of the seller's worst type is zero for all realizations of $W$. Since all other types of the seller are better off than the worst type under $\tilde{t}(\cdot)$ (all types have the choice to produce the same quantity as the worst type), the ex-post VP constraint is satisfied for all of the seller's types. ## Risk Allocation In the optimal mechanism/contract menu presented by Theorem 1, the buyer faces no uncertainty, and he is guaranteed to receive quantity $q(x)$, and all the risk associated with the realization of the weather is taken by the seller. We wish to modify the mechanism to reallocate the above-mentioned risk between the buyer and the seller. To do so, we modify the payment function so that the risk is reallocated between the buyer and the seller. Consider the following modified payment function with $\alpha\hspace{-2pt}\in\hspace{-2pt}[0,1]$, \[\begin{aligned} &\hat{t}(x,w)=&t(q(x))+\alpha\left[C(q(x),w,x)\right.\nonumber\\&&\left.-\mathbb{E}_W\left\{C(q(x),w,x)\right\}\right]\label{t-risk}. \end{aligned}\] From ([\[t-risk\]](#t-risk){reference-type="ref" reference="t-risk"}) it follows that $\mathbb{E}_W\hspace{-3pt} \left\{\hat{t}(x,w)\right\} \hspace{-3pt}=\hspace{-2pt}t(q(x))$. Therefore, the strategic behavior of the seller does not change and the seller chooses the same quantity under the modified payment function $\hat{t}(\cdot)$ as under the original payment function $t(q)$ given by ([\[optt-gen\]](#optt-gen){reference-type="ref" reference="optt-gen"}). Note that for $\alpha=0$ we have the same payment as $t(q)$. For $\alpha=1$, the seller is completely insured against any risk and all the risk is taken by the buyer. The parameter $\alpha$ determines the allocation of the risk between the buyer and the seller; the buyer undertakes $\alpha$ and the seller undertakes $(1-\alpha)$ share of the risk. # Introduction The intermittent nature of modern renewable energy resources makes the integration of modern renewable energy generation into the current designed infrastructure for conventional energy generation a challenging problem. Electricity generation from modern renewable energy resources is not predetermined and cannot be treated as conventional generation. Energy generation from wind, solar, and other modern renewable energy resources depends on the weather and is stochastic. This feature results in many technical issues in reliability and stability in generation and transmission, as well as market structure. Currently, modern renewable energy generators that participate in the regular real-time power market, that is originally designed for conventional generators, are treated as negative loads on the grid, and receive subsidy for each kWh they deliver. Due to the increasing share of wind power in energy markets, independent system operators (ISOs) gradually require wind power plants to participate in the day-ahead market, to commit to a fixed amount of generation, and to pay a penalty for each $KWh$ they fail to provide. Along with the current approach, the proposed structure of the smart grid creates additional opportunities to integrate conventional and modern renewable energy resources via flexible loads connected to the grid. The challenges that arise in the market aspect of the integration of renewable and conventional energy resources motivate the problem formulated and studied in this paper. We follow the current approach for integration of conventional and modern renewable energy resources. This approach requires modern renewable generators to behave as firm power plants that participate in the day-ahead market (in general, a forward market) and commit to producing a predetermined amount of electricity in advance. We want to incorporate new features into our problem formulation, which are mainly motivated by the following observations: (1) Currently, modern renewable generators are paid at a fixed rate, receive subsidy, and do not take any risk, therefore, no strategic behavior is considered. However, as the share of modern renewable generation increases and supportive programs for modern renewable energy decreases, the market becomes more competitive and participants behave strategically. (2) The cost of energy generation varies from 60 to 250 $(\$/MWh)\( due to the different technologies that are available at wind power plants. These technologies are the plants' private information. Because modern renewable generators have private production cost and behave strategically, the current market structure, where renewable generators are paid at a fixed rate, receive subsidies, and all the produced electricity is guaranteed to be procured at the real-time market with no risk, is inefficient. In this paper we consider a model for integration of conventional and modern renewable energy sources with the following features: (F1) Energy market participants are strategic. (F2) The energy seller has the ability to produce both modern renewable and conventional energy. (F3) Energy producers may have different technologies for renewable and conventional energy generation which are their own private information. By considering a seller with generation capabilities from both conventional and modern renewable energy resources, we postulate a possible future scenario in which the integration of modern renewable and conventional generation is partly done by sellers and the ISO is not fully responsible for the integration. Our model captures the current approach to the integration of conventional and modern renewable energy resources, that considers sellers with only modern renewable generation capability, if we set the cost of conventional generation to be fixed and equal to the penalty rate for each \)KWh$ producers fail to provide. ## Literature Review Research on resource allocation and resource management with uncertainty in energy markets has addressed two types of problems: (1) Those which follow the smart grid approach and focus on the demand side with strategic ( ) or non-strategic agents (e.g.* ). (2) Those where the focus is on the supply side and energy providers face uncertainties in their production. The problem formulated in this paper belongs to the second class where energy providers are strategic and have private information about their own cost and technology. Research on this class of problems has appeared in ,,, and. The work in considers a given uncertain demand and investigates a multi-dimensional auction mechanism for the forward reserved market assuming that the participants have no market power and the equilibrium price is not affected by each individual participant's behavior. The idea of selling uncertain (random) power to consumers is investigated in and. The problems studied in and consider modern renewable generation and are the most closely related works to the problem we consider here. The work in considers a modern renewable generator with stochastic generation and determines the optimal bidding policy for it in the day-ahead market. The authors of assume that price is given and fixed, so there is no role for a buyer, and there is a penalty for production deficiency and over production. The work in considers a problem where an ISO wants to procure energy from modern renewable generators with the assumption that generation from renewable energy resources is free and each generator has private information about the probability density function of its generation; a VCG-based mechanism is proposed for the optimal energy procurement. The proposed VCG-based mechanism is suboptimal for the problem formulated in when the probability distribution for the generation cannot be parameterized by only a one-dimensional variable (see, chapter 14). From the economics point of view, the problem we formulate in this paper belongs to the class of screening problems. In economics, the one-dimensional screening problem has been well-studied with both linear and nonlinear utility functions. However, the extension to the multi-dimensional screening problem is not straightforward and there is no general solution to it. The authors in study a general framework for a static multi-dimensional screening problem with linear utility. They discuss two general approaches, the parametric-utility approach and the demand-profile approach. The methodology we use to solve the problem formulated in this paper is similar to the demand-profile approach. We consider a multi-dimensional screening problem with nonlinear utilities. The presence of nonlinearities results in additional complications which are not present in where the utilities are linear[^2]. ## Contribution The contribution of this paper is two-fold. First, we introduce a model that captures key features of the current approach for the integration of modern renewable energy sources into the grid, and postulate a possible broader role for sellers in the future. We consider a strategic seller that has the capability to produce energy from modern renewable and conventional resources. To our knowledge, this is the first model that considers simultaneously both types of electricity generation. As we discuss below, considering both modern renewable and conventional generation with a general production cost results in a multi-dimensional mechanism design problem which is conceptually different from the one-dimensional screening problem that arises when there is only one type of energy resource with simple production cost. The model proposed in this paper captures the scenarios investigated in and as special cases; in and the seller owns only modern renewable generators with free generation and is penalized for production mismatch. Second, we determine the optimal mechanism for energy procurement from a strategic seller with multi-dimensional private information satisfying both interim and ex-post voluntary participation of the seller. Because of the random nature of renewable energy generation, interim voluntary participation of the seller does not necessarily imply ex-post voluntary participation. To our knowledge, our results present the first optimal mechanism for a strategic seller with conventional and renewable generation, and multi-dimensional private information which also guarantees the seller's ex-post voluntary participation. We show that the current linear pricing for modern renewable energy generation is not efficient and that the optimal pricing method is a nonlinear scheme. ## Organization The paper is organized as follows: In Section 2, we introduce the model and formulate the energy procurement problem. In section 3, we present an outline of our approach and the key ideas toward the solution of the problem formulated in section 2, and state the main result on the optimal mechanism for energy procurement. We illustrate the result by an example in section 4. We discuss the nature of our results in section 5. We extend our results to the energy procurement problem without full commitment for the seller, and propose an optimal contract with arbitrary risk allocation between the buyer and the seller in section 6. We conclude in section 7. # Model Specification and Problem Formulation ## Model Specification A buyer wishes to make an agreement to buy energy from an energy seller[^3]. The seller has the ability to produce energy from conventional (deterministic) generators or from renewable (random) generators that she owns. Let $q$ be the amount of energy the buyer buys, and $t$ be his payment to the seller. We proceed to formulate the energy procurement problem by making the following assumptions. (A1) The buyer is risk-neutral and his total utility is given by $\mathcal{V}(q)-t$, where $\mathcal{V}(q)$ is the utility that he gets from receiving $q$ amount of energy, and $\mathcal{V}(0)=0$. $\mathcal{V}(\cdot)$ is the buyer's private information[^4]. (A2) The seller's production cost is given by $C(q,w,x)$, where $x\hspace{-2pt}\in\hspace{-2pt}\chi\hspace{-2pt}\subseteq\hspace{-2pt}\mathbb{R}^n$ is the seller's type (technology and cost) and $w$ denotes the realization of a random variable $W$, e.g. weather. $C(q,w,x)$ is convex and increasing in $q$. The start-up cost $C(0,w,x)$ does not depend on the weather $w$ and is given by $x_1$, i.e. $C(0,w,x)\hspace{-2pt}=\hspace{-2pt}C(0,x)\hspace{-2pt}=\hspace{-2pt}x_1$. (A3) The probability distribution function of $W$, i.e. weather forecast, is common knowledge between the buyer and the seller and is given by $F_{W}(w)$. (A4) The seller is risk-neutral and her utility is given by her total expected revenue \[\mathbb{E}_W\left\{t-C(q,W,x)\right\}.\] (A5) Define $c(q,x)\hspace{-2pt}=\hspace{-2pt}\frac{\partial \mathbb{E}_W\left\{C(q,W,x)\right\}}{\partial q}$ as the expected marginal cost for the seller's type $x$. Without loss of generality, there exists $m$, $1\hspace{-2pt}<\hspace{-2pt} \hspace{-2pt}m\hspace{-2pt}\leq n$, such that $c(q,x)$ is increasing in $x_i$ for $1\hspace{-2pt}\leq\hspace{-2pt} i\hspace{-2pt}\leq\hspace{-2pt} m$, and decreasing in $x_i$ for $m\hspace{-2pt}<\hspace{-2pt}i\hspace{-2pt}\leq\hspace{-2pt} n$. Moreover, there is an $\underline{x}\hspace{-2pt}\in\hspace{-2pt}\chi$ (the seller's worst type) such that $\underline{x}_i\hspace{-2pt}\leq\hspace{-2pt} x_i$ and $\underline{x_j}\hspace{-2pt}\geq\hspace{-2pt} x_j$ for all $x\hspace{-2pt}\in\hspace{-2pt}\chi$, $1\hspace{-1pt}\leq \hspace{-2pt}i\hspace{-2pt}\leq\hspace{-2pt} m$ and $m\hspace{-2pt}<\hspace{-2pt}j\hspace{-2pt}\leq \hspace{-2pt}n$. (A6) The seller's type $x$ is her own private information, the set $\chi$ is common knowledge, and there is a prior probability distribution $f_X$ over $\chi$ which is common knowledge between the buyer and the seller. (A7) Both the buyer and the seller are strategic and perfectly rational, and this is common knowledge. (A8) The buyer has all the bargaining power; thus, he can design the mechanism/set of rules that determines the agreement for energy procurement quantity $q$, and payment $t$[^5]. (A9) After the buyer announces the mechanism for energy procurement and the seller accepts it, both the buyer and the seller are fully committed to following the rules of the mechanism. As a consequence of assumption (A8) on the buyer's bargaining power and the fact that the seller's utility does not directly depend on the buyer's private information, the solution of the problem formulated in this paper does not depend on whether the buyer's utility $\mathcal{V}(\cdot)$ is private information or common knowledge[^6]. Note that in the one-dimensional screening problem, the cost of production induces a complete order among the seller's types, which is crucial to the solution to the optimal mechanism design problem. However, in multi-dimensional screening problems, the expected cost of production induces, in general, only a partial order among the seller's types. From (A5), the seller's type $x$ is better than the seller's type $\hat{x}$ if and only if $x_i\hspace{-2pt}\leq \hspace{-2pt}\hat{x}_i$ for $1\hspace{-2pt}\leq\hspace{-2pt} i\hspace{-2pt}\leq\hspace{-2pt} m$, and $x_i\hspace{-2pt}\geq\hspace{-2pt} \hat{x}_i$ for $m\hspace{-2pt}<\hspace{-2pt} i\hspace{-2pt}\leq\hspace{-2pt} n$ with strict inequality for some $i$. The following example illustrates assumption (A2)-(A5) and Definition 1. A simple case. Consider a seller with a wind turbine and a gas generator. The generation from the wind turbine is free and given by $\gamma w^3$, where $\gamma$ is the turbine's technology and $w$ is the realized weather. The gas generator has a fixed marginal cost $\theta_c$. We assume that there is a fixed cost $c_0$ which includes the start-up cost for both plants and the capital cost for the seller. Therefore, the seller's type has $n=3$ dimensions. The generation cost for the seller is given by \[\begin{aligned} C(q,w,x)=c_0+\theta_c\max\left\{q-\gamma w^3,0\right\} \end{aligned}\] The seller's type $x=(c_0,\theta_c,\gamma)$ is better than the seller's type $\hat{x}=(\hat{c}_0,\hat{\theta}_c,\hat{\gamma})$ if and only if $c_0\leq\hat{c}_0$, $\theta_c\leq \hat{\theta}_c$, and $\gamma\geq \hat{\gamma}$ with one of the above inequalities being strict. ## Problem Formulation Let $(\mathcal{M},h)$ be the mechanism/game form (see, Ch. 23) for energy procurement designed by the buyer. In this game form, $\mathcal{M}$ describes the message/strategy space and $h$ determines the outcome function; $h:\mathcal{M}\rightarrow\mathbf{R}_+\times\mathbf{R}$ is such that for every message/action $m\in\mathcal{M}$ it specifies the amount $q$ of procured energy and the payment $t$ made to the seller, $h(m)=(q(m),t(m))=(q,t)$. The objective is to determine a mechanism $(\mathcal{M},h)$ so as to \[\underset{\left(\mathcal{M},(q,t)\right)}{\textnormal{maximize}}\quad \mathbb{E}_{X,W}\left\{\mathcal{V}(q)-t\right\} \label{P1}\] under assumptions (A1)-(A9) and the constraint that the seller is willing to voluntarily participate in the energy procurement process. The willingness of the seller to voluntarily participate in the mechanism for energy procurement is called voluntary participation (VP) (or individual rationality) and is written as \[\begin{aligned} \text{VP:}\quad t(m^)-\mathbb{E}_W\left\{C(q(m^),W,x)\right\}\geq0,\quad\forall x\in \chi \end{aligned}\] where $m^\in\mathcal{M}$ is a Bayesian Nash equilibrium (BNE) of the game induced by the mechanism $(\mathcal{M},h)$. That is, at equilibrium the seller has a non-negative payoff. We call the above problem (P1). # Outline of the Approach & Results We prove that the optimal energy procurement mechanism is a pricing scheme that the buyer offers to the seller and the seller chooses a production quantity based on her type. We characterize the optimal energy procurement mechanism by the following theorem, which reduces the original functional maximization problem (P1) to a set of equivalent point-wise maximization problems. The proof of theorem 1 proceeds is several steps. Below we present these steps and the key ideas behind each step. The detailed proof of all results (theorems and lemmas) appearing below can be found in the appendix. Step 1.* By invoking the revelation principle, we restrict attention, without loss of optimality, to direct revelation mechanisms that are incentive compatible (defined below) and individually rational. The seller is strategic and may lie and misreport her private information $x$, i.e. we do not necessarily have $x'=x$ unless it is to the seller's interest to report truthfully. We call incentive compatibility (IC) the requirement for truthful reporting, and define the following problem that is equivalent to (P1). Problem P2: Determine functions $q:\chi\rightarrow\mathbf{R}_+$ and $t:\chi\rightarrow\mathbf{R}_+$ so as to \[\begin{aligned} &&{\underset{(q,t)}{\textnormal{maximize}}}\quad \mathbb{E}_{x,W}\left\{\mathcal{V}(q(x))-t(x)\right\}\\ &&\textit{subject to}\nonumber\\&&\hspace{-25pt}IC: x\hspace{-2pt}=\hspace{-2pt}\textnormal{arg}\max_{x'}\mathbb{E}_W\hspace{-2pt}\left[t(x')\hspace{-1pt}-\hspace{-1pt}C(q(x'),w,x)\right],\forall x\hspace{-2pt}\in\hspace{-2pt}\chi\\ &&\hspace{-25pt}VP: \mathbb{E}_W\left[t(x)-C(q(x),W,x)\right]\geq0,\;\forall x\hspace{-2pt}\in\hspace{-2pt}\chi. \end{aligned}\] Step 2. We utilize the partial order among the seller's different types to rank the seller's utility for her different types, and reduce the VP constraint for all the seller's types to the VP constraint only for the seller's worst type. A direct consequence of Lemma [\[ut-order\]](#ut-order){reference-type="ref" reference="ut-order"}, is that the seller's worst type $\underline{x}$ receives the minimum utility among all the seller's types. Step 3. We show, via Lemma 2 below, that without loss of optimality, we can restrict attention to a set of functions $t(\cdot)$ that depend only on the amount of energy $q$. That is, the optimal mechanism is a pricing scheme. Step 4. As a consequence of Lemma [\[pricing\]](#pricing){reference-type="ref" reference="pricing"}, we determine an optimal mechanism sequentially. First, we determine the optimal payment function $t(\cdot)$, then the optimal energy procurement function $q(\cdot)$. For any function $t(\cdot)$, we determine, for each type $x$ of the seller, the optimal quantity $q^(x)$ that she wishes to produce as \[\begin{aligned} &&q^(x)=\text{arg}\max_{l}\mathbb{E}_W\left\{t\left(l\right)-C(l,w,x)\right\}\label{agent-q}. \end{aligned}\] Incentive compatibility then requires that the seller must tell the truth to achieve this optimal value, and cannot do better by lying, i.e. $q(x)=q^(x)$ for all $x\in\chi$. For any function $t(\cdot)$, this last equality can be taken as the definition for the associated function $q(\cdot)$. Thus, we eliminate the IC constraint by defining $q(\cdot):=q^(\cdot)$ and reduce the problem of designing the optimal direct revelation mechanism $(q,t)$ to an equivalent problem where we determine only the optimal payment function $t(\cdot)$ subject to the voluntary participation constraint for the worst type. Step 5. To solve this new equivalent problem, we write the buyer's expected utility as the integration of his marginal expected utility, and express the marginal expected utility in terms of the marginal price $p(q):=\frac{\partial t(q)}{\partial q}$ and the minimum payment $t(0)$ (which along with $p(\cdot)$ uniquely determines the payment function $t(\cdot)$). Specifically, in the appendix we show that \[\begin{aligned} &\hspace{-90pt}\mathbb{E}_{X}\hspace{-2pt}\left[\mathcal{V}(q^(X))\right]\hspace{-2pt}-\hspace{-2pt}\mathbb{E}_{X}\hspace{-2pt}\left[t(q^(X))\right]\hspace{-3pt}=\nonumber\\&\hspace{15pt}\int_{0}^{\infty}\hspace{-3pt}{P\left(x\in\chi \| q^(x)\hspace{-2pt}\geq\hspace{-2pt} l\right)\mathcal{V}'(l)dl}\nonumber\\&\hspace{40pt}-t(0)-\hspace{-3pt}\int_{0}^{\infty}\hspace{-3pt}{P\left(x\hspace{-1pt}\in\hspace{-1pt}\chi \| q^(x)\hspace{-2pt}\geq\hspace{-2pt} l\right)p(l)dl}\label{buyer-max1}, \hspace{-1pt} \end{aligned}\] where $\mathcal{V}'\hspace{-1pt}(q)\hspace{-3pt}:= \hspace{-3pt}\frac{d \mathcal{V}(q)}{dq}$. That is, the buyer's total expected utility is obtained by integrating his marginal utility at quantity $l$, times the probability that the seller's production exceeds $l$, and subtracting the minimum payment $t(0)$. We show in the appendix that the seller's optimal decision $q^(x)$ depends only on the marginal price $p(q)$. Thus, we can write the probability associated with the seller's decision as \[\begin{aligned} P\left(x\in\chi \| q^(x)\geq l\right)=P\left[x\in\chi\| p(l)\geq c(l,x)\right]\label{seller-p}. \end{aligned}\] That is, the seller is willing to produce the marginal quantity at $l$ if the resulting expected marginal profit is positive, i.e. marginal price $p(l)$ exceeds marginal expected cost of generation $c(l,x)$[^7]. Using ([\[buyer-max1\]](#buyer-max1){reference-type="ref" reference="buyer-max1"}) and ([\[seller-p\]](#seller-p){reference-type="ref" reference="seller-p"}), we define the following problem that is equivalent to (P2) and is in terms of the marginal price $p(q)$ and the minimum payment $t(0)$. Problem P3: \[\begin{aligned} &\hspace{-40pt}{\underset{p(\cdot),t(0)}{\textnormal{max}}}&\hspace{-30pt} \int_{0}^{\infty}\hspace{-9pt}{P\hspace{-2pt}\left[x\hspace{-2pt}\in\hspace{-2pt}\chi\| p(l)\hspace{-2pt}\geq\hspace{-2pt} c(l,x)\right]\hspace{-2pt}\left(\mathcal{V}'(l)\hspace{-2pt}-\hspace{-2pt}p(l)\right)\hspace{-1pt}dl}\hspace{-2pt}-\hspace{-2pt}t(0)\\ &\hspace{-10pt}\textit{subject to}&\nonumber\\&\hspace{-46pt} \text{VP:}&\hspace{-37pt}\mathbb{E}_W\hspace{-2pt}\left\{t(0)\hspace{-1pt}+\hspace{-2pt}\int_0^{q(\underline{x})}\hspace{-10pt}p(r)dr-C(q^(\underline{x}),w,\underline{x})\right\}\hspace{-4pt}\geq\hspace{-2pt}0.\label{p4-vp} \end{aligned}\] Step 6.* We provide a ranking for the seller's optimal decision $q^(x)$ based on the partial order among the seller's types. In the appendix we show that a consequence of corollary 1 and Lemma 3 is the following result. Based on corollary 2, we define a problem (P4) that is equivalent to (P3) and is only in terms of the marginal price $p(l)$ and the constraint that the payment the seller's lowest type receives is equal to her cost of production. Problem (P4)* \[\begin{aligned} &\hspace{-50pt}{\underset{p(\cdot)}{\textnormal{max}}}&\hspace{-30pt} \int_{0}^{\infty}{\hspace{-5pt}P\left[x\in\chi\| p(l)\geq c(l,x)\right]\left(\mathcal{V}'(l)-p(l)\right)dl}\\ &\hspace{-15pt}\text{subject to}&\nonumber\\ &&\hspace{-50pt}\text{VP:}\hspace{4pt} C(0,\underline{x})+\int_0^{q(\underline{x})}\hspace{-5pt}{p(l)dl}=\mathbb{E}_W\left[C(q(\underline{x}),W,x)\right]\label{P4-VP}. \label{p5-con} \end{aligned}\] Step 7. We consider a relaxed version of (P4) without the VP constraint ([\[P4-VP\]](#P4-VP){reference-type="ref" reference="P4-VP"}). The unconstrained problem can be solved point-wise at each quantity $l$ to determine the optimal $p(l)$ as \[\begin{aligned} \hspace{-20pt}&p(l)=&\hspace{-5pt}\textnormal{arg}\max_{\hat{p}}\left\{P\left[x\hspace{-1pt}\in\hspace{-1pt}\chi\| {\hat{p}}\geq c(q,x)\right]\hspace{-1pt}\left(\mathcal{V}'(q)-\hat{p}\right)\hspace{-1pt}\right\}\label{margp-gen}\hspace{-3pt} \end{aligned}\] which is the same as ([\[opt-p\]](#opt-p){reference-type="ref" reference="opt-p"}). We show in the appendix that the solution to the unconstrained problem automatically satisfies the VP constraint ([\[P4-VP\]](#P4-VP){reference-type="ref" reference="P4-VP"}), therefore, the solution to the unconstrained problem determines the optimal marginal price $p(\cdot)$ for the original problem. Using $p(\cdot)$ and the fact that $t(0)=C(0,\underline{x})$, we determine the optimal function $t(\cdot)$. Using $t(\cdot)$ we find the seller's best response function $q^(\cdot)$. By incentive compatibility $q^(\cdot)=q(\cdot)$, and this completely determines the optimal direct revelation mechanism $(q(\cdot),t(\cdot))$ described by Theorem 1. In essence, Theorem 1 states that at each quantity $l$, the optimal marginal price $p(l)$ is chosen so as to maximize the expected total marginal utility at $l$, which is given by the total marginal utility $\left(\mathcal{V}'(l)-p(l)\right)$ times the probability that the seller generates at least $l$. # Appendix {#appendix .unnumbered} # Details and Proofs of the Results {#details-and-proofs-of-the-results .unnumbered} Consider the following problem (P1) formulated in the paper. Problem (P1): \[\begin{aligned} &\hspace{-25pt}{\underset{(\mathcal{M},(q,t))}{\textnormal{maximize}}}& \mathbb{E}_{X,W}\left\{\mathcal{V}(q)-t\right\} \label{P1}\\\nonumber\vspace{-6pt}\\ &\textit{subject to}\nonumber&\\ &&\hspace{-65pt}\text{VP:}\; t(m^)\hspace{-2pt}-\hspace{-2pt}\mathbb{E}_W\hspace{-3pt}\left\{C(q(m^),W,x)\right\}\hspace{-2pt}\geq\hspace{-2pt}0,\forall x\hspace{-2pt}\in \hspace{-3pt}\chi. \end{aligned}\] where $\left\{\mathcal{M},(q,t).q:\mathcal{M}\hspace{-1pt}\rightarrow\hspace{-1pt} \mathbb{R}_+,t:\mathcal{M}\hspace{-1pt}\rightarrow\hspace{-1pt} \mathbb{R}_+\right\}$ denotes the mechanism to be designed, and the notation in (1) and (2) is the same as in the paper. The main result in the paper is given by Theorem 1 stated below. In this note, we provide all the details of the proof of Theorem 1 that were left out of the presentation in the paper due to lack of space. We follow the same steps as in the paper. Note that the seller is strategic and may lie and misreport her private information $x$, i.e. we do not necessarily have $x'=x$. The revelation principle: For any BNE $\tilde{m}^$ of the game induced by an arbitrary mechanism $(\tilde{\mathcal{M}},(\tilde{q},\tilde{t}))$, there exists an equivalent direct revelation mechanism $\left(\chi,(q,t)\right)$, in which truthful reporting is a BNE of the game induced by $\left(\chi,(q,t)\right)$, and the players' allocation and payment associated with the truth-telling equilibrium are identical to those associated with the BNE $\tilde{m}^$ of the original mechanism $(\tilde{\mathcal{M}},(\tilde{q},\tilde{t}))$. In essence, by invoking the revelation principle we eliminate the problem of finding the optimal message space $\mathcal{M}$ by restricting attention to direct revelation mechanisms ($\mathcal{M}\hspace{-4pt}:=\hspace{-4pt}\chi$), and impose a new set of incentive compatibility (IC) constraints. As a result, we can solve the following problem (P2) to find an optimal direct revelation mechanism. Problem P2: Determine functions $q:\chi\rightarrow\mathbf{R}_+$ and $t:\chi\rightarrow\mathbf{R}_+$ so as to \[\begin{aligned} &&\hspace{-25pt}{\underset{(q,t)}{\textnormal{maximize}}}\quad \mathbb{E}_{X,W}\left\{\mathcal{V}(q(X))-t(X)\right\}\\\nonumber\\ &&\hspace{-15pt}\textit{subject to:}\nonumber\\&&\hspace{-25pt}IC\hspace{-3pt}: x\hspace{-2pt}=\hspace{-2pt}\textnormal{arg}\max_{x'}\mathbb{E}_W\hspace{-2pt}\left[t(x')\hspace{-2pt}-\hspace{-2pt}C(q(x'),W,x)\right],\forall x\hspace{-2pt}\in\hspace{-2pt}\chi,\\ &&\hspace{-25pt}VP\hspace{-3pt}: \mathbb{E}_W\left[t(x)-C(q(x),W,x)\right]\geq0,\;\forall x\in\chi. \end{aligned}\] Step 2. We utilize the partial order among the seller's different types to order the seller's resulting utility for her different types and reduce the VP constraint for all of the seller's types to the VP constraint only for the seller's worst type. A direct consequence of Lemma 1 is the following. Step 3. We show, via lemma 2 below, that without loss of optimality, we can restrict attention to a set of functions $t(\cdot)$ that depend only on the amount of delivered energy $q$. That is, the optimal mechanism is a pricing scheme. Step 4. As a consequence of lemma [\[pricing\]](#pricing){reference-type="ref" reference="pricing"}, we determine an optimal mechanism sequentially. First, we determine the optimal payment function $t(\cdot)$, then the optimal energy procurement function $q(\cdot)$. For any given pair of functions $(q,t)$, a seller with true type $x$ solves the following maximization problem to find her optimal report $x'^$, \[\begin{aligned} x'^=\textnormal{arg}\max_{x'}\mathbb{E}_W\left\{t\left(q(x')\right)-C(q(x'),W,x)\right\}. \label{agent-gen} \end{aligned}\] Considering the solution of ([\[agent-gen\]](#agent-gen){reference-type="ref" reference="agent-gen"}) for every type $x\hspace{-2pt}\in\hspace{-2pt}\chi$, we can form a function $q^:\chi\longrightarrow \mathbf{R}_+$ defined by \[\begin{aligned} q^(x):=\textnormal{arg}\max_{l}\mathbb{E}_W\left\{t\left(l\right)-C(l,W,x)\right\}\label{agent-q}. \end{aligned}\] For a given direct revelation mechanism, the function $q^(\cdot)$ defines the optimal quantity of energy procured from each type of the seller. Incentive compatibility then requires that the seller must tell the truth to achieve this optimal value, and cannot do better by lying, i.e.* \[\begin{aligned} q(x)=q^(x)\quad \forall x\in\chi. \label{agent-rep} \end{aligned}\] The function $q^(\cdot)$ is induced only by $t(\cdot)$ through ([\[agent-q\]](#agent-q){reference-type="ref" reference="agent-q"}), and therefore, ([\[agent-rep\]](#agent-rep){reference-type="ref" reference="agent-rep"}) can be taken as the definition for the associated function $q(\cdot)$ that along with $t(\cdot)$ satisfies the set of IC constraints. Thus, we can eliminate the IC constraint by defining $q(\cdot):=q^(\cdot)$ and reduce the problem of designing the optimal direct revelation mechanism $(q,t)$ to an equivalent problem (P2') where we determine only the optimal payment function $t(\cdot)$ subject to the voluntary participation constraint for the worst type. Problem P2':* Determine function $t:\mathbf{R}_+\rightarrow\mathbf{R}_+$ so as to \[\begin{aligned} &&\hspace{-10pt}{\underset{t(\cdot)}{\textnormal{maximize}}} \quad \mathbb{E}_{X}\left\{\mathcal{V}(q^(X))-t(q^(X))\right\}\label{buyer-obj-p2}\\ &&\hspace{-0pt}\text{subject to}\nonumber\\ &&\hspace{-10pt}\text{VP:}\; \mathbb{E}_W\hspace{-2pt}\left[t(q(\underline{x}))\hspace{-2pt}-\hspace{-2pt}C(q^(\underline{x}),W,\underline{x})\right]\hspace{-2pt}\geq\hspace{-2pt}0, \label{ind-3} \end{aligned}\] where $q^$ is given by ([\[agent-q\]](#agent-q){reference-type="ref" reference="agent-q"}). Step 5. To solve problem (P2'), we show that the optimal decision of the seller for amount of power $q^$ depends only on the marginal price $p(q):=\frac{\partial t(q)}{\partial q}$ and express the buyer's expected utility in term of the marginal price. Consider the buyer's objective ([\[buyer-obj-p2\]](#buyer-obj-p2){reference-type="ref" reference="buyer-obj-p2"}). For any function $t(\cdot)$, we can determine from ([\[agent-q\]](#agent-q){reference-type="ref" reference="agent-q"}) the cumulative distribution function for $q^$, called $F_{q^}$. Consequently, we can rewrite the buyer's objective as \[\begin{aligned} &&\mathbb{E}_{q^}\left[\mathcal{V}(q^)-t(q^)\right]=\int_{0}^{\infty}{\left(\mathcal{V}(l)-t(l)\right)dF_{q^}(l)}\nonumber\\ &&=\left.\left(F_{q^}(l)-1\right)\left(\mathcal{V}(l)-t(l)\right)\right\|_{0}^{\infty}\nonumber\\&&+ \int_{0}^{\infty}{\left(1-F_{q^}(l)\right)\frac{d\left(\mathcal{V}(l)-t(l)\right)}{d l}dl}. \label{maxobj-1} \end{aligned}\] We have \[\begin{aligned} \left.\left(F_{q^}(l)-1\right)\left(\mathcal{V}(l)-t(l)\right)\right\|_{0}^{\infty}=-t(0) \label{t0} \end{aligned}\] because $\mathcal{V}(0)=0$ by assumption, and $\left(F_{q^}(\infty)-1\right)=0$. Because of ([\[t0\]](#t0){reference-type="ref" reference="t0"}), we can rewrite ([\[maxobj-1\]](#maxobj-1){reference-type="ref" reference="maxobj-1"}) as \[\begin{aligned} &\mathbb{E}_{q^}\left[\mathcal{V}(q^)-t(q^)\right]&\hspace{-5pt}=\hspace{-3pt}\int_{0}^{\infty}\hspace{-3pt}{P\left(q^\geq l\right)\left(\mathcal{V}'(l)-p(l)\right)dl} \nonumber\\&&-t(0) \label{buyer-max1} \end{aligned}\] where $\mathcal{V}'(l)=\frac{d \mathcal{V}(l)}{d l}$. We can rewrite $P\left(q^\geq l\right)$ as \[\begin{aligned} &&\hspace{-20pt}P\hspace{-1pt}\left(q^\hspace{-2pt}\geq\hspace{-2pt} l\right)\hspace{-3pt}=\hspace{-3pt}P[x\hspace{-2pt}\in\hspace{-2pt}\chi\|\text{arg}\hspace{-1pt}\max_l\mathbb{E}_W\hspace{-3pt}\left\{t(q)\hspace{-2pt}-\hspace{-2pt}C(q(x),\hspace{-1pt}W,\hspace{-1pt}x)\right\}\hspace{-3pt}\geq\hspace{-2pt} l].\nonumber\\&& \label{q-demand1} \end{aligned}\] We implicitly assume that the seller's problem given by ([\[agent-q\]](#agent-q){reference-type="ref" reference="agent-q"}) is continuous and quasi-concave[^9], so that from the first order optimality condition for ([\[agent-q\]](#agent-q){reference-type="ref" reference="agent-q"}) we obtain \[\begin{aligned} p(q^(x))=\left.\frac{\partial \mathbb{E}_W\left\{C(l,W,x)\right\}}{\partial l}\right\|_{q^(x)}. \label{foc} \end{aligned}\] Therefore, each type of the seller wishes to produce more than quantity $l$ if and only if the marginal price $p(q)$ that she is paid at $l$ is higher than the expected marginal cost of production $c(l,x)$ that she incurs at $l$. Consequently, combining ([\[q-demand1\]](#q-demand1){reference-type="ref" reference="q-demand1"}) and ([\[foc\]](#foc){reference-type="ref" reference="foc"}) we obtain \[\begin{aligned} P\left(q^\geq l\right)=P\left[x\hspace{-2pt}\in\hspace{-2pt}\chi\| p(l)\geq\frac{\partial \mathbb{E}_W\left\{C(l,W,x)\right\}}{\partial l}\right] \label{q-demand2}. \end{aligned}\] Substituting ([\[q-demand2\]](#q-demand2){reference-type="ref" reference="q-demand2"}) in ([\[buyer-max1\]](#buyer-max1){reference-type="ref" reference="buyer-max1"}), we obtain the following alternative expression for the buyer's objective \[\begin{aligned} &\hspace{-8pt}\mathbb{E}_{q^}\left[\mathcal{V}(q^)\hspace{-2pt}-\hspace{-2pt}t(q^)\right]\hspace{-2pt}=&\hspace{-12pt} \int_{0}^{\infty}\hspace{-6pt}{P\hspace{-2pt}\left[x\hspace{-2pt}\in\hspace{-2pt}\chi\| p(l)\hspace{-2pt}\geq\hspace{-2pt}\frac{\partial \mathbb{E}_W\hspace{-3pt}\left\{C(l,\hspace{-1pt}W,\hspace{-1pt}x)\right\}}{\partial l}\right]}\nonumber\\&&\hspace{10pt}\left(\mathcal{V}'(l)\hspace{-2pt}-\hspace{-2pt}p(l)\right)dl\hspace{-3pt}-t(0). \label{buyer-max2} \end{aligned}\] The buyer seeks to determine the marginal price $p(\cdot)$ and $t(0)$ to maximize the right hand side of ([\[buyer-max2\]](#buyer-max2){reference-type="ref" reference="buyer-max2"}), subject to the VP constraint for the seller's worst type. Based on this consideration, we define the following problem (P3) that is equivalent to problem (P2'). Problem P3:* \[\begin{aligned} &&\hspace{-20pt}{\underset{p(\cdot),t(0)}{\textnormal{maximize}}}\quad\hspace{-8pt} -\hspace{-1pt}t(0)\hspace{-2pt}+\hspace{-4pt}\int_{0}^{\infty}\hspace{-7pt}{P\hspace{-1pt}\left[x\hspace{-2pt}\in\hspace{-2pt}\chi\| p(l)\hspace{-2pt}\geq\hspace{-2pt} \frac{\partial \mathbb{E}_W\hspace{-3pt}\left\{C(l,w,x)\right\}}{\partial l}\right]}\nonumber\\&&\hspace{80pt}\left(\mathcal{V}'(l)-p(l)\right)dl\\ &&\textit{subject to}\quad\nonumber\\&& \hspace{-19pt}\text{VP:}\;\max_{l}{\hspace{-1pt}t(0)\hspace{-2pt}+\hspace{-4pt}\int_0^{q^\hspace{-1pt}(\underline{x})}\hspace{-11pt}p(r)dr\hspace{-2pt}-\hspace{-1pt}\mathbb{E}_W\hspace{-3pt}\left\{C(q^\hspace{-1pt}(\underline{x}),W,\underline{x})\hspace{-1pt}\right\}}\hspace{-4pt}\geq\hspace{-2pt}0. \end{aligned}\] Step 6. We provide a ranking for the seller's optimal decision $q^(x)$ based on the partial order among the seller's types via the following lemma. The following result is a consequence of corollary 1 and lemma 3. Using corollary 2, we define a problem (P4) that is equivalent to (P3) and is only in terms of the marginal price $p(\cdot)$ and the constraint that the payment the seller's lowest type receives is equal to her cost of production. Problem (P4)* \[\begin{aligned} &\hspace{-50pt}{\underset{p(\cdot)}{\textnormal{max}}}&\hspace{-15pt} \int_{0}^{\infty}{\hspace{-5pt}P\left[x\in\chi\| p(l)\geq c(l,x)\right]\left(\mathcal{V}'(l)-p(l)\right)dl}\\ &&\hspace{-25pt}\text{subject to}\nonumber\\&&\hspace{-30pt}\text{VP:}\; C(0,\underline{x})+\int_0^{q^(\underline{x})}{\hspace{-4pt}p(l)dl}\hspace{-1pt}=\hspace{-1pt}\mathbb{E}_W\left[C(q^(\underline{x}),w,x)\right]\label{P4-VP}\hspace{-1pt}. \label{p5-con} \end{aligned}\] Step 7. We consider a relaxed version of (P4) without the VP constraint ([\[P4-VP\]](#P4-VP){reference-type="ref" reference="P4-VP"}). The unconstrained problem (P4) can be solved by maximizing the integrand $P\left[x\in\chi\| p(l)\geq c(l,x)\right]\left(\mathcal{V}'(l)-p(l)\right)$ point-wise at each quantity $l$. The solution of the point-wise maximization problem for the optimal marginal price $p(\cdot)$ is given by, \[\begin{aligned} \hspace{-20pt}&p(l)\hspace{-2pt}=&\hspace{-8pt}arg\max_{\hat{p}}\left\{P\left[x\in\chi\| {\hat{p}}\geq c(q,x)\right]\left(\mathcal{V}'(q)-\hat{p}\right)\right\}\label{margp-gen}\hspace{-3pt}. \end{aligned}\] Using ([\[pforlmin\]](#pforlmin){reference-type="ref" reference="pforlmin"}), along with the the fact that the worst type has the highest expected marginal cost, we can simplify ([\[margp-gen\]](#margp-gen){reference-type="ref" reference="margp-gen"}) for $l\leq q^(\underline{x})$, \[p(l)= c(l,\underline{x}),\;\;\text{for}\;l\leq q^(\underline{x}).\] That is, for $l\leq q^(\underline{x})$, the minimum marginal price $p(l)$ that ensures all the seller's type are willing to produce more than $q^(\underline{x})$ is equal to the marginal expected cost for the seller's worst type $c(l,\underline{x})$. Therefore, the solution to the unconstrained version of problem (P4) satisfies condition ([\[p5-con\]](#p5-con){reference-type="ref" reference="p5-con"}) of problem (P4), and therefore, ([\[margp-gen\]](#margp-gen){reference-type="ref" reference="margp-gen"}) (which is the same as (3)) is also the optimal solution of problem (P4). From Corollary 2 and ([\[margp-gen\]](#margp-gen){reference-type="ref" reference="margp-gen"}), the optimal payment function (nonlinear pricing) is given by, \[\begin{aligned} t(q)=\int_{0}^q{p(l)dl}+C(0,\underline{x}) \end{aligned}\] which is the same as (4). From ([\[agent-q\]](#agent-q){reference-type="ref" reference="agent-q"}) we determine the optimal energy procurement function, \[\begin{aligned} q(x)=\text{arg}\max_{l}\mathbb{E}\left\{t\left(l\right)-C(l,w,x)\right\} \end{aligned}\] which us the as (5). The specification of $t(\cdot)$ and $q(\cdot)$ completes the proof of theorem 1 and the solution to problem (P1). ◻ ::: [^1]: Since the seller's reserve utility is zero by not participating (outside option), we can always think of the seller walks away from the agreement for these negative profit realizations and not follow the mechanism rules. [^2]: When a problem is linear, expectation of any random variable can be replaced by its expected value and reduce the problem to a deterministic one. [^3]: From now on, we refer to the buyer as "he" and to the seller as "she". [^4]: We assume that the buyer either has an elastic demand, or needs to meet some fixed demand and has an outside option to buy energy if he cannot buy it from the seller (which is the result of his interaction with other players in the market). [^5]: The buyer is either an ISO or a representative agent for aggregate demand. In the first case, it is realistic to assume that the ISO has all the bargaining power since he is the designer and the regulator of the energy market. In the later case, usually there is no competition on the demand side, but different sellers compete to win a contract with the demand side. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that in a non-cooperative setting, the demand side has all the bargaining power. [^6]: This becomes more clear by looking at the main result given by Theorem 1. [^7]: This relies on quasi-concavity of the seller's optimal decision program. This is a standard assumption in the literature, e.g. see and. Basically, it gives the seller the freedom to decide for each marginal unit of production independently. Therefore, the continuity of the resulting generation quantity must be checked posterior to the design of the optimal contract for each type of the seller. [^8]: To find the optimal admissible set, the optimal contract can be computed for different potential admissible sets. Then, the resulting utilities can be compared to find the best admissible set. [^9]: This is a standard assumption in literature, e.g. see and. Basically, it can be seen as a situation where the seller can decide for each marginal unit of production independently. Therefore, in general, there is no guarantee that the seller's independent decisions about each marginal unit of production results in a continuous and plausible total production quantity $q$. Therefore, the continuity of the result must be checked posteriori for each type of the seller.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-23T02:11:31', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5759', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5759'}
# Introduction Let $n>1$ and $k>0$ be integers. We define a $k$-matrix to be a matrix whose entries are in $\{0, 1, 2, \ldots, k\}$. A matrix is said to be level if all its column sums are equal. A level matrix with $m$ rows is called reducible if we can delete $j$ rows, $0<j<m$, so that the remaining matrix is level; otherwise it is irreducible. Note that if $M$ is an irreducible matrix, then any matrix obtained from it by a permutation of rows or columns is also irreducible. For $k=1$ and any integer $n>1$, the $n\times n$ identity matrix is irreducible. If $n>4$, then we can construct an irreducible $1$-matrix with $n$ columns and $m>n$ distinct rows. Moreover, for any integers $k>1$ and $n>1$, we can construct an irreducible $k$-matrix with $n$ columns and $m>n$ distinct rows. In general, we do not require that irreducible $k$-matrices have distinct rows. We are interested in the following question. . Given integers $n>1$ and $k>0$, is there a minimum integer $\ell=\ell(n,k)$ such that for all $m>\ell$, any $m\times n$ level $k$-matrix is reducible? If $\ell(m,k)$ exists, then what can we say about its value? The exact value of $\ell(2,k)$ (see Theorem [\[thm:La\]](#thm:La){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:La"}) follows from earlier work by Lambert . Perhaps due to a wide range of notation and terminology in related areas, Lambert's result has been (independently) rediscovered by Diaconis et al. , and Sahs et al. . In addition, M. Henk and R. Weismantel gave improvements of Lambert's result. However, to the best of our knowledge, the exact value of $\ell(n,k)$ is unknown for $n\geq 3$. In this paper, we prove the following theorem. Let $M_{m,n}(\mathbb Z)$ be the set of all $m\times n$ matrices with entries in $\mathbb Z$. In what follows, vectors are assumed to be column vectors (unless otherwise specified), and $\mathbb Z^n$ denotes the set of all (column) vectors with $n$ entries from $\mathbb Z$. Let $A\in M_{m,n}(\mathbb Z)$ be a $k$-matrix and let ${\bf 1} =(1,\ldots,1)^T \in \mathbb Z^n$. We also let $A_i$ denote the $i$th row of $A$. For any $\vec{x} \in \mathbb Z^m$, we say $\vec{x}$ is a leveler of $A$ if $\vec{x}$ has nonnegative entries and there exists a nonnegative $\alpha \in \mathbb Z$ such that $\vec{x}^TA = \alpha {\bf 1}^T$, or equivalently, $A^T\vec{x} = \alpha {\bf 1}$. In particular, given a leveler $\vec{x} =(x_1, x_2, \ldots,x_m)^T\in \mathbb Z^m$ of $A$, we can form an $(x_1+x_2+\cdots+x_m)\times n$ level $k$-matrix by taking $x_1$ copies of the first row of $A$, $x_2$ rows of the second row of $A$, etc. For the purposes of level $k$-matrices, this process will define this matrix up to a permutation of rows. In this way, each leveler represents a class of level $k$-matrices. One way to classify level $k$-matrices then is to classify the levelers of the $k$-matrices $A$. To assist us in this analysis, we use the base field ${\mathbb{Q}}$ and the following notation. For any $\vec{x}\in{\mathbb{Q}}^m$, we write $\vec{x}\geq \vec{0}$ if $x_i\geq 0$ for all $1\leq i\leq m$. If $\vec{x},\vec{y}\in {\mathbb{Q}}^m$, we write $\vec{x}\geq \vec{y}$ if $\vec{x}-\vec{y}\geq \vec{0}$, and write $\vec{x}>\vec{y}$ if $\vec{x}\geq \vec{y}$ and $\vec{x}\not=\vec{y}$. Finally, let $\vec{x}\in \mathbb Z^m$ be a leveler for $A$. We say $\vec{x}$ is an irreducible leveler if, for any leveler $\vec{y}\in \mathbb Z^m$, we have $\vec{x}\geq \vec{y} \Rightarrow \vec{y}=\vec{x} \mbox{ or } \vec{y} = \vec{0}$. Note that $\vec{x}$ is an irreducible leveler of $A$ if and only if the corresponding matrix formed from $A$ is an irreducible $k$-matrix. Assume that the rows of $A\in M_{m,n}(\mathbb Z)$ are distinct and $m\geq n$. Define \[\label{FA} \mathcal F(A)=\{\vec{x}\in {\mathbb{Q}}^m \,\|\, A^T\vec{x}={\bf 1} \mbox{ and } \vec{x}>\vec{0}\}.\] Note that $\mathcal F(A)$ is a convex polytope in ${\mathbb{Q}}^m$ since it is the intersection of the linear space $\{\vec{x}\in {\mathbb{Q}}^m \;\|\; A^T\vec{x}={\bf 1}\}$ with the half-spaces $\mathcal H_i = \{ \vec{x}\in {\mathbb{Q}}^m \;\|\; x_i \geq 0\}$ for $1\leq i\leq m$. We say that $\vec{x}\in\mathcal F(A)$ is a basic feasible solution (BSF) if there exists a set of $n$ indices $I=\{i_1,\ldots,i_n\}\subseteq \{1,2,\ldots,m\}$ such that: 1. $x_i=0$ for each $i\not\in I$. 2. If $C$ is the matrix with rows $A_i$ for $i\in I$, then $C$ is invertible. Thus, if $\vec{y}=C^{-1}{\bf 1}$, then $x_{i_j}=y_j$ for $1\leq j\leq n$. Note that for any given set of $n$ indices $I$, there is at most one BFS corresponding to it. We will use this property later. Define \[\label{BA} \mathcal B(A)=\{\vec{x}\in \mathcal F(A)\,\|\, \mbox{$\vec{x}$ is a basic feasible solution in $\mathcal F(A)$}\}.\] Let ${\mathcal C}(A) = \{ q\vec{x} :\; q\geq 0, q\in {\mathbb{Q}}, \vec{x}\in \mathcal F(A)\}$ be the positive affine cone of $\mathcal F(A)$ in ${\mathbb{Q}}^m$. Then ${\mathcal C}(A)$ is a pointed rational cone generated by $\mathcal B(A)$, and ${\mathcal Z}(A)={\mathcal C}(A)\cap \mathbb Z^m$ is exactly the set of levelers for $A$. By, there exists a unique minimal generating set of ${\mathcal Z}(A)$, which is called the Hilbert basis of ${\mathcal Z}(A)$. We have the following proposition. In Section [2](#sec:main){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:main"}, we prove our main theorem (Theorem [\[thm:main\]](#thm:main){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:main"}) using tools from combinatorial optimization (in particular Carathéodory's Theorem). In Section [3](#sec:app-vsp){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:app-vsp"}, we apply Theorem [\[thm:main\]](#thm:main){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:main"} to prove some Ramsey-type statements about vector space multipartitions with respect to some irreducibility criteria that we shall define later. # Proof of Theorem [\[thm:main\]](#thm:main){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:main"} {#sec:main} The proof of our main theorem relies on Theorem [\[thm:UB1\]](#thm:UB1){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:UB1"} in Section [2.1](#sec:UB1){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:UB1"}, Theorem [\[thm:UB2\]](#thm:UB2){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:UB2"} in Section [2.2](#sec:UB2){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:UB2"}, and Theorem [\[thm:LB\]](#thm:LB){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:LB"} in Section [2.3](#sec:LB){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:LB"}. ## The first upper bound for $\ell(n,k)$ {#sec:UB1} For any matrix $A$, let $\ell(A)$ denote its number of rows, and let $\|A\|$ denote its determinant if $A$ is a square matrix. For any rational vector $\vec{x}$, let $\vec{x}_i$ denote its $i$th entry and let $r_x$ be the smallest positive integer such that $r_x\vec{x}$ is integral, i.e., the entries of $r_x\vec{x}$ are all integers. For any vector $\vec{x}\in \mathcal F(A)$ (thus, $A^T\vec{x}={\bf 1}$ and $\vec{x}>\vec{0}$) and any integer $r> 0$ such that $r\vec{x}$ is an integral vector, let $L(A,r,\vec{x})$ be the matrix obtained by stacking $rx_i$ copies of $A_i$ for $1\leq i\leq m$. Note that we define $L(A,r,\vec{x})$ up to a permutation of rows. A convex combination of the vectors $\vec{x}^{(1)},\ldots, \vec{x}^{(t)}$ is an expression of the form \[\lambda_1\vec{x}^{(1)}+\ldots+\lambda_t\vec{x}^{(t)}\mbox{ with } \lambda_i\in \mathbb R^+ \mbox{ for $1\leq i\leq t$, and }\sum_{i=1}^t\lambda_i=1.\] If $\lambda_i\in\mathbb Q^+$ for all $1\leq i\leq t$, then the convex combination is called rational. We define the complement of a matrix $B$, denoted by $B^c$, to be the matrix obtained by replacing each entry $b$ of $B$ by $t-b$, where $t$ is the maximum entry in $B$. In the next lemma, we give an upper bound on the number of rows in the matrix $L(A,r_y,\vec{y})$ for the case when $A$ is an invertible $k$-matrix and $\vec{y}\in\mathcal F(A)$. To prove the main theorem in this section, we also use a theorem of Carathéodory, which we shall state after a few definitions, following the account of Ziegler . Let $S=\{\vec{x}^{(1)},\ldots, \vec{x}^{(t)}\}$ be a set of vectors from $\mathbb R^n$. The affine hull of $S$ is \[{\rm Aff}(S)=\{\lambda_1\vec{x}^{(1)}+\ldots+\lambda_t\vec{x}^{(t)} :\; \lambda_i\in \mathbb R\mbox{ and }\sum_{i=1}^t\lambda_i=1\}.\] The convex hull of $S$, which we denote by ${\rm Conv}(S)$, is the set of all its convex combinations. A set $I$ of vectors in $\mathbb R^n$ is affinely independent if every proper subset of $I$ has a smaller affine hull. The dimension of an affine hull $G$ is $g-1$, where $g$ is the cardinality of largest affinely independent subset $I\subseteq G$. Finally, the dimension of a convex hull ${\rm Conv}(S)$ is the dimension of the corresponding affine hull ${\rm Aff}(S)$. We can now prove the following theorem. ## The second upper bound for $\ell(n,k)$ {#sec:UB2} In this section, we establish another upper bound for $\ell(n,k)$ that is better than the upper bound provided by Theorem [\[thm:UB2\]](#thm:UB2){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:UB2"} for $n\in \{2,3\}$. ## The lower bound {#sec:LB} In this section we construct examples of irreducible matrices, each of whose number of rows is greater than some exponential function of its number of columns. ## Proof of Theorem [\[thm:main\]](#thm:main){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:main"} {#sec:proof} The first part Theorem [\[thm:main\]](#thm:main){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:main"} follows from directly from Theorem [\[thm:LB\]](#thm:LB){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:LB"}. The upper bound for $\ell(n,k)$ follows from Theorem [\[thm:UB1\]](#thm:UB1){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:UB1"} when $n=3$, and from Theorem [\[thm:UB2\]](#thm:UB2){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:UB2"} when $n>3$. # Application to multipartitions of finite vector spaces {#sec:app-vsp} Let $V=V(n,q)$, where $V(n,q)$ denotes the $n$-dimensional vector space over the finite field with $q$ elements. We will consider multisets of nonzero subspaces of $V$ such that each nonzero element of $V$ is in the same number of subspaces, counting multiplicities. More explicitly, a multipartition $P$ of $V$ is a pair $(F, \alpha)$, where $F$ is a finite set, $\alpha$ is a function from $F$ to the set of nonzero subspaces of $V$, and there exists a positive integer $\lambda$ such that whenever $v$ is a nonzero elements of $V$ we have \[\|\{f \in F :\; v \in \alpha(f)\}\|=\lambda.\] In this case, we call $P$ a $\lambda$-partition. A number of papers have been written about $1$-partitions, usually just called "partitions", (e.g., see and for a survey), and at least one about multipartitions (). A general question in this area is to classify the multipartitions of $V$. If $V$ has a $\lambda$-partition $P$ and a $\mu$-partition $Q$, then a $(\lambda + \mu)$-partition of $V$ may be formed by combining $P$ and $Q$ in the obvious way. We denote this by $P + Q$. Conversely, it may be possible to break a multipartition into smaller multipartitions. Thus, it is of interest to investigate multipartitions that cannot be broken up any further. We call a multipartition $P$ of $V$ irreducible if there do not exist multipartitions $Q_1$ and $Q_2$ of $V$ such that $P = Q_1 + Q_2$. Clearly any multipartition of $V$ can be written as a sum of irreducible multipartitions of $V$. Let $S$ be a set. Call $(F,\alpha)$ a level family of $S$ if $\alpha$ is a function from $F$ into $2^S\backslash \{\emptyset \}$ for which there exists a positive integer $\lambda$ such that if $x \in S$, then $\|\{f \in F :\; \alpha(f)=x\}\| = \lambda$. We call $\lambda$ the height of the family. Call the level family $(F, \alpha)$ with height $\lambda$ reducible if there exists a subset $F'$ of $F$ and an integer $\lambda'$, $0 < \lambda' < \lambda$, such that $(F', \alpha\|_{F'})$ is a level family of $S$ with height $\lambda'$; otherwise call $(F, \alpha)$ irreducible. # Conclusion {#sec:conc} Our main question (see page 1) is still open in general. For example, if $A\in M_{m,n}(\mathbb Z)$ is a $k$-matrix such that $A^T\vec{x}={\bf 1}$ for some $\vec{x}>\vec{0}$, then we know by Lemma [\[lem:LG\]](#lem:LG){reference-type="ref" reference="lem:LG"} that the number of rows, $\ell(L_A)$, of the irreducible matrix $L_A=L(A,r_x,\vec{x})$ satisfies $\ell(L_A)\leq (k/2)^{n-1}(n+1)^{(n+1)/2}$. However, the small cases that we have checked suggest that $\ell(L_A)$ is much smaller. It would be interesting to find the exact value of $\ell(L_A)$ or improve its upper bound. Such an improvement would also give a better upper bound for the general value of $\ell(n,k)$ in Theorem [\[thm:main\]](#thm:main){reference-type="ref" reference="thm:main"}. In Proposition [\[prop:hil\]](#prop:hil){reference-type="ref" reference="prop:hil"}, we characterized the set $\mathcal Z(A)$ of levelers of a given matrix by a cone whose Hilbert basis is the set of irreducible levelers $\mathcal I(A)\subseteq \mathcal Z(A)$. It would be interesting to investigate if this characterization can shed more light on the study of Hilbert bases (e.g., see ) in certain cases. The authors thank S. Tipnis for suggesting the connection to polyhedral cones.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-24T02:03:54', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5868', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5868'}
# Introduction Liquid suspensions of deformable particles are the focus of permanent interest due to their ubiquity in life science and applications, from emulsions to blood, a dense suspension of red blood cells. It is well known since Batchelor that the viscosity of a semi-dilute suspension of rigid spheres departs from the classic linear Einstein law of viscosity for volume fractions of particles above a few percents, due to the additional dissipation induced by hydrodynamic interactions between particles. In addition to their influence on the effective viscosity at significant volume fractions, these [hydrodynamic interactions (which are sometimes called binary collisions in the literature, although still mediated by hydrodynamics)]{style="color: black"} can lead to irreversible perturbations of the particle trajectories which result in an effective random walk of individual particles in the suspension. This shear-induced diffusion has two main consequences: enhanced mixing and transport even at low Reynolds number, and a modification of the structure of suspensions via diffusion along gradients of concentration of the particles. In shear flow, two identical particles located on different streamlines and moving towards each other will generally experience irreversible drift in the shear and vorticity directions after they have interacted. However, for smooth rigid spherical particles in a dilute regime dominated by pairwise interactions, the cross-stream lateral displacement is expected to be negligible at low Reynolds number since trajectories must be symmetric due to the flow-reversal symmetry of the Stokes equation and the symmetry of the geometrical configuration. Symmetry breaking can be obtained by considering rough particles or deformable two-fluid systems such as bubbles or drops. More recently, systems made of closed membranes have been investigated numerically or experimentally. Hydrodynamic interaction between elastic capsules were studied numerically in several papers . During the interaction, net displacement of the capsules can be coupled with wrinkling or buckling of the membranes, whose tension strongly increases during interaction. The dynamics and rheology of suspensions of lipid vesicles have recently been the focus of several studies, due to their relevance to the understanding of blood flows, considering giant vesicles as models of red blood cells, and the challenging theoretical questions they pose as a consequence of their rich microscopic dynamics. Vesicles are closed lipid bilayers with mechanical properties similar to those of living cells. A key property is the membrane inextensibility, which leads to local area conservation, while volume conservation is generally obtained once osmotic equilibrium is reached. The vesicles mechanical response, as well as their shapes, are governed by a bending energy of order a few $kT$, where $k$ is Boltzmann's constant and $T$ the temperature. These particular properties, especially the non-linearities due to the constraint of local area conservation, are responsible for the [various]{style="color: black"} dynamics of single vesicles in shear flow. The phase diagram of microscopic dynamics has a signature on the rheology of vesicle suspensions, but there is still disagreement, especially in the semi-dilute regime where two experimental studies show contradictory results. In an effort to resolve this contradiction, Kantsler et al. and Levant et al. have investigated the influence of interactions on fluctuations and correlations of the inclination angles of interacting vesicles and suggest that they may be responsible for discrepancies between theories in the dilute regime and experimental measurements of the effective viscosity, which are often made in a semi-dilute regime for sensitivity reasons. On the analytical side, the trajectories of interacting vesicles have been recently studied in the limit were they are initially very distant from each other. This study has been later on refined in the case of vesicles located in the same shear plane. Very recently, such trajectories have been calculated numerically by Zhao and Shaqfeh. They also calculated the rheology of a semi-dilute suspension and found good agreement with the experiments by Vitkova et al., a strong indication that, in that concentration regime, interactions between vesicles cannot explain the contradiction between the latter experiments and the one by Kantsler et al. Along with their influence on rheology, hydrodynamic interactions significantly affect the structure of suspensions, especially in confined flows where a balance between migration away from walls and shear-induced diffusion due to repulsive interactions leads to the formation of a non-homogeneous distribution of vesicles. During heterogeneous interactions of vesicles or capsules with different mechanical or geometrical characteristics, asymmetric displacements take place, which leads to segregation or margination, a phenomenon also observed in blood flows. In this paper, we report on our experimental and numerical investigation of the interaction of two identical vesicles in shear flow, with a focus on the net lateral displacement as a function of initial configuration and vesicle properties. With a good agreement between experiments and simulations, the amplitude of the lateral displacement is found to be weakly dependent on vesicle deflation and viscosity ratio, at least in the tank-treading regime to which we restrict our study. Thanks to the simulations, we also discuss to which extent the discrepancies between the ideal case of two identical and neutrally buoyant vesicles, placed in the shear plane of an infinite simple shear flow, and the realistic case of channel flow, influence the final result. Finally, from the numerical results, an evaluation of the self-diffusion coefficient, obtained by averaging displacements over all initial configurations, is proposed and compared to the recent results of Zhao and Shaqfeh. # Experimental set-up Fluid vesicles are prepared by following the electroformation method, which produces vesicles of various size and deflation (that is, the surface to volume ratio). They are made of a dioleoylphosphatidylcholine (DOPC) lipid bilayer. We consider three sets of outer and inner solutions in order to vary the viscosity ratio $\lambda$ between the inner and the outer fluids (see table [\[tab:sol\]](#tab:sol){reference-type="ref" reference="tab:sol"}). The different additives (sugars and dextran) used for inner and outer solutions provide an optical index contrast which is convenient for phase contrast microscopy. We wish to observe interactions in simple shear flow between vesicles located in the same $xy$ plane, where $x$ is the flow direction and $y$ the shear direction. To that end, the vesicle suspension is injected in a standard polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) microfluidic device. The observation channel is 184 m wide ($y$ direction) and 100 m deep ($z$ direction). The imposed flow is along the $x$ axis (see Fig. [\[sketch_exp\]](#sketch_exp){reference-type="ref" reference="sketch_exp"}). Before the observation section, vesicles flow in a channel of several centimeters long, so that centering in the $z$ direction is generally rather well achieved, as confirmed by the location of all vesicles within a focal plane of thickness of order 5 m. The interacting vesicles were followed manually translating the stage. The observation window is 477x358 $\text{\,\textmu m}^2$, with a resolution of $0.47$ m/pixel. The use of a channel flow, rather than a four-roll mill device, allows to measure the final lateral displacement due to the interaction, a key parameter in the discussion of diffusion phenomena. As measurable interactions only occur when vesicles have initial $y$ separation not larger than 2 radii, it appeared necessary to favor such an initial condition by adding a flow focusing device at the entrance of the observation channel. Two lateral inlets were then added, where vesicle-free fluid was injected in order to focus the suspension in a narrow area. This area is located at around one fourth of the total width of the channel, that is, far from the wall and far from the center, where the flow can be considered as a simple shear flow, in a first approximation to be discussed later. Vesicles stay at this favorable position thanks to the balance between lift forces and gravity. In addition, dilution by the lateral inlets decreases the probability of perturbation of the interaction trajectories by other vesicles. In the observation window, at most 3 or 4 vesicles (including the two studied vesicles) are present at the same time. In the selected interaction sequences, the additional vesicles of non negligible size are always at a distance from the pair larger than 5 radii [ and are located almost on the same streamlines, so that they will not come close to the pair within the duration of the studied interaction process.]{style="color: black"} As in Fig. [\[fig:trajexp\]](#fig:trajexp){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:trajexp"}, very small vesicles may come closer, but the induced perturbation is expected to be negligible: from an asymptotic approach, we can expect the velocity perturbations induced by a vesicle 4 times smaller than the studied ones to be smaller than the one coming from the interacting vesicles by a factor $({\frac{1}{4}})^2=0.06$. Once an appropriate pair of vesicles is chosen, the vesicles are followed along their trajectories and the $(x,y)$ coordinates of the vector linking their geometrical centers are determined, as well as their shapes. We denote by $(x_i,y_i)$ the initial position and by $(x_f,y_f)$ the final one. By convention, $x_i<0$ and $y_i>0$. An example of selected snapshots taken along a trajectory is shown in Fig. [\[fig:trajexp\]](#fig:trajexp){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:trajexp"}. As we only have access to their two-dimensional cross-section in the $xy$ plane, we characterize the 2D shapes by the effective radius $R_{\text{i}}$, $\text{i}=1,2$, defined by $R_{\text{i}}=\mathcal{P}_{\text{i}}/(2 \pi)$, where $\mathcal{P}_{\text{i}}$ is the cross-section perimeter, and by a reduced area $\nu_{a\text{i}}=\mathcal{A_{\text{i}}}/(\pi R_{\text{i}}^2) \le 1$, where $\mathcal{A_{\text{i}}}$ is the cross-sectional area. These two parameters are evaluated before the vesicles strongly interact, at which point out-of-plane deformations occur. In this study, we focus on pairs of vesicles of similar size and deflation (within maximal variations of 10 percent for the radii and 5 percent for the reduced area). We denote by $R_0$ and $\nu_a$ the arithmetic averages of the radii and reduced areas of the two interacting vesicles. $R_0$ lies between 5 and 19 m, and $\nu_{a}$ between 0.73 and 1. The flow velocity is set so that the capillary number lies typically between 10 and 100. This capillary number $Ca=\eta\dot{\gamma} a^{3}/{\kappa}$ qualitatively represents the ratio between the magnitude of the liquid viscous stresses exerted on a membrane, and its resisting bending stresses, controlled by bending rigidity $\kappa$. $\dot{\gamma}$ is the shear rate and $\eta$ the suspending fluid viscosity. $a$ is the effective radius of the vesicle, defined from its volume $V$ by $V=4\pi a^3/3$. Note that, due to vesicle volume conservation, this 3D effective radius is constant and characteristic of the considered vesicle, while the observed 2D radius $R_0$ depends on the applied flow. As $a$ can only be roughly estimated in the experiments, we only have access to estimated values for $Ca$. From the obtained trajectories, we extract the main information, that is the lateral displacement $\Delta_y=y_f-y_i$ as a function of initial lateral separation $y_i$. Both distances are rescaled by $R_0$. Several initial positions $y_i$ are scanned either by considering different pairs of vesicles, or by making a given pair going back and forth thanks to flow reversal. # Experimental results {#experimental_results} We first focus on vesicles with no viscosity contrast. Results for $\Delta_y/ {R}_0$ as a function of $y_i/{R}_0$ are shown in Fig. [\[fig:exp-lambda1\]](#fig:exp-lambda1){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:exp-lambda1"}. Initial and final $y$ positions are measured by averaging over several positions long before and after interaction. Error bars are associated to the fluctuations in these $y$ positions due to the presence of other small vesicles or flow variations due to channel roughness. Such events are likely to occur because of the large ratio between the relative velocity along the $x$ axis between the considered vesicles and the other vesicles or the wall, and the velocity along the $y$ axis. The studied pairs are split into two subpopulations according to their reduced areas. Vesicles with $\nu_a > 0.99$ undergo negligible deviations which are not measurable within experimental errors. This result is expected for spherical particles and allows to check that no uncontrolled drift [alters]{style="color: black"} the experimental results. All other pairs of vesicles yield comparable deviations whatever the reduced area in the range $0.82-0.98$. Data scattering can be due to variations in reduced areas (including within a pair), sizes, capillary numbers, but also to non complete colocation in the same $xy$ plane. In addition, displacements might be affected by the flow perturbation induced by the walls, which depends on the lateral position of the vesicles, a parameter that varies from one pair to another. Lateral deviation is a decreasing function of initial lateral separation, and becomes negligible for initial [lateral]{style="color: black"} separations greater than one diameter. An empirical estimate for this deviation can be obtained by considering that, in the reference frame of the bottom vesicle, the displacement of the top vesicle is due to the interaction with a wall of finite extent in the $x$ direction, whose role is played by the bottom vesicle. The lift velocity of a vesicle in a simple shear flow and at a distance $y$ from a wall was experimentally shown to agree with the scaling law $\dot{y}=U \dot{\gamma} R_0^3/y^2$ suggested or confirmed by several theoretical works, where $U$ is a dimensionless parameter that depends on viscosity ratio and reduced volume. The reduced volume $\nu$ is defined as the ratio between the vesicle volume and the volume of the sphere having the same area; due to volume conservation and membrane incompressibility, this is a constant parameter that characterizes the deflation of the vesicle. The top vesicle flows with relative velocity $\dot{x}=\dot{\gamma} y$, so that $dy/dx=U R_0^3/y^3$. Interaction takes place on a finite distance of order $2R_0$. Integrating the latter equation on this distance for $x$ and between $y_i$ and $y_f$ for $y$, one finally finds \[\Delta_y/R_0=\big(y_{i}^4/R_0^4+\] where $From this law, we can estimate how the final displacement should vary with reduced volume. {Following for instance the recent study by Farutin and Misbah, $U$ scales as $(1-\nu)^{\frac{1}{2}}$, so that the maximal displacement scales as $(1-\nu)^{\frac{1}{8}}$.} {This sharp increase around $\nu=1$ explains the strong difference between the quasi-spherical vesicles ($\nu_a>0.99$) and the more deflated ones ($\nu_a<0.98$) seen on Fig. \ref{fig:exp-lambda1}. On the other hand, from Olla's results, $U$ is multiplied by a factor 2.7 between prolate vesicles of reduced areas 0.98 and 0.82, respectively. The maximum displacement for vanishing $y_i$ should then be multiplied by $2.7^{1/4}\simeq 1.3$. Such a tiny variation is within the scattering and error of experimental data.} Similarly, when the viscosity ratio is varied, no significant displacement variation is observed, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:exp-lambda-autre}. Once again, this is consistent with our empirical law, since from Olla's results again, for$\_a=0.9$,$U\^1/4$decreases only by 2\% between vesicles of viscosity ratio 0.28 and 1, and by 12\% between vesicles of viscosity ratio 1 and 3.8. {According to Zhao and Shaqfeh, the maximum displacement drops by about 30\% between viscosity ratio 1 and 7.} In the next section, we address the same questions with full 3D numerical simulations {restricted to the case $\lambda=1$, following our discussion on the weak influence of the viscosity ratio in the previous section. We then confront the numerical results with the experimental ones.} \section{Model and numerical method} \subsection{Liquid and membrane} In this section we outline the model and numerical method. The internal and external liquids are modeled as incompressible, homogeneous, Newtonian fluids. We restrict our study to the case where their densities, as well as their viscosities, are equal. Both liquids flow in the creeping regime. The membranes are modeled by two dimensional surfaces. As for the liquids, their inertia is negligible. Their areas stay locally constant. They resist bending with an energy$E_b$, given by \begin{equation} \label{hel} E_b=\int_{A}\frac{\kappa}{2}(2H)^{2}dA, \end{equation} where$A$is the membrane surface,\[the bending rigidity, and$H$the mean curvature. The sign convention for the curvatures is taken so that the mean curvature of a sphere is negative. The resulting surface force density that the membrane exerts on the fluids is \begin{eqnarray} \mathbf{f}=-\{\kappa[2H(2H^{2}-2K)+2\Delta_{s}H]-2\zeta H\}\mathbf{n}+\boldsymbol{\nabla}_{s}{\zeta}, \end{eqnarray} where\]is the unit normal vector pointing outward,$K$the Gaussian curvature, and\[a Lagrange multiplier that enters the total energy, obtained by adding to (\ref{hel})$\_AdA$. It ensures local membrane incompressibility and satisfies: \begin{equation} \label{2d_inc} \boldsymbol{\nabla}_{s}\cdot \boldsymbol{v}=0, \end{equation} where$\_s$is the surface gradient operator and\]is the membrane velocity. \textcolor{black}{Note that we don't include in our model any other small range interaction than the hydrodynamic forces within the lubricating film, described as squeezed between athermal membranes. As a first approximation, we considered that theses stresses grow fast enough so that the minimal distance between the membranes, that we denote $d$, remains higher than a typical distance under which other type of interactions become significant. The first one that would appear is linked to the inhibition of thermal fluctuations, which leads to an entropic repulsion pressure. It is of order $0.2(k_{\text{B}}T)^2/(\kappa d^3)$. It would balance the imposed pressure, estimated as $\eta \dot \gamma$, that tends to push the two vesicles towards each other, if \begin{equation} d\sim ({0.2(k_{\text{B}}T)^2\over \kappa \eta \dot\gamma})^{1/3}. \end{equation} Using the typical value $\kappa\sim 20 k_{\text{B}}T$, for the smallest shear rate in our experiments $1s^{-1}$, one finds that $d$ reaches values in the range of $100$nm. We checked that, in the trajectories we investigated, $d$ remains higher than the previous estimate. The facts that the entropic force is repulsive, and that, on the contrary to some rigid particles, there are no heterogeneities on the phospholipid membranes that can facilitate the drainage of the lubricating film, support even more our approximation.} \subsection{Boundary conditions} The membranes are supposed to be at osmotic equilibrium and are modeled as impermeable. Together with the no slip boundary condition, this leads to an advection of the membranes with the local velocity of the flow. A force balance on the membrane yields \begin{equation} \mathbf{f}=-(\sigma^{+}-\sigma^{-})\cdot \mathbf{n}, \end{equation} where\[is the liquid stress tensor with a$+$or$-$superscript respectively for the external and internal fluids, defined as$=-p1+(+()\^t)$. Far from the vesicles, the imposed simple shear flow$\^=y\_x$is recovered. We denote by$=(x,y,z)$the vector linking the centers of mass$C\_$of the two vesicles. We shall study the evolution of$(y,z)$as a function of$x$, that is, the trajectory of vesicle 2 in the frame centered on vesicle 1. Different initial positions$(y_i,z_i)$will be scanned, with initial longitudinal distance$x_i\(much larger than the vesicles radii. A sketch of the initial state of the system is presented in Fig. \ref{sketchsystem}. \subsection{Numerical method} The full set of equations in the Stokes regime can be converted into a boundary integral formulation. The integral equation (recalled below) is solved numerically in three dimensions following the work by Biben \textit{et al.}. The new elements of the present study are the extensions to two vesicles and, in a second time, to the presence of a wall that turns out to be a relevant ingredient when confronting the numerical results with the experimental one. We shall first study the situation without wall, which is the main goal of the paper. The integral equation provides the expression of the membrane velocities as a function of boundary integrals and reads \begin{eqnarray} \label{bim_memb} v_{\alpha}(\mathbf{r})&=&v_{\alpha}^{\infty}(\mathbf{r})+\int_{\partial\Omega}G_{\alpha\beta}(\mathbf{r},\mathbf{r}')f_{\beta}(\mathbf{r}')dA', \end{eqnarray} where\]is the position vector of a membrane point,\[the boundaries present in the system under consideration, which are in the present case the two vesicle membranes, and\)G(,')$the Green's function of an incompressible fluid following Stokes equation. As we consider an unbounded domain, an appropriate choice is the Green's function associated to a point force in an infinite liquid, such that$G\_(,')=G\_\^(-')$, where \begin{eqnarray} G^{\infty}_{\alpha\beta}(\mathbf{r})=\frac{1}{8\pi\eta}\left( \frac{\delta_{\alpha\beta}}{r}+\frac{r_{\alpha}r_{\beta}}{r^{3}} \right). \end{eqnarray} For most simulations, the vesicles are meshed by$`<!-- -->`{=html}642$vertices, and the time step is$`<!-- -->`{=html}10\^-4a\^3/$. {We checked that for a typical trajectory ($(y_i,z_i)=(0.5,0)$), results were relatively independent from a reduction of the mesh size and time step: increasing the number of vertices to $2562$ and reducing the time step by a factor 2 led to relative changes in the transverse migration of $0.3\%$.} A challenge is to achieve an evolution of the membrane shapes ensuring a local conservation of the area. We present in appendix \ref{appendixA} details showing that our study conserves the area with a good approximation. The simulations start with both vesicles having the steady inclination angle of an isolated vesicle in shear flow, obtained from a preliminary simulation. \section{Numerical results} \subsection{Identical vesicles in the same shear plane} We start with the case of identical vesicles, with the typical parameters$(,)$, in the same shear plane of an infinite simple shear flow. The capillary number is taken in the set${10,50,100}$, so that the whole range of possible experimental values is covered. We plot in Fig. \ref{interaction_curve_zi0} the interaction curve$\_y(y_i)$(that is the difference between the final and initial$y$-positions), with initial and final distances corresponding to$x\_i=-10a$and$x\_f=10a$. \textcolor{black}{For all values of $Ca$, we recover the decrease of $\Delta_y/R_0$ from around $1$ to zero. All deviations become smaller than $0.1$ for $y_i/R_0>2.5$. There is a good agreement with the simple model based on the law for the lift of a vesicle near a wall, that was presented in the preceding section. It thus validates this model as a convenient tool to anticipate the dependency of the lift with the mechanical properties of the vesicles. Note however that, since the shape in Olla's model is prescribed, no dependency on $Ca$ can arise from it.} \textcolor{black}{Overall, considering that there are no fitting parameters (but some experimental uncertainty on $C_a$), the agreement is rather satisfactory. However, the experiments lead to smaller displacements, as the numerical curve passes through the error bars of \textcolor{black}{only} about $30\%$ of the experimental points. This discrepancy may be explained by differences between the experimental configuration and the ideal unbounded simple shear flow on three aspects. First, the suspension is slightly polydisperse, both in shape and size. Second, the centering in the $z$ direction might not be perfect. Indeed, the depth of focus of the microscope is about $5$\,\textmu m, which allows $z_i$ to differ from $0$ by amounts up to $R_0/2$. Third, the balance between wall-induced lift forces and sedimentation in the $y$ direction is perturbed during the interaction, and may also not be fully reached before interaction starts, because of preceding interactions. All those effects could be non negligible. We use the numerical model to study their relative importance. } \subsection{Departure from interaction of two identical vesicles in a shear plane of a simple shear flow} \subsubsection{Influence of polydispersity} Regarding the influence of polydispersity, we computed several sets of interaction curves, with$Ca=10$, first changing the radius ratio so that$R_2/R_1{0.9,1.1}$, and then both reduced volumes, so that$\_1=\_2{0.8,0.99}$. We find relatively small effects, not sufficient to explain all the data scattering: for instance, for$y_i/R_0=0.5$, the maximal variation in$\_y$is$`<!-- -->`{=html}9%$. Such a small effect was expected from the qualitative discussion presented in Sec. \ref{experimental_results}. \subsubsection{Influence of $\mathbf{z_i}$} We plot the interaction curve$\_y(y_i)$for$z_i{0,0.46R_0,0.92R_0,1.84R_0} (0.92R_0=a)$. The result is reported in Fig. \ref{interaction_curve}. {As expected, the deviation $\Delta_y$ decreases with $z_i\(. Considering that the vesicles can be initially shifted in the vorticity direction by the maximal distance allowed by the focal depth of the microscope, a better agreement between experimental data and simulations is found (about 70\% of experimental points, for vesicles of radii 10 \textmu m).} \subsubsection{{Influence of the bottom channel wall}} We consider now the influence of an imbalance between wall-outward migration and sedimentation. For simplicity and since gravity acts similarly on both vesicles, we only consider the wall migration effect. As lift is a decreasing function of the distance to the wall, we expect the upper vesicle to migrate less relatively to the wall, so that the distance between the two vesicles is indirectly reduced due to that wall-induced lift forces. We compare the whole trajectory obtained by our code with the one corresponding to the experiment shown on Fig. \ref{fig:trajexp}. The geometrical input parameters of the simulation are the reduced volume\]and the 3D effective radius\)a$, in contrast with the experimentally measured reduced area$\_a$and the 2D effective radius$R_0$. From the study of isolated vesicles in simple shear flow, we find that, for$Ca=10$, vesicles having same 2D cross-sections as the vesicles of Fig. \ref{fig:trajexp} are characterized respectively by${, a= 8.9}$and${, a= 8.6}$. In order to quantify the bottom wall effect, we adopt the Green's function corresponding to a semi-infinite fluid, and include the quadratic part of the flow in the plane of shear, so that the imposed flow is$y(1-y/L_y)\_x$. The initial distance of vesicle 1 from the wall is$y\_i,1=32$\,\textmu m. The comparison between the experiment and the numerical study is presented in Fig. \ref{influ_curv}, without and with wall, for vesicles in the same shear plane ($z_i=0$). A possible shift$z_i/a=0.39$is also considered together with the presence of the wall. As expected, lift by the wall leads to a slight initial attraction (a decrease of$y$for$x\<0$), which results in a slightly smaller final lateral displacement when$x\(. It appears however that this correction is too small to account for the remaining discrepancy between the simulations and the experiments, for which the initial attraction of around 1\,\textmu m, that is seen on Fig. \ref{fig:trajexp}, appears on most trajectories. Anyhow, this second-order effect is most probably linked with the presence of the wall, as suggested by recent simulations by Narsimhan et al., where interacting red blood cells in the vicinity of a wall are studied. They show that, for particles close enough to a wall, the relative lateral distance might decrease before interaction (see trajectories on their Fig. 15(b)), sometimes even leading to a completely different scenario of interaction involving swapping trajectories where particles do not cross. \textcolor{black}{As shown by the authors, the presence of the bottom wall in the y direction induces the formation of a recirculation vortex behind the first particle, which is mainly responsible for the initial attraction. It is likely that when walls are also present in the z direction, as is the case in the experiment, the strength and extension of this recirculation are larger, leading to the stronger attraction observed in the first stage of experimental trajectories.} To sum it up, starting from comparable results for experiments and simulations, we have shown that a shift in the vorticity direction and the contribution of walls, both being inherent to the experiment, lead to a decrease of the repulsion, thus to some scattering in the experimental data, that all lie right below the ideal curve given by the simulations. \subsection{Deflection in the vorticity direction} As an extension to experimental results, the model also allows to investigate the effect of the interaction on the deflection\)\_z$. In Fig. \ref{interaction_curve_z}, we present the interaction curves$\_y(z_i)$and$\_z(z_i)$, for$y_i=0.92 R_0\(, the other parameters remaining the same as previously. We find that there is a range of initial transverse positions for which the interaction leads to a transverse attraction between the vesicles, mostly in the vorticity direction. A similar phenomenon has been predicted for the interaction of capsules, but not for drops. An asymptotic study, for vesicles in the far field interacting regime, also predicts such an attraction. However, here the vesicles become close during the interaction, so a qualitative interpretation of the predicted attraction may involve the description of the flow of the thin liquid \textcolor{black}{film} between the two tank-treading membranes, as done for drops. \section{Hydrodynamic diffusion} From the numerical study, one can expect to deduce results about the hydrodynamic diffusion properties of vesicle suspensions, in a regime where the solution is concentrated enough so that interaction effects are not negligible, but dilute enough so that pairwise interactions dominate over three-body interactions. We mostly study the case of self-diffusion, a phenomenon related to the average transverse motion of a single vesicle. We also find that an estimation of the collective diffusion coefficients is not possible only considering two-vesicle interactions, due to the long range of hydrodynamic interactions. \subsection{Self-diffusion} \subsubsection{Theoretical background} We consider a homogeneous suspension of vesicles, described at a mesoscopic level by a volume fraction\[. For a given initial state, if this suspension is sheared by an imposed flow\)\^=y_x$, a given vesicle will interact with the others and, as a result, will undergo a net displacement\]from its original streamline. In an unstructured semi-dilute suspension, the transverse motion of the vesicle is expected to be a random walk due to successive interactions with different vesicles. At long times, its mean-squared displacement$X\_\^2 $is described by the self-diffusion coefficients$D\_s,$, defined by \begin{eqnarray} D_{s,\alpha}&=&\lim_{t\rightarrow\infty}\frac{1}{2}\frac{d\langle X_\alpha^2\rangle}{dt}, \end{eqnarray} with${y,z}$,$.$being an ensemble average over all possible initial states of the suspension. As detailed by Da Cunha and Hinch, assuming that only two-vesicle interactions occur leads to the following expression for$D\_a,$: \begin{equation} \label{expr_self_diff} D_{s,\alpha}=\phi \dot{\gamma}a^2f_\alpha, \end{equation} with \begin{equation} \label{def_f} f_{\alpha}={\frac{3}{2\pi}}\int_{(y_i,z_i)\in[0,+\infty]^2}\Delta_{l,\alpha}^2y_idy_idz_i, \end{equation} where$\_l,$is the deviation of a test vesicle in the laboratory frame after one interaction. For identical vesicles,$\_l,=\_/2$. In the latter integral and from now on, all lengths are expressed in$a$units. \subsubsection{Analysis of the formal convergence of the diffusion coefficient} \label{formal_convergence} As the hydrodynamic interaction between two vesicles slowly decreases, the question of the convergence of the previous integral arises. As all displacements$\_l,$are bounded, the convergence of the expression \ref{def_f} is linked to the contribution of the integration domain\[. We analyze this contribution by using an asymptotic study of two interacting quasi-spherical vesicles remaining very distant from each other, that was recently proposed by Gires \textit{et al.}. We first need to determine the domain in the$(y_i,z_i)$space for which this asymptotic study is valid, a discussion that was not provided in the original paper. For the asymptotic study to be valid, vesicles must remain far enough along the whole trajectory, so that, at all times,$\\|\\|\_12\\|\\|$. As\], one could expect this criterion to be always satisfied. However, let us consider$y_i=0$. If there was no interaction, both vesicles would flow with the same velocity. But, since the velocity field induced by one vesicle is radial, vesicle collision may occur, which is inconsistent with the asymptotic approach. These considerations hint to the fact that the asymptotic study may not be valid for$y_i$. In order to get a more accurate validity criterion, we assume the asymptotic study to be valid for all times, and check that the inter-vesicle distance remains large. We expect that this approach can be used as each vesicle is not in the vicinity of a bifurcation phenomenon, such as the transition between the tank-treading and vacillating-breathing modes. As detailed in Gires \textit{et al.}, within this asymptotic approach with respect to the inter-vesicle distance, the trajectory of$C_2$with respect to$C_1$is of the form: \begin{eqnarray} \label{y(x)} y(x)= & y_i\nonumber +\frac{1}{\dot{\gamma}}\left[\left(\frac{x^3}{(x^2+b^2)^{3/2}}+1\right)\frac{T_{xx}}{b^2}-\frac{2y_iT_{xy}}{(x^2+b^2)^{3/2}}\right.\nonumber\\ & \left.+\left(\frac{(2x^2+3b^2)x}{(x^2+b^2)^{3/2}}+2\right)\frac{y_{i}^2T_{yy}}{b^{4}}\right], \end{eqnarray} and \begin{equation} \label{z(x)} z(x)=\frac{(y(x)-y_i)z_i}{y_i}+z_i, \end{equation} where$b=$, and${T\_xx,T\_xy,T\_yy}$are constants linked to the perturbation of the velocity field induced by the vesicles. As the symmetry of the system does not depend on the reduced volume, we expect these scalings to be valid for vesicles of arbitrary deflation in the tank-treading regime, the dependency on the reduced volume being accounted for by the tensor$T\_$. As$y(x)-y_i=O(b\^-2)$, the$y$distance between the vesicles will remain large if initially large. However, as$z(x)-z_i=z_i/y_iO(b\^-2)$, problems may arise at small$y_i$, as discussed earlier. In this case, the prevalent term in Eq. \ref{y(x)} is the term proportional to$T\_xx/b\^2$. If$T\_xx\<0$, this could lead to a minimal distance in the vorticity direction of the form$z\_=z_i-c/(y_iz_i)$, with$c\>0$. In order that the asymptotic approach remains valid starting with$z_i$, we impose the condition that$z\_\>z_i/d,(d\>1)$, where$d$is a constant. This criterion can be achieved if$y_i\>e/z_i\^2$, with$e=dc/(d-1)\>0$. For initial positions satisfying this criterion, we find from Eqs. \ref{y(x)} and \ref{z(x)} that \begin{eqnarray} \label{inter_dy} \Delta_y=O(\frac{y_i^2-z_i^2}{(y_i^2+z_i^2)^2}),\\ \label{inter_dz} \Delta_z=O(\Delta_y\frac{z_i}{y_i}). \end{eqnarray} It is clear from these expressions that the integral of Eq. \ref{def_f}, restricted to the region where the asymptotic expression is valid, is convergent. As for the region of large$z_i$and small$y_i$with$y_i\<e/z_i\^2$, where the asymptotic expression is not valid, since$\_l,\^2$is bounded by its maximal value and the integral of$y_i$on this region is finite, its contribution to the integral in Eq. \ref{def_f} is bounded, and finally the whole integral is convergent. \subsubsection{Numerical determination of the self-diffusion coefficient} We now estimate the value of$f_y$(Eq. \ref{def_f}) that enters the expression of the diffusion coefficient (Eq. \ref{expr_self_diff}). For that purpose we need to run several simulations by starting with different initial position in the$y-z$plane (which is the plane orthogonal to the flow direction) and determine by how much the initial relative positions$y_i$and$z_i$have varied (by amounts$\_y$and$\_z$) after the two vesicles have interacted. We discretize the domain of initial values$(y_i,z_i$) by considering the following domain size$\[0,8\]$(in units of vesicle radius$a$). The discretized lattice of initial positions is shown in Fig. \ref{evol_pos_tran}(a) with dark gray disks (blue online). Since the interaction is important only when the two vesicles are separated by about 2 or 3 radii, the lattice has a wide enough periodicity far away from$(0,0)$, whereas in the vicinity further refinements are chosen in order to gain numerical precision. More precisely, the domain is decomposed into three regions$A$,$B$and$C$, consisting in$\[0,2\]$,${\[0,4\]}{\[0,2\]}$and${\[0,8\]}{\[0,4\]}$. The lighter gray disks (red online) in Fig. \ref{evol_pos_tran}(a) show the final relative positions$y_f$and$z_f$. We note that in region C the effect is weak, while it becomes more and more pronounced in region$B$and$A$. The contributions of the integral involved in Eq. \ref{def_f} on the different sub-domains$A$,$B$and$C$are then evaluated using a trapezoidal rule. The results are given in Table \ref{table1}. \begin{table}[t!] \begin{center} \begin{ruledtabular} \begin{tabular}{ccc} &$f_y$&$f_z$\\ \hline part A & 0.028 & 0.002 \\ \hline part B & 0.003 & 0.004 \\ \hline part C & 0.001 & 0.005 \\ \end{tabular} \end{ruledtabular} \caption{\label{table1}Contributions of the sub-domains to the dimensionless self-diffusion coefficients $f_y$ and $f_z$. $\nu=0.95, Ca=50$.} \end{center} \end{table} We find that the contributions for$f_y$are decreasing. As we proved the convergence of the expression, we expect the contributions of the remaining part of the plane to be at most of the order of the contribution of the sub-domain C, and thus get the following estimation for$f_y$: \begin{equation} f_y=0.032\pm10\%. \end{equation} The uncertainty of$`<!-- -->`{=html}10%$is a rough estimate coming from a study of the sensitivity of the code to some numerical parameters, like a tension parameter used to preserve locally the area of the membrane. For$f_z$, we do not get decreasing contributions, due to the slow decrease of$\_z$with$z_i$when$y_i$. {A similar study has been presented by Zhao and Shaqfeh }, {who calculated $f_y$ for $\nu=0.95$ and $Ca=1$. Using the effective radius based on the surface as a length scale ($a'=\sqrt{S/4\pi}$, where $S$ is the vesicle membrane area) they find $f_y=0.028$. With the same convention instead of our choice of radius based on the volume, we find $f_y=0.032 \nu^{2/3}=0.031$, for $\nu=0.95$ and $Ca=50$, which is a consistent result since lateral displacement increases with $Ca$ (Fig. \ref{fig:exp-lambda-autre}). Zhao and Shaqfeh also estimated the value of $f_z$, restricting to the integration domain $[0,3]\times[0,3]$: their value matches ours on the same region. However, the present study shows that restricting the integration to this domain is not sufficient to get a quantitative value of $f_z$, due to the slow decrease of the attraction with $z_i$ for vesicles characterized by $y_i\ll1$.} We are not aware of experimental measures of$f_y$to which we could compare our estimation. On the basis of studies on suspensions of spheres, the assumption of considering only two-vesicle interactions could be a good approximation up to volume fractions of about$`<!-- -->`{=html}10%$. \subsubsection{Discussion} From simulated trajectories, Loewenberg and Hinch calculated$f_y$and$f_z$for pairs of drops as a function of viscosity ratio and capillary number. They evoke the scaling at long distance$\_ \~1/(y_i\^2+z_i\^2)$, which is similar to ours, to prove the convergence of the integral of Eq. \ref{def_f}. It appears that in the case of drops, restricting the integration domain to A+B is sufficient, for$f_y$as for$f_z$. For\[,$f_y$was found to be around$`<!-- -->`{=html}0.03$, depending on the capillary number, a result close to ours. A more quantitative comparison is precluded by the dependency with capillary number and the difference in nature between the elastic restoring forces involved in drops and vesicles. Interestingly, Loewenberg and Hinch find$f_z $, while we already find a result 3 times larger by integration over A+B+C. We can conclude that anisotropy in self-diffusion is lower for vesicles than for drops. This weaker anisotropy is also stated by Lac and Barth\`es-Biesel in their study of capsules collisions, though$f_y$and$f_z$are not calculated. \subsection{Down-gradient diffusion} The collective diffusion property of a vesicle suspension can be modeled in the following way: we consider a suspension of vesicles with a linearly increasing concentration given by$=\_0+y$, sheared by an imposed flow$\^=y_y$. As a result of the hydrodynamic interactions between the vesicles, we expect a collective diffusion of the vesicles to appear, consisting of a transverse flux$=j\_y$of vesicles. As for molecular diffusion due to thermal motion,\]is expected to be in the opposite direction of\[, of order$O()$. Thus, for\], we expect that$j=-D\_c,y$, with$D\_c,y\>0$. As done by Da Cunha and Hinch in the case of rough spheres, we tried to estimate$D\_c,y$assuming only two-vesicle interactions. This leads to an expression involving the integral of$y_i\^2_y$over the plane. However, as$\_y= O()$and the integral of\[over$\[0,y_0\]$, with$(y_0,z_0)\^2\(, is divergent, it turns out that the estimated expression is not convergent. A renormalization procedure, analogous to the one used by Batchelor, and followed by Wang \textit{et al.} in the case of the study of the hydrodynamic diffusion properties of a suspension of spheres, may lead to a convergent expression. It is hoped to investigate this matter further in a future work. \section{Conclusion} We performed an experimental and numerical study of the trajectory deviations of identical vesicles interacting in shear flow. In experiments, restricted to pairs of vesicles in the same shear plane, the amplitude of the net displacement decreases quickly when the initial \textcolor{black}{lateral} distance increases and becomes negligible when this distance is larger than approximately two vesicle radii. A simplified model based on the well established law for the lift of a vesicle near a wall was proposed, which allows to estimate quantitatively how the displacement should vary with the mechanical properties of the vesicles. \textcolor{black}{With no fitting parameter, the deviations are found to be in rather good agreement with our 3D simulations,} \textcolor{black}{ even if smaller deviations are found experimentally. We found than the main part of this discrepancy can be due to } \textcolor{black}{differences between the experimental configuration and the ideal case of unbounded shear flow where the two vesicles would be perfectly coplanar. The effect of walls, recently highlighted by Narsimhan et al., would need to be quantified thoroughly in complementary experiments where our requirements of similar deflation within the pair of vesicles could be loosened for simplicity, since the effect of deflation has been characterized and shown to be weak. We also indicate that, according to partial results not shown here, the requirement of identical size within a pair may be released, as rescaling of the displacements by the average radius \)R_0$ of two vesicles of different size lead to \textcolor{black}{a similar} curve for $\Delta_y/ {R_0}$ as a function of $y_i/{R_0}$.} In addition, displacements in the vorticity direction were explored through the simulations and found to be about an order of magnitude lower than in the shear direction, with a range of initial distances leading to a weak attraction of vesicles. Shear-induced diffusion coefficients can be obtained by a proper averaging of the net displacement over all initial configurations. The self-diffusion, related to the random walk of vesicles in a suspension, can be quantified using a discrete integration over a relatively small domain for the diffusivity in the shear direction, and could be determined in the vorticity direction if a larger integration area was considered, due to the slower decrease of the amplitude of displacement in that direction. Note that this integration would not have been possible in 2D where the displacements would scale like$`<!-- -->`{=html}1/y$instead of$`<!-- -->`{=html}1/y\^2\(. An estimation of the down-gradient diffusivities as defined by Da Cunha and Hinch was not possible due to the long range of hydrodynamic interactions, leading to a divergence of the integrals. In this case, the dilute limit assumption breaks down and one can no longer consider only pair interactions as is the case for rough spheres with short range interactions. \section{Introduction} Liquid suspensions of deformable particles are the focus of permanent interest due to their ubiquity in life science and applications, from emulsions to blood, a dense suspension of red blood cells. It is well known since Batchelor that the viscosity of a semi-dilute suspension of rigid spheres departs from the classic linear Einstein law of viscosity for volume fractions of particles above a few percents, due to the additional dissipation induced by hydrodynamic interactions between particles. In addition to their influence on the effective viscosity at significant volume fractions, these \textcolor{black}{hydrodynamic interactions (which are sometimes called binary collisions in the literature, although still mediated by hydrodynamics)} can lead to irreversible perturbations of the particle trajectories which result in an effective random walk of individual particles in the suspension. This shear-induced diffusion has two main consequences: enhanced mixing and transport even at low Reynolds number, and a modification of the structure of suspensions via diffusion along gradients of concentration of the particles. In shear flow, two identical particles located on different streamlines and moving towards each other will generally experience irreversible drift in the shear and vorticity directions after they have interacted. However, for smooth rigid spherical particles in a dilute regime dominated by pairwise interactions, the cross-stream lateral displacement is expected to be negligible at low Reynolds number since trajectories must be symmetric due to the flow-reversal symmetry of the Stokes equation and the symmetry of the geometrical configuration. Symmetry breaking can be obtained by considering rough particles or deformable two-fluid systems such as bubbles or drops. More recently, systems made of closed membranes have been investigated numerically or experimentally. Hydrodynamic interaction between elastic capsules were studied numerically in several papers . During the interaction, net displacement of the capsules can be coupled with wrinkling or buckling of the membranes, whose tension strongly increases during interaction. \begin{table} \begin{ruledtabular} \begin{tabular}{clcc} Set&Solution &\](mPa.s) &\)=$\\ \hline 1 & \begin{tabular}{l}(I) 300mM sucrose in (20$%$glycerol + 80$%$water w/w) \\ (E) 370mM glucose in (20\% glycerol + 80$%$water w/w) \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} 2.2 \\ 2.2 \end{tabular} &1.0 \\ \hline 2 & \begin{tabular}{l}(I) 100mM sucrose in water + 3.3$%$dextran w/w \\ (E) 115mM glucose in water \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} 4.2 \\ 1.1 \end{tabular} & 3.8 \\ \hline 3& \begin{tabular}{l}(I) 300mM sucrose in water\\ (E) 316mM glucose in water + 3$%$dextran w/w \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} 1.1 \\ 4.0 \end{tabular} & 0.28 \\ \end{tabular} \end{ruledtabular} \caption{Sets of internal (I) and external (E) solutions considered in the experiments. Viscosities $\eta$ are measured at $T = 23^\circ$ C.} \label{tab:sol} \end{table} The dynamics and rheology of suspensions of lipid vesicles have recently been the focus of several studies, due to their relevance to the understanding of blood flows, considering giant vesicles as models of red blood cells, and the challenging theoretical questions they pose as a consequence of their rich microscopic dynamics. Vesicles are closed lipid bilayers with mechanical properties similar to those of living cells. A key property is the membrane inextensibility, which leads to local area conservation, while volume conservation is generally obtained once osmotic equilibrium is reached. The vesicles mechanical response, as well as their shapes, are governed by a bending energy of order a few$kT$, {where $k$ is Boltzmann's constant and $T\( the temperature}. These particular properties, especially the non-linearities due to the constraint of local area conservation, are responsible for the \textcolor{black}{various} dynamics of single vesicles in shear flow. The phase diagram of microscopic dynamics has a signature on the rheology of vesicle suspensions, but there is still disagreement, especially in the semi-dilute regime where two experimental studies show contradictory results. In an effort to resolve this contradiction, Kantsler et al. and Levant et al. have investigated the influence of interactions on fluctuations and correlations of the inclination angles of interacting vesicles and suggest that they may be responsible for discrepancies between theories in the dilute regime and experimental measurements of the effective viscosity, which are often made in a semi-dilute regime for sensitivity reasons. On the analytical side, the trajectories of interacting vesicles have been recently studied in the limit were they are initially very distant from each other. This study has been later on refined in the case of vesicles located in the same shear plane. Very recently, such trajectories have been calculated numerically by Zhao and Shaqfeh. They also calculated the rheology of a semi-dilute suspension and found good agreement with the experiments by Vitkova et al., a strong indication that, in that concentration regime, interactions between vesicles cannot explain the contradiction between the latter experiments and the one by Kantsler et al. Along with their influence on rheology, hydrodynamic interactions significantly affect the structure of suspensions, especially in confined flows where a balance between migration away from walls and shear-induced diffusion due to repulsive interactions leads to the formation of a non-homogeneous distribution of vesicles. During heterogeneous interactions of vesicles or capsules with different mechanical or geometrical characteristics, asymmetric displacements take place, which leads to segregation or margination, a phenomenon also observed in blood flows. In this paper, we report on our experimental and numerical investigation of the interaction of two identical vesicles in shear flow, with a focus on the net lateral displacement as a function of initial configuration and vesicle properties. With a good agreement between experiments and simulations, the amplitude of the lateral displacement is found to be weakly dependent on vesicle deflation and viscosity ratio, at least in the tank-treading regime to which we restrict our study. Thanks to the simulations, we also discuss to which extent the discrepancies between the ideal case of two identical and neutrally buoyant vesicles, placed in the shear plane of an infinite simple shear flow, and the realistic case of channel flow, influence the final result. Finally, from the numerical results, an evaluation of the self-diffusion coefficient, obtained by averaging displacements over all initial configurations, is proposed and compared to the recent results of Zhao and Shaqfeh. \section{Experimental set-up} Fluid vesicles are prepared by following the electroformation method, which produces vesicles of various size and deflation {(that is, the surface to volume ratio)}. They are made of a dioleoylphosphatidylcholine (DOPC) lipid bilayer. We consider three sets of outer and inner solutions in order to vary the viscosity ratio\[between the inner and the outer fluids (see table \ref{tab:sol}). The different additives (sugars and dextran) used for inner and outer solutions provide an optical index contrast which is convenient for phase contrast microscopy. We wish to observe interactions in simple shear flow between vesicles located in the same\)xy$plane, where$x$is the flow direction and$y$the shear direction. To that end, the vesicle suspension is injected in a standard polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) microfluidic device. The observation channel is 184\,{\textmu}m wide ($y$direction) and 100\,\textmu m deep ($z$direction). The imposed flow is along the$x$axis (see Fig. \ref{sketch_exp}). Before the observation section, vesicles flow in a channel of several centimeters long, so that centering in the$z$direction is generally rather well achieved, as confirmed by the location of all vesicles within a focal plane of thickness of order 5\,\textmu m. The interacting vesicles were followed manually translating the stage. The observation window is 477x358$\^2$, with a resolution of$`<!-- -->`{=html}0.47$\,\textmu m/pixel. The use of a channel flow, rather than a four-roll mill device, allows to measure the final lateral displacement due to the interaction, a key parameter in the discussion of diffusion phenomena. As measurable interactions only occur when vesicles have initial$y\(separation not larger than 2 radii, it appeared necessary to favor such an initial condition by adding a flow focusing device at the entrance of the observation channel. Two lateral inlets were then added, where vesicle-free fluid was injected in order to focus the suspension in a narrow area. This area is located at around one fourth of the total width of the channel, that is, far from the wall and far from the center, where the flow can be considered as a simple shear flow, in a first approximation {to be discussed later}. Vesicles stay at this {favorable} position thanks to the balance between lift forces and gravity. In addition, dilution by the lateral inlets decreases the probability of perturbation of the interaction trajectories by other vesicles. In the observation window, at most 3 or 4 vesicles (including the two studied vesicles) are present at the same time. In the selected interaction sequences, the additional vesicles of non negligible size are always at a distance from the pair larger than 5 radii \textcolor{black}{ and are located almost on the same streamlines, so that they will not come close to the pair within the duration of the studied interaction process.} As in Fig. \ref{fig:trajexp}, very small vesicles may come closer, but the induced perturbation is expected to be negligible: from an asymptotic approach, we can expect the velocity perturbations induced by a vesicle 4 times smaller than the studied ones to be smaller than the one coming from the interacting vesicles by a factor\)()\^2=0.06$. Once an appropriate pair of vesicles is chosen, the vesicles are followed along their trajectories and the$(x,y)$coordinates of the vector linking their geometrical centers are determined, as well as their shapes. We denote by$(x_i,y_i)$the initial position and by$(x_f,y_f)$the final one. By convention,$x_i\<0$and$y_i\>0$. An example of selected snapshots taken along a trajectory is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:trajexp}. As we only have access to their two-dimensional cross-section in the$xy$plane, we characterize the 2D shapes by the effective radius$R\_$,$=1,2$, defined by$R\_=\_/(2 )$, where$\_$is the cross-section perimeter, and by a reduced area$\_a=/(R\_\^2) $, where\]is the cross-sectional area. These two parameters are evaluated before the vesicles strongly interact, at which point out-of-plane deformations occur. In this study, we focus on pairs of vesicles of similar size and deflation (within maximal variations of 10 percent for the radii and 5 percent for the reduced area). We denote by$R_0$and$\_a$the arithmetic averages of the radii and reduced areas of the two interacting vesicles.$R_0$lies between 5 and 19\,\textmu m, and$\_a$between 0.73 and 1. The flow velocity is set so that the capillary number lies typically between 10 and 100. This capillary number$Ca= a\^3/$qualitatively represents the ratio between the magnitude of the liquid viscous stresses exerted on a membrane, and its resisting bending stresses, controlled by bending rigidity\[.$ $is the shear rate and\]the suspending fluid viscosity.$a$is the effective radius of the vesicle, defined from its volume$V$by$V=4a\^3/3$. Note that, due to vesicle volume conservation, this 3D effective radius is constant and characteristic of the considered vesicle, while the observed 2D radius$R_0$depends on the applied flow. As$a$can only be roughly estimated in the experiments, we only have access to estimated values for$Ca$. From the obtained trajectories, we extract the main information, that is the lateral displacement$\_y=y_f-y_i$as a function of initial lateral separation$y_i$. Both distances are rescaled by$R_0$. Several initial positions$y_i$are scanned either by considering different pairs of vesicles, or by making a given pair going back and forth thanks to flow reversal. \section{Experimental results} \label{experimental_results} We first focus on vesicles with no viscosity contrast. Results for$\_y/ R\_0$as a function of$y_i/R\_0$are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:exp-lambda1}. Initial and final$y$positions are measured by averaging over several positions long before and after interaction. Error bars are associated to the fluctuations in these$y$positions due to the presence of other small vesicles or flow variations due to channel roughness. Such events are likely to occur because of the large ratio between the relative velocity along the$x$axis between the considered vesicles and the other vesicles or the wall, and the velocity along the$y$axis. The studied pairs are split into two subpopulations according to their reduced areas. Vesicles with$\_a \> 0.99$undergo negligible deviations which are not measurable within experimental errors. This result is expected for spherical particles and allows to check that no uncontrolled drift \textcolor{black}{alters} the experimental results. All other pairs of vesicles yield comparable deviations whatever the reduced area in the range$`<!-- -->`{=html}0.82-0.98$. Data scattering can be due to variations in reduced areas (including within a pair), sizes, capillary numbers, but also to non complete colocation in the same$xy$plane. In addition, displacements might be affected by the flow perturbation induced by the walls, which depends on the lateral position of the vesicles, a parameter that varies from one pair to another. Lateral deviation is a decreasing function of initial lateral separation, and becomes negligible for initial \textcolor{black}{lateral} separations greater than one diameter. An empirical estimate for this deviation can be obtained by considering that, in the reference frame of the bottom vesicle, the displacement of the top vesicle is due to the interaction with a wall of finite extent in the$x$direction, whose role is played by the bottom vesicle. The lift velocity of a vesicle in a simple shear flow and at a distance$y$from a wall was experimentally shown to agree with the scaling law$=U R_0\^3/y\^2$suggested or confirmed by several theoretical works, where$U$is a dimensionless parameter that depends on viscosity ratio and reduced volume. The reduced volume\[is defined as the ratio between the vesicle volume and the volume of the sphere having the same area; due to volume conservation and membrane incompressibility, this is a constant parameter that characterizes the deflation of the vesicle. The top vesicle flows with relative velocity$= y$, so that$dy/dx=U R_0\^3/y\^3$. Interaction takes place on a finite distance of order$`<!-- -->`{=html}2R_0$. Integrating the latter equation on this distance for$x$and between$y_i$and$y_f$for$y$, one finally finds \begin{equation} \Delta_y/R_0=\big(y_{i}^4/R_0^4+ \end{equation} where$ From this law, we can estimate how the final displacement should vary with reduced volume. Following for instance the recent study by Farutin and Misbah, $U$ scales as $(1-\nu)^{\frac{1}{2}}$, so that the maximal displacement scales as $(1-\nu)^{\frac{1}{8}}$. This sharp increase around $\nu=1$ explains the strong difference between the quasi-spherical vesicles ($\nu_a>0.99$) and the more deflated ones ($\nu_a<0.98$) seen on Fig. [\[fig:exp-lambda1\]](#fig:exp-lambda1){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:exp-lambda1"}. On the other hand, from Olla's results, $U$ is multiplied by a factor 2.7 between prolate vesicles of reduced areas 0.98 and 0.82, respectively. The maximum displacement for vanishing $y_i$ should then be multiplied by $2.7^{1/4}\simeq 1.3$. Such a tiny variation is within the scattering and error of experimental data. Similarly, when the viscosity ratio is varied, no significant displacement variation is observed, as shown in Fig. [\[fig:exp-lambda-autre\]](#fig:exp-lambda-autre){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:exp-lambda-autre"}. Once again, this is consistent with our empirical law, since from Olla's results again, for $\nu_a=0.9$, $U^{1/4}$ decreases only by 2% between vesicles of viscosity ratio 0.28 and 1, and by 12% between vesicles of viscosity ratio 1 and 3.8. According to Zhao and Shaqfeh, the maximum displacement drops by about 30% between viscosity ratio 1 and 7. In the next section, we address the same questions with full 3D numerical simulations restricted to the case $\lambda=1$, following our discussion on the weak influence of the viscosity ratio in the previous section. We then confront the numerical results with the experimental ones. # Model and numerical method ## Liquid and membrane In this section we outline the model and numerical method. The internal and external liquids are modeled as incompressible, homogeneous, Newtonian fluids. We restrict our study to the case where their densities, as well as their viscosities, are equal. Both liquids flow in the creeping regime. The membranes are modeled by two dimensional surfaces. As for the liquids, their inertia is negligible. Their areas stay locally constant. They resist bending with an energy $E_b$, given by \]\label{hel} E_b=\int_{A}\frac{\kappa}{2}(2H)^{2}dA,\[ where $A$ is the membrane surface, $\kappa$ the bending rigidity, and $H$ the mean curvature. The sign convention for the curvatures is taken so that the mean curvature of a sphere is negative. The resulting surface force density that the membrane exerts on the fluids is \]\begin{aligned} \mathbf{f}=-\{\kappa[2H(2H^{2}-2K)+2\Delta_{s}H]-2\zeta H\}\mathbf{n}+\boldsymbol{\nabla}_{s}{\zeta}, \end{aligned}\[ where $\mathbf{n}$ is the unit normal vector pointing outward, $K$ the Gaussian curvature, and $\zeta$ a Lagrange multiplier that enters the total energy, obtained by adding to ([\[hel\]](#hel){reference-type="ref" reference="hel"}) $\int_{A}\zeta dA$. It ensures local membrane incompressibility and satisfies: \]\label{2d_inc} \boldsymbol{\nabla}_{s}\cdot \boldsymbol{v}=0,\[ where $\boldsymbol{\nabla}_{s}$ is the surface gradient operator and $\boldsymbol{v}$ is the membrane velocity. [Note that we don't include in our model any other small range interaction than the hydrodynamic forces within the lubricating film, described as squeezed between athermal membranes. As a first approximation, we considered that theses stresses grow fast enough so that the minimal distance between the membranes, that we denote $d$, remains higher than a typical distance under which other type of interactions become significant. The first one that would appear is linked to the inhibition of thermal fluctuations, which leads to an entropic repulsion pressure. It is of order $0.2(k_{\text{B}}T)^2/(\kappa d^3)$. It would balance the imposed pressure, estimated as $\eta \dot \gamma$, that tends to push the two vesicles towards each other, if \]d\sim ({0.2(k_{\text{B}}T)^2\over \kappa \eta \dot\gamma})^{1/3}.\[ Using the typical value $\kappa\sim 20 k_{\text{B}}T$, for the smallest shear rate in our experiments $1s^{-1}$, one finds that $d$ reaches values in the range of $100$nm. We checked that, in the trajectories we investigated, $d$ remains higher than the previous estimate. The facts that the entropic force is repulsive, and that, on the contrary to some rigid particles, there are no heterogeneities on the phospholipid membranes that can facilitate the drainage of the lubricating film, support even more our approximation.]{style="color: black"} ## Boundary conditions The membranes are supposed to be at osmotic equilibrium and are modeled as impermeable. Together with the no slip boundary condition, this leads to an advection of the membranes with the local velocity of the flow. A force balance on the membrane yields \]\mathbf{f}=-(\sigma^{+}-\sigma^{-})\cdot \mathbf{n},\[ where $\sigma$ is the liquid stress tensor with a $+$ or $-$ superscript respectively for the external and internal fluids, defined as $\sigma=-p1\!\!1+\eta\left(\boldsymbol{\nabla}\boldsymbol{v}+(\boldsymbol{\nabla}\boldsymbol{v})^t\right)$. Far from the vesicles, the imposed simple shear flow $\mathbf{v}^{\infty}=\dot{\gamma}y\boldsymbol{e}_{x}$ is recovered. We denote by $\mathbf{R_{12}}=(x,y,z)$ the vector linking the centers of mass $C_{\text{i}}$ of the two vesicles. We shall study the evolution of $(y,z)$ as a function of $x$, that is, the trajectory of vesicle 2 in the frame centered on vesicle 1. Different initial positions $(y_i,z_i)$ will be scanned, with initial longitudinal distance $x_i$ much larger than the vesicles radii. A sketch of the initial state of the system is presented in Fig. [\[sketchsystem\]](#sketchsystem){reference-type="ref" reference="sketchsystem"}. ## Numerical method The full set of equations in the Stokes regime can be converted into a boundary integral formulation. The integral equation (recalled below) is solved numerically in three dimensions following the work by Biben et al.. The new elements of the present study are the extensions to two vesicles and, in a second time, to the presence of a wall that turns out to be a relevant ingredient when confronting the numerical results with the experimental one. We shall first study the situation without wall, which is the main goal of the paper. The integral equation provides the expression of the membrane velocities as a function of boundary integrals and reads \]\begin{aligned} \label{bim_memb} v_{\alpha}(\mathbf{r})&=&v_{\alpha}^{\infty}(\mathbf{r})+\int_{\partial\Omega}G_{\alpha\beta}(\mathbf{r},\mathbf{r}')f_{\beta}(\mathbf{r}')dA', \end{aligned}\[ where $\mathbf{r}$ is the position vector of a membrane point, $\partial\Omega$ the boundaries present in the system under consideration, which are in the present case the two vesicle membranes, and $G(\mathbf{r},\mathbf{r}')$ the Green's function of an incompressible fluid following Stokes equation. As we consider an unbounded domain, an appropriate choice is the Green's function associated to a point force in an infinite liquid, such that $G_{\alpha\beta}(\mathbf{r},\mathbf{r}')=G_{\alpha\beta}^{\infty}(\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r}')$, where \]\begin{aligned} G^{\infty}_{\alpha\beta}(\mathbf{r})=\frac{1}{8\pi\eta}\left( \frac{\delta_{\alpha\beta}}{r}+\frac{r_{\alpha}r_{\beta}}{r^{3}} \right). \end{aligned}\[ For most simulations, the vesicles are meshed by $642$ vertices, and the time step is $10^{-4}{\eta a^3}/{\kappa}$. We checked that for a typical trajectory ($(y_i,z_i)=(0.5,0)$), results were relatively independent from a reduction of the mesh size and time step: increasing the number of vertices to $2562$ and reducing the time step by a factor 2 led to relative changes in the transverse migration of $0.3\%$. A challenge is to achieve an evolution of the membrane shapes ensuring a local conservation of the area. We present in appendix [\[appendixA\]](#appendixA){reference-type="ref" reference="appendixA"} details showing that our study conserves the area with a good approximation. The simulations start with both vesicles having the steady inclination angle of an isolated vesicle in shear flow, obtained from a preliminary simulation. # Numerical results ## Identical vesicles in the same shear plane We start with the case of identical vesicles, with the typical parameters $(\lambda=1,\nu=0.95)$, in the same shear plane of an infinite simple shear flow. The capillary number is taken in the set $\{10,50,100\}$, so that the whole range of possible experimental values is covered. We plot in Fig. [\[interaction_curve_zi0\]](#interaction_curve_zi0){reference-type="ref" reference="interaction_curve_zi0"} the interaction curve $\Delta_y(y_i)$ (that is the difference between the final and initial $y$-positions), with initial and final distances corresponding to $x_{i}=-10a$ and $x_{f}=10a$. [For all values of $Ca$, we recover the decrease of $\Delta_y/R_0$ from around $1$ to zero. All deviations become smaller than $0.1$ for $y_i/R_0>2.5$. There is a good agreement with the simple model based on the law for the lift of a vesicle near a wall, that was presented in the preceding section. It thus validates this model as a convenient tool to anticipate the dependency of the lift with the mechanical properties of the vesicles. Note however that, since the shape in Olla's model is prescribed, no dependency on $Ca$ can arise from it.]{style="color: black"} [Overall, considering that there are no fitting parameters (but some experimental uncertainty on $C_a$), the agreement is rather satisfactory. However, the experiments lead to smaller displacements, as the numerical curve passes through the error bars of [only]{style="color: black"} about $30\%$ of the experimental points. This discrepancy may be explained by differences between the experimental configuration and the ideal unbounded simple shear flow on three aspects. First, the suspension is slightly polydisperse, both in shape and size. Second, the centering in the $z$ direction might not be perfect. Indeed, the depth of focus of the microscope is about $5$ m, which allows $z_i$ to differ from $0$ by amounts up to $R_0/2$. Third, the balance between wall-induced lift forces and sedimentation in the $y$ direction is perturbed during the interaction, and may also not be fully reached before interaction starts, because of preceding interactions. All those effects could be non negligible. We use the numerical model to study their relative importance. ]{style="color: black"} ## Departure from interaction of two identical vesicles in a shear plane of a simple shear flow ### Influence of polydispersity {#influence-of-polydispersity .unnumbered} Regarding the influence of polydispersity, we computed several sets of interaction curves, with $Ca=10$, first changing the radius ratio so that $R_2/R_1\in\{0.9,1.1\}$, and then both reduced volumes, so that $\nu_1=\nu_2\in\{0.8,0.99\}$. We find relatively small effects, not sufficient to explain all the data scattering: for instance, for $y_i/R_0=0.5$, the maximal variation in $\Delta_y$ is $9\%$. Such a small effect was expected from the qualitative discussion presented in Sec. [3](#experimental_results){reference-type="ref" reference="experimental_results"}. ### Influence of $\mathbf{z_i}$ {#influence-of-mathbfz_i .unnumbered} We plot the interaction curve $\Delta_y(y_i)$ for $z_i\in\{0,0.46R_0,0.92R_0,1.84R_0\}~(0.92R_0=a)$. The result is reported in Fig. [\[interaction_curve\]](#interaction_curve){reference-type="ref" reference="interaction_curve"}. As expected, the deviation $\Delta_y$ decreases with $z_i$. Considering that the vesicles can be initially shifted in the vorticity direction by the maximal distance allowed by the focal depth of the microscope, a better agreement between experimental data and simulations is found (about 70% of experimental points, for vesicles of radii 10 m). ### Influence of the bottom channel wall {#influence-of-the-bottom-channel-wall .unnumbered} We consider now the influence of an imbalance between wall-outward migration and sedimentation. For simplicity and since gravity acts similarly on both vesicles, we only consider the wall migration effect. As lift is a decreasing function of the distance to the wall, we expect the upper vesicle to migrate less relatively to the wall, so that the distance between the two vesicles is indirectly reduced due to that wall-induced lift forces. We compare the whole trajectory obtained by our code with the one corresponding to the experiment shown on Fig. [\[fig:trajexp\]](#fig:trajexp){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:trajexp"}. The geometrical input parameters of the simulation are the reduced volume $\nu$ and the 3D effective radius $a$, in contrast with the experimentally measured reduced area $\nu_a$ and the 2D effective radius $R_0$. From the study of isolated vesicles in simple shear flow, we find that, for $Ca=10$, vesicles having same 2D cross-sections as the vesicles of Fig. [\[fig:trajexp\]](#fig:trajexp){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:trajexp"} are characterized respectively by $\{\nu=0.98, a= 8.9\text{\,\textmu m}\}$ and $\{\nu=0.97, a= 8.6\text{\,\textmu m}\}$. In order to quantify the bottom wall effect, we adopt the Green's function corresponding to a semi-infinite fluid, and include the quadratic part of the flow in the plane of shear, so that the imposed flow is $\dot{\gamma}y(1-{y}/{L_y})\boldsymbol{e}_{x}$. The initial distance of vesicle 1 from the wall is $y_{i,1}=32$ m. The comparison between the experiment and the numerical study is presented in Fig. [\[influ_curv\]](#influ_curv){reference-type="ref" reference="influ_curv"}, without and with wall, for vesicles in the same shear plane ($z_i=0$). A possible shift $z_i/a=0.39$ is also considered together with the presence of the wall. As expected, lift by the wall leads to a slight initial attraction (a decrease of $y$ for $x<0$), which results in a slightly smaller final lateral displacement when $x\to\infty$. It appears however that this correction is too small to account for the remaining discrepancy between the simulations and the experiments, for which the initial attraction of around 1 m, that is seen on Fig. [\[fig:trajexp\]](#fig:trajexp){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:trajexp"}, appears on most trajectories. Anyhow, this second-order effect is most probably linked with the presence of the wall, as suggested by recent simulations by Narsimhan et al., where interacting red blood cells in the vicinity of a wall are studied. They show that, for particles close enough to a wall, the relative lateral distance might decrease before interaction (see trajectories on their Fig. 15(b)), sometimes even leading to a completely different scenario of interaction involving swapping trajectories where particles do not cross. [As shown by the authors, the presence of the bottom wall in the y direction induces the formation of a recirculation vortex behind the first particle, which is mainly responsible for the initial attraction. It is likely that when walls are also present in the z direction, as is the case in the experiment, the strength and extension of this recirculation are larger, leading to the stronger attraction observed in the first stage of experimental trajectories.]{style="color: black"} To sum it up, starting from comparable results for experiments and simulations, we have shown that a shift in the vorticity direction and the contribution of walls, both being inherent to the experiment, lead to a decrease of the repulsion, thus to some scattering in the experimental data, that all lie right below the ideal curve given by the simulations. ## Deflection in the vorticity direction As an extension to experimental results, the model also allows to investigate the effect of the interaction on the deflection $\Delta_z$. In Fig. [\[interaction_curve_z\]](#interaction_curve_z){reference-type="ref" reference="interaction_curve_z"}, we present the interaction curves $\Delta_y({z_i})$ and $\Delta_z({z_i})$, for $y_i=0.92 R_0$, the other parameters remaining the same as previously. We find that there is a range of initial transverse positions for which the interaction leads to a transverse attraction between the vesicles, mostly in the vorticity direction. A similar phenomenon has been predicted for the interaction of capsules, but not for drops. An asymptotic study, for vesicles in the far field interacting regime, also predicts such an attraction. However, here the vesicles become close during the interaction, so a qualitative interpretation of the predicted attraction may involve the description of the flow of the thin liquid [film]{style="color: black"} between the two tank-treading membranes, as done for drops. # Hydrodynamic diffusion From the numerical study, one can expect to deduce results about the hydrodynamic diffusion properties of vesicle suspensions, in a regime where the solution is concentrated enough so that interaction effects are not negligible, but dilute enough so that pairwise interactions dominate over three-body interactions. We mostly study the case of self-diffusion, a phenomenon related to the average transverse motion of a single vesicle. We also find that an estimation of the collective diffusion coefficients is not possible only considering two-vesicle interactions, due to the long range of hydrodynamic interactions. ## Self-diffusion ### Theoretical background We consider a homogeneous suspension of vesicles, described at a mesoscopic level by a volume fraction $\phi$. For a given initial state, if this suspension is sheared by an imposed flow $\mathbf{v}^{\infty}=\dot{\gamma}y\mathbf{e}_x$, a given vesicle will interact with the others and, as a result, will undergo a net displacement $\mathbf{X}$ from its original streamline. In an unstructured semi-dilute suspension, the transverse motion of the vesicle is expected to be a random walk due to successive interactions with different vesicles. At long times, its mean-squared displacement $\langle X_\alpha^2 \rangle$ is described by the self-diffusion coefficients $D_{s,\alpha}$, defined by \]\begin{aligned} D_{s,\alpha}&=&\lim_{t\rightarrow\infty}\frac{1}{2}\frac{d\langle X_\alpha^2\rangle}{dt}, \end{aligned}\[ with $\alpha\in\{y,z\}$, $\langle.\rangle$ being an ensemble average over all possible initial states of the suspension. As detailed by Da Cunha and Hinch, assuming that only two-vesicle interactions occur leads to the following expression for $D_{a,\alpha}$: \]\label{expr_self_diff} D_{s,\alpha}=\phi \dot{\gamma}a^2f_\alpha,\[ with \]\label{def_f} f_{\alpha}={\frac{3}{2\pi}}\int_{(y_i,z_i)\in[0,+\infty]^2}\Delta_{l,\alpha}^2y_idy_idz_i,\[ where $\Delta_{l,\alpha}$ is the deviation of a test vesicle in the laboratory frame after one interaction. For identical vesicles, $\Delta_{l,\alpha}=\Delta_{\alpha}/2$. In the latter integral and from now on, all lengths are expressed in $a$ units. ### Analysis of the formal convergence of the diffusion coefficient {#formal_convergence} As the hydrodynamic interaction between two vesicles slowly decreases, the question of the convergence of the previous integral arises. As all displacements $\Delta_{l,\alpha}$ are bounded, the convergence of the expression [\[def_f\]](#def_f){reference-type="ref" reference="def_f"} is linked to the contribution of the integration domain $\sqrt{y_i^2+z_i^2}\gg 1$. We analyze this contribution by using an asymptotic study of two interacting quasi-spherical vesicles remaining very distant from each other, that was recently proposed by Gires et al.. We first need to determine the domain in the $(y_i,z_i)$ space for which this asymptotic study is valid, a discussion that was not provided in the original paper. For the asymptotic study to be valid, vesicles must remain far enough along the whole trajectory, so that, at all times, $\|\|\mathbf{R}_{12}\|\|\gg1$. As $\sqrt{y_i^2+z_i^2}\gg 1$, one could expect this criterion to be always satisfied. However, let us consider $y_i=0$. If there was no interaction, both vesicles would flow with the same velocity. But, since the velocity field induced by one vesicle is radial, vesicle collision may occur, which is inconsistent with the asymptotic approach. These considerations hint to the fact that the asymptotic study may not be valid for $y_i\ll1$. In order to get a more accurate validity criterion, we assume the asymptotic study to be valid for all times, and check that the inter-vesicle distance remains large. We expect that this approach can be used as each vesicle is not in the vicinity of a bifurcation phenomenon, such as the transition between the tank-treading and vacillating-breathing modes. As detailed in Gires et al., within this asymptotic approach with respect to the inter-vesicle distance, the trajectory of $C_2$ with respect to $C_1$ is of the form: \]\begin{aligned} \label{y(x)} y(x)= & y_i\nonumber +\frac{1}{\dot{\gamma}}\left[\left(\frac{x^3}{(x^2+b^2)^{3/2}}+1\right)\frac{T_{xx}}{b^2}-\frac{2y_iT_{xy}}{(x^2+b^2)^{3/2}}\right.\nonumber\\ & \left.+\left(\frac{(2x^2+3b^2)x}{(x^2+b^2)^{3/2}}+2\right)\frac{y_{i}^2T_{yy}}{b^{4}}\right], \end{aligned}\[ and \]\label{z(x)} z(x)=\frac{(y(x)-y_i)z_i}{y_i}+z_i,\[ where $b=\sqrt{y_i^2+z_i^2}$, and $\{T_{xx},T_{xy},T_{yy}\}$ are constants linked to the perturbation of the velocity field induced by the vesicles. As the symmetry of the system does not depend on the reduced volume, we expect these scalings to be valid for vesicles of arbitrary deflation in the tank-treading regime, the dependency on the reduced volume being accounted for by the tensor $T_{\alpha\beta}$. As $y(x)-y_i=O(b^{-2})$, the $y$ distance between the vesicles will remain large if initially large. However, as $z(x)-z_i={z_i}/{y_i}\times O(b^{-2})$, problems may arise at small $y_i$, as discussed earlier. In this case, the prevalent term in Eq. [\[y(x)\]](#y(x)){reference-type="ref" reference="y(x)"} is the term proportional to ${T_{xx}}/{b^2}$. If $T_{xx}<0$, this could lead to a minimal distance in the vorticity direction of the form $z_{\text{min}}=z_i-{c}/{(y_iz_i)}$, with $c>0$. In order that the asymptotic approach remains valid starting with $z_i\gg1$, we impose the condition that $z_{\text{min}}>{z_i}/{d},\quad(d>1)$, where $d$ is a constant. This criterion can be achieved if $y_i>{e}/{z_i^2}$, with $e=dc/(d-1)>0$. For initial positions satisfying this criterion, we find from Eqs. [\[y(x)\]](#y(x)){reference-type="ref" reference="y(x)"} and [\[z(x)\]](#z(x)){reference-type="ref" reference="z(x)"} that \]\begin{aligned} \label{inter_dy} \Delta_y=O(\frac{y_i^2-z_i^2}{(y_i^2+z_i^2)^2}),\\ \label{inter_dz} \Delta_z=O(\Delta_y\frac{z_i}{y_i}). \end{aligned}\[ It is clear from these expressions that the integral of Eq. [\[def_f\]](#def_f){reference-type="ref" reference="def_f"}, restricted to the region where the asymptotic expression is valid, is convergent. As for the region of large $z_i$ and small $y_i$ with $y_i<{e}/{z_i^2}$, where the asymptotic expression is not valid, since $\Delta_{l,\alpha}^2$ is bounded by its maximal value and the integral of $y_i$ on this region is finite, its contribution to the integral in Eq. [\[def_f\]](#def_f){reference-type="ref" reference="def_f"} is bounded, and finally the whole integral is convergent. ### Numerical determination of the self-diffusion coefficient We now estimate the value of $f_y$ (Eq. [\[def_f\]](#def_f){reference-type="ref" reference="def_f"}) that enters the expression of the diffusion coefficient (Eq. [\[expr_self_diff\]](#expr_self_diff){reference-type="ref" reference="expr_self_diff"}). For that purpose we need to run several simulations by starting with different initial position in the $y-z$ plane (which is the plane orthogonal to the flow direction) and determine by how much the initial relative positions $y_i$ and $z_i$ have varied (by amounts $\Delta_y$ and $\Delta_z$) after the two vesicles have interacted. We discretize the domain of initial values $(y_i,z_i$) by considering the following domain size $[0,8]\times[0,8]$ (in units of vesicle radius $a$). The discretized lattice of initial positions is shown in Fig. [\[evol_pos_tran\]](#evol_pos_tran){reference-type="ref" reference="evol_pos_tran"}(a) with dark gray disks (blue online). Since the interaction is important only when the two vesicles are separated by about 2 or 3 radii, the lattice has a wide enough periodicity far away from $(0,0)$, whereas in the vicinity further refinements are chosen in order to gain numerical precision. More precisely, the domain is decomposed into three regions $A$, $B$ and $C$, consisting in $[0,2]\times[0,2]$, $\{[0,4]\times[0,4]\}\diagdown\{[0,2]\times[0,2]\}$ and $\{[0,8]\times[0,8]\}\diagdown\{[0,4]\times[0,4]\}$. The lighter gray disks (red online) in Fig. [\[evol_pos_tran\]](#evol_pos_tran){reference-type="ref" reference="evol_pos_tran"}(a) show the final relative positions $y_f$ and $z_f$. We note that in region C the effect is weak, while it becomes more and more pronounced in region $B$ and $A$. The contributions of the integral involved in Eq. [\[def_f\]](#def_f){reference-type="ref" reference="def_f"} on the different sub-domains $A$, $B$ and $C$ are then evaluated using a trapezoidal rule. The results are given in Table [1](#table1){reference-type="ref" reference="table1"}. We find that the contributions for $f_y$ are decreasing. As we proved the convergence of the expression, we expect the contributions of the remaining part of the plane to be at most of the order of the contribution of the sub-domain C, and thus get the following estimation for $f_y$: \]f_y=0.032\pm10\%. The uncertainty of $10\%$ is a rough estimate coming from a study of the sensitivity of the code to some numerical parameters, like a tension parameter used to preserve locally the area of the membrane. For $f_z$, we do not get decreasing contributions, due to the slow decrease of $\Delta_z$ with $z_i$ when ${y_i}\ll1$. A similar study has been presented by Zhao and Shaqfeh , who calculated $f_y$ for $\nu=0.95$ and $Ca=1$. Using the effective radius based on the surface as a length scale ($a'=\sqrt{S/4\pi}$, where $S$ is the vesicle membrane area) they find $f_y=0.028$. With the same convention instead of our choice of radius based on the volume, we find $f_y=0.032 \nu^{2/3}=0.031$, for $\nu=0.95$ and $Ca=50$, which is a consistent result since lateral displacement increases with $Ca$ (Fig. [\[fig:exp-lambda-autre\]](#fig:exp-lambda-autre){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:exp-lambda-autre"}). Zhao and Shaqfeh also estimated the value of $f_z$, restricting to the integration domain $[0,3]\times[0,3]$: their value matches ours on the same region. However, the present study shows that restricting the integration to this domain is not sufficient to get a quantitative value of $f_z$, due to the slow decrease of the attraction with $z_i$ for vesicles characterized by $y_i\ll1$. We are not aware of experimental measures of $f_y$ to which we could compare our estimation. On the basis of studies on suspensions of spheres, the assumption of considering only two-vesicle interactions could be a good approximation up to volume fractions of about $10\%$. ### Discussion From simulated trajectories, Loewenberg and Hinch calculated $f_y$ and $f_z$ for pairs of drops as a function of viscosity ratio and capillary number. They evoke the scaling at long distance $\Delta_{\alpha} \sim 1/(y_i^2+z_i^2)$, which is similar to ours, to prove the convergence of the integral of Eq. [\[def_f\]](#def_f){reference-type="ref" reference="def_f"}. It appears that in the case of drops, restricting the integration domain to A+B is sufficient, for $f_y$ as for $f_z$. For $\lambda=1$, $f_y$ was found to be around $0.03\pm 0.01$, depending on the capillary number, a result close to ours. A more quantitative comparison is precluded by the dependency with capillary number and the difference in nature between the elastic restoring forces involved in drops and vesicles. Interestingly, Loewenberg and Hinch find $f_z \simeq 0.004$, while we already find a result 3 times larger by integration over A+B+C. We can conclude that anisotropy in self-diffusion is lower for vesicles than for drops. This weaker anisotropy is also stated by Lac and Barthès-Biesel in their study of capsules collisions, though $f_y$ and $f_z$ are not calculated. ## Down-gradient diffusion The collective diffusion property of a vesicle suspension can be modeled in the following way: we consider a suspension of vesicles with a linearly increasing concentration given by $\phi=\phi_0+\alpha y$, sheared by an imposed flow $\mathbf{v}^{\infty}=\dot{\gamma}y\mathbf{e}_y$. As a result of the hydrodynamic interactions between the vesicles, we expect a collective diffusion of the vesicles to appear, consisting of a transverse flux $\mathbf{j}=j\mathbf{e}_{y}$ of vesicles. As for molecular diffusion due to thermal motion, $\mathbf{j}$ is expected to be in the opposite direction of $\mathbf{\nabla}\phi$, of order $O(\alpha)$. Thus, for $\frac{\alpha a}{\phi_0}\ll1$, we expect that $j=-D_{c,y}\alpha$, with $D_{c,y}>0$. As done by Da Cunha and Hinch in the case of rough spheres, we tried to estimate $D_{c,y}$ assuming only two-vesicle interactions. This leads to an expression involving the integral of $y_i^2\Delta_y$ over the plane. However, as $\Delta_y= O(\frac{y_i^2-z_i^2}{(y_i^2+z_i^2)^2})$ and the integral of $\frac{y_i^2(y_i^2-z_i^2)}{(y_i^2+z_i^2)^2}$ over $[0,y_0]\times[z_0,+\infty]$, with $(y_0,z_0)\in {\mathbb{R}^{}_+}^2$, is divergent, it turns out that the estimated expression is not convergent. A renormalization procedure, analogous to the one used by Batchelor, and followed by Wang et al. in the case of the study of the hydrodynamic diffusion properties of a suspension of spheres, may lead to a convergent expression. It is hoped to investigate this matter further in a future work. # Conclusion We performed an experimental and numerical study of the trajectory deviations of identical vesicles interacting in shear flow. In experiments, restricted to pairs of vesicles in the same shear plane, the amplitude of the net displacement decreases quickly when the initial [lateral]{style="color: black"} distance increases and becomes negligible when this distance is larger than approximately two vesicle radii. A simplified model based on the well established law for the lift of a vesicle near a wall was proposed, which allows to estimate quantitatively how the displacement should vary with the mechanical properties of the vesicles. [With no fitting parameter, the deviations are found to be in rather good agreement with our 3D simulations,]{style="color: black"} [ even if smaller deviations are found experimentally. We found than the main part of this discrepancy can be due to ]{style="color: black"} [differences between the experimental configuration and the ideal case of unbounded shear flow where the two vesicles would be perfectly coplanar. The effect of walls, recently highlighted by Narsimhan et al., would need to be quantified thoroughly in complementary experiments where our requirements of similar deflation within the pair of vesicles could be loosened for simplicity, since the effect of deflation has been characterized and shown to be weak. We also indicate that, according to partial results not shown here, the requirement of identical size within a pair may be released, as rescaling of the displacements by the average radius $R_0$ of two vesicles of different size lead to [a similar]{style="color: black"} curve for $\Delta_y/ {R_0}$ as a function of $y_i/{R_0}$.]{style="color: black"} In addition, displacements in the vorticity direction were explored through the simulations and found to be about an order of magnitude lower than in the shear direction, with a range of initial distances leading to a weak attraction of vesicles. Shear-induced diffusion coefficients can be obtained by a proper averaging of the net displacement over all initial configurations. The self-diffusion, related to the random walk of vesicles in a suspension, can be quantified using a discrete integration over a relatively small domain for the diffusivity in the shear direction, and could be determined in the vorticity direction if a larger integration area was considered, due to the slower decrease of the amplitude of displacement in that direction. Note that this integration would not have been possible in 2D where the displacements would scale like $1/y$ instead of $1/y^2$. An estimation of the down-gradient diffusivities as defined by Da Cunha and Hinch was not possible due to the long range of hydrodynamic interactions, leading to a divergence of the integrals. In this case, the dilute limit assumption breaks down and one can no longer consider only pair interactions as is the case for rough spheres with short range interactions.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-24T02:08:25', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5965', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5965'}
null	null
# Introduction The possibility of a critical end point (CEP) in the QCD phase diagram is a hotly debated issue. Its speculated existence bears importance for heavy ion collisions, neutron stars and perhaps even the early universe. Since the application of lattice QCD to high chemical potential leads to the sign problem, the answer will come from beam energy scans at RHIC, and the future NICA and FAIR facilities. Alternatively, models can provide some guidance for arguing the location of the borders in the QCD phase diagram and in particular the existence of the CEP, see Refs. for reviews. While in many models one finds the CEP [@GomezDumm:2005hy; @Fukushima:2008wg; @Hell:2008cc; @Contrera:2010kz; @Contrera:2012wj] (for results from Dyson-Schwinger approach, see ), functional-renormalization group studies, lattice calculations at imaginary chemical potential, interplay with superconductivity or strong vector interaction all point that there may be no CEP. A simple approach to study the chiral phase transition and its possible accompanying CEP is the Nambu--Jona-Lasinio (NJL) model. However, even without its modifications that would include the vector channel, the diquark channel or the Kobayashi-Maskawa-'t Hooft channel , the exact position of the CEP is rather sensitive on the value of the scalar channel coupling. In fact, as we will demonstrate, if the physical coupling is below a certain value, the CEP is not present in the phase diagram. The intent of this work is to demonstrate that the CEP can be restored by delocalizing the interaction between quarks. In order to show this we use a instantaneous nonlocal variant of the NJL model, see also [@Blaschke:1995gr; @Blaschke:2003yn; @Grigorian:2003vi; @Aguilera:2006cj; @Sasaki:2006ww], allowing a smooth interpolation between highly delocalized and local NJL interactions. The idea of delocalizing quark interactions is well motivated by lattice QCD in Landau and in Coulomb gauge but also with Dyson-Schwinger calculations, in respective gauges, where a strong infrared running of the quark propagator is observed. We make a thorough study of the dependence of our statement on the value of quark condensate in vacuum. Our findings demonstrate that for larger values of the condensate, the CEP is strongly increasing towards higher temperatures as the interaction is gradually delocalized. For smaller values of the condensate the dependence of the position of the CEP on the delocalization of the quark interactions is mild. This paper is organized as follows: in Section [2](#sec:mod){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:mod"} we set up the model and define its parameterizations. The following Section [3](#sec:phase){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:phase"} contains our main results. In the final Section [4](#sec:conc){reference-type="ref" reference="sec:conc"} we make our conclusions. # Model {#sec:mod} We work with the $N_f=2$ NJL model where the delocalized 4-quark interactions are assumed to have a separable form. The Euclidean action of the model in coordinate space is given as \[S_E = \int d^4 x \left[\bar{q}(-i\slashchar{\partial}+m)q-\frac{G_S}{2}J_a(x)J_a(x)\right]~, \label{eq:nnjl}\] with currents \[J_a(x)=\int d^4 z \mathcal{F}(z)\bar{q}\left(x+\frac{z}{2}\right) \Gamma_aq\left(x-\frac{z}{2}\right)~, \label{eq:crts}\] where $\Gamma_a = (1,i\gamma_5\boldsymbol{\tau})$, $\boldsymbol{\tau}$ are Pauli matrices, $G$ is the interaction strength and $m$ is the current quark mass. The interaction parameter is suitably represented by a form-factor $\mathcal{F}(z)$. By assuming in addition that the interaction is instantaneous, i. e. that in momentum space the form-factor depends only on the square of the three-momenta $\mathcal{F}(\mathbf{p}^2)$, the thermodynamic potential in the mean-field approximation can be written as \[\Omega = \frac{\sigma^2}{2G}-\frac{d_q}{2}\int\frac{d^3 p}{(2\pi)^3} \left\{E+ T\log\left[1+e^{-\beta(E-\mu)}\right] +T\log\left[1+e^{-\beta(E+\mu)}\right] \right\}~, \label{eq:pot}\] where $\sigma$ is the chiral mass gap, $G$, and $d_q = 2\times 2\times N_c \times N_f$. The energy of the quark quasi-particle is given as \[E(\mathbf{p}) = \sqrt{\mathbf{p}^2 + M^2(\mathbf{p}^2)}~. \label{eq:disp}\] Delocalization of the quark interactions has important consequence of yielding a momentum dependent quark mass $M(\mathbf{p}^2)$ which is a property seen in lattice studies, see e. g.. For the model at hand, the momentum profile is governed by the form-factor \[M(\mathbf{p}^2) = m+\sigma \mathcal{F}(\mathbf{p}^2)~. \label{eq:}\] The local limit is given as $\mathcal{F}(\mathbf{p}^2) = \theta(\Lambda^2-\mathbf{p}^2)$ where $\Lambda$ is the NJL cutoff. Therefore, in order to study the influence of the delocalized interactions we use a family of form-factors \[\mathcal{F}(\mathbf{p}^2) = \frac{1}{1+\left(\frac{\mathbf{p}}{\Lambda}\right)^{2\alpha}}~, \label{eq:lor}\] where $\alpha=2$ is the smoothest form-factor that can be used and still provide convergence of the gap equation, while $\alpha \to \infty$ gives the local NJL limit. ## Parametrization The parameters of the NJL model $G,\Lambda$ and $m$ are fixed requiring $m_\pi = 135$ MeV, $f_\pi = 92.4$ MeV and, conventionally by the vacuum value of the quark condensate[^1] \[\langle\bar{q}q\rangle =-2N_c\int\frac{d^3 p}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{M(\mathbf{p})-m}{E(\mathbf{p})}~.\] There are two ambiguities in such a procedure. The first one is due to the fact that in the instantaneous NJL there are two values of the condensate for each coupling, known in the literature as the lower and the higher branch, see Fig. [\[fig:cond\]](#fig:cond){reference-type="ref" reference="fig:cond"} where the condensate $\langle\bar{q}q\rangle$ is plotted as a function of the dimensionless coupling \[g=G\Lambda^2~,\] by keeping $m_\pi = 135$ MeV and $f_\pi = 92.4$ MeV fixed, see Ref. for the corresponding equations. The lower (higher) branch is defined by those values of $g$ that lie one the left (right) from $g$ that gives a minimal $\langle\bar{q}q\rangle$. We are interested in studying the influence of the parameter $\alpha$ on the CEP. The large values of $g$ from the higher branch are not considered in this work as they yield large critical temperatures at $\mu=0$ in comparison to $T_c(0)\simeq 170$ MeV seen on the lattice. The family of parametrizations is therefore constrained on the lower branch. Notice also that in covariant non-local NJL models the higher branch is absent. [^1]: Fixing the constituent quark mass $M(0)$, instead of the condensate, is another possibility which we do not consider here. [^2]: For example, by fitting the covariant non-local NJL model to lattice Ref. obtained a rather high value of $\langle\bar{q}q\rangle =-(326 \, \mathrm{MeV})^3$.	{'timestamp': '2014-03-07T02:08:37', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5355', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5355'}
# Introduction Nonlinear Schrödinger (NLS) equations have many applications, e.g. in quantum physics, hydrodynamics, plasma physics and nonlinear optics where they can be used to model the amplitude modulation of weakly nonlinear, strongly dispersive waves.\ The Cauchy problem for the standard (\"elliptic\") NLS is given by \[\left\{ \begin{array}{ccc} i u_t + \frac{1}{2} \Delta u-\frac{\rho}{\sigma}\left\|u \right\|^{2\sigma}u & = & 0 \\ u(\mathbf{x}, t=0) & = & u_0(\mathbf{x}), \end{array} \right. \label{NLSellgen}\] where $u: \mathbb{R}^d \times \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{C}$ is a complex-valued function of time and space, $\Delta$ is the $d$-dimensional Laplacian in the space variables, $\rho=\pm1$ and $\sigma \geq 0$. The cases $\rho=-1$ or $\rho=1$ are known as the focusing and defocusing equations, respectively.\ For $u_0 \in H^1(\mathbb{R}^d)$, the local (in time) existence of a unique solution of ([\[NLSellgen\]](#NLSellgen){reference-type="ref" reference="NLSellgen"}) in $H^1(\mathbb{R}^d)$ holds for $0 \leq \sigma < \frac{2}{d-2}$ if $d \geq 3$ (there is no condition when $d=1$ or $2$), and this local solution extends to all times if $\sigma< \frac{2}{d}$ in the focusing case (no further condition in the defocusing case). At or above this critical value, finite time blow up can occur. This defines the notion of criticality for existence of blowup solutions for ([\[NLSellgen\]](#NLSellgen){reference-type="ref" reference="NLSellgen"}). The situations when $\sigma d < 2$ are then referred to as subcritical dimensions, $\sigma d = 2$, the critical dimension, and $\sigma d \geq 2$ the supercritical dimensions. When a solution exists, conserved quantities for ([\[NLSellgen\]](#NLSellgen){reference-type="ref" reference="NLSellgen"}) are the mass ([\[massgenNLS\]](#massgenNLS){reference-type="ref" reference="massgenNLS"}) and the energy (or Hamiltonian) ([\[nrjgenNLS\]](#nrjgenNLS){reference-type="ref" reference="nrjgenNLS"}), \[\begin{aligned} \label{massgenNLS} & N:= \underset{\mathbb{R}^d}{\int} \|u\|^2 d\mathbf{x} & \\ & E:= \underset{\mathbb{R}^d}{\int} \left( \|\nabla u\|^2-\frac{\rho}{\sigma + 1} \|u\|^{2\sigma + 2} \right) d\mathbf{x} & \label{nrjgenNLS} \end{aligned}\]\ In the focusing case ($\rho=-1$) and with the condition $u \to 0$ as $\|\mathbf{x}\| \to \infty$, the initial value problem ([\[NLSellgen\]](#NLSellgen){reference-type="ref" reference="NLSellgen"}) admits the well known solitary waves solutions of the form $u(\mathbf{x},t) = e^{i\lambda^2t} \Phi(\mathbf{x})$, where $\Phi$ satisfies \[\Delta \Phi-\lambda^2 \Phi + \|\Phi\|^{2\sigma} \Phi = 0, \,\, \lambda^2>0, \,\, \underset{\|\mathbf{x}\| \to \infty}{\lim} \Phi(\mathbf{x}) = 0.\] An important question with respect to applications concerns the stability or instability of such solitary waves. Their orbital stability[^1] has been intensively studied. It turns out that the solitary waves of the elliptic NLS equation ([\[NLSellgen\]](#NLSellgen){reference-type="ref" reference="NLSellgen"}) are orbitally stable only in the subcritical dimensions, see. In the critical and supercritical cases, instability occurs trough the apparition of blow up, see.\ \ The one-dimensional cubic NLS, ($d=\sigma=1$ in ([\[NLSellgen\]](#NLSellgen){reference-type="ref" reference="NLSellgen"})) has the property to be completely integrable by inverse scattering techniques (IST), as it was shown first by Zakharov and Shabat. This pioneer result yielded to the existence of a variety of exact solutions for it in the literature, mainly solitons and breathers solutions. In particular, in the focusing case ($\rho=-1$), exponentially localized in space solitary waves that travel without change of shape and velocity, the well known solitons solutions (balance between the cubic nonlinearities and wave dispersion) can be derived. They are also called isolated solitons and can be written in the form \[u_I = \lambda e^{i \left( \phi_0 + vx + \frac{\lambda^2-v^2}{2}t \right) } \,\frac{1}{\cosh (\lambda(x-x_0-vt))}, \label{trav}\] where the parameters $(\lambda, v, \phi_0, x_0)$ represent respectively the amplitude, velocity, phase and spatial location of the solitary wave. The constants $x_0, \Phi_0$ reflect the invariance of NLS by space translation and phase shift, and the velocity $v$ is associated to the invariance by Galilean transformation. The stability of the isolated soliton ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) have been intensively studied by various techniques, such as numerical experiments, but also formal asymptotics, PDE analysis, and it turns out that it is stable under unidimensional perturbations of both initial data and the equation (orbital stability). In this paper, we are rather/however interested in the transverse stability of ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}), i.e., the stability or instability of ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) under general (typically localized or periodic) two dimensional perturbations.\ The question of transverse stability of ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) was first addressed by Zakharov and Rubenchick and Yajima and reviewed in. Typically, the problem is first linearized around the soliton solution, and then one deals with the detection of unstable modes of the resulting problem, leading to conditions for the spectral stability of the solution. Many results in this context are available in the literature. However, as pointed out for instance in, the relevance of this linear analysis results with respect to the fully nonlinear problem stay in some situations unclear, due to the lack of understanding of the whole spectrum of the linearized problem. The question of nonlinear transverse (in-)stability stays consequently in some situations an open question. A recent advance in this context was given in, in which the authors present a theory which allows to reduce the problem of the transverse nonlinear instability of 1d solitary waves for Hamiltonian PDEs for both periodic or localized transverse perturbations to the linear instability of the latter. In particular, the nonlinear transverse instability of ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) under the time evolution of the 2-d elliptic NLS equation was proved in. This analytical method however requires some conditions to be fulfilled by the transversally perturbed system considered, and does not allow to consider a large class of perturbed transverse systems as we intend to do in this paper. In addition, such kind of analytical results do not provide any insight on the characteristics of the instability. In this paper, we address numerically the question of the transverse (in-)stability of the isolated soliton to the one-dimensional cubic NLS equation ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) under the time evolution of several higher dimensional models, being admissible/ as a transverse perturbation for/of the 1d cubic NLS, namely the 2d NLS equations, both elliptic and hyperbolic variants, and their equivalent when coupled with a mean field satisfying an elliptic equation, known as the Davey Stewartson systems. We first illustrate the features of the instability of ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) in 2-d elliptic NLS equation, which occurs via a $L_{\infty}$-blow up of the solution and then show that the elliptic elliptic Davey Stewartson system behaves as the former in this context. Then we investigate hyperbolic variants of the above models, namely the hyperbolic 2d cubic NLS equation and the Davey-Stewartson II equation. Whereas the isolated soliton appears to be unstable for the former case, it appears to be orbitally stable for the latter. For periodic perturbations the soliton is found to be unstable for all tranversally perturbed models considered, for elliptic equations this instability occurs via multiple-point blow up. The paper is organized as follow, in section 2, we present the different models (NLS type equations) we consider and discuss briefly the different issues we face to study these systems numerically. In section 3 we present the numerical methods used to deal with the above identified issues. In section 4 numerical simulations concerning localized perturbations of ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) are reported and in section 5 periodic perturbations of ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) are considered. Some concluding remarks are given in section 6. # Several NLS type equations We consider the general form of the focusing 2-dimensional cubic NLS equation, \[iu_t + u_{xx} + \mu u_{yy} + 2\|u\|^2 u = 0, \,\, \mu=\pm1 \label{cubNLSHE}\] which allows also the study of the hyperbolic (also known as the non-elliptic) NLS equation when $\mu=-1$. In the following we will denote by NLS$^+$ the 2d elliptic cubic NLS (([\[cubNLSHE\]](#cubNLSHE){reference-type="ref" reference="cubNLSHE"}) with $\mu = 1$) and by NLS$^-$ the hyperbolic variant when $\mu=-1$. The Hamiltonian (or energy) for this equation is given by \[E_{NLS2d}[u]:=\frac{1}{2}\underset{\mathbb{R}^2}{\int} \left( \| u_{x}\|^2 + \mu \|u_{y}\|^2-\|u\|^4 \right) dx dy. \label{NLS2dEHnrj}\] The 2d elliptic NLS equation NLS$^+$ is known to not be completely integrable, and to allow blow up phenomena (we are namely in the critical case defined above). One can prove rigorously that, for initial conditions for which the Hamiltonian ([\[NLS2dEHnrj\]](#NLS2dEHnrj){reference-type="ref" reference="NLS2dEHnrj"}) is negative, there exists a time $t^$ such that \[\underset{t\to t^}{\lim} \underset{\mathbb{R}^2}{\int} \|\nabla u\|^2 dxdy = \infty \label{blow}\] yielding to a $L_{\infty}$-blow up of $u$ when $t \to t^$. This means that the solutions lose after finite time the regularity of the initial data, a norm of the solution or of one of its derivatives becomes infinite. This phenomenon is referred to as self-focusing* in the context of nonlinear optics and as collapse when applied to problems on turbulence. It is also known that blowup is possible if the energy of the initial data is greater than the energy of the ground state solution, see e.g. and references therein, and for an asymptotic description of the blowup profile. Moreover, the existence of blow-up solutions that have more than one spatial blow up points have been proved in.\ The NLS$^-$ equation describes the evolution of gravity-capillary waves in deep water that may be two-dimensional, nearly monochromatic, and are slowly modulated. A derivation of this equation can be found in. It has been used also to investigate the evolution of optical pulses in normally dispersive (quasi discrete) optical waveguide array structures, as well as more generally in normally dispersive optical media. The NLS$^-$ equation is in fact related to both the Ishimori and Davey-Stewartson systems, to be discussed in the following. More precisely, the Davey-Stewartson systems (DS) can be written as \[\label{DSgen} \begin{array}{ccc} i u_{t}+ \alpha u_{xx}+ u_{yy} & = & b \Phi_x u +\chi \left\| u \right\|^{2}u, \\ \Phi_{xx}+\beta \Phi_{yy} & = & \left(\left\| u\right\|^{2}\right)_{x}, \end{array}\] where $\beta$ and $b$ can have both signs, $\alpha$ and $\chi$ take the values $\pm1$, and $\Phi$ is a mean field. These systems describe the amplitude modulation of weakly nonlinear, strongly dispersive $2 + 1$-dimensional waves in hydrodynamics and nonlinear optics, and appear also in plasma physics to describe the evolution of a plasma under the action of a magnetic field. They have been classified in, , according to the signs of $\alpha$ and $\beta$, as elliptic-elliptic (E-E) for $\alpha > 0$ and $\beta > 0$, hyperbolic-elliptic (H-E) for $\alpha < 0$ and $\beta > 0$, elliptic-hyperbolic (E-H) for $\alpha > 0$ and $\beta < 0$ and hyperbolic-hyperbolic (H-H) for $\alpha < 0$ and $\beta < 0$. In Ghidaglia and Saut showed that NLS$^-$ satisfies the same Strichartz estimates as its elliptic variant, and based on them they proved some well-posedness results in $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ for the (H-E) DS system. As well as for the latter, the same argument shows that NLS$^-$ is locally well posed in $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ with time of existence depending on the profile of the initial data, and globally well posed for sufficiently small initial data. Moreover, in, they showed that there are no nontrivial localized traveling wave solutions to NLS$^-$. It is in fact the consequence of the defocusing effect due to the energy which can in this case spread along the transversal direction to the main propagation. However, obviously any $y$-independent solution of the focusing 1d cubic NLS equation is a solution of NLS$^-$, allowing the question of the transverse (in-)stability of ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) in such model. An overview of previous work related to this question was presented in. For the best of our knowledge, all results here deal only with the linear spectral stability problem.\ Similarly, DS reduces to the cubic NLS in one dimension if the potential is independent of $y$, and if $\Phi$ satisfies certain boundary conditions (for instance rapidly decreasing at infinity or periodic), providing DS as an admissible model as transverse perturbation of the one dimensional cubic NLS equation. When the mean field $\Phi$ in ([\[DSgen\]](#DSgen){reference-type="ref" reference="DSgen"}) is governed by an elliptic equation ($\beta>0$), the latter can be solved uniquely with some fall off condition at infinity, $\Phi = \mathcal{M}\left( \|u\|^2 \right)$, where the operator $\mathcal{M}$ is defined in Fourier space by \[\widehat{\mathcal{M}(f)} = \frac{i k_x}{k_x^2 + \beta k_y^2} \widehat{f} (k_x, k_y),\] where $k_x$ and $k_y$ represent the wave numbers, in the $x$ and $y$ directions, respectively, and where $\hat{f}$ denotes the Fourier transform of a function $f$. Therefore in the following we will consider only elliptic equations for $\Phi$. In this case, the ($\mathbf{\cdot}$-elliptic) versions of DS enjoy the conservation of several functionals, in particular the Hamiltonian (energy) \[\label{DSenergy} E_{DS}[u] := \int_{\mathbb{R}^2} \alpha \| u_x\|^2 + \| u_y\|^2 +\frac{\chi\|u\|^{4}+ b\left(\Phi_x^{2}+\beta \Phi_y\right)^{2}}{2} d x d y.\] For both cases (H-E) and (E-E), Ghidaglia and Saut proved local existence and uniqueness of a solution in $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$, and global existence under a small norm assumption on the initial data. For the (E-E) case, they also proved the existence of solutions which blow up in finite time. Notice that numerical evidence for the occurrence of muli-blow up phenomena in (E-E) DS, as in the case of elliptic NLS equation, has been given in.\ In the following, we will consider an elliptic-elliptic case of DS, which can be re-written as \[\label{DSeeform} \begin{array}{ccc} i u_{t}+ u_{xx}+ u_{yy} & = & \Phi_x u +\chi \left\| u \right\|^{2}u, \\ \Phi_{xx}+\beta \Phi_{yy} & = &-\gamma \left(\left\| u\right\|^{2}\right)_{x}, \end{array}\] which is non integrable and very similar to the NLS$^+$, see for instance for a study of the blow up phenomena and for numerical simulations. We denote this system by DS$^{++}$ in the following. We expect the same behavior as in NLS$^+$, i.e. the same kind of instability for ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) in the focusing case, i.e., $\chi=-1$. We also consider the so called DS II equation, which can be re-written as \[\label{DSII} \begin{array}{ccc} i u_{t}+\left(u_{xx}-u_{yy}\right)-2\left(\Phi+\left\| u \right\|^{2}\right)u & = & 0, \\ \Phi_{xx}+ \Phi_{yy}+2\left\| u\right\|_{xx}^{2} & = & 0, \end{array}\] and which has in addition the property to be completely integrable by IST.\ Note that the hyperbolic Laplacian in DS II leads to a different dynamics compared to the standard elliptic NLS equations ([\[NLSellgen\]](#NLSellgen){reference-type="ref" reference="NLSellgen"}). Therefore many PDE techniques successful for NLS could not be applied to the DS system. Using integrability, Fokas and Sung studied the existence and long-time behavior of the solutions of the initial value problem for DS II (with $u(x,y,0)=u_0$). They proved the following The smallness condition in Theorem [\[theosung\]](#theosung){reference-type="ref" reference="theosung"} indicates that in general there might be a blow-up in solutions to the focusing DS II equations. In fact, as recalled above, $2+1$ dimensions constitute the critical dimension for focusing cubic NLS equations where blow-up can occur. But due to the hyperbolic Laplacian in DS II, this cannot be directly generalized to the latter. Therefore it is important in this context that Ozawa gave an exact blow-up solution in. The solution is similar to the well known lump solutions, traveling solitonic wave solutions with an algebraic fall off at infinity. Note that Theorem 1.1 does not hold for lumps due to the small-norm assumption imposed on the initial data. It is thus not known whether there is generic blow-up for initial data not satisfying this condition, nor whether the condition is optimal. Numerical studies in indicate, however, that blow-up can occur in solutions to the focusing DS II. In fact it was conjectured in that generic localized initial data are just radiated away to infinity or blow up for large $t$. The first numerical studies of DS were done by White and Weideman using Fourier spectral methods for the spatial coordinates and a second order time splitting scheme. Besse, Mauser and Stimming used an advanced parallelized version of this method to study the Ozawa solution and blowup in the elliptic-elliptic DS equation.\ \ As mentioned in the introduction, Rousset and Tzvetkov presented an analytical method allowing to reduce the problem of the transverse nonlinear instability of 1d solitary waves for Hamiltonian PDEs for both periodic or localized transverse perturbations to the linear instability of the latter. This theory requires a lot of assumptions on the problem, and it is not the scope of this paper to review the whole method. However, one can easily check that this method is not applicable to the hyperbolic Laplacian, so the question of the nonlinear transverse instability of ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) under the flow of NLS$^-$ and DS II remains an open problem. Notice that the linear question for NLS$^-$ has been intensively studied, and it turns out that ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) is spectrally unstable. On the contrary, the method was successfully applied to NLS$^+$, providing the transverse nonlinear instability of ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) under localized and periodic perturbations. The features of these instabilities however remain unknown. Moreover, due to the contribution of the mean field $\Phi$ in the nonlinear part of the elliptic-elliptic DS system, it is unclear that the method of Rousset and Tzvetkov can be applied there. We anyway expect the same behavior for these both elliptic cases. We thus investigate these questions in the present paper numerically. This is a highly non-trivial problem for several reasons: first these NLS equations are purely dispersive equations, which means that the introduction of numerical dissipation has to be avoided as much as possible to preserve dispersive effects such as rapid oscillations. This makes the use of spectral methods attractive since they are known for minimal numerical dissipation and for their excellent approximation properties for smooth functions. In addition they allow for efficient time integration algorithms which should be ideally of high order to avoid a pollution of the Fourier coefficients due to numerical errors in the time integration. An additional problem is the modulational instability of the focusing NLS equations, i.e., a self-induced amplitude modulation of a continuous wave propagating in a nonlinear medium, with subsequent generation of localized structures, see for instance for the NLS equation. Thus to address numerically questions of stability and blowup of their solutions, a quite high resolution is needed which can only be achieved by computations on high performance parallel computers. The use of Fourier spectral methods is also very convenient in this context, since for a parallel spectral code only existing optimized serial FFT algorithms are necessary. In addition, such codes are not memory intensive, in contrast to other approaches such as finite difference or finite element methods. Furthermore, as already mentioned, solutions to elliptic NLS equations, as well as the DS systems considered here can have blow up. Obviously it is non-trivial to decide numerically whether a solution blows up or not. Note that the criteria to determine the appearance of such phenomena in practice are somewhat arbitrary. We will use asymptotic Fourier analysis, as proposed in, and applied in to numerically prove the appearance of a blow up or the all-time regularity of the solution. In the efficiency of this method to detect blow up has been illustrated on the well understood example of the 1d quintic NLS equation. Moreover $(2+1)$-dimensional situations are also studied here for the DS II equation. We describe the numerical methods used in the next section. # Numerical Methods We consider a periodic setting for the spatial coordinates, which allows the use of a Fourier spectral method for the space discretization. We treat the rapidly decreasing functions we are studying as essentially periodic analytic functions within the finite numerical precision. For such functions, spectral methods are known for their excellent (in practice exponential) approximation properties, see for instance . In addition they introduce only very little numerical dissipation which is important in the study of dispersive effects. Last but not least we use the Fourier coefficients to identify the appearance of singularities (blow up) in the solution as in. In all cases, the numerical precision is controlled via both the good decay of the Fourier coefficients and the numerically computed energy for each system considered. More precisely, given $E$, a conserved quantity of the system, defined in the previous section for the models we consider here, the numerically computed conservation of $E$ (which will always depend on time due to unavoidable numerical errors) can be used as a reliable indicator of numerical accuracy , provided that there is sufficient spatial resolution (generally the accuracy of the numerical solution is overestimated by two orders of magnitude), by considering the conservation of the quantity \[\Delta_E = \left\|\frac{E(t)}{E(0)}-1\right\|. \label{delE}\] We always aim at a $\Delta_E$ smaller than $10^{-6}$ to ensure an accuracy well beyond the plotting accuracy $\sim 10^{-3}$. ## Numerical Integration So we proceed approximating the spatial dependence via truncated Fourier series for the studied equations. This leads to large stiff[^2] systems of ODEs in Fourier space of the form \[v_{t}=\mathbf{L}v+\mathbf{N}(v,t) \label{utrans},\] where $v$ denotes the (discrete) Fourier transform of $u$, and where $\mathbf{L}$ and $\mathbf{N}$ denote linear and nonlinear operators, respectively. These systems of ODEs are classical examples of stiff equations where the stiffness is related to the linear part $\mathbf{L}$ (it is a consequence of the distribution of the eigenvalues of $\mathbf{L}$), whereas the nonlinear part contains only low order derivatives. There are several approaches to deal efficiently with equations of the form ([\[utrans\]](#utrans){reference-type="ref" reference="utrans"}) with a linear stiff part such as implicit-explicit (IMEX), time splitting, integrating factor (IF) as well as sliders and exponential time differencing. By performing a comparison of stiff integrators for the 1+1-dimensional cubic NLS equation in semiclassical limit ([\[NLSellgen\]](#NLSellgen){reference-type="ref" reference="NLSellgen"}) in , and for the semiclassical limit of the DS II equation in , it was shown that Driscoll's composite Runge-Kutta (DCRK) method is very efficient in this context. We thus use this scheme for the time integration here. The basic idea of the DCRK method is inspired by IMEX methods, i.e., the use of a stable implicit method for the linear part of the equation ([\[utrans\]](#utrans){reference-type="ref" reference="utrans"}), which introduces the stiffness into the system, and an explicit scheme for the nonlinear part which is assumed to be non-stiff. Classic IMEX schemes do not perform in general satisfactorily for dispersive PDEs. Driscoll's more sophisticated variant consists in splitting the linear part of the equation in Fourier space into regimes of high and low frequencies, and to use the fourth order RK integrator for the low frequencies and the nonlinear part, and the linearly implicit RK method of order three for the high frequencies. He showed that this method is in practice of fourth order over a wide range of step sizes. An additional problem here is the modulational instability of the focusing NLS equations, i.e., a self-induced amplitude modulation of a continuous wave propagating in a nonlinear medium, with subsequent generation of localized structures, see for instance for the NLS equation. This instability leads to an artificial increase of the high wave numbers which eventually crashes the simulation code, if not enough spatial resolution is provided (see for instance for the focusing NLS equation). To allow high resolution simulations, the codes are parallelized as explained below. Moreover, as recalled in the previous section, some of the models studied here can have blow up solutions, even for smooth initial data. From the point of view of applications, a blow up of a solution does not necessarily mean that the studied equation is not relevant in this context. It just indicates the limit of its use as an approximation. This breakdown of the model can indicate how to amend the approximation, e.g. by additional terms in the equations, which is a challenging task both from the mathematical and the application point of view.\ We will use here an asymptotics Fourier analysis proposed in to numerically detect the appearance of a blow up or the all-time regularity of the solution. We discuss this method with more detail in the next section. ## Tracking of the singularities To identify numerically the blow up time of the solution with sufficient accuracy, we will use asymptotic Fourier analysis as first applied numerically by Sulem, Sulem and Frisch in. The basic idea here is that functions analytic in a strip around the real axis in the complex plane have a characteristic Fourier spectrum for large wave numbers. Thus it is in principle possible to obtain the width of the analyticity strip from the asymptotic behavior of the Fourier transform of the solution (in one spatial dimension), or from the angle averaged energy spectrum in higher dimensions. It is thus important here that we treated the coordinates by Fourier series. This allows in particular to identify the time when a singularity in the complex plane hits the real axis and thus leads to a singularity of the function on the real line. Singular solutions of the two-dimensional cubic NLS equation have been studied with this approach in, and an application of the method to the two-dimensional Euler equations can be found in. The method has also been applied to the study of complex singularities of the three-dimensional Euler equations in, in thin jets with surface tension, the complex Burgers' equation and the Camassa-Holm equation. More recently, its efficiency has been investigated quantitatively for the Hopf equation and it was shown that the method can be efficiently used in practice to describe the critical behavior of solutions to dispersionless equations. More precisely, one makes the use of the following analytical result, It implies that for a single such singularity with positive $\delta_{j}$, the modulus of the Fourier coefficients decreases exponentially for large $k$. For $\delta_{j}=0$, i.e., a singularity on the real axis, the modulus of the Fourier coefficients has an algebraic dependence on $k$, and thus the location of singularities in the complex plane can be obtained from a given Fourier series computed on the real axis. More precisely, from ([\[fourierasym\]](#fourierasym){reference-type="ref" reference="fourierasym"}) several situations are possibles: If a singularity reaches the real domain after a finite time $t_c$, i.e. $\delta_{j}(t_c)=0$, the solution looses analyticity and becomes singular. If the width of the analyticity strip is bounded away from zero, i.e. if there exists $\gamma \in \mathbb{R}$ such that $\delta_{j}(t) > \gamma, \,\, \forall t$, then the solution is uniformly analytic. If the width of the analyticity strip goes to zero without vanishing, (e.g., exponential decay), the solution remains smooth for all times. Finally, if several singularities are relevant asymptotically, then $\hat{u}$ displays an oscillatory behavior. This last case however implies also that only the first singularity occurring can be recovered in this way. In practice, to numerically compute a Fourier transform, it has to be approximated by a discrete Fourier series which can be done efficiently via a fast Fourier transform (FFT), see e.g. . The discrete Fourier transform of the vector $\mathbf{u}$ with components $u_{j}=u(x_{j})$, where $x_{j}=2\pi L j/N$, $j=1,\ldots,N$ (i.e., the Fourier transform on the interval $[0,2\pi L]$ where $L$ is a positive real number) will be always denoted by $v$ in the following. There is no obvious analogue of relation ([\[fourierasym\]](#fourierasym){reference-type="ref" reference="fourierasym"}) for a discrete Fourier series, but it can be seen as an approximation of the latter, which is also the basis of the numerical approach in the solution of the PDE. It is possible to establish bounds for the discrete series, see for instance.\ \ According to ([\[fourierasym\]](#fourierasym){reference-type="ref" reference="fourierasym"}), $v$ is assumed to be of the form $v(k,t) \underset{k \to \infty}{\sim} e^{A(t)} k^{-B(t)}e^{-\delta(t)k},$ and one can trace the temporal behavior of $\delta(t)$ via some fitting procedure in order to obtain evidence for or against blow-up (the problem of blow-up reduces to check if delta vanishes in a finite time $t_c$, which indicates a loss of regularity). In order to determine $\delta(t)$ from direct numerical simulations, a least-square fit is performed on the logarithm of the Fourier transform using the functional form \[\ln \|v\|\sim A-B\ln k-k\delta. \label{abd}\] The fitting is done for a given range of wave numbers $k_{min}<k<k_{max}$ (we only consider positive $k$), that have to be controlled, as explained in detail in. The critical time $t_c$ is determined by the vanishing of $\delta$, and the type of the singularity is given by the parameter $B(t_c)$ which is equal to $\mu_j+1$. As explained in the reliability of the fitting can be also inferred from the value of the fitting error, defined as $p=\\| \ln \|v\|-(A-B \ln k-k \delta) \\|_{\infty}$. In the case of blow up phenomena, it turns out (see ) that the study of the Fourier coefficients in only one direction is sufficient to determine the blow up appearance, and that a fitting error of the order of $\sim 0.5$ can be reached. Typically in this case the bounds $k_{min}, k_{max}$ for the fit interval have no real impact on the determination of the blow up time, and one usually considers the classical interval $10<k<2 \max(k)/3$, following the dealiaising rule.\ In addition, one can also determine the real part of the location of the singularity by doing a least square fitting on the imaginary part of the logarithm of $v$ for which one has asymptotically \[\phi:=\Im \ln v\sim C-\alpha k \label{phi}.\] Since the logarithm is branched in Matlab/Fortran at the negative real axis with jumps of $2\pi$, the computed $\phi$ will in general have many jumps. Thus one has first to construct a continuous function from the computed $\phi$, see also . The analytic continuation is done in the following way: starting from the first value (largest $k$), we check for all other values of $\phi(k_{j})$ whether $\|\phi(k_{j+1})-\phi(k_{j})\|>\|\phi(k_{j+1})-\phi(k_{j})\pm\pi\|$. If this is the case, we put $\phi(k_{j+1})\to \phi(k_{j+1})\pm \pi$. The result of this procedure will be a continuous function which will be fitted with a least square approach to a linear function. Then the location of the singularity on the real axis is given by $\alpha(t_c)$. ## Parallelization of the codes As explained before, to be able to provide the high space resolution needed, the numerical codes have been parallelized. This can be conveniently done for two-dimensional Fourier transforms where the task of the one-dimensional FFTs is performed simultaneously by several processors. This reduces also the memory requirements per processor with respect to alternative approaches such as finite difference or finite element methods. We consider periodic (up to numerical precision) solutions in $x$ and $y$, i.e., solutions on $\mathbb{T}^2 \times \mathbb{R}$. The computations are carried out with $N_x \times N_y$ points for $(x, y) \in [-L_x\pi, L_x\pi] \times [-L_y\pi, L_y\pi]$. In the computations, $L_x = L_y$ is chosen large enough such that the numerical solution is of the order of machine precision ($\sim 10^{-16}$ here) at the boundaries. A prerequisite for parallel numerical algorithms is that sufficient independent computations can be identified for each processor, that require only small amounts of data to be communicated between independent computations. To this end, we perform a data decomposition, which makes it possible to do basic operations on each object in the data domain (vector, matrix\...) to be executed safely in parallel by the available processors. Our domain decomposition is implemented by developing a code describing the local computations and local data structures for a single process. Global arrays are divided in the following way: denoting by $x_n = 2 \pi n L_x/N_x,\,\, y_m = 2 \pi m L_y/N_y$, $n=-N_x/2...,N_x/2, \,\, m=-N_y/2...,N_y/2,$ the respective discretizations of $x$ and $y$ in the corresponding computational domain, $u$ (respectively $\Psi$) is then represented by a $N_x \times N_y$ matrix. For programming ease and for the efficiency of the Fourier transform, $N_x$ and $N_y$ are chosen to be powers of two. The number $n_p$ of processes is chosen to divide $N_x$ and $N_y$ perfectly, so that each processor $P_i, i=1...n_p$, will receive $N_x \times \frac{N_y}{n_p}$ elements of $u$ corresponding to the elements \[u\left(1:N_x, (i-1).\frac{N_y}{n_p}+1: i.\frac{N_y}{n_p} \right)\] in the global array, and then each parallel task works on a portion of the data. While processors execute an operation, they may need values from other processors. The above domain decomposition has been chosen such that the distribution of operations is balanced and that the communication is minimized. The access to remote elements has been implemented via explicit communications, using sub-routines of the MPI (Message Passing Interface) library. Actually, the only part of our codes that requires communications is the computation of the two-dimensional FFT and the fitting procedure for the Fourier coefficients. For the former we use the transposition approach. The latter allows to use highly optimized single processor one-dimensional FFT routines, that are normally found in most architectures, and a transposition algorithm can be easily ported to different distributed memory architectures. We use the well known FFTW library because its implementation is close to optimal for serial FFT computation, see . Roughly speaking, a two-dimensional FFT does one-dimensional FFTs on all rows and then on all columns of the initial global array. We thus first transform in $x$ direction, each processor transforms all the dimensions of the data that are completely local to it, and the array is transposed once this has been done by all processors. Since the data are evenly distributed among the MPI processes, this transpose is efficiently implemented using MPI ALLTOALL communications of the MPI library. The asymptotic fitting of the Fourier coefficients in one spatial direction requires in addition two local communications. ## Tests of the codes on the exact solution The isolated soliton ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) is automatically a solution to the four models described in section 2, without explicit $y$-dependence and can be seen as a line soliton for these models. As recalled before, it is known to be unstable for the 2d cubic elliptic NLS equation. To test our numerical codes, we propagate the isolated soliton ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) in the four differents models we consider. The numerical accuracy is controlled by both the conservation of the numerically computed energy, and also the $L_{2}$-norm of the difference between the numerical and the exact solutions, denoted in the following by $\Delta_2 := \\| u_{num}-u_{ex} \\|_2$. The computations are carried out with $N_x =N_y= 2^{12}$ points for $x \times y \in [-15 \pi, 15 \pi] \times [-15 \pi, 15 \pi]$ for $t\leq 6$ and $\delta_t=610^{-4}$.\ \ We chose the following parameters $(\lambda, v, \phi_0, x_0)=(1,\sqrt{2}, 0, 0)$ in ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}). The situation is similar for the different models studied: We found that the $L_2$ norm of the difference between the numerical and the exact solutions reach a value of $\Delta_2 \sim 10^{-12}$ at $t_{max}=6$ in all cases, see Fig. [\[numaccuracyexsol\]](#numaccuracyexsol){reference-type="ref" reference="numaccuracyexsol"}, and $\Delta_E \sim 10^{-14}$. The numerical solution is shown at several times in Fig. [\[cont1\]](#cont1){reference-type="ref" reference="cont1"}, it travels with constant speed $\sqrt{2}$, and the Fourier coefficients are shown in Fig. [\[four1\]](#four1){reference-type="ref" reference="four1"} at $t=t_{max}=6$. For all models the Fourier coefficients decay to machine precision ($\sim 10^{-14}$), and no modulational instability occurs up to the maximal time of computation. This shows that our codes are able to propagate the exact solution even for the unstable case (2d elliptic NLS). It also allows to use the quantity $\Delta_E$ as an indicator for the numerical accuracy as in. On such travelling waves, it is expected and actually found that the ASM ([\[abd\]](#abd){reference-type="ref" reference="abd"}) produces a constant value for $\delta(t)$, see Fig. [\[solexdel\]](#solexdel){reference-type="ref" reference="solexdel"}, where we find that $\delta(t) \sim 1.57$ for all times studied, and the Fourier coefficients show an exponential decay so that one gets $B=0$ for all times studied. In this section, we explained the numerical tools used for the numerical study of the transverse (in)-stability of the isolated soliton of the 1d cubic NLS equation in higher dimensional models. We showed that we can numerically efficiently reproduce the exact solution under the flow of all models considered, typically with spectral accuracy. In the next section, we investigate the transverse stability of the isolated soliton under localized perturbations. # Localized Perturbations (by a Gaussian function) In this section we consider perturbations of the isolated soliton with a Gaussian function, and investigate its transverse (in-)stability under the flow of different higher models. More precisely, it is known that the isolated soliton ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) is nonlinearly unstable under the 2d cubic NLS flow. Such kind of analytical results however do not provide any idea about the qualitative behavior of the perturbed solutions. The cubic 2d NLS equation (NLS$^+$) being in addition known to allow blow up phenomena, it is also interesting to simulate such situations in this context. The similitudes between NLS$^+$ and DS$^{++}$ allow one to expect the same kind of results for both models. We will see that in both cases, the instability of the isolated soliton occurs via a $L_{\infty}$-blow up of the solution in one spatial point. On the other hand, we perform a similar study for the hyperbolic variants, NLS$^-$ and DS II. Here theoretical analysis as in no longer hold, and we will see that ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) appears to be unstable in NLS$^-$ and 'orbitally' stable for DS II. We thus propagate initial data of the form \[u(x,y,0) = u_I(x,y,0) + A \exp(-(x-x_1)^2-(y-y_1)^2), \label{Agauss}\] where $u_I$ denotes the isolated solution ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}), $A \in \mathbb{R}$ and $(x_1,y_1) \in [-L_x \pi, L_x \pi] \times [-L_y \pi, L_y \pi]$. ## Elliptic NLS equations In this section, the computations are carried out with $2^{13}\times 2^{13}$ points for $x \times y \in [-15 \pi, 15 \pi] \times [-15 \pi, 15 \pi]$. We first consider an initial data of the form ([\[Agauss\]](#Agauss){reference-type="ref" reference="Agauss"}) with $(x_1,y_1)=(0,0)$ for the NLS$^+$ equation. For $A=0.1$, we chose the time step as $\Delta_t = 610^{-4}$, and observe that, as expected, the perturbed soliton under the 2d cubic NLS flow is unstable. We show in Fig.[\[nlseA01uts\]](#nlseA01uts){reference-type="ref" reference="nlseA01uts"} the numerical solution at several times, it appears that the solution will blow up at $t^{}=5.148$, where $\delta$ in ([\[abd\]](#abd){reference-type="ref" reference="abd"}) vanishes[^3], see Fig. [\[nlseamplAs\]](#nlseamplAs){reference-type="ref" reference="nlseamplAs"}. The Fourier coefficients of the solution at $t=5$ still decrease to machine precision $\sim 10^{-15}$, see Fig. [\[nlseA01amplcoefs\]](#nlseA01amplcoefs){reference-type="ref" reference="nlseA01amplcoefs"}. That means that the system is still well resolved until $t=5$, just before the blow up time. At $t=t^=5.148$, $\\| u \\|_{\infty}$ reaches a value of $\sim 50$, and $\\| u_x \\|_{\infty} \sim 1819$. The fitting error $p$ is of the order of $\sim 0.05$, indicating that the fitting is reliable, and that the blow up time is recovered with sufficient accuracy. It is already clear from the pictures, that the blow up appears in only one spatial point, the location of the latter can be also identified as explained in section 3.2, here one finds $\alpha(t^) = 7.2162$. The value of the numerically computed energy at $t=t^$ is $\Delta_E \sim 10^{-15}$, indicating that the system is still well resolved, and that the asymptotic Fourier analysis provides also a determination of the blow up time before the 'typical' crash of the numerical code.\ The situation is similar for other values of $A>0$, the more we add energy to the initial data, the earlier is the blow up time. We show in Fig. [\[nlseamplAs\]](#nlseamplAs){reference-type="ref" reference="nlseamplAs"} the time evolution of $\\|u^A\\|_{\infty}$ for several values of $A$, $u^A$ denoting the solution to the NLS$^+$ equation for an initial data of the form ([\[Agauss\]](#Agauss){reference-type="ref" reference="Agauss"}), with $(x_1,y_1)=(0,0)$, and the time evolution of the corresponding fitting parameter $\delta(t)$ in ([\[abd\]](#abd){reference-type="ref" reference="abd"}). The transverse instability of the isolated soliton ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) in the 2d cubic NLS$^+$ equation for localized perturbations thus appears to be characterized by the appearance of a $L_{\infty}$ blow up of the solution at one spatial point.\ \ One thus expects that a similar study for perturbations of the isolated soliton under the flow of the DS$^{++}$ system leads to similar results. It has been however not yet proved, and the theory in does not seem to hold in this case due to the coupled mean field in the nonlinear part of the equation. We thus consider now an initial data of the form ([\[Agauss\]](#Agauss){reference-type="ref" reference="Agauss"}) with $(x_1,y_1)=(0,0)$ for the DS$^{++}$ system.\ For $A=0.1$, and $\Delta_t = 510^{-4}$, we show the solution of the DS$^{++}$ system at several times in Fig. [\[dseeA01uts\]](#dseeA01uts){reference-type="ref" reference="dseeA01uts"}. The situation differs from the previous study, due to the contribution of the coupled mean field $\Phi$ in the system ([\[DSgen\]](#DSgen){reference-type="ref" reference="DSgen"}). The localized perturbation is somehow more spread in the $y$-direction. The time evolution of the $L_{\infty}$-norm of $u$ is shown in Fig. [\[dseeA01linf\]](#dseeA01linf){reference-type="ref" reference="dseeA01linf"}, where we observe that after a rapid decrease, it increases again. The Fourier coefficients reach machine precision all along the computation, see for example the situation at $t=5$ in Fig. [\[dseeA01linf\]](#dseeA01linf){reference-type="ref" reference="dseeA01linf"}, as well as the numerically computed energy $\Delta_E$ typically used as an indicator of numerical accuracy, (one has $\Delta_E \sim 10^{-15}$ at $t=5$). If the code is run for longer time, one finds that the numerical solution will actually blow up, as for the NLS$^+$ case. We show in Fig. [\[dseeA01uts2\]](#dseeA01uts2){reference-type="ref" reference="dseeA01uts2"} the solution at later times. As before, we perform the fitting of the Fourier coefficients of $u$ on the interval $10<k_x<2 max(k_x)/3$, following the well known de-aliasing rule. The vanishing of $\delta(t)$ occurs at $t=t^=26.4$ indicating that a singularity occurs at this time. The value of the fitting parameter $B$ at $t^$ is of the order of $\sim 0.6$, which allows to conjecture a blow up of the solution in the $L_{\infty}$-norm, which can also be inferred from the value of the $L_{\infty}$-norm of $u$ at this time, $\\|u\\|_{\infty}\sim 40$. The fitting error reaches a value of $p=0.3$. This indicates that the fitting is reliable, one typically expect an error not higher than $0.5$ especially for blow up situations we are looking at, see also. The determination of the location of the singularity as in ([\[phi\]](#phi){reference-type="ref" reference="phi"}) yields $\alpha(t^)=36.79$, and $\Delta_E \sim{10^{-14}}$ at $t=t^$. The situation is similar for higher values of $A$, and we show in Fig. [\[dseeamplAs\]](#dseeamplAs){reference-type="ref" reference="dseeamplAs"} the $L_{\infty}$-norm of the solutions $u^A$ to the DS$^{++}$ equation for an initial data of the form ([\[Agauss\]](#Agauss){reference-type="ref" reference="Agauss"}) with $(x_1,y_1)=(0,0)$ for several values of $A$ on the right, and the time evolution of the corresponding $\delta(t)$ in ([\[abd\]](#abd){reference-type="ref" reference="abd"}) on the left. The blow up times are also reported in Table [1](#nlseDSeetblows){reference-type="ref" reference="nlseDSeetblows"} for the NLS$^+$ and DS$^{++}$ equations. [\[nlseDSeetblows\]]{#nlseDSeetblows label="nlseDSeetblows"} \ In this section, we illustrated numerically the instability of the isolated soliton ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) under the flow of the 2d elliptic NLS equation, and observed that this instability is characterized by the appearance of a blow up in one spatial point. Moreover, we performed the same study for the DS$^{++}$ system. Due to its elliptic character and the parameter chosen, a similar behavior was expected and actually observed. Localized perturbations to the isolated soliton lead also to a blow up here, at a later time though, because of the contribution of the the coupled elliptic equation for the mean field $\Phi$, which tends to extend the perturbation along the $y$-axis. As expected, the isolated soliton is thus found to be nonlinearly unstable under the flow of the DS$^{++}$ system. ## Hyperbolic NLS Equations In this section, we investigate the transverse (in)-stability of the isolated soliton ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) under the flow of hyperbolic NLS equations by studying again Gaussian perturbations of the form ([\[Agauss\]](#Agauss){reference-type="ref" reference="Agauss"}). We first perform simulations for the 2d hyperbolic cubic NLS (NLS$^-$), and then for the focusing DS II equation. It is found that we the perturbed isolated soliton is unstable under the flow of the 2d hyperbolic NLS equation, and that this instability occurs via dispersion, and it appears to be orbitrarily stable under the flow of DS II for Gaussian perturbations of the form [\[Agauss\]](#Agauss){reference-type="ref" reference="Agauss"} with $0<A<1$.\ For $A=0.1$, we choose the time step as $\Delta_t = 210^{-3}$, and observe that, as expected, the perturbed soliton under the flow of NLS$^-$ flow is unstable. Recall that in this context only linear analysis is available in the literature. We show in Fig.[\[nlshA01uts\]](#nlshA01uts){reference-type="ref" reference="nlshA01uts"} the numerical solution at several times, it appears that the solution becomes chaotic and totally looses the shape and typical features of the original soliton. The situation is even clearer in Fig. [\[nlshA01contts\]](#nlshA01contts){reference-type="ref" reference="nlshA01contts"}, where we show the corresponding contour plots of the solution. It seems the original soliton will totally disperse for longer times. In fact, as we can infer from Fig. [\[nlshA01diffcontts\]](#nlshA01diffcontts){reference-type="ref" reference="nlshA01diffcontts"}, where we show the contour plot of the difference between the numerical solution and the original soliton, the perturbation travels at the same velocity as the isolated soliton and simply disperses away. The dispersion of the perturbation yields then the dispersion of the full numerical solution. We ensure that the system is well resolved by checking the good decay of the Fourier coefficients all along the computation, they decrease to machine precision ($10^{-15}$) at all times considered. We show in Fig. [\[nlshA01vts\]](#nlshA01vts){reference-type="ref" reference="nlshA01vts"} the Fourier coefficients of the solution at several times plotted on the $k_x$-axis on the left, and plotted in both spatial directions at $t=20$ on the right. The same behavior was observed for higher values of $A$. The instability of the isolated soliton thus appears to occur though/via the dispersion of the solution as $t$ tends to infinity.\ \ We now perform the same study for the DS II equation. We show the numerical solution at several times in Fig.[\[ds2isopg01u\]](#ds2isopg01u){reference-type="ref" reference="ds2isopg01u"}. In this case the perturbation seems to be somehow distributed along the isolated soliton, in the $y$-direction. The $L_{\infty}$-norm of $u$ decreases as $t\to \infty$, see Fig. [\[ds2isopg01a\]](#ds2isopg01a){reference-type="ref" reference="ds2isopg01a"}, where we show also the situation for other values of $0<A<1$ until $t=5$. It seems it will stabilise for later times. The fitting of the Fourier coefficients appears to be reliable, with a fitting error of the order of $p\sim 0.1$ all along the computation. One finds that $\delta(t)$ is almost constant $\delta(t) \sim 1.5$, for all times $t \leq 20$ studied, indicating the regularity of the solution. The numerical accuracy is ensured by the decay to machine precision ($\sim 10^{-15}$) of the Fourier coefficients,, see Fig. [\[ds2isopg01co\]](#ds2isopg01co){reference-type="ref" reference="ds2isopg01co"}, and the conservation of the numerically computed energy, $\Delta_E$, which reaches the same order as the latter ($\Delta_E \sim 10^{-15}$) all along the computation.\ \ In this case, the solution preserves the shape of the original soliton, see Fig. [\[ds2isopg01utscontt20\]](#ds2isopg01utscontt20){reference-type="ref" reference="ds2isopg01utscontt20"} for the contour plots of the solution shown in Fig. [\[ds2isopg01u\]](#ds2isopg01u){reference-type="ref" reference="ds2isopg01u"}, and the perturbation itself takes the form of a soliton, see Fig. [\[ds2A01diffts\]](#ds2A01diffts){reference-type="ref" reference="ds2A01diffts"}. It is clearer when the code is run for longer times on a bigger domain of computation. One finds that the initially localized perturbation is indeed spread in the $y$-direction, and take finally itself the shape of a soliton, see see Fig. [\[ds2A01diffcontts\]](#ds2A01diffcontts){reference-type="ref" reference="ds2A01diffcontts"}, where we show the contour plot of the difference between the numerical solution and the original soliton at several times. The solution asymptotically preserves the soliton's shape, see Fig. [\[isopg01ut10\]](#isopg01ut10){reference-type="ref" reference="isopg01ut10"} for the situation at $t=100$ and the contour plot in the same picture. It appears that the perturbation travels with the soliton and leads also to oscillations around it. Notice that the speed of the soliton is not affected, indicating that no new soliton is formed here. The propagation of the perturbation is still present for large times, so it is difficult to decide if they will finally disappear.\ The situation is similar for all values of $A$ studied, and we show the $L_{\infty}$-norm of $u^A$ in Fig. [\[isopg01linft150\]](#isopg01linft150){reference-type="ref" reference="isopg01linft150"}, it decreases before stabilizing for longer times in all cases. Until now we considered perturbations centered as the same location as the original soliton, i.e., $x_0=0$ in ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) and $u_{pert}=\exp(-(x-x_1)^2-(y-y_1)^2)$ with $(x_1,y_1)=(0,0)$. If instead, one considers a de-centered Gaussian perturbation, i.e., either $(x_1,y_1)=(a,0)$ or $(x_1,y_1)=(a,b)$, with $(a,b) \in [-L_x\pi, L_x\pi]\times[-L_y\pi, L_y\pi]$, one observes that the perturbation simply disperses as $t$ goes to infinity, and has no real impact on the soliton behavior. To illustrate this, we consider an initial data of the form ([\[Agauss\]](#Agauss){reference-type="ref" reference="Agauss"}), with $(x_1,y_1)=(-L_x/2,0)$. The computation is carried out with $2^{13}\times 2^{13}$ points for $x \times y \in [-15 \pi, 15 \pi] \times [-15 \pi, 15 \pi]$ and $\Delta_t=310^{-3}$. We show in Fig. [\[ds2dcxuts\]](#ds2dcxuts){reference-type="ref" reference="ds2dcxuts"} the resulting numerical solution of DS II at several times. The solution travels with the original velocity, and its shape is preserved. The difference between the solution and the original soliton $u_I$ are shown in Fig. [\[ds2dcxdiffts\]](#ds2dcxdiffts){reference-type="ref" reference="ds2dcxdiffts"}. One can see that the perturbation simply disperses away in the form of tails to infinity. It is even clearer in the contour plots shown in Fig. [\[ds2dcxdiffcontts\]](#ds2dcxdiffcontts){reference-type="ref" reference="ds2dcxdiffcontts"}. The $L_{\infty}$-norm of the solution is shown in Fig. [\[ds2dcxamplvts\]](#ds2dcxamplvts){reference-type="ref" reference="ds2dcxamplvts"} together with the Fourier coefficients at several times. The latter reach machine precision all along the computation, indicating sufficient accuracy, and the $L_{\infty}$-norm of $u$ stays almost constant. The soliton appears to be unaffected by the perturbation which appears to smear out in the background of the soliton. The same behavior was observed for initial data of the form ([\[Agauss\]](#Agauss){reference-type="ref" reference="Agauss"}) with $y_1$ non equal to $0$.\ For localized perturbations, we found that the perturbed isolated soliton is unstable under the flow of the 2d hyperbolic NLS equation, and that this instability occurs via dispersion. The study of ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) under the flow of DS II however indicates that numerical solutions issued from Gaussian perturbations travel with unchanged speed, and have a profile very close to the original one, in particular the $L_{\infty}$-norm of $u$ becomes constant as $t \to \infty$. The perturbed solution recovers the features of a soliton for all cases studied there, including de-centered Gaussian perturbations. The isolated soliton appears in this sense orbitrarily stable under Gaussian perturbations of the form [\[Agauss\]](#Agauss){reference-type="ref" reference="Agauss"} with $0<A<1$. This a noticeable difference with the results for the 2d (both hyperbolic and elliptic) NLS equations, in which the isolated soliton is unstable. # Periodic deformations We now consider periodic deformations of the isolated soliton ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}). More precisely, we consider initial data of the form \[u(x,y,0) = u_{I}(x,0)(1 + \epsilon \cos(\gamma y/L_y)), \epsilon \ll 1, \gamma \in \mathbb{R} \label{perio}\] for the four models we are considering in this paper. The analytical results in provide also here the instability of ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) for the 2d elliptic NLS equation under this kind of perturbations. We will see that in this case, this instability occurs via a blow up in multiple spatial points. For the NLS equation, such behavior has been studied by Merle, and we find in addition that such phenomena occur also in the case of DS$^{++}$, for which however no theoretical study is available in this context. The isolated soliton ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) appears to be unstable under periodic perturbations of the form ([\[perio\]](#perio){reference-type="ref" reference="perio"}) for all cases here. ## Elliptic NLS Equations We first consider an initial data of the form ([\[perio\]](#perio){reference-type="ref" reference="perio"}) with $\epsilon=0.1$ and $b=2$ for the 2d elliptic NLS equation (NLS$^{+}$). The computations are carried out with $2^{13} \times 2^{13}$ points for $x \times y \in [-15\pi, 15\pi]\times[-15\pi, 15\pi]$ and $\Delta_t=610^{-4}$. As in the previous section, we study the asymptotics of the Fourier coefficients all along the computation, and choose the following range of wavenumbers for the fitting, $10<k_x<2 \max(k_x)/3$. For the situation here, we found that a multiple blow up occurs at $t^=10.107$, where $\delta$ as in ([\[abd\]](#abd){reference-type="ref" reference="abd"}) vanishes. We show in Fig. [\[nlseperiouts\]](#nlseperiouts){reference-type="ref" reference="nlseperiouts"} the numerical solution at several times, including $t^$. The time evolution of $\delta$ as in ([\[abd\]](#abd){reference-type="ref" reference="abd"}) and of the $L_{\infty}$-norm of $u$ are shown in Fig. [\[nlseperioampldel\]](#nlseperioampldel){reference-type="ref" reference="nlseperioampldel"}. At $t^$, $\\|u \\|_{\infty} \sim 25$. The fitting error is of the order of $p\sim 0.13$ at $t=t^$, and $B$ in [\[abd\]](#abd){reference-type="ref" reference="abd"} reaches a value of $B(t^)=0.4852$ indicating clearly a $L_{\infty}$ blow up. Notice that, in this configuration, (multiple blow up points) it was not clear how well the parameter $B$ could reach such value. Some other tests in this context are needed to be able to decide if the asymptotics of the Fourier coefficients can identify or not with such good precision the kind of the singularity via the parameter $B$. Notice that even for one spatial point blow up, the parameter B is not always reliable, as pointed out in. The numerically computed energy is of the order of $\Delta_E \sim 10^{-14}$, indicating that the system is well resolved until the singularity formation. In this case, the blow up of the solution occurs in multiple spatial points, located on the same $x$ locations, that we can identify via the formula ([\[phi\]](#phi){reference-type="ref" reference="phi"}). One finds here that $\alpha(t^)=14.2739$. The $y$-locations correspond to the maxima of the solution, i.e. the values of $y$ such that $\sin(\gamma y/L_y)=0$, i.e., $\gamma y/L_y=0 \,\, \mbox{modulo} \,\, \pi$. For the example here, we thus get three spatial blow up points. The Fourier coefficients are shown in Fig. [\[nlseperiovts\]](#nlseperiovts){reference-type="ref" reference="nlseperiovts"} at several times. If one varies $\gamma$, i.e., the period, one observes that the number of blow up points corresponds to the number of maximum of the solution, for example for $\gamma=4$, one gets 5 blow up space locations, see Fig.[\[nlseperio2uts\]](#nlseperio2uts){reference-type="ref" reference="nlseperio2uts"}. In this case, the blow up occurs at $t^=5.871$, where $B=0.5435$ and $p\sim 0.04$, with $\\|u \\|_{\infty} \sim 32$, $\Delta_E \sim 10^{-14}$ and $\alpha(t^)=8.2983$. The same phenomena are observed if one considers an initial data of the form ([\[perio\]](#perio){reference-type="ref" reference="perio"}) for the DS$^{++}$ equation. We show in Fig. [\[dseeperiouts\]](#dseeperiouts){reference-type="ref" reference="dseeperiouts"} the solution of DS$^{++}$ for an initial data of the form ([\[perio\]](#perio){reference-type="ref" reference="perio"}) with $\gamma=2$ and $\epsilon=0.1$ at several times. In this case, the vanishing of $\delta$ (as in ([\[abd\]](#abd){reference-type="ref" reference="abd"})) occurs at $t^=14.778$, with $\\|u \\|_{\infty} \sim 35$, see Fig. [\[dseeperioampldelv\]](#dseeperioampldelv){reference-type="ref" reference="dseeperioampldelv"}, where we show the time evolution of these two quantities. One finds also $B=0.5036$ and $p\sim 0.3$, $\Delta_E \sim 10^{-14}$ and $\alpha(t^)=20.8731$. We recover in this case also a value of $B$ in [\[abd\]](#abd){reference-type="ref" reference="abd"} really convincing. The situation here is really similar to the previous case, and we see that the instability of the isolated soliton [\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"} under periodic perturbations for elliptic models studied there occurs via a multiple blow up point. Recall once again that this instability was known for the NLS$^+$ but not yet for DS$^{++}$, and that the features of this instability were up to now not known. The phenomena of multiple blowing-up solutions in DS$^{++}$ has been also not studied (as far as we know), and it would be interesting to see if the theory as by Merle in can be applied there. ## Hyperbolic NLS Equations We now perform the same study, but for the hyperbolic NLS equations, NLS$^-$ and the DS II equation. The computations are carried out with $2^{13} \times 2^{13}$ points for $x \times y \in [-15\pi, 15\pi]\times[-15\pi, 15\pi]$ and $\Delta_t=2*10^{-3}$. For the NLS$^-$ equation we consider an initial data of the form ([\[perio\]](#perio){reference-type="ref" reference="perio"}) with $b=2$ and $\epsilon=0.2$, and show in Fig. [\[nlshperiouts\]](#nlshperiouts){reference-type="ref" reference="nlshperiouts"} the solution at several times. We can see that the solution spreads in the $y$-direction, and tends to recover the initial shape of the soliton, before being decomposed as in the case of localized perturbations studied in the previous section. The difference between the solution to NLS$^-$ for an initial condition of the form ([\[perio\]](#perio){reference-type="ref" reference="perio"}), with $\epsilon=0.2$, $b=2$ and the original soliton $u_I$ is shown in Fig. [\[nlshperiodiffts\]](#nlshperiodiffts){reference-type="ref" reference="nlshperiodiffts"} at several times. The $L_{\infty}$-norm of the solution is shown in Fig. [\[nlshperioampl\]](#nlshperioampl){reference-type="ref" reference="nlshperioampl"}, together with the Fourier coefficients at the maximal time of computation. The latter decrease to machine precision ($10^{-15}$) all along the computation, and $\Delta_E \sim 10^{-14}$ at the end of the computation. As in the case of localized perturbations, the isolated soliton appears to be unstable under periodic perturbations here in the hyperbolic 2d NLS equation, and this instability occurs via the dispersion of the solution. For the DS II equation we consider again an initial data of the form ([\[perio\]](#perio){reference-type="ref" reference="perio"}) with $b=2$ and $\epsilon=0.2$. The solution is shown in Fig. [\[ds2periouts\]](#ds2periouts){reference-type="ref" reference="ds2periouts"} at several times. The difference between the solution to DS II and the original soliton is shown in Fig. [\[ds2periodiffts\]](#ds2periodiffts){reference-type="ref" reference="ds2periodiffts"} at several times. We observe here that the perturbation is also dispersed around the soliton. The $L_{\infty}$-norm of the solution is shown in Fig. [\[ds2perioampl\]](#ds2perioampl){reference-type="ref" reference="ds2perioampl"}, together with the Fourier coefficients of the solution shown in Fig. [\[ds2periouts\]](#ds2periouts){reference-type="ref" reference="ds2periouts"}. The latter decrease to machine precision ($10^{-15}$) all along the computation, and $\Delta_E \sim 10^{-12}$ at the end of the computation. Though it is difficult numerically to determine the long time behavior of the solution shown in Fig. [\[ds2periouts\]](#ds2periouts){reference-type="ref" reference="ds2periouts"}, the soliton appears clearly to be unstable under the time evolution of DS II for periodic deformations. # Conclusion In this paper, we addressed numerically the question of the nonlinear transverse stability of the isolated soliton ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) of the 1d cubic NLS equation in higher dimensional models, admissible as transversally perturbed models for it, including elliptic and non-elliptic NLS equations. Whereas for the 2d elliptic cubic NLS, a theory in has been successfully applied to this problem, no such results are known for others models considered in this paper, in particular for hyperbolic NLS equations. In addition, the features of the instability of the isolated soliton ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) under the flow of the 2d elliptic NLS remain unknown from the analysis point of view. We investigated here these questions numerically, by using efficient numerical schemes for such dispersive PDEs which can develop singularity of blow up type in finite time. The spatial resolution as seen from the Fourier coefficients was always well beyond typical plotting accuracies of the order of $10^{-3}$. For the time integration we used a fourth order time stepping scheme already used in for the study of NLS equations. As argued for instance in, the numerically computed energy of the solution gives a valid indicator of the accuracy for sufficient spatial resolution. To ensure the latter, we always presented the Fourier coefficients of the solution. The detection of the singularity formation has been performed thanks to a careful study of the asymptotics of the Fourier coefficients, as used in. We found that the instability of the isolated soliton under the flow of the 2d elliptic NLS equation for localized perturbations occurs via a blow up in the $L_{\infty}$-norm of the solution, in only one spatial point, and for periodic perturbations, this leads to blow up in multiple spatial points. As expected, the same results were observed for the elliptic elliptic DS system, for which, however, neither the instability of ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) have been proved, nor the existence of multiple blowing up solutions. Another question that we addressed in this paper was the difference between elliptic and hyperbolic variants of NLS in this context. We found that ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) is unstable for both localized and periodic perturbations under the flow of the 2d hyperbolic NLS equation, and that this instability occurs via the dispersion of the solution here. For the DS II equation, however, we found that the features of the soliton solutions, such as the velocity, shape, and amplitude, remain robust under localized perturbations considered here, and that the perturbation added to the soliton just appears to disperse away in this case. In this sense, the soliton ([\[trav\]](#trav){reference-type="ref" reference="trav"}) appears to be somehow 'orbitally' stable under the time evolution of DS II. For periodic perturbations, however, it seems to be unstable. [^1]: Orbital stability here refers to stability up to the transformations keeping the equation invariant [^2]: We use the word stiffness to indicate that there are largely different scales to be resolved in this system of ODEs which make the use of explicit methods inefficient for stability reasons. [^3]: By vanishing, we mean here that the fitting parameter $\delta$ reaches the smallest distance in Fourier space which can be resolved, since we use a discrete Fourier series. It is defined by $m:=2\pi L_x/N_x$. No length below this threshold can be numerically distinguished from zero, see also.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-22T02:10:14', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5349', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5349'}
null	null
# Introduction and the main result Let $f_c(z)=z^2-c$ and $f^n_c$ denotes its $n$-iterate, $n=1,2...$. (Here and later on we keep the notations of , in particular, we use the parameter $-c$ instead of standard $c$.) The set $M=\{c: \sup_{n}\|f_c^n(0)\|<\infty \}$ is called the Mandelbrot set. It is a closed bounded subset of the plane and, by the maximum principle, the complement ${\bf C}\setminus M=\{c: f_c^n(0)\to \infty, n\to \infty\}$ is connected. Douady and Hubbard prove that $M$ is also connected. For the proof, they construct a conformal isomorphism \[\label{phi} \varphi:{\bf C}\setminus M \to {\bf C}\setminus \overline{\bf D}\] from the complement of $M$ onto the complement of the unit disk. Note that the famous MLC conjecture says that $M$ is locally connected and this is equivalent to say that the inverse (Riemann) map \[\label{psi} \psi=\varphi^{-1}: {\bf C}\setminus \overline{\bf D}\to {\bf C}\setminus M\] extends continuously onto the unit circle $\partial {\bf D}$. Consider the Laurent series of $\varphi$ and $\psi$ at $\infty$: \[\label{B} \varphi(c)=c+B_0+\frac{B_1}{c}+...+\frac{B_\ell}{c^\ell}+...,\] \[\label{C} \psi(w)=w+C_0+\frac{C_1}{w}+...+\frac{C_\ell}{w^\ell}+....\] Every number $B_\ell$, $C_\ell$ is either zero or has a finite 2-adic expansion: \[\label{exp} B_\ell=\frac{R_\ell}{2^{p_\ell}}, \ C_\ell=\frac{K_\ell}{2^{q_\ell}}, \ \ell=0,1...,\] for some odd integer numbers $R_\ell$, $K_\ell$ and some integers $p_\ell$, $q_\ell$. In what follows, given an integer $m\not=0$, we denote by $ord (m)$ the maximal power of $2$ which devides $m$, and we set $ord (0)=+\infty$. For a fraction $m/n$ with $m,n$ non-zero integers, $ord (m/n)=ord(m)-ord(n)$. In particular, $ord (B_\ell)=-p_\ell$, $ord (C_\ell)=-q_\ell$ for non-zero $B_\ell$, $C_\ell$. The following properties of the Laurent coefficients $B_\ell$ and $C_\ell$ are found in , . Theorems [\[ordB\]](#ordB){reference-type="ref" reference="ordB"}-[\[zeroC\]](#zeroC){reference-type="ref" reference="zeroC"} are announced in along with schemes of their proofs. Detailed proofs of Theorem [\[zeroC\]](#zeroC){reference-type="ref" reference="zeroC"} (in a more general setting of the Multibrot set) and Theorem [\[ordB\]](#ordB){reference-type="ref" reference="ordB"} appear in . Theorem [\[ordC\]](#ordC){reference-type="ref" reference="ordC"} is only stated in with the note that its proof is analogous to the one of Theorem [\[ordB\]](#ordB){reference-type="ref" reference="ordB"}. Recently, the author learned from that Theorem [\[zeroC\]](#zeroC){reference-type="ref" reference="zeroC"} and Theorem [\[ordC\]](#ordC){reference-type="ref" reference="ordC"} are parts of empirical observations (based on computer calculations) by Don Zagier: see the conjectures (i)-(iii) on p.32-33 of . Since the proof of Theorem [\[ordC\]](#ordC){reference-type="ref" reference="ordC"} was not written in we reproduce it in the present note as a consequence of Theorem [\[ordB\]](#ordB){reference-type="ref" reference="ordB"}. In the course of the proof we confirm also all parts of Zagier's observation (ii), see Theorem [\[Zager\]](#Zager){reference-type="ref" reference="Zager"} below. A particular case of Theorem [\[zeroC\]](#zeroC){reference-type="ref" reference="zeroC"} (for $l=0$) firts appeared in (at the time of writing -the author had no access to though). For a proof of Theorem [\[zeroC\]](#zeroC){reference-type="ref" reference="zeroC"} which is different from , , see . Let us state the main result. It is about (formal) inverse of any (formal) Laurent series with rational coefficients such that their denominators $2^{p_\ell}$ satisfy ([\[ordb\]](#ordb){reference-type="ref" reference="ordb"}): Acknowledgment. The author thanks Dierk Schleicher for sending him . # Proof of Theorem [\[Zager\]](#Zager){reference-type="ref" reference="Zager"} We use standard notations \[\binom{n}{k}=\frac{n!}{k!(n-k)!}, \ \ 0\le k\le n\] for binomial coefficients, and \[\binom{k}{k_1, k_2,... ,k_j}=\frac{k!}{k_1!k_2!...k_j!}, \ \ 0\le k_1...,k_j\le k, \ k_1+...+k_j=k\] for multinomial ones. We will use repeatedly the following obvious Fact.If $D=\sum_{k=1}^{k_0} D_k$ is a sum of fractions $D_k=\frac{L_k}{2^{r_k}}$, where $L_k$ is an odd integer, $p_k$ is an integer and $p_k\le p_0$ for every $k$, then $ord(D)\ge-p_0$. The equality $ord(D)=-p_0$ holds if and only if $p_k=p_0$ for an odd number of indexes $k$. We need also two identities (a)-(b): (a) For any integers $1\le m\le n$, \[\label{id1} \sum_{j=1}^m \binom{m}{m-j}\sum_{(r_1...,r_j): r_t\ge 1, 1\le t\le j, r_1+...+r_j=n} \binom{n}{r_1, r_2,... ,r_j}=m^n.\] (b) For any integer $n\ge 1$, \[\label{id2} \sum_{i=0}^{[n/2]} \binom{n}{2i}=2^{n-1}.\] Now we prove Theorem [\[Zager\]](#Zager){reference-type="ref" reference="Zager"} by indunction on $\ell\ge 1$. As $C_1=-B_1$, the statement is true for $\ell=1$. Assume that, for some $\ell>1$, $ord(C_k)>ord(B_k)$ for any even $2\le k\le \ell-1$, and $ord(C_k)=ord(B_k)$ for any odd $1\le k\le \ell-1$. We show in (i)-(iv), see below, that then $ord(C_k)>ord(B_k)$, if $\ell$ is even and $ord(C_k)=ord(B_k)$, if $\ell$ is odd. (i). By Lemma [\[key\]](#key){reference-type="ref" reference="key"}, $ord(M_{\ell+1}-P_\ell)=ord(B_\ell)$ as the integers $(\ell+1)^{\ell+1}$ and $\ell^{\ell+1}$ have different parity. (ii). $ord(C_0 M_\ell)=ord(B_0 M_\ell)=-1+ord(M_\ell)\ge-1+ord(B_{\ell-1})=-(1+\ell)-ord(\ell!)$ and the equality holds if and only if $\ell$ is odd. In turn, $-(1+\ell)-ord(\ell!)\ge-(1+\ell)-ord(\ell+1)!= ord(B_\ell)$, where the equality holds if and only if $\ell$ is even. Thus in any case, $ord(C_0 M_\ell)>ord(B_\ell)$. (iii). Let $\ell$ be an odd number. Then, for each odd $1\le k\le \ell-1$, $\ell-k$ is even, hence, $ord(M_{\ell-k})>ord(B_{\ell-k-1})$. Also, $ord(C_k)\ge ord(B_k)$ by the induction hypothesis. For each even $1\le k\le \ell-1$, $\ell-k$ is odd, hence, $ord(M_{\ell-k})=ord(B_{\ell-k-1})$, but, by the induction hypothesis, $ord(C_k)>ord(B_k)$. Therefore, for each $1\le k\le \ell-1$, $ord(C_k M_{\ell-k})>ord(B_k B_{\ell-k-1})\ge ord(B_\ell)$ and using also (ii), $ord(C_0 M_\ell+\sum_{k=1}^{\ell-1} C_k M_{\ell-k})>ord(B_\ell)$. Thus, by (i), \[ord(C_\ell)=ord(M_{\ell+1}-P_\ell+\sum_{k=0}^{\ell-1} C_k M_{\ell-k})=ord(B_\ell).\] (iv). Let $\ell$ be even. For even $1\le k\le \ell-1$, by the induction hypotheis, $ord(C_k)>ord(B_k)$, hence, $ord(C_k M_{e\\-k})>ord(B_k B_{\ell-k-1})\ge ord(B_\ell)$. For odd $1\le k\le \ell-1$, by the induction hypotheis, $ord(C_k)=ord(B_k)$ and since $\ell-k$ is odd too, $ord (M_{\ell-k})=ord (B_{\ell-k-1})$. Hence, for odd $k$, $ord (C_k M_{\ell-k})=ord (B_k B_{\ell-k-1})\ge ord(B_\ell)$ and the equality holds if and only if $\binom{\ell+1}{k+1}$ is odd. By the identity ([\[id2\]](#id2){reference-type="ref" reference="id2"}), $\sum_{k=1, k \text{ is odd }}^{\ell-1} \binom{\ell+1}{k+1}=2^\ell-1$ (we use that $\ell+1$ is odd). As $2^\ell-1$ is even, that means that in the sum $\sum_{k=0}^{\ell-1}C_k M_{\ell-k}$, we have: $ord (C_k M_{\ell-k})\ge ord (B_\ell)$ for every $k$ and the number of indexes where the equality holds is odd. Hence, $ord(\sum_{k=0}^{\ell-1}C_k M_{\ell-k})=ord(B_\ell)$. Using (i) we have in the considered case: $ord(M_{\ell+1}-P_\ell)=ord(\sum_{k=0}^{\ell-1}C_k M_{\ell-k})=ord(B_\ell)$. Therefore, \[ord(C_\ell)=ord(M_{\ell+1}-P_\ell+\sum_{k=0}^{\ell-1}C_k M_{\ell-k})>ord(B_\ell).\] This completes the step of induction.	{'timestamp': '2014-01-22T02:11:44', 'yymm': '1401', 'arxiv_id': '1401.5422', 'language': 'en', 'url': 'https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5422'}