prompt
stringlengths
0
256
answer
stringlengths
1
256
\infty D^\alpha \tilde h_j(x)\cdot b_j. \end{equation} Next, since the range of $\widetilde H$ is the subset of $T(X)$, \[ H=T^{-1}\cdot P\cdot \widetilde H. \] From here and \eqref{equ4.32} we obtain, for all $\alpha\in{\mbf Z}_+^n$, $|\alpha|\le k$, $
x\in{\mbf R}^n$, \begin{equation}\label{equ4.33} H(\delta_x^\alpha)=\sum_{j=1}^\infty D^\alpha \tilde h_j(x)\cdot (T^{-1}\cdot P)(b_j) \end{equation} (convergence in $X$). Finally, we set \begin{equation}\label{equ4.34} h_j:=\|(T^{-1}\cdot P)(b_j)\|\cdot\
tilde h\quad {\rm and}\quad v_j:=\frac{(T^{-1}\cdot P)(b_j)}{\|(T^{-1}\cdot P)(b_j)\|},\quad j\in{\mbf N}. \end{equation} Then all $v_j\in X$ are of norm one. In turn, all $h_j\in C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ and due to \eqref{equ4.32a}, \eqref{equ4.34} an
d the properties of $T$ and $P$ for all $j\in{\mbf N}$, \[ \|h_j\|_{C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}\le \|T^{-1}\|\cdot\|P\|\cdot\|\tilde h_j\|_{C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}\le 2\cdot \|T\|\cdot\|T^{-1}\|\cdot\|P\|\cdot\|H\|\le 32\cdot\lambda^2\cdot\|H\|. \] Mo
reover, by \eqref{equ4.33}, for all $\alpha\in{\mbf Z}_+^n$, $|\alpha|\le k$, $x\in{\mbf R}^n$, \[ H(\delta_x^\alpha)=\sum_{j=1}^\infty D^\alpha h_j(x)\cdot v_j, \] as required. The proof of Theorem \ref{teor1.10} is complete. \end{proof} \section{Pro
ofs of Theorem \ref{te1.4} and Corollary \ref{cor1.10}} \subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{te1.4}\,(1)} \begin{proof} Let $\Lambda_{n,k}:=\{\alpha\in {\mbf Z}_+^n\, :\, |\alpha|\le k\}$. We set \begin{equation}\label{eq4.23} M_{n,k}:=\bigl(\Lambda_{n,k}\
times{\mbf R}^n\bigr)\sqcup \bigl(\bigl(\Lambda_{n,k}\setminus\Lambda_{n,k-1}\bigr)\times\bigl(({\mbf R}^n\times{\mbf R}^n)\setminus\Delta_n\bigr)\bigr), \end{equation} where $\Delta_n:=\{(x,y)\in{\mbf R}^n\times{\mbf R}^n\, :\, x=y\}$. Space $M_{n,k}$ ha
s the natural structure of a $C^\infty$ manifold, in particular, it is a locally compact Hausdorff space. By $C_b(M_{n,k})$ we denote the Banach space of bounded continuous functions on $M_{n,k}$ equipped with supremum norm. Let us define a linear map $\ma
thcal I: C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\rightarrow C_b(M_{n,k})$ by the formula\medskip \begin{equation} \mathcal I(f)(m)=\left\{ \begin{array}{lll} \displaystyle D^\alpha f(x)&{\rm if}&m=(\alpha,x)\in\Lambda_{n,k}\times {\mbf R}^n\\ \\ \displaystyle \frac{D^\
alpha f(x)-D^\alpha f(y)}{\omega(\|x-y\|)}&{\rm if}&m=(\alpha, (x,y))\in \bigl(\Lambda_{n,k}\setminus\Lambda_{n,k-1}\bigr)\times\bigl({\mbf R}^n\times{\mbf R}^n\setminus\Delta_n\bigr), \end{array} \right. \end{equation} \begin{Proposition}\label{prop5.1} $
\mathcal I$ is a linear isometric embedding. \end{Proposition} \begin{proof} The statement follows straightforwardly from the definitions of the involved spaces. \end{proof} Since $\mathcal I\bigl(C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\bigr)$ is a closed subspace of
$C_b(M_{n,k})$, the Hahn-Banach theorem implies that the adjoint map \begin{equation}\label{eq4.25} \mathcal I^*:\bigl(C_b(M_{n,k})\bigr)^*\rightarrow \bigl(C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\bigr)^* \end{equation} of $\mathcal I$ is surjective of norm one. Simi
larly, $\mathcal I$ maps $C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ isometrically into the Banach subspace $C_0(M_{n,k})\subset C_b(M_{n,k})$ of continuous functions on $M_{n,k}$ vanishing at infinity. Thus the adjoint of $\mathcal I_0:=\mathcal I |_{C_0^{k,\omega}({\mb
f R}^n)}$ is the surjective map of norm one \begin{equation}\label{eq4.26} \mathcal I_0^*:\bigl(C_0(M_{n,k})\bigr)^*\rightarrow \bigl(C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\bigr)^*. \end{equation} According to the Riesz representation theorem (see, e.g.,\cite{DS}), $\
bigl(C_0(M_{n,k})\bigr)^*$ is isometrically isomorphic to the space of countably additive regular Borel measures on $M_{n,k}$ with the norm being the total variation of measure. In what follows we identify these two spaces. In the proof we use the followi
ng result. \begin{Proposition}\label{prop4.2} If $\omega$ satisfies condition \eqref{omega2}, then $C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ is weak$^*$ dense in $C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$. \end{Proposition} \begin{proof} Let $\{L_{NN}\}_{N\in{\mbf N}}$ be finite ra
nk bounded linear operators on $C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ defined by \eqref{eq3.18}. According to Lemma \ref{lem3.5} for each $f\in C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ the sequence $\{L_{NN}f\}_{N\in{\mbf N}}$ weak$^*$ converges to $f$. Moreover, each $L_{NN}f\i
n C^\infty({\mbf R}^n)$, cf. Lemma \ref{lem2.2}\,(a). We set \begin{equation}\label{e4.27} \hat f_N:=\rho_N\cdot L_{NN}f, \end{equation} see section~4.3. Then $\hat f_N$ is a $C^\infty$ function with compact support on ${\mbf R}^n$ satisfying, due to Lemma
s \ref{norm} and \ref{lem2.2}\,(b), the inequality \begin{equation}\label{e4.28} \|\hat f_N\|_{C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}\le C_N^2\|f\|_{C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}, \end{equation} where $\lim_{N\rightarrow\infty}C_N=1+c_{k,n}\cdot 4\sqrt n \cdot (k+1)\cd
ot\lim_{t\rightarrow\infty}\frac{1}{\omega(t)}$. Clearly, sequence $\{D^\alpha \hat f_N\}_{N\in{\mbf N}}$ converges pointwise to $D^\alpha f$ for all $\alpha\in {\mbf Z}_+^n$, $|\alpha|\le k$. Also, due to condition \eqref{omega2} all $\hat f_N\in C_0^{
k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$. Hence, according to Proposition \ref{prop3.1}, sequence $\{\hat f_N\}_{N\in{\mbf N}}$ weak$^*$ converges to $f$. This shows that $C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ is weak$^*$ dense in $C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$. \end{proof} Next, let
$i^*: \bigl(C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\bigr)^*\rightarrow \bigl(C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\bigr)^*$ be the linear surjective map of norm one adjoint to the isometrical embedding $i: C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\hookrightarrow C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$. \b
egin{C}\label{cor4.3} Restriction of $i^*$ to $G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ is injective. \end{C} \begin{proof} Proposition \ref{prop4.2} implies that functions in $C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ regarded as linear functionals on $G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ s
eparate the points of $G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\, (\subset \bigl(C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\bigr)^*)$. If $i^*(v)=0$ for some $v\in G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$, then \[ 0=(i^*(v))(f)=f(v)\quad {\rm for\ all}\quad f\in C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n). \] Hen
ce, $v=0$. \end{proof} We set \[ \tilde\delta_x^\alpha:=i^*(\delta_x^\alpha),\quad |\alpha|\le k,\ x\in{\mbf R}^n. \] By definition, maps $\phi_\alpha: {\mbf R}^n\rightarrow \bigl(C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\bigr)^*$, $x\mapsto\delta_x^\alpha$, $|\alpha|\le
k$, are continuous and bounded and so are the maps $i^*\circ\phi_\alpha:{\mbf R}^n\rightarrow \bigl(C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\bigr)^*$. \begin{Proposition}\label{prop4.4} The range of $\mathcal I_0^*$ coincides with $i^*(G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n))$. \e
nd{Proposition} \begin{proof} Let $\mu\in \bigl(C_0(M_{n,k})\bigr)^*$ be a countably additive regular Borel measures on $M_{n,k}$. We set, for all admissible $\alpha$ and all Borel measurable sets $U\subset M_{n,k}$, \[ \mu_\alpha^1(U)=\mu\bigl(U\cap (\{
\alpha\}\times{\mbf R}^n)\bigr)\quad {\rm and}\quad \mu_\alpha^2(U)=\mu\bigl(U\cap \bigl(\{\alpha\}\times \bigl(({\mbf R}^n\times{\mbf R}^n)\setminus\Delta_n\bigr)\bigr)\bigr). \] Then $\mu=\sum_{\alpha,j}\mu_\alpha^j$. Let us show that each $\mathcal I_
0^*(\mu_\alpha^j)$ belongs to $i^*(G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n))$. Indeed, for $j=1$ consider the Bochner integral \begin{equation}\label{eq4.27} J(\mu_\alpha^1):=\int_{x\in{\mbf R}^n}i^*(\phi_\alpha(x))\, d\mu_\alpha^1(x)=i^*\left(\int_{x\in{\mbf R}^n}\phi_
\alpha(x)\, d\mu_\alpha^1(x)\right). \end{equation} Since $\phi_\alpha$ is continuous and bounded, the above integral is well-defined and its value is an element of $i^*(G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n))$. By the definition of the Bochner integral, for each $f\i
n C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$, \[ (J(\mu_\alpha^1))(f)=\int_{x\in{\mbf R}^n}\bigl(i^*(\phi_\alpha(x))\bigr)(f)\,d\mu_\alpha^1(x)=\int_{x\in{\mbf R}^n} D^\alpha f(x)\,d\mu_\alpha^1(x)=:\bigl(\mathcal I_0^*(\mu_\alpha^1)\bigr)(f). \] Hence, \[ \mathcal I_0^*
(\mu_\alpha^1)=J(\mu_\alpha^1)\in i^*(G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)). \] Similarly, for $\alpha\in\Lambda_{n,k}\setminus\Lambda_{n,k-1}$ we define \begin{equation}\label{eq4.28} J(\mu_\alpha^2):=\int_{z=(x,y)\in ({\mbf R}^n\times{\mbf R}^n)\setminus\Delta_n}\
frac{i^*(\phi_\alpha(x))-i^*(\phi_\alpha(y))}{\omega(\|x-y\|)} d\mu_\alpha^2(z). \end{equation} Then, as before, we obtain that \[ \mathcal I_0^*(\mu_\alpha^2)=J(\mu_\alpha^2)\in i^*(G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)). \] Thus we have established that the range
of $\mathcal I_0^*$ is a subset of $i^*(G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n))$. Since the map $\mathcal I_0^*$ is surjective and its range contains all $\tilde\delta_x^\alpha$, it must contain $i^*(G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n))$ as well. This completes the proof of
the proposition. \end{proof} In particular, we obtain that $\bigl(C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\bigr)^*=i^*(G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n))$, i.e., by the inverse mapping theorem $i^*$ restricted to $G_b^{k,\omega}$ maps it isomorphically onto $\bigl(C_0^{k,\ome
ga}({\mbf R}^n)\bigr)^*$. Let us show that if $\lim_{t\rightarrow\infty}\omega(t)=\infty$, then $i^*$ is an isometry. Assume, on the contrary, that for some $v\in G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$, \begin{equation}\label{eq4.31} \|i^*(v)\|_{(C_0^{k,\omega}({
\mbf R}^n))^*}<\|v\|_{G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}. \end{equation} Let $f\in C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$, $\|f\|_{C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}=1$, be such that \[ v(f)=\|v\|_{G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}. \] Let $\{f_N\}_{N\in{\mbf N}}\subset C_0^{k,\omega}({
\mbf R}^n)$, $\|f_N\|_{C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}\le C_N^2$, $N\in{\mbf N}$, be the sequence of Proposition \ref{prop4.2} weak$^*$ converging to $f$. Observe that $\lim_{N\rightarrow\infty} C_N=1$ due to the above condition for $\omega$. Then from \eqref
{eq4.31} and \eqref{e4.28} we obtain \[ \begin{array}{l} \displaystyle \|v\|_{G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}=v(f)=\lim_{N\rightarrow\infty} v(f_N)=\lim_{N\rightarrow\infty} \bigl(i^*(v)\bigr)(f_N)\medskip\\ \displaystyle \le \|i^*(v)\|_{(C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf
R}^n))^*}\cdot\varlimsup_{N\rightarrow\infty} \|f_N\|_{C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}\le \|i^*(v)\|_{(C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n))^*}<\|v\|_{G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}, \end{array} \] a contradiction proving that $i^*$ is an isometry. The proof of Theorem \r
ef{te1.4}\,(1) is complete. \end{proof} \subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{te1.4}\,(2)} \begin{proof} By the hypotheses of the theorem there exists a weak$^*$ continuous operator $T\in Ext(C_b^{k,\omega}(S);C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n))$ such that $T(C_0^{k,\
omega}(S))\subset C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$. This implies that there is a bounded linear projection of the geometric preduals of the corresponding spaces $P: G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\rightarrow G_b^{k,\omega}(S)$ such that $P^*=T$. Let $q_S: C_b^{k,\o
mega}({\mbf R}^n)\rightarrow C_b^{k,\omega}(S)$ and $q_{S0}: C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\rightarrow C_0^{k,\omega}(S)$ denote the quotient maps induced by restrictions of functions on ${\mbf R}^n$ to $S$. Finally, let $i: C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\rightar
row C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ and $i_S: C_0^{k,\omega}(S)\rightarrow C_b^{k,\omega}(S)$ be the bounded linear maps corresponding to inclusions of the spaces. Note that $i$ is an isometric embedding and $i_S$ is injective of norm $\le 1$. \begin{Lm}\label
{lem5.5} $T_0:=T|_{C_0^{k,\omega}(S)}:C_0^{k,\omega}(S)\rightarrow C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ is a bounded linear map between Banach spaces. \end{Lm} \begin{proof} For $f\in C_0^{k,\omega}(S)$ we have \[ \|T_0f\|_{C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}=\|(T\circ i_
S)(f)\|_{C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}\le\|T\|\cdot\|i_S(f)\|_{C_b^{k,\omega}(S)}\le \|T\|\cdot\|f\|_{C_0^{k,\omega}(S)}, \] as required. \end{proof} Now, we have the following two commutative diagrams of adjoints of the above bounded linear maps (one corre
sponding to upward arrows and another one to downward arrows): \begin{equation}\label{equ5.38} \begin{array}{cccc} \bigl(C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\bigr)^*&\stackrel{i^*}{\longrightarrow}&\bigl(C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\bigr)^*\smallskip\\ _{\mbox{{\tin
y $q_S^*$}}}\!\uparrow\ \ \ \downarrow\mbox{{\tiny $T^*$}}&&_{\mbox{{\tiny $q_{S0}^*$}}}\!\uparrow\ \ \ \downarrow\mbox{{\tiny $T_0^*$}} \\ \bigl(C_b^{k,\omega}(S)\bigr)^*&\stackrel{i_S^*}{\longrightarrow}&\bigl(C_0^{k,\omega}(S)\bigr)^*. \end{array} \end
{equation} Here $T^*\circ q_S^*=(q_S\circ T)^*={\rm id}$ and $T_0^*\circ q_{S0}^*=(q_{S0}\circ T_0)^*={\rm id}$, maps $q_S^*$ and $q_{S0}^*$ are isometric embeddings and map $i^*$ is surjective. Note that $i^*|_{G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}:G_b^{k,\omega}
({\mbf R}^n)\rightarrow \bigl(C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\bigr)^*$ is an isomorphism by the first part of the theorem. Also, by the definition of $P$ (see \eqref{proj} in section~3.3 above), \begin{equation}\label{equ5.39} q_S^*\circ (T^*|_{G_b^{k,\omega}({
\mbf R}^n)})=P. \end{equation} Let us show that the map \[ I:=i_S^*\circ(T^*|_{G_b^{k,\omega}(S)}):G_b^{k,\omega}(S)\rightarrow \bigl(C_0^{k,\omega}(S)\bigr)^* \] is an isomorphism.\smallskip (a) Injectivity of $I$: If $I(v)=0$ for some $v\in G_b^{k,\omeg
a}(S)$, then by the commutativity of \eqref{equ5.38} and by \eqref{equ5.39}, \[ 0=(q_{S0}^*\circ i_S^*)(T^*v)=(i^*\circ q_S^*)(T^*v)=i^*(Pv)=i^*(v). \] Since $i^*$ is injective, the latter implies that $v=0$, i.e., $I$ is an injection.\medskip (b) Surject
ivity of $I$: Let $v\in \bigl(C_0^{k,\omega}(S)\bigr)^*$. Since $T_0^*$ is surjective, there exists $v_1\in \bigl(C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\bigr)^*$ such that $T_0^*(v_1)=v$. Further, since $i^*|_{G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}:G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\rig
htarrow \bigl(C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\bigr)^*$ is an isomorphism, there exists $v_2\in G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ such that $i^*(v_2)=v_1$. Now, by the commutativity of \eqref{equ5.38}, \[ v=(T_0^*\circ i^*)(v_2)=(i_S^*\circ T^*)(v_2)=(i_S^*\circ (T^*\
circ q_S^*)\circ T^*)(v_2)=(i_S^*\circ T^*)(Pv_2)=I(Pv_2), \] i.e., $I$ is a surjection. So $I$ is a bijection and therefore by the inverse mapping theorem it is an isomorphism. This completes the proof of the second part of Theorem \ref{te1.4}. \end{pro
of} \subsection{Proof of Corollary \ref{cor1.10}} \begin{proof} Let $X\subset C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ be the closure of the space of $C^\infty$ functions with compact supports on ${\mbf R}^n$. Assume, on the contrary, that there exists $f\in C_0^{k,\om
ega}({\mbf R}^n)\setminus X$. Then there exists a functional $\lambda\in \bigl(C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\bigr)^*$ such that $\lambda|_X=0$ and $\lambda(f)=1$. Let $i^*: \bigl(C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\bigr)^*\rightarrow \bigl(C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)
\bigr)^*$ be the adjoint of the isometrical embedding $i:C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\hookrightarrow C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$. According to the arguments of the proof of Theorem \ref{te1.4}, $i^*|_{G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}:G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\r
ightarrow \bigl(C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\bigr)^*$ is an isomorphism. Hence, for $\tilde\lambda:=(i^*|_{G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)})^{-1}(\lambda)$ we have $g(\tilde\lambda)=0$ for all $g\in X$ and $f(\tilde\lambda)=1$. Observe that $X$ is weak$^*$ dense
in $C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ (see the proof of Proposition \ref{prop4.2}). Thus $X$ separates the points of $G_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$. Since $g(\tilde\lambda)=0$ for all $g\in X$, the latter implies that $\tilde\lambda=0$, a contradiction with $f(\ti
lde\lambda)=1$. This shows that $X=C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$. Clearly, $X$ is separable (it contains, e.g., the dense countable set of functions of the form $\rho_N\cdot p$, $N\in{\mbf N}$, where $p$ are polynomials with rational coefficients and $\{
\rho_N\}_{N\in{\mbf N}}$ is a fixed sequence of $C^\infty$ cut-off functions weak$^*$ converging in $C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ to the constant function $f= 1$). This completes the proof of the corollary. \end{proof} \section{Proof of Theorem \ref{te1.1
1}} \subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{te1.11} for Weak $k$-Markov Sets} First, we recall some results proved in \cite{BB1,BB2, B}. (1) If $S\in {\rm Mar}_k^*({\mbf R}^n)$, then a function $f\in C_b^{k,\omega}(S)$ has derivatives of order $\le k$ at each w
eak $k$-Markov point $x\in S$, i.e., there exists a (unique) polynomial $T_x^k(f)\in\cP_{k,n}$ such that \[ \lim_{y\to x}\frac{|f(y)-T_x^k(f)(y)|}{\|y-x\|^k}=0. \] If $T_x^k(f)(z):=\sum_{|\alpha|\le k} \frac{c_\alpha}{\alpha !} (z-x)^\alpha$, $\alpha\in{\
mbf Z}_+^n$, then $c_\alpha$ is called the partial derivative of order $|\alpha|$ at $x$ and is denoted as $D_S^\alpha f (x)$.\medskip (2) If $\tilde f\in C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ is such that $\tilde f|_S=f$, then the Taylor polynomial $T_x^k(\tilde
f)$ of order $k$ of $\tilde f$ at $x$ coincides with $T_x^k(f)$.\medskip (3) The analog of the the classical Whitney-Glaeser theorem holds: A function $f\in C(S)$ belongs to $C_b^{k,\omega}(S)$ if and only if it has derivatives of order $\le k$ at each
weak $k$-Markov point $x\in S$ and there exists a constant $\lambda>0$ such that for all weak $k$-Markov points $x,y\in S$, $z\in\{x,y\}$ \begin{equation}\label{equ6.40} \begin{array}{l} \displaystyle \max_{|\alpha|\le k}|D^\alpha_S f(x)|\le \lambda\quad
\text{and}\\ \\ \displaystyle \max_{|\alpha|\le k}\frac{|D_S^\alpha \bigl(T_x^k(f)-T_y^k(f)\bigr)(z)|}{\|x-y\|^{k-|\alpha|}}\le\lambda\cdot\omega(\|x-y\|). \end{array} \end{equation} Moreover, \[ \|f\|_{C_b^{k,\omega}(S)}\approx\inf\lambda \] with consta
nts of equivalence depending only on $k$ and $n$.\medskip (4) There exists a bounded linear extension operator $T: C_b^{k,\omega}(S)\to C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ of finite depths \[ (Tf)(x):= \left\{ \begin{array}{ccc} \displaystyle \sum_{i=1}^\infty \
lambda_i(x)f(x_i)&{\rm if}&x\in{\mbf R}^n\setminus S \\ f(x)&{\rm if}& x\in S, \end{array} \right. \] where all $\lambda_i\in C^\infty({\mbf R}^n)$ and have compact supports in ${\mbf R}^n\setminus S$, all $x_i\in S$ and for each $x\in{\mbf R}^n$ the numbe
r of nonzero terms in the above sum is at most ${n+k\choose n}\cdot w$, where $w$ is the order of the Whitney cover of ${\mbf R}^n\setminus S$. The construction of $T$ repeats that of the Whitney-Glaeser extension operator \cite{Gl}, where instead of jets
$T_x^k(f)$ of $f\in C_b^{k,\omega}(S)$ at weak $k$-Markov points $x\in S$ (forming a dense subset of $S$) one uses polynomials of degree $k$ interpolating $f$ on certain subsets of cardinality ${n+k\choose n}$ close to $x$. In particular, as in the case
of the Whitney-Glaeser extension operator, we obtain that $T\in Ext(C_b^{k,\omega}(S);C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n))$ for all moduli of continuity $\omega$. Also, by the construction, if $f\in C_b^{k,\omega}(S)$ is the restriction to $S$ of a $C^\infty$ func
tion with compact support on ${\mbf R}^n$, then $Tf\in C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ has compact supports in all closed $\delta$-neihbourhoods of $S$ (i.e., sets $[S]_\delta:=\{x\in{\mbf R}^n\, :\, \inf_{y\in S}\|x-y\|\le\delta\}$, $\delta>0$). \begin{proof}
[Proof of Theorem \ref{te1.11} for $S\in {\rm Mar}_k^*({\mbf R}^n)$] Let $\rho\in C^\infty({\mbf R}^n)$, $0\le \rho\le 1$, be such that $\rho|_{[S]_{1}}=1$, $\rho|_{{\mbf R}^n\setminus [S]_{3}}=0$ and for some $C_{k,n}\in{\mbf R}_+$ (depending on $k$ and $
n$ only) \begin{equation}\label{rho1} \sup_{x\in\mathbb R^n}|D^\alpha\rho(x)|\le C_{k,n}\quad {\rm for\ all}\quad \alpha\in\mathbb Z_+^n. \end{equation} (E.g., such $\rho$ can be obtained by the convolution of the indicator function of $[S]_2$ with a fixed
radial $C^\infty$ function with support in the unit Euclidean ball of ${\mbf R}^n$ and with $L_1({\mbf R}^n)$ norm one.) We define a new extension operator by the formula \begin{equation}\label{eq6.42} \widetilde Tf=\rho\cdot Tf,\qquad f\in C_b^{k,\omega}
(S). \end{equation} \begin{Lm}\label{lem6.1} Operator $\widetilde T\in Ext(C_b^{k,\omega}(S);C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n))$ for all moduli of continuity $\omega$. \end{Lm} \begin{proof} We equip $C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ with equivalent norm \[ \|f\|_{C_b
^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}':=\max\left\{\|f\|_{C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)},|f|_{C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}'\right\}, \] where $|f|_{C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}'$ is defined similarly to $|f|_{C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}$ but with the supremum taken over all
$x\ne y$ such that $\|x-y\|\le 1$, see \eqref{eq3}--\eqref{eq5}. (Note that the constants of equivalence between these two norms depend on $\omega$.) Now, using word-by-word the arguments of Lemma \ref{norm} with $\rho_\ell$ replaced by $\rho$, $\ell$ re
placed by $1$, and $c_{k,n}$ replaced by $C_{k,n}$ we obtain for some constant $C=C(k,n,\omega)$ and all $h\in C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$, \begin{equation}\label{eq6.43} \|\rho\cdot h\|_{C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}'\le C\cdot\|h\|_{C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}
^n)}'. \end{equation} Since $T\in Ext(C_b^{k,\omega}(S);C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n))$ for all moduli of continuity $\omega$, inequality \eqref{eq6.43} implies the required statement. \end{proof} Clearly, $\widetilde T$ is of finite depth. Moreover, if $f
\in C_b^{k,\omega}(S)$ is the restriction to $S$ of a $C^\infty$ function with compact support on ${\mbf R}^n$, then $\widetilde Tf\in C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ and has compact support on ${\mbf R}^n$ due to the properties of operator $T$, (see part (4)
above). Finally, since the set of all $C_b^{k,1}(S)$ functions (i.e., for this space $\omega(t):=t$, $t\in{\mbf R}_+$) with compact supports on $S$ is dense in $C_0^{k,\omega}(S)$ (because $\omega$ satisfies condition \eqref{omega2}, see Corollary \ref{cor
1.10}), the preceding property of $\widetilde T$ and Lemma \ref{lem6.1} imply that $\widetilde T(C_0^{k,\omega}(S))\subset C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$. Therefore $\widetilde T$ satisfies the hypotheses of Theorem \ref{te1.4}\,(2) (weak$^*$ continuity of $\
widetilde T$ follows from Theorem \ref{teo1.6}). This implies the required statement: $\bigl(C^{k,\omega}_0(S)\bigr)^*$ is isomorphic to $G_b^{k,\omega}(S)$ for all $\omega$ satisfying \eqref{omega2} and all weak $k$-Markov sets $S$. Now, $G_b^{k,\omega}(
S)$ has the metric approximation property due to the Grothendieck result \cite[Ch.\,I]{G} (formulated before Remark \ref{k} of section~1.4 above) because this space has the approximation property by Theorem \ref{te1.3}. Also, $C_0^{k,\omega}(S)$ has the me
tric approximation property because its dual has it, see, e.g., \cite[Th.\,3.10]{C}. The proof of the theorem for $S\in {\rm Mar}_k^*({\mbf R}^n)$ is complete. \end{proof} \subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{te1.11} in the General Case} \begin{proof} We r
equire some auxiliary results. Let $\widetilde\omega$ be the modulus of continuity satisfying \begin{equation}\label{eq6.46} \varlimsup_{t\rightarrow 0^+}\frac{\omega_o(t)}{\widetilde\omega(t)}<\infty. \end{equation} \begin{Lm}\label{lem6.2} The restricti
on of the pullback map $H^*:C_b^k({\mbf R}^n)\rightarrow C_b^k({\mbf R}^n)$, $H^*f:=f\circ H$, to $C_b^{k,\tilde\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ belongs to $\mathcal L(C_b^{k,\tilde\omega}({\mbf R}^n);C_b^{k,\tilde\omega}({\mbf R}^n))$. \end{Lm} \begin{proof} We set
$H=(h_1,\dots, h_n)$. Then by the hypothesis (a) of the theorem all $D^i h_j\in C_b^{k-1,\omega_o}({\mbf R}^n)$, where $\omega_o$ satisfies \eqref{equ1.8}. Let $f\in C_b^{k,\tilde\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$. Then for each $\alpha\in{\mbf Z}_+^n$, $|\alpha|\le k$
, by the Fa\`{a} di Bruno formula, see, e.g., \cite{CS}, we obtain \begin{equation}\label{eq6.47} (D^\alpha (f\circ H))(x)=\sum_{0<|\lambda|\le |\alpha|} D^\lambda f(H(x))\cdot P_\lambda\left(\bigl[D^\beta H(x)\bigr]_{0<|\beta|\le |\alpha|}\right); \end{eq
uation} here $P_\lambda\left(\bigl[D^\beta H(x)\bigr]_{0<|\beta|\le |\alpha|}\right)$ are polynomials of degrees $\le |\alpha|$ without constant terms with coefficients in $\mathbb Z_+$ bounded by a constant depending on $k$ and $n$ only in variables $D^\
beta h_j$, $0<|\beta|\le |\alpha|$, $1\le j\le n$. Since clearly $C_b^{0,\tilde\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ is a Banach algebra with respect to the pointwise multiplication of functions, to prove the lemma it suffices to check that all $D^\lambda f(H(\cdot))$ and
$D^\beta h_j$ belong to $C_b^{0,\tilde\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$. For $|\beta|=k$ this is true because $D^\beta h_j\in C_b^{0,\omega_o}({\mbf R}^n)\subset C_b^{0,\widetilde\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ by the definition of $H$ and by condition \eqref{eq6.46}, while for
$1\le |\beta|\le k-1$ because $D^\beta h_j\in C_b^{0,1}({\mbf R}^n)$ which is continuously embedded into $C_b^{0,\widetilde\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$. Similarly, for $D^\lambda f(H(\cdot))$ with $1\le |\alpha|\le k-1$ this is true because of the continuous embe
dding $C_b^{0,1}({\mbf R}^n)\hookrightarrow C_b^{0,\widetilde\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ and because $H$ is Lipschitz, while for $|\lambda|=k$ by the definition of $f$ and the fact that $H$ is Lipschitz. \end{proof} Using this lemma we prove the following result
. \begin{Lm}\label{lem6.3} The operator $(H|_{S'})^*: C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}(S)\rightarrow C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}(S')$, $(H|_{S'})^*f:=f\circ H|_{S'}$, is well-defined and belongs to $\mathcal L(C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}(S); C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}(S')
)$. Moreover, it is weak$^*$ continuous.\footnote{Here the weak$^*$ topologies are defined by means of functionals in $G_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}(\tilde S)$, where $\tilde S$ stands for $S'$ or $S$.} \end{Lm} \begin{proof} Let $\tilde f\in C_b^{k,\widetilde\
omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ be such that $\tilde f|_{S}=f$ and $\|\tilde f\|_{C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}=\|f\|_{C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}(S)}$. Then by Lemma \ref{lem6.2} we have \[ \begin{array}{l} \displaystyle (H|_{S'})^*f=f\circ H_{S'}=(\tilde f\circ
H)|_{S'}=(H^*\tilde f)|_{S'}\in C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}(S')\quad {\rm and}\\ \\ \displaystyle \|(H|_{S'})^*f\|_{C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}(S')}\le \|H^*\|\cdot\|\tilde f\|_{C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}({\mbf R}^n)}=\|H^*\|\cdot\|f\|_{C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}(S
)}. \end{array} \] This shows that the operator $(H|_{S'})^*: C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}(S)\rightarrow C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}(S')$ is well-defined and belongs to $\mathcal L(C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}(S); C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}(S'))$. Further, the fact t
hat the operator $H^*:C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\rightarrow C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$ is weak$^*$ continuous follows straightforwardly from Proposition \ref{prop3.1}, Lemma \ref{lem6.2} and the the Fa\`{a} di Bruno formula \eqref{eq6.
47}. Let $T\in Ext(C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}(S);C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}({\mbf R}^n))$ be the extension operator of finite depth (see section~1.3) and $q_{S'}: C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}({\mbf R}^n)\rightarrow C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}(S')$ be the quotient map
induced by restrictions of functions on ${\mbf R}^n$ to $S'$. Then clearly, for all $f\in C_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}(S)$, \[ (H|_{S'})^*f=f\circ H|_{S'}=((Tf)\circ H)|_{S'}=(q_{S'}\circ H^*\circ T)f. \] Therefore $(H|_{S'})^*=q_{S'}\circ H^*\circ T$. Here t
he operator $T$ is weak$^*$ continuous by Theorem \ref{teo1.6} and the operator $q_{S'}$ is weak$^*$ continuous because it is adjoint of the isometric embedding $G_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}(S')\hookrightarrow G_b^{k,\widetilde\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$. This impli
es that the operator $(H|_{S'})^*$ is weak$^*$ continuous as well. \end{proof} We are ready to prove Theorem \ref{te1.11}. Let $\widetilde T\in Ext(C_b^{k,\omega}(S');C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n))$ be the extension operator of the first part of Theorem \
ref{te1.11}, see \eqref{eq6.42}. We set (for $\widetilde \omega:=\omega$) \begin{equation}\label{eq6.48} E:=\widetilde T\circ (H|_{S'})^*. \end{equation} \begin{Lm}\label{lem6.4} Operator $E\in Ext(C_b^{k,\omega}(S); C_b^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n))$, is weak$^
*$ continuous and maps $C_0^{k,\omega}(S)$ in $C_0^{k,\omega}(S')$. \end{Lm} \begin{proof} The first two statements follow from the hypotheses of the theorem, Lemma \ref{lem6.3} and the fact that $\widetilde T$ is weak$^*$ continuous. So let us check the l
ast statement. Let $f\in C_0^{k,\omega}(S)$ be the restriction of a $C^\infty$ function with compact support on ${\mbf R}^n$. Since $H|_{S'}:S'\rightarrow S$ is a proper map (by hypothesis (b) of the theorem), $(H|_{S'})^*f\in C_b^{k,\omega}(S')$ has com
pact support. Moreover, since $f\in C_b^{k,\omega_o}(S)$, Lemma \ref{lem6.3} applied to $\widetilde\omega=\omega_o$ implies that $(H|_{S'})^*f\in C_b^{k,\omega_o}(S')$. Finally, since $\widetilde T\in Ext(C_b^{k,\omega_o}(S');C_b^{k,\omega_o}({\mbf R}^n)
)$ as well, $Ef\in C_b^{k,\omega_o}({\mbf R}^n)$ and has compact support (because $(H|_{S'})^*f$ has it). Due to condition \eqref{equ1.8} for $\omega_o$ we obtain from here that $Ef\in C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$. Since the set of such functions $f$ is den
se in $C_0^{k,\omega}(S)$ (see Corollary \ref{cor1.10}), $E$ maps $C_0^{k,\omega}(S)$ in $C_0^{k,\omega}({\mbf R}^n)$, as required. \end{proof} Now the result of the theorem follows from Lemma \ref{lem6.4} and Theorem \ref{te1.4}\,(2); that is, $G_b^{k,\o
mega}(S)$ is isomorphic to $\bigl(C_0^{k,\omega}(S)\bigr)^*$ and so $G_b^{k,\omega}(S)$ and $C_0^{k,\omega}(S)$ have the metric approximation property (see the argument at the end of section~6.1 above). The proof of the theorem is complete. \end{proof}
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:introduction} In recent years there has been a resurgence of interest in the properties of metastable states, due mostly to the studies of the jammed states of hard sphere systems; see for revi
ews Refs. \onlinecite{charbonneau16, baule16}. There are many topics to study, including for example the spectrum of small perturbations around the metastable state, i.e. the phonon excitations and the existence of a boson peak, and whet
her the Edwards hypothesis works for these states. In this paper we shall study some of these topics in the context of classical Heisenberg spin glasses both in the presence and absence of a random magnetic field. Here the metastable states which we stu
dy are just the minima of the Hamiltonian, and so are well-defined outside the mean-field limit. It has been known for some time that there are strong connections between spin glasses and structural glasses ~\cite{tarzia2007glass,f
ullerton2013growing, moore06}. It has been argued in very recent work~\cite{baity2015soft} that the study of the excitations in classical Heisenberg spin glasses provides the opportunity to contrast with similar phenomenology in
amorphous solids~\cite{wyart2005geometric, charbonneau15}. The minima and excitations about the minima in Heisenberg spin glasses have been studied for many years \cite{bm1981, yeo04, bm1982} but only in the absence of external fields.
In Sec. \ref{sec:models} we define the models to be studied as special cases of the long-range one - dimensional $m$-component vector spin glass where the exchange interactions $J_{ij}$ decrease with the distance between the spins
at sites $i$ and $j$ as $1/r_{ij}^{\sigma}$. The spin $\mathbf{S}_i$ is an $m$-component unit vector. $m=1$ corresponds to the Ising model, $m=2$ corresponds to the XY model and $m=3$ corresponds to the Heisenberg model. By tuning the parame
ter $\sigma$, one can have access to the Sherrington-Kirkpatrick (SK) model and on dilution to the Viana-Bray (VB) model, and indeed to a range of universality classes from mean-field-type to short-range type \cite{leuzzi2
008dilute}, although in this paper only two special cases are studied; the SK model and the Viana-Bray model. We intend to study the cases which correspond to short-range models in a future publication. In Sec. \ref{sec:metastability} we have us
ed numerical methods to learn about the metastable minima of the SK model and the Viana Bray model. Our main procedure for finding the minima is to start from a random configuration of spins and then align each spin with the local field produced by
its neighbors and the external random field, if present. The process is continued until all spins are aligned with their local fields. This procedure finds local minima of the Hamiltonian. In the thermodynamic limit, the energy per spin $\varepsilon$
of these states reaches a characteristic value, which is the same for almost all realization of the bonds and random external fields, but slightly dependent on the dynamical algorithm used for selecting the spin to be flipped e.g. the ``polite'' or
``greedy'' or Glauber dynamics or the sequential algorithm used in the numerical work in this paper \cite{newman:99,parisi:95}. In the context of Ising spin glasses in zero random fields such states were first studied by Parisi \cite{parisi:95}
. For Ising spins these dynamically generated states are an unrepresentative subset of the totality of the one-spin flip stable metastable states, which in general have a distribution of local fields $p(h)$ with $p(0)$ is finite \cite{rober
ts:81}, whereas those generated dynamically are marginally stable and have $p(h) \sim h$, just like that in the true ground state \cite{yan:15}. Furthermore these states have a trivial overlap with each other: $P(q)= \delta(q)$ \cite{parisi:95};
there is no sign of replica symmetry breaking amongst them. Presumably to generate states which show this feature one needs to start from initial spin configurations drawn from a realization of the system at a temperature where broken replic
a symmetry is already present before the quench. Because the initial state is random, one would also expect for vector spin glasses that the states reached after the quench from infinite temperature would have only a trivial overlap with each
other \cite{newman:99} and this is indeed found to be the case in Sec. \ref{sec:overlap}. We have studied the energy which is reached in the quench for both the $m=2$ and $m=3$ SK models but for the case of zero applied random field and
in both cases it is very close to the energy $E_c$ which marks the boundary above which the minima where spins are parallel to their local fields have trivial overlaps with each other, while below it the minima have overlaps with full broken
replica symmetry features \cite{bm:81a, bm1981}. In Ref. \onlinecite{bm1981} the number $N_S(\varepsilon)$ of minima of energy $\varepsilon$ was calculated for the case of zero random field in the SK model and in fact it is only for this
model and zero field that the value of $E_c$ is available. That is why in Sec. \ref{sec:marginal} only this case was studied numerically. The work in Sec. \ref{sec:SKanalytic} was the start of an attempt to have the same information
in the presence of random vector fields. The number of minima $N_S(\varepsilon)$ is exponentially large so it is useful to study the complexity defined as $g(\varepsilon)= \ln N_S(\varepsilon)/N$, where $N$ is the number of spins in the
system. Despite the fact that minima exist over a large range of values of $\varepsilon$ a quench by a particular algorithm seems to reach just the minima which have a characteristic value of $\varepsilon$. What is striking is that th
is characteristic value is close to the energy $E_c$ at which the minima would no longer have a trivial overlap with each other but would start to acquire replica symmetry breaking features, at least for the $m=2$ and $m=3$ SK models in
zero field. The states reached in the quenches are usually described as being marginally stable \cite{muller:15}. The coincidence of the energy obtained in the numerical quenches with the analytically calculated $E_c$ suggests that long-r
ange correlations normally associated with a continuous transition will also be found for the quenched minima since such features are present in the analytical work at $E_c$ \cite{bm:81a}. In the Ising case the field distribution $p(h)$ pro
duced in the quench is very different from that assumed when determining $E_c$, and the quenched state energy at $\approx -0.73$ was so far below from the Ising value of $E_c=-0.672$ that the connection of its marginality to the onset of broken repli
ca symmetry has been overlooked. We believe that the identification of the energy $E_c$ reached in the quench with the onset of replica symmetry breaking in the overlaps of the minima is the most important of our results. In Sec. \ref{sec:SK
analytic} we present our analytical work on the $m$-component SK model in the presence of an $m$-component random field. It has been shown that in the mean-field limit ~\cite{sharma2010almeida} that under the application of a ra
ndom magnetic field, of variance $h_r^2$, there is a phase transition line in the $h_r - T$ plane, the so-called de Almeida-Thouless (AT) line, across which the critical exponents lie in the Ising AT universality class. Below this li
ne, the ordered phase has full replica symmetry breaking. This ordered phase is similar to the Gardner phase expected in high-dimensional hard sphere systems \cite{charbonneau16}. In Sec. \ref{sec:SKanalytic} we study the minima o
f the Heisenberg Hamiltonian in the presence of a random vector field. In the presence of such a field the Hamiltonian no longer has any rotational invariances so one might expect there to be big changes in the excitations about the minimum
as there will be no Goldstone modes in the system. We start Sec. \ref{sec:SKanalytic} by studying the number of local minima $N_S(\varepsilon)$ of the Hamiltonian which have energy per spin of $\varepsilon$. The calculation within th
e annealed approximation, where one calculates the field and bond averages of $N_S(\varepsilon)$ is just an extension of the earlier calculation of Bray and Moore for zero random field \cite{bm1981}. When the random field $h_r> h_{AT}$, w
here $h_{AT}$ is the field at which the AT transition occurs, the complexity is zero, but $g(\varepsilon)$ becomes non-zero for $h_r < h_{AT}$. When it is non-zero, it is thought better to average the complexity itself over the random f
ields and bonds so that one recovers results likely to apply to a typical sample. We have attempted to calculate the quenched complexity $g$ for the SK model in the presence of a random field. The presence of this random field greatly
complicates the algebra and the calculations in Sec. \ref{sec:quenched} and the Appendix really just illustrate the problems that random fields pose when determining the quenched average but do not overcome the algebraic difficulties.
The annealed approximation is much simpler and using it we have calculated the density of states $\rho(\lambda)$ of the Hessian matrix associated with the minimum for the SK model. When $h_r > h_{AT}$ there is a gap $\lambda_0$ in the s
pectrum below which there are no excitations. $\lambda_0$ tends to zero as $h_r \to h_{AT}$. For $m \ge 4$, $\rho(\lambda) \sim \sqrt{\lambda-\lambda_0}$ as $\lambda \to \lambda_0$. For $m =3$ the square root singularity did not o
ccur, much to our surprise. For $h_r < h_{AT}$, the square-root singularity applies for all $m > 2$ with $\lambda_0=0$. Thus in the low-field phase, despite the fact that in the presence of the random fields there are no continuous symmetr
ies in the system and hence no Goldstone modes, there are massless modes present. In Sec. \ref{sec:density} we present numerical work which shows that even for $h_r < h_{AT}$ when the annealed calculation of the density of stat
es of the SK model cannot be exact, it nevertheless is in good agreement with our numerical data. We have also calculated in Sec. \ref{sec:spinglasssusceptibility} the zero temperature spin glass susceptibility $\chi_{SG}$ for $h_
r > h_{AT}$ for the SK model and find that for all $m > 2$ it diverges to infinity as $h_r \to h_{AT}$ just as is found at finite temperatures \cite{sharma2010almeida}. For the SK model, because the complexity is zero for $h_r > h_{AT}$, the quen
ch produces states sensitive to the existence of an AT field. The quench then goes to a state which is the ground state or at least one very like it. The AT field is a feature of the true equilibrium state of the system, which in our cas
e is the state of lowest energy. In Sec. \ref{sec:spinglasssusceptibility} we have studied a ``spin glass susceptibility'' obtained from the minima obtained in our numerical quenches and only for the SK model is there evidence for a diverging
spin glass susceptibility. For the VB model, there is no sign of any singularity in the spin glass susceptibility defined as an average over the states reached in our quench from infinite temperature, but we cannot make any statement concerning
the existence of an AT singularity in the true ground state. This is the problem studied in Ref. \onlinecite{lupo:16}. Finally in Sec. \ref{sec:conclusions} we summarise our main results and make some suggestions for further research.
\section{Models} \label{sec:models} The Hamiltonians studied in this paper are generically of the form \begin{equation} \mathcal{H} = -m\sum_{\langle i, j \rangle} J_{ij} \mathbf{S}_i \cdot \mathbf{S}_j - \sqrt{m}\sum_i \mathbf{h}_i \cdot \mathbf{S}_i \,
, \label{Ham} \end{equation} where the $\mathbf{S}_i$, $i = 1, 2, \cdots, N$, are classical $m$-component vector spins of unit length. This form of writing the Hamiltonian allows for easy comparison against a Hamiltonian where the spins are normalized to
have length $\sqrt{m}$. We are particularly interested in Heisenberg spins, for which $m=3$. The magnetic fields $h_i^\mu$, where $\mu$ denotes a Cartesian spin component, are chosen to be independent Gaussian random fields, uncorrelated between sites, wi
th zero mean, which satisfy \begin{equation} [ h_i^\mu h_j^\nu]_{av} = h_r^2\, \delta_{ij}\, \delta_{\mu\nu} \, . \label{hs} \end{equation} The notation $[\cdots]_{av}$ indicates an average over the quenched disorder and the magnetic fields. We shall stud
y two models, the Sherrington-Kirkpatrick (SK) model and the Viana-Bray (VB) model. Both are essentially mean-field models. In the Sherrington-Kirkpatrick model, the bonds $J_{ij}$ couple all pairs of sites and are drawn from a Gaussian distribution with
zero mean and the variance $1/(N-1)$. The Viana-Bray model can be regarded as a special case of a diluted one-dimensional model where the sites are arranged around a ring. The procedure to determine the bonds $J_{ij}$ to get the diluted model is as speci
fied in Refs. \onlinecite{leuzzi2008dilute,sharma2011phase,sharma2011almeida}. The probability of there being a non-zero interaction between sites $(i,j)$ on the ring falls off with distance as a power-law, and when an interaction does occur, its variance
is independent of $r_{ij}$. The mean number of non-zero bonds from a site is fixed to be $z$. To generate the set of pairs $(i,j)$ that have an interaction with the desired probability the spin $i$ is chosen randomly, and then $j \ (\ne i)$ is chosen at
distance $r_{ij}$ with probability \begin{equation} p_{ij} = \frac{r_{ij}^{-2\sigma}}{\sum_{j\, (j\neq i)}r_{ij}^{-2\sigma}} \, , \end{equation} where $r_{ij}=\frac{N}{\pi}\sin\left[\frac{\pi}{N}(i-j)\right]$ is the length of the chord between the sites $
i,j$ when all the sites are put on a circle. If $i$ and $j$ are already connected, the process is repeated until a pair which has not been connected before is found. The sites $i$ and $j$ are then connected with an interaction picked from a Gaussian inter
action whose mean is zero and whose standard deviation is set to $J \equiv 1$. This process is repeated precisely $N_b = z N / 2 $ times. This procedure automatically gives $J_{ii} = 0$. Our work concentrates on the case where the coordination number is f
ixed at $z=6$ to mimic the $3$-d cubic scenario. The SK limit ($z=N-1, \sigma = 0$) is a special case of this model, as is the VB model which also has $\sigma = 0$, but the coordination number $z$ has (in this paper) the value $6$. The advantage of th
e one-dimensional long-range model for numerical studies is that by simply tuning the value of $\sigma$ one can mimic the properties of finite dimensional systems~\cite{leuzzi2008dilute,sharma2011phase,sharma2011almeida} and we have already done some work
using this device. However, in this paper we only report on our work on the SK and VB models. \section{Numerical studies of the minima obtained by quenching} \label{sec:metastability} In this section we present our numerical studies of the minima of
the VB and SK models. We begin by describing how we found the minima numerically. They are basically just quenches from infinite temperature. In Sec. \ref{sec:overlap} we have studied the overlap between the minima and we find that
the minima produced have only trivial overlaps with one another. In Sec \ref{sec:marginal} we describe our evidence that the minima of the SK model in zero field have marginal stability as they have an energy per spin close to the energy $E_c
$ which marks the energy at which the minima starting to have overlaps showing replica symmetry breaking features. At zero temperature, the metastable states (minima) which we study are those obtained by aligning every spin along its local field direc
tion, starting off from a random initial state. In the notation used for our numerical work based on Eq. (\ref{Ham}) we iterate the equations \begin{equation} \mathbf{S}^{n+1}_i= \frac{\mathbf{H}^{n}_i}{|\mathbf{H}_i^{n}|}, \label{eq:parn} \end{equation}
where the local fields after the $n$th iteration, $\mathbf{H}_i^{n}$, are given by \begin{equation} \mathbf{H}_i^n= \sqrt{m} \mathbf{h}_i+m \sum_j J_{ij} \mathbf{S}_j^{n}. \label{eq:hdefn} \end{equation} For a given disorder sample, a random configuration
of spins is first created which would be a possible spin configuration at infinite temperature. Starting from the first spin and scanning sequentially all the way up to the $N^{th}$ spin, every spin is aligned to its local field according to Eq.~(\ref{eq:
parn}), this whole process constituting one sweep. The vector $(\Delta \mathbf{S}_{1},\Delta \mathbf{S}_{2},\cdots,\Delta \mathbf{S}_{N})$ is computed by subtracting the spin configuration before the sweep from the spin configuration generated after the sw
eep. The quantity $\eta = \frac{1}{Nm}\sum_{\mu=1}^{m}\sqrt{\sum_{j=1}^{N}(\Delta S_{j\mu})^{2}}$ is a measure of how close the configurations before and after the sweep are. The spin configurations are iterated over many sweeps until the value of $\eta$ f
alls below $0.00001$, when the system is deemed to have converged to the metastable state described by Eq.~(\ref{eq:par}), which will be a minimum of the energy at zero temperature. Differing starting configurations usually generate different minima, at le
ast for large systems. \subsection{Overlap distribution} \label{sec:overlap} \begin{figure} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_VB.eps} \caption{(Color online) The overlap distribution $P(q)$ for the VB model ($\sigma =0, z =6$, $h_r=0.6$) for t
he minima generated by the prescription described in the text. $P(q)$ seems to be approaching a delta function as $N$ tends to infinity.} \label{fig0} \end{figure} It is informative to study the overlaps between the various minima. Consider the overlap b
etween two minima $A$ and $B$ defined as \begin{equation} q \equiv \frac{1}{N}\sum_{i}\mathbf{S}_i^{A} \cdot \mathbf{S}_i^{B}. \end{equation} Numerically, the following procedure is adopted. A particular realization of the bonds and fields is chosen. Choos
ing a random initial spin configuration, the above algorithm is implemented and descends to a locally stable state. This generates a metastable spin state that is stored. One then chooses a second initial condition, and the algorithm is applied, which gene
rates a second metastable spin state which is also stored. One repeats this $N_{min}$ times generating in total $N_{min}$ metastable states (some or all of which might be identical). One then overlaps all pairs of these states, so there are $N_{pairs} = N_
{min}(N_{min}-1)/2$ overlaps which are all used to make a histogram. The whole process is averaged over $N_{samp}$ samples of disorder. Fig.~\ref{fig0} shows the overlap distribution of the metastable states obtained by the above prescription for the VB mo
del. The figure suggests that in the thermodynamic limit, the distribution of overlaps, $P(q) = \delta(q-q_0(h_r))$. In zero field we have found that $q_0(h_r=0)=0$. Since we study only a finite system of $N$ spins, the delta function peak is broadened
to a Gaussian centered around $q_0$ and of width $O(\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}})$. We studied also the SK model, for a range of values for the $h_r$ fields, and the data are consistent with $P(q)$ just having a single peak in the thermodynamic limit. This suggests
that the metastable states generated by the procedure of repeatedly putting spins parallel to their local fields starting from a random state always produces minima which have a $P(q)$ of the same type as would be expected for the paramagnetic phase. N
ewman and Stein \cite{newman:99} showed that for Ising spins in zero field that when one starts off from an initial state, equivalent to being at infinite temperature, and quenches to zero temperature one always ends up in a state with a trivial $P(q)=\del
ta(q)$, in agreement, for example with the study of Parisi \cite{parisi:95}. Our results for vector spin glasses seem exactly analogous to the Ising results. \subsection{Marginal stability} \label{sec:marginal} In this subsection we shall focus on t
he Ising, XY ($m = 2$) and Heisenberg ($m=3$) SK models with zero random field. Parisi found for the Ising case that when starting a quench from infinite temperature, when the spins are just randomly up or down, and putting spins parallel to
their local fields according to various algorithms, the final state had an energy per spin $\varepsilon=-0.73$ \cite{parisi:95}. In their studies of one-spin flip stable spin glasses in zero field, Bray and Moore \cite{bm1981,bm