content
stringlengths 1
15.9M
|
|---|
\section{Introduction}
\noindent\emph{Quantum computing.} Quantum computing is one of the most promising emerging computation technology. Theory promises algorithmic speed ups ranging from quadratic, for unstructured problems, up to exponential for some particular key problems. Besides the some problems such as integer factoring and its obvious applications in cryptology, very few applicable large scale algorithms have been derived or studied. In 2015 especially, Montanaro \cite{Mon15} presented a general method to obtain speedups of backtracking-based algorithms, relying on Belovs' previous work \cite{Bel13} (merged in \cite{BCJ13}). The algorithm uses Quantum Walks, a well developed quantum algorithmic tool intensively studied in the scope of search algorithms \cite{Amb03,Amb07,CCD03,Kem03,MNRS07,San08,Sze04}.
\noindent\emph{Constraint satisfaction problems.} CSPs form a very general class of problems, that encompass a large set of practical problems. The most famous examples are the Boolean satisfiability problem (SAT) \cite{GPFW97} and the graph coloring problem \cite{MT10}. Both have applications in many fields, like scheduling \cite{Lei79} or timetabling \cite{deW85} for graph coloring, and in computer science or artificial intelligence, among others, for SAT (refer to \cite{GPFW97} for a wide list of applications of SAT).
CSPs have been widely studied and a well known tool taking advantage of their structure to solve them is backtracking. For example, the DPLL \cite{DLL62,DP60} backtracking-based algorithm has been introduced in 1962 and is currently the procedure at the basis of some of the most efficient SAT solvers \cite{ES04,GKSS08,vBe06}. Since backtracking algorithms explore a tree whose vertices are partial solutions to the associated CSP \cite{vBe06}, one can think of using a quantum walk to obtain a speedup.
\noindent\emph{Quantum backtracking.} In 2017, Ambainis and Kokainis \cite{AK17} have dealt with Montanaro's algorithm in depth and in 2018, Aono, Nguyen and Shen \cite{ANS18} used these works to speed up the two most efficient forms of enumeration (a lattice algorithm) known. They claim that it affects the security estimates of several lattice-based submissions to the NIST post-quantum standardization process \cite{CJL16}. In turn, Montanaro \cite{Mon19a} has presented how to get a quantum speedup of branch-and-bound algorithms by using Ambainis-Kokainis' work and his own. Thus, Montanaro's algorithm is of high interest in computing science and cryptography. In 2018, Campbell, Khurana and Montanaro \cite{CKM18} reviewed its complexity when applied to the graph coloring problem and SAT, assuming access to a very large amount of qubits, since they aggressively optimized the circuit depth. The aim of this work is to investigate a memory efficient implementation of this backtracking algorithm, in order to be able to validate the algorithm on small instances via classical emulation.
The paper is organized as follows. Section \ref{Prel} introduces definitions. We discuss the choice of heuristic in section \ref{Heur}. Then, section \ref{Implem} is about the use of the predicate, how to implement it and how to check some generic constraints. We conclude by presenting some of the results we got for graph coloring, thanks to a simulator, in section \ref{Res}.
\section{Preliminaries} \label{Prel}
Thereafter, we will denote by $\mathcal{P}$ a constraint satisfaction problem defined by a triple $\langle X,D,C \rangle$, where $X = \{x_1,\dots,x_n\}$ is a set of $n$ variables, $D = [\![1,d]\!]$ is a set of $d$ values and $C$ is a set of $m$ constraints. We will also use $\mathcal{D}$ to denote the extended domain $D\cup\{\ast\}$ in which each variable can take its value, $\ast$ standing for "the variable has no value".
Let $x$ be an assignment of values to the $n$ variables of a CSP $\mathcal{P}$. It will be said to be a solution to $\mathcal{P}$ if it verifies all the constraints in $C$; complete if $\forall x_i \in X,~ x_i \neq \ast$, partial otherwise; valid if it is partial and can be extended to a solution; invalid if it is partial and not a solution.
\subsection{Backtracking algorithm}
A standard approach for solving a CSP $\mathcal{P}$ is the technique of backtracking. For this, we assume that we have access to a predicate $P$ which can receive an assignment (complete or partial) of values $x$ as argument and returns "true" if $x$ is a solution, "indeterminate" if it is valid, "false" otherwise. We also assume access to a heuristic $h$ which specifies which variable should be instantiated next. The general algorithm is presented as algorithm \ref{Backtracking}.
\begin{algorithm}[ht!]
\caption{General backtracking algorithm }\label{Backtracking}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require An assignment of values $x$, access to $h : \mathcal{D} \rightarrow [\![1,n]\!]$ and to $P : \mathcal{D} \rightarrow \{true, indeterminate, false\}$.
\If{$P(x)$ is true} output $x$ and \Return \EndIf
\If{$P(x)$ is false} \Return \EndIf
\State $j \leftarrow h(x)$
\For{$w \in [\![1,d]\!]$}
\State $y \leftarrow x$ with the $j$-th entry replaced with $w$.
\State \Return \textbf{Algorithm \ref{Backtracking}}$(y)$
\EndFor
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\renewcommand{\algorithmicloop}{\textbf{Repeat}}
\renewcommand{\algorithmicif}{\textbf{If}}
\renewcommand{\algorithmicelse}{\hspace{.5cm}\textbf{else }}
\subsection{Montanaro's algorithm}
The algorithm presented in \cite{Mon15} is based on a quantum walk on trees. The idea is summarized as follows. Consider a rooted tree $\mathcal{T}$ with $T$ vertices, labeled $r,1,\dots,T-1$, the vertex $r$ being the root of $\mathcal{T}$. Hereafter, $A$ (resp. $B$) will denote the set of vertices at an even (resp. odd) distance from $r$ and $x \longrightarrow y$ will mean that $y$ is a child of $x$ in the tree. The quantum walk operates on the space spanned by $\{\ket{x};~x\in \{r\} \cup [\![1,T-1]\!]\}$, and starts in the state $\ket{r}$. It is based on a set of diffusion operators $D_x$, where $D_x$ is the identity if $x$ is a solution, otherwise, diffuses on the subspace spanned by $\{\ket{x}\} \cup \{\ket{y}:x\longrightarrow y\}$. A step of the walk consists in applying the operator $R_BR_A$, where :
\begin{center}
$R_A = \bigoplus_{x\in A} D_x$ and $R_B = \dyad{r} + \bigoplus_{x\in B} D_x$
\end{center}
Thanks to these operators, an algorithm for detecting a solution in a tree can be established (algorithm \ref{Detection}). It is the phase estimation of the operator $R_BR_A$ which allows the quantum walker to go through the paths leading to a solution in $\mathcal{T}$. By applying the detection algorithm to wisely chosen vertices of $\mathcal{T}$, it is possible to construct an hybrid algorithm for finding a solution (algorithm \ref{Finding}). Montanaro has shown that it finds a solution in time complexity $\mathcal{O} (\sqrt{T}n^{3/2}\log{n}\log{1/\delta})$ and if there exists a unique solution, it is shown to be $\mathcal{O} (\sqrt{Tn}\log^3{n}\log{1/\delta})$. For more details on the quantum walk, refer to \cite{Mon15}.
\begin{algorithm}[ht!]
\caption{Detecting a solution (algorithm 2 of \cite{Mon15})}\label{Detection}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require Operators $R_A$, $R_B$, a failure probability $\delta$, upper bounds on the depth $n$ and the number of vertices $T$. Let $\beta,\gamma > 0$ be universal constants to be determined.
\Loop $~K = \ceil{\gamma \log{1/\delta}}$ times:
\State Apply phase estimation to the operator $R_BR_A$ with precision $\beta/\sqrt{Tn}$.
\If{the eigenvalue is 1} accept \EndIf
\EndLoop
\If{number of acceptances $\ge 3K/8$} \Return "Solution exists" \Else{\Return "No solution"} \EndIf
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{algorithm}[ht!]
\caption{Finding a solution (described in subsection 2.1 of \cite{Mon15})}\label{Finding}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State Apply algorithm \ref{Detection} to the entire tree.
\If{it outputs "No solution"} \Return \EndIf
\State Apply algorithm \ref{Detection} to each child of the root until one outputs "Solution exists".
\If{this child is a solution} output its label and \Return \Else{go back to step 3 with this child as the root.} \EndIf
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\section{Variable ordering heuristics} \label{Heur}
In order to be able to test the algorithm with the means we have, our glance was initially towards the choice of the heuristic. In fact, the largest qubit overhead in the implementation comes from the heuristic implementation, since one has to store variable indexes inside the quantum memory ($\mathcal{O}(n\log n)$ qubits are needed). Moreover, even though the depth overhead of the heuristic is asymptotically negligible compared to the rest of the algorithm, it seems
that for instances of reasonable size, this overhead is not negligible.
Since we are interested in optimizing the number of qubits, we chose to deal with static variable ordering (SVO) heuristics, which can be classically precomputed at the start of the meta-algorithm. This has two main benefits: only $\mathcal{O}(n\log d)$ data qubits are required to store an assignment and we do not have to produce a reversible implementation of a dynamic variable ordering (DVO) heuristic.
In \cite{CKM18} and \cite{Mon19b}, the implementation of Montanaro's algorithm has been optimized in depth and its complexity has been studied considering the use of a DVO heuristic. However, the benefit of implementing a DVO heuristic is unclear in the range of parameters for which it is claimed in \cite{CKM18} that a graph could be colored in one day (up to approximately 150 vertices). Let $T$ (resp. $T'$) be the number of vertices in the backtracking tree associated with a SVO (resp. DVO) heuristic and $c_T$ (resp. $c_{T'}$) the number of calls to $R_BR_A$ made by Montanaro's algorithm. If we denote the depth of the overhead due to the implementation of a DVO heuristic by $d_h$ and the depth of the operators $R_A$ and $R_B$ without heuristic by $d_R$, we have that using a dynamic heuristic is more efficient than using a static one if: $c_T d_R \ge c_{T'}(d_R + d_h)$, i.e. if $\frac{c_T}{c_{T'}} \ge 1 + \frac{d_h}{d_R}$. This is asymptotically true but thanks to the script computing algorithm \ref{Finding} complexity to solve graph coloring given in \cite{Mon19b}, one can compute an estimate of $\frac{d_h}{d_R}$ (Fig. \ref{depth}). In the considered range of parameters, we can see that using a DVO heuristic would be better than using a SVO one if $c_T \ge \frac{5}{4} c_{T'}$. Unfortunately, as far as we know, no DVO heuristic has been proved to verify such a bound. Thus, the time-saving trick allowed by a DVO heuristic may not be obvious and it might be worth using a SVO heuristic for "small" instances.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.8\linewidth]{Images/depth.png}
\caption{$d_h/d_R$ according to \textit{finalcomplexity.py} for graph coloring given in \cite{Mon19b}.}\label{depth}
\end{figure}
The modified algorithm for $R_A$ and $R_B$ is presented as algorithm \ref{Gen_implem}.
\begin{algorithm}[ht!]
\caption{Implementation of the operator $R_A$}\label{Gen_implem}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require A basis state $\ket{\ell}\ket{v_1}\dots \ket{v_n} \in \mathbb{C}^{n+1} \otimes (\mathbb{C}^{d+1})^{\otimes n}$ corresponding to a partial assignment $x_1 = v_1, \dots, x_\ell = v_\ell$. Ancilla registers : $\mathcal{H}_{\text{anc}}$, $\mathcal{H}_{\text{children}}$, storing a tuple $(a,S)$, where $a \in \{\ast\} \cup [d]$,
$S \subseteq [d]$, initialized to $a=\ast$, $S=\emptyset$.
\State If $\ell$ is odd, swap $a$ with $v_{\ell}$.
\State Compute $P(x)$.
\State If $P(x)$ is true, go to step 8.
\State If $a \neq \ast$, subtract 1 from $\ell$.
\State For each $w \in [d]$, if $P(v_1,\dots,v_\ell,w)$ is not false, set $S = S \cup \{w\}$.
\State If $\ell = 0$, $i=n$, else, $i=1$. Perform $I - 2 \dyad{\phi_{i,S}}$ on $\mathcal{H}_{\text{anc}}$.
\State Revert steps 5 and 4.
\State Revert steps 2 and 1.
\end{algorithmic}
$R_B$ is similar, except that: step 1 is preceded by the check "If $\ell = 0$, return"; "odd" is replaced with "even" in step 1; and the check "If $\ell = 0$ is removed from step 6.
\end{algorithm}
In order to test our implementation of Montanaro's algorithm, we used the following SVO heuristics:
\begin{itemize}
\item Maximum cardinality (MC) \cite{DM89}: chooses the variable with the largest number of neighbors to be the first one and then orders the others by choosing at each step the most connected one with previously ordered ones;
\item Maximum degree (MD) \cite{DM89}: orders the variables in the decreasing order of the size of their neighborhood;
\item Minimum width (MW) \cite{Fre82}: orders the variables from last to first by choosing at each step the one having the minimum number of neighbors in the subproblem where previously ordered variables have been deleted.
\end{itemize}
To get an idea of the efficiency of these heuristics compared to the naive one, we emulated Montanaro's algorithm on the graph coloring problem by replacing algorithm \ref{Detection} with a backtracking one in algorithm \ref{Finding}. For fixed values of $n$ and $d$, we generated 1000 random graphs for a varying number of edges, ran algorithm \ref{Finding} on these graphs and counted the number of calls to the emulated algorithm in average. The same pattern arose when $n$ took different values between 10 and 20 and $d$ between 3 and 6 (Fig. \ref{heuristic}). We observed that the MD heuristic offered the best (and optimal) results and that MC and MW heuristics led to very similar results. Of course, we can not extrapolate for higher values of $n$ and $d$.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.9\linewidth]{Images/heuristics.png}
\caption{Mean number of calls to algorithm \ref{Detection} depending on the number of edges in a graph with 15 nodes and 4 colors.}\label{heuristic}
\end{figure}
\section{Generic implementation} \label{Implem}
Thereafter, we will use the following notations : $\nu = \ceil{\log{(n+1)}}$, $\delta = \ceil{\log{(d+1)}}$ and $\mu = \ceil{\log{(m+1)}}$.
The most straightforward way of implementing the predicate $\mathcal{P}$ is to compute a logical $AND$ of the result of the evaluation of each constraint over the current variable assignment. This would lead to a circuit using $m+1$ work qubits. We present another solution, a quantum counter, using only $\mu$ qubits.
In the case of the partial predicate, an index $\ell$ stored in a quantum register indicates that the first $\ell +1$ variables have been assigned a value.
Therefore, if is sufficient to check the constraints that depends on at least one variable in $\{x_{i_1},\dots,x_{i_\ell}\}$. To find out if a constraint has to be checked, we use a system of comparison of values, one of which is quantum and the other classical. The overall process requires $\mathcal{O}(m)$ additions on $\nu$ qubits.
Similarly, if we apply the detection algorithm to a vertex located at the $\ell$-th level of the backtracking tree, it is unnecessary to check the constraints that depend solely on the variables in $\{x_{i_1},\dots,x_{i_{\ell -1}}\}$.
Thanks to these optimizations, the deeper we go in the backtracking tree, the more qubits, quantum gates and time are saved.
\subsection{How to implement a predicate}
Let $\mathcal{P} = \langle X,D,C \rangle$ be a CSP. For all $i \in [\![1,n]\!]$, the binary representation of the value assigned to $x_i$ is denoted by $v_i$. The symbol $\ast$ will be encoded by 0.
The circuit \ref{circ1} is used to verify if an assignment is solution to $\mathcal{P}$, by checking for all $i \in [\![1,m]\!]$ the constraint $C_i \in C$. An ancillary register $c$ is used as a counter. In order to check $C_i$, a subroutine depending on the set $Y_i$ of involved variables in $C_i$ will be used and will increase the counter if $C_i$ is not verified. Once all the constraints have been checked, the counter will be equal to the number of constraints that are violated. Thus, if it is 0, we set an ancillary qubit to 1. Then, we reverse the $C_i$ checking operations to reset the counter to 0. At the end of the circuit, we have in the ancillary qubit the wanted value: $P(v_1,\dots,v_n)$.
We also want to be able to verify if a partial assignment $x_1 = v_1, \dots, x_{\ell +1}= v_{\ell +1}$ is valid for $\mathcal{P}$. In this aim, we have to check for all $i \in [\![1,m]\!]$ the constraint $C_i$ if $\max_{x_i \in Y_i} \{i\} -1 \le \ell$. In the following, $\forall i \in [\![1,m]\!]$, $M_i$ will denote $\max_{x_i \in Y_i} \{i\} -1$ and $M_0 = 0$.
In order to compute the comparison operator, we add a bit (most significant one) to $\ket{\ell}$ (call it $\ket{a}$, initialize it to $\ket{0}$) and use the following procedure (\ref{circ3}):
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $M_{i}-M_{i-1}>0$, subtract it from $\ket{\ell -M_{i-1}}$, otherwise, add it to $\ket{\ell -M_{i-1}}$;
\item If $M_i>\ell$ then some overflow will occur and thus, $\ket{a}$ will be flipped. Use it to control the $C_i$ checking operation.
\end{enumerate}
In circuit \ref{circ2}, the ancillary qubit $\ket{a}$ is set to 1. Thus, the comparison operator will flip $\ket{a}$ if $M_i>\ell$, i.e. if $\max_{x_i \in Y_i} \{i\}>\ell +1$. Thanks to $\ket{a}$ we can control the $C_i$ checking operation. For the rest of the circuit, the idea is the same as the one of the circuit \ref{circ1}.
Within the scope of an optimization of the depth of our implementation, note that constraint checking operations can easily be parallelized (figure \ref{parallel}). We just have to divide $C$ in $k\in\mathbb{N}$ sets of $\frac{m}{k}$ constraints and use a copy of the $v_i$ registers and a counter for checking each one. This involves using $\mathcal{O}(kn\log n)$ qubits but the depth of the predicate would be divided by $k$ (we just have then to fan-out/fan-in $v_i$ registers to $k$ copies, which can be done in depth $\mathcal{O}(\log k)$).
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\captionsetup[subfigure]{labelformat=empty}
\begin{minipage}{.39\linewidth}
\centering
\subfloat[(a)]{\label{circ1}\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Images/circ1.png}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.59\linewidth}
\centering
\subfloat[(c)]{\label{circ3}\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Images/circ3.png}}
\end{minipage}\par\medskip
\centering
\subfloat[(b)]{\label{circ2}\includegraphics[width=.6\textwidth]{Images/circ2.png}}
\caption{Circuit (a) computes $P(v_1\cdots v_n)$. If the assignment is a solution, then $p=1$, else $p=0$. Circuit (b) is a comparison operator. The operation is done modulo $2^{\nu +1}$. Circuit (c) computes $P(v_1,\dots,v_{\ell +1})$. If the partial assignment is not invalid, then $p=1$, else $p=0$.}\label{circuits1}
\end{figure}
\subsection{How to check a constraint}
The circuit \ref{circ4} is used to check if the variable $x_i$ has been assigned a value (e.g. if the $i$-th vertex of a graph $G$ has been colored). It uses the ancillary register $\ket{c}$ which contains a bit string corresponding to the counter. Since we have chosen that the value 0 means that $v_i=\ast$, we just have to check that $v_i$ is different from 0. The counter is increased by 1 if $x_i$ has not been assigned a value.
The circuit \ref{circ5} is used to check if the variables $x_j$ and $x_k$ have different values (e.g. if the coloring of the edge between the $j$-th and the $k$-th vertices of a graph is well colored). It uses the ancillary register $\ket{c}$, which is increased by 1 if $v_j \oplus v_k = 0$ (i.e. $v_j = v_k$). For that, we apply a bit-wise XOR to the values of the two variables (the result is stocked in the register of the second value).
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\begin{minipage}{.34\linewidth}
\centering
\subfloat[]{\label{circ4}\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Images/circ4.png}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.64\linewidth}
\subfloat[]{\label{circ5}\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Images/circ5.png}}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Circuit (a) checks if the $i$-th variable has been assigned a value. If $v_i =0$, $\ket{c'} = \ket{c+1}$, otherwise $\ket{c'} = \ket{c}$. Circuit (b) checks if the $j$-th and the $k$-th variables have different values. If $v_j = v_k$, $\ket{c'} = \ket{c+1}$, otherwise $\ket{c'} = \ket{c}$.}\label{circuitsgraph}
\end{figure}
For the specific case of boolean variables, we suggest to represent the bit 0 by the quantum state $\ket{10}$, the bit 1 by the quantum state $\ket{11}$ and the unassigned symbol $\ast$ by $\ket{00}$. In the following, we will denote the left qubit by an $L$ in exponent and the right qubit by an $R$ in exponent. Our suggestion stems from the fact that thanks to this choice, it will be simpler to manipulate the variables. The left qubit will allow us to do the negation of the boolean variable without having a side effect on the unassigned values. The right qubit will allow us to distinguish 1 from $\ast$ and 0, which will be useful to check a disjunction of literals.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\begin{center}
\begin{minipage}{.2\linewidth}
\centering
\subfloat[]{\label{circ6}\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Images/circ6.png}}
\end{minipage}
\hspace{2cm}
\begin{minipage}{.35\linewidth}
\centering
\subfloat[]{\label{circ7}\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Images/circ7.png}}
\end{minipage}
\end{center}
\vspace{-.5cm}
\caption{Circuit (a) is the negation of a boolean variable. The value associated with $\ket{v}$ is the negation of the one associated with $\ket{u}$. Circuit (b) checks if the disjunction of the literals $x_{i_1},\dots,x_{i_k}$ is True or False. If $\bigvee_{j \in [\![1,k]\!]}x_{i_j} = 0$, $\ket{c'} = \ket{c+1}$, otherwise $\ket{c'} = \ket{c}$.}\label{circuitssat}
\end{figure}
\subsection{General structure}
Thanks to the precedent subsections, step 2 and most of step 5 of algorithm \ref{Gen_implem} can be realized. The rest of the implementation is most straightforward, circuits of the operators $R_A$ and $R_B$ are given in appendix (resp. Fig. \ref{RA} and \ref{RB}). Note that contrary to what is said in \cite{CKM18}, we just need to add one control qubit to three (resp. one) controlled-Z gates in step 6 to control the whole operator $R_A$ (resp. $R_B$).
\section{Simulation results} \label{Res}
Now, we present some results of our simulations for the problem of graph coloring. In order to check the constraints, the circuits \ref{circ4} and \ref{circ5} can be used. The colors red (circle), green (square) and blue (triangle) will be denoted by $R$, $G$ and $B$. We will denote any partial assignment $x_1=v_1,\dots,x_\ell=v_\ell$ which is not trivially false by $a^\ell$ and if the values are of importance by $a_{v_1\dots v_\ell}$.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\captionsetup[subfigure]{labelformat=empty}
\begin{minipage}{.24\linewidth}
\centering
\subfloat[(a)]{\label{graph1}\includegraphics[width=.6\linewidth]{Images/graph1.png}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.74\linewidth}
\centering
\subfloat[(c)]{\label{table1}\includegraphics[width=.9\linewidth]{Images/table1.png}}
\end{minipage}\par\medskip
\begin{minipage}{.49\linewidth}
\centering
\subfloat[(b)]{\label{tree1}\includegraphics[width=.7\linewidth]{Images/tree1.png}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.49\linewidth}
\centering
\subfloat[(d)]{\label{graphic1}\includegraphics[width=.6\linewidth]{Images/graphic1.png}}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Fig. (a): a graph. Fig. (b): its associated classical backtracking tree. Tab. (c): results of our simulations. Fig. (d): some of these results as a graph.}\label{example1}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{table1} (resp. \ref{table2}) shows the classical backtracking tree associated to the graph in Fig. \ref{graph1} (resp. \ref{graph2}), assuming, without loss of generality, that the first vertex has been colored in blue.
By applying the algorithm \ref{Finding} on the root of the complete tree associated to the graph in Fig. \ref{graph1}, it is supposed to detect that there is no possible coloring for this graph with two colors. Thus, the subtree presented here may not be visited thanks to the quantum part. For the second example, the algorithm \ref{Finding} will travel along the dark gray tree (if it outputs all the solutions in Fig. \ref{table2}).
Tab. \ref{tree1} (resp. \ref{tree2}) presents some probabilities of obtaining eigenvalue 1 depending on the precision used for the phase estimation in the algorithm \ref{Detection} and the partial assignment at the root of the subtree on which it is applied. Some of these probabilities (y-axis) depending on the precision (x-axis) are presented in Fig. \ref{graphic1} (resp. \ref{graphic2}).
For the first example, we look at the results where the algorithm has been applied on $a^0$. We can see that for a precision smaller than 4, the algorithm \ref{Detection} will fail with high probability, since the threshold probability of acceptance fixed in \cite{Mon15} is $0.375$ (blue line). For the second example, we look at the results where the algorithm has been applied on $a_{BB}$ (plus signs) and $a_{BR}$ $\&$ $a_{BG}$ (crosses). We can see that for a precision equal to 1, the algorithm \ref{Detection} will fail with high probability.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\captionsetup[subfigure]{labelformat=empty}
\begin{minipage}{.24\linewidth}
\centering
\subfloat[(a)]{\label{graph2}\includegraphics[width=.6\linewidth]{Images/graph2.png}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.74\linewidth}
\centering
\subfloat[(c)]{\label{table2}\includegraphics[width=.9\linewidth]{Images/table2.png}}
\end{minipage}\par\medskip
\begin{minipage}{.49\linewidth}
\centering
\subfloat[(b)]{\label{tree2}\includegraphics[width=.85\linewidth]{Images/tree2.png}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.49\linewidth}
\centering
\subfloat[(d)]{\label{graphic2}\includegraphics[width=.6\linewidth]{Images/graphic2.png}}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Fig. (a): a graph. Fig. (b): a subtree of its associated classical backtracking tree ($d=3$). Tab. (c): results of our simulations. Fig. (d): some of these results as a graph.}\label{example2}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we discussed our implementation of Montanaro's algorithm, but an improved quantum algorithm for backtracking has been introduced by Ambainis and Kokainis \cite{AK17}, reducing the queries complexity from $\mathcal{O}(\sqrt{Tn}\log{\frac{1}{\delta}})$ to $\mathcal{O}(n^{3/2}\sqrt{T'}\log^2{\frac{n\log{T}}{\delta}})$, where $T'$ is the number of vertices of $\mathcal{T}$ actually explored by a classical backtracking algorithm. Nevertheless, Montanaro's algorithm can not be left out since it is a component of Ambainis-Kokainis' algorithm.
While Campbell, Khurana and Montanaro \cite{CKM18} assumed access to an extremely large number of physical qubits to propose a depth optimized method to implement Montanaro's algorithm, we have presented techniques minimizing the space usage. For that, we especially looked at the implementation of the predicate and the heuristic. We have proposed the use of a quantum counter for the former and highlighted the fact that up to a certain point, the latter might not be quantumly implemented. However, these propositions are not asymptotically competitive, although our implementation of the predicate could be parallelized to be efficient and could lead to a trade-off between the space usage and the time usage. As far as the heuristic is concerned, it would be interesting to establish a precise resource estimation and define to what extent a SVO heuristic would present benefits compared to a DVO one.
\bigskip
\noindent\textbf{Acknowledgments.} This work was supported by Atos. The implementation was developed in python using Atos’ pyAQASM library. All simulations were performed on the Atos Quantum Learning Machine. We acknowledge support from the French ANR project ANR-18-CE47-0010 (QUDATA), the QuantERA ERA-NET Cofund in Quantum Technologies implemented within the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Program (QuantAlgo project), and the French ANR project ANR-18-QUAN-0017 (QuantAlgo Project).
\bibliographystyle{abbrv}
\input{BacktrackingLNCS.bbl}
\section*{Appendix}
\begin{appendix}
\begin{sidewaysfigure}[ht!]
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Images/parallelized.png}
\caption{Example of parallelization of the predicate for $k=4$. $\{C^{(i)}, i\in [\![1,4]\!]\}$ is a partition of $C$ and $\abs{C^{(i)}} \le \frac{m}{k} \forall i \in [\![1,4]\!]$. The checking operation of an element in $C^{(i)}$ is denoted by Check$^{(i)}$.}\label{parallel}
\end{sidewaysfigure}
\begin{sidewaysfigure}[ht!]
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Images/RA.png}
\caption{Circuit corresponding to algorithm \ref{Gen_implem} for $R_A$. Steps 7 and 8 are not represented since they consist in reversing steps 5, 4, 2 and 1. Step 3 is realized by controlling cZ (controlled Z) operations in step 6 with $\ket{P}$. In the same way, it is sufficient to control the three cZ in step 6 to control the whole operator, due to the reversibility of the other steps.}\label{RA}
\end{sidewaysfigure}
\begin{sidewaysfigure}[ht!]
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Images/RB.png}
\caption{Circuit corresponding to algorithm \ref{Gen_implem} for $R_B$. Steps 7 and 8 are not represented since they consist in reversing steps 5, 4, 2 and 1. Steps "$\ell\stackrel{?}{=}0$" and 3 are realized by controlling cZ (controlled Z) operation in step 6 with $\ket{\ell\stackrel{?}{=}0}$ and $\ket{P}$ respectively. In the same way, it is sufficient to control the cZ operation in step 6 to control the whole operator, due to the reversibility of the other steps.}\label{RB}
\end{sidewaysfigure}
\end{appendix}
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
Consensus networks, where the state of each node approaches a weighted average of the states of adjacent nodes, are used to model the diffusive couplings numerous natural and engineered systems. These systems typically operate in the face of various disturbances such as measurement/process noise, communication delays, component failures, misbehaving nodes, or malicious attacks (e.g., \cite{Young10, Bamieh12,Leblanc13,Shi13,yazicioglu2017resilient}).
Accordingly, a central question regarding such networks is how they behave in the face of disturbances.
This paper is focused on the robustness of undirected consensus networks to noisy interactions. In such networks, each edge is endowed with some positive weight denoting the coupling strength between the corresponding nodes. We consider a setting with additive process noise, where the state of each node is attracted towards the weighted average of the states of its neighbors plus some independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) white Gaussian noise with zero mean and unit covariance. We use the expected steady state population variance of states, which is a variant of the $\mathcal{H}_2$-norm of the system with the output defined as the deviation of nodes from global average, as the measure of vulnerability to noise. Similar dynamics were considered in \cite{Young10,Bamieh12} and it was shown that for any network with a given allocation of edge weights, the expected steady state variance can be expressed in terms of the weighted Laplacian eigenvalues. Some tight bounds on this robustness measure were presented in \cite{Siami16,Siami17}.
In this paper, we introduce the notion of structural robustness to noise, which extends the related measures in the literature (e.g., \cite{Young10,Bamieh12}) and assess each network based on the smallest value of expected steady state variance that can be attained under the noisy consensus dynamics with edge weights from the unit interval. We show that two simple graph measures, namely the average distance between nodes and the average node degree, define tight bounds on the proposed measure of structural robustness. We then use these bounds to obtain some fundamental limits and trade-offs regarding structural robustness and to characterize graphs with extremal robustness. The main contributions of this paper are as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item We show that the average distance between nodes and the average node degree define tight upper and lower bounds on the proposed measure of structural robustness to noise. Using these bounds, we also provide a characterization of networks with extremal scaling of structural robustness, i.e., graph families such that the structural robustness gets arbitrarily worse (e.g., path graph) or arbitrarily better (e.g., complete graph) as the network size increases.
\item We show that there is a fundamental trade-off between the structural robustness and the edge-sparsity of networks. We express this trade-off in terms of tight bounds on the ratio of structural robustness of any given graph to the structural robustness of the complete graph (best) and the star graph (best among the connected graphs with minimum average degree). While these bounds imply that a desired level of structural robustness can only be achieved by graphs with a sufficiently large average degree, we also show that there exist graphs whose robustness becomes arbitrarily worse with increasing size despite having an arbitrarily large average degree.
\item We show that, for sufficiently large $n$ and $k$, random $k$-regular graphs with $n$ nodes typically have near-optimal structural robustness among the graphs with size $n$ and average degree $k$. Moreover, when $k$ increases properly with size, random $k$-regular graphs maintain a structural robustness within a constant factor of the complete graph's while also having the minimum average degree required for such robustness.
\end{itemize}
The organization of this paper is as follows: Section \ref{prelim} provides some graph theory preliminaries. Section \ref{main} presents our main results. Section \ref{sims} provides the numerical simulations. Finally, Section \ref{conclusion} concludes the paper.
\section{ Preliminaries}
\label{prelim}
\subsection{Notation}
We use $\mathbb{R}$ and $\mathbb{R}_{+}$ to denote the set of real numbers and positive real numbers, respectively. For any finite set $A$ with cardinality $|A|$, we use $\mathbb{R}^{|A|}$ (or $\mathbb{R}_{+}^{|A|}$) to denote
the space of real-valued (or positive-real-valued) ${|A|-\mbox{dimensional}}$ vectors. For any pair of vectors $x,y \in \mathbb{R}^{|A|}$, we use $x \leq y$ (or $x<y$) to denote the element-wise inequalities, i.e., $x_i \leq y_i$ (or $x_i < y_i$) for all $i=1,2, \hdots, |A|$.
The all-ones and all-zeros vectors, their sizes being clear from the context, will be denoted by $\bold{1} \in \mathbb{R}^n$ and $\bold{0} \in \mathbb{R}^n$.
We use $\mathcal{O}(\cdot)$ to denote the Big O notation.
\subsection{Graph Theory Basics}
A graph $\mathcal{G}=(V,E)$ consists of a node set ${V=\{1,2,\hdots,n\}}$ and an edge set $E \subseteq V \times V$. For an undirected graph, each edge is represented as an unordered pair of nodes. For each $i \in V$, let $\mathcal{N}_i$ denote the \emph{neighborhood} of $i$, i.e., $\mathcal{N}_i = \{ j \in V \mid (i,j) \in E \}$. A \emph{path} between a pair of nodes $i,j \in V$ is a sequence of distinct nodes $\{i, \hdots, j\}$ such that each pair of consecutive nodes are linked by an edge. For any node $i$, the number of nodes in its neighborhood, $|\mathcal{N}_i|$, is called its degree, $d_i$. Accordingly, the average node degree is
\begin{equation}
\label{degav2}
\tilde{d}(\mathcal{G})=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^nd_i=\frac{2|E|}{n}.
\end{equation}
The \emph{distance} between any two nodes $i$ and $j$, which is denoted by $\delta_{ij}$, is equal to the number of edges on the shortest path between those nodes. The maximum distance between any two nodes, $\max_{i,j \in V} \delta_{ij}$ is known as the \emph{diameter} of the graph, and the \emph{average distance} between the nodes is given as
\begin{equation}
\label{distav}
\tilde{\delta}(\mathcal{G})=\frac{2}{n^2-n}\sum_{1\leq i<j\leq n}\delta_{ij}.
\end{equation}
A graph is \emph{connected} if there exists a path between every pair of nodes. A connected undirected graph with $n$ nodes is called a \emph{tree} if there is exactly one path between each pair of nodes. Any connected graph with $n$ nodes and $n-1$ edges is a tree. A graph is called a $k$-regular graph if the number of edges incident to each node (the degree) is equal to $k$. A random $k$-regular graph, $\mathcal{G}_{n,k}$, is a graph that is selected uniformly at random from the set of all $k$-regular graphs with $n$ nodes.
For weighted graphs, we use $w \in \mathbb{R}_+^{|E|}$ to denote the vector of edge weights and $w_{ij}\in \mathbb{R}_+$ to denote the weight of the edge $(i,j)\in E$. The (weighted) \emph{graph Laplacian} of a weighted graph is defined as
\begin{equation}
\label{Deg}
[L_w]_{ij}=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}\sum_{k\in \mathcal{N}_{i}}w_{ik}&\mbox{ if }
i=j\\-w_{ij}&\mbox{ if } j\in \mathcal{N}_i \\ 0&\mbox{ otherwise }\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
In the remainder of the paper, we will use $L$ to denote the unweighted Laplacian, i.e., the special case when $w=\bold{1}$.
\subsection{Consensus Networks}
Consensus networks can be represented as a graph, where the nodes correspond to the agents, and the weighted edges exist between the agents that are coupled through local interactions. For such a network $\mathcal{G}=(V,E)$, let the dynamics of each agent $i\in V$ be
\begin{equation}
\label{consensus}
\dot{x}_i(t)=\sum_{j\in \mathcal{N}_i}w_{ij}(x_j(t)-x_i(t))+ \xi_i(t),
\end{equation}
where $x_i(t) \in \mathbb{R}$ denotes the state of $i$, each ${w_{ij} \in \mathbb{R}_+}$ is a constant weight representing the strength of the coupling between $i$ and $j$, and $\xi(t) \in \mathbb{R}^n$ is i.i.d. white Gaussian noise with zero mean and unit covariance, which is one of the standard noise models for agents that are independently affected by disturbances of same
intensity due to various effects such as communication errors, noisy measurements, or quantization errors (e.g.,\cite{Young10,Bamieh12,Siami16}). Accordingly, the overall dynamics of the agents can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
\label{consensus2}
\dot{x}(t)=-L_wx(t)+ \xi(t),
\end{equation}
where $L_w$ denotes the weighted Laplacian. In a noise-free setting ($\xi(t)= \bold{0}$ for all $t\geq 0$), the dynamics in \eqref{consensus2} are known to result in a global consensus, ${\lim_{t\to \infty} x(t) \in span \{\bold{1}\}}$, for any $x(0) \in \mathbb{R}^n$ if and only if the graph is connected \cite{Jadbabaie03,Ren05}. In the noisy case, a perfect consensus can not be achieved. Instead, some finite steady state variance of $x(t)$ is observed on connected graphs \cite{Young10, Bamieh12}. Accordingly, the robustness of the network can be quantified through the expected population variance in steady state, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\label{heq}
\mathcal{H}(\mathcal{G},w) \coloneqq \lim_{t \to \infty} \frac{1}{n}\sum\limits_{i =1}^{n} \mathrm{E}[{(x_i(t)-\tilde{x}(t))^2}],
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{x}(t) \in \mathbb{R}$ denotes the average of $x_1(t), x_2(t), \hdots, x_n(t)$.
It can be shown that (e.g., see \cite{Young10,Bamieh12}) $\mathcal{H}(\mathcal{G},w)$ is equal to $1/n$ times the square of the $\mathcal{H}_2$-norm of the system in \eqref{consensus2} from the input $\xi(t)$ to the output $y(t) \in \mathbb{R}^n$ defined as ${y_i(t)= x_i(t)-\tilde{x}(t)}$, and it satisfies
\begin{equation}
\label{heq2}
\mathcal{H}(\mathcal{G},w) = \frac{1}{2n} \sum_{i=2}^n \frac{1}{\lambda_i (L_w)},
\end{equation}
where and $0 < \lambda_2(L_w) \leq \hdots \leq \lambda_n(L_w) $ denote the eigenvalues of the weighted Laplacian $L_w$.
In this paper, we investigate how much the structure of the underlying graph (the edge set $E$) causes vulnerability to noise in consensus networks. We measure the structural vulnerability of any given network to noise based on the smallest possible value of $\mathcal{H}(\mathcal{G},w)$, given that the edge weights should belong to the feasible set ${ \mathcal{W}= \{w \mid \bold{0} < w \leq \bold{1} \}}$. Since multiplying all the weights by some $\alpha \in \mathbb{R}_+$ results in ${L_{\alpha w}=\alpha L_w}$ and ${\mathcal{H}(\mathcal{G},\alpha w)= \mathcal{H}(\mathcal{G},w)/\alpha}$ due to \eqref{heq2}, it is possible to make $\mathcal{H}(\mathcal{G},w)$ arbitrarily small for any network by just scaling up all the weights. By considering only weights in $(0,1]$, we remove this possibility and focus on the impact of network structure.
\begin{definition}
(Structural Vulnerability and Robustness) The structural vulnerability of an undirected consensus network $\mathcal{G}=(V,E)$ to noise is the smallest possible value of $\mathcal{H}(\mathcal{G},w)$ that is achievable under weights from the unit interval, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\label{strob}
\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}) \coloneqq \min_{\bold{0} < w \leq \bold{1}} \mathcal{H}(\mathcal{G},w).
\end{equation}
The structural robustness to noise is quantified using the reciprocal of structural vulnerability, $1/\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G})$.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
For brevity, we will say ``structural robustness (or vulnerability)" without explicitly saying ``to noise". The term ``structural robustness" is also used in the literature for referring to the robustness of connectivity to node/edge failures (e.g., \cite{Wu11,Abbas12}). While the two notions of robustness have connections, the distinction should be clear from the context.
\end{remark}
\section{Main Results}
\label{main}
In this section, we provide the main results of this paper. We start our derivations by providing $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G})$ as a function of the (unweighted) Laplacian eigenvalues.
\begin{lem} \label{lspect}For any connected undirected graph $\mathcal{G}$, \begin{equation}
\label{hseig}
\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G})= \frac{1}{2n} \sum_{i=2}^n \frac{1}{\lambda_i (L)},
\end{equation} where $L$ denotes the unweighted Laplacian of $\mathcal{G}$.\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
For any connected undirected $\mathcal{G}$, any weighted Laplacian is a positive semidefinite matrix \cite{Merris94}. Increasing any of its weights or adding new edges leads to a new Laplacian that is equal to the initial Laplacian plus another matrix that is also a weighted Laplacian (a graph with just the added/strengthened edges). All the Laplacian eigenvalues monotonically (not necessarily strictly) increase under such an addition of a positive semidefinite matrix due to the Weyl's inequality (e.g., see \cite{Horn90}). Hence, $\mathcal{H}(\mathcal{G},w)$ is minimized for $w=\bold{1}$ within the feasible set of \eqref{strob}. Accordingly, using \eqref{heq2}, we obtain \eqref{hseig}.
\end{proof}
In light of Lemma \ref{lspect}, $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G})$ of any connected network can be computed through the eigenvalues of the unweighted Laplacian.
Furthermore, using this result, $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G})$ can also be expressed in terms of a graph measure known as the Kirchhoff index (total effective resistance) \cite{Klein93}. For any connected undirected graph with $n$ nodes, $\mathcal{G}$, the Kirchhoff index satisfies
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:K_f}
K_f(\mathcal{G}) = n\sum\limits_{i=2}^n\frac{1}{\lambda_i(L)},
\end{equation}
where $L$ is the Laplacian of $\mathcal{G}$. Accordingly, due to \eqref{hseig},
\begin{equation}
\label{srobKf}
\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G})= \frac{K_f(\mathcal{G})}{2n^2}.
\end{equation}
The connection in \eqref{srobKf} is particularly useful as it links the structural robustness to the rich literature in graph theory on Kirchhoff index. For instance, closed form expressions in terms of size are known for some graph families (e.g., see \cite{Palacios01,Lukovits99, Ellens11}). Using those results on Kirchhoff index we immediately obtain that the path ($\mathcal{P}_n$), cycle ($\mathcal{C}_n$), star ($\mathcal{S}_n$), and complete ($\mathcal{K}_n$) graphs of size $n$ have
\begin{align}
\label{robPCSK}
\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{P}_n) =\frac{n^2-1}{12n} &\;,\;
\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{C}_n) =\frac{n^2-1}{24n}, \\
\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{S}_n) = \frac{(n-1)^2}{2n^2} &\;,\;
\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{K}_n)=\frac{(n-1)}{2n^2}.
\end{align}
Furthermore, among all the connected undirected graphs with $n$ nodes, the Kirchoff index is minimized in the complete graph $\mathcal{K}_n$ and maximized in the path graph $\mathcal{P}_n$ (e.g., see \cite{Ellens11}). As such, in light of \eqref{srobKf}, $\mathcal{K}_n$ and $\mathcal{P}_n$ are also the minimizer and maximizer of $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G})$, respectively.
\subsection{Impact of Average Degree and Average Distance}
The structural vulnerability of any given network can be computed by using the Laplacian eigenvalues as in \eqref{hseig}. However, it is not easy to use \eqref{hseig} or \eqref{srobKf} for certain analysis and design applications in a systematic and efficient way. For instance, finding an optimal way to add a given number of edges to an arbitrary network to reduce the $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G})$ would require searching among all possibilities (e.g., see \cite{Ellens11}). Furthermore, while it is possible to see how $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G})$ scales with size for the special graph families with closed form expressions as in \eqref{robPCSK}, it is hard to analyze the asymptotic robustness of generic networks. One way to overcome these type of difficulties is focusing on some bounds on $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G})$ rather than its exact value.
Many bounds on the Kirchhoff index have been proposed in the literature by using graph measures such as chromatic number, independence number, edge/node connectivity, diameter, or degree sequence (e.g., see \cite{Zhou08,Milovanovic17}). These bounds typically require significant amount of global information and/or computation, which limits their applicability in large networks. Motivated by such limitations, we present a fundamental relationship between the $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G})$ and two aggregate measures, namely the average node degree and the average distance between nodes, which can be computed/estimated efficiently based on limited information (e.g. \cite{Goldreich08}).
\begin{theorem}
\label{bounds}
For any connected undirected graph ${\mathcal{G}=(V,E)}$ with $n\geq 2$ nodes, \begin{equation}
\frac{(n-1)^2}{2\tilde{d}(\mathcal{G})n^2} \leq \mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}) \leq \frac{\tilde{\delta}(\mathcal{G})(n-1) }{4n},
\label{boundseq}
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{d}(\mathcal{G})$ is the average node degree, $\tilde{\delta}(\mathcal{G})$ is the average distance between the nodes. Moreover, the lower bound holds with equality if and only if $\mathcal{G}$ is a complete graph, and the upper bound holds with equality if and only if $\mathcal{G}$ is a tree.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
(Lower bound:) Since the harmonic mean is always less than or equal to the arithmetic mean, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{lb1}
\frac{n-1}{\sum_{i=2}^n \lambda_i (L)} \leq \frac{1}{n-1}\sum_{i=2}^n \frac{1}{\lambda_i (L)},
\end{equation}
where the left side is the harmonic mean and the right side is the arithmetic mean of $1/\lambda_2(L), 1/\lambda_3(L), \hdots, 1/\lambda_n(L)$. Furthermore since $L$ is a symmetric matrix, the sum of its eigenvalues equals its trace, which is equal to the sum of node degrees $n\tilde{d}(\mathcal{G})$. Hence, \eqref{lb1} implies
\begin{equation}
\label{lb2}
\frac{(n-1)^2}{n\tilde{d}(\mathcal{G})} \leq \sum_{i=2}^n \frac{1}{\lambda_i (L)}.
\end{equation}
Due to \eqref{heq2} and \eqref{lb2},
\begin{equation}
\label{lb3}
\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}) =\frac{1}{2n} \sum_{i=2}^n \frac{1}{\lambda_i (L)} \geq \frac{(n-1)^2}{2\tilde{d}(\mathcal{G})n^2} .
\end{equation}
Alternatively, \eqref{lb3} can also be obtained by using \cite[Theorem 6]{Siami16} and Lemma \ref{lspect}, which implies that the performance measure in \cite[Theorem 6]{Siami16} equals $n\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G})$.
Note that the harmonic mean equals the arithmetic mean if and only if all the numbers are equal. Hence, \eqref{lb1} holds with equality if and only if $\lambda_2(L)=\lambda_3(L)= \hdots = \lambda_n(L)$. Furthermore, all the positive Laplacian eigenvalues of a connected graph are equal if and only if the graph is a complete graph (e.g., see \cite{Merris94}). Hence, \eqref{lb3} holds with equality if and only if $\mathcal{G}$ is a complete graph.
(Upper bound:) The Kirchoff index is defined as the sum of pairwise effective resistances between nodes \cite{Klein93,Ellens11}, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\label{ub2a}
K_f(\mathcal{G}) = \sum_{1\leq i < j \leq n}r_{ij},
\end{equation}
where $r_{ij}$ is equal to the effective resistance between the nodes $i$ and $j$ on an electrical network that is obtained by assigning a unit resistor to each edge of $\mathcal{G}$. For any two nodes $i$ and $j$, $r_{ij}=\delta_{ij}$ if there is a unique path between $i$ and $j$, and $r_{ij}<\delta_{ij}$ otherwise (e.g., see \cite[Theorem 2.4]{Ellens11}). Accordingly, the Kirchoff index satisfies
\begin{equation}
\label{ub2}
K_f(\mathcal{G}) \leq \sum_{1\leq i < j \leq n}\delta_{ij},
\end{equation}
and \eqref{ub2} holds with equality if and only if there is a unique path between any two nodes, i.e. $\mathcal{G}$ is a tree. Since the sum of distances between the nodes satisfy
\begin{equation}
\label{ub3}
\sum_{1\leq i < j \leq n}\delta_{ij}= \frac{n(n-1)\tilde{\delta}(\mathcal{G})}{2},\end{equation}
\eqref{srobKf} and \eqref{ub2} together imply
\begin{equation}
\label{ub4}
\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}) \leq \frac{\tilde{\delta}(\mathcal{G})(n-1)}{4n}.\end{equation}
Furthermore, since \eqref{ub2} holds with equality if and only if $\mathcal{G}$ is a tree, the same is true for the inequality in \eqref{ub4}. Alternatively, the upper bound can also be proved by using \cite[Theorem 2]{Sivasubramanian09} and Lemma \ref{lspect}.
\end{proof}
Theorem \ref{bounds} is closely related to \cite[Thms. 6 and 8]{Siami16}, which can be combined with Lemma \ref{lspect} to obtain two other bounds on $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G})$: a lower bound based on the degree sequence (all the node degrees) and an upper bound based on the diameter. While using the degree sequence may yield a better lower bound (closer to actual value), the average degree can be computed with significantly less information, namely the number of nodes and the number of edges as in \eqref{degav2}. The upper bound in Theorem \ref{bounds} can be computed by using only the pairwise distances between nodes, whereas computing the upper bound in \cite[Thm. 6]{Siami16} also requires the number of edges. These two upper bounds may outperform each other on different graphs.
For example, while \cite[Thm. 6]{Siami16} yields a better upper bound for the complete graph, Theorem \ref{bounds} gives a better upper bound for the path graph.
\subsection{Graphs with Extremal Robustness Scaling}
One of the important considerations when designing large scale networks is how the robustness of the system would scale with its size. As indicated by \eqref{robPCSK}, different network topologies may exhibit different robustness scaling properties.
For instance, while the structural vulnerability of complete graph, $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{K}_n)$, tends to zero as the network size increases (see \eqref{robPCSK}), the structural vulnerability of path graph, $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{P}_n)$, tends to infinity as the network size increases (see \eqref{robPCSK}). Apart from these two extremal cases of robustness scaling, there are also networks (e.g., star graph) such that $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_n)$ converges to some non-zero value as the network size increases. One question of interest is then which topological properties determine how the structural robustness behaves as the size goes to infinity. Our next result provides a graph topological characterization of networks with extremal robustness scaling.
\begin{cor}
\label{findeg} Let $\{\mathcal{G}_n\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$ denote an infinite sequence of connected undirected graphs with $n$ nodes. The structural vulnerability of $\mathcal{G}_n$ tends to zero as $n$ goes to infinity only if the average node degree grows unbounded, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\label{findeg1}
\lim_{n \to \infty}\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_n) = 0 \Rightarrow \lim_{n \to \infty} \tilde{d}(\mathcal{G}_n) = \infty.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, the structural vulnerability grows unbounded only if the average distance also grows unbounded, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\label{findeg2}
\lim_{n \to \infty}\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_n) = \infty \Rightarrow \lim_{n \to \infty} \tilde{\delta}(\mathcal{G}_n) = \infty.
\end{equation}
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
($\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_n) \to 0 $): Note that the lower bound in \eqref{boundseq} is non-negative for any connected undirected $\mathcal{G}$ with $n\geq 2$ nodes. Hence, due to the squeeze theorem, if $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_n)$ tends to zero then the lower bound must also tend to zero, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\label{findeg2b}
\lim_{n \to \infty}\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_n) = 0 \Rightarrow \lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{(n-1)^2}{2\tilde{d}(\mathcal{G}_n)n^2}= 0.
\end{equation}
Since the average node degree $\tilde{d}(\mathcal{G}_n)$ is positive, \eqref{findeg2b} implies
\begin{equation}
\label{findeg3}
\lim_{n \to \infty}\tilde{d}(\mathcal{G}_n)= \infty.
\end{equation}
($\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_n) \to \infty $): If $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_n)$ diverges as $n$ goes to infinity, the upper bound in \eqref{boundseq} must also diverge, which is only possible if the average distance between nodes, $\tilde{\delta}(\mathcal{G}_n)$, diverges.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Structural Robustness vs. Sparsity}
We first highlight a fundamental trade-off between structural robustness and sparsity. We use the average node degree as the measure of sparsity (lower average degree implies higher sparsity). We express this trade-off in terms of tight bounds, i.e., bounds that are satisfied with equality for some connected $\mathcal{G}_n$, on the ratio of structural robustness of any given graph to the structural robustness of the complete graph, which has the best robustness among all connected graphs, and the star graph, which has the best structural robustness achievable with the minimum number of edges a connected graph can have.
\begin{theorem}
\label{gn-hstar-th}For any connected undirected graph $\mathcal{G}_n$,
\begin{equation}
\label{gn-hstar}
\frac{\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{S}_n)}{\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_n)}\leq \tilde{d}(\mathcal{G}_n),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{gn-hcomp}
\frac{\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_n)}{\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{K}_n)}\geq \frac{n-1}{\tilde{d}(\mathcal{G}_n)},
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{S}_n$ and $\mathcal{K}_n$ denote the star and complete graphs with $n$ nodes. Furthermore, these inequalities are tight in the sense that they hold with equality for some $\mathcal{G}_n$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Both \eqref{gn-hstar} and \eqref{gn-hcomp} follow from \eqref{robPCSK} and the lower bound in \eqref{boundseq}. The tightness of the bounds can be proved by showing that they are satisfied with equality for some $\mathcal{G}_n$. For instance, the bounds are satisfied with equality for the complete graph, $\mathcal{G}_n=\mathcal{K}_n$, due to \eqref{robPCSK} and the fact that $\tilde{d}(\mathcal{K}_n)=n-1$.
\end{proof}
Since $\mathcal{S}_n$ has the best structural robustness achievable with the minimum number of edges a connected graph can have, \eqref{gn-hstar} highlights the price of structural robustness in terms of sparsity. Any graph with significantly better structural robustness than the star graph of same size should have a proportionally high average degree. Similarly, \eqref{gn-hcomp} indicates how sparse a graph can be while having a certain level of structural robustness relative to the complete graph.
Theorem \ref{gn-hstar-th} can be used for the design of sparse yet robust networks. For example, consider a network design problem, where the goal is to build a network with the minimum number of edges that has a bounded robustness-suboptimality with respect to the complete graph, i.e., ${\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_n)/\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{K}_n) \leq \alpha}$ for some desired $\alpha \geq 1$. For instance, in a wireless sensor network, this design problem can be motivated by the goal of achieving robust distributed estimation with minimum communication due to energy and bandwidth considerations. In light of \eqref{gn-hcomp}, such a network must have an average degree of at least $(n-1)/\alpha$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\label{gn-hcomp-cor}
\frac{\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_n)}{\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{K}_n)}\leq \alpha \Rightarrow \tilde{d}(\mathcal{G}_n) \geq \frac{n-1}{\alpha}.
\end{equation}
Accordingly, the design space can be narrowed down to the set of graphs with sufficiently many edges as per \eqref{gn-hcomp-cor}. Note that \eqref{gn-hcomp-cor} defines a necessary condition on sparsity and not every graph with that many edges have the desired robustness property. In fact, our next result shows that there even exist graphs whose structural vulnerability grows unbounded despite having such an average degree. This result also complements Corollary \ref{findeg} by showing that an unbounded growth in $\tilde{d}(\mathcal{G}_n)$ with increasing size is only a necessary condition and not a sufficient condition for $ \mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_n)$ to approach zero.
\begin{theorem}
\label{confrag}For any constant $\alpha> 1$, there exist infinite sequences of connected undirected graphs with $n$ nodes, $\{\mathcal{G}_n\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$, such that
\begin{equation}
\label{confrag1}
\lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{\tilde{d}(\mathcal{G}_n)}{n-1} \geq \frac{1}{\alpha},\; \;
\lim_{n \to \infty}\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_n) = \infty.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We prove this result by designing such a sequence of graphs. Consider the following bridging operation, $\bigoplus$, which connects two disjoint graphs, $\Gamma=(U,F)$ with the node set ${U=\{u_1, \hdots, u_p\}}$ and $\Gamma'=(U',F')$ with the node set ${U'=\{u_1', \hdots, u_q'\}}$, with a single edge such that $\mathcal{G}=(V,E)=\Gamma\bigoplus\Gamma'$ is defined as
\begin{equation}
\label{confrag3}
V= U \cup U', \; E= F \cup F' \cup \{(u_i,u_j')\},
\end{equation}
for some $u_i \in U$ and $u_j' \in U'$.
It was shown in \cite{gago2018kirchhoff} that the Kirchhoff index of of such a bridged graph can be expressed in terms of the Kirchhoff indices of the two components as
\begin{equation}
\label{confrag4}
K_f(\mathcal{G})=\dfrac{p+q}{p}K_f(\Gamma)+ \dfrac{p+q}{q}K_f(\Gamma')+ \dfrac{2p^2-3p+1}{6p}+ \dfrac{q-1}{q^2}+1.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, using \eqref{degav2} it can be shown that
\begin{equation}
\label{confrag5}
\tilde{d}(\mathcal{G})=\dfrac{p\tilde{d}(\Gamma)+q\tilde{d}(\Gamma')+2}{p+q}.
\end{equation}
Now, consider any sequence of graphs $\mathcal{G}_n=\Gamma_{p}\bigoplus\Gamma'_{q}$ such that $p+q=n$, ${K_f(\Gamma'_{q}) = \mathcal{O}(q^3)}$, $p = \lceil n/ \beta \rceil$, and ${\tilde{d}(\Gamma_{p}) \geq (p-1)/ \beta}$ for some constant $\beta >1$ such that $\beta^3 \leq \alpha$. For instance, $\Gamma_{p}$ can be any graph with $p$ nodes and at least $p(p-1)/2\beta$ edges, and $\Gamma'_{q}$ can be a path or a cycle with $q$ nodes, which results in ${K_f(\Gamma'_{q}) = \mathcal{O}(q^3)}$ as per \eqref{robPCSK} and \eqref{srobKf}. For example, if $\Gamma_{p}$ is a complete graph and $\Gamma'_{q}$ is a path, the resulting graph $\Gamma_p\bigoplus\Gamma'_q$ is known as a lollipop graph. For $p=\lceil n/\beta \rceil$, we have $p \approx n/\beta$ and $q\approx n- n/\beta$, which implies ${K_f(\Gamma'_{q}) = \mathcal{O}(q^3)=\mathcal{O}(n^3)} $ since $\beta >1$ is a constant. Accordingly, using \eqref{srobKf} and \eqref{confrag4}, one can show that such a sequence of graphs $\{\mathcal{G}_n\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$ satisfies
\begin{equation}
\label{confrag5c}
\lim_{n \to \infty} \mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_n)=\infty.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, \eqref{confrag5} and the fact that $p = \lceil n/ \beta \rceil$, $p+q=n$, and ${\tilde{d}(\Gamma_{p}) \geq (p-1)/ \beta}$ for some $\beta>1$ such that $\beta^3 \leq \alpha$ imply
\begin{equation}
\label{confrag7}
\lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{\tilde{d}(\mathcal{G}_n)}{n-1} \geq \lim_{n \to \infty} \dfrac{n/\beta(n/\beta-1)}{\beta (n^2-n)}=\frac{1}{\beta^3} \geq \frac{1}{\alpha}.
\end{equation}
Due to \eqref{confrag5c} and \eqref{confrag7}, any such $\{\mathcal{G}_n\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$ satisfies \eqref{confrag1}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Structural Robustness of Random Regular Graphs}
In this subsection, we show that random $k$-regular graphs are approximate solutions to the combinatorial problem of designing sparse networks with optimal structural robustness. Our particular focus on random $k$-regular graphs is motivated by their several desirable properties. For example, such graphs yield uniform/bounded node degrees, which is useful in many applications that demand a balanced communication load among the nodes (e.g., \cite{melamed2004araneola,pandurangan2003building}). It is also known that random $k$-regular graphs ($k\geq 3$) are expander graphs, i.e., sparse yet well-connected structures that can not be easily disconnected by a targeted removal of nodes/edges (e.g., \cite{Hoory06}). Moreover, the algebraic connectivity of such graphs is bounded away from zero (e.g., \cite{Friedman03}), which not only implies fast convergence in consensus networks \cite{Olfati04} but also can be used for providing guarantees on their structural robustness. More specifically, as $n$ goes to infinity, for $k \geq 3$ almost every $k$-regular graph has ${\lambda_2(L)\geq k-2\sqrt{k-1}-\epsilon}$ for any $\epsilon>0$ (e.g., see \cite{Friedman03}). In light of \eqref{hseig}, this property implies an upper bound on the structural vulnerability of those graphs since for any graph
\begin{equation}
\label{hseig2}
\frac{1}{2n} \sum_{i=2}^n \frac{1}{\lambda_i (L)} \leq \frac{n-1}{2n\lambda_2 (L)}.
\end{equation}
Accordingly, for any integer $k \geq 3$ and $\epsilon \in (0,k-2\sqrt{k-1})$
\begin{equation}
\lim_{n \to \infty} \Pr \left \{\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_{n,k}) \leq \frac{n-1}{2n(k-2\sqrt{k-1}-\epsilon)} \right \} =1,
\label{rreq}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{G}_{n,k}$ is a random $k$-regular graph. Since $n$ and $k$ cannot be both odd (the number of edges is equal to $nk/2$), for odd values of $k$ the limit in \eqref{rreq} is defined along the sequence of even integers $n \in \{k+1,k+3, \hdots\}$. Furthermore, the probability in \eqref{rreq} tends to one rather fast with increasing $n$ even for moderate values of $k$. Using \cite[Theorem 1.1]{Friedman03}, it can be shown that for any even integer $k \geq 4$
\begin{equation}
\Pr \left \{\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_{n,k}) \leq \frac{n-1}{2n(k-2\sqrt{k-1}-\epsilon)} \right \} \geq 1- \frac{c}{n^\tau},
\label{resb1}
\end{equation}
for some constant $c>0$ and
\begin{equation}
\tau = \left \lceil \frac{\sqrt{k-1}+1}{2} \right \rceil -1.
\label{resb2}
\end{equation}
As such, the bound in \eqref{rreq} is satisfied by a random $k$-regular graph of size $n$ with probability at least $1-\mathcal{O}(1/n)$ for $k=4$, with probability at least $1-\mathcal{O}(1/n^2)$ for $k=12$, and so on.
By combining \eqref{rreq} with the lower bound in \eqref{boundseq} for ${\tilde{d}(\mathcal{G})=k}$, we can show that for large values of $n$, with high probability, the structural vulnerability of random $k$-regular graphs ($k\geq 3$) is within a constant factor of the smallest possible value among the graphs with the same size and average degree. Furthermore, this factor gets arbitrarily close to one as $k$ increases. In other words, for large values of $k$, random $k$-regular graphs have a structural robustness arbitrarily close to the best possible value (with that many edges) with high probability as the network size increases.
\begin{theorem}
\label{rand-regt} For any integer $k\geq 3$ and $\epsilon \in (0,k-2\sqrt{k-1})$
\begin{equation}
\lim_{n \to \infty} \Pr \left \{ \frac{\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_{n,k})}{\min\limits_{\mathcal{G}_n : \tilde{d}(\mathcal{G}_n)=k}\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_n)}\leq \frac{k}{k-2\sqrt{k-1}-\epsilon}+\epsilon \right \} =1, \;
\label{rand-regt1}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{G}_{n,k}$ is a random $k$-regular graph.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Using the lower bound in \eqref{boundseq} and \eqref{robPCSK}, for any undirected graph $\mathcal{G}_n$ with $n$ nodes and average degree $\tilde{d}(\mathcal{G}_n)=k$,
\begin{equation}
\label{randregt2}
\min\limits_{\mathcal{G}_n : \tilde{d}(\mathcal{G}_n)=k}\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_n) \geq \frac{(n-1)^2}{2kn^2}
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{randregt2} with \eqref{rreq}, for any random $k$-regular graph with $k \geq 3$ and $\epsilon \in (0,k-2\sqrt{k-1})$,
\begin{equation}
\lim\limits_{n \to \infty} \Pr \left \{ \frac{\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_{n,k})}{\min\limits_{\mathcal{G}_n : \tilde{d}(\mathcal{G}_n)=k}\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_n)}\leq \frac{2kn^2}{(2n^2-2n)(k-2\sqrt{k-1}-\epsilon)}\right \} =1.
\label{rand-regt3}
\end{equation}
Note that the upper bound in \eqref{rand-regt3} satisfies
\begin{equation}
\lim\limits_{n \to \infty} \frac{2kn^2}{(2n^2-2n)(k-2\sqrt{k-1}-\epsilon)}= \frac{k}{k-2\sqrt{k-1}-\epsilon}.
\label{rand-regt4a}
\end{equation}
Due to the definition of limit, for any $\epsilon'>0$ there exists some $n' \in \mathbb{N}$ such that
\begin{equation}
\left| \frac{2kn^2}{(2n^2-2n)(k-2\sqrt{k-1}-\epsilon)} - \frac{k}{k-2\sqrt{k-1}-\epsilon} \right | < \epsilon', \forall n > n'.
\label{rl2}
\end{equation}
Note that for any $k \geq 3$, $\epsilon \in (0,k-2\sqrt{k-1})$, and $n\geq2$,
\begin{equation}
\frac{2kn^2}{(2n^2-2n)(k-2\sqrt{k-1}-\epsilon)} \geq \frac{k}{k-2\sqrt{k-1}-\epsilon}.
\label{rl3}
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{rl2} and \eqref{rl3}, we get
\begin{equation}
\frac{2kn^2}{(2n^2-2n)(k-2\sqrt{k-1}-\epsilon)} < \frac{k}{k-2\sqrt{k-1}-\epsilon} + \epsilon', \forall n > n'.
\label{rand-regt4}
\end{equation}
Without loss of generality, we can pick $\epsilon'=\epsilon$ and \eqref{rand-regt4} would hold for the corresponding $n' \in \mathbb{N}$. Accordingly, we can obtain \eqref{rand-regt1} from \eqref{rand-regt3} and \eqref{rand-regt4}.
\end{proof}
In light of Theorem \ref{rand-regt}, random $k$-regular graphs with sufficiently large degree $k$ and size $n$ typically have bounded suboptimality in their structural robustness when compared to the best graph of size $n$ and average degree $k$. Fig. \ref{fig-approx} illustrates how the approximation bound in \eqref{rand-regt1} changes as a function of $k$. As shown in this figure, the approximation bound starts around 17.5 for $k=3$, rapidly drops to 5 by $k=5$ and to 2 by $k=15$, and then keeps approaching one as $k$ increases. Accordingly, random $k$-regular graphs with $n$ nodes are typically very good approximate solutions to the problem of optimizing structural robustness subject to a sparsity constraint $\tilde{d}(\mathcal{G}_n)=k$ for sufficiently large values of $n$ and $k$ . We complement Theorem \ref{rand-regt} by showing that the structural vulnerability of random $k$-regular graphs is typically within a bounded proximity of the complete graph's structural vulnerability for sufficiently large $k$ and $n$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[trim = 0mm 0mm 0mm 0mm,clip,scale=0.34]{approx}
\caption{Approximation bound in \eqref{rand-regt1}, which bounds the ratio of the structural vulnerability of random $k$-regular graphs to the smallest possible value among the graphs with same size and average degree $k$, is shown as a function of $k$.
}
\label{fig-approx}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{theorem} \label{rand-reglem} For any constant $\alpha \geq 1$ and any $\epsilon>0$,
\begin{equation}
\lim_{n \to \infty} \Pr \left \{\frac{\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_{n,k})}{\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{K}_n)} \leq\alpha+\epsilon \right \} =1, \; \forall k \geq \frac{n-1}{\alpha},
\label{rand-reg1}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{K}_n$ is the complete graph and $\mathcal{G}_{n,k}$ is a random $k$-regular graph.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Note that the denominator of the upper bound in \eqref{rreq} is strictly increasing in $k$ since
\begin{equation}
\dfrac{d(k-2\sqrt{k-1}-\epsilon)}{dk}=1-\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{k-1}}>0, \; \forall k \geq 3.
\end{equation}
Accordingly, for ${k \geq (n-1)/\alpha}$, we can plug the smallest possible value of $k$ into the upper bound in \eqref{rreq} and obtain
\begin{equation}
\lim_{n \to \infty} \Pr \left \{\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_{n,k}) \leq \dfrac{n-1} {2n \left ( \dfrac{n-1}{\alpha} -2\sqrt{\dfrac{n-1-\alpha}{\alpha}}-\epsilon\right )} \right \} =1,
\label{rand-reg2}
\end{equation}
for any $\epsilon \in (0,k-2\sqrt{k-1})$.
Using \eqref{rand-reg2} together with \eqref{robPCSK}, and without loss of generality setting $\epsilon=0.1$, which is in $(0,k-2\sqrt{k-1})$ for all $k\geq 3$, we have
\begin{equation}
\lim_{n \to \infty} \Pr \left \{\dfrac{\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_{n,k})}{\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{K}_n)} \leq \dfrac{n} { \dfrac{n-1}{\alpha} -2\sqrt{\dfrac{n-1-\alpha}{\alpha}}-0.1} \right \} =1.
\label{rand-reg3}
\end{equation}
Note that the upper bound in \eqref{rand-reg3} approaches $\alpha$ as $n \to \infty$. Hence, for any $\epsilon>0$ there is a sufficiently large value of $n$ such that, the upper bound is smaller than $\alpha +\epsilon$. Accordingly, we obtain \eqref{rand-reg1}.
\end{proof}
Theorem \ref{rand-reglem} implies that the random regular graphs can approach the fundamental limit in \eqref{gn-hcomp-cor} on $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_n)/\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{K}_n)$ imposed by the sparsity of $\mathcal{G}_n$. For example, for any constant $\alpha \geq 1$ and even number of nodes $n$ such that $n \geq 3\alpha +1$, let $\mathcal{G}_{n,k^*}$ be a random $k^*$-regular graph, where
\begin{equation}
\label{kstar}
k^*=\left \lceil \frac{n-1}{\alpha} \right \rceil .
\end{equation}
For such random regular graphs, as $n$ increases, $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_{n,k^*})/\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{K}_n)$ is upper bounded by $\alpha$ with a very high probability due to \eqref{rand-reg1}. Furthermore, $\mathcal{G}_{n,k^*}$ has an average degree of $k^*$ that is equal or very close to the minimum required value of $(n-1)/\alpha$ as given in \eqref{gn-hcomp-cor}.
\section{Simulation Results}
\label{sims}
We simulate the noisy consensus dynamics in \eqref{consensus2}, where $\xi(t) \in \mathbb{R}^n$ is white Gaussian noise with zero mean and unit covariance, on different networks with uniform edge weights $w=\bold{1}$ to demonstrate their structural robustness. In each simulation, the network is initialized at $x(0) = \bold{0}$.
In the first set of simulations, we consider the path, star, random $3$-regular, and complete graphs. We generate the random regular graphs using the distributed algorithm in \cite{Yasin15TNSE}. We aim to numerically illustrate how the structural robustness of these graphs compare to each other and change with increasing network size. For each type we generate three networks of different sizes: $n=20$, $n=40$, and $n=60$. The resulting state variances over time on the networks with $n=60$ are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig-60}. In Table~\ref{Tab-PSRC}, for each of these networks we provide the average of state variance over the simulation horizon and the theoretical value of structural vulnerability, which is computed using the Laplacian eigenvalues as per \eqref{hseig}. For the path, star, and complete graphs, the empirical values can also be verified using \eqref{robPCSK}. For the random $3$-regular graphs, the average distances are computed as $2.62$ ($n=20$), $3.62$ ($n=40$), and $4.09$ ($n=60$). Using the average distances together with the average degrees, the lower and upper bounds in \eqref{boundseq} are computed as $0.15$ and $0.62$ ($\mathcal{G}_{20,3}$), $0.158$ and $0.882$ ($\mathcal{G}_{40,3}$), $0.161$ and $1.005$ ($\mathcal{G}_{60,3}$). For each random 3-regular graph, the observed average state variance is inside the corresponding interval, closer to the lower bound.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[trim = 0mm 0mm 0mm 0mm,clip,scale=0.43]{Graphs-PSRC60.eps}
\vspace*{-5mm}
\caption{Variance of states under the noisy consensus dynamics on path ($\mathcal{P}_{60}$), star ($\mathcal{S}_{60}$), random $3$-regular ($\mathcal{G}_{60,3}$), and complete ($\mathcal{K}_{60}$) graphs with 60 nodes. The edge weights are all set to one to illustrate structural robustness.
}
\label{fig-60}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}\centering
{\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1}\footnotesize
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c |c |c |c|}
\cline{2-4}
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{}
& $n=20$ & $n=40$ & $n=60$ \\ [0.5ex]
\hline
\multirow{2}{4em}{\centering Path } & 1.662 & 3.32 & 5.21\\
& \bf{1.663} & \bf{3.33} & \bf{4.99} \\
\hline
\multirow{2}{4em}{\centering Star} & 0.45 & 0.478 & 0.485\\
& \bf{0.45} & \bf{0.475} & \bf{0.483}\\
\hline
\multirow{2}{4em}{\centering Random 3-regular} & 0.239 & 0.286 & 0.305\\
& \bf{0.237} & \bf{0.287} & \bf{0.305} \\
\hline
\multirow{2}{4em}{\centering Complete} & 0.024 & 0.0124 & 0.0085\\
& \bf{0.024} & \bf{0.0122} & \bf{0.0082}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
}
\caption{Average of state variances over time and the value of structural vulnerability as per \eqref{hseig} (bold) for the path, star, random 3-regular, and complete graphs of sizes 20,40, and 60.}
\label{Tab-PSRC}
\end{table}
In the second set of simulations, we aim to illustrate how the structural robustness of random $k$-regular graphs with $k$ as in \eqref{kstar} change with increasing network size for a given $\alpha \geq 1$. As such, we investigate the performance of such graphs as an approximate solution to the combinatorial problem of designing a network with minimum sparsity that has $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_n) \leq \alpha \mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{K}_n)$. For this simulation we pick $\alpha=25$ and set $k$ as per \eqref{kstar} for four different sizes: $n=100$, $n=150$, $n=200$, and $n=250$. Accordingly, we simulate the noisy consensus dynamics on the random regular graphs $\mathcal{G}_{100,4}$, $\mathcal{G}_{150,6}$, $\mathcal{G}_{200,8}$, and $\mathcal{G}_{250,10}$.
The average of state variances over the simulation horizon were observed as
$0.1818$ ($\mathcal{G}_{100,4}$), $0.1015$ ($\mathcal{G}_{150,6}$), $0.0717$ ($\mathcal{G}_{200,8}$), and $0.0556$ ($\mathcal{G}_{250,10}$).
In Table \ref{Tab-RR}, we provide the theoretical values of $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_{n,k})$ and $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{K}_n)$, which are computed using the Laplacian eigenvalues of graphs as per \eqref{hseig}. We also provide their ratios, $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_{n,k})/\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{K}_n)$, in the last row of this table. The ratio starts at 36.3 for $n=100$ and monotonically drops to $27.8$ by $n=250$. These results indicate that $\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{G}_{n,k})/\mathcal{H}^*(\mathcal{K}_n)$ is approaching $\alpha$ in accordance with Theorem \ref{rand-reglem}. Hence, such random $k$-regular graphs with $k$ as per \eqref{kstar} approximately maintain the required level of robustness with the minimum average degree possible as shown in \eqref{gn-hcomp-cor}.
\begin{table}\centering
{\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1}\footnotesize
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c |c |c |c| c|}
\cline{2-5}
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{}
& $n=100$ & $n=150$ & $n=200$ & $n=250$ \\ \multicolumn{1}{c|}{}& $k=4$ & $k=6$ & $k=8$ & $k=10$\\
\hline
\multirow{2}{4em}{\centering Random $k$-regular} & \multirow{2}{3em}{\centering 0.1813} & \multirow{2}{3em}{\centering 0.1013} & \multirow{2}{3em}{\centering 0.0716}& \multirow{2}{3em}{\centering 0.0555}\\
& & & &\\
\hline
\multirow{2}{4em}{\centering Complete} & \multirow{2}{3em}{\centering 0.005} & \multirow{2}{3em}{\centering 0.0033} & \multirow{2}{3em}{\centering 0.0025}& \multirow{2}{3em}{\centering 0.002}\\
& & & &\\
\hline
\multirow{2}{4em}{\centering Ratio } & \multirow{2}{3em}{\centering 36.3} & \multirow{2}{3em}{\centering 30.7} & \multirow{2}{3em}{\centering 28.6}& \multirow{2}{3em}{\centering 27.8}\\
& & & &\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
}
\caption{structural vulnerability of the random $k$-regular graphs and the complete graphs of size $n$ as per \eqref{hseig} and their ratios.}
\label{Tab-RR}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion}
\label{conclusion}
We investigated the structural robustness of undirected linear consensus networks to noisy interactions. We measured the structural robustness of a graph based on the smallest possible value of the expected steady state population variance of states under the noisy consensus dynamics with admissible edge weights in $(0,1]$. We showed that the average distance and the average node degree in the underlying graph define tight bounds on the structural robustness. Using these novel bounds, we also presented some fundamental graph topological limitations on structural robustness and we investigated the graphs with extremal robustness properties.
As a future direction, we intend to extend our robustness analysis to the generalized case of directed graphs, where the interactions between nodes are not necessarily symmetric. We also plan to investigate the fundamental trade-offs between the proposed measure of structural robustness and other system properties. For example, recently it was shown that the distances between the nodes have a major impact on the controllability of consensus networks and there are trade-offs between the controllability and robustness of such systems (e.g., \cite{Yasin16TAC, Abbas19}). We believe that the results in this paper can be used for further investigation of such relationships between important system properties.
|
\section{Introduction}
Small particles, droplets and bubbles are ubiquitously present in flowing fluids. When a suspended particle is transported by a viscous fluid, it modifies the flow around it. If another particle happens to be in the region of the modified flow, mutual hydrodynamic interactions between the particles will take place. The interactions are given implicitly by imposing boundary conditions on the flow that must hold simultaneously on the surfaces of all interacting particles \cite{hb,kim}. This setting is inconvenient for analyses, both theoretical and numerical. Thus there is no answer to even simplest questions, for instance whether there can be a non-trivial stationary configuration of particles that would flow as a whole due to the hydrodynamic interaction. Although these interactions somewhat resemble electrostatic interactions, there is no a hydrodynamic counterpart of Earnshaw's theorem \cite{pur} stating that such simple configurations are impossible. Here we provide an example of this possibility in the presence of a boundary and demonstrate that boundaries can have surprising and non-trivial effects on hydrodynamic interactions.
The only well-studied case of hydrodynamic interactions of particles transported by non-uniform flow is the case of two particles in a time-independent low Reynolds number linear flow. This was studied in the seminal Batchelor-Green's paper \cite{ujhd}, see also \cite{arp} for more details and an account of various contributions to the problem. If the particles' (and fluid) inertia can be entirely neglected, the vector between the particle centers obeys an autonomous first-order evolution equation, which gives its rate of change as a function of the instantaneous value. The use of the symmetries makes it possible to quantify the interaction by the two scalar functions of the distance, which have been tabulated \cite{ujhd}, see also \cite{kim}. This case presents no stationary configurations for the two particles. One of the main applications is the Poiseuille flow in the channel shown in Fig. \ref{fig:setup}. If both particles are far from the walls, $z_0 \gg a, r$, they can seemingly be considered as flowing in an unbounded shear flow and the analysis of \cite{ujhd,arp,lin} applies. The BG theory thus predicts that there are no possible stationary configurations of the particle pair. Here we demonstrate that the approximation of an unbounded flow overlooks such configurations and also other phenomena, which hold independently of how large $z_0$ is, cf. \cite{agto}. Thus, the presence of the wall exhibits a singular perturbation of the BG theory.
Recently, stationary configurations of particles transported in microfluidic channels attracted attention due to the possibility of flow-assisted microfabrication by using a combination of hydrodynamic and non-hydrodynamic (i.e., adhesive) interactions \cite{tab0,tabeling}. Under certain conditions, the particles can self-assemble into clusters of different morphology that flow with no change of inter-particle distances, see \cite{flow-assist} for detailed discussions. These micron-scale clusters can then be solidified and collected from the flow, and be potentially used for fabrication of functional metamaterials. To theoretically explain and subsequently predict the structure formation of the suspended particles observed in experiments, Shen \textit{et al}. \cite{tabeling} proposed a
model based on a dipolar asymptotic form of hydrodynamic interaction. Notice that the dipolar form only holds at large particle separations (it was derived in detail using the fundamental solution for the channel flow \cite{LironMochon}, see \cite{2017} and also references therein). One reason for the apparent applicability of this description, despite the particles were \textit{close to} each other, is likely the dominance of the adhesive radial forces between particles at close proximity, such that any hydrodynamic interaction producing a non-zero tangential velocity component would yield a similar cluster formation dynamics (see \cite{flow-assist} for further evidence). In contrast, a consistent predictive theory of hydrodynamic interactions should hold irrespective of the presence of adhesive forces, and allow for analysis of interaction of flowing particles at close proximity and near the wall, as in experimental setup \cite{tabeling}. The present paper is a step toward this theory.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{setup.png}
\caption{Setup of a particle pair in the Poiseuille flow (depicted in a comoving reference frame). In this work we study the case $z_0 \gg a$, where $a$ is the particle radius, however does not necessarily require $z_0\gg r$. The upper wall is assumed to be much further away from the particle pair than $z_0$.
}
\label{fig:setup}
\end{figure}
There are two differences between the channel flow and the unbounded shear flow considered in the BG theory \cite{lin,ujhd}. The velocity profile of the channel flow is quadratic \cite{quadratic} in the coordinate rather than linear. This difference is often irrelevant when the interacting particles are located much closer to one of the channel walls, so that the flow can be closely approximated by the linear shear flow. This is the case we consider in the present paper. Another difference, is that the no-slip rigid wall is always at a finite distance and it interacts with the flowing particles.
We first consider the evolution of the inter-particle distance when the effect of the wall is neglected and the BG theory applies. It is useful to consider the three-dimensional phase space spanned by all possible distances $\bm r$ between the spheres' centers where one of them is at the origin. The distance $\bm r(t)$ between the spheres' centers obeys an autonomous evolution equation which means that there is a well-defined phase space flow $\bm V^0(\bm r)$ such that $\dot{\bm r}=\bm V^0(\bm r(t))$ and a unique trajectory passes through each point. This is the consequence of neglecting particles' and fluid inertia and the translational invariance due to which the shear resistance matrix depends on $\bm r$ only, cf. \cite{sh} (translation in a linear flow changes the flow by a constant vector, irrelevant by Galilean invariance). The flow $\bm V^0(\bm r)$ does not vanish anywhere so that there are no steady configurations. The absence of critical points with $\bm V^0(\bm r)=0$ implies a simple structure of the phase space. This can be most readily observed in the symmetry plane formed by the horizontal flow direction $x$ and the vertical velocity gradient direction $z$ (see Fig.~\ref{fig:SeparatrixBG}). The trajectories that belong to the plane never leave it, $V_y(y=0)=0$, and can be considered separately. There is a simple dichotomy of the trajectories: closed trajectories crossing the $x$-axis and open trajectories that do not cross the $x$-axis. The open trajectories describe the faster particle overtaking the slower one. The particles return to their original vertical positions following the hydrodynamic encounter and there is fore-and-aft symmetry of the phase portrait. In contrast, the trajectories that cross the $x$-axis are closed, corresponding to a bound pair of spheres orbiting around each other. Open and closed trajectories are separated by the separatrix that touches the $x$-axis asymptotically at large distances \cite{lin}. Rotation of this separatrix around the $z$-axis creates an axisymmetric surface that separates the regions of open and closed trajectories in space (it is not readily evident how this axial symmetry could be guessed \textit{a priori} without writing down the equations). The region of closed trajectories has an infinite volume, which presents difficulties in, e.g., calculation of the effective viscosity of a dilute hard-sphere suspension at the quadratic order in concentration \cite{bgst}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{SeparatrixBG.pdf}
\caption{Phase portrait of the trajectories in the symmetry $xz$-plane, within the BG approximation of $z_0=\infty$. All lengths are scaled with the particle radius $a$.
Throughout the paper the reference sphere is at the origin and the trajectories of the second sphere are shown. Due to the fore-and-aft and top-down symmetries only one quadrant is depicted. The two types of the trajectories -- closed (blue) and open (red), are separated by the separatrix, the open trajectory that asymptotically approaches the $x$-axis \cite{lin,ujhd}. For two spheres at the same vertical line, the maximal separation for closed trajectories is of order of $10^{-5}$, see \cite{arp}. As a result, at this resolution, the trajectories are indistinguishable when approaching the $z$-axis. This includes the shown open trajectory that crosses the $z$-axis slightly above the closed trajectories. The time-period of revolution along the shown closed trajectory is more than $700$ (here and thereafter the time units of inverse shear rate $\dot{\gamma}^{-1}$ are used).}
\label{fig:SeparatrixBG}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Schematics.pdf}
\caption{The phase portrait in the symmetry $xz$-plane at finite $z_0=5$. The fore-and-aft and top-down symmetries survive the wall perturbation in the leading order. The phase portrait exhibits two critical (equilibrium) points: the saddle (hyperbolic) point $r_s$ and the neutral equilibrium (elliptic) point $r_c$, representing a completely different topology from the BG theory in Fig.~\ref{fig:SeparatrixBG}. As $z_0 \to \infty$, the topology of the phase portrait is preserved, while the critical points are being shifted to infinity. }
\label{fig:Schematics}
\end{figure}
We demonstrate here that when a distant wall is considered, the evolution of $\bm r$ remains autonomous in the leading approximation, $\dot{\bm r}=\bm V(\bm r(t))$. Thus at any finite $z_0\gg a$ we can still examine the phase portrait, which is however qualitatively different from that in Fig.~\ref{fig:SeparatrixBG}. Our calculation is not a perturbation theory of the BG solution as we do not assume $\bm V\approx \bm V^0$, so the disturbed phase space flow $\bm V(\bm r)$ is significantly different from $\bm V^0$. The change in topology occurs because at finite $z_0$ there exist critical points at which $\bm V(\bm r)$ vanishes, see the phase portrait in the symmetry plane in Fig.~\ref{fig:Schematics}. The saddle (hyperbolic) point $r_s$, the closer of the two critical points to the origin, is unstable. The other neutral equilibrium (elliptic) point $r_c$ corresponds to a marginally stable configuration, where the pair flows without changing its inter-particle distance and orientation, see Fig.~\ref{Draw1}(a). Not too large deviations from this state result in the sphere orbiting around this elliptic point. These dancing trajectories would have rather unusual appearance when considered in the laboratory frame: while one sphere travels downstream, the other sphere revolves around a point co-moving in space with the first sphere, see Fig.~\ref{Draw1}(b). The phase plane at $x>0$ is characterized by two disconnected regions of closed trajectories shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Schematics} by the blue curves. The region to the left of
the separatrix (blue) that crosses $x=r_s$ resembles the BG's closed trajectories. The trajectories around the elliptic point $(r_c, 0)$ are solely due to the presence of the wall. The lowest red curve is an open trajectory similar to the BG's: after the encounter the vertical separation is restored to its initial value. In contrast to that, along the (red) trajectories circumventing the elliptic point, the vertical separation of the particles reverses sign after the encounter. We call these ``swapping trajectories", since they seem to correspond to the numerical findings of \cite{agto} at $z_0\sim a$, where trajectories with particles swapping their vertical positions after the encounter in a channel flow were reported (careful consideration of the Figure presented in \cite{agto} reveals slight changes of the vertical coordinates which seem to be a higher order effect than that considered here). The phase portrait for the evolution of inter-particle distance along the swapping trajectory obtained in \cite{agto} numerically, agrees with that predicted here theoretically. To prove that the sign-reversal of the vertical separation predicted here implies swapping, it has to be shown that the center of mass of the pair is not displaced vertically as a result of the encounter. We leave the rigorous proof for future work, focusing here on the evolution of inter-particle distance only. Thus, the use of the term ``swapping trajectories" here, strictly speaking, refers to open trajectories with sign-reversal of the vertical separation following the encounter.
The three-dimensional trajectories are more complex. The circle of radius $r_c$ around the $z$-axis provides the critical curve with $\bm V(\bm r)=0$. The configurations with $\bm r$ on that circle are stationary, so that for instance there is a stationary pair where only the $y$-coordinates of the particles are different. Displacements from these stationary configurations result in closed trajectories that loop around the critical circle, see Fig.~\ref{Fig8b_CircleRc}. In contrast with the symmetry plane, where the BG trajectories display no behavior similar to dancing, some of the three-dimensional BG trajectories do look rather similar (notice that it was not stressed in the original work or in \cite{arp}), see Fig.~\ref{FigX_BG_closed_trajectory1} for comparison.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{Draw1.pdf} &
\hskip1cm&
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{Draw2.pdf} \\
(a) && (b)
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{(a) There is a unique value of the stream-wise separation distance between two particles, $x=r_c$, flowing along the same streamline of the Poiseuille flow, for which they flow steadily without changing their configuration. The stability of such motion is marginal, cf. (b). The value $r_c=4 z_0$ is confirmed in the numerical simulations of the Navier-Stokes equations for $z_0=5$.
(b) Trajectories that pass through points around the stationary point $x=r_c$, $z=0$, crossing $x$-axis at distance larger than $2\sqrt{2}z_0$, exhibit a peculiar dancing dynamics. In the coordinate frame co-moving with the trailing (left) particle, the leading (right) sphere follows an elongated closed orbit around $(r_c, 0)$. Similar trajectories hold outside the symmetry plane.}
\label{Draw1}
\end{figure}
We emphasize the topological difference between the phase portrait in Fig.~\ref{fig:Schematics} and that of the BG theory in Fig.~\ref{fig:SeparatrixBG}. There are two disconnected regions of closed trajectories. In one region the particles orbit each other, similarly to $z_0=\infty$ approximation, however the volume of this region is finite. The other region contains dancing closed trajectories and at large $x^2+y^2$ it is bounded by the surface of revolution $|z|\propto z_0(x^2+y^2)^{-3/2}$. This is similar to the BG bounding surface, $|z|\propto (x^2+y^2)^{-3/2}$, however boosted by the large $z_0$ factor. In both cases the volume of the phase space domain containing closed trajectories diverges, so the divergences in the second order in particle concentration stress calculations of \cite{bgst} are not regularized by the wall. At finite $z_0$ the two regions of closed trajectories are separated by a region of a new type of open swapping trajectories that, in contrast to the BG theory, cross the $x$-axis. Then the top-down symmetry, which holds remarkably in the presence of the wall, implies that for open trajectories that cross the $x$-axis, the vertical component of the inter-particle distance reverses its sign, as in numerically observed swapping trajectories \cite{agto}. At least some features of the presented topology, derived theoretically at $z_0\gg a$, work accurately down to $z_0=5a$, as demonstrated by our in-house numerical simulations of the Navier-Stokes equations.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Fig8b_CircleRc.pdf}
\caption{The blue line depicts the closed trajectory that forms a loop around the critical circle of radius $r_c$ (whose segment is shown by the green line) for $z_0=5$.
The trajectory can be shrunk to a (necessarily critical) point by continuously changing the initial conditions. The red line shows the BG trajectory
that starts from the same initial condition as the blue line. The period of revolution along the closed trajectory is $1165$.}
\label{Fig8b_CircleRc}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{FigX_BG_closed_trajectory1.pdf}
\caption{Three-dimensional BG trajectory (red curve) of the sphere in the frame co-moving with the reference sphere. The closed trajectory has a geometrical center on the $y$-axis. In contrast to the trajectory in Fig.~\ref{Fig8b_CircleRc}, this curve cannot be shrunk to a point by a continuous change of the initial conditions. That point would have to be critical and the BG phase space does not admit those. For this trajectory, a distant wall is only a regular small perturbation.
The period of revolution is $120$.}
\label{FigX_BG_closed_trajectory1}
\end{figure}
In the next Section we present the detailed derivation of the evolution equation for the inter-particle distance in the wall-bounded shear flow. Sec.~\ref{singular} demonstrates why the wall presents a singular perturbation of the BG theory. In Sec.~\ref{infinitely} we review the BG trajectories that serve as the reference point of our study. We present the results of the numerical solutions of the derived evolution equation in Sec.~\ref{finitely}. Sec. \ref{dancing-swapping} presents full solution of equation of motion in the dancing-swapping region. Section \ref{dns} presents the confirmation of the theory by direct numerical simulations of the motion of a pair of spheres in the Poiseuille flow. In the last Section we conclude our results, discuss the applicability of the BG theory and formulate some open questions.
\section{Evolution of the distance between two particles transported by a shear flow near wall} \label{interpair}
In this Section we derive the autonomous evolution equation for the distance $\bm r(t)$ between two spheres transported by the Poiseuille flow. We make the simplifying assumption that both spheres are much closer to one of the bounding walls than the other. Thus the particles are effectively transported by the shear flow and not the parabolic velocity profile. The hydrodynamic interaction of particles transported by an unbounded shear flow are well-studied and their velocities
$\bm V^0_{\alpha},\ \alpha=1,2$ were considered in \cite{ujhd}. This analysis serves as a starting point of our study. We also assume that the distance to the wall is much larger than the particles' radii. We derive the particles' relative velocity as a sum of $\bm V^0_{\alpha}$ and the correction velocity $\delta \bm V_{\alpha}$. The correction velocity is not necessarily smaller than $\bm V^0$, as our solution is not a perturbation around the solution for an unbounded shear flow.
\subsection{Direct approach} \label{direct}
We set the problem and consider its formulation using the flow for infinitely separated walls as a reference.
The problem of two spheres driven by the Poiseuille flow is described by,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\nabla p\!=\!\eta\nabla^2\bm u,\ \ \nabla\!\cdot\!\bm u\!=\!0,\ \ \ \ \bm u(z\!=\!0)\!=\!\bm u(z\!=\!h)\!=\!0,\ \
u_x(\infty)\!=\!\frac{z(z\!-\!h)\nabla_x p^0}{2\eta},\ \ \bm u(S_{\alpha})\!=\!\bm V_{\alpha}\!+\!\bm \Omega_{\alpha}\!\times\! (\bm x\!-\!\bm x_{\alpha}),
\label{ds}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\alpha=1, 2$ are the indices of the spheres, $x_{\alpha}$ are the coordinates of the centers and $S_{\alpha}$ is the surface of the $\alpha-$th sphere. We designate the flow by $\bm u$, and the translational and rotational velocities of the spheres by $\bm V_{\alpha}$ and $\bm \Omega_{\alpha}$. The constant pressure gradient $\nabla p^0=-|\nabla_x p^0| \bm{\hat x}$ drives the flow in the positive $x-$direction, $\eta$ is the fluid viscosity, $z$ is the vertical coordinate and $h$ the channel height. We assume that the spheres have equal radii $a$, although most of the calculations below can be done without this assumption.
We will use below $a$ as the unit of length so that the radii are 1.
We assume that the particle inertia is negligible so that the values of $\bm V_{\alpha}$ and $\bm \Omega_{\alpha}$ are determined from the conditions that the total force and torque from the fluid on either particle is zero,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\int_{S_{\alpha}} \bm t dS=0,\ \ \int_{S_{\alpha}} (\bm x-\bm x_{\alpha})\times \bm t dS=0, \label{inertless}
\end{eqnarray}
where we have introduced the surface traction $\bm t$, which can be written via the stress tensor $\sigma_{ik}$ as,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
t_i(\bm x)\!=\!\frac{\sigma_{ik}(\bm x\!-\!\bm x_{\alpha})_k}{a},\ \ \sigma_{ik}\!=\!-p\delta_{ik}\!+\!\eta(\nabla_iu_k\!+\!\nabla_ku_i),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\bm x$ belongs to $S_{\alpha}$. We observe that if the spheres are much closer to the wall at $z=0$ than at $z=h$, then we can use different boundary conditions in Eq.~(\ref{ds}),
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\bm u(z=0)=0,\ \ \bm u(\infty)\!=\!\dot{\gamma}z\bm{\hat x}, \ \ \dot{\gamma}\!=\!\frac{h|\nabla_x p^0| }{2\eta},
\end{eqnarray}
where we introduced the effective shear rate $\dot{\gamma}$ in terms of the parameters defining the Poiseuille flow. The boundary conditions at $S_{\alpha}$ are unchanged. Without the boundary condition at $z=0$ we reduce to the problem of motion of two spheres in an unbounded shear flow considered in \cite{ujhd}. We designate all quantities
of this problem by the superscript zero. Thus $\bm u^0$ is the unbounded shear flow for the two spheres with translational and rotational velocities $\bm V^0_{\alpha}$ and $\bm \Omega^0_{\alpha}$, which obey Eq.~(\ref{inertless}) with $\bm t=\bm t^0$. We look for the solution as superposition of $\bm u^0$ and the flow perturbation $\delta \bm u$ (where the use of $\delta$ does not imply smallness of $\delta \bm u$). We thus have,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\nabla \delta p\!=\!\eta\nabla^2\delta\bm u,\ \ \nabla\cdot\delta\bm u\!=\!0,\ \ \ \ \delta\bm u(z\!=\!0)\!=\!-\bm u^0(z\!=\!0),\ \
\delta \bm u(\infty)\!=\!0,\ \ \delta \bm u(S_{\alpha})\!=\!\delta \bm V_{\alpha}\!+\!\delta\bm \Omega_{\alpha}\!\times\! (\bm x\!-\!\bm x_{\alpha}),
\label{ds1}
\end{eqnarray}
where we introduced deviations of the velocities and of the surface traction from their values in an infinite domain,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\delta\bm V_{\alpha}\!=\!\bm V_{\alpha}\!-\!\bm V^0_{\alpha},\ \ \delta\bm \Omega_{\alpha}\!=\!\bm \Omega_{\alpha}\!-\!\bm \Omega^0_{\alpha},\ \ \delta \bm t\!=\!\bm t\!-\!\bm t^0.
\end{eqnarray}
The deviations of the velocities are fixed by the condition that the deviation from the surface traction obeys Eqs.~(\ref{inertless}) with $\delta \bm t$ instead of $\bm t$. We notice that the flow $\bm u^0(z=0)$ in Eq.~(\ref{ds1}) is induced by the spheres, since the unperturbed flow vanishes at $z=0$. Thus $\bm u^0(z=0)$ vanishes at infinity as necessary for consistency of the boundary conditions at the plane and at infinity. For the distant wall the flow $\bm u^0(z\!=\!0)$ can be simplified. This flow obeys the integral representation (see the derivation in Appendix \ref{shear}),
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
u^0_i(\bm x)\!=\!\dot{\gamma}\delta_{i1}z \!-\!\sum_{\alpha}\int_{S_{\alpha}}\!\!\!\frac{Y_{il}(\bm x-\bm x')t^0_{l}(\bm x')dS}{8\pi \eta};\ \ Y_{il}(\bm r)=\frac{\delta_{il}}{r}+\frac{r_ir_l}{r^3},\ \ \bm r=\bm x-\bm x', \label{inter}
\end{eqnarray}
where $Y_{il}$ is the Oseen tensor or the Green's function of the Stokes flow in an unbounded fluid \cite{kim}. If the vertical positions $z_{\alpha}$ of the centers of both spheres are much larger than their radii, $a$, then the asymptotic expansion of $\bm u^0(z\!=\!0)$ in $a/z_{\alpha}$ is obtained by Taylor expansion of $Y_{il}(\bm x-\bm x')$ in Eq.~(\ref{inter}) near $\bm x'=\bm x_{\alpha}$. Using the condition of zero force we find that, at the leading order,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
u^0_i(z=0)\!\approx \!\frac{1}{8\pi \eta}\frac{\partial}{\partial x_m}\sum_{\alpha} Y_{il}(\bm x-\bm x_{\alpha})S^{\alpha}_{lm}|_{z=0};\ \ \ S^{\alpha}_{lm}\!\equiv \!\!\int_{S_{\alpha}}\!\!\!\!\left(\!(\bm x\!-\!\bm x_{\alpha})_m t^0_l(\bm x)\!-\!\frac{\delta_{ml}(\bm x\!-\!\bm x_{\alpha})_pt^0_p(\bm x)}{3}\!\right)\!dS,
\label{far}
\end{eqnarray}
where the traceless tensor $S^{\alpha}_{lm}$ is \cite{ujhd} the force dipole strength of sphere $\alpha$. The $\delta_{lm}$ term can be added since $\nabla_lY_{il}=0$. The force dipole strengths obey a general form derived in \cite{ujhd}. We have $S^{1}_{lm}=S^{2}_{lm}=S_{lm}$ with
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\frac{3S_{lm}(\bm r)}{10 \pi \eta a^3\dot{\gamma}}\!=\!\left(\delta_{lx}\delta_{mz}\!+\!\delta_{mx}\delta_{lz}\right)(1\!+\!K)
\!+\!\left(\frac{r_l\left(x\delta_{mz}\!+\!z\delta_{mx}\right)\!+\!r_m\left(x\delta_{lz}\!+\!z\delta_{lx}\right)}{r^2}\!-\!\frac{4xz\delta_{lm}}{3r^2}\right)L
\!+\!\frac{2xz}{r^2}\left(\frac{r_lr_m}{r^2}\!-\!\frac{\delta_{lm}}{3}\right) M,\label{dipole}
\end{eqnarray}
where the scalar functions $K$, $L$ and $M$ depend on the inter-particle distance $r/a$ only (we omitted the prime in the notation of \cite{ujhd}, as the spheres have identical radii in our case). These functions can be completely found only numerically and are considered below as given. We can use Eq.~(\ref{far}) instead of the boundary condition at $z=0$ in Eq.~(\ref{ds1}). The first reflection \cite{hb} gives the leading order approximation for $\delta\bm V_{\alpha}$ as in the Lorentz solution for a sphere in the presence of a distant wall \cite{hb}. The compact expansion can be found below from integral representations.
\subsection{Integral equation for velocities}
Here we derive the integral equation that determines the particle velocities. For future generalization to the case where the distances from the spheres to both walls are comparable we perform the derivation starting from the full formulation given by Eq.~(\ref{ds}).
We use the integral representation of the flow derived in \cite{2017},
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
u_i(\bm x)\!=\!\frac{\delta_{ix}z(z\!-\!h)\nabla_x p^0}{2\eta}\!-\!\sum_{\alpha}\int_{S_{\alpha}}\!\!\!\frac{S_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')t_{l}(\bm x')dS'}{8\pi \eta},\label{inrepmany}
\end{eqnarray}
where we exploited the symmetry \cite{ps} of Green's function $S_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')=S_{li}(\bm x', \bm x)$. This function is defined by,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\bm u^S(\bm x)=\frac{1}{8\pi \eta}S_{ik}(\bm x, \bm x_0)g_k, \label{vl}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\bm u^S$ is the Stokeslet flow caused by a point force acting between two parallel plates,
\begin{eqnarray}&&
-\nabla p^S+\eta \nabla^2 \bm u^S+\bm g\delta(\bm x-\bm x_0)=0,\ \ \nabla\cdot\bm u^S=0, \ \ \bm u^S(z=0)=\bm u^S(z=h)=0,\ \ \bm u^S(x^2+y^2\to\infty)=0.\label{stokes1}
\end{eqnarray}
The function $S_{ik}$ is independent of $\bm g$ and it was derived in \cite{LironMochon}. We study the velocities $\bm V_{\alpha}$ using the integral equation for the surface traction $\bm t(\bm x)$ obtained by taking
$\bm x$ in Eq.~(\ref{inrepmany}) to the surface of one of the spheres; this gives
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
(V_{\alpha})_i+(\bm \Omega_{\alpha}\times (\bm x-\bm x_{\alpha}))_i\!=\!\frac{\delta_{ix}z(z\!-\!h)\nabla_x p^0}{2\eta}
-\!\sum_{\alpha'}\int_{S_{\alpha'}}\!\!\!\frac{S_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')t_{l}(\bm x')dS'}{8\pi \eta}, \label{intr1}
\end{eqnarray}
cf. \cite{ps}. This equation holds for all $\bm x$ on $S_{\alpha}$ with $\alpha=1, 2$. Together with the conditions of zero forces and torques it determines $\bm V_{\alpha}$, $\bm \Omega_{\alpha}$ and the surface traction
uniquely \cite{kim}. We use the assumption $h\gg z_{\alpha}$, meaning that the wall at $z=h$ is much further from the spheres than the one at $z=0$. We can therefore approximately assume
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
S_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')\approx G_{il}(\bm x, \bm x'), \label{condi}
\end{eqnarray}
where $G_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')$ is the Stokeslet near a plane wall defined by
\begin{eqnarray}&&
-\nabla p'+\eta \nabla^2 \bm u'+\bm g\delta(\bm x-\bm x')=0,\ \ \nabla\cdot\bm u'=0, \ \ \bm u'(z=0)=\bm u'(x\to\infty)=0,\ \
\bm u'(\bm x)=\frac{G_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')g_l}{8\pi \eta}.\label{stokes}
\end{eqnarray}
The requirement that Eq.~(\ref{condi}) holds when both $\bm x$ and $\bm x'$ belong to the spheres quantifies the assumption that one of the walls is much further than the other. In practice the difference between distances to the upper and lower walls does not have to be too large for the equation to hold. With $z_{\alpha}\ll h$ and this assumption, Eq.~(\ref{intr1}) becomes
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
(V_{\alpha})_i+(\bm \Omega_{\alpha}\times (\bm x-\bm x_{\alpha}))_i\!=\!\dot{\gamma}\delta_{ix}z
-\!\sum_{\alpha'}\int_{S_{\alpha'}}\!\!\!\frac{G_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')t_{l}(\bm x')dS'}{8\pi \eta}. \label{intr}
\end{eqnarray}
We next introduce the decomposition of $G_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')$ into the Stokeslet in an infinite space and the correction due to the wall ${\tilde G}_{il}$,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
G_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')=Y_{il}(\bm r)+{\tilde G}_{il}(\bm x, \bm x'), \label{do}
\end{eqnarray}
with $\bm r=\bm x-\bm x'$, as above. The contribution ${\tilde G}_{il}$ is induced by the images located at the reflection $(\bm x')^*=(x', y', -z')$ of the source position $\bm x'=(x', y', z')$ with respect to the plane $z=0$. It was found in \cite{Blake} that the image singularities are a point force of the same magnitude as the source, but with an opposite sign, a stokes-doublet and a source-doublet, see definitions in the paper. We can write the formula in Ref.~\cite{Blake} as follows
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!
{\tilde G}_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')=-Y_{il}(\bm R)+2z'G^{(1)}_{il}(\bm R)+2z'^2 G^{(2)_{il}}(\bm R),\ \ G^{(1)}_{il}\!=\!\left(2\delta_{3l}\!-\!1\right)\partial_l Y_{i3},\ \
G^{(2)}_{il}\!=\!\frac{\left(1\!-\!2\delta_{3l}\right)\left(R^2\delta_{il}\!-\!3R_iR_l\right)}{R^5},\label{gr}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\bm R=\bm x-(\bm x')^*$ is the distance from the images and there is no summation over repeated indices. The symmetries of the Green's functions $G_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')=G_{li}(\bm x', \bm x)$ and $Y_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')=Y_{li}(\bm x', \bm x)$ imply the symmetry ${\tilde G}_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')={\tilde G}_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')$, which can be confirmed directly.
We compare Eq.~(\ref{intr}) with the similar equation for two spheres driven by the unbounded shear flow that was considered above. The equation can be obtained by dropping ${\tilde G}_{il}$ above, see Eq.~(\ref{inter}), which yields
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
(V^0_{\alpha})_i\!+\!(\bm \Omega^0_{\alpha}\!\times\! (\bm x\!-\!\bm x_{\alpha}))_i\!=\!\dot{\gamma}\delta_{ix}z
-\!\sum_{\alpha'}\int_{S_{\alpha'}}\!\!\!\frac{Y_{il}(\bm x\!-\!\bm x')t^0_{l}(\bm x')dS'}{8\pi \eta}.\label{intb}
\end{eqnarray}
Subtracting Eq.~(\ref{intb}) from Eq.~(\ref{intr}) we find
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
(\delta V_{\alpha})_i\!+\!(\delta\bm \Omega_{\alpha}\!\times\! (\bm x\!-\!\bm x_{\alpha}))_i\!+\!\sum_{\alpha'}\int_{S_{\alpha'}}\!\!\!\frac{{\tilde G}_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')t^0_{l}(\bm x')dS'}{8\pi \eta}\!=\!-\!\sum_{\alpha'}\int_{S_{\alpha'}}\!\!\!\frac{G_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')\delta t_{l}(\bm x')dS'}{8\pi \eta}.\label{ineg}
\end{eqnarray}
Provided that $\bm t^0(\bm x)$ is known, this is an integral equation on $\delta\bm t(\bm x)$ which also obeys the conditions of zero forces and torques given by Eqs.~(\ref{inertless}) with $\delta \bm t$ replacing $\bm t$. So far we have not made any approximations besides that the spheres are much closer to one of the two walls of the channel. \\ \\
\subsection{Asymptotic solution for a distant wall}
We consider the solution of Eq.~(\ref{ineg}) in the limit of a distant wall.
The last (source) term in the left hand side of this equation, in contrast with the rest of the terms, does not involve properties of $\delta\bm u$.
If it is dropped, then we find Eq.~(\ref{intr}) with $\dot{\gamma}=0$, that is the equation for two inertialess spheres moving near the wall in the fluid at rest, which unique solution is trivial -- zero translational and angular velocities.
In fact, Eq.~(\ref{ineg}) coincides with the equation for the velocities of an inertialess swimmer, composed of two spheres, that swims near a plane wall at $z=0$. In this case, the propulsion is powered by the swimming stroke prescribed by the velocity distribution at the spheres' surface as given by that last term.
When both spheres are separated from the wall by a distance much larger than $a$ the asymptotic series solution can be obtained via the Taylor expansion of ${\tilde G}_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')$ near the centers of the spheres, cf.
Sec.~\ref{direct}. Indeed, both arguments, $\bm x$ and $\bm x'$, of ${\tilde G}_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')$ are confined in Eq.~(\ref{ineg}) to one of the spheres (possibly different ones).
In this range ${\tilde G}_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')$ is a slowly varying function of its arguments because $z_{\alpha}\gg a$ and the image of $\bm x'$ under this condition is separated from each sphere by a distance much larger than the radius, cf. with the Lorentz solution \cite{hb} and also Appendix of Ref.~\cite{fl2018}.
This observation does not depend on the separation between the spheres that can be nonetheless arbitrary.
Thus we write Eq.~(\ref{ineg}) as,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
(\delta V_{\alpha})_i\!+\!(\delta\bm \Omega_{\alpha}\!\times\! (\bm x\!-\!\bm x_{\alpha}))_i\!+\!\sum_{\alpha'}\int_{S_{\alpha'}}\!\!\!\frac{{\tilde G}_{il}(\bm x_{\alpha}, \bm x')t^0_{l}(\bm x')dS'}{8\pi \eta}
+(\bm x\!-\!\bm x_{\alpha})_k\frac{\partial}{\partial x_k}\sum_{\alpha'}\int_{S_{\alpha'}}\!\!\!\frac{{\tilde G}_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')t^0_{l}(\bm x')dS'}{8\pi \eta}|_{\bm x=\bm x_{\alpha}}+\ldots
\nonumber\\&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
=\!-\!\sum_{\alpha'}\int_{S_{\alpha'}}\!\!\!\frac{G_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')\delta t_{l}(\bm x')dS'}{8\pi \eta}, \label{fdk}
\end{eqnarray}
where dots stand for higher order terms in the Taylor expansion. The asymptotic solution can be obtained by requiring that the equation holds at every order in $\max [a/z_1, a/z_2]$ (the case of disparate $z_{\alpha}$ seems to be of little interest so $z_1\sim z_2$ can be assumed below though this is not necessary for the analysis). The zero-order term determines the particle velocities,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
(\delta V_{\alpha})_i=\!-\!\sum_{\alpha'}\int_{S_{\alpha'}}\!\!\!\frac{{\tilde G}_{il}(\bm x_{\alpha}, \bm x')t^0_{l}(\bm x')dS'}{8\pi \eta}, \label{ordsa}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\delta t_{l}$ is zero at this order. This formula can be simplified by noting that ${\tilde G}_{il}(\bm x_{\alpha}, \bm x')$ is a smooth function of $\bm x'$ on each of the spheres for the same reasons as before due to the symmetry ${\tilde G}_{il}(\bm x, \bm x')={\tilde G}_{li}(\bm x', \bm x)$. The zero-order term in the expansion vanishes by the condition of zero force. We thus find that
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\delta V_{\alpha i}=-\frac{S_{lm}}{8\pi \eta}\sum_{\alpha'}\frac{\partial {\tilde G}_{il}(\bm x_{\alpha}, \bm x_{\alpha'})}{\partial (x_{\alpha'})_m}+o\left(\frac{a}{z_{\alpha}}\right), \label{response}
\end{eqnarray}
which is a more rigorous derivation of the result that might also be obtained using reflections as described in the beginning of the Section. The use of an integral representation allows us to precisely formulate the validity conditions and to provide a transparent structure of the asymptotic series. It is important for the further analysis that the derivation does not assume any \emph{a priori} relation between $\bm V^0_{\alpha}$ and $\delta \bm V_{\alpha}$. Actually, the absolute value of the velocities $\delta \bm V_{\alpha}$ would be smaller than $\bm V^0_{\alpha}$, however, this need not to be true for the relative velocities which are of main interest here.
\subsection{Evolution equation of inter-particle distance} \label{dista}
The velocity of the relative motion of the spheres is described by $\bm V=\bm V_2-\bm V_1$ that, at the leading order, obeys
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
V_i\!=\!V^0_i\!+\!\frac{S_{lm}}{8\pi \eta}\sum_{\alpha'}\left(\frac{\partial {\tilde G}_{il}(\bm x_1, \bm x_{\alpha'})}{\partial (x_{\alpha'})_m}\!-\!\frac{\partial {\tilde G}_{il}(\bm x_2, \bm x_{\alpha'})}{\partial (x_{\alpha'})_m}\right). \label{vls}
\end{eqnarray}
The relative velocity in an unbounded shear flow $\bm V^0$ can be written as \cite{ujhd}
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
V^0_i(\bm r)\!=\!\dot \gamma z\delta_{i1}\!-\!\frac{\dot \gamma B z\delta_{i1}}{2}\!-\!\frac{\dot \gamma B x\delta_{i3}}{2}\!-\!\frac{\dot \gamma(A-B)xz r_i}{r^2}, \label{unpert}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\bm r=\bm x_2-\bm x_1$. The first term in the RHS is the driving shear flow. The remaining terms, due to hydrodynamic interactions, are described by the functions $A$ and $B$, which depend on $|\bm r|=r$ only. These functions are considered, similarly to $K$, $L$ and $M$ above, as given \cite{ujhd}.
We observe that $\bm V^0$ is determined uniquely by the distance between the particles and is independent of the particles' center of mass. Thus the evolution of $\bm r(t)$ without the wall is autonomous, i.e., the time derivative of $\bm r(t)$ is determined uniquely by the instantaneous value of $\bm r(t)$. We demonstrate that the
evolution of $\bm r(t)$, described by Eq.~(\ref{vls}), remains autonomous. This means that we can neglect in $\bm V$, which is a function of $\bm x_i$, the dependence on the center-of-mass coordinate $(\bm x_1+\bm x_2)/2$. Since the horizontal coordinates of the center of mass are irrelevant by translational invariance in the horizontal directions, we need to consider only the dependence on $z_0=(z_1+z_2)/2$. This coordinate would not change at all without the hydrodynamic interactions and the particles would move in straight lines parallel to the wall. The interactions cause temporal variations of $z_0$; however these occur only over the scale of these interactions which is the radius $a$. Moreover, this change is small by the assumption that $\max [a/z_1, a/z_2]\ll 1$. This allows to consider $z_0=(z_1+z_2)/2$ as constant during the whole time of the interactions giving $\bm V=\bm V(\bm r(t), z_0(t))\approx \bm V(\bm r(t), z_0(t_0))$ where $t_0$ is arbitrary. For $\delta V_i\equiv V_i\!-\!V^0_i$ we have
\begin{eqnarray}&&
\delta V_i\!=\!\frac{S_{lm}}{8\pi \eta}\sum_{\alpha'}\left(\frac{\partial {\tilde G}_{li}(\bm x_{\alpha'}, \bm x_1)}{\partial (x_{\alpha'})_m}\!-\!\frac{\partial {\tilde G}_{li}(\bm x_{\alpha'}, \bm x_2)}{\partial (x_{\alpha'})_m}\right)
=\!\frac{S_{lm}}{8\pi \eta}\sum_{\alpha'}
\frac{\partial}{\partial (x_{\alpha'})_m}
\left(Y_{li}(\bm x_{\alpha'}-\bm x_2^*)-Y_{li}(\bm x_{\alpha'}-\bm x_1^*)
+2z_1G^1_{li}(\bm x_{\alpha'}-\bm x_1^*)\right.\nonumber\\&&\left.
+2z_1^2G^2_{li}(\bm x_{\alpha'}-\bm x_1^*)-2z_2G^1_{li}(\bm x_{\alpha'}-\bm x_2^*)
-2z_2^2G^2_{li}(\bm x_{\alpha'}-\bm x_2^*)
\right),\label{dfr}
\end{eqnarray}
where we used Eq.~(\ref{gr}). The derivatives in the above equation can be written via the tensors
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!
T^{(1)}_{lim}(\bm r)\!\equiv\! -\frac{\partial Y_{li}(\bm r)}{\partial r_m}\!=\!\frac{r^2\left(r_m\delta_{il}\!-\!r_i\delta_{lm}\!-\!r_l\delta_{im}\right
\!+\
3r_ir_lr_m}{r^5};\ \
T^{(2)}_{lim}(\bm r)\!\equiv\!\frac{\partial G^1_{li}}{\partial r_m}
=\left(1\!-\!2\delta_{3i}\right)\left(\frac{\delta_{im}\delta_{3l}\!-\!\delta_{i3}\delta_{lm}\!-\!\delta_{il}\delta_{3m}}{r^3}
\right.\nonumber\\&&\!\!\!\!\!\left.-\frac{3r_i(r_m\delta_{3l}\!-\!r_3\delta_{lm}\!-\!r_l\delta_{3m})}{r^5}
+\frac{3(\delta_{i3}r_lr_m\!+\!\delta_{il}r_3r_m\!+\!\delta_{im}r_3r_l)}{r^5}\!-\!\frac{15r_ir_3r_lr_m}{r^7}
\right);\nonumber\\&&\!\!\!\!\!
T^{(3)}_{lim}(\bm r)\!\equiv\!\frac{\partial G^2_{li}}{\partial r_m}
\!=\!-3\!\left(1\!-\!2\delta_{3i}\right)\left(\frac{r_m\delta_{il}\!+\delta_{im}r_l\!+\!\delta_{lm}r_i}{r^5}\!
-\!\frac{5r_mr_ir_l}{r^7}
\right),
\label{tensors}
\end{eqnarray}
where we used Eqs.~(\ref{do}) and (\ref{gr}). We also observe that,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\bm x_{\alpha'}-\bm x_{\alpha}^*=(x_{\alpha'}-x_{\alpha}, y_{\alpha'}-y_{\alpha}, z_{\alpha'}+z_{\alpha}).
\end{eqnarray}
Thus we find,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\delta V_i
=\!\frac{S_{lm}}{8\pi \eta}
\left[K_{lim}^{11}-K_{lim}^{12}+K_{lim}^{21}-K_{lim}^{22}
\right];\ \ K_{lim}^{kn}=
T^{(1)}_{lim}(\bm x_k-\bm x_n^*)+2z_jT^{(2)}_{lim}(\bm x_k-\bm x_n^*)+2z_j^2T^{(3)}_{lim}(\bm x_k-\bm x_n^*).
\label{fk}
\end{eqnarray}
We write above $z_2=z_0+r_3/2$ and $z_1=z_0-r_3/2$ where $r_3=z_2-z_1$ is the vertical component of the distance $\bm r$.
We use $\bm x_{\alpha}-\bm x_{\alpha}^*=2z_{\alpha}$ so that,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
T^{(k)}_{lim}(\bm x_1-\bm x_1^*)=T^{(k)}_{lim}(0, 0, 2z_0-r_3);\ \
T^{(k)}_{lim}(\bm x_2-\bm x_2^*)=T^{(k)}_{lim}(0, 0, 2z_0+r_3). \label{tesnor}
\end{eqnarray}
Similarly, using $\bm x_1-\bm x_2^*=(-r_1, -r_2, z_1+z_2)=(-r_1, -r_2, 2z_0)$ and $\bm x_2-\bm x_1^*=(r_1, r_2, 2z_0)$ we find,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
T^{(k)}_{lim}(\bm x_1-\bm x_2^*)=T^{(k)}_{lim}(-r_1, -r_2, 2z_0);\ \
T^{(k)}_{lim}(\bm x_2-\bm x_1^*)=T^{(k)}_{lim}(r_1, r_2, 2z_0).\label{tesnor1}
\end{eqnarray}
The last equations provide the velocity in Eq.~(\ref{fk}) in terms of $\bm r$ and $z_0$.
We consider $z_0$ as a constant given by the initial configuration, see the discussion
after Eq.~(\ref{unpert}). The remaining terms in Eq.~(\ref{dfr}) depend only on $\bm r$, providing an autonomous equation for $\bm r$.
The detailed form of the evolution equation for $\bm r$ in Cartesian coordinates is given by Eqs.~(\ref{delV})-(\ref{delV1}) in Appendix \ref{cartesian}. The more compact form is found by employing the cylindrical coordinate system with $x = \rho \cos\phi,\ y = \rho \sin\phi,\ z=z$. We find using the identities $x \dot x + y \dot y = \rho \dot\rho$ and $-y \dot x + x \dot y = \rho^2 \dot\phi$ and the definitions $s^2\equiv \rho^2+4z_0^2$ and $\sigma\equiv r^2-s^2$ that (here and below we set $\dot{\gamma}=1$ by passing in the equation of
motion for $\bm r$ to dimensionless time $\dot{\gamma} t$),
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\dot\rho = z c_{\phi}
\left[
1-\frac{B}{2}-\frac{\rho^2(A-B)}{r^2}
+\frac{5\rho^2 P}{3r^4s^5}
+\frac{10z_0 R}{r^4\sigma^2}
+\frac{5\rho^2\sigma}{2r^4s^7}
(P+2(\rho^4-s^2\rho^2+4z^2z_0^2)M)
\right].
\label{rho}
\end{eqnarray}
Here, we have introduced $c_{\phi} = \cos\phi$, $P = r^2s^2(L-M)+3(\rho^4+4z^2z_0^2)M$ and
$R = r^4(1+K+L)+2z^2\rho^2M$, see definitions in Eqs.~(\ref{dipole}) and (\ref{unpert}). The dynamics of $c_{\phi}$ is
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\dot c_{\phi} = \frac{z}{\rho}(c_{\phi}^2-1)\left[
\frac{B}{2}-1+
\frac{5\rho^2\sigma L}{2r^2s^5}
-\frac{10z_0}{r^2\sigma^2}(r^2(1+K)+z^2L)
\right].
\label{phi1}
\end{eqnarray}
Finally, the dynamics of $z$ reads
\begin{eqnarray}&&
\dot z = \rho c_{\phi}
\left[
-\frac{B}{2}-\frac{z^2(A-B)}{r^2}
+\frac{5(\rho^2-16z_0^2)\sigma R}{2r^4s^7}
+\frac{5z^2 P}{3r^4s^5}
+\frac{10z^2 z_0}{r^4\sigma^2}(r^2 L+(2z^2-\rho^2)M)
\right].
\label{zz}
\end{eqnarray}
Further noting that $\rho^4-s^2\rho^2+4z^2z_0^2 =
\rho^2(\rho^2-s^2)+4z^2z_0^2 =
-4z_0^2\rho^2+4z^2z_0^2 =
4z_0^2(z^2-\rho^2)$ the evolution equation for $\rho$ can be rewritten as
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\dot\rho = z c_{\phi}
\left[
1-\frac{B}{2}-\frac{\rho^2(A-B)}{r^2}
+\frac{5\rho^2 P}{3r^4s^5}
+\frac{10z_0 R}{r^4\sigma^2}
+\frac{5\rho^2\sigma P}{2r^4s^7}
+\frac{20\rho^2 z_0^2\sigma}{r^4s^7}
(z^2-\rho^2)M
\right].
\label{rho2}
\end{eqnarray}
It can be readily seen using $|s|\sim z_0$ and $|\sigma| \sim z_0^2$, that at fixed $\bm r$ we have $\delta V_i \sim z_0^{-3}$ upon varying $z_0$. Similarly if we fix $z_0$ then $\delta V_i \sim r^{-2}$ upon varying $r$. The inverse cubic dependence on $z_0$ is non-trivial. Derivatives of ${\tilde G}_{il}(\bm r)$ contain terms of order $r^{-2}$ which would give $z_0^{-2}$ behavior in Eq.~(\ref{response}), cf. the dependence of $T^k_{lim}$ on $r$ in Eq.~(\ref{tensors}). Following rules for tensorial transformations upon the sign reversal of the argument, see, {\it e. g.}, Eqs.~(\ref{tesnor})-(\ref{tesnor1}), the leading order $z_0^{-2}$ terms cancel.
We remark that finding the next order correction to $\bm V$ in the inverse distance to the wall would involve the quadratic surface moments originating from $\bm t^0$. These were not considered previously and would be quite demanding to compute, see Eq.~(\ref{ordsa}). It would also require considering the contributions in the second line of Eq.~(\ref{fdk}). The corresponding exceedingly complex calculations are beyond the scope of the present paper. We take here the practical approach of trying to push our leading order calculation to smaller $z_0$ and compare the analytical prediction with the results of the direct numerical simulations.
The equations of motion have symmetries that can be described as the properties of the velocity components,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
V_{\rho}(\rho,-\phi,z)\!=\!V_{\rho}(\rho,\phi,z),\
V_{\rho}(\rho,\phi,-z)\!=\!-V_{\rho}(\rho,\phi,z),\ \
V_{\phi}(\rho,-\phi,z)\!=\!V_{\phi}(\rho,\phi,z),\
V_{\phi}(\rho,\phi,-z)\!=\!-V_{\phi}(\rho,\phi,z),
\nonumber\\
&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
V_{z}(\rho,-\phi,z)\!=\!V_{z}(\rho,\phi,z),\
V_{z}(\rho,\phi,-z)\!=\!V_{z}(\rho,\phi,z).
\label{symmetriesCyl}
\end{eqnarray}
These properties allow to confine the study of the trajectories $\bm r(t)$ to $z \ge 0,\ 0\le\phi\le\pi/2$, besides the constraint $r\ge 2$.
The main result of this Section is the evolution equation for the distance between two spheres freely suspended in a shear flow near the wall,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\dot{\bm r}=\bm V(\bm r)=\bm V^0(\bm r)+\delta \bm V(\bm r).
\end{eqnarray}
Here $\bm V^0(\bm r)$, given by Eq.~(\ref{unpert}), describes hydrodynamic interactions due to shear in unbounded flow and $\delta \bm V$ describes the effects of the wall, given at the leading order
by Eqs.~(\ref{delV})-(\ref{delV1}). Despite that the wall is assumed to be distant, its effect
is not small even for large channels.
\section{Singular effect of the wall at far distances}\label{singular}
In this Section we demonstrate that the wall is a singular perturbation of the relative motion between the two spheres. Regardless of how large $z_0$ is, its influence cannot be entirely neglected.
For any fixed $\bm r$ we have $\bm V(\bm r)=\bm V^0(\bm r)$ for $z_0\to\infty$. However for any fixed $z_0\gg 1$ there are large $\bm r$ for which some velocity components satisfy $|\delta V_i|\gg V^0_i$. There is a competition between the different parameters: the hydrodynamic interactions are small by $a/r$ whereas the interaction with the wall is small by $a/z_0$. As a result at $r$ given by a power of $z_0$, whose exponent is determined by the details of the power laws of the particle-particle and particle-wall interactions, the interactions with the wall may dominate the evolution of $\bm r$. The resulting topology of the trajectories of the relative motion is hence different, as we will describe in the next Sections. First, we illustrate the differences numerically.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Fig2a.pdf} &
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Fig2b_extended_range.pdf}
\\
(a) & (b)
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{The ratio $V_z/V_z^0$ for $z_0=20$ (a) in the $xz$-plane and (b) along the $x$-axis. The presence of the wall increases
the velocity at $x\gg z_0$ by a constant large factor of order $z_0^2$. The two critical points are the neutral equilibrium point $r_c=4z_0=80$
and the saddle point $r_s=(32 z_0^3/15)^{1/5}$ (see the inset in (b)).}
\label{Ratio1}
\end{figure*}
Trajectories that pass through points with $y=0$ belong to the $xz$-plane by symmetry, as $V_y(y=0)=0$. We consider the remaining components $V_x$ and $V_z$ as functions of $x$ and $z$ in the $xz$-plane. We can restrict the analysis to positive $x$ and $z$ due to the symmetries described in the previous Section. For the streamwise component of the velocity the wall is a regular perturbation: the ratio $V_x/V_x^0$ is everywhere close to 1. Thus for $z_0=20$ the maximal deviation of $V_x/V_x^0$ from 1 is seen numerically to be less than 1\%. Consider for instance the ratio at $x=y=0$ where the only nonzero components are $V_x^0(0, 0, z)=(1-B(z)/2)z$ and $\delta V_x(0, 0, z) = 10 z z_0(1+K(z)+L(z))/(z^2-4z_0^2)^2$, see
Eqs.~(\ref{unpert}) and (\ref{delV}). When $z \sim 2$ all $B(z),K(z),L(z)$ are finite and less than unity \cite{ujhd}. By taking the ratio we find that $\delta V_x/V_x^0 \sim 10/z_0^3\ll 1$ at $z_0\gg 1$.
At large distances $V_x^0$ is dominated by the driving shear flow, see Eq.~(\ref{unpert}), and it is much larger than $\delta V_x$ because the symmetry imposes proportionality of $\delta V_x$ and $z$, see Eq.~(\ref{delV}).
Similarly, in other cases, $V_x/V_x^0\approx 1$. Thus for practical purposes we can set
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
V_x(\bm r)\approx V^0_x(\bm r)\!=\!\left(1\!-\!\frac{B(r)}{2}\right) z\!-\!\frac{(A(r)-B(r))x^2z}{r^2}, \label{practical}
\end{eqnarray}
which at large distances reduces to the carrying shear flow difference given by $z$.
The situation is quite different for $V_z/V_z^0$ in Fig. \ref{Ratio1}.
We see that when the spheres are close, the difference is negligible and $V_z\approx V_z^0$. However the situation is quite different at
large separations. From Eq.~(\ref{unpert}) we obtain that for a wall at infinite distance,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
V^0_z(\bm r)\!=\!-\frac{ B x }{2}\!-\!\frac{(A-B)xz^2}{r^2},\label{sdh}
\end{eqnarray}
which can be further simplified at large $r$ using
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
A(r)=\frac{5}{r^3}+O\left(\frac{1}{r^5}\right),\ \ B(r)=\frac{16}{3r^5}+o\left(\frac{1}{r^6}\right), \label{largr}
\end{eqnarray}
see \cite{ujhd}. We thus find that
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
V^0_z(\bm r)\!\approx \!-\frac{8x }{3r^5}\!-\!\frac{5 xz^2}{r^5},
\label{bgz}
\end{eqnarray}
which is negative at $x>0$. We observe from Eqs.~(\ref{largr}) that the order of corrections is quite high so this formula might hold already at $r\simeq 3-4$.
For $\delta V_z$ we have from the equations in Appendix \ref{cartesian} that
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\delta V_z(x, 0, 0)\! =\!\frac{10x z_0^2(16z_0^2\!-\!x^2)}{(x^2+4z_0^2)^{7/2}}(1+K(x)+L(x)). \label{delata}
\end{eqnarray}
This can be simplified at large $x$ following Ref.~\cite{ujhd},
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
K(r)\!\approx \!-\frac{2}{r^5},\ \ L(r)\!\approx \!-\frac{5}{2r^3},\ \ M(r)\!\approx \!\frac{25}{2r^3},\ \ r\gg 1, \label{dsf}
\end{eqnarray}
by neglecting $K$ and $L$ compared to unity in Eq.~(\ref{delata}). These functions decay fast with $r$ implying that
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\delta V_z(x, 0, 0)\!\approx \!\frac{10x z_0^2(16z_0^2\!-\!x^2)}{(x^2+4z_0^2)^{7/2}}, \label{velsc}
\end{eqnarray}
must hold already at $x=3$ where the spheres are rather close. We also find for the ratio of velocities
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\frac{\delta V_z(x, 0, 0)}{V^0_z(x, 0, 0)}\! =\!\frac{15x^5z_0^2(x^2\!-\!16z_0^2)}{4(x^2+4z_0^2)^{7/2}};\ \ \ x\gg 1.\label{fok}
\end{eqnarray}
The corrections are of order higher than $1/x$ so in practice this formula works at rather small $x$.
The ratio on the LHS of Eq.~(\ref{fok}) equals $-1$ at $x$ obeying the condition,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
15x^5z_0^2(x^2\!-\!16z_0^2)+4(x^2+4z_0^2)^{7/2}=0.
\label{critical_pts_eq}
\end{eqnarray}
This equation has two solutions. The first one is obtained when
$x \ll 2z_0$ and hence $15x^5 = 32 z_0^3$ leading to $r_s = (32 z_0^3/15)^{1/5}$. This expression for the critical point, obtained from the $x\gg 1$ approximation given by Eq.~(\ref{fok}), is indistinguishable from the numerical solution of $V_z(x, 0, 0)=0$ with the full velocity given by Eqs.~(\ref{delV})-(\ref{delV1}), at least down to $z_0=5$ which is the smallest $z_0$ considered in this work (we have $r_s\approx 3$ at $z_0=5$). This is reasonable in view of the remarks after Eqs.~(\ref{bgz}), (\ref{velsc}) and (\ref{fok}). To find the other solution we notice that $x^2=16z_0^2+\delta$ with $\delta \ll 16z_0^2$ solves the equation giving $r_c \approx 4z_0$. Both $r_s$ and $r_c$ are much larger than unity at $z_0\gg 1$ confirming the consistency of the approach and can be used for $z_0\geq 5$.
The obtained points obey $V_z(r_c, 0, 0)=V_z(r_s, 0, 0)=0$. Moreover $V_x(x, 0, 0)=V_y(x, 0, 0)=0$ since both $V_x(x, y, z)$ and $V_y(x, y, z)$ are odd functions of $z$, see Eq.~(\ref{symmetries}). Thus, the points on the $x$-axis with $x=r_s$ and $x=r_c$ are the critical points with $\bm V=0$. We demonstrate below that these are a saddle point and a stationary point, respectively.
Finally we would like to emphasise the singular nature of the perturbation due to the long-range interaction at finite $z_0$. For motions in the plane $y=0$, at large but finite $z_0$, there are locations $\bm r$ for which the wall-normal component of the velocity $V_z$ is much larger than the BG velocity, see the $z_0=20$ case in Fig. \ref{Ratio1}. In fact, for $x\gg z_0$, the ratio $\delta V_z(x, 0, 0)/V^0_z(x, 0, 0)$ becomes an $x-$independent constant of order $z_0^2\gg 1$. The wall contribution to the velocity is opposite in sign to the BG velocity. If we consider two particles on the same streamline of the unperturbed flow with $y=z=0$, then the only non-vanishing, $z$-component of
the velocity $V_z(x, 0, 0)$ is,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
V_z\!=\!\frac{10x z_0^2(16z_0^2\!-\!x^2)}{(x^2\!+\!4z_0^2)^{7/2}}(1\!+\!K(x)\!+\!L(x))\!-\!\frac{xB(x)}{2}. \label{frac}
\end{eqnarray}
In the BG limit of $z_0\to \infty$, taken at fixed $x$, the first term drops, reducing the velocity to $V_z^0(x, 0, 0)=xB(x)/2$, see Eq.~(\ref{sdh}), and at large distances $xB(x)/2\approx 8/(3x^{4})$, see Eq.~(\ref{largr}). In contrast, at any finite $z_0$, for $x\gg z_0$, the range not considered in the BG approximation, the contribution due to the wall, described by the first term in Eq.~(\ref{frac}) behaves as $z_0^2 x^{-4}$. We find, using that the functions $K(x)$ and $L(x)$ vanish at large distances by Eq.~(\ref{dsf}),
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\lim_{x\to\infty}\frac{\delta V_z(x, 0, 0)}{V_z^0(x, 0, 0)}\!=\!\lim_{x\to\infty}\frac{20 z_0^2(x^2\!-\!16z_0^2)}{B(x)(x^2\!+\!4z_0^2)^{7/2}}
=\frac{15 z_0^2}{4}. \label{limit}
\end{eqnarray}
Thus the interaction between particles flowing along the same streamline is dominated by the wall term at $x\gtrsim z_0$. This sets in non-uniformly. We see
from Fig. \ref{Ratio1}(b)
that for $z_0=20$ the absolute value $|V_z(x, 0, 0)/V_z^0(x, 0, 0)|$ grows fast with $x$. It crosses zero (which corresponds to $|\delta V_z(x, 0, 0)/V^0_z(x, 0, 0)|=1$) at the critical saddle point $(32 z_0^3/15)^{1/5}\approx 7$, a value smaller than the half of $z_0$. One might have expected that $r\lesssim z_0$ guarantees at least a qualitative validity of the BG theory, however it does not. The ratio $|\delta V_z(x, 0, 0)/V^0_z(x, 0, 0)|$ rapidly grows with $x$, becoming of order one hundred already at $x \approx 30$. However, after reaching the maximum, it decreases to the value 1 at the critical point at $x=4z_0$. Only at $x\gg 4z_0$ the asymptotic law $|V_z(x, 0, 0)/V_z^0(x, 0, 0)| \sim z_0^2$ starts to apply. We find numerically that the curve $|V_z(x, 0, 0)/V_z^0(x, 0, 0)|$ starts flattening at $x\sim 200$ when its value is about one thousand. The approach to the limiting value of $1500$, imposed by Eq.~(\ref{limit}), is quite slow: e.g.\ at $x\simeq 450$ the ratio is about $1400$. We conclude that, at the considered value of $z_0$, the wall dominates the interactions at all $x\gtrsim z_0/2$, excluding a small neighborhood of the neutral equilibrium critical point $r_s$.
The strong changes of $\bm V$ induced by the presence of a wall described in this Section imply that the phase portrait is very different from that obtained in the limit $z_0
\to \infty$. In the next section, we therefore start from reviewing the reference $z_0=\infty$ case.
\section{Trajectories for infinitely distant walls}\label{infinitely}
We describe briefly the seminal results in Ref.~\cite{ujhd} pertaining the relative motion of two spheres in unbounded shear flow, as determined by the equation of motion $\dot{\bm r}=\bm V^0(\bm r)$. The trajectories can be obtained from the two integrals $R_2$ and $R_3$ (notice a different labelling of the axes compared to Ref.~\cite{ujhd}. We have $y$ and $z$, and correspondingly $R_2$ and $R_3$, switched)
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
R_2=y\exp\left(\int_r^{\infty}\frac{B(r')-A(r')}{1-A(r')}\frac{dr'}{r'}\right);\ \
R_3^
=z^2\exp\left(2\int_r^{\infty}\frac{B(r')-A(r')}{1-A(r')}\frac{dr'}{r'}\right)\nonumber\\&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\!-\!\int_r^{\infty}\!\!\!\frac{B(r')r'dr'}{1\!-\!A(r')}\exp\left(2\int_{r'}^{\infty}\frac{B(r'')\!-\!A(r'')}{1\!-\!A(r'')}\frac{dr''}{r''}\right).
\end{eqnarray}
We consider trajectories in the symmetry $xz$-plane ($y=0$) where $R_2=0$. The trajectories are given in the form $z=z(r)$ where ($r^2=x^2+z^2$),
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
z^2(r)=
R_3^2\exp\left(2\int_r^{\infty}\frac{A(r')-B(r')}{1-A(r')}\frac{dr'}{r'}\right)
\!+\!\int_r^{\infty}\!\!\!\frac{B(r')r'dr'}{1\!-\!A(r')}\exp\left(2\int_r^{r'}\frac{A(r'')\!-\!B(r'')}{1\!-\!A(r'')}\frac{dr''}{r''}\right).
\end{eqnarray}
There are two types of trajectories: open and closed trajectories corresponding to $R_3^2>0$ and $R_3^2<0$, respectively. The regions in phase space occupied by open and closed trajectories are separated by the separatrix $z^s(r)$ whose equation is found by setting $R_3=0$,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
(z^s)^2\!=\!\!\!\int_r^{\infty}\!\!\!\frac{B(r')r'dr'}{1\!-\!A(r')}\exp\left(\!2\!\!\int_r^{r'}\!\!\!\frac{A(r'')\!-\!B(r'')}{1\!-\!A(r'')}\frac{dr''}{r''}\right).\label{separ}
\end{eqnarray}
We can obtain $z^s(r)$ at large $r$ using Eq.~(\ref{largr}),
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\int_r^{r'}\frac{A(r'')\!-\!B(r'')}{1\!-\!A(r'')}\frac{dr''}{r''}\approx \int_r^{r'}\frac{5dr''}{r''^4}=\frac{5}{3}\left(\frac{1}{r^3}-\frac{1}{r'^3}\right).\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
The separatrix equation becomes (this asymptotic form was not presented in \cite{ujhd}),
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
(z^s)^2\approx \exp\left(\frac{10}{3r^3}\right)\int_r^{\infty}\frac{16 dr'}{3r'^4}\exp\left(-\frac{10}{3r'^3}\right)
=\frac{8}{15}\left(\exp\left(\frac{10}{3r^3}\right)-1\right)\approx \frac{16}{9r^3}\approx \frac{16}{9x^3}, \label{bsgd}
\end{eqnarray}
which shows that the separatrix asymptotically approaches the $x$-axis \cite{lin}. The surface obtained by rotation of this curve around the $z$-axis separates closed and open three-dimensional trajectories. The volume of closed trajectories is infinite due to divergence of two dimensional integral of $(x^2+y^2)^{-3/2}$.
We could not obtain a description of the particle-pair motion by integrals similar to $R_2$ and $R_3$ in the presence of the walls. For some trajectories, however, the wall is a small perturbation so that $\bm V(\bm r)\approx \bm V^0(\bm r)$ holds everywhere along the trajectory. The trajectory equation is then $\bm x(t)=\bm x^0(t)+\delta \bm x(t)$ where $\bm x^0(t)$ is a BG trajectory and $\delta \bm x(t)$ represents just a small modification. An example of these trajectories is the trajectory $a$ in Fig.~\ref{comparison}. These trajectories can be described with integrals of motion $R_i=R_i^0+\delta R_i$ where $\delta R_i$ is a small perturbation of the functional form of the $R_i$ due to the wall. This perturbation can be found from perturbation theory.
However this is of limited use since we are interested in trajectories for which the wall contribution is not small.
\section{Trajectories for a wall at finite distance}\label{finitely}
Here, we present the results of numerical simulations of the evolution equation of the inter-particle distance obtained in Sec. \ref{dista}. We apply the algorithm proposed in \cite{Filippov2000}, which allows us to
compute the hydrodynamic interactions in a system of $N$ spheres in a creeping flow. The algorithm is based on the multipole expansion of the Lamb solution for the fluid velocity field. We applied it to describe the motion in a system of two force- and torque-free solid spheres of unit radius in a shear flow for different distances $r$ between
the centers. Namely, for given components of the shear flow field and the vector
$\bm r$ connecting the sphere centers, we compute the velocity $\bm V$ in Eq.~(\ref{vls}).
Thus we determined the functions $A$, $B$, $K$, $L$ and $M$ for $r\geq 2.01$ using
the formulas in Ref.~\cite{ujhd}. When $r$ approaches the value $r=2$ the algorithm requires a very large number of spherical harmonics into the solution expansion, which leads to a very large system of linear equations for the coefficients of the harmonics.
The functions $A$ and $B$ were therefore smoothly continued to $r=2$ using the asymptotic forms for almost touching spheres given by
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
A(r)=1-4.077 (r-2)+O((r-2)^{3/2}),\ \
B\approx 0.406-\frac{0.78}{\ln \left[(r-2)^{-1}\right]}.
\label{tou}
\end{eqnarray}
The derivative of $B$ diverges at $r=2$, while the functions $A$, $K$, $L$ and $M$ are finite in the limit of touching spheres, $r\to 2$ and can be continued from $r\geq 2.01$ to $r<2.01$ using a linear Taylor series approximation. A similar approach was used in Ref.~\cite{arp}, where, however, continuation was used only below $2.0002$. Our main interest is in the behavior at larger $r$ so we did not undertake the detailed solution for the small values of $r-2$. A higher resolution is needed for the precise evaluation of the impact of the wall on the nearly touching BG trajectories and is left for future work.
Here, the equations of motion are generated employing the velocities given by the contributions (\ref{unpert},\ref{fk}). These equations
are solved numerically using the custom code in {\it Mathematica}, which reduces the integration step when the trajectory approaches the
vicinity of $r = 2$. In this region, the different trajectories are very close to each other and one has to resolve them accurately. This necessity is obvious already from the BG trajectories in the symmetry plane. All trajectories when the spheres pass in close vicinity to $r=2$ are closed. In other words, the trajectories that cross the $z$-axis at $z$ obeying $2\leq z\leq 2+\Delta$ are closed; however, those crossing at $z>2+\Delta$ are open where $\Delta$ is a small number. The quantity $\Delta$ obeys the equation
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
(2+\Delta)^2\!=\int_{2+\Delta}^{\infty}\!\!\!\frac{B(r')r'dr'}{1\!-\!A(r')}\exp\left(2\int_{2+\Delta}^{r'}\frac{A(r'')\!-\!B(r'')}{1\!-\!A(r'')}\frac{dr''}{r''}\right),
\end{eqnarray}
as readily seen from Eq.~(\ref{separ}). The evaluation of $\Delta$ from this equation (not done in \cite{ujhd}) is beyond our scope here. Note however that Ref.~\cite{arp} provide $\Delta\sim 10^{-5}$.
The smallness of $\Delta$ implies that small perturbations can readily turn closed trajectory into an open one, which is indeed what the distant wall does as shown
in Fig.~\ref{fig:Fig4a}. The resolution of these small-scale effects demands high numerical precision.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Fig4a.pdf} \hspace{1cm} &
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Fig4b.pdf}
\\
(a) & (b)
\end{tabular}
\caption{The phase portrait in the $xz$-plane for $z_0=5$ (a) and,
$z_0=10$ (b). The BG separatrix obeying $z^2=16/(9x^3)$ at large $x$ is depicted by the dashed (grey) line. For any finite $z_0$, the phase portrait contains two disconnected regions of closed trajectories, in contrast to one region at $z_0=\infty$. Region I, where all trajectories are closed and the spheres are close to each other, is similar to that at $z_0=\infty$. Region II is also similar to the $z_0=\infty$ case: all the trajectories are open and the vertical separation after the interaction returns to its original value.
Region III has no counterpart at $z_0=\infty$. This region contains both closed and open trajectories (see Fig.~\ref{Separatrix2D} for a more detailed description). The trajectories passing not far from the stationary point $r_c$ are closed, orbiting around this point. The swapping open trajectories instead are characterized by a sign reversal of the vertical component of the separation vector after the encounter. The region of swapping trajectories is bounded from one
side by the closed trajectories around $r_c$ and from the other side by open non-swapping trajectories.}
\label{fig:Fig4a}
\end{figure*}
To construct the separatrices (defined here as curves separating regions of qualitatively different behavior) in the $xz$-plane for given value of $z_0$ we first
find the critical point on the $x$-axis $(r_s,0,0)$ where the approximate value of $r_s$ is given in Section III.
One separatrix (red curve in Fig. \ref{fig:Fig4a}) is stable, see Fig.~\ref{fig:Schematics} and thus is computed
using integration of the original equations. The other separatrix (blue curve in Fig. \ref{fig:Fig4a}) is unstable as seen from Fig. \ref{fig:Schematics}. Thus, it is
found by
backward integration in time, for which it is stable, until the trajectory reaches the $z$-axis. All the trajectories below the blue curve (region I) are closed, while
those between the red and blue curves (region II) are open -- they correspond to
non-swapping trajectories. The trajectories between the red curve and the $x$-axis (region III)
can be divided into two classes -- open swapping trajectories (brown, black curves in the inset of Fig.~\ref{Separatrix2D}) and closed trajectories characterized by a
very large separation between the spheres (green, blue curves), see the captions of the Figures and detailed theory in the next Section.
We next consider three-dimensional trajectories. The axial symmetry of the governing equations
(\ref{rho})-(\ref{zz})
implies that the saddle points reside in the $xy-$plane on a circle with radius $r_s$.
For each point on this curve one can construct the corresponding separatrices in 3D
(see Fig.~\ref{Separatrix3D}, where the third neutral direction is given by the circle $r=r_c$, not shown).
\begin{figure}[h!]
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Fig6.pdf}
\caption{The separatrices for $z_0=20$ corresponding to the
initial point $(r_s \cos\phi,r_s\sin\phi,0)$ with $\phi = 7\pi/90$.}
\label{Separatrix3D}
\end{figure}
All the separatrices belong to some surface of rotation (Fig.~\ref{Separatrix3D_polar}) which is obtained by the rotation of the curves in Fig.~\ref{Separatrix2D} around the $z$-axis.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Fig7.pdf}
\caption{Surface of rotation formed by the separatrices that pass through $(r_s \cos\phi, \sin\phi,0)$ with $0\leq \phi\leq 2\pi$ at $z_0=20$. The green curves represent separatrices corresponding to $\phi = 0,\pi/36,\pi/18,5\pi/36,\pi/4$. The trajectories inside the region formed by the blue surface are closed BG-type orbits, whereas the trajectories inside the orange surface are either open swapping or closed dancing trajectories, as in region III in Fig.~\ref{Separatrix2D}, cf.\ Fig.~\ref{Separatrix3D}.}
\label{Separatrix3D_polar}
\end{figure}
At this point, it is instructive to compare the evolutions of the same representative initial conditions for $z_0=\infty$ and finite $z_0$.
The evolution of conditions that produce closed BG trajectories with small $x^2+z^2$ in the limit $z_0=\infty$ is only weakly influenced by far wall (unless passing near the BG separatrix where small perturbations are relevant), as in Fig.~\ref{FigX_BG_closed_trajectory1}, see the caption. In contrast, the trajectories with large $x^2+z^2$ may be very different as shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig8b_CircleRc} where the wall changes the evolution from an open trajectory to a closed one. The evolution of initial conditions leading to open trajectories for $z_0=\infty$
may be only slightly changed by the wall, as in Fig.~\ref{comparison}(a), or result in swapping as for the case in Fig.~\ref{comparison}(b).
\begin{figure*}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Fig8c.pdf} &
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Fig8d.pdf}
\\
(a) & (b)
\end{tabular}
\caption{Comparison of representative open trajectories in the BG case (red) and in the case of a wall at a finite distance $z_0$ (blue): (a) typical open trajectories are qualitatively similar in both cases ($z_0=20$); (b) for some initial conditions the presence of the wall results in the appearance of a swapping trajectory ($z_0=5$). The black arrows indicate the direction of motion.}
\label{comparison}
\end{figure*}
\section{Theory of dancing-swapping region}\label{dancing-swapping}
In this Section we analyze the trajectories in the dancing-swapping region III, as shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:Fig4a}. We restrict the consideration to the symmetry plane $y=0$. All trajectories in this region cross the $x$-axis. These trajectories are of two types, both are qualitatively different from the BG theory. The swapping trajectories are open, each crosses the $x$-axis at a single point $x$ obeying $r_s<x<x_s$ where $r_s=\left(32 z_0^3/15\right)^{1/5}$ and $x_s=2\sqrt{2}z_0$ is determined below. For these trajectories the difference of the $z$ coordinates of the particles changes sign as a result of the hydrodynamic encounter (as for black curve in Fig.~\ref{Separatrix2D}. This sign-reversal corresponds to swapping of the vertical coordinates, see the Introduction. The larger crossing coordinate is, starting from $x=r_s$, the closer the trajectory is to the $x$-axis at large $x$. For the unique trajectory passing through $x=x_s$ the trajectory asymptotically approaches the $x$-axis indefinitely similarly to the BG's separatrix, dividing regions of open and closed trajectories. Finally, the trajectories that pass through a point $(x>x_s, 0, 0)$ are closed, each crossing the $x$-axis at two locations.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Fig5_inset.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{The dancing-swapping region III of Figs. \ref{fig:Fig4a} for $z_0=20$. The red line is the region's boundary that crosses the $x$-axis at $\left(32 z_0^3/15\right)^{1/5}$. The dashed blue line separates open swapping and closed dancing trajectories and crosses the $x$-axis at $x_s=2\sqrt{2}z_0$. The black dot is the equilibrium point $(r_c=4z_0, 0)$.}
\label{Separatrix2D}
\end{figure}
First we observe that the evolution of trajectories in the dancing-swapping region III admits $r\gg 1$ and thus can be simplified. It is readily seen numerically that, at least for $z_0\geq 5$ that are of interest here, we have $V^0_x(\bm r)\approx z$ within less than 15\% accuracy, meaning that the BG velocity difference is fully determined by the undisturbed shear flow. This is because the hydrodynamic interactions' correction to $V^0_x(\bm r)$ decays quickly with the spheres' separation, see Eqs.~(\ref{practical}), (\ref{largr}). We find from Eq.~(\ref{practical}) that we can use $V_x(\bm r)\approx z$ everywhere in region III. Moreover, we observe that $\delta V_z(x, 0, z)-\delta V_z(x, 0, 0)$ grows quadratically with $z$, see Appendix \ref{cartesian}. It is then found that since small-$z$ approximation holds (see below) then we can then use $\delta V_z(x, 0, z)\approx \delta V_z(x, 0, 0)$ in the whole region III. Finally, we can use the reduced Eq.~(\ref{velsc}). We find that the evolution of the trajectories in region III can be accurately described by the reduced system of equations,
\begin{eqnarray}&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
\dot x=z,\ \ \dot z=-\frac{8x }{3r^5}\!-\!\frac{5 xz^2}{r^5}+\frac{10x z_0^2(16z_0^2\!-\!x^2)}{(x^2+4z_0^2)^{7/2}},
\label{ds1}
\end{eqnarray}
where we assumed $z_0\geq 5$ and used Eq.~(\ref{bgz}). Furthermore, since region III is characterized by small $z$ then it is seen that $r\approx x$ and the second term in the RHS of the equation on $z$ can be dropped. Indeed, the ratio $15 z^2/8$ of this term to the first term in the RHS is small at moderate $x$ and not so small at larger $x$. However, at larger $x$ the time-derivative $\dot z$ is determined by the third term. Thus the second term is uniformly small everywhere in III as we verified numerically, and Eq.~(\ref{ds1}) is rewritten as
\begin{equation}
\dot x = z,
\quad
\dot z=-\frac{8}{3x^4}+
\frac{10x z_0^2(16z_0^2-x^2)}{(x^2+4z_0^2)^{7/2}}.
\label{ds2}
\end{equation}
The trajectories produced by this system in region III are indistinguishable from those produced by the full $\bm V(\bm r)$. The critical points of this approximate evolution obviously coincide with those obtained in Eq.~(\ref{critical_pts_eq}), so that, e. g. $10r_s z_0^2(16z_0^2-r_s^2)/(r_s^2+4z_0^2)^{7/2}=8/(3r_s^4)$ with $r_s= \left(32 z_0^3/15\right)^{1/5}$. Eliminating time variable we arrive at
\begin{equation}
\frac{d}{dx}z^2=-\frac{16}{3x^4}+
\frac{20x z_0^2(16z_0^2-x^2)}{(x^2+4z_0^2)^{7/2}}.
\label{ds3}
\end{equation}
The trajectory that crosses the $x$-axis at $x=x_i$ is given by the solution of the above equation and it reads
\begin{equation}
z^2=
\frac{16}{27x^3}
+\frac{20z_0^2(x^2-8z_0^2)}{3(x^2+4z_0^2)^{5/2}}
-\frac{16}{27x_i^3}
-\frac{20z_0^2(x_i^2-8z_0^2)}{3(x_i^2+4z_0^2)^{5/2}}.
\label{ds4}
\end{equation}
Setting here $x_i=r_s$ and using the condition on $r_s$ provided after Eq.~(\ref{ds2}), we arrive at the equation of the separatrix bounding the dancing-swapping region and separating it from region II (red line in Fig. \ref{fig:Fig4a})
\begin{equation}
z_{II, III}^2=
\frac{16}{27 x^3}
+\frac{20z_0^2(x^2-8z_0^2)}{3(x^2+4z_0^2)^{5/2}}+\frac{40z_0^2\left(48z_0^4-2r_s^2 z_0^2-r_s^4\right)}{9(r_s^2+4z_0^2)^{7/2}},\ \ r_s= \left(\frac{32 z_0^3}{15}\right)^{1/5}.
\label{ds5}
\end{equation}
We further find the following asymptotic behavior
\begin{equation}
z_{II, III}^2(x=\infty) =\frac{40z_0^2\left(48z_0^4-2r_s^2 z_0^2-r_s^4\right)}{9(r_s^2+4z_0^2)^{7/2}}\approx \frac{5}{3z_0},
\end{equation}
where the first equality holds down to $z_0=5$ and the last equality assumes $z_0\gg 1$. The equations confirm that region III has a finite width in $z$-direction, the fact underlying the validity of $\delta V_z(x, 0, z)\approx \delta V_z(x, 0, 0)$. The last equality provides the scaling law of growth of region III as the proximity to the wall decreases from $z_0=\infty$ to some finite value.
There is a unique value of $x_i=x_s$ for which the last two terms in Eq.~(\ref{ds4}) vanish and the trajectory asymptotes the $x$-axis at large $x$. This value is determined by the condition $x_s^3=4(x_s^2+4z_0^2)^{5/2}/(45 z_0^2(8z_0^2-x_s^2))$. The solution is $x_s^2=8z_0^2-\epsilon$ with $\epsilon\approx 8 \sqrt{3}/(5\sqrt{2})$. The corresponding trajectory $z_{sw}$ is the separatrix of swapping and dancing trajectories,
\begin{equation}
z_{sw}^2=
\frac{16}{27x^3}
+\frac{20z_0^2(x^2-8z_0^2)}{3(x^2+4z_0^2)^{5/2}};\ \ \ z_{sw}^2(x\approx 2\sqrt{2} z_0)=0.
\end{equation}
This asymptotic behavior of this separatrix at $x\gg z_0$ is $z_{sw}^2\sim 20z_0^2/(3x^3)$. Remarkably this is the same behavior as the BG asymptote given by Eq.~(\ref{bsgd}), however with a much larger coefficient. Since the three-dimensional separatrix is obtained by revolution around the $z$-axis, we conclude that the volume of closed dancing trajectories is infinite. Thus the wall does not regularize the divergences in the stress calculation at the second order in concentration of \cite{bgst}. The volume of swapping trajectories is also infinite. Finally we remark that long-distance behavior of trajectories in regions I and II can also be described using the approach of this Section, however the global behavior in those regions involves close positions of the spheres and demands the full formulas.
\section{Direct numerical simulation of a particle pair in Poiseuille flows}\label{dns}
In this Section we provide evidence of the existence of the neutral equilibrium point $(r_c, 0, 0)$ from direct numerical simulations of the motion of a pair of particles in the Poiseuille flow. We simulate the Navier-Stokes equations with appropriate boundary conditions for Reynolds number of $0.1$. We consider a moderate distance from the wall, of $z_0=5$, demonstrating that the theory is accurate in this configuration. In this way, we provide confirmation of the theory and demonstrate that the theory holds down to rather small $z_0$.
We use interface-resolved, direct numerical simulations. The particles are simulated either as solid spheres using an immersed boundary method or as liquid droplets using the interface-correction level set/ghost fluid method; see Refs.\ \cite{ibm,icls,flow-assist} and the Appendix B of \cite{2017}, for detailed descriptions of the governing equations and their numerical treatments.
Fig.\ \ref{fig:setup} illustrates the schematic of the simulation setup. Here, two neutrally buoyant particles are transported inside a rectangular channel of dimensions $L_x$, $L_y$, and $L_z$, that are at least an order-of-magnitude larger than the particle radius $a$. The undisturbed flow is the Poiseuille flow shifted backwards by a constant velocity so that the position of the first particle remains roughly unchanged throughout the simulation \cite{mframe}.
The particle pair is initially placed adjacent to the bottom wall, with $z_0=5$ and $L_z=64$. $L_x$ and $L_y$ are chosen to be large enough so that the imposed boundary conditions (periodic or inflow/outflow) do not qualitatively affect the particle motion, which we verified by checking that changes in $L_x$ and $L_y$ do not affect the results appreciably. Thus we used $L_x=12$ and $24$, and increased $L_y$ from $60$ up to $80$.
Fig.\ \ref{fig:vel} depicts the vertical component of the relative velocity $V_z$ of two solid particles at various initial separations $r/z_0$, obtained asymptotically upon their release. That is, we extract $V_z$ from the simulations when both particles are still approximately at the same vertical position $z_0$ within the accuracy of $10^{-4}$. The theoretical values are computed according to Eqs.\ \eqref{bgz} and \eqref{fok}, which apply since the minimal considered distance is $15$.
Remarkably, we observe a close agreement between the theoretical prediction and the numerical simulation, from the smallest studied distance of $r=3z_0$.
This is despite that the simulations are performed in a pressure-driven channel flow in the presence of two walls and $z_0$ is not so large.
The deviation of the numerical results from the theoretical values at $r/z_0 \geq 5$ is probably due to numerical confinement; as the particles are further separated, larger computational boxes would be necessary to accurately isolate the interaction due solely to the neighbouring particle.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{vel_of_r.pdf}
\caption{Asymptotic vertical velocity of particle 2 relative to particle 1 as a function of the horizontal separation, at $z_0=5a$ (cf.\ Fig.\ \ref{fig:setup}). We focus
on the range where the theory predicts change of sign of the velocity and the associated critical point. The theory is seen to hold accurate predictions even in geometrically confined Poiseuille flows.}
\label{fig:vel}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
We presented here the theory of the hydrodynamic interactions of two spheres in a shear flow in the presence of a plane rigid wall. This theory provides a reference for consistent direct numerical or experimental studies of the particles' trajectories. Some of the predictions of the theory have been confirmed by direct numerical simulations in Poiseuille flow, demonstrating that neglecting the farthest wall is a valid assumption and the theory holds at least down to distances from the wall of 5 particle radii, $z_0 \approx 5a$.
The immediate use of our work is the determination of the limitations of the BG theory \cite{ujhd}, see also \cite{kim}. Our theory indicates that for inter-particle distances $r/a$ much smaller than $(z_0/a)^{3/5}$ variations of the inter-particle velocity with respect to the BG velocity is small.
This condition, $r\ll z_0^{3/5} a^{2/5}$, is stricter than the rough estimate $r \ll z_0$. If this condition is not fulfilled, the trajectories are significantly changed in comparison with the BG predictions, both quantitatively and qualitatively.
However, corrections due to the wall can also be relevant at $r\ll z_0^{3/5} a^{2/5}$. The reason is that the global behavior of the BG trajectories passing near the separatrix is sensitive to small perturbations. Thus, perturbations originating from the wall presence, Brownian noise, gravity, finite roughness of the particles' surface or any other source, may easily change the global portrait of the interactions. All the closed trajectories of the classic BG solution \cite{ujhd} can be altered quite significantly by small perturbations, since they all pass near the separatrix. Indeed when particles, orbiting around each other in the symmetry plane, reach the vertical (side-by-side) orientation, the maximal distance between them is of order of $10^{-5} a$, see \cite{arp}. The wall, even a distant one, can produce a small upward displacement which would shrink the region of closed trajectories. This is in fact what we see in the simulations where the separatrix in the presence of the wall crosses the $z$-axis at shorter distance from $z-2 a$ than without the wall. However, our simulations are not built for resolving distances as small as $10^{-5} a$ so this initial observation demands further, more accurate studies, which can take advantage of the evolution equation for the inter-particle separation derived here.
It is of interest to discuss here how our findings affect the applicability of the BG theory in various practical situations. We consider as an example the linear approximation to the turbulent flow at scales much smaller than the viscous scale of turbulence $\ell_\eta$, \cite{frisch}. This approximation can be used for describing collisions of two small droplets in turbulence, relevant, among others, to the problem of rain formation \cite{clc}. The linear approximation breaks down at a finite distance $\ell_\eta$ from the colliding particles with radii $a\ll \ell_\eta$. Our work implies that at distances $r\sim \ell_\eta^{3/5} a^{ 2/5}$ the BG description may be inaccurate. Thus the applicability of the BG description in the region of significant hydrodynamic interactions, $r\sim a$, demands $(\ell_\eta/a)^{3/5}\gg 1$. We find that for strong cloud turbulence with energy dissipation rate of $2000$~cm$^2$/s$^3$ this condition might fail already for droplet sizes of $50$~$\mu$m. In contrast, if the naive criterion of $\ell_\eta/a\gg 1$ was used, then the approximation would still be valid. In this specific problem, however, other difficulties that involve non-stationarity of the velocity gradients also appear. Thus $\bm V^0(\bm r)$ would hold with the instantaneous value of the coefficients of the linear flow considered by \cite{ujhd}. However the periods of revolution, as indicated
above, can be much larger than the inverse shear rate, which in turbulence determines the characteristic time of variations of the flow gradients. This would make the BG trajectories inapplicable. Another difficulty arises from the finiteness of the Reynolds number, which may be relevant already at $30$~$\mu$m, see, e.g., \cite{fi2015}. This would demand the introduction of corrections to the BG theory due to the non-linear term in the Navier-Stokes equations. These questions are of high interest due to
the ubiquitous occurrence of collisions of small particles in turbulence and are left for future work.
We notice that the problem considered here seemingly has a hidden symmetry. The presence of the wall makes the top-down symmetry, which is displayed by the trajectories, non-evident. Moreover, it is not so evident why the separatrices form a surface of rotation in both the BG and our cases.
Strictly speaking our analysis is not complete. The leading order correction that we found has naive order of smallness $z_0^{-2}$, and not the actually holding $z_0^{-3}$. We found this from the detailed calculation that revealed the vanishing of the $z_0^{-2}$ contribution due to symmetry. It is possible that the symmetry would be irrelevant for the next order term which has the naive order of magnitude of $z_0^{-3}$ and it cannot be neglected. We consider this scenario implausible and make the conjecture that the next order term is actually $\mathcal{O}(z_0^{-4})$ and can be consistently neglected. Proving this conjecture theoretically is a formidable task which was not undertaken here. It seemed more practical to test the predictions that we made by direct numerical simulations of the motion of two spheres in a shear flow in the presence of a wall. The performed numerical simulations of the Poiseuille flow closely confirmed the predictions of our theory.
Another confirmation of our theory comes from the previous, unguided by the theory, simulations of \cite{agto}. This work considered the shear flow between two parallel planes induced by the motion of the upper plane. This problem, with both walls included, could be considered as in Sec.\ \ref{interpair} by using the Green's function for the Stokes flow between two infinite planes \cite{LironMochon}, which however is beyond the scope of the present paper.
The interacting spheres in \cite{agto}, however, were located closer to the immobile lower wall which makes our theory applicable at least qualitatively.
The phase portrait of \cite{agto} for the evolution of the inter-particle distance in the symmetry plane agrees remarkably well with that provided here, though it lacks the neutral equilibrium point and the closed trajectories revolving around it. The authors observed the saddle point at $z_0=4.8$ with distance $10$ between the walls. In this case, our theory applies only qualitatively. However, when we use our formula $(32 z_0^3/15)^{1/5}$ for the position of the saddle point, we find that our prediction agrees very well with the numerical findings of \cite{agto}. All these provide strong evidence for validity of our theory.
The complete proof showing that our open trajectories with sign-reversal of the vertical separation describe swapping of the vertical positions
requires the computation of the vertical coordinate of the center of mass after the interaction.
Although as we argued above, this seems inevitable, a proof demands the study of the motion of the center of mass, which was not undertaken here (the formulae of Sec.~\ref{interpair} can be used for this aim). For an unbounded shear flow, the motion of the center of mass could be obtained using the shear resistance matrix, function of
the instantaneous distance between the spheres. This matrix can be written in terms of scalar coefficient functions, similar to $A$ and $B$, with the asymptotic form of this matrix obtained at large separations in \cite{sh} (see also \cite{arp}). Considering this matrix
and the solution for the inter-particle distance as a function of time as given, one can readily find the center of mass velocity as a function of time. In our case the calculations are even more involved due to the presence of the wall. This is therefore left for future work.
The numerical and experimental tests of our predictions may focus on the emergence of the neutrally stable bound state, when the particle pair flows as a whole
at some fixed distance from the wall $z_0$. The horizontal component of the inter-particle distance in this state belongs to the circle of radius $4 z_0$, although at small $z_0$ some deviations from $4 z_0$ must occur.
Since the experiments of \cite{tab0,tabeling,flow-assist} used droplets and not rigid particles, we shall briefly address how the results obtained for the rigid particles here would change for droplets. Close interactions of rigid particles and droplets are quite different, both qualitatively and quantitatively, see e. g. \cite{kim}. However at large separations, when the effects of the wall are most relevant, the differences seem to be less significant. We have confirmed this again using direct numerical simulations for two liquid droplets in the same setup as for the solid particles in Sec.~\ref{dns}. We verified that $V_z>0$ at $r/z_0=3$ while $V_z\lesssim 0$ at $r/z_0=5$. Thus, there is a point within this range where the velocity vanishes, as in the case of rigid particles. Therefore at least the prediction of the stationary point holds also in the case of liquid droplets. This suggests that the existence of states of marginal equilibrium is a robust phenomenon for pair of particles flowing next to a wall.
The theory presented here has direct generalisations to other distant boundaries. The developed approach can also be used to study the hydrodynamic interactions between suspended particles in other confined shearing flows, such as, e.g., Couette flow. The case of a third particle at a finite distance from the pair of spheres in an unbounded shear flow is also of interest. When the driving flow is enclosed between two parallel planes (i.e., a slit geometry), as in \cite{agto}, the inclusion of the second plane is required for a theoretical analysis, as suggested above.
The present finding of stable configurations of pairs of particles due to hydrodynamic interactions is probably due to the fact that the position of one of the three bodies in interaction - the wall, - is fixed. The question whether such configurations can exist for three, or a larger number of flowing particles is left for future work.
\section*{Acknowledgement}
The authors wish to thank K.~I.~Morozov for fruitful discussions. Z. Ge thanks P.~S.~Costa for technical discussions on the numerical solver. The work is supported by the Microflusa project. The Microflusa project receives funding from the European Union Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme
under Grant Agreement No. 664823.
|
\section{Introduction}
\IEEEPARstart{A}{s} the machine learning technology and the performance of hardware develop rapidly in recent years, Deep Learning(DL) has been successfully applied to many fields, especially in Computer Version and Nature Language Processing(NLP). Such technology has been applied to the physical layer processing of communication systems in \cite{8054694}. Since then, more research has been focusing on applying learning algorithms to different communication user scenarios.
\par
In traditional communication system, it always consists of different modules such as source coding, channel coding, modulation, demodulation, estimation, equalization, etc.
And an end-to-end communication system under AWGN channel is designed in \cite{8054694}. Using fully connected NN, whose behavior is similar to an autoencoder, it achieves the similar performance to the tradition system with (7,4) Hamming code and BPSK modulation. Such autoencoder learns how to get an expression in a low dimension and the way to restore it.
And Convolution Neural Network(CNN) based model \cite{8664650} has been developed to solve the dimensional explosion problem in autoencoder and achieves better performance than traditional methods(64QAM+MMSE) under both AWGN and static fading channel.
Besides, a communication system with Software Defined Radio(SDR) only including NN are used to prove that transmission over the air with deep learning technology is possible \cite{8214233}.
In Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing \cite{387096} system, the deep learning algorithm for joint channel estimation and signal detection has been researched in \cite{8052521}.
To overcome the back-propagation problem in NN transmitter when the channel is unknown, different methods are proposed. Policy gradient algorithm in the reinforcement learning is used in \cite{8433895}.
A new deep learning technology, Conditional Generative Adversarial Nets\cite{CGAN}, is introduced in \cite{8644250} to emulate the unknown channel.
Simultaneous Perturbation Stochastic Approximation\cite{SPSA} algorithm is utilized in \cite{8452950} to give a direct estimation of the channel gradient.
\par However, in order to make DL-based communication system meaningful in the practical system, complex channels need to be considered. One kind of complex channel, which is difficult to handle with a traditional algorithm, is the time selective channel. Due to the movement of receiver, the channel status will change in time domain. Research on such channel using deep learning is somehow only a little.
Sliding Bidirectional Recurrent Neural Network(SBRNN) has been put forward in \cite{8454325} and works as a detector to learn rapid varying optical and molecular channel.
A simple application of neural network to Rayleigh fading channel is given in \cite{8554830}.
Multiple Layers Perceptron(MLP) is used to undertake channel estimation for the time selective channel \cite{8491068} and doubly selective channel \cite{8672767}, respectively.
\par However, MLP is a memoryless structure. Thus, it can't learn the relation of data in time domain well. Besides, linear layers in MLP will result in the increasing of neurons size as input length increases. Despite that data can be divided into blocks to avoid this problem, divided data may lead to the discontinuity of the channel estimation. Considering the similarity of this problem in NLP field, it is better to use Recurrent Neural Network(RNN) to get the estimation of channel. In this article, time varying Rayleigh fading channel is explored using the deep learning technology and our contributions are summarized as below.
\begin{itemize}
\item Based on deep learning algorithm, the SBGRU channel estimator is proposed to learn time varying Rayleigh fading channel. Using RNN structure and sliding idea, SBGRU can handle the transmitted symbol with arbitrary length and immediately provide the result as soon as the symbol arrived.
\item Substantial simulations are provided in this paper to analyze and explain NN estimator. The simulation result shows the ability of SBGRU to track channel dynamically and achieve better performance compared with traditional algorithms and other NNs. Besides, the SBGRU also has demonstrated the robustness with various pilot densities.
\end{itemize}
\par The rest parts of this article is arranged as follow: Section II describes the basic channel model, data structure and the signal flow model. Section III gives the deep learning based algorithm in details for NN channel estimator. Section IV uses quantities of simulation results to demonstrate the performance of NN estimator. Finally, Section V concludes the paper and gives some orientations for future work.
\par \textit{Notation}: Bold lower-case letters and upper-case letters denote vectors and matrices, respectively. The subscript on a lower-case letter $x_i$ represent $i^{th}$ element of vector $\bm{x}$. $E(\cdot)$ refers to the expectation. $(\cdot)^T$ and $(\cdot)^H$ refer to the transpose and Hermite transpose of the vector. $|\cdot|$ represents for the absolute value or amplitude for real number and complex number, respectively. For two vectors or matrices $\bm{a}$ and $\bm{b}$,$[\bm{a},\bm{b}]$ is the matrix combing $\bm{a}$ and $\bm{b}$. For two real numbers $a\leq b$, $[a,b]$ is the set for all real numbers in range from $a$ to $b$. $real(\cdot)$ and $image(\cdot)$ are the functions giving the real and imaginary part of complex vector for each element.
\section{System Model}
\par In this section, signal architecture and time varying Rayleigh fading channel model are firstly presented. Then, a signal flow model will be introduced. Denote the transmitted signal and received signal as $\bm{x}$,$\bm{y}$, respectively. Denote the Rayleigh time varying channel as $\bm{h}$. Considering a Linear Time Variant(LTV) model, the relation between input and output of channel is:
\begin{equation}
\label{E1}
\bm{y}=\bm{h}\cdot\bm{x}+\bm{\omega}
\end{equation}
where $\bm{\omega}$ is i,i,d Additive White Gaussian Noise(AWGN) vector, and $\omega_i\sim\mathcal{CN}(0,\sigma_n^2)$
\subsection{Time Varying Rayleigh Fading Channel Model}
\par Typically, wireless communication environment is generally modeled as Rayleigh fading channel. Multi-path will cause frequency selective fading and Doppler shifting will result in time selective fading. However, in this paper, only time selective fading is considered in order to give the first exploration of rapidly varying channel. The influence of multi-path will be researched in the future work.
\par Clarke's model \cite{6779222} is used in this paper to describe time varying channel. In order to describe the time varying characteristic, Jakes Doppler Spectrum\cite{1622098} is adopted here:
\begin{equation}
\label{E2}
S(f)=\frac{1}{\pi f_d\sqrt{1-(\frac{f}{f_d})^2}},\quad|f|<f_d
\end{equation}
where $f_d$ is the maximum Doppler shift. Given a speed $v$(m/s) and carrier frequency $f_c$(Hz), $f_d=\frac{vf_c}{c}$($c\approx3.0*10^8$ is the speed of light in free space). The autocorrelation of Jakes Doppler Spectrum is:
\begin{equation}
\label{E3}
R(\tau)=\int_{-f_d}^{f_d}S(f)\exp(j2\pi f\tau)df=J_0(2\pi f_d\tau)
\end{equation}
where $J_0(\cdot)$ is the first kind of Bessel function of 0 order and the discrete form of autocorrelation is:
\begin{equation}
\label{E4}
R[d]=J_0(2\pi\phi_d|d|)
\end{equation}
where $\phi_d=\frac{f_d}{r_s}$ is the maximum Doppler frequency normalized by sampling rate.
Besides, It is generally asked that the channel has normalized gain $E(|h[n]|^2)=1$ in order to simplify following analysis.
\subsection{Signal Architecture}
\par Considering standard signal architecture, transmitted signals are generated as shown in Fig. \ref{img1}. One single data frame consists of $K$ blocks. Due to multi-path not considering in this article, protection interval isn't necessary. Each block has $N_s$ information symbols and $N_p$ pilot symbols. Thus, each block has $N_s+N_p=N$ symbols and the whole frame has total $L=NK$ symbols. Pilots are equally interval inserted in each block, and define $\frac{N_p}{N_s+N_p}$ as the pilot density. Besides, pilots in each block are the same, which results in repetition in time domain.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{Data_Architecture_Frame}
\caption{Data structure of transmitted signal in time domain}
\label{img1}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Signal Flow Model}
The signal flow model is shown in Fig. \ref{img2}. At the transmitter side, no deep learning technology is introduced. Information bits and pilot bits are combined to generated original signal. After modulating, transmitted signal $\bm{x}$ is sent to the channel and modulated pilots $\bm{p}$ are sent to NN estimator. At the receiver side, NN channel estimator uses $\bm{p}$ and channel distorted signal plus the noise $\bm{y}$ to give the estimation of channel $\bm{h}$.
\par Two things need to be notified. Firstly, due to no NN introduced at transmitter, it is easy to add any traditional channel coding such as Low Density Parity Check(LDPC)\cite{LDPC}, to improve the performance against noise. Secondly, NN channel estimator doesn't need any information about the channel. It means that the communication system is model free.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{signal_flow}
\caption{Signal flow model}
\label{img2}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Traditional Algorithms For Channel Estimation}
In channel estimation, the most common estimators are Least Square(LS)\cite{LS} estimator and Minimal Mean Square Error(MMSE)\cite{MMSE} estimator. According to (\ref{E1}), LS estimator under the time varying channel is:
\begin{equation}
\label{E5}
\hat{\bm{h}}_{LS}=\frac{\bm{y}}{\bm{x}}
\end{equation}
For those positions where pilots are inserted, above equation can be directly used to get the estimation. For other positions, linear interpolation is necessary. Denote $j$,$k(j<k)$ to be positions of pilot nearest to the position $i$. Thus, the interpolated channel is:
\begin{equation}
\label{E6}
\hat{h}_{i,LS}=\frac{k-i}{k-j}\hat{h}_{j,LS} + \frac{i-j}{k-j}\hat{h}_{k,LS}
\end{equation}
Due to the existence of noise, omitting the influence of interpolation, the expected Mean Square Error(MSE) of LS estimator is:
\begin{equation}
\label{E7}
E(|\hat{\bm{h}}_{LS}-\bm{h}|^2)=E(\frac{\bm{\omega}^2}{\bm{x}^2})=\frac{1}{SNR}
\end{equation}
\par Another traditional estimator would be MMSE estimator:
\begin{equation}
\label{E8}
\hat{\bm{h}}_{MMSE}=\bm{R}_{\bm{hy}}\bm{R}_{\bm{yy}}^{-1}\bm{y}=\bm{R}_{\bm{hh}}(\bm{R}_{\bm{hh}}+\frac{\sigma_n^2}{\sigma_s^2}\bm{I})^{-1}\hat{\bm{h}}_{LS}
\end{equation}
where $\bm{I}$ represents unit matrix and $\bm{R}_{\bm{hh}}=E(\bm{h}\bm{h^H})$ represents correlation matrix:
\begin{equation*}
\bm{R}_{\bm{hh}}=
\left[\begin{array}{ccccc}
R[0] & R[1] & R[2] & \cdots & R[L-1]\\
R[1] & R[0] & R[1] & \cdots & R[L-2]\\
R[2] & R[1] & R[0] & \cdots & R[L-3]\\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots\\
R[L-1] & R[L-2] & R[L-3] & \cdots & R[0]\\
\end{array}
\right]
\end{equation*}
where $R[\cdot]$ can be calculated according to (\ref{E4})
\par It should be noticed that the form of autocorrelation function of channel and Doppler speed need to be given in advance in order to undertake the MMSE estimation. However, real channel model and accurate statistic characteristic(Doppler speed here) are hard to know under practical application. Thus, two methods for MMSE estimation are used in simulation.
\par Firstly, assuming above information already known, $\hat{\bm{h}}_{MMSE}$ can be directly calculated according to (\ref{E3}) and (\ref{E8}). Thus, we call this method "MMSE theory". Secondly, after getting LS estimation, $\hat{\bm{h}}_{LS}$ can be used to calculate autocorrelation $R[d]=\sum_{n=0}^{L-1}\hat{h}_{LS}[n]\hat{h}_{LS}[n-d]$ and then use (\ref{E8}). We call this method "MMSE sim" because the computation is completed by simulation results.
\section{DL-based NN channel estimator}
\par
To track a time varying channel, it is necessary to give neural network the ability of studying the behavior of correlation in time domain. Thus, a good choice to handle sequence data is using RNN.
\subsection{RNN structure}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=3in]{RNN
\label{img3a}}
\hfil
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=3in]{BRNN
\label{img3b}}
\caption{The structure of RNN (a) The structure of forward only RNN (b) The structure of bidirectional RNN}
\label{img3}
\end{figure*}
A simple example of 1 layer RNN is given in Fig. \ref{img3a}. In this structure, the output of last time becomes one part of input of this time. By this way, RNN can capture past information. The basic RNN cell will give the computation result as the following function.
\begin{equation}
\label{E9}
\bm{h}_t=Tanh(\bm{W}_{ih}\bm{x}_t+\bm{b}_{ih}+\bm{W}_{hh}\bm{h}_{t-1}+\bm{b}_{hh})
\end{equation}
where $Tanh$ is hyperbolic tangent function and $\bm{h}_t,\bm{h}_{t-1}$ are the hidden states at time $t$ and $t-1$, respectively. $\bm{x}_t$ is the input at time $t$. $\bm{W}_{ih},\bm{W}_{hh}$ and $\bm{b}_{ih},\bm{b}_{hh}$ are weights and biases, which need to be learned.
\par However, the time varying channel $h(t)$ has relation with both past and future channel states. Basic RNN cell is fed forward only. Thus, bidirectional structure, as shown in Fig. \ref{img3b}, would have better performance. Blue blocks are forward cells and red blocks are backward cells. The data will not only be fed in forward direction, but fed backward again. The hidden states $\bm{h}_t$ and $\bm{h}^{'}_t$ are combined together to become the input of a linear layer to give final results.
\par Another problem is that Basic RNN cell with (\ref{E9}) can't capture long time information. To solve this problem, Long Short Time Memory(LSTM)\cite{LSTM} cell has been put forward. In this paper, Gated Recurrent Unit(GRU)\cite{GRU} is used, one variation of LSTM, to replace basic RNN cell. The GRU will give the result as the following function(\cite{GRU},(5),(6),(7),(8))
\begin{subequations}
\label{E10}
\begin{equation}
\label{E10a}
\bm{z}_t=\sigma(\bm{W}_z\cdot[\bm{h}_{t-1},\bm{x}_t])
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{E10b}
\bm{r}_t=\sigma(\bm{W}_r\cdot[\bm{h}_{t-1},\bm{x}_t])
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{E10c}
\overline{\bm{h}}_t=Tanh(\bm{W}\cdot[\bm{r}_t*\bm{h}_{t-1},x_t])
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{E10d}
\bm{h}_t=(1-\bm{z}_t)*\bm{h}_{t-1}+\bm{z}_t*\overline{\bm{h}}_t
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
where $\sigma(\cdot)$ refers to Sigmoid function $f_s(x)=\frac{1}{1+e^{-x}}$, $\bm{W}_z,\bm{W}_r,\bm{W}$ are weights and $\bm{h}_t,\bm{h}_{t-1},\bm{x}_t$ have the same meaning as (\ref{E9}).
Compared with basic RNN cell, GRU introduces 2 gates, update gate $\bm{z}_t$ and reset gate $\bm{r}_t$, to control the information flow. GRU has been proved to have similar performance to LSTM on many tasks\cite{7508408} and have higher speed due to less gate number.
\par Based on above discussion, BGRU cell will be used in NN channel estimator. However, the result of simple BGRU is not good enough. The idea of Sliding BRNN(SBRNN)\cite{8454325} is considered to improve the performance further, and the compare between BGRU and SBGRU will be given in section IV.C.
\subsection{SBGRU structure}
\par SBRNN is put forward in \cite{8454325} to work as a detector under optical and molecule channel. Here, this structure is used in estimation task under the time varying Rayleigh fading channel. A simple example of the sliding structure is given in Fig. \ref{img4}.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{Sliding}
\caption{Sliding structure of BGRU}
\label{img4}
\end{figure}
Each BGRU block in the figure has a fixed window length $W_L$. It should be stated that the selection of window length has relationship with channel character. Due to the any two moments of channel $h$ is correlated, it is reasonable that the longer the window is, the better the performance will be. The simulation about window length will be given in section IV.D.
\par SBGRU will be given $W_L$ symbols to undertake once computation, and will slide 1 symbol after each computation. Due to the sliding operation, most symbols in the sequence will be estimated for several times. We take the average of all estimation to give final results. Denote $\bm{h}_t=f_{BGRU}(\bm{x_t},\bm{h}_{t-1},\bm{h'}_{t+1})$ as the function of operation defined in (\ref{E10}) for bidirectional version in BGRU layer. Denote $\mathbf{S}=\{j|j\in\mathbb{Z},max(0,t-W_L+1)\leq j\leq min(t,L-1)\}$ as the set including all starting positions of BGRU for symbol $\bm{x}_t$, and final output of SBGRU for $\bm{x}_t$ is:
\begin{equation}
\label{E11}
\bm{h}_t=\frac{1}{|\mathbf{S}|}\sum_{j\in\mathbf{S}}f_{BGRU}(\bm{x_t},\bm{h}_{t-1}^j,\bm{h}_{t+1}^{'j})
\end{equation}
where $\bm{h}_{t-1}^j$ and $\bm{h}_{t+1}^{'j}$ are the hidden states for BGRU starting from $j^{th}$ symbol in time $t-1$ for forward and $t+1$ for backward.
\subsection{Train and test NN estimator}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.2in]{SBGRU}
\caption{The structure of SBGRU channel estimator}
\label{img5}
\end{figure}
\par A final implement of SBGRU neural network is given in Fig. \ref{img5}. The input data to SBGRU consists of channel distorted signal $\bm{y}$ and the original pilot information $\bm{p}=[\bm{p}^1,\bm{p}^2,...,\bm{p}^K]$, including $K$ same pilot blocks $\bm{p}^i$ with length $N$, and
$$\bm{p}^i=[p_1,0_{1*N_s},p_2,0_{1*N_s},...,p_{N_p},0_{1*N_s}]$$
It means that the pilot sequence will have the same symbols as $\bm{x}$ in pilot positions and have 0 symbols in information positions. Due to current deep learning platform only receiving real numbers, real part and image part of complex signal need to be separated firstly. Thus, the input data of the SBGRU will be given as:
$$\bm{X}_{in}=[real(\bm{y}^T),real(\bm{P}^T),imag(\bm{y}^T),imag(\bm{P}^T)]^T$$
\par Considering the balance between accuracy and training time, here 2 layers BGRU are adopted to construct SBGRU layer.
Denote function $f_{SBGRU}$ as the operation in SBGRU layer defined by (\ref{E11}) and function $f_{Linear}$ as the operation in Linear layer defined as:
\begin{equation}
\label{E12}
f_{Linear}(\bm{x})=\bm{W}\bm{x}+\bm{b}
\end{equation}
where $\bm{W},\bm{b}$ are weight and bias in linear layer, respectively.
The final estimation of channel, denoted as $\hat{\bm{h}}$, can be expressed as:
\begin{equation}
\label{E13}
\hat{\bm{h}}=f_{Linear}(f_{SBGRU}(\bm{X}_{in},\bm{\theta}_{S}),\bm{\theta}_{L})
\end{equation}
where $\bm{\theta}_{S}$ are the parameters of SBGRU and $\bm{\theta}_{L}$ are the parameters of Linear layer.
\par Denote $\bm{\theta}=\{\bm{\theta}_{S},\bm{\theta}_{L}\}$ to make notation clearly. To train the NN estimator, a loss function, which can represent the system performance, needs to be constructed. And parameters $\bm{\theta}$ need to be optimized in order to minimize the loss function. Due to MSE always regarded as criterion in estimation problem, MSE loss function is adopted, which can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
\label{E14}
Loss(\theta)=\frac{1}{L}\sum_{n=1}^{L}|\hat{h}_n-h_n|^2
\end{equation}
Minimizing loss function can be completed by updating $\bm{\theta}$ iteratively. The most classical algorithm is Stochastic Gradient Descant(SGD). Adam\cite{Adam} optimization algorithm, which has better performance in multiple tasks, is adopted here.
\par Testing data has the same structure and statistic characteristics with training data. Trained parameters $\bm{\theta}$ are loaded to finish the computation of testing data and get the estimated channel.
\section{Simulation Results}
In this section, we demonstrate the performance of NN channel estimator under the time varying Rayleigh fading channel and provide the explanation to the performance improvement through the simulation results. And the simulation setting for the NN estimator is firstly described. Then, four group simulation results of NN estimator have been presented and analyzed.
\subsection{Simulation Setting}
In the following simulations, i.i.d. bit sequences are randomly generated, and QPSK modulation is used to map bits to symbols. According to the channel model given in section II.A and channel parameters given in Table \ref{Tab1}, 1200 channels are generated, 800 for training, 200 for validation and 200 for testing. The selection of channel parameters and pilot density is the same as \cite{8491068} in order to undertake comparison simulation in Section IV.C. Also, based on the data structure in Fig. \ref{img1} and data parameters in Table \ref{Tab1}, 120000 sequences are generated, 100000 for training, 10000 for validation and 10000 for testing. When calculating the channel distorted signal, each symbol sequence randomly choose one channel to send.
\begin{table}[!t]
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.3}
\caption{Channel and data parameters}
\label{Tab1}
\centering
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{12mm}{
\begin{tabular}{c|c}
\hline
Carrier frequency & 5.2GHz\\
\hline
Sampling rate & 0.25MHz\\
\hline
Receiver speed & 10m/s\\
\hline
Signal Length & 160 symbols\\
\hline
Pilot density & 50\% \\
\hline
Signal Block Length & 16 symbols\\
\hline
Signal Block Number & 10 symbols\\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\end{table}
\par The default data and NN parameters of estimator, detector and system are shown in Table \ref{Tab2}.
\begin{table*}[!t]
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.3}
\caption{NN Parameters for simulation}
\label{Tab2}
\centering
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{20mm}{
\begin{tabular}{c|c}
\hline
Parameter & Estimator \\
\hline
NN architecture & SBGRU \\
\hline
Number of hidden layers & 2\\
\hline
Hidden size & 40*2(2 for Bi-direction) \\
\hline
Window Length & 40 symbols\\
\hline
Activation function & Tanh for hidden layers \& Relu for hidden layers \\
\hline
Loss function & MSE \\
\hline
Optimizer & Adam \\
\hline
Learning rate & 0.001 \\
\hline
Batch Size & 128 \\
\hline
Train SNR & 20dB \\
\hline
Test SNR & 5,10,15,20,25dB \\
\hline
Train number & 100000 \\
\hline
Validation number & 10000\\
\hline
Test number & 10000 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\end{table*}
\par The proposed DL-based algorithm is implemented on a computer with an Intel (R) Corel (TM) i7-6700K CPU @ 4.0GHz CPU, a NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 GPU and 16GB memory. Pytorch 1.0.0 and python 3.6 are used for the estimation.
\subsection{Performance Comparison with the traditional algorithm}
\par Here the proposed NN channel estimator is compared with traditional algorithm, LS estimator and MMSE estimator. The performance comparison is shown in Fig. \ref{img6}. It is obvious that "MMSE theory" achieves the best performance within the testing SNR range. And the LS estimation is the worst due to not considering the influence of the noise. And the simulation result does match the expected performance stated in (\ref{E7}). "MMSE sim" estimation, stated in section II.E, has small performance improvement compared with LS estimator and the improvement decreases when SNR reaches high value. SBGRU estimator reaches the similar performance to "MMSE theory" estimator and doesn't need any channel knowledge. Besides, SBGRU estimator also greatly outperforms both LS and "MMSE sim". Such results prove that SBGRU estimator is a best solution under the time varying channel.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{MSE_LS_MMSE}
\caption{Performance compare with LS and MMSE estimator}
\label{img6}
\end{figure}
\par To visualize how the SBGRU estimator work, the performance of the channel tracking of the SBGRU and traditional estimator is given in Fig. \ref{img7}. In order to make the channel varying significant in time domain, channel length is extended to 4000 symbols and SNR is set to 20dB. It's easy to find that SBGRU estimator can track the channel very well in most linear parts and has slight oscillation in non-linear parts. However, in Fig. \ref{img7b}, where white line represents real channel, both LS estimator and "MMSE sim" estimator vibrate heavily.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{SBGRU_Track
\label{img7a}}
\hfil
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{Traditional_Track
\label{img7b}}
\caption{Simulation results for Channel Tracking. (a) Tracking performance of SBGRU estimator (b) Tracking performance of LS and MMSE estimator}
\label{img7}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Performance Comparison with different structures of NN}
\par When deep learning algorithms are used to undertake the channel estimation, different structures of neural network will achieve different performances. Firstly, The enhancement of the sliding operation for SBGRU is demonstrated in Fig. \ref{img8}. All settings are the same except that BGRU computes block by block. The performance of BGRU decreases rapidly as SNR increases because the introduction of sliding operation can utilizes the average channel information within a certain time window.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{SBGRU_BGRU}
\caption{Performance compare between Sliding BGRU and Non-sliding BGRU}
\label{img8}
\end{figure}
\par Besides, the channel estimation problem under similar time varying channel has been researched in \cite{8491068} by using MLP neural network. Its basic idea is to include not only the channel distorted data and pilot data but the estimated channel from last block to get the better channel estimation performance. In its simulations, it sets the estimation block length the same as the data structure. However, this estimation block length can be different. In order to compare the performance fairly, the NN architecture in \cite{8491068} is reconstructed, trained and tested using the same settings and simulation parameters as the SBGRU simulation. Besides, three different parameters $16$, $32$ and $40$ are used to fully explore the influence of the estimation block length, .
\par The performance comparison between MLP and SBGRU is given in Fig. \ref{img9}. MLP with estimation block length 16(same design as \cite{8491068}) doesn't work very well. It is possible that parameters in NN model is not enough so that the ability to learn the nonlinear channel isn't strong. When estimation block length increases to 32, the performance increase a bit. However, a estimation block length of 40 will result in performance decreased. It is because MLP with estimation block length 40, which is not the integral multiple of original data block length 16, can't fully explore the pilot information repeated in time domain. However, SBGRU estimator outperforms all above MLP estimator when SNR is above 5dB. Besides, thanks to the recurrent structure of RNN, previous channel estimation doesn't need to be inputed into neural network. It can be captured by SBGRU automatically.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{SBGRU_MLP}
\caption{Performance compare between SBGRU estimator and MLP estimator}
\label{img9}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Performance vs window length}
\par Here the influence of sliding window length is explored. The performance among different window lengths is in Fig. \ref{img10}. The performance monotonically increases as the window length getting longer. Except for window length of 16 symbols, all 3 other window lengths have nearly the same performance. It shows that the window length can't be too short in order to have enough information to undertake the estimation. However, the too long window length can't bring much more improvement. Thus, selecting a suitable window length can achieve the balance between the accuracy and the speed of training and testing. Overall, the setting of window length have the relation with channel characteristics.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{SBGRU_Window_Length}
\caption{The influence of sliding window length to SBGRU estimator}
\label{img10}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Performance vs pilot density}
\par Finally, the influence of pilot density is described to show the robustness of SBGRU estimator. The performance is shown in Fig. \ref{img11}. As the pilot density decreases, the MSE performance indeed decreases a little but not seriously. The result is still much better than LS estimation and "MMSE sim" estimation. Thus, SBGRU estimator shows the performance robustness with the different pilot densities.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{SBGRU_Pilot}
\caption{The influence of pilot density to SBGRU estimator}
\label{img11}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, a DL-based channel estimator is designed under the time varying Rayleigh fading channel. The proposed DL-based channel estimator can achieve better performance than traditional algorithms and some NN estimators with different structures. Besides, the proposed NN channel estimator shows its ability to dynamically track the channel and its robustness with pilot density.
\par In the traditional communication, there are much more complex traditional algorithms to complete channel estimation. However, there are some unique advantages compared with the traditional algorithms when deep learning algorithms are used.
\begin{itemize}
\item Despite many estimation methods having been developed in traditional communication system, most of them always assume the channel to be invariant in coherence time. However, using deep learning algorithm, the prior knowledge about channel model and the channel invariant in coherence time assumption aren't needed during the training and testing, which shows the potential performance of DL-based algorithm under the time varying channel.
\item The channel estimator designed in this paper can be easily optimized by combining traditional algorithms. For example, it's convenient to insert the high performance channel coding before the modulation to protect the performance against Gaussian noise. Thus, the MSE performance can be further improved.
\end{itemize}
\par In addition, there is still a lot work to do in applying deep learning or machine learning technology to the physical layer under time varying channel and here are some following aspects.
\begin{itemize}
\item Except for the channel estimation, it is also feasible to construct a detector to undertake the equalization and demodulation together using deep learning algorithm. Thus, by connecting NN estimator and NN detector, a wireless communication system can be constructed. It is worth to explore whether such DL-based system can achieve better bit error rate(BER) performance than traditional system under the time varying channel and is still robust with different pilot densities.
\end{itemize}
\ifCLASSOPTIONcaptionsoff
\newpage
\fi
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Numerical study on network operation}
\label{sec:case_study}
In this section we demonstrate the potential for optimization of
district heating networks. Operating the network according to certain
exogenously given temporal profiles for the internal energy densities
injected at the depot may lead to high amplitudes in the feed-in
power. The avoidance of such power peaks in the feed-in prevents that
using additional energy sources, such as gas storages, is required for
covering the heating demand of the consumers. This is environmental
friendly, while saving resources and operational costs.
In the numerical case study we employ a real-world district heating
network supplying different streets by means of the port-Hamiltonian
semi-discrete network model~\eqref{eq:upw:sys}. For the time
integration we use an implicit midpoint rule with constant time
step~$\Delta t$. The topology of the network and the data of the
pipelines come from the Technische Werke Ludwigshafen AG; see
Fig.~\ref{fig:topol_street} and Table~\ref{tab:runtime_fullred}.
For the presented simulation, a time
horizon of \SI{50}{\hour} is studied. The consumption behavior of the
households is modeled by standardized profiles used in the operation
of district heating networks \cite{SLP_BGW}
for a mean environmental temperature of~\SI{3}{\degreeCelsius}. The total consumption of
all households is \SI{108}{\kilo\watt} on temporal average and rises up to a
maximum of~\SI{160}{\kilo\watt}. Given the internal energy density~$u^\text{e}$
injected at the depot as input, the feed-in power can be considered as
the response of the network system, \abbr[i.e],
\begin{equation*}
P_{\text{in}} = (u^\text{e}-e_{\arc_{\text{d}}:m} )\sum_{a \in \Arcs_{\text{c}}} \hat q_a.
\end{equation*}
Note that due to the neglect of cooling in~\eqref{eq:e_net},
$e_{\arc_{\text{d}}:m}=e(T^\text{bf})$ holds, where the backflow temperature at
the consumers is fixed here to $T^\text{bf}=\SI{60}{\degreeCelsius}$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{street_topol-crop}
\caption{Real-world heating network supplying several streets. The
network consists of the foreflow part (top) and the backflow part
(bottom), where the households are indicated
by circles. The topology has been provided by Technische Werke
Ludwigshafen AG, Germany. The color plot visualizes a simulated
temperature distribution for a certain time~$t^\star$, where
$T(u^\text{e}(t^\star))=\SI{84}{\degreeCelsius}$. The backflow
temperature is constant at $T^\text{bf}=\SI{60}{\degreeCelsius}$ due to the
use of the network model \eqref{eq:e_net} where cooling effects are neglected.}
\label{fig:topol_street}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Graph-associated outline data for the street network in
Fig.~\ref{fig:topol_street}. The total pipe length of the foreflow
part is \SI{835.5}{\meter} and of the backflow part \SI{837.0}{\meter}.}
\label{tab:runtime_fullred}
\begin{tabular}{cccccc}
\toprule
Pipes $|\Arcs_{\text{p}}|$
& Consumers $|\Arcs_{\text{c}}|$
& Depot
& Arcs $|\graphset{A}|$
& Nodes $|\Nodes|$ & Loops
\\
\midrule
162 & 32 & 1 & 195 & 162 & 2 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
The traveling time of the heated water from the depot to the consumers
(households) allows to choose from different injection profiles, when
covering the aggregated heating demand in the
network. Figure~\ref{fig:opt_street} shows the injected temperature
$T(u^\text{e})$ and the corresponding feed-in power for two different
input profiles. Supplying an almost constant energy density~$u^\text{e}$ over time
yields pronounced power peaks (dashed-dotted red curves). These
undesired peaks can be avoided when using an input that is varying in
time with respect to the expected consumer demands. For the
illustrated improved input, the feed-in power is bounded by
$\bar{P}_\text{in} = \SI{134}{\kilo\watt}$ (dashed green curves). This promising result asks for a rigorous optimal control of the network in further studies.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{opt_street_EiFer}
\caption{Flow temperature at depot $T(u^\text{e})$ (top) and
corresponding feed-in power (bottom) over time for two different
injection profiles marked in dashed-dotted red and dashed green,
$\Delta t= \SI{5}{\minute}$. The upper solid, black line indicates the power
threshold $\bar \Power$, the lower one the mean feed-in power over time.}
\label{fig:opt_street}
\end{figure}
\section{Research perspectives}
\label{sec:concl-persp}
An energy-based port-Hamiltonian framework is very suitable for
optimization and control when dealing with subsystems coming from
various different physical domains, such as hydraulic, electrical, or
mechanical ones, as it occurs when coupling a district heating
network with a power grid, a waste incineration plant, or a gas
turbine. The formulation is advantageous as it brings different scales
on a single level, the port-Hamiltonian character is inherited by the
coupling, and the physical properties are directly encoded in the
structure of the equations. However, to come up with efficient
adaptive optimization strategies based on port-Hamiltonian model
hierarchies for complex application issues on district heating
networks, there are still many mathematical challenges to be handled.
In this paper we contributed with an infinite-dimensional
and thermodynamically consistent formulation for a compressible turbulent pipe flow,
which required to set up a (reversible) Hamiltonian system and a
generalized (dissipative) gradient system with suitable degeneracy
conditions. In particular, the choice of an appropriate energy
function was demanding. The asymptotic transition to an incompressible
pipe flow is non-trivial in this framework, since it changes the
differential-algebraic structure of the equations and hence requires
the reconsideration of the variables and the modification of the
energy function. In view of structure-preserving discretization and
model reduction the use of Galerkin projection-based techniques seems
to be promising. However, the choice of the variables and the formulation
of the system matrices crucially determine the complexity of the
numerics as, \abbr[e.g], the works \cite{CBG2016,Egger:2018,c47:liljegren-sailer:2019} show. Especially, the handling of the nonlinearities requires adequate complexity-reduction strategies. Interesting to explore are certainly also structure-preserving time-integration schemes, see, \abbr[e.g], \cite{KotL18,MorM19}.
In the special case of the presented semi-discrete district heating network model that makes use of the different hydrodynamic and thermal time scales and a suitable finite volume upwind discretization we came up with a finite-dimensional port-Hamiltonian system for the internal energy density where the solenoidal flow field acts a time-varying parameter. This system is employed for model reduction (moment matching) in \cite{rein:2019a} and for optimal control in \cite{rein:2019b}.
The application of the port-Hamiltonian modeling framework
for coupled systems leads to many promising ideas for the
optimization of these systems.
Due to the complexity and size of the respective optimization models,
a subsystem-specific port-Hamiltonian modeling together with suitable
model reduction techniques allows for setting up a coupled model
hierarchy for optimization, which paves the way for highly efficient
adaptive optimization methods; \abbr[cf], \abbr[e.g], \cite{MSS18}, where a
related approach has shown to be useful for the related field of
gas network optimization.
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
A very important part of a successful energy transition is an
increasing supply of renewable energies.
However, the power supply through such energies is highly volatile.
That is why a balancing of this volatility and more energy efficiency
is needed. An important player in this context are district heating networks.
They show a high potential to balance the fluctuating supply of
renewable energies due to their ability to absorb more or less excess power while keeping the heat supply unchanged. A long-term objective is to strongly increase energy
efficiency through the intelligent control of district heating
networks.
The basis for achieving this goal is the dynamic modeling of the
district heating network itself, which is not available in the optimization tools
currently used in industry. Such a dynamic modeling would allow for
optimization of the fluctuating operating resources, \abbr[e.g], waste
incineration, electric power, or gas. However, as power and heating networks act
on different time scales and since their descriptions lead to mathematical
problems of high spatial dimension, their coupling for a dynamic
simulation that is efficiently realizable involves various
mathematical challenges. One possible remedy is a port-Hamiltonian modeling framework: Such an energy-based formulation
brings the different scales on a single level, the port-Hamiltonian
character is inherited during the coupling of individual systems, and
in a port-Hamiltonian system the physical principles (stability,
passivity, conservation of energy and momentum) are ideally encoded in
the algebraic and geometric structures of the model. Deriving model
hierarchies by using adequate Galerkin projection-based techniques for
structure-preserving discretization as well as model reduction, and
combining them with efficient adaptive optimization strategies opens up a new promising approach to complex application issues.
Against the background of this vision, this paper provides a first
contribution to port-Hamiltonian modeling of district heating
networks, illustrating the potential for optimization in a case study,
and raising open research questions and challenges. Port-Hamiltonian
(pH) systems have been elaborately studied in literature lately; see,
\abbr[e.g], \cite{BeaMXZ18,MehMW18,SchJ14,SchM18} and the references therein.
The standard form appears as
\begin{subequations}\label{eq:pH}
\begin{align}
\frac{\mathrm{d}{z}}{\mathrm{d}t}
= (J-R) \nabla_z \mathcal{H}(z) + (B-P) u,
\quad
y = (B+P)^T \nabla_z \mathcal{H}(z) + (S+N) u
\end{align}
with
\begin{align}
W = W^T\geq 0,
\quad W =\left[
\begin{array}{cc}
R & P \\ P^T & S
\end{array}\right].
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
The Hamiltonian $\mathcal{H}$ is an energy storage function, $J =
-J^T$ is the structure matrix describing energy flux among energy
storage elements, $R = R^T$ is the dissipation matrix, $B\pm P$ are
port matrices for energy in- and output, and $S=S^T$, $N=-N^T$ are
matrices associated with the direct feed-through from input $u$ to
output $y$. The system satisfies a dissipation inequality, which is an
immediate consequence of the positive (semi-)definiteness of the
passivity matrix~$W$ and also holds even when the coefficient matrices
depend on the state $z$ or explicitly on time $t$, or when they are
defined as linear operators on infinite-dimensional spaces. Including
time-varying state constraints yields a port-Hamiltonian descriptor
system of differential-algebraic equations \cite{BeaMXZ18,MehMW18,Sch13}. Port-Hamiltonian partial
differential equations on networks (port-Hamiltonian PDAE) are topic
in, \abbr[e.g], \cite{a28:egger:2018} for linear damped wave equations or
in~\cite{c47:liljegren-sailer:2019} for nonlinear isothermal Euler
equations. The adequate handling of thermal effects is a novelty of
this work. Extending the work of \cite{BadMBM18,BadZ18}, we make use of a thermodynamically consistent generalization of
the port-Hamiltonian framework in which the Hamiltonian is combined with
an entropy function. The resulting dynamic system consists of a
(reversible) Hamiltonian system and a generalized (dissipative)
gradient system. Degeneracy conditions ensure that the flows of the
two parts do not overlap. Respective pH-models in operator form can be
found, \abbr[e.g], for the Vlasov--Maxwell system in plasma physics in
\cite{KraH17,KraKMS17}, for the Navier--Stokes equations for reactive flows in \cite{AltS17} or for finite strain thermoelastodynamics in \cite{BetS19}.
The paper is structured as follows. Starting with the description of a
district heating network as a connected and directed graph in
Sect.~\ref{sec:network-modeling}, we present models associated to the
arcs for the pipelines, consumers, and the depot of the network
operator that are coupled with respect to conservation of mass and energy
as well as continuity of pressure at the network's nodes. We especially
introduce a hierarchy of pipe models ranging from the compressible
instationary Navier--Stokes equations for a thermodynamic fluid flow to
an advection equation for the internal energy density coupled with
incompressible stationary Euler-like equations for the
hydrodynamics. Focusing on the latter, we show that the associated
spatially discretized network model can be embedded into a family of
parameter-dependent standard port-Hamiltonian systems in
Sect.~\ref{sec:ph_semidiscrete} and numerically explore the network's behavior in Sect.~\ref{sec:case_study}. In a study on operating the
heating network with respect to the avoidance of power peaks in the
feed-in, we particularly reveal the potential for optimization. In view
of the other pipe models, a generalization of the port-Hamiltonian
framework to cover the dissipative thermal effects is necessary. In
Sect.~\ref{sec:pH-modeling} we develop an infinite-dimensional
thermodynamically consistent port-Hamiltonian formulation for the one-dimensional partial differential equations of a compressible instationary turbulent pipe flow. From this, we raise open research questions and perspectives concerning structure-preserving discretization, model reduction, and optimization in Sect.~\ref{sec:concl-persp}.
\section{Network modeling}
\label{sec:network-modeling}
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\input{dhn.tikz}
\caption{A schematic district heating network: Foreflow arcs are
plotted in solid black, backflow arcs in dashed black, consumers (households) in
dotted blue, and the depot in dash-dotted red.}
\label{fig:sample-network}
\end{figure}
The district heating network is modeled by a connected and directed
graph $\graphset{G} = (\Nodes, \graphset{A})$ with node set~$N$ and arc
set~$A$. This graph consists of (i) a
foreflow part, which provides the consumers with hot water; (ii)
consumers, that obtain power via heat exchangers; (iii) a backflow part,
which transports the cooled water back to the depot; and (iv) the
depot, where the heating of the cooled water takes place; see
Fig.~\ref{fig:sample-network} for a schematic illustration.
The nodes $\Nodes = \Nodes_{\text{ff}} \cup \Nodes_{\text{bf}}$ are
the disjoint union of nodes~$\Nodes_{\text{ff}}$ of the foreflow part and
nodes~$\Nodes_{\text{bf}}$ of the backflow part of the network. The arcs $\graphset{A} =
\Arcs_{\text{ff}} \cup \Arcs_{\text{bf}} \cup \Arcs_{\text{c}} \cup \set{\arc_{\text{d}}}$ are divided into foreflow arcs
$\Arcs_{\text{ff}}$, backflow arcs $\Arcs_{\text{bf}}$, consumer arcs $\Arcs_{\text{c}}$, and the depot arc
$\arc_{\text{d}}$ of the district heating network operator. The set of pipelines
is thus given by $\Arcs_{\text{p}} = \Arcs_{\text{ff}} \cup \Arcs_{\text{bf}}$.
In the following we introduce a model hierarchy for the flow in a
single pipe (\abbr[cf] Fig.~\ref{fig:pipe_models}) and afterward discuss the nodal coupling conditions for the
network. Models for consumers (households) and the depot yield the
closure conditions for the modeling of the network.
\subsection{Model hierarchy for pipe flow}
\label{subsec:pipe-modeling}
Let $a \in \Arcs_{\text{p}}$ be a pipe. Starting point for the modeling of the flow in a
pipe are the cross-sectionally averaged one-dimensional instationary
compressible Navier--Stokes equations for a thermodynamic fluid flow \cite{Schlichting06}.
We assume that the pipe is cylindrically shaped,
that it has constant circular cross-sections, and that the flow
quantities are only varying along the cylinder axis. Consider $(x,t)\in
(0,\ell)\times (t_0,t_\mathrm{end}] \subseteq \mathbb{R}^2$
with pipe length $\ell$ as well as start and end time $t_0$,
$t_\text{end}>0$. Mass density, velocity, and internal energy density,
\abbr[i.e], $\rho, v, e: (0,\ell) \times (t_0,t_\mathrm{end}] \rightarrow
\mathbb{R}$, are then described by the balance equations
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:distr-heat-pipe}
\begin{split}
0&=\partial_t\rho+\partial_x(\rho v),\\
0&=\partial_t(\rho v)+\partial_x(\rho v^2)+\partial_x p+\frac{\lambda}{2d}\rho|v|v+\rho g\partial_x h,\\
0&=\partial_t e+\partial_x(ev)+p\partial_xv-\frac{\lambda}{2d}\rho|v|v^2+\frac{4k_\mathrm{w}}{d}(T-\vartheta).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Pressure and temperature, \abbr[i.e], $p, T : (0,\ell) \times
(t_0,t_\mathrm{end}] \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$, are determined by
respective state equations. In the momentum balance the frictional
forces with friction factor $\lambda$ and pipe diameter $d$ come from
the three-dimensional surface conditions on the pipe walls, the outer
forces arise from gravity with gravitational acceleration $g$ and pipe
level $h$ (with constant pipe slope $\partial_x h$). The energy exchange with the outer surrounding is
modeled in terms of the pipe's heat transmission coefficient $k_\mathrm{w}$ and
the outer ground temperature
$\vartheta$. System~\eqref{eq:distr-heat-pipe} are
(Euler-like) non-linear hyperbolic partial differential equations of first order for a turbulent pipe flow.
The hot water in the pipe is under such a high pressure that it does
not turn into steam. Thus, the transition to the incompressible limit
of \eqref{eq:distr-heat-pipe} makes sense, yielding the following
partial differential-algebraic system for velocity $v$ and internal
energy density $e$, where the pressure $p$ acts as a Lagrange
multiplier to the incompressibility constraint:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:distr-heat-pipe-incomp}
\begin{split}
0&=\partial_x\velocity,\\
0&=\partial_t\velocity+\frac{1}{\rho}\partial_x\pressure+\frac{\lambda}{2d}|\velocity|\velocity+g\partial_x
h,\\
0&=\partial_t e+\velocity\partial_x e-\frac{\lambda}{2d}\rho|v|v^2+\frac{4k_\mathrm{w}}{d}(\temperature-\vartheta).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The system is supplemented with state equations for density~$\rho$ and
temperature~$T$. Note that the energy term due to friction is
negligibly small in this case and can be omitted.
Since the hydrodynamic and thermal effects act on different time
scales, System~\eqref{eq:distr-heat-pipe-incomp} may be simplified
even further by setting $\partial_tv=0$, \abbr[i.e],
\begin{equation}\label{eq:distr-heat-pipe-smallacc}
\begin{split}
0&=\partial_x\velocity,\\
0&=\partial_x\pressure+ \frac{\lambda}{2d}\rho |\velocity|\velocity+ \rho g\partial_x h,\\
0&=\partial_t e+\velocity\partial_x e+\frac{4k_\mathrm{w}}{d}(\temperature-\vartheta),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
again supplemented with state equations for $\rho$, $T$.
System~\eqref{eq:distr-heat-pipe-smallacc} describes the heat
transport in the pipe where flow velocity and pressure act as
Lagrange multipliers to the stationary hydrodynamic
equations. However, the flow field is not stationary at all because of
the time-dependent closure (boundary) conditions (at households and
the depot). In the presented model hierarchy one might even go a step
further and ignore the term concerning the heat transition with the
outer surrounding of the pipe, \abbr[i.e], $4 k_\mathrm{w}(T-\vartheta)/d=0$, when
studying the overall network behavior caused by different operation of
the depot; see Sect.~\ref{sec:ph_semidiscrete} and
Sect.~\ref{sec:case_study}.
\tikzstyle{block} = [rectangle, draw,
text width=30em, text centered, rounded corners, minimum height=3em]
\tikzstyle{line} = [draw, ->]
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[node distance = 1.75cm, auto]
n [block] (Comp) {compressible instationary thermodynamic turbulent flow \eqref{eq:distr-heat-pipe}};
n [block, below of = Comp] (Incomp) {incompressible instationary thermodynamic turbulent flow \eqref{eq:distr-heat-pipe-incomp}};
n [block, below of = Incomp] (Stat) {energy advection with outer cooling\\ w.r.t. incompressible stationary hydrodynamic equations (\ref{eq:distr-heat-pipe-smallacc})};
n [block, below of = Stat] (WC) {energy advection without outer cooling \\w.r.t. incompressible stationary hydrodynamic equations (\ref{eq:e_net})};
\path [line] (Comp) -- node{$\partial_xv=0$} (Incomp);
\path [line] (Incomp) -- node{$\partial_tv=0$, $\frac{\lambda}{2d}\rho|v|v^2$ small}(Stat);
\path [line] (Stat) -- node{$\frac{4k_W}{d}(T-\vartheta)=0$}(WC);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Hierarchy of pipe flow models \label{fig:pipe_models}}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{State equations and material models }
In the pressure and temperature regime being relevant for operating
district heating networks, we model the material properties of water by polynomials depending exclusively on the internal energy
density, and not on the pressure. The relations for temperature $T$,
mass density $\rho$, and kinematic viscosity $\bar\nu$ summarized in
Table~\ref{tab:wasser} are based on a fitting of data taken from the
NIST Chemistry WebBook~\cite{nist16}. The relative error of the
approximation is of order $O(10^{-3})$, which is slightly higher than
the error $O(\num{5e-4})$ we observe due to neglecting
the pressure dependence. The quadratic state equation for the
temperature allows a simple conversion between $e$ and $T$, which is
necessary since closure conditions (households, depot) are usually
stated in terms of $T$;
cf. Sect.~\ref{sec:network-modeling:househelds-depot}. Obviously,
$e_\star(T_\star)= 0.5 \, T_2^{-1}(-T_1 + (T_1^2 - 4 T_2( T_0 -
T_\star))^{1/2})$ holds for $T_\star(e_\star)=\sum_{i=0}^2 T_i
e_\star^i$, $e_\star \geq 0$.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Material properties of water as functions of the internal
energy density $z(e)=z_0\,z_\star(e/e_0)$, $z
\in\{T,\rho,\bar\nu\}$, where $z_\star$ denotes the dimensionless
quantity scaled with the reference value $z_0$; in particular $e_\star=e/e_0$ with
$e_0= 10^9\,\si{\joule\per\cubic\meter}$. The stated relative errors of the underlying
polynomial approximation hold in the regime $e \in [0.2, 0.5]$\,\si{\giga\joule\per\cubic\meter}
and $p\in [5, 25]$\,\si{\bar}, implying $T\in [50, 130]$\,\si{\degreeCelsius}.}
\label{tab:wasser}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\toprule
Reference
& Material model
& Rel. error\\
\midrule
$T_0=1$\,\si{\degreeCelsius}
& $T_\star(e_\star)=59.2453 \, e_\star^2 + 220.536 \, e_\star +
1.93729$
& \num{1.2e-3} \\
$\rho_0=10^3$\,\si{\kilogram\per\cubic\meter}\hspace*{-0.1cm}
& $\rho_\star(e_\star)=-0.208084 \, e_\star^2 -0.025576\, e_\star +
1.00280$
& \num{6.0e-4}\\
$\bar\nu_0=10^{-6}$\,\si{\square\meter\per\second}\hspace*{-0.2cm}
& $\bar\nu_\star(e_\star)=11.9285\, e_\star^4 -22.8079\, e_\star^3
+17.6559\, e_\star^2 -7.00355\, e_\star +1.42624$\hspace*{-0.1cm}
& \num{9.9e-4}\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:state}
Alternatively to the specific data-driven approach, the state equations
can be certainly also deduced more rigorously from thermodynamic
laws. A thermodynamic fluid flow described by
\eqref{eq:distr-heat-pipe} satisfies the entropy balance for
$s:(0,\ell) \times (t_0,t_\mathrm{end}] \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$, \abbr[i.e],
\begin{align*}
0=\partial_t s+\partial_x(sv)-\frac{\lambda}{2d}\frac{1}{\temperature} \rho
|\velocity|\velocity^2+\frac{4k_\mathrm{w}}{d}\frac{1}{\temperature}(\temperature-\vartheta).
\end{align*}
Considering the entropy as a function of mass density and internal
energy density, $s=s(\rho, e)$, yields the Gibbs identities which can
be used as state equations for pressure~$p$ and temperature~$T$, \abbr[i.e],
\begin{align*}
\partial_\rho s=-(\rho T)^{-1} (e+p-Ts), \quad \partial_e s =T^{-1}.
\end{align*}
\end{remark}
\paragraph{Pipe-related models }
The pipe flow is mainly driven in a turbulent regime, \abbr[i.e], with
Reynolds number $\mathrm{Re}>10^3$. Thus, the pipe friction factor $\lambda$ can be
described by the Colebrook--White equation in terms of the Reynolds
number $\mathrm{Re}$ and the ratio of pipe roughness and diameter
$k_\mathrm{r}/d$,
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda}} (v,e)
= -2\, \log_{10} \left(
\frac{2.52}{\mathrm{Re}(v,e)\,
\sqrt{\lambda}(v,e)}
+ \frac{1}{3.71}\frac{k_\mathrm{r}}{d} \right),
\quad
\mathrm{Re}(v,e) = \frac{|v|\, d}{\bar \nu(e)}.
\end{equation*}
The model is used for technically rough pipes.
Its limit behavior corresponds to the relation by Prandtl and Karman
for a hydraulically smooth pipe, \abbr[i.e], $1/{\sqrt{\lambda}} = 2
\log_{10}(\mathrm{Re}\sqrt{\lambda})-0.8$ for $k_\mathrm{r}/d\rightarrow 0$,
and to the relation by Prandtl, Karman, and Nikuradse for a completely
rough pipe, \abbr[i.e], $1/{\sqrt{\lambda}}=1.14-2 \log_{10}(k_\mathrm{r}/d)$ for
$\mathrm{Re}\rightarrow \infty$, \cite{Shashi15}.
The underlying root finding problem for~$\lambda$ can be
solved using the Lambert W-function; see~\cite{clamond2009efficient}.
However, in view of the computational effort it can also be reasonable
to consider a fixed constant Reynolds number for the pipe as further simplification.
The pipe quantities -- length~$\ell$, diameter~$d$, slope~$\partial_x
h$, roughness~$k_\mathrm{r}$, and heat transmission coefficient~$k_\mathrm{w}$ -- are assumed to be constant in the pipe model. Moreover, note that in this work we also consider the outer ground temperature $\vartheta$ as constant, which will play a role for our port-Hamiltonian formulation of \eqref{eq:distr-heat-pipe} in Sect.~\ref{sec:pH-modeling} .
\subsection{Nodal coupling conditions}
\label{sec:network-modeling:nodal-coupl-cond}
For the network modeling it is convenient to use the following
standard notation. Quantities related to an arc
$a = (m, n) \in \graphset{A}$, $m, n \in \Nodes$,
are marked with the subscript~$a$, quantities associated to a node
$n \in \Nodes$ with the subscript~$n$. For a node $n
\in \Nodes$, let $\delta^{\text{in}}_n$, $\delta^{\text{out}}_n$ be the sets of
all topological ingoing and outgoing arcs, \abbr[i.e],
\begin{equation*}
\delta^{\text{in}}_n
= \defset{a \in \graphset{A}}{\exists m \text{ with
}a = (m, n)},
\quad
\delta^{\text{out}}_n
= \defset{a \in \graphset{A}}{\exists
m \text{ with } a = (n, m)},
\end{equation*}
and let $\mathcal{I}_n(t)$, $\mathcal{O}_n(t)$, $t \in [t_0,t_{\text{end}}]$,
be the sets of all flow-specific ingoing and outgoing arcs,
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{I}_n(t)
&=\defset{a \in \delta^{\text{in}}_n}{q_a(\ell_a,t)\geq 0}\cup
\defset{a \in \delta^{\text{out}}_n}{q_a(0,t)\leq 0},\\
\mathcal{O}_n(t)
&=\defset{a \in \delta^{\text{in}}_n}{q_a(\ell_a,t)< 0}\cup
\defset{a \in \delta^{\text{out}}_n}{q_a(0,t)> 0};
\end{align*}
see, \abbr[e.g],
\cite{Geissler_et_al:2015,Geissler_et_al:2018,Hante_Schmidt:2019}
where a similar notation is used in the context of gas networks.
Note that the sets~$\mathcal{I}_n(t)$, $\mathcal{O}_n(t)$ depend on
the flow~$q_a$, $a \in A$, in the network, which is not known a
priori.
The coupling conditions we require for the network ensure the conservation of mass
and energy as well as the continuity of pressure at every node $n\in
\Nodes$ and for all time $t\in [t_0,t_{\text{end}}]$, i.e.,
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:nodal_cond}
\begin{align}
\label{eq:mass-balance}
\sum_{a \in \delta^{\text{in}}_n} \massflow_a(\ell_a, t) &=
\sum_{a \in \delta^{\text{out}}_n} \massflow_a(0, t),\\
\label{eq:energy-balance}
\sum_{a \in \delta^{\text{in}}_n} \hat q_a(\ell_a, t) e_a(\ell_a, t) &=
\sum_{a \in \delta^{\text{out}}_n} \hat q_a(0, t) e_a(0, t),&& \,
e_a(0, t) = e_n(t), \,\,\,\, a \in \mathcal{O}_n(t),\\
\label{eq:pressure-continuity}
\pressure_a(\ell_a, t)
&= \pressure_n(t),
\,\,\, a \in \delta^{\text{in}}_n,
&&
\pressure_a(0, t)
= \pressure_n(t),
\,\,\, a \in \delta^{\text{out}}_n.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Here, $q_a$ and $\hat q_a$ denote the mass flow and the volumetric
flow in pipe $a$, respectively. They scale with the mass density,
\abbr[i.e], $q_a= \rho_a v_a \varsigma_a$ and $\hat q_a=q_a/\rho_a$, where
$\varsigma_a=d^2_a \pi/4$ is the cross-sectional area of the pipe. In
case of incompressibility, it holds that $\hat{q}_a(x,t)=\hat{q}_a(t)$
is constant along the pipe. The functions $e_n$ and $\pressure_n$ are
auxiliary variables describing internal energy density and pressure at
node $n$. Note that the second condition in
\eqref{eq:energy-balance}, namely that the out-flowing energy
densities are identical in all (flow-specific outgoing) pipes, rests upon the
assumption of instant mixing of the in-flowing energy densities.
\subsection{Households, depot, and operational constraints}
\label{sec:network-modeling:househelds-depot}
The network modeling is closed by models for the consumers
(households) and the depot of the network operator.
Quantities associated to the arc~$a$ at
node~$n$ are indicated by the subscript~${a:n}$.
For the consumer at $a = (m, n) \in \Arcs_{\text{c}}$, where the
nodes $m$ and $n$ belong to the foreflow and backflow part of the
network, respectively (\abbr[cf] Fig.~\ref{fig:sample-network}), the
following conditions are posed for $t\in [t_0,t_{\text{end}}]$,
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:consumer}
\begin{align}
\Power_a(t)
& = \hat q_a(t) \Delta e_{a}(t),
& \velocity_a(t)
& \geq 0,
& \Delta e_{a}(t)
& = e_{a:m}(t) - e_{a:n}(t),
\label{eq:consumer-power-usage}\\
\temperature_{a:n}(t)
& = \temp^{\text{bf}},
& \temperature_{a:m}(t)
& \in [\temp^{\text{ff}}_-,\temp^{\text{ff}}_+],
& \temperature_{a:m}(t) - \temperature_{a:n}(t)
& \leq \Delta \temp^\text{c},
\label{eq:consumer-temperature}\\
\pressure_{a:n}(t)
& \in [\press^{\text{bf}}_-,\press^{\text{bf}}_+],
& \pressure_{a:m}(t)
& \in [\press^{\text{ff}}_-,\press^{\text{ff}}_+],
& \pressure_{a:m}(t) -\pressure_{a:n}(t)
& \in [\Delta p^{\text{c}}_-, \Delta p^{\text{c}}_+].
\label{eq:consumer-pressure}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
The prescribed power consumption~$\Power_a$ of the household is
realized by the product of the energy density difference at the arc
and the volumetric flow in~\eqref{eq:consumer-power-usage}. Moreover, the
underlying flow velocity has a pre-specified direction. The consumer's
outflow temperature is set to be equal to the contractually agreed
temperature $\temp^{\text{bf}}$. Moreover, the operational constraints ensure a
certain temperature range at each consumption point and define a
maximal temperature difference between foreflow and backflow part of
the consumers. In addition, minimal and maximal values for the
pressure level at both backflow and foreflow part of the consumer arcs
are prescribed. Finally, the pressure difference between foreflow and
backflow part is bounded.
The depot~$\arc_{\text{d}}=(m,n)$ for operating the district heating
network is modeled by the following conditions for $t \in [t_0,t_{\text{end}}]$:
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:distr-heat-depot}
\begin{align}
\label{eq:distr-heat-depot-flow-energy}
e_{\arc_{\text{d}}:n}(t) &= u^\text{e}(t), \quad
\temperature_{\arc_{\text{d}}:n}(t) \leq T^\text{net}, \hspace*{2.2cm}
\velocity_{\arc_{\text{d}}}(t) \geq 0, \\
\label{eq:distr-heat-depot-pressure}
\pressure_{\arc_{\text{d}}:m}(t) & = u^\text{p}(t), \quad
\pressure_{\arc_{\text{d}}:n}(t) = \pressure_{\arc_{\text{d}}:m}(t) + u^{\Delta\text{p}}(t).
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Here, $u^\text{p}$ prescribes the so-called stagnation pressure of the
network and $u^{\Delta\text{p}}$ is the realized pressure increase at
the depot. The energy density injected at the depot to the foreflow
part of the network is denoted by $u^\text{e}$. The resulting
temperature is bounded above by $T^\text{net}$, which also acts as
temperature limit for all network nodes.
In addition to the operational constraints in \eqref{eq:consumer} and
\eqref{eq:distr-heat-depot}, the pressure in all network nodes is
bounded, \abbr[i.e], $\pressure_{n}(t) \leq p^\text{net}$ for $n \in
\Nodes$ and $t \in [t_0,t_{\text{end}}]$.
\section{Port-Hamiltonian formulation of compressible thermodynamic pipe flow}
\label{sec:pH-modeling}
The adequate handling of thermal effects requires the generalization of the port-Hamiltonian framework by combing the Hamiltonian with an entropy function. In this section we embed the partial differential model \eqref{eq:distr-heat-pipe} for a compressible thermodynamic turbulent pipe flow into the GENERIC-formalism, which has lately been studied in \cite{BadMBM18,BadZ18}, and present an infinite-dimensional thermodynamically consistent port-Hamiltonian description.
The thermodynamic pipe flow model \eqref{eq:distr-heat-pipe} can be reformulated as a generalized (non-linear) port-Hamiltonian system in operator form for $z=(\rho, M, e)^T$, $M=(\rho v)$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:GENERIC_ph}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{\mathrm{d}z}{\mathrm{d}t}&=\left(\mathcal{J}(z)-\mathcal{R}(z)\right)\frac{\delta\mathcal{E}(z)}{\delta z}+\mathcal{B}(z)u(z)\quad &\text{in } \mathcal{D}_z^*,\\
y(z)&=\mathcal{B}^*(z)\frac{\delta\mathcal{E}(z)}{\delta z} \quad &\text{in } \mathcal{D}_u^*,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{Z}=\{z\in \mathcal{D}_z \,|\,\rho\geq\delta \text{ with } \delta>0 \text{ almost everywhere} \}\subset \mathcal{D}_z$ denotes the state space with the Sobolev space $\mathcal{D}_z=W^{1,3}((0,\ell);\mathbb{R}^3)$ being a reflexiv Banach space. For $z\in \mathcal{Z}$ the operators $\mathcal{J}(z)[\cdot]$, $\mathcal{R}(z)[\cdot]:\mathcal{D}_z \rightarrow \mathcal{D}_z^*$ are linear and continuous, moreover $\mathcal{J}(z)$ is skew-adjoint and $\mathcal{R}(z)$ is self-adjoint semi-elliptic, i.e., $\langle\varphi,\mathcal{J}(z)\psi\rangle=-\langle\psi,\mathcal{J}(z)\varphi\rangle$ and $\langle\varphi,\mathcal{R}(z)\psi\rangle=\langle\psi,\mathcal{R}(z)\varphi\rangle\geq 0$ for all $\varphi,\psi \in\mathcal{D}_z$. The system theoretic input is given by $u(z)\in \mathcal{D}_u= L^{q}(\{0,\ell\})$ with linear continuous operator $\mathcal{B}(z)[\cdot]:\mathcal{D}_u\rightarrow\mathcal{D}_z^*$ and dual space $\mathcal{D}_u^*= L^{p}(\{0,\ell\})$, ${1}/{q}+{1}/{p}=1$. The system theoretic output is denoted by $y(z)$. The form of the energy functional $\mathcal{E}$ and the port-Hamiltonian operators $\mathcal{J}(z)$, $\mathcal{R}(z)$ and $\mathcal{B}(z)[\cdot]$ are derived as follows.
\begin{remark}
We assume that all relevant mathematical statements hold for an arbitrary but fixed time parameter $t\in (t_0,t_\text{end}]$. The function spaces $\mathcal{D}_z$ and $\mathcal{D}_u$ associated with the spatial evolution are chosen in an ad-hoc manner, \abbr[i.e], we assume that the considered fields and functions satisfy certain regularity requirements. A mathematically rigorous justification requires an analytical consideration of the generalized port-Hamiltonian system. The corresponding functional analytical and structural questions are the focus of ongoing work.
\end{remark}
Accounting for the thermodynamic behavior of the pipe flow, \eqref{eq:GENERIC_ph} is composed of a Hamiltonian and a generalized gradient system. This is reflected in the energy functional that is an exergy-like functional consisting of a Hamiltonian and an entropy part, i.e.,
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{E}(z)=\mathcal{H}(z)-\vartheta\mathcal{S}(z), \quad
\mathcal{H}(z)=\int_0^\ell \left(\frac{|M|^2}{2\rho}+e+\rho gh\right)\mathrm{d}x, \quad \mathcal{S}(z)=\int_0^\ell s(\rho,e)\,\mathrm{d}x.
\end{align*}
where the outer ground temperature $\vartheta$ is assumed to be constant.
Introducing the ballistic free energy $H(\rho,e)= e-\vartheta s(\rho,e)$ \cite{Feireisl12}, the functional $\mathcal{E}$ and its variational derivatives become
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{E}(z)&=\int_0^\ell \left(\frac{|M|^2}{2\rho}+H(\rho,e)+\rho gh\right)\mathrm{d}x\\
\frac{\delta\mathcal{E}(z)}{\delta z}&=
\left( \frac{\delta\mathcal{E}(z)}{\delta \rho}, \frac{\delta\mathcal{E}(z)}{\delta M},\frac{\delta\mathcal{E}(z)}{\delta e} \right)^T
=\left(\left(-\frac{|M|^2}{2\rho^2}+\frac{\partial H}{\partial\rho}+gh\right), \frac{M}{\rho}, \frac{\partial H}{\partial e}\right)^T.
\end{align*}
The port-Hamiltonian operators in \eqref{eq:GENERIC_ph} are assembled with respect to the (block-) structure of the state $z$. Let $\varphi, \psi \in \mathcal{D}_z$ be two block-structured test functions, i.e., $\varphi = (\varphi_\rho, \varphi_M, \varphi_e)^T$. Then the skew-adjoint operator $\mathcal{J}(z)$ is given by
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:Skew_Op_J}
\begin{align}
\mathcal{J}(z)=\left[ \begin{array}{ccc}0 & \mathcal{J}_{\rho,M}(z) & 0 \\ \mathcal{J}_{M,\rho}(z) & \mathcal{J}_{M,M}(z) &\mathcal{J}_{M,e}(z) \\ 0 & \mathcal{J}_{e,M}(z) & 0\end{array}\right],
\end{align}
associated with the bilinear form
\begin{align*}
\langle\varphi,\mathcal{J}(z)\psi\rangle & =
\langle\varphi_\rho,\mathcal{J}_{\rho,M}(z)\psi_M\rangle+
\langle\varphi_M,\mathcal{J}_{M,\rho}(z)\psi_\rho\rangle+
\langle\varphi_M,\mathcal{J}_{M,M}(z)\psi_M\rangle\\ &\quad +
\langle\varphi_M,\mathcal{J}_{M,e}(z)\psi_e\rangle+
\langle\varphi_e,\mathcal{J}_{e,M}(z)\psi_M\rangle.
\end{align*}
Its entries are particularly defined by the following relations,
\begin{align}
\langle\varphi_\rho,\mathcal{J}_{\rho,M}(z)\psi_M\rangle&=-\langle\psi_M,\mathcal{J}_{M,\rho}(z)\varphi_\rho\rangle=\int_0^\ell\rho(\psi_M\partial_x)\varphi_\rho\,\mathrm{d}x,\\
\langle\varphi_M,\mathcal{J}_{M,M}(z)\psi_M\rangle&=-\langle\psi_M,\mathcal{J}_{M,M}(z)\varphi_M\rangle=\int_0^\ell M((\psi_M\partial_x)\varphi_M-(\varphi_M\partial_x)\psi_M)\,\mathrm{d}x,\\
\langle\varphi_e,\mathcal{J}_{e,M}(z)\psi_M\rangle&=-
\langle\psi_M,\mathcal{J}_{M,e}(z)\varphi_e\rangle=\int_0^\ell e(\psi_M\partial_x)\varphi_e+(\psi_M\partial_x)(\varphi_ep)\,\mathrm{d}x \label{eq:ph-J}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
that result from the partial derivatives in \eqref{eq:distr-heat-pipe}. The self-adjoint semi-elliptic operator $\mathcal{R}(z)$ is composed of two operators that correspond to the friction in the pipe $\mathcal{R}^\lambda(z)$ and the temperature loss through the pipe walls $\mathcal{R}^{k_\mathrm{w}}(z)$. It is given by
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:Dis_Op_R}
\begin{align}
\mathcal{R}(z)=\mathcal{R}^\lambda(z)+\mathcal{R}^{k_\mathrm{w}}(z)=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & \mathcal{R}^\lambda_{M,M}(z) &\mathcal{R}^\lambda_{M,e}(z) \\ 0 & \mathcal{R}^\lambda_{e,M}(z) & \mathcal{R}^\lambda_{e,e}(z)+\mathcal{R}^{k_\mathrm{w}}_{e,e}(z)\end{array}\right],
\end{align}
associated with the bilinear form,
\begin{align*}
\langle\varphi,\mathcal{R}(z)\psi\rangle & =
\langle\varphi_M,\mathcal{R}^\lambda_{M,M}(z)\psi_M\rangle+
\langle\varphi_M,\mathcal{R}^\lambda_{M,e}(z)\psi_e\rangle+
\langle\varphi_e,\mathcal{R}^\lambda_{e,M}(z)\psi_M\rangle\\ &\quad+\langle\varphi_e,(\mathcal{R}^\lambda_{e,e}(z)+\mathcal{R}^{k_\mathrm{w}}_{e,e}(z))\psi_e\rangle.
\end{align*}
Its entries are
\begin{align}\label{eq:ph-R1}
\langle\varphi_M,\mathcal{R}^\lambda_{M,M}(z)\psi_M\rangle&=\int_0^\ell \varphi_M\left(\frac{\lambda}{2d}\frac{\temperature}{\vartheta}\rho|\velocity|\right)\psi_M\,\mathrm{d}x,\\
\langle\varphi_M,\mathcal{R}^\lambda_{M,e}(z)\psi_e\rangle=
\langle\psi_e,\mathcal{R}^\lambda_{e,M}(z)\varphi_M\rangle&=\int_0^\ell -\varphi_M\left(\frac{\lambda}{2d}\frac{\temperature}{\vartheta}\rho|\velocity|\velocity\right)\psi_e\,\mathrm{d}x,\\
\langle\varphi_e,(\mathcal{R}^\lambda_{e,e}(z)+\mathcal{R}^{k_\mathrm{w}}_{e,e}(z))\psi_e\rangle&=\int_0^\ell \varphi_e\left(\frac{\lambda}{2d}\frac{\temperature}{\vartheta}\rho|\velocity|\velocity^2+\frac{4k_\mathrm{w}}{d}\temperature\right)\psi_e\,\mathrm{d}x.\label{eq:ph-R3}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Note that the state dependencies of pressure $p=p(\rho,e)$ and temperature $T=T(\rho,e)$ occurring in \eqref{eq:ph-J} and \eqref{eq:ph-R1}-\eqref{eq:ph-R3} are prescribed by the state equations, cf.\ Remark~\ref{rem:state}. Moreover, $v=M/\rho$ and $\lambda=\lambda(v,e)$ hold for the velocity and the friction factor, respectively. Assuming consistent state equations, \abbr[e.g], ideal gas law, \abbr[cf] Remark~\ref{rem:ideal-gas}, the operators in \eqref{eq:Skew_Op_J} and \eqref{eq:Dis_Op_R} fulfill the non-interacting conditions
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{J}(z)\frac{\delta\mathcal{S}(z)}{\delta z}=0, \quad \quad \mathcal{R}^\lambda(z)\frac{\delta\mathcal{H}(z)}{\delta z}=0,
\end{align*}
which arise in the GENERIC context \cite{BadMBM18,BadZ18} and ensure that the flows of the Hamiltonian and the gradient system do not overlap. Finally, concerning the system theoretic input and output, the state dependent input is given as $u(z)\in \mathcal{D}_u$ by $u(z)=[M/\rho]|^\ell_0$. Then, the port operator $\mathcal{B}(z)[\cdot]:\mathcal{D}_u\rightarrow \mathcal{D}_z^\star$ is specified through the pairing
\begin{align*}
\langle\varphi,\mathcal{B}(z)u(z)\rangle=-\left.\left[(\varphi_\rho\rho+\varphi_MM+\varphi_e(e+p))\,u(z)\right]\right|_0^\ell,
\end{align*}
which originates from the boundary terms, when applying partial integration to parts of (\ref{eq:distr-heat-pipe}).
With the adjoint operator $\mathcal{B}^*(z)[\cdot]:\mathcal{D}_z\rightarrow \mathcal{D}_u^*$, i.e.,
$\langle\varphi,\mathcal{B}(z)u(z)\rangle=\langle\mathcal{B}^*(z)\varphi,u(z)\rangle $, the system theoretic output reads
\begin{align*}
y(z)=\mathcal{B}^*(z)\frac{\delta\mathcal{E}(z)}{\partial z}=-\left.\left[\frac{|M|^2}{2\rho}+p+H(\rho,e)+\rho gh\right]\right|^\ell_0.
\end{align*}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:ideal-gas}
In the port-Hamiltonian framework the choice of the state variables in the interplay with the energy functional is crucial for encoding the physical properties in the system operators. Hence, asymptotic simplifications as, \abbr[e.g], the limit to incompressibility in the hydrodynamics \eqref{eq:distr-heat-pipe-incomp}, are not straightforward, since they change the underlying equation structure. However, system~\eqref{eq:GENERIC_ph} is well suited when, \abbr[e.g], dealing with gas networks. Then, it can be closed by using, \abbr[e.g], the ideal gas law, implying \begin{align*}
s(\rho,e)=\frac{R}{2} \rho \operatorname{ln}\left(c_{\text{p}}\frac{e^3}{\rho^5}\right), \quad \temperature(\rho,e)=\frac{2}{3R}\frac{e}{\rho}, \quad \pressure(\rho,e)=\frac{2}{3}e,
\end{align*}
with specific gas constant $R$ and heat capacity $c_{\text{p}}$.
\end{remark}
\section{Port-Hamiltonian formulation of a semi-discrete network
model}
\label{sec:ph_semidiscrete}
In this section we present a spatially semi-discrete model variant for the
district heating network and discuss its formulation in the
port-Hamiltonian context. Making use of the different hydrodynamic and
thermal time scales, a finite volume upwind discretization yields a
port-Hamiltonian descriptor system for the internal energy density,
in which the solenoidal flow field acts as a time-varying parameter.
We describe the network by means of the following partial
differential-algebraic system for $t\in [t_0,t_{\text{end}}]$,
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:e_net}
\begin{align}
\partial_t e_a
&= -v_a \partial_x e_a,
&& a \in \Arcs_{\text{p}},
\label{eq:e_upw_advec}\\
e_a(0,t)
&= e_n(t),
&& a \in \mathcal{O}_n(t),
\qquad \sum_{a \in \delta^{\text{in}}_n} \hat q_a
e_a(\ell_\arc, t) = \sum_{a \in \delta^{\text{out}}_n}
\hat q_a e_a(0,t),
\quad n \in \Nodes,
\label{eq_mix}\\
e_{a:n}(t)
&= e^\text{bf},
&& a \in \Arcs_{\text{c}},
\label{eq:e_bc_II}\\
e_{a:n}(t)
&= u^\text{e}(t),
&& a = \arc_{\text{d}},
\label{eq:e_bc_I}\\
g(e,v,p)
&=0 \label{eq:e_upw_algeb}.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
This system results from the incompressible pipe model
in~\eqref{eq:distr-heat-pipe-smallacc} and neglecting the cooling term in
the energy balance (\abbr[i.e], $k_\mathrm{w} =0$). Here, the condition on the backflow temperature for the consumers is expressed in terms of the internal energy density,
\abbr[cf], $e^\text{bf}=e(T^\text{bf})$ in~\eqref{eq:e_bc_II}. In the formulation
we use the separation of thermal and hydrodynamic effects and state
the temporal advection of the internal energy density with respect to
the algebraic equations covering the hydrodynamics. So, $g(e,v,p)=0$
in \eqref{eq:e_upw_algeb} contains the hydrodynamic pipe equations,
the pressure continuity at the nodes \eqref{eq:pressure-continuity},
the condition on the households' power consumption
\eqref{eq:consumer-power-usage}, the pressure conditions at the depot
\eqref{eq:distr-heat-depot-pressure}, and the conservation of volume
\begin{align}\label{eq:cons_vol}
\sum_{b \in \delta^{\text{in}}_n} \hat q_b(t) =
\sum_{\arc \in \delta^{\text{out}}_n} \hat q_\arc(t), \quad n\in
\Nodes.
\end{align}
Considering the volume balance~\eqref{eq:cons_vol} instead of the
mass balance~\eqref{eq:mass-balance} is very convenient in the
incompressible setting, since the velocity field and hence the induced
volumetric flow are constant along a pipe. Moreover, this description
naturally fits the numerical method of finite volumes.
For the spatial discretization of the hyperbolic-like system
\eqref{eq:e_net} we apply a classical finite volume upwind scheme
\cite{leveque_numerical_2008}. Let $\alpha\in \Arcs_{\text{p}}$, $\alpha\in
\mathcal{O}_n(t_0)$, $n \in \Nodes$, and consider an
equidistant mesh of cell size $\Delta x_\alpha$, then
\begin{align*}
\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d} t} e_{\alpha,\beta}
&=
-\frac{v_\alpha}{\Delta x_\alpha}(e_{\alpha,\beta} -
e_{\alpha,\beta-1}),\quad
\beta \in V_\alpha,
\\
e_{\alpha,0}
&=e_n,
\quad
e_n= \frac{\sum_{b \in \mathcal{I}_n }
\hat q_b
\,e_{b,|V_b|}}{\sum_{\arc \in
\mathcal{O}_n} \hat q_\arc},
\end{align*}
where $e_{\alpha,\beta}$ denotes the internal energy density
with respect to the finite volume cell~$\beta$ of pipe~$\alpha$
with cell index set $V_\alpha$. For the first cell
($\beta=1$) we make use of the quantity at the node that results
from \eqref{eq_mix}. We summarize the unknown energy densities in a
vector $e=(e_1,...,e_\kappa)^T$, $e_{f(\alpha,\beta)}=e_{\alpha,\beta}$ by ordering pipe- and cell-wise according to the mapping
$f(\alpha,\beta) = \beta + \sum_{k=1}^{\alpha-1}
|V_k|$, $ \alpha \in \Arcs_{\text{p}}$, $\beta \in
V_\alpha$, in particular $\kappa=\sum_{\alpha \in \Arcs_{\text{p}}}
|V_\alpha|$.
Then, a semi-discrete version of the network model~\eqref{eq:e_net} is
given by the following descriptor system
\begin{align}\label{eq:upw:sys}
&\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d} t} e= A(\velocity) \,e + B(\velocity)\, u,
\quad y = C e,
\\ \nonumber
&\text{subject to } \velocity=G(e).
\end{align}
The system matrices $A(w)\in \mathbb{R}^{\kappa\times \kappa}$
and $B(w)\in \mathbb{R}^{\kappa \times 2}$ can be interpreted as
parameter-dependent quantities, where the (vector-valued) parameter
$w$ represents a spatially discretized solenoidal volume-preserving
velocity field. So,
\begin{equation*}
A_{f(\alpha,\beta),f(\mu,\sigma)}(w)= \partial
\frac{\mathrm d}{\mathrm{d} t} e_{\alpha,\beta}(w)/{\partial
e_{\mu,\sigma}}
\end{equation*}
holds. The special velocity field
belonging to the hydrodynamic network equations~\eqref{eq:e_upw_algeb}
is formally stated as $v=G(e)$. We assume a setting in which $v$ is
time-continuous. In~\eqref{eq:upw:sys} the input~$u$ consists of the
energy densities $u^\text{e}$ injected at the depot into the foreflow
part and $e^{\text{bf}}$ returning from the consumers into the
backflow part of the network,
$u=(u^\text{e},e^{\text{bf}})^T \in \mathbb{R}^{2} $. The
output~$y$ typically refers to energy densities in pipes supplying the
consumers, implying $C\in \mathbb{R}^{c \times \kappa}$.
\begin{theorem}\label{theo:semi_discr_pH}
Let $w$ be a (spatially discretized) solenoidal volume-preserving
time-continuous velocity field. Then, the semi-discrete network
model~\eqref{eq:upw:sys} can be embedded into a family of
parameter-dependent port-Hamiltonian systems
%
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pH_net}
\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t} e
= (J(w)-R(w)) Q e + \tilde B(w) \tilde u,
\quad
\tilde y = \tilde{B}^T(w) Q e,
\end{equation}
%
with $\tilde u=(u^T,0,\dotsc,0)^T\in \mathbb{R}^{2+c}$ which contains
the original outputs as subset.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
Theorem~\ref{theo:semi_discr_pH} implies that there exists an energy
matrix~$Q$ such that
%
\begin{equation}\label{eq:upw_lyap}
Q A(w) + A^T(w) Q \leq 0
\end{equation}
%
for all solenoidal volume-preserving velocity fields $w$. Thus, the
Hamiltonian $\mathcal{H}(e) = e^T Q e$ is a
Lyapunov function for the parameter-dependent system
\cite{antoul_approx}. The energy matrix $Q$ can be particularly
constructed as a diagonal matrix with positive entries, \abbr[i.e], $
Q_{f(\alpha,\beta),f(\alpha,\beta)} =
\varsigma_\alpha\, \Delta x_\alpha $ for $\alpha \in \Arcs_{\text{p}}$, $\beta \in V_\alpha$, where
$ \varsigma_\alpha\,\Delta x_\alpha$ is the volume of each discretization
cell in pipe $\alpha$.
Note that a change of the flow direction, which might occur in case
of cycles, yields a structural modification of the system matrix
$A(w)$, but does not affect the
stability of the system. However, it might cause a discontinuity in
the velocity field such that \eqref{eq:upw:sys}, or
\eqref{eq:pH_net} respectively, only allows for a weak solution.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}[of~Theorem~\ref{theo:semi_discr_pH}]
Let the positive definite diagonal matrix $Q\in\mathbb{R}^{\kappa
\times \kappa}$ with
$Q_{f(\alpha,\beta),f(\alpha,\beta)} =
\varsigma_\alpha\,\Delta x_\alpha > 0$ be given. Then, we define the
matrices $J$ and $R$ by
\begin{equation*}
J(w) = \frac{1}{2}(A(w)Q^{-1} -(A(w)Q^{-1})^T),
\quad
R(w) = -\frac{1}{2}(A(w)Q^{-1} + (A(w)Q^{-1})^T).
\end{equation*}
Obviously, $A(w)=(J(w)-R(w))Q$ holds. The properties $J=-J^T$ and
$R=R^T$ of port-Hamiltonian system matrices are satisfied by
construction for any parameter $w$. The positive semi-definiteness of~$R$ follows from
the Lyapunov inequality~\eqref{eq:upw_lyap}.
Considering
\begin{equation*}
L(w) = Q A(w) + A^T(w) Q,
\quad L_{f(\alpha,\beta),f(\alpha,\beta)}(w) = -2
Q_{f(\alpha,\beta),f(\alpha,\beta)}
\frac{w_\alpha}{\Delta x_\alpha} = -2\hat q_\alpha\leq 0,
\end{equation*}
the volume-preservation of $w$ ensures that the symmetric matrix
$L(w)$ is weakly diagonal dominant. Hence, $L(w)$ is negative
semi-definite, yielding
\begin{equation*}
x^T R(w) x= -\frac{1}{2} (Q^{-1}x)^T \, L(w) \, (Q^{-1}x) \geq 0
\quad\text{for all}\quad
x \in \mathbb{R}^\kappa.
\end{equation*}
Here, $R(w)$ acts as the passivity matrix since the system has no feed-through term. The port matrix
$\tilde{B}(w)\in \mathbb{R}^{\kappa \times 2+c}$ defined by
\begin{align*}
\tilde{B}(w)=[B(w), \,\, (CQ^{-1})^T]
\end{align*}
ensures that the outputs of the network model are contained in the
output set of the port-Hamiltonian system, \abbr[i.e], $\tilde{B}^T(w)Q=
[B^T(w)Q, \,\,C]^T$. Finally note that the parameter-dependent
port-Hamiltonian system matrices $J(w)$, $R(w)$, and $\tilde B(w)$
are continuous in time due to the given time-regularity of the
parameter $w$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
We point out that applying the stated framework to the other pipe
models presented in Sect.~\ref{subsec:pipe-modeling} is
non-trivial. Already the consideration of the cooling term in the
energy balance, \abbr[cf] pipe model \eqref{eq:distr-heat-pipe-smallacc},
which acts dissipative requires a generalization of the
port-Hamiltonian description. We refer to Sect.~\ref{sec:pH-modeling}
for an infinite-dimensional port-Hamiltonian formulation of the
compressible thermodynamic pipe flow \eqref{eq:distr-heat-pipe}.
\end{remark}
|
\section{Introduction}
Over the last two decades, there have been many remarkable advances in the study of observables such as scattering amplitudes and correlation functions in a wide variety of quantum field theories (QFTs). In many cases, an underlying motivation has been that -- at least for some QFTs -- it might be possible to find alternative formulations which manifest hidden symmetries, streamline perturbative calculations or enable the \emph{exact} computation of observables. One of the most widely studied QFTs in this context has been planar, maximally supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory in four-dimensions ($\cN=4$ SYM).
Indeed, planar $\cN=4$ SYM has many advantageous properties: it is exactly conformal, has only a single tuneable parameter (the 't Hooft coupling), admits a holographic description, possesses an infinite-dimensional symmetry algebra and is widely believed to be an integrable conformal field theory (CFT) (cf., \cite{Beisert:2010jr,Elvang:2013cua}). Yet there are issues (e.g., IR-divergences) which obstruct the analytic determination of observables in this theory.
Recently, there has been considerable interest in other QFTs for which it may be possible to make more exact analytic statements. A prime example is the four-dimensional \emph{conformal fishnet theory} (FCFT)~\cite{Gurdogan:2015csr}, whose name derives from the shape of its typical Feynman diagrams in the planar limit. \emph{A priori}, this FCFT seems far removed from $\cN=4$ SYM. It is a non-unitary theory of two complex scalars valued in the adjoint representation of SU$(N)$ with only quartic interactions; there is no supersymmetry or local gauge symmetry. However, FCFT can actually be derived by taking a `double scaling limit' of the well-known $\gamma$-deformation of $\cN=4$ SYM~\cite{Leigh:1995ep,Lunin:2005jy,Frolov:2005dj,Frolov:2005ty}. The double scaling limit decouples the gauge field, leaving a chiral field theory of fermions and scalars ($\chi$FT)~\cite{Gurdogan:2015csr,Caetano:2016ydc,Kazakov:2018gcy}. Setting two of the couplings in this $\chi$FT to zero leaves only two complex scalars with a chiral quartic interaction.
Quantum completeness requires FCFT to be supplemented with quartic double trace interactions, whose couplings have non-trivial $\beta$-functions~\cite{Fokken:2013aea,Sieg:2016vap}. This full theory has two conformal fixed points, which have been determined perturbatively up to seven loops~\cite{Sieg:2016vap,Grabner:2017pgm}. At these conformal fixed points and in the planar limit, FCFT is believed to be integrable\footnote{The integrability of fishnet diagrams was already established almost forty years ago~\cite{Zamolodchikov:1980mb}.}~\cite{Chicherin:2017cns,Gromov:2017cja,Chicherin:2017frs,Grabner:2017pgm,Kazakov:2018hrh}.
Anomalous dimensions, certain correlation functions and scattering amplitudes have all been determined \emph{exactly} as functions of the coupling in FCFT~\cite{Grabner:2017pgm,Gromov:2018hut,Korchemsky:2018hnb,Basso:2018cvy,Chowdhury:2019hns}. In addition, FCFT appears to admit a holographic description in terms of a discretized string-like model~\cite{Basso:2018agi,Gromov:2019aku,Gromov:2019bsj,Gromov:2019jfh}, and provides a first example of a non-supersymmetric 4d QFT with spontaneously broken conformal invariance~\cite{Karananas:2019aab}. Fishnet CFTs with the hallmarks of integrability also exist in diverse dimensions~\cite{Kazakov:2018qez,Derkachov:2018rot} and arise from non-integrable gauge theories~\cite{Pittelli:2019ceq}. Furthermore, many of the Feynman integrals of FCFT play an important role in other integrable QFTs like $\cN=4$ SYM (cf., \cite{Basso:2017jwq,Bourjaily:2018ycu}).
\medskip
One of many `non-standard' tools used in modern studies of $\cN=4$ SYM is \emph{twistor theory}~\cite{Penrose:1967wn} (cf., \cite{Penrose:1972ia,Ward:1990vs,Adamo:2017qyl} for reviews). This began with the realization that the full tree-level S-matrix of $\cN=4$ SYM is given by genus zero worldsheet correlation functions of a string theory whose target is twistor space~\cite{Witten:2003nn,Roiban:2004yf}, but there are myriad other applications of twistor theory in this setting. For instance, $\cN=4$ SYM can be described perturbatively by a \emph{twistor action} functional~\cite{Mason:2005zm,Boels:2006ir}, whose gauge freedom is significantly greater than the standard space-time gauge transformations. This, combined with the natural manifestation of superconformal symmetry and the non-local relation between space-time and twistor space, makes the twistor action a very useful tool for the study of perturbative $\cN=4$ SYM (cf., \cite{Adamo:2011pv})\footnote{The twistor approach to $\cN=4$ SYM is equivalent to that of Lorentz harmonic chiral superspace~\cite{Sokatchev:1995nj,Chicherin:2016soh}; this paper will be phrased entirely in the language of twistors.}.
The twistor action provides a natural derivation of modified Feynman rules (i.e., the MHV formalism~\cite{Cachazo:2004kj}) for $\cN=4$ SYM~\cite{Boels:2007qn,Bullimore:2010pj,Adamo:2011cb}, can be used to provide descriptions of local operators and form factors in twistor space~\cite{Chicherin:2014uca,Chicherin:2016fac,Chicherin:2016fbj,Koster:2016ebi,Koster:2016loo,Chicherin:2016qsf,Koster:2016fna,Brandhuber:2016xue}, and characterizes dual superconformal symmetry~\cite{Mason:2009qx} and its breaking~\cite{Bullimore:2011kg}. It gives a powerful method for proving various dualities and correspondences in planar $\cN=4$ SYM to all loop orders (at the level of the loop integrand~\cite{ArkaniHamed:2010kv}) which were not possible with space-time methods. These include the scattering amplitude/Wilson loop duality~\cite{Mason:2010yk,Bullimore:2011ni}, as well as correspondences between null limits of correlations functions and null polygonal Wilson loops~\cite{Adamo:2011dq,Adamo:2011cd}.
Twistor actions have been developed for many other QFTs, including self-dual Einstein (super)gravity~\cite{Mason:2007ct}, four-dimensional conformal (super)gravity~\cite{Mason:2005zm,Adamo:2013tja}, conformal higher spin theory~\cite{Haehnel:2016mlb,Adamo:2016ple} and three-dimensional (super-)Yang-Mills-Higgs theory~\cite{Adamo:2017xaf}. Generally, one expects twistor methods to be useful for any four-dimensional massless QFT, especially if there is conformal invariance. It is thus natural to consider a twistor formulation of FCFT.
\medskip
In this paper, we give twistor actions for $\gamma$-deformed $\cN=4$ SYM, $\chi$FT and FCFT, showing how to implement the $\gamma$-deformation and double scaling limit on twistor space. For each of these theories, the twistor action has an enhanced gauge invariance relative to space-time. Focusing on FCFT, we impose a twistor axial gauge, derive Feynman rules suitable for computing scattering amplitudes in a `cohomological' representation which is natural in twistor space~\cite{Adamo:2011cb,Adamo:2013cra} and use them to characterize the appearance of UV-divergences and double trace counterterms. We then compute twistor formulae (which manifest conformal invariance) for various scattering amplitudes in the planar limit and at one of the conformal fixed points.
Twistor amplitude formulae previously obtained for $\cN=4$ SYM had the drawback of only being well-defined at the integrand level. This is due to IR-divergences and the lack of an easy-to-use regulator on twistor space, though some concrete calculations have been possible using mass regularization~\cite{Lipstein:2013xra}. The absence of IR- and UV-divergences in FCFT ensures that our formulae define meaningful amplitudes.
Of course, an interesting long-term goal of this research is to provide a twistorial description of the integrability underlying FCFT. This aim has already been explored for planar $\cN=4$ SYM with limited success~\cite{Koster:2014fva}, but the added simplicity of FCFT -- and the fact that the twistor description is \emph{exact} rather than perturbative -- gives cause to be optimistic. This paper sets the foundations and assembles the toolkit needed to embark on the study of FCFT integrability in twistor space in future work.
\medskip
The paper is organized as follows: section~\ref{GDEF} begins with a brief review of twistor theory and the twistor action for $\cN=4$ SYM, then develops the $\gamma$-deformation of $\cN=4$ SYM on twistor space and proves its perturbative equivalence to the space-time theory. In section~\ref{DSLIM}, we implement the double scaling limit on twistor space, and prove that the resulting twistor action describes $\chi$FT; decoupling all fermions results in a quartic theory on twistor space which we prove to be equivalent to classical FCFT.
Section~\ref{FRULES} reviews the cohomological representation of scattering amplitudes in twistor space and derives the Feynman rules for the FCFT twistor action in axial gauge. We provide a characterization of UV-divergences on twistor space in terms of certain structures appearing in cohomological amplitudes, and complete the twistor action with the double trace counterterms needed to remove these divergences. In section~\ref{SCAMPS} we compute the cohomological amplitudes for various scattering processes in FCFT, including a class of tree-level exact amplitudes and general fishnet diagrams.
\section{Twistor action for $\gamma$-deformed $\cN=4$ SYM}
\label{GDEF}
While it is straightforward to write the twistor action of conformal fishnet theory (FCFT) directly from its space-time Lagrangian, it is instructive to derive the theory on twistor space itself. In this section, we give a perturbative description of $\gamma$-deformed $\cN=4$ super-Yang-Mills (SYM) theory in twistor space, proceeding from the well-known twistor action of $\cN=4$ SYM~\cite{Mason:2005zm,Boels:2006ir,Adamo:2011pv}. After a brief review of the basics of twistor geometry and the $\cN=4$ SYM twistor action, we implement the $\gamma$-deformation on twistor space through a $\star$-product which acts on the anti-commuting twistor variables and prove that the resulting twistor action is perturbatively equivalent to $\gamma$-deformed $\cN=4$ SYM.
\subsection{Twistor theory and $\cN=4$ SYM}
The twistor space $\PT$ appropriate to four-dimensional $\cN=4$ supersymmetry is an open subset of the complex projective supermanifold $\P^{3|4}$. This twistor space is charted with homogeneous coordinates $Z^I$, with the index $I$ ranging over four commuting (bosonic) and four anti-commuting (fermionic) directions:
\be\label{4PTcoord}
Z^I=(Z^{A},\, \chi^{a})=(\mu^{\dot\alpha},\,\lambda_{\alpha},\,\chi^{a})\,,
\ee
where $A$ is a SL$(4,\C)$ spinor index and $\mu^{\dot\alpha}$, $\lambda_{\alpha}$ are commuting SL$(2,\C)$ spinors of opposite chirality. The coordinates $\chi^{a}$ are anti-commuting, with the index $a=1,\ldots,4$. As homogeneous coordinates, $Z^I$ are defined only up to an overall $\C^*$ rescaling, with $Z^I\sim rZ^I$ for $r$ any non-zero complex number.
The twistor space $\PT$ is related non-locally to space-time through the `incidence relations,' which have a simple algebraic expression:
\be\label{4PTinc}
\mu^{\dot\alpha}=x^{\alpha\dot\alpha}\lambda_{\alpha}\,, \qquad \chi^{a}=\theta^{\alpha a}\lambda_{\alpha}\,,
\ee
where $(x^{\alpha\dot\alpha},\theta^{\alpha a})$ are coordinates on complexified, chiral $\cN=4$ Minkowski superspace. These incidence relations indicate that every point $(x,\theta)\in\M$ corresponds to a holomorphic, linearly embedded Riemann sphere -- or `line' -- in twistor space, $X\cong\P^1\subset\PT$. The conformal structure of $\M$ is encoded by these twistor lines: two twistor lines $X,Y$ intersect if and only if their corresponding space-time points $(x,\theta)$, $(y,\theta')$ are null separated.
Since $\mathfrak{psl}(4|4,\C)$ acts projectively on $\P^{3|4}$, twistor space carries a natural linear action of the complexified superconformal algebra. Conformal invariants are naturally built from the SL$(4,\C)$-invariant Levi-Civita symbol $\epsilon_{ABCD}$. For instance, any four points in $\PT$ define the conformal invariant
\be\label{TConinv}
(ijkl):=\epsilon_{ABCD}\,Z^{A}_{i}\,Z^{B}_{j}\,Z^{C}_{k}\,Z^{D}_{l}\,,
\ee
and more general superconformal invariants are also easily constructed (cf., \cite{Mason:2009qx}).
There are two main theorems of twistor theory which will be of particular importance. The first is the \emph{Penrose transform}, which states that free zero-rest-mass fields on $\M$ can be described by cohomology classes on $\PT$~\cite{Penrose:1969ae,Eastwood:1981jy}:
\be\label{PenTran}
\left\{\mbox{Free z.r.m. fields on } \M \mbox{ of helicity } h\right\}\cong H^{1}(\PT,\,\cO(2h-2))\,,
\ee
where $\cO(k)$ is the sheaf of holomorphic functions, homogeneous of weight $k\in\Z$ on $\PT$. The second is the \emph{Ward correspondence}~\cite{Ward:1977ta}, which relates self-dual Yang-Mills connections on $\M$ to holomorphic vector bundles on $\PT$ which obey some technical conditions\footnote{For gauge group SU$(N)$, every Yang-Mills instanton on $\M$ corresponds to a rank $N$ holomorphic vector bundle which is trivial on restriction to every line in $\PT$, admits a positive real form, and has a trivial determinant line bundle (cf., \cite{Ward:1990vs}).}.
To pass from complexified Minkowski space $\M$ to a real space-time, reality conditions must be imposed on twistor space. We will primarily use Euclidean reality conditions, associated with the real slice $\R^{4|8}\subset\M$. In this case, the reality structure is encoded by a `quaternionic' conjugation operation, defined on Weyl 2-spinors and the fermionic twistor variables by~\cite{Woodhouse:1985id}:
\be\label{euc1}
\mu^{\dot\alpha}=(\mu^{\dot0},\,\mu^{\dot{1}})\mapsto \hat{\mu}^{\dot\alpha}=\left(-\overline{\mu^{\dot1}},\, \overline{\mu^{\dot0}}\right)\,,
\ee
\begin{equation*}
\chi^{a}=(\chi^1,\,\chi^2,\,\chi^3,\,\chi^4)\mapsto \hat{\chi}^a=(-\overline{\chi^2},\,\overline{\chi^1},\,-\overline{\chi^4},\,\overline{\chi^3})\,,
\end{equation*}
and similarly for un-dotted spinors. This induces an involution $\sigma:\PT\rightarrow\PT$ via $Z^I\mapsto \hat{Z}^{I}$, and from \eqref{euc1} it is easy to see that $\sigma^{2}=-\mathrm{id}$ on $\PT$. There are no real points under $\sigma$, but lines obeying $X\cong \hat{X}$ \emph{are} preserved and correspond to points in $\R^{4|8}$.
So for Euclidean reality conditions, twistor space fibres over $\P^1$:
\begin{equation*}
\xymatrix{
\P^1 \ar@{^{(}->}[r] & \PT\cong\R^{4|8}\times\P^1 \ar[d] \\
& \R^{4|8}}
\end{equation*}
The incidence relations take points in $\R^{4|8}$ to twistor lines as before, but now each point in $\PT$ corresponds to a unique point in $\R^{4|8}$ via:
\be\label{euc2}
x^{\alpha\dot\alpha}=\frac{\hat{\mu}^{\dot\alpha}\lambda^{\alpha}-\mu^{\dot\alpha}\hat{\lambda}^{\alpha}}{\la\lambda\,\hat{\lambda}\ra}\,, \qquad \theta^{\alpha a}=\frac{\hat{\chi}^a \lambda^{\alpha}-\chi^{a}\hat{\lambda}^{\alpha}}{\la\lambda\,\hat{\lambda}\ra}\,,
\ee
with $\la\lambda\,\hat{\lambda}\ra=\lambda^{\alpha}\hat{\lambda}_{\alpha}=\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}\lambda_{\beta}\hat{\lambda}_{\alpha}$. This means that the homogeneous coordinates $Z^I$ can be interchanged with $(x,\theta,\lambda)$ as coordinates on $\PT$, with the projective scaling carried exclusively by $[\lambda_\alpha]$, now viewed as homogeneous coordinates on the $\P^1$ fibres. For instance, a useful basis of the anti-holomorphic tangent and cotangent bundles of $\PT$ can be given in these coordinates~\cite{Woodhouse:1985id}:
\be\label{eucb1}
\dbar_0=\la\lambda\,\hat{\lambda}\ra\,\lambda^{\alpha}\frac{\partial}{\partial\hat{\lambda}^\alpha}\,, \qquad \dbar_{\dot\alpha}=\lambda^{\alpha}\frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\alpha\dot\alpha}}\,,
\ee
\be\label{eucb2}
\bar{e}^0=\frac{\la\hat{\lambda}\,\d\hat{\lambda}\ra}{\la\lambda\,\hat{\lambda}\ra^2}\,, \qquad \bar{e}^{\dot\alpha}=\frac{\hat{\lambda}_{\alpha}\,\d x^{\alpha\dot\alpha}}{\la\lambda\,\hat{\lambda}\ra}\,.
\ee
Using the incidence relations, one confirms that $\bar{e}^0\dbar_0+\bar{e}^{\dot\alpha}\dbar_{\dot\alpha} = \d\hat{Z}^{A}\frac{\partial}{\partial \hat{Z}^A}$, as appropriate for the complex structure on $\PT$ with these reality conditions.
\medskip
With these tools, a perturbative description of $\cN=4$ SYM can be given entirely on twistor space. Since Yang-Mills theory admits a perturbative expansion around the self-dual sector~\cite{Chalmers:1996rq}, this is achieved using the Ward correspondence to give a twistorial description of the instanton sector and the Penrose transform to describe perturbations away from self-duality~\cite{Mason:2005zm,Boels:2006ir}. The resulting twistor action is a functional of a single field $\cA\in\Omega^{0,1}(\PT,\cO)$ valued in the adjoint representation of the gauge group. By expanding in the fermionic directions of twistor space,
\be\label{4TF}
\cA=a+\chi^{a}\,\tilde{\psi}_{a}+\frac{\chi^{a}\chi^{b}}{2}\,\phi_{ab}+\frac{1}{3!}\epsilon_{abcd}\chi^{a}\chi^{b}\chi^{c}\,\psi^{d}+\frac{\chi^4}{4!}\,b\,,
\ee
where each remaining component is a $(0,1)$-form of the appropriate homogeneity on the bosonic twistor space. When $\dbar \cA=0$, the Penrose transform states that $\cA$ contains the full linear spectrum of $\cN=4$ SYM.
The twistor action for $\cN=4$ SYM is given by~\cite{Boels:2006ir}
\be\label{4TA1}
S[\cA]=\frac{\im}{2\,\pi}\int_{\PT}\!\D^{3|4}Z\wedge\tr\left(\cA\wedge\dbar\cA+\frac{2}{3}\cA\wedge\cA\wedge\cA\right)+\mathrm{g}^{2}\oint_{\R^{4|8}} \!\d^{4|8}X\,\mathrm{log}\,\mathrm{det}\!\left(\dbar+\cA\right)|_{X}\,,
\ee
where $\mathrm{g}$ is the dimensionless coupling constant. The first term in this action is local on $\PT$, with $\D^{3|4}Z$ standing for the global holomorphic section of the canonical bundle
\be\label{Ber1}
\D^{3|4}Z=\D^{3}Z\,\d^{4}\chi=\epsilon_{ABCD}\,Z^{A}\,\d Z^{B}\wedge\d Z^{C}\wedge\d Z^{D}\,\d^{4}\chi\,.
\ee
The second, non-local, contribution to the action is integrated over the real contour in the moduli space of lines in $\PT$ corresponding to $\R^{4|8}$, and the integrand can be understood perturbatively via the expansion
\begin{multline}\label{logdet}
\mathrm{log}\,\mathrm{det}\!\left(\dbar+\cA\right)|_{X}=\tr\left(\log \dbar|_X\right) \\
+\sum_{n=2}^{\infty}\frac{1}{n}\left(\frac{1}{2\pi\im}\right)^{n} \int\limits_{(\P^1)^{n}} \frac{\D\sigma_{1}\cdots\D\sigma_{n}}{(1\,2)\,(2\,3)\cdots (n\,1)}\,\tr\left(\cA_1\,\cA_2\cdots \cA_n\right)\,.
\end{multline}
Here, $\sigma_{i}^{\alpha}=(\sigma_{i}^{0},\,\sigma_{i}^{1})$ are homogeneous coordinates on the $i^{\mathrm{th}}$ copy of the twistor line $X\cong\P^1$; $(i\,j):=\sigma_{i}^{\alpha}\sigma_{j\,\alpha}$ is the SL$(2,\C)$-invariant inner product on these coordinates; and $\D\sigma_i:=(\sigma_i\,\d\sigma_{i})$ is shorthand for the weight $+2$ holomorphic measure on the $i^{\mathrm{th}}$ copy of $\P^1$. Similarly, $\cA_i$ is shorthand for $\cA(Z(\sigma_i))$, the twistor field of \eqref{4TF} evaluated at the point $\sigma_i$ on the twistor line $X$.
The action \eqref{4TA1} is invariant with respect to non-abelian gauge transformations on twistor space,
\be\label{4gi}
\dbar+\cA\rightarrow g\left(\dbar+\cA\right) g^{-1}\,,
\ee
for $g$ any weight zero function on $\PT$ valued in the adjoint of the gauge group. This gauge freedom is much greater than the usual space-time gauge invariance, since space-time gauge transformations are functions of only four bosonic variables. Nevertheless, the twistor action \eqref{4TA1} is perturbatively equivalent to the space-time Lagrangian of $\cN=4$ SYM. Indeed, for a particular choice of gauge on $\PT$, the twistor action is equal to the Chalmers-Siegel Lagrangian of $\cN=4$ SYM on $\R^{4}$~\cite{Boels:2006ir,Koster:2017fvf}.
\subsection{The $\gamma$-deformed twistor action}
The $\gamma$-deformation of $\cN=4$ SYM breaks the PSL$(4|4,\C)$ superconformal group to SL$(4,\C)$ $\times$U$(1)^{3}$; the three deformation parameters $\{\gamma_i\}_{i=1,2,3}$ correspond to the Cartan subgroup U$(1)^3$ of the initial SO$(6)$ R-symmetry group. On space-time, this deformation can be operationalized through a non-commutative $\star$-product on the field space of $\cN=4$ SYM~\cite{Lunin:2005jy,Fokken:2013aea}, which introduces phase factors depending on the U$(1)^3$ charges of the fields. On twistor space, the $\gamma$-deformation is most naturally described by a $\star$-product on polynomials of the fermionic twistor coordinates~\cite{Kulaxizi:2004pa,Gao:2006mw}.
We assign a U$(1)^3$ charge vector $q^k$ to every power of the $\chi^{a}$ twistor variables. Using the notation $\chi^{a}=(\chi^i,\chi^4)$, for $i=1,2,3$, the charge assignments are:
\be\begin{split}\label{qcharge}
q^{k}[1]=0\,, & \qquad q^{k}[(\chi)^4]=0\,, \\
q^{k}[\chi^i]=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
-\frac{1}{2} & \mbox{if } k=i \\
\frac{1}{2} & \mbox{otherwise}
\end{array}\right.
\,, & \qquad q^{k}[\chi^4]=\left(-\frac{1}{2},\,-\frac{1}{2},\,-\frac{1}{2}\right)\,, \\
q^{k}[\chi^i \chi^4]=-\delta^{ki}\,, & \qquad q^{k}[\chi^{i}\chi^{j}]=|\epsilon^{kij}|\,, \\
q^{k}[(\chi)^3_{i}]=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
\frac{1}{2} & \mbox{if } k=i \\
-\frac{1}{2} & \mbox{otherwise}
\end{array}\right.\,, & \qquad q^{k}[(\chi)^3_{4}]=\left(\frac{1}{2},\,\frac{1}{2},\,\frac{1}{2}\right)\,,
\end{split}
\ee
where $(\chi)^{3}_{a}:=\epsilon_{bcda}\chi^{b}\chi^{c}\chi^{d}$. These charges define a $\star$-product on the fermionic twistor coordinates. Let $A$ and $B$ be any two powers of the $\chi^a$ variables; their $\star$-product is:
\be\label{starprod}
A\star B:=\exp\left[-\frac{\im}{2}\epsilon_{ijk}\,\gamma_{i}\,q^{j}[A]\,q^{k}[B]\right]\,A\,B\,,
\ee
with the product $AB$ on the right-hand side given by the usual Grassmannian multiplication. The three real parameters $\gamma_i$ appearing in the exponential phase are those of the $\gamma$-deformation.
This is applied to the twistor action of $\cN=4$ SYM by replacing the wedge product of differential forms on $\PT$ with the $\star$-product. In particular, we consider the action
\be\label{gTA}
S^{\gamma}[\cA]=S^{\gamma}_{1}[\cA]+\mathrm{g}^2\,S^{\gamma}_{2}[\cA]\,,
\ee
where the two terms are given by\footnote{This version of $S^{\gamma}_1[\cA]$ first appeared in~\cite{Kulaxizi:2004pa} as the effective action of twistor-string theory deformed by the $\star$-product.}
\be\label{gTA1}
S^{\gamma}_{1}[\cA]=\frac{\im}{2\,\pi}\,\int_{\PT}\D^{3|4}Z\wedge \tr\left(\cA\star\dbar\cA+\frac{2}{3}\cA\star\cA\star\cA\right)\,,
\ee
and
\be\label{gTA2}
S^{\gamma}_{2}[\cA]=\oint_{\R^{4|8}}\d^{4|8}X\,\mathrm{log}\,\mathrm{det}_{\star}\!\left(\dbar+\cA\right)|_{X}\,.
\ee
In $S^{\gamma}_2$, the $\star$-deformed log det$(\dbar+\cA)|_X$ is understood through its perturbative expansion:
\begin{multline}\label{*logdet}
\mathrm{log}\,\mathrm{det}_{\star}\!\left(\dbar+\cA\right)|_{X}:=\tr\left(\log \dbar|_X\right) \\
+\sum_{n=2}^{\infty}\frac{1}{n}\left(\frac{1}{2\pi\im}\right)^{n} \int\limits_{(\P^1)^{n}} \frac{\D\sigma_{1}\cdots\D\sigma_{n}}{(1\,2)\,(2\,3)\cdots (n\,1)}\,\tr\left(\cA_1\star\cA_2\star\cdots\star\cA_n\right)\,.
\end{multline}
Crucially, the twistor superfield $\cA$ remains unchanged; its $\chi$-expansion is still given by \eqref{4TF}, containing only the usual Grassmann product. The $\gamma$-deformed twistor action remains invariant under non-abelian gauge transformations \eqref{4gi}.
\medskip
At this point, we have established that the twistorial $\gamma$-deformation defined by \eqref{starprod} leads to a deformed twistor action which is gauge-invariant. However, it is not clear that this $\gamma$-deformed twistor action is actually related to $\gamma$-deformed SYM on space-time. This is established by the following:
\begin{propn}\label{gTAprop}
The $\gamma$-deformed twistor action \eqref{gTA} is perturbatively equivalent to $\gamma$-deformed SYM theory on space-time, in the sense that solutions to its field equations are in one-to-one correspondence with solutions to the field equations of $\gamma$-deformed SYM, up to space-time gauge transformations.
\end{propn}
\proof The proof is virtually equivalent to that for the undeformed $\cN=4$ SYM twistor action~\cite{Mason:2005zm,Boels:2006ir,Koster:2017fvf}. It suffices to show that with a partial gauge fixing -- which reduces the twistor space gauge freedom \eqref{4gi} to space-time gauge transformations -- the twistor action \eqref{gTA} is perturbatively equivalent to the space-time action of $\gamma$-deformed SYM. The relevant condition is the Woodhouse harmonic gauge~\cite{Woodhouse:1985id}:
\be\label{Wgauge}
\dbar^{*}|_{X}\cA|_X = 0\,,
\ee
where $\dbar^{*}|_{X}$ is the adjoint of the $\dbar$-operator restricted to any twistor line $X\cong\P^1$. Since $\dbar|_X \cA_X=0$ on dimensional grounds, \eqref{Wgauge} forces the twistor field $\cA$ to be harmonic upon restriction to the $\P^1$ fibres of twistor space. Residual gauge transformations which preserve \eqref{Wgauge} are harmonic functions on the fibres of twistor space, valued in the adjoint of the gauge group:
\begin{equation*}
\dbar^{*}|_{X}\dbar|_{X}g(Z) =0\,.
\end{equation*}
The only harmonic functions on $\P^1$ which are homogeneous of degree zero are constant, so the residual gauge freedom associated with \eqref{Wgauge} is precisely that of space-time gauge transformations: $g(Z)=g(x)$.
We must now evaluate the $\gamma$-deformed twistor action \eqref{gTA} in the Woodhouse harmonic gauge. Expanding $\cA$ in the basis \eqref{eucb2} with the Woodhouse gauge condition, each component on the bosonic twistor space takes the form:
\be\label{Wgcomps}
a=a_{\dot\alpha}(x,\lambda,\hat{\lambda})\,\bar{e}^{\dot\alpha}\,, \qquad \tilde{\psi}_{a}=\tilde{\psi}_{a\dot\alpha}(x,\lambda,\hat{\lambda})\,\bar{e}^{\dot\alpha}\,,
\ee
\begin{equation*}
\phi_{ab}=\Phi_{ab}(x)\,\bar{e}^{0}+\phi_{ab\dot\alpha}(x,\lambda,\hat{\lambda})\,\bar{e}^{\dot\alpha}\,, \qquad \psi^{a}=2\,\frac{\Psi^{a\alpha}(x)\,\hat{\lambda}_{\alpha}}{\la\lambda\,\hat{\lambda}\ra}\,\bar{e}^{0}+\psi^{a}_{\dot\alpha}(x,\lambda,\hat{\lambda})\,\bar{e}^{\dot\alpha}\,,
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
b=3\,\frac{B_{\alpha\beta}(x)\,\hat{\lambda}^{\alpha}\hat{\lambda}^{\beta}}{\la\lambda\,\hat{\lambda}\ra^2}\,\bar{e}^0+b_{\dot\alpha}(x,\lambda,\hat{\lambda})\,\bar{e}^{\dot\alpha}\,,
\end{equation*}
with all functional coefficients valued in the adjoint of the gauge group.
First, consider $S^{\gamma}_{1}[\cA]$ in this gauge. Integration over the fermionic directions of twistor space annihilates all terms which are not proportional to $(\chi)^4$ after evaluating the $\star$-product. Using the definition \eqref{starprod}, it follows that the only contribution to $S^{\gamma}_{1}[\cA]$ for which the $\star$-product can lead to non-trivial phases is:
\be\label{Pproof1}
\int\text{D}^{3|4}Z\wedge \text{tr}\left(\chi^{a}\Tilde{\psi}_{a}\star\chi^{b}\chi^{c}\phi_{bc}\star\chi^{d}\Tilde{\psi}_{d}\right)\,.
\ee
In the sum over R-symmetry indices, there are three distinct cases. The first is
\be\label{Pproof2}
\frac{1}{3}\int\text{D}^{3|4}Z\wedge \text{tr}\left(\chi^{i}\Tilde{\psi}_{i}\star\chi^{j}\chi^{k}\phi_{jk}\star\chi^{4}\Tilde{\psi}_{4}\right)
= -\frac{\epsilon^{ijk}}{72}\int\D^{3}Z\wedge \text{tr}\left(\Tilde{\psi}_{i}\wedge\phi_{jk}\wedge\Tilde{\psi}_{4}\right) \e^{-\frac{\im}{2}\gamma_{i}^{-}}\,,
\ee
where the combination $\gamma_{i}^{\pm}$ is defined as
\be\label{gammapmdef}
\gamma_{1}^{\pm}:=-\frac{(\gamma_3\pm\gamma_2)}{2}\,, \qquad \gamma^{\pm}_2:=-\frac{(\gamma_1\pm\gamma_3)}{2}\,, \qquad \gamma_{3}^{\pm}:=-\frac{(\gamma_2\pm\gamma_1)}{2}\,.
\ee
Similarly, the second and third cases are
\be\label{Pproof3}
\frac{1}{3}\int\text{D}^{3|4}Z\wedge \text{tr}\left(\chi^{4}\Tilde{\psi}_{4}\star\chi^{j}\chi^{k}\phi_{jk}\star\chi^{l}\Tilde{\psi}_{l}\right)
= -\frac{\epsilon^{jkl}}{72}\int\D^{3}Z\wedge \text{tr}\left(\Tilde{\psi}_{4}\wedge\phi_{jk}\wedge\Tilde{\psi}_{l}\right) \e^{\frac{\im}{2}\gamma_{l}^{-}}\,,
\ee
and
\be\label{Pproof4}
\begin{split}
&\frac{2}{3}\int\text{D}^{3|4}Z\wedge \text{tr}\left(\chi^{i}\Tilde{\psi}_{i}\star\chi^{j}\chi^{4}\phi_{j4}\star\chi^{k}\Tilde{\psi}_{k}\right)\\
& = \frac{\epsilon^{ijk}}{36}\,\int\D^{3}Z\wedge \text{tr}\left(\Tilde{\psi}_{i}\wedge\phi_{j4}\wedge\Tilde{\psi}_{k}\right)\exp\left[\frac{\im}{2}\,\epsilon^{kim}\,\gamma_{m}^{+}\right]\,,
\end{split}
\ee
respectively. The three distinct cyclic permutations of the fields in the trace can be shown to contribute with the same phases.
Define the normalized (bosonic) holomorphic 3-form on twistor space
\be\label{omega}
\Omega:=\frac{\D^{3}Z}{4!}=\la\lambda\,\hat{\lambda}\ra^{4}\,e^{0}\wedge e^{\dot\alpha}\wedge e_{\dot\alpha}\,.
\ee
Combining \eqref{Pproof2} -- \eqref{Pproof4} with all the other terms in $S^{\gamma}_1[\cA]$ which are effectively undeformed by the $\star$-product, leaves:
\begin{multline}\label{Pproof5}
\frac{\im}{2\,\pi}\int_{\PT}\frac{\Omega\wedge\Bar{\Omega}}{\la\lambda\,\hat{\lambda}\ra^4}\,\mathrm{tr}\left(b^{\dot\alpha}\,\dbar_0 a_{\dot\alpha}+3\frac{B_{\alpha\beta}\,\hat{\lambda}^{\alpha}\hat{\lambda}^{\beta}}{\la\lambda\,\hat{\lambda}\ra^2}\,\left(\dbar_{\dot\delta}a^{\dot\delta}-\frac{1}{2}[a_{\dot\delta},\,a^{\dot\delta}]\right) +\psi^{a\dot\alpha}\,\dbar_0\Tilde{\psi}_{a\dot\alpha}\right. \\
+2\frac{\Psi^{a\alpha}\,\hat{\lambda}_{\alpha}}{\la\lambda\,\hat{\lambda}\ra}\left(\dbar_{\dot\delta}\Tilde{\psi}^{\dot\delta}_{a}+[a_{\dot\delta},\,\Tilde{\psi}^{\dot\delta}_{a}]\right)-\frac{\epsilon^{abcd}}{4}\,\Phi_{ab}\left(\dbar_{\dot\delta}\phi_{cd}^{\dot\delta}+[a_{\dot\delta},\,\phi_{cd}^{\dot\delta}]\right)+\frac{\epsilon^{ijk}}{2}\left(\Tilde{\psi}^{\dot\delta}_{i}\,\Phi_{jk}\,\Tilde{\psi}_{4\dot\delta}\,\e^{-\frac{\im}{2}\gamma_{i}^{-}}\right. \\
\left.\left. -\Tilde{\psi}^{\dot\delta}_{4}\,\Phi_{jk}\,\Tilde{\psi}_{i\dot\delta}\,\e^{\frac{\im}{2}\gamma_{i}^{-}}\right)-\epsilon^{ijk}\,\Tilde{\psi}_{i}^{\dot\delta}\,\Phi_{j4}\,\Tilde{\psi}_{k\dot\delta}\,\exp\left[\frac{\im}{2}\,\epsilon^{kim}\,\gamma_{m}^{+}\right]-\frac{\epsilon^{abcd}}{2}\,\phi_{ab}^{\dot\alpha}\,\dbar_{0}\phi_{cd\dot\alpha}\right)\,.
\end{multline}
The functions $\psi^{a}_{\dot\alpha}$ and $b_{\dot\alpha}$ act as Lagrange multipliers, and $\phi_{ab}^{\dot\alpha}$ can also be integrated out. These impose that the remaining twistor functions in \eqref{Pproof5} obey
\begin{equation}\label{Pproof6}
a_{\Dot{\alpha}}(x,\lambda,\hat\lambda)=A_{\alpha\Dot{\alpha}}(x)\,\lambda^{\alpha}, \quad\Tilde{\psi}_{a\Dot{\alpha}}(x,\lambda,\hat\lambda)=\Tilde{\Psi}_{a\Dot{\alpha}}(x),\quad\phi_{ab\Dot\alpha}=\frac{\hat\lambda^{\alpha}}{\langle\lambda\,\hat\lambda\rangle}\,D_{\alpha\Dot{\alpha}}\Phi_{ab}(x)\,,
\end{equation}
where $D_{\alpha\dot\alpha}$ is the gauge covariant derivative on $\R^4$ defined by $A_{\alpha\dot\alpha}$. With these expressions, all dependence on the $\P^1$ fibre coordinates $(\lambda,\hat{\lambda})$ is manifest in \eqref{Pproof5}, and the integral over the fibre can be performed explicitly (cf., \cite{Boels:2006ir}). This leaves an action functional on $\R^4$:
\begin{equation}\label{Pproof7}
\begin{split}
S^{\gamma}_{1}[\cA]
&= \int\text{d}^{4}x\text{ tr}\left(-\frac12B_{\alpha\beta}\,F^{\alpha\beta}-\Psi^{a\alpha}\,D_{\alpha\Dot{\alpha}}\Tilde{\Psi}_{a}^{\Dot{\alpha}}+\frac{\epsilon^{abcd}}{8}\, D_{\alpha\Dot{\alpha}}\Phi_{ab}\,D^{\alpha\Dot{\alpha}}\Phi_{cd}\right. \\
&\quad \left. +\Tilde{\Psi}_{i}^{\Dot{\alpha}}\,\Phi^{i}\,\Tilde{\Psi}_{4\Dot{\alpha}}\,\e^{-\frac{\im}{2}\gamma^{-}_{i}}-\Tilde{\Psi}_{4}^{\Dot{\alpha}}\,\Phi^{i}\,\Tilde{\Psi}_{i\Dot{\alpha}}\,\e^{\frac{\im}{2}\gamma^{-}_{i}} -\epsilon^{ijk}\,\Tilde{\Psi}_{k}^{\Dot{\alpha}}\,\Phi_{i}^{\dagger}\,\Tilde{\Psi}_{j\Dot{\alpha}}\,\e^{\frac{\im}{2}\epsilon^{jkm}\gamma_{m}^{+}}\right)\,,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $F_{\alpha\beta}$ is the anti-self-dual part of the field strength of $A_{\alpha\dot\alpha}$ and we have defined $\frac12\epsilon^{ijk}\Phi_{jk}\equiv\Phi^{i}$ and $\Phi_{i4}\equiv\Phi^{\dagger}_{i}$ for the space-time scalars.
\medskip
Now consider the non-local part of the twistor action, $S_{2}^{\gamma}[\cA]$. Woodhouse harmonic gauge leaves only the $n=2,3,4$ terms of the infinite sum \eqref{*logdet}, since the forms $a$ and $\tilde{\psi}_{a}$ have no component along the $\P^{1}$ fibres. In the integral over the space of lines in $\PT$, there is a SL$(2,\C)$ redundancy associated with the automorphism group of the line. We fix this redundancy by identifying the intrinsic homogeneous coordinates on each copy of $\P^1$ ($\sigma_i^{\alpha}$) fibre-wise with the projective coordinates $\lambda_i^{\alpha}$ on twistor space.
With this identification, we can proceed to compute each of the $n=2,3,4$ contributions to $S^{\gamma}_{2}[\cA]$. The $n=2$ contribution is identical to the undeformed case~\cite{Boels:2006ir}:
\begin{equation}\label{*Pproof1}
\begin{split}
\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{1}{2\pi \im}\right)^{2}\oint\text{d}^{4|8}X\int \frac{\text{D}\lambda_{1}\text{D}\lambda_{2}}{\langle12\rangle\langle21\rangle}\text{ tr}\left(\cA_{1}\star\cA_{2}\right)
& = -\frac{1}{2}\int\text{d}^{4}x\text{ tr}\left(B_{\alpha\beta}\,B^{\alpha\beta}\right)\,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
However, the $\star$-product acts non-trivially on the $n=3,4$ contributions. For the $n=3$ case, the only non-vanishing contributions arise from
\begin{multline}\label{*Pproof2}
\text{tr}\left(\frac{\left(\chi_{1}\right)^{3}_{a}}{3!}\psi^{a}\star\frac{\chi^{b}_{2}\chi^{c}_{2}}{2}\phi_{bc}\star\frac{\left(\chi_{3}\right)^{3}_{d}}{3!}\psi^{d}\right) =\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{1}{3!}\right)^{2}\text{tr}\left(\left(\chi_{1}\right)^{3}_{i}\,\psi^{i}\star\chi^{j}_{2}\chi^{k}_{2}\,\phi_{jk}\star\left(\chi_{3}\right)^{3}_{l}\,\psi^{l}\right. \\
\left.+2\,\left(\chi_{1}\right)^{3}_{i}\,\psi^{i}\star\chi^{j}_{2}\chi^{4}_{2}\,\phi_{j4}\star\left(\chi_{3}\right)^{3}_{4}\,\psi^{4} +2\,\left(\chi_{1}\right)^{3}_{4}\,\psi^{4}\star\chi^{j}_{2}\chi^{4}_{2}\,\phi_{j4}\star\left(\chi_{3}\right)^{3}_{l}\,\psi^{l}\right)\,.
\end{multline}
Evaluating the $\star$-product in each of these cases yields a phase, and once again all cyclic permutations of fields in the trace contribute with the same phase. Performing the $\P^1$ integrations using the methods of~\cite{Boels:2006ir} gives
\begin{equation}\label{*Pproof3}
\int\text{d}^{4}x\text{ tr}\left(-\Psi^{i\alpha}\,\Phi_{i}^{\dagger}\,\Psi^{4}_{\alpha}\,\e^{-\frac{\im}{2}\gamma^{-}_{i}}+\Psi^{4\alpha}\,\Phi_{i}^{\dagger}\,\Psi^{i}_{\alpha}\,\e^{\frac{\im}{2}\gamma^{-}_{i}}+\epsilon_{ikl}\,\Psi^{i\alpha}\,\Phi^{k}\,\Psi^{l}_{\alpha}\,\e^{\frac{\im}{2}\epsilon_{lim}\gamma^{+}_{m}}\right)\,,
\end{equation}
for the $n=3$ contribution.
The $n=4$ contribution arises from four insertions of the twistor field $\phi$, which can occur in six distinct structures:
\begin{equation}\label{*Pproof4}
\begin{split}
&\frac{1}{16}\left(\frac{1}{2\pi i}\right)^{4}\oint\text{d}^{4|8}X\int \frac{\text{D}\lambda_{1}\text{D}\lambda_{2}\text{D}\lambda_{3}\text{D}\lambda_{4}}{\langle12\rangle\langle23\rangle\langle34\rangle\langle41\rangle}\text{tr} \left(\chi^{i}_{1}\chi^{j}_{1}\phi_{ij}\star\chi^{k}_{2}\chi^{l}_{2}\phi_{kl}\star\chi^{m}_{3}\chi^{4}_{3}\phi_{m4}\star\chi^{p}_{4}\chi^{4}_{4}\phi_{p4}\right. \\
&\phantom{}\left.+\chi^{i}_{1}\chi^{j}_{1}\phi_{ij}\star\chi^{k}_{2}\chi^{4}_{2}\phi_{k4}\star\chi^{l}_{3}\chi^{m}_{3}\phi_{lm}\star\chi^{p}_{4}\chi^{4}_{4}\phi_{p4}+\chi^{i}_{1}\chi^{4}_{1}\phi_{i4}\star\chi^{j}_{2}\chi^{k}_{2}\phi_{jk}\star\chi^{l}_{3}\chi^{m}_{3}\phi_{lm}\star\chi^{p}_{4}\chi^{4}_{4}\phi_{p4}\right. \\
&\left.+\chi^{i}_{1}\chi^{j}_{1}\phi_{ij}\star\chi^{k}_{2}\chi^{4}_{2}\phi_{k4}\star\chi^{l}_{3}\chi^{4}_{3}\phi_{l4}\star\chi^{m}_{4}\chi^{p}_{4}\phi_{mp}+\chi^{i}_{1}\chi^{4}_{1}\phi_{i4}\star\chi^{j}_{2}\chi^{k}_{2}\phi_{jk}\star\chi^{l}_{3}\chi^{4}_{3}\phi_{l4}\star\chi^{m}_{4}\chi^{p}_{4}\phi_{mp}\right. \\
&\left.+\chi^{i}_{1}\chi^{4}_{1}\phi_{i4}\star\chi^{j}_{2}\chi^{4}_{2}\phi_{j4}\star\chi^{k}_{3}\chi^{m}_{3}\phi_{km}\star\chi^{l}_{4}\chi^{p}_{4}\phi_{lp}\right)\,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
For each term, we evaluate the $\star$-product then use the result of~\cite{Koster:2017fvf} section 2.5 to perform the $\P^1$ integrals. The result for all of the $n=4$ contributions is remarkably simple:
\be\label{*Pproof5}
\int\text{d}^{4}x\text{ tr}\left(\Phi^{i}\Phi^{j}\Phi_{i}^{\dagger}\Phi_{j}^{\dagger}\exp\left[-\im\epsilon_{ijk}\gamma_{k}\right]-\frac{1}{4}\left\{\Phi_{i}^{\dagger},\,\Phi^{i}\right\}\left\{\Phi_{j}^{\dagger},\,\Phi^{j}\right\}\right)\,.
\ee
Combining \eqref{*Pproof1}, \eqref{*Pproof3} and \eqref{*Pproof4} gives:
\begin{multline}\label{*Pproof6}
S^{\gamma}_{2}[\cA]=\int\text{d}^{4}x\text{ tr}\left(-\frac{1}{2}B_{\alpha\beta}\,B^{\alpha\beta}-\Psi^{i\alpha}\,\Phi_{i}^{\dagger}\,\Psi^{4}_{\alpha}\,\e^{-\frac{\im}{2}\gamma^{-}_{i}}+\Psi^{4\alpha}\,\Phi_{i}^{\dagger}\,\Psi^{i}_{\alpha}\,\e^{\frac{\im}{2}\gamma^{-}_{i}}\right.\\
\left.+\epsilon_{ijk}\Psi^{i\alpha}\,\Phi^{j}\,\Psi^{k}_{\alpha}\,\e^{\frac{\im}{2}\epsilon_{kil}\gamma^{+}_{l}}+\Phi^{i}\,\Phi^{j}\,\Phi_{i}^{\dagger}\,\Phi_{j}^{\dagger}\,\e^{-\im\epsilon_{ijk}\gamma_{k}}-\frac{1}{4}\left\{\Phi_{i}^{\dagger},\,\Phi^{i}\right\}\,\left\{\Phi_{j}^{\dagger},\,\Phi^{j}\right\}\right)\,
\end{multline}
for $S_{2}^{\gamma}[\cA]$ evaluated in Woodhouse harmonic gauge.
The combination of $S_{1}^{\gamma}+\mathrm{g}^2\,S_2^{\gamma}$ through \eqref{Pproof7}, \eqref{*Pproof6} defines an action on $\R^4$ with the standard non-abelian gauge invariance. Integrating out the field $B_{\alpha\beta}$ using its equations of motion, one obtains an action which differs from that of $\gamma$-deformed $\cN=4$ SYM by a multiple of the topological term $\int \tr(F\wedge F)$. Thus, the action is perturbatively equivalent to $\gamma$-deformed SYM. The simple field redefinition
\be\label{Proofd}
\Phi^{i}\rightarrow\im\, \Phi^{i}\,, \quad \Psi^{i}\rightarrow\frac{\im}{\sqrt{\mathrm{g}}}\,\Phi^{i}\,, \quad \tilde{\Psi}_{i}\rightarrow-\im\sqrt{\mathrm{g}}\,\tilde{\Psi}_{i}\,, \quad \Phi^{\dagger}_{i}\rightarrow-\im\,\Phi^{\dagger}_{i}\,,
\ee
matches this action with a form that often appears in the literature (e.g., \cite{Fokken:2013aea,Gurdogan:2015csr}). \hfill \ensuremath{\Box}
\section{Double scaling limit in twistor space}
\label{DSLIM}
In~\cite{Gurdogan:2015csr,Caetano:2016ydc}, a double scaling limit of $\gamma$-deformed SYM was considered, where the deformation parameters $\gamma_i\rightarrow \im\infty$ for $i=1,2,3$, the gauge coupling constant $\mathrm{g}\rightarrow 0$, and the three effective couplings $\xi_{i}:=\mathrm{g}\e^{-\frac{\im}{2}\gamma_i}$ are left finite. The gauge field decouples in this limit, and the resulting theory is a non-unitary (since the deformation parameters -- and thus the action -- are complexified) but extremely simple theory of scalars and fermions with only cubic and quartic interactions. This theory is known as four-dimensional \emph{chiral field theory} ($\chi$FT), which is believed to be integrable at the quantum level in the planar limit~\cite{Caetano:2016ydc,Kazakov:2018hrh}. Conformal fishnet theory (FCFT) is obtained from $\chi$FT by setting to zero two of the effective couplings, leaving only a quartic theory of two complex scalars.
In this section, we implement the double scaling limit in twistor space, starting from the $\gamma$-deformed twistor action. The resulting twistor action is shown to give a classical (non-perturbative) description of $\chi$FT, and upon setting to zero two effective couplings, gives a classical (non-perturbative) description of FCFT.
\subsection{Double scaling limit and $\chi$FT}
On $\PT$, the double scaling limit can be implemented directly through the $\star$-product and gauge coupling. However, direct comparison with the space-time action requires rescaling some space-time fields by powers of $\sqrt{\mathrm{g}}$, as in \eqref{Proofd}. This can be accomplished in twistor space by simultaneously rescaling the fermionic coordinates on $\PT$ as well as the twistor field $\cA$:
\be\label{ds1}
\chi^{a}\rightarrow \sqrt{\mathrm{g}}\,\chi^{a}\,, \qquad \cA\rightarrow \mathrm{g}\,\cA\,.
\ee
Compatibility between these two rescalings implies that the bosonic components of $\cA$ are rescaled as:
\be\label{ds2}
a\rightarrow \mathrm{g}\,a\,, \quad \tilde{\psi}_{a}\rightarrow \sqrt{\mathrm{g}}\,\tilde{\psi}_a\,, \quad \phi_{ab}\rightarrow \phi_{ab}\,, \quad \psi^{a}\rightarrow \mathrm{g}^{-\frac{1}{2}}\,\psi^{a}\,, \quad b\rightarrow \mathrm{g}^{-1}\,b\,.
\ee
The holomorphic measure on $\PT$ and the measure on the space of twistor lines transform by
\be\label{ds3}
\D^{3|4}Z\rightarrow \mathrm{g}^{-2}\,\D^{3|4}Z\,, \qquad \d^{4|8}X\rightarrow \mathrm{g}^{-4}\,\d^{4|8}X\,,
\ee
respectively under this rescaling.
As a result, the two terms in the $\gamma$-deformed twistor action are trivially rewritten as
\be\label{dsTA1}
S^{\gamma}_{1}[\cA]=\frac{\im}{2\,\pi}\,\int_{\PT}\D^{3|4}Z\wedge \tr\left(\cA\star\dbar\cA+\frac{2\,\mathrm{g}}{3}\,\cA\star\cA\star\cA\right)\,,
\ee
and
\be\label{dsTA2}
S^{\gamma}_{2}[\cA]=\mathrm{g}^{-4}\,\oint_{\R^{4|8}}\d^{4|8}X\,\mathrm{log}\,\mathrm{det}_{\star}\!\left(\dbar+\mathrm{g}\,\cA\right)|_{X}\,.
\ee
In the double scaling limit
\be\label{dslimit}
\mathrm{g}\rightarrow 0\,, \qquad \gamma_{i}\rightarrow \im\,\infty\,, \qquad \xi_{i}:=\mathrm{g}\,\e^{-\frac{\im}{2}\gamma_i}=\mbox{ finite}\,,
\ee
it is easy to see that all quadratic terms in $S^{\gamma}[\cA]$ remain finite (and undeformed), so we need only consider the interacting terms. It is useful to make the identification
\be\label{scalarlabel}
\phi_{i}^{\dagger}:=\phi_{i4}\,, \qquad \phi^{i}:=\frac{1}{2}\epsilon^{ijk}\,\phi_{jk}\,,
\ee
for the weight $-2$ components of $\cA$.
Since the cubic interaction in $S^{\gamma}_{1}[\cA]$ scales as $\mathrm{g}$, only terms which are proportional to $\e^{-\frac{\im}{2}\gamma}$ (for some combination $\gamma$ of the $\gamma_i$s) will survive in the double scaling limit. Using the definition of the $\star$-product, it is easy to identify such terms:
\begin{multline}\label{dsTA11}
\lim_{\substack{\mathrm{g}\rightarrow0 \\ \gamma_i\rightarrow\im\infty}} \frac{\im\,\mathrm{g}}{3\,\pi}\,\int_{\PT}\D^{3|4}Z\wedge\tr\left(\cA\star\cA\star\cA\right) =\frac{\im}{2\,\pi}\, \int_{\PT}\D^{3}Z\wedge \tr\left(\sqrt{\xi_1\xi_2}\,\tilde{\psi}_{2}\wedge \phi^{\dagger}_{3}\wedge\tilde{\psi}_{1} \right. \\
\left.+\sqrt{\xi_1\xi_3}\,\tilde{\psi}_1\wedge\phi^{\dagger}_{2}\wedge\tilde{\psi}_{3} +\sqrt{\xi_2\xi_3}\,\tilde{\psi}_3\wedge\phi^{\dagger}_{1}\wedge\tilde{\psi}_2\right)\,.
\end{multline}
In taking the limit, integration over the fermionic directions of twistor space has been performed explicitly; we abuse notation by denoting the bosonic twistor space (an open subset of $\P^3$ with homogeneous coordinates $Z^A$) as $\PT$.
To account for contributions from $\mathrm{g}^2 S^{\gamma}_2[\cA]$, one expands $\mathrm{log}\,\mathrm{det}_{\star}\!\left(\dbar+\mathrm{g}\,\cA\right)|_{X}$. Only terms proportional to $(\mathrm{g}\e^{-\frac{\im}{2}\gamma})^{k}$ for some integer $k>2$ will survive in the double scaling limit. It is easy to see that there are non-vanishing cubic and quartic contributions of this type:
\begin{multline}\label{dsTA21}
\left.\left(\lim_{\substack{\mathrm{g}\rightarrow0 \\ \gamma_i\rightarrow\im\infty}}\mathrm{g}^2\,S^{\gamma}_{2}[\cA]\right)\right|_{O(\cA^3)}=
\oint_{\R^4}\d^4 X\,\int_{(\P^1)^{3}} \frac{\D\sigma_1\,\D\sigma_2\,\D\sigma_3}{16\,(2\pi\im)^3}\,(1\,3) \\
\mathrm{tr}\left(\sqrt{\xi_1\xi_2}\,\psi^{2}_1\,\phi^{3}_2\,\psi^{1}_3+\sqrt{\xi_1\xi_3}\,\psi^{1}_1\,\phi^{2}_2\,\psi^{3}_3 +\sqrt{\xi_2\xi_3}\,\psi^{3}_1\,\phi^{1}_2\,\psi^{2}_3\right)\,,
\end{multline}
and
\begin{multline}\label{dsTA22}
\left.\left(\lim_{\substack{\mathrm{g}\rightarrow0 \\ \gamma_i\rightarrow\im\infty}}\mathrm{g}^2\,S^{\gamma}_{2}[\cA]\right)\right|_{O(\cA^4)}=
\oint_{\R^4}\d^4 X\,\int_{(\P^1)^{4}} \frac{\D\sigma_1\,\D\sigma_2\,\D\sigma_3\,\D\sigma_4}{(2\pi\im)^4}\,\mathrm{tr}\left(\xi_1^2\,(\phi^{\dagger}_2)_1\,(\phi^{\dagger}_3)_{2}\,\phi^{2}_3\,\phi^{3}_4\right. \\
+\left.\xi_{2}^{2}\,(\phi^{\dagger}_3)_1\,(\phi^{\dagger}_1)_2\,\phi^{3}_3\,\phi^{1}_{4} +\xi^2_3\,(\phi^{\dagger}_1)_1\,(\phi^{\dagger}_2)_2\,\phi^{1}_3\,\phi^{2}_4\right)\,.
\end{multline}
Here, subscripts on twistor fields indicate the fibre dependence of that field: $\psi^{2}_1=\psi^{2}(Z(\sigma_1))$, and so forth. All higher-order terms in the expansion of $S^{\gamma}_2$ are easily seen to vanish in the double-scaling limit.
\medskip
Collecting these results, the twistor action for the double scaling limit of $\gamma$-deformed $\cN=4$ SYM is given by two pieces:
\be\label{dsTA}
S^{\mathrm{DS}}[\tilde{\psi}_i,\phi^{i},\psi^i]=S_1^{\mathrm{DS}}+S_2^{\mathrm{DS}}\,,
\ee
where $S^{\mathrm{DS}}_1$ is local on $\PT$ and $S^{\mathrm{DS}}_2$ is non-local. In detail, these are given by
\begin{multline}\label{dsTA1*}
S^{\mathrm{DS}}_1=\frac{\im}{2\,\pi}\int_{\PT}\D^{3}Z\wedge \tr\left(\phi^{\dagger}_i\wedge\dbar\phi^{i}+\tilde{\psi}_{i}\wedge\dbar\psi^{i} +\sqrt{\xi_1\xi_2}\,\tilde{\psi}_{2}\wedge \phi^{\dagger}_{3}\wedge\tilde{\psi}_{1} \right. \\
\left.+\sqrt{\xi_1\xi_3}\,\tilde{\psi}_1\wedge\phi^{\dagger}_{2}\wedge\tilde{\psi}_{3} +\sqrt{\xi_2\xi_3}\,\tilde{\psi}_3\wedge\phi^{\dagger}_{1}\wedge\tilde{\psi}_2\right)\,,
\end{multline}
and
\begin{multline}\label{dsTA2*}
S^{\mathrm{DS}}_2=\oint_{\R^4}\d^4 X\,\int_{(\P^1)^{3}} \frac{\D\sigma_1\,\D\sigma_2\,\D\sigma_3}{16\,(2\pi\im)^3}\,(1\,3)\,\mathrm{tr}\left(\sqrt{\xi_1\xi_2}\,\psi^{2}_1\,\phi^{3}_2\,\psi^{1}_3+\sqrt{\xi_1\xi_3}\,\psi^{1}_1\,\phi^{2}_2\,\psi^{3}_3\right. \\
\left.+\sqrt{\xi_2\xi_3}\,\psi^{3}_1\,\phi^{1}_2\,\psi^{2}_3\right) +\oint_{\R^4}\d^4 X\,\int_{(\P^1)^{4}} \frac{\D\sigma_1\,\D\sigma_2\,\D\sigma_3\,\D\sigma_4}{(2\pi\im)^4}\,\mathrm{tr}\left(\xi_1^2\,(\phi^{\dagger}_2)_1\,(\phi^{\dagger}_3)_{2}\,\phi^{2}_3\,\phi^{3}_4\right. \\
+\left.\xi_{2}^{2}\,(\phi^{\dagger}_3)_1\,(\phi^{\dagger}_1)_2\,\phi^{3}_3\,\phi^{1}_{4} +\xi^2_3\,(\phi^{\dagger}_1)_1\,(\phi^{\dagger}_2)_2\,\phi^{1}_3\,\phi^{2}_4\right)
\end{multline}
While the fields $a$ and $b$ -- which correspond to gauge degrees of freedom on space-time -- have decoupled, the twistor action \eqref{dsTA} retains a purely twistorial gauge invariance under
\be\label{dsGI}
\tilde{\psi}_i\rightarrow \tilde{\psi}_i+\dbar \tilde{\beta}_i\,, \qquad \phi^i\rightarrow \phi^i+\dbar\alpha^i\,, \qquad \psi^i\rightarrow\psi^i+\dbar\beta^i\,,
\ee
where $\{\tilde{\beta}_i,\alpha^i,\beta^i\}$ are adjoint-valued functions on $\PT$ of weight $-1$, $-2$ and $-3$, respectively.
This twistor action describes a space-time field theory of three complex scalars and fermions, known as the \emph{chiral field theory} ($\chi$FT)~\cite{Gurdogan:2015csr,Caetano:2016ydc}. Unlike the $\gamma$-deformation, the twistorial description of $\chi$FT is classically exact (i.e., non-perturbative), as the gauge field degrees of freedom are decoupled:
\begin{propn}\label{dsTAprop}
The double-scaling limit twistor action \eqref{dsTA} is equivalent to $\chi$FT, in the sense that solutions to its field equations are in one-to-one correspondence with solutions to the field equations of $\chi$FT. Furthermore, the twistor action and $\chi$FT actions take the same values when evaluated on corresponding field configurations.
\end{propn}
\proof Using the gauge freedom \eqref{dsGI}, the twistor fields can be put into Woodhouse harmonic gauge
\be\label{dsprop1}
\dbar^{*}|_{X}\tilde{\psi}_i|_{X}=0\,, \qquad \dbar^{*}|_{X}\phi^i|_{X}=0\,, \qquad \dbar^{*}|_{X}\psi^i|_{X}=0\,.
\ee
The remaining gauge freedom on $\PT$ is then reduced to transformations \eqref{dsGI} for which $\{\tilde{\beta}_i,\alpha^i,\beta^i\}$ are harmonic functions when restricted to $X\cong\P^1$. But there are no such functions, since each of $\{\tilde{\beta}_i,\alpha^i,\beta^i\}$ have negative homogeneity on $\P^1$. Therefore, the Woodhouse gauge \eqref{dsprop1} leaves no residual gauge freedom on space-time.
Using the Woodhouse gauge condition,
\be\label{dsWgcomps}
\tilde{\psi}_{i}=\tilde{\psi}_{i\dot\alpha}(x,\lambda,\hat{\lambda})\,\bar{e}^{\dot\alpha}\,, \qquad \phi^i=\Phi^i(x)\,\bar{e}^{0}+\phi^{i}_{\dot\alpha}(x,\lambda,\hat{\lambda})\,\bar{e}^{\dot\alpha}\,,
\ee
\begin{equation*}
\psi^{i}=2\,\frac{\Psi^{i\alpha}(x)\,\hat{\lambda}_{\alpha}}{\la\lambda\,\hat{\lambda}\ra}\,\bar{e}^{0}+\psi^{i}_{\dot\alpha}(x,\lambda,\hat{\lambda})\,\bar{e}^{\dot\alpha}\,,
\end{equation*}
the proof now proceeds in the same way as Proposition \ref{gTAprop}. After integrating out all of the $\P^1$-fibre dependence from the twistor action, one finds:
\begin{multline}\label{dsprop2}
S^{\mathrm{DS}}_1=\int_{\R^4}\d^4x\,\tr\left(\frac{1}{2}\partial_{\alpha\dot\alpha}\Phi^{\dagger}_{i}\,\partial^{\alpha\dot\alpha}\Phi^{i}-\Psi^{i\alpha}\,\partial_{\alpha\dot\alpha}\tilde{\Psi}_{i\dot\alpha} +\sqrt{\xi_1\xi_2}\,\tilde{\Psi}^{\dot\alpha}_2 \Phi^{\dagger}_3 \tilde{\Psi}_{1\dot\alpha} \right. \\
+\sqrt{\xi_1\xi_3}\,\tilde{\Psi}^{\dot\alpha}_1 \Phi^{\dagger}_2 \tilde{\Psi}_{3\dot\alpha} +\sqrt{\xi_2\xi_3}\,\tilde{\Psi}^{\dot\alpha}_3 \Phi^{\dagger}_1 \tilde{\Psi}_{2\dot\alpha}\bigg)\,,
\end{multline}
\begin{multline}\label{dsprop3}
S^{\mathrm{DS}}_2=\int_{\R^4}\d^4x\,\tr\left(\xi_1^2\,\Phi_2^{\dagger}\Phi_{3}^{\dagger}\Phi^{2}\Phi^{3}+\xi_2^2\,\Phi_3^{\dagger}\Phi_{1}^{\dagger}\Phi^{3}\Phi^{1} + \xi_3^2\,\Phi_1^{\dagger}\Phi_{2}^{\dagger}\Phi^{1}\Phi^{2}\right. \\
\left. -\sqrt{\xi_1\xi_2}\,\Psi^{2\alpha} \Phi^3 \Psi^1_{\alpha}-\sqrt{\xi_1\xi_3}\,\Psi^{1\alpha} \Phi^2 \Psi^3_{\alpha}-\sqrt{\xi_2\xi_3}\,\Psi^{3\alpha} \Phi^1 \Psi^{2}_{\alpha}\right)\,.
\end{multline}
This agrees with the space-time action of $\chi$FT~\cite{Gurdogan:2015csr,Caetano:2016ydc} after performing the rescalings $\Psi^i\rightarrow\im\Psi^i$, $\Phi^{i}\rightarrow\im\Phi^i$, $\tilde{\Psi}_{i}\rightarrow -\im\tilde{\Psi}_i$ and $\Phi^{\dagger}_{i}\rightarrow-\im\Phi^{\dagger}_i$. \hfill \ensuremath{\Box}
\subsection{Classical conformal fishnet theory}
On space-time, FCFT is obtained directly from $\chi$FT by setting to zero two of the effective couplings, say $\xi_{1},\xi_{2}\rightarrow 0$. This decouples all of the fermions from $\chi$FT as well as one of the scalars, leaving a theory with only a single quartic interaction:
\be\label{stCFT}
S[\varphi_1, \varphi_2]=\int \d^{4}x\:\tr\!\left(\partial^{\mu}\bar{\Phi}_1\,\partial_{\mu}\Phi^{1}+\partial^{\mu}\bar{\Phi}_2\,\partial_{\mu}\Phi^{2}+\xi^2\,\bar{\Phi}_1\bar{\Phi}_2\Phi^1\Phi^2\right)\,,
\ee
where $\xi_{3}:=\xi$.
Setting $\xi_{1},\xi_2=0$ in the twistor action for $\chi$FT \eqref{dsTA} leaves a remarkably simple theory on twistor space, with local kinetic terms and a non-local quartic interaction:
\begin{multline}\label{cfTA}
S[\phi_1,\phi_2]=\frac{\im}{2\,\pi}\int_{\PT}\D^{3}Z\wedge\tr\left(\phi^{\dagger}_1\wedge\dbar\phi^{1}+\phi^{\dagger}_2\wedge\dbar\phi^{2}\right) \\
+\xi^2\,\oint_{\R^4}\d^{4}X\,\int_{(\P^1)^4}\frac{\D\sigma_1\,\D\sigma_2\,\D\sigma_3\,\D\sigma_4}{(2\pi\im)^4}\,\mathrm{tr}\left((\phi^{\dagger}_1)_1\,(\phi^{\dagger}_2)_2\,\phi^{1}_3\,\phi^{2}_4\right)\,.
\end{multline}
It is easy to see that this action is invariant under global SU$(N)$ and U$(1)\times$U$(1)$ transformations of the twistor fields, but in addition the action is preserved by the local twistor gauge transformations:
\be\label{cfgauge}
\phi^{1,2}\rightarrow \phi^{1,2}+\dbar\alpha^{1,2}\,, \qquad \alpha^{1,2}\in\Omega^{0}(\PT,\cO(-2)\otimes\mathfrak{g})\,.
\ee
This freedom can be used to put the twistor fields in Woodhouse harmonic gauge
\be\label{cfWood}
\dbar^{*}|_{X}\phi^{1,2}|_{X}=0\,,
\ee
whence the twistor action \eqref{cfTA} reduces to the space-time action \eqref{stCFT} for FCFT.
\medskip
This establishes that classical FCFT can be obtained exactly (i.e., non-perturbatively) by lifting the $\gamma$-deformation and double scaling limit directly to twistor space. Although the double-scaling limit decouples all local gauge freedom on space-time, in twistor space there is always a local `abelian' SU$(N)$ symmetry. While crucial for establishing the equivalence between the twistor actions and space-time theories for both $\chi$FT and FCFT, the local gauge freedom on twistor space enables other gauge-fixings particularly amenable to performing calculations.
\section{Conformal fishnet theory in twistor space}
\label{FRULES}
At this point, we turn our focus to the study of perturbative conformal fishnet theory using the twistor action \eqref{cfTA}, particularly in the planar limit $N\rightarrow\infty$ of the SU$(N)$-valued scalar fields. As our subsequent focus will be the computation of scattering amplitudes in FCFT, we first recall the structure of these amplitudes in twistor space before describing the twistor Feynman rules of the theory and discussing the structure of UV-divergences and their removal by double trace counter-terms in twistor space.
\subsection{Cohomological amplitudes}
The external legs of any scattering process in FCFT are given by on-shell, massless SU$(N)$-valued scalar fields. On space-time, these external legs are often represented with a momentum eigenstate basis, $\e^{\im k\cdot x}$ where $k^2=0$, but of course any basis of on-shell solutions will do. On twistor space, the Penrose transform \eqref{PenTran} means that any such on-shell external scalar field is represented by a cohomology class:
\be\label{ca1}
\Phi_{\mathrm{on-shell}}(x)\leftrightarrow\phi\in H^{0,1}(\PT,\cO(-2)\otimes\mathfrak{g})\,.
\ee
This cohomology class encodes the quantum numbers of external states in the scattering process.
For instance, in a momentum basis the on-shell $k_\mu$ is encoded by the spinors $k_{\alpha}\tilde{k}_{\dot\alpha}$, and the space-time external field
\begin{equation*}
\Phi(x)=\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}}\,\e^{\im k\cdot x}\,,
\end{equation*}
is represented by a twistor cohomology class
\be\label{ca2}
\phi(Z;k)=\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}}\,\int \d s\,s\,\bar{\delta}^{2}\!\left(k-s\,\lambda\right)\,\e^{\im s\,[\mu\,\tilde{k}]}\,,
\ee
where $\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}}$ is a generator of SU$(N)$. In \eqref{ca2}, the holomorphic delta function
\be\label{delta2}
\bar{\delta}^2\!(\lambda):=\bigwedge_{\alpha=0,1} \d\overline{\lambda_{\beta}}\frac{\partial}{\partial\overline{\lambda_\beta}}\left(\frac{1}{\lambda_{\alpha}}\right)=\bigwedge_{\alpha=0,1} \dbar\left(\frac{1}{\lambda_{\alpha}}\right)\,,
\ee
is a $(0,2)$-distribution enforcing the vanishing of both components of its argument. One of the distributional form degrees is integrated against the scale parameter $s$, so that $\phi(Z;k)$ is a SU$(N)$-valued $(0,1)$-form on $\PT$ of weight $-2$, as required by the Penrose transform.
Thus, a scattering amplitude in FCFT can be represented as a functional of these twistor cohomology classes. The twistor version of the LSZ truncation procedure would then be given by a pairing between some integral kernel and these cohomology classes, with the integral kernel taking values in $\oplus_{i=1}^{n}H^{0,1}(\PT_i,\cO(-2)\otimes\mathfrak{g})^\vee$, where the duality is defined by the Hilbert space structure of $H^{0,1}(\PT,\cO(-2))$. This pairing removes the twistor dependence, leaving only a function of the relevant quantum numbers, as expected for a scattering amplitude.
Unfortunately, this pairing is non-local on twistor space and relies on an explicit choice of space-time signature~\cite{Eastwood:1981b}. A more useful pairing for our purposes is~\cite{Adamo:2011cb,Adamo:2013cra}
\be\label{capair}
H^{0,1}(\PT,\cO(-2)\otimes\mathfrak{g})\times H^{0,2}_{c}(\PT,\cO(-2)\otimes\mathfrak{g})\rightarrow \C\,, \qquad (\phi,\rho)\mapsto\int_{\PT}\D^3Z\wedge\,\tr\!\left(\phi\wedge\rho\right)\,,
\ee
where the subscript on $H^{0,2}_c$ denotes compact support. With this pairing, a $n$-point scattering amplitude on $\PT$ is represented by an integral kernel
\be\label{cakern}
A_n(Z_1,\ldots Z_n)\in\bigoplus_{i=1}^{n}H^{0,2}_c(\PT_i,\cO(-2)\otimes\mathfrak{g})\,,
\ee
where each $\PT_i$ is charted with homogeneous coordinates $Z_i$. The numerical (physical) scattering amplitude is uniquely obtained from this \emph{cohomological amplitude} by the pairing \eqref{capair} with external wavefunctions. Knowing the cohomological amplitude on twistor space is equivalent to knowing the physical amplitude in terms of external momenta.
\subsection{Feynman rules: vertices and propagator}
The only vertex in the twistor action for classical conformal fishnet theory is given by the quartic interaction:
\be\label{vert1}
\xi^2\,\oint_{\R^4}\d^{4}X\,\int_{(\P^1)^4}\D\sigma_1\,\D\sigma_2\,\D\sigma_3\,\D\sigma_4\,\mathrm{tr}\left((\phi^{\dagger}_1)_1\,(\phi^{\dagger}_2)_2\,\phi^{1}_3\,\phi^{2}_4\right)
\ee
where the contour integral is over the moduli space of lines $X\cong\P^1$ in $\PT$ which are preserved by the Euclidean reality conditions\footnote{From now on, we will neglect factors of $(2\pi\im)$, as they may be viewed as implicit in the definitions of the projective integrals and distributions encountered.}. A pictorial version of this vertex is shown in figure~\ref{Tvertex}, with different operator insertions distinguished by their colour.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{Tvertex.pdf}
\caption{The 4-point vertex in twistor space: insertions of $\phi^1$ and $\phi^2$ are denoted with filled black and red dots, insertions of $\phi^{\dagger}_1$ and $\phi^{\dagger}_2$ with black and red circles, respectively. The trace structure on the Riemann sphere (left) can be represented by arranging the insertions on a line (right).}
\label{Tvertex}
\end{figure}
Now, a holomorphic linear map $Z^A:\P^1\rightarrow\PT$ can be written
\be\label{linmap1}
Z^A(\sigma)=X^{A}_{\alpha}\,\sigma^{\alpha}=A^{A}\,\sigma^{0}+B^A\,\sigma^1\,,
\ee
for $\sigma^{\alpha}$ the homogeneous coordinate on $\P^1$ and moduli $X^{A}_{\alpha}=\{A^A,\,B^A\}$. \emph{A priori}, there seem to be eight moduli, but the description of the linear map \eqref{linmap1} is redundant: we must account for the SL$(2,\C)$-invariance of $\P^1$ as well as the $\C^*$ projective rescalings of the target space.
Thus, the measure appearing in \eqref{vert1} can be written explicitly as
\be\label{vert2}
\d^4 X=\frac{\d^4 A\wedge\d^4 B}{\mathrm{vol}\;\GL(2,\C)}\,,
\ee
with the quotient by the (infinite) volume of GL$(2,\C)\cong\SL(2,\C)\times\C^*$ understood in the Fadeev-Popov sense. Writing the measure in this way has two benefits: first, it manifests the nature of the line $X\cong\P^1$ as the skew of two points $A,B\in\PT$. Secondly, this expression for the measure is manifestly conformally invariant, since it is constructed entirely from SL$(4,\C)$-invariant objects.
To construct cohomological amplitudes using this interaction, we must choose representatives for the four legs of this vertex. The suitable choice is given by \emph{elementary} states, which localize a field insertion on $X\cong\P^1$ to a point in twistor space:
\be\label{states}
\phi^{1,2}=\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}}\,\bar{\delta}^{3}_{-2,-2}(Z,\,Z(\sigma))=\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}} \int \d s\,s\,\bar{\delta}^{4}(Z+s\,Z(\sigma))\,,
\ee
where
\be\label{delta4}
\bar{\delta}^4(Z):=\bigwedge_{A=0}^{3} \dbar\left(\frac{1}{Z^A}\right)\,.
\ee
Thus, $\bar{\delta}^{3}_{-2,-2}(Z,Z(\sigma))$ is a $(0,3)$-distribution on $\PT$ enforcing the projective coincidence of its arguments, homogeneous of weight $-2$ in both $Z$ and $Z(\sigma)$. We often drop homogeneity subscripts on these distributional forms when their weights are clear from the context.
With the elementary states \eqref{states} and manifestly conformally invariant measure \eqref{vert2}, the four-point interaction vertex is $\xi^2\,\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_1}\cdots\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_4})\,V_4$, for
\be\label{vert3}
V_4(Z_1,Z_2,Z_3,Z_4):=\oint_{\R^4}\frac{\d^4 A\wedge\d^4 B}{\mathrm{vol}\;\GL(2,\C)}\,\int_{(\P^1)^4}\prod_{i=1}^{4}\D\sigma_i\,\bar{\delta}^{3}(Z_i,\,Z(\sigma_i))\,.
\ee
Integration over each of the four copies of $\P^1$ ensures that $V_4$ is a distributional $(0,2)$-form in each of the $\{Z_1,\ldots,Z_4\}$. The fact that $\{Z_i\}$ enter only through the projective delta functions makes it clear that $V_4$ is compactly supported. Finally, $\dbar V_4=0$ since
\be\label{vert4}
\dbar\,\bar{\delta}^{3}(Z_i,\,Z(\sigma_i))=0\,,
\ee
and the integrand of \eqref{vert3} is otherwise holomorphic. This establishes that
\be\label{vert5}
V_4(Z_1,\ldots,Z_4)\in\bigoplus_{i=1}^{4}H^{0,2}_c(\PT_i,\cO(-2))\,,
\ee
as required for the vertex in a cohomological representation.
This statement is exact, in contrast to the situation for the vertices of the $\cN=4$ SYM twistor action, which fail to be $\dbar$-closed due to IR collinear divergences~\cite{Adamo:2011cb,Adamo:2013cra}. However, planar FCFT is free from IR-divergences, so \eqref{vert5} is a first reflection of this fact on twistor space. Finally, note that upon pairing the vertex using \eqref{capair} with momentum eigenstate representatives \eqref{ca2}, one obtains
\be\label{momrep}
\int_{\PT^4}V_4\,\prod_{i=1}^{4}\D^{3}Z_i\,\phi(Z_i;k_i)=\delta^{4}\!\left(\sum_{i=1}^{4}k_i\right)\,,
\ee
which is the standard momentum space, LSZ-truncated expression for the vertex.
In practical computations, the following facts about the 4-point vertex are extremely useful.
\begin{lemma}
The cohomological 4-point vertex of FCFT obeys
\be\label{vdecomp}
\begin{split}
V_{4}(1,2,3,4) & =\cV_3(1|2,3)\,\bar{\delta}^{2}_{-1,-1,-2}(2,3,4) \\
& =\cV_2(2,3)\,\bar{\delta}^{2}_{-1,-1,-2}(2,3,1)\,\bar{\delta}^{2}_{-1,-1,-2}(2,3,4)\,,
\end{split}
\ee
where the pseudo-vertex $\cV_3$ is
\begin{multline}\label{3vert}
\cV_3(1|2,3):=\oint_{\R^4}\frac{\d^4 A\wedge\d^4 B}{\mathrm{vol}\;\GL(2,\C)}\,\int_{(\P^1)^3}(2\,3)\,\D\sigma_1\,\D\sigma_2\,\D\sigma_3\,\bar{\delta}^{3}_{-2,-2}(Z_1,\,Z(\sigma_1)) \\
\bar{\delta}^{3}_{-1,-3}(Z_2,\,Z(\sigma_2))\,\bar{\delta}^{3}_{-1,-3}(Z_3,\,Z(\sigma_3))\,,
\end{multline}
taking values in
\be\label{3vc}
\cV_{3}(1|2,3)\in H^{0,2}_c(\PT_1,\cO(-2))\bigoplus_{i=2,3} H^{0,2}_c(\PT_i,\cO(-1))\,,
\ee
as a cohomological object. The pseudo-vertex $\cV_2$ is
\be\label{2vert}
\cV_2(2,3):=\oint\limits_{\R^4\times (\P^1)^2} \D^3A\wedge\D^3B\,\bar{\delta}^{3}_{0,-4}(Z_2,\,A)\,\bar{\delta}^{3}_{0,-4}(Z_3,\,B)\,,
\ee
where the contour integrates $A,B$ over the line $X\cong\P^1$ and then integrating the line over the real contour $\R^4\subset\M$, and $\cV_2$ takes values in
\be\label{2vc}
\cV_2(2,3)\in H^{0,2}_c(\PT_2,\cO)\oplus H^{0,2}_c(\PT_3,\cO)\,,
\ee
as a cohomological object.
\end{lemma}
\proof These relations follow from manipulation of the projective integrals over $\P^1$ in $V_4$. Let us work with affine coordinates on $\P^1$ (e.g., by choosing the coordinate patch where $\sigma_i^0\neq0$); we abuse notation, denoting these affine coordinates by $\sigma_i$ for $i=1,\ldots,4$. Writing out all scale integrals, the 4-point vertex is:
\be\label{pl1}
\oint_{\R^4}\frac{\d^4 A\wedge\d^4 B}{\mathrm{vol}\;\GL(2,\C)}\,\int_{(\C^*)^4}\prod_{i=1}^{4}\d\sigma_i\,\d s_{i}\,s_i\,\bar{\delta}^{4}(Z_i+s_i\,Z(\sigma_i))\,.
\ee
Change variables from $\sigma_4$ to $u$ via:
\be\label{pl2}
\sigma_4=\frac{s_2\,\sigma_2+u\,s_3\,\sigma_3}{s_2+u\,s_3}\,,
\ee
and observe that (in the affine coordinates)
\be\label{pl3}
Z(\sigma_i)=A+\sigma_i\,B\,,
\ee
whence \eqref{pl1} becomes
\begin{multline}
\oint_{\R^4}\frac{\d^4 A\wedge\d^4 B}{\mathrm{vol}\;\GL(2,\C)}\,\int_{(\C^*)^4}\frac{\d u\,(\sigma_3-\sigma_2)}{(s_2+us_3)^2}\,\d s_4\,s_4\,\bar{\delta}^{4}\left(Z_4-\frac{s_4}{s_2+us_3}(Z_2+uZ_3)\right) \\
\d\sigma_1\,\d s_1\,s_1 \bar{\delta}^{4}(Z_1+s_1 Z(\sigma_1))\,\prod_{i=2,3}\d\sigma_i\,\d s_i\,s_i^2\,\bar{\delta}^4(Z_i+s_i Z(\sigma_i))\,,
\end{multline}
making use of the various delta functions in play. Re-scaling $s_4\rightarrow (s_2+us_3)\,s_4$ and $Z_4\rightarrow s_4$ and restoring homogeneous coordinates on $\P^1$ leaves
\be\label{pl4}
\cV_3(1|2,3)\,\int_{(\C^*)^2}\d u\,\d s_4\,s_4\,\bar{\delta}^{4}(Z_2+uZ_3+tZ_4)=\cV_3(1|2,3)\,\bar{\delta}^{2}_{-1,-1,-2}(2,3,4)\,,
\ee
as claimed.
To obtain the second line of \eqref{vdecomp}, apply the same change of variables \eqref{pl2} now to $\sigma_1$ in $\cV_{3}(1|2,3)$. This results in
\begin{multline}\label{pl5}
\cV_{3}(1|2,3)=\oint_{\R^4}\frac{\d^4 A\wedge\d^4 B}{\mathrm{vol}\;\GL(2,\C)}\,\int_{(\P^1)^2} (2\,3)^2\, \D\sigma_2\,\D\sigma_3\,\bar{\delta}^{3}_{0,-4}(Z_2,\,Z(\sigma_2))\,\bar{\delta}^{3}_{0,-4}(Z_3,\,Z(\sigma_3)) \\
\times \bar{\delta}^{2}_{-1,-1,-2}(2,3,1)\,.
\end{multline}
The GL$(2,\C)$ redundancy in the measure can now be fixed by making the integrals over $A$ and $B$ projective (i.e., contracting with the Euler vector in $A$ and $B$) and setting $\sigma_{2}^{\alpha}=(1,0)$ and $\sigma_3^\alpha=(0,1)$, while removing the appropriate Jacobian factor. The result is the claimed expression \eqref{2vert}. \hfill \ensuremath{\Box}
\medskip
The kinetic operator for both $\phi^1$ and $\phi^2$ is the $\dbar$-operator on $\PT$; a useful form of its inverse has long been known in the context of the twistor action for $\cN=4$ SYM by using an axial gauge~\cite{Adamo:2011cb}. This axial gauge eliminates all vertices from the action except those arising from the non-local logdet$(\dbar+\cA)|_X$ term, which becomes a generating function for all MHV vertices of $\cN=4$ SYM. Although there is only one `MHV amplitude' in FCFT (the 4-point amplitude), we are still free to choose an axial gauge thanks to the twistor gauge invariance \eqref{cfgauge}.
In particular, the axial gauge is defined by a choice of fixed reference twistor $Z_*\in\PT$ such that the propagator $\Delta(Z_1,\,Z_2)$ obeys
\be\label{prop1}
\dbar\Delta(Z_1,\,Z_2)=\bar{\delta}^3_{-2,-2}(Z_1,\,Z_2)\,, \qquad Z_*\cdot\overline{\frac{\partial}{\partial Z_1}}\lrcorner \Delta=0=Z_*\cdot\overline{\frac{\partial}{\partial Z_2}}\lrcorner \Delta\,,
\ee
with $\Delta(Z_1,Z_2)$ understood to be a distribution with $(0,1)$-form degree in each of $Z_1$ and $Z_2$. This axial gauge can be imposed at the level of the twistor action through the usual gauge-fixing procedure, but (as usual for axial gauges) the ghost sector decouples from the path integral~\cite{Boels:2007qn}.
Building on the results for $\cN=4$ SYM, the propagator for each of the fields in FCFT on twistor space is:
\be\label{prop2}
\Delta(Z_1,\,Z_2)=\bar{\delta}^2_{-2,0,-2}(Z_1,\,*,\,Z_2)=\int \frac{\d s}{s}\,\d t\,t\,\bar{\delta}^4(Z_1+s\,Z_*+t\,Z_2)\,.
\ee
This is a $(0,2)$-distribution on $\PT_1\times\PT_2$ enforcing the projective collinearity of its three arguments. It is straightforward to show that \eqref{prop2} obeys the conditions of \eqref{prop1}; indeed, the calculation is just a simpler version of that for $\cN=4$ SYM. Firstly, one observes that
\be\label{prop3}
\dbar \Delta(Z_1,\,Z_2)=\int \d s\,\dbar\left(\frac{1}{s}\right)\,\d t\,t\,\bar{\delta}^4(Z_1+s\,Z_*+t\,Z_2)=\int \d t\,t\,\bar{\delta}^4(Z_1+t\,Z_2)=\bar{\delta}^3_{-2,-2}(Z_1,\,Z_2)\,,
\ee
so $\Delta$ is a Green's function for the $\dbar$-operator on twistor space. To establish that $\Delta$ is in the axial gauge defined by $Z_*$, one observes that
\begin{multline}\label{prop4}
\Delta(Z_1,\,Z_2)=\int \frac{\d s}{s}\,\d t\,(1\hat{1}*\hat{2})\,(\hat{1}*2\hat{2})^2\,\dbar_1\left(\frac{1}{(1*2\hat{2})}\right)\,\dbar_2\left(\frac{1}{(2*1\hat{1})}\right) \\
\times\bar{\delta}\left((1\hat{1}2\hat{2})+s(*\hat{1}2\hat{2})\right)\,\bar{\delta}\left((1\hat{1}2\hat{2})+t(2\hat{1}*\hat{2})\right) \\
=-\frac{(1\hat{1}*\hat{2})\,(\hat{1}*2\hat{2})}{(1\hat{1}2\hat{2})}\,\dbar_1\left(\frac{1}{(1*2\hat{2})}\right)\,\dbar_2\left(\frac{1}{(2*1\hat{1})}\right)\,,
\end{multline}
where we employ the notation
\be\label{epsnot}
(1234):=\epsilon_{ABCD}\,Z_1^A\,Z_2^B\,Z_3^C\,Z_4^D\,,
\ee
and $\hat{Z}_1$, $\hat{Z}_2$ are the conjugates of $Z_1,\,Z_2$ with respect to the Euclidean reality condition. From the last line in \eqref{prop4}, it follows that
\begin{equation*}
Z_*\cdot\overline{\frac{\partial}{\partial Z_1}}\lrcorner \Delta=0=Z_*\cdot\overline{\frac{\partial}{\partial Z_2}}\lrcorner \Delta\,,
\end{equation*}
due to the skew-symmetry of the 4-dimensional Levi-Civita symbol.
Finally, the colour structure of the propagator is the same as on space-time. Therefore, the full twistor space propagator for FCFT in axial gauge is:
\be\label{fullprop}
\Delta(Z_1,\,Z_2)=\bar{\delta}^2_{-2,0,-2}(Z_1,\,*,\,Z_2)\,\left(\delta^{\bar{j}_1}_{i_2}\,\delta^{\bar{j}_2}_{i_1}-\frac{1}{N}\,\delta^{\bar{j}_1}_{i_1}\,\delta^{\bar{j}_2}_{i_2}\right)\,,
\ee
where $i_1,i_2$ are fundamental indices of SU$(N)$ and $\bar{j}_1,\bar{j}_2$ are anti-fundamental indices associated with each end of the propagator.
\subsection{Divergences, counterterms and conformality}
It is well-known that the single-trace Lagrangian of FCFT is not quantum-complete due to UV divergences -- even in the planar limit~\cite{Fokken:2013aea,Sieg:2016vap}. These divergences come with a double-trace structure, and their removal necessitates adding double-trace counterterms to the space-time action. Of course, we could translate these counterterms to the twistor action, but it is more enlightening to derive them directly in twistor space. With the single-trace vertex \eqref{vert3} and propagator \eqref{fullprop} in twistor space, we have all the required tools.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.7]{CFdiv1.pdf}
\caption{A class of diagram leading to a double-trace UV divergence in space-time (left) and twistor space (right).}
\label{CFdiv1}
\end{figure}
Consider the 4-point 1-loop diagram given by figure~\ref{CFdiv1}, in both space-time and twistor space. Using the twistorial Feynman rules, this diagram gives
\begin{multline}\label{primdiv1}
\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_1}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_2})\,\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_3}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_4}) \int_{\PT^4}\prod_{i=1}^{4}\D^{3}Z^{(i)}\,\bar{\delta}^{2}(Z^{(1)},*,Z^{(2)})\,\bar{\delta}^{2}(Z^{(3)},*,Z^{(4)}) \\
\times V_4(1,2,Z^{(3)},Z^{(1)})\,V_{4}(Z^{(4)},Z^{(2)},4,3)\,,
\end{multline}
in the planar limit, where the $Z^{(i)}$ are the propagator endpoints which are integrated over. Using \eqref{vdecomp}, the integrals in \eqref{primdiv1} can be reduced to
\be\label{primdiv2}
\int_{\PT^2}\D^3Z\, \D^3Z'\,\bar{\delta}^{1}(2,Z',*,Z)\,\bar{\delta}^{1}(3,4,*,Z')\,\cV_3(1|2,Z')\,\cV_{3}(Z|4,3)\,,
\ee
where the weights on the distributional forms can be deduced from the requirement of projective homogeneity. The object $\bar{\delta}^1$ is a $(0,1)$-distribution with support where its four arguments are projectively coplanar; for instance
\be\label{1distr}
\bar{\delta}^{1}_{-1,-1,0,-2}(2,Z',*,Z):=\int \d s\,\frac{\d t}{t}\,\d r\,r\,\bar{\delta}^{4}(Z_2+sZ'+tZ_* +rZ)\,.
\ee
Applying \eqref{vdecomp} yet again, another of the twistor integrals can be performed to leave:
\be\label{primdiv3}
\int_{\PT}\D^{3}Z\,\cV_{2}(4,3)\,\cV_{2}(1,2)\:\frac{\bar{\delta}^{1}(4,3,*,Z)\,\bar{\delta}^{2}(2,Z,1)}{(Z234)}\,,
\ee
with the weights of the distributional forms implicit.
It follows that
\be\label{primdiv4}
\frac{\bar{\delta}^{2}_{-1,-1,-2}(2,Z,1)}{(Z234)}=\frac{\bar{\delta}^{2}_{-1,-2,-1}(2,Z,1)}{(1234)}\,,
\ee
on the support of the distributional form in the numerator. This allows the final twistor integral in \eqref{primdiv3} to be performed, so this 1-loop diagram gives:
\be\label{primdiv5}
\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_1}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_2})\,\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_3}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_4})\,I^{(1)}(1,2|4,3)\,,
\ee
where the primitive $I^{(1)}$ is defined by
\be\label{primdiv}
I^{(1)}(1,2|4,3):=\frac{\cV_{2}(1,2)\,\cV_{2}(4,3)}{(1234)^2}\,.
\ee
Note that all dependence on the twistor $Z_*$ defining the axial gauge has dropped out, and a double pole structure (to be expected from the bubble diagram topology) emerges.
There are key differences between $I^{(1)}$ and the structure arising from analogous diagrams in planar $\cN=4$ SYM. For $\cN=4$ SYM this diagram gives an ambiguous answer in twistor space of the form `$0/0$' due to IR divergences~\cite{Brandhuber:2004yw,Bena:2004xu,Adamo:2011cb}, but \eqref{primdiv5} is finite. This is unsurprising, since FCFT should be free from IR ambiguities and the mechanisms which produced them in $\cN=4$ SYM (degenerate configurations in the \emph{fermionic} directions of $\PT$) are absent here. However, the repeated conformal invariant $(1234)^2$ in the denominator is a new structure, which does not arise in the context of $\cN=4$ SYM.
To understand the space-time interpretation of this repeated denominator, $I^{(1)}$ can be translated to momentum space using the pairing between the cohomological expression \eqref{primdiv} and twistor momentum eigenstates. This yields:
\begin{multline}\label{primdiv6}
\int I^{(1)}(1,2|4,3)\,\prod_{i=1}^{4}\D^{3} Z_i\,\d s_i\,s_i\,\bar{\delta}^{2}\!\left(\la i|-s_i\,\lambda_i\right)\,\e^{\im s_i\,[\mu_i\,i]}=\int\frac{\d^{4}x\,\d^{4}y}{(x-y)^4}\,\e^{\im(k_1+k_2)\cdot x}\,\e^{\im(k_3+k_4)\cdot y} \\
=\delta^{4}\!\left(\sum_{i=1}^{4}k_i\right)\left(\frac{1}{\varepsilon}+\cdots\right)\,,
\end{multline}
in dimensional regularization with $d=4-2\varepsilon$. Thus, we learn that the repeated SL$(4,\C)$ invariant in the denominator of \eqref{primdiv} encodes a primitive UV-divergence in FCFT. The same structure arises from the 1-loop diagram in figure~\ref{CFdiv2}, which yields
\be\label{primdiv7}
\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_1}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_2})\,\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_3}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_4})\,I^{(1)}(1,4|2,3)\,.
\ee
Both classes of UV-divergence \eqref{primdiv5}, \eqref{primdiv7} are precisely what is expected from space-time considerations.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.7]{CFdiv2.pdf}
\caption{Another class of double-trace UV divergence in space-time (left) and twistor space (right).}
\label{CFdiv2}
\end{figure}
\medskip
While this gives a nice rubric for recognizing UV-divergences on twistor space (i.e., in terms of repeated conformal invariants in the denominator), the twistor approach does not immediately offer any new insights on how to actually perform loop integrations. That is, to actually extract the $\varepsilon^{-1}$ divergence, the cohomological amplitude was paired with wavefunctions and converted into a `standard' position space Feynman integral.
Nevertheless, it may be possible to use the conformal invariance (and its breaking) encoded in twistors to derive properties of the integrals themselves \emph{before} pairing with wavefunctions. In particular, it has been shown that for finite conformal integrals arising in the context of FCFT, conformal Ward identities can be derived by probing certain singular collinear configurations~\cite{Chicherin:2017bxc}. As in the context of (super-)conformal symmetry breaking in $\cN=4$ SYM~\cite{Bullimore:2011kg}, it may be possible to reformulate these Ward identities entirely in terms of twistorial expressions, thereby gaining information about the full integral in terms of lower-loop data without having to explicitly perform any loop integrations. While such issues remain beyond the scope of this paper, they seem a promising line of enquiry for future work.
\medskip
The presence of these double trace divergences leads to the addition of counterterms in the twistor action. These are given by writing twistor vertices which generate the double trace interactions appearing in the divergences:
\begin{multline}\label{TACT}
\alpha_1^2\,\oint_{\R^4}\d^{4}X\,\int_{(\P^1)^4}\prod_{i=1}^{4}\D\sigma_i\,\left[\mathrm{tr}\left(\phi^{1}_{1}\,\phi^{1}_{2}\right)\,\tr\left((\phi^{\dagger}_1)_3\,(\phi^{\dagger}_{1})_4\right)+\mathrm{tr}\left(\phi^{2}_{1}\,\phi^{2}_{2}\right)\,\tr\left((\phi^{\dagger}_2)_3\,(\phi^{\dagger}_{2})_4\right)\right] \\
-\alpha_2^2\,\oint_{\R^4}\d^{4}X\,\int_{(\P^1)^4}\prod_{i=1}^{4}\D\sigma_i\,\left[\mathrm{tr}\left(\phi^{1}_{1}\,\phi^{2}_{2}\right)\,\tr\left((\phi^{\dagger}_1)_3\,(\phi^{\dagger}_{2})_4\right)+\mathrm{tr}\left(\phi^{1}_{1}\,(\phi^{\dagger}_2)_{2}\right)\,\tr\left(\phi^{2}_{3}\,(\phi^{\dagger}_1)_4\right)\right]\,,
\end{multline}
where $\alpha_1,\alpha_2$ are the induced couplings. These counterterms are invariant under the twistor gauge transformations \eqref{cfgauge}, and equal to the double-trace counterterms of FCFT in Woodhouse harmonic gauge.
There is now considerable perturbative evidence that the $\beta$-functions for the couplings $\alpha_1,\alpha_2$ have two fixed points, for which FCFT is a true (non-unitary) CFT. For $\alpha_2$, the $\beta$-function can be computed exactly~\cite{Sieg:2016vap,Grabner:2017pgm}, and vanishes for $\alpha_2^2=\xi^2$. The $\beta$-function for $\alpha_1$ has been computed up to seven loops~\cite{Grabner:2017pgm}, where it vanishes at the values
\be\label{CFT1}
\alpha_1^2=\alpha^{2}_{\pm}:=\pm\im\,\frac{\xi^2}{2}-\frac{\xi^4}{2}\mp\im\, \frac{3\,\xi^6}{4}+\xi^8\pm\im\,\frac{65\,\xi^{10}}{48}-\frac{19\,\xi^{12}}{10}+O(\xi^{14})\,.
\ee
The complexity of $\alpha^2_{\pm}$ is a consequence of the lack of unitarity; note that the two fixed points are related by $\xi^2\leftrightarrow-\xi^2$. Without loss of generality, we assume that the induced couplings lie at the CFT fixed point
\be\label{CFT2}
\alpha_1^2=\alpha^2_+\,, \qquad \alpha_2^2=\xi^2\,,
\ee
for all further calculations. Note that this conformal fixed point was obtained in the MS-bar renormalization scheme; choosing a different scheme corresponds to a finite renormalization of the coupling constant under which the conformal fixed point \eqref{CFT2} in MS-bar is mapped to a fixed point in the new scheme.
\section{Scattering amplitudes in twistor space}
\label{SCAMPS}
We are now in a position to compute general classes of cohomological scattering amplitudes for conformal fishnet theory in twistor space. The twistor formulation ensures that these cohomological answers are formulated entirely in terms of conformal invariants. The global U$(1)\times$U$(1)$ symmetry of FCFT means that non-vanishing amplitudes must have the same number of external $\phi^{1}$ and $\phi^{\dagger}_1$ fields, and similarly for $\phi^2$, $\phi^{\dagger}_2$. Consequently, scattering amplitudes can be labeled as $A_{n}(m,p)$: this is a $n$-point amplitude with $m$ external $\phi^1$ fields and $p$ external $\phi^2$ fields, where $2m+2p=n$.
The amplitudes of FCFT can be expanded in colour traces, much like amplitudes in gauge theory. However, unlike gauge theory (where there are $L+1$ trace structures at $L$ loops in perturbation theory, with only single traces in the planar limit) the amplitudes of FCFT can have multi-trace contributions at \emph{all} orders in perturbation theory, even in the large-$N$ limit. This is due to the double trace counterterms needed to ensure conformality.
Thus, a scattering amplitude of FCFT in the planar limit admits a double expansion in loops as well as traces:
\be\label{mtexpand}
A_{n}(m,p)=\delta^{4}\!\left(\sum_{i=1}^n k_i\right)\,\sum_{L=0}^{\infty} \sum_{\tau=1}^{\frac{n}{2}} \tr(\cdots)^{\tau}\,A_{n|\tau}^{L}(m,p)\,,
\ee
where $\tr(\cdots)^{\tau}$ is shorthand for $\tau$ traces over generators of SU$(N)$. The coefficient functions $A_{n|\tau}^{L}(m,p)$ are `partial amplitudes' depending only on the kinematics on space-time, or on the twistors associated with the external fields on twistor space.
In this section, we compute the cohomological (full and partial) amplitudes for various configurations in FCFT in the planar limit at the conformal fixed point \eqref{CFT2}.
\subsection{Exact half-track amplitudes}
Consider amplitudes $A_{n}(1,\frac{n}{2}-1)$ or $A_{n}(\frac{n}{2}-1,1)$; note that $n$ must be even due to the global U$(1)\times$U$(1)$ symmetry. Since the theory is invariant under $\phi^1\rightarrow (\phi^1)^{\mathrm{T}}$, $\phi^2\rightarrow(\phi^2)^{\mathrm{T}}$, it suffices to consider the former class. In~\cite{Korchemsky:2018hnb} it was shown that $A_{4}(1,1)$ is tree-level exact; let us review the argument here.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.7]{HTdiag1.pdf}
\caption{Tree-level and 1-loop contributions to $A_{4}(1,1)$ on space-time. Black vertices stand for single trace $\xi^2$ interactions, white vertices for double trace $\alpha_2^2$ interactions and grey vertices for a combination of the two.}
\label{HTdiag1}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{HTdiag1} displays the tree-level contributions to $A_{4}(1,1)$ from the single trace vertex and the double trace vertices proportional to $\alpha_2^2$, as well as the 1-loop diagram which receives contributions from both of these single and double trace vertices. Therefore, $A_{4}^{0}(1,1)=A_{4|1}^{0}(1,1)+A_{4|2}^{0}(1,1)$, with
\be\label{HT4p1}
A_{4|1}^{0}(1,1)=\xi^2\,\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_1}\cdots\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_4})\,,
\ee
\begin{equation*}
A_{4|2}^{0}(1,1)=-\alpha_2^2\left[\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_1}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_2})\,\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_3}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_4})+\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_1}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_4})\,\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_2}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_3})\right]\,.
\end{equation*}
Due to the chiral nature of the single trace vertex, both the $\xi^2$ and $\alpha_2^2$ interactions contribute to the \emph{same} trace structure at 1-loop in the large-$N$ limit:
\be\label{HT4p2}
A_{4}^{1}(1,1)=(\xi^2-\alpha_2^2)^2\,\left[\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_1}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_2})\,\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_3}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_4})+\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_1}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_4})\,\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_2}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_3})\right]\,I\,,
\ee
where $I$ is a 1-loop integral. Evaluated at the conformal fixed point $\alpha_2^2=\xi^2$, the 1-loop amplitude vanishes, as do all higher-loop corrections by the same mechanism~\cite{Korchemsky:2018hnb}.
This argument generalizes to all amplitudes of the form $A_{n}(1,\frac{n}{2}-1)$. At tree-level, these are represented by half-track diagrams -- shown in space-time and twistor space in figure~\ref{HTdiag2} -- where vertices are given by single trace $\xi^2$ interactions or double trace $\alpha_2^2$ interactions. Quantum corrections entail the insertion of the loops appearing in figure~\ref{HTdiag1}, which are always proportional to $(\xi^2-\alpha_2^2)^2$ and vanish at the conformal fixed point. Thus, all half-track amplitudes are tree-level exact.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.7]{HTdiag2.pdf}
\caption{The structure of a half-track amplitude in space-time (top) and twistor space (bottom).}
\label{HTdiag2}
\end{figure}
The trace structure of the tree-level contribution is dictated by the location and number of double trace vertices appearing in the half-track diagram. Indeed, if $k$ of the $\frac{n}{2}-1$ total vertices are double trace (proportional to $\alpha_2^2$) then the corresponding contribution will have $k+1$ traces. It is easy to work out the particular trace structure for a given vertex placement, but in any case all of the trace structures share the same kinematic structure. In particular, at the conformal fixed point the half-track amplitude is always
\be\label{HT1}
A_{n}\left(1,\frac{n}{2}-1\right)=\xi^{n-2}\,\left(\mbox{traces}\right)\,K_{n}^{0}\left(1,\frac{n}{2}-1\right)\,,
\ee
where $K_{n}^{0}(1,\frac{n}{2}-1)$ is the kinematic function associated with the diagram~\ref{HTdiag2}.
In momentum space this kinematic function is simply a product of scalar propagators. But in twistor space, it is given by the cohomological amplitude that follows from evaluating the twistor half-track diagram in the bottom of figure~\ref{HTdiag2}. Using the twistor propagator in axial gauge, we find:
\begin{multline}\label{HT2}
K_{n}^{0}\left(1,\frac{n}{2}-1\right)=\frac{\cV_{3}(n|1,2)\,\cV_{3}(\frac{n}{2}|\frac{n}{2}+1,\frac{n}{2}+2)}{(1\,2\,3\,n-1)\,(\frac{n}{2}-1\,\frac{n}{2}+3\,\frac{n}{2}+1\,\frac{n}{2}+2)} \\
\times\,\prod_{i=3}^{\frac{n}{2}-2}\frac{\cV_{2}(i,n-i+2)\,\cV_{2}(i+1,n-i+1)}{(i\,n-i+2\,i+1\,n-i+1)}\,.
\end{multline}
As expected, this result is built entirely from SL$(4,\C)$ invariants and manifestly independent of the twistor $Z_*$ that defines the axial gauge condition. Equivalent representations can be constructed by making alternative decompositions of the 4-point vertices using \eqref{vdecomp}.
\subsection{Four-point single colour amplitude}
In contrast to half-track amplitudes, the `single colour' four-point amplitude $A_{4}(2,0)$ has non-vanishing quantum corrections at each loop order~\cite{Korchemsky:2018hnb}. Many properties of $A_{4}(2,0)$ were studied in~\cite{Korchemsky:2018hnb} at both weak and strong coupling, but it is particularly illustrative to study the cancellation of UV-divergences between diagrams at each loop order in twistor space.
In the planar limit, $A_4(2,0)$ is a double trace structure $\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_1}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_2})\,\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_3}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_4})$ to all loop orders; the tree-level contribution is given by the first term in the $\alpha_1^2$ interaction of \eqref{TACT}. On twistor space, this is simply
\be\label{SCtree}
A^{0}_{4|2}(2,0)=2\im\,\xi^2\,V_{4}(1,2,3,4)\,,
\ee
where the overall factor is $4\alpha_1^2$ evaluated at the conformal fixed point. At 1-loop, there are two classes of diagram that contribute, as shown in figure~\ref{SC1loopd}. The first of these we have already evaluated in \eqref{primdiv7}, and the second is easily computed using the same techniques, with the result:
\be\label{SC1loop}
A^{1}_{4|2}(2,0)=\xi^4\,I(1,4|2,3)+\xi^{4}\,I(2,4|1,3)+8\alpha_{+}^{4}\,I(1,2|3,4)\,,
\ee
with $I$ defined by \eqref{primdiv}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.7]{SC1loop.pdf}
\caption{The two types of 1-loop diagram contributing to $A_4(2,0)$ on space-time (upper) and twistor space (lower).}
\label{SC1loopd}
\end{figure}
Clearly, each term in \eqref{SC1loop} is UV-divergent: $I$ encodes a simple pole (in dimensional regularization) which is independent of its arguments, due to the presence of squared conformal invariants in the denominator. However, when the value of the conformal fixed point $\alpha_+^2=\im\xi^2/2$ is inserted,
\be\label{SC1loop*}
A^{1}_{4|2}(2,0)=\xi^4\,\left[I(1,4|2,3)+I(2,4|1,3)-2\,I(1,2|3,4)\right]\,.
\ee
Since the singular parts of each term in the brackets are independent of the arguments of $I$, all of the divergences cancel, leaving a finite remainder. The precise form of this finite remainder (after pairing with external wavefunctions and integrating) depends on the renormalization scheme, which we assume to be MS-bar.
To see what happens at two loops, we must confront a new situation. There are two classes of diagrams which contribute to $A_{4|2}^{2}(2,0)$, as illustrated in space-time and twistor space in figure~\ref{SC2loopd}. In both cases, we see that the twistor diagrams involve a vertex/line with less than two external insertions; this scenario never occurs in the protected half-track amplitudes. Let us consider the first class of diagram; using the usual twistor machinery leads us to an expression of the form:
\be\label{SC2l1}
\cV_{2}(1,2)\,\cV(3,4) \oint\frac{\D^{3}A\wedge\D^{3}B}{(12AB)\,(AB34)}\,\bar{\delta}^{1}(1,2,*,A)\,\bar{\delta}^{1}(B,*,3,4)\,.
\ee
At first, one might be tempted to conclude that there are no UV-divergences encoded in this diagram, since the two conformal invariants in the denominator are different. However, the distributional forms in the numerator can still be reduced to non-projective distributions as, so this conclusion is premature.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.7]{SC2loop.pdf}
\caption{The two types of 2-loop diagram contributing to $A_4(2,0)$ on space-time (upper) and twistor space (lower).}
\label{SC2loopd}
\end{figure}
Indeed, it is an easy exercise to confirm that
\be\label{SC2l2}
\bar{\delta}^{1}_{-1,-1,0,-2}(1,2,*,A)=-\frac{(12*B)}{(12AB)}\,\bar{\delta}(12*A)\,,
\ee
where $\bar{\delta}(z)=\dbar z^{-1}$ is the standard $(0,1)$-distribution of weight $-1$. This identity -- applied to both distributional forms inside of the integral -- enables \eqref{SC2l1} to be rewritten as
\be\label{SC2l3}
\cV_{2}(1,2)\,\cV(3,4) \oint\frac{\D^{3}A\wedge\D^{3}B}{(12AB)^2\,(AB34)^2}\,\bar{\delta}(12*A)\,\bar{\delta}(B*34)\,(12*B)\,(34*A)\,.
\ee
There are now two repeated conformal invariants in the denominator, leading us to expect that this cohomological expression encodes a \emph{quadratic} UV-divergence on space-time. Indeed, when \eqref{SC2l3} is paired with momentum eigenstate wavefunctions, it returns the space-time integral
\be\label{SC2l4}
\int \frac{\d^{4}x\,\d^{4}y\,\d^{4}z}{(x-z)^4\,(z-y)^4}\,\e^{\im (k_1+k_2)\cdot x}\,\e^{\im (k_3+k_4)\cdot y}=\delta^{4}\!\left(\sum_{i=1}^{4}k_i\right)\left(\frac{1}{\varepsilon^2}+\cdots\right)\,,
\ee
in dimensional regularization.
Similarly, the second class of diagram in figure~\ref{SC2loopd} can be evaluated to
\be\label{SC2l5}
\cV_{2}(3,4)\oint\frac{\D^{3}A\wedge\D^{3}B\,\D^{3}C\wedge\D^{3}D}{(1B34)^2\,(2D34)^2}\bar{\delta}^{3}(1,A)\,\bar{\delta}^{3}(2,C)\,\bar{\delta}(1B*D)\,\bar{\delta}(2B*D)\,(1*34)(2*34)\,,
\ee
which features the same denominator structure leading to a quadratic UV-divergence. Adding together all of the diagrams with the appropriate symmetry factors yields
\be\label{SC2l6}
16\,\alpha_+^{6}\,(\mbox{diag. 1})+2\,\xi^{4}\,\alpha_+^{2}\,(\mbox{diag. 2})+2\,\xi^{4}\,\alpha_+^{2}\,(\mbox{diag. 2})_{(1,2)\leftrightarrow(3,4)}\,.
\ee
At the conformal fixed point value for $\alpha_+^2$, this has precisely the structure required to cancel the quadratic UV-divergences between all three terms.
At general loop order, similar mechanisms will always be at play. Any $L$-loop diagram in twistor space contributing to $A_4(2,0)$ will contain $L$ repeated conformal invariants in its denominator, and all such diagrams will be combined in a fashion which cancels these divergences at the conformal fixed point of the theory. The value of the finite remainder depends on the renormalization scheme used to perform the integrals after pairing with external wavefunctions.
We also observe a generic feature of FCFT Feynman diagrams in twistor space: any diagram with fewer than two external insertions on one of its vertices will not be explicitly independent of $Z_*$. Nevertheless, such contributions to scattering amplitudes remain independent of the choice of axial gauge. This follows because such diagrams are always holomorphic and homogeneous of degree zero with respect to $Z_*$.
\subsection{Snowflake amplitudes}
Certain higher-point amplitudes in FCFT are controlled by structures inherited from the four-point single colour and half-track amplitudes. A particularly illustrative example is given by the amplitude $A_{12}(2,4)$, which we refer to as the `snowflake' due to the appearance of its space-time Feynman diagrams in the planar limit. At tree-level, this involves a single insertion of the double trace $\alpha_1^2$ interaction, linked to four insertions of single trace $\xi^2$ or double trace $\alpha_2^2$ interactions, as depicted in figure~\ref{SFTree}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.7]{SFTree.pdf}
\caption{Tree-level snowflake amplitude in space-time (left) and twistor space (right).}
\label{SFTree}
\end{figure}
The trace structure of the amplitude depends on where any $\alpha_2^2$ vertices appear in the snowflake diagram. If the only double trace vertex is the one appearing in the middle of the diagram, then the overall structure is double trace, with the grouping of generators determined by the U$(1)\times$U$(1)$ quantum numbers. In the space-time diagram of figure~\ref{SFTree}, suppose we number the external particles in the clockwise fashion shown in the figure. If legs $2$ and $11$ correspond to $\phi^{\dagger}_1$ fields, then the double trace structure is:
\be\label{SFt1}
\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_1}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_2}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_3}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_{10}}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_{11}}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_{12}})\,\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_4}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_5}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_6}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_{7}}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_{8}}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_{9}})\,.
\ee
When one of the peripheral vertices is an $\alpha^2_2$ interaction, a triple trace structure results, decomposed around the insertion. For instance, if a double trace interaction is inserted at the bottom-most vertex in figure~\ref{SFTree}, then the triple trace structure is
\be\label{SFt2}
\big[ \tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_1}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_{10}}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_{11}}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_{12}})\,\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_2}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_3})+\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_3}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_{10}}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_{11}}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_{12}})\,\tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_2}\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_1})\big] \tr(\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_4}\cdots\mathsf{T}^{\mathsf{a}_{9}})\,.
\ee
Overall, the tree-level amplitude has a trace decomposition:
\be\label{SFtraces}
A^{0}_{12}(2,4)=\sum_{\tau=2}^{6} \tr(\cdots)^{\tau}\,A^{0}_{12|\tau}(2,4)\,,
\ee
with the maximal six-trace contribution arising when all five vertices of the snowflake diagram are double trace.
In twistor space, the cohomological amplitude associated with the snowflake is:
\begin{multline}\label{STt3}
\int \prod_{i=1}^{8}\D^{3}Z^{(i)} V_{4}(1,2,3,Z^{(1)})\cdots V_{4}(10,11,12,Z^{(4)})\,V_{4}(Z^{(5)},Z^{(6)},Z^{(7)},Z^{(8)}) \\
\times\bar{\delta}^{2}(Z^{(1)},*,Z^{(5)})\,\cdots\,\bar{\delta}^{2}(Z^{(4)},*,Z^{(8)})\,.
\end{multline}
Applying \eqref{vdecomp} and performing the maximum number of integrations leaves:
\begin{multline}\label{STt4}
A^{0}_{12|\tau}(2,4)=\pm\im\frac{\xi^{10}}{2}\:\cV_{3}(2|3,1)\cdots \cV_{3}(11|12,10)\\
\oint \frac{\D^{3}A\wedge\D^{3}B}{(12\,10\,A\,B)\,(9\,7\,A\,B)}\,\bar{\delta}^{1}(3,1,*,A)\wedge\bar{\delta}^{1}(6,4,*,B)\,,
\end{multline}
at the conformal fixed point, with the overall sign determined by whether there are an even ($+$) or odd ($-$) number of $\alpha_2^2$ insertions. The distributional forms in the integrand can be further reduced using identity \eqref{SC2l2}, giving an equivalent expression
\begin{multline}\label{STt4*}
A^{0}_{12|\tau}(2,4)=\pm\im\frac{\xi^{10}}{2}\:\cV_{3}(2|3,1)\cdots \cV_{3}(11|12,10)\\
\oint \frac{\D^{3}A\wedge\D^{3}B}{(12\,10\,A\,B)\,(9\,7\,A\,B)}\,\frac{(3\,1\,*\,B)\,(6\,4\,*\,A)}{(3\,1\,A\,B)\,(6\,4\,A\,B)}\,\bar{\delta}(31*A)\,\bar{\delta}(64*B)\,.
\end{multline}
Since there are no UV-divergences (i.e., no repeated denominators), there is no particular advantage to using the representation \eqref{STt4*} as opposed to \eqref{STt4} besides the cosmetic symmetry of the denominator.
\medskip
We briefly discuss the structure of quantum corrections to the snowflake amplitude. By the arguments of~\cite{Korchemsky:2018hnb}, it follows that there are no 1-loop corrections to the outer four-point interactions (in the planar limit and at the conformal fixed point). For simplicity, assume that all four of these outer interactions are single trace. On space-time, the central 4-point interaction can be corrected by the 1-loop diagrams shown in figure~\ref{SFLoop}; both contribute with the same overall double trace structure \eqref{SFt1}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.7]{SFLoop.pdf}
\caption{One-loop diagrams contributing to the double trace snowflake amplitude.}
\label{SFLoop}
\end{figure}
The 1-loop kinematic contribution from all relevant diagrams of this form is given by
\be\label{SFl1}
\xi^{4}\,F(k_{123789})+\xi^{4}\,F(k_{10\,11\,12\,789})-2\xi^{4}\,F(k_{123\,10\,11\,12})\,,
\ee
where the coefficient of the final term is equivalent to $8\alpha_+^{2}$ evaluated at the fixed point \eqref{CFT2}, $k_{i\cdots j}:=k_i+\cdots+k_j$, and $F$ is the 1-loop scalar integral
\be\label{SFl2}
F(k_{i\cdots j}):=\int\frac{\d^{4-2\varepsilon}\ell}{(2\,\pi)^{4-2\varepsilon}}\,\frac{1}{\ell^2\,(k_{i\cdots j}-\ell)^2}\,.
\ee
Term-by-term, \eqref{SFl1} is UV-divergent, but it is straightforward to see that the combination of all three terms is finite. This is the same mechanism that removes all divergences from the four-point single colour amplitudes (cf., \cite{Korchemsky:2018hnb}) at the conformal fixed point.
On twistor space, the diagram corresponding to the first term in \eqref{SFl1} evaluates to:
\be\label{SFl3}
\xi^{12}\,\cV_{3}(2|3,1)\cdots \cV_{3}(11|12,10)\,\cF[3,1|9,7][6,4|12,10]\,,
\ee
where the integral $\cF$ is defined by:
\begin{multline}\label{SFl4}
\cF[a,b|c,d][i,j|k,l]:=\oint \frac{\D^{3}A\wedge\D^{3}B\:\D^{3}C\wedge\D^{3}D}{(ABCD)^2}\:\bar{\delta}^{1}(a,b,*,A)\,\bar{\delta}^{1}(c,d,*,B)\\
\bar{\delta}^{1}(i,j,*,C)\,\bar{\delta}^{1}(k,l,*,D)\,.
\end{multline}
The squared conformal invariant in the denominator is indicative of a linear UV-divergence, and pairing with external twistor wavefunctions confirms that there is a simple pole (in dimensional regularization) which is independent of the arguments of $\cF$. Upon evaluating all 1-loop diagrams in twistor space contributing to the snowflake amplitude, one finds
\begin{multline}\label{SFl5}
A^{1}_{12|2}(2,4)=\xi^{12}\,\cV_{3}(2|3,1)\cdots \cV_{3}(11|12,10)\bigg(\cF[3,1|9,7][6,4|12,10] \\
+\cF[3,1|6,4][9,7|12,10]-2\,\cF[3,1|12,10][6,4|9,7]\bigg)\,,
\end{multline}
at the conformal fixed point. Sure enough, since the divergent part of each term is independent of its arguments, all UV-divergences cancel from the 1-loop result.
\subsection{Fishnet diagrams}
As a final example, consider planar fishnet diagrams where all vertices are given by the single trace interaction. These diagrams contribute to the single trace component of the amplitude in the planar limit, and combine many of the features of twistor amplitudes observed in the preceding examples. Every twistor space vertex involved in a fishnet diagram has no more than two external field insertions, so vertices of a general fishnet diagram fall into one of three sets: corner (two external field insertions), edge (one external insertion) and interior (no external insertions) vertices.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.7]{FN1loop.pdf}
\caption{The 1-loop fishnet diagram on space-time (left) and twistor space (right).}
\label{FN1loop}
\end{figure}
The 1-loop case illustrated in figure~\ref{FN1loop} is straightforward to evaluate:
\be\label{FNl1}
A_{8|1}^{1}(2,2)=\frac{\cV_{2}(8,1)\,\cV_{2}(2,3)\,\cV_{2}(4,5)\,\cV_{2}(6,7)}{(8123)\,(2345)\,(4567)\,(6781)}\,,
\ee
which is manifestly conformally invariant and free from UV- and IR-divergences. Pairing with external wavefunctions gives the standard conformal box integral, which can be evaluated in terms of dilogarithms~\cite{Usyukina:1992jd}. So if $V_{4}(i,j,\bullet,\bullet)$ and $V_{4}(k,\bullet,\bullet,l)$ are two corner vertices of a fishnet diagram connected by a propagator, their contraction will produce a factor of
\be\label{FNccon}
\frac{\cV_{2}(i,j)\,\cV_{2}(k,l)}{(ijkl)}\,,
\ee
in the evaluation of the diagram.
Next, consider a propagator contraction between a corner vertex $V_{4}(i,j,\bullet,\bullet)$ and an edge vertex $V_{4}(k,\bullet,\bullet,\bullet)$. This contraction can be evaluated to
\be\label{FNcecon}
\cV_{2}(i,j)\oint \frac{\D^{3}A\wedge\D^{3}B}{(ijkB)}\,\bar{\delta}^{3}(k,A)\,\bar{\delta}^{3}(\bullet,B)\,\bar{\delta}^{2}(k,\bullet,\bullet)\,,
\ee
where the remaining $\bullet$ entries are contracted with propagators to some other part of the diagram. All remaining contractions (between edge and interior vertices) are then dictated by the remaining distributional forms.
For a generic fishnet diagram $\Gamma$ contributing to $A_{n}(m,k)$, each vertex can be labeled by a pair $(i,j)$ for $i\in\{1,\ldots,m\}$ and $j\in\{1,\ldots,k\}$. Label the sets of corner, edge and interior vertices by $\mathcal{C}$, $\mathcal{E}$ and $\mathcal{I}$, respectively. The cohomological amplitude associated with $\Gamma$ takes the form
\be\label{FN1}
\oint \prod_{(i,j)}\D^{3}A_{ij}\wedge\D^{3}B_{ij}\:\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{C}\cup\mathcal{E})\,\prod_{(i,j)\in\mathcal{E}\cup\mathcal{I}}\bar{\delta}^{2}(A_{ij},*,B_{(i+1)j})\,\bar{\delta}^{2}(A_{i(j+1)},*,B_{ij})\,,
\ee
where $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{C}\cup\mathcal{E})$ is a contribution depending on the boundary topology of the fishnet diagram that encodes all dependence on external field insertions. This $\mathcal{B}$ can be determined directly from the rules described above.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.7]{FNmult.pdf}
\caption{The $m\times k$ rectangular fishnet diagram with external leg twistor labels.}
\label{FNmult}
\end{figure}
To be completely precise, let's consider an example. Suppose that $\Gamma$ is a $m\times k$ rectangular fishnet diagram (for $m,k>2$), with $(m-1)(k-1)$ loops. Label the external points on the columns $(i,1)$ and $(i,k)$ by twistors $\alpha_i$ and $\gamma_i$, respectively. Label the external points on rows $(1,j)$ and $(m,j)$ with twistors $\beta_j$ and $\delta_j$, respectively. This labeling scheme is shown in figure~\ref{FNmult}. Then the boundary contribution to \eqref{FN1} is given by
\begin{multline}\label{FNrect}
\mathcal{B}^{\mathrm{rect}}_{m\times k}=\frac{\bar{\delta}^{3}(\alpha_1,A_{11})\,\bar{\delta}^{3}(\beta_1,B_{11})}{(\alpha_1\beta_1 A_{12}\beta_2)\,(\alpha_1\beta_1\alpha_2 B_{21})}\:\:\frac{\bar{\delta}^{3}(\alpha_m,A_{m1})\,\bar{\delta}^{3}(\delta_1,B_{m1})}{(\alpha_m\delta_1 A_{m2}\delta_2)\,(\alpha_m\delta_1\alpha_{m-1} B_{(m-1)1})} \\
\frac{\bar{\delta}^{3}(\gamma_m,A_{mk})\,\bar{\delta}^{3}(\delta_k,B_{mk})}{(A_{m(k-1)}\delta_{k-1}\gamma_m \delta_k)\,(\gamma_{m-1}B_{(m-1)k}\gamma_m \delta_k)}\:\:\frac{\bar{\delta}^{3}(\gamma_1,A_{1k})\,\bar{\delta}^{3}(\beta_k,B_{1k})}{(A_{1(k-1)}\beta_{k-1} \gamma_{1}\beta_{k})\,(\gamma_1 \beta_k \gamma_2 B_{2k})} \\
\prod_{i=2}^{m-2}\frac{\bar{\delta}^{3}(\alpha_{i},A_{i1})\,\bar{\delta}^{3}(\gamma_{i},A_{ik})}{(\alpha_i B_{i1}\alpha_{i+1}B_{(i+1)1})\,(\gamma_i B_{ik}\gamma_{i+1} B_{(i+1)k})}\, \prod_{j=2}^{k-2} \frac{\bar{\delta}^{3}(\beta_j,B_{1j})\,\bar{\delta}^{3}(\delta_j,B_{mj})}{(A_{1j}\beta_j A_{1(j+1)}\beta_{j+1})\,(A_{mj}\delta_j A_{m(j+1)}\delta_{j+1})}\,.
\end{multline}
Here, all projective delta functions have weight $\bar{\delta}^{3}_{0,-4}(\cdot,\cdot)$, ensuring that $\mathcal{B}^{\mathrm{rect}}_{m\times k}$ has the appropriate projective and form weights to give a well-defined cohomological amplitude upon being inserted into \eqref{FN1}.
\acknowledgments
We thank Gregory Korchemsky and Matthias Wilhelm for helpful comments on a draft, as well as Jake Bourjaily, Amit Sever and David Skinner for interesting discussions. TA is supported by an Imperial College Junior Research Fellowship.
|
\section{Introduction } \label{intro}
\begin{figure}[t]\vspace{-10pt}
\includegraphics[width=237pt,height=307pt]{images/overview.jpg}\vspace{-4pt}
\caption{
\small{
\textbf{Architectural Overview.} Our framework processes video snippets (top left) and robustly detects per-frame great ape locations~(bottom right). The architecture extends a traditional detection backbone~(blue) by two self-attention components,~which select and `blend' most relevant temporal~(TCM, red) and spatial (SCM, green) information via SoftMax folding. Blended feature maps are fed back into the feature pyramid network~(yellow) before fuelling the detection head, which contains bounding box regression~(black) and classification~streams~(grey).
}
}
\vspace{-16pt}
\label{fig:arch}
\end{figure}
The problem of visually identifying the presence and locations of animal species filmed in natural habitats~\cite{kuhlburghardt2013} is of central importance for automating the interpretation of large-scale camera trap imagery. This is particularly challenging in scenarios where lighting is difficult, backgrounds are non-static, and major occlusions, image noise, as well as animal camouflage effects occur: filming great apes via camera traps in jungle environments constitutes one such setting. There, animals appear uniformly dark and blend into the forest during eating, playing or moving in groups sometimes behind trees or thicket. An animal's visual presence and location is thus often only determinable by linking selective spatial and temporal information about species-typical appearance and locomotion across video snippets.
In this paper, we address this specific video object detection challenge by proposing a blended detection framework integrated into a feature pyramid network (FPN) architecture \cite{He2016DeepRecognition,Lin2017FeatureDetection} as illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:arch}. We introduce two extra components to a traditional detection backbone:~a~Spatial Context Module (SCM) and a Temporal Context Module (TCM). Each of these modules is driven by a self-attention mechanism tasked to learn how to emphasise most relevant elements of a feature given its context. In particular, these attention components are effective in learning how to `blend' spatially and temporally distributed visual cues in order to reconstruct object locations under dispersed partial information; be that due to occlusion or lighting.
Whilst the self-attention concept has been used recently in various application contexts \cite{Wang2018Non-localNetworks,Cao2019GCNet:Beyond}, we tailor it here to spatio-temporal video object detection and propose a flexible component setup that can be utilized as an add-on to different backbone networks. We show that the approach is beneficial in scenarios where distinctive species appearance and motion signatures are only partly accessible and intermittently dispersed across the spatial and temporal domain. Figure~\ref{fig:dataset} exemplifies such scenarios on the Pan Africa camera trap data used in this work. This dataset contains~$500\times$ $15s$ video clips with the resolution of $720\times 404$ and was collected by the Pan African Programme `The Cultured Chimpanzee'~(see Acknowledgements). It was subsequently labelled for this paper with accurate bounding box ground truth for all animals in each frame.
\begin{figure}[b]\vspace{-10pt}
\includegraphics[width=237pt,height=188pt]{images/ICCVW_figure2.pdf}\vspace{-33pt}
\begin{center}
\end{center}
\caption{
\small{
\textbf{Pan Africa Great Ape Camera Trap Dataset.} Sample frames from four representative videos of the dataset with ground truth animal annotations in red. \textbf{\textit{(1$^{st}$ row)}}~clip showing two easily detectable animals walking past a camera trap with a third animal moving behind thicket; \textbf{\textit{(2$^{nd}$ row)}}~clip where two great apes hide and emerge from behind bushes; \textbf{\textit{(3$^{rd}$ row)~}}clip with frames of extreme close-ups;\textbf{\textit{ (4$^{th}$ row)~}}clip with challenging lighting.
}
}
\label{fig:dataset}
\end{figure}
\textbf{Contributions.} \textbf{\textit{(1)}} FPN-integrated blended detection framework driven by spatial and temporal self-attention components;
\textbf{\textit{(2)}} Cross-dataset ablation study of the framework quantifying details for various backbones and setups; \textit{\textbf{(3)}} Comprehensive animal bounding box annotations in 180K frames of the Pan Africa dataset.
\section{Related Work}
Object detection in video is usually implemented via video feature extraction~\cite{Simonyan2014Two-StreamVideos,Carreira2017QuoDataset,Karpathy2014Large-scaleNetworks}, frame feature aggregation~\cite{Chen2018OptimizingLattice,Zhu2017DeepRecognition,Zhu2017Flow-GuidedDetection}, or detection post-processing~\cite{han2016Seq-NMSDetection,Kang2018T-CNN:Videos,Kang2016ObjectNetworks}. The task is distinct from object tracking \cite{Zhu2018Distractor-awareTracking,Li2018SiamRPN++:Networks,Bertinetto2016Fully-convolutionalTracking} since the object instances to follow are not given -- they may appear or disappear at any point and need to be localised and determined as absent or present on a per-frame basis.
Similar to other video tasks, video object detection relies on extracting relevant information from the spatio-temporal corpus formed by frame sequences.
For instance, C3D~\cite{Tran2015LearningNetworks} and I3D~\cite{Carreira2017QuoDataset} explore 3D convolutional neural networks~(CNNs) to generate mixed motion-RGB features from frame sequences. In contrast, dual-stream ConvNets such as Siamese ConvNet~\cite{Simonyan2014Two-StreamVideos} and TSN~\cite{Wang2016TemporalRecognition} apply separate networks for RGB and motion processing where optical flow is often used as a pre-computed input. Frame feature aggregation, as used in DFF~\cite{Zhu2017DeepRecognition}, FGFA~\cite{Zhu2017Flow-GuidedDetection}, and ST-Lattice~\cite{Chen2018OptimizingLattice}, deals with motion implicitly by training networks that fuse frame-level spatial features to explore the temporal structure of videos. Detection post-processing, such as used in T-CNN~\cite{Kang2018T-CNN:Videos} and Seq-NMS~\cite{han2016Seq-NMSDetection}, ignores explicit temporal feature construction altogether. Operating closer to a traditional tracking paradigm, these methods instead link detection results from individual frames into tracklets by optimising overall trajectory scores.
Before focusing on the most relevant details of some of the above methods, we will first review the foundations on which many of the approaches rest, that is: how to extract detection-relevant features from single~frames.
\subsection{Single Image Object Detection}
Object detection fundamentally requires two conceptual tasks to be solved: localisation and classification of content of interest. Region proposal based methods such as F-RCNN~\cite{Ren2017FasterNetworks.} or Cascade-RCNN~\cite{Cai2018CascadeDetection} pre-process images first to generate class-agnostic regions of interest (ROIs) before classifying these and regressing associated bounding boxes. F-RCNN, in particular, uses a region proposal network~(RPN) built on top of a backbone shared with the classification component. More recently, to improve the quality of detection, Cascade-RCNN appends two more stages based on F-RCNN and replaces ROI pooling with ROI alignment making the framework more robust.
In contrast to all region proposal based methods, single-shot detectors infer class probability and bounding box offsets within a single feed forward network. This approach is usually simpler in design and faster at runtime as impressively shown, for instance, by YOLO~\cite{Redmon2016YouDetection,Redmon2017YOLO9000:Stronger} and SSD~\cite{Liu2016SSD:Detector}. Darknet-based YOLO~\cite{Redmon2016YouDetection} in particular regresses anchor boxes and box scores directly as well as class probabilities. Due to its versatility and fast performance, YOLO has formed the detection backbone for successfully constructed primate face detectors~\cite{Brust2017TowardsWild} for single images in the past. Similarly to the YOLO approach, SSD predicts a fixed number of bounding boxes. However, by applying detection at different scales, SSD has been shown to adjust better to different object sizes and aspect ratios. More recently, by addressing the class imbalance problem of all of the previous single-shot methods, RetinaNet~\cite{Lin2017FocalDetection} replaces the cross-entropy loss with the focal loss for classification, which focusses the training on hard examples.
\subsection{Video Object Detection}
Whilst single image object detectors are directly applicable to video in a frame-by-frame manner, they ignore -- by definition -- temporal cues. Yet, these are often vital for detection under challenging conditions as for the case at hand. We will next briefly review the key ideas behind most relevant recent works~such as FGFA~\cite{Zhu2017Flow-GuidedDetection}, D\&T \cite{Feichtenhofer2017DetectDetect}, T-CNN~\cite{Kang2018T-CNN:Videos}, and Seq-NMS~\cite{han2016Seq-NMSDetection}. The fundamental task for all these methods is to integrate information from the temporal domain directly into detection decisions.
Linking single frame detections across the temporal dimension as done by T-CNN~\cite{Kang2018T-CNN:Videos} constitutes possibly the simplest form of temporal domain exploration. T-CNN essentially runs region-based detectors per frame and enforces motion-based propagation to adjacent frames. This classical tracking paradigm thereby extends detections into tubelets, which after re-scoring and suppression of overlaps yield the final set of detected objects.
In contrast, D\&T \cite{Feichtenhofer2017DetectDetect} interlinks single image detection and tracking in a unified approach using ROI pooling on both detection-based feature maps and tracking-based correlation feature maps, where a specific correlation layer is introduced to produce the latter.
Seq-NMS~\cite{han2016Seq-NMSDetection} follows a similar paradigm constructing sequences along temporally close, high confidence bounding boxes in consecutive frames.
Their governing metric for sequence association maximises overall confidence and IOU scores, and sequence-based non-maximum suppression is utilised to fuse or filter out overlapping tracklets. Whilst temporal consistency can be extrapolated this way, the spatial distortion effects across the temporal domain are not accounted for.
To address this, FGFA~\cite{Zhu2017Flow-GuidedDetection} performs optical flow guided spatial warping before aggregating features. The resulting features are subsequently fused temporally by weighted element-wise addition where weights are determined by the optical flow field. These descriptors contain rich spatio-temporal information that have been shown to address problems such as blurred object detection and partially occluded object detection.
Taking closest inspiration from the temporal cue aggregation mechanism used in FGFA, we propose an attention-based spatial \textit{and} temporal feature blending framework that can be used as an add-on to existing (and future) feature pyramid networks as they are in standard use for object detection today~\cite{Lin2017FocalDetection}. Attention-based spatial blending was successfully used before in GCNet~\cite{Cao2019GCNet:Beyond}, but attention-based spatio-temporal blending is -- to the best of our knowledge -- novel as a core concept for video object detection.
We will now describe how such information blending across space and time can be implemented, and how it is beneficial to addressing the problem of great ape detection.
\begin{figure}[b]
\centering \vspace{-13pt}
\includegraphics[scale=0.37]{images/concept.jpg}\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{
\small{\textbf{Principled Workflow of the Blending Framework.} \textit{\textbf{(1)}} Input features are grouped by the target dimension; \textit{\textbf{(2)}}~Each location of the feature map is embedded by its position; \textbf{\textit{(3)}}~A correlation map is computed and reduced. This map is then applied back to the embedded feature via matrix multiplication (marked as $\bigotimes)$ implementing the self-attention principle. \textbf{\textit{(4)}}~The resulting feature is finally transformed, before \textbf{\textit{(4)}}~ being fused with the residual to form the blended output. Key functions are shown at the point of application as annotations.}
}\vspace{-18pt}
\label{fig:concept}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-12pt}
\section{Detection via Spatial \& Temporal Blending}
\textbf{Task.} Our task is to generate frame-level bounding box detections~$\mathbf{D}=\{\mathbf{D}_1, \dots, \mathbf{D}_t, \dots\}$ of great apes across a video $\mathbf{X}=\{\mathbf{X}_1, \dots,\mathbf{X}_t,\dots\}$, where $\mathbf{D}_t$ are the detection results for frame $\mathbf{X}_t$ at time step~$t$. To predict the bounding box detections~$\mathbf{D}_t$, the network can utilise both previous \textit{and} future frames, $i.e.$ a snippet~$\{\mathbf{X}_{t-\tau}, \dots, \mathbf{X}_t, \dots, \mathbf{X}_{t+\tau}\}$ of length~$T$. \vspace{5pt}
\textbf{Overall Concept.} As shown in Figure~\ref{fig:arch}, our integrated architecture extends a standard feature pyramid network by two extra components: a Spatial Context Module~(SCM) and a Temporal Context Module (TCM). Each of these modules is driven by a self-attention mechanism that learns how to emphasise the most relevant elements of a feature given its context. Both components follow a principled workflow similar to the one described by Cao et al~\cite{Cao2019GCNet:Beyond} and visualised in Figure~\ref{fig:concept}. Essentially, after grouping inputs along the dimensions of attentional interest (spatial or temporal), features are embedded into a lower dimensional space and a self-attention map of the feature is created. This map is then applied back onto the features in order to `blend' it and emphasise elements important to the detection process whilst suppressing other content. Critically, these components are trainable as part of the network and can be rolled out across space and time so that dispersed species-distinctive information can be selected from within the spatio-temporal volume.
For a given spatial or temporal module and position~$i$ in the input feature~$x_i$, the context-enhanced and `blended' output feature~$z_i$ can in its simplest form be expressed as: \vspace{-6pt}
\begin{equation}
\label{equ1}
z_i=x_i+f\bigg(\frac{1}{M}\sum^{M}_{j=1} s\Big(e_i(x_i),e_j(x_j)\Big) e_i(x_i)\bigg) ~, \vspace{-4pt}
\end{equation}
where $x_i$ is {the} $i$th descriptor of the residual feature map, $e(\cdot)$~is the embedding function, $f(\cdot)$ is the transform function, $s(\cdot)$~is the correlation function, $M$ is the number of positions in the feature, $e.g.$ $M=HWT$ for {a} video {sequence} {($H$ denotes height, $W$ denotes width, $T$ denotes snippet length)}, and $j$~enumerates all the positions across the context. The embedding function $e(\cdot)$ and transfer function $f(\cdot)$ are implemented via $1\times 1$ convolution kernels without bias using learnable weights $w$.\vspace{5pt}
\textbf{Spatial Module.} As depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:arch} (green), we use a simplified non-local attention component with a SoftMax function applied across the embedded feature vector as the SCM. The module output $z_i^{SCM}$ is:\vspace{-5pt}
\begin{small}\begin{equation}
z_{i}^{SCM}=x_{i} \oplus w^3 \sum_{j=1}^{M}\left(\begin{small}\frac{\exp{(w^1x_j)}}{\sum^{M}_{a=1}\exp{(w^1x_a)}}\end{small}\otimes(w^2x_j) \right) ~, \vspace{-3pt}
\end{equation}\end{small}
where $j$ enumerates all context locations, $x_i$ represents the incoming features, $\oplus$ denotes element-wise broadcast addition, $\otimes$ denotes multiplication of tensor elements, $w^{1}$~and $w^{2}$~describe the different learnable parameters of linear embedding functions $e(\cdot)$, and $w^{3}$~represent the parameters of a linear transform function $f(\cdot)$.
\vspace{5pt}
\textbf{Temporal Module.} Figure~\ref{fig:arch} (red) visualises the temporal module in detail, which follows the principles layed out in Equation~(\ref{equ1}) in general terms. In particular, the TCM module is constructed to apply self-attention across a short-term temporal context where, for each input frame $X_t$, a feature $x_t$ from the previous layer is first embedded by a linear function~$e(\cdot)$ with weights $w^4_{t}$. Subsequently, its temporal correlation function $s(\cdot)$ is modelled by a global SoftMax $\mathcal{C}(\cdot)$ across a temporal context of $T=2\tau+1$ selected nearby frames. For each feature position $i \in M$ the global SoftMax is defined as:
\vspace{-12pt}
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{C}(x_{t,i} ; w^4)=\frac{\exp{(w^{4}_{t}x_{t,i})}}{\sum_{m \in T}\exp{(w^4_{m}x_{m,i})}} ~, \vspace{-2pt}
\end{equation}{}
where frame $m$ enumerates all $T$ frame positions, and $w_{t}$ is the linear embedding parameter for time step $t$. We then use the mean value of all positional temporal attention to normalise the term yielding a temporal attention map for time step $t$ as:\vspace{-12pt}
\begin{equation}
\hat{x}_{t,i}=\frac{1}{HW}\mathcal{C}(x_{t,i} ; w^4)\sum_{j=1}^{HW}\mathcal{C}(x_{t,j} ; w^4) ~.\vspace{-3pt}
\end{equation}
In order to visually illustrate this concept, two examples of temporal attention maps projected back into the image domain are depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:attention maps}. The maps highlight distinctive, dispersed features for context-aware inference revealing target object locations despite heavy partial occlusion.
These maps are subsequently applied back onto the original feature by matrix multiplication~$\otimes$, element-wise broadcast addition~$\oplus$, and two linear transformations. One transform learns adaptive weights (\textit{i.e.} $w^5_{m}$) to `blend' between original and attention-adapted features, the other learns weights (\textit{i.e.} \textit{$w^6_{m}$}) to `blend' across the temporal domain. Finally, an additive connection to the original inputs~$x_{t,i}$ is made to ensure learning stability yielding: \vspace{-8pt}
\begin{equation}
z_{t,i}^{TCM}=x_{t,i}+\sum_{m \in T}w^6_{m}(x_{m,i} \oplus w^5_{m}\sum_{j=1}^{HW}\hat{x}_{m,j}\otimes x_{m,j}) ~.\vspace{-3pt}
\end{equation} \vspace{5pt}
\begin{figure}[b]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=237pt,height=180pt]{images/ICCVW_figure5.pdf}
\end{center}\vspace{-13pt} \caption{\small{\textbf{Visualisation of Temporal Attention Maps for Two Example Scenes.} First and third rows depict attention maps when projected back into the image domain. Second and fourth row show the associated frames with green bounding boxes showing predictions by the network with $T=3$. Green lines indicte that shown attention maps contribute to detections in the central frame.}}\vspace{-10pt
\label{fig:attention maps}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-9pt}
\subsection{ Overall Network Architecture}
\textbf{Backbones.} {We follow the layout of RetinaNet~\cite{Lin2017FocalDetection}} and Cascade~\cite{Cai2018CascadeDetection} as the {two major} state-of-the-art architectures in our study. Figure~\ref{fig:arch}~(blue) visualises a ResNet50 architecture as an example backbone \cite{He2016DeepRecognition} where we extract FPN levels from network layers $P_3$ to~$P_7$. Across different scales of the FPN, anchors cover area sizes of $32^2$ to $512^2$ distributed over pyramid levels from $P_3$ to $P_7$, respectively.
We embed our TCM and SCM after the last layer of the backbone for a maximal receptive field during blending. \vspace{4pt}
\textbf{Detection Head.} The RetinaNet based detection head contains two streams, \textit{i.e.} a localisation stream and classification stream. The classification subnet (coloured grey in Figure~\ref{fig:arch}) predicts a likelihood vector of class membership for each anchor box. This network is fully convolutional and operates on top of the $5$ FPN layer outputs $P_3$ to $P_7$. It is composed of $4$ cascaded $3 \times 3$ convolutional layers, each with $256$ channels, and followed by a ReLU activation. The final layer uses $3 \times 3$ convolutions with a Sigmoid function as activation for producing the final classification output. In the localisation subnet (coloured black in Figure~\ref{fig:arch}) the final layer yields $4\times$ channel outputs describing bounding box locations. We assign initial anchor areas ranging from $32^2$ to $512^2$ elements corresponding to the pyramid levels $P_3$ to $P_7$, respectively. Subsequent rescaling uses the ratios of [$2^0$, $2^{1/3}$, $2^{2/3}$] and transforms anchors with three aspect ratios [1:2, 1:1, 2:1]. In total there are 9 anchors per level. Focal loss from \cite{Lin2017FocalDetection} is adopted to tackle the foreground and background imbalance problem.
We also implemented a stronger, cascaded detection head~\cite{Cai2018CascadeDetection} for maximum detection quality. The cascaded detection head contains four stages, one for an RPN, which regresses class-agnostic regions of interest, and three for detection with different IoU ground truth assignments parameterized as~$[0.5,0.6,0.7]$. Note that the three cascaded detection heads are fully convolutional and ROI alignment is used for ROI feature pooling.
\subsection{Training Details}
We train the network end-to-end in two separate stages~(see Figure~\ref{fig:training}). First, we pre-train our model on the ImageNet VID dataset for 14 epochs, and then the entire model is trained with synchronised batch normalisation and {training data augmentation (sequence-based random brightness, horizontal flip, central crop)} for $14$ epochs on the $400$ video training portion of the Pan Africa dataset. The remaining $100$ clips are used for testing.
During the various experiments, we use short-term video snippets and sparse sampling of between $T=3$ to $T=8$ frames {whose shorter size is }resized {to at least $512$ and up to $800$} pixels horizontally keeping the aspect ratio constant by padding if necessary. During training, each mini-batch contains $8$ snippets, that is $1$ per deployed Nvidia Tesla P100 GPU. The learning rate is warmed up for the first $500$ iterations of each training phase from $0.002$ to $0.01$ and decreased $10$ times at epoch $6$ and $11$, respectively.
We use SGD with the momentum of $0.9$ as the optimizer and utilise ImageNet pre-trained weights to initialise the backbone. FPN layers and all other convolutional layers are initialised by normal distributions.\vspace{-5pt}
\section{Experimental Results}
We evaluate the proposed system both quantitatively and qualitatively, and perform detailed ablation studies. We also perform a validation on the full ILSVRC 2015 VID data corpus to demonstrate wider applicability.
\subsection{Quantitative Evaluation}
Using the test portion of the Pan Africa dataset, we first evaluate single frame detectors as our baselines. For evaluation, we compute the average precision (AP) as the area under precision-recall curve and then report the mean of AP~(mAP) for the classes in the validation set.
We re-implemented RetinaNet~\cite{Lin2017FocalDetection} with ResNet50 and ResNet101 baselines and, as shown in Table \ref{tab:chimpresult}, these two architectures achieve 80.79\% and 85.25\% mAP, respectively. Whilst adding a SCM component to the ResNet50 RetinaNet setup improves performance slightly to 81.21\%, the current state-of-the-art Cascade-RCNN~\cite{Cai2018CascadeDetection} outperforms this setup and older single frame baselines, achieving 88.31\% on the Pan Africa test data.
The basic addition of a TCM component, on the other hand, produces significant performance improvements by up to $10.02\%\uparrow$ for ResNet50 RetinaNet, and still $2.86\%\uparrow$ for Cascade-RCNN.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=237pt,height=111pt]{images/figure4.pdf}\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{
\small{
\textbf{Example Training and Validation Performance.} {mAP plots} for both training (blue) and validation~(green) of the {ResNet50} RetinaNet SCM+TCM setup along the $28$ epochs of optimisation split into two distinct phases, i.e. pre-training on ImageNet VID, and fine-tuning on the Pan Africa dataset. }
}\vspace{-4pt}
\label{fig:training}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[b]
\begin{adjustbox}{width=\columnwidth,center}
\begin{tabular}{cc|cc|c}
\multicolumn{2}{c|}{Backbone and FPN Layout} & $T_{train}$ & $T_{test}$ & mAP(\%) \\
\hline
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Res50\\ RetinaNet\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}baseline\cite{Lin2017FocalDetection}\\ +SCM\\ +TCM\\ +SCM+TCM\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}\textbackslash\\ \textbackslash\\ 7\\ 7\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}\textbackslash\\ \textbackslash\\ 21\\ 21\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}80.79\\81.21\\90.02\\ \textbf{90.81}\end{tabular} \\
\hline
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Res101\\ RetinaNet\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}baseline\cite{Lin2017FocalDetection}\\ +SCM+TCM\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}\textbackslash\\ 5\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}\textbackslash\\ 21\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}85.25\\\textbf{90.21}\end{tabular} \\
\hline
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}ResX101\\ Cascade\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}baseline\cite{Cai2018CascadeDetection}\\ +SCM+TCM\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}\textbackslash\\ 3\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}\textbackslash\\ 21\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}88.31\\ \textbf{91.17}\end{tabular}
\end{tabular}
\end{adjustbox}
\caption{\textbf{Pan Africa Performance Results}. Boosts in mean average precision (mAP) on the Pan Africa test dataset when applying the proposed TCM \& SCM components with various state-of-the-art FPN architectures.}\vspace{-8pt}
\label{tab:chimpresult}
\end{table}
The training process for a full SCM+TCM setup, as quantified earlier in Figure~\ref{fig:training} for instance, furthermore reveals that the generalisation gap~of such a model (mAP distance between blue and green curves) narrows significantly for the PanAfrica dataset compared to the ImageNet VID pre-training in late stages. Narrow generalisation gaps indicate that a model is particularly capable of carrying over learned inference strategies to unseen instances of the particular dataset. For the case at hand, this and the improved overall mAP indicate that fine-tuning is indeed successful.
We also validated a basic ResNet50 RetinaNet version that uses SCM+TCM on the full ILSVRC 2015 VID corpus to show that our rather simple and flexible SCM+TCM network extension can achieve {strong} results also in this general detection setting at $63.85\%$~mAP. This
ranks within the top three of the original mAP based competition~\cite{ImageNet}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=240pt,height=260pt]{images/ICCVW_figure6.pdf}
\vspace{-20pt}
\caption{\small{\textbf{ Examples of Positive Attention Component Impact.} Depicted are ground truth labels (red) and detections~(green) for a ResNet50 FPN with (rows 2, 4, and 6) and without (rows 1, 3, and 5) SCM+TCM components. Note the clear detection improvements for partially occluded great apes (top two examples) and under challenging lighting (bottom example).}}\vspace{-9pt}
\label{fig:results}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Qualitative Observations on Pan Africa Data}
The Pan Africa dataset contains many scenes where illumination, occlusions, noise or animal camouflage effects make it challenging to recognise animals (as seen before in Figure \ref{fig:dataset}). We found that the SCM+TCM setup consistently improves detection robustness compared to baselines in such cases. These improvements make a significant contribution to the overall quantitative results reported before. Figure~\ref{fig:results} provides examples of successful cases where per-frame accurate animal detection is achieved by the SCM+TCM components in the presence of partial occlusion or challenging lighting. However, as depicted in the bottom examples of Figure~\ref{fig:results2}, a number of particular animal appearances remain challenging to detect despite the availability of spatial and temporal context information.
\begin{figure}[b]\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=240pt,height=202pt]{images/ICCVW_figure7.pdf}
\vspace{-29pt}
\begin{center}
\end{center}\vspace{-13pt} \caption{\small{\textbf{Success and Failure Cases.} Depicted are ground truth labels (red) and detections~(green) in frames of various example clips using the best performing model ResX101\ Cascade with SCM+TCM components. }}\vspace{-10pt}
\label{fig:results2}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Ablation Study}
We conduct an ablation study on both the Pan Africa and the ILSVRC 2015 VID datasets in order to quantify in detail the impact of the key system parameters. All of the results are reported based on ResNet50+SCM+TCM setup with a RetinaNet detection head.
\textbf{SCM+TCM\ Insertion Point.} Considering arguments in \cite{Cao2019GCNet:Beyond}, we acknowledge that the embedding position of our module along the original backbone network is important. To determine the best insertion point, we test three possible positions for insertion into ResNet50: after the $3 \times 3$ convolution of the last ResNet block; after the last $1 \times 1$ convolution before the residual addition; and after the residual addition.
As shown in Table \ref{tab:ablation1}(a) and Table \ref{tab:ablation2}(a), we find that the last option is superior and can gain $6.01\%\uparrow$ mAP on Pan Africa and $6.42\% \uparrow$ mAP on VID improvement when compared with insertion after the last $1 \times 1$ convolution. This indicates that the final residual addition
in the base network \textit{does} provide useful extra information.
\textbf{Temporal Frame Support.} Different choices on supporting frames~$T$ are ablated in Table \ref{tab:ablation1}(b) and \ref{tab:ablation2}(b). Results confirm that wider windows for temporal integration do indeed benefit detection, however, particularly during training, GPU sizes limit possible choices of $T$. During testing, longer exposures are possible. Quantifying the effect of varying test exposures we find that, for $T_{test}=21$ frames compared to $T_{test}=5$, there is a $1.96\% \uparrow$ and $3.69\% \uparrow$ improvement for fixed $T_{train}=7$ on the Pan Africa and ILSVRC 2015 VID datasets, respectively.\vspace{10pt}
\textbf{Embedding Strategy in the TCM.} We found that when applying an embedding strategy in the TCM where only the current main frame features (indicated as black arrows of the TCM in Figure~\ref{fig:arch}) are backpropagated and reference features are used, but not backprogagated, then a marginally improved overall performance can be observed (marked as \textit{Main \& Refs} in contrast to \textit{Positional} in Tables \ref{tab:ablation1} and \ref{tab:ablation2}).
\begin{table}[b]
\centering
\begin{subtable}{.5\textwidth}
\caption{\textbf{Position}}\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
Embedding & position &$T_{train}$ & $T_{test}$ & mAP(\%) \\
\hline
Positional & after add & 8 & 8 & 88.21 \\
Positional & after 1x1 & 8 & 8 & 82.20 \\
Positional & after 3x3 & 8 & 8 & \textbf{87.75} \\
\specialrule{.1em}{.05em}{.05em}
\end{tabular}
\end{subtable}
\begin{subtable}{.5\textwidth}
\caption{\textbf{Supporting Frames}}\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
Embedding & position & $T_{train}$ & $T_{test}$ & mAP(\%) \\
\hline
Main \& Refs & after add & 7 & 21 & \textbf{90.81} \\
Main \& Refs & after add & 7 & 5 & 88.85 \\
Main \& Refs & after add & 3 & 5 & 87.76 \\
\specialrule{.1em}{.05em}{.05em}
\end{tabular}
\end{subtable}
\begin{subtable}{.5\textwidth}
\caption{\textbf{Embedding Strategy}}\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
Embedding & position & $T_{train}$ & $T_{test}$ & mAP(\%) \\
Positional & after add & 7 & 21 & 88.61 \\
Main \& Refs & after add & 7 & 21 & \textbf{90.81} \\
\specialrule{.1em}{.05em}{.05em}
\end{tabular}
\end{subtable}
\caption{\textbf{Pan Africa Dataset Ablation Study.} Key system design choices tested on a ResNet50+SCM+TCM setup with a RetinaNet detection head.}
\label{tab:ablation1}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[b]
\centering
\begin{subtable}{.5\textwidth}
\caption{\textbf{Position}}\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
Embedding & position & $T_{train}$ & $T_{test}$ & mAP(\%) \\
\hline
Positional & after add & 8 & 8 & 56.25 \\
Positional & after 1x1 & 8 & 8 & 49.83 \\
Positional & after 3x3 & 8 & 8 & \textbf{58.20} \\
\specialrule{.1em}{.05em}{.05em}
\end{tabular}
\end{subtable}
\begin{subtable}{.5\textwidth}
\caption{\textbf{Supporting Frames}}\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
Embedding & position & $T_{train}$ & $T_{test}$ & mAP(\%) \\
\hline
Positional & after add & 8 & 8 & 56.25 \\
Positional & after add & 5 & 8 & 54.38 \\
\hline
Main \& Refs & after add & 7 & 21 & \textbf{63.85} \\
Main \& Refs & after add & 7 & 5 & 60.16 \\
\specialrule{.1em}{.05em}{.05em}
\end{tabular}
\end{subtable}
\begin{subtable}{.5\textwidth}
\caption{\textbf{Embedding Strategy}}\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
Embedding & position & $T_{train}$ & $T_{test}$ & mAP(\%) \\
\hline
Positional & after add & 7 & 21 & 59.25 \\
Main \& Refs & after add & 7 & 21 & \textbf{63.85} \\
\specialrule{.1em}{.05em}{.05em}
\end{tabular}
\end{subtable}
\caption{\textbf{ILSVRC 2015 VID Dataset Ablation Study.} Key system design choices tested on a ResNet50+SCM+TCM setup with a RetinaNet detection head.}\vspace{-15pt}
\label{tab:ablation2}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion and Implications}
In this paper we proposed the first multi-frame video object detection framework trained and evaluated for detecting great apes utilising their full body morphology. We demonstrated that the framework is applicable to challenging camera trap footage taken in complex jungle environments.
We introduced two self-attention driven feature blending components operating in both the spatial and the temporal domains to facilitate detection under heavy partial occlusions and challenging lighting variations.
We showed that this novel and flexible extension performs robustly at $91.17\%$~mAP on a real world Pan Africa camera trap $500$ video dataset, which we labelled accurately with animal ground truth annotations for $180$K frames. We conducted detailed ablation studies on our method and showed that the setup significantly outperforms state-of-the-art frame based detectors. For general evaluation beyond the task at hand, we also performed a validation on the ILSVRC 2015 VID data corpus to demonstrate {significant} performance on non-specialised video object detection.
We note that currently ecological camera trap studies are widely conducted by manual inspection, although great ape face detection~\cite{Brust2017TowardsWild,loos2013automated} has been used for ecological surveys before \cite{crunchant2017automated} and DrivenData \cite{Competition:Factorization} hosted a recent challenge to classify jungle camera trap clips by species, without detecting animals and their location in frames explicitly.
The presented system, in contrast, provides explicit animal locations and is independent of visibility constraints regarding the animal's face. It adds a new capability of detection and localisation of animals partly occluded by vegetation at adequate performance levels.
Whilst tests against other current video detection frameworks are outstanding and will form part of our future work, we conclude that the presented system is ready to assist human camera trap inspection efforts.
\vspace{-5pt}\section*{Acknowledgements}
We would like to thank the entire team of the Pan African Programme: `The Cultured Chimpanzee' and its collaborators for allowing the use of their data for this paper. Please contact the copyright holder Pan African Programme at http://panafrican.eva.mpg.de to obtain the dataset. Particularly, we thank: H Kuehl, C Boesch, M Arandjelovic, and P Dieguez. We would also like to thank: K Zuberbuehler, K Corogenes,
E Normand, V Vergnes, A Meier, J Lapuente,
D Dowd, S Jones,
V Leinert,
E Wessling, H Eshuis,
K Langergraber, S Angedakin,
S Marrocoli,
K Dierks, T C Hicks, J Hart,
K Lee,
and M Murai.
Thanks also to the team at https://www.chimpandsee.org.
The work that allowed for the collection of the dataset was funded by the Max Planck Society, Max Planck Society Innovation Fund, and Heinz L. Krekeler. In this respect we would also like to thank: Foundation
Ministère de la Recherche Scientifique, and Ministère des Eaux et Forêts in Co´te d'Ivoire; Institut Congolais pour la Conservation de la Nature and Ministère de la Recherche Scientifique in DR Congo; Forestry Development Authority in Liberia; Direction des Eaux, Forêts Chasses et de la Conservation des Sols, Senegal; and Uganda National Council for Science and Technology, Uganda Wildlife Authority, National Forestry Authority in Uganda.
{
\small
\bibliographystyle{ieee_fullname}
\section{Introduction } \label{intro}
\begin{figure}[t]\vspace{-10pt}
\includegraphics[width=237pt,height=307pt]{images/overview.jpg}\vspace{-4pt}
\caption{
\small{
\textbf{Architectural Overview.} Our framework processes video snippets (top left) and robustly detects per-frame great ape locations~(bottom right). The architecture extends a traditional detection backbone~(blue) by two self-attention components,~which select and `blend' most relevant temporal~(TCM, red) and spatial (SCM, green) information via SoftMax folding. Blended feature maps are fed back into the feature pyramid network~(yellow) before fuelling the detection head, which contains bounding box regression~(black) and classification~streams~(grey).
}
}
\vspace{-16pt}
\label{fig:arch}
\end{figure}
The problem of visually identifying the presence and locations of animal species filmed in natural habitats is of central importance for automating the interpretation of large-scale camera trap imagery. This task is particularly challenging in scenarios where lighting is difficult, backgrounds are non-static, and major occlusions, image noise, as well as animal camouflage effects occur: filming great apes via camera traps in jungle environments constitutes one such setting. There, animals appear uniformly dark and blend into the forest during eating, playing or moving in groups sometimes behind trees or thicket. An animal's visual presence and location is thus often only determinable by linking selective spatial and temporal information about species-typical appearance and locomotion across video snippets.
In this paper, we address this specific video object detection challenge by proposing a blended detection framework integrated into a feature pyramid network (FPN) architecture \cite{He2016DeepRecognition,Lin2017FeatureDetection} as illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:arch}. We introduce two extra components to a traditional detection backbone: a Spatial Context Module (SCM) and a Temporal Context Module (TCM). Each of these modules is driven by a self-attention mechanism tasked to learn how to emphasise most relevant elements of a feature given its context. In particular, these attention components are effective in learning how to `blend' spatially and temporally distributed visual cues in order to reconstruct object locations under dispersed partial information; be that due to occlusion or lighting.
Whilst the self-attention concept has been used recently in various application contexts \cite{Wang2018Non-localNetworks,Cao2019GCNet:Beyond}, we tailor it here to spatio-temporal video object detection and propose a flexible component setup that can be utilized as an add-on to different backbone networks. We show that the approach is beneficial in scenarios where distinctive species appearance and motion signatures are only partly accessible and intermittently dispersed across the spatial and temporal domain. Figure~\ref{fig:dataset} exemplifies such scenarios on the Pan Africa camera trap data used in this work. This dataset contains~$500\times$ $15s$ video clips with the resolution of $720\times 404$ and was collected by the Pan African Programme `The Cultured Chimpanzee'~(see Acknowledgements). It was subsequently labelled for this paper with accurate bounding box ground truth for all animals in each frame.
\begin{figure}[b]\vspace{-10pt}
\includegraphics[width=237pt,height=188pt]{images/ICCVW_figure2.pdf}\vspace{-33pt}
\begin{center}
\end{center}
\caption{
\small{
\textbf{Pan Africa Great Ape Camera Trap Dataset.} Sample frames from four representative videos of the dataset with ground truth animal annotations in red. \textbf{\textit{(1$^{st}$ row)}}~clip showing two easily detectable animals walking past a camera trap with a third animal moving behind thicket; \textbf{\textit{(2$^{nd}$ row)}}~clip where two great apes hide and emerge from behind bushes; \textbf{\textit{(3$^{rd}$ row)~}}clip with frames of extreme close-ups;\textbf{\textit{ (4$^{th}$ row)~}}clip with challenging lighting.
}
}
\label{fig:dataset}
\end{figure}
\textbf{Contributions.} \textbf{\textit{(1)}} FPN-integrated blended detection framework driven by spatial and temporal self-attention components;
\textbf{\textit{(2)}} Cross-dataset ablation study of the framework quantifying details for various backbones and setups; \textit{\textbf{(3)}} Comprehensive animal bounding box annotations in 180K frames of the Pan Africa dataset.
\section{Related Work}
Object detection in video is usually implemented via video feature extraction~\cite{Simonyan2014Two-StreamVideos,Carreira2017QuoDataset,Qiu2017LearningNetworks,Karpathy2014Large-scaleNetworks}, frame feature aggregation~\cite{Chen2018OptimizingLattice,Zhu2017DeepRecognition,Zhu2017Flow-GuidedDetection}, or detection post-processing~\cite{han2016Seq-NMSDetection,Kang2018T-CNN:Videos,Kang2016ObjectNetworks}. The task is distinct from object tracking \cite{Zhu2018Distractor-awareTracking,Li2018SiamRPN++:Networks,Bertinetto2016Fully-convolutionalTracking} since the object instances to follow are not given -- they may appear or disappear at any point and need to be localised and determined as absent or present on a per-frame basis.
Similar to other video tasks, video object detection relies on extracting relevant information from the spatio-temporal corpus formed by frame sequences.
For instance, C3D~\cite{Tran2015LearningNetworks} and I3D~\cite{Carreira2017QuoDataset} explore 3D convolutional neural networks~(CNNs) to generate mixed motion-RGB features from frame sequences. In contrast, dual-stream ConvNets such as Siamese ConvNet~\cite{Simonyan2014Two-StreamVideos} and TSN~\cite{Wang2016TemporalRecognition} apply separate networks for RGB and motion processing where optical flow is often used as a pre-computed input. Frame feature aggregation, as used in DFF~\cite{Zhu2017DeepRecognition}, FGFA~\cite{Zhu2017Flow-GuidedDetection}, and ST-Lattice~\cite{Chen2018OptimizingLattice}, deals with motion implicitly by training networks that fuse frame-level spatial features to explore the temporal structure of videos. Detection post-processing, such as used in T-CNN~\cite{Kang2018T-CNN:Videos} and Seq-NMS~\cite{han2016Seq-NMSDetection}, ignores explicit temporal feature construction altogether. Operating closer to a traditional tracking paradigm, these methods instead link detection results from individual frames into tracklets by optimising overall trajectory scores.
Before focusing on the most relevant details of some of the above methods, we will first review the foundations on which many of the approaches rest, that is: how to extract detection-relevant features from single~frames.
\subsection{Single Image Object Detection}
Object detection fundamentally requires two conceptual tasks to be solved: localisation and classification of content of interest. Region proposal based methods such as F-RCNN~\cite{Ren2017FasterNetworks.} or Cascade-RCNN~\cite{Cai2018CascadeDetection} pre-process images first to generate class-agnostic regions of interest (ROIs) before classifying these and regressing associated bounding boxes. F-RCNN, in particular, uses a region proposal network~(RPN) built on top of a backbone shared with the classification component. More recently, to improve the quality of detection, Cascade-RCNN appends two more stages based on F-RCNN and replaces ROI pooling with ROI alignment making the framework more robust.
In contrast to all region proposal based methods, single-shot detectors infer class probability and bounding box offsets within a single feed forward network. This approach is usually simpler in design and faster at runtime as impressively shown, for instance, by YOLO~\cite{Redmon2016YouDetection,Redmon2017YOLO9000:Stronger} and SSD~\cite{Liu2016SSD:Detector}. Darknet-based YOLO~\cite{Redmon2016YouDetection} in particular regresses anchor boxes and box scores directly as well as class probabilities. Due to its versatility and fast performance, YOLO has formed the detection backbone for successfully constructed primate face detectors~\cite{Brust2017TowardsWild} for single images in the past. Similarly to the YOLO approach, SSD predicts a fixed number of bounding boxes. However, by applying detection at different scales, SSD has been shown to adjust better to different object sizes and aspect ratios. More recently, by addressing the class imbalance problem of all of the previous single-shot methods, RetinaNet~\cite{Lin2017FocalDetection} replaces the cross-entropy loss with the focal loss for classification, which focusses the training on hard examples.
\subsection{Video Object Detection}
Whilst single image object detectors are directly applicable to video in a frame-by-frame manner, they ignore -- by definition -- temporal cues. Yet, these are often vital for detection under challenging conditions as for the case at hand. We will next briefly review the key ideas behind most relevant recent works~such as FGFA~\cite{Zhu2017Flow-GuidedDetection}, D\&T \cite{Feichtenhofer2017DetectDetect}, T-CNN~\cite{Kang2018T-CNN:Videos}, and Seq-NMS~\cite{han2016Seq-NMSDetection}. The fundamental task for all these methods is to integrate information from the temporal domain directly into detection decisions.
Linking single frame detections across the temporal dimension as done by T-CNN~\cite{Kang2018T-CNN:Videos} constitutes possibly the simplest form of temporal domain exploration. T-CNN essentially runs region-based detectors per frame and enforces motion-based propagation to adjacent frames. This classical tracking paradigm thereby extends detections into tubelets, which after re-scoring and suppression of overlaps yield the final set of detected objects.
In contrast, D\&T \cite{Feichtenhofer2017DetectDetect} interlinks single image detection and tracking in a unified approach using ROI pooling on both detection-based feature maps and tracking-based correlation feature maps, where a specific correlation layer is introduced to produce the latter.
Seq-NMS~\cite{han2016Seq-NMSDetection} follows a similar paradigm constructing sequences along temporally close, high confidence bounding boxes in consecutive frames.
Their governing metric for sequence association maximises overall confidence and IOU scores, and sequence-based non-maximum suppression is utilised to fuse or filter out overlapping tracklets. Whilst temporal consistency can be extrapolated this way, the spatial distortion effects across the temporal domain are not accounted for.
To address this, FGFA~\cite{Zhu2017Flow-GuidedDetection} performs optical flow guided spatial warping before aggregating features. The resulting features are subsequently fused temporally by weighted element-wise addition where weights are determined by the optical flow field. These descriptors contain rich spatio-temporal information that have been shown to address problems such as blurred object detection and partially occluded object detection.
Taking closest inspiration from the temporal cue aggregation mechanism used in FGFA, we propose an attention-based spatial \textit{and} temporal feature blending framework that can be used as an add-on to existing (and future) feature pyramid networks as they are in standard use for object detection today~\cite{Lin2017FocalDetection}. Attention-based spatial blending was successfully used before in GCNet~\cite{Cao2019GCNet:Beyond}, but attention-based spatio-temporal blending is -- to the best of our knowledge -- novel as a core concept for video object detection.
We will now describe how such information blending across space and time can be implemented, and how it is beneficial to addressing the problem of great ape detection.
\begin{figure}[b]
\centering \vspace{-5pt}
\includegraphics[scale=0.37]{images/concept.jpg}\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{
\small{\textbf{Principled Workflow of the Blending Framework.} \textit{\textbf{(1)}} Input features are grouped by the target dimension; \textit{\textbf{(2)}}~Each location of the feature map is embedded by its position; \textbf{\textit{(3)}}~A correlation map is computed and reduced. This map is then applied back to the embedded feature via matrix multiplication (marked as $\bigotimes)$ implementing the self-attention principle. \textbf{\textit{(4)}}~The resulting feature is finally transformed, before \textbf{\textit{(4)}}~ being fused with the residual to form the blended output. Key functions are shown at the point of application as annotations.}
}\vspace{-18pt}
\label{fig:concept}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-5pt}
\section{Detection via Spatial \& Temporal Blending}
\textbf{Task.} Our task is to generate frame-level bounding box detections~$\mathbf{D}=\{\mathbf{D}_1, \dots, \mathbf{D}_t, \dots\}$ of great apes across a video $\mathbf{X}=\{\mathbf{X}_1, \dots,\mathbf{X}_t,\dots\}$, where $\mathbf{D}_t$ are the detection results for frame $\mathbf{X}_t$ at time step~$t$. To predict the bounding box detections~$\mathbf{D}_t$, the network can utilise both previous \textit{and} future frames, $i.e.$ a snippet~$\{\mathbf{X}_{t-\tau}, \dots, \mathbf{X}_t, \dots, \mathbf{X}_{t+\tau}\}$ of length~$T$. \vspace{5pt}
\textbf{Overall Concept.} As shown in Figure~\ref{fig:arch}, our integrated architecture extends a standard feature pyramid network by two extra components: a Spatial Context Module~(SCM) and a Temporal Context Module (TCM). Each of these modules is driven by a self-attention mechanism that learns how to emphasise the most relevant elements of a feature given its context. Both components follow a principled workflow similar to the one described by Cao et al~\cite{Cao2019GCNet:Beyond} and visualised in Figure~\ref{fig:concept}. Essentially, after grouping inputs along the dimensions of attentional interest (spatial or temporal), features are embedded into a lower dimensional space and a self-attention map of the feature is created. This map is then applied back onto the features in order to `blend' it and emphasise elements important to the detection process whilst suppressing other content. Critically, these components are trainable as part of the network and can be rolled out across space and time so that dispersed species-distinctive information can be selected from within the spatio-temporal volume.
For a given spatial or temporal module and position~$i$ in the input feature~$x_i$, the context-enhanced and `blended' output feature~$z_i$ can in its simplest form be expressed as: \vspace{-6pt}
\begin{equation}
\label{equ1}
z_i=x_i+f\bigg(\frac{1}{M}\sum^{M}_{j=1} s\Big(e_i(x_i),e_j(x_j)\Big) e_i(x_i)\bigg) ~, \vspace{-4pt}
\end{equation}
where $x_i$ is {the} $i$th descriptor of the residual feature map, $e(\cdot)$~is the embedding function, $f(\cdot)$ is the transform function, $s(\cdot)$~is the correlation function, $M$ is the number of positions in the feature, $e.g.$ $M=HWT$ for {a} video {sequence} {($H$ denotes height, $W$ denotes width, $T$ denotes snippet length)}, and $j$~enumerates all the positions across the context. The embedding function $e(\cdot)$ and transfer function $f(\cdot)$ are implemented via $1\times 1$ convolution kernels without bias using learnable weights $w$.\vspace{5pt}
\textbf{Spatial Module.} As depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:arch} (green), we use a simplified non-local attention component with a SoftMax function applied across the embedded feature vector as the SCM. The module output $z_i^{SCM}$ is:\vspace{-5pt}
\begin{small}\begin{equation}
z_{i}^{SCM}=x_{i} \oplus w^3 \sum_{j=1}^{M}\left(\begin{small}\frac{\exp{(w^1x_j)}}{\sum^{M}_{a=1}\exp{(w^1x_a)}}\end{small}\otimes(w^2x_j) \right) ~, \vspace{-3pt}
\end{equation}\end{small}
where $j$ enumerates all context locations, $x_i$ represents the incoming features, $\oplus$ denotes element-wise broadcast addition, $\otimes$ denotes multiplication of tensor elements, $w^{1}$~and $w^{2}$~describe the different learnable parameters of linear embedding functions $e(\cdot)$, and $w^{3}$~represent the parameters of a linear transform function $f(\cdot)$.
\vspace{5pt}
\textbf{Temporal Module.} Figure~\ref{fig:arch} (red) visualises the temporal module in detail, which follows the principles layed out in Equation~(\ref{equ1}) in general terms. In particular, the TCM module is constructed to apply self-attention across a short-term temporal context where, for each input frame $X_t$, a feature $x_t$ from the previous layer is first embedded by a linear function~$e(\cdot)$ with weights $w^4_{t}$. Subsequently, its temporal correlation function $s(\cdot)$ is modelled by a global SoftMax $\mathcal{C}(\cdot)$ across a temporal context of $T=2\tau+1$ selected nearby frames. For each feature position $i \in M$ the global SoftMax is defined as:
\vspace{-12pt}
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{C}(x_{t,i} ; w^4)=\frac{\exp{(w^{4}_{t}x_{t,i})}}{\sum_{m \in T}\exp{(w^4_{m}x_{m,i})}} ~, \vspace{-2pt}
\end{equation}{}
where frame $m$ enumerates all $T$ frame positions, and $w_{t}$ is the linear embedding parameter for time step $t$. We then use the mean value of all positional temporal attention to normalise the term yielding a temporal attention map for time step $t$ as:\vspace{-12pt}
\begin{equation}
\hat{x}_{t,i}=\frac{1}{HW}\mathcal{C}(x_{t,i} ; w^4)\sum_{j=1}^{HW}\mathcal{C}(x_{t,j} ; w^4) ~.\vspace{-3pt}
\end{equation}
In order to visually illustrate this concept, two examples of temporal attention maps projected back into the image domain are depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:attention maps}. The maps highlight distinctive, dispersed features for context-aware inference revealing target object locations despite heavy partial occlusion.
These maps are subsequently applied back onto the original feature by matrix multiplication~$\otimes$, element-wise broadcast addition~$\oplus$, and two linear transformations. One transform learns adaptive weights (\textit{i.e.} $w^5_{m}$) to `blend' between original and attention-adapted features, the other learns weights (\textit{i.e.} \textit{$w^6_{m}$}) to `blend' across the temporal domain. Finally, an additive connection to the original inputs~$x_{t,i}$ is made to ensure learning stability yielding: \vspace{-8pt}
\begin{equation}
z_{t,i}^{TCM}=x_{t,i}+\sum_{m \in T}w^6_{m}(x_{m,i} \oplus w^5_{m}\sum_{j=1}^{HW}\hat{x}_{m,j}\otimes x_{m,j}) ~.\vspace{-3pt}
\end{equation} \vspace{5pt}
\begin{figure}[b]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=237pt,height=180pt]{images/ICCVW_figure5.pdf}
\end{center}\vspace{-13pt} \caption{\small{\textbf{Visualisation of Temporal Attention Maps for Two Example Scenes.} First and third rows depict attention maps when projected back into the image domain. Second and fourth row show the associated frames with green bounding boxes showing predictions by the network with $T=3$. Green lines indicate that shown attention maps contribute to detections in the central frame.}}\vspace{-10pt
\label{fig:attention maps}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-9pt}
\subsection{ Overall Network Architecture}
\textbf{Backbones.} {We follow the layout of RetinaNet~\cite{Lin2017FocalDetection}} and Cascade~\cite{Cai2018CascadeDetection} as the {two major} state-of-the-art architectures in our study. Figure~\ref{fig:arch}~(blue) visualises a ResNet50 architecture as an example backbone \cite{He2016DeepRecognition} where we extract FPN levels from network layers $P_3$ to~$P_7$. Across different scales of the FPN, anchors cover area sizes of $32^2$ to $512^2$ distributed over pyramid levels from $P_3$ to $P_7$, respectively.
We embed our TCM and SCM after the last layer of the backbone for a maximal receptive field during blending. \vspace{4pt}
\textbf{Detection Head.} The RetinaNet based detection head contains two streams, \textit{i.e.} a localisation stream and classification stream. The classification subnet (coloured grey in Figure~\ref{fig:arch}) predicts a likelihood vector of class membership for each anchor box. This network is fully convolutional and operates on top of the $5$ FPN layer outputs $P_3$ to $P_7$. It is composed of $4$ cascaded $3 \times 3$ convolutional layers, each with $256$ channels, and followed by a ReLU activation. The final layer uses $3 \times 3$ convolutions with a Sigmoid function as activation for producing the final classification output. In the localisation subnet (coloured black in Figure~\ref{fig:arch}) the final layer yields $4\times$ channel outputs describing bounding box locations. Focal loss from \cite{Lin2017FocalDetection} is adopted to tackle the foreground and background imbalance problem.
We also implemented a stronger, cascaded detection head~\cite{Cai2018CascadeDetection} for maximum detection quality. The cascaded detection head contains four stages, one for an RPN, which regresses class-agnostic regions of interest, and three for detection with different IoU ground truth assignments parameterized as~$[0.5,0.6,0.7]$. Note that the three cascaded detection heads are fully convolutional and ROI alignment is used for ROI feature pooling.
\subsection{Training Details}
We train the network end-to-end in two separate stages~(see Figure~\ref{fig:training}). First, we pre-train our model on the ImageNet VID dataset for 14 epochs, and then the entire model is trained with synchronised batch normalisation and {training data augmentation (sequence-based random brightness, horizontal flip, central crop)} for $14$ epochs on the $400$ video training portion of the Pan Africa dataset. The remaining $100$ clips are used for testing.
During the various experiments, we use short-term video snippets and sparse sampling of between $T=3$ to $T=8$ frames {whose shorter size is }resized {to at least $512$ and up to $800$} pixels horizontally keeping the aspect ratio constant by padding if necessary. During training, each mini-batch contains $8$ snippets, that is $1$ per deployed Nvidia Tesla P100 GPU. The learning rate is warmed up for the first $500$ iterations of each training phase from $0.002$ to $0.01$ and decreased $10$ times at epoch $6$ and $11$, respectively.
We use SGD with the momentum of $0.9$ as the optimizer and utilise ImageNet pre-trained weights to initialise the backbone. FPN layers and all other convolutional layers are initialised by normal distributions.\vspace{-0pt}
\section{Experimental Results}
We evaluate the proposed system both quantitatively and qualitatively, and perform detailed ablation studies. We also perform a validation on the full ILSVRC 2015 VID data corpus to demonstrate wider applicability.
\subsection{Quantitative Evaluation}
Using the test portion of the Pan Africa dataset, we first evaluate single frame detectors as our baselines. For evaluation, we compute the average precision (AP) as the area under precision-recall curve and then report the mean of AP~(mAP) for the classes in the validation set.
We re-implemented RetinaNet~\cite{Lin2017FocalDetection} with ResNet50 and ResNet101 baselines and, as shown in Table \ref{tab:chimpresult}, these two architectures achieve 80.79\% and 85.25\% mAP, respectively. Whilst adding a SCM component to the ResNet50 RetinaNet setup improves performance slightly to 81.21\%, the current state-of-the-art Cascade-RCNN~\cite{Cai2018CascadeDetection} outperforms this setup and older single frame baselines, achieving 88.31\% on the Pan Africa test data.
The basic addition of a TCM component, on the other hand, produces significant performance improvements by up to $10.02\%\uparrow$ for ResNet50 RetinaNet, and still $2.86\%\uparrow$ for Cascade-RCNN.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=237pt,height=111pt]{images/figure4.pdf}\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{
\small{
\textbf{Example Training and Validation Performance.} {mAP plots} for both training (blue) and validation~(green) of the {ResNet50} RetinaNet SCM+TCM setup along the $28$ epochs of optimisation split into two distinct phases, i.e. pre-training on ImageNet VID, and fine-tuning on the Pan Africa dataset. }
}\vspace{-4pt}
\label{fig:training}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[b]
\begin{adjustbox}{width=\columnwidth,center}
\begin{tabular}{cc|cc|c}
\multicolumn{2}{c|}{Backbone and FPN Layout} & $T_{train}$ & $T_{test}$ & mAP(\%) \\
\hline
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Res50\\ RetinaNet\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}baseline\cite{Lin2017FocalDetection}\\ +SCM\\ +TCM\\ +SCM+TCM\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}\textbackslash\\ \textbackslash\\ 7\\ 7\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}\textbackslash\\ \textbackslash\\ 21\\ 21\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}80.79\\81.21\\90.02\\ \textbf{90.81}\end{tabular} \\
\hline
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Res101\\ RetinaNet\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}baseline\cite{Lin2017FocalDetection}\\ +SCM+TCM\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}\textbackslash\\ 5\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}\textbackslash\\ 21\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}85.25\\\textbf{90.21}\end{tabular} \\
\hline
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}ResX101\\ Cascade\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}baseline\cite{Cai2018CascadeDetection}\\ +SCM+TCM\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}\textbackslash\\ 3\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}\textbackslash\\ 21\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}88.31\\ \textbf{91.17}\end{tabular}
\end{tabular}
\end{adjustbox}
\caption{\textbf{Pan Africa Performance Results}. Boosts in mean average precision (mAP) on the Pan Africa test dataset when applying the proposed TCM \& SCM components with various state-of-the-art FPN architectures.}\vspace{-8pt}
\label{tab:chimpresult}
\end{table}
The training process for a full SCM+TCM setup, as quantified earlier in Figure~\ref{fig:training} for instance, furthermore reveals that the generalisation gap~of such a model (mAP distance between blue and green curves) narrows significantly for the PanAfrica dataset compared to the ImageNet VID pre-training in late stages. Narrow generalisation gaps indicate that a model is particularly capable of carrying over learned inference strategies to unseen instances of the particular dataset. For the case at hand, this and the improved overall mAP indicate that fine-tuning is indeed successful.
We also validated a basic ResNet50 RetinaNet version that uses SCM+TCM on the full ILSVRC 2015 VID corpus to show that our rather simple and flexible SCM+TCM network extension can achieve {strong} results also in this general detection setting at $63.85\%$~mAP. This
ranks within the top three of the original mAP based competition~\cite{ImageNet}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=240pt,height=270pt]{images/ICCVW_figure6.pdf}
\vspace{-23pt}
\caption{\small{\textbf{ Examples of Positive Attention Component Impact.} Depicted are ground truth labels (red) and detections~(green) for a ResNet50 FPN with (rows 2, 4, and 6) and without (rows 1, 3, and 5) SCM+TCM components. Note the clear detection improvements for partially occluded great apes (top two examples) and under challenging lighting (bottom example).}}\vspace{-4pt}
\label{fig:results}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Qualitative Observations on Pan Africa Data}
The Pan Africa dataset contains many scenes where illumination, occlusions, noise or animal camouflage effects make it challenging to recognise animals (as seen before in Figure \ref{fig:dataset}). We found that the SCM+TCM setup consistently improves detection robustness compared to baselines in such cases. These improvements make a significant contribution to the overall quantitative results reported before. Figure~\ref{fig:results} provides examples of successful cases where per-frame accurate animal detection is achieved by the SCM+TCM components in the presence of partial occlusion or challenging lighting. However, as depicted in the bottom examples of Figure~\ref{fig:results2}, a number of particular animal appearances remain challenging to detect despite the availability of spatial and temporal context information.
\begin{figure}[b]\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=240pt,height=212pt]{images/ICCVW_figure7.pdf}
\vspace{-29pt}
\begin{center}
\end{center}\vspace{-13pt} \caption{\small{\textbf{Success and Failure Cases.} Depicted are ground truth labels (red) and detections~(green) in frames of various example clips using the best performing model ResX101\ Cascade with SCM+TCM components. }}\vspace{-10pt}
\label{fig:results2}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Ablation Study}
We conduct an ablation study on both the Pan Africa and the ILSVRC 2015 VID datasets in order to quantify in detail the impact of the key system parameters. All of the results are reported based on ResNet50+SCM+TCM setup with a RetinaNet detection head.
\textbf{SCM+TCM\ Insertion Point.} Considering arguments in \cite{Cao2019GCNet:Beyond}, we acknowledge that the embedding position of our module along the original backbone network is important. To determine the best insertion point, we test three possible positions for insertion into ResNet50: after the $3 \times 3$ convolution of the last ResNet block; after the last $1 \times 1$ convolution before the residual addition; and after the residual addition.
As shown in Table \ref{tab:ablation1}(a) and Table \ref{tab:ablation2}(a), we find that the last option is superior and can gain $6.01\%\uparrow$ mAP on Pan Africa and $6.42\% \uparrow$ mAP on VID improvement when compared with insertion after the last $1 \times 1$ convolution. This indicates that the final residual addition
in the base network \textit{does} provide useful extra information.
\textbf{Temporal Frame Support.} Different choices on supporting frames~$T$ are ablated in Table \ref{tab:ablation1}(b) and \ref{tab:ablation2}(b). Results confirm that wider windows for temporal integration do indeed benefit detection, however, particularly during training, GPU sizes limit possible choices of $T$. During testing, longer exposures are possible. Quantifying the effect of varying test exposures we find that, for $T_{test}=21$ frames compared to $T_{test}=5$, there is a $1.96\% \uparrow$ and $3.69\% \uparrow$ improvement for fixed $T_{train}=7$ on the Pan Africa and ILSVRC 2015 VID datasets, respectively. Larger training snippets can improve results marginally too. \vspace{10pt}
\textbf{Embedding Strategy in the TCM.} We found that when applying an embedding strategy in the TCM where only the current main frame features (indicated as black arrows of the TCM in Figure~\ref{fig:arch}) are backpropagated and reference features are used, but not backprogagated, then a marginally improved overall performance can be observed (marked as \textit{Main \& Refs} in contrast to \textit{Positional} in Tables \ref{tab:ablation1} and \ref{tab:ablation2}).
\begin{table}[b]
\centering
\specialrule{.1em}{.05em}{.05em}
\begin{subtable}{.5\textwidth}
\caption{\textbf{Position}}\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
Embedding & position &$T_{train}$ & $T_{test}$ & mAP(\%) \\
\hline
Positional & after add & 8 & 8 & 88.21 \\
Positional & after 1x1 & 8 & 8 & 82.20 \\
Positional & after 3x3 & 8 & 8 & \textbf{87.75} \\
\specialrule{.1em}{.05em}{.05em}
\end{tabular}
\end{subtable}
\begin{subtable}{.5\textwidth}
\caption{\textbf{Supporting Frames}}\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
Embedding & position & $T_{train}$ & $T_{test}$ & mAP(\%) \\
\hline
Main \& Refs & after add & 7 & 21 & \textbf{90.81} \\
Main \& Refs & after add & 7 & 5 & 88.85 \\
Main \& Refs & after add & 3 & 5 & 87.76 \\
\specialrule{.1em}{.05em}{.05em}
\end{tabular}
\end{subtable}
\begin{subtable}{.5\textwidth}
\caption{\textbf{Embedding Strategy}}\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
Embedding & position & $T_{train}$ & $T_{test}$ & mAP(\%) \\
\hline
Positional & after add & 7 & 21 & 88.61 \\
Main \& Refs & after add & 7 & 21 & \textbf{90.81} \\
\specialrule{.1em}{.05em}{.05em}
\end{tabular}
\end{subtable}
\caption{\textbf{Pan Africa Dataset Ablation Study.} Key system design choices tested on a ResNet50+SCM+TCM setup with a RetinaNet detection head.}
\label{tab:ablation1}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[b]
\centering
\specialrule{.1em}{.05em}{.05em}
\begin{subtable}{.5\textwidth}
\caption{\textbf{Position}}\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
Embedding & position & $T_{train}$ & $T_{test}$ & mAP(\%) \\
\hline
Positional & after add & 8 & 8 & 56.25 \\
Positional & after 1x1 & 8 & 8 & 49.83 \\
Positional & after 3x3 & 8 & 8 & \textbf{58.20} \\
\specialrule{.1em}{.05em}{.05em}
\end{tabular}
\end{subtable}
\begin{subtable}{.5\textwidth}
\caption{\textbf{Supporting Frames}}\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
Embedding & position & $T_{train}$ & $T_{test}$ & mAP(\%) \\
\hline
Positional & after add & 8 & 8 & 56.25 \\
Positional & after add & 5 & 8 & 54.38 \\
\hline
Main \& Refs & after add & 7 & 21 & \textbf{63.85} \\
Main \& Refs & after add & 7 & 5 & 60.16 \\
\specialrule{.1em}{.05em}{.05em}
\end{tabular}
\end{subtable}
\begin{subtable}{.5\textwidth}
\caption{\textbf{Embedding Strategy}}\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
Embedding & position & $T_{train}$ & $T_{test}$ & mAP(\%) \\
\hline
Positional & after add & 7 & 21 & 59.25 \\
Main \& Refs & after add & 7 & 21 & \textbf{63.85} \\
\specialrule{.1em}{.05em}{.05em}
\end{tabular}
\end{subtable}
\caption{\textbf{ILSVRC 2015 VID Dataset Ablation Study.} Key system design choices tested on a ResNet50+SCM+TCM setup with a RetinaNet detection head.}\vspace{-15pt}
\label{tab:ablation2}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion and Implications}
In this paper we proposed the first multi-frame video object detection framework trained and evaluated for detecting great apes utilising their full body morphology. We demonstrated that the framework is applicable to challenging camera trap footage taken in complex jungle environments.
We introduced two self-attention driven feature blending components operating in both the spatial and the temporal domains to facilitate detection under heavy partial occlusions and challenging lighting variations.
We showed that this novel and flexible extension performs robustly at $91.17\%$~mAP on a real world Pan Africa camera trap $500$ video dataset, which we labelled accurately with animal ground truth annotations for $180$K frames. We conducted detailed ablation studies on our method and showed that the setup significantly outperforms state-of-the-art frame based detectors. For general evaluation beyond the task at hand, we also performed a validation on the ILSVRC 2015 VID data corpus to demonstrate {significant} performance on non-specialised video object detection.
We note that currently ecological camera trap studies are widely conducted by manual inspection, although great ape face detection~\cite{Brust2017TowardsWild,loos2013automated} has been used for ecological surveys before \cite{crunchant2017automated} and DrivenData \cite{Competition:Factorization} hosted a recent challenge to classify jungle camera trap clips by species, without detecting animals and their location in frames explicitly.
The presented system, in contrast, provides explicit animal locations and is independent of visibility constraints regarding the animal's face. It adds a new capability of detection and localisation of animals partly occluded by vegetation at adequate performance levels.
Whilst tests against other current video detection frameworks are outstanding and will form part of our future work, we conclude that the presented system is ready to assist human camera trap inspection efforts.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We would like to thank the entire team of the Pan African Programme: `The Cultured Chimpanzee' and its collaborators for allowing the use of their data for this paper, in particular: \sout{} H Kuehl, C Boesch, M Arandjelovic, and P Dieguez. We would also like to thank: K Zuberbuehler, K Corogenes,
E Normand, V Vergnes, A Meier, J Lapuente,
D Dowd, S Jones,
V Leinert,
E Wessling, H Eshuis,
K Langergraber, S Angedakin,
S Marrocoli,
K Dierks, T C Hicks, J Hart,
K Lee,
and M Murai.
Thanks also to the team at https://www.chimpandsee.org.
The work that allowed for the collection of the dataset was funded by the Max Planck Society, Max Planck Society Innovation Fund, and Heinz L. Krekeler. In this respect we would also like to thank: Foundation
Ministère de la Recherche Scientifique, and Ministère des Eaux et Forêts in Co´te d'Ivoire; Institut Congolais pour la Conservation de la Nature and Ministère de la Recherche Scientifique in DR Congo; Forestry Development Authority in Liberia; Direction des Eaux, Forêts Chasses et de la Conservation des Sols, Senegal; and Uganda National Council for Science and Technology, Uganda Wildlife Authority, National Forestry Authority in Uganda.
{\small
\bibliographystyle{ieee}
|
\section{Convexity of Simple PMDs}
Recall the definition of simple PMDs.
\begin{definition}[Simple PMDs, \textit{alias} Compatible POVMs]\label{def:simple}
A PMD $M^Q(a|x)$ is called \textit{simple} if its constituting POVMs can be written as
\begin{equation}
\label{Eq:simple-PMD}
M^Q(a|x)=\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}}p(a|i,x) \tilde{M}^Q(i),
\end{equation}
where the $\tilde{M}^Q(i)$ are elements of a single POVM (sometime referred to as the ``mother'' POVM), and $p(a|i,x)$ is a conditional probability distribution.
\end{definition}
\noindent As noted in the body of the letter, any convex mixing of simple PMDs can be directly incorporated into the ``mother'' POVM. We now describe this in a bit more detail. Suppose that $M^Q(a|x)$ admits a decomposition of the form
\[
M^Q(a|x)=\sum_r\mu(r)\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}}p(a|i,x,r) \tilde{M}^Q(i|r),
\]
where $\mu(r)$ is a probability distribution and $\tilde{M}^Q(i|r)$ is now a \textit{family} of POVMs indexed by the shared random index $r$. Then, simply by noticing that $\mu(r)\tilde{M}^Q(i|r)$ is itself a normalized two-outcome indexed POVM, it is possible to conclude that Definition~\ref{def:simple} is fully general and no further random variables are needed.
\section{Free Convertibility among Simple PMDs}
Recall that $M^Q(a|x)\succeq N^{Q'}(b|y)$ whenever
\begin{align}\label{eq:strategies}
N^{Q'}(b|y)= \sum_r\mu(r)\sum_{i,x,a}q(b|a,x,i,y,r)p(x|i,y,r)(\mathcal{E}^{Q'\to Q}_{i|r})^\dagger [M^Q(a|x)]\;.
\end{align}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:simple-all-equiv}
All simple devices are free, that is, given any two simple devices $M^Q(a|x)$ and $N^{Q'}(b|y)$, possibly defined on different Hilbert spaces $\mathcal{H}^Q$ and $\mathcal{H}^{Q'}$, both relations holds:
\[
M^Q(a|x)\succeq N^{Q'}(b|y)\quad\text{and}\quad N^{Q'}(b|y)\succeq M^{Q}(a|x)\;.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For any two simple PMDs. Let us denote by $I^Q(a|x)$ the trivial PMD, i.e. the PMD with alphabets $\set{A}=\set{X}=\{0 \}$ and Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}^Q=\mathbb{C}$. Clearly the trivial PMD can be attained from any other using the free operations. Showing that the converse is true will complete the proof of the lemma. Using the trivial PMD as the input PMD in Eq. \eqref{eq:strategies}, we see that the instruments $\{\mathcal{E}^{Q'\to Q}_{i|r} \}$ are, in fact, POVMs $E^{Q'}(i|r)$: this is so because $\dim\mathcal{H}^Q=1$. Since these POVMs can be freely chosen, all devices of the form
\[
\begin{split}
N^{Q'}(b|y)&=\sum_r\mu(r)\sum_{i,j}q(b|j,r)p(j|i,y,r)\ E^{Q'}(i|r)\\
&=\sum_r\sum_{i}p'(b|i,y,r)\ E^{Q'}(i,r)\;,
\end{split}
\]
can be obtained from the trivial PMD, where $E^{Q'}(i,r):=\mu(r)E^{Q'}(i|r)$ is considered now as a POVM with two outcome indices. Since the above coincides with the definition of simple PMDs, the desired conclusion is reached.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Proposition 1}
\begin{proposition}
$M^Q(a|x)\succeq N^{Q'}(b|y)$ if and only if $M^Q(a|x)$ can be converted to $N^{Q'}(b|y)$ by a one-way LOCC from Alice to Bob.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
It is obvious from Fig. 1 in the main text that $M^Q(a|x)\succeq N^{Q'}(b|y)$ implies an implementation by one-way LOCC. Conversely, every one-way LOCC protocol from Alice to Bob consists here of (i) a one-way LOCC pre-processing, (ii) local side channels that are quantum for Alice and classical for Bob, and (iii) one-way LOCC post-processing. Since Alice receives no output from the PMD, any local post-processing and forward communication she performs can be included in her pre-processing. What remains is exactly as depicted in Fig. 2.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem 1 and its Corollary}
Recall the optimal success probability of post-information guessing games:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:optimal-guess}
P_{\operatorname{guess}}(M^Q(a|x);\rho^R_{w,z}):=\max_{\mu,q,p,\mathcal{E}}\sum_{w,z}\sum_r\sum_{i,x,a}\mu(r)q(z|a,w,i,r)p(x|w,i,r)\ \Tr{\mathcal{E}^{R\to Q}_{i|r}(\rho^R_{w,z})\ M^Q(a|x)}\;.
\end{equation}
\begin{theorem}\label{th:main}
Given two PMDs $M^Q(a|x)$ and $N^{Q'}(b|y)$, the following are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item $M^Q(a|x)\succeq N^{Q'}(b|y)$;
\item for all guessing games with post-information $\{\rho^R_{w,z}:w\in\mathcal{W},z\in\mathcal{Z} \}$, \[P_{\operatorname{guess}}(M^Q(a|x);\rho^R_{w,z})\ge P_{\operatorname{guess}}(N^{Q'}(b|y);\rho^R_{w,z})\;.\]
\end{enumerate}
In~(b), it is possible to consider only guessing games with $\mathcal{H}^R=\mathcal{H}^{Q'}$, $\set{W}=\set{Y}$, and $\set{Z}=\set{B}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
For the sake of notation, we will denote the processing of a PMD $M^Q(a|x)$ as prescribed in Eq.~(\ref{eq:strategies}) simply by
\[
[\mathcal{T}(M)](b|y)\;.
\]
In particular, the set of all allowed mappings of PMDs with input Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}^Q$, input alphabet $\mathcal{X}$, and output alphabet $\mathcal{A}$, into PMDs with input Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}^{Q'}$, input alphabet $\mathcal{Y}$, and output alphabet $\mathcal{B}$, will be denoted by $\mathscr{T}$:
\[
\mathscr{T}:=\{\mathcal{T}:\text{PMD}(\mathcal{H}^Q,\mathcal{X},\mathcal{A})\to\text{PMD}(\mathcal{H}^{Q'},\mathcal{Y},\mathcal{B}) \}\;.
\]
A crucial observation is that the set $\mathscr{T}$ is convex due to the presence of shared randomness (represented by the probability distribution $\mu(r)$ in Eq. \eqref{eq:strategies}).
The implication (a)$\implies$(b) is trivial: since processings of the form~(Eq. \eqref{eq:strategies}) are always allowed when playing guessing games with post-information, as prescribed in~ Eq. \eqref{eq:optimal-guess}), if PMD $M^Q(a|x)$ can simulate $N^{Q'}(b|y)$, then any strategy that can be reached from the latter can obviously be reached also from the former. Hence, we only need to prove explicitly the implication (b)$\implies$(a).
We begin by noticing that condition~(a) is equivalent to the existence of a mapping $\mathcal{T}$ of the form~(\ref{eq:strategies}) such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cond-a}
[\mathcal{T}(M)]^{Q'}(b|y)=N^{Q'}(b|y),\qquad\forall b,\forall y\;.
\end{equation}
Let us fix a basis of self-adjoint operators $\{X_j^{Q'} :j\in\mathcal{J}\}$. Then, relation~(\ref{eq:cond-a}) is equivalent to the following:
\[
\Tr{N^{Q'}(b|y)\ X_j^{Q'}}=\Tr{[\mathcal{T}(M)]^{Q'}(b|y)\ X_j^{Q'} }\;,\qquad\forall b,\forall y,\forall j\;.
\]
Denote by $\vec{s}(N)$ the vector whose entries are the $|\set{B}|\times|\set{Y}|\times|\set{J}|$ real numbers above, and by $\vec{r}(M,\mathcal{T})$ the same vector on the right-hand side.
Let us consider now the set of all such vectors that can be obtained from PMD $M^Q(a|x)$ by varying the processing $\mathcal{T}$ in $\mathscr{T}$; denote such set by
\[
\mathscr{S}(M):=\{\vec{r}(M,\mathcal{T}):\mathcal{T}\in\mathscr{T} \}\;.
\]
Such a set is closed and convex, because closed and convex is the set of all transformations $\mathscr{T}$. Hence, we can say that relation~(\ref{eq:cond-a}) is equivalent to
\[
\vec{s}(N)\in \mathscr{S}(M)\;,
\]
that is, by applying the separation theorem for convex sets,
\[
\vec{s}(N)\cdot\vec{c}\le\max_{\vec{r}\in \mathscr{S}(M)}\vec{r}\cdot\vec{c}\;,\qquad\forall\vec{c}\in\mathbb{R}^{|\set{B}|\times|\set{Y}|\times|\set{J}|}\;.
\]
Denoting by $Y_{b,y}^{Q'}$ the self-adjoint operators obtained as $Y_{b,y}^{Q'}:=\sum_jc(b,y,j)X_j^{Q'}$, we have that relation~(\ref{eq:cond-a}) is equivalent to
\[
\sum_{b,y}\Tr{N^{Q'}(b|y)\ Y_{b,y}^{Q'}}\le\max_{\mathcal{T}\in\mathscr{T}}\sum_{b,y}\Tr{[\mathcal{T}(M)]^{Q'}(b|y)\ Y^{Q'}_{b,y}}\;,\qquad\forall\{Y^{Q'}_{b,y}:\text{self-adjoint} \}\;.
\]
We now shift and rescale the self-adjoint operators $Y^{Q'}_{b,y}$ to $\rho^{Q'}_{b,y}:=\frac{Y^{Q'}_{b,y}+C}{\sum_{b,y}\Tr{Y^{Q'}_{b,y}+C}}\ge 0$, so that the $\rho^{Q'}_{b,y}$ form an ensemble. This can always be done by choosing the constant operator $C$ large enough. Then, by noticing that $\sum_{b,y}\Tr{N^{Q'}(b|y)\ C}=|\set{Y}|\Tr{C}$ does not depend on the particular PMD $N^{Q'}(b|y)$, we can rewrite the above equation arriving at the following conclusion: condition~(\ref{eq:cond-a}) is equivalent to
\[
\sum_{b,y}\Tr{N^{Q'}(b|y)\ \rho^{Q'}_{b,y}}\le\max_{\mathcal{T}\in\mathscr{T}}\sum_{b,y}\Tr{[\mathcal{T}(M)]^{Q'}(b|y)\ \rho^{Q'}_{b,y}}\;,\qquad\forall\ \text{ensembles}\ \{\rho^{Q'}_{b,y}:b\in\set{B},y\in\set{Y} \}\;.
\]
Comparing the above relation with the expression~(\ref{eq:optimal-guess}) of the optimal guessing probability in guessing games with post-information, we recognize that the above equation means that, for any guessing game with post-information $\{\rho^{Q'}_{b,y}:b\in\set{B},y\in\set{Y} \}$, it holds that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:almost-final-passage}
\sum_{b,y}\Tr{N^{Q'}(b|y)\ \rho^{Q'}_{b,y}}\le P_{\operatorname{guess}}(M^Q(a|x);\rho^{Q'}_{b,y})\;.
\end{equation}
But then, a \textit{sufficient} condition for relation~(\ref{eq:cond-a}) is that
\[
P_{\operatorname{guess}}(N^{Q'}(b|y);\rho^{Q'}_{b,y})\leP_{\operatorname{guess}}(M^Q(a|x);\rho^{Q'}_{b,y})\;,
\]
for all guessing game with post-information $\{\rho^{Q'}_{b,y}:b\in\set{B},y\in\set{Y} \}$.
\end{proof}
\noindent\textbf{Proof of Corollary:}
First, we notice that, for any guessing game with post-information, the optimum guessing probability is the same \textit{for all} simple PMDs. This is a direct consequence of Theorem~\ref{th:main} and Lemma~\ref{lemma:simple-all-equiv}.
Then, the statement is proved by contradiction. Suppose that, for all guessing game with post-information $\{\rho^Q_{x,a}: x\in\mathcal{X},a\in\mathcal{A} \}$, the opposite relation holds, that is
\[
\sum_{a,x}\Tr{M^Q(a|x)\ \rho^Q_{x,a}}\leP_{\operatorname{guess}}^{\text{simple}}(\rho^Q_{x,a})\;.
\]
But then, by means of Eq.~(\ref{eq:almost-final-passage}) in the proof above, one would conclude that it is possible to obtain $M^Q(a|x)$ by acting with a free operation on a simple PMD, in contradiction with the fact that $M^Q(a|x)$ is incompatible.
\section{Proof of Robustness}
In this section, we prove the connection of robustness and the guessing game scenario. We show that the generalized robustness of PMD is an exact quantifer for the advantage in some guessing games.
Suppose we are given a PMD, $\{M(a|x): a\in \set{A}, x\in \set{X}\}$ on the Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}^Q$, and an ensemble $\{\rho_{a,x}\}$. According to the theorem in main text, it is possible to restrict all $\rho_{a,x} \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{H}^Q) \quad \forall a,x $.
At first, we define the set of \textit{simple} PMDs as,
\begin{equation}
\set{F}_{Q,\set{A},\set{X}}:=\{ \{M(a|x)\}_{a,x}:\exists \text{ POVM } \{\widetilde{M}^Q(i)\}, p(a|x,i), \text{s.t. }M^Q(a|x)=\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}}p(a|i,x) \widetilde{M}^Q(i) \quad \forall a,x\},
\end{equation}
Definition~(\ref{Eq:simple-PMD}) identifies $\set{F}_{Q,\set{A},\set{X}}$ as a collection of POVM familes that is convex and closed. Since it is possible to fix $Q, \set{A}, \set{X}$, in what follows we ignore the subscripts. We define $\mathds{M}:= \{M(a|x)\}_{a,x}$ and in what follows we use the same font style to represent PMDs. We denote by $\mathcal{Z}$ the set of general PMDs, that is to say $\mathcal{F}\subseteq \mathcal{Z}$.
For usefullness, we define a real vector space $ \mathcal{V}$ as,
\begin{equation}\label{vector}
\mathcal{V}: =\Bigg\{ \mathds{V}=
\scalebox{0.5}[1]{$\displaystyle
\left(\scalebox{2}[1]{$\displaystyle
\begin{array}{cc}
V_{1} \\
\vdots \\
V_{d}
\end{array}$}
\right)$} : V_i=V^{\dagger}_i \quad \forall i
\Bigg\}
\end{equation}
on $\mathbb{R}_{+}$, while we define its inner product as $\langle\mathds{A}|\mathds{B}\rangle:=\sum_{i}\langle A_i,B_i\rangle=\langle\mathds{B}|\mathds{A}\rangle$, and the notation $\langle \cdot,\cdot \rangle $ is defined as the inner product, such that $\langle A,B \rangle:=\Tr{AB}$, and $d=|\set{X}||\set{A}|$. Note that each element in $\set{Z}$ corresponds to a unique vector in $\set{V}$.
Let us first define the convex cone generated by \textit{simple} PMDs as,
\begin{align}
&\mathcal{C}:= \{c\mathds{W}: c \in \mathbb{R}_{+},\mathds{W}\in \set{F}\},
\end{align}
as well as its dual,
\begin{align}
&\mathcal{C}^*:= \{\mathds{E} \in \set{V}: \langle\mathds{E}|\mathds{F}\rangle\geq 0, \forall \mathds{F}\in \set{C}\}.
\end{align}
We then define the generalized robustness of PMD $\mathds{M}$ with respect to $\set{F}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:defrb}
\mathfrak{R}(\mathds{M}):=\min \{r \in \mathbb{R}_{+}: \mathds{M}+r\mathds{N}\in\mathcal{C}, \quad \mathds{N}\in \mathcal{Z}\}
\end{equation}
where $\mathds{M}+r\mathds{N}\in\mathcal{C}$ is equivalent to the fact that the family of $\{M(a|x)+rN(a|x)\}$ considered as a vector defined in~(\ref{vector}) is in set $\set{C}$.
In order to see the connection between robustness and guessing game, let's us define $\mathds{N}':=r\mathds{N}$, i.e., $N'(a|x)=rN(a|x) \forall a,x$, and define $\mathds{N}' \succeq 0$ the same fashion as, $N'(a|x)\geq 0 \quad \forall a,x$, then we rewrite the definition~(\ref{eq:defrb}) as a conic form problem (which we call primal problem) with generalized inequality $\succeq$, i.e., given $\mathds{M}$, we want:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll@{}ll}
\text{minimize} & \displaystyle\lambda &\\
\text{subject to}& \displaystyle \mathds{M}+\mathds{N}'\in\mathcal{C}&&\\
&\mathds{N}' \succeq 0, &&\\
&\sum_{a}N'(a|x)=\lambda\mathds{1}, &&\forall x.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Introducing hermitian operators $\gamma_x$ as Lagrange multiplies, we can write the Lagrangian with respect to $\mathds{M}$ as
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}(\lambda,\mathds{N}', \mathds{A},\mathds{B},\{\gamma_{x}\})&=\lambda - \langle\mathds{M}+\mathds{N}'|\mathds{A}\rangle-\langle\mathds{N}'|\mathds{B}\rangle -\sum_{x}\Big \langle \lambda\mathds{1}-\sum_{a}N'(a|x),\gamma_{x}\Big \rangle\\
&=-\langle\mathds{M}|\mathds{A}\rangle+\lambda(1-\sum_{x}\Tr{\gamma_{x}})+\sum_{a,x}\Big \langle N'(a|x),\gamma_{x}-\beta_{a,x}-\alpha_{a,x}\Big \rangle.
\end{align}
where the dual variables satisfy $ \mathds{A}\in \set{C}^*$, $ \mathds{B}\succeq 0$, and the elements of $\mathds{A}$ and $\mathds{B}$ are $\{\alpha_{a,x}\}$ and $\{\beta_{a,x}\}$ respectively. Then we write the dual function as,
\begin{align}
g(\mathds{A},\mathds{B},\{\gamma_{x}\})&=\min_{\lambda,\mathds{N}'}\mathcal{L}(\lambda,\mathds{N}',\mathds{A},\mathds{B},\{\gamma_{x}\})\\
&=-\langle\mathds{M}|\mathds{A}\rangle+\min_{\lambda,\mathds{N}'}\bigg(\lambda(1-\sum_{x}\Tr{\gamma_{x}})+\sum_{a,x}\Big \langle N'(a|x),\gamma_{x}-\beta_{a,x}-\alpha_{a,x}\Big \rangle\bigg)
\end{align}
since $g$ is linear function and a linear function is bounded below only when it is identical zero. Thus, $g=-\infty$ (trivial bound), except only when the following two conditions hold,
\[
\begin{cases}
\sum_{x}\Tr{\gamma_{x}}=1& \\
\gamma_{x}-\beta_{a,x}-\alpha_{a,x}=0 &\forall a,x,
\end{cases}
\]
in which cases, $g(\mathds{A},\mathds{B},\{\gamma_{x}\})=-\langle\mathds{M}|\mathds{A}\rangle$.
So we can write the dual problem to define the upper bound of dual fucntion as follows,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll@{}ll}
\text{maximize} & \displaystyle -\langle\mathds{M}|\mathds{A}\rangle&\\
\text{subject to}& \displaystyle \mathds{A}\in \set{C}^* &\\
&\mathds{B}\succeq 0, &&\\
& \gamma_{x}-\beta_{a,x}-\alpha_{a,x}=0 &&\forall a,x,\\
&\sum_{x}\Tr{\gamma_{x}}=1,
&&\gamma_{x}=\gamma^{\dagger}_{x}.\\
\end{array}
\end{equation}
we can get rid of the dual variable $\mathds{B}$ by combining the second and third constriant as the condition $\gamma_{x}-\alpha_{a,x}\geq 0\quad\forall a,x$, becasue $\mathds{B}$ is only the constraint of dual variables, then the above problem reduces to,
\begin{equation}\label{sdp}
\begin{array}{ll@{}ll}
\text{maximize} & \displaystyle -\langle\mathds{M}|\mathds{A}\rangle&\\
\text{subject to}& \displaystyle \mathds{A}\in \set{C}^* &\\
& \gamma_{x}-\alpha_{a,x}\geq 0 &&\forall a,x,\\
&\sum_{x}\Tr{\gamma_{x}}=1,
&&\gamma_{x}=\gamma^{\dagger}_{x}.\\
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Define a new variable $\mathds{W}$, such that its element $\omega_{a,x}:=\gamma_{x}-\alpha_{a,x}$, and we see that,
\[
-\langle\mathds{M}|\mathds{A}\rangle=\langle\mathds{M}|\mathds{W}\rangle-1=\sum_{a,x}\Big \langle M(a|x), \omega_{a,x} \Big \rangle-1,
\]
then we can rewrite the dual problem as,
\begin{equation}\label{sdp2}
\begin{array}{ll@{}ll}
\text{maximize} & \displaystyle\langle\mathds{M}|\mathds{W}\rangle-1&\\
\text{subject to}& \displaystyle
\mathds{A} \in\set{C}^*&\\
&\mathds{W} \succeq 0 &\\
&\sum_{x}\Tr{\gamma_{x}}=1, &&\gamma_{x}=\gamma^{\dagger}_{x}.\\
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where $\mathds{W} \succeq 0$ is equivalent to, $\gamma_{x}-\alpha_{a,x}\geq 0 \forall a,x$.
To see that the strong duality holds, that is to say, the optimal value of the dual is equal to the optimal value of the primal problem, let's choose $\alpha_{a,x}=\frac{1}{2|\set{X}|\Tr{\mathds{1}}}\mathds{1}, \forall a,x$, i.e., $\mathds{A} \succ 0$ (thus $\mathds{A}$ is in the interior of $\set{C}^*$), and $\gamma_{x}:=2\alpha_{a,x}$, we then see that $\gamma_{x}-\alpha_{a,x}= \alpha_{a,x} > 0\quad \forall a,x$ and $\sum_{x}\Tr{\gamma_{x}}=1$. These choices can be noticed to strictly satisfy the conditions~(\ref{sdp2}). So Slater's theorem ensures that the strong duality holds.
\begin{theorem}\label{robustness}
For any PMD, with its robustness related to guessing games, it satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{maineq}
1+\mathfrak{R}( \{M(a|x)\}_{a,x})=\max_{\{\rho_{a,x} \}} \frac{P_{\operatorname{guess}}(M(a|x);\rho_{a,x})}{P_{\operatorname{guess}}^{\text{simple}}(\rho_{a,x})}\;,
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We first show the right hand side is smaller than or equal to the left hand side for all possible ensembles, then we show a special choosing ensemble satisfies that the right hand side is greater than or equal to the left hand side, which can be seen as the optimal ensemble.
According to the definition of the general robustness of $\{M(a|x)\}_{a,x}$, one can write $M(a|x)=(1+r)F(a|x)-rN(a|x)$ for some $\mathds{F}\in \set{F}$ with elements as $F(a|x)$, where $r=\mathfrak{R}( \{M(a|x)\}_{a,x})$. By using the same notations as shown in Theorem~\ref{th:main}, and according to Lemma~\ref{lemma:simple-all-equiv}, we obtain,
\begin{align}
&P_{\operatorname{guess}}^{\text{simple}}(\rho_{a,x})=\max_{\mathcal{T}\in\mathscr{T}}\sum_{a,x}\Big \langle \mathcal{T}(F)(a|x), \rho_{a,x}, \Big \rangle
\end{align}
and,
\begin{align}
P_{\operatorname{guess}}(M(a|x);\rho_{a,x})&=\max_{\mathcal{T}\in\mathscr{T}}\sum_{a,x}\Big \langle \mathcal{T}(M)(a|x), \rho_{a,x} \Big \rangle\\
&=\sum_{a,x}\Big \langle \mathcal{T}^*(M)(a|x), \rho_{a,x} \Big \rangle\;\\
&=(1+r)\sum_{a,x}\Big \langle \mathcal{T}^*(F)(a|x), \rho_{a,x} \Big \rangle-r\sum_{a,x}\Big \langle \mathcal{T}^*(N)(a|x), \rho_{a,x} \Big \rangle\\
&\le (1+r)\max_{\mathcal{T}\in\mathscr{T}}\sum_{a,x}\Big \langle \mathcal{T}(F)(a|x), \rho_{a,x} \Big \rangle\\
&=(1+r)P_{\operatorname{guess}}^{\text{simple}}(\rho_{a,x}),
\end{align}
where the third equality holds because the optimized $\mathcal{T}^*$ is linear.
Next we choose an ensemble $\rho_{a,x}=\omega_{a,x}$ (up to normalization constriant of the ensemble) satisfying the constraint in
where we consider the set of optimal $\{\omega_{a,x}\}$ appear in the dual problem~(\ref{sdp2}), under this ensemble, we obtain,
\begin{align}
\frac{P_{\operatorname{guess}}(M(a|x);\rho_{a,x})}{P_{\operatorname{guess}}^{\text{simple}}(\rho_{a,x})}&=\frac{\max_{\mathcal{T}\in\mathscr{T}}\sum_{a,x}\Big \langle \mathcal{T}(M)(a|x), \omega_{a,x} \Big \rangle}{\max_{\mathcal{T}\in\mathscr{T}}\sum_{a,x}\Big \langle \mathcal{T}(F)(a|x), \omega_{a,x} \Big \rangle}\\
&\ge \frac{\sum_{a,x}\Big \langle M(a|x), \omega_{a,x} \Big \rangle}{\max_{\mathcal{T}\in\mathscr{T}}\sum_{a,x}\Big \langle \mathcal{T}(F)(a|x), \omega_{a,x} \Big \rangle}\\
&\ge \frac{\sum_{a,x}\Big \langle M(a|x), \omega_{a,x} \Big \rangle}{\max_{\mathcal{T}\in\mathscr{T}}\sum_{a,x}\Big \langle \mathcal{T}(F)(a|x),\gamma_{x} \Big \rangle}\\
&= \frac{\sum_{a,x}\Big \langle M(a|x), \omega_{a,x} \Big \rangle}{\sum_{x}\Big \langle \mathds{1}, \gamma_{x}\Big \rangle} \\
&=1+\mathfrak{R}( \{M(a|x)\}_{a,x})\label{eq:linearity}
\end{align}
where the first inequality holds because of maximization over all possible $\mathcal{T}$, the second inequality holds because of the constraint $\gamma_{x}-\omega_{a,x}=\alpha_{a,x}$ and $\mathds{A} \in \set{C}^*$ in~(\ref{sdp2}), which brings the fact that $\sum_{a,x}\Big \langle \mathcal{T}(F)(a|x),\gamma_{x} -\omega_{a,x}\Big \rangle \ge 0$, and the last equality holds because we have that $\sum_{a}\mathcal{T}(F)(a|x)=\mathds{1} $ and also $\sum_{x}\Tr{\gamma_{x}}=1$, which concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
This survey offers \emph{a common roof} to several methods and results
concerning the continuous dependence of solutions with respect to the data
in monotone and non-monotone frameworks. So, besides to present here some
new results, this paper offers also a peculiar survey to some topics which
attracted the attention of many specialists in elliptic and parabolic
nonlinear partial differential equations in the last years. We will show how
some monotonicity methods (as in Brezis \cite{Brezis Monotonic} and Lions
\cite{Lions} ), related with the subdifferential of suitable convex
functions, lead to new results concerning the monotone and continuous
dependence of solutions on an unexpected framework for the problem under
consideration. Our main goal here is not exactly the existence of solutions
but the continuous and monotone dependence of solutions with respect to the
data (and coefficients) of the problem in $L^{2}$ when the expected space
for it is reduced to $L^{1}$. Most of the result of this paper will deal
with positive solutions of the following class of doubly nonlinear diffusion
parabolic equations (in divergence form) with a sub-homogeneous non-monotone
forcing term
\begin{equation*}
(P)\qquad \left\{
\begin{array}{rclr}
\partial _{t}(u^{2q-1})-\Delta _{p}u & = & f(x,u)+h(t,x)u^{q-1} & \text{ in
Q_{T}\overset{}{:=}(0,T)\times \Omega , \\[0.1cm]
u & = & 0\ & \text{ on }\Sigma :=(0,T)\times \partial \Omega , \\[0.1cm]
u(0,.) & = & u_{0}(.) & \text{ on }\Omega
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation*
where $\Omega $ is a smooth bounded domain in $\mathbb{R}^{N}$, $N\geq 1$,
T>0$ and with $\Delta _{p}u$ the usual $p-$Laplacian operator, $\Delta _{p}u
\mathrm{div}(|\nabla u|^{p-2}\nabla u)$ for $1<p<\infty $. We emphasize that
probably the interest of our results is not for the applications to the
above doubly nonlinear equations but by its method of proof. Moreover, they
are new even for the case of a linear diffusion as $(P)$ with $p=2$. We
assume in $(P)$ a possible nonlinear inertia term (i.e. in the time
derivative), for some
\begin{equation}
q\in (1,p] \label{Hypo q}
\end{equation
and a \textit{sub-homogeneous} forcing term $f(x,u)+h(t,x)u^{q-1}$, where
\begin{equation}
h\in L^{1}(0,T:L^{2}(\Omega )), \label{Hypo L^1 h(x,t)}
\end{equation
and with the non-homogeneous perturbation term $f(x,u)$ satisfying the
following structural assumptions:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(f1)] \label{f1}$f(x,u)$ is a continuous function on $u\in (0,+\infty
) $, for a.e. $x\in \Omega $ and $x\rightarrow f(x,u)$ belongs to
L^{2}(\Omega ),$ for any $u\in (0,+\infty )$,
\item[(f2)] \label{f2}$f(x,u)=f_{1}(x,u)+f_{2}(x,u)$ with $\dfrac{f_{1}(x,u
}{u^{q-1}}$ non increasing and $\dfrac{f_{2}(x,u)}{u^{q-1}}$ is globally
Lipschitz continuous in $u\in (0,+\infty )$, of Lipschitz constant $K\geq 0,$
for a.e. $x\in \Omega $,
\item[(f3)] $\lim_{r\downarrow 0}\dfrac{f_{1}(x,r)}{r^{q-1}}=a_{0}(x)$ with
a_{0}\in L^{2}(\Omega )$.
\end{itemize}
\noindent Additionally, in some cases, we shall need also the condition
\begin{itemize}
\item[(f4)] for any $z>0$ there exists $v_{z}\in L^{\infty }(\Omega )$ such
that $z=\dfrac{f_{1}(x,v_{z}(x))}{\left\vert v_{z}(x)\right\vert ^{q-1}
-a_{0}(x)$ a.e. $x\in \Omega $.
\end{itemize}
\noindent Notice that, since we shall not pay attention to the existence of
solutions but to the continuous dependence with respect to the data, \textit
no sign condition }is assumed on $h(t,x)$ although we are interested in
positive solutions of $(P)$. Notice also that, as in \cite{Di Thelin},
condition (f2) can be simply formulated as
\begin{equation*}
f(x,u)-f(x,\widehat{u})\geq -K\big (u^{q-1}-\widehat{u}^{q-1}\big )\text{
for any }u>\widehat{u}\geq 0\text{ and a.e. }x\in \Omega .
\end{equation*
Condition (f4), of technical nature, will be required only when $f_{1}(x,r)$
is $x-$dependent and express some kind of surjectivity condition of the
application $u\mapsto \frac{f_{1}(x,u)}{u^{q-1}}$, over $(0,+\infty ).$ We
also point out that assumptions (f1) and (f4), for some $q\in (1,p]$, are
compatible with other assumptions, near $r=0$ and near $r=+\infty $, which
arise in the literature and that allows to consider some singular problems.
For instance, in \cite{Diaz-Saa} it was proved that the necessary and
sufficient condition for the existence of a positive solution for the
stationary problem associated to $(P),$ when $h(t,x)=K=0$ is that
\begin{equation*}
\lambda _{1}(-\Delta _{p}v-a_{0}v^{p-1})<0
\end{equation*
an
\begin{equation*}
\lambda _{1}(-\Delta _{p}v-a_{\infty }v^{p-1})>0,\text{ }a_{\infty
}(x)=\lim_{r\uparrow +\infty }\frac{f_{1}(x,r)}{r^{p-1}}.
\end{equation*
There are many variants in the literature: for instance, in \cit
{Ghergu-Radulescu libro poblacion} (see page 275) it is assumed (for $p=2$)
that $\lim_{r\downarrow 0}\frac{f_{1}(x,r)}{r^{p-1}}=+\infty $ and that
\lim_{r\uparrow +\infty }\frac{f_{1}(x,r)}{r^{p-1}}=0$.
On the initial condition we will assume that
\begin{equation}
u_{0}\in L^{2q}(\Omega )\cap W_{0}^{1,p}(\Omega ),\text{ }u_{0}>0\text{ on
\Omega .\text{ } \label{Hypo u_0}
\end{equation
but some more general conditions are also possible (see Remark \ref{Rem Hipo
dato inicial}).
Very often the nonlinear diffusion equation is equivalently written, in
terms of $W=u^{2q-1}$ with
\begin{equation*}
m=\frac{1}{2q-1}\in \lbrack \frac{1}{2p-1},1)
\end{equation*
as
\begin{equation*}
(P_{m,p,q})\qquad \left\{
\begin{array}{rclr}
\partial _{t}W-\Delta _{p}W^{m} & = & f(x,W^{m})+h(t,x)(W^{m})^{\frac{1-2m}
2m}} & \text{ in }Q_{T}, \\
W^{m} & = & 0\ & \text{ on }\Sigma , \\
W(0,.) & = & u_{0}^{2q-1} & \text{ on }\Omega
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation*
Since $(p-1)m=\frac{p-1}{2q-1}\in \lbrack \frac{p-1}{2q-1},p-1)$, the
diffusion operator in problem $(P)$, i.e. $(P_{m,p,q})$, offers three
different classes of diffusions, in the terminology of \cite{Di Herrero},
\cite{Kalashnikov}, \cite{Di}, \cite{Tsutsumi}, \cite{Gilding-Kersner}, \cit
{Dia Extrac}, \cite{Vazquez libro}:
i) \emph{fast diffusion} (which corresponds to $(p-1)m<1$, $i.e.$ $q\in
(\max (\frac{p}{2},1),p]$),
ii) \emph{slow diffusion} (which corresponds to $(p-1)m>1$, $i.e.$ $p>2$ and
$q\in (1,\frac{p}{2})$),
and
iii) the case $(p-1)m=1$ ($i.e.$ $q=\frac{p}{2})$, which was considered, for
instance, in \cite{Del Pino-Daulbaut} in connection with \textit{optimal
logarithmic Sobolev inequalities}: see also \cite{Saa}.
Since the perturbation in the right hand side can be written as $(W^{m})^
\frac{1-2m}{2m}}=W^{r}$ with $r:=\frac{1-2m}{2},$ if we assume, for
instance, $p=2$ then $m\in \lbrack \frac{1}{3},1)$ and, in particular
0<r<m<1$: a case considered for $h=1$ and $f=0$ by several authors as, e.g.
\cite{Pablo-Vazquez}, and \cite{Hui}: see also \cite{Guo}.
In the limit case $q=1$ ($i.e.$ $m=1$), the problem \textit{formally}
includes a Heaviside function (a model similar to the one which appears in
some climate models with the $p$-Laplace operator) since, roughly speaking,
we can approximate the problem by other ones corresponding to a sequence of
exponents $q_{n}$ $\searrow 1$ as $n\rightarrow +\infty $ and thus it seems
possible to extend the conclusions to the multivalued proble
\begin{equation*}
(P_{H})\qquad \left\{
\begin{array}{rclr}
\partial _{t}W-\Delta _{p}W & \in & f(x,W)+h(t,x)H(W) & \text{ in }Q_{T}, \\%
[0.1cm]
W & = & 0\ & \text{ on }\Sigma , \\[0.1cm]
W(0,.) & = & W_{0} & \text{ on }\Omega
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation*
with $H(r),$ the Heaviside, multivalued-function, $H(r)=\{0\}$ if $r<0,$
H(r)=\{1\}$ if $r>0$ and $H(0)=[0,1]$. Problems similar to $(P_{H})$ appear
in many contexts, and, in particular, in climate Energy Balance Models (see,
e.g., \cite{Di-Tello}, \cite{Bensid-Di}, and their references). \ For some
comparison results concerning solutions of $(P_{m,p,q})$ corresponding to
two different values of $m$ see \cite{Benilan-Diaz}. The continuous
dependence on $m$ (even in a more general framework than the one here
considered) was studied in \cite{Beni-Cr depende} and \cite{Beni-Cr-Saks}.
It is well known (see, $e.g.$, the exposition made in \cite{Brezis Monotonic
, \cite{Ben Madrid}, \cite{Di Thelin}, \cite{Dia Extrac}) that the theory of
maximal monotone operators on Hilbert spaces [or, more in general, the
theory of m-accretive operators in Banach spaces: see, $e.g.$, \cite{Barbu},
\cite{BenCran Pazy} and the surveys \cite{Evans} and \cite{Benilan-Wight}]
can be applied to the above class of problems in the absence of the forcing
term or when it is assumed to be globally Lipschitz continuous on the
corresponding functional space. But it seems that the applicability of the
abstract theory of such type of operators is not well known in the
literature when the forcing term is merely \textit{sublinear} (if $p=2$) or,
more generally, \textit{sub-homogeneous }($q\leq p$ if $p\neq 2$). For some
pioneering results we send the reader to \cite{Kranoselki}, \cite{Fujita
-Watananbe}, \cite{Keller-Cohen}, \cite{Keller Krisne}, \cite{Amman}, \cit
{Berestycki}, \cite{Levine-Sacks}, \cite{Levine SIAM} and the book \cit
{Samarski-Galaktionov libro}.
As said before, the main goal of this paper is to show how the above
mentioned \emph{monotonicity methods} can be suitably applied also to this
class of non-monotone problems, leading to a general framework (specially
concerning the $x$-dependence of coefficients) in which it is possible to
show the \textit{continuous and monotone dependence with respect to the data}
(the initial datum and the \emph{potential type} coefficient $h(t,x)$) even
if there are non-monotone terms in the right hand side.
As a matter of fact, in contrast with the previous literature, we will show
that it is possible to give a sense to the solvability of the equation even
for time dependent coefficients $h(x,t)$ satisfying merely (\ref{Hypo L^1
h(x,t)}) (see some comments on the difficulties arising when using a more
classical variational approach in \cite{Boccardo-Orsina}, \cite{Artola},
\cite{Palmieri}) and, what it is more important, \textit{without prescribing
any sign} on $h(x,t)$, which corresponds to the so-called \textit{indefinite
perturbed problems} arising, for instance, in population dynamics: see \cit
{Namba}, \cite{Bandle-Pozio-Tesei}, \cite{Badii-Diaz-Tesei} and \cite{Arias
Cuesta Gossez}, among many other possible references.
As we will see, it is useful to start our program by considering the\textit
\ }sub-homogeneous \textit{simpler }problem corresponding to $f(x,u)\equiv 0,
$ $i.e.$ the problem
\begin{equation*}
(P_{q})\qquad \left\{
\begin{array}{rclr}
\partial _{t}(u^{2q-1})-\Delta _{p}u & = & h(t,x)u^{q-1} & \text{ in }Q_{T},
\\
u & = & 0\ & \text{ on }\Sigma , \\
u(0,.) & = & u_{0}(.) & \text{ on }\Omega
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation*
The existence and uniqueness of a $L^{1}-$mild positive solution when
h(t,x)\leq 0$ is a consequence of the well-known m-T-accretivity results of
the associated operator (see, e.g. \cite{Benilan Franco-Japan}, \cite{Di
Thelin} and\ \cite{Vazquez libro}). Nevertheless, since the right hand side
is non-Lipschiz continuous, problem $(P_{q})$ (and also problem $(P)$) may
have more than one solution (in particular when $h(t,x)$ is changing sign
and negative near $\Sigma $ and we assume $p>2$ and $q\in (1,\frac{p}{2})$)$.
$ Nevertheless we can introduce a method to select only one $L^{1}-$mild
positive solution by means of some monotonicity arguments. Indeed, we will
select the $L^{1}-$mild positive solution $u$ of $(P_{q})$ such that $w
\frac{q}{2q-1}t)=u(t)^{q}$ coincides with the unique $L^{2}-$mild positive
solution of the proble
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{lc}
\dfrac{dw}{dt}+\partial J_{0,q}(w)\ni h(t) & \text{in }L^{2}(\Omega ), \\%
[0.2cm]
w(0)=w_{0}, &
\end{array
\right. \label{Problem parabolic subdifferential J-0q}
\end{equation
where $J_{0,q}$ is the functional in $L^{2}(\Omega )$ given b
\begin{equation*}
J_{0,q}(w)=\left\{
\begin{array}{lr}
\displaystyle\dfrac{q}{p}\int_{\Omega }|\nabla w^{\frac{1}{q}}|^{p}\mathrm{d
x & \text{if }w\in D(J_{0,q}), \\
+\infty & \text{otherwise,
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation*
with
\begin{equation*}
D(J_{0,q}):=\{w\in L^{2}(\Omega )\text{ such that }w\geq 0\text{ and }w^
\frac{1}{q}}\in W_{0}^{1,p}(\Omega )\}.
\end{equation*
Developing an idea of D\'{\i}az and Sa\'{a} \cite{Diaz-Saa} (for $p\neq 2$)
we will see that $J_{0,q}$ is a convex, lower semicontinuous functional and
thus its subdifferential $\partial J_{0,q}(w)$ is well defined and the
uniqueness of a $L^{2}-$mild positive solution $w$ of (\ref{Problem
parabolic subdifferential J-0q}) is well-known. In that case we say that
u(t)$ is the \textit{selected }$L^{1}-$\textit{mild positive solution} of
(P_{q})$ (and so it is unique). Of course that if, under some additional
assumptions, it can be shown the uniqueness of a positive weak solution of
the equation then necessarily it must coincides with the selected $L^{1}-
mild positive solution (see, e.g., \cite{Pablo-Vazquez}, \cite{Hui}, \cit
{Guo}, \cite{Cazenave-Dik-Escobedo}, \cite{Dickstein} and \cite{Charro-Peral
, among others).
In Section 2 of this paper we will study the subdifferential $\partial
J_{0,q}(w)$. We we will prove that, given $\mu >0$ and $h\in L^{2}(\Omega )
, the resolvent equatio
\begin{equation}
w+\mu \partial J_{0,q}(w)\ni h \label{Resolvent equation 2}
\end{equation
is connected, through the relation $w=u^{q}$, with the auxiliary variational
problem
\begin{equation*}
\underset{v\in K}{\min }J_{h,q}(v)
\end{equation*
wher
\begin{equation*}
K:=\big \{v\in W_{0}^{1,p}(\Omega )\cap L^{2q}(\Omega ),v\geq 0\text{ on
\Omega \big \}
\end{equation*
an
\begin{equation*}
J_{h,q}(v):=\frac{\mu }{p}\int_{\Omega }|\nabla v|^{p}\mathrm{d}x+\frac{1}{2
}\int_{\Omega }|v|^{2q}\mathrm{d}x-\frac{1}{q}\int_{\Omega }h(x)|v|^{q
\mathrm{d}x.
\end{equation*}
Since the problem is sub-homogeneous ($q\in (1,p]$) the different terms of
J_{h,q}(v)$ satisfy good growth conditions and the existence and uniqueness
of a minimum $v_{h,q}\in K$ can be obtained by standard direct methods of
the Calculus of Variations (see, $e.g.$, Lemma 5 of \cite{Benguria Brezis
Lieb} for the case $p=2$ and \cite{Takac-Tello-Ulm} for $p>1$ and $q\in
\lbrack 1,p]$). Once again, the Euler-Lagrange equation
\begin{equation}
-\mu \Delta _{p}v+v^{2q-1}=h(x)v^{q-1}\text{ in }\Omega ,
\label{Euler-Lagrange}
\end{equation
may have other weak solutions $\widehat{v}\in W_{0}^{1,p}(\Omega )$
different to the minimum $v$ of $J_{h,q}$ (specially if the sign of $h(x)$
is not prescribed, $h(x)$ is negative near $\Sigma $ and we assume $p>2$ and
$q\in (1,\frac{p}{2})$)) but the relation $w=u^{q}$ allows to select only $v$
when we assume that $w$ is the solution of (\ref{Resolvent equation 2}).
As we shall show in Section 3, the definition of a unique $u(t)$ \textit
selected }$L^{1}-$\textit{mild positive solution} of $(P)$ can be also
obtained for the general case of $f\neq 0$ as indicated before by following
a similar process to the indicated above. The main result of this paper is
the following:
\begin{theorem}
\label{Theore main} Let $q\in (1,p]$ and $h\in L^{1}(0,T:L^{2}(\Omega ))$.
Let $u_{0},f$ satisfying (\ref{Hypo u_0}) and (f1)-(f3). Assume that
f_{1}(x,u)=f_{1}(u)$ independent of $x$ or $f_{1}(x,u)$ satisfying also
(f4). Then for any $T>0$, there exists a unique selected positive $L^{1}-
mild solution $u$ to problem $(\mathrm{P})$ and $u^{q}\in
C([0,T]:L^{2}(\Omega ))$. In addition, if $h\in L^{\infty }(0,T:L^{\infty
}(\Omega ))$ and $u_{0}\in L^{\infty }(\Omega )$ then $u\in L^{\infty
}(0,T:L^{\infty }(\Omega ))$. Moreover, if $v_{0}$ and $g$ satisfy the same
conditions than $u_{0}$ and $h$, and if $v$ is the respective selected
positive $L^{1}-$mild solution of problem $(\mathrm{P}),$ then, for any
t\in \lbrack 0,T]$ we have the monotone continuous dependence estimat
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\Vert (u^{q}(t)-v^{q}(t))^{+}\Vert _{L^{2}(\Omega )} & \leq e^{Kt}\Vert
(u_{0}^{q}-v_{0}^{q})^{+}\Vert _{L^{2}(\Omega )} \\[0.1cm]
& \displaystyle+\int_{0}^{t}e^{K(t-s)}\left\Vert [h(s)-g(s)]_{+}\right\Vert
_{L^{2}(\Omega )}ds
\end{array}
\label{Estimate dependence parabolic}
\end{equation}
where $K\geq 0$ is the constant indicated in (f2).
\end{theorem}
\bigskip
Notice that, in particular, for the case of a slow diffusion, $p>2$ and
q\in (1,\frac{p}{2})$, the above conclusions hold for `flat solutions' (
i.e. $ positive solutions such that $u=\frac{\partial u}{\partial n}=0$ on
\Sigma $). Notice that even for the special case $h=g$ estimate (\re
{Estimate dependence parabolic}) is new for the doubly nonlinear problem $
\mathrm{P})$: indeed, as indicated before the accretivity results of the
doubly nonlinear diffusion operator leads only to $L^{1}(\Omega )-$monotone
continuous dependence estimates (if $p=2$ such estimates also hold on
H^{-1}(\Omega )$ \cite{Brezis Monotonic}$)$, but not in $L^{2}(\Omega )$
(see, e.g., B\'{e}nilan \cite{Benilan not L`2}) as it is expressed in (\re
{Estimate dependence parabolic}).
We point out that, obviously, the function $u_{\infty }(x)\equiv 0$ in
\Omega $ is a trivial solution of the stationary problem associated to $(P)
. Here we are interested on positive solutions of problem $(P)$. We will
prove (see Theorem \ref{Theorem extinction copy(1)}) that, in fact, if $q\in
(1,\frac{p}{2})$ and $p>2,f(x,u)\equiv 0,~h\in L^{1}(0,T:L^{2}(\Omega )),$
h\geq 0$ and $u_{0}\gvertneqq 0$ then there is no extinction in finite time,
so that $\Vert u^{2q-1}(t)\Vert _{L^{2}(\Omega )}>0$ for any $t>0.$ The
situation is different if $q\in (\frac{p}{2},p]$ since, at least for
f(x,u)\equiv 0$ and $h\leq 0$, there is a finite extinction time $T_{e}>0$,
such that $w(t)\equiv 0,$ in $\Omega $, for any $t\geq T_{e}$. In that case,
we understand that the $L^{1}-$mild solution $u(t)$ of $(P)$ also
extinguishes in $\Omega $ after $T_{e}.$
In the Section 3 we will study of the auxiliary simplified problem $(P_{q})$
through the study of the subdifferential operator $\partial J_{0,q}(v)$ in
L^{2}(\Omega )$. This will allow to get the proof of Theorem \ref{Theore
main} by application of some abstract results on monotone operators on
Hilbert spaces. Many other variants, commented in form of a series of
Remarks, opening the application of this view point to many other different
formulations, will be presented. This is the case, for instance when the $p
-Laplacian is replaced by an homogeneous diffusion operator of the form
\mathrm{div}(a(x,\nabla u))$ with the homogeneity condition
\begin{equation*}
A(x,t\mathbf{\xi )=}\left\vert t\right\vert ^{p}A(x,\mathbf{\xi )}\text{ for
all }t\in \mathbb{R}\text{ and all }(x,\mathbf{\xi )\in }\Omega \times
\mathbb{R}^{N},
\end{equation*
where $a(x,\mathbf{\xi })=\frac{1}{p}\partial _{\mathbf{\xi }}A(x,\mathbf
\xi )}$.
\section{On the subdifferential of $J_{0,q}$}
The proof of the main results will be obtained through the study of the
Cauchy problem
\begin{equation*}
\left\{
\begin{array}{lc}
\dfrac{dw}{dt}+\partial J_{0,q}(w)\ni h(t) & \text{in }L^{2}(\Omega ) \\%
[0.2cm]
w(0)=w_{0}, &
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation*
with $J_{0,q}$ the functional presented in the Introduction. The convexity
of $J_{0,q}$ will play a crucial role in the rest of the paper.
\bigskip
\begin{lemma}
\label{Convexity} Given $q\in (1,p]$, the functional $J_{0,q}$ is convex,
lower semicontinuous and proper on $L^{2}(\Omega )$.
\end{lemma}
\noindent \textit{Proof}. The proof for the case $q=p$ was given in Lemma 1
of \cite{Diaz-Saa}, and the proof for the case $q\in (1,p)$ was obtained in
\cite{Takac-Tello-Ulm} (see Lemma 4 and Example 5.2). A different proof of
this last case can be obtained from Proposition 2.6 of \cite{Brasco-Franzina
. To prove that $J_{0,q}$ is lower semicontinuous in $L^{2}(\Omega )$ it
suffices to prove that if we have a sequence $\rho _{n}\rightarrow \rho $ in
$L^{2}(\Omega )$ such that $J_{0,q}(\rho _{n})\leq \lambda $ then
J_{0,q}(\rho )\leq \lambda $. But since $\rho _{n}^{1/q}$ is bounded in
W_{0}^{1,p}(\Omega )$ there exists a subsequence, still labeled as $\rho
_{n}^{1/q}$, such that $\rho _{n}^{1/q}$ converges weakly in
W_{0}^{1,p}(\Omega )$, so that $\nabla \rho _{n}^{1/q}$ converges weakly in
L^{p}(\Omega )^{N}$ and since the norm is lower semicontinuous we obtain
that $\liminf_{n}J_{0,q}(\rho _{n})\geq J_{0,q}(\rho )$, and hence
J_{0,q}(\rho )\leq \lambda ._{\quad \blacksquare }$
\bigskip
\begin{remark}
As indicated in \cite{Diaz-Saa}, the main results of \cite{Diaz-Saa} were
presented in September 1985 in \cite{Diaz-Saa CEDYA}. Its Lemma 1 extends
and develops to the case $p\neq 2$ Remark 2 of Brezis and Oswald \cite{Bre
Oswald} which was inspired in the paper Benguria, Brezis and Lieb \cit
{Benguria Brezis Lieb} where some previous results of Rafael Benguria's
Ph.D. thesis \cite{Beguria tesis} were presented together with some newer
results. So, in contrast to what is indicated in \cite{Brasco-Franzina}, the
consideration of the case $p\neq 2$ was not carried for the first time in
\cite{Belloni-Kawhol} but in \cite{Diaz-Saa CEDYA}, \cite{Diaz-Saa}
seventeen years before. The extension to the case of $\mathbb{R}^{N}$ was
carried out in \cite{Chaib} (for an extension to weaker solutions see \cit
{Dat}).
\end{remark}
\bigskip
\begin{remark}
It seems, that the connection between Lemma 1 of \cite{Diaz-Saa} (called by
some authors \emph{D\'{\i}az -Sa\'{a} inequality} when $q=p,$ \cite{Chaib},
\cite{Takac-Giacomoni}) and the generalization of the 1910 Picone inequality
\cite{Picone} (concerning originally with ordinary differential equations
and much more later extended to partial differential equations in \cit
{Allegreto-Huang}; see, also the survey \cite{Dosly}) was pointed out for
the first time in Chaib \cite{Chaib}. As a matter of fact, it was proved in
Section 3.2 of \cite{Brasco-Franzina} that the convexity of $J_{0,q}$ (for
any $q\in (1,p]$) is equivalent to the generalized Picone inequality
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{p}\left\vert \nabla u\right\vert ^{p-2}\langle \nabla u,\nabla
\left( \frac{z^{q}}{u^{q-1}}\right) \rangle \leq \frac{q}{p}\left\vert
\nabla z\right\vert ^{p}+\frac{p-q}{p}\left\vert \nabla u\right\vert ^{p
\text{ a.e. on }\Omega
\end{equation*
if $u,z\in W_{loc}^{1,p}(\Omega ),~u>0,~z\geq 0\text{ on }\Omega $.
\end{remark}
\bigskip
We recall that given a convex, l.s.c. function $\phi :H\rightarrow (-\infty
,+\infty ]$, $\phi $ proper, over a Hilbert space $H$, a pair $(w,z)\in
H\times H$ is such that $z\in \partial \phi (w)$ if $\forall \xi \in H,$
\phi (\xi )\geq \phi (w)+(z,\xi -w)$. We say that $w\in D(\phi ):=\{v\in H$
such that $\phi (v)<+\infty \}$ is such that $w\in D(\partial \phi )$ if the
set of $z\in \partial \phi (w)$ is not empty. We have
\begin{equation*}
D(\partial J_{0,q})\subset D(J_{0,q})\subset \overline{D(J_{0,q})}^{L^{2}}
\overline{D(\partial J_{0,q})}^{L^{2}}
\end{equation*
(see Proposition 2.11 of Brezis \cite{Brez OMXM}). The following result
proves that the operator $\partial J_{0,q}$ satisfies an additional property
to the mere monotonicity: it is a $T-$monotone operator in $L^{2}(\Omega )$
in the sense of Brezis-Stampacchia (\cite{Brezis-Stampacchia}). This will
explain later the comparison of solutions of problem $(P)$ with respect to
different data $h(t,x)$ for solutions.
\begin{lemma}
\label{Prop Benilan} Let $\tau (s)=s_{+}$. Then for any $w,\widehat{w}\in
L^{2}(\Omega )
\begin{equation}
J_{0,q}\left( w-\tau (w-\widehat{w})\right) +J_{0,q}\left( \widehat{w}+\tau
(w-\widehat{w})\right) \leq J_{0,q}(w)+J_{0,q}(\widehat{w}).
\label{tau-contraction}
\end{equation}
\noindent In particular $\partial J_{0,q}$ is a $T-$monotone operator in
L^{2}(\Omega )$, i.e. for any $w,\widehat{w}\in D(\partial J_{0,q})$ and
z\in \partial J_{0,q}(w),$ $\widehat{z}\in \partial J_{0,q}(\widehat{w}),
\begin{equation}
\int_{\Omega }(z-\widehat{z})[w-\widehat{w}]_{+}\mathrm{d}x\geq 0,
\label{T-monotone}
\end{equation}
\noindent and given $h,\widehat{h}\in L^{2}(\Omega )$, if for $\mu >0$, $w
\widehat{w}\in L^{2}(\Omega )$ are such that
\begin{equation}
w+\mu \partial J_{0,q}(w)\ni h\text{ and }\widehat{w}+\mu \partial J_{0,q}
\widehat{w})\ni \widehat{h}, \label{resolvent equation}
\end{equation
the
\begin{equation}
\left\Vert \lbrack w-\widehat{w}]_{+}\right\Vert _{L^{2}(\Omega )}\leq
\left\Vert \lbrack h-\widehat{h}]_{+}\right\Vert _{L^{2}(\Omega )}.
\label{L^2 contraction}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\noindent \textit{Proof}. Property (\ref{tau-contraction}) is equivalent to
the inequalit
\begin{equation}
J_{0,q}(\min (w,\widehat{w}))+J_{0,q}(\max (w,\widehat{w}))\leq
J_{0,q}(w)+J_{0,q}(\widehat{w}). \label{max-min contract}
\end{equation
Obviously we can assume $w,\widehat{w},\min (w,(\widehat{w}-k)),\max ((w-k)
\widehat{w})\in D(J_{0,q}):=\{v\geq 0$ and $v^{\frac{1}{q}}\in
W_{0}^{1,p}(\Omega )\cap L^{\frac{2}{q}}(\Omega )\}$ and then, by
Stampacchia's truncation results, we can writ
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\Omega }|\nabla \min (w,\widehat{w})^{\frac{1}{q}}|^{p}\mathrm{d
x=\int_{\{w\leq \widehat{w}\}}|\nabla w^{\frac{1}{q}}|^{p}\mathrm{d
x+\int_{\{w>\widehat{w}\}}|\nabla \widehat{w}^{\frac{1}{q}}|^{p}\mathrm{d}x
\end{equation*
an
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\Omega }|\nabla \max (w,\widehat{w})^{\frac{1}{q}}|^{p}\mathrm{d
x=\int_{\{w>\widehat{w}\}}|\nabla w^{\frac{1}{q}}|^{p}\mathrm{d
x+\int_{\{w\leq \widehat{w}\}}|\nabla \widehat{w}^{\frac{1}{q}}|^{p}\mathrm{
}x.
\end{equation*
Adding both expressions we get inequality (\ref{max-min contract}). To show
that (\ref{max-min contract}) implies that $\partial J_{0,q}$ is a $T-
monotone operator in $L^{2}(\Omega )$, i.e. (\ref{T-monotone}) we shall
develop a suggestion made by H. Brezis in Remark 1.10 of \cite{Brezis Probl
Unilateraux}. Since $z\in \partial J_{0,q}(w)$ and $\widehat{z}\in \partial
J_{0,q}(\widehat{w})$ we know that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{cc}
J_{0,q}(v)-J_{0,q}(w)\geq \int_{\Omega }z[v-w]\mathrm{d}x\geq 0 & \text{for
any }v\in L^{2}(\Omega ), \\
J_{0,q}(v)-J_{0,q}(\widehat{w})\geq \int_{\Omega }\widehat{z}[v-\widehat{w}
\mathrm{d}x\geq 0 & \text{for any }v\in L^{2}(\Omega )
\end{array
\end{equation*
By taking $v=\min (w,\widehat{w})=w-[w-\widehat{w}]_{+}$ in the first of the
two inequalities, and $v=\max (w,\widehat{w})=\widehat{w}+[w-\widehat{w
]_{+} $ in the second one, using that
\begin{equation*}
\min (w,\widehat{w})-w=-[w-\widehat{w}]_{+}\text{ and }\max (w,\widehat{w})
\widehat{w}=[w-\widehat{w}]_{+},
\end{equation*
by adding the results we get
\begin{equation*}
J_{0,q}(\min (w,\widehat{w}))+J_{0,q}(\max (w,\widehat{w
))-J_{0,q}(w)-J_{0,q}(\widehat{w})\leq -\int_{\Omega }(z-\widehat{z})[w
\widehat{w}]_{+}\mathrm{d}x,
\end{equation*
and thus inequality (\ref{max-min contract}) implies property (\re
{T-monotone}). By well-known results (see Section IV.4 of Brezis \cite{Brez
OMXM}) we get conclusion (\ref{L^2 contraction}).$_{\substack{ \blacksquare
\\ }}$
\bigskip
\begin{remark}
\label{Remark correccion k>0}For some convex functionals $J$ a stronger
property than (\ref{tau-contraction}) holds
\begin{equation}
J(\min (w,(\widehat{w}-k)))+J(\max ((w-k),\widehat{w}))\leq J(w)+J(\widehat{
}) \label{tau-contraction for any k}
\end{equation
for any $k>0$. This property is equivalent (\cite{Benilan-Picard}) to
inequality (\ref{tau-contraction}) for any $\tau :\mathbb{R\rightarrow R}$
Lipschitz continuous with $0\leq \tau ^{\prime }\leq 1$ and $\tau (0)=0$ and
for any $k>0.$ This property (\ref{tau-contraction}) implies several
important properties for the realization of the operator $w\rightarrow
\partial J(w)$ over the Banach spaces $L^{s}(\Omega )$, $1\leq s\leq +\infty
$ (see Lemma 3 of \cite{Brez-Strauss} and its generalization in a series of
papers (Th\'{e}or\`{e}me 1.2 and Remark 1.4 of \cite{Benilan-Picard}, \cit
{Beni tesis}, \cite{Benilan cone}) and (\cite{Benilan-Picard})$.$ Property
\ref{tau-contraction}) holds for the class of the, so called, \emph{normal
convex functionals }(see the above mentioned references) but to check it for
the special case of the functional $J_{0,q}$ remains as an open problem
(some partial results can be obtained in this direction: see Remark \ref{Rem
T-accretivity in L^1} ).
\end{remark}
\bigskip
An uneasy task is to identify the operator $\partial J_{0,q}$ involved in
the \textit{resolvent equation} (\ref{resolvent equation}) in terms of the
Euler-Lagrange equation associated to the functional $J_{0,q}$. When trying
to do that directly, using merely the functional $J_{0,q}$, \ we see that,
if we assume that $w>0$ on $\Omega $, given a \textit{direction test
function }$\zeta \in W_{0}^{1,p}(\Omega )\cap L^{2}(\Omega )$ the G\^{a
teaux derivative of $J_{0,q}$ in $w$ in the direction $\zeta $ is given
formally b
\begin{equation}
J_{0,q}^{\prime }(w;\zeta )=-\int_{\Omega }\frac{\Delta _{p}(w^{\frac{1}{q}}
}{w^{\frac{q-1}{q}}}\zeta \mathrm{d}x. \label{subdiferential calculus}
\end{equation
Thus, at least formally, the convexity of $J_{0,q}$ implies the monotonicity
in $L^{2}(\Omega )$ of its subdifferential and so
\begin{equation}
\int_{\Omega }\left (-\frac{\Delta _{p}(w^{\frac{1}{q}})}{w^{\frac{q-1}{q}}}
\frac{\Delta _{p}(\widehat{w}^{\frac{1}{q}})}{\widehat{w}^{\frac{q-1}{q}}
\right )(w-\widehat{w})\mathrm{d}x\geq 0. \label{Monotonia en L^2}
\end{equation}
In \cite{Diaz-Saa} it was shown that expression (\ref{subdiferential
calculus}) is well justified if we assume $w\in {\mathcal{D}}(J_{0,q})$ and
w,\Delta _{p}(w^{\frac{1}{q}})\in L^{\infty }(\Omega )$. A different
justification was made in Remark 3.3 of Taka\v{c} \cite{Takac Handbook},
this time under the additional condition that $w>0$ on any compact subset
M\subset \Omega ,$
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\Delta _{p}(w^{\frac{1}{q}})}{w^{\frac{q-1}{q}}}\in \mathcal{D
^{\prime }(\Omega ),
\end{equation*
and $w\in C^{0}(\Omega ).$ Nevertheless, it is possible to get some more
general justifications when instead of analyzing separately $J_{0,q}^{\prime
}(w;\zeta )$ we consider the \textit{resolvent equation} (\ref{resolvent
equation}). The following result is inspired by Lemma 6 of \cite{Benguria
Brezis Lieb} concerning a related problem in which $p=q=2$ and $N=3$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{Lemm subdifferential}Given $q\in (1,p]$, $h\in L^{2}(\Omega )$ and
\mu >0$, assume that $w\in D(\partial J_{0,q}),$ $w\geq 0$, satisfies the
resolvent equation (\ref{Resolvent equation 2}). Then function $v:=w^{\frac{
}{q}}$ satisfies that $v\in W_{0}^{1,p}(\Omega )\cap L^{2q}(\Omega )$,
\Delta _{p}v,h(x)v^{q-1}\in L^{1}(\Omega ),$ $v$ is positive in the sense
that
\begin{equation}
\big |\big \{x\in \Omega :v(x)=0\big \}\big |=0,
\label{Positivity Lemma Subdiffer}
\end{equation}
\noindent and $v$ satisfies the sub-homogeneous equation (\re
{Euler-Lagrange}) in the sense of distributions. Moreover,
i) if $1<q<p$ and $0<h_{-}(x)=\max (-h(x),0)\leq C_{h_{-}}$near $\partial
\Omega $
\begin{equation}
v(x)\geq Cd(x,\partial \Omega )^{\frac{p}{p-q}}\text{ a.e. }x\in \Omega
\text{ for some }C>0\text{ dependent of }C_{h_{-}}, \label{Decay h negativa}
\end{equation}
ii) if $h_{-}(x)\equiv 0$ near $\partial \Omega $ and $p>2$ with $q\in (1
\frac{p}{2})$ the
\begin{equation}
v(x)\geq Cd(x,\partial \Omega )^{\frac{p}{p-2q}}\text{ a.e. }x\in \Omega
\text{ for some }C>0\text{ independent on }h, \label{decay q moderate}
\end{equation}
iii) if $h_{-}(x)\equiv 0$ near $\partial \Omega $ and $q\in \lbrack \frac{
}{2},p)$ if $p>2,$ or $q\in (\max (1,\frac{p}{2}),p)$ if $p\leq 2$, the
\begin{equation}
v(x)\geq Cd(x,\partial \Omega )\text{ a.e. }x\in \Omega ,\text{ for some }C>
\text{ independent on }h,
\end{equation}
iv) if $q=p$ then
\begin{equation}
v(x)\geq Cd(x,\partial \Omega )\text{ a.e. }x\in \Omega ,\text{ for some }C>
\text{ independent on }h. \label{estricta positividad}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\noindent \textit{Proof}. Since $D(\partial J_{0,q})\subset D(J_{0,q})$ we
know that $v=w^{\frac{1}{q}}\in W_{0}^{1,p}(\Omega )\cap L^{2q}(\Omega )$.
Moreover $h(x)v^{q-1}\in L^{1}(\Omega )$ since $v\in L^{2q-2}(\Omega )$ and
h\in L^{2}(\Omega )$. Therefore the equation (\ref{Euler-Lagrange}) has a
meaning in the sense of distributions. Let $\eta \in $ $\widetilde{D
:=W_{0}^{1,p}(\Omega )\cap L^{2q}(\Omega )$ (i.e. without the sign condition
$\eta \geq 0$). Define the functional
\begin{equation*}
J_{h,q}(\eta )=\frac{\mu }{p}\int_{\Omega }|\nabla \eta |^{p}\mathrm{d}x
\frac{1}{2q}\int_{\Omega }|\eta |^{2q}\mathrm{d}x-\frac{1}{q}\int_{\Omega
}h(x)|\eta |^{q}\mathrm{d}x.
\end{equation*
Therefore, for every $\eta \in $ $\widetilde{D}
\begin{equation*}
J_{h,q}(v)\leq J_{h,q}(\eta )
\end{equation*
so, $v$ is a minimum of $J_{h,q}$ on $\widetilde{D}$. Now, for $\zeta \in
C_{0}^{\infty }(\Omega )$, using that $d(J_{h,q}(v+\epsilon \zeta
))/d\epsilon $ $=0$ we conclude easily that
\begin{equation*}
\mu \int_{\Omega }|\nabla v|^{p-2}\nabla v\nabla \eta \mathrm{d
x+\int_{\Omega }v^{2q-1}\eta \mathrm{d}x=\int_{\Omega }h(x)v^{q}\eta \mathrm
d}x,
\end{equation*
which proves $v$ satisfies (\ref{Euler-Lagrange}) and $\Delta _{p}v\in
L^{2}(\Omega )$. On the other hand,
\begin{equation*}
-\frac{\Delta _{p}(w^{\frac{1}{q}})}{w^{\frac{q-1}{q}}}=h(x)-w\in
L^{2}(\Omega ),
\end{equation*
so, necessarily, $w$ is positive (in the sense of (\ref{Positivity Lemma
Subdiffer})). Moreover, using the decomposition $h(x)=h_{+}(x)-h_{-}(x)$,
with
\begin{equation*}
h_{+}(x)=\max (h(x),0),\text{ }h_{-}(x)=\max (-h(x),0),
\end{equation*
we can write (\ref{Euler-Lagrange}) a
\begin{equation*}
-\mu \Delta _{p}v+v^{2q-1}+h_{-}(x)v^{q-1}=h_{+}(x)v^{q-1}\text{ in }\Omega .
\end{equation*
The proof of iii) and v) is consequence of the strong maximum principle
\cite{Vazquez Fuerte max}, \cite{Pucci-Serrin}) once that $v\geq 0$ on
\Omega ,$ $-\mu \Delta _{p}v+v^{2q-1}+h_{-}(x)v^{q-1}\geq 0$ and since the
zero order terms in the above inequality are super-homogeneous ($2q-1\geq p-1
$ and $h_{-}(x)=0$ near $\partial \Omega $ if $q\in \lbrack \frac{p}{2},p)$).
\noindent To prove i) and ii) notice that in both cases there is a \emph
strong absorption with respect to the diffusion} once we write
\begin{equation*}
-\mu \Delta _{p}v+v^{2q-1}+h_{-}(x)v^{q-1}=h_{+}(x)v^{q-1}.
\end{equation*}
\noindent In the case ii), if $h_{-}(x)=0$ on a neighborhood $D_{\delta }$
of $\partial \Omega ,$ with $D_{\delta }=\{x\in \Omega :d(x,\partial \Omega
)\leq \delta \}$, for some $\delta >0$, then $-\mu \Delta _{p}v+v^{2q-1}\geq
0$ in $D_{\delta }$. Given $M>0$ and $\epsilon >0$, small enough, the se
\begin{equation*}
\Omega _{\epsilon ,M}=\{x\in \Omega :\epsilon \leq v(x)\leq M\}
\end{equation*
is a neighborhood of $\partial \Omega $ \ contained in $D_{\delta }$ (i.e.
\Omega _{\epsilon ,M}\subset D$). Then, for any $x_{0}\in \partial \Omega
_{\epsilon ,M},$ we can use a local barrier function $\underline{V}(x)$
based on the expression $c\left\vert x-x_{0}\right\vert ^{\frac{p}{p-2q}}$
over the set $\Omega _{\epsilon ,M}\cap B_{\delta }(x_{0})$, for some $c>0$.
As in the proof of Theorem 2.3 of \cite{Alvarez -Diaz retention}, it is
possible to chose $c>0$ (independent of $h$) such that $\underline{V}(x)$ is
a local subsolution, in the sense that
\begin{equation*}
\left\{
\begin{array}{rl}
-\mu \Delta _{p}\underline{V}+\underline{V}^{2q-1}\leq 0 & \text{in }\Omega
_{\epsilon ,M}\cap B_{\delta }(x_{0}), \\[0.1cm]
\underline{V}\leq v & \text{on }\partial (\Omega _{\epsilon ,M}\cap
B_{\delta }(x_{0}))
\end{array
\right. \text{ }
\end{equation*
Thus, by the weak comparison principle $v(x)\geq \underline{V}(x)$ on
\Omega _{\epsilon ,M}\cap B_{\delta }(x_{0})$, which implies (\ref{decay q
moderate}) since $\Omega $ is bounded (see an alternative direct proof, for
N=1$, in Proposition 1.5 of \cite{Di Interfaces}).
\noindent The proof of i) follows also those type of arguments. Since $q<p$
and $h_{-}(x)\leq \overline{h}_{-}$ on a neighborhood $D_{\delta }$ of
\partial \Omega $ we can built a local subsolution $\underline{V}^{\ast }(x)$
on the set $\Omega _{\epsilon ,M}$ (a neighborhood $D_{\delta }$ of
\partial \Omega $) such that
\begin{equation*}
-\mu \Delta _{p}\underline{V}^{\ast }+\overline{h}_{-}\underline{V}^{\ast
q-1}\leq 0\text{ in }\Omega _{\epsilon ,M}\cap B_{\delta }(x_{0}),
\end{equation*
and the same above arguments apply (leading to the estimate (\ref{decay q
moderate}) since $\Omega $ is bounded) but now building the subsolution by
modifying the function $c\left\vert x-x_{0}\right\vert ^{\frac{p}{p-q}}$
with $c$ depending on $\overline{h}_{-}$.$_{\blacksquare }$
\bigskip
It is useful to study some additional properties satisfied by the
subdifferential $\partial J_{0,q}.$
\begin{lemma}
\label{Lemma compactness}i) $\partial J_{0,q}$ generates a compact semigroup
over $L^{2}(\Omega )$
ii) the resolvent operator $(I+\mu \partial J_{0,q})^{-1}$ leaves invariant
the subspace $L^{\infty }(\Omega )$; i.e. if $h\in L^{\infty }(\Omega )$ and
if $w\in D(\partial J_{0,q}),$ $w\geq 0$, satisfies (\ref{Resolvent equation
2}) then $w\in L^{\infty }(\Omega )$, for any $\mu >0.$
\end{lemma}
\noindent \textit{Proof}. i) Let $\left\{ h_{n}\right\} _{n\in \mathbb{N}}$
be a bounded sequence in $L^{2}(\Omega )$,
\begin{equation*}
\left\Vert h_{n}\right\Vert _{L^{2}(\Omega )}\leq M.
\end{equation*}
\noindent In particular, $h_{n}\rightharpoonup h$ in $L^{2}(\Omega )$ to
some $h\in L^{2}(\Omega ).$ Let $w_{n}\in D(\partial J_{0,q}),$ $w_{n}\geq 0$
be the associated solution of (\ref{Resolvent equation 2}) for any given
\mu >0.$ Then, by Lemma \ref{Lemm subdifferential} $v_{n}:=w_{n}^{\frac{1}{q
}$ satisfies that $v_{n}\in W_{0}^{1,p}(\Omega )\cap L^{2q}(\Omega )$,
\Delta _{p}v_{n},h_{n}(x)v_{n}^{q-1}\in L^{1}(\Omega ),$ $v_{n}$ is positive
and satisfies the sub-homogeneous equation
\begin{equation}
-\mu \Delta _{p}v_{n}+v_{n}^{2q-1}=h_{n}(x)v_{n}^{q-1}\text{ in }\Omega ,
\end{equation
in the sense of distributions. By multiplying the equation $w_{n}+\mu
\partial J_{0,q}(w_{n})\ni h_{n}$ by $w_{n},$ from the monotonicity of
\partial J_{0,q}$ we get
\begin{equation*}
\left\Vert w_{n}\right\Vert _{L^{2}(\Omega )}\leq M
\end{equation*
and so
\begin{equation*}
\left\Vert v_{n}\right\Vert _{L^{2q}(\Omega )}\leq M.
\end{equation*
Thus
\begin{equation*}
\left\Vert -\mu \Delta _{p}v_{n}+v_{n}^{2q-1}\right\Vert _{L^{1}(\Omega
)}\leq M^{\prime }
\end{equation*
for some $M^{\prime }>0$ (independent on $n$) and thus there exists a
subsequence such that $v_{n}\rightarrow v$ strongly in $L^{1}(\Omega )$ and
weakly in $W^{1,s}(\Omega )$ for any $1\leq s\leq N(p-1)/(N-1)$ (see, e.g.,
\cite{Di} Chapter 4 and its references). By the dominated convergence
Lebesgue theorem $v_{n}^{q}\rightarrow v^{q}$ strongly in $L^{1}(\Omega ).$
Moreover, integrating by parts
\begin{equation*}
\mu \int_{\Omega }|\nabla v|^{p}\mathrm{d}x+\int_{\Omega }v^{2q}\mathrm{d
x\leq M^{\prime \prime }
\end{equation*
for some $M^{\prime \prime }>0$ and then $v\in W_{0}^{1,p}(\Omega )\cap
L^{2q}(\Omega )$, $\Delta _{p}v,$ $h(x)v^{q-1}\in L^{1}(\Omega )$ (see, e.g.
\cite{Boccardo-Orsina}) and so $w_{n}\rightarrow w$ in $L^{2}(\Omega )$.
Applying the results of \cite{Brezis-commpSemi} (see also Theorem 2.2.2 of
\cite{Vrabie}) we get the conclusion.
\noindent The proof of ii) follows by the Stampacchia iteration method and
it is an obvious modification of Theorem 5.5 of (\cite{Boccardo-Orsina})
(notice that their arguments, for the case $1<q<p$, apply also for this
special purpose to the limit case $q=p$).$_{\blacksquare }$
\bigskip
\begin{remark}
\label{Rem Unique among minima of Euler-Lag}Notice that the functional
J_{h,q}$ may have other stationary points different to $w^{1/q}$, with $w$
solution of the resolvent equation (\ref{Resolvent equation 2}). What the
above lemma shows is that the relation $v=w^{1/q}$ gives a uniqueness
criterion for positive solutions of (\ref{Euler-Lagrange}). The positivity
of $v$ is fundamental since it is known that if $\left\vert \left\{ x\in
\Omega :v(x)=0\right\} \right\vert >0$ (which arise, in particular, when
h(x)\leq -\overline{h}_{-}<0$ in a neighborhood of $\partial \Omega $ and
q<p$ (\cite{Shatzman})) there is multiplicity of nonnegative solutions of
\ref{Euler-Lagrange}) (see also \cite{Bandle-Pozio-Tesei}). Nevertheless, if
$q<p$, the uniqueness result applies to `flat solutions' ($i.e.$ positive
solutions such that $u=\frac{\partial u}{\partial n}=0$ on $\Sigma $) (see
\cite{Di-Her-Ilyasov Nonlinear}).When the set $\{x\in \Omega $: $h(x)<0\}$
is \emph{big enough} (or if $\{x\in \Omega $: $h(x)=0\}$ is \emph{big enough}
and $q\in (1,p)$) there are some nonnegative solutions $v$ of (\re
{Euler-Lagrange}) which may vanish on some positively measured subset of
\Omega $ (and so their support is strictly included in $\overline{\Omega }$)
.$ This property (which does not holds when $v=w^{1/q}$ with $w$ solution of
(\ref{Resolvent equation 2})) can be obtained by comparison methods: through
a refined version of \cite{Bensso-Bre-Fri} (see \cite{Di}, \cite{Di. Gaeta
), by local energy type methods (\cite{AntDSh libro}), etc.
\end{remark}
\bigskip
\begin{remark}
\label{Rem other powers in resolvent}It is clear that it is possible to
consider \ equations like (\ref{Euler-Lagrange}) with some different
balances between the nonlinear absorption ($v^{2q-1}$) and forcing ($v^{q-1}
) terms. Our special case is motivated by the application of the semigroup
theory to the operator $\partial J_{0,q}(w)$ in $L^{2}(\Omega )$.
\end{remark}
\bigskip
\begin{remark}
\label{Remark Lucio} Lemma \ref{Lemm subdifferential} admits many
generalizations dealing with $h\notin L^{2}(\Omega )$ but still with
solutions $v\in W_{0}^{1,p}(\Omega )\cap L^{2q}(\Omega )$\textbf{.} It seems
possible to complement inequality (\ref{L^2 contraction}) by other
inequalities involving different exponents on the norms of the data and the
solutions (see, $e.g.$, \cite{Boccardo-Orsina} and \cite{Palmieri} in the
parabolic framework and Remark \ref{Rem T-accretivity in L^1}).
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
\label{Rem more general than p-Laplace}It is possible to extend the above
approach by replacing the p-Laplace operator by more general quasilinear
homogeneous operators of the form $\mathrm{div}(a(x,\nabla u))$ with
\begin{equation*}
A(x,t\mathbf{\xi )=}\left\vert t\right\vert ^{p}A(x,\mathbf{\xi )}\text{ for
all }t\in \mathbb{R}\hbox{, } \xi \in \mathbb{R}^{N} \hbox{and a.e. } x\in
\Omega,
\end{equation*
where
\begin{equation*}
a(x,\mathbf{\xi })=\frac{1}{p}\partial _{\mathbf{\xi }}A(x,\mathbf{\xi )}
\end{equation*
(see \cite{Takac Handbook} and \cite{Girg-Takac}). We point out that the
application of the abstract results of the accretive operators theory allows
also the consideration of this type of diffusion operators (see, $e.g.$,
\cite{Benilan Franco-Japan}).
\end{remark}
\bigskip
\begin{remark}
\label{Rem Strict convexity} A crucial property of the functional
J_{0,q}(w) $ is its strict \emph{ray-convexity}: it means that $J_{0,q}(w)$
is strictly convex except for any couple of colinear points$\ w$, $\widehat{
}$ with $\widehat{w}$ $=\alpha w$ for some $\alpha \in (0,+\infty )$. That
was used in \cite{Anane}, \cite{Takac-Tello-Ulm} and \cite{Takac Handbook}
to get the uniqueness of nonnegative solutions when $\frac{f_{1}(x,u)}
u^{q-1}}$ in (f2) is not strictly decreasing (as it is the case of the first
eigenfunction of the $p$-Laplacian).
\end{remark}
\bigskip
\begin{remark}
\label{Rem p=1 and p=inf} The limit case $p=\infty $ (defined in a suitable
way) can be also considered since, curiously enough, it is an homogeneous
operator of exponent $3$ (see, $e.g.$, \cite{Di Goyo infinite laplacian}).
It is well-known that the other limit case $p=1$ can be also treated as a
subdifferential of a convex function (see $e.g.$, \cite{Andreu-Caseels
D-Mazon}) but the unique choice to apply the reasoning of this paper seems
to be $q=p=1$ and then the results reduce to the well-known case of monotone
perturbations. It would be interesting to know if it is possible to get the
uniqueness of nonnegative solutions of equations\ involving some different
kind of non-monotone sub-homogeneity nonlinear term.
\end{remark}
\section{Selected $L^{s}-$mild solutions, proof of the main theorem and
further remarks}
It is useful to unify the application of abstract results on the associated
Cauchy Problem to the case of the Banach spaces $L^{s}(\Omega )$, for any
s\in \lbrack 1,+\infty ].$ For instance, we can define the realizations of
the operator $\partial J_{0,q}$ over the spaces $L^{s}(\Omega )$, for any
s\in \lbrack 1,+\infty ]$ as $A_{s}=\overline{\partial J_{0,q}}^{L^{s}}$ in
the sense of graphs over $L^{s}(\Omega )\times L^{s}(\Omega )$: $i.e.$,
A_{s}:D(A_{s})\rightarrow \mathcal{P(}L^{s}(\Omega ))$ and $z\in A_{s}(w)$
if and only if there exists $z_{n}\in \partial J_{0,q}(w_{n})$ such that
w_{n}\rightarrow w$ and $z_{n}\rightarrow z$ in $L^{s}(\Omega ),$ so that
D(A_{s})=$ $\left\{ w\in L^{s}(\Omega ):\exists w_{n}\in L^{2}(\Omega )\text
, with }w_{n}^{\frac{1}{q}}\in W_{0}^{1,p}(\Omega )\cap L^{2q}(\Omega )\text{
such that }w_{n}\rightarrow w\text{ in }L^{s}(\Omega )\right\} .$
Then, we consider the Cauchy problem
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{lc}
\dfrac{dw}{dt}+A_{s}w\ni F(t) & \text{in }L^{s}(\Omega ) \\[0.2cm]
w(0)=w_{0}, &
\end{array
\right. \label{Abstract Cauchy}
\end{equation
where $w_{0}\in \overline{D(A_{s})}$ and $F\in L^{1}(0,T:L^{s}(\Omega ))$.
In our case, two relevant examples are $A_{2}=\partial J_{0,q}$ and the
L^{1}(\Omega )$ operator
\begin{equation*}
\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
AW=-\Delta _{p}W^{m}\text{, for }W\in D(A)\text{, with} \\
D(A)=\{W\in L^{1}(\Omega )\text{, }W^{m}\in W_{0}^{1,1}(\Omega ),\Delta
_{p}W^{m}\in L^{1}(\Omega )\}
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation*
given $m>0$ and $p>1.$
We start by recalling the definition of \emph{mild solution} of (\re
{Abstract Cauchy}) by particularizing the abstract framework to the case of
the Banach space $X=L^{s}(\Omega )$. The good class of operators to solve
\ref{Abstract Cauchy}) is the class of \emph{accretive operators} (resp.
\textit{T-}\emph{accretive operators})\emph{\ }over a Banach space $X:$ i.e.
$A:D(A)\rightarrow \mathcal{P(}X)$ such that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left\Vert x-\widehat{x}\right\Vert &\leq &\left\Vert x-\widehat{x}+\mu (y
\widehat{y})\right\Vert \text{ } \\
\text{(resp. }\left\Vert \left[ x-\widehat{x}\right] _{+}\right\Vert &\leq
&\left\Vert \left[ x-\widehat{x}+\mu (y-\widehat{y})\right] _{+}\right\Vert
\text{)} \\
\text{whenever }\mu &>&0\text{ and }(x,y),(\widehat{x},\widehat{y})\in A.
\end{eqnarray*
The operator is called \textit{m-}\emph{accretive }if in addition $R(I+A)=X
. For many results and definitions about mild solutions of the Cauchy
Problem for accretive operators in Banach spaces see, e.g., \cite{Barbu},
\cite{Barbu 2010}, \cite{BenCran Pazy}, \cite{Di}, \cite{Veron}, \cite{Evans}
and \cite{Benilan-Wight}. We recall that over any Hilbert space (as
L^{2}(\Omega )$) the class of m-T-accetive operators coincides with the
class of maximal T-monotone operators and thus it is possible to apply the
abstract theory presented in Brezis \cite{Brez OMXM}) to problem (\re
{Problem parabolic subdifferential J-0q}). The notion of mild solution below
is well defined in both cases: Hilbert and Banach spaces.
\bigskip
\begin{definition}
A function\ $w\in C([0,T]:L^{s}(\Omega ))$ is a $L^{s}-$\emph{mild solution}
of (\ref{Abstract Cauchy}) if for any $\epsilon >0$, there exists a
partition $\{0=t_{0}<t_{1}<...$ $t_{n}\}$ of $[0,t_{n}]$ and there exist two
finite sequences $\{w_{i}\}_{i=0}^{n},$ $\{F_{i}\}_{i=0}^{n}$ in
L^{s}(\Omega )$ such tha
\begin{equation*}
\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
\text{(i) }\dfrac{w_{i+1}-w_{i}}{t_{i+1}-t_{i}}+A_{s}w_{i+1}\ni
F_{i+1},\qquad i=0,1,...,n-1 \\[0.2cm]
\text{(ii) }t_{i+1}-t_{i}<\epsilon \\[0.2cm]
\text{(iii) }0\leq T-t_{n}<\epsilon \\[0.2cm]
\text{(iv) }\displaystyle\sum_{i=1}^{n-1}\int_{t_{i}}^{t_{i+1}}\left\Vert
F_{i}-F(t)\right\Vert _{L^{s}(\Omega )}dt<\epsilon
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation*
and
\begin{equation*}
\left\Vert w_{\epsilon }(t)-w(t)\right\Vert _{L^{s}(\Omega )}\leq \epsilon
\text{ on }[0,t_{n}],
\end{equation*
where
\begin{equation*}
w_{\epsilon }(t)=w_{i}\text{ for }t_{i}\leq t<t_{i+1}\text{, }i=0,1,...,n-1.
\end{equation*}
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
The piecewise constant function $w_{\epsilon }(t)$ defined before is called
an \emph{$\epsilon $-}$L^{s}$-\emph{approximate solution} of (\ref{Abstract
Cauchy}).
\end{definition}
\bigskip
\noindent \textit{Proof of Theorem \ref{Theore main}. }Let us start by
considering the simpler problem $f(x,v)\equiv 0$. Since $w_{0}=u_{0}^{q}\in
D(J_{0,q})\subset \overline{D(J_{0,q})}^{L^{2}}=\overline{D(\partial J_{0,q}
}^{L^{2}}$, the existence and uniqueness of a mild solution $w\in C([0
\widetilde{T}]:L^{2}(\Omega )),$ for any arbitrary $T>0$, is a direct
consequence of the application of the abstract theory (Brezis \cite{Brez
OMXM}) on maximal T-monotone operators in $L^{2}(\Omega )$. Moreover, we
know that $w$ is a weak solution (in the sense of Definition 3.1 of \cit
{Brez OMXM}): i.e. if we assume $w_{0,n}\in $ $D(\partial J_{0,q})$ and
h_{n}\in W^{1,1}(0,\widetilde{T}:L^{2}(\Omega ))$ such that
w_{0,n}\rightarrow w_{0}$ in $L^{2}(\Omega )$ and $h_{n}\rightarrow h$ in
L^{1}(0,\widetilde{T}:L^{2}(\Omega ))$ then the respective solutions $w_{n}$
satisfy that $w_{n}\rightarrow w$ in $C([0,\widetilde{T}]:L^{2}(\Omega ))$
(see, Theorem 3.4 of \cite{Brez OMXM}). By applying Theorem 3.7 of \cit
{Brez OMXM} we know that, in fact, $w_{n}$ is a strong solution in the sense
that $w_{n}(t)$ is Lipschitz continuous on $[\delta ,\widetilde{T}]$ for any
$\delta \in (0,\widetilde{T})$ and thus differentiable. Then the associate
problem (\ref{Problem parabolic subdifferential J-0q}) can be written as
\begin{equation*}
\dfrac{dw_{n}}{d\tau }(\tau )-\frac{\Delta _{p}(w_{n}^{{}}(\tau )^{\frac{1}{
}})}{w_{n}^{{}}(\tau )^{\frac{q-1}{q}}}=h_{n}(\tau ),
\end{equation*
i.e.,
\begin{equation*}
w_{n}^{{}}(\tau )^{\frac{q-1}{q}}\dfrac{dw_{n}}{d\tau }(\tau )-\Delta
_{p}(w_{n}^{{}}(\tau )^{\frac{1}{q}})=h_{n}(\tau )w_{n}^{{}}(\tau )^{\frac
q-1}{q}}.
\end{equation*}
If we define $w_{n}^{{}}(\tau )=u_{n}(t)^{q}$ then
\begin{equation*}
w_{n}^{{}}(\tau )^{\frac{q-1}{q}}\dfrac{dw_{n}}{d\tau }(\tau )=\frac{q}{2q-1
\dfrac{d(w_{n}^{(2q-1)/q})}{d\tau }(\tau )=\dfrac{d(u_{n}^{2q-1})}{dt}(t)
\end{equation*
if
\begin{equation*}
\tau =\frac{q}{2q-1}t.
\end{equation*
Obviously we take now $\widetilde{T}=\frac{q}{2q-1}T.$ Notice that $w_{n}\in
C([0,\widetilde{T}]:L^{2}(\Omega ))$ implies that $u_{n}^{q}\in
C([0,T]:L^{2}(\Omega ))$ and thus $u_{n}^{2q-1}\in C([0,T]:L^{2}(\Omega ))$
since $(2q-1)/q>1$ (remember that $q>1$). In addition, for those regular data
\begin{equation*}
\dfrac{d(u_{n}^{2q-1})}{dt}\in \lbrack \widehat{\delta },T]\text{ for any
\widehat{\delta }\in (0,T].
\end{equation*
Thus, we conclude that $u_{n}(t):=w_{n}(\frac{q}{2q-1}t)^{1/q}$ is a\textit
\ }$L^{1}-$\textit{mild positive solution} of $(P_{q})$ on $[0,T]$,
associated to $u_{0,n}:=$ $w_{0,n}{}^{1/q}$ and $h_{n}$ (which the
corresponding unique selected $L^{1}-$\textit{mild positive solution} of
(P_{q})$. Finally, as $w_{n}\rightarrow w$ in $C([0,\widetilde{T
]:L^{2}(\Omega ))$ we get that $u(t):=w(\frac{q}{2q-1}t)^{1/q}$ is a\textit
\ }$L^{1}-$\textit{mild positive solution} of $(P_{q})$ on $[0,T]$,
associated to $u_{0}:=$ $w_{0}{}^{1/q}$ and $h$ since the notion of mild
solution is stable by approximations of the data (see, e.g. Theorem 11. 1 of
\cite{BenCran Pazy}). The rest of conclusions of Theorem \ref{Theore main},
when $f(x,v)\equiv 0$ are a consequence of Lemma \ref{Lemma compactness} and
the T-monotocity of operator $\partial J_{0,q}$ (Lemmas \ref{Prop Benilan}
and \ref{Lemm subdifferential}).
\noindent We consider now the parabolic problem $(P)$ in the general case,
i.e., with a non-homogeneous term $f(x,u)$ satisfying the structural
assumptions (f1)-(f3). We consider now the operator on $L^{2}(\Omega )$
\begin{equation}
Cw=\partial J_{0,q}(w)-\frac{f_{1}(x,w)}{w^{q-1}} \label{Operator C_1}
\end{equation
with $D(C)=D(\partial J_{0,q})$. Since (f1)-(f3) hold and
f_{1}(x,w)=f_{1}(w),$ independent of $x$, or $f_{1}(x,w)$ satisfies also
(f4), then the function $E:\Omega \times \lbrack 0,+\infty )\rightarrow
\mathbb{R}$, given by
\begin{equation*}
E(x,w)=-\frac{f_{1}(x,w)}{w^{p-1}}-a_{0}(x)
\end{equation*
generates a m--T-accretive operator $L^{2}(\Omega )$ with $E(x,0)=0$. Then,
the operator $C$ is m-T-accretive on $L^{2}(\Omega )$. Moreover, the
Lipschitz function
\begin{equation*}
G(x,w)=-\frac{f_{2}(x,w)}{w^{q-1}}+a_{0}(x)
\end{equation*
(of constant $K_{{G}}>0$) generates a Lipschitz operator on $L^{2}(\Omega )$
(of constant $K$ for some $K>0$). Then the operator $C+KI$ is a
m-T-accretive in $L^{2}(\Omega )$ (see, $e.g.$, Chapter 2, Example 2.2 of
\cite{BenCran Pazy}), i.e., $C$ is a $K$-m-T-accretive in $L^{2}(\Omega )$.
So, by the Crandall-Ligget theorem (see, $e.g.$, \cite{Barbu}, and \cit
{BenCran Pazy}), for any $w_{0}\in \overline{D(\partial J_{0,q})}$ and $h\in
L^{1}(0,T:L^{2}(\Omega ))$ there exists a unique positive $L^{2}-$mild
solution $w\in C([0,T]:L^{2}(\Omega ))$ of the Cauchy Problem
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{lc}
\dfrac{dw}{dt}+\partial J_{0,q}(w)-\dfrac{f_{1}(x,w)}{w^{q-1}}-\dfrac
f_{2}(x,w)}{w^{q-1}}\ni h(t) & \text{in }L^{2}(\Omega ) \\[0.2cm]
w(0)=w_{0}, &
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation
and if $\widehat{w}\in C([0,T]:L^{2}(\Omega ))$ is the $L^{2}-$mild solution
corresponding to the data $\widehat{w}_{0}\in \overline{D(\partial J_{0,q})}$
and $\widehat{h}\in L^{1}(0,T:L^{2}(\Omega ))$ then for any $t\in \lbrack
0,T]$
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\left\Vert \lbrack w(t)-\widehat{w}(t)]_{+}\right\Vert _{L^{2}(\Omega )} &
\leq e^{Kt}\Vert (w_{0}-\widehat{w}_{0})^{+}\Vert _{L^{2}(\Omega )} \\
& \displaystyle\hspace*{-0.2cm}+\int_{0}^{t}e^{K(t-s)}\left\Vert [h(s)
\widehat{h}(s)]_{+}\right\Vert _{L^{2}(\Omega )}ds
\end{array
\end{equation*
(see, $e.g.$, \cite{Barbu 2010} Proposition 4.1 or Theorem 13.1 of \cit
{BenCran Pazy}). Arguing as before $u(t):=w(\frac{q}{2q-1}t)^{1/q}$ is
\textit{\ }$L^{1}-$\textit{mild positive solution} of $(P)$. The proof that
u\in L^{\infty }(0,T:L^{\infty }(\Omega ))$ once we assume $h\in L^{\infty
}(0,T:L^{\infty }(\Omega ))$ and $u_{0}\in L^{\infty }(\Omega )$ is a
consequence of Lemma \ref{Lemma compactness} (which implies the compactness
of the semigroup generated by operator $\partial J_{0,q}(w)-\dfrac{f_{1}(x,w
}{w^{q-1}}-\dfrac{f_{2}(x,w)}{w^{q-1}}$) and the abstract invariant results
presented in Theorem 2.4.1 of Vrabie \cite{Vrabie} (see also \cite{Di Vrabie
), which ends the proof of Theorem \ref{Theore main} $_{\blacksquare }$
\bigskip
\begin{remark}
\label{Rem Hipo dato inicial}In fact, the existence and uniqueness of a
L^{2}-$mild positive solution of problem (\ref{Problem parabolic
subdifferential J-0q}) can be assured in the more general case of $w_{0}\in
\overline{{\mathcal{D}}(\partial J_{0,q})}$. Notice that if $w_{0}\in
\overline{{\mathcal{D}}(\partial J_{0,q})}$ the selected $L^{1}-$mild
positive solution $u$ of $(P_{q})$ such that $w(\frac{q}{2q-1}t)=u(t)^{q},$
with $w(t)$ the corresponding $L^{2}-$mild positive solution of problem (\re
{Problem parabolic subdifferential J-0q}) satisfies (in some sense) the
decay estimates given in Lemma \ref{Lemm subdifferential} since they are
obtained through the implicit Euler scheme given in the definition of mild
solution. As a matter of fact, if $w(t_{0})\in {\mathcal{D}}(\partial
J_{0,q})$ for some $t_{0}\in \lbrack 0,T]$, i.e. $\partial
J_{0,q}(w(t_{0}))\ni h(t_{0})$ for some $h(t_{0})\in L^{2}(\Omega )$ then
-\Delta
_{p}v(t_{0})+h(t_{0})_{-}(x)v(t_{0})^{q-1}=h(t_{0})_{+}(x)v(t_{0})^{q-1}$
and necessarily we get the estimates iii) and iv) of \ref{Lemm
subdifferential} for $v(t_{0})$. We also point out that some uniqueness
results for suitable sublinear parabolic problems, when $u_{0}(x)\geq
Cd(x,\partial \Omega ),$ can be found in \cite{Cazenave-Dik-Escobedo}, \cit
{Giacomoni-Sauvy-Shmarev}, \cite{Dao-Diaz}, \cite{Di-Her-Ilyasov}, \cit
{Diaz-Giacomoni} (see also their references to previous works in this
direction). Curiously enough such type of assumptions also lead to the
uniqueness of solutions in the case of equations with multivalued right hand
side terms as problem $(P_{H})$ (see \cite{Feireisel}, \cite{Di-Tello})
which until now required completely different ideas.
\end{remark}
\bigskip
\begin{remark}
We point out that selected $L^{1}-$mild positive solution $u$ satisfies some
extra regularity properties due to the subdifferential of $J_{0,q}$ involved
in the equation. See also some variational type techniques applied to the
case $p=2$ in \cite{Palmieri} and the general approach (also for $p=2$)
presented to some related problems in \cite{Brezis-Cacenave}, \cite{Brez
Cazenave libro}.
\end{remark}
\bigskip
\begin{remark}
It seems possible to make a sharper study of the regularity of the solution
of the equation $-\mu \Delta _{p}v+v^{2q-1}=h(x)v^{q-1}$, but we shall not
enter into the maximum of its generality here. For instance, when $p=2$ such
equation becomes a Schr\"{o}dinger equation with a potential $h(x)$ (and a
nonlinear perturbation term $v^{3}$) and so it is possible to consider
potentials $h(x)$ with a singular behavior near $\partial \Omega $ (and in
other subregions of $\Omega $) which goes beyond $L^{1}(\Omega )$ (see,
e.g. $, \cite{Ben-Petra-absorptions}, \cite{Ponce}, \cite{Di Go Rako},\cit
{Orsina ponce}, \cite{Di Go Vazq} and its many references). For the special
case of $q=p\neq 2$ singular potentials were considered in \cit
{Marcus-Shafir}, \cite{Pincho-Tertikas-Titore}, \cite{DiHernMance2} and in
many other papers.
\end{remark}
\bigskip
\begin{remark}
\label{Rem Caso R^N} The main result of this paper may be also proved when
we replace the open bounded set $\Omega $ by the whole space $\mathbb{R
^{N}. $ The \emph{Diaz-Sa\'{a} inequality} (and the generalized Picone
inequality) was obtained in \cite{Chaib} (respectively in \cite{Dat}). We do
no want to enter into details here but the arguments of truncating the
domain, generate the associate problems on an expansive sequence of domains
\Omega _{n}$ and then to get the solution as limit of the solutions of the
corresponding problems on $\Omega _{n}$ can be applied as in Brezis and
Kamin \cite{Br-Kamin} (see also \cite{Di Oleinik}). The assumptions made on
functions $f_{i}$ allow to get some similar estimates to (\ref{Estimate
dependence parabolic}) to solutions of several quasilinear formulations
(see, \cite{Pablo-Vazquez}, and \cite{Hui}) and, in particular, to solutions
of the associated to the KPP equation as in the papers \cite{Br-Kamin}, \cit
{Di-Kamin}, \cite{Audrito-Vazquez} and \cite{Audruito.Vazquez slow}).
\end{remark}
\bigskip
\begin{remark}
\label{rem singular equ}As mentioned before, the assumptions on $f_{1}(x,u)$
allow the consideration of some singular terms: see, $e.g.$, \cit
{Badra-Giacomoni}, \cite{Brou-Giacomoni}, \cite{Ghergu-Radulescu}, \cit
{Diaz-Giacomoni} and the surveys \cite{Hernandez-Mancebo} and \cit
{Ghergu-Radulescu libro singular}. The assumption of the type $\frac
f_{2}(x,u)}{u^{q-1}}$ globally Lipschitz continuous in $u\in (0,+\infty )$
was used for other purposes in previous works in the literature (see, $e.g.
, \cite{Cuesta -Takak}).
\end{remark}
\bigskip
\begin{remark}
\label{rEM nEUMANN TYE boundary cnditions} It seems possible to get similar
results to positive solutions of Neumann type boundary conditions once that
the homogeneity of the boundary condition is compatible with the one of the
doubly nonlinear problem $(P)$ (see, $e.g.$, \cite{Benilan Franco-Japan},
\cite{Alt-Luckhaus}, \cite{Bandle-Pozio-Tesei} and \cite{Andreucci} among
many other possible references).
\end{remark}
\bigskip
We point out that, obviously, the function $u_{\infty }(x)\equiv 0$ in
\Omega $ is a trivial solution of the stationary problem. Here we are
interested on nonnegative solutions of problem $(P)$ (and its implicit time
discretization). The following result shows that the asymptotic behavior, as
$t\rightarrow +\infty $, is very different according $q\in (1,\frac{p}{2})$
and $p>2$ than in the case $q\in (\frac{p}{2},p].$
We will prove that, in fact, if $q\in (1,\frac{p}{2})$ and $p>2,f(x,u)\equiv
0,~h\in L^{1}(0,T:L^{2}(\Omega )),$ $h\geq 0$ and $u_{0}\gvertneqq 0$ then
there is no extinction in finite time, so that $\Vert u^{2q-1}(t)\Vert
_{L^{2}(\Omega )}>0$ for any $t>0.$ The situation is different if $q\in
\frac{p}{2},p]$ since, at least for $f(x,u)\equiv 0$ and $h\leq 0$, there is
a finite extinction time $T_{e}>0$, such that $w(t)\equiv 0,$ in $\Omega $,
for any $t\geq T_{e}$. In that case, we understand that the selected
solution $v(t)$ of $(P)$ also extinguishes in $\Omega $ after $T_{e}.$
\bigskip
\begin{theorem}
\label{Theorem extinction copy(1)} a) Assume $q\in (1,\frac{p}{2})$ and
p>2,f(x,u)\equiv 0,~h\in L_{loc}^{1}(0,+\infty :L^{2}(\Omega )),$ $h\geq 0$
and $u_{0}\gvertneqq 0$ satisfying (\ref{Hypo u_0}). Then the selected
L^{1}-$mild positive solution $u$ of $(P)$ satisfies tha
\begin{equation*}
\Vert u^{q}(t)\Vert _{L^{2}(\Omega )}\geq \frac{1}
(c_{1}t+c_{2})^{(q-1)/(p+q-2)}}
\end{equation*}
for any $t>0$, for some positive constants $c_{1}$ and $c_{2}.$
b) Assume $q\in (\frac{p}{2},p]$, $f(x,v)\equiv 0$ and $h\in
L_{loc}^{1}(0,+\infty :L^{2}(\Omega ))$ such that $h\leq 0.$Then there is a
finite extinction time $T_{e}>0$, such that the selected solution $u(t)$ of
(P)$ extinguishes in $\Omega $ after $T_{e},$ i.e., $u(t)=u_{\infty
}(x)\equiv 0,$ in $\Omega $, for any $t\geq T_{e}$.
\end{theorem}
\noindent \textit{Proof}. Since $h\geq 0$, from the comparison estimate (\re
{Estimate dependence parabolic}) we deduce that $u\geq \underline{U}$ with
\underline{U}$ the unique solution of the proble
\begin{equation*}
(P_{0})\qquad \left\{
\begin{array}{rclr}
\partial _{t}(\underline{U}^{2q-1})-\Delta _{p}\underline{U} & = & 0 & \text{
in }Q_{T}, \\[0.1cm]
\underline{U} & = & 0\ & \text{ on }\Sigma , \\[0.1cm]
\underline{U}^{q}(0,.) & = & u_{0}^{q}(.) & \text{ on }\Omega
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation*
Moreover, as indicated in Theorem \ref{Theore main}, we know that if
\underline{U}(t):=\underline{W}(\frac{q}{2q-1}t)^{1/q}$ then $\underline{W}$
satisfies of the problem
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{lc}
\dfrac{d\underline{W}}{dt}+\partial J_{0,q}(\underline{W})\ni 0 & \text{in
L^{2}(\Omega ) \\[0.2cm]
\underline{W}(0)=u_{0}. &
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation
In addition, the operator $\partial J_{0,q}(\underline{W})$ is formally
given by $\frac{\Delta _{p}(w^{\frac{1}{q}})}{w^{\frac{q-1}{q}}}$ and thus
it is homogeneous of exponent $\theta =(p-q)/q$, in the sense that
\begin{equation*}
\partial J_{0,q}(r\underline{W})=r^{\theta }\partial J_{0,q}(r\underline{W}
\text{ for any }r\geq 0\text{ and }\underline{W}\in D(\partial J_{0,q}).
\end{equation*
Then, since $q\in (1,\frac{p}{2})$ and $p>2$ implies that $\theta >1$,
applying Theorem 1.1 of \cite{Alikakos-Rostamian} we get that
\begin{equation*}
\Vert \underline{U}^{q}(t)\Vert _{L^{2}(\Omega )}\geq \frac{1}
(c_{1}t+c_{2})^{(q-1)/(p+q-2)}}\text{ for any }t>0,
\end{equation*
for some positive constants $c_{1}$ and $c_{2}$, and then the conclusion
holds since $U\geq \underline{U}.$
\noindent b) We consider, again the solution $\underline{U}$ of $(P_{0}).$
Now $0\leq u\leq \underline{U}$ \ and since, in this case, the homogeneity
exponent of $\partial J_{0,q}(\underline{W})$ is $\theta <1$ the conclusion
results of the application of Corollary 1 of \cite{Belaud-Diaz}.
_{\blacksquare }$
\bigskip
\begin{remark}
\label{Rem sytems and higher order} \ Systems involving sub-homogeneous
terms have been extensively considered in the literature: see, $e.g.$, \cit
{Fle-Hern Thelin systems}, \cite{Flekinger Gossez Hernandez}, \cite{Chaib}
and its references. It would be interesting to apply the assumptions of the
general framework in this paper to the case of systems. In the case of \emph
higher order equations with sub-homogeneous} terms the T-accretivity in
L^{p}$ fails but I conjecture that the $L^{2}-$contraction continuous
dependence still holds for certain homogeneous higher order operators (as
for instance those considered in \cite{Bernis} and \cite{Alt}).
\end{remark}
\bigskip
\begin{remark}
\label{Rem T-accretivity in L^1}As mentioned before (see Remark \ref{Remark
correccion k>0}) a stronger property on the convex funcional $J$ may lead to
the accretivity in $L^{1}$ and in $L^{\infty }$ of the realization over
these spaces of the subdifferential operator $\partial J$. Although we are
not able to check the stronger property (\ref{tau-contraction for any k}) in
the special case of functional $J_{0,q}$ it is possible to get some
continuity dependence inequalities for solutions of the equation $w+\mu
\partial J_{0,q}(w)\ni h$, for any $\mu >0$, which keep some resemblances
with the inequalities expressing the $L^{1}$ and $L^{\infty }$ T-accretivity
for the realization of the operator $\partial J_{0,q}(w)$ over those spaces
(some related techniques can be found in Brezis and Kamin \cite{Br-Kamin}
and \cite{Charro-Peral}).
\end{remark}
\bigskip
\begin{acknowledgement}
It is a great pleasure to thank the many discussions with Jacques Giacomoni
on a very preliminary version of this paper. In particular, he showed me how
to prove that the operator $\partial J_{0,q}$ is m-T-accretive in
L^{2}(\Omega )$ by using the Picone inequality instead the convexity of
J_{0,q}$. I also thank Lucio Boccardo for several comments (in particular on
Remark \ref{Remark Lucio}) and Gregorio D\'{\i}az, David G\'{o}mez-Castro,
Jes\'{u}s Hern\'{a}ndez, Jean Michel Rakotoson and Laurent Veron for some
useful conversations. The research was partially supported by the project
ref. MTM2017-85449-P of the DGISPI (Spain) and the Research Group MOMAT
(Ref. 910480) of the UCM.
\end{acknowledgement}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Compacted binary trees are a special class of directed acyclic graphs that appear as a model for data structures in the compression of XML documents~\cite{bousquet2015xml}.
Given a rooted binary tree of size $n$, its compacted form can be computed in expected and worst-case time $\mathcal{O}(n)$ with expected compacted size $\Theta(n/ \sqrt{\log n})$~\cite{flss90}.
Recently, Genitrini, Gittenberger, Kauers, and Wallner solved the reversed question on the asymptotic number of compacted trees under certain height restrictions~\cite{GenitriniGittenbergerKauersWallner2016}; however the asymptotic number in the unrestricted case remained elusive. They also solved this problem for a simpler class of trees known as relaxed trees under the same height restrictions.
In this paper we show that the counting sequences $(c_n)_{n \in \mathbb{N}}$ of (unrestricted) compacted binary trees and $(r_n)_{n \in \mathbb{N}}$ of (unrestricted) relaxed binary trees both admit a stretched exponential:
\begin{theo}
\label{theo:mainasy}
The number of compacted and relaxed binary trees satisfy for $n \to \infty$
\begin{align*}
c_n &= \Theta\left( n! \, 4^n e^{3a_1n^{1/3}} n^{3/4} \right) &\text{ and } &&
r_n &= \Theta\left( n! \, 4^n e^{3a_1n^{1/3}} n \right),
\end{align*}
where $a_{1}\approx-2.338$ is the largest root of the Airy function $\text{\normalfont Ai}(x)$ defined as the unique function satisfying $\text{\normalfont Ai}''(x)=x\text{\normalfont Ai}(x)$ and $\lim_{n\to \infty} \text{\normalfont Ai}(x) = 0$.
\end{theo}
We believe that there are constants $\gamma_{c}$ and $\gamma_{r}$ such that
\[c_{n}\sim \gamma_{c}n!4^{n}e^{3a_1n^{1/3}}n^{3/4}~~~~\text{and}~~~~r_{n}\sim \gamma_{r}n!4^{n}e^{3a_1n^{1/3}}n,\]
however, we have been unable to find the exact values of these constants or even prove their existence. Nevertheless, our empirical analysis yields what we believe to be very accurate estimates for $\gamma_{c}$ and $\gamma_{r}$, namely $\gamma_{c}\approx 173.12670485$ and $\gamma_{r}\approx 166.95208957$.
The presence of a stretched exponential term in a sequence counting combinatorial objects is not common, although there are quite a few precedents. One simple example is that of {\em pushed Dyck paths}, where Dyck paths of maximum height $h$ are given a weight $y^{-h}$ for some $y>1$. In this case McKay and Beaton determined the weighted number $d_{n}$ of paths of length $2n$ up to {\em and including} the constant term to be asymptotically given by
\[d_{n}\sim A y(y-1)(\log y)^{1/3}4^n\exp\left(-C(\log y)^{2/3}n^{1/3}\right)n^{-5/6},\]
where $A=2^{5/3}\pi^{5/6}/\sqrt{3}$ and $C=3(\pi/2)^{2/3}$; see
\cite{guttmann2015analysis}. For the analogous problem of counting pushed self avoiding walks, Beaton et al.~\cite{BeatonEtal2015Compressed} gave a (non-rigorous) probabilistic argument for the presence of a stretched exponential of the form $e^{-cn^{3/7}}$ for some $c>0$. In each of these cases, a stretched exponential appears as part of a compromise between the large height regime in which most paths occur and the small height regime in which the weight is maximized. We will see that a similar compromise occurs in this paper.
Another situation in which stretched exponentials have appeared is in cogrowth sequences in groups~\cite{EP2017numerical}, that is, paths on Cayley graphs which start and end at the same point. In particular, Revelle~\cite{revelle2003heat} showed that in the lamplighter group the number $c_{n}$ of these paths of length $2n$ behaves like
\[c_n \sim C \, 9^n \kappa^{n^{1/3}} n^{1/6}.\]
In the group $\mathbb{Z}\wr\mathbb{Z}$, Pittet and Saloff-Coste showed that the asymptotics of the cogrowth series contains the slightly more complicated term $\kappa^{\sqrt{n\log n}}$ \cite{pittet2002random}. Another example comes from the study of pattern avoiding permutations, where Conway, Guttmann, and Zinn-Justin~\cite{ConwayEtal20151324,ConwayEtal20181324} have given compelling numerical evidence that the number $p_{n}$ of 1324-avoiding permutations of length $n$ behaves like
\[p_{n}\sim B \mu^n \mu_1^{\sqrt{n}} n^g,\]
with $\mu\approx11.600$, $\mu_1 \approx 0.0400$, $g \approx -1.1$.
As seen by these examples, it is generally quite difficult to prove that a sequence has a stretched exponential in its asymptotics. Part of the difficulty is that a sequence which has a stretched exponential cannot be ``very nice''. In particular, the generating function cannot be algebraic, and can only be $D$-finite if it has an irregular singularity~\cite{flaj09}.
Some explicit examples of $D$-finite generating series with a stretched exponential are known; see e.g.~\cite{Wright1949Coefficients,Wright1933Coefficients,Wright1932Coefficients}.
In these cases Wright uses a saddle-point method to prove the presence of the stretched exponential. To apply this method, one needs to meticulously check various analytic conditions on the generating function, or to bound related integrals in a delicate way. These tasks can be highly non-trivial and require a precise knowledge of the analytic properties of the generating function. For more detail on how to use the saddle-point method to prove stretched exponentials, and further examples, see \cite[Chapter VIII]{flaj09}.
In lieu of detailed information on the generating function, we find and analyze the following recurrence relation
\[r_{n,m}=r_{n,m-1}+(m+1)r_{n-1,m},\]
corresponding to a partial differential equation to which the saddle point method cannot be readily applied.
The number of relaxed trees of size $n$ is then $r_{n,n}$.
We present a method that works directly with a transformed sequence $d_{n,k}$ and the respective recurrence relation.
We find two explicit sequences $A_{n,k}$ and $B_{n,k}$ with the same asymptotic form, such that
\begin{align}
\label{eq:boundsintro}
A_{n,k} \leq d_{n,k} \leq B_{n,k},
\end{align}
for all $k$ and all $n$ large enough.
The idea is that $A_{n,k}$ and $B_{n,k}$ satisfy the recurrence of $d_{n,k}$ with the equalities replaced by inequalities, allowing us to prove~\eqref{eq:boundsintro} by induction.
In order to find appropriate sequences $A_{n,k}$ and $B_{n,k}$, we start by performing a heuristic analysis to conjecture the asymptotic shape of $d_{n,k}$ for large $n$. We then prove that the required recursive inequalities hold for sufficiently large $n$ using adapted Newton polygons.
The inductive step in the method described above requires that all coefficients in the recurrence be positive. This occurs in the case of relaxed binary trees but not for compacted binary trees. In the latter case, we construct a sandwiching pair of sequences, each determined by a recurrence with positive coefficients, to which our method applies.
As an application, we use our results on relaxed and compacted trees to give new asymptotic upper and lower bounds for the number of minimal deterministic finite automata with $n$ states recognizing a finite language on a binary alphabet. These automata are studied in the context of the complexity of regular languages; see~\cite{DomaratzkiKismaShallit2002DFA,liskovets2006exact, domaratzki2006enumeration}. To our knowledge no upper or lower bounds capturing even the exponential term had been proven for this problem. Our bounds are much more accurate, only differing by a polynomial factor, and thereby proving the presence of a stretched exponential term.
As a further extension of our method, some preliminary results show that our approach can be generalized to a $k$-ary version of compacted trees, which in turn settles the enumeration of minimal finite automata recognizing finite languages for an arbitrary alphabet. A follow-up paper in this direction is underway.
In its simplest form, our method applies to two parameter linear recurrences with positive coefficients which may depend on both parameters. We expect, however, that our method could be adapted to handle a much wider range of recurrence relations, potentially involving more than two parameters, negative coefficients and perhaps even some non-linear recurrences. Indeed, we have already seen that it can be adapted to at least one case involving negative coefficients, namely that of counting compacted binary trees.
\paragraph{Plan of the article.}
In Section~\ref{sec:paths} we introduce compacted binary trees and the related relaxed binary trees, and then derive a bijection to Dyck paths with weights on their horizontal steps.
In Section~\ref{sec:heuristic} we show a heuristic method of how to conjecture the asymptotics and in particular the appearance of a stretched exponential term.
Building on these heuristics, we prove exponentially and polynomially tight bounds for the recurrence of relaxed binary trees in Section~\ref{sec:induction} and of compacted binary trees in Section~\ref{sec:compacted}.
In Section~\ref{sec:automata} we show how our results lead to new bounds on minimal acyclic automata on a binary alphabet.
\section{A two-parameter recurrence relation}
\label{sec:paths}
Originally, compacted binary trees arose in a compression procedure in~\cite{flss90} which computes the number of unique fringe subtrees.
Relaxed binary trees are then defined by relaxing the uniqueness conditions on compacted binary trees.
As we will not need this algorithmic point of view, we directly give the following definition adapted from~\cite[Definition~3.1 and Proposition~4.3]{GenitriniGittenbergerKauersWallner2016}.
Before we define compacted and relaxed binary trees, let us recall some basic definitions.
A \emph{rooted binary tree} is a plane directed connected graph with a distinguished node called the root, in which all nodes have out-degree either $0$ or $2$ and all nodes other than the root have in-degree $1$, while the root has in-degree $0$. For each vertex with out-degree $2$, the out-going edges are distinguished as a left edge and a right edge. Nodes with out-degree $0$ are called \emph{leaves}, and nodes with out-degree $2$ are called \emph{internal nodes}.
All trees in this paper will be rooted and we omit this term in the future.
\begin{definition}[Relaxed binary tree] \label{def:relaxedtree}
A \emph{relaxed binary tree} (or simply \emph{relaxed tree}) of size~$n$ is a directed acyclic graph obtained from a binary tree with $n$ internal nodes, called its \emph{spine}, by keeping the left-most leaf and turning other leaves into pointers, with each one pointing to a node (internal ones or the left-most leaf) preceding it in postorder.
\end{definition}
The counting sequence $(r_n)_{n \in \mathbb{N}}$ of relaxed binary trees of size $n$ starts as follows:
\begin{align*}
\left( r_n \right)_{n \in \mathbb{N}} &=
\left(
1, 1, 3, 16, 127, 1363, 18628, 311250, 6173791, 142190703,
\ldots \right).
\end{align*}
It corresponds to \OEIS{A082161} in the On-line Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences.\footnote{\url{https://oeis.org}}
There, it first appeared as the counting sequence of the number of deterministic, completely defined, initially connected,
acyclic automata with $2$ inputs and $n$ transient, unlabeled states
and a unique absorbing state, yet without specified final states.
This is a direct rephrasing of Definition~\ref{def:relaxedtree} in the language of automata theory; for more details see Section~\ref{sec:automata}.
Liskovets~\cite{liskovets2006exact} provided (probably) the first recurrence relations ($C_2(n)$ used for $r_n$) and
later Callan~\cite{Callan2008Determinant} showed that they are counted by determinants of Stirling cycle numbers.
However, the asymptotics remained an open problem, which we will solve in the present paper.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{comptrees012noids}%
\caption{All relaxed (and also compacted) binary trees of size $0,1,2$, where internal nodes are shown by circles and the unique leaf is drawn as a square. }
\label{fig:compacted_trees_n123}
\end{figure}
Using the class of relaxed trees, it is then easy to define the set of compacted trees by requiring the uniqueness of subtrees.
\begin{definition}[Compacted binary tree]\label{def:compactedtree}
Given a relaxed tree, to each node $u$ we can associate a binary tree $B(u)$. We proceed by postorder. If $u$ is the left-most leaf, we define $B(u) = u$. Otherwise, $u$ has two children $v, w$, then $B(u)$ is the binary tree with $B(v)$ and $B(w)$ as left and right sub-trees, respectively.
A \emph{compacted binary tree}, or simply \emph{compacted tree} of size~$n$ is a relaxed tree with $B(u) \neq B(v)$ (i.e., $B(u)$ not isomorphic to $B(v)$) for all pairs of distinct nodes $u,v$.
\end{definition}
Figure~\ref{fig:compacted_trees_n123} shows all relaxed (and compacted) trees of size $n=0,1,2$ and
Figure~\ref{fig:compacted3invalid} gives the smallest relaxed tree that is not a compacted tree.
The counting sequence $(c_n)_{n \in \mathbb{N}}$ of compacted binary trees of size $n$ is \OEIS{A254789} and starts as follows:
\begin{align*}
\left( c_n \right)_{n \in \mathbb{N}} &=
\left(
1, 1, 3, 15, 111, 1119, 14487, 230943, 4395855, 97608831,
\ldots \right).
\end{align*}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.19\textwidth]{compacted3invalid}%
\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad
\includegraphics[width=0.19\textwidth]{compacted3valid}%
\caption{(Left) The smallest relaxed binary tree that is not a compacted binary tree, as the two gray subtrees correspond to the same (classical) binary tree. (Right) A valid compacted binary tree of size $3$ with the same spine.
}
\label{fig:compacted3invalid}
\end{figure}
In~\cite[Theorem~5.1 and Corollary~5.4]{GenitriniGittenbergerKauersWallner2016} the so-far most efficient recurrences are given for the number of compacted and relaxed binary trees, respectively.
Computing the first $n$ terms using these requires $\mathcal{O}(n^3)$ arithmetic operations.
In this section we give an alternative recurrence with only one auxiliary parameter (instead of two) other than the size $n$, which leads to an algorithm of arithmetic complexity $\mathcal{O}(n^2)$ to compute the first $n$ terms of the sequence.
The construction is motivated by the recent bijection~\cite{Wallner2018R1}.
As a corollary of our main result Theorem~\ref{theo:mainasy}, we directly get an estimate of the asymptotic proportion of compacted trees among relaxed trees:
\begin{align*}
\frac{c_n}{r_n} = \Theta(n^{-1/4}).
\end{align*}
An analogous result for compacted and relaxed trees of bounded right height was shown in~\cite[Corollary~3.5]{GenitriniGittenbergerKauersWallner2016}. The right height is the maximal number of right edges to internal nodes on a path in the spine from the root to a leaf. Let $c_{k,n}$ (resp.~$r_{k,n}$) be the number of compacted (resp.~relaxed) trees of right height at most~$k$.
Then,
for fixed $k$,
\begin{align*}
\frac{c_{k,n}}{r_{k,n}} \sim
\lambda_k n^{- \frac{1}{k+3} - \left(\frac{1}{4} - \frac{1}{k+3}\right)\frac{1}{\cos^2\left(\frac{\pi}{k+3} \right)}}
= o\left(n^{-1/4} \right),
\end{align*}
for a constant $\lambda_k$ independent of $n$. As $k \to \infty$, we see that the exponent of $n$ approaches~$-1/4$. It is thus not surprising that the exponent in the unbounded case is also~$-1/4$.
\subsection{Relaxed binary trees and horizontally decorated paths}
For the subsequent construction, we need the following type of lattice paths.
\begin{definition}
\label{def:hordecpath}
A \emph{horizontally decorated path} $P$ is a lattice path starting from $(0,0)$ with steps $H = (1,0)$ and $V = (0,1)$ confined to the region $0 \leq y \leq x$, where each horizontal step $H$ is decorated by a number in $\{1,\ldots,k+1\}$ with $k$ its $y$-coordinate. If $P$ ends at $(n,n)$, we call it a \emph{horizontally decorated Dyck path}.
\end{definition}
We denote by $\mathcal{D}_n$ the set of horizontally decorated Dyck paths of length $2n$.
\begin{remark}
Horizontally decorated Dyck paths can also be interpreted as classical Dyck paths, where below every horizontal step a box given by a unit square between the horizontal step and the line $y=-1$ is marked, see Figure~\ref{fig:bij-dyck}.
This gives an interpretation connecting these paths with the heights of Dyck paths, which we will exploit later.
Independently, Callan gave in~\cite{Callan2008Determinant} a more general bijection in which he called the paths \emph{column-marked subdiagonal paths}, and Bassino and Nicaud studied in~\cite{BassinoNicaud2007Automata} a variation when counting some automata, where the paths stay \emph{above} the diagonal, which they called \emph{$k$-Dyck boxed diagrams}.
\end{remark}
\begin{theo}
\label{theo:relaxedbij}
There exists a bijection $\mathbf{Dyck}$ between relaxed binary trees of size $n$ and the set $\mathcal{D}_n$ of horizontally decorated Dyck paths of length $2n$.
\end{theo}
\begin{proof}
Let $C$ be a relaxed binary tree of size $n$, and $C_*$ its spine. For convenience, we identify the internal nodes in $C$ and $C_*$, and pointers in $C$ with leaves (not the left-most one) in $C_*$.
We now give a recursive procedure transforming $C$ into a horizontally decorated Dyck path $P$.
First, we take $C_*$ and label its internal nodes \emph{and the left-most leaf} in postorder from $1$ to $n+1$.
Next, we define the following function $\mathbf{Path}$ that transforms $C_*$ into a lattice path in $H$ and $V$. Given a binary tree $T$, it either consists of two sub-trees $(T_1, T_2)$, or it is a leaf $\varepsilon$. We thus define $\mathbf{Path}$ recursively by
\[
\mathbf{Path}((T_1, T_2)) = \mathbf{Path}(T_1)\mathbf{Path}(T_2)V, \quad\quad \mathbf{Path}(\varepsilon) = H.
\]
It is clear that $\mathbf{Path}(C_*)$ starts with $H$ for the left-most leaf. Let $P_0$ be $\mathbf{Path}(C_*)$ with its starting $H$ removed.
Note that $\mathbf{Path}$ performs a postorder traversal on $C_*$ where leaves are matched with $H$ and internal nodes with $V$. Then, $\mathbf{Path}(C_*)$ ends at $(n+1,n)$ and stays always strictly below $y=x$ because every binary (sub-)tree has one more leaf than internal nodes, and each initial segment of $\mathbf{Path}(C_*)$ corresponds to a collection of subtrees of $C_*$. Hence, $P_0$ is a Dyck path.
Observe that the $i$-th step $V$ in $P_0$ corresponds to the $(i+1)$-st node in postorder, as the left-most leaf is labeled~$1$.
Finally, for each step $H$ in $P_0$, we label it by the label of the internal node (or the left-most leaf) to which its corresponding leaf in $C_*$ points in $C$. We thus obtain a Dyck path~$P$ with labels on the horizontal steps, and we define $\mathbf{Dyck}(C_*) = P$.
We have seen that the Dyck path $P_0$ is in bijection with the spine $C_*$. To see that the labeling condition on horizontally decorated Dyck paths is equivalent to the condition on relaxed binary trees, we take a pointer $p$ pointing to a node $u$ with label $\ell$ that corresponds to a step $H$ with a certain coordinate $k$. By construction of the Dyck path, $p$ comes after $u$ in postorder if and only if the step $H$ from $p$ comes after the step $V$ from $u$, which is equivalent to $\ell \leq k+1$, as the node with label $1$ is the left-most leaf and is not recorded as a step $H$. We thus have the equivalence of the two conditions, so $\mathbf{Dyck}$ is indeed a bijection as claimed.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[thbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth, page=1]{ipe-fig.pdf}
\caption{Example of the bijection $\mathbf{Dyck}$ between relaxed trees and horizontally decorated Dyck paths. It transforms internal nodes into vertical steps and pointers into horizontal steps.}
\label{fig:bij-dyck}
\end{figure}
The following result gives the claimed algorithm with quadratic arithmetic complexity to count such paths, which can also be used as a precomputation step of an algorithm that randomly generates these paths using a linear number of arithmetic operations for each path. These algorithms are also applicable to relaxed binary trees via the bijection $\mathbf{Dyck}$.
\begin{prop}
\label{prop:recrelaxed}
Let $r_{n,m}$ be the number of horizontally decorated paths ending at $(n,m)$. Then,
\begin{align*}
r_{n,m} &= r_{n,m-1} + (m+1) r_{n-1,m}, & \text{ for } &n,m \geq 1 \text{ and } n\geq m,\\
r_{n,m} &= 0, & \text{ for } & n < m, \\
r_{n,0} &= 1, & \text{ for } & n \geq 0.
\end{align*}
The number of relaxed binary trees of size $n$ is equal to $r_{n,n}$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let us start with the boundary conditions. First of all, no such path is allowed to cross the diagonal $y=x$, thus $r_{n,m}=0$ for $n<m$. Second, the paths consisting only of horizontal steps stay at altitude $0$ and admit therefore just one possible label for each step, i.e., $r_{n,0}=1$ for $n \geq 0$.
For the recursion we consider how a path can jump to $(n,m)$. It either uses a step~$V$ from $(n,m-1)$ or it uses a step~$H$ from $(n-1,m)$. In the second case, there are $m+1$ possible decorations as the path is currently at altitude $m$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}[Compacted trees of bounded right height]
This restriction naturally translates relaxed binary trees of right height at most $k$ from~\cite{GenitriniGittenbergerKauersWallner2016} into horizontally decorated Dyck paths of height at most $k+1$, where height is the maximal normal distance rescaled by $\sqrt{2}$ from a lattice point on the path to the diagonal.
In other words, these paths are constrained to remain between the diagonal and a line translated to the right parallel to the diagonal by $k+1$ unit steps.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Compacted binary trees}
Given a relaxed tree $C$, an internal node $u$ is called a \emph{cherry} if its children in the spine are both leaves and none of them is the left-most one. According to the discussion at the end of Section~4 in \cite{GenitriniGittenbergerKauersWallner2016}, the only obstacle for a relaxed tree to be a compacted tree is a cherry with badly chosen pointers. For the convenience of the reader, we now recall and formalize this observation in the following proposition.
\begin{prop} \label{prop:cherry}
A relaxed tree $C$ is a compacted tree if and only if there are no two nodes $u\neq v$ in $C$ which share the same left child $u_{\ell}$ and the same right child $u_{r}$. Moreover, if $C$ is not a compacted tree, such a pair exists where $v$ is a cherry and $u$ precedes $v$ in postorder.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The ``only if'' part follows directly from Definition~\ref{def:compactedtree}. We now focus on the ``if'' part. Suppose that $C$ is not a compacted tree, which means there is at least a pair of internal nodes $u, v$ such that $u$ precedes $v$ and $B(u) = B(v)$, with $B(u)$ defined in Definition~\ref{def:compactedtree}.
Now we want to show that there is one such pair with $v$ being a cherry.
We take such a pair $(u,v)$.
If $v$ is a cherry, the claim holds.
Otherwise, without loss of generality, we suppose that the left child $v'$ of $v$ is not a leaf. Let $u_\ell$ be the left child of $u$. If $u_\ell$ is an internal node, we take $u' = u_\ell$. Otherwise, we take $u'$ to be the internal node pointed to by $u_\ell$. By definition, we have $B(u') = B(v')$, and clearly $u'$ precedes $v'$ in postorder. We thus obtain a new pair with the same conditions but of greater depth in the spine. However, since the spine has finite depth, this process cannot continue forever. As it only stops when $v$ is a cherry, we have the existence of such a pair $(u,v)$ with $v$ a cherry.
\end{proof}
The restriction described in Proposition \ref{prop:cherry} has an analogue in the class of horizontally decorated paths:
We label every step $V$ with its final altitude plus one, which corresponds to its row number in the interpretation with marked boxes, and which also corresponds to the traversal/process order in postorder of its internal node in the relaxed tree; compare Figure~\ref{fig:bij-dyck}.
Recall that each step $H$ is already labeled.
For any step $S$, let $\mathbf{\mathcal{L}}(S)$ be its label.
We associate to every step $V$ a pair of integers $(v_1,v_2)$, which correspond to the labels of its left and right children.
First, let $S'$ be the step before $V$ and set $v_2 = \mathbf{\mathcal{L}}(S')$.
Next, draw a line from the ending point of $V$ in the southwest direction parallel to the diagonal, and stop upon touching the path again. Let $S''$ be the last step before $V$ that ends on this line (if there is no such step, set $v_{1}=1$). Then set $v_{1} = \mathbf{\mathcal{L}}(S'')$.
\begin{definition}
\label{def:hordecpathb}
A \emph{C-decorated{} path} $P$ is a horizontally decorated path where the decorations $h_1$ and $h_2$ of each pattern of consecutive steps $HHV$ fulfill $(h_1,h_2) \neq (v_1,v_2)$ for all preceding steps~$V$.
\end{definition}
\begin{prop}
The map $\mathbf{Dyck}$ bijectively sends the set of compacted trees of size~$n$ to the set of C-decorated{} Dyck paths of length~$2n$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Recall from Theorem~\ref{theo:relaxedbij} that the map $\mathbf{Dyck}$ is a bijection sending relaxed trees of size $n$ to the set of horizontally decorated Dyck paths of size $2n$. C-decorated paths are defined precisely so that their corresponding relaxed trees satisfy the condition of Proposition~\ref{prop:cherry}. Therefore, $\mathbf{Dyck}$ forms a bijection between C-decorated{} paths and compacted trees.
\end{proof}
The key observation for the counting result is that exactly one pair of labels $(h_{1},h_{2})$ is avoided for each preceding step~$V$ of a consecutive pattern $HHV$.
Applying this classification to the previous result we get a similar quadratic-time recurrence for compacted binary trees.
\begin{prop} \label{prop:reccompacted}
Let $c_{n,m}$ be the number of C-decorated{} paths ending at $(n,m)$. Then,
\vspace{-1mm}
\begin{align*}
c_{n,m} &= c_{n,m-1} + (m+1) c_{n-1,m} - (m-1) c_{n-2,m-1}, & \text{ for } &n\geq m \geq 1,\\
c_{n,m} &= 0, & \text{ for } & n < m, \\
c_{n,0} &= 1, & \text{ for } & n \geq 0.
\end{align*}
\vspace{-1mm}
The number of compacted binary trees of size $n$ is equal to $c_{n,n}$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
In the first case, the term $(m+1)c_{n-1,m}$ counts the paths ending with a $H$-step while $c_{n,m-1}-(m-1)c_{n-2,m-1}$ counts the paths ending with a $V$-step. The term $-(m-1)c_{n-2,m-1}$ occurs because, for each C-decorated{} path ending at $(n-2,m-1)$, there are exactly $m-1$ paths formed by adding an additional $HHV$ that are not C-decorated{} paths.
\end{proof}
Note that one might also count the following simpler class which is in bijection with C-decorated{} paths, albeit without a natural bijection.
\begin{definition}
\label{def:hordecpathc}
A \emph{H-decorated{} path} $P$ is a horizontally decorated path where the decorations $h_1$ and $h_2$ of each pattern of consecutive steps $HHV$ fulfill $h_1 \neq h_2$ except for $h_1=h_2=1$.
\end{definition}
In terms of marked boxes, this constraint translates to the fact that, below the horizontal steps in each consecutive pattern $HHV$, the marks must be in different rows except possibly for the lowest one.
\section{Heuristic analysis} \label{sec:heuristic}
In this section, we will explain briefly some heuristics and an \textit{ansatz} that we will apply later to get the asymptotic behavior of $r_n$ and $c_n$. These heuristics are closely related to the asymptotic behavior of Dyck paths and the Airy function.
\subsection{An intuitive explanation of the stretched exponential} \label{sec:heuristic-dyck}
We can consider $r_n$ as a weighted sum of Dyck paths, where each Dyck path $P$ has a weight $w(P)$ that is the number of horizontally decorated Dyck paths that it gives rise to. There is thus a balance of the number of total paths and their weights for the weighted sum $r_{n,n}$. On the one hand, most paths have an (average) height of $\mathcal{O}(\sqrt{n})$ (i.e., mean distance to the diagonal). On the other hand, their weight is maximal if their height is $\mathcal{O}(1)$, i.e., they are close to the diagonal. In other words, typical Dyck paths are numerous but with small weight, and Dyck paths atypically close to the diagonal are few but with enormous weight. The asymptotic behavior of the weighted sum of Dyck paths that we consider should be a result of a compromise between these two forces. We will now make this more explicit by analyzing Dyck paths with height approximately $n^{\alpha}$ for some $\alpha\in(0,1/2)$.
Given a Dyck path $P$ with steps $H=(1,0)$ and $V=(0,1)$ as in Definition~\ref{def:hordecpath}, let $m_i$ be the $y$-coordinate of the $i$-th step $H$.
The number of Dyck paths with $m_i$ bounded uniformly satisfy the following property.
\begin{prop}[{\cite[Theorem~3.3]{kousha2012asymptotic}}]
For a Dyck path $P$ of length $2n$ chosen uniformly at random, let $m_i$ be the $y$-coordinate of the $i$-th step $H$. For $\alpha < 1/2$, we have
\[
\log \PR\left(\max_{1 \leq i \leq n} (i - m_i) < n^{\alpha} \right) \sim -\pi^2 n^{1 - 2\alpha}.
\]
\end{prop}
Let $w(P)$ the number of horizontally decorated Dyck paths whose unlabeled version is the Dyck path $P$. For a randomly chosen Dyck path $P$ of length $2n$ with $i-m_i$ bounded uniformly by $n^\alpha$, we heuristically expect most values of $i-m_i$ to be of the order $\Theta(n^\alpha)$, with $i$ of order $\Theta(n)$.
This leads to the following approximation:
\begin{align*}
\log \frac{w(P)}{n!} = \sum_{1 \leq i \leq n} \log\left( \frac{m_i+1}{i} \right) = \sum_{1 \leq i \leq n} \log\left( 1 - \frac{i - m_i-1}{i} \right) \approx c n \cdot \left( - \frac{n^\alpha}{n} \right) = - c n^\alpha.
\end{align*}
Here, $c>0$ is some constant depending on $\alpha$. This approximation is only heuristically justified and very hard to prove. The contribution of Dyck paths with $i-m_i$ uniformly bounded by $n^\alpha$ should thus roughly be $n! 4^n \exp(-(1+o(1))c' n^{p(\alpha)})$, with $p(\alpha) = \min(\alpha, 1 - 2\alpha)$ and $c'>0$ a constant depending on $\alpha$. Here, $4^n$ comes from the growth constant of Dyck paths. The function $p(\alpha)$ is minimal at $\alpha = 1/3$, which maximizes the contribution, leading to the following heuristic guess that the number of relaxed binary trees $r_n$ should satisfy
\[
\log \frac{r_n}{n! 4^n} \underset{n \to \infty}{\sim} - a n^{1/3},
\]
for some constant $a>0$. Furthermore, we anticipate that the main contribution should come from horizontally decorated Dyck paths with $i - m_i$ mostly of order $\Theta(n^{1/3})$. Since most such $i$'s should be of order $\Theta(n)$, we can even state the condition above as $x - y = \Theta(y^{1/3})$ for most endpoints $(x,y)$ of horizontal steps. This heuristic is the starting point of our analysis.
\subsection{Weighted Dyck meanders}
\label{sec:meander}
\newcommand{d}{d}
\newcommand{\tilde{d}}{\tilde{d}}
The heuristics of the previous section suggest that the mean distance to the diagonal will play an important role.
Therefore, we propose another model of lattice paths emphasizing this distance.
A \tdef{Dyck meander} (or simply a \tdef{meander}) $M$ is a lattice path consisting of up steps $U = (1,1)$ and down steps $D = (1,-1)$ while never falling below $y=0$. It is clear that Dyck paths of length $2n$ are in bijection with Dyck meanders of length $2n$ ending on $y=0$ with the transcription $H \to U, V \to D$. This bijection can also be viewed geometrically as the linear transformation $x' = x + y, y' = x - y$. This transformation will simplify the following analysis. We can consider Dyck meanders as initial segments of Dyck paths.
Furthermore, we have seen that a rescaling by $n!$ seems practical.
So we consider the following weight on steps $U$ in a meander $M$. If $U$ starts from $(a,b)$, then its weight is $(a-b+2)/(a+b+2)$, and the weight of $M$ is the product of the weights of its steps $U$. Let $d_{n,m}$ denote the weighted sum of meanders ending at $(n,m)$. We get the following recurrence for $d_{n,m}$.
\begin{prop} \label{prop:rec-meander-relaxed}
The weighted sum $d_{n,m}$ defined above for meanders ending at $(n,m)$ satisfies the recurrence
\begin{align}
\label{eq:relaxedrecsimp}
\left\{
\begin{array}{rlrl}
d_{n,m} &= \frac{n-m+2}{n+m} d_{n-1,m-1}+ d_{n-1,m+1}, & \text{ for } &n> 0, m\geq0,\\
d_{0,m} &= 0, & \text{ for } & m>0, \\
d_{n,-1} &= 0, & \text{ for } & n \geq 0, \\
d_{0,0} &= 1.&&
\end{array}
\right.
\end{align}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
We concentrate on the first case, as the boundary cases follow directly from the definition of meanders. Given a meander ending at $(n,m)$ with $n > 0$, the last step may be an up step or a down step. The contribution of the former case is $\frac{n-m+2}{n+m} d_{n-1,m-1}$, with the weight of the last up step taken into account. The contribution of the latter case is simply $d_{n-1,m+1}$. We thus get the claimed recurrence.
\end{proof}
\begin{coro} \label{coro:meander-in-dyck}
For integers $m, n$ of the same parity, we have
\[
d_{n,m}=\frac{1}{((n+m)/2)!}r_{(n+m)/2,(n-m)/2}.
\]
When $m,n$ are not of the same parity, we have $d_{n,m} = 0$.
In particular, the number of relaxed trees of size $n$ is given by $n! d_{2n,0}$.
\end{coro}
\begin{proof}
It is clear that meanders can only end on points $(n,m)$ for $n,m$ of the same parity. In this case, it suffices to compare Proposition~\ref{prop:recrelaxed} with Proposition~\ref{prop:rec-meander-relaxed} under the proposed equality.
\end{proof}
For some simple cases of $d_{n,m}$, elementary computations show that $d_{n,m} = 0$ for $m>n$, $d_{n,n} = \frac{1}{n!}$, $d_{n,n-2} = \frac{2^{n-1}-1}{(n-1)!}$ and $d_{ n,n-4} = \frac{7 \cdot 3^{n-3} - 2^n + 1}{2(n-2)!}$.
\subsection{Analytic approximation of weighted Dyck meanders} \label{sec:heuristic-analytic}
The heuristic in Section~\ref{sec:heuristic-dyck} suggests that the main weight of $d_{n,m}$ comes from the region $m = \Theta(n^{1/3})$. It thus suggests an approximation of $d_{n,m}$ of the form
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ansatz}
d_{n,m}\sim f(n^{-1/3}(m+1))h(n),
\end{equation}
for some functions $f$ and $h$, where we expect $h(n)\approx 2^{n}\rho^{n^{1/3}}$ for some $\rho$. The idea is that $h(n)$ describes how the total weight for a fixed $n$ grows, and $f(\kappa)$ describes the rescaled weight distribution in the main region $m = \Theta(n^{1/3})$.
Let $s(n)$ be the ratio $\frac{h(n)}{h(n-1)}$. Suppose that $m=\kappa n^{1/3}-1$, the recurrence relation becomes
\begin{align} \label{eq:rec-equation}
f(\kappa) s(n) = \frac{n-\kappa n^{1/3}+3}{n+\kappa n^{1/3}-1} f\left((n-1)^{-1/3}(\kappa n^{1/3}-1)\right) + f\left((n-1)^{-1/3}(\kappa n^{1/3}+1)\right).
\end{align}
Now, since we expect $h(n) \approx 2^n \rho^{n^{1/3}}$, we postulate that the ratio $s(n)$ behaves like
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ratio-sn}
s(n) = 2+cn^{-2/3}+O(n^{-1}),
\end{equation}
and that $f(\kappa)$ is analytic. Using these assumptions, we can expand \eqref{eq:rec-equation} as a Puiseux series in $1/n$. Moving all terms to the right-hand side yields
\[0=\left((c+2\kappa)f(\kappa)-f''(\kappa)\right)n^{-2/3}+O(n^{-1}).\]
Solving the differential equation $(c+2\kappa)f(\kappa)-f''(\kappa)=0$ under the condition $f(\kappa) \to 0$ when $\kappa \to \infty$ yields the unique solution (up to multiplication by a constant)
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:analytic-approx}
f(\kappa)=b\text{\normalfont Ai}\left(\frac{c+2\kappa}{2^{2/3}}\right).
\end{equation}
The condition on the behavior of $f(\kappa)$ near $\infty$ is motivated by the experimental observation that $d_{n,m}$ is quickly decaying for $m$ close to $n$.
We also insist that $f(0)=0$ as $d_{n,-1}=0$, which implies that $c=2^{2/3}a_{1}$ where $a_{1}\approx-2.338$ is the first root of the Airy function $\text{\normalfont Ai}(x)$, i.e.~the largest one as all roots are on the real negative axis; see~\cite[p.~450]{AbramowitzStegun1964}.
Now, using this conjectural value of $c$, it follows that (ignoring polynomial terms)
\[h(n)\approx 2^n\exp\left(3a_1 (n/2)^{1/3}\right).\]
This suggests that the number of relaxed trees $r_{n}=n!d_{2n,0}$ behaves like
\[r_{n}\approx n!4^{n}\exp\left(3a_1 n^{1/3}\right),\]
which is compatible with what we want to prove.
We observe that \eqref{eq:rec-equation} can be expanded into a Puiseux series of $n^{1/3}$ by taking appropriate series expansions of $f(\kappa)$ and $s(n)$. Therefore, to refine the analysis above, it is natural to look at the expansion of $s(n)$ in \eqref{eq:ratio-sn} to more subdominant terms, and to postulate a more refined \textit{ansatz} of $d_{n,m}$ than \eqref{eq:ansatz}, probably as a series in $n^{1/3}$. Indeed, if we take
\[d_{n,m} \sim \left(f(n^{-1/3}(m+1)) + n^{-1/3}g(n^{-1/3}(m+1)) \right) h(n)\]
and
\[s(n) = 2 + c n^{-2/3} + d n^{-1} + O(n^{-4/3}),\]
then using the same method we can reach the polynomial part of the asymptotic behavior of $r_n$ as
\[r_{n} \approx n!4^{n} \exp\left(3a_1 n^{1/3}\right)n.\]
In general, we can postulate
\[d_{n,m} \approx h(n) \sum_{j=0}^{k} f_{j}(n^{-1/3}(m+1)) n^{-j/3},\]
and
\[s(n) = 2 + \gamma_{2} n^{-2/3} + \gamma_{3} n^{-1} + \ldots + \gamma_{k} n^{-k/3} + o(n^{-k/3}).\]
The proof of our main result on relaxed binary trees is based on choosing the cutoff appropriately, and using perturbations of that truncation to bound $r_{n}$.
\subsection{Discussion on the constants}
One of the first steps in our method
involves taking ratios $h(n)/h(n-1)$ (or equivalently $r_{n}/r_{n-1}$) of successive terms. From the leading asymptotic behavior of these ratios we can deduce the exact asymptotic form up to the constant term. Unfortunately, however, this method makes it impossible to exactly determine the constant term $\gamma_{r}$. In this section we give estimates of the constant terms: we believe that there are constants $\gamma_{r}\approx166.95208957$ and $\gamma_{c}\approx173.12670485$ such that
\[c_{n}\sim \gamma_{c}n!4^{n}e^{3a_1n^{1/3}}n^{3/4}~~~~\text{and}~~~~r_{n}\sim \gamma_{r}n!4^{n}e^{3a_1n^{1/3}}n.\]
\newcommand{165pt}{165pt}
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\begin{subfigure}{0.48\textwidth}
\begin{picture}(190,190)
\put(18,15){\includegraphics[width=165pt]{relaxed_constant_approx_bad.pdf}}
\put(0,100){$u_{n}$}
\put(100,0){$10n^{-1/3}$}
\end{picture}
\subcaption{Plot of $u_{n}$ vs.~$10n^{-1/3}$ for approximating the constant term $\gamma_{r}$ of relaxed trees. \\~}
\label{fig:relaxed_constant_approx_bad}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}{0.48\textwidth
\begin{picture}(190,190)
\put(18,15){\includegraphics[width=165pt]{relaxed_constant_approx_good.pdf}}
\put(0,100){$\hat{v}_{n}$}
\put(100,0){$10^{18}n^{-6}$}
\end{picture}
\subcaption{Plot of $\hat{v}_{n}=v_{n}-166.95208957$ vs.~$10^{18}n^{-6}$, where $v_{n}$ approximates the constant term $\gamma_{r}$ for relaxed trees.}
\label{fig:relaxed_constant_approx_good}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.48\textwidth}
\begin{picture}(190,190)
\put(18,15){\includegraphics[width=165pt]{compacted_constant_approx_bad.pdf}}
\put(0,100){$u_{n}$}
\put(100,0){$10n^{-1/3}$}
\end{picture}
\subcaption{Plot of $u_{n}$ vs.~$10n^{-1/3}$ for approximating the constant term $\gamma_{c}$ of compacted trees.\\}
\label{fig:compacted_constant_approx_bad}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}{0.48\textwidth
\begin{picture}(190,190)
\put(18,15){\includegraphics[width=165pt]{compacted_constant_approx_good.pdf}}
\put(0,100){$\hat{v}_{n}$}
\put(100,0){$10^{18}n^{-6}$}
\end{picture}
\subcaption{Plot of $\hat{v}_{n}=v_{n}-173.1267048$ vs.~$10^{18}n^{-6}$, where $v_{n}$ approximates the constant term $\gamma_{c}$ of compacted trees.}
\label{fig:compacted_constant_approx_good}
\end{subfigure}
%
\caption{Plots for $800\leq n\leq1000$ visualizing the numerical approximation of the leading constants $\gamma_r$ and $\gamma_c$ of relaxed and compacted trees, respectively. Note that the scalings on the $x$-axes with $10n^{-1/3}$ and $10^{18}n^{-6}$ are chosen because $n$ is close to $1000$.}
%
\end{figure}
Based on the analysis in Section \ref{sec:heuristic-analytic}, we expect the ratios $r_{n}/r_{n-1}$ to behave like
\[\frac{r_{n}}{r_{n-1}}=\sum_{j=0}^{k-1}\beta_{j}n^{1-j/3}+\mathcal{O}(n^{1-k/3}),\]
for any positive integer $k$, with the sequence $\beta_{0},\beta_{1},\ldots$ beginning with the terms $4,0,4a_{1},4$. This is equivalent to the existence of a sequence $\delta_{0},\delta_{1},\ldots$ such that $r_{n}$ behaves like
\[r_{n}=n!4^{n} \exp(3a_{1} n^{1/3})n\left(\sum_{j=0}^{k-1}\delta_{j}n^{-j/3}+\mathcal{O}(n^{-k/3})\right),\]
for any positive integer $k$. In this equation, $\delta_{0}=\gamma_{r}$ is the constant term that we aim to approximate. A simple way to approximate $\gamma_{r}$ is to write
\[u_{n}=\frac{r_{n}}{n!4^{n} \exp(3a_{1} n^{1/3})n}.\] Then the graph of the values of $u_{n}$ plotted against $10n^{-1/3}$ (because $n$ is close to $1000$) should be roughly linear (see Figure~\ref{fig:relaxed_constant_approx_bad}), and the point where it crosses the $y$-axis can be taken as an approximation for $\gamma_{r}$. This yields $\gamma_{r}\approx160$. We get a more precise estimate as follows:
Fix $k$ to be some positive integer. Then, for each $n$, consider the integers $m\in[n,n+k)$. For each such $m$ we expect the equation
\[u_{m}\approx\sum_{j=0}^{k-1}\delta_{j}m^{-j/3}\]
to be approximately true. We then solve this system of equations for $\delta_{0},\ldots,\delta_{k-1}$ as though the equations were exact, using known, exact values of $u_{m}$. This yields approximations for
$\delta_{0},\ldots,\delta_{k-1}$. Denote the approximation thus obtained for $\delta_{0} = \gamma_{r}$ by $v_{n}$. Note that this is equivalent to writing $v_{n}$ as a weighted sum of the numbers $u_{m}$, which cancels the terms $n^{-j/3}$ for $1\leq j<k$. For example, if $k=2$ then $v_{n}=((n+1)^{1/3}u_{n}-n^{1/3}u_{n+1})/((n+1)^{1/3}-n^{1/3})$. Hence, if our assumptions are correct then $v_{n}=\gamma_{r}+\mathcal{O}(n^{-k/3})$. Taking $k=18$ and plotting $v_{n}$ against $10^{18}n^{-6}$ (because $n$ is close to $1000$) as in Figure \ref{fig:relaxed_constant_approx_good} yields the approximation $\gamma_{r}\approx166.95208957$, where we expect the quoted digits to be correct. In Figures \ref{fig:compacted_constant_approx_bad} and \ref{fig:compacted_constant_approx_good} we show a similar analysis of the counting sequence for compacted trees, yielding the approximation $\gamma_{c}\approx173.12670485$.
\section{Proof of stretched exponential for relaxed trees}
\label{sec:induction}
In this section we prove upper and lower bounds for the number of relaxed trees. These bounds differ only in the constant term, so they completely determine both the stretched exponential factor and the polynomial factor in the asymptotic number of relaxed trees for large $n$.
Recall from Corollary \ref{coro:meander-in-dyck} that the number of relaxed trees $r_{n}$ of size $n$ is given by $r_{n}=n!d_{2n,0}$, where the terms $d_{n,m}$ are given by the recurrence relation~\eqref{eq:relaxedrecsimp} which we repeat here for the convenience of the reader:
\begin{align*}
\left\{
\begin{array}{rlrl}
d_{n,m} &= \frac{n-m+2}{n+m} d_{n-1,m-1}+ d_{n-1,m+1}, & \text{ for } &n> 0, m\geq0,\\
d_{0,m} &= 0, & \text{ for } & m>0, \\
d_{n,-1} &= 0, & \text{ for } & n \geq 0, \\
d_{0,0} &= 1.&&
\end{array}
\right.
\end{align*}
Our proofs of the upper and lower bounds for relaxed trees come from more general bounds for the numbers $d_{n,m}$, which we prove by induction. Suppose that $(X_{n,m})_{n\geq m\geq0}$ and $(s_{n})_{n\geq1}$ are sequences of non-negative real numbers satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{Xequation}
X_{n,m}s_{n}\leq \frac{n-m+2}{n+m} X_{n-1,m-1}+ X_{n-1,m+1},
\end{equation}
for all sufficiently large $n$ and all integers $m\in[0,n]$. We define the sequence $(h_{n})_{n\geq0}$ by $h_{0}=1$ and $h_{n}=s_{n}h_{n-1}$. By induction on $n$, for some constant $b_0$, the following inequality
holds for all sufficiently large $n$ and all $m\geq0$:
\begin{align}
X_{n,m}h_n &\stackrel{\text{\eqref{Xequation}}}{\leq} \frac{n-m+2}{n+m} X_{n-1,m-1} h_{n-1} + X_{n-1,m+1}h_{n-1} \notag \\
&\stackrel{\text{(IS)}}{\leq} \frac{n-m+2}{n+m} b_0 d_{n-1,m-1} + b_0 d_{n-1,m+1} \label{eq:inductionXH} \\
&\stackrel{\text{\eqref{eq:relaxedrecsimp}}}{=} b_0 d_{n,m}. \notag
\end{align}
Here (IS) marks the ``Induction Step''.
Similarly, if we can show the opposite of \eqref{Xequation}, it will imply that
\[X_{n,m}h_{n}\geq b_1\cdot d_{n,m},\]
for all sufficiently large $n$ and all integers $m\in[0,n]$.
Comparing to the heuristic analysis in Section~\ref{sec:heuristic-analytic}, we see that $X_{n,m}$ acts as the function $f(\kappa)$, and $s_n$ as $s(n)$. Therefore, we should expect $X_{n,m}$ to be close to \eqref{eq:analytic-approx}, and $s_n$ to be a slight deviation of \eqref{eq:ratio-sn}.
In Lemma \ref{lem:AiryXLower} we will prove that certain explicit sequences $\tilde{X}_{n,m}$ and $\tilde{s}_{n}$ satisfy \eqref{Xequation}, which will lead to a lower bound on the numbers $d_{n,m}$. Similarly, in Lemma \ref{lem:AiryXUpper} we will show that other explicit sequences $\hat{X}_{n,m}$ and $\hat{s}_{n}$ satisfy the opposite of \eqref{Xequation}, which therefore yields an upper bound on the numbers $d_{n,m}$. Together, these two bounds determine the exact asymptotic form of the numbers $d_{2n,0}$ up to the constant term.
In order to prove these bounds with the explicit expressions of $X_{n,m}$ and $s_n$, we will consider the difference between the right- and the left-hand side of~\eqref{Xequation}.
Then we will show that this difference is non-negative.
We start by expanding the involved Airy function and its derivative in the neighborhood of an appropriate point $\alpha$, leading to a sum of the form
\[
p_{n,m}\text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha) + p'_{n,m}\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha),
\]
where $p_{n,m}$ and $p'_{n,m}$ can be expressed as Puiseux series in $n$ whose coefficients are fractional polynomials in $m$. By looking at the ``Newton polygon'' of these Puiseux series, we can pick out the dominant term at different regimes of $n$ and $m$, leading to a proof of \eqref{Xequation} (or the reverse direction).
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{AiryAi}%
\qquad
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{AiryAiPrime}%
\qquad
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{xAiPrimeoverAi}%
\caption{(Left) The Airy function $\text{\normalfont Ai}(a_1+x)$, (Centre) its derivative $\text{\normalfont Ai}'(a_1+x)$, and (Right) the quotient $\Phi(x) = x\frac{\text{\normalfont Ai}'(a_1+x)}{\text{\normalfont Ai}(a_1+x)}$ on the positive real line.}
\label{fig:AiryAi}
\end{figure}
The following Lemma summarizes some elementary results on the relation between the Airy function $\text{\normalfont Ai}$ and its derivative $\text{\normalfont Ai}'$. We will use these results in Lemmas \ref{lem:AiryXLower} and \ref{lem:AiryXUpper} to bound the subsequently defined auxiliary sequence $\tilde{X}_{n,m}$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:PsiPhi}
The functions
\begin{align*}
&&
\Phi(x) &= x \frac{\text{\normalfont Ai}'(a_1+x)}{\text{\normalfont Ai}(a_1+x)}
&& \text{and} &
\Psi(x) &= \frac{\text{\normalfont Ai}'(a_1+x)}{\text{\normalfont Ai}(a_1+x)}
&&
\end{align*}
are infinitely differentiable and monotonically decreasing on $x>0$ with $\Phi(0)=1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, by l'Hospital's rule it is easy to see that $\Phi(0)=1$.
Second, as $a_1$ is the largest root of $\text{\normalfont Ai}(x)$, the functions $\Phi(x)$ and $\Psi(x)$ are infinitely differentiable as compositions of differentiable functions.
It remains to prove the monotonicity; see Figure~\ref{fig:AiryAi}.
A local expansion at $x=0$ shows that the functions are initially decreasing.
The same holds for large $x$ due to the approximation $\text{\normalfont Ai}(x) \sim \frac{\exp\left(-\frac{2}{3}x^{3/2}\right)}{2\sqrt{\pi} x^{1/4}}$,
see~\cite[Equation~10.5.49]{AbramowitzStegun1964}, giving
\begin{align}
\label{eq:Psilarge}
\Psi(x) \sim - \sqrt{a_1+x},
\end{align}
for $x \to \infty$.
We will show that $\Phi'(x)$ and $\Psi'(x)$ are always negative for $x>0$.
Note that $\Phi(x)$ and $\Psi(x)$ will change sign only once at $x_0\approx0.91$.
We present the following argument for the monotonicity of $\Phi(x)$.
Assume that there exists an $x_+$ such that $\Phi'(x_+)>0$.
Then, as $\Phi(x)$ is initially and finally decreasing, there must exist $y_1 < x_+ < y_2$ such that $\Phi'(y_1)=\Phi'(y_2)=0$ and $\Phi''(y_1) \geq 0 \geq \Phi''(y_2)$.
The second derivatives are equal to
\[
\Phi''(x) = 2a_1+3x - \frac{2}{x}\Phi(x)\Phi'(x).
\]
These lead to $2a_1 + 3 y_1 \geq 0 \geq 2a_1 + 3y_2$, thus also the contradiction $y_1 \geq y_2$.
%
The argument for the monotonicity of $\Psi(x)$ is analogous, except that the second derivative is now
\[
\Psi''(x) = 1-2\Psi(x)\Psi'(x),
\]
leading to the contradiction $\Psi''(y_1)=\Psi''(y_2)=1$.
\end{proof}
Later we will use the value $x_0$ which is the unique root of $\Phi(x)$ and $\Psi(x)$ to determine the dominant term in the expansion of our series in $\text{\normalfont Ai}(x)$ and $\text{\normalfont Ai}'(x)$.
\subsection{Lower bound}
\label{sec:lowerbound}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:AiryXLower}
For all $n,m\geq0$ let
\begin{align*}
\tilde{X}_{n,m} &:= \left(1-\frac{2m^2}{3n} + \frac{m}{2n}\right)\text{\normalfont Ai}\left(a_{1}+\frac{2^{1/3}(m+1)}{n^{1/3}}\right)~~~~~~~~\text{and}\\
\tilde{s}_n &:= 2+\frac{2^{2/3}a_1}{n^{2/3}}+\frac{8}{3n} - \frac{1}{n^{7/6}}.
\end{align*}
Then, for any $\varepsilon>0$, there exists an $\tilde{n}_0$ such that
\begin{align}
\label{Xequation2}
\tilde{X}_{n,m}\tilde{s}_{n} \leq \frac{n-m+2}{n+m} \tilde{X}_{n-1,m-1} + \tilde{X}_{n-1,m+1},
\end{align}
for all $n\geq \tilde{n}_0$ and for all $0 \leq m < n^{2/3-\varepsilon}$.
\end{lemma}
\newcommand*{\alpha}{\alpha}
\newcommand{Z}{Z}
\begin{proof}
First, define the following sequence
\begin{align*}
P_{n,m} := -Z_{n,m}{s}_{n} + \frac{n-m+2}{n+m} Z_{n-1,m-1} + Z_{n-1,m+1},
\end{align*}
where
\begin{align*}
s_n &:= \sigma_0 + \frac{\sigma_1}{n^{1/3}} + \frac{\sigma_2}{n^{2/3}}+\frac{\sigma_3}{n} + \frac{\sigma_4}{n^{7/6}}, \\
Z_{n,m} &:= \left(1+\frac{\tau_2 m^2+\tau_1 m}{n}\right)\text{\normalfont Ai}\left(a_{1}+\frac{2^{1/3}(m+1)}{n^{1/3}}\right),
\end{align*}
with $\sigma_i, \tau_j \in\mathbb{R}$.
%
Then the inequality~\eqref{Xequation2} is equivalent to $P_{n,m} \geq 0$ with $\sigma_0=2$, $\sigma_1=0$, $\sigma_2=2^{2/3}a_1$, $\sigma_3=8/3$, and $\sigma_4=-1$ as well as $\tau_0=0$, $\tau_1=1/2$, and $\tau_2=-2/3$.
%
%
Next, we expand $\text{\normalfont Ai}(z)$ in a neighborhood of
\begin{align}
\label{eq:Pnmexpansionlow}
\alpha = a_{1}+\frac{2^{1/3} m}{n^{1/3}},
\end{align}
and we get the following expansion
\begin{align*}
P_{n,m} &= p_{n,m} \text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha) + p'_{n,m} \text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha),
\end{align*}
where $p_{n,m}$ and $p'_{n,m}$ are functions of $m$ and $n^{-1}$ and may be expanded as power series in $n^{-1/6}$ with coefficients polynomial in $m$.
As long as $n>1$ and $n>m$, this series converges absolutely because the Airy function is entire and so all functions expanded are analytic in the region defined by $|n|>1$ and $|n|>|m|$.
As a first step we compute the possible range of the powers in $m$ and $n$.
We will start by showing that $[m^i n^{j}]P_{n,m} = 0$ for $i+j > 1$, $i,j \in \mathbb{Q}$. The expansions of the three involved Airy functions only give terms of the form $\mathcal{O}(m^jn^{-j}(n^{-1/3})^k)\text{\normalfont Ai}^{(k)}(\alpha)$, with $j,k\geq0$. Due to the differential equation $\text{\normalfont Ai}''(\alpha)=\alpha\text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha)$, the term $\text{\normalfont Ai}^{(k)}(\alpha)$ takes the form $\mathcal{O}(\alpha^{\lfloor k/2 \rfloor })\text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha)+\mathcal{O}(\alpha^{\lfloor (k-1)/2 \rfloor })\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha)$. Hence, all terms in the expansion of the Airy function are of the form $\mathcal{O}(m^j n^{-j})\text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha)$ or $\mathcal{O}(m^j n^{-j-1/3})\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha)$ for some $j\geq0$. Due to the factor $m^2 n^{-1}$ in the definition of $\tilde{X}_{n,m}$, this implies that $[m^i n^{j}]P_{n,m} = 0$ for $i+j > 1$. Additionally, it also implies that the coefficients of $\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha)$ are equal to $0$ for $i+j > 2/3$.
Next, we strengthen this result by choosing suitable values $\sigma_i$ for $0 \leq i \leq 4$ in the definition of $s_n$ in order to eliminate more initial coefficients.
Then, we will show that the remaining terms satisfy $P_{n,m} \geq 0$.
We performed this tedious task in Maple
and we refer to the accompanying worksheet~\cite{Wallner2019web} for more details.
The results are summarized in Figure~\ref{fig:PosP1} where the initial non-zero coefficients are shown.
A diamond at $(i,j)$ is drawn if and only if the coefficient $[m^in^j]P_{n,m}$ is non-zero.
It is an empty diamond if the given choice of $\sigma_i$ and $\tau_j$ makes it disappear, whereas it is a solid diamond if it remains non-zero.
The convex hull is formed by the following three lines
\begin{align*}
L_1 &: j = -\frac{7}{6} - \frac{7i}{18}, \\
L_2 &: j = -\frac{1}{3} - \frac{2i}{3}, \\
L_3 &: j = 1 - i.
\end{align*}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Newton2}%
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Newton2a}%
\caption{(Left) Non-zero coefficients of $P_{n,m} = \sum {a_{i,j}} m^i n^j$ shown by diamonds for $s_n := \sigma_0 + \frac{\sigma_1}{n^{1/3}} + \frac{\sigma_2}{n^{2/3}}+\frac{\sigma_3}{n} + \frac{\sigma_4}{n^{7/6}}$ and $Z_{n,m} := \left(1+\frac{\tau_2 m^2+\tau_1 m}{n}\right)\text{\normalfont Ai}\left(a_{1}+\frac{2^{1/3}(m+1)}{n^{1/3}}\right)$. There are no terms in the blue dashed area. The blue terms vanish for $\sigma_0=2$, the red terms vanish for $\sigma_1=0$, the green terms vanish for $\sigma_2=2^{2/3}a_1$, and the yellow terms vanish for $\sigma_3=8/3$ and $\tau_2=-2/3$. The black and red lines represent the two parts $L_1$ and $L_2$, respectively, of the convex hull. (Right) The solid gray diamonds are decomposed into the coefficients $p_{n,m}$ of $\text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha)$ (red boxes) and $p'_{n,m}$ of $\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha)$ (blue diamonds).}
\label{fig:PosP1}
\end{figure}
Next, we distinguish between the contributions arising from $p_{n,m}$ and $p'_{n,m}$.
The expansions for $n$ tending to infinity start as follows, where the elements on the convex hull are written in color:
\begin{align*}
P_{n,m} =&~\text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha) \left(
\textcolor{red}{-\frac{\sigma_4}{n^{7/6}}}
- \frac{2^{5/3} a_1 m}{3 n^{5/3}}
\textcolor{red}{- \frac{41 m^2}{9n^2}}
- \frac{2^{8/3} a_1 m^3}{3 n^{8/3}}
\textcolor{red}{- \frac{34 m^4}{9n^3} - \frac{62 m^5}{135 n^4}}
+ \ldots
\right) + \\
&~\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha) \left(
\textcolor{blue}{\frac{2^{1/3}(2\tau_1-1)}{n^{4/3}}}
+
\frac{2^{1/3}}{n^{3/2}}
- \frac{8 a_1 m}{9n^2}
+ \frac{2^{1/3} (24 \tau_1 - 31) m^2}{9 n^{7/3}}
\textcolor{blue}{- \frac{2^{13/3} m^3} {9n^{7/3}}} \right.\\
&\qquad \qquad \left. \textcolor{blue}{-5 \frac{2^{5/3}m^4}{9n^{10/3}} -89 \frac{2^{4/3} m^5}{135 n^{13/3}}}
+ \ldots
\right).
\end{align*}
We now choose $\sigma_4=-1$ which leads to a positive term $\text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha)n^{-7/6}$
and set $\tau_1=1/2$ to eliminate the term of order $n^{-4/3}$ from the convex hull (it is replaced by $\frac{2^{1/3}}{n^{3/2}}$).
Then, the non-zero coefficients are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:PosP2}.
Next, for fixed (large) $n$ we prove that for all $m$ the dominant contributions in $P_{n,m}$ are positive.
Therefore, we consider three different regimes.
Let $x_0$ be the unique positive root of $\Psi(x)$ from Lemma~\ref{lem:PsiPhi}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Newton2b}%
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Newton2cq1}%
\caption{Non-zero coefficients $p_{n,m} = \sum \tilde{a}_{i,j} m^i n^j$ (red) and $p'_{n,m} = \sum \tilde{a}_{i,j}' m^i n^j$ (blue) of the expansion~\eqref{eq:Pnmexpansionlow} for $P_{n,m}$. The coefficient of $n^{-4/3}$ in the right picture depicted as a solid blue circle disappears for $\tau_1=1/2$.}
\label{fig:PosP2}
\end{figure}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Consider the range of small values of $m$ given by $m \leq x_0 (n/2)^{1/3}$.
In this range $\text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha)$ and $\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha)$ are both positive.
Moreover, the (red) coefficients of $\text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha)$ are dominated by $n^{-7/6}$ for large $n$, while the (blue) coefficients of $\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha)$ apart from the term $\nu=-\frac{2^{13/3}m^3}{9n^{7/3}}\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha)$ are dominated by $\frac{2^{1/3}}{n^{3/2}}$. By Lemma~\ref{lem:PsiPhi} we have
\begin{align*}
\frac{2^{1/3} m}{n^{1/3}} \text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha) - \text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha) < 0.
\end{align*}
Hence, $\nu > -\frac{16 m^2}{9n^{2}}\text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha)$,
and it can therefore be treated as if it belonged to the coefficients of $\text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha)$.
Thus, as the dominating terms are positive, there exists some $N_{0}$ such that $P_{n,m} > 0$ whenever $n>N_{0}$ and $m \leq x_0 (n/2)^{1/3}$.
\item Next, consider the central range $x_0 (n/2)^{1/3} < m \leq n^{7/18}$.
Here, we have $\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha) < 0$.
On the one hand, as seen in the left part of Figure~\ref{fig:PosP2}, the (red) coefficients of $\text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha)$ are still dominated by $n^{-7/6}$ (which holds up to $m = \Theta(n^{5/12})$).
On the other hand, in this range the term $\nu=-\frac{2^{13/3}m^3}{9n^{7/3}}\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha)$ dominates all other (blue) coefficients of $\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha)$ (due to $\tau_1=1/2$). Since $\nu>0$ in this range, this implies that there exists some (sufficiently large) $N_{1}$ such that $P_{n,m} > 0$ whenever $n>N_{1}$ and $x_0 (n/2)^{1/3}< m \leq n^{7/18}$.
\item Finally, consider the range of large values $n^{7/18} < m <n^{2/3-\epsilon}$.
By the reasoning on $\Psi(x)$ in Lemma~\ref{lem:PsiPhi} we see that $-\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha) > \text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha)>0$.
Therefore, the (blue) term $\nu$ dominates all of the (red) terms of $\text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha)$ as well as all other (blue) terms of $\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha)$. Hence there exists some $N_{2}$ such that $P_{n,m} > 0$ whenever $n>N_{2}$ and $n^{7/18} < m <n^{2/3-\epsilon}$.
\end{enumerate}
Choosing $\tilde{n}_0=\max\{N_{0},N_{1},N_{2}\}$ completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
The previous result could be strengthened to hold up to $m \leq n^{1-\varepsilon}$ by~\eqref{eq:Psilarge} as will be shown in the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:AiryXUpper}. However, we will not need this result in the sequel.
\end{remark}
Now, to complete the lower bound we define the sequence $X_{n,m}:=\max\{\tilde{X}_{n,m},0\}$, i.e., %
\[
X_{n,m}:=
\begin{cases}
\hfill \tilde{X}_{n,m}, \hfill & \text{ if $m<\frac{\sqrt{96n+9}+3}{8}$,} \\
\hfill 0,\hfill & \text{ if $m\geq \frac{\sqrt{96n+9}+3}{8}$.} \\
\end{cases}
\]
Then, in the first case we get the following inequality for all sufficiently large $n$
\begin{align*}
X_{n,m}\tilde{s}_{n}\leq \frac{n-m+2}{n+m} \tilde{X}_{n-1,m-1} + \tilde{X}_{n-1,m+1}\leq \frac{n-m+2}{n+m} X_{n-1,m-1} + X_{n-1,m+1},
\end{align*}
using Lemma \ref{lem:AiryXLower} with $\varepsilon=\frac{1}{12}$. Note that we could choose any $\varepsilon\in(0,\frac{1}{6})$, as we just need $n^{2/3-\varepsilon}>\frac{\sqrt{96n+9}+3}{8}$ for large $n$. In the second case we have
\[X_{n,m}\tilde{s}_{n}=0\leq \frac{n-m+2}{n+m} X_{n-1,m-1} + X_{n-1,m+1}.\]
Finally, we write $\tilde{h}_{n}=\tilde{s}_{n}\tilde{h}_{n-1}$ and we deduce by induction that $d_{n,m}\geq b \tilde{h}_{n}X_{n,m}$ for some constant $b>0$, all sufficiently large $n$ and all $m\in[0,n]$. In particular, it follows from~\eqref{eq:inductionXH} that the number $r_{n}=n!d_{2n,0}$ of relaxed trees of size $n$ is bounded below by
\begin{align}
\label{eq:rnlower}
r_{n} \geq \gamma\, n! 4^n e^{3a_1n^{1/3}} n^{},
\end{align}
for some constant $\gamma>0$. In the next section we will show an upper bound with the same asymptotic form, but with a different constant $\gamma$.
\subsection{Upper bound}
Next, we consider a similar auxiliary sequence $\hat{X}_{n,m}$ which will give rise to an upper bound on the number of relaxed binary trees.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:AiryXUpper}
Choose $\eta > 2/9$ fixed and for all $n,m \geq 0$ let
\begin{align*}
\hat{X}_{n,m} &:= \left(1-\frac{2m^2}{3n} + \frac{m}{2n} + \eta\frac{m^4}{n^2}\right)\text{\normalfont Ai}\left(a_{1}+\frac{2^{1/3}(m+1)}{n^{1/3}}\right)~~~~~~~~\text{and}\\
\hat{s}_n &:= 2+\frac{2^{2/3}a_1}{n^{2/3}}+\frac{8}{3n} + \frac{1}{n^{7/6}}.
\end{align*}
Then, for any $\varepsilon>0$, there exists a constant $\hat{n}_0$ such that
\begin{align}
\label{XequationB}
\hat{X}_{n,m}\hat{s}_{n} \geq \frac{n-m+2}{n+m} \hat{X}_{n-1,m-1} + \hat{X}_{n-1,m+1},
\end{align}
for all $n\geq \hat{n}_0$ and all $0 \leq m < n^{1-\varepsilon}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof follows the same lines as that of Lemma~\ref{lem:AiryXLower}.
Therefore we only focus on the needed modifications.
%
As a first step we define the following sequence
\begin{align*}
Q_{n,m} := \hat{X}_{n,m}\hat{s}_{n} - \frac{n-m+2}{n+m} \hat{X}_{n-1,m-1} - \hat{X}_{n-1,m+1}.
\end{align*}
Then the inequality~\eqref{XequationB} is equivalent to $Q_{n,m} \geq 0$.
Again, we expand $\text{\normalfont Ai}(z)$ in a neighborhood of
$
\alpha = a_{1}+\frac{2^{1/3} m}{n^{1/3}},
$
and we get (see~\cite{Wallner2019web} for more details)
\begin{align*}
Q_{n,m} &= q_{n,m} \text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha) + q'_{n,m} \text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha),
\end{align*}
where $q_{n,m}$ and $q'_{n,m}$ are functions of $m$ and $n^{-1}$ and may again be expanded as power series in $n^{-1/6}$ with coefficients polynomial in $m$.
Now, it is easy to see that $[m^i n^{j}]Q_{n,m} = 0$ for $i+j > 2$, where the shift by~$1$ compared to the lower bound is due to the factor $\eta m^4n^{-2}$.
The initial non-zero coefficients are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:PosP3}.
The four lines (black, red, green, blue) of the convex hull are
\begin{align*}
\hat{L}_1 &: j = -\frac{7}{6} - \frac{7i}{18}, \\
\hat{L}_2 &: j = -\frac{5}{6} - \frac{i}{2}, \\
\hat{L}_3 &: j = - \frac{2i}{3}, \\
\hat{L}_4 &: j = 2 - i.
\end{align*}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Newton3}%
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Newton3a}%
\caption{(Left) Non-zero coefficients of $Q_{n,m} = \sum b_{i,j} m^i n^j$ shown in solid gray diamonds for $s_n := \sigma_0 + \frac{\sigma_1}{n^{1/3}} + \frac{\sigma_2}{n^{2/3}}+\frac{\sigma_3}{n} + \frac{\sigma_4}{n^{7/6}}$ and $X_{n,m} := \left(1+\frac{\tau_2 m^2+\tau_1 m}{n} + \eta \frac{m^4}{n^2} \right)\text{\normalfont Ai}\left(a_{1}+\frac{2^{1/3}(m+1)}{n^{1/3}}\right)$. There are no terms in the blue dashed area. The blue terms vanish for $\sigma_0=2$, the red terms vanish for $\sigma_1=0$, the green terms vanish for $\sigma_2=2^{2/3}a_1$, and the yellow term vanishes for $\sigma_3=8/3$ and $\tau_2=-2/3$. The black, red, and green lines represent the three parts $\hat{L}_1$, $\hat{L}_2$ and $\hat{L}_3$, respectively, of the convex hull. (Right) The solid gray diamonds are decomposed into the coefficients $q_{n,m}$ of $\text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha)$ (red boxes) and $q'_{n,m}$ of $\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha)$ (blue diamonds).}
\label{fig:PosP3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Newton3b}%
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Newton3cq1}%
\caption{Non-zero coefficients $q_{k,l} = \sum \tilde{b}_{i,j} m^i n^j$ (red) and $q'_{k,\ell} = \sum \tilde{b}_{i,j}' m^i n^j$ (blue) of the expansion for $Q_{n,m}$. The coefficient of $n^{-4/3}$ in the right picture depicted as a solid blue circle disappears for $\tau_1=1/2$.}
\label{fig:PosP4}
\end{figure}
\pagebreak
Next, we distinguish between the contributions arising from $q_{n,m}$ and $q'_{n,m}$. The non-zero coefficients are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:PosP4}.
The expansions for $n$ tending to infinity start as follows, where the elements on the convex hull are written in color.
\begin{align*}
Q_{n,m} =&~\text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha) \left(
\textcolor{red}{\frac{\sigma_4}{n^{7/6}}}
+ \frac{2^{5/3} a_1 m}{3 n^{5/3}}
\textcolor{red}{+ \frac{m^2 (41-108\eta)}{9n^2}}
+ \frac{2^{8/3} a_1 m^3(1-6\eta)}{3 n^{8/3}}
\textcolor{red}{+ \frac{2 m^4 (17-132\eta)}{9n^3}} \right. \\
& \qquad \qquad - \left. \frac{2^{5/3} a_1 m^5 \eta}{n^{11/3}} \textcolor{red}{- \frac{17 m^6 \eta}{3n^4}} \textcolor{red}{- \frac{31 m^7 \eta}{45 n^5}} + \ldots
\right) + \\
&~\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha) \left(
\textcolor{blue}{\frac{2^{1/3}}{n^{3/2}}}
+ \frac{8 a_1 m}{9n^2}
+ \frac{2^{1/3} m^2(19-108\eta)}{9 n^{7/3}}
\textcolor{blue}{+ \frac{2^{10/3} m^3(2-9\eta)}{9n^{7/3}}} + \frac{5m^4 2^{1/3} (2-27\eta)}{9n^{10/3}} \right. \\
& \qquad \qquad \left. \textcolor{blue}{- \frac{2^{10/3} m^5 \eta}{3n^{10/3}} - \frac{5 m^6 2^{1/3} \eta}{3n^{13/3}} - \frac{89 m^7 2^{1/3} \eta}{45 n^{16/3}}} + \ldots
\right).
\end{align*}
Let $x_0$ be again the unique positive root of $\Psi(x)$ from Lemma~\ref{lem:PsiPhi}.
In order to prove that $Q_{n,m}\geq 0$ for $m \leq n^{1-\varepsilon}$, we consider the following four regions:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $m \leq x_0 (n/2)^{1/3}$,
\item $x_0 (n/2)^{1/3} < m \leq n^{7/18}$,
\item $n^{7/18} < m \leq n^{1/2}$,
\item $n^{1/2} < m \leq n^{1-\varepsilon}$.
\end{enumerate}
Recall that in the proof that $P_{n,m}\geq0$ in Lemma \ref{lem:AiryXLower}, we considered almost the same first $3$ regions, except that in that case the upper bound on the third region was slightly larger ($n^{2/3-\epsilon}$). So the main difference here is the addition of the fourth region, which is required for this lemma to apply up to $m=n^{1-\varepsilon}$.
The treatments of the first $3$ regions are analogous to those in Lemma~\ref{lem:AiryXLower} except for 2 minor changes.
First, in the second and third regime we include the additional variable $\eta$ to make the dominant term $\frac{2^{10/3} m^3(2-9\eta)}{9n^{7/3}}\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha)$ positive.
Second, in the third regime an additional dominant term $- \frac{2^{10/3} m^5 \eta}{3n^{10/3}}\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha)$ appears for $m = \Theta(n^{1/2})$ which is positive anyway.
Finally, in the fourth regime, the aforementioned term $- \frac{2^{10/3} m^5 \eta}{3n^{10/3}}\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha)$ is positive and dominates all other blue terms.
However, the dominant red term is $- \frac{17 m^6 \eta}{3n^4}\text{\normalfont Ai}(z)$, which is negative, so it suffices to show that this is dominated by the blue term.
Indeed, due to~\eqref{eq:Psilarge} we know that as $m/n^{1/3}$ tends to infinity, $\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha) \sim -2^{1/6} \frac{m^{1/2}}{n^{1/6}} \text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha)$.
Hence, the blue term $- \frac{2^{10/3} m^5 \eta}{3n^{10/3}} \text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha)$ dominates in this entire region $n^{1/2} < m \leq n^{1-\varepsilon}$.
\end{proof}
To finish the proof of the upper bound, we will choose some constant $N>0$ and define a sequence $\tilde{d}_{n,m}$ by the same rules as $d_{n,m}$ except that $\tilde{d}_{n,m}=0$ whenever $m>n^{3/4}$ and $n>N$. Then, writing $\hat{h}_{n}=\hat{s}_{n}\hat{h}_{n-1}$, we can use the lemma above to show by induction that the numbers $\tilde{d}_{n,m}$ satisfy the inequality.
\[b_{0}\tilde{d}_{n,m}\leq \hat{h}_{n}X_{n,m},\]
for some constant $b_{0}$ and all sufficiently large $n$; compare~\eqref{eq:inductionXH}. In particular, the numbers $\tilde{d}_{2n,0}$ are bounded above by
\[\tilde{d}_{2n,0}\leq \gamma 4^{n}e^{3a_1n^{1/3}}n,\]
for some constant $\gamma>0$. The rest of this section is dedicated to proving that there is some choice of $N$ such that $\tilde{d}_{2n,0}\geq d_{2n,0}/2$ for all $n$.
In order to finish our proof of the upper bound for the numbers $d_{2n,0}$, we will use the interpretation of these numbers as weighted Dyck paths, described in Section~\ref{sec:meander}. It will be useful to have an upper bound on the number of these paths which pass through a certain point $(2x,2y)$ as a proportion of the total weighted number of paths.
Let $p_{\ell,m,2n}$ denote the weighted number of paths from $(\ell,m)$ to $(2n,0)$; see Figure~\ref{fig:sxyn}.
Then the proportion $s_{x,y,n}$ of the $d_{2n,0}$ weighted Dyck paths that pass through $(2x,2y)$ is \[s_{x,y,n}=\frac{d_{2x,2y}p_{2x,2y,2n}}{d_{2n,0}}.\] The following lemma yields an upper bound on the number $p_{2x,2y,2n}$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{ipe-sxyn}%
\caption{Proportion of weighted Dyck paths of length $2n$ passing through the point $(2x,2y)$ showing one example path contributing to $s_{x,y,n}$.}
\label{fig:sxyn}
\end{figure}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:relaxed_end} The numbers $p_{\ell,m,2n}$ satisfy the inequality
\[\frac{p_{\ell,j,2n}}{j+1}\geq \frac{p_{\ell,k,2n}}{k+1},\]
for integers $0\leq j<k\leq \ell\leq 2n$ satisfying $2 \mid k-j$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First we note that the numbers $p_{\ell,m,2n}$ are determined by the recurrence relation
\[p_{\ell,m,2n}=p_{\ell+1,m-1,2n}+\frac{\ell-m+2}{\ell+m+2}p_{\ell+1,m+1,2n}\]
along with the initial conditions $p_{2n,m,2n}=\delta_{m,0}$ and $p_{l,-1,2n}=0$.
We will now prove the statement of the lemma by reverse induction on $\ell$.
Our base case is $\ell=2n$, for which the inequality clearly holds. For the inductive step, we assume that the inequality holds for $\ell+1$ and all $m$, and we will prove that it holds for $\ell$. It suffices to prove that for $m\geq 1$ the following inequality holds
\[\frac{p_{\ell,m-1,2n}}{m}-\frac{p_{\ell,m+1,2n}}{m+2}\geq0.\]
Let $L$ denote the left-hand side of this inequality. Using the recurrence relation, we can rewrite $L$ as
\[L=\frac{p_{\ell+1,m-2,2n}}{m}+\frac{(\ell-m+3)p_{\ell+1,m,2n}}{(\ell+m+1)m}-\frac{p_{\ell+1,m,2n}}{m+2}-\frac{(\ell-m+1)p_{\ell+1,m+2,2n}}{(\ell+m+3)(m+2)}.\]
Now, by the inductive assumption we get the inequalities $p_{\ell+1,m+2,2n}\leq\frac{m+3}{m+1}p_{\ell+1,m,2n}$ and $p_{\ell+1,m-2,2n}\geq\frac{m-1}{m+1}p_{\ell+1,m,2n}$, where the latter even holds for $m=1$ as then both sides are $0$. It follows that
\begin{align*}L&\geq \frac{(m-1)p_{l+1,m,2n}}{(m+1)m}+\frac{(\ell-m+3)p_{\ell+1,m,2n}}{(\ell+m+1)m}-\frac{p_{\ell+1,m,2n}}{m+2}-\frac{(m+3)(\ell-m+1)p_{\ell+1,m,2n}}{(m+1)(\ell+m+3)(m+2)}\\
&=\frac{4(3+m+\ell+m\ell)p_{\ell+1,m,2n}}{m(m+2)(1+m+\ell)(3+m+\ell)}\geq0\end{align*}
as desired. This completes the induction, which proves the inequality for $\ell\in[0,2n]$.
We refer to the accompanying worksheet~\cite{Wallner2019web} for more details.
\end{proof}
In particular, it follows from this lemma that
\[p_{2x,2y,2n}\leq (2y+1)p_{2x,0,2n}.\]
Moreover, note that the proportion $s_{x,0,n}$ of weighted paths passing through $(2x,0)$ satisfies $s_{x,0,n}\leq1$. Hence, the proportion $s_{x,y,n}$ satisfies
\begin{align}
\label{eq:sxynupperbound}
s_{x,y,n}=\frac{p_{2x,2y,2n}d_{2x,2y}}{d_{2n,0}}\leq\frac{(2y+1)p_{2x,0,2n}d_{2x,2y}}{d_{2n,0}s_{x,0,n}}=(2y+1)\frac{d_{2x,2y}}{d_{2x,0}}.
\end{align}
From the lower bound \eqref{eq:rnlower} we have
\[d_{2x,0}\geq\gamma 4^{x}e^{3a_1x^{1/3}}x,\]
so we now desire an upper bound for $d_{2x,2y}$. It will suffice to use the upper bound
\[d_{2x,2y}\leq{\binom{2x}{x+y}},\]
which holds because the right-hand side is the number of (unweighted) paths from $(0,0)$ to $(2x,2y)$, and all weights on our weighted paths are smaller than $1$. We are now ready to prove the following lemma
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:choose_const}
For all $\varepsilon>0$ there exists a constant $N_{\varepsilon}>0$ with the following property:
Recall that $d_{n,m}$ is the weighted number of paths ending at $(n,m)$. Let $\tilde{d}_{n,m}$ be the number of these paths such that no intermediate point $(2x,2y)$ on the path satisfies $x>N_{\varepsilon}$ and $y>x^{3/4}$. Then $d_{2n,0}\leq(1+\varepsilon)\tilde{d}_{2n,0}$ for all $n>0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We can rewrite the desired inequality as
\[1-\frac{\tilde{d}_{2n,0}}{d_{2n,0}}\leq\frac{\varepsilon}{1+\varepsilon}.\]
Note that the left-hand side is equal to the proportion of weighted paths with at least one intermediate point $(2x,2y)$ satisfying $x>N_{\varepsilon}$ and $y>x^{3/4}$. The proportion $s_{x,y,n}$ of weighted paths which go through any such point $(2x,2y)$ is bounded above by
\begin{align*}
s_{x,y,n}
& \stackrel{\eqref{eq:sxynupperbound}}{\leq} (2y+1)\frac{d_{2x,2y}}{d_{2x,0}} \\
& \stackrel{\eqref{eq:rnlower}}{\leq} \frac{2y+1}{\gamma 4^{x}e^{3a_1x^{1/3}}x}{\binom{2x}{x+y}} \\
& \leq \gamma^{-1}4^{-x}e^{-3a_1x^{1/3}}x^{-1}\frac{(2y+1)\Gamma(2x+1)}{\Gamma(x+x^{3/4}+1)\Gamma(x-x^{3/4}+1)}.
\end{align*}
The right-hand side of this inequality behaves like
\begin{align}
\label{eq:rhssxynbound}
\Theta\left(e^{-x^{1/2}+\mathcal{O}(x^{1/3})}\right)
\end{align}
for large $x$. Hence, there is some constant $c$ such that
\[s_{x,y,n}\leq c\cdot 2^{-x^{1/2}}\]
for all $x,y,n$ satisfying $y>x^{3/4}$.
Now, the proportion $1-\tilde{d}_{2n,0}/d_{2n,0}$ of weighted paths passing through at least one point $(2x,2y)$ is no greater than the sum of the proportions of paths going through each such point. Hence
\begin{align*}
1-\frac{\tilde{d}_{2n,0}}{d_{2n,0}}\leq\sum_{x\geq N_{\varepsilon}+1^{\phantom{/}}}\!\sum_{x\geq y>x^{3/4}}s_{x,y,n}\leq\sum_{x\geq N_{\varepsilon}+1^{\phantom{/}}\!}\sum_{x\geq y>x^{3/4}}c\cdot 2^{-x^{1/2}}\leq\sum_{x\geq N_{\varepsilon}+1^{\phantom{/}}}\!cx\cdot 2^{-x^{1/2}}.
\end{align*}
The sum on the right converges to a value less than $\varepsilon/(1+\varepsilon)$ for sufficiently large $N_{\varepsilon}$. This completes the proof of the lemma.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
Choosing $y>x^{\beta}$ instead of $y>x^{3/4}$ one can show that~\eqref{eq:rhssxynbound} behaves like $\mathcal{O}\left(e^{-x^{2\beta-1}-3a_1x^{1/3}}\right)$. Hence, any $\beta>2/3$ gives the same result, yet $\beta=2/3$ is not sufficient.
\end{remark}
Finally, we define $\tilde{d}_{n,m}$ as in Lemma~\ref{lem:choose_const} with some fixed $\epsilon > 0$. Then it follows from Lemma \ref{lem:AiryXUpper} that there is some constant $\gamma'>0$
such that
\[\tilde{d}_{2n,0}\leq \gamma' 4^{n}e^{3a_1n^{1/3}}n,\]
for all $n$. Hence
\[r_{n}=n!d_{2n,0}\leq 2\gamma' n!4^{n}e^{3a_1n^{1/3}}n,\]
completing the proof of the upper bound. We have now proven upper and lower bounds for the number $r_{n}$ of relaxed trees, which differ only in the constant term. Therefore,
\[r_{n}=\Theta\left(n!4^{n}e^{3a_1n^{1/3}}n\right).\]
\section{Proof of stretched exponential for compacted trees}
\label{sec:compacted}
\newcommand{e}{e}
\newcommand{\hat{e}}{\hat{e}}
\newcommand{\tilde{e}}{\tilde{e}}
\newcommand{\!\!\!=}{\!\!\!=}
We will now deal with compacted binary trees, whose recurrence as in Proposition~\ref{prop:reccompacted} has negative terms. We start by transforming the terms $c_{n,m}$ counting compacted trees to a sequence $e_{n,m}$ using the equation
\[
e_{n,m}=\frac{1}{((n+m)/2)!}c_{(n+m)/2,(n-m)/2},
\]
for $n-m$ even. Then, the terms $e_{n,m}$ are determined by the recurrence
\begin{align*}
\left\{
\begin{array}{rll}
e_{n,m}&\!\!\!= \frac{n-m+2}{n+m} e_{n-1,m-1} + e_{n-1,m+1} - \frac{2(n-m-2)}{(n+m)(n+m-2)}e_{n-3,m-1}, & \text{for } n\geq m>0,\\
e_{n,m}&\myarrayeqe_{n-1,m+1}, &\text{for } n> 0,m=0, \\
e_{n,m} &\!\!\!= 1,&\text{for } n=m=0,\\
e_{n,m} &\!\!\!= 0, & \text{for } m>n,
\end{array}
\right.
\end{align*}
and the number of compacted trees of size $n$ is equal to $n!e_{2n,0}$.
The method that we applied to \eqref{eq:relaxedrecsimp} in the relaxed case does not directly apply to this recurrence, as there is a negative term on the right-hand side. We solve this problem using the following lemma:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:recurrence_bounds}
For $n \geq 3$ and $n>m\geq0$, the term $e_{n,m}$ for compacted binary trees is bounded below by
\begin{small}
\[L_{e}=\frac{n-m+2}{n+m}e_{n-1,m-1} + \frac{n-m-2}{n-m} e_{n-1,m+1} + \frac{n-m-4}{n-m-2}\left( \frac{2}{n-m} e_{n-2,m+2} + \frac{2}{n+m}e_{n-3,m+1} \right)\]
\end{small}
and bounded above by
\begin{small}
\begin{align*}
U_{e}&=
\frac{n-m+2}{n+m}e_{n-1,m-1} + \frac{n-m-2}{n-m} e_{n-1,m+1} + \frac{2}{n-m} e_{n-2,m+2} \\
& \quad + \frac{2}{n+m}e_{n-3,m+1}+\frac{4}{(n+m)(n+m-2)}e_{n-3,m-1}.
\end{align*}\end{small}%
That is, $L_{e}\leqe_{n,m}\leq U_{e}$. Furthermore, $U_e \leq U_d \leq d_{n,m}$ where $U_{d}$ is defined by the same expression as $U_{e}$ but with each $e$ replaced by $d$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We start with the upper bound of $e_{n,m}$. In order to prove that, we will compute successively stronger upper bounds. We start with the trivial upper bound
\begin{align}
\label{eq:bounde1}
e_{n,m}\leq \frac{n-m+2}{n+m} e_{n-1,m-1} + e_{n-1,m+1}.
\end{align}
Applying this bound to $e_{n-1,m+1}$ then $e_{n-2,m}$ we find that
\begin{align}
\label{eq:bounde2}
e_{n-1,m+1}\leq \frac{n-m}{n+m}\left(\frac{n-m}{n+m-2} e_{n-3,m-1} + e_{n-3,m+1}\right)+ e_{n-2,m+2}.
\end{align}
Adding $2/(n-m)$ times this inequality to the defining equation of $e_{n,m}$ yields
\begin{align*}e_{n,m} &\leq
\frac{n-m+2}{n+m}e_{n-1,m-1} + \frac{n-m-2}{n-m} e_{n-1,m+1}\\
&~+ \frac{2}{n-m} e_{n-2,m+2} + \frac{2}{n+m}e_{n-3,m+1}+\frac{4}{(n+m)(n+m-2)}e_{n-3,m-1}.
\end{align*}
Now we will prove that $U_{d}\leqd_{n,m}$. Note that the first two inequalities~\eqref{eq:bounde1} and \eqref{eq:bounde2} in this proof become equalities when each $e$ is replaced by $d$. Adding $2/(n-m)$ times the latter (now) equality~\eqref{eq:bounde2} to the defining equation~\eqref{eq:relaxedrecsimp} of $d_{n,m}$ yields
\begin{align*}
U_{d}=d_{n,m} - \frac{2(n-m-2)}{(n+m)(n+m-2)} d_{n-3, m-1} \leq d_{n,m}.
\end{align*}
We then see that $e_{n,m} \leq U_{e} \leq U_{d} \leq d_{n,m}$ through induction on $n$.
For the lower bound on $e_{n,m}$, we start with the inequality
\begin{align}
\label{eq:elower1}
e_{n,m}\geq\frac{n-m+2}{n+m}e_{n-1,m-1}.
\end{align}
This is clear for $m=0$, and for $m\geq n$ it is an equality. We can then deduce this inequality~\eqref{eq:elower1} for all $n,m$ using induction: Assume that the statement is true for all $n<N$ and all $m\in[0,n]$. Then, for $m\in[1,n-2]$ and $n=N$, we have
\[\frac{1}{n-m}e_{n-1,m+1}\geq\frac{1}{n+m}e_{n-2,m}
>\frac{n-m-2}{(n+m)(n+m-2)}e_{n-3,m-1}.\]
Hence,
\vspace{-3mm}
\begin{align*}e_{n,m}&=\frac{n-m+2}{n+m} e_{n-1,m-1} + e_{n-1,m+1} - \frac{2(n-m-2)}{(n+m)(n+m-2)}e_{n-3,m-1}\\
&\geq\frac{n-m+2}{n+m} e_{n-1,m-1} + \left(1-\frac{2}{n-m}\right)e_{n-1,m+1}.\\
&\geq\frac{n-m+2}{n+m} e_{n-1,m-1}.\end{align*}
This completes the induction. Moreover, it shows that
\vspace{-1mm}
\begin{align}
\label{eq:lowere2}
e_{n,m}\geq\frac{n-m+2}{n+m} e_{n-1,m-1} + \left(1-\frac{2}{n-m}\right)e_{n-1,m+1},
\end{align}
for $m\in[1,n-2]$. It is easy to see that this stronger inequality~\eqref{eq:lowere2} also holds for $m=0$ and $m\geq n$. Applying~\eqref{eq:lowere2} to $e_{n-1,m+1}$ then $e_{n-2,m}$ yields
\begin{align*}\frac{1}{n-m}e_{n-1,m+1}&\geq\frac{1}{n+m}e_{n-2,m}+\frac{n-m-4}{(n-m)(n-m-2)}e_{n-2,m+2}\\
&\geq\frac{1}{n+m}\left(\frac{n-m}{n+m-2}e_{n-3,m-1}+\frac{n-m-4}{n-m-2}e_{n-3,m+1}\right) \\
&\quad +\frac{n-m-4}{(n-m)(n-m-2)}e_{n-2,m+2}.\end{align*}
Finally, combining this with the inequality
\[e_{n,m}\geq\frac{n-m+2}{n+m} e_{n-1,m-1} + e_{n-1,m+1} - \frac{2(n-m)}{(n+m)(n+m-2)}e_{n-3,m-1}\]
yields the desired result.\end{proof}
The advantage of the bounds in the lemma above is that all terms are positive, so we can derive the asymptotics using the same techniques as for relaxed binary trees.
Note that the behavior stays the same in the process of deriving the Newton polygons and leads to the same pictures as shown in Figures~\ref{fig:PosP1} and \ref{fig:PosP2}.
\vspace{-1mm}
\subsection{Lower bound}
The following result is analogous to Lemma~\ref{lem:AiryXLower}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:AiryYLower}
For all $n,m \geq 0$ let
\begin{align*}
\tilde{Y}_{n,m} &:= \left(1-\frac{2m^2}{3n} + \frac{m}{4n} \right)\text{\normalfont Ai}\left(a_{1}+\frac{2^{1/3}(m+1)}{n^{1/3}}\right)~~~~~~~~\text{and}\\
\tilde{s}_n &:= 2+\frac{2^{2/3}a_1}{n^{2/3}}+\frac{13}{6n} - \frac{1}{n^{7/6}}.
\end{align*}
Then, for any $\varepsilon>0$, there exists a constant $\tilde{n}_0$ such that
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\tilde{Y}_{n,m}\tilde{s}_{n}\tilde{s}_{n-1}\tilde{s}_{n-2} & \leq \frac{n-m+2}{n+m} \tilde{Y}_{n-1,m-1}\tilde{s}_{n-1}\tilde{s}_{n-2} + \frac{n-m-2}{n-m} \tilde{Y}_{n-1,m+1}\tilde{s}_{n-1}\tilde{s}_{n-2} \\
& \quad + \frac{n-m-4}{n-m-2}\left( \frac{2}{n-m} \tilde{Y}_{n-2,m+2}\tilde{s}_{n-2} + \frac{2}{n+m}\tilde{Y}_{n-3,m+1} \right),
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
for all $n\geq \tilde{n}_0$ and all $0 \leq m < n^{2/3-\varepsilon}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof is analogous to the case of relaxed trees.
In this case, the expansions for $n \to \infty$ start as follows, where the elements on the convex hull are written in color:
\begin{align*}
P_{n,m} =&~\text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha) \left(
\textcolor{red}{-\frac{4 \sigma_4}{n^{7/6}}}
- \frac{2^{11/3} a_1 m}{3 n^{5/3}}
\textcolor{red}{- \frac{164m^2}{9n^2}}
- \frac{2^{14/3} a_1 m^3}{3 n^{8/3}}
\textcolor{red}{- \frac{136 m^4 }{9n^3} - \frac{248 m^5}{135n^4}} + \ldots
\right) + \\
&~\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha) \left(
\textcolor{blue}{\frac{2^{7/3}}{n^{3/2}}}
- \frac{32 a_1 m}{9n^2}
- 7\frac{2^{13/3} m^2}{9 n^{7/3}}
\textcolor{blue}{- \frac{2^{19/3} m^3}{9n^{7/3}} - \frac{ 5 m^4 2^{10/3} }{9n^{10/3}} - \frac{89 m^5 2^{10/3}}{135 n^{13/3}}}
+ \ldots
\right).
\end{align*}
In this expansion we choose $\sigma_4=-1$, which leads to a positive term $\text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha)n^{-7/6}$, and we also choose $\tau_1=1/4$ (instead of $1/2$ in the relaxed trees case), which kills the leading coefficient of $\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha)2^{4/3}(4\tau_1-1)n^{-4/3}$ for small $m = o(n^{1/3})$.
Then, the behavior and thus the pictures are identical to the case of relaxed trees shown in Figures~\ref{fig:PosP1}~and~\ref{fig:PosP2}.
Hence, the proof follows exactly the same lines as that Lemma~\ref{lem:AiryXLower}.
\end{proof}
As in the relaxed case, we define a sequence $Y_{n,m}:=\max\{\tilde{Y}_{n,m},0\}$, i.e., %
\[
Y_{n,m}:=
\begin{cases}
\hfill \tilde{Y}_{n,m}, \hfill & \text{ if $m<\frac{\sqrt{384n+9}+3}{16}$,} \\
\hfill 0,\hfill & \text{ if $m\geq \frac{\sqrt{384n+9}+3}{16}$.} \\
\end{cases}
\]
Then defining $\tilde{h}_n = \tilde{s}_n \tilde{h}_{n-1}$, we get by induction
$$e_{n,m} \geq \kappa_0 \tilde{h}_n Y_{n,m},$$
for some $\kappa_{0}>0$. In particular, it follows that the number $c_{n}=n!e_{2n,0}$ of compacted trees of size $n$ is bounded below by
\begin{align}
\label{eq:cnlower}
c_{n} \geq \gamma\, n! 4^n e^{3a_1n^{1/3}} n^{3/4},
\end{align}
for some constant $\gamma>0$. In the next section we will show an upper bound with the same asymptotic form, but with a different constant $\gamma$.
\subsection{Upper bound}
The following result is analogous to Lemma~\ref{lem:AiryXUpper}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:AiryYUpper}
Choose $\eta > 2/9$ fixed and for all $n,m \geq 0$ let
\begin{align*}
\hat{Y}_{n,m} &:= \left(1-\frac{2m^2}{3n} + \frac{m}{4n} + \eta\frac{m^4}{n^2}\right)\text{\normalfont Ai}\left(a_{1}+\frac{2^{1/3}(m+1)}{n^{1/3}}\right)~~~~~~~~\text{and}\\
\hat{s}_n &:= 2+\frac{2^{2/3}a_1}{n^{2/3}}+\frac{13}{6n} + \frac{1}{n^{7/6}}.
\end{align*}
Then, for any $\varepsilon>0$, there exists a constant $\hat{n}_0$ such that
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\hat{Y}_{n,m}\hat{s}_{n}\hat{s}_{n-1}\hat{s}_{n-2} & \geq \frac{n-m+2}{n+m} \hat{Y}_{n-1,m-1}\hat{s}_{n-1}\hat{s}_{n-2} + \frac{n-m-2}{n-m} \hat{Y}_{n-1,m+1}\hat{s}_{n-1}\hat{s}_{n-2} \\
& \quad + \frac{2}{n-m} \hat{Y}_{n-2,m+2}\hat{s}_{n-2} \\
& \quad + \frac{2}{n+m}\hat{Y}_{n-3,m+1} + \frac{4}{(n+m)(n+m-2)}\hat{Y}_{n-3,m-1},
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
for all $n\geq \hat{n}_0$ and all $0 \leq m < n^{1-\varepsilon}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof is again analogous to the case of relaxed trees.
In this case, the expansions for $n \to \infty$ start as follows, where the elements on the convex hull are written in color:
\begin{align*}
Q_{n,m} =&~\text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha) \left(
\textcolor{red}{\frac{4 \sigma_4}{n^{7/6}}}
+ \frac{2^{11/3} a_1 m}{3 n^{5/3}}
\textcolor{red}{+ \frac{4m^2 (41-108\eta)}{9n^2}}
+ \frac{2^{14/3} a_1 m^3(1-6\eta)}{3 n^{8/3}}
\textcolor{red}{+ \frac{8 m^4 (17-132\eta)}{9n^3}} \right. \\
& \qquad \qquad - \left. \frac{2^{11/3} a_1 m^5 \eta}{n^{11/3}} \textcolor{red}{- \frac{68 m^6 \eta}{3n^4}} \textcolor{red}{- \frac{124 m^7 \eta}{45 n^5}} + \ldots
\right) + \\
&~\text{\normalfont Ai}'(\alpha) \left(
\textcolor{blue}{\frac{2^{7/3}}{n^{3/2}}}
+ \frac{32 a_1 m}{9n^2} + \frac{2^{13/3} m^2(7-27\eta)}{9 n^{7/3}} \textcolor{blue}{+ \frac{2^{16/3} m^3(2-9\eta)}{9n^{7/3}}} + \frac{2^{4/3} m^4 (20-279\eta)}{9n^{10/3}} \right. \\
& \qquad \qquad \left. \textcolor{blue}{- \frac{2^{16/3} m^5 \eta}{3n^{10/3}} - \frac{5 m^6 2^{7/3} \eta}{3n^{13/3}} - \frac{89 m^7 2^{7/3} \eta}{45 n^{16/3}}} + \ldots
\right).
\end{align*}
In this expansion we choose $\sigma_4=1$, which leads to a positive term $\text{\normalfont Ai}(\alpha)n^{-7/6}$, and again $\tau_1 = 1/4$.
Then, the behavior and therefore the pictures are identical to the case of relaxed trees shown in the Figures~\ref{fig:PosP3} and \ref{fig:PosP4}; see the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:AiryXUpper} for more details.
\end{proof}
As in the relaxed tree case, the inequality of Lemma~\ref{lem:AiryYUpper} is only proven for $m<n^{1-\varepsilon}$, so we need to do more work to handle the $m\geq n^{1-\varepsilon}$ case and deduce the desired upper bound. In order to use the lemma, we define a new sequence $\hat{e}_{n,m}$ by the recurrence relation
\begin{align*}
\left\{
\begin{array}{rlrl}
\hat{e}_{n,m}&= \frac{n-m+2}{n+m}\hat{e}_{n-1,m-1} + \frac{n-m-2}{n-m} \hat{e}_{n-1,m+1}&\\
&\quad + \frac{2}{n-m} \hat{e}_{n-2,m+2} + \frac{2}{n+m}\hat{e}_{n-3,m+1}&\\
&\quad+ \frac{4}{(n+m)(n+m-2)}\hat{e}_{n-3,m-1}, & \text{ for } n\geq 3, n>m\geq0,\\
\hat{e}_{n,m} &= e_{n,m}, & \text{ otherwise.}
\end{array}
\right.
\end{align*}
Then it follows from Lemma~\ref{lem:recurrence_bounds} that $e_{n,m}\leq\hat{e}_{n,m}\leqd_{n,m}$ for all $n,m$, as $\hat{e}_{n,m}$ share the same recurrence as $U_d$ in Lemma~\ref{lem:recurrence_bounds}.
Now consider some large $N>0$, to be determined later, and define a second sequence $\tilde{e}_{n,m}$ by the same rules as $\hat{e}_{n,m}$ except that $\tilde{e}_{n,m}=0$ whenever $m>n^{3/4}$ and $n>N$. Then, using Lemma \ref{lem:AiryYUpper} and defining $\hat{h}_{n}=\hat{s}_{n}\hat{h}_{n-1}$, we can show by induction that there is some constant $\kappa_{1}$ such that
\[\tilde{e}_{n,m}\leq\kappa_{1}\hat{h}_{n}\hat{Y}_{n,m}.\]
It follows that there is some constant $\gamma'>0$ such that
\[\tilde{e}_{2n,0}\leq \gamma'4^{n}e^{3a_1n^{1/3}}n^{3/4}.\]
Hence, it suffices to prove that there is some choice of $N$ and some constant $\varepsilon>0$ such that $\hat{e}_{2n,0}\leq (1+\epsilon)\tilde{e}_{2n,0}$ for all $n$.
Therefore, we first define a class $\mathcal{C}$ of weighted paths with the step set $\{(1,1), (1,-1), (2,-2), (3,-1), (3,1)\}$ and weights corresponding to the recurrence defining $\hat{e}_{n,m}$. Then $\hat{e}_{n,m}$ is the weighted number of paths $p\in\mathcal{C}$ from $(0,0)$ to $(n,m)$. We start with the following lemma, which is analogous to Lemma~\ref{lem:relaxed_end}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:compact_end} Let $q_{\ell,m,2n}$ denote the weighted number of paths $p\in\mathcal{C}$ from $(\ell,m)$ to $(2n,0)$. Then the numbers $q_{\ell,m,2n}$ satisfy the inequality
\[\frac{q_{\ell,j,2n}}{j+1}\geq \frac{q_{\ell,k,2n}}{k+1},\]
for integers $0\leq j<k\leq \ell\leq 2n$ satisfying $2|k-j$ and $n\geq10$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof is along the same lines as the proof of Lemma \ref{lem:relaxed_end}. As in that case, it suffices to prove that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:compactdiff}
\frac{q_{\ell,m-1,2n}}{m}-\frac{q_{\ell,m+1,2n}}{m+2}\geq0,
\end{equation}
for all $m\geq1$. We proceed by reverse induction on $\ell$, with base case $\ell=2n$. For the inductive step, note that $q$ satisfies the following recurrence for $\ell<2n$:
\begin{align*}
\left\{
\begin{array}{rlrl}
q_{\ell,m,2n}&=0, & \text{ for } &m<0,\\
q_{\ell,m,2n}&=\frac{\ell-m}{\ell-m+2}q_{\ell+1,m-1,2n}+\frac{\ell-m+2}{\ell+m+2}q_{\ell+1,m+1,2n}&&\\
&~~~+\frac{2}{\ell-m+4}q_{\ell+2,m-2,2n}+\frac{2}{\ell+m+2}q_{\ell+3,m-1,2n}&&\\
&~~~+\frac{4}{(\ell+m+4)(\ell+m+2)}q_{\ell+3,m+1,2n}, & \text{ for } & m\geq0.
\end{array}
\right.
\end{align*}
Now in order to prove \eqref{eq:compactdiff}, we expand the left-hand side $L(\ell,m,n)$ using the recurrence relation above. For $m\geq 2$, we use the inductive assumption, which says that \eqref{eq:compactdiff} holds for all larger values of $\ell$ and all $m$, to show that
\[L(\ell,m,n)\geq R_{1}(\ell,m)q_{\ell+1,m,2n}+R_{2}(\ell,m)q_{\ell+2,m-1,2n}+R_{3}(\ell,m)q_{\ell+3,m-2,2n},\]
for some explicit rational functions $R_{1}$, $R_{2}$ and $R_{3}$. Due to the nature of the functions $R_{1}$, $R_{2}$ and $R_{3}$, we can prove that the right-hand side above is positive using the inequalities
\[q_{\ell+1,m,2n}\geq \frac{\ell-m+1}{\ell-m+3}q_{\ell+2,m-1,2n}~~~~~\text{and}~~~~~q_{\ell+2,m-1,2n}\geq \frac{\ell-m+3}{\ell-m+5}q_{\ell+3,m-2,2n},\]
which follow directly from the recurrence relation. The case $m=1$ is similar, though we instead find
\[L(\ell,1,n)\geq \tilde{R}_{1}(\ell)q_{\ell+1,1,2n}+\tilde{R}_{2}(\ell)q_{\ell+2,0,2n}+\tilde{R}_{3}(\ell)q_{\ell+3,1,2n},\]
and we prove that the right hand side is positive using the inequalities
\[q_{\ell+1,1,2n}\geq \frac{\ell}{\ell+2}q_{\ell+2,0,2n}~~~~~\text{and}~~~~~q_{\ell+2,0,2n}\geq q_{\ell+3,1,2n},\]
which follow directly from the recurrence relation. We refer the accompanying worksheet~\cite{Wallner2019web} for more details.
\end{proof}
Now, among the $\hat{e}_{2n,0}$ weighted paths starting at $(0,0)$ and ending at $(2n,0)$, the proportion of those passing through some point $(2x,2y)$ is
\[\frac{\hat{e}_{2x,2y}q_{2x,2y,2n}}{\hat{e}_{2n,0}}\leq \frac{\hat{e}_{2x,2y}q_{2x,2y,2n}}{\hat{e}_{2x,0}q_{2x,0,2n}}\leq(2y+1)\frac{\hat{e}_{2x,2y}}{\hat{e}_{2x,0}}\leq(2y+1)\frac{d_{2x,2y}}{e_{2x,0}}\leq\frac{2y+1}{\gamma 4^{x}e^{3a_1x^{1/3}}x^{3/4}}{\binom{2x}{x+y}}.\]
We used the fact that $\hat{e}_{2x,2y} \leq d_{2x,2y}$ which we proved inductively using Lemma~\ref{lem:recurrence_bounds}, and we also used the lower bound~\eqref{eq:cnlower} for $e_{2x,0}$.
We can finish in exactly the same way as in Lemma~\ref{lem:choose_const} for relaxed trees, thereby showing that there is some choice for $N$ such that $\hat{e}_{2n,0}\leq 2\tilde{e}_{2n,0}$ for all $n$.
Recall that $e_{2n,0}\leq\hat{e}_{2n,0}$ and there is some constant $\kappa_{1}$ such that
$\tilde{e}_{n,m}\leq\kappa_{1}\hat{h}_{n}\hat{Y}_{n,m}.$ This implies that
\[c_{n}=n!c_{2n,0}\leq2\kappa_{1}n!\hat{h}_{2n}\hat{Y}_{2n,0}.\]
The right-hand side behaves asymptotically like $\Theta(n!4^{n}e^{3a_1n^{1/3}}n^{3/4})$, hence there is some constant $\gamma''$ such that
\[c_{n}\leq \gamma'' n!4^{n}e^{3a_1n^{1/3}}n^{3/4},\]
for all $n$. This completes the upper bound. Indeed, since we have now proven both the upper and lower bounds, which differ only in the constant term, they imply that
\[c_{n}= \Theta\left(n!4^{n}e^{3a_1n^{1/3}}n^{3/4}\right).\]
\section{Minimal finite automata}
\label{sec:automata}
In this section we use the results on compacted and relaxed trees to give bounds on the enumeration of a certain class of deterministic finite automata considered in \cite{DomaratzkiKismaShallit2002DFA,liskovets2006exact, domaratzki2006enumeration}. We start with some basic definitions of automata.
A \emph{deterministic finite automaton} (DFA) $A$ is a $5$-tuple $(\Sigma, Q, \delta,q_0,F)$, where $\Sigma$ is a finite set of letters called the \emph{alphabet}, $Q$ is a finite set of states, $\delta : Q \times \Sigma \to Q$ is the \emph{transition function}, $q_0$ is the \emph{initial state}, and $F \subseteq Q$ is the set of \emph{final states} (sometimes called \emph{accept states}). A DFA can be represented by a directed graph with one vertex $v_{s}$ for each state $s\in Q$, with the vertices corresponding to final states being highlighted, and for every transition $\delta(s,w)=\hat{s}$, there is an edge from $s$ to $\hat{s}$ labeled $w$ (see Figure \ref{fig:DFA}).
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.9]{DFA.pdf}%
\caption{The unique minimal DFA with $5$ states for the language $\{aa,aab,ab,b,bb\}$. Here, $q_{0}$ is the initial state, $q_{2}$ and $q_{3}$ are the final states, and $q_{4}$ is the unique dead state.}
\label{fig:DFA}
\end{figure}
A word $w = w_1 w_2 \cdots w_n \in \Sigma^*$ is \emph{accepted} by $A$ if the sequence of states $(s_0,s_1,\ldots,s_n) \in Q^{n+1}$ defined by $s_0=q_0$ and $s_{i+1} = \delta(s_i,w_i)$ for $i=0,\ldots,n-1$ ends with $s_n \in F$ a final state.
The set of words accepted by $A$ is called the \emph{language} $\mathcal{L}(A)$ recognized by $A$.
It is well-known that DFAs recognize exactly the set of regular languages.
Note that every DFA recognizes a unique language, but a language can be recognized by several different DFAs.
A DFA is called \emph{minimal} if no DFA with fewer states recognizes the same language.
The Myhill-Nerode Theorem states that every regular language is recognized by a unique minimal DFA (up to isomorphism)~\cite[Theorem~3.10]{HopcroftUllman1979Automata}.
For more details on automata see~\cite{HopcroftUllman1979Automata}.
Since every regular language defines a unique minimal automaton, one can define the complexity of the language to be the number of states in the corresponding automaton. More precisely, this is an interpretation for the space complexity of the language.
The asymptotic proportion of minimal DFAs in the class of (not necessarily acyclic) automata was solved by Bassino, Nicaud, and Sportiello in~\cite{BassinoEtal2012Automata}, building on enumeration results by Korshunov~\cite{Korshunov1986Automata,Korshunov1978Automata} and Bassino and Nicaud~\cite{BassinoNicaud2007Automata}.
This result also exploits an underlying tree structure of the automata, but this tree structure comes from a different traversal than what we use.
In that case, no stretched exponential appears in the asymptotic enumeration, and
the minimal automata account for a constant fraction of all automata.
The analogous problem in the restricted case of automata that recognize a finite language is widely open (see for example \cite{domaratzki2006enumeration}). This corresponds to counting finite languages by their space complexity. To show the relation between these automata and compacted and relaxed trees, we need the following lemma from \cite[Lemma~2.3]{liskovets2006exact} or \cite[Section~3.4]{HopcroftUllman1979Automata}. For the convenience of the reader, we include a proof of one direction here.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:DFAmin}A DFA $A$ is the minimal automaton for some finite language if and only if it has the following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item There is a unique \emph{sink} $s$. That is, a state which is not a final state and with all transitions from $s$ end at $s$ that is, $\delta(s,w)=s$.
\item $A$ is \emph{acyclic}: the corresponding directed graph has no cycles except for the loops at the dead state.
\item $A$ is \emph{initially connected}: for any state $p$ there exists a word $w \in \Sigma^*$ such that $A$ reaches the state $p$ upon reading $w$.
\item $A$ is \emph{reduced}: for any two different states $q$, $q'$, the two automata with initial state $q$ and $q'$ recognize different languages.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We will show one direction of this proof: that a minimal automaton has the four properties. For a proof of the reverse direction see e.g.~\cite[Lemma~2.3]{liskovets2006exact} or \cite[Section~3.4]{HopcroftUllman1979Automata}.
If $A$ is minimal but not reduced then there are two states $q$ and $q'$ from which the same language is recognized. These two states can be merged into a single state without changing the language, contradicting the minimality of $A$. This implies that there is at most one state $q$ from which the empty language is recognized. Moreover, such a state must exist for the language to be finite. This state $q$ must therefore be the unique sink.
The fact the $A$ is acyclic follows immediately from the fact that $A$ recognizes a finite language. Finally, if we remove from $A$ all states $p$ that cannot be reached, the language accepted by the automaton will not be changed, so by the minimality of $A$, there must be no such states and $A$ must be initially connected.
\end{proof}
We note here one consequence of this lemma: since the automaton is acyclic, there must be some state $q$ other than the sink $s$ such that all transitions from $q$ end at $s$. Then since the automaton is reduced, there must be only one such state $q$, and it must be an accept state.
Now using our asymptotic results on compacted and relaxed trees, we give the following new bounds on the asymptotic number of such automata, determining their asymptotics up to a polynomial multiplicative term.
\begin{theo}
\label{theo:m2nbounds}
Let $m_{2,n}$ be the number of minimal DFAs over a binary alphabet with $n$ transient states (and a unique sink) that recognize a finite language.
Then,
\begin{align*}
2^{n-1} c_n \leq m_{2,n} \leq 2^{n-1} r_n.
\end{align*}
As a consequence, there exist positive constants $\kappa_1$ and $\kappa_2$ such that
\begin{align*}
\kappa_1 n^{3/4}
\leq \frac{m_{2,n}}{n! 8^n e^{3a_1n^{1/3}}}
\leq \kappa_2 n.
\end{align*}
\end{theo}
\begin{proof}
By the lemma above, a compacted tree $\mathcal{C}$ can be transformed into an automaton $A$ that recognizes a finite language over the alphabet $\{a, b\}$ as follows:
The states of the automaton $A$ correspond to the internal nodes and the leaf of $\mathcal{C}$. The initial state corresponds to the root, and at each state, the transition after reading $a$ (resp.~$b$) is given by the left (resp.~right) child or pointer in $\mathcal{C}$. The leaf is designated as the unique sink, and we can choose any subset of internal nodes as final states, with the condition that the unique node with two pointers to the sink is always a final state.
To prove the minimality of such automata, we just need to check the four conditions of Lemma \ref{lem:DFAmin}. The fact that $A$ is acyclic and has a unique sink follow immediately from the fact the $\mathcal{C}$ is a DAG. Then $A$ is initially connected because $\mathcal{C}$ has a unique source.
Now we will show that $A$ is reduced.
For any state $q$ in $A$, let $\mathcal{L}(q)$ denote the language recognized by the automaton with initial state $q$.
Now suppose that $A$ is not reduced and let $q$ and $q'$ be different states of $A$ satisfying $\mathcal{L}(q)=\mathcal{L}(q')$.
We also assume that amongst all such pairs $(q,q')$, the length of the longest word in $\mathcal{L}(q)$ is minimized.
Since the unique node with both pointers to the sink is a final state, the language $\mathcal{L}(q)$ can only be empty if $q$ and $q'$ are both the final state, which is impossible.
Since $\mathcal{L}(q)=\mathcal{L}(q')$ we must have $\mathcal{L}(\delta(q,a))=\mathcal{L}(\delta(q',a))$ and $\mathcal{L}(\delta(q,b))=\mathcal{L}(\delta(q',b))$.
Then, the minimality condition on the language $\mathcal{L}(q)$ implies that $\delta(q,a)=\delta(q',a)$ and $\delta(q,b)=\delta(q',b)$.
But this means that the node $u$ and $v$ in $\mathcal{C}$ corresponding to $q$ and $q'$ have the same left child and the same right child, contradicting the fact that $\mathcal{C}$ is compacted.
This completes the proof that $A$ is reduced.
Hence, each of the $2^{n-1}$ subsets of the remaining states (not the sink and not the node with two pointers to the sink) gives a valid minimal automaton of size $n$.
Applying the same construction to relaxed trees gives an upper bound, as every minimal automaton, after forgetting which states are final, corresponds by construction to a relaxed tree. Note that this observation has already been made in~\cite[Equation~(1)]{liskovets2006exact}, yet the asymptotics was not known.
\end{proof}
Using the methods of the present work, the authors showed in a companion paper~\cite{ElveypriceFangWallner2020DFA} that
\begin{align*}
m_{2,n} = \Theta\left( n! \, 8^n e^{3a_1n^{1/3}} n^{7/8} \right).
\end{align*}
To our knowledge, our results give the best known bounds on the asymptotic number of minimal DFAs on a binary alphabet recognizing a finite language.
Note that they disprove the conjecture $m_{2,n} \sim K \, 2^{n-1}r_n$ for some $K>0$ of Liskovets based on numerical data; see~\cite[Equation~(16)]{liskovets2006exact}.
Previously, Domaratzki derived in~\cite{Domaratzki2004Bounds} the lower bound
\[m_{2,n} \geq \frac{(2n-1)!}{(n-1)!}c_1^{n-1},\]
with $c_1 \approx 1.0669467$, which implies the asymptotic bound $m_{2,n} \geq \frac{n!(4c_1)^n}{2c_1\sqrt{\pi n}}$
(note that $m_{2,n} = f_2'(n+1)$ in his results).
Furthermore, Domaratzki showed in~\cite{Domaratzki2004Genocchi} the upper bound
\[m_{2,n} \leq 2^{n-1}G_{2n+2},\]
where $G_{2n}$ are the Genocchi numbers defined by $\frac{2t}{e^t+1} = t + \sum_{n \geq 1}(-1)^n G_{2n} \frac{t^{2n}}{(2n)!}$. This gives the asymptotic bound $m_{2,n} \leq 4 (2n)! (\frac{2}{\pi^2})^{n+1} n^2.$ This bound, however, is much larger than the superexponential growth given by $n!$ in our upper bound.
While not explicitly formulated in the literature, it is possible to bound the acyclic DFAs by general DFAs using the results by Korshunov~\cite{Korshunov1986Automata,Korshunov1978Automata} (see also~\cite[Theorem~18]{BassinoNicaud2007Automata}).
Thereby, we get the upper bound
\[m_{2,n} = \mathcal{O}\left(n! (2e^2\nu)^n\right),\]
where $\nu = \alpha^\alpha (1+\alpha)^{1-\alpha} \approx 0.8359$ with $\alpha$ being the solution of $1+x=xe^{2/(1+x)}$, and therefore $2e^2\nu \approx 12.3531$, which is significantly larger than the exponential growth in our upper bound.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We would like to thank Tony Guttmann for sending us calculations on the asymptotic form of pushed Dyck paths. More generally, we thank him, Cyril Banderier and Andrea Sportiello for interesting discussions on the presence of a stretched exponential. We want to thank the anonymous referees for their detailed comments which improved the presentation of this work.
\addcontentsline{toc}{section}{References}
\bibliographystyle{abbrv}
|
\section{Introduction}
Physical as well as physiological constraints on tomographic image acquisition (e.g. motion) often prohibit the acquisition of high resolution volumetric images that are commonly used for morphological examinations and diagnosis. Acquisition of high resolution images requires a fixed period of time where the patient is asked to remain still, this is often not possible in cases such as fetal imaging. Motion during this period causes scanned slices to become incoherent and corrupt. Long periods of CT scans also impose high levels of exposure to ionising radiation. Single slice or sparse acquisition can often be mentally extrapolated to a 3D mental map by experienced physicians. However, it relies on years of experience and training, thus the need to perform sparse reconstruction arises. In this paper, we address both the need to perform sparse reconstruction, as well as creating mental maps of anatomies.
Extrapolation of 3D volumes have advantages for tracking and interventional applications. Tracking, e.g. methods such as freehand ultrasound, can benefit the sonographer greatly by providing an extrapolated 3D volume for better spatial reference. Furthermore, iterative image-based motion compensation methods needs a good initial target, which is often not possible to obtain if the subject is awake and constantly in motion during image acquisition. Thus, the need to extrapolate a full 3D volume from very sparse amount of slices is highly desirable.
We leverage Bayesian Deep Learning (BDL) and environment mapping to generate full volumetric anatomy representations derived from none to a few conditioning slices. In contrast to commonly used Conditional Variational AutoEncoders (C-VAE), our model leverages traditional statistical methods where the conditioning variable is not fixed or restricted. This therefore enables us to perform reconstruction of normative structures, extrapolate sparse image acquisition and create mental maps of anatomies. Contrary to previous approaches of sparse reconstruction, as detailed in the related work section below, our method can also produce probabilistic mental representations of the anatomy and anatomical context in question to aid diagnosis and therapy.
\textbf{Related Work:}
Sparse reconstruction of anatomical structures has been the topic of extensive work as a method to reduce cost and, \emph{e.g.}, exposure to ionising radiation for patients and doctors alike. Early approaches included deformable statistical models~\cite{ehlke2013fast} to set a prior to the reconstruction process. More recent approaches have been adopting neural networks and deep learning to perform sparse reconstruction. Cerrolaza et al.~\cite{cerrolaza20183d} uses a hierarchical C-VAE, where given three standard plane views from a 2D ultrasound scan of a fetal brain, to reconstruct the 3D segmentation mask of the fetal skull. Similarly~\cite{wang2017unsupervised} use a Convolutional Auto-Encoder to construct a shared latent space between 2D and 3D images to aid the reconstruction of a 3D image. In addition~\cite{10.1007/11569541_46} perform an inter-domain sparse reconstruction as they perform segmentation of 3D volumes based on 2D sparse data inputs. In the field of natural images~\cite{choy20163d} suggested an iterative technique of refining the 3D reconstruction as the model is given more views. Finally in~\cite{Kunter2009} used stereoscopic reconstruction to achieve 2D to 3D segmentation reconstruction.
\textbf{Contribution:}
We introduce a method to generate missing slices, via BDL, by sampling from a distribution on the image manifold, which is conditioned on sparse scanned slices as context. We restructure the Conditional BRUNO~\cite{korshunovaconditional} architecture, and train the model to learn a mental map of a specific region of interest or anatomy. The novel aspect of our work is that conditional image generation is not achieved by commonly used C-VAE architectures, but instead through Normalising Flows~\cite{rezende2015variational} and statistical modelling such as Student's t-process. This is applied to generate patient specific dense medical volumes, and evaluated on three different data-sets. To generate patient specific dense medical volumes, we query the model by performing a dense sweep of all possible pose positions, while conditioning the model on sparsely sampled context slices from the patient. The method is evaluated on three data-sets and we demonstrate its application for motion correction in fetal brain MRI.
\textbf{Background:}
Generative Models are used to model probabilistic distributions, $p(x)$, of a data-set, $X$, such that $x \in X$ in some high-dimensional space $\mathcal{X}$. The model can then be used to generate new samples, such as images, that follows the same probabilistic distribution. New samples are seeded by a latent variable, a vector often denoted $z$ in some high-dimensional space $\mathcal{Z}$, and are sampled according to some Probability Density Function (PDF) $p(z)$. Given a fixed deterministic function, $f(z;\theta)$, parameterised by $\theta$ in some high-dimensional space $\Theta$ and $f:\mathcal{Z} \times \Theta \rightarrow \mathcal{X}$, the aim is to optimise $\theta$ such that samples of $z$ from $p(z)$, and subsequently $f(z;\theta)$, will be similar to $x$ with high probability. Formally, this can then be written as: $p(x) = \int p_{\theta}(x|z)p_{\theta}(z)dz$.
The most commonly used distribution, also known as the prior, for the latent space is a Gaussian, with a mean of zero and unit variance ($\mathcal{N}(0,1)$). An important component of the modelling process is defining a bijector, which is an invertible fixed transformation function that maps one data space to another. $f$, defined above, can be used to map the complex distribution of the input data space to the $z$ latent space. The distribution of modelled image space can then be written as: $X \sim \mathcal{N}(f(z;\theta),\,\sigma^{2}I)$. As the probability integral is high-dimensional and complex, a neural network can be used to learn $f$. Therefore it is possible to use gradient descent (or any other optimisation technique) to perform $\max_{\theta} \sum_{i} \log(p_{\theta}(x_i))$, which aims to find an optimal set of parameters $\theta$, for the fixed deterministic function $f(z;\theta)$.
Such mappings can be achieved through methods such as Variational AutoEncoders (VAEs)~\cite{DBLP:journals/corr/KingmaW13} or Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs)~\cite{goodfellow2014generative}. The encoder and decoder component of the VAE models the forward and inverse of the bijector function, but are learned separately. In GANs, only the fixed function from latent $z$ space to data space is learned. RealNVP~\cite{DBLP:journals/corr/DinhSB16} and Masked Autoregressive Flow (MAF)~\cite{papamakarios2017masked}, however, are bijectors that are fully invertible. The same weights are used for both forward and inverse transformations.
Conditional Generative Models, such as C-VAEs~\cite{DBLP:conf/nips/SohnLY15}, Generative Query Network (GQN)~\cite{Eslami1204}, or BRUNO~\cite{korshunovaconditional}, generate new samples based on a predefined condition such that for each possible value of $c$ there exists a $p(z)$; $p(x|c) = \int p_{\theta}(x|z)p_{\theta}(z,c)dz$. For this particular task, $c$ is a set of images that are sparsely acquired, and is not bound by quantity. This requires the set of images in the condition being exchangeable, i.e. the joint probability is invariant to permutation of the images. For any permutation, $\pi$; $p(x_{1}, x_{2}, ..., x_{n}) = p(x_{\pi_1}, x_{\pi_2}, ..., x_{\pi_n})$. Random variables are often independent and identically distributed (iid), and iid random variables are always infinitely exchangeable. However, the converse is not always true, an infinitely exchangeable sequence is not necessarily iid. Bruno de Finetti's theorem therefore states `a sequence of random variables $(x_{1}, x_{2}, ..., x_{n})$ is infinitely exchangeable \emph{iff} for all $n$; $p(x_{1}, x_{2}, ..., x_{n}) = \int \prod_{i=1}^{n} p(x_{i} | \theta) p(\theta) d\theta$. The stochastic process is then defined; $p(x_n | x_{1:n-1}) = \int p_{\theta}(x_n|z)p_{\theta}(z|x_{1:n-1})dz$.
\section{Method}
In the proposed framework, the Conditional BRUNO architecture is restructured and trained to build mental maps of medical volumes using 2D slices, $x$, with their corresponding pose parameter, $v$, that represents the slice's location in 3D space. Similar to a GQN, the data-set is of the form $D = \{(x_n^k,v_n^k)\}$, where $n \in \{1,2,...,N\}$ and $k \in \{1,2,...,K\}$. $N$ is the number of high resolution 3D volumes and $K$ is the number of 2D axial slices of the volumes. During training, $M$ random image-pose pairs, are sampled from a particular volume. Each $m \in M$ is a particular observation, with the collective being denoted as a \textbf{sequence}. $M-1$ observations from the sequence are used as \textbf{contexts}, with the remaining image-pose pair being used as the \textbf{query pose} and \textbf{target image}.
Each individual context (i.e. image-pose pair) in a sequence is passed through a Conditional RealNVP~\cite{DBLP:journals/corr/DinhSB16}, which is the bijector of the model. The affine coupling layer uses Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN), and learns the mapping of the input image distribution to a Gaussian prior. The mapping is conditioned on the pose, and is made possible by augmenting the input image with the pose vector as an additional input variable. This CNN can be of any structure, for simplicity, a simplified ResNet was used. As the RealNVP component is trained on a Gaussian prior, the output variables should therefore be Gaussian distributed. This can then be modelled by classical statistical methods such as Student's t-distribution, $\mathcal{TP}$. To achieve exchangability, i.e. the conditioning context set is invariant to the number and order of the contexts, a na\"{i}ve approach would be to simply perform sum/average operation similar to~\cite{DBLP:conf/nips/ZaheerKRPSS17}. Alternatively, a Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) update scheme~\cite{korshunovaconditional}, can also be used, where the covariance matrix of the conditional image set is made to be simple (i.e. the diagonal is parameterised by $\mu$, with upper and lower triangle parameterised by $\sigma$), each image therefore has an identical mean and variance to one other.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{architecture2}
\caption{BRUNO Architecture for the generation of volumetric anatomical mental maps from very sparse data. Conditioning context images $v_i^{1,2,...,M}$ can be any sample from the observed anatomy in contrast to defined samples in, e.g., C-VAEs.}
\label{fig:bruno-architecture}
\end{figure}
During testing, the number of context image-pose pairs is not required to be the same as the number as used during training, due to the property of exchangeability. Intuitively speaking, as more context images are supplied, the predicted image should look more similar to the target image. Contexts are first passed through the RNN to set up the distribution at the condition by updating the mean and variance, from which the samples can then be drawn. Each sample, drawn from this distribution, is then passed though the inverse Conditional RealNVP, whilst being conditioned on the query pose.
To create a dense 3D volume from very sparsely sampled 2D slices, a trained BRUNO model is queried with a dense sweep of all possible pose positions within the same Field-of-View (FoV) as training. The sparse sampled 2D slices, along with the corresponding pose, are therefore supplied as contexts for the model. Multiple samples can then be drawn from the trained distribution as possible hallucinations of the missing slice. Alternatively, it is also possible to take the mean image (i.e. average of infinite samples). With no contexts supplied, samples are drawn from the prior distribution. This can be used to create organ and/or volume atlases and for manual model validation, as the trained distribution is an average of all training volumes. Patient specific missing slices and extrapolated anatomy can be generated if context images are supplied. Samples are then drawn from the posterior as the distribution is conditioned on the contexts.
\section{Experiments and Results}
To validate the trained model, high resolution 3D volumes from the test set are decomposed into individual 2D slices with their corresponding one-hot pose vector. A sparse set of slices (between 1 to 10) are used as contexts. The model is then queried with the pose vectors, the generated slices are then compared to the target image using Cross-Correlation (CC) and Structural Similarity Index (SSIM). CC measures the similarity of pixel-wise intensities, whereas SSIM uses a combination luminance, contrast and structure to assess the image quality.
The first set of experiments used brain MRI and thorax CT images. 85 healthy brains were selected from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database. These were split 70 for training and 15 for validation, with $K=120$ axial slices extracted from the middle 75\% portion of the brain. The CT images were split 50 for training and 8 for validation, with $K=100$ axial slices extracted from the middle 50\% portion of the scan volume. Both data-sets are isotropic with spacing of $1mm\times1mm\times1mm$. Each 2D slice, $x$, are of size $218\times218$ for MRI brain and $200\times200$ for CT thorax, and are further down-sampled to $64\times64$. An additional isotropic fetal brain MRI data-set, with spacing of $1mm\times1mm\times1mm$, was used for Initial Experiments and Exp2. 270 brains ranging from 40 to 43 Gestational Age (GA) were selected; split 250 for training and 20 for testing. $K=80$ axial slices were then extracted from the middle 65\% of the brain, each 2D slice of size $160\times160$ is further down-sampled to $64\times64$ for training and inference.
The pose is formulated as one-hot vector of length $K$, to represent the slice number of the scan stack. For all experiments, $M=9$; a sequence of eight image-pose pairs are used as context, with the 1 remaining as query pose and target image. Contexts are randomly sampled from the entire stack during training phase. However, during testing, the contexts are strategically selected so that they cover an approximate even distribution across the scan stack. For each query pose, 100 samples were drawn from the posterior distribution and compared to the target image using SSIM and Cross-Correlation. An average is then taken across all slices for a volume average, and further averaged across all test subjects.
\subsection{Initial Experiments}
To compare with existing baseline models, GQN and C-VAE architectures were used to build mental maps using the Fetal brain data-set. Both GQN and C-VAE models have been trained with 4 context image-pose pairs.
As official code for the Generative Query Network have not been published, a reputable public reimplementation~\cite{ogroth_2019} was used instead. The implementation has been validated to be correctly functioning, as it has been successfully tested on several, but simple, official GQN data-sets. Performance however was not able to match the results published by DeepMind, as the architecture for the DRAW-LSTM was not disclosed. Only the baseline architecture was used.
A na\"{i}ve Conditional Variational AutoEncoder was also implemented as a baseline. The architecture follows the structure of a standard U-Net~\cite{ronneberger2015u}, but without skip connections, and with 4 scaled resolutions and 2 convolutional layers at each resolution. It has also been formulated such that the input is a pose vector, the condition is a set of encoded context images, and the output is the generated image. Contexts are first passed through a tower encoder network, same as the GQN, to encode each image-pose pair in latent representation. All Contexts are then averaged together in latent space to maintain order invariance. During inference, the latent vector $z$ is sampled from a unit Gaussian distribution to feed the generator whilst being conditioned on contexts as well as queried pose.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfloat[$v$: 10]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{CC00388XX18_1.png}} \hspace{2mm}
\subfloat[$v$: 30]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{CC00388XX18_2.png}} \hspace{2mm}
\subfloat[$v$: 50]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{CC00388XX18_3.png}} \hspace{2mm}
\subfloat[$v$: 70]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{CC00388XX18_4.png}} \hspace{2mm} \\
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gt_img0.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gt_img10.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gt_img20.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gt_img30.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gt_img40.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gt_img50.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gt_img60.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gt_img70.png}} \\
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gqn_image0.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gqn_image10.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gqn_image20.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gqn_image30.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gqn_image40.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gqn_image50.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gqn_image60.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gqn_image70.png}} \\
\setcounter{subfigure}{0}
\subfloat[$v$: 10]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{cvae_image0.png}} \hfill
\subfloat[$v$: 20]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{cvae_image10.png}} \hfill
\subfloat[$v$: 30]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{cvae_image20.png}} \hfill
\subfloat[$v$: 40]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{cvae_image30.png}} \hfill
\subfloat[$v$: 50]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{cvae_image40.png}} \hfill
\subfloat[$v$: 60]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{cvae_image50.png}} \hfill
\subfloat[$v$: 70]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{cvae_image60.png}} \hfill
\subfloat[$v$: 80]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{cvae_image70.png}} \\
\caption{Dense sampling the 3D volume using GQN and C-VAE Models. Top Row: Context slices from one particular subject at pose position $v$. Second Row: Ground Truth Images. Third Row: GQN predicted slice at pose position $v$. Bottom Row: C-VAE predicted slice at pose position $v$.}
\label{fig:gqn-cvae-results}
\vspace{-7mm}
\end{figure}
Both models were not able to achieve satisifiable results, as seen in Figure~\ref{fig:gqn-cvae-results}. Due to the complex nature of the brain structure, the GQN model was not able to generalise, and predicted static for all slices. The generated images by the C-VAE model seem to resemble an average of all input context slices with variational noise on top. The experiments also shown that the models do not easily converge, as the latent distribution is far from the prior distribution as measured by the KL divergence. This is notably evident with the GQN, where the KL divergence in the generator module is often very high. Images generated by either method are corrupt.
\subsection{Exp1: ADNI MRI and Thorax CT}
The first set of experiments were used to evaluate the performance of the BRUNO architecture. Tables~\ref{tab:adni-thorax-benchmark}a and \ref{tab:adni-thorax-benchmark}b shows the average SSIM and Cross-Correlation of the generated dense sampled volume compared to the original high resolution volume across all test subjects. 4 experiments were ran with increasing number of contexts; 1, 3, 5 and 9. The contexts selected are sparsely spread to maximise the coverage across the dense volume. In Table~\ref{tab:adni-thorax-benchmark}a and \ref{tab:adni-thorax-benchmark}b it can be seen that as the number of contexts increases, the reconstructed volume becomes closer to the ground truth volume in similarity.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\iffalse
\resizebox{0.8\textwidth}{!}{%
\subfloat[Selected slices to use as contexts]{
\begin{tabular}{@{}ccc@{}}
\toprule
\multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}~~\textbf{Number of}~\\ ~~\textbf{Contexts}\end{tabular}}
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{Slice Number, $k$}} \\ \cmidrule(l){2-3}
& \textbf{ADNI ($K=120$)} & \textbf{Thorax ($K=100$)} \\ \midrule
\textbf{1} & [60] & [50] \\
\textbf{3} & [40,60,80] & [25,50,75] \\
\textbf{5} & [20,40,60,80,100] & [10,30,50,70,90] \\
\textbf{9} & ~[20,30,40,50,60,70,80,90,100]~ & ~[10,20,30,40,50,60,70,80,90]~~ \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
} \\
\fi
\resizebox{0.42\textwidth}{!}{%
\subfloat[ADNI MRI Data-set]{
\begin{tabular}{@{}ccccccccc@{}}
\toprule
& \multicolumn{4}{c}{~~\textbf{Context Images}~~} \\ \cmidrule(l){2-5}
& 1 & 3 & 5 & 9 \\ \midrule
~~\textbf{SSIM} & ~~0.695~ & ~0.719~ & ~0.733~ & ~0.736~~ \\
~~\textbf{CC} & ~~0.913~ & ~0.917~ & ~0.919~ & ~0.922~~ \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
}
\resizebox{0.42\textwidth}{!}{%
\subfloat[Thorax CT Data-set]{
\begin{tabular}{@{}ccccccccc@{}}
\toprule
& \multicolumn{4}{c}{~~\textbf{Context Images}~~} \\ \cmidrule(l){2-5}
& 1 & 3 & 5 & 9 \\ \midrule
~~\textbf{SSIM} & ~~0.779~ & ~0.786~ & ~0.787~ & ~0.791~~ \\
~~\textbf{CC} & ~~0.802~ & ~0.815~ & ~0.832~ & ~0.833~~ \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
} \\
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=0.24\textwidth]{adni-1ctx}}
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=0.24\textwidth]{adni-3ctx}}
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=0.24\textwidth]{adni-5ctx}}
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=0.24\textwidth]{adni-9ctx}} \\
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=0.24\textwidth]{thorax-1ctx}}
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=0.24\textwidth]{thorax-3ctx}}
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=0.24\textwidth]{thorax-5ctx}}
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=0.24\textwidth]{thorax-9ctx}} \\
(c) Average SSIM vs Slice Number w.r.t. Number of Context Images \\
Top Row: ADNI MRI Data-set, Bottom Row: Thorax CT Data-set
\caption{Table and Figures for the Results of Experiment 1}
\label{tab:adni-thorax-benchmark}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{tab:adni-thorax-benchmark}c shows the average SSIM of each slice across all test subjects for ADNI and Thorax data-sets. A distinct peak in SSIM is perceivable where a query slice aligns with a supplied context slice. This confirms the notion that conditional contexts correctly steer the posterior to a particular part of the distribution. High SSIM for ADNI 0 to 20 and 100 to 120 are the edge cases, where a majority of the content are background. The inverse is the case for thorax, where slices approaching top and bottom have high variability in structure, thus reducing the SSIM.
\subsection{Exp2: Fetal Brain Template Volume}
The second set of experiments has evaluated the usefulness of the proposed approach for fetal MRI reconstruction: State-of-the-art iterative image-based reconstruction methods, e.g. Slice-to-Volume Reconstruction (SVR)~\cite{kainz2015fast}, often require a good initialisation volume for the initial target registration. In clinical setting, especially in fetal MRI, volumes are often motion corrupted if the fetus is awake and constantly moving during image acquisition. Neighbouring slices of the volumes are therefore incoherent and in disarray. In this experiment, BRUNO is used to create the initial registration target volume for 2D to 3D fetal brain reconstruction. During fetal MRI, a few images are often acquired in parallel (usually four, spatially far apart images, at once). These image batches can be used as conditional contexts for BRUNO. Due to fast parallel acquisition, the slices can be assumed to be aligned and motion free.
As with the first set of experiments, the performance of BRUNO is evaluated with varying context slices. In total, there are 80 slices in the dense fetal brain volume. Table~\ref{tab:fetal-benchmark}a below shows the number of contexts, with the corresponding slice numbers, that is used during inference. Table~\ref{tab:fetal-benchmark}b shows the SSIM and CC of average reconstructed SVR initialisation volumes. Like as in the first experiments, as the number of context images increase, the average SSIM and Cross-Correlation increases. Distinct peaks in SSIM are also present where a query slice approaches a supplied context slice.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\resizebox{0.42\textwidth}{!}{%
\subfloat[Selected Slices as Context]{
\begin{tabular}[b]{@{}cc@{}}
\toprule
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}~~\textbf{Number of}~\\ ~~\textbf{Contexts}\end{tabular}
& \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}\textbf{Slice Number, $k$}\\ \textbf{($K=80$)}\end{tabular} \\ \midrule
\textbf{1} & {[}40{]} \\
\textbf{3} & {[}20,40,60{]} \\
\textbf{4} & {[}10,30,50,70{]} \\
\textbf{7} & ~{[}10,20,30,40,50,60.70{]}~~ \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
} \quad
\resizebox{0.42\textwidth}{!}{%
\subfloat[SSIM/CC of Reconstructed Volume]{
\begin{tabular}[b]{@{}ccccccccc@{}}
\toprule
& \multicolumn{4}{c}{~~\textbf{Context Images}~~} \\ \cmidrule(l){2-5}
& 1 & 3 & 4 & 7 \\ \midrule
~~\textbf{SSIM} & ~~0.665~ & ~0.676~ & ~0.679~ & ~0.684~~ \\
~~\textbf{CC} & ~~0.868~ & ~0.875~ & ~0.876~ & ~0.880~~ \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
} \\
\subfloat[Average SSIM vs Slice Number w.r.t. Number of Context Images]{
\includegraphics[width=0.23\textwidth]{dhcp-1ctx}
\includegraphics[width=0.23\textwidth]{dhcp-3ctx}
\includegraphics[width=0.23\textwidth]{dhcp-4ctx}
\includegraphics[width=0.23\textwidth]{dhcp-7ctx}
}
\caption{Table and Figures for the Results of Experiment 2}
\label{tab:fetal-benchmark}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:neonatal-examples} below shows more examples of samples drawn from the posterior distribution that have been conditioned by the 4 context slices.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\subfloat[$v$: 10]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{CC00388XX18_1.png}} \hspace{2mm}
\subfloat[$v$: 30]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{CC00388XX18_2.png}} \hspace{2mm}
\subfloat[$v$: 50]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{CC00388XX18_3.png}} \hspace{2mm}
\subfloat[$v$: 70]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{CC00388XX18_4.png}} \hspace{2mm} \\
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gt_img0.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gt_img10.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gt_img20.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gt_img30.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gt_img40.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gt_img50.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gt_img60.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{gt_img70.png}} \\
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_0_0.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_10_0.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_20_0.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_30_0.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_40_0.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_50_0.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_60_0.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_70_0.png}} \\
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_0_1.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_10_1.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_20_1.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_30_1.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_40_1.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_50_1.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_60_1.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_70_1.png}} \\
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_0_2.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_10_2.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_20_2.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_30_2.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_40_2.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_50_2.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_60_2.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_70_2.png}} \\
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_0_3.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_10_3.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_20_3.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_30_3.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_40_3.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_50_3.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_60_3.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_70_3.png}} \\
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_0_4.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_10_4.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_20_4.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_30_4.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_40_4.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_50_4.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_60_4.png}} \hfill
\subfloat{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_70_4.png}} \\
\setcounter{subfigure}{0}
\subfloat[$v$: 0]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_0_7.png}} \hfill
\subfloat[$v$: 10]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_10_7.png}} \hfill
\subfloat[$v$: 20]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_20_7.png}} \hfill
\subfloat[$v$: 30]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_30_7.png}} \hfill
\subfloat[$v$: 40]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_40_7.png}} \hfill
\subfloat[$v$: 50]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_50_7.png}} \hfill
\subfloat[$v$: 60]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_60_7.png}} \hfill
\subfloat[$v$: 70]{\includegraphics[width=1.4cm]{bruno_image_70_7.png}} \\
\caption{A Conditional BRUNO architecture, consisting of a trainable bijector and Student's t-process statistical modelling. Top Row: Context slices from one particular test subject at pose position $v$, Second Row: Ground Truth Images, Third Row On-wards: six predicted slices at pose position $v$ sampled from the posterior distribution conditioned by the contexts.}
\label{fig:neonatal-examples}
\end{figure}
Fetuses can move up to 20mm~\cite{kainz2015fast} when active. For SVR, a Gaussian average is taken of all acquired stacks to be used as the initial registration target. If motion is too severe this initialisation volume will not be sufficient for subsequent iterative reconstruction. To simulate motion, high resolution reconstructed volumes are synthetically motion corrupted to be used as a base line. Three orthogonal stacks are made with 10mm of random motion in translation only. On average, the SSIM of Gaussian averaged volumes motion corrupted volumes compared to the original high resolution volume is 0.297. Depending on the robustness of the SVR algorithm used, reconstruction may, or may not, be possible. A BRUNO generated volume is made by densely and repeatedly sampling all possible pose positions, with the final volume being an average of all sampled slices. Only four context images are used. The generated volume was able to achieve an SSIM of 0.679 compared to the original high resolution volume, this is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:bruno-reconstruction-compare}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{exp2_motion3.pdf}
\caption{For motion compensation of fetal and neonatal MRI, averaged template volumes (a) from all acquired slices (several 100) are used to initialise SVR~\cite{kainz2015fast}. Only four images were used (b) from an image batch that has been acquired in parallel, (common in fetal and neonatal MRI, i.e. without motion corruption between the four images). A C-VAE is not able to predict a template volume from these four images (c), while our approach using BRUNO predicts a reasonable volume (d) compared to the ground truth (e). }
\label{fig:bruno-reconstruction-compare}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion and Discussion}
This paper introduces the idea of using Deep Neural Networks and Bayesian Deep Learning to build mental maps of anatomy of various medical volumes. A conditional generative model, based on the BRUNO architecture, is trained on existing high resolution 3D volumes. It can be used to create patient specific volumes by densely querying all possible pose positions, whilst conditioned by a few existing slices that are used as contexts. \emph{Exp1} shows that BRUNO is able to reconstruct MRI brain volumes with an SSIM of 0.7 and Thorax volumes with an SSIM of 0.8 compared to the original high resolution ground truth. \emph{Exp2} shows a specific use case for BRUNO to generate initial target volumes for 2D to 3D fetal brain MRI reconstruction.
Future work will be to investigate further into the framework, and improve image quality generation as well as to introduce more Degrees-of-Freedom (DoF). In the current implementation, BRUNO is able to successfully traverse single DoF, and is applicable for use cases such CT and MRI. Increased DoF, with added rotations and translations, can be particularly valuable for modalities such as freehand ultrasound, with applications for Reinforcement Learning and 3D scene exploration.
\subsection{Acknowledgements}
We thank The Wellcome Trust IEH Award iFind project [102431], Innovate UK: London Medical Imaging \& Artificial Intelligence Centre for Value-Based Healthcare [104691], and NVIDIA for their GPU donations. The data used in the preparation of this article were obtained from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database (\url{http://adni.loni.usc.edu}). Fetal brain data were accessed only with informed consent, subject to approval and formal Data Sharing Agreement. We also like to thank Ira, author of BRUNO and Conditional BRUNO, for the valuable discussions.
\bibliographystyle{splncs03}
|
\section{INTRODUCTION}
\label{sec:intro}
Radiological weapons pose a serious concern. In order to mitigate this concern
Preventative Radiological Nuclear Detection (PRND) is performed before and during major public events.
The traditional method of performing PRND consists of deploying personnel equipped with radiological detectors around the event.
This approach is limited by the amount of personel available, their expertise in using the detectors, and interpreting the data.
False alarms are common, as confuser sources e.g. medical isotopes and industrial gauges, are numerous.
In addition the radiological background varies significantly based on immediate surroundings further complicating threat determination.
In order to deal with false alarms, spectroscopists are utilized to review data and determine whether an anomaly is a threat.
Therefore PRND is fundamentally limited by the number of trained personnel, both in fielding detectors, and in interpreting the results.
Our approach is to employ a vast network of static sensors, monitored by neural networks allowing a single spectroscopist to monitor orders of magnitude more sensors than is traditionally possible. With such a network augmenting classical PRND, we can have an increased confidence in detecting threats.
This paper discusses our implementation of machine learning techniques for isotope identification of gamma ray spectra.
\section{Framework}\label{sec:Framework}
For this work we employed two simple networks depicted in Fig. \ref{fig:networks}. The single layer network (left in Fig. \ref{fig:networks}) can be expressed as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:single_layer}
\hat{\mathbf{y}} = \left( \mathbf{W}\cdot \mathbf{x} + \mathbf{b} \right),
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{x}$ is the input vector, $\mathbf{W}$ is a matrix of the weights,
$\mathbf{b}$ are the bias', and $\mathbf{\hat{y}}$ is a softmax normalized output vector representing the various classes.
For this work the input vector is a gamma spectrum of 1024 channels (or rebinned to 256), and the elements of the output vector are the isotopes we are considering. The slightly more complex network shown on the right in Fig. \ref{fig:networks} can likewise be expressed as
\begin{align}
\hat{\mathbf{y}} &= \mathbf{W_2}\cdot \mathbf{y_1} + \mathbf{b_2}, \\
\mathbf{y_1} &= \tanh \left( \mathbf{W_1}\cdot \mathbf{x} + \mathbf{b_1} \right),
\end{align}
where the $\tanh $ function implies elementwise operation.
The networks were implemented and trained using Tensorflow \cite{tensorflow2015-whitepaper}.
The cost function was chosen to be cross entropy.
Training was performed using AdamOptimizer.
For this work we generate data from modeled, or simulated, and measured spectra.
The first source is simulated spectra using GADRAS \cite{Gadras-Manual,Gadras-Transport}.
Gadras provides deterministic gamma and neutron transport, and has a variety of detectors characterized.
For the purposes of this work we focus on $2"$ x $4"$ x $16" $ sodium iodide (NaI) detectors.
This was chosen to be consistent with our detector that we used for our data collects.
The spectra are initially produced at 24 hour long dwells,
and then are Poisson sampled to appropriate dwell times,
typically 1 second spectra again corresponding to the sampling frequency of our detectors.
The second source of data are measured spectra, which we performed in controlled collects at our lab.
The data were collected using a $2" x 4" x 16" $ sodium iodide (NaI) detector.
Both collected and simulated sources are at a variety of distances and shielding configurations in order to ensure that the machines trained are robust against these variations. These variations are presented in Table \ref{tab:Variations}. We show an example of a long dwell spectrum and a 1 second spectrum that we typically train our machines to identify in Fig. \ref{fig:examplespectra}
\begin{table}[ht]
\caption{Variations of sources, distances, and shieldings for data.}
\label{tab:Variations}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
\rule[-1ex]{0pt}{3.5ex} & Isotopes & Distances (m) & Shiedings \\
\hline
\rule[-1ex]{0pt}{3.5ex} Simulated & Cesium, Cobalt, Barium, Selenium, Iridium & 10,11,12,...,20 & \makecell{Bare, Concrete, Steel, \\ Depleted Uranium} \\
\hline
\rule[-1ex]{0pt}{3.5ex} Measured & Cesium, Cobalt, Barium & ~0-10 & Bare, Steel \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\section{Results}\label{sec:Results}
In Fig. \ref{fig:Ensemble_Study} results are shown for training to simulated data and testing against a Poisson sampled ensemble.
We experimented with training to both the time asymptotic spectra as well as a subset of the ensemble. Preliminary results suggest that it is actually better to train to a subset of the ensemble, however, further studies are needed. The results shown are from training to time asymptotic spectra.
The top figures represent the cost function, Cross Entropy, after training to ten epochs (left) vs. training to 100 epochs (right).
Also shown is the overall accuracy with regards to the testing data.
the middle plots represent the accuracy per output, i.e. how often the machine classifies the appropriate isotope.
The bottom plots are of the weights, each row of the weight matrix is a different colored line on the plot.
These results illustrate convergence of the training. Notice in the plots on the left the much lower accuracy, both overall and per output. Particularly interesting are the plots of the weights. As the training converges one starts to see spectral features apparent in the weights. Note also that at higher energies (Channels $> 600$) there are no features as these spectra have no counts that high and only noise is reflected in the weights.
Besides just trying to classify according to isotope we also wanted to test whether we could identify what type of shieding a source was behind. While this has no direct application it sheds light onto the robustness of the machines. We took the same training set, and trained to identify shielding; these results are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:Shielding_Study}. Note the while some of the features extracted are similar many others are significantly different. In particular the double humps between Channels 500-600 are interesting as they correspond to depleted uranium, and one can see a strong correlation and anti-correlation in the weights.
Next we turn our attention to testing our machine against real data. For this we utilize the single layer network trained to time asymptotic simulated data, and tested againts data collects taken at our lab. The testing data are 1 second spectra as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:examplespectra}. The results are surprisingly good considering that this machine was not trained to data having any background radiation. The results are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:Measured_Data}
Each of the above results were also implemented with the hidden layer network with similar results. While we typically had slightly better accuracy the small improvement did not seem to justify the more complicated architecture for these examples.
A typical confuser when performing PRND are industrial gauges. To determine the feasablity of a machine identify such a gauge we defined a surragate industrial gauge as Cesium shielded by steel, and allowed all other sources and configurations to be confusers, including Cesium in the other shielding and distance configurations. We then train the machine to identify Cesium Steel (Industrial Gauge) or Not Cesium Steel (anything else!). The results of this are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:Industrial_Results}. Here we show the results of both the simple linear model and the hidden layer network. In particular we note that while we have good convergence of the linear model it almost completely fails to identify the gauge, i.e. the accuracy for that output is less than $20\%$. The hidden layer network on the other hand is almost completely accurate correctly identifying the gauge. This suggests that there are certain spectral id problems that demand deep learning or at least the nonlinearity that is in the hidden layer network.
\section{Summary and Outlook}\label{sec:Summary}
We have implemented two different machine learning models, a simple linear model and a hidden layer neural network.
These machines were trained with simulated spectra and were tested against a Poisson sampled ensemble and measured data.
An important result is that one can train to simulated data and obtain a machine that performs well against measured data.
We have identified that for many cases a simple linear machine may suffice, but there are cases where non-linear machines vastly outperform the linear model. Future work includes expanding both our simulated and modeled datasets, and with more complex data we expect to need more complex architectures.
\acknowledgments
This manuscript has been authored by Mission Support and Technical Services, LLC, under Contract No. DE-NA0003624 with the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, Office of Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Research and Development. The United States Government retains and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the United States Government retains a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript, or allow others to do so, for United States Government purposes. The U.S. Department of Energy will provide public access to these results of federally sponsored research in accordance with the DOE Public Access Plan (\href{http://energy.gov/downloads/doe-public-access-plan}{http://energy.gov/downloads/doe-public-access-plan}). The views expressed in the article do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Department of Energy or the United States Government. DOE/NV/03624--0088
The authors would like to thank Sarah Bender, Andre Butler, Emily Jackson, Lance Mclean, Jessica McNutt, Scott Suchyta, and Julia You
for their help with this project.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:1}
This paper considers a long-standing problem known as the geodesic center problem, which involves finding a point inside a given simple polygon $P$ of $n$ vertices, that minimizes the maximum geodesic distance to any point inside $P$. Pollack et al. showed that the problem can be solved in $O(n \log n)$ time~\cite{14}. For a long time, it was the best result for the problem. Finally, in a fairly recent paper, Ahn et al. provided a linear time algorithm for the problem~\cite{29}. Both algorithms use $O(n)$ amount of space. We are interested in studying the problem when the available workspace is limited (specifically sub-linear).
Our underlying memory-constrained model is as follows: the input of the problem is given in a read-only memory, such that random access to each input item is possible. In addition to the input, we are permitted to use $O(s)$ words of space for reading and writing, for any $s \in \{1, \dots, n\}$. Note that, a word of space has $\Theta(\log n)$ bits. Since, the size of the intermediate data can be larger than the available workspace, they are not stored but computed when needed. In literature, this often referred to as the $s$-workspace model.
There are several algorithmic results in this setting in computational geometry. In all of them, either a new algorithm is devised, or an existed algorithm in unlimited environment is adapted to the memory-constrained setting. For a survey of memory-constrained algorithms in computational geometry, the reader is referred to~\cite{30}.
A problem that has been considered in this model is the problem of computing the shortest path between two given points inside a simple polygon. Har-Peled showed that there exists an $s$-workspace algorithm that computes the shortest path between two points inside a simple polygon of $n$ vertices in $O(n^2/s + n\log s\log^4(n/s))$ expected time~\cite{31}.
Aronov et al. presented an algorithm for constructing the shortest path tree of a given point inside an $n$-vertex simple polygon. Their algorithm runs in $O(\frac{n^2}{s}\log n + n \log s \log^5 (n/s))$ expected time and uses $O(s)$ words of space, for any $s\leq n$~\cite{4}. Oh and Ahn improved these results~\cite{27}. Both algorithms are $s$-workspace algorithms. Their algorithm for computing the shortest path runs in $O(n^2/s)$ deterministic time. The expected running time of their algorithm for constructing the shortest path tree is $O(\frac{n^2}{s} \log n)$.
We present an $s$-workspace algorithm that finds the geodesic center of a simple polygon $P$ of size $n$ in $O(T(n, s) \log^2 n + \frac{n^2}{s} \log n)$ expected time, assuming $s \in \Omega(\log n) \cap O(n)$, where $T(n, s)$ is the time complexity of constructing the shortest path tree of a given point inside $P$, in depth-first order, using $O(s)$ words of space. Our approach provides a time-space trade-off; that is, the running time of our algorithm decreases as $s$ grows. If we use the shortest path tree algorithm of Oh and Ahn~\cite{27}, the expected running time of our algorithm will be $O(\frac{n^2}{s}\log^3 n)$.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows: Section 2 contains some preliminaries and notations. In Section 3, we study the problem of computing the geodesic center of a given simple polygon. To solve the problem, we need to know how to find the geodesic center constrained to a chord of the polygon. Thus, we first consider the constrained geodesic center problem (Section 3.1). Afterwards, in Section 3.2, we explain how to solve the geodesic center problem. Finally, we give a conclusion in Section 4.
\section{Preliminaries and Notations}
\label{sec:2}
Assume that $P$ is a simple polygon of $n$ vertices, and $p$ and $q$ are two points inside $P$. The \textit{shortest path} from $p$ to $q$ in $P$ is a polygonal path connecting $p$ to $q$ with minimum length that is totally contained in $P$.
The \textit{geodesic distance} between $p$ and $q$, denoted by $d_P(p, q)$, is defined as the length of the shortest path between $p$ and $q$ in $P$.
The \textit{direction} $\vec{v}(p, q)$ is the unit vector at $p$ directed along the first segment of the shortest path from $p$ to $q$ in $P$.
A \textit{geodesic farthest neighbor} of $p$ in $P$ is a point of $P$ with maximum geodesic distance from $p$. It is well-known that a geodesic farthest neighbor is always a vertex of the polygon~\cite{14}. Also, a point can have more than one geodesic farthest neighbor. We denote by $F_P(p)$ the set of all geodesic farthest neighbors of $p$ in $P$.
The \textit{shortest path tree} of $p$ inside $P$ is a tree rooted at $p$ whose nodes represent all vertices of $P$, and there exists an edge between two nodes $u$ and $v$ if and only if the line segment $uv$ lies on either $\pi_P(p, u)$ or $\pi_P(p, v)$. We use $ST_P(p)$ to denote the shortest path tree.
A \textit{chord} of $P$ is a line segment whose endpoints lie on the boundary of $P$ and does not intersect the exterior of $P$.
Recall that, throughout the paper, by $T(n, s)$ we mean the time needed for constructing the shortest path tree of a given point inside $P$, in depth-first order, with $O(s)$ extra space.
\section{Geodesic Centers}
\label{sec:3}
In this section we propose an $s$-workspace algorithm which computes the geodesic center of a given simple polygon $P$ of $n$ vertices in $O(T(n, s) \log^2 n + \frac{n^2}{s} \log n)$ expected time, where $s\in \Omega(\log n) \cap O(n)$. Our approach is similar to that of Pollack et al.~\cite{14}. They showed that there exists an algorithm that finds the geodesic center of a simple polygon with $n$ vertices in $O(n \log n)$ time using $O(n)$ space. We apply their approach to solve the geodesic center problem in the aforementioned model of memory-constrained.
Before going into the details of our algorithm, let us first briefly explain the approach. Initially we show, for a given chord inside $P$, how to decide on which side of the chord the geodesic center lies. To do that, we find the geodesic center constrained to the chord. Using these and performing a binary search, we will find a triangle inside the polygon which contains the geodesic center.
To find the geodesic center, constrained to a chord or a triangle, we first compute the shortest path tree of the unknown center. Having the shortest path tree of the center in hand, we can find a linear number of circles such that finding the geodesic center reduces to computing the smallest circle enclosing these circles.
Here, we show how to do all these in the memory-constrained environment. Thus, in Subsection 3.1, we consider the constrained geodesic center problem. Then, in Subsection 3.2, we explain how to find the geodesic center of $P$.
\subsection{Constrained Geodesic Centers}
We are given a simple polygon $P$ and a chord $d$ of $P$. We show how to find the geodesic center constrained to $d$. In other words, we present an algorithm for computing a point $c_d$ of $d$ which minimizes the maximum geodesic distance to any point inside $P$. Our algorithm is a memory-constrained algorithm that runs in $O(T(n,s)\log n)$ expected time and uses $O(s)$ words of space for any $s\in \Omega(\log n)\cap O(n)$. First, we briefly describe our algorithm, then we go into more details.
\\[2mm]
\noindent\textbf{Algorithm.} Let $a$ and $b$ be the endpoints of $d$. Consider all edges of $ST_P(a)$ and $ST_P(b)$ and the intersections of their extensions with $d$, regardless of whether the extensions meet the boundary of $P$. Let $X$ be the sequence of the intersection points, in the order that they are appear on $d$, and $m$ be the number of the members of the sequence. $X$ divides $d$ into $m+1$ subchords in which the shortest path tree does not change.
In other words, for any such subchord $I$ and for each vertex $p$, there exists a reflex vertex $r_p$ such that the shortest path from any point $x\in I$ to $p$ is of the form $xr_p \cup \pi_P(r_p, p)$,
in which $xr_p$ represents the line segment connecting $x$ to $r_p$.
By performing a binary search on $X$,
we can identify the subchord containing the constrained geodesic center (Lemma~\ref{lem:2}).
The problem of computing the constrained geodesic center in the subchord is precisely equivalent to that of computing the smallest circle enclosing all circles centered at $r_p$ with radius $d_P(r_p, p)$ for each vertex $p$ of $P$.
To solve the problem, we use an approach similar to the method used by Megiddo~\cite{26}. We modify the method in such a way that it uses sublinear space (Lemma~\ref{lem:7}).
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:2}
We can compute the shortest path tree of the unknown constrained geodesic center in $O(T(n, s)\log n)$ expected time using $O(s)$ additional words of space for any $s \in O(n)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{pf}
From above discussion, to compute the shortest path tree of the constrained geodesic center, it suffices to find the subchord where contains it. To this end, we perform a binary search on $X$.
At the end of the $i$th step of the search, we find a subchord $I_i$ of $d$ of size at most $(\textstyle\frac{3}{4})^im$ which contains the constrained geodesic center. By \textit{size of a subshord} we mean the number of the intersection points which are contained in the subchord.
Initially, we set $I_0$ to be the whole $d$. While generating the edges of the shortest path trees, we randomly pick points from $X$ until we finally get close enough to its median. Note that we do not need to store $X$ in the space, instead, whenever we need it, we generate it using the shortest path tree algorithm. The expected number of the iterations to find such a point is constant.
In other words, after constant number of iterations, we expect to detect a point $x_1 \in X$ that splits $I_0$ into two subchords of size at most $\frac {3}4m$ each.
By constructing $ST_P(x_1)$, we compute the geodesic farthest neighbor(s) of $x_1$ in $P$.
Since the constrained geodesic center problem is a convex programming~\cite{14},
if the directions $\{\vec{v}(x_1, f) \vert f\in F_P(x_1)\}$ lie on different sides of the line perpendicular to $d$ at $x_1$, then $x_1$ is the constrained geodesic center. Otherwise, the center lies on the same side as the directions.
In this case, we consider the subchord containing the center as $I_1$, and ignore the other subchord.
In this way, at the beginning of the $(i+1)$th step, we have a subchord $I_{i}$ of $d$ of size at most $(\textstyle\frac{3}{4})^{i}m$ which contains the constrained geodesic center.
Again we construct $ST_P(a)$ and $ST_P(b)$. Using a similar approach as above on the intersection points that are contained in $I_{i}$, we find a point $x_{i} \in X$ that splits $I_{i}$ into two subchords of nearly equal size, and compute the geodesic farthest neighbor(s) of $x_{i}$. Thus, at the end of the step, we will find the subchord $I_{i+1}$ of size at most $(\textstyle\frac{3}{4})^{i+1}m$ where the constrained geodesic center lies.
Since shortest path trees are of linear size, after $O(\log m)$ steps, we will identify the subchord where contains the constrained geodesic center but no intersection point. As a result, the shortest path tree does not change in the subchord. Therefore, the shortest path tree of the constrained geodesic center is same as that of any point in the subchord. Note that in each step, the expected number of times we call the shortest path tree algorithm is constant. Therefore the result follows.
\end{pf}
Using above lemma, we can find the subchord $I^*$ of $d$ containing the constrained geodesic center with this property that the shortest path tree does not change in it.
Let $R^*$ be the set of all nodes that are children of the root in the shortest path tree $ST_P(x)$, for any point $x\in I^*$.
For each $r\in R^*$, we denote by $f_r$ the geodesic distance between $r$ and its geodesic farthest neighbor(s) in the subtree rooted at $r$ in $ST_P(x)$.
As we mentioned before, the problem of computing the constrained geodesic center in $I^*$ is equivalent to that of computing the smallest circle enclosing circles centered at $r$ with radius $f_r$, for all $r\in R^*$.
To solve the problem, we apply the prune-and-search algorithm by Megiddo for computing the smallest enclosing circle of pints in the plane~\cite{26}. We use \textit{tournament tree} to adapt the algorithm in such a way that it can be used in the memory-constrained model. Hence, we first explain the Megiddo's approach by using tournament tree. Next, we show how to modify it to solve our problem in the memory-constrained model.
We are given a line $l$ and a set $S$ of $n$ points in the plane. We aim to find the smallest circle enclosing $S$ whose center is constrained to lie on $l$.
Megiddo's algorithm for solving the problem is a prune-and-search algorithm with $O(\log n)$ rounds, in which, in each round, $1/4$ of the points of $S$ are pruned. At each round, the set of all points that have not been pruned in previous rounds are called \textit{active points}.
At the beginning of each round, the algorithm pairs the active points, intersects their bisectors with $l$, finds the median of the intersection points, and decides on which side of the median the solution lies.
Next, for each pair whose corresponding bisector intersect $l$ at the side of the median that does not contain the solution, the algorithm prunes the point that is closer to the median. In this way, at the end of the round, $1/4$ of the active points are omitted.
Thus, after $O(\log n)$ rounds, we have constant number of active points whose smallest enclosing circle can be found directly.
We can explain the process using tournament tree. In fact, we have a tournament tree with \textit{draw possibility}. We number the levels of the tree from bottom to top. All points of $S$ are represented by the leaves of the tree. The first round constructs the second level of the tree. The $i$th round of the algorithm constructs $(i+1)$th level of the tree using the $i$th level. We build the tournament tree from bottom to top. Nodes in the $i$th level of the tree represent the active points in its corresponding round.
The number of nodes in $(i+1)$th level of the tree is at most $3/4$ of that in $i$th level.
At the beginning of the $i$th round, we pair nodes of the $i$th level.
For pairs one of whose points is pruned, we call the pruned point \textit{loser} and the other one \textit{winner}. Winners are qualified to advance to the $(i+1)$th level. For other pairs, we say that \textit{draw} happens. In this case, both points will qualify to advance to the $(i+1)$th level.
Now, suppose that a limited amount of workspace is available. We aim to find the smallest circle enclosing circles $C(r, f_r)$, for all $r\in R^*$, such that the center of the circle lies on the subchord $I^*$, where $C(r, f_r)$ denotes the circle centered at $r$ with radius $f_r$. We use a similar approach as above.
Note that, to construct each level of the tournament tree, we need to know the lower level. Since the available workspace is limited, we are not able to store lower levels, instead, at each level, we construct all lower levels parallelly.
Suppose that we are at the beginning of the first round and constructing the second level of the tournament tree. We have a subchord $I^*$ where we are looking for the solution. We construct $ST_P(x)$ for an arbitrary point $x$ inside $I^*$.
Let $C_1=C(r_1, f_1), \dots, C_{n^\prime}=C(r_{n^{\prime}}, f_{n^\prime})$ be the sequence of the circles that are going to be enclosed, in the order that they are generated while constructing $ST_P(x)$.
We pair $C_{2j-1}$ and $C_{2j}$ for each $j\in \{1, 2, \dots, {n^{\prime}}/2\}$. We define \textit{covering bisector} of $C_{2j-1}$ and $C_{2j}$ to be the locus of all points that are equidistant from the farthest points on $C_{2j-1}$ and $C_{2j}$. Note that the covering bisectors are hyperbolic, thus they intersect a line in at most two points.
For any pair whose covering bisector do not intersect $I^*$, one circle can be ignored (the one that lies at the same side of the covering bisector as $I^*$), because it is covered if so is the other one.
Let $T$ be the sequence of all intersection points of the covering bisectors of $C_{2j-1}$ and $C_{2j}$ with $I^*$, for each pair intersecting $I^*$, in the order that they appear on $I^*$.
By computing the approximate median of $T$, in a similar way as the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:2}, we can find a subinterval of $I^*$ containing at least $1/4$ of the intersection points but not the solution. For the covering bisectors that intersect this subinterval, we compute the approximate median of the intersection points that lie in the subinterval containing the solution. In this way, we will find a subinterval of $I^*$ that is not intersected by at least $1/{16}$ of the covering bisectors. We use $J_1$ to denote the subinterval.
For pairs whose covering bisector does not intersect $J_1$, with the same argument as above, we can ignore one of the circles. In this case, only one of the circles is active at the higher level. For other pairs draw happens.
For integer $i \geq 1$, we let $A_i$ to be a process that computes an interval $J_i$ at the $i$th level which contains the solution and at least $1/{16}$ of the covering bisectors of the active circles do not intersect it. We also define $B_i$ to be a process that constructs the $(i+1)$th level of the tree. We described $A_1$ and $B_1$ at the previous paragraph.
For $i \geq 2$, $A_{i}$ computes $J_{i}$ by running $B_{i-1}$ constant times.
We maintains $J_{i}$ to be used by $B_{i}$. $B_{i}$ uses $J_{i}$ and runs $B_{i-1}$ once to construct the $(i+1)$th level.
Everything is similar to the previous paragraph, except that we get pairs by using $B_i$ instead of the shortest path tree algorithm.
Let $\tau_i$ and $s_i$ be the running time and workspace needed for constructing $(i+1)$th level, respectively. From above discussion, $\tau_{i}=\tau_{i-1}+O(n/\sigma^{i-1})=\tau_1+O(n)$ and $s_{i} = s_{i-1} +c=ic$, where $c$ and $\sigma \geq \frac{32}{31}$ are constants. Also, the time for computing $J_i$ is $c'\tau_{i-1}+O(n/\sigma^{i-1})=c'\tau_1 +O(n)$, for a constant $c'$.
In this way, after constructing $O(\log n)$ levels, we have constant number of active circles. Therefore, we can find the constrained geodesic center directly. The following lemma summarizes the result.
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:7}
Let $P$ be a simple polygon with $n$ vertices, and $d$ be a chord of the polygon. We can compute the geodesic center constrained to $d$ in $O(T(n,s)\log n)$ expected time and $O(s)$ extra space, where $s\in \Omega(\log n) \cap O(n)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{pf}
Since at each level of the tournament tree a constant fraction of nodes are dominated, the tree has $O(\log n)$ levels.
Therefore, from above discussions, the total time spent by our algorithm is given by $O(\log n)((c'+1)\tau_1 +O(n))$. $B_1$ constructs the shortest path tree constant times. Hence, $\tau_1=O(T(n,s))$. Note that $i\in O(\log n)$ and $s_i = ic$, for some constant $c$. Thus, in addition to the space needed for constructing the shortest path tree, we use $O(\log n)$ words of space. As a result the time and space bounds follow. The correctness of our algorithm is deduced from that of Megiddo's.
\end{pf}
\subsection{Geodesic Centers}
In this section, we aim to show how to find the geodesic center of a simple polygon $P$ in the memory-constrained setting. We first find a chord splitting $P$ into two subpolygons of almost equal size (Lemma~\ref{lem:3}). Then, we decide on which side of the chord the geodesic center lies, and repeat the process for the subpolygon recursively. At the end, we will identify a triangle whose edges are chords of $P$ and contains the geodesic center (Lemma~\ref{lem:5}). Afterwards, we find a subregion of the triangle containing the geodesic center where the shortest path tree does not change. In this way, we can compute the shortest path tree of the geodesic center. As we mentioned before, having the shortest path tree in hand, we can find a linear number of circles such that finding the geodesic center reduces to computing the smallest circle enclosing these circles. We will show how to take care of this in the memory-constrained model.
There are some algorithmic results in the memory-constrained environment for decomposing simple polygons into subpolygons. To our knowledge, the best one presents an $O(n^ 2 /s)$-time $s$-workspace algorithm for subdividing a simple polygon of $n$ vertices into $O(\min\{n/s, s\})$ subpolygons of complexity $O(\max\{n/s, s\})$~\cite{27}. Note that, it suffices for us to partition $P$ into only two almost equal-sized subpolygons. Hence, we can conclude the following lemma from Lemma~1 in \cite{27}.
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:3}
We can find in $O(n^2/s)$ time a chord that decomposes $P$ into two nearly equal-sized subpolygons. Our approach uses $O(s)$ words of space.
\end{lem}
\begin{pf}
There exists a vertical chord $l$ of $P$ that splits $P$ into two subpolygons of size at most $\frac{2}{3}n$ each~\cite{24}. By moving $l$ horizontally in $P$ such that it is a chord yet, it will touch a vertex of $P$. Hence, it suffices to check for each vertex $v$ of $P$ whether the vertical chord passing through $v$ partitions $P$ into two nearly equal-sized parts. Lemma~1 in \cite{27} explains how to find vertical chords passing through all vertices of a simple polygon in $O(n^2/s)$ time using $O(s)$ extra space. Therefore, the result follows.
\end{pf}
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:5}
Let $P$ be a simple polygon of $n$ vertices. We can find the geodesic center of the polygon or a triangle whose edges are chords of $P$ and contains the geodesic center in $O(T(n,s)\log^2 n + \frac{n^2}{s} \log n )$ expected time and $O(s)$ words of space where $s \in \Omega(\log n) \cap O(n)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{pf}
Using Lemma~\ref{lem:3}, we first find a chord that partitions $P$ into two nearly equal-sized subpolygons. Next, we decide in which subpolygon the geodesic center lies and repeat the process on the subpolygon. In each step, we have a subpolygon that contains the geodesic center of $P$. We call the subpolygon the \textit{underlying subpolygon} of the step. $P_i$ is used to denote the underlying subpolygon of the $i$th step. Let $d_i$ be the chord that splits $P_i$ into two subpolygons of almost equal size.
$d_i$ also divides $P$ into two subpolygons $P_l^i$ and $P_r^i$ (Note that these chords $d_i$ are vertical and do not intersect each other). We find the geodesic center of $P$ constrained to $d_i$. We use $c_i$ to denote the center. By constructing the shortest path trees of $c_i$ in $P$, we can compute its geodesic farthest neighbors in $P$. Let $\vec{v}_p(q)$ be the unit vector from $p$ in direction of the first edge on $\pi_P(p, q)$, and $F_P(p)$ denotes the set of all geodesic farthest neighbors of $p$ in $P$. From Lemmas 2 and 3 in \cite{14}, if $\{\vec{v}_{c_i}(f)\vert f \in F_P(c_i)\}$ does not lie in an open halfplane through $c_i$, then $c_i$ is the geodesic center of $P$. Otherwise, the unit vector that bisects the angle of the cone with apex $c_i$ spanned by all directions of $\{\vec{v}_{c_i}(f)\vert f \in F_P(c_i)\}$, points to the side of $d_i$ containing the geodesic center. Note that, since a cone can be represented by only two vectors, we do not need to maintain all these vectors.
Assume without loss of generality that $P_l^i$ contains the geodesic center, and we set $P_{i+1} = P_i \cap P_l^i$ and consider $P_{i+1}$ as new underlying subpolygon.
We repeat the process until the underlying subpolygon is of constant size. Now by triangulating the subpolyon and finding the constrained geodesic center for the diagonals, we will eventually find the geodesic center or a triangle that contains the geodesic center.
The above process has $O(\log n)$ steps.
In each step, we compute a chord and the side where the geodesic center lies. The underlying subpolygon of each step can be determined by $O(\log n)$ chords and directions from previous steps. Using these and by applying Lemma~\ref{lem:3}, we can construct the underlying subpolygon of the next step. Thus, from Lemmas~\ref{lem:7} and \ref{lem:3} and the time and space bounds of the shortest path tree algorithm the result follows.
\end{pf}
Let $\bigtriangleup{\alpha\beta\gamma}$ be the triangle from Lemma~\ref{lem:5}. We now show how to find the geodesic center inside the triangle. Similar to the constrained case, we find a subregion of the triangle which contains the geodesic center, additionally, the shortest path tree does not change in it. To do that, we perform an approach similar to~\cite{14} and adapt it to be able to be used in the aforementioned model of memory-constrained.
Our algorithm has $O(\log n)$ rounds. In each round, two half-planes containing the geodesic center are identified. Therefore, after $O(\log n)$ rounds, we have a set $L^\star$ of $O(\log n)$ half-planes defining a subregion in $\bigtriangleup{\alpha\beta\gamma}$ which contains the geodesic center, with this property that the shortest path tree does not change in the subregion.
We denote by $L$ the set of lines passing through all edges of the shortest path trees $ST_P(\alpha)$, $ST_P(\beta)$ and $ST_P(\gamma)$.
At the beginning of the first round, we set $L^\star$ to be an empty set. Using random choices similar to that of the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:2}, we find a line with approximately median slope among the members of $L$. Let $l_m^1$ denotes the line. We rotate all lines in $L$ around an arbitrary point on $l_m^1$, considering $l_m^1$ as $x$-axis.
Next, we pair the lines such that in each pair, one line has positive slope and the other has negative slope. To do that, we run the shortest path tree algorithm twice for each of $ST_P(\alpha)$, $ST_P(\beta)$ and $ST_P(\gamma)$, in parallel fashion, such that one reports the positive-slope lines in $L$ and the other reports the negative-slope ones. Now, we find the median of $x$-coordinates of the intersection points of lines in pairs. We use $x_m^1$ to denote the median. By solving the constrained geodesic center problem for $x=x_m^1$, we can decide on which side of $x=x_m^1$ the geodesic center lies.
We now find the median of $y$-coordinates of the intersection points lying on the opposite side. Let $y_m^1$ denotes the median. We now find the geodesic center constrained to $y=y_m^1$ to determine the side on which the geodesic center lies.
We add to $L^\star$ two half-planes $h_x^1$ and $h_y^1$ defined by $x=x_m^1$ and $y=y_m^1$, respectively, and contain the geodesic center.
Note that, at least $1/{16}$ of pairs do not have their intersection point inside $h_x^1\cup h_y^1$. For each such pair, the line which does not intersect $h_x^1\cap h_y^1$ can be ignored at the next round. Other lines are called \textit{active} at the next round.
As a result, in each round, a constant fraction of active lines are omitted.
In this way, after $O(\log n)$ rounds, we have $O(\log n)$ half-planes defining a subregion in $\bigtriangleup{\alpha\beta\gamma}$ which contains the geodesic center. Furthermore, the number of lines in $L$ intersecting the subregion is constant.
For these lines, we solve the constrained geodesic center problem directly to determine on which side of them the geodesic center lies. We add to $L^*$ their corresponding half-planes.
In this way, we will construct a subregion of $\bigtriangleup{\alpha\beta\gamma}$ whose interior is not intersected by any lines in $L$.
This means that the shortest path tree does not change in the subregion. In other words, if $R$ denotes the subregion, for any two points $u, v \in R$, the shortest path trees $ST_P(u)$ and $ST_P(v)$ are same.
Let $x$ be an arbitrary point in $R$, points $q_1, \dots, q_k$ be the vertices of $P$ which form the first level of $ST_P(x)$, and $f_i$ be the distance between $q_i$ and its farthest neighbor(s) in subtree of $ST_P(x)$ rooted at $q_i$, for each $i = 1, \dots, k$.
The problem of computing the geodesic center of $P$ is equivalent to that of finding the center of the smallest circle that encloses circles $C(q_1, f_1), \dots, C(q_k, f_k)$. If $C(x, \rho)$ denotes the circle, we can state the problem as fallows:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq1}
\mathrm{Minimize} && \rho \\ \nonumber
\mathrm{subject~to} && \|x - q_i\| + f_i \leq \rho \quad (1\leq i\leq k).
\end{eqnarray}
This is an optimization problem in three dimensions that can be solved in linear time when there is no limitation on the space. We use the approaches presented in \cite{22} and \cite{28} to solve the problem in the memory-constrained environment.
Although the constraints are not linear, according to \cite{22}, for each pair of the constraints, there exists a plane such that if we know the position of the solution relative to the plane, we can omit one of the constraints.
Suppose that we have an oracle that can find the position of the solution relative to a given plane. Using Meggido's approach~\cite{28}, we want to solve the problem by calling the oracle a few number of times.
Meggido's approach is a prune-and-search method that in each step produces constant number of half-spaces.
Using these half-spaces, it drops a constant fraction of planes. In fact, in each step, it has constant number of median finding and plane pairing, alternatively. Accordingly, it finds constant number of planes. By applying the oracle for the planes, it obtains the mentioned half-spaces.
To find median, we run the shortest path tree algorithm constant expected number of times. To pair planes, we run the shortest path tree algorithm two more times, parallelly, one for generating positive slopes and the other for negative ones. Later, we will explain how to implement the oracle in our computational model.
Now let us return to the approach explained in the previous section. Similarly, the process $A_i$ computes a subspace containing the solution. Using this, the process $B_i$ reduces the size of the set of active planes by a constant fraction and determines the set of the active planes in higher level. Note that $A_i$ is nothing but what explained in the previous paragraph. The intended subspace is the intersection of the half-spaces.
In fact, $A_i$ runs the shortest path tree algorithm and calls the oracle constant number of times. Consequently, its running time is from the order of the maximum of the running time of the oracle and the shortest path tree algorithm. Hence, everything is same as before except that we need to explain the oracle.
The oracle is an algorithm that for the problem~\ref{eq1} and a given plane $h$, decides whether the solution lies on $h$, or else which of the half-spaces bounded by $h$ contains the solution in its interior. To do that, it first solves the problem~\ref{eq1} constrained to $h$.
Next, it finds the direction that decreases the cost function of the unconstrained problem.
Note that the constrained problem is nothing but the unconstrained problem at a lower dimension. Therefore, it can be solved in recursive manner. The base case of the recursion is very similar to computing the geodesic center constrained to a line. Since we recurse on dimension, the running time of the oracle is from the order of that of the constrained geodesic center algorithm (See Lemma~\ref{lem:7}). Thus, we have the following result.
\begin{thm}
\label{theo:8}
There is an $s$-workspace algorithm that computes the geodesic center of a simple polygon with $n$ vertices in $O(T(n, s) \log ^2 n + \frac{n^2}{s} \log n)$ expected time, where $s\in\Omega(\log n) \cap O(n)$.
\end{thm}
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper we addressed the problem of computing the geodesic center of a simple polygon. For an $n$-vertex simple polygon $P$, we provided a time-space trade-off algorithm that solves the problem in $O(T(n, s) \log^2 n + \frac{n^2}{s}\log n)$ expected time using $O(s)$ words of space, for any $s \in \Omega(\log n) \cap O(n)$, in which $T(n, s)$ represents the time complexity of constructing the shortest path tree of a given point inside $P$, with $O(s)$ extra space.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{section:introduction}
In the general problem of functional estimation, one is interested in estimating some quantity $\boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})$ where ${\boldsymbol{\theta}}\in{\boldsymbol{\Theta}}$ is an unknown parameter and $\boldsymbol{F}$ is a known function. Information on this quantity is provided by an observation $\boldsymbol{y} \sim \mathbf P_{\boldsymbol{\theta}}$, where $(\mathbf P_{\boldsymbol{\theta}})_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}\in{\boldsymbol{\Theta}}}$ is some family of probability distributions.
An exhaustive bibliography on the subject of functional estimation is out of the scope of this paper, but typical examples include functionals of a density function, e.g. the integrals of its square \cite{BickelRitov1988}, of smooth functionals of its derivatives \cite{BirgeMassart1995} or of nonlinear functionals \cite{KerkyacharianPicard1996}.
In this work, we focus on the case where ${\boldsymbol{\theta}}\in\mathbb R^d$ is a finite vector and $\boldsymbol{F}$ is an additive functional, \textit{i.e.},
\begin{equation}\label{additive:functional}
\boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}}) = \sum_{i=1}^d F(\theta_i),
\end{equation}
which has now been well studied in the literature. For example, in the case when $\mathbf P_{\boldsymbol{\theta}}$ is the multinomial distribution $\mathcal{M}(n, p_1,\ldots, p_d)$, Shannon's or Rényi's entropy, which correspond respectively to marginal functionals $F(t)=-t\log(t)$ and $F(t)=t^{\alpha}$, are considered in \cite{HanJiaoWeissman2015, JiaoVenkatHanWeissman2015,WuYang2016} among others. The distinct elements problem, \textit{i.e.}, finding how many different colors are present among at most $d$ colored balls in an urn, can also be expressed in this form \cite{PolyanskiyWu2019,WuYang2018}. Moreover, the quadratic functional defined by $F(t)=t^2$ is key in the problem of signal detection \cite{CarpentierCollierCommingesTsybakovWang2018}, and when the vector ${\boldsymbol{\theta}}$ is assumed to be sparse, \textit{i.e.}, when most of its coefficients are assumed to be exactly $0$, it also plays a crucial role for noise variance estimation \cite{CommingesCollierNdaoudTsybakov2019}. Finally, robust estimation of the mean is shown in \cite{CollierDalalyan2019} to be related with a linear functional of the outliers.
Here, our aim is not to focus on some particular functional, but to exhibit optimal minimax rates over large classes of functionals. Furthermore, we consider the Gaussian mean model, \textit{i.e.},
\begin{equation}\label{Gaussian:mean:model}
\boldsymbol{y} \sim \mathcal N({\boldsymbol{\theta}},I_d) \quad \Rightarrow \quad y_i = \theta_i + \xi_i, \quad \xi_i \overset{iid}{\sim} \mathcal{N}(0,1)
\end{equation}
and we measure the quality of an estimator by the minimax risk defined by
\begin{equation}\label{minimax:risk}
\sup_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}\in {\boldsymbol{\Theta}}} \mathbf E_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}\big( \hat{\boldsymbol{F}} - \boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}}) \big)^2,
\end{equation}
where ${\boldsymbol{\Theta}}$ is some set of parameters. This framework was also used in \cite{CollierCommingesTsybakov2017,CaiLow2011,CollierCommingesTsybakov2019}, where respectively the cases when $F(t)=t$ or $F(t)=t^2$, $F(t) = |t|$ and $F(t) = |t|^\gamma$ for $0<\gamma\le 1$ are studied. It is clear from the last two papers that for rapidly growing functionals, it is relevant to restrict the set of ${\boldsymbol{\theta}}'s$ to a bounded subset of~$\mathbb R^d$. Therefore, we assume that each component of ${\boldsymbol{\theta}}$ belongs to a
segment, which we take for simplicity sake in the form $[-M,M]$. Finally, we place ourselves in a sparse context, which means that we assume the number of nonzero coefficients of ${\boldsymbol{\theta}}$ -- its $l_0$-norm -- to be bounded by a known quantity, and we define
\begin{equation}\label{set:Theta}
{\boldsymbol{\Theta}} \triangleq {\boldsymbol{\Theta}}_{s,M} = \big\{ {\boldsymbol{\theta}}\in\mathbb R^d \,|\, \|{\boldsymbol{\theta}}\|_0\le s, \|{\boldsymbol{\theta}}\|_\infty \le M \big\}.
\end{equation}
In this paper, we build minimax rate-optimal estimators when the functional $F$ is not too regular in the sense of polynomial approximation and does not grow too fast, when $s$ is at least of the order of $\sqrt{d}$ and $M$ is at most of order $\sqrt{\log(s^2/d)}$, showing that the polynomial approximation based method developed in \cite{CollierCommingesTsybakov2019} can be extended to a very broad class of functionals. More precisely, we make the following assumptions, where we use the notation $\delta_{K,M}$ that is introduced in~\eqref{def:delta} below:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\textbf{(A0)}] $F$ is continuous on $[-\sqrt{\log(s^2/d)},\sqrt{\log(s^2/d)}]$.
\item[\textbf{(A0')}] $F$ is continuous on $[-\sqrt{\log(s)},\sqrt{\log(s)}]$.
\item[\textbf{(A1)}] There exist positive real numbers $\epsilon_1,C_1$ such that
\begin{equation}
\sup_{\sqrt{2\log(s^2/d)}\le M\le \sqrt{2\log(d)}} \frac{\|F-F(0)\|_{\infty,[-M,M]}}{e^{\epsilon_1M^2}} \le C_1.
\end{equation}
\item[\textbf{(A2)}] There exist positive real numbers $\epsilon_2,C_2$ such that
\begin{equation}
\sup_{\sqrt{2\log(s^2/d)}\le M\le \sqrt{2\log(d)}} \frac{ \delta^{-1}_{M^2,M} }{e^{\epsilon_2M^2}} \le C_2.
\end{equation}
\item[\textbf{(A3)}] $\forall \alpha>0$, $\exists f_\alpha>0$ such that if $|1-K_1/K_2|\vee|1-M_1/M_2| \le \alpha$, then $$f_\alpha^{-1} \le \frac{\delta_{K_1,M_1}}{\delta_{K_2,M_2}} \le f_\alpha.$$
\end{enumerate}
We make the first assumption on the continuity of $F$ for simplicity sake. Indeed, it would not be hard to extend the result to the case of a functional that is piecewise continuous with a finite number of discontinuities, even if discontinuous functionals might not be very important in practice. The second assumption is very mild, since estimation of rapidly growing functionals leads to very large minimax rates, making such problems uninteresting in practice. However the third assumption is essential: it expresses how the polynomial approximation rate drives the quality of estimation of the associated additive functional. Assumption~(A2) thus requires that $F$ is not smooth enough to be very quickly approximated by polynomials. In Section~\ref{section:optimality}, we recall the relation between polynomial approximation and differentiability. Finally, the last assumption is convenient to show that our lower and upper bounds match up to a constant. We believe that it is satisfied for all reasonable functionals.
Our theorems allow to recover some of the results implied by \cite{CaiLow2011,CollierCommingesTsybakov2019}, but cover a large part of all possible functionals. Note that some papers have already tackled the problem of general functionals. In \cite{FukuchiSakuma2017}, the authors give optimal rates of convergence for additive functionals in the discrete distribution case, when the fourth-derivative of the marginal functional is close in sup-norm to an inverse power function. In \cite{KoltchinskiiZhilova2018}, the case of general, not necessarily additive, functionals is considered in the Gaussian mean model with arbitrary covariance matrix. However, their results differ significantly from ours since they consider minimax risk over all marginal functionals belonging to some relatively small set of bounded and smooth functions in the Hölder sense. For example, none of the results obtained in \cite{CollierCommingesTsybakov2017,CollierCommingesTsybakov2019,CaiLow2011} can be recovered. Finally, the minimax rate for even larger classes of functionals, under constraints in the form $\sum_{i=1}^d c(\theta_i) \le 1$ which includes sparsity, is obtained in~\cite{PolyanskiyWu2019} in term of the quantity
\begin{equation}\label{def:chi2modulus}
\sup_{\pi_1,\pi_2} \Big\{ \Big| \int F(\theta)\,\pi_1(d\theta) - \int F(\theta)\,\pi_2(d\theta) \Big| \,|\, \chi^2(\mathbf P_{\pi_1},\mathbf P_{\pi_2})\le \frac1d, \mathbf E_{\pi_i} \sum_{i=1}^d c(\theta_i) \le 1 \Big\}
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf P_\pi = \int \mathbf P_\theta\,\pi(d\theta)$, $\chi^2(\mathbf P_{\pi_1},\mathbf P_{\pi_2})$ is the chi-square divergence between probabilities $\mathbf P_{\pi_1}$ and $\mathbf P_{\pi_2}$ and the supremum is taken over all probability distributions on~${\boldsymbol{\Theta}}$. Their theorems allow for example to recover the minimax rate from~\cite{CaiLow2011} when $\Theta$ is bounded, and may also allow to get the minimax rates from this paper. However, they do not exhibit generic estimators achieving the minimax risk. This paper fills in this gap in some cases.
\subsection*{Organization of the paper}
In Section~\ref{section:estimateur}, we build rate-optimal estimators of the additive functional and assess their performance. In Section~\ref{section:optimality}, we prove their optimality up to constants, and discuss conditions under which Assumption~(A2) is satisfied. The proofs of the theorems are postponed to Section~\ref{section:proof:theorem}, while technical lemmas can be found in~Section~\ref{section:lemma}.
\section{Upper bounds}\label{section:estimateur}
\subsection{Polynomial approximation}
Here, we set the notation on polynomial approximation that will be used throughout this paper. First denote $\mathcal{P}_K$ the set of polynomials of degree at most $K$, then define the polynomial of best approximation of $F$ on $[a,b]$ by
\begin{equation}\label{def:PKM}
P_{K,[a,b]} = \underset{{P\in\mathcal{P}_K}}{\operatorname{\arg\min}} \| F - P \|_{\infty,[a,b]}
\end{equation}
and the polynomial approximation rate by
\begin{equation}\label{def:delta}
\delta_{K,[a,b]} = \| F - P_{K,[a,b]} \|_{\infty,[a,b]}.
\end{equation}
In the following, we write $P_{K,M} = P_{K,[-M,M]}$, $\delta_{K,M}=\delta_{K,[-M,M]}$, and we decompose~$P_{K,M}$ in the canonical base as
\begin{equation}\label{def:coefficients}
P_{K,M} = \sum_{k=0}^K a_{k,K,M} X^k.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Definition of the estimator and main theorem}
First, we use the sample duplication trick to transform observation $y_i$ into independent randomized observations $y_{1,i}, y_{2,i}$ while keeping the same mean. Let us consider random variables $z_1,\ldots,z_d\overset{iid}{\sim} \mathcal{N}(0,1)$ independent of $\boldsymbol{y}$ and define
\begin{equation}
y_{1,i} = y_i + z_i, \quad y_{2,i} = y_i - z_i,
\end{equation}
so that $y_{1,i}, y_{2,i}\overset{iid}{\sim}\mathcal N(\theta_i,2)$. Yet for convenience, we will assume that $y_{1,i}, y_{2,i}\overset{iid}{\sim}\mathcal N(\theta_i,1)$.
Then, we recall the definition of the Hermite polynomials $H_k$ defined by
\begin{equation}\label{def:Hermite}
H_k(x) = (-1)^k e^{x^2/2}\frac{\partial^k}{\partial x^k} \big(e^{-x^2/2}\big),
\end{equation}
which have in particular the property that $\mathbf E_{X\sim\mathcal N(\theta,1)} H_k(X) = \theta^k$.
Finally, we define our estimator of $\boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})$ as
\begin{equation}\label{def:estimateur}
\hat{\boldsymbol{F}} = \sum_{i=1}^d \hat{F}(y_{1,i},y_{2,i})
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\hat{F}(u,v) = \sum_{l=0}^{L}\hat{P}_{K_l,M_l}(u) \mathds{1}_{t_{l-1}<|v|\le t_l} + \hat{P}_{K_{L+1},M_{L+1}}(u) \mathds{1}_{t_{L}<|v|},
\end{equation}
and for an arbitrary constant $c>0$,
\begin{equation}\label{parametres}
\begin{cases}
\ \hat{P}_{K,M}(u) = \sum_{k=1}^K a_{k,K,M} H_k(u), \phantom{\Big()} \\
\ M_l = 2^{l}\sqrt{2\log(s^2/d)}, \quad K_l = \frac{c}{8} M_l^2, \phantom{\Big()} \\
\ t_l = M_l/2,\, t_{-1}=0, \phantom{\Big()} \\
\ L \text{ is the largest integer such that } 2^L < \sqrt{\log(d)/\log(s^2/d)}, \phantom{\Big()}\\
\ M_{L+1} = \sqrt{2\log(d)}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
The next theorem is a slight modification of Theorem~1 in~\cite{CollierCommingesTsybakov2019}. It states the performance of our estimator in the case when the signal ${\boldsymbol{\theta}}$ is not too sparse.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem_upperbound_dense}
Assume that $2\sqrt{d} \le s\le d$ and that $F$ satisfies Assumptions~(A1-A2) with $\epsilon_1+\epsilon_2$ small enough. Then the estimator defined in~(\ref{def:estimateur}) with small enough $c$, depending on $\epsilon_1$ and $\epsilon_2$, satisfies
\begin{equation}
\sup_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}\in{\boldsymbol{\Theta}}_{s,\sqrt{2\log(d)}}} \mathbf E_{\boldsymbol{\theta}} \big(\hat{\boldsymbol{F}}-\boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})\big)^2 \le C_3\, s^2\max_{l=0,\ldots,L+1} \delta^2_{K_l,M_l},
\end{equation}
where $C_3$ is some positive constant, depending only on $C_1$ and $C_2$.
\end{theorem}
Furthermore, in the case when no sparsity is assumed ($s=d$), we can derive a simpler statement for every segment $[-M,M]$ included in $[-\sqrt{\log(d)}, \sqrt{\log(d)}]$. To this end, we define the simplified estimator
\begin{equation}\label{def:estimateur2}
\tilde{\boldsymbol{F}} = \sum_{i=0}^d \hat{P}_{K,M}(y_i), \quad \hat{P}_{K,M}(u) = \sum_{k=0}^K a_{k,K,M} H_k(u),
\end{equation}
with $K=c\log(d)/\log(e\log(d)/M^2)$ for an arbitrary constant $c>0$.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem_upperbound_nonsparse}
Assume that $0<M\le\sqrt{\log(d)}$, that for some constants $C'_1,C'_2>0$
\begin{equation}
\|F-F(0)\|_{\infty,[-M,M]} \le C'_1 d^{\epsilon_1}, \quad \delta_{K,M}^{-1} \le C'_2 d^{\epsilon_2},
\end{equation}
and let $\tilde{\boldsymbol{F}}$ be the estimator defined by~(\ref{def:estimateur2}). Then if $2\epsilon_1+2\epsilon_2<1$ and if $c$ is chosen small enough, depending only on $\epsilon_1+\epsilon_2$, then
\begin{equation}
\sup_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}} \in {\boldsymbol{\Theta}}_{d,M}} \mathbf E_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}} \big(\tilde{\boldsymbol{F}}-\boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})\big)^2 \le C'_3 d^2\delta_{K,M}^2,
\end{equation}
where $C'_3$ is some positive constant, depending only on $C_1'$ and $C_2'$.
\end{theorem}
\section{Optimality results}\label{section:optimality}
The next theorem, which is a slight modification of Theorem~4 in \cite{CollierCommingesTsybakov2019}, states a lower bound on the minimax rate.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem_sparse_lowerbound_2}
Assume that $0<M\le\sqrt{\log(s^2/d)}$ and that for some constants $C''_1 , C''_2>0$
\begin{equation}
\|F-F(0)\|_{\infty,[-M,M]} \le C''_1 \Big(\frac{s^2}{d}\Big)^{\epsilon_1}, \quad \delta_{e^2\log(s^2/d)/\log(e\log(s^2/d)/M^2),M}^{-1} \le C''_2 \Big(\frac{s^2}{d}\Big)^{\epsilon_2},
\end{equation}
and that Assumption~(A0) holds. Then there exists an absolute positive constant $C\ge 1$ such that if $s^2\ge C d$, if $2\epsilon_1+2\epsilon_2<1$ and if $c$ is chosen small enough, depending on $\epsilon_1+\epsilon_2$, we have
\begin{equation}
\inf_{\hat{\boldsymbol{F}}} \sup_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}\in{\boldsymbol{\Theta}}_{s,M}} \mathbf E_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}} \big( \hat{\boldsymbol{F}}-\boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})\big)^2 \ge C''_3 s^2\delta_{e^2\log(s^2/d)/\log(e\log(s^2/d)/M^2),M}^2,
\end{equation}
for some positive constant $C''_3$, depending only on $C''_1 $ and $C''_2$.
\end{theorem}
But our estimation problem is more difficult than the problem where we know in advance that the nonzero coefficients belong to the first $k$ components of ${\boldsymbol{\theta}}$ for $k\in\{s,\ldots,d\}$, and the last theorem gives lower bounds for these problems as well by replacing $d$ by $k$. This argument leads to the following corollary:
\begin{corollary}\label{corollary:lower}
Let Assumptions~(A0'-A1-A2) hold. Then there exist an absolute positive constant $C\ge 1$ such that if $s^2\ge C d$, if $2\epsilon_1+2\epsilon_2<1$ and if $c$ is chosen small enough, depending only on $\epsilon_1+\epsilon_2$, we have
\begin{equation}
\inf_{\hat{\boldsymbol{F}}} \sup_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}\in{\boldsymbol{\Theta}}_{s,\sqrt{\log(s)}}} \mathbf E_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}} \big( \hat{\boldsymbol{F}}-\boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})\big)^2 \ge C_4 s^2 \max_{s\le k\le d} \delta_{e^2\log(s^2/k),\sqrt{\log(s^2/k)}}^2,
\end{equation}
for some positive constant $C_4$, depending only on $C_1 $, $C_2$. \end{corollary}
Furthermore, the next theorem states that Assumption~(A3) is sufficient to prove that the upper bound from Theorem~\ref{theorem_upperbound_dense} matches with the lower bound from Corollary~\ref{corollary:lower}.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:minimax}
Let Assumptions~(A0'-A1-A2-A3) hold. Then there exist an absolute positive constant $C\ge \sqrt{2}$ such that if $s^2\ge C d$, if $\epsilon_1,\epsilon_2$ are small enough and $c$ is chosen small enough, depending only on $\epsilon_1$ and $\epsilon_2$, we have
\begin{equation}
C_5 \le \frac{\inf_{\hat{\boldsymbol{F}}} \sup_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}\in{\boldsymbol{\Theta}}_{s,\sqrt{\log(d)}}} \mathbf E_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}} \big( \hat{\boldsymbol{F}}-\boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})\big)^2}{s^2 \max_{s\le k\le d} \delta_{\log(s^2/k),\sqrt{\log(s^2/k)}}^2} \le C'_5,
\end{equation}
for some positive constants $C_5,C'_5$, depending only on $C_1, C_2$ and $c$.
\end{theorem}
This means in particular that for non-regular functionals satisfying the conditions (A0'-A1-A2-A3), the rate appearing in Theorem~\ref{theorem:minimax} must be the same as the rate found in~\cite{PolyanskiyWu2019}. More precisely, let us denote $\delta_{\chi^2}(\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}})$ the following quantity
\begin{align}
\sup_{\pi_1,\pi_2} \Big\{ \Big| \int F(\theta)\,\pi_1(d\theta) - \int F(\theta)\,\pi_2(d\theta) \Big| \,|\, \chi^2(\mathbf P_{\pi_1},\mathbf P_{\pi_2})\le \frac1d, \mathbf E_{\pi_i} \|{\boldsymbol{\theta}}\|_0 \le s\Big\}
\end{align}
where the supremum is taken over all distribution probabilities on $[-M,M]^d$. According to Theorem 8 in~\cite{PolyanskiyWu2019}, if $\delta_{\chi^2}(\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}})\ge 31\frac{\|F\|_{\infty,[-M,M]}}{\sqrt{d}}$, then $\delta_{\chi^2}(\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}})$ is the minimax rate for estimating $\sum_{i=1}^d F(\theta_i)$ over ${\boldsymbol{\Theta}}_{s,M}$, hence it is of the order of
\begin{equation}
s^2 \max_{s\le k\le d} \delta_{\log(s^2/k),\sqrt{\log(s^2/k)}}^2.
\end{equation}
Moreover, similar results as in~\cite{CaiLow2011,CollierCommingesTsybakov2019} (with bounded parameter space) can be easily deduced since for the function $x\to |x|^\gamma$, the approximation rate $\delta_{K,M}$ is of the order of $(M/K)^\gamma$ (\textit{cf.}~ for example Theorem~7.2.2 in~\cite{Timan1963}).
Finally, Assumption~(A2) is strongly related to the differentiability of the marginal functional $F$. Indeed, the following properties can be found in~\cite{Timan1963}, Sections~5.1.5 and~6.2.4:
\begin{itemize}
\item If $F$ has a bounded derivative of order $r$ on $[-1,1]$, then
\begin{equation}
\forall n\ge1, \quad \delta_{n,[-1,1]} \le \frac{C}{n^r},
\end{equation}
for some positive contant $C$.
\item $F$ is infinitely derivable on $[a,b]$ if and only if for any $r>0$,
\begin{equation}
n^r \delta_{n,[a,b]} \to 0.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
This suggests that many not infinitely differentiable functionals satisfy Assumption~(A2).
\section{Proof of theorems}\label{section:proof:theorem}
In the whole section, we denote by $A$ a positive constant the value of which may vary from line to line. This constant only depends on $C_1$ and $C_2$ (Theorem~\ref{theorem_upperbound_dense}) and Theorem~\ref{theorem:minimax}), $C_1'$ and $C_2'$ (Theorem~\ref{theorem_upperbound_nonsparse}), $C_1^{''}$ and $C_2^{''}$ (Theorem~\ref{theorem_sparse_lowerbound_2}). Moreover, since
\begin{equation}
\mathbf E_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}} \big( \hat{\boldsymbol{F}}-\boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})\big)^2 = \mathbf E_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}} \Big[ \big(\hat{\boldsymbol{F}}-dF(0)\big)-\big(\boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})-dF(0)\big)\Big]^2,
\end{equation}
we can assume without loss of generality that $F(0)=0$, which we do throughout this section.
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{theorem_upperbound_dense}}
Denote by $S$ the support of ${\boldsymbol{\theta}}$. We start with a bias-variance decomposition
\begin{align}
\big(\hat{\boldsymbol{F}}-\boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})\big)^2 &\le 4\,\Big(\sum_{i\in S} \mathbf E_{\boldsymbol{\theta}}\hat{F}(y_{1,i},y_{2,i})-\sum_{i\in S} F(\theta_i)\Big)^2 \\
&+ 4\,\Big(\sum_{i\in S} \hat{F}(y_{1,i},y_{2,i})-\sum_{i\in S} \mathbf E_{\boldsymbol{\theta}}\hat{F}(y_{1,i},y_{2,i})\Big)^2 \\
&+ 4\,\Big(\sum_{i\not\in S} \mathbf E_{\boldsymbol{\theta}} \hat{F}(y_{1,i},y_{2,i}) \Big)^2 \\
&+ 4\,\Big(\sum_{i\not\in S} \hat{F}(y_{1,i},y_{2,i})-\sum_{i\not\in S} \mathbf E_{\boldsymbol{\theta}}\hat{F}(y_{1,i},y_{2,i})\Big)^2
\end{align}
leading to the bound
\begin{align}\label{proof_eq1}
\mathbf E_{\boldsymbol{\theta}}(\hat{\boldsymbol{F}}-\boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}}))^2 &\le 4s^2 \max_{i\in S} B_i^2 + 4s \max_{i\in S} V_i \\
&+ 4d^2 \max_{i\not\in S} B_i^2 + 4d \max_{i\not\in S} V_i, \nonumber
\end{align}
where $B_i=\mathbf E_{\boldsymbol{\theta}} \hat{F}(y_{1,i},y_{2,i})- F(\theta_i)$ is the bias of $\hat{F}(y_{1,i},y_{2,i})$ as an estimator of $F(\theta_i)$ and $V_i=\mathbf{Var}_{\boldsymbol{\theta}}(\hat{F}(y_{1,i},y_{2,i}))$ is its variance. We now bound separately the four terms in~\eqref{proof_eq1}. \\
$1^{\circ}.$ {\it Bias for $i\not\in S$.} If $i\not\in S$, then $B_i = 0$.
$2^{\circ}.$ {\it Variance for $i\not\in S$.} If $i\not\in S$, then using in particular Lemma~\ref{lemma_CaiLow1},
\begin{align}\label{proof_eq1a}
V_i &\le \sum_{l=0}^{L+1} \mathbf E \hat{P}^2_{K_l,M_l}(\xi) \, \mathbf P(t_{l-1}<|\xi|), \quad \xi\sim\mathcal{N}(0,1), \\
&\le A \sum_{l=0}^{L+1} \|F\|_{\infty,[-M_l,M_l]}^2 6^{K_l} e^{-t_{l-1}^2/2}.
\end{align}
For $l=0$, we have by Assumptions~(A1-A2), if $\epsilon_1+\epsilon_2<1/4$ and for $c$ small enough
\begin{equation}
\|F\|_{\infty,[-M_0,M_0]}^2 6^{K_0} e^{-t_{-1}^2/2} \delta^{-2}_{K_0,M_0} \le A \Big(\frac{s^2}{d}\Big)^{4\epsilon_1 + 4\epsilon_2 + c\log(6)/4} \le A \frac{s^2}{d}.
\end{equation}
Then, if $l>0$,
\begin{equation}
\|F\|_{\infty,[-M_l,M_l]}^2\, 6^{K_l} e^{-t_{l-1}^2/2} \delta^{-2}_{K_l,M_l} \le A \Big(\frac{s^2}{d}\Big)^{4^l(4\epsilon_1+4\epsilon_2 + c\log(6)/4 - \frac1{16})}
\end{equation}
so that for small enough $c,\epsilon_1$ and $\epsilon_2$ and since $s^2\ge 4d$,
\begin{equation}
dV_i \le A s^2\max_{l=0,\ldots,L} \delta^2_{K_l,M_l}.
\end{equation}
\medskip
$3^{\circ}.$ {\it Bias for $i\in S$.} If $i\in S$, the bias has the form
\begin{align}
B_i &= \sum_{l=0}^{L} \big\{ \mathbf E \hat{P}_{K_l,M_l}(\xi) - F(\theta_i) \big\}\,\mathbf P(t_{l-1}<|\xi|\le t_l) \\ &+ \big\{ \mathbf E \hat{P}_{K_{L+1},M_{L+1}}(\xi) - F(\theta_i) \big\}\,\mathbf P(t_{L}<|\xi|), \quad \xi\sim\mathcal N(\theta_i,1).
\end{align}
We will analyze this expression separately in different ranges of $|\theta_i|$.
\smallskip
$3.1^{\circ}.$ {\it Case $0<|\theta_i|\le2 t_0$. } In this case, we use the bound
\begin{align}
|B_i| &\le \max_l \big|\mathbf E \hat{P}_{K_l,M_l}(\xi)-F(\theta_i)\big|, \quad \xi\sim\mathcal N(\theta_i,1).
\end{align}
Since $|\theta_i|\le M_l$ for all~$l$, we have by the definition of $P_{K_l,M_l}$ and since $F(0)=0$,
\begin{align}\label{proof_eq3a}
\big|\mathbf E \hat{P}_{K_l,M_l}(\xi)-F(\theta_i)\big| &\le \big| P_{K_l,M_l}(\theta_i) - a_{0,K_l,M_l} - F(\theta_i)\big| \\ &\le \big| P_{K_l,M_l}(\theta_i) - F(\theta_i)\big| + |F(0) - P_{K_l,M_l}(0)| \\ &\le 2\delta_{K_l,M_l}, \phantom{\big|}
\end{align}
so that
\begin{equation}\label{proof_eq4}
s^2 \max_{0<|\theta_i|\le 2 t_0} B^2_i \le 4s^2\max_{l=0,\ldots,L+1} \delta^2_{K_l,M_l}.
\end{equation}
\smallskip
$3.2^{\circ}.$ {\it Case $2 t_0<|\theta_i|\le 2t_L$. }
Let $l_0\in\{0,\ldots,L-1\}$ be the integer such that $2t_{l_0} < |\theta_i| \le 2t_{l_0+1}$. We have
\begin{align}\label{proof_eq4a}
|B_i| &\le \sum_{l=0}^{l_0} \big|\mathbf E \hat{P}_{K_l,M_l}(\xi)-F(\theta_i)\big|\cdot\mathbf P(t_{l-1}<|\xi|\le t_l) \\
&+ \max_{l> l_0} \big|\mathbf E \hat{P}_{K_l,M_l}(\xi)-F(\theta_i)\big|, \quad \xi\sim\mathcal N(\theta_i,1)\nonumber
\end{align}
The arguments in~\eqref{proof_eq3a} yield that
\begin{equation}
\max_{l> l_0}\big|\mathbf E \hat{P}_{K_l,M_l}(\xi)-F(\theta_i)\big| \le 4 \max_{l=0,\ldots,L+1} \delta^2_{K_l,M_l}.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, using the triangular inequality,
\begin{align}
&\sum_{l=0}^{l_0} \big|\mathbf E \hat{P}_{K_l,M_l}(\xi)-F(\theta_i)\big|\cdot\mathbf P(t_{l-1}<|\xi|\le t_l) \\ \le &\sum_{l=0}^{l_0} \big|\mathbf E \hat{P}_{K_l,M_l}(\xi)\big|\cdot\mathbf P(|\xi|\le t_l) + \sum_{l=0}^{l_0} \big|F(\theta_i)\big|\cdot\mathbf P(t_{l-1}<|\xi|\le t_l).
\end{align}
The first sum in the right-hand side can be bounded using Lemma~\ref{lemma_CaiLowamlior}, since
\begin{align}
\big|\mathbf E \hat{P}_{K_l,M_l}(\xi)\big|\,\mathbf P(|\xi|\le t_l) \le A \|F\|_{\infty,[-M_l,M_l]}\, 3^{K_l} e^{c\theta_i^2/16}\, \mathbf P(|\xi|\le t_l),
\end{align}
so that, as $|\theta_i|>2t_{l_0}\ge 2t_l$ for $l\le l_0$,
\begin{align}
\big|\mathbf E \hat{P}_{K_l,M_l}(\xi)\big|\,\mathbf P(|\xi|\le t_l) \delta^{-1}_{K_l,M_l} &\le A 3^{K_l} e^{(c-2)\theta_i^2/16} e^{(\epsilon_1+\epsilon_2)M_l^2} \\
&\le A e^{(8\epsilon_1+8\epsilon_2+c\log(3)+(c-2)/2)t_l^2/2} \\
&= A\Big(\frac{s^2}{d}\Big)^{2^{2l-2}(8\epsilon_1+8\epsilon_2+c\log(3)+(c-2)/2)}
\end{align}
Again, if $\epsilon_1+\epsilon_2<\frac{1}{8}$, choosing $c$ small enough yields that
\begin{equation}
\sum_{l=0}^{l_0} \big|\mathbf E \hat{P}_{K_l,M_l}(\xi)\big|\,\mathbf P(|\xi|\le t_l) \le A \max_{l=0,\ldots,L} \delta_{K_l,M_l}.
\end{equation}
Moreover, similar arguments lead to the fact that if $4\epsilon_1+\epsilon_2 < \frac1{8}$
\begin{equation}
\sum_{l=0}^{l_0} |F(\theta_i)| \mathbf P(t_{l-1}<|\xi|\le t_l) \le \|F\|_{\infty,[-M_{l_0+1},M_{l_0+1}]} \mathbf P(|\xi|\le t_{l_0}) \le A \delta_{K_{l_0},M_{l_0}},
\end{equation}
and we conclude that
\begin{equation}\label{proof_eq5}
s^2 \max_{2 t_0<|\theta_i|\le2 t_L} B^2_i \le A s^2 \max_{l=0,\ldots,L+1} \delta_{K_l,M_l}^2.
\end{equation}
$3.3^{\circ}.$ {\it Case $2t_L < |\theta_i| \le \sqrt{2\log(d)}$. } Similar arguments as in the previous case yield that
\begin{equation}\label{proof_eq6}
s^2 \max_{2t_L < |\theta_i| \le \sqrt{2\log(d)}} B^2_i \le A s^2 \max_{l=0,\ldots,L+1} \delta_{K_l,M_l}^2.
\end{equation}
\vspace{3mm}
\bigskip
$4^{\circ}.$ {\it Variance for $i\in S$.} We consider the same cases as in item $3^{\circ}$ above. In all cases, it suffices to bound the variance by the second-order moment, which grants that, for all $i\in S$,
\begin{align} \label{rough}
V_i \le \sum_{l=0}^{L} \mathbf E \hat{P}^2_{K_l,M_l}(\xi) \,\mathbf P(t_{l-1}<|\xi|\le t_l) + \mathbf E \hat{P}^2_{K_{L+1},M_{L+1}}(\xi) \,\mathbf P(t_{L}<|\xi|), \quad \xi\sim\mathcal N(\theta_i,1).
\end{align}
\medskip
$4.1^{\circ}.$ {\it Case $0<|\theta_i|\le2 t_0$.}
In this case, we deduce from \eqref{rough} that
\begin{equation}
V_i \le \max_{l=0,\ldots,L+1} \mathbf E \hat{P}^2_{K_l,M_l}(\xi), \quad \xi\sim\mathcal N(\theta_i,1).
\end{equation}
Lemma~\ref{lemma_CaiLow2} implies
\begin{align}
V_i \le A \|F\|_{\infty,[-M_{L+1},M_{L+1}]}^2 12^{K_{L+1}} \le A d^{4\epsilon_1+c\log(12)/4},
\end{align}
which, as $\sqrt{d}\le s$, is sufficient to conclude that
\begin{equation}\label{proof_eq7}
s \max_{0<|\theta_i|\le 2 t_0} V_i \le A s^2 \max_{l=0,\ldots,L+1} \delta_{K_l,M_l}^2,
\end{equation}
for $c, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2$ small enough.
\smallskip
$4.2^{\circ}.$ {\it Case $2 t_0<|\theta_i|\le2 t_L$.}
As in item $3.2^{\circ}$ above, we denote by $l_0\in\{0,\ldots,L-1\}$ the integer such that $2t_{l_0} < |\theta_i| \le 2t_{l_0+1}$. We deduce from \eqref{rough} that
\begin{align}
V_i &\le (l_0+1)\max_{l=0,\ldots,l_0} \mathbf E \hat{P}^2_{K_l,M_l}(\xi) \, \mathbf P(|\xi|\le t_{l_0}) + \max_{l=l_0+1,\ldots,L+1} \mathbf E \hat{P}^2_{K_l,M_l}(\xi), \quad \xi\sim\mathcal N(\theta_i,1).
\end{align}
The last term on the right hand side is controlled as in item~$4.1^{\circ}$. For the first term, we find using Lemma~\ref{lemma_CaiLowamlior} that, for $\xi\sim\mathcal N(\theta_i,1)$,
\begin{align}\label{gg}
\max_{l=0,\ldots,l_0} \mathbf E \hat{P}^2_{K_l,M_l}(\xi) \, \mathbf P(|\xi|\le t_{l_0}) &\le A \|F\|_{\infty,[-M_{l_0},M_{l_0}]}^2\, 6^{K_{l_0}} e^{\frac{c\log(1+8/c)}{8}\theta_i^2}\, e^{-\theta_i^2/8} \\
&\le A e^{(8\epsilon_1+\frac{c\log 6}2+\frac{c\log(1+8/c)}2-\frac12)t^2_{l_0}}.
\end{align}
Choosing $c,\epsilon_1,\epsilon_2$ small enough allows us to obtain the desired bound
\begin{equation}\label{proof_eq8}
s \max_{2 t_0<|\theta_i|\le2 t_L} V_i \le A s^2 \max_{l=0,\ldots,L+1} \delta_{K_l,M_l}^2.
\end{equation}
$4.3^{\circ}.$ {\it Case $2t_L < |\theta_i| \le \sqrt{2\log(d)}$. } Similar arguments as in the previous case yield that
\begin{equation}\label{proof_eq8}
s \max_{2t_L < |\theta_i| \le \sqrt{2\log(d)}} V_i \le A s^2 \max_{l=0,\ldots,L+1} \delta_{K_l,M_l}^2.
\end{equation}
\medskip
The result of the theorem follows.
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{theorem_upperbound_nonsparse}}
By construction, we have
\begin{equation}
\mathbf E_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}} \big(\hat{\boldsymbol{F}}-\boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})\big)^2 \le d^2\delta_{K,M}^2 + \mathbf{Var}\big(\hat{\boldsymbol{F}}\big).
\end{equation}
To bound the variance, we write
\begin{equation}
\hat{\boldsymbol{F}} = \sum_{k=0}^K a_{k,K,M} S_k, \quad S_k = \sum_{i=1}^d H_k(y_i),
\end{equation}
so that
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{Var}(\hat{\boldsymbol{F}}) \le \Big( \sum_{k=0}^K |a_{k,K,M}| \sqrt{\mathbf{Var}(S_k)} \Big)^2,
\end{equation}
since for any random variables $X_1,\ldots, X_n$, we have
\begin{equation}
\mathbf E\Big(\sum_{i=1}^n X_i\Big)^2 \le \Big( \sum_{i=1}^n \sqrt{\mathbf E(X_i^2)} \Big)^2.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, by Lemmas~\ref{lemma_coefficients} and~\ref{lemma_hermite2},
\begin{align}
\sum_{k=0}^K |a_{k,K,M}| \sqrt{\mathbf{Var}(S_k)} &\le A \sqrt{d} \|F\|_{\infty,[-M,M]}\, K(1+\sqrt2)^K \Big(1+\frac{K}{M^2}\Big)^{K/2}.
\end{align}
Using the definition of $K$, we have
\begin{align}
K\log(1+K/M^2) \le A c\log(d),
\end{align}
hence, taking $c$ small enough implies that
\begin{align}
\mathbf{Var}(\hat{\boldsymbol{F}}) \delta^{-2}_{K,M} &\le A K^2(1+\sqrt2)^{2K} d^{2\epsilon_1+2\epsilon_2+1+Ac} \le A d^2.
\end{align}
The result follows.
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{theorem_sparse_lowerbound_2}}
\textbf{Preliminary:} By Markov's inequality, we have for every $K>0$
\begin{equation}\label{theorem_sparse_lowerbound_2:1}
\inf_{\hat{\boldsymbol{F}}} \sup_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}\in{\boldsymbol{\Theta}}} \mathbf E_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}} \big( \hat{\boldsymbol{F}}-\boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})\big)^2 \ge \frac{s^2\delta_{K,M}^2}{4} \inf_{\hat{\boldsymbol{F}}} \sup_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}\in{\boldsymbol{\Theta}}} \mathbf P_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}} \Big( |\hat{\boldsymbol{F}}-\boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})| \ge s\delta_{K,M}/2 \Big),
\end{equation}
and Theorem~2.15 in~\cite{Tsybakov2009} implies that for any prior measures $\bar{\mu}_0$ and $\bar{\mu}_1$ concentrated on~${\boldsymbol{\Theta}}$
\begin{equation}\label{theorem_sparse_lowerbound_2:2}
\inf_{\hat{\boldsymbol{F}}} \sup_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}\in{\boldsymbol{\Theta}}} \mathbf P_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}} \Big( |\hat{\boldsymbol{F}}-\boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})| \ge \frac{m_1-m_0}{4} \Big) \ge \frac{1-V}{2}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}\label{egaliteV}
V = \mathrm{TV}(\bar{\mathbf P}_0,\bar{\mathbf P}_1) + \bar{\mu}_0\big(\boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})\ge m_0+3v_0 \big) + \bar{\mu}_1\big( \boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})\le \frac{m_0+m_1}{2}+3v_0 \big),
\end{equation}
where $\mathrm{TV}$ denotes the total-variation distance, and for $i=0,1$, $\bar{\mathbf P}_i$ is defined for every measurable set by
\begin{equation}
\bar{\mathbf P}_i(A) = \int_{\mathbb R^d} \mathbf P_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}} (A)\,\bar{\mu}_i(d{\boldsymbol{\theta}})
\end{equation}
and $m_0,m_1,v_0$ are to be chosen later.
\textbf{Construction of the prior measures:} First we choose
\begin{equation}
K = \frac{e^2\log(s^2/d)}{\log(e\log(s^2/d)/M^2)},
\end{equation}
and we denote $\mu_i$ for $i\in\{0,1\}$ the distribution of the random vector ${\boldsymbol{\theta}}\in\mathbb R^d$ with independent components distributed as $\epsilon\eta_i$, where $\epsilon$ and $\eta_i$ are independent, $\epsilon\sim\mathcal{B}\big(s/(2d)\big)$ and $\eta_i$ is distributed according to $\nu_i$ defined in~Lemma~\ref{lemma_mesure}. Then, we define probabilities $\mathbf P_0$ and $\mathbf P_1$ by
\begin{equation}
\mathbf P_i(A) = \int_{\mathbb R^d} \mathbf P_{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}(A)\,\mu_i(d{\boldsymbol{\theta}}),
\end{equation}
for all measurable sets $A$. The densities of these probabilities with respect to the Lebesgue measure on $\mathbb R^d$ are given by
\begin{equation}
f_i(x) = \prod_{i=1}^d g_i(x_i),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
g_i(x) = \frac{s}{2d} \phi_i(x) + \Big(1-\frac{s}{2d}\Big) \phi(x),
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\phi_i(x) = \int_{\mathbb R} \phi(x-t)\,\nu_i(dt), \quad \phi(x) = \frac1{\sqrt{2\pi}} e^{-x^2/2}.
\end{equation}
But as the $\mu_i$'s are not supported on ${\boldsymbol{\Theta}}$, we define counterparts $\bar{\mu}_i$'s by
\begin{equation}
\bar{\mu}_i(A) = \frac{\mu_i(A\cap {\boldsymbol{\Theta}})}{\mu_i({\boldsymbol{\Theta}})}.
\end{equation}
Finally, we denote
\begin{equation}
m_i = \int_{\mathbb R^d} \boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})\,\mu_i(d{\boldsymbol{\theta}}), \quad v_i^2 = \int_{\mathbb R^d} (\boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})-m_i)^2\,\mu_i(d{\boldsymbol{\theta}}).
\end{equation}
\textbf{Bounding the probabilities in~(\ref{egaliteV}):}
According to Lemma~\ref{lemma_mesure}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{m1-m0}
m_1 - m_0 = d \times \frac{s}{2d} \times \Big( \int_{-M}^M F(t)\,\nu_1(dt) - \int_{-M}^M F(t)\,\nu_0(dt) \Big) = s\delta_{K,M}.
\end{equation}
Using Lemma~9 in~\cite{CollierCommingesTsybakov2019} and Chebyshev-Cantelli's inequality, we have for $d$ large enough
\begin{align}\label{theorem_sparse_lowerbound_2:3}
\bar{\mu}_0\big(\boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})\ge m_0+3v_0 \big) &\le \mu_0\big(\boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})\ge m_0+3v_0 \big) + e^{-s/16}\\
&\le \frac{v_0^2}{v_0^2+(3v_0)^2} + e^{-s/16} < \frac15.
\end{align}
Now, we notice that for $i\in\{0,1\}$, we have
\begin{equation}
v_i^2 \le d \|F\|_{\infty,[-M,M]}^2,
\end{equation}
so that for $C$ large enough,
\begin{align}
\frac{m_0+m_1}{2}+3v_0 - m_1 \le 3\sqrt{d}\|F\|_{\infty,[-M,M]} - \frac{s\delta_{K,M}}2 \le -\frac{s\delta_{K,M}}3,
\end{align}
since the assumptions of the theorem imply that
\begin{equation}
\frac{\sqrt{d}}{s\delta_{K,M}} \|F\|_{\infty,[-M,M]} \le A \Big(\frac{s^2}{d}\Big)^{\epsilon_1+\epsilon_2-1/2}.
\end{equation}
Consequently,
\begin{align}
\bar{\mu}_1\big( \boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})\le \frac{m_0+m_1}{2}+3v_0 \big) &\le \mu_1\big( \boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}}) - m_1 \le -\frac{s\delta_{K,M}}{3} \big) + e^{-s/16} \\
&\le \frac{9v_1^2}{9v_1^2+s^2\delta^2_{K,M}} + e^{-s/16},
\end{align}
by Chebyshev-Cantelli's inequality, and the last quantity is smaller than
\begin{equation}
\frac{9d \|F\|_{\infty,[-M,M]}^2}{9d \|F\|_{\infty,[-M,M]}^2+s^2\delta^2_{K,M}} + e^{-s/16}.
\end{equation}
Finally, we use again the fact that $d \|F\|_{\infty,[-M,M]}^2/(s^2\delta^2_{K,M}) \le A (d/s^2)^{1-2\epsilon_1-2\epsilon_2}$ with $s^2/d>C$, so that for $C$ large enough,
\begin{equation}\label{theorem_sparse_lowerbound_2:5}
\bar{\mu}_1\big( \boldsymbol{F}({\boldsymbol{\theta}})\le \frac{m_0+m_1}{2}+3v_0 \big) < \frac15.
\end{equation}
\textbf{Bounding the total-variation distance in~(\ref{egaliteV}):}
We can upper bound the total-variation distance as follows:
\begin{align}
\mathrm{TV}(\bar{\mathbf P}_0,\bar{\mathbf P}_1) &\le \mathrm{TV}(\bar{\mathbf P}_0,\mathbf P_0) + \mathrm{TV}(\mathbf P_0,\mathbf P_1) + \mathrm{TV}(\mathbf P_1,\bar{\mathbf P}_1) \\
&\le \sqrt{\chi^2(\mathbf P_0,\mathbf P_1)/2} + \mu_0({\boldsymbol{\Theta}}^\complement) + \mu_1({\boldsymbol{\Theta}}^\complement),
\end{align}
where ${\boldsymbol{\Theta}}^\complement$ denotes the complement of ${\boldsymbol{\Theta}}$.
As before,
\begin{equation}\label{theorem_sparse_lowerbound_2:6}
\mu_i({\boldsymbol{\Theta}}^\complement) \le \mathbf P\Big( \mathcal{B}\big(d,\frac{s}{2d}\big) > s \Big) \le e^{-\frac{s}{16}}.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, since the $\mathbf P_i$'s are product measures, we have
\begin{equation}
\chi^2(\mathbf P_0,\mathbf P_1) = \Big(1 + \int \frac{(g_1-g_0)^2}{g_0} \Big)^d - 1,
\end{equation}
and by the definition of $g_0,g_1$,
\begin{equation}
\int \frac{(g_1-g_0)^2}{g_0} \le \frac{1}{1-\frac{s}{2d}} \Big(\frac{s}{2d}\Big)^2 \int \frac{(\phi_1-\phi_0)^2}{\phi} \le \frac{s^2}{2d^2} \int \frac{(\phi_1-\phi_0)^2}{\phi}.
\end{equation}
Then
\begin{align}
\int \frac{(\phi_1-\phi_0)^2}{\phi} &= \int e^{\theta\t'} \nu_1(d\theta)\nu_1(d\theta') + \int e^{\theta\t'} \nu_0(d\theta)\nu_0(d\theta') - 2 \int e^{\theta\t'} \nu_0(d\theta)\nu_1(d\theta') \phantom{\sum_{k\ge K+1}}\\
&= \sum_{k\ge0} \frac1{k!} \Big( \int t^k\nu_1(dt) - \int t^k\nu_0(dt) \Big)^2 \\
&\le 4\sum_{k\ge K+1} \frac{M^{2k}}{k!},
\end{align}
and the choice of $K$ along with the condition on $M$ imply that $eM^2/K\le1/e$, so that
\begin{equation}
\int \frac{(\phi_1-\phi_0)^2}{\phi} \le 4\sum_{k\ge K+1} \Big(\frac{eM^2}{k}\Big)^k \le 4\Big(\frac{eM^2}{K}\Big)^K.
\end{equation}
Coming back to the $\chi^2$-distance and using the fact that $1+x\le e^x$ for every $x\in\mathbb R$, we get
\begin{equation}
\chi^2(\mathbf P_0,\mathbf P_1) \le \exp \Big[ \frac{2s^2}{d}\Big(\frac{eM^2}{K}\Big)^K \Big] - 1.
\end{equation}
Finally, we compute
\begin{align}
K \log\Big(\frac{eM^2}{K}\Big) = - e^2\log(s^2/d)\times g\Big(e\log(s^2/d)/M^2\Big),
\end{align}
where
\begin{equation}
g(x) = \frac{\log\Big(\frac{x}{\log(x)}\Big)}{\log(x)},
\end{equation}
and it can be shown that $g>0.5$, so that $\chi^2(\mathbf P_0,\mathbf P_1) \le e^{2(d/s^2)^{e^2/2-1}}-1$. This inequality, combined with \eqref{theorem_sparse_lowerbound_2:6}, yields
\begin{equation} \label{theorem_sparse_lowerbound_2:7} \mathrm{TV}(\bar{\mathbf P}_0,\bar{\mathbf P}_1) <3/5
\end{equation}
if $C$ and $d$ are large enough.
The proof is completed by gathering \eqref{theorem_sparse_lowerbound_2:1}, \eqref{m1-m0}, \eqref{theorem_sparse_lowerbound_2:2}, \eqref{egaliteV}, \eqref{theorem_sparse_lowerbound_2:3}, \eqref{theorem_sparse_lowerbound_2:5} and \eqref{theorem_sparse_lowerbound_2:7}.
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{theorem:minimax}}
If $l \in \{0,\ldots,L+1\}$, then by definition of $K_l$ in~\eqref{parametres}, we have\begin{equation}
K_l\le \frac{c}4 \log(d) \le \frac{c}4\log(s^2/C) \le \log(s)
\end{equation}
for $c$ small enough. Besides, if $l_0=\big\lfloor \frac{\log_2(4/c)}{2}\big\rfloor +1$, where $\lfloor \cdot \rfloor$ denotes the integer part, then
\begin{equation}
\forall l\ge l_0, \quad K_l\ge \log(s^2/d).
\end{equation}
On the other hand, when $k\in\{s,\ldots,d\}$, the quantity $\log(s^2/k)$ ranges from $\log(s^2/d)$ to $\log(s)$ and the consecutive differences satisfy
\begin{equation}
\log\big(s^2/k\big)-\log\big(s^2/(k+1)\big) = \log(1+1/k) \in [0,1],
\end{equation}
so that for every $l \in \{l_0,\ldots,L+1\}$, there exists an integer $k_l\in\{s,\ldots,d\}$ such that
\begin{equation}
|K_l-\log(s^2/k_l)|\le 1.
\end{equation}
Now note that $\log(s^2/k_l)\ge \log(C)$, which yields that, for every $l \in \{l_0,\ldots,L+1\}$,
\begin{equation}
\frac{K_l}{\log(s^2/k_l)} = 1 + \frac{K_l-\log(s^2/k_l)}{\log(s^2/k_l)} \in \Big[1-\frac1{\log(C)}, 1+\frac1{\log(C)}\Big].
\end{equation}
But for $l\in \{ 0,\ldots, l_0-1\}$, we have
\begin{equation}
1 \le \frac{K_l}{K_0} \le \frac{4}{c},
\end{equation}
so that the last two displays, combined with Assumption~(A3), entail that
\begin{equation}
\max_{l=0,\ldots,L+1} \delta^2_{K_l,M_l} \le A \max_{l=0,\ldots,L+1} \delta_{\log(s^2/k_l),\sqrt{\log(s^2/k_l)}}^2 \le A \max_{k=s,\ldots,d} \delta_{\log(s^2/k),\sqrt{\log(s^2/k)}}^2.
\end{equation}
Finally, we conclude by Assumption~(A3) again, since
\begin{equation}
\max_{k=s,\ldots,d} \delta_{\log(s^2/k),\sqrt{\log(s^2/k)}}^2 \le A \max_{k=s,\ldots,d} \delta_{e^2\log(s^2/k),\sqrt{\log(s^2/k)}}^2.
\end{equation}
\section{Lemmas}\label{section:lemma}
In the whole section, we denote by $A$ an absolute positive constant that precise value may vary from line to line.
The following lemma is a direct consequence of Proposition~2 in~\cite{CollierCommingesTsybakov2019}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma_coefficients}
Let $P_{K,M}$ be the polynomial defined in~(\ref{def:PKM}). Then the coefficients $a_{k,K,M}$ in~(\ref{def:coefficients}) satisfy
\begin{equation}
|a_{k,K,M}| \le A \|F\|_{\infty,[-M,M]} M^{-k} (1+\sqrt2)^{K}, \quad k=0,\dots,K.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
The following lemma is a slight modification of Lemma~1 in~\cite{CaiLow2011}:
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma_mesure}
Assume that $F$ is continuous on $[-M,M]$, then for every positive integer~$K$, if $\delta_{K,M}>0$, there exist measures $\nu_0, \nu_1$ on $[-M,M]$ such that
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
\ \int t^l \nu_0(dt)= \int t^l \nu_1(dt), \quad l=0,\ldots,K \\
\ \int F(t) \nu_0(dt) - \int F(t) \nu_1(dt) = 2\delta_{K,M}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Denote $\mathcal{C}$ the set of continuous functions on $[-M,M]$ equipped with the uniform norm, and $\mathcal{F}_k$ be the linear space spanned by $\mathcal{P}_K$ (the set of polynomials of degree smaller than $K$) and $F$. Note that $F$ does not belong to $\mathcal{P}_K$, since by assumption, $\delta_{K,M}>0$. Then every element $g$ of $\mathcal{F}_K$ can be represented as $g=cF+P$, where $P\in\mathcal{P}_K$ and $c\in\mathbb R$. Then we can define the linear functional $T$ on $\mathcal{F}_K$ by $T(g)=c\delta_{K,M}$. We then compute the norm of $T$ defined as
\begin{equation}
\|T\| = \sup\{ T(g) \,|\, \|g\|_\infty = 1 \}.
\end{equation}
Now, every $g\in\mathcal{F}_K$ satisfying $\|g\|_\infty=1$ can be written as
\begin{equation}
g = \frac{cF+P}{\|cF+P\|_\infty}, \quad P\in\mathcal{P}_K,
\end{equation}
so that
\begin{equation}
\|T\| = \sup_{c,P} \frac{c\delta_{K,M}}{\|cF+P\|_\infty} = \sup_P \frac{\delta_{K,M}}{\|F-P\|_\infty} = 1
\end{equation}
by definition of $\delta_{K,M}$. Then, using Hahn-Banach and Riesz representation theorems, we can extend $T$ on $\mathcal{C}$ without changing its norm, and represent this extension $\tilde{T}$ as
\begin{equation}
\tilde{T}(g) = \int_{-M}^M g(t)\,\tau(dt),
\end{equation}
where $\tau$ is a signed measure with total variation $1$. Then, using Jordan decomposition, we can write $\tau$ as a difference of two positive measures
\begin{equation}
\tau=\tau^+-\tau^-.
\end{equation}
Denoting $\nu_0=2\tau^+$ and $\nu_1=2\tau^-$, which are probability measures since $2\tau$ has total variation $2$ and $\int_{-M}^M \tau(dt)=0$, the last properties of the lemma follow from the properties of $\tau$.
\end{proof}
The proof of the next lemma can be found in~\cite{CaiLow2011}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma_hermite2}
Let $\theta\in \mathbb R$ and $X\sim \mathcal N(\theta,1)$. For any $k\in \mathbb N$, the $k$-th Hermite polynomial satisfies
\begin{align}
\mathbf E H_k(X) &= \theta^k, \\
\mathbf E H_k^2(X) &\le \big(k+\theta^2\big)^k.
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma_CaiLow1}
Let $\hat{P}_{K,M}$ be defined in~(\ref{parametres}) with $K\le M^2$. If $\xi\sim\mathcal N(0,1)$, then
\begin{equation}
\mathbf E \hat{P}_{K,M}^2(\xi) \le A \|F\|^2_{\infty,[-M,M]}\, 6^{K}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that, for the Hermite polynomials, $\mathbf E (H_k(\xi)H_j(\xi))=0$ if $k\ne j$ and $\xi \sim\mathcal N(0,1)$.
Using this fact and then Lemmas~\ref{lemma_coefficients} and~\ref{lemma_hermite2} we obtain
\begin{align}
\mathbf E \hat{P}_{K,M}^2(\xi) = \sum_{k=1}^K a^2_{k,K,M} \mathbf E H^2_{k}(\xi) \le A \|F\|^2_{\infty,[-M,M]}\, (1+\sqrt2)^{2K} \sum_{k=1}^K (k/M^2)^{k}.
\end{align}
Moreover, since $K/M^2 \le 1$, we have $\sum_{k=1}^K (k/M^2)^{k} \le K$. The result follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma_CaiLow2}
Let $\hat{P}_{K,M}$ be defined in~(\ref{parametres}) with parameters $K=cM^2/8$ and $c\le8$. If $\xi\sim\mathcal N(\theta,1)$ with $|\theta|\le M$, then
\begin{align}
\mathbf E \hat{P}^2_{K,M}(X) \le A \|F\|_{\infty,[-M,M]}^2\, 12^{K}.
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We use the bound
\begin{equation}\label{secmom}
\mathbf E \hat{P}^2_{K,M}(\xi) \le \bigg(\sum_{k=1}^K |a_{k,K,M}| \sqrt{\mathbf E H_{k}^2(\xi)} \bigg)^2.
\end{equation}
Thus Lemma~\ref{lemma_hermite2} in particular and the fact that $K\le M^2$ imply that
\begin{align}
\mathbf E \hat{P}^2_{K,M}(\xi) \le A \|F\|_{\infty,[-M,M]}^2 (1+\sqrt2)^{2K} \bigg(\sum_{k=1}^K M^{-k} 2^{k/2} M^{k} \bigg)^2 \le A \|F\|_{\infty,[-M,M]}^2\,12^{K}.
\end{align}
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma_CaiLowamlior}
Let $\hat{P}_{K,M}$ be defined in~(\ref{parametres}) with $K=cM^2/8$ and $c\le 8$. If $\xi\sim\mathcal N(\theta,1)$ with $|\theta|>M$, then
\begin{align}
\big| \mathbf E \hat{P}_{K,M}(\xi) \big| &\le A \|F\|_{\infty,[-M,M]}\, 3^{K} e^{c\theta^2/16}, \\
\mathbf E \hat{P}^2_{K,M}(\xi) &\le A \|F\|_{\infty,[-M,M]}^2\, 6^{K} e^{\frac{c\log(1+8/c)}{8}\theta^2}.
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
To prove the first inequality of the lemma, we use Lemma~\ref{lemma_coefficients} to obtain
\begin{align}
\big| \mathbf E \hat{P}_{K,M}(\xi) \big| \le A \|F\|_{\infty,[-M,M]} K (1+\sqrt2)^{K} \Big(\frac{|\theta|}{M}\Big)^K,
\end{align}
and the result follows from
\begin{equation}
K\log(|\theta|/M)= \frac{cM^2}8 \log(|\theta|/M) \le c\theta^2/16.
\end{equation}
We now prove the second inequality of the lemma. Using \eqref{secmom} and then Lemmas~\ref{lemma_coefficients} and~\ref{lemma_hermite2} we get
\begin{align}
\mathbf E \hat{P}^2_{K,M}(\xi) \le A \|F\|_{\infty,[-M,M]}^2\, (1+\sqrt2)^{2K} \Big( \sum_{k=1}^K M^{-k} (k+\theta^2)^{k/2} \Big)^2.
\end{align}
But as $\frac{\theta^2}{k} \ge \frac{M^2}{K} = \frac8{c}\ge 1$, we can use the fact that the function $x\to x^{-1}\log(1+x)$ is decreasing on $\mathbb R_+^*$ to obtain that
\begin{equation}
k \log\Big(1+\frac{\theta^2}{k}\Big)\le \frac{c\theta^2\log(1+8/c)}{8}.
\end{equation}
Therefore,
\begin{align}
\mathbf E \hat{P}^2_{K,M}(\xi) &\le A \|F\|_{\infty,[-M,M]}^2\, (1+\sqrt2)^{2K} e^{\frac{c\log(1+8/c)}{8}\theta^2} \bigg( \sum_{k=1}^K (k/M^2)^{k/2} \bigg)^2.
\end{align}
Finally, the result follows since $K\le M^2$.
\end{proof}
\acks{We thank A.B. Tsybakov for fruitful discussions during the redaction of this paper. Olivier Collier’s research has been conducted as part of the project Labex MME-DII (ANR11- LBX-0023-01). }
\vskip 0.2in
|
\section{Introduction}
AdV \cite{advVirgo,tdr} is a major upgrade of the Virgo/Virgo+ experiment, which significantly enhanced sensitivity to gravitational waves. The detector is a laser interferometer which consists of two $3\,\rm km$ long Fabry-Perot resonant cavities of a Michelson interferometer, fitted with four highly reflective 42 kg suspended mirror Test Masses (TM). The overall improvement of the detector allowed to reach a stable sensitivity of $\approx 50$ Mpc, in terms of Binary Neutron Star Inspiral Range, during the third scientific data taking.
The AdV sensitivity curve is shaped by several independent noises, which pose a challenge to the ongoing upgrading efforts. Among these disturbances, we focused on the magnetic noise (MN). In a recent paper \cite{cirone_magnetic_2018}, we aimed at finding the contribution of the MN to the entire noise budget of AdV. This was done by simulating the electromagnetic (EM) response of the payload to a slowly time-varying magnetic field with the use of Finite Element Analysis (FEA). We want to further investigate it by taking on-site surveys in order to improve our understanding of the interactions of MN with the whole AdV structure.
The main coupling channel between the outside EM environment and the AdV output data stream has been identified in the coil-magnet pairs which act on the TMs and the upper stages of the mirrors attenuation system for fine positioning. The reader can find a schematic illustration of the TM assembly and suspension system in the supplementary material (Figure S1, courtesy of \cite{cirone_magnetic_2018}).
The voice-coil actuators are very sensitive to the presence of the environmental magnetic field, whose fluctuations couple directly to the magnets and induce a mirror displacement noise. Even though the magnets are glued on the surface of the mirrors following an anti-parallel cross configuration (to compensate the effect of a uniform external magnetic field), in practice, the external field interacts with all the metallic structures surrounding the mirrors. These, in turns, cause eddy currents and warp the magnetic field with non-uniform gradients.
In this work, we did an extended magnetic field measurement campaign inside the main AdV buildings, in order to isolate the most powerful localized magnetic noise sources. This activity served as a preparation for the actual experimental measure of the transfer function between the ambient MN and the interferometer output. This measurement campaign was performed through a series of artificial noise injections. Then we compared results with two other possible ways to evaluate the relationship between the environmental noise and the gravitational wave strain signal h(t): the FE simulations done in 2016 \cite{cirone_magnetic_2018} and a long time period coherence-based approach. Finally, we will propose a feasible mitigation strategy in case we would need it for a later detector improvement.
\section{Magnetic characterization of the site}
In this first section, we discuss the extended magnetic measure campaign performed inside the three main AdV buildings: the Central Building (CEB), hosting the two input TMs, the West-End Building (WEB) and the North-End Building (NEB), hosting the two end TMs. In figure \ref{fig:nebcad}a-b we see the blueprint of NEB, where we recognize the vacuum chamber in the middle (also called North-End Tower, NET) hosting the north-end mirror and its seismic attenuation system, and all other ancillary devices. Depending on the availability of the area and the type of measure we want to perform, we choose either a terminal or the central building as a proxy for all the other AdV infrastructures, knowing that the CEB hosts far more equipment than the others.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.5in]{figure1a.eps}
\includegraphics[width=3.4in]{figure1b.eps}
\caption{a) Top-view drawing of the "North-End Building" experimental area and the main instrumentation. TCS, HVAC and NET stand respectively for "Thermal Compensation System", "Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning" and "North-End Tower". b) 3D CAD picture of the relevant infrastructure, which mainly consists of the vacuum-tight enclosure of the interferometer components.}
\label{fig:nebcad}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Typical magnetic sources}
\label{sec:mag_sources}
The sources of ambient MN are distributed throughout the experimental hall and include electronic boards, pumps, motors, lights, electrical power circuits and, in principle, any wire where current flows. Furthermore, eddy currents induced by the conductive nature of materials are not easy to measure. Because of eddy currents, external magnetic fields are spatially distorted and changed in magnitude by the presence of conductive parts.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4in]{figure2.eps}
\caption{Typical magnetic noise spectra detected at "Central Building" by the 3 permanent single-axis magnetometers used to monitor the magnetic activity in the experimental area. Periodic features and broader structures in the spectrum are easily identifiable as known sources. N, W and V stand respectively for North-South, West-East and Vertical directions.}
\label{fig:envB}
\end{figure*}
There are plenty of different coupling mechanisms between a MN source and the interferometer; examples are a direct coupling to the magnets used for the TM control, but also via cables carrying signals to the voice-coil actuators to which the magnets belong.
Several countermeasures have been put in operation to reduce this kind of coupling (e.g. anti-aligned magnets, Shielded Twisted Pair cabling). However a residual signature is unavoidable, due to the extreme sensitivity of the interferometer. This kind of noise is very difficult to deal with, since the EM field can have a strong spatial dependency and it is usually hard to find any coherence between the strain signal and magnetic probes. When a coherence is found, the best practice is to act on the noise source, which means spotting its presence and location and eventually trying to cure it.
Typical sources are mains transformers and mains cables carrying high current, motors, impulsive electronics driving heavy loads (e.g. Pulse-Width Modulation regulators). Indeed any sufficiently close low power supply module and electronic board can also trigger a detectable disturbance. Other than that, many recurrent features are present in the AdV magnetic spectra (figure \ref{fig:envB}), ranging from a series of lines in the 4-10 Hz interval caused by the air conditioning system machinery to the 50 Hz and its harmonics, associated to the frequency of the electrical system.
The principal lines due the the main power supply could be broadened by the presence of sidebands: they are barely discernible on the vertical magnetometer plot (V axis) in figure \ref{fig:envB} (e.g. around the 50Hz line, at 36 Hz and 64 Hz, and around the 100 Hz harmonic, at 86 Hz and 114 Hz). Sometimes, the sidebands are rather intense and can be visible as separate lines adjacent to the main one, causing undue coupling to the interferometer output and impairing the spectral sensitivity.
\subsection{Evaluation of the vacuum chamber shielding properties}
\label{ssec:shield}
A study we carried out inside the WEB on February 2018 was a new evaluation of the magnetic filtering effect produced by the steel tank. The tank is a grounded austenitic stainless steel 304L shell with a diameter of 2 m and a thickness of 15 mm, which isolates the vacuum-sealed environment from the outside.
During a previous measurement (2006), a transfer function with frequency slope of $f^{-1.3}-f^{-2}$ was found, but there were high uncertainties on the shape of the filter and it was not possible to determine its exact order (first or second order) nor its pole (from about 5 to 30 Hz).
The new measurement required the positioning of an injection coil, which will act as magnetic field source, and two magnetic probes, one inside the Tower and the other outside.
Figure \ref{fig:Bshield}a shows a map of the different configurations: the 3 "injection coil - external magnetic probe" position pairs are numbered consecutively.
The shielding power of the steel enclosure is quantified by the filter frequency response $H(f)=B_{mod}^{inside}/B_{mod}^{outside}=k/\sqrt{1+(f/f_{pole})^2}$, where $B_{mod}$ is the magnetic field modulus, k is a constant and $f_{pole}$ is the frequency of the filter pole or in other words the cut-off frequency.
The trend of the experimental data fits the first order lower pass filter curve of Butterworth type with pole ranging from 3.3 to 4.85 Hz, depending on the setup configuration (figure \ref{fig:Bshield}b).
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3in]{figure3a.eps}
\includegraphics[width=3in]{figure3b.eps}
\caption{Frequency evolution of the West-End Tower (WET) shielding power: a) The 3 "injection coil - external magnetic probe" configurations for their positioning inside the experimental area: coil at 7.3 m, probe near the WET (config. 1); coil at 10.3 m, probe near the WET (config. 2); coil at 6.8 m, specular probe (config. 3). b) The measurement results, along with the fits to a first order lower pass filter model of Butterworth type.}
\label{fig:Bshield}
\end{figure*}
Above 100 Hz we note an inflection and a consequent change in the slope. This would mean the presence of an unknown effect, summing to that of a pure low pass filter (whose frequency response would indefinitely continue to decreasing).
The difference between the measurements with the probe near the Tower and the measurement with the specular probe suggest that the magnetic field is more concentrated in the proximity of the Tower. Note that the frequency evolution is nearly the same for all the 3 configurations.
\subsection{Identification of point magnetic sources}
We know that ferromagnetic materials are usually magnetized during various machining phases. The causes of this residual magnetism may be different depending on the processing. Just to mention a few: forging, bending, welding, cutting, hardness checks, transport, handling and even mechanical vibrations. In our case, the main consequences we could encounter are a direct effect on the EM TM actuators and a potential disturbance on the instruments we use to probe the MN. As the NET can be mechanically excited by sound waves and seismic vibrations, magnetic patches on it could be a dangerous MN source. Hence we measured the DC magnetic field on the external walls of the NET to be sure there were no significant magnetization patches on it. We found an average field strength of about 35-50 $\mu$T in modulus on 24 locations around the tank, within a 1 m and a half height from the platform ground. These values correspond quite well to the average magnetic field measured in other internal and external building locations and to the typical magnetic field of the Earth. Therefore we don't see any evidence of alarming magnetic patches on the surface and the core of the steel tank at the height level of the TM.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4in]{figure4.eps}
\caption{Comparison between three different magnetic noise levels, found near a localized noisy source, before (orange) and after its removal (green) and in correspondence of a particularly low-noise location (blue), inside the "North-End Building".}
\label{fig:EMactivity}
\end{figure*}
Nevertheless, there may be other higher MN sources around the tank. We found a particularly high and variable (in intensity and periodicity) EM activity in the proximity of the electronic racks, which are almost two metres away from the NET. However the intensity of this disturbance drops to the standard quiet magnetic activity ($[0.01,0.1]$ nT/$\sqrt{Hz}$) before reaching the tank.
Another example of noise coming from fields irradiated by electronic devices was tracked down to power supply boxes, whose noise was nearly 3 orders of magnitude higher than the standard quiet magnetic activity. These boxes were placed close to each Tower, on the first floor platform. We performed some on-off tests and then we removed the noisy power supply.
In figure \ref{fig:EMactivity} we compare the noise level near the localized MN source, before (orange) and after its removal (green), with the environmental low-noise activity in the area (blue). This preliminary characterization and mitigation work was necessary for the evaluation of the ambient noise contribution to the AdV sensitivity.
\subsection{Far-field magnetic noise injections}
Stimulated noise injections are largely used in Virgo to assess to what extent a noise would spoil the instrument sensitivity. This approach is called ‘active’ as we stimulate the interferometer (or just small sections of it) with an active probe in order to drive a discernible signal in the instrument output.
In order to study the MN, we had to build from scratch a driving coil. The coil is composed of a 1 mm section copper wire, wrapped 50 times to form a 1 m diameter winding around a full PVC frame as a support structure.
We extract the magnitude of the environmental or injected magnetic fields with two different kind of probes. Firstly the single axis, one meter long, tube-like magnetometer MFS-06 by Metronix, with a very low intrinsic noise (better than 0.01 pT$/\sqrt{Hz}$ at 10 Hz), which makes it suited to measure the field strength variations of the Earth. Secondly a portable triaxial magnetic field sensor FL3-100 by Stefan Mayer Instruments with a measurement range of $\pm 100\ \mu$T and an intrinsic noise of few pT$/\sqrt{Hz}$ at 10 Hz.
A very crucial aspect to take care of is the positioning of the coil and the magnetic probes inside the experimental buildings. More specifically we want the interferometer and the magnetometers to sense approximately the same injected field in order to obtain a faithful projection. Moreover we want to be in the regime of the far-field injections, where the source is ideally situated at infinite distance from the detection equipment (coil dimensions << distance). If we take into account the space limitations of the area surrounding the vacuum chambers, we were left with limited choices to the positioning of the instrumentation. A quick calculation shows that, with a current of about 10 A flowing in the coil, the magnetic field strength at 20 m from the coil would be around a few tens of $\mu$T.
The first measurement campaign was performed during the second half of 2017 inside the three main AdV building: NEB, WEB and CEB. The same procedure has been replicated every time by adapting the setup to the building environment. The three actual coil-probe mutual positions are depicted in figure \ref{fig:coilprobe_pos}.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.1in]{figure5.eps}
\caption{From left to right the "West-End, North-End and Central Buildings" floor plans. The thunderbolt and the blue cylinder correspond respectively to the coil and the probe locations inside the three facilities; the red spots identifies the four TMs and the red lines follow the main laser path.}
\label{fig:coilprobe_pos}
\end{figure*}
We injected a series of monochromatic magnetic signals (magnetic lines) lasting 600 seconds each and with field intensity of few mT at the magnetometer locations for each line and for the entire explored frequency range (from 14 to 140 Hz). For comparison, this is nearly the same field strength we encountered in correspondence of the noisy source of figure \ref{fig:EMactivity} below 100 Hz.
At the same time we need some important conditions to be met during the procedure: interferometer in science mode\footnote{Fully locked interferometer in the foreseen configuration for observation, with no human or automated intervention on the machine.}; quiet environmental magnetic activity\footnote{Absence of known noisy magnetic field sources close to the TM, for instance due to accessory/monitoring electronics and/or during a thunderstorm.}; sensors readout far from saturation; the amplifier tuned so that the output measured on the spectral density had the same amplitude for all injected lines, regardless of the input frequency (from a few Hz to a few hundred Hz); good coherence between the injected lines and the strain signal h(t) for almost every investigated frequency. In figure \ref{fig:maginj} we show the injection of the 114.8 Hz line at CEB, which is visible both by the magnetic sensors (\ref{fig:maginj}a) and the detector (\ref{fig:maginj}b). The overall coherence is above 0.8 for almost all the other frequencies, except for the 14 Hz due to poorer detector sensitivity.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3in]{figure6a.eps}
\includegraphics[width=3in]{figure6b.eps}
\caption{114.8 Hz line injection at "Central Building". It is readily visible by the 3 single-axis magnetic probes (a) and the interferometer (b), where the blue peak stands out against the reference orange curve.}
\label{fig:maginj}
\end{figure*}
We repeated the injection scan several times to make sure we have always stable interferometer conditions.
After that, the responses of the sensors and the instrument are analyzed, in order to quantify the coupling between the environmental MN (m) and the strain (h). The transfer function, at the time of the injections, corresponds to:
\begin{equation}
TF_{mh}(f)=\frac{ASD_{hm}^{\ inj}(f)}{ASD_{mm}^{\ inj}(f)}
\label{eq:tf_inj}
\end{equation}
where ASD stands for Amplitude Spectral Density (cross spectral density as a numerator and power spectral density as a denominator). We computed the coupling for all measurements inside the 3 buildings and took the incoherent sum to obtain a single magnetic TF, which is displayed in figure \ref{fig:TF_fit}. We fit the coupling measurements with a power law and performed a least squares fit of the model to the data to estimate the model parameters. The results show that the points follow the model below:
\begin{equation}
TF_{mh}(f)=TF_{mh}\left(\frac{f-f_{0}}{10\ Hz}\right)^{\alpha}+\beta
\label{eq:tf_fit_model}
\end{equation}
with amplitude $TF_{mh}$ and pole $f_{0}$. Most notably, the exponent $\alpha=-3.3\pm0.4$ is consistent with the expectations regarding the decreasing trend of the coupling function. Indeed we expected a factor -1 from the tank shielding, plus a factor -2 from the TM pendulum mechanical contribution. Above 100 Hz, spurious phenomena like the electronic coupling through cabling are probably dominant and add up to the descending pattern given by the low-pass filtering of the Tower.
For what it concerns the coherence between the injected lines and h(t), we considered the frequency range $[20,140]$ Hz reliable, while at lower and higher frequencies the lines are not always perfectly visible by the interferometer and this could lead to an overestimate of the projection.
However we also investigated higher frequency coupling, whose results can be found in section \ref{sec:results}, in terms of comprehensive magnetic noise projections.
Indeed the last step involves the computation of the magnetic projection by multiplying the coupling function by the environmental magnetic spectrum (no injections):
\begin{equation}
P(f)=TF_{mh}(f)\cdot ASD_{mm}^{\ quiet}(f).
\label{eq:proj_inj}
\end{equation}
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4in]{figure7.eps}
\caption{Magnetic coupling measurement. The orange diamond means that the corresponding injected line is detected in the strain channel, while the green star is only an upper limit, due to bad coherence between the injected field and the strain output. The fit to the coupling function is also included.}
\label{fig:TF_fit}
\end{figure*}
The values from equation \ref{eq:proj_inj} work under the assumption that both sensors and the Tower experience the same field intensity, which is true in the far-field regime. However, in our case the distance between the driving coil and the Tower is hardly greater than 20 m and hence the positioning of the magnetic sensors becomes a crucial aspect. We verified that the transfer function slope is conserved even when we changed the location of the magnetic sensors. In our test, we fixed the coil location and placed three different set of magnetic sensors, including one nearer to the coil and another one farther away from the coil with respect to the Tower. While the transfer function slope is conserved, there was an amplitude shift so that we obtained the amplitude range on the projected noise (the nearest sensor underestimates the intensity, the farthest one overestimates it).
In addition, we assessed the MN effect in different buildings. It turned out that the coupling level at CEB is comparable to the one we measured at the WEB and NEB buildings. In a later measurement campaign, we were able to repeat the injections at CEB with the optimized AdV sensitivity, which we confidently take as a proxy of the other two locations (NEB and WEB).
\subsection{Magnetic noise projection with coherence}
The far-field projections and the simulation-based approach are not the only ways to estimate the noise contribution to the sensitivity: a third possibility is to use the coherence between the magnetic and the GW channels as if the background magnetic activity were the (external) injected field. The main limitation is that we need a long time interval in order to get a meaningful value of the coherence, as the MN does not contribute significantly to the GW signal. With this latter method, we should obtain an upper limit of the MN level, which we can compare with the projected noise contribution we already got from the injections.
The background coherence analysis lasted for 10 hours, as data were acquired during a stable functioning interval of the interferometer (i.e. locked). The starting time point was on Monday 08 Apr 2019, at 12:00:00 UTC, and during the data gathering period the Binary Neutron Star observing range was around 50 Mpc. These figures were sufficient to calculate the coherence under stationary conditions by averaging over 360 data chunks, each one 100 seconds long (50$\%$ overlapping).
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3in]{figure8a.eps}
\includegraphics[width=3in]{figure8b.eps}
\caption{Magnetic noise projection with coherence. a) Maximum coherence at each frequency between the strain channel and the 3 magnetic probes in the "Central Building" (blue line); the dashed red line indicates the statistical significance level of the coherence, calculated according to the 95$\%$ confidence level of the coherence distribution between randomly resampled data (orange line). b) Related magnetic noise projection (blue for statistically reliable bins, grey for coherence below significance level), compared to the most recent one obtained by the far-field injections (red diamonds) and the Advanced Virgo sensitivity (orange line).}
\label{fig:cohere}
\end{figure*}
Figure \ref{fig:cohere}a shows the max coherence value among the GW output channel h(t) and the 3 magnetometers in the CEB (blue line). The statistical significance of the computed coherence (dashed red line) is the 95$\%$ confidence level of the coherence distribution between randomly resampled data (orange line). Figure \ref{fig:cohere}b shows a noise projection calculated according to:
\begin{equation}
P_{cohe} = \sqrt{C_{mh}}\cdot ASD_{hh}
\label{eq:proj_cohe}
\end{equation}
Here the statistically reliable coherence bins are drawn in blue, while the remaining ones in grey.
Results from the background coherence analysis are in good agreement with the ones obtained by the far-field injections acquired in the CEB during the latest measurement campaign (red diamonds). Incidentally, these results come from the analysis of the same time period. The advantage of the background coherence method is that we obtain noise projection over all frequencies, as opposed to the discrete sampling of the frequency interval in the case of the artificial injections. The drawbacks are the need for long time data series in order to get an acceptable level of coherence and the influence of glitches that might occur during this particularly long time period. For this reason we vetoed data sections using a glitch monitoring channel. Indeed, it could be interesting in the future to further investigate the broadening of the coherence around 50 Hz. For now, we can only speculate on the origin of these structures: possible causes could stem from significant phase-noise fluctuations of the mains (we remind the acquisition time of 10 hours) and/or non-linear behavior of the various power supplies and electronics.
\section{Results}
\label{sec:results}
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=5.5in]{figure9.eps}
\caption{Magnetic noise budget. The relevant Advanced Virgo and Advanced Virgo+ present and future sensitivity outcomes are shown as reference. The grey band represents the "Finite Element" simulation uncertainty among all the investigated electrical configurations of the payload, which is the mechanical assembly that suspend the test masses. Diamonds represent the far-field magnetic noise injections, performed 2 years apart.}
\label{fig:allproj}
\end{figure*}
Finally, we computed the magnetic noise budget. Figure \ref{fig:allproj} shows a comprehensive view of the AdV and AdV+ observing scenarios and the MN estimates. We specifically compare two completely independent evaluations: the FE analysis done in 2016 \cite{cirone_magnetic_2018} and the experimental noise injections (both the 2017 and 2019 ones). The FE simulation study took into account a large number of possible electrical configurations of the payloads and eventually the sum of translational and rotational effects were taken. This simulation considers the impact on the 4 mirrors of the 2 Fabry-P\`{e}rot cavities. Hence the comparison with the magnetic injections was made possible as we incoherently summed in quadrature the injections performed in the three main AdV buildings. The FE analysis provides a slightly more optimistic estimate than the one obtained with the current study but, on the other hand, the slope of the strain noise spectrum (below 100 Hz) appears to be the same around $f^{-3}$. We also point out the substantial consistency of the MN level during a 2-year period, from 2017 to 2019. At frequencies higher than 100 Hz, simulation and injections don't agree anymore, with the former continuously decreasing and the latter spreadly flattening. The rationale for this behavior is currently under investigation but it seems plausible to attribute it to the magnetic coupling with nearby electrical cables, an effect not taken into account in the FE simulations.
However the influence of the MN on the instrument sensitivity is not concerning for the O3 observing run yet, but it might be for the next interferometer design phases.
A similar study of the magnetic coupling was carried out at the advanced Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (aLIGO) \cite{advLIGO}, with comparable results \cite{ligo_mag} (see the "Discussion" section for further details).
\section{Proposal for a mitigation strategy}
As a final step, we investigated a mitigation strategy to reduce the MN to avoid limitations even at the future design sensitivities. For this purpose we studied different passive shielding configurations consisting of Helmholtz coils and/or spherical metallic grids to be put around each TM vacuum chamber.
The idea is to passively reduce the field intensity in the area close to the mirrors in order to reduce gradients at the magnets position. This works for noisy sources at both the external and internal sides of the shield.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.45in]{figure10a.eps}
\includegraphics[width=3.8in]{figure10b.eps}
\includegraphics[width=3in]{figure10c.eps}
\includegraphics[width=3in]{figure10d.eps}
\caption{"Finite Element Analysis" of two possible magnetic field shielding solutions: a) the Helmholtz coils and a spherical shell (different shapes and sizes). b) Longitudinal studies (along z) of the normalized reduction of the magnetic field. c) Orthogonal studies (along y) within a height range of [-1,7] m, along the "Tower" axis. d) Frequency evolution of the normalized field at the Test Mass location.}
\label{fig:mitig}
\end{figure*}
We used the Finite Element Analysis software "Comsol Multiphysics" to simulate the coarse geometry and physics. We recreated the vacuum chamber surrounding the TMs with the exact same dimensions of the real one and tried several different shielding configurations. We report results on the best two solutions: the Helmholtz coils and a spherical shielding made of chain-link (figure \ref{fig:mitig}a). The former have an external radius of 2m/5m, an internal radius of 1.2m, a thickness of 0.1m and they are placed 2m far from the mirror. By contrast the metallic sphere is centered on the TM position, it has an external radius of 2m and a thickness of 0.1m. The FE model was consequently exposed to a spatially homogeneous and harmonic magnetic field of intensity 1T along z.
It turned out that Helmholtz coils of radius 5m are able to lower the external magnetic field up to a factor 10, with respect to the intrinsic Tower shielding, and homogenize it within 1m from the centre of the mirror both along y and z axis (figure \ref{fig:mitig}b-c). In addition, the shielding effect (evaluated at the virtual TM location) increase with the frequency (figure \ref{fig:mitig}d) and the coil turns, as expected.
On the other hand, the spherical grid configuration reached a better level of reduction up to a factor 20 but in a narrower region. This point is supported by both the longitudinal and orthogonal profiles. In this sense we feel confident to consider the integration of the Helmholtz coils configuration as the better possible future mitigation strategy, essentially in terms of improved homogenisation power, easier implementing and less overall space required. As further validation, we got a good agreement between the Tower shielding experimental measurements (with the filter pole at 4.85 Hz, see section \ref{ssec:shield}) and the Tower numerical simulations (without any further shielding, see figure \ref{fig:mitig}d).
This was an exploratory mitigation analysis that we may further pursue in order to be compliant to the sensitivity targets of the detector designs. Of course, separate strategies might be taken into account as well, like for example a new TM actuation method that do not require any parts on the TMs with magnetic susceptibility. MN mitigation is going to be important also for the upcoming realization of the Einstein Telescope, as its spectral sensitivity would be at least one order of magnitude higher than the AdV design one.
\section{Discussion}
In this paper, we have studied the MN contribution to the AdV sensitivity.
Our approach was experimental, and it was compared to simulation studies of various EM phenomena and their impact on the interferometer configuration.
For this study, we had to deepen our understanding of the various local EM sources and their effects on the measuring process.
We started with the evaluation of the EM shielding properties of the steel tanks embedding the TMs. The tank mostly behaves as a low-pass filter as expected, albeit with a mild slope inflection above 100 Hz.
Then we identified and mitigated whenever possible the most annoying EM sources nearby the TM Towers, including the verification of the presence of any residual magnetism on the metallic enclosure walls. Indeed, a MN source like that of figure \ref{fig:EMactivity} would affect the AdV sensitivity below 100 Hz, if not removed.
With this preliminary work we prepared the environment for the MN injection campaign, in order to directly assess the ambient MN effect on the AdV output. Results show that there is substantial agreement between simulations and noise injections, and that MN is currently not an issue for the AdV sensitivity.
There are, however, some discrepancies between the simulation and the noise injections at frequencies > 100 Hz, which suggest the presence of additional effects. The slope flattening in the transfer function is real (see section \ref{ssec:shield}) and it can't be ascribed to the shielding properties of the metallic vacuum chamber. A possible explanation is that the simulation is limited to the Payload structure and does not consider all the extra components, passive or active, in the area.
Interestingly aLIGO noticed a very similar behaviour, therefore we think that it can be attributed to the magnetic coupling to all the electronic cables in the proximity of the vacuum chambers.
While aLIGO uses a very different actuation scheme, with mixed electrostatic and EM actuators \cite{advLIGO}, AdV uses exclusively EM actuators for all the positioning corrections. Accordingly, AdV is expected to be more plagued by any magnetic disturbance. As a result, aLIGO is probably more dominated by coupling to cables and electronics, cable connectors and so on, which could be influenced by cabling issues and could enter the noise path through the marionette actuation stage. In this case, the magnetic noise impact should drastically change along with the general maintenance and commissioning of the interferometer on short time scales. For further reference, see the aLIGO technical note \cite{magTF_ligo}.
The small discrepancy found below 100 Hz between the payload magnetic simulations and the magnetic injections could also be explained by the updated payload design, whose details were not included in the previous study and cannot be easily accounted for due to their small details and intricacies (for instance the installation of Fiber Guards to shield fused silica fiber from high speed particles \cite{payload_FG}).
An additional issue related to magnetic coupling is the correlated MN from Schumann resonances, which is relevant to the observation of a Stochastic Gravitational-Wave Background (SGWB) in GW detectors \cite{thrane2013,schumann_mio}. Briefly, Schumann resonances are global EM signals in the cavity formed by the surface of the Earth and the ionosphere. The cavity is excited by the lightning activity around the world and eventually a magnetic field of $0.5-1.0\ pT/\sqrt{Hz}$ is produced on the Earth's surface, which is roughly one order of magnitude lower than the environmental MN at CEB (see figure \ref{fig:envB}). Correlated noise, however, cannot be reduced through integration nor can it be mitigated through instrumental (re)design and/or background subtraction. For this reason a LIGO-Virgo joint experimental evaluation of the global MN contribution may be worth investigating in the future. In anticipation of that, it has been decided to keep monitoring the global MN activity at each GW site with dedicated low-noise magnetometers \cite{schumann_mio}. Similarly it has been proposed to perform MN injections on a weekly/monthly basis, during the normal scientific run, to keep track of the magnetic transfer function. The injections would be made with a series of permanent coils at each building, lasting less than an hour per injection cycle.
In the next few months, aLIGO and AdV will complete the third observing run with increasingly large sensitivity and number of detections. The development of noise reduction techniques to improve the opportunities of detection, especially for low SNR events, is therefore a crucial effort. Our mitigation strategy, consisting in the integration of a passive Helmholtz coil system around the most sensible TM Towers, may thus prove to be a valuable one.
The present study has shown that, if the GW detectors reach their design sensitivity, some MN mitigation strategy might become relevant. That is also the case for the future third generation ground-based GW detectors as the European Einstein Telescope (ET) \cite{ET_2011}, whose low frequency spectral sensitivity would be certainly limited by the above documented MN level.
\ack
The authors gratefully acknowledge the European Gravitational Observatory (EGO) and the Virgo Collaboration for providing access to the facilities and to the environmental data. We would particularly like to thank Antonio Pasqualetti for providing the CAD drawings of the Virgo experimental areas. AC was supported by the INFN Doctoral Fellowship at the University of Genova. The member of IFAE-Barcelona group were supported by the Spanish Ministry for Science, Innovation and Universities, and the Catalan CERCA Programme.
\section*{References}
\bibliographystyle{iopart-num}
\section{Introduction}
The \texttt{iopart-num} Bib\TeX{} style is intended for use in
preparing manuscripts for Institute of Physics Publishing journals,
including Journal of Physics. It provides numeric citation with
Harvard-like formatting, based upon the specification in ``How to
prepare and submit an article for publication in an IOP journal using
\LaTeXe'' by Graham Douglas (2005).
The \texttt{iopart-num} package is available on the Comprehensive
\TeX{} Archive Network (CTAN) as \texttt{/biblio/bibtex/contrib/iopart-num}.
\section{General instructions}
To use the \texttt{iopart-num} style, include the command
\verb+\bibliographystyle{iopart-num}+ in the
document preamble. The reference section is then inserted into the
document with the command \verb+
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec-intro}
First-order logic is used widely and in many roles in philosophy, mathematics,
and artificial intelligence as well as other branches of computer science.
Many practically successful reasoning approaches can be viewed as derived from
reasoning in first-order logic, for example, SAT solving, logic programming,
database query processing and reasoning in description logics. The aim of the
\name{PIE} system is to increase practicability of actual \emph{reasoning in
first-order logic}. The system is written and embedded in \name{SWI-Prolog}
\cite{swiprolog}. Formulas are basically represented by Prolog ground terms,
where explicit quantifiers distinguish Prolog atoms as formula variables. In
addition, \textit{PIE}\xspace supports clausal formulas represented as list of lists of terms
(logic literals), with variables represented by Prolog variables. Prolog is
very well suited as basis of a formula manipulation tool, in particular since
it supports terms as readable and printable data structures that can be
immediately used to represent logic formulas, since unification and on
occasion also backtracking is quite useful to implement formula manipulating
operations and since it offers an interpreter-based environment for
development, which is also useful to develop mechanized formalizations. The
functionality of \textit{PIE}\xspace is provided essentially in form of a library of Prolog
predicates. It includes:
\begin{itemize}
\item Support for a Prolog-readable syntax of first-order logic formulas.
\item Formula pretty-printing in Prolog syntax and in \LaTeX.
\item A versatile formula macro processor.
\item Support for processing documents that intersperse formula macro
definitions, reasoner invocations and \LaTeX-formatted natural language
text.
\item Interfaces to external first-order and propositional reasoners.
\item A built-in Prolog-based first-order theorem prover.
\item Computation of first-order Craig interpolants.
\item Second-order quantifier elimination.
\item Various formula conversion operations for use in preprocessing,
inprocessing and output presentation.
\end{itemize}
One possibility to use the system is to develop or inspect formalizations in a
machine-supported way, similar to programming in AI languages like Prolog and
Lisp, by (re-)loading documents with macro definitions and specifications of
reasoner invocations as well as evaluating expressions interactively in the
Prolog interpreter, where output formulas might be pretty-printed. Optionally
documents can be also rendered in \LaTeX, where macro definitions as well as
output formulas are also pretty-printed, interspersed with natural language
text in the fashion of literate programming \cite{knuth:literate}. Craig
interpolation and second-order quantifier elimination are reasoning techniques
that compute formulas. Both are supported by \textit{PIE}\xspace on the basis of first-order
logic. For interpolation it seems that most other implementations are on the
basis of propositional logics with theory extensions and specialized for
applications in verification
\cite{benedikt:2017}.\footnote{\label{foot:implem:ipol}Craig interpolation for
first-order logic is supported by \name{Princess}
\cite{ruemmer:ipol:jar:2011,ruemmer:ipol:beyond:2011} and by extensions of
\name{Vampire} \cite{vampire:interpol:2010,vampire:interpol:2012}.} For
second-order quantifier elimination and similar operations there are several
implementations based on modal and description logics, but very few on
first-order logic.\footnote{\label{foot:implem:soqe}A Web service
\url{http://www.mettel-prover.org/scan/} invokes an implementation of the
SCAN algorithm \cite{scan,scan:engel}. Another system is \name{DLSForgetter}
\url{https://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/ruba.alassaf/software.html},
which implements the \name{DLS} algorithm \cite{dls}. An earlier
implementation of \name{DLS} \cite{dls:gustafsson} seems to be no longer
available.}
The system is available as free software from its homepage
\begin{center}
\url{http://cs.christophwernhard.com/pie}.
\end{center}
It comes with several examples whose source files as well as rendered
\LaTeX\ presentations can also be accessed directly from the system page.
\name{Inspecting Gödel's Ontological Proof} is there an advanced application
demo that utilizes some of the recently introduced system features.
An earlier version of the system was presented at the 2016 workshop
\name{Practical Aspects of Automated Reasoning} \cite{cw-paar}. Many small
improvements make it now more workable.
The rest of this system description is structured as follows: Features and
uses of the formula macro system are presented in Sect.~\ref{sec-macros}. In
Sect.~\ref{sec-documents} the support for documents that integrate macro
definitions, reasoner invocations and natural language text is shown.
Interfaces to external provers and the prover included with \textit{PIE}\xspace are described
in Sect.~\ref{sec-provers}, followed by the discussion of included reasoners
that compute formulas by preprocessing conversions, Craig interpolation and
second-order quantifier elimination in Sect.~\ref{sec-formops}.
Section~\ref{sec-conclusion} concludes the paper. The bibliography reflects
that the system relates to methods as well as implementation and application
aspects in a number of areas, including first-order theorem proving, Craig
interpolation, second-order quantifier elimination and knowledge
representation.
\section{Formula Macros}
\label{sec-macros}
\textit{PIE}\xspace includes a formula macro system, where macros can have parameters and
expand into first- or second-order formulas. In the simplest case, a macro
without parameters serves as a formula label that may be used in subformula
position in other formulas and is expanded into its definiens. The following
example of such a macro definition effects that \code{kb1} is declared as
label of a formula. In the formula syntax, the comma and \code{->} represent
conjunction and implication, respectively:
\begin{center}
\begin{BVerbatim}[fontsize=\small]
def(kb1) ::
(sprinkler_was_on -> wet(grass)),
(rained_last_night -> wet(grass)),
(wet(grass) -> wet(shoes)).
\end{BVerbatim}
\end{center}
Prolog variables in macro specifications express macro parameters. The
following example illustrates this with the schematic definition of a certain
form of abductive explanation, the \name{weakest sufficient condition}
\cite{lin:01:snc,dls-snc,cw-projcirc}, as a second-order formula, where the
parameters are the background knowledge base $\code{Kb}$, the set $\code{Na}$
(\name{non-assumables}) of predicates that are not allowed to occur free in
explanations, and the observation $\code{Ob}$. Universal second-order
quantification is represented in the formula syntax by \code{all2}.
\begin{center}
\begin{BVerbatim}[fontsize=\small]
def(explanation(Kb, Na, Ob)) ::
all2(Na, (Kb -> Ob)).
\end{BVerbatim}
\end{center}
Pattern matching is applied to choose the effective declaration for expansion,
allowing structural recursion in macro declarations. An optional Prolog body
in a macro declaration permits expansions involving arbitrary
computations. Utility predicates for use in these bodies are provided for
common tasks. The second-order circumscription of predicate \code{P} in
formula \code{F} can thus be defined as shown in the following example, where
\code{\~} represents negation and \code{ex2} existential second-order
quantification. The suffix \code{\_p} is used for some variable names because
it is translated to the prime superscript in the \LaTeX\, rendering, as shown
below in Sect.~\ref{sec-documents}.
\begin{center}
\begin{BVerbatim}[fontsize=\small]
def(circ(P, F)) ::
F, ~ex2(P_p, (F_p, T1, ~T2)) ::-
mac_rename_free_predicate(F, P, pn, F_p, P_p),
mac_get_arity(P, F, A),
mac_transfer_clauses([P/A-n], p, [P_p], T1),
mac_transfer_clauses([P/A-n], n, [P_p], T2).
\end{BVerbatim}
\end{center}
With a macro declaration, properties of its lexical environment, in particular
configuration settings that affect the expansion, are recorded. The macro
system utilizes further features of Prolog variables to mimic some features of
the processing of lambda expressions: A Prolog variable that is free after
computing the user-specified part of the expansion is bound automatically to a
freshly generated symbol. A Prolog variable used as macro parameter may occur
in the definiens in predicate position (\name{SWI-Prolog} has an option that
allows variables in predicate position). The parameter then can be
instantiated with a predicate symbol (Prolog atom) or a lambda term. The
following macro definition gives an example. It specifies 2-colorability by an
existential second-order sentence and has the \name{edge} relationship as
parameter~\code{E}. The semicolon in the formula represents disjunction and
\code{all} universal first-order quantification.
\begin{center}
\begin{BVerbatim}[fontsize=\small]
def(col2(E)) ::
ex2([r,g], (all(x, (r(x) ; g(x))),
all([x,y], (E(x,y) -> (~((r(x), r(y))),
~((g(x), g(y)))))))).
\end{BVerbatim}
\end{center}
The macro can then be used with instantiating \code{E} to a predicate symbol,
as in \code{col2(e)}, or to lambda expression that might describe a particular
graph, as in \code{col2(lambda([u,v],((u=1,v=2);(u=2,v=3))))}. At macro
expansion, \code{E(x,y)} in the definiens of \code{col2(E)} is then replaced
by \code{e(x,y)} or \code{((x=1,y=2);(x=2,y=3))}, respectively.
Macros provide a convenient way to express abstractly properties of predicates
such as transitivity and application patterns of second-order quantification
such as circumscription. As parameterized formula labels they are helpful to
structure formalizations.
Working practically with first-order provers typically involves experimenting
with a large and developing set of related proving problems, for example with
alternate axiomatizations or different candidate theorems, and is thus often
accompanied with some meta-level technique to compose and relate the actual
proof tasks submitted to first-order reasoners. The \textit{PIE}\xspace macro system tries to
provide such a technique in a non ad-hoc, systematic way with a uniform
mechanism that remains in spirit of first-order logic, which in mathematics is
actually often used with schemas.
\section{\textit{PIE}\xspace Documents}
\label{sec-documents}
\textit{PIE}\xspace supports the handling of documents that intersperse macro definitions,
specifications of reasoning tasks and \LaTeX-formatted natural language text.
Such a \name{\textit{PIE}\xspace document} can be \emph{loaded} into the Prolog environment
like a source code file and, in addition, be \emph{processed}, which means to
invoke the specified reasoning tasks and print the \LaTeX\ fragments in the
document interspersed with \LaTeX\ presentations of the reasoning task
outputs. The resulting output \LaTeX\ document can then be displayed in PDF
format. In such a document, the first definitions from
Sect.~\ref{sec-macros}, for example, would be rendered as follows:
\begin{outbox}
\pplkbBefore
\index{kb1@$\ppldefmacro{kb_{1}}$}$\begin{array}{lllll}
\ppldefmacro{kb_{1}}
\end{array}
$\pplkbBetween
$\begin{array}{lllll}
(\mathsf{sprinkler\_was\_on} \imp \mathsf{wet}(\mathsf{grass})) &&&&\; \land \\
(\mathsf{rained\_last\_night} \imp \mathsf{wet}(\mathsf{grass})) &&&&\; \land \\
(\mathsf{wet}(\mathsf{grass}) \imp \mathsf{wet}(\mathsf{shoes})).
\end{array}
$\end{center}\noindent
\end{outbox}
\begin{outbox}
\pplkbBefore
\index{explanation(Kb,Na,Ob)@$\ppldefmacro{explanation}(\pplparam{Kb},\pplparam{Na},\pplparam{Ob})$}$\begin{array}{lllll}
\ppldefmacro{explanation}(\pplparam{Kb},\pplparam{Na},\pplparam{Ob})
\end{array}
$\pplkbBetween
$\begin{array}{lllll}
\forall \pplparam{Na} \, (\pplparam{Kb} \imp \pplparam{Ob}).
\end{array}
$\end{center}\noindent
\end{outbox}
\begin{outbox}
\pplkbBefore
\index{circ(P,F)@$\ppldefmacro{circ}(\pplparamplain{P},\pplparamplain{F})$}$\begin{array}{lllll}
\ppldefmacro{circ}(\pplparamplain{P},\pplparamplain{F})
\end{array}
$\pplkbBetween
$\begin{array}{lllll}
\pplparamplain{F} \land \lnot \exists \pplparamplainsup{P}{\prime} \, (\pplparamplainsup{F}{\prime} \land \pplparamplainidx{T}{1} \land \lnot \pplparamplainidx{T}{2}),
\end{array}
$\end{center}\noindent
\par\noindent where\begin{center}
$
\begin{array}{l}\pplparamplainsup{F}{\prime} \mathrel{\mathop:}= \pplparamplain{F}[\pplparamplain{P} \mapsto \pplparamplainsup{P}{\prime}],\\
\pplparamplain{A} \mathrel{\mathop:}= \mathrm{arity\ of }\; \pplparamplain{P}\; \mathrm{ in }\; \pplparamplain{F},\\
\pplparamplainidx{T}{1} \mathrel{\mathop:}= \mathrm{transfer\ clauses}\; {[}\pplparamplain{P}/\pplparamplain{A}\textrm{-}\mathsf{n}{]} \rightarrow {[}\pplparamplainsup{P}{\prime}{]},\\
\pplparamplainidx{T}{2} \mathrel{\mathop:}= \mathrm{transfer\ clauses}\; {[}\pplparamplainsup{P}{\prime}{]} \rightarrow {[}\pplparamplain{P}/\pplparamplain{A}\textrm{-}\mathsf{n}{]}.
\end{array}$\end{center}
\end{outbox}
\noindent
First- and second-order quantifiers are not distinguished in the default
\LaTeX\ presentation. An intuitive idea of the effect of the Prolog code in
the definition of the \code{circ} macro (presented as \name{where} clause in
\LaTeX) can be obtained by considering the expansion of an example instance:
$\pplmacro{circ}(\mathsf{p},\mathsf{p}(\mathsf{a}))$ expands into
\begin{outbox}
\[\begin{array}{lllll}
\mathsf{p}(\mathsf{a}) \land
\lnot \exists \mathit{q} \, (\mathit{q}(\mathsf{a}) \land \forall \mathit{x} \, (\mathit{q}(\mathit{x}) \imp \mathsf{p}(\mathit{x})) \land \lnot \forall \mathit{x} \, (\mathsf{p}(\mathit{x}) \imp \mathit{q}(\mathit{x}))).
\end{array}
\]
\end{outbox}
\noindent
\name{\textit{PIE}\xspace
documents} serve various purposes:
\begin{itemize}
\item They are useful in the workflow of developing a formalization, in
particular as they can be re-loaded into the Prolog environment, which
effects appropriate updates of the specified items.
\item First-order reasoners are often heavily dependent on configuration
settings. A \name{\textit{PIE}\xspace document} specifies all information needed to
reproduce the results of reasoner invocations. Effective configuration
parameters are combined by system defaults, defaults declared in the
document and options supplied with particular specifications of reasoner
invocations.
\item Formulas are presented nicely formatted in \LaTeX. Aside of
indentation, the \LaTeX\ pretty-printer by default applies some symbol
conversions to subscripted or primed symbols. Also a compact syntax where
parentheses to separate arguments from functors and commas between arguments
are omitted is available as an option for both Prolog and \LaTeX\ forms.
\item The interspersing of formal specifications with \LaTeX-formatted text
allows to develop formalizations in analogy to \name{literate programming}
\cite{knuth:literate}, that is, embedded into explanation and discussions
formulated in natural language.
\end{itemize}
\label{sec-output-shape}
\noindent
Finding good presentations of formulas, in particular in presence of
operations that yield formulas, seems a challenging topic. In practice often
simply conjunctive normal form is used, possibly with representing clauses as
implications. The \textit{PIE}\xspace system supports the option to present output formulas
in a shape that is similar and is obtained by computing conjunctive or
disjunctive normal form followed by un-Skolemization.
\section{Interfaced and Included Provers}
\label{sec-provers}
\textit{PIE}\xspace allows to invoke a variety of external reasoning systems: Most
first-order provers via the \name{TPTP} formats, \name{Otter}, \name{Prover9}
and \name{Mace4} via their own input format, as well as SAT and QBF solvers
via \name{DIMACS} and \name{QDIMACS}. Large propositional formulas are
supported with an internal representation based on destructive term
operations. Most features for handling propositional formulas are inherited
from the precursor system \name{ToyElim} \cite{cw-toyelim}.
A user-level predicate to test a first-order formula for validity invokes by
default first the model searcher \name{Mace4} with a short timeout, and, if it
could not find a ``counter''-model of the negated formula, the prover
\name{Prover9}, again with a short timeout. Correspondingly, the predicate
then prints one of three result values: \name{valid}, \name{not valid} or
\name{failed to validate}. For example, the top-level goal
\begin{center}
\begin{BVerbatim}[fontsize=\small]
:- ppl_printtime(ppl_valid((kb1, rained_last_night -> wet(shoes)))).
\end{BVerbatim}
\end{center}
in a \textit{PIE}\xspace document effects that during document processing (at ``printtime'')
\name{Prover9} is invoked and, given the above definition of \code{kb1}, the
following is inserted into the \LaTeX\ output:
\begin{outbox}
\pplIsValid{\pplmacro{kb_{1}} \land \mathsf{rained\_last\_night} \imp \mathsf{wet}(\mathsf{shoes}).}
\end{outbox}
\noindent
Alternatively, the \code{ppl\_valid} statement can also be directly input as
query to the Prolog interpreter, effecting then that \code{*Valid*} is printed
to the console. Optionally Prolog term representations of Prover9's
resolution proof or Mace4's model, respectively, can be obtained.
The \textit{PIE}\xspace system also includes the first-order Prover \textit{CM}\xspace, whose calculus can
be understood as model elimination, clausal tableau construction
\cite{handbook:tableaux:letz}, or the connection method, similar to provers of
the \name{leanCoP} family \cite{leancop,kaliszyk15:tableaux,femalecop}. The
implementation of \textit{CM}\xspace follows the compilation-based \name{Prolog Technology
Theorem Prover (PTTP)} paradigm \cite{pttp}. It can return clausal tableau
proofs as Prolog terms, which allow the extraction of Craig interpolants (see
Sect.~\ref{sec-craig} below). More details and evaluation results available
at \url{http://cs.christophwernhard.com/pie/cmprover}.
\section{Beyond Proving: Operations that Output Formulas}
\label{sec-formops}
Beyond theorem proving in the strict sense and model construction, first-order
logic is related to further mechanizable operations whose results are
\emph{formulas} with certain semantic and syntactic properties and which are
supported by \textit{PIE}\xspace.
\subsection{Preprocessing Operations}
\label{sec-preprocess}
Practically successful reasoners usually apply in some way conversions of low
complexity as far as possible: as preprocessing on inputs, potentially during
reasoning, which has been termed \name{inprocessing}, and to improve the
syntactic shape of output formulas as discussed in
Sect.~\ref{sec-output-shape}. Abstracting from these situations, we subsume
these conversions under \name{preprocessing operations}. Also the low
complexity might be taken more or less literally and, for example, be achieved
simply by trying an operation within a threshold limit of resources. The \textit{PIE}\xspace
system includes a number of preprocessing operations including normal form
conversions, also in variants that produce structure preserving
normalizations, various simplifications of clausal formulas, and an
implementation of McCune's un-Skolemization algorithm
\cite{mccune:unskolemizing}. While some of these preserve equivalence, others
preserve equivalence just with respect to a set of predicates, for example,
purity simplification with respect to predicates that are not deleted or
structure preserving clausification with respect to predicates that are not
added. This can be understood as preserving the second-order equivalence
$\exists q_1 \ldots \exists q_n\, F \equiv \exists q_1 \ldots \exists q_n\,
G$, where $F$ and $G$ are in- and outputs of the conversion and $q_1, \ldots,
q_n$ are those predicates permitted to occur in $F$ or $G$ whose semantics
needs \emph{not} to be preserved. If $q_1,\ldots, q_n$ includes all permitted
predicates, the above equivalence expresses equi-satisfiability. Some of the
simplifications implemented in \textit{PIE}\xspace allow to specify explicitly a set of
predicates whose semantics is to be preserved, which makes them applicable for
Craig interpolation and second-order quantifier elimination discussed below.
\subsection{Craig Interpolation}
\label{sec-craig}
By Craig's interpolation theorem \cite{craig:linear}, for given first-order
formulas $F$ and $G$ such that $F$ entails $G$ a first-order formula $H$ can
be constructed such that $F$ entails $H$, $H$ entails $G$ and $H$ contains
only symbols (predicates, functions, constants, free variables) that occur in
both $F$ and $G$. Craig interpolation has many applications in logics and
philosophy. Main applications in computer science are in verification
\cite{mcmillan:handbook} and query reformulation, based on its relationship to
definability and construction of definientia in terms of a given vocabulary
\cite{toman:wedell:book,benedikt:book,benedikt:2017}. The \textit{PIE}\xspace system
supports the computation of Craig interpolants~$H$ from a closed clausal
tableau that represents a proof that~$F$ entails~$G$ with a novel adaption of
Smullyan's interpolation method \cite{smullyan:book,fitting:book} for clausal
tableaux \cite{cw-ipol}. Suitable clausal tableaux can be constructed by the
\textit{CM}\xspace prover. \textit{PIE}\xspace also supports the conversion of proof terms returned by the
hypertableau prover \name{Hyper} \cite{cw-ekrhyper} to such tableaux and thus
to interpolants, but this is currently at an experimental
stage.\footnote{Hypertableaux, either obtained from a hypertableau prover or
obtained from a clausal tableau prover like \textit{CM}\xspace by restructuring the tableau
seem interesting as basis for interpolant extraction in query reformulation,
as they allow to ensure that the interpolants are range restricted. Some
related preliminary results are in \cite{cw-ipol}.} As an example, consider
a \textit{PIE}\xspace document with the top-level goal
\begin{center}
\begin{BVerbatim}[fontsize=\small]
:- ppl_printtime(ppl_ipol((all(x, p(a,x)), q) -> (ex(x, p(x,b)) ; r))).
\end{BVerbatim}
\end{center}
At document processing the interpolation procedure is invoked. The argument
of $\code{ppl\_ipol}$ must be an implication, whose left and right side are
taken as~$F$ and~$G$, respectively. The example leads to the following
\LaTeX\, output:
\begin{outbox}
\noindent Input: $\forall \mathit{x} \, \mathsf{p}(\mathsf{a},\mathit{x}) \land \mathsf{q} \imp \exists \mathit{x} \, \mathsf{p}(\mathit{x},\mathsf{b}) \lor \mathsf{r}.$\\
\noindent Result of interpolation:
\[\begin{array}{lllll}
\exists \mathit{x} \, \forall \mathit{y} \, \mathsf{p}(\mathit{x},\mathit{y}).
\end{array}
\]
\end{outbox}
\noindent
The interpolants~$H$ constructed by \textit{PIE}\xspace strengthen the requirements for Craig
interpolants in that they are actually Lyndon interpolants, that is,
predicates occur in~$H$ only in polarities in which they occur in both~$F$
and~$G$.
Symmetric interpolation
\cite[Lemma~2]{craig:uses}\cite[Sect.~5]{mcmillan:symmetric} is supported in
\textit{PIE}\xspace, implemented by computing a conventional interpolant for each of the
input formulas, corresponding to the induction suggested in \cite{craig:uses}.
In some contexts, for example the application of interpolation to compute
definientia, it is natural to use second-order formulas, although the
underlying reasoning is in fact just first-order: If $F$ and $G$ are
second-order formulas of the form of a second-order quantifier prefix that is
for $F$ just existential and for $G$ just universal, followed by a first-order
formula, then $F$ entails $G$ if and only if a first-order formula~$F'$
entails the first-order formula~$G'$, where $F'$ and $G'$ are obtained from
$F$ and $G$, respectively, by renaming quantified predicates with fresh
symbols and dropping the second-order prefixes. An interpolant of~$F'$
and~$G'$ is then also an interpolant of $F$ and $G$. \textit{PIE}\xspace quietly translates
such second-order entailments to first-order form when submitting them to
provers.
\subsection{Second-Order Quantifier Elimination}
Second-order quantifier elimination is the task of computing for a given
formula with second-order quantifiers, that is, quantifiers upon predicate or
function symbols, an equivalent first-order formula. Of course, on the basis
of first-order logic this does not succeed in general. Along with variants
termed \name{forgetting}, \name{uniform interpolation} or \name{projection}
its applications include deciding fragments of first-order logic, computation
of frame correspondence properties from modal axioms, computation of
circumscription, embedding nonmonotonic semantics in a classical setting,
abduction with respect to classical and to nonmonotonic semantics, forgetting
in knowledge bases, and approaches to modularization of knowledge bases
derived from the notion of conservative extension
\cite{loewenheim:15,beh:22,scan,lin-forget,dls,cw-skp,dl-conservative,soqe,grau:modular:2008,lutz:ijcai11,schmidt:2012:ackermann,cw-projcirc,cw-abduction,ks:2013:frocos,ludwig:dl14,delgrande:17}.
As already noted in the introduction, implementations of second-order
quantifier elimination on the basis of first-order logic are rare.
\textit{PIE}\xspace includes an implementation of the \name{DLS} algorithm \cite{dls} for
second-order quantifier elimination, a method based on formula rewriting until
second-order subformulas have a certain shape that allows elimination in one
step by rewriting with Ackermann's lemma, an equivalence due to
\cite{ackermann:35}. Implementing \name{DLS} brings about many subtle issues
\cite{dls:gustafsson,dls:conradie,cw-relmon}, for example, dealing with
un-Skolemization, simplification of formulas in non-clausal form, and ensuring
success of the method for certain input classes. The current implementation
in \textit{PIE}\xspace is far from optimum solutions of these issues, but can nevertheless be
used in nontrivial applications and might contribute to improvements by making
experiments possible.
Given the macro definitions shown in Sect.~\ref{sec-macros}
and~\ref{sec-documents}, \textit{PIE}\xspace can, for example, be used to compute abductive
explanations or circumscriptions: The top-level goal
\begin{center}
\begin{BVerbatim}[fontsize=\small]
:- ppl_printtime(ppl_elim(explanation(kb1,[wet],wet(shoes)))).
\end{BVerbatim}
\end{center}
in the document effects invocation of the elimination procedure
at document processing and printing the following phrases
in the \LaTeX\, rendering:
\begin{outbox}
\noindent Input: $\pplmacro{explanation}(\pplmacro{kb_{1}},{[}\mathsf{wet}{]},\mathsf{wet}(\mathsf{shoes})).$\\
\noindent Result of elimination:
\[\begin{array}{lllll}
\mathsf{rained\_last\_night} \lor \mathsf{sprinkler\_was\_on}.
\end{array}
\]
\end{outbox}
\noindent
Analogously, the circumscription of $\mathsf{wet}$ in $\pplmacro{kb_{1}}$ can
be computed with the top-level goal:
\begin{center}
\begin{BVerbatim}[fontsize=\small]
:- ppl_printtime(ppl_elim(circ(wet,kb1), [simp_result=[c6]])).
\end{BVerbatim}
\end{center}
This leads to the following \LaTeX\ output:
\begin{outbox}
\noindent Input: $\pplmacro{circ}(\mathsf{wet},\pplmacro{kb_{1}}).$\\
\noindent Result of elimination:
\[\begin{array}{lllll}
(\mathsf{rained\_last\_night} \imp \mathsf{wet}(\mathsf{grass})) &&&&\; \land \\
(\mathsf{sprinkler\_was\_on} \imp \mathsf{wet}(\mathsf{grass})) &&&&\; \land \\
(\mathsf{wet}(\mathsf{grass}) \imp \mathsf{wet}(\mathsf{shoes})) &&&&\; \land \\
\forall \mathit{x} \, (\mathsf{wet}(\mathit{x}) \imp \mathsf{rained\_last\_night} \lor \mathsf{sprinkler\_was\_on}) &&&&\; \land \\
\forall \mathit{x} \, (\mathsf{wet}(\mathit{x}) \land \mathsf{wet}(\mathsf{grass}) \imp \mathit{x}=\mathsf{grass} \lor \mathit{x}=\mathsf{shoes}).
\end{array}
\]
\end{outbox}
\noindent
The option \code{[simp\_result=[c6]]} supplied here to \code{ppl\_elim}
effects that the elimination result is postprocessed by equivalence preserving
conversions with the aim to make it more readable, as discussed above in
Sect.~\ref{sec-preprocess}. The conversion named \code{c6} chosen for this
example converts to conjunctive normal form, applies various clausal
simplifications and then converts back to a quantified first-order formula,
involving un-Skolemization if required. That the last conjunct of the result
can be replaced by the more succinct $\forall \mathit{x} \,
(\mathsf{wet}(\mathit{x}) \imp \mathit{x}=\mathsf{grass} \lor
\mathit{x}=\mathsf{shoes})$ is, however, not detected by the current
implementation.
With options \code{[printing=false, r=\textit{Result}]} the elimination result
is not print\-ed, but bound to \textit{Result} for further processing by
Prolog. Another way to access the result is with the supplied predicate
\code{last\_ppl\_result(\textit{Result})}, which may be used to define a macro
\code{def(last\_result) :: X ::- last\_ppl\_result(X).}
\textit{PIE}\xspace also includes an implementation of second-order quantifier elimination
with respect to ground atoms by an expansion method shown in
\cite{lin-forget}, which always succeeds on the basis of first-order logic. A
second-order quantifier is there, so-to-speak, just upon a particular instance
of a predicate.
The \name{Boolean solution problem} or \name{Boolean unification with
predicates} is a computational task related to second-order quantifier
elimination \cite{schroeder:all,rudeanu:74,cw-boolean}. So far, \textit{PIE}\xspace includes
experimental implementations for simple cases: Quantifier-free formulas with a
technique from \cite{eberhard} and a version for finding solutions with
respect to ground atoms, in analogy to the elimination of ground atoms.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec-conclusion}
The \textit{PIE}\xspace system tries to supplement what is needed to use automated
first-order proving techniques for developing and analyzing formalizations.
Its main focus is on formulas, as constituents of complex formalizations and
as results of interpolation and elimination. Special emphasis is made on
utilizing some natural relationships between first- and second-order logics.
Key features of the system are macros, \LaTeX\ pretty-printing and integration
into the Prolog programming environment. The system mediates between
high-level logical presentation and detailed configuration of reasoning
systems. It shows up a number of challenging and interesting open issues for
research, for example improving practical realizations of rewriting-based
second-order quantifier elimination, strengthenings of Craig interpolation
that ensure application-relevant properties such as range restriction, and
conversion of computed formulas that are basically just semantically
characterized to comprehensible presentations. Progress in these issues can
be directly experienced and verified with the system.
\bibliographystyle{splncs04}
|
\section*{Introduction}
Rare events are an important and exciting theoretical research field in mathematics and in natural sciences, with
a long history in topics ranging from physics, geophysics and biology, to ecology and social systems \cite{Gumbel,Hollander,Holger,Vulp}. A deeper understanding
of the mechanism that leads to rare events is a major problem in risk predictions and management, across different disciplines \cite{Embrechts,Lucilla1}.
In this field, an interesting role is played by the so called {\it Big Jump principle}. The principle explains extreme events in a wide class of natural and man-made systems
with heavy tailed distributions, not in terms of an accumulation of many small subevents but solely as an effect of the biggest event, the big jump. The
accumulated rain fall in one month in a region \cite{rain}, the energy released in an earthquake, and also the position of particles whose motion is determined by a sum of
very heterogeneous steps are examples of processes where the principle is very likely to be valid. If only one event is controlling the statistics of extremes, we can understand the inherent difficulties
in the prediction. At the same time, if we know that the process we are studying follows the principle, we can learn how to better quantify the extremes.
The big jump principle has originally been shown to hold for sums of independent random variables following a heavy-tailed (i.e. subexponential) distribution \cite{Chistyakov,Foss,Denisov,Geluk,Clusel1}. Recently it has been applied to models of anomalous transport in quenched disorder \cite{levyrand,Ub,VBB19}, where it has been used to predict with a surprising accuracy large fluctuations driven by a single rare event. Interestingly, a key feature of the big jump approach is that it is able to reproduce the whole general shape of the probability density for rare events, and in particular its non-analytical behaviors \cite{VBB19}, i.e. cusps and fine structures related to the specific form of the single process that contributes to the tail. Indeed, while the central part of the probability distribution typically features universal and smooth shapes driven by central limit theorems arguments \cite{Gardiner}, the big jump can give rise to non universal effects
since it involves a single process. The non universal effects can be used in one direction, from the microscopic modelling towards an accurate prediction of the risk for rare events, but also in reverse order, that is to argue details of the microscopic underlying processes from the structure of the far tail.
In particular, the big jump principle was recently extended \cite{VBB19,WVBB19,Gradenigo} to case studies which involve L\'evy walks. These are introduced as continuous time stochastic process for particles performing steps with duration drawn from a power law, hence heavy-tailed, distribution \cite{Klafter1,zumofen,zaburdaev}. Because of their generality, L\'evy walks are applied to describe motion of cold atoms in laser cooling \cite{Davidson}, transport in turbulent flow \cite{boffetta} and in neural transmission \cite{Neur-levy}, animal motion \cite{Ariel,future-levy}, and natural and optimized search processes \cite{Benichou}. These systems all have in common a power law distribution for step durations and they can differ in how the walker moves along the steps, i.e. at constant velocity or with a more complex type of motion. In this framework, the typical quantity of interest is the particle position at fixed time, independently of the number of steps (draws). This introduces a non trivial coupling mechanism between position and observation time, as the far tails of the position distribution are naturally cutoff by the finite speed of propagation. Therefore L\'evy walks depart from the simple case of summation of random variables and in particular the distribution of rare events presents cutoffs and other non analytic features.
A generalized L\'evy walks \cite{Albers,Sokolov}, originally introduced for motion in turbulent fluids,
has recently been considered to model complex motion in each single stretch. More precisely, the duration of a step $t$ is drawn from a power law distribution $\lambda(t)\sim t^{-1-\alpha}$, while the motion within a step is described by two further exponents: $\nu$, relating the step length with the duration time $t$, and $\eta$, which provides the temporal dynamics within a step, modelling acceleration and deceleration effects. Such a general description of the microscopic motion is suitable to deal with a wide class of L\'evy walks and hence it can be applied to many model systems in the presence of complex trajectories \cite{Ariel,future-levy}. Previous results \cite{Albers,Sokolov} focus on the calculation of the mean square displacement of the generalized L\'evy walk as a function of time. Here, we describe the asymptotic time evolution of the entire walker probability distribution, which allows us to extract the behavior of correlations and higher moments.
First, we apply standard techniques in random walk theory to obtain the central part of the distribution and its scaling length.
We show that the bulk of the distribution displays standard universal behaviors, i.e. a Gaussian distribution, a L\'evy stable distribution or the distribution of continuous time random walks (CTRW), depending on the divergence or finiteness of the mean duration and the mean square length of the single step.
Then, by using the big jump principle, we characterize the tail of the probability distribution at distances much larger than the scaling length. We show that rare events are described by non trivial functions, determined both by the duration distribution of the steps $\lambda(t)$ and by the microscopic acceleration and deceleration along the step, so that the result depends on all the exponents $\alpha$, $\nu$ and $\eta$. Remarkably, these non-universal distributions, which display non-analytic behaviors, are obtained from the general principle of single big jump, which provides a unique physical explanation of the process driving the rare events. We also highlight that for some values of $\alpha$, $\nu$ and $\eta$ the motion within a step can be slower than the growth of the scaling length, so in this case the principle does not apply.
As a final result, we also derive the scaling of all the moments of the distribution that, interestingly, feature strong anomalous diffusion \cite{castiglione,Cagnetta,vollmer}. All our analytical results are in very good agreement with extensive numerical simulations.
The paper is organized as follows: the section Results is divided into 4 parts. In the first one we discuss the single big jump principle. In the second, we discuss the generalized L\'evy walk model \cite{Albers,Sokolov} and we describe the central part of the probability distribution. In the third part we apply the big jump principle to the generalized L\'evy walk and we obtain the distribution of rare events and in the last part we discuss the moments of the distribution. Comparisons with numerical simulations are shown along the sections, showing a very good agreement in the long time asymptotic limit. The section Methods is devoted to a discussion of the big jump principle in terms of a very general formulation which can be applied to a wide class of models. In the Supplementary Information (SI) we describe some
the details of our calculation. We end with our conclusions and final remarks.
\section*{Results}
\subsubsection{The Big Jump principle}
The big jump principle applies to systems where a rare fluctuation of a stochastic variable is driven by a single extreme event, that we call the big jump. We introduce the principle
with the {\em rate approach} \cite{VBB19}, an heuristic formulation which allows for an easy extension beyond the standard case of sum of independent and identically distributed random variables. The estimate is based on the splitting of the problem in two parts: the first one leads to the calculation of the {jump rate}, that is the rate at which the walker makes attempts to perform the big jump. The second part takes into account the dynamical evolution during the big jump.
We consider a dynamical stochastic process with random variables $t_i$ drawn from a broad distribution $\lambda(t)$ at times $T_i$ ($T_i<T_j$ if $i<j$). The extraction time $T_i$ is also a random variable that can depend on $t_i$ ($i<j$), while in the simple case of the sum of IID we simply have $T_i=i$. We are interested in the "global" stochastic variable $R$ which in general depends on $t_i$ in a non trivial way ($R>0$ for the sake of simplicity). We call $P(R,T)$ the Probability Density Function (PDF) of measuring $R$ at time $T$ (see Methods for details). We focus on generalized L\'evy walks where the event $i$ is a jump, $t_i$ is the jump duration and $R$ the particle position. In different stochastic processes, $t_i$ and $R$ can have different interpretations (energies, masses...) \cite{Maj1b,Maj2,filias,corberi}.
We consider a process where, at large $T$, $P(R,T)$ can be split in two terms, one related to
the central part of the distribution, describing typical values of the final position R, and the other related to the far tail at very large $R$, driven by rare events:
\begin{equation}
P(R,T)\sim
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\displaystyle
\ell^{-1}(T)f(R/\ell(T)) &\mbox{if }\ R < \ell(T)\kappa(T) \\
\displaystyle
B(R,T) &\mbox{if }\ R> \ell(T) \kappa(T)
\end{array}
\right.
\label{sal}
\end{equation}
where $\ell(T)$ is the characteristic length of the process and $\kappa(T)$ is a slowly growing function of $T$ (e.g. a logarithmic function).
Notice that at large $T$, $P(R,T)$ converges in probability to $\ell^{-1}(T)f(R/\ell(T))$,
a function which is significantly different from zero only for values of the final position $R < \ell(T) \kappa(T)$.
However, $B(R,T)$ describes $P(R,T)$ for $R\gg \ell(T)$, i.e. at distances much larger than the scaling length of the process. Therefore $B(R,T)$ can be relevant in the calculation of higher moments of the distribution $\langle R^q (T)\rangle=\int_0^\infty P(R,T)R^q dR$ ($q>0$), such as the mean square displacement $q=2$, since:
\begin{equation}
\langle R^q (T)\rangle \sim \int_0^{\ell(T)\kappa(T)} \ell^{-1}(T)f(R/\ell(T)) R^q dR + \int_{\ell(T)\kappa(T)}^\infty B(R,T) R^q dR.
\label{rP}
\end{equation}
Here the first term can be subleading with respect to the second integral for $q >q_c$, where $q_c$ is a critical order of the moments. This means that some moments of the process are influenced by the rare events \cite{castiglione,vollmer}. $B(R,T)$ is precisely the part of the distribution that we want to calculate with the big jump principle. In practice, $B(R,T)$ describes the finite time deviations of $P(R,T)$ from the bulk scaling function at large $R\gg \ell(T)$, and this is what determines the anomalous moments of the distribution.
Since $\lambda(t)$ does not depend on the jumping time,
the probability to perform a jump of duration $t$ at time $T_w$ is $p_{{\rm tot}}(t,T_w)= n_R(T_w)\cdot \lambda(t) $, where $n_R(T_w)$ is the jumping rate that is $n_R(T)=d \langle N(T) \rangle /d T$
and $\langle N(T) \rangle $ in the average number of jumps up to time $T$.
As we are considering $R\gg \ell(T)$, according to the principle we suppose that the only important process that contributes to $B(R,T)$ is the biggest jump and therefore we neglect all the jumps occurring before and after that. We call ${\cal P}(R|T,t,T_w)$ the probability that a process, driven by the single jump of duration $t$ starting at $T_w$, takes the walker in $R$ at time $T\geq T_w$. The big jump principle states that, as for $R\gg \ell(T)$ the relevant part of the distribution is $B(R,T)$, this can be determined as:
\begin{equation}
B(R,T) = \int dt \int_0^T dT_w p_{{\rm tot}}(t,T_w) {\cal P}(R|T,t,T_w)
\label{BigJump}
\end{equation}
Hence, $B(R,T)$ is evaluated by summing over all the paths ($t$ and $T_w$) that in a single jump bring the process to $R$ at time $T$. These paths, described by ${\cal P}(R|T,t,T_w)$, can be very complex, as they include all the correlations and non-linearities of the the model. However, since only one stochastic draw is involved, an analytic approach is often feasible (for further details see Methods).
Notice that Eq. (\ref{BigJump}) provides an estimate of $B(R,T)$ only for large $R$, so in general $B(R,T)$ can behave as an {\em infinite density} \cite{Eli1}, i.e. $B(R,T)$ diverges at $R=0$ so that $\int dR B(R,T)=\infty$. Nevertheless, $B(R,T)$ provides the correct expression for the asymptotic behavior of the moments $\langle R^q(T) \rangle$ with large $q$, since, according to Eq. (\ref{rP}), the factor $R^q$ cures the divergence in $R=0$. Notice also that the hypothesis that a single big jump contributes to $B(R,T)$ is crucial. If in a process it is not possible to reach $R>>\ell(T)$
with a single stochastic event, Eq. (\ref{BigJump}) does not apply and different approaches must be introduced \cite{Hoell}.
\subsubsection{Generalized L\'evy walks: microscopic dynamics and the bulk of the distribution}
The generalized L\'evy walk \cite{Albers,Sokolov} is a model of anomalous transport with acceleration and deceleration along the microscopic trajectories, an effect that is often encountered in experiments \cite{Ariel,future-levy}.
In this model, the stochastic variable $t_i$ drawn from the broad PDF $\lambda(t_i)$ defines the duration of the $i$-th step so that the draw $i$ occurs at time $T_i=\sum_{j=1}^{i-1} t_j $ ($T_1=0$).
As a typical example of broad distribution we take a power law $\lambda(t)$ where for $t>\tau_0$
\begin{equation}
\lambda(t) = \frac{\tau_0^\alpha} {t^{1 + \alpha} }
\label{lambdaL}
\end{equation}
and $\lambda(t)=0$ for $t<\tau_0$.
We define $r(T)$ the position of the walker and $R(T)=|r(T)-r(0)|$ its distance from the origin.
The microscopic dynamic of the walker in the time interval $T_i<T<T_{i+1}$ is defined as:
\begin{equation}
r(T)=r(T_i)+ c_i t_i^{\nu-\eta} (T-T_i)^\eta,
\label{ap2}
\end{equation}
where $\nu>0$ and $\eta>0$ are the parameters describing the microscopic motion and the random "velocity" $c_i=\pm c$ is drawn with probability $1/2$ in each step. According to Eq.(\ref{ap2}) the step $i$ starts in $r(T_i)$ and stops in $r(T_i)+c_i t_i^\nu=r(T_{i+1})$ which defines the starting point of the $i+1$ step. In this framework we call $L_i=c t_i^\nu$ the length of the step $i$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.70\textwidth]{Fig1.eps}
\caption{
The big jump contributions.
The jump starts at time $T_w$ and it can either lead you to the
time horizon of the L\'evy walk $t>(T-T_w)$, as in panel ({\bf a}) or it may start and end before time $T$ if $t<(T-T_w)$ as in panel ({\bf b}). The orange line in the big jump represents the global motion after a jump $c t^\nu$ ($\nu=1$ in this case). In green we plot the motion of the walker. Within the jump we plot $c t^{\nu-\eta}(T-T_w)^\eta$ and continuous and dashed lines refer to $\eta<\nu$ and to $\eta>\nu$ respectively.
The final position $R$ is plotted in magenta. In panel ({\bf a}) $R$ depends on $\eta$ and $\nu$ while in panel ({\bf b}) it is driven by the exponent $\nu$ only.}
\label{LWfig}
\end{figure}
The generalized L\'evy walks correspond to many different types of motions along the steps. If $\eta < \nu$ the walker moves faster at the beginning of the step, then it slows down. Conversely, for $\eta>\nu$ the motion starts at slow speed, then it speeds up (see Figure \ref{LWfig}). In particular, for $\eta=0$ we recover the so called step-first dynamics \cite{zaburdaev}, where the particle reaches instantaneously $r(T_i)+ c_i t_i^\nu$ at time $T_i$ then it waits a time $t_i$ before the following step. On the other hand, for $\eta=\infty$ this is the wait-first dynamics \cite{zaburdaev}, with the walker waiting a time $t_i$ in $r(T_i)$ then suddenly moving to $r(T_i)+ c_i t_i^\nu$ just before the next step.
The case $\eta=\nu=1$ corresponds to standard L\'evy walks \cite{Klafter1}, which presents ballistic motion along the steps, while the case $\eta=\nu$ has been studied recently
in detail in \cite{Aghion}, where the distribution of the rare events has been evaluated using a moment resummation technique.
If $\lambda(t_i)$ is given by Eq. (\ref{lambdaL}), the step length $L_i$ is distributed as $\tilde \lambda(L_i)\sim L_i^{-1-\alpha/\nu}$.
Hereafter, we define $\langle t \rangle =\int dt t \lambda(t)$ the average duration of a step and
$\langle L^2 \rangle=c^2 \langle t^{2\nu} \rangle= \int dt t^{2\nu} \lambda(t)$ the average square length of a jump; $\langle t \rangle$ is finite for $\alpha>1$, $\langle L^2 \rangle$ is finite for $\alpha>2\nu$.
Since at the end of the jump the length $L_i=c t_i ^\nu$ is independent of $\eta$, one can expect
naively, as in standard transport theories, that the statistical properties of $R$ will be $\eta$ independent. However, for heavy-tailed processes, the dynamics in the time interval between the last jump and the measurement time are important and hence the final result will be sensitive to $\eta$.
Since $t_i$ can be arbitrary large, also the generalized velocity $c t_i^{\nu-\eta}$ for $\nu>\eta$ is unbounded and the walker can reach arbitrary large distances in an arbitrary small time $\delta t=T-T_i$.
Conversely, for $\eta\geq \nu$, in a time $T$ the walker can reach a maximum distance $l_{\rm cone}(T)$, that we call the {\em light cone} of the walker. For $\nu\geq 1$ the light cone can be reached in a single step and $l_{\rm cone}(T)=c T^{\nu}$. For $\nu<1$ the light cone can only be reached in many steps, all in the same direction and $l_{\rm cone}(T)=T c \tau_0^{\nu-1}$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Fig2a.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Fig2b.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Fig2c.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Fig2d.eps}
\caption{Scaling at short distances for the PDF in the generalized L\'evy walk model. In panel ({\bf a}) $\alpha=1.6>1$ and $\nu=0.7<\alpha/2$ we obtain a diffusive behavior with a Gaussian scaling function. In panel ({\bf b}) $\alpha=1.6>1$ and $\nu=0.7<\alpha/2$. Here the scaling length grows super-diffusively as $T^{\nu/\alpha}$ and the scaling function is the L\'evy function (see SI). In the panel ({\bf c}) $\alpha=0.8<1$ and $\nu=0.3<\alpha/2$, there is sub-diffusion, the scaling length grows as $T^{\alpha/2}$ and the scaling function is the scaling function of CTRW with infinite waiting time, which is independent of $\nu$ (see SI). In panel ({\bf d}) $\alpha=0.7<1$ and $\nu=0.8>\alpha/2$, the scaling described in SI is determined by the single step motion $R\sim T^\nu$. The scaling function depends in a non-trivial way also on the exponents $\nu$ and $\eta$. The dashed line represents the result of the big jump approach in Formula (\ref{BJ3}). }
\label{scalSHc}
\end{figure}
The bulk behavior of the PDF $P(R,T)$ can be evaluated showing that the following scaling form holds (see SI for details):
\begin{equation}
P(R,T)\sim \frac{f(R/\ell(T))}{\ell(T)}.
\label{scal}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
{\ell(T)}\sim
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\displaystyle
T^{1/2} &\mbox{if } \alpha>2 \nu \ \mbox{and }\ \alpha>1 \\
\displaystyle
T^{\nu/\alpha} &\mbox{if } \alpha<2 \nu \ \mbox{and }\ \alpha>1 \\
\displaystyle
T^{\alpha/2} &\mbox{if } \alpha>2 \nu \ \mbox{and }\ \alpha<1 \\
\displaystyle
T^{\nu} &\mbox{if } \alpha<2 \nu \ \mbox{and }\ \alpha<1
\end{array}
\right.
\label{ell}
\end{equation}
For $\alpha> 2\nu$ and $\alpha>1$, the mean duration and the mean square length of the single step are finite so that the scaling function is Gaussian, independently of the value of the exponents $\alpha$, $\nu$ and $\eta$, as shown in Figure \ref{scalSHc} panel ({\bf a}). For $\alpha< 2\nu$ and $\alpha>1$ the mean duration of a step is finite but the mean square length is infinite, we are in a super-diffusive regime and $f(\cdot)$ is a L\'evy stable function \cite{Chistyakov,Bouchaud} which only depends on the ratio $\nu/\alpha$, as shown in Figure \ref{scalSHc} panel ({\bf b}). Notice that in this case the exponent $\alpha/\nu$ driving both the scaling length $\ell(T)$ and the distribution $f(\cdot)$ is exactly the exponent that describes the distribution of the jump $L$ whose variance is infinite. For
$\alpha> 2\nu$ and $\alpha<1$ the mean square length is finite but the mean duration of a step is infinite, and in this case the motion is sub-diffusive and $f(\cdot)$ only depends on $\alpha$ and corresponds to the scaling function of CTRW with infinite waiting time \cite{Bouchaud} (see Figure \ref{scalSHc} panel ({\bf c})). Finally, Figure \ref{scalSHc} panel ({\bf d}) shows that for $\alpha< 2\nu$ and $\alpha<1$, when the mean square length and the mean duration are both infinite,
the scaling function is not universal and depends on the exponents $\alpha$, $\nu$ and $\eta$.
In particular, the tail of the scaling function for $R/T^\nu\gg1$ is a pure power law when $\eta<\nu$ and in this case it can be evaluated using the big jump approach (dashed-line).
\subsubsection{Generalized L\'evy walks and the Big Jump: tails and rare events}
Let us now derive the tail $B(R,T)$ by applying the {big jump} principle. According to Eq. (\ref{BigJump}), we have to find the rate of attempts for the big jump, and the form of all the processes that, in a single jump, bring the walker in $R\gg\ell(T)$ at time T. We ignore the motion before and after the big jump, as this is the only contribution to the displacement.
As shown in Figure \ref{LWfig}, two possible different contributions to ${\cal P}(R|T,t,T_w)$ are present. In panel ({\bf a}) $t>(T-T_w)$, the walker is still moving in the big jump at $T$ and $R=c t^{\nu-\eta}(T-T_w)^\eta$. In panel ({\bf b}) $t<(T-T_w)$, the walker ends its motion at $t$ so that $R=c t^\nu$. Since the big jump principle applies if $R\gg\ell(T)$, in this second process we get $c T^\nu \gtrsim c t^\nu = R\gg\ell(T)$. By comparing $\nu$ with the characteristic exponent of $\ell(T)$ in Eq. (\ref{ell}), we obtain that the path in panel ({\bf b}) is relevant only for $\alpha>1$ and $\nu>1/2$. On the other hand, in the process of panel ({\bf a}) for $\nu>\eta$ the walker can reach arbitrary large distances in any fixed time interval $T-T_w$ and the process is always relevant. Finally, for $\nu\leq \eta$, for both processes in Figure \ref{LWfig}, we have that $R \sim cT^\nu$, and they both provide a contribution to ${\cal P}(R|T,t,T_w)$ only for $\alpha>1$ and $\nu>1/2$.
This means that, for $\nu\leq \eta$, $\alpha<1$ and for
$\nu\leq \eta$, $\alpha>1$, $\nu<1/2$ the walker cannot reach a distance larger than $\ell(T)$ in a single step and
Eq. (\ref{BigJump}) cannot be used to evaluate $B(R,T)$.
Let us first consider the case $\alpha>1$ and $\nu>1/2$ when both processes in Figure \ref{LWfig}
are relevant. In the SI we show that these processes can be simply encoded into the function ${\cal P}(R|T,L,T_w)$. Moreover since $\alpha>1$, the jump rate is constant ($n_R(T_w) =\langle t\rangle^{-1}$) and $p_{{\rm tot}}(t,T_w)=\lambda(t) /\langle t\rangle$. Then we plug $p_{{\rm tot}}(t,T_w)$ and the explicit expression for ${\cal P}(R|T,L,T_w)$ into the formula (\ref{BigJump}) so we obtain the explicit scaling form of $B(R,T)$:
\begin{equation}
B(R,T)=\frac{1 }{T^{\alpha-1+\nu} }F\left(\frac{ R }{c T^{\nu} }\right)
\label{BJ1}
\end{equation}
The scaling length at large distance grows as $cT^\nu$. The non universal scaling function $F(x)$ can be explicitly evaluated (see SI), it depends on the exponents $\alpha$, $\nu$ and $\eta$ and it is non-analytic at $x=1$.
The case $\eta=\mu$ with $2\nu>\alpha$ has recently been studied in \cite{Aghion} and the far tails of the distribution have been obtained using a moment summation technique. The tail of standard L\'evy walks $\eta=\nu=1$ has been discusses within various approaches \cite{Eli1,Wanli}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Fig3a.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Fig3b.eps}
\caption{ The far tails of the distributions $P(R,T)$ for $\alpha=1.6>1$ and $\nu>1/2$: $\nu=0.7$ and $\nu=1.2$ in panel ({\bf a}) and ({\bf b}) respectively. The thick lines represent the theoretical value of the scaling function $F(x)$ explicitly calculated in the SI. The
plot shows the singular behavior of the scaling function when $x=R/T\nu=1$. Different behaviors are present for $\eta<\nu$, $\eta>\nu$ and $\eta=\nu$ respectively.
For very small values of $\eta$ the cusp singularity in the distribution becomes barely visible.}
\label{LW2fig}
\end{figure}
In Figure \ref{LW2fig}, panels ({\bf a}) and ({\bf b}), for $\alpha>1$ and $\nu>1/2$, we plot the far tail of $P(R,T)$ as a function of $R/(cT^\nu)$ and compare the analytic predictions with finite time simulations. In the long time limit, the densities fully agree with the big jump formalism. We remark that we used the same data of panels ({\bf a}) and ({\bf b})
in Figure (\ref{scalSHc}) introducing only a different scaling procedure.
In particular, the figure shows the singularities in the distribution when $R/(cT^\nu)=1$
and the different behaviors when $\nu>\eta$, $\nu=\eta$ and $\nu<\eta$ respectively.
In the case $\alpha>1$, $\nu<1/2$ and $\eta<\nu$ only the first process in Figure \ref{LWfig}
allows to reach distances larger than $\ell(T)$. Moreover since $\alpha>1$ and $\langle t \rangle$ is finite we have $p_{{\rm tot}}(t,T_w)=\lambda(t) /\langle t\rangle$. So we obtain (see SI):
\begin{equation}
B (R , T) =
\frac{ T^{\frac{\alpha\eta}{\nu-\eta}+1} c^{\frac{\alpha}{\nu-\eta}} \tau_0^\alpha }{\langle t \rangle (\nu+(\alpha-1)\eta)R^{1+\frac{\alpha}{\nu-\eta}}}
\label{BJ2}
\end{equation}
Also for $\alpha<1$ and $\eta<\nu$ only the process in panel ({\bf a}) provides a contribution. For $\alpha<1$, however, the rate is not constant and $n_R(T_w) = C_\alpha T_w^{\alpha-1}/\tau_0^\alpha $ (the numerical constant $C_\alpha$ depends on $\alpha$ only) so we get (see SI):
\begin{equation}
B (R , T) =
\frac{ T^{\frac{\nu\alpha}{\nu-\eta}} c^{\frac{\alpha}{\nu-\eta}} D_\alpha }{ (\nu-\eta)R^{1+\frac{\alpha}{\nu-\eta}}} \label{BJ3}
\end{equation}
where $D_\alpha$ depends on $\alpha$ only.
Since for $R\gg \ell(T)\gg cT^\nu$, no characteristic length is present in the system, Eqs. (\ref{BJ2}) and (\ref{BJ3}) are pure power-laws (scale free) functions decaying as $R^{-(1+\frac{\alpha}{\nu-\eta})}$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Fig4a.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Fig4b.eps}
\caption{ Far tails of the distributions $P(R,T)$ for $\alpha=1.2>1$ and $\nu=0.4<0.5$ (panel ({\bf a})) and $\alpha=0.8<1$ $\nu=0.3<\alpha/2$ (panel ({\bf b})). The thick lines represent the big jump predictions when $\eta<\nu$ in formula (\ref{BJ2}) and (\ref{BJ3}) for the left and right panel respectively. The
plot shows the singular behavior of the scaling function when $x=R/T\nu=1$ and the different results when $\eta<\nu$, $\eta>\nu$ and $\eta=\nu$ respectively. For $\eta\geq\nu$ the figure shows that the bulk scaling function seems to describe the distribution even for $R>\ell(T)$. In this case, indeed,
Eq. (\ref{BigJump}) does not apply but the light cone grows much faster than $\ell(T)$. Therefore deviations at large distances are not given by a single process but by the contribution of many steps in the same direction, which is an exponentially suppressed process very difficult to be observed.}
\label{LW3fig}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{LW3fig}, panels ({\bf a}) and ({\bf b}), shows that, for $\alpha>1$, $\nu<1/2$ and for $\alpha<1$, $\nu<\alpha/2$, Eq.s (\ref{BJ2}) and (\ref{BJ3}) well describe the distributions at $R\gg \ell(T)$, if $\eta<\nu$ (dashed-lines). In the regime, $\alpha<1$, $\nu>\alpha/2$, $\eta<\nu$ Figure \ref{scalSHc}, panel ({\bf d}), shows that the tail in Eq. (\ref{BJ3}) perfectly matches the short distance scaling function. Notice that in this last case Eq. (\ref{BJ3}) can be rewritten as in Eq.s (\ref{scal}) and (\ref{ell}) i.e. introducing the scaling length $\ell(T)\sim T^\nu$ and obtaining the same $T$ dependent pre-factor i.e. $B (R , T)\sim T^{-\nu} (R/T^\nu)^{-1-\frac{\alpha}{\nu-\eta}} $. This perfect matching means that for $\alpha<1$, $\nu>\alpha/2$ and $\eta<\nu$, Eq. (\ref{scal}) holds also for $R\gg \ell(T)$, however its behavior for $R\gg \ell(T)$ can be evaluated with the single big jump approach.
For $\alpha<1$, $\eta\geq\nu$ and $\eta\geq\nu$, $\alpha>1$ with $\nu<1/2$ a single process cannot reach a distance larger than $\ell(T)$ and Eq. (\ref{BigJump}) does not apply. In particular the power law tails in Eq.s (\ref{BJ2}) and (\ref{BJ3}) cannot be observed, as shown in Figure \ref{scalSHc}, panel ({\bf d}), and in Figure \ref{LW3fig}, panels ({\bf a}) and ({\bf b}). A summary of the scaling for the bulk and the tails in the whole range of exponents is shown in Table 1.
\begin{table}[]
\begin{tabular}{|c|l|l|l}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{$\nu>\alpha/2$} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{$\alpha/2>\nu>1/2$} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{$1/2>\nu$} \\ \hline
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}$\alpha>1$\\ Bulk\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Superdiffusion: \\ $\ell(T)\sim T^{\nu/\alpha}$\\ L\'evy Scaling\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Normal diffusion: \\ $\ell(T)\sim T^{1/2}$\\ Gaussian Scaling\end{tabular} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Normal diffusion: \\ $\ell(T)\sim T^{1/2}$\\ Gaussian Scaling\end{tabular}} \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}$\alpha>1$\\ Tail\end{tabular}} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}$\eta<\nu$: \\ $B(R,T)=\frac{1 }{T^{\alpha-1+\nu} }F\left(\frac{ R }{c T^{\nu} }\right)$\\ $F(x)=x^{-1-\frac{\alpha}{\nu-\eta}}$ for $x>1$\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}$\eta<\nu$: \\ $B(R,T)=\frac{1 }{T^{\alpha-1+\nu} }F\left(\frac{ R }{c T^{\nu} }\right)$\\ $F(x)=x^{-1-\frac{\alpha}{\nu-\eta}}$ for $x>1$\end{tabular} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}$\eta<\nu$: \\ $B(R,T)\sim \frac{ T^{\frac{\alpha\eta}{\nu-\eta}+1} }{R^{1+\frac{\alpha}{\nu-\eta}}}$\end{tabular}} \\ \cline{2-4}
& \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}$\eta\geq\nu$: \\ $B(R,T)=\frac{1 }{T^{\alpha-1+\nu} }F\left(\frac{ R }{c T^{\nu} }\right)$ \\ $F(x)=0$ for $x>1$\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}$\eta\geq\nu$: \\ $B(R,T)=\frac{1 }{T^{\alpha-1+\nu} }F\left(\frac{ R }{c T^{\nu} }\right)$\\ $F(x)=0$ for $x>1$\end{tabular} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}$\eta\geq \nu$: \\ Eq. (\ref{BigJump}) does not apply\end{tabular}} \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{$\nu>\alpha/2$} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{$\alpha/2>\nu$} & \\ \cline{1-3}
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}$\alpha<1$\\ Bulk\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Ballistic motion \\ $\ell(T)\sim T^\nu$\\ Non-universal scaling\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Subdiffusion \\ $\ell(T)\sim T^{\alpha/2}$\\ CTRW scaling\end{tabular} & \\ \cline{1-3}
\multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}$\alpha<1$\\ Tail\end{tabular}} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}$\eta<\nu$: \\ $B(R,T)\sim \frac{ T^{\frac{\alpha\eta}{\nu-\eta}+1} }{R^{1+\frac{\alpha}{\nu-\eta}}}$\\ Matching with the Bulk\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}$\eta<\nu$: \\ $B(R,T)\sim \frac{ T^{\frac{\alpha\eta}{\nu-\eta}+1} }{R^{1+\frac{\alpha}{\nu-\eta}}}$\end{tabular} & \\ \cline{2-3}
& \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}$\eta\geq \nu$: \\ Eq. (\ref{BigJump}) does not apply\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}$\eta\geq \nu$: \\ Eq. (\ref{BigJump}) does not apply\end{tabular} & \\ \cline{1-3}
\end{tabular}
\caption{A summary of the scaling behavior of bulk and tails for the PDF $P(R,T)$ when $\alpha>1$ and when $\alpha < 1$.}
\end{table}
We can compare the results of the tail in Table 1 with the conditions for the light cone.
For $\eta<\nu$ there is no light cone, so $B(R,T)$ describes the behavior of the tail at arbitrary large distances. When $\eta \geq \nu$ and $\alpha>1$ and $\nu> 1$, the tail $B(R,T)$ exactly vanishes at the light cone $l_{\rm cone}(T)=c T^\nu$. For $\alpha>1$ and $1/2 <\nu< 1$,
$B(R,T)$ vanishes at $R=cT^\nu$. However in this case the particle can reach larger distances
($l_{\rm cone}(T) \sim T$) with multiple steps. Clearly these processes are exponentially suppressed, and this means that in the simulations of Figure \ref{LW2fig} panel ({\bf a}), for $\eta=3$ we observe events reaching a distance larger than $cT^\nu$ at time $T$ , but these events become extremely rare when increasing $T$.
When the big jump does not apply, two cases are possible: for $\alpha<1$ and $\nu\geq 1$, the light cone of the walker is determined by a single step, $l_{\rm cone}(T) = c T^\nu$, and trivially $B(R,T)=0$ since it is impossible to go farther than $c T^\nu \sim \ell(T)$ (as in the case of the standard L\'evy walks for $\alpha<1$ where $l_{\rm cone}(T) = c T$).
In the other cases, the light cone is reached in a large number of coherent steps all in the same direction and $l_{\rm cone}(T) \sim T \gg \ell(T)$, whereas the single jump cannot go farther than $\ell(T)$. In this case we expect $B(R,T)$ to be exponentially suppressed and not described by Eq. (\ref{BigJump}).
\subsubsection{The Moments of the distribution}
We now study the moments of the distribution of $R$, which are related to quantities typically measured in experiments. We introduce the exponents $\gamma(q)$ defined as
$\langle R^q(T) \rangle \sim T^{\gamma(q)}$. If $\gamma(q)$ is not simply proportional to $q$, this is what is called strongly anomalous diffusion \cite{castiglione,vollmer}. Here $\gamma(q)$ is evaluated taking into account the dominant term in Eq. (\ref{rP}) in the different regimes of Table 1.
Notice that, for $\eta<\nu$ $B(R,T)$ decays at large $T$ as $R^{-1-\frac{\alpha}{\nu-\eta}}$, therefore, for $q>\alpha/(\nu-\eta)$, the second integral in Eq. (\ref{rP}) and the relevant moments are infinite. In this case, as we show in Figs.
\ref{Momfig} and \ref{Momfig2} the numerical value of $\langle R^q(T)\rangle$ depends on the number of realizations $N_R$ that we average in the simulation. In particular, $\langle R^q(T)\rangle$
diverges for $N_R\to \infty$ displaying at the same time very large fluctuations.
In Figure \ref{Momfig} we consider the super-diffusive regime $\alpha>1$, $\nu>\alpha/2$ and $\nu>\eta$ where:
\begin{equation}
\gamma(q) =
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\displaystyle
{q \nu / \alpha} &\mbox{if } q< \alpha/\nu \\
\displaystyle
{q \nu -\alpha +1} &\mbox{if } \alpha/\nu<q<\alpha/(\nu-\eta)\\
\displaystyle
\infty &\mbox{if } q>\alpha/(\nu-\eta)
\end{array}
\right.
\label{rP3}
\end{equation}
Therefore the system displays strong anomalous diffusion \cite{castiglione,Cagnetta}.
In panel ({\bf a}) of Figure \ref{Momfig} we plot $\langle R^q(T)\rangle$ and we show
that when $\langle R^q(T)\rangle$ diverges, the results indeed depend
on the number of realizations $N_R$ we use to obtain the average.
In panel ({\bf b}) we plot the function $\gamma(q)$ and we show that
far away from the critical value, where preasymptotic effects are expected to be
stronger, simulations displays a nice agreements with theoretical values in Eq. \eqref{rP3}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Fig5a.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Fig5b.eps}
\caption{Moments of the distribution for $\alpha=1.6$, $\nu=1.2$ and $\eta=0.5$. Panel ({\bf a}):
$\langle R^q(T)\rangle$ as a function of $T$
in the three regimes $q<\alpha/\nu$ ($q=1$), $\alpha/\nu<q< \alpha(\nu-\eta)$ ($q=1.5$) and $q> \alpha(\nu-\eta)$ ($q=2.5$). Different symbols correspond to a different number of averages $N_R$. Continuous lines are the theoretical prediction $\langle R^q(T) \rangle \sim T^{\gamma(q)}$ according to Eq. (\ref{rP3}). In the first two regimes the symbols are perfectly superimposed and the results are independent of $N_R$. For $q> \alpha(\nu-\eta)$ instead the results depends on the number of realizations that we are averaging. In general, $\langle R^q(T)\rangle$ increases with $N_R$ but large fluctuations are present. In panel ({\bf b}) we plot the fitted exponent $\gamma$ as a function of the moment $q$. The three regimes $q<\alpha/\nu$, $\alpha/\nu<q< \alpha(\nu-\eta)$ and $q> \alpha(\nu-\eta)$ are shown. The theoretical result is well fitted but strong pre-asymptotic effects are present close to transitions points between the different regimes. }
\label{Momfig}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Fig6a.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Fig6b.eps}
\caption{ Panel ({\bf a}): plot of
$\langle R^q(T)\rangle$ as a function of $T$ for $\alpha=1.2$, $\nu=0.4$, $\eta=0.1$ or $\eta=0.9$ and $q=4.7$ or $q=3.3$. For $\eta<\nu$ and $q> \alpha/(\nu-\eta)$ ($\eta=0.1$ and $q=4.7$) moments are infinite and simulations show a strong dependence on the number of dynamical realizations $N_R$. In the other cases the results are independent of $N_R$ and the theoretical results $\langle R^q(T)\rangle \sim T^{q/2}$ (continuous lines) asymptotically fit the simulations. Panel ({\bf b}): we plot the fitted exponent $\gamma$ as a function of the moment $q$.}
\label{Momfig2}
\end{figure}
In Figure \ref{Momfig2}, panels ({\bf a}) and ({\bf b}), we consider $\alpha>1$ and $\nu<1/2$. For $\eta<\nu$ analytical calculations of Eq. (\ref{rP}) gives $\gamma(q)=q/2$ if $q<\alpha/(\nu-\eta)$ while $\gamma(q)$ diverges if $q>\alpha/(\nu-\eta)$. On the other hand, for $\eta\geq \nu$ we get $\gamma(q)=q/2$ for any values of $q$ and strong anomalous diffusion is not present. We remark that this is a general feature of the regimes where the big jump cannot be applied and the far tail are exponentially
suppressed. Figure \ref{Momfig2} confirms that simulations fit analytical predictions and that in the divergent regime the average moments depends on the number of dynamical realizations in the average process.
In general, therefore, the big jump approach via Eq. (\ref{rP}) is an effective tool for the calculations of anomalous exponents. Moreover, strong anomalous diffusion seems to be a general feature for systems where the big jump approach provides a significant contribution to the tail of $P(R,T)$.
\section*{Discussion}
The single big jump principle provides an interesting and effective insight
on the origin of rare events in heavy - tailed processes. The principle allows both for
a physical interpretation of the mechanism that drives large fluctuations and
also for a direct tool for calculation. In practice, it works as soon as we deal with a
process where only one event contributes to the far tail, that is when only one jump takes our physical quantity $R$ to a value that is well beyond the scaling length of the process.
While derived within a heuristic scheme, the principle in the rate approach appears to be extremely
effective in predicting the form of the tails, leaving an open question for a rigorous derivation.
We have here applied the principle to derive the exact form of the tail of the distribution in a class of generalized L\'evy walks, a stochastic process that models anomalous transport in the presence of complex dynamics in the single step taken by the walker, which is subject to acceleration and deceleration effects. The dynamics in the steps give rise to a variety of shapes and behaviors for the PDF, summarized in Table 1. Interestingly, the single step dynamics is shown to strongly influence the form of the tail.
We are therefore in a situation where, while the bulk of the distribution feature the usual universality properties of central limit theorems, the tail is sensitive to the detail of the single step dynamics, because the single step is what drives the rare events.
The big jump approach and the rate calculation can be applied well beyond the L\'evy walk models considered in this paper and well beyond quantities that represent random walkers, sums of steps and particle positions. Our result opens new possibilities to use rare events to obtain information on the microscopic dynamics and to have a fresh look on real datasets of single trajectories in systems exhibiting heavy tails statistics. In particular, we expect the generalized L\'evy walk to be largely applicable to all settings where deceleration and acceleration effects are relevant along the microscopic trajectories, like in contamination spreading and in complex active transport in the cell \cite{future-levy,Gal}.
An open point is to deal with processes where single rare events provide non trivial contribution to the distribution also at shorter distances \cite{Hoell}, as it happens in the case of the
standard L\'evy walk for $\alpha <1$. The extension of the results to higher dimensions \cite{fouxon} is also an open question.
\section*{Methods}
Consider a stochastic process where the variables $t_i$ ($i=1,2,\dots$) are drawn from the distribution $\lambda(t)$ at times $T_i$ with $T_i<T_j$ if $i<j$. The time $T_i$ is, in general, a stochastic variable which can depend, according to the model, also on the draws occurring before $T_i$, i.e. on $t_1,\dots, t_{i-1}$.
A general expression for the PDF to measure the quantity $R$ at time $T$ is:
\begin{equation}
P(R,T)=\int \prod_i dt_i \lambda(t_i) {\cal F}(R|T,\{t_i\})
\label{Pgen}
\end{equation}
where ${\cal F}(R|T,\{t_i\})$ is the probability of measuring $R$ at time $T$ given the sequence of random variables $\{t_i\}$.
Eq. (\ref{Pgen}) is very general and it
is suitable to describe processes with complex dynamical correlations, with ${\cal F}(R|T,\{t_i\})$ being a highly non trivial function \cite{levyrand,VBB19,WVBB19}.
We first discuss the explicit form of ${\cal F}(R|T,\{x_i\})$ for the generalized L\'evy walk
\cite{Albers,Sokolov}. We notice that only the first $n$ steps with $T_n<T<T_{n+1}$ provides a contribution to the process, so
we can rewrite ${\cal F}(R|T,\{t_i\})$ as
\begin{equation}
{\cal F}(R|T,\{t_i\})=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \theta(T-T_n) \theta(T_{n+1}-T)
\int \prod_{i=1}^n dc_i \frac{1}{2}(\delta(c_i-c)+\delta(c_i+c))\delta\left(R-\sum_{i=1}^{n-1} c_i t_i^\nu -c_n t_n^{\nu-\eta}(T-T_n)^\eta \right)
\end{equation}
where $\theta(\cdot)$ is the Heaviside function.
So we obtain for Eq. (\ref{Pgen}):
\begin{equation}
P(R,T)= \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \int \prod_{i=1}^{i<n} d t_i \lambda(t_i)
\theta(T-\sum_{i=1}^{n-1} t_i) \theta(\sum_{i=1}^{n} t_i-T)
\int \prod_{i=1}^n d c_i \frac{1}{2}(\delta(c_i-c)+\delta(c_i+c))\delta\left(R-\sum_{i=1}^{n-1} c_i t_i^\nu -c_n t_n^{\nu-\eta}(T-\sum_{i=1}^{n-1} t_i)^\eta \right)
\label{Pgen_LW}
\end{equation}
Notice that in Eq. (\ref{Pgen_LW}) $P(R,T)$ is written as the sum of a series and each term of the series is given by an integral over a finite number $n$ of random variables. This is a general property since only processes occurring at time $T_n<T$ can affect the measure of quantity $R$ at time $T$.
Let us consider again the general process in Eq. (\ref{Pgen}) where $t_i$ are generic random variables
drawn at times $T_i$. We can call $w_n(t_1,\dots,t_n,T)$ the probability that $T_n<T<T_{n+1}$ given the sequence of random variables $t_1,\dots,t_n$. Moreover we
define ${\cal F}_n(R|T,t_1, \dots,t_n)$ the PDF to measure $R$ at time $T$ given the the random variables $t_1, \dots,t_n$ and knowing that the variables $t_n$ has been drawn before $T$ and the variable $t_{n+1}$ has been drawn after $T$.
We have
\begin{equation}
P(R,T)= \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \int \prod_{i=1}^{i<n} d t_i \lambda(t_i)
w_n(t_1,\dots,t_n,T) {\cal F}_n(R|T,t_1, \dots,t_n)
\label{Pgen_2}
\end{equation}
comparing Eq. (\ref{Pgen_LW}) and Eq. (\ref{Pgen_2}) we have that $w_n(t_1,\dots,t_n,T)=
\theta(T-\sum_{i=1}^{n-1} t_i) \theta(\sum_{i=1}^{n} t_i-T) $ i.e. the probability is, respectively, zero or one if the sums are smaller or larger than $T$ and
\begin{equation}
{\cal F}_n(R|T,t_1, \dots,t_n) = \int \prod_{i=1}^n d c_i \frac{1}{2}(\delta(c_i-c)+\delta(c_i+c))
\delta\left(R-\sum_{i=1}^{n-1} c_i t_i^\nu -c_n t_n^{\nu-\eta}(T-\sum_{i=1}^{n-1} t_i)^\eta \right)
\end{equation}
Moreover, we can now write a simple general definition of $\langle N(T) \rangle$ that is the average number of draws up to time $T$, i.e.
\begin{equation}
\langle N(T) \rangle = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} n \int \prod_{i=1}^{i<n} d t_i \lambda(t_i)
w_n(t_1,\dots,t_n,T)
\label{Pgen_3}
\end{equation}
Here, we have considered the generalized L\'evy walk and we provide a heuristic expression for ${\cal P}(R|T,t,T_w)$; analogous results have been obtained in \cite{VBB19} for different models such as the L\'evy Lorentz gas. A fundamental question for the stochastic process is to obtain a general procedure to obtain ${\cal P}(R|T,t,T_w)$ given the stochastic process described by the observable $R$ and the function ${\cal F}(R|T,\{t_i\})$ in Eq. (\ref{Pgen}).
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The support of Israel Science Foundation grant 1898/17
(E.B.) is acknowledged. R.B. thanks CSEIA (Center for Studies in European and International Affairs) of the University of Parma for the award granted to cover the costs of open-access publication.
|
\section{Introduction}
\subsection{Statement of the main result}
The tremendous literature on Gaussian bounds for fundamental solutions of second order parabolic operators can be splitted into two classes: divergence or non-divergence operators. In the first class we only quote the deep results obtained by Aronson, following Nash's ideas, and we refer to \cite{FS} for a comprehensive treatment. The second class is more classical and can be found in the books \cite{Fr,LSU} where a fundamental solution is constructed, via the parametrix method, assuming H\"older continuity of the coefficients. By construction the fundamental solution satisfies precise upper bounds but, strangely enough, lower bounds are not proved. In this note we show that the parametrix method produces also lower bounds.
Let $P=\mathbb{R}^n_x\times \mathbb{R}_t$ and set
\[
Q=\{(x,t,\xi ,\tau );\; (x,t),(\xi ,\tau )\in P,\; \tau <t\}.
\]
The space of continuous and bounded functions $f:P\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ is denoted by $C_b^0(P)$.
Let $f\in C_b^0(P)$. We say that $f$ is H\"older continuous with exponent $\alpha$, $0<\alpha \le 1$, if
\[
[f]_\alpha =\sup\left\{ \frac{|f(x,t)-f(x',t')|}{|(x-x',t-t')|_\alpha },\; (x,t),\; (x',t') \in P,\; (x,t)\ne (x',t')\right\}<\infty ,
\]
where
\[
|(x-x',t-t')|_\alpha=\left(|x-x'|^2+|t-t'|\right)^{\alpha/2}.
\]
We define
\[
C^\alpha (P)=\{ f\in C_b^0(P);\; [f]_\alpha <\infty\}.
\]
$C^\alpha (P)$ is a Banach space when it is endowed with its natural norm
\[
\|f\|_\alpha =\|f\|_\infty +[f]_\alpha
\]
and we also use the notation
\[
\{f\}_\alpha =\sup\left\{\frac{|f(x,t)-f(x',t)|}{|x-x'|^\alpha};\; x,x'\in \mathbb{R}^n,\; x\neq x'\; \mbox{and}\; t\in \mathbb{R}\right\}.
\]
We consider the second order parabolic operator
\begin{equation} \label{defL}
L=\sum_{i,j=1}^na_{ij}(x,t)\partial ^2_{ij} +\sum_{i=1}^n b_i(x,t) \partial _i +q(x,t)-\partial_t
\end{equation}
with the following assumptions on its coefficients.
\noindent
(a1) $a_{ij}\in C^\alpha (P)$, $1\le i,j\le n$.
\noindent
(a2) The matrix $\mathbf{a}(x,t)=(a_{ij}(x,t))$, $(x,t)\in P$, is symmetric, real-valued, and there exist constants $\kappa>0$, $M >0$ so that
\[
\kappa |\eta|^2 \le \langle \mathbf{a}(x,t)\eta ,\eta \rangle \le M |\eta |^2,\;\; (x,t)\in P,\; \eta \in \mathbb{R}^n.
\]
\noindent
(a3) $b_i$, $q \in C_b^0(P)$, $1\le i\le n$.
\noindent
(a4) There exists a constant $N_1>0$ so that
\[
\sum_{i,j =1}^n[a_{ij}]_\alpha \le N_1.
\]
\noindent
(a5) There exists a constant $N_2>0$ so that
\[
\sum_{i=1}^n \|b_i\|_\infty +\|q\|_\infty \le N_2.
\]
\noindent
(a6) $\{b_i\}_\alpha <\infty$, $1\le i\le n$, and $\{q\}_\alpha <\infty$.
Henceforth we use for convenience the notation $\mathfrak{D}$ for $(n,\alpha ,N_1,N_2, M,\kappa )$.
In this paper the fundamental solution constructed by the parametrix method is denoted by $E=E(x,t;\xi ,\tau )$, $(x,t,\xi ,\tau )\in Q$. Recall that $E$ is a fundamental solution if $E\in C^2(Q)$, $LE=0$ and
\[
\lim_{t\rightarrow \tau}\int_{\mathbb{R}^n} E(x,t;\xi ,\tau )f(\xi )d\xi=f(x),\;\; f\in C_0^\infty (\mathbb{R}^n).
\]
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem-ge}
Let
\[
c=\frac{1}{8M}\;\; \mbox{and}\;\; d=\frac{4 \ln \left [ e2^{3n}(M\kappa ^{-1})^{n/2}\Gamma (n/2+1)\right]}{\kappa}.
\]
Under assumptions (a1) to (a6), there exist four constants $\aleph _i=\aleph_i(\mathfrak{D})$, $i=0,1,2,3$, $\aleph_0>0$, $\aleph_1 \ge 0$, $\aleph_2>0$ and $\aleph_3\ge 0$, such that
\begin{align}
\aleph _0e^{-\aleph _1(t-\tau )}(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}}e^{-d\frac{|x-\xi|^2}{t-\tau}}\le E(x,&t;\xi ,\tau)\label{ge1}
\\
&\le \aleph _2e^{\aleph _3(t-\tau )}(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}}e^{-c\frac{|x-\xi|^2}{t-\tau}},\nonumber
\end{align}
for all $(x,t,\xi ,\tau )\in Q$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}\label{rem-ge1}
{\rm
By inspecting the proof of Theorem \ref{theorem-ge} we see that, in the Gaussian upper bound, we can substitute $c$ by $c^\epsilon=\frac{\epsilon}{4M}$, $0<\epsilon <1$, and $\aleph_i$ by $\aleph _i^\epsilon$, $i=2,3$, with an explicit dependence of $\aleph _2^\epsilon$ and $\aleph _3^\epsilon$ on $\epsilon$.
}
\end{remark}
\subsection{Consequences}
Let $\Omega$ be a $C^{1,1}$-bounded domain of $\mathbb{R}^n$. We denote the parabolic Dirichlet-Green (resp. Neumann-Green) function on $\Omega$ by $G_\Omega ^D$ (resp. $G_\Omega^N$).
It is well known that, according to the maximum principle, $0\le G_\Omega ^D\le E$. Therefore as a consequence of Theorem \ref{theorem-ge}, we have
\begin{corollary}\label{corollary-ge1}
Let the coefficients of $L$ satisfy assumptions (a1) to (a6). Then the Dirichlet-Green function $G_\Omega^D$ satisfies
\[
0\le G_\Omega ^D(x,t;\xi ,\tau)\le \aleph _2e^{\aleph _3(t-\tau )}(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}}e^{-c\frac{|x-\xi|^2}{t-\tau}}, \quad (x,t,\xi ,\tau )\in Q,
\]
where the constants in this inequality are the same as in Theorem \ref{theorem-ge}.
\end{corollary}
We say that $\Omega$ satisfies the chain condition if there exists a constant $\varpi >0$ such that for any two points $x$, $y\in \Omega$ and for any positive integer $m$ there exists a sequence $(x_i)_{0\leq i\leq m}$ of points in $\Omega$ such that $x_0=x$, $x_m=y$ and
\[
|x_{i+1}-x_i|\leq \frac{\varpi}{m}|x-y|,\;\; i=0,\ldots ,m-1.
\]
The sequence $(x_i)_{0\leq i\leq m}$ is named a chain connecting $x$ and $y$.
Since any bounded Lipschitz domain has the chain condition (this fact can be easily deduced from \cite[Corollary A.1]{CY}), an adaptation of the proof of \cite[Theorem 3.1]{Ch} (see also \cite{CK}) and the reproducing property enable us to get the following result.
\begin{corollary}\label{corollary-ge2}
If the coefficients of $L$ satisfy assumptions (a1) to (a6) then there exist five constants $c_0=c_0(\mathfrak{D})$ and $\aleph _i=\aleph_i(\mathfrak{D})>0$, $i=0,1,2,3$, such that
\begin{align*}
\aleph _0e^{-\aleph _1(t-\tau )}(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}}e^{-c_0\frac{|x-\xi|^2}{t-\tau}}\le G_\Omega ^N(x,&t;\xi ,\tau)
\\
&\le \aleph _2e^{\aleph _3(t-\tau )}(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}}e^{-c\frac{|x-\xi|^2}{t-\tau}},
\end{align*}
for all $(x,t,\xi ,\tau )\in Q$, where $c$ is as in Theorem \eqref{theorem-ge}.
\end{corollary}
\section{Preliminaries}
In this section the coefficients of $L$ satisfy assumptions (a1) to (a5).
\subsection{Basic properties of generalized Gaussian kernels}
In the sequel we frequently use
\begin{equation}\label{GI}
\int_{\mathbb{R}}e^{-\rho ^2}d\rho =\sqrt{\pi}.
\end{equation}
The Gaussian heat kernel is defined as follows
\begin{equation}\label{hk1}
G(x,t)=\frac{1}{(4\pi t)^{\frac{n}{2}}}e^{-\frac{|x|^2}{4t}},\quad x\in \mathbb{R}^n,\; t>0.
\end{equation}
We have, according to Fubini's theorem,
\[
\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}G(x,t)dx=\left(\int_{\mathbb{R}} \frac{1}{2\sqrt{\pi t}}e^{-\frac{y ^2}{4t}}dy \right)^n,\quad t>0.
\]
Then the change of variable $\rho= \frac{y}{2\sqrt{t}}$ yields
\begin{equation}\label{hk2}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}G(x,t)dx=1,\quad t>0,
\end{equation}
where we used the value of the Gauss integral \eqref{GI}.
If $\mathbf{a}=(a^{ij})$ is $n\times n$ symmetric positive definite matrix, we define the generalized Gaussian heat kernel by
\begin{equation}\label{hk3}
G_{\mathbf{a}}(x,t)= \frac{\sqrt{\mbox{det}\, \mathbf{a}}}{(4\pi t)^{\frac{n}{2}}}e^{-\frac{\langle \mathbf{a}x,x\rangle }{4t}},\;\; x\in \mathbb{R}^n,\; t>0.
\end{equation}
Let $\mathbf{d}=\mbox{diag}(d_1,\ldots ,d_n)$ be a diagonal matrix and $\mathbf{u}$ an orthogonal matrix, that is $\mathbf{u}^t\mathbf{u}=I$, so that $\mathbf{u}\mathbf{a}\mathbf{u}^t=\mathbf{d}$. Then
\[
\langle \mathbf{a}x,x\rangle =\langle \mathbf{d}\mathbf{u}x,\mathbf{u}x\rangle, \quad \mbox{det}\, \mathbf{a}=\prod_{i=1}^n d_i
\]
and
\[
\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}G_{\mathbf{a}}(x,t)dx=\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\frac{\sqrt{\mbox{det}\, \mathbf{a}}}{(4\pi t)^{\frac{n}{2}}}e^{-\frac{\langle \mathbf{d}\mathbf{u}x,\mathbf{u}x\rangle}{4t}}dx,\quad t>0.
\]
Since $|\mbox{det}\, \mathbf{u}|=1$, the change of variable $y=\mathbf{u}x$ gives
\[
\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}G_{\mathbf{a}}(x,t)dx=\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\frac{\sqrt{\mbox{det}\, \mathbf{a}}}{(4\pi t)^{\frac{n}{2}}}e^{-\frac{\langle\mathbf{d}x,x\rangle}{4t}}dx,\quad t>0.
\]
Applying again Fubini's theorem, we get
\begin{align}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}G_{\mathbf{a}}(x,t)dx&=\sqrt{\mbox{det}\, \mathbf{a}}\prod_{j=1}^n \int_{\mathbb{R}}\frac{1}{2\sqrt{\pi t}}e^{-\frac{d_i\rho ^2}{4t}}d\rho \label{hk4-}
\\
& =\sqrt{\mbox{det}\, \mathbf{a}}\prod_{j=1}^n \int_{\mathbb{R}}\frac{1}{2\sqrt{d_i\pi t}}e^{-\frac{\rho ^2}{4t}}d\rho \nonumber
\\
& =\prod_{j=1}^n \int_{\mathbb{R}}\frac{1}{2\sqrt{\pi t}}e^{-\frac{\rho ^2}{4t}}d\rho=1,\quad t>0.\nonumber
\end{align}
It is straightforward to check that $G_{\mathbf{a}}\in C^\infty (\mathbb{R}^n \times (0,\infty ))$ and, since
\[
\partial _k \langle \mathbf{a}x,x\rangle =2\sum_{j=1}^na^{kj}x^j =2(\mathbf{a}x)_k,\quad x\in \mathbb{R}^n,
\]
we have
\begin{equation}\label{hk4}
\partial _k G_{\mathbf{a}}(x,t)= -\frac{1}{2t}G_{\mathbf{a}}(x,t )(\mathbf{a}x)_k,\quad x\in \mathbb{R}^n,\; t>0.
\end{equation}
We easily derive from \eqref{hk4}
\begin{equation}\label{hk5}
\partial ^2_{k\ell} G_{\mathbf{a}}(x,t)= \frac{1}{4t^2}G_{\mathbf{a}}(x,t )(\mathbf{a}x)_k(\mathbf{a}x)_\ell -\frac{1}{2t}G_{\mathbf{a}}(x,t )a^{k\ell},\quad x\in \mathbb{R}^n,\; t>0.
\end{equation}
Let $\mathbf{a}^{-1}=(a_{ij})$. Inserting the identity
\[
\sum_{k,\ell =1}^na_{k\ell}(\mathbf{a}x)_k(\mathbf{a}x)_\ell= \langle\mathbf{a}^{-1}\mathbf{a}x, x\rangle=\langle \mathbf{a}x,x\rangle
\]
in \eqref{hk5} we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{hk6}
\sum_{k,\ell =1}^na_{k\ell}\partial ^2_{k\ell} G_{\mathbf{a}}(x,t)= \left(\frac{1}{4t^2}\langle \mathbf{a}x,x\rangle -\frac{n}{2t}\right)G_{\mathbf{a}}(x,t ),\quad x\in \mathbb{R}^n,\; t>0.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, it is straightforward to check that
\begin{equation}\label{hk7}
\partial _tG_{\mathbf{a}}(x,t) = \left(\frac{1}{4t^2}\langle \mathbf{a}x,x\rangle -\frac{n}{2t}\right)G_{\mathbf{a}}(x,t ),\quad x\in \mathbb{R}^n,\; t>0.
\end{equation}
We define the parabolic operator $L_{\mathbf{a}^{-1}}$ by
\[
L_{\mathbf{a}^{-1}}= \sum_{i,j =1}^na_{ij}\partial ^2_{ij} -\partial _t.
\]
Comparing \eqref{hk6} and \eqref{hk7} we see that $G_{\mathbf{a}}$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{hk8}
L_{\mathbf{a}^{-1}}G_{\mathbf{a}}(x,t)=0 ,\quad x\in \mathbb{R}^n,\; t>0.
\end{equation}
\subsection{The parametrix}
Let $\mathbf{a}^{-1}(x,t)=(a^{ij}(x,t))$, $(x,t)\in P$, where $(a^{ij}(x,t))$ is the inverse of the matrix $(a_{ij}(x,t))$, and define
\[
Z(x,t;\xi ,\tau )=G_{\mathbf{a}^{-1}(\xi ,\tau)}(x-\xi ,t-\tau ),\quad (x,t,\xi,\tau )\in Q,
\]
that is
\begin{equation}\label{fs1}
Z(x,t;\xi ,\tau )= \frac{\sqrt{\mbox{det}\,\mathbf{a}^{-1}(\xi ,\tau)}}{(4\pi (t-\tau))^{\frac{n}{2}}}e^{-\frac{\langle \mathbf{a}^{-1}(\xi ,\tau )(x-\xi ),(x-\xi )\rangle }{4(t-\tau )}},\quad (x,t,\xi,\tau )\in Q.
\end{equation}
This function is usually called the parametrix associated to the parabolic operator $L$. According to the results of the previous subsection, for any $(\xi ,\tau )\in P$, $Z(\cdot ,\cdot ;\xi ,\tau )\in C^\infty (P_\tau )$ with $P_\tau =\{(x,t)\in \mathbb{R}^n;\; t>\tau\}$, and
\begin{equation}\label{fs2}
\sum_{i,j=1}^na_{ij}(\xi ,\tau)\partial _{ij}^2Z(\cdot ,\cdot ;\xi ,\tau ) -\partial _tZ(\cdot ,\cdot ;\xi ,\tau )=0\;\; \mbox{in}\; P_\tau .
\end{equation}
Let us define
\begin{align*}
&d_i(x,t;\xi ,\tau )=-\frac{1}{2(t-\tau)}\sum_{j=1}^na^{ij}(\xi ,\tau )(x_j-\xi _j),
\\
&
d_{ij}(x,t;\xi ,\tau)=-\frac{a^{ij}(\xi ,\tau )}{2(t-\tau)}+d_i(x,t;\xi ,\tau)d_j(x,t;\xi ,\tau).
\end{align*}
From \eqref{hk4} and \eqref{hk5} we have
\[
\partial _iZ=d_iZ\;\; \mbox{and}\;\; \partial_{ij}^2Z=d_{ij}Z.
\]
Therefore, taking into account \eqref{fs2}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{fs3}
LZ=\left[ \sum_{i,j=1}^n\left(a_{ij}(x,t)-a_{ij}(\xi ,\tau )\right)d_{ij}+\sum_{i=1}^nd_ib_i+q\right]Z=\Psi Z,
\end{equation}
where
\[
\Psi = \sum_{i,j=1}^n\left(a_{ij}(x,t)-a_{ij}(\xi ,\tau )\right)d_{ij} +\sum_{i=1}^nd_ib_i+q.
\]
We need a pointwise estimate for $LZ$. To this end, we start with the following lemma
\begin{lemma}\label{pa1}
We have
\begin{equation}\label{fs4}
|\mathbf{a}^{-1}(x,t)\eta |\le \frac{1}{\kappa}|\eta |,\quad (x,t)\in P,\; \eta \in \mathbb{R}^n ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{fs8+}
\sup_{1\le i,j\le n}\|a^{ij}\|_\infty \le \frac{1}{\kappa}.
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{fs8++}
\frac{\langle \mathbf{a}^{-1}(x,\tau )(x-\xi ), x-\xi\rangle }{4(t-\tau )}\ge \frac{1}{4M}\frac{|x-\xi]^2}{t-\tau}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
From assumption (a2), we have
\[
\langle \mathbf{a}(x,t)\eta ,\eta \rangle \ge \kappa |\eta |^2,\;\; (x,t)\in P,\; \eta \in \mathbb{R}^n.
\]
In this inequality we get by substituting $\eta$ by $\mathbf{a}^{-1}(x,t)\eta$
\[
|\mathbf{a}^{-1}(x,t)\eta ||\eta |\ge \langle \mathbf{a}^{-1}(x,t)\eta ,\eta \rangle \ge \kappa |\mathbf{a}^{-1}(x,t)\eta |^2,\quad (x,t)\in P,\; \eta \in \mathbb{R}^n
\]
and \eqref{fs4} follows.
Since $a^{ij}=\langle \mathbf{a}^{-1} \mathbf{e}_i, \mathbf{e}_j\rangle $, where $(\mathbf{e}_1,\ldots ,\mathbf{e}_n)$ the canonical basis of $\mathbb{R}^n$, \eqref{fs8+} follows from \eqref{fs4}.
Finally, \eqref{fs8++} is equivalent to $\langle \mathbf{a}^{-1}(x,\tau )\eta, \eta \rangle \ge \frac{1}{M}|\eta|^2$ or $\langle \mathbf{a}(x,\tau )\eta, \eta \rangle \le M|\eta|^2$, which holds by assumption.
\end{proof}
From \eqref{fs4}, we get
\begin{equation}\label{fs9}
\|d_i\|_\infty \le \frac{|x-\xi |}{2\kappa (t-\tau)}\quad {\rm or } \quad \|d_i\|_\infty \le \frac{\varrho}{2\kappa \sqrt{t-\tau}}
\end{equation}
where
\[
\varrho =\frac{|x-\xi |}{\sqrt{t-\tau}}.
\]
It is easy to see that \eqref{fs8+} and \eqref{fs9} entail
\begin{equation}\label{fs10}
\|d_{ij}\|_\infty \le \left(\frac{1}{2\kappa }+\frac{\varrho ^2}{4\kappa^2}\right)\frac{1}{t-\tau }.
\end{equation}
Hence
\begin{equation}\label{fs11}
\left|\sum_{i,j=1}^n\left(a_{ij}(x,t)-a_{ij}(\xi ,\tau )\right)d_{ij}\right| \le N_1\left(\frac{1}{2\kappa }+\frac{\varrho ^2}{4\kappa^2}\right)\frac{(1+\varrho ^2 )^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}}{(t-\tau)^{1-\frac{\alpha}{2}}}.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, we get from \eqref{fs9}
\begin{equation}\label{fs9.1}
\left| \sum_{i=1}^n b_id_i +q \right|\le N_2 \left (\frac{\varrho}{2k \sqrt{t-\tau}}+1\right ) \le N_2\frac{1+\frac{\varrho}{2\kappa}}{(t-\tau)^{1-\frac{\alpha}{2}}},\quad t-\tau \le 1.
\end{equation}
In light of \eqref{fs11} and \eqref{fs9.1} we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{fs12}
\|\Psi \|_\infty \le N_1\left(\frac{1}{2\kappa }+\frac{\varrho ^2}{4\kappa^2}\right)\frac{(1+\varrho ^2 )^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}}{(t-\tau)^{1-\frac{\alpha}{2}}}
+N_2\frac{1+\frac{\varrho}{2\kappa}}{(t-\tau)^{1-\frac{\alpha}{2}}} ,\quad t-\tau \le 1.
\end{equation}
Now \eqref{fs8++} implies
\begin{equation}\label{fs13}
|Z(x,t)|\le \frac{1}{ (4\kappa \pi (t-\tau ))^{\frac{n}{2}}}e^{-\frac{1}{4M}\varrho ^2}.
\end{equation}
Recall that $c=\frac{1}{8M}$ and let
\begin{equation}\label{e}
C=\frac{1}{ (4\kappa\pi )^{\frac{n}{2}}}\max_{\lambda >0}\left[N_1\left(\frac{1}{2\kappa }+\frac{\lambda ^2}{4\kappa^2}\right)(1+\lambda ^2 )^{\alpha/2}
+N_2\left(\frac{\lambda}{\kappa}+1\right)\right]e^{-c\lambda ^2}.
\end{equation}
If $\Phi_1=LZ=\Psi Z$, then a combination of \eqref{fs12} and \eqref{fs13} gives
\begin{equation}\label{fs14}
|LZ|=|\Psi Z|\le C(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}-1+\beta }e^{-c\varrho ^2},\;\; t-\tau \le 1,
\end{equation}
with $\beta =\frac{\alpha}{2}$.
\section{Two-sided Gaussian bounds}
In this section the coefficients of $L$ satisfy (a1) to (a6). Let $\Phi_1=LZ$,
\[
\Phi_{\ell +1}(x,t,\xi ,\tau)= \int_\tau ^t\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\Phi_1(x,t;\eta ,\sigma )\Phi_\ell (\eta ,\sigma ,\xi ,\tau )d\eta d\sigma ,\quad \ell \ge 1
\]
and define
\[
\Phi=\sum_{\ell \ge 1}\Phi_\ell .
\]
Let $E$ be the fundamental solution, associated to $L$, constructed by the parametrix method. According to \cite{Fr,LSU}, $E$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{fs18}
E(x,t;\xi,\tau )=Z(x,t;\xi ,\tau )+\int_\tau^t\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}Z(x,t;\eta ,\sigma )\Phi (\eta ,\sigma ; \xi ,\eta )d\eta d\sigma ,
\end{equation}
for all $(x,t,\xi ,\tau )\in Q$.
We refer to \cite[Chapter 1]{Fr} or to \cite[Chapter IV]{LSU} for more details.
\subsection{Preliminary estimate}
The following lemma will be useful in the sequel.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma2.1}$($\cite[Chapter 1, Section 4]{Fr}$)$
Let $\lambda >0$ and $-\infty <\gamma,\delta <1$. Then
\begin{align*}
\int_\tau ^t\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}(t-\sigma )^{-\frac{n}{2}-\gamma}e^{-\frac{\lambda |x-\eta |^2}{t-\sigma }}&(\sigma -\tau )^{-\frac{n}{2}-\delta}e^{-\frac{\lambda |\eta -\xi |^2}{\sigma -\tau}}d\eta d\sigma
\\
&=\left(\frac{4\pi}{\lambda }\right)^{\frac{n}{2}}B\left(1-\gamma,1-\delta \right)(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}+1-\gamma-\delta}e^{-\frac{\lambda |x-\xi |^2}{t-\tau }},
\end{align*}
where $B$ is the Euler beta function.
\end{lemma}
Let $C$ be the constant given by \eqref{e} and assume that $t-\tau \le 1$. We deduce from \eqref{fs14}
\begin{equation}\label{fs14+}
|\Phi_1|\le C(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}-1+\beta }e^{-c\varrho ^2}.
\end{equation}
Let $\widetilde{C}= \left(\frac{4\pi}{c }\right)^{\frac{n}{2}}$. We have by applying Lemma \ref{lemma2.1}
\[
|\Phi_2|\le \widetilde{C} C^2B(\beta ,\beta )(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}-1+2\beta}e^{-c\varrho ^2}.
\]
By induction in $\ell$, wo obtain
\[
|\Phi_\ell |\le \widetilde{C}^{\ell -1} C^{\ell}\prod_{j=1}^{\ell -1}B(\beta ,j\beta )(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}-1+\ell \beta}e^{-c\varrho ^2},\quad \ell \ge 2.
\]
If $\Gamma$ is the Euler gamma function, we recall that
\[
B(\beta ,j\beta )=\frac{\Gamma (\beta )\Gamma (j\beta )}{\Gamma ((j+1)\beta )}.
\]
Therefore
\[
\prod_{j=1}^{\ell -1}B(\beta ,j\beta )=\frac{\Gamma (\beta)^\ell }{\Gamma (\ell \beta )}
\]
and hence
\[
|\Phi_\ell |\le \widetilde{C}^{-1} \frac{\Lambda ^\ell}{\Gamma (\ell \beta )}(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}-1+\ell \beta}e^{-c\varrho ^2},\quad \ell \ge 2,
\]
where $\Lambda =C\widetilde{C}\Gamma (\beta)$. Since $t-\tau \le 1$, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{fs15}
|\Phi_\ell |\le \widetilde{C}^{-1} \frac{\Lambda ^\ell}{\Gamma (\ell \beta )}(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}-1+ \beta}e^{-c\varrho ^2},\quad \ell \ge 2,
\end{equation}
If $\overline{C}=\widetilde{C}^{-1} $, then \eqref{fs15} takes the form
\begin{equation}\label{fs16}
|\Phi_\ell |\le\overline{C}\frac{\Lambda ^\ell}{\Gamma (\ell \beta )}(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}-1+ \beta}e^{-c\varrho ^2},\quad \ell \ge 2.
\end{equation}
From Stirling's formula for the $\Gamma$ function (see for instance \cite[Chapter V, Section 3]{LV}) we have
\[
\Gamma (x+1 )\sim x^x e^{-x}\sqrt{2\pi x}, \quad x \to \infty .
\]
Therefore, the series
\begin{equation} \label{S}
S=C+\overline{C}\sum_{\ell \ge 2}\frac{\Lambda ^\ell}{\Gamma (\ell \beta )}
\end{equation}
is convergent.
We get from \eqref{fs14} and \eqref{fs16}
\begin{equation}\label{fs17}
|\Phi |\le S(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}-1+ \beta}e^{-c\varrho ^2}.
\end{equation}
\subsection{The upper bound}
In light of \eqref{fs14} and \eqref{fs17}, Lemma \ref{lemma2.1} yields
\begin{equation}\label{fs19}
\left| \int_\tau^t\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}Z(x,t;\eta ,\sigma )\Phi (\eta ,\sigma ; \xi ,\tau )d\eta d\sigma\right|\le \frac{SB(1,\beta )}{(\kappa c)^{\frac{n}{2}}}(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}+ \beta}e^{-c\varrho ^2},
\end{equation}
for all $(x,t,\xi ,\tau )\in Q$ and $t-\tau \le 1$.
Let
\[
\widehat{C}=\frac{1}{(4\kappa \pi )^{\frac{n}{2}}}+\frac{SB(1,\beta )}{(\kappa c)^{\frac{n}{2}}}.
\]
As an immediate consequence of \eqref{fs14} and \eqref{fs19}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{fs20}
|E(x,t;\xi ,\tau )|\le \widehat{C}(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}}e^{-c\varrho ^2},\quad (x,t,\xi ,\tau )\in Q,\; t-\tau \le 1.
\end{equation}
We recall that $E$ possesses the so-called reproducing property
\begin{equation}\label{rp}
E(x,t;\xi ,\tau )=\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}E(x,t;\eta ,\sigma )E(\eta ,\sigma ;\xi ,\tau )\, d\eta,\quad \tau< \sigma < t .
\end{equation}
Applying \eqref{fs20}, we get
\begin{equation}\label{fs21}
|E(x,t,\xi ,\tau )|\le \widehat{C}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}(t-\sigma )^{-\frac{n}{2}}e^{-c\frac{|x-\eta |^2}{4(t-\sigma )}}(\sigma -\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}}e^{-c\frac{|\eta -\xi|^2}{4(\sigma -\tau )}}d\eta ,
\end{equation}
for all $t-\tau \le 2$, where $\sigma =\frac{t+\tau}{2}$.
We introduce a variable $z$ so that
\[
c\frac{|x-\eta |^2}{4(t-\sigma )}+c\frac{|\eta -\xi|^2}{4(\sigma -\tau )}=c\frac{|x -\xi|^2}{4(t -\tau )}+|z|^2.
\]
Using the identity $|x-\eta |^2=|x-\xi |^2+|\xi -\eta |^2+\langle x-\xi ,\xi -\eta \rangle$, we get
\begin{align*}
\frac{|x-\eta |^2}{t-\sigma }+\frac{|\eta -\xi|^2}{\sigma -\tau }&-\frac{|x -\xi|^2}{t -\tau }
\\
&=\frac{(\sigma -\tau )|x-\xi |^2}{(t-\sigma)(t-\tau)} +\frac{(t-\tau )|\eta -\xi| ^2}{(t-\sigma )(\sigma -\tau )} +\frac{2\langle x-\xi ,\xi -\eta \rangle}{(t-\sigma)^2} .
\\
&=\left| \left(\frac{\sigma -\tau}{(t-\sigma)(t-\tau)}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}} (x-\xi ) +\left(\frac{t-\tau}{(t-\sigma )(\sigma -\tau )}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}(\xi -\eta ) \right|^2 .
\end{align*}
Therefore, we can for instance take
\[
z=\left(c\frac{t-\tau}{t-\sigma}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\frac{\eta -\xi}{2(\sigma -\tau)^{\frac{1}{2}}}+\left(c\frac{\sigma -\tau}{t-\sigma}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\frac{\xi -x}{2(t -\tau)^{\frac{1}{2}}}.
\]
Passing to the variable $z$ in \eqref{fs21}, we deduce
\[
|E(x,t,\xi ,\tau )|\le \widetilde{C} \widehat{C}^2 (t-\tau )^{-\frac{n}{2}}e^{-c\varrho ^2},\quad t-\tau \le 2.
\]
Next assume that $t-\tau >2$ and let $m$ be the smallest integer so that $t-\tau \le m$. Define
\[
\sigma _0=\tau ,\quad \sigma_1=\tau +\frac{t-\tau}{m},\ldots ,\sigma_{m-1}=\tau+(m-1)\frac{t-\tau}{m},\quad \sigma_m=t.
\]
Iterating the reproducing property \eqref{rp}, we get
\begin{align*}
E(x,t;\xi ,\tau )=\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}\ldots\int_{\mathbb{R}^m} E(x,\sigma_m,\eta _m,\sigma_{m-1})E(\eta_m ,&\sigma_{m-1} ,\eta_{m-1} ,\sigma_{m-2})
\\
&\ldots E(\eta _1,\sigma_1,\xi ,\sigma_0)d\eta _1\ldots d\eta_m.
\end{align*}
Repeating inductively the case $m=2$, we find
\[
|E(x,t,\xi ,\tau )|\le \widetilde{C}^{m-1} \widehat{C}^{m} (t-\tau )^{-\frac{n}{2}}e^{-c\varrho ^2}.
\]
This and the fact that $m<t-\tau+1$ entail
\[
|E(x,t,\xi ,\tau )|\le \widetilde{C}^{-1} e^{\max\left(0,\ln (\widetilde{C}\widehat{C})\right)}e^{\max\left(0,\ln (\widetilde{C}\widehat{C})\right)(t-\tau )} (t-\tau )^{-\frac{n}{2}}e^{-c\varrho ^2}.
\]
This is the expected Gaussian upper bound.
A more precise upper bound can be obtained by optimizing the constants appearing in the previous computations. We do it in the special case $b_i=q=0$, where the iteration procedure based on \eqref{rp} is not needed.
\begin{corollary} \label{preciseupper}
If $b_i=q=0$, then
\[
E(x,t;\xi, \tau) \le \frac{1}{(4\kappa \pi)^{\frac{n}{2}}}(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}}e^{-\frac{\varrho^2}{4M}}\left (1+c_1(t-\tau)^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}e^{c_2 \left ((t-\tau)+ \varrho^\gamma \right)}\right ),
\]
for all $(x,t,\xi ,\tau )\in Q$, where $\varrho =\frac{|x-\xi |}{\sqrt{t-\tau}}$ and $\gamma=\frac{4\alpha+8}{3\alpha+4}<2$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
First we note that the restriction $t-\tau \le 1$ is not needed in \eqref{fs12}, since it comes from \eqref{fs9.1} only. Then we define $C_\epsilon$ as in \eqref{e} with $c=\frac{\epsilon}{4M}$, $N_2=0$. It is easy to see that $C_\epsilon \le A\epsilon^{-2-\alpha}$ with $A>0$ and this leads to \eqref{fs14} with this $C_\epsilon$ and $c=\frac{(1-\epsilon)}{4M}$. Next we write \eqref{fs16} with $\ell \beta$ instead of $\beta$, since we no longer assume that $t-\tau \le 1$.
Entering this estimate in the constants $C, \Lambda$ defining $S$ (see \eqref{S}), using \cite[Theorem 2, Section 15, Chapter V]{Chabat} and Stirling's formula again, we deduce that
\[
\sum_{\ell \ge 2} \frac{\Lambda^\ell (t-\tau)^{\ell \beta} }{\Gamma(\ell \beta)}\le c_1 (t-\tau)^{2\beta}e^{c_2((t-\tau)+\Lambda^{\frac{1}{\beta}})}
\]
and $S \le c_1 e^{c_2 ((t-\tau)+\epsilon^{-(2+\frac{4}{\alpha})})}$. Then we use this estimate in \eqref{fs19} with $c=\frac{(1-\epsilon)}{4M}$ to get
\begin{align*}
&\left| \int_\tau^t\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}Z(x,t;\eta ,\sigma )\Phi (\eta ,\sigma ; \xi ,\eta )d\eta d\sigma\right|
\\
&\hskip 3cm \le c_1(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}+\beta}e^{-\frac{(1-\epsilon)}{4M}\varrho ^2+c_2\epsilon^{-(2+\frac{4}{\alpha})}+c_2(t-\tau)}.
\end{align*}
Optimizing over $\epsilon$ and using \eqref{fs18}, the corollary follows.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The lower bound}
From the previous analysis, we easily get
\[
Z(x,t;\xi ,\tau )\ge \frac{1}{(4\pi M )^{\frac{n}{2}}}(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}}e^{-\frac{1}{\kappa}\rho ^2}.
\]
Hence,
\begin{equation}\label{fs22}
Z(x,t;\xi ,\tau )\ge \frac{e^{-1}}{(4\pi M )^{\frac{n}{2}}}(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}},\quad |x-\xi |^2\le \kappa (t-\tau ).
\end{equation}
A combination of \eqref{fs19} and \eqref{fs22} yields
\[
E(x,t;\xi ,\tau )\ge \frac{e^{-1}}{(4\pi M )^{\frac{n}{2}}}(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}}-\frac{SB(1,\beta )}{(\kappa c)^{\frac{n}{2}}}(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}+ \beta} ,
\]
for all $|x-\xi |^2\le \kappa (t-\tau )$ and $t-\tau \le 1$.
Fix $\delta \le 1$ sufficiently small in such a way that
\[
\frac{e^{-1}}{(4\pi M )^{\frac{n}{2}}}-\frac{SB(1,\beta )}{(\kappa c)^{\frac{n}{2}}}\delta ^\beta\ge \frac{e^{-1}}{2(4\pi M )^{\frac{n}{2}}}.
\]
Then, with $\mu=\frac{e^{-1}}{2(4\pi M )^{\frac{n}{2}}}$,
\begin{equation}\label{fs23}
E(x,t;\xi ,\tau )\ge \mu (t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}} ,\quad |x-\xi |^2\le \kappa (t-\tau ),\; t-\tau\le \delta .
\end{equation}
Let $x$ and $\xi$ be given so that $2|x-\xi | >\sqrt{\kappa (t-\tau)}$ and let $m\ge 2$ be the smallest integer so that
\begin{equation}\label{fs24}
\frac{4|x-\xi |^2}{m}\le \kappa (t-\tau).
\end{equation}
Define the sequence $(x_k)_{0\le k\le m}$
\[
x_k=x+\frac{k}{m}(\xi -x ),\quad 0\le k\le m.
\]
Set
\[
r=\frac{1}{4}\frac{\sqrt{\kappa (t-\tau)}}{\sqrt{m}}
\]
and
\[
\sigma _k=\tau +\frac{k}{m}(t-\tau ),\quad 0\le k\le m.
\]
Using \eqref{fs23}, the positivity of $E$ and the reproducing property, we get
\begin{align*}
E(x,t;&\xi ,\tau)
\\
&\ge \mu ^m\int_{B(x_1,r)}\ldots \int_{B(x_{m-1},r)} (\sigma _1-\sigma_0)^{-\frac{n}{2}}\ldots (\sigma _m-\sigma_{m-1})^{-\frac{n}{2}}d\eta_1\ldots d\eta_{m-1},
\end{align*}
where we used
\[
|x_{i+1}-x_i|=\frac{1}{\sqrt{m}}\frac{|x-\xi|}{\sqrt{m}}\le \frac{1}{2}\frac{\sqrt{\kappa (t-\tau)}}{\sqrt{m}}=2r,
\]
and
\begin{align*}
|\eta _{i+1}-\eta_i|\le |\eta_{i+1}&-x_{i+1}|+|x_{i+1}-x_i|+|x_i-\eta _i|
\\
&<2r+|x_{i+1}-x_i|\le 4r=\frac{\sqrt{\kappa (t-\tau)}}{\sqrt{m}}=\sqrt{\kappa (\sigma_{i+1}-\sigma_i)}.
\end{align*}
Whence
\[
E(x,t;\xi ,\tau )\ge \kappa ^{-\frac{n}{2}}\nu ^m (t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}},
\]
with
\[
\nu =\frac{\kappa^{\frac{n}{2}}}{e M^{\frac{n}{2}}2^{3n}\Gamma (n/2+1)} <1.
\]
Noting that
\[
m<\frac{4|x-\xi|^2}{\kappa (t-\tau)}+1,
\]
we obtain
\begin{align*}
E(x,t;\xi ,\tau )\ge \kappa ^{-\frac{n}{2}}&e^{-|\ln \nu |m}(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}}
\\
&\ge \kappa ^{-\frac{n}{2}}e^{-|\ln \nu |}(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}}e^{-\frac{4|\ln \nu |}{\kappa} \frac{|x-\xi|^2}{t-\tau}},\quad t-\tau \le \delta .
\end{align*}
If $C_0=\min \left(\mu ,\kappa ^{-\frac{n}{2}}e^{-|\ln \nu |}\right)$ and $d=\frac{4|\ln \nu |}{\kappa}$, then the last inequality and \eqref{fs23} yield
\[
E(x,t;\xi ,\tau )\ge C_0(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}}e^{-d\frac{|x-\xi|^2}{t-\tau}},\quad t-\tau \le \delta .
\]
We now proceed similarly to the case of the upper bound to remove the condition $t-\tau\le \delta$. If $m$ is the smallest integer so that $t-\tau \le m\delta$, we get
\[
E(x,t;\xi ,\tau )\ge \widetilde{C}^{-1}\left(\widetilde{C}C_0\right)^m(t-\tau)^{-\frac{n}{2}}e^{-d\varrho ^2},
\]
from which we deduce
\[
E(x,t;\xi ,\tau )\ge\widetilde{C}^{-1} e^{\min\left(0, \ln (\widetilde{C}C_0)\right)}e^{\min\left(0,\frac{\ln (\widetilde{C}C_0)}{\delta}\right)(t-\tau )} (t-\tau )^{-\frac{n}{2}}e^{-d\varrho ^2}.
\]
|
\section{Introduction}
Present universe is under acceleration phase \cite{Masi:2002hp} and the cosmic picture must be consequence of inflationary expansion at very early time \cite{inflation}.
The accelerating expansion could result from dynamical canonical or phantom scalar field with
time-dependent equation of state $w_{\phi}(t) < -1/3$
or from modification of general
relativity (see e.g. \cite{Nojiri:2006ri, Padmanabhan:2004av}). Conventional FLRW cosmology is the Einstein field equations, i.e. the Friedmann and acceleration equations with conservation in form of the fluid equation. The system is sourced by canonical (or phantom) scalar field and barotropic perfect fluids resulting in the cosmic kinematics. There is an alternative mathematical approach to the same system in which the cosmological equations are expressed in form non-linear Schr\"{o}dinger (NLS) equation. We review this in the following.
Ermakov system \cite{Er1, Er2}, which is a pair of non-linear second-order ordinary differential equations, was noticed to have a connection to standard FLRW cosmology sourced by a barotropic perfect fluid and a self-interacting canonical scalar field minimally coupled to gravity. This provides alternative analytical approach to the cosmological system \cite{Hawkins:2001zx}. One-dimensional Ermakov system decouples to single equation dubbed the Ermakov-Pinney (or Milne-Pinney) equation \cite{Er1, Pinney, Milne},
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
\ddot{b} + Q(t) b \;=\; \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{\lambda}{b^3}\,, \label{EP}
\ee
where $b = b(t) \equiv u^{-1}(t) = a^{n/2}$. Function $a$ is the scale factor and $t$ is cosmic time. Dot is $\d /\d t$. Albeit its non-linearity, its general solution is a superposition of particular solutions of a related linear second-order ordinary differential equation when the constant $\lambda = 0$ \cite{Pinney, lut}. As discussed in \cite{Hawkins:2001zx}, $Q(t)$ and $\lambda$ reads\footnote{Here we change the expression of variables in \cite{Hawkins:2001zx} so that it matches the later literatures.}
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
Q(t) = \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{\kappa^2 n}{4} {\dot{\phi}}^2 \;\;\;\; \text{and} \;\;\;\; \lambda = -\frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{D n^2 \kappa^2}{12}.
\ee
The system above is related to FLRW cosmology of the flat ($k=0$) case of the system,
\bea
H^2 & = & \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{\kappa^2}{3}\l(\rho_{\phi} + \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{D}{a^n} \right} \def\l{\left) - \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{k}{a^2}, \\
\epsilon(\ddot{\phi} + 3 H \dot{\phi})& = & - \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{\d V}{\d \phi}.
\eea
where the speed of light $c\equiv 1$, $\kappa^2 \equiv 8 \pi G$, $D \geq 0$ is proportional constant, $\epsilon = 1$ or $-1$ for canonical or phantom field cases. The scalar field density is, $\rho_{\phi} = (1/2)\epsilon \dot{\phi}^2 + V(\phi)$, the scalar field pressure is, $p_{\phi} = (1/2)\epsilon \dot{\phi}^2 - V(\phi)$. Barotropic fluid pressure and density are, $p_{\gamma} = w_{\gamma}\rho_{\gamma}$ and $\rho_{\gamma} = {D}/{a^n}$ where $n = 3(1+w_{\gamma})$. With further reparametrization $x(t) = \int u \, \d t$, the Ermakov-Pinney equation (\ref{EP}) is expressed as time-independent one-dimensional linear Schr\"{o}dinger equation,
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
u'' + \l[E - P(x) \right} \def\l{\left] u(x) = 0,
\ee
where $' \equiv \d/\d x $, $\: E = -(\kappa^2 n^2 D)/12 $ and $P(x) = (\kappa^2 n/4)\epsilon (\d \phi/\d x)^2 $. Hence flat FLRW cosmology with scalar field and a barotropic fluid can be described by a linear Schr\"{o}dinger equation. This relation is also applicable in case of RSII braneworld \cite{Hawkins:2001zx}. The connection between FLRW scalar field cosmologies to non-linear partial differential equations such as the Ermakov-Penny equation in 2+1 dimensions \cite{WK2_1} and 3+1 dimensions were further studied and blowup solutions are found, giving hope to have relevance to non-linear quantum cosmology \cite{WK3_1}. Non-flat ($k \neq 0$) case extension of the FLRW system is reported in \cite{WKCPG} and Bianchi I and V extension of the approach are also made. It is also found that Bianchi I Einstein field equation with scalar field and a perfect fluid is equivalent to linear Schr\"{o}dinger equation \cite{D'Ambroise:2007gm}.
Cosmology in form of Ermakov-Penny equation with $k>0$ is found to be corresponding to two-dimensional Bose-Einstein condensates \cite{Lidsey:2003ze}. Perturbative scheme of the solution of the Ermakov-Pinney equation was developed in connection to generalized WKB method \cite{Kamenshchik:2005kf}.
The work by \cite{Williams:2005bp} shows that a generalized Ermakov-Milne-Pinney (EMP) equation is completely equivalent to the FLRW scalar field cosmology (including the non-flat case). It comfirms and generalizes the result of \cite{Hawkins:2001zx}. The generalized EMP equation later was found to be equivalent to the NLS equation,
\bea u''(x) + \left[E-P(x)\right]
u(x)
= -\frac{nk}{2}u(x)^{(4-n)/n}\,, \label{schroeq} \eea
providing alternative approach to the FLRW scalar field cosmology with quantum-mechanical formulation \cite{D'Ambroise:2006kg}.
In the NLS-Friedmann correspondence, inputs are assumed scale factors which enable us to obtain exact solutions for a non-flat Friedmann universe with a barotropic fluid and a scalar field \cite{Gumjudpai:2007bx}.
Recently, parametric solutions of non-linear ordinary differential equation of which the special cases are homogeneous and inhomogenous cosmologies and Bose-Einstein condensation correspondence, are found \cite{DW2013}.
These literatures motivated studies on the NLS formulation of scalar field cosmology assuming scale factors functions \cite{Gumjudpai:2007qq, Phetnora:2008mf, Gumjudpai:2009ws, Gumjudpai:2008mg}. Detail of the NLS formulation is presented in D'Ambroise's dissertation \cite{DAmbroise:2010dgl} which also gives larger classes of solution of the system. Further connection in case of time-dependent NLS equation and Friedmann scalar field cosmology was studied and it is possible to fulfill the need of non-perturbative quantum description of gravity and cosmology since it establishes correspondence between quantum and gravitational systems \cite{Lidsey:2013osa}.
Here in this work, we investigate the time-independent NLS equation in connection to Friedmann formulation in the case of two barotropic fluids with a canonical scalar field. We consider and analyse solutions of the NLS system of the two-fluid case based on possible $u(x)$ solutions reported in \cite{DAmbroise:2010dgl}. We try to interpret the given possible solutions.
\section{Equation of motion}
Considering a FRW universe sourced by two non-interacting perfect fluids
and a minimally coupled scalar field $\phi$ with potential $V(\phi)$,
density and pressure of the fluids are given by
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
\rho_1 = \frac{D_1}{a^n},\qquad
\rho_2 = \frac{D_2}{a^m}, \label{densityev} \ee
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
p_1 = \l( \frac{n-3}{3} \right} \def\l{\left) \frac{D_1}{a^n},\qquad
p_2 = \l( \frac{m-3}{3} \right} \def\l{\left) \frac{D_2}{a^m},
\ee
whereas the scalar field density and pressure are given by
$
\rho_\phi = (1/2)\epsilon\dot\phi^2+V(\phi),\;
p_\phi = (1/2)\epsilon\dot\phi^2-V(\phi)
$ as above. The scalar equation of state is $w_{\phi} = p_{\phi}/\rho_{\phi}$.
The dynamics are governed by the Friedmann equation,
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
H^2=\frac{\kappa^2}{3}\rho_{\text{tot}}-\frac{k}{a^2}=
\frac{\kappa^2}{3}\left[\frac12\epsilon\dot\phi^2+V+\frac{D_1}{a^n}+\frac{D_2}{a^m}\right]-\frac{k}{a^2},
\ee
and by acceleration equation,
\bea
\frac{\ddot a}{a} &=& -\frac{\kappa^2}{6}(\rho_{\text{tot}}+3p_{\text{tot}}), \\ &=& -\frac{\kappa^2}{6}\left[2\epsilon\dot\phi^2-2V+(n-2)\frac{D_1}{a^n}+(m-2)\frac{D_2}{a^m}\right].
\eea
Note that the Klein-Gordon equation is a consequence of the above two equations.
It is sufficient to consider only the Friedmann equation and acceleration equation. Therefore
we have
\bea
\label{kin}
\epsilon\dot\phi(t)^2 &=& -\frac{2}{\kappa^2}\left[\dot H-\frac{k}{a^2}\right]-\frac{n D_1}{3a^n}-\frac{mD_2}{3a^m},\nonumber\\
\label{pot}
V(\phi) &=& \frac{3}{\kappa^2}\left[H^2+\frac{\dot H}{3}+\frac{2k}{3a^2}\right]+\l(\frac{n-6}{6}\right} \def\l{\left)\frac{D_1}{a^n} + \left(\frac{m-6}{6}\right)\frac{D_2}{a^m}.
\eea
In general, once we specify $a(t),D_1, D_2,n,m,k,$ we can immediately
obtain $\epsilon\dot\phi(t)^2$ and $V(\phi).$ The value for $n$ or $m$ implies types of barotropic fluids, for instance, $n = 0$ for $w_{\gamma} = -1$, $n = 2$ for $w_{\gamma} = -1/3$, $n = 3$ for $w_{\gamma} = 0$ (dust), $n = 4$ for $w_{\gamma} = 1/3$ (radiation), $n = 6$ for $w_{\gamma} = 1$ (stiff fluid).
\section{NLS Formulation}
In order to connect the Friedmann formulation to the NLS formulation, we define\footnote{We add $D_2$ contribution to $P(x)$ rather than adding to $E$ because $E$ must be constant in according to the solutions listed in table \ref{tab:7solutions}},
\bea
u(x) &\equiv & a(t)^{-n/2}, \qquad
E\equiv - \frac{\kappa^2n^2}{12}D_1, \label{ua} \\
P(x) & \equiv & \frac{\kappa^2n}{4}a(t)^n\epsilon\dot\phi(t)^2+\frac{m D_2}{12}\kappa^2 n a^{n-m}, \label{PxEq}
\eea
where $\dot x(t)=u(x).$ The equation (\ref{kin}) then becomes a non-linear Schr\"odinger equation
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber\label{NLS}
u''(x)+\left[E-P(x)\right]u(x) = -\frac{nk}{2}u(x)^{(4-n)/n}.
\ee
We can express $\epsilon\dot\phi(t)^2, V(\phi)$ and the other cosmological quantities
as
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
\epsilon\dot\phi^2 = \frac{4}{\kappa^2n}uu''+\frac{2k}{\kappa^2}u^{4/n} + \frac{4E}{\kappa^2n}u^2-\frac{mD_2}{3}u^{2m/n},
\ee
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
V = \frac{12}{\kappa^2n^2}(u')^2-\frac{2P}{\kappa^2n}u^2+\frac{12E}{\kappa^2n^2}u^2
+\frac{3k}{\kappa^2}u^{4/n}+\left(\frac{m-6}{6}\right)D_2u^{2m/n},
\label{Vaa} \ee
\bea
\rho_\phi &=& \frac{12}{\kappa^2n^2}(u')^2+\frac{12E}{\kappa^2n^2}u^2+\frac{3k}{\kappa^2}u^{4/n}-D_2u^{2m/n}, \no \\
&=& \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{12}{\kappa^2n^2}(u')^2 - u^2D_1 + \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{3k}{\kappa^2}u^{4/n} - D_2u^{2m/n}.
\eea
\bea
p_\phi (= \rho_\phi-2V) &=& -\frac{12}{\kappa^2n^2}(u')^2 + \frac{4P}{\kappa^2n}u^2- \frac{12E}{\kappa^2n^2}u^2-\frac{3k}{\kappa^2}u^{4/n}-\left(\frac{m-3}{3}\right)D_2u^{2m/n}, \no \\
& = & -\frac{12}{\kappa^2n^2}u'^2 + \frac{4}{\kappa^2n}uu'' -
\frac{k}{\kappa^2}u^{4/n} - \left(\frac{n-3}{3}\right) u^2D_1
-\left(\frac{m-3}{3}\right)D_2u^{2m/n}, \\
\eea
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
\rho_{\text{tot}} = \frac{12}{\kappa^2n^2}(u')^2+\frac{3k}{\kappa^2}u^{4/n}-D_2u^{2m/n} \left(=\frac{3}{\kappa^2}\left[H^2+\frac{k}{a^2}\right]\right),
\ee
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
p_{\text{tot}} \left(=-\frac{2}{\kappa^2}\left[\dot H+H^2+\frac{\kappa^2}{6}\rho_{\text{tot}}\right]\right) = -\frac{12}{\kappa^2n^2}(u')^2 +\frac{4}{\kappa^2n}uu''-\frac{k}{\kappa^2}u^{4/n},
\ee
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
H=-\frac{2}{n}u',\qquad
\dot{H} = -\frac{2}{n}uu'',
\ee
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
\ddot\phi=\pm\frac{P'u^2+2uu'\left(P-\frac{m^2D_2\kappa^2u'u^{2(m-n)/n}}{12}\right)}{\kappa\sqrt{n\epsilon}\sqrt{P-\frac{D_2mnu^{2(m-n)/n}\kappa^2}{12}}},\qquad
3H\dot\phi = \mp\frac{12 u' u\sqrt{P-\frac{1}{12}D_2 \kappa ^2 m n u^{\frac{2 (m-n)}{n}}}}{n\kappa \sqrt{\epsilon n}}\,.
\ee
Using these relations, we recover the NLS equation (\ref{NLS}) with the NLS potential,
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
P(x) = \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{u''}{u} + \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{kn}{2} u^{(4/n)-2} + E \no
\ee
where NLS kinetic energy is $T = - ({u''}/{u}) - ({kn}/{2}) u^{(4/n)-2} $. Note that $u' = \dot{u}/u$ and $u'' = u^{-1} (\d u'/\d t)$.
If expressed in term of density parameters
\bea
\Omega_1 \equiv \frac{\rho_1}{\rho_{\rm c}} = \frac{n^2D_1\kappa^2u^2}{12(u')^2}, \;\;\;\;\;\;\;
\Omega_2 \equiv \frac{\rho_2}{\rho_{\rm c}} = \frac{n^2D_2\kappa^2u^{2m/n}}{12(u')^2}, \;\;\;\;\;\;\;
\Omega_k \equiv \frac{\rho_k}{\rho_{\rm c}} = -\frac{k}{a^2H^2} = -\frac{kn^2}{4(u')^2u^{-4/n}},
\eea
where
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
\rho_{\rm c} \equiv \rho_{\rm tot}-\frac{3k}{\kappa^2 a^2} = \frac{3H^2}{\kappa^2} = \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{12 u'^2}{\k^2 n^2} ,\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;
\rho_k \equiv -\frac{3k}{\kappa^2 a^2} = -\frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{3 k u^{4/n}}{\k^2},
\ee
such that the Friedmann equation $
\Omega_\phi \equiv {\rho_\phi}/{\rho_{\rm c}} = 1-\Omega_1-\Omega_2-\Omega_k
$
is,
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
\Omega_\phi = 1 - \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{n^2 \k^2}{12 u'^2} \l( D_1 u^2 + D_2 u^{2m/n} - \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{3 k u^{4/n} }{\k^2} \right} \def\l{\left).
\ee
Here we consider only non-phantom case, i.e. $\epsilon = 1$.
\section{NLS exact solutions}
Following the D'Ambroise thesis \cite{DAmbroise:2010dgl}, we consider the NLS equation,
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
u''(\sigma)+[E-P(\sigma)]u(\sigma) = \dfrac{F}{u(\sigma)^{C}}, \label{NLSGenn}
\ee
where $E,F$ and $C$ are constants and
\bea
D_1 = -\frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{12 E}{n^2 \kappa^2}, \;\;\;\; F = -\frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{n k}{2}, \;\;\;\; C = \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{n-4}{n}.
\eea
D'Ambroise demonstrates that there are at least seven exact solutions of NLS for single barotropic-fluid case \cite{DAmbroise:2010dgl}. Here we apply the solutions to the NLS equation for two barotropic fluids. Contribution of the second fluid is expressed as an additional term in $P(x)$ as seen in the equation (\ref{PxEq}). We quote table of solutions from table E.1 of the previous work \cite{DAmbroise:2010dgl} into Table \ref{tab:7solutions} of this work where minor notation here is altered from \cite{DAmbroise:2010dgl}, i.e. $\sigma \rightarrow x $, $a_0 \rightarrow e_0$ and $\theta \equiv 1$. Features of the NLS formulation are the benefits of having an alternative way of solving for (1) scalar field exact solutions (as in \cite{Gumjudpai:2007bx}) and (2) scale factor solutions. Here we emphasize our studies on the scale factor solutions.
\begin{table}[h!]
\caption {The NLS exact solutions given by J.~D'Ambroise \cite{DAmbroise:2010dgl}} \label{tab:7solutions}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
& Solutions: $u(x)$ & $P(x)$ & $E$ & $F$ & $C$ \\ \hline
$1$ & $e_0x^2+b_0x+c_0$ & $(2e_0+d_0)/(e_0x^2+b_0x+c_0)$ & 0 & $-d_0$ & $0$ \\ \hline
$2$ & $e_0\cos^2(b_0x)$ & $2b_0^2\tan^2(b_0x)$ & $2b_0^2$ & $0$ & arbitrary \\
& & $4b_0^2\tan^2(b_0x)$& $0$ & $-2b_0^2e_0$& $0 $\\ \hline
3 &$e_0\tanh(b_0x)$ &$c_0$ & $c_0+2b_0^2$ & $2b_0^2/e_0$ & $-3$ \\ \hline
$4$& $e_0e^{(-x\sqrt{-c_0})}-b_0e^{x\sqrt{-c_0}}$ & $0$ & $c_0<0$ & $0$ & arbitrary \\ \hline
$5$ & $(e_0/x)e^{c_0x^2/2} $ & $c_0^2x^2+2/x^2+b_0$ & $c_0+b_0$ & $0$ & arbitrary \\ \hline
$6$ & $-e_0\cosh^2(b_0x)$ & $2b_0^2\tanh^2(b_0x)+c_0 $ & $c_0-2b_0^2$ & $0$ & arbitrary \\ \hline
$7$ & $e_0/x^{b_0} $ & $\frac{b_0(b_0+1)}{x^2}+c_0$ & $c_0$ & $0$ & arbitrary \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{Solution 1}
The first solution of equation (\ref{NLSGenn}) is
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
u(x) = \dot{x} = e_0 x^2 + b_0 x + c_0\,, \label{line1sol}
\ee
where $E = 0, F = -d_0$ and $C = 0$. These imply
$D_1 = 0, n = 4$ and $ k = d_0/2 $ and equation (\ref{NLSGenn}) in this case is
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
u''(x) - P(x)u(x) = -d_0.
\ee
Hence $D_1$ represents the radiation fluid since $n = 4$ (see equation (\ref{densityev})). However there is no radiation density for this solution since $D_1 = 0$, hence there are only fluid $D_2$ and curvature $k = d_0/2$.
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Case 1.1:} $e_0 \neq 0$ \\
The solution is reported in \cite{DAmbroise:2010dgl} as,
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
x(t) = \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{1}{2 e_0} \l\{ \sqrt{-\Delta} \tan\l[ \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{\sqrt{-\Delta}}{2} (t - t_0) \right} \def\l{\left] - b_0 \right} \def\l{\left\}\,,
\ee
where $\Delta = b_0^2 - 4 e_0 c_0 < 0$ and
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
u(t) = -\frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{\Delta}{4 e_0}\sec^2 \l[\frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{\sqrt{-\Delta}}{2}(t-t_0) \right} \def\l{\left]\,.
\ee
The coefficients $e_0, c_0$ must take the same signs, i.e. $e_0 > 0$ when $c_0 > 0$ or $e_0 < 0$ when $c_0 < 0$ so that the condition $\Delta < 0$ is satisfied. From $u = a^{-n/2}$ in equation (\ref{ua}) hence the scale factor is
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
a(t) = \l\{ - \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{4 e_0}{\Delta} \cos^2 \l[ \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{\sqrt{-\Delta}}{2} (t - t_0) \right} \def\l{\left] \right} \def\l{\left\}^{2/n}.
\ee
In form of redshift, $1+z = a(t_0)/a(t)$ hence
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
z(t) = \l\{ \sec^2\l[\frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{\sqrt{-\Delta}}{2}(t-t_0) \right} \def\l{\left] \right} \def\l{\left\}^{2/n} - 1\,, \;\;\;\;{\text{and}}\;\;\;\;
t -t_0 = \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{2}{\sqrt{-\Delta}} \l\{\arcsec[(z+1)^{n/4}] \right} \def\l{\left\}\,.
\ee
The Hubble rate is derived,
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
H(t) = -\frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{2\sqrt{-\Delta}}{n} \tan \l[ \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{\sqrt{-\Delta}}{2}(t-t_0) \right} \def\l{\left] \,, \;\;\;\;{\text{or}}\;\;\;\;
H(z) = -\frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{2\sqrt{-\Delta}}{n} \tan \l\{ \arcsec[(z+1)^{n/4}] \right} \def\l{\left\}\,.
\ee
For $t > t_0$, Hubble rate is negative, the universe contracts and for $t < t_0$ the universe expands. Both cases blow up at some finite values of the tan function.
\item {\bf Case 1.2:} $e_0 = 0$ \\
The wave function reduces to $ u(x) = b_0 x + c_0$ and the solution is\footnote{Here we give correction to the result in \cite{DAmbroise:2010dgl}.}
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
x(t) = \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{1}{b_0}\l[e^{b_0(t-t_0)} - c_0\right} \def\l{\left]\,,
\ee
and for $b_0 \neq 0 $,
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
u(t) = e^{b_0(t-t_0)}\,.
\ee
The scale factor is hence
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
a(t) = e^{-2 b_0(t-t_0)/n}\,,
\ee
hence
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
z(t) = e^{2 b_0 (t-t_0)/n} - 1\,,
\ee
and $H = -2b_0/n = H_0$ is a constant Hubble rate. Since $n = 4$ hence $b_0 = - 2 H_0$. This could give either positive or negative constant $H_0$ depending on the sign of $b_0$. For negative $b_0$, the expansion is of the de Sitter type.
\end{itemize}
Although, we have solutions for the cases 1.1 and 1.2, it does not make sense to have zero density of the first fluid, $D_1 = 0$
but having $n=4$. Fluid density with zero value must remain zero forever. The appearing of $n = 4$ in expressions of density and pressure makes no sense.
\subsection{Solution 2}
The second solution expresses that \begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber u(x) = e_0\cos^2(b_0x)\,. \label{eqsol2} \ee The conditions satisfying this solution are
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Case 2.1}: $ E=2b_0^2$, $F = 0$ and $C$ is arbitrary. The form of $E$ gives $D_1 = -24 b_0^2/ n^2 \kappa^2 < 0$, i.e. negative density. The condition $ F = 0 = -n k/2$ is considered into three subcases. First, $k=0$ and arbitrary $n$ give arbitrary value of $C$ and $D_1 < 0$ for $b_0 \neq 0$. Secondly, $n=0$ and arbitrary $k$ correspond to $C = \infty$ and $D_1 = \infty$.
Thirdly, $k=0$ and $n=0$ imply $C = \infty$ and $D_1 = \infty$. Having negative or infinity values of density proportional constant (of the barotropic fluid) is nonphysical and is not of our interest.
\item {\bf Case 2.2}: $ E=0$, $F = -2b_0^2 e_0$ and $C=0$. This gives $D_1 = 0, n=4$ (radiation) and $k = b_0^2 e_0$. There is no radiation density in this solution although we know that $n$ must be of the radiation. Hence the system is of the universe with arbitrary $k= b_0^2 e_0$ and a second fluid with $m$ value of barotropic equation of state with density $D_2$.
\end{itemize}
The solution equation (\ref{eqsol2}) corresponds to
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
x(t) = \frac{1}{b_0}\arctan\l[e_0b_0(t-t_0)\right} \def\l{\left]\,, \;\;\;\;\;\text{and}\;\;\;\;\;
u(t) = \dot{x}(t) = \frac{e_0}{1+e_0^2b_0^2(t-t_0)^2}.
\ee
The scale factor solution is found as
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
a(t) = \l[\frac{1+e_0^2b_0^2(t-t_0)^2}{e_0}\right} \def\l{\left]^{2/n}\,,
\ee
where $e_0 \neq 0$. As $n = 4$ hence
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
H(t) = \dot{a}/{a} = \frac{e_0^2b_0^2(t-t_0)}{e_0^2b_0^2(t-t_0)^2 + 1},
\ee
and time-redshift relation is
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
z(t) = \sqrt{\frac{1}{e_0^2 b_0^2 (t-t_0)^2+1}} - 1\,.
\ee
We hence write
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
H(z) = e_0b_0(z+1)\sqrt{-z(z+2)}\,.
\ee
The valid range of redshift is $z \in (-2,0)$ which is not realistic. Negative density, $D_1 < 0$ of the case 2.1 is not physical.
The case 2.2 has the same problem of the case 1.1 and 1.2 such that $D_1 = 0$.
\subsection{Solution 3}
The given solution is
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber u(x) = e_0\tanh(b_0x)\,, \label{line3sol}
\ee
where $C = -3$ corresponds to $n = 1$ or $w_{\gamma} = -2/3$, $E=c_0+2 b_0^2$ corresponds to $D_1 = {-12(c_0+2b_0^2)}/{\kappa^2}$ and $F = 2b_0^2/e_0$ corresponds to $k = {-4b_0^2}/{e_0}$. This condition demonstrates major fluid with $w_{\gamma} = -2/3$. This leads us to
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
x(t)= \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{1}{b_0}{\arcsinh(e^{e_0b_0(t-t_0)})}\,, \;\;\;\;\;\text{and}\;\;\;\;\;
u(t) = \frac{e_0e^{e_0b_0(t-t_0)}}{\sqrt{1+e^{2e_0b_0(t-t_0)}}}.
\ee
where $b_0 x > 0$.
The scale factor is hence
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
a(t) = \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{1}{e_0^2} \l[1+e^{-2e_0b_0(t-t_0)}\right} \def\l{\left] ,
\ee
where $e_0 \neq 0$.
The redshift can be determined as
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
z(t) = \frac{2}{e^{-2e_0b_0(t-t_0)}+1} - 1\,,
\ee
and there is a relation
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
t-t_0 = \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{-1}{2 e_0 b_0} \ln \l(\frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{2}{z+1} -1 \right} \def\l{\left)\,,
\ee
whereas $z < 1 $.
The Hubble rate as function of time and redshift are
\bea
H(t) &=& \frac{-2e_0b_0}{1+e^{2e_0b_0(t-t_0)}}\,, \\
H(z) &=& e_0 b_0 (z-1)\,.
\eea
The barotropic fluid of this case is non-realistic with $w_{\gamma} = -2/3$.
\subsection{Solution 4}
The exact solution is
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
u(x) = e_0e^{-x\sqrt{-c_0}}-b_0e^{x\sqrt{-c_0}}\,, \label{sol4ux}
\ee in this case. The constant
$E = c_0 < 0, F=0$ and $C$ is arbitrary, hence $D_1 = -12 c_0/n^2\k^2 > 0$. The results are
\bea
x(t) & = & \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{1}{\sqrt{-c_0}} \ln \l\{ \sqrt{\frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{e_0}{b_0}} \tanh\l[\sqrt{-e_0 b_0 c_0} (t - t_0) \right} \def\l{\left] \right} \def\l{\left\}\,, \\
u(t) & = & \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{2 \sqrt{e_0 b_0}}{\sinh\l[2 \sqrt{-e_0 b_0 c_0} (t - t_0) \right} \def\l{\left]}\,,
\eea
and
\bea
a(t) & = & \l\{ \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{\sinh\l[2\sqrt{-e_0 b_0 c_0} (t-t_0) \right} \def\l{\left]}{2\sqrt{e_0 b_0}} \right} \def\l{\left\}^{2/n}\,, \\
H(t) & = & \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{4}{n} \sqrt{-e_0 b_0 c_0} \coth\l[ 2\sqrt{-e_0b_0c_0} (t- t_0) \right} \def\l{\left]\,.
\eea
Conditions need to be satisfied are $e_0, b_0$ must have the same sign and $n \neq 0$, i.e. $w_{\gamma} \neq -1$.
Having non-zero $n$ with $F=0$ implies $k=0$ (flat geometry).
The redshift $z$ is found to be constant, i.e. $z = -1$ hence there is no time-redshift relation.
\subsection{Solution 5}
The exact solution is
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
u(x) = \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{e_0}{x} e^{c_0 x^2 /2}\,,
\ee in this case. The constants
$E = c_0+b_0 < 0, F=0 = -nk/2$ and $C$ is arbitrary, hence $D_1 = -12 (c_0+b_0)/n^2\k^2 > 0$. Results are
\bea
x(t) & = & \sqrt{\frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{-2}{c_0} \ln\l[-e_0 c_0 (t-t_0)\right} \def\l{\left]}\,, \\
u(t) & = & \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{- 1}{(t-t_0)\sqrt{-2 c_0 \ln\l[ -e_0c_0(t-t_0) \right} \def\l{\left]}}\,, \\
a(t) & = & \l\{(t-t_0)^2 \l( - 2 c_0 \ln \l[-e_0 c_0 (t-t_0) \right} \def\l{\left] \right} \def\l{\left) \right} \def\l{\left\}^{1/n} \,,\\
H(t) & = & \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{1}{n(t-t_0)} \l\{ \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{1}{\ln\l[-e_0c_0(t-t_0) \right} \def\l{\left]} + 2 \right} \def\l{\left\}\,,
\eea
where $c_0 < 0, n \neq 0$. At $t = t_0$, $a$ is indeterminate therefore there is no time-redshift relation.
\subsection{Solution 6}
The exact solution is
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
u(x) = {-e_0} \cosh^2(b_0 x)\,, \label{case6sol}
\ee in this case. Other conditions are $E = c_0 - 2b_0^2 < 0$, $F=0$ (i.e. $k=0$), arbitrary $C$ so that
$D_1 = -12 (c_0 - 2 b_0^2)/n^2\k^2 > 0$. The results are
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
x(t) = \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{1}{b_0} \arctanh\l[ -e_0 b_0 (t-t_0) \right} \def\l{\left] \;\;\;\;\;\text{and}\;\;\;\;\;
u(t) = \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{-e_0}{1 - e_0^2 b_0^2 (t-t_0)^2}\,,
\ee
and the scale factor, redshift and Hubble rate are
\bea
a(t) & = & \l[ \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{1 - e_0^2 b_0^2 (t-t_0)^2}{-e_0} \right} \def\l{\left]^{2/n}\,, \;\;\;\;\; a(z) \,=\, \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{1}{e_0^{2/n}(z+1)} \\
z(t) & = & \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{1}{\l[ 1 - e_0^2 b_0^2 (t-t_0)^2 \right} \def\l{\left]^{2/n}} - 1\,, \\
H(t) & = & \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{-4}{n} \l[ \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{e_0^2 b_0^2 (t-t_0)}{1 - e_0^2 b_0^2(t-t_0)^2} \right} \def\l{\left]\,, \\
H(z) & = & \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{-4}{n} |e_0||b_0|\sqrt{z(z+1)}\,,
\eea
where $n \neq 0$. Taylor expansion of the solution (\ref{case6sol}) is
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
u(x) = -e_0 \l[ 1 + b_0^2(x-x_0)^2 + \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{b_0^4}{3} (x-x_0)^4 + \ldots \right} \def\l{\left]. \label{case6tl}
\ee
Compare to the power-law expansion solution $a \sim t^q$ (with constant $q$) which corresponds to \cite{Gumjudpai:2007qq}
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber u(x)_{\text{power-law}} = \l[\frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{(2-qn)}{2}(x-x_0)\right} \def\l{\left]^{qn/(qn - 2)} \label{upowerlaw}
\ee
for $n=3$ (dust), we found that the second and third terms of
the equation (\ref{case6tl}), i.e $b_0^2(x-x_0)^2$ and $[{b_0^4}(x-x_0)^4]/3$
correspond to $ u(x)_{\text{power-law}} $ with $q= 4/3$ and $q= 8/9$ respectively. Density parameters are
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
\Omega_1(z) = \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{- 3 D_1 \kappa^2}{16 b_0^2} \l[ \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{1}{(z+1)^{-3/2} -1} \right} \def\l{\left], \;\;\;\;\;\; \Omega_2(z) = \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{- 3 D_2 \kappa^2}{16 b_0^2}\l\{ \l[ \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{ e_0^{2/3} (z+1) }{(z+1)^{-3/2} -1} \right} \def\l{\left] \right} \def\l{\left\}
\ee
where $ \Omega_{\phi}(z) = 1 - \Omega_1 - \Omega_2$. Plot of $a(t)$ and $\Omega_{\phi}(z)$ are in figures \ref{fig1} and \label{fig2}. They do not resemble current observation
which suggests acceleration and present value of scalar field density parameter, $\Omega_{\phi,0}\sim 0.7$.
\begin{figure}[t] \begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=5.0cm,height=3.3cm,angle=0]{Plot_case_6a.pdf} \end{center}
\caption{Scale factor $a(t)$ of the solution 6 \label{fig1}} \end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t] \begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=5.0cm,height=3.3cm,angle=0]{Plot_case_6.pdf} \end{center}
\caption{Scalar field density parameter $\Omega_{\phi}(z)$ of the solution 6 plotted versus redshift. \label{fig2}} \end{figure}
\subsection{Solution 7}
The exact solution is
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
u(x) = \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{e_0}{x^{b_0}}\,.
\ee Other conditions are $E = c_0$, $F=0$, arbitrary $C$. We need $c_0<0$ such that
$D_1 = -12 c_0/n^2\k^2 > 0$. The results are
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
x(t) = \l[e_0(b_0+1)(t-t_0)\right} \def\l{\left]^{1/(b_0+1)} \;\;\;\;\;\text{and}\;\;\;\;\;
u(t) = e_0 \l[ e_0(b_0+1)(t-t_0) \right} \def\l{\left]^{-b_0/(b_0+1)}\,,
\ee
and the scale factor, redshift and Hubble rate are
\bea
a(t) & = & \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{1}{e_0^{2/n}} \l[ e_0 (b_0+1)(t-t_0) \right} \def\l{\left]^{2b_0/[n(b_0+1)]} \,, \\
H(t) & = & \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{2 b_0}{n(b_0+1)(t-t_0)}\,,
\eea
where $n \neq 0$. As $a(t_0) = 0 $, $z(t) = -1$ hence there is no time-redshift relation.
\subsection{Solution 8}
Apart from the solution given by J.~D'Ambroise \cite{DAmbroise:2010dgl}, we tried solutions in form of $\cosh (b_0 x)$ and
$\sinh (b_0 x)$ and found that they are not solutions. However we found that
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
u(x) = {-e_0} \sinh^2(b_0 x)\,, \label{case8sol}
\ee is also a solution with
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
P(x) = 2 b_0^2 \coth^2(b_0 x) + c_0
\ee
with $E = c_0 - 2b_0^2 < 0$, $F=0$, arbitrary $C$ such that
$D_1 = -12 (c_0 - 2 b_0^2)/n^2\k^2 > 0$. Taylor expansion of the solution (\ref{case8sol}) is
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
u(x) = -e_0 \l[b_0^2(x-x_0)^2 + \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{b_0^4}{3} (x-x_0)^4 + \ldots \right} \def\l{\left] \label{case8tl}
\ee
When comparing to the solution in the power-law expansion case, (\ref{upowerlaw}), for $n=3$ (dust), we found that the first and the second terms of
the equation (\ref{case8tl}), i.e $b_0^2(x-x_0)^2$ and $[{b_0^4}(x-x_0)^4]/3$
correspond to $q= 4/3$ and $q= 8/9$ as well. The other results are
\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}} \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}} \def\no{\nonumber
x(t) = \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{1}{b_0} \arccoth\l[e_0 b_0 (t-t_0) \right} \def\l{\left] \;\;\;\;\;\text{and}\;\;\;\;\;
u(t) = \frac} \def\s{\sqrt} \def\l{\left} \def\r{\right{e_0}{1 - e_0^2 b_0^2 (t-t_0)^2}\,,
\ee
and the scale factor $a(t)$, redshift $z(t)$, and Hubble rate $H(t),
H(z)$ are the same as of solution 6 so as density parameters and all other relations.
\section{Conclusions and Comments}
In this work, we express NLS formulation of FRW cosmology with canonical scalar field evolving under unspecified potential and two barotropic fluids. The first barotropic density ($D_1$) is related to NLS total energy ($E$) (see equation (\ref{ua}))
and the second barotropic fluid density ($D_2$) contributes to additional term in $P(x)$ (see equation (\ref{PxEq})).
The choice of not adding $D_2$ term into definition of $E$ is because $E$ must be constant in deriving solutions.
We give a lists of Friedmann formulation variables expressed in terms of NLS variables for two barotropic fluids case. The second part of this work is to explore
seven solutions given in \cite{DAmbroise:2010dgl}. The solutions considered in this work base on top-down deducing derivation from the equation of motion (NLS equation).
These are solutions of the system of scalar field with barotropic fluids under NLS potential ($P(x)$) listed in table \ref{tab:7solutions}. In addition, we found one new solution which gives the same result as of the sixth solution of \cite{DAmbroise:2010dgl}.
It is noticed that previous works (\cite{Gumjudpai:2007bx}, \cite{Gumjudpai:2007qq}, \cite{Phetnora:2008mf},
\cite{Gumjudpai:2009ws}, \cite{Gumjudpai:2008mg}) assumed forms of the expansion
functions, $a(t)$. These are power-law ($a \sim t^q$), de-Sitter ($a \sim \exp(t/\tau)$
and super-acceleration ($a \sim (t_{a} - t)^q$) (with constant $q$ and $\tau$).
These expansion functions are converted to the explicit form of NLS solutions, $u(x)$.
Although it is true that $u(x)$ are exact solutions but assuming the expansion forms
is to force the problem to take the assumed answers in a bottom-up direction of reasoning.
These alter the form of scalar potential $V = V(u, u') = V(a, \dot{a})$ to adjust so that
the dynamics can accommodate the assumed expansions. Hence it is not a natural procedure. This is unlike conventional derivation of which at beginning step, $V(\phi)$ is taken
from high energy physics motivation and as a result, solutions and $\Omega_{\phi}$ are derived.
All solutions-the NLS wave functions $u(x)$ found here are non-normalizable
(a specific case of power-law expansion \cite{Gumjudpai:2007qq} was also claimed to correspond to non-normalizable NLS wave function). Hence it can not be probabilistically interpreted. The NLS total energy $E$ is negative. The time-independent NLS formulation interpretation in quantum cosmology that $u(x)$ and $E$ could be the wave function and total energy
of the universe should be upgraded to the time-dependent case as in the NLS formulation reported in \cite{Lidsey:2013osa}. It is hopeful that describing Friedmann cosmology with time-dependent NLS formulation would give deeper physical insight and more realistic solutions of the problem. This is awaiting for further investigation.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We thank James E. Lidsey for discussion. This work is supported by a TRF Basic Research Grant no. BRG6080003 under
TRF Advanced Scholar scheme of the Thailand Research Fund and the Royal Society-Newton Advanced Fellowship of the Newton Fund (NAF-R2-180874).
BG thanks Center for Cosmology and Particle Physics, New York University for hospitality to where partial works
were completed. Prof. Dr. Sujin Jinahyon Foundation is acknowledged for traveling grant to present this work at the 10th Aegean Summer School.
|
\section{Introduction}
Recent years have witnessed the increasing popularity of social networks and video streaming platforms.
People heavily rely on these channels to express their opinions through video-based discussions or reviews. Whereas such opinionated data has been widely studied in the context of written customer reviews \cite{liu2012sentiment} crawled on websites such as Amazon \cite{hu2004mining} and IMDB \cite{maas2011learning}, only a few studies have been proposed in the case of video-based reviews.
Such multimodal data has been shown to provide a mean to disambiguate some hard to understand opinion expressions such as irony and sarcasm \cite{attardo2003multimodal} and contains crucial information indicating the level of engagement and the persuasiveness of the speaker \cite{clavel2016sentiment,ben2018,nojavanasghari2016deep}. A key problem in this context is the lack of availability of fine grained opinion annotation \emph{i.e. } annotations performed at the token or short span level and highlighting on the components of the structure of opinions. Indeed whereas such resources have been gathered in the case of textual data and can be used to deeply understand the expression of opinions \cite{wiebe2005annotating,pontiki2016semeval}, the different attempts at annotating multimodal reviews have shown that reaching good annotator agreement is nearly impossible at a fine grained level. This results from the disfluent aspect of spontaneous spoken language making it difficult to choose opinions' annotation boundaries \cite{garcia2019,langlet2015improving}. Thus the price to pay to gather reliable data is the definition of an annotation scheme focusing on coarse grained information such as long segment categorization as done by \citet{zadeh2016mosi} or review level annotation \cite{park2014computational}. Building models able to predict fine grained opinion information in a multimodal setting is in fact of high importance in the context of designing human--robot interfaces \cite{langlet2016grounding}. Indeed the knowledge of opinions decomposed over a set of polarities associated to some targets is a building block of automatic human understanding pipelines \cite{langlet2015adapting}.
The present work is motivated by the following observations:
\begin{itemize}
\item Despite the lack of reliability of fine grained labels collected for multimodal data, the redundancy of the opinion information contained at different granularities can be leveraged to reduce the inherent noise of the labelling process and to build improved opinion predictors. We build a model that takes advantage of this property and joinlty models the different components of an opinion.
\item Hierarchical multi-task language models have been recently shown to improve upon the single tasks' models \cite{sanh2018hierarchical}. A careful choice of the tasks and the order in which they are sequentially presented to the model has been proved to be the key to build competitive predictors. It is not clear whether such type of hierarchical model could be adapted to handle multimodal data with the state of the art neural architectures \cite{zadeh2018multi,zadeh2018memory}. We discuss in the experimental section the strategies and models that are adapted to the multimodal opinion mining context.
\item In the case where no fine grained supervision is available, the attention mechanism \cite{vaswani2017attention} provides a compelling alternative to build models generating interpretable decisions with token-level explanations \cite{hemamou2018hire}. In practice such models are notoriously hard to train and require the availability of very large datasets. On the other hand, the injection of fine-grained polarity information has been shown to be a key ingredient to build competitive sentiment predictors by \citet{socher2013recursive}. Our hierarchical approach can be interpreted under the lens of attention-based learning where some supervision is provided at training to counterbalance the difficulty of learning meaningful patterns with spoken language data. We specifically experimentally show that providing this supervision is here necessary to build competitive predictors due to the limited number of data and the difficulty to extract meaningful patterns from it.
\end{itemize}
\section{Background on fine grained opinion mining}
The computational models of opinion are grounded in a linguistic framework defining how these objects can be structured over a set of interdependent functional parts. In this work we focus on the model of \citet{martin2003language} that defines the expression of opinions as an \textit{evaluation} towards an object. The expression of such evaluations can be summarized by the combination of three components: a \textit{source} (mainly the speaker) expressing a statement on a \textit{target} identifying the entity evaluated and a \textit{polarized expression} making the attitude of the source explicit. In the literature, the task of finding the words indicating these components and categorizing them using a set of predefined possible targets and polarities has been studied under the name of Aspect Based Sentiment Analysis (ABSA) and popularized by the SEMEVAL campaigns \cite{pontiki2016semeval}. They defined a set of tasks including sentence-level prediction. \textit{Aspect Category Detection} consists in finding the target of an opinion from a set of possible entities; \textit{Opinion Target Expression} is a sequence tagging problem where the goal is to find the word indicating this entity; and \textit{Sentiment Polarity} recognition is a classification task where the predictor has to determine whether the underlying opinion is positive, negative or neutral. Such problems have also been extended at the text level (\textit{text-level ABSA}) where the participants were asked to predict a set of tuples (Entity category, Polarity level) summarizing the opinions contained in a review. In this work we adapt these tasks to a recently released fine-grained multimodal opinion mining corpus and study a category of hierarchical neural architecture able to jointly perform \textit{token}-level, \textit{sentence}-level and review-level predictions. In the next sections, we present the data available and the definition of the different tasks.
\section{Data description and model}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.9\textwidth]{Figures/Fig_1.pdf}
\caption{Structure of an annotated opinion}
\label{Fig1}
\end{figure*}
This work relies on a set of fine and coarse grained opinion annotations gathered for the Persuasive Opinion Multimedia (POM) corpus presented in \citet{garcia2019}. The dataset is composed of 1000 videos carrying a strong opinion content: in each video, a single speaker in frontal view makes a critique of a movie that he/she has watched. The corpus contains 372 unique speakers and 600 unique movie titles. The opinion of each speaker has been annotated at 3 levels of granularity as shown in Figure \ref{Fig1}.
At the finest (\textit{Token}) level, the annotators indicated for each token whether it is responsible for the understanding of the polarity of the sentence and whether it describes the target of an opinion.
On top of this, a span-level annotation contains a categorization of both the target and the polarity of the underlying opinion in a set of predefined possible target \textit{entities} and polarity \textit{valences}.
At the review level (or \textit{text}-level since the annotations are aligned with the tokens of the transcript), an overall score describes the attitude of the reviewer about the movie.
As \citet{garcia2019} have shown that the boundaries of span-level annotations are unreliable, we relax the corresponding boundaries at the sentence level. This \textit{sentence} granularity is in our data the intermediate level of annotation between the \textit{token} and the \textit{text}. In practice, these intermediate level labels can be modeled by tuples such as the one provided in the \textit{text-level ABSA} SEMEVAL task which are given for each sentence in the dataset. In what follows, we will refer to the problem of predicting such information as the \textit{sentence level}-prediction problem. Details concerning the determination of the sentence boundaries and the associated pre-processing of the data are given in the supplemental material.
The representation described above can be naturally converted into a mathematical representation: A review $\mathbf{x}^{(i)}, \; i\in \{1,\ldots,N\}$ is made of $S_i$ sentences each containing $W_{S_i}$ words. Thus the canonical feature representation of a review is the following $\mathbf{x}^{(i)} = \{\{x_{1,1}^{(i)},\ldots,x_{1,W_{S_1}}^{(i)}\},\ldots, \{x_{S_i,1}^{(i)},\ldots,x_{S_i,W_{S_i}}^{(i)}\} \}$, where each $x$ is the feature representation of a spoken word corresponding to the concatenation of a textual, audio and video feature representation. It has been shown in \cite{zadeh2018multi,zadeh2016mosi,zadeh2016multimodal} that whereas the textual modality carries the most information, taking into account video and audio modalities is mandatory to obtain state of the art results on sentiment analysis problems. Based on this input description, the learning task consists in finding a parameterized function $g_\theta:\mathcal{X} \rightarrow \mathcal{Y}$ that predicts various components of an opinion $\mathbf{y}\in \mathcal{Y}$ based on an input review $\mathbf{x}\in \mathcal{X}$.
The parameters of such a function are obtained by minimizing an empirical risk:
\begin{equation}
\hat{\theta} = \min_\theta \sum_{i = 1}^N l(g_\theta(\mathbf{x}^{(i)}),\mathbf{y}^{(i)}),
\end{equation}
where $l$ is a non-negative loss function penalizing wrong predictions. In general the loss $l$ is chosen as a surrogate of the evaluation metric whose purpose is to measure the similarity between the predictions and the true labels. In the case of complex objects such as opinions, there is no natural metric for measuring such proximity and we rely instead on distances defined on substructures of the opinion model. To introduce these distances, we first decompose the label-structures following the model previously described:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textit{Token-level labels} are represented by a sequence of 2-dimensional binary label vectors $y^{(i),\text{Tok}}_{j,k} = \begin{pmatrix} y^{(i),\text{Pol}}_{j,k} \\ y^{(i),\text{Tar}}_{j,k} \end{pmatrix}$ where $y^{(i),\text{Pol}}_{j,k}$ and $y^{(i),\text{Tar}}_{j,k}$ are some binary variables indicating respectively whether the $k^\text{th}$ word of the sentence $j$ in review $i$ is a word indicating the polarity of an opinion , and the target of an opinion.
\item \textit{Sentence}-level labels carry 2 pieces of information: (1) the categorization of the target \textit{entities} mentioned in an opinion expressed is represented by an $E$ dimensional binary vector $y^{(i),\text{Ent}}_{j}$ where each component encodes the presence of an entity among $E$ possible values; and (2) the polarity of the opinions contained in the sentence are represented by a $4$-dimensional one-hot vector $y^{(i),\text{Val}}_{j}$ encoding the possible \textit{valences}: \textit{Positive}, \textit{Negative}, \textit{Neutral/Mixed} and \textit{None}. Thus the sentence level label $y^{(i),\text{Sent}}_j$ is the concatenation of the two representations presented above:
$y^{(i),\text{Sent}}_j = \begin{pmatrix} y^{(i),\text{Ent}}_{j} \\ y^{(i),\text{Val}}_j \end{pmatrix}$
\item \textit{Text}-level labels are composed of a single continuous score obtained for each review $y^{(i),Tex}$ summarizing the overall rating given by the reviewer to the movie described.
\end{itemize}
Based on these representations, we define a set of losses, $l^{(\text{Tok})},l^{(\text{Sent})},l^{(\text{Tex})}$ dedicated to measuring the similarity of each substructure prediction, $\hat{\mathbf{y}}^{(\text{Tok})},\hat{\mathbf{y}}^{(\text{Sent})},\hat{\mathbf{y}}^{(\text{Tex})}$ with the ground-truth. In the case of binary variables and in the absence of prior preference between targets and polarities, we use the negative log-likelihood for each variable. Each task loss is then defined as the average of the negative log-likelihood computed on the variables that compose it. For continuous variables, we use the mean squared error as the task loss. Consequently the losses to minimize can be expressed as:
\begin{align*}
&l^{(Tok)}(\mathbf{y}^{\text{Tok}},\hat{\mathbf{y}}^{\text{Tok}}) = - \frac{1}{2}\sum_i( \big(\mathbf{y}_i^{Pol}\log(\hat{\mathbf{y}}_i^{Pol}) + \\ & \quad \mathbf{y}_i^{Tar} \log( \hat{\mathbf{y}_i}^{Tar})\big),\\
&l^{(Sent)}(\mathbf{y}^{Sent},\hat{\mathbf{y}}^{Sent}) = - \frac{1}{2} \sum_i \big(\mathbf{y}_i^{\text{Ent}}\log(\hat{\mathbf{y}}_i^{\text{Ent}}) + \\ &\quad \mathbf{y}_i^{\text{Val}}\log( \hat{\mathbf{y}}_i^{\text{Val}})\big),\\
&l^{(Tex)}(y^{\text{Tex}},\hat{y}^{\text{Tex}}) = (y^{\text{Tex}}-\hat{y}^{\text{Tex}})^2,
\end{align*}
Following previous works on multi-task learning \cite{argyriou2007multi,ruder2017overview}, we argue that optimizing simultaneously the risks derived from these losses should improve the results, compared to the case where they are treated separately, due to the knowledge transferred across tasks. In the multi-task setting, the loss $l$ derived from a set of task losses $l^{(t)}$, is a convex combination of these different task losses. Here the tasks corresponds to each granularity level: $t\in \text{Tasks} = \{\textit{Tok},\textit{Sent},\textit{Tex}\}$ weighted according to a set of task weights $\lambda_t$ :
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:mtloss}
l(\mathbf{y},\hat{\mathbf{y}}) = \frac{\sum_{t\in \text{Tasks}} \lambda_t l^{(t)}(\mathbf{y}^{t},\hat{\mathbf{y}}^{t})}{\sum_{t\in \text{Tasks}} \lambda_t},\; \forall \lambda_t \geq 0.
\end{equation}
Optimizing this type of objectives in the case of hierarchical deep net predictors requires building some strategy in order to train the different parts of the model: the low level parts as well as the abstract ones. We discuss such an issue in the next section.
\section{Learning strategies for multitask objectives}\label{sec:learning_strat}
The main concern when optimizing objectives of the form of \autoref{eq:mtloss} comes from the variable difficulty in optimizing the different objectives $l^{(t)}$. Previous works \cite{sanh2018hierarchical} have shown that a careful choice of the order in which they are introduced is a key ingredient to correctly train deep hierarchical models. In the case of hierarchical labels, a natural hierarchy in the prediction complexity is given by the problem. In the task at hand, coarse grained labels are predicted by taking advantage of the information coming from predicting fine grained ones. The model processes the text by recursively merging and selecting the information in order to build an abstract representation of the review. In Experiment 1 we show that incorporating these fine grained labels into the learning process is necessary to obtain competitive results from the resulting predictors. In order to gradually guide the model from easy tasks to harder ones, we parameterize each $\lambda_t$ as a function of the number of epochs of the form $\lambda^{(n_\text{epoch})}_t = \lambda_\text{max} \frac{\exp{((n_\text{epoch}-Ns_{t})/\sigma)}}{1+\exp{((n_\text{epoch}-Ns_{t})/\sigma)}}$ where $Ns_{t}$ is a parameter devoted to task $t$ controlling the number of epochs after which the weight switches to $\lambda_\text{max}$ and $\sigma$ is a parameter controlling the slope of the transition. We construct 4 strategies relying on smooth transitions from a low state $\lambda_t^{(0)}=0$ to a high state $\lambda_t^{(Ns_t)}=\lambda_t^{\max}$ of each task weight varying with the number of epochs. The different strategies described below are illustrated in the supplemental material.
\begin{itemize}
\item Strategy 1 (S1) consists in optimizing the different objectives one at a time from the easiest to the hardest. It consists in first moving vector $(\lambda_\textit{Token},\lambda_\textit{Sentence}, \lambda_\textit{Text})^T$ values from $( 1, 0, 0)^T$ to $(0, 1, 0)^T$ and then finally to $(0, 0, 1)^T$. The underlying idea is that the low level labels are only useful as an initialization point for higher level ones.
\item Strategy 2 (S2) consists in adding sequentially the different objectives to each other from the easiest to the hardest. It goes from a word only loss $(\lambda_\textit{Token}, \lambda_\textit{Sentence}, \lambda_\textit{Text})^T=(\lambda_\textit{Token}^{(N)}, 0, 0)^T$ and then adds the intermediate objectives by setting $\lambda_\textit{Sentence}$ to $\lambda_\textit{Sentence}^{(N)}$ and then $\lambda_\textit{Text}$ to $\lambda_\textit{Text}^{(N)}$. This strategy relies on the idea that keeping a supervision on low level labels has a regularizing effect on high level ones. Note that this strategy and the two following require a choice of the stationary weight values $\lambda_\textit{Token}^{(N)},\lambda_\textit{Sentence}^{(N)},\lambda_\textit{Text}^{(N)} $.
\item Strategy 3 (S3) is similar to (S2) except that the \textit{sentence} and \textit{text} weights are simultaneously increased. This strategy and the following one are introduced to test whether the order in which the tasks are introduced has some importance on the final scores.
\item Strategy 4 (S4) is also similar to (S2) except that \textit{text}-level supervision is introduced before the \textit{sentence}-level one. This strategy uses the intermediate level labels as a way to regularize the video level model that would have been learned directly after the \textit{token}-level supervision
\end{itemize}
These strategies can be implemented in any stochastic gradient training procedure of objectives (\autoref{eq:mtloss}) since it only requires modifying the values of the weight at the end of each epoch.
In the next section, we design a neural architecture that jointly predicts opinions at the three different levels, \textit{i.e.} the \textit{token}, \textit{sentence} and \textit{text} levels, and discuss how to optimize multitask objectives built on top of opinion-based output representations.
\section{Architecture}\label{sec:architecture}
Before digging into the model description, we introduce the set of hidden variables $h^{(i),\text{Tex}},h^{(i),Sent}_j,h^{(i),\text{Tok}}_{j,k}$ corresponding to the unconstrained scores used to predict the outputs: $\hat{y}^{(i),\text{Tex}} = \sigma^\text{Tex}(W^\text{Tex} h^{(i),\text{Tex}} + b^\text{Tex})$, $\hat{y}^{(i),\text{Sent}}_j = \sigma^\text{Sent}(W^\text{Sent} h^{(i)^\text{Sent}}_j+b^\text{Sent})$, $\hat{y}^{(i),\text{Tok}}_{j,k}= \sigma^\text{Tok}(W^\text{Tok} h^{(i),\text{Tok}}_{j,k} + b^\text{Tok})$, where the $W$ and $b$ are some parameters learned from data and the $\sigma$ are some fixed almost everywhere differentiable functions ensuring that the outputs ``match'' the inputs of the loss function. In the case of binary variables for example, it is chosen as the sigmoid function $\sigma(x) = \exp(x)/(1+\exp(x))$. From a general perspective, a hierarchical opinion predictor is composed of 3 functions $g^\text{Tex},g^\text{Sent},g^\text{Tok}$ encoding the dependency across the levels:
\begin{align*}
h^{(i),\text{Tok}}_{j,k} &= g^\text{Tok}_{\theta^\text{Tok}} ( x^{(i),\text{Tok}}_{j,:}), \\
h^{(i)^\text{Sent}}_j &= g^\text{Sent}_{\theta^\text{Sent}} ( h^{(i)^\text{Tok}}_{j,:}), \\
h^{(i)^\text{Tex}} &= g^\text{Tex}_{\theta^\text{Tex}} ( h^{(i)^\text{Sent}}_{:}).
\end{align*}
In this setting, low level hidden representations are shared with higher level ones. A large body of work has focused on the design of the $g$ functions in the case of multimodal inputs. In this work we exploit state of the art sequence encoders to build our hidden representations that we detail below. The mathematical expression of the models and a more in depth description are provided in the supplemental material.
\begin{itemize}
\item Bidirectional Gated Recurrent Units (GRU) \cite{cho2014learning} especially when coupled with a self attention mechanism have been shown to provide state of the art results on tasks implying the encoding or decoding of a sentence in or from a fixed size representation. Such a problem is encountered in automatic machine translation \cite{luong2015effective}, automatic summarization \cite{nallapati2017summarunner} or image captioning and visual question answering \cite{anderson2018bottom}. We experiment with both models mixing the 3 concatenated input feature modalities (BiGRU model in Experiment 1) and a model carrying 3 independent BiGRU with a hidden state per modality (Ind BiGRU models).
\item The Multi-attention Recurrent Network (MARN) proposed in \cite{zadeh2018multi} extends the traditional Long Short Term Memory (LSTM) sequential model by both storing a view specific dynamic (similar to the LSTM one) and by taking into account cross-view dynamics computed from the signal of the other modalities. In the original paper, this cross-view dynamic is computed using a multi-attention bloc containing a set of weights for each modality used to mix them in a joint hidden representation. Such a network can model complex dynamics but does not embed a mechanism dedicated to encoding very long-range dependencies.
\item Memory Fusion Networks (MFN) are a second family of multi-view sequential models built upon a set of LSTM per modality feeding a joint delta memory. This architecture has been designed to carry some information in the memory even with very long sequences due to the choice of a complex retain / forget mechanism.
\end{itemize}
The 3 models described previously build a hidden representation of the data contained in each sequence. The transfer from one level of the hierarchy to the next coarser one requires building a fixed length representation summarizing the sequence. Note that in the case of the MARN and the MFN, the model directly creates such a representation. We present the strategies that we deployed to pool these representations in the case of the BiGRU sequential layer.
\begin{itemize}
\item Last state representation: Sequential models build their inner state based on observations from the past. One can thus naturally use the hidden state computed at the last observation of a sequence to represent the entire sequence. In our experiments, this is the representation chosen for the BiGRU and Ind BiGRU models.
\item Attention based sequence summarization: Another technique consists in computing a weighted sum of the hidden states of the sequence. The attention weights can be learned from data to focus on the important parts of the sequence only and avoid building too complex inner representations. An example of such a technique successfully applied to the task of text classification based on 3 levels of representation can be found in \cite{yang2016hierarchical}. In our experiments, we implemented the attention model for predicting only the \textit{Sentence}-level labels (model Ind BiGRU + att Sent) and the \textit{Sentence} and \textit{Text}-level labels by sharing a common representation (Ind BiGRU + att model).
\end{itemize}
All the resulting architectures extend the existing hierarchical models by enabling the fusion of multimodal information at different granularity levels while maintaining the ability to introduce some supervision at any level.
\section{Experiments}
In this section we propose 3 sets of experiments that show the superiority of our model over existing approaches with respect to the difficulties highlighted in the introduction, and explore the question of the best way to train hierarchical models on multimodal opinion data.
All the results presented below have been obtained on the recently released fine grained annotated POM dataset \cite{garcia2019}. The input features are computed using the CMU-Multimodal SDK: We represented each word by the concatenation of the 3 feature modalities. The textual features are chosen as the 300-dimensional pre-trained Glove embeddings \cite{pennington2014glove} (not updated during training). The acoustic and visual features have been obtained by averaging the descriptors computed following \cite{park2014computational} during the time of pronunciation of each spoken word. These features include MFCC and pitch descriptors for the audio signals. For the video descriptors, posture, head and gaze movement are taken into account. As far as the output representations are concerned, we merely re-scaled the \textit{Text}-level polarity labels in the [0,1] range.
The results are reported in terms of mean average error (MAE) for the continuous labels and micro F1 score $\mu F1$ for binary labels. We used the provided train, val and test set and describe for each experiment the training procedure and displayed values below. More detail concerning the preprocessings and architectures can be found in the supplemental material.
\subsection{Experiment 1: Which architecture provides the best results on the task of fine grained opinion polarity prediction?}
In this first section, we describe our protocol to select an architecture devoted to performing fine grained multimodal opinion prediction. In order to focus on a restricted set of possible models, we only treat the polarity prediction problem in this section and selected the architectures that provided the best review-level scores (\emph{i.e. } with lowest mean average prediction error). Taking into account the entity categories would only bring an additional level of complexity that is not necessary in this first model selection phase. Building upon previous works \cite{zadeh2018memory}, we use the MFN model as our \textit{sentence}-level sequential model since it has been shown to provide state of the art results on \textit{text}-level prediction problems on the POM dataset. For the \textit{token}-level model, we test different state of the art models able to take advantage of the multimodal information. Our architecture is built upon the \textit{token}-level encoders presented in section \ref{sec:architecture}: the MFN, MARN and independent BiGRUs. Our baseline is computed similarly to \citet{zadeh2018multi}: we represent each sentence by taking the average of the feature representation of the Tokens composing it. The best results reported were obtained after a random search on the parameters and presented in Table \ref{tab:Exp1}.
\begin{table*}[hbt!]
\centering
\scalebox{0.9}{
\begin{tabular}{c|ccccccc}
\hline
&\multicolumn{6}{c}{$\lambda_\textit{Tok}=\lambda_\textit{Sent}=0$: no fine grained supervision} \\\hline
MAE \textit{Text} & 0.35 & 0.40 & 0.40& 0.38 &0.29 & 0.32 & \textbf{0.17}\\ \specialrule{.1em}{.0em}{0em}
&\multicolumn{6}{c}{Supervision at the token, sentence and review levels} \\\hline
\diagbox[height=20pt]{\footnotesize{Metric}}{\footnotesize{Model}} & {BiGRU} &{Ind BiGRU} & {Ind BiGRU + att Sent}& {Ind BiGRU + att}& {MARN}& {MFN}& {Av Emb}\\ \hline
$\mu F1$ \textit{Tokens} & 0.90 & \textbf{0.93} &
\textbf{0.93} & \textbf{0.93}
& 0.90 & 0.89 & X\\ \hline
$\mu F1$ \textit{Sentence} & 0.68 & 0.72 & \textbf{0.75}& \textbf{0.75} &0.52 & 0.47& X \\ \hline
MAE \textit{Text} & 0.16 & 0.15 & 0.15& \textbf{0.14} &0.35 & 0.37 & X\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Scores on sentiment label}
\label{tab:Exp1}
\end{table*}
In the top row, we report results obtained when only using the \textit{text}-level labels to train the entire network. The baseline consisting in representing each sentence by the average of its tokens representation strongly outperforms all the other results. This is due to the moderate size of the training set (600 videos) which is not enough to learn meaningful fine grained representations. In the second part, we introduce some supervision at all levels and found that a choice of $\lambda_\textit{Tok}=0.05,\;\lambda_\textit{Sent}=0.5,\;\lambda_\textit{Tex} = 1$ being respectively the \textit{token}, \textit{sentence} and \textit{text} weights provides the best \textit{text}-level results. This combination reflects the fact that the main objective (\textit{text}-level) should receive the highest weight but low level ones also add some useful side supervision. Despite the ability of MARN and MFN to learn complex representations, the simpler BiGRU-based Token encoder retrieves the best results at all the levels and provides more than 12\% of relative improvement over the Average Embedding based model at the video level. This behavior reveals that the high complexity of MARN and MFN makes them hard to train in the context of hierarchical models with limited data leading to suboptimal performance against simpler ones such as BiGRU. We fix the best architecture obtained in this experiment displayed in Figure \ref{Fig2} and reuse it in the subsequent experiments.
\begin{figure*}[hbt!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.8\textwidth]{Figures/Fig_2.pdf}
\caption{Best architecture selected during the Experiment 1}
\label{Fig2}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Experiment 2: What is the best strategy to take into account multiple levels of opinion information?}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{Figures/strategy.pdf}
\caption{Path of the weight vector in the simplex triangle for the different tested strategies}
\label{Fig3}
\end{figure}
Motivated by the issues concerning the training of multitask losses raised in Section \ref{sec:learning_strat}, we implemented the 4 strategies described and chose the final stationary values as the best one obtained in Experiment 1: $(\lambda_\textit{Token}^{(N)},\lambda_\textit{Sentence}^{(N)},\lambda_\textit{Text}^{(N)})= (0.05,0.5,1) $ Note that each strategy corresponds to a path of the vector $(\lambda_\textit{Tok},\lambda_\textit{Sent},\lambda_\textit{Tex})^T / \sum_t \lambda_t$ in the 3 dimensional simplex. We represent the 3 strategies tested in the Figure \ref{Fig3} corresponding to the projection of the weight vector onto the hyperplane containing the simplex.
The best paths for optimizing the \textit{text}-level objectives are the one that smoothly move from a combination of \textit{sentence} and \textit{token}-level objectives to a \textit{text} oriented one. The path in the simplex seems to be more important than the nature of the strategy since S1 and S2 reach the same \textit{text}-level MAE score while working differently. It also appears than an objective with low $\sigma$\footnote{described in Section \ref{sec:learning_strat}} values corresponding to harder transitions tends to obtain lower scores than smooth transition based strategies. All the strategies are displayed as a function of the number of epochs in the supplemental material.
In this last section we deal with the issue of the joint prediction of entities and polarities.
\subsection{Experiment 3: Is it better to jointly predict opinions and entities ?}
In this section, we introduce the problem of predicting the entities of the movie on which the predictions are expressed, as well as the tokens that mention them. This task is harder than the previously studied polarity prediction task due to (1) the problem of label imbalance appearing in the label distribution reported in the Table \ref{Tab:4} and (2) the diversity of the vocabulary incurred when dealing with many entities. However since the presence of a polarity implies the presence of at least one entity, we expect that a joint prediction will perform better than an entitiy-based predictor only. Table \ref{Tab:3} contains the results obtained with the architecture described in Figure \ref{Fig2} on the task of joint polarity and entity prediction as well as the results obtained when dealing with these tasks independently.
Using either the joint or the independent models provides the same results on the polarity prediction problems at the \textit{token} and \textit{sentence}-level. The reason is that the polarity prediction problem is easier and relying on the entities prediction would only introduce some noise in the prediction.
\begin{table}[hbt!]
\begin{tabular}{c|ccc}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Polarity\\ labels\end{tabular}} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Entity\\ labels\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Polarity +\\ entities\end{tabular} \\ \hline
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}F1 polarity\\ tokens\end{tabular} & 0.93 & X & 0.93 \\ \hline
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}F1 polarity\\ valence\end{tabular} & 0.75 & X & 0.75 \\ \hline
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}F1 entities\\ tokens\end{tabular} & X & 0.97 & 0.97 \\ \hline
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}F1 entities \\ Entities\end{tabular} & X & Table \ref{Tab:4} & Table \ref{Tab:4} \\ \hline
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}MAE score \\ review level\end{tabular} & 0.14 & 0.38 & 0.14 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Joint and independent prediction of entities and polarities}
\label{Tab:3}
\end{table}
We detail the case of \textit{Entities} in the Table \ref{Tab:4} and present the results obtained for the most common entity categories (among 11). As expected, the entity prediction tasks benefits from the polarity information on most of the categories except for the \textit{Vision and special effects}. A 5\% of relative improvement can be noted on the two most present \textit{Entities}: \textit{Overall} and \textit{Screenplay}.
\begin{table}[hbt!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|ccc}
\hline
& Entity & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Entity +\\ Polarity\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Value\\ Count\end{tabular} \\ \hline
Overall & 0.71 & \textbf{0.73} & 1985 \\ \hline
Actors & \textbf{0.65} & \textbf{0.65} & 493 \\ \hline
Screenplay & 0.60 & \textbf{0.63} & 246\\ \hline
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Atmosphere\\ and mood\end{tabular} & 0.62 & \textbf{0.64} & 151 \\ \hline
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Vision and \\ special effects\end{tabular} & \textbf{0.62} & 0.58 & 154 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{F1 score per label for the top entity categories annotated at the sentence level (mean score averaged over 7 runs), value counts are provided on the test set.}
\label{Tab:4}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion}
The proposed framework enables the joint prediction of the different components of an opinion based on a hierarchical neural network. The resulting models can be fully or partially supervised and take advantage of the information provided by different views of the opinions. We have experimentally shown that a good learning strategy should first rely on the easy tasks (\emph{i.e. } for which the labels do not require a complex transformation of the inputs) and then move to more abstract tasks by benefiting from the low level knowledge. Future work will explore the use of \textit{structured output learning} methods dedicated to the opinion structure.
\section{Acknowledgements}
We would like to thanks Thibaud Besson and the whole french Cognitive Systems team of IBM for supporting our research with the server IBM Power AC922.
|
\section{Introduction}
\Acp{uav} offer cost-efficient, flexible and automated delivery of high-quality sensing data in various applications, \emph{e.g}\onedot} \def\Eg{\emph{E.g}\onedot\ search-and-rescue, inspection and agricultural monitoring. Image sensors in particular are well suited for \ac{uav} based sensing because of their low cost, size, and power demand. Recent advances in computer vision and deep learning enable automated analysis of the gathered data and make the system applicable to a range of monitoring and mapping tasks in large or hard-to-access environments.
In this work, we look into the problem of data collection for environmental monitoring. Especially in mentioned applications like long-term agricultural monitoring, imagery can change drastically over time and differ from the training data. Cases of novelty require tedious data collection, annotation and retraining, with two time-costly challenges: On the one hand the flight time is limited due to the energy consumption of the \ac{uav}, on the other hand the time investment for manually annotating the large pool of acquired images is huge. By flying over an area in a conventional predetermined lawnmower-fashion, energy is wasted on gathering repetitive and similar images that will not significantly improve the segmentation and classification quality. We propose an \ac{ipp} system that actively searches for and gathers data different to the training distribution of the available semantic segmenter.
Based on results from the recent `Fishyscapes' benchmark for novelty detection in semantic segmentation~\cite{Blum2019-eh}, we propose an \ac{ipp} system that maximises the novelty of the gathered images in a single flight mission. Given the available resources, we reduce the number of flights and annotated data, while achieving faster improvements of the semantic segmentation.
\input{teaser.tex}
An illustration of our approach is given in figure~\ref{fig:teaser}. For every new image captured by the \ac{uav}, we estimate the novelty of the image and follow this information to high-interest regions.
The contributions of this work are the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item We propose an \ac{ipp} algorithm that uses novelty estimation from deep learning as primary source of information.
\item We evaluate the proposed \ac{ipp} solution and the novelty estimation towards the problem of active learning.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{images/DiscreteGrid.png}
\caption{Illustration of the path planning scenario. \textbf{Left.} The \ac{uav} is in between its mission to collect useful new training data. The path is planned as a sequence of grid cells on the map. \textbf{Right.} The current image seen from the \ac{uav} is put through the \ac{cnn} to get a heatmap of patchwise novelty scores. The heatmap is then used to select the most promising next gridcell.}
\label{fig:DiscGrid}
\end{figure*}
\section{Related Work}
\label{sec:related_work}
\Par{Novelty detection} or uncertainty estimation for deep learning models is a very active area of research. Uncertainty and mistakes in prediction algorithms can come from noise in the input, but also from differences between the training data and the input. In our case, we are exclusively interested in the second part, as we want to decrease the distance between input and training distributions by gathering a broader range of training data with our \ac{ipp} setup.\\
Hendrycks\ \emph{et al}\onedot~\cite{Hendrycks2017-ua} give a comprehensive overview of the problem and evaluate the baseline of the softmax output. Bayesian Deep Learning~\cite{Gal2016-mx,Kendall2017-jy} estimates uncertainty from deep models whose outputs and weights are probability distributions. Different works compare the flow of data through the network to the training data and estimate uncertainty as deviation from the training distribution~\cite{Mandelbaum2017-ti,Papernot2018-xz}. \cite{Blum2019-eh} adapted and evaluated these approaches towards novelty detection in semantic segmentation. As a third direction of research, learned representations of the input are reconstructed and compared in input space~\cite{Pidhorskyi2018-qf,Lis2019-vd}.
\Par{Active Sampling} is known in machine learning as a technique for data reduction to speed up training times. Wang\ \emph{et al}\onedot~\cite{Wang2017-tz} show a system that samples from training images based on the softmax confidence. Gal\ \emph{et al}\onedot~\cite{Gal2017-hn} develop a similar system based on Bayesian Deep Learning, which is more suited for novelty detection. Both systems focus on reducing the expensive labelling and do not take into account the problem of data acquisition.
\Par{Informative Path Planning} has recently experienced increasing interest for a variety of applications, such as environmental monitoring~\cite{Hitz2017-kh, Hollinger2014-md, Ghaffari2019}, surveillance~\cite{vivaldini2016} and inspection~\cite{Bircher2018}. The aim is efficient continuous or discrete data acquisition in complex environments using a mobile robot, whose motions are constrained by its sensing and mobility capabilities. Popular techniques include Partially Observable Markov Decision Processes (POMDPs)~\cite{Kaelbling1998} or Gaussian Processes~\cite{Rasmussen2005}. However, the \ac{uav} sensing scenario represents an extreme case where only information about past places in the trajectory is available, which makes path planning for more than a few steps unfeasible and reduces the applicability of the mentioned methods.\\
While they do not use novelty as input to a path planner, Richter~\emph{et al}\onedot~\cite{Richter2017-wg} proposed one of the first path planning systems with novelty detection based on deep learning. They use reconstruction based novelty to safely switch between a neural network-based obstacle avoidance controller and a slower conservative planner. In our method, we directly exploit the novelty information to steer the robot towards more informative regions.
\section{Method}
\label{sec:method}
\subsection{Novelty Detection}
Our novelty estimation approach follows results from~\cite{Mandelbaum2017-ti,Papernot2018-xz,Blum2019-eh} and uses density estimation in the feature space. In particular, we use kernel density estimation to produce patchwise uncertainty estimates. Lower resolution feature vectors from a convolutional neural network are compared to their nearest neighbors from the training distribution. Novelty is here defined as the average cosine distance to neighbors from the training distribution, a metric that was shown to work well in different scenarios in the aforementioned works. However, we note that the proposed system setup is independent of the underlying technique for novelty detection as long as it produces pixel- or patchwise values.
Given a training set of images $\bm{A}$, we extract embeddings $\bm{Z}_l = f_l(\bm{A})$ at layer $l$ from the segmentation network and store them in a database. For a given input image $\bm{a}'$ and embeddings $\bm{z}_l' = f_l(\bm{a}')$, we then approximate the probability density of the input image with respect to the distribution of training data using a kernel density estimation of $\bm{z}_l'$ with respect to the $k$ nearest neighbors in $\bm{Z}_l$. This can be found through
\begin{align*}
D(\bm{z}') = \sum \limits_{i=0}^{k-1} \frac{\bm{z}'\bm{z}^{(i)}}{|\bm{z}'|\,|\bm{z}^{(i)}|}.
\end{align*}
$D(\bm{z}')$ is a patchwise uncertainty estimation of the current input image. The size of the patches is dependent on the layer $l$ where the embeddings are extracted, \emph{i.e}\onedot} \def\Ie{\emph{I.e}\onedot\ usually the resolution is 8 or 16 times smaller than the input image. An example of the uncertainty estimation is shown in figure~\ref{fig:teaser}.
For our input image size, the above approach requires 64 nearest neighbor searches per input image and is therefore not feasible for real-time. However, it can be directly switched out with flow-based density estimation as was very recently shown in~\cite{Blum2019-eh}, which only requires a single pass through a network.
\subsection{Path Planning}
The objective in our \ac{ipp} problem is to find new, informative images for training. The difficulty of approaching this problem is twofold. First, the information computed by the novelty detection is available only in locations that have already been visited by the \ac{uav}; second, the distribution of novelty over the explorable space is unknown. In this work, we adopt the assumption of spatial correlation, \emph{i.e}\onedot} \def\Ie{\emph{I.e}\onedot\ while we do not pose any hypothesis on where to find novel inputs, we assume that there are regions of connected novelty cells scattered over the map, rather than an i.i.d. uniform distribution.\\
Given a grid discretization of the world, the path-planning problem is stated as active sampling from the adjacent cells of the current position in the grid map. An illustration of the problem is given in figure~\ref{fig:DiscGrid}.
At each re-planning step, the following information is available to the path planner:
\begin{itemize}
\item number of additional explorable cells (\emph{i.e}\onedot} \def\Ie{\emph{I.e}\onedot\ battery life);
\item explored cells in the map;
\item distances to the borders of the explorable world;
\item average novelty score of the current cell image;
\item gradient direction of the novelty score from the current cell image.
\end{itemize}
We implement the path planning on basis of potential fields, where each grid cell $\bm{p}$ on the map has an assigned potential $\varphi(\bm{p})$:
\begin{align*}
\varphi(\bm{p}) &= D(\bm{p}) + \textrm{penalty}_\textrm{border}(\bm{p}) + \textrm{penalty}_\textrm{visited}(\bm{p})
\end{align*}
The novelty of a grid cell image $D(\bm{p})$ is initialized uniformly to a constant value for all unknown patches and updated once a patch has been observed. $\textrm{penalty}_\textrm{border}(\bm{p})$ increases the potential towards the border of the observable world. This term is required only in simulated environments, in order to avoid situations where the \ac{uav} gets stuck in corners of the simulation environment. $\textrm{penalty}_\textrm{visited}(\bm{p})$ is a constant penalty applied to cells that have already been visited and therefore should be avoided.
\input{gradient_propagation.tex}
\begin{algorithm}[ht]
\caption{Selection of the next adjacent grid cell}\label{alg:IPP}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State $t \gets 0$
\While{enough energy to head home}
\If{surrounded by visited patches}
\State follow shortest path to non-visited patch
\EndIf
\Statex
\State update $\varphi(\bm{x}_t)$ with observed novelty
\State $\hat{\varphi}(\bm{p}) \gets \varphi(\bm{p})$ \Comment{temporary updates to $\varphi$}
\Statex
\If {$D(\bm{x}_t) < \alpha$} \Comment{low novelty}
\Statex \Comment{no updates to $\hat{\varphi}$}
\EndIf
\Statex
\If {$\alpha < D(\bm{x}_t) \leq \beta$} \Comment{medium novelty}
\State $\hat{\varphi}(\bm{p}) \gets \hat{\varphi}(\bm{p}) - f(\bm{p}, \nabla D(\bm{x}_t))$
\Statex \Comment{propagate novelty gradient, see fig.~\ref{fig:gradient_propagation}}
\EndIf
\Statex
\If {$\beta < D(\bm{x}_t)$} \Comment{high novelty}
\State $\hat{\varphi}(\bm{p}) \gets \hat{\varphi}(\bm{p}) \circledast {\tiny\frac{1}{9}\begin{bmatrix}1\hspace{-7pt} & 1\hspace{-7pt}& 1 \\ 1\hspace{-7pt} & 1\hspace{-7pt}& 1 \\ 1\hspace{-7pt} & 1\hspace{-7pt} & 1\end{bmatrix}}$
\Comment{smooth potential}
\EndIf
\Statex
\If {$D(\bm{x}_{t-1}) > \beta$ and $D(\bm{x}_t) < \beta$}
\Statex\Comment{edge of informative region}
\State $\hat{\varphi}(\bm{x}_\textrm{straight}) \gets \hat{\varphi}(\bm{x}_\textrm{straight}) + \textrm{penalty}_\textrm{forward}$
\Statex\Comment{don't go forward, away from high novelty}
\EndIf
\Statex
\State choose direction with lowest $\hat{\varphi}(\bm{p})$
\State $t \gets t + 1$
\EndWhile
\State return home
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
Based on the defined potential field, the drone selects one of the 4 adjacent grid cells to its current location $\bm{x}_t$ according to algorithm~\ref{alg:IPP}. The algorithm follows a scheme of fast traversion of low-novelty areas and exhaustive exploration of high-novelty areas. We distinguish 3 different cases, depending on the novelty of position $\bm{x}_t$:
\begin{description}
\item[low novelty] is defined as $D(\bm{x}_t) \leq \alpha$. These are images uninteresting for training. The path planner tries to avoid these regions and follows the gradient of the potential field towards more informative areas.
\item[medium novelty] is defined by $\alpha < D(\bm{x}_t) \leq \beta$. It can depict borders between different classes, as well as borders to more informative areas. The path planner takes the gradient of the current novelty heatmap as additional information into account, as it might be directed towards high novelty regions.
\item[high novelty] is defined by $D(\bm{x}_t) > \beta$. It identifies regions that contain crucial data for training. Instead of following the gradient, we found that it is more helpful to explore larger areas of high-average novelty. In order to encourage exploration, we smooth the potential field to not disturb the path planner with local fluctuation of the novelty estimation function. Moreover, we add $\textrm{penalty}_\textrm{forward}$ for moving out of high-novelty regions.
\end{description}
We set $\alpha$ and $\beta$ based on the lower and upper quartile thresholds on a validation set. The overall goal of the \ac{ipp} algorithm is to catch as many high-novelty cells in a mission as possible.
\section{Evaluation}
\label{sec:evaluation}
We evaluate our approach on the remote sensing task of the RIT18~\cite{Kemker2018-kc} dataset. The dataset contains high-resolution hyperspectral images of the same location for two points in time, suitable as a training and validation dataset. For both images, ground truth annotations are given. We use the classes \emph{grass}, \emph{tree}, \emph{beach}, and \emph{other}. We simulate the \ac{uav} flight by laying a grid over the image with cell size $128 \times 128 \textrm{ px}$.
The images gathered from each grid cell are segmented using a fully convolutional network~\cite{Long2015-fm} with a VGG-16 encoder~\cite{Simonyan2015-zf}, in particular the implementation from~\cite{Blum2018-kp}. We use the embeddings from the \emph{conv5-1} layer and sample the density over 20 nearest neighbors.
The experiment is set up as follows. The \ac{uav} is sent on multiple missions, each time with the objective to gather new training data. After each mission, we add the new images together with annotations to the pool of training data, retrain the semantic segmenter, and build a new kNN database. The new semantic segmenter is then used for the novelty estimation in the next mission.\\
At every iteration we evaluate the accuracy of the segmenter on the whole map measured in \ac{mIoU}.
To evaluate our approach, we compare against two different lawnmower baselines:
\begin{description}
\item[a - big lawnmower] For the conventional approach flights with the UAV are simulated in lawnmower fashion across the whole site. A starting point near the edge of the site is chosen and from there line after line, back and forth across the map images are acquired until there is no energy left and the (re-)training of the network is performed.
\item[b - small lawnmower] For more diverse image acquisition with less flights, the small-scale lawnmower approach works by manually choosing different starting positions spread out across the whole site. From each of the starting positions a flight with a small-scale lawnmower approach is executed which results in the collection of imagery in a rectangle with a size depending on the energy capacity of the UAV. After each flight, the gathered image patches are then used for (re-)training.
\item[c - \acl{ipp}] To test the developed IPP system the same starting positions as the one used for the small lawnmower approach are used. Instead of predetermined paths, from the second flight on the IPP system is used to guide the UAV autonomously until the energy is depleted, then the vehicle heads back to the starting position and the network is (re-)trained with the acquired images.
\end{description}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{plots/segmentation_miou.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of the mean IoU on the full map after every retraining of the networks following the three different approaches.}
\label{fig:iou_plot}
\end{figure}
\input{planned_paths.tex}
The experimental results are shown in figure~\ref{fig:iou_plot}. The experiment validates that our \ac{ipp} system collects useful data faster than the lawnmower based approaches. To reach a good segmentation performance of $\textrm{mIoU}\geq 90\,\%$, only 3 \ac{uav} missions were necessary. As a comparison, the prediction maps and generated paths after 3 missions of all methods are shown in figure~\ref{fig:planned_paths}. In particular, we note that the novelty plotted over the whole map after 3 missions in~\ref{fig:planned_paths:c} highlights the lake on the upper left as a region of high novelty, which is also the only region that is wrongly classified. The corresponding path shows that the \ac{ipp} was aborted before collecting more lake data due to energy constraints and went back to the starting position.
\section{Discussion}
In our experiments with the RIT18 dataset, we found that one of the main differences among the evaluated path planners was the data balance of the different classes captured in each mission, because the classes are geographically very separated on the map. This makes the experiment in general sensitive to the choice of starting positions for each mission. Choosing positions in all 4 quadrants of the map came to the advantage of the smaller lawnmower approach for the particular dataset. It remains to test how our \ac{ipp} framework performs with a starting position fixed over several missions. To disentangle the evaluation of our \ac{ipp} system and the novelty detection, we plan experiments on datasets with a different class distribution, as well as experiments where we exchange the novelty estimation to a randomly generated heatmap.
On top of the points above, we restricted the path planning problem by the available information and the possible actions. For other scenarios, the information available can vary, \emph{e.g}\onedot} \def\Eg{\emph{E.g}\onedot\ it is also possible to have novelty maps similar to the one on figure~\ref{fig:planned_paths:c} from previous missions available. In our experiments the height above ground was kept constant. While informative path planning with variable height was explored in different works before, it remains subject of further research how the height affects segmentation performance and novelty estimation.
\section{Conclusion}
In this work we present an \ac{ipp} system to collect valuable training data with a \ac{uav}. We show how to incorporate novelty estimation from deep learning into a path planning objective and evaluate our system on a real world terrain monitoring map. The results indicate a significantly faster useful data acquisition with improved performance compared to traditional lawnmower approaches.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
We thank Cesar Cadena and Juan Nieto for their valuable inputs.
\printbibliography
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro}
The Seiberg-Witten prepotential provides a complete description for the low energy dynamics of 4d $\mathcal{N}=2$ or 5d $\mathcal{N}=1$ gauge theory in its Coulomb branch \cite{Seiberg:1994rs,Seiberg:1994aj}. It is a function of the vacuum expectation value (VEV) of the scalar in the vector multiplet that parameterizes the Coulomb branch moduli space. Quantum correction to the prepotential is known to be one-loop exact, while there also exist non-perturbative corrections coming from Yang-Mills instantons.
An efficient way to compute the fully quantum corrected prepotential $\mathcal{F}$ is to study the Nekrasov partition function $\mathcal{Z}$ on $\Omega$-deformed $\mathbb{C}^2$ or $\mathbb{C}^2 \times S^1$.
It can be written as the product of the classical, one-loop, and instanton contributions,
\begin{align}
\mathcal{Z}(\vec{a}, \vec{{m}}, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2, {q}) = {Z}_{\textrm{class}}(\vec{a}, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2, {q}) \ {Z}_{\textrm{1-loop}} (\vec{a}, \vec{{m}}, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2) \ {Z}_{\textrm{inst}}(\vec{a}, \vec{{m}}, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2, {q}),
\end{align}
where the instanton piece is the fugacity sum over all multi-instanton contributions:
\begin{align}
{Z}_{\textrm{inst}}(\vec{a}, \vec{{m}}, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2, {q}) = 1 + \sum_{n=1}^\infty {q}^n {Z}_n(\vec{a}, \vec{{m}}, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2).
\end{align}
Once the Nekrasov partition function is known, one can extract the Seiberg-Witten prepotential via taking the $\epsilon_1, \epsilon_2 \to 0$ limit as $\mathcal{F} = \lim_{\epsilon_{1, 2}\rightarrow 0} \epsilon_1 \epsilon_2 \log{{\cal Z}}$ \cite{Nekrasov:2002qd,Nekrasov:2003rj,Nakajima:2003pg, Braverman:2004cr}.
The instanton part of the partition function in the $\Omega$-background can be computed once we know the appropriate instanton moduli space. For the classical gauge groups, the ADHM construction of the moduli space \cite{Atiyah:1978ri} provides a direct way to compute the instanton partition function. The ADHM construction can be understood as the quantum mechanics describing the D$p$-D$(p+4)$ system. The Higgs branch moduli space of the D$p$ system gives the desired moduli space. Matter fields can be also introduced by including more branes, for instance,
by considering the world-volume theory on the D0-branes of the D0-D4-D8 system.
By using the localization on the 1d system on the D0-branes or its dimensional reduction \cite{Moore:1997dj, Bruzzo:2002xf}, the contour integral formula of the partition function has been obtained for the case of classical gauge groups with a particular choice of matter representations \cite{Nekrasov:2004vw, Marino:2004cn, Fucito:2004gi, Hollands:2010xa, Hollands:2011zc}.
The precise choice of the contour of the ADHM integral has been derived in \cite{Hwang:2014uwa, Cordova:2014oxa,Hori:2014tda} following the Jeffrey-Kirwan residue formula in 2d elliptic genus \cite{Benini:2013xpa,Benini:2013nda}.
However, there is no ADHM type construction for the exceptional gauge groups or generic type of matter fields even for the classical group. The string-theoretic picture implies that they require strong-coupling dynamics or non-Lagrangian field theories to realize instanton moduli space of exceptional theories as a vacuum moduli space. Even though there has been a number results regarding the exceptional instantons that we review later in the beginning of Section \ref{sec:example}, a complete way for general instanton counting is still lacking.
To this end, we generalize the blowup formula of Nakajima-Yoshioka (NY) \cite{Nakajima:2003pg,Nakajima:2003uh,Nakajima:2005fg, Gottsche:2006bm, Nakajima:2009qjc, Gottsche:2010ig}.\footnote{This is an equivariant generalization of the blow-up formula of Donaldson invariants \cite{FintushelStern}, which is also derived and generalized in the context of Seiberg-Witten theory in \cite{Moore:1997pc, Marino:1998bm}.}
In \cite{Keller:2012da}, the blow-up formula was used to compute the instanton partition function for exceptional gauge group without matter by extrapolating the NY blowup equation to arbitrary gauge group. This is tested against the superconformal index of 4d SCFT where the Higgs branch is given by the instanton moduli space \cite{Gaiotto:2012uq}. Since the Nekrasov partition function computes the topological string partition function for certain toric Calabi-Yau spaces, a similar blowup formula for topological string theory is expected. Indeed such formulae are found and developed in \cite{Grassi:2016nnt, Gu:2017ccq, Huang:2017mis, Gu:2018gmy,Gu:2019dan}. Especially in \cite{Gu:2018gmy,Gu:2019dan}, non-perturbative partition functions for 6d SCFTs are obtained using the blowup equation.
We generalize the Nakajima-Yoshioka (NY) blowup equations \cite{Nakajima:2003pg,Nakajima:2003uh,Nakajima:2005fg, Gottsche:2006bm, Nakajima:2009qjc, Gottsche:2010ig} to arbitrary gauge group (with a possible 5d Chern-Simons term or discrete theta angle) with hypermultiplets in arbitrary representations. We propose a blow-up formula for a general gauge theory with arbitrary matter representations, under the condition that the matter representation is not `too large' as we discuss shortly. This enables us to compute the instanton partition functions for numerous gauge theories that have not been known before, without relying on the explicit construction of the moduli space.
The basic idea is as follows: Let us consider a one-point blow-up $\hat{\mathbb{C}}^2$ of the flat space $\mathbb{C}^2$. The \emph{full} partition function on $\hat{\mathbb{C}}^2$ can be written in terms of the products of the \emph{full} partition function of $\mathbb{C}^2$. But at the same time, the partition function on the blowup is identical to that of the flat space since we can smoothly blow-down $\hat{\mathbb{C}}^2$ to $\mathbb{C}^2$. On $\hat{\mathbb{C}}^2$, we can insert certain topological operator associated with the 2-cycle that turns out to be trivial via selection rule as long as the matter representation is not `too large'. This provides us functional relations for the partition function, that we call the blowup equations of the form
\begin{align}
{\cal Z} = \sum_{\vec{k} \in \Delta} {\cal Z}^{(N), d}(\vec{k}) {\cal Z}^{(S), d}(\vec{k}) \qquad \textrm{ for }\quad 0 \le d \le d_{\text{max}} \ ,
\end{align}
for some value of $d_\text{max}$ that depends on the gauge group and matter content. Here, ${\cal Z}^{(N/S), d} (\vec{k})$ is given entirely in terms of the flat space partition function ${\cal Z}$ and the sum is over the co-root vectors of the gauge group.
It turns out that this equation is sufficient to determine the instanton partition function itself as long as $d_\text{max} \ge 2$. Remarkably, this blowup equation leads to a set of recursion relations which can completely determine the instanton contribution from the perturbative part of the partition function. Therefore we arrive at a surprising conclusion:
\begin{quote}
\centering
The \emph{perturbative} physics determines the \emph{non-perturbative} physics!
\end{quote}
Sometimes in the resurgence analysis, the perturbative partition function constrains or even determine the non-perturbative part. This is not necessarily the case, especially for the case of 4d ${\cal N}=2$ and 5d ${\cal N}=1$ gauge theory that we consider \cite{Honda:2016mvg}. In our case, we demand the consistency of the partition function as we change the spacetime smoothly, without assuming any analytic property, which turns out to be sufficient to determine the full partition function from the perturbative part. In fact, it was noticed several decades ago in \cite{Edelstein:1998sp, Edelstein:1999xk} that the instanton part of the prepotential can be determined recursively via perturbative part. What we find here is that the same statement holds at the level of partition function in Omega background as well.
Using the blowup equation we find, we obtain the following universal expression of the 1-instanton partition function for arbitrary gauge group and matter (5d version):
\begin{align}
\boxed{
Z_1=\ \frac{e^{-\frac{b}{2}(\epsilon_1 + \epsilon_2)}\prod_{l}e^{\frac{m^\text{tw}_l I_2(\mathbf{R}_l)}{2}}}{(1-e^{-\epsilon_1})(1-e^{-\epsilon_2})} \sum_{\vec{k}\in\Delta_\ell}\frac{e^{\frac{\kappa_{\text{eff}}}{2}(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k}-d_{ijk}a^ik^jk^k)}\prod_{\omega \in \mathbf{R}_l} {\cal L}_{\vec{k}\cdot\vec{\omega}}(\vec{a}\cdot \vec{\omega} + m_{l}^\text{tw})}{(1-e^{-\epsilon_1-\epsilon_2-\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k}})(1-e^{\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k}})\prod_{\vec{\alpha}\cdot \vec{k}=-1}(1-e^{-\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\alpha}})}}.
\end{align}
Various symbols in this expression will be explained later in section \ref{sec:blowup}. But we highlight here that this formula depends only on group-theoretic data such as the set of long roots $\Delta_\ell$ and weight vectors for representation $\mathbf{R}_l$ of each hypermultiplet labeled by $l$.
We emphasize that even though this expression looks completely universal, this formula turns out to be valid only if the matter representations satisfy certain constraint. For example, it fails for the matters in the adjoint representation. We find our 1-instanton formula in 5d is valid if
\begin{align}
d_\text{max} = h^\vee -\frac{1}{2}\sum_l I_2(\mathbf{R}_l) \ge 2 \qquad \textrm{for } \quad G \neq SU(N) \textrm{ or } Sp(N) \ ,
\end{align}
where $h^\vee$ is the dual Coxeter number of the gauge group and $I_2(\mathbf{R})$ is the quadratic Dynkin index of the representation $\mathbf{R}$ and $l$ runs over all hypermultiplets that are charged under the gauge group $G$. We give analogous expressions for $G=SU(N)$ or $Sp(N)$ in section \ref{subsec:numd}. The complication arises because of possible Chern-Simons term and discrete theta angle. One can consider 4d version of the partition function as well. In this case, an analogous formula turns out to be valid for any gauge group and matters with $h^\vee - \frac{1}{2} \sum_l I_2(\mathbf{R}_l) >1$ since we do not have a Chern-Simons coupling nor discrete theta angle in this case.
We compute instanton partition functions for a large number of examples and test against known results, from which we build our confidence for the generalized blowup equation we find.
The organization of this paper is as follows: In Section \ref{sec:blowup}, we give a physical derivation of the blowup equations. From this, we obtain a recursion formula to compute instanton partition function at any number of instantons. Especially, we derive a concise closed-form formula for one instanton partition function that works for a large number of theories. We give a precise condition for our formula to work. In the case of 4d Nekrasov partition function, we are able to derive the bound on the matter representation for which the formula to work. We suggest an analogous bound for 5d version, by extrapolating known results. In Section \ref{sec:example}, we test our formula against various known cases. Moreover, we also obtain many previously unknown partition functions. Some of them are expressed as the character expansion, whose form is explicitly given in Appendix \ref{sec:data}. We then conclude with several future directions.
\section{Instanton Counting from Blow-up} \label{sec:blowup}
The essential idea of using the blow-up of ${\mathbb{C}}^2$ for instanton counting is that the gauge theory partition function for a 4d ${\cal N}=2$ (or 5d ${\cal N}=1$) theory on the blow-up of a point $\hat{\mathbb{C}}^2$ (or $\hat{\mathbb{C}}^2 \times S^1$) can be written in two different ways. This will allow us to write a recursion relation for the instanton partition function that can be solved rather easily \cite{Nakajima:2003pg, Nakajima:2003uh,Nakajima:2005fg, Keller:2012da}.
\subsection{Blowup equation}
\paragraph{Localization on the blow-up $\hat{\mathbb{C}}^2$}
One of the expressions for the partition function $\hat{\mathcal{Z}}$ on the blow-up $\hat{\mathbb{C}}^2$ comes from the Coulomb branch localization, which results that $\hat{\mathcal{Z}}$ can be obtained by patching together the flat-space partition function $\mathcal Z$ \cite{Nekrasov:2003vi}.
The blow-up $\hat{\mathbb{C}}^2$ of the complex plane is constructed from $\mathbb{C}^2$ by replacing the origin with a compact 2-cycle $\mathbb{P}^1$. In particular, the geometry is identical to the total space of the line bundle of degree $(-1)$ over $\mathbb{P}^1$. One can parametrize $\mathcal{O}(-1)\rightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$ using the homogeneous coordinates $(z_0, z_1, z_2)$, satisfying the projective condition $(z_0, z_1, z_2) \sim (\lambda^{-1}z_0, \lambda^1 z_1, \lambda^1 z_2)$ for any $\lambda \in \mathbb{C}^*$, where the two-cycle $\mathbb{P}^1 \subset \hat{\mathbb{C}}^2$ corresponds to the locus $z_0 = 0$.
We are interested in the $U(1)^2$ equivariant partition function, with the $U(1)^2$ action $V$ rotating the complex coordinates $(z_0, z_1, z_2)$ as follows:
\begin{align}
(z_0, z_1, z_2) \mapsto (z_0, e^{\epsilon_1}z_1, e^{\epsilon_2}z_2).
\end{align}
Instantons are located at two fixed points of the $U(1)^2$ action, \textit{i.e.}, the north/south poles of the $\mathbb{P}^1$, whose coordinates are
$(z_0, z_1, z_2) = (0,1,0)$ and $(0,0,1)$. Around these fixed points, ($\mathbb{C}^*$-invariant) local coordinates are given by $(z_0 z_1, z_2/z_1)$ and $(z_0 z_2, z_1/z_2)$ respectively. The local weights under the $U(1)^2$ action $V$ near the fixed points are:
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
(z_0 z_1,\,z_2/z_1) \mapsto (e^{\epsilon_1}z_0 z_1, \,e^{\epsilon_2 - \epsilon_1}z_2/z_1) & \qquad \qquad \text{(near the north pole)}\\
(z_0 z_2,\,z_1/z_2) \mapsto (e^{\epsilon_2}z_0 z_2, \,e^{\epsilon_1 - \epsilon_2}z_1/z_2) & \qquad \qquad \text{(near the south pole)}
\end{split}
\end{align}
The full partition function $\hat{\mathcal Z}$ on $\hat{\mathbb{C}}^2$, which includes both the perturbative and instanton contributions, can be obtained by performing the localization on the Coulomb branch. On the Coulomb branch, the gauge group is generically broken to $U(1)^r$ where $r$ is the rank of the gauge group. The $U(1)^r$ equivariant parameters $\vec{a}$ naturally appear in the partition function. One needs to sum over all distinct field configurations with zero-sized instantons located at the north and south poles. All the inequivalent configurations are labeled by the $r$-dimensional vector $\vec{k}$ of the first Chern numbers, corresponding to different flux configurations on the two-cycle $\mathbb{P}^1$. When the gauge group has $U(1)$ factor, we can turn on the external flux that can be supported on the $\mathbb{P}^1$. We assume there is no such a factor in the gauge group.
Summing up, $\hat{\mathcal Z}$ can be expressed in terms of the partition function ${\cal Z}$ on $\mathbb{C}^2$ as \cite{Nekrasov:2003vi, Gottsche:2006bm, Gottsche:2006tn, Gasparim:2008ri, Bonelli:2012ny}
\begin{align} \label{eq:blowup}
\hat{\mathcal Z}(\vec{a}, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2, q, \vec{m}) = \sum_{\vec{k} \in \Lambda} {\cal Z}^{(N)}(\vec{k}) {\cal Z}^{(S)}(\vec{k}) \ ,
\end{align}
where the flux sum is taken over the co-root lattice $\Lambda$ of the gauge algebra. Each factor represents the partition function localized at the $U(1)^2$ fixed points (north/south-poles of the $\mathbb{P}^1 \subset \hat{\mathbb{C}}^2$) given as
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
{\cal Z}^{(N)}(\vec{k}) &\equiv {\cal Z} (\vec{a}+ \vec{k} \epsilon_1, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2 - \epsilon_1, q, \vec{m}-\frac{1}{2}{\epsilon_1}) \ , \\
{\cal Z}^{(S)}(\vec{k}) & \equiv {\cal Z} (\vec{a}+\vec{k} \epsilon_2, \epsilon_1 - \epsilon_2, \epsilon_2, q, \vec{m}-\frac{1}{2}{\epsilon_2}) \ .
\end{split}
\end{align}
In addition to the Coulomb branch parameters, the partition function depends on the Omega deformation parameters $\epsilon_1, \epsilon_2$ and also mass parameters $\vec{m}$. The instanton fugacity $q$ takes the following form: For a 4d theory, it is given as $q = e^{2\pi i \tau} = \Lambda^{b_0} $ where $\tau$ is the complexified gauge coupling and $\Lambda$ being the dynamical scale of the gauge theory. The exponent $b_0$ is the 1-loop beta function coefficient. For a 5d theory, it is also given by the exponentiated gauge coupling as $q=e^{-\frac{1}{g^2}} \equiv e^{-m_0}$.
Notice that the Coulomb parameter $\vec{a}$ gets an appropriate shift at each fixed point $p$, induced by the non-trivial magnetic flux $\vec{k}$ on the blown-up $\mathbb{P}^1$, with the proportionality constant $H|_p$. The values of the moment map $H$ for the $U(1)^2$ action $V$, \textit{i.e.}, $dH = \iota_V \omega$, at the north and south poles are given as
\begin{align}
H|_\text{NP} = \epsilon_1 \text{ and } H|_\text{SP} = \epsilon_2.
\end{align}
The mass parameters also get shifted since the hypermultiplet mass is twisted by $SU(2)_R$, which makes the combination $m - \frac{\epsilon_1+\epsilon_2}{2}$ invariant at the fixed points.\footnote{One can instead use the shifted mass to simplify the formula involving mass. We use unshifted mass to match with the existing formulae in the literature.}
\paragraph{Partition function on $\hat{\mathbb{C}}^2$ vs $\mathbb{C}^2$}
Another important fact for the partition function $\hat{{\cal Z}}$ on the blow-up $\hat{\mathbb{C}}^2$ is that $\hat{{\cal Z}}$ is actually identical to the flat-space partition function ${\cal Z}$ \cite{Nakajima:2003pg,Nakajima:2003uh,Nakajima:2005fg, Gottsche:2006bm, Nakajima:2009qjc, Gottsche:2010ig}.
The blow-up $\hat{\mathbb{C}}^2$ is identical to $\mathbb{C}^2$ except for the origin, which is replaced by the blown-up sphere $\mathbb{P}^1$.
Since the Nekrasov partition function gets contributions only from the small instantons localized at the fixed points of the $U(1)^2$ equivariant action $V$, the size of the divisor should not affect the partition function as we smoothly shrink it. So we expect that $\hat{{\cal Z}} = {\cal Z}$. This implies the following relation:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:blowup-generic}
{\cal Z} = \hat{{\cal Z}} = \sum_{\vec{k} \in \Lambda} {\cal Z}^{(N)}(\vec{k}) {\cal Z}^{(S)}(\vec{k}).
\end{align}
This blow-up identity can be thought of as a special case of more generalized orbifold partition functions \cite{Sasaki:2006vq,Bonelli:2012ny,Ito:2013kpa, Bruzzo:2013daa, Bruzzo:2014jza}.
For example, the Nekrasov partition function on the orbifold $\mathbb{C}^2/\mathbb{Z}_2$ can be computed in two different ways, one is via formula analogous to \eqref{eq:blowup} by combining the contributions from two fixed points of the blown-up geometry ${\cal O}(-2) \to \mathbb{P}^1$. The other way is to compute the partition function at the orbifold point using the ADHM construction for the orbifolds. The Nekrasov partition function still remains the same as we blow up or down the singular point.\footnote{This simple picture does not necessarily hold when there are too many hypermultiplets, due to some subtle scheme dependence related to the wall-crossing \cite{Ito:2013kpa}.}
The only difference in our case is that we blow-up or down a non-singular point instead of a singular point.
\paragraph{Correlation functions in 4d}
The equation \eqref{eq:blowup-generic} itself is not enough to fix the partition function completely, since there are 3 unknown functions and only one relation. It turns out the necessary additional relations can be found from the insertion of non-trivial $\mathcal{Q}$-closed operators \cite{Nakajima:2003pg,Nakajima:2005fg} associated to the two-cycle on the blow-up.
In the 4d Donaldson-twisted theory, the $\mathcal{Q}$-invariant observable ${\cal O}_2$ associated to a two-cycle can be constructed by applying the topological descent procedure twice to the Casimir invariant ${\cal O}_0 = \text{Tr}(\Phi^2)$ as \cite{Witten:1988ze}
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
0 &= \{ {\cal Q}, {\cal O}_0 \},
~ d{\cal O}_0 = \{{\cal Q}, {\cal O}_1 \},
~ d{\cal O}_1 = \{{\cal Q}, {\cal O}_2 \}, \\
~ d{\cal O}_2 &= \{{\cal Q}, {\cal O}_3 \},
~ d{\cal O}_3 = \{{\cal Q}, {\cal O}_4 \},
~ d{\cal O}_4 = 0 \ .
\end{split}
\end{align}
In our case, we consider a $U(1)^2$-equivariant version of the topological descent procedure, that is to choose ${\cal Q}$ so that ${\cal Q}^2 = {\cal L}_V$ and also change $d \to D \equiv d + \iota_V$ to obtain the operator associated to the two-cycle. In terms of the component fields, it can be written as \cite{Bershtein:2015xfa}
\begin{align} \label{eq:muC}
{{\cal O}}_{\mathbb{P}^1} = \int_{\mathbb{P}^1} {\cal O}_2 = \int_{M_4} \left\{ \omega \wedge \text{Tr}\Big(\Phi F + \frac{1}{2} \psi \wedge \psi\Big) + H\, \text{Tr}\Big( F \wedge F \Big) \right\} \ .
\end{align}
Here $\omega$ and $H$ are the K\"ahler two-form on the $\mathbb{P}^1$ and the moment map $\iota_V \omega = dH$, respectively. $M_4$ denotes the spacetime. The first part of \eqref{eq:muC} without $H$ is the non-equivariant version of the topological operator associated to two-cycle.
It is convenient to study the generating function $\langle e^{t \, {{\cal O}}_{\mathbb{P}^1}}\rangle $ of the correlators $\langle {{\cal O}}_{\mathbb{P}^1} \ldots {{\cal O}}_{\mathbb{P}^1} \rangle$.
This causes a shift of the instanton parameter by $q \to q \exp(t H)$ at the fixed points of the blow-up $\hat{\mathbb{C}}^2$ \cite{Nakajima:2003pg,Nakajima:2003uh, Nakajima:2005fg}.
The expectation value of the generating function can be written as
\begin{align} \label{eq:corgen}
\hat{{\cal Z}}^{t} \equiv \langle e^{t {{\cal O}}_{\mathbb{P}^1}}\rangle = \sum_{\vec{k} \in \Lambda} {\cal Z}^{(N),t}(\vec{k}) \cdot {\cal Z}^{(S),t}(\vec{k})\ ,
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
\label{eq:param-np-sp}
\begin{split}
{\cal Z}^{(N),t}(\vec{k}) &\equiv {\cal Z}(\vec{a}+\vec{k} \epsilon_1, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2-\epsilon_1, q \exp(t \epsilon_1), \vec{m} -\tfrac{1}{2}\epsilon_1) \ , \\
{\cal Z}^{(S),t}(\vec{k}) &\equiv {\cal Z}(\vec{a}+\vec{k} \epsilon_2, \epsilon_1 - \epsilon_2, \epsilon_2, q \exp(t \epsilon_2), \vec{m} -\tfrac{1}{2}\epsilon_2)\ . \\
\end{split}
\end{align}
Now, as we shrink the two-cycle $\mathbb{P}^1$ to recover the flat $\mathbb{C}^2$, the effect of inserting $({{\cal O}}_{\mathbb{P}^1})^d$ turns out to give a vanishing contribution for small $d$ due to the selection rule. We recall that the instanton breaks the $U(1)_R$ symmetry to the discrete subgroup $\mathbb{Z}_{2b_0}$ with $b_0 = 2h^\vee - \sum_l I_2(\mathbf{R}_l)$ where the sum is over all hypermultiplets, and $h^\vee$ is the dual Coxeter number of the gauge group and $\mathbf{R}_l$ denotes the representation of the $l$-th hypermultiplet and $I_2(\mathbf{R})$ being the quadratic Dynkin index.\footnote{We normalize it so that $I_2(\mathbf{F})= 1$ for the fundamental representation $\mathbf{F}$.} The first term of the operator ${{\cal O}}_{\mathbb{P}^1}$ (the two-form piece) carries $R$-charge $+2$, which is the familiar non-equivariant version. This discrete $R$-charge is sometimes called as a ghost number. The correlation functions vanish unless the $R$-charges add up to zero, modulo $2b_0 = 4h^\vee - 2\sum_l I_2(\mathbf{R}_l)$.
Therefore, expanding \eqref{eq:corgen} in powers of $t$, we find
\begin{align}
\label{eq:donaldson-4d}
\boxed{ \langle e^{t {{\cal O}}_{\mathbb{P}^1}}\rangle = {\cal Z} + {\cal O} \left(t^{2h^\vee - \sum_l I_2(\mathbf{R}_l)}\right) } \ .
\end{align}
This is our blowup equation.
To show this, notice that each term at order $t^m$ carries pieces with $R$-charge between $0$ and $2m$. When $m < b_0$, the only possible non-trivial contribution comes from the $R=0$ piece $ \int H F\wedge F$ at zero instanton sector. This piece vanishes for zero instanton sector (at the north/south poles). For $n$-instanton sector, one should have $R=2b_0 n$, which is the condition to absorb the fermionic zero modes. For $m \ge b_0$, we always have a term that absorbs all the fermionic zero modes (or the term that has $R \equiv 0 \textrm{ mod } 2b_0 n)$ so they do not vanish.
We see that as long as the hypermultiplet representation is not too large, \emph{i.e.}, when $b_0 = 2h^\vee - \sum_l I_2(\mathbf{R}_l) > 2$, this allows us to write 3 independent relations for the 3 unknown variables. One can expand $\langle e^{t \, {\cal O}_{\mathbb{P}_1}}\rangle$ to order $t^2$, $\mathcal{O}(t^2)$ and then recursively solve for ${\cal Z}$ at each instanton number. So the instanton part of the partition function will be completely determined from the perturbative partition function. An explicit form of the recursion relation will be studied in Section~\ref{subsec:recursion}.
\paragraph{Correlation functions in 5d}
We now turn to 5d ${\cal N}=1$ gauge theory wrapped on $S^1$. The Casimir invariant ${\rm Tr} (\Phi^2)$ and its descendants are no longer considered as well-defined observables. Instead, there are two types of ${\cal Q}$-invariant observables \cite{Baulieu:1997nj}. The first type of observables are constructed from the 5d Wilson loop on the $S^1$ by applying the descent procedure. The second type of observables introduce the 3d (K\"ahler) Chern-Simons term, which can be written as \cite{Losev:1995cr,Baulieu:1997nj}
\begin{align}
\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1} = \exp\bigg[
\int_{S^1 \times M_4} \bigg( & \omega \wedge \text{Tr}\Big(A \wedge dA + \frac{2}{3}A\wedge A \wedge A \Big) \\ \nonumber
& + \omega \wedge \Big( \phi \, F + \frac{1}{2}\psi \wedge \psi \Big)\wedge dt + H\, \text{Tr}\Big( F \wedge F \Big) \wedge dt \bigg)
\bigg] \ .
\end{align}
It can be viewed as the natural $S^1$ uplift of \eqref{eq:muC} via exponentiation. The correlation function is now given by
\begin{align}
\label{eq:cor5d}
\hat{{\cal Z}}^{d} \equiv \langle (\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1})^{d}\rangle = \sum_{\vec{k} \in \Lambda} {\cal Z}^{(N),d}(\vec{k}) \cdot {\cal Z}^{(S),d}(\vec{k}) \ ,
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
\label{eq:param-np-sp5d}
\begin{split}
{\cal Z}^{(N),d}(\vec{k}) &\equiv {\cal Z}(\vec{a}+\vec{k} \epsilon_1, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2-\epsilon_1, q \exp \left((d - \tfrac{b}{2})\epsilon_1 \right), \vec{m} -\tfrac{1}{2}\epsilon_1) \ , \\
{\cal Z}^{(S),d}(\vec{k}) &\equiv {\cal Z}(\vec{a}+\vec{k} \epsilon_2, \epsilon_1 - \epsilon_2, \epsilon_2, q \exp \left( (d - \tfrac{b}{2})\epsilon_2\right), \vec{m} -\tfrac{1}{2}\epsilon_2)\ .
\end{split}
\end{align}
Here the quantity $b$ is given as
\begin{align}
b \equiv h^\vee - \frac{1}{2} \sum_i I_2(\mathbf{R}_i) - \kappa_{\textrm{eff}} \ , \quad \kappa_{\textrm{eff}} = \kappa - \frac{1}{2} \sum_i I_3(\mathbf{R}_i) \ ,
\end{align}
where $I_2(\mathbf{R})$ and $I_3(\mathbf{R})$ are quadratic and cubic Casimir invariants respectively.
We note that $d$ appearing in the exponential in \eqref{eq:param-np-sp5d} has to be an integer to be gauge-invariant.
The reason that the instanton parameter is further shifted by $\exp(\frac{b}{2} H|_p) $ is that the instanton mass parameter is twisted by $SU(2)_R$ as in the case of the hypermultiplet mass. The $SU(2)_R$ twisted mass of the instanton soliton is given by $m_\text{inst} \equiv m_{0, \textrm{eff}} - \kappa_\text{eff}\,\epsilon_+$. The effective Chern-Simons coupling $\kappa_{\textrm{eff}}$ also induces an electric charge to the instanton, contributing to its ground state energy as $E_0 = m_\text{inst} - \vec{a} \cdot \vec{\Pi}$, where $\vec{\Pi}$ is the $U(1)^r \subset G$ electric charge.\footnote{This agrees with the supersymmetric Casimir energy of the ADHM quantum mechanics.} To keep the effective instanton mass $m_\text{inst}$ invariant at a fixed point $p$ of the blow-up $\hat{\mathbb{C}}^2$, we require the shifted gauge coupling $m_0|_p$ to be
\begin{align}
\label{eq:coupling-shift}
m_0|_p = m_0 + \frac{b}{2}H|_p \quad \text{ with }\quad
b \equiv h^{\vee}-\sum_i\frac{I_2(\mathbf{R}_i)}{2} - \kappa_\text{eff}.
\end{align}
For the case of 5d pure $\mathcal{N}=1$ SYM, the correlation function turns out to be
\begin{align}
\label{eq:cor5d-unity}
\boxed{ \langle (\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1})^{d}\rangle = {\cal Z} \quad \text{ for }\quad 0\leq d \leq d_\text{max} } \ ,
\end{align}
where $d_\text{max} = h^\vee$.\footnote{This was shown in \cite{Nakajima:2005fg} for the case of $G=SU(N)$.} We call \eqref{eq:cor5d-unity} as the blowup equation. The value of $d_{\text{max}}$ depends on the matter content and gauge group. For $d_\text{max} \geq 2$, there are a sufficient number of algebraic relations to determine the instanton partition function recursively in increasing order of instantons. This fact was utilized in \cite{Keller:2012da} to compute instanton partition function for the gauge theories with exceptional gauge groups, for which the ADHM construction of instanton moduli space is unknown.
In this paper, we aim at developing the relation \eqref{eq:cor5d-unity} for various 5d
$\mathcal{N}=1$ gauge theories with hypermultiplets in various representations, so as to compute the instanton partition function. We will identify a certain bound on $d$ in Section~\ref{subsec:numd} as the \emph{necessary} condition for \eqref{eq:cor5d-unity} for a large number of theories.
We conjecture that the bound on $d$ we obtain is actually sufficient to obtain the blowup equation \eqref{eq:cor5d-unity}. While we do not attempt to prove this sufficiency, we compute $n$-instanton partition function $Z_n$, based on the recursion formula that will be derived shortly from \eqref{eq:cor5d-unity}, and confirm the agreement with the known result obtained from an alternative method.
We find a universal expression for the bound on $d$ when the gauge group is neither $SU(N)$ nor $Sp(N)$:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:cor5d-dmax}
d_{\textrm{max}} = h^\vee -\frac{1}{2}\sum_l I_2(\mathbf{R}_l) \quad \textrm{for } G \neq SU(N) \textrm{ or } Sp(N).
\end{align}
This is essentially identical condition as in $4d$ ${\cal N}=2$ gauge theory. But in 5d, some new effects come into play.
For the $SU(N)$ case, we can have a Chern-Simons term generated at 1-loop, which alters the bound on $d$. When there is neither bare nor effective Chern-Simons coupling, the same bound holds for the $SU(N)$ case as well. The detailed condition will be given in section \ref{subsec:numd}. For the case of $Sp(N)$, one can turn on the discrete $\theta$-parameter and it turns out the bound on $d$ depends on this parameter.
\begin{comment}
\paragraph{Background parameters}
The expected relation \eqref{eq:blowup-generic} is only a schematic expression.
The partition function also depends on some background parameters, such as the gauge coupling $g$, $\theta$ (only in 4d), Chern-Simons level $\kappa$ (only in 5d) and the flavor chemical potentials (mass parameters) $m$. They need to be appropriately shifted at each fixed point $p$ of the blow-up $\hat{\mathbb{C}}^2$, keeping invariant the effective mass parameters twisted by $SU(2)_R$.
We mostly focus on 5d theory in this section. The 4d result can be obtained by a straight-forward dimensional reduction, which we will discuss later in this section.
One can identify the shifted parameters $m_0 |_p$ (with $m_0 \equiv \frac{1}{g^2}$) and $m|_p$ at a fixed point $p$, by examining the 1-loop effective free energy of the Nekrasov partition function ${\cal Z}_{\textrm{pert}}$. For a general 5d $\mathcal{N}=1$ gauge theory with the Chern-Simons level $\kappa$ and/or some hypermultiplets, the perturbative part of the Nekrasov partition function is given as\footnote{We assume a particular Weyl chamber in the Coulomb branch, i.e., $ 0< a_i < \epsilon_+ < m$ for all $i\in \{1,\cdots, r\}$.}
\begin{align}
\label{eq:free-energy}
\begin{split}
\log{{\cal Z}_{\textrm{pert}}} &= \frac{1}{\epsilon_1\epsilon_2}\Bigg[\frac{1}{2} \, m_0 h_{ij}a_i a_j +\frac{\kappa}{6}d_{ijk} a^{i}a^j a^k \\
&\quad+ \sum_{\vec{\alpha}\in\Delta}\left(\frac{(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\alpha}+\epsilon_+)^3}{12}-\frac{\epsilon_1^2+\epsilon_2^2+24}{48}\,(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\alpha}+\epsilon_+)+1\right) \\
&\quad -\sum_i\sum_{\vec{\omega}\in\mathbf{R}_i}\left(\frac{(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\omega}+m_i)^3}{12}-\frac{\epsilon_1^2+\epsilon_2^2+24}{48}\,(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\omega}+m_i)+1\right)\Bigg] + \ldots
\end{split}
\end{align}
where $\epsilon_+ = \frac{\epsilon_1 + \epsilon_2}{2}$ and $\Delta$ is the set of all roots for the gauge group and $i$ runs over all hypermultiplets. The $\mathbf{R}_i$ denotes the set of all weights under which the $i$-th hypermultiplet is charged.
Here the first 2 terms inside the square brackets constitute the classical prepotential ${\cal F}_\text{cl}$, whereas all the other terms come in at one-loop level. The explicit expression for the omitted part will be given later.
First, let us consider a 5d free hypermultiplet with mass $m$, whose corresponding free energy is
\begin{align}
\label{eq:free-hyper}
& \log{{\cal Z}} = -\frac{1}{\epsilon_1\epsilon_2} \left(\frac{m^3}{12}-\frac{\epsilon_1^2+\epsilon_2^2+24}{48}\,m +1\right) + \sum_{n=1}^\infty\frac{ 1}{n} \frac{e^{-nm}\cdot e^{-n\epsilon_+}}{(1-e^{-n\epsilon_1})(1-e^{-n\epsilon_2})}.
\end{align}
This satisfies the relation \eqref{eq:blowup-generic} only when it is accompanied by $m \rightarrow m \pm \frac{H}{2}|_p$.
Each $\pm$ shift preserves the combination $(m \pm \epsilon_+)$ respectively, corresponding to the $SU(2)_R$ twisted mass of the hypermultiplet \cite{Okuda:2010ke}. Throughout this paper, we take $m_\text{phy} \equiv (m- \epsilon_+)$ as the invariant $SU(2)_R$ twisted mass, identifying that
\begin{align}
\label{eq:mass-shift}
m|_p = m - \frac{H}{2}|_p
\end{align}
at a fixed point $p$. Second, the twisted instanton mass can be easily read off after simplifying \eqref{eq:free-energy} based on the following identities:
\begin{align}
\sum_{\vec{\omega}\in\mathbf{R}}(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\omega})(\vec{b}\cdot\vec{\omega})(\vec{c}\cdot\vec{\omega})=&\,I_3(\mathbf{R})\,d_{ijk}\,a^ib^jc^k,\nonumber \\
\sum_{\vec{\omega}\in\mathbf{R}}(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\omega})(\vec{b}\cdot\vec{\omega})=&\,I_2(\mathbf{R})\,h_{ij}\,a^ib^j,\\
\sum_{\vec{\omega}\in\mathbf{R}}(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\omega})=&\,0.\nonumber
\end{align}
Here $I_2(\mathbf{R})$ and $I_3(\mathbf{R})$ are the quadratic and cubic Dynkin indices\footnote{The Dynkin indices are normalized such that $I_2(\mathbf{F}) = 1$ for the $SU(N)$ fundamental representation $\bf F$.} of a given representation $\bf R$. In particular, $I_2(\mathbf{adj}) = h^\vee$ is the dual Coxeter number of the gauge algebra.
Speaking explicitly, the rational part of the one-loop free energy \eqref{eq:free-energy} can be written as
\begin{align}
\log{{\cal Z}_{\textrm{pert}}}=\frac{1}{\epsilon_1\epsilon_2}\Bigg[&\,\frac{1}{2}m_{0, \text{eff}}\,h_{ij}\,a^ia^j+\frac{\kappa_\text{eff}}{6}d_{ijk}\,a^ia^ja^k+ \text{(independent of $\vec{a}$)}\Bigg],
\end{align}
where the one-loop corrected parameters are
\begin{align}
m_{0, \textrm{eff}}=\,m_0+\Bigg(h^{\vee}-\sum_i\frac{I_2(\mathbf{R}_i)}{2}\Bigg)\epsilon_+-\sum_i\frac{I_2(\mathbf{R}_i)}{2}m_i^{\textrm{phy}},\quad
\kappa_{\textrm{eff}}=\,\kappa-\sum_i\frac{I_3(\mathbf{R}_i)}{2}
\end{align}
in which the sum is taken over all the matter multiplets. We notice that the instanton soliton carries the $SU(2)_R$ twisted effective mass, given by $m_\text{inst} \equiv m_{0, \textrm{eff}} - \kappa_\text{eff}\,\epsilon_+$.
In addition, the effective Chern-Simons coupling $\kappa_{\textrm{eff}}$ induces an electric charge to the instanton, contributing to its ground state energy as $E_0 = m_\text{inst} - \vec{a} \cdot \vec{\Pi}$, where $\vec{\Pi}$ is the $U(1)^r \subset G$ electric charge.\footnote{This agrees with the supersymmetric Casimir energy of the ADHM quantum mechanics.} To keep it invariant the effective instanton mass $m_\text{inst}$ at a fixed point $p$ of the blow-up $\hat{\mathbb{C}}^2$, we require the shifted gauge coupling $m_0|_p$ to be
\begin{align}
\label{eq:coupling-shift}
m_0|_p = m_0 + \frac{b}{2}H|_p \quad \text{ with }\quad
b \equiv h^{\vee}-\sum_i\frac{I_2(\mathbf{R}_i)}{2} - \kappa_\text{eff}.
\end{align}
For example, the $\mathbb{C}^2 \times S^1$ partition function of $\mathcal{N}=1$ free Maxwell theory, given as a product between the perturbative index of a free vector multiplet,
\begin{align}
\exp\left[+\frac{1}{\epsilon_1 \epsilon_2} \left(\frac{\epsilon _1
\epsilon _2 (\epsilon _1+\epsilon _2)}{48} -\frac{\epsilon _1+\epsilon _2}{4} +1 \right) \right] \cdot \text{PE}\left[-\frac{e^{-\epsilon_1-\epsilon_2}}{(1-e^{-\epsilon_1})(1-e^{-\epsilon_2})}\right],
\end{align}
and the non-perturbative correction from $U(1)$ multi-instantons,
\begin{align}
\text{PE}\left[\frac{e^{-m_0} \cdot e^{-\epsilon_+}}{(1-e^{-\epsilon_1})(1-e^{-\epsilon_2})}\right],
\end{align}
will comply with the relation \eqref{eq:blowup-generic} by shifting the gauge coupling as $m_0 \rightarrow m_0|_p = m_0 + \frac{H}{2}|_p$.
In summary, the blow-up relation \eqref{eq:blowup-generic} should always be understood with \eqref{eq:mass-shift} and \eqref{eq:coupling-shift}.
\end{comment}
\subsection{Recursion formula for 5d instanton partition function}
\label{subsec:recursion}
The blowup equation \eqref{eq:cor5d-unity} can be translated to a recursion formula on the (5d) $n$-instanton contribution $Z_n$ to the full partition function ${\cal Z}$.
To derive this, we decompose the partition function ${\cal Z}$ in terms of the classical, one-loop, and instanton pieces:
\begin{align}
{\cal Z}(\vec{a}, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2, q, \vec{m}) = Z_{\textrm{class}}(\vec{a}, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2, q, \vec{m}) \cdot Z_{\textrm{1-loop}} (\vec{a}, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2, \vec{m}) \cdot Z_{\textrm{inst}}(\vec{a}, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2, q, \vec{m}),
\end{align}
where $Z_\text{inst}$ can be further expanded in terms of the instanton fugacity $q$ as\footnote{Sometimes the instanton partition function is expanded in powers of the shifted instanton mass $q \exp (-b \frac{\epsilon_1+\epsilon_2}{2})$ instead of $q$ \cite{Nakajima:2005fg, Gottsche:2006bm, Keller:2012da}. We expand it with the true instanton fugacity, which makes the symmetry property $\epsilon_{1, 2} \to - \epsilon_{1, 2}$ of $Z_n$ manifest. This is the one that we obtain using the ADHM quantum mechanics.}
\begin{align}
Z_{\textrm{inst}} (\vec{a}, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2, q, \vec{m}) = \sum_{n \ge 0} q^n Z_n (\vec{a}, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2, m) \ .
\end{align}
Then the blowup equation \eqref{eq:cor5d-unity} can be written as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:recur-inst}
\begin{split}
Z_{\textrm{inst}} &= \sum_{\vec{k}} \left[ \frac{Z^{(N), d}_{\textrm{class}}(\vec{k}) \, Z^{(S), d}_{\textrm{class}}(\vec{k})}{Z_{\textrm{class}}} \frac{Z^{(N), d}_{\textrm{1-loop}}(\vec{k})\, Z^{(S), d}_{\textrm{1-loop}}(\vec{k})}{Z_{\textrm{1-loop}}} \right] Z^{(N), d}_{\textrm{inst}}(\vec{k})\, Z^{(S), d}_{\textrm{inst}}(\vec{k}) \\
&\equiv \sum_{\vec{k}} f_d(\vec{k}) Z^{(N), d}_{\textrm{inst}}(\vec{k})\, Z^{(S), d}_{\textrm{inst}}(\vec{k}) \ ,
\end{split}
\end{align}
where the superscript $(N/S),d$ denotes the appropriate shift of the parameters, specified in \eqref{eq:param-np-sp}. The function $f_d(\vec{k})$ is determined only via the perturbative part of the partition function.
We recall the known expressions for the classical and 1-loop partition function (in 5d) \cite{Intriligator:1997pq,Nekrasov:2002qd,Shadchin:2005mx}:\footnote{There exists an ambiguity in writing the perturbative partition function, which depends on a choice of the $\mathbb{C}^2$ boundary condition at infinity. The equations \eqref{eq:1-loop-vec} and \eqref{eq:1-loop-hyp} are fixed upon a specific choice.
The `Casimir part' of $Z_{\text{1-loop}}$ is included here to make $f_d(\vec{k})_\text{1-loop}$ and thus the whole blow-up equations respect the charge conjugation, regardless of the ambiguity. We thank Hee-Cheol Kim for the related comment.}
\begin{align}
{ Z_{\textrm{class}}} &= \exp \Bigg[\frac{1}{\epsilon_1\epsilon_2}\left(\frac{1}{2}m_0 \, h_{ij}a_i a_j +\frac{\kappa}{6}d_{ijk} a^{i}a^j a^k\right) \Bigg],\\
\begin{split} \label{eq:1-loop-vec}
{ Z_{\textrm{1-loop}}^\text{vec}} &= \exp \Bigg[\frac{1}{\epsilon_1\epsilon_2} \, \sum_{\vec{\alpha}\in\Delta}\Big(\frac{(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\alpha}+\epsilon_+)^3}{12}-\frac{\epsilon_1^2+\epsilon_2^2+24}{48}\,(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\alpha}+\epsilon_+)+1\Big)\Bigg]\\ & ~~\times \text{PE}\ \Bigg[- \frac{p_1 p_2}{(1-p_1)(1-p_2) }\sum_{\vec{\alpha} \in \Delta} e^{- \vec{a} \cdot \vec{\alpha}} \Bigg] \qquad \text{ for the vector multiplet}
\end{split} \\
\begin{split} \label{eq:1-loop-hyp}
{ Z_{\textrm{1-loop}}^\text{hyp,$l$}} &= \exp \Bigg[-\frac{1}{\epsilon_1\epsilon_2} \sum_{\vec{\omega}\in\mathbf{R}_l}\Big(\frac{(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\omega}+m_l)^3}{12}-\frac{\epsilon_1^2+\epsilon_2^2+24}{48}\,(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\omega}+m_l)+1\Big)\Bigg]\\ &
~~\times \text{PE}\ \Bigg[+ \frac{(p_1 p_2)^{\frac{1}{2}} \cdot y_\ell } {(1-p_1)(1-p_2) }\sum_{\vec{\omega}\in\mathbf{R}_l}e^{-\vec{a} \cdot \vec{\omega}}\Bigg] \qquad \text{ for the $l$'th hypermultiplet}
\end{split}
\end{align}
where $p_1 \equiv e^{-\epsilon_1},\, p_2 \equiv e^{-\epsilon_2},\, y_l \equiv e^{-m_{l}}, q \equiv e^{-m_0}$.\footnote{We assume a particular Weyl chamber in the Coulomb branch, i.e., $ 0< a_i < \epsilon_+ < m$ for all $i\in \{1,\cdots, r\}$.} Also $\Delta$ is the set of all roots and $\vec{\omega} $ runs over all weight vectors in representation $\mathbf{R}_\ell$.
Here, PE represents the Plethystic exponential
\begin{align}
\label{eq:PE}
\text{PE}\left[f(\vec{a},\epsilon_1,\epsilon_2, m_0 ,\vec{m})\right] \equiv \exp\left(\sum_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{n} f(n\vec{a},n\epsilon_1,n\epsilon_2,n m_0,n\vec{m})\right).
\end{align}
We also set the radius of ${S}^1$ as $\beta = 1$. Also, the symbols $h_{ij}$ and $d_{ijk}$ are defined as
\begin{align}
h_{ij} = {\rm Tr} (T_i T_j ) \ , \quad
d_{ijk} = \frac{1}{2} {\rm Tr} T_i \{T_j, T_k\} \ ,
\end{align}
where $T_i$ are the generators of the gauge algebra.
They satisfy the relations
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\sum_{\vec{\omega}\in\mathbf{R}}(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\omega})(\vec{b}\cdot\vec{\omega})(\vec{c}\cdot\vec{\omega})=&\,I_3(\mathbf{R})\,d_{ijk}\,a^ib^jc^k, \\
\sum_{\vec{\omega}\in\mathbf{R}}(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\omega})(\vec{b}\cdot\vec{\omega})=&\,I_2(\mathbf{R})\,h_{ij}\,a^ib^j,\\
\sum_{\vec{\omega}\in\mathbf{R}}(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\omega})=&\,0 ,
\end{split}
\end{align}
where $I_2(\mathbf{R})$ and $I_3(\mathbf{R})$ are the quadratic and cubic Dynkin indices.
Substituting them to \eqref{eq:recur-inst}, we obtain the ratio of three different $Z$'s given as
\begin{align}
f_d(\vec{k})_{\text{class}} &= q^{\frac{\vec{k}\cdot\vec{k}}{2} } \,
(p_1p_2)^{(\frac{b}{2}-d) (\frac{\vec{k}\cdot\vec{k}}{2}) +\frac{\kappa}{6}d_{ijk}\,k^ik^jk^k} \times e^{-(\frac{b}{2}-d)(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k})}\,
e^{-\frac{\kappa}{2}d_{ijk}\,a^ik^jk^k} \ , \\
f_d(\vec{k})_{\text{1-loop}}^{\text{vec}}&= e^{\frac{h^\vee}{2}(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k})} \prod_{\alpha \in \Delta} {\cal L}_{\vec{k} \cdot \vec{\alpha}} (\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\alpha}, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2)^{-1} \ , \\
\begin{split}
f_d(\vec{k})_{\text{1-loop}}^{\text{hyp}} &= e^{-\frac{I_2(\mathbf{R}_l)}{4}(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k})+\frac{I_3(\mathbf{R}_l)}{4}d_{ijk}\,a^ik^jk^k} (p_1p_2)^{\frac{I_2(\mathbf{R}_\ell)}{8}(\vec{k}\cdot\vec{k})-\frac{I_3(\mathbf{R}_l)}{12}d_{ijk}\,k^ik^jk^k} \\
&\qquad \times y_\ell^{-\frac{I_2(\mathbf{R}_\ell)}{4}(\vec{k}\cdot\vec{k})} \prod_{\omega \in \mathbf{R}_l} {\cal L}_{\vec{k}\cdot\vec{\omega}}(\vec{a}\cdot \vec{\omega} + m_{\text{tw},l}, \epsilon_1,\epsilon_2) \ ,
\end{split}
\end{align}
where we split the $f_d(\vec{k})$ into classical and 1-loop pieces for vector and hypermultiplet.
Here we used $I_2(\textbf{adj}) = 2h^\vee$, $I_3(\textbf{adj})=0$, and also
the fact $h_{ij}$ and $d_{ijk}$ are totally symmetric. We also define $m_{\text{tw}} \equiv m - \epsilon_+$. The function ${\cal L}_k (x,\epsilon_1,\epsilon_2)$ is introduced to denote concisely the combination of the PE parts:
\begin{align}
{\cal L}_k (x,\epsilon_1,\epsilon_2) \equiv \text{PE}\left[ e^{-x} \left(\frac{p_1^k \, p_2}{(1-p_1)(1-\frac{p_2}{p_1})}+\frac{p_1\, p_2^k}{(1-\frac{p_1}{p_2})(1-p_2)}-\frac{p_1p_2}{(1-p_1)(1-p_2)}\right) \right].
\end{align}
One can easily check that the expression inside the PE vanishes at $k=0, 1$. After some work, it is not difficult to find that
\begin{align}
{\cal L}_k (x,\epsilon_1,\epsilon_2) =
\begin{dcases}
\prod_{m+n \le k-2}(1-p_1^{m+1} p_2^{n+1}e^{-x}) & \text{ for } k\geq +2 \\
\prod_{m+n \le -k-1}(1-p_1^{-m} p_2^{-n}e^{-x}) & \text{ for } k\leq-1 \\
1 & \text{ for } k=0, 1.
\end{dcases} .
\end{align}
Combining them all together, the recursion formula on the $n$-instanton piece $Z_n$ can be written as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:recursion}
Z_n = &\sum_{\frac{1}{2}\vec{k}\cdot\vec{k} + \ell + m = n}
\Bigg( (p_1p_2)^{(\frac{b}{2} -d) (\frac{\vec{k}\cdot\vec{k}}{2}) +\frac{\kappa_\text{eff}}{6}d_{ijk}\,k^ik^jk^k} e^{(d+\frac{\kappa_\text{eff}}{2})(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k})}\,
e^{-\frac{\kappa_\text{eff}}{2}d_{ijk}\,a^ik^jk^k} \\&
\times \frac{\prod_{l} y_{\text{tw}, l}^{-I_2(\mathbf{R}_l)(\frac{\vec{k}\cdot\vec{k}}{4})} \prod_{\omega \in \mathbf{R}_l} {\cal L}_{\vec{k}\cdot\vec{\omega}}(\vec{a}\cdot \vec{\omega} + m_{\text{tw},l}, \epsilon_1,\epsilon_2)}{ \prod_{\alpha \in \Delta} {\cal L}_{\vec{k} \cdot \vec{\alpha}} (\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\alpha}, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2)}
\cdot p_1^{(\frac{b}{2}-d)\ell}p_2^{(\frac{b}{2}-d)m}Z^{(N)}_{\ell}(\vec{k}) Z^{(S)}_m (\vec{k}) \Bigg) \nonumber,
\end{align}
where $y_{\text{tw},l} \equiv e^{-m_{\text{tw},l}} = y_l / \sqrt{p_1p_2}$ and $l$ runs over all hypermultiplets in the theory. This is a generalization of the recursion formula found for the pure SYM case \cite{Nakajima:2005fg,Gottsche:2006bm}.
\paragraph{Solving the recursion formulae}
The recursion relation \eqref{eq:recursion} can be rewritten as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:kinst}
Z_n = p_1^{n(\frac{b}{2}-d)}Z^{(N)}_{n} + p_2^{n(\frac{b}{2}-d)} Z^{(S)}_n + I_n^{(d)} \qquad \text{with an allowed range of $d$},
\end{align}
where $I_{n}^{(d)}$ is defined as
\begin{align} \label{eq:Ind}
I_{n}^{(d)} = &\sum_{\stackrel{\frac{1}{2}\vec{k}\cdot\vec{k} + \ell + m = n}{\ell, m \neq n}}
\Bigg( (p_1p_2)^{(\frac{b}{2} -d) (\frac{\vec{k}\cdot\vec{k}}{2}) +\frac{\kappa_\text{eff}}{6}d_{ijk}\,k^ik^jk^k} e^{(d+\frac{\kappa_\text{eff}}{2})(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k})}\,
e^{-\frac{\kappa_\text{eff}}{2}d_{ijk}\,a^ik^jk^k} \\&
\times \frac{\prod_{l} y_{\text{tw}, l}^{-I_2(\mathbf{R}_l)(\vec{k}\cdot\vec{k}/4)} \prod_{\omega \in \mathbf{R}_l} {\cal L}_{\vec{k}\cdot\vec{\omega}}(\vec{a}\cdot \vec{\omega} + m_{\text{tw},l}, \epsilon_1,\epsilon_2)}{ \prod_{\alpha \in \Delta} {\cal L}_{\vec{k} \cdot \vec{\alpha}} (\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\alpha}, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2)}
\cdot p_1^{(\frac{b}{2}-d)\ell}p_2^{(\frac{b}{2}-d)m} Z^{(N)}_{\ell}(\vec{k}) Z^{(S)}_m (\vec{k}) \Bigg) . \nonumber
\end{align}
Notice that we have a set of equations labeled by the parameter $d$. If the blowup equation holds for at least 3 values of $d$, we can solve it for $Z_n$.
The $n$-instanton partition function $Z_n$ is given as the solution to the three linear equations \eqref{eq:kinst} with consecutive integers $\{d_0, d_0+1, d_0+2\}$,
\begin{align}
Z_n(\vec{a},\epsilon_1,\epsilon_2, \vec{m})=\frac{p_1^n p_2^n \,I_{n}^{(d_0+2)}-(p_1^n+p_2^n)\,I_{n}^{(d_0+1)}+I_{n}^{(d_0)}}{(1-p_1^n)(1-p_2^n)}.
\end{align}
Since $I_n^{(d)}$ only involves low-order instanton corrections, the $n$-instanton partition function $Z_n$ can be constructed from $Z_{m<n}$, allowing us to obtain the full non-perturbative part $Z_\text{inst}$ in a recursive manner starting from $Z_0 = 1$.
Therefore we arrive at a remarkable conclusion. The \emph{non-perturbative} partition function $Z_\text{inst}$ is completely fixed by the \emph{perturbative} partition function! We note that we do not reach this conclusion by requiring the perturbative series to be well-behaved, as is often done in the resurgence analysis. Instead, we demand consistency upon smooth deformation of the spacetime $\mathbb{C}^2$ or $\mathbb{C}^2 \times S^1$. Such consistency condition requires non-perturbative parts to exist and even enough to fix the instanton partition function (at least for a large number of examples).
Now, let us write the solution for 1-instanton explicitly. At one instanton level, the formula \eqref{eq:Ind} can be written as
\begin{align}
\begin{split} \label{eq:1inst-i}
I_1^{(d)} = &\sum_{\vec{k} \in \Delta_\ell} \Bigg(
(p_1p_2)^{(\frac{b}{2}-d ) } e^{(d+\frac{\kappa_\text{eff}}{2})(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k})}\,
e^{-\frac{\kappa_\text{eff}}{2}d_{ijk}\,a^ik^jk^k} \\&
\times \frac{\prod_{l} y_{\text{tw},l}^{-I_2(\mathbf{R}_l)/2} \prod_{\omega \in \mathbf{R}_l} {\cal L}_{\vec{k}\cdot\vec{\omega}}(\vec{a}\cdot \vec{\omega} + m_{\text{tw},l}, \epsilon_1,\epsilon_2)}{ (1-p_1p_2 e^{-\vec{a} \cdot \vec{k} })(1-p_1^{-1} e^{\vec{a} \cdot \vec{k} })(1-p_2^{-1} e^{\vec{a} \cdot \vec{k} })(1-e^{\vec{a} \cdot \vec{k} })\prod_{\vec{\alpha} \cdot \vec{k} = -1}(1-e^{-\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\alpha}})}
\Bigg) ,
\end{split}
\end{align}
where $\Delta_\ell$ is the set of long roots ($\vec{k}\cdot \vec{k} = 2$) and we used $Z_0 = 1$.
It turns out to be more convenient to express $Z_1$ by decomposing $I_1^{(d)}$ into the flux sum, \emph{i.e.}, $I_1^{(d)} \equiv \sum_{\vec{k}\in\Delta_{\ell}} i_1^{(d)}(\vec{k})$, where
\begin{align}
\label{eq:1inst-i-flux}
\begin{split}
i_{1}^{(d)}(\vec{k})\equiv &\ (p_1p_2)^{(\frac{b}{2}-d)}\,e^{(d+\frac{\kappa_{\text{eff}}}{2})(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k})}e^{-\frac{\kappa_{\text{eff}}}{2}d_{ijk}a^ik^jk^k}\\
&\,\times\frac{\prod_{l}(y_{l}^{\text{tw}})^{-{I_2(\mathbf{R}_l)}/{2}}\prod_{\omega \in \mathbf{R}_l} {\cal L}_{\vec{k}\cdot\vec{\omega}}(\vec{a}\cdot \vec{\omega} + m_{\text{tw},l}, \epsilon_1,\epsilon_2)}{(1-p_1p_2e^{-\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k}})(1-e^{\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k}})(1-p_1^{-1}e^{\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k}})(1-p_2^{-1}e^{\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k}})\prod_{\vec{\alpha}\cdot \vec{k}=-1}(1-e^{-\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\alpha}})}.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Using the property $i_{1}^{(d_0+\aleph)}(\vec{k}) /i_{1}^{(d_0)}(\vec{k})=(p_1p_2)^{-\aleph}\,e^{\aleph(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k})}$, the one-instanton partition function $Z_1$ can be written as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:1inst-formula}
Z_1=&\ \sum_{\vec{k}\in\Delta_\ell}\frac{(1-p_1^{-1}e^{\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k}})(1-p_2^{-1}e^{\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k}})}{(1-p_1)(1-p_2)}
\cdot i_1^{(d_0)}(\vec{k})
\\=&\ \frac{(p_1p_2)^{(\frac{b}{2}-d_0)}\prod_{l}(y_{l}^{\text{tw}})^{-{\frac{I_2(\mathbf{R}_l)}{2}}}}{(1-p_1)(1-p_2)} \sum_{\vec{k}\in\Delta_l}\frac{e^{(d_0+\frac{\kappa_{\text{eff}}}{2})(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k})-\frac{\kappa_{\text{eff}}}{2}d_{ijk}a^ik^jk^k}\prod_{\omega \in \mathbf{R}_l} {\cal L}_{\vec{k}\cdot\vec{\omega}}(\vec{a}\cdot \vec{\omega} + m_{l}^\text{tw})}{(1-p_1p_2e^{-\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k}})(1-e^{\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k}})\prod_{\vec{\alpha}\cdot \vec{k}=-1}(1-e^{-\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\alpha}})} . \nonumber
\end{align}
Notice that there are multiple options for choosing $d_0$. However, we find that \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} is independent of a specific choice of $d_0$. Once we choose $d_0 = 0$, for instance, which works in most cases,\footnote{A numerical value of $d_0$ should be a half-integer for theories with $G = Sp(N)_{\theta=\pi}$.} \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} becomes
\begin{align}
\boxed{
Z_1=\ \frac{(p_1p_2)^{\frac{b}{2}}\prod_{l}(y_{l}^{\text{tw}})^{-\frac{I_2(\mathbf{R}_l)}{2}}}{(1-p_1)(1-p_2)} \sum_{\vec{k}\in\Delta_\ell}\frac{e^{\frac{\kappa_{\text{eff}}}{2}(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k}-d_{ijk}a^ik^jk^k)}\prod_{\omega \in \mathbf{R}_l} {\cal L}_{\vec{k}\cdot\vec{\omega}}(\vec{a}\cdot \vec{\omega} + m_{l}^\text{tw})}{(1-p_1p_2e^{-\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k}})(1-e^{\vec{a}\cdot\vec{k}})\prod_{\vec{\alpha}\cdot \vec{k}=-1}(1-e^{-\vec{a}\cdot\vec{\alpha}})}}\ .
\end{align}
When the hypermultiplets are in the representations with $|\vec{k} \cdot \vec{w}|\le 1$ for all $\vec{w} \in \mathbf{R}$, we have
\begin{align}
\label{eq:weight-expansion-non-sym}
\prod_{\omega \in \mathbf{R}} {\cal L}_{\vec{k}\cdot\vec{\omega}}(\vec{a}\cdot \vec{\omega} + m_{\text{tw}}, \epsilon_1,\epsilon_2) &= \prod_{\vec{k}\cdot \vec{\omega} = -1}(1-y_\text{tw} e^{-\vec{a}\cdot \vec{\omega}}) .
\end{align}
The formula \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} indeed reduces to the pure YM partition function derived in \cite{Keller:2011ek, Keller:2012da} upon removing hypermultiplets and Chern-Simons levels up to the overall factor $(p_1 p_2)^{\frac{b}{2}} = e^{-\frac{h^\vee}{2} (\epsilon_1 + \epsilon_2)}$ that accounts for the shift of instanton fugacity.
We claim that \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} is the closed-form expression for the one-instanton partition function, which holds \emph{universally for any gauge theory} with $d_{\text{max}}>2$.
In section \ref{subsec:numd}, we study the structure of the blowup equations to bound the number of possible independent equations.
\subsection{Number of independent blowup equations} \label{subsec:numd}
We are mainly interested in 4d ${\cal N}=2$ and 5d $\mathcal{N}=1$ gauge theories which are UV-complete. The UV-complete set of 4d ${\cal N}=2$ gauge theories are classified in \cite{Bhardwaj:2013qia}. For 5d gauge theories that are UV complete as 5d SCFTs, possible matter representations are restricted to \cite{Jefferson:2017ahm}:\footnote{A gauge group is always assumed to be simple in the current paper.}
\begin{itemize}
\item fundamental representation for $SU(N)$, $SO(N)$, $Sp(N)$, $G_2$, $F_4$, $E_6$, $E_7$
\item antisymmetric representation for $SU(N)$, $Sp(N)$
\item spinor representation for $SO(N)$ with $7 \leq N \leq 14$
\item rank-3 antisymmetric representation for $Sp(3)$, $Sp(4)$, $SU(6)$, $SU(7)$
\item symmetric representation for $SU(N)$.
\end{itemize}
In the case of 4d, we can also have the following additional cases:
\begin{itemize}
\item adjoint representation for arbitrary group
\item rank-3 antisymmetric for $SU(8)$
\item \textbf{16} for $Sp(2)$ (half-hypermultiplet)
\end{itemize}
We note that though our blow-up formula is applicable to a large number of 5d theories with various matter representations, we are not able to apply our formula for some cases including the one with adjoint hypermultiplet since the number of independent blowup equations is smaller than 3.
The formula \eqref{eq:recursion} is valid only for a certain range of $d$, for which $\langle (\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1})^{d}\rangle = {\cal Z}$. We want to narrow down the valid range of $d$ by performing a simple sanity check on the blowup equation for the one-instanton partition function:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:1inst}
Z_1 = p_1^{\frac{b}{2}-d}Z^{(N)}_1 + p_2^{\frac{b}{2}-d} Z^{(S)}_1 + I_1^{(d)} \qquad \text{with an allowed range of $d$} \ .
\end{align}
Specifically, we want to examine the expansion of each term in \eqref{eq:1inst} in powers of $p_1p_2 \ll 1$. The leading exponent of each term behaves as {\allowdisplaybreaks
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
I_1^{(d)} &\sim \begin{dcases}
g_0(\vec{a}, \vec{m}_{\text{tw}})\cdot (p_1p_2)^{\frac{b}{2}-d + 1} + \cdots & \text{for }N_\text{sym} = 0\\
g_0(\vec{a}, \vec{m}_{\text{tw}})\cdot (p_1p_2)^{\frac{b}{2}-d } + \cdots & \text{for }N_\text{sym} = 1
\end{dcases}
\\
Z_1 &\sim \ \ \, g_1(\vec{a}, \vec{m}_{\text{tw}})\cdot (p_1p_2)^{\frac{s}{2}} + \cdots \\
p_1^{\frac{b}{2}-d}Z_1^{(N)}\sim p_2^{\frac{b}{2}-d} Z^{(S)}_1 &\sim \ \ \, g_2(\vec{a}, \vec{m}_{\text{tw}})\cdot (p_1p_2)^{\frac{b}{4}-\frac{d}{2}+\frac{s}{4}} + \cdots ,
\end{split}
\end{align}
where $g_{0, 1, 2}(\vec{a}, \vec{m}_{\text{tw}})$ are functions independent of $p_{1, 2}$ and $N_{\text{sym}}$ denotes the number of symmetric representation. The numerical value of $s$ will be obtained shortly for a variety of gauge theories for which ADHM-like construction is available.
Notice that for the equation \eqref{eq:1inst} to be true, some terms on the right-hand side should have the leading exponent less than or equal to that of $Z_1$. Therefore, the condition $d - \frac{b}{2} \geq -\frac{s}{2}$ is naturally imposed, setting a lower bound on $d$.
Similarly, an upper bound on $d$ can be found from an expansion of \eqref{eq:1inst} with respect to $ 1/p_1p_2 \ll 1$.\footnote{This is equivalent to assuming a different parameter regime $ 0 < a_i < -\epsilon_+ < m$ for all $1\leq i \leq r$. In general, an explicit form of the 1-loop partition function \eqref{eq:1-loop-vec}--\eqref{eq:1-loop-hyp} can change depending on a parameter regime, thus affecting \eqref{eq:recursion}. However, all the above expressions remain valid under flipping a sign of $\epsilon_+$, such that we can simply study the expansion of the single terms in \eqref{eq:1inst} with respect to $ 1/p_1p_2 \ll 1$.}
Each term in \eqref{eq:1inst} can be written as
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
I_1^{(d)} &\sim \begin{dcases}
h_0(\vec{a}, \vec{m}_{\text{tw}})\cdot (1/p_1p_2)^{d-\frac{b}{2} + 1} + \cdots & \text{for }N_\text{sym} = 0\\
h_0(\vec{a}, \vec{m}_{\text{tw}})\cdot (1/p_1p_2)^{d-\frac{b}{2} } + \cdots & \text{for }N_\text{sym} = 1
\end{dcases}
\\
Z_1 &\sim \ \ \, h_1(\vec{a}, \vec{m}_{\text{tw}})\cdot (1/p_1p_2)^{\frac{s'}{2}} + \cdots \\
p_1^{\frac{b}{2}-d}Z_1^{(N)} \sim p_2^{\frac{b}{2}-d} Z^{(S)}_1&\sim \ \ \, h_2(\vec{a}, \vec{m}_{\text{tw}})\cdot (1/p_1p_2)^{\frac{d}{2}-\frac{b}{4}+\frac{s'}{4}} + \cdots .
\end{split}
\end{align}
Again, for \eqref{eq:1inst} to be consistent, the leading exponent of $Z_1$ should be greater than or equal to those of the terms on the right-hand side. Such a requirement imposes an upper bound on $d$, namely $\frac{s'}{2} \geq d - \frac{b}{2}$.
Combining the two inequalities, one can identify the following range
\begin{align}
\label{eq:bound}
-\frac{s}{2} + \frac{b}{2} \leq d \leq \frac{s'}{2} + \frac{b}{2},
\end{align}
as a necessary condition for \eqref{eq:1inst}.
We explicitly checked that the $n$-instanton partition function $Z_n$ actually satisfies all the $(\frac{s+s'}{2})$ recursion relations up to a certain value of $n > 1$ for numerous examples whose $Z_n$ is already known from alternative methods.
This is true even though the bound \eqref{eq:bound} itself is merely a \emph{necessary} condition found from one-instanton analysis.
Based on this empirical observation, we claim that the 5d recursion formulae \eqref{eq:recursion} within the above range of $d$ is true at all instanton orders.
Another remarkable thing is that a numerical value of $(s, s')$ exhibits the very simple pattern across a broad range of theories whose gauge group is not $SU(N)_\kappa$.
\begin{align}
\label{eq:n-np}
s = s' &= h^\vee - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{l}I_2(\mathbf{R}_l) && \text{ for } \quad G\neq SU(N)_\kappa \text{ nor } Sp(N) \nonumber \\
s = s' - 2\left\{\frac{N_f}{2} \right\} &= h^\vee - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{l}I_2(\mathbf{R}_l)
&& \text{ for } \quad G = Sp(N)_{\theta=0}\\
s = s' + 2 \left\{\frac{N_f}{2} \right\} &= h^\vee - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{l}I_2(\mathbf{R}_l) + 1 && \text{ for } \quad G = Sp(N)_{\theta=\pi} \nonumber
\end{align}
where $\{ x\} \equiv x - \lfloor x \rfloor $ denote the non-integer part of $x$.
As the above numerical pattern \eqref{eq:n-np} emerges for all $G \neq SU(N)_\kappa$ examples that we studied, we conjecture that \eqref{eq:n-np} is generally true, thereby taking the recursion formulae \eqref{eq:recursion} with
\begin{alignat}{2}
\label{eq:d-range-nonsu}
0 & \leq d \leq h^\vee - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{l}I_2(\mathbf{R}_l) & \text{ for } \quad G \neq SU(N)_\kappa \text{ nor } Sp(N), \nonumber \\
0 &\leq d \leq h^\vee - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{l}I_2(\mathbf{R}_l) + \left\{\frac{N_f}{2} \right\} & \qquad \text{ for }\quad G =Sp(N)_{\theta=0}, \\
-\frac{1}{2} &\leq d \leq h^\vee - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{l}I_2(\mathbf{R}_l) + \frac{1}{2} - \left\{\frac{N_f}{2} \right\} & \qquad \text{ for }\quad G =Sp(N)_{\theta=\pi}, \nonumber
\end{alignat}
as a basic assumption to obtain the partition function $\mathcal{Z}$ for any $G \neq SU(N)_\kappa$ gauge theory.
It would be desirable to understand from the first principle the range \eqref{eq:d-range-nonsu} of $d$ for which \eqref{eq:recursion} holds true.
It turns out to be more difficult to characterize a general pattern behind $(s, s')$ for $SU(N)_\kappa$ gauge theories, due to extra complication caused by the 5d Chern-Simons level $\kappa$. Here we consider two particular classes of $SU(N)_\kappa$ gauge theories for illustration. For $SU(N)_\kappa + N_f\mathbf{F}$ gauge theory ($N_f$ fundamental hypermultiplets) with $N_f + 2|\kappa| \leq 2N$, we find that
\begin{align}
\label{eq:sun-nf}
s &= \begin{dcases}
\frac{N_f}{2}
& \quad \text{ if } \kappa_\text{eff} = N - N_f, \\
N - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{l}I_2(\mathbf{F}) + |\kappa_\text{eff}|
& \quad \textstyle\text{ otherwise},
\end{dcases}\\
s' &=
\begin{dcases}
\frac{N_f}{2}
& \quad \textstyle\text{ if } \kappa_\text{eff} = -N, \\
N - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{l}I_2(\mathbf{F}) + \left|\bar{\kappa}_\text{eff}\right|
& \quad \textstyle\text{ otherwise} ,
\end{dcases}
\end{align}
where $\bar{\kappa}_\text{eff} \equiv \kappa + \frac{1}{2} \sum_l I_3 (\mathbf{F}) $.
Plugging in these values to \eqref{eq:bound}, we find the range of $d$ to be
\begin{align}
\label{eq:sun-nf-range}
0 \leq &\ d \leq N &\text{ if } \kappa &= -N + \frac{N_f}{2}, \nonumber \\
0 \leq &\ d \leq N-\frac{N_f}{2}-\kappa &\text{ if } \kappa & \in \left(-N +\frac{N_f}{2}, -\frac{N_f}{2} \right], \nonumber \\
0 \leq &\ d \leq N &\text{ if } \kappa &\in \left[-\frac{N_f}{2}, +\frac{N_f}{2}\right], \\
\frac{N_f}{2}-\kappa \leq &\ d \leq N & \text{ if } \kappa &\in \left[\frac{N_f}{2}, N -\frac{N_f}{2}\right), \nonumber \\
0 \leq &\ d \leq N & \text{ if } \kappa &= N -\frac{N_f}{2}, \nonumber
\end{align}
which always includes the range $0 \leq d \leq N$. Thus the recursion formula \eqref{eq:recursion} holds for at least $3$ values of $d$, which is enough to determine the partition function $Z_{\text{inst}}$ completely.
For the $SU(N)_\kappa + N_f\mathbf{F} + 1\mathbf{AS}$ theory ($N_f$ fundamentals and 1 anti-symmetric tensor) with $N_f + 2|\kappa| \leq N+4$, we find
\begin{align}
\label{eq:sun-nf-na}
\begin{split}
s &= \min
\left(N - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{l}I_2(\mathbf{R}_l) - (\kappa_\text{eff}-2),\ N - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{l}I_2(\mathbf{R}_l) + 2 \left\{\frac{\kappa_\text{eff}}{2}\right\}\right) \\
s' &= \min
\left(N - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{l}I_2(\mathbf{R}_l) + \Big(\kappa_\text{eff}+\sum_{l}I_3(\mathbf{R}_l)+2\Big),\right. \\& \left. \qquad \qquad \ N - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{l}I_2(\mathbf{R}_l) + 2\Big\{\!\!-\frac{\kappa_\text{eff}}{2}+\frac{1}{2}\sum_{l}I_3(\mathbf{R}_l) \Big\}\right)
\end{split}
\end{align} for most cases except for
\begin{align}
s=&\,\frac{N}{2}+2 \qquad N\in2\mathbb{Z},\,N_f=0,\,\kappa=\frac{N}{2}+1,\nonumber\\
s'=&\,\frac{N}{2}+2 \qquad N\in2\mathbb{Z},\,N_f=0,\,\kappa=-\frac{N}{2}-1,
\end{align}
from which one can identify the valid range of $d$ via \eqref{eq:bound}.
As long as there exist at least three distinct allowed values for $d$ for given $(N, \kappa)$, the corresponding partition function $Z_{\text{inst}}$ can be solved from the recursion formula \eqref{eq:recursion}.
We also consider $SU(6)_\kappa + 1 \mathbf{TAS}$ theory (one rank-3 antisymmetric tensor) with $|\kappa| \leq 3$ in Section~\ref{sec:example}. This model can be Higgsed to two disjoint copies of $SU(3)_\kappa$ theory without a bifundamental hypermultiplet \cite{Hayashi:2019yxj}. At the level of the partition function, Higgsing is realized by turning off $m_\text{tw} = 0$ and imposing the $SU(3)$ traceless conditions. As neither of them modifies $s$ nor $s'$, the numerical value of $(s,s')$ must be identical to that of $SU(3)_\kappa$ gauge theory, the blowup equation always holds for the range $0\leq d \leq 3$. Therefore, the recursion formula \eqref{eq:recursion} is enough to determine the instanton partition function $Z_{\text{inst}}$ for $SU(6)_\kappa + 1 \mathbf{TAS}$ theory as well.
\begin{table}[t!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$G$ & Hypermultiplets & Conditions for $d_{\text{max}}\ge 2$ & $(s, s')$ & $d$ \\
\hline \hline
$SU(N)_\kappa$ & $N_f \mathbf{F}$ & Always & \eqref{eq:sun-nf} & \eqref{eq:sun-nf-range} \\
\cline{1-5}
\multirow{2}{*}{$SU(N)_\kappa$} & \multirow{2}{*}{$N_f \mathbf{F}+1\textbf{AS}$} & $N_f \le N-1$ & \multirow{2}{*}{\eqref{eq:sun-nf-na}} & \multirow{2}{*}{\eqref{eq:bound}} \\\cline{3-3}
& & $N_f=N,\; \kappa\equiv N+1\,(\text{mod } 2)$ & & \\
\cline{1-5}
$Sp(N)_{\theta=0}$ & $N_f\mathbf{F}+N_a \mathbf{AS}$ & $N_a(N-1)+\lfloor N_f/2\rfloor\leq N-1$ & \multirow{7}{*}{\eqref{eq:n-np}}& \multirow{7}{*}{\eqref{eq:d-range-nonsu}} \\
\cline{1-3}
$Sp(N)_{\theta=\pi}$ & $N_f\mathbf{F}+N_a\mathbf{AS}$ & $N_a(N-1)+\lceil N_f/2\rceil\le N$ & & \\
\cline{1-3}
$SO(2N)$ & $N_v\mathbf{V}+N_s\mathbf{S}+N_c\mathbf{C}$ & $N_v+2^{N-4}(N_s+N_c) \le 2N-4$ & & \\
\cline{1-3}
$SO(2N+1)$ & $N_v\mathbf{V}+N_s\mathbf{S}$ & $N_v+2^{N-3}N_s \le 2 N-3$ & & \\
\cline{1-3}
$E_6$ & $N_f\mathbf{F}+N_{\bar{f}}\mathbf{\bar{F}}$ & $N_f+N_{\bar{f}} \le 3 $ & & \\
\cline{1-3}
$E_7$ & $N_f\mathbf{F}$ & $N_f \le 2$ & & \\
\cline{1-3}
$E_8$ & $\varnothing$ & & & \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{List of 5d gauge theories whose partition function is determined via the blowup equations. The number of hypermultiplets are bounded so that there are at least 3 blowup equations.
For the case of $SU(N) + N_f \mathbf{F}$ theory, it turns out that the Young diagram formula \eqref{eq:SUn-young} always satisfy at least 3 blowup equations. When $N_f + 2|\kappa| > 2N$, however, this formula does not produce the correct partition function for the UV field theory as we discuss in the text.}
\label{tbl:list}
\end{table}
We give the list of theories we consider in the current paper in Table \ref{tbl:list}.
\section{Examples} \label{sec:example}
The recursion formula \eqref{eq:recursion} for the $n$-instanton partition function and also the general expression \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} at one-instanton order are widely applicable to 5d $\mathcal{N}=1$ (and also similarly to 4d ${\cal N}=2$) gauge theory whose $(s,s')$ satisfies $\frac{s+s'}{2}\geq 2$. Combined with the observation that $(s,s')$ follows \eqref{eq:n-np} in most cases, they become a very efficient approach to obtaining the BPS partition function on $\mathbb{C}^2 \times S^1$ (or $\mathbb{C}^2$), unless the matter representation is `too large.'
Conventionally, the instanton partition function can be computed by employing the ADHM construction of the instanton moduli space \cite{Atiyah:1978ri,Nekrasov:2002qd,Nekrasov:2003rj} or by applying the topological vertex formalism to the 5-brane web \cite{Aganagic:2003db,Iqbal:2007ii}. Both are based on a certain UV realization of 5d $\mathcal{N}=1$ gauge theory via geometric engineering in string theory.
Even though IR 5d gauge theory sometimes can be obtained using more than one string theory realizations, the correct UV completion might be only achieved through specific string theory realizations. For instance, the $SU(2)$ gauge theory with $N_f$ fundamental hypermultiplets with $N_f\geq 5$ must be embedded into D4-D8-O8 brane system to be UV-completed as 5d $E_{N_f+1}$ Minahan-Nemeschansky SCFT \cite{Seiberg:1996bd, Minahan:1996fg, Minahan:1996cj}. Ordinary $(p,q)$ 5-brane web with colliding branes (without O-planes) indicate UV inconsistency \cite{Aharony:1997ju}.
A sensible QFT observable can thus be obtained only through a proper embedding of the gauge theory into string theory. In some occasions, an extra factor dressing the true QFT observable may appear during the above instanton computation, which is sensitive to the choice of a string theory embedding.
Our blow-up formula \eqref{eq:recursion} does not explicitly specify a particular UV completion nor string theory embedding. However, we observe that the formula does prefer a particular string theory embedding of the gauge theory. For example, for the $SU(2)$ gauge theory with $N_f$ fundamental hypermultiplets, we find the partition function obtained from the blow-up formula agrees with the partition function obtained from the ordinary $(p,q)$ 5-brane webs.
There are wide varieties of `exceptional' gauge theories (having exceptional gauge groups or exotic matter representations) whose UV completion is found as M-theory wrapped on a singular Calabi-Yau 3-fold \cite{Diaconescu:1998cn, Jefferson:2018irk, Bhardwaj:2018yhy, Apruzzi:2019opn}.
As most exceptional theories lack the ADHM description \cite{Kim:2018gjo}, their instanton partition function $Z_\text{inst}$ has been studied in a case-by-case basis. Once the 5-brane web configuration engineering an exceptional theory is identified \cite{Zafrir:2015ftn, Hayashi:2018bkd, Hayashi:2019yxj}, the topological vertex formalism can be applied to compute the relevant partition function ${\cal Z}$ \cite{Hollowood:2003cv, Iqbal:2007ii}.
Alternatively, one can first construct the $\mathbb{C}^2 \times T^2$ partition function for a related 6d gauge theory, based on its modularity and anomaly, then take the circle reduction to obtain the 5d partition function ${\cal Z}$ \cite{DelZotto:2016pvm, DelZotto:2018tcj}. Several interesting exceptional theories have been studied so far, based on the above two approaches.
Sometimes, there exists auxiliary 4d ${\cal N}=2$ SCFT \cite{Benini:2009gi} that realizes exceptional instanton moduli space as its Higgs branch.\footnote{Also 2d ${\cal N}=(0, 4)$ version \cite{Putrov:2015jpa} for any 4d ${\cal N}=2$ theory can be obtained upon twisted dimensional reduction, which allows us to compute the 6d instanton string partition function.} In this case, computing the superconformal index in the Higgs branch limit provides a way to compute the necessary instanton partition function for the exceptional gauge theory \cite{Gadde:2010te, Gadde:2011uv, Gaiotto:2012uq, Gadde:2015xta, Agarwal:2018ejn}.
Likewise, 3d ${\cal N}=4$ theory can realize exceptional instanton moduli space via its Coulomb branch \cite{Intriligator:1996ex}. Computing its Hilbert series (or the Coulomb branch limit of the superconformal index), one can compute the instanton partition function \cite{Cremonesi:2013lqa, Cremonesi:2014xha}.
We will illustrate that bootstrapping the instanton partition function $Z_{\text{inst}}$ based on the recursion formula \eqref{eq:recursion} works well for those `exceptional' theories, providing their BPS spectrum efficiently.
\subsection{Theories with known ADHM description}
\label{subsec:ex-adhm}
Let us first consider the `standard' gauge theories with classical gauge groups, whose hypermultiplet admits UV realization as a perturbative string ending on D-branes. In these cases, the ADHM construction of the instanton moduli space is well-known \cite{Atiyah:1978ri,Nekrasov:2002qd,Shadchin:2005mx}.
As for the $k$-instanton partition function $Z_k$, the Witten index of the relevant ADHM quantum mechanics can be computed by SUSY localization \cite{Kim:2011mv, Hwang:2014uwa,Hwang:2016gfw, Lee:2017lfw}, ending up collecting all Jeffrey-Kirwan residues of a multi-dimensional contour integral. We will examine whether the recursion formula \eqref{eq:recursion} actually produces the same result as the localization computation.
\paragraph{SU(N)}
The ADHM construction for the $n$-instanton partition function, for $SU(N)_\kappa +N_f \mathbf{F}$ ($N_f$ fundamentals) theory with $N_f + 2|\kappa| \leq 2N$ is well-known. Its partition function can be written as a sum over Young diagrams as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:SUn-young}
Z_n^\text{ADHM} = \sum_{|\vec{Y}| = n}\prod_{i=1}^N\prod_{\sigma \in Y_i}\frac{e^{-\kappa \phi(s)} \prod_{l=1}^{N_f} 2\sinh{\frac{\phi(\sigma)+m_l}{2}} }{\prod_{j=1}^N 2\sinh{\frac{E_{ij}}{2}}\,2\sinh{\frac{E_{ij}-2\epsilon_+}{2}}} \ ,
\end{align}
where
\begin{align*}
E_{ij}(\sigma) &= a_i - a_j - \epsilon_1 h_i(\sigma)+ \epsilon_2(v_j(\sigma)+1)\\
\varphi(\sigma)&= a_i -\epsilon_+-(n-1)\epsilon_1-(m-1)\epsilon_2
\quad \qquad\text{ for }\quad \sigma = (m,n) \in Y_i \ .
\end{align*}
Here $h_i(\sigma)$ denotes the distance from $\sigma$ to the right end of the diagram $Y_i$ by moving right and $v_j(\sigma)$ denotes the distance from $\sigma$ to the bottom of the diagram $Y_j$ by moving down.
We checked that the instanton partition functions $Z_1$ and $Z_2$ obtained from the recursion formula \eqref{eq:recursion} with \eqref{eq:sun-nf-range} and the 1-instanton expression \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} precisely agree with the above $Z_{n=1,2}^\text{ADHM}$ for $N=2,3,4$.
As we have said earlier, $Z_n^\text{ADHM}$ often contains an additional factor $Z_\text{extra}$ that captures the contribution from an extra branch of vacua of the ADHM quantum mechanics. It is sensitive to the string theory embedding (UV completion) of the gauge theory and can be regarded as spurious from the 5d QFT perspective. It is usually factorized from the true QFT partition function as
\begin{align}
\sum_{n=0}^\infty q^n \,Z_n^\text{ADHM}(\vec{a}, \epsilon_{1},\epsilon_2, \vec{m}) = Z_\text{QFT}(\vec{a}, \epsilon_{1},\epsilon_2, \vec{m},q) \cdot Z_\text{extra}(\epsilon_{1},\epsilon_2, \vec{m},q).
\end{align}
A non-trivial $Z_\text{extra}\neq 1$ appears in the above expression \eqref{eq:SUn-young} if and only if $N_f + 2|\kappa| = 2N$. This factor can be identified as the contribution of D1-branes escaping from D5-branes which engineer the $SU(N)_\kappa + N_f\mathbf{F}$ gauge theory. Since $Z_n = Z_n^\text{ADHM}$, the same factor $Z_\text{extra}$ emerges from the recursion formula \eqref{eq:recursion} as well. The 5-brane web construction of the gauge theory is thus indirectly reflected in the recursion formula.
A similar observation is that the 1-instanton expression \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} applied to $SU(2)_\kappa+N_f\mathbf{F}$ with $N_f \geq 5$ does not match the Witten index of the D0-D4-D8-O8${}^-$ quantum mechanics, which is the correct 1-instanton partition function.\footnote{The case with $SU(2) \simeq Sp(1
)$ is an exception, which allows $N_f \leq 7$ fundamental hypermultiplets \cite{Seiberg:1996bd}.} Instead, it coincides with the topological vertex computation applied to the 5-brane web with a colliding pair of branes, which engineers the $SU(2)$ gauge theory with $N_f \geq 5$ in the IR, but behaves badly in the UV. Again, this suggests that the recursion formula \eqref{eq:recursion} implicitly chooses a specific string theory construction of the gauge theory, i.e., the web of $(p,q)$ 5-branes. It would be interesting to figure out if there is a version of the recursion relation \eqref{eq:recursion} that allows us to choose the particular UV embedding of the gauge theory.
For the $SU(N)_\kappa + N_f\mathbf{F} + 1\mathbf{AS}$ theory ($N_f$ fundamental and 1 anti-symmetric hypermultiplets) with $N_f + 2|\kappa| \leq N+4$, the ADHM quantum mechanics is the worldvolume theory of D1-branes, probing the D5-NS5-D7-O7${}^{-}$ brane configuration that realizes the gauge theory. Let us compute the Witten index for 1 and 2 D1-branes, then compare with the blow-up computation based on the recursion formula \eqref{eq:recursion}. For instance, the Witten index for the single D1-brane can be written as
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
&Z_1^\text{ADHM} = - \sum_{i=1}^N \frac{e^{-\kappa (a_i - \epsilon_+)}}{2\sinh{\frac{\epsilon_1}{2}}\,2\sinh{\frac{\epsilon_2}{2}}} \frac{\prod_{l=1}^{N_f}2\sinh{\frac{-\epsilon_+ + a_i + m_l}{2}}}{2\sinh{\frac{-3\epsilon_+ + 2a_i + m_a}{2}}} \prod_{j \neq i}\frac{2\sinh{\frac{a_i + a_j + m_a - \epsilon_+}{2}}}{2\sinh{ \frac{a_{i}-a_j}{2}}\, 2\sinh{\frac{2\epsilon_+ - a_i + a_j}{2}}} \\
&- \frac{1}{2}\ \frac{e^{-\frac{\kappa}{2}(\epsilon_+ - m_a)}}{2\sinh{\frac{\epsilon_1}{2}}\,2\sinh{\frac{\epsilon_2}{2}}} \left(\frac{\prod_{l=1}^{N_f} 2\sinh{\frac{\epsilon_+ + 2m_l - m_a}{4}}}{\prod_{i=1}^N 2\sinh{\frac{3\epsilon_+ - M - 2a_i}{4}}} - (-1)^{\kappa + \frac{N-N_f}{2}}\frac{\prod_{l=1}^{N_f} 2\cosh{\frac{\epsilon_+ + 2m_l - m_a}{4}}}{\prod_{i=1}^N 2\cosh{\frac{3\epsilon_+ - M - 2a_i}{4}}}\right).
\end{split}
\end{align}
Note that $Z_n^\text{ADHM}$ contains an extra factor $Z_\text{extra} \neq 1$ if $N_f + 2|\kappa| = N+4$, coming from the spectrum of D1-branes escaping from the D5-branes on which the gauge theory is supported.
The appearance of $Z_\text{extra}\neq 1$ is an artifact of the string theory embedding, spurious from the 5d QFT perspective.
We checked that $Z_1^\text{ADHM}$ and the 1-instanton formula \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} agree for the $SU(3)$, $SU(4)$, $SU(5)$ theories whose $(n,n')$ satisfies $\frac{n+n'}{2} \geq 2$.
We confirmed $Z_2 = Z_2^\text{ADHM}$ as well, where $Z_2$ is the solution of the recursion formulae \eqref{eq:recursion} with \eqref{eq:sun-nf-na}. The same spurious factor $Z_\text{extra}$ arises from the recursion formula, implying that our blowup equations are implicitly based on the D5-NS5-D7-O7${}^{-}$ brane realization of the gauge theory.\footnote{An exceptional case is the $SU(2)$ gauge theory, in which the antisymmetric hypermultiplet decouples and never affects the recursion formula. The corresponding $Z_n$ is the same as the Young diagram formula \eqref{eq:SUn-young}.}
\paragraph{Sp(N)}
The $n$-instanton partition function for $Sp(N)_\theta + N_f \mathbf{F}$ theory ($\theta$ being the discrete theta-angle for $Sp$ and $N_f$ fundamental hypermultiplets) with $N_f \leq 2N+4$ can be computed from the ADHM quantum mechanics of D1-D5-NS5-O5 branes, which engineers the gauge theory and its instantons. The Witten index for the D1-brane theory is written as
\begin{align}
Z_1^\text{ADHM} &= \frac{1}{2}\,\frac{1}{2\sinh\frac{\epsilon_1}{2}\,2\sinh\frac{\epsilon_2}{2}}\Bigg(\frac{\prod_{l=1}^{N_f}\,2\sinh\frac{m_l}{2}}{\prod_{i=1}^{N}2\sinh\frac{\epsilon_+\pm a_i}{2}}+e^{i\theta}\frac{\prod_{l=1}^{N_f}\,2\cosh\frac{m_l}{2}}{\prod_{i=1}^{N}2\cosh\frac{\epsilon_+\pm a_i}{2}}\Bigg).
\end{align}
We checked that our 1-instanton formula \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} agrees with $Z_1^\text{ADHM}$ for the $Sp(2)$ and $Sp(3)$ gauge theories satisfying $N-1 \geq \lfloor \frac{N_f}{2} \rfloor$ (at $\theta = 0$) and $N \geq \lceil \frac{N_f}{2} \rceil$ (at $\theta = \pi$).
We also confirmed that $Z_2^\text{ADHM} = Z_2$, where $Z_2$ is the solution of the recursion formulae \eqref{eq:recursion} with \eqref{eq:d-range-nonsu}. Note that there is no spurious factor $Z_\text{extra}$ so that the ADHM and the blowup results agree $Z_n^\text{ADHM} = Z_n $ for these theories.
For the $Sp(N)_\theta + N_f \mathbf{F} + 1\mathbf{AS}$ theory ($N_f$ fundamental and 1 anti-symmetric hypermultiplets) with $N_f \leq 7$, the relevant ADHM quantum mechanics is the worldvolume gauge theory of D0-branes which probe the D4-D8-O8 brane configuration. It is well-known that the QFT on D4-branes exhibits an enhanced $E_{N_f + 1}$ flavor symmetry at the UV fixed point \cite{Seiberg:1996bd}. Let us consider the Witten index for one and two D0-branes \cite{Kim:2012gu,Hwang:2014uwa}. For a single D0-brane, we obtain the one instanton partition function to be
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
& Z_1^{\text{ADHM}}=\frac{1}{2} \, \frac{1}{2\sinh\frac{\epsilon_1}{2}\,2\sinh\frac{\epsilon_2}{2}\, 2\sinh\frac{m_a+ \epsilon_+}{2} \, 2\sinh\frac{m_a-\epsilon_+}{2}} \\
& \qquad \times\left(\,\frac{\prod_{i=1}^{N}2\sinh\frac{m_a\pm a_i}{2}\prod_{l=1}^{N_f}\,2\sinh\frac{m_l}{2}}{\prod_{i=1}^{N}2\sinh\frac{\epsilon_+\pm a_i}{2}}
+\frac{e^{i\theta}\prod_{i=1}^{N}2\cosh\frac{m_a\pm a_i}{2}\prod_{l=1}^{N_f}\,2\cosh\frac{m_l}{2}}{ \prod_{i=1}^{N}2\cosh\frac{\epsilon_+\pm a_i}{2}}\right).
\end{split}
\end{align}
We find that $Z_1^{\text{ADHM}}$ itself is \emph{not} the same as the 1-instanton expression from the blowup \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} for the $Sp(2)_\theta$, $Sp(3)_\theta$ theories with $N_f \leq 1$ (at $\theta=0$) and $N_f \leq 2$ (at $\theta=\pi$). Instead, the difference between $Z_1$ and $Z_1^{\text{ADHM}}$ can be identified as the BPS index of D0-branes moving away from the D4-D8-O8 brane system \cite{Kim:2012gu,Hwang:2014uwa}.
Similarly, we confirmed that the 2-instanton correction $Z_2$ captures the same 5d QFT spectrum as in $Z_2^\text{ADHM}$, upon subtracting the spurious contribution of escaping D0-branes. It is interesting that our blow-up formula does \emph{not} contain a spurious factor $Z_\text{extra}$.
\paragraph{SO(N)} One can compute the instanton partition function of $SO(N) + N_v \mathbf{V}$ theory ($N_v$ hypermultiplets in the vector representation) with $N_v \leq N-4$ using the ADHM quantum mechanics of the D1-D5-NS5-O5 brane system. For even $N$, the Witten index for a single D1-brane can be written as
\begin{align}
Z_1^\text{ADHM} = \sum_{i=1}^{N/2}\bigg(\frac{2\sinh(2\epsilon_+-a_i)\,2\sinh(a_i-\epsilon_+)\prod_{l=1}^{N_v}2\sinh\frac{m_l\pm(a_i-\epsilon_+)}{2}}{2 \cdot 2\sinh\frac{\epsilon_1}{2}\,2\sinh\frac{\epsilon_2}{2}\prod_{j\neq i}2\sinh\frac{a_i\pm a_j}{2}\,2\sinh\frac{2\epsilon_+-a_i\pm a_j}{2}}+(a_i\rightarrow -a_i)\bigg).
\end{align}
For odd $N$,
\begin{align}
Z_1^\text{ADHM} =\sum_{i=1}^{\lfloor N/2\rfloor}\bigg(\frac{2\cosh\frac{2\epsilon_+-a_i}{2}\,2\sinh(a_i-\epsilon_+)\,\prod_{l=1}^{N_f}2\sinh\frac{m_l\pm(a_i-\epsilon_+)}{2}}{2 \cdot 2\sinh\frac{\epsilon_1}{2}\,2\sinh\frac{\epsilon_2}{2}\, 2\sinh\frac{a_i}{2}\prod_{j\neq i}2\sinh\frac{a_i\pm a_j}{2}\,2\sinh\frac{2\epsilon_+-a_i\pm a_j}{2}}+(a_i\rightarrow -a_i)\bigg).
\end{align}
The general 1-instanton expression \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} and the recursion formula \eqref{eq:recursion} are applicable for all $N_v \leq N-4$. We explicitly verified that $Z_n^\text{ADHM} = Z_n$ for $n=1, 2$ and $4 \leq N \leq 9$, where $Z_1$ is written in \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} and $Z_2$ is the solution of the recursion formula \eqref{eq:recursion}. We find that $Z_n^\text{ADHM} = Z_n$ involves a non-trivial extra factor $Z_\text{extra} \neq 1$ when $N_v = N-4$. This extra factor can be attributed to the D1-branes moving away from the D5-NS5-O5 brane system, where the 5d QFT lives. It implies that a specific UV realization of the gauge theory, i.e., type IIB string theory with D1-D5-NS5-O5, is implicit in our recursion formulae \eqref{eq:recursion} with \eqref{eq:d-range-nonsu}.
\subsection{Theories with spinor hypermultiplets}
\label{subsec:spinor}
So far, we have investigated the `standard' gauge theories that have certain D-brane set-ups in type IIA/IIB string theory to realize themselves and also their instantons. For the theory with a sufficient number of the blowup equations, the $n$-instanton partition function $Z_n$ can be determined as the solution of the blowup equations. We have found that this formula agrees with the instanton counting result using the ADHM construction, modulo possible extra factor $Z_\text{extra}$ that is sensitive to the string theory embedding of the gauge theory.
We take advantage of the universality of the blowup equation. Recall that the blow-up recursion formula \eqref{eq:recursion} holds for a certain range of $d$, i.e., the set of all integers between $0 \leq d \leq h^\vee - \frac{1}{2}\sum_l I(\mathbf{R}_l)$, when the gauge group $G$ is neither $ SU(N)_\kappa$ nor $Sp(N)_\theta$. In this case, there is no extra complication due to the Chern-Simons level $\kappa$ or the theta angle $\theta$.
One can solve the recursion formulae for the $n$-instanton correction $Z_n$ to the partition function, as long as $h^\vee - \frac{1}{2}\sum_l I(\mathbf{R}_l) \geq 2$, even for the exceptional gauge theories. We conjecture that $Z_n$ solved from the recursion formula would be the correct BPS data for UV-consistent 5d SCFTs, modulo an extra factor $Z_\text{extra}$ independent of the Coulomb VEV $\vec{a}$. This conjecture will be tested via comparison with \cite{Kim:2018gjo, DelZotto:2018tcj,Hayashi:2019yxj} which compute ${\cal Z}$ for some exceptional cases.
In this section, we will focus on the $SO(N)$ gauge theories with spinor hypermultiplets.
We have a sufficient number of recursion formulae \eqref{eq:recursion} to determine the $n$-instanton partition function $Z_n$ of the $SO(N)$ gauge theory, if and only if
\begin{align}
\label{eq:spinor-range}
\begin{split}
N-4 &\geq N_{\bf v} + 2^{\frac{N-7}{2}}\cdot N_{\bf s} \qquad\qquad\qquad \text{ for odd $N$},\\
N-4 &\geq N_{\bf v} + 2^{\frac{N-8}{2}}\cdot (N_{\bf s} + N_{\bf c})\qquad\quad \text{for even $N$},
\end{split}
\end{align}
where $N_{\bf v}$, $N_{\bf s}$, and $N_{\bf c}$ denote the number of hypermultiplets in the vector, spinor and conjugate spinor representations, respectively. Our 1-instanton expression \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} is also applicable to the cases satisfying \eqref{eq:spinor-range}.
We compare our formula against any known results for $SO(N)$ gauge theory with a number of spinor hypermultiplets \cite{Kim:2018gjo, DelZotto:2018tcj}. We not only find perfect agreements for the case with the known results, but also obtain partition functions for the previously unknown cases as well.
\paragraph{SO(7)} The $n$-instanton contribution $Z_n$ of $SO(7) + N_{\bf s}\,\mathbf{S}$ theory can be obtained from the SUSY quantum mechanics proposed in \cite{Kim:2018gjo}, which can be summarized as the following $SU(4)$ Young diagram expression:
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
Z_n^\text{YD} = \sum_{|\vec{Y}| = n} &\prod_{i=1}^4\prod_{s \in Y_i}\frac{2\sinh{(\phi(s))} \ 2\sinh{(\phi(s)-\epsilon_+)} \ \prod_{l=1}^{N_\textbf{s}}2\sinh(\frac{m_l \pm \phi(s)}{2}) }{\prod_{j=1}^4 2\sinh{\frac{E_{ij}}{2}}\,2\sinh{\frac{E_{ij}-2\epsilon_+}{2}}\,2\sinh{\frac{\epsilon_+ - \phi(s) - a_j}{2}}} \\ \times &\prod_{i \leq j}^4 \prod_{\stackrel{s_{i,j} \in Y_{i,j}}{s_i < s_j}} \frac{2\sinh{\frac{\phi(s_i)+\phi(s_j)}{2}}\, 2\sinh{\frac{\phi(s_i)+\phi(s_j)-2\epsilon_+}{2}}}{ 2\sinh{\frac{\epsilon_1 - \phi(s_i)-\phi(s_j)}{2}} \, 2\sinh{\frac{\epsilon_2 - \phi(s_i)-\phi(s_j)}{2}}}.
\end{split}
\end{align}
We verified that $Z_1^\text{YD}$ and the 1-instanton formula $Z_1$ in \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} agree for $N_{\bf s} \leq 3$. We further confirmed at two instanton order for $N_{\bf s} \leq 3$ that $Z_2^\text{YD} = Z_2$, where $Z_2$ is the solution of the recursion formula \eqref{eq:recursion} with \eqref{eq:d-range-nonsu}. Such explicit comparison implies that the blow-up recursion formula \eqref{eq:recursion} indeed works for the $SO(7) + N_{\bf s}\,\mathbf{S}$ theory.
The 1-instanton partition function of $SO(7) + 4\mathbf{S} + 1\mathbf{V}$ theory is given in (H.15) of \cite{DelZotto:2018tcj}.
From this expression, we can obtain the 1-instanton correction of $SO(7) + N_{\bf s}\,\mathbf{S} + N_{\bf v}\mathbf{V}$ theory with $( N_{\bf s}, N_{\bf v}) \leq ( 2,1)$ by integrating out hypermultiplets or equivalently taking some flavor chemical potentials to infinity. We confirmed that the result agrees with our general 1-instanton expression \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} up to order $(p_1p_2)^{13/2}$. Notice that our formula holds for any $N_{\bf v} + N_{\bf s} \le 2$ and can be used to compute arbitrary high orders in instanton number.
\paragraph{SO(8)}
Our instanton formula should hold for $N_{\bf v} + N_{\bf s} + N_{\bf c} \le 4$. Let us compare it with known results.
The 1-instanton result of $SO(8) + 1\mathbf{S} + 1\mathbf{C} + 1\mathbf{V}$ theory is found in (H.28) of \cite{DelZotto:2018tcj}.
It is expressed in terms of characters of irreducible representations $\chi_{\mathbf{R}}^S$, whose superscript $S \in \{G,v,s,c\}$ means either the gauge symmetry ($G$) or the flavor symmetry acting on the vector ($v$), spinor ($s$), or conjugate spinor ($c$) hypermultiplets. Their representation $\mathbf{R}$ is specified by the Dynkin label in the subscript. All irreducible characters for the flavor symmetry are assumed to be written in the orthogonal basis, to be compatible with our convention of mass parameters in \eqref{eq:1-loop-hyp}, \eqref{eq:recursion}, \eqref{eq:1inst-formula}. The mass parameters will be often distinguished by the superscript $S \in \{s,c,v\}$ according to the matter representation. The flavor symmetry is $Sp(N_{\bf v})_v \times Sp(N_{\bf s})_s \times Sp(N_{\bf c})_c$.
We can obtain the 1-instanton partition function of $SO(8) + N_{\bf s}\mathbf{S} + N_{\bf c}\mathbf{C} + N_{\bf v}\mathbf{V}$ theory with $( N_{\bf s}, N_{\bf c}, N_{\bf v}) \leq ( 1,1,1)$ from (H.28) of \cite{DelZotto:2018tcj} by sending appropriate mass parameters to infinity.
All the results obtained in this way is consistent with our general 1-instanton expression \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} up to $t^{20}$ order, where $t \equiv \sqrt{p_1p_2}$.
Furthermore, we are able to determine the unknown part of (H.28) of \cite{DelZotto:2018tcj} as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:SO8-v1s1c1}
\begin{split}
\tilde{Z}_1 &= t^4 + \sum_{n=0}^\infty t^{5+2n} \chi_{(0n00)}^G \chi^v_{(1)}\chi^s_{(1)}\chi^c_{(1)} \\
&\quad + \sum_{n=0}^\infty t^{6+2n}\left(\chi_{(1n00)}^G \chi^s_{(1)}\chi^c_{(1)}+ \chi_{(0n10)}^G \chi^s_{(1)}\chi^v_{(1)}
+\chi_{(0n01)}^G \chi^c_{(1)}\chi^v_{(1)}\right)\\
&\quad + \sum_{n=0}^\infty t^{7+2n} \left(\chi^G_{(1n10)}\chi^s_{(1)} + \chi^G_{(1n01)}\chi^c_{(1)}+\chi^G_{(0n11)}\chi^v_{(1)}\right)- \sum_{n=0}^\infty t^{8+2n}\chi^G_{(1n11)} \ ,
\end{split}
\end{align}
where $\tilde{Z}_1 \equiv (2\sinh{\frac{\epsilon_{1}}{2}})(2\sinh{\frac{\epsilon_{2}}{2}}) Z_1$ is the 1-instanton partition function with the center-of-mass factor removed.
Now we compare \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} with the 1-instanton partition function of $SO(8) + 2\mathbf{S}
+ 2\mathbf{C} + 2\mathbf{V}$ theory, written in (H.19) of \cite{DelZotto:2018tcj}. Our 1-instanton formula \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} applied to the $SO(8)$ theories having $( N_{\bf s}, N_{\bf c}, N_{\bf v}) \leq (2,1,1), (1,2,2), (1,1,2),(2,2,0),(2,0,2),(0,2,2)$ agree with (H.19) up to $t^{20}$ order, after suitably setting some mass parameters in (H.19) to infinity. We could further determine the unknown part of (H.19) of \cite{DelZotto:2018tcj} as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:SO8-v2s2c2}
\tilde{Z}_1 &= t^{-1} - t^3(\chi_{(01)}^v+\chi_{(01)}^s+\chi_{(01)}^c)
+t^5(\chi^G_{(1000)}\chi^s_{(10)}\chi^c_{(10)}+\chi^G_{(0010)}\chi^s_{(10)}\chi^v_{(10)}+\chi^G_{(0001)}\chi^c_{(10)}\chi^v_{(10)}) \nonumber \\&
-t^6(\chi^G_{(1010)}\chi_{(10)}^s+\chi^G_{(1001)}\chi_{(10)}^c+\chi^G_{(0011)}\chi_{(10)}^v) + t^7 \chi_{(1011)}^G - \sum_{n=0}^\infty \Big(t^{5+2n}\chi_{(0n00)}^G \chi^s_{(10)}\chi^c_{(10)} \chi^v_{(10)} \nonumber \\&
+ t^{6+2n}(\chi^G_{(1n00)}\chi^s_{(01)}\chi^c_{(01)}\chi^v_{(10)}+\chi^G_{(0n10)}\chi^s_{(01)}\chi^c_{(10)}\chi^v_{(01)}+\chi^G_{(0n01)}\chi^s_{(10)}\chi^c_{(01)}\chi^v_{(01)}) \nonumber \\&- t^{7+2n}
(\chi^G_{(1n10)}\chi^s_{(01)}\chi^c_{(10)}\chi^v_{(10)}+\chi^G_{(1n01)}\chi^s_{(10)}\chi^c_{(01)}\chi^v_{(10)}+\chi^G_{(0n11)}\chi^s_{(10)}\chi^c_{(10)}\chi^v_{(01)}) \\& + t^{8+2n}
(\chi^G_{(2n10)}\chi^s_{(01)}\chi^c_{(10)}+\chi^G_{(2n01)}\chi^s_{(10)}\chi^c_{(01)}+\chi^G_{(1n20)}\chi^s_{(01)}\chi^v_{(10)}+\chi^G_{(1n02)}\chi^c_{(01)}\chi^v_{(10)} \nonumber\\&
+\chi^G_{(0n21)}\chi^s_{(10)}\chi^v_{(01)}+\chi^G_{(0n12)}\chi^c_{(10)}\chi^v_{(01)}) - t^{9+2n}(\chi^G_{(2n11)}\chi^s_{(10)}\chi^c_{(10)}+\chi^G_{(1n21)}\chi^s_{(10)}\chi^v_{(10)} \nonumber\\&
+\chi^G_{(1n12)}\chi^c_{(10)}\chi^v_{(10)}) + t^{10+2n} (\chi^G_{(2n21)}\chi^s_{(10)}+\chi^G_{(2n12)}\chi^c_{(10)} + \chi^G_{(1n22)}\chi^v_{(10)}) - t^{11+2n} \chi^G_{(2n22)}\Big). \nonumber
\end{align}
Notice that \eqref{eq:SO8-v1s1c1} and \eqref{eq:SO8-v2s2c2} are manifestly invariant under the $SO(8)$ triality, transforming the $SO(8)$ representations as $(n_vn_an_cn_s) \rightarrow (n_sn_an_vn_c)$
along with $\chi^v_\mathbf{R} \rightarrow \chi^s_\mathbf{R} \rightarrow \chi^c_\mathbf{R} \rightarrow \chi^v_\mathbf{R}$.
It can be done by shuffling the Coulomb VEVs and renaming the flavor chemical potentials. We rearranged $Z_1$ in terms of the new variables $\vec{a}'$ or $\vec{a}''$,
\begin{align}
\label{eq:so8-triality}
\begin{split}
(a_1',a_2',a_3',a_4') &= \textstyle(\frac{-a_1+a_2+a_3-a_4}{2},\frac{-a_1+a_2+a_3-a_4}{2},\frac{-a_1+a_2+a_3-a_4}{2},\frac{-a_1+a_2+a_3-a_4}{2}) \\
(a_1'',a_2'',a_3'',a_4'') &= \textstyle(\frac{+a_1-a_2-a_3-a_4}{2},\frac{-a_1+a_2-a_3-a_4}{2},\frac{-a_1-a_2+a_3-a_4}{2},\frac{+a_1+a_2+a_3-a_4}{2}),
\end{split}
\end{align}
which exchanges the $SO(8)$ irreducible characters as
\begin{align}
\chi_{(n_cn_an_sn_v)} (\vec{a}) &= \chi_{(n_vn_an_cn_s)} (\vec{a}')|_{\vec{a}' \rightarrow \vec{a}}, &
\chi_{(n_sn_an_vn_c)} (\vec{a}) &= \chi_{(n_vn_an_cn_s)} (\vec{a}'')|_{\vec{a}'' \rightarrow \vec{a}}.
\end{align}
Dropping off primes from $Z_1 (\vec{a}', \epsilon_1,\epsilon_2; \vec{m}^s,\vec{m}^c,\vec{m}^v)$ or $Z_1 (\vec{a}'', \epsilon_1,\epsilon_2;\vec{m}^s,\vec{m}^c,\vec{m}^v) $, we indeed find
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
Z_1^{N_{\bf s}=N_{\bf c}= N_{\bf v}}\,(\vec{a}, \epsilon_1,\epsilon_2;\vec{m}^s,\vec{m}^c,\vec{m}^v) &= Z_1^{N_{\bf s}=N_{\bf c}= N_{\bf v}}\,(\vec{a}', \epsilon_1,\epsilon_2;\vec{m}^v,\vec{m}^s,\vec{m}^c)|_{\vec{a}' \rightarrow \vec{a}}\\
Z_1^{N_{\bf s}=N_{\bf c}= N_{\bf v}}\,(\vec{a}, \epsilon_1,\epsilon_2;\vec{m}^s,\vec{m}^c,\vec{m}^v) &= Z_1^{N_{\bf s}=N_{\bf c}= N_{\bf v}}\,(\vec{a}'', \epsilon_1,\epsilon_2;\vec{m}^c,\vec{m}^v,\vec{m}^s)|_{\vec{a}'' \rightarrow \vec{a}} ,
\end{split}
\end{align}
which is consistent with the triality.
Similarly, we also found the 1-instanton formula \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} applied to $SO(8)$ theories with $( N_{\bf s}, N_{\bf c}, N_{\bf v}) \leq (4,0,0)$ or $(0,4,0)$ is compatible with the $SO(8)$ triality.
Starting with the 1-instanton result $Z_1^\text{ADHM} = Z_1^\text{ADHM} (\vec{a}, \epsilon_1,\epsilon_2, \vec{m}) $ obtained from the relevant ADHM quantum mechanics for $SO(8) + N_{\bf v}\mathbf{V}$ theory with $ N_{\bf v} \leq 4$, we find
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
Z_1^{N_{\bf c}, \, N_{\bf c}= N_{\bf v}= 0}\,(\vec{a}, \epsilon_1,\epsilon_2, \vec{m}) &= Z_1^{\text{ADHM}}(\vec{a}', \epsilon_1,\epsilon_2, \vec{m})|_{\vec{a}' \rightarrow \vec{a}}\\
Z_1^{N_{\bf s}, \, N_{\bf s}= N_{\bf v}= 0}\,(\vec{a}, \epsilon_1,\epsilon_2, \vec{m}) &= Z_1^{\text{ADHM}}(\vec{a}'', \epsilon_1,\epsilon_2, \vec{m})|_{\vec{a}'' \rightarrow \vec{a}}.
\end{split}
\end{align}
\paragraph{SO(9)}
For the $SO(9)$ theory with $N_{\bf s}$ spinor and $N_{\bf v}$ vector, our blowup formula is valid for $N_{\bf v} + 2 N_{\bf s} \le 5$.
The 1-instanton formula \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} can be applied to $(N_\mathbf{s}, N_{\mathbf{v}}) \leq (1,3)$ or $(2,1)$, which has $Sp(N_\mathbf{s})_s \times Sp(N_\mathbf{v})_v$ flavor symmetry. It can be compared with the 1-instanton partition function of $SO(9) + 2\mathbf{S} + 3\mathbf{V}$ theory, which is written in (H.20) of \cite{DelZotto:2018tcj} up to $t^7$ order, after appropriately taking some mass parameters to infinity. We checked all their consistency up to the given order. For example, the character expansion of $\hat{Z}_{1}$ for $SO(9) + 2\mathbf{S} + 1\mathbf{V}$ can be written as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:SO9-v1s2}
\begin{split}
\tilde{Z}_1&=\, t^4\chi^v_{(1)}+t^5\chi^s_{(20)}-t^6\chi_{(0001)}^G\chi^s_{(10)}
\\&\quad +\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\Bigg(t^{6+2n}\chi^G_{(0n00)}\chi^s_{(02)}\chi^v_{(1)}
-t^{7+2n}\left(\chi^G_{(1n00)}\chi^s_{(02)}+\chi^G_{(0n01)}\chi^s_{(11)}\chi^v_{(1)}\right)
\\&\qquad \quad+t^{8+2n}\left(\chi^G_{(1n01)}\chi^s_{(11)}+\chi^G_{(0n10)}\chi^s_{(20)}\chi^v_{(1)}
+\chi^G_{(0n02)}\chi^s_{(01)}\chi^v_{(1)}\right)
\\&\qquad \quad-t^{9+2n}\left(\chi^G_{(1n10)}\chi^s_{(20)}+\chi^G_{(1n02)}\chi^s_{(01)}+\chi^G_{(0n11)}\chi^s_{(10)}\chi^v_{(1)}\right)\\
&\qquad \quad+t^{10+2n}\left(\chi^G_{(1n11)}\chi^s_{(10)}+\chi^G_{(0n20)}\chi^v_{(1)}\right) -t^{11+2n}\chi^G_{(1n20)} \Bigg),
\end{split}
\end{align}
which is tested against the general formula \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} up to $t^{20}$ order. It is the same as (H.20) of \cite{DelZotto:2018tcj} after reducing the $Sp(3)_v$ characters by
\begin{align}
\chi^{v}_{(001)}\rightarrow \chi^{v}_{(1)},\qquad \chi^{v}_{(010)}\rightarrow 1,\qquad \chi^{v}_{(100)}\rightarrow 0,\qquad\chi^{v}_{(000)}\rightarrow 0.
\end{align}
\paragraph{SO(10)}
We apply our 1-instanton expression \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} to $SO(10) + N_{\mathbf s}\mathbf{S} + N_{\mathbf c}\mathbf{C} + N_{\mathbf v}\mathbf{V}$ theory with $( N_{\bf s}, N_{\bf c}, N_{\bf v}) \leq (2,0,2),(1,1,2), (0,2,2),(1,0,4),(0,1,4)$. The relevant flavor symmetry is $U(N_\mathbf{s} + N_\mathbf{c}) \times Sp(N_\mathbf{v})$ because the $SO(10)$ (conjugate) spinor is a complex representation. Since the $SO(10)$ charge conjugation exchanges the spinor and conjugate spinor representations,
\textit{i.e.}, $\chi_{(00001)}^G = (\chi_{(00010)}^G)^*$, the instanton partition function for $SO(10) + (N_{\mathbf s}\mp 1)\mathbf{S} + (N_{\mathbf c}\pm 1)\mathbf{C} + N_{\mathbf v}\mathbf{V}$ must be identified with that of $SO(10) + N_{\mathbf s}\mathbf{S} + N_{\mathbf c}\mathbf{C} + N_{\mathbf v}\mathbf{V}$ simply by flipping the sign of mass parameters for (conjugate) spinor hypermultiplets:
\begin{align}
Z_{1}^{N_{\mathbf{s}},N_\mathbf{c},N_{\mathbf{v}}}(m^s_{1, \cdots, N_\mathbf{s}}; m^c_{1,\cdots,N_\mathbf{c}}) &= Z_{1}^{N_{\mathbf{s}}-1,N_\mathbf{c}+1,N_{\mathbf{v}}}(m^s_{1, \cdots, N_\mathbf{s}-1}; m^c_{1,\cdots,N_\mathbf{c}+1})\big|_{m^c_{N_\mathbf{c}+1} = -m^s_{N_\mathbf{s}}}\nonumber\\
&= Z_{1}^{N_{\mathbf{s}}+1,N_\mathbf{c}-1,N_{\mathbf{v}}}(m^s_{1, \cdots, N_\mathbf{s}+1}; m^c_{1,\cdots,N_\mathbf{c}-1})\big|_{m^s_{N_\mathbf{s}+1} = -m^c_{N_\mathbf{c}}}.
\end{align}
This relation is explicitly confirmed in all above cases at 1-instanton order.
We may want to compare \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} with the known 1-instanton partition function of $SO(10) + 1\mathbf{S} + 1\mathbf{C} + 4\mathbf{V}$ theory, written in (H.21) of \cite{DelZotto:2018tcj}, after taking relevant mass parameters to infinity. However, (H.21) specifies $\tilde{Z}_1$ only up to $\mathcal{O}(t^5)$, which leaves nothing for comparison once we reduce the mass parameters. Thus the consistency between two expressions can be only weakly tested. For instance, $\tilde{Z}_{1}$ obtained from \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} for $SO(10) + N_\mathbf{s}\mathbf{S}+ N_\mathbf{c}\mathbf{C} + 4\mathbf{V}$ theory with $ N_\mathbf{s}
+ N_\mathbf{c} = 2$ is displayed in \eqref{eq:so10-2s2v}, which turns out to be trivial upto $t^4$ order.
\paragraph{SO(12)}
The 1-instanton partition function of $SO(12) + 1\mathbf{S} + 6\mathbf{V}$ theory is written in (H.22) of \cite{DelZotto:2018tcj}, up to $t^8$ order. It can be compared with our 1-instanton formula \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} applied to $SO(12) + N_\mathbf{s}\mathbf{S} + N_\mathbf{c}\mathbf{C} + N_\mathbf{v}\mathbf{V}$ theory with $(N_\mathbf{s},N_\mathbf{c}, N_{\mathbf{v}}) \leq (1,0,4)$ or $(0,1,4)$, whose flavor symmetry acting on matter multiplets is $SO(2N_\mathbf{s})_s \times SO(2N_\mathbf{c})_c \times Sp(N_\mathbf{v})_v$. For comparison, we need to appropriately decouple some mass parameters in (H.22) to infinity. It reduces the $Sp(6)_v$ characters in (H.22) to, e.g., the $Sp(4)_v$ irreducible characters as follows:
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\begin{array}{llllll}
\chi^{v}_{(000000)} &\rightarrow 0, & \quad \chi^{v}_{(100000)}&\rightarrow 0,& \quad \chi^{v}_{(010000)}&\rightarrow 1, \\ \chi^{v}_{(001000)}&\rightarrow \chi^{v}_{(1000)}, & \quad \chi^{v}_{(000100)}&\rightarrow \chi^{v}_{(0100)}, & \quad \chi^{v}_{(000001)}&\rightarrow \chi^{v}_{(0001)}.
\end{array}
\end{split}
\end{align}
We explicitly confirmed that (H.22) and \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} agree up to the given order, for $(N_\mathbf{s},N_\mathbf{c}, N_{\mathbf{v}}) = (1,0,4)$. Moreover, we checked that the 1-instanton results ${Z}_1$ from \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} for $(N_\mathbf{s},N_\mathbf{c}, N_{\mathbf{v}})= (1,0,N_\mathbf{v})$ and $(0,1,N_\mathbf{v})$ could be interchanged as follows:
\begin{align}
Z_{1}^{N_{\mathbf{s}}=1,N_\mathbf{c}=0,N_{\mathbf{v}}}(a_1,a_2,a_3,a_4,a_5,a_6) =Z_{1}^{N_{\mathbf{s}}=0,N_\mathbf{c}=1,N_{\mathbf{v}}}(a_1,a_2,a_3,a_4,a_5,-a_6).
\end{align}
\paragraph{Summary of new results}
We have compared so far the solution $Z_1$ of the recursion formulae \eqref{eq:recursion} with the known $1$-instanton partition function for various $SO(N)$ theories with spinor hypermultiplets. The comparison showed consistency for all the examples whose $Z_1$ had been computed \cite{Kim:2018gjo,DelZotto:2018tcj}. We also collect the character expansion of the 1-instanton partition function \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} in Appendix~\ref{sec:data} for novel $SO(N)$ theories with spinor matters. See Table~\ref{tbl:son-data} for the list of character expansions.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc|c}
\hline
Gauge Group & Hypermultiplets & Equation No.\\
\hline\hline
$SO(8)$ & $1\mathbf{S}+1\mathbf{C}+1\mathbf{V}$ & \eqref{eq:SO8-v1s1c1}\\
$SO(8)$ & $2\mathbf{S}+2\mathbf{C}+2\mathbf{V}$ & \eqref{eq:SO8-v2s2c2}\\
$SO(8)$ & $3\mathbf{S}+1\mathbf{C}$ & \eqref{eq:so8-s3c1}\\
$SO(9)$ & $2\mathbf{S}+1\mathbf{V}$ & \eqref{eq:SO9-v1s2}\\
$SO(10)$ & $2\mathbf{S}+2\mathbf{V}$ & \eqref{eq:so10-2s2v}\\
$SO(10)$ & $3\mathbf{S}$ & \eqref{eq:so10-s3}\\
$SO(11)$ & $1\mathbf{S}+3\mathbf{V}$ & \eqref{eq:so11-s1v3}\\
$SO(12)$ & $2\mathbf{S}$ & \eqref{eq:so12-s2}\\
$SO(12)$ & $1\mathbf{S}+1\mathbf{C}$ & \eqref{eq:so12-s1c1}\\
$SO(13)$ & $1\mathbf{S}+1\mathbf{V}$ & \eqref{eq:so13-s1v1}\\
$SO(14)$ & $1\mathbf{S}+2\mathbf{V}$ & \eqref{eq:so14-s1v2}\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Character expansion of $SO(N)$ theory with spinor hypermultiplets}
\label{tbl:son-data}
\end{table}
\subsection{Theories with an exceptional gauge group}
\label{subsec:exceptional}
Let us continue to apply the recursion formulae \eqref{eq:recursion} and the general 1-instanton expression \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} to study the instanton partition function of exceptional gauge theories. One can find a sufficient number of recursion formulae \eqref{eq:recursion} to fix the $n$-instanton partition function $Z_n$, if and only if the gauge theory has the following number of fundamental hypermultiplets:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:exceptional-range}
\begin{split}
N_{f} \leq 2 & \qquad\text{ if }\quad G=G_2,\\
N_{f} \leq 2 & \qquad\text{ if }\quad G=F_4,\\
N_{f}+N_{\overline{f}} \leq 3 & \qquad\text{ if }\quad G=E_6,\\
N_{f} \leq 2 & \qquad\text{ if }\quad G=E_7,\\
\varnothing & \qquad\text{ if }\quad G=E_8.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Notice that other representations do not appear in the recent classification of 4d ${\cal N}=2$ SCFTs \cite{Bhardwaj:2013qia} nor 5d SCFTs \cite{Jefferson:2017ahm}.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc|c}
\hline
Gauge Group & Hypermultiplets & Equation No.\\
\hline\hline
$F_4$ & $2\mathbf{F}$ & \eqref{eq:F4F2}\\
$E_6$ & $3\mathbf{F}$ & \eqref{eq:E6F3}\\
$E_7$ & $2\mathbf{F}$ & \eqref{eq:E7F2}\\
$E_8$ & $\emptyset$ & \eqref{eq:E8}\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Character expansion of exceptional gauge theory with fundamental hypermultiplets}
\label{tbl:exc-data}
\end{table}
We give explicit character expansion of the one instanton partition function in Appendix \ref{sec:data}. See Table \ref{tbl:exc-data} for the list of character expansions.
\paragraph{$\bf G_2$}
A supersymmetric quantum mechanical model was proposed in \cite{Kim:2018gjo}, whose Witten index corresponds to the $n$-instanton partition function of
$G_2 + N_f \mathbf{F}$ theory with $N_f \leq 3$. Its index can be written as the following sum over $SU(3)$ colored Young diagrams:
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
Z_n^\text{YD} = \sum_{|\vec{Y}| = n} &\prod_{i=1}^3\prod_{s \in Y_i}\frac{2\sinh{(\phi(s))} \ 2\sinh{(\epsilon_+-\phi(s))} \ \prod_{l=1}^{N_f}2\sinh(\frac{m_l \pm \phi(s)}{2}) }{2\sinh{\frac{\epsilon_+ - \phi(s)}{2}}\prod_{j=1}^3 2\sinh{\frac{E_{ij}}{2}}\,2\sinh{\frac{E_{ij}-2\epsilon_+}{2}}\,2\sinh{\frac{\epsilon_+ - \phi(s) - a_j}{2}}} \\ \times &\prod_{i \leq j}^3 \prod_{\stackrel{s_{i,j} \in Y_{i,j}}{s_i < s_j}} \frac{2\sinh{\frac{\phi(s_i)+\phi(s_j)}{2}}\, 2\sinh{\frac{\phi(s_i)+\phi(s_j)-2\epsilon_+}{2}}}{ 2\sinh{\frac{\epsilon_1 - \phi(s_i)-\phi(s_j)}{2}} \, 2\sinh{\frac{\epsilon_2 - \phi(s_i)-\phi(s_j)}{2}}}.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Our 1-instanton formula \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} agrees with the above expression $Z_1^\text{YD}$ for all $N_f \leq 2$. Also at two instantons, we explicitly checked that $Z_2^\text{YD} = Z_2$, where $Z_2$ is the solution of the recursion formulae \eqref{eq:recursion} with \eqref{eq:d-range-nonsu}.
\paragraph{$\bf F_4$}
The 1-instanton partition function of $F_4 + 2 \mathbf{F}$ gauge theory is given in (H.31) of \cite{DelZotto:2018tcj}, which has $Sp(2)_f$ flavor symmetry. In terms of $F_4$ and $Sp(2)_f$ characters,
\begin{align}
\label{eq:F4F2}
\begin{split}
& \tilde{Z}_1 =\,t^6\chi^f_{(01)}+t^7\chi^{f}_{(30)}-t^8\left(\chi^G_{(0001)}\chi^f_{(20)}+\chi^G_{(1000)}\right)+t^9\chi^G_{(0010)}\chi^f_{(10)}-t^{10}\chi^G_{(0100)}\\
&+\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\Bigg(t^{8+2n}\chi^G_{(n000)}\chi^f_{(03)}-t^{9+2n}\chi^G_{(n001)}\chi^f_{(12)}+t^{10+2n}\left(\chi^G_{(n010)}\chi^f_{(21)}+\chi^G_{(n002)}\chi^f_{(02)}\right)\\
&\qquad\quad-t^{11+2n}\left(\chi^G_{(n100)}\chi^f_{(30)}+\chi^G_{(n011)}\chi^f_{(11)}\right)
+t^{12+2n}\left(\chi^G_{(n101)}\chi^f_{(20)}+\chi^G_{(n020)}\chi^f_{(01)}\right)\\
&\qquad\quad-t^{13+2n}\chi^G_{(n110)}\chi^f_{(10)}+t^{14+2n}\chi^G_{(n200)}\Bigg).
\end{split}
\end{align}
We confirmed that our 1-instanton formula \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} agrees with the above expression up to $t^{15}$ order.
\paragraph{$\bf E_6$}
Let us apply our general 1-instanton expression \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} to $E_6 + N_f \mathbf{F} + N_{\bar{f}}\overline{\mathbf{F}}$ gauge theory with $(N_f,N_{\bar{f}}) \leq (3,0), (2,1), (1,2),(0,3)$ whose flavor symmetry is $U(N_f
+ N_{\bar{f}})$. Since the fundamental and anti-fundamental representations are interchanged by the $E_6$ charge conjugation, their instanton partition functions should be identical upon inverting the sign of relevant mass parameters. We explicitly confirmed that \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} satisfies the relations
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
Z_{1}^{N_f,N_{\bar{f}}}(m^f_{1, \cdots, N_f}; m^{\bar{f}}_{1,\cdots,N_{\bar{f}}}) &= Z_{1}^{N_f-1,N_{\bar{f}}+1}(m^f_{1, \cdots, N_f-1}; m^{\bar{f}}_{1,\cdots,N_{\bar{f}}+1})\big|_{m^{\bar{f}}_{N_{\bar{f}}+1} = -m^f_{N_f}}\\
&= Z_{1}^{N_f+1,N_{\bar{f}}-1}(m^f_{1, \cdots, N_f+1}; m^{\bar{f}}_{1,\cdots,N_{\bar{f}}-1})\big|_{m^{f}_{N_{f}+1} = -m^{\bar{f}}_{N_{\bar{f}}}},
\end{split}
\end{align}
in all above cases. Furthermore, $Z_1$ at $(N_f, N_{\bar{f}}) = (3,0)$ can be compared with (H.35) of \cite{DelZotto:2018tcj} which displays the character expansion up to $t^{11}$ order. We checked their consistency except a sign mistake in the second term of (H.35). The full character expansion of $Z_1$ at $N_f=3$ and $N_{\bar{f}}=0$ is written in \eqref{eq:E6F3}, after turning off the $E_6$ Coulomb VEV $\vec{a} = 0$ for simplicity.
\paragraph{$\bf E_7$}
Our 1-instanton expression \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} is applicable to $E_7 + N_f\mathbf{F}$ gauge theory with $N_f \leq 2$, which has $SO(2N_f)$ flavor symmetry. We give the full character expansion of $Z_1$ at $N_f=2$ in \eqref{eq:E7F2} after setting $\vec{a}=0$ to shorten the expression. We also compared the result \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} applied to the $N_f = 1$ case with (H.40) of \cite{DelZotto:2018tcj} and found that they agree up to $t^{280}$ order.
\paragraph{$\bf E_8$}
The (centered) 1-instanton partition function of $E_8$ gauge theory can be written as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:E8}
\tilde{Z}_1=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}t^{29+2n}\chi^{E_8}_{(000000n0)}.
\end{align}
We confirmed that it agrees with our 1-instanton expression \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} up to $t^{520}$ order.
It is actually proven in \cite{Keller:2011ek, Keller:2012da} that the (centered) 1-instanton formula \eqref{eq:1inst-formula} for any gauge group without matter can be written in terms of the character expression \cite{VinbergPopov, Garfinkle, Benvenuti:2010pq}
\begin{align}
\tilde{Z}_1 = t^{h^\vee - 1} \sum_{n=0}^\infty t^{2n} \chi^G_{n \cdot \textbf{adj}} \ .
\end{align}
\subsection{SU(6) theory with a rank-3 antisymmetric hypermultiplet}
\label{subsec:rank3}
Another non-trivial test of our blow-up recursion formulae \eqref{eq:recursion} is the partition function for 5d $SU(6)$ theory with a hypermultiplet in the rank-3 antisymmetric representation ({\bf TAS}). This theory has can be Higgsed to a theory with $SU(3)\times SU(3)$ gauge symmetry that can be explicitly checked at the level of the partition function.
To have a UV fixed point, 5d $SU(6)$ theories can have up to 2 hypermultiplets in the rank-3 antisymmetric representation \cite{Jefferson:2017ahm}. Their type IIB 5-brane configurations were constructed in~\cite{Hayashi:2019yxj} with/without O5-planes. In particular, 5-brane web diagrams for $SU(6)+\frac12{\bf TAS}$ and $SU(6)+1{\bf TAS}$ do not contain orientifold planes, so that topological vertex method \cite{Aganagic:2003db, Iqbal:2007ii} can be straightforwardly applied to compute their partition functions. In \cite{Hayashi:2019yxj}, for instance, the partition function of $SU(6)_\frac52 + \frac12{\bf TAS}$ theory was computed up to two instantons using the topological vertex formalism.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{SU6-monopole.pdf}
\caption{A 5-brane web for $SU(6)_3$ theory with one massless hypermultiplet in the rank-3 antisymmetric representation.}
\label{fig:SU6-monopole}
\end{figure}
Our blow-up equation \eqref{eq:cor5d-unity} demands all mass parameters to be generically turned on. In particular, we need a mass parameter for the rank-3 antisymmetric hypermultiplet. As one cannot introduce mass for a half-hypermultiplet, let us consider the $SU(6)_3$ theory with a full hypermultiplet in the rank-3 antisymmetric representation ($SU(6)_3+1{\bf TAS}$).
An example for 5-brane web for $SU(6)_3+1{\bf TAS}$ is depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:SU6-monopole}. It is instructive to see if Figure~\ref{fig:SU6-monopole} is consistent with the expected prepotential. The effective prepotential on the Coulomb branch of a 5d gauge theory with a gauge group $G$ and matter $f$ in a representation $\mathbf{R}_f$ is \cite{Intriligator:1997pq}
\begin{align}
\mathcal{F}(\phi) = \frac{m_0}{2}h_{ij}\phi_i\phi_j + \frac{\kappa}{6}d_{ijk}\phi_i\phi_j\phi_k + \frac{1}{12}\left(\sum_{\vec{\alpha}\in \Delta}\Big|\vec{\alpha} \cdot \vec{\phi}\,\Big|^3 - \sum_f\sum_{\vec{\omega} \in \mathbf{R}_f}\Big|\vec{\omega}\cdot \vec{\phi} + m_f\Big|^3\right). \label{prepotential}
\end{align}
Here, $m_0$ is the inverse of the gauge coupling squared, $\kappa$ is the Chern-Simons level and $m_f$ is a mass parameter for the matter $f$. $\vec{\alpha}$ is a root of the Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}$ associated to $G$ and $\vec{\omega}$ is a weight of the representation $\mathbf{R}_f$ of $\mathfrak{g}$. We also defined $h_{ij} = \text{Tr}(T_iT_j), d_{ijk} = \frac{1}{2}\text{Tr}\left(T_i\{T_j, T_k\}\right)$ where $T_i$ are the Cartan generators of the Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}$. With the Coulomb branch moduli assigned in Figure \ref{fig:SU6-monopole} and the identification of Weyl chamber for the Coulomb VEV ($a_1\ge a_2\ge \cdots \ge a_{6}$, $\sum_{i=1}^{6}a_i=0$),
\begin{align}
a_1= \phi_1,&&
a_2=\phi_2-\phi_1,&&
a_3=\phi_3-\phi_2,&&
a_4=\phi_4-\phi_3,&&
a_5=\phi_5-\phi_4,&&
a_6=-\phi_5, \label{orth2Dynkin}
\end{align}
one finds that the prepotential for $SU(6)_3$ with one \emph{massless} rank-3 antisymmetric matter takes the form of
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{F}_{SU(6)_3+1{\bf TAS}} &= m_0 \big( \phi _1^2+\phi _2^2+\phi _3^2+\phi _4^2+\phi _5^2-\phi _1 \phi _2-\phi _2 \phi _3-\phi _3 \phi _4-\phi _4
\phi _5\big) \cr
&\quad + \frac{\phi _1^3}{3}+\frac{4 \phi _2^3}{3}+\frac{4
\phi _3^3}{3}+\frac{4 \phi_4^3}{3}+\frac{4 \phi_5^3}{3}+4\phi_1^2 \phi_2 -5 \phi_1\phi_2^2 \cr
& \quad -2\phi_1 \big(\phi_3^2+\phi_4^2+\phi_5^2\big) +\phi_2^2 \phi_3-2 \phi_2 \phi_3^2-\phi_3 \phi_4^2-\phi _4^2 \phi_5 \cr
& \quad +2 \phi _1\phi _2 \phi _3 +2\phi_1\phi_3\phi_4+2\phi_1\phi_4\phi_5. \label{eq:prep+SU6-3}
\end{split}
\end{align}
One can easily see that the monopole string tensions $T_i=\partial{\mathcal{F}}/\partial{\phi_i}$ computed from the above prepotential \eqref{eq:prep+SU6-3} agree with the areas of the compact faces of the 5-brane web, i.e.,
\begin{align}
T_1=\textcircled{\scriptsize 1} + 2\times\textcircled{\scriptsize 2},
&& T_2=\textcircled{\scriptsize 3},
&&T_3=\textcircled{\scriptsize 4},
&&T_4=\textcircled{\scriptsize 5},
&&T_5=\textcircled{\scriptsize 6}
+ 2\times\textcircled{\scriptsize 7},
\end{align}
where the encircled numbers represent the area of apparent faces in Figure \ref{fig:SU6-monopole}. This shows that Figure~\ref{fig:SU6-monopole} is indeed consistent with the prepotential of $SU(6)_3+1{\bf TAS}$ gauge theory.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{SU6-Higgsing.pdf}
\caption{(a) A Higgsing of $SU(6)_3+1{\bf TAS}$ into two $SU(3)_3$ theories by aligning internal D5-branes in red. (a) Two different $SU(3)_3$ theories are painted in blue and red, respectively.
}
\label{fig:SU6-Higgsing}
\end{figure}
Notice that this 5-brane web for $SU(6)_3+1{\bf TAS}$ suggests an intriguing Higgsing of the theory, which is the Higgsing of $SU(6)$ theory with one rank-3 antisymmetric hyper into two disjoint $SU(3)$ theories. It can be achieved by setting the Coulomb branch parameters as
\begin{align}
a_5= - a_1-a_6, \qquad {\rm or~equivalently} \qquad \phi_4=\phi_1. \label{eq:HiggisingToSU3}
\end{align}
This tuning of the parameters, of course, reduces dimension of the Coulomb branch by one and also opens up a Higgs branch in such a way that the 5-brane web in Figure \ref{fig:SU6-monopole} becomes 5-brane web in Figure \ref{fig:SU6-Higgsing}(a) where the D5-branes on the upper edges of $\textcircled{\scriptsize 6}$ and $\textcircled{\scriptsize 7}$ are aligned and joint to become a single D5-brane denoted red in Figure~\ref{fig:SU6-Higgsing}(a). The resulting configuration is then a 5-brane configuration for two pure $SU(3)_3$ theories that are on top of each other, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:SU6-Higgsing}(b). This is a 5-brane realization of Higgsing $SU(6)_3+1{\bf TAS}$ theory into two pure $SU(3)_3$ theories. It follows that
under this Higgsing, the prepotential for $SU(6)_3+1{\bf TAS}$ \eqref{eq:prep+SU6-3} theory reduces to a sum of prepotentials for two disjoint pure $SU(3)_3$ theories:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{F}_{SU(6)_{3}+1{\bf TAS}}{}\Big|_{a_1+a_5+a_6=0}
&\rightarrow \mathcal{F}_{SU(3)_3}(m_0,a_1,a_5,a_6)+\mathcal{F}_{SU(3)_3}(m_0,a_2,a_3,a_4).
\end{align}
This in turn implies that under this Higgsing, the partition function for $SU(6)_{3}+1{\bf TAS}$ should be expressed as a product of the partition functions of two pure $SU(3)_3$ theories:
\begin{align}
{\cal Z}^{SU(6)_{3}+1{\bf TAS}}\big|_{\rm Higgsing}~\rightarrow ~~ {\cal Z}^{SU(3)_{3}}\!(q,A_1, A_5,A_6)\,{\cal Z}^{SU(3)_{3}}\!(q,A_2, A_3,A_4)\,Z_{\rm extra}(q)\,,
\label{eq:SU6-Higgs-SU3}
\end{align}
where the parameters $q$ and $A_i$ are the K\"ahler parameters for instanton and Coulomb branch parameters, and $Z_{\rm extra}(q)$ represents the overall extra terms that do not explicitly depend on the Coulomb branch moduli, which would correspond to a new decoupled mode appearing in Figure \ref{fig:SU6-Higgsing}. In what follows, we explicitly compute the partition function for $SU(6)_3+1{\bf TAS}$ based on the 5-brane web and compare it with our general 1-instanton formula \eqref{eq:1inst-formula}. At two instantons, we will consider this Higgsing as a consistency check of our solution $Z_2$ obtained from the blowup recursion formulae \eqref{eq:recursion}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{SU6young.pdf}
\caption{A labeling of Young diagrams assigned to the horizontal edges of Figure \ref{fig:SU6-monopole}.}
\label{fig:SU6young}
\end{figure}
To compute the instanton partition function based on the 5-brane web for $SU(6)_3+1{\bf TAS}$ given in Figure \ref{fig:SU6-monopole}, we assign the Young diagrams $Y_i$ to each horizontal edge of the web diagram as shown in Figure \ref{fig:SU6young} and use the topological vertex method. For convenience, we restrict ourselves to the unrefined case where $2\epsilon_+=\epsilon_1+\epsilon_2=0$. (See also a similar calculation done in \cite{Hayashi:2019yxj}.) As the web diagram in Figure \ref{fig:SU6-monopole} is left-right symmetric, it is convenient to split the web diagram to the left and right parts and glue them later to obtain the full partition function. Let us introduce the following fugacity variables to express the partition function.
\begin{align}
A_i \equiv e^{-a_i} \ \text{ for } \ i=1, \cdots, 6
, \qquad g\equiv \sqrt{p_1/p_2} = e^{-\epsilon_-},
\end{align}
in which the $SU(6)$ traceless condition $\prod_{i=1}^{6}A_i =1$ is assumed. Applying the topological vertex formalism \cite{Aganagic:2003db}, we find that
\begin{align}
\label{eq:znek-su6}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{Z}
=&\, \sum_{(Y_1, \cdots, Y_6)}q^{\sum_{i=1}^6|Y_i|} (-A_1^6)^{|Y_1|}(-A_2^6)^{|Y_2|}(-A_2^2A_3^4)^{|Y_3|}(-A_2^2A_3^2A_4^2)^{|Y_4| + |Y_5|}\\
&\times f_{Y_1}(g)^5f_{Y_2}(g)^5f_{Y_3}(g)^3f_{Y_4}(g)f_{Y_5}(g)^{-1}f_{Y_6}(g)^{2}
Z_{\text{left}}(\vec{Y})Z_{\text{right}}(\vec{Y}),
\end{split}
\end{align}
where $\vec{Y}=(Y_1, Y_2, Y_3, Y_4, Y_5, Y_6)$. The left/right factor
$Z_{\text{left}}(\vec{Y})$/$Z_{\text{right}}(\vec{Y})$ can be written as
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
Z_{\text{left}}(\vec{Y}) = Z_{\text{right}}(\vec{Y})=& \,
\sum_{Y'} ( - A_1{}^{-1} A_6{}^{-2})^{|Y'|}
g^{\frac{||Y'^t||^2+||Y'||^2}{2}} \tilde{Z}_{Y'}^2 f_{Y'}^2(g)
\prod_{i=1}^6 g^{\frac{||Y_i||^2}{2}} \tilde{Z}_{Y_i}
\cr
&
\times
R_{Y_1 Y_6^t}^{-1} (A_1 A_6{}^{-1})\,R_{Y' Y_6^t}^{-1} (A_1{}^{-1} A_6{}^{-2})\,R_{Y_1Y'^t }^{-1} (A_1^2A_6) \cr
&
\times
\prod_{2 \le i < j \le 5} R_{Y_i Y_j^t}^{-1} (A_i A_j{}^{-1})
\prod_{i=2}^5 R_{Y'^t Y_i} (A_1 A_i A_6)
\end{split}
\end{align}
in which the dummy variable $Y'$ should be interpreted as $Y_0$ for $Z_{\text{left}}(\vec{Y})$ and $Y_7$ for $Z_{\text{right}}(\vec{Y})$.
Here, for a Young diagram $\lambda = (\lambda_1, \lambda_2, \cdots)$ and its transpose $\lambda^t$,
\begin{align}
|\lambda|=\sum_{i}\lambda_i, \qquad ||\lambda||^2 =\sum_{i}\lambda_i^2, \qquad \tilde{Z}_{\lambda}
&= \prod_{(i,j) \in \lambda} \frac{1}{1 - g^{\lambda_i + \lambda^t_j - i - j +1} }.
\end{align}
The framing factor $f_{\lambda}(g)$ is defined by
\begin{align}
f_\lambda(g) = (-1)^{|\lambda|}g^{\frac{1}{2}(g^{||\lambda^t||^2 - ||\lambda||^2})}.
\end{align}
And also, $R_{\lambda \mu } (Q)=R_{\mu \lambda} (Q)$ is defined by
\begin{align}
R_{\lambda \mu } (Q
=\text{PE} \left[ - \frac{g}{(1-g)^2} Q \right]
\times N_{\lambda^t \mu} (Q),
\end{align}
with PE representing the Plethystic exponential \eqref{eq:PE}
and
\begin{align}
N_{\lambda \mu} (Q)
= \prod_{(i,j) \in \lambda} \left( 1 - Q g^{\lambda_i + \mu_j^t -i-j+1} \right)
\prod_{(i,j) \in \mu} \left( 1 - Q g^{-\lambda^t_j - \mu_i + i + j - 1} \right).
\end{align}
Recall that the Nekrasov partition function is expressed as the following weighted sum:
\begin{align}
{\cal Z} = Z_{\text{pert}} \cdot \bigg(1 + \sum_{k=1}^{\infty}q^kZ_k\bigg) ,
\end{align}
where $Z_{\text{pert}}$ is the perturbative partition function, while $Z_k$ stands for the $k$-instanton partition function.
The perturbative part of the partition function $Z_{\text{pert}}$ comes from the summand of \eqref{eq:znek-su6} at empty Young diagrams, i.e.,
$(Y_1, Y_2, Y_3, Y_4, Y_5, Y_6) = (\o,\o,\o,\o,\o,\o)$.
It is given by
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
Z_{\rm pert}
=& \,
Z_{\text{left}}(\o,\o,\o,\o,\o,\o)
Z_{\text{right}}(\o,\o,\o,\o,\o,\o)
\cr
=&\,
\text{PE} \Biggl[
\frac{2g}{(1-g)^2}
\Bigl( \frac{A_1}{A_6} + \frac{1}{A_1A_6^2} + A_1^2 A_6
+ \sum_{2 \le i < j \le 5} \frac{A_i}{A_j}
- \sum_{i=2}^5 A_1 A_i A_6
\Bigr)
\Biggr]
\cr
&
\times \bigg(\sum_{Y'} ( - A_1{}^{-1} A_6{}^{-2})^{|Y'|} \
g^{\frac{\Vert Y'^t \Vert ^2+\Vert Y'\Vert ^2}{2}} \tilde{Z}_{Y'}(g)^2 f_{Y'}^2(g)
\cr
& \qquad \qquad
\textstyle N_{Y'^t \o }^{-1} (A_1{}^{-1} A_6{}^{-2})
N^{-1}_{Y' \o } (A_1^2 A_6)\prod_{i=2}^5 N_{Y' \o } (A_1 A_i A_6)\bigg)^2 ,\label{eq:zpert-top}
\end{split}
\end{align}
where the last two lines can be combined into the following closed-form expression:
\begin{align}
\text{PE} \Biggl[
\frac{2g}{(1-g)^2}
\Bigl(\sum_{i=2}^5 \frac{A_1}{A_i} +\sum_{i=2}^5 \frac{A_i}{A_6} - \frac{1}{A_1A_6^2} - A_1^2 A_6
- \sum_{2\leq i<j \leq 5} A_1 A_i A_j + \mathcal{O}(A_1^6)
\Bigr)
\Biggr].
\end{align}
We note here that when performing the Young diagram sum over $Y'$ in \eqref{eq:zpert-top} to compute the $Z_{\rm pert}$, we expand \eqref{eq:zpert-top} in terms of $A_1$ and, by $\mathcal{O}(A_1^6)$, we mean that the obtained result is explicitly compared up to $\mathcal{O}(A_1^6)$. As it is very unlikely that there will be a new term which suddenly appears in higher orders than 6 in $A_1$, we believe that there are no further terms for $\mathcal{O}(A_1^6)$.
It is clear then that \eqref{eq:zpert-top} is manifestly consistent with the equivariant index \cite{Shadchin:2005mx} for 5d $SU(6)$ gauge theory with a hypermultiplet in the rank-3 antisymmetric representation,
i.e.,
\begin{align}
\label{eq:SU6pert}
Z_{\rm pert} = \text{PE} \Biggl[
\frac{2g}{(1-g)^2}
\Bigl(\sum_{1\leq i<j \leq 6} \frac{A_i}{A_j}
- \sum_{2\leq i<j \leq 6} A_1 A_i A_j
\Bigr)
\Biggr].
\end{align}
The 1-instanton partition function $Z_1$ can be obtained from the summands of \eqref{eq:znek-su6} at Young diagrams satisfying $\sum_{i=1}^6 |Y_i|=1$. There are 6 different profiles of Young diagrams. The configuration $|Y_i| = 1$ and
$Y_{j\neq i} = \o$ contribute to $Z_{1}$ as
\begin{align}
+ \frac{g}{(1-g)^2} \frac{A_i^6}{\prod_{j \neq i} (A_i - A_j)^2}
\Bigl(-A_i \sum_{j\neq i} A_j + \sum_{j\neq i}\frac{1}{A_j} - \frac{1}{A_i} + A_i^2
\Bigr)^2.
\end{align}
Summing over all six contributions, one finds
\begin{align}
Z_1 = \sum_{i=1}^6 \frac{g}{(1-g)^2} \frac{A_i^6}{\prod_{j \neq i} (A_i - A_j)^2}
\Bigl(-A_i \sum_{j\neq i} A_j + \sum_{j\neq i}\frac{1}{A_j} - \frac{1}{A_i} + A_i^2
\Bigr)^2.
\end{align}
which is in agreement with our general 1-instanton formula \eqref{eq:1inst-formula}.
We checked that upon imposing the Higgsing condition \eqref{eq:SU6-Higgs-SU3}, i.e., $a_1 + a_5 + a_6 = 0$ and $a_2 + a_3 + a_4 = 0$, the 1-loop contribution \eqref{eq:SU6pert} can be factorized into a product of two $SU(3)$ vector multiplet indices \eqref{eq:1-loop-vec}. We also confirmed that the instanton corrections $Z_1$ and $Z_2$ obtained from the blowup recursion formulae \eqref{eq:recursion} with \eqref{eq:sun-nf-range} become
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
Z_1^{SU(6)_{3}+1{\bf TAS}}\big|_{\rm Higgsing}~&\rightarrow ~~ Z_1^{SU(3)_{3}}
\!(A_1, A_5,A_6)+Z_1^{SU(3)_{3}}\!(A_2, A_3,A_4),\\
Z_2^{SU(6)_{3}+1{\bf TAS}}\big|_{\rm Higgsing}~&\rightarrow ~~ Z_2^{SU(3)_{3}}\!(A_1, A_5,A_6)+Z_2^{SU(3)_{3}}\!(A_2, A_3,A_4) \\
&\quad+ Z_1^{SU(3)_{3}}\!(A_1, A_5,A_6)\cdot Z_1^{SU(3)_{3}}\!(A_2, A_3,A_4),
\end{split}
\end{align}
which satisfy the expected Higgsing relation \eqref{eq:SU6-Higgs-SU3}. Here, $Z_n^{SU(3)_3}$ is the Young
diagram formula \eqref{eq:SUn-young} which includes the Coulomb VEV independent contribution $Z_{\rm extra}(q)$.
\section{Conclusion} \label{sec:conclusion}
In this paper, we have found the blowup equations for the Nekrasov partition function that hold for a large set of 4d and 5d gauge theories.
We listed the theories that are determined via the blowup equations in Table \ref{tbl:list}, and tested against various examples in Section \ref{sec:example}. In particular, the blowup formula enables us to compute instanton partition functions for `exceptional' theories whose ADHM description is not known.
One of the remarkable aspects of the blowup formulae is that the instanton part of the partition function is completely determined via the perturbative part of the partition function. Let us make a couple of comments on future directions.
First, we have not given a fully general condition for the blowup formula to hold in the case of 5d $SU(N)$ gauge theory. For the case of 4d ${\cal N}=2$ theory, the general conditions for arbitrary gauge theory is given by the selection rule obtained from an unbroken subgroup of $U(1)_R$ symmetry. It would be desirable to find an analogous explanation for $d_{\text{max}}$ in 5d $SU(N)$ theories.
Secondly, there must be a broader set of blow-up relations for the 5d Nekrasov partition function ${\cal Z}$, similar to those recently found for topological string partition functions and 6d minimal SCFTs \cite{Grassi:2016nnt, Gu:2017ccq, Huang:2017mis, Gu:2018gmy,Gu:2019dan}. We expect that there exists recursion formulae, derived from the generalized blow-up equations, realize different string theory embeddings of the gauge theory. It would be very interesting if one can reveal the connection between the choice of UV embedding and the blow-up equations. In this way, it may be possible to determine the partition function even for the theories that we are not able to fix in the current paper.
Finally, we remark that though our blow-up formula is applicable to a fairly large set of theories that contain hypermultiplets of various representations, it is not clear how to implement our blow-up formula to theories with half-hypermultiplets. There exist many interesting gauge theories with half-hypermultiplets, such as trifundamentals in generalized $SU(2)$ quiver gauge theories \cite{Gaiotto:2009we} that appear in AGT correspondence \cite{Alday:2009aq} or bifundamentals in $SO-Sp$ quiver theories. To the best of our knowledge, instanton counting with half-hypermultiplet has not been studied except for \cite{Hollands:2010xa, Hollands:2011zc} some time ago, and there is recent progress in \cite{Coman:2019eex}. Our blowup formula is naturally written in terms of the representation of a full hypermultiplet, therefore it is not obvious how to incorporate half-hypermultiplet. It would be interesting to develop a way to do instanton counting for half-hypermultiplets as well.
\acknowledgments
We thank Babak Haghighat, Saebyeok Jeong, Hee-Cheol Kim, Seok Kim and Jaemo Park for discussion.
JK and JS thank the hospitality of UESTC where part of this work is done.
The work of KL and JS is partly done at the 2019 Pollica summer workshop, which was supported in part by the Simons Foundation (Simons Collaboration on the Non-perturbative Bootstrap) and in part by the INFN. KL and JS are grateful for this support.
SSK and KHL also thank APCTP for hosting the Focus program ``Strings, Branes and Gauge Theories 2019," where part of the work is done.
JK, KL, and JS also thank the Simons Center for Geometry and Physics during the Simons Summer Workshop 2019 where part of this work is done.
This work is supported in part by the UESTC Research Grant A03017023801317 (SSK), the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) Grants 2017R1D1A1B06034369 (KL, JS), and 2018R1A2B6004914 (KHL).
|
\section{Introduction}
In this short paper we study certain properties of deformations of transversely holomorphic foliations. In \cite{Noz} the authors pose the question whether the basic Hodge numbers of Sasakian manifolds are rigid under arbitrary deformations of Sasakian manifolds. This is motivated by their results on the invariance of such numbers under type I and type II deformations as well as the fact that basic Hodge numbers can be used to distinguish different Sasaki structures on a given manifold. We give a positive answer to the question i.e. we prove the following theorem:
\begin{tw}\label{main} Given a smooth family $\{(M_s,\xi_s,\eta_s,g_s,\phi_s)\}_{s\in [0,1]}$ of compact Sasakian manifolds and fixed integers $p$ and $q$ the function associating to each point $s\in [0,1]$ the basic Hodge number $h^{p,q}_s$ of $(M_s,\xi_s,\eta_s,g_s,\phi_s)$ is constant.
\end{tw}
We split the proof of this result into two theorems which are of independent interest. First we prove Theorem \ref{IfBundle} which states that the basic Hodge numbers are constant for any smooth family (over the interval $[0,1]$) of manifolds with homologically orientable transverse K\"{a}hler foliations for which the spaces of complex-valued basic Harmonic forms constitute a bundle over the interval. Since a family of Sasakian manifolds is in particular a family of homologically orientable transversely K\"{a}hler foliations all that is left to prove is that in this case the spaces of complex-valued basic harmonic forms give in fact a bundle over the interval. This is precisely the content of Theorem \ref{BundleTrue} which allows us to bypass the key difficulty of this and related problems (such as in \cite{Noz}) meaning the fact that the spaces of basic forms over each manifold do not in general form a bundle over the interval. On the way we correct a slight error in \cite{Noz} (see Remark \ref{Correction}). This Theorem strongly relies on the Sasaki structure (and not only on the transverse K\"{a}hler structure) and so the following question remains open:
\begin{ques} Are the basic Hodge numbers rigid under deformations of (homologically orientable) transversely K\"{a}hler foliations on compact manifolds?
\end{ques}
We feel that Theorem \ref{IfBundle} might be helpful in solving this more general problem. Moreover, an answer to this question would have some further use to the theory of $S$-structures which were developed in \cite{B} and are the higher dimensional (meaning the dimension of the characteristic foliation) analogue of Sasakian structures.
\newline\indent In section $4$ we develope some of the Theorems from \cite{KS} for smooth families of transversely elliptic operators on manifolds with TP foliations. We apply this to prove the upper semi-continuity Theorem of the dimensions of kernels of such operators. This in turn is applied to achieve our results in section $5$.
\newline\indent We devote the fifth and sixth section to the study of the behaviour of the basic $\partial\bar{\partial}$-lemma under deformations of transversely holomorphic foliations. We show that if the basic $\partial\bar{\partial}$-lemma holds for a foliated manifold $(M,\mathcal{F})$ then it also holds for appropriately small deformations of the transverse holomorphic structure (provided that we do not deform the foliation itself) as well as a similar rigidity theorem for being transversely K\"{a}hler. The upper-semi continuity theorems for the Bott-Chern and Aeppli cohomology together with the Fr\"{o}licher-type inequality for foliations (which was proven in \cite{My}) allow us to adapt the proofs from \cite{D1} to achieve the main results of this section. In the final section we show that the restriction on deforming the foliation is necessary by studying an example from \cite{Noz,Noz2}.
\section{Preliminaries}
\subsection{Foliations}
We provide a quick review of transverse structures on foliations.
\begin{defi} A codimension q foliation $\mathcal{F}$ on a smooth n-manifold M is given by the following data:
\begin{itemize}
\item An open cover $\mathcal{U}:=\{U_i\}_{i\in I}$ of M.
\item A q-dimensional smooth manifold $T_0$.
\item For each $U_i\in\mathcal{U}$ a submersion $f_i: U_i\rightarrow T_0$ with connected fibers (these fibers are called plaques).
\item For all intersections $U_i\cap U_j\neq\emptyset$ a local diffeomorphism $\gamma_{ij}$ of $T_0$ such that $f_j=\gamma_{ij}\circ f_i$
\end{itemize}
The last condition ensures that plaques glue nicely to form a partition of M consisting of submanifolds of M of codimension q. This partition is called a foliation $\mathcal{F}$ of M and the elements of this partition are called leaves of $\mathcal{F}$.
\end{defi}
We call $T=\coprod\limits_{U_i\in\mathcal{U}}f_i(U_i)$ the transverse manifold of $\mathcal{F}$. The local diffeomorphisms $\gamma_{ij}$ generate a pseudogroup $\Gamma$ of transformations on T (called the holonomy pseudogroup).The space of leaves $M\slash\mathcal{F}$ of the foliation $\mathcal{F}$ can be identified with $T\slash\Gamma$.
\begin{defi}
A smooth form $\omega$ on M is called basic if for any vector field X tangent to the leaves of $\mathcal{F}$ the following equality holds:
\begin{equation*}
i_X\omega=i_Xd\omega=0
\end{equation*}
Basic 0-forms will be called basic functions henceforth.
\end{defi}
Basic forms are in one to one correspondence with $\Gamma$-invariant smooth forms on T. It is clear that $d\omega$ is basic for any basic form $\omega$. Hence, the set of basic forms of $\mathcal{F}$ (denoted $\Omega^{\bullet}(M\slash\mathcal{F})$) is a subcomplex of the de Rham complex of M. We define the basic cohomology of $\mathcal{F}$ to be the cohomology of this subcomplex and denote it by $H^{\bullet}(M\slash\mathcal{F})$. A transverse structure to $\mathcal{F}$ is a $\Gamma$-invariant structure on T. For example:
\begin{defi}
$\mathcal{F}$ is said to be transversely symplectic if T admits a $\Gamma$-invariant closed 2-form $\omega$ of maximal rank. $\omega$ is then called a transverse symplectic form. As we noted earlier $\omega$ corresponds to a closed basic form of rank q on M (also denoted $\omega$).
\end{defi}
\begin{defi}
$\mathcal{F}$ is said to be transversely holomorphic if T admits a complex structure that makes all the $\gamma_{ij}$ holomorphic. This is equivalent to the existence of an almost complex structure $J$ on the normal bundle $N\mathcal{F}:=TM\slash T\mathcal{F}$ (where $T\mathcal{F}$ is the bundle tangent to the leaves) satisfying:
\begin{itemize}
\item $L_XJ=0$ for any vector field $X$ tangent to the leaves.
\item if $Y_1$ and $Y_2$ are sections of the normal bundle then:
\begin{equation*}
N_J(Y_1,Y_2):=[JY_1,JY_2]-J[Y_1,JY_2]-J[JY_1,Y_2]+J^2[Y_1,Y_2]=0
\end{equation*}
where $[$ , $]$ is the bracket induced on the sections of the normal bundle.
\end{itemize}
\end{defi}
\begin{rem}
If $\mathcal{F}$ is transversely holomorphic we have the standard decomposition of the space of complex valued forms $\Omega^{\bullet}({M\slash\mathcal{F},\mathbb{C}})$ into forms of type (p,q) and $d$ decomposes into the sum of operators $\partial$ and $\bar{\partial}$ of order (1,0) and (0,1) respectively. Hence, one can define the Dolbeault double complex $(\Omega^{\bullet,\bullet}({M\slash\mathcal{F},\mathbb{C}}),\partial,\bar{\partial})$, the Fr\"{o}licher spectral sequence and the Dolbeault cohomology as in the manifold case.
\end{rem}
\begin{defi}
$\mathcal{F}$ is said to be transversely orientable if T is orientable and all the $\gamma_{ij}$ are orientation preserving. This is equivalent to the orientability of $N\mathcal{F}$.
\end{defi}
\begin{defi}
$\mathcal{F}$ is said to be Riemannian if T has a $\Gamma$-invariant Riemannian metric. This is equivalent to the existence of a Riemannian metric g on $N\mathcal{F}$ with $L_Xg=0$ for all vector fields X tangent to the leaves.
\end{defi}
\begin{defi}
$\mathcal{F}$ is said to be transversely parallelizable (TP for short) if there exist q linearly independent $\Gamma$-invariant vector fields.
\end{defi}
Regarding TP foliation we state the following important result from \cite{F}:
\begin{tw}\label{TP} Given a Riemannian TP foliation $\mathcal{F}$ on a compact manifold $M$ the closures of the leaves of $\mathcal{F}$ are submanifolds as well as fibers of a locally trivial fibration $\pi: M\rightarrow W$ with $W$ a compact manifold. In particular they provide another foliation on $M$ for which the leaf space is a compact manifold.
\end{tw}
\begin{defi}
A foliation is said to be Hermitian if it is both transversely holomorphic and Riemannian.
\end{defi}
Throughout the rest of this chapter $\mathcal{F}$ will denote a transversely orientable Riemannian foliation on a compact manifold M. Under these assumptions we shall construct a scalar product on the space of basic forms following \cite{E1}. We start with the principal $SO(q)$-bundle $p:M^{\#}\rightarrow M$ of orthonormal frames transverse to $\mathcal{F}$. The foliation $\mathcal{F}$ lifts to a transversely parallelizable, Riemannian foliation $\mathcal{F}^{\#}$ on $M^{\#}$ of the same dimension as $\mathcal{F}$. Furthermore, this foliation is $SO(q)$-invariant (i.e. for any element $a\in SO(q)$ and any leaf $L$ of $\mathcal{F^{\#}}$, $a(L)$ is also a leaf of $\mathcal{F^{\#}}$) and the transverse metric can be chosen in such a way that it is invariant with respect to the $SO(q)$-action and the fibers of $p:M^{\#}\rightarrow M$ are of measure $1$. By Theorem \ref{TP} there exists a compact manifold $W$ and a fiber bundle $\pi:M^{\#}\rightarrow W$ with fibers equal to the closures of leaves of $\mathcal{F}^{\#}$ (one can now extend the transverse metric to a Riemannian metric on $M^{\#}$ in such a way that the fibers of this bundle have measure $1$ as well). The manifold $W$ is called the basic manifold of $\mathcal{F}$. The $SO(q)$-action on $M^{\#}$ descends to an $SO(q)$-action on $W$. It is apparent that the $SO(q)$-invariant smooth functions on $W$ and basic functions on M are in one to one correspondence. In particular, for basic k-forms $\alpha$ and $\beta$ the basic function $g_x(\alpha_x,\beta_x)$ induces a $SO(q)$-invariant function $\Phi (\alpha,\beta)(w)$ on $W$ (where $g_x$ is the scalar product induced on $\wedge^k T_x^*M$ by the Riemmanian structure). With this we can define the scalar product on basic forms:
\begin{equation*}
<\alpha,\beta>:=\int_W \Phi(\alpha,\beta)(w)d\mu (w)
\end{equation*}
Where $\mu$ is the measure associated to the metric on W. The transverse $*$-operator can be defined fiberwise on the orthogonal complements of the spaces tangent to the leaves in the standard way. This construction can be repeated for complex valued basic forms on Hermitian foliations. We use this scalar product to define $\delta$ as the operator adjoint to $d$ (i.e. such that $<d\alpha,\beta>=<\alpha,\delta\beta>$ for any forms $\alpha$ and $\beta$).
\begin{defi}
A basic differential operator of order m is a linear map $D:\Omega^{\bullet}(M\slash\mathcal{F})\rightarrow\Omega^{\bullet}(M\slash\mathcal{F})$ such that in local coordinates $(x_1,...,x_p,y_1,...,y_q)$ (where $x_i$ are leaf-wise coordinates and $y_j$ are transverse ones) it has the form:
\begin{equation*}
D=\sum\limits_{|s|\leq m}a_s(y)\frac{\partial^{|s|}}{\partial^{s_1}y_1...\partial^{s_q}y_q}
\end{equation*}
where $a_s$ are matrices of appropriate size with basic functions as coefficients. A basic differential operator is called transversely elliptic if its principal symbol is an isomorphism at all points of $x\in M$ and all non-zero, transverse, cotangent vectors at x.
\end{defi}
Due to the correspondence between basic forms of $\mathcal{F}$ and $\Gamma$-invariant forms on the transverse manifold T, a basic differential operator induces a $\Gamma$-invariant differential operator on T. Furthermore, transverse ellipticity of a basic differential operator is equivalent to the ellipticity of its $\Gamma$-invariant counterpart (this is apparent since the principal symbol is defined pointwise).
\begin{tw}(cf.\cite{E1})
Under the above assumptions the kernel of a transversely elliptic differential operator is finitely dimensional.
\end{tw}
\subsection{Basic Bott-Chern and Aeppli cohomology theories}
Let M be a manifold of dimension $n=p+2q$, endowed with a Hermitian foliation $\mathcal{F}$ of complex codimension q. Recall that a foliation satisfies the basic $\partial\bar{\partial}$-lemma if:
$$Ker(\partial)\cap Im(\bar{\partial})=Ker(\bar{\partial})\cap Im(\partial)=Im(\partial\bar{\partial}).$$
This property is thoroughly studied in the classical case in \cite{D1,C1,Del} and in the foliated case in \cite{My}. Suffice to say that in our case it induces many important cohomological properties found in transversely K\"{a}hler foliations such as the decomposition of the basic cohomology induced by the bigradin and the degeneration of the Fr\"{o}licher spectral sequence on the first page.
Using the basic Dolbeault double complex we can define the basic Bott-Chern cohomology of $\mathcal{F}$:
\begin{eqnarray*}
H^{\bullet,\bullet}_{BC}(M\slash\mathcal{F}):=\frac{Ker(\partial)\cap Ker(\bar{\partial})}{Im(\partial\bar{\partial})}
\end{eqnarray*}
where the operators $\partial$ and $\bar{\partial}$ are defined as the components of order (1,0) and (0,1) of the operator $d$ restricted to the basic forms (as mentioned earlier). Our main goal in this subsection, is to present the decomposition theorem for basic Bott-Chern cohomology. To that purpose, we define the operator:
\begin{equation*}
\Delta_{BC}:=(\partial\bar{\partial})(\partial\bar{\partial})^*+(\partial\bar{\partial})^*(\partial\bar{\partial})+
(\bar{\partial}^*\partial)(\bar{\partial}^*\partial)^*+(\bar{\partial}^*\partial)^*(\bar{\partial}^*\partial)
+\bar{\partial}^*\bar{\partial}+\partial^*\partial
\end{equation*}
where by $\partial^*$ and $\bar{\partial}^*$, we mean the operators adjoint to $\partial$ and $\bar{\partial}$, with respect to the Hermitian product, defined by the transverse Hermitian structure.
\begin{prop}
The operator $\Delta_{BC}$ is transversely elliptic and self-adjoint.
\end{prop}
\begin{tw}\label{HoBC}(Decomposition of basic Bott-Chern cohomology)
If M is a compact manifold, endowed with a Hermitian foliation $\mathcal{F}$, then we have the following decomposition:
\begin{equation*}
\Omega^{\bullet,\bullet}(M\slash\mathcal{F},\mathbb{C})=Ker(\Delta_{BC})\oplus Im(\partial\bar{\partial})\oplus (Im(\partial^*)+Im(\bar{\partial}^*))
\end{equation*}
In particular,
\begin{equation*}
H^{\bullet,\bullet}_{BC}(M\slash\mathcal{F})\cong Ker(\Delta_{BC})
\end{equation*}
and the dimension of $H^{\bullet,\bullet}_{BC}(M\slash\mathcal{F})$ is finite.
\end{tw}
We also define the basic Aeppli cohomology of $\mathcal{F}$ to be:
\begin{equation*}
H^{\bullet,\bullet}_{A}(M\slash\mathcal{F}):=\frac{Ker(\partial\bar{\partial})}{Im(\partial)+Im(\bar{\partial})}
\end{equation*}
We define a basic differential operator, needed for the decomposition theorem for the basic Aeppli cohomology of $\mathcal{F}$:
\begin{equation*}
\Delta_A:=\partial\partial^*+\bar{\partial}\bar{\partial}^*+
(\partial\bar{\partial})^*(\partial\bar{\partial})+(\partial\bar{\partial})(\partial\bar{\partial})^*+(\bar{\partial}\partial^*)^*(\bar{\partial}\partial^*)+
(\bar{\partial}\partial^*)(\bar{\partial}\partial^*)^*
\end{equation*}
\begin{prop}
$\Delta_A$ is a self-adjoint, transversely elliptic operator.
\end{prop}
\begin{tw}(Decomposition of basic Aeppli cohomology)
Let M be a compact manifold, endowed with a Hermitian foliation $\mathcal{F}$. Then we have the following decomposition:
\begin{equation*}
\Omega^{\bullet,\bullet}(M\slash\mathcal{F},\mathbb{C})=Ker(\Delta_A)\oplus (Im(\partial)+Im(\bar{\partial}))\oplus Im((\partial\bar{\partial})^*)
\end{equation*}
In particular, there is an isomorphism,
\begin{equation*}
H^{\bullet,\bullet}_A(M\slash\mathcal{F})\cong Ker(\Delta_A)
\end{equation*}
and the dimension of $H^{\bullet,\bullet}_A(M\slash\mathcal{F})$ is finite.
\end{tw}
Finally, we give a duality theorem for basic Bott-Chern and Aeppli cohomology. However, for the theorem to work, we need an additional condition on our foliation:
\begin{defi} A codimension $2q$ foliation $\mathcal{F}$ on M is called homologically orientable if $H^{2q}(M\slash\mathcal{F})=\mathbb{R}$.
\end{defi}
\begin{rem} The above condition guaranties that the following equalities hold for basic r-forms:
\begin{equation*}
\partial^*=(-1)^{q(r+1)+1}*\partial*
\quad
\bar{\partial}^*=(-1)^{q(r+1)+1}*\bar{\partial}*
\end{equation*}
where $*$ is the transverse $*$-operator. For general foliations this does not have to be true (c.f. \cite{M1}, appendix B, example 2.3 and \cite{E1}).
\end{rem}
\begin{cor}
If M is a compact manifold endowed with a Hermitian, homologically orientable foliation $\mathcal{F}$, then the transverse star operator induces an isomorphism:
\begin{equation*}
H^{p,q}_{BC}(M\slash\mathcal{F})\rightarrow H^{n-p,n-q}_A(M\slash\mathcal{F})
\end{equation*}
\end{cor}
Let us continue with the main results from \cite{My}:
\begin{tw}(Basic Fr\"{o}licher-type inequality)
Let $\mathcal{F}$ be a Hermitian foliation of codimension $q$ on a closed manifold M. Then, for every $k\in\mathbb{N}$, the following inequality holds:
\begin{equation*}
\sum\limits_{p+q=k}(dim_{\mathbb{C}}(H^{p,q}_{BC}(M\slash\mathcal{F}))+dim_{\mathbb{C}}(H^{p,q}_A(M\slash\mathcal{F})))\geq 2dim_{\mathbb{C}}(H^k(M\slash\mathcal{F},\mathbb{C}))
\end{equation*}
Furthermore, the equality holds for every $k\in\mathbb{N}$, iff $\mathcal{F}$ satisfies the $\partial\bar{\partial}$-lemma.
\end{tw}
\subsection{Sasakian Manifolds}
We provide a quick recollection of properties of Sasakian Manifolds used in this paper:
\begin{defi} A Sasakian Manifold $(M,g,\xi,\eta,\phi)$ is a $(2n+1)$-dimensional Manifold $M$ together with a Riemannian metric $g$, a Killing vector field $\xi$ a $1$-form $\eta$, and a $(1,1)$ tensor field $\phi$ satisfying for any point $x\in M$ and $X,Y\in T_xM$:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\eta_x\wedge (d\eta^n)_x\neq 0 & \phi^{2}_x(X)=-X+\eta_x(X)\xi_x & \eta_x(\phi_x(X))=0\\
\eta_x(X)=g_x(\xi_x,X) & (d\eta_x)(X,Y)=g_x(\phi_x X,Y)& g_x(\xi_x,\xi_x)=1\\
&g_x(\phi_x(X),\phi_x(Y))=g_x(X,Y)-\eta_x(X)\eta_x(Y)&
\end{eqnarray*}
and additionally the Nijenhuis tensor $[\phi,\phi]$ satisfies:
$$[\phi,\phi](X,Y)+2d\eta(X,Y)\xi=0$$
for any vector fields $X$ and $Y$.
\end{defi}
It is well known that for the homologically orientable foliation $\mathcal{F}$ induced by $\xi$ these tensors define a transverse K\"{a}hler structure by identifying $N\mathcal{F}$ with $\xi^{\perp}$.
\newline\indent Aside from the abundance of properties contained in the above definition and properties of homologically orientable transversely K\"{a}hler foliations we are going to need the following two results:
\begin{prop} For a Sasakian manifold the standard inner product on forms restricted to $\xi^{\perp}$ induced by $g$ can be written in terms of the basic star operator $*_b$ through the formula:
$$<\alpha,\beta>:=\int_M \eta\wedge\alpha\wedge *_b\beta$$
\end{prop}
\begin{tw}\label{BG} Given an odd dimensional manifold $M$ any two Sasaki structures on $M$ have the same basic Betti numbers.
\end{tw}
The later can be found in \cite{BG} (Theorem $7.4.14$).
\section{Invariance of basic Hodge numbers under deformations of Sasakian manifolds}
We start by reducing the problem to proving that the spaces of complex-valued basic harmonic $k$-forms $\mathcal{H}^k_s$ of $(\mathcal{M}_s,\mathcal{F}_s)$ form a bundle over $[0,1]$.
\begin{tw}\label{IfBundle} Let $\{(M_s,\mathcal{F}_s)\}_{s\in [0,1]}$ be a smooth family of homologically orientable transversely K\"{a}hler foliations on compact manifolds such that $\mathcal{H}^k_s$ forms a smooth family of constant dimension for any $k\in\mathbb{N}$. For a fixed pair of integers $(p,q)$ the function associating to each point $s\in [0,1]$ the basic Hodge number $h^{p,q}_s$ of $(M_s,\mathcal{F}_s)$ is constant.
\begin{proof} Using the fact that the kernels of the operators $\Delta$ and $\Delta_{\bar{\partial}}:=\bar{\partial}\bar{\partial}^*+\bar{\partial}^*\bar{\partial}$ are equal under our assumptions (see \cite{E1}) we get the equality:
$$\mathcal{H}^k_s=\bigoplus\limits_{p+q=k}\mathcal{H}^{p,q}_s,$$
where $\mathcal{H}^{p,q}_s$ denotes the kernel of $(\Delta_{\bar{\partial}})_s$ on forms of type $(p,q)$ which is isomorphic to $H^{p,q}(M_s\slash\mathcal{F}_s)$.
Hence, it is sufficient to restrict our attention to the bundle $\mathcal{H}^k_s$. Consider the action of $J_s$ on basic forms given by:
\begin{equation*}
J_s\alpha(X_1,...,X_k)=\sum\limits_{i=1}^k \alpha(X_1,...,J_sX_i,...,X_k),
\end{equation*}
for any $k$ normal sections $X_1,...,X_k\in\Gamma(N\mathcal{F}_s)$ (see e.g. the Lie algebra action in \cite{Gul} for motivation). The spaces $\mathcal{H}^{p,q}_s$ are precisely the $i(p-q)$-eigenspaces of the restriction of $J_s$ to harmonic basic k-forms (note that this operation restricts to a linear operator on $\mathcal{H}^k_s$ due to the decomposition above). With this we can write:
$$\mathcal{H}^{p,q}_s=Ker(J_s|_{\mathcal{H}^k_s}-i(p-q)Id_{\mathcal{H}^k_s}).$$
Taking any $s_0\in [0,1]$ we know (via a standard rank argument) that we can choose a small neighbourhood $U_{p,q}$ of $s_0$ such that the dimension of $Ker(J_s|_{\mathcal{H}^k_s}-i(p-q)Id_{\mathcal{H}^k_s})$ cannot be greater then the dimension of $Ker(J_{s_0}|_{\mathcal{H}^k_{s_0}}-i(p-q)Id_{\mathcal{H}^k_{s_0}})$ for $s\in U_{p,q}$. On the other hand, by our assumptions the direct sum $\bigoplus\limits_{p+q=k}\mathcal{H}^{p,q}_s$ has constant dimension which implies that the dimension of $\mathcal{H}^{p,q}$ cannot drop on $\bigcap\limits_{p+q=k} U_{p,q}$ (since then the dimension of $\mathcal{H}^{p',q'}$ for some other pair $(p',q')$ with $p'+q'=k$ would have to increase to compensate for the loss). This proves that the basic Hodge numbers $h^{p,q}_s$ are locally constant with respect to $s$ and so they are in fact constant.
\end{proof}
\end{tw}
As we already mentioned in the introduction the main difficulty of the problem is to work around the fact that basic forms may not constitute a bundle over the interval. The first step of dealing with this problem is to consider transverse $k$-forms (i.e. forms $\alpha$ such that $i_{\xi_s}\alpha=0$) we denote the space of such forms by $\Omega^{T,k}_s$ (a similar approach was proposed in e.g. \cite{E2,Noz}). On such forms it is natural to consider the operator $d_T:=\pi(d)$ where $\pi$ is the projection onto transverse forms given by the Riemannian metric. Its adjoint $\delta_T$ is given by the formula:
$$\delta_T:=(-1)^k\star_b^{-1} d_T \star_{b},$$
Which due to homological orientability coincides on basic forms with the basic coderivative $\delta_b$. This allows us to define the transverse Laplace operator in a fashion similar to \cite{E2,Noz}:
$$\Delta^T:=\mathcal{L}_{\xi}\mathcal{L}_{\xi}-\delta_Td_T-d_T\delta_T,$$
and similarly as in \cite{Noz} we can prove the following lemma:
\begin{lem}
The operator $\Delta^T:\Omega^{k,T}\rightarrow \Omega^{k,T}$ is strongly elliptic and self-adjoint.
\begin{proof}
Around any point $x_0$ take a local coordinate chart $(t,x_1,y_1,...,x_n,y_n)$ where $\xi=\frac{\partial}{\partial t}$ and $(x_1,y_1,...,x_n,y_n)$ are transverse holomorphic coordinates such that $(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_1},\frac{\partial}{\partial y_1},...\frac{\partial}{\partial x_n},\frac{\partial}{\partial y_n})$ are orthonormal over $x_0$ and $\eta=dt+\sum\limits_{i=0}^n x_idy_i$. In such coordinates the principal symbol $\sigma(\delta_{T}d_T+d_T\delta_T)$ coincide with that of the Laplacian $\Delta_b$ on the planes $t=0$ (to see this note that in these coordinates $\pi(dt)=-\sum\limits_{i=0}^n x_idy_i$ and so after writing the operator in local coordinates we see that aside from the parts present in $\Delta_b$ the additional components are either of degree less then $2$ or are a multiple of some $x_i$ and hence in either case do not contribute to the symbol over $x_0$). For $\alpha:=\alpha_0dt+\sum\limits_{i=1}^n \alpha_{2i-1}dx_i+\alpha_2idy_i\in T^*_{x_0}M$ let $\sigma_{\alpha}(\Delta_{T})$ be the symbol of $\Delta^T$ at $\alpha$. The symbol $\sigma_{\alpha}(\frac{\partial^2}{\partial^2 t})=\alpha_0^2Id_{(\Omega^{k,T})_{x_0}}$, while the symbol of $\Delta_b$ is given by $\sigma(\Delta_b)=-(\sum\limits_{i=1}^{2n}\alpha_i^2)Id_{(\Omega^{k,T})_{x_0}}$ (see \cite{V} Lemma 5.18). This shows that the symbol $\sigma_{\alpha}(\Delta^T)=||\alpha||^2Id_{(\Omega^{k,T})_{x_0}}$ and so the operator is in fact strongly elliptic.
\newline\indent Since $\delta_{T}d_T+d_T\delta_T$ is self-adjoint it suffices to prove that $\mathcal{L}_{\xi}$ is skew-symmetric. For $\alpha_1,\alpha_2\in\Omega^{k,T}$ we have:
$$\mathcal{L}_{\xi}(\eta\wedge\alpha_1\wedge*_b\overline{\alpha_2})=\eta\wedge\mathcal{L}_{\xi}(\alpha_1)\wedge*_b\overline{\alpha_2}+\eta\wedge\alpha_1\wedge*_b\mathcal{L}_{\xi}\overline{\alpha_2},$$
since $\mathcal{L}_{\xi}\eta=0$ and $\mathcal{L}_{\xi}*_b=*_b\mathcal{L}_{\xi}$. Hence, we only need to prove that the left hand side integrates to zero over $M$. But we can write it as:
$$di_{\xi}(\eta\wedge\alpha_1\wedge*_b\overline\alpha_2)=d(\alpha_1\wedge*_b\overline\alpha_2),$$
now it suffices to note that the right hand-side is exact and hence integrates to zero.
\end{proof}
\end{lem}
\begin{rem}\label{Correction} In \cite{Noz} it is claimed that the form $d(\alpha_1\wedge*_b\overline\alpha_2)$ is itself zero which would also imply our theorem as well as the corresponding theorem in \cite{Noz}. This however is not true since the proof uses transverse forms and not basic ones. More concretely taking $k$-even one can consider the forms $\alpha_1=(d\eta)^{\frac{k}{2}}$ and $\alpha_2=f(d\eta)^{\frac{k}{2}}$ where $f$ is any function on $M$ which is non constant in the $\xi$ direction. It is apparent that $\mathcal{L}_{\xi}(\eta\wedge\alpha_1\wedge*_b\overline\alpha_2)\neq 0$
\newline\indent One can alternatively prove this by computing the adjoint of $\mathcal{L}_{\xi}$ (treated as an operator on $\Omega^{k}(M,\mathbb{C})$) using the formula $\mathcal{L}_{\xi}=di_{\xi}+i_{\xi}d$ along with the fact that $i_{\xi}^*=\eta\wedge$. By standard Hodge theory one arrives at the formula $\eta\wedge=(-1)^k*^{-1}i_{\xi}*$ and using the fact that $\mathcal{L}_{\xi}*=*\mathcal{L}_{\xi}$ one finds that:
$$\mathcal{L}_{\xi}^*=-\mathcal{L}_{\xi}.$$
Now all that is left to prove is that being an adjoint on $\Omega^k(M,\mathbb{C})$ implies being an adjoint on $\Omega^{k,T}$which readily follows from the equalities:
$$\int_M\eta\wedge\mathcal{L}_{xi}\alpha_1\wedge *_b\overline{\alpha}_2=\int_M\mathcal{L}_{xi}\alpha_1\wedge *\overline{\alpha}_2=-\int_M\alpha_1\wedge *\mathcal{L}_{xi}\overline{\alpha}_2=-\int_M\eta\wedge\alpha_1\wedge *_b\mathcal{L}_{xi}\overline{\alpha}_2$$
\end{rem}
With this we can now finish the proof of Theorem \ref{main} by proving the following result:
\begin{tw}\label{BundleTrue} Let $\{(M_s,\xi_s,\eta_s,g_s,\phi_s)\}_{s\in [0,1]}$ be a smooth family of compact Sasakian manifolds over an interval. Then the spaces $\mathcal{H}^k_s$ of complex-valued basic harmonic $k$-forms on $M_s$ constitute a bundle over $[0,1]$.
\begin{proof} We start by using the results of \cite{KS} in a fashion similar to \cite{Noz} in order to contain our problem in some smooth vector bundle (with fibers of finite dimension). Using the Spectral Theorem for smooth families of strongly elliptic self-ajoint operators (see Theorem $1$ of \cite{KS}) for the family $\Delta^{k,T}_s$ we get a complete system of eigensections $\{e_{sh}\}_{h\in{\mathbb{N}}, s\in[0,1]}$ together with the corresponding eigenvalues $\lambda_h(s)$ which form an ascending sequence in $[0,\infty)$ with a single accumulation point at infinity. Fix a point $s_0\in[0,1]$ and let $k_0$ be the largest number such that for $h\in\{1,...,k_0\}$ we have $\lambda_h(s_0)=0$. Consider the family of vector spaces $\mathcal{E}_s=span\{e_{sh}\text{ }|\text{ }h\in\{1,...,k_0\}\}$. Since the only accumulation point of the sequence $\lambda_{h}(s_0)$ is infinity we can find a small disc around $0$ in $\mathbb{C}$ such that the only eigenvalue of $\Delta^{k,T}_{s_0}$ contained in this disc is zero. Using Theorem $2$ of \cite{KS} we establish that for each $h$ the eigenvalues $\lambda_h(s)$ form a continuous function and hence in a small neighbourhood $U$ of $s_0$ all $s\in U$ are contained in this disc as well. This allows us to conclude by using Theorem 3 of \cite{KS} that $P_{\mathcal{E}_s}(\tilde{e}_{sh})$ for $h\in\{1,...,k_0\}$ form smooth sections of $\Omega^{k,T}$ over a small neighbourhood $U'\subset U$ of $s_0$ which span $\mathcal{E}_s$ (where $P_{\mathcal{E}_s}$ is the projection onto $\mathcal{E}_s$ and $\tilde{e}_{sh}$ are the extensions of $e_{s_0h}$ with the use of some partition of unity over $[0,1]$). Shrinking the neighbourhood is necessary to retain linear independence of $\tilde{e}_{sh}$. Hence, we have shown that $\mathcal{E}_s$ form a bundle over $U'$.
\newline\indent Now we consider the operator $\mathcal{L}_{\xi_s}:\mathcal{E}_s\rightarrow \Omega^{k,T}_s$. Note that $Ker\mathcal{L}_{\xi_{s_0}}=\mathcal{H}^k_{s_0}$. Via a standard rank argument there is a small neighbourhood $U''\subset U'$ of $s_0$ such that $dim(Ker\mathcal{L}_{\xi_{s_0}})\geq dim(Ker\mathcal{L}_{\xi_{s}})$. However, $Ker\mathcal{L}_{\xi_{s}}\supset \mathcal{H}^k_s$ and since $dim(\mathcal{H}^k_s)=dim(\mathcal{H}^k_{s_0})$ (by Theorem \ref{BG}) we have the following:
$$dim(Ker\mathcal{L}_{\xi_{s_0}})\geq dim(Ker\mathcal{L}_{\xi_{s}})\geq dim(\mathcal{H}^k_s)=dim(\mathcal{H}^k_{s_0})=dim(Ker\mathcal{L}_{\xi_{s_0}}).$$
Hence, all of the dimensions above are equal and $Ker\mathcal{L}_{\xi_{s}}= \mathcal{H}^k_s$. But this implies that $\mathcal{H}^k_s$ can be described as a kernel of a morphism of bundles and since its dimension is constant we conclude that it is a bundle (over $U''$). It immediately follows that $\mathcal{H}^k_s$ forms a bundle over $[0,1]$ since it is a family of subspaces of a bundle with local trivializations around any point.
\end{proof}
\end{tw}
\section{Upper-semi continuity of dimensions of kernels of transversely elliptic operators}
We start by proving some of the results from \cite{KS} for smooth families of transversely elliptic selfadjoint operators on manifolds with TP foliations. The key tools here are the corresponding Theorems from \cite{KS} as well as methods and constructions from \cite{E1} .
\begin{tw}\label{KS1} Let $M$ be a compact manifold with a codimension $q$ homologically orientable TP Riemannian foliation and let $D:\Omega^k(M\slash\mathcal{F})\rightarrow \Omega^k(M\slash\mathcal{F})$ be a transversely elliptic operator of even order. Then there exists a complete orthonormal set of eigenfunctions $e_h\in \Omega^k(M\slash\mathcal{F})$ with corresponding real eigenvalues $\lambda_h$. Moreover, we can arrange them in such order that the eigenvalues grow and their only possible accumulation point is infinity.
\begin{proof}
First let us note that if our foliation has a dense leaf then the corresponding basic $k$-forms are a finitely dimensional vector space $V$ so the Theorem is trivially true. For a TP foliation it is known that the leaf closures form a bundle over some manifold $W$. Note that there is a natural one to one correspondence between smooth sections of the bundle with fiber over a point $w\in W$ of the form $V_{w}\oplus\Omega^k_w(W)$ (this is the so called useful bundle of \cite{E3}) and basic forms of $\mathcal{F}$. The operator $D$ induces then a self-adjoint elliptic operator $\tilde{D}$ (via this correspondence) acting on the useful bundle over $W$ (in \cite{E1,E2} it was proven that the spaces $V_w$ form a bundle over $W$ and that the operator $\tilde{D}$ acting on this bundle has the desired properties). Now by applying Theorem 1 from \cite{KS} to $\tilde{D}:\Gamma(V)\oplus\Omega^k(W)\rightarrow \Gamma(V)\oplus\Omega^k(W)$ we get our desired result.
\end{proof}
\end{tw}
In the exact same fashion we can adapt Theorems 2 and 3 from \cite{KS} to this context. Hence, we get the following Theorems:
\begin{tw}\label{KS2} Let $M$ be a compact manifold with a codimension $q$ homologically orientable TP Riemannian foliation and let $D_s:\Omega^k(M\slash\mathcal{F})\rightarrow \Omega^k(M\slash\mathcal{F})$ be a family of transversely elliptic operator of even order. Then the eigenvalues $\lambda_h(s)$ in the previous theorem form continuous functions.
\end{tw}
\begin{tw}\label{KS3} Under the assumptions of Theorem \ref{KS2} we put $\mathcal{E}_s:=span\{e_{sh_i}\text{ }|\text{ }i\in\{1,...,l\}\}$ where $e_{sh_i}$ are the eigenfunctions from Theorem \ref{KS1} for the operator $D_s$ such that the corresponding eigenvalues constitute a set of all the eigenvalues contained in some bounded domain $U$ in $\mathbb{C}$ which has no eigenvalues on its boundary. Then the projections onto $\mathcal{E}_s$ depend smoothly on $s$.
\end{tw}
We take the time to pose the following question:
\begin{ques} Can these theorems be further generalized to arbitrary Riemannian foliations?
\end{ques}
Now we are ready to prove the main theorem of this section:
\begin{tw} Let $M$ be a compact manifold with a codimension $q$ homologically orientable Riemannian foliation and let $D_s:\Omega^k(M\slash\mathcal{F})\rightarrow \Omega^k(M\slash\mathcal{F})$ be a family of transversely elliptic operator of even order $m$. Denote $h(s):=dimKer(D)$. Then $h(s)$ is upper semi-continuous.
\begin{proof} We start by lifting the foliation $\mathcal{F}$ to a foliation $\mathcal{F}^{\#}$ on the total space $M^{\#}$ of the bundle of orthonormal frames transverse to $\mathcal{F}$. As we already mentioned in the preliminary section $\mathcal{F}^{\#}$ is TP. Moreover, we have an action of $G=SO(q)$ on $M^{\#}$ such that there is a natural one to one correspondence between $G$-invariant basic forms on $(M^{\#},\mathcal{F}^{\#})$ and basic forms on $(M,\mathcal{F})$ (see \cite{E1} for details). We can now lift the family of operators $D_s$ to a family $D_s^{\#}$ of operators on $M^{\#}$. However, the members of this family are usually not transversely elliptic. To remedy this we consider the family $D_s'$ defined by the formula:
$$D_s':=D_s^{\#}+(-1)^{\frac{m}{2}}(\sum_{i=1}^{N}\mathcal{L}_{Q_i}\mathcal{L}_{Q_i})^{\frac{m}{2}}.$$
where $Q_1,...,Q_N$ are the fundamental vector fields of the $G$-action on $M^{\#}$.
\newline\indent Noting that $Q_i$ are killing (with respect to the transverse metric) via a similar argument as in remark \ref{Correction} we observe that the operators $\mathcal{L}_{Q_i}\mathcal{L}_{Q_i}$ (and hence $D_s'$) are self-adjoint. More precisely, one can prove this by computing the adjoint of $\mathcal{L}_{Q_i}$ (treated as an operator on $\Omega^{k}(M,\mathbb{C})$) using the formula $\mathcal{L}_{Q_i}=di_{Q_i}+i_{Q_i}d$ and the equality $ \delta=(-1)^{k+1}*_bd*_b$ which is true due to homological orientabilty. By standard Hodge theory one arrives at the formula $i_{Q_i}^{*}=(-1)^k*_b^{-1}i_{Q_i}*_b$ and using the fact that $\mathcal{L}_{Q_i}*_b=*_b\mathcal{L}_{Q_i}$ one finds that:
$$\mathcal{L}_{Q_i}^*=-\mathcal{L}_{Q_i}.$$
Due to the results of \cite{E1} the operators $D_s'$ are also strongly transversely elliptic. Note that $D_s'$ coincides on $G$-invariant forms with the operator defined using the identification of $G$-invariant basic forms on $(M^{\#},\mathcal{F}^{\#})$ and basic forms on $(M,\mathcal{F})$.
\newline\indent We finish the proof by using our adaptations of theorems \cite{KS} in a fashion similar to \cite{Noz} with respect to the family $D'_s$. Using Theorem \ref{KS1} for the family $D'_s$ we get a complete system of eigensections $\{e_{sh}\}_{h\in{\mathbb{N}}, s\in[0,1]}$ together with the corresponding eigenvalues $\lambda_h(s)$ which form an ascending sequence in $[0,\infty)$ with (at most) a single accumulation point at infinity. Fix a point $s_0\in[0,1]$ and let $k_0$ be the largest number such that for $h\in\{1,...,k_0\}$ we have $\lambda_h{s_0}=0$. Consider the family of vector spaces $\mathcal{E}_s=span\{e_{sh}\text{ }|\text{ }h\in\{1,...,k_0\}\}$. Since the only accumulation point of the sequence $\lambda_{h}(s_0)$ is infinity we can find a small disc around $0$ in $\mathbb{C}$ such that the only eigenvalue of $D'_{s_0}$ contained in this disc is zero. Using Theorem \ref{KS2} we establish that for each $h$ the eigenvalues $\lambda_h(s)$ form a continuous function and hence in a small neighbourhood $U$ of $s_0$ all $s\in U$ are contained in this disc as well. This allows us to conclude by using Theorem \ref{KS3} that $P_{\mathcal{E}_s}(\tilde{e}_{sh})$ for $h\in\{1,...,k_0\}$ form smooth sections of $\Omega^{k}(M\slash\mathcal{F})$ over a small neighbourhood $U'\subset U$ of $s_0$ which span $\mathcal{E}_s$ (where $P_{\mathcal{E}_s}$ is the projection onto $\mathcal{E}_s$ and $\tilde{e}_{sh}$ are the extensions of $e_{s_0h}$ with the use of some partition of unity over $[0,1]$). Shrinking the neighbourhood is necessary to retain linear independence of $\tilde{e}_{sh}$. Hence, we have shown that $\mathcal{E}_s$ form a bundle over $U'$.
\newline\indent Note that since the $G$-action commutes with $D'$ (by the definition of $D'$) and $\mathcal{E}_s$ is a sum of eigenspaces for each $s$ we have a well defined action of $G$ on the family $\mathcal{E}_s$. Let $\mathcal{E}^G_s$ denote the subspace of $\mathcal{E}_s$ consisting of $G$-invariant forms. Due to the fact that representations of compact Lie groups do not change their isomorphism class under smooth deformations we have that $\mathcal{E}^{G}_s$ form a bundle over $U'$. Finally, note that we have:
$$dim(Ker(D_{s_0}))=dim((Ker (D'_{s_0}))^G)=dim(\mathcal{E}^G_s)\geq dim((Ker (D'_{s}))^G)=dim(Ker(D_{s})),$$
for $s\in U'$. This concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
\end{tw}
\begin{rem} Homological orientability is necessary for the self adjointness of $\mathcal{L}_{Q_i}\mathcal{L}_{Q_i}$ as otherwise a correction term appears in the formula for $\delta$. One could remedy this by taking $\mathcal{L}_{Q_i}\mathcal{L}^*_{Q_i}$ instead but then the operators $D'_s$ do not coincide with $D_s$ on basic forms (via the aforementioned correspondence).
\end{rem}
\begin{rem} The above discussion can be easily adapted to complex valued forms and their bi-gradation. Moreover, this can be done even if the transverse holomorphic structures varies with $s$. To see this note that $\pi:(N\mathcal{F})^*\otimes\mathbb{C}\rightarrow (N^{0,1}\mathcal{F})^*_s$ induces an isomorphism between $(N^{0,1}\mathcal{F})^*_{s_0}$ and $(N^{0,1}\mathcal{F})^*_{s_1}$ which preserves basic forms for $s_1$ sufficiently close to $s_0$.
\end{rem}
\begin{cor}\label{uSemi} Let $(M_s,\mathcal{F}_s)$ be a smooth family of compact manifolds with homologically orientable transversely Hermitian foliations such that $\mathcal{F}_{s_1}=\mathcal{F}_{s_2}$ for $s_1,s_2\in [0,1]$ and denote $h^{p,q}_{BC}(s):=dim(H^{p,q}_{BC}(M_s\slash\mathcal{F}_s))$. Then $h^{p,q}_{BC}(s)$ is upper semi-continuous.
\begin{proof} Consider the family $(\Delta_{BC})_s$ of transversely elliptic differential operators. Then by Theorem \ref{HoBC} we have:
$$dim(Ker((\Delta_{BC})_s)|_{\Omega^{p,q}(M_s\slash\mathcal{F}_s,\mathbb{C})})=dim(H^{p,q}_{BC}(M_s\slash\mathcal{F}_s,\mathbb{C})).$$
Hence, after choosing a point $s_0\in [0,1]$ we see that in a sufficiently small neighbourhood $U$ of $s_0$ the dimension of $H^{p,q}_{BC}(M_s\slash\mathcal{F}_s,\mathbb{C})$ can only drop (since they are described as a kernel of a linear operator).
\end{proof}
\end{cor}
\begin{rem} Similar corollaries analogously follow for Dolbeault and Aeppli cohomology theories. One needs to use then the operators $\Delta_{\bar{\partial}}$ and $\Delta_A$.
\end{rem}
\section{Deformations of the transverse holomorphic structure with fixed foliation}
Throughout this section we assume that $\{J_s\}_{s\in[0,1]}$ is a smooth family of transverse Hermitian structures on a compact homologically orientable foliated manifold $(M,\mathcal{F})$ (such deformations were already considered in \cite{G} under the name $f$-deformations). In this section we will show that if $(M,\mathcal{F},J_{s_0})$ satisfies the $\partial\bar{\partial}$-lemma (resp. admits a transverse K\"{a}hler structure) then there exists a neighbourhood $U$ of $s_0$ such that for $s\in U$ the transversly holomorphicly foliated manifold $(M,\mathcal{F},J_{s})$ satisfies the $\partial\bar{\partial}$-lemma (resp. admits a transverse K\"{a}hler structure). We shall show in the subsequent section that this is not the case when the foliation is deformed as well. We will use the notation $(M_s,\mathcal{F}_s)$ instead of $(M,\mathcal{F},J_{s})$ to point out which transverse holomorphic structure is being considered. With the upper semi-continuity theorem of the previous section the rigidity of basic $\partial\bar{\partial}$-lemma is a simple consequence of the foliated version of the Fr\"{o}licher type inequality.
\begin{tw} Let $(M_s,\mathcal{F}_s)$ be a smooth family of compact manifolds with transversely Hermitian homologically orientable foliations such that $\mathcal{F}_{s_1}=\mathcal{F}_{s_2}$ for $s_1,s_2\in [0,1]$. If $(M_{s_0},\mathcal{F}_{s_0})$ satisfies the $\partial\bar{\partial}$-lemma then there exists a neighbourhood $U$ of $s_0$ such that for $s\in U$ the transversly Hermitian foliated manifold $(M_s,\mathcal{F}_s)$ satisfies the $\partial\bar{\partial}$-lemma.
\begin{proof} Using Corollary \ref{uSemi} and the remark that follows we know that the dimensions of both the Bott-Chern and Aeppli cohomologies can only drop on a sufficiently small neighbourhood $U$ of $s_0$. Since $(M_{s_0},\mathcal{F}_{s_0})$ satisfies the $\partial\bar{\partial}$-lemma we have the equality:
$$\sum\limits_{p+q=k}(dim_{\mathbb{C}}(H^{p,q}_{BC}(M_{s_0}\slash\mathcal{F}_{s_0}))+dim_{\mathbb{C}}(H^{p,q}_A(M_{s_0}\slash\mathcal{F}_{s_0})))= 2dim_{\mathbb{C}}(H^k(M_{s_0}\slash\mathcal{F}_{s_0},\mathbb{C})),$$
while the Fr\"{o}licher-type inequality applied to $(M_s,\mathcal{F}_s)$ for $s\in U$ prevents the dimensions of Bott-Chern and Aeppli cohomologies from dropping (since the foliations $\mathcal{F}_s$ coincide for all $s\in [0,1]$).
\end{proof}
\end{tw}
\begin{tw} Let $(M_s,\mathcal{F}_s)$ be a smooth family of compact manifolds with transversely Hermitian homologically orientable foliations such that $\mathcal{F}_{s_1}=\mathcal{F}_{s_2}$ for $s_1,s_2\in [0,1]$. If $(M_{s_0},\mathcal{F}_{s_0})$ is transversely K\"{a}hler then there exists a neighbourhood $U$ of $s_0$ such that for $s\in U$ the transversely Hermitian foliated manifold $(M_s,\mathcal{F}_s)$ is transversely K\"{a}hler.
\begin{proof}Using the Fr\"{o}licher type inequality and Theorem \ref{uSemi} we can again conclude that the dimensions of $Ker(\Delta_{BC})$ are constant (in some small neighbourhood of $s_0$). Using Theorem \ref{KS3} we know that the projection $\pi^{\#}_s:\Omega^{1,1}(M^{\#}\slash\mathcal{F}^{\#})\rightarrow Ker((\Delta'_{BC})_s)$ depends smoothly on $s$. Hence, by restricting $\pi^{\#}$ to $G$-invariant forms and noting that $(\Delta'_{BC})_s$ preserve basic forms we conclude that the same is true for the projection $\pi_s:\Omega^{1,1}(M\slash\mathcal{F})\rightarrow Ker((\Delta_{BC})_s)$. Put:
$$\omega_s:=\frac{1}{2}(\pi_s\omega_{s_0}+\overline{\pi_s\omega_{s_0}}),$$
where $\omega_{s_0}$ is the transverse k\"{a}hler form on $(M_{s_0},\mathcal{F}_{s_0})$ (note that no collision arises since for $\pi_{s_0}$ the expression on the right is in fact equal to $\omega_{s_0}$). Note that the forms $\omega_s$ are real and closed (since they are in $Ker(\Delta_{BC})$). Invariance under $J_s$ follows from being $(1,1)$-forms. Moreover, for $s$ sufficiently close to $s_0$ these forms are non-degenerate and $\omega_s(J_sv,v)\geq 0$. Hence, the forms $\omega_s$ are in fact K\"{a}hler forms for $(M_s,\mathcal{F}_s)$.
\end{proof}
\end{tw}
We also want to present the following simple corollary of the Theorem \ref{uSemi}:
\begin{cor} Let $(M_s,\mathcal{F}_s)$ be a smooth family of compact manifolds with homologically orientable transversely K\"{a}hler foliations such that $\mathcal{F}_{s_1}=\mathcal{F}_{s_2}$ for $s_1,s_2\in [0,1]$. For fixed integers $p$ and $q$ the function associating to each point $s\in [0,1]$ the basic Hodge number $h^{p,q}_s$ of $(M_s,\mathcal{F}_s)$ is constant.
\begin{proof} For transversely K\"{a}hler foliations we have the equality:
$$\sum\limits_{i+j=k}h^{i,j}=h^k,$$
where $h^k$ denotes the basic Betti numbers. Theorem \ref{uSemi} implies that the numbers $h^{i,j}$ cannot increase and hence for the equality to be preserved they have to remain constant.
\end{proof}
\end{cor}
\section{Example}
We recall an example of a family of transversely Hermitian foliations presented in \cite{Noz}. Let $M:=\mathbb{S}^1\times\mathbb{S}^1\times\mathbb{S}^3$. Define $\xi_1$ to be the vector field tangent to the first circle in the product and $\xi_0$ to be the vector field tangent to the fibers of the Hopf fibration (with total space $\mathbb{S}^3$). Let $\xi_s= (1-s)\xi_0+s\xi_1$ and let $\mathcal{F}_s$ denote the foliation of dimension $1$ defined by $\xi_s$. The transverse Hermitian structure is taken from the leaf space $\mathbb{T}^2\times\mathbb{S}^2$ (resp. transverse manifold $\{*\}\times\mathbb{S}^1\times\mathbb{S}^3$) for $s=0$ (resp. $s\in (0,1]$). Equivalently, one can define the transverse holomorphic structure by specyfying the almost complex structure $J$ since the manifold $M$ is parallelizable. In this case one takes $J$ evaluated on the vector field tangent to the second circle to be the orthogonal complement of $\xi_s$ in the tori which are generated by the vector fields $\xi_0$ and $\xi_1$ (the evaluation on the vector fields complementary to $\xi_1$ in the parallelization of $\mathbb{S}^3$ does not change).
\begin{rem} Since the leaf space of $\mathcal{F}_0$ is precisely $\mathbb{T}^2\times\mathbb{S}^2$ it is in fact transversely K\"{a}hler. For $s\in(0,1]$ the transverse manifold of this foliation can be taken to be $\{*\}\times\mathbb{S}^1\times\mathbb{S}^3$ which admits no closed non-degenerate $2$-form. Hence, these foliations are not transversely symplectic. This proves that being transversely K\"{a}hler is not a rigid property under small deformations if the foliations are allowed to vary.
\end{rem}
Since $(M_0,\mathcal{F}_0)$ is transversely K\"{a}hler it has to also satisfy the $\partial\bar{\partial}$-lemma. We will show that for $s\in [0,1]\backslash\mathbb{Q}$ this lemma does not hold and so we will disprove rigidity of this property when the foliation is allowed to vary.
Note that $\mathbb{S}^3\times\mathbb{S}^1$ is a Lie group which has a basis of one forms $\{\alpha_1,\alpha_2,\alpha_3,\alpha_4\}$ invariant under the action of this group on itself and such that:
$$d\alpha_1=-2\alpha_2\wedge\alpha_3$$
$$d\alpha_2=2\alpha_1\wedge\alpha_3$$
$$d\alpha_3=-2\alpha_1\wedge\alpha_2$$
$$d\alpha_4=0$$
We define the corresponding basis of $(1,0)$ forms by:
$$\beta_1=\alpha_1+i\alpha_2$$
$$\beta_2=\alpha_3+i\alpha_4$$
From this we can easily compute that:
$$\bar{\partial}\beta_1=i\beta_1\wedge\overline{\beta_2}$$
$$\bar{\partial}\beta_2=-i\beta_1\wedge\overline{\beta_1}$$
$$\bar{\partial}\overline{\beta}_1=i\overline{\beta}_1\wedge\overline{\beta_2}$$
$$\bar{\partial}\overline{\beta}_2=0$$
Note that since all these forms are invariant under the action of $\mathbb{S}^3\times\mathbb{S}^1$ they also satisfy $\mathcal{L}_{\xi_s}\beta_i=0$ and hence they are a basis (over $\mathcal{C}^{\infty}(M_s\slash\mathcal{F}_s)$) of basic forms. Note also that for $s\in [0,1]\backslash\mathbb{Q}$ the basic functions are precisely the functions constant in the directions $\xi_0$ and $\xi_1$ hence they can be canonically identified with the functions on $\mathbb{S}^2\times\mathbb{S}^1$. One can now see that $H^{1,1}_A(M\slash\mathcal{F})\neq 0$ since at the very least the form $\beta_2\wedge\overline{\beta}^{2}$ provides a non-vanishing class in it. By the Fr\"{o}licher type inequality it suffices to prove that $H^2(M_s\slash\mathcal{F}_s,\mathbb{C})=0$. By the Fr\"{o}licher spectral sequence it is sufficient to prove that the second Dolbeault cohomology are zero. It is easily seen that $H^{2,0}_{\bar{\partial}}(M_s\slash\mathcal{F}_s)=H^{0,2}_{\bar{\partial}}(M_s\slash\mathcal{F}_s)=0$ since in degree $(2,0)$ the kernel is trivial and for $(0,2)$ the imagis the entire space of $(0,2)$ basic forms. For degree $(1,1)$ one immediately sees that $\bar{\partial}(f\beta_2\wedge\overline{\beta}_1)$ and $\bar{\partial}(f\beta_2\wedge\overline{\beta}_2)$ never vanish while the other two components are contained in the image of $\bar{\partial}$. Hence, we get that for any neighbourhood $U$ of $0$ there exists an $s\in U$ such that $(M_s,\mathcal{F}_s)$ does not satisfy the $\partial\bar{\partial}$-lemma while $(M_0,\mathcal{F}_0)$ satisfies the $\partial\bar{\partial}$-lemma.
\begin{rem} It is important to note that all the foliations in this family are homologically orientable. This is obvious for $s=0$. For $s\in (0,1]$ the generator of the top basic cohomology is provided by $\alpha_1\wedge\alpha_2\wedge\alpha_3\wedge\alpha_4$.
\end{rem}
|
\section*{Acknowledgements}
This work was supported in part the OPRECOMP (Open trans-PREcision COMPuting) project founded from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under Grant Agreement No. 732631.
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
\section{Background}
\label{sec:Background}
\subsection{Quantized Neural Networks}
\label{sec:background_quant}
A Deep convolution Neural Network (CNN) is made of several layers stacked one on top of the other.
Each layer can be considered as a computation kernel, and the most computive-intensive ones are the convolution and the fully connected layers.
To favor the deployment of CNN models into resource-constrained devices, a set of constraints can be applied to the numeric domain of either network parameters or activation values, turning the original model into a Quantized Neural Network (QNN).
One of the most effective approaches \cite{hubara2017quantized} to quantize a real-valued weight parameter $w$ to a $Q$-bit signed fixed-point number $q(w)$ is by using the following quantization function:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:quantization}
q (w) = clip_{[-1,1)}(2^{-( Q-1)} \cdot round(w \cdot 2^{(Q-1)} ) \;,
\end{equation}
\noindent where $clip_{[a,b)}(x) = max(a,min(x,b))$.
We define then the integer $W = q(w) \cdot 2^{(Q-1)}$ as the corresponding INT-Q representation of $w$. According to \cite{hubara2017quantized}, the quantization rule (\ref{eq:quantization}) applies also to any activation value.
In this work, we explore the case of INT-8, INT-4, INT-2 and INT-1 data types as they are the most natural ones to fit in a 32-bit register of the targeted MCUs.
If both weights and activations are INT-Q values, the convolution becomes a sum of products operation in the integer domain:
\begin{equation}
\phi(w,x) = 2^{-2(Q-1)}\sum_{i \in C}W_iX_i \doteq 2^{-2(Q-1)} \cdot \Phi(W,X)\;.
\end{equation}
\noindent where $C$ is the number of input channels and $\phi$ is the convolution operation.
$\Phi(W, X)$ is the accumulator value with high precision, i.e. INT-32 for INT-8 operands and INT-16 for sub-byte (INT-4, INT-2, INT-1) operands.
To produce an output activation value, the accumualtion is compressed back into Q bits, working as input for the next layer.
For INT-8 data we adopt the compression approach proposed by Lai~et~al.~\cite{lai2018cmsis}, which relies on scaling and clamp operations, while for the 2 and 4 bit cases a thresholding-based
\footnote{
The $\tau_p$ thresholds absorb bias, batch normalization and the $2^{-2(Q-1)}$ factor. Specifically, considering the batch-normalized $y= \gamma / \sigma (b + \phi - \mu) + \beta$ (where $b$ is the bias, $\gamma,\,\sigma,\,\beta,\,\phi $ are the batch normalization parameters), the thresholds are \begin{equation}
\tau_p = [2^{Q-1} (p \cdot \sigma/\gamma- 2^{Q-1} \cdot (b - \mu) + \beta \cdot \sigma/\gamma]\;.
\end{equation}}
compression is considered, described by the staircase function that generalizes (\ref{eq:quantization}):
\begin{equation}
Y = q\big(\phi(x)\big) = \sum_{p=-2^{Q-1}}^{2^{Q-1}-1} \left( p \cdot \chi_{[\tau_p, t_{p+1})} \cdot \Phi(W,X)\right)\;,
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\chi_s(\cdot)$ it the characteristic function of the interval $s$.
In this equation also the threshold values feature high precision (INT-16), since they are meant to be compared with INT-16 accumulations.
The staircase function is optimally implemented through a balanced binary tree where an INT-16 comparison takes place at every node.
To produce a Q-bit output, $2^{Q}-1$ threshold values per channel must be stored for any convolution layer.
The INT-1 format, where activation and weight values are expressed by binary values, is a special case because the convolution can be reduced to a logical XNOR and a bit-count operation:
\begin{equation}
\Phi_{bin}(X) = \mathrm{popcount}( W\,\mathrm{xnor} X)
\end{equation}
where ${popcount}(\cdot)$ is the bitcount operator.
Also in this scenario, a thresholding procedure is applied for compression.
On the model accuracy side, it has been demonstrated that, through specific re-training techniques, the accuracy drop-off of quantized fixed-point networks can be significantly reduced \cite{hubara2017quantized, jacob2018quantization, rusci2019memory}.
Choi et al. \cite{choi2018pact}, for example, have proved that a 4-bit quantization leads to an accuracy level close to single-precision floating point representation.
The accuracy drop is limited to $3 \%$ when running ResNet50 on Imagenet with 2-bit weights and 4-bit activations and to $6.5 \%$ when downscaling the weights and activations to 2 bits.
Furthermore, the authors of \cite{moons2017minimum} investigated the trade-off between energy efficiency and accuracy of QNNs, highlighting the practical effectiveness of the sub-byte fixed-point networks.
At the cost of specific retraining procedures, the accuracy drop of is kept very close to the single-precision floating point counterpart while the energy efficiency gain, at the iso-accuracy, is orders of magnitude higher.
Moreover, for the investigated networks, trained on CIFAR-10 and MNIST datasets, the energy consumption achieved with 1- to 4-bit fixed-point networks, at iso-accuracy, outperforms the 8-bit counterpart by up to 10$\times$.
\subsection{Dataflow Schedule and Data Layout}
\label{sec:dataflow_layout}
In this subsection, we detail the dataflow schedule and data layout as implemented in the CMSIS-NN library \cite{lai2018cmsis}, which is at the base of the proposed library.
A convolution layer, standing as the basic building block for a CNN or a QNN model, produces an output feature map based on a set of weight filters and the output from the previous layer.
An activation value of any output feature map is computed as the dot product between a weights filter bank and a region of the input feature map, i.e. the $C$ features values of every point under the area $kw \mathrm{\ x\ } kh$ of the filter. To efficiently implement this operation on an MCU-like device, the convolution is decomposed into two phases:
an \textit{im2col} step to load the input features of the current convolution into a contiguous memory array and a dot product. Besides the memory requirements of the activation maps and the model parameters, the \textit{im2col} demands an extra memory footprint of $ C \mathrm{\ x\ } kw \mathrm{\ x\ } kh$ values, on which the dot product operates.
Fig \ref{fig:cmsis}(a) shows graphically this operation.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{cmsis.pdf}
\caption{(a) Dataflow of the spatial convolution kernel (b) Convolution inner loop computation as a matrix multiplication.}
\label{fig:cmsis}
\end{figure}
Given this, the computation of one value of the output feature map, indicated as $O(m,x,y)$ becomes:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:output_pixel}
O(m, x, y) = \mathrm{dot}\Big( W(m) , \; im2col(x,y) \Big)\;,
\end{equation}
\noindent where $W(m)$ is the $m$-th bank of weight filter, im2col is the unrolled input buffer of length $C \mathrm{\ x\ } kw \mathrm{\ x\ } kh$.
The inner loop of the convolution dot product is realized through a matrix multiplication kernel, as depicted in Figure \ref{fig:cmsis}(b). In general, $s$ output features of $r$ activation outputs ($s$=2 and $r$=2 in the example in figure) can be computed at this low-level stage. As a specific case, CMSIS-NN implements a matrix multiplication kernel working on two spatially adjacent pixels of two consecutive channels inside the inner loop of the convolution kernel; we identify this configuration as 2$\times$2, as explained in detail in Section \ref{sec:size_explo}.
Moreover, authors of \cite{lai2018cmsis} demonstrated the most convenient data layout to be Height-Width-Channel (HWC), as it introduces minor overhead when building the im2col buffer with respect to the Channel-Height-Width (CHW) layout.
According to such a layout, the data along the channels is stored with a stride of 1, data along the width is stored with a stride equal to the number of channels $C$.
\subsection{Target Architectures}
\label{sec:target_architecture}
The target architecture of this work is based on a Parallel Ultra-Low-Power (PULP) cluster of RISC-V based processors.
A commercial embodiment of this architectural template is GAP8~\cite{flamand2018gap}, on which we run our experiments.
The GAP8 PULP cluster contains eight RISC-V cores, implementing a 4 stage in-order single-issue pipeline, supporting the RV32IMC instruction set \cite{waterman2016risc}, plus extensions targeting energy-efficient digital signal processing and machine learning (Xpulp) \cite{gautschi2017near}.
The cores are served by a 64kB L1 data memory, named Tightly-Coupled Data Memory (TCDM), enabling shared-memory parallel programming models such as OpenMP.
The shared L1 can serve all memory requests accessing different banks in parallel with single cycle access latency.
The 4 KB cluster program cache is also shared among the cores \cite{loi2018quest}.
The cluster is also provided by an Event Unit which manages synchronization and thread dispatching, enabling low-overhead and fine-grained parallelism, thus high energy efficiency:
each core waiting for a barrier is brought into a fully clock gated state.
The cluster features also a DMA controller which manages the transfer between the L1 and the L2 memory (512kB in size), the latter residing outside-of-the-cluster of the GAP-8 architecture.
The Xpulp extensions available in the ISA\footnote{https://github.com/pulp-platform/riscv/tree/master/doc} include hardware loops, load/store with post-increment, Multiply and Accumulate as well as dedicated digital signal processing extensions inferred in the c code as built-in functions, presented below.
The SIMD vectorial instructions allow processing more sub-word data in parallel, most of them taking only one clock cycle.
The vectorial data types to be used with such instructions are \textit{v4s} and \textit{v2s}:
\textbf{\textit{v4s}} allows to fill a 32bit register with four INT-8 data, \textbf{\textit{v2s}} does the same by filling the register with two INT-16 integers, in one clock cycle.
Sum of dot products SIMD instructions are provided to process either two 16 bit (\textit{sdotp2}) or four 8 bit (\textit{sdotp4}) integer operands in a single cycle.
\textbf{\textit{sdotp4}} takes two \textit{v4s} data operands as input and computes the sum of dot products over the same accumulator, which is the INT-32 output of the built-in function.
The \textbf{\textit{max4}} instruction instead allows to compare two \textit{v4s} operands by returning the element-wise maximum, in one cycle.
\textbf{\textit{bextract}} extracts, in one clock cycle, a specified number of bits ("size") from a register, starting at a specified position ("offset").
The extracted bits are then sign-extended and stored in the destination register.
The natural counterpart is the \textbf{\textit{bitinsert}} built-in function, specifying the number of bits to be inserted ("size") to the destination register, starting from the specified position ("offset").
\textbf{\textit{pack4}} allows to pack four INT-8 variables in a SIMD \textit{v4s} data type in two clock cycles.
Finally, the \textbf{\textit{popcnt}} built-in returns, in one cycle, the number of bits set to one in a word which is passed to the function as input.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:Conclusion}
We have presented PULP-NN: an optimized library to run QNNs at the edge, targeting INT-8, INT-4, INT-2, and INT-1 data operands.
We showed that, by optimizing the library with the SIMD extensions and bit manipulation instructions of the targeted architecture, we heavily increase the performance of each kernel by up to 63x with respect to a corresponding RISC-V \textit{IMC} implementation, in an eight core cluster configuration.
Running an entire INT-8 QNN on GAP8 showed us that we can achieve a speedup (in terms of cycles) of $19.49 \times$ with respect to the inference of the network on an STM32H7 microcontroller, using CMSIS-NN library.
Furthermore, the energy efficiency achieved on GAP8 results to be $24\; GMAC/s/W$, $14.1 \times$ higher with respect to the one obtained with STM32L4 board.
We conclude the same also for the performance: GAP8 achieves $1.066 \;GMAC/s$, which is $7.45 \times$ higher than the performance of STM32H7 board.
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:Introduction}
The Internet-of-Things has favored a rapid growth of the number of wireless-connected nodes for a large variety of applications, including agriculture \cite{elijah2018overview}, health monitoring \cite{hassanalieragh2015health}, surveillance \cite{motlagh2017uav}, structural monitoring \cite{tokognon2017structural}.
Such a massive unconstrained increment poses severe challenges to the network infrastructure, due to the exponential increase of data flowing through the network.
Capacity, security and reliability issues are exacerbated as the number of IoT nodes increases exponentially together with the ability to produce high-bandwidth data.
To address IoT scalability issues, data must be filtered at the edge of the network, on the sensor system itself \cite{shi2016edge}, using compression and analytics algorithms.
To this aim, Machine Learning (ML), including also state-of-the-art Deep Learning (DL), provides attractive solutions for edge processing. ML algorithms ``squeeze'' raw sensor data in a much more semantically dense format (i.e. classes or extracted high-level features/symbols), eventually packed into few bytes of information for wireless transmission.
To empower IoT nodes with smart capabilities \cite{conti2017iot}, the design process of edge devices must trade-off the high computation and memory requirements of leading DL methods with the usual scarcity of resources of deeply embedded systems, powered by batteries or energy harvesters.
Typically, deep network inference tasks run on GPUs or FPGAs devices, which however have a power envelope significantly higher than what can be sustained on extreme-edge devices, integrated with the sensors.
On the other side of the spectrum, resource-constrained MCUs are flexible, due to their software programmability, low-cost, low-power and suitable for extreme-edge usage, but they present severe limitations in memory footprint and computation resources that may prevent meeting application-specific latency and accuracy requirements.
To reduce the computational cost and memory footprint of Neural Newtorks, so that they can fit the limited computing capability and storage capacity of MCU-class devices, recent progress in DL training methodologies has introduced novel quantization methods, aiming at compressing either network weights parameters or activations into 8-bit or smaller data types, while incurring into a reduced or even negligible accuracy loss \cite{hubara2017quantized,lin2016fixed,wang2018haq,jacob2018quantization, moons2017minimum, conti2018xnor, rusci2019memory}.
Since Quantized Neural Networks (QNNs) feature much lower memory requirements than 32-bit floating point full precision models and low-bitwidth fixed-point execution units can operate efficiently at the core of the convolution routine, industry and academia are devoting a major effort to develop hardware and software platforms for efficient execution of QNNs on MCU-class devices.
In this work, we propose the first multicore computing library for QNN inference on fully programmable edge devices, which supports low bit-width (8-bit, 4-bit, 2-bit and 1-bit) operations.
While efficient libraries for commercial MCUs have been proposed for edge QNN inference \cite{lai2018cmsis, rusci2018work}, not many software solutions have been yet presented that efficiently exploit a parallel MCU architecture. We fill this void by building the back-end library upon the recent architectural template of parallel ultra-low-power RISC-V based platforms such as GAP8 \cite{flamand2018gap}, which improve energy efficiency and performance in IoT edge devices coupling parallelism with low voltage operation \cite{rossi2017energy}.
The main contributions of this paper are the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textit{PULP-NN} \footnote{https://github.com/pulp-platform/pulp-nn}, an open-source optimized library based on the CMSIS-NN~\cite{lai2018cmsis, rusci2018work} dataflow including a full set of kernels and utilities to support the inference of Quantized Neural Networks (8,4,2 and 1-bit) on a DSP-optimized RISC-V based processor.
By fully exploiting the DSP extensions available within the ISA, we can achieve a speedup of $ 9 \times$ with respect to a plain\textit{RV32IMC} ISA;
\item We optimized the library for a Parallel Ultra-Low-Power (PULP) cluster of RISC-V processors, leading to near-linear speedup with respect to single core execution, increasing the throughput of each kernel by up to $7.5 \times$ on eight cores;
\item We optimized the convolution kernel, the most computing intensive task of CNN workloads, by improving data reuse, with a further 20\% performance gain with respect to the original kernel of CMSIS-NN~\cite{lai2018cmsis}, with a $\sim$1.9$\times$ improvement with respect to the GAP-8 NN native library and an overall efficiency of $49\%$ in terms of MAC utilization, which implies just 1.01 LD/ST per MAC, and brings us to just a factor of 2 from the theoretical peak MAC utilization achievable using only register operands;
\item We compare our solution with State-of-the-Art architectures and software, by running a CIFAR-10 quantized model on the GAP8 8-core cluster, outperforming by $19.5 \times$ a high-end MCU (based on ARM CORTEX-M7) running the same network using the CMSIS-NN library. The inference with the proposed library also achieves $14.1 \times$ better energy efficiency with respect to a highly energy efficient MCU (based on ARM CORTEX-M4).
\end{itemize}
\noindent These order-of-magnitude improvements with respect to State-of-the-Art MCUs demonstrate for the first time that extreme-edge inference of QNN models is indeed possible on today's parallel ultra-low power MCUs.
\section{PULP-NN Library}
\label{sec:PULPNN}
This section introduces the PULP-NN library and describes the optimization of the kernels with the presented RV32IMCXpulp extended ISA on a parallel cluster of eight processors and the optimization of the main computational kernel of the library: the matrix multiplication. We focus on the computational part since we are interested in exploring software solutions capable of achieving high computing performance and energy efficiency, on top of parallel edge architectures like PULP.
\subsection{Implementation and Optimization on RISC-V}
\label{sec:riscv_imple}
We present implementation details of the most significant QNN kernels on the target RV32IMCXpulp ISA. The experiments are conducted assuming that all the data resides in L1 memory of the PULP cluster
\subsubsection*{\textbf{INT-8 Kernels}}
The first layer for which we detail the implementation is the convolution one.
We first consider the INT-8 kernel, as it also provides a basis for the implementation of INT-4 and INT-2.
Starting from the implementation presented in section \ref{sec:dataflow_layout}, with a 2$\times$2 matrix multiplication kernel, we optimize it to fully exploit the RV32IMCXpulp ISA.
Since the matrix multiplication operation has to be looped over the size of each filter bank ($ C \mathrm{\ x\ } kw \mathrm{\ x\ } kh$), we take advantage of the \textit{hardware loops} to accelerate the \textit{for} statement.
In the inner loop, we also exploit the load and store with post-increment since the access pattern to the im2col and filter elements is extremely regular by construction.
In the same way, we use the 8-bit SIMD instructions to increase the throughput of the computation.
Figure \ref{fig:2x2kernel_isa} graphically schematizes the execution of the inner loop of the matrix multiplication kernel and reports the corresponding assembly code.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{2x2_kernel_isa.pdf}
\caption{2$\times$2 sized matrix multiplication kernel for INT-8 data operands.}
\label{fig:2x2kernel_isa}
\end{figure}
After filling two im2col buffers that are needed to compute two spatially adjacent output pixels, the matrix multiplication inner loop takes place as follows.
At every iteration of the loop, four consecutive elements are loaded into the register file from each of the two im2col buffers (pointers \textit{pBuffer1} and \textit{pBuffer2} in the figure), and from two weight banks (pointers \textit{pWeight} and \textit{pWeight2}), after casting INT-8 pointers to \textit{v4s}.
The total number of load operations required is four.
In this way we have sufficient elements to set four \textit{sdotp4} built-in functions over four different accumulators.
Hence, in a single run of the inner loop of the matrix multiplication kernel, we can compute four sdotp4 instructions, which correspond to 16 MAC operations, at the cost of four load instructions.
Since the fully connected kernel is a simple matrix by vector multiplication, the previous methodology naturally scales to it.
Here there is no need to build the im2col buffer since the spatial dimension of the filters is the same size as the spatial dimension of the input feature map.
To reduce load instructions and exploit a data reuse mechanism, the fully connected kernel implements $2x1$ matrix multiplication kernel within the inner loop (see Section \ref{sec:size_explo} and Figure \ref{fig:kernel_size}).
By loading two different subsets of weights, we can compute two consecutive output pixels along the channel dimension.
By using the SIMD ISA extensions as before, with three loads we are able to set two \textit{sdotp4} vector operations per loop cycle, which translates in 8 MACs.
Ancillary operations also take benefit of the DSP extensions.
ReLU, which consists of a simple $\max$ looped over the input feature map, exploits \textit{hardware loops}, load store with post-increment and the SIMD \textit{max4} built-in instruction.
The same is also used to optimize the max-pooling kernel, which is implemented in two steps: first along the width dimension, working destructively \textit{in situ} on the input buffer; then along the height dimension.
\subsubsection*{\textbf{Sub-byte Extensions}}
\label{sec:data_packing_unpacking}
The smallest data type well supported by the ISA with the SIMD extensions is INT-8.
To exploit efficiently such vector operations, it is necessary to provide additional support functions to convert sub-byte data, i.e. INT-2 and INT-4, into INT-8.
Having sub-byte operands compactly stored in memory, in the case of INT-4 data two consecutive elements are placed in a single byte.
The casting operation, realized through the \textit{pulp\_nn\_int4\_to\_int8} function, takes place either when building the im2col buffer as well as in the innermost loop of the matrix multiplication kernel to "unpack" weight elements. To reduce the overhead due to the unpacking operations, combined use of the \textit{bextract} and \textit{pack4} built-in functions allows to extract four INT-4 elements (weights or pixels) with few instructions, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:int4toint8}.
After loading eight INT-4 data with a single load, four elements are extracted by means of the \textit{bitextract} built-in and packed into one single SIMD \textit{v4s} variable, which feeds the matrix multiplication kernel.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{bextint4_to_int8.pdf}
\caption{INT-4 to INT-8 unpacking function.}
\label{fig:int4toint8}
\end{figure}
The results of the matrix multiplication kernel (which is always performed with the INT-8 data type) are 16-bit long, as the accumulator features a precision higher than operands, as described in Section \ref{sec:background_quant}.
A compression procedure is thus needed to bring the result back to INT-4.
Starting from the considerations in \cite{rusci2018work}, the 16-bit accumulator is compared with the corresponding $2^4-1$ threshold values, using an optimal balanced binary tree function, named \textit{pulp\_nn\_int4\_quant}.
Such a procedure is necessary to restore the precision of the results in a 4 bit range.
To save memory footprint, two consecutive output INT-4 data are stored in a single-byte variable using the \textit{bitinsert} built-in function.
A graphical explanation of the compression mechanism is provided in Figure \ref{fig:int4compression}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9 \linewidth]{int4_compression.pdf}
\caption{The compression procedure for INT-4 data types.}
\label{fig:int4compression}
\end{figure}
A similar process is implemented for INT-2 convolutions, by featuring dedicated \textit{packing} and \textit{unpacking} functions.
\subsubsection*{\textbf{Binary Convolution Kernel}}
For the INT-1 data representation no casting/unpacking is needed because of the natural support provided by the ISA for binary operations.
We exploit the bitwise instructions to implement the convolution kernel, which is based on bitwise XNOR operations between binary weights and binary inputs.
The accumulator is filled by counting the number of ones occurring after the XNOR.
To this purpose we use \textit{popcnt} built-in.
The 16-bit accumulator is compared with a single threshold and results either in a zero or one, stored back into memory by means of the \textit{bitinsert} built-in function.
\subsection{Multicore Execution}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{Conv_data_parallel.pdf}
\caption{The right side of the figure shows how the chunks are assigned to the 8 cores of the PULP cluster. To take advantage of the HWC data-layout each chunk is built along the spatial dimension of the output feature map. The left side gives a graphical intuition of the need each core has to create its private im2col buffer. Considering the 2$\times$2 matrix multiplication kernel each core requires two private buffers of such type. }
\label{fig:convdataparallel}
\end{figure}
As discussed above the \textit{convolution kernel} execution consists of two phases: the im2col function and the matrix multiplication kernel.
The proposed data-parallel multi-core optimization is motivated
by the HWC format used to store pixels and weights and by the two phases of the dataflow.
Because of the HWC format, it is convenient to split the workload along the spatial dimension of the output feature map, in a way that each core computes the full set of $M$ output features for a given output spatial coordinate, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:convdataparallel}.
To implement this strategy, each core requires a private im2col buffer.
More specifically, if we consider the 2$\times$2 kernel, each core must allocate and load two im2col buffers before running the matrix multiplication kernel.
Therefore, the parallelization boost comes at the cost of a small amount of additional memory footprint for the extra im2col buffers, which in the worst case (eight cores configuration) is about $9\%$ of the total when considering 16$\times$16$\times$32 sized input feature map, 16$\times$16$\times$64 sized output feature map and 64$\times$3$\times$3$\times$32 sized 3D convolution filter.
The weights instead are shared among the cores.
Since the fully connected layer generates a set of neurons as output (i.e., the output feature map does not extend along any spatial dimension), the only dimension along which we can split the workload is the channel.
We assign a balanced number of neurons to be computed to each core.
The parallelization of the ReLu and the Max Pooling kernel is straight-forward: the chunk to be assigned to each core is a balanced group of pixels along the entire input feature map.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{kernel_size_exploration.pdf}
\caption{Inner loop of the matrix multiplication considering different sizes of the kernel.}
\label{fig:kernel_size}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Matrix Multiplication Kernel Size Exploration}
\label{sec:size_explo}
To further increase the throughput of a memory intensive kernel such as matrix multiplication, it is important to reduce the cost of loading the operands into the registers as much as possible, by maximizing the \textit{data reuse} at the register file level.
The direct implementation of the Equation~(\ref{eq:output_pixel}) would be inefficient since, from a computation perspective,
two loads are required (one to fetch an im2col element and one to fetch a weight parameter) to feed the MAC instruction.
In this scenario, one load stall will be necessarily paid, degrading the IPC metric and reducing the throughput.
To avoid the stall, multiple output data can be computed within the inner loop of the dot product routine, i.e., the inner loop of the matrix multiplication kernel.
When applying equation (\ref{eq:output_pixel}) to compute the output data at the spatial coordinate $(x+1,y)$, the formula becomes:
\begin{equation}
O(m, x+1, y) = \mathrm{dot}\Big( W(m) , \; im2col(x+1,y) \Big)\;.
\end{equation}
\noindent We can notice that the same subset of weights is used in the computation of the output data at coordinates $(x,y)$ and $(x+1,y)$ .
What changes is only the im2col buffer.
When operating on these two point simultaneously, the inner loop consists of two dot product operations, which are performed over two different accumulators. By reusing the register that stores the elements of $W(m)$ along the spatial dimension we can set two \textit{sdotp4} operations at the cost of one additional load (three in total), needed to fetch the elements of the second im2col buffer.
So doing, we build the 1x2 sized kernel and increment the MAC to load ratio.
If extending this strategy also to the feature dimension,
the inner loop of the convolution can operate on a 2$\times$2 sized kernel, i.e. computing four accumulations related to two features of two separate output pixels $(x,y)$ and $(x+1,y)$. Such a kernel size is the one used by ARM CMSIS-NN.
In this case, an additional subset of weights, $W(m+1)$ is needed and, at the cost of four loads, we can perform four \textit{sdotp4} operations in the inner loop.
By means of this upgrading, the MAC to Load ratio grows up to $4$.
Let us consider the 4x2 sized kernel, which means we want to compute two adjacent spatial pixels along four consecutive channels of the output feature map.
Following what we said before, we need to build two im2col buffers, and we need four different subsets of weights.
The elements loaded in the register file are reused similarly as presented before to maximize the MAC to Load ratio.
Figure \ref{fig:kernel_size} explains the concept of register file data reuse.
As a counterpart, we can explore the 2x4 sized kernel.
In this case, the reasoning is reversed.
The MAC to load ratio we can achieve in both cases is $5.33$, as we compute 32 MACs at the cost of 6 load operations, in a single run of the inner loop.
Thus we expect a better throughput with respect to the 2$\times$2 sized area.
It is interesting to notice that in the 2x4 case, the memory footprint is slightly higher than the 4x2 sized kernel because of the two additional im2col buffers.
For the same performance, the former is thus to be preferred between the two.
It is important to notice that the upscaling of the kernel size is limited by the resources available in the register file to store operands and accumulators, thus limiting the \textit{data reuse} design space at this level. We explore such a space to find the best register file data reuse condition which maximizes the throughput. The experimental results and further considerations are provided in Section \ref{sec:kernel_expl_results}.
\section{Related Work}
\label{sec:Related_work}
The success of Deep Learning (DL) has paved the way to many different DL deployments on embedded computing platforms of all kinds.
In this section, we recap the state-of-the-art and give insights on its applicability to CNN inference at the extreme-edge, on IoT end-nodes.
\subsubsection*{\textbf{FPGA Based Approaches}}
Recent heterogeneous FPGAs such as Xilinx Zynq have enabled many solutions for CNN acceleration, embedding general purpose processors that manage the program flow, handle I/O and memory accesses, making them easier to program.
As DSP-capable FPGAs have a power envelope in the order of Watts, numerical precision of the CNN operands plays a crucial role to achieve high performance and thus energy efficiency.
While several architectures available in literature feature a precision of 16-bit (fixed-point) \cite{gokhale2017snowflake,ma2017automatic,venieris2017latency, meloni2018neura}, more and more designs are moving towards lower precision.
For example, Qiu et al. \cite{qiu2016going} proposed a CNN accelerator supporting 8 and 4-bit data, implemented on a Xilinx Zynq platform.
On this trail, even extreme quantization approaches have been presented, exploiting ternary or binary networks \cite{prost2017scalable, umuroglu2017finn}.
While most DSP-capable FPGAs currently do not offer a low enough power envelope to be used in IoT end-nodes,
Lattice recently announced SenseAI class of FPGAs \cite{LatticeSENSEAI} providing a comprehensive hardware and software solutions for always-on artificial intelligence (AI) within a power budget between 1 mW and 1 W. However these ultra-low power FPGAs are currently too expensive for many applications where MCUs are traditionally chosen because of their low cost. Furthermore, they report \cite{senseaiwhite} a measured performance of 8 fps with 64$\times$64 RGB input for a VGG8 like 16-bit CNN at a power consumption of 7 mW, which maps to $0.88\,mJ/frame$, and performance of 5 fps for a VGG network consisting of 6 convolution layers and 4 fully connected at a power consumption of 3.3 mW with an energy per inference of $0.66\,mJ/frame$. Both the results are significantly higher ($4.63 \times$ and $3.48 \times$, respectively) than the energy per frame that we report at the maximum efficiency point for our solution in sec. \ref{sec:results}.
\subsubsection*{\textbf{Application Specific Architectures}}
On the other side of the programmability spectrum, ASIC accelerators are known to achieve best in class performance and energy efficiency.
Notable examples are Orlando~\cite{desoli201714} achieving energy efficiencies in the order of a few Top/s/W, and Origami~\cite{cavigelli2017origami} achieving a throughput of 274 Gop/s, with an efficiency of 803 Gop/s/W.
Dropping the arithmetic precision of CNN operands has demonstrated to be a useful technique to reduce the memory footprint and the energy cost for computation \cite{zhou2016dorefa, courbariaux2015binaryconnect, courbariaux2016binarized, rastegari2016xnor}.
UNPU \cite{lee2018unpu} is an example of an accelerator targeting fully-variable weight bit-precision, achieving a peak energy efficiency of 50.6 Top/s/W at a throughput of 184 Gop/s.
YodaNN \cite{andri2018yodann} targets binary-weight networks and reaches energy efficiency up to 61 Top/s/W.
Other accelerators exploit extreme quantization for the deployment of binary neural networks on silicon using in- or near-memory computing techniques (e.g., Brein~\cite{ando2018brein}, Conv-RAM \cite{biswas2018conv}) with energy efficiencies in the range 20-55 Top/s/W.
Such high energy efficiency and throughput achievable using ASIC accelerators are counterbalanced by limited flexibility, being application specific, which makes them unattractive to satisfy fully the flexibility demand of IoT edge nodes.
\begin{table*}[t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\multicolumn{5}{c}{\textbf{Summary of CNN Embedded Inference Computing Platform}} \\ \\
\hline
& Performance & Energy Efficiency & Power Budget & Flexibility \\ \\
\textbf{ASICs \cite{lee2018unpu, andri2018yodann, cavigelli2017origami, desoli201714}} & 1 - 10 Tops/s & 10 - 100 Tops/s/W & 1 mW - 1 W & Low\\ \\
\textbf{FPGAs \cite{gokhale2017snowflake,ma2017automatic,venieris2017latency, meloni2018neura, qiu2016going}} & 10 - 200 Gops/s & 1 - 10 Gops/s/W & 1 W - 10 W & Medium\\ \\
\textbf{MCUs \cite{STM32L476, STM32H743xl} } & 100 - 300 Mops/s & 1 - 3 Gops/s/W & 1 mW - 1 W & High\\ \\
\textbf{PULP SoCs \cite{conti2017iot, flamand2018gap, pullini2019mr} } & 1 - 2 Gops/s & 30 - 50 Gops/s/W & 1 mW - 100 mW & High\\ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\newline
\caption{The table shows the trade-offs among the CNN computing platforms described in the related work section.}
\label{tab:related_work}
\end{table*}
\subsubsection*{\textbf{Software Programmable Architectures}}
Software-programmable general-purpose processors provide the highest degree of flexibility in QNN inference at the edge.
While CNNs are traditionally executed on programmable high-performance GPUs \cite{NvidiaTegra2015, NvidiaTegra2015perf} also with reduced precision support ~\cite{NvidiaTuring}, these platforms are typically not designed to operate in the tight power envelope of IoT end-nodes, and their cost is off-spec too.
Some architectures exploit the computing power of multi-core processors, such as Raspberry Pi 3+ \cite{Raspberry}, powered by a Quad-core ARM CORTEX-A53.
Although these platforms are relatively inexpensive and flexible, their power consumption is too high as well.
To fit the power budget of IoT edge devices, many low power microcontrollers include ARM CORTEX-M cores. Among these solutions, STMicroelectronics proposed low-end (STM32L4 family based on ARM CORTEX M-4 cores and high-end (STM32H7 family featuring ARM CORTEX M-7 cores) microcontrollers supporting DL processing at the edge \cite{STM32L476, STM32H743xl}.
To improve the computing capabilities of such tiny and cheap computing platforms, ARM recently announced the development of the ARMv8.1-M \cite{Armv8.1} architecture, featuring Helium, an ISA extension tailored for DSP-oriented workloads, such as an inference task. However, such an extension is not supported yet by any device.
Other solutions move toward heterogeneous architectures, coupling microcontrollers with dedicated CNN accelerators, to deal with the extremely regular CNN workload. ARM proposed Trilium \cite{trilium}, a heterogeneous compute platform which provides flexible support for ML workloads. Conti et al. \cite{conti2015ultra} proposed a convolution engine to be integrated in a microcontroller to speed up the convolutional kernels while Kendryte \cite{Kendryte} is a dual-core RISC-V SoC outfitted with a CNN accelerator for AI applications. Flamand~et~al. proposed GAP8~\cite{flamand2018gap}, a multi-GOPS fully programmable RISC-V IoT-edge computing engine, featuring a cluster of 8 cores with dedicated DSP extensions and a CNN-specialized accelerator. These accelerators can give the MCU a 5 to 10$\times$ energy efficiency boost, but they are proprietary, closed, platform specific and currently not fully supported by the software design flows. Hence, their acceptance and penetration among application developers is still quite low.
Table \ref{tab:related_work} summarizes the trade-offs among the CNN computing platforms described so far. Next section will describe the State-of-the-Art of software solutions for MCU platforms, the main focus of this work.
\subsubsection*{\textbf{Optimized Software Libraries}}
On the MCU side, the limited computational and memory capabilities make aggressive software and algorithmic optimizations necessary to deploy DNN inference models on them.
An efficient solution to reduce DNN memory footprint is to use fixed-point arithmetic and quantization of both weights and activations into 8-bit or smaller data types, at the cost of a minor drop in accuracy \cite{hubara2017quantized,lin2016fixed, rusci2019memory}.
Relying on fixed-point quantized networks, ARM proposed the CMSIS-NN library \cite{lai2018cmsis}, which maximizes the performance of the DL kernels on CORTEX-M series cores, supporting 16-bit and 8-bit fixed-point data.
On the same trail, targeting a parallel MCU architecture such as GAP-8, Greenwaves Technologies released open-source a set of QNN kernels (16- and 8-bit data precisions) as part of a proprietary tiling solution \cite{flamand2018gap}. The tiling procedure, exploiting the DMA controller available on GAP-8, hides the latency of fetching/storing activations and weights along the memory hierarchy introducing only a small overhead (a few \%), thus enabling the processing of large networks whose layers may not fit the MCU on-board memory. In this work we focus on the computational aspects of reduced precision quantized CNN inference. In this context, despite the demonstrated effectiveness of sub-byte aggressive quantization \cite{moons2017minimum}, only Rusci~et~al.~\cite{rusci2018work} explored the inference speed as well as memory requirements of using low-precision (4-, 2- or 1-bit) convolution kernels on a Cortex-M7 microcontroller.
Our work aims at bridging this gap, leveraging the results of \cite{moons2017minimum} and focusing on the computational side to enable efficient QNN inference at the edge on fully programmable devices.
To this purpose, we propose an open-source QNN library targeting 8-bit as well as sub-byte quantized data types, down to 1-bit data, targeting parallel ultra-low-power (PULP) architectures.
By exploiting the ISA extensions available on PULP architectures and tightly coupled cluster, our contributions outperform the CMSIS-NN based solutions by one order of magnitude in terms of performance and energy efficiency.
\section{Experimental Results and Discussion}
\label{sec:results}
The solutions presented in this paper are evaluated on the off-the-shelf GAP8 \cite{flamand2018gap} microcontroller, which is an embodiment of the target PULP architecture with eight cores.
The same experiments can also be replicated on the open-source PULP platform\footnote{https://github.com/pulp-platform.} via RTL simulation.
\subsection{Comparison with RV32IMC ISA}
\label{sec:RISC-V_impl_res}
To evaluate the proposed library, which exploits the DSP extensions available on the RI5CY processor \cite{gautschi2017near}, we first compare the optimized single core execution of the convolution kernels with respect to a corresponding \textit{RV32IMC} ISA implementation, sweeping all the INT-Q datatypes supported.
This evaluation is performed by benchmarking a convolution kernel operating on a 16x16x32 input tensor (HWC data-layout) with a filter size of 64x3x3x32 ($C \mathrm{ x } kw \mathrm{ x } kh \mathrm{ x } M$).
We consider the convolution kernel as its workload is dominant when inferring an entire QNN (about 96 \% on the CIFAR-10).
As a second term of comparison, we run the kernels on off-the-shelf STM32H743 \cite{STM32H743xl} and STM32L476 \cite{STM32L476} commercial microcontrollers based on ARM CORTEX-M7 and CORTEX-M4 cores respectively, using the CMSIS-NN \cite{lai2018cmsis} library.
To run the sub-byte quantized version of the convolution layer on such MCUs, we refer to \cite{rusci2018work}; the extension to the CMSIS-NN library is open access\footnote{https://github.com/EEESlab/CMSIS\_NN-INTQ}.
The results of the comparison are presented in terms of speedup with respect to the \textit{RV32IMC} implementation and reported in Figure \ref{fig:plain_comparison}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{plain_comparison.pdf}
\caption{Speed-up of PULP-NN conv kernels (single core execution on GAP-8) and CMSIS-NN conv kernels (on STM32H7 and STM32L4) with respect to RV32IMC ISA.}
\label{fig:plain_comparison}
\end{figure}
We achieve the best speedup on the INT-8 convolution kernel, mainly thanks to the 8-bit SIMD \textit{sdotp} instructions. The ARM ISA features support for 16-bit instructions only, dividing by a factor of 2 the MAC throughput with respect to the RI5CY processor. Moreover additional rotate instructions are required on ARM architectures to pack 16-bit vector data to feed the MAC units \cite{rusci2018work}. Finally, hardware loops provide another factor of improvement with respect to ARM. Thanks to these extensions we outperform by $2.54 \times$ and $4.51 \times$ the STM32H7 and L4 MCUs respectively, despite the CORTEX-M7 processor available in the STM32H7 featuring a dual-issue pipeline.
When considering sub-byte data types, we notice a degradation of the speedup with respect to RV32IMC which passes from $8.8 \times$ (INT-8) to $3.69 \times$ and $4.22 \times$ for INT-4 and INT-2 data respectively.
Such degradation is due to the additional instructions to unpack and cast INT-2/4 operands to INT-8 ones. Although these operations are implemented with \textit{bextract} and \textit{pack4} instructions, they do not achieve the same speedup as the INT-8 convolution kernel, limiting the overall speedup for sub-byte kernels, still leading to a speedup of $1.42 \times$ and $2.1 \times$ with respect to STM32H7 and STM32L4 for INT-4 kernel, respectively, and a speedup of $1.52 \times$ and $2.17 \times$ with respect to H7 and L4 for INT-2 kernel, respectively.
The ARM CORTEX-M7/M4 processors do not have ISA support for efficient bit manipulation instructions nor for popcount instruction which is helpful for the INT-1 case. However most of the computational load of this kernel is implemented with xnor instructions available in all considered ISAs. Hence, the proposed implementation, runs $1.41 \times$ and $2.22 \times$ faster than the extended CMSIS-NN solution on STM32H7 and STM32L4 respectively.
\begin{table*}[t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
Configuration& Nr. & I\$ stall & TCDM cont.& Load stall& Total exec. & Speedup\\
& insns &cycles& cycles&cycles&cycles& \\
\hline
\hline
\\
\textbf{Convolution} &&&&&& \\
1 CORE & $2546k$ & $1.3k\,\, (0.05\%)$ & $0$ & $18k\,\,(0.7\%)$ & $2586k$ & $1 \times$\\
2 CORES & $1286k$ & $4.5k\,\, (0.35 \%)$ & $1.4k\,\, (0.11 \%)$ & $11k \,\, (0.85 \%)$ & $1299k$ & $\mathbf{1.99 \times}$\\
4 CORES & $636k$ & $5.7k\,\, (0.86 \%)$ & $3.8k\,\, (0.56 \%)$ & $5.5k \,\, (0.83 \%)$ & $660k$ & $\mathbf{3.92 \times}$\\
8 CORES & $318k$ & $21.5k\,\, (5.96 \%)$ & $6.6k\,\, (1.83 \%)$ & $2.7k \,\, (0.75 \%)$ & $361k$ & $\mathbf{7.16 \times}$
\\
\hline
\\
\textbf{Fully connected}&&&&&& \\
1 CORE & $20.7k$ & $0.03k \,\, (0.09 \%)$ & $0$ & $0$ & $33k$ & $1 \times$\\
2 CORES & $10.4k$ & $1.1k \,\, (6.25 \%)$ & $1k\,\,(5.69\%)$ & $0$ & $17.6k$ & $\mathbf{1.89 \times}$\\
4 CORES & $5.2k$ & $0.1k \,\, (1.19 \%)$ & $0.2k \, \, (2.38 \%)$ & $0$ & $8.4k$ & $\mathbf{3.92 \times}$\\
8 CORES & $2.6k$ & $0.1k \,\, (2.27 \%)$ & $0.3k \,\, (6.81 \%)$ & $0$ & $4.4k$ & $\mathbf{7.52 \times}$\\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{The table shows the multicore execution profiling of the kernels. The measurements for multicore configurations are reported as an average of the measurements taken on each core. The percentage value highlights the impact of each measured contribution on the total execution cycles.}
\label{tab:parallel_results}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Multicore Execution Results}
\label{sec:multicore_results}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width= 0.9\linewidth]{ARM_comparison_CONV_cycMAC.pdf}
\caption{Comparison in terms of cycles/MAC between the PULP-NN conv kernels on one/eight core(s) of GAP-8 cluster and CMSIS-NN conv kernels on STM32L4 and STM32H7.}
\label{fig:ARM_comp_multicore}
\end{figure}
In this section, we focus on the analysis of the multicore optimization of the kernels.
Figure \ref{fig:ARM_comp_multicore} shows a comparison of the convolution kernels running on the 8-core cluster of GAP-8 with respect to the equivalent CMSIS-NN implementation on STM32H7 and STM32L4.
It is possible to notice that, due to the additional operations required to execute sub-byte kernels, their overall cycles/MAC are 0.186 for INT-4 and 0.181 for INT-2, both 2.4$\times$ higher than the INT-8 case
However, we can notice how the software-efficient exploitation of the parallel processors cluster provides almost linear speedups ($7.16 \times$ to $7.7 \times$) with respect to the single core configuration, leading to a dramatic improvement of performance with respect to the equivalent execution on sequential RV32IMC (where the overall speedup passes from 8.8$\times$ of the single-core execution to up 63$\times$ when considering 8-cores) and on single-core ARM architectures ($10 \times$ to $32 \times$). This huge performance gain enables the exploitation of the benefits of heavily quantized neural networks in terms of memory footprint, still performing one order of magnitude better than state-of-the-art ARM-based implementations.
To provide more insight on the multi-core optimizations, we present an exhaustive study of the performance achieved on the parallel cluster of GAP-8.
First, we measure the amount of executed instructions per each core providing an indication of the Amdhal's limit of the kernels, i.e. the amount of cycles lost due to non-parallelizable code.
As a second point, we measure the the number of cycles in which the cores are not waiting on a barrier (active cycle).
Then we measure the architectural sources of overhead: number of cycles lost due to contention on the shared TCDM, cycles lost due to instruction cache stalls and cycle lost due to load stalls (read after write).
The results for the convolution and fully-connected kernels are summarized in Table \ref{tab:parallel_results}.
Considering the convolution kernel, we achieve a Speedup of $7.16 \times$ with eight cores.
By analyzing the table we can notice that the Amdahl's limit of the kernels is around $8 \times$ (thus, ideal), but we lose a small number of cycles due to architectural overheads: the
$67\%$ of this overhead is due to I\$ non-idealities, $8\%$ is due to load stalls and $20\%$ is due to TCDM contention, which is reasonable as there are eight cores that access the same shared L1 memory.
The number of I\$ stalls increases with the number of cores due to the increasing contentions in the shared cache banks \cite{loi2018quest} (the banking factor of 8 can not completely remove the conflicts), on top of the I\$ misses due to the large inner loop of the kernel.
The parallel execution of the fully connected layer presents a speedup higher than the convolution kernel mainly thanks to the reduction of I\$ stalls due to the smaller size of the kernel.
The speedup is never lower than $7 \times$ also when considering the max-pooling and ReLU kernels running on eight cores.
\subsection{Kernel Exploration}
\label{sec:kernel_expl_results}
The exploration of the matrix multiplication kernel size design space is carried out for the INT-8 operands, considering sizes ranging from 1$\times$2 to 4$\times$4.
The results are summarized in Figure \ref{fig:kernel_exploration}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{mac_sdotpld_kernelsize_cores_new_grid2.pdf}
\caption{Performance of the convolution layer considering different sized matrix multiplication kernels. On the x-axis we show the sdotp to load ratio to clarify how many \textit{sdotp4} (equivalent to 4 MAC) we can set with one load. The label of each point of the graph, in the form of $a \times b$, specifies the kernel size considered. $a$ is the number of output features computed by the kernel, $b$ is the number of output activations.}
\label{fig:kernel_exploration}
\end{figure}
A peak throughput of 15.5 MACs/cycle is reached when we consider a convolution kernel with a 4$\times$2 sized matrix multiplication kernel running over eight cores of the cluster, achieving a result of just 1.01 LD/ST per MAC. This result translates in an overall efficiency of $49\%$ in terms of MAC utilization, only a factor of 2 from the theoretical peak achievable (32 MACs/cycle) on a cluster of eight programmable cores with SIMD MAC units, i.e. considering the MAC units constantly fed.
Nearly the same throughput is achieved with the 2$\times$4 sized kernel, as the almost overlapping points in the graph suggests.
Then, the optimal sized kernel has been chosen taking into account also the extra memory footprint needed to build the im2col buffers in the two configurations, which results to be lower for the 4$\times$2 solution (see section \ref{sec:size_explo} for more details). As regards the 1$\times$2, 2$\times$1 cases, they appear to be inefficient, as the amount of data reuse is meager and we pay the overhead due to the higher number of loads.
For these configurations, the MAC to load ratio is slightly higher than $1$.
The 4$\times$4 case instead would demonstrate to be the best, since the first indication of ideal data reuse is equal to 8 (MAC/load).
However, to set a 4$\times$4 sized matrix multiplication kernel inner loop we should have at least 24 registers available (16 for the accumulators and 8 for the operands), while the target RISC-V, like most MCU-dedicated micro-architectures, has a register file with 32 general purpose registers.
With only eight usable registers, the compiler has to spill variables to the stack to make room for the accumulators and operands, leading to significant performance degradation.
\subsection{Comparison with GAP8 Native Library}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{PULP-NN_vs_ERIC-NN.pdf}
\caption{Comparison between PULP-NN using a 4$\times$2 kernel and the best result obtained by GWT-NN.}
\label{fig:pulp_nn_vs_eric_nn}
\end{figure}
We compare our library with the optimized multi-core kernels that are openly distributed by GreenWaves Technologies as part of a proprietary tiling solution\footnote{https://github.com/greenwaves-technologies/autotiler.} and tailored for the GAP8 processor.
We call this library GWT-NN.
In this section, we compare the performance of PULP-NN on INT-8 data with that provided by GWT-NN.
We focus on a 3$\times$3 kernel in terms of filter size as a representative example constituting the bulk of most SoA DNNs.
Differently from PULP-NN, GWT-NN operates spatially on CHW-formatted data with explicit convolution filters working in a sliding window fashion, and accumulation over an appropriately sized INT-32 buffer.
In the innermost loop, the GWT 3x3 kernel uses the register file to implement a sliding window and uses three \textit{sdotp4} instructions to implement a total of 9 multiply-accumulate operations.
\cite{gautschi2017near} and \cite{palossi201964mw} report further details with respect to this convolution kernel.
Figure~\ref{fig:pulp_nn_vs_eric_nn} shows a comparison between the two libraries when running on a single core of the GAP-8 cluster, in terms of performance in MAC/cycle.
For PULP-NN, the performance is swept by changing the number of input and output channels between 2 and 64 (only results from configurations fitting the L1 are shown).
We chose the biggest input spatial size (24x24) for which configurations with 64 input or output channels fit L1.
Conversely, for GWT-NN, performance is substantially independent of the number of in/out channels, but only on the spatial size of the input image; therefore, we fix their input/output channels at 4 and have them sweep their input size between 4, 16, and 64 pixels height/width.
As visible from Figure~\ref{fig:pulp_nn_vs_eric_nn}, PULP-NN outperforms GWT-NN for all small images, and in most cases of spatially bigger images by a significant margin.
This is due to a combination of two effects: the 3x3 sliding window requires three loads and three \textit{sdotp4} per output pixel, yielding a lower \textit{sdotp4} per load ratio (1) with respect to the 4$\times$2 PULP-NN kernel (1.4); moreover, only three MAC are used per each \textit{sdotp4}, yielding a further loss of 25\% in terms of efficiency.
Consequently, the GWT-NN kernel is mostly competitive when the spatial size of the feature maps is much higher than the number of channels, e.g., in the first layer of a CNN. While, when the number of input/output channels is high, which typically represents the majority of the workload for state-of-the-art deep networks topologies \cite{howard2017mobilenets}, PULP-NN can achieve as much as a +89\% speedup with respect to GWT-NN.
\subsection{Comparison with State-of-the-Art Architectures}
\label{subsec:SoAcomparison}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{ARM_comparison_CIFAR10.pdf}
\caption{This figure shows the execution cycles, the performance (at the maximum frequency) and energy efficiency (at the lowest consumption configuration) to infer the entire QNN on GAP8, STM32L4 and STM32H7 microcontrollers.}
\label{fig:en_eff&perfo}
\end{figure*}
To assess the library performance on an inference task, we run a full QNN, trained on CIFAR-10 dataset, on GAP-8, using PULP-NN back-end library. For comparison purposes, we run the same network also on State-of-the-Art edge of IoT ARM Cortex-M based microcontrollers (STM32H7 and STM32L4), using CMSIS-NN.
STM32H7 and STM32L4 were chosen as representative of popular high-end and low-end MCU systems, with a clear trade-off between performance and energy efficiency. The comparison with these two popular computing platforms allows to analyze where our results lay in terms of trade-off between computing performance and energy efficiency.
The implemented network topology is composed by three convolution layers and one fully-connected layer, consisting of $26.7\,k$ parameters and $6.56$ MMACs in total\footnote{The layer parameters can be found at: https://github.com/ARM-software/ML-examples/tree/master/cmsisnn-cifar10}.
The weights and the activations are quantized to INT-8 format.
Such a topology is already used on IoT edge devices (MCUs) and also used by ARM to validate Neural Networks on low-power microcontrollers such as STM32L4 or STM32H7.
On GAP-8, the RGB image is initially stored in the L2 memory and brought in the L1 memory before the start of the inference task, through a DMA transfer.
The activation values are then kept in the L1 memory to save on memory transfer overhead. Before the execution of each convolution or linear kernel the weights, initially residing on L2 memory, are brought in L1 through DMA as well. Also the im2col buffers are kept in L1 memory.
On the STM32L4 microcontroller, the entire network is stored in the first level of memory, which consists of 128 kB SRAM. On STM32H7 the network is stored in SRAM as well and we enable also the harware data cache which is provided by the MCU architecture.
In the single core configuration, we are able to infer the entire network in 28.6 ms, when GAP-8 runs at 170 MHz.
We achieve almost linear speedup when considering two and four cores, $1.99 \times$ and $3.79 \times$ respectively.
With eight cores the speedup is slightly less than $7 \times$.
Figure~\ref{fig:en_eff&perfo} shows the comparison of PULP-NN implementation of the network on GAP-8 with respect to the CMSIS-NN implementation on STM32H743 and STM32L467 in terms of execution cycles, performance (i.e. also considering the maximum operating frequency of the devices), and energy efficiency.
Our PULP-NN CIFAR-10 achieves a peak performance of 1.07 GMAC/s at the frequency of $170$ MHz and the supply voltage of 1.2 V on GAP-8, inferring $241$ frame per second (fps) with an energy per inference of $0.27$ mJ/frame.
The performance is $7.45 \times$ better than the STM32H7 and $36.8 \times$ better than the STM32L4. The energy efficiency achieved at this operating point is $16.1$ GMAC/s/W, $16.6 \times$ higher than the STM32H7 and $9.48 \times$ higher than STM32L4.
At the same time, at the best energy point, at the supply voltage of 1V, PULP-NN achieves a performance of $577$ MMAC/s on GAP-8, with energy efficiency of $24$ GMAC/s/W, inferring $127$ fps with $0.19$ mJ/frame, and outperforming STM32H7 by $4.06 \times$ and STM32L4 by $32.05 \times$ in terms of performance and by $39.5 \times$ and $14.1 \times$ the same devices respectively, in terms of energy efficiency.
\subsection{Discussion}
In this work we demonstrate that coupling optimized software libraries with a parallel ultra low power computing platform we achieve energy proportionality where, as opposed to commercial ARM-based solutions, we do not have to trade performance with energy efficiency, paving the way to fully software programmable CNN inference at the edge of the IoT.
However, sub-byte kernels still suffer from drop-off in performance when compared to the INT-8 ones, despite their execution on GAP-8 performs more than one order of magnitude better with respect to MCU-based SoA solutions. The overhead, as highlighted in section \ref{sec:RISC-V_impl_res}, is due to the hardware support of the target architecture only for 8-bit SIMD instructions, which makes necessary to introduce additional packing and unpacking functions.
The sub-byte precision QNNs though, provide several advantages when deployed at the edge, since their memory footprint decreases linearly with the bit-width used to represent weights and activations \cite{hubara2017quantized}, making them more suitable to fit the limited memory capacity of MCU-like devices. Moreover, it has the potential to increase the energy efficiency, crucial for battery-powered devices \cite{moons2017minimum}. Recent research demonstrated that, by exploiting specific retraining techniques, the accuracy drop can be kept under control, leading to a cumulative loss which is acceptable for many IoT applications \cite{rusci2019memory}. Hence the research community is focusing more and more on the study and implementation of strongly quantized NNs. It is therefore important going further in the work presented in this paper to exploit fully the potential of heavily quantized networks on fully programmable edge devices. From the hardware perspective, providing the target ISA with sub-byte hardware SIMD operations will be a step forward to eliminate the software overhead and to double, at least, the performance and the energy efficiency with respect to the current optimal 8-bit solution.
\sloppypar
|
\section{Introduction}
Electromagnetic radiation in the terahertz (THz) frequency domain is known to have a considerable potential for utilization both in fundamental experimental physics and in various applications.
This includes THz spectroscopy of molecular gases and solids, control of magnetism in complex materials, noninvasive diagnostics, imaging and more, see \cite{biomed-rev-jpd06,lee-book,dexheimer-book,THz-rev-opt16,THz-rev-jpd17} for review and references.
Sources of high-intensity short THz pulses are of particular interest as they provide nonlinear regime of interaction and can be used for control of fast processes.
Several efficient methods for the generation of strong THz waves are presently known and being applied in laboratories \cite{THz-rev-opt16,THz-rev-jpd17}.
Optical rectification in crystals \cite{yeh-apl07} provides the currently highest convergence efficiency from optical or infrared (IR) to THz radiation at frequencies $\nu<3~\mathrm{THz}$.
Such sources can deliver THz pulses of $\simeq 10~\mu\mathrm{J}$ energy and $\simeq 1~\mathrm{MV/cm}$ electric field strength.
Their main limitations are the relatively narrow spectral width determined by material absorption and the intensity damage threshold of crystals which becomes particularly restrictive at high repetition rates of pump lasers.
Another family of perspective methods for the THz generation is based on laser frequency conversion in plasmas.
This includes in particular emission of relativistic laser plasmas at solid-state densities \cite{gopal-njp12,gopal-prl13} and several schemes based on nonlinear ionization of gases \cite{bartel-ol05,kim-oe07,vved-prl09,berge-prl13,vved-prl18}.
These ionization schemes are technically simple and can employ ambient air at normal conditions as a target.
The emitted spectrum is broad and typically extends up to $10-30~\mathrm{THz}$.
In combination with the absence of a damage threshold and the possibility of using high-repetition pump lasers, this makes ionization-based sources of THz radiation a promising alternative to nonlinear crystals.
Two-color laser radiation consisting of a strong pulse of frequency $\omega$ and its relatively weak second harmonic (SH) is conventionally used to excite asymmetric ionization currents emitting THz waves \cite{kim-oe07,you-prl12}.
By now, employing linearly polarized 800-nm pulses and their co-polarized SH, THz waves with an electric field strength of the order of 10 MV/cm \cite{kim-apl14} have been obtained providing the presently strongest THz source operating in the high-repetition-rate regime.
Over the past years the $\omega-2\omega$ scheme has been extensively studied employing different field polarization states and wavelengths \cite{dai-prl09,wen-prl09,clerici-prl13,meng-apl16}.
According to recent theoretical predictions \cite{fedorov-pra18,tulsky-pra18}, application of mid-infrared two-color pulses instead of conventionally used 800-nm radiation may help increasing the THz emitted energy by one order of magnitude or even more.
This foreseeing enhancement can make THz sources of interest for fundamental experiments in atomic and molecular physics and for other applications requiring nonlinear regimes of interaction.
The physical mechanism of $\omega-2\omega$ THz generation is well understood on the single-atom level. A two-color laser field generally generates asymmetric photoelectron momentum distributions, so that after the averaging over fast oscillations with the frequencies $\omega$ and $2\omega$ and over the distribution, the electron current does not vanish, in contrast to the case of a quasi-monochromatic field \cite{kim-pp09,kotelnikov-jetp11,kim-pra13,poprz-pra15}.
The collective response of media ionized by bichromatic fields is less studied owing to a high complexity of the problem.
Most of the theory developed so far used simple models for the photo-induced current or nonlinear susceptibility which enter the right-hand side of an exact or reduced inhomogeneous wave equation (see examples in \cite{vved-prl18,kim-pp09,kim-pra13}).
Such approaches allow to compute the response of spatially extended media including filaments, but they suffer from model simplifications and do not take self-consistently into account the back reaction of THz radiation created in the plasma on the electron motion.
Meanwhile, radiation can significantly influence the electron dynamics as the number of coherently emitting electrons may reach giant values of $\displaystyle\sim 10^{10}$ and higher.
In this paper, we address the problem of the macroscopic THz response of laser-driven plasma in a complimentary way by employing a particle-in-cell (PIC) simulation of the plasma dynamics during and after the interaction with a two-color ionizing laser pulse.
Our simulation includes the ionization step and allows for a fully self-consistent calculation of the electron current including the back reaction of the coherently emitted radiation on the plasma dynamics.
We employ the PIC code UMKA developed for studying laser-plasma interactions in the strong-field regime and adapted to include ionization \cite{Vshivkov-1998,droplet-2013}.
High numerical costs of PIC simulations restrict the interaction volume in all dimensions by size $\sim 100~\mathrm{\mu m}$, so that instead of considering filaments created in open air we examine radiation emitted from a
spatially restricted target.
Such targets can be realized with thin gas jets or small gas-filled cells, the latter were used in experiment \cite{meng-apl16}.
We analyze the plasma dynamics, calculate distributions of the quasi-static electric field inside the plasma and the radiation spectra emitted in the forward direction, and estimate the efficiency of the electron energy conversion into that of THz radiation.
Our results show a relatively high energy conversion which appears more efficient for a smaller interaction volume and indicate the presence of strong long-living quasi-static electric fields.
On this basis, we suggest that the application of small gas-filled cells or thin gas beams where a two-color laser field can induce an almost homogeneous oscillating dipole, may lead to a much higher IR-to-THz energy conversion efficiency than that presently achieved in the regime of filamentation.
\section{Basic equations and numerical model}
We consider a two-color circularly polarized pulse described by the vector potential
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{A}(\mathbf{r},t)=\mathbf{A}_{\omega}(\mathbf{r},t)+\mathbf{A}_{2\omega}(\mathbf{r},t)
\label{A}
\end{equation}
whose form is determined by its time dependence in the plane $(x=0,y,z)$:
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{A}_{\omega}(x=0,y,t)=\frac{E_0}{\omega}\e^{-\frac{y^2}{2R^2}}\bigg(0,f(\varphi)\cos(\varphi),f(\varphi-\pi)\sin(\varphi)\bigg)~,~~f(\varphi)=\sin^2\bigg(\frac{\varphi}{2N}\bigg)~.
\label{A1}
\end{equation}
Here $E_0$ and $\omega$ are the electric field amplitude and the carrier frequency of the fundamental pulse with duration of $N$ periods, $R=16~\mathrm{\mu m}$ corresponding to the focal spot diameter (FWHM) of $27~\mathrm{\mu m}$ and the phase $\varphi=\omega(t-x/c)$ with c being the speed of light.
The phase variable $\varphi\in [0,2\pi N]$, and $\mathbf{A}=0$ outside of this interval.
The SH field has the same spatio-temporal envelope
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{A}_{2\omega}(x=0,y,t)=\epsilon\frac{E_0}{2\omega}\e^{-\frac{y^2}{2R^2}}\bigg(0,f(\varphi)\cos(2\varphi-\alpha),f(\varphi-\pi)\sin(2\varphi-\alpha)\bigg)~
\label{A2}
\end{equation}
and is shifted by phase $\alpha$ with respect to the fundamental.
The fundamental field amplitude was taken $E_0=0.17~\mathrm{at.u.}=0.87~\mathrm{GV/cm}$, corresponding to intensity
$\displaystyle\mathcal{I}=2\times 10^{15}~\mathrm{W/cm^2}$ of circularly polarized radiation.
The number of cycles $N=100$ for $0.8~\mathrm{\mu m}$ wavelength and $N=40$ for $2~\mathrm{\mu m}$ corresponds to the fixed pulse duration $\tau=267~\mathrm{fs}$.
The relative electric field amplitude in Eq.~\eqref{A2} is taken $\epsilon=0.22$ corresponding to a 5\% relative intensity of SH.
The choice of circularly polarized radiation is based on its higher efficiency in the excitation of the net photoelectron current responsible for emission of THz waves \cite{meng-apl16,tulsky-pra18}.
For an isotropic gas target, the phase shift $\alpha$ between the two fields in Eqs.~\eqref{A1} and \eqref{A2}, determines the orientation of the symmetry axis in the polarization plane, but otherwise does not affect the plasma dynamics \cite{tulsky-pra18}.
In our calculations
we use a rectangular two-dimensional cell which makes results $\alpha$-dependent.
To focus on the physically relevant situation when plasma oscillations are exited along the direction where the plasma size is spatially restricted, we adjust the value of $\alpha$ to direct the net photoelectron momentum after ionization along the $y$ axis.
In the case of linearly polarized pulses, the plasma dynamics is expected to be generally similar, but with a clear dependence on the phase shift, as was observed in \cite{meng-apl16}.
The rectangular gas cell is restricted in the $(x,y)$ plane, $0\le x\le L, -L/2\le y\le +L/2,$ with $L=20~\mathrm{\mu m}$ or $50~\mathrm{\mu m}$ and homogeneous in $z$ direction which
makes the calculation two-dimensional (2D) in the position space, while electron momenta and electromagnetic fields are calculated in the full dimension.
The incoming laser pulse propagating along the $x$ axis is determined by Eqs.~\eqref{A1}, \eqref{A2} on the front side of the cell $x=0,$
while the electromagnetic field in the whole space is calculated numerically from the system of Vlasov-Maxwell equations.
With the phase shift $\alpha$ fixed as described above, translation invariance along the $z$ axis is not expected to introduce unphysical effects.
Spatial and temporal resolution were $\displaystyle\Delta x =\Delta y=(2\pi c/\omega)/40$ and $\displaystyle\Delta t=(2\pi/\omega)/80,$ correspondingly, and $64$ macroparticles per species per numerical cell were used.
The gas is assumed initially neutral, and its ionization proceeds along the field tunneling mechanism.
We describe ionization events probabilistically, with the distribution function determined by the tunneling ionization rate taken from \cite{popov-usp04,poprz-jpb14}.
We only consider single-electron ionization, so that all the atomic species are either neutral or single-charged.
When an ionization event happens, the charge state of a chosen ion changes from $0$ to $+1$, and a free electron is created at rest at the position of the ion.
The energy required for ionization is subtracted from the field via the work of the "ionization current" $\mathbf{j}_{\mathrm{ion}}$ parallel to the electric field at the ion location.
The energy conservation is secured by the condition that the value $(\mathbf{j}_{\mathrm{ion}}\cdot\mathbf{E})\Delta t$ is equal to the energy spent on ionization per time step $\Delta t$ \cite{Rae,Mulser-Cornolti-Bauer}.
If the field energy in a cell is insufficient for further ionization, this cell is not considered anymore during the current time step \cite{Kemp-2004}.
For target and laser parameters we consider below, a small fraction of the laser energy is sufficient to singly ionize all atoms in the interaction volume, so that effects of saturation play a minor role.
In order to check the role of cell boundaries we have also made several runs for bigger cells with the sizes up to $150~\mathrm{\mu m}$ in the longitudinal and lateral directions.
Results of these calculations show that the effective lateral size of the plasma is determined by that of the focal waist $\simeq 30~\mathrm{\mu m}$ and does not depend on the cell width and on its shape in the lateral direction.
Instead, the longitudinal cell size has a direct effect on the plasma response.
\section{Numerical results}
Figure \ref{fig:fig1} shows the vector potential, Eq.~\eqref{A}, the target geometry, distributions in electron velocity $v_y$ taken at a time instant $t=333~\mathrm{fs}$ approximately equal to the time when the laser pulse leaves the cell after the interaction, and spectra $P(\nu)\sim\mathbf{E}(\nu)\mathbf{E}^*(\nu)$ of radiation emitted in the forward direction.
These distributions demonstrate a clear dependence on the cell size, on the laser wavelength, and on the gas density.
Firstly, at intensity $\mathcal{I}=2\times 10^{15}~\mathrm{W/cm^2}$, single-electron tunnel ionization of argon happens within a couple of optical cycles on the front edge of the pulse, so that during the interaction and after the laser pulse is gone the electron concentration of the plasma $n_e$ is close to that of atoms $n_0$.
As a consequence, the plasma frequency $\displaystyle\omega_p=\sqrt{4\pi e^2n_e/m_e}$ approximately equals to
$5\times 10^{13}~\mathrm{s^{-1}}$ for $n_0=10^{18}~\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$ and to $1.5\times 10^{14}~\mathrm{s^{-1}}$ for $n_0=10^{19}~\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$.
These numbers agree with the positions of maxima in the radiation spectra.
Note that the
plasma wavelength, $\displaystyle\lambda_p=2\pi c/\omega_p$, which is equal to $40~\mathrm{\mu m}$ and $13~\mathrm{\mu m}$ for $10^{18}~\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$ and
$10^{19}~\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$, respectively, determines the number of oscillations per cell size $L$ in the electron distribution.
Secondly, the laser wavelength determines the initial photoelectron velocity (see e.g. \cite{tulsky-pra18} for details) $\displaystyle v_0\approx keE_0\lambda/(2\pi m_ec)$ with $k\approx 0.1$.
These parametric scalings are clearly seen on the distributions shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig1}(c-f).
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\leftline{\includegraphics[height=10cm]{fig1ab_THz.jpg}
\includegraphics[height=10cm]{Fig1_c-f_nnew.jpg}}
\end{center}
\caption{(color online) Vector potentials of the single-color $\mathbf{A}_{\omega}(0,0,t)$ (black dotted line) and the two-color $\mathbf{A}(0,0,t)$ (solid red line) laser pulses defined by Eqs.~\eqref{A}, \eqref{A1} and \eqref{A2} (a); geometry of the 2D target (b); distributions in the electron velocity $v_y(x)$ normalized to the speed of light $c$ at $t=333~\mathrm{fs}$ and $y=0$ (c) and $y=0.45L$ (d) for the $20~\mathrm{\mu m}$ cell; spectral radiation power $P(\nu)$ in the forward direction measured in relative units for the $50~\mathrm{\mu m}$ (e) and $20~\mathrm{\mu m}$ (f) cells. Black lines correspond to parameters $(\lambda=0.8~\mathrm{\mu m}),~n_0=10^{19}~\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$, blue lines -- to $(\lambda=0.8~\mathrm{\mu m}),~n_0=10^{18}~\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$ and red lines -- to $(\lambda=2~\mathrm{\mu m}),~n_0=10^{18}~\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$.
On panel (a), the number of cycles in the pulse is reduced to $N=10$ for better visibility.}
\label{fig:fig1}
\end{figure}
Below we focus on the distribution of the electric field inside the plasma and on the total energy emitted in the THz domain.
Analysis of the magnetic fields and of the temporal structure of THz pulses will be presented elsewhere.
Figure \ref{fig:fig2} shows spatial distributions of the electric field $E_y$ taken at times $t\approx 400~\mathrm{fs}$ after the interaction has started.
The fields are averaged over the fundamental period aiming to smear out fast oscillations induced by the two-color pump pulse.
Cuts of $E_y$ alog the $x$-axis for $y=0$ and $y=L/2$ are depicted by black and white lines, respectively.
The plots allow estimating the peak values of the oscillating electric fields inside the plasma and in the near-field zone.
On the cell axis, the magnitude of this quasi-static electric field reaches $E_\mathrm{m}\approx 0.01E_0=8.6~\mathrm{MV/cm}$ for the $50~\mathrm{\mu m}$ cell at concentration $n_0=10^{19}~\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$ and $0.8~\mathrm{\mu m}$ wavelength.
For the $20~\mathrm{\mu m}$ cell and $2~\mathrm{\mu m}$ wavelength the peak electric field inside the plasma is even higher despite of the $10$-times lower electron density.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{Fig2_a_140nnew.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{Fig2_b_140nnew.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{Fig2_c_54nnew.jpg}
}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{Fig2_d_140nnew.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{Fig2_e_140nnew.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{Fig2_f_54nnew.jpg}
}
\end{center}
\caption{(color online) Distributions of the time-averaged electric field $E_y(x,y)$ and cuts of these distributions taken on the cell axis $y=0$ (black lines) and the cell boundary, $y=L/2$ (white lines) at times $t\simeq 400~\mathrm{fs}.$ The cell size, atomic concentration, laser wavelength and time instants $t$ are shown on the panels headlines.
}
\label{fig:fig2}
\end{figure}
Finally, we compute the total energy emitted in the THz domain.
To this end, we notice that at $t>400~\mathrm{fs}$ THz pulses are already well localized in space relatively far from the plasma, so that their linear energy density (i.e. energy per unit length in $z$ direction) can be estimated as
\begin{equation}
W_{\rm THz}\approx\int\limits_{S}dxdy\frac{{\bar{\mathbf{E}}}^2}{4\pi}~
\label{W}
\end{equation}
where the integral is taken over the 2D area $S$ in the $(x,y)$ plane where the THz wave is localized.
Here $\bar{\mathbf{E}}$ denotes the electric field averaged over fast oscillations with frequencies $\omega$ and $2\omega$.
The averaging procedure rules out the contribution of the pump laser field.
Results are summarized in Table~\ref{table:table1} for the same set of parameters as used for Fig.~\ref{fig:fig2}.
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{\label{table:table1} THz pulse energy per unit length calculated from Eq.~\eqref{W} for parameters of Fig.~\ref{fig:fig2}, and normalized to its value for $n_0=10^{19}~\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$, $\lambda=0.8~\mathrm{\mu m}$ and $L=50~\mathrm{\mu m}$.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\br
Cell size & $n_0=10^{19}~\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$ & $n_0=10^{18}~\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$ & $n_0=10^{18}~\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$\\
~~~ & $\lambda=0.8~\mathrm{\mu m}$ & $\lambda=0.8~\mathrm{\mu m}$ & $\lambda=2~\mathrm{\mu m}$\\
\mr
$50\mu$m & 1.0 & 0.21 & 2.0 \\
$20\mu$m & 0.44 & 0.16 & 0.88 \\
\br
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\section{Discussion and outlook}
Results reported in the previous section show several clear tendencies.
First, in all cases the THz pulse duration is shorter than that of the pump pulse.
The main spike of the field lasts about $100~\mathrm{fs}$ for $n_0=10^{19}~\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$ and $150~\mathrm{fs}$ for $n_0=10^{18}~\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$.
These times are approximately equal to the plasma periods $\displaystyle T_p=2\pi/\omega_p$ at the electron concentration equal to $n_0$.
At the same time, the THz pulse duration appears almost independent on the cell size and the pump wavelength.
The short duration of the THz burst contrasts with the fact that plasma oscillations are clearly present in the cell long after the pump laser pulse is gone.
A possible mechanism, which limits the pulse duration, can be connected to an extremely strong radiation damping of the plasma oscillations.
In the long wavelength limit, the radiation reaction force acting on an electron is proportional to the number of coherently radiating electrons.
For THz wavelengths and plasma concentrations considered here, this number can be as large as $N_e\simeq 10^{10}$ leading to an almost prompt damping of that component of the plasma oscillation, which emits radiation.
The following plasma evolution remains time-dependent but does not lead to significant emission anymore.
This behavior can be interpreted as resulting from a weak coupling of the survived plasma oscillation mode to the field of radiation \cite{berge} or, equivalently, as a formation of a specific non-radiating dynamic configuration.
The latter has been extensively studied in nanoplasmonics and optics of metamaterials \cite{nano}.
A quantitative description of this radiation damping effect on the plasma dynamics at long wavelengths will be given elsewhere.
Second, the quasi-static electric field excited inside and in a close vicinity of the cell reach the value $E_\mathrm{m}\approx 0.013E_0=11.6~\mathrm{MV/cm}$ for parameters of Fig.~2(d).
The peak amplitude practically does not depend on the cell size and grows with the electron concentration and the laser wavelength.
Assuming a homogeneous plasma oscillation with electron velocity distribution shown on Fig.~\ref{fig:fig1}(c-d), one may estimate the electric field amplitude as $\displaystyle E_\mathrm{m}\simeq E_0 v_0/v_p\sim\sqrt{n_e}\lambda$ where $v_0$ is the characteristic value of the initial velocity $v_y$ and $\displaystyle v_p=eE_0/m_e\omega_p$.
Estimating $v_0$ from the data of Fig.~\ref{fig:fig1} one obtains values of the electric field amplitude close to those shown on Fig.~\ref{fig:fig2}.
Thus, the quasi-static electric field induced inside the cell by the plasma oscillation grows with the atomic concentration and the laser wavelength, the latter agrees with the known data and calculations of two-color THz emission in mid-infrared fields \cite{clerici-prl13,fedorov-pra18,tulsky-pra18}.
The dependence of the electric field distribution on the cell size is less trivial. At $50~\mathrm{\mu m}$ the field is mostly concentrated near the cell edges where it oscillates spatially in the $y$-direction with a relatively small period.
These lateral oscillations can be explained as resulting from an non-homogeneous ionization on the shoulders of the pump laser pulse whose width in the transverse direction is determined by the parameter $R=16~\mathrm{\mu m}$ and is smaller than the cell size.
Instead, for the smaller cell the field ionization is quickly saturated in the whole volume making the system behaving similarly to a plain capacitor with an almost homogeneous time-dependent electric field inside.
Finally, we consider the energy emitted in the THz domain.
Its relative value given in Table 1 shows that the smaller cell emits with a much higher efficiency per electron than that of $50~\mathrm{\mu m}$ size.
Indeed, taking into account that for our 2D calculation the linear concentration of electrons in the $20~\mathrm{\mu m}$ cell is $6.25$ times smaller, we obtain, from the numbers shown in Table~\ref{table:table1}, that this cell emits $2.7-4.7$ times more energy per electron, at other parameters fixed.
This enhanced efficiency is the result of higher coherency of the electron motion inside the smaller cell.
While the $50~\mathrm{\mu m}$ cell supports $2-3$ plasma wavelengths, the smaller cell shows almost a pure dipole oscillation of the electron gas.
As a result, the electrons emit in-phase maximizing both the emission power and the radiation damping.
The higher radiation damping is also responsible for a much weaker tail of the THz pulse in the case of the smaller cell.
For a 3D plasma this quasi-dipole oscillation would make THz emission almost isotropic in the $(x,z)$ plane.
In our 2D model, a considerable emission happens in the backward direction.
Its contribution is not seen on Figs.~\ref{fig:fig2}(e,f) for $t\simeq 400~\mathrm{fs}$ because the back propagated THz wave at this time is located at $x\approx -80\div -60~\mathrm{\mu m}$.
Backward THz emission from two-color ionization of air has been recently observed in experiment \cite{bukin-apl19} where the laser pulse was tightly focused to create a small spike instead of a conventional elongated filament.
Effects considered in this paper essentially depend on the plasma size (particularly on that in the longitudinal direction).
A cell restricted by sharp boundaries is a numerically convenient model, but it might appear a setup difficult for experimental realizations.
The problem of cell material, which will unavoidably interact with a strong laser pulse, becomes particularly severe for the smallest considered cell size of $20~\mathrm{\mu m}$.
Alternative realizations of the scheme with a spatially restricted interaction volume can be achieved by using either tight focusing or thin gas jets.
In the tight focusing scheme, the lateral plasma size will also be limited to the value of several microns, highly reducing the total THz energy output.
Instead, in a gas jet flowing from a thin linear nozzle, the longitudinal and lateral plasma dimensions can be independently controlled by the jet thickness and the focal spot size.
In conclusion, we studied emission of THz waves from a small gas cell where a non-equilibrium plasma is created by means of strong-field two-color ionization of atoms.
Our main funding is the high relative efficiency of the electron energy conversion into THz radiation for smaller plasma emitters.
Quasi-static electric fields are shown to achieve values $>10~\mathrm{MV/cm}$ and can be further enhanced by applying longer mid-infrared wavelengths and using higher concentrations in the target.
Consequently, a gas jet, gas-filled cell or fiber of size of $10-20~\mathrm{\mu m}$ can serve as a highly efficient source of quasi-static electric and magnetic fields both in the near-filed and far-field zones.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
Authors acknowledge useful discussions with V. Bukin, A. Gopal, G.G. Paulus and V. Strelkov.
SVP acknowledges financial support of the Russian Science Foundation through grant No.18-12-00476 in the part related to the development of the model and analysis of numerical results.
The development of numerical algorithms was partially supported by the Russian Science Foundation through the grant No.19-71-20026.
TVL acknowledges the Siberian Supercomputer Center ICMMG SB RAS (Novosibirsk) for providing the computing time on NKS-1P cluster.
Most of the numerical simulations were performed using the computing resources granted by the John von Neumann-Institut f\"ur Computing (Research Center J\"ulich) under the project HRO04.
\section*{References}
|
\section{Introduction}
Interaction between light and matter has been key to our understanding of the physical universe. Ranging from microscopy and interferometry to a wide variety of spectroscopic techniques, electromagnetic waves are the carriers that bring to us almost all the information we can obtain about the universe around. The advent of quantum optics~\cite{gerry_knight_2004,Glauber:1963ei,Glauber:1963it,Klauder:2006wt,Sudarshan:1963bb} has moved the focus of research on light-matter interactions into the regime where quantum features of light also have a role in investigating, manipulating and understanding matter at the smallest scales. Theoretical and experimental tools that allow the use of a quantum state of light to interrogate and carry information about another quantum (or classical) system are now available~\cite{Berman:1994up,FornDiaz:2019br,Hood:1998fc,Kimble:1998hm,Weiner:2003wh,Raimond:2001jj,Giovannetti:2006cr,McCormick:2019hh,Toth:2014ew}.
Quantum mechanics allows information to lie delocalized across multiple, physically distinguishable, quantum systems, thereby providing one of the main motivations for studying quantum information theory as distinct from classical information theory~\cite{Nielsen10}. Entanglement, violations of the Bell's inequalities, quantum discord and other non-classical correlations in quantum states etc. can be considered as well-defined and quantifiable manifestations of such delocalized information~\cite{Horodecki:2009gb,Ollivier:PhysRevLett:2001,LANG:IntJQuanumInform:2011,Henderson:JournalOfPhysicsAMathematicalAndGeneral:2001,Modi:ReviewsOfModernPhysics:2012,Linta-Shaji}. In the context of quantum states of a field as information carriers which, in turn, are measured to elicit this information, one of the manifestations of the delocalized information that is of natural interest is quantum steering. First pointed out by Schr\"{o}dinger~\cite{schrodinger35a}, steering refers to the possibility allowed by quantum mechanics that measurements on one system can {\em steer} another quantum system into specific states under suitable conditions. The states into which the measured particles can be steered into when various read-out strategies are employed on the information carriers are the question of interest in this paper.
Quantum steering is considered to be a type of non-classical correlation in multipartite quantum states that can be placed between entanglement and non-locality as witnessed by the violation of Bell's inequalities. A precise formulation of steering and steerability criteria were first presented in~\cite{Wiseman-Steering}. Subsequently quantum steering became a very active area of research~\cite{Bhattacharya:2017gj,Costa:2016kf,McCloskey:2017kt,volume-monogamy,Xiao:2017ii,Yu:2018iz,Cavalcanti:2016ev,Das:2018hr,Gallego:2015ew,Nguyen:2017kr,Orieux:2018cu,Piani:2015gk,Rutkowski:2017ei,Sainz:2016jl,Saunders:2010iv,Skrzypczyk:2014jl,Weston:2018fe,Zeng:2018ec,Zhu:2016fg,Hu:2015ij,Milne:2014cy,Chowdhury:2015ig,Handchen:2012dq,He:2013go,He:2015kp,Li:2018dx,Olsen:2013do,Kogias:2015ef}. For comprehensive reviews on the topic from two different perspectives see~\cite{Cavalcanti:2017ba,Uola:2019wr}. In a bipartite quantum system, the set of states on to which a subsystem can be steered to by measurements on the other is determined by the correlations that present in their joint state. Traditionally questions of such steerability and its interpretations have been investigated theoretically and experimentally for quantum systems with finite dimensional Hilbert spaces~\cite{Bhattacharya:2017gj,Costa:2016kf,McCloskey:2017kt,volume-monogamy,Xiao:2017ii,Yu:2018iz,Cavalcanti:2016ev,Das:2018hr,Gallego:2015ew,Nguyen:2017kr,Orieux:2018cu,Piani:2015gk,Rutkowski:2017ei,Sainz:2016jl,Saunders:2010iv,Skrzypczyk:2014jl,Weston:2018fe,Zeng:2018ec,Zhu:2016fg,Hu:2015ij,Milne:2014cy}. Measurement of continuous variables like position and momentum have been discussed in the context of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen steering~\cite{Chowdhury:2015ig,Handchen:2012dq,He:2013go,He:2015kp}. Steering in the context of Gaussian~\cite{Kogias:2015ef} and non-Gaussian~\cite{Olsen:2013do} continuous-variable states also have been studied previously.
In this paper we consider a qubit interacting with a single mode of a radiation field. As mentioned previously, assuming a picture in which the interaction between the two is a means of eliciting information about the qubit by making measurements on the field mode, we examine the steerability of the qubit state. In particular, we assume heterodyne detection on the field mode corresponding to projections on to coherent states~\cite{Leonhardt:2005wy,Weedbrook:2012fe,Yuen:1980tr}. We compute the quantum steering ellipsoid~\cite{QSE} for the qubit corresponding to heterodyne detection of the field. The steering ellipsoid provides an intuitive way of not only visualizing the set of states on to which the qubit can be steered but also the nature of the correlations that exists between the qubit and the system from which the steering is done~\cite{Hu:2015ij,Milne:2014cy,QSE,volume-monogamy,Zhang:2019jh}. We briefly review the quantum steering ellipsoid construction for two-qubit systems described in~\cite{QSE} and obtain our main results in Section~\ref{sec2}. Illustrative examples are included in Sec.~\ref{sec3}. In Section~\ref{sec4} we use our result to study the steering states of a qubit interacting with single-mode field under Jaynes-Cummings Hamiltonian. A brief discussion and our conclusions are presented in~\ref{sec5}.
\section{The quantum steering ellipsoid \label{sec2}}
The quantum steering ellipsoid was introduced in~\cite{QSE} as a means of visualizing the state space of two qubits using only the three-dimensional Bloch-ball picture of single-qubit states. The ellipsoid corresponds to the set of all states into which one of the qubits in a two-qubit state can be steered to through all possible measurements on the other. The nature and size of the ellipsoid, in turn, is indicative of the correlations that exist between the two. We start with a brief recap of the construction of the quantum steering ellipsoid in the two-qubit case. An arbitrary two-qubit density matrix can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:twoqubitrho}
\rho_{A\!B} & = & \frac{1}{4}[ \openone_{A}\otimes \openone_{B} + \vec{a}\cdot\vec{\sigma}_{A}\otimes \openone_{B} + \openone_{A}\otimes\vec{b}\cdot\vec{\sigma}_{B} \nonumber \\
&& + \quad \Sigma^{3}_{i,j=1}T_{i,j}\sigma_{i}\otimes\sigma_{j}],
\end{eqnarray}
where $A$ and $B$ label the two qubits and the set $\sigma_\mu = \{ \openone, \, \sigma_x \, \sigma_y \, \sigma_z \}$ consisting of the identity operator and the three Pauli sigma matrices $\sigma_j$ furnish an operator basis for the single-qubit Hilbert space. The density matrix can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{rhoab}
\rho_{AB} =\frac{1}{4}\Sigma^{3}_{\mu,\nu=0} \Theta_{\mu\nu} \sigma_{\mu}\otimes\sigma_{\nu},
\end{equation}
by re-packaging the coefficients appearing in Eq.~(\ref{eq:twoqubitrho}) as
\[
\Theta=
\left[ {\begin{array}{cc}
1&\vec{b}^{T}\\
\vec{a}&T \\
\end{array} } \right].
\]
Here we identify $ \vec{a} $ and $\vec{b}$ as the Bloch vectors corresponding to the reduced states of the individual qubits and $T$ as the correlation matrix. Any measurement (POVM element) acting on the second qubit can be written as
\[ \hat{E} = \frac{1}{2}\sum_{\nu} X_{\nu}\sigma_{\nu}. \]
Applying the positivity condition to the operator leads to the constraint $X_{0}\geq 0 $ and $ X^{2}_{0}\geq |\vec{X}|^2 = \sum_{i}X^{2}_{i} $. Here we can choose measurement operators such that $X_{0} =1 $ and $\sum_{i}X^{2}_{i} =1$ exploiting certain invariance properties of the set of steering states. The result of such a measurement is that with probability $(1+\vec{b}\cdot \vec{X})/2$ the state of the first qubit is steered to
\begin{equation}
\rho^{E}_{A}= \frac{1}{2}\sum_{\mu}Y_{\mu}\sigma_{\mu},
\end{equation}
where $Y_{\mu}=\sum_{\nu}\tilde{\Theta}_{\mu\nu}X_{\nu}$ and $ \tilde{\Theta} = (1+\vec{b} \cdot \vec{X})^{-1} \Theta$. In terms of its components we have
\begin{equation}
Y_\mu = \left\{ 1, \, \frac{\vec{a}+T \vec{X}} {1+\vec{b}\cdot \vec{X}} \right\}.
\end{equation}
Taking all possible measurements on system B corresponds to all possible $\vec{X}$ with $|\vec{X}|\leq 1$. The set of all steered states of the first qubit then forms an ellipsoid given by,
\begin{equation}
\varepsilon_{A\rvert B} =\bigg\{ \frac{\vec{a}+T \vec{X}} {1+ \vec{b} \cdot \vec{X}} \colon | \vec{X}| \leq 1 \bigg\}.
\end{equation}
The size, orientation, etc. of an ellipsoid is determined by the correlation matrix $T$ and so $ \varepsilon_{A\rvert B} $ furnishes a means of visualizing these correlations.
We want to extend the quantum ellipsoid construction to the case where the second qubit is replaced by a single field mode with an infinite dimensional Hilbert space. Rather than considering all possible measurements on the field mode, we are looking at a particular type of measurement, namely heterodyne detection, on the field mode which corresponds to projecting it on to coherent states $|\beta \rangle \langle \beta|$. Keeping the detection scheme in mind, we write the state of the field in the same basis using the diagonal representation introduced by Sudarshan in~\cite{Sudarshan:1963bb} as,
\begin{equation}
\rho_{F} = \int P(\alpha) | \alpha \rangle \langle \alpha | d^{2}\alpha.
\end{equation}
Here $ P(\alpha)$ is the Sudarshan-Glauber $P$-function that has the inversion formula,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Pinvert}
P(\alpha) = \frac{e^{|\alpha|^{2}} }{\pi^{2}}\int\langle -u|\rho_F| u\rangle e^{| u|^{2}} e^{-u\alpha^*+u^*\alpha}d^{2}u.
\end{equation}
The coherent states of the field furnish an over-complete basis for representing states of the field with
\[ \frac{1}{\pi}\int{|\beta}\rangle \langle \beta| d^{2}\beta = \openone. \]
The combined density matrix for system and field can be written using the basis of Pauli matrices for the qubit and coherent state basis for the field as
\begin{equation}
\rho_{S\!F} =\sum_{\mu} \int{\Theta_{\mu}(\alpha) \sigma_{\mu}\otimes|\alpha}\rangle \langle \alpha| d^{2}\alpha.
\end{equation}
Using ${\rm Tr} (\sigma_\mu \sigma_\nu) = 2 \delta_{\mu \nu}$ we have
\[ {\rm Tr}_S(\rho_{ S\!F}\cdot \sigma_{\nu} \otimes \openone)= 2\int{\Theta_{\nu} (\alpha) |\alpha}\rangle \langle \alpha| d^{2}\alpha. \]
Along the lines of Eq.~(\ref{eq:Pinvert}) we get
\begin{eqnarray}
\Theta_{\nu}(\alpha) & = & \frac{e^{|\alpha|^{2}}}{2\pi^{2}} \int \langle -u|\ {\rm Tr}_S(\rho_{S\!F}\cdot \sigma_{\nu} \otimes \openone)| u\rangle \nonumber \\
&& \qquad \qquad \qquad \times \; e^{| u|^{2}} e^{-u\alpha^*+u^*\alpha}d^{2}u.
\end{eqnarray}
Here $ \Theta_{\nu}(\alpha)$ is a set of four functions each of which is analogous to each of the four rows of $\Theta$ matrix in the two-qubit case. Heterodyne detection corresponds to measurements that project on to $\hat{E} = (1/\pi) |\beta \rangle \langle \beta| $. When this measurement is performed on the field, the state of the qubit is steered to,
\[ \rho_{S,\beta} = \frac{ {\rm Tr}_F(\hat{E}\rho_{S\!F}\hat{E})}{{\rm Tr}(\hat{E}\rho_{S\!F}\hat{E})}, \]
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\rm Tr}_F(\hat{E}\rho_{S\!F}\hat{E}) & =& {\rm Tr}_F\bigg[\frac{1}{\pi^2} \openone \otimes|\beta\rangle \langle\beta| \\
&& \quad \times \; \sum_{\mu}\int \Theta_{\mu}(\alpha) \sigma_{\mu} \otimes |\alpha\rangle \langle \alpha| d^{2}\alpha \\
&& \qquad \qquad \qquad \times \; \openone \otimes |\beta\rangle \langle \beta| \bigg], \\
& = & \frac{1}{\pi^2}\sum_{\mu} \int \Theta_{\mu}(\alpha) \sigma_{\mu} {|\langle \alpha|\beta\rangle|}^2 d^2 \alpha.
\end{eqnarray*}
We obtain the normalized steered state of the qubit after the measurement on the field as
\begin{equation}
\rho_{S, \beta} = \frac{1}{2}\sum_{\mu} \frac{\int{\Theta_{\mu}(\alpha) {|\langle \alpha|\beta\rangle|}^2 d^2 \alpha}}{\int\Theta_0(\alpha){|\langle \alpha|\beta\rangle|}^2 d^2 \alpha} \sigma_{\mu}.
\end{equation}
From the equation above we can readily identify the Bloch vector of the steered state as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bloch}
X_{j} =\frac{\int{\Theta_{j}(\alpha) {|\langle \alpha|\beta\rangle|}^2 d^2 \alpha}}{\int{\Theta_0(\alpha){|\langle \alpha|\beta\rangle|}^2 d^2 \alpha}}.
\end{equation}
The steering set is constructed by considering the Bloch vectors of the set of all states of the qubit obtained by projecting the field on to all possible coherent states. We work out a few examples below and we find that the steering set indeed does form an ellipsoid in many cases but in others, it traces out a different figure.
\section{Examples \label{sec3}}
We first consider joint states of the qubit and the field in which the field state is also a manifestly quantum one like a number state. This lets us draw parallels with the two-qubit case pointing out the similarities and differences. Following this, we consider a state in which the field mode is in a Gaussian state.
\subsection{Pure state \label{sec2a}}
Consider the pure entangled Bell state of the form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:pure1}
| \Psi\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|00\rangle + |11\rangle),
\end{equation}
where the first position in the ket corresponds to the qubit and the second to the field. The field is in one of two possible number states $|0\rangle$ of $|1\rangle$ and it is maximally entangled with the qubit. After a straightforward calculation (see Appendix~\ref{AppA} for details) we find,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:thetapure}
\int\Theta_0(\alpha) | \langle \alpha | \beta \rangle|^2 d^2\alpha &=& \frac{1}{4}[e^{-| \beta |^2}+ |\beta|^2e^{-| \beta |^2}], \nonumber \\
\int\Theta_1(\alpha) | \langle \alpha | \beta \rangle|^2 d^2\alpha &=& -\frac{1}{4} [\beta e^{-| \beta |^2} + \beta^*e^{-| \beta |^2} ], \nonumber \\
\int\Theta_2(\alpha) | \langle \alpha | \beta \rangle|^2 d^2\alpha &=& \frac{i}{4}[-\beta e^{-| \beta |^2}+\beta^* e^{-| \beta |^2} ], \nonumber \\
\int\Theta_3(\alpha) | \langle \alpha | \beta \rangle|^2 d^2\alpha &=& \frac{1}{4}[e^{-| \beta |^2} - |\beta|^2e^{-| \beta |^2}].
\end{eqnarray}
Using Eqs.~(\ref{eq:bloch}) and (\ref{eq:thetapure}) we find,
\begin{eqnarray}
X_0 = 1, \quad & \quad
X_1 = -\frac{(\beta +\beta^*)}{(1+|\beta|^2)}, \nonumber \\
X_2 = i \frac{(\beta^* - \beta)}{(1+|\beta|^2)}, &
X_3 = \frac{(1-|\beta|^2)}{(1+|\beta|^2)}.
\end{eqnarray}
where $ \beta $ is a complex number that can be parametrized as $ \beta = r e^{i\varphi} $ to get
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:puresteer}
X_1 = -\frac{(2 r\cos{\varphi})}{(1+r^2)}, \; X_2 = \frac{(2r\sin{\varphi)}}{(1+r^2)}, \; X_3 = \frac{1-r^2}{1+r^2}.
\end{equation}
It is easy to check that $ X_1^2+X_2^2+X_3^2 = 1$, from which it follows that for a pure, maximally entangled, joint state, the steering ellipsoid for the qubit is the surface of the Bloch sphere itself as expected in direct comparison with the two-qubit case with measurements restricted to pure states of the second qubit. We see that heterodyne detection is capable of steering the qubit to any pure state. The coordinates in Eq.~(\ref{eq:puresteer}) correspond to a stereographic projection from the point $(0,0,-1)$ of the complex $\beta$-plane on to the unit sphere analogous to the construction of the Riemann sphere. The projection is implemented by identifying the point $(\varphi, \phi)$ in spherical polar coordinates that lie on the unit sphere as
\[ \tan \frac{\theta}{2}e^{-i\phi} = \frac{X_1 - i X_2}{1+X_3}.\]
This, in turn, corresponds to $\phi = \varphi$ and $\varphi = 2 \tan^{-1}(r)$. It is easy to verify that re-parametrizing the Bloch vector components of the steered states in terms of $(\varphi, \phi)$ yields
\[ X_1 = - \sin \theta \cos \phi, \quad X_2 = \sin \theta \sin \phi, \quad X_3 = \cos \theta.\]
The point $(0,0,-1)$ with $\theta = \pi$ representing the state $|1\rangle$ of the qubit corresponds to the point at infinity with $r \rightarrow \infty$ in this case. The probability of projecting $|\Psi\rangle$ on to $|\beta\rangle$ is
\[ {\rm Tr}[(\openone \otimes |\beta\rangle \langle \beta|)|\Psi \rangle \langle \Psi|] = \frac{1}{2}e^{-r^2}(1+r^2).\]
This means that the probability of steering the qubit to the state $|1\rangle$ is vanishingly small. Note that if one expands the scope of possible measurements on the field from heterodyne detection and include projections of the form $p|\beta\rangle\langle \beta| + (1-p)|\beta'\rangle \langle \beta'|$ with $0\leq p \leq 1$ then it is possible to access the interior of the Bloch sphere of states of the qubit through the steering.
Alternatively, if we consider a product state of the qubit and the field of the form,
\[ | \Psi\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|0 n\rangle + |1 n\rangle), \]
repeating the same calculation leads to
\[ X_0 = 1, \quad X_1 = 1, \quad X_2 = 0, \quad X_3 = 0.\]
Here there are no quantum or classical correlations between the qubit and the field and as a result, the steered qubit state is independent of the measurements on field as expected. The steering ellipsoid is, therefore, a single point in the Bloch ball of state of the qubit.
\subsection{Mixed quantum state \label{sec:mixed}}
Next, we consider a joint state that is mixed:
\[ \rho = p(| +2 \rangle \langle +2|) + (1-p) | \Phi\rangle \langle\Phi|,\]
where
\[ | +\rangle =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(| 0\rangle + | 1\rangle), \quad | \Phi\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(| 10\rangle +| 01\rangle), \]
with $ p\in (0,1)$. Again, after a straightforward calculation whose details are in Appendix~\ref{AppB}, we obtain,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:mixedbloch}
X_0 &=& 1, \nonumber \\
X_1 &=& \frac{p r^{4}-2(1-p)r\cos{\varphi}}{pr^4+(1-p)(1+r^2)}, \nonumber \\
X_2 &=& -\frac{2(1-p)r\sin{\varphi}}{pr^4+(1-p)(1+r^2)}, \nonumber \\
X_3 &=& \frac{(1-p)(r^2 -1)}{pr^4+(1-p)(1+r^2)}.
\end{eqnarray}
The figure traced out by the steered states of the qubit does not form an ellipsoid in this case. The shape of the set also varies with $p$. The steering set for two different values of $p$ are given in Fig.~\ref{fig1}. The point $(1,0,0)$ corresponding to the state $|+\rangle$ of the qubit is always part of the steered set except for $p=0$. We see that the set of steered states, in this case, does not always form a convex figure. The steering set corresponding to $p=0.3$ has a part in the bottom right side which curves inwards like the poles of an apple and touches the point $(1,0,0)$. Indeed by choosing to project the field mode on to states of the form $p|\beta\rangle\langle \beta| + (1-p)|\beta'\rangle \langle \beta'|$, the convex hull as well as the interior points of the set can be obtained as mentioned earlier. \begin{figure}[!htb]
\resizebox{7.55cm}{14cm}{\includegraphics{fig1.pdf}}
\caption{The steering set for the mixed state. The figure above corresponds to $p=0.3$ and the one below to $p=0.9$. The full Bloch sphere is also shown for reference.}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Field mode in a coherent state \label{sec2c}}
We now consider a joint state of the form
\[ | \Psi\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|0\gamma\rangle + |1\gamma'\rangle), \]
where $ |\gamma \rangle $ and $ |\gamma' \rangle $ are coherent states. Computing the Bloch vector components of the steered states as before (see Appendix~\ref{AppC}) we obtain,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:gammax}
X_0 &=& 1,\nonumber \\
X_1 &=& \frac{1}{\Theta_0} \Big(e^{-\frac{1}{2}| \gamma |^2-\frac{1}{2}| \gamma' |^2-| \beta |^2+\gamma\beta^*+\beta\gamma'^*} \nonumber \\
&& \qquad \qquad \qquad + \; e^{-\frac{1}{2}| \gamma |^2-\frac{1}{2}| \gamma' |^2-| \beta |^2+\gamma'\beta^*+\beta\gamma^*} \Big), \nonumber \\
X_2 &=& \frac{i}{\Theta_0} \Big(e^{-\frac{1}{2}| \gamma |^2-\frac{1}{2}| \gamma' |^2-| \beta |^2+\gamma\beta^*+\beta\gamma'^*} \nonumber \\
&& \qquad \qquad \qquad - \; e^{-\frac{1}{2}| \gamma |^2-\frac{1}{2}| \gamma' |^2-| \beta |^2+\gamma'\beta^*+\beta\gamma^*}\Big), \nonumber \\
X_3 &=& \frac{1}{\Theta_0} \Big(e^{-| \gamma |^2-| \beta |^2+\gamma\beta^*+\beta\gamma^*} \nonumber \\
&& \qquad \qquad \qquad -\; e^{-| \gamma' |^2-| \beta |^2+\gamma'\beta^*+\beta\gamma'^*} \Big). \end{eqnarray}
where
\[ \Theta_0 = e^{-| \gamma |^2-| \beta |^2+\gamma\beta^*+\beta\gamma^*}+ e^{-| \gamma' |^2-| \beta |^2+\gamma'\beta^*+\beta\gamma'^*}. \]
Here also we find that $ {X_1}^2+{X_2}^2+{X_3}^2=1 $, indicating that the steering set for the pure entangled state, as in Sec.~\ref{sec2a}, is the surface of the Bloch sphere even when the individual field states appearing in the joint entangled states are coherent ones.
\section{Evolution under the Jaynes-Cummings Hamiltonian \label{sec4}}
We now consider the case in which the qubit of interest is interacting with the field mode with their combined evolution described by the Jaynes-Cummings Hamiltonian~\cite{gerry_knight_2004}
\begin{equation}
\hat{H}_{JC}=\hbar\omega\hat{a}^{\dagger}\hat{a}+\frac{\hbar\omega_0}{2}\hat{\sigma}_{z}+\hbar\lambda[\hat{\sigma}_{+}\hat{a}+\hat{\sigma}_{-}a^{\dagger}].
\end{equation}
The first two terms are the Hamiltonians of the field mode and the qubit while the third term is the interaction. We assume that the initial state of the qubit-field system is $|1 \, n \rangle$ with the qubit in its ground state $|1\rangle$ and the field in an $n$-photon state. Solving the time-dependent schr\"{o}dinger equation in the interaction picture we obtain the time evolved state as
\[| \Psi_t \rangle = \cos(\sqrt{n} \lambda t) | 1 \, n \rangle-i\sin(\sqrt{n}\lambda t)| 0 \, n-1 \rangle.\]
As before (see Appendix~\ref{AppD}) we obtain the components of the Bloch vectors of the steered states as
\begin{eqnarray}
X_1 &=& -\frac{r\sqrt{n}\sin{\varphi}\sin(2\sqrt{n} \lambda t)}{n \sin^2(\sqrt{n} \lambda t)+r^2 \cos^2(\sqrt{n} \lambda t) },
\nonumber \\
X_2 &=& -\frac{r \sqrt{n} \cos{\varphi}\sin(2\sqrt{n} \lambda t)}{n \sin^2(\sqrt{n} \lambda t)+r^2 \cos^2(\sqrt{n} \lambda t) }, \nonumber \\
X_3 & =& \frac{n \sin^2(\sqrt{n} \lambda t)-r^2 \cos^2(\sqrt{n} \lambda t)}{n \sin^2(\sqrt{n} \lambda t)+r^2 \cos^2(\sqrt{n} \lambda t)}.
\end{eqnarray}
We find that in this case $X_1^2+X_2^2+X_3^2 = 1$ for all time $ t$. Initially, we had a product state and the corresponding steering set was the isolated point $(0,0,-1)$. For arbitrarily small $t>0$, we obtain complete steerability to any point on the surface of the Bloch sphere and to it's interior if we remove the restriction of Heterodyne detection. There are isolated points in time when the state again becomes a product state leading to loss of steerability. For example, when $ n=1 $, we get steering to the set of all pure state for all time except $\lambda t =n\pi/2$. In this case, the behavior of the steering set can be contrasted with the concurrence between the qubit and field mode which behaves as $C=\sin( 2\lambda t)$. The entanglement between the qubit and the field is a smoothly varying function while the steerability jumps discontinuously between full and no steerability.
\section{Discussion and Conclusion \label{sec5}}
Motivated by the role of light both in interrogating as well as manipulating matter at the quantum level, we have studied a qubit coupled to a single mode of a field with regard to the states into which the qubit can be steered to by performing an easily implementable measurement, namely heterodyne detection, on the state of the field mode. Using the diagonal state representation of the state of the field, we were able to obtain closed-form expressions for the components of the Bloch vector of the qubit corresponding to a given outcome for the measurement on the field mode. We found that in the case of pure entangled states of the qubit-field system, full steerability to any pure state of the qubit is available independent of the degree of entanglement between the two. This is pertinent to our analysis of the case where the qubit and field are interacting via the Jaynes-Cummins Hamiltonian. The interaction can be thought of as the one that implements either the required manipulation of the qubit or the one that precedes a measurement of it. We find that even if the interaction is present for an arbitrarily small amount of time, the result joint state of the qubit and field gives full steerability. In particular, with pure Heterodyne detection, steering to any pure state of the qubit is enabled. This shows that even with very limited resources, quantified here in terms of the interaction time, and with additional constraints on the allowed read-out of the field more, the full scope of qubit state preparation through measurement of the field is still available.
The restriction to Heterodyne detection does impose a limitation on the set of accessible states in two regards. Access to mixed states as well as access to the full convex hull of states in the second example is available only if one can project on to convex combinations of coherent states of the field mode. Repeating the Heterodyne detection on identical copies of the qubit-field system followed grouping of the resultant qubit states together as an ensemble can also yield mixed states. We also saw that in order to access all possible pure states of the qubit, projection of the field mode into coherent states with arbitrary high amplitudes is required. For joint states with low mean energy for the field, such projections happens only with vanishingly low probability. For qubit state preparation one can still adopt a hybrid strategy in which the state heralded by the measurement result of the qubit is rotated to the desired one through suitable control pulses provided one has sufficient control on the qubit.
\acknowledgments
Anil Shaji acknowledges the support of the Science and Engineering Research Board, Government of India through EMR grant No. EMR/2016/007221.
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro}
Filaments, which are also called prominences when they appear on the limb of the Sun, are cool and dense material suspended in the corona. They are usually located in highly sheared magnetic fields above polarity inversion lines (PILs). Filaments that occur over a wide range of latitudes outside active regions are called quiescent filaments. The filament field structure is probably a flux rope that supports the mass (e.g., \citealt{1989Priest}). A loss of stability or balance of the flux rope can cause an eruption, and the trigger mechanism for the eruption is a field of active research and still under debate. There are many trigger mechanisms, e.g., the catastrophe model \citep{1991Forbes}, torus instability \citep{2006Kliem}, kink instability \citep{2004Torok}, breakout model \citep{1999Antiochos}, shearing motion \citep{1990Aly} and flux emergence \citep{1995Feynman}. The decay index of coronal magnetic fields can be used to measure the torus instability. \citet{2006Kliem} find that the torus instability can be triggered if the value of the decay index n $\geq$ 1.5, while \citet{2010Demoulin} suggest that the critical decay index depends on the thickness and shape of the current channel.
Filament eruptions can result in coronal mass ejections (CMEs; e.g., \citealt{2003Gopalswamy,1979Munro,2000Gilbert,2002Hori}). CMEs are large-scale magnetized plasma ejected from the Sun into interplanetary space and major drivers of space weather effects. CMEs and their upstream sheaths are responsible for most major geomagnetic storms in the terrestrial environment (e.g., \citealt{1988Tsurutani,1994Gonzalez, 2008Echer}). The properties and geoeffectiveness of CMEs have been widely studied and discussed. Previous studies of CME interplanetary propagation categorize CMEs into fast and slow events according to their speed in comparison with the average solar wind speed (e.g., \citealt{2000Gopalswamy})\footnote{Note that a slow CME with speed lower than the average solar wind speed (about 400 km s$^{-1}$) can also drive a shock when it is propagating into an even slower solar wind (e.g., \citealt{2016Liu, 2017Lugaz}). In this case, the speed of the ICME leading edge relative to the upstream solar wind speed has to be larger than the ambient fast magnetosonic speed (e.g., \citealt{2011Tsurutani}). Therefore, a shock ahead of an ICME observed at 1 AU is not necessarily suggestive of a fast CME near the Sun.}. During the transit from the Sun to Earth, fast CMEs experience an impulsive acceleration, and then rapidly decelerate to a nearly constant speed or gradual deceleration phase \citep{2013Liu}, while slow CMEs gradually accelerate out to about 20-30 $R_\sun${} and then travel with a nearly invariant speed around the average solar wind level \citep{2016Liu}. Fast CMEs have attracted great attention because of their association with interplanetary shocks, high energy particles, and intense geomagnetic storms upon arrival at the Earth. Slow CMEs are generally thought to be not as geoeffective as fast CMEs. However, slow CMEs take a long time to travel from the Sun to Earth, so they have a high potential to interact with other solar wind structures and their geoeffectiveness can thus be enhanced (e.g., \citealt{2016Liu, 2018He,2010Rouillard,2015Kataoka,2004Tsurutani}).
The interactions with the coronal magnetic fields and the solar wind structures can alter the propagation properties of CMEs. \citet{1986MacQueen}, \citet{2015Kay}, \citet{2015Wang}, and \citet{2018LiuYi} suggest that the propagation directions of CMEs can be influenced by the background coronal magnetic fields. Slow CMEs tend to deflect toward and propagate along streamer belts because of the strong open magnetic fields of coronal holes, while some fast CMEs may propagate away from streamer belts (e.g., \citealt{2009Xie, 2009Kilpua,2017Manchester} and references therein). The propagation directions of CMEs in interplanetary space can also be changed by interactions between CMEs or interactions with fast solar wind streams (e.g., \citealt{2001bGopalswamy, 2012Lugaz, 2014Liu, 2016Liu}), so it is difficult to predict the propagation direction in this case (e.g., \citealt{2009Echer}). In addition to deflections, CMEs could rotate during their journey from the Sun to Earth (e.g., \citealt{2007Yurchyshyn, 2010bLiu, 2010Lynch, 2011Vourlidas}). Although a statistical study finds that the tilt angles of CME flux ropes are close to those of the magnetic PILs in the corresponding solar source regions \citep{2015Marubashi}, cases with rotations larger than 100\degr{} are reported (e.g., \citealt{2005Rust, 2010bLiu, 2016Vemareddy}). The strength and duration of the southward magnetic field at 1 AU would change due to deflection and rotation of the CME flux rope, and as a result the geoeffectiveness of CMEs becomes uncertain. Thus, slow CMEs can also cause intense geomagnetic storms (e.g., \citealt{2004Tsurutani, 2018He}). However, the process of how slow CMEs leads to enhanced geoeffectiveness at 1 AU, compared with fast CMEs, is still unclear.
On 2018 August 20, a large-scale quiet-region solar filament gradually erupted into a slow CME, which drove the third largest geomagnetic storm of solar cycle 24 with a $D_{st}$ minimum of $-$174 nT. This event provides a good opportunity to investigate how a slow CME can result in an intense geomagnetic storm. In this paper, we present a comprehensive analysis of this CME and its propagation from the Sun to Earth with remote sensing observations and in situ measurements. We describe the source region eruption in Section \ref{1}, the interplanetary propagation characteristics in Section \ref{2}, and the properties of the flux rope at 1 AU and the associated geoeffectiveness in Section \ref{3}. We conclude and discuss the results in Section \ref{4}.
\section{Source Region eruption} \label{1}
The filament was lunched around 08:00 UT on 2018 August 20, and weak flare ribbons and dimming regions were observed. Figure \ref{f1} shows an overview of the filament in a 193 \AA{} image from the Atmosphere Imaging Assembly (AIA; \citealt{2012Lemen}) with potential field source surface (PFSS) extrapolation results mapped on it. The filament with an ``L''·-like shape lies beneath a streamer with closed magnetic fields. The open magnetic field lines and the AIA image suggest that near the filament there are mainly two coronal holes, which can produce fast solar wind.
Figure \ref{f2}(a) shows an extreme ultraviolet (EUV) image of the filament at the time of the eruption. During the eruption, the top part of the filament began to oscillate and move upward. However, we can not trace the height of the filament radial motion. Flare ribbons became visible at about 08:00 UT on the bottom half of the filament and separated with a very slow velocity. However, the soft x-ray flux at 1--8 \AA{} from \textit{GOES} just increased sightly and did not reach class B. Dimming regions, which often appear in eruptions (e.g., \citealt{1997Sterling, 2007Sterling, 2005deToma}), were observed in Figure \ref{f2}(b). After the eruption, the northeast coronal hole gradually merged with a dimming region into a low-latitude coronal hole on 2018 August 21. This is probably the source of the fast solar wind following the interplanetary CME (ICME) in our case (see below). The filament channel is overlaid on the Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager (HMI; \citealt{2012Schou}) magnetogram in Figure \ref{f2}(c). The filament lies roughly along a neutral line with the positive polarity on the left side and the negative polarity on the right side, although it is not in an active region. The south end of the filament is located in the negative polarity region, which indicates that the axial magnetic field of the filament is likely pointing from northeast to southwest. The azimuthal magnetic field above the filament is from the left side to the right side. This magnetic field configuration indicates a left-handed flux rope around the filament.
We give the distribution of the critical height at n $=$ 1.2 above the filament from the measurements of the decay index of coronal magnetic fields in Figure \ref{f3}. A decay index is defined as
\begin{equation}
n=\frac{\partial{\ln B_h}}{\partial{\ln H}},
\end{equation}
where $B_h$ is the horizontal magnetic field component and $H$ is the height above the photosphere. \citet{2010Demoulin} show that for circular and straight current channels, which are deformable and as thick as those expected in the corona, the critical index is typically in the range [1.1,1.3]. Thus, we choose the value of 1.2 to calculate the distribution of the critical height. {Relatively low critical heights are seen in regions where the flare ribbons began. Therefore, we suggest that the bottom half of the filament erupted first due to the loss of stability and then perhaps destabilized the whole filament.
We make a slice along the flare-ribbon separating direction (see Figure \ref{f2}) to create a distance-time diagram, which is shown in Figure \ref{f4}. From the distance-time plot, we find that the flare ribbons separated with a very slow speed of $\sim$3 km s$^{-1}${} at the initial stage and $\leq$ 1 km s$^{-1}${} later. The flare-ribbon separation lasted about 24 hours, which is a surprisingly long time period. These signatures indicate a gradual filament eruption, which will evolve into a slow and weak CME. The coronagraph observations from Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (\textit{SOHO}; \citealt{1995Domingo}) and Solar Terrestrial Relations Observatory (\textit{STEREO}; \citealt{2008Kaiser}) confirm a slow CME. Interestingly, the flare-ribbon separation overlaps with the slow acceleration of the CME (see below).
\section{Characteristics of Propagation} \label{2}
Coronagraph observations and corresponding GCS modeling are displayed in Figure \ref{f5}. The CME first appeared in the field of view of \textit{STEREO A}/COR2 \citep{2008Howard} at 19:00 UT and \textit{SOHO}/C2 \citep{1995Domingo} at 21:00 UT on August 20. The CME signal looks very weak in \textit{SOHO} but much clearer in \textit{STEREO A}{}, which indicates the importance to have a side view for CME observations. We use a graduated cylindrical shell (GCS) model proposed by \citet{2006Thernisien} to fit the CME based on running-difference coronagraph images from \textit{STEREO A}/COR2 and \textit{SOHO${/}$}LASCO{}. The GCS model can determine the direction of propagation, tilt angle of CME flux rope and height (e.g., \citealt{2009Thernisien, 2010bLiu, 2017Hu, 2017Zhao}). Application of the model gives an average propagation direction of about 13\degr{} west of the Sun-Earth line and 6\degr{} north, which is consistent with the location of the flare ribbons (W12\degr{}N17\degr{}). The speed of the CME leading edge is accelerated from $\sim$70 km s$^{-1}${} at 4.4 $R_\sun${} to $\sim$370 km s$^{-1}${} at 16.2 $R_\sun${} (see below). According to the interval of the GCS CME fitting shown in Figure \ref{f4}, we find that the CME acceleration is coincident with the flare-ribbon separation. The tilt angle of the CME flux rope obtained from the GCS model is about 10\degr{} with respect to the ecliptic plane, which is quite different from the southwest orientation of the flare ribbons. We have actually tried to fit the CME flux rope with the same orientation as that of the flare ribbons, but a good match with \textit{SOHO${/}$}LASCO{} and \textit{STEREO A}/COR2 coronagraph images can not be obtained simultaneously. Then, we choose a small tilt angle according to the loop-like structure in \textit{STEREO A}/COR2 images and get a good visual consistency between the GCS model and observations.
Figure \ref{f6} shows the GONG synoptic magnetogram, over which the coronal magnetic field configuration and the heliospheric current sheet at 2.5 $R_\sun${} are plotted. The tilt angles of the white arrow and the lower cyan solid line suggest that the CME rotated in the low corona. We can not determine the direction and amount of the rotation, because the GCS model does not give the direction of the axial magnetic field of the CME flux rope. \citet{2007Green} find that for left-handed chirality a filament rotates counterclockwise. According to \citet{2007Green}, the CME in our study might have rotated counterclockwise by tens of degrees if the axis of the CME flux rope is westward, or by over 200\degr{} if the axis of the CME flux rope is eastward. However, we can not rule out the possibility that the CME has rotated clockwise by tens of degrees with the axis eastward. We compare the orientation of the heliospheric current sheet and the tilt angle of the CME flux rope by translating the lower cyan solid line to the location of the heliospheric current sheet along the same longitude. As shown in Figure \ref{f6}, the axis of the CME flux rope matches the tilt of the heliospheric current sheet, which supports the speculation of \citet{2008Yurchyshyn} that the axis of the ejecta may rotate in such a way that it locally aligns itself with the heliospheric current sheet.
We investigate the CME evolution in interplanetary space by producing a time-elongation map (e.g., \citealt{2008Sheeley, 2009Davies, 2010aLiu}). The time-elongation map shown in the left panel of Figure \ref{f7} is produced by stacking running-difference images of COR2, HI1, and HI2 from \textit{STEREO A}{} within a slit along the ecliptic plane. The track associated with the CME can be identified from the map. Elongation angles of the CME leading edge in the ecliptic plane are extracted along the track, and then can be converted to radial distances using the methods summarized in \citet{2010bLiu}. Given that \textit{STEREO A}{} is 108\degr{} east of the Sun-Earth line, we derive the CME kinematics using a harmonic mean (HM) approximation \citep{2009Lugaz}, which assumes that CMEs are attached to the Sun as a spherical front and move along a fixed radial direction. Readers are directed to \citet{2013Liu} for discussions of selection of CME geometry depending on the observation angle of the spacecraft.
The CME kinematics obtained from the GCS modeling and HM approximation are presented in the right panel of Figure \ref{f7}. Note that we have used the GCS propagation longitude (W13\degr{}) as input for the HM approximation. The GCS model and the HM approximation give consistent CME height and speed profiles below $\sim$17 $R_\sun$. The CME was gradually accelerated to about 370 km s$^{-1}${} below $\sim$17 $R_\sun${} and then moved with a nearly constant speed. This is a typical speed profile for slow CMEs, i.e., a gradual acceleration followed by a nearly constant speed around the average solar wind level \citep{2016Liu}. We use a linear extrapolation of the distances after 17 $R_\sun${} to predict the CME arrival time at the Earth, which is about 15:21 UT on August 25. We will compare the predicted arrival time and the CME final speed with in situ measurements at the Earth. Given the flux rope orientation and the slow speed, the CME would have little geoeffectiveness at the Earth.
\section{Properties at 1 AU} \label{3}
Figure \ref{f8} shows the in situ measurements from \textit{Wind}{} associated with 2018 August 20 CME without a preceding shock. The flux rope interval is from 14:10 UT on August 25 to 09:09 UT on August 26, which is determined through a boundary-sensitive reconstruction technique (see below). It has all the three signatures of a magnetic cloud (MC), i.e., a smooth and strong magnetic field, a coherent rotation of the field, and a low proton temperature, according to the definition of \citeauthor{1981Burlaga} (\citeyear{1981Burlaga}; also see \citealt{2008Echer, 2019MengXing} and references therein). The CME arrival time (15:21 UT on August 25) at the Earth predicted by wide-angle imaging observations is in good agreement with the observed MC leading boundary time (14:10 UT). The average speed across the MC leading boundary is about 400 km s$^{-1}$, which is also well consistent with the predicted speed ($\sim$370 km s$^{-1}${}). According to the velocity measurements, the CME is bracketed between slow and fast solar winds. The source of the fast solar wind is probably the coronal hole east of the filament, as discussed in section \ref{1}. Inside the MC, the magnetic field strength is as high as 19.1 nT, and the peak southward component reaches $-$16.4 nT. The magnetic field inside the CME must have been enhanced because the CME is inside a compression region between slow and fast solar winds. A similar situation is observed by \citet{2018He} and \citet{1989Tang}. The N component remains largely negative inside the MC, which indicates a southward orientation of the CME flux rope. This is different from the tilt angle derived from the GCS model, so the flux rope may have rotated again in interplanetary space. The $D_{st}$ index reaches a minimum of $-$174 nT, which is the third largest one of solar cycle 24. The largest geomagnetic storms of solar cycle 24 so far occurred on 2015 March 17 and June 22 with $D_{st}$ minima of $-$223 and $-$195 nT, respectively \citep{2015Liu}.
We reconstruct the flux rope at 1 AU using a Grad-Shafranov (GS) technique \citep{1999Hau, 2002Hu}, which has been validated by multi-spacecraft measurements \citep{2008Liu, 2009Mostl}. As shown in Figure \ref{f9}, the reconstruction results give a left-handed flux rope, which is consistent with the solar source observations. The elevation angle of the flux rope is about $-$51\degr{} and the azimuthal angle is about 299\degr{}. The flux-rope tilt angle is very different from that determined from the GCS model near the Sun, which indicates that the CME rotated again in interplanetary space. The southeast axis orientation of the flux rope explains the prolonged southward magnetic fields inside the MC, which is the most important trigger of geomagnetic storms. From the in situ measurements and the GS reconstruction results, the unexpected intense geomagnetic storm is mainly caused by the enhanced magnetic field in a solar wind compression region and a southward orientation of the flux rope at 1 AU from the rotation of the flux rope.
Figure \ref{f10} shows the heliospheric current sheet map at 1 AU at 14:10 UT on 2018 August 25 (adapted from \url{http://www.predsci.com/mhdweb/summary_plots.php}). The propagation direction of the CME is 16\degr{} west of the Sun-Earth line derived from the GCS model, and the Carrington longitude of the Sun-Earth line is 103\degr{} at 14:10 UT on 2018 August 25. Assuming that the propagation direction of the CME does not change much beyond 17 $R_\sun${}, the CME would arrive at 1 AU with a Carrington longitude of about 120\degr{} as marked by the diamond symbol in Figure \ref{f10}. It is clear that the CME rotated in interplanetary space. Again, the flux-rope rotation is such that the axis of the flux rope is aligned with the tilt of the local heliospheric current sheet at 1 AU.
\section{summary and discussions}\label{4}
We have investigated the characteristics of the 2018 August 20 CME in relation to an intense geomagnetic storm, using remote sensing observations from \textit{SDO}, \textit{STEREO}, and \textit{SOHO} and in situ measurements at \textit{Wind}. The PFSS model together with EUV observations is used to examine the coronal magnetic field configuration and filament eruption. The Sun-to-Earth propagation of the CME is analyzed using the GCS model and wide-angle imaging observations. Finally, a GS reconstruction method is employed to understand the flux-rope structure and how the structure controls geomagnetic activity. The results are summarized and discussed below, which provide insights on how a weak CME can result in an unexpected strong geomagnetic storm.
The filament eruption is a very slow process and lasted about 24 hours, as can be seen from the gradual separation of the flare ribbons. This indicates a slow CME, whose acceleration is coincident with the flare-ribbon separation. We give the distribution of the critical height above the filament from the measurements of the decay index of coronal magnetic fields. Regions with relatively low critical heights above the filament are found and are consistent with where the flare ribbons began. Therefore, we suggest that the part of the filament with relatively low critical heights first erupted due to the loss of stability and then destabilized the whole filament.
The axis of the CME flux rope rotated in the corona as well as in interplanetary space, which tended to be aligned with the local heliospheric current sheet. The solar source observations suggest that the orientation of the flux rope is southwest, but the tilt angle of the CME flux rope determined by the GCS model is largely horizontal. Therefore, the CME may have rotated in the low corona. The axis of the CME flux rope matches the tilt of the heliospheric current sheet at 2.5 $R_\sun${}. Through the reconstruction of the flux-rope structure near the Earth, we find that the elevation angle of the flux rope is about $-$51\degr{}, which is different from the GCS orientation. Therefore, the CME may have rotated again in interplanetary space, and the rotation is such that the tilt angle of the CME flux rope is aligned with the heliospheric current sheet at 1 AU. These results support the speculation of \citet{2008Yurchyshyn} that the axis of the CME flux rope may rotate in such a way that it aligns itself with the local heliospheric current sheet.
According to the in situ measurements, the CME was bracketed between slow and fast winds, which enhanced the magnetic field inside the CME at 1 AU. The magnetic strength inside the MC is as high as 19.1 nT, and the southward field component peaks at $-$16.4 nT. The fast solar wind following the CME from behind came from a coronal hole east of the filament. According to the GS reconstruction results, the prolonged southward magnetic field
inside the MC is mainly from the axial component of the largely southward inclined flux rope (e.g., \citealt{2016Hu}). If the flux rope had not rotated in interplanetary space, the strength and duration of the southward magnetic field would be much smaller. These results indicate that the unexpected intense geomagnetic storm was caused by the enhanced magnetic field of the CME in the solar wind compression region and a southward orientation of the flux rope at 1 AU from the rotation of the flux rope.
In summary, our analysis gives a whole process of the CME propagation from the Sun to Earth in connection with geomagnetic activity. The large-scale quiescent filament gradually erupted beneath a streamer, which evolved into a weak CME that entered a solar wind compression region between slow and fast winds. Meanwhile, the CME flux rope rotated in the corona as well as in interplanetary space and tended to be aligned with the local heliospheric current sheet. As a result, the CME arrived at 1 AU with the enhanced and prolonged southward magnetic field, which caused the third largest geomagnetic storm of solar cycle 24. These results indicate the crucial importance of understanding the physical process of CME evolution for accurate space weather forecasting.
\acknowledgments
The research was supported by NSFC under grants 41774179 and 41604146, and the Specialized Research Fund for State Key Laboratories of China. We acknowledge the use of data from {\textit{STEREO}, \textit{SDO}, \textit{SOHO}, \textit{Wind}, and \textit{GONG}}. The MHD simulation results are obtained from \url{http://www.predsci.com/mhdweb/summary_plots.php}.
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\epsscale{0.8}
\plotone{f1.eps}
\caption{\label{f1}PFSS modeled coronal magnetic fields
surrounding the source region mapped onto the AIA 193 \AA{} image at 04:00 UT on 2018 August 20. Closed field lines are in black, open positive field lines in green, and open negative field lines in magenta.}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\epsscale{1.2}
\plotone{f2.eps}
\caption{\label{f2}EUV images at 193 \AA{} and magnetogram around the filament region. (a-b) EUV images at 08:00 and 18:00 UT on August 20 showing the filament eruption. The white arrows mark the flare ribbons. The white dash line indicates a slice along the flare-ribbon separating direction to create a distance-time diagram. (c) HMI magnetogram with mapped filament channel.}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\epsscale{0.8}
\plotone{f3.eps}
\caption{\label{f3}Distribution of the critical height at n $=$ 1.2 on the AIA 193 \AA{} image at 12:00 UT on August 20 with contours of [55, 65, 75, 85] Mm. The white arrows indicate the locations of the flare ribbons.}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure
\epsscale{1.1}
\plotone{f4.eps}
\caption{\label{f4}Distance-time diagram of the flare ribbons created along the slice in Figure \ref{f2}(a). The white vertical dotted lines denote the interval of the GCS CME fitting.}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\epsscale{0.8}
\plotone{f5.eps}
\caption{\label{f5}Running-difference coronagraph images and corresponding GCS modeling (green grids) from \textit{LASCO} C2 (right) and \textit{STEREO A}/COR2 (left). Detectors and times are given in the images. Note that \textit{STEREO A}{} is 108\degr{} east of the Sun-Earth line.}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\epsscale{1.2}
\plotone{f6.eps}
\caption{\label{f6}GONG synoptic map for CR2207 with the PFSS magnetic field lines. Closed field lines are in blue, open positive field lines in green, and open negative field lines in red. The black solid line is the heliospheric current sheet. The white cross indicates the location of the Earth in Carrington coordinates at the time of 18:30 UT on 2018 August 20 (the start time of the GCS CME fitting). The orientations of the flare ribbons and the CME flux rope are marked by the white arrow and the lower cyan solid line, respectively. The diamond gives the propagation direction of the CME. The upper cyan solid line is a translation from the lower cyan solid line to the heliospheric current sheet along the same longitude.}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\epsscale{2}
\centering
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=3.4in]{f7_1.eps}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=3.4in]{f7_2.eps}}
\caption{\label{f7}Left: time--elongation map constructed from running-difference images of COR2, HI1 and HI2 from \textit{STEREO A}{} along the ecliptic plane. The red curve indicates the track of the CME, along which the elongation angles are extracted. The black horizontal line denotes the elongation angle of the Earth. The white vertical line shows the arrival time of the CME leading edge at the Earth. Right: radial distance and speed profiles of the CME leading edge derived from the GCS model (red) and the HM approximation (black). The horizontal dash line marks the average speed of $\sim$370 km s$^{-1}${} beyond 17 $R_\sun${}.}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\epsscale{0.8}
\plotone{f8.eps}
\caption{\label{f8}Solar wind plasma and magnetic field parameters from \textit{Wind}{} associated with the 2018 August 20 CME. From top to bottom, the panels show the proton density, bulk speed, proton temperature, magnetic field strength and components, and $D_{st}$ index, respectively. The dotted line in the third panel denotes the expected proton temperature calculated from the observed speed \citep{1987Lopez}. The shaded region indicates the flux rope interval determined by our GS reconstruction. The red vertical line represents the predicted arrival time of the CME leading edge at the Earth.}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\epsscale{1.1}
\plotone{f9.eps}
\caption{\label{f9}Reconstructed cross section of the flux rope at \textit{Wind}. Black contours are the distribution of the vector potential, and the color shading shows the value of the axial magnetic field strength. The location of the maximum axial field is indicated by the white cross. The horizontal dash line marks the trajectory of the \textit{Wind}{} spacecraft. The thin black arrows denote the direction and magnitude of the observed magnetic field projected onto the cross section, and the thick colored arrows show the projected \textbf{RTN} directions.}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\epsscale{1.1}
\plotone{f10.eps}
\caption{\label{f10}The heliospheric current sheet map at 1 AU at 14:10 UT on 2018 August 25 (adapted from \url{http://www.predsci.com/mhdweb/summary_plots.php}). Red (blue) represents the positive (negative) radial component of the heliospheric magnetic field. The tilt angle of the CME flux rope derived from the GCS model and the orientation of the flux rope at 1 AU are indicated by the magenta solid line and the cyan arrow, respectively. The upper cyan arrow is a translation from the lower cyan arrow to the heliospheric current sheet along the same longitude.}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\bibliographystyle{aasjournal}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\emph{Texels}~\cite{ahuja2007extracting} are nameable elements that, distributed according to statistical models (see Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}a-b), form textures that can be defined as \emph{Element-based}~\cite{ijiri2008example,ma2011discreet,ma2013dynamic,loi2017programmable}.
Textures of this kind are of interest in the textile, fashion and interior design industry, since websites or catalogues (containing many products) have to be browsed by users that want to buy or take inspiration from~\cite{kovashka2012whittlesearch,kovashka2015whittlesearch}. Two examples taken from the popular e-commerce website Zalando are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}b. For each item multiple pictures are usually available, including close-up pictures of the fabric highlighting the texture. Not all textures can be defined as Element-based; some can only be characterized at a \emph{micro} scale (\emph{e.g.} in the case of material textures in Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}c), but usually the patterns that decorate textile materials are based on repeated elements.
In the fashion domain browsing for textures is a common task.
A shopper that is in possession of an item (e.g. a shirt) with a specific pattern could wish to shop for another item (e.g. pants with a matching pattern) to combine with by taking a close-up picture to highlight the desired texture.
A fashion designer could want to take inspiration from an existing garment with only a low resolution picture of the texture available.
In these scenarios, it would be useful to be able to search in a database for the desired texture using only a low-quality picture (i.e. in diverse lighting conditions and resolution) as a query. Texture retrieval that is robust to these conditions is an important addition for a fashion e-shop~\cite{pinterest2015visual,ebay2017visual} or for fashion designer tools~\cite{WhereToBuyItICCV15}.
To be able to achieve this for textures, it is very important to describe them and their structural information in an intuitive and interpretable way, in order to achieve a precise description that enables an accurate retrieval~\cite{smeulders2000content} based on the image content.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth,height=3cm]{images/edtd}}
\hspace{0.2em}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.40\textwidth,height=3cm]{images/Zalando}}
\hspace{0.2em}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.13\textwidth,height=3cm]{images/dtd-notelementbased}}
\hspace{0.2em}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.13\textwidth,height=3cm]{images/elba}}
\caption{\small \label{fig:exte} (a) Examples of element-based textures in the DTD~\cite{cimpoi2014describing}: the \emph{dotted} (left) and \emph{banded} (right) classes are examples where texels are dots and bands, respectively; (b) Zalando shows for each clothing a particular on the texture; (c) examples of DTD~\cite{cimpoi2014describing} textures which are \emph{not} element-based: (\emph{marbled} on top and \emph{porous} on bottom); here is hard to find clearly nameable local entities; (d) examples of \emph{ElBa} textures: polygon on top, multi-class lined+circle texture on bottom.}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
For the purpose of achieving a discriminative and nameable description, attribute-based texture features~\cite{matthews2013enriching,roboticDatasetTex,cimpoi2014describing,surveytex2018} are explicitly suited.
In the literature, the 47 perceptually-driven attributes such as \emph{dotted, woven, lined,} etc. learned on the Describable Texture Dataset (DTD)~\cite{cimpoi2014describing} are the most known.
\\
These 47 attributes are limited in the sense that they describe the properties of a texture image \emph{as a single whole atomic entity}: in Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}a,
two different (element-based) attributes are considered: \emph{dotted} (left) and \emph{banded} (right) each one arranged in a column. Images in the same column, despite having the same attribute, are strongly different: for the dots, the difference is on the area; for the bands, the difference is on the thickness.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}b (Zalando examples), both garments come with the same ``checkered'' attribute, despite the different sized squares.
It is evident that one needs to focus on the recognizable \emph{texels} that form textures to achieve a finer expressivity.
\\
\\
In this paper, we employ \emph{Texel-Att}~\cite{godi2019texelatt}, a fine-grained, attribute-based texture representation and classification framework for element-based textures. \\
The pipeline of Texel-Att first detects the single texels and describes them by using \emph{individual attributes}. Then, depending on the individual attributes, they are grouped and these groups of texels are described by \emph{layout attributes}.
The Texel-Att description of the texture is formed by joining the individual and layout attributes, so that they can be used for classification and retrieval. The dimensionality of the Texel-Att descriptor isn't pre-defined, it depends on which attributes are selected for the task. In this paper, we just give some examples to illustrate the general framework.
A Mask-RCNN~\cite{he2017mask} is used to detect texels; this shows that current state-of-the-art detection architectures can produce element-based descriptions (further improvements are foreseeable as we will discuss later). We design \emph{ElBa}, the first \emph{El}ement-\emph{Ba}sed texture dataset, inspired by printing services and online catalogues\footnote{\url{https://www.spoonflower.com/}, \url{https://designyourfabric.ca/}, \url{https://patternizer.com/d0Wp} and \url{https://www.contrado.com/} respectively.}. By varying in a \emph{continuous} way element shapes and colors and their distribution, we generate realistic renderings of 30K texture images in a procedural way using a total of 3M localized texels. Layout attributes such as local symmetry, stationarity and density are known by construction.
\\
In the experiments we show that, using the attribute-based descriptor that we extract with our framework, we are able to retrieve textures in a more accurate way under simulated image conditions mimicking real-world scenarios. The performance of our approach is compared against state of the art texture descriptors of different kinds to show the usefulness of our approach.
We also show qualitative results to highlight the steps of the employed framework, such as the texel detection (detailed in Sec~\ref{sec:textiler}).
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\section{Method}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
In this section we explain the Texel-Att framework step-by-step. Then we propose a simple method for texture retrieval that can be employed with this framework.
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\subsection{The Texel-Att Framework}\label{sec:textiler}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
Fig. \ref{fig:scheme} shows a block diagram of the Texel-Att description creation pipeline.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{images/schema}
\caption{\small \label{fig:scheme} Block diagram of the formation of the Texel-Att element-based texture descriptor. On the bottom of each plate, the specific choices made in this paper, which can be varied.}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
The main concept is extracting texels using an object detection framework (trained for the task). Then, texels are described with \emph{individual} attributes, \emph{i.e.} labelled according to category, appearance and size. Texels are then grouped and filtered according to the individual labels. For each group, descriptions of the spatial layout of groups are estimated and aggregated into \emph{layout} attributes. The composite Texel-Att descriptor is formed by individual and layout attributes.
In the following, each processing block is detailed.
\textbf{Texel Detector}. The Mask-RCNN~\cite{he2017mask} model handles the texel detection by localizing (with bounding boxes and segmentation masks) and classifying objects.
The model is trained on the \emph{ElBa} dataset's training set, learning to detect and classify texels such as \emph{lines}, \emph{circles}, \emph{polygons} (see Sec.~\ref{sec:ElBa_dataset}). Texels are easily handled in any displacement (while a few years ago it was a quite complicated task limited to specific scenarios \emph{i.e.}, lattices~\cite{gui2011texel,liu2015patchmatch}).
\textbf{Individual description of texels.} By using attributes related to shape and human perception it is possible to characterize each detected texel; in particulare we make use of: (i) the \textit{label} indicating its shape, classified by the Mask-RCNN model; (ii) histogram of 11 \textit{color}s using a color naming procedure~\cite{van2009learning}; (iii) \textit{orientation} of texels; (iv) \textit{size} of texels, represented by the area in pixels.
By aggregating (e.g. through averages or histograms, see in the following sections) it is possible to characterize the whole texture. It is worth noting that in this work we are not showing ``the best'' set of features, but we are highlighting the portability and effectiveness of the framework; in fact, different attributes could be used instead.
\textbf{Texel Grouping}
Texels with the same appearance are clustered, so that spatial characteristics of similar elements can be captured using layout attributes. In this work we simply group texels by the assigned shape labels (\emph{circle}, \emph{line} or \emph{polygon}). Groups with less than 10 texels are removed.
\textbf{Layout description of texels.}
Spatial characteristics of each texel group, are described by measuring attributes using the spatial distribution of the centroids of the texels. We can refer to the literature on spatial points pattern analysis, where measures for symmetry, randomness, and regularity ~\cite{diggle1983statistical,velazquez2016evaluation,baddeley2015spatial} are available; we select a simple and general set of measures. They are:
(i) texel \textit{density}, \emph{e.g.} the average number of texels per unit of area (for circles and polygons) or line density (\emph{e.g.} by projecting centroid on to the direction perpendicular to their principal orientation density is measured on one spatial dimension).
(ii) Quadratic counts-based \textit{homogeneity} evaluation~\cite{illian2008statistical}: the original image is divided into a number of patches and a $\chi^2$ test is performed to evaluate the hypothesis of average point density in each patch. Similarly to the previous case, we estimated a similar 1D feature on the projection for lines.
(iii) Point pair statistics~\cite{zhao2011translation}: the histogram of \textit{vectors orientation} is estimated using point pair vectors for all the texel centers.
(iv) \textit{Local symmetry}: we considered the centroids' grid for circles and polygons and measured, for 4-points neighborhoods of points, the average reflective
self-similarity after their reflection around the central point. The average point distance is used as a distance function. Neighborhood size is used to normalize it.
\textit{Translational symmetry} is estimated in a similar way by considering 4-point neighborhoods of the centroids traslated by the vectors defined by point pairs in the neighborhood and measuring the average minimum distance of those points. For line texels, we compute on 1D projections.
We report the dimensionalities for each of these attributes in Tab.~\ref{tab:descriptorSize}. Multi-dimensional attributes are histograms, while 1-dimensional ones are averages.
By concatenating and Z-normalizing spatial pattern attributes, individual texel attributes statistics and the color attributes of the \textit{background}, the final descriptor for the texture is built.
\begin{table}[t]
\small
\begin{flushleft}
\begin{minipage}{.35\textwidth}
\scalebox{0.6}{
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\toprule
Label & Color & Orientation & Size & \textbf{Total}\\
Histogram & & Histogram & & \\
\toprule
3 & 11 & 3 & 1 & 18\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.60\textwidth}
\scalebox{0.67}{
\begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
\toprule
Density & Homogeneity & Vector & Local & Traslational & Background & \textbf{Total}\\
& & Orientations & Symmetry & Symmetry & Color & \\
\toprule
1 & 1 & 3 & 1 & 1 & 11 & 18\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\end{minipage}
\end{flushleft}
\small
\caption{\small \label{tab:descriptorSize} Dimensionality of descriptor attributes. On the left, the attributes computed from the individual characterization of texels; on the right, attributes computed from statistics resulting from the spatial layout. The total dimensionality of the descriptor is 36. }
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{table}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\subsection{Element-Based Texture Retrieval}\label{sec:retrieval}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
The descriptor detailed in the previous section can be used to compute distances between element-based textures using the corresponding attributes. We define \emph{database set} the set of images that we want to search into using a \emph{query image}. The idea is that database texture closest to the query image (in terms of descriptor distance) are also the most similar ones in the database set.
The pipeline is as follows: a query image (e.g. a picture of a textured captured by a user) is processed by the Texel detector, allowing for the computation of individual and layout attributes and thus obtaining a descriptor. A standard distance function (such as cosine distance) is computed between every database image and the query image. The database set is then sorted according to the distance and the resulting ranking can be shown to the user for browsing.
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\section{\emph{ElBa}: Element-Based Texture Dataset}
\label{sec:ElBa_dataset}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
While available datasets such as the DTD~\cite{cimpoi2014describing} include some examples of element-based textures mixed with other texture types (Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}(a)), there is no dataset focused on this particular domain. In this work, we present \emph{ElBa}, the first element-based texture dataset.
As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}(d), photo-realistic images are included in the \emph{ElBa} dataset. Training a model with synthetic data is a common practice~\cite{tremblay2018training,barbosa2018looking} and annotations for texels are easily made available as an output of the image generation process. \emph{Layout} attributes and \emph{individual} ones (addressing the single texel can be varied in our proposed parametric synthesis model. For example individual attributes such as texel shape, size and orientation and color can be varied.
Available shapes are \emph{polygons} (squares, triangles, rectangles), \emph{lines} and \emph{circles} (inspired by the 2D shape ontology of~\cite{niknam2011modeling}). The idea is that these kind of shapes are common in geometric textiles and they approximate other more complex shapes.
Orientation and size are varied within a range of values. We choose colors from color palettes to simulate a real-world use of colors.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{images/collage-elba-det}
\caption{\small \label{fig:detRes} Texel-Att detection qualitative results on \emph{ElBa} datasets. In green the correct detections, in red the false positives and in blue the false negatives.}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
As for Layout Attributes, we select different 2D layouts based on symmetries to place texels. Linear and grid-based layouts are considered; one or two non-orthonormal vectors define the translation between texels in the plane. With this parametrization, we can represent several tilings of the plane. As for randomized distributions, we jitter the regular grid, creating a continuous distribution between randomized and regular layouts.
We also consider multiple element shapes within a single image, creating for example dotted+striped patterns. Each group of elements of the same shape is distributed with its own spatial layout, creating arbitrary multi-class element textures as in Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}(d).
We made use of Substance Designer for pattern generation (which gives high-quality output and pattern synthesis, and is easily controllable) and IRay ( which is a physically-based renderer) \footnote{\url{https://www.allegorithmic.com/} and \url{https://bit.ly/2Hz4ZVI} respectively.}.
Substance gives high-quality pattern synthesis, easy control and high-quality output including pattern antialiasing.
Low-frequency distortions of the surface of the plane where the pattern is represented and high frequency patterns are added to simulate realistic materials.
A total of 30K texture images (for a total 3M annotated texels) rendered at a resolution of $1024 \times 1024$ has been generated by this procedure. For each image ground-truth data (such as texel masks, texel bounding boxes and attributes) is available.
\emph{ElBa} does not come with a partition into classes: differently from other datasets used in texture analysis semantic labels for classification tasks can be computed from ground truth attributes or by user studies.
The dataset is randomly partitioned with a 90/10 split for, respectively, training and testing set.
\begin{table}[t!]
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{1.3em}
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.90}{
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
\toprule
\textbf{Distortions} &\textbf{Tamura}~\cite{tamura1978textural} & \textbf{FV-CNN}~\cite{cimpoi2016deep} & \textbf{Texel-Att}\\
\bottomrule
\bottomrule
Down-Sampling (100x100) and\\Impulsive Noise (p=0.2) & 0.1380 & 0.3304 & \textbf{0.6618}\\
\bottomrule
Down-Sampling (200x200) and\\Impulsive Noise (p=0.2) & 0.2103 & 0.4811 & \textbf{0.8011}\\
\bottomrule
Down-Sampling (300x300) and\\Impulsive Noise (p=0.2) & 0.2284 & 0.5640 & \textbf{0.8560}\\
\bottomrule
Down-Sampling (100x100) and\\Radial Lighting Effect& 0.1611 & 0.4394 & \textbf{0.6356}\\
\bottomrule
Down-Sampling (200x200) and\\Radial Lighting Effect& 0.1728 & 0.8001 & \textbf{0.8746}\\
\bottomrule
Down-Sampling (300x300) and\\Radial Lighting Effect& 0.2708 & 0.8855 & \textbf{0.9376}\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\end{center}
\caption{\small \label{tab:RetriRes} \emph{AUC (Area Under Curve)} for each distortion variant. Texel-Att performs better on every one of them. The related CMC are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Retr_plot}.}
\vspace{-0.7cm}
\end{table}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\section{Experiments}\label{sec:exp}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
Experiments show the potential of our framework for the description of element-based textures, with a focus on difficult environmental conditions (low resolution and diverse lighting) ensuring an accurate retrieval inside large catalogues of textures in real-world applications.
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\subsection{Qualitative Detection Results}\label{sec:exp:detection}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
We briefly show the detection results over our dataset, a fundamental step of our framework, through some qualitative results in Fig~\ref{fig:detRes}. Texels are highlighted by bounding boxes which are then used to compute the attributes (described in Sec.~\ref{sec:textiler}) that we employ in the following experiment.
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\subsection{Texture Retrieval Results}\label{sec:exp:retrieval}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
In this experiment, we highlight the effectiveness of Texel-Att in a retrieval task under simulated real-world conditions following the procedure detailed in Sec.~\ref{sec:retrieval}. We compare our approach with both state-of-the-art texture descriptor FV-CNN~\cite{cimpoi2014describing} and Tamura attribute-based descriptor~\cite{tamura1978textural}. The \emph{database set} for this retrieval experiment is the whole test partition of the \emph{ElBa} dataset (composed of $\sim$3000 images). To simulate the real challenging conditions, we generated 6 variants of each image, down-sampling at one of 3 different resolutions (100x100, 200x200, 300x300) and up-sampling them back to the original image size (1024x1024).
Then we apply one of the following distortions:
\begin{itemize}
\item impulsive noise with a pixel's probability of 0.2 over all the image;
\item radial lighting effect, increasing the brightness on a random point on the image and gradually decreasing it more in each pixel the farther from the chosen point it is.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{images/CMC_legend}
\end{center}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.31\linewidth]{images/CMC_100_noise}}
\hspace{0.02\linewidth}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.31\linewidth]{images/CMC_200_noise}}
\hspace{0.02\linewidth}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.31\linewidth]{images/CMC_300_noise}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.31\linewidth]{images/CMC_100L_noise}}
\hspace{0.02\linewidth}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.31\linewidth]{images/CMC_200L_noise}}
\hspace{0.02\linewidth}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.31\linewidth]{images/CMC_300L_noise}}
\caption{\small \label{fig:Retr_plot} \emph{CMC curves} on the retrieval experiments. Different plot for different variants of distortion: (a) 100x100 down-sampling and impulsive noise (b) 200x200 down-sampling and impulsive noise (c) 300x300 down-sampling and impulsive noise (d) 100x100 down-sampling and radial lighting effect. (e) 200x200 down-sampling and radial lighting effect. (f) 300x300 down-sampling and radial lighting effect. On the x axis the rank score (first 200 positions). On the y axis the recognition rate.}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
Some examples of these images are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:exDist}. It can be seen that distorted images simulate pictures that could be captured by users wishing to employ a retrieval application. The lighting effect simulates the flash of a camera while impulsive noise simulates general defects in the image acquisition process.
We consider each of the 6 variants as \emph{query set} and we test each one separately.
Given a distorted image from the query set, the task is to retrieve the corresponding original one from the database set. The position of the correct match in the computed ranking is recorded. This process is repeated for every image in a query set.
To distance functions used for ranking is chosen according to the descriptor; for each descriptor we selected the best performing distance function between all of the ones available in the MATLAB software~\cite{MATLAB:2019}. More specifically, for the FV-CNN descriptor and our descriptor we employ the cosine distance while for the Tamura descriptor the cityblock distance function performs best.
\\
\\
Table~\ref{tab:RetriRes} shows the results of this experiment in all of the 6 variants previously described. In each case Texel-Att reaches the best results in terms of \emph{AUC: Area Under Curve} index related to CMC (Cumulative Matching Characteristics) curves shown in the plots in Fig~\ref{fig:Retr_plot}. We show only the first 200 positions for the CMC curve rank as we consider higher ranking positions less useful for a retrieval application (a user will rarely check results beyond 200 images).
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/distortion1}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/distortion2}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/distortion3}
\caption{\small \label{fig:exDist} Three examples of distortions. For each one the biggest image is the original pattern. On the right, the first row depicts the radial lighting effect while the second one the impulsive noise distortion. The column are organized from the 100x100 down-sampling to 300x300 down-sampling.}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:conc}
This paper promotes to describe element-based textures by using attributes which focus on texels. Our framework, Texel-Att, can successfully describe and retrieve this type of patterns inside large databases even under simulated real-world factors such as poor resolution, noise and lighting conditions. The experiments show that we perform better in this task with our texel based attributes than by using state-of-the-art general texture descriptors, paving the way for retrieval applications in the fashion and textile domains where element-based textures are prominent.
\\
\\
\textbf{Acknowledgements:} This work has been partially supported by the project of the Italian Ministry of Education,
Universities and Research (MIUR) "Dipartimenti di Eccellenza 2018-2022", and has been partially supported
by the POR FESR 2014-2020 Work Program (Action 1.1.4,
project No.10066183). We also thank Nicolò Lanza for assistance with Substance Designer software.
\bibliographystyle{splncs04}
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\emph{Texels}~\cite{ahuja2007extracting} are nameable elements that, distributed according to statistical models (see Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}a-b), form textures that can be defined as \emph{Element-based}~\cite{ijiri2008example,ma2011discreet,ma2013dynamic,loi2017programmable}.
Textures of this kind are of interest in the textile, fashion and interior design industry, since websites or catalogues (containing many products) have to be browsed by users that want to buy or take inspiration from~\cite{kovashka2012whittlesearch,kovashka2015whittlesearch}. Two examples taken from the popular e-commerce website Zalando are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}b. For each item multiple pictures are usually available, including close-up pictures of the fabric highlighting the texture. Not all textures can be defined as Element-based; some can only be characterized at a \emph{micro} scale (\emph{e.g.} in the case of material textures in Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}c), but usually the patterns that decorate textile materials are based on repeated elements.
In the fashion domain browsing for textures is a common task.
A shopper that is in possession of an item (e.g. a shirt) with a specific pattern could wish to shop for another item (e.g. pants with a matching pattern) to combine with by taking a close-up picture to highlight the desired texture.
A fashion designer could want to take inspiration from an existing garment with only a low resolution picture of the texture available.
In these scenarios, it would be useful to be able to search in a database for the desired texture using only a low-quality picture (i.e. in diverse lighting conditions and resolution) as a query. Texture retrieval that is robust to these conditions is an important addition for a fashion e-shop~\cite{pinterest2015visual,ebay2017visual} or for fashion designer tools~\cite{WhereToBuyItICCV15}.
To be able to achieve this for textures, it is very important to describe them and their structural information in an intuitive and interpretable way, in order to achieve a precise description that enables an accurate retrieval~\cite{smeulders2000content} based on the image content.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth,height=3cm]{images/edtd}}
\hspace{0.2em}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.40\textwidth,height=3cm]{images/Zalando}}
\hspace{0.2em}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.13\textwidth,height=3cm]{images/dtd-notelementbased}}
\hspace{0.2em}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.13\textwidth,height=3cm]{images/elba}}
\caption{\small \label{fig:exte} (a) Examples of element-based textures in the DTD~\cite{cimpoi2014describing}: the \emph{dotted} (left) and \emph{banded} (right) classes are examples where texels are dots and bands, respectively; (b) Zalando shows for each clothing a particular on the texture; (c) examples of DTD~\cite{cimpoi2014describing} textures which are \emph{not} element-based: (\emph{marbled} on top and \emph{porous} on bottom); here is hard to find clearly nameable local entities; (d) examples of \emph{ElBa} textures: polygon on top, multi-class lined+circle texture on bottom.}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
For the purpose of achieving a discriminative and nameable description, attribute-based texture features~\cite{matthews2013enriching,roboticDatasetTex,cimpoi2014describing,surveytex2018} are explicitly suited.
In the literature, the 47 perceptually-driven attributes such as \emph{dotted, woven, lined,} etc. learned on the Describable Texture Dataset (DTD)~\cite{cimpoi2014describing} are the most known.
\\
These 47 attributes are limited in the sense that they describe the properties of a texture image \emph{as a single whole atomic entity}: in Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}a,
two different (element-based) attributes are considered: \emph{dotted} (left) and \emph{banded} (right) each one arranged in a column. Images in the same column, despite having the same attribute, are strongly different: for the dots, the difference is on the area; for the bands, the difference is on the thickness.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}b (Zalando examples), both garments come with the same ``checkered'' attribute, despite the different sized squares.
It is evident that one needs to focus on the recognizable \emph{texels} that form textures to achieve a finer expressivity.
\\
\\
In this paper, we employ \emph{Texel-Att}~\cite{godi2019texelatt}, a fine-grained, attribute-based texture representation and classification framework for element-based textures. \\
The pipeline of Texel-Att first detects the single texels and describes them by using \emph{individual attributes}. Then, depending on the individual attributes, they are grouped and these groups of texels are described by \emph{layout attributes}.
The Texel-Att description of the texture is formed by joining the individual and layout attributes, so that they can be used for classification and retrieval. The dimensionality of the Texel-Att descriptor isn't pre-defined, it depends on which attributes are selected for the task. In this paper, we just give some examples to illustrate the general framework.
A Mask-RCNN~\cite{he2017mask} is used to detect texels; this shows that current state-of-the-art detection architectures can produce element-based descriptions (further improvements are foreseeable as we will discuss later). We design \emph{ElBa}, the first \emph{El}ement-\emph{Ba}sed texture dataset, inspired by printing services and online catalogues\footnote{\url{https://www.spoonflower.com/}, \url{https://designyourfabric.ca/}, \url{https://patternizer.com/d0Wp} and \url{https://www.contrado.com/} respectively.}. By varying in a \emph{continuous} way element shapes and colors and their distribution, we generate realistic renderings of 30K texture images in a procedural way using a total of 3M localized texels. Layout attributes such as local symmetry, stationarity and density are known by construction.
\\
In the experiments we show that, using the attribute-based descriptor that we extract with our framework, we are able to retrieve textures in a more accurate way under simulated image conditions mimicking real-world scenarios. The performance of our approach is compared against state of the art texture descriptors of different kinds to show the usefulness of our approach.
We also show qualitative results to highlight the steps of the employed framework, such as the texel detection (detailed in Sec~\ref{sec:textiler}).
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\section{Method}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
In this section we explain the Texel-Att framework step-by-step. Then we propose a simple method for texture retrieval that can be employed with this framework.
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\subsection{The Texel-Att Framework}\label{sec:textiler}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
Fig. \ref{fig:scheme} shows a block diagram of the Texel-Att description creation pipeline.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{images/schema}
\caption{\small \label{fig:scheme} Block diagram of the formation of the Texel-Att element-based texture descriptor. On the bottom of each plate, the specific choices made in this paper, which can be varied.}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
The main concept is extracting texels using an object detection framework (trained for the task). Then, texels are described with \emph{individual} attributes, \emph{i.e.} labelled according to category, appearance and size. Texels are then grouped and filtered according to the individual labels. For each group, descriptions of the spatial layout of groups are estimated and aggregated into \emph{layout} attributes. The composite Texel-Att descriptor is formed by individual and layout attributes.
In the following, each processing block is detailed.
\textbf{Texel Detector}. The Mask-RCNN~\cite{he2017mask} model handles the texel detection by localizing (with bounding boxes and segmentation masks) and classifying objects.
The model is trained on the \emph{ElBa} dataset's training set, learning to detect and classify texels such as \emph{lines}, \emph{circles}, \emph{polygons} (see Sec.~\ref{sec:ElBa_dataset}). Texels are easily handled in any displacement (while a few years ago it was a quite complicated task limited to specific scenarios \emph{i.e.}, lattices~\cite{gui2011texel,liu2015patchmatch}).
\textbf{Individual description of texels.} By using attributes related to shape and human perception it is possible to characterize each detected texel; in particulare we make use of: (i) the \textit{label} indicating its shape, classified by the Mask-RCNN model; (ii) histogram of 11 \textit{color}s using a color naming procedure~\cite{van2009learning}; (iii) \textit{orientation} of texels; (iv) \textit{size} of texels, represented by the area in pixels.
By aggregating (e.g. through averages or histograms, see in the following sections) it is possible to characterize the whole texture. It is worth noting that in this work we are not showing ``the best'' set of features, but we are highlighting the portability and effectiveness of the framework; in fact, different attributes could be used instead.
\textbf{Texel Grouping}
Texels with the same appearance are clustered, so that spatial characteristics of similar elements can be captured using layout attributes. In this work we simply group texels by the assigned shape labels (\emph{circle}, \emph{line} or \emph{polygon}). Groups with less than 10 texels are removed.
\textbf{Layout description of texels.}
Spatial characteristics of each texel group, are described by measuring attributes using the spatial distribution of the centroids of the texels. We can refer to the literature on spatial points pattern analysis, where measures for symmetry, randomness, and regularity ~\cite{diggle1983statistical,velazquez2016evaluation,baddeley2015spatial} are available; we select a simple and general set of measures. They are:
(i) texel \textit{density}, \emph{e.g.} the average number of texels per unit of area (for circles and polygons) or line density (\emph{e.g.} by projecting centroid on to the direction perpendicular to their principal orientation density is measured on one spatial dimension).
(ii) Quadratic counts-based \textit{homogeneity} evaluation~\cite{illian2008statistical}: the original image is divided into a number of patches and a $\chi^2$ test is performed to evaluate the hypothesis of average point density in each patch. Similarly to the previous case, we estimated a similar 1D feature on the projection for lines.
(iii) Point pair statistics~\cite{zhao2011translation}: the histogram of \textit{vectors orientation} is estimated using point pair vectors for all the texel centers.
(iv) \textit{Local symmetry}: we considered the centroids' grid for circles and polygons and measured, for 4-points neighborhoods of points, the average reflective
self-similarity after their reflection around the central point. The average point distance is used as a distance function. Neighborhood size is used to normalize it.
\textit{Translational symmetry} is estimated in a similar way by considering 4-point neighborhoods of the centroids traslated by the vectors defined by point pairs in the neighborhood and measuring the average minimum distance of those points. For line texels, we compute on 1D projections.
We report the dimensionalities for each of these attributes in Tab.~\ref{tab:descriptorSize}. Multi-dimensional attributes are histograms, while 1-dimensional ones are averages.
By concatenating and Z-normalizing spatial pattern attributes, individual texel attributes statistics and the color attributes of the \textit{background}, the final descriptor for the texture is built.
\begin{table}[t]
\small
\begin{flushleft}
\begin{minipage}{.35\textwidth}
\scalebox{0.6}{
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\toprule
Label & Color & Orientation & Size & \textbf{Total}\\
Histogram & & Histogram & & \\
\toprule
3 & 11 & 3 & 1 & 18\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.60\textwidth}
\scalebox{0.67}{
\begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
\toprule
Density & Homogeneity & Vector & Local & Traslational & Background & \textbf{Total}\\
& & Orientations & Symmetry & Symmetry & Color & \\
\toprule
1 & 1 & 3 & 1 & 1 & 11 & 18\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\end{minipage}
\end{flushleft}
\small
\caption{\small \label{tab:descriptorSize} Dimensionality of descriptor attributes. On the left, the attributes computed from the individual characterization of texels; on the right, attributes computed from statistics resulting from the spatial layout. The total dimensionality of the descriptor is 36. }
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{table}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\subsection{Element-Based Texture Retrieval}\label{sec:retrieval}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
The descriptor detailed in the previous section can be used to compute distances between element-based textures using the corresponding attributes. We define \emph{database set} the set of images that we want to search into using a \emph{query image}. The idea is that database texture closest to the query image (in terms of descriptor distance) are also the most similar ones in the database set.
The pipeline is as follows: a query image (e.g. a picture of a textured captured by a user) is processed by the Texel detector, allowing for the computation of individual and layout attributes and thus obtaining a descriptor. A standard distance function (such as cosine distance) is computed between every database image and the query image. The database set is then sorted according to the distance and the resulting ranking can be shown to the user for browsing.
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\section{\emph{ElBa}: Element-Based Texture Dataset}
\label{sec:ElBa_dataset}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
While available datasets such as the DTD~\cite{cimpoi2014describing} include some examples of element-based textures mixed with other texture types (Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}(a)), there is no dataset focused on this particular domain. In this work, we present \emph{ElBa}, the first element-based texture dataset.
As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}(d), photo-realistic images are included in the \emph{ElBa} dataset. Training a model with synthetic data is a common practice~\cite{tremblay2018training,barbosa2018looking} and annotations for texels are easily made available as an output of the image generation process. \emph{Layout} attributes and \emph{individual} ones (addressing the single texel can be varied in our proposed parametric synthesis model. For example individual attributes such as texel shape, size and orientation and color can be varied.
Available shapes are \emph{polygons} (squares, triangles, rectangles), \emph{lines} and \emph{circles} (inspired by the 2D shape ontology of~\cite{niknam2011modeling}). The idea is that these kind of shapes are common in geometric textiles and they approximate other more complex shapes.
Orientation and size are varied within a range of values. We choose colors from color palettes to simulate a real-world use of colors.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{images/collage-elba-det}
\caption{\small \label{fig:detRes} Texel-Att detection qualitative results on \emph{ElBa} datasets. In green the correct detections, in red the false positives and in blue the false negatives.}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
As for Layout Attributes, we select different 2D layouts based on symmetries to place texels. Linear and grid-based layouts are considered; one or two non-orthonormal vectors define the translation between texels in the plane. With this parametrization, we can represent several tilings of the plane. As for randomized distributions, we jitter the regular grid, creating a continuous distribution between randomized and regular layouts.
We also consider multiple element shapes within a single image, creating for example dotted+striped patterns. Each group of elements of the same shape is distributed with its own spatial layout, creating arbitrary multi-class element textures as in Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}(d).
We made use of Substance Designer for pattern generation (which gives high-quality output and pattern synthesis, and is easily controllable) and IRay ( which is a physically-based renderer) \footnote{\url{https://www.allegorithmic.com/} and \url{https://bit.ly/2Hz4ZVI} respectively.}.
Substance gives high-quality pattern synthesis, easy control and high-quality output including pattern antialiasing.
Low-frequency distortions of the surface of the plane where the pattern is represented and high frequency patterns are added to simulate realistic materials.
A total of 30K texture images (for a total 3M annotated texels) rendered at a resolution of $1024 \times 1024$ has been generated by this procedure. For each image ground-truth data (such as texel masks, texel bounding boxes and attributes) is available.
\emph{ElBa} does not come with a partition into classes: differently from other datasets used in texture analysis semantic labels for classification tasks can be computed from ground truth attributes or by user studies.
The dataset is randomly partitioned with a 90/10 split for, respectively, training and testing set.
\begin{table}[t!]
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{1.3em}
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.90}{
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
\toprule
\textbf{Distortions} &\textbf{Tamura}~\cite{tamura1978textural} & \textbf{FV-CNN}~\cite{cimpoi2016deep} & \textbf{Texel-Att}\\
\bottomrule
\bottomrule
Down-Sampling (100x100) and\\Impulsive Noise (p=0.2) & 0.1380 & 0.3304 & \textbf{0.6618}\\
\bottomrule
Down-Sampling (200x200) and\\Impulsive Noise (p=0.2) & 0.2103 & 0.4811 & \textbf{0.8011}\\
\bottomrule
Down-Sampling (300x300) and\\Impulsive Noise (p=0.2) & 0.2284 & 0.5640 & \textbf{0.8560}\\
\bottomrule
Down-Sampling (100x100) and\\Radial Lighting Effect& 0.1611 & 0.4394 & \textbf{0.6356}\\
\bottomrule
Down-Sampling (200x200) and\\Radial Lighting Effect& 0.1728 & 0.8001 & \textbf{0.8746}\\
\bottomrule
Down-Sampling (300x300) and\\Radial Lighting Effect& 0.2708 & 0.8855 & \textbf{0.9376}\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\end{center}
\caption{\small \label{tab:RetriRes} \emph{AUC (Area Under Curve)} for each distortion variant. Texel-Att performs better on every one of them. The related CMC are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Retr_plot}.}
\vspace{-0.7cm}
\end{table}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\section{Experiments}\label{sec:exp}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
Experiments show the potential of our framework for the description of element-based textures, with a focus on difficult environmental conditions (low resolution and diverse lighting) ensuring an accurate retrieval inside large catalogues of textures in real-world applications.
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\subsection{Qualitative Detection Results}\label{sec:exp:detection}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
We briefly show the detection results over our dataset, a fundamental step of our framework, through some qualitative results in Fig~\ref{fig:detRes}. Texels are highlighted by bounding boxes which are then used to compute the attributes (described in Sec.~\ref{sec:textiler}) that we employ in the following experiment.
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\subsection{Texture Retrieval Results}\label{sec:exp:retrieval}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
In this experiment, we highlight the effectiveness of Texel-Att in a retrieval task under simulated real-world conditions following the procedure detailed in Sec.~\ref{sec:retrieval}. We compare our approach with both state-of-the-art texture descriptor FV-CNN~\cite{cimpoi2014describing} and Tamura attribute-based descriptor~\cite{tamura1978textural}. The \emph{database set} for this retrieval experiment is the whole test partition of the \emph{ElBa} dataset (composed of $\sim$3000 images). To simulate the real challenging conditions, we generated 6 variants of each image, down-sampling at one of 3 different resolutions (100x100, 200x200, 300x300) and up-sampling them back to the original image size (1024x1024).
Then we apply one of the following distortions:
\begin{itemize}
\item impulsive noise with a pixel's probability of 0.2 over all the image;
\item radial lighting effect, increasing the brightness on a random point on the image and gradually decreasing it more in each pixel the farther from the chosen point it is.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{images/CMC_legend}
\end{center}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.31\linewidth]{images/CMC_100_noise}}
\hspace{0.02\linewidth}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.31\linewidth]{images/CMC_200_noise}}
\hspace{0.02\linewidth}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.31\linewidth]{images/CMC_300_noise}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.31\linewidth]{images/CMC_100L_noise}}
\hspace{0.02\linewidth}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.31\linewidth]{images/CMC_200L_noise}}
\hspace{0.02\linewidth}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.31\linewidth]{images/CMC_300L_noise}}
\caption{\small \label{fig:Retr_plot} \emph{CMC curves} on the retrieval experiments. Different plot for different variants of distortion: (a) 100x100 down-sampling and impulsive noise (b) 200x200 down-sampling and impulsive noise (c) 300x300 down-sampling and impulsive noise (d) 100x100 down-sampling and radial lighting effect. (e) 200x200 down-sampling and radial lighting effect. (f) 300x300 down-sampling and radial lighting effect. On the x axis the rank score (first 200 positions). On the y axis the recognition rate.}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
Some examples of these images are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:exDist}. It can be seen that distorted images simulate pictures that could be captured by users wishing to employ a retrieval application. The lighting effect simulates the flash of a camera while impulsive noise simulates general defects in the image acquisition process.
We consider each of the 6 variants as \emph{query set} and we test each one separately.
Given a distorted image from the query set, the task is to retrieve the corresponding original one from the database set. The position of the correct match in the computed ranking is recorded. This process is repeated for every image in a query set.
To distance functions used for ranking is chosen according to the descriptor; for each descriptor we selected the best performing distance function between all of the ones available in the MATLAB software~\cite{MATLAB:2019}. More specifically, for the FV-CNN descriptor and our descriptor we employ the cosine distance while for the Tamura descriptor the cityblock distance function performs best.
\\
\\
Table~\ref{tab:RetriRes} shows the results of this experiment in all of the 6 variants previously described. In each case Texel-Att reaches the best results in terms of \emph{AUC: Area Under Curve} index related to CMC (Cumulative Matching Characteristics) curves shown in the plots in Fig~\ref{fig:Retr_plot}. We show only the first 200 positions for the CMC curve rank as we consider higher ranking positions less useful for a retrieval application (a user will rarely check results beyond 200 images).
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/distortion1}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/distortion2}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/distortion3}
\caption{\small \label{fig:exDist} Three examples of distortions. For each one the biggest image is the original pattern. On the right, the first row depicts the radial lighting effect while the second one the impulsive noise distortion. The column are organized from the 100x100 down-sampling to 300x300 down-sampling.}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:conc}
This paper promotes to describe element-based textures by using attributes which focus on texels. Our framework, Texel-Att, can successfully describe and retrieve this type of patterns inside large databases even under simulated real-world factors such as poor resolution, noise and lighting conditions. The experiments show that we perform better in this task with our texel based attributes than by using state-of-the-art general texture descriptors, paving the way for retrieval applications in the fashion and textile domains where element-based textures are prominent.
\\
\\
\textbf{Acknowledgements:} This work has been partially supported by the project of the Italian Ministry of Education,
Universities and Research (MIUR) "Dipartimenti di Eccellenza 2018-2022", and has been partially supported
by the POR FESR 2014-2020 Work Program (Action 1.1.4,
project No.10066183). We also thank Nicolò Lanza for assistance with Substance Designer software.
\bibliographystyle{splncs04}
|
\section{Introduction}
Microtubules are a ubiquitous component of the cytoskeleton in eukaryotic cells. They are filamentous aggregates of tubulin-dimers reaching lengths of several $\mu$m's. They are typically part of structures that span the dimensions of the whole cell, enabling e.g.\ their major role in intracellular transport by providing ``tracks'' for cargo carrying motor proteins and cell division where they form the mitotic spindle responsible for the spatial segregation of the duplicated chromosomes \cite{Alberts2007}. The fact that during the cell cycle microtubules can be reassembled into different spatial structures is due to their intrinsically dynamic nature. They stochastically switch between phases of growth through polymerization to phases of shrinkage through rapid depolymerization, a mechanism that has been dubbed dynamic instability \cite{Mitchison1984DynamicGrowth}. A direct consequence of this mechanism is that microtubules have a finite lifetime, as they can shrink away, and therefore need to be actively (re)nucleated to sustain their overall number. Cells achieve control over the microtubule structures they build by manipulating the nucleation and dynamics of microtubules in space and time, using specific nucleating complexes and a host of microtubule-interacting proteins (MAPS)\cite{Sedbrook2004MAPsOrganization}.
Growing plant cells have a unique microtubule structure called the cortical array. The cortical array is an assembly of mutually aligned microtubules localized close to the cell membrane that almost homogeneously covers the inside surface of the cell. Generically the preferential direction of the cortical microtubules is transverse to the long axis of the cell. This is crucial to their function, as they guide the anisotropic deposition of cell-wall building polymers, which in turn allows the cell to grow along a single expansion axis. In this way the cortical array drives the dominant mode of morphogenesis in plants, which is the formation of linear extensions, like roots, stems and branches. However, it is known that this generic growth scenario can be modulated by hormonal, mechanical and other environmental signals \cite{Dixit2004TheOrganization.}. A striking example of this type of modulation is the reorientation of the cortical array of dark-grown hypocotyl (stem precursor) cells after exposure to blue light \cite{Lindeboom2013}. This effect is highly relevant, as the developmental program of the plant must change dramatically, once the hypocotyl, which typically emerges from a buried seed, first reaches the sunlight. It is believed that the observed reorientation from the transverse to the longitudinal orientation of the cortical array is associated with the arrest of further growth, and the subsequent differentiation of the cells.
The light-induced reorientation of the cortical array is mediated by the microtubule severing protein \emph{katanin}. It has been shown to localize at the crossover between differently oriented cortical microtubules and, moreover, to preferentially sever the overlying microtubule, i.e.\ the one that crossed over a pre-existing one. As the underlying microtubule is most likely to be a transversely oriented microtubule from the pre-exposure state and severing effectively multiplies the number of microtubules, this effect can rapidly create an exponentially growing population of longitudinal microtubules. In this way the original transverse cortical array serves as a template for the reorientation towards a longitudinal array.
Recent experiments involving a number of mutants in which the reorientation effect is impaired, have shown that there is an important role for the propensity of the newly-created plus end of the lagging microtubule to immediately switch to the growing state, a process which \emph{in vivo} is mediated by the prominent MAP \emph{CLASP} \cite{Nakamura2018}. This specific function of \emph{CLASP} appears to have evolved, as the default outcome of a severing event is the creation of a shrinking plus end of the lagging microtubule \cite{Tran1997AEnds}. Stochastic simulations of a simplified model of the reorientation mechanism, indeed, showed that the degree of amplification of the numbers of microtubules due to severing increases monotonically with the probability of the so-called rescue-after-severing of the lagging plus end \cite{Nakamura2018}. However, the dynamic parameters of the microtubules measured in the experiments suggest that, at least in the initial phase of reorientation, the microtubules are in the so-called unbounded-growth regime \cite{Dogterom1993PhysicalStructures}. Since in this regime the microtubules in principle are very long-lived on the timescale of the reorientation, this raises the question to what extent rescue-after-severing is in fact a necessary ingredient of the mechanism. Moreover, as the total amount of tubulin in the cell is finite, it is also clear that unbounded-growth and amplification of microtubules cannot be sustained indefinitely, as the pool of available tubulin to drive polymerization is inevitably depleted. This will cause the growth speed of the microtubules to decrease, effectively driving them back to the bounded-growth regime. To fully understand the reorientation process we thus need to disentangle the role of the microtubule growth state from that of the probability of rescue-after-severing, and this is the main aim of this paper. We approach this problem using a combination of stochastic simulations and analytical theory, which together allow us to fully characterize the requirements for the amplification of longitudinal microtubules to occur.
The structure of the paper is as follows. In Sec.\ II we introduce our dynamic model of longitudinal microtubules undergoing dynamic instability and severing in the presence of a grid of stable transverse microtubules. We then briefly review some of the main features of Dogterom-Leibler model for microtubules undergoing dynamic instability \cite{Dogterom1993PhysicalStructures}, on which our model is based. In Sec.\ III we show how, for microtubules in the unbounded-growth regime, while not a necessary ingredient, the probability of rescue-after-severing does dramatically affect the speed and ultimate success probability of amplification of the longitudinal microtubule population. Then, we extend our treatment to the bounded-growth regime, showing that in this case amplification can occur provided that the probability of rescue-after-severing exceeds a critical threshold. Finally, we calculate the critical value for the probability of rescue-after-severing using a combination of analytical calculations and computer simulations. To that end, we introduce an approximate theory in which each microtubule can experience at most two crossovers, allowing an analytical determination of the contribution of the probability of rescue-after-severing to the probability that the creation of a crossover actually leads to a severing event, and hence contributes to the amplification. In order to do so, we develop a novel approximate technique to calculate the first-passage time distribution (hereafter FPTD) for the microtubules to reach relatively close targets, which has potential application for studying first-passage time problems in other systems as well.
\section{The model}
\subsection{Dynamic model}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.27]{images/fig1_model.pdf}
\caption{Schematic of the model of longitudinal microtubules undergoing dynamic instability in a grid of stable transverse microtubules. After a crossover creation, a competition between the intrinsic severing waiting time and crossover removal due to dynamic instability takes place. If severing occurs, the newly-created plus end is rescued with probability $p^+$.} \label{fig1_model}
\end{figure}
In order to better understand the importance of the probability of rescue-after-severing for the reorganization mechanism of the cortical microtubule array, we introduce a stochastic model of longitudinal microtubules undergoing dynamic instability in a one dimensional grid of transverse microtubules. Since before the exposure to light the transverse array consists of relatively long microtubules, in the initial stage of this process, i.e. the first $500$ seconds, the array can be seen as a constant background. In particular, we focus on this time interval because it is the period of time in which the amplification takes place.
The model consists of a single longitudinal microtubule undergoing dynamic instability in the one dimensional grid of stable, transverse microtubules with constant spacing $d$ between neighboring filaments \cite{Nakamura2018}. According to experimental observations, where the angle between differently oriented microtubules is very close to $\ang{90}$, we assume that all longitudinal microtubules are exactly perpendicular to the transverse. The microtubule is nucleated at position $x=0$ with plus end in the growing state with growing speed $v^+$, and it can switch to shrinking state with constant catastrophe rate $r_c$. Once it is in the shrinking state, either its plus end shrinks back to position $x=0$ and dies, or it undergoes a rescue with constant rate $r_r$, switching back to the growing state.
Every time the plus end reaches a transverse microtubule - i.e. when its position is $x = nd$ with $n \in \mathbb{N}$, it creates a crossover. This crossover can be resolved in two distinct ways: either it is removed by the shrinkage of the microtubule due to its dynamic instability, or it survives long enough to lead to a severing event. Whether or not the severing event occurs is determined not only by the dynamic instability of the longitudinal microtubule, but also by an intrinsic severing waiting time distribution at the crossover that can be, in principle, arbitrary. Here, however, we choose a distribution that best fits the biological experimental data about the action of \emph{katanin} at crossovers \cite{Lindeboom2018CLASPReorientation.}. Moreover, we need the distribution to account the fact that \emph{katanin} requires a certain amount of time to localize at crossovers before being able to sever microtubules. For this reason we choose the severing waiting time distribution to be
\begin{equation} \label{gamma_sever-wait_distr}
W_{k \theta} \left( t \right) = \frac{t^{k-1}}{\theta^k \Gamma\left(k\right)} e^{-\frac{t}{\theta}},
\end{equation}
i.e. Gamma probability density function \cite{Papoulis2002ProbabilityProcesses}, where
\begin{equation}
\Gamma \left( k \right) = \int_0^\infty ds \, s^{k-1} e^{-s},
\end{equation}
is the Euler gamma function, $k$ is the shape, and $\theta$ is the scale parameter of the distribution.
When the severing event occurs, the former long microtubule is split in two shorter microtubules, and both of them keep undergoing dynamic instability and can create new crossovers and being severed again, in order to amplify the number of longitudinal microtubules. The newly-created plus end of the lagging microtubule either is stabilized and it enters the growing state with probability $p^+$, or it enters the shrinking state with probability $1-p^+$. The newly-created minus end of the leading microtubule is now positioned at the severing point in a stable state, whilst no changes are applied to its plus end, see Figure \ref{fig1_model}.
\subsection{Microtubule behaviour in the interstitial strip}
After the creation of a crossover and before the creation of a second one, the dynamics of the plus end of a microtubule is described by the Dogterom-Leibler model for microtubules undergoing dynamic instability \cite{Dogterom1993PhysicalStructures}. Notice that the dynamics of the plus end is not influenced by eventual severing events. Therefore, as long as the plus end is at $x \in \left(nd, (n+1)d \right)$, we can study the property of the correspondent microtubule undergoing dynamic instability in a strip of width $d$ as if its length is $l=x-nd$.
In the non-confined-in-a-strip case, the model has two possible solutions for the probability distribution of microtubule length: in the bounded-growth regime, defined by the relation $\overline{l} > 0$, with
\begin{equation} \label{typical-length}
\overline{l} = \left( \frac{r_c}{v^+} - \frac{r_r}{v^-} \right)^{-1},
\end{equation}
the steady-state solution is reached, and the length distribution is an exponential decay proportional to $e^{-l/\overline{l}}$, whilst in the unbounded-growth regime the average length of microtubules grows linearly in time, with the length distribution that is well-approximated by a Gaussian-like function \cite{Dogterom1993PhysicalStructures}.
When microtubule dynamics is confined in a strip of a finite width, however, both the bounded and the unbounded-growth regimes lead to a steady-state solution for the length distribution that is proportional to $e^{-l/\overline{l}}$. Notice that, in the unbounded-growth regime case, $\overline{l}$ is no-longer positive, and hence the distribution is exponentially increasing \cite{Govindan2004SteadyGeometry}. General features regarding the lifetime distribution and the splitting probabilities of microtubules in the Dogterom-Leibler model can be found in the Appendix A.
Given our specific interest in studying the properties of the system in both the bounded and the unbounded-growth regime, we have chosen two sets of dynamic parameters: for the bounded-growth case parameters are chosen accordingly to previous observations \cite{Vos2004MicrotubulesTranslocation}, while for the unbounded-growth case, both dynamic parameters and grid parameters are those that have been directly measured for the WT case by previous experimental works \cite{Lindeboom2018CLASPReorientation.}, see Table \ref{table1-parameters}.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c}
\hline
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Parameter} & \multirow{2}{*}{Description} & Numerical value & Numerical value & \multirow{2}{*}{Units} \\
& & (bounded-growth) & (unbounded-growth) & \\
\hline
$v^+$ & Growth speed & $0.1$ & $0.103$ & $\mu\mbox{m} \, \mbox{s}^{-1}$ \\
$v^-$ & Shrinkage speed & $0.25$ & $0.225$ & $\mu\mbox{m} \, \mbox{s}^{-1}$ \\
$r_c$ & Catastrophe rate & $0.02$ & $0.0058$ & $\mbox{s}^{-1}$ \\
$r_r$ & Rescue rate & $0.02$ & $0.026$ & $\mbox{s}^{-1}$ \\
$p^+$ & Probability of rescue-after-severing & Tuned & Tuned & - \\
$d$ & Spacing between neighbors & $1.5$ & $1.5$ & $\mu\mbox{m}$ \\
$\theta$ & Scale parameter of Gamma distribution & $8.5$ & $8.5$ & s \\
$k$ & Shape parameter of Gamma distribution & $7$ & $7$ & - \\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Model parameters.}
\label{table1-parameters}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\section{Results}
\subsection{Amplification in the unbounded-growth regime}
The model introduced in the last section had partially been computationally studied for microtubules in the unbounded-growth regime, and it shows that the factor that influences the most the speed of the amplification of longitudinal microtubules is the probability of rescue-after-severing $p^+$ rather than the intrinsic rescue rate $r_r$ of microtubules \cite{Lindeboom2018CLASPReorientation.}.
Here, we want to perform an in-depth study of the response to the system to the change of $p^+$. We will show that, even though $p^+$ is crucial for the speed of amplification, in the unbounded-growth regime it is not required for the occurrence of it.
Our simulations consist of $N = 10^5$ trials in which a single longitudinal microtubule undergoes dynamic instability in the whole grid of transverse microtubules. For every trial we keep track of the fate of the initial microtubule and its offspring until either no more microtubules are present - i.e. they all have shrunk to length zero, and we call this possible output extinction, or, for every trial that did not result in an extinction, the number of microtubules is exponentially increasing, and we call this second possible output amplification.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.27]{images/fig2A_unbounded-amplif.pdf}
\caption{(A) Time evolution of the number of longitudinal microtubules for four different values of $p^+$. They all exhibit amplification. (B) Extinction probability as a function of time. It represents the fraction of trials in which, after a certain amount of time, all microtubules have completely depolymerized. } \label{fig2A_amplification-extinction_unbounded}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{fig2A_amplification-extinction_unbounded}A shows that for our choice of dynamic parameters, the speed of amplification increases with $p^+$. Furthermore, we notice from Fig. \ref{fig2A_amplification-extinction_unbounded}B that greater values of $p^+$ correspond to lower extinction probabilities, suggesting that a good rescue-after-severing entails a double effect: not only it increases the speed of amplification, but also makes the amplification occur more likely.
The interesting result that in the unbounded-growth regime even the $p^+=0$ case leads to an overall amplification can be explained by an intrinsic property of the regime itself. Indeed, although every severing event shortens the length of the severed microtubule, its plus end is not affected by such an event. Consequently, the dynamic properties of the leading microtubule are not changed by the severing, and so it applies to the microtubule lifetime as well. Since, on average, the length of microtubules in the unbounded-growth regime grows as
\begin{equation}
J = \frac{ r_r v^+ - r_c v^-}{r_r + r_c} t,
\end{equation}
it follows that the average lifetime of microtubules is infinite \cite{Dogterom1993PhysicalStructures}, and therefore there is no upper bound for the number of severing events that a microtubule can undergo.
\subsection{Amplification in the bounded-growth regime}
In this section, we address the question whether or not the amplification occurs regardless of $p^+$ in the bounded-growth regime as well as in the unbounded-growth case. To do so we perform computer simulations for microtubules in the bounded-growth regime (see Table \ref{table1-parameters}) to show that $p^+$ needs to be greater that a certain critical value $p^+_{crit}$ in order have amplification. Moreover, using a combination of computer simulations and analytical calculations we identify such a critical value as a function of the other model parameters.
\subsubsection{Critical point in simulations}
By tuning the probability of rescue-after-severing $p^+$ from $0$ to $1$, we observe two different behaviours, see Figure \ref{fig2_amplification-criticality}A: for lower values of $p^+$ the average number of microtubules exponentially decays in time (extinction), whilst for higher values of $p^+$ the number of microtubules exponentially increases (amplification). It follows that there exists a critical threshold for $p^+$ above which the average output is amplification. For our choice of model parameters, the computationally measured critical value is $p^+_{crit} \simeq 0.36$. Therefore, if we define the \textit{amplification probability} as the fraction of trials the output of which is amplification, we observe that below the critical threshold the amplification probability is zero, whilst it is greater than zero otherwise, see Figure \ref{fig2_amplification-criticality}B.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.27]{images/fig2_amplification-criticality.pdf}
\caption{(A) Time evolution of the number of longitudinal microtubules for three different values of $p^+$. One leads to amplification (blue line), one to extinction (black line), and one corresponds to the critical behaviour (red line). (B) Amplification probability as a function of $p^+$. Amplification probability is non-zero for $p^+$ larger than $p^+_{crit} \simeq 0.36$. } \label{fig2_amplification-criticality}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Calculation of the critical point}
When microtubule is created through a severing event, either it shrinks to length zero and dies, or it is severed a sufficient number of times to create an offspring of new lagging microtubules. If the size of such an offspring is, on average, greater than one, the output is amplification. In other words, if $M$ is the number of severing events that a newly-created microtubule undergoes, then amplification occurs if, on average,
\begin{equation} \label{amplification-condition_1}
M > 1.
\end{equation}
To fix the ideas, suppose that a microtubule is created by severing with initial length $x=d$. Then, with probability $p^+$ it is initially created in the growing state, and consequently with probability $1-p^+$ in the shrinking state. It follows that the size of the offspring of the mother microtubule can be written as $M = p^+ M^+ + \left( 1- p^+ \right) M^-$, where $M^\sigma$ is the size of the offspring of a microtubule created in the state $\sigma$. However, since a shrinking microtubule with plus end at $x < d$ cannot be severed, $M^-$ equals $M^+$ times the probability that the shrinking microtubule recovers the length at birth $d$, i.e. $M^- = R^-_{d} \left( d \right) M^+$, where $R^-_{d} \left( d \right)$ is the splitting probability defined in the Appendix A. Hence, the condition expressed in Eq. (\ref{amplification-condition_1}) can be rewritten as
\begin{equation} \label{amplification-condition_2}
M = \left[ p^+ + \left( 1 - p^+ \right) R^-_{d} \left( d \right) \right] M^+ > 1.
\end{equation}
By solving the equality related to Eq. (\ref{amplification-condition_2}) we can find the critical value of $p^+ = p^+_{crit}$ above which amplification takes place
\begin{equation} \label{p+_crit}
p^+_{crit} = \frac{1 - R^-_{d} \left( d \right) M^+}{ \left( 1 - R^-_{d} \left( d \right) \right) M^+ }.
\end{equation}
From this equation, we can identify the two extreme scenarios in which amplification never or always occurs, regardless of $p^+$. In the first case, we state that amplification never occurs if $p^+_{crit} > 1$, meaning that the maximum value that $p^+$ can reach is not enough to lead to amplification. We can show that condition $p^+_{crit} > 1$ is equivalent to condition $M^+ < 1$, i.e. amplification is impossible if the average size of the offspring of mother microtubules born in growing state is smaller than $1$. In the second case, we state that amplification always occurs if $p^+_{crit} < 0$, meaning that even without rescue-after-severing, dynamic parameters of the model are such that amplification is still possible. This condition is equivalent to $M^+ R^-_{d} \left( d \right) > 1$, or $M^- >1$, i.e. amplification occurs every time the average size of the offspring of mother microtubules born in shrinking state is greater than $1$.
It is important to underline that, in our discussion, we assumed that all microtubules were born with initial length $d$. This choice implies that all severing events occur at the first crossover.
However, given the stochastic nature of the system and of the severing waiting time probability of Eq. (\ref{gamma_sever-wait_distr}), it is possible that a severing event occurs further in the grid than at the first crossover of a microtubule. In other words, the initial length of a newly-created microtubule can be $x = n d$, with $n>1$.
In this case, we need to add into the count of the size of offspring of a mother microtubule all cases in which a microtubule that is born with initial length $n d$, $n>1$, it is also severed at $(n-1) d$, $(n-2) d$, $\dots$ . We consider the microtubules created by this mechanism as direct daughter microtubules of the mother microtubule we are measuring the size of the offspring of. To that end, we first define $m_i$ via $M^+ = \frac{1}{N} \sum\limits_{i=1}^N m_i$ as the number of microtubules generated by the mother microtubule labeled by $i$, and $N$ is the number of microtubules we keep track of the fate. Then, we denote the number of severing events the microtubule $i$ undergoes with $s_i$, and the position of the crossover at which the first severing takes place with $c_{j_i}$, with the rule: $c_{j_i} = n-1$ if the severing occurred at $nd$. Since after a severing event at $nd$ the crossovers at $kd$, $k<n$, can be removed by either shrinkage or severing, we define $b_{c_{j_i}}$ as the number of crossovers that are resolved by shrinkage. Therefore
\begin{equation} \label{m_i}
m_i = s_i + \sum_{j_i=1}^{s_i} \left[ c_{j_i} - b_{c_{j_i}} \right].
\end{equation}
Notice that $b_{c_{j_i}}$ depends on $p^+$, as it depends on the behaviour of the plus end after severing of the newly-created microtubule. Consequently, the r.h.s. of Eq. (\ref{p+_crit}) exhibits a dependency on $p^+$. Hence, we need to find the exact dependency on $p^+$ of $b_{c_{j_i}}$. To avoid the problem, in first approximation we set $b_{c_{j_i}} = 0$ for every $c_{j_i}$. In this way, we can computationally measure $m_i^{(1)} \equiv s_i + \sum\limits_{j_i=1}^{s_i} c_{j_i}$, and we use Eq. (\ref{p+_crit}) to give a first estimate of the critical probability $p^+_{crit,(1)}$, see Table \ref{table2-crit-p+}. We refer to this approximation as \textit{one-crossover} approximation. From the table we notice that, although this approximation gives a reasonable prediction for the critical probability of rescue-after-severing, it systematically underestimates it.
Analytically, one can calculate $b_{c_{j_i}}$ only under the condition that a severing event at $nd$ always implies the resolution of the crossovers at $d$, $2 d$, $\dots$, $\left( n - 2 \right) d$ through a severing event, whilst the crossover at $\left( n - 1 \right) d$ can be resolved by either severing or shrinkage.
Therefore, if we denote the probability of resolving this crossover with a shrinkage as $p_{cr} \left( p^+ \right)$, we have
\begin{equation} \label{b_c_j_i}
b_{c_{j_i}} = \left( 1 - \delta_{c_{j_i},0} \right) p_{cr} \left( p^+ \right).
\end{equation}
The Kronecker function $\delta_{c_{j_i},0}$ of Eq. (\ref{b_c_j_i}) accounts the fact that, if the severing happens at $d$ (i.e. $c_{j_i} = 0$), no other crossovers are removed by either severing or shrinkage. If we plug Eq. (\ref{b_c_j_i}) into Eq. (\ref{m_i}), we can now calculate an approximate expression for $M^+$, i.e.
\begin{equation} \begin{split} \label{M+1}
M^+_{(2)} & = \frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^N m_i^{(2)} = \frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^N \Big[ s_i + \sum_{j_i=1}^{s_i} c_{j_i} - p_{cr} \left( p^+ \right) \sum_{j_i=1}^{s_i} \left( 1 - \delta_{c_i,0} \right) \Big].
\end{split} \end{equation}
The detailed derivation of Eq. (\ref{M+1}) can be found in the Appendix B. Finally, if we define $M^+_{(1)} = \frac{1}{N} \sum\limits_{i=1}^N \left[ s_i + \sum\limits_{j_i=1}^{s_i} c_{j_i} \right]$, $S = \frac{1}{N} \sum\limits_{i=1}^N s_i$, and $\left\langle 1 - \delta_{c_i,0} \right\rangle = \frac{1}{s_i} \sum\limits_{j_i=1}^{s_i} \left( 1 - \delta_{c_{j_i},0} \right)$, (see Appendix B), we can rewrite the condition (\ref{amplification-condition_2}) for microtubule amplification as
\begin{equation} \label{amplification-condition_final}
M = \Big[ p^+ + \left( 1 - p^+ \right) R^-_{d} \left( d \right) \Big] \left[ M^+_{(1)} - p_{cr} \left( p^+ \right) S \frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^N \left\langle 1 - \delta_{c_i,0} \right\rangle \right] > 1.
\end{equation}
The resolution of the equation associated to this inequality provides the critical threshold for the probability of rescue-after-severing $p^+_{crit,(2)}$ in order to have amplification. We refer to this approximation as \textit{two-crossovers} approximation. The expression (\ref{amplification-condition_final}) contains two quantities, $M_{(1)}^+$ and $S$, that cannot be analytically calculated but can be easily measured with computer simulations. On the other hand, in the following sections we are going to analytically calculate the terms $p_{cr} \left( p^+ \right)$ and $\frac{1}{N}\sum\limits_{i=1}^N \left\langle 1 - \delta_{c_i,0} \right\rangle$. In this way, we will make a better prediction off the critical probability of rescue-after-severing in order to have amplification.
\subsection{Analytical approach}
In this section we are going to calculate the critical probability of rescue-after-severing.
To that end, we first need to calculate $p_{cr} \left( p^+ \right)$ and $\frac{1}{N}\sum\limits_{i=1}^N \left\langle 1 - \delta_{c_i,0} \right\rangle$. In order to do so, and because of the complexity of the model, we make the approximation that the entire grid of transverse microtubules is replaced by just two transverse microtubules. This reduces the total number of possible crossovers to two. Therefore, we first calculate the FPTD for a longitudinal microtubule to create a crossover with a transverse, as we will need it for the formulation of our \textit{two-crossovers approximation}. Then, we give some analytical results of the one-crossover approximation already introduced in the previous section. Finally, we present the two-crossovers approximation and we show that we can use it to calculate the critical probability of rescue-after-severing with a good degree of accuracy.
\subsubsection{The first passage time distribution}
The creation of new crossovers for a microtubule undergoing dynamic instability is intimately linked to a FPTD problem for the same microtubule to reach a target. Here, we face this problem by making use of an approach where we consider all possible legal paths to reach the target, given the knowledge of the time needed to reach it.
The first passage time problem for a microtubule to reach length $x_1$ starting from $x_0$ in the absence of severing can be seen as a reverse lifetime problem, in the sense that in place of studying the reaching of the target at $x_1$ we study the survival of the microtubule until it arrives at $x_1$, as if it is shrinking from $x_0$ to $x_1$. In this way, the growing speed of the microtubule acts as its shrinking speed, its catastrophe rate as the rescue rate, and viceversa. However, with this approach we assume that a microtubule ``shrinking'' from $x_0$ can undergo a ``rescue'' and grow beyond the initial position $x_0$. This means that the microtubule assumes negative length. To avoid this, we need to take into account only the paths from $x_0$ to $x_1$ that never shrink below $x_0$. Hence, if $L_\sigma \left( t | x_1 -x_0 \right)$ is the lifetime distribution for microtubules with initial length $x_1 - x_0$ and initial state $\sigma$ (see Appendix A), we define
\begin{equation} \label{lifetime-distribution_-_reverse}
L_\sigma^{target} \left( t, x_1 - x_0 \right) = \big. L_\sigma \left( t | x_1 - x_0 \right) \Big|_{\tiny{\begin{matrix} v^\pm \to v^\mp \\ r_c \leftrightarrow r_r \end{matrix}}},
\end{equation}
as the FPTD to reach the target, including the possibility of assuming negative length. Therefore, this function must be re-scaled by the number of \textit{legal paths} $\Gamma_{x_0 \to x_1} \left( t \right)$ that reach the target $x_1$ at time $t$, without ever shrinking back to $x<x_0$, calculated over all possible paths that arrive at $x_1$ at time $t$, see Figure \ref{fig4_completeFPTD}AB.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.27]{images/fig4_completeFPTD.pdf}
\caption{(A) Legal and (B) illegal path for a microtubule to reach the target at a distance $d$ in a first passage time $T$. Only one catastrophe and one rescue are allowed. (C-F) Comparison between simulations (red dots) and theory (blue line) for the non-direct part $f_d \left( t \right)$ of the first passage time distribution. (B, C) Our theory nicely fits simulations for relatively close targets ($d = 1.5 \, \mu\mbox{m}$, $d = 6 \, \mu\mbox{m}$), (D, E) while it is not very good for more distant targets ($d = 30 \, \mu\mbox{m}$, $d = 60 \, \mu\mbox{m}$).} \label{fig4_completeFPTD}
\end{figure}
For our purpose, the target to reach is a transverse microtubule for the creation of a new crossover, the position of which is at distance $d$ from the starting point, i.e. the previous transverse microtubule. Typically, for the range of values of Table \ref{table1-parameters}, every plus end that impinges on a transverse microtubule starting from the previous one either it does it without undergoing any catastrophe, or it undergoes one catastrophe and a subsequent rescue. For the dynamic parameters we are considering, the occurrence of multiple catastrophe-rescue events is very unlikely. Therefore we assume that all paths are either direct - no catastrophes, or indirect - one catastrophe and one rescue.
Given the constant growing and shrinking speeds, the amount of time that a microtubule needs to reach the target at $d$ is given by the time needed to reach it in absence of any catastrophe, added to the time spent from a catastrophe to the moment when the original length before the catastrophe is restored. Mathematically, if $T_d$ is the first-passage time and $\Delta x \left( T_d \right)$ is the distance walked by the plus end from the catastrophe to the subsequent rescue, the equation
\begin{equation} \label{FPT}
T_d = \frac{d}{v^+} + \Delta x \left( T_d \right) \left( \frac{1}{v^+} + \frac{1}{v^+} \right),
\end{equation}
holds. From Eq. (\ref{FPT}) we can find the expression for $\Delta x \left( T \right) = \frac{v^+ v^-}{v^+ + v^-} \left( T - \frac{d}{v^+}\right)$.
Since catastrophes are modelled as Poisson events, if a catastrophe occurs, the probability that it occurs does not depend on the distance from the target. Therefore, the fraction of legal paths can be written as $\Gamma_{0 \to d} \left( T \right) = 1 - \frac{\Delta x \left( T \right)}{d}$, and, finally, the FPTD as
\begin{equation} \label{FPTD}
F_{0d} \left( t \right) = L_\sigma^{target} \left( t, d \right) \Gamma_{0 \to d} \left( t \right) \Theta \left[ d \left( \frac{2}{v^+} + \frac{1}{v^-} \right) - t \right],
\end{equation}
where the Heaviside theta is imposed to allow at most one catastrophe-rescue event.
In order to separate direct paths from indirect paths, it is convenient to split $F_{0d} \left( t \right)$ in two parts, and rewrite it as
\begin{equation} \label{FPTD-split}
F_{0d} \left( t \right) = \delta \left( t - \frac{d}{v^+} \right) \, e^{-r_c t} + f_{0d} \left( t \right),
\end{equation}
where the term multiplied by the delta function accounts direct paths, while $f_{0d} \left( t \right)$ accounts indirect. From Appendix A that microtubules reach the target with probability $R_d^+ \left( x \right)$. Therefore $F_{0d} \left( t \right)$ is normalized to $R_d^+ \left( x \right)$, and as a consequence, the relation
\begin{equation}
\int_0^\infty dt \, f_{0d} \left( t \right) = R_d^+ \left( 0 \right) - e^{-\frac{r_c d}{v^+}}
\end{equation}
holds.
We run $N = 10^6$ simulations of microtubules undergoing dynamic instability in a strip of width $d$, and we create the histogram of the arrival times for the microtubules that reach the target with an indirect path. Figure \ref{fig4_completeFPTD}CD shows that the approximation of only one catastrophe-rescue event is a good approximation when the target is relatively close compared to the dynamic parameters of the microtubules, while it apparently fails when the target is more distant, see Figure \ref{fig4_completeFPTD}EF. However, it is convenient to point out that, for $d \gg \overline{l}$, we observe a very few arrivals at the target, since from Eq. (\ref{splitting-xtod+}) we notice that the arrival probability $R_d^+ \left( 0 \right)$ decays as $e^{-d/\overline{l}}$. On the other hand, in the unbounded-growth regime, since a fraction $1-\frac{r_c v^-}{r_r v^+}$ of the microtubules always arrives at the target, for distant targets the approximation of one catastrophe-rescue event is no longer accurate.
\subsubsection{One-crossover theory}
Na\"ively, one can think that once a crossover is created, the probability $p^{(1)}_{sev}$ of resolving it with a severing event is given by the competition between two independent events: microtubule lifetime, expressed by the random variable $T_+ \left( x \right)$ with density function given by Eq. (\ref{lifetime-distribution_+}), and severing waiting time at the crossover, with random variable $\tau_d$ and density function defined in Eq. (\ref{gamma_sever-wait_distr}). Then, if we define the random variable $t = \tau_d - T_0$, we can calculate its probability density function by using the relation $P_{z} \left( z = x + y \right) = \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} dz' \, P_x \left( z - z' \right) P_y \left( z' \right),$
where $P_i$ is the probability density function of the random variable $i = x,y,z$, and $x$ and $y$ are independent random variables. In our case, the probability density function is
\begin{equation} \label{taud-T0_pdf}
P_{\tau_d - T_+ \left( 0 \right)} \left( t \right) = \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} dt' \, W_{k,\theta} \left( t + t' \right) L_+ \left( t' | 0 \right).
\end{equation}
Hence, the probability that the event ``severing'' happens before the event ``return'' is $\mathbb{P}\left[ t < 0 \right] = \int_{-\infty}^{0} dt \, P_{\tau_d - T_+ \left( 0 \right)} \left( t \right)$. This probability is not yet the probability of resolving a crossover with a severing event: indeed, microtubules in the unbounded-growth regime have a finite probability of growing indefinitely. For those, the lifetime $T_+ \left( 0 \right) \to \infty$ is infinite. Therefore, the probability of resolving a crossover with a severing event is
\begin{equation} \label{psevONE}
p^{(1)}_{sev} = S_+ \left( \infty | 0 \right) + \left[ 1 - S_+ \left( \infty | 0 \right) \right] \int_{-\infty}^{0} dt \, P_{\tau_0 - T_+ \left( 0 \right)} \left( t \right),
\end{equation}
where $S_+ \left( \infty | 0 \right)$ is the ultimate survival probability defined in the Appendix A. As a consequence the probability of resolving a crossover with a shrinkage is
\begin{equation} \label{pshrinkONE}
p^{(1)}_{shrink} = 1 - p^{(1)}_{sev}.
\end{equation}
However, with this approach we neglect the number of crossovers removed by shrinkage after the severing at a second crossover, and, therefore, the dependency on $p^+$. In other words, the one-crossover theory does not take into account that some microtubules that would have been severed at $d$ are not anymore severed there because an eventual severing at $nd$, $n>1$, can in principle shorten their lifetimes, and make them shrink below $d$, resulting in the resolution of the crossover by a shrinkage induced by the severing at $nd$, see Figure \ref{fig5_sevVSshrink_V3}.
\subsubsection{Two-crossovers theory}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.27]{images/fig5_sevVSshrink_V4.pdf}
\caption{Schematic of the full one-crossover theory (A). The newly-created crossover can be resolved either by the shrinkage of the plus end below the crossover itself (lower blue square), or by the severing at crossover (upper blue square). Schematic of the full two-crossovers theory (B). The first crossover created can be resolved either by the shrinkage of the longitudinal microtubule with probability $p_{shrink}^{(2)}$ (sum of all paths that bring to the lower blue square), or by the severing at crossover with probability $p_{sev}^{(2)}$ (sum of all paths that bring to the upper blue square). Whether the severing at the first crossover occurs or not also depends on what happens at the second crossover: a severing event at the second crossover alters the dynamic instability of the lagging microtubule, and hence its probability of shrinking before being severed at the first crossover.} \label{fig5_sevVSshrink_V3}
\end{figure}
In order to take into account the influence of a crossover on the resolution of the previous one, we calculate the probability of resolving a crossover with a severing event in a scenario in which we have two transverse microtubules, at position $d$ and $2d$ respectively. We make the further approximation that a microtubule cannot be severed two times at the same crossover. We denote the probability of having a severing event at $d$ with $p^{(2)}_{sev}$, and consequently the probability of resolving a crossover with shrinkage with $p^{(2)}_{shrink} = 1 - p^{(2)}_{sev}$.
Figure \ref{fig5_sevVSshrink_V3}B shows the three distinct ways in which the newly-created crossover at $d$ can be resolved by shrinkage or severing: 1) the microtubule shrinks (is severed) without reaching $2d$, 2) the microtubule shrinks (is severed) after reaching $2d$ but without being severed there, 3) the microtubule shrinks (is severed) after reaching $2d$ and after being severed there. The third case bears a dependency on $p^+$.
We first notice that $p^{(2)}_{shrink}$ can be split in two probabilities, i.e. $p^{(2)}_{shrink} = q_{sev} + q_{shrink}$, where $q_{sev}$ is the probability of shrinkage after severing at $2d$ (path $\longrightarrow \longrightarrow \swarrow$ of Figure \ref{fig5_sevVSshrink_V3}B), while $q_{shrink}$ is the probability of shrinkage without any severing (paths $\longrightarrow \downarrow$ or $\searrow$ of Figure \ref{fig5_sevVSshrink_V3}B). Furthermore, since $q_{sev}$ depends on the dynamic behaviour of the microtubule just after the severing event, it carries a dependency on $p^+$ and can be split again in $q_{sev} \left( p^+ \right) = p^+ q_{sev,+} + \left( 1 - p^+ \right) q_{sev,-}$, where $q_{sev,\sigma}$ is the probability of shrinkage after being severed at $2d$ with the newly-created plus end in the state $\sigma$. The derivation of $q_{sev, \sigma}$ can be found in Appendix B.
As regards the probability $q_{shrink}$ that microtubules shrink below $d$ without being severed there, we observe that such a probability accounts all cases in which crossovers are resolved by shrinkage in absence of the crossover at $2d$, i.e. $p^{(1)}_{shrink}$, except for those cases in which microtubules that in principle would have shrunk back, do not have enough time to do so because they are severed at $2d$. We denote this probability with $q_{ns}$, and hence $q_{shrink} = p^{(1)}_{shrink} - q_{ns}$. The derivation of $q_{ns}$ can be found in Appendix B.
Therefore, the final expressions for the probabilities of resolving a crossover with a severing and with a shrinkage are
\begin{equation} \label{p2shrink_final}
p^{(2)}_{shrink} \left( p^+ \right) = p^{(1)}_{shrink} - q_{ns} + q_{sev} \left( p^+ \right),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{p2sev_final}
p^{(2)}_{sev} \left( p^+ \right) = p^{(1)}_{sev} + q_{ns} - q_{sev} \left( p^+ \right).
\end{equation}
Notice that $q_{sev} \left( p^+ \right)$ can be rewritten as
$$
q_{sev} \left( p^+ \right) = q_{sev,-} - \left( q_{sev,-} - q_{sev,+} \right) p^+,
$$
where the term in the braces is always positive. Indeed, since a microtubule initially in the growing state takes more time to completely depolymerize than a microtubule in the shrinking state, its probability of resolving the crossover at $d$ before being severed there is smaller than in the opposite case. Consequently, from Eq. (\ref{p2sev_final}) the probability $p^{(2)}_{sev} \left( p^+ \right)$ of resolving a crossover with a severing event grows linearly with $p^+$.
By making use of this two-crossovers theory, we finally give a new estimate of the critical probability of rescue-after-severing by calculating the probabilities $p_{cr} \left( p^+ \right)$ and $\frac{1}{N} \sum\limits_{i=1}^N \left\langle 1 - \delta_{c_i,0} \right\rangle$ of Eq. (\ref{amplification-condition_final}). In order to do that, we first define $p_{2d}$ as the probability to have a severing event at $2d$ before an eventual severing event at $d$. The derivation of $p_{2d}$ can be found in the Appendix B.
We now define the three events $A$, $B$, and $C$ as
\begin{align*}
A &= \mbox{shrinkage of microtubule below $d$ after severing at $2d$}, \\
B &= \mbox{severing event at $2d$ before an eventual severing event at $d$},\\
C &= \mbox{severing event at either $d$ or $2d$}.
\end{align*}
The three events are nested as $A \subset B \subset C$, and their probabilities are $\mathbb{P} \left( A \right) = q_{sev} \left( p^+ \right)$, $\mathbb{P} \left( B \right) = p_{2d}$, and $\mathbb{P} \left( C \right) = p_{sev}^{(2)} \left( p^+ \right) - q_{sev} \left( p^+ \right) + p_{2d} = p_{sev}^{(1)} - q_{ns} + p_{2d}$. Thus, it holds
\begin{equation}\begin{split} \label{pcr}
p_{cr} \left( p^+ \right) &= \mathbb{P} \left( A | B \right) = \frac{\mathbb{P} \left( A \cap B \right)}{\mathbb{P} \left( B \right)} \\
& = \frac{\mathbb{P} \left( A \right)}{\mathbb{P} \left( B \right)} = \frac{q_{sev} \left( p^+ \right)}{p_{2d}},
\end{split}\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\begin{split} \label{average-delta-sum}
\frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^N \left\langle 1 - \delta_{c_i,0} \right\rangle &= \mathbb{P} \left( B | C \right) = \frac{\mathbb{P} \left( B \cap C \right)}{\mathbb{P} \left( C \right)} \\
& = \frac{\mathbb{P} \left( B \right)}{\mathbb{P} \left( C \right)} = \frac{p_{2d}}{p_{sev}^{(1)} - q_{ns} + p_{2d}}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
Plugging $p_{cr}$ and $\frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^N \left\langle 1 - \delta_{c_i,0} \right\rangle$ into the equality associated to inequality (\ref{amplification-condition_final}), we finally calculate the critical threshold for the probability of rescue-after-severing $p^+_{crit,(2)}$, that is
\begin{equation}\begin{split} \label{p+_crit_final}
p^+_{crit,(2)} = & \, \frac{ 1 }{ 2 S \Delta q_{sev} \beta \left( 1 - R_{d}^- \left( d \right) \right) } \\
& \times \bigg\{ \left( M^+_0 - S \alpha \beta \right)\left( 1 -R_{d}^- \left( d \right) \right) - S \Delta q_{sev} \beta R_{d}^- \left( d \right) \bigg. \\
& \quad \bigg. + \sqrt{ \left[ \left( M^+_0 - S \alpha \beta \right)\left( 1 - R_{d}^- \left( d \right) \right) + S \Delta q_{sev} \beta R_{d}^- \left( d \right) \right]^2 - 4 S \Delta q_{sev} \beta \left( 1 - R_{d}^- \left( d \right) \right) } \bigg\},
\end{split}\end{equation}
where
$$
\alpha = p_{sev}^{(1)} + q_{ns} - q_{sev,-},
$$
$$
\beta = \frac{1}{p_{sev}^{(1)} - q_{ns} + p_{2d}},
$$
$$
\Delta q_{sev} = q_{sev,-} - q_{sev,+}.
$$
Table \ref{table2-crit-p+} shows a very good agreement between our predicted critical probability of rescue-after-severing in the two-crossovers approximation and the critical probability obtained with our simulations in the whole grid of transverse microtubules for different choices of dynamic parameters, confirming our hypothesis that, in order to study the critical properties of the system, we can approximate the entire grid of transverse microtubules with just two of them without any considerable loss of accuracy.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c | c c c c c}
\hline
\hline
\multicolumn{4}{c|}{\multirow{2}{*}{Dynamic parameters}} & Critical point & Critical point & Relative error & Critical point & Relative error \\
& & & & (simulations) & (1-cross. theory) & & (2-cross. theory) \\
\hline
$v^+$ & $v^-$ & $r_c$ & $r_r$ & $p_{crit}^+$& $p_{crit,(1)}^+$ & $\Delta p^+_{(1)}$ & $p_{crit,(2)}^+$ & $\Delta p^+_{(2)}$ \\
$\mu\mbox{m} \, \mbox{s}^{-1}$ & $\mu\mbox{m} \, \mbox{s}^{-1}$ & $\mbox{s}^{-1}$ & $\mbox{s}^{-1}$ & - & - & - & - & - \\
\hline
0.10 & 0.250 & 0.020 & 0.020 & 0.360 & 0.316 & 0.122 & 0.361 & 0.003 \\
0.08 & 0.275 & 0.016 & 0.022 & 0.338 & 0.297 & 0.121 & 0.337 & 0.003 \\
0.15 & 0.225 & 0.020 & 0.020 & 0.142 & 0.108 & 0.239 & 0.144 & 0.014 \\
0.10 & 0.250 & 0.030 & 0.015 & 0.882 & 0.819 & 0.071 & 0.864 & 0.020 \\
0.10 & 0.250 & 0.015 & 0.030 & 0.089 & 0.068 & 0.236 & 0.103 & 0.157 \\
0.10 & 0.250 & 0.030 & 0.015 & 0.800 & 0.733 & 0.084 & 0.780 & 0.025 \\
0.10 & 0.275 & 0.020 & 0.030 & 0.285 & 0.240 & 0.158 & 0.285 & 0.000 \\
0.10 & 0.250 & 0.010 & 0.020 & 0.054 & 0.041 & 0.241 & 0.066 & 0.222 \\
0.08 & 0.225 & 0.015 & 0.025 & 0.208 & 0.179 & 0.139 & 0.213 & 0.024 \\
0.12 & 0.225 & 0.020 & 0.025 & 0.175 & 0.140 & 0.200 & 0.179 & 0.023 \\
0.08 & 0.250 & 0.002 & 0.020 & 0.510 & 0.455 & 0.108 & 0.497 & 0.025 \\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Comparison $p^+_{crit}$ vs $p_{crit,(1)}$ vs $p_{crit,(2)}$ for different sets of dynamic parameters as $v^+$, $v^-$, $r_c$, and $r_r$. All other model parameters are those of Table \ref{table1-parameters}. $\Delta p^+_{(1)} = \frac{ p_{crit}^+ - p_{crit,(1)}^+}{ p_{crit}^+}$ and $\Delta p^+_{(2)} =\frac{ p_{crit}^+ - p_{crit,(2)}^+}{ p_{crit}^+}$ represent the relative error of the one and two-crossovers theory to the computationally measured critical value for the probability of rescue-after-severing.}
\label{table2-crit-p+}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\section{Discussion}
Our aim was to obtain a deeper insight into the conditions under which templated severing of microtubules at microtubule crossovers can lead to exponential proliferation of a new population of microtubules, as observed in the recent experiments on the light-induced reorientation of the plant microtubule cortical array. To that end we separately considered the role of the microtubule growth state, be it bounded or unbounded, and that of the rescue-after-severing effect previously identified as a key component of the amplification process. Simulations revealed a striking difference between the unbounded and the bounded microtubule growth regimes. In the unbounded-growth regime, which appears to be salient for the experimental situation, amplification due to templated severing will occur even in the absence of rescue-after-severing. The reason is that in this growth regime microtubules in principle have infinite lifetime, allowing them (and their descendants after severing) to be severed without limit, which by itself is sufficient to drive the amplification. There still is a role for the probability of rescue-after-severing, but only as a moderator for rate of amplification and the probability of success per microtubule. In contrast, in the bounded-growth regime an microtubule can in principle only be severed a finite number of times. In this case amplification can only occur if the process is biased by a sufficiently high probability of rescue-after-severing. When the system is below a critical value of this parameter, a newly nucleated microtubule, and all of its descendants through severing, is sure to go extinct. The value of this critical rescue-after-severing probability depends strongly on the probability of a newly-severed microtubule to cross the interval between neighboring transverse microtubules, so that it can be severed in turn, a crucial step in the amplification process. This prompted us to develop a novel approach to calculating the appropriate first passage time distribution, using an approach that may find application in other stochastic systems as well. This formed the basis of approximate calculation of the critical rescue-after-severing probability, which compares favourably with the results obtained from simulations.
While our work sheds light on the initial phase of the amplification process, understanding the later stages and the stability of the final state remains a challenging problem. Here we have neglected a number of important effects. First, the transverse microtubules were taken to be inert, while in reality they are also dynamic and will tend to be broken down over time as more and more of the available tubulin is incorporated into the exponentially growing population of longitudinal microtubules. This will remove opportunities for severing, and therefore tend to dampen the amplification again. Moreover, as the amplification process develops, the availability of free tubulin dimers, which surely are a limited resource in the cell, is also bound to decrease, which in turn affects both the growth dynamics and nucleation rate. Given our results here, the first effect, depression of the growth speed, could in fact switch the microtubules from the unbounded to the bounded-growth regime, which likely decelerates the amplification process. We are currently exploring these issue, which will be the subject of a follow-up paper.
\begin{acknowledgments}
The work of MS was supported by the ERC 2013 Synergy Grant MODELCELL. The work of BMM is part of the research program of the Dutch Research Council (NWO).
\end{acknowledgments}
\section{Appendix A: main features of the Dogterom-Leibler model}
\subsection{Splitting probabilities in the interstitial strip}
If a microtubule plus end impinges on a transverse microtubule, it creates a crossover. After the creation of the crossover the plus end is located at $x \in \left( nd, (n+1)d \right)$, and, as long as this condition is fulfilled, the dynamics of microtubules is described by the Dogterom-Leibler model for microtubules with their minus end at $nd$, regardless the occurrence of a severing event. Without any loss of generality, we can set $n=0$ and length $l=x$.
Due to the dynamic instability of the plus end, the microtubule either reaches length $x=d$ or shrinks back to length $x=0$. The occurrence probability of either of these events is described by the so-called \textit{splitting probabilities} $R^\sigma_0 \left( x \right)$ and $R^\sigma_d \left( x \right)$, that describe the probability that a microtubule with initial state $\sigma$ and initial length $x$ arrives first at length $0$ or $d$ respectively. Conservation of probability implies that $R^\sigma_0 \left( x \right) + R^\sigma_d \left( x \right) = 1$.
It is possible to show \cite{Mulder2012MicrotubulesTimes} that
\begin{equation} \label{splitting-xtod+}
R_{d}^+ \left( x \right) = \frac{ e^{x/\overline{l}} - \frac{r_r v^+}{r_c v^-} }{ e^{d/\overline{l}} - \frac{r_r v^+}{r_c v^-} },
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{splitting-xtod-}
R_{d}^- \left( x \right) = \frac{ \frac{r_r v^+}{r_c v^-} \left( e^{x/\overline{l}} - 1 \right) }{ e^{d/\overline{l}} - \frac{r_r v^+}{r_c v^-} },
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{splitting-xto0+}
R_{0}^+ \left( x \right) = \frac{ e^{d/\overline{l}} - e^{x/\overline{l}} }{ e^{d/\overline{l}} - \frac{r_r v^+}{r_c v^-} },
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{splitting-xto0-}
R_{0}^- \left( x \right) = \frac{ e^{d/\overline{l}} - \frac{r_r v^+}{r_c v^-} e^{x/\overline{l}} }{ e^{d/\overline{l}} - \frac{r_r v^+}{r_c v^-} }.
\end{equation}
Interestingly, these expressions hold for both bounded and unbounded-growth case. This is a direct consequence of the fact that in a strip both regimes produce a steady-state solution \cite{Govindan2004SteadyGeometry}.
\subsection{Microtubule lifetime and survival probability}
The lifetime density function $L_\sigma\left( t | x \right)$ of a microtubule with initial length $x$ and initial state $\sigma$, is defined as the distribution of the time needed by microtubules to completely depolymerize.
In the bounded-growth regime all microtubules have a finite lifetime, hence $L_\sigma \left( t | x \right)$ is normalized to $1$. However, in the unbounded-growth a fraction of microtubules grows linearly in time. It follows that for unbounded-growth microtubules, the lifetime density function can be defined only for the fraction of microtubules the lifetime of which is finite.
In the bounded-growth regime, the lifetime density functions are \cite{Bicout1997}
\begin{equation}\begin{split} \label{lifetime-distribution_+}
L_+ \left( t | x \right) = & \ \Theta\left( t - \frac{x}{v^-} \right) \frac{r_c}{v^+ t + x} \, e^{-\left[ r_r \left( v^+ t + x \right) + r_c \left( v^- t - x \right) \right]} \\
& \times \Bigg[ x \, I_0 \left( \frac{2}{v^+ + v^-} \sqrt{r_r r_c \left( v^+ t + x \right) \left( v^- t - x \right)} \right) \big. \\
& \qquad \Bigg. + \frac{v^+}{r_c} \sqrt{\frac{r_c \left( v^- t - x \right)}{r_r \left( v^+ t + x \right) }} I_1 \left( \frac{2}{v^+ + v^-} \sqrt{r_r r_c \left( v^+ t + x \right) \left( v^- t - x \right)} \right)\Bigg],
\end{split}\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\begin{split} \label{lifetime-distribution_-}
L_- \left( t | x \right) = & \ \delta \left( t - \frac{x}{v^-} \right) \, e^{-r_r t} + \Theta\left( t - \frac{x}{v^-} \right) \sqrt{ \frac{r_c r_r}{ \left( v^+ t + x \right) \left( v^- t - x \right) } } \, x \\
& \times e^{-\left[ r_r \left( v^+ t + x \right) + r_c \left( v^- t - x \right) \right]} I_1 \left( \frac{2}{v^+ + v^-} \sqrt{r_r r_c \left( v^+ t + x \right) \left( v^- t - x \right)} \right),
\end{split}\end{equation}
where $I_0 \left( \cdot \right)$ and $I_1 \left( \cdot \right)$ are the modified Bessel functions of order $0$ and $1$, respectively.
In order to obtain the densities in the unbounded-growth regime, we need to by divide Eq. (\ref{lifetime-distribution_+}) and Eq. (\ref{lifetime-distribution_-}) by $ 1 - S_+ \left( \infty | x \right)$ and $1 - S_- \left( \infty | x \right)$ respectively, where $S_\sigma \left( \infty | x \right)$ is the fraction of microtubules with initial length $x$ and initial state $\sigma$ that never completely depolymerize. Due to their finite lifetime, in the bounded-growth regime these fractions are identically $0$. The fractions $S_\sigma \left( \infty | x \right)$ are called \textit{ultimate survival probabilities}, and they are
\begin{equation} \label{ultimate-survival-prob_+}
S_+ \left( \infty | x \right) =
\begin{cases}
1 - \frac{r_c v^-}{r_r v^+} \, \exp\left[- \frac{r_r v^+ - r_c v^-}{v^+ v^-} x\right] & \qquad \mbox{if unbounded-growth regime},\\
0 & \qquad \mbox{if bounded-growth regime},
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{ultimate-survival-prob_-}
S_- \left( \infty | x \right) =
\begin{cases}
1 - \exp\left[- \frac{r_r v^+ - r_c v^-}{v^+ v^-} x\right] & \qquad \mbox{if unbounded-growth regime},\\
0 & \qquad \mbox{if bounded-growth regime}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\section{Appendix B: derivation of the size of the offspring of a microtubule}
Here, we derive the expression for the size of the offspring of a microtubule in the one and two-crossovers approximations.
First, we introduce the one-crossover approximation by removing the dependency on $p^+$ from the r.h.s. of Eq. (\ref{m_i}). We assume that $b_{c_{j_i}} = 0$ for every $j_i$. This implies that, when a severing event occurs at $nd$, $n>1$, then all previous crossovers are resolved by a severing event. With this approximation, we replace $m_i$ with
\begin{equation} \label{m_i^0}
m_i^{(1)} = s_i + \sum\limits_{j_i=1}^{s_i} c_{j_i},
\end{equation}
see Figure \ref{fig3_Mplus-count}. Analytically, we cannot calculate neither $s_i$ nor $c_{j_i}$, but these quantity are easily measurable with computer simulations. We average $m_i^{(1)}$ over $N = 10^5$ simulations to find the first approximation for $M^+$, i.e. $M^+_{(1)} = \frac{1}{N} \sum\limits_{i=1}^N m_i^{(1)} = 2.61$. Therefore, from Eq. (\ref{p+_crit}), we can calculate the first estimate of the critical probability of rescue-after-severing, i.e. $p^+_{crit,(1)} = 0.316$, against the computationally measured one $p^+_{crit} = 0.360$. Table \ref{table2-crit-p+} shows a comparison between $p^+_{crit,(1)}$ and $p^+_{crit}$ for different sets of dynamic parameters. The table shows that, even though our one-crossover approximation provides a reasonable estimate of the critical probability, we systematically underestimate it.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.27]{images/fig3_Mplus-count.pdf}
\caption{Schematic of the count of the size of the offspring $m_0^{(1)}$ of a microtubule labelled by $0$ created by severing in the growing state. When a crossover is created, the competition severing-shrinking takes place, and if the severing occurs, the counter for the number of severing events $s_0$ gains one unity, whilst the size of the offspring gains $1 + c_{s_0}$. We keep track of the leading microtubule as it can generate other descendants, further increasing $m_0^{(1)}$. We do not keep track of the lagging microtubules created by severing.} \label{fig3_Mplus-count}
\end{figure}
Now, we introduce the two-crossovers approximation by assuming that after a severing at $nd$, $n>1$, all crossovers at $d$, $2d$, $\dots$, $\left( n - 2 \right) d$ are resolved by a severing event, while the crossover at $\left( n - 1 \right) d$ is resolved by a shrinkage with probability $p_{cr} \left( p^+ \right)$ and by a severing with probability $1 - p_{cr} \left( p^+ \right)$. Our aim is to give a better estimate of $p^+_{crit}$ then in the one-crossover approximation. Here
$$
b_{c_{j_i}} = \left( 1 - \delta_{c_{j_i},0} \right) p_{cr} \left( p^+ \right).
$$
With this definition for $b_{c_{j_i}}$, we approximate $m_i$ with
\begin{equation} \label{m_1^1}
m_i^{(2)} = s_i + \sum_{j_i=1}^{s_i} \Big[ c_{j_i} - \left( 1 - \delta_{c_{j_i},0} \right) p_{cr} \left( p^+ \right) \Big].
\end{equation}
From this equation, we can observe that
\begin{equation} \begin{split} \label{1-delta_calc}
\sum_{j_i=1}^{s_i} \left( 1 - \delta_{c_{j_i},0} \right) p_{cr} \left( p^+ \right) & = p_{cr} \left( p^+ \right) \Big[ s_i - \left( \delta_{c_{1},0} + \delta_{c_{2},0} + \cdots + \delta_{c_{s_i},0} \right) \Big] \\
& = p_{cr} \left( p^+ \right) \Big[ s_i - s_i \left\langle \delta_{c_i,0} \right\rangle \Big] \\
& = p_{cr} \left( p^+ \right) s_i \left\langle 1 - \delta_{c_i,0} \right\rangle,
\end{split}\end{equation}
where the average value $\left\langle \delta_{c_i,0} \right\rangle$ is calculated over all severing events that a leading microtubule undergoes along its lifetime. Consequently, $\left\langle 1 - \delta_{c_i,0} \right\rangle$ is the fraction of severing events that a leading microtubule undergoes at $nd$ with $n>1$. If we combine Eqs. (\ref{m_i^0}), (\ref{m_1^1}), and (\ref{1-delta_calc}) together, and we average over $N$, we obtain
\begin{equation} \begin{split} \label{M+1-app}
M^+_{(2)} & = \frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^N m_i^{(2)} \\
& = \frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^N \Big[ s_i + \sum_{j_i=1}^{s_i} c_{j_i} - p_{cr} \left( p^+ \right) s_i \left\langle 1 - \delta_{c_i,0} \right\rangle \Big] \\
& = M^+_{(1)} - p_{cr} \left( p^+ \right) S \frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^N \left\langle 1 - \delta_{c_i,0} \right\rangle,
\end{split} \end{equation}
where $S = \frac{1}{N} \sum\limits_{i=1}^N s_i$, and where we assumed that the correlation between the number of severing events that occur along the lifetime of a microtubule and the fraction of them that occur at $nd$ with $n>1$ is neglectable. In this case, if $N \gg 1$, for the law of large numbers $\frac{1}{N} \sum\limits_{i=1}^N \left\langle 1 - \delta_{c_i,0} \right\rangle$ is the probability that a microtubule is severed at $nd$ with $n>1$, sampled over all cases in which a severing event has occurred. By replacing $M^+$ with $M^+_{(2)}$ in Eq. (\ref{amplification-condition_2}), we obtain the final amplification condition (\ref{amplification-condition_final}). Table \ref{table2-crit-p+} shows that the two-crossovers reproduces the computationally measured critical probability of rescue-after-severing with a good degree of accuracy.
\section{Appendix C: derivation of severing and shrinkage probabilities}
In order to calculate $q_{sev,\sigma}$ we first define the following random variables:
\begin{equation}\begin{split}
&\tau_{d} = \mbox{severing waiting time at $d$}, \\
&\tau_{2d} = \mbox{severing waiting time at $2d$}, \\
&T_d = \mbox{FPT from the first to the second crossover, i.e. from $d$ to $2d$}, \\
&T_{\sigma} \left( x \right) = \mbox{lifetime of a microtubule with initial state $\sigma$ and initial length $x$}, \\
&\widetilde{\tau}_{2d} = \mbox{severing waiting time at $2d$ given that the severing occurs}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
$\tau_{d}$ and $\tau_{2d}$ have probability density function $W_{k \theta} \left( t \right)$ defined in Eq. (\ref{gamma_sever-wait_distr}), while the probability density function of $T_d$ is $F_{0d} \left( t \right)$ from Eq. (\ref{FPTD}). The probability density function of $T_{\sigma} \left( x \right)$ is $L_+ \left( t | x \right)$ defined in the Appendix A. Finally, the probability density function of $\widetilde{\tau}_{2d}$ can be calculated by observing that the event ``severing'' and the event ``shrinkage'' are independent. Therefore, the cumulative function $\Phi_{\widetilde{\tau}_{2d}} \left( t \right) = \mathbb{P} \left[ \widetilde{\tau}_{2d} < t \right]$ can be written as
\begin{equation}
\Phi_{\widetilde{\tau}_{2d}} \left( t \right) = \mathbb{P} \left[ \left( \tau_{2d} < t \right) \cap \left( \tau_{2d} < T_+ \left( 0 \right) \right) \right] = \frac{1}{Z_W} \int_0^{t} dt' \, W_{k,\theta} \left( t' \right) \int_{t'}^{\infty} dt'' \, L_+ \left( t'' | 0 \right),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
Z_W = \int_0^{\infty} dt \, W_{k,\theta} \left( t \right) \int_t^{\infty} dt' \, L_+ \left( t' | 0 \right).
\end{equation}
Thus, the probability density function $\widetilde{W}_{k\theta} \left( t \right)$ of $\widetilde{\tau}_{2d}$ is
\begin{equation} \label{pdf_tildetau}
\widetilde{W}_{k\theta} \left( t \right) = \frac{d}{dt}\Phi_{\widetilde{\tau}_{2d}} \left( t \right) = \frac{1}{Z_W} W_{k\theta} \left( t \right) \int_t^{\infty} dt' \, L_+ \left( t' | 0 \right).
\end{equation}
The probability $q_{sev,\sigma}$ is the probability that a microtubule reaches $2d$, it is severed there with newly-created plus end in the state $\sigma$, and finally shrinks back below $d$ \textit{before} being severed at $d$. In $S_+ \left( \infty | 0 \right)$ of the cases (i.e. for indefinitely growing microtubules), this event occurs if $T_1 = \tau_d - T_d - \tau_{2d} - T_\sigma \left( d \right) > 0$, with probability density function of $T_1$ defined by
\begin{equation}
P_{ T_1 } \left( t \right) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^3} dt' dt'' dt''' \, W_{k\theta} \left( t + t' + t'' + t''' \right) F_{0d} \left( t' \right) W_{k\theta} \left( t'' \right) L_\sigma \left( t''' | d \right).
\end{equation}
In the remaining $1 - S_+ \left( \infty | 0 \right)$ of the cases (i.e. for microtubules with a finite lifetime), the event occurs if $T_2 = \tau_d - T_d - \widetilde{\tau}_{2d} - T_\sigma \left( d \right) > 0$, and if it is severed at $2d$, i.e. if $\tau_d < T_+ \left( 0 \right)$. The probability density function of $T_2$ is
\begin{equation}
P_{ T_2 } \left( t \right) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^3} dt' dt'' dt''' \, \widetilde{W}_{k\theta} \left( t + t' + t'' + t''' \right) F_{0d} \left( t' \right) W_{k\theta} \left( t'' \right) L_\sigma \left( t''' | d \right).
\end{equation}
Hence, the final expression for $q_{sev,\sigma}$ is
\begin{equation} \begin{split} \label{qsev_sigma}
q_{sev,\sigma} = R_{d}^+ \left( 0 \right) & \left\{ S_+ \left( \infty | 0 \right) \int_0^{\infty} dt \, P_{ T_1 } \left( t \right) + \left[ 1 - S_+ \left( \infty | 0 \right) \right] \int_0^{\infty} dt \, P_{ \tau_d - T_0} \left( t \right) \int_0^{\infty} dt \, P_{ T_2 } \left( t \right) \right\} \left[ 1 - S_+ \left( \infty | d \right) \right].
\end{split}\end{equation}
To calculate $q_{ns}$ we first define the random variable $\widetilde{T}_{+}$ as the time that a microtubule initially in the growing state and with plus end in $2d$ needs in order to return in the shrinking state at $2d$, given that no severing event occurs at $2d$. Similarly to the derivation of $\widetilde{W}_{k\theta} \left( t \right)$, we can derive the probability density function of $\widetilde{T}_{+}$, that is
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{L}_{+} \left( t \right) = \frac{1}{Z_L} L_+ \left( t | 0 \right) \int_0^t dt' \, W_{k,\theta} \left( t' \right),
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
Z_L = \int_0^{\infty} dt \, L_+ \left( t | 0 \right) \int_0^t dt' \, W_{k,\theta} \left( t' \right).
\end{equation}
Therefore, as $q_{ns}$ is the probability that a microtubule reaches length $2d$ and would return to length $d$ but it cannot because it is severed at $2d$, the two conditions that our random variables have to fullfil are $\tau_{2d} < T_+ \left( 0 \right)$ and $\tau_d > T_d + \widetilde{T}_{+} + T_- \left( d \right)$. The former condition had already been discussed before, whilst the latter is associated to the probability density function
\begin{equation}
P_{\tau_d - T_d - \widetilde{T}_{+} - T_- \left( d \right)} \left( t \right) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^3} dt' dt'' dt''' \, W_{k\theta} \left( t + t' + t'' + t''' \right) F_{0d} \left( t' \right) \widetilde{L}_{+} \left( t'' \right) L_- \left( t''' | d \right).
\end{equation}
Therefore
\begin{equation} \label{qns}
q_{ns} = R_{0d}^+ \left[ 1 - S_+ \left( \infty | 0 \right) \right] \int_{-\infty}^0 dt \, P_{\tau_d - T_+ \left( 0 \right)} \left( t \right) \int_0^{\infty} dt \, P_{\tau_d - T_d - \widetilde{T}_{+} - T_- \left( d \right)} \left( t \right).
\end{equation}
Finally, in order to calculate the probability $p_{2d}$ to have a severing event at $2d$ before an eventual severing event at $d$, we notice that we have two different cases. In the first case, the microtubule reaches length $2d$ and it is severed there before being severed at $d$, i.e. $\tau_d > T_d + \tau_{2d}$. In the second case, the microtubule reaches $2d$ and it is severed there before being severed at $d$, i.e. $\tau_d > T_d + \widetilde{\tau}_{2d}$, given that the event ``severing'' wins the competition against the event ``shrinkage'' at $2d$, or $\tau_{2d} < T_+ \left( 0 \right)$. The probability density functions associated to these conditions are, respectively,
\begin{equation}
P_{\tau_d - T_d - \tau_{2d}} \left( t \right) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^2} dt' dt'' \, W_{k\theta} \left( t + t' + t'' \right) F_{0d} \left( t' \right) W_{k\theta} \left( t'' \right),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
P_{\tau_d - T_d - \widetilde{\tau}_{2d}} \left( t \right) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^2} dt' dt'' \, W_{k\theta} \left( t + t' + t'' \right) F_{0d} \left( t' \right) \widetilde{W}_{k\theta} \left( t'' \right),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
P_{\tau_{2d} - T_+\left( 0 \right)} \left( t \right) = P_{\tau_{d} - T_+\left( 0 \right)} \left( t \right).
\end{equation}
Then
\begin{equation}\begin{split} \label{pd}
p_{2d} = R_{0d}^+ & \left\{ S_+ \left( \infty | 0 \right) \int_0^{\infty} dt \, P_{\tau_d - T_d - \tau_{2d}} \left( t \right) + \left[ 1 - S_+ \left( \infty | 0 \right) \right] \int_{-\infty}^0 dt \, P_{\tau_{2d} - T_+\left( 0 \right)} \left( t \right) \int_0^{\infty} dt \, P_{\tau_d - T_d - \widetilde{\tau}_{2d}} \left( t \right) \right\}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
\nocite{*}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{introb}
Let us consider a collection of random variables $\mathcal{Y}_n = \{Y_1, \dots, Y_n\}$, defined on a
same probability space and satisfying the no-tie condition, i.e. any two of them are equal with probability zero.
Let $ [n]:=\{1, 2,\dots ,n\}$.
For $ i \neq j \in [n]$, one
says that $Y_i$ is \emph{less than} (resp. is \emph{equivalent to}) $Y_j$ in the \emph{stochastic precedence} sense if
$$
{\mathbb P} (Y_i < Y_j) > \frac{1}{2}, \qquad \left ( \text{resp. } {\mathbb P} (Y_i < Y_j ) = \frac{1}{2} \right ).
$$
This notion
is natural in many
applications, see e.g. \cite{AS2000, blyth72, DSS1} and
references therein. From a theoretical point of view, it gives rise to a series of apparent paradoxes which are
caused by the non-transitivity of the stochastic precedence comparison,
see \cite{DMS19, Savage, trybula1969}.
In order to present some results it is convenient to introduce the definition of \emph{ranking graph} $ \mathbb G ( \mathcal{Y}_n ) = ([n], \vec{E} ( \mathcal{Y}_n ) )$ associated with the set of random variables $\mathcal{Y}_n = \{Y_1, \dots, Y_n\}$. For any $i,j \in [n]$, the pair $(i,j)$ is an arrow of
$\vec{E} ( \mathcal{Y}_n ) $ if and only if $Y_j $ is less than $Y_i $ in the stochastic precedence sense.
Although expressed in a different form, it is known that for any digraph $\mathbb H =([n], \vec E)$ there exists a set of $n $ random variables $ \mathcal{Y}_n $ such that the ranking graph $\mathbb G ( \mathcal{Y}_n ) $
coincides with $\mathbb H $, i.e. any set of stochastic precedence relations can be achieved (see \cite{McGarvey1953, Saari}).
This result was initially obtained in the field of voting theory by McGarvey, see \cite{McGarvey1953}, but it can be rewritten by using random variables and the stochastic precedence comparison between them (see \cite{blyth72, DS20, Saari}). We also mention \cite{S1959}, \cite{ErdosMoser}, \cite{AlonPara} and \cite{Dominating2006} which improve McGarvey's result by providing precise upper and lower bounds on the number of voters needed to achieve all possible ranking graphs.
In this paper we take a different point of view and we give a positive answer to the following problem: given a digraph $ \mathbb H =([n], \vec E) $, can we find a stationary Markov chain with $n$ \emph{identically distributed} hitting times $\mathcal{T}_n = \{T_1, \ldots , T_n \}$ such that $\mathbb G ( \mathcal{T}_n ) =\mathbb H $?
Our interest in this problem is twofold.
\begin{itemize}
\item[1)] The problem loses its combinatorial structure and becomes entirely probabilistic.
\item[2)] There are many applications where it is preferable to use hitting times rather than arbitrary random variables.
\end{itemize}
In various applications the type of random variables to use is constrained by the nature of the
problem.
For instance, in many competitive games the winner is the player who achieves his goal or target before the others. In this situation
one is forced to work with hitting times. As an example of an application in this field, in the final part of the paper
we define and analyze a Penney-type game in which these random variables arise quite naturally.
From a theoretical point of view, we emphasize that the structure of the hitting times is very particular and many properties on their distributions are known a priori, see e.g. \cite{DSS5},
\cite{MaSc} and references therein. Moreover, the stationary Markov chains used in our construction have the particular property that the square of the transition matrix has all of its entries equal. Hence, they are \emph{1-dependent uniform}, in the sense that they are $1$-dependent \cite{1-dependent, 1-bis}, with uniform invariant distribution.
The plan of the paper is as follows.
In the next Section \ref{uniform} we give some basic notation and definitions, and preliminary results. In
Section \ref{realization}, we present our main result through an explicit construction of 1-dependent uniform Markov chains. In Section \ref{comb}, we present a Penney-type games and we develop a qualitative analysis of it. In particular, we identify a threshold value beyond which it is possible to construct a Penney-type game unfavorable to the starting player whereas this is impossible below the same threshold.
\begin{comment}
For a collection $\mathcal{Y}_n= \{Y_1, \ldots , Y_n\}$, we
define the \emph{ranking graph} $ \mathbb G ( \mathcal{Y}_n ) = ([n], \vec{E} ( \mathcal{Y}_n ) )$ as follows. For any $i,j \in [n]$,
\begin{equation} \label{realizza}
(i,j ) \in \vec E ( \mathcal{Y}_n ) \iff {\mathbb P} (Y_j < Y_i) > \frac{1}{2} ,
\end{equation}
i.e. there exists the arrow $(i, j )\in \vec{E}$ if and only if $Y_j $ precedes $Y_i$ in the stochstic precedence sense.
It is clear from \eqref{realizza} that $ \mathbb G ( \mathcal{Y}_n ) $ does not have loops or 2-cycles, thus it is a digraph.
\medskip
The construction of $\mathbb G ( \mathcal{Y}_n ) $ is analogous to those realized
with a list of linear orders $ P_1, P_2 , \ldots , P_{2k-1}$ where there is an arrow $(i,j) \in \vec E $ if and only if $j $ lies above $i$ in at least $k $ of the orders $ P_1, P_2 , \ldots , P_{2k-1}$ (in this last case either $(i,j) \in \vec E $ or $(j,i) \in \vec E $), see \cite{McGarvey1953} and see \cite{blyth72, Saari, DS20} for details in the connection between voting theory and probability theory.
It was shown in \cite{McGarvey1953} that given any tournament
$ \mathbb{T} =([n], \vec E)$ there exist a finite $k =k(n)$ and some linear orders $P_1, P_2 , \ldots , P_{2k(n)-1} $ such that the digraph, constructed through these linear orders, coincides
with $ \mathbb{T} $. Many improvements were achieved in \cite{S1959}, \cite{ErdosMoser}, \cite{AlonPara} and \cite{Dominating2006} giving bounds from above and below of $k(n)$, the number
of linear orders needed to realize any assigned tournament with $n $ vertices.
In our problem we will restrict our attention only to some particular classes of random variables making the problem completely probabilistic in nature. In order to construct our random variables we first need the following definition
\begin{definition}\label{1uc}
A Markov chain $\mathbf{X} =(X_s :s \geq 0)$ is a\emph{1-dependent uniform chain} if its state space is $[N]$, for some $N$. Furthermore,
for any sequence of increasing indices $m_1, m_2, \ldots $ with $m_\ell - m_{\ell -1} \geq 2$ (for each $\ell \geq 2$), then
$\{ X_{m_1} , X_{m_2} , \ldots \}$ is a sequence of i.i.d. random variables with uniform distribution on $[N]$.
We collect all the 1-dependent uniform chains in $\mathcal{M}_1$.
\end{definition}
We notice that Definition \ref{1uc} implies that the initial distribution of such a Markov chain and the invariant one coincide with the uniform distribution on $ [N]$. For further properties on 1-dependent chains see \cite{1-dependent}, \cite{1-bis}, where such chains are studied in detail and characterized.
We are ready to present our problem.
We ask if for any given digraph $\bar \mathbb G = ([n], \vec{E})$ one can find a 1-dependent chain and $n $ identically distributed hitting times $\mathcal{T}_n = \{T_1, \ldots , T_n\}$ on this chain such that $\mathbb G (\mathcal{T}_n ) =\bar \mathbb G$.
We answer affirmatively to this question by constructing a two-factor of an i.i.d. sequence, hence 1-dependent chain, and a collection
of identically distributed hitting times on this Markov chain having the assigned ranking graph $\bar \mathbb G$.
\end{comment}
\section{1-dependent uniform Markov chains, patterns and identically distributed hitting times} \label{uniform}
\begin{comment}
In order to avoid some difficulties and present the result in the most simple way we will realize some specific constructions, in any case
some of the following results could be presented in a more general framework.
It is regular if all the vertices have the same outdegree $(n - 1)/2$ (and hence
also the same indegree $(n-1)/2$). A Hamilton cycle in $T$ is a simple directed
cycle containing all its vertices. It is clear that there are tournaments on
$n$ vertices with at least $\frac{(n - 1)!}{2n}$ Hamilton cycles, as this is the expected
number of such cycles in a random tournament where the directions are i.i.d. random variables that are uniform on the two possible orientations.
DA GUIBAS
ides appear with varying probabilities. A formula for the odds that B wins similar to (1.5) can be derived in this case also (see Section 3). However, the question of non-transitivity becomes much more involved. For example, if 0
comes up with a probability very close to 1, then the first player will be practically guaranteed to win if the chooses A = 0 .a+ 0. Even for q = 2 it is an open question to determine, for a given k, those probabilities which enable Player II to obtain odds better than 1 to 1 against all possible choices for Player I. Because of the complexity of dealing with unequal probabilities or more than two players, we will confine ourselves to the two-player, fair q-sided die situation, in which both players choose sequences of length k.
We refer the reader to \cite{GO1981, penney1974} where the Penney's game is presented, discussed and solved.
We present a new version of this game. It will be a zero-sum game between two players.
\end{comment}
First of all, recall that
for a collection of r.v. $\mathcal{Y}_n= \{Y_1, \ldots , Y_n\}$, we
defined the \emph{ranking graph} $ \mathbb G ( \mathcal{Y}_n ) = ([n], \vec{E} ( \mathcal{Y}_n ) )$ in the following way. For any $i,j \in [n]$,
\begin{equation} \label{realizza}
(i,j ) \in \vec E ( \mathcal{Y}_n ) \iff {\mathbb P} (Y_j < Y_i) > \frac{1}{2} .
\end{equation}
It is clear that $ \mathbb G ( \mathcal{Y}_n ) $ does not have loops or 2-cycles, thus it is a digraph.
We also recall the definition of 1-dependent uniform chain.
\begin{definition}\label{1uc}
A Markov chain is a \emph{1-dependent uniform chain} if it is stationary and the square of its transition matrix has all equal entries. The set of 1-dependent uniform chains is denoted by $\mathcal{M}_1$.
\end{definition}
We notice that a 1-dependent uniform chain $\mathbf{X} =(X_m :m \in \mathbb N_0)$ has the property that,
for any sequence of increasing indices $m_1, m_2, \ldots $ with $m_{\ell+1} - m_{\ell } \geq 2$ (for $\ell \in \mathbb N $), the
random variables
$(X_{m_\ell} : \ell \in \mathbb N )$ are i.i.d. with $X_{m_\ell}$ distributed uniformly on the state space.
In particular,
the initial distribution
is invariant and it coincides with the uniform distribution. For further properties on 1-dependent chains see \cite{1-dependent}, \cite{1-bis}, where such chains are studied in detail and characterized.
\subsection{Construction of 1-dependent uniform Markov chains.}
Let $k, N \in \mathbb N $ with $N\geq 2$, we consider a sequence of i.i.d. random (column) vectors
$\mathcal{U}_m =(U_{m,1}, \ldots , U_{m,k})^T$, with $U_{m, i}$ i.i.d. uniformly distributed on $[N]$, for $i \in [k]$ and $m \in \mathbb N_0$.
Next define the $k \times 2 $ matrix
\begin{equation}\label{duecolonne}
X^{(N,k)}_m = [\mathcal{U}_m, \mathcal{U}_{m+1}] , \text{ }m \in \mathbb N_0.
\end{equation}
Notice that the collection of random variables
$\mathbf{X}^{(N,k)}= (X^{(N,k)}_m: m \in \mathbb N_0) $ forms a $1$-dependent uniform chain, in particular it starts
with the uniform distribution on the state space of all the matrices $k \times 2 $ with elements belonging to $[N]$
(see Example \ref{espattern}). We notice that, for any $k\in \mathbb N$ and $N \geq 2$ the Markov chain $\mathbf{X}^{(N,k)}$ is not reversible,
instead ${\mathbb P} ( X^{(N,k)}_0 = [\mathbf{1}, \mathbf{1}] , X^{(N,k)}_1 = [\mathbf{1}, \mathbf{2}] ) = N^{-3k} $ but ${\mathbb P} ( X^{(N,k)}_0 = [\mathbf{1}, \mathbf{2}] , X^{(N,k)}_1 = [\mathbf{1}, \mathbf{1}] ) =0 $, where $\mathbf{1}$ and $ \mathbf{2}$ are column vectors with all the entries equal to $1$ and $2$, respectively.
\begin{comment}
$$
\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 \\
\vdots & \vdots \\
1 & 1
\end{bmatrix}
\to
\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 2 \\
\vdots & \vdots \\
1 & 2
\end{bmatrix}
\text{ but }
\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 2 \\
\vdots & \vdots \\
1 & 2
\end{bmatrix} \not \to
\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 \\
\vdots & \vdots \\
1 & 1
\end{bmatrix} .
$$
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
a $1$-dependent family
of random variables, therefore for any sequence $m_1< m_2< \ldots m_\ell $
with $m_{i+1} - m_i \geq 2 $ the random
variables $\{ X^{(N,k)}_{m_1}, \ldots , X^{(N,k)}_{m_\ell} \}$ are
independent.
One can think to the states of this Markov chain as vectors $(\mathcal{U}_n \in [N]^k: n \in \mathbb N_0)$ sequentially postponed where the components of the vectors are independent and uniform distributes on $[N]$ (see Example \ref{espattern}); in formula $X^{(N,k)}_m =(\mathcal{U}_m , \mathcal{U}_{m+1} )$.
Let us consider a Markov chain with state space $I_{N,k}$, where $I_{N,k}$ is the collection of all the matrices of the form
$$
A = (a_{i,j} \in [N] : i \in [k], j \in [2]) .
$$
The cardinality of the state space $ I_{N,k}$ is $N^{2k}$.
We consider the transition matrix $ P_{N,k} = (p_{A,B}: A, B \in I_{N,k} )$
defined by
\begin{equation}\label{matrice}
p_{A, B} =\left \{ \begin{array}{cr}
\frac{1}{N^k} & \text{ if } a_{i,2}=b_{i,1} \text{ for } i = 1, \ldots , k; \\
0 & \text{ otherwise;}
\end{array}
\right .
\end{equation}
where $A= (a_{i,j} \in [N] : i \in [k], j \in [2]) $ and
$B= (b_{i,j} \in [N] : i \in [k], j \in [2]) $ are elements of $I_{N,k}$.
This transition matrix is irreducible
and bi-stochastic, therefore the unique invariant
distribution is uniform on $I_{N,k}$. The uniform
chain having transition matrix $P_{N,k}$, with uniform initial distribution, is denoted by
$\mathbf{X}^{(N,k)} = (X^{(N,k)}_m:m \in \mathbb N_0)$.
Notice that the collection of random variables
$ (X_m: m \in \mathbb N_0) $ forms a $1$-dependent family
of random variables, therefore for any sequence $m_1< m_2< \ldots m_\ell $
with $m_{i+1} - m_i \geq 2 $ the random
variables $\{ X^{(N,k)}_{m_1}, \ldots , X^{(N,k)}_{m_\ell} \}$ are
independent.
One can think to the states of this Markov chain as vectors $(\mathcal{U}_n \in [N]^k: n \in \mathbb N_0)$ sequentially postponed where the components of the vectors are independent and uniform distributes on $[N]$ (see Example \ref{espattern}); in formula $X^{(N,k)}_m =(\mathcal{U}_m , \mathcal{U}_{m+1} )$.
\end{comment}
\subsection{Patterns}
For $M , k \in \mathbb N $, a \emph{pattern} $Q= (q_{i,j} \in [M] \cup \{0 \} : i \in [k], j \in [2]) $ is a $k \times 2 $ matrix, with the property that
$$
q_{i, 1} \in [M ], \text{ for } i \in [k], \text{ and }
\sum_{i=1}^k \mathbf{1}_{\{ q_{i,2} \neq 0 \}} =1.
$$
For a pattern $Q$ we define the \emph{index of hump} as
\begin{equation} \label{indice}
h(Q) = j \text { if } q_{j, 2} >0.
\end{equation}
The collection of all the
$k \times 2 $ patterns with entries
in $ [M] \cup \{ 0 \}$ is denoted by $\mathcal{P}_{M, k}$.
In particular, any pattern in $ \mathcal{P}_{M, k} $ has a
number of entries different from zero which is equal to $k+1$.
\begin{comment}
Moreover, any pattern has at least entries taking value over $[N]$ in its first and in its last column.
The family of all the patterns $m \times n$ over the alphabet $[N]$ is denoted by $\mathcal{P}_{N,m,n}$.
For $c = 2, \ldots , mn $, let us consider also the family $\mathcal{P}_{N,m,n, c} \subset \mathcal{P}_{N,m,n}$ that is done of all the patterns in $\mathcal{P}_{N,m,n}$ having
a number of entries in $[N ]$ that is equal to $c$, or equivalently with $mn - c $ entries equal to $0$.
\end{comment}
\subsection{Hitting time of a pattern}
For any $h \in [k]$, we define the projection $\Pi_h$ on the set of
$k \times 2 $ matrices in the following way:
if $ S=(s_{i,j} : i \in [k], j \in [2])$ , then
\begin{equation} \label{proietti}
\Pi_h (S) =
\begin{bmatrix}
s_{1,1} & 0 \\
\vdots & \vdots \\
s_{h-1,1} & 0 \\
s_{h,1} & s_{h,2} \\
s_{h+1,1} & 0 \\
\vdots & \vdots \\
s_{k,1} & 0
\end{bmatrix} .
\end{equation}
Now let $\mathbf{X}^{(N,k)} =(X^{(N,k)} _m:m \in \mathbb N_0) $ be
as in \eqref{duecolonne}
and let $R \in \mathcal{P}_{M,k}$ be a target pattern, with $2 \leq M \leq N$. We define the hitting time of $R$ as
\begin{equation}\label{stopping}
T_R = \inf
\{ m \in \mathbb N_0 : \Pi_{h(R)} ( X^{(N,k)} _m ) = R \} ,
\end{equation}
In the following when $ \Pi_{h (R)} ( X^{(N,k)} _m ) = R$ holds we will write
$ X^{(N,k)} _m \triangleright R$.
The hitting time $T_R $ can be interpreted as the first time in which the pattern $R $ occurs in the random sequence $(X^{(N,k)} _m)_{ m\in \mathbb N_0}$. From the finiteness of state space $[N]^k$ and the irreducibility of the Markov chain $\mathbf{X}^{(N, k)}$ it follows that $T_R$ is finite almost surely.
\subsection{Overlap}
For two different patterns
\begin{equation}\label{duepat}
R =( r_{i,j} \in [M] : i\in [k], j \in[2] ) , S=( s_{i,j} \in [M] : i\in [k], j \in[2] ) \in \mathcal{P}_{M,k} ,
\end{equation}
we define the \emph{overlap}
$ O( R , S )\in \{0,1\}^2 $ in the following way
\begin{equation}\label{overlapvec1}
O_1 (R ,S )=
\left \{
\begin{array}{ll}
1, & \text{ if } r_{h , 1} =
s_{h, 1 } , \text{ }h \in [k] \text{ and } \delta_{h(R) , h(S)} (r_{h(R), 2}- s_{h(S), 2})=0
; \\
0, & \text{ otherwise. } \\
\end{array}
\right .
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{overlapvec2}
O_2 (R ,S )=
\left \{
\begin{array}{ll}
1, & \text{ if }r_{h(R), 2} = s_{h(R), 1}
; \\
0, & \text{ otherwise. } \\
\end{array}
\right .
\end{equation}
An analogous definition for strings has given in \cite{GO1981}.
We notice that
$T_R $ and $ T_S $ are different w.p. 1 if and only if
$O_1(R ,S )=0 $. The meaning of
$O_2(R ,S ) $ will be clarified by Lemmas \ref{richiesto}-\ref{lemmastima} and Theorem \ref{thgrfo} in which the relevance of $O_2(R ,S ) $ for the computation of ${\mathbb P}(T_R < T_S)$ becomes evident.
The overlap $O(R, S)$ is in general different from $ O(S, R) $. Moreover it makes sense to consider the overlap of a pattern with itself,
in which case the first component is always
equal to $1$.
For patterns $ R_1, \ldots , R_n \in \mathcal{P}_{M,k}$, one has
\begin{equation}\label{sipuo}
\text{no-tie property of } T_{R_1}, \ldots , T_{R_n}
\iff \text{for distinct } i,j \in [n] , \text{ } O_1(R_i, R_j) =0 .
\end{equation}
In this case, for sake of simplicity, we say that the collection of patterns $R_1, \ldots , R_n $ is \emph{no-tie}.
To familiarize with the notions and definitions we present the following example
\begin{example} \label{espattern}
Let
$$
R=
\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 0 \\
2 & 1 \\
2 & 0
\end{bmatrix}
, \,\,\,
S=
\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 0 \\
1 & 0 \\
2 & 1
\end{bmatrix} ,
$$
be two patterns in $\mathcal{P}_{2, 3}$, with index of hump $i (R) =2 $ and $i (S)= 3$.
The overlap $O(R, S) =(0,1 )$ and $O( S, R) =(0, 0)$. Thus the collection of patterns $\{ R, S \}$ is no-tie.
\noindent
Suppose that
$$\mathbf{X}^{(2,3)}=
\begin{array}{ccccccc}
1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 2 & \cdots \\
2 & 2 & 1 & 1 & 2 & 1 & \cdots \\
2 & 1 & 2 & 1 & 2 & 1 & \cdots \\
\end{array}
$$
Then $T_S =2 $ being
$$
S \neq \Pi_3 \begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 \\
2 & 2 \\
2 & 1
\end{bmatrix} =
\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 0 \\
2 & 0 \\
2 & 1
\end{bmatrix}
, \quad
S \neq \Pi_3 \begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 \\
2 & 1 \\
1 & 2
\end{bmatrix} =
\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 0 \\
2 & 0 \\
1 & 2
\end{bmatrix}
, \quad
S = \Pi_3 \begin{bmatrix}
1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 \\
2 & 1
\end{bmatrix}
= \begin{bmatrix}
1 & 0 \\
1 & 0 \\
2 & 1
\end{bmatrix}
.
$$
Similarly,
$T_R = 4$.
\end{example}
\section{Ranking graphs through identically distributed hitting times } \label{realization}
Let $R$ be a pattern with $O(R, R) =(1,0)$.
Following the proof of Theorem 2.1 in \cite{BT82} we recursively compute the discrete distribution of $T_{R} $.
\begin{lemma} \label{tt11nuovo}
Let $k,M,N$ be integers such that $N \geq M \geq 2$ and $k\geq 1$. Let $R \in \mathcal{P}_{M,k}$ with $O(R, R) =(1,0)$ and consider the 1-dependent uniform chain $\mathbf{X}^{(N , k)} $. Define
$w (t):= \mathbb{P} ( T_{R} =t)$, then
the probabilities $(w(t) : t \in \mathbb N_0 )$ are recursively determined
from
\begin{equation} \label{iterate}
w(t) = N^{-k-1} - N^{-k-1}
\sum_{s = 0}^{t-2} w (s) .
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Consider the event $\{ X^{(N , k)}_t \triangleright R \}$, it holds true with
probability $N^{-k-1}$. Moreover, $\{ X^{(N , k)}_t \triangleright R \}$ can be written as the union of the following three disjoint events:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] $ \{ T_{R} = t \}$;
\item[(ii)] $ \{ X^{(N , k)}_t \triangleright R \} \cap \{ T_{R } = s \}$, for $s < t-1 $;
\item[(iii)] $ \{ X^{(N , k)}_t \triangleright R \} \cap \{ T_{R } = t-1 \}$.
\end{itemize}
The probability of $ \{ T_{R } = t \}$ is by definition $w (t)$.
For $s < t-1 $, as a consequence of 1-dependence, one has
$$
\mathbb{P} ( \{ X^{(N , k)}_t \triangleright R \} \cap \{ T_{R } = s \} ) =
w(s )\mathbb{P} ( X^{(N , k)}_t \triangleright R ) = N^{-k-1} w (s ) .
$$
The event in (iii) has probability zero because,
by hypothesis $O_2(R, R) =0$.
Therefore
$$
N^{-k - 1} = w (t ) + N^{-k-1}
\sum_{s = 0}^{t-2} w (s) ,
$$
which corresponds to \eqref{iterate}.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}\label{remare}
Let $ R_1, \ldots , R_n \in \mathcal{P}_{M,k}$ such that $O(R_i,R_i) =(1,0)$, for each $i \in [n]$. Let $N \geq M$ and consider the 1-dependent uniform chain
$\mathbf{X}^{(N , k)} $. Then, by Lemma \ref{tt11nuovo}, the hitting times $T_{R_1}, \ldots , T_{R_n} $ are identically distributed because the distribution of any $T_{R_i}$
is given by \eqref{iterate}.
\end{rem}
Given a digraph $ \bar \mathbb G=([n ], \vec{E} )$, we now construct a collection of associated patterns $\{ R_u \in \mathcal{P}_{n+1,n+1}:u \in [n]\}$.
For $\ell \in [n]$, pattern $R_\ell =(r^{(\ell)}_{i,j} : i \in [n+1] , j\in [2] ) $ is constructed in the following way:
\begin{itemize}
\item[\emph{1}.] $r^{(\ell)}_{1,1} =r^{(\ell)}_{\ell +1 ,2 } =\ell $;
\item[\emph{2}.] for any $j \in [n +1] \setminus \{ \ell+1 \}$, $ r^{(\ell)}_{j, 2} =0$;
\item[\emph{3}.] for any $j \in [n ] $,
\begin{equation} \label{over}
r^{(\ell )}_{j+1,1} = \left \{
\begin{array}{ll}
j, & \text{ if $(\ell,j )\in \vec E $;} \\
n+1, & \text{ otherwise. } \\
\end{array}
\right .
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
We will say that the patterns $R_1, \dots , R_n $ are \emph{generated} by
the graph $\bar \mathbb G =([n], \vec E)$.
First notice that $h (R_\ell ) = \ell +1 $, for $\ell \in [n]$.
In order to explain our construction of the patterns we observe that when $(i, j) \in \vec{E}$ then
$O_2(R_i, R_j) = 0$ and $O_2(R_j, R_i)= 1$ (see Lemma \ref{tt11} below), and this will cause $ {\mathbb P} (T_{R_j} < T_{R_i} ) > \frac{1}{2} $ through the phenomenon of clustering (see Lemma \ref{richiesto}-\ref{lemmastima} and Theorem \ref{thgrfo}). This phenomenon is analogous to what happens to the appearance of strings in a sequence of letters randomly drawn (see e.g. \cite{chen1979, GO1981}). To illustrate the notation, we present the following example.
\begin{example} \label{escostru}
Let us consider the graph $ \bar \mathbb G=([3], \vec{E} )$ with $ \vec{E} = \{ (1,3), (3,2), (2,1) \}$. Then the
patterns $R_1, R_2 , R_3$ generated by $ \bar \mathbb G $ are
$$
R_1=
\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 0 \\
4 & 1 \\
4 & 0 \\
3 & 0
\end{bmatrix}
, \qquad
R_2=
\begin{bmatrix}
2 & 0 \\
1 & 0 \\
4 & 2 \\
4 & 0
\end{bmatrix} ,
\qquad
R_3=
\begin{bmatrix}
3 & 0 \\
4 & 0 \\
2 & 0 \\
4 & 3
\end{bmatrix}.
$$
The present example will be continued at the end of the section where the patterns will be employed in the definition of three hitting times that show non-transitivity for the stochastic precedence.
\end{example}
We now consider the properties of the overlap for patterns $R_1, \dots , R_n $ generated by a digraph $\bar \mathbb G =([n], \vec E)$.
\begin{lemma} \label{tt11}
Let $n \geq 2$ and $\bar \mathbb G =([n], \vec E)$ be a digraph. The overlaps of the patterns $R _1 \ldots , R_n $ generated by $\bar \mathbb G =([n], \vec E)$
are
$$
O(R_i, R_j) = \delta_{i,j} \cdot (1,0) + ( 1-\delta_{i,j}) \cdot \left [
\mathbf{1}_{\{ (i,j) \in\vec E\}} \cdot (0,1)
+ \mathbf{1}_{\{ (i,j) \not \in\vec E\}} \cdot (0,0) \right ] ,
$$
for any $i,j \in [n]$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Case $i=j$, then $O_1(R_i, R_i) =1$. The second component $O_2(R_i, R_i) =0$ since $r^{(i)}_{ i+1, 1} =n+1 \neq i = r^{(i)}_{ i+1, 2}$ (see \eqref{over}).
Case $i \neq j $. $O_1(R_j, R_i) =0$ since $r^{(i)}_{1, 1} =i \neq j = r^{(j)}_{1, 1}$.
If $(i,j) \in \vec E$ then $O_2(R_j, R_i) =1$. Indeed, the condition in \eqref{overlapvec2}
$
r^{(j)}_{h (R^{(j)}) , 2 } = r^{(i)}_{h (R^{(j)}) , 1 }
$
holds true
since $ r^{(j)}_{j+1, 2} = r^{(i)}_{j+1, 1} = j$.
If $(i,j) \not \in \vec E$ then $O_2(R_j, R_i) =0$. Indeed, the condition
$
r^{(j)}_{h (R^{(j)}) , 2 } = r^{(i)}_{h (R^{(j)}) , 1 }
$
is not true
\begin{comment}
the sum in \eqref{overlapvec2} becomes
$$
\sum_{h =1}^{n+1} r^{(j)}_{h, 2} \cdot r^{(i)}_{h, 1} \cdot | r^{(j)}_{h, 2} - r^{(i)}_{h, 1} | =
r^{(j)}_{j+1, 2} \cdot r^{(i)}_{j+1, 1} \cdot | r^{(j)}_{j+1, 2} - r^{(i)}_{j+1, 1} | \neq 0
$$
\end{comment}
since $ r^{(j)}_{j+1, 2} = j $ and $ r^{(i)}_{j+1, 1} = n+1$.
\end{proof}
Let us consider no-tie collection of patterns $\{ R_1, \ldots , R_\ell\} $ belonging to $ \mathcal{P}_{M, k}$ and the corresponding hitting times $ \mathcal{T}_\ell =\{ T_{R_1} , \ldots , T_{R_\ell} \}$
of $\mathbf{X}^{(N,k)}$, with $N \geq M$. We are interested to upper and lower bound
\begin{equation} \label{prob}
p_i ( \mathcal{T}_\ell ) : ={\mathbb P} \left ( \bigcap_{j \in [\ell ] } \{ T_{R_i} \leq T_{R_j} \} \right ) \text{ for } i \in [\ell ].
\end{equation}
First notice that by the no-tie property one has
$\sum_{i \in [\ell ] } p_i ( \mathcal{T}_\ell ) =1$.
We also define the sequence of stopping times $(Z_h: h \in \mathbb N_0 )$, as
\begin{equation}\label{Z1}
Z_0= \inf \{ m \geq 0 : X^{(N,k)}_m\triangleright R_i \text{ for some } i \in [\ell] \}
\end{equation}
and recursively, let
\begin{equation}\label{Zh}
Z_{h+1}= \inf \{ m\geq Z_{h} + 2 : X^{(N,k)}_m\triangleright R_i \text{ for some } i \in [\ell] \}.
\end{equation}
It is immediate to notice that every hitting time $ Z_h$ is finite almost surely. We present this simple lemma without a proof.
\begin{lemma}\label{richiesto}
For any $s\in \mathbb N$, one has
\begin{equation} \label{nonno}
\mathbb{P} ( X^{(N,k)}_{Z_s +1 } \triangleright R_i | X^{(N,k)}_{Z_s } \triangleright R_j ) = \frac{O_2(R_j , R_i)}{N^k} .
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
The probabilities $( p_i ( \mathcal{T}_\ell ) : i \in [\ell ])$ could be explicitly calculated through a linear system
but for our purposes it will be more useful to have good upper and lower bounds.
\begin{comment}
For a set of indices $I \subset [n]$ we write $ \mathcal{T}_I =\{ T_{R_i} : i \in I \} $ and
we are interested in estimating
\begin{equation} \label{prob}
p_i ( \mathcal{T}_I ) : ={\mathbb P} \left ( \bigcap_{j \in I } \{ T_{R_i} \leq T_{R_j} \} \right ) \text{ for } i \in I.
\end{equation}
First notice that by the no-tie property one has
$\sum_{i \in I } p_i ( \mathcal{T}_I ) =1$.
\end{comment}
\begin{lemma} \label{lemmastima}
Let $N \geq M \geq 2 $ and $k , \ell \geq 2 $.
Let $R_1, \ldots , R_\ell \in \mathcal{P}_{M, k}$ be a collection of no-tie patterns
and let $O_2 (R_i, R_i) =0$, for $i \in [\ell ]$.
Let us take the uniform Markov chain $\mathbf{X}^{(N,k)}$ and the hitting times $ \mathcal{T}_\ell =\{ T_{R_i} : i \in [\ell ] \} $.
Then $ \mathcal{T}_\ell $ are identically distributed.
Moreover, for $i \in [\ell ]$,
\begin{equation} \label{probfine}
p_i ( \mathcal{T}_\ell ) =\frac{v_i}{\sum_{j \in [\ell]} v_j } ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation} \label{vistima}
1- \frac{1}{N^k} \sum_{j \in [\ell] } O_2(R_j, R_i) \leq v_i \leq 1 - \frac{1}{N^k} \left (1- \frac{\ell -1 }{N^k} \right )
\sum_{j \in [\ell] } O_2(R_j, R_i ) .
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
In the proof, we will write $X_m $ for $X_m^{(N,k)}$.
Lemma \ref{tt11nuovo}, Remark \ref{remare} and
$O_2 (R_i, R_i)=0 $, for each $i$, imply that $ \mathcal{T}_\ell$ are identically distributed.
For any $i \in [\ell ]$, by definition
$$
p_i( \mathcal{T}_\ell) = {\mathbb P} (T_{R_i} = Z_0 ) .
$$
From the fact that the sequence of random variables $(X_m) _{m \in \mathbb N_0 }$ is 1-dependent also
\begin{equation} \label{MP}
p_i( \mathcal{T}_\ell) = {\mathbb P} (X_{Z_h } \triangleright R_i ) ,
\end{equation}
for any $h \in \mathbb N$. Moreover the times $(Z_s : s \in \mathbb N_0)$ are renewal times i.e.
$$
{\mathbb P} (X_{Z_h } \triangleright R_i , Z_h -Z_{h-1} = s| X_{Z_{h -1}} =j , Z_{h -1}=t ) , \text{ for } h, s \in \mathbb N , \text{ and } i \in [\ell],
$$
does not depend on $h, t\in \mathbb N$ and $ j \in [n]$. Again it is a consequence of the 1-dependent structure.
We define, for any $i \in [\ell]$, the sets of random times
\begin{equation}\label{SETVu}
\mathcal{V}_{i, t} := \{ m <t : m=Z_s \text{ for some } s , X_{m} \triangleright R_i \}, \quad
\mathcal{N}_{i, t} := \{ s<t: X_s \triangleright R_i \} ,
\end{equation}
where $t \in \mathbb N \cup \{+ \infty \}$. The cardinalities are
\begin{equation}\label{Vu}
V_{i, t} := | \mathcal{V}_{i, t} |= \sum_{s=0}^{\infty} \mathbf{1}_{ \{ Z_s \leq t-1 \} } \mathbf{1}_{ \{ X_{Z_s } \triangleright R_i \} }, \quad
N_{i, t} := | \mathcal{N}_{i, t} |= \sum_{s=0}^{t-1} \mathbf{1}_{ \{ X_s \triangleright R_i \} }.
\end{equation}
By \eqref{MP} and by the ergodic theorem for renewal process, one has
\begin{equation}\label{fra1bb}
\lim_{t \to \infty} \frac{V_{i,t}}{\sum_{j \in [\ell ]} V_{j,t} } = p_i ( \mathcal{T}_\ell ) \,\,\, a.s. , \quad \lim_{t \to \infty} \frac{N_{i,t}}{t} =\frac{1}{N^{k+1}} \,\,\, a.s.
\end{equation}
We define the quantities $ (v_i>0 :i \in [\ell] )$ as
\begin{equation} \label{leobb}
v_i := \lim_{t \to \infty}\frac{V_{i,t} N^{k+1} }{t} \,\,\, a.s.,
\end{equation}
by
hypothesis $N \geq M $ one has $v_i \leq 1$, for each $i \in [\ell ]$.
The equalities in \eqref{fra1bb} and the previous definition give \eqref{probfine}.
We notice that
\begin{equation} \label{spiegare}
N_{i,t} = V_{i,t} + \sum_{j \in [\ell]: j\neq i} \, \sum_{s=0}^{\infty} \mathbf{1}_{ \{ Z_s \leq t -2\} } \mathbf{1}_{ \{ X_{Z_s } \triangleright R_j \} }
\mathbf{1}_{ \{ X_{Z_s +1 } \triangleright R_i \} } ,
\end{equation}
indeed if $ X_{Z_s +1} \triangleright R_i $, for some $s $, the time $(Z_s+1 )$ belongs to $\mathcal{N}_{i, \infty}$ but it is not in $\mathcal{V}_{i, \infty} $.
Let us multiply by $N^{k+1} /t$ the previous formula and take the limit for
$t \to \infty $, then, by the ergodic theorem, by \eqref{fra1bb} and \eqref{leobb}, one obtains
\begin{equation} \label{nuovaF}
1 = v_i + \lim_{t \to \infty}
\frac{N^{k+1}}{t} \sum_{j \in [\ell ]: j\neq i} \,\sum_{s=0}^{\infty} \mathbf{1}_{ \{ Z_s \leq t -2\} } \mathbf{1}_{ \{ X_{Z_s } \triangleright R_j \} }
\mathbf{1}_{ \{ X_{Z_s +1 } \triangleright R_i \} } \qquad a.s.
\end{equation}
By the ergodic theorem and Lemma \ref{richiesto} one has
\begin{equation}\label{ssh}
1= v_i + \sum_{j \in [\ell ]: j\neq i} \frac{O_2(R_j , R_i)}{N^k} v_j .
\end{equation}
Thus,
\begin{equation}\label{ssh2}
1\leq v_i + \sum_{j \in [\ell ]: j\neq i} \,\frac{O_2 (R_j , R_i)}{N^k} =
v_i + \sum_{j \in [\ell ]} \,\frac{O_2 (R_j , R_i)}{N^k} .
\end{equation}
The inequality \eqref{ssh2} corresponds to the first inequality in \eqref{vistima}. In particular, $ v_i \geq 1 - (\ell-1 ) /N^k$, for any $i \in [\ell ]$. Thus, for any fixed $i \in [\ell ]$
\begin{equation} \label{purequesta}
\lim_{t \to \infty}
\frac{N^{k+1}}{t} \sum_{s=0}^{\infty} \mathbf{1}_{ \{ Z_s \leq t -2\} } \mathbf{1}_{ \{ X_{Z_s } \triangleright R_i \} }
\geq 1 - (\ell -1 ) /N^k \qquad a.s.
\end{equation}
Now, by \eqref{spiegare}-\eqref{purequesta}, Lemma \ref{richiesto} and ergodicity one has
$$
v_i \leq 1 - \frac{1}{N^k} \left (1- \frac{ \ell -1 }{N^k} \right ) \sum_{j \in [\ell] } O_2(R_j, R_i ) .
$$
This end the proof.
\end{proof}
We are now ready to present the following result on the construction of any digraph through the ranking graphs of
1-dependent uniform chains and identically distributed hitting times.
\begin{theorem} \label{thgrfo}
For any digraph $ \bar \mathbb G=([n], \vec{E} )$ there exists
$\mathbf{X}=(X_m: m \in \mathbb N_0) \in \mathcal{M}_1$ and a
collection of identically distributed hitting times $\mathcal{T}_n =\left\{T_1,T_2,\ldots,T_n\right\}$ on $\mathbf{X}$ such that
$\mathbb G ( \mathcal{T}_n ) = \bar \mathbb G$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let us consider the 1-dependent uniform chain $\mathbf{X}^{(N, n+1)} $ with $N \geq n+1$.
By Lemma \ref{tt11},
the patterns $R_1, \ldots , R_n $ generated by $\bar \mathbb G$ have the no-tie property. Furthermore, by Lemmas \ref{tt11nuovo}-\ref{tt11} the hitting times $\{T_{R_1}, \ldots, T_{R_n}\}$ are identically distrributed.
For distinct indices $i,j$, one has
$$
p_a(\{ T_{R_i}, T_{R_j}\}) = {\mathbb P} (T_{R_a} = Z_1 ) ,
$$
where $a \in \{ i,j\}$.
In the case that $ (i,j)$ and $(j,i) $ are not arrows of the digraph $ \bar{ \mathbb{G } } $
then, by Lemma \ref{tt11}, $O_2(R_i, R_i) = O_2(R_j, R_j) =O_2 (R_i, R_j) =O_2(R_j, R_i) =0 $. Thus, by \eqref{spiegare} of Lemma \ref{lemmastima} follows that $N_{i,t} = V_{i,t}$ and $ N_{j,t} = V_{j,t}$. Hence by \eqref{fra1bb} and \eqref{leobb} one has
$$
p_i ( \{ T_{R_i}, T_{R_j}\} ) = p_j ( \{ T_{R_i}, T_{R_j}\} ) = \frac{1}{2}.
$$
Hence, $ (i,j) $ and $(j,i)$ does not belong to $\mathbb G ( \mathcal{T}_n ) $.
\medskip
We now consider the case: $(i,j) $ is in $ \bar{\mathbb{G }}$. By Lemma \ref{tt11},
$O(R_i, R_j) =(0,0) $ and
$ O(R_j, R_i)= (0,1) $. Thus, by \eqref{spiegare} follows that $N_{j,t} = V_{j,t}$ while
$$
N_{i,t} = V_{i,t} + \, \sum_{s=0}^{\infty} \mathbf{1}_{ \{ Z_s \leq t -2\} } \mathbf{1}_{ \{ X_{Z_s } \triangleright R_j \} } \mathbf{1}_{ \{ X_{Z_s +1 } \triangleright R_i \} } .
$$
Now, defining $v_i $ and $v_j$
as in the proof of Lemma \ref{lemmastima}, $v_j=1$ while
$$
v_i \leq 1 - \frac{1}{N^k} \left (1- \frac{ 1 }{N^k} \right ) <1.
$$
Therefore
$$
p_i ( \{ T_{R_i}, T_{R_j}\} ) = \frac{v_i}{ v_i +v_j} < \frac{v_j}{ v_i +v_j} = p_j ( \{ T_{R_i}, T_{R_j}\} ) .
$$
Hence, $ (i,j) $ belongs to $\mathbb G ( \mathcal{T}_n ) $.
\end{proof}
We end the section with the following example
\begin{example} \label{escostru2}
We want to construct $\mathbf{X}\in \mathcal{M}_1$ and three identically distributed hitting times such that
\begin{equation}\label{T3T}
{\mathbb P}(T_1 <T_2 ) > \frac{1}{2}, \qquad
{\mathbb P}(T_2 <T_3 ) > \frac{1}{2}, \qquad
{\mathbb P}(T_3 <T_1 ) > \frac{1}{2}.
\end{equation}
Thus we consider the digraph $ \bar \mathbb G $ and the generated patterns $R_1, R_2, R_3$ defined in Example \ref{escostru}.
We take $\mathbf{X}= \mathbf{X}^{(4,4)}$ and $T_i = T_{R_i}$, for $i =1,2,3$.
Now, by Theorem \ref{thgrfo}, the inequalities in \eqref{T3T} hold.
\end{example}
\section{A Penney-type game}\label{comb}
The classical Penney's game concerns
the occurrence of different strings in a sequence of independent random draws of letters. This kind of problem was studied and solved in \cite{chen1979} and \cite{GO1981} (see also \cite{DSS2} for a version of the game with many players). In \cite{GO1981}, among other results, the Authors give the construction for the optimal reply or optimal string to every string chosen by the first player. The game is always unfavorable for the player who chooses first.
The cause of this behavior lies in the absence of transitivity for the stochastic precedence order (see e.g.
\cite{DSS1, Savage, trybula1969}).
To introduce our Penney-type game we need some notation.
Let $\mathcal{T}_n=\{ T_1, T_2 , \ldots , T_n \}$ be a collection of no-tie r.v.,
for $A \subset [n ]$ we write
$$T^{(A)} = \min \{T_i : i \in A\}.$$
By the no-tie property, if the subsets $ A, B \subset [n ]$ are disjoint then ${\mathbb P} (T^{(A)} =T^{(B)} ) =0$.
Let $r_1, r_2 \in \mathbb N$, $ \mathbf{X} \in \mathcal{M}_1$ and let $ \mathcal{T}_n $ be a collection of $n $ identically distributed hitting times
on $\mathbf{X}$ with $n \geq r_1+r_2$. We define the stochastic zero-sum game G$_{r_1,r_2 }(\mathbf{X} ,\mathcal{T}_n ) $ as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item[\emph{Step 1.}] Player \rom{1} chooses a set $A \subset [n]$ with $ |A|= r_1 $.
\item[\emph{Step 2.}] Player \rom{2} chooses a set $B \subset [n] \setminus A$ with $| B|= r_2 $.
\item[\emph{Step 3.}] Player \rom{1} chooses two nonempty sets $A' \subset A$ and $B' \subset B$.
\item[\emph{Step 4.}] If $T^{(A' )} < T^{(B')} $ then Player \rom{2} pays $|B'| $ dollars to Player \rom{1}, otherwise Player \rom{1} pays $|A' | $ dollars to Player \rom{2}.
\end{itemize}
The idea underlying this payoff is that, in the final stage, each player pays one dollar for betting on any hitting time and the winner takes all the stakes.
After the choice of $A'$ and $B' $, the expected payoff of Player \rom{1} is given by
\begin{equation}\label{payoff}
|B'| \, \cdot \, {\mathbb P} ( T^{(A' )} < T^{(B')} ) -
|A'| \, \cdot \, {\mathbb P} ( T^{(A' )} > T^{(B')} ).
\end{equation}
Note that for given $ \mathbf{X} \in \mathcal{M}_1$ and for a collection of hitting times $\mathcal{T}_n$
the expected payoff of the first player is a non-decreasing function
of $r_1$ and $ r_2 $, as long as $r_1+r_2 \leq n$. Indeed, when $r_1' \geq r_1$ or $r_2' \geq r_2$, the
first player can mimic, for G$_{r'_1, r'_2} (\mathbf{X} , \mathcal{T}_n)$, the strategies used in G$_{r_1, r_2} (\mathbf{X} , \mathcal{T}_n)$. Therefore his expected payoff is a monotone
increasing function in $r_1$ and $r_2$ when the two players adopt an optimal strategy.
It is quite easy to construct for given $ r_1$, $r_2$ and $n \geq r_1+r_2$ games of this kind that are fair or favorable to Player \rom{1}. We will come back to this point in this section. However, we also determine a threshold ${\mathcal S} (r_1, r_2)$ through a graph
characterization that will be used in the following result (see formula \eqref{def_grafica} below).
\begin{theorem}\label{qaz} For any $r_1, r_2 \in \mathbb N$,
there exist $ \mathbf{X} \in \mathcal{M}_1 $ and a family of identically distributed hitting times $ \mathcal{T}_n $ on
$ \mathbf{X} $ such that the game G$_{r_1, r_2} (\mathbf{X}, \mathcal{T}_n )$
is favorable to Player \emph{\rom{2}} if and only if
$n \geq {\mathcal S} (r_1, r_2)$.
\end{theorem}
This result is also related with "voting paradoxes", see e.g.
\cite{AlonPara} and \cite{Dominating2006}.
\begin{comment}
It is more difficult to answer the following question.
\begin{itemize}
\item[\bf{Q:}] For given $r_1 , r_2 \in \mathbb N $, is there $n $ such that, for suitable choices of $\mathbf{X} \in \mathcal{M}_1$ and identically distributed hitting times $T_1, \ldots , T_n$, the game will be favorable to the second player?
\end{itemize}
We will answer this question in the affirmative.
Moreover, for $r_1, r_2 \in \mathbb N$, we will find a function
$ (r_1, r_2) \mapsto {\mathcal S} (r_1, r_2)$ such that there exist games
G$_{r_1,r_2 }(\mathbf{X} ,\mathcal{T}_n ) $ favorable to the second player if and only if
$n \geq {\mathcal S} (r_1, r_2) $.
The function ${\mathcal S} (r_1,r_2)$ will be characterized through the use of $(r_1, r_2)$-directional graphs.
As it will be clear in our constructions, our paper has some deep connections with \cite{McGarvey1953, S1959, ErdosMoser, Dominating2006} but here we desire to stress the differences that are:
\begin{itemize}
\item[1.] our constructions are realized with Markov chains and hitting times and not using generals random variables. Thus introducing a natural setting for the presentation of these kind of games;
\item[2.] our game involves the minimum on some sets of random variables therefore, in a first stage, it is impossible to reduce it to a problem of graph theory. In fact the game requires an analysis of the collective behaviour of the random variables.
\end{itemize}
The paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{uniform}, we define the patterns (a class of matrices with integers entries), a class
of 1-dependent uniform chains and some identically distributed hitting times.
In Section \ref{realization}, for a given oriented graph $\bar \mathbb G =([n], \vec E)$, we construct some $\mathbf{X} \in \mathcal{M}_1$ and some identically distributed hitting times $\mathcal{T}_n$ of $\mathbf{X}$ such that $\mathbb G( \mathcal{T}_n ) = \bar \mathbb G$.
In Section \ref{comb}, we prove the existence of $(r_1, r_2)$-directional graphs, for any $r_1, r_2 \in \mathbb N$ when the number of vertices of the graph is large enough. In Section \ref{finale}, we give the definition of 2-determined random variables and finally we show that for $n \geq {\mathcal S} (r_1, r_2)$
there are games G$_{r_1, r_2} (\mathbf{X} , \mathcal{T}_n)$ that are favorable to the second player.
\end{comment}
\subsection{Existence of $(r_1, r_2)$-directional graphs}
We start this subsection with some definitions.
For a digraph $\mathbb G = ([n], \vec{E})$ and for disjoint $A , B \subset [n]$ we write $A \to B $ if for any $i \in A $ and $j \in B$
one has that $(i,j) \in \vec{E}$.
For $r_1, r_2 \in \mathbb N$, we say that a
digraph $\mathbb G=([n], \vec E)$ is $( r_1, r_2 )$-\emph{directional} if for any $A \subset [n]$ with $|A|=r_1$ there exists $B \subset [n] \setminus A $ with $ |B| = r_2 $ such that $A \rightarrow B$ (see \cite{Erdos1963} and \cite{Dominating2006} for similar definitions).
For any $r_1, r_2 \in \mathbb N $, let us define
\begin{equation}\label{def_grafica}
\mathcal{S} (r_1, r_2) : = \inf \left \{ k \geq r_1 + r_2: \text{there exists a $(r_1, r_2)$-directional tournament }
([k], \vec E) \right \} .
\end{equation}
In \cite{Erdos1963} Erd\H{o}s analyses a problem that correspond to the
existence of $(r_1, 1)$-directional graphs (see also \cite{AlonSpencer}). The probabilistic method developed there can be easily adapted in our case.
\begin{theorem}\label{directional}
For any $r_1, r_2 \in \mathbb N$ and any $n \geq \mathcal{S} (r_1, r_2)$ there exists a $(r_1, r_2)$-directional tournament $\mathbb{T} = ([n], \vec E)$. Moreover
\begin{equation} \label{boundE}
\mathcal{S} (r_1, r_2) \leq \inf \left \{ n \geq r_1+r_2: \binom{n}{r_1} \left (1- \frac{1}{2^{r_1 r_2}} \right )^{ \left \lfloor \frac{n - r_1}{r_2} \right \rfloor } <1
\right \} < \infty .
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
For $r_1, r_2 \in \mathbb N$, we first assume that for a specific $n_0 \in \mathbb N $ there exists
a $(r_1, r_2)$-directional tournament $ \mathbb{T}_{n_0} =([n_0] , \vec E)$. Then, we prove that for any $n > n_0 $
there exists
a $(r_1, r_2)$-directional tournament $ \mathbb{T}_n =([n], \vec E_n)$. The proof is by induction.
Suppose that for $n-1 \geq n_0 $ there is a $(r_1, r_2)$-directional tournament
$ \mathbb{T}_{n-1} =([n-1], \vec E_{n-1})$, then we will construct a tournament $ \mathbb{T}_{n} =([n], \vec E_{n})$ that is
$(r_1, r_2)$-directional.
For any distinct $i,j \in [n-1]$ let $(i,j)$ be in $\vec E_n$ if and only if
$(i,j) \in \vec E_{n-1}$. Moreover, for any $i \in [n-1]$, we impose that $(n, i) $ belongs to $\vec E_n $.
It is clear that if $ \mathbb{T}_{n-1}$ is a $(r_1, r_2)$-directional tournament then also $ \mathbb{T}_n$ is an $(r_1, r_2)$-directional tournament. Indeed, if $A \subset [n-1]$ with $|A| =r_1$ then one can select $B \subset [n-1] $ with $|B| =r_2$ and $A \rightarrow B$, as in $ \mathbb{T}_{n-1}$. On the other hand if we consider an $A \subset [n]$ such that
$n \in A$ and $|A| = r_1$ then one can take $B \subset [n-1]$ such that
$(A\setminus \{n\} )\rightarrow B $ and $|B| =r_2$. In any case the relation $(A\setminus \{n\} )\rightarrow B $ implies $A \rightarrow B $ because $(n, i) \in \vec E_n$ for any $i \in [n-1]$.
Now, we prove formula \eqref{boundE}, by the probabilistic method (see e.g. \cite{AlonSpencer}).
For this purpose, we will construct a random tournament, denoted by $ \mathbb{T} (n )= ([n] , \vec{E} (n ))$, and we will show that it is $(r_1, r_2)$-directional with positive probability.
For two distinct vertices $u,v$, either $(u,v) \in \vec{E} (n)$
or $ (v, u) \in \vec{E} (n) $; both these events occur with probability $1/2$. Moreover all the events involving distinct edges are assumed independent.
For given $r_1, r_2 \in \mathbb N$ let $\widetilde V \subset [ n ]$ with $| \widetilde V|=r_1 $,
we define the event
$$
A_{\widetilde V} := \{ \exists V' \subset [n ] \setminus \widetilde V : \widetilde V \to V', \text{ with } |V'| = r_2 \}.
$$
Now, for a given $\widetilde V $ having cardinality $ r_1$, let us choose a family of sets of vertices
$$
\left (V_i : |V_i|= r_2, V_i \subset [n]\setminus \widetilde V, \,\,\, i = 1, \ldots, \left \lfloor \frac{n - r_1}{r_2} \right \rfloor \right ) ,
$$
with $V_i \cap V_j = \emptyset $, for $i \neq j$.
By independence of the random directions involving different edges one has
$$
{\mathbb P}(A_{\widetilde V}^c) \leq {\mathbb P} \left ( \bigcap_{i=1}^{ \left \lfloor \frac{n - r_1}{r_2} \right \rfloor } \{ \widetilde V \to V_i \}^c \right ) \leq \left (1- \frac{1}{2^{r_1 r_2}} \right )^{ \left \lfloor \frac{n - r_1}{r_2} \right \rfloor } ,
$$
for any $\widetilde V \subset [n] $ with $ | \widetilde V|=r_1$.
\noindent
By subadditivity of the probability measure one has
\begin{equation}\label{cuscus}
{\mathbb P} \left ( \bigcap_{ \widetilde V \subset [n ] : | \widetilde V|=r_1} A_{ \widetilde V} \right ) = 1- {\mathbb P} \left ( \bigcup_{ \widetilde V \subset [n ] : | \widetilde V|=r_1} A^c_{ \widetilde V} \right ) \geq 1 - \binom{n }{r_1} \left (1- \frac{1}{2^{r_1 r_2}} \right )^{ \left \lfloor \frac{n - r_1}{r_2} \right \rfloor } .
\end{equation}
For any $r_1, r_2\in \mathbb N$,
\begin{equation}\label{limite0}
\lim_{n \to \infty} \binom{n}{r_1} \left (1- \frac{1}{2^{r_1 r_2}} \right )^{ \left \lfloor \frac{n - r_1}{r_2} \right \rfloor } =0.
\end{equation}
Formulas \eqref{cuscus} and \eqref{limite0}
imply \eqref{boundE}.
\end{proof}
Observe that, for a given $n \in \mathbb N$, if $\mathbb G= ([n], \vec E)$ is a $ (r_1,r_2)$-directional digraph and $ \mathbb G'= ([n], \vec E')$ with $\vec E \subset \vec E'$ then also $\mathbb G'$ is a $ (r_1,r_2)$-directional digraph.
This easy observation and Theorem \ref{directional} imply the following result.
\begin{corollary} \label{coro}
For $ r_1, r_2 \in \mathbb N$, all the $(r_1, r_2)$-directional digraphs have a number of vertices larger than or equal to $ {\mathcal S} (r_1, r_2) $.
\end{corollary}
\begin{comment}
We construct an asymptotic
upper bound for ${\mathcal S} (r_1, r_2)$ by
formula \eqref{boundE}.
Let $ \phi : \mathbb N \times \mathbb N \to \mathbb N$, with $ (r_1 , r_2) = r_1r_2^2 \cdot 2^{r_1 r_2} $
$$
\lim_{r_1 \to \infty } r_1^{r_1}r_2^{2r_1} \cdot 2^{r_1^2 r_2}
$$
\end{comment}
\subsection{Favourable, fair and unfavorable games} \label{finale}
In the following, we take the point of view of the second player so we declare \emph{favorable} (resp. \emph{fair}
and \emph{unfavorable}) the game if the expected value of the payoff of Player \rom{2}
is positive (resp. null and negative), when both players adopt optimal strategies
We first construct, for any $n \geq r_1+r_2 $ a fair game G$_{r_1, r_2}( \mathbf{X} , \mathcal{T}_n)$.
Let $\mathbf{X} =(X_m : m \in \mathbb N_0)$ be a sequence of i.i.d. random variables taking value on $[n]$, with $X_0 $ uniformly distributed on $[n]$,
hence $\mathbf{X}\in \mathcal{M}_1$. Let
$\mathcal{T}_n =\{ T_1, \ldots , T_n \}$ be the collection of identically distribute hitting times, where
$T_i= \inf \{ m \in \mathbb N_0 :X_m = i \}, \text{ for } i \in [n] .$
For any strategy of the players the game has a null expected payoff, therefore the game is trivially fair.
Now we construct an unfavorable game for any $n \geq r_1+r_2$. Let us consider the Markov chain $\mathbf{X}^{(n+1, n+1)}$, a tournament
$\mathbb{T} = ([n], \vec E)$ with the property that $(i, n) \in \vec E$ for any $i \in [n-1]$, the patterns $R_1, \ldots , R_n $ generated by
$\mathbb{T}$ and the hitting times $T_{R_1}, \ldots , T_{R_n}$. Player \rom{1} takes
$A$ with $n \in A $ then, for any chosen set $B$ by Player \rom{2}, Player \rom{1} selects $A' = \{n \}$ and $B' \subset B $ with $|B'| =1$. By construction $B \to \{n \}$, therefore Player \rom{1} has guaranteed a positive expected payoff despite of the fact that this strategy could be suboptimal.
In order to find for which $n $ there exist favorable games we need some more discussions and definitions. The following Definition \ref{small} and \ref{2-det} are similar
to others given in \cite{DMS19} but they are used there for different applications and purposes.
\begin{definition} \label{small}
Let us consider two finite sets of random variables $\mathcal{S}_A =\{ S_i : i \in A \} $ and $\mathcal{S}_B =\{ S_i : i \in B \}$, such that $\mathcal{S}_A \cup \mathcal{S}_B$ has the no-tie property. We say that
$\mathcal{S}_A$ is \emph{small} with respect to $\mathcal{S}_B$ iff
\begin{equation}\label{ssmm}
\frac{1}{|A|}\sum_{i \in A} p_i ( \mathcal{S}_A \cup \mathcal{S}_B ) >\frac{1}{|B|}\sum_{i \in B} p_i ( \mathcal{S}_A \cup \mathcal{S}_B ).
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
\medskip
First we present an example showing that the collective behaviour cannot be deduced by pair relations.
\begin{example}
Let $S_1 = \frac{49}{100}$ and let $S_2, S_3 $ be independent r.v. with uniform law on $[0,1]$. The collection $\{S_1, S_2,S_3 \}$ has the no-tie property.
The r.v.
$S_1$ is small with respect to $S_i $, for $i=2,3$, because
${\mathbb P} (S_1< S_2) = {\mathbb P} (S_1< S_3) = \frac{51}{100}$. But
$$
\frac{1}{2} \sum_{i=2}^3 p_i (\{ S_1, S_2, S_3 \}) = \frac{1}{2} - \frac{1}{2} \left (\frac{51}{100} \right )^2 > \left (\frac{51}{100} \right )^2 =
p_1 (\{ S_1, S_2, S_3 \}) .
$$
Therefore $\{ S_2, S_3\}$ is small with respect
to $S_1$. This example shows that the analysis of the
smallness property cannot be reduced to the study of
pair relations. In fact, these can be completely reversed
when we move on to consider collections of random variables. A complete theory that studies all the possible ranking in a set of random variables is in
\cite{DS20} and \cite{Saari}.
\end{example}
In order to avoid some difficulties in the construction of favorable games we define some special systems of random variables.
\begin{definition} \label{2-det}
Let $\mathcal{S}_n = \{S_1, \ldots , S_n \} $ be a collection of random variables and let $\mathbb G( \mathcal{S}_n ) = ([n], \vec{E})$ be the associated ranking graph. We say that
$\mathcal{S}_n$ is $2$-\emph{determined} if for any two disjoint $A, B \subset [n ]$ such that $A \to B $ then
${\mathcal S}_B =\{ S_i : i \in B \} $ is small with respect to ${\mathcal S}_A =\{ S_i : i \in A\} $.
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}\label{THs}
Let $n \geq 2$ and $ \bar \mathbb G =([n], \vec E)$ be given. Let $R_1, \ldots , R_n $ be patterns
in $\mathcal{P}_{n+1,n+1}$ generated by
$\bar \mathbb G =([n], \vec E)$.
For $N \geq n+1$, let us consider the 1-dependent uniform
chain $\mathbf{X}^{(N,n+1)}$ and the identically distributed hitting times
$\mathcal{T}_n = \{T_{R_1} , \ldots , T_{R_n}\} $.
Then
$\mathcal{T}_n$ is $2$-determined.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
For any $C \subset [n]$ let $\mathcal{T}_{C } :=\{ T_i: i \in C \}$. For any disjoint $A, B \subset [n]$ with $A \to B $,
we need to show
\begin{equation}\label{ssmm2}
\frac{1}{|A|}\sum_{i \in A} p_i ( \mathcal{T}_A \cup \mathcal{T}_B ) <\frac{1}{|B|}\sum_{i \in B} p_i ( \mathcal{T}_A \cup \mathcal{T}_B ) .
\end{equation}
Inequality \eqref{ssmm2} holds true if and only if
$ \frac{1}{|B|} \sum_{i \in B} v_i- \frac{1}{|A|} \sum_{i \in A} v_i >0 $, , for disjoint sets $A, B $.
\noindent
For any $i \in A$, by Lemma \ref{lemmastima}, one has
$$
v_i \leq 1-\frac{1}{N^{n+1}} \left ( 1- \frac{|A|+|B| -1}{N^{n+1}} \right ) \frac{|B|}{N^{n+1}} .
$$
Hence,
\begin{equation}\label{Ape}
\frac{1}{|A|} \sum_{i \in A} v_i \leq 1-\frac{|B|}{N^{n+1}} + \frac{ ( |A| + |B| -1 )|B| }{N^{2n+2}} .
\end{equation}
Analogously, by the first inequality in \eqref{vistima} and the hypothesis that $A \to B$, one has
\begin{equation}\label{Bpe}
\frac{1}{|B|} \sum_{i \in B } v_i \geq 1 - \frac{1}{N^{n+1}} \sum_{i \in B}\,\, \sum_{j \in B \setminus \{ i\} : (i,j) \in \vec E } 1 .
\end{equation}
Hence,
\begin{equation}\label{Bpe2}
\frac{1}{|B|} \sum_{i \in B } v_i \geq 1 - \frac{|B| -1 }{2N^{n+1}}
\end{equation}
Therefore one obtains
\begin{equation}\label{NuovA}
\frac{1}{|B|} \sum_{i \in B} v_i- \frac{1}{|A|} \sum_{i \in A} v_i >
\frac{|B|}{2N^{n+1}} - \frac{ ( |A| + |B| -1 )|B| }{N^{2n+2}} > |B| \cdot \left [ \frac{1}{2N^{n+1}} -
\frac{1}{N^{2n+1}} \right ] ,
\end{equation}
where the last inequality is a consequence of $N > |A| + |B| -1$.
Thus, for any $N \geq n+1 \geq 3$ and for any choice of non-empty disjoint sets $A, B \subset [n]$ the l.h.s. in \eqref{NuovA} results larger than zero.
\end{proof}
We give the key result that will allow the construction of favorable games.
\begin{theorem}\label{THgame}
Let $r_1, r_2 \in \mathbb N $, $n \geq r_1+r_2$, let $\mathbf X \in \mathcal{M}_1$ and $\mathcal{T}_n = \{ T_1, \ldots , T_n \}$
be a collection of identically distributed hitting times.
\begin{itemize}
\item[i.] The game G$_{r_1, r_2} (\mathbf{X} , \mathcal{T}_n )$ is favorable
$\Rightarrow $ $ \mathbb G (\mathcal{T}_n) $ is $(r_1, r_2)$-directional.
\end{itemize}
Moreover, let us suppose that $ \mathcal{T}_n $ is $2$-determined then
\begin{itemize}
\item[ii.] The game G$_{r_1, r_2} (\mathbf{X} , \mathcal{T}_n )$ is favorable
$\iff $ $ \mathbb G (\mathcal{T}_n) $ is $(r_1, r_2)$-directional.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Item i. The proof is by contradiction. Suppose that $\mathbb G (\mathcal{T}_n) = ( [n] , \vec E ( \mathcal{T}_n) )$ is not $(r_1, r_2)$-directional.
By hypothesis,
Player \rom{1} can select $A$, with cardinality $r_1$, such that, for any
$B$ with cardinality $r_2$, $A \not \to B$ in $ \mathbb G (\mathcal{T}_n) $. Let us consider such $A$ and $B$. Now, Player \rom{1} selects $i \in A$ and $j \in B $ such that $(i,j) \notin \vec E ( \mathcal{T}_n)$. Hence, $\mathbb{P} (T_j < T_i) \leq \frac{1}{2}$. Then, by choosing $A' = \{ i \} $ and
$B' = \{ j\} $ Player \rom{1} has guaranteed that the game is either fair or in his favour. Obviously, this strategy could be suboptimal for Player \rom{1}.
In any case, the game G$_{r_1, r_2} (\mathbf{X} , \mathcal{T}_n )$ is not favorable for Player \rom{2}.
Item ii.
For any set $A$ having cardinality $r_1$, Player \rom{2} selects $B$, with cardinality $r_2$, such that $A \to B$. Let us consider such a $B$. From the fact that the system is $2$-determined for any choice of no empty $A' \subset A $ and $B' \subset B $
one obtains
$$
\frac{1}{|A'|} \sum_{i \in A'} p_i (\mathcal{T}_{A' \cup B'}) <
\frac{1}{|B'|} \sum_{i \in B'} p_i (\mathcal{T}_{A' \cup B'}) .
$$
By \eqref{payoff}, the expected payoff of Player \rom{2} is positive,
for all $A' \subset A $, $B' \subset B$.
\end{proof}
\medskip
Now we prove Theorem \ref{qaz} presented in the beginning of this section.
For given $r_1, r_2$ if $n < {\mathcal S} (r_1, r_2)$, by Corollary \ref{coro} any graph is not $(r_1, r_2)$-directional;
then by Theorem \ref{THgame}, the considered game is fair or unfavorable.
If $n \geq {\mathcal S} (r_1, r_2) $, by Theorem \ref{directional}, one take
a digraph $\bar \mathbb G =([n], \vec E )$ that is $(r_1, r_2)$-directional. Let us take
a chain $\mathbf{X}^{(N, n+1)} \in \mathcal{M}_1$ with $N \geq n+1$. Then the patterns $R_1, \ldots , R_n \in \mathcal{P}_{n+1, n+1} $ generated by $\bar \mathbb G$ are considered.
By Theorem \ref{thgrfo}, we know that $ \mathbb G (\{ T_{R_1}, \ldots , T_{R_n} \}) = \bar \mathbb G $, moreover $T_{R_1}, \ldots , T_{R_n}$ are identically distributed
hitting times and, by Theorem \ref{THs}, these hitting times are
$2$-determined.
Finally, by the item ii of Theorem \ref{THgame}, the game G$_{r_1, r_2} (\mathbf{X}^{(N, n+1)}, \{ T_{R_1}, \ldots , T_{R_n} \} )$ is favorable. This proves Theorem \ref{qaz}.
\begin{comment}
We have introduced the ranking graph problem in relation with uniform chains in $\mathcal{M}_1$ and identically distributed hitting times.
We have shown that also in this particular case the ranking graph can be constructed equal to any assigned digraph. Our result is optimal in the sense that it is impossible to generate these graphs with uniform chains in $\mathcal{M}_0$ (a sequence independent uniform random variables) and identically distributed hitting times.
In the second part of the paper
we have applied this result in order to analyze a Penney type game. In particular, we characterize the existence of favorable games in this class of games.
The aspect that we consider most interesting is that many things can be said only from the knowledge of the discrete parameters of the game. In this way we can do a qualitative analysis that does not involve the difficulties of having to calculate the Nash equilibria. Qualitative analysis of other games could become an interesting research framework.
\end{comment}
\bigskip
\noindent
{\bf Acknowledgements.}
I would like to thank the anonymous Reviewers for several helpful comments and suggestions that have improved the text.
\bibliographystyle{abbrv}
|
\section{Introduction}
We provide a new approach for studying groups and spaces with features of non-positive curvature by defining a local-to-global property for Morse quasi-geodesics.
We show a variety of results from hyperbolic spaces effortlessly extend to any space satisfying this Morse local-to-global property. We prove examples of such spaces include the mapping class group and Teichm\"uller space of finite type, orientable surfaces, the fundamental groups of closed $3$--manifolds, and all $\CAT(0)$ spaces.
\subsection{The local-to-global property for Morse quasi-geodesics}
Morse quasi-geodesics generalize a key property of quasi-geodesics in hyperbolic spaces. Given a function $M \colon [1,\infty)\times [0,\infty) \to [0,\infty)$, a quasi-geodesic $\gamma$ is \emph{$M$--Morse} if every $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic with endpoints on $\gamma$ is contained in the $M(\lambda,\epsilon)$--neighborhood of $\gamma$. We call the function $M$ the \emph{Morse gauge} of $\gamma$.\footnote{To simplify proofs, we use a more technical, but equivalent, definition of Morse quasi-geodesics; see Section \ref{subsec:Morse_geodesics}.}
The study of Morse quasi-geodesics arose from trying to understand the ``hyperbolic directions" in a non-hyperbolic space \cite{Charney_Sultan_CAT(0)} and has since received immense interest in the literature (see \cite{ABD,HamenstaedtHensel_Stability_Outer_Space,ACGH,DMS_divergence,OOS_Lacunary_hyperbolic_groups} for a sampling). Numerous results from hyperbolic spaces have fruitful generalizations to spaces containing infinite Morse quasi-geodesics, particularly with respect to the study of stable subgroups \cite{AMST,Cordes_Hume_boundary,ADT} and the quasi-isometric classification of spaces \cite{MC1, CCM_quasi-mobius}. Our new contribution to the study of Morse quasi-geodesics is the introduction of a local-to-global property for Morse quasi-geodesics.
Intuitively, a local Morse quasi-geodesic can be thought of as a path where every subpath of a specified length is uniformly a Morse quasi-geodesic. Since quasi-geodesics need not be continuous, we make this idea rigorous by measuring the length in the domain of the map.
\begin{defni}[Local Morse quasi-geodesic]
Let $L\geq 0$, $\lambda\geq 1$, $\epsilon \geq 0$, and $M$ be a Morse gauge. A map $\gamma \colon [a,b] \to X$ is an \emph{$(L;M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic} if for any $[s,t] \subseteq [a,b]$ with $|s-t| \leq L$, the restriction of $\gamma$ to $[s,t]$ is an $M$--Morse, $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic.
\end{defni}
A local-to-global property for Morse quasi-geodesics should give conditions for a local Morse quasi-geodesic to be a global Morse quasi-geodesic. However, every finite quasi-geodesic will be Morse for some Morse gauge, implying every $L$--local quasi-geodesic will be a local Morse quasi-geodesic for a Morse gauge depending on $L$. Thus, a meaningful local-to-global property requires the number $L$ to depend on the Morse gauge.
\begin{defni}[Morse local-to-global property]\label{intro_defn:local_to_global}
A metric space $X$ has the \emph{Morse local-to-global} property if for every Morse gauge $M$ and constants $\lambda \geq 1$, $\epsilon \geq 0$, there exists $L \geq 0$ so that every $(L;M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic is a global $M'$--Morse, $(\lambda',\epsilon')$--quasi-geodesic for some $M'$, $\lambda'$, and $\epsilon'$ depending only on $M$, $\lambda$, and $\epsilon$. A finitely generated group has the \emph{Morse local-to-global} property if any Cayley graph with respect to a finite generating set has the Morse local-to-global property.
\end{defni}
Since Morse quasi-geodesics are invariant under quasi-isometry, the Morse local-to-global property is a quasi-isometry invariant. In particular, the Cayley graph of a finitely generated group will have the Morse local-to-global property regardless of the choice of finite generating set.
The sizable literature generalizing the behavior of quasi-geodesics in hyperbolic spaces to Morse quasi-geodesics in all metric spaces may lead one to suspect that all metric spaces would have the Morse local-to-global property. However, the results of our study show that this conjecture is false even among finitely generated groups.
\begin{examplei}
There exist finitely generated groups whose Cayley graph contain bi-infinite Morse geodesics, but do not have the Morse local-to-global property. See Example \ref{ex:non-examples} for specific groups.
\end{examplei}
The results of this paper therefore come in two flavors. We show a wide variety of groups and spaces do have the local-to-global property for Morse quasi-geodesics, and we demonstrate a range of results of consequences for these space.
\subsection{Examples of Morse local-to-global Spaces}
The most significant work of this paper lies in proving the collection of groups and spaces with the Morse local-to-global property is very broad.
\begin{thmi}[Morse local-to-global groups and spaces]\label{intro_thm:examples_of_local_to_global}
The following groups and spaces have the Morse local-to-global property.
\begin{itemize}
\item Any $\CAT(0)$ space.
\item The mapping class group of an orientable, finite type surface.
\item The Teichm\"uller space of an orientable, finite type surface with either the Weil--Petersson or Teichm\"uller metric.
\item Any graph product of hyperbolic groups.
\item All finitely generated virtually solvable groups.
\item Any finitely generated group with an infinite order central element.
\item The fundamental group of any closed $3$--manifold.
\end{itemize}
\end{thmi}
The proof that CAT$(0)$ spaces have the Morse local-to-global property relies on the convexity of the distance function and a characterization of Morse geodesics in CAT$(0)$ spaces due to Charney and Sultan \cite{Charney_Sultan_CAT(0)}. For the mapping class group, Teichm\"uller space, and graph products of hyperbolic groups, we prove a more general result for the class of hierarchically hyperbolic spaces satisfying a minor technical condition that encompasses these examples. The proof for hierarchically hyperbolic spaces rests upon a characterization of Morse quasi-geodesics in these space due to Abbott, Behrstock, and Durham \cite{ABD}. Virtually solvable groups and groups with infinite order central elements are examples of spaces where the Morse geodesics have uniformly bounded length. We call these spaces \emph{Morse limited} and prove they all trivially satisfy Definition \ref{intro_defn:local_to_global} by taking $L$ sufficiently larger than the bound on the lengths of the Morse geodesics. These ``trivial" examples are essential to proving that the fundamental group of any closed $3$--manifold has the Morse local-to-global property. The fundamental group of a $3$--manifold decomposes into a free product of groups that are either virtually solvable or hierarchically hyperbolic spaces. The proof for all closed $3$--manifold thus follow from the above plus the next theorem about relatively hyperbolic groups.
\begin{thmi}[Hyperbolic relative to Morse local-to-global]\label{intro_thm:relative_hyperbolicity}
Let $G$ be a group hyperbolic relative to the subgroups $H_1,\dots,H_n$. If each $H_i$ has the Morse local-to-global property, then $G$ has the Morse local-to-global property.
\end{thmi}
The proof of Theorem \ref{intro_thm:relative_hyperbolicity} is, somewhat surprisingly, the most involved of this paper. Our proof develops a theory of ``deep points" for local quasi-geodesics in a relatively hyperbolic space analogous to the deep points for geodesics introduced by Hruska \cite{Hruska10}. The deep points partition a local quasi-geodesic into pieces that alternatingly avoid and pass through the peripheral subsets of the relatively hyperbolic space and maybe of independent interest in the study of relative hyperbolicity.
\begin{thmi}[Local quasi-geodesics in relatively hyperbolic spaces]\label{intro_thm:deep_point_decomposition}
Let $X$ be hyperbolic relative to a collection $\mc{P}$ of peripheral subsets. For each $\lambda \geq 1$ and $\epsilon \geq 0$, there exists $L >0$ so the following holds. For every $(L;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic $\gamma$ in $X$, there exist peripheral subsets $\{P_1,\dots,P_n\}$ and a decomposition $\gamma = \decomposition$ so that each $\alpha_i$ is contained in a uniform neighborhood of $P_i$ and each $\sigma_i$ uniformly quasi-isometrically embeds in the coned-off space $\cone{X}$. This implies each $\sigma_i$ is uniformly a Morse quasi-geodesic in $X$.
\end{thmi}
\subsection{Consequences of the Morse local-to-global property}
Once the difficult task of showing a space satisfies the Morse local-to-global property is completed, many arguments from hyperbolic spaces can be seamlessly generalized.
Our first examples of this are extensions of Gitik's combination theorems for quasiconvex subgroups of hyperbolic groups to stable subgroups of Morse local-to-global groups. A streamlined version of the combination theorems is the following (see Section \ref{sec:combination_theorems} for complete statements).
\begin{thmi}[Combinations of stable subgroups]\label{intro_thm:combination_theorems}
Let $G$ be a finitely generated group with the Morse local-to-global property and $P$, $Q$ be stable subgroups of $G$.
For each finite generating set of $G$, there exists $C>0$ (depending only on the stability parameters of $P$ and $Q$) so that if $P\cap Q$ contains all elements of $P \cup Q$ whose length in $G$ is at most $C$, then the subgroup $\langle P,Q \rangle$ is stable in $G$ and isomorphic to $P \ast_{P\cap Q} Q$. Further, if $P$ is malnormal in $G$, then the same conclusion holds if we only require $P\cap Q$ to contain all elements of $P$ whose length in $G$ is at most $C$.
\end{thmi}
Stable subgroups are a strong generalization of quasiconvex subgroups that requires every pair of elements to be joined by a uniform Morse geodesic that stays uniformly close to the subgroup. Stable subgroups were introduced by Durham and Taylor to study the convex cocompact subgroups of the mapping class group \cite{Durham_Taylor_Stability}, but have sense been studied in a variety of non-hyperbolic groups \cite{HamenstaedtHensel_Stability_Outer_Space,ABD,Tran2017}. Theorem \ref{intro_thm:combination_theorems} is particularly interesting in the mapping class group, where it produces combination theorems for the convex cocompact subgroups by the work of Durham and Taylor (see Section \ref{subsec:intro_MCG} for details). Similar combination theorems have been proved by Dey, Kapovich, and Leeb for Anosov subgroups of semi-simple Lie groups \cite{Dey_Kapovich_Leeb_combination} and by Mart{\'i}nez-Pedroza and Sisto for relatively quasiconvex subgroups of relatively hyperbolic groups \cite{Martinez_Sisto_combination}.
In Section \ref{sec:combination_theorems}, we record several corollaries to Theorem \ref{intro_thm:combination_theorems}, including the fact that all infinite normal subgroups of a Morse local-to-global group contain a Morse element.
\begin{cori}[Normal subgroups of Morse local-to-global groups]\label{intro_cor:normal_subgroups}
Let $G$ be a finitely generated group with the Morse local-to-global property. If $G$ contains a Morse element and $N$ is an infinite normal subgroup of $G$, then $N$ contains a Morse element of $G$.
\end{cori}
An element $g \in G$ is \emph{$M$--Morse} if $\langle g \rangle$ is undistorted and every pair of elements of $\langle g \rangle$ is joined by a $M$--Morse geodesic in the Cayley graph of $G$. Prominent examples of Morse elements include pseudo-Anosov elements of the mapping class group and rank-1 elements of CAT$(0)$ groups.
In these cases, Corollary \ref{intro_cor:normal_subgroups} can be obtained from Ivanov's omnibus subgroup theorem \cite{ivanov_subgroups} or a result of Arzhantseva, Cashen, and Tao for groups acting on spaces with strongly contracting elements \cite[Proposition 3.1]{ACT_Growth_tight}. Corollary \ref{intro_cor:normal_subgroups} provides a proof entirely in terms of the Cayley of the group in these cases, and extends these results to all hierarchically hyperbolic groups and closed $3$--manifold groups containing Morse elements.
Theorem \ref{intro_thm:combination_theorems} also allows us to produce a trichotomy that guarantees Morse local-to-global groups that are not Morse limited or virtually cyclic cannot be amenable.
\begin{cori}[Trichotomy for Morse local-to-global groups]\label{intro_cor:trichotomy}
A finitely generated group $G$ with the Morse local-to-global property satisfies exactly one of the following.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $G$ is Morse limited.
\item $G$ is virtually infinite cyclic.
\item $G$ contains an infinite index stable free subgroup of rank $2$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{cori}
Our last corollary is an generalization of a theorem of Arzhantseva to stable subgroups of torsion-free, Morse local-to-global groups \cite[Theorem 1]{Arzhantseva_quasiconvex_subgroups}.
\begin{cori}
Let $G$ be a torsion free, Morse local-to-global group. If $Q$ is a non-trivial, infinite index stable subgroup of $G$, then there is an infinite order element $h$ such that $\langle Q,h\rangle \cong Q \ast \langle h \rangle$ and $\langle Q,h\rangle$ is stable in $G$.
\end{cori}
Beyond our combination theorem, we generalize an assertion of Gromov \cite{Gromov_Hyp_Groups} that was proved by Delzant \cite{Delzant} about the set of translation lengths for elements of a hyperbolic group. We say a conjugacy class is $M$--Morse if all elements with the shortest word length in the conjugacy class are $M$--Morse.
\begin{thmi}[Translation length of Morse elements]\label{intro_thm:translation_lengths}
Let $G$ be a finitely generated group with the Morse local-to-global property. For each Morse gauge $M$, the set of translation lengths of $M$--Morse conjugacy classes of $G$ is a discrete set of rational numbers.
\end{thmi}
We also establish a Cartan--Hadamard style theorem for Morse local-to-global spaces that allows for hyperbolicity to be checked locally.
\begin{thmi}[Local condition for hyperbolicity]\label{intro_thm:Cartan-Hadamard}
Let $X$ be a geodesic metric space with the Morse local-to-global property. For each $\delta\geq 0$, there exists $R\geq 0$ so that if every triangle in $X$ with vertices contained in a ball of radius $R$ is $\delta$--slim, then $X$ is a hyperbolic metric space.
\end{thmi}
Theorem \ref{intro_thm:Cartan-Hadamard} is similar to Gromov's local condition for hyperbolicity in simply connected spaces \cite[Theorem 4.1.A]{Gromov_Hyp_Groups}. While our result does not apply to all simply connected spaces, the proof of Theorem \ref{intro_thm:Cartan-Hadamard} is considerably shorter than proofs of Gromov's condition appearing in the literature (see \cite{Coulon_Cartan-Hadamard,Bowditch_Note_on_Hyperbolicity,Papasoglu_algorithm}) while still capturing the important cases of $\CAT(0)$ spaces and the universal covers of closed $3$--manifolds.
\subsection{Convex cocompact subgroups}\label{subsec:intro_MCG}
Farb and Mosher originally introduced convex cocompact subgroups of the mapping class group by analogy with convex cocompact subgroups of Kleinian groups \cite{Farb_Mosher_convex_cocompact}. These subgroups have since attracted substantial attention as they play a critical role in the theory of extensions of hyperbolic groups and the geometry of surface bundles \cite{Hamenstadt_extensions_of_surface_groups,Kent_Leininger_convex_cocompactness}. A theorem of Durham and Taylor established that the stable subgroups of the mapping class group are precisely the convex cocompact subgroups \cite{Durham_Taylor_Stability}. Using this equivalence, Theorem \ref{intro_thm:combination_theorems} produces a combination theorem for convex cocompact subgroups of the mapping class group.
\begin{thmi}\label{intro_thm:MCG_combination_theorem}
Let $\mathrm{MCG}(S)$ be the mapping class group of a orientable surface $S$ of finite type. Suppose $P$ and $Q$ are convex cocompact subgroups of $\mathrm{MCG}(S)$. There exists $C>0$ so that if $P\cap Q$ contains all elements of $P \cup Q$ whose word length in $\mathrm{MCG}(S)$ is at most $C$, then the subgroup $\langle P,Q \rangle$ is convex cocompact and isomorphic to $P \ast_{P\cap Q} Q$. Further, if $P$ is malnormal, then the same conclusion holds if we only require $P\cap Q$ to contain all elements of $P$ whose length in $\mathrm{MCG}(S)$ is at most~$C$.
\end{thmi}
A long standing open question of Farb and Mosher makes combination theorems for convex cocompact subgroups particularly interesting
\begin{questioni}[{\cite[Question 1.7]{Farb_Mosher_convex_cocompact}}]\label{intro_ques:surface_subgroup}
Does there exist a convex cocompact subgroup of the mapping class group that is not free or virtually free?
\end{questioni}
Since examples of virtually free convex cocompact subgroups are abundant, a strategy to answer Question \ref{intro_ques:surface_subgroup} could involve using Theorem \ref{intro_thm:MCG_combination_theorem} to create new examples using an amalgamated free product. This remains beyond our current reach in the mapping class group, but we produce new examples of one-ended stable subgroups of $\CAT(0)$ groups using our combination theorem in Example \ref{ex:example_of_combination_theorem}.
\subsection{Outline of the paper}
Section \ref{sec: background} consists of preliminary results on Morse quasi-geodesics and the definition of the Morse local-to-global property.
Section \ref{sec: consequences of Mltg} is dedicated to consequences of the Morse local-to-global property.
Sections \ref{sec:examples} and \ref{sec:relativelyhyperbolic} contain proofs that the Morse local-to-global property is exhibited by a large number of spaces. Section \ref{sec:examples} contains the cases of $\CAT(0)$ spaces, hierarchically hyperbolic spaces, and virtually solvable groups, while Section \ref{sec:relativelyhyperbolic} contains the cases of relatively hyperbolic spaces and $3$--manifold groups.
Below, we report open questions that arose from our study of the Morse local-to-global property. This outlines a rich new direction for research in groups with features of non-positive curvature.
\subsection{Open questions and further directions}
The examples we give of groups without the Morse local-to-global property are all infinitely presented. Our first question, inspired by Ruth Charney, asks how ``nice" such a group could be.
\begin{openQ}
Does there exist an example of a finitely presented group that is not Morse local-to-global? Does there exist an example of a group with quadratic Dehn function that is not Morse local-to-global? Does there exist an example of a bi-automatic group that is not Morse local-to-global?
\end{openQ}
We have shown that several different notions of non-positive curvature ($\CAT(0)$, hierarchically hyperbolic, relatively hyperbolic) imply the Morse local-to-global property. It is natural to wonder if other groups with features of non-positive curvature are also Morse local-to-global.
\begin{openQ}\label{question:Out(F_n) and Free by cycli}
Do free-by-cyclic groups or the outer automorphism group of a free group have the Morse local-to-global property?
\end{openQ}
The Morse local-to-global property is closed under both free products and direct products. This inspires the question of what other combination of groups is the property closed under.
\begin{openQ}
Do graph products of Morse local-to-global groups have the Morse local-to-global property?
\end{openQ}
\begin{openQ}
When does a graph of Morse local-to-global groups have the Morse local-to-global property?
\end{openQ}
Several of the properties of Morse local-to-global groups that we establish are reminiscent of properties of acylindrically hyperbolic groups. Further, every known example of a Morse local-to-global group that is not Morse limited or virtually cyclic is acylindrically hyperbolic. We ask if this is always the case.
\begin{openQ}\label{question:acylindrically_hyperbolic}
If $G$ is a Morse local-to-global group that is not Morse limited or virtually cyclic, is $G$ acylindrically hyperbolic?
\end{openQ}
Note, the converse of Question \ref{question:acylindrically_hyperbolic} is false. Counterexamples can be found by taking the free product of two copies of either of the groups we show to not have the Morse local-to-global property in Example \ref{ex:non-examples}. The resulting group is acylindrically hyperbolic, but not Morse local-to-global.
One consequence of a positive answer to Question \ref{question:acylindrically_hyperbolic} would be that all Morse local-to-global groups that are not Morse limited or virtually cyclic would have property $P_{naive}$ \cite{Abbott_Dahmani_Pnaive}. That is, for any collection of group elements $g_1,\dots,g_n$, there would exist an element $h$ so that $\langle g_i, h\rangle \cong \langle g_i \rangle \ast \langle h \rangle$ for each $1\leq i \leq n$. Property $P_{naive}$ is a strong version of the ping-pong lemma and very close to several of the results in this paper, making it an attractive property to study directly in these groups.
\begin{openQ}
If $G$ is a Morse local-to-global group that is not Morse limited or virtually cyclic, does $G$ have property $P_{naive}$?
\end{openQ}
A classical application of the local-to-global property of quasi-geodesic in hyperbolic groups is Cannon's proof that the geodesics of a hyperbolic group form a regular language \cite{Cannon_regular_language}. In \cite{Eike_Zal_regular_language}, the local nature of Morse geodesics in $\CAT(0)$ spaces is used to show that the $M$--Morse geodesics of a $\CAT(0)$ group also form a regular language. Extending these result to all Morse local-to-global groups would produce new results for both the mapping class group and $3$--manifold groups.
\begin{openQ}\label{question:regular_language}
Do the $M$--Morse geodesics of a Morse local-to-global group form a regular language?\footnote{Regular languages of Morse geodesic in Morse local-to-global groups have since been constructed in \cite{CRSZ_languages}.}
\end{openQ}
In CAT$(0)$ spaces and hierarchically hyperbolic spaces, Morse quasi-geodesics have equivalent formulations in terms of contracting and divergence properties \cite{Charney_Sultan_CAT(0),ABD,RST_convexity}. The authors of \cite{ACGH} showed these characterizations do not hold in general metric spaces, but provided characterization of Morse quasi-geodesics using much weaker contracting and divergence properties. We ask if Morse quasi-geodesics in Morse local-to-global spaces have stronger contracting and divergence properties as in the CAT$(0)$ and hierarchically hyperbolic cases. A positive resolution of this question may assist in answering Questions \ref{question:acylindrically_hyperbolic} and \ref{question:regular_language}.
\begin{openQ}
Do Morse quasi-geodesic in Morse local-to-global spaces have stronger contracting or divergence properties than general Morse quasi-geodesics?
\end{openQ}
In section \ref{sec:trivial_examples}, we show that if a space has any asymptotic cone with no cut-points, then it is Morse limited. It is unknown if the converse is true.
\begin{openQ}\label{question:morse_limited_to_unconstriced}
If $G$ is Morse limited, does $G$ have an asymptotic cone with no cut-points?
\end{openQ}
A positive answer to Question \ref{question:morse_limited_to_unconstriced} would upgrade Corollary \ref{intro_cor:trichotomy} to say every Morse local-to-global group either contains a Morse element or has an asymptotic cone with no cut-points. This would give a positive answer to \cite[Question 6.10]{BD_short_conjugators} that asks if every $\CAT(0)$ group with a cut-point in every asymptotic cone must contain a Morse quasi-geodesic.
Our final two questions seek to improve on results in is paper. The first asks to make our stable subgroup combination theorem effective in specific examples.
\begin{openP}
Effectivize the stable subgroup combination theorems (Theorem \ref{thm:stable_subgroup_combination}) for the mapping class group and/or CAT(0) groups.
\end{openP}
In the case of the mapping class group, Bowditch shows a much stronger version of Theorem \ref{intro_thm:translation_lengths}, namely that the set of translation lengths of all Morse elements, independent of Morse gauge, is a discrete set of rational numbers \cite[Corollary 1.5]{Bowditch_tight_geodesics}. We ask if the same improvement can be made for all Morse local-to-global groups.
\begin{openQ}\label{question:translation_length}
If $G$ is Morse local-to-global group, is the set of translation lengths of all Morse elements of $G$ a discrete set of rational numbers?
\end{openQ}
\noindent \textbf{Acknowledgments:}
The authors are grateful to Sam Taylor for insightful conversations and answering many questions. They also thank Emily Stark for helping to find references for Example~\ref{ex:example_of_combination_theorem} and Thomas Ng for comments on a draft of this paper. The first two authors thank their advisors, Jason Behrstock and Alessandro Sisto, for their support and guidance during this project. The first and third author thank the organizers of the 2019 Tech Topology conference where some of the work on this project was completed. The first author would also like to thank the FIM Institute for Mathematical Research at ETH Z\"urich for their hospitality during the conference ``Groups, spaces, and geometries" where much of the work on this project was completed. Lastly, the authors thank the anonymous referee for their helpful comments.
\section{Background and preliminaries}\label{sec: background}
\subsection{Groups and Cayley graphs}
The majority of the metric spaces we are interested in will be the Cayley graphs of finitely generated groups.
\begin{defn}
If $G$ is a group generated by a set $S$, then the \emph{Cayley graph of $G$ with respect to $S$} is the graph with all elements of $G$ as vertices and where $g,h \in G$ are joined by an edge if $g^{-1}h \in S \cup S^{-1}$. We denote the Cayley graph of $G$ with respect to $S$ by $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$.
\end{defn}
Given a fixed generating set $S$ for $G$, we use $|g|$ to denote the minimum number of elements of $S \cup S^{-1}$ needed to write $g$, i.e., the word length of $g$ with respect to $S$. The word length of $g$ with respect to $S$ is equal to the distance in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ from the identity $e$ to $g$. Every path is $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ is labeled by some word $w$ in the set $S \cup S^{-1}$. If a path labeled with the word $w$ starts at $e$ and ends at $g$, then the word $w$ represents $g$. Throughout this article, we will always implicitly consider a finitely generated group as a metric space by equipping it with a word metric with respect to some finite generating set.
\subsection{Morse quasi-geodesics}\label{subsec:Morse_geodesics}
In this section, $(X,d)$ will denote a metric space and $I$ will denote a closed, but possibly unbounded, interval of $\mathbb{R}$. Throughout this article, if $\gamma \colon I \to X$ is a map, we will abuse notation by using $\gamma$ to refer the image of $\gamma$ in $X$. The main objects of this paper are quasi-geodesics with a stability property called Morse.
\begin{defn}[Quasi-geodesics]
A map $\gamma \colon I\to X$ is a \emph{$(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic} if $\lambda \geq 1$, $\epsilon \geq 0$ and for each $ s,t \in I$
\[\frac{1}{\lambda}|s-t|-\epsilon\leq d\bigl(\gamma(s),\gamma(t)\bigr)\leq \lambda |s-t|+\epsilon.\]
We say $\gamma$ is a \emph{finite} quasi-geodesic if $I$ is a compact interval and an \emph{infinite} quasi-geodesic if $I$ is not compact. A \emph{subsegment} of a quasi-geodesic $\gamma \colon I \to X$ is a restriction of $\gamma$ to a closed, connected subset of $I$. The \emph{parametrized length} of a quasi-geodesic is the length of the domain of the quasi-geodesic.
\end{defn}
\begin{defn}[Morse quasi-geodesic]\label{defn:Morse_quasi-geodesic}
Let $M \colon [1,\infty)\times [0,\infty) \to [0,\infty)$ be a function. The quasi-geodesic $\gamma \colon I \to X$ is an \emph{$M$--Morse quasi-geodesic} if for all $s<t$ in $I$, if $\alpha$ is a $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic with endpoints $\gamma(s)$ and $\gamma(t)$, then the Hausdorff distance between $\alpha$ and $\gamma \vert_{[s,t]}$ is bounded by $M(\lambda,\epsilon)$. If $\gamma$ is an $M$--Morse $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic, we say $\gamma$ is an $(M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--Morse quasi-geodesic.
\end{defn}
Those familiar with the literature will note that Definition \ref{defn:Morse_quasi-geodesic} is stronger than the usual definition of a Morse quasi-geodesic. The next lemma shows that, up to a modification of the Morse gauge, Definition \ref{defn:Morse_quasi-geodesic} is equivalent to the usual definition of Morse quasi-geodesic. This allows us to simplify proofs by utilizing the stronger definition of Morse when working with Morse quasi-geodesics, but only demonstrating the weaker condition in Lemma \ref{lem:Morse_easy_proof} when proving a quasi-geodesic is Morse.
\begin{lem}[Verification of Morse]\label{lem:Morse_easy_proof}
Let $\gamma \colon I \to X$ be a $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic. Suppose there exists a function $N \colon [1,\infty) \times [0,\infty) \to [0,\infty)$ such that for all $s,t \in I$, if $\alpha$ is a $(\lambda', \epsilon')$--quasi-geodesic with endpoints $ \gamma(s)$ and $\gamma(t)$, then $\alpha$ is contained in the $N(\lambda',\epsilon')$--neighborhood of $\gamma$. Then, $\gamma$ is $M$--Morse where $M$ depends on only $N$, $\lambda$, and $\epsilon$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
This follows directly from \cite[Lemma 2.1]{MC1} and \cite[Lemma 5]{MR_Morse_Boundary}.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
When applying previous results from the literature, if $\gamma$ is $M$--Morse in the sense of Definition \ref{defn:Morse_quasi-geodesic}, then $\gamma$ will also be $M$--Morse, with the same Morse gauge, in the more traditional weaker definition. In particular, statements proved with the weaker definition of Morse can be applied to the stronger definition with no modification.
\end{rem}
The trademark of Morse quasi-geodesics is that they mimic the behavior of quasi-geodesics in a hyperbolic space. In particular, triangles and rectangles with Morse sides will be slim and every Morse quasi-geodesic will be close to a Morse geodesic.
\begin{defn}
A geodesic triangle (quadrilateral) is $\delta$--\emph{slim}, if each side is contained in the $\delta$--neighborhood of the other two (three) sides.
\end{defn}
\begin{lem}[Morse triangles and quadrilateral; {\cite[Lemmas 2.2, 2.3]{MC1}}]
\label{lem:Morse_polygons}
Let $X$ be a geodesic space and $M$ be a Morse gauge.
\begin{itemize}
\item If $T$ is a geodesic triangle in $X$ where two of the three sides are $M$--Morse, then $T$ is $4M(3,0)$--slim and there exists a Morse gauge $M'=M'(M)$ such that all three sides of $T$ are $M'$--Morse.
\item If $R$ is a geodesic quadrilateral in $X$ where three of the four sides are $M$--Morse, then $R$ is $8M(3,0)$--slim and there exists a Morse gauge $M'=M'(M)$ such that all four sides of $R$ are $M'$--Morse.
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\begin{lem}[Close to Morse implies Morse]\label{lem:close_to_Morse}
\label{lem:Morse_finite_distance}
If $\gamma$ is an $(M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--Morse quasi-geodesic and $\alpha$ is a $(\lambda',\epsilon')$--quasi-geodesic contained in the $C$--neighborhood of $\gamma$, then $\alpha$ is $M'$--Morse where $M'=M'(M,C,\lambda,\lambda',\epsilon,\epsilon')$. In particular, if $\gamma$ is finite and $\alpha$ is the geodesic connecting the endpoints of $\gamma$, then $\alpha$ is $M'$--Morse where $M'$ depends only on $M$, $\lambda$, and $\epsilon$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
This follows immediately from Definition \ref{defn:Morse_quasi-geodesic}
\end{proof}
The last result we record on Morse geodesics is an application of the Arzela--Ascoli Theorem to say limits of Morse geodesics are Morse with the same gauge. We state the result just for the cases we shall use, finitely generated groups.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:long_Morse_segments_imply_Morse_ray}
Let $G$ be a group generated by the finite set $S$. If there exists a Morse gauge $M$ so that for each $n \in \mathbb{N}$ there is an $M$--Morse geodesic $\gamma_n$ in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ with $\diam(\gamma_n) \geq 2n$, then there exists a bi-infinite $M$--Morse geodesic $\gamma \colon \mathbb{R} \to \operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Without loss of generality, we can assume that each $\gamma_n$ has the form $\gamma_n \colon [-n,n] \to \operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ with $\gamma(0) = e$. Since there are only a finite number of paths of a specific length in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$, a diagonal argument produces a subsequence $\gamma_{n_k}$ where $\gamma_{n_k}\vert_{[-\ell,\ell]} = \gamma_{n_\ell}\vert_{[-\ell,\ell]}$ whenever $\ell \leq k$. The map $\gamma \colon \mathbb{R} \to \operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ defined by $\gamma(t) = \gamma_{n_k}(t)$ for $|t|<k$ is then an $M$--Morse geodesic, as the $M$--Morse $\gamma_{n_k}$ exhaust $\gamma$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Local quasi-geodesics and the local-to-global property}
In this section, $(X,d)$ will be a metric space and $I$ will be a closed, but not necessarily bounded, interval in $\mathbb{R}$.
\begin{defn}[Local quasi-geodesic]
Let $L >0$. The map $\gamma \colon I \to X$ is an \emph{$(L;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic} if for any $s<t$ in $I$ with $|s-t| \leq L$,
$\gamma\vert_{[s,t]}$ is a $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic. If, in addition, $\gamma\vert_{[s,t]}$ is $M$--Morse, then $\gamma$ is an \emph{$(L;M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic}. We call the number $L$ the \emph{scale} of the local quasi-geodesic.
\end{defn}
The following theorem of Gromov shows that hyperbolic spaces are characterized by the property that all local quasi-geodesics of sufficiently large scale are global quasi-geodesics.
\begin{thm}[{\cite[Proposition 7.2.E]{Gromov_Hyp_Groups}}]\label{thm:local_to_global_hyperbolic}
A geodesic metric space is hyperbolic if and only if for all $\lambda \geq 1$, $\epsilon \geq 0$ there exists $L$, $\lambda'$, $\epsilon'$ so that every $(L;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesics is a $(\lambda',\epsilon')$--quasi-geodesic.
\end{thm}
The main topic of this paper are spaces where local Morse quasi-geodesics with sufficiently large scale are global Morse quasi-geodesics. In Sections \ref{sec:examples} and \ref{sec:relativelyhyperbolic}, we show that this class of spaces includes CAT$(0)$ spaces, hierarchically hyperbolic spaces such as the mapping class groups and Teichm\"uller space, and spaces hyperbolic relative to spaces with the local-to-global property.
\begin{defn}
Let $\mathcal{M}$ be the collection of all Morse gauges. Let $\Phi\colon \mathcal{M} \times [1,\infty)\times [0,\infty) \to (0,\infty)\times \mc{M} \times [1,\infty)\times [0,\infty)$ be a map. A metric space $X$ has the $\Phi$--\emph{Morse local-to-global property} if every $(L;M; \lambda,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic in $X$ is an $(N;k,c)$--Morse quasi-geodesic where $(L,N,k,c)=\Phi(M,\lambda,\epsilon)$.
\end{defn}
\begin{rem} \
\begin{enumerate}
\item One can equivalently define the Morse local-to-global property without reference to the map $\Phi$ as follows: $X$ has the \emph{Morse local-to-global} property if for every $\lambda \geq 1$, $\epsilon \geq 0$ and Morse gauge $M$, there exist $L$, $k$, $c$, and $N$ so that every $(L;M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic in $X$ is a global $(N;k,c)$--quasi-geodesic.
\item The Morse local-to-global property applies to local Morse quasi-geodesics with both infinite and finite domains. However, when verifying a space has the Morse local-to-global property, it is sufficient to verify the property for only the local Morse quasi-geodesics with finite domains.
\end{enumerate}
\end{rem}
We now record a pair of basic lemmas about local quasi-geodesics the we will use throughout this paper. The first reduces the problem of showing a local quasi-geodesic is a global quasi-geodesic to showing that every subsegment of the local quasi-geodesic is uniformly close to a geodesic.
\begin{lem} \label{lem:local_close_to_global}
Let $\gamma \colon I \to X$ be an $(L;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic and $C\geq0$. If $L > \lambda(3 C +\epsilon +2)$ and for all $[s,t] \subseteq I$, $\gamma\vert_{[s,t]}$ is contained in the $C$--neighborhood of a geodesic from $\gamma(s)$ to $\gamma(t)$, then $\gamma$ is a $(\lambda',\epsilon')$--quasi-geodesic where $\lambda'$ and $\epsilon'$ depend only on $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, and $C$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $t_1, t_2 \in I$ with $t_1<t_2$. Since $\gamma$ is an $(L;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic, we can assume $|t_1-t_2| > L$.
For the first inequality, let $t_1=s_0<s_1<\cdots <s_{n}=t_2$ such that $L/2\leq |s_i-s_{i+1}|<L$. Thus, each $\gamma\vert_{[s_i,s_{i+1}]}$ is a $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic and we have
\[ d\bigl(\gamma(t_1),\gamma(t_2)\bigr) \leq \sum \limits_{i=0}^{n-1} \left[\lambda|s_i - s_{i+1}| +\epsilon \right]\leq \sum \limits_{i=0}^{n-1} (\lambda+\epsilon)|s_i-s_{i+1}|\leq (\lambda+\epsilon) |t_1- t_2|. \]
For the second inequality, let $\alpha$ be a geodesic connecting $\gamma(t_1)$ and $\gamma(t_2)$.
Since $\gamma\bigl([t_1,t_2]\bigr) \subseteq \mc{N}_C(\alpha)$, there exists a map $p \colon [t_1,t_2] \to \image(\alpha)$ such that $p(t_1) = \gamma(t_1)$, $p(t_2) = \gamma(t_2)$, and $d\bigl(p(s),\gamma(s)\bigr) \leq C$ for all $s \in (t_1,t_2)$. Let $\gamma(t_1) = x_0, x_1,\dots x_{n} = \gamma(t_2)$ be a sequence of points of $\alpha$ so that \[1\leq d(x_i,x_{i+1}) <2 \text{ and } d\bigl(\gamma(t_1),\gamma(t_2) \bigr) = \sum\limits_{i=0}^{n-1} d \bigl( x_i, x_{i+1} \bigr).\] Let $I_i$ be the closed subsegment of $\alpha$ between $x_i$ and $x_{i+1}$ and define $J_i = p^{-1}(I_i)$ for each $0\leq i \leq n-1$.
Since $n \leq 2 d\bigl(\gamma(t_1),\gamma(t_2) \bigr) +1$ and
\[|t_1-t_2| \leq \sum \limits_{i=0}^{n-1} \diam(J_i),\]
\noindent the desired inequality will follow if we can uniformly bound $\diam(J_i)$ in terms of $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, and $C$ for each $0\leq i \leq n-1$.
Suppose $\diam(J_i) >0$ for some $0\leq i \leq n-1$ and let $s,r \in J_i$ with $s<r$. By definition of $J_i$ and $p$ we have
\[d\bigl(\gamma(s),\gamma(r) \bigr) \leq d\bigl(p(s),p(r)\bigr) + 2C \leq d(x_i,x_{i+1}) + 2C \leq 2C+2. \]
By assumption, for all $v \in [s,r]$, $\gamma(v)$ is within $C$ of a geodesic from $\gamma(s)$ to $\gamma(r)$. This implies \begin{equation*}
d\bigl(\gamma(s),\gamma(v)\bigr) \leq 3C+2 \text{ for all } v \in [s,r]. \tag{$\ast$}\label{eq:local_close_to_global}
\end{equation*} Because $L > \lambda(3 C +\epsilon +2)$ and $\gamma$ is an $(L;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic,
\[d\bigl(\gamma(s),\gamma(s + L) \bigr) \geq \frac{L}{\lambda} - \epsilon > 3C+2.\]
Hence, (\ref{eq:local_close_to_global}) implies that $s+L \not\in [s,r]$ and $|s-r| < L$. Thus, $\gamma\vert_{[s,r]}$ is a $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic and we have
\[|s-r| \leq \lambda \bigl( d(\gamma(s),\gamma(r) )+\epsilon \bigr) \leq \lambda(2C+2 + \epsilon). \]
This shows $\diam(J_i) \leq \lambda(2C+2 + \epsilon) $ for all $0 \leq i \leq n-1$.
Since $[t_1 , t_2] \subseteq \bigcup \limits_{i=0}^{n-1} J_i$ and $n \leq 2 d\bigl(\gamma(t_1),\gamma(t_2) \bigr)+1$, we have \[|t_1-t_2| \leq \lambda(2C+2 + \epsilon) n \leq 2\lambda(2C+2 + \epsilon) \cdot d\bigl(\gamma(t_1),\gamma(t_2) \bigr) + 2\lambda(2C+2 + \epsilon),\]
and the proof is complete.
\end{proof}
An important source of local quasi-geodesics are concatenations of geodesics. The next lemma shows that if a concatenation of Morse geodesics is a local quasi-geodesic, then is will automatically be a local Morse quasi-geodesic.
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:concatenation_of_morse_is_quasi_geodesic}
Let $X$ be a geodesic metric space. For each $i \in \{1,\cdots,n\}$, let $\gamma_i \colon [a_i,a_{i+1}]\to {X}$ be an $M$--Morse geodesic with $\gamma_i(a_{i+1}) = \gamma_{i+1}(a_{i+1})$ for $1 \leq i \leq n-1$. If there is $L>0$ such that $|a_{i+2}-a_i|>L$ for each $i$ and the concatenation $\gamma = \gamma_1 \ast \cdots \ast \gamma_n$ is an $(L;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic for some $\lambda \geq 1$ and $\epsilon \geq 0$, then there is a Morse gauge $M'$ depending on $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, and $M$ such that $\gamma$ is an $(L;M';\lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
For each $t_1<t_2$ in $[a,b]$ satisfying $|t_1-t_2|<L$, we need to show the $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic $\gamma\vert_{[t_1,t_2]}$ is $M'$--Morse, where $M'$ depends only on $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, and $M$.
Since $|a_{i+2}-a_i|>L$ for each $i$, there are only three possibilities for the position of $t_1$ and $t_2$ in $[a_1,a_{n+1}]$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $t_1$ and $t_2$ both lie in $[a_j,a_{j+1}]$ for some $j$;
\item $t_1\in[a_j,a_{j+1}]$ and $t_2\in[a_{j+1},a_{j+2}]$ for some $j$;
\item $t_1\in[a_j,a_{j+1}]$ and $t_2\in[a_{j+2},a_{j+3}]$ for some $j$.
\end{enumerate}
In all three cases, Lemma~\ref{lem:Morse_polygons} implies any geodesic $\alpha$ connecting $\gamma(t_1)$ and $\gamma(t_2)$ is an $N$--Morse geodesic and that lies in the $C$--neighborhood of $\gamma\bigl([t_1,t_2]\bigr)$ where $C$ and $N$ only depend on $M$. Lemma~\ref{lem:Morse_finite_distance} thus provides a Morse gauge $M'$ depending on $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, and $M$ such that $\gamma\vert_{[t_1,t_2]}$ is $M'$--Morse. Therefore, $\gamma$ is an $(L;M';\lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Stable subgroups}
Intimately connected with the study of Morse geodesics are stable subgroups of finitely generated groups. Stable subgroups are a strong generalization of quasiconvex subgroups of hyperbolic groups.
\begin{defn}[Stable subgroup]\label{defn:stable_subgoup}
Let $G$ be a group with finite generating set $S$, $M$ be a Morse gauge, and $\mu >0$. We say a subgroup $H < G$ is \emph{$(M,\mu)$--stable in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$} if every pair of elements in $H$ is connected by an $M$--Morse geodesic in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ that lies in the $\mu$--neighborhood of $H$. A subgroup $H <G$ is a \emph{stable subgroup} if for any choice of finite generating set $S$ for $G$, there exist $M$ and $\mu$ such that $H$ is $(M,\mu)$--stable in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$.
\end{defn}
The above definition of stable subgroup is equivalent to the definition originally given by Durham and Taylor in \cite{Durham_Taylor_Stability}. In Definition \ref{defn:stable_subgoup}, the parameters $(M,\mu)$ ``measure'' the stability of a subgroup $H$ in the Cayley graph $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$. While the specific pair $(M,\mu)$ depends on the choice of finite generating set for $G$, the stability of the subgroup $H$ does not. That is, if $S$ and $T$ are two finite generating sets for $G$ and $H$ is $(M,\mu)$--stable in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$, then $H$ will be $(M',\mu')$--stable in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,T)$ for some $M'$ and $\mu'$ depending on $M$, $\mu$, $S$, and $T$.
Durham and Taylor generalized several properties of quasiconvex subgroups of hyperbolic groups to all stable subgroups. The key properties we need are summarized in the next proposition.
\begin{prop}[Properties of Stable subgroups; {\cite{Durham_Taylor_Stability}}]\label{prop:stable_subgroups}
Let $G$ be a finitely generated group and $H<G$ a stable subgroup.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $H$ is finitely generated and undistorted.
\item $H$ is a hyperbolic group.
\item If $K$ is a finitely generated, undistorted subgroup of $H$, then $K$ is stable in $G$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
The third author and Antol\'in, Mj, Sisto, and Taylor independently studied the intersection properties of stable subgroups and showed that all infinite index stable subgroups have finite width and are finite index in their commensurators.
\begin{thm}[{\cite[Theorem 1.2]{Tran2017}, \cite[Theorem 1.1, Proposition 3.3]{AMST}}]\label{thm:finite_width}
Let $G$ be a finitely generated group and $H$ an infinite index stable subgroup of $G$.
\begin{itemize}
\item $H$ is finite index in the commensurator of $H$ in $G$.
\item $H$ has finite width, i.e., there exist $n$ so that if $\mc{H}$ is a set of at least $n$ distinct cosets of $H$, then there exists $g_1H,g_2H\in \mc{H}$ so that $g_1Hg_1^{-1} \cap g_2 H g_2^{-1}$ is finite.
\end{itemize}
\end{thm}
The most well studied examples of stable subgroups in the literature are stable cyclic subgroups. The generators of these subgroups are called \emph{Morse elements} since the cyclic subgroup they generate will be a Morse quasi-geodesic in the Cayley graph.
\begin{defn}[Morse element]\label{defn:morse_element}
Let $G$ be a finitely generated group with a finite generating set $S$ and $g \in G$. We say $g$ is $M$--\emph{Morse}
with respect to $S$, if $g$ has infinite order and $\langle g \rangle$ is $(M,\mu)$--stable in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ for some $\mu \geq 0$.
A group element in $G$ is \emph{Morse} if it is $M$--Morse with respect to some finite generating set $S$.
\end{defn}
While the specific Morse gauge of an element depends on the choice of generating set, whether or not an element is Morse is independent of choice of generating set.
\section{Consequences of the Morse local-to-global property}\label{sec: consequences of Mltg}
We now give our main applications of the local-to-global property for Morse quasi-geodesics. In Section \ref{sec:combination_theorems}, we prove two combination theorems for stable subgroups of Morse local-to-global groups as well as several consequences of these theorems. In Section \ref{sec:translation_length}, we show that the algebraic translation length of conjugacy classes with a fixed Morse gauge is discrete. In Section \ref{sec:Cartan-Hadamard}, we prove our local condition for checking hyperbolicity.
\subsection{Stable subgroup combination theorems}\label{sec:combination_theorems}
The primary results of this section are the following combination theorems for stable subgroups of Morse local-to-global groups. These results extend results of Gitik for quasiconvex subgroups of hyperbolic groups \cite[Theorems 1, 2]{Gitik_ping_pong} and prove Theorems \ref{intro_thm:combination_theorems} and \ref{intro_thm:MCG_combination_theorem} from the introduction.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:stable_subgroup_combination}
Let $G$ be a finitely generated group with the Morse local-to-global property and $S$ be a fixed finite generating set for $G$. If $P,Q$ are $(M,\mu)$--stable subgroups of $G$, then there exists $C = C(M,\mu,S)>0$ such that the following holds for all subgroups $P_1\leq P$ and $Q_1\leq Q$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \label{item:combination_thrm_1} If $P_1\cap Q_1=P\cap Q=I$ and $I$ contains all elements of $P_1 \cup Q_1$ whose word length in $G$ is less than $C$, then $\langle P_1,Q_1\rangle \cong P_1\ast_{I}Q_1$. If $P_1$ and $Q_1$ are additionally finitely generated and undistorted in $G$, then the subgroup $\langle P_1,Q_1\rangle$ is stable in $G$.
\item \label{item:combination_thrm_2} If $P$ is malnormal in $G$, $P_1\cap Q=P\cap Q=I$, and $I$ contains all elements of $P_1$ whose word length in $G$ is less than $C$, then $\langle P_1,Q\rangle \cong P_1\ast_{I}Q$. If $P_1$ is additionally finitely generated and undistorted in $G$, then the subgroup $\langle P_1,Q\rangle$ is stable in $G$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
The proofs of (\ref{item:combination_thrm_1}) and (\ref{item:combination_thrm_2}) are quite similar to each other and to Gitik's original proofs in the case of hyperbolic groups. Before giving the proofs, we sketch the argument for the case where $P_1 = P$ and $Q_1 =Q$.
The amalgamated product $P \ast_I Q$ naturally surjects onto the subgroups $\langle P , Q\rangle$. The goal is therefore to show this map is an isomorphism by proving any $h \in P \ast _I Q $ that is not in $I = P \cap Q$ is non-trivial under the map $P \ast _I Q \to G$. The element $h\in P \ast _I Q - I$ can be decomposed as an alternating product $p_1q_1\dots p_nq_n$ of elements of $P$ and $Q$ so that each $p_i$ and $q_i$ contains some subword that is not in $P \cap Q$. Since $P$ and $Q$ are stable subgroups, the path $\gamma$ starting at the identity and labeled by $p_1q_1\dots p_nq_n$ is a concatenation of Morse geodesics. By requiring that all short element of $P$ and $Q$ are contained in $P \cap Q$, we can mimic Gitik's proof in the hyperbolic case to show that $\gamma$ is a local Morse quasi-geodesic with sufficiently large scale. We can then apply the Morse local-to-global property to show $\gamma$ is actually a uniform Morse quasi-geodesic with small enough constants that $\gamma$ cannot be a loop in the Cayley graph of $G$. Since $\gamma$ is not a loop, $p_1q_1\dots p_nq_n$ cannot be the identity and $\langle P, Q \rangle \cong P \ast_I Q$. The stability of $P$ and $Q$ implies that the uniform Morse quasi-geodesic $\gamma$ is contained in a regular neighborhood of $\langle P, Q \rangle$, proving the subgroup is stable.
\begin{proof}[Proof of (1)]
There exist $M$ and $\mu$ such that $P$ and $Q$ are $(M,\mu)$--stable in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$. Let $\delta=4M(3,0)$ and $A$ be the number of elements of $G$ with length less than $2\mu+\delta$. Define $\epsilon=4A\mu+\delta$ and let $M'$ be the Morse gauge so that a concatenation of $M$--Morse geodesics satisfying the hypothesis of Lemma \ref{lem:concatenation_of_morse_is_quasi_geodesic} is an $(L;M';3,\epsilon)$--local Morse geodesic whenever the concatenation is an $(L;3,\epsilon)$--local geodesic. Since $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ has the Morse local-to-global property, there are $L>0$, $k\geq 1$, $c\geq 0$ and a Morse gauge $N$ such that every $(L;M';3,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ is an $(N;k,c)$--Morse quasi-geodesic. Let $C=\max\{L,kc\}+1$.
Form the abstract group $P_1\ast_{I}Q_1$ from isomorphic copies of $P_1$ and $Q_1$. Let $\iota \colon P_1\ast_{I}Q_1 \to G$ be the natural map whose image is the subgroup $\langle P_1,Q_1 \rangle <G$. We need to prove that the map $\iota$ is injective.
Consider an element $h \in P_1\ast_{I}Q_1$ such that $h\notin I$. We will show that $\iota(h)$ is not the identity in $G$. We can write $h$ as a product $h=p_1q_1p_2q_2\cdots q_{m-1}p_m$ where $p_i$ and $q_i$ satisfy the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $q_i\in Q_1-I$ for $1\leq i \leq m-1$;
\item $p_1,p_m \in P_1$ where $p_1$ (resp. $p_m)$ is a shortest representative of the coset $p_1 I$ (resp. $Ip_m$);
\item For $2 \leq i \leq m-1$, $p_i\in P_1-I$ is a shortest representative of the double coset $I p_i I$.
\end{enumerate}
For $1\leq i \leq m$, let $\alpha_i$ and $\beta_i$ be $M$--Morse geodesics in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ connecting the following points:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\alpha_1$ connects $e$ and $p_1$;
\item $\alpha_m$ connects $p_1q_1\cdots q_{m-1}$ and $p_1q_1\cdots q_{m-1}p_m$;
\item $\alpha_i$ connects $p_1q_1\cdots q_{i-1}$ and $p_1q_1\cdots q_{i-1}p_i$ for all $2\leq i \leq m-1$;
\item $\beta_i$ connects $p_1q_1\cdots p_i$ and $p_1q_1\cdots p_iq_i$ for $1\leq i \leq m-1$.
\end{itemize}
Note, $\alpha_1$ is degenerate if $p_1$ is trivial and $\alpha_m$ is degenerate if $p_m$ is trivial, but all other $\alpha_i$ and $\beta_i$ have length as least $C>L$. Let $\gamma=\alpha_1\ast \beta_1\ast \alpha_2\ast \beta_2\ast\cdots\ast \beta_{m-1} \ast \alpha_m$. We claim that $\gamma$ is an $(L;M';3,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic.
Since each $\alpha_i$ except $\alpha_1$ and $\alpha_m$ has length at least $ C>L$, Lemma \ref{lem:concatenation_of_morse_is_quasi_geodesic} states it is sufficient to verify that $\gamma$ is an $(L;3,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic. Let $\psi$ be a subsegment of $\gamma$ with parametrized length at most $L$. If $\psi$ is contained entirely in a single $\alpha_i$ or $\beta_i$, then $\psi$ is a $(3,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic. Otherwise, $C > L$ implies that $\psi$ decomposes into two pieces $\eta_1$ and $\eta_2$ where, without loss of generality, $\eta_1 \subseteq \alpha_i$ and $\eta_2 \subseteq \beta_i$ for some $1\leq i \leq m-1$. If $\eta_3$ is a geodesic in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ connecting the endpoints of $\psi$, then $\eta_1\cup \eta_2 \cup \eta_3$ is $\delta$--slim by Lemma~\ref{lem:Morse_polygons}.
In the proof of \cite[Theorem 1]{Gitik_ping_pong}, Gitik shows that if $G$ is a $\delta$--hyperbolic group, then $\psi$ will be a $(3,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic. This argument only uses the fact that the triangle $\eta_1\cup \eta_2 \cup \eta_3$ is uniformly $\delta$--slim, that the segments $\alpha_i$ and $\beta_i$ are contained in the $\mu$--neighborhood of a coset of either $P$ or $Q$ respectively, that there are only $A$ elements of $G$ of length $2\delta+\mu$, and the minimality of the choice of the $p_i$. Since these facts remain true in this setting, we can apply the same argument to conclude that $\psi$ is a $(3,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic. This implies $\gamma$ is an $(L;3,c)$--local quasi-geodesic and hence an $(L;M';3,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic.
Since $\gamma$ is an $(L; M';3,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic, the Morse local-to-global property implies that $\gamma$ is an $(N;k,c)$--Morse quasi-geodesic. Now, the path $\gamma$ connects the identity $e$ and the element $\iota(h)$ in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$. Since the parametrized length of $\gamma$ is greater than $C \geq kc+1$ and the distance between the endpoints of $\gamma$ is positive, and $\iota(h)$ is not the identity. This implies that $\iota$ is injective and $\langle P_1,Q_1\rangle \cong P_1\ast_{I}Q_1$.
If $P_1$ and $Q_1$ are finitely generated and undistorted in $G$, then they are both stable subgroups of $G$. To verify that $\langle P_1,Q_1\rangle$ is stable, it is sufficient to check that every element $h \in \langle P_1,Q_1\rangle - I$ can be connected to the identity with a uniform quality Morse quasi-geodesic that is contained in a uniform neighborhood of $\langle P_1,Q_1\rangle$. Since $P_1$ and $Q_1$ are stable, each of the $\alpha_i$ and $\beta_i$ used to construct $\gamma$ will be uniformly close to a coset of $P_1$ or $Q_1$ respectively. Thus, the $(N;k,c)$--Morse quasi-geodesic $\gamma$ will then be contained in a uniform neighborhood of $\langle P_1,Q_1\rangle$, and $\langle P_1,Q_1\rangle$ will be a stable subgroup of $G$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of (2)]
There exist $M$ and $\mu$ such that $P$ and $Q$ are $(M,\mu)$--stable in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$.
Let $\delta=4M(3,0)$ and $A$ be the number of elements of $G$ with length less than $2\mu+\delta$. Let $\Gamma$ be the quotient of the action of $P$ on $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$. If $v_0 \in \Gamma$ is the vertex that represents the orbit of the identity, then let $r$ be the number of vertices of $\Gamma$ in the ball of radius $\mu+2\delta$ centered at $v_0$. Set $\epsilon=4A\mu+\delta+r^2+1$. Let $M'$ be the Morse gauge so that a concatenation of $M$--Morse geodesics satisfying the hypotheses of Lemma \ref{lem:concatenation_of_morse_is_quasi_geodesic} is an $(L;M';6,\epsilon)$--local Morse geodesic whenever the concatenation is an $(L;6,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic. Since $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ has the Morse local-to-global property, there are $L>0$, $k\geq 1$, $c\geq 0$ and a Morse gauge $N$ such that every $(L;M';6,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic is an $(N;k,c)$--Morse quasi-geodesic. Let $C=\max\{L,kc\}+1$.
Form the abstract group $P_1\ast_{I}Q$ from isomorphic copies of $P_1$ and $Q$. As in the proof of (\ref{item:combination_thrm_1}), we need to show that the natural map of $P_1\ast_{I}Q \rightarrow \langle P_1, Q \rangle < G$ is injective. As before, for $h \in P_1\ast_{I}Q - I$, we can pick a representation $h=p_1q_1p_2q_2\cdots q_{m-1}p_m$ that satisfies the same properties as in (\ref{item:combination_thrm_1}) with the change that $q_i \in Q - \{e\}$ for each $1\leq i \leq m-1$. Continuing to follow the proof of (\ref{item:combination_thrm_1}), we select $M$--Morse geodesics $\alpha_i$ and $\beta_i$ in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$, and let $\gamma = \alpha_1 \ast \beta_1 \ast \dots \alpha_{m-1}\ast \beta_{m-1} \ast\alpha_m$. Once we show that $\gamma$ is an $(L;M';6,c)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic, the remainder of the proof will finish identically to the proof of (\ref{item:combination_thrm_1}).
As in (\ref{item:combination_thrm_1}), every $\alpha_i$ except $\alpha_1$ and $\alpha_m$ will have length longer than $C>L$. Thus, if $\gamma$ is an $(L;6,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic, then it will satisfy the hypotheses of Lemma \ref{lem:concatenation_of_morse_is_quasi_geodesic} and be an $(L;M';6,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic. Let $\psi$ be a subpath of $\gamma$ with parametrized length at most $L$. If $\psi$ is contained entirely in a single $\alpha_i$ or $\beta_i$, then $\psi$ is a $(6,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic. Otherwise, $C > L$ implies that $\psi$ decomposes into three pieces $\eta_1,\eta_2,\eta_3$. Without loss of generality, $\eta_1 \subseteq \alpha_i$, $\eta_2 \subseteq \beta_i$ and $\eta_3\subseteq \alpha_{i+1}$ for some $1\leq i \leq m-1$ where at most one of $\eta_1$ or $\eta_3$ is empty. If $\eta_4$ is a geodesic in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ connecting the endpoints of $\psi$, then the rectangle $\eta_1\cup \eta_2 \cup \eta_3 \cup \eta_4$ is $2\delta$--slim by Lemma~\ref{lem:Morse_polygons}.
In the proof of \cite[Theorem 2]{Gitik_ping_pong}, Gitik shows that if $G$ is a $\delta$--hyperbolic group, then $\psi$ will be a $(6,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic. This argument only use the fact that $P$ is malnormal, the rectangle $\eta_1\cup \eta_2 \cup \eta_3 \cup \eta_4$ is uniformly $2\delta$--slim, that the segments $\alpha_i$ and $\beta_i$ are contained in the $\mu$--neighborhood of a coset of either $P$ or $Q$ respectively, that $G$ contains only $A$ elements of length $2\delta + \mu$, and the minimality of the choice of the $p_i$. These facts all remain true in this setting, so we can apply the same argument to conclude that $\psi$ is a $(6,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic.
The remainder of the proof now follows identically to the proof of (\ref{item:combination_thrm_1}).
\end{proof}
Verifying that the intersection of two stable subgroups contains all the short elements of each subgroup can be quite challenging in practice, especially since the function $\Phi$ governing the Morse local-to-global property (and therefore the constant $C$) is often not explicit. However, one can circumvent this difficulty by utilizing the separability of subgroups.
\begin{defn}
A subgroup $H$ of a group $G$ is called \emph{separable} if for every $g\in G-H$, there is a subgroup $K$ of finite index in $G$ such that $H\leq K$ but $g\notin K$.
\end{defn}
\begin{cor}
\label{cor:separable_intersection}
Let $G$ be a finitely generated group with the Morse local-to-global property. Let $P$ and $Q$ be infinite, stable subgroups of $G$ and $I =P\cap Q$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \label{item:separability_cor_1} If $I$ is separable and infinite index in both $P$ and $Q$, then there exist infinite families of finite index subgroups $P_i <P$ and $Q_i <Q$ with $P_i \cap Q_i = I$, $P_{i} < P_{i-1}$, and $Q_i < Q_{i-1}$ so that each subgroup $\langle P_i, Q_i\rangle$ is stable in $G$ and $\langle P_i, Q_i\rangle \cong P_i\ast_{I} Q_i$ .
\item \label{item:separability_cor_2} If $P$ is malnormal in $G$ and $I$ is separable and infinite index in $P$, then there exists an infinite family of finite index subgroups $P_i <P$ with $P_i \cap Q = I$ and $P_i < P_{i-1}$ so that each subgroup $\langle P_i, Q\rangle$ is stable in $G$ and $\langle P_i, Q\rangle \cong P_i\ast_{I} Q$ .
\end{enumerate}
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
We give the proof for (\ref{item:separability_cor_1}) and the proof for (\ref{item:separability_cor_2}) is similar.
Fix a finite generating $S$ for $G$ and let $C$ be the constant from Theorem \ref{thm:stable_subgroup_combination}.(\ref{item:combination_thrm_1}) for $P$ and $Q$. For each of $P$ and $Q$, there exists a finite set of elements outside of $P\cap Q$ that have word length less than $C$. Since $P \cap Q$ is separable in $P$ and $Q$, there exist finite index subgroups $P_1<P$ and $Q_1<Q$ so that $P_1 \cap Q_1 = P \cap Q$ and all elements of $P_1$ and $Q_1$ with word length less than $C$ are contained in $P_1 \cap Q_1$. Since $P_1$ and $Q_1$ are finite index in $P$ and $Q$, they are finitely generated and undistorted in $G$ and the conclusion follows from Theorem \ref{thm:stable_subgroup_combination}.(\ref{item:combination_thrm_1}). We produce the infinite family of subgroups by inductively separating $P_{i}$ and $Q_{i}$ from the short elements of $P_{i-1}$ and $Q_{i-1}$ that are not contained in $P \cap Q$.
\end{proof}
Corollary \ref{cor:separable_intersection} allows us to produce a plethora of examples where our combination theorem applies with a non-trivial intersection between the subgroups. We demonstrate an explicit example in right-angled Coxeter groups, which are Morse local-to-global by virtue of being cocompact $\CAT(0)$ groups (or alternatively hierarchically hyperbolic groups).
\begin{exmp}\label{ex:example_of_combination_theorem}
\begin{figure}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.5]
\draw (0,0) node[circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt, color=black](1){} -- (-2,-2) node[circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt, color=black](1){}-- (-2,-5) node[circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt, color=black](1){}-- (0,-7) node[circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt, color=black](1){} -- (2,-5) node[circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt, color=black](1){} -- (2,-2) node[circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt, color=black](1){} -- (0,0) node[circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt, color=black](1){};
\draw (-2,-2) node[circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt, color=black](1){} -- (0,-4) node[circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt, color=black](1){}-- (2,-2) node[circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt, color=black](1){};
\node at (0, 0.5) {$a$}; \node at (-2.5, -2) {$b$};\node at (-2.5, -5) {$c$}; \node at (0, -7.5) {$d$};\node at (2.5, -5) {$e$}; \node at (2.5, -2) {$f$}; \node at (0, -4.5) {$g$};
\draw (0,0) node[circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt, color=black](1){} -- (-7,-4) node[circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt, color=black](1){}-- (0,-7) node[circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt, color=black](1){};
\draw (0,0) node[circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt, color=black](1){} -- (-7,-4) node[circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt, color=black](1){}-- (0,-7) node[circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt, color=black](1){};
\draw (0,0) node[circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt, color=black](1){} -- (5,0) node[circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt, color=black](1){}-- (5,-7) node[circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt, color=black](1){}--(0,-7) node[circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt, color=black](1){};
\node at (-7.8, -4) {$m$}; \node at (5, 0.5) {$n$}; \node at (5, -7.5) {$p$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Defining graph $\Gamma$ for the right-angled Coxeter group in Example \ref{ex:example_of_combination_theorem}}
\label{figure:defining_graph}
\end{figure}
Let $G$ be the right-angled Coxeter group defined by the graph $\Gamma$ in Figure \ref{figure:defining_graph}. Let $\Gamma_1$ be the subgraph of $\Gamma$ with vertex set $\{a,b,c,d,m\}$ and let $\Gamma_2$ be the subgraph of $\Gamma$ with vertex set $\{a,f,e,d,p,n\}$. Let $P$ and $Q$ be the right-angled Coxeter subgroups of $G$ defined by $\Gamma_1$ and $\Gamma_2$ respectively. Both $P$ and $Q$ are stable subgroups by \cite[Corollary 7.12]{Tran2017}, and $P\cap Q$ is the virtually cyclic subgroup $I$ generated by the vertex set $\{a,d\}$. While the subgroups $\langle P,Q \rangle$ is isomorphic to $P\ast_I Q$, $\langle P,Q \rangle$ is not a stable subgroup by \cite[Corollary 7.12]{Tran2017}. However, $I$ is separable in both $P$ and $Q$ (see \cite[Corollary 1.2]{Agol_Virtual_Haken} for instance), so there are two finite index subgroups $P_1 <P$ and $Q_1<Q$ such that $P_1\cap Q_1=I$, $\langle P_1,Q_1 \rangle \cong P_1\ast_I Q_1$, and $\langle P_1,Q_1 \rangle$ is a stable subgroup by Corollary~\ref{cor:separable_intersection}. In addition to $I$ being non-trivial, $\langle P_1, Q_1 \rangle$ is a one-end group as it is virtually a graph of closed surface groups with cyclic edge groups \cite[Theorem 18]{wilton_one_ended_graphs_of_free_groups}.
\end{exmp}
When one of the subgroups is cyclic, we can separate the subgroup from short elements by raising the generator to sufficiently high powers. In Section \ref{sec:trivial_examples}, we will employ this idea to show that all Morse local-to-global groups that contain a Morse element are either virtually cyclic or contain a stable free subgroup of rank 2. Here, we employ this trick to generalize a theorem of Arzhantseva \cite[Theorem 1]{Arzhantseva_quasiconvex_subgroups}.
\begin{cor}\label{cor: extending_stable_subgroups}
Let $G$ be a torsion free, Morse local-to-global group. If $Q$ is a non-trivial infinite index stable subgroup of $G$, then there is an infinite order element $h$ such that $\langle Q,h\rangle \cong Q \ast \langle h \rangle$ and $\langle Q,h\rangle$ is stable in $G$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem \ref{thm:finite_width}, there exists $g \in G$ such that $Q \cap gQg^{-1} = \{e\}$. Let $k$ be a non-identity element of $Q$. Since $Q$ is hyperbolic, $\langle gkg^{-1}\rangle$ is undistorted in $gQg^{-1}$ implying $\langle gkg^{-1}\rangle$ is stable in $G$. Let $P$ be the commensurator of $\langle gkg^{-1}\rangle$ in $G$. By Theorem \ref{thm:finite_width}, $\langle gkg^{-1}\rangle$ has finite index in $P$ implying $P$ is stable.
We now prove that $P$ is malnormal. If $u \in G$ such that $uPu^{-1}\cap P \neq \{e\}$, then $uPu^{-1}\cap P$ is infinite as $G$ is torsion free. Since $\langle gkg^{-1}\rangle$ is finite index in $P$, $u\langle gkg^{-1}\rangle u^{-1}\cap \langle gkg^{-1}\rangle$ is finite index in $uPu^{-1}\cap P$. Therefore, $u\langle gkg^{-1}\rangle u^{-1}\cap \langle gkg^{-1}\rangle$ is infinite and finite index in both cyclic subgroups $u\langle gkg^{-1}\rangle u^{-1}$ and $\langle gkg^{-1}\rangle$. Thus, $u$ is an element of $P$, the commensurator of $\langle gkg^{-1}\rangle$. This proves $P$ is malnormal.
By Theorem~\ref{thm:stable_subgroup_combination}.(\ref{item:combination_thrm_2}) the subgroup generated by $Q$ and $h=gk^ng^{-1}$ for $n$ large enough is then stable in $G$ and isomorphic to $Q\ast \langle h \rangle$.
\end{proof}
Our final application of our combination theorem is to show that every normal subgroup of a Morse local-to-global group contains a Morse element. For the mapping class group of a surface more complex than a one-holed torus or a $\CAT(0)$ group, the Morse elements are respectively the pseudo-Anosov and rank-1 elements. Thus, Corollary \ref{cor:Morse elements in normal subgroups} shows every infinite normal subgroup of such a mapping class group or $\CAT(0)$ group contains a pseudo-Anosov or rank-1 element respectively.
\begin{cor}\label{cor:Morse elements in normal subgroups}
Let $G$ be a finitely generated group that contains an infinite order Morse element. If $G$ has the Morse local-to-global property, then every infinite normal subgroup of $G$ contains an infinite order Morse element of $G$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Let $h\in G$ be an infinite order Morse element and $N$ an infinite normal subgroup of $G$. Assume that no positive power of $h$ is an element of $N$.
The subgroup $H = \langle h \rangle$ is an infinite index stable subgroup of $G$ because $h$ is a Morse element. Since $H$ is finite index in its commensurator in $G$ (Theorem \ref{thm:finite_width}) and $N$ is infinite, there exists an infinite number of distinct left cosets of $H$ with representatives in $N$.
Theorem \ref{thm:finite_width} thus provides $g\in N$ such that $H\cap gHg^{-1} = \{e\}$.
By Theorem \ref{thm:stable_subgroup_combination}.(\ref{item:combination_thrm_1}), there is $n>0$ so that the elements $h^{n}$ and $gh^{n}g^{-1}$ generate a stable free subgroup.
Since $N$ is a normal subgroup and $g \in N$, $(h^{-n}gh^{n})g^{-1}$ is an infinite order Morse element of $N$.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
By \cite[Lemma 3.25]{DMS_divergence}, if the subgroup $N$ is also finitely generated, then the Morse element of $G$ it contains is also a Morse element of $N$ with respect to the word metric on $N$.
\end{rem}
\subsection{Translation lengths for Morse elements}\label{sec:translation_length}
We now generalize a result stated by Gromov and proved by Delzant on the discreteness of the set of algebraic translation lengths of elements of hyperbolic groups. We show that in the case of Morse local-to-global groups, the same result applies to conjugacy classes with a fixed Morse gauge.
\begin{defn}
Let $G$ be a group with finite generating set $S$. The \emph{algebraic translation length} of $g\in G$ is defined to be $$\tau_{G,S}(g)=\lim_{n\to \infty} \frac{|g^n|}{n}.$$
The limit $\displaystyle \lim_{n\to \infty} \frac{|g^n|}{n}$ always exists, because the function $n\mapsto |g^n|$ is sub-additive.
\end{defn}
For a given finite generating set, the algebraic translation length depends only on the conjugacy class of an element. While being Morse is also a conjugacy class invariant, the specific Morse gauge of an element is not. Thus, we need to define a useful definition of Morse gauge for a conjugacy class of Morse elements. We do so by taking the Morse gauge for the elements in the conjugacy class with the shortest word length.
\begin{defn}[Morse gauge of a conjugacy class]
Let $G$ be a finitely generated group with a finite generating set $S$. For each element $g\in G$, let $[g]$ denote the conjugacy class of $g$ and $\mathrm{short}([g])$ be the collection of group elements in $[g]$ with minimal length with respect to $S$. The conjugacy class $[g]$ is \emph{$M$--Morse} with respect to $S$ if every element of $\mathrm{short}([g])$ is $M$--Morse.
\end{defn}
The key use of the Morse local-to-global property in establishing discreteness of translation length is Lemma \ref{lem:uniform_embedding_morse} below, which says $M$--Morse elements with minimal word length in their conjugacy class have a Morse quasi-axis with constants depending only on $M$.
\begin{defn}[Quasi-axis]
\label{defn:quasi-axis}
Let $G$ be a finitely generated group with a finite generating set $S$. The \emph{quasi-axis} for group element $g \in G$ and a geodesic $\alpha$ from $e$ to $g$ in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ is the path $p_g \colon (-\infty,\infty) \to \operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ such that for all $n \in \mathbb{Z}$, $p_g$ restricted to the interval $[(n-1)|g|,n|g|]$ is~$g^n \alpha$.
\end{defn}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:uniform_embedding_morse}
Let $G$ be a finitely generated group with the Morse local-to-global property and $S$ be a finite generating set for $G$. Let $g\in G$ be an infinite order element such that $|g|$ is minimal in $[g]$. If $g$ is $M$--Morse with respect to $S$, then any quasi-axis $p_g$ is an $(N;\lambda,\epsilon)$--Morse quasi-geodesic in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$, where $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, and $N$ depend only on $G$, $S$, and $M$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\delta = 4M(3,0)$ be the constant so that geodesic triangles with two $M$--Morse sides are $\delta$--slim (Lemma \ref{lem:Morse_polygons}). Let $M_0$ be the Morse gauge, depending only on $M$, so that any concatenation of $M$--Morse geodesics satisfying the hypothesis of Lemma \ref{lem:concatenation_of_morse_is_quasi_geodesic} is an $(L;M_0;1,4\delta +4)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic whenever the concatenation is an $(L;1,4\delta +4)$--local quasi-geodesic. Let $L$, $\lambda_0$, $\epsilon_0$ be the constants and $N_0$ the Morse gauge such that every $(L;M_0;1,4\delta +4)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ is a global $(N_0;\lambda_0,\epsilon_0)$--Morse quasi-geodesic in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$.
Let $\alpha$ be any geodesic from $e$ to $g$ and $p = p_g$ be the quasi-axis for $g$ and $\alpha$ as described in Definition \ref{defn:quasi-axis}. We first use the Morse local-to-global property to show that if $|g|>L$, then the quasi-axis $p$ is an $(N_0;\lambda_0,\epsilon_0)$--Morse quasi-geodesic.
\begin{claim}\label{claim:translation_length}
If $|g| >L$, then $p$ is an $(L;M_0;1,4\delta+4)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic.
\end{claim}
\begin{subproof}
We first show $p$ is an $(L;1,4\delta+4)$--local quasi-geodesic.
Suppose $|g|>L$ and let $t_1,t_2\in (-\infty,\infty)$ with $t_1<t_2$ and $|t_2-t_1|<L$. Since the length of
$\alpha$ is greater than $L$, $p\bigl([t_1,t_2]\bigr)$ must be contained in either $g^n \alpha$ or $g^n\alpha \cup g^{n+1}\alpha$ for some $n \in \mathbb{Z}$. If $p\bigl([t_1,t_2]\bigr) \subseteq g^n \alpha$, then $p\vert_{[t_1,t_2]}$ is an $M$--Morse
geodesic, so suppose $p\bigl([t_1,t_2]\bigr) \not\subseteq g^n\alpha$ for any $n \in \mathbb{Z}$. Without loss of generality, we can assume $p\bigl([t_1,t_2]\bigr) \subseteq g^{-1}\alpha \cup \alpha$.
Let $s_1,s_2 \in [t_1,t_2]$. Since $p\vert_{[t_1,t_2]}$ is a concatenation of geodesics, the inequality $d\bigl(p(s_1),p(s_2)\bigr)\leq |s_2-s_1|$ holds by the triangle inequality. For the other inequality we can assume that $p(s_1) \in g^{-1} \alpha$ and $p(s_2) \in \alpha$.
Let $\eta$ be a geodesic in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ connecting $p(s_1)$ and $p(s_2)$, $\gamma_1$ be the geodesic segment of $g^{-1} \alpha$ connecting $e$ and $p(s_1)$, and $\gamma_2$ be the geodesic segment of $\alpha$ connecting $e$ and $p(s_2)$. Since the triangle $\gamma_1 \cup \eta \cup \gamma_2$ is $\delta$--slim and the sum of the lengths of $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$ is less than $|g|$, there are group elements $z \in \eta$ and $v_1, v_2, g_0 \in G$ satisfying the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $v^{-1}_1$ is a vertex of $\gamma_1$ and $v_2$ is a vertex of $\gamma_2$;
\item $d(z,v^{-1}_1)\leq \delta +1$ and $d(z,v_2) \leq \delta +1$;
\item $g = v_2g_0v_1$ with $|g|=|v_2|+|g_0|+|v_1|$.
\end{enumerate}
\noindent Now, $v_2^{-1} g v_2 = g_0v_1v_2$, which implies $|v_2^{-1} g v_2| \leq |g_0| +|v_1v_2|\leq |g_0|+2\delta+2.$ Since $g$ is an element of minimal length in the conjugacy class, we have
\[|g| = |v_1| + |g_0| + |v_2| \leq |v_2^{-1} g v_2| \leq |g_0| +2\delta+2.\] Thus, $|v_1| + |v_2| \leq 2\delta+2$. We now finish establishing that $p\vert_{[t_1,t_2]}$ is a $(1,4\delta +4)$--quasi-geodesic with the following calculation.
\begin{align*}
d\bigl(p(s_1),p(s_2)\bigr) &=d\bigl(p(s_1),z\bigr)+d\bigl(z,p(s_2)\bigr)\\&\geq d\bigl(p(s_1),v^{-1}_1\bigr) + d(p(s_2),v_2\bigr) - 2 \delta -2\\ &= \bigl(d\bigl(p(s_1),p(0)\bigr)-|v_1|\bigr) + \bigl(d\bigl(p(s_2),p(0)\bigr)-|v_2|\bigr) -2 \delta -2\\
&\geq |s_2-s_1| - 4\delta -4.
\end{align*}
Since $p$ is an $(L;1,4\delta +4)$--local quasi-geodesic, $p$ satisfies the hypothesis of Lemma \ref{lem:concatenation_of_morse_is_quasi_geodesic} as $\alpha$ has length more than $L$. Thus, $p$ is an $(L;M_0;1,4\delta +4)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic.
\end{subproof}
By the Morse local-to-global property of $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$, Claim \ref{claim:translation_length} implies that $p=p_g$ is an $(N_0;\lambda_0,\epsilon_0)$--Morse quasi-geodesic when $|g| > L$.
To finish the proof in the remaining cases, recall that $L$ depends only on $M$, $G$, and $S$. Therefore, the number of $M$--Morse elements with word length at most $L$ is bounded by a constant depending only on $M$, $G$, and $S$. This implies that there are constants $\lambda_1$, $\epsilon_1$ and a Morse gauge $N_1$ depending only on $M$, $G$, and $S$ such that $p_g$ is an $(N_1;\lambda_1,\epsilon_1)$--quasi-geodesic for each $M$--Morse element $g$ satisfying $|g|\leq L$. Thus, the lemma follows with $\lambda=\max\{\lambda_0,\lambda_1\}$, $\epsilon=\max\{\epsilon_0,\epsilon_1\}$, and $N=\max\{N_0,N_1\}$.
\end{proof}
With Lemma \ref{lem:uniform_embedding_morse} in hand, we can apply Delzant's argument to show discreteness of translation length for conjugacy classes with a fixed Morse gauge.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:discrete_translation_lengths}
Let $G$ be a finitely generated group with the Morse local-to-global property. For all Morse gauges $M$ and finite generating sets $S$, the set of algebraic translation lengths of elements of $G$ whose conjugacy class is $M$--Morse with respect to $S$ is a discrete subset of the rational numbers.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Let $[g]$ be an $M$--Morse conjugacy class in $G$ with respect to $S$ and let $u$ be the shortest representative of $[g]$. By Lemma~ \ref{lem:uniform_embedding_morse}, any quasi-axis $p_u$ is an $(N;\lambda,\epsilon)$--Morse quasi-geodesic where $N$, $\lambda$, and $\epsilon$ depend only on $M$, $G$, and $S$. Let $U_+$ and $U_-$ be the endpoint of $p_u$ in the Morse boundary of $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ (see \cite{MC1} for the definition of the Morse boundary). By \cite[Lemma 9]{MR_Morse_Boundary}, there exists $R >0$, depending on $M$, $G$, and $S$ such that every bi-infinite geodesic in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ with endpoints $U_+$ and $U_-$ is contained in the $R$--neighborhood of $p_u$.
We can now follow the proof of \cite[Theorem III.H.3.17]{Bridson_Haefliger} verbatim. \end{proof}
\begin{rem}
Morse gauges come with a natural partial order: $M_1 \preceq M_2$ if $M_1(\lambda,\epsilon) \leq M_2(\lambda,\epsilon)$ for all $(\lambda,\epsilon) \in [1,\infty) \times [0,\infty)$. If $M_1 \preceq M_2$, then every conjugacy class that is $M_1$--Morse is also $M_2$--Morse. Thus, Theorem \ref{thm:discrete_translation_lengths} can be rephrased as ``the set of translation lengths of all conjugacy classes that are at most $M$--Morse is discrete for every Morse gauge $M$".
\end{rem}
\subsection{A Cartan--Hadamard theorem for Morse local-to-global spaces}\label{sec:Cartan-Hadamard}
Our final application of the Morse local-to-global property is a short proof that hyperbolicity in Morse local-to-global spaces can be checked locally.
\begin{defn}
A geodesic metric space $X$ is \emph{$(R;\delta)$--locally hyperbolic} if for each point $x\in X$ and for each triple of points $a,b,c \in \operatorname{Ball}_R(x)$, any geodesic triangle with vertices $a$, $b$, and $c$ is $\delta$--slim.
\end{defn}
\begin{thm}\label{thm:cartan-hadamard}
Let $X$ be a metric space with the $\Phi$--Morse local-to-global property. For each $\delta \geq 0$, there exist $R=R(\delta, \Phi)$ and $\delta'=\delta'(\delta, \Phi)$ such that if $X$ is $(R;\delta)$--locally hyperbolic, then $X$ is globally $\delta'$--hyperbolic.
\end{thm}
To prove Theorem \ref{thm:cartan-hadamard}, we show local hyperbolicity implies every geodesic is uniformly locally Morse. We can then apply the Morse local-to-global property to conclude that every geodesic is Morse. This implies hyperbolicity by Lemma \ref{lem:Morse_polygons}. We first record an auxiliary lemma.
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:mimic}
For each $\delta>0$ there is a Morse gauge $M$ so that the following holds. Let $X$ be an $(R;\delta)$--locally hyperbolic space and $x \in X$. Let $\alpha$ be a geodesic in $X$ and $\beta$ be a $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic with the same endpoints as $\alpha$. If $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are both contained $\operatorname{Ball}_{R/4}(x)$, then the Hausdorff distance between $\beta$ and $\alpha$ is at most $M(\lambda,\epsilon)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Any geodesic connecting two points in $\alpha\cup \beta$ is contained in $\operatorname{Ball}_R(x)$. Since $X$ is $(R;\delta)$--locally hyperbolic, we can follow the proof of \cite[Theorem III.H.1.7]{Bridson_Haefliger} to find a Morse gauge for $\alpha$ depending only on $\delta$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:cartan-hadamard}]
Let $\delta >0$ and $M$ be the Morse gauge, depending only on $\delta$, from Lemma~\ref{lem:mimic}. By increasing $M$, we can assume that $M(\lambda, \epsilon) \geq \lambda^2(\lambda+2\epsilon)+\epsilon +1$ for all $\lambda\geq 1$ and $\epsilon\geq 0$. Let $N$ be the Morse gauge and $L$, $k$, $c$ be the constants such that every $(L;M;1,0)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic in $X$ is a global $(N;k,c)$--Morse quasi-geodesic, i.e., $(L,N,k,c) = \Phi(M,1,0)$. Let $R=8L^3+4L+1$ and assume that $X$ is $(R;\delta)$--locally hyperbolic. If we show that every geodesic of $X$ is an $(L;M;1,0)$--Morse quasi-geodesic, then every geodesic of $X$ is $N$--Morse. By Lemma \ref{lem:Morse_polygons}, this implies that $X$ is $\delta'$--hyperbolic where $\delta' = 4N(3,0)$.
Let $\gamma$ be an arbitrary geodesic in $X$ and $\alpha \colon[a,b]\to X$ be a $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic with endpoints on $\gamma$ such that $d\bigl(\alpha(a),\alpha(b)\bigr)<L$. This forces $|a-b|\leq \lambda(L+\epsilon)$.
First, assume $L \leq \lambda+\epsilon$. For each $t\in[a,b]$ we have \[d\bigl(\alpha(t),\alpha(a)\bigr)\leq \lambda|t-a|+\epsilon\leq \lambda^2(\lambda+2\epsilon)+\epsilon< M(\lambda,\epsilon).\]
Therefore, the Hausdorff distance between $\alpha$ and the subsegment of $\gamma$ between $\alpha(a)$ and $\alpha(b)$ is bounded by $M(\lambda,\epsilon)$.
Now, assume $L > \lambda+\epsilon$. Therefore, $|a-b|\leq 2L^2$, and we have
\[d\bigl(\alpha(t),\alpha(a)\bigr)\leq \lambda |t-a|+\epsilon\leq 2 L^3+L<R/4 \text { for all } t\in[a,b].\]
Thus, $\alpha$ and the subsegment of $\gamma$ between $\alpha(a)$ and $\alpha(b)$ both lie in the ball $\operatorname{Ball}_{R/4}\bigl(\alpha(a)\bigr)$. The Hausdorff distance between $\alpha$ and the geodesic segment of $\gamma$ between $\alpha(a)$ and $\alpha(b)$ is then at most $M(\lambda,\epsilon)$ by Lemma \ref{lem:mimic}.
This verifies that the geodesic $\gamma$ is an $(L;M;1,0)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic. Since $X$ has the Morse local-to-global, $\gamma$ is $N$--Morse. Hence, $X$ is $\delta'$--hyperbolic where $\delta' = \delta'(\delta,\Phi)$.
\end{proof}
\section{Spaces with the Morse local-to-global property}\label{sec:examples}
In this section, we prove unconstricted spaces, $\CAT(0)$ spaces, and hierarchically hyperbolic spaces with a technical condition have the Morse local-to-global property. This covers all of the examples given in Theorem \ref{intro_thm:examples_of_local_to_global}, except the fundamental groups of closed $3$--manifolds with Nil or Sol components in their prime decomposition. The proof for all closed $3$--manifold groups is contained in the next section on relative hyperbolicity. In section \ref{sec:trivial_examples}, we also give examples of groups that contain infinite Morse quasi-geodesics, but do not have the Morse local-to-global property. As we will not be needing the full breath of the definitions, we opt to give the salient properties of each class of spaces that we need and forgo giving the definitions in full. We direct the reader to the following sources for detailed background on the spaces in question: unconstricted spaces \cite{DrutuSapir}, $\CAT(0)$ spaces \cite{Bridson_Haefliger}, and hierarchically hyperbolic spaces \cite{BHS_HHSII}.
\subsection{Spaces that trivially satisfy the definition and non-examples.}\label{sec:trivial_examples}
The simplest examples of non-hyperbolic spaces with the Morse local-to-global property are spaces, like the Euclidean plane, where the Morse quasi-geodesics have uniformly bounded domains. We call these spaces \emph{Morse limited}.
\begin{defn}
A metric space $X$ is \emph{Morse limited} if for every Morse gauge $M$ and $\lambda \geq 1, \epsilon \geq 0$ there exists $B \geq 0$ so that every $(M;\lambda, \epsilon)$--Morse quasi-geodesic $\gamma \colon I\to X$ has $\diam(I) \leq B$. A finitely generated group $G$ is \emph{Morse limited} if $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ is Morse limited for some finite generating set $S$.
\end{defn}
Since Morse quasi-geodesics are preserved by quasi-isometries, being Morse limited is a quasi-isometry invariant.
When a space is Morse limited, it trivially satisfies the Morse local-to-global property by choosing the local scale to be larger than the bound on the length of the domain of a Morse quasi-geodesic.
\begin{lem}\label{lem: trivially ltg}
Let $X$ be a metric space. If $X$ is Morse limited, then $X$ has the Morse local-to-global property.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $B \geq 0$ so that the domain of any $(M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--Morse quasi-geodesic has diameter at most $B$. Let $L > B$ and suppose $\gamma \colon I \to X$ is an $(L;M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic. If $\diam(I) > B$, then there exists $[a,b]\subseteq I$ with $B<|a-b|\leq L$. However, this is a contradiction as $\gamma \vert_{[a,b]}$ would then be an $(M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--Morse quasi-geodesic with domain longer than $B$. Thus, $\diam(I) \leq B <L$ and $\gamma$ is an $(M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--Morse quasi-geodesic.
\end{proof}
While Lemma \ref{lem: trivially ltg} is a simple observation, it plays a key role when combined with the relative hyperbolicity results of Section \ref{sec:relativelyhyperbolic}. In particular, the fundamental groups of all closed 3--manifolds will have the Morse local-to-global property as they are hyperbolic relative to subgroups that have the Morse local-to-global property either by being hierarchically hyperbolic space or by being Morse limited.
A large class of examples of Morse limited spaces come from the class of unconstricted groups introduced by Dru\c{t}u and Sapir.
\begin{defn}[{\cite{DrutuSapir}}]
A finitely generated group $G$ is \emph{unconstricted} if for any finite generating set $S$, there exists an asymptotic cone of $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ that does not contain a cut-point.
\end{defn}
Drutu and Sapir demonstrate several classes of groups are unconstricted. The most interesting ones for us will be solvable groups, which satisfy a law by virtue of being uniformly amenable \cite[Corollary 6.17]{DrutuSapir}.
\begin{thm}[{\cite[Theorem 6.5, Corollary 6.14]{DrutuSapir}}]
Let $G$ be finitely generated group that is not virtually cyclic. If $G$ either satisfies a law or has a central, infinite cyclic subgroup, then $G$ is unconstricted.
\end{thm}
Examples of groups that are not unconstricted included those that contain a bi-infinite Morse geodesics.
\begin{lem}[{A consequence of \cite[Proposition 1]{DMS_Corrigendum}}]
Let $G$ be a group generated by a finite generating set $S$. If $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ contains a bi-infinite Morse geodesic, then for every finite generating set $T$, every asymptotic cone of $\operatorname{Cay}(G,T)$ contains a cut-point.
\end{lem}
\begin{prop}\label{prop: unconstricted implies trivial ltg}
If a finitely generated group $G$ is unconstricted, then $G$ is Morse limited.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
We prove the contrapositive
Let $S$ be a finite generating set for $G$ and suppose there is a sequence, $\gamma_n \colon I_n \to \operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$, of $(M; \lambda, \epsilon)$--Morse quasi-geodesics with $\diam(I_n) \to \infty$ as $n \to \infty$. By Lemma \ref{lem:close_to_Morse}, there exists a Morse gauge $M'$ so that $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ contains $M'$--Morse geodesics of arbitrarily long length. This implies $G$ is not unconstricted as $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ will contain an infinite $M'$--Morse geodesic by applying Lemma \ref{lem:long_Morse_segments_imply_Morse_ray}
\end{proof}
Morse limited groups give a structural dichotomy to Morse local-to-global group: either the group is Morse limited or it contains a Morse element.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:trivial_Morse_element_dichotomy}
Let $G$ be a finitely generated group with Morse local-to-global property. Either $G$ contains a Morse element or $G$ is Morse limited.
\end{thm}
Since Lemma \ref{lem:long_Morse_segments_imply_Morse_ray} guarantees that a group containing arbitrarily long Morse geodesics must contain an infinite Morse geodesic, Theorem \ref{thm:trivial_Morse_element_dichotomy} follows immediately from the next proposition plus Lemma~\ref{lem:long_Morse_segments_imply_Morse_ray}.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:Morse_ray_imlies_Morse_element}
Let $G$ be a finitely generated group with the Morse local-to-global property. If there is some finite generating set $S$ of $G$ such that the Cayley graph $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ contains a Morse geodesic ray, then $G$ contains a Morse element.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $\alpha \colon [0,\infty)\to \operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ be an $M$--Morse geodesic ray in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$. We can assume that $\alpha(0) = e$. Since $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ has the Morse local-to-global property, there is a positive integer $L$, real numbers $\lambda\geq 1$, $\epsilon \geq 0$, and Morse gauge $N$ such that any $(L;M;1,0)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic in $\operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ is an $(N;\lambda,\epsilon)$--Morse quasi-geodesic.
For each integer $i\geq 0$, let $\alpha_i$ be the subsegment of $\alpha$ from $\alpha(i\cdot 2L)$ to $\alpha\bigl((i+1)\cdot 2L\bigr)$. There are two non-negative integers $m$ and $n$ such that $n-m\geq 2$ and $\alpha_m$ and $\alpha_n$ are both labeled by same word $w_1$ in $S$. Let $w_2$ be the word in $S$ labeling the subsegment of $\alpha$ from the end of $\alpha_m$ to the beginning of $\alpha_n$. By construction, $|w_1|,|w_2| \geq 2L$ and any geodesic labeled by any subword of $w_1w_2$ or $w_2w_1$ is an $M$--Morse geodesic.
Let $\ell=|w_1|+|w_2|$ and define $\beta \colon (-\infty,\infty)\to \operatorname{Cay}(G,S)$ to be the path such that $\beta(0)=e$ and for each $i \in \mathbb{Z}$, $\beta\vert_{[i\ell,(i+1)\ell]}$ is labeled by the word $w_1w_2$. Then, $\beta$ is an $(L;M;1,0)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic and hence an $(N;\lambda,\epsilon)$--Morse quasi-geodesic. This implies that $w_1w_2$ represent a Morse element of $G$.
\end{proof}
By applying our combination theorem for stable subgroups (Theorem \ref{thm:stable_subgroup_combination}), we expand Theorem \ref{thm:trivial_Morse_element_dichotomy} to show that Morse local-to-global groups that are not Morse limited are either virtually cyclic or contain a stable free subgroups of rank 2.
\begin{cor}\label{cor:trichotomy}
If $G$ is a finitely generated group with the Morse local-to-global property, then $G$ satisfies exactly one of the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $G$ is Morse limited;
\item $G$ is virtually infinite cyclic;
\item $G$ contains a stable, free subgroup of rank $2$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Assume that $G$ is not Morse limited and not virtually a cyclic group. By Theorem~\ref{thm:trivial_Morse_element_dichotomy}, $G$ must contain a Morse element $h$. The subgroup $H = \langle h\rangle$ is then an infinite index stable subgroup of $G$. Thus, there is an element $g \in G$ such that $gHg^{-1}\cap H =\{e\}$ (Theorem \ref{thm:finite_width}). By Theorem~\ref{thm:stable_subgroup_combination}, there is $n>0$ such that the elements $h^{n}$ and $gh^{n}g^{-1}$ generate a stable free subgroup of rank $2$.
\end{proof}
Theorem \ref{thm:trivial_Morse_element_dichotomy} and Corollary \ref{cor:trichotomy} allow us to give examples of finitely generated groups that contain bi-infinite Morse geodesics (and even Morse elements), but do not have the Morse local-to-global property.
\begin{exmp}[Groups that are not Morse local-to-global]\label{ex:non-examples}
The following finitely generated groups do not have the Morse local-to-global property.
\begin{enumerate}
\item In \cite{Fink_Torsion}, Finks the author gives an example of a finitely generated, torsion group that contains a bi-infinite Morse geodesic. Theorem \ref{thm:trivial_Morse_element_dichotomy} shows this groups is not Morse local-to-global as it is not Morse limited and does not contain a Morse element.
\item In \cite[Theorem 1.12]{OOS_Lacunary_hyperbolic_groups}, Osin, Ol'shanskii, and Sapir produce a finitely generated, non-virtually cyclic group $G$ where every proper, non-trivial subgroup is infinite cyclic and stable. Every non-identity element of $G$ is Morse, but $G$ does not contains a free subgroup of rank 2. Thus, $G$ is not Morse local-to-global by Corollary \ref{cor:trichotomy}.
\end{enumerate}
\end{exmp}
Since the direct product of any group with $\mathbb{Z}$ is unconstricted and hence Morse limited, the above examples show the Morse local-to-global property does not descend to undistorted finitely generated subgroups.
\subsection{$\CAT(0)$ spaces}
The main tool we need to establish the Morse local-to-global property in $\CAT(0)$ spaces is the closest point projection onto geodesics. For the remainder of this section $\pi_\gamma$ will denote the closest point projection onto the geodesic $\gamma$ described in the next lemma.
\begin{lem}[{\cite[Proposition 2.4, Corollary 2.5]{Bridson_Haefliger}}]\label{lem:CAT(0)_closest_projection}
Let $X$ be a $\CAT(0)$ space and $\gamma$ be a geodesic in $X$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \label{item:definition} There exists a continuous function $\pi_\gamma \colon X \to \gamma$ so that for all $x \in X$, $\pi_\gamma(x)$ is the unique point in $\gamma$ that minimizes the distance from $x$ to $\gamma$.
\item \label{item:convexity} For any geodesic $\eta \colon [a,b] \to X$, \[d(\eta(t), \pi_\gamma(\eta(t)) \leq \max \{ d(\eta(a), \pi_\gamma(\eta(a)), d(\eta(b),\pi_\gamma(\eta(b))\}\] where $\pi_\gamma$ is the map from (\ref{item:definition}).
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
We also need a characterization of Morse geodesics in $\CAT(0)$ spaces in term of the closest point projection established by Charney and Sultan.
\begin{defn}\label{defn:contracting}
Let $D\geq 0$. A geodesic $\gamma$ in a $\CAT(0)$ space $X$ is \emph{$D$--contracting} if for all $x ,y \in X$ with $d(x,y) < d(x,\gamma)$, the distance $d\bigl(\pi_\gamma(x), \pi_\gamma(y) \bigr)$ is at most $D$.
\end{defn}
\begin{thm}[{\cite[Theorem 2.9]{Charney_Sultan_CAT(0)}}]\label{thm:CAT(0)_Morse_equiv_contracting}
Let $\gamma$ be a geodesic in a $\CAT(0)$ space.
\begin{enumerate}
\item For each Morse gauge $M$, there exists $D=D(M) \geq 0$ so that if $\gamma$ is $M$--Morse, then $\gamma$ is $D$--contracting.
\item For each $D \geq 0$, there exists a Morse gauge $M = M(D)$ so that if $\gamma$ is $D$--contracting, then $\gamma$ is $M$--Morse.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
Finally, we need a lemma of the third author about concatenating geodesics in any geodesic metric space.
\begin{lem}[{\cite[Lemma 3.6]{Tran2017}}]\label{lem:uniform_quasi-geodesic}
Let $\gamma=\gamma_1\ast \gamma_2 \ast \gamma_3$ be the concatenation of the geodesics $\gamma_1$, $\gamma_2$, and $\gamma_3$ in a geodesic space. If the length of $\gamma_2$ is more than $21$ times the sum of the lengths of $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_3$, then there is a $(5,0)$--quasi-geodesic $\alpha$ with the same endpoints of $\gamma$ and $\alpha\cap\gamma_2\neq \emptyset$.
\end{lem}
We prove the Morse local-to-global property. First, we use Lemma \ref{lem:CAT(0)_closest_projection}.(\ref{item:convexity}) to show that a local Morse quasi-geodesic of sufficient scale is close to the geodesic between its end points (Proposition \ref{prop:CAT(0)_Key}). This implies the local Morse quasi-geodesic is a global quasi-geodesic by Lemma \ref{lem:local_close_to_global}. Next, we use the contracting characterization of Morse geodesics to prove this global quasi-geodesic is Morse (Theorem \ref{thm:CAT(0)_are_local_to_global}).
\begin{prop}\label{prop:CAT(0)_Key}
Let $X$ be a $\CAT(0)$ space. For each $\lambda\geq 1$, $\epsilon\geq 0$, and Morse gauge $M$, there are constants $\ell\geq 0$ and $C\geq 0$ such that the following holds. If $L \geq \ell$ and $\gamma \colon [a,b] \to X$ is an $(L;M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic and $\beta$ is the geodesic connecting $\gamma(a)$ and $\gamma(b)$, then the Hausdorff distance between $\gamma$ and $\beta$ is less than $C$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
For any two points $x,y \in X$, let $[x,y]$ denote the unique geodesic from $x$ to $y$ in the $\CAT(0)$ metric on $X$. Let $M'$ be the Morse gauge provided by Lemma \ref{lem:close_to_Morse} so that any geodesic connecting the endpoints of an $(M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--Morse quasi-geodesic is $M'$--Morse. Let $K_1 = M(1,0)$, $K_2 = M'(5,0)$, and $R = 2(K_2+K_1 +1)$. Let $L\geq \ell = 4\lambda(44R+\epsilon+K_1)$.
Let $\gamma \colon [a,b] \to X$ be an $(L;M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic and $\beta$ be the geodesic connecting $\gamma(a)$ and $\gamma(b)$. We first show that $\gamma \subseteq \mc{N}_{C_1}(\beta)$ for some $C_1$ depending only on $M$, $\lambda$, and $\epsilon$.
Let $t\in [a,b]$ such that \[d\bigl(\gamma(t),\beta\bigr)+1>\sup\limits_{s\in [a,b]} d\bigl(\gamma(s),\beta\bigr).\]
If $|a-t|<\ell/4$ or $|t-b|<\ell/4$, then the distance $d\bigl(\gamma(t),\beta\bigr)$ is bounded by a constant depending only on $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, and $M$.
Assume $|a-t|\geq \ell/4$ and $|t-b|\geq \ell/4$. Let $x=\gamma(t-\ell/4)$, $y=\gamma(t+\ell/4)$, and $\beta_1$ be the geodesic connecting $x$ and $y$. Since $\gamma$ is locally $M$--Morse, the Hausdorff distance between $\beta_1$ and $\gamma\vert_{[t-\ell/4,t+\ell/4]}$ is at most $K_1 = M(1,0)$. Let $z$ be a point in $\beta_1$ such that $d\bigl(\gamma(t),z\bigr)<K_1$. Note, both geodesic segments $[x,z]$ and $[z,y]$ are $M'$--Morse.
\begin{claim}
$d(z,\beta) < 2R = 4(M(1,0)+M'(5,0) +1)$.
\end{claim}
\begin{subproof}
Assume for the purposes of contradiction that $d(z,\beta)\geq 2R$. We shall create a contradiction to Lemma \ref{lem:CAT(0)_closest_projection}.(\ref{item:convexity}) by showing there is $w_1 \in [x,z]$ and $w_2 \in [z,y]$ such that the distances $d(w_1,\beta)$ and $d(w_2,\beta)$ are both strictly less than the distance $d(z,\beta)$. We only give the proof for the existence of $w_1$ as the proof for the existence of $w_2$ is entirely analogous.
If $d(x,\beta)<R$, then we can choose $w_1=x$. Otherwise, let $x_1$ and $z_1$ be the points in $X$ such that \[d(x,x_1)=R; \quad \ d(x_1,\beta)=d(x,\beta)-R \] and \[ d(z,z_1)=R; \quad d(z_1,\beta)=d(z,\beta)-R.\]
Since $\gamma$ is a local quasi-geodesic, we have \[d(x,z)\geq d\bigl(\gamma(t-\ell/4),\gamma(t)\bigr)-d\bigl(\gamma(t),z\bigr)\geq \left(\frac{\ell}{4\lambda}-\epsilon\right)-K_1= 44R.\]
This implies,
\[d(x_1,z_1)\geq d(x,z)-d(x,x_1)-d(z,z_1)\geq 42R.\]
We can now apply Lemma~\ref{lem:uniform_quasi-geodesic} to the concatenation of the geodesics $[x,x_1]$, $[x_1,z_1]$, and $[z_1,z]$ to produce a $(5,0)$--quasi-geodesic $\beta_2$ connecting $x$ and $z$ with $\beta_2\cap [x_1,z_1] \neq \emptyset$. Since $[x,z]$ is $M'$--Morse, any point in $\beta_2$ lies in the $M'(5,0)$--neighborhood of $[x,z]$. Therefore, there is $w_1 \in [x,z]$ and $u \in \beta_2\cap [x_1,z_1]$ such that $d(w_1,u)<K_2 = M'(5,0)$.
By Lemma \ref{lem:CAT(0)_closest_projection}.(\ref{item:convexity}), we have $d(u,\beta)\leq d(x_1,\beta)$ or $d(u,\beta)\leq d(z_1,\beta)$. In either case, we have $d(u,\beta)\leq d(z,\beta)+1+K_1-R$ as
\[d(x_1,\beta)=d(x,\beta)-R\leq d\bigl(\gamma(t),\beta\bigr)+1-R\leq d(z,\beta)+1+K_1-R\]
and
\[d(z_1,\beta)=d(z,\beta)-R.\]
This implies that
\[d(w_1,\beta)\leq d(w_1,u)+d(u,\beta)\leq K_2+ d(z,\beta)+1+K_1-R<d(z,\beta)\]
as desired.
\end{subproof}
Since the distance $d(z,\beta)$ is bounded above by $2R$, we have \[d\bigl(\gamma(t),\beta\bigr) \leq 2R + K_1 = 4\bigl(M(1,0)+M'(5,0)\bigr) + M(1,0).\] Therefore, $\gamma$ lies in the $C_1$--neighborhood of $\beta$ where $C_1 = 2R+K_1+1$ depends only on $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, and~$M$.
We now prove that $\beta$ also lies in the $C_2$--neighborhood of $\gamma$ where $C_2$ depends only on $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, and $M$. Let $a=t_0<t_1<\cdots<t_n=b$ with $|t_{i+1}-t_i|<\ell$. Since each $\gamma\vert_{[t_i,t_{i+1}]}$ is a $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic, the distance between $\gamma(t_i)$ and $\gamma(t_{i+1})$ is bounded above by $\lambda\ell+\epsilon$. Let $u_0= \gamma(a)$, $u_n= \gamma(b)$, and for each $1\leq i \leq n-1$, let $u_i$ be a point in $\beta$ such that the distance between $\gamma(t_i)$ and $u_i$ is at most $C_1$. By the triangle inequality, the distance between $u_i$ and $u_{i+1}$ is at most $\lambda\ell+\epsilon+2C_1$. If $u\in \beta$, then $u$ must lie in a subsegment of $\beta$ with endpoints $u_i$ and $u_{i+1}$ for some $0\leq i < n$. Therefore, the distance between $u$ and $\gamma(t_i)$ is at most $\ell \lambda+\epsilon +3C_1 $. This implies that $\beta$ lies in the $(\lambda\ell+\epsilon+3C_1)$--neighborhood of $\gamma$.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{thm:CAT(0)_are_local_to_global}
For each $\lambda\geq 1$, $\epsilon\geq 0$, and Morse gauge $M$, there are constants $L\geq 0$, $\lambda'\geq 1$, $\epsilon'\geq 0$, and a Morse gauge $M'$ such that the following holds. If $\gamma$ is an $(L;M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic in a $\CAT(0)$ space $X$, then $\gamma$ is an $(M';\lambda',\epsilon')$--Morse quasi-geodesic in $X$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Let $\ell$ and $C$ be the constants from Proposition \ref{prop:CAT(0)_Key} for $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, and $M$. Let $L \geq \lambda(3 C + \epsilon +2 +\ell) +1$ and let $\gamma \colon [a,b] \to X$ be an $(L;M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic in a $\CAT(0)$ space $X$. By Proposition \ref{prop:CAT(0)_Key}, every subsegment of $\gamma$ in contained in the $C$--neighborhood of the geodesic between its endpoints. Since $L > \lambda(3 C + \epsilon +2 )$, Lemma \ref{lem:local_close_to_global} implies $\gamma$ is a $(\lambda',\epsilon')$--quasi-geodesic for $\lambda'$ and $\epsilon'$ depending ultimately only on $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, and $M$.
To show $\gamma$ is Morse, consider the geodesic $\beta$ connecting $\gamma(a)$ and $\gamma(b)$. By Theorem \ref{thm:CAT(0)_Morse_equiv_contracting} and Lemma \ref{lem:close_to_Morse}, it suffices to show that $\beta$ is $D$--contracting for some $D$ depending only on $M$, $\lambda$, and $\epsilon$. Let $M'$ be the Morse gauge so that any geodesic with endpoints in the $C$--neighborhood of an $(M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--Morse quasi-geodesic is $M'$--Morse. Let $D>0$ so that any $M'$--Morse geodesic in $X$ is $D$--contracting and suppose $L > \lambda (D +2C + \epsilon +1)$. Note, such a $D$ depends ultimately only on $M$, $\lambda$, and $\epsilon$.
Suppose, for the purposes of contradiction, that $\beta$ is not $D$--contracting. Then, there are $x$ and $y$ in $X$ such that $d(x,y)<d\bigl(x,\pi_{\beta}(x)\bigr)$, but $d\bigl(\pi_{\beta}(x), \pi_{\beta}(y)\bigr) > D$.
Let $c = \min\{1,d\bigl(\pi_{\beta}(x), \pi_{\beta}(y)\bigr)-D\}$.
By the continuity of the projection map $\pi_{\beta}$, there is a point $y_1$ in the geodesic connecting $x$ and $y$ such that $d\bigl(\pi_{\beta}(x), \pi_{\beta}(y_1)\bigr)= D + c/2$. Let $\beta'$ be the geodesic subsegment of $\beta$ connecting $\pi_{\beta}(x)$ and $\pi_{\beta}(y_1)$.
Then $\pi_{\beta}(x)=\pi_{\beta'}(x)$, $\pi_{\beta}(y_1)=\pi_{\beta'}(y_1)$, and $d(x,y_1)\leq d(x,y)$. Therefore, $d(x,y_1)<d\bigl(x,\pi_{\beta'}(x)\bigr)$ and $d\bigl(\pi_{\beta'}(x), \pi_{\beta'}(y_1)\bigr)=d\bigl(\pi_{\beta}(x), \pi_{\beta}(y_1)\bigr) >D$. This implies that $\beta'$ is not $D$--contracting.
However, since $L > \lambda (D +2C + \epsilon +1)$, $\beta'$ is a geodesic with endpoints in the $C$--neighborhood of an $(M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--Morse quasi-geodesic and hence $D$--contracting. This contradiction implies $\beta$ must be $D$--contracting.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Hierarchically hyperbolic spaces and Morse detectability} \label{subsec:HHS}
For hierarchically hyperbolic spaces, the Morse local-to-global property follows from a result of Abbott, Behrstock, and Durham that established most hierarchically hyperbolic spaces admit a projection onto a hyperbolic space that detects when a quasi-geodesic is Morse. We prove that any space with this \emph{Morse detectability} property has the Morse local-to-global property. In addition to simplifying the proof in the case of hierarchically hyperbolic spaces, this approach also provides an avenue for producing new examples of Morse local-to-global spaces.
\begin{defn}\label{Morse detectable}
A metric space $X$ is \emph{Morse detectable} if there exists a $\delta$--hyperbolic space $Y$ and a coarsely Lipschitz map $\pi \colon X \to Y$ such that for every $(\lambda, \epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic $\gamma \colon [a,b] \to X$, the following holds.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \label{item:Morse detectable 1} If $\gamma$ is $M$--Morse, then $\pi\circ \gamma$ is a $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesic in $Y$ where $(k,c)$ is determined by $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, $\delta$, and $M$.
\item \label{item:Morse detectable 2} If $\pi\circ \gamma$ is a $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesic in $Y$, then $\gamma$ is $M$--Morse, where $M$ is determined by $k$, $c$, $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, and $\delta$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{defn}
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:Morse local-to-globle for Morse detectable}
If $X$ is a Morse detectable metric space, then $X$ has the Morse local-to-global property.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Let $Y$ be the $\delta$--hyperbolic space and $\pi \colon X \to Y$ be the coarsely Lipschitz map satisfying Definition~\ref{Morse detectable}. Fix $\lambda \geq 1$, $\epsilon \geq 0$, and Morse gauge $M$.
Since $X$ is Morse detectable, there exists $k\geq 1$ and $c\geq 0$ depending on $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, $\delta$, and $M$ so that if $\eta$ is an $(M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--Morse quasi-geodesic, then $\pi\circ \eta$ is a $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesic. By the local-to-global property for quasi-geodesics in hyperbolic spaces (Theorem \ref{thm:local_to_global_hyperbolic}), there are constants $L> 2\epsilon$, $k'\geq 1$ and $c'\geq 0$ depending only on $k$, $c$, and $\delta$ such that any $(L;k,c)$--local quasi-geodesic in $Y$ is a $(k',c')$--quasi-geodesic.
Let $\gamma \colon [a,b] \to X$ be an $(L;M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic.
By (\ref{item:Morse detectable 1}) of Morse detectability, $\pi\circ \gamma$ is an $(L;k,c)$--local quasi-geodesic in $Y$. Since $Y$ is $\delta$--hyperbolic, $\pi\circ \gamma$ is a $(k',c')$--quasi-geodesic. Using Lemma \ref{lem: Folklore} below, this implies $\gamma$ is a $(\lambda',\epsilon')$--quasi-geodesic in $X$ where $\lambda'$ and $\epsilon'$ depend only on $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, $\delta$, $M$, and the coarse Lipschitz constants of $\pi \colon X \to Y$ . Applying (\ref{item:Morse detectable 2}) of Morse detectable makes $\gamma$ an $(M';\lambda',\epsilon')$--Morse quasi-geodesic in $X$ where $M'$ depends only on $M$, $\delta$, $\lambda$, and $\epsilon$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem: Folklore}
Let $X, Y$ be metric spaces and $\pi\colon X \to Y$ be a $(K,C)$--coarsely Lipschitz map. Let $\gamma \colon I \to X$ be an $(L;\lambda, \epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic with $L> 2\epsilon$. For all $k \geq 1$ and $c \geq 0$, there exists $\lambda'$ and $\epsilon'$ so that if $ \pi \circ \gamma \colon I \to Y$ is a $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesic, then $\gamma$ is a $(\lambda',\epsilon')$--quasi-geodesic in $X$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $t_1,t_2 \in I$ with $t_1 < t_2$ and choose $t_1=s_0 < \cdots < s_n = t_2$ such that $L/2 \leq |s_i-s_{i+1}|\leq L$. Since $L > 2\epsilon$ and $\gamma$ is an $(L;\lambda, \epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic, the triangle inequality gives
\[d_X\bigl(\gamma(t_1),\gamma(t_2)\bigr) \leq \sum\limits_{i=0}^{n} d_X\bigl(\gamma(s_i),\gamma(s_{i+1})\bigr) \leq \sum\limits_{i=0}^{n} \bigl[\lambda |s_i - s_{i+1}| + \epsilon\bigr] \leq (\lambda +1)\cdot |t_1 - t_2|.\]
Since $\pi$ is $(K,C)$--coarsely Lipschitz and $\pi \circ \gamma$ is a $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesic, we have
\[\frac{1}{k}|t_1 - t_2| - c \leq d_Y\bigl(\pi \circ \gamma (t_1), \pi \circ \gamma (t_2)\bigr) \leq Kd_X\bigl(\gamma(t_1), \gamma(t_2)\bigr) +C \leq K(\lambda+1)\cdot|t_1 - t_2| +C. \qedhere\]
\end{proof}
Abbott, Behrstock, and Durham showed that all hierarchically hyperbolic spaces satisfying a minor technical condition are Morse detectable \cite{ABD}. This covers all of the natural examples of hierarchically hyperbolic spaces as outlined in Corollary \ref{cor:Examples_of_HHS}. Abbott, Behrstock, and Durham provide an explicit description of the space and projection map for Morse detectability. In the case of the mapping class group, the space is the curve graph and the projection map is the subsurface projection of Masur and Minsky.
\begin{thm}[{\cite[Corollary 6.2, Theorem 7.2]{ABD}}]
\label{thm:HHS_are_Morse_detectable}
If $X$ is a hierarchically hyperbolic space with the bounded domain dichotomy, then $X$ is Morse detectable. In particular, all hierarchically hyperbolic groups are Morse detectable.
\end{thm}
\begin{cor}\label{cor:Examples_of_HHS}
The following groups and spaces have the Morse local-to-global property.
\begin{itemize}
\item The mapping class group of an orientable, finite type surface.
\item Graph products of hyperbolic groups.
\item The Teichm\"uller space of an orientable, finite type surface with either the Teichm\"uller or Weil--Petersson metric.
\item The fundamental group of a closed $3$--manifold without Nil or Sol components in its prime decomposition.
\end{itemize}
\end{cor}
Theorem \ref{thm:Morse local-to-globle for Morse detectable} also provides a possible avenue for proving the group $\Out(F_n)$ has the Morse local-to-global property by showing it is Morse detectable. Several partial results in this direction exist in the literature \cite{HamenstaedtHensel_Stability_Outer_Space, DowdallTaylor_Hyperbolic_extensions,ADT}, but the question of Morse detectability remains open and likely requires an innovative understanding of the Morse quasi-geodesics of $\Out(F_n)$.
\begin{ques}
Is $\Out(F_n)$ or Outer Space Morse detectable for $n \geq 3$?
\end{ques}
\section{Spaces hyperbolic relative to Morse local-to-global spaces}\label{sec:relativelyhyperbolic}
In this final section, we show the Morse local-to-global property is inherited under relative hyperbolicity.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:local_to_global_and_relative_hyperbolicity}
Let $X$ be a geodesic metric space that is hyperbolic relative to a collection of peripheral subsets $\mc{P}$. If each element of $\mc{P}$ has the $\Phi$--Morse local-to-global property, then $X$ has the $\Psi$--Morse local-to-global property.
\end{thm}
If a group $G$ is hyperbolic relative to subgroups $H_1,\dots,H_n$, then the Cayley graph of $G$ with respect to any finite generating set is hyperbolic relative to the collection of left cosets of the $H_i$. Since each coset of the $H_i$ is isometric to $H_i$, if each $H_i$ has the $\Phi_i$--Morse local-to-global property, then there exists $\Phi$ so that every coset of one of the $H_i$ has the $\Phi$--Morse local-to-global property. Theorem \ref{thm:local_to_global_and_relative_hyperbolicity} then implies $G$ is also Morse local-to-global, proving Theorem \ref{intro_thm:relative_hyperbolicity} from the introduction.
Theorem \ref{thm:local_to_global_and_relative_hyperbolicity} implies that the Morse local-to-global property is closed under free products of finitely generated groups. Combining this with the work in Section \ref{sec:examples}, we deduce that the fundamental groups of all close $3$--manifolds have the Morse local-to-global property.
\begin{cor}\label{cor:3-manifolds}
If $M$ is a closed $3$--manifold, then $\pi_1(M)$ has the Morse local-to-global property.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
By the geometrization of closed $3$--manifolds, if $M$ is a closed $3$--manifold, then $M$ has a prime decomposition $M = M_1 \# M_2 \# \dots \# M_n$ where each $M_i$ is either geometric or has a mixed geometry. Thus, $\pi_1(M) \cong \pi_1(M_1) \ast \dots \ast \pi_1(M_n)$ where each $\pi_1(M_i)$ is either virtually solvable or a hierarchically hyperbolic space with the bounded domain dichotomy \cite[Theorem 10.1]{BHS_HHSII}. In both cases, $\pi_i(M)$ has the Morse local-to-global property by Section \ref{sec:trivial_examples} or Corollary \ref{cor:Examples_of_HHS}. Since $\pi_1(M)$ is hyperbolic relative to the collection of left cosets of $\pi_1(M_1),\dots, \pi_1(M_n)$, Theorem \ref{thm:local_to_global_and_relative_hyperbolicity} implies $\pi_1(M)$ has the Morse local-to-global property.
\end{proof}
The proof of Theorem \ref{thm:local_to_global_and_relative_hyperbolicity} is considerably longer and more technical than our previous proofs that spaces have the Morse local-to-global property. To guide the reader, we give an outline of the proof in Section \ref{subsec:rel_hyp_outline} after collecting some required facts about relatively hyperbolic spaces in Section \ref{subsec:rel_hyp_background}. The proof of Theorem \ref{thm:local_to_global_and_relative_hyperbolicity} then spans Sections \ref{subsec:local_qg_with_bounded_projections} to \ref{subsec:proof_or_rel_hyp}. As part of the proof, we investigate features of local quasi-geodesics in relatively hyperbolic spaces that maybe of independent interest. These include showing that local quasi-geodesics that ``avoid" all peripheral subsets are actually global Morse quasi-geodesics (Section \ref{subsec:local_qg_with_bounded_projections}) and developing a notion of ``deep points" for a local quasi-geodesic that decomposes a local quasi-geodesic into pieces that alternate between avoiding and passing through peripheral subsets (Section \ref{subsec:deep_points}).
\subsection{Background on relatively hyperbolic spaces}\label{subsec:rel_hyp_background}
If $\mc{P}$ is a collection of subsets of a geodesic metric space $X$, let $\cone{X}$ be the space obtained from $X$ by adding a point $c_P$ for each $P \in \mc{P}$ and connecting $c_P$ to every element of $P$ by an edge of length $1$. The space $X$ is \emph{hyperbolic relative to $\mc{P}$} if $\cone{X}$ is $\delta$--hyperbolic for some $\delta \geq 0$ and $X$ satisfies a \emph{bounded subset penetration} property that controls how geodesics travel through the elements of $\mc{P}$ (see \cite{Sisto_metric_rel_hyp} for a complete description and several equivalent definition of a relatively hyperbolic space).
For the remainder of this section, $X$ will be a fixed geodesic metric space that is hyperbolic relative to a collection of peripheral subsets $\mc{P}$, $\delta$ will be the constant so that $\cone{X}$ is $\delta$--hyperbolic, and $\pi \colon X \to \cone{X}$ will denote the distance non-increasing inclusion of $X$ into $\cone{X}$.
We now recall several facts about the relatively hyperbolic space $X$. The first says that the peripherals must be isolated away from each other.
\begin{lem}[Isolated peripherals; {\cite[Definition 2.4, Theorem 1.1]{Sisto_metric_rel_hyp}}] \label{lem:intersection of peripherals}
There is increasing function $F \colon [0,\infty) \to [0,\infty)$ so that for all $P, U \in \mc{P}$ we have:
\[\mathrm{diam}\left( \mc{N}_K(P) \bigcap \mc{N}_K(U) \right) \leq F(K).\]
\end{lem}
A key tool in our study of relatively hyperbolic spaces is the coarse closest point projection onto peripheral subsets, denoted by $\pi_P \colon X \to P$ for all $P \in \mc{P}$. The basic properties of $\pi_P$ are outlined in the following lemma.
\begin{lem}[Properties of projection onto peripherals; \cite{Sisto_Rel_hyp_projections}]\label{lem:projections_lemmas}
There exist $\mu \geq 0$ so that for each $P \in \mc{P}$ there is a $(\mu,\mu)$--coarsely Lipschitz map $\pi_P \colon X \to P$ such that the following hold for all $P,U \in \mc{P}$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item For all $x \in P$, $\pi_P(x) = x$.
\item For all $x \in X - P$, $d\bigl(x,\pi_P(x) \bigr) \leq d(x,P) +1$.
\item If $P \neq U$, $\diam(\pi_P(U)) \leq \mu$.
\item For all $x \in X$, if $\gamma$ is a geodesic in $X$ from $x$ to $\pi_P(x)$, then $\diam(\pi_P(\gamma)) \leq \mu$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
The next two lemmas will frequently be used in tandem. Together they imply that if two points $x,y \in X$ project significantly far apart on a peripheral $P$, then every quasi-geodesic connecting $x$ and $y$ must travel close to $P$ for a distance comparable to the distance between $\pi_P(x)$ and $\pi_P(y)$.
\begin{lem}[Linear quasiconvexity of peripherals; {\cite[Lemma 4.5]{DrutuSapir}}]\label{lem: quasi-geodesics remain in a nbhd}
For every $\lambda\geq 1$ and $\epsilon\geq0$ there exists $r = r(\lambda, \epsilon) \geq 1$ such that for every $R\geq 1$ if $\gamma$ is a $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic joining points in $\mc{N}_{R}(P)$, then $\gamma \subseteq \mc{N}_{rR}(P)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{lem}[Bounded quasi-geodesic image; {\cite[Lemma 1.15]{Sisto_Rel_hyp_projections}}]\label{lem: BGI for rel hyp}
There exists $Q >0$ and $R \colon [1,\infty) \times [0,\infty) \to [0,\infty)$ so that for all $x,y \in X$ and $P \in \mc{P}$, if $d(\pi_P (x), \pi_P(y)) \geq Q$, then any $(\lambda, \epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic between $x$ and $y$ intersects $\mc{N}_{R}(\pi_P(x))$ and $\mc{N}_{R}(\pi_P(y))$ where $R = R(\lambda,\epsilon)$.
\end{lem}
The projections onto peripheral subsets along with the map $\pi \colon X \to \cone{X}$ produce a distance formula where distances in $X$ can be approximated by summing distances in the projections.
\begin{thm}[The distance formula; {\cite[Theorem 3.1]{Sisto_Rel_hyp_projections}\cite[Theorem 6.10]{BHS_HHSII}}]\label{thm:distance_formula_for_rel_hyp}
There exists $T_0 \geq 0$ so that for all $T \geq T_0$, there is $A\geq 1$ so that for all $x,y \in X$ we have \[d_X(x,y) \stackrel{A,A}{\asymp} \ignore{d_{\widehat{X}}\bigl(\pi(x),\pi(y)\bigr)}{T} + \sum \limits_{P \in \mc{P} } \ignore{d_P\bigl(\pi_P(x),\pi_P(y)\bigr))}{T} \]
\noindent where $\ignore{N}{T} = N$ if $N \geq T$ and $0$ otherwise.
\end{thm}
The most important consequence of the distance formula for our proof of Theorem \ref{thm:local_to_global_and_relative_hyperbolicity} are that quasi-geodesics whose projection to each peripheral subset is uniformly bounded will quasi-isometrically embed into $\cone{X}$ and be Morse quasi-geodesics of $X$.
\begin{cor}[Quasi-isometric embedding and bounded projections]\label{cor:qi-emebed iff bounded projections}
Let $\gamma$ be a $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic in $X$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item For every $C >0$, there exists $k \geq 1$ and $ c \geq 0$ so that if $\diam\bigl( \pi_P (\gamma) \bigr) \leq C$ for all $P \in \mc{P}$, then $\pi \circ \gamma$ is a $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesic in $\cone{X}$.
\item For every $k\geq 1$ and $c \geq 0$, there exists $C>0$ so that if $\pi \circ \gamma$ is a $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesic in $\cone{X}$, then $\diam\bigl( \pi_P (\gamma) \bigr) \leq C$ for all $P \in \mc{P}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Item (1) is a direct consequence of the distance formula. For Item (2), assume $\pi \circ \gamma$ is a $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesic and let $Q >0$ and $R = R(\lambda,\epsilon)$ be the constants from Lemma \ref{lem: BGI for rel hyp}. If $\diam(\pi_P(\gamma)) > \lambda[Q + 2R+2+\epsilon +k(2+2R)+c+1)]$ for some $P \in\mc{P}$, then there is $t,s$ in the domain of $\gamma$ so that $\gamma(t),\gamma(s) \in \mc{N}_R(P)$ and $|t-s| > k(2+2R)+c$. However, this would be a contradiction since $|t-s| \leq k(2+2R)+c$ as $\pi \circ \gamma(t), \pi \circ \gamma(s)$ are both within $R+1$ of the cone point $c_P$ and $\pi \circ \gamma$ is a $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesic. Thus, we have $\diam(\pi_P(\gamma)) \leq \lambda[Q + 2R+2+\epsilon +k(2+2R)+c+1)]$ for all $P \in \mc{P}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}[Quasi-geodesics with bounded projections are Morse]\label{cor:bounded projections implies Morse}
For each $C \geq 0$, $\lambda \geq 1$, and $\epsilon \geq 0$, there exists a Morse gauge $M$ so that if $\gamma$ is a $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic in $X$ and $\diam(\pi_P(\gamma)) \leq C$ for all $P \in \mc{P}$, then $\gamma$ is $M$--Morse.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Let $\alpha \colon [a,b] \to X$ be a $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesic with $\alpha(a),\alpha(b) \in \gamma$. We claim $\diam\bigl( \pi_P (\alpha) \bigr)$ is bounded above by a constant $C' = C'(k,c,C)$.
Let $Q \geq 0$ and $R = R(k,c)$ be the constants from Lemma \ref{lem: BGI for rel hyp} and suppose $\diam\bigl(\pi_P(\alpha)\bigr) \geq Q$ for some $P \in \mc{P}$. Let $t$ and $s$ be the first and last points in $[a,b]$ so that $\alpha(t),\alpha(s) \in \mc{N}_{R}(P)$. By Lemma \ref{lem: BGI for rel hyp}, $\diam\bigl( \pi_P(\alpha\vert_{[a,t]})\bigr) \leq Q$ and $\diam\bigl( \pi_P(\gamma\vert_{[s,b]})\bigr) \leq Q$. Since there exists $r=r(k,c)\geq 1$ so that $\alpha\vert_{[t,s]} \subseteq \mc{N}_{rR}(P)$ (Lemma \ref{lem: quasi-geodesics remain in a nbhd}), we have \[\diam\bigl( \pi_P(\alpha\vert_{[t,s]})\bigr) \leq k^2 \cdot d\bigl( \pi_P(\alpha(t)), \pi_P(\alpha(s)) \bigr)+5k^2(rR+c+1).\] Thus,
\begin{align*}
\diam\bigl( \pi_P(\alpha)\bigr) \leq& k^2 \cdot d\bigl( \pi_P(\alpha(a)), \pi_P(\alpha(b)) \bigr) + 5k^2(rR+c+1) +2Q \\
\leq& k^2 C + 5k^2(rR+c+1) + 2Q = C' .
\end{align*}
Since $\diam\bigl( \pi_P (\alpha) \bigr) \leq C'$ and $\diam\bigl( \pi_P (\gamma) \bigr) \leq C$, $\pi \circ \alpha$ and $\pi \circ \gamma$ are respectively $(k',c')$ and $(\lambda',\epsilon')$--quasi-geodesic in $\widehat{X}$ where $(k',c')$ and $(\lambda',\epsilon')$ depend only on $k$, $c$, $C$ and $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, $C$ respectively (Corollary \ref{cor:qi-emebed iff bounded projections}). Since $\widehat{X}$ is $\delta$--hyperbolic, there exists a Morse gauge $N$, depending on $\lambda'$, $\epsilon'$, and $\delta$, so that $\pi \circ \gamma$ is $N$--Morse and $\pi \circ \alpha$ is contained in the $N(k',c')$--neighborhood of $\pi \circ \gamma$. For $x \in \alpha$, let $y \in \gamma$ so that $d_{\widehat{X}}(x,y) \leq N(k',c')$. Since $d_P(x,y) \leq C + C'$ for all $P \in \mc{P}$, the distance formula (Theorem \ref{thm:distance_formula_for_rel_hyp}) produces $C'' = C''(\lambda,\epsilon,C,k,c)$ so that $d_X(x,y) \leq C''$. Thus, $\gamma$ is $M$--Morse where $M$ depends on $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, $C$, and $\delta$.
\end{proof}
Our last preliminary result is an adaption of the work of Hruska \cite[Proposition 8.14]{Hruska10} and Sisto \cite[Proposition 5.7]{Sisto_metric_rel_hyp} to fit our needs. In the sequel, we say a map $\gamma \colon [a,b] \to X$ is an \emph{unparametrized $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic} if there exists a homeomorphism $f \colon [a',b'] \to [a,b]$ so that $\gamma \circ f$ is a $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic of $X$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem: projections are unparametrized q geod}
For every $\lambda \geq 1$ and $\epsilon\geq 0$, there are $k \geq 1$ and $c \geq 0$ so that if $\gamma \colon [a,b] \to X$ is $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic in $X$, then $\pi \circ \gamma$ is an unparametrized $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesic in $\cone{X}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
It is sufficient to verify that $\pi \circ \gamma$ is within finite Hausdorff distance of the image of a geodesic in $\cone{X}$. Since $X$ is a geodesic space, we can assume $\gamma$ is a continuous quasi-geodesic without any loss of generality \cite[Lemma III.H.1.11]{Bridson_Haefliger}.
By \cite[Lemma 1.14]{Sisto_Rel_hyp_projections}, there is a continuous $(\lambda',\epsilon')$--quasi-geodesic $\eta \colon [a',b'] \to X$ so that $\pi \circ \eta$ is an unparametrized geodesic in $\cone{X}$.
By \cite[Proposition 5.7]{Sisto_metric_rel_hyp}, there is a constant $D = D(\lambda,\epsilon)$ and sequences $a=q_0\leq p_1<q_1<\dots<p_n<q_n \leq p_{n+1} = b$ and $a'=q'_0\leq p'_1<q'_1<\dots<p'_n<q'_n \leq p'_{n+1} = b'$ so that
\begin{itemize}
\item the Hausdorff distance between $\gamma \vert_{[q_i,p_{i+1}]}$ and $\eta\vert_{[q'_i,p'_{i+1}]}$ is bounded by $D$ for $i \in \{0,\dots,n\}$;
\item $\gamma\vert_{[p_{i+1},q_{i+1}]}$, and $\eta\vert_{[p'_{i+1},q'_{i+1}]} $ are both contained in the $D$--neighborhood of the same peripheral $P_i \in \mc{P}$ for $i \in \{0,\dots,n-1\}$.
\end{itemize}
\noindent This implies the Hausdorff distance between $\pi \circ \gamma \vert_{[q_i,p_{i+1}]}$ and $\pi \circ \eta\vert_{[q'_i,p'_{i+1}]}$ is also at most $D$ for $i \in \{0,\dots,n\}$ and $\diam\bigl( \pi(\gamma \vert_{[p_{i+1},q_{i+1}]}) \bigr) \leq 2D+2$ for all $i \in\{0,\dots,n-1\}$. Thus, the Hausdorff distance between $\pi \circ \gamma$ and the unparametrized geodesic $\pi \circ \eta$ is bounded by a constant depending only on $\lambda$ and $\epsilon$ as desired.
\end{proof}
Before continuing, we set constants that we shall use for the remainder of the section. We fix a pair of quasi-geodesic constants $\lambda \geq 1$ and $\epsilon \geq 0$ and then fix the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mu$ the constant from Lemma \ref{lem:projections_lemmas};
\item $F \colon [0,\infty) \to [0,\infty)$ the function from Lemma \ref{lem:intersection of peripherals};
\item $r = r(\lambda,\epsilon)$ the constant from Lemma \ref{lem: quasi-geodesics remain in a nbhd};
\item $Q$ and $R=R(\lambda,\epsilon)$ the constants from Lemma \ref{lem: BGI for rel hyp}.
\end{itemize}
With these constants fixed, we define $\theta = \theta(\lambda,\epsilon)$ to be
\[ \theta = 100\lambda\mu(\lambda+\epsilon+\mu+F(2rR)+r+ R+ rR +Q+1). \]
Henceforth, whenever $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, $\mu$, $r$, $Q$, $R$, or $\theta$ are written, they implicitly refer to the constants outlined above. Note, $r$, $R$, and $\theta$ depend on $\lambda$ and $\epsilon$, while $\mu$, $F$, and $Q$ do not. Further, $I$ will always denote a compact interval of $\mathbb{R}$ for the remainder of the section.
\subsection{A sketch of the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:local_to_global_and_relative_hyperbolicity}} \label{subsec:rel_hyp_outline}
Similar to the case of $\CAT(0)$ spaces, the key to proving Theorem \ref{thm:local_to_global_and_relative_hyperbolicity} is to establish that, when every peripheral subset has the $\Phi$--Morse local-to-global property, every local Morse quasi-geodesic of sufficient scale in $X$ is finite Hausdorff distance from any quasi-geodesic between its endpoints. However, unlike the $\CAT(0)$ case, the argument requires substantially more care and technicalities. The main steps of the proof are outlined below with work on the proof beginning in the next section.
\begin{enumerate}[{Step} 1:]
\item \label{item:local_qg_with_bounded projections} Use the local-to-global property of quasi-geodesics in the hyperbolic space $\cone{X}$ to prove a local version of Corollary \ref{cor:bounded projections implies Morse}, i.e., any local quasi-geodesic where the projection of every local segment is uniformly bounded is a Morse quasi-geodesic (Section \ref{subsec:local_qg_with_bounded_projections}).
\item Show any local Morse quasi-geodesic $\gamma$ has a decomposition $\gamma = \decomposition$ and a collection of peripheral subsets $\{P_1, \dots,P_n\}$ so that
\begin{itemize}
\item each $\alpha_i$ is sufficiently long and contained in the $rR$--neighborhood of the peripheral subset $P_i$;
\item the projection of each local segment of each $\sigma_i$ to every peripheral subset is uniformly bounded (Section \ref{subsec:deep_points}).
\end{itemize}
\item Argue each $\sigma_i$ and $\alpha_i$ are Morse quasi-geodesics. For the $\sigma_i$, this follows from Step \ref{item:local_qg_with_bounded projections} since projection of each local segment of each $\sigma_i$ to every peripheral subset is uniformly bounded. For the $\alpha_i$, we apply the Morse local-to-global property of each of the peripherals $P_i$ whose $rR$--neighborhood contains $\alpha_i$ (Corollary \ref{cor: alphas are Morse q.g}).
\item \label{item:endpoints_projection} Prove the projection of the endpoints of $\gamma$ to each $P_i$ are coarsely equal to the projections of the endpoints of $\alpha_i$ to $P_i$. We show this by establishing $P_1,\dots, P_n$ are ``linearly ordered" by $\gamma$, that is, if $1\leq i<j<k\leq n$, the projection of $P_i$ onto $P_k$ is coarsely equal to the projection of $P_j$ onto $P_k$ (Section \ref{subsec:ordering_of_peripherals}).
\item \label{item:BGI} Since the $\alpha_i$ are sufficiently long, Step \ref{item:endpoints_projection} ensures that the projection of the endpoints of $\gamma$ to each of the $P_i$ are far enough apart that we can apply Lemma \ref{lem: BGI for rel hyp} to concluded that every quasi-geodesic between the endpoints of $\gamma$ must pass close to the endpoints of each $\alpha_i$ (Lemma \ref{lem: BCP for local things}).
\item Since each of the $\sigma_i$ and $\alpha_i$ are Morse quasi-geodesics, Step \ref{item:BGI} ensures any quasi-geodesic between the endpoints of $\gamma$ will be within finite Hausdorff distance from $\gamma$. This directly implies $\gamma$ has the Morse property and Lemma \ref{lem:local_close_to_global} will imply that $\gamma$ is a global quasi-geodesic.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{Local quasi-geodesics with bounded projections}\label{subsec:local_qg_with_bounded_projections}
We now study local quasi-geodesics where the projection of local subsegments to all peripheral subsets are uniformly bounded.
\begin{defn} \label{defn:bounded_projections}
An $(L;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic $\gamma$ has \emph{$D$--bounded projections} if every subsegment $\sigma \subseteq \gamma$ of parametrized length at most $L$ has $\diam(\pi_P ({\sigma}))\leq D$ for all $P \in \mc{P}$.
\end{defn}
The goal is to prove a local version of Corollary \ref{cor:bounded projections implies Morse}. That is, for each $D$ there exists a local scale $L$ so that $(L;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesics with $D$--bounded projections are global Morse quasi-geodesics.
\begin{cor}\label{cor: local qg+bounded projection=Morse}
For each $D \geq 0$, there exist $L_1= L_1(\lambda,\epsilon,D)$, $A_2 = A_2(\lambda, \epsilon, D)$, and Morse gauge $M=M(\lambda,\epsilon,D)$ so that if an $(L_1;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic $\gamma \colon I \to X$ has $D$--bounded projection, then $\gamma$ is a global $(M;A_2, A_2)$--Morse quasi-geodesic of $X$.
\end{cor}
To prove Corollary \ref{cor: local qg+bounded projection=Morse}, we first show that local quasi-geodesics with bounded projections are quasi-geodesics in~$\cone{X}$ .
\begin{prop}\label{prop:bounded_projections_imply_quasi-geodesic}
For each $D\geq 0$, there exist $\lambda' = \lambda'(\lambda,\epsilon)$, $\epsilon'=\epsilon'(\lambda,\epsilon)$, $L_1= L_1(\lambda,\epsilon,D)$ and $A_1 = A_1(\lambda, \epsilon, D)$ such that the following holds. If $\gamma \colon I \to X$ is an $(L_1;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic with $D$--bounded projections, then
\begin{enumerate}
\item ${\pi} \circ \gamma \colon I \to \widehat{X}$ is an unparametrized $(\lambda',\epsilon')$--quasi-geodesic.
\item ${\pi} \circ \gamma \colon I \to \widehat{X}$ is a parametrized $(A_1, A_1)$--quasi-geodesic.
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $k$ and $c$ be so that every $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic in $X$ is a unparametrized $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesic in $\cone{X}$ (Lemma \ref{lem: projections are unparametrized q geod}). Let $\ell$, $\lambda'$, and $\epsilon'$ be such that every $(\ell;k^3,5k^2c)$--local quasi-geodesic in the hyperbolic space $\cone{X}$ is a global $(\lambda',\epsilon')$--quasi-geodesic in $\cone{X}$ (Theorem \ref{thm:local_to_global_hyperbolic}). Let $A \geq 1$ be the constant from the distance formula (Theorem \ref{thm:distance_formula_for_rel_hyp}) with $T = T_0 +D$. Assume $L_1 \geq 20\ell A^2\lambda k(1+\epsilon+c)$ and let $\gamma \colon I \to X$ be an $(L_1;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic with $D$--bounded projections. We assume $\diam(I) > L_1$ as the proposition follows from Lemma \ref{lem: projections are unparametrized q geod} and the distance formula when $\diam(I) \leq L_1$.
For the first item, let $a_0<a_1< \dots <a_n$ be elements of $I$ such that $[a_0,a_n] =I$ and $L_1/4 \leq |a_i - a_{i+1} | \leq L_1/2$ for all $0\leq i \leq n-1$. Since ${\pi} \circ \gamma\vert_{[a_i,a_{i+1}]}$ is an unparametrized $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesic for each $0\leq i \leq n-1$, there exists real numbers $b_0 < b_1< \dots <b_n$ and a homeomorphism $f \colon [b_0,b_n] \to [a_0,a_n]$ such that $f(b_i) = a_i$ for $0 \leq i \leq n$ and ${\pi} \circ \gamma \circ f \vert_{[b_i,b_{i+1}]}$ is a $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesic in $\cone{X}$ for each $0 \leq i \leq n-1$. Let $\widetilde{\gamma} = {\pi} \circ \gamma \circ f$. The next two claims show $\widetilde{\gamma}$ is an $(\ell,k^3,5k^2c)$--local quasi-geodesic in $\cone{X}$. This implies $\widetilde{\gamma}$ is a $(\lambda',\epsilon')$--quasi-geodesic of $\cone{X}$ by the local-to-global property of quasi-geodesics in the hyperbolic space $\cone{X}$.
\begin{claim}\label{claim:reparmeterized_segments_are_long}
$2\ell \leq |b_i-b_{i+1}|$ for all $0\leq i \leq n-1$.
\end{claim}
\begin{subproof}[Proof of Claim \ref{claim:reparmeterized_segments_are_long}]
Fix $i \in \{0,1,\dots,n\}$. Since $\gamma$ has $D$--bounded projections, the distance formula with threshold $T = T_0 +D$ provides $d_{X}(\gamma(a_i),\gamma(a_{i+1})) \leq A\cdot d_{\cone{X}}\bigl(\cone{\gamma}(a_i),\cone{\gamma}(a_{i+1})\bigr) +A.$ We show $2\ell \leq |b_i-b_{i+1}|$ with the following calculation.
\begin{align*}
\frac{L_1}{4} \leq |a_i - a_{i+1}| &\leq \lambda \cdot d_X\bigl(\gamma(a_i),\gamma(a_{i+1})\bigr) +\epsilon\\
&\leq A\lambda \cdot d_{\cone{X}}\bigl(\cone{\gamma}(a_i),\cone{\gamma}(a_{i+1})\bigr) +A\lambda +\epsilon\\
&= A\lambda \cdot d_{\cone{X}}\bigl(\widetilde{\gamma}(b_i),\widetilde{\gamma}(b_{i+1})\bigr) +A\lambda +\epsilon\\
&\leq A\lambda k \cdot |b_i - b_{i+1}| +A\lambda c +A\lambda +\epsilon. \qedhere
\end{align*}
\end{subproof}
\begin{claim}\label{claim:projection_is_local_qg}
$\widetilde{\gamma}$ is an $(\ell;k^3,5k^2c)$--local quasi-geodesic in $\cone{X}$.
\end{claim}
\begin{subproof}[Proof of Claim \ref{claim:projection_is_local_qg}]
Let $s,t \in [b_0,b_n]$ with $|s-t| \leq \ell$. By Claim \ref{claim:reparmeterized_segments_are_long}, we can assume there exist $i\in \{1,\dots,n-1\}$ so that $s \in [b_{i-1},b_i]$ and $t \in [b_i,b_{i+1}]$. It suffices to show that $\widetilde{\gamma}\vert_{[b_{i-1},b_{i+1}]}$ is a $(k^3,5k^2c)$--quasi-geodesic.
Now, $\widetilde{\gamma}\vert_{[b_{i-1},b_{i+1}]}$ is a concatenation of the $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesics $\widetilde{\gamma}\vert_{[b_{i-1},b_{i}]}$ and $\widetilde{\gamma}\vert_{[b_{i},b_{i+1}]}$.
Further, $\widetilde{\gamma}\vert_{[b_{i-1},b_{i+1}]}$ is a unparametrized $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesic because $\widetilde{\gamma}\vert_{[b_{i-1},b_{i+1}]}$ is a reparametrization of $\cone{\gamma}\vert_{[a_{i-1},a_{i+1}]}$ and $\cone{\gamma}\vert_{[a_{i-1},a_{i+1}]}$ is an unparametrized $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesic since $|a_{i-1} - a_{i+1}| \leq L_1$. Thus, Lemma \ref{lem:unparametrized_concatentation} below implies $\widetilde{\gamma}\vert_{[b_{i-1},b_{i+1}]}$ is a $(k^3,5k^2c)$--quasi-geodesic.
\end{subproof}
For the second item, let $t_1, t_2 \in I$ with $|t_1 - t_2| \leq L_1$ and let $\gamma(t_1)= x_1, \gamma(t_2) = x_2$. Using the distance formula as in Claim \ref{claim:reparmeterized_segments_are_long}, we get
\[d_{\cone{X}}({\pi}(x_1),{\pi}(x_2)) \geq \frac{1}{A}d_{X}(x_1,x_2) -A \geq \frac{1}{A}\left(\frac{1}{\lambda}|t_1 -t_2|- \epsilon \right) -A.\]
Since $\pi \colon X \to \cone{X}$ is distance non-increasing, we also have
\[d_{\cone{X}}({\pi}(x_1),{\pi}(x_2))\leq d_X(x_1,x_2) \leq \lambda | t_1 - t_2| + \epsilon. \]
These calculations show that $\widehat{\gamma}$ is an $(L_1; A', A')$--local quasi-geodesic in the hyperbolic space $\cone{X}$ for some $A'= A'(\lambda,\epsilon,D)$ . By increasing $L_1$, we can use the local-to-global property of quasi-geodesics in the hyperbolic space $\cone{X}$, to obtain that $\widehat{\gamma}$ is a $(A_1, A_1)$--quasi-geodesic where $A_1 = A_1(\lambda,\epsilon,D)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:unparametrized_concatentation}
Let $Y$ be a metric space and $\gamma_1 \colon [a,b] \to Y$ and $\gamma_2\colon [b,d] \to Y$ be $(k, c)$--quasi-geodesics with $\gamma_1(b) = \gamma_2(b)$. If the concatenation $\gamma_1 \ast \gamma_2$ is an unparametrized $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesic, then $\gamma_1\ast\gamma_2$ is a $(k^3, 5k^2 c)$--quasi-geodesic.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $f \colon [a',d'] \to [a,d]$ be the homeomorphism of $\gamma_1 \ast \gamma_2$ so that $ (\gamma_1 \ast \gamma_2) \circ f$ is a $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesic. Let $\gamma = \gamma_1 \ast \gamma_2$ and $s,t \in [a,d]$. Let $s', t',b' \in [a',d']$ so that $s = f(s')$, $t= f(t')$, and $b = f(b')$. Without loss of generality, we can assume $s \in [a,b]$ and $t\in[b,d]$. The fact that $d\big(\gamma(s), \gamma(t) \bigr) \leq k |s-t| +2c$ follows from the triangle inequality. The other inequality is the following calculation.
\begin{align*}
|s-t| &\leq k \cdot d\big(\gamma(s), \gamma(b) \bigr) + k \cdot d\big(\gamma(b), \gamma(t) \bigr) +2c \\
&= k \cdot d\big(\gamma(f(s')), \gamma(f(b')) \bigr) + k \cdot d\big(\gamma(f(b')), \gamma(f(t')) \bigr) +2c\\
&\leq k^2|s' -t'| +4k c\\
&\leq k^3 \cdot d\big(\gamma(f(s')), \gamma(f(t')) \bigr) + 5k^2 c\\
&= k^3 \cdot d\big(\gamma(s), \gamma(t) \bigr) + 5k^2 c. \qedhere
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
We now apply Corollaries \ref{cor:qi-emebed iff bounded projections} and \ref{cor:bounded projections implies Morse} to finish the proof Corollary \ref{cor: local qg+bounded projection=Morse}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Corollary \ref{cor: local qg+bounded projection=Morse}]
Let $L_1 = L_1(\lambda,\epsilon,D)$ be the local scale from Proposition \ref{prop:bounded_projections_imply_quasi-geodesic} and $\gamma$ be an $(L_1,\lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic with $D$--bounded projection. By Proposition \ref{prop:bounded_projections_imply_quasi-geodesic}, $\pi \circ \gamma$ is a parametrized $(A_1,A_1)$--quasi-geodesic where $A_1 = A_1(\lambda,\epsilon,D)$. The fact that $\gamma$ is an $(A_2, A_2)$--quasi-geodesic for $A_2 = A_2(\lambda,\epsilon,D)$ then follows from Lemma \ref{lem: Folklore}. Since $\pi \circ \gamma$ is a parametrized $(A_1,A_1)$--quasi-geodesic, Corollary \ref{cor:qi-emebed iff bounded projections} provides a constant $C = C(\lambda,\epsilon,D)$ so that $\diam(\pi_P(\gamma)) \leq C$ for each $P \in \mc{P}$. By Corollary \ref{cor:bounded projections implies Morse}, $\gamma$ is $M$--Morse for some $M$ depending ultimately on $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, and~$D$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Deep points decomposition of local quasi-geodesics}\label{subsec:deep_points}
As a consequence of the isolation and quasiconvexity of the peripheral subsets (Lemmas \ref{lem:intersection of peripherals} and \ref{lem: quasi-geodesics remain in a nbhd}), any quasi-geodesic $\gamma$ in $X$ has a decomposition $\gamma = \decomposition$ so that each $\alpha_i$ is ``deep" in a peripheral, i.e., $\alpha_i$ runs close to a single peripheral for a long time, and each $\sigma_i$ avoids getting close to any peripheral for a significant length of time (see \cite{Hruska10} and \cite{Sisto_metric_rel_hyp} for details). The goal of this section is to give a similar decomposition for local quasi-geodesics in $X$. We begin by defining when an element $t$ of the domain of a local quasi-geodesic $\gamma$ is ``deep" in a peripheral $P \in \mc{P}$. This means that we can find points $s_1$, $s_2$ on either side of $t$ whose distance from $t$ is between $\theta$ and $L/4$ and with $\gamma(s_1)$,$\gamma(s_2)$ close to $P$.
\begin{defn}[Deep points]
Let $X$ be hyperbolic relative to a collection $\mc{P}$ of peripheral subsets and $\gamma \colon I \to X$ be an $(L;\lambda, \epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic where $L \geq 12\theta$. A number $t \in I$ is \emph{$P$--deep} for some $P \in \mc{P}$, if there are $s_1 <t <s_2$ in $I$ such that $\theta \leq |s_i - t| \leq L/4$ and $d(\gamma(s_i), P)\leq rR$. We say $s_1$ (resp. $s_2$) is a \emph{left (resp. right) witness of $t$}. For each $P \in \mc{P}$, define $\operatorname{deep}(\gamma;P)$ to be the set of $P$--deep elements of $I$.
\end{defn}
The next three results establish that $\operatorname{deep}(\gamma;P)$ is a collection of disjoint intervals and isolated points of the domain of $\gamma$ and that points in the domain of $\gamma$ cannot be deep for two different peripherals.
\begin{lem}\label{lem: deep points are uniformly near}
Let $\gamma \colon I \to X$ be an $(L; \lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic, where $L \geq 12 \theta$. If $t \in \operatorname{deep}(\gamma;P)$, then there exists $u_1<t<u_2$ so that $\gamma([u_1,u_2]) \subseteq N_{rR} (P)$ and $\theta/2 \leq |t-u_i| \leq L/4$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $s_1, s_2$ be the left and right witnesses of $t \in \operatorname{deep}(\gamma;P)$. Since $\gamma(s_i) \in \mc{N}_{rR}(P)$ and $\gamma \vert_{[s_1,s_2]}$ is a $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic,\[d\bigl( \pi_P(\gamma(s_1)), \pi_P(\gamma(s_2)) \bigl) \geq \frac{2\theta}{\lambda} - \epsilon - 2rR-2 > Q.\] By Lemmas \ref{lem: BGI for rel hyp} and \ref{lem: quasi-geodesics remain in a nbhd}, there exists $[u_1, u_2] \subseteq [s_1,s_2]$ so that $|s_i - u_i|\leq (2rR+1)\lambda + \epsilon$ and $\gamma([u_1,u_2])$ is contained in $\mc{N}_{r R}(P)$. Since $|s_i - u_i|< \theta/2$ and $\theta \leq |s_i -t| \leq L/4 $, $t \in [u_1, u_2]$ and $\theta/2 \leq |t-u_i| \leq L/4$.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{cor:unique peripherals for deep points}
Let $\gamma \colon I \to X$ be an $(L; \lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic, where $L \geq 12 \theta$. For all distinct $P,U \in \mc{P}$, $\operatorname{deep}(\gamma;P) \cap \operatorname{deep}(\gamma;U) = \emptyset$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Suppose there exists $t \in \operatorname{deep}(\gamma;P) \cap \operatorname{deep}(\gamma;U)$ where $P \neq U$ and let $F \colon [0,\infty) \to [0,\infty)$ be the function from Lemma \ref{lem:intersection of peripherals} that bounds the coarse intersection of $P$ and $U$. Let $[p_1,p_2]$ and $[u_1,u_2]$ be the intervals containing $t$ provided by Lemma \ref{lem: deep points are uniformly near} for $P$ and $U$ respectively. Without loss of generality, assume $p_1 \leq u_1$. Thus, $\gamma(u_1),\gamma(t) \in \mc{N}_{rR}(P) \cap \mc{N}_{rR}(U)$ and \[d(\gamma(t),\gamma(u_1)) \geq \frac{\theta}{2\lambda} - \epsilon \geq F(rR)\] by choice of $\theta$. However, this contradicts Lemma \ref{lem:intersection of peripherals}, so we must have~$\operatorname{deep}(\gamma;P) \cap \operatorname{deep}(\gamma;U)=\hspace{-3mm}~\emptyset$.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{cor: deep points are a disjoint union}
Let $\gamma \colon I \to X$ be an $(L;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic with $L \geq 12 \theta$. If $[t_1,t_2] \subseteq I$ so that $|t_1 - t_2| \leq L/4$ and $t_1,t_2 \in \operatorname{deep}(\gamma;P)$ for some $P \in \mc{P}$, then we have $[t_1,t_2] \subseteq \operatorname{deep}(\gamma;P)$.
In particular, for each $P \in \mc{P}$, $\operatorname{deep}(\gamma;P)$ is a (possibly empty) union of disjoint intervals and isolated points of $I$ where the distance between any two connected components of $\operatorname{deep}(\gamma;P)$ is greater than $L/4$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Let $t \in [t_1,t_2]$. We give the proof of the existence of a left witness for $t$. The proof for a right witness is analogous.
Let $s_1, s_2 \in I$ be a left and right witnesses for $t_1$ respectively. If $|t - t_1| \geq \theta$ or $|s_1 - t| \leq L/4$, then either $t_1$ or $s_1$ is a left witness for $t$. Suppose $|t - t_1| \leq \theta$ and $|s_1 - t| \geq L/4$. Thus, $|t_1 - s_1| \geq L/4 - \theta \geq 2\theta$.
By Lemma \ref{lem: deep points are uniformly near}, $\gamma(t_1)$ and $\gamma(s_1)$ are both within $rR$ of $P$, so $d\bigl( \pi_P(\gamma(t_1)),\pi_P(\gamma(s_1)) \bigr) > Q$ and Lemmas \ref{lem: BGI for rel hyp} and \ref{lem: quasi-geodesics remain in a nbhd} produces $[u_1,u_2] \subseteq [s_1,t_1]$ so that \[d\bigl( \pi_P(\gamma(s_1)) , \gamma(u_1) \bigr) \leq R \text{ and } d\bigl( \pi_P(\gamma(t_1)) , \gamma(u_2) \bigr) \leq R\] and $\gamma\bigl( [u_1,u_2] \bigr)$ is contained in the $rR$--neighborhood of $P$.
Since \[d\bigl( \pi_P(\gamma(s_1)), \gamma(s_1) \bigr)\leq rR+1 \text{ and } d\bigl( \pi_P(\gamma(t_1)), \gamma(t_1) \bigr) \leq rR+1\] and $\gamma \vert_{[s_1,t_1]}$ is a $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic, $|s_1 - u_1| \leq \theta$ and $|t_1 - u_2| \leq \theta$.
In particular, $|u_1 - t| \geq \theta$ and $|u_2 - t| \leq 2\theta$. Thus, there exists $\tau \in [u_1,u_2]$ so that $\theta \leq |\tau - t| \leq L/4$ and $\gamma(\tau) \in \mc{N}_{rR}(P)$.
\end{proof}
Corollaries \ref{cor:unique peripherals for deep points} and \ref{cor: deep points are a disjoint union} establish that the domain of a local quasi-geodesic can be decomposed into non-overlapping deep points for peripheral subsets and points that are not deep for any peripheral. However, we want to ensure that the deep parts of our decomposition run near the peripheral for a sufficiently long time. To achieve this, we define the following \emph{relevant decomposition} of a local quasi-geodesic.
\begin{defn}[Relevant subsegments, relevant decomposition] \label{defn: relevant decomposition}
Let $B \geq 0$ and $\gamma \colon I \to X$ be an $(L;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic with $L \geq 12\theta$. A subsegment $\alpha \subseteq \gamma$ is \emph{$B$--relevant} if the parametrized length of $\alpha$ is at least $B$ and there exists $P \in \mc{P}$ so that the domain of $\alpha$ is the closure of a connected component of $\operatorname{deep}(\gamma;P)$. If $\operatorname{Relevant}_B(\gamma) = \{\alpha_i\}_{i=1}^n$ is the set of $B$--relevant subsegments of $\gamma$, then Corollaries \ref{cor:unique peripherals for deep points} and \ref{cor: deep points are a disjoint union}, decompose $\gamma$ into a concatenation:
\[\gamma= \sigma_0 \ast \alpha_1 \ast \sigma_1 \ast \cdots \ast \alpha_n \ast \sigma_n,\] where each $\sigma_i$ does not contain a $B$--relevant subsegment of $\gamma$. We call this decomposition the \emph{$B$--relevant decomposition of $\gamma$}. For each $\alpha_i \in \operatorname{Relevant}_B(\gamma)$, there exists a single $P_i \in \mc{P}$ so that the interior of the domain of $\alpha_i$ is a subset of $\operatorname{deep}(\gamma;P_i)$. We call $P_i$ the \emph{relevant peripheral for $\alpha_i$} and the set $\{P_i\}_{i=1}^n$ the \emph{relevant peripherals for $\gamma$}.
\end{defn}
The next two lemmas give some basic properties of the relevant decomposition of a local quasi-geodesic. Lemma \ref{lem:alphas are close and sigmas have bounded projections} says the $\alpha_i$ of the decomposition run close to the relevant peripheral $P_i$ while the $\sigma_i$ have bounded projection (in terms of $B$) and hence cannot run close to any peripheral subset. Lemma \ref{lem:adjacent_relevant_peripherals_are_distinct} says relevant peripherals for ``adjacent" $\alpha_i$ must be distinct.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:alphas are close and sigmas have bounded projections}
For every $B >2 \theta$ and $L \geq 12\theta$, if $\decomposition$ is the $B$--relevant decomposition of an $(L; \lambda, \epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic $\gamma$, then
\begin{enumerate}
\item \label{item:relevant} $\alpha_i \subseteq \mc{N}_{r R} (P_i)$ where $P_i$ is the relevant peripheral for $\alpha_i$;
\item \label{item:non-relevant} each $\sigma_i$ has $\lambda(4 B + \epsilon)$--bounded projections.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Item (\ref{item:relevant}) follows immediately from Lemma \ref{lem: deep points are uniformly near}. For Item (\ref{item:non-relevant}), let $t_1,t_2$ be in the domain of $\sigma_i$ with $|t_1 - t_2| \leq L/4$. Suppose $d\bigl(\pi_P(\sigma_i(t_1)),\pi_P(\sigma_i(t_2))\bigr) \geq \lambda(4 B + \epsilon)$ for some $P\in\mc{P}$. By Lemma \ref{lem: BGI for rel hyp}, we can find points $[s_1, s_2] \subseteq [t_1,t_2]$ with $|s_1 -s_2| >3B$ so that $\sigma_i(t_1)$ and $\sigma_i(t_2)$ are within $R$ of $\pi_{P}(\sigma_i(t_1))$ and $\pi_{P}(\sigma_i(t_1))$ respectively. Since $3\theta < 3B \leq |s_1 - s_2| \leq L/4 $, Lemma \ref{lem: quasi-geodesics remain in a nbhd} implies $[s_1 + B, s_2-B] \subseteq \operatorname{deep}(\gamma;P)$, contradicting the definition of $\sigma_i$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:adjacent_relevant_peripherals_are_distinct}
For every $B >2\theta$, there exists $L_2 = L_2(\lambda,\epsilon,B)$ so that if $\decomposition$ is the $B$--relevant decomposition of an $(L_2; \lambda, \epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic $\gamma$ and $\{P_1,\dots, P_n\}$ are the relevant peripherals for $\gamma$, then $P_i \neq P_{i+1}$ for each $1 \leq 1 \leq n-1$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $L_1 = L_1(\lambda,\epsilon,B)$ and $A_1 = A_1(\lambda,\epsilon, B)$ be the constants from Proposition \ref{prop:bounded_projections_imply_quasi-geodesic} so that if $\eta$ is an $(L_1,\lambda, \epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic in $X$ with the {$\lambda(4 B + \epsilon)$}--bounded projections, then $\pi \circ \eta$ is an $(A_1,A_1)$--quasi-geodesic in $\cone{X}$.
Let $L_2 = L_1+ 12\theta A^2_1 $ and $\gamma$ be an $(L_2,\lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic with $B$--relevant decomposition $\decomposition$ and relevant peripherals $\{P_1,\dots, P_n\}$.
Suppose $P_i =P_{i+1}$ for some $1 \leq i \leq n-1$.
Let $I$ be the domain for $\gamma$ and $[a,b] \subseteq I$ be the domain of $\sigma_i $.
If $|a-b| \leq L_2/4$, then Corollary \ref{cor: deep points are a disjoint union} would imply $[a,b] \subseteq \operatorname{deep}(\gamma;P_i)$ contradicting the definition of $\sigma_i$. If $|a-b| > L_2/4$, then $\pi \circ \sigma_i(a)$ and $\pi\circ \sigma_i(b)$ are more than $2+2rR$ far apart in $\cone{X}$ as $\pi\circ \sigma_i$ is a $(A_1,A_1)$--quasi-geodesic and $L_2 /(4A_1) - A_1 >\theta > 2 + 2rR$.
However, this contradicts that $\gamma(a), \gamma(b) \in \mc{N}_{rR}(P_i)$. Therefore, we must have that $P_i \neq P_{i+1}$.
\end{proof}
A simple, but central application of Lemma \ref{lem:alphas are close and sigmas have bounded projections} is establishing that the $\sigma_i$ and $\alpha_i$ are Morse quasi-geodesics. Since the $\sigma_i$ have bounded projections, Corollary \ref{cor: local qg+bounded projection=Morse} implies, for sufficient local scale, they are Morse quasi-geodesics, regardless of what the peripheral subsets are. When the peripheral subsets have the Morse local-to-global property, then there is a local scale so that the $\alpha_i$ will also be Morse quasi-geodesics by virtue of the fact that they run close to the peripheral $P_i$.
\begin{cor}\label{cor: sigma_i are Morse q.g}
For all $B > 2\theta$, there exists constants $L_1 = L_1(\lambda,\epsilon,B)$, $A_2 = A_2(\lambda,\epsilon,B)$, and Morse gauge $M = M(\lambda,\epsilon,B)$ so that if $\decomposition$ is the $B$--relevant decomposition of an $(L_2;\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic, then each $\sigma_i$ is an $(M;A_1,A_1)$--Morse quasi-geodesic.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Apply Corollary \ref{cor: local qg+bounded projection=Morse} with $D = \lambda(4B+\epsilon)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{cor: alphas are Morse q.g}
Suppose every $P \in \mc{P}$ has the $\Phi$--Morse local-to-global property. For every Morse gauge $M$, there are constants $L_3 \geq 12 \theta$, $k$, $c$ and Morse gauge $N$ (all depending only on $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, and $M$) so that for every $B > 2\theta$, if $\decomposition$ is the $B$--relevant decomposition of an $(L_3; M; \lambda, \epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic $\gamma$, then each $\alpha_i$ is an $(N;k,c)$--Morse quasi-geodesics.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Recall $\alpha_i \subseteq \mc{N}_{rR}(P_i)$ by Proposition \ref{lem:alphas are close and sigmas have bounded projections}. Since $P_i$ has the $\Phi$--Morse local-to-global property, $\mc{N}_{rR}(P_i)$, equipped with the induced metric from $X$, has the $\Psi$--Morse local-to-global property where $\Psi$ ultimately depends only on $\Phi$, $\lambda$, and $\epsilon$. Thus, there exist constants $L_3$, $\lambda_0$, $\epsilon_0$ and Morse gauge $M_0$ so that $\Psi(M,\lambda,\epsilon) = (L_3,M_0,\lambda_0,\epsilon_0)$ and if $\gamma$ is an $(L_3;M;\lambda, \epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic, then each $\alpha_i$ is an $(M_0;\lambda_0,\epsilon_0)$--Morse quasi-geodesic in $\mc{N}_{rR}(P_i)$. The distance formula (Theorem \ref{thm:distance_formula_for_rel_hyp}) and Lemma \ref{lem: quasi-geodesics remain in a nbhd} then imply each $\alpha_i$ is an $(N;k,c)$--Morse quasi-geodesic in $X$ where $N$, $k$, and $c$ ultimately depend only on $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, and $M$.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}[Uniformity of $\Phi$]
Corollary \ref{cor: alphas are Morse q.g} is the key place in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:local_to_global_and_relative_hyperbolicity} where the Morse local-to-global property of the peripheral subsets is used. The requirement that the Morse local-to-global property is controlled by the same function $\Phi$ for each element of $\mc{P}$ is precisely to ensure that each $\alpha_i$ is a Morse quasi-geodesic whose parameters do not depend on which peripherals are relevant.
\end{rem}
\subsection{Ordered projections of relevant peripherals}\label{subsec:ordering_of_peripherals}
The goal of this section is to prove that if $ \decomposition$ is the $B$--relevant decomposition of a local Morse quasi-geodesic $\gamma$, then the distance between the projection of the endpoints of $\gamma$ to any relevant peripheral $P_i$ is bounded below the by a linear function of $B$. We first show each $\sigma_i$ has uniformly bounded projection (independent of $B$) onto the relevant peripherals immediately before and after $\sigma_i$ (Proposition \ref{prop: adjacent projection of sigmas are bounded}). Next, we establish that the relevant peripherals are ``linearly ordered" along the local quasi-geodesic, that is, if $1\leq i<j<k \leq n$, the projection of $P_i$ onto $P_k$ is uniformly close to the projection of $P_j$ onto $P_k$ (Proposition \ref{prop: Behrstock inequality for local qg}). These two facts mean that the projection of $P_1$ and $P_n$ to each other relevant peripheral $P_i$ coarsely equal the endpoints of $\alpha_i$. Since each $\alpha_i$ is a quasi-geodesic with parametrized length at least $B$, the distance between $\pi_{P_i}(P_1)$ and $\pi_{P_i}(P_n)$ will be bounded below by a linear function of $B$ for each other relevant peripheral (Corollary \ref{cor: the distance between projections of domains depends on B}). Finally, we show that the projection of the endpoints of $\gamma$ onto any $P_i$ must agree with the projection of $P_1$ and $P_n$ onto $P_n$ (Corollary \ref{cor:endpoints_project_to_peripherals}).
We begin with proving the projection of $\sigma_i$ onto $P_i$ and $P_{i+1}$ is bounded independent of $B$.
\begin{prop}\label{prop: adjacent projection of sigmas are bounded}
There exists a constant $K_0= K_0(\lambda, \epsilon)$ so that the following holds. For every $B > 2\theta$ there exists $L_4 =L_4(\lambda,\epsilon, B)$ so that if $\sigma_0 \ast \alpha_1 \ast \sigma_1 \ast \cdots \alpha_n \ast \sigma_n$ is the $B$--relevant decomposition of an $(L_4;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic $\gamma$, then $\mathrm{diam} (\pi_{P_{i}}(\sigma_{i-1})) \leq K_0$ and $\mathrm{diam} (\pi_{P_{i}}(\sigma_{i})) \leq K_0$ for each $1\leq i \leq n$.
\end{prop}
We first show that the conclusion of Proposition \ref{prop: adjacent projection of sigmas are bounded} holds for the portion of the $\sigma_i$ that is close to its endpoints.
\begin{lem}\label{lem: the sigma coarsely project near at the endpoints}
There exists $C = C (\lambda, \epsilon)$ such that the following holds. Let $L \geq 12\theta$, $B >2\theta$, and $\sigma_0\ast \alpha_1 \ast \sigma_1 \ast \dots \alpha_n \ast \sigma_n$ be the $B$--relevant decomposition of an $(L;\lambda, \epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic $\gamma$. If $[a_i,b_i]$ is the domain of $\sigma_i$ and $s_i, t_i \in [a_i,b_i]$ so that $|a_i - s_i| \leq L/4$ and $|b_i-t_i| \leq L/4$, then \[ \diam\bigl(\pi_{P_i} (\gamma\vert_{[a_i,s_i]}) \bigr) \leq C \text{ and } \diam\bigl(\pi_{P_{i+1}}(\gamma\vert_{[t_i,b_i]}) \bigr)\leq C\]
whenever $P_i$ or $P_{i+1}$ exists.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We shall only prove the case of $\gamma \vert_{[a_i,s_i]}$ as the other case is analogous.
Let $C = 2\lambda(2\theta + 2R+\epsilon+1)$.
There exists $[v_1,v_2] \subseteq [a_i, s_i]$ so that $d\bigl(\pi_{P_i}(\gamma(v_1)), \pi_{P_i}(\gamma(v_2)\bigr)\geq C/2$.
By Lemma \ref{lem: BGI for rel hyp}
there is $[u_1,u_2] \subseteq [v_1, v_2]$ such that \[d\bigl( \gamma(u_1), \pi_{P_i}(\gamma(v_1)) \bigr) \leq R \text{ and } d\bigl( \gamma(u_2), \pi_{P_i}(\gamma(v_2)) \bigr) \leq R.\]
Since $\gamma\vert_{[a_i, s_i]}$ is a $(\lambda,\epsilon)$--quasi-geodesic, the choice of $C$ gives us $2\theta +1 \leq |u_1 - u_2| \leq L/4$. Thus, there exists $\tau \in (u_1,u_2) \cap \operatorname{deep}(\gamma;P_{i})$. By Corollary \ref{cor: deep points are a disjoint union}, $[a_i,\tau] \subseteq \operatorname{deep}(\gamma;P_{i})$, but this is a contradiction to the fact that $\alpha_{i}$ is $B$--relevant for $P_{i}$. Thus, we must have $\mathrm{diam}\bigl(\pi_P(\gamma\vert_{{[a_i, s_i]}}) \bigr)\leq C.$
\end{proof}
To prove the general case of Proposition \ref{prop: adjacent projection of sigmas are bounded}, we employ the following lemma of Sisto.
\begin{lem}[{\cite[Lemma 4.14]{Sisto_metric_rel_hyp}}]\label{lem: BGI in cone-off}
There exists $C_1 >0$ so that for every $\lambda'\geq 1$ and $\epsilon' \geq 0$ there exists $C_2 = C_2(\lambda',\epsilon')$ such that if $\widehat{\gamma}$ is a $(\lambda',\epsilon')$--quasi-geodesic of $\widehat{X}$ connecting $x,y$ and $\widehat{\gamma}$ does not intersect the $C_2$--neighborhood of $P \in \mc{P}$ in $\cone{X}$, then $d\bigl(\pi_P(x), \pi_P(y)\bigr) \leq C_1.$
\end{lem}
In light of Lemmas \ref{lem: the sigma coarsely project near at the endpoints} and \ref{lem: BGI in cone-off}, Proposition \ref{prop: adjacent projection of sigmas are bounded} will follow if we can show that the portion of $\sigma_i$ far from the endpoints satisfies the hypotheses of Lemma \ref{lem: BGI in cone-off}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{prop: adjacent projection of sigmas are bounded}]
We only show that the projection of $\sigma_{i-1}$ onto $P_{i}$ is uniformly bounded as the other case is analogous. Let $c_P$ be the cone point of $P_{i}$.
Let $L_1 = L_1(\lambda,\epsilon,B)$, $\lambda' = \lambda'(\lambda,\epsilon)$, $\epsilon'=\epsilon'(\lambda,\epsilon)$, and $A_1= A_1(\lambda, \epsilon, B )$ be the constants from Proposition \ref{prop:bounded_projections_imply_quasi-geodesic} such that if $\eta$ is an $(L_1;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local quasi-geodesic of $X$ with $\lambda(4B+\epsilon)$--bounded projections, then $\pi \circ \eta$ is a unparametrized $(\lambda', \epsilon')$--quasi-geodesic and a parametrized $(A_1,A_1)$--quasi-geodesic in $\cone{X}$. Let $C_1, C_2$ be the constants of Lemma \ref{lem: BGI in cone-off} applied to $\lambda', \epsilon'$. Assume $L_4 \geq 8 (A_1 (C_2 + rR +1) + A_1 + L_1 + 12\theta)$.
Let $[a,b]$ be the domain of $\sigma_{i-1}$. If $|a-b| \leq L_4/4$, then the result follows from Lemma \ref{lem: the sigma coarsely project near at the endpoints}. So, suppose there exists $c \in (a,b)$ so that $|c-b| = L_4/4$. Since Lemma \ref{lem: the sigma coarsely project near at the endpoints} bounded the diameter of $\pi_{P_i}\bigl( \sigma_{i-1}([c,b])\bigr)$, our goal is to bound the diameter of $\pi_{P_{i}}\bigl(\sigma_{i-1}([a,c]) \bigr)$.
By Lemma \ref{lem:alphas are close and sigmas have bounded projections}, $\sigma_{i-1}(b)$ lies in the $rR$--neighborhood of $P_{i}$ in $X$, so ${\pi} \circ \sigma_{i-1}(b)$ has distance at most $rR+1$ from $c_P$ in $\widehat{X}$.
Since $\pi \circ \sigma_{i-1}$ is a parametrized $(A_1, A_1)$--quasi-geodesic, the choice of $L_4$ yields
\[ ({\pi}\circ \sigma_{i-1})^{-1} \bigl( \mc{N}_{C_2}(c_P) \bigr) \subseteq (c,b].\]
In particular, $\pi \circ \sigma_{i-1} \vert_{[a,c]}$ is an unparametrized $(\lambda', \epsilon')$--quasi-geodesic of $\widehat{X}$ that does not intersect the $(C_2+1)$--neighborhood of $c_P$. Lemma \ref{lem: BGI in cone-off} now yields the result.
\end{proof}
Corollary \ref{cor: alphas are Morse q.g} established that the relevant subsegments of the decomposition are global Morse quasi-geodesics when the peripherals have the Morse local-to-global property. Since the diameter of the projection of $\sigma_{i-1}$ and $\sigma_i$ to the relevant peripheral $P_i$ are bounded independent of $B$, we can use the quasi-geodesic $\alpha_i$ to produce a linear lower bound on the distance between $\pi_{P_i}(\sigma_{i-1})$ and $\pi_{P_i}(\sigma_i)$ in terms of $B$.
\begin{cor}\label{cor: relevant implies large projection}
Suppose each $P\in\mc{P}$ has the $\Phi$--Morse local-to-global property. Let $B > 2 \theta$ and $M$ be a Morse gauge. There exist constants $L_5 = L_5(\lambda,\epsilon, B,M)$ and $A_3 = A_3 (\lambda,\epsilon,M)$ so that if $\sigma_0 \ast \alpha_1 \ast \dots \ast\alpha_n \ast \sigma_n$ is the $B$--relevant decomposition of an $(L_5;M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic and $P_i$ is the relevant peripheral for $\alpha_i$, then
\[d\bigl( \pi_{P_i}(\sigma_{i-1}), \pi_{P_i}(\sigma_{i}) \bigr) \geq \frac{1}{A_3}B - A_3.\]
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Let $L_5 = \max\{L_3,L_4\}+1$ where $L_3 = L_3(\lambda,\epsilon, B,M)$ and $L_4 = L_4(\lambda,\epsilon, B,M)$ are the constants from Corollary \ref{cor: alphas are Morse q.g} and Proposition \ref{prop:bounded_projections_imply_quasi-geodesic} respectively. Let $k = k(\lambda,\epsilon, M)$ and $c = c(\lambda,\epsilon, M)$ be the constants from Corollary \ref{cor: alphas are Morse q.g} so that each $\alpha_i$ is a $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesic. If $x_i$ and $y_i$ are the left and right endpoints of $\alpha_i$ respectively, then $x_i,y_i \in \mc{N}_{rR}(P_i)$ by Lemma \ref{lem:alphas are close and sigmas have bounded projections}. Let $K_0 = K_0(\lambda,\epsilon)$ be the constant from Proposition \ref{prop: adjacent projection of sigmas are bounded} so that the diameter of $\pi_{P_i}(\sigma_{i-1})$ and $\pi_{P_i}(\sigma_i)$ is at most $K_0$. Recall, $d(x_i,y_i) \geq B/k - c$, since $\alpha_i$ has parametrized length at least $B$ (Definition \ref{defn: relevant decomposition}). Thus, we establish the corollary with the following calculation:
\begin{align*}
\frac{1}{k}B - c \leq& d(x_i,y_i)\\
\leq& d\left(\pi_{P_i}(x_i),\pi_{P_i}(y_i)\right) + 2rR+2\\
\leq& d\left( \pi_{P_i}(\sigma_{i-1}),\pi_{P_i}(\sigma_i) \right) +2rR +2 +2K_0.\qedhere
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
We now pause to define a local scale $\Lambda$ larger than any of the local scales required by any of the results in this section up until this point. This will allow all of the proceeding results to apply to any $(\Lambda;M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic in $X$. This scale depends on the relevancy constant $B$ from the decomposition of the local quasi-geodesic, the Morse gauge $M$, our fixed quasi-geodesic constants $\lambda$ and $\epsilon$, and the function $\Phi$ governing the Morse local-to-global property of the peripherals.
\begin{defn}[Largest local scale given $B$, $M$, and $\Phi$]
Given $B > 2\theta$, a Morse gauge $M$, and a Morse local-to-global function $\Phi$, let $L_1 = (\lambda,\epsilon,D)$ be constant from Proposition \ref{prop:bounded_projections_imply_quasi-geodesic} for $D = \lambda(4B + \epsilon)$ and $L_2$, $L_3$, $L_4$, and $L_5$ be the constants depending on $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, $B$, and $M$ from Lemma \ref{lem:adjacent_relevant_peripherals_are_distinct}, Corollary \ref{cor: alphas are Morse q.g}, Proposition \ref{prop: adjacent projection of sigmas are bounded}, and Corollary \ref{cor: relevant implies large projection}. Define $\Lambda_\Phi(\lambda,\epsilon,B,M) = \max\{L_1,L_2,L_3,L_4,L_5,12 \theta\}+1$.
\end{defn}
We now show the second main tool of this section, the linear ordering of the relevant peripheral subsets along the local Morse quasi-geodesic.
\begin{prop}\label{prop: Behrstock inequality for local qg} Suppose every $P \in \mc{P}$ has the $\Phi$--Morse local-to-global property. For each Morse gauge $M$, there exist constants $K_1 = K_1(\lambda,\epsilon)$ and $B_1 = B_1(\lambda,\epsilon,M)$ such that the following holds for for any $B \geq B_1$. Let $\Lambda = \Lambda_\Phi (\lambda,\epsilon,B,M)$ and $\sigma_0 \ast \alpha_1 \ast \sigma_1 \ast \cdots \ast \alpha_n \ast \sigma_n$ be the $B$--relevant decomposition of a $(\Lambda;M;\lambda, \epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic $\gamma$. If $\{P_1,\dots,P_n\}$ are the relevant peripherals for $\gamma$, then for all $1\leq i<j<k \leq n$ \[ \pi_{P_k}(P_i) \subseteq \mc{N}_{K_1}\left(\pi_{P_k}(P_j)\right) \text{ and } \pi_{P_i}(P_k) \subseteq \mc{N}_{K_1}\left(\pi_{P_i}(P_j)\right).\]
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} We only show the first containment as the second follows analogously.
Assume $B > 2\theta$. By Lemma \ref{lem:adjacent_relevant_peripherals_are_distinct}, we know $P_{i-1} \neq P_i$ and $P_{i+1} \neq P_i$.
By Proposition \ref{prop: adjacent projection of sigmas are bounded}, there exists $K_0 = K_0(\lambda, \epsilon)$ so that \[\diam(\pi_{P_i}(\sigma_{i-1}))\leq K_0 \text{ and } \diam(\pi_{P_i}(\sigma_{i})) \leq K_0.\]
By Lemma \ref{lem:alphas are close and sigmas have bounded projections}, we have \[\sigma_{i-1} \cap \mc{N}_{rR}(P_{i}) \neq \emptyset \text{ and } \sigma_{i} \cap \mc{N}_{rR}(P_{i}) \neq \emptyset.\] Using the fact that $\pi_{P_i}$ is $(\mu, \mu)$--coarsely Lipschitz and Corollary \ref{cor: relevant implies large projection} we obtain:
\begin{align*}
d\bigl( \pi_{P_{i}}(P_{i-1}), \pi_{P_i}(P_{i+1}) \bigr) &\geq d \bigl( \pi_{P_i}(\sigma_{i-1}),\pi_{P_i}(\sigma_{i+1})\bigr) - 2\mu (rR + 1) - 2K_0 \\
&\geq \frac{1}{A_3}B - A_3 -2\mu (rR + 1)-2K_0 \tag{$\ast$} \label{eq:adjacent_sigmas_have_big_projection}
\end{align*}
where $A_3 = A_3 (\lambda,\epsilon,M)$ is as in Corollary \ref{cor: relevant implies large projection}.
Let $K_1 = {\mu} R + 4{\mu}$, and suppose that $B_1 > 2\theta$ is chosen large enough so that for $B \geq B_1$, (\ref{eq:adjacent_sigmas_have_big_projection}) yields
\[ d\bigl( \pi_{P_{i}}(P_{i-1}), \pi_{P_i}(P_{i+1}) \bigr) \geq Q + 2K_1.\]
We now proceed by induction on $n$, the number of terms in the $B$--relevant decomposition.
Assume $n=3$, so \[\gamma = \sigma_0 \ast \alpha_1 \ast \sigma_1 \ast \alpha_2 \ast \sigma_2 \ast \alpha_3 \ast \sigma_3.\] Let $x \in P_{1}$ and $y = \pi_{P_3}(x)$. Since $B \geq B_1$, (\ref{eq:adjacent_sigmas_have_big_projection}) implies $ d\bigl( \pi_{P_2}(x), \pi_{P_2}(y) \bigr) \geq Q +2K_1$. Thus, if $\beta$ is a geodesic from $x$ to $y$, then $\beta \cap \mc{N}_{R}(P_2)$ (Lemma \ref{lem: BGI for rel hyp}). By the properties of $\pi_{P_3}$ (Lemma \ref{lem:projections_lemmas}), \[\diam\bigl(\pi_{P_3}(\beta) \bigr) \leq \mu \text{ and }d\bigl( \pi_{P_3}(\beta), \pi_{P_3}(P_2) \bigr) \leq {\mu} R + {\mu}.\] This implies $\pi_{P_3}(P_1) \subseteq \mc{N}_{{\mu} R+4{\mu}}(\pi_{P_3}(P_2)) = \mc{N}_{K_1}(\pi_{P_3}(P_2))$.
Assume the proposition is true of all $n'< n$ and consider \[\gamma = \sigma_0 \ast \alpha_1\ast \sigma_1 \ast \dots \ast \alpha_n \ast \sigma_n.\]
Let $1\leq i<j<k \leq n$. If $k<n$ or $1<i$, then the induction hypothesis applies to the local quasi-geodesic $\sigma_{i-1} \ast \alpha_{i}\ast \sigma_{i} \ast \dots \alpha_k \ast \sigma_k$ and we are finished. Thus, we can assume $k=n$ and $i=1$.
Now, the induction hypothesis applies to $\sigma_{1} \ast \alpha_2\ast \sigma_2 \ast \dots \alpha_n \ast \sigma_n$ and $\sigma_{0} \ast \alpha_1\ast \sigma_1 \ast \dots \alpha_{n-1} \ast \sigma_{n-1}$. In particular, $\pi_{P_j}(P_n) \subseteq \mc{N}_{K_1}(\pi_{P_j}(P_{j+1}))$ and $\pi_{P_j}(P_1) \subseteq \mc{N}_{K_1}(\pi_{P_j}(P_{j-1}))$ for $2\leq j \leq n-1$.
By the choice of $B_1$ and (\ref{eq:adjacent_sigmas_have_big_projection}), we have \[d\bigl( \pi_{P_j}(P_1), \pi_{P_j}(P_n) \bigr) \geq Q.\] As in the base case, this implies every geodesic connecting a point $x \in P_1$ to $\pi_{P_n}(x)$ passes through $\mc{N}_R(P_j)$, yielding $\pi_{P_n}(P_1) \subseteq \mc{N}_{{\mu} R+4{\mu}}(\pi_{P_n}(P_j))=\mc{N}_{K_1}(\pi_{P_n}(P_j))$ by Lemma \ref{lem:projections_lemmas}.
\end{proof}
The ordering of the peripherals has two immediate consequences when coupled with Proposition \ref{prop: adjacent projection of sigmas are bounded}. Each relevant peripheral is in fact distinct and the distance between the projection of two relevant peripherals onto a peripheral between them is bounded below by a linear function of $B$.
\begin{cor}\label{cor: the distance between projections of domains depends on B}
Suppose each $P\in\mc{P}$ has the $\Phi$--Morse local-to-global property and let $M$ be a Morse gauge. There exist $B_2 = B_2(\lambda,\epsilon,M)$ and $A_4 = A_4(\lambda, \epsilon, M)$ so that for all $B \geq B_2$, if $\Lambda = \Lambda_\Phi (\lambda,\epsilon,B,M)$ and $\{P_1,\dots,P_n\}$ are the $B$--relevant peripherals of a $(\Lambda;M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic, then
\begin{itemize}
\item $P_i = P_j$ if and only if $i = j$;
\item $d\bigl( \pi_{P_j}(P_i), \pi_{P_j}(P_k) \bigr) \geq \frac{1}{A_4} B - A_4$ whenever $1\leq i <j<k \leq n$.
\end{itemize}
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
By Corollary \ref{cor: relevant implies large projection}, there exists $B_2 = B_2(\lambda,\epsilon,M)$ so that $B_2$ is larger than the constant $B_1 = B_1(\lambda,\epsilon,M)$ from Proposition \ref{prop: Behrstock inequality for local qg} and $\diam(P_i) \geq \mu+2K_1+10$ where $K_1 = K_1(\lambda,\epsilon)$ is the constant from Proposition \ref{prop: Behrstock inequality for local qg}.
In Lemma \ref{lem:adjacent_relevant_peripherals_are_distinct}, we showed $P_{i-1} \neq P_i$ and $P_{i+1} \neq P_i$, so $\pi_{P_i}(P_{i-1})$ and $\pi_{P_i}(P_{i+1})$ both have diameter at most $\mu$ (Lemma \ref{lem:projections_lemmas}).
Proposition \ref{prop: Behrstock inequality for local qg} implies $\pi_{P_i}(P_j)$ is contained in the $K_1$--neighborhood of $\pi_{P_i}(P_{i-1})$ or $\pi_{P_i}(P_{i+1})$. Thus, $\diam\bigl( \pi_{P_i}(P_j) \bigr) \leq \mu +2 K_1$.
If $P_i = P_j$ for $i \neq j$, then $\pi_{P_i}(P_j) = P_i$. But, this would be a contradiction as $\diam(P_i) \geq \mu + 2K_1 +10$.
The second item follows by combining Corollary \ref{cor: relevant implies large projection} with Proposition \ref{prop: Behrstock inequality for local qg} and the fact that $\sigma_{j-1} \cap \mc{N}_{rR}(P_{j-1}) \neq \emptyset$ and $\sigma_j \cap \mc{N}_{rR}(P_{j+1})\neq \emptyset $.
\end{proof}
We now use the results of this section to show that the projection of the endpoints of a local quasi-geodesic to a relevant peripheral $P_i$ are coarsely equal to the projection of the first and last relevant peripheral on $P_i$. By Corollary \ref{cor: the distance between projections of domains depends on B}, this implies the distance between the projection of the endpoints is bounded below by a linear function of the relevancy constant $B$.
\begin{cor}\label{cor:endpoints_project_to_peripherals}
Suppose each $P\in\mc{P}$ has the $\Phi$--Morse local-to-global property and let $M$ be a Morse gauge. There exists constants $B_3=B_3(\lambda,\epsilon,M)$ and $K_2 = K_2(\lambda,\epsilon)$ so that for all $B \geq B_3$, if $\Lambda =\Lambda_\Phi (\lambda,\epsilon,B,M)$ and $\sigma_0 \ast \alpha_1 \ast \dots \ast \alpha_n \ast \sigma_n$ is the $B$--relevant decomposition of a $(\Lambda;M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic, then
\[\pi_{P_i}(\sigma_0) \subseteq \mc{N}_{K_2}\bigl(\pi_{P_i}(P_1)\bigr) \text{ and } \pi_{P_i}(\sigma_n) \subseteq \mc{N}_{K_2}\bigl(\pi_{P_i}(P_n)\bigr) \text{ for all $i \in \{1,\dots,n\}$}.\]
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Let $K_1(\lambda,\epsilon)$ and $B_1(\lambda,\epsilon,M)$ be the constant from Proposition \ref{prop: Behrstock inequality for local qg}. We first show that each $\sigma_i$ has a projection onto each $P_j$ bounded independently of $B$.
\begin{claim}\label{claim: sigmas have bounded projection on all relevant domains}
There exists $B'= B'(\lambda,\epsilon,M)$ and $K' = K'(\lambda,\epsilon)$ so that if $B \geq B'$, then $\diam\bigl(\pi_{P_j}(\sigma_i)\bigr) \leq K'$ for all $i \in \{0,\dots,n\}$ and $j \in \{1,\dots,n\}$.
\end{claim}
\begin{subproof}
Without loss of generality, assume $i<j$. By Proposition \ref{prop: adjacent projection of sigmas are bounded}, we can assume $j \neq i+1$. Let $x \in \sigma_i$ and $y = \pi_{P_{i+1}}(x)$ and assume $B \geq B_1$. We first show that $d\bigl( \pi_{P_j}(x),\pi_{P_j}(y) \bigr) \leq Q$ for large enough $B$.
If $d\bigl( \pi_{P_j}(x),\pi_{P_j}(y) \bigr) \geq Q$, then every geodesic in $X$ from $x$ to $y$ passes through the $R$--neighborhood of $P_{j}$ (Lemma \ref{lem: BGI for rel hyp}).
By Lemma \ref{lem:projections_lemmas}, if $\eta$ is a geodesic in $X$ from $x$ to $\pi_{P_{i+1}}(x) = y$, then $\diam(\pi_{P_{i+1}}(\eta) \bigr) \leq \mu$. Thus, if $d\bigl( \pi_{P_j}(x),\pi_{P_j}(y) \bigr) \geq Q$, then $d\bigl(y, \pi_{P_{i+1}}(P_j) \bigr)\leq 2\mu +\mu R$.
Now, $y =\pi_{P_{i+1}}(x) \in \pi_{P_{i+1}}(\sigma_i)$ and $\pi_{P_{i+1}}(\sigma_i)$ is contained in the $(K_0+\mu rR + \mu)$--neighborhood of $\pi_{P_{i+1}}(P_i)$ by Proposition \ref{prop: adjacent projection of sigmas are bounded}. Therefore, if $d\bigl( \pi_{P_j}(x),\pi_{P_j}(y) \bigr) \geq Q$, then $d\bigl( \pi_{P_{i+1}}(P_i),\pi_{P_{i+1}}(P_j) \bigr) \leq K_0 + 5\mu r R$.
However, Corollary \ref{cor: the distance between projections of domains depends on B} provides a constant $B_2=B_2(\lambda,\epsilon,M)$, so that for all $B \geq B_2$, the distance between $\pi_{P_{i+1}}(P_i)$ and $\pi_{P_{i+1}}(P_j)$ is bounded below by a linear function (also determined by $\lambda,\epsilon,M$) of $B$. Hence, for sufficiently large $B$, we would have $d\bigl( \pi_{P_{i+1}}(P_i),\pi_{P_{i+1}}(P_j) \bigr) > K_0 + 5\mu r R$. This contradiction implies $d\bigl( \pi_{P_j}(x),\pi_{P_j}(y) \bigr) \leq Q$ for all $B \geq B'$ where $B' = B'(\lambda,\epsilon,M)$
Now for any $x,z \in \sigma_i$, we can use the above plus the triangle inequality and the fact that $\diam\bigl(\pi_{P_{j}}(P_{i+1}))\bigr) \leq \mu$ to obtain $d\bigl( \pi_j(x),\pi_j(z) \bigr) \leq 2 Q + \mu$.
\end{subproof}
Now, let $B_3 = B_1 + B'$ and $K_2 = K' + \mu rR +\mu$ where $B'$ and $K'$ are as in Claim \ref{claim: sigmas have bounded projection on all relevant domains}. Since, $\pi_{P_i}$ is $(\mu,\mu)$--coarsely Lipschitz and $\sigma_0$, $\sigma_n$ intersect the $rR$--neighborhoods of $P_1$ and $P_n$ respectively (Lemma \ref{lem:alphas are close and sigmas have bounded projections}), Claim \ref{claim: sigmas have bounded projection on all relevant domains} implies \[\pi_{P_i}(\sigma_0) \subseteq \mc{N}_{K_2}\bigl(\pi_{P_i}(P_1)\bigr) \text{ and } \pi_{P_i}(\sigma_n) \subseteq \mc{N}_{K_2}\bigl(\pi_{P_i}(P_n)\bigr).\qedhere\]
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of the Morse local-to-global property}\label{subsec:proof_or_rel_hyp}
We now give the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:local_to_global_and_relative_hyperbolicity}. The heart of the proof is Lemma \ref{lem: BCP for local things} below, which uses the tools developed throughout this section to show that, for sufficiently large local scales, a local Morse quasi-geodesic will be uniformly close to any quasi-geodesic between its endpoints.
\begin{lem}\label{lem: BCP for local things}
Suppose each $P \in \mc{P}$ has the $\Phi$--Morse local-to-global property and let $M$ be a Morse gauge. There exists $B_4 = B_4(\lambda,\epsilon,M)$ so that for each $B \geq B_4$, $k \geq 1$, and $c \geq 0$, there exists $C = C(\lambda,\epsilon,k,c,B,M)$ such that if $\Lambda = \Lambda_\Phi (\lambda,\epsilon,B,M)$ and $\gamma$ is a $(\Lambda; M; \lambda, \epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic, then any $(k, c)$--quasi-geodesic with the same endpoints as $\gamma$ has Hausdorff distance at most $C$ from $\gamma$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $B >2\theta$ be larger than the constants $B_1$, $B_2$, and $B_3$ from Proposition \ref{prop: Behrstock inequality for local qg}, Corollary \ref{cor: the distance between projections of domains depends on B}, and Corollary \ref{cor:endpoints_project_to_peripherals}. Let $\Lambda = \Lambda_\Phi (\lambda,\epsilon,B,M)$ and $\decomposition$ be the $B$--relevant decomposition of a $(\Lambda;M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic $\gamma$. Let $x$ be the left endpoint of $\gamma$ and $y$ the right endpoint. Let $\eta$ be a $(k,c)$--quasi-geodesic connecting $x$ and $y$.
For each $i$, let $p_i$ be the left endpoints of $\alpha_i$ and $q_i$ be the right endpoint. We first show that, after increasing $B$, $\eta$ passes close to each of the $p_i$ and $q_i$.
\begin{claim} \label{claim:close to geodesic}
There exist constants $B_4 = B_4(\lambda,\epsilon,M)$ and $C_1=C_1(\lambda,\epsilon,k,c)$ so that if $B \geq B_4$, then there exists $x_i,y_i \in \eta$ with $d(x_i,p_i) \leq C_1$ and $d(y_i,q_i) \leq C_1$ for each $i$.
\end{claim}
\begin{subproof}
Let $K_1 = K_1(\lambda,\epsilon)$ and $K_2 = K_2(\lambda,\epsilon)$ be the constants from Proposition \ref{prop: Behrstock inequality for local qg} and Corollary \ref{cor:endpoints_project_to_peripherals} so that
\[\pi_{P_i}(P_1) \subseteq \mc{N}_{K_1}\bigl(\pi_{P_i}(P_{i-1})\bigr); \quad \pi_{P_i}(P_n) \subseteq \mc{N}_{K_1}\bigl(\pi_{P_i}(P_{i+1})\bigr)\]
and
\[\pi_{P_i}(x) \in \mc{N}_{K_2}\bigl(\pi_{P_i}(P_1)\bigr) ; \quad \pi_{P_i}(y) \in \mc{N}_{K_2}\bigl(\pi_{P_i}(P_n)\bigr) \tag{$\ast$} \label{eq:projection of endpoints}\]
for each $1\leq i \leq n$.
By Corollary \ref{cor: the distance between projections of domains depends on B}, there exists $B_4 = B_4(\lambda,\epsilon,M)$ such that if $B \geq B_4$, then $d(\pi_{P_i}(x), d(\pi_{P_i}(y)) \geq Q$ for each $i\in\{1,\dots,n\}$. By Lemma \ref{lem: BGI for rel hyp}, there exist $x_i,y_i \in \eta$ and a constant $R_1 =R_1(k,c)$ so that \[d\bigl(x_i,\pi_{P_i}(x) \bigr) \leq R_1 \text{ and } d\bigl(y_i,\pi_{P_i}(y) \bigr) \leq R_1 \tag{$\ast \ast$} \label{eq:BGI}.\]
We now argue that $p_i$ is close to $x_i$. The case of $q_i$ and $y_i$ is analogous.
First assume $i \neq 1$.
Since $\sigma_{i-1} \cap \mc{N}_{rR}(P_{i-1}) \neq \emptyset$, we have $d \big( \pi_{P_i}(\sigma_{i-1}), \pi_{P_i}(P_{i-1}) \bigr) \leq \mu r R +\mu$. By Proposition \ref{prop: adjacent projection of sigmas are bounded}, $\diam\bigl(\pi_{P_i}(\sigma_{i-1}) \bigr) \leq K_0$ where $K_0 = K_0(\lambda,\epsilon)$. Thus, $d\bigl( p_i , \pi_{P_i}(P_{i-1}) \bigr) \leq rR+1+K_0+\mu r R+\mu$ as $p_i \in \mc{N}_{rR}(P_i)$. Since $\diam\bigl(\pi_{P_i}(P_{i-1}) \bigr) \leq \mu$ (Lemma \ref{lem:projections_lemmas}), (\ref{eq:projection of endpoints}) and (\ref{eq:BGI}) imply that
\begin{align*}
d( p_i , x_i) \leq& d\bigl( p_i, \pi_{P_i}(P_{i-1}) \bigr) + d\bigl( \pi_{P_i}(P_{i-1}), \pi_{P_i}(P_1) \bigr) + d\bigl( \pi_{P_i}(P_1), \pi_{P_i}(x) \bigr) + d\bigl( \pi_{P_i}(x), x_i \bigr) + 2\mu\\
\leq& (rR+1+K_0+\mu r R+\mu) + K_1 + K_2 + R_1+2\mu.
\end{align*}
If $i =1$, then $d\bigl(p_1, \pi_{P_1}(\sigma_0) \bigr) \leq rR +1$ implies
\[ d(p_1,x_1) \leq d\bigl( p_1, \pi_{P_1}(x) \bigr) + d\bigl( \pi_{P_1}(x), x_1 \bigr) \leq K_0 + rR+1 +R_1. \qedhere\]
\end{subproof}
To complete the proof of Lemma \ref{lem: BCP for local things}, let $B \geq B_4$ where $B_4 = B_4(\lambda,\epsilon)$ is as in Claim \ref{claim:close to geodesic}.
By Corollaries \ref{cor: sigma_i are Morse q.g} and \ref{cor: alphas are Morse q.g}, there exists a Morse gauge $M' = M'(\lambda,\epsilon,B,M)$ so that each $\sigma_i$ and $\alpha_i$ is $M'$--Morse. Thus, $\eta$ has Hausdorff distance at most $M'(k,c+2C_1)$ from $\gamma$ where $C_1 = C_1(\lambda,\epsilon,k,c)$ is as in Claim \ref{claim:close to geodesic}.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:local_to_global_and_relative_hyperbolicity}]
Let $\lambda \geq 1$, $\epsilon \geq 0$, and $M$ be a Morse gauge. Recall, we want to show there exists $L>0$, $\lambda' \geq 1$, $\epsilon'\geq 0$, and Morse gauge $N$ so that every $(L;M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesic in $X$ is a global $(N;\lambda',\epsilon')$--Morse quasi-geodesic.
Let $B = B_4+1$ where $B_4 = B_4(\lambda,\epsilon,M)$ is the constant from Lemma \ref{lem: BCP for local things}, then let $\Lambda = \Lambda_\Phi (\lambda,\epsilon,B,M)$ and $C$ be the constant from Lemma \ref{lem: BCP for local things} with $k=1$, $c=0$, and $B=B_4 +1$. Let $L= \lambda(3 C +\epsilon +2) +\Lambda$ and $\gamma$ be an $(L;M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--Morse local quasi-geodesic. Lemma \ref{lem: BCP for local things} shows that $\gamma$ satisfies the hypothesis of Lemma \ref{lem:local_close_to_global}. Thus, $\gamma$ is a global $(\lambda',\epsilon')$--quasi-geodesic where $\lambda'$ and $\epsilon'$ depends only on $\lambda$, $\epsilon$, and $M$. Since all subsegments $\gamma$ are also $(L;M;\lambda,\epsilon)$--local Morse quasi-geodesics, Lemma \ref{lem: BCP for local things} also implies that $\gamma$ is $N$--Morse for some $N = N(\lambda,\epsilon,M)$.
\end{proof}
\bibliographystyle{alpha}
|
\section{Introduction}
Quantum entanglement is an invaluable tool to access the intrinsic nature of underlying states
and their non-equilibrium properties in quantum physics \cite{Amico2008, Eisert2010, laflorencie2016quantum}.
For example, typical excited eigenstates exhibit a volume-law scaling; i.e.,
the entanglement entropy of the reduced state of a sub-system grows as its volume.
In contrast, for most gapped ground states, an area-law of entanglement entropy emerges
(entropy is proportional to the surface area of the sub-system).
The scaling behavior of entanglement entropy could vary in out-of-equilibrium driving
~\cite{calabrese2005evolution, calabrese2007quantum, hartman2013time, liu2014entanglement1, liu2014entanglement2, alba2017entanglement,
mezei2017entanglement, tonni2018entanglement, wen2018entanglement, von2018operator, gong2018topological, rakovszky2019sub, alba2019quantum, gong2019lieb}.
If the thermalization is triggered by a global unitary quench with an interacting post-quench Hamiltonian,
the volume-law entropy will replace the area-law behavior~\cite{calabrese2005evolution, hartman2013time, mezei2017entanglement}.
Many factors may affect the non-equilibrium dynamics;
for instance, randomness may lead to the many-body localization (MBL)
~\cite{basko2006metal, vznidarivc2008many, bardarson2012unbounded, iyer2013many, kim2013ballistic, vosk2013many, serbyn2013universal,
huse2014phenomenology, serbyn2014quantum, vosk2015theory, singh2016signatures, khemani2017two, luschen2017observation, bordia2017probing, nahum2018dynamics}.
As a result of avoiding thermalization in the MBL,
the stationary state (quench steady state) exhibits area-law entropy for the short-entangled systems,
and the entanglement entropy grows logarithmically in time,
which is in contrast with the linear growth in thermalized case.
Except for the disorder,
the presence of non-unitary operations (e.g. relaxation, dissipation, measurements)
will also influence the entanglement dramatically.
One notable example is, by introducing a continuous monitoring (damping) term in quench dynamics of free Fermion chain,
it is found that the volume law entanglement is unstable
under arbitrary weak damping if it is applied everywhere~\cite{cao2018entanglement}.
One related problem is the quantum Zeno effect~\cite{degasperis1974does, misra1977zeno}, where the total system is measured continuously and localized near a trivial product state.
Instead of above continuous monitoring, another protocol is to apply the local measurements discretely into quantum dynamics, with a finite probability $P$ named by \emph{measurement rate}.
One may expect that the presence of the local measurements will destroy the volume law produced by pure unitary dynamics, especially in low-dimensional systems.
However, this is not the case in generic interacting systems, where more subtle entanglement structures could survive under measurements.
A stable volume law phase was found under finite small measurement rate in several numerics on the circuit models~\cite{skinner2018measurement, li2018quantum, li2019measurement, choi2019quantum}.
By simulating hundreds of qubits in Clifford circuits,
it is found a continuous quantum dynamical phase transition by tuning the measurement rate
~\cite{li2018quantum, li2019measurement}.
The presence of the volume-to-area law transition is also identified in Floquet and random unitary circuits \cite{skinner2018measurement},
and can be understood by a classical percolation problem.
Furthermore, it has been argued the presence of the volume-to-area law transition can be reinterpreted in a quantum error correction point of view \cite{choi2019quantum}.
The authors of Ref. \cite{choi2019quantum} considered the influence of two parameters -- depth and fraction --
on entanglement dynamics rather than considering only the measurement rate (density of non-unitaries in whole dynamics, which is equivalent to the fraction when the depth is one).
By tuning the additional parameter depth, they show that information scrambling plays a crucial role in the transition.
One can also directly define the strength of measurement, e.g., by introducing positive operator-valued measurements
~\cite{szyniszewski2019entanglement}.
Interestingly, the transition occurs at a finite measurement strength even for permanent measurements ($P=1$) \cite{szyniszewski2019entanglement}.
It should be noticed that this is not the end of the story.
Although the volume-to-area law transition is observed in several different circuit models numerically,
it is still unclear under what condition the volume law phase could survive.
An important example of absence of the transition is the non-interacting Bell pair model reported in Ref.~\cite{chan2018weak},
where arbitrary measurement rate exhibits an area law entanglement.
They also showed that by extending the Bell pair with only two-body entanglement to mutually entangled clusters,
a volume-to-area law entanglement transition can exist.
Taken the above facts, another question immediately arises:
What is the nature of this measurement-induced entanglement phase transition?
In Ref.~\cite{skinner2018measurement},
by mapping the calculation of zeroth R\'enyi entropy to a classical percolation problem,
a toy model describing the disentanglement process for unitary dynamics with measurements was provided.
The scale invariance in critical percolation system exhibits a logarithmic growth of entanglement,
and also leads to power-law decay correlations.
These behaviors are observed in the circuit models by numerics~\cite{skinner2018measurement, li2019measurement}.
Under the symmetry between time-like and space-like directions,
the von Neumann entropy (the first R\'enyi entropy) is found to grow logarithmically in both space and time.
The mutual information is investigated as a measure of quantum correlations between two separated sites,
and exhibits power-law decay in space.
Based on these critical entanglement structures, an underlying conformal field theory (CFT) description was proposed.
Moreover, it was shown that the peak of mutual information~\cite{li2019measurement} and
the variance of entanglement entropy~\cite{szyniszewski2019entanglement} can be the indicator of the volume-to-area law phase transition,
which gives more insights on the possible statistic description of this transition.
Please note that, the above discussions are mainly based on the circuits model \cite{skinner2018measurement,li2019measurement},
and non-interacting models \cite{li2019measurement}.
Besides, much less is known about
the universality (if any) of the entanglement entropy of more generic models,
e.g., quantum many-body lattice systems, or of models mappable to them.
In this paper, we study the quantum dynamics of one-dimensional Bose-Hubbard model in the presence of random projective measurements
by using matrix product state (MPS) and time-evolving block decimation (TEBD)~\cite{suzuki1976generalized, vidal2004efficient, white2004real, daley2004time, paeckel2019time}.
The Bose-Hubbard model has been a paradigmatic non-integrable lattice model
to understand the quantum dynamics and non-equilibrium properties.
We map out a global phase diagram controlled by the measurement rate in time domain $N_t$ and spatial space $P_x$ (see Fig. \ref{fig:network} for definition).
A volume-to-area law phase transition is observed,
and the region of volume law phase becomes wider with decreasing $N_t$.
The behavior provides strong evidence of the existence of a stable volume law phase, and also shows the importance of the information scrambling in this dynamical transition.
We find that the single-site entanglement entropy can indicate the transition,
similar to the case of disorder-induced MBL~\cite{wahl2019signatures}.
At the critical point,
we obtain a logarithmic growth of entanglement and power-law decay of correlations.
The scaling behavior of entropy around the critical point appears to belong to a single universality class.
Our work provides a wealth of evidences that non-unitary factors, such as projective measurements,
can induce a dynamical phase transition, adding more pieces of message
to the recently proposed theoretical scenario \cite{skinner2018measurement,li2019measurement,choi2019quantum},
from the microscopic view on non-integrable quantum lattice model.
\section{Model and Method}
\begin{figure}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{network.pdf}
\caption{ \label{fig:network} (a) A diagrammatic representation of the quench dynamics with local projective measurements.
The quench dynamics is from a trivial product state described by MPS (gray rectangles), and the unitary time evolution background is build with several unitary layers described by MPO (blue rectangles).
The local projective measurements (green rounded squares) are applied only after several unitary layers, which are chosen randomly with measurement rate in time $N_t$. For each measured layers, the local projective measurements are posited randomly with measurement rate in space $P_x$.
(b) Two-dimensional phase diagram of the entanglement phase transition as a function of the measurement rate in time $N_t$ and in space $P_x$, where $\bf{A}$ and $\bf{B}$ represent the disentangling and entangling phases respectively.
The background colors represent the value of the von Neumann entropy for long-time steady states with sub-system size $L = 8$ averaged over different (up to 900) random realizations. }
\end{figure}
In the present work, we consider a quench dynamics of the von Neumann entropy on an one-dimensional Bose-Hubbard model~\cite{fisher1989boson} as the post-quench Hamiltonian
\begin{equation}
H = - J_0 \sum_i (b^\dagger_i b_{i+1} + b^\dagger_{i+1} b_i) + \frac{U}{2} \sum_i n_i(n_i - 1)
\end{equation}
where $b^\dagger_i$, $b_i$, and $n_i = b^\dagger_i b_i$ are the boson creation, annihilation, and particle number operators on site $i$ respectively.
The model has a critical point $U_c / J_0 \sim 3.3$ \cite{kashurnikov1996exact, kashurnikov1996mott, kuhner2000one, zakrzewski2008accurate, lauchli2008spreading, ejima2011dynamic, pino2012reentrance, ejima2012characterization, rachel2012detecting, carrasquilla2013scaling},
which separates a superfluid phase in $U < U_c$ from a Mott insulator phase in $U > U_c$.
Our setup for the unitary time evolution background is a quench dynamics from the Mott phase into the superfluid phase.
Without losing the generality, in our simulation we set $J_0 = 1$ and $U = 0.14$,
and the initial state is chosen to be a trivial product state with occupation number on each site $n_i = 1$.
The maximum number of bosons per site is set to be $5$.
The quench dynamics is simulated using MPS and TEBD performing in TeNPy package \cite{hauschild2018efficient}, and a network diagrammatic representation is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:network}(a).
The unitary time evolution background is built by several layers of the matrix product operator (MPO),
describing the time evolution operator.
By performing TEBD, each unitary layer is written in terms of two-site gates by using a second order Suzuki-Trotter decomposition with $dt=0.02$.
A bond dimension $\chi$ up to 2048 was test to be fine for the time scale (up to $T = 30$) considered in the present work.
In our calculation, an open boundary chain with total system size $L_0 = 36$ is considered.
We also test some calculations on $L_0=48$ size and get the very similar behavior,
which gives us confidence that the results shown below are free of the finite-size effect.
The local projection operator is defined by $\mathcal{O}_P=|1_x\rangle \langle 1_x|$,
which projects the quantum state at spatial position $x$ to $|1\rangle$.
These operators are set to be applied randomly in the dynamics.
We introduce the measurement rate in time domain $N_t$ and spatial space $P_x$ separately,
as the tuning parameters in our model.
There are $N_t$ measurement layers per time unit (we set time unit $\hbar/J_0=1$) in the time evolution process.
In our setup, for each time unit we generate a list with length $1/dt = 50$.
For the considered time scale $T = 30$, there are 30 such lists,
which build one-to-one correspondence with the unitary layers in the network.
Each list contains $50 - N_t$ ``0'' and $N_t$ ``1'' values,
and the order of these ``0'' and ``1'' values is set to be random.
If the random number is ``1'', the local projective measurements will be applied after this layer; otherwise no measurement is applied.
Here, we note that the lists for each time unit are generated independently,
so that the measured layers are selected randomly, not in a periodical pattern.
For each measured layer, we define the probability applying local projective measurements on a single site to be the measurement rate in spatial space $P_x$.
Numerically this is achieved by generating a list of random numbers $R_x$ in uniform distribution between 0 and 1.
If $R_x < P_x$, the spatial position $x$ will be measured; otherwise it is unmeasured.
After each local measurement, the total state has been renormalized, and therefore the full dynamics is nonlinear.
For smaller measurement rates, we have simulated more random realizations;
for example, for $P_x = 0.02$, $N_t = 50$ we simulate 900 random realizations,
since the effect of single local projective measurement is larger.
For larger measurement rates, the effect of single local projective measurement is much smaller,
so we do not need many random realizations to obtain the smooth averaged curve with small standard error; for example, for $P_x = 0.08$, $N_t = 50$ we only simulate 40 random realizations.
The two parameters $N_t$ and $P_x$ considered in our simulations are independent.
By definition, the average number of measurement per site per unitary time $N_{\rm aver} = N_t \ P_x$.
In fact, the $N_t$ considered in our simulation controls the degree of information spreading effectively,
similar to the ``depth'' defined in Ref.~\cite{choi2019quantum} but with randomness.
\section{Results and discussions}
\begin{figure}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{time_dependence.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:logt}
The dynamics of the von Neumann entropy with sub-system size $L = 8$ for different values of $P_x$;
here the results for $N_t=50$ are chosen. The results for different (up to 900) random realizations are presented in the form of a two-dimensional color-coded histogram.
(a-c) The full dynamics of the entropy with time up to $T = 30$, where the von Neumann entropy already reaches the platform saturated by the sub-system size.
(d-f) The short-time dynamics of the entropy plotted in $\ln t$. The red line shows a $\ln t$ growth of the averaged entropy. The inset in panel (e) shows a fitting in form $S=a \ln t + b$, with $a \approx 0.22 \pm 0.02$ and $b \approx 0.58 \pm 0.02$. }
\end{figure}
By examining the von Neumann entropy, we observe the competing tendencies between the local projective measurements and
unitary time evolution background, which suggest a phase transition between entangling and disentangling phases.
A two-dimensional phase diagram of von Neumann entropy consisting with the measurement rate
in time $N_t$ and space $P_x$ is presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:network}(b).
In the case of $N_t = 50$, the region of volume law phase in our model is very narrow.
Because of this, one may question about stability of the strong entangling phase in a combination of unitary evolution and local projective measurements.
As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:network}(b), for different considered values of $N_t = 50, 40, 30, 20$, the corresponding critical spatial measurement rate $P_{x,c} \approx 0.06, 0.08, 0.12, 0.24$ respectively.
The fast (than linear) growth of $P_{x,c}$ with decreasing $N_t$ strongly supports the existence of a phase transition when $N_t$ is finite small.
One may naively think that, the phase diagram is only controlled by the density of the local projective measurements applied $N_{\rm aver} = N_t \ P_x$.
In our setup, we show that the degree of information scrambling (controlled by $N_t$) also plays an important role and contributes to the critical value of $N_{\rm aver}$.
Our numerical results for different $N_t$ show that, with deceasing $N_t$, the critical value of $N_{\rm aver}$ increases.
This, in fact, is the consequence of the competing tendency between density of the local projective measurements applied and the degree of information scrambling.
Obviously, the critical value of $N_{\rm aver}$ is model dependent, since the information scrambling will be changed in different model realizations.
We also note that, although the critical $N_{\rm aver}$ is not universal, the behaviors at or near critical point is expected to be universal in different models.
In further discussions, we will focus only on the case of $N_t = 50$.
The difference between the entanglement structures in two phases is evident in Fig. \ref{fig:logt}(a-c),
where we show the time evolution of the entropy for various values of $P_x$.
For the smaller measurement rate (Fig. \ref{fig:logt}(a)),
the entanglement entropy increases ballistically at initial times and then saturates at a large value.
The entropy in the quasi-stationary regime at long times is close to the volume-law values in the unitary evolution.
For larger measurement rate (Fig. \ref{fig:logt}(c)), the entropy saturates quickly to very small values,
corresponding to an area law phase or localized phase.
\begin{figure}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{space_dependence.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:logL} (a) The spacial distribution of the von Neumann entropy for long-time steady states, with fixed $N_t = 50$,
after averaging over hundreds of random realizations. Different curves from top to bottom correspond to different values of
$P_x = 0.02, 0.025, 0.03, 0.035, 0.04, 0.045, 0.05, 0.055, 0.06, 0.07, 0.08$.
(b) The von Neumann entropy of long-time steady states for $P_x \sim P_{x,c}$.
The results for 240 different random realizations are presented in the form of a two-dimensional color-coded histogram. The red line shows the averaged data.
(c) The red line shows the averaged von Neumann entropy of long-time steady states for $P_x \sim P_{x,c}$ plotted in $\ln L$. The black line shows the result of a fitting in the form $S=a \ln L + b$, with $a \approx 0.21 \pm 0.01$ and $b \approx 0.41 \pm 0.01$. }
\end{figure}
Besides the long-time behaviors exhibit a phase transition between volume law and area law phases,
the short-time behaviors (Fig.~\ref{fig:logt}(d-f)) also display interesting features.
In the area law phase (Fig. \ref{fig:logt}(f)),
the state is close to a trivial product state due to the very frequent measurement,
therefore the entropy is very small and almost unchanged in time.
In the volume law phase (Fig. \ref{fig:logt}(d)),
the entanglement growth exhibits a linear dependence (with possible logarithmic correlations) with time like in the case of pure unitary evolution,
and the growth velocity decreases with increasing the measurement rate.
At the critical point (Fig. \ref{fig:logt}(e)), the linear growth is totally destroyed by the local measurements,
the entanglement exhibits a logarithmic growth in time as shown in Ref.~\cite{skinner2018measurement} for zeroth R\'enyi entropy.
Under the symmetry between space-like and time-like directions~\cite{skinner2018measurement},
we also expect to observe the phase transition by the entanglement growth in space (sub-system size).
In Fig.~\ref{fig:logL}(a), the averaged von Neumann entropy of long-time steady states for different $P_x$ is presented.
The growth velocity of the von Neumann entropy in space decreases as a result of increasing measurement rate. As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:logL}(b), at the critical point, a logarithmic dependence of the entropy on the sub-system size is observed.
Our numerical results of the spacial distribution of the entropy suggests the scaling behavior introduced in Refs.~\cite{vasseur2018entanglement, skinner2018measurement, li2019measurement}, where a logarithmic correction is added onto the linear dependence in the volume law phase.
The logarithmic growth entropy emerges at the criticality both in space and time,
in line with the percolation picture proposed in Ref.~\cite{skinner2018measurement}, where the logarithmic scaling is proved~\cite{chayes1986critical}.
As a signature of scale invariance, the logarithmic growth entropy also implies a possible underlying CFT description~\cite{vasseur2018entanglement, skinner2018measurement, li2019measurement}.
Moreover, in the critical percolation problem, another important signature of scale invariance is the the power law decay correlations, which are also observed in our model (see below).
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{SSEE.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:SSEE} Probability distribution of the single-site von Neumann entropy for different values $P_x$, with fixed $N_t = 50$.
(a) Deep in volume-law phase and (b) Near the critical point and in area-law phase. }
\end{figure}
Before discussion on the critical scaling, we introduce another indicator of the measurement-induced volume-to-area law transition, called \emph{single-site von Neumann entropy}.
Its probability distribution for different $P_x$ is plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig:SSEE}.
We find that the single-site entanglement entropy raises signature of the transition similar to the case of the thermal-to-MBL transition~\cite{wahl2019signatures}.
In the volume law phase, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:SSEE}(a), the single-site entropy distribution hosts two dominate peaks.
One is located at $S=0$ and the other one is at $S\approx 1.25$.
When we increase the measurement rate, the peak centered at $S>0$ becomes broadened, and the $S=0$ peak becomes sharper.
For the case of the measurement rate near the critical value, as the curves for $P_x = 0.05$ and $0.055$ shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:SSEE}(b),
the $S>0$ peak is very small. In the area law phase, the $S>0$ peak totally disappears.
That a single quantity can indicate both measurement-induced volume-to-area law transition and disorder-induced thermal-to-MBL transition,
suggests a possible generic picture of entanglement transition.
Considering a pure unitary dynamics without any impurity effect (e.g. disorders and measurements),
the local information spreads into the whole space,
so that the single-site entanglement is strong and only one peak should appear in $S>0$ side.
The presence of disorders/measurements generally stabilizes quantum information in the system, resulting in a peak near vanishing entropy.
\begin{figure}\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{scaling.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:scaling} (a) The von Neumann entropy of long-time steady states with different sub-system size $L$ as a function of the measurement rate in space $P_x$, with fixed $N_t = 50$. (b) Data collapse of the same data presented in panel (a) by scaling form in Eq.~\ref{eq:scaling} with $P_{x,c} = 0.06$ and $\nu=2$.}
\end{figure}
We now turn to consider global scaling behavior of entanglement entropy.
In order to extract critical behavior around the critical measurement rate $P_{x,c}$,
we perform a finite-size scaling form for the von Neumann entropy~\cite{vasseur2018entanglement, skinner2018measurement, li2019measurement, choi2019quantum}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:scaling}
S(P_x) - S(P_{x,c}) = F((P_x - P_{x,c}) L^{1/\nu})
\end{equation}
where $L$ is the sub-system size. The data collapse yields the critical value $P_{x,c}\approx0.060 \pm 0.004$ and the exponent $\nu \approx 2.00 \pm 0.15$.
The fine data collapse presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:scaling}(b) shows the correctness of the scaling form,
and also strongly supports the universal phase transition.
When $P_x$ asymptotically reduces to $P_{x,c}$, there is a region of logarithmic scaling entropy (with fluctuations), as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:logL}.
This subtle structure is suddenly canceled out when $P_x > P_{x,c}$, which also indicates a critical point.
In particular, the obtained scaling index $\nu \approx 2.00$ in our calculation is close to the dynamics of random unitaries in one dimension \cite{skinner2018measurement}.
The emergence of such a consistency implies that the randomness of local measurements and unitary gates may have similar origins.
Moreover, percolation criticality yields $\nu = 4/3$ in the bulk theory, which is different from our simulation and the result in random unitary circuits.
Interestingly, Ref.~\cite{vasseur2018entanglement} argues that the physical $\nu$ is defined by boundary theory,
where the Knizhnik-Polyakov-Zamolodchikov formula~\cite{knizhnik1988fractal} gives $\nu = 2$.
In this regard, our numeric estimation seems matches the percolation picture quite well.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{mutinf.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:mutinf} Decay of the the mutual information $I_{A, B}$ in spatial distance $r$.
(a) The mutual information $I_{A, B}$ as a function of $\ln r$ for different values of $P_x$, with fixed $N_t=50$.
(b) Linear fitting of the mutual information in form $\ln I_{A, B} = a\ln r + b$ with the critical measurement rate $P_x = 0.06$. The data for different total system sizes $L_0 = 36$, $48$ are plotted by green and red lines, respectively. The fitting results are $a(L_0 = 36) \approx -2.58 \pm 0.65 $, $b(L_0 = 36) \approx 0.02 \pm 1.99$ and $a(L_0 = 48) \approx -3.12 \pm 0.57$, $b(L_0 = 48) \approx 0.68 \pm 1.89$, which give critical exponents $\Delta(L_0 = 36) \approx 1.29$ and $\Delta(L_0 = 48) \approx 1.56$. }
\end{figure}
As we mentioned above, the power-law decay correlations in spatial space is served as a signature of the scale invariance.
Next we consider the correlation of entanglement by investigating the mutual information between two distant sites $A$ and $B$
\begin{equation}
I_{A, B} = S_A + S_B - S_{A \cup B} \ .
\end{equation}
From the enhanced conformal invariance, one expects that the critical exponent of power-law decay correlation is $\Delta = 2$ \cite{skinner2018measurement, li2019measurement},
which leads to $I_{A, B} \propto r^{-4}$. A comparison between different values of measurement rate $P_x$ is presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:mutinf}(a).
Note first that, the mutual information decays slowest at the critical point.
When $P_x$ is large (after transition), the measurements applied very frequently,
and the correlation decays exponentially since the long-time steady state is close to a product state.
When $P_x$ is small (before transition), the unitary time evolution leads the system to thermalization, where the local information vanishes, so that results in a fast decay of correlations.
At the critical point, the mutual information between two sites $I_{A, B}$ with long distance is almost unchanged with increasing distance,
and $I_{A, B}$ for critical value of $P_x$ exhibits a power-law decay.
As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:mutinf}(b), the linear fitting in form $\ln I_{A,B} = a \ln r + b$ results in a critical exponent
$\Delta = -a/2 \approx 1.29$ for total system size $L_0 = 36$.
On larger system size ($L_0=48$), it is found this value enhances to $\Delta \approx 1.56$.
As discussed above, the obtained critical exponent from CFT is $\Delta=2$ \cite{skinner2018measurement, li2019measurement}.
Through this comparison, our result seems non-universal,
which can be attributed to the following reasons.
First, unlike the circuits model, the current calculations are based on
a non-integrable quantum lattice model.
Second, our calculations are limited to finite sizes, and the non-universal behavior is a finite-size effect.
\section{Summary and outlooks}
In this paper, we have studied the entanglement dynamics of a 1D Bose-Hubbard model with local projective measurements randomly appearing in space and time.
A volume-to-area law entanglement phase transition was observed. By considering two parameters -- measurement rate in time $N_t$ and space $P_x$,
a two-dimensional phase diagram was presented. It is found that the volume law phase is robust with local measurements applied.
The time dependence and spatial distribution of the entanglement entropy distinguish the two phases,
and the single-site entanglement entropy is introduced as another indicator of this transition.
Finite-size scaling analysis indicates that the transition falls into a single universality class,
and the critical exponent $\nu \approx 2$
is close to the estimation in random unitary circuits \cite{skinner2018measurement}.
For the critical values of measurement rate, a logarithmic growth of entanglement entropy on sub-system size and evolved time was observed.
Moreover, the mutual information between two distinct sites was found to exhibit a power-law decay in space.
Both the logarithmic growth entanglement entropy and the power-law decay correlations support the presence of a scale invariant quench steady state.
Based on this, our results support that it is possible to describe the observed volume-to-area law phase transition by a conformal field theory \cite{vasseur2018entanglement,skinner2018measurement,li2019measurement}.
The present work opens a number of questions on the entanglement phase transition.
For example, it is important to find more common signatures of different transitions as the single-site entanglement entropy investigated in our work.
These information can help to build a general picture of entanglement phase transition.
Moreover, in Ref.~\cite{vasseur2018entanglement}, to describe general entanglement transition, e.g. MBL transition,
a random tensor network (RTN) picture is proposed in a holographic way.
In fact, the volume-to-area law transition in RTN is closer to the measurement-induced phase transition investigated in the present work.
Importantly, the critical exponent $\nu \approx 2$ found in our work and previous numerics \cite{skinner2018measurement}
is very close to the theoretical value predicted from the boundary of percolation bulk theory~\cite{vasseur2018entanglement}.
More detailed study of a possible connection to the holographic picture is deserved to explore in the future.
For the measurement-induced transition, Refs.~\cite{bao2019theory, jian2019measurement}
provide theoretical understanding of the transition by mapping onto a percolation problem within a replica method.
Based on the fact that the conformal method can be used to describe critical two-dimensional percolation, they argue for an underlying CFT of the entanglement transition.
However, the exact mapping to the percolation model only works under the limit of large local Hilbert space dimension $\mathcal{D}$.
In more realistic cases with finite $\mathcal{D}$, the situation is still unclear.
It would be also interesting to investigate the role of randomness in entanglement transition.
In thermal-to-MBL transition, the randomness is not necessary; a quasi-periodic potential~\cite{iyer2013many} also can lead to failure of thermalization.
In the case of measurement-induced entanglement transition, the role of randomness is still unclear.
In Ref.~\cite{li2019measurement}, it was found that the randomness of the unitary gates and the local measurements is inessential by simulating Clifford circuits.
But the numerics of Harr circuits in Ref.\cite{skinner2018measurement} show that the randomness of the unitary gates leads to a different critical exponent,
which means a different universality.
We leave the discussion of the possible non-randomness induced entanglement transition for future work.
\begin{acknowledgements}
W.Z. thanks X. Chen and Q. T. thanks Q.-H. Guo for discussion.
This work is supported by start-up funding from Westlake University.
The numerical calculations in this paper have been done on the supercomputing system in the Information Technology Center of Westlake University.
\end{acknowledgements}
\bibliographystyle{apsrev4-1}
|
\section{#1}}
\textwidth 160mm \textheight 220mm
\newcommand{\vs}[1]{\vspace{#1 mm}}
\newcommand{\hs}[1]{\hspace{#1 mm}}
\newcommand{\bra}[1]{\langle{#1}|}
\newcommand{\ket}[1]{|{#1}\rangle}
\renewcommand{\a}{\alpha}
\renewcommand{\b}{\beta}
\renewcommand{\c}{\gamma}
\renewcommand{\d}{\delta}
\newcommand{\e}{\epsilon}
\newcommand{\dsl}{\pa \kern-0.5em /}
\newcommand{\half}{\frac{1}{2}}
\renewcommand{\t}{\theta}
\newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber\\}
\newcommand{\p}[1]{(\ref{#1})}
\newcommand{\lan}{\langle}
\newcommand{\ran}{\rangle}
\def\ii{{\rm i}}
\begin{document}
\topmargin 0pt \oddsidemargin 0mm
\vspace{2mm}
\begin{center}
{\Large Black hole magnetospheres in the Born-Infeld theory}
\vs{10}
{\large Huiquan Li \footnote{E-mail: <EMAIL>} and Jiancheng Wang}
\vspace{6mm}
{\em
Yunnan Observatories, Chinese Academy of Sciences, \\
650216 Kunming, China
Key Laboratory for the Structure and Evolution of Celestial Objects,
\\ Chinese Academy of Sciences, 650216 Kunming, China
Center for Astronomical Mega-Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences,
\\ 100012 Beijing, China}
\end{center}
\vs{9}
\begin{abstract}
We study the force-free electrodynamics on rotating black holes in
the Born-Infeld (BI) effective theory. The stream equation
describing a steady and axisymmetric magnetosphere is derived. From
its near-horizon behavior, we obtain the modified Znajek regularity
condition, with which we find that the horizon resistivity in the BI
theory is generally not a constant. As expected, the outer boundary
condition far away from the hole remains unchanged. In terms of the
conditions at both boundaries, we derive the perturbative solution
of split monopole in the slow rotation limit. It is interesting to
realise that the correction to the solution relies not only on the
parameter in the BI theory, but also on the radius (or the mass) of
the hole. We also show that the quantum effects can undermine the
energy extraction process of the magnetosphere in the non-linear
theory and the extraction rate gets the maximum in the Maxwell
theory.
\end{abstract}
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
Analogous to neutron stars and other ordinary objects,
magnetospheres can also form on astronomical black holes. In the
black hole magnetosphere, plenty of electron-positron pairs can be
created via the pair cascade processes \cite{Blandford:1977ds}. With
strong electromagnetic fields, this form the force-free
magnetosphere in which the electric fields along the magnetic field
lines are screened and the charges feel zero net force.
The force-free magnetosphere can be used to extract the rotational
energy of a rotating black hole. As a kind of Penrose process, the
energy is extracted through the rotation of the magnetosphere
dragged by the black hole spacetime. This process has become a
promising mechanism nowadays that can explain the formation of
powerful jets observed in many high energy objects, like AGN, GRB
and microquasars.
It is known that the magnetic fields on neutron stars are very high,
even exceeding the quantum electrodynamics (QED) critical value. In
this case, the QED corrections should be included in the force-free
magnetospheres and the Maxwell electrodynamics should be replaced by
the non-linear theory. This has been discussed in magnetar
magnetospheres (e.g.,
\cite{Denisov:2003ba,Pereira:2018mnn,Li:2019uws}), whose surface
magnetic fields sometimes can be above $10^{15}$ G.
However, this is not the case for black hole magnetospheres. The
astronomical black holes do not have their own magnetic fields. The
magnetic fields on them come from accretion and are usually far
weaker (e.g., $\lesssim10^4$ G for a black hole with mass $M=10^9$
$M_\odot$ \cite{1978MNRAS.185..833Z}) than the QED critical value.
But, the study of the black hole magnetosphere in non-linear
electrodynamics is useful for that of the QED corrected
magnetosphere near a magnetar where gravity is important. The latter
can be obtained in a weak field limit of the former despite a
difference of the inner boundary condition.
The study of black hole magnetospheres in non-linear electrodynamics
is also of theoretical interest. The force-free magnetospheres on
black holes are not well understood even in the Maxwell theory. We
still do not know well the structure and geometry of the field lines
in the force-free magnetosphere. The extension to the non-linear
theory help find the analytical properties of black hole
magnetospheres in a general sense.
Moreover, non-linear electrodynamics include quantum corrections to
the Maxwell theory. As is known, strong quantum effects also happen
in black holes. Thermal particles are excited and radiated in the
near-horizon regions of black holes. It is interesting to examine
the force-free non-linear electrodynamics in these regions.
In this work, we consider the black hole magnetospheres in
non-linear electrodynamics, in particular in the Born-Infeld (BI)
effective theory \cite{Born:1934gh}. The BI theory has an explicit
expression with well-regularized features. It also arises in string
theory and so attracts much attention. The paper is organized as
follows. In Section \ref{sec:FFnonE}, we present the force-free
theory in general non-linear electrodynamics. In this general
framework, the stream equation describing steady and axisymmetric
magnetospheres on rotating black holes is derived in Section
\ref{sec:BHmagnetosphere}. Based on the stream equation, the
boundary conditions are discussed in Section \ref{sec:bc} and the
perturbative solution of split monopole is derived in Section
\ref{sec:monopolesol}. In the final section, we summarize and
discuss the results.
\section{Force-free non-linear electrodynamics}
\label{sec:FFnonE}
We start with the action of general electrodynamics
\begin{equation}\label{e;EMaction}
S=\int \sqrt{-g}\left[\frac{1}{4\pi}\mathcal{L}_{\textrm{EM}}(s,p)
+A_\mu J^\mu\right]d^4x,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{L}_{\textrm{EM}}(s,p)$ is general Lagrangian of the
electromagnetic fields with
\begin{eqnarray}
s=\frac{1}{4}F^{\mu\nu}F_{\mu\nu}, &&
p=\frac{1}{4}\widetilde{F}^{\mu\nu}F_{\mu\nu}.
\end{eqnarray}
The dual field strength
$\widetilde{F}^{\mu\nu}=(1/2)\ep^{\mu\nu\rho\si}F_{\rho\si}$. For
the BI theory, the Lagrangian of electromagnetic fields takes the
form
\begin{equation}\label{e:BI}
\mathcal{L}_{\textrm{EM}}(s,p)=b^2\left(1-\sqrt{1+
\frac{2s}{b^2}-\frac{p^2}{b^4}}\right),
\end{equation}
where $b$ is an undetermined parameter, with the dimension of mass
squared.
The modified Maxwell equations are given by
\begin{equation}
\nabla_\mu \widetilde{F}^{\mu\nu}=0,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{e:currents}
\nabla_\mu G^{\mu\nu}=4\pi J^\nu,
\end{equation}
where $J^\nu$ is the conserved current and
\begin{equation}
G^{\mu\nu}=SF^{\mu\nu}+P\widetilde{F}^{\mu\nu},
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
S\equiv\pa_s\mathcal{L}_{\textrm{EM}}, \textrm{ }
\textrm{ }\textrm{ } P\equiv\pa_p\mathcal{L}_{\textrm{EM}}.
\end{equation}
The energy-momentum tensor of the electromagnetic fields is obtained
from the derivative of the Lagrangian with respect to the metric
\begin{equation}\label{e:enmontensor}
T_{\textrm{EM}}^{\mu\nu}
=-\frac{1}{4\pi}[SF^\mu_{\textrm{ }\textrm{ }\al}F^{\nu\al}+
P\widetilde{F}^\mu_{\textrm{ }\textrm{
}\al}F^{\nu\al}-g^{\mu\nu}\mathcal{L}_{\textrm{EM}}],
\end{equation}
for which we have
\begin{equation}\label{e:divtensor}
\nabla_\mu T_{\textrm{EM}}^{\mu\nu}=J_\mu F^{\mu\nu}.
\end{equation}
We are considering magnetospheres described by the BI theory in the
force-free limit, i.e., the EM energy momentum tensor be conserved:
\begin{equation}\label{e:ffcond}
J_\mu F^{\mu\nu}=0.
\end{equation}
This implies $p=0$ so that
$\mathcal{L}_{\textrm{EM}}(s,p)=\mathcal{L}_{\textrm{EM}}(s)$.
\section{Steady magnetospheres on rotating black holes}
\label{sec:BHmagnetosphere}
Let us consider the steady and axisymmetric magnetosphere on a Kerr
black hole, whose metric on the BL coordinates is
\begin{equation}\label{e:Kerr}
ds^2=-\frac{\rho^2\triangle}{A}dt^2+\frac{\rho^2}{\triangle}dr^2+
\rho^2 d\th^2+\frac{A\sin^2\th}{\rho^2}(d\phi-\om dt)^2,
\end{equation}
where $\rho^2=r^2+a^2\cos^2\th$, $\triangle=r^2-2Mr+a^2$,
$A=2Mr(r^2+a^2)+\rho^2\triangle$ and $\om=2Mra/A$.
\subsection{The stream equation}
On the Kerr black hole, the force-free condition (\ref{e:ffcond})
reads:
\begin{equation}\label{e:ffcond1}
\pa_r A_0J^r+\pa_\th A_0 J^\th=0,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{e:ffcond2}
\pa_r A_0J^0+F_{r\th}J^\th+\pa_r A_\phi J^\phi=0,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{e:ffcond3}
\pa_\th A_0J^0-F_{r\th}J^r+\pa_\th A_\phi J^\phi=0,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{e:ffcond4}
\pa_r A_\phi J^r+\pa_\th A_\phi J^\th=0.
\end{equation}
It is convenient to use the Poison bracket defined by
\begin{equation}
[C,D]\equiv\pa_r C\pa_\th D-\pa_\th C\pa_r D.
\end{equation}
When $C$ is a function of $D$, we must have $[C,D]=0$. From Eqs.\
(\ref{e:ffcond1}) and (\ref{e:ffcond4}), we get
\begin{equation}
[A_0, A_\phi]=0.
\end{equation}
So $A_0$ should be a function of $A_\phi$. We can define:
\begin{equation}
dA_0=-\Om(A_\phi)dA_\phi,
\end{equation}
where $\Om$ is the angular velocity of a magnetic field line, which
is constant along any field line.
Eq.\ (\ref{e:currents}) can be expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{e:currents1}
J^0=\frac{1}{4\pi}\nabla\cdot\left[Sg^{00}(\om-\Om)
\nabla A_\phi\right],
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{e:currents2}
J^r=-\frac{1}{4\pi\sqrt{-g}}\pa_\th(SB_T),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{e:currents3}
J^\th=\frac{1}{4\pi\sqrt{-g}}\pa_r(SB_T),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{e:currents4}
J^\phi=\frac{1}{4\pi}\nabla\cdot\left[S\left(g^{\phi\phi}-g^{0\phi}
\Om\right)\nabla A_\phi\right],
\end{equation}
where the operator $\nabla_i=(\nabla_r, \nabla_\th)$ is associated
with the full Kerr metric. The toroidal field $B_T=(\triangle
\sin\th/\rho^2)F_{r\th}$.
From Eqs.\ (\ref{e:ffcond1}), (\ref{e:ffcond4}), (\ref{e:currents2})
and (\ref{e:currents3}), we find that
\begin{equation}
[A_\phi,\textrm{}SB_T]=0.
\end{equation}
So $\sin\th SF_{r\th}$ is also a function of $A_\phi$. Let us denote
\begin{equation}
\psi\equiv2\pi A_\phi, \textrm{ }\textrm{ }\textrm{ }
I(\psi)\equiv-2\pi SB_T.
\end{equation}
From Eq.\ (\ref{e:ffcond2}) or (\ref{e:ffcond3}), we can have
\begin{equation}\label{e:jphi}
J^\phi=\Om J^0-\frac{II'}{8\pi^2S\triangle\sin^2\th},
\end{equation}
where the prime denotes the derivative with respect to $\psi$.
By comparing Eqs.\ (\ref{e:currents4}) and (\ref{e:jphi}) after
insertion of Eq.\ (\ref{e:currents1}), we derive the stream equation
of the black hole magnetosphere in the non-linear theory:
\begin{equation}\label{e:GSeq}
S\nabla\cdot\left\{\frac{\rho^2S}{A\sin^2\th}\left[1-
\frac{A^2\sin^2\th(\Om-\om)^2}{\rho^4\triangle}\right]\nabla\psi
\right\}+\frac{AS^2(\Om-\om)}{\rho^2\triangle}\Om'(\nabla\psi)^2+
\frac{II'}{\triangle\sin^2\th}=0.
\end{equation}
The equation is just modified with the factor $S$. When
$S\rightarrow-1$, the equation recovers the case in the Maxwell
theory. As shown by the equation, the positions of the lightsurfaces
are not changed.
With the above equations, we get
\begin{equation}\label{e:s}
s=\frac{1}{8\pi^2A\sin^2\th}\left\{\frac{AI^2}{\triangle S^2}+
\left[1-\frac{A^2\sin^2\th}{\rho^4\triangle}(\Om-\om)^2\right]
[\triangle(\pa_r\psi)^2+(\pa_\th\psi)^2]\right\}.
\end{equation}
From this, the expression of $S$ for the BI theory is obtained:
\begin{equation}\label{e:BIS2}
S^2=\frac{A(f\triangle-I^2)}{Af\triangle+
\left[\triangle-\frac{A^2\sin^2\th}{\rho^4}(\Om-\om)^2\right]
[\triangle(\pa_r\psi)^2+(\pa_\th\psi)^2]},
\end{equation}
where $f(\th)=4\pi^2b^2\sin^2\th$.
\subsection{The energy and momentum extraction rates}
The field components observed by the Zero Angular Momentum Observers
(ZAMOs) in the unit basis vectors of the absolute space
\cite{MacDonald:1982zz} are
\begin{equation}\label{e:E}
\mathbf{E}=-\frac{\mathbf{D}}{S}=-\frac{\Om-\om}{2\pi\La\sqrt{\rho^2}}
\left(\sqrt{\triangle}\pa_r\psi\mathbf{e}_r+\pa_\th\psi\mathbf{e}_\th\right),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{e:B}
\mathbf{B}=-\frac{\mathbf{H}}{S}=\frac{1}{2\pi\sqrt{A}\sin\th}\left(
\pa_\th\psi\mathbf{e}_r-\sqrt{\triangle}\pa_r\psi\mathbf{e}_\th
-\frac{I\sqrt{\rho^2}}{S\La}\mathbf{e}_\phi\right),
\end{equation}
where $\La^2=\rho^2\triangle/A$.
From the energy-momentum tensor (\ref{e:enmontensor}), we can obtain
the poloidal components of the energy and angular momentum flux
densities:
\begin{equation}\label{e:r-enmom}
\mathcal{E}^r=\Om\mathcal{L}^r=-\frac{\Om I}
{16\pi^2\rho^2\sin\th}\pa_\th\psi,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{e:th-enmom}
\mathcal{E}^\th=\Om\mathcal{L}^\th=\frac{\Om I}
{16\pi^2\rho^2\sin\th}\pa_r\psi.
\end{equation}
The total rate of angular momentum and energy extraction from the
hole is given by the integration of the radial densities over all
the accessable spacetime:
\begin{equation}\label{e:totr-enmom}
L=-\frac{1}{8\pi^2}\int Id\psi, \textrm{ }\textrm{ }\textrm{ }
E=\frac{1}{4\pi}\int (\mathbf{E}\times\mathbf{H})\cdot d\mathbf{s}
=-\frac{1}{8\pi^2}\int\Om Id\ps.
\end{equation}
So they take the same form in appearance as in the Maxwell theory,
containing no $S$. But, it should be noticed that the functions
actually have been corrected by the non-linear factor $S$.
\section{Boundary behaviors}
\label{sec:bc}
As done in the Maxwell theory in the previous work
\cite{Li:2017qzu}, the conditions of the differential equation
(\ref{e:GSeq}) at the event horizon and spatial infinity can be
determined. In what follows, we examine the conditions in the BI
theory.
\subsection{The condition at the event horizon}
\subsubsection{The Znajek condition}
The equation (\ref{e:GSeq}) at the event horizon $r\rightarrow
r_+=M+\sqrt{M^2-a^2}$
is simplified to
\begin{equation}\label{e:horeq}
II'
=\frac{S\sqrt{A}\sin\th(\Om-\om)}
{\rho^2}\pa_\th\frac{S\sqrt{A}\sin\th(\Om-\om)\pa_\th\psi}{\rho^2}.
\end{equation}
This exactly gives the Znajek regularity condition
\cite{Znajek:1977unknown} at the horizon:
\begin{equation}\label{e:Zbd}
I_+=-\frac{2Mr_+S_+\sin\th(\Om_+-\om_+)}{\rho_+^2}\pa_\th\psi_+,
\end{equation}
where the quantities with the subscript $+$ indices denote values at
the $r=r_+$. Note that $S$ is negative here. It is interesting to
find that the expression of $S_+$ obtained from Eq.\ (\ref{e:BIS2})
with $r\rightarrow r_+$ gives the same condition. As it is seen, the
Znajek condition is modified in the non-linear theory compared to
the Maxwell theory case.
This relation is actually the result that the electromagnetic fields
satisfy the radiation condition \cite{Nathanail:2014aua} at the
horizon:
\begin{equation}\label{e:radcon}
E_\th=\pm B_\phi.
\end{equation}
As determined in the ingoing frame \cite{Znajek:1977unknown}, the
field components (\ref{e:E}) and (\ref{e:B}) at the horizon
generally satisfy the following conditions \cite{MacDonald:1982zz}:
\begin{equation}\label{e:horcon1}
E_r, B_r, E_H, B_H\sim\mathcal{O}(1),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{e:horcon2}
\mathbf{B}_H=\mathbf{E}_H\times\mathbf{e}_r,
\end{equation}
where the horizon fields are defined by
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{E}_H=\La E_\th\mathbf{e}_\th|_{r\rightarrow r_+},
\textrm{ }\textrm{ }\textrm{ } \mathbf{B}_H=\La
B_\phi\mathbf{e}_\phi|_{r\rightarrow r_+}.
\end{equation}
So the condition (\ref{e:horcon2}) corresponds to the negative sign
case of the radiation condition (\ref{e:radcon}), which also leads
to the Znajek condition (\ref{e:Zbd}). Similarly, we can have the
field components $D_r$, $H_r$, $\mathbf{D}_H$ and $\mathbf{H}_H$
according to the relations given in Eqs.\ (\ref{e:E}) and
(\ref{e:B}).
\subsubsection{The horizon resistivity}
The boundary conditions of the electrodynamics on the horizon give
rise to the notions of surface charge and current
\cite{1978MNRAS.185..833Z,Damour:1978cg}. In the non-linear theory,
their definitions are changed to
\begin{equation}
\si_H=\frac{D_r}{4\pi},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{j}_H=-\frac{1}{4\pi}\mathbf{H}_H\times\mathbf{e}_r.
\end{equation}
When $\psi=\psi(\th)$ at the horizon, $D_r=0$ and so the surface
charge is zero. It can be checked that the surface charge and
current satisfy the charge conservation equation
\cite{MacDonald:1982zz}. Combined with equation (\ref{e:horcon2}),
we have
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{j}_H=\frac{\mathbf{E}_H}{R_H},
\end{equation}
where the resistivity of the horizon is now
\begin{equation}\label{e:res}
R_H=-\frac{4\pi}{S_+}.
\end{equation}
So the resistivity is not constant any more on the horizon. As
indicated by the monopole solution that will be derived in the next
section, $-S_+>1$ in the BI theory. So the resistivity here should
be larger than in the Maxwell theory, for which $S_+=-1$ and the
resistivity gets the minimum value $R_H=4\pi\simeq377$ ohms.
The result is different from that in \cite{Kim:2000yd}, where the
obtained resistivity is the same as in the Maxwell theory. The
reason is that the authors have chosen a special frame in which the
BI theory looks like the Maxwell theory. This should be not true for
a general observer's frame.
\subsection{The condition at spatial infinity}
Similar to the Maxwell theory case \cite{Menon:2005va,Menon:2005mg},
the finiteness of both the energy and the momentum fluxes in Eqs.\
(\ref{e:r-enmom}) and (\ref{e:th-enmom}) requires $\Om$ be
independent of $r$ at infinity:
\begin{equation}\label{e:Om-infcon}
\Om(r,\th)\rightarrow\Om_0(\th) \textrm{ }\textrm{ } \textrm{ as }
\textrm{ }\textrm{ } r\rightarrow\infty,
\end{equation}
where $\Om_0(\th)$ is the value at the infinite boundary. Since
$I(\Om)$ and $\psi(\Om)$ are functions of $\Om$, then the values
$I_0$ and $\psi_0$ at infinity should be independent of $r$ as well.
In combination with the expression (\ref{e:BIS2}) of $S$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{e:psi-I-infcon}
r\rightarrow\infty: \textrm{ }\textrm{ }\textrm{ }
\psi(\Om)\rightarrow\psi_0(\Om_0(\th)), \textrm{ }\textrm{ }\textrm{
} I(\Om)\rightarrow I_0(\Om_0(\th)), \textrm{ }\textrm{ }\textrm{ }
S^2\rightarrow1.
\end{equation}
At spatial infinity, the BI theory with weak fields approaches the
Maxwell theory.
In this case, the stream equation (\ref{e:GSeq}) at infinity reduces
to
\begin{equation}\label{e:}
I_0\frac{\pa I_0}{\pa\psi_0}
=\sin\th\Om_0\pa_\th(\sin\th\Om_0\pa_\th\psi_0).
\end{equation}
Similarly, the equation gives rise to the relation:
\begin{equation}\label{e:infbd}
I_0=-\sin\th\Om_0\pa_\th\psi_0.
\end{equation}
Here, the negative sign is chosen for $\Om_+\leq\om_+$. It
corresponds to the positive sign case of the radiation condition
(\ref{e:radcon}), which guarantees outflow of energy from the hole.
\subsection{Matching the boundary conditions}
\label{sec:}
It is seen that the two boundaries of any field line in the black
hole magnetosphere are in two different regimes: one is in the
Maxwell theory and the other is in the BI theory.
As in \cite{Li:2017qzu}, we first consider the case that the
functions at the horizon and at infinity are matched to be
identical:
\begin{equation}\label{e:con1}
\psi_0=\psi_+, \textrm{ }\textrm{ }\textrm{ }
\Om_0=\Om_+, \textrm{ }\textrm{ }\textrm{ } I_0=I_+.
\end{equation}
Then, from Eqs.\ (\ref{e:Zbd}) and (\ref{e:infbd}), we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{e:}
S_+=-\frac{\Om_+(1-a\sin^2\th\om_+)}{\om_+-\Om_+}.
\end{equation}
Thus, for a given black hole, the quantum correction to the
magnetosphere near the horizon is relying on the angular velocity
$\Om_+$ of the field lines. The correction factor $-S_+$ gets larger
when $\Om_+$ increases.
Instead, we may also make the identifications:
\begin{equation}\label{e:con2}
\Om_0=\Om_+, \textrm{ }\textrm{ }\textrm{ }
\frac{\pa_\th\psi_0}{I_0}=S_+\frac{\pa_\th\psi_+}{I_+}.
\end{equation}
By comparing Eqs.\ (\ref{e:Zbd}) and (\ref{e:infbd}), we then have
the solution
\begin{equation}\label{e:OmP}
\Om_+=\Om_0
=\frac{a}{2Mr_++\rho^2_+}.
\end{equation}
If we choose positive sign in Eq.\ (\ref{e:infbd}), the resulting
solution is
\begin{equation}\label{e:OmN}
\Om_+=\Om_0
=\frac{1}{a\sin^2\th}.
\end{equation}
In this case, the angular velocity is larger than the one of the
black hole. These two solutions at the boundaries are exactly the
asymptotical solutions found in \cite{Menon:2005va,Menon:2005mg}. It
is easy to check that the latter solution with $S=-1$ is still an
exact solution to the stream equation in all regions in the BI
theory. But this trivial solution is unphysical since it admits null
current.
\section{The perturbative monopole solution in the BI theory}
\label{sec:monopolesol}
It is easy to find that the monopole solution $\psi=-\cos\th$ still
exists to the stream equation (\ref{e:GSeq}) on Schwarzschild back
holes with $a=0$ (and so $\Om=I=0$). Based on the solution, the
perturbative monopole solution (though its existence is debated
\cite{Grignani:2018ntq}) can be derived in slowly rotating black
holes, as done in \cite{Blandford:1977ds}. In this section, we shall
explore the corresponding monopole solution in the BI theory.
Let us define the dimensionless parameters:
\begin{equation}\label{e:}
x=\frac{r}{r_0}, \textrm{ }\textrm{ }\textrm{ }
\al=\frac{a}{r_0},
\end{equation}
where $r_0=2M$ is the radius of the horizon in the Schwarzschild
case. The functions can be expanded in powers of $\al$:
\begin{equation}\label{e:}
\psi=\psi_0+\al^2\psi_2+\cdots,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{e:}
\widetilde{\Om}= r_0\Om=\al\widetilde{\Om}_1+\al^3\widetilde{\Om}_3
+\cdots,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{e:}
\widetilde{I}= r_0I=\al\widetilde{I}_1+\al^3\widetilde{I}_3
+\cdots,
\end{equation}
where $\psi_0$ is the monopole solution of the zero-th order
equation:
\begin{equation}\label{e:}
\psi_0=-\cos\th.
\end{equation}
With them, we get the expanded form of $S^2$:
\begin{equation}\label{e:expBIS2}
S^2=\frac{kx^4}{1+kx^4}+\al^2\frac{g}{(x-1)(1+kx^4)^2}+\cdots,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{e:k}
k=4\pi^2b^2r_0^4,
\end{equation}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{e:g}
g=kx(x-1)[2x-(x-1)\sin^2\th]+kx\sin^2\th(1-\widetilde{\Om}_1x^3)^2
\nonumber \\
-2kx^4(x-1)\frac{\pa_\th\psi_2}{\sin\th}-x^3(1+kx^4)
\frac{\widetilde{I}_1^2}{\sin^2\th}.
\end{eqnarray}
The expanded equation (\ref{e:GSeq}) with (\ref{e:expBIS2}) at the
order $\mathcal{O}(\al^2)$ gives the equation:
\begin{equation}\label{e:pereq}
L^2\psi_2=\frac{1}{1-\frac{1}{x}}\left[\sin^2\th\left(\widetilde{\Om}_1
-\frac{1}{x^3}\right)\pa_\th\widetilde{\Om}_1+\sin2\th\left(\widetilde{\Om}_1
-\frac{1}{x^3}\right)^2-\frac{\widetilde{I}_1\widetilde{I}_1'}{\sin\th}\right]
+\frac{\sin2\th}{x^5}+\de,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{e:}
L^2=\frac{1}{\sin\th}\pa_x\left(1-\frac{1}{x}\right)\pa_x
+\frac{1}{x^2}\pa_\th\left(\frac{1}{\sin\th}\pa_\th\right),
\end{equation}
and the correction terms
\begin{equation}\label{e:}
\de=-\frac{1}{kx^4}\left[\frac{1}{1-\frac{1}{x}}\left(
\frac{\widetilde{I}_1\widetilde{I}_1'}{\sin\th}+\frac{\pa_\th
g}{2x^3(1+kx^4)}\right)+ \frac{2kx^3(1-\frac{1}{x})}
{\sin\th(1+kx^4)}\pa_x\psi_2\right].
\end{equation}
Towards the horizon with $x\rightarrow1$, the equation diverges as
$\mathcal{O}(1/(1-1/x))$. So, to avoid divergence, the relevant
terms must cancel out, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{e:perZbd}
\widetilde{I}_1(x=1,\th)=\sqrt{\frac{k}{1+k}}
(\widetilde{\Om}_1-1)\sin\th\pa_\th\psi_0.
\end{equation}
This is also the boundary condition (\ref{e:Zbd}) at the horizon.
Since the magnetosphere in asymptotical regions is in the regime of
the Maxwell theory, we can still take the outer boundary condition
as the Michel monopole solution obtained in the flat spacetime.
Inserting it into the condition (\ref{e:infbd}) at infinity leads to
\begin{equation}\label{e:perinfbd}
\widetilde{I}_1(x\rightarrow\infty,\th)=-\widetilde{\Om}_1\sin^2\th.
\end{equation}
Adopting the matching condition (\ref{e:con1}) given in the previous
section for the above two boundary conditions (\ref{e:perZbd}) and
(\ref{e:perinfbd}), we derive
\begin{equation}\label{e:}
\widetilde{\Om}_1=\frac{\sqrt{k}}{\sqrt{1+k}+\sqrt{k}}.
\end{equation}
So the angular velocity grows with the value of $k$ and reaches the
maximum value $1/2$ as $k\rightarrow\infty$. With the angular
velocity, we have
\begin{equation}\label{e:}
\widetilde{I}_1=-\frac{\sqrt{k}}{\sqrt{1+k}+\sqrt{k}}\sin^2\th.
\end{equation}
Inserting the above results into Eq.\ (\ref{e:pereq}), the solution
of $\psi_2$ can be derived basically. But it is hard to do so
because the resulting equation is highly non-linear. Here, we only
consider the solution in the asymptotical region. At large $x$, the
equation reduces to
\begin{equation}\label{e:}
\frac{1}{\sin\th}\pa_x^2\psi_2+\frac{1}{x^2}\pa_\th
\left(\frac{1}{\sin\th}\pa_\th\psi_2\right)=
-\frac{2\widetilde{\Om}_1\sin2\th}{x^3}.
\end{equation}
The solution is
\begin{equation}\label{e:}
\psi_2=\frac{\sqrt{k}\sin^2\th\cos\th}{(\sqrt{1+k}+\sqrt{k})x}.
\end{equation}
When $k\rightarrow\infty$, this recovers the result in
\cite{Blandford:1977ds}.
\section{Discussion and conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
Force-free non-linear electrodynamics on rotating black holes is
discussed. Based on the derived stream equation, we analyze the
boundary conditions at the horizon and at spatial infinity. Compared
to the case in the Maxwell theory, the Znajek condition at the
horizon is modified in the non-linear theory, while the one at
infinity remains the same as in the Maxwell theory. We also show
that the surface resistivity on the horizon is modified in the ZAMO
frame.
In terms of the boundary conditions, we further obtain the
perturbative solution of the split monopole in the slow rotation
limit. With the solution, we can find that the horizon resistivity
given by Eq.\ (\ref{e:res}) is larger than that in the Maxwell
theory: $R_H=4\pi\sqrt{k}/\sqrt{1+k}$. Following the analysis in
\cite{1978MNRAS.185..833Z}, this implies that the energy extraction
rate should be lower in the BI theory. For given electric potential
difference induced by the hole rotation, the energy output should be
smaller with a larger impedance. Indeed, from Eq.\
(\ref{e:totr-enmom}) with the monopole solution, we can see that the
energy extraction rate is smaller compared to that in the Maxwell
theory:
\begin{equation}\label{e:}
\frac{E^\textrm{(BI)}}{E^\textrm{(Maxwell)}}=
\left(\frac{2\sqrt{k}}{\sqrt{1+k}+\sqrt{k}}\right)^3.
\end{equation}
The ratio only relies on the parameter $k$ defined in Eq.\
(\ref{e:k}). It gets the Maximum value as $k\rightarrow\infty$. It
is interesting that the parameter $k$ is related to the parameter
$b$ in the BI theory as well as the radius $r_0$ of the black hole
horizon, which implies that we can recover the results in the
Maxwell theory only with $k\rightarrow\infty$, without need of a
large $b$. The non-linear correction in the BI theory become more
important on a lighter black hole (with smaller $r_0$). On the
opposite, the BI theory with finite $b$ can behave like the Maxwell
theory on a massive black hole. This is different from the situation
in the Minkowski spacetime.
The reason for this difference might be due to the converging effect
of the horizon on the field lines. For given boundary conditions at
infinity, the field lines are much denser across a horizon on a
lighter black hole because the area of the horizon is smaller. This
makes the fields to be stronger and easier to reach the QED regime.
Similarly, for a massive black hole, the field field lines will be
diluted on the horizon with a large area.
Finally, it should be pointed out that the result is also consistent
with that from the quantum aspects of black holes. Thermal particles
excited in the vacuum near the horizon should also contribute to the
quantum corrections to the electrodynamics in this region. So the
quantum corrections become more important for the electrodynamics on
a smaller black hole who has a larger Hawking temperature. Of
course, our discussion here does not include the quantum effects
from the black hole spacetime. It is interesting to do further
investigation in future study.
\section*{Acknowledgements\markboth{Acknowledgements}{Acknowledgements}}
This work is supported by the Yunnan Natural Science Foundation
2017FB005 and 2014FB188.
\bibliographystyle{JHEP}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:Intro}
Reduced models have become a ubiquitous tool to make tractable computations that require large numbers of model evaluations in, e.g., uncertainty quantification, optimization, and inverse problems.
Traditional model reduction derives reduced models from high-dimensional (full) models of systems that typically are given in the form of partial differential equations (PDEs) and their corresponding discretized operators. The properties of reduced models have been extensively studied by the model reduction community \cite{AntoulasBook,RozzaPateraSurvey,AntBG10,MORSurveySIREV} and even rigorous error estimation has been established for certain classes of problems \cite{veroy_posteriori_2003,doi:10.1002/fld.867,refId0,doi:10.1080/13873954.2010.514703,HaasdonkError,RozzaPateraSurvey}.
The aim of data-driven model reduction methods is to learn reduced models from data alone and so to extend the scope of model reduction to settings where the governing equations and the corresponding discrete operators of the high-dimensional systems are unavailable; however, the models learned from data alone typically are only approximations of the reduced models obtained with traditional model reduction and thus establishing the same rigor for the learned models as for reduced models is challenging.
In contrast, this work presents an approach to learn low-dimensional models from data that exactly match the reduced models that are obtained with traditional model reduction as if the governing equations and discrete operators of the high-dimensional systems were available. This guarantee of exactly recovering reduced models from data holds pre-asymptotically in the number of data points and for a wide class of high-dimensional systems with polynomial nonlinear terms under certain conditions. Thus, models learned with the proposed approach \emph{are} the reduced models of traditional model reduction and therefore directly inherit their well-studied properties.
There is a large body of literature on learning dynamical-system models from data. We review only the works that are most relevant for the proposed approach. First, there is system identification that originated in the systems and control community \cite{LjungBook}. The Loewner approach was introduced by Antoulas and collaborators \cite{ANTOULAS01011986,5356286,Mayo2007634,BeaG12} and has been extended from linear time-invariant systems to parametrized \cite{doi:10.1137/130914619}, bilinear \cite{doi:10.1137/15M1041432} and quadratic-bilinear systems \cite{doi:10.1002/nla.2200}. Under certain conditions, the models learned with the Loewner approach are the reduced models that are obtained with interpolatory model reduction; however, Loewner models are learned from frequency-response data rather than from time-domain data. The work \cite{PSW16TLoewner} builds on Loewner to learn reduced models of linear time-invariant systems from time-domain data; however, learning from time-domain data can introduce errors and so the learned models can differ from the corresponding Loewner models derived from frequency-response data. Second, there is dynamic mode decomposition \cite{SchmidDMD,FLM:7843190,FLM:6837872,Tu2014391,NathanBook} that best-fits linear operators to state trajectories with respect to the $L_2$ norm. Methods based on the Koopman operator have been developed as one path to extending dynamic mode decomposition to nonlinear dynamical systems \cite{Mezic2005,Williams2015,NathanKoopman1}. Third, there are methods that learn parsimonious models by exploiting sparsity in the high-dimensional systems, e.g., the work by Schaeffer and collaborators \cite{Schaeffer6634,doi:10.1137/18M116798X} and the work by Kutz, Brunton, and collaborators \cite{Brunton12042016,Rudye1602614}. The learned models typically are either continuous in the sense that terms of PDEs are learned from a dictionary or high-dimensional models are learned that inherit sparsity from, e.g., finite-element discretizations of the governing equations of the systems of interest. In contrast, we aim to learn low-dimensional models that help to reduce computational costs in applications that require many model evaluations \cite{MORSurveySIREV,PWG17MultiSurvey}.
Instead of aiming to find models that best-fit data, we aim to exactly recover reduced models from data so that our models inherit the reduced models' well-studied properties. Our approach is based on operator inference \cite{Peherstorfer16DataDriven}, which has been derived from \cite{pehersto15dynamic} and is a data-driven model reduction approach that learns approximations of reduced models from state trajectories. In \cite{Peherstorfer16DataDriven}, operator inference has been introduced for systems with polynomial nonlinear terms and in \cite{doi:10.2514/6.2019-3707} operator inference is combined with the transform \& learn approach to obtain models of systems with more general nonlinear terms. Operator inference projects trajectories of systems of interest onto low-dimensional subspaces of the high-dimensional state spaces and then fits operators to the projected trajectories via least-squares regression. However, as is known from, e.g., the Mori-Zwanzig formalism from statistical physics \cite{Givon_2004,chorin2006}, the projected trajectories correspond to non-Markovian dynamics in the low-dimensional subspaces even though the high-dimensional trajectories and the corresponding high-dimensional systems are Markovian. The non-Markovian dynamics are related to the closure error in model reduction \cite{Wang12PODclosureComp,2017arXiv171003569F,doi:10.1137/18M1177263,doi:10.1098/rspa.2017.0385,doi:10.1098/rspa.2014.0446,doi:10.1063/1.5003467}.
To account for the non-Markovian dynamics, methods have been proposed that learn non-Markovian terms \cite{CHORIN2002239,doi:10.1137/18M1177263,doi:10.1098/rspa.2017.0385,doi:10.1063/1.5003467} and that use time-delay and other embeddings \cite{doi:10.1063/1.5063730,doi:10.1137/15M1054924,doi:10.1137/18M1188227}; however, since we aim to exactly recover the Markovian reduced models that are obtained with traditional model reduction, neither of these remedies are applicable in our situation. Instead,
we propose a data sampling scheme that iterates between time stepping the high-dimensional systems and projecting onto low-dimensional subspaces to generate trajectories that correspond to low-dimensional Markovian dynamics. We then show that, under certain conditions, applying operator inference to these re-projected trajectories gives the same operators that are obtained with traditional model reduction methods. The result is a pre-asymptotic guarantee to exactly recover reduced models from finite amounts of data for a wide class of systems with polynomial nonlinear terms. Our numerical results demonstrate these theoretical results in practice by learning low-dimensional models that match the reduced models from traditional model reduction up to numerical errors.
Section~\ref{sec:Prelim} discusses preliminaries on dynamical systems, traditional model reduction, operator inference, and formulates the problem. Section~\ref{sec:ReProj} introduces data sampling with re-projection to obtain trajectories that correspond to low-dimensional Markovian dynamics and provides an analysis that shows that operators fitted to these re-projected trajectories are the operators obtained with traditional model reduction. The overall computational approach is presented in Algorithm~\ref{alg:OpInfWithReProj} in Section~\ref{sec:CompProc} and numerical results are given in Section~\ref{sec:NumExp}. Conclusions are drawn in Section~\ref{sec:Conc}.
\section{Preliminaries}
\label{sec:Prelim}
The focus of this work is on dynamical systems with polynomial nonlinear terms, which we introduce in Section~\ref{sec:Prelim:FOM} together with traditional model reduction for these systems in Section~\ref{sec:Prelim:MOR}. A building block of our approach is operator inference \cite{Peherstorfer16DataDriven} for learning reduced models from data, which we discuss in Section~\ref{sec:Prelim:OpInf}. The problem we aim to address is formulated in Section~\ref{sec:Prelim:ProbForm}.
\subsection{Dynamical systems with polynomial nonlinear terms}
\label{sec:Prelim:FOM}
Let $K \in \mathbb{N}$ and consider a dynamical system of the form
\begin{equation}
\boldsymbol x_{k + 1}(\boldsymbol \mu) = \boldsymbol f(\boldsymbol x_k(\boldsymbol \mu), \boldsymbol u_k(\boldsymbol \mu); \boldsymbol \mu)\,,\qquad k = 0, \dots, K-1\,,
\label{eq:Prelim:FOMGeneral}
\end{equation}
with state $\boldsymbol x_k(\boldsymbol \mu) \in \mathbb{R}^{N}$ of dimension $N \in \mathbb{N}$ and input $\boldsymbol u_k(\boldsymbol \mu) \in \mathbb{R}^p$ of dimension $p \in \mathbb{N}$ at time steps $k = 0, \dots, K-1$. The parameter $\boldsymbol \mu \in \mathcal{D} \subset \mathbb{R}^{d}$ is independent of the time step. The initial condition is $\boldsymbol x_0 \in \mathbb{R}^{N}$. The potentially nonlinear function $\boldsymbol f: \mathbb{R}^{N} \times \mathbb{R}^p \times \mathcal{D} \to \mathbb{R}^{N}$ describes the dynamics of system \eqref{eq:Prelim:FOMGeneral}. Set $N_i = {N + i - 1 \choose i}$ for $i \in \mathbb{N}$. In the following, we consider systems \eqref{eq:Prelim:FOMGeneral} that are polynomial of order $\ell \in \mathbb{N}$, which means that there exists $\boldsymbol A_i(\boldsymbol \mu) \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times N_i}$ for $i = 1, \dots, \ell$ and $\boldsymbol B(\boldsymbol \mu) \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times p}$ for $\boldsymbol \mu \in \mathcal{D}$ such that
\begin{equation}
\boldsymbol f(\boldsymbol x_k(\boldsymbol \mu), \boldsymbol u_k(\boldsymbol \mu); \boldsymbol \mu) = \sum_{i = 1}^{\ell} \boldsymbol A_i(\boldsymbol \mu)\boldsymbol x_k^i(\boldsymbol \mu) + \boldsymbol B(\boldsymbol \mu)\boldsymbol u_k(\boldsymbol \mu)\,,\qquad k = 0, \dots, K-1\,.
\label{eq:Prelim:FOMPolynomial}
\end{equation}
The vector $\boldsymbol x^i_k(\boldsymbol \mu) \in \mathbb{R}^{N_i}$ is the $i$-th power of $\boldsymbol x_k$, which is constructed from the Kronecker product $\boldsymbol x_k(\boldsymbol \mu) \otimes \dots \otimes \boldsymbol x_k(\boldsymbol \mu)$ by removing all duplicate entries due to commutativity of the multiplication \cite{Peherstorfer16DataDriven}. Note that $\boldsymbol x_k^1(\boldsymbol \mu) = \boldsymbol x_k(\boldsymbol \mu)$. Define the trajectories $\boldsymbol X(\boldsymbol \mu) = [\boldsymbol x_0(\boldsymbol \mu), \dots, \boldsymbol x_{K-1}(\boldsymbol \mu)] \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times K}$ and $\boldsymbol Y(\boldsymbol \mu) = [\boldsymbol x_1(\boldsymbol \mu), \dots, \boldsymbol x_K(\boldsymbol \mu)] \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times K}$, which differ in their start and end index. Let further $\boldsymbol X^i(\boldsymbol \mu) = [\boldsymbol x_0^i(\boldsymbol \mu), \dots, \boldsymbol x_{K - 1}^i(\boldsymbol \mu)] \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times K}$, for $i = 1, \dots, \ell$, be the trajectories corresponding to the $i$-th powers of the states at times $k = 0, \dots, K-1$. More details on systems with polynomial nonlinear terms and their relevance in computational science and engineering can be found in, e.g., \cite{5991229,doi:10.1137/16M1098280,BorisLift,7330699,Peherstorfer16DataDriven}.
\subsection{Model reduction of systems with polynomial nonlinear terms}
\label{sec:Prelim:MOR}
If operators $\boldsymbol A_1(\boldsymbol \mu), \dots, \boldsymbol A_{\ell}(\boldsymbol \mu), \boldsymbol B(\boldsymbol \mu)$ of \eqref{eq:Prelim:FOMGeneral} for $\boldsymbol \mu \in \mathcal{D}$ are available, then traditional projection-based model reduction can be applied to find a reduced model; see, e.g., \cite{RozzaPateraSurvey,MORSurveySIREV}. Traditional projection-based model reduction typically first constructs a reduced space and then projects the operators of the high-dimensional system to obtain the reduced operators and to assemble the reduced model.
Consider first the construction of a reduced space. Let $\boldsymbol \mu_1, \dots, \boldsymbol \mu_m \in \mathcal{D}$ and let $\boldsymbol X(\boldsymbol \mu_1), \dots, \boldsymbol X(\boldsymbol \mu_m) \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times K}$ be the corresponding trajectories of length $K$. Applying proper orthogonal decomposition (POD) \cite{MORSurveySIREV,SirovichMethodOfSnapshots} to the snapshot matrix $[\boldsymbol X(\boldsymbol \mu_1), \dots, \boldsymbol X(\boldsymbol \mu_m)] \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times mK}$ yields an orthonormal basis $\boldsymbol v_1, \dots, \boldsymbol v_{n}$, with $n \ll N$, that spans an $n$-dimensional subspace $\mathcal{V}_{n} \subset \mathbb{R}^{N}$. Let $\boldsymbol V_{n} = [\boldsymbol v_1, \dots, \boldsymbol v_{n}] \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times n}$ be the basis matrix that has as columns the basis vectors $\boldsymbol v_1, \dots, \boldsymbol v_n$. Note that $\boldsymbol V_{n}$ is independent of the parameter $\boldsymbol \mu$ in the following. There are other methods for constructing reduced spaces such as greedy methods \cite{prudhomme_reliable_2001,veroy_posteriori_2003} and interpolatory model reduction \cite{Antoulas2010,gugercin_2008,AntoulasBook}. We refer to \cite{RozzaPateraSurvey,MORSurveySIREV} for details on how to select the parameters $\boldsymbol \mu_1, \dots, \boldsymbol \mu_m$ and how to select the dimension $n$ of the space $\mathcal{V}_{n}$.
For $j = 1, \dots, m$, the reduced operators are constructed via, e.g., Galerkin projection
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\bfA}_1(\boldsymbol \mu_j) = \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol A_1(\boldsymbol \mu_j)\boldsymbol V_{n}\,,\qquad \tilde{\bfB}(\boldsymbol \mu_j) = \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol B(\boldsymbol \mu_j)\,,
\label{eq:Prelim:ROMOperators}
\end{equation}
and similarly for $\tilde{\bfA}_2(\boldsymbol \mu_j) \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times n_2}, \dots, \tilde{\bfA}_{\ell}(\boldsymbol \mu_j) \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times n_{\ell}}$ with
\begin{equation}
n_i = {n + i - 1 \choose i}\,, \qquad i \in \mathbb{N}\,.
\label{eq:Prelim:nri}
\end{equation}
The reduced model for $\boldsymbol \mu_j$ is
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\tilde{\bfx}_{k + 1}(\boldsymbol \mu_j) = & \tilde{\bff}(\tilde{\bfx}_{k}(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \boldsymbol u_k(\boldsymbol \mu_j); \boldsymbol \mu_j) \\
= & \sum_{i = 1}^{\ell}\tilde{\bfA}_i(\boldsymbol \mu_j)\tilde{\bfx}_k^i(\boldsymbol \mu_j) +\tilde{\bfB}(\boldsymbol \mu_j) \boldsymbol u_k(\boldsymbol \mu_j)\,,\qquad k = 0, \dots, K-1\,,
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:Prelim:iROM}
\end{equation}
with the reduced state $\tilde{\boldsymbol x}_k(\boldsymbol \mu_j) \in \mathbb{R}^{n}$ and its $i$-th power $\tilde{\boldsymbol x}_k^i(\boldsymbol \mu_j) \in \mathbb{R}^{n_i}$ for $i \in \mathbb{N}$. The initial condition is $\tilde{\bfx}_0(\boldsymbol \mu_j) = \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol x_0(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$. Once the reduced models $\tilde{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \boldsymbol \mu_1), \dots, \tilde{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \boldsymbol \mu_m)$ are constructed for all $m$ parameters $\boldsymbol \mu_1, \dots, \boldsymbol \mu_m$, a reduced model for $\boldsymbol \mu \in \mathcal{D}$ is derived by element-wise interpolation of the reduced operators corresponding to $\boldsymbol \mu_1, \dots, \boldsymbol \mu_m$. If structure of the reduced operators is known, e.g., symmetry and positive definiteness, then this structure can preserved in the interpolation. We refer to \cite{NME:NME2681,panzer_parametric_2010,degroote_interpolation_2010} for details on interpolating reduced operators in model reduction.
\subsection{Operator inference}
\label{sec:Prelim:OpInf}
The traditional model reduction approach described in Section~\ref{sec:Prelim:MOR} to construct a reduced model \eqref{eq:Prelim:iROM} is intrusive in the sense that the operators $\boldsymbol A_1(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \dots, \boldsymbol A_{\ell}(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \boldsymbol B(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$ of system \eqref{eq:Prelim:FOMPolynomial} for $j = 1, \dots, m$ are required in the projection step \eqref{eq:Prelim:ROMOperators}. Operator inference is introduced in \cite{Peherstorfer16DataDriven} to derive approximations of the reduced operators $\tilde{\bfA}_1(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \dots, \tilde{\bfA}_{\ell}(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \tilde{\bfB}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$ from data of the high-dimensional system without requiring the high-dimensional operators $\boldsymbol A_1(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \dots, \boldsymbol A_{\ell}(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \boldsymbol B(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$.
\subsubsection{Operator inference} Operator inference proceeds in three steps. First, state trajectories $\boldsymbol X(\boldsymbol \mu_1), \dots, \boldsymbol X(\boldsymbol \mu_m)$ and $\boldsymbol Y(\boldsymbol \mu_1), \dots, \boldsymbol Y(\boldsymbol \mu_m)$ are obtained by querying the system \eqref{eq:Prelim:FOMGeneral} at parameters $\boldsymbol \mu_1, \dots, \boldsymbol \mu_m \in \mathcal{D}$ to derive a reduced space spanned by the columns of $\boldsymbol V_{n} = [\boldsymbol v_1, \dots, \boldsymbol v_{n}]$. Many of the basis construction techniques developed in traditional model reduction can be applied; see references given in Section~\ref{sec:Prelim:MOR}. In the following, we will use POD to construct $\boldsymbol V_{n}$ as described in Section~\ref{sec:Prelim:MOR}. The second step of operator inference is to project the trajectories onto the reduced space $\mathcal{V}_{n}$ spanned by the columns of $\boldsymbol V_{n}$ and so to obtain the projected trajectories
\[
\breve{\bfX}(\boldsymbol \mu_j) = \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol X(\boldsymbol \mu_j)\,,\qquad \breve{\bfY}(\boldsymbol \mu_j) = \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol Y(\boldsymbol \mu_j)\,,\qquad j = 1, \dots, m\,.
\]
In the third step of operator inference, the operators
\begin{equation}
\hat{\bfA}_1(\boldsymbol \mu_j) \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times n_1}, \dots, \hat{\bfA}_{\ell}(\boldsymbol \mu_j) \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times n_{\ell}}, \hat{\bfB}(\boldsymbol \mu_j) \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times p}
\label{eq:Prelim:InferredOperators}
\end{equation}
are learned via least-squares regression
\begin{equation}
\min_{\hat{\bfA}_1(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \dots, \hat{\bfA}_{\ell}(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \hat{\bfB}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)} \sum_{k = 0}^{K-1} \left\| \sum_{i = 1}^{\ell} \hat{\bfA}_i(\boldsymbol \mu_j)\breve{\bfx}_k^{i}(\boldsymbol \mu_j) + \hat{\bfB}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)\boldsymbol u_k(\boldsymbol \mu_j) - \breve{\bfx}_{k + 1}(\boldsymbol \mu_j) \right\|_2^2
\label{eq:Prelim:OpInfOpti}
\end{equation}
to obtain the model
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\hat{\bfx}_{k + 1}(\boldsymbol \mu_j) = & \sum_{i = 1}^{\ell} \hat{\bfA}_i(\boldsymbol \mu_j)\hat{\bfx}_k^{i}(\boldsymbol \mu_j) + \hat{\bfB}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)\boldsymbol u_k(\boldsymbol \mu_j)\\
= & \hat{\bff}(\hat{\bfx}_k(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \boldsymbol u_k(\boldsymbol \mu_j); \boldsymbol \mu_j)
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:Prelim:nROM}
\end{equation}
for $j = 1, \dots, m$. Note that the least-squares problem \eqref{eq:Prelim:OpInfOpti} is solved for each parameter $\boldsymbol \mu_j$ with $j = 1, \dots, m$. The state of the learned model at time $k$ is $\hat{\bfx}_k(\boldsymbol \mu_j) \in \mathbb{R}^{n}$ with its $i$-th power $\hat{\bfx}_k^i(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$. Note that the state $\hat{\bfx}_k(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$ is obtained by time stepping the learned model \eqref{eq:Prelim:nROM}, whereas the projected state $\breve{\bfx}_k(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$ is obtained by projecting the high-dimensional state $\boldsymbol x_k(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$ at time $k$ onto the reduced space $\mathcal{V}_{n}$. The initial condition is $\hat{\bfx}_0(\boldsymbol \mu_j) = \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol x_0(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$. To obtain a model for $\boldsymbol \mu \in \mathcal{D}$, the operators of the learned models corresponding to $\boldsymbol \mu_1, \dots, \boldsymbol \mu_m$ are interpolated as in traditional model reduction; see Section~\ref{sec:Prelim:MOR}. We refer to \cite{Peherstorfer16DataDriven,doi:10.2514/6.2019-3707,2019arXiv190803620S,pehersto15dynamic} for details on operator inference.
\subsubsection{Data matrix} It will be convenient to write \eqref{eq:Prelim:OpInfOpti} for each $j = 1, \dots, m$ as
\begin{equation}
\min_{\hat{\bfO}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)} \left\|\breve{\bfD}^T(\boldsymbol \mu_j)\hat{\bfO}^T(\boldsymbol \mu_j) - \breve{\bfY}^T(\boldsymbol \mu_j)\right\|_F^2
\label{eq:Prelim:OpInfDOY}
\end{equation}
with the data matrix
\begin{equation}
\breve{\bfD}(\boldsymbol \mu_j) =
\begin{bmatrix}
\breve{\bfX}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)\\
\breve{\bfX}^{2}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)\\
\vdots\\
\breve{\bfX}^{\ell}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)\\
\boldsymbol U(\boldsymbol \mu_j)
\end{bmatrix} \in \mathbb{R}^{\sum_{i = 1}^{\ell} n_i + p \times K}
\label{eq:Prelim:OpInfDataMatrixProj}
\end{equation}
and $\breve{\bfX}^i(\boldsymbol \mu_j) = [\breve{\bfx}_0^i(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \dots, \breve{\bfx}_{K - 1}^i(\boldsymbol \mu_j)] \in \mathbb{R}^{n_i \times K}$ for $i = 1, \dots, \ell$ and $\boldsymbol U(\boldsymbol \mu_j) = [\boldsymbol u_0(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \dots, \boldsymbol u_{K - 1}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)] \in \mathbb{R}^{p \times K}$.
The operator matrix is
\[
\hat{\bfO}(\boldsymbol \mu_j) = \begin{bmatrix}
\hat{\bfA}_1(\boldsymbol \mu_j) & \dots & \hat{\bfA}_{\ell}(\boldsymbol \mu_j) & \hat{\bfB}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)
\end{bmatrix} \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times \sum_{i = 1}^{\ell} n_i + p}\,.
\]
\subsection{Problem formulation}
\label{sec:Prelim:ProbForm}
Our goal is exactly recovering the operators \eqref{eq:Prelim:ROMOperators} of the intrusive reduced model from data of the high-dimensional system without knowledge of the high-dimensional operators \eqref{eq:Prelim:ROMOperators}. The operators \eqref{eq:Prelim:InferredOperators} obtained with operator inference from the projected trajectories, as described in Section~\ref{sec:Prelim:OpInf}, equal the intrusive operators \eqref{eq:Prelim:ROMOperators} in the limit of $n \to N$ under certain conditions described in \cite{Peherstorfer16DataDriven}. However, typically, one is interested in reduced models with $n \ll N$, in which case the learned operators can differ significantly from the intrusive operators. To explain the origin of the difference between the intrusive and the learned, non-intrusive operators, consider the trajectory $\tilde{\bfX}(\boldsymbol \mu) = [\tilde{\bfx}_0(\boldsymbol \mu), \dots, \tilde{\bfx}_{K - 1}(\boldsymbol \mu)] \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times K}$ obtained by time stepping the intrusive reduced model \eqref{eq:Prelim:iROM}. Even if $\boldsymbol x_0(\boldsymbol \mu) \in \mathcal{V}_{n}$, and thus $\tilde{\bfx}_0(\boldsymbol \mu) = \breve{\bfx}_0(\boldsymbol \mu)$, the projected trajectory $\breve{\bfX}(\boldsymbol \mu)$ can be different from the intrusive trajectory $\tilde{\bfX}(\boldsymbol \mu)$, i.e., there is a non-zero closure error
\begin{equation}
\|\breve{\bfX}(\boldsymbol \mu) - \tilde{\bfX}(\boldsymbol \mu)\|_F\,.
\label{eq:Prelim:ClosureError}
\end{equation}
By fitting operators to projected trajectories with operator inference as described in Section~\ref{sec:Prelim:OpInf} and in \cite{Peherstorfer16DataDriven}, the closure error \eqref{eq:Prelim:ClosureError} is introduced into the learned operators, which means that the learned operators can fail to approximate the dynamics of the intrusive reduced model.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
{\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{ToyClosure}}} & {\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{ToyTraj}}}\\
\scriptsize (a) closure error & \scriptsize (b) trajectories
\end{tabular}
\caption{Toy example: The closure error \eqref{eq:Prelim:ClosureError} pollutes operators that are fitted to projected trajectories with operator inference, which can lead to models that only poorly approximate the corresponding intrusive reduced models and projected trajectories of the high-dimensional systems.}
\label{fig:Prelim:Example}
\end{figure}
We demonstrate the effect of the closure error on operator inference with a toy example. Consider a system \eqref{eq:Prelim:FOMPolynomial} of degree $\ell = 1$, order $N = 10$, time steps $K = 100$, and without inputs, i.e., a time-discrete autonomous linear dynamical system $\boldsymbol x_{k + 1} = \boldsymbol A_1\boldsymbol x_k$ for $k = 0, \dots, K - 1$. The matrix $\boldsymbol A_1 \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times N}$ is generated by first sampling entries uniformly in $[0, 1]$ and then transforming them to ensure the eigenvalues of $\boldsymbol A_1$ have absolute values less than 1. The initial condition $\boldsymbol x_0$ is the first column of the identity matrix of dimension $n \times n$ and $\boldsymbol X$ is the corresponding trajectory of length $K$. Set $n = 2$ and consider the 2-dimensional space $\mathcal{V}_{n}$ that is spanned by the initial condition and the canonical unit vector with 1 at component 2. Let $\boldsymbol V_{n}$ be the corresponding basis matrix and let $\breve{\bfX} = \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol X$ be the projected trajectory. The intrusive reduced model is given by $\tilde{\bfx}_{k + 1} = \tilde{\bfA}_1\tilde{\bfx}_k$ with $\tilde{\bfA}_1 = \boldsymbol V_n^T\boldsymbol A_1\boldsymbol V_n$, $\tilde{\bfx}_0 = \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol x_0 = [1, 0]^T$, and the trajectory $\tilde{\bfX}$. Figure~\ref{fig:Prelim:Example}a shows the difference $\|\breve{\bfx}_k - \tilde{\bfx}_k\|_2$ for time steps $k = 0, \dots, K-1$, which is the 2-norm of the difference of the projected state and the state of the intrusive reduced model at time step $k$.
We now derive a model with operator inference from the projected trajectory $\breve{\bfX}$ as described in Section~\ref{sec:Prelim:OpInf} and denote the trajectory corresponding to this learned model as $\hat{\bfX}$. The trajectory $\hat{\bfX}$ differs significantly from the trajectory of the intrusive reduced model, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:Prelim:Example}b. This toy example demonstrates that the closure error can have a significant polluting effect on fitting operators to projected trajectories and so lead to models that exhibit different dynamics than the corresponding intrusive reduced models and high-dimensional systems. Thus, if the aim is to learn from data the same reduced models that intrusive model reduction constructs, then there is a need for revising operator inference to guarantee the recovery of the intrusive operators from trajectories with finite length $K < \infty$ and for dimensions $n \ll N$.
\section{Sampling Markovian dynamics via re-projection}
\label{sec:ReProj}
We present a data sampling scheme that generates trajectories $\bar{\bfX}(\boldsymbol \mu) \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times K}$ from the high-dimensional system \eqref{eq:Prelim:FOMGeneral} so that the closure error $\|\bar{\bfX}(\boldsymbol \mu) - \tilde{\bfX}(\boldsymbol \mu)\|_F = 0$ is zero. Applying operator inference to these trajectories $\bar{\bfX}(\boldsymbol \mu)$ of sufficient length $K < \infty$ exactly recovers the corresponding intrusive reduced model under certain conditions.
In Section~\ref{sec:ReProj:MoriZwanzig}, we build on the Mori-Zwanzig formalism \cite{Givon_2004,chorin2006} to clarify that the closure error \eqref{eq:Prelim:ClosureError} corresponds to non-Markovian dynamics of the projected trajectories in $\mathcal{V}_{n}$. These non-Markovian dynamics cannot be represented by a reduced model of the form \eqref{eq:Prelim:iROM}. Section~\ref{sec:ReProj:ReProj} describes a data sampling scheme that cancels these non-Markovian dynamics after each time step to obtain trajectories that correspond to Markovian dynamics in the reduced space $\mathcal{V}_{n}$. Section~\ref{sec:ReProj:ExactRecovery} shows that these re-projected trajectories equal the trajectories that are obtained with an intrusive reduced model and thus that operator inference exactly recovers the intrusive reduced model from these re-projected trajectories.
In this section, we focus on learning reduced models corresponding to a single parameter $\boldsymbol \mu_j$, which then is subsequently repeated for all parameter $j = 1, \dots, m$. To ease exposition, we drop the dependence on $\boldsymbol \mu_j$ in this section.
\subsection{Non-Markovian dynamics of projected states}
\label{sec:ReProj:MoriZwanzig}
To motivate our data sampling scheme, we first discuss the closure error $\|\breve{\bfX} - \tilde{\bfX}\|_F$ on the toy example given in the problem formulation in Section~\ref{sec:Prelim:ProbForm}. The arguments in this section are not new; we refer to the literature from the statistical physics community on the Mori-Zwanzig formalism, which describes the arguments in this section for more general systems and in stochastic settings; see, e.g., the surveys \cite{Givon_2004,chorin2006} for more details.
Our toy example is an autonomous linear system, which corresponds to system \eqref{eq:Prelim:FOMGeneral} with $\ell = 1$ and $\boldsymbol B = \boldsymbol 0$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\boldsymbol x_{k + 1} = \boldsymbol A_1\boldsymbol x_k\,,\qquad k = 0, \dots, K-1\,.
\label{eq:ReProj:LinearSystem}
\end{equation}
Consider now the orthogonal complement $\mathcal{V}_{n}^{\bot}$ of $\mathcal{V}_{n}$ that is spanned by the orthonormal columns of the basis matrix $\boldsymbol V_{n}^{\bot} \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times N - n}$ such that $\mathbb{R}^{N} = \mathcal{V}_{n} \oplus \mathcal{V}_{n}^{\bot}$. Define $\boldsymbol x^{\parallel}_k = \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol x_k$ and $\boldsymbol x^{\bot}_k = (\boldsymbol V_{n}^{\bot})^T\boldsymbol x_k$ so that $\boldsymbol x_k = \boldsymbol V_{n}\boldsymbol x^{\parallel}_k + \boldsymbol V_{n}^{\bot}\boldsymbol x^{\bot}$. Correspondingly, \eqref{eq:ReProj:LinearSystem} is split into
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol x_{k + 1}^{\parallel} & = \boldsymbol A_1^{\parallel\parallel}\boldsymbol x_k^{\parallel} + \boldsymbol A_1^{\parallel\bot}\boldsymbol x_k^{\bot}\\
\boldsymbol x_{k + 1}^{\bot} & = \boldsymbol A_1^{\bot\parallel}\boldsymbol x_k^{\parallel} + \boldsymbol A_1^{\bot\bot}\boldsymbol x_k^{\bot}\,,
\end{align*}
with the matrices
\[
\boldsymbol A_1^{\parallel\parallel} = \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol A_1\boldsymbol V_{n}\,, \boldsymbol A_1^{\parallel\bot} = \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol A_1\boldsymbol V_{n}^{\bot}\,, \boldsymbol A_1^{\bot\parallel} = (\boldsymbol V_{n}^{\bot})^T\boldsymbol A_1\boldsymbol V_{n}\,, \boldsymbol A_1^{\bot\bot} = (\boldsymbol V_{n}^{\bot})^T\boldsymbol A_1(\boldsymbol V_{n}^{\bot})^T\,.
\]
Model reduction as described in Section~\ref{sec:Prelim:MOR} constructs the reduced operator $\tilde{\bfA}_1 = \boldsymbol A_1^{\parallel\parallel}$ via projection. Consider now the trajectory $\boldsymbol X = [\boldsymbol x_0, \boldsymbol x_1, \dots, \boldsymbol x_{K - 1}]$ and its projection $\breve{\bfX} = [\breve{\bfx}_0, \dots, \breve{\bfx}_{K - 1}]$ with $\boldsymbol V_{n}$. Then, we obtain
\[
\boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol x_{k + 1} = \breve{\bfx}_{k+1} = \boldsymbol x^{\parallel}_{k + 1} = \boldsymbol A_1^{\parallel\parallel}\boldsymbol x_k^{\parallel} + \boldsymbol A_1^{\parallel\bot}\boldsymbol x_k^{\bot}\,,\qquad k = 0, \dots, K-1\,,
\]
which gives with an inductive argument that
\[
\breve{\bfx}_{k + 1} = \boldsymbol x_{k + 1}^{\parallel} = \underbrace{\boldsymbol A_1^{\parallel\parallel}\boldsymbol x_k^{\parallel}}_{\text{Markovian term}} + \underbrace{\boldsymbol A_1^{\parallel\bot}\sum_{i = 0}^{k-1} \left(\boldsymbol A_1^{\bot\bot}\right)^{k - 1 - i}\boldsymbol A_1^{\bot\parallel}\boldsymbol x_i^{\parallel}}_{\text{non-Markovian term}} + \boldsymbol A_1^{\parallel\bot}\left(\boldsymbol A_1^{\bot\bot}\right)^k\boldsymbol x_0^{\bot}\,.
\]
Thus, the projected state $\breve{\bfx}_{k + 1} = \boldsymbol x_{k + 1}^{\parallel}$ at time $k + 1$ depends on the time history of projected states $\boldsymbol x_0^{\parallel}, \boldsymbol x_1^{\parallel}, \dots, \boldsymbol x_k^{\parallel}$ instead of only on the last time step $\boldsymbol x_k^{\parallel}$. This means that the dynamics of the trajectory $\boldsymbol X$ become non-Markovian if projected onto the reduced space $\mathcal{V}_{n}$ in the sense that going from $\boldsymbol x_k^{\parallel}$ to $\boldsymbol x_{k + 1}^{\parallel}$ requires knowledge of the time history $\boldsymbol x_0^{\parallel}, \dots, \boldsymbol x_{k-1}^{\parallel}$ in general. Therefore, the reduced model \eqref{eq:Prelim:iROM}, which is derived with traditional model reduction, cannot describe well the projected trajectory $\breve{\bfX}$ because the reduced model \eqref{eq:Prelim:iROM} is Markovian in the sense that the state $\tilde{\bfx}_{k + 1}$ at time step $k + 1$ depends on the state $\tilde{\bfx}_k$ of the previous time step $k$ alone, instead of on the history $\tilde{\bfx}_{0}, \dots, \tilde{\bfx}_{k-1}$.
\subsection{Data sampling with re-projection to avoid non-Markovian dynamics}
\label{sec:ReProj:ReProj}
We now describe our sampling scheme with re-projection. Consider an initial condition $\boldsymbol x_0 \in \mathcal{V}_{n}$ and set $\bar{\bfx}_0 = \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol x_0$. Note that $\boldsymbol V_{n}\bar{\bfx}_0 = \boldsymbol x_0$ because $\boldsymbol x_0 \in \mathcal{V}_{n}$. Our scheme proceeds iteratively, see Figure~\ref{fig:ReProj}. In the first iteration, system \eqref{eq:Prelim:FOMGeneral} is queried at initial condition $\boldsymbol V_{n}\bar{\bfx}_0$ and input $\boldsymbol u_0$ to obtain
\[
\boldsymbol x_{\text{tmp}} = \boldsymbol f(\boldsymbol V_{n}\bar{\bfx}_0, \boldsymbol u_0)\,.
\]
Then, the re-projected state $\bar{\bfx}_1 = \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol x_{\text{tmp}}$ is computed by projecting $\boldsymbol x_{\text{tmp}}$ onto $\mathcal{V}_{n}$. In the second iteration, system \eqref{eq:Prelim:FOMGeneral} is queried for a single time step at the initial condition $\boldsymbol V_{n}\bar{\bfx}_1$ and input $\boldsymbol u_1$ to obtain $\boldsymbol f(\boldsymbol V_{n}\bar{\bfx}_1, \boldsymbol u_1)$ and to compute $\bar{\bfx}_2$ via projection $\bar{\bfx}_2 = \boldsymbol V_n^T\boldsymbol f(\boldsymbol V_n\bar{\bfx}_1, \boldsymbol u_1)$. This process is repeated to generate the re-projected states $\bar{\bfx}_0, \bar{\bfx}_1, \dots, \bar{\bfx}_K$ and to collect them into the re-projected trajectories $\bar{\bfX} = [\bar{\bfx}_0, \bar{\bfx}_1, \dots, \bar{\bfx}_{K - 1}]$ and $\bar{\bfY} = [\bar{\bfx}_1, \dots, \bar{\bfx}_K]$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\fbox{\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{reproj}}
\caption{The scheme shows data sampling with re-projection. Under certain conditions that are discussed in Section~\ref{sec:ReProj:ExactRecovery}, the re-projected trajectories $\bar{\bfX} = [\bar{\bfx}_0, \bar{\bfx}_1, \dots, \bar{\bfx}_{K-1}]$ are the trajectories $\tilde{\bfX}$ obtained by time stepping the intrusive reduced model. Thus, the closure error \eqref{eq:Prelim:ClosureError} of the re-projected trajectories is zero.}
\label{fig:ReProj}
\end{figure}
Algorithm~\ref{alg:ReProj} summarizes our data sampling scheme with re-projection. The inputs to Algorithm~\ref{alg:ReProj} are the high-dimensional system $\boldsymbol f$, a basis matrix $\boldsymbol V_{n}$, an initial condition $\boldsymbol x_0 \in \mathcal{V}_{n}$, a parameter $\boldsymbol \mu \in \mathcal{D}$, and inputs $\boldsymbol u_0, \dots, \boldsymbol u_{K - 1}$. Line~\ref{alg:ReProj:ICinV} projects the initial condition $\boldsymbol x_0$ to obtain $\bar{\bfx}_0$. The \texttt{for} loop on line~\ref{alg:ReProj:For} iterates over the time steps $k = 0, \dots, K-1$ and generates the re-projected state $\bar{\bfx}_{k + 1}$ by querying the high-dimensional system for a single time step in line~\ref{alg:ReProj:Query}. The re-projected trajectories $\bar{\bfX}$ and $\bar{\bfY}$ are returned in line~\ref{alg:ReProj:Return}.
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\caption{Data sampling with re-projection}\label{alg:ReProj}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Procedure{ReProj}{$\boldsymbol f, \boldsymbol V_{n}, \boldsymbol x_0, \boldsymbol u_0, \dots, \boldsymbol u_{K-1}$}
\State Set $\bar{\bfx}_0 = \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol x_0$\label{alg:ReProj:ICinV}
\For{$k = 0, \dots, K-1$}\label{alg:ReProj:For}
\State Query system for a single time step $\boldsymbol x_{\text{tmp}} = \boldsymbol f(\boldsymbol V_{n}\bar{\bfx}_k, \boldsymbol u_k)$\label{alg:ReProj:Query}
\State Set $\bar{\bfx}_{k+1} = \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol x_{\text{tmp}}$\label{alg:ReProj:ReProj}
\EndFor
\State Return $\bar{\bfX} = [\bar{\bfx}_0, \bar{\bfx}_1, \dots, \bar{\bfx}_{K - 1}]$ and $\bar{\bfY} = [\bar{\bfx}_1, \dots, \bar{\bfx}_K]$\label{alg:ReProj:Return}
\EndProcedure
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Exact recovery of reduced models from re-projected trajectories}
\label{sec:ReProj:ExactRecovery}
Proposition~\ref{prop:rX=tX} shows that the trajectories $\bar{\bfX}$ and $\bar{\bfY}$ obtained with sampling with re-projection are the trajectories $\tilde{\bfX}$ and $\tilde{\bfY}$ obtained from time stepping the corresponding intrusive reduced models. Proposition~\ref{prop:rX=tX} leads to Corollary~\ref{cor:Exact} that shows that intrusive reduced models are exactly recovered from re-projected trajectories in the sense that $\|\tilde{\bfA}_i - \hat{\bfA}_i\|_F = \|\tilde{\bfB} - \hat{\bfB}\|_F = 0$ for $i = 1, \dots, \ell$ under certain conditions. This is a pre-asymptotic result in the sense that it holds for finite-length trajectories, i.e., for finite number of data points, and for reduced spaces $\mathcal{V}_{n}$ of dimensions $n < N$.
\begin{proposition}
Consider a system \eqref{eq:Prelim:FOMPolynomial} with polynomial nonlinear terms. Let $\boldsymbol x_0 \in \mathcal{V}_{n}$ be an initial condition and let $\boldsymbol u_0, \dots, \boldsymbol u_{K-1}$ be inputs. Generate trajectories $\bar{\bfX}$ and $\bar{\bfY}$ from system \eqref{eq:Prelim:FOMPolynomial} with re-projection as described in Algorithm~\ref{alg:ReProj}. Then, $\bar{\bfX} = \tilde{\bfX}$ and $\bar{\bfY} = \tilde{\bfY}$ holds, where $\tilde{\bfX} = [\tilde{\bfx}_0, \dots, \tilde{\bfx}_{K - 1}]$ and $\tilde{\bfY} = [\tilde{\bfx}_1, \dots, \tilde{\bfx}_K]$ are trajectories obtained with the intrusive reduced model \eqref{eq:Prelim:iROM} with initial condition $\tilde{\bfx}_0 = \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol x_0$ and inputs $\boldsymbol u_0, \dots, \boldsymbol u_{K-1}$.
\label{prop:rX=tX}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
With zero padding, the operators $\boldsymbol A_1, \dots, \boldsymbol A_{\ell}$ of \eqref{eq:Prelim:FOMPolynomial} can be reformulated to $\mathsf{A}_1, \dots, \mathsf{A}_{\ell}$ so that
\[
\boldsymbol x_{k + 1} = \sum_{i = 1}^{\ell} \mathsf{A}_i (\underbrace{\boldsymbol x_k \otimes \dots \otimes \boldsymbol x_k}_{i-\text{times}}) + \boldsymbol B\boldsymbol u_k\,,\qquad k = 0, \dots, K-1\,,
\]
where $\otimes$ is the Kronecker product. Note that $\mathsf{A}_i \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times N^i}$ for $i = 1, \dots, \ell$. Similarly, operators $\tilde{\sfA}_1, \dots, \tilde{\sfA}_{\ell}$ are obtained via projection
\[
\tilde{\sfA}_i = \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\mathsf{A}_i (\underbrace{\boldsymbol V_{n} \otimes \dots \otimes \boldsymbol V_{n}}_{i-\text{times}})\,,\qquad i = 1, \dots, \ell\,,
\]
so that $\tilde{\bfA}_i\tilde{\bfx}_k^i = \tilde{\sfA}_i(\tilde{\bfx}_k \otimes \dots \otimes \tilde{\bfx}_k)$ holds for $i = 1, \dots, \ell$. Set $\bar{\bfx}_0 = \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol x_0$ and note that $\boldsymbol x_0 \in \mathcal{V}_{n}$ and thus $\bar{\bfx}_0 = \tilde{\bfx}_0$. Querying system \eqref{eq:Prelim:FOMPolynomial} at initial condition $\boldsymbol V_{n}\bar{\bfx}_0 = \boldsymbol x_0$ as described in line~\ref{alg:ReProj:Query} of Algorithm~\ref{alg:ReProj} leads to
\begin{align}
\boldsymbol x_{\text{tmp}} = & \sum_{i = 1}^{\ell}\boldsymbol A_i\boldsymbol x_0^k + \boldsymbol B\boldsymbol u_0\,,\notag\\
= & \sum_{i = 1}^{\ell}\mathsf{A}_i(\boldsymbol x_0 \otimes \dots \otimes \boldsymbol x_0) + \boldsymbol B\boldsymbol u_0\notag\\
= & \sum_{i = 1}^{\ell} \mathsf{A}_i(\boldsymbol V_{n}\tilde{\bfx}_0 \otimes \dots \otimes \boldsymbol V_{n}\tilde{\bfx}_0) + \boldsymbol B \boldsymbol u_0\label{eq:ReProj:rX=tX:One}\\
= & \sum_{i = 1}^{\ell} \mathsf{A}_i(\boldsymbol V_{n} \otimes \dots \otimes \boldsymbol V_{n})(\tilde{\bfx}_0 \otimes \dots \otimes \tilde{\bfx}_0) + \boldsymbol B\boldsymbol u_0\label{eq:ReProj:rX=tX:Two}\,,
\end{align}
where we used that $\boldsymbol x_0 = \boldsymbol V_{n}\tilde{\bfx}_0$ in \eqref{eq:ReProj:rX=tX:One} and where we exploited the mixed-product property of the Kronecker product in \eqref{eq:ReProj:rX=tX:Two}. We now project \eqref{eq:ReProj:rX=tX:Two} to obtain
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol x_{\text{tmp}} = & \sum_{i = 1}^{\ell}\boldsymbol V_{n}^T\mathsf{A}_i(\boldsymbol V_{n} \otimes \dots \otimes \boldsymbol V_{n})(\tilde{\bfx}_0 \otimes \dots \otimes \tilde{\bfx}_0) + \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol B\boldsymbol u_0\\
= & \sum_{i = 1}^{\ell} \tilde{\sfA}_i(\tilde{\bfx}_0 \otimes \dots \otimes \tilde{\bfx}_0) + \tilde{\bfB}\boldsymbol u_0
\end{align*}
and thus $\tilde{\bfx}_1 = \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol x_{\text{tmp}}$. According to line~\ref{alg:ReProj:ReProj} in Algorithm~\ref{alg:ReProj}, the re-projected state is $\bar{\bfx}_1 = \boldsymbol V_{n}^T\boldsymbol x_{\text{tmp}}$ and thus $\tilde{\bfx}_1 = \bar{\bfx}_1$ holds. The same steps can be repeated for time step $k$ with $\bar{\bfx}_k = \tilde{\bfx}_k$ to obtain $\tilde{\bfx}_{k + 1} = \bar{\bfx}_{k + 1}$. Then, with induction follows that $\bar{\bfX} = \tilde{\bfX}$ and $\bar{\bfY} = \tilde{\bfY}$ hold.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
Let the trajectories $\bar{\bfX}$ and $\bar{\bfY}$ of length $K$ be generated with Algorithm~\ref{alg:ReProj} from a system with polynomial nonlinear terms up to degree $\ell$. Let further
\begin{equation}
K \geq p + \sum_{i = 1}^{\ell} n_i\,,
\label{eq:ReProj:Cond}
\end{equation}
with $n_i$ defined in \eqref{eq:Prelim:nri} for $i = 1, \dots, \ell$. Consider the data matrix
\begin{equation}
\bar{\bfD} = \begin{bmatrix}
\bar{\bfX}\\
\bar{\bfX}^2\\
\vdots\\
\bar{\bfX}^j\\
\boldsymbol U
\end{bmatrix} \in \mathbb{R}^{\sum_{i = 1}^{\ell} n_i + p \times K}
\label{eq:ReProj:DataMatrixReProj}
\end{equation}
derived from the re-projected trajectory $\bar{\bfX}$, cf.~the data matrix $\breve{\bfD}$ derived from the projected trajectory $\breve{\bfX}$ defined in \eqref{eq:Prelim:OpInfDataMatrixProj}. If $\bar{\bfD}$ has full rank, then the least-squares problem
\begin{equation}
\min_{\hat{\bfO}} \|\bar{\bfD}^T\hat{\bfO}^T - \bar{\bfY}^T\|_F^2
\label{eq:ReProj:LSQReProj}
\end{equation}
has a unique solution $\hat{\bfO}^*$ with objective 0 and that solution is $\hat{\bfO}^* = [\tilde{\bfA}_1, \tilde{\bfA}_2, \dots, \tilde{\bfA}_{\ell}, \tilde{\bfB}]$, where $\tilde{\bfA}_1, \dots, \tilde{\bfA}_{\ell}, \tilde{\bfB}$ are the intrusive operators \eqref{eq:Prelim:ROMOperators}.
\label{cor:Exact}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
First, because of Proposition~\ref{prop:rX=tX}, we have $\tilde{\bfX} = \bar{\bfX}$ and $\tilde{\bfY} = \bar{\bfY}$, and thus the states of $\bar{\bfX}$ and $\bar{\bfY}$ satisfy the equations corresponding to the intrusive reduced model \eqref{eq:Prelim:iROM}. This means that the matrix $\tilde{\bfO} = [\tilde{\bfA}_1, \tilde{\bfA}_2, \dots, \tilde{\bfA}_{\ell}, \tilde{\bfB}]$ is a solution of \eqref{eq:ReProj:LSQReProj} because it achieves objective 0. To show uniqueness, note that \eqref{eq:ReProj:LSQReProj} corresponds to $i = 1, \dots, n$ independent least-squares problems
\begin{equation}
\min_{\hat{\bfO}_i} \|\bar{\bfD}\hat{\bfO}_i^T - \bar{\bfY}_i^T\|_2^2\,,
\label{eq:ReProj:SeparateOpInf}
\end{equation}
with $\hat{\bfO} = [\hat{\bfO}_1^T, \dots, \hat{\bfO}_{n}^T]^T$ and $\bar{\bfY} = [\bar{\bfY}_1^T, \dots, \bar{\bfY}_{n}^T]^T$. Each of the rows of $\hat{\bfO}$ has length $p + \sum_{i = 1}^{\ell} n_i$ and thus each of the least-squares problems \eqref{eq:ReProj:SeparateOpInf} has $p + \sum_{i = 1}^{\ell} n_i$ unknowns. Condition \eqref{eq:ReProj:Cond} guarantees that the number of equations in each least-squares problem \eqref{eq:ReProj:SeparateOpInf} is at least $K \geq p + \sum_{i = 1}^{\ell} n_i$. Thus, if $\bar{\bfD}$ has full rank, then there is at most one solution that solves \eqref{eq:ReProj:SeparateOpInf}. Since $\tilde{\bfO}$ leads to objective 0, we obtain $\hat{\bfO}^* = \tilde{\bfO}$.
\end{proof}
\section{Computational procedure and practical aspects}
\label{sec:CompProc}
This section summarizes the overall computational procedure of operator inference with re-projected trajectories in Algorithm~\ref{alg:OpInfWithReProj} and discusses practical aspects as well as limitations of the approach.
\subsection{Computational procedure}
Algorithm~\ref{alg:OpInfWithReProj} summarizes the overall procedure of recovering reduced models from re-projected trajectories with operator inference. The inputs to Algorithm~\ref{alg:OpInfWithReProj} are $\boldsymbol f$, the degree $\ell$, the dimension $n$ of the reduced space, the parameters $\boldsymbol \mu_1, \dots, \boldsymbol \mu_m$, the initial conditions $\boldsymbol x_0(\boldsymbol \mu_1), \dots, \boldsymbol x_0(\boldsymbol \mu_m)$, and the input trajectories $\boldsymbol U(\boldsymbol \mu_1), \dots, \boldsymbol U(\boldsymbol \mu_m)$. Algorithm~\ref{alg:OpInfWithReProj} time steps the high-dimensional system to obtain the trajectories $\boldsymbol X(\boldsymbol \mu_1), \dots, \boldsymbol X(\boldsymbol \mu_m)$ in the \texttt{for} loop on line~\ref{alg:OpInfWithReProj:ForInitial}. Then, in line~\ref{alg:OpInfWithReProj:POD}, the POD basis matrix $\boldsymbol V_{n}$ is computed from the snapshot matrix $[\boldsymbol X(\boldsymbol \mu_1), \dots, \boldsymbol X(\boldsymbol \mu_m)]$. The \texttt{for} loop in line~\ref{alg:OpInfWithReProj:ReProj} calls Algorithm~\ref{alg:ReProj} to generate the re-projected trajectories $\bar{\bfX}(\boldsymbol \mu_1), \dots, \bar{\bfX}(\boldsymbol \mu_m)$ and $\bar{\bfY}(\boldsymbol \mu_1), \dots, \bar{\bfY}(\boldsymbol \mu_m)$. Operator inference as described in Corollary~\ref{cor:Exact} is then applied to the re-projected trajectories in line~\ref{alg:OpInfWithReProj:Assemble} and line~\ref{alg:OpInfWithReProj:Solve} to learn operators. Line~\ref{alg:OpInfWithReProj:Return} returns the learned operators.
The computational costs of Algorithm~\ref{alg:OpInfWithReProj} are typically dominated by querying the high-dimensional system. The costs of assembling the data matrix on line~\ref{alg:OpInfWithReProj:Assemble} and the costs of solving the corresponding least-squares problem on line~\ref{alg:OpInfWithReProj:Solve} typically are negligible. In the \texttt{for} loop in line~\ref{alg:OpInfWithReProj:ForInitial}, the high-dimensional system is time stepped to generate the trajectories for constructing the POD basis matrix, which is similar to traditional, intrusive model reduction. The \texttt{for} loop in line~\ref{alg:OpInfWithReProj:ReProj} requires time stepping the high-dimensional systems once more to sample the re-projected trajectories with Algorithm~\ref{alg:ReProj}. Thus, the computational costs of learning a reduced model with operator inference with re-projection is twice as high as the costs of constructing a model with operator inference without re-projection. Note, however, that it is unnecessary to sample re-projected trajectories of length $K$. Sampling shorter re-projected trajectories can significantly reduce the computational costs of operator inference with re-projection.
\subsection{Practical aspects and condition of least-squares problem}
\label{sec:ReProj:Practical}
We make three remarks of practical aspects of operator inference with re-projection. First, Corollary~\ref{cor:Exact} states that operator inference from re-projected trajectories gives the intrusive reduced models if condition \eqref{eq:ReProj:Cond} is satisfied and if the data matrix $\bar{\bfD}$ defined in \eqref{eq:ReProj:DataMatrixReProj} has full rank. It is straightforward to numerically verify these two conditions in practice and so to determine if Corollary~\ref{cor:Exact} applies and if the intrusive reduced model is obtained up to numerical errors.
Second, to sample the re-projected trajectories with Algorithm~\ref{alg:ReProj}, it is necessary to have available the high-dimensional system in the sense that it can be time stepped for a single time step with initial condition $\bar{\bfx}_k$ for $k = 0, \dots, K-1$. This is in contrast to operator inference without re-projection, which is applicable even if only the trajectories $\boldsymbol X(\boldsymbol \mu_1), \dots, \boldsymbol X(\boldsymbol \mu_m)$ and the corresponding inputs $\boldsymbol U(\boldsymbol \mu_1), \dots, \boldsymbol U(\boldsymbol \mu_m)$ are available and the high-dimensional system cannot be queried. However, note that it is unnecessary to time step the high-dimensional system at arbitrary initial conditions. The re-projected states are close to the states of the high-dimensional system if the space $\mathcal{V}_{n}$ is sufficiently rich, which typically is a necessary requirement for the success of model reduction in any case.
Third, in practice, the condition number of $\bar{\bfD}^T(\boldsymbol \mu_j)\bar{\bfD}(\boldsymbol \mu_j), j = 1, \dots, m$ can be high, which means that numerical errors are amplified and pollute the learned operators even if all conditions required for Corollary~\ref{cor:Exact} are satisfied. To keep the condition number of $\bar{\bfD}^T(\boldsymbol \mu_j)\bar{\bfD}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$ low, we concatenate multiple trajectories corresponding to different inputs in practice. Let $\boldsymbol U_1(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \dots, \boldsymbol U_{m^{\prime}}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$ be $m^{\prime} \in \mathbb{N}$ input trajectories and let $\boldsymbol X_{1}(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \dots, \boldsymbol X_{m^{\prime}}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$ be the corresponding trajectories and $\bar{\bfX}_{1}(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \dots, \bar{\bfX}_{m^{\prime}}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$ be the corresponding re-projected trajectories computed with Algorithm~\ref{alg:ReProj}. We concatenate the trajectories to obtain
\begin{equation}
\qquad \boldsymbol U(\boldsymbol \mu_j) = \begin{bmatrix}
\boldsymbol U_1(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \dots, \boldsymbol U_{m^{\prime}}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)
\end{bmatrix}\,,\quad \bar{\bfX} = \begin{bmatrix}
\bar{\bfX}_1(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \dots, \bar{\bfX}_{m^{\prime}}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)
\end{bmatrix}\,,
\label{eq:ReProj:StackedTraj}
\end{equation}
and then use \eqref{eq:ReProj:StackedTraj} and $\bar{\bfY}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$ obtained from $\bar{\bfY}_1(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \dots, \bar{\bfY}_{m^{\prime}}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$ in the least-squares problem \eqref{eq:ReProj:LSQReProj} to learn a model. This is a similar process as suggested in \cite{Peherstorfer16DataDriven}.
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\caption{Operator inference with re-projected trajectories}\label{alg:OpInfWithReProj}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Procedure{OpInfRP}{$\boldsymbol f, \ell, n, \boldsymbol \mu_1, \dots, \boldsymbol \mu_m, \boldsymbol x_0(\boldsymbol \mu_1), \dots, \boldsymbol x_0(\boldsymbol \mu_m), \boldsymbol U(\boldsymbol \mu_1), \dots, \boldsymbol U(\boldsymbol \mu_m)$}
\For {$j = 1, \dots, m$}\label{alg:OpInfWithReProj:ForInitial}
\State Time step $\boldsymbol f$ at $\boldsymbol \mu_j$ with $\boldsymbol x_0(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$ and $\boldsymbol U(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$ to obtain $\boldsymbol X(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$
\EndFor
\State Derive POD basis matrix $\boldsymbol V_{n}$ from snapshot matrix $[\boldsymbol X(\boldsymbol \mu_1), \dots, \boldsymbol X(\boldsymbol \mu_m)]$\label{alg:OpInfWithReProj:POD}
\For {$j = 1, \dots, m$}\label{alg:OpInfWithReProj:ReProj}
\State Call Algorithm~\ref{alg:ReProj} with $\boldsymbol V_{n}, \boldsymbol x_0(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \boldsymbol U(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$ to obtain $\bar{\bfX}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$ and $\bar{\bfY}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$
\State Assemble data matrix $\bar{\bfD}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$ defined in \eqref{eq:ReProj:DataMatrixReProj}\label{alg:OpInfWithReProj:Assemble}
\State Solve \eqref{eq:ReProj:LSQReProj} to learn operators $\hat{\bfA}_1(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \dots, \hat{\bfA}_{\ell}(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \hat{\bfB}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$\label{alg:OpInfWithReProj:Solve}
\EndFor
\State Return learned operators $\hat{\bfA}_{1}(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \dots, \hat{\bfA}_{\ell}(\boldsymbol \mu_j), \hat{\bfB}(\boldsymbol \mu_j)$ for $j = 1, \dots, m$\label{alg:OpInfWithReProj:Return}
\EndProcedure
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\section{Numerical results}
\label{sec:NumExp}
The numerical results in this section demonstrate that the proposed data sampling strategy with re-projection leads to low-dimensional models that match reduced models derived with traditional model reduction methods up to numerical errors in practice. The toy example introduced in the problem formulation in Section~\ref{sec:Prelim:ProbForm} is revisited in Section~\ref{sec:NumExp:ToyExample}. Section~\ref{sec:NumExp:Burgers} derives models for the viscous Burgers' equation and Section~\ref{sec:NumExp:Chafee} for the Chafee-Infante equation. Both of these examples are one dimensional in the spatial domain. Section~\ref{sec:NumExp:DiffReact} demonstrates learning models from re-projected trajectories on a diffusion-reaction equation with two spatial dimensions.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\multicolumn{2}{c}{{\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{ToyTrajReProj}}}} \\
\multicolumn{2}{c}{\scriptsize (a) trajectories}\\
{\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{ToyCond}}} &
{\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{ToyClosureDiff}}}\\
\scriptsize (b) condition number of $\bar{\bfD}^T\bar{\bfD}$ & \scriptsize (c) difference of reduced model and learned model
\end{tabular}
\caption{Toy example: Plot (a) shows that time stepping the model fitted to re-projected trajectories gives a trajectory that matches the trajectory obtained with the intrusive reduced model. Plot (b) and (c) show that the condition number of $\bar{\bfD}^T\bar{\bfD}$ can be high, which means that numerical errors are amplified. Increasing the number of time steps $K$ and concatenating multiple trajectories as described in Section~\ref{sec:ReProj:Practical}, and as used in Sections~\ref{sec:NumExp:Burgers}--\ref{sec:NumExp:DiffReact}, typically helps to keep the condition number reasonably low in practice.}
\label{fig:NumExp:ToyExample}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Toy example}
\label{sec:NumExp:ToyExample}
We revisit the toy example introduced in Section~\ref{sec:Prelim:ProbForm}. Let $\bar{\bfX}$ be the re-projected trajectory obtained with Algorithm~\ref{alg:ReProj}. Following the least-squares problem \eqref{eq:ReProj:LSQReProj} described in Corollary~\ref{cor:Exact}, we learn a model from the re-projected trajectory $\bar{\bfX}$ and time step the learned model to obtain the trajectory $\hat{\bfX}$, which is plotted in Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:ToyExample}a. The trajectory of the model learned from the re-projected trajectory closely follows the trajectory of the intrusive reduced model, which is in stark contrast to the model learned from the trajectory $\breve{\bfX}$ without re-projection. Thus, the results in Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:ToyExample}a are in agreement with Corollary~\ref{cor:Exact}.
Now consider the data matrix $\bar{\bfD}$ defined in \eqref{eq:ReProj:DataMatrixReProj}. Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:ToyExample}b shows the condition number of $\bar{\bfD}^T\bar{\bfD}$ for dimensions $n \in \{2, 4, 6\}$ and various numbers of time steps $K$. In this example, the condition number grows with the dimension $n$. This means that even though condition \eqref{eq:ReProj:Cond} together with a full-rank data matrix are sufficient to recover the intrusive reduced model, numerical errors are introduced into the learned operators because of the potentially high condition number of $\bar{\bfD}^T\bar{\bfD}$; cf.~Section~\ref{sec:ReProj:Practical}. Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:ToyExample}c demonstrates that the difference
\begin{equation}
\frac{\|\hat{\bfX} - \tilde{\bfX}\|_F}{\|\tilde{\bfX}\|_F}
\label{eq:NumExp:DiffErrorNoParameter}
\end{equation}
between the trajectory $\tilde{\bfX}$ of the intrusive reduced model and the trajectory $\hat{\bfX}$ of the model learned from the re-projected trajectory grows with the dimension $n$ as numerical errors are amplified by the increasing condition number of $\bar{\bfD}^T\bar{\bfD}$ in this example. Increasing the number of time steps $K$ seems to help to reduce the condition number, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:ToyExample}b.
\subsection{Burgers' equation}
\label{sec:NumExp:Burgers}
A similar setup as in \cite{Peherstorfer16DataDriven} is used for demonstrating the proposed approach on the viscous Burgers' equation.
\subsubsection{Setup}
\label{sec:NumExp:Burgers:Setup}
Set the spatial domain to $\Omega = (-1, 1) \subset \mathbb{R}$ and the parameter domain to $\mathcal{D} = [10^{-1}, 1]$. Let $T = 1$ be end time. Consider the viscous Burgers' equation
\[
\frac{\partial}{\partial t}x(\xi, t; \mu) + x(\xi, t; \mu)\frac{\partial}{\partial \xi} x(\xi, t; \mu) - \mu \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \xi^2} x(\xi, t; \mu) = 0\,, \qquad \xi \in \Omega\,,
\]
with the spatial coordinate $\xi \in \Omega$, time $t \in [0, T]$, and parameter $\mu \in \mathcal{D}$. Impose Dirichlet boundary conditions $x(-1, t; \mu) = u(t)$ and $x(1, t; \mu) = -u(t)$ with the input function $u: [0, T] \to \mathbb{R}$. The initial condition is zero $x(\xi, 0; \mu) = 0$ for $\xi \in \Omega$. We discretize the Burgers' equation with finite difference on an equidistant grid in $\Omega$ with mesh width $2^{-7}$, which leads to a system of ordinary differential equations of order $N = 128$. Time is discretized with the forward Euler method and time step size $\delta t = 10^{-4}$ to obtain
\begin{equation}
\boldsymbol x_{k + 1}(\mu) = \boldsymbol A_1(\mu)\boldsymbol x_k(\mu) + \boldsymbol A_2\boldsymbol x^2_k(\mu) + \boldsymbol B u_k(\mu)\,,\qquad k = 0, \dots, K-1\,,
\label{eq:NumExp:Burgers:Eq}
\end{equation}
which is a polynomial nonlinear dynamical system \eqref{eq:Prelim:FOMPolynomial} of degree $\ell = 2$ with $\boldsymbol A_1(\mu) \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times N}, \boldsymbol A_2 \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times N_2}$, and input matrix $\boldsymbol B \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times 1}$. Note that $\boldsymbol A_2$ and $\boldsymbol B$ are independent of the parameter $\mu$. Note further that $\boldsymbol f(\boldsymbol x_k(\mu), u_k(\mu); \mu) = \boldsymbol A_1(\mu)\boldsymbol x_k(\mu) + \boldsymbol A_2\boldsymbol x^2_k(\mu) + \boldsymbol B u_k(\mu)$ in this example. The number of time steps is $K = 10^4$.
To generate trajectories from system \eqref{eq:NumExp:Burgers:Eq} for learning low-dimensional models, consider the $m = 10$ equidistant parameters $\mu_1, \dots, \mu_m \in \mathcal{D}$ in the parameter domain $\mathcal{D}$. Set $m^{\prime} = 5$ and consider the input trajectories $\boldsymbol U_l(\mu_j) = [u_{l,0}(\mu_j), \dots, u_{l,K-1}(\mu_j)]$ for $j = 1, \dots, m$ and $l = 1, \dots, m^{\prime}$, where $u_{l,i}(\mu_j)$ is a realization of the random variable with uniform distribution in $[0, 10]$ for $i = 0, \dots, K-1$. Then, we generate $m$ trajectories $\boldsymbol X_l(\mu_1), \dots, \boldsymbol X_l(\mu_m)$ for $l = 1, \dots, m^{\prime}$ to derive the POD basis matrix $\boldsymbol V_{\bar{\nr}}$ of the POD space $\mathcal{V}_{\bar{\nr}}$ of dimension $\bar{\nr} \in \mathbb{N}$ from the snapshot matrix $[\boldsymbol X(\mu_1), \dots, \boldsymbol X(\mu_m)]$. The trajectories are $\boldsymbol X(\mu_i) = [\boldsymbol X_1(\mu_i), \dots, \boldsymbol X_m^{\prime}(\mu_i)]$ for $i = 1, \dots, m$, cf.~Section~\ref{sec:ReProj:Practical}. The re-projected trajectories $\bar{\bfX}(\mu_1), \dots, \bar{\bfX}(\mu_m)$, and the corresponding trajectories $\bar{\bfY}(\mu_1), \dots, \bar{\bfY}(\mu_m)$, are obtained by calling Algorithm~\ref{alg:ReProj} for each parameter $\mu_1, \dots, \mu_m$ and for $l = 1, \dots, m^{\prime}$ and by concatenating the trajectories corresponding to the same parameters as described in Section~\ref{sec:ReProj:Practical}. We learn models $\hat{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot, \mu_1), \dots, \hat{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot, \mu_m)$ by solving the optimization problem \eqref{eq:ReProj:LSQReProj} stated in Corollary~\ref{cor:Exact} using the re-projected trajectories. We verified numerically that the data matrices have full rank. Condition \eqref{eq:ReProj:Cond} holds as well, and thus Corollary~\ref{cor:Exact} is applicable in this setup, which means that we expect that time stepping the learned model gives a trajectory that matches the corresponding trajectory of the intrusive reduced model up to numerical errors. We construct the intrusive reduced models $\tilde{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu_1), \dots, \tilde{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu_m)$ and learn models $\breve{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu_1), \dots, \breve{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu_m)$ from the projected trajectories $\breve{\bfX}(\mu_1), \dots, \breve{\bfX}(\mu_m)$ (with\emph{out} re-projection) as described in Section~\ref{sec:Prelim:OpInf}. The projected trajectories $\breve{\bfX}(\mu_1), \dots, \breve{\bfX}(\mu_m)$ are obtained by concatenating the trajectories $\breve{\bfX}_1(\mu_1), \dots, \breve{\bfX}_{m^{\prime}}(\mu_m)$ accordingly. For a parameter $\mu \in \mathcal{D} \setminus \{\mu_1, \dots, \mu_m\}$, model $\hat{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu)$ is derived by component-wise spline interpolation of the operators of the learned models $\hat{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu_1), \dots, \hat{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu_m)$. The same interpolation approach is used for deriving the intrusive reduced model $\tilde{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu)$ and the model $\breve{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu)$ learned from trajectories without re-projection for $\mu \in \mathcal{D} \setminus \{\mu_1, \dots, \mu_m\}$. To derive model $\hat{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu)$ for dimension $n < \bar{\nr}$, we truncate the operators of $\hat{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu)$ accordingly, which is the same approach as used in \cite{Peherstorfer16DataDriven}. This means that for $n < \bar{\nr}$, the $n \times n$ submatrix of $\hat{\bfA}_1(\mu) \in \mathbb{R}^{\bar{\nr} \times \bar{\nr}}$ of model $\hat{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu)$ is extracted, which corresponds to the first $n$ POD modes. A similar process is performed for the input matrix, quadratic terms, and higher-degree nonlinear terms if present. Thus, model $\hat{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu)$ is learned once for dimension $\bar{\nr}$ and then truncated for $n < \bar{\nr}$. The intrusive reduced model $\tilde{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu)$ and model $\breve{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu)$ are truncated the same way for $n < \bar{\nr}$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
{\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{BurgersErrorTrainDim10}}} &
{\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{BurgersErrorTrainDim15}}}\\
\scriptsize (a) training, re-projection dimension $\bar{\nr} = 10$ & \scriptsize (b) training, re-projection dimension $\bar{\nr} = 15$\\
{\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{BurgersErrorDim10}}} &
{\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{BurgersErrorDim15}}}\\
\scriptsize (c) test, re-projection dimension $\bar{\nr} = 10$ & \scriptsize (d) test, re-projection dimension $\bar{\nr} = 15$
\end{tabular}
\caption{Burgers' equation: The results in plots (a)-(d) demonstrate Corollary~\ref{cor:Exact} that states that models fitted with operator inference to re-projected trajectories are the reduced models obtained with traditional model reduction. In contrast, models fitted to projected trajectories (without re-projection) perform significantly worse and even show unstable behavior (missing values).}
\label{fig:NumExp:BurgersError}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Results}
Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:BurgersError}a shows the error
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{m}\sum_{i = 1}^{m} \frac{\|\boldsymbol V_{n}\boldsymbol{Z}(\mu_i) - \boldsymbol X(\mu_i)\|_F}{\|\boldsymbol X(\mu_i)\|_F}\,,
\label{eq:NumExp:RelAvgError}
\end{equation}
where $\boldsymbol{Z}(\mu_i) = [\boldsymbol{Z}_1(\mu_i), \dots, \boldsymbol{Z}_{m^{\prime}}(\mu_i)]$, for $i = 1, \dots, m$, is the concatenated trajectory of either the intrusive reduced model $\tilde{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu_i)$, the model $\hat{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu_i)$ learned from re-projected trajectories, or the model $\breve{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu_i)$ learned from trajectories without re-projection for all $m^{\prime}$ inputs $\boldsymbol U_1(\mu_i), \dots, \boldsymbol U_{m^{\prime}}(\mu_i)$. The dimension $\bar{\nr}$ of the POD space used for re-projection is set to $\bar{\nr} = 10$ and operators are truncated as described in Section~\ref{sec:NumExp:Burgers:Setup} to compute error \eqref{eq:NumExp:RelAvgError} corresponding to models with $n < \bar{\nr}$. The results in Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:BurgersError}a are reported for the training parameters $\mu_1, \dots, \mu_m$ and the training inputs that are also used in Section~\ref{sec:NumExp:Burgers:Setup} to construct the POD basis matrix and to learn the models. The intrusive reduced model achieves an error of almost $10^{-2}$ for $n = 10$ dimensions. The model learned from trajectories without re-projection exhibits unstable behavior for most dimensions $n = 1, \dots, 10$ in the sense that the state during time stepping numerically diverges to NaNs (not a number). Missing values in Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:BurgersError}a mean that the states diverged to NaNs. In contrast, the model learned from trajectories with re-projection achieves an error \eqref{eq:NumExp:RelAvgError} that closely follows the error of the intrusive reduced model. To test the learned models on parameters that are different from the parameters used for learning the models, we select $m_{\text{test}} = 7$ test parameters $\mu_1^{\text{test}}, \dots, \mu_7^{\text{test}}$ equidistantly in $\mathcal{D}$ and set the input constant to 1. The corresponding error
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{m_{\text{test}}}\sum_{i = 1}^{m_{\text{test}}} \frac{\|\boldsymbol V_{n}\boldsymbol{Z}(\mu_i^{\text{test}}) - \boldsymbol X(\mu_i^{\text{test}})\|_F}{\|\boldsymbol X(\mu_i^{\text{test}})\|_F}\,,
\label{eq:NumExp:RelAvgErrorTest}
\end{equation}
is plotted in Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:BurgersError}c. The models learned from re-projected trajectories achieve similar errors as the intrusive reduced models, in contrast to models learned from trajectories without re-projection. Similar observations can be made for $\bar{\nr} = 15$ as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:BurgersError}b for training parameters and training inputs and in Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:BurgersError}d for test parameters and test inputs.
Now consider the difference
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{m_{\text{test}}}\sum_{i = 1}^{m_{\text{test}}}\frac{\|\boldsymbol{Z}(\mu_i^{\text{test}}) - \tilde{\bfX}(\mu_i^{\text{test}})\|_F}{\|\tilde{\bfX}(\mu_i^{\text{test}})\|_F}
\label{eq:NumExp:DiffError}
\end{equation}
between the trajectories of the intrusive reduced models and the trajectories computed with the learned models. Thus, $\boldsymbol{Z}(\mu_i^{\text{test}})$ in \eqref{eq:NumExp:DiffError} is either the trajectory obtain with $\hat{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu_i^{\text{test}})$ or with $\breve{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu_i^{\text{test}})$ for $i = 1, \dots, m_{\text{test}}$. The difference \eqref{eq:NumExp:DiffError} is plotted in Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:BurgersDifference}. The models learned from re-projected trajectories achieve a difference to the intrusive reduced model of less than $10^{-10}$, whereas the models learned from trajectories without re-projection are up to 8 orders of magnitude worse in terms of difference \eqref{eq:NumExp:DiffError} and diverge in most cases (missing values in the plots).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
{\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{BurgersCmpDim10}}} &
{\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{BurgersCmpDim15}}}\\
\scriptsize (a) difference, re-projection dimension $\bar{\nr} = 10$ & \scriptsize (b) difference, re-projection dimension $\bar{\nr} = 15$\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Burgers' equation: The plots show that time stepping models learned from re-projected trajectories give the same trajectories, up to numerical errors, as intrusive reduced models. In contrast, models learned from trajectories without re-projection lead to significantly different behavior than the corresponding intrusive reduced models. The results shown are for the test parameters $\mu^{\prime}_1, \dots, \mu^{\prime}_7$. Missing values mean that the states of the corresponding model diverged to NaNs during time stepping.}
\label{fig:NumExp:BurgersDifference}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Chafee-Infante equation}
\label{sec:NumExp:Chafee}
A similar setup as in \cite{doi:10.1137/16M1098280} is used in this section.
\subsubsection{Setup}
Set the spatial domain to $\Omega = (0, 1) \subset \mathbb{R}$ and end time to $T = 4$. We consider the Chafee-Infante equation given by
\[
\frac{\partial}{\partial t} x(\xi, t) - \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \xi^2}x(\xi, t) + x^3(\xi, t) - x(\xi, t) = 0\,,\qquad \xi \in \Omega\,,
\]
with the spatial coordinate $\xi \in \Omega$ and time $t \in [0, T]$. Note that we consider a parameter-independent version of the Chafee-Infante equation. The boundary conditions are
\[
\frac{\partial}{\partial \xi} x(1, t) = 0\,,\qquad x(0, t) = u(t)\,,\qquad t \in [0, T]\,,
\]
with the input $u: [0, T] \to \mathbb{R}$. The initial condition is $x(\xi, t) = 0$ for $\xi \in \Omega \cup \{0, 1\}$. The spatial domain $\Omega$ is discretized on an equidistant grid with mesh width $2^{-7}$ and finite differences. Time is discretized with the forward Euler method and time-step size $\delta t = 10^{-5}$ to obtain the time-discrete dynamical system with polynomial nonlinear terms up to degree $\ell = 3$
\begin{equation}
\boldsymbol x_{k + 1} = \boldsymbol A_1\boldsymbol x_k + \boldsymbol A_2\boldsymbol x_k^2 + \boldsymbol A_3\boldsymbol x_k^3 + \boldsymbol B u_k\,,\qquad k = 0, \dots, K - 1
\label{eq:NumExp:Chafee:FOM}
\end{equation}
for $K = 4 \times 10^5$ and $N = 128$ and where the input matrix $\boldsymbol B$ corresponds to the discretization of the boundary conditions.
Consider the $m^{\prime} = 25$ input trajectories $\boldsymbol U_1, \dots, \boldsymbol U_{m^{\prime}}$ with components sampled from a uniform distribution in $[0, 10]$ and let $\boldsymbol X_1, \dots, \boldsymbol X_{m^{\prime}}$ be the corresponding trajectories of system \eqref{eq:NumExp:Chafee:FOM}. The same steps as in Section~\ref{sec:NumExp:Burgers:Setup} are performed to concatenate the trajectories $\boldsymbol X_1, \dots, \boldsymbol X_{m^{\prime}}$, to derive a POD space of dimension $\bar{\nr} \in \mathbb{N}$ and the corresponding re-projected trajectories $\bar{\bfX}_1, \dots, \bar{\bfX}_{m^{\prime}}$ and the concatenated re-projected trajectory $\bar{\bfX}$, and to learn the model $\hat{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot)$ from the re-projected trajectory $\bar{\bfX}$. Additionally, as described in Section~\ref{sec:NumExp:Burgers:Setup}, the intrusive reduced model $\tilde{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot)$ and the model $\breve{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot)$ learned from the trajectories without re-projection are constructed. The test input is $u(t) = 25(\sin(\pi t) + 1)$, which is also used in \cite{doi:10.1137/16M1098280}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
{\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{ChafeeReProjTraj}}} &
{\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{ChafeeReProjTrajDiff}}}\\
\scriptsize (a) trajectories & \scriptsize (b) difference re-projected and projected trajectory
\end{tabular}
\caption{Chafee-Infante: Even though the projected trajectory (without re-projection) and the re-projected trajectory are similar in this example, as shown in plot (a) and (b), the corresponding closure error \eqref{eq:Prelim:ClosureError} has a significant polluting effect on operators learned from trajectories without re-projection as shown in~Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:ChafeeInfante}.}
\label{fig:NumExp:ChafeeTraj}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Results}
Consider the re-projected trajectory $\bar{\bfX}_1$ and the projected trajectory $\breve{\bfX}_1 = \boldsymbol V_{\bar{\nr}}^T\boldsymbol X_1$ for $\bar{\nr} = 10$. Let $\boldsymbol v_{\cdot, N} \in \mathbb{R}^{1 \times \bar{\nr}}$ be the last row of $\boldsymbol V_{\bar{\nr}}$ so that $\boldsymbol v_{\cdot, N}\breve{\bfX}_1$ and $\boldsymbol v_{\cdot, N}\bar{\bfX}_1$ is the approximation of the state at spatial coordinate $\xi = 1$ given by the projected and the re-projected trajectory, respectively. Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:ChafeeTraj}a plots $\boldsymbol v_{\cdot, N}\breve{\bfX}_1$ and $\boldsymbol v_{\cdot, N}\bar{\bfX}_1$ restricted to time $t \in [0, 1]$. Both trajectories overlap, which indicates that the projected and the re-projected trajectory are similar in this example. The absolute value of the difference $\boldsymbol v_{\cdot, N}\breve{\bfX}_1 - \boldsymbol v_{\cdot, N}\bar{\bfX}_1$ against the time step is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:ChafeeTraj}b and indicates again that the projected and the re-projected trajectories are close relative to the absolute value of the trajectories in Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:ChafeeTraj}a; however, even this small difference has a polluting effect on operator inference that can lead to poor models. Consider Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:ChafeeInfante}, which shows the test error
\begin{equation}
\frac{\|\boldsymbol V_{n}\boldsymbol{Z}_{\text{test}} - \boldsymbol X_{\text{test}}\|_F}{\|\boldsymbol X_{\text{test}}\|_F}\,,
\label{eq:NumExp:Chafee:TrainTestError}
\end{equation}
for $n \leq \bar{\nr}$ and where $\boldsymbol{Z}_{\text{test}}$ is computed with the test input with either model $\boldsymbol f(\cdot, \cdot), \hat{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot), \tilde{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot)$, or $\breve{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot)$. Even though the difference between the projected and the re-projected trajectories is small in this example, the results in Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:ChafeeInfante} demonstrate that fitting a model to trajectories without re-projection leads to poor approximations of the intrusive reduced models.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
{\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{ChafeeErrorDim6}}} &
{\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{ChafeeErrorDim12}}}\\
\scriptsize (a) test, re-projection dimension $\bar{\nr} = 6$ & \scriptsize (b) test, re-projection dimension $\bar{\nr} = 12$\\
{\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{ChafeeCmpDim6}}} &
{\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{ChafeeCmpDim12}}}\\
\scriptsize (c) test, re-projection dimension $\bar{\nr} = 6$ & \scriptsize (d) test, re-projection dimension $\bar{\nr} = 12$
\end{tabular}
\caption{Chafee-Infante equation: Models learned from re-projected trajectories achieve similar performance in terms of error \eqref{eq:NumExp:Chafee:TrainTestError} as intrusive reduced models in this example. Even though the difference between re-projected trajectories and projected trajectories is small in this example (cf.~Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:ChafeeTraj}), models learned from trajectories without re-projection perform significantly worse than models learned from re-projected trajectories. Missing values correspond to models that numerically diverged during time stepping.}
\label{fig:NumExp:ChafeeInfante}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Diffusion-reaction equation}
\label{sec:NumExp:DiffReact}
The setup of the diffusion-reaction equation in this section follows the example in \cite{PM18MultiTM}.
\subsubsection{Setup}
Let $\Omega = (0, 1)^2 \subset \mathbb{R}^2$ be the spatial domain with boundary $\partial\Omega$ and closed set $\bar{\Omega} = \Omega \cup \partial \Omega$. Let further $\mu \in \mathcal{D} = [1, 1.5]$ be the parameter domain. Consider the PDE
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial}{\partial t} x(\boldsymbol{\xi}, t; \mu) = -\Delta x(\boldsymbol{\xi}, t; \mu) + s(\boldsymbol{\xi})u(t) + g(x(\boldsymbol{\xi}, t; \mu))\,,\qquad \boldsymbol{\xi} \in \Omega\,,
\label{eq:NumExp:DiffReact:Eq}
\end{equation}
where the spatial coordinate is $\boldsymbol{\xi} = [\xi_1, \xi_2]^T$, the source term $s: \bar{\Omega} \to \mathbb{R}$ is $s(\boldsymbol{\xi}) = 10^{-1}\sin(2\pi\xi_1)\sin(2\pi\xi_2)$, and the nonlinear term $g: \bar{\Omega} \to \mathbb{R}$ is the second-order Taylor approximation of $x \mapsto -(a\sin(\mu)+2)\exp(-(\mu^2)b)\exp(\mu xc)$ about 0 and with $a = 0.1, b = 2.7$ and $c = 1.8$, which is the same nonlinear term as used in \cite{PM18MultiTM}. The initial condition is 0. We impose homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions and discretize with finite difference on a grid with 64 equidistant grid points in each dimension. Time is discretized with the forward Euler method and time step size $\delta t = 10^{-2}$ and end time $T = 100$. The corresponding time-discrete dynamical system is
\[
\boldsymbol x_{k + 1}(\mu) = \boldsymbol A_1(\mu)\boldsymbol x_k(\mu) + \boldsymbol A_2(\mu)\boldsymbol x_k^2(\mu) + \boldsymbol A_3(\mu)\boldsymbol x_k^3(\mu) + \boldsymbol B u_k\,,\qquad k = 0, \dots, K - 1\,,
\]
for $K = 10^4$. The dimension $N$ of the state $\boldsymbol x_k$ at time step $k$ is $N = 64^2 = 4096$. Plots of $\boldsymbol x_K(\mu)$ for $\mu = 1.0625$ and $\mu = 1.4375$ are given in Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:DiffReactSurface}.
To construct a reduced space, we select $m = 10$ equidistant parameters $\mu_1, \dots, \mu_m \in \mathcal{D}$ and set the inputs to be realizations of the random variables uniformly distributed in $[1, 1000]$. From these trajectories, the basis matrix $\boldsymbol V_{\bar{\nr}}$ with $\bar{\nr} = 10$ columns is computed with POD. Then, re-projected trajectories are sampled up to time $t = 5$ (instead of end time $T = 100$). For each $\mu_i$, 10 re-projected trajectories with different random inputs are derived, and concatenated together as described in Section~\ref{sec:ReProj:Practical}. The concatenation of trajectories ensures that the data matrix $\bar{\bfD}$ has full rank in this example. Models are learned with operator inference from the re-projected trajectories to obtain $\hat{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu_1), \dots, \hat{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu_m)$. The same process is repeated for the trajectories without re-projection to obtain the models $\breve{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu_1), \dots, \breve{\bff}(\cdot, \cdot; \mu_m)$. The rest of the setup is the same as in Section~\ref{sec:NumExp:Burgers}. Test parameters are 7 equidistantly chosen parameters in $\mathcal{D}$. Test inputs are realizations of random variables with uniform distribution in $[1, 1000]$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
{\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{React2DSurfFOMMu10625}}} & {\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{React2DSurfFOMMu14375}}}\\
\scriptsize (a) high-dimensional system, $\mu = 1.0625$ & \scriptsize (b) high-dimensional system, $\mu = 1.4375$
\end{tabular}
\caption{Diffusion-reaction: Plots show the numerical approximation of the solution of equation \eqref{eq:NumExp:DiffReact:Eq} for parameters $\mu = 1.0625$ and $\mu = 1.4375$, respectively.}
\label{fig:NumExp:DiffReactSurface}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Results}
Figure~\ref{fig:NumExp:DiffReactError}a shows the error \eqref{eq:NumExp:RelAvgError} for the training parameters and training inputs. The model fitted to trajectories without re-projection numerically diverged to NaNs during time stepping for all dimensions $n > 2$. The model fitted to re-projected trajectories closely matches the behavior of the intrusive reduced model as expected from the analysis presented in Corollary~\ref{cor:Exact}. The same observations can be made for the error \eqref{eq:NumExp:RelAvgErrorTest} with the test parameters and test inputs.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
{\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{React2DErrorTrainDim10}}} & {\resizebox{0.48\columnwidth}{!}{\LARGE\input{React2DErrorDim10}}}\\
\scriptsize (a) training & \scriptsize (b) test
\end{tabular}
\caption{Diffusion-reaction: Models learned from trajectories without re-projection show unstable behavior (missing values) for all dimensions $n > 2$. In contrast, models learned with operator inference from re-projected trajectories achieve the same errors as the intrusive reduced models, which is guaranteed by Corollary~\ref{cor:Exact} in this example.}
\label{fig:NumExp:DiffReactError}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:Conc}
The presented approach exactly recovers reduced models from data under certain conditions. This result holds pre-asymptotically in the number of data points and the dimension of the reduced space as long as the corresponding data matrix is full rank. The optimization problem underlying operator inference with re-projected trajectories is convex and can be solved with standard numerical linear algebra packages. Numerical experiments demonstrate that reduced models are learned up to numerical errors in practice for a wide class of systems with polynomial nonlinear terms.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The author would like to thank Elizabeth Qian, Nihar Sawant, and Karen Willcox for many helpful discussions. This work was partially supported by US Department of Energy, Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research, Applied Mathematics Program (Program Manager Dr. Steven Lee), DOE Award DESC0019334. The numerical experiments were computed with support through the NYU IT High Performance Computing resources, services, and staff expertise.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{SEC:Introduction}
The performance of collaborative filtering (CF) recommendation models have reached a remarkable level of maturity. These models are now widely adopted in real-world recommendation engines because of their state-of-the-art recommendation quality. In recent years, a number of recommendation scenarios have emerged, which have encouraged the research community to consider using various additional information sources (aka side information) beyond the user rating matrix~\cite{shi2014collaborative}. A prominent example---and the one we focus on---is item content.
In the movie domain, for instance, a variety of content features have been considered, such as metadata or features extracted directly from the core audio-visual signals. Metadata-based movie recommender systems typically use genre~\cite{DBLP:conf/ijcnn/FilhoWB17,DBLP:journals/mta/HwangPHK16,DBLP:conf/worldcist/SoaresV17}
or user-generated tags~\cite{DBLP:conf/icmlc/LiuFY17,wei2016hybrid,zhao2017social}
over which user profiles are built, assuming that these aspects represent the semantic content of movies.
In contrast, audio-visual signals represent the low-level content (e.g., color, lighting, spoken dialogues, music, etc.)~\cite{DBLP:conf/recsys/DeldjooCEISC18,DBLP:journals/umuai/DeldjooDCECSIC19,DBLP:conf/cbmi/DeldjooCSQ17,DBLP:conf/ijcnn/FilhoWB17,DBLP:journals/sp/DengRQHQ18}.
Some approaches try to infer semantic concepts from low-level representations, e.g., via word2vec embeddings~\cite{DBLP:journals/jocs/AnwaarIAN18}, deep neural networks~\cite{DBLP:journals/csur/ZhangYST19,DBLP:journals/eswa/WeiHCZT17}, fuzzy logic~\cite{DBLP:journals/jifs/VashisthKB17}, or genetic algorithms~\cite{DBLP:conf/iiwas/Mueller17}. For these reasons, it is evident that item content plays a key role in building hybrid or content-based filtering (CBF) models and, furthermore, it is important to correctly distinguish and weight the item features by their estimated relevance for a target user, to better model his or her tastes.
In Figure~\ref{fig:standardContentRecommendation}, we illustrate a simplified diagram that shows our research contributions. Standard recommendation based on content (CBF or hybrid) is structured in three main steps: (i) extraction of item content, consisting of building a \textit{feature vector} that describes each item $i$; (ii) building the \textit{profile of the target user} $\mathbf{p}_u$, i.e., a structured representation of the user's preference over item content features;
(iii) matching the user profile $\mathbf{p}_u$ against the feature vector of each item $\mathbf{f}_i$ to produce the list of recommended items most similar to the target user's tastes.
\begin{figure*}[!t
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{standard_content_recommendation_reduced.pdf}
\caption{Main steps involved in a recommendation system leveraging content information,
highlighting our contributions.}
\label{fig:standardContentRecommendation}
\end{figure*}
A shortcoming of typical RS evaluation is that the user profiling stage, which is a key part of the RS, is barely
evaluated. Usually, only the performance of the entire RS, which is composed of several components, is assessed and how effectively the user profiling step functions remains an open question.
We argue that
it is important to investigate the user profiling stage and compare performance of different profile modelling methods (see upper part of Figure~\ref{fig:standardContentRecommendation}).
The goal of this work is therefore to investigate the difference between explicit user ratings on individual movie content features (e.g., genre, actors, or directors) and implicit models inferred via state-of-the-art user modelling techniques from explicit ratings of the whole movies. To this end, we (i) create (and make publicly available) a varied dataset of explicit ratings both on movies and content features and (ii) evaluate different user profiling methods and compare their resulting implicit models against the true feature ratings provided in the collected dataset.
\section{Related Work} \label{SEC:RelatedWork}
With respect to previous research, to the best of our knowledge, the only work that evaluates implicit user profiles against true ratings on content features is~\cite{Nasery2015PoliMovie:Systems}.
Nasery et al.~compare actually rated features with the ones implicitly derived from rated movies, but no concrete user profiling methods are investigated. Instead,
the number of times each feature is explicitly rated and the number of times it appears in the content of all rated movies is counted, and these counts are compared.
The authors create a dataset of movies' feature ratings (genres, actors/cast, and directors), dubbed PoliMovie,\footnote{PoliMovie: \url{http://bit.ly/polimovie}}
through a survey web application they built. Their approach, using limited survey questions and a fixed reduced dataset of top popular movies and features, extracted from IMDb,\footnote{Internet Movie Database (IMDB): \url{www.imdb.com}} tends to push users to limited and convergent preferences.
In contrast, we systematically investigate 4 methods to model implicit user profiles and we compare them with explicit user profiles obtained by feature ratings. Another contribution of the work at hand is the creation of a dataset that includes ratings on movie content features. Other datasets commonly used in movie recommender systems research, but which do not contain such feature ratings, include MovieLens 20M (ML-20M)~\cite{DBLP:journals/tiis/HarperK16}, IMDB Movies Dataset~\cite{Leka2016IMDBDataset}, The Movies Dataset~\cite{Banik2017TheMoviesDataset}, MMTF-14K and MVCD-7K~\cite{DBLP:conf/mmsys/DeldjooCISC18,DBLP:conf/cbmi/DeldjooCSQ19} and the Netflix Prize dataset~\cite{NeftlixPrizeData}.
\section{User profile Modelling Techniques}
\label{SEC:User_profiling}
To create a \textit{user profile}, we adopt the \textit{vector profile} representation, consisting of weighted attributes measuring the user's taste on each feature~\cite{DBLP:conf/cbmi/DeldjooCSQ17,DBLP:phd/hal/Kacem17}, because it is best suited for our evaluation in terms of similarity functions.
Formally, the user profiling methods we investigate build the user profile $\mathbf{p}_u$ as a vector whose attributes are the relevance weight of each feature $f$ for the target user $u$, denoted as~$h_{u,f}$.
We analyze 3 state-of-the-art methods from literature to model user profiles
and we refer to them according to the first author of the corresponding publication, for simplicity and a 4\textsuperscript{th} method that applies the TF-IDF (term frequency--inverse document frequency) term weighting idea, which is widely used in CBF and, in general, in information retrieval~\cite{DBLP:reference/rsh/LopsGS11,DBLP:conf/hais/Sanchez-MorenoG18,DBLP:journals/kbs/WangLXFG18}.
\textbf{Zhang method.} Zhang et al.~\cite{DBLP:conf/aaai/ZhangWLXSY15} build the user profile based on item ratings or explicit feature ratings.
Let $\mathcal{U}$ and $\mathcal{I}$ denote the set of users and items, respectively, and $\mathcal{F}$ the set of all features of the items. In case of binary ratings (like in our dataset), this method assigns relevance weight $h_{u,f}$ equal to 1 for each feature $f$ in $\mathcal{F}$ that applies to items with which the target user $u$ interacted with, 0 otherwise.
The obvious limitation of this method is that it assigns only weights 0 or 1 to the features, without distinguishing their relevance for the user.
\textbf{Li method.} Li et al.~\cite{DBLP:conf/apweb/LiK04}, unlike Zhang et al., differentiate the relevance of features contained in an item by assigning scalar weights. Their method furthermore ignores items with low ratings by using a threshold value.
In case of binary ratings, the threshold rating $r_{\tau}$
is 0 and the relevance weight $h_{u,f}$ of each feature $f$ in $\mathcal{F}$ for the target user $u$ becomes the percentage of occurrences of $f$ in the items $u$ interacted with:
$h_{u,f} = N_{u,f} / M_{u}$
, where $N_{u,f}$ is the number of items rated by user $u$ containing feature $f$ and
$M_{u}$ is the total number of items rated by user $u$.
\textbf{Symeonidis method.} Symeonidis et al.~\cite{DBLP:conf/um/SymeonidisNM07} adopt an approach similar to TF-IDF to compute feature relevance weights, but define them in the vector space of
user profiles.
The rationale of using TF-IDF is to increase the relevance of rare features contained in less user profiles.
Symeonidis et al.~also use a fixed rating threshold to consider only the most relevant items.
In case of binary ratings, the threshold rating $r_{\tau}$ is set to 0 and the relevance weight $h_{u,f}$ of each feature $f$ in $\mathcal{F}$ for the target user $u$ is computed as: $h_{u,i}= FF(u,f) \cdot IU\!F(f)$
, where $FF(u, f)$ is the feature frequency, i.e., the number of times feature $f$ occurs in movies rated by $u$,
and $IU\!F(f)$ is the inverse user frequency of feature $f$. $IU\!F(f)= \log \frac{\left | \mathcal{U} \right |}{U\!F(f)}$
, where $U\!F(f)$ is the user frequency of $f\!$, i.e., the number of users whose rated movies contain feature $f$ at least once.
\textbf{TF-IDF method.}
After having reviewed the 3 state-of-art methods described above, we decided to investigate another variant of TF-IDF as a user profiling method. The Symeonidis method above is similar to TF-IDF, but it is user-centric because it considers the vector space of user profiles.
Instead, our proposed TF-IDF method is item-centric as it considers the vector space of items (movies).
First, we compute the IDF of each feature $f$ as: $ IDF(f) = \log \frac{\left | \mathcal{I} \right |}{n_f}$
, where $n_f$ denotes the number of items in $\mathcal{I}$ in which feature $f$ occurs at least once.
Then, for each user $u$, we compute the relevance weight $h_{u,f}$ of a feature $f$ as: $ h_{u,f} = TF(u,f) \cdot IDF(f)$
, where $TF(u,f)$ is equivalent to $FF(u, f)$ of the Symeonidis method (i.e., number of times feature $f$ occurs in items rated by user $u$).
In contrast to the method by Symeonidis et al.,~$IDF(f)$ is computed in relation to all the existing items in which feature $f$ appears, not related to user profiles.
As will be shown in Section~\ref{SEC:Evaluation:userProfiling}, our TF-IDF method yields better results than Symeonidis et al.'s.
\section{Data Acquisition}
\label{SEC:Experimental_Setup}
The dataset we use to evaluate user profiling methods has been collected through
a web application we implemented, which can be navigated on a variety of stationary and mobile devices.
It provides access to a large catalogue of more than 450K movies and any related content feature. This vast breadth of choice is possible thanks to the fact that we retrieve up-to-date information on-the-fly from TMDb\footnote{The Movie Database (TMDb): \url{www.themoviedb.org}
} via APIs.
We developed the application with the idea of a completely free user experience, instead of making it like a survey application, so that users are not forced in any way during their selections.
To acquire the needed data, we asked users to select a set of ``favourites'', which included at least 5 movies, 2 genres, 3 actors, and 1 director. Users were, nevertheless, free to select more than these numbers of elements.
We also asked users to provide some demographics information: age range, gender, and country of residence.
The collection of data was divided into two phases, the first one involved the \textit{volunteer} users, which are the ones invited to freely contribute (friends, family, acquaintances, and colleagues of the authors),
while the second phase involved users recruited by the \textit{crowdsourcing} platform MTurk,\footnote{Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk): \url{www.mturk.com}}
which have been paid between 20 and 50 US cents for their contribution.
To assess the participants' reliability, we also asked them to complete a final consistency test
which required to select again all (and only) the favourites they remember to have added (from a list of movies, genres, and actors of random popular elements).
A user's reliability is then estimated by means of the precision score
computed on the re-selection of correct favourites.
Finally, in order to explore
a catalogue of existing features needed for user profiling evaluation, we retrieved The Movies Dataset~\cite{Banik2017TheMoviesDataset} containing the content of 45,3K movies scraped from TMDb. Then, we extended this dataset by scraping the content of missing movies that were added as favorites by users on our web application.
\textbf{Dataset characteristics.}
We have collected the preferences of 194 users, 180 (93\%) of whom have added the minimum number of required favourites.
Among all users, 81 (42\%) are volunteers and 113 (58\%) are paid ones.
We consider users reliable if they are either volunteers that have completed the required favourites or crowdsourced users who scored at least 50\% of precision during the consistency test (see above).
The reliable volunteers are 67 (83\% of all volunteers), while the crowdsourcing ones are 88 (78\% of all crowdsourcing), hence a total of 155 reliable users (80\% of all users).
Regarding users' gender, 115 users (59\%) are male, 66 are female (34\%), and 13 (7\%) did not specify gender. 53\% of the users are between 24 and 30 years old. We received registrations from users coming from 10 different countries, mainly from Italy (40\%), India (31\%), and United States (19\%).
We collected a total 4,109 favourites (movies and content features) selected by participants, including 1,212 unique elements, i.e., favourites selected by at least one user.
In the following experiments, we include only favourites of \textit{reliable} users, that are 3,341 (81\%), including
1,737 favourite movies, 461 genres, 698 actors, 198 directors, 74 production companies, 92 production countries, 39 producers, 17 screenwriters, 21 release years, and 4 sound crew members.
The dataset is available on Kaggle\footnote{\url{https://www.kaggle.com/lucacostanzo/mints-dataset-for-recommender-systems}}.
\section{Results and Discussion}
\label{SEC:Evaluation}
\subsection{Initial statistical analysis}
An initial statistical analysis highlights main differences between the set of all explicitly rated features and the set of all implicit features extracted from rated movies.
In Tables~\ref{table:results:commonGenres} and~\ref{table:results:commonActorsDirectors}, we present a comparison between the explicit and implicit sets of features, in percentage of common attributes (features), focusing on the $k$ most frequently selected attributes, respectively, for genre, actor, and director. These tables generally highlight a low overlap between the explicitly preferred features and the implicitly estimated ones (derived from favourite movies), in particular for actors and directors.
The only exception is the genre attribute, which reveals a maximum overlap of 94.74\% when considering all 19 genres.
These results generally confirm the previous findings in~\cite{Nasery2015PoliMovie:Systems} regarding existing gaps between explicitly selected features and implicitly estimated ones, with a different dataset containing more up-to-date movies and not limited to the most popular movies as used in~\cite{Nasery2015PoliMovie:Systems}.
\begin{table}[!hbpt]
\caption{\small{Common genres in the most selected $k$ attributes, either explicitly or implicitly
}}
\label{table:results:commonGenres}
\centering
\resizebox{.8\linewidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c}
\toprule
$k$ & No.~common genres & \%~common genres\\
\midrule
5 & 3 & 60.00\% \\
10 & 8 & 80.00\% \\
15 & 13 & 86.67\% \\
All genres (19) & 18 & 94.74\% \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t!]
\caption{\small{Common quota of either actors or directors between the most selected $k$ attributes, either explicitly or implicitly
}}
\label{table:results:commonActorsDirectors}
\centering
\resizebox{.7\linewidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c}
\toprule
$k$ & \% of common actors & \% of common directors\\
\midrule
10 & 10.00\% & 30.00\% \\
20 & 20.00\% & 20.00\% \\
40 & 22.50\% & 27.50\% \\
60 & 16.67\% & 28.33\% \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
We further provide a finer-grained analysis of the gap between explicit and implicit preferences of users according to their gender.
In Tables~\ref{table:results:male:topFeatures} and~\ref{table:results:female:topFeatures}, we compare the 5 most frequently selected genres, actors, and directors,
by \textit{male} and \textit{female} users, respectively.
We notice a substantial difference between
between male and female users with the exception of genre.
Investigating the results, it is surprising that in both Tables~\ref{table:results:male:topFeatures}~and~\ref{table:results:female:topFeatures} Stan Lee is among the top \textit{implicitly} preferred actors even if he barely acted as a main character in any movie.
The most probable reason is that even though he has not been selected explicitly as favourite actor by study participants, he appeared in all
Marvel movies (in small ``cameo roles''), so he is included in the implicit profiles.
Furthermore, it is surprising that the genre ``action'' is highly ranked by female users. This could be due to the fact that the genre tastes of young women might be changing nowadays, especially because many popular action movies, like the Marvel ones, are liked by many people (especially under 30, i.e., the largest age group in our dataset), irrespective of gender. Nonetheless, the other differences between male and female users suggest to embed gender information in a recommender system.
\begin{table}[!hbpt]
\caption{\small{Most selected 5 features, either explicitly ($ R_f^{exp}$) or implicitly ($ R_f^{imp} $), by male users;}}
\label{table:results:male:topFeatures}
\centering
\footnotesize
\resizebox{.8\linewidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabularx}{\linewidth}{l|r|X|c || X|c}
\toprule
& Pos. & Explicit selection & $ R_f^{exp} $ & Implicit selection & $ R_f^{imp} $ \\
\midrule
\multirow{5}*{Genres} & 1 & Action & 51 & Action & 86 \\
& 2 & Drama & 31 & Adventure & 83 \\
& 3 & Adventure & 30 & Drama & 80 \\
& 4 & Thriller & 28 & Science Fiction & 76 \\
& 5 & Science Fiction & 28 & Thriller & 74 \\
\midrule
\multirow{5}*{Actors} & 1 & Robert Downey Jr. & 16 & Samuel L. Jackson & 64 \\
& 2 & Johnny Depp & 15 & Stan Lee & 56 \\
& 3 & Jason Statham & 10 & Bradley Cooper & 51 \\
& 4 & Leonardo DiCaprio & 10 & Paul Bettany & 47 \\
& 5 & Tom Hardy & 8 & Vin Diesel & 47 \\
\midrule
\multirow{5}*{Directors} & 1 & Quentin Tarantino & 11 & Hajar Mainl & 42 \\
& 2 & Steven Spielberg & 9 & Chris Castaldi & 41 \\
& 3 & Joe Russo & 7 & Mark Rossini & 41 \\
& 4 & M. Night Shyamalan & 6 & Lori Grabowski & 41 \\
& 5 & Christopher Nolan & 6 & Eli Sasich & 41 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabularx}
}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[!hbpt]
\caption{\small{Most selected 5 features, either explicitly ($ R_f^{exp}$) or implicitly ($ R_f^{imp} $), by female users;}}.
\label{table:results:female:topFeatures}
\centering
\footnotesize
\resizebox{.8\linewidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabularx}{\linewidth}{l|r|X|c || X|c}
\toprule
& Pos. & Explicit selection & $ R_f^{exp} $ & Implicit selection & $ R_f^{imp} $ \\
\midrule
\multirow{5}*{Genres} & 1 & Drama & 26 & Drama & 52 \\
& 2 & Action & 22 & Adventure & 48 \\
& 3 & Adventure & 14 & Action & 47 \\
& 4 & Comedy & 14 & Fantasy & 45 \\
& 5 & Thriller & 13 & Science Fiction & 43 \\
\midrule
\multirow{5}*{Actors} & 1 & Robert Downey Jr. & 12 & Stan Lee & 27 \\
& 2 & Leonardo DiCaprio & 7 & Samuel L. Jackson & 26 \\
& 3 & Jennifer Lawrence & 5 & Bradley Cooper & 23 \\
& 4 & Chris Hemsworth & 5 & Djimon Hounsou & 21 \\
& 5 & Bruce Willis & 4 & James McAvoy & 21 \\
\midrule
\multirow{5}*{Directors} & 1 & Joe Russo & 4 & Anthony Russo & 16 \\
& 2 & Christopher Nolan & 4 & Joe Russo & 16 \\
& 3 & Steven Spielberg & 4 & Bryan Singer & 15 \\
& 4 & Martin Scorsese & 2 & Hajar Mainl & 14 \\
& 5 & Ridley Scott & 2 & Chris Castaldi & 14 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabularx}
}
\end{table}
\subsection{Evaluation of user profiling methods}\label{SEC:Evaluation:userProfiling}
We study the user profiling step in-depth by investigating the 4 user profiling methods described in Section~\ref{SEC:User_profiling}. Our aim is to analyze the similarity (i.e., the overlap) between the implicitly modelled user profiles and the real explicit tastes of users.
For each target user $u$, we built his or her \textit{explicit profile} $\mathbf{p}'_u$ as vector composed of relevance weights equal to 1, for all the features explicitly rated by $u$, and weight 0 for the ones not rated. Then we computed the pairwise similarity between the explicit user profiles and \textit{implicit profiles} $\mathbf{p}_u$ produced by each method, using cosine similarity and Jaccard
similarity. The highest is this similarity, the most accurate is the implicit user profile modelled.
The average pairwise similarity $sim(\mathbf{p}_u, \mathbf{p}'_u)$ between implicit user profile $\mathbf{p}_u$ and explicit one $\mathbf{p}'_u$ is shown in Table~\ref{table:results:averagePairwiseSimilarity}.
As revealed in the table and already anticipated in Section~\ref{SEC:User_profiling}, the TF-IDF method yields better results than Symeonidis even if they are intrinsically similar, hence the item-centric TF-IDF approach outperforms the user profle-based one.
In general, the average pairwise similarities are remarkably low, even for the best investigated method, i.e.,~Li.
The overlap between explicit and implicit profiles increases if we consider only genres; the reason is that the catalogue of all possible genres in the dataset is rather limited (19) compared to actors (567K) and directors (58K). The Jaccard measure yields lower similarities because it can be applied only to vectors composed of binary attributes
while our tested profiling methods compute scalar weights (except for Zhang); hence we had to cut-off some feature weights by considering only the k most relevant features in the implicit profile of each user considered, in which k is the number of explicit features rated by that user.
The presented results underline the low effectiveness of the investigated user profiling methods to model real user tastes. This finding gives rise to
the need of further research on this important user profiling step when devising recommender systems. If user profiles are not properly modelled before applying any RS technique, the accuracy of the final recommendations will likely be affected and lowered by an inaccurate representation of the user's tastes
\begin{table}[!t]
\caption{\small{Average pairwise similarity between \textit{explicit} and \textit{implicit} user profiles, for all the methods.}}
\label{table:results:averagePairwiseSimilarity}
\centering
\resizebox{.8\linewidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{l|l|r|r|r|r}
\toprule
Similarity & Feature & Zhang & Li & Symeonidis & TF-IDF \\
\midrule
\multirow{3}*{Cosine} & Genre & 48.52\% & 58.07\% & 42.00\% & 53.08\% \\
& Actor & 7.03\% & 9.13\% & 6.50\% & 7.24\% \\
& Director & 15.17\% & 17.24\% & 15.32\% & 16.14\% \\
\midrule
\multirow{3}*{Jaccard} & Genre & 27.49\% & 36.19\% & 18.54\% & 33.36\% \\
& Actor & 0.97\% & 5.73\% & 2.87\% & 4.64\% \\
& Director & 5.22\% & 10.24\% & 6.30\% & 8.17\% \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion and Future Works}\label{SEC:CONCLUSION}
In this paper, we analyzed the user profiling modelling by studying the differences between explicit user preferences and implicit user profiles. We evaluated different user profiling methods and showed that even the best profiling method that we tested provided low pairwise similarities between explicit and implicit profiles. This finding can be explained by the fact that when a user rates a movie, he is implicitly rating only some characteristics of the item that impacted on her (but not all). Also, it could happen that a user may select a movie but she only loved some part of it (e.g., very good director but bad actors), and this can result in the introduction of some noise in the learning process. Overall, our study encourages a more in-depth on ways we can obtain reliable feedbacks on features and study the optimization of the user profile modelling step in RS, which will eventually allow to produce more accurate recommendations. Furthermore, we publicly provide the dataset that we collected and used for evaluation, which includes ratings on movies and on corresponding content features.
In the future, we plan to investigate the generalizability of findings in this work on other domains where the exist a wide variety of item content features and personalization on these features is paramount, in domains including but not limited to fashion~\cite{he2016ups}, music domain~\cite{schedl2018current}, tourism~\cite{adamczak2019session,Knees_etal:RSC:2019} and so forth.
|
\section{Introduction}
\setcounter{equation}{0} \setcounter{footnote}{0}
\setcounter{figure}{0} The aim of this note is to provide Carleson embeddings for some weighted spaces
of holomorphic functions $D^\Phi$ of the upper-half plane. More precisely, we characterize those positive measures $\mu$ on the upper-half plane such that $D^\Phi$ embeds continuously into $L^\Psi(d\mu)$. Here the space $D^\Phi$ is either a Hardy-Orlicz space or a Bergman-Orlicz space. Our results are applied to
the characterization of embedding relations between Hardy-Orlicz spaces and Bergman-Orlicz spaces or just between Bergman-Orlicz spaces. We also characterize pointwise multipliers from Hardy-Orlicz spaces or Bergman-Orlicz spaces to Bergman-Orlicz spaces.
\vskip .3cm
Recall that the upper-half plane is the subset $\mathbb{C}_+$ of the complex plane $\mathbb{C}$ defined by $$\mathbb{C}_+:=\{x+iy\in \mathbb{C}:y>0\}.$$
A continuous and nondecreasing
function $\Phi$ from $[0,\infty)$ onto itself is called a growth function. Note that this implies that $\Phi(0)=0$.
\vskip .1cm
For $\Phi$ a growth function, the Luxembourg (quasi)-norm on $L^\Phi(\mathbb{R})$ is the quantity $$\|f\|_{L^\Phi}^{lux}:=\inf\{\lambda>0:\,\,\int_{\mathbb{R}}\Phi\left(\frac{|f(x)|}{\lambda}\right)dx\le 1\}.$$
Given $\Phi$ a growth function, the Hardy-Orlicz space $H^{\Phi}(\mathbb{C}_+)$ is the space of all holomorphic functions $f$ on $\mathbb{C_+}$ such that $$\|f\|_{H^{\Phi}}^{lux}:=\sup_{y>0}\|f(\cdot+iy)\|_{L^\Phi}^{lux}<\infty.$$
For $\alpha>-1$, we write $dV_\alpha(z)=y^\alpha dV(z)$ where $dV(x+iy)=dxdy$. For $\Phi$ a growth function and $\alpha>-1$, the Bergman-Orlicz space $A_\alpha^{\Phi}(\mathbb{C}_+)$ is the subspace of the Orlicz space $L_\alpha^\Phi(\mathbb{C}_+)$ consisting of all holomorphic functions on $\mathbb{C_+}$. Recall that $f\in L_\alpha^\Phi(\mathbb{C}_+)$ if $$\|f\|_{L_\alpha^{\Phi}}=\|f\|_{\Phi,\alpha}:=\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi(|f(z)|)dV_\alpha(z)<\infty.$$
We also endow $A_\alpha^\Phi(\mathbb{C}_+)$ with the following Luxembourg (quasi)-norm defined on $L_\alpha^\Phi(\mathbb{C}_+)$ by $$\|f\|_{\Phi,\alpha}^{lux}:=\inf\left\{\lambda>0:\,\,\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi\left(\frac{|f(z)|}{\lambda}\right)dV_\alpha(z)\le 1\right\}.$$
We note that when $\Phi(t)=t^p$, $0<p<\infty$, $H^\Phi(\mathbb{C}_+)$ and $A_\alpha^\Phi(\mathbb{C}_+)$ are just the usual Hardy space and Bergman space $H^p(\mathbb{C}_+)$ and $A_\alpha^p(\mathbb{C}_+)$ respectively defined as the spaces of all holomorphic functions $f$ on $\mathbb{C}_+$ such that $$\|f\|_{H^p}^p:=\sup_{y>0}\int_{\mathbb{R}}|f(x+iy)|^pdx<\infty$$
and
$$\|f\|_{A_\alpha^p}^p:=\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}|f(z)|^pdV_\alpha(z)<\infty.$$
A growth function $\Phi$ is said to be of upper type $q$ if we can find $q > 0$ and $C>0$ such that, for $s>0$ and $t\ge 1$,
\begin{equation}\label{uppertype}
\Phi(st)\le Ct^q\Phi(s).\end{equation}
We denote by $\mathscr{U}^q$ the set of growth functions $\Phi$ of upper type $q$, (with $q\ge 1$), such that the function $t\mapsto \frac{\Phi(t)}{t}$ is non-decreasing. We write $$\mathscr{U}=\bigcup_{q\geq 1}\mathscr{U}^q.$$
Note that we may always suppose that any $\Phi\in\mathscr{U}$ is convex and
that $\Phi$ is a $\mathscr{C}^1$ function with derivative $\Phi'(t)\backsimeq \frac{\Phi(t)}{t}$.
\vskip .3cm
For $\Phi_1,\Phi_2\in \mathscr{U}$, our main concern in this note is the characterization of all positive measures $\mu$ on $\mathbb{C}_+$ such that $H^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+)$ (resp. $A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+)$) embeds continuously into $L^{\Phi_2}(\mathbb{C}_+, d\mu)$.
\vskip .2cm
In the case of the unit disc, the continuous embedding $H^p\hookrightarrow L^q(d\mu)$ was first considered by L. Carleson \cite{carleson1,carleson2} for $p=q$. The case $0<p\le q<\infty$ for the unit disc was solved by P. Duren in \cite{duren}. Since then the problem has been considered by several authors for both Hardy and Bergman spaces of various domains for $\Phi_1(t)=t^p$ and $\Phi_2(t)=t^q$, $0<p,q<\infty$ (see \cite{CW,hastings,hormander,luecking1,luecking2,luecking3,power,Ueki} and the references therein). In the unit ball, the continuous embeddings $H^{\Phi_1}\hookrightarrow L^{\Phi_2}(d\mu)$ and $A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}\hookrightarrow L^{\Phi_2}(d\mu)$ for $\frac{\Phi_2}{\Phi_1}$ nondecreasing were obtained in \cite{Charpentier,Charpentiersehba,sehba}.
\vskip .1cm
The characterization of the measures $\mu$ for which the embedding $H^p(\mathbb{C}_+)\hookrightarrow L^q(\mathbb{C}_+ d\mu)$ holds, essentially makes use of techniques from harmonic analysis (for $p=q$, see for example \cite[Ch. 7]{grafakos}). One of the further main difficulties when working with growth functions, is the fact that they are not multiplicative (i.e. $\Phi(ab)\neq\Phi(a)\Phi(b)$) in general. Hence to handle Carleson measures here, we develop an approach also based on techniques of harmonic analysis that allows us to overcome the mentioned obstacle and extend the classical results.
\vskip .1cm
Carleson embeddings are very useful in the study of various questions in analytic function spaces: continuous inclusion between spaces, pointwise multipliers, composition operators, integration operators to name a few (see for example \cite{Att,Axler1,Charpentier,Charpentiersehba,luecking,sehbastevic,Ueki,Vukotic,Zhao} and the references therein). These applications are our main motivation for considering these questions here.
\section{Presentation of the results}
We present in this section our main results and some applications.
\subsection{Carleson embeddings for $H^\Phi(\mathbb{C}_+)$ and $A_\alpha^\Phi(\mathbb{C}_+)$}
The complementary function $\Psi$ of the convex growth function $\Phi$, is the function defined from $\mathbb R_+$ onto itself by
\begin{equation}\label{complementarydefinition}
\Psi(s)=\sup_{t\in\mathbb R_+}\{ts - \Phi(t)\}.
\end{equation}
The growth function $\Phi$ satisfies the $\Delta_2$-condition if there exists a constant $K>1$ such that, for any $t\ge 0$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:delta2condition}
\Phi(2t)\le K\Phi(t).\end{equation}
It follows easily from (\ref{uppertype}) that any growth function $\Phi\in \mathscr{U}$ satisfies the $\Delta_2$-condition.
We say that the growth function $\Phi$ satisfies the $\bigtriangledown_2-$condition whenever both $\Phi$ and its complementary function satisfy the $\Delta_2-$conditon.
\vskip .3cm
For any interval $I\subset \mathbb{R}$, we recall that the Carleson square above $I$ is the set
$$Q_I:=\{z=x+iy\in \mathbb{C}: x\in I\,\,\,\textrm{and}\,\,\,0<y<|I|\}.$$
The following definition is adapted from \cite{sehba}.
\begin{defin}
Let $\Phi$ be a growth function. A positive Borel measure $\mu$ on $\mathbb{C}_+$ is called a $\Phi$-Carleson measure, if there is a constant $C>0$ such that for any finite interval $I\subset \mathbb{R}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:phicarldef}
\mu(Q_I)\le \frac{C}{\Phi\left(\frac 1{|I|}\right)}.
\end{equation}
\end{defin}
Our first Carleson embedding result is as follows.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:main1}
Let $\Phi_1$ and $\Phi_2$ be two $\mathcal{C}^1$ convex growth functions with $\Phi_2\in\mathscr{U}$. Assume that $\Phi_1$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition and that $\frac{\Phi_2}{\Phi_1}$ is nondecreasing. Let $\mu$ be a positive Borel measure on $\mathbb{C}_+$. Then the following assertions are equivalent.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)] $\mu$ is a $\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}$-Carleson measure.
\item[(b)] There exists a constant $C>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:equivcarlhardy1}
\sup_{z=x+iy\in \mathbb{C}_+}\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi_2\left(\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{y}\right)\frac{y^2}{|z-\bar{w}|^2}\right)d\mu(w)\le C<\infty.
\end{equation}
\item[(c)] There exists a constant $K>0$ such that for any $f\in H^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+)$, $f\neq 0$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:equivcarlhardy2}
\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi_2\left(\frac{|f(z)|}{K\|f\|_{H^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)d\mu(z)<\infty.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
\end{thm}
Note that the equivalence (a)$\Leftrightarrow$(b) holds even without the additional assumption ``$\Phi_1$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition''. This assumption is needed only in the proof of the assertion (c) and this is due to our method of proof which involves the Hardy-Littlewood maximal function whose boundedness on Orlicz spaces is known only under our assumption (see \cite[Theorem 1.2.1]{koki}).
\vskip .1cm
\begin{defin}
Let $\Phi$ be a growth function and let $\alpha>-1$. A positive Borel measure $\mu$ on $\mathbb{C}_+$ is called a $(\Phi,\alpha)$-Carleson measure, if there is a constant $C>0$ such that for any finite interval $I\subset \mathbb{R}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:phicarlbergdef}
\mu(Q_I)\le \frac{C}{\Phi\left(\frac 1{|I|^{2+\alpha}}\right)}.
\end{equation}
\end{defin}
We obtain the following Carleson embedding result for weighted Bergman-Orlicz spaces.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:main2}
Let $\Phi_1$ and $\Phi_2$ be two $\mathcal{C}^1$ convex growth functions with $\Phi_2\in\mathscr{U}$. Assume that $\Phi_1$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition and that $\frac{\Phi_2}{\Phi_1}$ is nondecreasing. Let $\mu$ be a positive Borel measure on $\mathbb{C}_+$ and let $\alpha>-1$. Then the following assertions are equivalent.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)] There exists a constant $C_1>0$ such that for any interval $I\subset \mathbb{R}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:equivcarlberg1}
\mu(Q_I)\le \frac{C_1}{\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{|I|^{2+\alpha}}\right)}.
\end{equation}
\item[(b)] There exists a constant $C_2>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:equivcarlberg2}
\sup_{z=x+iy\in \mathbb{C}_+}\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi_2\left(\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{y^{2+\alpha}}\right)\frac{y^{4+2\alpha}}{|z-\bar{w}|^{4+2\alpha}}\right)d\mu(w)\le C_2<\infty.
\end{equation}
\item[(c)] There exists a constant $C_3>0$ such that for any $f\in A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+)$, $f\neq 0$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:equivcarlberg3}
\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi_2\left(\frac{|f(z)|}{C_3\|f\|_{A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)d\mu(z)<\infty.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
\end{thm}
\subsection{Application to some inclusion relations}
We apply the above results in giving exact conditions under which a Hardy-Orlicz space or a Bergman-Orlicz space as given above embeds continuously into another Bergman-Orlicz space. In the unit disc of $\mathbb{C}$ or the unit ball of $\mathbb{C}^n$, for the classical Hardy and Bergman spaces, these characterizations are well known (see \cite{ZZ,Zhu} and the references therein). Embedding relations between Bergman-Orlicz spaces of the unit ball have been obtained by the second author in \cite{sehba}.
\vskip .2cm
We first have the following result.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:embed1}
Let $\Phi_1$ and $\Phi_2$ be two $\mathcal{C}^1$ convex growth functions with $\Phi_2\in\mathscr{U}$, and let $\alpha>-1$. Assume that $\Phi_1$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition and that $\frac{\Phi_2}{\Phi_1}$ is nondecreasing. Then the Hardy-Orlicz space $H^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+)$ embeds continuously into the Bergman-Orlicz space $A_\alpha^{\Phi_2}(\mathbb{C}_+)$ if and only if there exists a constant $C>0$ such that for any $t\in (0,\infty)$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:embedhardybergcond}
\Phi_1^{-1}(t)\leq \Phi_2^{-1}(Ct^{2+\alpha}).
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\vskip .1cm
We remark that in the case $\Phi_1(t)=t^p$ and $\Phi_2(t)=t^q$ with $0<p<q<\infty$, the condition (\ref{eq:embedhardybergcond}) reduces to $\frac 1p=\frac{2+\alpha}{q}$.
\vskip .1cm
We also obtain the following.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:embed2}
Let $\Phi_1$ and $\Phi_2$ be two $\mathcal{C}^1$ convex growth functions with $\Phi_2\in\mathscr{U}$, and let $\alpha,\beta>-1$. Assume that $\Phi_1$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition and that $\frac{\Phi_2}{\Phi_1}$ is nondecreasing. Then the Bergman-Orlicz space $A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+)$ embeds continuously into the Bergman-Orlicz space $A_\beta^{\Phi_2}(\mathbb{C}_+)$ if and only if there exists a constant $C>0$ such that for any $t\in (0,\infty)$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:embedbergbergcond}
\Phi_1^{-1}(t^{2+\alpha})\leq \Phi_2^{-1}(Ct^{2+\beta}).
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\vskip .1cm
It is easy to see that in the case $\Phi_1(t)=t^p$ and $\Phi_2(t)=t^q$ with $0<p<q<\infty$, the condition (\ref{eq:embedbergbergcond}) reduces to $\frac {2+\alpha}p=\frac{2+\beta}{q}$.
\subsection{Application to pointwise multipliers}
Let $X$ and $Y$ be two analytic function spaces which are metric spaces, with respective metrics $d_X$ and $d_Y$. An analytic function $g$ is said to be a multiplier from $X$ to $Y$, if there exists a constant $C>0$ such that for any $f\in X$, $$d_Y(fg,0)\leq Cd_X(f,0).$$
We denote by $\mathcal{M}(X,Y)$ the set of multipliers from $X$ to $Y$.
Multipliers between usual Bergman spaces of the unit disc and the unit ball have been obtained in \cite{Att, Axler1, Axler2, luecking, Vukotic, Zhao}. In \cite{sehba}, the first author, using Carleson embeddings for Bergman-Orlicz spaces of the unit ball $\mathbb{B}^n$ of $\mathbb{C}^n$ characterized pointwise multipliers from $A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{B}^n)$ to $A_\beta^{\Phi_2}(\mathbb{B}^n)$ where $\Phi_1$ and $\Phi_2$ are growth functions such that $\frac{\Phi_2}{\Phi_1}$ is nondecreasing and $\Phi_2$ is in some subclass $\tilde{\mathscr U}$ of $\mathscr U$. We provide here the same type of results for Hardy-Orlicz and Bergman-Orlicz spaces of the upper-half plane.
\vskip .2cm
We say a growth function $\Phi\in \mathscr U^q$ belongs to $\tilde{\mathscr U}$, if the following three conditions are satisfied.
\begin{itemize}
\item[($a_1$)] There exists a constant $C_1>0$ such that for any $0<s,t<\infty$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:uppertypecondmulti1}
\Phi(st)\leq C_1\Phi(s)\Phi(t).
\end{equation}
\item[($a_2$)] There exists a constant $C_2>0$ such that for any $a,b\geq 1$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:uppertypecondmulti2}
\Phi\left(\frac{a}{b}\right)\leq C_2\frac{\Phi(a)}{b^q}.
\end{equation}
\item[($a_3$)] There exists a constant $C_3>0$ such that for any $0<a\le b\le 1$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:uppertypecondmulti3}
\Phi\left(\frac{a}{b}\right)\leq C_3\frac{\Phi(a)}{\Phi(b)}.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
Clearly, power functions are in $\tilde{\mathscr U}$. As nontrivial member of $\tilde{\mathscr U}$, we have the function $t\mapsto t^q\log^\alpha(C+t)$, where $q\geq 1$, $\alpha>0$ and the constant $C>0$ is large enough.
\vskip .2cm
Let $\omega:(0,\infty)\longrightarrow (0,\infty)$ be a continuous function. An analytic function $f$ in $\mathbb C_+$ is said to be in $\mathcal H_\omega^\infty(\mathbb C_+)$ if
\begin{equation}\label{OmegaHinfdef}
||f||_{\mathcal H_\omega^\infty}:=\sup_{z\in \mathbb C_+}\frac{|f(z)|}{\omega(\Im z)}<\infty.
\end{equation}
We observe that $\mathcal H_\omega^\infty(\mathbb C_+)$ is a Banach space.
The following result provides pointwise multipliers from Hardy-Orlicz spaces to Bergman-Orlicz spaces.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:main3}
Let $\Phi_1\in \mathscr U$ and $\Phi_2\in \tilde{\mathscr U}$. Assume that $\frac{\Phi_2}{\Phi_1}$ is non-decreasing. Let $\alpha>-1$ and define for $t\in (0,\infty)$, the function
$$\omega(t)=\frac{\Phi_2^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{t^{2+\alpha}}\right)}{\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{t}\right)}.$$
Then the following assertions hold.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] If $\Phi_1$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition, and $\omega$ is equivalent to $1$, then $$\mathcal{M}\left(H^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+),A_\alpha^{\Phi_2}(\mathbb{C}_+)\right)=H^\infty(\mathbb{C}_+).$$
\item[(ii)] If $\omega$ is non-decreasing on $(0,\infty)$ and $\lim_{t\rightarrow 0}\omega(t)=0$, then $$\mathcal{M}\left(H^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+),A_\alpha^{\Phi_2}(\mathbb{C}_+)\right)=\{0\}.$$
\item[(iii)] If $\Phi_1$ and $\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition, and $\omega$ is non-increasing on $(0,\infty)$, then $$\mathcal{M}\left(H^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+),A_\alpha^{\Phi_2}(\mathbb{C}_+)\right)=H_\omega^\infty(\mathbb{C}_+).$$
\end{itemize}
\end{thm}
The next result provides pointwise multipliers between two different Bergman-Orlicz spaces.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:main4}
Let $\Phi_1\in \mathscr U$ and $\Phi_2\in \tilde{\mathscr U}$. Assume that $\frac{\Phi_2}{\Phi_1}$ is nondecreasing. Let $\alpha, \beta>-1$ and define for $t\in (0,\infty)$, the function
$$\omega(t)=\frac{\Phi_2^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{t^{2+\beta}}\right)}{\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{t^{2+\alpha}}\right)}.$$
Then the following assertions hold.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] If $\Phi_1$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition, and $\omega$ is equivalent to $1$, then $$\mathcal{M}\left(A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+),A_\beta^{\Phi_2}(\mathbb{C}_+)\right)=H^\infty(\mathbb{C}_+).$$
\item[(ii)] If $\omega$ is non-decreasing on $(0,\infty)$ and $\lim_{t\rightarrow 0}\omega(t)=0$, then $$\mathcal{M}\left(A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+),A_\beta^{\Phi_2}(\mathbb{C}_+)\right)=\{0\}.$$
\item[(iii)] If $\Phi_1$ and $\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}$ satisfy the $\nabla_2$-condition, and $\omega$ is non-increasing on $(0,\infty)$, then $$\mathcal{M}\left(A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+),A_\beta^{\Phi_2}(\mathbb{C}_+)\right)=H_\omega^\infty(\mathbb{C}_+).$$
\end{itemize}
\end{thm}
\vskip .1cm
In the above two results, we require $\Phi_1$ to satisfy the $\nabla_2$-condition because we aim to apply Theorem \ref{thm:main1} and Theorem \ref{thm:main2} where this hypothesis is used. In assertion (iii) of these results, we also require $\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}$ to satisfy the $\nabla_2$-condition. This is needed to prove that the measure $$d\mu(x+iy)=\frac{dxdy}{y^2\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac 1{y^{2+\alpha}}\right)}$$ appearing in our proofs is a $\left(\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1},\alpha\right)$-Carleson measure. In the case where this condition does not hold, it is easy to exhibit an example of $\Phi_1$ and $\Phi_2$ for which the measure $\mu$ is not a $\left(\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1},\alpha\right)$-Carleson measure.
\vskip .3cm
In the next section, we introduce more definitions and present some results that we need in our presentation. In Section 4, we present the proofs of the Carleson embeddings results; in Section 5, we prove the results on the continuous inclusion of a Hardy-Orlicz or Bergman-Orlicz space into another Bergman-Orlicz space. Section 6 contains the proofs of the pointwise multipliers results. In the last section, we conclude our presentation, taking advantage of this part to present the corresponding weak-type results.
\vskip .3cm
As usual, given two positive quantities $A$ and $B$, the notation $A\lesssim B$
means that for some positive constant $C$, $A\le CB$. When $A\lesssim B$ and $B\lesssim A$, we write $A\thickapprox B$. In general $C$ or $C_s$, $s\in \mathbb{R}$ will denote a constant (depending only on the underlined variable) whose value is not necessarily the same for different occurrences.
\section{Some useful facts}
We present in this section some useful results needed in our presentation.
\subsection{Some properties of growth functions}
We recall that a growth function $\Phi$ is of lower type $p$ if we can find $p > 0$ and $C>0$ such that, for $s>0$ and $0<t\le 1$,
\begin{equation}\label{lowertype}
\Phi(st)\le Ct^p\Phi(s).\end{equation}
We denote by $\mathscr{L}_p$ the set of growth functions $\Phi$ of lower type $p$, $0<p\le 1$, such that the function $t\mapsto \frac{\Phi(t)}{t}$ is non-increasing. We write $$\mathscr{L}=\bigcup_{0<p\leq 1}\mathscr{L}_p.$$
We recall with \cite[Proposition 2.1]{sehbatchoundja} that $\Phi\in \mathscr{L}_p$ if and only if $\Phi^{-1}\in \mathscr{U}^{1/p}$.
\vskip .2cm
We recall that for $\Phi$ a $\mathcal C^1$ growth function, the lower and the upper indices of $\Phi$ are respectively defined by
$$a_\Phi:=\inf_{t>0}\frac{t\Phi^\prime(t)}{\Phi(t)}\,\,\,\textrm{and}\,\,\,b_\Phi:=\sup_{t>0}\frac{t\Phi^\prime(t)}{\Phi(t)}.$$
We also recall that if $\Phi$ is convex, then $1\le a_\Phi\le b_\Phi<\infty$. Following \cite[Lemma 2.6]{DHZZ} we have that a convex growth function satisfies the $\nabla_2-$condition if and only if $1< a_\Phi\le b_\Phi<\infty$.
Let us observe that if $\Phi$ is a $\mathcal C^1$ growth function, then the function $\frac{\Phi(t)}{t^{a_\Phi}}$ is increasing while the function $\frac{\Phi(t)}{t^{b_\Phi}}$ is decreasing. These observations imply in particular that if $\Phi$ is $\mathcal{C}^1$ convex growth function that satisfies the $\nabla_2-$condition, then $\Phi\in \mathscr{U}$.
The following will be useful.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:dini}
Let $\Phi$ be a convex growth function that satisfies the $\Delta_2$-condition. Then the following assertions are equivalent.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)] $\Phi$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condtion.
\item[(b)] There is a constant $C_1>0$ such that for any $t>0$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dini}
\int_0^t\frac{\Phi(s)}{s^2}ds\le C_1\frac{\Phi(t)}{t}.
\end{equation}
\item[(c)] There is a constant $C_2>1$ such that for any $t>0$, $\Phi(C_2t)\ge 2C_2\Phi(t)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We prove that (a)$\Rightarrow$(b)$\Rightarrow$(c)$\Rightarrow$(a).
\vskip .1cm
(a)$\Rightarrow$(b): Assume that $\Phi$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condtion. We start by observing that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\int_0^t\frac{\Phi(s)}{s^2}ds &=& \sum_{j=0}^\infty\int_{2^{-j-1}t}^{2^{-j}t}\frac{\Phi(s)}{s^2}ds\\ &\le& \sum_{j=0}^\infty\frac{\Phi(2^{-j}t)}{2^{-2(j+1)}t^2}2^{-j-1}t.
\end{eqnarray*}
Let $p$ be the lower indice of $\Phi$. As $\Phi$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condtion, we have that $p>1$. As $t\rightarrow \frac{\Phi(t)}{t^p}$ is increasing, we obtain that for $j\ge 0$, $\Phi(2^{-j}t)\le 2^{-jp}\Phi(t)$. Hence
\begin{eqnarray*}
\int_0^t\frac{\Phi(s)}{s^2}ds &\le& 2\frac{\Phi(t)}{t}\sum_{j=0}^\infty 2^{-j(p-1)}\\ &\lesssim& \frac{\Phi(t)}{t}.
\end{eqnarray*}
\vskip .1cm
(b)$\Rightarrow$(c): Assume that $\Phi$ satisfies (\ref{eq:dini}), i.e.
$~\forall~t>0 ~$,
\[ \int_0^t\frac{\Phi(s)}{s^2}ds\le C_1\frac{\Phi(t)}{t}. \]
Let $d>2$ be fixed. As the function
$t\rightarrow \dfrac{\Phi(t)}{t}$ is nondecreasing, we have that
\[ \int_0^t\frac{\Phi(s)}{s^2}ds \geq \int_\frac{t}{d}^\frac{t}{2}\frac{\Phi(s)}{s}\frac{ds}{s} \geq \frac{\Phi(\frac{t}{d})}{\frac{t}{d}}\int_\frac{t}{d}^\frac{t}{2} \frac{ds}{s}= \frac{\Phi(\frac{t}{d})}{\frac{t}{d}}\ln(\frac{d}{2}) \]
Hence \[d\Phi(\frac{t}{d}) \leq \frac{C_1}{\ln(\frac{d}{2})}\Phi(t).\]
Let us choose $d\geq 2e^{2C_1}$ such that $\dfrac{C_1}{\ln(\frac{d}{2})} \leq \dfrac{1}{2}$. Then
\[ d\Phi(\frac{t}{d}) \leq \frac{1}{2}\Phi(t). \]
That is \[ 2d\Phi(u) \leq \Phi(du). \]
\vskip .1cm
(c)$\Rightarrow$(a): Assume that there exists $C_2>1$ such that $~\forall~t>0$, $\Phi(C_2t)\ge 2C_2\Phi(t)$. We only have to prove that the complementary function $\Psi$ of $\Phi$ satisfies the $\Delta_2$-condition.
\vskip .1cm
Let $~t>0$. Put \[ \Phi_{1}(t)= \frac{1}{2C_2}\Phi(C_2t). \]
Then $\Phi_{1}$ belongs to $\mathscr{U}$. Let $\Psi_{1}$ be the complementary function of $\Phi_{1}$. We have that
for any $u \geq 0$, \[\Psi_{1}(u) =\sup_{t\geq 0}\{ut- \Phi_{1}(t) \}= \frac{1}{2C_2}\Psi(2u). \]
Hence
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
\Phi(C_2t)\ge 2C_2\Phi(t) &\Leftrightarrow &
\Phi(t) \leq \Phi_{1}(t) \\\\
&\Rightarrow&
\Psi_{1}(u) \leq \Psi(u) \\\\
&\Rightarrow&
\Psi(2u) \leq 2C_2 \Psi(u).
\end{array}$$
Thus $\Psi$ satisfies the $\Delta_{2}$-condition.
As $\Phi$ and its complementary function $\Psi$ satisfy the $\Delta_{2}$-condition, we conclude that $\Phi$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condtion.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:reverseprodphi}
Let $\Phi_1,\Phi_2$ be two convex growth functions. Assume that $\Phi_2\in \mathscr{U}^q$ and that $\frac{\Phi_2}{\Phi_1}$ is nondecreasing. Then the function $\Phi_3$ defined by $\Phi_3(0)=0$ and $$\Phi_3(t)=\frac{1}{\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac 1t\right)},\,\,\,\textrm{for}\,\,\,t>0$$
belongs to the class $\mathscr{U}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Note that as $\frac{\Phi_1^{-1}(t)}{t}$ is nonincreasing, we have that for any $s\ge 1$ and $t>0$, $$\Phi_1^{-1}(st)\le s\Phi_1^{-1}(t)$$ and so
\begin{eqnarray*}\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}(st) &\le& \Phi_2\left(s\Phi_1^{-1}(t)\right)\\ &\le& Cs^q\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}(t).\end{eqnarray*}
That is $\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\in \mathscr{U}^q$.
Hence $$\frac{\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac 1{st}\right)}{\left(\frac 1{st}\right)^q}\ge \frac{\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac 1{t}\right)}{\left(\frac 1{t}\right)^q},$$
or equivalently, $$\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac 1{st}\right)\ge \frac{\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac 1{t}\right)}{s^q}.$$
That is for any $s\ge 1$ and $t>0$, $\Phi_3(st)\le s^q\Phi_3(t)$. Lemma follows easily as $\Phi_3$ and the function $t\mapsto \frac{\Phi_3(t)}{t}$ are increasing.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Integrability results for some positive kernel functions}
We recall that the beta function is defined by $$B(m, n)= B(n,m) = \int_0^{\infty}\!\!\!\frac{u^{m-1}}{(1+u)^{m+n}}\mathrm{d}u\qquad\mbox{where}\quad m,n>0.$$
The two following results can be found for example in \cite{BanSeh}.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:betafunctionconditions}
Let $\alpha, \beta$ be a real numbers, and $t>0$ be fixed. Then the integral $$I(t)=\int_0^\infty \frac{y^\alpha}{(t+y)^\beta}\mathrm{d}x$$
converges if and only if $\alpha>-1$ and $\beta-\alpha>1$. In this case, $$I(y)=B(\alpha+1, \beta-\alpha-1)t^{-\beta+\alpha+1}.$$
\end{lem}
\vskip .1cm
\begin{lem}\label{lem:integkernel} Let $\alpha$ be real. Then for $y>0$ fixed, the integral
$$J_{\alpha}(y)=\int_{\mathbb{R}}\frac{dx}{|x+iy|^\alpha}
$$ converges if and only if $\alpha > 1.$ In this case,
$$J_{\alpha}(y)=B(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{\alpha-1}{2})y^{1-\alpha}.$$
\end{lem}
\subsection{Hardy-Orlicz spaces of the upper-half plane}
For $\Phi\in \mathscr{U}^q$ and $f\in H^\Phi(\mathbb{C}_+)$, we define $$\|f\|_{H^\Phi}:=\sup_{y>0}\int_{\mathbb{R}}\Phi\left(|f(x+iy)|\right)dx.$$
One can check that $f\in H^\Phi(\mathbb{C}_+)$ if and only if $\|f\|_{H^\Phi}<\infty$. Indeed, we have that the following relations hold:
$$\|f\|_{L^\Phi}\lesssim \max\{\|f\|_{L^\Phi}^{lux},\left(\|f\|_{L^\Phi}^{lux}\right)^q\}$$
and $$\|f\|_{L^\Phi}^{lux}\lesssim \max\{\|f\|_{L^\Phi},\left(\|f\|_{L^\Phi}\right)^{1/q}\}.$$
\vskip .1cm
Also $\|\cdot\|_{H^\Phi}^{lux}$ defines a norm on $H^\Phi(\mathbb{C}_+)$ and $(H^\Phi(\mathbb{C}_+),\|\cdot\|_{H^\Phi}^{lux})$ is a Banach space.
\vskip .2cm
Let us observe the following.
\begin{lem}
Let $\Phi$ a convex growth function. Then $\|f\|_{H^\Phi}=0$ if and only if $f=0$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Assume that $\|f\|_{H^\Phi}=0$. Then for any $y>0$ fixed, there exists $\delta_0=\delta_0(y)>0$ such that for any $0<\delta<\delta_0$,
$$\int_{\mathbb{R}}\Phi\left(\frac{|f(x+iy)|}{\delta}\right)dx\le 1.$$
This implies that for any interval $I\subset \mathbb{R}$,
$$\int_{I}\Phi\left(\frac{|f(x+iy)|}{\delta}\right)\frac{dx}{|I|}\le \frac{1}{|I|}.$$
We obtain in particular that for any $C>1$,
$$\Phi\left(\int_{I}\frac{C|f(x+iy)|}{\delta_0}\frac{dx}{|I|}\right)\le \int_{I}\Phi\left(\frac{|f(x+iy)|}{(\delta_0/C)}\right)\frac{dx}{|I|}\le \frac{1}{|I|}.$$
Thus
$$\int_{I}\frac{|f(x+iy)|}{\delta_0}dx\le \frac{|I|}{C}\Phi^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{|I|}\right).$$
Letting $C\rightarrow \infty$, we obtain that for any interval $I\subset \mathbb{R}$,
$$\int_{I}|f(x+iy)|dx=0.$$
Hence the Monotone Convergence Theorem then gives that
$$\int_{\mathbb{R}}|f(x+iy)|dx=0.$$
Thus $f=0$. The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
We recall that the Hardy-Littlewood maximal function of $\mathbb{R}$ is the function defined for any locally integrable function $f$ by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:defmaxfnct}Mf(x):=\sup_{I\subset \mathbb{R}}\frac{\chi_I(x)}{|I|}\int_I|f(s)|ds\end{equation}
where the supremum is taken over all intervals of $\mathbb{R}$.
\vskip .1cm
Let us consider the following system of dyadic grids,
$$\mathcal D^\beta:=\{2^j\left([0,1)+m+(-1)^j\beta\right):m\in \mathbb Z,\,\,\,j\in \mathbb Z \},\,\,\,\textrm{for}\,\,\,\beta\in \{0,1/3\}.$$
When $\beta=0$, we observe that $\mathcal D^0$ is the standard dyadic grid of $\mathbb R$, denoted $\mathcal D$.
\vskip .2cm
For any $\beta\in \{0,1/3\}$, we denote by ${M}^{d,\beta}$ the dyadic analogue of the Hardy-Littlewood maximal function, defined as in (\ref{eq:defmaxfnct}) but with the supremum taken over dyadic intervals in the grid $\mathcal D^\beta$.
\vskip .2cm
It is a classical fact that for any locally integrable function $f$ on $\mathbb{R}$, \begin{equation}\label{eq:strongdyamax}Mf(x)\le 6\sum_{\beta\in \{0,\frac 13\}}{M}^{d,\beta}f(x).\end{equation}
The following is a well known result (see for example \cite{koki}). We provide a proof here for the sake of the reader.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:boundedHLmax}
Let $\Phi$ be a $\mathcal{C}^1$ convex growth function that satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition. Then there exists a constant $C=C_\Phi>0$ such that for any $f\in L^\Phi(\mathbb{R})$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:HLineq}
\int_{\mathbb{R}}\Phi(Mf(x))dx\le C\int_{\mathbb{R}}\Phi(|f(x)|)dx.
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
From the inequality (\ref{eq:strongdyamax}), it is enough to prove (\ref{eq:HLineq}) for the maximal function ${M}^{d,\beta}$, $\beta=0,\frac 13$. From standard properties of dyadic intervals, one obtain that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:weakmaxest} | \{ x\in {\mathbb{R}} : M^{d,\beta}f(x) > \lambda \} | \leq \frac{2}{\lambda} \int_{\{ t\in {\mathbb{R}} : \mid f(t) \mid > \frac{\lambda}{2} \}}\mid f(t) \mid dt.\end{equation}
Hence
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
\int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\Phi\left( M^{d,\beta}f(x) \right) dx &=& \int_{0}^{\infty}\Phi^{\prime}(\lambda) | \{ x\in {\mathbb{R}} : M^{d,\beta}f(x) > \lambda \} | d\lambda \\\\
&\leq& \int_{0}^{\infty}\Phi^{\prime}(\lambda) \left(\frac{2}{\lambda} \int_{\{ x\in {\mathbb{R}} : \mid f(x) \mid > \frac{\lambda}{2} \}}\mid f(x) \mid dx \right)d\lambda \\\\
&\leq& 2\int_{{\mathbb{R}}} \mid f(x) \mid \left(\int_{0}^{2\mid f(x) \mid} \frac{\Phi^{\prime}(\lambda)}{\lambda}d\lambda\right) dx. \\
\end{array}$$
As $\Phi$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition, we have from Lemma \ref{lem:dini} that there exists $ C>0$ such that $\forall~ t >0$ , \[ \int_{0}^{t}\frac{\Phi(\lambda)}{\lambda^{2}}d\lambda \leq C \frac{\Phi(t)}{t} .\]
It follows from an integration by parts that \[ \int_{0}^{t}\frac{\Phi^{\prime}(\lambda)}{\lambda}d\lambda \leq \frac{\Phi(t)}{t} + \int_{0}^{t}\frac{\Phi(\lambda)}{\lambda^{2}}d\lambda \leq C_{1}\frac{\Phi(t)}{t}. \]
Thus
\[ 2\int_{{\mathbb{R}}} \mid f(x) \mid \left(\int_{0}^{2\mid f(x) \mid} \frac{\Phi^{\prime}(\lambda)}{\lambda}d\lambda\right) dx \leq C \int_{\pmb{\mathbb{R}}} \Phi(\mid f(x) \mid)dx \]
and consequently, \[ \int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\Phi( M^{d,\beta}f(x) ) dx \leq C_{1} \int_{{\mathbb{R}}} \Phi(\mid f(x) \mid)dx. \]
\end{proof}
The nontangential maximal function $f^*$ of a function $f$ defined on $\mathbb{C}_+$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:deefnintanmaxfunct}
f^*(x):=\sup_{z\in \Gamma(x)}|f(z)|
\end{equation}
where $\Gamma(x):=\{z=t+iy\in \mathbb{C}_+:\,|t-x|<y\}$.
\vskip .1cm
As for classical Hardy spaces of the upper-half plane, we have the following characterization of Hardy-Orlicz spaces.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:nontangequivdef}
Let $\Phi$ be a $\mathcal{C}^1$ convex growth function that satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition. Then $f\in H^\Phi(\mathbb{C}_+)$ if and only if $f^*\in L^\Phi(\mathbb{R})$. Moreover,
$$\|f\|_{H^\Phi}^{lux}\approx \|f^*\|_{L^\Phi}^{lux}.$$
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Let assume that $f \in {H}^{\Phi}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$. Then as
$\Phi\in \mathcal{U}$ and satisfies $\nabla_2$-condition, we obtain as in the case of classical Hardy spaces (see \cite{Jan}) that there exists a unique function $g \in {L}^{\Phi}({\mathbb{R}})$ such that \[ \forall~ z=x+iy \in {\mathbb{C_{+}}},~~ f(z)= \int_{{\mathbb{R}}}P_{y}(t)g(x-t)dt \]
where $P_{y}(x)=\frac{1}{\pi}\frac{x}{x^2+y^2}$ is the Poisson kernel.
Moreover, $\|f\|_{{H}^{\Phi}}^{lux}=\| g\|_{{L}^{\Phi}}^{lux}$.
\vskip .1cm
From \cite[Theorem 4.2]{garnett}, we know that \[ f^{\star}(t_{0}) \leq C Mg(t_{0}),~ \forall~ t_{0}\in {\mathbb{R}}. \]
Hence as $\Phi\in \mathcal{U}$ and satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition, and $g \in {L}^{\Phi}({\mathbb{R}})$, it follows from Proposition \ref{prop:boundedHLmax} that \[ \int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\Phi( Mg(x) ) dx \leq C_{1} \int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\Phi( |g(x)| ) dx .\] Thus \[ \int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\Phi( f^{\star}(x) ) dx \leq C C_{1} \int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\Phi( |g(x)| ) dx. \] One deduces that $f^{\star} \in {L}^{\Phi}{\mathbb{R}})$, and
$\| f^{\star}\|_{{L}^{\Phi}}^{lux} \leq C_{2} \|f\|_{{H}^{\Phi}}^{lux}$ since $\|f\|_{{H}^{\Phi}}^{lux}=\| g\|_{{L}^{\Phi}}^{lux}$.
\vskip .2cm
Now suppose that $f^{\star} \in {L}^{\Phi}({\mathbb{R}})$. Observe that
$\forall~ y > 0 ,~ \forall~ x \in {\mathbb{R}}$, $$|f(x+iy) | \leq f^{\star}(x),$$ since $x+iy \in \Gamma(x)$. Hence $\forall y > 0$ ,
\[ \int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\Phi( |f(x+iy)| ) dx \leq \int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\Phi( f^{\star}(x) ) dx. \]
Thus \[ \sup_{y> 0}\int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\Phi( |f(x+iy)| ) dx \leq \int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\Phi( f^{\star}(x) ) dx \]
and consequently, $\|f\|_{{H}^{\Phi}}^{lux}\leq \| f^{\star}\|_{{L}^{\Phi}}^{lux}$.
\vskip .1cm
We conclude that \[ \|f\|_{{H}^{\Phi}}^{lux}\approx \| f^{\star}\|_{{L}^{\Phi}}^{lux}. \]
\end{proof}
Let us finish this subsection by giving an example of elements in Hardy-Orlicz spaces.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:testfuncthardyo}
Let $\Phi$ be a convex growth function. Then for any $z=x+iy\in \mathbb{C}_+$, the function $$f_z(w):=\Phi^{-1}\left(\frac 1y\right)\frac{y^2}{(w-\bar{z})^2}$$
is in $H^\Phi(\mathbb{C}_+)$. Moreover, $\|f\|_{H^\Phi}\le \pi.$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
It is clear that $f_{z}$ is analytic on ${\mathbb{C_{+}}}$. We observe that
$$|\omega-\overline{z}|^{2}=(u-x)^{2}+(y+v)^{2} > y^{2} \Longrightarrow \dfrac{y^{2}}{|z-\overline{\omega}|^{2}}< 1.$$
As the function $t\rightarrow \frac{\Phi(t)}{t}$ is increasing, we obtain using Lemma \ref{lem:integkernel} that
$\forall~ v > 0$,
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
\int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\Phi(|f_{z}(u+iv)|)du &=& \int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\Phi\left(\Phi^{-1}\left(\dfrac{1}{y}\right) \dfrac{y^{2}}{ |(u-x)+i(y+v) |^{2}}\right) du \\\\
&\leq& \int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\dfrac{y^{2}}{ |(u-x)+i(y+v) |^{2}}\Phi\left(\Phi^{-1}\left(\dfrac{1}{y}\right)\right)du, \\\\
&=& \int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\dfrac{y}{ |(u-x)+i(y+v) |^{2}}du \\\\
&=& y B(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2} )\frac{1}{y+v} \\\\
&\leq& \pi.
\end{array}$$
Thus
\[ \sup_{v > 0}\int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\Phi(|f_{z}(u+iv)|)du \leq \pi < \infty. \]
That is $f_{z} \in {H}^{\Phi}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$ and $\|f_{z}\|_{{H}^{\Phi}}^{lux} \leq \pi$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Some useful facts on Bergman-Orlicz spaces of the upper-half plane}
We start by observing that as in the case of Hardy-Orlicz spaces, the following holds.
\begin{lem}
Let $\Phi$ be a convex growth function, and let $\alpha>-1$. Then $\|f\|_{A_\alpha^\Phi}=0$ if and only if $f=0$.
\end{lem}
For any $\alpha>-1$, and any measurable set $E\subset \mathbb{C}_+$, we use the notation $$|E|_\alpha=V_\alpha(E)=\int_EdV_\alpha.$$ Let us prove the following pointwise estimate.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:pointwiseberg}
Let $\Phi$ be a convex growth function, and $\alpha > -1$. Then there exists $C=C_{\alpha}>0$ such that for any $ f\in {A}^{\Phi}_{\alpha}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$ and any $z= x+iy \in {\mathbb{C_{+}}}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pointwiseBerg}|f(z)|~\leq~C \Phi^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{ y^{\alpha+2}}\right)\|f\|_{\Phi,\alpha}^{lux}.\end{equation}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $f \in {A}^{\Phi}_{\alpha}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$. If $f=0$, then there is nothing to prove . Assume that $f\neq 0$. Let $z_{0}=x_{0}+iy_{0}\in {\mathbb{C_{+}}}$ and let
$Q_{I}$ be the Carleson square centered at $z_{0}$. As $f$ is analytic, as a consequence of the mean value theorem, there exists a constant $C=C_\alpha>0$ and independent of $z_0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:mvt} |f(z_{0})|\le \dfrac{C}{|Q_{I}|_\alpha} \int_{Q_{I}}|f(u+iv)|dV_{\alpha}(u+iv) \end{equation}
(see \cite[Lemma 7.1]{BekSeh}).
It follows from this, the Jensen's inequality and (\ref{uppertype}) that \[ \Phi\left(\dfrac{|f(z_{0})|}{\|f\|_{\Phi,\alpha}^{lux}}\right) \leq \dfrac{C}{|Q_{I}|_\alpha}\int_{{Q_I}}\Phi\left(\dfrac{|f(u+iv)|}{\|f\|_{\Phi,\alpha}^{lux}}\right)dV_{\alpha}(u+iv). \]
But \[ |Q_{I}|_\alpha=\int_{Q_{I}}dV_{\alpha}(u+iv)= \int_{0}^{|I|}\int_{I}v^{\alpha}du dv= \frac{1}{1+\alpha}|I|^{\alpha+2}=\frac{2^{\alpha+2}}{1+\alpha}y^{\alpha+2}_{0}. \]
Hence \[ \Phi\left(\dfrac{|f(z_{0})|}{\|f\|_{\Phi,\alpha}^{lux}}\right) \leq \dfrac{C}{y^{\alpha+2}_{0}} \]
which leads to \[|f(z)|~\leq~C \Phi^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{ y^{\alpha+2}}\right)\|f\|_{\Phi,\alpha}^{lux},\,\,\,\textrm{for any}\,\,\,z=x+iy\in \mathbb{C}_+. \]
\end{proof}
Let $\alpha>-1$. We recall that the (weighted) Hardy-Littlewood maximal function of $\mathbb{C}_+$ is the function defined for any locally integrable function $f$ by
$$\mathcal{M}_\alpha f(x):=\sup_{I\subset \mathbb{R}}\frac{\chi_{Q_I}(x)}{|Q_I|_\alpha}\int_{Q_I}|f(w)|dV_\alpha(w)$$
where again, the supremum is taken over all intervals of $\mathbb{R}$. Its dyadic counterpart called dyadic (weighted) Hardy-Littlewood maximal function and denoted $\mathcal{M}_\alpha^d$ is defined the same way but with supremum taken only over dyadic intervals of $\mathbb{R}.$
\vskip .1cm
Let us recall three useful facts, the first one is given in \cite[Lemma 2.2]{sehba1} (see also\cite[Lemma 3.4]{carnotbenoit}), the second one and the third one are pretty classical and can be found in \cite[Lemma 2.1]{sehba1}.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:levelsets}
Let $\alpha>-1$. Then for any locally integrable function $f$, the following assertions are satisfied.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] There is a constant $C=C_\alpha>0$ such that for any $\lambda>0$,
$$\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+:\mathcal{M}_\alpha f(z)>\lambda\}\subset \{z\in \mathbb{C}_+:\mathcal{M}_\alpha^d f(z)>\frac{\lambda}{68}\}.$$
\item[(ii)] For any $\lambda>0$, there exists a family of disjoint maximal (with respect to inclusion) dyadic intervals $\{I_j\}_j$ such that
$$\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+:\mathcal{M}_\alpha^d f(z)>\lambda\}=\bigcup_{j}Q_{I_j}.$$
\item[(iii)] There exists a constant $C=C_\alpha>0$ such that for any $\lambda>0$,
$$|\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+:\mathcal{M}_\alpha^d f(z)>\lambda\}|_\alpha\le \frac{C}{\lambda}\int_{\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+:|f(z)|>\frac {\lambda}2\}}|f(z)|dV_\alpha.$$
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
Note that the dyadic intervals in assertions (ii) are maximal intervals such that $$\frac{1}{|Q_{I_j}|_\alpha}\int_{Q_{I_j}}|f(w)|dV_\alpha(w)>\lambda.$$
\vskip .1cm
Let us give a proof of the following result.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:boundedHLmaxberg}
Let $\Phi$ be a $\mathcal{C}^1$ convex growth function, and $\alpha>-1$. Assume that $\Phi$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition. Then there exists a constant $C=C_\Phi>0$ such that for any $f\in L^\Phi(\mathbb{C}_+)$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:HLineqberg}
\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi(\mathcal{M}_\alpha f(z))dV_\alpha(z)\le C\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi(|f(z)|)dV_\alpha(z).
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Using assertions (i) and (iii) of the previous result and Lemma \ref{lem:dini}, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
L &:=& \int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi(\mathcal{M}_\alpha f(z))dV_\alpha(z)\\ &=& \int_0^\infty\Phi'(\lambda)|\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+:\mathcal{M}_\alpha f(z)>\lambda\}|_\alpha d\lambda\\ &\le& \int_0^\infty\Phi'(\lambda)|\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+:\mathcal{M}_\alpha^df(z)>\frac{\lambda}{C}\}|_\alpha d\lambda\\ &\le& \int_0^\infty\Phi'(\lambda)\left(\frac{C}{\lambda}\int_{\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+:|f(z)|>\frac{\lambda}2\}}|f(z)|dV_\alpha(z)\right)d\lambda\\ &=& C\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}|f(z)|\left(\int_0^{2|f(z)|}\frac{\Phi'(\lambda)}{\lambda}\right)dV_\alpha(z)\\ &\approx& C\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}|f(z)|\left(\int_0^{2|f(z)|}\frac{\Phi(\lambda)}{\lambda^2}\right)dV_\alpha(z)\\ &\le& C\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi(|f(z)|)dV_\alpha(z).
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{proof}
Let us observe that for $f$ locally integrable, $$\mathcal{M}_\alpha^df(z)\le \mathcal{M}_\alpha f(z),\,\,\,\textrm{for any}\,\,\,z\in \mathbb{C}_+$$
and that by (\ref{eq:mvt}) there exists a constant $C=C_\alpha>0$ such that
$$ |f(z)|\le C\mathcal{M}_\alpha f(z),\,\,\,\textrm{for any}\,\,\,z\in \mathbb{C}_+.$$
Combining these two facts with assertion (i) of Lemma \ref{lem:levelsets} and Proposition \ref{prop:boundedHLmaxberg}, we obtain the following.
\begin{cor}\label{cor:equivdefbergorlicz}
Let $\Phi$ be a $\mathcal{C}^1$ convex growth function, and $\alpha>-1$. Assume that $\Phi$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition. Then for any holomorphic function $f$ on $\mathbb{C}_+$, the following are equivalent.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] $f\in L^\Phi(\mathbb{C}_+,dV_\alpha)$.
\item[(ii)] $\mathcal{M}_\alpha f\in L^\Phi(\mathbb{C}_+,dV_\alpha)$.
\item[(iii)] $\mathcal{M}_\alpha^d f\in L^\Phi(\mathbb{C}_+,dV_\alpha)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{cor}
Obviously, the corresponding norms in the above corollary are equivalent and this provides equivalent definitions of Bergman-Orlicz spaces in terms of Hardy-Littlewood maximal functions.
\vskip .2cm
The following provides an example of function in the Bergman-Orlicz spaces.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:testfunctbergo}
Let $\Phi$ be a convex growth function, and $\alpha>-1$. Then for any $z=x+iy\in \mathbb{C}_+$, the function $$f(w):=\Phi^{-1}\left(\frac 1{y^{2+\alpha}}\right)\frac{y^{4+2\alpha}}{(w-\bar{z})^{4+2\alpha}}$$
belongs to $A_\alpha^\Phi(\mathbb{C}_+)$. Moreover, $\|f\|_{A^\Phi}\le B(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3+2\alpha}{2})B(1+\alpha, 2+\alpha).$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
First observing that $\frac{y^{4+2\alpha}}{(w-\bar{z})^{4+2\alpha}}\le 1$ and using Lemma \ref{lem:integkernel}, we obtain
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
\int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi(|f_{z}(\omega)|)dV_{\alpha}(\omega)
&=&\int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi\left(\Phi^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{y^{2+\alpha}}\right) \frac{y^{4+2\alpha}}{ |\omega-\overline{z}|^{4+2\alpha}}\right) dV_{\alpha}(\omega) \\\\
&\leq& \int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}} \frac{y^{4+2\alpha}}{ |\omega-\overline{z}|^{4+2\alpha}}\Phi\left(\Phi^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{y^{2+\alpha}}\right)\right) dV_{\alpha}(\omega)\\\\
&\leq& \int_{0}^{\infty}\int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\frac{y^{2+\alpha}}{ |(u-x)+i(y+v) |^{4+2\alpha}}v^{\alpha}du dv \\\\
&=& y^{2+\alpha}\int_{0}^{\infty}\left( \int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\frac{du}{ |(u-x)+i(y+v) |^{4+2\alpha}}\right) v^{\alpha}dv \\\\
&\leq& y^{2+\alpha}\int_{0}^{\infty}B(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3+2\alpha}{2})\frac{1}{(y+v)^{3+2\alpha}}v^{\alpha}dv. \end{array}$$
Hence using Lemma \ref{lem:betafunctionconditions}, we obtain
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
\int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi(|f_{z}(\omega)|)dV_{\alpha}(\omega)
&\le& B(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3+2\alpha}{2})\frac{1}{y}\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{(\frac{v}{y})^{\alpha}}{(1+\frac{v}{y})^{3+2\alpha}}dv \\\\
&=& B(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3+2\alpha}{2})\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{u^{\alpha}}{(1+u)^{3+2\alpha}}du \\\\
&=& B(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3+2\alpha}{2})B(1+\alpha, 2+\alpha).
\end{array}$$
Thus \[ \int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi(|f_{z}(\omega)|)dV_{\alpha}(\omega) \leq B(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3+2\alpha}{2})B(1+\alpha, 2+\alpha). \]
Hence $f_{z}$ is uniformly in ${A}^{\Phi}_{\alpha}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$ with \[ \|f_{z}\|_{{A}_\alpha^{\Phi}} \leq B(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3+2\alpha}{2})B(1+\alpha, 2+\alpha). \]
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Carleson embeddings}
\subsection{A general characterization}
Let $s>0$. We prove here a characterization of the positive measures $\mu$ on $\mathbb{C}_+$ for which there is a constant $C>0$ such that for any finite interval $I\subset \mathbb{R}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:sphicarlmeasdef}
\mu(Q_I)\le \frac{C}{\Phi\left(\frac{1}{|I|^s}\right)}.
\end{equation}
If a measure $\mu$ satisfies (\ref{eq:sphicarlmeasdef}), we call $\mu$ a $s$-$\Phi$-Carleson measure. When $s=1$ this corresponds to $\Phi$-Carleson measures and for $s=2+\alpha$ with $\alpha>-1$, we recover the $(\Phi,\alpha)$-Carleson measures. When $\Phi(t)=t$, the above measures are usually called $s$-Carleson measures.
\vskip .1cm
We have the following equivalent definition of $s$-$\Phi$-Carleson measures.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:sphi}
Let $\Phi_1,\Phi_2$ be two convex growth functions with $\Phi_2\in \mathscr{U}$. Let $s>0$. Let $\mu$ be a positive Borel measure on $\mathbb{C}_+$. Then the following assertions are equivalent.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)] $\mu$ is a $s$-$\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}$-Carleson measure.
\item[(b)] There exists a constant $C>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:sphi}
\sup_{z=x+iy\in \mathbb{C}_+}\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi_2\left(\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{y^s}\right)\frac{y^{2s}}{|z-\bar{w}|^{2s}}\right)d\mu(w)\le C<\infty.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
Moreover, the constants in (\ref{eq:sphicarlmeasdef}) and (\ref{eq:sphi}) are equivalent.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
$(b) \Rightarrow (a)$:
Let $I\subset {\mathbb{R}}$ be a finite interval and $Q_{I}$ its associated Carleson square. Assume that $Q_{I}$ is centered at $z_{0}=x_{0}+iy_{0} \in {\mathbb{C}}_{+}$. Observe that for any $\omega \in Q_{I}$ , \[ \dfrac{1}{10^{s}} \leq \dfrac{y^{2s}_{0}}{ |\omega-\overline{z_{0}}|^{2s}} \leq 1. \]
As $|I|=2y_{0}$ and $\Phi_{1}^{-1}$ is nondecreasing, it follows that \[ \Phi_{1}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{|I|^{s}}\right) = \Phi_{1}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{2^{s}y_{0}^{s}}\right) \leq \Phi_{1}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{y_{0}^{s}}\right). \]
Hence \[ \dfrac{1}{10^{s}} \Phi_{1}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{|I|^{s}}\right) \leq \Phi_{1}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{y_{0}^{s}}\right)\dfrac{y^{2s}_{0}}{ |\omega-\overline{z_{0}}|^{2s}}. \]
As $\Phi_2\in \mathscr{U}$, using (\ref{uppertype}), we obtain
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
\Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{|I|^{s}}\right)\mu(Q_{I}) &=& \int_{Q_{I}}\Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{|I|^{s}}\right)d\mu(\omega) \\\\
&\leq& C\int_{Q_{I}}\Phi_{2}\left(\Phi^{-1}_{1}\left(\dfrac{1}{y^{s}_{0}}\right) \dfrac{y^{2s}_{0}}{ |\omega-\overline{z_{0}}|^{2s}}\right)d\mu(\omega) \\\\
&\leq& C \int_{\pmb{\mathbb{C_{+}}}}\Phi_{2}\left(\Phi^{-1}_{1}\left(\dfrac{1}{y^{s}_{0}}\right) \dfrac{y^{2s}_{0}}{ |\omega-\overline{z_{0}}|^{2s}}\right)d\mu(\omega) \\\\
&\le& C. \\\\
\end{array} $$
We conclude that there is a constant $C>0$ such that for any interval $I\subset \mathbb{R}$, \[ \mu(Q_{I}) \leq \dfrac{ C}{\Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}(\frac{1}{|I|^{s}})}. \]
That is $\mu$ is $s-\Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}$- Carleson measure.
\vskip .3cm
We next prove the reverse implication.
\vskip .1cm
$(a) \Rightarrow (b)$:
Assume that $\mu$ is a $s-\Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}$-Carleson. Let
$z_{0}=x_{0}+iy_{0} \in {\mathbb{C}}_{+}$ be fixed, and define $I_0$ to be the interval about $x_0$ and length $2y_0$. For any $j\in \mathbb{N}$, define $I_{j}\subset {\mathbb{R}}$ to be the interval centered at $x_{0}$ with length $2^j|I_{0}|$. Let $Q_{I_{j}}$ be the Carleson square associated to $I_{j}$. For $j=1,2,\ldots$, put
\[ E_{j}=Q_{I_{j}}\backslash Q_{I_{j-1}}~~~and~~~ E_{0}=Q_{I_{0}} \]
Then for $j \geq 0$ and $\omega \in E_{j}$,
\[ \dfrac{y^{2}_{0}}{ |\omega-\overline{z_{0}}|^{2}} \leq \dfrac{1}{2^{2(j-1)}}\]
and $\mu(E_j)\le \mu(Q_{j}).$
\vskip .2cm
Using (\ref{uppertype}), we obtain
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
T &:=& \int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi_{2}\left(\Phi^{-1}_{1}\left(\dfrac{1}{y^{s}_{0}}\right) \dfrac{y^{2s}_{0}}{ |\omega-\overline{z_{0}}|^{2s}}\right) d\mu(\omega)\\ &=& \sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \int_{E_{j}}\Phi_{2}\left(\Phi^{-1}_{1}\left(\dfrac{1}{y^{s}_{0}}\right) \dfrac{y^{2s}_{0}}{ |\omega-\overline{z_{0}}|^{2s}}\right) d\mu(\omega) \\\\
&\le& \sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \int_{E_{j}}\Phi_{2}\left(\Phi^{-1}_{1}\left(\dfrac{1}{y^{s}_{0}}\right)\dfrac{1}{2^{2s(j-1)}} \right) d\mu(\omega) \\\\
&=& \sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \int_{E_{j}}\Phi_{2}\left(\Phi^{-1}_{1}\left(\dfrac{1}{y^{s}_{0}}\right)\dfrac{4^s}{2^{sj}} \dfrac{1}{2^{s(j+1)}}\right) d\mu(\omega)\\\\ &\le& C\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}2^{-sj} \int_{E_{j}}\Phi_{2}\left(\Phi^{-1}_{1}\left(\dfrac{1}{2^{s(j+1)}y^{s}_{0}}\right) \right) d\mu(\omega)\\\\
&\le& C\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}2^{-sj}\Phi_{2}\circ\Phi^{-1}_{1}\left(\dfrac{1}{ |I_j|^s}\right) \mu(Q_{I_j}) \\\\
&\leq& C\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}2^{-sj} \\\\
&\leq& C
\end{array}$$
and the last constant does not depend on $y_0$. We conclude that
\[ \sup_{z=x+iy \in {\mathbb{C_{+}}}} \int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi_{2}\left(\Phi^{-1}_{1}\left(\dfrac{1}{y^{s}}\right) \dfrac{y^{2s}}{ |\omega-\overline{z}|^{2s}}\right) d\mu(\omega) \leq \tilde{C} < \infty . \]
The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:main1}}
For any measurable set $E\subset \mathbb{R}$, we denote by $|E|$ the Lebesgue measure of $E$. We start with the following crucial lemma.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:main11}
Let $\Phi$ be a growth function such that the function $t\mapsto \tilde{\Phi}(t):=\frac{1}{\Phi\left(\frac 1t\right)}$ belongs to the class $\mathscr{U}$. Assume that $\mu$ is a $\Phi$-Carleson measure. Then for any harmonic function $f$ on $\mathbb{C}_+$ and any $\lambda>0$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:main11}
\mu\left(\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+: |f(z)|>\lambda\}\right)\le C\tilde{\Phi}\left(|\{x\in \mathbb{R}: f^*(x)>\lambda\}|\right)
\end{equation}
where $C$ is the constant in (\ref{eq:phicarldef}). Moreover, if $\Phi\in \mathscr{U}$ and satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition, then the reverse holds. That is if $\mu$ satisfies (\ref{eq:main11}), then $\mu$ is a $\Phi$-Carleson measure with the same constant.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Assume that $\mu$ is a $\Phi$-Carleson measure. Fix $\lambda > 0$.
We start by observing that the set $$E_\lambda:=\{ t\in {\mathbb{R}} : f^{\star}(t) > \lambda \}$$
is open and consequently, is a disjoint union of open intervals $\{I_j\}$ (see \cite[Page 138]{grafakos}).
\vskip .2cm
If $z=x+iy\in E_\lambda$, then $f^{\star}(t) > \lambda$ for any $t$ in the interval $I_{z}:=\{t\in \mathbb{R}:\,|t-x|<y\}$. Hence there is a unique $j_0$ such that the interval $I_z$ is contained in $I_{j_0}$. Moreover, if $Q_{I_{j_{0}}}$ is the Carleson square associated to $I_{j_{0}}$, then $z \in Q_{I_{j_{0}}}$. Thus
\[ \{ z\in {\mathbb{C_{+}}} : |f(z)| > \lambda \} \subset \bigcup_{j}Q_{I_{j}} . \]
It follows that
$$\mu(\{ z\in {\mathbb{C_{+}}} : |f(z)| > \lambda \} ) \leq \sum_{j}\mu(Q_{I_{j}})\leq \sum_{j} \dfrac{C}{\Phi(\frac{1}{|I_{j}|})}\leq C \sum_{j} \tilde{\Phi}(|I_{j}|).$$
As $\tilde{\Phi} \in \mathcal{U}$, we have
\[ \sum_{j} \tilde{\Phi}(|I_{j}|) \leq \tilde{\Phi}( \sum_{j} |I_{j}|) = \tilde{\Phi}(| \bigcup_{j}I_{j} | ) = \tilde{\Phi}(| \{ x\in {\mathbb{R}} : f^{\star}(x) > \lambda \} | ). \] Hence \[ \mu(\{ z\in {\mathbb{C_{+}}} : |f(z)| > \lambda \} ) \leq C \tilde{\Phi}(| \{ x\in {\mathbb{R}} : f^{\star}(x) > \lambda \} |). \]
\vskip .3cm
Let us now assume that $\Phi\in \mathscr{U}$ and satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition and that (\ref{eq:main11}) holds. Let
$I\subset {\mathbb{R}}$ be an interval and $Q_{I}$ its associated Carleson square.
For $\lambda > 0$ given, define $f=4 \lambda \chi_{I}$. Then $f \in {L}^{\Phi}({\mathbb{R}})$. Consider the function \[ u(z)=P_{y}\star f(x) = \int_{{\mathbb{R}}}P_{y}(x-t)f(t)dt ,~ \forall~ z=x+iy \in {\mathbb{C_{+}}}. \]
Then $\forall~ z \in Q_{I} ,~ u(z) > \lambda$. Hence
\[ Q_{I} \subset \{ z\in {\mathbb{C_{+}}} : |u(z)| > \lambda \}.\]
Using Proposition \ref{prop:boundedHLmax}, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mu( Q_{I} ) &\leq& \mu(\{ z\in {\mathbb{C_{+}}} : |u(z)| > \lambda \})
\leq C\tilde{\Phi}(| \{ x\in {\mathbb{R}} : u^{\star}(x) > \lambda \} |) \\\\
&=& C\tilde{\Phi}\left(| \{ x\in {\mathbb{R}} :\Phi(u^{\star}(x)) > \Phi(\lambda )\} |\right)\\
&\leq& C\tilde{\Phi}\left( \frac{1}{\Phi (\lambda)} \int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\Phi(u^{\star}(x))dx \right)\\\\
&\leq& C\tilde{\Phi}\left( \frac{1}{\Phi (\lambda)} \int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\Phi(Mf(x))dx \right)
\leq C\tilde{\Phi}\left( \frac{1}{\Phi (\lambda)} \int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\Phi(f(x))dx \right)\\
&\leq& C\tilde{\Phi}(| I | )
= \dfrac{C}{\Phi(\frac{1}{| I |})}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus $\mu$ is a $\Phi$-Carleson measure. The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
Let us now prove the Carleson embedding for Hardy-Orlicz spaces.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:main1}]
We have from Theorem \ref{thm:sphi} that $(a)\Leftrightarrow (b)$. Hence it is enough to prove that $(a) \Rightarrow (c) \Rightarrow (b) $. We start with the second implication.
\vskip .2cm
$(c) \Rightarrow (b)$:
$\forall z_{0}=x_{0}+iy_{0}\in {\mathbb{C}}_{+}$ , we have from Lemma \ref{lem:testfuncthardyo} that the function
\[ f_{z_{0}}(\omega)=\Phi^{-1}_{1}\left(\dfrac{1}{y_{0}}\right) \dfrac{y^{2}_{0}}{ (\omega-\overline{z_{0}})^{2}} ,~ \forall~ \omega=u+iv \in {\mathbb{C_{+}}} \]
belongs to ${H}^{\Phi_{1}}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$, and $\|f_{z_{0}}\|_{{H}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux} \leq \pi$.
It follows from assertion $(c)$ that there is a constant $K>0$ such that \[ \int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|f_{z_{0}}(z)|}{K\|f_{z_{0}}\|_{{H}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}}\right)d\mu(z) < \infty. \]
This implies that there is $C>0$ independent of $z_0$ such that \[ \int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi_{2}( |f_{z_{0}}(z)|)d\mu(z)) \leq C < \infty. \]
We can then conclude that \[ \sup_{z=x+iy \in {\mathbb{C_{+}}}} \int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi_{2}\left(\Phi^{-1}_{1}\left(\dfrac{1}{y}\right) \dfrac{y^{2}}{ |\omega-\overline{z}|^{2}}\right) d\mu(\omega) \leq C < \infty. \]
\vskip .2cm
$(a) \Rightarrow (c) $:
As $\Phi_{1}, \Phi_{2}\in \mathcal{U}$ and $\dfrac{\Phi_{2}}{\Phi_{1}}$ is nondecreasing, we have from Lemma \ref{lem:reverseprodphi} that the function : \[ \Phi_{3}(t) =\dfrac{1}{\Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}(\frac{1}{t})} , ~ \forall~ t > 0 \]
also belongs to $\mathcal{U}$.
\vskip .1cm
Let $f \in {H}^{\Phi_{1}}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$, $f\not=0$. As $\Phi_{1}\in \mathcal{U}$ and satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition, we have by Theorem \ref{thm:nontangequivdef} that $f^{\star} \in {L}^{\Phi_{1}}({\mathbb{R}})$, and \[ \|f\|_{{H}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}\approx \|f^{\star}\|_{{L}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}. \]
Hence there is a constant $C> 1$ such that $\|f^{\star}\|_{{L}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux} \leq C \|f\|_{{H}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}$. It follows that
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
\int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|f(z)|}{C\|f\|_{{H}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}}\right)d\mu(z)
&\leq& \int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|f(z)|}{\|f^{\star}\|_{{L}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}}\right)d\mu(z) \\\\
&=& \int_{0}^{\infty}\Phi_{2}^{\prime}(\lambda)\mu(\{ z\in {\mathbb{C_{+}}} : |f(z)| > \lambda \|f^{\star}\|_{{L}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}\})d\lambda .
\end{array}$$
As $\mu$ is a $\Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}$-Carleson measure and $\Phi_{3}\in \mathcal{U}$, we have by Lemma \ref{lem:main11} that there is constant $K>0$ such that
\[ \mu(\{ z\in {\mathbb{C_{+}}} : |f(z)| > \lambda \|f^{\star}\|_{{L}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}\} ) \leq K \Phi_{3}(| \{ x\in {\mathbb{R}} : f^{\star}(x) > \lambda \|f^{\star}\|_{{L}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}\} |). \]
Let us put \[ E_{\lambda}= \{ x\in {\mathbb{R}} : f^{\star}(x) > \lambda \|f^{\star}\|_{{L}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}\}. \]
Then
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
|E_{\lambda}|
&=& | \{ x\in {\mathbb{R}} : \Phi_{1}\left(\frac{f^{\star}(x)}{\|f^{\star}\|_{{L}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}} \right ) > \Phi_{1}(\lambda) \} | \\\\
&\leq& \frac{1}{\Phi_{1}(\lambda)}\int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\Phi_{1}\left(\frac{f^{\star}(x)}{\|f^{\star}\|_{{L}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}}\right)dx \leq \dfrac{1}{\Phi_{1}(\lambda)}.
\end{array}$$
As the function $t\mapsto \dfrac{\Phi_{3}(t)}{t}$ is nondecreasing, we deduce that \[ \Phi_{3}(|E_{\lambda}|) \leq \Phi_{1}(\lambda)\Phi_{3}\left(\dfrac{1}{\Phi_{1}(\lambda)}\right)|E_{\lambda}|. \]
Hence
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
\int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|f(z)|}{C\|f\|_{{H}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}}\right)d\mu(z) &\leq& \int_{0}^{\infty}\Phi_{2}^{\prime}(\lambda)\mu(E_\lambda)d\lambda \\\\
&\leq& K \int_{0}^{\infty}\Phi_{2}^{\prime}(\lambda)\Phi_{3}(|E_{\lambda}|)d\lambda \\\\
&\leq& K \int_{0}^{\infty}\Phi_{2}^{\prime}(\lambda)\Phi_{1}(\lambda)\Phi_{3}(\dfrac{1}{\Phi_{1}(\lambda)})|E_{\lambda}|d\lambda \\\\
&=& K \int_{0}^{\infty}\Phi_{2}^{\prime}(\lambda)\Phi_{1}(\lambda)\frac{1}{\Phi_{2}(\lambda)}|E_{\lambda}|d\lambda \\\\
&\approx& \int_{0}^{\infty}\Phi_{1}^{\prime}(\lambda)|E_{\lambda}|d\lambda \\\\
&\approx& \int_{0}^{\infty}\Phi_{1}^{\prime}(\lambda)| \{ x\in {\mathbb{R}} : \frac{f^{\star}(x)}{\|f^{\star}\|_{{L}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}} > \lambda \} |d\lambda \\\\
&=& \int_{{\mathbb{R}}}\Phi_{1}\left(\frac{f^{\star}(x)}{\|f^{\star}\|_{{L}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}}\right)dx \\\\
&\leq& 1 .\\\\
\end{array}$$
The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:main2}}
Let us start with the following key result.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:main21}
Let $\alpha>-1$. Let $\Phi$ be growth function such the function $t\mapsto \tilde{\Phi}(t):=\frac{1}{\Phi\left(\frac 1t\right)}$ belongs to the class $\mathscr{U}$. Assume $\mu$ is a $(\Phi,\alpha)$-Carleson measure. Then for any locally integrable function $f$ on $\mathbb{C}_+$ and any $\lambda>0$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:main21}
\mu\left(\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+: \mathcal{M}_\alpha^d f(z)>\lambda\}\right)\le C\tilde{\Phi}\left(|\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+: \mathcal{M}_\alpha^d f(z)>\lambda\}|_\alpha\right)
\end{equation}
where $C$ is the constant in (\ref{eq:phicarlbergdef}). Moreover, if $\Phi\in \mathscr{U}$ and satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition, then the reverse holds. That is if $\mu$ satisfies (\ref{eq:main21}), then $\mu$ is a $(\Phi,\alpha)$-Carleson measure with a constant equivalent to the one in (\ref{eq:main21}).
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Recall with Lemma \ref{lem:levelsets} that $$E_\lambda:=\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+: \mathcal{M}_\alpha^d f(z)>\lambda\}=\bigcup_jQ_{I_j}$$
where $\{I_j\}_j$ is a family of pairwise disjoint dyadic intervals. It follows easily that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mu(E_\lambda) &=& \sum_j\mu(Q_{I_j})\le C\sum_j\tilde{\Phi}(|I|^{2+\alpha})\\ &\le& C\tilde{\Phi}\left(\sum_j|I|^{2+\alpha}\right)=C\tilde{\Phi}(E_\lambda).
\end{eqnarray*}
For the converse, let $I$ be any interval in $\mathbb{R}$ and for $\lambda>0$, put $f(z)=\lambda\chi_{Q_I}(z)$. Then using the first assertion in Lemma \ref{lem:levelsets} and Proposition \ref{prop:boundedHLmaxberg}, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mu(Q_I) &\le& \mu\left(\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+: \mathcal{M}_\alpha^d f(z)>\lambda\}\right)\\ &\le& C\tilde{\Phi}\left(|\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+: \mathcal{M}_\alpha^d f(z)>\lambda\}|_\alpha\right)\\ &\le& C\tilde{\Phi}\left(\frac{1}{\Phi(\lambda)}\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi\left(\mathcal{M}_\alpha^d f(z)\right)dV_\alpha(z)\right)\\ &\le& C\tilde{\Phi}\left(\frac{1}{\Phi(\lambda)}\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi\left(|f(z)|\right)dV_\alpha(z)\right)\\ &=& C\tilde{\Phi}\left(\frac{1}{\Phi(\lambda)}\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi(\lambda)\chi_{Q_I}(z)dV_\alpha(z)\right)\\ &=& C\tilde{\Phi}(|Q_I|_\alpha)=\frac{C}{\Phi\left(\frac{1}{|I|^{2+\alpha}}\right)}.
\end{eqnarray*}
The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
Next, we prove Theorem \ref{thm:main2}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:main2}]
We note that the equivalence (a)$\Leftrightarrow$(b) is a special case of Theorem \ref{thm:sphi}. That (c)$\Rightarrow$(b) follows by taking as $f$ in (\ref{eq:equivcarlberg3}), the test function given in Lemma \ref{lem:testfunctbergo}. To finish, it suffices to prove that (a)$\Rightarrow$(c).
\vskip .3cm
Let us assume that $\mu$ is a $(\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1},\alpha)$-Carleson measure. Let $C$ be the constant in (\ref{eq:HLineqberg}). We can assume that $C>1$. Put $$\frac 1{\Phi_3(t)}:=\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac 1t\right).$$ For $\lambda>0$, define $$ E_\lambda :=\left\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+:\,\mathcal{M}_\alpha^d\left(\frac{f}{C\|f\|_{A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)(z)>\lambda\right\}.$$
Then using the first assertion in Lemma \ref{lem:levelsets}, and Lemma \ref{lem:main21},
we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
L &:=& \int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi_2\left(\frac{|f(z)|}{C\|f\|_{A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)d\mu(z)\\ &\le& K\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi_2\left(\mathcal{M}_\alpha\left(\frac{f}{C\|f\|_{A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)(z)\right)d\mu(z)\\ &=& \int_0^\infty\Phi_2'(\lambda)\mu\left(\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+:\,\mathcal{M}_\alpha\left(\frac{f}{C\|f\|_{A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)(z)>\lambda\}\right)d\lambda\\
&\le& \int_0^\infty\Phi_2'(\lambda)\mu\left(\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+:\,\mathcal{M}_\alpha^d\left(\frac{f}{C\|f\|_{A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)(z)>\frac{\lambda}{68}\}\right)d\lambda\\ &\le& K\int_0^\infty\Phi_2'(\lambda)\mu\left(E_\lambda\right)d\lambda\\ &\le& K\int_0^\infty\Phi_2'(\lambda)\Phi_3\left(|E_\lambda|_\alpha\right)d\lambda.
\end{eqnarray*}
Now we recall that by Lemma \ref{lem:reverseprodphi}, $\Phi_3$ also belongs to the class $\mathscr{U}$ and so the function $t\mapsto \frac{\Phi_3(t)}{t}$ is increasing. We also observe using Proposition \ref{prop:boundedHLmaxberg} that
\begin{eqnarray*}
|E_\lambda|_\alpha &=& |\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+:\,\mathcal{M}_\alpha^d\left(\frac{f}{C\|f\|_{A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)(z)>\lambda\}|_\alpha\\ &\le& \frac{1}{\Phi_1(\lambda)}\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi_1\left(\mathcal{M}_\alpha^d\left(\frac{f}{C\|f\|_{A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)(z)\right)dV_\alpha\\ &\le& \frac{C}{\Phi_1(\lambda)}\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi_1\left(\frac{|f(z)|}{C\|f\|_{A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)dV_\alpha\\ &\le& \frac{1}{\Phi_1(\lambda)}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus
\begin{eqnarray*}
\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi_2\left(\frac{|f(z)|}{C\|f\|_{A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)d\mu(z) &\le& K\int_0^\infty\Phi_2'(\lambda)\Phi_3\left(|E_\lambda|_\alpha\right)d\lambda\\ &=& K\int_0^\infty\Phi_2'(\lambda)\frac{\Phi_3\left(|E_\lambda|_\alpha\right)}{|E_\lambda|_\alpha}|E_\lambda|_\alpha d\lambda\\ &\le& K\int_0^\infty\Phi_2'(\lambda)\Phi_1(\lambda)\Phi_3\left(\frac{1}{\Phi_1(\lambda)}\right)|E_\lambda|_\alpha d\lambda\\ &=& K\int_0^\infty\Phi_2'(\lambda)\frac{\Phi_1(\lambda)}{\Phi_2(\lambda)}|E_\lambda|_\alpha d\lambda\\ &\le& K\int_0^\infty\Phi_1'(\lambda)|E_\lambda|_\alpha d\lambda\\ &=& K\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi_1\left(\mathcal{M}_\alpha^d\left(\frac{f}{C\|f\|_{A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)(z)\right)dV_\alpha\\ &\le& CK\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi_1\left(\frac{|f(z)|}{C\|f\|_{A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)dV_\alpha\\ &\le& K.
\end{eqnarray*}
The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\section{{Embedding of Hardy-Orlicz spaces and Bergman-Orlicz spaces into Bergman-Orlicz spaces}}
In this part, we are interested in the conditions under which a Hardy-Orlicz space or Bergman-Orlicz space embeds continuously into another Bergman-Orlicz space.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:embed1}]
We start by recalling that if $I\subset {\mathbb{R}}$ is an interval and $Q_{I}$ its associated Carleson square, then
\[ V_{\alpha}(Q_{I})= \frac{1}{1+\alpha}|I|^{\alpha+2}. \]
Now assume that ${H}^{\Phi_{1}}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$ embeds continuously into ${A}^{\Phi_{2}}_{\alpha}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$. That is
there is a constant $C>0$ such that for any $ f \in {H}^{\Phi_{1}}({\mathbb{C_{+}}}), f\not=0$, \[ \int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|f(z)|}{C\|f\|_{{H}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}}\right)dV_{\alpha}(z) \leq 1. \]
As $\Phi_{1}, \Phi_{2}\in \mathcal{U}$, $\Phi_{1}$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition and $\dfrac{\Phi_{2}}{\Phi_{1}}$ is nondecreasing, by Theorem \ref{thm:main1}, $V_{\alpha}$ is a $\Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}$-Carleson measure.
\vskip .1cm
For $t > 0$, let $I\subset {\mathbb{R}}$ be an interval such that $|I|=\dfrac{1}{t}$ and let $Q_{I}$ be the Carleson square associated to $I$. Then as $V_\alpha$ is a $\Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}$-Carleson measure, we obtain in particular that for some $C_1$ independent of $I$,
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
V_{\alpha}(Q_{I}) \leq \dfrac{C_{1}}{\Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}(\frac{1}{|I|})}
&\Leftrightarrow& \frac{1}{1+\alpha}|I|^{\alpha+2} \leq \dfrac{C_{1}}{\Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}(\frac{1}{|I|})} \\\\
&\Rightarrow& \Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}(\frac{1}{|I|}) \leq \tilde{C} \dfrac{1}{|I|^{\alpha+2}}. \\\\
\end{array}$$
That is $$\Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}(t) \leq \tilde{C}t^{\alpha+2}$$ or equivalently, $$\Phi_{1}^{-1}(t) \leq \Phi_{2}^{-1}( \tilde{C}t^{\alpha+2}).$$
\vskip .2cm
Conversely,
assume that there exists a constant $ C>0$ such that for any $ t > 0$ , $$\Phi_{1}^{-1}(t) \leq \Phi_{2}^{-1}(Ct^{2+\alpha}). $$
Let $I\subset {\mathbb{R}}$ be an interval and $Q_{I}$ its associted Carleson square. Then
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
\Phi_{1}^{-1}\left( \frac{1}{|I|} \right) \leq \Phi_{2}^{-1}\left(C\frac{1}{|I|^{\alpha+2}} \right) &\Leftrightarrow& \Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{|I|}\right) \leq C\dfrac{1}{|I|^{\alpha+2}} \\\\
&\Leftrightarrow& \Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{|I|}\right) \leq C\dfrac{1}{(\alpha+1)V_{\alpha}(Q_{I})} \\\\
&\Leftrightarrow& V_{\alpha}(Q_{I}) \leq \dfrac{C_{1}}{\Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{|I|}\right)}. \\
\end{array}$$
That is $V_{\alpha}$ is a $\Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}$-Carleson measure. Thus by Theorem \ref{thm:main1}, there exists a constant $K>0$ such for any $\ f \in {H}^{\Phi_{1}}({\mathbb{C_{+}}}),~ f\not=0$, \[ \int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|f(z)|}{K\|f\|_{{H}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}}\right)dV_{\alpha}(z) < \infty, \]
that is ${H}^{\Phi_{1}}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$ embeds continuously into ${A}^{\Phi_{2}}_{\alpha}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$. The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:embed2}]
This essentially follows as above. We leave it to the interested reader.
\end{proof}
\section{Pointwise multipliers characterizations}
We start with the following lemma.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:main31}
Let $\Phi_1,\Phi_2\in {\mathscr U}$. Assume that $\frac{\Phi_2}{\Phi_1}$ is non-decreasing. Let $\alpha>-1$ and define for $t\in (0,\infty)$, the function
$$\omega(t)=\frac{\Phi_2^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{t^{2+\alpha}}\right)}{\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{t}\right)}.$$
Then the following assertions hold.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] If $\Phi_1$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition, and $\omega$ is equivalent to $1$, then $$\mathcal{M}\left(H^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+),A_\alpha^{\Phi_2}(\mathbb{C}_+)\right)=H^\infty(\mathbb{C}_+).$$
\item[(ii)] If $\omega$ is nondecreasing $\lim_{t\rightarrow 0}\omega(t)=0$, then $$\mathcal{M}\left(H^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+),A_\alpha^{\Phi_2}(\mathbb{C}_+)\right)=\{0\}.$$
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
(i) Assume that $\omega$ is equivalent to $1$. Then for every
$t >0$,
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
\omega(\frac{1}{t}) \approx 1 &\Rightarrow& \Phi_{1}^{-1}(t) \approx \Phi_{2}^{-1}(t^{2+\alpha}).
\end{array}$$
This means in particular that there exists a constant $C>0$ such that for every $t>0$, $$\Phi_{1}^{-1}(t) \leq \Phi_{2}^{-1}(Ct^{2+\alpha}).$$
As $\Phi_{1}, \Phi_{2}\in \mathcal{U}$, $\Phi_{1}$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition and $\dfrac{\Phi_{2}}{\Phi_{1}}$ nondecreasing, we have by Theorem \ref{thm:embed1}, that ${H}^{\Phi_{1}}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$ embeds continuously into ${A}^{\Phi_{2}}_{\alpha}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$. Thus there is a constant $C>0$ such that $\forall~ f \in {H}^{\Phi_{1}}({\mathbb{C_{+}}}), ~f\not=0$, \begin{equation}\label{eq:hardbergembpro} \int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|f(z)|}{C\|f\|_{{H}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}}\right)dV_{\alpha}(z) \leq 1.\end{equation}
Let us now prove that $\mathcal{M}( {H}^{\Phi_{1}}({\mathbb{C_{+}}}) , {A}^{\Phi_{2}}_{\alpha}({\mathbb{C_{+}}}) ) = {H}^{\infty}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$. \\
Let $g \in {H}^{\infty}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$ and let $ f \in {H}^{\Phi_{1}}({\mathbb{C_{+}}}),~ f\not=0$. If $g=0$, then there is nothing to prove. Let us then assume that $g\not=0$. Using (\ref{eq:hardbergembpro}), we obtain
\[ \int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|g(z)f(z)|}{C\|g\|_{\infty}\|f\|_{{H}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}}\right)dV_{\alpha}(z)\leq \int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|f(z)|}{C\|f\|_{{H}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}}\right)dV_{\alpha}(z) \leq 1 . \]
Thus \[ \|fg\|_{\Phi_{2},\alpha }^{lux} \leq C\|g\|_{\infty}\|f\|_{{H}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux} \leq K\|f\|_{{H}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}. \]
It follows that $g\in \mathcal{M}( {H}^{\Phi_{1}}({\mathbb{C_{+}}}) , {A}^{\Phi_{2}}_{\alpha}({\mathbb{C_{+}}}) )$ whenever $g\in {H}^{\infty}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$.
\vskip .2cm
Let us now prove the converse. Let $g \in \mathcal{M}( {H}^{\Phi_{1}}({\mathbb{C_{+}}}) , {A}^{\Phi_{2}}_{\alpha}({\mathbb{C_{+}}}) )$. Then there is a constant $C>0$ such that for any $f \in {H}^{\Phi_{1}}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$,
\[ \|fg\|_{\Phi_{2},\alpha}^{lux} \leq C\|f\|_{{H}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}. \] \\
It follows from this and Lemma \ref{lem:pointwiseberg} that there is a constant $K>0$ such that for any $z=x+iy\in \mathbb{C}_+$, \begin{equation}\label{eq:pointwisetotest} | f(z)g(z)| \leq K\Phi_{2}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{y^{2+\alpha}} \right) \|fg\|_{\Phi_{2},\alpha}^{lux} \leq KC\Phi_{2}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{y^{2+\alpha}} \right)\|f\|_{{H}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux}. \end{equation}
Fix $z_0=x_0+iy_0\in \mathbb{C}_+$ and consider the function $f_{z_{0}}$ defined \[ f_{z_o}(\omega)= \Phi^{-1}_{1}\left(\dfrac{1}{y_{0}}\right) \dfrac{y^{2}_{0}}{ (\omega-\overline{z_{0}})^{2}} ,~ \forall~ \omega \in {\mathbb{C_{+}}}. \]
We recall with Lemma \ref{lem:testfuncthardyo} that $f_{z_0}\in {H}^{\Phi_{1}}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$ with $\|f_{z_{0}}\|_{{H}^{\Phi_{1}}}^{lux} \leq \pi$. Replacing $f$ by $f_{z_0}$ in (\ref{eq:pointwisetotest}), we obtain that for any $z=x+iy\in \mathbb{C}_+$,
$$\Phi^{-1}_{1}\left(\dfrac{1}{y_{0}}\right) \dfrac{y^{2}_{0}}{ |z-\overline{z_{0}}|^{2}}|g(z)|\leq C\Phi_{2}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{y^{2+\alpha}}\right )\pi$$
and the constant does not depend on $z$. As this happens for any $z=x+iy\in \mathbb{C}_+$, taking in particular $z=z_0$, we obtain
\[ |g(z_{0})|\leq 4\pi C\frac{\Phi_{2}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{y_{0}^{2+\alpha}}\right)}{\Phi^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{y_{0}}\right)}= 4\pi C\omega(y_{0})\approx 4\pi C. \]
Thus \[ |g(z)|\leq 4\pi C \,\,\,\textrm{for any}\,\,\,z=x+iy\in \mathbb{C}_+. \]
Hence $g \in {H}^{\infty}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$.
\vskip .3cm
(ii) Suppose that the function $\omega$ is nondecreasing and $\lim_{t \to 0}\omega(t)=0$.
Let $g$ be a multiplier from $ {H}^{\Phi_{1}}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$ to ${A}^{\Phi_{2}}_{\alpha}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$. We obtain as above that there is a constant $C>0$ such that for any $z=x+iy\in {\mathbb{C_{+}}}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pointwisegene} |g(z)|\leq 4\pi C\omega(y_). \end{equation}
Letting $y\rightarrow 0$, we obtain from our hypothesis on $\omega$ that the right hand side of (\ref{eq:pointwisegene}) goes to $0$. Thus $g(z)=0$ for all $z\in \mathbb{C}_+$.
Hence $$\mathcal{M}( {H}^{\Phi_{1}}({\mathbb{C_{+}}}) , {A}^{\Phi_{2}}_{\alpha}({\mathbb{C_{+}}}) ) = \{ 0 \}.$$ The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
We next prove the following.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:main32}
Let $\Phi_1\in \mathscr U$ and $\Phi_2\in \tilde{\mathscr U}$. Assume that $\Phi_1$ and $\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}$ satisfy the $\nabla_2$-condtion and that $\frac{\Phi_2}{\Phi_1}$ is non-decreasing. Let $\alpha>-1$ and define for $t\in (0,\infty)$, the function
$$\omega(t)=\frac{\Phi_2^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{t^{2+\alpha}}\right)}{\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{t}\right)}.$$
If $\omega$ is non-increasing on $(0,\infty)$, then $$\mathcal{M}\left(H^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+),A_\alpha^{\Phi_2}(\mathbb{C}_+)\right)=H_\omega^\infty(\mathbb{C}_+).$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
That if $g\in \mathcal{M}\left(H^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+),A_\alpha^{\Phi_2}(\mathbb{C}_+)\right)$, then $g\in H_\omega^\infty(\mathbb{C}_+)$, follows from (\ref{eq:pointwisegene}). Let us then prove the converse.
\vskip .2cm
Let $K=\max\{1,2C_1C_2,2C_1C_3\}$ where $C_1$, $C_2$ and $C_3$ are respectively the constants in conditions (\ref{eq:uppertypecondmulti1}), (\ref{eq:uppertypecondmulti2}) and (\ref{eq:uppertypecondmulti3}) in the definition of the class $\tilde{\mathscr U}$.
Using the property (\ref{eq:uppertypecondmulti1}), we first obtain for $C>0$ a constant whose existence has to be proved,
\begin{eqnarray*}
L &:=& \int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi_2\left(\frac{|g(z)||f(z)|}{KC\|g\|_{H_\omega^\infty}\|f\|_{H^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)dV_\alpha(z)\\ &\leq& \int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi_2\left(\frac{\Phi_2^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\alpha}}\right)}{\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{\Im z}\right)}\frac{|f(z)|}{KC\|f\|_{H^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)dV_\alpha(z)\\ &\leq& C_1\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi_2\left(\frac{\Phi_2^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\alpha}}\right)}{\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{\Im z}\right)}\right)\Phi_2\left(\frac{|f(z)|}{KC\|f\|_{H^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)dV_\alpha(z)\\ &=& L_1+L_2
\end{eqnarray*}
where
$$L_1:=C_1\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi_2\left(\frac{\Phi_2^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\alpha}}\right)}{\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{\Im z}\right)}\right)\Phi_2\left(\frac{|f(z)|}{KC\|f\|_{H^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)\chi_{\{\Im z>1\}}(z)dV_\alpha(z)$$
and
$$L_2:=C_1\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi_2\left(\frac{\Phi_2^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\alpha}}\right)}{\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{\Im z}\right)}\right)\Phi_2\left(\frac{|f(z)|}{KC\|f\|_{H^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)\chi_{\{\Im z\le 1\}}(z)dV_\alpha(z).$$
We observe that as the function $\omega$ is nonincreasing, we have that $$\Phi_2^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{t^{2+\alpha}}\right)\le \Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{t}\right)\,\,\,\textrm{for any}\,\,\,t\ge 1.$$
Hence using (\ref{eq:uppertypecondmulti3}) and the definition of the constant $K$, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*} L_1 &\leq& C_1C_3\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\alpha}\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{\Im z}\right)}\Phi_2\left(\frac{|f(z)|}{KC\|f\|_{H^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)dV_\alpha(z)\\ &\leq& \frac{1}{2}\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\alpha}\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{\Im z}\right)}\Phi_2\left(\frac{|f(z)|}{C\|f\|_{H^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)dV_\alpha(z).
\end{eqnarray*}
Now let $q\geq 1$ be the upper-type of $\Phi_2$. Using (\ref{eq:uppertypecondmulti2}), we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*} L_2 &\leq& C_1C_3\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\alpha}\left(\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{\Im z}\right)\right)^q}\Phi_2\left(\frac{|f(z)|}{KC\|f\|_{H^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)\chi_{\{\Im z\le 1\}}(z)dV_\alpha(z)\\ &\leq& \frac{1}{2}\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\alpha}\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{\Im z}\right)}\Phi_2\left(\frac{|f(z)|}{C\|f\|_{H^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)dV_\alpha(z).
\end{eqnarray*}
It follows that
$$L\le \int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\alpha}\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{\Im z}\right)}\Phi_2\left(\frac{|f(z)|}{C\|f\|_{H^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}}\right)dV_\alpha(z).$$
Hence to conclude, we only have to prove the existence of a constant $C>0$ such that
$$\int_{\mathbb{C}_+}\Phi_2\left(\frac{|f(z)|}{C\|f\|_{\Phi_1,\alpha}^{lux}}\right)d\mu(z)\leq 1$$ where $$d\mu(x+iy)=\frac{dV(x+iy)}{y^2\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{y}\right)}.$$ By Theorem \ref{thm:main2}, it is enough to prove that $\mu$ is a $\Phi_2\circ \Phi_1^{-1}$-Carleson measure.
\vskip .2cm
Let $I\subset \mathbb{R}$ be a fixed interval. Let $s$ be the lower indice of $\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}$. From the comments at the beginning of the Subsection 3.1, we have that $s>1$. Using that the function $t\mapsto \frac{\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}(t)}{t^s}$ is increasing, we obtain that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mu(Q_I) &=& \int_I\int_0^{|I|}\frac{dxdy}{y^2\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{y}\right)}\\ &=& |I|\sum_{j=0}^\infty\int_{2^{-j-1}|I|}^{2^{-j}|I|}\frac{dy}{y^2\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{y}\right)}\\ &\le& |I|\sum_{j=0}^\infty\frac{1}{(2^{-j-1}|I|)^2\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{2^{-j}|I|}\right)}2^{-j}|I|\\ &\le& \frac{4}{\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{|I|}\right)}\sum_{j=0}^\infty 2^{-j(s-1)}\\ &\lesssim& \frac{1}{\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{|I|}\right)}.
\end{eqnarray*}
The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\begin{xrem}
For the measure $d\mu(x+iy)=\frac{dV(x+iy)}{y^2\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{y}\right)}$ to be a $\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}$-Carleson measure, that $\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-Condition is relevant in our proof. Indeed, if we take $\Phi_1(t)=t^2$ and $\Phi_2(t)=t^2\ln(C+t)$ with $C>0$ large enough, then these two functions are in $\mathscr U$ and obviously, $\Phi_1$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition while $\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}(t)=t\ln(C+t^{\frac 12})$ does not, moreover, we have that $\mu$ is not a $\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}$-Carleson measure in this case. Indeed, we have for any finite interval $I$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mu(Q_I) &=& \int_I\int_0^{|I|}\frac{dxdy}{y\ln\left(C+\frac{1}{y^{\frac 12}}\right)}\\ &=& 2|I|\int_{\frac{1}{\sqrt{|I|}}}^\infty \frac{ds}{s\ln(C+s)}\\ &\ge& |I|\int_{\frac{1}{\sqrt{|I|}}}^\infty \frac{ds}{(C+s)\ln(C+s)}\\ &=& |I|\lim_{R\rightarrow \infty}\left[\ln\ln(C+R)-\ln\ln\left(C+\frac{1}{\sqrt{|I|}}\right)\right]\\ &=&\infty.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{xrem}
The proof of the following lemma is obtained as for Lemma \ref{lem:main31}.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:main41}
Let $\Phi_1,\Phi_2\in \mathscr U$. Assume that $\frac{\Phi_2}{\Phi_1}$ is non-decreasing. Let $\alpha, \beta>-1$ and define for $t\in (0,\infty)$, the function
$$\omega(t)=\frac{\Phi_2^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{t^{2+\beta}}\right)}{\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{t^{2+\alpha}}\right)}.$$
Then the following assertions hold.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] If $\Phi_1$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition, and $\omega$ is equivalent to $1$, then $$\mathcal{M}\left(A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+),A_\beta^{\Phi_2}(\mathbb{C}_+)\right)=H^\infty(\mathbb{C}_+).$$
\item[(ii)] If $\omega$ is nondecreasing and $\lim_{t\rightarrow 0}\omega(t)=0$, then $$\mathcal{M}\left(A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+),A_\beta^{\Phi_2}(\mathbb{C}_+)\right)=\{0\}.$$
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
Let us prove the following.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:main42}
Let $\Phi_1\in \mathscr U$ and $\Phi_2\in \tilde{\mathscr U}$. Assume that $\Phi_1$ and $\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}$ satisfy the $\nabla_2$-condition, and $\frac{\Phi_2}{\Phi_1}$ is non-decreasing. Let $\alpha, \beta>-1$ and define for $t\in (0,\infty)$, the function
$$\omega(t)=\frac{\Phi_2^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{t^{2+\beta}}\right)}{\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{t^{2+\alpha}}\right)}.$$
If $\omega$ is non-increasing on $(0,\infty)$, then $$\mathcal{M}\left(A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+),A_\beta^{\Phi_2}(\mathbb{C}_+)\right)=H_\omega^\infty(\mathbb{C}_+).$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $g \in \mathcal{M}( {A}^{\Phi_{1}}_{\alpha}({\mathbb{C_{+}}}), {A}^{\Phi_{2}}_{\beta}({\mathbb{C_{+}}}) )$. Then using Lemma \ref{lem:pointwiseberg}, and the test function given in Lemma \ref{lem:testfunctbergo}, we obtain as in (\ref{eq:pointwisegene}) that there is a constant $C>0$ such that for any $z=x+iy \in {\mathbb{C_{+}}}$,
\[ |g(z)|\leq C\dfrac{\Phi_{2}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{y^{2+\beta}}\right)}{\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{y^{2+\alpha}}\right)}= C\omega(y). \]
Hence \[ \dfrac{|g(z)|}{\omega(y)} \leq C<\infty . \]
Thus $g \in {H}^{\infty}_{\omega}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$.
\vskip .2cm
For the converse, we start by observing that as in the proof of Lemma \ref{lem:main32}, one has that the measure $$ d\mu(x+iy)=\dfrac{dV(x+iy)}{y^{2}\Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}(\frac{1}{y^{2+\alpha}})}$$
is a $(\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1},\alpha)$-Carleson measure. Hence by Theorem \ref{thm:main2}, the is a constant $C>0$ such that for any $f \in {A}^{\Phi_{1}}_{\alpha}({\mathbb{C_{+}}}), f\not=0$,
$$\int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|f(z)|}{C\|f\|_{\Phi_{1},\alpha} ^{lux}}\right)d\mu(z)\le 1.$$
Let $f \in {A}^{\Phi_{1}}_{\alpha}({\mathbb{C_{+}}}), f\not=0$ , and define
\[ L_{1}=C_{1}\int_{{\mathbb{C_{+}}}}\Phi_{2}\left(\frac{\Phi_{2}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\beta}}\right)}{\Phi_{1}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\alpha}}\right)}\right)\Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|f(z)|}{KC\|f\|_{\Phi_{1},\alpha} ^{lux}}\right)\chi_{\{\Im z > 1\}}(z) dV_{\beta}(z) \]
and
\[ L_{2}=C_{1}\int_{{\mathbb{C_{+}}}}\Phi_{2}\left(\frac{\Phi_{2}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\beta}}\right)}{\Phi_{1}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\alpha}}\right)}\right)\Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|f(z)|}{KC\|f\|_{\Phi_{1},\alpha} ^{lux}}\right)\chi_{\{\Im z \leq 1\}}(z) dV_{\beta}(z)\]
where $K=\max\{1, 2C_{1}C_{3} , 2C_{1}C_{2}C_{4} \}$ with $C_{1} , C_{2}, C_{3}$ and $C_{4}$ the constants $(13) , (14), (15)\,\,\textrm{and}\,\,(17)$ respectively.
\vskip .1cm
As $\omega$ is nonincreasing on $(0, \infty)$, we have that $\forall ~t\geq 1$, \[ \Phi_{2}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{t^{2+\beta}}\right) \leq \Phi_{1}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{t^{2+\alpha}}\right) \leq 1.\]
Hence using (15), we obtain
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
L_{1} &\leq& C_{1}C_{3}\int_{{\mathbb{C_{+}}}}\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\beta}\Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\alpha}}\right)}\times\\ && \Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|f(z)|}{KC\|f\|_{\Phi_{1},\alpha} ^{lux}}\right)\chi_{\{\Im z > 1\}}(z) dV_{\beta}(z) \\\\
&\leq& C_{1}C_{3}\int_{{\mathbb{C_{+}}}}\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\beta}\Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\alpha}}\right)}\Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|f(z)|}{KC\|f\|_{\Phi_{1},\alpha} ^{lux}}\right)dV_{\beta}(z) \\\\
&\leq& \frac{1}{2}\int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|f(z)|}{C\|f\|_{\Phi_{1},\alpha} ^{lux}}\right)d\mu(z) \\\\
&\leq& \frac{1}{2}.
\end{array}$$
Also, we have that ~ $\forall ~t \leq 1$, \[ \Phi_{1}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{t^{2+\alpha}}\right) \geq 1 ~~~ \textrm{and}~~~ \Phi_{2}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{t^{2+\beta}}\right) \geq 1. \]
Thus if $q\geq 1$ is the upper-type of $\Phi_{2}$, we obtain using (14) that
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
L_{2}
&\leq& C_{1}C_{2}\int_{{\mathbb{C_{+}}}}\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\beta}\left(\Phi_{1}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\alpha}}\right)\right)^{q}}\times\\ & & \Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|f(z)|}{KC\|f\|_{\Phi_{1},\alpha} ^{lux}}\right)\chi_{\{\Im z \leq 1\}}(z) dV_{\beta}(z) \\\\
&\leq& C_{1}C_{2}C_{4}\int_{{\mathbb{C_{+}}}}\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\beta}\Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\alpha}}\right)}\times\\ & & \Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|f(z)|}{KC\|f\|_{\Phi_{1},\alpha} ^{lux}}\right)\chi_{\{\Im z \le 1\}}(z) dV_{\beta}(z) \\\\
&\leq& C_{1}C_{2}C_{4}\int_{{\mathbb{C_{+}}}}\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\beta}\Phi_{2} \circ \Phi_{1}^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\alpha}}\right)}\Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|f(z)|}{KC\|f\|_{\Phi_{1},\alpha} ^{lux}}\right)dV_{\beta}(z) \\\\
&\leq& \frac{1}{2}\int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|f(z)|}{C\|f\|_{\Phi_{1},\alpha} ^{lux}}\right)d\mu(z) \\\\
&\leq& \frac{1}{2}.
\end{array}$$
Now suppose that $g \in {H}^{\infty}_{\omega}({\mathbb{C_{+}}})$. Let us prove that $g \in \mathcal{M}( {A}^{\Phi_{1}}_{\alpha}({\mathbb{C_{+}}}), {A}^{\Phi_{2}}_{\beta}({\mathbb{C_{+}}}) )$. If $g=0$, then there is nothing to prove, so let us assume that $g\neq 0$.
$\forall~ f \in A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+),~ f\not=0$, using the above observations and (13), we obtain
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
L &:=& \int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|g(z)f(z)|}{KC\|g\|_{\omega}^{\infty}\|f\|_{\Phi_{1},\alpha} ^{lux}}\right)dV_{\beta}(z)\\
&\leq &\int_{{\mathbb{C}}_{+}}\Phi_{2}\left(\frac{\Phi_{2}^{-1}(\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\beta}})}{\Phi_{1}^{-1}(\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\alpha}})} \frac{|f(z)|}{KC\|f\|_{\Phi_{1},\alpha} ^{lux}}\right)dV_{\beta}(z) \\\\
&\leq & C_{1}\int_{{\mathbb{C_{+}}}}\Phi_{2}\left(\frac{\Phi_{2}^{-1}(\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\beta}})}{\Phi_{1}^{-1}(\frac{1}{(\Im z)^{2+\alpha}})}\right)\Phi_{2}\left( \dfrac{|f(z)|}{KC\|f\|_{\Phi_{1},\alpha} ^{lux}}\right) dV_{\beta}(z) \\\\
&\leq& L_{1} +L_{2} \\\\
&\leq& 1.
\end{array}$$
Thus $g \in \mathcal{M}( {A}^{\Phi_{1}}_{\alpha}({\mathbb{C_{+}}}), {A}^{\Phi_{2}}_{\beta}({\mathbb{C_{+}}}) )$ and the proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\section{Further results and concluding remarks}
In this paper, we have presented Carleson embeddings for both Hardy-Orlicz spaces and Bergman-Orlicz spaces, extending the corresponding results for power functions. We have seen with our examples of applications, how useful these embeddings are to understand some other questions of complex analysis and harmonic analysis.
\vskip .1cm
It is possible to obtain weak versions of the above Carleson embeddings using essentially the ideas developed in this paper. Let us start this further discussion by recall that for $\Phi$ a growth function, the weak Orlicz space $L^{\Phi,\infty}(\mathbb{C}_+,\mu)$ consists of all functions $f$ such that $$\|f\|_{\Phi,\infty}:=\sup_{\lambda>0}\Phi(\lambda)\mu\left(\left\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+:\,|f(z)|>\lambda \right\}\right)<\infty.$$
The characterization of the positive measures $\mu$ such that $H^{1}(\mathbb{C}_+)$ embeds continuously into $L^{1,\infty}(\mathbb{C}_+,\mu)$ is also due to L. Carleson (see \cite{carleson2}). The following is an extension of his result.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:Hardyweak}
Let $\Phi_1$ and $\Phi_2$ be two $\mathcal{C}^1$ convex growth functions with $\Phi_2\in\mathscr{U}$. Assume that $\Phi_1$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition and that $\frac{\Phi_2}{\Phi_1}$ is nondecreasing. Let $\mu$ be a positive Borel measure on $\mathbb{C}_+$. Then the following assertions are equivalent.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)] There exists a constant $C_1>0$ such that for any interval $I\subset \mathbb{R}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:weakhardy1}
\mu(Q_I)\le \frac{C_1}{\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{|I|}\right)}.
\end{equation}
\item[(b)] There exists a constant $C_2>0$ such that for any $f\in H^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+)$, $f\neq 0$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:weakhardy2}
\sup_{\lambda>0}\Phi_2(\lambda)\mu\left(\left\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+:\,|f(z)|>C_2\lambda\|f^\star\|_{\Phi_1}^{lux} \right\}\right)\le 1.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Assume that (\ref{eq:weakhardy1}) holds. Then by Lemma \ref{lem:main11} we have that for $f\in H^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+)$, $f\neq 0$, and any $\lambda>0$,
$$\mu\left(\left\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+:\,\frac{|f(z)|}{K\|f^\star\|_{\Phi_1}^{lux}}>\lambda \right\}\right)\le C_1\Phi_3\left(\left|\left\{ x\in {\mathbb{R}} : \frac{f^{\star}(x)}{K\|f^\star\|_{\Phi_1}^{lux}} > \lambda \right\}\right|\right)$$
where $\Phi_3(t)=\frac{1}{\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac 1t\right)}$, and $C_1$ is the constant in (\ref{eq:weakhardy1}). We can assume that $C_1>1$, and we define $$E_\lambda:=\left\{ x\in {\mathbb{R}} : \frac{f^{\star}(x)}{\|f^\star\|_{\Phi_1}^{lux}} > \lambda \right\}.$$ It follows that
\begin{eqnarray*}
S &:=& \Phi_2(\lambda)\mu\left(\left\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+:\,\frac{|f(z)|}{C_1\|f^\star\|_{\Phi_1}^{lux}}>\lambda \right\}\right)\\ &\le& C_1\Phi_2(\lambda)\Phi_3\left(\left|\left\{ x\in {\mathbb{R}} : \frac{f^{\star}(x)}{C_1\|f^\star\|_{\Phi_1}^{lux}} > \lambda \right\}\right|\right)\\ &\le& \Phi_2(\lambda)\frac{\Phi_3\left(|E_\lambda|\right)}{|E_\lambda|}|E_\lambda|\\ &\le& \Phi_2(\lambda)\frac{\Phi_3\left(\frac{1}{\Phi_1(\lambda)}\right)}{\frac{1}{\Phi_1(\lambda)}}|E_\lambda|\\ &\le& \Phi_1(\lambda)|E_\lambda|\\ &\le& \int_{\mathbb{R}}\Phi_1\left(\frac{f^{\star}(x)}{\|f^\star\|_{\Phi_1}^{lux}}\right)dx\le 1.
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus (\ref{eq:weakhardy2}) holds.
\vskip .3cm
Let us now assume that (\ref{eq:weakhardy2}) holds. Let
$I\subset {\mathbb{R}}$ be a finite interval and $Q_{I}$ its associated Carleson square. We assume that $Q_I$ is centered at $z_0=x_0+iy_0\in \mathbb{C}_+$. Then by Lemma \ref{lem:testfuncthardyo}, the function $f_0(w):=\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac 1{y_0}\right)\frac{y^2}{(w-\bar{z}_0)^2}$ belongs to $H^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+)$ and $\|f\|_{H^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}\le \pi$. Also, we have seen that
$\forall~ w \in Q_{I} ,~ |f_0(w)| > \frac{1}{10}\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{|I|}\right) $. Hence
\[ Q_{I} \subset \left\{ z\in {\mathbb{C_{+}}} : |f_0(z)| > \frac{1}{10}\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{|I|}\right) \right\}.\]
Then putting $$E_I:=\left\{ w\in {\mathbb{C_{+}}} : \frac{|f_0(w)|}{C_2\|f_0\|_{H^{\Phi_1}}^{lux}} > \frac{1}{10\pi C_2}\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{|I|}\right) \right\},$$
it follows from our hypothesis that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\Phi_2\left(\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{|I|}\right)\right)\mu( Q_{I} )&\le& C\Phi_2\left(\frac{1}{10\pi C_2}\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{|I|}\right)\right)\mu( Q_{I} )\\ &\leq& C\Phi_2\left(\frac{1}{10\pi C_2}\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{|I|}\right)\right)\mu\left(E_I\right)\\
&\leq& C.
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus $\mu$ is a $\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}$-Carleson measure. The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\vskip .1cm
Similarly, we have the following weak-Carleson embedding result for weighted Bergman-Orlicz spaces.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:Bergweak}
Let $\Phi_1$ and $\Phi_2$ be two growth functions in $\mathscr{U}$. Assume that $\Phi_1$ satisfies the $\nabla_2$-condition and that $\frac{\Phi_2}{\Phi_1}$ is nondecreasing. Let $\mu$ be a positive Borel measure on $\mathbb{C}_+$ and let $\alpha>-1$. Then the following assertions are equivalent.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)] There exists a constant $C_1>0$ such that for any interval $I\subset \mathbb{R}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bergweak1}
\mu(Q_I)\le \frac{C_1}{\Phi_2\circ\Phi_1^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{|I|^{2+\alpha}}\right)}.
\end{equation}
\item[(b)] There exists a constant $C_2>0$ such that for any $f\in A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}(\mathbb{C}_+)$, $f\neq 0$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bergweak2}
\sup_{\lambda>0}\Phi_2(\lambda)\mu\left(\left\{z\in \mathbb{C}_+:\,|f(z)|>C_2\lambda\|f\|_{\Phi_1,\alpha}^{lux} \right\}\right)\le 1.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
\end{thm}
Finally, we remark that in the case of Bergman-Orlicz spaces, one could have also considered a characterization of their Carleson measures in terms of Bergman metric balls. The case of the continuous embeddings $$H^{\Phi_1},A_\alpha^{\Phi_1}\hookrightarrow L^{\Phi_2}(d\mu)$$ for $\frac{\Phi_2}{\Phi_1}$ nonincreasing is still open and is expected to be particularly hard for the case of Hardy-Orlicz spaces.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
Supersymmetry (SUSY) remains a potent and powerful model for physics Beyond the Standard Model, despite the fact that there is insufficiency of signals from the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) {\color{blue}\cite{1}}. SUSY solves the naturalness problem i.e, the big hierarchy problem {\color{blue}\cite{2}}, introduces a stable dark matter candidate, neutralino {\color{blue}\cite{3}} and explains neutrino masses when supplemented with right-handed (RH) Majorana neutrinos {\color{blue}\cite{4}}. Hitherto, the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) {\color{blue}\cite{5}} has been confronted and yet it has sustained itself into following experimental tests: 1. Gauge coupling unification of three fundamental forces {\color{blue}\cite{6}}, 2. Discovery of the top quark within 100-200 GeV for a successful radiative electroweak symmetry breaking (REWSB) {\color{blue}\cite{7}}, 3. discovery of the Higgs boson $m_{h} \sim $ 125 GeV, within the narrow range of MSSM allowed values {\color{blue}\cite{8}}.
\par
Neutrino oscillations, proved by experiments, requires one to go to physics beyond standard model. These neutrino oscillations, and hence mixings, are also surmised to induce lepton flavor violations in the charged leptonic sector. Theoretically, such cLFV processes could be instigated in different theories with BSM particles such as SUSY GUT {\color{blue}\cite{Sidori2007}}, SUSY See Saw {\color{blue}\cite{S.Antusch2006}}-{\color{blue}\cite{A.Masiero2004}} , LHC Higgs Model {\color{blue}\cite{M.Blank2010}} and models with extra dimension {\color{blue}\cite{K.Agashe2006}}. In this work cLFV decay $ \mu \rightarrow e \gamma $, getting contributions from neutrino oscillations and mixings is considered.
\par
The current sensitivity of precision charged lepton flavor violation experiments, cLFV measurements already explores certain regions of SUSY parameter space, mostly the constrained MSSM (cMSSM or mSUGRA) {\color{blue}\cite{16}} with light scalar masses and right-handed neutrinos (RHN). The MEG Collaboration announced an upper bound for the branching fraction of the process $ \mu \rightarrow e \gamma $: BR$(\mu \rightarrow e \gamma )< 4.2 \times 10^{-13} $ at 90 percent C.L. {\color{blue}\cite{17}}. The expected
sensitivity of the MEG-II experiment is 6 $ \times 10^{-14}$ for three years of data taking {\color{blue}\cite{44}} .
\par
Nevertheless precision experiments cannot be speculated of as a replacement for LHC, they can be compatible. Constructive results for sparticle searches at the LHC in company with LFV search results would constrain many BSM theories that are presently consistent with observations.
\par
Numerous processes implicating lepton flavor violating decays could be feasible such as $\mu \rightarrow e $, $ \tau \rightarrow \mu $ or $ \tau \rightarrow e $ transitions. Enhancement for $ \mu \rightarrow e \gamma $ decay at next phase of MEG experiment is expected to reach BR ( $ \mu \rightarrow e + \gamma $) $ \leq $ 6$\times 10^{-14}$ {\color{blue}\cite{Adam}},{\color{blue}\cite{Baldini}}. In this work, the decay $ \mu \rightarrow e + \gamma $ is considered, as this is top foremostly constrained by experiments. Such experimental hunt, and abstract studies on lepton flavor violation (LFV) can help us compel the new physics or BSM theories, that could be contemporary just above the electroweak scale, or within the jurisdiction of next run of LHC. It is significant, that in the next run of LHC, i.e High Luminosity LHC (HE/HL-LHC), the center of mass energies are conventional to go to 27 TeV {\color{blue}\cite{Christoph}}. The flavor physics programme at the HL-LHC comprises many different probes- the weak decays of $ \mu $, $ \tau $ leptons and the Higgs boson in which the experiments can search for signs of new physics. It will be exciting to see the full potential of the HE-LHC to serve as a facility for precision new physics for decades to come.
\par
It is needless to say that SUSY GUTs gives intensification to tiny neutrino masses via see saw mechanisms in which noteworthy benefaction to lepton flavor violation could come from flavor violations amidst heavy sleptons. The outcome of lepton flavor violation could become outstanding due to radiative corrections to Dirac Neutrino Yukawa Couplings (DNY), which might become apparent if the see saw scale is slightly lower than the GUT scale {\color{blue}\cite{L.Cabbibi2012}}, {\color{blue}\cite{I.H.Lee}}-{\color{blue}\cite{E. Arganda}}. Alike studies in contrastive see saw mechanisms have been carried out in {\color{blue}\cite{L.Cabbibi2012}},{\color{blue}\cite{I.H.Lee}}-{\color{blue}\cite{Hambye}}.
In {\color{blue}\cite{L.Cabbibi2012}}, similar studies were done in scenario when neutrino masses and mixings appear attributable to type I See Saw mechanism of SUSY SO(10) theory, where the Dirac neutrino Yukawa
couplings were of the kind- $ Y_{\nu} = Y_{u} $ and $ Y_{\nu} = Y_{u}^{diag}
U_{PMNS}$, where $ Y_{u} = V_{CKM}Y_{u}^{diag}V_{CKM}^{\dagger}$. In this work Similar studies are done in type II See Saw scenario in $ S_{4} \times Z_{n} $ flavor symmetric model. Lepton Flavor Violation in SUSY type II seesaw {\color{blue}\cite{J.Schechter}} models have also been considered untimely in {\color{blue}\cite{Rossi}}-{\color{blue}\cite{E. Arganda}}.
\par
In this work examination on LFV decay ($ \mu \rightarrow e \gamma $) using type II see saw mechanism in $ S_{4} \times Z_{n} $ flavor symmetric SUSY SO(10) theories {\color{blue}\cite{bd}} is carried out, and hence the reactivity to try out the surveillance of sparticles at HE/HL run of LHC {\color{blue}\cite{Christoph}}, in mSUGRA, NUHM,and NUSM {\color{blue}\cite{utpal}} models is also discussed. Such studies in Non Universal Gaugino Mass models were done earlier in {\color{blue}\cite{Profumo,Ga}}. It is noteworthy that $ S_{4} \times Z_{n} $ flavor symmetric SUSY SO(10) theory gives correct fit to observed neutrino oscillations and mixings and provides specific mass
textures for the quarks and leptons with only a small number of parameters and also predicts quark lepton mass relations and mixing angles in both the quark and the lepton sector. Specially, the model leads to tri-bi-maximal form for the PMNS matrix in the leading order with corrections to this imminent from charged lepton fields. In {\color{blue}\cite{L.Cabbibi2012,Ga}}, similar studies were done employing type I see saw formula, applying older value of BR($ \mu \rightarrow e \gamma $) {\color{blue}\cite{MEGJ.Adam}}. The structure of Dirac neutrino Yukawa couplings from {\color{blue}\cite{bd}} is used here in this work, for $ \tan\beta = 10-60 $, and $M_{GUT}= 2\times 10^{16}$ GeV. The value of Higgs mass as measured at LHC {\color{blue}\cite{Christoph}} and improved precision values of reactor mixing angle $ \theta_{13} $ as measured at Daya Bay, Reno {\color{blue}\cite{tor}} have been utilised in this work. Few studies on LFV in SO(10) GUTs have also been conferred in {\color{blue}\cite{Tatsuru}},{\color{blue}\cite{Amon}}.
\par
The minimal supergravity model (mSUGRA) is a well driven and induced model {\color{blue}\cite{Chamseddine}}, in which Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) {\color{blue}\cite{Tata}} can be inserted. In mSUGRA, SUSY is broken in the hidden sector, and is proclaimed to the visible sector MSSM fields by dint of gravitational interactions. Formation of gaugino masses {\color{blue}\cite{cremmer}} in mSUGRA (N=1 supergravity) embraces two scales $-$ spontaneous SUGRA breaking scale in the hidden sector over the singlet chiral superfield and the another one is GUT breaking scale via the non singlet chiral superfield {\color{blue}\cite{Chamseddine}}. In postulate these two scales can be distinct. But in a minimalistic perspective, they are usually assumed to be similar {\color{blue}\cite{Chamseddine}}. This conducts to a common mass $m_{0}$ for all the scalars, a common mass $M_{1/2}$ for all the gauginos and a common trilinear SUSY breaking term $A_{0}$ at the GUT scale, $M_{GUT}\simeq2\times10^{16}$ GeV.
\par
Now, the universality of sfermion masses, assumed in mSUGRA, NUHM models is analysed here. SO(10) symmetric soft terms approximately mean boundary conditions close to NUHM. In the scheme of SO(10) theories, all the matter fields, and the right handed neutrino, are there in the same 16-dimensional representation, and consequently, all the matter fields will have identical mass at the high scale. Nevertheless, the higgs fields can have dissimilar mass, as they doesnot survive in the same representation as the matter field. Therefore, the boundary terms for the SO(10) theory are compatible with NUHM and mSUGRA (in mSUGRA, all the higgs will be in equivalent representation). Diverging from NUHM boundary conditions, will generally gesture a deviation from SO(10) boundary conditions. If the hidden sector has representations which are not singlets under SO(10), one can expect non-trivial gaugino mass boundary conditions. So, to sum up, both NUHM and NUGM are boundary conditions which are a result of assuming SO(10) symmetric boundary conditions at the GUT scale in two disparate ways. Moreover, as can be percieved from figs presented in section IV, low energy flavor phenomenology is not much attacked by these distinct boundary conditions at high scales.
\par
In this work a SUGRA model with non universal scalar masses {\color{blue}\cite{utpal}} where the first two generations of scalar masses and the third generation of sleptons are extremely massive is also probed. This model implores the flavor changing neutral current (FCNC) issue by subscribing very large masses for the first two generations of squarks and sleptons. But the need of radiative breaking of electroweak symmetry REWSB prohibits the scalar masses from being too hugely massive. This situation is eluded by allowing third generation squark masses and the Higgs scalar mass parameters to be of small scale. {\color{blue}\cite{utpal}}. This smallness also set out to keep the naturalness problem within sovereignty.
\par
It is conventional that SUSY can be broken by soft terms of kind $- A_{0}, m_{0}, M_{1/2}$, where $A_{0}$ is the universal trilinear coupling, $m_{0}$ is the universal scalar mass, and $M_{1/2}$ is the universal gaugino mass. Stern universality amongst Higgs and matter fields of mSUGRA models can be reduced or weakened in NUHM (Non Universal Higgs Mass {\color{blue}\cite{nuhm}} models. As manifested in the results in Sec.IV in mSUGRA, the spectrum region of $M_{1/2}$ and $ m_{0} $ is found to settle in the direction of heavy side, as enabled by MEG constraints on BR($ \mu \rightarrow e \gamma $), but in NUHM, lighter spectra is feasible (owing to partial cancellations in flavor violating terms). So it enthrals one to study LFV decay $ \mu \rightarrow e \gamma $ in NUSM (Non Universal Scalar Mass Models) {\color{blue}\cite{utpal, Ga}}. As manifested in the results in sec.IV it is found that in NUSM model the gaugino masses are very massive, so as to enable very large scalar masses. In the light of the third generation squark masses and the Higgs scalar mass parameters being small, the fine tuning problem of naturalness does not get deteriorated. So to have Higgs mass around 125.9 GeV, the first two generation of squark and slepton masses as well as third generation of slepton masses habitats around 12000 GeV-16000 GeV. It is found that in NUSM model, current value of the branching fraction of the process $ \mu \rightarrow e \gamma $: BR$(\mu \rightarrow e \gamma )< 4.2 \times 10^{-13} $ at 90 percent C.L. allows $ tan\beta $ to lie in the region 5$-$45 and in order to have Higgs mass around 125.9 GeV, NUSM model grants $ tan\beta $ to find its appropriate value in the region 20$-$ 30 whereas in NUHM model it is seen that $ tan\beta $ occupies itself around 7$-$13 for Higgs mass around 125.9 GeV.
\par
Therefore it is conceived that indication of LFV could be tested at high luminosity HE/HL run of LHC, if SUSY sparticles are spotted around TeV range. It is eminent that, no SUSY partner of SM has been noticed yet at LHC, and this tipst to a high scale SUSY theory. The LHC has rigorous limits on sparticles, which could entail a tuning of EW symmetry at a few percent level {\color{blue}\cite{T.Gherg}}-{\color{blue}\cite{J.Fan}}. Thus some substitute to low scale SUSY theories have been recommended. Few of them are $ - $ minisplit SUSY {\color{blue}\cite{Villadoro}} and maximally natural SUSY {\color{blue}\cite{Savas}}. In minisplit SUSY the scalar sparticles are massive than the sfermions (gauginos and higgsinos), so that sfermions could be spotted at HE-LHC. Scalar sparticles could be available everywhere in the range (10$-10^{5})$ TeV. In maximally natural SUSY, the 4D theories rises from 5D SUSY theory, with Scherk-Schwarz SUSY breaking at a Kaluza-Klein scale $ \sim \frac{1}{R}$ of several TeV {\color{blue}\cite{Savas}}. Some prospects of LFV in those theories have been explored in {\color{blue}\cite{Isabel}}.
The paper has been organised as follows. In section II, connections of LFV with type II See Saw mechanism in $ S_{4} \times Z_{n} $ flavor symmetric SUSY SO(10) theory is discussed. In section III, the values of various parameters used in this analysis has been presented. The software SuSeFLAV {\color{blue}\cite{Garani}} is used to determine BR($ \mu \rightarrow e \gamma $). Section IV manifests itself in results and their analysis. Section V outlines the work.
\section{Lepton Flavor Violation $ \mu \rightarrow e \gamma $ decay in $ S_{4} \times Z_{n} $ flavor symmetric SUSY SO(10) theory.}
\label{sec:1}
\subsection{\textbf{Lepton Flavor Violation and observables.}}
\label{sec:2}
In SUSY theory, non-diagonal mass matrix elements in the slepton mass matrix are the initiator of Lepton Flavor Violation processes.
\begin{center}
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\includegraphics[height=5.9cm,width=10cm]{pi.eps}
\caption{Examples of Feynmann Diagrams contributing to $ \tau \rightarrow \mu +\gamma $ processes in SUSY models. }
\label{fig:1}
\end{figure*}
\end{center}
\begin{center}
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\includegraphics[height=6cm,width=15cm]{pl.eps}
\caption{Examples of Feynmann Diagrams contributing to $ \mu \rightarrow e +\gamma $ processes in SUSY models. }
\label{fig:1}
\end{figure*}
\end{center}
The SUSY SO(10) theory obviously embraces the see–saw mechanism. The existence of heavy RH neutrinos at an intervening scale give on to the running and originate flavor violating entries in the left-handed slepton mass matrix at the weak scale {\color{blue}\cite{L.Cabbibi2012}}. The lepton flavour violating entries in the SO(10) SUSY GUT framework can be percieved in terms of the low energy parameters. In the mass insertion (MI) method with leading log approximation,
the branching fractions for different LFV processes $ l_{i} \rightarrow l_{j} + \gamma $ can be resembled as
\begin{equation}
\text{BR} \left( l_{i} \rightarrow l_{j}+\gamma \right)\approx \alpha^{3}\frac{\vert (m^{2}_{\bar(L)})(LL)_{ij}\vert^{2}}{G_{F}^{2}m^{8}_{SUSY}}\tan^{2}\hspace{.01cm}\beta \linebreak \text{BR} \left( l_{i} \rightarrow l_{j}\nu_{i}\tilde{\nu_{j}} \right)
\end{equation}
where $ M_{SUSY } $ is mas scale of the SUSY particles, $ \alpha $ is the fine structure constant and $ G_{F} $ is the Fermi constant. The 6 $\times$ 6 slepton mass matrix is described as
\begin{equation}
m^{2}_{\bar(L)} = \begin{pmatrix}
m^{2}_{\bar(L)})(LL)_{ij}& m^{2}_{\bar(L)})(LR)_{ij}\\
m^{2}_{\bar(L)})(RL)_{ij} & m^{2}_{\bar(L)})(RR)_{ij}\\
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
where \textit{LL, RL, LR, RR} are 3$ \times $ 3 entries established on the chirality tag of sfermions.
\par
The leading log entries approximation in mSUGRA is defined as {\color{blue}\cite{A.Faccia}}
\begin{equation}
\left( m^{2}_{\tilde{L}} \right)_{i\neq j} = \frac{-3m_{o}^{2}+A_{o}^{2}}{ 8\pi^{2}} \sum_{k}
\left(f_{\nu}^{\star}\right)_{ik}\left(f_{\nu}\right)_{jk} \\ log\left(\frac{M_{X}}{M_{R_{k}}}\right)
\end{equation}
where $M_{X}$ is the GUT scale, $M_{R_{k}}$ is the $k^{th}$ heavy RH majorana neutrino scale, $m_{0}$ and $A_{0}$ are universal soft mass and trilinear terms at the high GUT scale. $ f_{\nu} $ are the Dirac neutrino Yukawa (DNY) couplings. The flavour violation is specified in terms of the quantity $\delta_{ij}=\frac{\Delta_{ij}}{\overline{m}^{2}_{\tilde{l}}}$, where ${{\overline{m}}}^{2}_{\tilde{l}} $ is the geometric mean of the slepton squared masses {\color{blue}\cite{F.Gabbiani}}, and $ \Delta_{i \neq j}$ are flavour non diagonal entries of the slepton mass matrix instigated at the weak scale due to RG evolution. The mass insertions are labelled into the LL/LR/RL/RR kinds {\color{blue}\cite{Masina}}, based on the chirality of the SM fermions. The fermion masses are formed by renormalisable Yukawa couplings of the 10$\oplus$126$\oplus\overline{120}$ portrayal of scalars of SO(10) GUTs. The Dirac neutrino Yukawa couplings $ f_{\nu} $ at the high GUT scale in $ S_{4} \times Z_{n} $ flavor symmetric SUSY SO(10) theory is used in this work from {\color{blue}\cite{bd}} .
\begin{equation}
f_{\nu}=\frac{1}{\upsilon sin\beta}M_{D}
\end{equation}
Here $M_{D}$ is the Dirac neutrino mass matrix. The off-diagonal flavor violating entries at the weak scale in eq. {\color{blue}(3)} are then absolutely decided by using $f_{\nu}$ from eq. {\color{blue}(4)}. The $ \delta $s from the RGEs are calculated, using the leading log approximation. The soft SUSY masses are flavour universal at the input scale, so, off diagonal entries in the LL sector are developed by running of right handed neutrinos in the renormalisation group equation loops. For using the leading log expression (eq. {\color{blue}(3)}) one requires the mass of the heaviest right handed neutrino, which is here, $\sim 10^{16} $ GeV. The induced off-diagonal leading log entries pertinent to LFV decay $l_{i}$ $\rightarrow$ $l_{j}$ +$ \gamma $ are of the magnitude of (setting down $ A_{0} $ to 0){\color{blue}\cite{Ga}}
\begin{equation}
\left( \delta_{LL}\right) _{\mu e} = \frac{-3}{8\pi^{2}} \left( f_{\nu}^{\star}\right) _{13}\left( f_{\nu}\right) _{23}ln\left( \frac{M_{X}}{M_{R_{3}}}\right)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\left( \delta_{LL}\right) _{\tau \mu} = \frac{-3}{8\pi^{2}} \left( f_{\nu}^{\star}\right) _{23}\left( f_{\nu}\right) _{33}ln\left( \frac{M_{X}}{M_{R_{3}}}\right)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\left( \delta_{LL}\right) _{\tau e} = \frac{-3}{8\pi^{2}} \left( f_{\nu}^{\star}\right) _{13}\left( f_{\nu}\right) _{33}ln\left( \frac{M_{X}}{M_{R_{3}}}\right)
\end{equation}
\begin{table}
\caption{Governing values of $\delta_{ij}$ that enter eq. {\color{blue}(5,6,7)}
for in $ S_{4} \times Z_{n} $ flavor symmetric SUSY SO(10) theory.}
\label{tab:2}
\begin{tabular}{ll}
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
\textbf{LFV contributions} &\textbf{ For $ S_{4} \times Z_{n} $ flavor symmetric SUSY SO(10) theory case} \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
$\delta_{12}$ & $0.6672\times 10^{-4}$ \\
$\delta_{23}$ & $1.5634\times 10^{-4}$ \\
$\delta_{31}$ & $0.7377\times 10^{43}$ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\par
In NUHM models, the expression
$(-3m_{o}^2+A_{o}^2)$ of mSUGRA models in {\color{blue}eq.(3)} is put back by the leading log approximation for the slepton mass matrix element that induces the process $ \mu\rightarrow e +\gamma $, as $(-2m_{o}^2+A_{o}^2+m^2_{H_u})$. $ m_{H_u} $ is the soft mass terms of the up type Higgs at the high scale. At the GUT scale, the NUHM case,
$
m_{H_{u}}=m_{H_{d}}
$
Besides, due to a relative sign difference between the universal soft mass terms for the matter fields and the Higgs mass terms at the GUT scale, cancellations occurs for
$m^{2}_{H_{u}}\approx -2m_{0}^{2}$, or increment for $m^{2}_{H_{u}} \geq m_{0}^{2}$
in contrast to mSUGRA for the off diagonal flavor violating entries at the weak scale.
\subsection{\textbf{$ S_{4} \times Z_{n} $ flavor symmetry}}
\label{sec:2}
Dirac Neutrino Yukawa couplings from a supersymmetric SO(10) grand unified theory (GUT) of flavor relevant to an $ S_{4} $ family symmetry is used here in this work. It makes use of the fact that, SO(10) theory combined with type II seesaw mechanism for generating neutrino masses mingled with a simple assertion that the dominant Yukawa coupling matrix (the 10-Higgs coupling to matter) has rank one. The rank one model arises within some reasonable speculation as a constructive field theory from vectorlike 16 dimensional matter fields with masses lying above the GUT scale. $ S_{4} $ flavon multiplets
get vevs in the ground state of the theory. By enlarging the $ S_{4} $ theory with
an additional discrete symmetry $ Z_{n} $, it has been found that the flavon vacuum field alignments acquire a discrete values of parameters assuming that some of the higher dimensional couplings are small. An observed set of vacuum alignments directs one to an unification of quark-lepton flavor: (i) the lepton mixing matrix that is dominantly tri-bimaximal with small corrections related to quark mixings; (ii) quark lepton mass is related at GUT scale as $ m_{b} = m_{\tau} $and $m_{\mu} = 3m_{s}$ and (iii) the solar to atmospheric neutrino mass ratio $m_{solar}/m_{atm} = \theta $ Cabibbo, which in tally with the experiments.
The mass matrix becomes
\begin{equation}
M_{\nu} = \begin{pmatrix}
0 & c & c\\
c & a & c-a\\
c & c-a & a\\
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
where $\frac{c}{a} = \lambda \leq 1$. It is diagonalized by the tri-bi-maximal matrix,
\begin{equation}
U_{TB} = \begin{pmatrix}
\sqrt\frac{2}{3} & \sqrt\frac{1}{3}& 0\\
-\sqrt\frac{1}{6} & \sqrt\frac{1}{3} & - \sqrt\frac{1}{2}\\
-\sqrt\frac{1}{6} & \sqrt\frac{1}{3} & \sqrt\frac{1}{2}\\
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
This is not the full $U_{PMNS}$ matrix which is going to get small radiative corrections from diagonalization of the charged lepton mass matrix, which generates small reactor angle, $ \theta_{13} $ along with small $ \theta_{\odot} $ and $ \theta_{atm} $.
The neutrino masses are given by $ m_{\nu_{3}} \equiv 2a -c$ ; $m_{\nu_{2}} = 2c$ and $m _{\nu_{1}} = -c$.
To fit observations, $ \frac{c}{a} \simeq \Delta m^{2}_{\odot}/\Delta m^{2}_{atm} \sim 0.2$, which realises the neutrino masses to be, $m_{\nu_{3}} = 0.05 eV$, $m_{\nu_{3}} = 0.01 eV$, and $m_{\nu_{1}} $ = 0.005 eV.
\section{Branching Ratio, BR($\mu \rightarrow e\gamma$) in CMSSM, NUHM, NUSM}
In this section the computations on the LFV constraints of BR($\mu \rightarrow e\gamma$) in $ S_{4} \times Z_{n} $ flavor symmetric SUSY SO(10) theory with type II Seesaw mechanism using the NUHM, CMSSM, NUSM like boundary conditions through detailed numerical analysis is presented. The soft parameter space for CMSSM in the following ranges is studied.
\begin{equation*}
tan\beta \in \left[ 1, 60\right]
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
\Delta m_{H} \in 0
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
m_{0} \in \left[ 0, 8\right] \hspace{.1cm}\text{TeV}
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
M_{1/2} \in \left[ 0.3, 4.5\right] \hspace{.1cm} \text{TeV}
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
A_{0} \in \left[ -3m_{0} , +3m_{0} \right]
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation}
sgn\left( \mu\right) \in\lbrace-,+\rbrace
\end{equation}
\vspace{.05cm}
The analytical part is done using the publicly available package SuSeFLAV {\color{blue}\cite{Garani}}. LFV for the non universal Higgs model without completely universal soft masses at high scale is scrutinised. Range of examination of various SUSY parameters, used in NUHM are:
\begin{equation*}
30\hspace{.1cm} \text{GeV} \leq m_{0} \leq 8\hspace{.1cm} \text{TeV}
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
30\hspace{.1cm} \text{GeV} \leq M_{1/2} \leq 5\hspace{.1cm}\text{TeV}
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
- 9.5 \hspace{.1cm}\text{TeV} \leq m_{H_{u}} \leq +9.5 \hspace{.1cm}\text{TeV}
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
-9.5\hspace{.1cm}\text{TeV} \leq m_{H_{d}} \leq +9.5 \hspace{.1cm}\text{TeV}
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation}
-24 \hspace{.1cm}\text{TeV} \leq A_{0} \leq + 24\hspace{.1cm}\text{TeV}
\end{equation}
The $\Delta^{LL}_{i\neq j}$ owing to non universal Higgs and $ m_{h} $ $\geq$ 125 GeV puts a powerful restraint on SUSY parameter space. Due to partial cancellations in the entrance of $\Delta^{LL}_{i\neq j}$ in NUHM case, a substantial region of parameter space can be probed by MEG.
\par
Contingent scans for the following range of parameters in NUSM model is performed {\color{blue}\cite{utpal}} and the SUSY particle spectrum using the publicly available package SuSeFLAV {\color{blue}\cite{Garani}} is created.
\begin{equation*}
tan\beta \in \left[ 5, 60\right]
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
m_{0} \in \left[ 0, 16\right] \hspace{.1cm}\text{TeV}
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
M_{1/2} \in \left[ 0, 6\right] \hspace{.1cm}\text{TeV}
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
A_{0} \in 0\hspace{.1cm} \text{TeV}
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation}
m_{H_{u}}=m_{H_{d}} \in 0\hspace{.1cm} \text{TeV}
\end{equation}
Massive right handed neutrinos used in our calculations are - $ M_{R_{1}}=10^{13} \hspace{.1cm}\text{GeV}$, $M_{R_{2}} = 10^{14}\hspace{.1cm}\text{GeV}$, and $M_{R_{3}}= 10^{16}\hspace{.1cm}\text{GeV}$.
The central values of $ \Delta m^{2}_{sol} $, $\Delta m^{2}_{atm}$ and $\theta_{13}$, from the recent global fit of neutrino data {\color{blue}\cite{tor}} is employed. In Table 1 the presiding values of $\delta_{ij}$ that enter {\color{blue}eq.(5,6,7)} is presented.
\section {Calculations and Discussion on Results}
In this section, study on the computation of results presented in section 3 is discussed.
\subsection{\textbf{Complete Universality - CMSSM }}
\label{sec:2}
At the high scale, the parameters of the CMSSM model described are $m_{0}$, $A_{0}$ and unified gaugino mass $ M_{1/2} $. Also there are the Higgs potential parameter $ \mu $ and the ratio of the Higgs VEVs, tan$\beta$. The overall SUSY mass spectrum is estimated once those parameters are accessible. The updated MEG constraint {\color{blue}\cite{17,44}} set together with a big $\theta_{13}$ {\color{blue}\cite{tor}} brings forth significant restrictions on SUSY parameter space in CMSSM. As depicted from fig {\color{blue}3a}, few part of the paramater space is allowed for tan $ \beta $ = 5$-$ 60 in CMSSM as constrained by future MEG limit for BR($ \mu \rightarrow e \gamma $) which is 6$ \times 10^{-14}$. So to conclude it is seen that the parameter space $M_{1/2} \geq $ 10 GeV is permitted by present MEG bounds on BR($ \mu \rightarrow e \gamma $), incidentally future MEG limit prohibits strictly almost whole $M_{1/2}$ space. Similarly as seen from fig {\color{blue}3b}, the current MEG limit allows very heavy spectra for $ m_{0} $, which favours $ m_{0} $ to lie between 4.5 TeV to 8 TeV which is indeed massive. The permitted space in fig {\color{blue}4a} needs very massive spectra, i.e. $ m_{0} $ $ \geq $ 6 TeV and it mostly lies around 8 TeV for the whole spectrum of $M_{1/2}$. From fig {\color{blue}4b}, it is found that the current bound for the process BR($ \mu \rightarrow e \gamma $) $4.2 \times 10^{-13}$ sets very stringent constraint on tan $ \beta $, which find its value from around 2 to 10. $ tan\beta \leq $ 2 and $ tan\beta \geq $ 10 is ruled out in the CMSSM case. In fig {\color{blue}4c, 4d} the light Higgs mass, $ m_{h} $ as a function of $ m_{0} $, $M_{1/2}$ in the CMSSM case is computed. The range of Higgs mass as given by the data at LHC, i.e 123 $\text{GeV} \le m_{h} \le$ 127 $\text{GeV}$ allows $m_{0} $ 6 TeV $\geq$ 8 TeV as restricted by constrained stringent MEG bounds on BR($ \mu \rightarrow e \gamma $). The region $M_{1/2} \geq$ 3 TeV is permitted as can be seen from fig {\color{blue}4d}. The asymmetry in $ A_{0} $ GeV can be seen from fig {\color{blue}4g}. To have Higgs mass around, 123 $\text{GeV} \le m_{h} \le$ 127 $\text{GeV}$, the values of $ tan\beta $ from 3 to 6 are mostly allowed. The dependancy of $ A_{0} $ on $ tan \beta $ is shown in fig {\color{blue}4g}
\begin{center}
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering{
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=5.9cm,width=7.9cm]{m12br.eps}}\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height= 5.93cm,width=8cm]{mobr.eps}}\end{subfigure}\\
\caption{The outcome of the calculations are presented for CMSSM case. In fig {\color{blue}3a, 3b}, different
horizontal lines depicts the present (MEG 2016) and future MEG constraints for BR($ \mu $ $ \rightarrow $ e + $ \gamma $).}}
\label{fig:1}
\end{figure*}
\end{center}
\begin{center}
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering{
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=4.9cm,width=7.9cm]{mom12.eps}}\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=4.9cm,width=8cm]{tbbr}}\end{subfigure}\\
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=5.9cm,width=7.7cm]{momh1.eps}}\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=5.9cm,width=7.9cm]{m12mh.eps}}\end{subfigure}\\
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=5.9cm,width=7.7cm]{tbmh.eps}}\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=5.9cm,width=7.9cm]{tbao.eps}}\end{subfigure}\\
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=4.9cm,width=7.9cm]{aomh.eps}}\end{subfigure}\\
\caption{ In figs {\color{blue}(4a-4e)} allowed SUSY parameters region as constrained by MEG 2016 bound is presented.}}
\label{fig:1}
\end{figure*}
\end{center}
\subsection{\textbf{Non Universal Higgs Model (NUHM)}}
The cMSSM+RHN model parameter set is investigated in the literature {\color{blue}\cite{l,m,n}}. Also, the NUHM1 +RHN models were extensively studied for specific non-universal scenarios with the following GUT-scale mass relations: NUHM1 ($m^{2}_{H_{u}} = m^{2}_{H_{d}} = m^{2}_{20} $) in {\color{blue}\cite{nuhm}}
The leading log approximation for the slepton mass matrix element that induces the process $ \mu\rightarrow e +\gamma $ is
\begin{equation}
\left( m^{2}_{\tilde{L}} \right)_{i\neq j} = \frac{-2m_{o}^{2}+A_{o}^{2}+m^{2}_{H_{u}}}{ 8\pi^{2}} \sum_{k}
\left(f_{\nu}^{\star}\right)_{ik}\left(f_{\nu}\right)_{jk} \\ log\left(\frac{M_{X}}{M_{R_{k}}}\right)
\end{equation}
For low values of $ M_{1/2} $, the approximation holds good but for values of $ M_{1/2} \simeq $ 1 TeV, the branching
fractions may be up to a factor of 10 dissimilar than the evaluation from RGE running. If the hierarchy of dirac neutrino yukawa couplings are alike to that of the up-type in the Standard Model, where the third generation predominantly
dominates, then the largest donation is from the $k = 3$ terms in the summation. Calculation of Log[BR($ \mu \rightarrow e+\gamma$)], in the NUHM case leads to a good approximation for a light/pre-LHC SUSY mass spectrum due to the cancellations between the soft SUSY parameters in {\color{blue}eq.(13)}. Alongside, the consequences of the results accessed in NUHM case is discussed. In fig. {\color{blue}5a} $m_{0}$ [GeV] Vs Log[BR($ \mu \rightarrow e+\gamma$)], and the fig. {\color{blue}5b} in the right panel depicts $M_{1/2}$ [GeV] Vs Log[BR($ \mu \rightarrow e+\gamma$)]. Various horizontal lines in fig. {\color{blue}5a, 5b} correspond to present and future bounds on BR($ \mu $ $ \rightarrow $ e + $ \gamma $). It is see from the figs. {\color{blue}5a} and {\color{blue}5b} that due to the partial cancellations between the NUHM parameters $ m_{0} $, $ A_{0} $ and $ m_{H_{u}} $, almost all of the NUHM parameter space is going to be probed by the stringent MEG bounds for a good approximation of a light/pre-LHC SUSY mass spectrum.
\begin{center}
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering{
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=5.9cm,width=7.9cm]{Nbrm0.eps}}\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=6cm,width=8cm]{Nbrm12.eps}}\end{subfigure}\\
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=5.9cm,width=7.9cm]{Nbrtb.eps}}\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=6cm,width=8cm]{Nm12mo.eps}}\end{subfigure}\\
\caption{The consequences of the analysis and calculations are presented for NUHM case. In fig {\color{blue}5a,5b}, different
horizontal lines illustrates the present (MEG 2016) by MEG Collaboration and future MEG bounds for BR($ \mu $ $ \rightarrow $ e
+ $ \gamma $). Figs. {\color{blue}5c,5d} portrays the allowed SUSY parameter space for different parameters, as is constrained by stringent by MEG 2016 bounds.}}
\label{fig:2}
\end{figure*}
\end{center}
In figs. {\color{blue}5c}, Log[BR($ \mu \rightarrow e+\gamma$)] Vs $ tan\beta $ is presented. It is grasped from the fig. {\color{blue}5c}, that for present bound of MEG, almost all values of $ tan\beta $ from 5 to 60 are favoured, whereas future MEG bound restricts the values of $tan\beta$ to 5 $ - $ 40. Fig.{\color{blue}5d} represents $ m_{0} $ Vs $ M_{1/2} $. The SUSY parameter space $M_{1/2} - m_{h} $ and $m_{0} - m_{h} $ is presented, as allowed by present MEG bounds in figs. {\color{blue}6a,6c}. For Higgs mass to be around 126 GeV, values of $ M_{1/2} $ from 4 TeV to 5 TeV are mostly allowed. Similarly for $ m_{h} $ around 126 GeV, region 6 TeV $ \leq m_{0}\leq $ 8 TeV are mostly allowed. In $ \delta^{LL}_{i \neq j} $ owing to the cancellations between $ m^{2}_{H_{u}} $ and $ m_{0}^{2} $ a huge susy soft parameter space compared to CMSSM is permitted which would be easily spotted at the HE LHC fulfilling the present cLFV constraints measured by MEG collaboration in 2016. Fig {\color{blue}6b} shows $A_{0}$ [GeV] Vs $ m_{h} $ [GeV]. Negative values of $A_{0}$ are favoured in order to have Higgs mass around 126 GeV. Fig {\color{blue}6d} represents tan $ \beta $ Vs $ m_{h} $. The last row in the right panel depicts the constraintor restriction on tan$ \beta $. Amost all values of tan$ \beta$ from around 5 to 40 are allowed. In the CMSSM case, the resrictions in the low tan$ \beta $ are due to $ m_{h} $ while those at high tan β are from the constraints on BR($ \mu \rightarrow e+\gamma$). In the CMSSM case, a light
Higgs mass around 125 GeV does not necessarily implies a suppressed flavor violating entry instead of the largeness of A-terms required. In fact flavor violation constraints
are indeed still very powerful.
\begin{center}
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=5.9cm,width=7.9cm]{Nm12mh.eps}}\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=6cm,width=8cm]{Naomh.eps}}\end{subfigure}\\
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=5.9cm,width=7.9cm]{Nmomh.eps}}\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=5.9cm,width=7.9cm]{Ntbmh.eps}}\end{subfigure}\\
\caption{Figs. {\color{blue}6a-6d} describe the allowed SUSY region for different soft SUSY parameter space, as is obstructed by stringent MEG 2016 bounds.}
\label{fig:2}
\end{figure*}
\end{center}
\subsection{\textbf{Non Universal Scalar Mass Models (NUSM)}}
The parameters of NUSM model is given by {\color{blue}\cite{Ga}}
\par
$\hspace{.7cm}$ $\text{tan}\beta$, $M_{1/2}$, $A_{0}$, $\text{sgn}(\mu)$, \text{and} $m_{0}$.
\newline
The parameters of this model have the exact role to those in CMSSM case except for a major dissimilarity in the scalar sector. First two generations scalars masses (squarks and sleptons) and the third generations sleptons masses are designated as $ m_{0} $ at the GUT scale. Here $ m_{0} $ is streches over a very large value upto tens of TeVs. Nevertheless the Higgs scalars and the third family of squarks are presumed to have dispersed mass values at $ M_{GUT} $. In this computation the mass of third generation of squarks and Higgs scalars are zero. A vanishing $ A_{0} $ in our analysis is conjectured. {\color{blue}\cite{utpal}}. Computations obtained with the non universal scalar masses at
\begin{center}
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering{
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=5.9cm,width=7.9cm]{Num12br.eps}}\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=6cm,width=8cm]{Numobr.eps}}\end{subfigure}\\
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=5.9cm,width=7.9cm]{Numom12.eps}}\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=6cm,width=8cm]{Nutbbr.eps}}\end{subfigure}\\
\caption{The results of the analysis are presented for NUSM case. In fig {\color{blue}7a, 7b}, different horizontal lines depicts the present (MEG 2016) and future MEG bounds for BR($ \mu $ $ \rightarrow $ e
+ $ \gamma $). Figs. {\color{blue}7c, 7d} shows the allowed space for different parameters, that is allowed by MEG 2016 bound.}}
\label{fig:2}
\end{figure*}
\end{center}
$ M_{GUT} $ is presented. In fig.7a, the soft SUSY parameter space as allowed by present and future MEG bounds on $BR(\mu \rightarrow e \gamma)$ is depicted. For the present MEG bound on Log$BR(\mu \rightarrow e \gamma)$ i,e -12.376, a large part of $ M_{1/2} $ parameter space survives. $M_{1/2}$ lies between $ 1 TeV \hspace{.1cm}\text{TeV} \leq M_{1/2}\leq 6 \hspace{.1cm} \text{TeV}$. In fig.7b $ 2 \hspace{.1cm}\text{TeV} \leq m_{0}\leq 16 \hspace{.1cm} \text{TeV}$ exists for MEG constraint i.e -12.376. The fig.7c in the right panel shows $ m_{0} $ GeV Vs $ M_{1/2} $ GeV as constrained by MEG 2016 bound on BR$(\mu \rightarrow e \gamma)$. From fig. 7d it is seen that present MEG bound allows tan$ \beta $ to lie between 5 to 47, whereas future MEG bound restricts high values of tan $ \beta $ and limits itself to low values, where $ 5 \hspace{.1cm} \leq tan \beta \leq 18 \hspace{.1cm}$. It is found from fig. 8a that for Higgs boson mass around 125 GeV, $ m_{0} \geq $ 10 TeV is mostly allowed. For $ m_{h} \simeq $ 125.9 GeV the parameter space $ 10000 GeV \leq m_{0} \leq 16000 GeV $ is mostly recommended. From fig. 8b it is observed that for higgs mass range around $125\pm 2 $ GeV, $ M_{1/2} $ lies between 1.5 TeV $ \leq M_{1/2} \leq $ 5 TeV. From fig.8c, it is grasped Higgs mass of 125 GeV disfavours values of both low tan$ \beta \leq 15 $ and high tan$ \beta \geq 30 $. Fig. 8d and fig.8e represents favoured values of soft susy space detectable at future run of HE LHC.
\begin{center}
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering{
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=5.9cm,width=7.9cm]{Numomh.eps}}\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=6cm,width=8cm]{Num12mh.eps}}\end{subfigure}\\
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=5.9cm,width=7.9cm]{Nutbmh.eps}}\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=6cm,width=8cm]{Nutbmo.eps}}\end{subfigure}\\
\begin{subfigure}[]{\includegraphics[height=6cm,width=8cm]{Nutbm12.eps}}\end{subfigure}\\
\caption{The results of the computations presented for NUSM case. Fig {\color{blue}8a, 8b, 8c, 8d, 8e}, depicts the permitted space for different parameters, that is allowed by MEG 2016 bound by MEG collaboration.}}
\label{fig:2}
\end{figure*}
\end{center}
In Tables II and III the relative research of the comparative study between different models is presented here. The new consequences in NUSM are the following:
\newline
1. Fragile $m_{0}$ susy space is allowed as contrasted to CMSSM.
\newline
2. A wider SUSY parameter space is favoured as compared to CMSSM and NUHM model.
\newline
3.For Higgs mass around 125 GeV, favoured values of tan $ \beta $ are $ 12 \leq tan\beta \leq 28$ are allowed. Tan $ \beta $ values less than 30 are allowed.
\newline
4.The expected sensitivity of the MEG-II experiment which is $6 \times 10^{-14}$ for three years of data taking restricts values of tan$ \beta $ to be less than 20 and these predict or forecast small LFV rates which is easily accessible from the figures.
\begin{table*}
\caption{Spartcle masses in this table are comparison between model CMSSM and NUHM.}
\label{}
\begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}lrrrrl@{}}
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
Range of parameters allowed by & Range of parameters allowed by
\\ for BR $\left( \mu \rightarrow e \gamma\right) < 4.2\times 10^{-13}$ & BR $\left(\mu \rightarrow e\gamma\right) < 4.2\times 10^{-13}$
\\ MEG 2016, for CMSSM & MEG 2016, for NUHM \\
\hline
\textbf{1}.Fig 3a:& \textbf{1}.Fig 5b: For MEG 2016, $M_{1/2}\geq$ 1 TeV
\\$M_{1/2}\geq$ 3.2 TeV by MEG 2016 & Fig: 5a, $m_{0} \geq$ 2.2 TeV
\\ Fig 3b: $m_{0} \geq$ 4.2 TeV & for BR$\left( \mu \rightarrow e \gamma\right)<10^{-13}$.
\\
\textbf{2}.Fig 4b (MEG 2016), : & \textbf{2}.Fig. 5c for MEG 2016 of BR $\left(\mu \rightarrow e\gamma\right)$
\\ tan $ \beta $ lies in the range, 2 $ \leq $tan$ \beta \leq$ 10 & tan $ \beta $ lies in the range, 3 $ \leq $tan$ \beta \leq$60
\\ for BR $\left( \mu \rightarrow e \gamma\right) < 4.2\times 10^{-13}$ & for BR $\left( \mu \rightarrow e \gamma\right) < 4.2\times 10^{-13}$ \\
\textbf{3}.Fig 4g: $ A_{0} $ lies in the range, & \textbf{3}. Fig: 6b, $ A_{0} $ lies in the range, \\ $ A_{0}\sim $ -9000 GeV and$ A_{0}\sim $ 12000 GeV & -10000 GeV $\leq A_{0} \leq $ -1000 GeV, \\ for $m_{h} = 125.9 $ GeV
& for $ m_{h} = 125.9\hspace{.1cm} \text{GeV} $
\\
\hline
\end{tabular*}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}
\caption{Spartcle masses in this table are comparison between model NUSM and NUHM.}
\label{}
\begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}lrrrrl@{}}
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
Range of parameters allowed by & Range of parameters allowed by
\\ for BR $\left( \mu \rightarrow e \gamma\right) < 4.2\times 10^{-13}$ & BR $\left(\mu \rightarrow e\gamma\right) < 4.2\times 10^{-13}$
\\ MEG 2016, for CMSSM & MEG 2016, for NUHM \\
\hline
\textbf{1}.Fig 7a:& \textbf{1}.Fig 5b: For MEG 2016, $M_{1/2}\geq$ 1 TeV
\\$M_{1/2}\geq$ 1 TeV by MEG 2016 & Fig: 5a, $m_{0} \geq$ 2.2 TeV
\\ Fig 7b: $m_{0} \geq$ 2.2 TeV & for BR$\left( \mu \rightarrow e \gamma\right)<10^{-13}$.
\\
\textbf{2}.Fig 7b (MEG 2016), : & \textbf{2}.Fig. 5c for MEG 2016 of BR $\left(\mu \rightarrow e\gamma\right)$
\\ tan $ \beta $ lies in the range, 5 $ \leq $tan$ \beta \leq$ 50 & tan $ \beta $ lies in the range, 3 $ \leq $tan$ \beta \leq$60
\\ for BR $\left( \mu \rightarrow e \gamma\right) < 4.2\times 10^{-13}$ & for BR $\left( \mu \rightarrow e \gamma\right) < 4.2\times 10^{-13}$ \\
\textbf{3}.Fig 8c: $ tan\beta $ lies in the range, & \textbf{3}. Fig: 6d, $ tan\beta$ lies in the range, \\ 15 $ \leq $tan$ \beta \leq$ 30 & 8 $ \leq $tan$ \beta \leq$ 13\\ for $m_{h} = 125.9 $ GeV
& for $ m_{h} = 125.9\hspace{.1cm} \text{GeV} $
\\
\hline
\end{tabular*}
\end{table*}
\section{Conclusion}
The see-saw mechanism is very encouraging in the sense that an intermediate mass scale exists for Majorana neutrinos which solves the mystery of the tiny active neutrino masses neverthelss also describing the absence of right-handed
neutrino effects in low energy laboratory scale. The see-saw mechanism is not an impelling extension of the SM since the Higgs boson mass would likely blasts to the see-saw scale owing to its quadratic divergent radiative corrections to the Higgs scalar masses. Supersymmetry stabilizes the hierarchy problem and steadfast
the Higgs mass so the weak scale can mutually stays along with the Majorana mass scale (and the GUT and Planck scales). The aim of this paper is to present forecast for LFV
process $ \mu \rightarrow e + \gamma $ within credible SUSY models that are consistent with LHC Run 2 results. Within SUSY models, LFV mechanisms should happen, possibly at an observable level. The motivation for this paper is to present predictions for cLFV
processes within various SUSY models that are happening with LHC Run 2 results. These should naturally include SUSY models with radiatively-driven naturalness [22] which requires a 125 GeV Higgs mass along with multi-TeV soft terms (as implied by LHC data) nevertheless at the same time it avoids the fine-tunings attached with the Little Hierarchy problem. Here, the current and projected reaches of LFV search $ \mu \rightarrow e + \gamma $ in MEG II and MEG collaboration within CMSSM, NUHM and NUSM SUSY model where neutrinos are generated with a type-II seesaw mechanism is examined. The soft SUSY parameter space is constrained within the HE-LHC reach. The NUHM model is well inspired in that it admits for weak scale naturalness accompanying with a 125 GeV Higgs mass and sparticles beyond LHC Run 2 limits.
\par
The value of Higgs mass as measured at LHC, latest global data on the reactor mixing angle $ \theta_{13} $ for neutrinos, and latest constraints on BR($ \mu \rightarrow e \gamma $) as projected by MEG collaboration{\color{blue}\cite{Adam}},{\color{blue}\cite{Baldini}} is used here. In CMSSM a very heavy $ M_{1/2} $ region is allowed by projected sensitivity of MEG II experiments which is 6$ \times 10^{-14} $, nevertheless in NUHM case comparatively a low $ M_{1/2} $ region is also favoured. Further the non universal scalar mass model (NUSM) is also studied. As compared to CMSSM, in NUHM, a broader soft susy space is allowed. It is found that in NUSM, a wide spectra of susy parameter space is admitted, as compared to both CMSSM and NUHM. In NUHM, it is seen that favoured values of $ \vert A_{0}\vert $ consistent with the newly discovered Higgs boson mass are negative and are shifted towards lighter side (compared to CMSSM). It is perceived that in NUSM as Log[BR($ \mu \rightarrow e \gamma $)] decreases from present MEG bound to around to future MEG II projected sensitivity, a wide region of soft susy parameter space of $ M_{1/2} $ from 1 TeV to almost 6 TeV is allowed. The computations in this paper show that for natural SUSY with the model CMSSM, rates
for BR($ \mu \rightarrow e \gamma $) are already ruled out by the projected MEG II sensitivity experiment for $ S_{4} \times Z_{n} $ flavor symmetric SUSY SO(10) theory
scenarios. The non universal boundary conditions in NUSM can probe experimental indications for the production of supersymmetric particles and can entertain detector set up to ensure that various supersymmetric models can probe signatures at HE LHC. Observation of sparticles at HE/HL LHC, could help us to distinguish among CMSSM, NUSM and NUHM models, in context to the limits put by cLFV decays. This in turn leads to a motivation for examining various SUSY theories beyond standard model.
\begin{acknowledgements}
This work was supported in part by the Department of Physics, Office of High Energy Physics, IISC, Bangalore, India. The computing for this paper is performed by SuSeFLAV software.
\end{acknowledgements}
|
\section{Introduction}
Active systems are characterized by constituents that consume energy to
produce directed motion. These systems are inherently out-of-equilibrium, and
thus lead to novel steady state behaviors~\cite{ramaswamy2010, marchetti2013}.
For example, simple model systems such as active nematics composed of
microtubules driven by kinesin motor proteins can continuously create and
annihilate topological defects~\cite{sanchez2012, giomi2013, decamp2015,
doostmohammadi2018, thampi2014}, and active Brownian particles can aggregate
into ``active solids''~\cite{redner2013, bechinger2016}.
Active polymers are a class of active systems that are of considerable interest
due to their prevalence in biological systems on multiple length scales,
including the flagella of bacterial microswimmers~\cite{chelakkot2014,
elgeti2015}, chromatin in eukaryotic cells~\cite{bronstein2009, bronshtein2015,
cabal2006, zidovska2013, ganai2014,haddad2017perspectives}, and actin in
cellular cytoskeletons~\cite{brangwynne2008, mizuno2007}. Many studies have
focused on the collective dynamics of many such filaments~\cite{le_goff2001,
prathyusha2018, weber2015, humphrey2002, sakaue2017, suzuki2017, sokolov2007,
saintillan2018}, and found that activity can lead to behaviors such as formation
of clusters~\cite{suzuki2017} and spiral patterns~\cite{gupta2019,
prathyusha2018, isele-holder2015}.
As in the context of self-propelled particle models \cite{ten2011brownian,
angelani2011active, ai2013rectification, fily2014dynamics, basu2018,
dauchot2019, kranz2019}, it is fruitful to understand the properties of isolated
active units to provide a framework for understanding the non-equilibrium steady
states that emerge in these complex systems. While there are few analytical
results available to date~\cite{liverpool2003, gao2017, eisenstecken2016,
eisenstecken2017, osmanovic2017, osmanovic2018, de_canio2017}, a number of
numerical studies have been undertaken to understand the statistical properties
of single active filaments~\cite{bronshtein2015, bronstein2009, weber2010,
ghosh2014, osmanovic2017, osmanovic2018, eisenstecken2016, di_pierro2018,
bianco2018, chaki2019, anand2018, bianco2018, das2019}. Filaments placed in a
bath of active particles can have anomalous dynamic properties, including super-
and sub-diffusive motion~\cite{bronshtein2015, bronstein2009, weber2010,
ghosh2014, osmanovic2017, osmanovic2018}, as well as enhanced diffusion
coefficients~\cite{eisenstecken2016, di_pierro2018, bianco2018, chaki2019}.
Activity was also found to lead to the ``softening'' of semiflexible filaments,
effectively reducing the persistence length, while sufficiently large active
forces could lead to chain swelling~\cite{eisenstecken2017, harder2014}. Similar
results have been found in the case where the active forces are directed along
the filament tangent~\cite{anand2018, bianco2018}, such as in actin or
microtubule motility assays.
In this work, we seek to understand the influence of activity on the statistical
properties of an isolated semiflexible filament subject to tangential active
forces~\cite{gupta2019, bianco2018, anand2018}, using an analytically tractable
model. Note that, neglecting excluded volume interactions, a semiflexible
filament with persistence length $l_\text{p}$ can be modeled as a Rouse chain with bond
length $b \approx 2 l_\text{p}$~\cite{doi2007}. Motivated by this mapping, we consider
a single active Rouse chain with activity directed along the tangent. We show
analytically that activity leads to an enhanced diffusion coefficient that grows
\textit{linearly} with the strength of the active force, while the end to end
distance of the polymer is \textit{independent} of activity. Mapping the typical
Rouse bond length, $b$, to the persistence length, $l_\text{p}$, we obtain an
analytical expression for the diffusion coefficient of an active semiflexible
polymer. We compare these predictions to Langevin dynamics simulations of both
Rouse chains and semiflexible filaments, and find that our analytical results
are able to accurately describe both cases. These results are directly relevant
for motility assay experiments~\cite{pringle2013, farhadi2018, sumino2012,
schaller2010, suzuki2017}, and elucidate behaviors of active units with internal
degrees of freedom.
\section{The active Rouse model}
A Rouse chain is a simple polymer model wherein we have $N$ beads connected by
harmonic bonds. Assuming this chain is in a highly viscous medium with thermal
noise, we obtain the familiar Rouse equation of motion for the $n$th
bead~\cite{doi2007}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:BasicRouseEOM}
\gamma \pdv{\vb{r}_n}{t} = k (\vb{r}_{n+1} + \vb{r}_{n-1} - 2 \vb{r}_n)
+ \sqrt{2 \gamma k_\text{B}T} \vb{\xi}_n(t),
\end{equation}
where $\gamma$ is the damping coefficient, and $k$ the spring constant. Note
that the Rouse chain simply collapses to a point in the zero temperature limit.
A non-zero temperature is necessary to give the polymer a finite size. The
root-mean-square (RMS) bond length is given by $b_0^2 = d k_\text{B}T/k$, where $d$ is
the system dimensionality. The thermal noise $\vb{\xi}_n(t)$ is Gaussian white
noise with moments
\begin{eqnarray}
\ev{\vb{\xi}_n(t)} &=& 0 \quad \text{and} \nonumber \\
\ev{\xi_n^\alpha(t) \xi_m^\beta (t')}
&=& \delta_{\alpha \beta} \delta_{nm} \delta(t-t').
\end{eqnarray}
Eq.~\eqref{eq:BasicRouseEOM} holds for $n = 2,\ldots,N-1$. At the ends,
we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\gamma \pdv{\vb{r}_1}{t} &=& k (\vb{r}_2 - \vb{r}_1)
+ \sqrt{2 \gamma k_\text{B}T} \vb{\xi}_1(t), \\
\gamma \pdv{\vb{r}_N}{t} &=& k (\vb{r}_{N-1} - \vb{r}_N)
+ \sqrt{2 \gamma k_\text{B}T} \vb{\xi}_N(t).
\end{eqnarray*}
However, we can extend Eq.~\eqref{eq:BasicRouseEOM} to hold for all $n$ provided
we allow for ``ghost'' beads such that $\vb{r}_0 = \vb{r}_1$ and $\vb{r}_{N+1} =
\vb{r}_N$. This Rouse model describes an idealized filament in a dry system and
has served as an important model for obtaining physical intuition about the
statistical properties of polymers~\cite{doi2007}.
We add tangential activity to this polymer by supposing that the bonds of the
polymer impart a force on their attached beads. That is, if the $n$th bond
connects beads $n$ and $n+1$, then each of those beads experiences some force
$\vb{A}_n/2$ (so that the total force generated by the bond is $\vb{A}_n$). We
consider the simple case where
\[
\vb{A}_n = f_\text{a} \times (\vb{r}_{n+1} - \vb{r}_n),
\]
with $f_a$ a constant parameter, in which the equation of motion for an active
Rouse chain is
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:DiscreteRouseEOM}
\gamma \pdv{\vb{r}_n}{t} &=& k (\vb{r}_{n+1} + \vb{r}_{n-1} - 2 \vb{r}_n)
+ f_\text{a} \left(\frac{\vb{r}_{n+1} - \vb{r}_{n-1}}{2}\right)
\nonumber \\
&& + \sqrt{2 \gamma k_\text{B}T} \vb{\xi}_n(t).
\end{eqnarray}
Note that activity could have been implemented by making the beads active,
rather than the bonds. But, adding activity to the beads also requires
constraining the orientation of the active force, leading to additional
complexity (see Appendix~\ref{app:MeanSquareBondLength}). Our implementation of
activity is the most tractable for analytical computation, and successfully
captures the phenomenology of tangential driving as shown below.
\section{Analytical results}
Assuming a Rouse chain with a contour length much longer than the bond length
$b_0$, we take the continuous limit of Eq.~\eqref{eq:DiscreteRouseEOM} to obtain
\begin{equation} \label{eq:RouseEOMDimensional}
\gamma \pdv{\vb{r}(n,t)}{t} = k \pdv[2]{\vb{r}(n,t)}{n}
+ f_\text{a} \pdv{\vb{r}(n,t)}{n}
+ \sqrt{2 \gamma k_\text{B}T} \vb{\xi}(n, t)
\end{equation}
with the boundary conditions
\begin{equation} \label{eq:RouseEOMBoundaryConds}
\pdv{\vb{r}(n,t)}{n}\eval_{n=0,N} = 0,
\end{equation}
which physically correspond to force-free boundary conditions. We
non-dimensionalize this equation by measuring time in units of $d\gamma/k$,
distance in units of $b_0 = \sqrt{dk_\text{B}T/k}$, and energy in units of $k_\text{B}T$.
Finally, we let $\alpha = f_\text{a} N b_0^2/2dk_\text{B}T$ be a measure of activity in our
system. As such, $\alpha$ is a measure of the ratio of work performed by the
active force to the thermal energy. Our equation of motion now takes the form
\begin{equation} \label{eq:RouseEOM}
\pdv{\tilde{\vb{r}}}{\tilde{t}}
= d \pdv[2]{\tilde{\vb{r}}}{n} +
\frac{2 d \alpha}{N} \pdv{\tilde{\vb{r}}}{n} +
\sqrt{2} \tilde{\vb{\xi}}(n,\tilde{t}).
\end{equation}
\subsection{Eigenfunction expansion}
The general solution of~\eqref{eq:RouseEOM} is
\begin{equation} \label{eq:EigenfunctionExpansion}
\vb{r}(n, t) = \sum_{p=0}^\infty \vb{c}_p(t) \phi_p(n)
\end{equation}
where the $\phi_p(n)$ are the eigenfunctions
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Eigenfunctions}
\phi_p(n) = A_p e^{-\alpha n / N}
\left[
\cos (\frac{\omega_p n}{N}) +
\frac{\alpha}{\omega_p} \sin(\frac{\omega_p n}{N})
\right]
\end{equation}
where $\omega_p = \pi p + i \alpha \delta_{p,0}$, and $A_p$ is a
normalization factor:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:NormalizationFactor}
A_p^2 = \frac{2}{N} \begin{cases}
\alpha e^{-\alpha} / 2 \sinh \alpha & p = 0, \\
\pi^2 p^2 / (\pi^2 p^2 + \alpha^2) & p > 0.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
The decaying exponential in these eigenfunctions encodes the breaking of the
head-tail symmetry due to the active forces.
The $\phi_p$ are orthonormal with respect to the weight function $w(n) =
e^{2\alpha n / N}$; that is,
\begin{equation} \label{eq:EigenfunctionInnerProduct}
\int_0^N \dd{n} w(n) \phi_p(n) \phi_q(n)
= \delta_{pq}.
\end{equation}
We can check that in the limit $\alpha \to 0$, this reduces to the standard
cosine series, which is the correct set of eigenfunctions for the passive Rouse
chain~\cite{doi2007}.
Without loss of generality, we assume $\vb{r}(n, 0) = 0$, so that
\begin{equation} \label{eq:CpSolution}
\vb{c}_p(t) = \int_0^t \dd{s} e^{-\lambda_p^2 (t - s)} \vb{\xi}_p(s),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:TimeConstants}
\lambda_p^2 = \frac{d}{N^2} \times
[\pi^2 p^2 + (1 - \delta_{p,0}) \alpha^2]
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:NoiseModes}
\vb{\xi}_p(t) =
\sqrt{2} \int_0^N \dd{n} w(n) \phi_p(n) \vb{\xi}(n, t).
\end{equation}
Unlike a passive Rouse chain, these noise modes are now correlated, so that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:NoiseModeMoments}
\ev{\xi_p^\alpha(t)\xi_q^\beta(t')}
= G_{pq} \delta_{\alpha \beta} \delta(t - t')
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation} \label{eq:NoiseModeCorrelation}
G_{pq} = 2 \int_0^N \dd{n} w(n)^2 \phi_p(n) \phi_q(n).
\end{equation}
We now use the eigenfuncton representation of the exact solution to compute the
center-of-mass diffusion coefficient and RMS end-to-end distance.
\subsection{Diffusion coefficient}
The center of mass $\vb{X}(t)$ of the chain is given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:CenterOfMass}
\vb{X}(t) = \frac{1}{N} \int_0^N \dd{n} \vb{r}(n, t)
= \sum_{p=0}^\infty \vb{c}_p(t) \bar{\phi}_p
\end{equation}
where $\bar{\phi}_p = \int \dd{n} \phi_p(n) / N$ is the average value of
$\phi_p$ over the interval $n \in [0, N]$. From this, we compute the
mean square displacement (MSD) as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:MeanSquareDisplacement}
\text{MSD} &=& \ev{X(t)^2}
\nonumber \\
&=& \sum_{p,q} \bar{\phi}_p \bar{\phi}_q \ev{\vb{c}_p(t) \cdot \vb{c}_q(t)}
\nonumber \\
&=& d G_{00} \bar{\phi}_0^2 t + F(t),
\end{eqnarray}
where $F(t)$ is a function that contains only terms that are constant or decay
with time (see Appendix~\ref{app:MeanSquareDisplacement}). From this, we find
the diffusion coefficient to be
\begin{equation} \label{eq:DiffusionCoefficient}
D(\alpha)
= \lim_{t \to \infty} \frac{\text{MSD}}{2 d t}
= \frac{1}{2} G_{00} \phi_0^2
= D_0 \alpha \coth \alpha.
\end{equation}
where $D_0 = 1/N$ is the diffusion coefficient of a passive Rouse chain.
Notably, this gives the limiting behaviors
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:DiffusionLimitingBehavior}
D(\alpha) \propto \begin{cases}
D_0 (1 + \alpha^2/3) & \alpha \ll 1, \\
D_0 \alpha & \alpha \gg 1,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
This result shows that when the active work per bead is small compared to the
thermal energy, the diffusion coefficient grows with the square of activity,
which is reminiscent of the behavior of an active Brownian
particle~\cite{ghosh2015}. However, for $\alpha \gg 1$, i.e., when the active
work is large compared to the thermal fluctuations, the diffusion coefficient
grows linearly with activity.
At timescales shorter than the rotational relaxation time (discussed in the next
section), we expect to see evidence of the active driving through a nonlinear
growth in the MSD. After considering the possible effects of inertia, the MSD
takes the form
\[
\textrm{MSD}(\delta t) \approx 2dD(\alpha) \delta t + B(\alpha) \delta t^2
\]
for $\delta t \ll 1$. Here, the coefficient $B(\alpha)$ describes the ballistic
motion of the filament at short times scales. Interestingly, we can show that
$B(\alpha)$ actually decays with increasing $\alpha$. This is discussed further
in Appendix~\ref{app:EffectOfInertia}.
\subsection{Conformational Dynamics}
There are two relevant parameters that encode the conformational dynamics of the
active polymer: the end-to-end length (or the radius of gyration, see
Appendix~\ref{app:RadiusOfGyration}), which captures its size, and the
relaxation time over which correlations in the end-to-end vector decay. We
compute each of these quantities here.
The end-to-end vector $\vb{L}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:EndToEndVector}
\vb{L}(t) = \vb{r}(N,t) - \vb{r}(0, t)
= \sum_{p>0}^\infty \vb{c}_p(t) \Delta \phi_p,
\end{equation}
where $\Delta \phi_p = \phi_p(N) - \phi_p(0)$, and the $p = 0$ mode vanishes
since $\Delta \phi_0 = 0$. In the long-time limit, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:EndToEndDistanceExpression}
\ev{L^2}
&=& \sum_{p,q>0} \Delta \phi_p \Delta \phi_q
\lim_{t \to \infty} \ev{\vb{c}_p(t) \cdot \vb{c}_q(t)}
\nonumber \\
&=& d \sum_{p,q>0} G_{pq}
\frac{\Delta \phi_p \Delta \phi_q}{\lambda_p^2 + \lambda_q^2}.
\end{eqnarray}
While this series representation is the exact result, it converges slowly and
does not lend itself to analytical approximation. We compute the sum numerically
(see Appendix~\ref{app:MeanSquareEndToEndDistance}) and find that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:EndToEndDistance}
\ev{L^2} \approx N.
\end{equation}
That is, $\ev{L^2}$ is independent of the strength of the active force.
This result can be understood in the context of the microscopic equations of
motion given in Eq.~\eqref{eq:DiscreteRouseEOM} as follows. Since there are no
terms that lead to correlations in bond vector orientations in the model, we can
envision the polymer as being constructed of uncorrelated active rods. The
active forces exerted by these rods cannot change their own lengths,
and so the overall length of the polymer is left unchanged. Interestingly, this
result does not necessarily hold if the beads are made active instead of the
bonds (see the appendix for more details). Further, we expect this result to be
modified in the context of the semiflexible polymer where orientational
correlations between the bonds can modify the end-to-end length, as discussed in
the subsequent sections.
Next, we compute the end-to-end vector autocorrelation function to obtain the
rotational relaxation time, $\tau_R$, using the approximation
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:EndToEndCorrelationApprox}
\ev{\vb{L}(t + \tau) \cdot \vb{L}(t)}
\propto e^{-\tau/\tau_R}
\end{equation}
in the $t \to \infty$ limit. Using \eqref{eq:EndToEndVector}, we see that
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:RotationalRelaxation}
\ev{\vb{L}(t + \tau) \cdot \vb{L}(t)}
&=& \sum_{p,q>0} \Delta \phi_p \Delta \phi_q
\ev{\vb{c}_p(t + \tau) \cdot \vb{c}_q(t)}
\nonumber \\
&=& d\sum_{p,q>0} G_{pq}
\frac{\Delta \phi_p \Delta \phi_q}{\lambda_p^2 + \lambda_q^2}
e^{-\lambda_p^2 \tau}.
\end{eqnarray}
As with Eq.~\eqref{eq:EndToEndDistanceExpression}, this sum cannot be computed
analytically. Assuming it can be approximated by the slowest decaying term
($\propto e^{-\lambda_1^2 t}$), we find the rotational relaxation time to be
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:RelaxationTime}
\tau_R = 1/\lambda_1^2 = \frac{\tau_R^0}{1 + \alpha^2/\pi^2},
\end{equation}
where $\tau_R^0 = N^2 / \pi^2 d$ is the relaxation time of a passive Rouse
filament. Activity therefore reduces the relaxation time. It is worth noting
that the approximation in Eq.~\eqref{eq:EndToEndCorrelationApprox} is limited in
that no individual term of Eq.~\eqref{eq:RotationalRelaxation} dominates. Though
Eq.~\eqref{eq:RelaxationTime} is the slowest relaxation time, it is not
necessarily the dominant one. See Appendix~\ref{app:RotationalRelaxationTime}
for more details.
\subsection{Mapping to a Semiflexible Filament}
Now, we generalize the above results to the case of a
semiflexible polymer. Consider a filament as a chain of $N$ beads connected via
inextensible bonds of length $b_0$, with rigidity encoded through the potential
\[
H(\{\vb{r}_i\}) = \frac{1}{2} \kappa
\sum_{i=1}^{N-2} \vu{t}_i \cdot \vu{t}_{i+1},
\]
where $\vb{t}_i = \vb{r}_{i+1} - \vb{r}_i$ and $\vu{t}_i = \vb{t}_i /
|\vb{t}_i|$. Activity is added in the same manner as in the case of the Rouse
filament. For simplicity, we will neglect excluded volume interactions in these
considerations; these will be incorporated in our computational model later.
Suppose our semiflexible filament is constructed of $N$ bonds with typical bond
length $b_0$. We can also view the filament as being constructed of $n$ rigid
segments of length $b = 2 l_\text{p}$. Then using $Nb_0 = n b$, we have
\[
\alpha = \frac{f_\text{a} N b_0^2}{2 d k_\text{B}T}
= \frac{f_\text{a} n b^2}{2 d k_\text{B}T} \frac{b_0}{b}
= \frac{\tilde{\alpha} b_0}{2l_\text{p}}.
\]
That is, there is an effective activity $\tilde{\alpha}$ for a semiflexible
filament that is related to that of a simple Rouse chain through
\begin{equation} \label{eq:SemiflexibleActivity}
\tilde{\alpha} = 2 \alpha l_\text{p} / b_0.
\end{equation}
We hypothesize that if we substitute this renormalized activity into the results
for the Rouse chain, they will generalize to the case of an active semiflexible
polymer. In particular, Eq.~\eqref{eq:DiffusionCoefficient} becomes
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ModifiedDiffusion}
D(\alpha, \kappa) / D_0
= (2 \alpha l_\text{p} / b_0) \coth (2 \alpha l_\text{p} / b_0),
\end{equation}
which implicitly depends on the stiffness $\kappa$ through $l_\text{p}$. We test this
hypothesis using numerical simulations in the next section.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{figures/rouse_mseel.png}
\caption{The mean square end-to-end length $\ev{L^2}$ normalized by the
number of bonds $N$ is shown as a function of activity $\alpha$. The
horizontal line is the predicted value based on
Eq.~\eqref{eq:EndToEndDistance}, the symbols are results from computer
simulations, and the error bars show the 95\% confidence interval. For all
simulation results in this article, we used $N_\text{atoms}=51$ beads.}
\label{fig:EndToEndLength}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{figures/rouse_msd.png}
\includegraphics{figures/diffusion_coefficient.png}
\caption{Dynamics of active Rouse chains. \textbf{Top:} The mean square
displacement (MSD) for Rouse chains as a function of time for various
activities, computed from simulation trajectories. For the range of times
shown, all of the filaments exhibited purely diffusive motion, with higher
activities leading to larger growth in the MSD with time. \textbf{Bottom:}
The ratio of the active diffusion coefficient $D(\alpha)$ to the passive
diffusion coefficient $D_0$ for a range of activities. The points are
simulation data, and the line is the prediction from
Eq.~\eqref{eq:DiffusionCoefficient}.}
\label{fig:RouseDiffusionCoefficient}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{figures/semiflexible_mseel.png}
\includegraphics{figures/lp_vs_activity.png}
\caption{Configurational properties of active semiflexible filaments.
\textbf{Top:} The mean-squared end-to-end length computed from simulation
trajectories as a function of the activity $\alpha$ for various stiffnesses
$\kappa$. The results are normalized by those of the passive ($\alpha = 0$)
case. In general, we observe $\ev{L^2}$ decaying with $\alpha$, though this
effect is weak over the range of activities tested. \textbf{Bottom:}
Persistence length $l_\text{p}$ normalized by $\kappa$ as a function of activity.
This plot more clearly shows the reduction in $l_\text{p}$ with increasing
activity, indicating a slight softening of the filament.}
\label{fig:PersistenceLength}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{figures/semiflexible_dcoeff.png}
\includegraphics{figures/low_alpha_lp_dcoeff_loglin.png}
\caption{Dynamics of active semiflexible filaments. \textbf{Top:} Diffusion
coefficients $D(\alpha, \kappa)$ for all simulation parameters as a function
of $\alpha l_\text{p}$, the typical net active force exerted on a correlated
segment of the filament of length $l_\text{p}$. All of the data lie along the line
$D/D_0 \sim 2 \alpha l_\text{p}$ (dashed line). Notably, we see the same linear
scaling of the diffusion coefficient with activity as with the active Rouse
chain (see Fig.~\ref{fig:RouseDiffusionCoefficient}). \textbf{Bottom:}
Diffusion coefficient measured at low $\alpha l_\text{p}$. The dashed line shows
Eq.~\eqref{eq:ModifiedDiffusion} using the modified activity parameter from
Eq.~\eqref{eq:SemiflexibleActivity}.}
\label{fig:SemiflexibleDiffusionCoefficient}
\end{figure}
\section{Simulation results}
In this section, we perform numerical simulations to: a) validate the continuum
approximation of the Rouse chain used to obtain the analytical results, and b)
test the hypothesis of their generalization to semiflexible active polymers with
a renormalized activity parameter.
\subsection{Active Rouse Filaments}
To test the continuum limit approximation, we integrate the discrete equations
of motion of a Rouse chain, Eq.~\eqref{eq:DiscreteRouseEOM}, for a filament with
$N_\text{atoms} = 51$ atoms. As before, we non-dimensionalize by measuring
energy in units of $k_\text{B}T$, time in units of $d \gamma / k$, and length in units
of $\sqrt{d k_B T / k}$. Additionally, $f_a = 2d\alpha / N$ where $0 \leq \alpha
\leq 10$ and $N = N_\text{atoms} - 1 = 50$ is the number of bonds. We use a
time step of $\Delta t = 10^{-3}$ and integrate for a total of $10^8$ steps.
We start by considering the steady-state mean square end-to-end length
$\ev{L^2}$. For a passive Rouse polymer, we know that $\ev{L^2} = N b_0^2$, and
we expect from Eq.~\eqref{eq:EndToEndDistance} that this will hold even for an
active filament. Indeed, we can see in Fig.~\ref{fig:EndToEndLength} that the
polymer size is independent of the strength of the active force. The same result
was found when testing chains with shorter lengths as well.
Next, note that based on Eq.~\eqref{eq:RelaxationTime}, the slowest relaxation
time occurs for a passive Rouse chain, for which $\tau_R \approx 10^2$ for the
units chosen here. Thus, for lag times $t > \tau_R$, the filament orientations
should decorrelate, and so the mean square displacement (MSD) should grow
linearly in time. Fig.~\ref{fig:RouseDiffusionCoefficient} (top) shows the MSD
results computed from simulations, which exhibit diffusive motion for times $t
\gtrsim 10^2$ for all active force strengths. From these results, we can compute
the activity-dependent diffusion coefficient $D(\alpha)$
(Fig.~\ref{fig:RouseDiffusionCoefficient} (bottom)). Here, we observe close
agreement between the prediction of Eq.~\eqref{eq:DiffusionCoefficient} and the
simulation results. In particular, we see the expected linear scaling of the
diffusion coefficient with activity for $\alpha > 1$.
\subsection{Active Semiflexible Filaments}
To see if the results above are valid beyond the Rouse limit, we consider a more
realistic model that incorporates stiff bonds, resistance to bending, and
excluded volume interactions. We add these properties by including the potential
\begin{eqnarray}
U(\{\vb{r}_n\})
&=& \sum_{n=1}^{N-1} \frac{1}{2} k (|\vb{t}_n| - b_0)^2
+ \sum_{n=1}^{N-2} \kappa (1 - \vu{t}_n \cdot \vu{t}_{n+1})
\nonumber \\
&+& \sum_{i \neq j} U_\text{WCA}(|\vb{r}_j - \vb{r}_i|)
\label{eq:SemiflexiblePotential}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\vb{t}_n = \vb{r}_{n+1} - \vb{r}_n$, $b_0$ is the preferred bond length,
and $k$ and $\kappa$ set the strength of the bond and angle potentials,
respectively. The potential $U_\text{WCA}(r)$ is a purely repulsive
Weeks-Chandler-Andersen potential~\cite{weeks1971}, defined as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:WCAPotential}
U_\text{WCA}(r) = \begin{cases}
4 \epsilon \left[
\left(\dfrac{\sigma}{r}\right)^{12}
- \left(\dfrac{\sigma}{r}\right)^6
+ \dfrac{1}{4}
\right]
& r \leq 2^{1/6}\sigma, \\
0 & r > 2^{1/6}\sigma.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
The equation of motion for the $n$th bead of the semiflexible polymer is
therefore
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:SemiflexibleEOM}
\gamma \pdv{\vb{r}_n}{t}
= -\pdv{U}{\vb{r}_n}
+ f_\text{a} \left(\frac{\vb{r}_{n+1} - \vb{r}_{n-1}}{2}\right)
+ \sqrt{2 \gamma k_\text{B}T} \vb{\xi}_n(t).
\end{equation}
We choose $b_0 = k_\text{B}T = 1$, $\sigma = b_0$, $\epsilon = k_\text{B}T$, and $k = 200$,
and we vary $\kappa \in [20, 100]$.
We again start by investigating how activity affects the polymer size, in this
case looking at both the normalized mean-square end-to-end distance
$\ev{L^2}(\alpha,\kappa) / \ev{L^2}(0, \kappa)$ and the persistence length $l_\text{p}$
(see Fig.~\ref{fig:PersistenceLength}), which is computed by fitting the
tangent-tangent correlation function $C_{t}(m) = \ev{\vu{t}(n + m) \cdot
\vu{t}(n)}$ to the exponential $e^{-m b_0/l_\text{p}}$. In general, we find that
activity reduces the size of the polymer, but this effect is weak over the range
of activities tested. As such, we see that $l_\text{p} \approx \kappa$ for all
$\alpha$, as is expected for a passive semiflexible filament. The decrease in
persistence length with activity indicates that activity leads to a slight
``softening'' of the filament. This behavior has been studied in-depth in recent
work on polymers with directed active forces~\cite{anand2018, gupta2019,
bianco2018}.
We compute the diffusion coefficient $D(\alpha, \kappa)$ for semiflexible
polymers the MSD results, and find linear scaling with the parameter $\alpha
l_\text{p}$ for $\alpha l_\text{p} \gtrsim 1$, as shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:SemiflexibleDiffusionCoefficient}), with $D(\alpha, \kappa)
\approx 2 \alpha l_\text{p}$. To fully test the applicability of
Eq.~\eqref{eq:ModifiedDiffusion}, we performed additional simulations for
$\alpha l_\text{p} \ll 1$ and found excellent agreement between the measured and
predicted values over more than five orders of magnitude.
\section{Summary and Discussion}
In this paper, we consider a simple model for an active filament in the form of
a Rouse chain with an additional force acting along the tangent. By explicitly
solving the equation of motion, Eq.~\eqref{eq:RouseEOM}, we analytically compute
certain configurational and dynamical observables, in particular the MSD,
diffusion coefficient, and the end-to-end length as a function of the active
force strength. We find that the filament exhibits diffusive motion for times
larger than a rotational relaxation timescale, $\tau_R$, which decays rapidly
with activity (see Eq.~\eqref{eq:RelaxationTime}). This diffusive motion is
characterized by an activity-dependent diffusion coefficient that grows linearly
with $\alpha$ for $\alpha \gg 1$. This is in contrast to studies on passive
filaments in an active bath (see, for example,~\cite{eisenstecken2016,
osmanovic2017, chaki2019, ghosh2014}), which find the diffusion coefficient to
grow with the square of the active force strength. In general, studies of
polymers with configuration-independent active forces can be well described via
an ``effective temperature'', whereas configuration-dependent active forces, as
studied here, cannot be readily described in this manner.
We verify these analytical results by performing molecular dynamics simulations
of an active Rouse chain for a range of active force strengths. As evidenced by
Figs.~\ref{fig:EndToEndLength} and~\ref{fig:RouseDiffusionCoefficient}, we
observe excellent agreement between theory and simulation. To test whether the
active Rouse model results can be extended to more realistic polymer models, we
compare our analytical results to simulations of a semiflexible polymer with
excluded volume interactions and stiff bonds. We find that the persistence
length is weakly dependent on activity over the range of activities tested (as
shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:PersistenceLength}), with activity leading to a
``softening'' of the filament. This result is consistent with other recent
numerical studies on active polymers~\cite{anand2018, bianco2018, gupta2019}.
Additionally, we find that the diffusion coefficient $D(\alpha, \kappa)$ grows
linearly with a renormalized activity parameter, $\tilde{\alpha} = 2 \alpha l_\text{p}
/ b_0$. This can be explained by envisioning the semiflexible filament as a
Rouse chain with $n$ bonds of length $b$ equal to the Kuhn length $2l_\text{p}$, and
directly applying the results of Eq.~\eqref{eq:DiffusionCoefficient}. In
principle, this depends non-linearly on activity since the persistence length
$l_\text{p}$ is also activity-dependent. However, for small activities, $l_\text{p}$ is
approximately independent of $\alpha$, and so we recover the linear scaling of
the diffusion coefficient with activity.
Due to the simplicity of this model, it can be readily extended to incorporate
richer interactions at the single-filament level. For example, future work could
examine how attractive or solvent-mediated interactions affect the behavior of
these filaments. These analytical results for the effective activity on an
isolated filament can also serve as a starting point for understanding emergent
behaviors of dense systems containing many active filaments.
\begin{acknowledgments}
We acknowledge support from the Brandeis NSF \mbox{MRSEC}, Bioinspired Soft
Materials, DMR-1420382 (MP, AB, and MFH) and DMR-1855914 (MFH). Computational
resources were provided by the NSF through XSEDE computing resources (MCB090163)
and the Brandeis HPCC which is partially supported by the Brandeis MRSEC.
\end{acknowledgments}
\bibliographystyle{apsrev4-1}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec: LRD}
The occurrence of long memory in time series has been known for a long time starting from the work of \cite{hurst51}. Since then, this phenomenon
has been observed and studied in applications in various fields including
biophysical data (\cite{burnecki2012farima}), network traffics (\cite{Pilip2016}), neuroscience (\cite{botcharova2014markers}), and geosciences (\cite{Montillet2015}), etc.
A typical example in financial applications (see e.g. \cite{cheung1995search} and \cite{panas2001estimating}) is a stationary solution of a autoregressive moving average FARIMA($p,d,q$) process with $\alpha-$stable innovations.
In light of the variety of applications, a wide range of statistical models and methods for long range dependent processes has been developed, see, for instance, \cite{Avram1986}, \cite{Kasahara1988}, \cite{Kokoszka1996} for classical ones, and \cite{Magdziarz2007} \cite{Beran2012}, \cite{Jach2012}, \cite{Koul2018} for more recent developments. For
a broader overview, we recommend the books of \cite{Doukhan2003}, \cite{beran:kulik:2013}, and \cite{Samorod16}.
These instruments rely on the explicit definition of long range dependence (LRD, for short) of a stationary time series or, more generally, a stationary stochastic process $X = \{X(t), \, t \in T\}$. Here and throughout this paper, stationarity is understood in the sense that all finite-dimensional distributions of $X$ are invariant
under translations. There are many definitions of LRD in the literature depending on the class of processes to which $X$ belongs. For instance, if $X$ has a finite variance the following definition is classical, cf. \cite[P. 194-195]{Samorod16}:
\begin{Definition}
\label{Def: LRD_classical}
A stationary stochastic process $X = \{ X(t), \, t \in T \}$ on some domain $T \subset \mathbb{R}$ with $\mathbb{E}\big[\vert X(0)\vert^2\big] < \infty$ is called {\it long range dependent} if
\begin{align*}
\int_{T} \vert C(t) \vert \, \mathrm{d} t = \infty,
\end{align*}
where $C(t) = \Cov(X(0), X(t))$, $t \in T$, is its covariance function. For processes in discrete time, the integral above should be changed to a sum.
Also, $X$ is {\it antipersistent} if $\int_{T} \vert C(t) \vert \, \mathrm{d} t <\infty$, $\int_{T} C(t) \, \mathrm{d} t = 0$, and {\it short range dependent}, otherwise.
\end{Definition}
Alternative definitions of long memory rely e.g. on the unboundedness of the spectral density of $X$ at zero, growth comparisons of partial sums, phase transition in limit theorems for sums or maxima, etc., cf. \cite{HeydeYang97,DehlPhil02,Samorod04,Lavancier06,GiraitisKoulSurg12,beran:kulik:2013,Paul16,Samorod16, Jach2012}.
Many of these approaches fail for heavy-tailed stochastic processes whose variance does not exist. Such processes occur, for instance, in modelling of network data, in finance and in insurance (see e.g. \cite{Kokoszka1997} who call the FARIMA($p,d,q$) process with $\alpha$-stable innovations long range dependent if $d \in (0,1-1/\alpha)$ or \cite{EKM97, resnick-2007}). In order to allow for the analysis of long memory behaviour in a broader setting, \cite{Kulik_Spodarev_LRD} propose to consider the covariance of indicator functions of excursions and introduce
\begin{Definition}[]
\label{def: LRD_Spodarev}
A real-valued stationary stochastic process $X = \{ X(t), \, t \in T \}$ where $T$ is an unbounded subset of $\mathbb{R}$ is short range dependent (SRD) if
\begin{align}
\int_{T} &\int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \Big\vert \Cov (\mathds{1} \{ X(0) > u \}, \mathds{1} \{ X(t) > v \})\Big\vert \, \mu(\mathrm{d} u) \, \mu(\mathrm{d} v)\, \mathrm{d} t < \infty \label{eq: LRD_Spodarev}
\end{align}
for any finite measure $\mu$ on $\mathbb{R}$. Otherwise, i.e. if there exists a finite measure $\mu$ such that the integral in inequality $\eqref{eq: LRD_Spodarev}$ is infinite, $X$ is long range dependent. For stochastic processes in discrete time, the integral $\int_T\, \mathrm{d} t$ should be replaced by the summation $\sum_{t \in T: \, t\neq 0}$.
\end{Definition}
One major advantage of this definition is that the above covariance exists in any case due to the boundedness of the indicators. Furthermore, the definition turns out to be useful as it offers the applicability of limit theorems for certain functionals of the process of interest.
In practice, however, the computation of the multiple integral in \eqref{eq: LRD_Spodarev} might prove to be tricky. Therefore, we restrict ourselves here to the wide class of positively associated stochastic processes, including the class of infinitely divisible moving average processes with nonnegative kernels \cite[Chapter 1, Theorem 3.27]{Bulinski_Shashkin}. This will allow us to eliminate the absolute value in \eqref{eq: LRD_Spodarev}.
To introduce the notion of positive association, we need the class $\mathcal{M}(n)$ of real-valued bounded coordinate-wise nondecreasing Borel functions on $\mathbb{R}^n$, $n \in \mathbb{N}$. For a real-valued stochastic process $X = \{ X(t), \, t \in T \}$ and a set $I \subset T$, we denote $X_I = \{ X(t), \, t \in I \}$. \
\begin{Definition}[]
\label{def: association}
A real-valued stochastic process $X = \{ X(t), \, t \in T \}$ is {\it positively associated} if $\Cov(f(X_I), g(X_J)) \geq 0$ for any disjoint finite subsets $I,J \subset T$ and all functions $f \in \mathcal{M}(\vert I \vert)$ and $g \in \mathcal{M}(\vert J \vert)$.
\end{Definition}
By setting $I = \{ 0 \}$ and $J = \{ t \}$ for $t \neq 0$, $f(x) = \mathds{1}\{ x > u \}$ and $g(x) = \mathds{1}\{ x > v \}$ for $u,v \in \mathbb{R}$, we have $f \in \mathcal{M}(\vert I \vert)$ and $g \in \mathcal{M}(\vert J \vert)$. Consequently, for a positively associated stochastic process $X$, it holds $\Cov (\mathds{1} \{ X(0) > u \}, \mathds{1} \{ X(t) > v \}) = \Cov(f(X_I), g(X_J))\ge 0$, i.e.\ the absolute value in \eqref{eq: LRD_Spodarev} can be omitted.
\medskip
In this paper, we consider two important subclasses of positively associated stationary processes that satisfy certain stability properties. More precisely, we study $\alpha$-stable moving averages and max--stable processes with $\alpha$-Fr\'echet marginals. As these processes are heavy-tailed, the classical definition of LRD (\Cref{Def: LRD_classical})
does not apply. Instead, we check \Cref{def: LRD_Spodarev}.
With regard to this endeavor, we first establish a general framework to compute the double integral $\int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \Cov (\mathds{1} \{ X(0) > u \}, \mathds{1} \{ X(t) > v \})\, \mu(\mathrm{d} u)\, \mu(\mathrm{d} v)$ by inverting the univariate characteristic function $\CFA{s}$ of $X(0)$ and the bivariate characteristic function $\CFB{+}{+}$ of $(X(0), X(t))$. Thus, our \Cref{thm: SRD and LRD} yields
\begin{align*}
&\int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \Cov (\mathds{1} \{ X(0) > u \}, \mathds{1} \{ X(t) > v \})\, \mu(\mathrm{d} u)\, \mu(\mathrm{d} v) \\[2mm]
&= \frac{1}{2 \pi^2} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \frac{1}{s_1s_2} \re{} \bigg\{ \big( \CFB{+}{-} - \CFA{s_1}\CFA{-s_2} \big) \overline{\psi(s_1)}\psi(s_2) \bigg\} \\[2mm]
&\hspace{1cm} - \frac{1}{s_1s_2} \re{} \bigg\{ \big( \CFB{+}{+} - \CFA{s_1}\CFA{s_2} \big) \overline{\psi(s_1)\psi(s_2)} \bigg\} \, \mathrm{d} s_1 \, \mathrm{d} s_2
\end{align*}
where $\psi(s) = \int_{\mathbb{R}} \exp \{ isx \}\, \mu(dx)$ is the Fourier transform of measure $\mu$. \\
Integrating this relation with respect to $t$ will establish short or long range dependence according to \Cref{def: LRD_Spodarev}. Subsequently, we will apply this result to get the LRD of {\it symmetric $\alpha$-stable (S$\alpha$S) moving averages} which are defined as follows.
\begin{Definition}[\cite{SamorodTaqqu94}]
\label{def: SaS MA}
Let $m$ be a measurable function with $m \in \lp{\alpha}{\mathbb{R}}$, $\alpha \in (0,2)$. Then, a S$\alpha$S moving average process with parameter $\alpha \in (0,2)$ and kernel function $m$ is a stochastic process $X = \{ X(t), \, t \in \mathbb{R} \}$ defined by
\begin{align}
X(t) = \int_{\mathbb{R}} m(t-x)\ \Lambda(dx), \quad t \in \mathbb{R}, \label{eq: SASMA}
\end{align}
where $\Lambda$ is a S$\alpha$S random measure with Lebesgue control measure.
\end{Definition}
Here and throughout the paper, we use the notation $m \in \lp{p}{A}$, $p>0$, to imply that $ \int_A \vert m(x)\vert ^p\, \mathrm{d} x < \infty$.
Regarding the SRD/LRD of the process $X$ given in \eqref{eq: SASMA}, our main result relies on the notion of $\alpha$--spectral covariance $\rho_t = \int_{\mathbb{R}} (m(-x)m(t-x))^{\alpha/2} \, \mathrm{d} x$, $t \in \mathbb{R}$, where $m(x)\ge 0$, $x\in\mathbb{R}$. The $\alpha$--spectral covariance was first introduced by \cite{Paulauskas1976} and its properties were studied in \cite{Damarackas2014} and \cite{Damarackas2017}. In \cite{Paul16}, it was discussed how the integrability of $\rho_t$ can be used for the definition of the memory property. Here, we establish by \Cref{thm: SRD_rho} that $X$ is short range dependent if $\rho_t \in \lp{1}{\mathbb{R}}$ or, equivalently, $m \in \lp{\alpha/2}{\mathbb{R}}$. Also, \Cref{thm: LRD_min_m} establishes long range dependence if $\int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} (m^\alpha(x) \wedge m^\alpha(t)) \, \mathrm{d} x \, \mathrm{d} t = \infty$ where $a\wedge b$ is the minimum of $a$ and $b$. These results hold also for $\alpha$-stable linear time series if integrals are replaced by sums.
To put our results into context, one may refer to other research and discussion on memory properties of $\alpha-$stable processes such as \cite{Rachev2002}, \cite{Maejima2003}, \cite{Samorod04}.
Also, we demonstrate how our findings are meaningful in practice by detecting LRD in a real world data set consisting of daily log-returns based on the opening price of the Intel corporation share.
\medskip
Analogously to $\alpha$-stable processes, which have become popular as limits of rescaled sums of stochastic processes, \emph{max-stable processes} have become a widely used concept in extreme value analysis occurring as limiting models for maxima. Thus, they have found applications in various areas such as meteorology \citep[see e.g.]{coles93, buishand-etal-08, davison-gholamrezaee-2012, oesting-friederichs-schlather-2017}, hydrology \citet{asadi-davison-engelke-18} and finance \citep{zhang-smith-2010}. Max-stable processes are defined as follows.
\begin{Definition}
A real-valued stochastic process $X=\{X(t), \ t \in T\}$ is called a {\it max-stable process} if, for all $n \in \mathbb{N}$, there exist functions $a_n: T \to (0,\infty)$ and $b_n : T \to \mathbb{R}$ such that
$$ \left\{ \max_{i=1}^n \frac{X_i(t) - b_n(t)}{a_n(t)}, \, t \in T \right\}
\stackrel{d}{=} \{X(t), \, t \in T \}, $$
where the processes $X_i$, $i \in \mathbb{N}$, are independent copies of $X$, and $\stackrel{d}{=}$ means equality in distribution.
If the index set $T$ is finite, $X$ is also called a {\it max-stable vector}.
\end{Definition}
It follows from the univariate extreme value theory that the marginal
distributions of a max-stable process are either degenerate or follow a
Fr\'echet, Gumbel or Weibull law. While covariances always exist in the Gumbel and Weibull case and, thus, the classical notion of long-range dependence applies, we will consider the case when $X$ is a stationary max-stable process with $\alpha$-Fr\'echet marginal distributions, i.e.\ $\PP(X(t) \leq x) = \exp(-x^{-\alpha})$ for all $x > 0$ and some $\alpha > 0$ and all $t \in T$. Here, covariances do not exist if $\alpha \leq 2$.
In combination with Definition \ref{def: LRD_Spodarev}, a well-established dependence measure for max--stable stochastic processes allows for an easily tractable condition for short and long memory, respectively.
More specifically, we use the pairwise extremal coefficient $\{\theta_t, \ t \in \mathbb{R}\}$ defined via the relation $\PP(X(0) \leq x, \ X(t) \leq x) = \PP(X(0) \leq x)^{\theta_t}$, which holds for all $x > 0$, to show that a stationary max-stable process with $\alpha$-Fréchet marginal distributions is long range dependent if and only if $\int_{\mathbb{R}} (2-\theta_t) \, \mathrm{d} t = \infty$ (cf.~\Cref{prop:lrd}).
\medskip
To summarize, our paper is structured as follows: \Cref{sec: Vitalii} establishes the framework to invert the bivariate characteristic functions.
In \Cref{sec: AlphaStable}, we make use of this framework to find conditions for long range dependence of symmetric $\alpha$-stable moving averages and linear time series, while, in \Cref{sec: MaxStable}, we investigate long range dependence of a stationary max-stable process with $\alpha$-Fréchet marginals. Finally, we model the daily log-returns of an Intel corporation share by a S$\alpha$S moving average $X$ and show that $X$ is LRD in \Cref{sec: data}.
For the sake of legibility, some of the proofs have been left out of the main part of this paper. They can be found in the Appendix.
\section{From Characteristic Function to Covariance of Indicators}
\label{sec: Vitalii}
In this section, we express the covariance of indicators of excursions of random variables above some levels $u,v$ through their uni- and bivariate characteristic functions. Notice that for random variables $U$ and $V$ it holds that
\begin{align}
\Cov (\mathds{1} \{ U > u \}, \mathds{1} \{ V > v \}) = \mathbb{P}(U \leq u, V \leq v) - \mathbb{P}(U \leq u)\mathbb{P}(V \leq v). \label{lem: Covariance with joint and marginal distr}
\end{align}
\allowdisplaybreaks
%
\begin{Theorem}[]
\label{thm: Integrated Covariance}
Suppose $U$ and $V$ are identically distributed random variables with marginal characteristic function $\CFU{}$ and joint characteristic function $\CFV{}{}$. Then, for a finite measure $\mu$ with its Fourier transform denoted by $\psi: \mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{C}, \psi(s) = \int_{\mathbb{R}} \exp \{ isx \}\, \mu(dx)$ it holds that
\begin{align}
&\int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \Cov (\mathds{1} \{ U > u \}, \mathds{1} \{ V > v \})\, \mu(\mathrm{d} u)\, \mu(\mathrm{d} v) \notag \\[2mm]
&=\frac{1}{4 \pi^2} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \frac{1}{s_1 s_2} \Big( \varphi_U(s_1)\varphi_U(s_2) - \CFV{+}{+} \Big) \overline{\psi(s_1)\psi(s_2)}\ ds_1\, ds_2 \notag \\[2mm]
&= \frac{1}{2 \pi^2} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \bigg[ \frac{1}{s_1s_2} \re{} \bigg\{ \big( \CFV{+}{-} - \CFU{s_1}\CFU{-s_2} \big) \overline{\psi(s_1)}\psi(s_2) \bigg\} \notag \\[2mm]
&\hspace{2cm} - \frac{1}{s_1s_2} \re{} \bigg\{ \big( \CFV{+}{+} - \CFU{s_1}\CFU{s_2} \big) \overline{\psi(s_1)\psi(s_2)} \bigg\} \bigg] \, \mathrm{d} s_1 \, \mathrm{d} s_2. \label{eq: integrated covariance}
\end{align}
\begin{pf}
Let $U^{\prime}$ and $V^{\prime}$ be independent copies of $U$ and $V$. Then
\begin{align}
&\int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \Cov (\mathds{1} \{ U > u \}, \mathds{1} \{ V > v \})\, \mu(\mathrm{d} u)\, \mu(\mathrm{d} v) \notag \\
&= \int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \mathbb{E} \big[\mathds{1} \{ U > u, V > v \} - \mathds{1} \{ U^{\prime} > u, V^{\prime} > v \}\big]\, \mu(\mathrm{d} u)\, \mu(\mathrm{d} v) \notag\\
&= \lim_{a \to \infty} \mathbb{E} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \big[\mathds{1} \big\{ U > u > -a, V > v> -a \big\} - \mathds{1} \big\{ U^{\prime} > u > -a, V^{\prime} > v > -a \big\}\big]\, \mu(\mathrm{d} u)\, \mu(\mathrm{d} v). \label{eq: before_plancherel}
\end{align}
If we denote the difference of the two indicators by $f_a(u, v)$, then by \cite[Theorem 19.12]{Schilling_measure_theory}\footnote{We thank René Schilling for his idea which simplifies our original proof.} we get that the last equality in \eqref{eq: before_plancherel} simplifies to
\begin{align}
&\lim_{a \to \infty} \frac{1}{4 \pi^2} \mathbb{E} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \widehat{f}_a(s_1, s_2) \overline{\psi(s_1)\psi(s_2)}\ ds_1\, ds_2, \label{eq: after_Schilling_thm}
\end{align}
where $\widehat{f}_a(s_1, s_2) = \int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} e^{i(s_1u+s_2v)} f_a(u,v)\ du\, dv$. By \Cref{lem: Schilling_lemma} one can interchange the expectation and the integrals in equation \eqref{eq: after_Schilling_thm} and computes
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E} \widehat{f}_a(s_1, s_2) = \frac{1}{s_1 s_2} \Big( \CFU{s_1}\CFU{s_2} -\CFV{+}{+} \Big)
\end{align}
which is independent of $a$. Thus, equation \eqref{eq: after_Schilling_thm} simplifies to
\begin{align*}
\frac{1}{4 \pi^2} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \frac{1}{s_1 s_2} \Big( \CFU{s_1}\CFU{s_2} - \CFV{+}{+} \Big) \overline{\psi(s_1)\psi(s_2)}\ ds_1\, ds_2.
\end{align*}
The second identity in \eqref{eq: integrated covariance} follows from splitting the integrals into the positive and negative half-lines and substituting afterwards.
\end{pf}
\end{Theorem}
\begin{Corollary}
\label{Corr: SRD and LRD symmetric}
Under the assumptions of \Cref{thm: Integrated Covariance}, suppose that the random vector $(U,V)$ is symmetric. Then relation \eqref{eq: integrated covariance} simplifies to
\begin{align}
&\int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \Cov (\mathds{1} \{ U > u \}, \mathds{1} \{ V > v \})\, \mu(\mathrm{d} u)\, \mu(\mathrm{d} v) \notag\\[2mm]
&= \frac{1}{2 \pi^2} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \bigg[ \frac{1}{s_1s_2} \big( \CFV{+}{-} - \CFU{s_1}\CFU{-s_2} \big) \re{} \big\{\overline{\psi(s_1)}\psi(s_2) \big\} \notag\\[2mm]
&\hspace{2cm} - \frac{1}{s_1s_2} \big( \CFV{+}{+} - \CFU{s_1}\CFU{s_2} \big) \re{} \big\{\psi(s_1)\psi(s_2) \big\} \bigg] \, \mathrm{d} s_1 \, \mathrm{d} s_2 \label{eq: thm_sym_case1}\\[2mm]
&= \frac{1}{2 \pi^2} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \frac{1}{s_1s_2} \Big( \CFV{+}{-} - \CFV{+}{+} \Big) \re{1}\re{2} \notag \\[2mm]
&\hspace{0.5cm} + \frac{1}{s_1s_2} \Big(\CFV{+}{-}+ \CFV{+}{+} - 2\CFU{s_1}\CFU{s_2} \Big) \im{1} \im{2} \, \mathrm{d} s_1 \, \mathrm{d} s_2. \label{eq: thm_sym_case2}
\end{align}
\end{Corollary}
\begin{proof}
Equality \eqref{eq: thm_sym_case1} follows immediately from $\CFU{}$ and $\CFV{}{}$ being real-valued as characteristic functions of a symmetric random variable and random vector, respectively.
Equality \eqref{eq: thm_sym_case2} follows from $\text{Re}\{ xy \} = \text{Re}\{ x \}\text{Re}\{ y \} - \text{Im}\{ x \}\text{Im}\{ y \}$ for any $x, y \in \mathbb{C}$.
\end{proof}
If the stationary real-valued stochastic process $X = \{ X(t), t \in \mathbb{R} \}$ is positively associated, we can apply \Cref{thm: Integrated Covariance} and, in the symmetric case, \Cref{Corr: SRD and LRD symmetric} to $X(0)$ and $X(t)$ to check the long range dependence of $X$. \\
To do so, let $T=\mathbb{R}$ in integral \eqref{eq: LRD_Spodarev}. However, the resulting expressions in \eqref{eq: integrated covariance}, \eqref{eq: thm_sym_case1} or \eqref{eq: thm_sym_case2} might prove difficult to integrate w.r.t.\ $t$ over the whole real line. Thus, it is worth noting that the following lemma allows us to restrict integration to unbounded subsets over which it might be easier to integrate.
\begin{Lemma}[]
\label{lemma: Restriction of X}
Let $|\cdot|$ denote the Lebesgue measure on $\mathbb{R}$ and let $A \subset \mathbb{R}$ be an arbitrary subset with $|A^c| < \infty$. Then, a process $X = \{ X(t), \, t \in \mathbb{R} \}$ is SRD or LRD iff $X_A = \{ X(t), \, t \in A \}$ is SRD or LRD, respectively.
\begin{pf}
We split up the integral in relation \eqref{eq: LRD_Spodarev} into $A$ and $A^c$
\begin{align*}
&\int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \bigg\vert \text{Cov}\bigg(\mathds{1}\big\{ X(0) > u \big\}, \mathds{1}\big\{ X(t) > v \big\}\bigg) \bigg\vert \, \mu(\mathrm{d} u) \, \mu(\mathrm{d} v) \, \mathrm{d} t \\[2mm]
=&\int_{A} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \bigg\vert \text{Cov}\bigg(\mathds{1}\big\{ X(0) > u \big\}, \mathds{1}\big\{ X(t) > v \big\}\bigg) \bigg\vert \, \mu(\mathrm{d} u) \, \mu(\mathrm{d} v) \, \mathrm{d} t \\[2mm]
\vspace{1cm}&+
\int_{A^c} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \underbrace{\bigg\vert \text{Cov}\bigg(\mathds{1}\big\{ X(0) > u \big\}, \mathds{1}\big\{ X(t) > v \big\}\bigg) \bigg\vert}_{\leq 1} \, \mu(\mathrm{d} u) \, \mu(\mathrm{d} v) \, \mathrm{d} t.
\end{align*}
As the integral over $A^c$ is finite in any case, the integral in relation \eqref{eq: LRD_Spodarev} is finite iff $X_A$ is SRD.
\end{pf}
\end{Lemma}
Now we give the main result of this section showing the use of characteristic functions to check the short or long range dependence of $X$.
\begin{Theorem}[]
\label{thm: SRD and LRD}
Suppose we have a stationary real-valued, positively associated stochastic process $X = \{ X(t),\, t \in \mathbb{R} \}$ with absolutely continuous marginal distributions. Denote the univariate characteristic function of $X(0)$ by $\CFA{}$ and the bivariate characteristic function of $(X(0), X(t))$ by $\CFB{}{}$. Furthermore, let $A \subset \mathbb{R}$ be an arbitrary subset with $|A^c| < \infty$.
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item Then, $X$ is short range dependent if
\begin{align}
\int_{A} &\int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \Cov (\mathds{1} \{ X(0) > u \}, \mathds{1} \{ X(t) > v \}) \, \mu(\mathrm{d} u) \, \mu(\mathrm{d} v)\, \mathrm{d} t \notag \\[2mm]
&= \frac{1}{2 \pi^2} \int_{A} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \bigg[ \frac{1}{s_1s_2} \re{} \bigg\{ \big( \CFB{+}{-} - \CFA{s_1}\CFA{-s_2} \big) \overline{\psi(s_1)}\psi(s_2) \bigg\} \notag \\[2mm]
&\hspace{1cm} - \frac{1}{s_1s_2} \re{} \bigg\{ \big( \CFB{+}{+} - \CFA{s_1}\CFA{s_2} \big) \overline{\psi(s_1)\psi(s_2)} \bigg\} \bigg] \, \mathrm{d} s_1 \, \mathrm{d} s_2\, \mathrm{d} t < \infty \label{eq: SRD_or_LRD}
\end{align}
for any finite measure $\mu$ with Fourier transform $\psi(s) = \int_{\mathbb{R}} \exp \{ isx \}\, \mu(dx)$.
\item Additionally, if $(X(0), X(t))$ is symmetric for all $t \in \mathbb{R}$, then condition \eqref{eq: SRD_or_LRD} rewrites as
\begin{align}
&\int_{A}\int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \Cov (\mathds{1} \{ X(0) > u \}, \mathds{1} \{ X(t) > v \})\, \mu(\mathrm{d} u)\, \mu(\mathrm{d} v)\, \mathrm{d} t \notag \\[2mm]
&= \frac{1}{2 \pi^2} \int_{A} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \bigg[ \frac{\CFB{+}{-} - \CFB{+}{+}}{s_1s_2} \re{1}\re{2}\notag \\[2mm]
& - \frac{\CFB{+}{-} + \CFB{+}{+} - 2\CFA{s_1}\CFA{s_2}}{s_1s_2} \im{1} \im{2} \bigg] \, \mathrm{d} s_1 \, \mathrm{d} s_2\, \mathrm{d} t <\infty \label{eq: SRD_or_LRD2}.
\end{align}
\end{enumerate}
Otherwise, i.e.\ if there exists a finite measure $\mu$ such that the integral in \eqref{eq: SRD_or_LRD} is infinite, $X$ is long range dependent.
\begin{pf}
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item Take $U = X(0)$ and $V=X(t),$ where $t \in \mathbb{R}$ in \Cref{thm: Integrated Covariance}.
Then, $U$ and $V$ are absolutely continuous and identically distributed random variables. Therefore, the equality in \eqref{eq: SRD_or_LRD} is established by \Cref{thm: Integrated Covariance}. It follows by relation \eqref{eq: SRD_or_LRD} and \Cref{lemma: Restriction of X} that $X$ is SRD. Similarly, $X$ is LRD if \eqref{eq: SRD_or_LRD} is infinite.
\item Follows analogously by using \Cref{Corr: SRD and LRD symmetric}.
\end{enumerate}
\end{pf}
\end{Theorem}
\section{Long Range Dependence of $\alpha$--stable Moving Averages}
\label{sec: AlphaStable}
In this section, we investigate the LRD of S$\alpha$S moving averages in continuous and discrete time.
By \Cref{def: SaS MA}, a symmetric $\alpha$-stable moving average with kernel function $m \in \lp{\alpha}{\mathbb{R}}$, $\alpha < 2$, is defined by $X(t) = \int_{\mathbb{R}} m(t-x) \ \Lambda(\mathrm{d} x)$, $t \in \mathbb{R}$, where $\Lambda$ is a symmetric $\alpha$-stable random measure.
\begin{Remark}[]
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\label{rem: ID moving averages}
\item Note that the S$\alpha$S moving average process $X = \{ X(t), \, t \in \mathbb{R} \}$ is stationary, $X(0)$ is absolutely continuous and, by Property 3.2.1 from \cite{SamorodTaqqu94}, the random vector $(X(0),X(t))$ is symmetric for every $t \in \mathbb{R}$.
\item By \cite{Bulinski_Shashkin}, Theorems 1.3.5 and 1.3.27, $X$ is positively associated if the kernel function $m$ is nonnegative.
\item To exclude the trivial case $X(t) = 0$ for all $t \in \mathbb{R}$ we always assume that the Lebesgue measure of the set $\{ x\in \mathbb{R} \, \vert \; m(x) > 0 \}$ is positive.
\end{enumerate}
\end{Remark}
By \cite{SamorodTaqqu94}, Proposition 3.4.2., the characteristic function $\varphi:\mathbb{R}\to \mathbb{C}$ of $X(t)$, $t \in \mathbb{R}$, is given by
\begin{align}
\CFA{s}=\exp \bigg\{ - \vert s \vert ^ \alpha \int_{\mathbb{R}} \vert m(x) \vert ^ \alpha \, \mathrm{d} x \bigg\}, \quad s\in \mathbb{R}. \label{eq: char_fct_univ}
\end{align}
Moreover, the bivariate characteristic function $\varphi_t:\mathbb{R}\times\mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{C}$ of $\big( X(0),X(t) \big),$ $t\in \mathbb{R}$ is given by
\begin{align}
\CFB{+}{+} =\exp \bigg\{ - \int_{\mathbb{R}} \vert s_1m(-x)+s_2m(t-x)\vert^{\alpha} \, \mathrm{d} x \bigg\}, \quad s_1,s_2\in \mathbb{R}. \label{eq: char_fct_biv}
\end{align}
Before we get to our main result, we need to introduce the \textit{$\alpha$-spectral covariance} of a stable vector as defined by \cite[equation (11)]{Damarackas2017}. Let $\mathbb{S}^1=\{\mathbf{x}\in \mathbb{R}^2: \|\mathbf{x}\|=1\}$ be the unit circle. Recall that a random vector $Z = (X_1, X_2)$ is symmetric $\alpha$-stable with parameter $\alpha$ if there exists a finite measure $\Gamma$ on $\mathbb{S}^1$, the so-called \textit{spectral measure}, such that the characteristic function of $Z$ is given by
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{E}e^{i\langle s, Z \rangle} = \exp \bigg\{ -\int_{\mathbb{S}^1} \vert \langle s,x \rangle \vert ^{\alpha} \Gamma(dx) \bigg\}, s \in \mathbb{R}^2,
\end{align*}
where $\langle \cdot\, , \cdot \rangle$ is the standard inner product on $\mathbb{R}^2$.
\begin{Definition}[]
Suppose $(X_1,X_2)$ is an $\alpha$-stable random vector with spectral measure $\Gamma$, then the { \it $\alpha$-spectral covariance} of $X_1$ and $X_2$ is given by
\begin{align}
\rho = \int_{\mathbb{S}^1} |s_1 s_2|^{\alpha/2} \sgn(s_1 s_2)\ \Gamma(d(s_1,s_2)). \label{eq: alpha-convolution}
\end{align}
\end{Definition}
Let us calculate the $\alpha$-spectral covariance of $(X(0), X(t))$, $t \in \mathbb{R}$, where $X$ is a S$\alpha$S moving average.
\begin{Lemma}[]
\label{thm: alpha_convolution_SASMA_ASLP}
Suppose $X = \{ X(t) , t \in \mathbb{R}\}$ with $X(t) = \int_{\mathbb{R}} m(t-x)\ \Lambda(dx)$ is a S$\alpha$S moving average process. Then, the $\alpha$-spectral covariance of $(X(0), X(t))$, $t \in \mathbb{R}$, is given by
\begin{align}
\rho_t = \int_{\mathbb{R}} m^{\alpha/2}(-x)m^{\alpha/2}(t-x)\sgn(m(-x)m(t-x))\, \mathrm{d} x. \label{eq: rho_t}
\end{align}
\begin{pf}
Denote $m_1(x) = m(-x)$ and $m_2(x)=m(t-x)$, Proposition 3.4.3 in \cite{SamorodTaqqu94} and the the symmetry of $\Lambda$ yields that $(X(0), X(t))$ is S$\alpha$S with spectral measure $\Gamma$ defined for all Borel sets $A \subset \mathbb{S}^1$ by
\begin{align*}
\Gamma(A) &= \frac{1}{2} \int_{g^{-1}(A)} \Big( m_1^2(x) + m_2^2(x) \Big)^{\alpha/2}\, \mathrm{d} x
+ \frac{1}{2} \int_{g^{-1}(-A)} \Big( m_1^2(x) + m_2^2(x) \Big)^{\alpha/2}\, \mathrm{d} x\\[2mm]
&=\gamma(g^{-1}(A)) + \gamma(g^{-1}(-A)) =:(\gamma \circ g^{-1})(A) + (\gamma \circ g^{-1})(-A),
\end{align*}
where
\begin{align*}
g(x) = \left(
\frac{m_1(x)}{\big( m_1^2(x)+m_2^2(x) \big)^{1/2}}\ , \ \frac{m_2(x)}{\big( m_1^2(x)+m_2^2(x) \big)^{1/2}}
\right),\quad x\in \mathbb{R}.
\end{align*}
Hereby $\gamma$ is an absolutely continuous measure w.r.t.~the Lebesgue measure with density $\frac{1}{2}( m_1^2(x)+m_2^2(x))^{\alpha/2}$. With $f(s_1, s_2) = |s_1 s_2|^{\alpha/2} \sgn(s_1 s_2)$ we get
\begin{align*}
\int_{\mathbb{S}^1} f\ d(\gamma \circ g^{-1}) &= \int_{g^{-1}(\mathbb{S}^1)} f \circ g\ d\gamma = \int_{\mathbb{R}} \frac{m_1^{\alpha/2}(x)\, m_2^{\alpha/2}(x)\sgn(m_1(x)m_2(x))}{\big( m_1^2(x) + m_2^2(x) \big)^{ \alpha/2}}\, \gamma(dx) \\[2mm]
&=\frac{1}{2} \int_{\mathbb{R}}m_1^{\alpha/2}(x)\, m_2^{\alpha/2}(x)\sgn(m_1(x)m_2(x))\, \mathrm{d} x.
\end{align*}
Thus,
\begin{align*}
\rho_t = \int_{\mathbb{S}^1} |s_1 s_2|^{\alpha/2} \sgn(s_1 s_2)\ \Gamma(d(s_1, s_2)) = \int_{\mathbb{R}} m_1^{\alpha/2}(x)\, m_2^{\alpha/2}(x)\sgn(m_1(x)m_2(x))\, \mathrm{d} x.
\end{align*}
\end{pf}
\end{Lemma}
Now, a sufficient condition for the short range dependence of $X$ can be formulated in terms of $\rho_t$ or, equivalently, in terms of the kernel function $m$.
\begin{Theorem}[]
\label{thm: SRD_rho}
Let $X= \{ X(t), t \in \mathbb{R} \}$ be a S$\alpha$S moving average process with parameter $\alpha \in (0, 2)$, nonnegative kernel function $m$ and $\alpha$-spectral covariance $\rho_t$ given in \eqref{eq: rho_t}. $X$ is SRD if
\begin{align}
\rho_t \in \lp{1}{\mathbb{R}}, \label{eq: sufficient conditions rho}
\end{align}
or, equivalently, $m \in \lp{\alpha/2}{\mathbb{R}}$.
\begin{pf}
Without loss of generality, assume $\mu$ is a probability measure. Now, apply \Cref{thm: SRD and LRD} to $X$ for some $\varepsilon \in (0,\ANA{m})$ and choose $A = \{ t \in \mathbb{R} \ \vert \ \rho_t \in [0, \varepsilon) \}.$ It follows from the integrability of $\rho_t$ that $\rho_t \rightarrow 0$ as $t \rightarrow \pm \infty$. Thus, there exists a constant $\tilde{t} >0$ such that $\rho_t < \varepsilon$ for all $t \in \mathbb{R}$ where $\vert t \vert > \tilde{t}$. Hence, it holds that $A^c \subset \big\{ t \in \mathbb{R}\ \big\vert\ \vert t \vert \leq \tilde{t} \big\}$ and $|A^c| < \infty.$
Obviously, the right-hand side of the equality in \eqref{eq: SRD_or_LRD2} is bounded by
\begin{align}
\nonumber&\frac{1}{2 \pi^2} \int_{A} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \frac{|\CFB{+}{-} - \CFB{+}{+}|}{s_1s_2} \underbrace{\big\vert \re{1} \re{2} \big\vert}_{\leq 1} \mathrm{d} s_1 \, \mathrm{d} s_2 \mathrm{d} t\\[2mm]
\nonumber + &\frac{1}{2 \pi^2} \int_{A} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \frac{|\CFB{+}{-} + \CFB{+}{+} - 2\CFA{s_1}\CFA{s_2}|}{s_1s_2} \underbrace{\big\vert \im{1} \im{2} \big\vert}_{\leq 1} \, \mathrm{d} s_1 \, \mathrm{d} s_2\, \mathrm{d} t\\
\nonumber \leq &\frac{1}{ \pi^2} \int_{A} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \frac{\vert\CFB{+}{-} - \CFA{s_1}\CFA{s_2}\vert}{s_1s_2} \mathrm{d} s_1 \, \mathrm{d} s_2 \mathrm{d} t\\[2mm]
+ &\frac{1}{ \pi^2} \int_{A} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \frac{\vert\CFB{+}{+} - \CFA{s_1}\CFA{s_2}\vert}{s_1s_2} \, \mathrm{d} s_1 \, \mathrm{d} s_2\, \mathrm{d} t=:\frac{1}{ \pi^2}\left( I_1+I_2\right).
\end{align}
By inequalities \eqref{eq: I_1 finite} and \eqref{eq: I_2 finite} in Lemma \ref{lemma: ineq} we get
\begin{equation*}
I_1,I_2 \leq \frac{8\pi}{\alpha^2 \Vert m \Vert_{\alpha}^{2\alpha}} \int_{A} \frac{\rho_t}{\sqrt{\Vert m \Vert_{\alpha}^{2\alpha}-\rho_t^2}} \, \mathrm{d} t \leq \frac{8\pi}{\alpha^2 \Vert m \Vert _{\alpha}^{2\alpha}} \frac{1}{\sqrt{\Vert m \Vert_{\alpha}^{2\alpha}-\varepsilon^2}} \int_{A} \rho_t \, \mathrm{d} t < \infty.
\end{equation*}
Next, show that condition \eqref{eq: sufficient conditions rho} holds true iff $m\in\lp{\alpha/2}{\mathbb{R}}$. By Fubini's theorem we get
\begin{align*}
\int_{\mathbb{R}} \rho_t\, \mathrm{d} t &= \int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} m^{\alpha/2}(-x)m^{\alpha/2}(t-x)\, \mathrm{d} x \, \mathrm{d} t\\[2mm]
&= \int_{\mathbb{R}} m^{\alpha/2}(-x) \bigg( \int_{\mathbb{R}} m^{\alpha/2}(t-x) \, \mathrm{d} t \bigg) \, \mathrm{d} x\\[2mm]
&= \bigg( \int_{\mathbb{R}} m^{\alpha/2}(-x) \, \mathrm{d} x \bigg)^2 = \Vert m \Vert _{\alpha/2}^{\alpha}<\infty .
\end{align*}
\end{pf}
\end{Theorem}
Naturally, one may also ask for sufficient conditions for the long range dependence of $X$. Such a condition is given by
\begin{Theorem}[]
\label{thm: LRD_min_m}
Let $X= \{ X(t), t \in \mathbb{R} \}$ be a S$\alpha$S moving average process with parameter $\alpha \in (0, 2)$ and nonnegative kernel function $m$. Then, $X$ is long range dependent if
\begin{align}
\int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} (m^\alpha(x) \wedge m^\alpha(t)) \, \mathrm{d} x \, \mathrm{d} t = \infty. \label{eq: LRD_min_m}
\end{align}
\begin{pf}
Given in the appendix.
\end{pf}
\end{Theorem}
Additionally, if the kernel function $m$ is eventually monotonic, then we can simplify condition \eqref{eq: LRD_min_m} as follows.
\begin{Corollary}[]
\label{Corr: LRD}
Let $X= \{ X(t), t \in \mathbb{R} \}$ be a S$\alpha$S moving average process with parameter $\alpha \in (0, 2)$ and nonnegative kernel function $m \in \lp{\alpha}{\mathbb{R}}$ which is eventually monotonic, i.e. there is a number $a > 0 $ such that $m$ is monotonically decreasing on $(a, \infty)$ or monotonically increasing on $(-\infty, -a)$. Then, $X$ is long range dependent if
\begin{align}
\int_{a}^{\infty} t \,m^{\alpha}(t) \, \mathrm{d} t = \infty \quad \text{ or } \quad \int_{-\infty}^{-a} t \,m^{\alpha}(t) \, \mathrm{d} t = -\infty. \label{eq: sufficient_monotonicity}
\end{align}
Additionally, if $m$ is symmetric, the two sufficient conditions \eqref{eq: sufficient_monotonicity} are equivalent.
\end{Corollary}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $m$ is monotonically decreasing on $(a,\infty)$ and compute the integral \eqref{eq: LRD_min_m}. Thus, we have
\begin{align*}
&\int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} (m^\alpha(x) \wedge m^\alpha(t)) \, \mathrm{d} x \, \mathrm{d} t \geq \int_{a}^{\infty} \bigg( \int_{a}^{t} m^{\alpha}(t) \, \mathrm{d} x + \int_{t}^{\infty} m^{\alpha}(x) \, \mathrm{d} x \bigg) \, \mathrm{d} t \geq \int_{a}^{\infty} t m^{\alpha}(t)\, \mathrm{d} t - a \Vert m \Vert ^{\alpha}_{\alpha}.
\end{align*}
The claim follows from the fact that $m \in \lp{\alpha}{\mathbb{R}}$. The case of $m$ monotonically increasing on some interval $(-\infty, -a)$ follows analogously.
\end{proof}
Now let us give an example of a kernel function $m \in \lp{\alpha}{\mathbb{R} }$ whose corresponding S$\alpha$S moving average is long range dependent if $m \notin \lp{\alpha/2}{\mathbb{R}}$.
\begin{Example}[]
\label{ex: LRD}
Suppose we have a S$\alpha$S moving average process $X=\{ X(t), \, t \in \mathbb{R} \}$ with parameter $\alpha \in (0, 2)$ and nonnegative kernel function $m(x) \sim C \vert x \vert ^{-\delta}$ as $\vert x \vert \rightarrow \infty$
where $\delta > \frac{1}{\alpha}$ and $C > 0$.
Obviously, $m \in \lp{\alpha}{\mathbb{R}}$ and $ m(x) \geq \frac{C}{2} \vert x \vert ^{-\delta} $ where $\vert x \vert \geq a$ for some $a > 0$. Notice that
\begin{align*}
\int_{a}^{\infty} t \cdot \bigg( \frac{C}{2} \vert t \vert ^{-\delta} \bigg)^{\alpha} \, \mathrm{d} t = \bigg( \frac{C}{2} \bigg)^{\alpha}\int_{a}^{\infty} t^{1-\delta\alpha} \, \mathrm{d} t = \infty
\end{align*}
if $1-\delta\alpha \geq -1$ or, equivalently, $\delta \leq \frac{2}{\alpha}$. Analogously to the proof of \Cref{Corr: LRD}, this implies that $m$ fulfills equation \eqref{eq: LRD_min_m} if $m \notin \lp{\alpha/2}{\mathbb{R}}$.
Thus, $X$ is long range dependent if $\delta \in\left(\frac{1}{\alpha}, \frac{2}{\alpha}\right]$ by \Cref{thm: LRD_min_m} and is short range dependent if $\delta > \frac{2}{\alpha}$ by Theorem \ref{thm: SRD_rho}.
\end{Example}
\begin{Remark}[]
\label{rem: iff condition}
On one hand, this example was given to illustrate that the conditions \eqref{eq: sufficient_monotonicity} in \Cref{Corr: LRD} are useful when the kernel function itself is not eventually monotonic but rather asymptotically equivalent to such a function. On the other hand, this example motivates our conjecture that a S$\alpha$S moving average is long range dependent iff $m \notin \lp{\alpha/2}{\mathbb{R}}$. However, the conjecture's proof is still to be found.
\end{Remark}
Similar results as above can be obtained for symmetric $\alpha$-stable linear time series $Y$.
\begin{Definition}[\cite{Char_Fct_Hosoya}]
\label{def: linear process}
Let $\{Z(t), t\in \mathds{Z}\}$ be a sequence of i.i.d.~S$\alpha$S random variables with characteristic function $\CFA{s}=\exp\{-\tau^{\alpha}|s|^{\alpha}\}$, $\tau>0$, $0<\alpha < 2$,
$s\in \mathbb{R}$. Let $\{a_{j}, j\in \mathds{Z}\}$ be a sequence of numbers such that $\sum_{j=-\infty}^{+\infty}|a_j|<\infty$. The stochastic process defined by
\begin{align}
Y(t)=\sum\limits_{j=-\infty}^{+\infty}a_jZ(t-j),\quad t \in \mathds{Z}, \label{eq: linear process}
\end{align}
is called a {\it linear S$\alpha$S time series}.
\end{Definition}
Notice that $Y$ can be written as a continuous time S$\alpha$S moving average with parameter $\alpha \in (0, 2)$ and kernel function $m(x) = \sum_{j=-\infty}^{\infty} a_j \mathds{1}_{[(j-1)\tau^{\alpha},j\tau^{\alpha})}(x)$ sampled at time instants $t \in \mathbb{Z}$. Thus, $Y$ is positively associated if the coefficients $a_j$ are nonnegative for all $j \in \mathbb{Z}$. Moreover, the function $\rho_t$ simplifies to $\rho_t= \sum_{j=-\infty}^{\infty} a^{\alpha/2}_{-j} a^{\alpha/2}_{t-j}$, $t\in \mathds{Z}$.
\begin{Remark}
\label{rem: time series}
Theorems \ref{thm: SRD_rho} and \ref{thm: LRD_min_m} as well as \Cref{Corr: LRD} apply to linear processes with the obvious substitute of $\sum_{t=-\infty}^{\infty}$ for $\int_{\mathbb{R}}\, \mathrm{d} t$. Indeed,
let $Y= \{ Y(t), t \in \mathbb{Z} \}$ be a stationary S$\alpha$S time series with parameter $\alpha < 2$ and nonnegative coefficients $\{ a_j, j \in \mathbb{Z} \}$. If
\begin{align}
\sum_{t = - \infty}^{\infty} \rho_t < \infty \quad \text{ or, equivalently, } \quad \sum_{j=-\infty}^{\infty} a_j ^{\alpha/2} < \infty, \label{eq: sufficient conditions SRD linear}
\end{align}
then $Y$ is short range dependent. If
\begin{align}
\sum_{j=-\infty}^{\infty} \sum_{t=-\infty}^{\infty} (a_j^\alpha \wedge a_t^\alpha) = \infty \label{eq: LRD_min_a},
\end{align}
then $Y$ is long range dependent. Additionally, if the coefficients $a_j$ are for some $a > 0$ monotonically increasing for all $j < -a$ or monotonically decreasing for all $j > a$ , then $Y$ is long range dependent if
$
\sum_{j=a}^{\infty} j\,a_j^{\alpha} = \infty$ or $\sum_{j=-\infty}^{a} j\,a_j^{\alpha} = -\infty $, respectively.
\end{Remark}
\section{Long Range Dependence of Max-stable Processes}
\label{sec: MaxStable}
In this section, we demonstrate that it is possible to use already existing dependence properties to check \Cref{def: LRD_Spodarev} instead of inverting characteristic functions as in the previous sections.
Any max-stable process is positively associated, see for instance Proposition 5.29 in \cite{resnick-87}. Its dependence properties are typically summarized by its pairwise extremal coefficients $\{\theta_t, \ t \in T\}$ defined via
$$ \PP(X(0) \leq x, \ X(t) \leq x) = \PP(X(0) \leq x)^{\theta_t} \quad \text{for all } x > 0,$$
cf.\ \cite{schlather-tawn-03}. By a series expansion of the logarithm, it can be
seen that $ \theta_t = 2 - \lim_{x \to \infty} \PP(X(t) > x \mid X(0) > x)$.
Thus, $\theta_t \in [1,2]$, where $\theta_t=2$ corresponds to the case
of (asymptotic) independence between $X(0)$ and $X(t)$ while $\theta_t=1$ means
full dependence. Even though the joint distribution of $(X(0),X(t))$ is not
uniquely determined by $\theta_t$, this characteristic turns out to be a useful
tool for the identification of dependence properties. For instance, \cite{stoev-08}, \cite{kabluchko-schlather-10} and \cite{dombry-kabluchko-17} provide necessary and sufficient conditions for ergodicity and mixing of a max-stable process in terms of its pairwise extremal coefficients.
Here, we focus on the property of long-range dependence given by \Cref{def: LRD_Spodarev}. We obtain bounds for $\Cov \big(\mathds{1} \{ X(0) > u \}, \mathds{1} \{ X(t) > v \}\big)$, $t \in T$, $u,v > 0$, by making use of the following lemma.
\begin{Lemma}[] \label{lem:bounds-cdf}
Let $(X,Y)$ be a bivariate max-stable random vector with $\alpha$-Fr\'echet
margins, $\alpha > 0$, and extremal coefficient $\theta \in [1,2]$. Then, we have
\begin{align*}
\exp\left( - \frac 1 {u^\alpha} - \frac 1 {v^\alpha} + \frac{2 -\theta}{(u \vee v)^\alpha} \right)
\leq{} \PP(X \leq u, Y \leq v)
\leq{} \exp\left( - \frac 1 {u^\alpha} - \frac 1 {v^\alpha} + \frac{2 -\theta}{(u \wedge v)^\alpha} \right)
\end{align*}
for all $u,v > 0$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
It is well-known that the cumulative distribution function of a bivariate
max-stable random vector $(X,Y)$ with $\alpha$-Fr\'echet margins is of the
form
$$ \PP(X \leq u, Y \leq v) = \exp\left(- \EE\left[ \left( \frac{W_X}{u} \vee \frac{W_Y}{v} \right)^\alpha \right] \right), \quad u,v \geq 0, $$
where $(W_X,W_Y)$ is a bivariate random vector with $\EE W_X^\alpha = \EE W_Y^\alpha = 1$
cf.~Chapter 5 in \cite{resnick-87}, for instance. This so-called \textit{spectral
vector} $(W_X,W_Y)$ is closely connected to the extremal coefficient via the
relation $\theta = \EE( W_X^\alpha \vee W_Y^\alpha )$. Thus, we obtain
\begin{align}
& -\log \PP(X \leq u, Y \leq v) {}={} \EE\left[ \left(\frac{W_X} u\right)^\alpha \vee \left(\frac{W_Y} v\right)^\alpha \right] \nonumber\\
={}& \EE \bigg[ \phantom{\vee} \left( \frac{W_X^\alpha}{(u \vee v)^\alpha} + W_X^\alpha \cdot \left( \frac 1 {(u \wedge v)^\alpha} - \frac 1 {(u \vee v)^\alpha} \right) \cdot \mathbf{1}\{u \leq v\} \right) \nonumber \\
& \phantom{\EE \bigg[} \vee \left( \frac{W_Y^\alpha}{(u \vee v)^\alpha} + W_Y^\alpha \cdot \left( \frac 1 {(u \wedge v)^\alpha} - \frac 1 {(u \vee v)^\alpha} \right) \cdot \mathbf{1}\{v < u\} \right) \bigg]. \label{eq:lem}
\end{align}
Distinguishing between the two cases $u \leq v$ and $v < u$, it can be seen
that the right-hand side of equation \eqref{eq:lem} can be bounded from above by
\begin{align*}
& \frac{1}{(u \vee v)^\alpha} \EE\left( W_X^\alpha \vee W_Y^\alpha \right)
+ \left( \frac 1 {(u \wedge v)^\alpha} - \frac 1 {(u \vee v)^\alpha} \right) \cdot \EE\left( W_X^\alpha \cdot \mathbf{1}\{u \leq v\} + W_Y^\alpha \cdot \mathbf{1}\{v < u\}\right) \\
={}& \frac{\theta}{(u \vee v)^\alpha} + \left( \frac 1 {u^\alpha} + \frac 1 {v^\alpha} - \frac 2 {(u \vee v)^\alpha} \right) \cdot 1
{}={} - \frac{2-\theta}{(u \vee v)^\alpha} + \frac{1}{u^\alpha} + \frac{1}{v^\alpha},
\end{align*}
where we used the fact that $\EE W_X^\alpha = \EE W_Y^\alpha = 1$.
This gives the lower bound stated in the lemma. Analogously, we obtain
\begin{align*}
& -\log \PP(X \leq u, Y \leq v) {}={} \EE\left[ \left(\frac{W_X} u\right)^\alpha \vee \left(\frac{W_Y} v\right)^\alpha \right] \\
={}& \EE \bigg[ \phantom{\vee} \left( \frac{W_X^\alpha}{(u \wedge v)^\alpha} - W_X^\alpha \cdot \left( \frac 1 {(u \wedge v)^\alpha} - \frac 1 {(u \vee v)^\alpha} \right) \cdot \mathbf{1}\{v < u\} \right) \\
& \phantom{\EE \bigg[} \vee \left( \frac{W_Y^\alpha}{(u \wedge v)^\alpha} - W_Y^\alpha \cdot \left( \frac 1 {(u \wedge v)^\alpha} - \frac 1 {(u \vee v)^\alpha} \right) \cdot \mathbf{1}\{u \leq v\} \right) \bigg] \\
\geq{}& \frac{1}{(u \wedge v)^\alpha} \EE\left( W_X^\alpha \vee W_Y^\alpha \right)
- \left( \frac 1 {(u \wedge v)^\alpha} - \frac 1 {(u \vee v)^\alpha} \right) \cdot \EE\left( W_X^\alpha \cdot \mathbf{1}\{v < u\} + W_Y^\alpha \cdot \mathbf{1}\{u \leq v\}\right) \\
={}& \frac{\theta}{(u \wedge v)^\alpha} - \left( \frac{2}{(u \wedge v)^\alpha} - \frac 1 {u^\alpha} - \frac 1 {v^\alpha} \right) \cdot 1
= - \frac{2-\theta}{(u \wedge v)^\alpha} + \frac 1 {u^\alpha} + \frac 1 {v^\alpha},
\end{align*}
which gives the corresponding upper bound.
\end{proof}
\begin{Remark}[]
Note that the lower bound in Lemma \ref{lem:bounds-cdf} corresponds to the bound
given in \cite{strokorb-schlather-15}. For the so-called Molchanov--Tawn model,
we even have
\begin{align*}
\PP(X \leq u, Y \leq v) ={}
\exp\left( - \frac 1 {u^\alpha} - \frac 1 {v^\alpha} + \frac{2 -\theta}{(u \vee v)^\alpha} \right), \quad u, v > 0,
\end{align*}
i.e.\ the bound is sharp in this case.
\end{Remark}
Using \Cref{lem: Covariance with joint and marginal distr}, Lemma \ref{lem:bounds-cdf} yields the following bounds for $\Cov \big(\mathds{1} \{ X(0) > u \}, \mathds{1} \{ X(t) > v \}\big)$:
\begin{align*}
\exp\left(- \frac 1 {u^\alpha} - \frac 1 {v^\alpha}\right) \cdot
\left[ \exp\left(\frac{2 -\theta_t}{(u \vee v)^\alpha} \right) - 1\right]
\leq{}& \Cov \big(\mathds{1} \{ X(0) > u \}, \mathds{1} \{ X(t) > v \}\big) \\
\leq{}& \exp\left(- \frac 1 {u^\alpha} - \frac 1 {v^\alpha}\right) \cdot
\left[ \exp\left(\frac{2 -\theta_t}{(u \wedge v)^\alpha} \right) - 1\right]
\end{align*}
for $u, v > 0$ and $\Cov \big(\mathds{1} \{ X(0) > u \}, \mathds{1} \{ X(t) > v \}\big) = 0$ if $u \wedge v \leq 0$ due to the $\alpha$-Fr\'echet margins.
Consequently, one obtains for the integral in \eqref{eq: LRD_Spodarev} that
\begin{align}
& \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \exp\left(- \frac 1 {u^\alpha} - \frac 1 {v^\alpha}\right)
\int_{T} \left[\exp\left(\frac{2 -\theta_t}{(u \vee v)^\alpha} \right) - 1 \right] \, \mathrm{d} t
\, \mu(\mathrm{d} u) \, \mu(\mathrm{d} v) \nonumber \\
\leq{}& \int_{T} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \big\vert\Cov \big(\mathds{1} \{ X(0) > u \}, \mathds{1} \{ X(t) > v \}\big)\big\vert \, \mu(\mathrm{d} u) \, \mu(\mathrm{d} v) \, \mathrm{d} t \nonumber \\
\leq{}& \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \exp\left(- \frac 1 {u^\alpha} - \frac 1 {v^\alpha}\right)
\int_{T} \left[\exp\left(\frac{2 -\theta_t}{(u \wedge v)^\alpha} \right) - 1 \right] \, \mathrm{d} t
\, \mu(\mathrm{d} u) \, \mu(\mathrm{d} v). \label{eq:bounds-int-cov}
\end{align}
From the lower and the upper bound in \eqref{eq:bounds-int-cov}, we directly obtain a necessary and sufficient condition for long range dependence. Interestingly, unlike in case of $\alpha$-stable processes, the criterion does not depend on $\alpha>0$.
\begin{Theorem}[] \label{prop:lrd}
Let $X=\{X(t), \ t \in T\}$ be a stationary max-stable process with $\alpha$-Fr\'echet marginal distributions, $\alpha > 0$,
and pairwise extremal coefficients $\{\theta_t, \, t \in T\}$.
Then, $X$ is long range dependent if and only if
\begin{equation} \label{eq:cond-lrd}
\int_{T} (2-\theta_t) \, \mathrm{d} t = \infty.
\end{equation}.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
First, assume that \eqref{eq:cond-lrd} holds. Choosing the finite measure $\mu = \delta_{\{1\}}$ as the Dirac measure, we obtain from the lower bound in \eqref{eq:bounds-int-cov} and the inequality $ \exp(x) \geq 1 + x$ for all $x \geq 0$ that
\begin{align*}
& \int_{T} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} |\Cov \big(\mathds{1} \{ X(0) > u \}, \mathds{1} \{ X(t) > v \}\big)| \, \delta_{\{1\}}(\mathrm{d} u) \, \delta_{\{1\}}(\mathrm{d} v) \, \mathrm{d} t \\
\geq{}& \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \exp\left(- \frac 1 {u^\alpha} - \frac 1 {v^\alpha}\right)
\int_{T} \left[\exp\left(\frac{2 -\theta_t}{(u \vee v)^\alpha} \right) - 1 \right] \, \mathrm{d} t
\, \delta_{\{1\}}(\mathrm{d} u) \, \delta_{\{1\}}(\mathrm{d} v) \\
={}& \exp(-2) \cdot \int_{T} \left[\exp\left(2 -\theta_t\right) - 1 \right] \, \mathrm{d} t \geq \exp(-2) \cdot \int_{T} (2 -\theta_t) \, \mathrm{d} t = \infty.
\end{align*}
Conversely, assume that \eqref{eq:cond-lrd} does not hold, i.e.\
$$ C = \int_{T} (2 -\theta_t) \, \mathrm{d} t < \infty. $$
As $0 \leq 2 - \theta_t \leq 1$ for all $t \in T$, we obtain that
\begin{align*}
\int_T (2-\theta_t)^k \, \mathrm{d} t \leq \int_T (2-\theta_t) \, \mathrm{d} t = C
\end{align*}
for all $k \in \mathbb{N}$ and therefore
\begin{align*}
& \exp(-u^{-\alpha}) \int_T \left[ \exp((2-\theta_t)u^{-\alpha}) -1\right] \, \mathrm{d} t {}={} \exp(-u^{-\alpha}) \int_T \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac {u^{-\alpha k}} {k!} (2 -\theta_t)^k \, \mathrm{d} t \\
={}& \exp(-u^{-\alpha}) \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac {u^{-\alpha k}} {k!}
\int_T (2-\theta_t)^k \, \mathrm{d} t {}\leq{} \exp(-u^{-\alpha}) \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac {u^{-\alpha k}} {k!} C \leq C
\end{align*}
for all $u \geq 0$. Combining this inequality with the upper bound in \eqref{eq:bounds-int-cov}, we have
\begin{align*}
& \int_{T} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \int_{\mathbb{R}} \big\vert\Cov \big(\mathds{1} \{ X(0) > u \}, \mathds{1} \{ X(t) > v \}\big)\big\vert \, \mu(\mathrm{d} u) \, \mu(\mathrm{d} v) \, \mathrm{d} t \\
\leq{}& \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \int_{T}\exp\left(- \frac 1 {u^\alpha} - \frac 1 {v^\alpha}\right)
\int_{T} \left[\exp\left(\frac{2 -\theta_t}{(u \wedge v)^\alpha} \right) - 1 \right] \, \mathrm{d} t \, \mu(\mathrm{d} u) \, \mu(\mathrm{d} v) \\
\leq{}& \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \int_{T} \exp\left(- \frac 1 {(u \wedge v)^\alpha} \right)
\int_{T} \left[\exp\left(\frac{2 -\theta_t}{(u \wedge v)^\alpha} \right) - 1 \right] \, \mathrm{d} t \, \mu(\mathrm{d} u) \, \mu(\mathrm{d} v) \\
\leq{}& \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} \int_{\mathbb{R}_+} C \, \mu(\mathrm{d} u) \, \mu(\mathrm{d} v) \leq C \mu^2(\mathbb{R}_+)
\end{align*}
for any finite measure $\mu$ on $\mathbb{R}$. Thus, $X$ is short range dependent.
\end{proof}
\begin{Example}
Here, we consider two popular examples of max-stable processes, namely the extremal Gaussian process and the Brown--Resnick process.
\begin{enumerate}
\item The extremal Gaussian process \citep{schlather02} is a max-stable process with
$1$-Fr\'echet marginal distributions and finite-dimensional distributions of the form
$$ \PP(X(t_1) \leq x_1, \ldots, X(t_d) \leq x_d)
= \exp\left( - \sqrt{2\pi} \max_{i=1,\ldots,d} \frac{\max\{W(t_i),0\}}{x_i} \right),
\quad t_i \in T, \, x_i > 0, $$
where $\{W(t), \, t \in T\}$ is a centered stationary Gaussian process on $T=\mathbb{R}$. The
extremal coefficients of the extremal Gaussian process are given by
$$ \theta_t = 1 + \sqrt{1 - \frac{1+\rho_t}{2}}, \quad t \in T,$$
where $\rho_t = \Corr(W(t),W(0))$ denotes the correlation function of the underlying Gaussian process $W$. Provided that $\rho_t \geq 0$ for all $t \in T$, we have that $\theta_t \leq 1 + \sqrt{1/2}$, and, consequently,
$$ \int_{T} (2 -\theta_t) \, \mathrm{d} t \geq \int_{\mathbb{R}} (1 - \sqrt{1/2}) \, \mathrm{d} t = \infty,$$
that is, the process is long range dependent by \Cref{prop:lrd}.
\item The Brown--Resnick process \citep{KSH09} is a max-stable process with $1$-Fr\'echet marginal distributions and finite-dimensional distributions of
the form
$$ \PP(X(t_1) \leq x_1, \ldots, X(t_d) \leq x_d)
= \exp\left( - \max_{i=1,\ldots,d} \frac{\exp(W(t_i) - \frac 1 2 \Var[W(t_i)])}{x_i} \right), $$
$t_i \in T, \, x_i > 0,$ where $W$ is a centered Gaussian process with stationary increments on $T=\mathbb{R}$. The extremal coefficients of the Brown--Resnick process can be expressed in terms of the
variogram $\gamma(t) = \EE[(W(t)-W(0))^2]$, $t \in \mathbb{R}$, of the underlying Gaussian process $W$ via the relation
$$ \theta_t = 2 \Phi\left( \frac{\sqrt{\gamma(t)}}{2} \right), \quad t \in \mathbb{R},$$
where $\Phi$ denotes the standard normal distribution function.
Now assume that there exists some constant $C > 8$ such that
$\gamma(t) \geq C \log |t|$ for $|t|$ being sufficiently large. From Mill's ratio $1 - \Phi(x) \sim x^{-1} \varphi(x)$ as $x \to \infty$
with $\varphi$ being the standard normal density function, it follows that
\begin{align*}
2 - \theta_t {}={}& 2 [ 1 - \Phi(\sqrt{\gamma(t)}/2)]
{}\leq{} 2 [1 - \Phi(\sqrt{C \log|t|} / 2)] \\
\sim{}& \frac{4}{\sqrt{C \log|t|}} \varphi(\sqrt{C \log|t|} / 2)
{}={} \frac{2 \sqrt{2}}{\sqrt{\pi C \log|t|}} |t|^{-C/8}, \quad |t| \to \infty,
\end{align*}
is integrable. Thus, by \Cref{prop:lrd}, the Brown--Resnick process is SRD if $$\liminf_{|t| \to \infty} \gamma(t) / \log |t| > 8,$$ which is true, for instance, for any fractional Brownian motion $W$.
If, in contrast, the variogram $\gamma$ of the underlying Gaussian process $W$ is bounded as in the case of a stationary process, we obtain that $\sup_{t \in T} \theta_t < 2$. Thus, analogously to the case of the extremal Gaussian process, the Brown-Resnick process can be shown to be LRD.
Note that these conditions also appear in the literature when analyzing the existence of a mixed moving maxima (M3) representation of a Brown-Resnick process:
In \cite{KSH09}, it is shown that a M3 representation exists if $\liminf_{|t| \to \infty} \gamma(t) / \log |t| > 8$.
In case of a bounded variogram, however, the resulting Brown-Resnick is not even mixing. As sufficient and necessary conditions for the existence of a M3 representation
are stated in terms of the asymptotic behavior of the sample paths of the underlying Gaussian process rather than in terms of its variogram \citep[cf.][for instance]{wang-stoev-10, dombry-kabluchko-17},
to the best of our knowledge, there is no general treatment of the gap between these two cases. Similarly, for SRD/LRD, a detailed analysis of further cases is beyond the scope of this paper.
\end{enumerate}
\end{Example}
\begin{Remark}
In this section, using known dependency properties allows to avoid complex calculation such that no restrictions on the index set $T$ are required. In particular, all the results are also valid for max-stable random fields, i.e.\ the case that $T \subset \mathbb{R}^d$.
\end{Remark}
\section{Application to Data}
\label{sec: data}
In this section, we want to motivate our theoretical results by showing their applicability to real world data. To do so, let us consider the daily log-returns of the Intel corporation share from Mar 03, 2013 to Aug 21, 2017 depicted in \Cref{fig: log-returns}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{logreturnplots.eps}
\caption{Daily log-returns based on the opening price of the Intel corporation share from Mar 03, 2013 to Aug 21, 2017}
\label{fig: log-returns}
\end{figure}
Preliminary analysis has shown that the marginal distribution of these log-returns fits reasonably well to that of a symmetric $\alpha$-stable distribution with estimated index of stability $\hat{\alpha} = 1{.}56$ and scale parameter $\hat{\sigma} = 0{.}0072$ as depicted in \Cref{fig: marginal-dist}. For simplicity, here we use the simple and consistent estimation procedure proposed by \cite{McCulloch86}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{marginals.eps}
\caption{Estimated density of the log-returns (in blue) compared to the theoretical density of a symmetric $\alpha$-stable distribution with index of stability $\hat{\alpha} = 1{.}56$ and scale parameter $\hat{\sigma} = 0{.}0072$ (in red).}
\label{fig: marginal-dist}
\end{figure}
Further, we model this time series using a linear S$\alpha$S process $Y(t)=\sum_{j=-\infty}^{+\infty}a_jZ(t-j)$, $t \in \mathds{Z}$ with $\alpha \in (0, 2)$, as described in \Cref{def: linear process}. By \Cref{rem: time series}, we can apply our previous continuous-time results from \Cref{sec: AlphaStable} by considering a continuous-time S$\alpha$S moving average $X$ with a piecewise constant kernel function and interpreting the time series $Y$ as $X$ sampled at time instances $t \in \mathbb{Z}$.
To do so, we estimate a continuous-time kernel function by a non-parametric approach and check the conditions in Theorems \ref{thm: SRD_rho} and \ref{thm: LRD_min_m}. By \Cref{ex: LRD}, it suffices to check the condition $m \in \lp{\alpha/2}{\mathbb{R}}$ , if the estimated kernel function exhibits power decaying tails. \\
However, to the best of our knowledge, there is no universally applicable non-parametric approach for kernel estimation in our setting. For instance, the procedure proposed by \cite{Kampf2020} estimates the kernel of a S$\alpha$S moving average under certain conditions posed on the underlying kernel function $m$. However, the authors of this particular paper conclude that under their assumptions, $m$ must be bounded and $m \in \lp{p}{\mathbb{R}}$ for all $p \in (1/a, \infty]$ where $a > \max \{ 2, 1/\alpha \}$ which, in particular, implies that $m \in \lp{\alpha/2}{\mathbb{R}}$. Consequently, \Cref{thm: SRD_rho} implies that this kernel estimation procedure is applicable in our setting only if $X$ is SRD.
Therefore, let us choose a simple parametric minimal contrast method based on the codifference \begin{align*}
\tau(t) = \Vert X(0) \Vert ^{\alpha}_{c,\alpha}
+
\Vert X(t) \Vert ^{\alpha}_{c,\alpha}
-
\Vert X(0) - X(t) \Vert ^{\alpha}_{c,\alpha}
\end{align*}
of $X(0)$ and $X(t)$ as defined in \cite[Definition 2.10.1]{SamorodTaqqu94}.
Here $\Vert \cdot \Vert_{c,\alpha}$ describes the covariation norm of a S$\alpha$S random variable given by \cite[Definition 2.8.1]{SamorodTaqqu94}.
We assume that the kernel function of $X$ is causal, i.e., supported on the positive half-line, and parametrized like
\begin{align*}
m(t) = \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} \frac{c}{1 + k^\delta} \mathds{1}\{ t \in [k-1, k), t \geq 0 \},
\end{align*}
where $c, \delta > 0$. By \Cref{ex: LRD}, the process $X$ is well-defined iff $\delta > \frac{1}{\alpha}$ and long range dependent iff $\delta \leq \frac{2}{\alpha}$.
By \cite[Example 3.6.2]{SamorodTaqqu94} we have that $\Vert X(0) \Vert ^{\alpha}_{c,\alpha} = \Vert X(t) \Vert^{\alpha}_{c,\alpha} = \Vert m \Vert ^{\alpha}_{\alpha}$
and
$\Vert X(0) - X(t) \Vert ^{\alpha}_{c,\alpha} = \Vert m(\cdot) - m(t - \cdot) \Vert ^{\alpha}_{\alpha} $.
By simple calculations, we get that for all $t \in \mathbb{N}$
\begin{align*}
\Vert m \Vert ^{\alpha}_{\alpha}
&=
c^{\alpha} \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} (1+k^{\delta})^{-\alpha},\\
\Vert m(\cdot) - m(t - \cdot) \Vert ^{\alpha}_{\alpha}
&=
c^{\alpha} \bigg(
\sum_{k=1}^{t} (1 + k^{\delta})^{-\alpha}
+
\sum_{k=1}^{\infty} \Big\vert (1 + k^{\delta})^{-1}
-
(1 + (k+t)^{\delta})^{-1} \Big\vert^{\alpha}
\bigg).
\end{align*}
Note here that despite the process $X$ being defined on the whole real line, we are only interested in sample time points $t \in \mathbb{N}$ for our data analysis. Consequently, the codifference $\tau(t)$ of $X(0)$ and $X(t)$ writes
\begin{align}
\tau(t)
=
c^{\alpha} \bigg(
\sum_{k=1}^{\infty} (1+k^{\delta})^{-\alpha}
+
\sum_{k=t+1}^{\infty} (1 + k^{\delta})^{-\alpha}
-
\sum_{k=1}^{\infty} \Big\vert (1 + k^{\delta})^{-1} - (1 + (k+t)^{\delta})^{-1} \Big\vert^{\alpha}
\bigg). \label{eq: tau_theo}
\end{align}
By \cite[Prop. 2.8.2]{SamorodTaqqu94} it holds that $\Vert X(t) \Vert ^{\alpha}_{c,\alpha} = \sigma$
and
$ \Vert X(0) - X(t) \Vert ^{\alpha}_{c,\alpha} = \sigma_t$
for all $t \in \mathbb{N}$ where $\sigma$ and $\sigma_t$ are the scale parameters of $X(0)$ and $X(0)-X(t)$, respectively. We compare the theoretical quantity \eqref{eq: tau_theo} to
\begin{align*}
\hat{\tau}(t) = 2 \hat{\sigma} - \hat{\sigma_t}
\end{align*}
where $\hat{\sigma}$ and $\hat{\sigma_t}$ are estimators of $\sigma$ and $\sigma_t$, respectively. Again, we use the approach proposed by \cite{McCulloch86} to estimate $\sigma$. When estimating $\hat{\sigma_t}$, we do the same based on computed observations $X(i) - X(i + t)$, $i =1, \dots, n-t$, where $n$ denotes the length of the original sample.
Now, let us estimate the parameters $\delta$ and $c$ by minimizing the $\mathcal{L}^2$-distance of $\tau$ and $\hat{\tau}$ based on the first 25 time instances. We choose this value based on the computation costs of a higher threshold and on the fact that this value has proven useful in simulation studies as part of the preliminary analysis. Using our procedure, we estimate $\hat{\delta} = 1{.}0474$ and $\hat{c} = 0{.}0019$. To validate our estimation, we ran a parametric bootstrap and simulated 1000 S$\hat{\alpha}$S time series with kernel parameters $\hat{\delta}$ and $\hat{c}$ to get a grasp on the variance of $\tau$ in our chosen model. The results of our parametric bootstrap are depicted in \Cref{fig: bootstrap}. It shows that despite some discrepancies with regard to the empirically computed $\hat{\tau}$, which is to be expected in real data, our model exhibits a reasonable fit for the data set.
Notice that, due to the empirical estimation of the scale parameters $\sigma$ and $\sigma_t$, it happens that $\hat{\tau}(t)<0$ for some $t>0$, which is impossible for the theoretical codifference $\tau$. This, however, does not substantially affect the quality of the fit of $\hat{\tau}$ to $\tau$. By the same parametric bootstrap we find the standard deviations of $0{.}1802$ for $\delta$ and $0{.}0005$ for $c$. It holds that $\hat{\delta} = 1{.}0474 < 2/\alpha = 1{.}2821$ which implies by \Cref{ex: LRD} that the log-returns of Intel Corporation are long range dependent.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\linewidth]{bootstrap.eps}
\caption{Parametric bootstrap of $\tau(t)$. Black: boxplots of $\hat{\tau}(t)$ based on 1000 S$\hat{\alpha}$S time series simulated with kernel parameters $\hat{\delta}$ and $\hat{c}$; Blue: $\hat{\tau}(t)$ based on data; Red: kernel function with parameters $\hat{\delta}$ and $\hat{c}$ (plotted as a line for better visibility).}
\label{fig: bootstrap}
\end{figure}
\FloatBarrier
\section*{Data Availability Statement}
The data used in this paper was provided by a free data sample from \\ \href{https://www.quandl.com/data/EOD/INTC}{https://www.quandl.com/data/EOD/INTC}.
\bibliographystyle{abbrvnat}
|
\section{Introduction}
The Siegel-Weil formual is an identity between an Eisenstein series and an integral of a regularized theta function. The convergent case ($r=0$ or $m>n+r$) was studied first by Weil in \cite{weil}. The case for the classical unitary group ($d=1$) have been extensively studied by Ichino \cite{ichino2001crelle,ichino2004mathz,ichino2007sw} and Gan-Qiu-Takeda \cite{gan2014siegelweil}. When $d>1$, the first term identity in the first term range ($m\leq n$) was proved by Yamana in \cite{yamana2013siegel}. This paper will focus on the sencond term range, i.e., $n+1\leq m\leq n+r$ and $d>1$. The proof is indebted to Gan-Qiu-Takeda \cite{gan2014siegelweil}.
Following \cite{yamana2013siegel}, let $E/F$ be a quadratic extension of number fields and $D$ be a division algebra with center $E$, of dimension $d^2$ over $E$ and provided with an antiautomorphism $\ast$ of order two under which $F$ is the fixed subfield of $E$. Let $\mathbb{A}$ and $\mathbb{A}_E$ be the adele rings of $F$ and $E$ respectively. Let $\omega_{E/F}$ be the quadratic charater of $\mathbb{A}^\times/F^\times$ associated to the extension $E/F$.
Given a local place $v$ of $F$, let $F_v$ be the $v$-completion of $F$ and set $E_v=E\otimes_F F_v,D_v=D\otimes_F F_v$. Then
\[D_v\cong\begin{cases}
M_{d}(E_v)&\mbox{ if }E_v\mbox{ is a local field},\\
D_{F_v}\oplus D_{F_v}^{op}&\mbox{ if }E_v=F_v\oplus F_v,
\end{cases} \]
where $D_F$ is a central simple algebra with center $F$, of dimension $d^2$ over $F$, $D_{F_v}=D_F\otimes_F F_v$ is a central simple algebra with center $F_v$ and $D_{F_v}^{op}$ is its opposite algebra (see \cite[Theorem 10.2.4]{scharlau1985}).
Let $W_{2n}$ be a right $D$-vector space of dimension $2n$ with a nondegenerate skew-Hermitian form that has a complete polarization, and $V_r$ a left $D$-vector space of dimension $m$ with a nondegenerate Hermitian form. Let $\chi_V$ be the quadratic character of $\mathbb{A}_E^\times/E^\times$ associated to $V$ such that $\chi_V|_{\mathbb{A}^\times/F^\times}=\omega_{E/F}^{dm}$.
Let $V_0$ be a left $D$-vector space of dimension $m_0$ with $U(V_0)$ anisotropic and $V_r=V_0\oplus D^{2r}$, where $D^{2r}$ is a $D$-vector space with Hermtian form
\[\langle x,y\rangle =x J(y^\ast)^t,J=\begin{pmatrix}
0&\mathbf{1}_n\\\mathbf{1}_n&0
\end{pmatrix} \] for $x,y\in D^{2r}$, $\mathbf{1}_n$ is the identity matrix in $M_n(D)$, $x^t$ is the transpose of $x$ and $r$ is called the Witt index of $V_r$. Let $G_{2n}$ and $H_r$ be the unitary group of $W$ and $V$ respectively. Then
\[G_{2n}(F_v)\cong\begin{cases}
U_{nd,nd}&\mbox{ if }E_v\mbox{ is a field};\\
\mathrm{GL}_{2n}(D_{F_v})&\mbox{ if }E_v=F_v+F_v.
\end{cases} \]
Let $\alpha_E$ denote the standard norm of $\mathbb{A}^\times_E$ . We denote by $P$ the maximal parabolic subgroup
of $G_{2n}$ that stabilizes a maximal isotropic subspace of $W$. Note that $P$ has a Levi
decomposition $P = MN$ with $M \cong \mathrm{GL}_n(D)$. For any unitary character $\chi$ of $\mathbb{A}^\times_E /E^\times$
and for any $s\in\mathbb{C}$ ,we consider the representation $I(s,\chi)=Ind_{P(\mathbb{A})}^{G_{2n}(\mathbb{A})}\chi\alpha_E^s$
induced
from the character $m \rightarrow \chi(\nu(m))\alpha_E(\nu(m))^s$, where $\nu$ is the reduced norm viewed
as a character of the algebraic group $\mathrm{GL}_n(D)$ and the induction is normalized so that $I (s, \chi)$ is naturally unitarizable when $s$ is pure imaginary.
When $E=F+F$, we consider $$I(s,\mathbf{1})=Ind_{P(\mathbb{A})}^{GL_{2n}(D_F(\mathbb{A}))}\alpha_E^s\boxtimes\alpha_E^{-s},$$ where $P=MN$ and $M\cong \mathrm{GL}_n(D_F)\times\mathrm{GL}_n(D_F)$.
For any holomorphic section $f^{(s)}$ of $I(s,\chi)$, i.e.
\[f^{(s)}(mng)=\chi(\nu(m))\alpha_E(\nu(m))^{s+dn/2}f^{(s)}(g) \]
for $m\in\mathrm{GL}_n(D(\mathbb{A}))$, $n\in N(\mathbb{A})$ and $g\in G_{2n}(\mathbb{A})$,
the Siegel Eisenstein series
\[E(g;f^{(s)})=\sum_{\gamma\in P(F)\backslash G(F) }f^{(s)}(\gamma g) \]
is absolutely convergent for $Re(s)>\frac{dn}{2}$
and has a meromorphic continuation to the whole $s$-plane.
\begin{lem}\cite[Theorem 1]{yamana2013siegel}\label{siegeleisenstein}
If $n+1\leq m\leq n+r$ and $r>0$, then the Siegel Eisenstein series $E(g;f^{(s)})$ has a simple pole at $s=s_0=(m-n)d/2$ where $\chi=\chi_V$.
\end{lem}
Fix a nontrivial additive character $\psi$ of $\mathbb{A}/F$ and a character $\chi_V$ of $\mathbb{A}_E^\times/E^\times$ such that $\chi_V|_{\mathbb{A}^\times}=\omega_{E/F}^{dm}$.
The group $G_{2n}(\mathbb{A})\times H_r(\mathbb{A})$ acts on the Schwartz space $\mathfrak{S}(V_r^n(\mathbb{A})) $
of $V_r^n(\mathbb{A})$ via the Weil representation $\omega_{n,r}$. Let $S(V_r^n(\mathbb{A}))$ be the subspace of $\mathfrak{S}(V_r^n(\mathbb{A}))$ consisting of functions that correspond to polynomials in the Fock model at every archimedean place of $F$. Given a function $\phi\in S(V_r^n(\mathbb{A}))$,
set $$\Phi^{n,r}(\phi)(g)=\omega(g)\phi(0).$$ Then $\Phi^{n,r}(\phi)\in I((m-n)d/2,\chi_V)$ which is called the Siegel-Weil section associated to $V_r$. Suppose $f^{(s)}=\Phi^{n,r}(\phi)$ and the Siegel Eisentein series has an expression
\[E(s,\Phi^{n,r}(\phi))= \sum_{j\geq-1}A^{n,r}_j(\phi)(s-s_0)^j, \]
where each Laurent coefficient $A^{n,r}_j(\phi)$ is an automorphic form on $G_{2n}$ and $A_j^{n,r}$ can be viewed as a linear map
\[A_j^{n,r}:\omega_{n,r}\longrightarrow \mathcal{A}(G_{2n}) \]
where $\mathcal{A}(G_{2n})$ is the space of automorphic forms on $G_{2n}$.
The theta function associated to $\phi\in S(V_r^n(\mathbb{A}))$ is defined by
\[\Theta(g,h;\phi)=\sum_{x\in V_r^n(F)}(\omega(g)\phi)(h^{-1}x) \]
for $g\in G_{2n}(\mathbb{A})$ and $h\in H_r(\mathbb{A})$. Let $\tau(H_r)$ denote the Tamagawa number of $H_r$. By Weil's criterion \cite{weil}, the integral
\[I_{n,r}(\phi)(g)=\frac{1}{\tau(H_r)}\int_{H_r(F)\backslash H_r(\mathbb{A}) }\Theta(g,h;\phi)dh \]
is absolutely convergent for all $\phi$ either if $r=0$ or $m>r+n$.
When $m\leq r+n$ and $r>0$, the integral diverges in general.
Let $V_r=X_r\oplus V_0\oplus X_r^\ast$ such that $X_r$ is the maximal isotropic subspace in $V$ and $U(V_0)$ is anisotropic. Let $P(X_r)=M(X_r)N(X_r)$ be the maximal parabolic subgroup of $H_r$ which stabilizes the spaces $X_r$. Then its Levi factor is
\[M(X_r)\cong\mathrm{GL}_r(D)\times U(V_0). \]
Let us fix the Iwasawa decomposition $$H_r(\mathbb{A})=P(X_r)(\mathbb{A})\cdot K_{H_r}$$ such that $K_{H_r}\cap \mathrm{GL}(X_r)(\mathbb{A})$ is a maximal compact subgroup of $\mathrm{GL}_r(X_r)(\mathbb{A})$.
Let $$I_{H_r}(s)=Ind_{P(X_r)(\mathbb{A})}^{H_r(\mathbb{A})}\alpha_E^s\boxtimes\mathbf{1}_{U(V_0)}$$ be the normalized induced representation of $H_r(\mathbb{A})$ where $\alpha_E^s$ is a character of $\mathrm{GL}_r(D(\mathbb{A}))$ and $\mathbf{1}_{U(V_0)}$ is the trivial representation of $U(V_0)$.
Following \cite{kudla1994annals}, Ichino \cite{ichino2001crelle} defined a regularization of the integral $I(g,\phi)$ as follow
\begin{equation}\label{regularization}
\mathcal{E}^{n,r}(s,\phi)(g)=\frac{1}{\tau(H_r)\cdot \kappa_r\cdot P_{n,r}(s)}\int_{H_r(F)\backslash H_r(\mathbb{A}) }\Theta(g,h;z.\phi)E_{H_r}(s,\phi)dh, \end{equation}
where
\begin{itemize}
\item $z$ lies in the spherical Hecke algebra of $G_{2n}(F_v)\cong U_{nd,nd}$ for $v$ non-archimedean and $E_v$ is a field so that the action of $z$ commutes with the action of $G_{2n}(\mathbb{A})\times H_r(\mathbb{A})$ and $\Theta(g,-;z.\phi)$ is rapidly decreasing;
\item $E_{H_r}(s,h)$ is the Eisenstein series given by
\[E_{H_r}(s,h)=\sum_{\gamma\in P(X_r)(F)\backslash H(F) }f_s^0(\gamma h) \]
where $f_s^0\in I_{H_r}(s)$ is the $K_{H_r}$-spherical standard section with $f_s^0(1)=1$;
\item $P_{n,r}(s)$ is a scalar such that the Hecke operator $z\ast E_{H_r}(s,-)=P_{n,r}(s)\cdot E_{H_r}(s,-)$, which can be found in \cite[Page 208]{ichino2001crelle}.
\end{itemize}
The regularized integral (\ref{regularization}) converges absolutely at all points $s$ where $E_{H_r}(s,h)$ is holomorphic, and defines a meromorphic function of $s$ (independent of the choice of the Hecke operator $z$). (See \cite{ichino2001crelle}.) We are interested in the behavior of $\mathcal{E}^{n,r}(s,\phi)$ at
\[s=\rho_{H_r}=(m-r)d/2. \]
It turns out that in the first term range, when $m\leq n$, it has a pole of order at most $1$
whereas in the second term range, it has a pole of order at most $2$ when $n+1\leq m\leq n+r$ and $r>0$.
Thus, the Laurent expansion of (\ref{regularization}) at $s=\rho_{H_r}$ has the form
\[\mathcal{E}^{n,r}(s,\phi)=\sum_{i\geq-2}B^{n,r}_i(\phi)(s-\rho_{H_r})^i \]
where $B^{n,r}_{-2}(\phi)=0$ if $m\leq n$.
Then each Laurent coefficient $B^{n,r}_i(\phi)$ is an automophic form on $G_{2n}$, and hence we view $B^{n,r}_i$ as a linear map
\[B^{n,r}_i:\omega_{n,r}\longrightarrow \mathcal{A}(G), \]
via $\phi\mapsto B^{n,r}_i(\phi)$,
where $\mathcal{A}(G_{2n})$ is the space of automorphic forms on $G_{2n}$.
Yamana \cite{yamana2013siegel} showed the first term identity in the first term range, i.e. $m\leq n$. In this paper, we will focus on the sencond term range, i.e. $n+1\leq m\leq n+r$.
\begin{thm}[Siegel-Weil formula] Suppose that $n+1\leq m\leq n+r$. Then one has:
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]\label{secondtermsiegelweil}
\item (First term identity) $A^{n,r}_{-1}(\phi)=c\cdot B^{n,r}_{-2}(\phi)$ for a constant $c>0$;
\item (Second term identity) $$A^{n,r}_0(\phi)=B^{n,r}_{-1}(\phi)+c'\cdot B_0^{n,r'}(Ik^{n,r}(\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi))\pmod{\mbox{Im } A_{-1}^{n,r}}.$$
Here $c'$ is a constant and $0<r'<r$ is such that $m_0+2r'=2n-m$. Moreover,
\[Ik^{n,r}:\omega_{n,r}\longrightarrow\omega_{n,r'} \]
is the Ikeda map which is $G_{2n}\times H_{r'}$-equivariant. If $m= n+r$, then
\[A_0^{n,r}(\phi)=B_{-1}^{n,r}(\phi)\pmod{\mbox{Im }A_{-1}^{n,r} }. \]
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\begin{rem}
When $d=1$, it has been proven by Gan-Qiu-Takeda in \cite[Theorem 1.1]{gan2014siegelweil} and $c=1$.
\end{rem}
Now we briefly describe the contents and the organization of this paper. The basic notation will be set up in \S2. In \S3, we will introduce the Eisenstein series and their various properties.
The proof of Theorem \ref{secondtermsiegelweil} will be given in \S4. We will use the doubling method to sudy the nonvanishing of the global theta lift in the last section.
\section{Preliminaries}
From now on, we will follow the notation of Gan-Qiu-Takeda \cite{gan2014siegelweil} in this section. Let $W_{2n}$ be a $2n$-dimensional right $D$-vector space with a nondegenerate skew-Hermitian form. Assume that $Y_n$ is a maximal isotropic subspace in $W_{2n}$ of dimension $n$, so that
$W_{2n}=Y_n\oplus Y_n^\ast$. We fix an ordered basis $\{y_1,y_2,\cdots,y_n \}$ of $Y_n$ and corresponding dual basis $\{y_1^\ast,\cdots,y_n^\ast \}$ of $Y_n^\ast$, so that $Y_n=\oplus^n_{i=1} y_iD$
and $Y_n^\ast=\oplus_{i=1}^ny_i^\ast D$. For any subspace $Y_r=\oplus_{i=1}^ry_iD\subset Y_n$, let
\[Q(Y_r)=L(Y_r)\cdot U(Y_r) \]
denote the maximal parabolic subgroup fixing $Y_r$. Then its Levi factor is
\[L(Y_r)\cong \mathrm{GL}(Y_r)\times G_{2n-2r}. \]
If $r=n$, then $Q(Y_r)$ is a Siegel parabolic subgroup of $G_{2n}$.
The unipotent radical $U(Y_r)$ of $Q(Y_r)$ sits in a short exact sequence
\[\xymatrix{1\ar[r]&Z(Y_r)\ar[r]&N(Y_r)\ar[r]&Y_r\otimes V_{n-r}\ar[r]&1 } \]
where
\[Z(Y_r)=\{\mbox{Hermitian forms on }Y_r^\ast \}\subset \mathrm{Hom}(Y_r^\ast,Y_r). \]
\subsection{Measures} Let us fix the additive character $\psi$ of $\mathbb{A}/F$ and the Tamagawa measure $dx$ on $\mathbb{A}$. Locally, we fix the Haar measure $dx_v$ on $F_v$ to be self-dual with respect to $\psi_v$. For any algebraic group $G$ over $F$, we always use the Tamagawa measure on $G(\mathbb{A})$ when $G(\mathbb{A})$ is unimodular. This applies to the Levi subgroups and the unipotent radical of their parabolic subgroups. We use $\tau(G)$ to denote the Tamagawa number of $G$.
For any compact group $K$, we always use the Haar measure $dk$ with respect to which $K$ has volume $1$.
\subsection{Complementary spaces}
With $W_{2n}$ fixed, one may associate to $V_r$ a complementary space $V_{r'}$ such that
\[\dim V_{r'}=m_0+2r'=2n-m \]
and the quadratic character associated to $V_{r'}$ is $\chi_V$. If $m=n+r$, then $r'=0$ and the unitary group $U(V_0)$ is anisotropic. If $r>r'$,
we may write $V_r=X_{r-r'}'\oplus V_{r'}\oplus {X'}_{r-r'}^\ast$ where
\[X_{r-r'}'=\oplus_{i=r'+1}^r Dx_{i} \]
when $X_r=\oplus_{i=1}^r Dx_{i} $ and $\{x_1,\cdots,x_r \}$ is a basis of $X_r$. We say that $V_r$ and $V_{r'}$ lie in the same Witt tower.
For any maximal parabolic subgroup $P(X_{r-r'})$ of $H_r$, with Levi subgroup $\mathrm{GL}(X_{r-r'})\times H_r'$, we define a constant $\kappa_{r,r'}$ by the requirement that
\[\frac{1}{\tau(H_r)}=\kappa_{r,r'}\cdot\frac{1}{\tau(H_{r'})}\cdot dm\cdot dn\cdot dk \]
where $dm$ and $dn$ are the Tamagawa measures of $M(X_{r-r'})$ and $N(X_{r-r'})$ respectively. In particular $\kappa_r=\kappa_{r,0}$.
\subsection{Ideka's map}
Suppose that $V_r\supset V_{r'}$(not necessarily complementary spaces) and
\[ \dim V_r=m_0+2r=\dim V_{r'}+2(r-r'). \]
Then one may write
\[ V_r=X_{r-r'}'\oplus V_{r'}\oplus {X'}^\ast_{r-r'}. \]
We can define a map
\[Ik^{n,r,r'}:S(Y_n^\ast\otimes V_r )(\mathbb{A}) \longrightarrow S(Y_n^\ast\otimes V_{r'})(\mathbb{A}) \]
given by
\[Ik^{n,r,r'}(\phi)(a)=\int_{(Y_n^\ast\otimes X'_{r-r'} )(\mathbb{A}) }\phi(x,a,0)dx, \]
for $a\in(Y_n^\ast\otimes V_{r'})(\mathbb{A})$. Thus,
$Ik^{n, r,r'}$ is the composite
\[
\begin{CD}
S(Y_n^* \otimes V_r)
= S(Y_n^* \otimes V_{r'})\otimes
S(Y_n^* \otimes (X'_{r-r'} + {X'}^*_{r-r'}))\\
@VVId \otimes \mathcal{F}_1V \\
S(Y_n^* \otimes V_{r'})\otimes
S(W_{2n}\otimes X'_{r-r'})\\
@VVId \otimes ev_0V \\
S(Y_n^* \otimes V_{r'})
\end{CD}
\]
where
\[ \mathcal{F}_1 : S(Y_n^* \otimes (X'_{r-r'} +
{X'}^*_{r-r'}))
\longrightarrow S(W_{2n}\otimes X'_{r-r'})\]
is the partial Fourier transform in the subspace $(Y_n^* \otimes
{X'}^*_{r-r'})(mathbb{A})$, and $ev_0$ is evaluation at $0$. It is clear that
if $r'' < r' < r$, one has
\begin{equation} \label{E:ikeda}
Ik^{n,r', r''} \circ Ik^{n, r, r'} = Ik^{n, r, r''}.
\end{equation}
In the special case when $V$ and $V'$ are complementary
spaces, we shall simply write $Ik^{n,r}$ for $Ik^{n,r,r'}$. We will call
$Ik^{n,r}$ (more generally $Ik^{n,r,r'}$) an Ikeda map.
\subsection{Weil representation}
Let $\omega_{n,r}$ be the Weil representation of $G_{2n}(\mathbb{A})\times H_r(\mathbb{A})$. More precisely, given a Schwartz-Bruhat function $\phi\in S(Y_n^\ast\otimes V_r )(\mathbb{A})$, the $P(Y_n)(\mathbb{A})\times H_r(\mathbb{A})$-action is given by
\[
\begin{cases}
\omega_{n,r}(1, h)\phi(x) = \phi(h^{-1} \cdot x), &\text{ if $h \in H_r(\mathbb{A})$;} \\
\omega_{n,r}(a,1) \phi(x) = \chi_V(\nu(a)) \cdot \alpha_E(\nu (a))^{md/2}
\cdot \phi( a^{-1} \cdot x), &\text{ for $a \in L(Y_n)(\mathbb{A}) =
\mathrm{GL}(Y_n)(\mathbb{A})$;} \\
\omega_{n,r}(u,1) \phi(x) = \psi(\frac{1}{2} \cdot \langle u(x),
x\rangle)\cdot \phi(x), &\text{ for $u \in N(Y_n)(\mathbb{A}) \subset
\mathrm{Hom}(Y_n^*, Y_n)(\mathbb{A})$.}
\end{cases} \]
\subsection{The Fourier transform $\mathcal{F}_{n,r}$}
There is a partial Fourier transform
\[\mathcal{F}_{n,r}:S(Y_n^\ast \otimes V_r)(\mathbb{A})\longrightarrow S(W_{2n}\otimes X_r^\ast)(\mathbb{A}) \otimes S(Y_n^\ast \otimes V_0)(\mathbb{A}) \]
which is given by integration over the subspace
$(Y_n^\ast\otimes X_r )(\mathbb{A})$. We may regard $\mathcal{F}_{n,r}(\phi)$ as a function on $(W_{2n}\otimes X_r^\ast)(\mathbb{A})$ taking values in $S(Y_n^\ast \otimes V_0)(\mathbb{A})$.
\section{Eisenstein series}
In this section, we will study the analytic behavior of the Eisenstein series at certain points.
\subsection{The Siegel Eisenstein series}
Let $G_{2n}$ be the unitary group of $W_{2n}$. Let $P(Y_n)$ be the Siegel parabolic subgroup of $G_{2n}$.
Given a normalized induced representation $I(s,\chi_V)=Ind_{P(Y_n)(\mathbb{A})}^{G_{2n}(\mathbb{A})}\chi_V\alpha_E^s$, one can construct an Eisenstein series
\[E(g;f^{(s)})=\sum_{\gamma\in P(Y_n)(F)\backslash G_{2n}(F) }f^{(s)}(\gamma g) \]
for $f^{(s)}\in I(s,\chi_V)$ and $g\in G_{2n}(\mathbb{A})$. Sometimes we write
\[E(g;f^{(s)})= E^{(n,n)}(g;f^{(s)}) \]
when we want to emphasize the rank of the group. It admits a meromorphic continuation to the whole $s$-plane.
Let $a(s,\chi_V)=\prod_{j=1}^{dn}L(2s-j+1,\omega_{E/F}^{j+d(n+m)})$ and
\[b(s,\chi_V)=\prod_{j=1}^{dn}L(2s+j,\omega_{E/F}^{j+d(n+m)}). \]
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{siegeleisenstein}]
Suppose that $f^{(s)}\in I(s,\chi_V)$. The normalized intertwining operator $M_n(s,\chi_V)$ in \cite{yamana2013siegel} is given as follow
\[M_n(s,\chi_V)f^{(s)}(g)=a(s,\chi_V)^{-1}\int_{N(Y_n)(\mathbb{A})} f^{(s)}(\begin{pmatrix}
0&\mathbf{1}_n\\-\mathbf{1}_n&0
\end{pmatrix}ng)dn . \]
Then $M_n(s,\chi_V)$ is entire due to \cite[Lemma 1.2]{yamana2013siegel}. Moreover, at the point $s=s_0=(m-n)d/2$,
\[ord_{s=s_0} E(g;f^{(s)})=ord_{s=s_0}\frac{a(s,\chi_V)}{b(s,\chi_V)}=-1. \]
Therefore, $E(s,f^{(s)})$ has a simple pole at $s=s_0=(m-n)d/2$.
\end{proof}
Given a function $\phi\in S(Y_n^\ast\otimes V_r)(\mathbb{A})$,
set $$f^{(s)}(g)=\Phi^{n,r}(\phi)(g)=\omega_{n,r}(g)\phi(0)$$ and then $f^{(s)}\in I(s_0,\chi_V)$ which is called the Siegel-Weil section. Its image in $I(s_0,\chi_V)$ is isomorphic to the maximal $H_r(\mathbb{A})$-invariant quotient of $\omega_{n,r}$ by \cite[Proposition 1.4]{yamana2013siegel}.
Let $f^{(s)}=\Phi^{n,r}(\phi)$ be the Siegel-Weil section so that
\[E(g;\Phi^{n,r}(\phi))=A^{n,r}_{-1}(\phi)(s-s_0)^{-1}+A^{n,r}_0(\phi)+\cdots. \]
Here $A_0^{n,r}(\phi)$ denotes $Val_{s=s_0}E(g;\Phi^{n,r}(g))$.
There are local analogous notation for the intertwining operator and the Siegel-Weil section. Suppose that $V_r(F_v)$ is a Hermitian vector space over $D_v$. The maximal $H_r(F_v)$-invariant quotient of $(\omega_{n,r,v})_{H_r(F_v)}$ is isomorphic to a subrepresentation of $I_v(s_0,\chi_V)$, denoted by $R_n(V_r(F_v))$.
Let $\mathcal{C}=\{\mathfrak{V}_v \}$ be a collection of local Hermitian spaces of dimension $m$ over $D_v$ such that $\mathfrak{V}_v$ is isometric to $V_{r}(F_v)$ for almost all $v$. We form a restricted tensor product $\Pi(\mathcal{C},\chi_V)=\otimes_v' R_{n}(\mathfrak{V}_v)$, which we can regard as a subrepresentation of $I(s_0,\chi_V)$. If there is a global Hermitian $D$-vector space with $\mathfrak{V}_v$ as its completions, then we call $\mathcal{C}$ coherent. Otherwise, we call the collection $\mathcal{C}$ incoherent. By \cite[Proposition 1.4]{yamana2013siegel}, we see that the maximal semisimple quotient of $I(s_0,\chi_V)$ is given by
\[\bigoplus_\mathcal{C} \Pi(\mathcal{C},\chi_V) \]
where the sum runs over all the collections $\mathcal{C}$ (coherent or incoherent) as defined above.
Due to \cite[Proposition 3.5]{yamana2013siegel}, the image of $A^{n,r}_{-1}(\phi)$ is given by
$$\bigoplus_{\mathcal{C} }\Pi(\mathcal{C},\chi_V) $$
where $\mathcal{C}$ runs over coherent collections.
\begin{prop}\label{secondterm}
The leading term $A_{-1}^{n,r}(\phi)$ is $G_{2n}(\mathbb{A})$-equivariant and
\[A_0^{n,r}(\omega_{n,r}(g)\phi)=g\cdot A_{0}^{n,r}(\phi)\pmod{Im A_{-1}^{n,r}} \]
for any $g\in G(\mathbb{A})$ and $\phi\in S(Y_n^\ast\otimes V_r)(\mathbb{A})$.
\end{prop}
Note that when $v\in S$, $R_n(V_r(F_v))$ is the full induced representation $I(s_0,\chi_V)$. (See \cite[Proposition 1.4]{yamana2013siegel}.) Then Proposition \ref{secondterm} follows from \cite[Proposition 6.4]{gan2014siegelweil}.
\subsection{The non-Siegel Eisenstein series} Recall that
\begin{align*} \mathcal{E}^{n,r}(s,\phi)(g)&= \frac{1}{\tau(H_r)\cdot\kappa_r\cdot P_{n,r}(s)}\int_{H_r(F)\backslash H_r(\mathbb{A}) }\Theta(g,h;z.\phi)E_{H_r}(s,\phi)dh
\\&=\sum_{i\geq-2}B^{n,r}_i(\phi)(g)(s-\rho_{H_r})^i. \end{align*}
\begin{lem}
There exists a function $c_r(s)$ such that
\[E_{H_r}(s,-)=c_r(s)\cdot E_{H_r}(-s,-). \]
\end{lem}
Unfolding the Eisenstein series $E_{H_r}(s,-)$, one can
obtain the following.
\begin{prop}\cite[Proposition 3.3]{gan2014siegelweil}
Assume that $Re(s)$ is sufficiently large. Then
\[\mathcal{E}^{n,r}(s,\phi)=E^{(n,r)}(s,f^{n,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\phi))). \]
The following explains the notation in the above proposition:
\begin{itemize}
\item $E^{(n,r)}$ refers to the Eisenstein series associated to the family of induced representations \[I_r^n(s,\chi_V)=Ind_{Q(Y_r)}^{G_{2n}(\mathbb{A})}(\chi_V\alpha_E^s\boxtimes\Theta_{n-r,0}(V_{0}) ) \]
where we recall that the Levi factor of $Q(Y_r)$ is $L(Y_r)\cong \mathrm{GL}(Y_r)\times G_{2n-2r}$ and $$\Theta_{n-r,0}(V_0)=\langle \frac{1}{\tau(V_0)}\int_{H_0(F)\backslash H_0(\mathbb{A})}\Theta_{n-r,0}(g,h;\phi)dh:\phi\in S(Y_{n-r}^\ast\otimes V_0)(\mathbb{A}) \rangle. $$
If $m_0=0$, then $\Theta_{n-r,0}(V_0)$ is interpreted to be the character $\chi_V\circ\iota \circ \nu_{G_{2n-2r}}$ where $\iota:E^\times/F^\times\rightarrow E^1$ is the natural isomorphism and $\nu_{G_{2n-2r}}:G_{2n-2r}\rightarrow E^1$ is the reduced norm map.
\item $\pi_{K_{H_r}}$ is the projection operator onto the $K_{H_r}$-fixed subspace, defined by
\[\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\phi)=\int_{K_{H_r}}\omega_{n,r}(k)(\phi)dk. \]
\item For $\phi\in S(Y_n^\ast\otimes V_r)(\mathbb{A})$,
\[f^{n,r}(s,\phi)\in I_r^n(s,\chi_V) \]
is a meromorphic section given by
\begin{align*} f^{n,r}(s,\phi)(g) &=
\int_{\mathrm{GL}(X_r)(\mathbb{A})} I_{n-r,0}(\omega_{n,r}(g,a)\mathcal{F}_{n,r}(\phi)
( \beta_0)(0 , -) )\,\cdot \alpha_E(\nu(a))^{s - \rho_H} \, da \\
&= \int_{\mathrm{GL}(X_r)(\mathbb{A})} I_{n-r,0}(\omega_{n,r}(g)\mathcal{F}_{n,r}(\phi)
( \beta_0 \circ a )(0 , -) )\,\cdot \alpha_E(\nu(a))^{s +nd -
\rho_H} \, da.
\end{align*}
Here we note that $\mathcal{F}_{n,r}(\phi)$ is a Schwartz function on
$X_r^* \otimes W_n = \mathrm{Hom}(X_r, W_n)$ taking values in
\[ \mathcal{S}(Y_n^* \otimes V_0)(\mathbb{A}) = \mathcal{S}(Y_r^* \otimes V_0)(\mathbb{A})
\otimes \mathcal{S}({Y'}^*_{n-r}\otimes V_0)(\mathbb{A}), \]
and
\[ \beta_0 \in \mathrm{Hom}(X_r, W_{n}) \]
is defined by
\[ \beta_0(x_i) = y_i \quad \text{for $i = 1,\dots,r$,} \]
so that
\[ \mathcal{F}_{n,r}(\phi)(\beta_0 \circ a)(0,-) \in \mathcal{S}({Y'}^*_{n-r} \otimes V_0)(\mathbb{A}). \]
The integral defining $f^{n,r}(s,\phi)$ converges when
\[ {\rm Re}(s) > \frac{md}{2} - \frac{(2n-r)d }{2} \]
and extends to a meromorphic section of $I^n_r(s, \chi)$ (since it
is basically a Tate-Godement-Jacquet zeta integral).
When $r=0$ and $m_0>0$, we set $f^{n,0}(s,\phi)(g)=I_{n,0}(\phi)(g)$ by convention.
\end{itemize}
\end{prop}
Following \cite[\S4.2]{gan2014siegelweil}, we express elements of $Y_n^\ast\otimes V_r$ as $3\times 2$ matrices corresponding to the decompositions
\[Y_n^\ast=Y_r^\ast\oplus {Y'}_{n-r}^\ast\mbox{ and }V_r=X_r\oplus V_0\oplus X_r^\ast, \]
so the first column of the matrix has entries from $Y_r^\ast\otimes X_r,Y_r^\ast\otimes V_0$ and $Y_r^\ast\otimes X_r^\ast$ in this order, and the second column has entries from ${Y'}_{n-r}^\ast\otimes X_r,{Y'}^\ast_{n-r}\otimes V_0$ and ${Y'}_{n-r}^\ast\otimes X_r^\ast$.
\begin{lem}
\cite[Lemma 4.1]{gan2014siegelweil} One has
\[f^{n,r}(g)=I_{n-r,0}(\mathfrak{f}^{n,r}(s,\phi)(g) ) \]
where $\mathfrak{f}^{n,r}(s,\phi)(g)(-)=\int_{\mathrm{GL}(X_r)(\mathbb{A})}\int_{({Y'}_{n-r}^\ast\otimes X_r)(\mathbb{A})}\omega_{n,r}(g)\phi\begin{pmatrix}
A& X_2\\0&-\\0&0
\end{pmatrix} \alpha_E(\nu(A))^{-s+rd-dn+\rho_{H_r}}dX_2dA $
\end{lem}
Moreover, one can extend the definition of $f^{n,r}(s,\phi)$ to define functions $F^{n,r}(s,\phi)$ on $G_{2n}\times H_r$ such that $F^{n,r}(s,\phi)\in I_r^n(s,\chi_V)\boxtimes I_{H_r}(-s)$ and $F^{n,r}(s,\phi)|_{G_{2n}}=f^{n,r}(s,\phi)$, see \cite[Remark 4.3]{gan2014siegelweil}.
Now we consider the restriction of the section $f^{n+1,r}(s,\phi)$ from $G_{2n+2}$ to $G_{2n}$ which is closely related to the Ikeda map $Ik^{n,r,r-1}$. More precisely, fix $\phi_1\in S(Y_1^\ast\otimes V_r)(\mathbb{A})$ satisfying:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\phi_1(0)=1;$
\item $\phi_1$ is $K_{H_r}$-invariant, so that $\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\phi_1)=\phi_1$.
\end{itemize}
For any $\phi\in S({Y'}_n^\ast\otimes V_r)(\mathbb{A})$, we set
\[\tilde{\phi}=\phi_1\otimes\phi\in S(Y_{n+1}^\ast\otimes V_r )(\mathbb{A}) .\]
Then $\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\tilde{\phi})=\phi_1\otimes\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\phi)$. Let $W_{2n}=\langle y_2,\cdots,y_{n+1},y_{n+1}^\ast,\cdots,y^\ast_2\rangle \subset W_{2n+2}$ and $$G_{2n}=U(W_{2n})\subset U(W_{2n+2})= G_{2n+2}.$$
\begin{prop}\cite[Proposition 4.2]{gan2014siegelweil} Suppose $m_0>0$ when $r=1$. Then
there is a constant $\alpha_r>0$ such that
\[ f^{n+1,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\tilde{\phi}))|_{G_{2n}}=\alpha_r Z_1(-s-(n+1-r)d+\rho_{H_r},\phi_1)\cdot f^{n,r-1}(s+d/2,Ik^{n,r,r-1}(\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\phi))), \]
where $Z_1(s,\phi_1)$ is the Tate zeta integral
\[Z_1(s,\phi_1)=\int_{\mathrm{GL}_1(Y_1^\ast)(\mathbb{A}) }\phi_1(ty_1^\ast\otimes x_1)\alpha_E(\nu(t))^sdt. \]
Moreover, the constant $\alpha_r$ is given in \cite[Lemma 9.1]{ichino2004mathz}.\label{functionf(r)}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} It suffices to consider the function $\mathfrak{f}^{n,r}(s,\phi)(-)$.
Assume that $r=1$ and $m_0>0$. Observe that
\begin{align*}&\mathfrak{f}^{n+1,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}\tilde{\phi})(g)(-)\\
&=\int_{({Y'}^\ast_{n+1-r}\otimes X_r)(\mathbb{A}) } \int_{\mathrm{GL}_r(D(\mathbb{A}))}\phi_1(A)\alpha_E(\nu(A))^{-s+rd-dn-d+\rho_{H_r}} dA
\omega_{n,r}(g)\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\phi)\begin{pmatrix}
Y\\-\\0
\end{pmatrix}dY\\
&=Z_1(-s-(n+1-r)d+\rho_{H_r},\phi_1)\cdot \mathfrak{f}^{n,r-1}(s+d/2,\phi)(g)(-) \end{align*}
because $r-1=0$.
The proposition holds with $\alpha_1=1$.
\par
If $r>1$, then we use the Iwasawa decomposition on $\mathrm{GL}_r(D(\mathbb{A}))$. Namely, we have
\[A=k\cdot \begin{pmatrix}
1&u\\&1
\end{pmatrix}\cdot \begin{pmatrix}
t&\\&B
\end{pmatrix}=k\cdot\begin{pmatrix}
t& uB\\&B
\end{pmatrix} \]
with
\begin{itemize}
\item $t\in\mathrm{GL}_1(D(\mathbb{A}))$;
\item $u\in D(\mathbb{A})^{r-1}$;
\item $B\cong \mathrm{GL}_{r-1}(D(\mathbb{A}))$;
\item $k$ is an element in a maximal compact subgroup $K=K_{H_r}\cap \mathrm{GL}_r(D(\mathbb{A}))$ of $\mathrm{GL}_r(D(\mathbb{A}))$.
\end{itemize}
Accordingly, we have a constant $\alpha_r$ such that
\[\int_{\mathrm{GL}_r(D(\mathbb{A}))}\varphi(A)dA=\alpha_r\cdot \int_{\mathrm{GL}_1(D(\mathbb{A}))}\int_{\mathrm{GL}_{r-1}(D(\mathbb{A}))}\int_{D(\mathbb{A})^{r-1}}\int_K \varphi(k\cdot\begin{pmatrix}
t&uB\\0&B
\end{pmatrix}) dtdBdudk \]
for any $\varphi\in C_c^\infty(\mathrm{GL}_r(D(\mathbb{A})))$. Moreover, the explicit formula for $\alpha_r$ is given in \cite[Lemma 9.1]{ichino2004mathz}. Since the function $\pi_{K_{H_r}}\tilde{\phi}$ is $K_{H_r}$-invariant, the integral over $dk$ gives the value $1$ and thus disappears.
Hence
\begin{align*}
&\mathfrak{f}^{n+1,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}\tilde{\phi})(g)(-)\\
=&\alpha_r\cdot \int_t\int_B\int_u\int_Y \phi_1\otimes\omega_{n,r}(g)\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi\begin{pmatrix}\begin{matrix}
t\\0
\end{matrix}&
\begin{matrix}
uB\\ensuremath{{\bf B}}
\end{matrix}&Y\\
0&0&-\\0&0&0
\end{pmatrix} \\
&\times \alpha_E(\nu(t))^{-s-(n+1-r)d+\rho_{H_r}}\alpha_E(\nu(B))^{-s-(n+1-r)d+\rho_{H_r}}dtdBdudY\\
=&\alpha_r\cdot Z_{1}(-s-(n+1-r)d+\rho_{H_r},\phi_1)\\
&\times \int_u\int_B\int_Y \omega_{n,r}(g)\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi \begin{pmatrix}
\begin{matrix}
uB\\ B
\end{matrix}&Y\\ 0&-\\0&0
\end{pmatrix}\alpha_E(\nu(B))^{-s-(n+1-r)d+\rho_{H_r}}dYdBdu\\
=&\alpha_r\cdot Z_{1}(-s-(n+1-r)d+\rho_{H_r},\phi_1)\\
&\times \int_B\int_{Y_2}\int_{Y_1}\int_{u} \omega_{n,r}(g)\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi \begin{pmatrix}
\begin{matrix}
u\\ B
\end{matrix}&\begin{matrix}
Y_1\\Y_2
\end{matrix}\\ 0&-\\0&0
\end{pmatrix}\alpha_E(\nu(B))^{-s-d-(n+1-r)d+\rho_{H_r}}dudY_1dY_2dB\\
=&\alpha_r Z_1(-s-(n+1-r)d+\rho_{H_r},\phi_1)\mathfrak{f}^{n,r-1}(s+d/2,Ik^{n,r,r-1}(\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi))(g)(-)
\end{align*}
since $\rho_{H_r}=\rho_{H_{r-1}}+d/2$.
This finishes the proof of Proposition \ref{functionf(r)}.
\end{proof}
\section{The Siegel-Weil formula}
Let $V_{r'}$ be the complementary space of $V_r$.
Suppose that $0<m'=m_0+2r'\leq n$ with $r'>0$.
\begin{thm}
\cite[Theorem 2]{yamana2013siegel} Fix a function $\phi'\in S(Y_n^\ast\otimes V_{r'})$. Let $f'$ be the Siegel-Weil section associated to $V_{r'}$. Then the Siegel Eisenstein series $E(s,f')$ is holomorphic at $s=(m'-n)d/2 $ and $A_0^{n,r'}(\phi')=2B_{-1}^{n,r'}(\phi')$.
In particular, if $m=n$ so that $r=r'$, then $A_{0}^{n,r}(\phi)=2B_{-1}^{n,r}(\phi)$ for $\phi\in S(Y_n^\ast\otimes V_r)(\mathbb{A})$.
\end{thm}
This is called the regularized Siegel-Weil formula in the first term range. There is another form:
\[A_{-1}^{n,r}(\phi)=\kappa_{r,r'} B_{-1}^{n,r'}(Ik^{n,r}\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi) \]
for any $\phi\in S(Y_n^\ast\otimes V_r)(\mathbb{A})$ due to \cite[Theorem 4.1]{ichino2004mathz}. In particular, $A_{-1}^{n,r}(\phi)=\kappa_{r,r'}B^{n,r' }_0(Ik^{n,r}\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi)$ when $r'=0$.
\begin{thm}
[Weil] Let $U(V_0)$ be the anisotropic unitary group defined over $F$. For $\phi\in S(Y_n^\ast\otimes V_0)(\mathbb{A})$, there exists a constant $c>0$ such that
\[A_0^{n,0}(\phi)=c\cdot I_{n,0}(\phi) \]
\end{thm}
\begin{lem}
\cite[Proposition 7.2]{gan2014siegelweil}
For $\phi\in S(Y_n^\ast\otimes V_0)(\mathbb{A})=S(y_1^\ast\otimes V_0)(\mathbb{A})\otimes S({Y'}^\ast_{n-1}\otimes V_0)(\mathbb{A})$, we have
\[I_{n,0}(\phi)_{U_1(Y_1)}|_{\mathrm{GL}(Y_1)(\mathbb{A})\times G_{2n-2}(\mathbb{A}) }=\chi_V\cdot\alpha_E^{m_0d}\boxtimes I_{n-1,0}(\phi(0,-)) \]
where $I_{n,0}(\phi)_{U_1}$ is the constant term of $I_{n,0}(\phi)$ with respect to the maximal parabolic $Q_1(Y_1)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{secondtermsiegelweil}]
Suppose that we are dealing with the Weil representation of $G_{2n+2}\times H_r$ with $m=n+1$. Then for $\tilde{\phi}\in S(Y_{n+1}^\ast\otimes V_r )(\mathbb{A})$, \cite[Theorem 2]{yamana2013siegel} implies that \[A_0^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi})=2B_{-1}^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi}). \]
Let us take the constant term of both sides with respect to the maximal parabolic $Q^{n+1}(Y_1)=L^{n+1}(Y_1)\cdot U^{n+1}(Y_1)$ of $G_{2n+2}$, which gives
\[ A^{n+1,r}_0(\tilde{\phi})_{U^{n+1}(Y_1)} = 2 \cdot
B^{n+1,r}_{-1}(\tilde{\phi})_{U^{n+1}(Y_1)}, \]
which is an identity of automorphic forms on $L(Y_1) = \mathrm{GL}(Y_1)
\times G_{2n}$, where $W_{2n} = Y'_n \oplus {Y'_n}^*$. (Note that the
superscript $^{n+1}$ in the groups $Q^{n+1}(Y_1)$ etc indicates the
rank of the ambient group $G_{2n+2}$.)
Let $f_s$ be the standard section of
\[I_r^n(s,\chi_V)=Ind_{Q^{n+1}(Y_r)(\mathbb{A})}^{G_{2n+2}(\mathbb{A})}\chi_V\alpha_E^s\boxtimes\Theta_{n+1-r,0}(V_0). \]
Let $E^{(n+1,r)}(s,f_s)(g)$ be the associated Eisenstein series, i.e.
\[E^{(n+1,r)}(s,f_s)(g)=\sum_{\gamma\in Q^{n+1}(Y_r)(F)\backslash G_{2n+2}(F) }f_s(\gamma g) \]
for $g\in G_{2n+2}(\mathbb{A})$ and $Re(s)$ sufficiently large. Note that
\[\mathcal{E}^{n,r}(s,\phi)=E^{(n,r)}(s,f^{n,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\phi))) \]
and $A_0^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi})_{U(Y_1)}=Val_{s=0}E^{(n+1,n+1)}(s,\Phi^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi}))_{U(Y_1)}$.
So we are interested in computing the constant term $E^{(n+1,r)}(s,f_s)_{U^{n+1}(Y_1)}$.
Let us choose the double coset representatives $1,\omega^+$ and $\omega^-$ for the double coset space $Q^{n+1}(Y_r)\backslash G_{2n+2}/Q^{n+1}(Y_1)$, where
\[\omega^+=\begin{pmatrix}
J_{r+1}&0\\0&J_{r+1}
\end{pmatrix} \]
with $J_{r+1}=\begin{pmatrix}
0&0&1&0\\0&\mathbf{1}_{r-1}&0&0\\1&0&0&0\\0&0&0&\mathbf{1}_{n-r}
\end{pmatrix}$
and \[\omega^-=\begin{pmatrix}
0&0&1\\0&\mathbf{1}_{2n}&0\\-1&0&0
\end{pmatrix}. \]
Associated to the Weyl group element $\omega=\omega^+$ or $\omega^-$ is the standard intertwining operator $M(\omega,s)$:
\[M(\omega,s)(f_s)(g)= \int_{(U^{n+1}(Y_1)(F) \cap w Q^{n+1}(Y_r)(F) w^{-1})\backslash U^{n+1}(Y_1)(\mathbb{A})}
f_s(w^{-1} u g) \, du. \]
By the same computation as in \cite[Lemma 8.2]{gan2014siegelweil}, as the automorphic forms on $L^{n+1}(Y_1)=\mathrm{GL}_1(Y_1)\times G_{2n}$,
\begin{align*}
E^{(n+1,r)}(s,f_s)_{U^{n+1}(Y_1)}= &\chi_V\alpha_E^{s+(n+1)d-rd/2}E^{(n,r-1)}(s+d/2,f_s|_{G_{2n}})+\chi_V\alpha_E^{md/2}E^{(n,r)}(s,M(\omega^+,s)(f_s)|_{G_{2n}})\\
&+\chi_V\alpha_E^{-s+nd+d-rd/2}E^{(n,r-1)}(s-d/2,M(\omega^-,s)(f_s)|_{G_{2n}})
\end{align*}
and $E^{(n+1,n+1)}(s,f)_{U^{n+1}(Y_1)}$
\[=\chi_V\alpha_E^{s+(n+1)d/2}E^{(n,n)}(s+d/2,f|_{G_{2n}})+
\chi_V\alpha_E^{-s+(n+1)d/2}E^{(n,n)}(s-d/2,M(\omega^-,s)(f)|_{G_{2n}}) \]
for $f\in I_{n+1}^{n+1}(s,\chi_V)$.
Choose once and for all $\phi_1\in \mathcal{S}(Y_1^* \otimes
V_r)(\mathbb{A})$ satisfying:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\phi_1(0) = 1$;
\item $\phi_1$ is $K_{H_r}$-invariant, so that $\pi_{K_{H_r}} \phi_1 = \phi_1$.
\end{itemize}
Let $Y_n' = \langle y_2, ...,y_{n+1} \rangle$ so that ${Y'_n}^* = \langle y_2^*,...,y_{n+1}^* \rangle$.
For any $\phi \in \mathcal{S}({Y_n'}^* \otimes V_r)(\mathbb{A})$, we set
\[ \tilde{\phi} := \phi_1 \otimes \phi \in \mathcal{S}(Y_{n+1}^*
\otimes V_r)(\mathbb{A}). \]
Then
\[ \pi_{K_{H_r}}(\tilde{\phi}) = \phi_1 \otimes \pi_{K_{H_r}}
\phi. \]
Note that the group $G_{2n}$ acts trivially on $\phi_1$, i.e. for
$g\in G_{2n}(\mathbb{A})$,
$$\omega_{n+1,r}(g)\tilde{\phi}=\phi_1\otimes\omega_{n,r}(g)\phi.$$
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item We focus on the second term identity first. Observe that
for $g\in G_{2n}(\mathbb{A})$,
\[\Phi^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi})(g)=\phi_1(0)\cdot\omega_{n,r}(g)\phi(0)=\Phi^{n,r}(\phi)(g). \]
Thus,
\[E^{(n,n)}(s+d/2,\Phi^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi})|_{G_{2n}})=E^{(n,n)}(s+d/2,\Phi^{n,r}(\phi)) \]
Note that the functional equation implies that
\[E^{(n,n)}(s-d/2,M(\omega^-,s)(\Phi^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi})|_{G_{2n}})=E^{(n,n)}(d/2-s,M_n(s-d/2,\chi_V)(M(\omega^-,s)(\Phi^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi}))|_{G_{2n}})). \]
where $M_n(s,\chi_V)$ is the normalized intertwining operator for the Siegel principal series. By the result of Kudla-Rallis in \cite[Lemma 1.2.2]{kudlarallis},
\[M_n(s-d/2,\chi_V)M(\omega^-,s)=M_{n+1}(s,\chi_V) \]
which is holomorphic at $s=0$.
Moreover, $M_{n+1}(0,\chi_V)\Phi^{n+1,r}\tilde{\phi}=\Phi^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi})$. So
by a similar computation appearing in \cite[\S9.2]{gan2014siegelweil}, one has
\[A^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi})_{U^{n+1}(Y_1)}= 2A_0^{n,r}(\phi)\pmod{Im(A_{-1}^{n,r})} \]
as the automorphic forms on $ G_{2n}$.
Since $$B_{-1}^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi})=Res_{s=\rho_{H_r}}\mathcal{E}^{n+1,r}(s,\tilde{\phi})=Res_{s=\rho_{H_r}}E^{(n+1,r)}(s,f^{n+1,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\tilde{\phi}))),$$ $B_{-1}^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi})_{U^{n+1}(Y_1)}$ is the residue at $s=\rho_{H_r}=(m-r)d/2$ of the function
\begin{align*}\chi_V\alpha_E^{s+(n+1)d-rd/2}E^{(n,r-1)}(s+d/2,f^{n+1,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\tilde{\phi}))|_{G_{2n}})+\chi_V\alpha_E^{md/2}E^{(n,r)}(s,M(\omega^+,s)(f^{n+1,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\tilde{\phi})))|_{G_{2n}})\\
+\chi_V\alpha_E^{-s+nd+d-rd/2}E^{(n,r-1)}(s-d/2,M(\omega^-,s)(f^{n+1,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\tilde{\phi})))|_{G_{2n}}). \end{align*}
Note that $m=n+1$, so that $r'=r-1$. Then Proposition \ref{functionf(r)} implies
\[f^{n+1,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\tilde{\phi}))|_{G_{2n}}=\alpha_r Z_1(-s-\rho_{H_r},\phi_1) f^{n,r-1}(s+d/2,Ik^{n,r}(\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\phi))). \]
We will mainly concern the $\chi_V\alpha_E^{md/2}$-part of the residue at $s=\rho_{H_r}$ of
\[E^{(n+1,r)}(s,f^{n+1,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\tilde{\phi})))_{U^{n+1}(Y_1)}. \]
Due to \cite[Lemma 9.1]{gan2014siegelweil}, $E^{(n,r-1)}(s+d/2,f^{n+1,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\tilde{\phi}))|_{G_{2n}})$ is holomorphic at $s=\rho_{H_r}$. Thanks to \cite[Proposition 9.2]{gan2014siegelweil},
\[M(\omega^+,s)(f^{n+1,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\tilde{\phi}))|_{G_{2n}})=f^{n,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\phi)) \]
which implies that \[E^{(n,r)}(s,M(\omega^+,s)(f^{n+1,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\tilde{\phi}))|_{G_{2n}}))=\mathcal{E}^{n,r}(s,\phi). \]
It has a residue $B_{-1}^{n,r}(\phi)$ at $s=\rho_{H_r}$.
For the last term, the functional equation implies that
\begin{align*}
&E^{(n,r-1)}(s-d/2,M(\omega^-,s)(f^{n+1,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\tilde{\phi}))|_{G_{2n}}))
\\=&E^{(n,r-1)}(d/2-s,M_n(\omega_{r-1},s-d/2)(M(\omega^-,s)f^{n+1,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\tilde{\phi}))|_{G_{2n}}))\\
=&E^{(n,r-1)}(d/2-s,M_{n+1}(\omega_r,s)f^{n+1,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\tilde{\phi}))|_{G_{2n}})\\
=&c_r(s)\cdot E^{(n,r-1)}(d/2-s,f^{n+1,s}(-s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\tilde{\phi}))|_{G_{2n}})\\
=&c_r(s)\cdot \alpha_r Z_1(s-\rho_{H_r},\phi_1)\cdot E^{(n,r-1)}(d/2-s,f^{n,r-1}(-s+d/2,Ik^{n,r}(\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\phi))))\\
=&c_r(s)\cdot\alpha_r Z_1(s-\rho_{H_r},\phi_1)\mathcal{E}^{n,r-1}(d/2-s,Ik^{n,r}(\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\phi)))\\
=&\frac{c_r(s)}{c_{r-1}(s-d/2)}\alpha_r Z_1(s-\rho_{H_r},\phi_1)\mathcal{E}^{n,r-1}(s-d/2,Ik^{n,r}(\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\phi)))
\end{align*}
due to \cite[Lemma 1.2.2]{kudlarallis} and \cite[Remark 9.4]{gan2014siegelweil}, where $$\omega_{r-1}=\begin{pmatrix}
0&0&\mathbf{1}_{r-1}\\0&\mathbf{1}_{2n+2-2r}&0\\-\mathbf{1}_{r-1}&0&0
\end{pmatrix},\quad \omega_r=\begin{pmatrix}
0&0&\mathbf{1}_r\\0&\mathbf{1}_{2n+2-2r}&0\\-\mathbf{1}_r&0&0
\end{pmatrix}$$ and $c_r(s)$ is the meromorphic function satisfying $$E_{H_r}(s,-)=c_r(s)E_{H_r}(-s,-).$$
Note that
\begin{itemize}
\item $c_r(s)$ has a simple pole at $s=\rho_{H_r}=\rho_{H_{r-1}}+d/2$, then
$$\frac{c_r(s)}{c_{r-1}(s-d/2)}$$ is holomorphic and nonzero at $s=\rho_{H_r}$ when $r>1$;
\item the Tate zeta integral $Z_1(s-\rho_{H_r},\phi_1)$ has a simple pole at $s=\rho_{H_r}$;
\item $$\mathcal{E}^{n,r-1}(s-d/2,Ik^{n,r}(\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi))=\sum_{i\geq-1}B_{i}^{n,r-1}(Ik^{n,r}\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi)(s-\rho_{H_{r-1}}-d/2)^i $$ and $B_{-1}^{n,r-1}=0$ if $r=1$.
\end{itemize}
Taking the residue at $s=\rho_{H_r}=\rho_{H_{r-1}}+d/2$, we have
\begin{align*}
A_0^{n,r}(\phi)-B_{-1}^{n,r}(\phi)=a_1B_{-1}^{n,r'}(Ik^{n,r}\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi)+a_2 B_0^{n,r'}(Ik^{n,r}(\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi))\pmod{Im A_{-1}^{n,r}}
\end{align*} for some constants $a_1,a_2$.
By the first term identity in the first term range, $$B_{-1}^{n,r'}(Ik^{n,r}\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi)\in Im(A_{-1}^{n,r}).$$ Then we get the desired identity when $m=n+1$. If $r=1$, then $r'=0$ and
\[B_{-1}^{n,0}(Ik^{n,1}\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi)\in Im(A_{-1}^{n,1}). \]
\item Let us focus on the first term identity now.
In fact, the last term $$E^{(n,r-1)}(s-d/2,M(\omega^-,s)f^{n+1,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}\tilde{\phi})|_{G_{2n}})$$
has a pole of second order at $s=\rho_{H_r}$. It has a leading term
\begin{equation}B_{-1}^{n,r-1}(Ik^{n,r}\pi_{K_{H_r}}(\phi))\cdot\alpha_r Val_{s=\rho_{H_r}}\frac{c_r(s)}{c_{r-1}(s-d/2)} \cdot Res_{s=\rho_{H_r}}Z_1(s-\rho_{H_r},\phi_1) \label{leadingterm} \end{equation}
when $r>1$ and $Res_{s=\rho_{H_r}}Z_1(s-\rho_{H_r},\phi_1)$ only depends on the division algebra $D$.
The leading term (\ref{leadingterm}) must be cancelled with the leading term $B_{-2}^{n,r}(\phi)$ of $\mathcal{E}^{n,r}(s,\phi)$. Moreover
$$B_{-1}^{n,r-1}(Ik^{n,r}\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi)=\kappa_{r,r'}\cdot A_{-1}^{n,r}(\phi)$$ by the first term identity in the first term range.
Hence there exists a constant $c>0$ such that $A_{-1}^{n,r}(\phi)=c \cdot B_{-2}^{n,r}(\phi)$.
If $r=1$, then $B_{-1}^{n,r-1}=0$ and $\frac{c_r(s)}{c_{r-1}(s-d/2)}$ has a pole at $s=\rho_{H_r}$. This finishes the proof when $m=n+1$.
\end{enumerate}
In general, if $n+1< m\leq n+r$, we may assume that
\[A^{n+1,r}_{-1}(\tilde{\phi})=c\cdot B_{-2}^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi}) \]
and
\begin{equation}
\label{secondterminduction}
A_0^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi})= B_{-1}^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi})+c'\cdot B_{0}^{n+1,r'}(Ik^{n+1,r}(\pi_{K_{H_r}}\tilde{\phi}))+A_{-1}^{n+1,r}(\varphi) \end{equation}
for some $\varphi\in S(Y_{n+1}^\ast\otimes V_r)(\mathbb{A})$, where $m_0+r+r'=n+1$ and $r'\geq1$.
We still consider the constant term along $U^{n+1}(Y_1)$ and get
\[A_{-1}^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi})_{U^{n+1}(Y_1)}=c\cdot B_{-2}^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi})_{U^{n+1}(Y_1)}. \]
We concern the terms in
\[E^{(n+1,r)}(s,f^{n+1,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}\tilde{\phi}))_{U^{n+1}(Y_1)} \]
where $\mathrm{GL}_1(Y_1)\subset L(Y_1)$ acts by the character $\chi\cdot \alpha_E^{md/2}$. Then we have
\[\chi_V\alpha_E^{md/2}\cdot E^{(n,r)}(s,M(\omega^+,s)(f^{n+1,r}(s,\pi_{K_{H_r}}\tilde{\phi}))|_{G_{2n}})=\chi_V\alpha_E^{md/2}\mathcal{E}^{n,r}(s,\phi) \]
and so the $\chi_V\alpha_E^{md/2}$-part of $B_{-2}^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi})_{U^{n+1}(Y_1)}$ equals to
$B_{-2}^{n,r}(\phi) $. On the other hand, the $\chi_V\alpha_E^{md/2}$-part of $A_{-1}^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi})_{U^{n+1}(Y_1)}$ is the residue at $s=(m-1-n)d/2$ of
\[E^{(n,n)}(s+d/2,\Phi^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi})|_{G_{2n}})=E^{(n,n)}(s+d/2,\Phi^{n,r}(\phi)), \]
which is nothing but $A_{-1}^{n,r}(\phi)$. Thus there exists a constant $c$ such that
\[A_{-1}^{n,r}(\phi)=(\mbox{the }\chi_V\alpha_E^{md/2}\mbox{-part of } A_{-1}^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi})_{U^{n+1}(Y_1)})=c\cdot B_{-2}^{n,r}(\phi). \]
Observe that
\[A_{-1}^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi})_{U^{n+1}(Y_1)}=Res_{s=(m-n-1)d/2}E^{(n,n)}(s,\Phi^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi}))_{U^{n+1}(Y_1)} \]
and so the $\chi_V\alpha_E^{md/2}$-part of $A_{-1}^{n+1,r}(\tilde{\phi})_{U^{n+1}(Y_1)}$ lies in $Im A_{-1}^{n,r}$.
Similarly, we compute the constant term along $U^{n+1}(Y_1)$ of both sides of (\ref{secondterminduction}) and then extract the terms with $\mathrm{GL}(Y_1)$ acting via $\chi\cdot\alpha_E^{md/2}$. Therefore,
\[A_0^{n,r}(\phi)-B_{-1}^{n,r}(\phi)=c'\cdot (\mbox{the }\chi_V\alpha_E^{md/2}\mbox{-part of }B_0^{n+1,r'}(Ik^{n+1,r}\pi_{K_{H_r}}\tilde{\phi})_{U^{n+1}(Y_1)})\pmod{ Im A_{-1}^{n,r}}. \]
By the definition, $B_0^{n+1,r'}(Ik^{n+1,r}\pi_{K_{H_r}}\tilde{\phi})_{U^{n+1}(Y_1)}$ is the value taking at $s=\rho_{H_{r'}}$ of the function
\begin{align*}\chi_V\alpha_E^{s+(n+1)d-r'd/2}E^{(n,r'-1)}(s+d/2,\cdots)+\chi_V\alpha_E^{m'd/2}E^{(n,r')}(s,M(\omega^+,s)(\cdots))\\
+\chi_V\alpha_E^{-s+nd+d-r'd/2}E^{(n,r'-1)}(s-d/2,M(\omega^-,s)(\cdots)). \end{align*}
The remaining part of the proof is to show that there exists a nonzero constant $c'$ such that
\[Val_{s=\rho_{H_{r'}}}E^{(n,r'-1)}(s-d/2,M(\omega^-,s)f^{n+1,r'}(s,Ik^{n+1,r}(\pi_{K_{H_r}}\tilde{\phi}))|_{G_{2n}})=c'B_0^{n,r'-1}(Ik^{n,r}\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi)\pmod{Im A_{-1}^{n,r}} \]
since $r'-1+r+m_0=n$.
Note that
\[Ik^{n+1,r}(\pi_{K_{H_r}}\tilde{\phi})=Ik^{1,r,r'}(\phi_1)\otimes Ik^{n,r,r'}(\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi). \]
Thus
\begin{align*}
&E^{(n,r'-1)}(s-d/2,M(\omega^-,s)f^{n+1,r'}(s,Ik^{n+1,r}(\pi_{K_{H_r}}\tilde{\phi}))|_{G_{2n}})\\
=&c_{r'}(s)E^{(n,r'-1)}(d/2-s,f^{n+1,r'}(-s,Ik^{n+1,r}\pi_{K_{H_r}}\tilde{\phi})|_{G_{2n}})\\
=&c_{r'}(s)\alpha_{r'} Z_1(s-(n+1-r')d+\rho_{H_{r'}},Ik^{1,r,r'}\phi_1)\\
&\times E^{n,r'-1}(d/2-s, f^{n,r'-1}(-s+d/2,Ik^{n,r',r'-1}\circ Ik^{n,r,r'}\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi))\\
=&c_{r'}(s)\alpha_{r'} Z_1(s-(n+1-r')d+\rho_{H_{r'}},Ik^{1,r,r'}\phi_1)\\
&\times E^{n,r'-1}(d/2-s,f^{n,r'-1}(-s+d/2,Ik^{n,r,r'-1}\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi))\\
=&c_{r'}(s)\alpha_{r'} Z_1(s-(n+1-r')d+\rho_{H_{r'}},Ik^{1,r,r'}\phi_1)\cdot \mathcal{E}^{n,r'-1}(d/2-s,Ik^{n,r}\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi)\\
=&\frac{c_{r'}(s)}{c_{r'-1}(s-d/2)}\alpha_{r'} Z_1(s-(n+1-r')d+\rho_{H_{r'}},Ik^{1,r,r'}\phi_1)\mathcal{E}^{n,r'-1}(s-d/2,Ik^{n,r}\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi)
\end{align*}
where $V_{r'-1}$ and $V_{r}$ are complementary with respect to $W_{2n}$ and so $Ik^{n,r,r'-1}=Ik^{n,r}$.
If $r'>1$, then both $\frac{c_{r'}(s)}{c_{r'-1}(s-d/2)}$ and $Z_1(s-(n+1-r')d+\rho_{H_{r'}},Ik^{1,r,r'}\phi_1)$ are holomorphic at $s=\rho_{H_{r'}}$. Then
\[ Val_{s=\rho_{H_{r'}}}E^{(n,r'-1)}(s-d/2,M(\omega^-,s)f^{n+1,r'}(s,Ik^{n+1,r}(\pi_{K_{H_r}}\tilde{\phi}))|_{G_{2n}})=c'B_0^{n,r'-1}(Ik^{n,r}\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi)\]
for some constant $c'$. If $r'=1$, then $m=r+n$ and $B_0^{n,0}(Ik^{n,r}\pi_{K_{H_r}}\phi)\in Im A_{-1}^{n,r}$.
\end{proof}
\section{Applications to the Rallis inner product formula}
In this section, we use the the regularized Siegel-Weil formula to derive the Rallis inner product formula and prove the non-vanishing theorem of global thetal lifts. Yamana \cite{yamana2014theta} has studied the relation between the nonvanishing of theta lift
and the analytic property of its $L$-fucntion in the first term range, i.e. $m\leq n$. We will focus on the second term range.
Suppose that $E_v=F_v\oplus F_v$ for all archimedean places $v|\infty$. Let $W$ be a skew-Hermitian $D$-vector space and $W_{2n}=W\oplus W^-$, where $W^-$ is the space $W$ with the form scaled by $-1$. Let $V_r$ be the Hermitian $D$-vector space with Witt index $r$ as defined before. Suppose that $W\otimes V_r$ has a complete polarization
\[W\otimes V_r=\mathcal{X}\oplus\mathcal{Y}. \]
Let $\omega_\psi$ be the Weil representation of $U(W)\times H_r$ associated to $W\otimes V_r$. Given a function $\phi\in S(\mathcal{X})(\mathbb{A})$, one can define
\[\theta(\phi)(g,h)=\sum_{x\in\mathcal{X}(F)}\omega_\psi(g,h) \phi(x) \]
for $(g,h)\in U(W)(\mathbb{A})\times H_r(\mathbb{A})$. For a cuspidal representation $\pi$ of $U(W)$, we consider its global theta lift $\Theta_{n,r}(\pi)$ to $H_r$, so that $\Theta_{n,r}(\pi)$ is hte automorphic subrepresentation of $H_r$ spanned by the automorphic forms
\[\theta_{n,r}(\phi,f)(h)=\int_{U(W)(F)\backslash U(W)(\mathbb{A}) }\theta(\phi)(g,h)\cdot \overline{f(g)}dg \]
for $f\in\pi$.
We will use the doubling see-saw diagram
\[\xymatrix{G_{2n}\ar@{-}[d]\ar@{-}[rd]& H_r\times H_r\ar@{-}[d]\\ U(W)\times U(W^-)\ar@{-}[ru] & H_r^{\triangle} } \]
to study the inner product
\[\langle \theta_{n,r}(\phi_1,f_1),\theta_{n,r}(\phi_2,f_2) \rangle \]
for $\phi_i\in\omega_\psi$ and $f_i\in\pi$. Indeed, we choose a Witt decomposition of $W_{2n}$ to be
\[W_{2n}=Y_n\oplus Y_n^\ast \]
with $Y_n=W^\triangle=\{(y,y):y\in W \}$ and $Y_n^\ast=\{(y,-y):y\in W \}$. The Weil representation $\omega_{n,r}$ of $G_{2n}\times H_r$ can be realized on $S(Y_n^\ast\otimes V_r)$ such that $H_{r}^\triangle$ acts by
\[\omega_{n,r}(h)\phi(x)=\phi(h^{-1}\cdot x) \]
for $h\in H_r^\triangle$.
Moreover,
\[\omega_{n,r}|_{U(W)\times U(W)}\cong \omega_\psi\otimes(\omega_\psi^\vee\cdot\chi_V)|_{U(W)\times U(W) }. \]
There exists an isomorphism
\[\delta:\omega_\psi\otimes(\omega_\psi^\vee\cdot\chi_V)\longrightarrow \omega_{n,r} \]
such that $\delta(\phi_1\otimes\overline{\phi_2})(0)=\langle \phi_1,\phi_2 \rangle$
for $\phi_i\in S(\mathcal{X})(\mathcal{A})$.
\begin{thm}\label{fininaltheoremRallis}
Assume that $1+n\leq m\leq n+r$ and $W$ is a skew-Hermitian $D$-vector space of dimension $n$. Let $\pi$ be an irreducible cuspidal representation of $U(W)$ and consider its global theta lift
$\Theta_{n,r}(\pi) $ to $U(V_r)=H_r$. Assume that $\Theta_{n,j}(\pi)=0$ for $j< r$, so that $\Theta_{n,r}(\pi) $ is cuspidal. Then $\Theta_{n,r}(\pi)$ is nonzero if and only if
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item for all places $v$, $\Theta_{n,r}(\pi_v)\neq0$ and
\item $L(s_0+1/2,\pi\times\chi_V)\neq0$ where $s_0=(m-n)d/2$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Let us consider the integral
\begin{equation}\label{innerprod}
\int_{H_r(F)\backslash H_r(\mathbb{A}) }\theta_{n,r}(\phi_1,f_1)(h)\overline{\theta_{n,r}(\phi_2,f_2)(h)}E_{H_r}(s,h)dh.
\end{equation}
By the same computation appearing in \cite{kudla1994annals}, the integral (\ref{innerprod}) equals to
\[\int_{[U(W)\times U(W)]}f_1(g)\overline{f_2(g)}\mathcal{E}^{n,r}(s,\delta(\phi_1\otimes\overline{\phi_2}))((g_1,g_2))\chi_V^{-1}(\nu(g_1))dg_1dg_2 . \]
Here \[[U(W)\times U(W) ]=(U(W)\times U(W))(F)\backslash (U(W)\times U(W) )(\mathbb{A}) . \]
The Eisenstein series $E_{H_r}(s,h)$ has a simple pole at $s=\rho_{H_r}$ with a constant residue. Thus
\[\langle \theta_{n,r}(\phi_1,f_1),\theta_{n,r}(\phi_2,f_2) \rangle=c\cdot\int_{[U(W)\times U(W)]}f_1(g_1)\overline{f_2(g_2)} B_{-1}^{n,r}(\delta(\phi_1\otimes \overline{\phi_2}))((g_1,g_2))\chi_V^{-1}(\nu(g_2)) dg_1dg_2 \]
for a nonzero constant $c$. Note that
\begin{align*}
&\int_{[U(W)\times U(W)]} f_1(g_1)\overline{f_2(g_2)}A_{-1}^{n,r}(\delta(\phi_1\otimes \overline{\phi_2})(g_1,g_2)\chi_V^{-1}(\nu(g_2))dg_1dg_2\\
=&\int_{[U(W)\times U(W)]}f_1(g_1)
\overline{f_2(g_2)}B_{-1}^{n,r'}(Ik^{n,r}\pi_{K_{H_r}}\delta(\phi_1\otimes\overline{\phi_2} ))(g_1,g_2)\chi_V^{-1}(\nu(g_2)) dg_1dg_2 \\
=& 0 \end{align*}
since $\theta_{n,r'}(-,f)=0$ for any $f\in \pi$. Similarly,
\[\int_{[U(W)\times U(W)]} f_1(g_1)\overline{f_2(g_2)} B_0^{n,r'}(Ik^{n,r}\pi_{K_{H_r}}\delta(\phi_1\otimes\overline{\phi_2}))(g_1,g_2)\chi_V^{-1}(\nu(g_2)) dg_1dg_2=0. \]
The second term identity in the second term range implies that
\[\langle \theta_{n,r}(\phi_1,f_1),\theta_{n,r}(\phi_2,f_2) \rangle=c\cdot \int_{[U(W)\times U(W)]} f_1(g_1)\overline{f_2(g_2)} A_0^{n,r}(\delta(\phi_1\otimes\overline{\phi_2} ))(g_1,g_2)\chi_V^{-1}(\nu(g_2)) dg_1dg_2. \]
Let $f^{(s)}$ be the holomorphic section of $I_n^n(s,\chi_V)=Ind_{P(Y_n)}^{G_{2n}}\chi_V\alpha_E^s$. Set
\[Z(s,f^{(s)};f_1,f_2)=\int_{[U(W)\times U(W)]} E^{(n,n)}(f^{(s)})(g_1,g_2)\cdot \overline{f_1(g_1)}f_2(g_2)\chi_V^{-1}(\nu(g_2))dg_1dg_2. \]
Thus
\[\langle\theta_{n,r}(\phi_1,f_1),\theta_{n,r}(\phi_2,f_2) \rangle=c\cdot Val_{s=(m-n)d/2}Z(s,\Phi^{n,r}(\delta(\phi_1\otimes\overline{\phi_2}));f_1,f_2) \]
where $\Phi^{n,r}(\delta(\phi_1\otimes\overline{\phi_2}))$ is the Siegel-Weil section associated with $\delta(\phi_1\otimes\overline{\phi_2})$.
For $Re(s)$ sufficiently large, if $f^{(s)}=\otimes_vf_v^{(s)} $ and $f_i=f_{i,v}$ are pure tensors, one has an Euler product
\[Z(s,f^{(s)};f_1,f_2)=\prod_{v}Z_v(s,f_v^{(s)};f_{1,v},f_{2,v}) \]
where $$Z_v(s,f_v^{(s)};f_{1,v},f_{2,v})=\int_{U(W)(F_v)}f_v^{(s)}(g_v,1)\cdot\overline{\langle \pi_v(g_v)f_1,f_2\rangle}dg_v. $$
It gives us the standard $L$-function $L(s+1/2,\pi_v\times\chi_{V,v})$.
If every data involved is unramified (which is the case for almost all $v$), then one has
\[Z_v(s,f_v^{(s)};f_{1,v},f_{2,v})=L(s+1/2,\pi_v\times\chi_{V,v})/b_v(s,\chi_{V}). \]
Note that when $s>0$, $b_v(s,\chi_{V})$ has no poles and the Euler product $b(s,\chi_V)$ is absolutely convergent. In general, we would like to define the normalized local zeta integral
\[Z^\ast_v(s,f_v^{(s)};f_{1,v},f_{2,v})=\frac{Z_v(s,f_v^{(s)};f_{1,v},f_{2,v})}{L(s+1/2,\pi_v\times\chi_{V,v})}. \]
By the hypothesis that $E_v$ splits at all archimedean places $v|\infty$, $Z^\ast_v(s,f_v^{(s)};f_{1,v},f_{2,v})$ at $s=s_0=(m-n)d/2$ is nonzero if and only if the local theta lift
$\Theta_{n,r}(\pi_v)\neq0$. Then Theorem \ref{fininaltheoremRallis} holds due to the following equality
\[\langle \theta_{n,r}(\phi_1,f_1),\theta_{n,r}(\phi_2,f_2)\rangle=c\cdot Val_{s=s_0}L(s+1/2,\pi\times \chi_V)\cdot Z^\ast(s,\Phi^{n,r}(\delta(\phi_1\otimes\overline{\phi_2}));f_1,f_2) \]
where $Z^\ast(s,f^{(s)};f_1,f_2)=\prod_v Z^\ast_v(s,f_v^{(s)};f_{1,v},f_{2,v})$ is absolutely convergent.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
If \cite[Conjecture 11.4]{gan2014siegelweil} holds, then we can remove the assumption that $E_v=F_v\oplus F_v$ for all archimedean places $v|\infty$.
\end{rem}
\subsection*{Acknowledgments} The author would like to thank Yuanqing Cai for helpful discussions.
|
\section{Introduction}
Recently, there has been wide-spread research interest in stable polynomials and the
geometry of polynomials, accompanied by a variety of new connections to other
branches of mathematics
(including combinatorics \cite{braenden-hpp},
differential equations \cite{borcea-braenden-2010},
optimization \cite{straszak-vishnoi-2017},
probability theory \cite{bbl-2009},
applied algebraic geometry \cite{volcic-2019},
theoretical computer science \cite{mss-interlacing1, mss-interlacing2}
and statistical physics \cite{borcea-braenden-leeyang1}).
See also the surveys of
Pemantle \cite{pemantle-2012} and Wagner \cite{wagner-2010}.
Stable polynomials are strongly linked to matroid theory \cite{braenden-hpp},
as delta-matroids arise from support sets of stable polynomials.
In this paper, we concentrate on the generalized notion of $K$-stability as introduced
in \cite{joergens-theobald-conic}. Given a proper cone $K \subseteq \R^n$,
a polynomial $f \in \C[\mathbf{z}] = \C[z_1, \ldots, z_n]$ is called \emph{$K$-stable} if
$\mathcal{I}(f)\cap \inter K=\emptyset$, where $\inter K$ is the interior of $K$ and
$\I(f)$ denotes the imaginary projection of $f$ (as formally defined in
Section~\ref{se:prelim}).
Note that $(\R_{\ge 0})^n$-stability coincides with the usual stability,
and stability with respect to the positive semidefinite cone on the
space of symmetric matrices is denoted as \emph{psd-stability}.
In the case of a homogeneous polynomial, $K$-stability of $f$ is
equivalent to the containment of $\inter K$ in a hyperbolicity cone of $f$
(see Section~\ref{se:prelim}), which also provides a link to
hyperbolic programming.
Here, we study conditions and certificates
for the $K$-stability of a given polynomial $f \in \C[\mathbf{z}]$,
especially for the case of determinantal polynomials of the form
$f(\mathbf{z}) \ = \ \det(A_0 + A_1 z_1 + \cdots + A_n z_n)$
with symmetric or Hermitian matrices $A_0, \ldots, A_n$ as well as for
quadratic polynomials. A particular focus is on psd-stability.
Specifically, for cones $K$ with a spectrahedral representation we construct
a semidefinite feasibility problem, which, in the case of non-emptiness,
certifies $K$-stability of $f$. This reduction to a semidefinite problem
builds upon two ingredients.
Firstly, we characterize certain conic components in the complement of
the imaginary projection of the (not necessarily homogeneous) polynomial
$f$. Secondly, the sufficient criterion employs techniques
from \cite{ktt-2013} on containment problems of spectrahedra and
positive maps in order to check whether
$\inter K \subseteq \mathcal{I}(f)^{\compl}$.
For the special case of usual stability, we will recover the well-known
determinantal stability criterion of Borcea and Br\"anden
(see Proposition~\ref{pr:crit-stable} and
Remark~\ref{rem:usual-stability}) and thus obtain, as a byproduct,
an alternative proof of that statement.
In the case of psd-stability, if the sufficient criterion is satisfied, we can
explicitly construct a determinantal representation of the given polynomial,
see Corollary~\ref{co:quadr-certificate}.
To this end, the determinantal criterion for psd-stability
from \cite{joergens-theobald-conic} can be seen as a special case of
our more general results.
The procedure enables to check and certify the conic stability for a
large subclass of polynomials.
Moreover, we show that under certain preconditions,
there always exists a positive scaling factor such that the sufficient
criterion applies to a scaled version of the polynomial (or,
equivalently, a scaled version of the cone). See Theorem~\ref{th:nu-cont}.
The paper is structured as follows.
Section~\ref{se:prelim} provides relevant background on imaginary projections,
conic stability and determinantal representations.
In Section~\ref{se:coniccomponents}, we study the conic components in the
complement of the imaginary projection for the relevant classes of polynomials.
Section~\ref{se:conicstab-posmaps} develops the sufficient
criterion for $K$-stability based on the techniques from positive maps.
The scaling result is contained in Section~\ref{se:scaled}, and
Section~\ref{se:conclusion} concludes the paper.
\medskip
\noindent
{\bf Acknowledgments.}
Part of this work was done while the first and the third author were visiting
the Simons Institute for the Theory of Computing within the
semester program ``Geometry of Polynomials''. They are grateful for the
inspiring atmosphere there.
Thanks to Bernd Sturmfels for encouraging us to work jointly on this topic
and to the anonymous referees for very valuable comments.
The first author would like to gratefully acknowledge the financial support
through a Simons-Berkeley postdoctoral fellowship and the third author
the support through DFG grant TH 1333/7-1.
\section{Preliminaries\label{se:prelim}}
Throughout the text,
bold letters will denote $n$-dimensional vectors unless noted otherwise.
\subsection{Imaginary projections and conic stability\label{se:prelim-conicstab}}
For a polynomial $f \in \C[\mathbf{z}]$, define its \emph{imaginary projection}
$\mathcal{I}(f)$ as the projection of the variety of $f$ onto its
imaginary part, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\I(f ) = \{\Im(\z) = (\Im(z_{1}), \dots,\Im(z_{n})) : f(\z) = 0\},
\end{equation}
where $\Im(\cdot)$ denotes the imaginary part of a complex
number \cite{jtw-2019}.
Let $\sym_d, \sym_d^{+}$ and $\sym_{d}^{++}$ denote the set of symmetric $d \times d$
matrices as well as the subsets of positive semidefinite and positive definite matrices.
Moreover, let $\herm_d$ be the set of all Hermitian $d \times d$-matrices.
We consider the following generalization of stability.
Let $K$ be a \emph{proper} cone in $\R^n$, that is, a full-dimensional, closed
and pointed convex cone in $\R^n$.
\begin{definition}\label{de:kstable}
A polynomial $f \in \C[\mathbf{z}]$ is called $K$-\emph{stable}, if $f(\mathbf{z})\neq0$ whenever $\Im(\mathbf{z})\in \inter K$.
If $f \in \C[Z]$ on the symmetric matrix variables
$Z = (z_{ij})_{n \times n}$ is $\sym_n^+$-stable, then
$f$ is called \emph{positive semidefinite-stable} (for short, \emph{psd-stable}).
\end{definition}
A stable or $K$-stable polynomial with real coefficients is called
\emph{real stable} or \emph{real} $K$-\emph{stable}, respectively.
\begin{remark}
1. A set of the form $\R^n + iC$, where $C$ is an open convex cone, is called
a \emph{Siegel domain (of the first kind)}. Siegel domains provide an important concept
in function theory of several complex variables and harmonic analysis,
see the books \cite{hoermander-1990, piaetetski-shapiro-1969,stein-weiss-1971}.
2. The \emph{Siegel upper half-space} (or \emph{Siegel upper half-plane}) $\mathcal{H}_g$
of degree $g$ (or genus $g$) is defined as
\[
\mathcal{H}_g \ = \{ A \in \C^{g \times g} \text{ symmetric } \, : \, \Im(A) \text{ is positive definite}
\} \, ,
\]
where $\Im(A) = (\Im(a_{ij}))_{g \times g}$
(see, e.g., \cite[\S{2}]{van-der-geer-2008}).
The Siegel upper half-space occurs in algebraic
geometry and number theory as the domain of modular forms.
Using that notation, psd-stability can be viewed as stability with respect
to the Siegel upper half-space.
\end{remark}
A form (i.e., a homogeneous polynomial) $f \in \R[\z]$ is \emph{hyperbolic} in direction $\e \in \R^{n}$ if $f(\e)\neq 0$ and for every $\x \in \R^{n}$ the univariate polynomial $t \mapsto f(\x+t \e)$ has only real roots.
The cone $C(\mathbf{e})=\{\mathbf{x}\in\R^n:f(\mathbf{x}+t\mathbf{e})=0 \Rightarrow t<0\}$ is called the \emph{hyperbolicity cone} of $f$ with respect to $\mathbf{e}$. This cone $C(\mathbf{e})$ is convex,
$f$ is hyperbolic with respect to every point $\mathbf{e}' \in C(\mathbf{e})$
and
$C(\mathbf{e})=C(\mathbf{e}')$ (see \cite{garding-59}).
Let $f$ be a hyperbolic polynomial and $C(\e)$ denote the hyperbolicity cone
containing $\e$.
By definition of $K$-stability, a homogeneous polynomial $f$ is hyperbolic w.r.t.\ every
point $\mathbf{e}' \in C(\e)$ if and only if $f$ is $(\cl C(\e))$-stable,
where $\cl$ denotes the topological closure of a set.
The following theorem in \cite{joergens-theobald-conic}
reveals the connection between $K$-stable polynomials and hyperbolic polynomials.
\begin{theorem} \label{ThmConicStability}
For a homogeneous polynomial $f \in \R[\z]$,
the following are equivalent.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $f$ is $K$-stable.
\item $\I(f) \cap \inter K = \emptyset$.
\item $f$ is hyperbolic w.r.t.\ every point in $\inter K$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
By~\cite{joergens-theobald-hyperbolicity},
the hyperbolicity cones of a homogeneous polynomial
$f$ coincide with the components of $\I(f)^\compl$, where
$\mathcal{I}(f)^{\compl}$ denotes the complement of $\mathcal{I}(f)$.
This implies:
\begin{corollary}
A hyperbolic polynomial $f \in \R[\mathbf{z}]$ is $K$-stable
if and only if $\inter K \subseteq C(\e)$ for some hyperbolicity
direction $\e$ of $f$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof} This follows from the observation that a
hyperbolic polynomial $f \in \R[\z]$ is $K$-stable
if and only if $\inter K \subseteq \I(f)^\compl$.
\end{proof}
It is shown in \cite{joergens-theobald-hyperbolicity} that the number of hyperbolicity cones of a homogeneous polynomial $f \in \R[\mathbf{z}]$ is at most $2^d$ for $d \le n$ and at most $2 \sum_{k=0}^{n-1} \binom{d-1}{k}$ for $d > n$.
\subsection{Determinantal representations}
A \emph{determinantal polynomial} is a polynomial of the form
$f(\mathbf{z}) = \det(A_0 + \sum_{j=1}^n A_j z_j)$. For our purposes,
we always assume that the matrices $A_0, \ldots, A_n$ are Hermitian unless
stated otherwise. If the constant
coefficient matrix $A_{0}$ is positive definite or the
identity, then the determinantal polynomial is called \emph{definite} or
\emph{monic} determinantal polynomial, respectively. Helton, McCullough
and Vinnikov showed
that every polynomial $p \in \R[\mathbf{z}]$ with $p(0) \neq 0$
has a symmetric determinantal representation of the form
$p(\mathbf{z}) = \det(A_0 + \sum_{j=1}^n A_j z_j)$
with real symmetric matrices $A_0, \ldots, A_n$
(\cite[Theorem 14.1]{hmv-2006}, see also Quarez \cite[Theorem 4.4] {quarez-2012}
and, for the earlier result of a not necessarily symmetric determinantal
representation, Valiant \cite{valiant-1979} and its
exposition in B\"urgisser et al.\ \cite{bcs-book}).
Note that $A_0$ is not necessarily positive definite and not even
necessarily positive semidefinite.
In \cite{helton-vinnikov-2007} and \cite{netzer-thom-2012}, it
was shown that several classes of polynomials have monic determinantal
representations due to the connection to real zero polynomials. Here,
a polynomial $f\in\R[\mathbf{z}]$ is called \emph{real zero},
if the mapping $t\mapsto f(t\cdot \mathbf{z})$ has only real roots.
Br\"and\'{e}n has constructed a real zero polynomial for which $A_0$
cannot be taken to be positive definite in a determinantal
representation \cite{braenden-2011}.
Recently, Dey and Pillai \cite{dey-pillai-2018} added a complete
characterization of the quadratic case by also using the connection to
real zero polynomials.
\begin{prp}[\cite{dey-pillai-2018}]
A quadratic polynomial
$f(\mathbf{z}) = \mathbf{z}^T A \mathbf{z} + \mathbf{b}^T \mathbf{z} + 1
\in \R[\mathbf{z}]$
is a real zero polynomial if and only if $Q/(1,1) := A - \frac{1}{4} \mathbf{b} \mathbf{b}^T$ is negative
semidefinite. The polynomial $f(\z)$ has a monic determinantal representation if and only if at least one of the following conditions holds:
\begin{itemize}
\item $A$ is negative semidefinite.
\item $Q/(1,1)$ is negative
semidefinite and $\rank(Q/(1,1)) \le 3$.
\end{itemize}
\end{prp}
\subsection{Real stable polynomials}
As specified in the Introduction and Section~\ref{se:prelim-conicstab},
a real polynomial $f$ is real stable if it is real $K$-stable with respect
to the non-negative orthant $K = \R_+^n$. This holds true
if and only if for every $\e \in \R^{n}_{>0}$ and $\x \in \R^{n}$, the univariate polynomial $t \mapsto f(t\e+\x)$ is real-rooted. Indeed, a particular prominent class of real stable polynomials is generated from determinantal polynomials as follows.
\begin{prp}\normalfont{(\cite[Thm. 2.4]{borcea-braenden-2008})}
\label{pr:crit-stable}
Let $A_1, \ldots, A_n$ be positive semidefinite $d \times d$-matrices and
$A_0$ be a Hermitian $d \times d$-matrix. Then
\[
f(\mathbf{z}) \ = \ \det(A_0 + \sum_{j=1}^n A_j z_j)
\]
is real stable or the zero polynomial.
\end{prp}
It is also known a real polynomial $f \in \R[\mathbf{z}]$ is real stable if and only if the (unique) homogenization polynomial w.r.t.\ the variable $z_{0}$ is hyperbolic w.r.t.\ every vector $\e \in \R^{n+1}$ such that $e_{0}=0$ and $e_{j} > 0$ for all $1 \leq j \leq n$ (see \cite{borcea-braenden-2010}).
\begin{example}
The class of homogeneous stable polynomials is contained in the following class of
Lorentzian polynomials,
see \cite{lorentzian-braenden-huh,lorentzian-hehl-itin}.
Let $f \in \R[\mathbf{z}]$ be homogeneous of degree $d \ge 2$ with only positive coefficients.
$f$ is called \emph{strictly Lorentzian} if
\begin{itemize}
\item $d = 2$ and the \textit{Hessian} $\H(f)=(\partial_{i} \partial_{j} f)_{i,j=1}^{n}$
is non-singular and has exactly one positive eigenvalue
(i.e., $\H(f)$ has the \emph{Lorentzian signature} $(1,n-1)$, which expresses
that $f$ has one positive eigenvalue and $n-1$ negative eigenvalues
\cite{lorentzian-hehl-itin}),
\item or $d > 2$ and for all $\alpha \in \N_0^n$ with $|\alpha|=d-2$, the
$\alpha$-th derivative $\partial^{\alpha} f$ is strictly Lorentzian.
\end{itemize}
By convention, in degrees 0 and 1, every polynomial with only positive
coefficients is strictly Lorentzian. Limits of strictly Lorentzian polynomials
are called \emph{Lorentzian}.
\end{example}
Concerning psd-stability, the following variant of
Proposition~\ref{pr:crit-stable} is known.
\begin{proposition}\normalfont{(\cite[Thm. 5.3]{joergens-theobald-conic})}
\label{pr:crit-psd-stable}
Let $A= (A_{ij})_{n \times n}$ be a Hermitian block matrix with $n \times n$ blocks
of size $d \times d$. If $A$ is positive semidefinite and $A_0$ a Hermitian
$d \times d$-matrix, then the polynomial
$f(Z) \ = \ \det(A_0 + \sum_{i,j=1}^n A_{ij} z_{ij})$ on the set
of symmetric $n \times n$-matrices is psd-stable or identically zero.
\end{proposition}
Determinantal representations of complex polynomials which are stable with
respect to the unit ball of symmetric matrices have been studied in
\cite{gkv-2016,gkv-2017}.
In the present paper,
for cones $K$ with a spectrahedral representation, we derive
a semidefinite problem, which, in the case of feasibility,
certifies $K$-stability of $f$. For the case of psd-stability, if that
criterion is satisfied, we can explicitly
construct the determinantal representation of
Proposition~\ref{pr:crit-psd-stable}. In this respect, the criterion from
Proposition~\ref{pr:crit-psd-stable} can be seen as a special case of our
treatment.
The following examples serve to pinpoint some
relationships between stable, psd-stable and determinantal polynomials.
\begin{example} {a) A quadratic determinantal polynomial
does not need to be stable in order to be psd-stable (with respect to a suitable
ordering identification between the variables $z_i$ and the matrix variables
$z_{jk}$). Namely, the determinantal polynomial
\begin{equation*}
f(z_{1},z_{2},z_{3}) =(z_{1}+z_{3})^{2}-z_{2}^{2}
= (z_1 + z_3 - z_2)(z_1+z_3 +z_2)
\end{equation*}
is not stable, because $(1,2,1) \in \mathcal{I}(f) \cap \R_{>0}^3$.
However, in the matrix variables
$Z = \begin{pmatrix}z_1 & z_2 \\
z_2 & z_3 \end{pmatrix}$, the polynomial $f(Z) = f(z_1,z_2,z_3)$
is psd-stable. To see this, observe that by the arithmetic-geometric
mean inequality, every
$\mathbf{y} \in \mathcal{I}(f) = \{ \mathbf{y} \in \R^3 \, : \,
y_1+y_3 = y_2 \text{ or } y_1 + y_3 = - y_2\}$
satisfies
\[
\det \begin{pmatrix}
y_1 & y_2 \\
y_2 & y_3
\end{pmatrix}
\ = \
\det
\begin{pmatrix}
y_1 & \pm (y_1 + y_3) \\
\pm (y_1 + y_3) & y_3
\end{pmatrix}
\ = \ y_1 y_3 - (y_1 + y_3)^2
\ \le \ 0
\]
and thus
$\mathbf{y} \not\in \inter \sym_2^+$.
\smallskip
\noindent
b) An example of a non-psd-stable determinantal polynomial on $2 \times 2$-matrices,
i.e., with matrix variables
$Z = \begin{pmatrix} z_{11} & z_{12} \\
z_{12} & z_{22} \end{pmatrix}$,
is
$f(Z) = \det \diag(z_{11},z_{12},z_{22}) =
z_{11} z_{12} z_{22}$. Namely, since
$ \mathcal{I}(f) = \{ X \in \sym_2 \ : \ x_{11} x_{12} x_{22} = 0 \}$,
we have $\begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix} \in \mathcal{I}(f)$
and thus $\mathcal{I}(f) \cap \inter \sym_2^+ \neq \emptyset$.
}
\smallskip
\noindent
c) Another example of a non-psd-stable determinantal polynomial on $2\times 2$-matrices is the determinant of the spectrahedral representation of the open Lorentz cone $g(\mathbf{z})=\det\left(\begin{matrix}
z_1+z_3 & z_2 \\
z_2 & z_1-z_3
\end{matrix}
\right)=z_1^2-z_2^2-z_3^2$, where the same variable identification as in a)
is used. Note that
$g(\mathbf{z})=0$ for $\mathbf{z}=(1+2i,1+i,\sqrt{-3+2i})$ and $\left(\begin{matrix}
2 & 1 \\
1 & \alpha
\end{matrix}\right)\in \inter\sym_2^+$ for $\alpha=\Im(\sqrt{-3+2i})>1$. Hence,
$g$ is not psd-stable.
\end{example}
\iffalse In fact, it is true that determinantal polynomials are always psd-stable \textcolor{blue}{(papri: is it true, or proved for determinantal polynomials in the context of Lax conjecture?}))
\\
\textcolor{green}{What about
\begin{equation*}
f(x,y,z)=\text{det}\left( \begin{array}{rrr}
3x+y & 2y & 0 \\
2y & 2x+y & 0 \\
0 & 0 & z
\end{array}\right)=6x^2z+5xyz-3y^2z?
\end{equation*}
For $f$ and $a=2i,b=1/3\cdot(5+\sqrt{97})i, c=50i$ we get $f(a,b,c)=0$, but $Im(a)\cdot Im(c)-Im(b)^2\geq 0, Im(a),Im(c)\geq 0$. So $f$ shouldn't be psd-stable.}
\fi
\section{Conic components in the complement of the imaginary projection\label{se:coniccomponents}}
To prepare for the conic stability criteria
for determinantal and quadratic polynomials, we characterize
particular conic components in the complement of
the imaginary projection for these classes. Denote by $X \succ 0$
the positive definiteness of a matrix $X$.
First consider a determinantal polynomial
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:fdetpoly}
f(\mathbf{z}) \ = \ \det(A_0 + A_1 z_1 + \cdots + A_n z_n)
\end{equation}
with $A_0, \ldots, A_n \in \herm_d$. Note that if $A_0=I$, then
the homogenization of $f$ w.r.t.\ a variable $z_0$ is hyperbolic w.r.t.\
$\mathbf{e}=(1,0,\dots,0) \in \R^{n+1}$. Moreover, for a homogeneous determinantal
polynomial $f=\det(\sum_{j=1}^{n}A_jz_j)$, if there exists an $\e \in \R^{n}$ with
$\sum_{j=1}^n A_je_j \succ 0$, then $f$ is hyperbolic w.r.t.\ $\e$, and the set
\[
\{ \mathbf{z} \in \R^{n} \, : \ A_1 z_1 + \cdots + A_n z_n \succ 0 \}
\]
as well as its negative are hyperbolicity cones of $f$, see \cite[Prop.~2]{lpr-2005}.
If $f$ is irreducible, then these are the only two hyperbolicity cones
(see \cite{kummer-2019}), whereas in the reducible case there can be
more (cf.\ Section~\ref{se:prelim-conicstab}).
Let $A(\mathbf{z})$ be the linear matrix pencil
$A(\mathbf{z}) = A_0 + \sum_{j=1}^n A_j z_j$. The \textit{initial form} of $f$, denoted by $\init(f)$,
is defined as $\init(f)(\z)=f_{h}(0,\z)$, where $f_{h}$ is the homogenization of
$f$ w.r.t.\ the variable $z_0$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{th:cones-determinantal}
If $f$ is a degree $d$ determinantal polynomial of the form~\eqref{eq:fdetpoly} and there exists an
$\mathbf{e} \in \R^n$ with $\sum_{j=1}^n A_j e_j \succ 0$,
then $\init(f)$ is hyperbolic and every hyperbolicity cone of $\init(f)$ is
contained in $\mathcal{I}(f)^\compl$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $f = \det(A_0 + \sum_{j=1}^n A_j z_j)$ with
$A_0, \ldots, A_n \in \herm_d$. Since $f$ is of degree $d$, it holds
$\init(f) = \det(\sum_{j=1}^n A_jz_j)$. Then
$\sum_{j=1}^n A_j e_j \succ 0$ implies that
$\init(f)$ is hyperbolic.
First we assume that $\init(f)$ is irreducible.
By the precondition $\sum_{j=1}^n A_j e_j \succ 0$,
the initial form $\init(f)$ has exactly the two hyperbolicity cones
$C_1 = \{\mathbf{x} \in \R^n \, : \, \sum_{j=1}^n A_j x_j \succ 0\}$
and $C_2 = \{\mathbf{x} \in \R^n \, : \, \sum_{j=1}^n A_j x_j \prec 0\}$.
First we show that $C_1 \subseteq \mathcal{I}(f)^\compl$.
For every $\mathbf{x} \in \R^n$, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
f(\mathbf{x} + t \mathbf{e}) & = & \det(A_0 + \sum_{j=1}^n A_j x_j
+ t \sum_{j=1}^n A_j e_j).
\end{eqnarray*}
Since $\sum_{j=1}^n A_j e_j \succ 0$, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
f(\mathbf{x} + t \mathbf{e})
& = & \det(\sum_{j=1}^n A_j e_j) \det\Big( (\sum_{j=1}^n A_j e_j)^{-1/2}
(A_0 + \sum_{j=1}^n A_j x_j) (\sum_{j=1}^n A_j e_j)^{-1/2}
+ t I \Big) \, .
\end{eqnarray*}
Since $A_0 + \sum_{j=1}^n A_j x_j$ is Hermitian, all the roots of
$t \mapsto f(\mathbf{x} + t \mathbf{e})$ are real.
Hence, there cannot be a non-real vector $\mathbf{a}+i \mathbf{e}$ with
$f(\mathbf{a}+i\mathbf{e}) = 0$,
because otherwise setting $\mathbf{x} = \mathbf{a}$ would give a non-real solution
to $t \mapsto f(\mathbf{x}+t\mathbf{e})$.
Thus, there is a connected component $C'$ in $\mathcal{I}(f)^{\compl}$
containing $C_1$. The case $C_2 \subseteq \mathcal{I}(f)^\compl$ is symmetric,
since $-\mathbf{e} \in C_2$.
To cover also the case of reducible $\init(f)$,
it suffices to observe that for reducible $\init(f) = \prod_{j=1}^k h_j$ with
irreducible $h_1, \ldots, h_k$, every hyperbolicity cone $C$ of $\init(f)$
is of the form $C = \bigcap_{j=1}^k C_j$ with some hyperbolicity
cones $C_j$ of $h_j$, $1 \le j \le k$.
\end{proof}
\subsection*{Quadratic polynomials}
Now let $f \in \R[\mathbf{z}]$ be a quadratic polynomial of the form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:fquadr}
f \ = \ \mathbf{z}^T A \mathbf{z} + \mathbf{b}^T \mathbf{z} + c
\end{equation}
with $A \in \sym_n$, $\mathbf{b} \in \R^n$ and $c \in \R$.
We show that those components
of $\mathcal{I}(f)^{\compl}$ which are cones, can be described
in terms of spectrahedra, as made precise in the following.
First recall the situation of a homogeneous quadratic polynomial
$f = \mathbf{z}^T A \mathbf{z}$. By possibly multiplying $A$ with $-1$,
we can assume that the number of positive eigenvalues of $A$ is at least the
number of negative eigenvalues.
In this setting, it is well known that a non-degenerate quadratic form
$f \in \R[\mathbf{z}]$ is hyperbolic if and only if $A$ has signature
$(n-1,1)$ \cite{garding-59}.
Specifically, for the normal form
\[
f(\mathbf{z}) \ = \ \sum_{j=1}^{n-1} z_j^2 - z_n^2, \,
\]
we have
$
\mathcal{I}(f) \ = \
\{\mathbf{y} \in \R^n \; : \, y_n^2\leq \sum_{j=1}^{n-1} y_j^2\}
$
(see \cite{jtw-2019}). Hence, there are two
unbounded components in the complement $\mathcal{I}(f)^{\compl}$,
both of which are full-dimensional cones, and these two components are
\[
\{\mathbf{y} \in \R^{n-1} \times \R_+ \, : \, \sum_{j=1}^{n-1} y_j^2 < y_n^2 \}
\: \text{ and } \:
\{\mathbf{y} \in \R^{n-1} \times \R_- \, : \, \sum_{j=1}^{n-1} y_j^2 < y_n^2 \}.
\]
For a general homogeneous quadratic form, this generalizes as follows.
\begin{lemma}
\label{le:complquadr}
For a quadratic form $f=\mathbf{z}^T A \mathbf{z} \in \R[\mathbf{z}]$
with $A$ having signature $(n-1,1)$, the
components $C$ of the complement of $\mathcal{I}(f)$ are
given by the two components of the set
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:compl-spectra}
\{ \mathbf{y} \in \R^{n} \ : \ \mathbf{y}^T A \mathbf{y} < 0 \} \, ,
\end{equation}
and the closures of these components are spectrahedra.
\end{lemma}
The proof makes use of the following property from~\cite{jtw-2019}.
\begin{proposition}\label{pr:transf2}
Let $g\in\C[\mathbf{z}]$ and $T\in\R^{n\times n}$ be an invertible matrix. Then,
$\mathcal{I}(g(T\mathbf{z}))=T^{-1} \mathcal{I}(g(\mathbf{z}))$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma~\ref{le:complquadr}]
Since $-A$ has Lorentzian signature, there exists $S \in \GL(n,\R)$ with
$A_I \ := \ S^T A S \ = \ \diag(1, \ldots, 1, -1)$. Observing
\[
\mathcal{I}(f(S\mathbf{z})) \ = \ \mathcal{I}(\mathbf{z}^TA_I\mathbf{z})
\ = \ \{\mathbf{y}\in\R^n \ : \ y_n^2\leq \sum_{j=1}^{n-1} y_j^2 \}
\ = \{\mathbf{y}\in\R^n \ : \ \mathbf{y}^TA_I\mathbf{y}\geq 0\} \, ,
\]
Proposition~\ref{pr:transf2} then gives
\[
\mathcal{I}(f(\mathbf{z})) \ = \ S\cdot \mathcal{I}(f(S\mathbf{z}))
\ = \ \{S\cdot \mathbf{y}\in\R^n \ : \ \mathbf{y}^TA_I\mathbf{y}\geq 0\}
\ = \ \{\mathbf{y}\in\R^n \ : \ \mathbf{y}^TA\mathbf{y}\geq 0\} \, .
\]
\end{proof}
For the general, not necessarily homogeneous case, recall that
every quadric in $\R^n$ is affinely equivalent to a quadric given by
one of the following polynomials,
\[
\begin{array}{cll}
\text{(I)}& \sum_{j=1}^p z_j^2 - \sum_{j=p+1}^r z_j^2 & \quad (1 \le p \le r, \, r \ge 1, \, p \ge \frac{r}{2}) \, , \\ [0.5ex]
\text{(II)} & \sum_{j=1}^p z_j^2 - \sum_{j=p+1}^r z_j^2 + 1 & \quad (0 \le p \le r, \, r \ge 1) \, , \\ [0.5ex]
\text{(III)} & \sum_{j=1}^p z_j^2 - \sum_{j=p+1}^r z_j^2 + z_{r+1} & \quad (1 \le p \le r, \, r \ge 1,
\, p \ge \frac{r}{2}) \, .
\end{array}
\]
We refer to \cite{berger-book}
as a general background reference for real quadrics.
We say that a given quadratic polynomial $f \in \R[\mathbf{z}]$ is of type $X$
if it can be transformed to the normal form $X$ by an affine real transformation.
The homogeneous case, case (I), has already been treated, and by
\cite{jtw-2019}, it is known that in case (III), the imaginary
projection does not contain a full-dimensional component in
$\mathcal{I}(f)^{\compl}$.
By~\cite{jtw-2019}, in case (II), unbounded components only exist
in the cases $p=1$ and $p=r-1$, so we can restrict to these
cases. We list these relevant two cases from \cite{jtw-2019}.
\begin{theorem}\label{th:quadrics}
Let $n \ge r \ge 3$ and $f \in \R[\mathbf{z}]$ be a quadratic polynomial.
If $f$ is of type $\mathrm{(II)}$, then
\begin{equation}\label{eq:class2}
\mathcal{I}(f) \ = \ \begin{cases}
\{\mathbf{y} \in \R^n \; : \, y_1^2 - \sum_{j=2}^{r} y_j^2 \le 1\} & \text{if } p = 1 \, , \\
\{\mathbf{y} \in \R^n \; : \, \sum_{j=1}^{r-1} y_j^2 > y_r^2 \} \cup \{\mathbf{0}\} & \text{if } p = r-1 \, . \\
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
For the proof see \cite{jtw-2019}.
Since the proofs of the case $p=1$ and of the case $p=r-1$ differ in some important details, which are not carried out there, we include a proof here for the convenience of the reader.
\begin{proof}Without loss of generality we can assume $r=n$.
Writing $z_j=x_j+iy_j$,
we have $f(\mathbf{z})=\sum_{j=1}^{p}z_j^2- \sum_{j=p+1}^{n}z_j^2+1=0$
if and only if
\begin{eqnarray}
\sum_{j=1}^{p}x_j^2-\sum_{j=p+1}^{n}x_j^2-\sum_{j=1}^{p}y_j^2+\sum_{j=p+1}^{n}y_j^2+1& = & 0 \label{eq:imclass1} \\
\text{ and } \sum_{j=1}^{p}x_jy_j-\sum_{j=p+1}^{n}x_jy_j & = & 0.
\label{eq:imclass2}
\end{eqnarray}
Set $\alpha:=-\sum_{j=1}^{p}y_j^2+\sum_{j=p+1}^{n}y_j^2+1$,
and let $\mathbf{y} \in \R^n$ be fixed. Note that in both cases
$p=1$ and $p=n-1$, we have ${\bf 0} \in\I(f)$,
since $f(\mathbf{x} + i \cdot \mathbf{0})=0$ for
$\mathbf{x}=(0, \ldots ,0,1)$. Hence, we can assume ${\bf y} \neq \mathbf{0}$.
\medskip
\noindent
\emph{Case $p=1$}: Write
$\mathbf{x} = (x_1,\mathbf{x}') = (x_1, x_2, \ldots, x_n)$
and $\mathbf{y} = (y_1, \mathbf{y}') = (y_1, y_2, \ldots, y_n)$. Observe the
rotational symmetry of~\eqref{eq:imclass1} w.r.t.\ $\mathbf{x}'$ and
$\mathbf{y}'$ and
the invariance of the standard scalar product
$(\mathbf{x}',\mathbf{y}') \mapsto \sum_{j=2}^n x_j y_j$
under orthogonal transformations. Hence,
if $((x_1,\mathbf{x}'),(y_1,\mathbf{y}'))$
is a solution of~\eqref{eq:imclass1} and~\eqref{eq:imclass2}, then
for any $T \in \SO(n{-}1)$, the point
$((x_1,T\mathbf{x}'),(y_1,T\mathbf{y}'))$ is a solution as well,
where $\SO(n{-}1)$ denotes the special orthogonal group of order $n-1$.
Thus, we can assume $y_3 = \cdots = y_n = 0$, and $\alpha$ simplifies
to $\alpha = -y_1^2 + y_2^2+1$. Solving~\eqref{eq:imclass2} for $x_1$
(by assuming, without loss of generality, $y_1 \neq 0$)
yields $x_1 = \frac{x_2 y_2}{y_1}$ and substituting this into~\eqref{eq:imclass1}
then
\[
0 \ = \ \left( \frac{y_2^2}{y_1^2} -1 \right)
x_2^2 - \sum_{j=3}^n x_j^2 + \alpha
\ = \ \frac{(\alpha - 1) x_2^2}{y_1^2} - \sum_{j=3}^n x_j^2 + \alpha.
\]
This equation has a real solution $(x_2, \ldots, x_n)$ if and only if
$\alpha \ge 0$, which shows
$\mathcal{I}(f) \ = \{\mathbf{y} \in \R^n \; : \, y_1^2 - \sum_{j=2}^{n} y_j^2 \le 1\}$.
\smallskip
\noindent
\emph{Case $p=n-1$}: Following the same proof strategy, we now
write $x = (\mathbf{x}',x_n) = (x_1, x_2, \ldots, x_n)$
and $y = (\mathbf{y}',y_n) = (y_1, y_2, \ldots, y_n)$.
Then the symmetry of the problem allows to
assume $y_2 = \cdots = y_{n-1} = 0$, and $\alpha$ simplifies
to $\alpha = -y_1^2 + y_n^2+1$. If $y_1 \neq 0$,
solving~\eqref{eq:imclass2} for $x_1$
gives $x_1 = \frac{x_n y_n}{y_1}$, and a substitution into~\eqref{eq:imclass1}
\[
0 \ = \ \left( \frac{y_n^2}{y_1^2} -1 \right)
x_n^2 + \sum_{j=2}^{n-1} x_j^2 + \alpha
\ = \ \frac{(\alpha - 1) x_2^2}{y_1^2} + \sum_{j=2}^{n-1} x_j^2 + \alpha.
\]
There exists a real solution $(x_2, \ldots, x_n)$ if and only if
$\alpha < 1$, which, taking also into account the special case $y_1=0$, gives $\mathcal{I}(f) =
\{\mathbf{y} \in \R^n \; : \, \sum_{j=1}^{n-1} y_j^2 > y_n^2 \} \cup \{\mathbf{0}\} $.
\end{proof}
For the inhomogeneous case, we use the following lemma to reduce
it to the homogeneous case.
\begin{lemma}
Let $n \ge 3$ and
$f \in \R[\mathbf{z}]$ be quadratic of the form~\eqref{eq:fquadr}.
If $f$ is of type~(II) with $p=1$, then $\mathcal{I}(f)^{\compl}$
does not have connected components whose closures contain
full-dimensional cones.
If $f$ is of type~(II) with $p=n-1$ then every full-dimensional cone
which is contained in $\mathcal{I}(f)^\compl$ is contained
in the closure of a hyperbolicity cone of $\init(f)$.
\end{lemma}
Note, that in particular, that $\mathcal{I}(f)^{\compl}$ does not
contain a point at all
if and only if $\init(f)$ is not hyperbolic.
\begin{proof}
If $f$ is of type~(II) with $p=1$,
then the statement is a consequence of~\eqref{eq:class2}.
Now consider the case that $f$ is of type~(II) with $p=n-1$ and let
$C$ be full-dimensional cone which is contained in
a component of $\mathcal{I}(f)^\compl$.
By \cite[Theorem 4.2 and Lemma 4.3]{joergens-theobald-hyperbolicity},
$\inter C$ is contained in a hyperbolicity cone of $\init(f)$.
\end{proof}
Hence, among the quadratic polynomials of type (II), only the ones with
$p=n-1$ might possibly be $K$-stable.
\begin{theorem}
\label{th:conic-comp-quadr}
Let $n \ge 3$ and
$f \in \R[\mathbf{z}]$ be quadratic of the form~\eqref{eq:fquadr}
and of type (II) with $p=n-1$.
Then there exists a linear form $\ell(\mathbf{z})$ in $\mathbf{z}$ such that
$-\ell(\mathbf{z})^{n-2} {\init(f)}$
has a determinantal representation. In particular, the closure of
each unbounded component of $\mathcal{I}(f)^\compl$ is a spectrahedral
cone.
\end{theorem}
The theorem can be seen as an adaption of the well-known result that hyperbolic
quadratic forms have determinantal representations. See, e.g., \cite[Section~2]{vandenberghe-boyd-survey}
or \cite[Example 2.16]{netzer-thom-2012} for the determinantal representations which underlie that
result and which are utilized in the subsequent proof.
\begin{proof}
First consider the normal form of type (II) with $p=n-1$,
\[
g(\mathbf{z}) \ = \ \sum_{j=1}^{n-1} z_j^2 - z_n^2 + 1 \, .
\]
By~\eqref{eq:class2}, the complement of $\mathcal{I}(g)$ has the
two unbounded conic components
\[
\{ \mathbf{y} \in \R^{n-1} \times \R_+ \, : \, \sum_{j=1}^{n-1} y_j^2 \le y_n^2 \} \setminus \{0\} \: \text{ and } \:
\{ \mathbf{y} \in \R^{n-1} \times \R_- \, : \, \sum_{j=1}^{n-1} y_j^2 \le y_n^2 \} \setminus \{0\},
\]
which (up to the origin) are the open Lorentz cone and its negative.
Their closures are exactly the
closures of the hyperbolicity cones of the initial form $\init(g)$ of $g$.
It is well-known that the open Lorentz cone
has the spectrahedral representation
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:lz}
L(\mathbf{z}) \ := \ \left(
\begin{array}{ccc|c}
& & & z_ 1 \\
& z_n I& & \vdots \\
& & & z_{n-1} \\ \hline
z_1 & \cdots & z_{n-1} & z_n
\end{array} \right) \ \succ \ 0 \, ,
\end{equation}
and thus we also have $z_n^{n-2}\init(g) = -\det(L(\mathbf{z}))$.
Since $g$ results from $f$ by an affine transformation, the initial
form $\init(g)$ results from the initial form $\init(f)$ by a linear
transformation,
\[
\init(g)(T\mathbf{z}) \ = \ \init(f)(\mathbf{z})
\]
for some matrix $T \in \GL(n,\R)$. Hence, we obtain the spectrahedral
representation for one of the unbounded conic components in
$\mathcal{I}(f)^{\compl}$,
\[
F(\mathbf{z}) \ := \ \left(
\begin{array}{ccc|c}
& & & (T\mathbf{z})_ 1 \\
& (T \mathbf{z})_n I& & \vdots \\
& & & (T\mathbf{z})_{n-1} \\ \hline
(T\mathbf{z})_1 & \cdots & (T\mathbf{z})_{n-1} & (T\mathbf{z})_n
\end{array} \right) \ \succ \ 0 \, ,
\]
as well as its negative.
Moreover,
\[
-\det F(\mathbf{z}) \ = \ ((T \mathbf{z})_n)^{n-2} \init(f) \, ,
\]
so that $(T \mathbf{z})_n$ provides the desired linear form $\ell(\mathbf{z})$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{re:ldl}
Concerning $L(\mathbf{z})$ in~\eqref{eq:lz},
by subtracting $\frac{z_j}{z_n}$ times the $j$-th row from its
$n$-th row for every $j\in\{1,\dots,n-1\}$, we obtain
\[
\det(L(\mathbf{z})) =
\det\left(
\begin{array}{ccc|c}
& & & z_ 1 \\
& z_n I& & \vdots \\
& & & z_{n-1} \\ \hline
0 & \cdots & 0 & z_n-\frac{1}{z_n}\sum\nolimits_{i=1}^{n-1}z_i^2
\end{array} \right)
= z_n^{n-2}\left(z_n^2-\sum\limits_{i=1}^{n-1}z_i^2\right).
\]
By~\eqref{eq:fquadr}, in the proof we have
$\init(f) = \mathbf{z}^T A \mathbf{z}$. Let $A = LDL^T$ be an
$LDL^T$ decomposition of $A$ with
$D = \diag(d_1, \ldots, d_{n-1}, d_n)$ such that $d_1, \ldots, d_{n-1} > 0$
and $d_n < 0$. Then the variable transformation $T$ in the proof
is
\[
T \ = \ \diag( \sqrt{d_1}, \ldots, \sqrt{d_{n-1}}, \sqrt{|d_n|}) \cdot L^T
\]
and we derive
\[
A=T^T\cdot
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc|c}
& & & 0 \\
& I& & \vdots \\
& & & 0 \\ \hline
0 & \cdots & 0 & -1
\end{array} \right) \cdot T.
\]
\end{remark}
\begin{ex}
Consider $f(z_1,z_2,z_3,z_4)=-15z_1^2-12z_1z_4+z_2^2+z_3^2=\mathbf{z}^TA\mathbf{z}$ with
\begin{equation*}
A=\left(\begin{matrix}
-15 & 0 & 0 & -6 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
-6 & 0 & 0 & 0
\end{matrix}\right).
\end{equation*}
For $\ell(\mathbf{z})=4z_1+2z_4$,
a representation from Theorem~\ref{th:conic-comp-quadr} is
\begin{equation*}
-\ell(\mathbf{z})^2\cdot f(\mathbf{z})=\det \left(\begin{matrix}
4z_1+2z_4 & 0 & 0 & z_1+2z_4 \\
0 & 4z_1+2z_4 & 0 & z_2 \\
0 & 0 & 4z_1+2z_4 & z_3 \\
z_1+2z_4 & z_2 & z_3 & 4z_1+2z_4
\end{matrix}\right).
\end{equation*}
\end{ex}
\begin{remark}
A quadratic polynomial $f \in \R[\z]$ is of the form~\eqref{eq:fquadr}
and of type (II) with $p=n-1$ (i.e., $-f$ has Lorentzian signature) if
and only if $f \in \R[\z]$ is a real zero polynomial, see
for example \cite{dey-pillai-2018}.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}For the case of homogeneous polynomials,
Theorem \ref{th:conic-comp-quadr} recovers the known fact that
hyperbolicity cones defined by homogeneous quadratic polynomials $f$ are
spectrahedral \cite{netzer-thom-2012}.
In the affine setting, we can homogenize the type (II) polynomial
$f$ w.r.t.\ variable $z_0$ and get a quadratic polynomial of type (I) in $n+1$ variables with $p=n$. Then, using $\init(f_{h})=f_{h}$, Theorem~\ref{th:conic-comp-quadr} recovers that
\textit{the rigidly convex sets} (introduced by Helton-Vinnikov \cite{helton-vinnikov-2007}) defined by real zero polynomials $f$ are
spectrahedra \cite{netzer-thom-2012}.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
The proof of Theorem \ref{th:conic-comp-quadr} explicitly explains a technique to compute a suitable linear factor $\ell(\z)$ as well as a determinantal representation to get a spectrahedral structure.
\end{remark}
\section{Conic stability and positive maps\label{se:conicstab-posmaps}}
Based on the characterizations of the conic components in the
complement of $\mathcal{I}(f)$, we now study the problem whether
$f$ is $K$-stable, in particular, whether it is psd-stable.
In order to decide whether the cone $K$ is contained in one of the
components of $\mathcal{I}(f)^{\compl}$, observe that in the case of spectrahedral
representations of $K$ and of the components of $\mathcal{I}(f)^{\compl}$,
the problem of $K$-stability can be phrased as a containment problem
for spectrahedra. The theory of positive and completely positive maps (as detailed
in \cite{paulsen-2003})
provides a sufficient condition for the containment problem of spectrahedra,
see \cite{hkm-2010,ktt-2013,ktt-2015}.
\begin{definition}
Given two linear subspaces $\mathcal{U}\subseteq \herm_k$ and
$\mathcal{V}\subseteq\herm_l$
(or $\mathcal{U}\subseteq \sym_k$ and $\mathcal{V}\subseteq\sym_l$),
a linear map
$\Phi:\ \mathcal{U}\rightarrow\mathcal{V}$ is
called \emph{positive} if
$\Phi(U) \succeq 0$ for any $U \in \mathcal{U}$ with $U \succeq 0$.
For $d \ge 1$, define the \emph{$d$-multiplicity map} $\Phi_d$ on the set of all
Hermitian $d \times d$ block matrices with symmetric $n \times n$-matrix entries
by
\[
(A_{ij})_{i,j=1}^d \ \mapsto \ \big(\Phi \left(A_{ij}\right) \big)_{i,j=1}^d.
\]
The map $\Phi$ is called \emph{$d$-positive} if the $d$-multiplicity map $\Phi_d$ (viewed
as a map on a Hermitian matrix space) is a positive map.
$\Phi$ is called \emph{completely positive} if $\Phi_d$ is a positive map for all $d \ge 1$.
\end{definition}
Let $U(\mathbf{x}) = \sum_{j=1}^n U_j x_j$
and $V(\mathbf{x}) = \sum_{j=1}^n V_j x_j$ be homogeneous linear
pencils with symmetric matrices of size $k \times k$ and
$l \times l$, respectively
(since the matrices are symmetric, we prefer to denote the variables by
$\mathbf{x}$ rather than $\mathbf{z}$).
Then the spectrahedra
$S_U := \{ \x \in \R^n \, : \, U(\mathbf{x}) \succeq 0 \}$,
and $S_V := \{ \x \in \R^n \, : \, V(\mathbf{x}) \succeq 0 \}$
are cones.
Further, let $\mathcal{U} = \myspan(U_1, \ldots, U_n) \subseteq \sym_k$
and
$\mathcal{V} = \myspan(V_1, \ldots, V_n) \subseteq \sym_l$.
If $U_1, \ldots, U_n$ are linearly independent, then
the linear mapping
$\Phi_{UV} : \mathcal{U} \to \mathcal{V}$,
$\Phi_{UV}(U_i) := V_i$, $1 \le i \le n$, is well defined.
\begin{proposition}[\cite{ktt-2013}]
\label{pr:posmaps}
Let $U_1, \ldots, U_n \subseteq \herm_k$ (or, $U_1, \ldots, U_n \subseteq \sym_k$, respectively)
be linearly independent and $S_U \neq \emptyset$. Then for the properties
\begin{enumerate}
\item the semidefinite feasibility problem
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sdfp}
C = \left( C_{ij} \right)_{i,j=1}^{k} \succeq 0
\text{ and }
V_{p} = \sum_{i,j=1}^{k} (U_p)_{ij} C_{ij}
\text{ for } p = 1,\ldots,n
\end{equation}
has a solution with Hermitian (respectively symmetric) matrix $C$,
\item $\Phi_{UV}$ is completely positive,
\item $\Phi_{UV}$ is positive,
\item $S_U \subseteq S_V$,
\end{enumerate}
the implications and equivalences
$(1) \ \Longrightarrow \ (2) \ \Longrightarrow (3) \Longleftrightarrow (4)$
hold, and if $\mathcal{U}$ contains a positive definite matrix, $(1) \Longleftrightarrow (2)$.
\end{proposition}
Note that the statement $(1) \Longrightarrow (4)$ (which does not involve
the definition of $\Phi_{UV}$) is also valid without the assumption
of linear independence of $U_1, \ldots, U_n$ (see \cite{hkm-2010,ktt-2013}).
So, in case the cone $K$ and the conic components of
$\mathcal{I}(f)^{\compl}$ can be described in terms of spectrahedra,
we can approach the conic stability problem in terms of the
block matrix $C\succeq 0$ in~\eqref{eq:sdfp}, the so-called \emph{Choi matrix},
corresponding to an appropriate positive map $\Phi$, which maps the underlying
pencils of those spectrahedra onto each other certifying their containment.
This sufficient condition is provided by a certain semidefinite feasibility problem
whose non-emptiness of its feasible domain thus provides a sufficient criterion
for psd-stability.
Moreover, if we know a spectrahedral description of some
of the components of $\mathcal{I}(f)^{\compl}$
(as in the quadratic case or the determinantal case),
the sufficient containment criterion is based on writing
a matrix pencil for these components using linear combinations
of the matrices of a linear matrix pencil for $K$.
As formalized in Theorem~\ref{th:quadr-certificate} and
Corollary~\ref{co:quadr-certificate},
taking the determinant of a matrix pencil for a suitable component
of $\mathcal{I}(f)^{\compl}$ provides a
particular determinantal description
for the homogeneous part of the given polynomial $f$.
That description has exactly the structure of the sufficient
determinantal criterion for psd-stability and thus provides an elegant
determinantal representation that certifies the psd-stability of
a homogeneous polynomial $f$.
Let $K$ be a cone which is given as the positive semidefiniteness region
of a linear matrix pencil
$M(\mathbf{x}) = \sum_{j=1}^n M_j x_j$ with symmetric $l \times l$-matrices
(since $K$ is a cone in $\R^n$, we prefer to denote the variables by $\mathbf{x}$
rather than $\mathbf{z}$).
In the case of usual stability, the cone $K$ is the positive semidefiniteness
region of the linear matrix pencil
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:kge0}
M^{\ge 0}(\mathbf{x}) \ = \ \sum_{j=1}^n M^{\ge 0}_j x_j
\end{equation}
with $M^{\ge 0}_j = E_{jj}$, where $E_{ij}$ is the matrix
with a one in position $(i,j)$ and zeros elsewhere.
In the case of psd-stability, the matrix pencil is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:kpsd}
M^{\psdtext}(X) \ = \ \sum_{i,j=1}^{n} M^{\psdtext}_{ij} x_{ij}
\end{equation}
with symmetric matrix variables $X = (x_{ij})$
and $M^{\psdtext}_{ij} = \frac{1}{2}(E_{ij} + E_{ji})$, i.e.,
$M^{\psdtext}(X)$ is the matrix pencil
$M^{\psdtext}(X) = (x_{ij})_{ij}$ in the symmetric matrix variables
$x_{ij}$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{th:kstable-determinantal}
Let $f = \det(A_0 + \sum_{j=1}^n A_j z_j)$ with Hermitian matrices $A_0, \ldots, A_n$
be a degree $d$ determinantal polynomial
of the form~\eqref{eq:fdetpoly} such that $\init(f)$ is irreducible and
there exists $\mathbf{e} \in \R^n$ with $\sum_{j=1}^n A_j e_j \succ 0$.
Let $M(\mathbf{x}) = \sum_{j=1}^n M_j x_j$ with symmetric $l \times l$-matrices
be a pencil of the cone $K$.
If there exists a Hermitian block matrix $C=(C_{ij})_{i,j=1}^l$ with
blocks $C_{ij}$ of size $d \times d$ and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:containment-crit1}
C = (C_{ij})_{i,j=1}^l \ \succeq \ 0,
\quad \forall p = 1, \ldots, n \; : \;
\sigma A_p \ = \ \sum_{i,j=1}^l (M_p)_{ij} C_{ij}
\end{equation}
for some $\sigma \in \{-1,1\}$,
then $f$ is $K$-stable. Deciding whether such a block matrix $C$ exists
is a semidefinite feasibility problem.
\end{theorem}
Note that a necessary condition of $K$-stability of $f$ is obtained as follows.
Fix any vector $\mathbf{v}$ in the interior of the cone $K$. Then a necessary condition for
$K$-stability is that $\mathbf{v}$ is contained in the complement of
$\mathcal{I}(f)$.
\begin{proof}Let $C$ be a block matrix $C=(C_{ij})_{i,j=1}^l$ with
$d \times d$-blocks and which satisfies~\eqref{eq:containment-crit1}
for some $\sigma \in \{-1,1\}$.
The initial form $\init(f)$ is hyperbolic and,
by~Theorem~\ref{th:cones-determinantal}, every hyperbolicity
cone of $\init(f)$ is contained in $\mathcal{I}(f)^{\compl}$.
So, in order to show $K$-stability of $f$, it suffices to show that
$K$ is contained in the closure of a hyperbolicity cone of $\init(f)$, i.e.,
in the closure of a component of $\mathcal{I}(\init(f))^{\compl}$.
As recorded at the beginning of Section~\ref{se:coniccomponents},
since $\init(f)$ is irreducible, $\init(f)$ has exactly
two hyperbolicity cones, and these are given by
$A^h(\mathbf{x}) = \sum_{j=1}^n A_j x_j \succ 0$ as well as
$A^h(\mathbf{x}) = \sum_{j=1}^n A_j x_j \prec 0$.
By Proposition~\ref{pr:posmaps},
if~\eqref{eq:containment-crit1} is satisfied, say with $\sigma = 1$,
then the spectrahedron given by the matrix pencil $M(\mathbf{x})$ is contained
in the closure of $\mathcal{I}(\init(f))^{\compl}$. For the service of the reader,
we provide an explicit derivation of this step in our setting. Namely,
for $\mathbf{x}$ in the spectrahedron defined by $M(\mathbf{x})$, we have
\begin{eqnarray}
A^h(\mathbf{x}) & = & \sum_{p=1}^n A_p x_p
\ = \ \sum_{p=1}^n x_p \sum_{i,j=1}^l (M_p)_{ij} C_{ij}
\label{eq:comb1} \\
& = & \sum_{i,j=1}^l (M(\mathbf{x}))_{ij} C_{ij}. \label{eq:comp2}
\end{eqnarray}
Apply the Khatri-Rao product (where the blocks of $M(\mathbf{x})$ are of size $1 \times 1$
and the blocks of $C$ are of size $d \times d$).
Since $M(\mathbf{x})$ and $C$ are positive semidefinite, the Khatri-Rao product
\[
M(\mathbf{x}) * C \ := \ ((M(\mathbf{x}))_{ij} \otimes C_{ij})_{i,j=1}^l
\ = \ ((M(\mathbf{x}))_{ij} C_{ij})_{i,j=1}^l
\]
is positive semidefinite as well; see Liu \cite{liu1999}, where this property is stated
on the space of
symmetric positive semidefinite matrices.
Since $M(\mathbf{x})$ is a real symmetric pencil, Liu's result carries over to our
situation of a Hermitian positive semidefinite matrix $C$ by employing that a Hermitian matrix $Z=X+iY$
with $X \in \sym_k$ and $Y$ skew-symmetric
is positive semidefinite if and only if the real symmetric matrix
\[
\left( \begin{array}{cc}X & -Y \\
Y & Z
\end{array} \right) \ \in \ \sym_{2k}
\]
is positive semidefinite (see, e.g., \cite{goemans-williamson-2004}).
Altogether, since
\[
A^h(\mathbf{x}) \ = \ (I \cdots I) (M(\mathbf{x})*C) \begin{pmatrix} I \\ \vdots \\ I \end{pmatrix} \, ,
\]
$A^h(\mathbf{x})$ is positive semidefinite
as well. Hence, $\mathbf{x}$ is contained in the spectrahedron
defined by $A^h(\mathbf{x})$.
Since $A^h(\mathbf{x})$ is the matrix pencil of the closure of a component of
$\mathcal{I}(\init(f))^{\compl}$, the claim follows.
\end{proof}
Note that the constant coefficient matrix
$A_{0}$ does not play any role for the criterion in
Theorem~\ref{th:kstable-determinantal}. This comes from
Theorem~\ref{th:cones-determinantal} and its proof, where
only the Hermitian property of $A_0$ matters rather than
the exact values of the coefficients themselves.
\begin{remark}\label{rem:usual-stability}
In the special case of usual stability,
Theorem~\ref{th:kstable-determinantal} provides a new proof for
Borcea and Br\"and\'{e}n's determinantal criterion from Proposition~\ref{pr:crit-stable}.
Namely, for usual stability, $K$ is given by~\eqref{eq:kge0} and thus,
a matrix $C$ satisfying the hypothesis of
Theorem~\ref{th:kstable-determinantal} can be viewed as a
a block diagonal matrix $C=(C_{ij})_{i=1}^l$ with
diagonal blocks $C_{ii}$ of size $d \times d$ and
vanishing non-diagonal blocks $C_{ij}$ ($i \neq j$).
Since the condition~\eqref{eq:containment-crit1} specializes
to
\[
A_p = C_{pp} \quad \text{ for } p = 1, \ldots, n,
\]
the stability criterion in Theorem~\ref{th:kstable-determinantal}
is satisfied if and only if the matrices
$A_1, \ldots, A_n$ are positive semidefinite.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}Theorem~\ref{th:kstable-determinantal} gives a sufficient
criterion, but it is not necessary. As a counterexample,
consider the following adaption from an example
in~\cite[Example 3.1, 3.4]{hkm-2010}
and~\cite[Section 6.1]{ktt-2013}.
Let $K \subseteq \R^3$ be the Lorentz cone as given by~\eqref{eq:lz}.
The polynomial
\[
f \ = \ \det \left( \begin{array}{cc}
z_1 + z_3 & z_2 \\
z_2 & -z_1 + z_3
\end{array}
\right) \ = \ z_3^2-z_1^2-z_2^2
\]
(whose underlying matrix pencil provides an alternative matrix pencil
for the Lorentz cone) has all its zeroes
on the boundary of the Lorentz cone or on its negative.
Hence, $f$ is $K$-stable,
but by the results in \cite{hkm-2010} and
\cite{ktt-2013}, the condition~\eqref{eq:containment-crit1}
is not satisfied.
\end{remark}
\begin{example}
\label{ex:example-determinantal}
i) Let $g(z_1,z_2,z_3):=31z_1^2+32z_1z_3+8z_3^2-8z_1z_2-16z_2^2$. A determinantal representation of $g$ is given by $\text{det}\left(\begin{matrix}
4z_1+2z_3 & z_1+4z_2 \\
z_1+4z_2 & 8z_1+4z_3
\end{matrix}\right)$, and at $\mathbf{z}=(0,0,1)^T$, the matrix polynomial
is positive definite.
Let $M(\mathbf{x})$ denote the linear matrix pencil of the psd cone $\sym^+_2$. Then the psd-stability of $g$ follows from Theorem~\ref{th:kstable-determinantal} and by the matrix
\begin{equation*}
C=\left( \begin{array}{rrrr}
4 & 1 & 0 & 2 \\
1 & 8 & 2 & 0 \\
0 & 2 & 2 & 0 \\
2 & 0 & 0 & 4
\end{array}\right)\succeq 0.
\end{equation*}
ii) Let $f = \sum_{i,j=1}^2 M_{ij}^{\psdtext} x_{ij}
= \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix} x_{11}
+ \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ 1 & 0 \end{pmatrix} x_{12}
+ \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix} x_{22}$
be the canonical matrix polynomial of the $2 \times 2$-psd cone. Clearly,
$f$ is psd-stable, and the following consideration shows that this is also
recognized by the sufficient criterion.
For symmetric $2 \times 2$-matrices, the condition in
Theorem~\ref{th:kstable-determinantal} requires to find
a block matrix $C\succeq 0$ with $2 \times 2$ blocks of size $2 \times 2$
such that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:psdinpsd}
M_{pq}^{\psdtext} =\sum_{i,j=1}^{2} (M_{pq}^{\psdtext})_{ij} C_{ij}
\quad \text{ for $1 \le p, q \le 2$.}
\end{equation}
This yields $C_{11}=\left(\begin{matrix}
1 & 0 \\
0 & 0
\end{matrix}\right)$,
$C_{22}=\left(\begin{matrix}
0 & 0 \\
0 & 1
\end{matrix}\right)$
and $C_{12}+C_{21}=\left(\begin{matrix}
0 & 1 \\
1 & 0
\end{matrix}\right)$. Since $C = \begin{pmatrix} C_{11} & C_{12} \\ C_{21} & C_{22} \end{pmatrix} $ is symmetric, $C_{12}$ must be of the form
$\begin{pmatrix}
0 & \gamma \\
\delta & 0
\end{pmatrix}$ with $\gamma, \delta \in \R$. Positive semidefiniteness of
$C$
then implies $\delta = 0$, and further, the condition on $C_{12} + C_{21}$
gives $\gamma = 1$. Hence, the matrix
\[
C=\left(\begin{matrix}
1 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
1 & 0 & 0 & 1
\end{matrix}\right)
\]
satisfies~\eqref{eq:psdinpsd} and thus
certifies the psd-stability of $f$ in view of the sufficient
criterion in Theorem~\ref{th:kstable-determinantal}.
\end{example}
For quadratic polynomials, we can provide the following criterion.
As in the proof of Theorem~\ref{th:conic-comp-quadr},
for a homogeneous quadratic polynomial
$f(\mathbf{z}) = \mathbf{z}^T A \mathbf{z}$
of signature $(n-1,1)$,
we consider
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ft}
F(\mathbf{x}) := \sum_{p=1}^n F_p x_p \ := \ \left(
\begin{array}{ccc|c}
& & & (T\mathbf{x})_ 1 \\
& (T \mathbf{x})_n I& & \vdots \\
& & & (T\mathbf{x})_{n-1} \\ \hline
(T\mathbf{x})_1 & \cdots & (T\mathbf{x})_{n-1} & (T\mathbf{x})_n
\end{array} \right) \ \succ \ 0 \, ,
\end{equation}
where $T$ is as in that proof.
\begin{theorem}
\label{th:kstable-quadratic}
Let $n \ge 3$ and
$f$ be a quadratic polynomial of the form~\eqref{eq:fquadr},
let $f$ be of type (II) with $A$ having signature $\left(n-1,1\right)$ and $\init(f)$ be
irreducible.
Let $M(\mathbf{x})$ be a matrix pencil for the cone $K$, and
let $T$ and $F(\mathbf{x}) := \sum_{p=1}^n F_p x_p$ be defined
as in~\eqref{eq:ft} w.r.t.\ $\init(f)$.
If there exists a block matrix $C=(C_{ij})_{i=1}^l$ with
blocks $C_{ij}$ of size $d \times d$ and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:containment-crit2}
C = (C_{ij})_{i,j=1}^l \ \succeq \ 0,
\quad \forall p = 1, \ldots, n \; : \;
\sigma F_p \ = \ \sum_{i,j=1}^l (M_p)_{ij} C_{ij}
\end{equation}
for some $\sigma \in \{-1,1\}$,
then $f$ is $K$-stable.
Deciding whether such a block matrix $C$ exists is a semidefinite
feasibility problem.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By~Theorem~\ref{th:conic-comp-quadr} and its proof, the unbounded
components of $\mathcal{I}(f)^\compl$ which are full-dimensional cones
are exactly the hyperbolicity cones of $\init(f)$.
For $\mathbf{x}$ in the spectrahedron defined by
$M(\mathbf{x})\succeq 0$, we have
\[
F(\mathbf{x}) \ = \ \sum_{p=1}^n F_p x_p
\ = \ \sum_{p=1}^n x_p \sum_{i,j=1}^l (M_p)_{ij} C_{ij}
\ = \ \sum_{i,j=1}^l (M(\mathbf{x}))_{ij} C_{ij}.
\]
Analogous to the application of the Khatri-Rao product in the
proof of Theorem~\ref{th:kstable-determinantal}, this yields
$F(\mathbf{x}) \succeq 0$. Hence, $f$ is $K$-stable.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
\label{th:quadr-certificate}
Let $n \ge 3$ and $f(\mathbf{z}) = \mathbf{z}^T A \mathbf{z}$
be an irreducible homogeneous quadratic polynomial of signature $(n-1,1)$,
$M(\mathbf{z})$ be a matrix pencil for the cone $K$, and
let $T$ and $F(\mathbf{z}) := \sum_{p=1}^n F_p z_p$ be defined
as in~\eqref{eq:ft}.
If there exists a block matrix $C=(C_{ij})_{i=1}^l$ with
blocks $C_{ij}$ of size $d \times d$ satisfying
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:containment-cr1b}
C = (C_{ij})_{i,j=1}^l \ \succeq \ 0,
\quad \forall p = 1, \ldots, n \; : \;
\sigma F_p \ = \ \sum_{i,j=1}^l (M_p)_{ij} C_{ij}
\end{equation}
for some $\sigma \in \{-1,1\}$,
then there exists a linear form $\ell(\mathbf{z})$ such that
$-\ell(\mathbf{z})^{n-2} f$ has a determinantal representation
\[
- \sigma \ell(\mathbf{z})^{n-2} f = \det(\sum_{p=1}^n z_p \sum_{i,j=1}^l (M_p)_{ij} C_{ij})
\]
with positive semidefinite matrices $C_{ij}$.
The representation provides a certificate for the $K$-stability of $f$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The $K$-stability was shown in Theorem~\ref{th:kstable-quadratic}.
By~\eqref{eq:containment-cr1b} and the definition of $F(\mathbf{z})$,
we have
\[
\sigma \det F(\mathbf{z}) =
\det \big( \sum_{p=1}^n z_p \sum_{i,j=1}^l (M_p)_{ij} C_{ij} \big).
\]
Since $\det F(\mathbf{z}) = - ((T \mathbf{z})_n)^{n-2} f$,
the choice $\ell(\mathbf{z}) := (T \mathbf{z})_n$
provides the desired representation.
This provides a certificate for the $K$-stability
of $f$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{co:quadr-certificate}
Let $n \ge 2$ and $f(Z)$ be a homogeneous quadratic polynomial on symmetric
$n \times n$-variables, in the linearized vector $\mathbf{z} = (z_1, \ldots, z_N)$ let
$f = \mathbf{z}^T A \mathbf{z}$ with $A \in \R^{N \times N}$ of signature $(N-1,1)$.
If $M(\mathbf{z})$ is a matrix pencil for the psd-cone and
$C$ is a block matrix satisfying~\eqref{eq:containment-cr1b}, then
for some linear form $\ell(\mathbf{z})$ in $\mathbf{z}$, the polynomial
$-\ell(\mathbf{z})^{N-2} f$ has a determinantal representation of the
form
\[
-\ell(\mathbf{z})^{N-2} f \ = \ \det\big( \sum_{i,j=1}^l C_{ij} z_{ij} \big)
\]
with positive semidefinite matrices $C_{ij}$.
This representation provides a certificate for the psd-stability of $f$ in
the sense of the sufficient criterion for psd-stability.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
This is a consequence of Theorem~\ref{th:quadr-certificate}.
\end{proof}
\section{Certifying $K$-stability with respect to scaled cones\label{se:scaled}}
The sufficient criterion does not capture all the cases
of $K$-stable polynomials. Here, we extend our techniques
to scaled versions of the cone. To this end, we will
reduce a scaled version of the $K$-stability problem
to the situation of the following statement.
\begin{proposition}[Proposition~6.2 in \cite{ktt-2013}]\label{pr:ktt-bounded}
Let $A(\mathbf{z})$ and $B(\mathbf{z})$ be monic linear matrix pencils of size $k \times k$ and $l \times l$, respectively, and such that $S_A:=\{\mathbf{z}\in\R^n:A(\mathbf{z})\succeq 0 \}$ is bounded. Then there exists a constant $\nu >0$ such that for the scaled spectrahedron $\nu S_A$ the inclusion $\nu S_A\subseteq S_B$ is certified by the system
\begin{equation*}
C = (C_{ij})_{i,j=1}^k \ \succeq \ 0,
\quad \forall p = 1, \ldots, n \; : \;
B_p \ = \ \sum_{i,j=1}^k \Big( \frac{1}{\nu} A_p \Big)_{ij} C_{ij}.
\end{equation*}
\end{proposition}
As before, let $K$ be a proper cone which is given by a linear matrix pencil
$M(\mathbf{z}) = \sum_{j=1}^n M_j z_j$ with $l \times l$-matrices,
and assume that there exists a hyperplane
$H$ not passing through the origin and such that $K \cap H$ is bounded. For
notational convenience, assume that
$H = \{(x_1, \ldots, x_n) \in \R^{n} \, : \, x_1 = 1\}$ and
that $M_1 = I_n$. In particular, then the first unit vector
$\mathbf{e}^{(1)}$ is contained in the interior of the full-dimensional
cone $K$.
\begin{theorem}\label{th:nu-cont}
Let $f \in \R[\mathbf{z}]$ and $M(\mathbf{z})$ be as described before.
Let $N(\mathbf{z})$ be the matrix pencil of a spectrahedral, conic
set contained in $\cl (\mathcal{I}(f)^{\compl})$, and assume that
$N_1 = I_n$ as well.
Then there exists a constant $\nu > 0$ such that
$g_\nu(z_1, \ldots, z_n) := f(z_1, \nu z_2, \ldots, \nu z_n)$
is $K$-stable and such that the $K$-stability of $g$ is certified by the
system
\begin{equation}\label{eq:c-system}
C = (C_{ij})_{i,j=1}^l \succeq 0,
\quad \forall p = 1, \ldots, n \; : \;
\nu N_p \ = \ \sum_{i,j=1}^l \left( M_p\right)_{ij} C_{ij},
\end{equation}
where the variable matrix $C$ is a block matrix with $l \times l$ blocks.
As a consequence, $f$ is $\hat{K}$-stable with respect to
$\hat{K} = \cone (\{1\} \times \nu(K \cap H))$,
where the multiplication of $\nu$ with the set
$K \cap H$ is done in the $(n-1)$-dimensional space with variables
$\mathbf{z}' = (z_2, \ldots, z_n)$ and $\cone$ denotes the conic hull.
\end{theorem}
Since the scaling variable $\nu$ occurs linearly in~\eqref{eq:c-system},
its optimal value can be expressed by a semidefinite program.
Further note that the preconditions $M_1 = I_n$ and $N_1 = I_n$ imply that
the induced matrix pencils of the conic spectrahedra of $M(\mathbf{z})$ and
of $N(\mathbf{z})$ give monic pencils within the hyperplane $H$.
\begin{proof}
Let $N'(\mathbf{z}'), M'(\mathbf{z}')$ be the matrix pencils in the $n-1$ variables
$\mathbf{z}'=(z_2, \ldots, z_n)$
defined by
\[
N'(\mathbf{z}') = N(\mathbf{z}) \Big|_{z_1 = 1} \text{ and }
M'(\mathbf{z}') = M(\mathbf{z}) \Big|_{z_1 = 1}.
\]
$N'(\mathbf{z}')$ and $M'(\mathbf{z}')$ are monic linear matrix pencils
and the spectrahedron
$S_{M'(\mathbf{z}')} = \{\mathbf{z}' = (z_2, \ldots, z_n) \in
\R^n \, : \, M'(\mathbf{z}') \succeq 0\}$ is bounded.
By Proposition~\ref{pr:ktt-bounded}, the inclusion
$ \nu S_{M'(\mathbf{z}')} \subseteq S_{L'(\mathbf{z}')}$ is certified by the system
\begin{equation}\label{eq:c-system2}
C = (C_{ij})_{i,j=1}^l \ \succeq \ 0,
\quad \forall p = 1, \ldots, n \; : \;
N'_p \ = \ \sum_{i,j=1}^l \Big( \frac{1}{\nu} M'_p \Big)_{ij} C_{ij}
\end{equation}
with some block matrix $C = (C_{ij})_{i,j=1}^l$. Since $M_p' = M_p$
and $N_p' = N_p$ for $p \ge 1$,
this is equivalent to~\eqref{eq:c-system}.
Moreover, $\nu S_{M'(\mathbf{z}')} \subseteq S_{N'(\mathbf{z}')}$ implies that
$ \nu S_{M(\mathbf{z})} \subseteq S_{N(\mathbf{z})}$ and also that
for any $\mathbf{z}$ with $z_1 = 1$ and
$f(\mathbf{z}) = 0$, we have
$(1, \frac{z_2}{\nu}, \ldots, \frac{z_n}{\nu}) \not\in \inter S_{M'(\mathbf{z}')}$, or,
equivalently, $g_{\nu}(\mathbf{z})$ is $K$-stable. Finally, this also
gives the reformulation that $f$ is $\hat{K}$-stable.
\end{proof}
Theorem~\ref{th:nu-cont} can also be applied to such polynomials $f$ which meet the requirements of the theorem after applying a invertible linear transformation, since those preserve the containment of sets.
\begin{example}
Setting $\begin{pmatrix} z_1 & z_2 \\ z_2 & z_3 \end{pmatrix}
= \begin{pmatrix} z_{11} & z_{12} \\ z_{12} & z_{22} \end{pmatrix}$,
the polynomial $f=\det \begin{pmatrix} z_1 & 2 z_2 \\ 2 z_2 & z_3 \end{pmatrix} $ $= z_1z_3-4z_2^2$ is not psd-stable. To fit the requirements of Theorem~\ref{th:nu-cont},
let $Q$ be the rotation matrix
$Q=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\begin{matrix}
1 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & \sqrt{2} & 0 \\
-1 & 0 & 1
\end{matrix}\right)$ and consider the rotated versions of the underlying matrix pencils
\begin{eqnarray*}
N_Q(\mathbf{y}) & = & N(Q^{-1} \mathbf{z}) \ = \
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\begin{matrix} y_1-y_3 & \sqrt{8}y_2 \\
\sqrt{8}y_2 & y_1+y_3
\end{matrix}\right) \\
\text{ and } M_Q(\mathbf{y}) & = & M(Q^{-1} \mathbf{z}) \ = \
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(
\begin{matrix}
y_1-y_3 & \sqrt{2}y_2 \\
\sqrt{2}y_2 & y_1+y_3
\end{matrix}
\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
For $N_{Q,\nu}(\mathbf{y}):=N_Q(y_1,\nu y_2,\nu y_3)$ and $M_Q(\mathbf{y})$,
$\left( \ref{eq:c-system} \right)$ leads to the equations
\begin{eqnarray*}
C_{11} + C_{22} & = & \left(\begin{matrix}
1 & 0 \\
0 & 1
\end{matrix}\right), \quad
C_{12} + C_{21} \ = \ \left(\begin{matrix}
0 & 2\nu \\
2\nu & 0
\end{matrix}\right), \quad
-C_{11} + C_{22} = \left(\begin{matrix}
-\nu & 0\\
0 & \nu
\end{matrix}\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Hence, the set of matrices $C = C_{\nu}$ satisfying~\eqref{eq:c-system} is given by
the system
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:cnu}
C \ = \ \frac{1}{2}\left(
\begin{matrix}
1+\nu & 0 & 0 & 4\lambda \nu \\
0 & 1-\nu & 4(1-\lambda) \nu & 0 \\
0 & 4(1-\lambda) \nu & 1-\nu & 0 \\
4 \lambda \nu & 0 & 0 & 1+\nu
\end{matrix}
\right), \quad C \succeq 0 \quad \text{with $\lambda \in \R$.}
\end{equation}
The largest $\nu$ satisfying~\eqref{eq:cnu} is given by $\nu=\frac{1}{2}$ with
$\lambda =\frac{3}{4}$. When rotating back, this certifies the psd-stability of
\begin{equation*}
f_\frac{1}{2}(\mathbf{z}) \ := \ \det \left(N_{Q,\frac{1}{2}}(Q\mathbf{z})\right)
\ = \ \frac{1}{16}\cdot(3z_1^2+10z_1z_3+3z_3^2-16z_2^2).
\end{equation*}
In addition to that, we obtain that $f$ is $\hat{K}$-stable with respect
to the cone
\begin{equation*}
\hat{K} \ = \ \left\{\mathbf{y}\in\R^3 \ : \ \frac{1}{2}\left(
\begin{matrix}
3y_1-y_3 & 4y_2 \\
4y_2 & -y_1+3y_3
\end{matrix}
\right)\succeq 0\right\}.
\end{equation*}
\end{example}
\section{Conclusion and open questions\label{se:conclusion}}
In this paper, we have shown how techniques from the theory of positive
maps and from the containment of spectrahedra can be used to provide
a sufficient criterion for the $K$-stability of a given polynomial $f$.
In particular, we have considered quadratic and determinantal polynomials.
Beyond that, our approach generally applies whenever (for a polynomial of
arbitrary degree) some spectrahedral components in the complement of
$\mathcal{I}(f)$ are known.
It would be interesting to understand whether this
or related techniques can be effectively exploited also for classes of
polynomials beyond the ones studied in the paper. In particular, with
regard to the recent development of a theory of Lorentzian
polynomials \cite{lorentzian-braenden-huh}, which provides a superset
of the set of homogeneous stable polynomials, it would be of interest
to understand the connection of Lorentzian polynomials to conic
stability and to the effective methods presented in our paper.
|
\section{Introduction.}
The Erd\H{o}s discrepancy problem asks if there exists an arithmetic function $f:\mathds{N}\to\{-1,1\}$ that it is well distributed along all homogeneous arithmetic progressions, in the sense that
\begin{equation*}
\sup_{x,d}\bigg{|}\sum_{n\leq x}f(nd)\bigg{|}<\infty.
\end{equation*}
This problem became the subject of the Polymath5 project in 2010, and as Tao showed in 2015 \cite{taodiscrepancy}, for such $f$ the $\sup$ of the quantity above is equal to infinity. In particular, if $f:\mathds{N}\to\{-1,1\}$ is completely multiplicative, then $f$ has unbounded partial sums. However, if $f:\mathds{N}\to\{-1,1\}$ is assumed to be only multiplicative, then $f$ may have bounded partial sums, for instance $f(n)=(-1)^{n+1}$.
Following Granville \& Soundararajan \cite{granvillepretentious}, define the ``distance'' between two multiplicative functions $|f|,|g|\leq 1$ up to $x$ as
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{D}(f,g;x):=\left(\sum_{p\leq x}\frac{1-Re(f(p)\overline{g(p))}}{p}\right)^{1/2},
\end{equation*}
where in the sum above $p$ denotes a generic prime. Moreover, let $\mathbb{D}(f,g):=\mathbb{D}(f,g;\infty)$, and we say that $f$ pretends to be $g$, or that $f$ is $g$-pretentious if $\mathbb{D}(f,g)<\infty$.
In \cite{taodiscrepancy}, Tao showed that if $f:\mathds{N}\to\{-1,1\}$ is multiplicative and has bounded partial sums, then $f$ is $1$-pretentious and $f(2^k)=-1$ for all $k\geq 1$. In \cite{klurmancorrelation}, Klurman provided a complete classification of such $f$ with bounded partial sums -- It has been proved the Erd\H{o}s-Coons-Tao conjecture: A multiplicative function $f:\mathds{N}\to\{-1,1\}$ has bounded partial sums if and only if there exists an integer $m\geq 1$ such that for all $n\in\mathds{N}$, $f(n+m)=f(n)$ and $\sum_{n=1}^mf(n)=0$.
When we allow zero values, that is, for a completely multiplicative function $f:\mathds{N}\to\{-1,0,1\}$ such that $f(p)=0$ only for a finite subset of primes $p$, then also $f$ may have bounded partial sums, for instance, any real non-principal Dirichlet character $\chi$. Moreover, in \cite{klurmanchudakov}, Klurman \& Mangerel established the Chudakov's conjecture: Assume that $f:\mathds{N}\to\mathds{C}$ is completely multiplicative; Take only a finite number of values; Has bounded partial sums; The set $|\{p\mbox{ is a prime}:f(p)=0\}|<\infty$. Then $f$ is a Dirichlet character.
Here we are interested in the discrepancy problem for multiplicative functions $f$ assuming zero values and such that at primes, $f(p)=\pm 1$. More precisely, we are interested in knowing if such $f$ has bounded, or unbounded partial sums when the summation $\sum_{n\leq x}' f(n)$ is restricted to certain subsets of integers with additional arithmetic properties. As showed in \cite{klurmancorrelation}, \cite{klurmanchudakov} and \cite{taodiscrepancy} (see Proposition \ref{proposicao chi pretentious} below), if such $f$ has bounded partial sums, then $f$ must be $\chi$-pretentious for some real and primitive Dirichlet character $\chi$.
In \cite{aymoneresemblingmobius}, the author addressed the question of how small can we make the partial sums of a multiplicative function supported on the squarefree integers, that is, $f=\mu^2g$, where $g:\mathds{N}\to\{-1,1\}$ is a completely multiplicative function and $\mu$ is the M\"obius function. As mentioned above, when we seek for multiplicative functions with small partial sums, then one needs to look firstly to multiplicative functions that pretends to be a Dirichlet character $\chi$. In \cite{aymoneresemblingmobius}, it has been proved that if $f$ is \textit{strongly} $\chi$-pretentious for some real and non-principal Dirichlet character $\chi$, \textit{i.e.}, $\sum_{p\leq x}|1-f(p)\chi(p)|\ll 1$, then the partial sums of $f$ can not have too much cancellation, more precisely $\sum_{n\leq x}f(n)$ is $\Omega(x^{1/4-\epsilon})$. This motivate us to conjecture:
\begin{conjecture}\label{conjecture squarefree} If $g:\mathds{N}\to\{-1,1\}$ is multiplicative, then $f=\mu^2g$ has unbounded partial sums.
\end{conjecture}
Towards this conjecture, our first result states:
\begin{theorem}\label{teorema correlacoes resembling mobius} Let $g:\mathds{N}\to\{-1,1\}$ be multiplicative and $f=\mu^2g$. If $f$ has bounded partial sums, then $\mathbb{D}(f,\chi)<\infty$ for some real and primitive character $\chi$ of conductor $q$ coprime with $6$, and $f(2)\chi(2)=f(3)\chi(3)=-1$.
\end{theorem}
The theorem above, stated in another way, says essentially that if the condition $f(2)\chi(2)=f(3)\chi(3)=-1$ is violated, then $f$ has unbounded partial sums.
Let us consider for a moment multiplicative functions not necessarily bounded by $1$ and assuming zero values, but with the restriction $f(p)\neq0$ for all primes $p$. Then, the next example shows the technical issue that we obtain in order to establish the conjecture \ref{conjecture squarefree}. More precisely, the next example shows that the values of $f$ at powers of $2$ are pivotal for bounded partial sums:
\begin{example} Let $f$ be the multiplicative function such that: for $k\geq 1$, $f(2^k)=-2\mu^2(2^k)$, and for each prime $p>2$, for all $k\geq 1$, $f(p^k)=1$. Then $f(n+4)=f(n)$, for all $n\in\mathds{N}$, and $f(1),f(2),f(3),f(4)=1,-2,1,0$. Thus, $f$ has bounded partial sums. However, clearly $f$ is not a counterexample to our Conjecture \ref{conjecture squarefree}, since $f$ is not supported on the squarefree integers neither is bounded by $1$, although, it represents the kind of issue that we have in the case $f(2)\chi(2)=f(3)\chi(3)=-1$ in Theorem \ref{teorema correlacoes resembling mobius} above.
\end{example}
Let $\mu_2^2(n)$ be the indicator that $n$ is \textit{cubefree}, \textit{i.e.}, $\mu_2^2$ is multiplicative and at each prime $p$, $\mu_{2}^2(p^k)=1$ if $k\in\{0,1,2\}$, and $0$ otherwise. In the cubefree case, for $g:\mathds{N}\to\{-1,1\}$ completely multiplicative, we have a certain rigidity of $f=\mu_2^2g$ at primes squared: $f(p^2)=1$. On the one hand, one could think that this could prevent $f$ to have small partial sums, when actually the opposite is true, at least when compared with the squarefree case: In the squarefree case, we can provide examples of multiplicative functions $f=\mu^2g$ whose partial sums have square root cancellation, see \cite{aymoneresemblingmobius}; In the cubefree case we can provide examples of $f=\mu_2^2g$ with partial sums $\sum_{n\leq x}f(n)\ll x^{1/3+\epsilon}$, for any $\epsilon>0$. Indeed, we can get an example of this by adjusting, in a standard way, any real non-principal Dirichlet character $\chi$ to a completely multiplicative function $g:\mathds{N}\to\{-1,1\}$, and then restrict $g$ to the cubefree integers. With an extra effort, one could, perhaps, remove the $+\epsilon$ from the exponent, by following the same line of reasoning of \cite{aymoneresemblingmobius}. Our next result states:
\begin{theorem}\label{teorema cube free} Let $g:\mathds{N}\to\{-1,1\}$ be completely multiplicative and let $f=\mu_2^2g$. Then $f$ has unbounded partial sums.
\end{theorem}
In our proofs, we follow essentially the same line of reasoning of the proof of Chudakov's conjecture \cite{klurmanchudakov}. As mentioned above, if our $f$ has bounded partial sums, then $f$ is $\chi$-pretentious for some real and primitive Dirichlet character $\chi$ of conductor $q$, and when this happens, in \cite{klurmancorrelation}, it has been established formulae for the correlations (see Theorem \ref{teorema correlacoes klurman} below):
\begin{equation*}
S_d:=\lim_{x\to\infty}\frac{1}{x}\sum_{n\leq x}f(n)\overline{f(n+d)}:=v(d;f\chi)\lambda(d;|f|,\chi).
\end{equation*}
The function $\lambda(d)$ depends essentially on the sum $\sum_{a\leq q }\chi(a)\overline{\chi(a+d)}$, and the function $v(d)$ can be expressed as a constant $C=C(f)$ times $1\ast u(d)$, where $u$ is a well behaved multiplicative function. With these correlations formulae, we can give precise estimates for
\begin{equation}\label{equacao definicao Lambda introducao}
\Lambda(H):=\lim_{x\to\infty}\frac{1}{x}\sum_{n\leq x}\bigg{|}\sum_{k=n+1}^{n+H} f(k) \bigg{|}^2=\sum_{|h|\leq H}(H-|h|)S_{|h|}.
\end{equation}
If $f$ has bounded partial sums, then $\Lambda(H)=O(1)$, and as we show below, the structure of $u$ implies that this impossible in the cubefree case. In the squarefree case we are not able to handle the case in which $f$ is $\chi$-pretentious and $f(2)\chi(2)=f(3)\chi(3)=-1$, however we still believe that Conjecture 1.1 is true.
From the analysis below, it seems likely that if $f$ is the restriction of a completely multiplicative function $g:\mathds{N}\to\{-1,1\}$ to the \textit{$k-$free} integers, $k\geq 2$, then we will have Theorem \ref{teorema correlacoes resembling mobius} if $k$ is even and Theorem \ref{teorema cube free} if $k$ is odd. Moreover, it will be interesting to investigate the case in which $g$ is only multiplicative, which is subject of future research.
Let $\chi$ be a real and primitive Dirichlet character of conductor $q$ and let $\chi^*$ be a completely multiplicative extension of $\chi$, \textit{i.e.}, $\chi^*$ is completely multiplicative, $\chi^*(n)=\chi(n)$, if $\gcd(n,q)=1$, and at each prime $p|q$, $\chi^*(p)=\pm1$. Let $f_1=\mu^2\chi^*$ and
$f_2=\mu_2^2\chi^*$. Clearly $f_1$ and $f_2$ are $\chi$-pretentious. In \cite{aymoneresemblingmobius}, it has been proved that if $\chi$ is real and non-principal, and if we assume RH for $L(s,\chi)$, then the statement $\sum_{n\leq x}f_1(n)\ll x^{1/4+\epsilon}$ for any $\epsilon>0$ implies RH for $\zeta$. Towards this fact we have:
\begin{theorem}\label{teorema H^1/4 cancelacao} Let $f_1$ and $f_2$ be as above and let $\Lambda(H)$ be as in (\ref{equacao definicao Lambda introducao}). Then, in the squarefree case, $\Lambda(H)\ll H^{1/2}$; In the cubefree case $\Lambda(H)\ll H^{1/3}$.
\end{theorem}
We can interpret $\frac{1}{x}\sum_{n\leq x} |\cdot|^2$ as an expectation $\mathbb{E} |\cdot|^2$ where $n$ is a random number chosen with probability $\frac{1}{x}$ in the set $\{1,...,x\}\subset \mathds{N}$. Thus, for each fixed $x$, we have H\"{o}lder's inequality: $\mathbb{E} |\cdot|\leq (\mathbb{E} |\cdot|^2)^{1/2}$. By defining $\mathbb{E}^*=\limsup_{x\to\infty} \mathbb{E}$, Theorem \ref{teorema H^1/4 cancelacao} says that, in the squarefree case, for a certain proportion of $n\in\mathds{N}$, the short sum $|\sum_{k=n+1}^{n+H} f_1(k)|$ has $H^{1/4}$-cancellation, and similarly, we have $H^{1/6}$- cancellation in the cubefree case, which is, as mentioned above, consistent with GRH. It seems likely that we will have the same pattern if $f_k$ is the restriction of $\chi^*$ to the $k$-free integers.
\noindent \textbf{Remark}. The first version of this paper has been uploaded to arXiv in September, 2019. In November, 2019, our Theorem \ref{teorema correlacoes resembling mobius} has been strenghtened by Klurman, Mangerel, Pohoata and Ter\"av\"ainen \cite{klurmanteravainen}. Indeed, in their first version uploaded to arXiv, they showed that if $f$ as in Theorem \ref{teorema correlacoes resembling mobius} has bounded partial sums, then $f(p)=\chi(p)$ for all sufficiently large primes $p$. By following a suggestion of the author, more precisely, by combining their result with an unconditional version of Theorem 1.3 of \cite{aymoneresemblingmobius}, the authors of \cite{klurmanteravainen} have completely solved our conjecture \ref{conjecture squarefree}, in their version 2 uploaded to arXiv in December, 2019.
\noindent \textbf{Acknowledgements.} This project started at the 1st Joint Meeting Brazil-France in Mathematics realized at IMPA, Brazil, precisely in mathematical conversations done by the author with Oleksiy Klurman after our talks (coincidentally both were about the Erd\H{o}s discrepancy problem). I am very grateful to Oleksiy Klurman for dozens of fruitful email exchanges on this subject and for kindly explaining his (\& Sacha Mangerel) solution of Chudakov's conjecture. My Phd advisor, Vladas Sidoravicius, and me were interested in the discrepancy problem since 2013. I would like to thank Vladas for his great intuition, ideas and enthusiasm that played a fundamental role in my academic trajectory.
\section{Proofs of the main results}
\subsection*{Notation} Here $\mathbb{U}=\{z\in\mathds{C}:|z|\leq 1\}$. We use both $f(x)\ll g(x)$ and $f(x)=O(g(x))$ whenever there exists a constant $C>0$ such that for all $x\geq1$ we have that $|f(x)|\leq C|g(x)|$. Further, $\ll_\delta$ means that the implicit constant may depend on $\delta$. The standard $f(x)=o(g(x))$ means that $\lim_{x\to\infty}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)}=0$. We let $\mathcal{P}$ for the set of primes and $p$ for a generic element of $\mathcal{P}$. The notation $p^k\| n$ means that $k$ is the largest power of $p$ for which $p^k$ divides $n$. The M\"obius function is denoted by $\mu$, \textit{i.e.}, the multiplicative function with support on the squarefree integers and such that at the primes $\mu(p)=-1$. Dirichlet convolution is denoted by $\ast$. Given a subset $A\subset\mathds{N}$, we denote by $\mathds{1}_A(n)$ the characteristic function of $A$. We let $\mu_2^2(n)=\mathds{1}[n\mbox{ is cubefree}]$, \textit{i.e.}, at power of primes $\mu_2^2(p^l)=\mathds{1}_{l\in\{0,1,2\}}$. Here $\rad(n)=\prod_{p|n}p$. Given multiplicative functions $f,g:\mathds{N}\to\mathbb{U}$,
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{D}(f,g;x):=\left(\sum_{p\leq x}\frac{1-Re(f(p)\overline{g(p)})}{p}\right)^{1/2},
\end{equation*}
and $\mathbb{D}(f,g)=\lim_{x\to\infty}\mathbb{D}(f,g;x)$. We let $\mathds{N}(q)=\{m\in\mathds{N}:\rad(m)|q\}$. Finally, $\omega(k)$ is the number of distinct primes that divide a certain $k$.
\subsection{Preliminaries} The proof of our results starts with the Proposition below, which is essentially due to Tao \cite{taodiscrepancy} Remark 3.1, Klurman \cite{klurmancorrelation} Lemma 4.3 and Klurman \& Mangerel \cite{klurmanchudakov} Lemma 5.1. Hence, for the convenience of the reader, in Appendix \ref{appendix proposicao chi pretentious}, we only indicate how to obtain it from these results.
\begin{proposition}\label{proposicao chi pretentious} Suppose that $f:\mathds{N}\to\{-1,0,1\}$ is a multiplicative function such $\sum_{n\leq x}f^2(n)=(c+o(1))x$ for some positive constant $c$, and further assume that at primes $f(p)^2=1$. If $f$ has bounded partial sums, then there exists a real and primitive Dirichlet character $\chi$ of conductor $q$ such that $\mathbb{D}(f,\chi)<\infty$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{theorem}[Klurman, \cite{klurmancorrelation}, Corollary 3.3]\label{teorema klurman correlations pretentious to 1} Let $f:\mathds{N}\to\mathbb{U}$ be a multiplicative function such that $\mathbb{D}(1,f)<\infty$. Let $d\in\mathds{N}$. Then
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{x\to \infty}\frac{1}{x}\sum_{n\leq x}f(n)\overline{f(n+d)}=\sum_{r|d}\frac{G(r)}{r},
\end{equation*}
where $G(r)$ is given by:
\begin{equation*}
G(r)=\prod_{\substack{p^k\| r\\(k\geq 0) }} \left(|f\ast\mu(p^k)|^2+2\sum_{i=k+1}^\infty \frac{Re(f\ast\mu(p^k)\overline{f\ast\mu(p^i)} )}{p^{i-k}}\right).
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
Now we will suppose that $f:\mathds{N}\to\mathbb{U}$ is multiplicative, $\mathbb{D}(f,\chi n^{it})<\infty$ for some $t\in\RR$ and for some primitive Dirichlet character $\chi$ of conductor $q$. We define $F$ to be the multiplicative function such that
\begin{equation}\label{equacao definicao F}
F(p^k)=\begin{cases}f(p^k) \overline{\chi(p^k)}p^{-ikt}, &\mbox{ if }p\nmid q \\
1, &\mbox{ if } p|q. \end{cases}
\end{equation}
For $p\nmid q$, let $F_p(\cdot)$ be the multiplicative function such that for each prime $\tilde{p}$,
\begin{equation*}
F_p(\tilde{p}^k)=\begin{cases} F(p^k), &\mbox{ if }\tilde{p}=p \\
1, &\mbox{ if } \tilde{p}\neq p. \end{cases}
\end{equation*}
For $p\nmid q$, let $M_p(F,\overline{F},d)$ be given by
\begin{equation*}
M_p(F,\overline{F},d)=\lim_{x\to\infty}\frac{1}{x}\sum_{n\leq x}F_p(n)\overline{F_p(n+d)}.
\end{equation*}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma Klurman auxiliar teorema correlations} Suppose that $p\nmid q$ and that $p^n\|d$, where $n\geq 0$. Let $F$ be given by (\ref{equacao definicao F}). Then
\begin{equation*}
M_p(F,\overline{F},d)=\sum_{a=0}^n\left(\frac{|F\ast\mu(p^a)|^2}{p^a} +2\sum_{i=a+1}^\infty \frac{Re(F\ast\mu(p^a)\overline{F\ast\mu(p^i)} )}{p^{i}} \right).
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} For $p\nmid q$, observe that $\mathbb{D}(1,F_p)=\sqrt{\frac{1-Re(F(p))}{p}}$. Thus Theorem \ref{teorema klurman correlations pretentious to 1} is applicable to $F_p$:
\begin{equation*}
M_p(F,\overline{F},d)=\sum_{r|d}\frac{G_p(r)}{r},
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{equation*}
G_p(r)=\prod_{\substack{\tilde{p}^k\| r\\(k\geq 0) }} \left(|F_p\ast\mu(\tilde{p}^k)|^2+2\sum_{i=k+1}^\infty \frac{Re(F_p\ast\mu(\tilde{p}^k)\overline{F_p\ast\mu(\tilde{p}^i)} )}{\tilde{p}^{i-k}}\right).
\end{equation*}
For $\tilde{p}\neq p$ and $k\geq 1$, we have that $F_p\ast\mu(\tilde{p}^k)=F_p(\tilde{p}^k)-F_p(\tilde{p}^{k-1})=1-1=0$. Thus, if $r$ is divisible by some prime $\tilde{p}\neq p$, for $\tilde{p}^k\| r$, we have that $G_p(r)=0$. Hence, if $p^n\| d$, $n\geq 0$,
\begin{equation*}
M_p(F,\overline{F},d)=\sum_{a=0}^n\frac{G_p(p^a)}{p^a}.
\end{equation*}
For $a\geq 0$:
\begin{align*}
G_p(p^a)&= \left(|F_p\ast\mu(p^a)|^2+2\sum_{i=a+1}^\infty \frac{Re(F_p\ast\mu(p^a)\overline{F_p\ast\mu(p^i)} )}{p^{i-a}}\right)\\
& \times \prod_{\tilde{p}\neq p} \left(|F_p\ast\mu(1)|^2+2\sum_{i=1}^\infty \frac{Re(F_p\ast\mu(1)\overline{F_p\ast\mu(\tilde{p}^i)} )}{\tilde{p}^{i}}\right)\\
&=|F_p\ast\mu(p^a)|^2+2\sum_{i=a+1}^\infty \frac{Re(F_p\ast\mu(p^a)\overline{F_p\ast\mu(p^i)} )}{p^{i-a}}\\
&=|F\ast\mu(p^a)|^2+2\sum_{i=a+1}^\infty \frac{Re(F\ast\mu(p^a)\overline{F\ast\mu(p^i)} )}{p^{i-a}}.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}[Klurman, \cite{klurmancorrelation}, Theorem 1.5, correct formulation\footnote{Private communication; The formula (19) of \cite{klurmanchudakov} is correct. In our Lemma \ref{lemma formula klurman} and Appendix \ref{appendix formula klurman} we deduce the correct formulation of Theorem \ref{teorema correlacoes klurman} from formula (19) of \cite{klurmanchudakov}.}]\label{teorema correlacoes klurman} Let $f:\mathds{N}\to\mathbb{U}$ be multiplicative and such that $\mathbb{D}(f,\chi n^{it})<\infty$, for some $t\in\RR$ and for some primitive Dirichlet character $\chi$ of conductor $q$. Let $F$ be as in (\ref{equacao definicao F}). For $d\in\mathds{N}$, let
\begin{equation*}
S_d:=\lim_{x\to\infty}\frac{1}{x}\sum_{n\leq x}f(n)\overline{f(n+d)}.
\end{equation*}
Then
\begin{equation*}
S_d=\prod_{p\nmid q}M_p(F,\overline{F},d)\prod_{p^l\| q}M_{p^l}(f,\overline{f},d),
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{equation*}
M_{p^l}(f,\overline{f},d)=\begin{cases}0, &\mbox{ if }p^{l-1}\nmid d,\\
-\frac{1}{p},&\mbox{ if }p^{l-1}\| d,\\
\left(1-\frac{1}{p}\right)\sum_{j=0}^k\frac{|f(p^j)|^2}{p^j}-\frac{|f(p^{k+1})|^2}{p^{k+2}}, &\mbox{ if }p^{l+k}\| d, \mbox{ where }k\geq 0, \end{cases}
\end{equation*}
and if $p^n\| d$ for some $n\geq 0$, $M_p(F,\overline{F},d)$ is given by Lemma \ref{lemma Klurman auxiliar teorema correlations}.
\end{theorem}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{teorema correlacoes resembling mobius}}
From now on, we will assume that $f:\mathds{N}\to\{-1,0,1\}$ is multiplicative, at primes $f(p)=\pm1$, and $f=\mu^2 f$. Further, in light of Proposition \ref{proposicao chi pretentious}, we will assume that $\mathbb{D}(f,\chi)<\infty$ for some real, non-principal and primitive character $\chi$ of conductor $q$.
Let $F$ be given by (\ref{equacao definicao F}). For each prime $p\nmid q$, let
\begin{equation}\label{equacao definicao h}
h(p)=1-\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p}-\frac{2F(p)}{p^2}.
\end{equation}
The hypothesis $\mathbb{D}(f,\chi)<\infty$ implies that the series $\sum_{p\nmid q}|1-h(p)|$ converges,
and hence it is well defined
\begin{equation}\label{equacao definicao C}
C:=\prod_{p\nmid q}h(p).
\end{equation}
Further, a simple calculation shows that $C\neq 0$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma auxiliar construcao da v} Let $f$ be as above, $F$ be given by (\ref{equacao definicao F}) and $h$ be given by (\ref{equacao definicao h}). Let $d\in\mathds{N}$. Suppose that $p^n\| d$, $n\geq 0$. Then
\begin{equation*}
M_p(F,\overline{F},d)=\begin{cases}h(p),& \mbox{ if }n=0,\\
1-\frac{2}{p^2},& \mbox{ if }n=1,\\
1-\frac{1}{p^2},& \mbox{ if }n\geq 2. \end{cases}
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} We begin by observing that for each prime $p\nmid q$, and any power $k\geq0$:
\begin{equation*}
F(p^k)=\begin{cases}1,&\mbox{ if }k=0,\\
f(p)\chi(p),&\mbox{ if }k=1, \\
0,&\mbox{ if }k\geq 2. \end{cases}
\end{equation*}
Thus, for $k\geq 1$:
\begin{equation*}
F\ast\mu(p^k)=F(p^k)-F(p^{k-1})=\begin{cases}F(p)-1,&\mbox{ if }k=1,\\
-F(p),&\mbox{ if }k=2, \\
0,&\mbox{ if }k\geq 3. \end{cases}
\end{equation*}
Now suppose that $p^n\|d$, where $n\geq 0$. If $n=0$, by Lemma \ref{lemma Klurman auxiliar teorema correlations}
\begin{align*}
M_p(F,\overline{F},d)&=\sum_{a=0}^0\left(\frac{|F\ast\mu(p^a)|^2}{p^a} +2\sum_{i=a+1}^\infty \frac{Re(F\ast\mu(p^a)\overline{F\ast\mu(p^i)} )}{p^{i}} \right)\\
&=1+2\sum_{i=1}^\infty \frac{F\ast\mu(p^i)}{p^{i}}=1+2\left(\frac{F(p)-1}{p}-\frac{F(p)}{p^2} \right)\\
&=1-\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p}-\frac{2F(p)}{p^2}\\
&=h(p).
\end{align*}
If $n=1$:
\begin{align*}
M_p(F,\overline{F},d)&=\sum_{a=0}^1\left(\frac{|F\ast\mu(p^a)|^2}{p^a} +2\sum_{i=a+1}^\infty \frac{Re(F\ast\mu(p^a)\overline{F\ast\mu(p^i)} )}{p^{i}} \right)\\
&=h(p)+\frac{|F\ast\mu(p)|^2}{p} +2\sum_{i=2}^\infty \frac{F\ast\mu(p)F\ast\mu(p^i) }{p^{i}}\\
&=h(p)+\frac{|1-F(p)|^2}{p} +2\frac{(F(p)-1)(-F(p)) }{p^{2}}\\
&=h(p)+\frac{|1-F(p)|^2}{p} -\frac{2}{p^2}+\frac{2F(p)}{p^2}\\
&=1-\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p}-\frac{2F(p)}{p^2}+\frac{|1-F(p)|^2}{p} -\frac{2}{p^2}+\frac{2F(p)}{p^2}\\
&=1+\frac{-2(1-F(p))+|1-F(p)|^2}{p} -\frac{2}{p^2}\\
&=1+\frac{-(1-F(p))(1+F(p))}{p} -\frac{2}{p^2}\\
&=1-\frac{2}{p^2}.
\end{align*}
If $n=2$:
\begin{align*}
M_p(F,\overline{F},d)&=\sum_{a=0}^2\left(\frac{|F\ast\mu(p^a)|^2}{p^a} +2\sum_{i=a+1}^\infty \frac{Re(F\ast\mu(p^a)\overline{F\ast\mu(p^i)} )}{p^{i}} \right)\\
&=1-\frac{2}{p^2}+\frac{|F\ast\mu(p^2)|^2}{p^2} +2\sum_{i=3}^\infty \frac{F\ast\mu(p^2)F\ast\mu(p^i) }{p^{i}}\\
&=1-\frac{2}{p^2}+\frac{1}{p^2}+2\cdot 0\\
&=1-\frac{1}{p^2}.
\end{align*}
If $n\geq 3$:
\begin{align*}
M_p(F,\overline{F},d)&=\sum_{a=0}^n\left(\frac{|F\ast\mu(p^a)|^2}{p^a} +2\sum_{i=a+1}^\infty \frac{Re(F\ast\mu(p^a)\overline{F\ast\mu(p^i)} )}{p^{i}} \right)\\
&=\sum_{a=0}^2\left(\frac{|F\ast\mu(p^a)|^2}{p^a} +2\sum_{i=a+1}^\infty \frac{Re(F\ast\mu(p^a)\overline{F\ast\mu(p^i)} )}{p^{i}} \right)\\
&=1-\frac{1}{p^2}.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
Let $\mathds{N}(q):=\{m\in\mathds{N}:\rad(m)|q\}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma construcao da v} Let $h$ be as in \eqref{equacao definicao h} and $v:\mathds{N}\to[-1,1]$ be given by
\begin{equation*}
v(d)=\prod_{p\nmid q}M_p(F,\overline{F},d).
\end{equation*}
Then, if $\gcd(d,q)=1$, $v(md)=v(d)$, for all $m\in\mathds{N}(q)$. Further, there exists a multiplicative function $g:\mathds{N}\to\RR$, such that $v(d)=Cg(d)$, for all $d\in\mathds{N}$, where $C$ is given by (\ref{equacao definicao C}) and $g$ is given by:\\
If $p|q$, $g(p^n)=1$; If $p\nmid q$
\begin{equation}\label{equacao definicao da g}
g(p^n)=\begin{cases}\frac{1}{h(p)}\left(1-\frac{2}{p^{2}}\right), &\mbox{ if }n=1,\\
\frac{1}{h(p)}\left(1-\frac{1}{p^{2}}\right),&\mbox{ if }n\geq 2. \end{cases}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $\gcd(d,q)=1$. Thus, by Lemma \ref{lemma auxiliar construcao da v}:
\begin{align*}
v(d)&=\prod_{p\nmid q}M_p(F,\overline{F},d)=\prod_{\substack{p\nmid q\\p\nmid d }}M_p(F,\overline{F},d)\prod_{\substack{p^n\|d\\ (n\geq 1) \\ }} M_p(F,\overline{F},d)\\
&=\prod_{\substack{p\nmid q\\p\nmid d }}h(p)\prod_{\substack{p^n\|d\\ (n\geq 1) \\ }} M_p(F,\overline{F},d)=\prod_{\substack{p\nmid q}}h(p)\prod_{\substack{p^n\|d\\ (n\geq 1) \\ }}\frac{1}{h(p)} M_p(F,\overline{F},d)\\
&=Cg(d).
\end{align*}
If $m\in\mathds{N}(q)$, since $v(d)$ is given by a product that involves only primes $p\nmid q$, we have that $v(m)=C$. Thus, if $d=m\tilde{d}$, with $m\in\mathds{N}(q)$ and $\gcd(\tilde{d},q)=1$, $v(d)=v(\tilde{d})$, and hence, $g(m)=1$ for all $m\in\mathds{N}(q)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma construcao da u} Let $g$ be as in Lemma \ref{lemma construcao da v}. Let $u=g\ast \mu$. Then $u$ is multiplicative, supported on the cubefree integers, $u(p^k)=0$ for each $p|q$ and any power $k\geq1$, and for each $\gcd(p,q)=1$:
\begin{align*}
u(p)&=\frac{2(1-F(p))}{h(p)p}\left(1-\frac{1}{p}\right),\\
u(p^2)&=\frac{1}{h(p)p^2}.
\end{align*}
Moreover, for $l=1,2$, $u(p^l)$ can be negative only for $p\in\{2,3\}$, and this happens if and only if $F(2)=-1$ and $F(3)=-1$, respectively; For all $p\geq 5$, $u(p^2)p^2\geq 1$, and:
\begin{align*}
a)&\sum_{n=1}^\infty |u(n)|<\infty,\\
b)&\sum_{n\leq H}|u(n)|n=o(H), \\
c)&\sum_{\substack {n\leq H}}u(n)n\mathds{1}_{\gcd(n,6)=1}\gg\sqrt{H}.
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We have for each prime $p$:
\begin{equation*}
u(p^n)=g(p^n)\mu(1)+g(p^{n-1})\mu(p)=g(p^n)-g(p^{n-1}).
\end{equation*}
If $p|q$, then $g(p^n)=1$ for all $n\geq0$, and hence $u(p^n)=0$ for all $n\geq 1$. If $p\nmid q$,
we have that
\begin{align*}
u(p)&=g(p)-1=\frac{1}{h(p)}\left(1-\frac{2}{p^{2}}\right)-1=\frac{1-h(p)}{h(p)}-\frac{2}{p^2h(p)}\\
&=\frac{1}{h(p)}\left(\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p}+\frac{2F(p)}{p^2}\right)-\frac{2}{p^2h(p)}\\
&=\frac{2(1-F(p))}{h(p)p}-\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p^2h(p)}.
\end{align*}
Further
\begin{align*}
u(p^2)&=g(p^2)-g(p)=\frac{1}{h(p)}\left(1-\frac{1}{p^{2}}\right)-\frac{1}{h(p)}\left(1-\frac{2}{p^{2}}\right)\\
&=\frac{1}{h(p)p^2}.
\end{align*}
For $n\geq 3$, $g(p^n)=g(p^{n-1})$, and hence, $u(p^n)=0$.
To proof that $\sum_{n=1}^\infty |u(n)|$ converges, we only need to show that the series (see \cite{tenenbaumlivro}, pg. 106, Theorem 2)
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{p\in\mathcal{P}}\sum_{m=1}^\infty|u(p^m)|
\end{equation*}
converges. Observe that $h(p)\to 1$ as $p\to\infty$. Hence, the assumption $\mathbb{D}(f,\chi)<\infty$ implies that
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{p\in\mathcal{P}}|u(p)|\leq \sum_{p\nmid q}\left(\frac{2(1-F(p))}{|h(p)|p}+\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p^2|h(p|)}\right)<\infty.
\end{equation*}
Now
\begin{align*}
\sum_{p\in\mathcal{P}}\sum_{m=2}^\infty|u(p^m)|&=\sum_{p\in\mathcal{P}}|u(p^2)|=\sum_{p\nmid q}\frac{1}{|h(p)|p^2}<\infty.
\end{align*}
This shows that the series $\sum_{n=1}^\infty |u(n)|$ converges. In particular, $\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{|u(n)|n}{n}$ converges, and hence, by Kroenecker's Lemma (see \cite{shiryaev}, pg. 390 Lemma 2), we have that $\sum_{n\leq H}|u(n)|n=o(H)$.
Now observe that when $F(p)=1$, $h(p)=1-\frac{1}{p^2}>0$ for all primes $p$. When $F(p)=-1$, $h(p)= 1-\frac{4}{p}+\frac{2}{p^2}$. As a function of $p$, $1-\frac{4}{p}+\frac{2}{p^2}$ is increasing for $p>1$, and hence for $p\geq 5$, $h(p)\geq 1-\frac{4}{5}+\frac{2}{5^2}=\frac{7}{25}$. In both cases $F(p)=\pm1$, we have that $h(p)\leq1$ for all $p\geq 5$, and hence $\frac{1}{h(p)}=u(p^2)p^2\geq1$. This implies that $\sum_{\substack {n\leq H}}u(n)n\mathds{1}_{\gcd(n,6)=1}\geq \sum_{n\leq H}\mathds{1}_{\mathds{N}}(\sqrt{n})\mu^2(\sqrt{n})\mathds{1}_{\gcd(n,6q)=1}\gg \sqrt{H}$.
\end{proof}
The Lemma below is formula (19) of \cite{klurmanchudakov}, which is in implicit in the proof of Theorem \ref{teorema correlacoes klurman}. For the convenience of the reader, we do reverse engineering in Appendix \ref{appendix formula klurman}, \textit{i.e.}, we deduce the formula below from Theorem \ref{teorema correlacoes klurman}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma formula klurman} Let $u$ be as in Lemma \ref{lemma construcao da u}. If $\mathbb{D}(f,\chi)<\infty$, where $\chi$ is a primitive Dirichlet character of conductor $q$, then there exists a constant $C=C(f)$ such that
\begin{equation*}
S_d:=\lim_{x\to\infty} \frac{1}{x}\sum_{n\leq x}f(n)\overline{f(n+d)}=\frac{C}{q}\sum_{ \substack{ R|d \\ \rad(R)|q}}\frac{|f(R)|^2}{R}\sum_{a=1}^q \chi(a)\overline{\chi(a+d/R)}\sum_{e|d/R}u(e).
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
In our case, $|f(R)|^2=\mu^2(R)$ and $C$ is given by (\ref{equacao definicao C}). A short calculation shows that
\begin{equation*}
\Lambda(H):=\lim_{x\to\infty}\frac{1}{x}\sum_{n\leq x}\bigg{|}\sum_{k=n+1}^{n+H} f(k) \bigg{|}^2=\sum_{|h|\leq H}(H-|h|)S_{|h|},
\end{equation*}
and by Lemma \ref{lemma formula klurman}, after an interchange in the order of summation we obtain that
\begin{equation*}
\Lambda(H)=\frac{C}{q}\sum_{d=1}^\infty u(d)\sum_{\rad(R)|q}\frac{\mu^2(R)}{R}\sum_{\substack{|h|\leq H \\ R|h,\,d|h/R}}(H-|h|)S_\chi(|h|/R),
\end{equation*}
where the inner sum above, is defined and computed as in the same way of \cite{klurmanchudakov} (pg. 684 - 687):
\begin{align*}
&S_\chi(h):=\sum_{a=1}^q\chi(a)\overline{\chi(a+h)},\\
&\sum_{\substack{|h|\leq H \\ R|h,\,d|h/R}}(H-|h|)S_\chi(|h|/R)=qdR\sum_{g|\rad(q)}\frac{\mu(g)}{g^2}\Delta\left(\frac{Hg}{qdR}\right),
\end{align*}
where $\Delta(t)=\{t\}-\{t\}^2$. We thus arrive at:
\begin{equation}\label{equacao Lambda(H)}
\Lambda(H)=C\sum_{d=1}^\infty u(d)d\sum_{\rad(R)|q}\mu^2(R)\sum_{g|\rad(q)}\frac{\mu(g)}{g^2}\Delta\left(\frac{Hg}{qdR}\right).
\end{equation}
Let $\|t\|=\min\{\{t\},1-\{t\}\}$. A short calculation shows that $4\Delta(t)-\Delta(2t)=2\|t\|$. Hence
\begin{equation*}
4\Lambda(qH)-\Lambda(2qH)=2C\sum_{d=1}^\infty u(d)d\sum_{\rad(R)|q}\mu^2(R)\sum_{g|\rad(q)}\frac{\mu(g)}{g^2}\bigg{\|}\frac{Hg}{dR}\bigg{\|}.
\end{equation*}
Thus, we proved:
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma ainda nao sei o nome} Assume that $f$ has bounded partial sums. Then $\Lambda(H)\ll 1$ and hence
\begin{equation*}
S(H):=\sum_{d=1}^\infty u(d)d\sum_{\rad(R)|q}\mu^2(R)\sum_{g|\rad(q)}\frac{\mu(g)}{g^2}\bigg{\|}\frac{Hg}{dR}\bigg{\|}\ll 1.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
In Lemma 5.5 of \cite{klurmanchudakov}, it has been proved that for any $t>0$,
\begin{equation}\label{equacao soma positiva da mobius}
\sum_{g|\rad(q)/2^\kappa}\frac{\mu(g)}{g^2}\| gt\|\geq0,
\end{equation}
where $\kappa=1$ if $q$ is even, and $\kappa=0$ otherwise. Now we establish Lemma \ref{lemma quase matador} below whose proof is essentially the one contained in Proposition 5.3 of \cite{klurmanchudakov}. Since the argument is short, we present it for the convenience of the reader:
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma quase matador} Let $\kappa=\mathds{1}_{2|q}$. Assume that $f$ has bounded partial sums. Then
\begin{equation*}
\Sigma(H):=\sum_{d=1}^\infty u(d)d\sum_{\rad(R)|q}\mu^2(R)\sum_{g|\rad(q)/2^\kappa}\frac{\mu(g)}{g^2}\bigg{\|}\frac{Hg}{dR}\bigg{\|}\ll 1.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Let $S(H)$ be as in Lemma \ref{lemma ainda nao sei o nome}. If $q$ is odd, then the result follows from Lemma \ref{lemma ainda nao sei o nome}. Assume then that $q$ is even. We have that
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{g|\rad(q)}\frac{\mu(g)}{g^2}\bigg{\|}\frac{Hg}{dR}\bigg{\|}=\sum_{g|\rad(q)/2^\kappa}\frac{\mu(g)}{g^2}\bigg{\|}\frac{Hg}{dR}\bigg{\|}-\frac{1}{4}\sum_{g|\rad(q)/2^\kappa}\frac{\mu(g)}{g^2}\bigg{\|}\frac{Hg}{2dR}\bigg{\|},
\end{equation*}
and hence $S(H)=\Sigma(H)-\frac{1}{4}\Sigma(2H)$. Let
\begin{equation*}
T:=\sup_{H}|S(H)|.
\end{equation*}
From Lemma \ref{lemma ainda nao sei o nome}, it is clear that $T<\infty$. We now have for any non-negative integer $K$:
\begin{align*}
\Sigma(H)-\frac{1}{4^K}\Sigma(2^KH)=\sum_{k=0}^{K-1}\frac{1}{4^k}\left(\Sigma(2^kH)-\frac{1}{4}\Sigma(2^{k+1}H)\right)\ll T\sum_{k=0}^{K-1}\frac{1}{4^k}\ll T.
\end{align*}
Now, we recall from Lemma \ref{lemma construcao da u} that $\sum_{d=1}^\infty |u(d)|<\infty$ and $\sum_{n\leq H}|u(n)|n=o(H)$. Observe that for fixed $H$, $d\geq 4H\rad(q)$ implies
\begin{equation*}
\Sigma(H)\ll \sum_{d\leq 4H\rad(q)}|u(d)|d+H\sum_{d\geq 4H\rad(q)}|u(d)|\ll H.
\end{equation*}
In particular, $\frac{1}{4^K}\Sigma(2^KH)\ll \frac{H}{2^K}\to0$ as $K\to\infty$, which concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{teorema correlacoes resembling mobius}] We will suppose that we are not in the situation $F(2)=F(3)=-1$ and then we will show that $f$ must have unbounded partials sums. Thus there are 3 possibilities: $F(2),F(3)\geq 0$; $F(2)=-1$ and $F(3)\geq 0$; $F(3)=-1$ and $F(2)\geq 0$. In each of this situations we will argue by contradiction, \textit{i.e.}, we will suppose that $f$ has bounded partial sums, and hence Lemma \ref{lemma quase matador} holds. By Lemma \ref{lemma construcao da u}, either $u(2),u(4)<0$ or $u(2)=0$ and $u(4)\geq 0$, and similarly, either $u(3),u(9)<0$ or $u(3)=0$ and $u(9)\geq0$. Thus, firstly, we consider the case $u(2)=u(3)=0$. Define
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{M}(H):=\sum_{\substack{d=1\\ \gcd(d,2)=1}}^\infty u(d)d\sum_{\rad(R)|q}\mu^2(R)\sum_{g|\rad(q)/2^k}\frac{\mu(g)}{g^2}\bigg{\|}\frac{Hg}{dR}\bigg{\|}.
\end{equation*}
Since by (\ref{equacao soma positiva da mobius}) the inner sum above is positive, $u(2)=u(3)=0$ and $u(9),u(4)\geq0$, we have that $\mathcal{M}(H)>0$ and $u(4)4\mathcal{M}(H/4)\geq0$, and as $O(1)=\Sigma(H)=\mathcal{M}(H)+u(4)4\mathcal{M}(H/4)$, we have that $\mathcal{M}(H)=O(1)$. By interchanging the order of summation between $\rad(R)|q$ and $d$, the same argument allow us to conclude that
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{\substack{d=1\\ \gcd(d,2)=1}}^\infty u(d)d\sum_{g|\rad(q)/2^k}\frac{\mu(g)}{g^2}\bigg{\|}\frac{Hg}{d}\bigg{\|}=O(1).
\end{equation*}
Let $d_m=2m+1$, where $m\in\{1,2,...,M\}$. Let $H=\frac{1}{2}\lcm(d_1,...,d_M)$. By Lemma \ref{lemma construcao da u}, we then obtain
\begin{equation*}
O(1)=\sum_{\substack{d=1\\ \gcd(d,2)=1}}^\infty u(d)d\sum_{g|\rad(q)/2^k}\frac{\mu(g)}{g^2}\bigg{\|}\frac{Hg}{d}\bigg{\|}\geq\frac{1}{2}\prod_{p|q}\left(1-\frac{1}{p^2}\right)\sum_{\substack{d\leq 2M\\ \gcd(d,6)=1}}u(d)d\gg \sqrt{M},
\end{equation*}
which is a contradiction for large $M$. We assume now that $u(2)<0$ and $u(3)=0$ and consequently $u(9)\geq0$. A simple calculation shows that $u(2)2=-4$ and $u(4)4=-2$. We thus have $\Sigma(H)=\mathcal{M}(H)-4\mathcal{M}(H/2)-2\mathcal{M}(H/4)$. Let $T=\sup_H|\Sigma(H)|<\infty$. Thus for all $H\gg1$
\begin{equation}\label{equacao M(4H)}
\mathcal{M}(4H)=4\mathcal{M}(2H)+2\mathcal{M}(H)+\Sigma(4H)\geq 4\mathcal{M}(2H)+2\mathcal{M}(H)-T.
\end{equation}
As before, by letting $M\gg T^2$ and $H_0=\frac{1}{4}\lcm(d_1,...,d_M)$, for $d\leq 2M$ and $\gcd(dg,2)=1$, we have $\|2H_0g/d\|=1/2$ and $\|H_0g/d\|=1/4$ and hence, we can make $\mathcal{M}(2H_0)\geq 2T$ and $\mathcal{M}(H_0)\geq2 T$. We claim: For all $k\geq 0$
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{M}(2^k\cdot 4H_0)\geq 4^k\cdot 11T.
\end{equation*}
We prove by induction on $k$. For $k=0$, we have $\mathcal{M}(4H_0)\geq 4\mathcal{M}(2H_0)+2\mathcal{M}(H_0)-T\geq 11T$. Suppose now that the claim holds for all $n\leq k-1$, and consider $n=k\geq1$. By (\ref{equacao M(4H)}):
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{M}(2^k\cdot 4H_0)&\geq 4\mathcal{M}(2^k\cdot 2H_0)+2\mathcal{M}(2^k\cdot H_0)-T\\
&\geq 4\mathcal{M}(2^{k-1}\cdot 4H_0)+2\mathcal{M}(2^{k-2}4\cdot H_0)-T \\
&\geq4\cdot 4^{k-1}11T+4T-T\\
&\geq 4^k\cdot11T.
\end{align*}
Let now $H_k=2^k\cdot 4H_0$. Thus we have proved that $\mathcal{M}(H_k)\geq H_k^2\frac{11T}{16H_0^2}$. However, as we showed in Lemma \ref{lemma quase matador} that $\Sigma(H)\ll H$, in the same line of reasoning we can show that
$\mathcal{M}(H_k)\ll H_k$, and hence, we again obtain a contradiction. Consider now the case $u(3),u(9)<0$ and $u(2)=0$. In this case $u(4)\geq0$. In this case we define
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{M}(H):=\sum_{\substack{d=1\\ \gcd(d,3)=1}}^\infty u(d)d\sum_{\rad(R)|q}\mu^2(R)\sum_{g|\rad(q)/2^k}\frac{\mu(g)}{g^2}\bigg{\|}\frac{Hg}{dR}\bigg{\|}.
\end{equation*}
Notice that in this case, $u(d)\geq0$ for all $\gcd(d,3)=1$. A simple calculation shows that $u(3)3=-24$ and $u(9)9=-9$. We then have $\Sigma(H)=\mathcal{M}(H)-24\mathcal{H}(H/3)-9\mathcal{M}(H/9)$. In particular for all $H\gg1$:
\begin{equation}\label{equacao M(9H)}
\mathcal{M}(9H)=24\mathcal{M}(3H)+9\mathcal{M}(H)+\Sigma(9H)\geq 24\mathcal{M}(3H)+9\mathcal{M}(H)-T.
\end{equation}
Observe that
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{M}(H)\geq\sum_{\substack{d=1\\ \gcd(d,3)=1}}^\infty u(d)d\sum_{g|\rad(q)/2^k}\frac{\mu(g)}{g^2}\bigg{\|}\frac{Hg}{d}\bigg{\|}.
\end{equation*}
Let $H_0=H_0(M)=\frac{1}{2}\lcm\{d_1,...,d_M\}$, and observe that in the case $u(3)<0$, we necessarily have $\gcd(q,3)=1$, and hence, for $g|\rad(q)/2^\kappa$, $d\leq 2M$ and $\gcd(d,2)=1$, we have $\|3H_0g/d\|,\|H_0g/d\|=\frac{1}{2}$. Thus, again we can make $\mathcal{M}(3H_0),\mathcal{M}(H_0)\gg \sqrt{M}$. We then choose $M$ such that $\mathcal{M}(3H_0),\mathcal{M}(H_0)\geq 10T$. By iterating and doing induction as above, we can conclude that $\mathcal{M}(3^k9H_0)\geq 24^k\cdot 10T$. Define $H_k=3^k9H_0$. We thus showed that
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{M}(H_k)\geq \left(\frac{H_k}{9H_0}\right)^{\frac{\log 24}{\log 3}}\cdot10T.
\end{equation*}
Since $\mathcal{M}(H_k)\ll H_k$ and $\frac{\log 24}{\log 3}\geq 2.8$, we again arrive at a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{teorema cube free}} We let $f=\mu_2^2g$, where $g:\mathds{N}\to\{-1,1\}$ is a completely multiplicative function, and in light of Proposition \ref{proposicao chi pretentious}, we suppose that $\mathbb{D}(f,\chi)<\infty$ for some real and primitive Dirichlet character of conductor $q$. We let $F$ be the multiplicative function given by: For all primes $\gcd(p,q)=1$ and all powers $k$, $F(p^k)=f(p^k)\chi(p^k)$, for each $p|q$ and any power $k$, $F(p^k)=1$. As in the squarefree case, in light of Theorem \ref{teorema correlacoes klurman}, we let
\begin{equation*}
v(d):=\prod_{p\nmid q}M_p(F,\overline{F},d).
\end{equation*}
Then, again, if $\gcd(d,q)=1$, $v(md)=v(d)$, for all $m\in\mathds{N}(q)$. For $\gcd(p,q)=1$, we redefine:
\begin{align}\label{equacao definicao h cube free}
h(p)&=1-\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p}+\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p^2}-\frac{2}{p^3},\\
C&=\prod_{p\nmid q}h(p).
\end{align}
As before, we have that $C\neq0$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma construcao da u cube free} We have that $v(d)=C(1\ast u)(d)$, where $u$ is the multiplicative function supported on the $4$-free integers, $u(p^k)=0$ for each prime $p|q$ and any power $k\geq 1$, and for $\gcd(p,q)=1$:
\begin{align*}
u(p)&=\frac{2(1-F(p))}{h(p)p}\left(1-\frac{2}{p}+\frac{1}{p^2}\right),\\
u(p^2)&=\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p^2h(p)}\left(1-\frac{1}{p}\right),\\
u(p^3)&=\frac{1}{h(p)p^3}.
\end{align*}
Moreover, for $l=1,2,3$, $u(p^l)$ can be negative only for $p=2$, and this happens if and only if $F(2)=-1$; For all $p\geq 3$, $u(p^3)p^3\geq 1$, and:
\begin{align*}
a)&\sum_{n=1}^\infty |u(n)|<\infty,\\
b)&\sum_{n\leq H}|u(n)|n=o(H), \\
c)&\sum_{\substack {n\leq H}}u(n)n\mathds{1}_{\gcd(n,2)=1}\gg H^{1/3}.
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
In what follows $\gcd(p,q)=1$. Then
\begin{equation*}
F(p^k)=\begin{cases}f(p)\chi(p),&\mbox{ if }k=1\\ 1,&\mbox{ if }k=2\\ 0,&\mbox{ if }k\geq 3.\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
As $\mu\ast F(p^k)=F(p^k)-F(p^{k-1})$, we have that
\begin{equation*}
\mu\ast F(p^k)=\begin{cases}F(p)-1,&\mbox{ if }k=1\\ 1-F(p),&\mbox{ if }k=2\\ -1,&\mbox{ if }k= 3\\0,&\mbox{ if }k\geq 4.\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
Suppose that $p^n\| d$. By Lemma \ref{lemma Klurman auxiliar teorema correlations}, we have that
\begin{equation*}
M_p(F,\overline{F},d)=\sum_{a=0}^n\left(\frac{|F\ast\mu(p^a)|^2}{p^a} +2\sum_{i=a+1}^\infty \frac{Re(F\ast\mu(p^a)\overline{F\ast\mu(p^i)} )}{p^{i}} \right).
\end{equation*}
Thus, if $n=0$
\begin{align*}
M_p(F,\overline{F},d)&=\sum_{a=0}^0\left(\frac{|F\ast\mu(p^a)|^2}{p^a} +2\sum_{i=a+1}^\infty \frac{Re(F\ast\mu(p^a)\overline{F\ast\mu(p^i)} )}{p^{i}} \right)\\
&=1+2\left(\frac{F\ast \mu(p)}{p}+\frac{F\ast \mu(p^2)}{p^2}+\frac{F\ast \mu(p^3)}{p^3} \right)\\
&=1+2\left(\frac{F(p)-1}{p}+\frac{1-F(p)}{p^2}-\frac{1}{p^3}\right)\\
&=h(p).
\end{align*}
If $n=1$,
\begin{align*}
M_p(F,\overline{F},d)&=\sum_{a=0}^1\left(\frac{|F\ast\mu(p^a)|^2}{p^a} +2\sum_{i=a+1}^\infty \frac{Re(F\ast\mu(p^a)\overline{F\ast\mu(p^i)} )}{p^{i}} \right)\\
&=h(p)+\frac{|F\ast\mu(p)|^2}{p}+2F\ast\mu(p)\left(\frac{F\ast \mu(p^2)}{p^2}+\frac{F\ast \mu(p^3)}{p^3} \right)\\
&=h(p)+\frac{|F(p)-1|^2}{p}+2(F(p)-1)\left(\frac{1-F(p)}{p^2}-\frac{1}{p^3} \right)\\
&=h(p)+\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p}-\frac{4(1-F(p))}{p^2}+\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p^3}\\
&=1-\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p}+\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p}-\frac{2}{p^3}\\
&+\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p}-\frac{4(1-F(p))}{p^2}+\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p^3}\\
&=1-\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p^2}-\frac{2F(p)}{p^3}.
\end{align*}
If $n=2$,
\begin{align*}
M_p(F,\overline{F},d)&=\sum_{a=0}^2\left(\frac{|F\ast\mu(p^a)|^2}{p^a} +2\sum_{i=a+1}^\infty \frac{Re(F\ast\mu(p^a)\overline{F\ast\mu(p^i)} )}{p^{i}} \right)\\
&=1-\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p^2}-\frac{2F(p)}{p^3}+\frac{|F\ast \mu(p^2)|^2}{p^2}+2F\ast\mu(p^2)\frac{F\ast\mu(p^3)}{p^{3}} \\
&=1-\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p^2}-\frac{2F(p)}{p^3}+\frac{|1-F(p)|^2}{p^2}+2(1-F(p))\frac{-1}{p^{3}}\\
&=1-\frac{2}{p^3}.
\end{align*}
If $n=3$,
\begin{align*}
M_p(F,\overline{F},d)&=\sum_{a=0}^3\left(\frac{|F\ast\mu(p^a)|^2}{p^a} +2\sum_{i=a+1}^\infty \frac{Re(F\ast\mu(p^a)\overline{F\ast\mu(p^i)} )}{p^{i}} \right)\\
&=1-\frac{2}{p^3}+\frac{|F\ast\mu(p^3)|^2}{p^3}=1-\frac{1}{p^3}.
\end{align*}
If $n\geq 4$
\begin{align*}
M_p(F,\overline{F},d)&=\sum_{a=0}^3\left(\frac{|F\ast\mu(p^a)|^2}{p^a} +2\sum_{i=a+1}^\infty \frac{Re(F\ast\mu(p^a)\overline{F\ast\mu(p^i)} )}{p^{i}} \right)\\
&=1-\frac{1}{p^3}.
\end{align*}
As
\begin{align*}
v(d)&=\prod_{p\nmid q}M_p(F,\overline{F},d)=\prod_{\substack{p\nmid d \\ p\nmid q}}M_p(F,\overline{F},d)\prod_{\substack{p^n\|d \\ (n\geq 1)}}M_p(F,\overline{F},d) \\
&=\prod_{\substack{p\nmid q}}h(p)\prod_{\substack{p^n\|d\\(n\geq 1)}}\frac{1}{h(p)}M_p(F,\overline{F},d),
\end{align*}
we obtain that $v(d)=Cg(d)$, where $g$ is the multiplicative function given by $g(p^n)=1$ if $p|q$, and if $\gcd(p,q)=1$:
\begin{equation*}
g(p^n)=\begin{cases}\frac{1}{h(p)}\left(1-\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p^2}-\frac{2F(p)}{p^3} \right),&\mbox{ if }n=1,\\ \frac{1}{h(p)}\left(1-\frac{2}{p^3} \right), &\mbox{ if }n=2\\
\frac{1}{h(p)}\left(1-\frac{1}{p^3}\right), &\mbox{ if }n\geq 3.\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
Let $u=\mu\ast g$. Then $u(p^k)=g(p^k)-g(p^{k-1})$. Thus, clearly $u(p^k)=0$ if $k\geq 1$ and $p|q$. Now, if $\gcd(p,q)=1$, we have that $u(p^k)=0$ for $k\geq 4$, and for $k\leq 3$:
\begin{align*}
u(p)&=g(p)-1=\frac{1}{h(p)}\left(1-\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p^2}-\frac{2F(p)}{p^3} -h(p)\right)\\
&=\frac{1}{h(p)}\left(1-\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p^2}-\frac{2F(p)}{p^3}-\left(1-\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p}+\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p^2}-\frac{2}{p^3}\right)\right)\\
&=\frac{1}{h(p)}\left(\frac{2(1-F(p)}{p}-\frac{4(1-F(p))}{p^2}+\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p^3}\right) \\
&=\frac{2(1-F(p)}{h(p)}\left(\frac{1}{p}-\frac{2}{p^2}+\frac{1}{p^3}\right).
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
u(p^2)&=\frac{1}{h(p)}\left(1-\frac{2}{p^3}-\left(1-\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p^2}-\frac{2F(p)}{p^3} \right)\right)\\
&=\frac{2(1-F(p))}{h(p)p^2}\left(1-\frac{1}{p}\right).
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
u(p^3)&=\frac{1}{h(p)}\left(1-\frac{1}{p^3}-\left(1-\frac{2}{p^3} \right)\right)\\
&=\frac{1}{h(p)p^3}.
\end{align*}
Thus, we have that the sign of $u(p^l)$ is dictated by $h(p)$. Since
\begin{align*}
h(p)&=1-\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p}+\frac{2(1-F(p))}{p^2}-\frac{2}{p^3},\\
\end{align*}
we have that $0<h(p)<1$ in the case that $F(p)=1$. In the case $F(p)=-1$, we have that
\begin{align*}
h(p)&=1-\frac{4}{p}+\frac{4}{p^2}-\frac{2}{p^3}=\frac{p^3-4p^2+4p-2}{p^3}\leq \frac{p^3-2}{p^3}<1.\\
\end{align*}
In this case, we have that $h(2)=-1/4$. Let $s(p)=p^3-4p^2+4p-2$. Then $s'(p)=3p^2-8p+4=3(p-2)(p-2/3)$, and hence $s(p)$ is increasing for $p\geq 3$. Hence, for $p\geq 3$, $s(p)\geq s(3)=1>0$. In particular, in any case we have $h(p)>0$ and $u(p^3)p^3\geq 1$ for all $p\geq 3$. Similarly to Lemma \ref{lemma construcao da u}, we can show that $\sum_{n=1}^\infty |u(n)|<\infty$ and that $\sum_{n\leq H}|u(n)|n=o(H)$. Let $\tilde{u}$ be the multiplicative function such that $\tilde{u}(p^k)=\mathds{1}_{k=3}\mathds{1}_{\gcd(p,2q)=1}$.
Thus $\tilde{U}(s):=\sum_{n=1}^\infty\frac{\tilde{u}(n)}{n^s}=\prod_{p\nmid 2q}(1+p^{-3s})$. Thus the Dirichlet series $\tilde{U}(s)\zeta^{-1}(3s)=\prod_{p|2q}(1-p^{-3s})\prod_{p\nmid 2q}(1-p^{6s})$ converges absolutely for all $Re(s)>1/6$. Hence $\sum_{n\leq H}\tilde{u}(n)\gg H^{1/3}$. Now observe that
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{\substack {n\leq H}}u(n)n\mathds{1}_{\gcd(n,2)=1}\geq\sum_{n\leq H}\tilde{u}(n)\gg H^{1/3}.
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{teorema cube free}] Let $f=\mu_2^2g$, where $g:\mathds{N}\to\{-1,1\}$ is a completely multiplicative function. Similarly as in the squarefree case, we can show that if $f$ has bounded partial sums, then
\begin{equation}\label{equacao Sigma cube free}
\Sigma(H):=\sum_{d=1}^\infty u(d)d\sum_{\rad(R)|q}\mu_2^2(R)\sum_{g|\rad(q)/2^\kappa}\frac{\mu(g)}{g^2}\bigg{\|}\frac{Hg}{dR}\bigg{\|}\ll 1,
\end{equation}
where $\kappa=1$ if $q$ is even, or $0$ otherwise. Recall that the inner sum $\sum_{g|\rad(q)/2^\kappa}$ is non-negative. By Lemma \ref{lemma construcao da u cube free}, either $u(2^l)\geq 0$ for $l=1,2,3$, or $u(2^l)<0$ for $l=1,2,3$. Consider first the case that all $u(2^l)\geq0$.
In this case
\begin{equation*}
\Sigma(H)\geq\sum_{d=1}^\infty u(d)d\sum_{g|\rad(q)/2^\kappa}\frac{\mu(g)}{g^2}\bigg{\|}\frac{Hg}{d}\bigg{\|}.
\end{equation*}
Let $d_1,...,d_M$ be the first $M$ odd integers, and let $H=\frac{1}{2} \lcm(d_1,...,d_M)$. Thus for each $d_i$, we have that $\|Hg/d\|=1/2$. Hence, by Lemma \ref{lemma construcao da u cube free},
\begin{equation*}
\Sigma(H)\gg\sum_{\substack{d\leq 2M\\ \gcd(d,2)=1}}u(d)d\gg M^{1/3},
\end{equation*}
which is a contradiction for sufficiently large $M$. Suppose now that $u(2)<0$. A simple calculation shows that $u(2)2=-4$, $u(4)4=-8$ and $u(8)8=-4$. Let
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{M}(H)=\sum_{\substack{d=1\\ \gcd(d,2)=1}}^\infty u(d)d\sum_{\rad(R)|q}\mu_2^2(R)\sum_{g|\rad(q)/2^\kappa}\frac{\mu(g)}{g^2}\bigg{\|}\frac{Hg}{dR}\bigg{\|}.
\end{equation*}
Then $\Sigma(H)=\mathcal{M}(H)-4\mathcal{M}(H/2)-8\mathcal{M}(H/4)-4\mathcal{M}(H/8)$.
Let $T=\sup_H|\Sigma(H)|$. Then for all $H\gg1$
\begin{equation}\label{equacao recursao cube free}
\mathcal{M}(4H)\geq4\mathcal{M}(2H)+8\mathcal{M}(H)+4\mathcal{M}(H/2)-T\geq 4\mathcal{M}(2H)+8\mathcal{M}(H)-T.
\end{equation}
let $H_0=H_0(M)=\frac{1}{4} \lcm(d_1,...,d_M)$. Since $g|\rad(q)/2^\kappa$, $\|2H_0g/d_i\|=1/2$. On the other hand write $\lcm(d_1,...,d_M)g/d_i=2l+1$. Then $\|H_0g/d_i\|=\|(2l+1)/4\|=1/4$ if $l$ is even, otherwise, if $l=2l'+1$, $\|(2l+1)/4\|=\|(2l'+1)/2+1/4\|=\|3/4\|=1/4$. Thus,
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{M}(2H_0)\geq \sum_{\substack{d=1\\ \gcd(d,2)=1}}^\infty u(d)d\sum_{g|\rad(q)/2^\kappa}\frac{\mu(g)}{g^2}\bigg{\|}\frac{2H_0g}{d}\bigg{\|}\gg \sum_{\substack{d\leq 2M\\ \gcd(d,2)=1}}^\infty u(d)d\gg M^{1/3}.
\end{equation*}
Hence, by making $M\gg T^3$, we can make $\mathcal{M}(2H_0),\mathcal{M}(H_0)\geq 10 T$. Iterating and using induction in (\ref{equacao recursao cube free}), we conclude that $\mathcal{M}(2^kH_0)\geq 4^k2T$. Defining $H_k=2^kH_0$, we obtain that $\mathcal{M}(H_k)\gg H_k^2$. However, as in the proof of Theorem \ref{teorema correlacoes resembling mobius}, we have that $\mathcal{M}(H_k)\ll H_k$, and hence we again obtain a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{teorema H^1/4 cancelacao}}
\begin{proof} Consider first the squarefree case. Since $f_1(p)=\chi(p)$ for all $\gcd(p,q)=1$, we have, by Lemma \ref{lemma construcao da u}, that $u(d)d$ is always non-negative, and moreover, it is supported on the perfect squares coprime with $q$, and $u(p^2)p^2=\frac{1}{h(p)}$, where $h(p)=1-\frac{2}{p^2}$.
Consider, then, the Dirichlet series $U(s)=\sum_{d=1}^\infty \frac{u(d)d}{d^s}$. Let $F(s)=\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{a(n)}{n^s}:= U(s)\zeta(2s)^{-1}$. Thus
\begin{equation*}
F(s)=\prod_{p|q}\left(1-\frac{1}{p^{2s}}\right)\prod_{p\nmid q}\left( 1+\frac{2}{p^2 h(p)p^{2s}}-\frac{1}{h(p)p^{4s}}\right).
\end{equation*}
Clearly, from the Euler product above, we have that $F(s)$ converges absolutely for all $Re(s)>1/4$, and hence $\sum_{n\leq x}a(n)\ll x^{1/4+\epsilon}$, for any $\epsilon>0$. Now define $\zeta(2s):=\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{\mathds{1}^{(2)}(n)}{n^s}$. Then $\sum_{n\leq x}\mathds{1}^{(2)}(n)=\sum_{n\leq \sqrt{x}}1=[\sqrt{x}]$.
Thus, since $u(d)d=\mathds{1}^{(2)}\ast a(d)$, we have
\begin{align*}
\sum_{d\leq H}u(d)d=\sum_{d\leq H}a(d)\bigg{[}\sqrt{\frac{H}{d}}\bigg{]}=\sqrt{H}\sum_{d=1}^\infty \frac{a(d)}{\sqrt{d}}+O(H^{1/4+\epsilon}):=D\sqrt{H}+O(H^{1/4+\epsilon}).
\end{align*}
On the other hand, we have that
\begin{align*}
H\sum_{d>H}u(d)&=H\int_{H^+}^\infty\frac{1}{x}d\left(\sum_{n\leq x}u(n)n\right)=-\sum_{d\leq H}u(d)d+H\int_{H}^\infty \left(\sum_{n\leq x}u(n)n\right)\frac{dx}{x^2}\\
&=-D\sqrt{H}+2D\sqrt{H} +O(H^{1/4+\epsilon})=D\sqrt{H}+O(H^{1/4+\epsilon}).
\end{align*}
Now recall formula (\ref{equacao Lambda(H)}):
\begin{equation*}
\Lambda(H)=C\sum_{d=1}^\infty u(d)d\sum_{\rad(R)|q}\mu^2(R)\sum_{g|\rad(q)}\frac{\mu(g)}{g^2}\Delta\left(\frac{Hg}{qdR}\right),
\end{equation*}
where $\Delta(t)=\{t\}-\{t\}^2\leq \{t\}$. As $\sum_{\rad(R)|q}\mu^2(R)<\infty$, we split the sum $\sum_{d=1}^\infty$ into $\sum_{d\leq \alpha H}$ and $\sum_{d> \alpha H}$, where $\alpha$ is such that: If $d>\alpha H$, then $\frac{Hg}{qdR}<1$, for all $g|\rad(q)$. Thus we obtain that
\begin{equation*}
\Lambda(H)\ll \sum_{d\leq \alpha H}u(d)d+H\sum_{d>\alpha H}u(d)\ll \sqrt{H}.
\end{equation*}
Now we consider the cubefree case. Since $f_2(p)=\chi(p)$ for all $\gcd(p,q)=1$, by Lemma \ref{lemma construcao da u cube free}, we have that $u$ has support on the perfect cubes coprime with $q$, and $u(p^3)p^3=\frac{1}{h(p)}$, where $h(p)=1-\frac{2}{p^3}$. Thus we can proceed as in the same way as above. \end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{SUB:sect1}
A wide range of applications, such as in chemometrics, signal processing and high order statistics \cite{cichocki2015tensor,nonnegative,tensor_app,Kolda,vervliet2014breaking}, involve the manipulation of quantities with elements addressed by more than two indices. With three indices or more, these higher-order expansions of vectors (first-order) and matrices (second-order) are called higher-order tensors, multidimensional matrices, or multiway arrays.
We use the symbol $\mathcal{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2\times I_3}$ to represent a three-dimensional array of real numbers with entries given by
$a_{i_1i_2 i_3}\in\mathbb{R}$ for $i_n=1,2,\dots,I_n$ and $n=1,2,3$. For notational simplicity, we illustrate our results by using third-order tensors whenever generalizations to higher-order cases are straightforward. Slight differences will be explained when needed.
In this paper, we consider the low multilinear rank approximation of a tensor, which is defined as follows.
\begin{problem}\label{SUB:prob1}
Suppose that $\mathcal{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2\times I_3}$. The goal is to require three orthonormal matrices ${\bf Q}_n\in\mathbb{R}^{I_{n}\times \mu_{n}}$ with $\mu_n\leq I_n$, such that
\begin{equation*}
a_{i_1i_2i_3}\approx\sum_{j_1,j_2,j_3=1}^{I_1,I_2,I_3}a_{j_1j_2j_3}p_{1,i_1j_1}p_{2,i_2j_2}p_{3,i_3j_3},
\end{equation*}
where $\mathbf{P}_n=\mathbf{Q}_n\mathbf{Q}_n^\top\in\mathbb{R}^{I_n\times I_n}$ is a projection matrix and $p_{n,i_nj_n}$ is the $(i_n,j_n)$-element of $\mathbf{P}_n$.
\end{problem}
Problem \ref{SUB:prob1} can be solved by a number of recently developed algorithms, such as higher-order orthogonal iteration \cite{lathauwer_rank_one_2000}, the Newton-Grassmann method \cite{elden_newton_2009}, the Riemannian
trust-region method \cite{trust_region_2011}, the Quasi-Newton method \cite{quasi_app_2010}, semi-definite programming (SDP) \cite{semidefinite_2009}, and Lanczos-type iteration \cite{GOS_SISC_2012,SE_T_2009}. The readers can refer to two surveys \cite{tensor_survery_Grasedyck,Kolda} for the relevant information. If the columns of each $\mathbf{Q}_n$ are extracted from the mode-$n$ unfolding matrix $\mathbf{A}_{(n)}$, then the solution of Problem \ref{SUB:prob1} is called as the {\it CUR}-type decomposition of $\mathcal{A}$, which can be obtained by the different versions of the cross approximation method. We refer to \cite{tensor_cur_2010,tensor_based_2007_laa,GT_SMMCS_2001,tensor_cur_2008,OST_SIMAX_2008,OST_NLAA_2010} for more details about a {\it CUR}-type decomposition of tensors. On the other hand, for Problem \ref{SUB:prob1}, when we restrict the entries of the tensor $\mathcal{A}$ and the matrices $\mathbf{Q}_n$ to be nonnegative and admit the matrices $\mathbf{Q}_n$ not being orthonormal, the solution of Problem \ref{SUB:prob1} is called a nonnegative Tucker decomposition \cite{FH_CMS_2008,nonegative_tucker_zhang2016,nonnegative_tucker_zhou2012,nonnegative_tucker_zhou2015}.
Low-rank matrix approximations, such as the truncated singular value decomposition \cite[page 291]{Golub} and the rank-revealing QR decomposition \cite{rank_QR_1987}, play a central role in data analysis and scientific computing. Halko {\it et al.} \cite{random_2011_siamreview} present a modular framework to construct randomized algorithms for computing partial matrix decompositions. Randomized algorithms for low-rank approximations and their theory have been well established in terms of its near optimality compared to the Eckart-Young theorem. We recommend three surveys \cite{drineas2016randnla,mahoney2011randomized,woodruff2014sketching} for more details about the randomized algorithms for computing low rank matrix approximations.
Randomized algorithms have recently been applied to tensor decompositions. Drineas and Mahoney \cite{tensor_based_2007_laa} present and analyze randomized algorithms for computing the CUR-type decomposition of a tensor, which can be viewed as the generalization of the Linear-Time-SVD algorithm \cite{Drineas2005fast} and the Fast-Approximate-SVD algorithm \cite{deshpande2006matrix} for the low-rank approximations of matrices to tensors, which are originally for matrices. Battaglino {\it et al.} \cite{Battaglino2017a} extend randomized least squares methods to tensors and show the workload of CANDECOMP/PARAFAC-ALS can be drastically reduced without sacrifice in quality. Vervliet and De Lathauwer \cite{vervliet2016a} present the randomized block sampling canonical polyadic decomposition method, which combines increasingly popular ideas from randomization and stochastic optimization to tackle the computational problems.
Zhou {\it et al.} \cite{decomposition_big_tensor} propose a distributed randomized Tucker decomposition for arbitrarily big
tensors but with relatively low multilinear rank. Che and Wei \cite{che2018randomized} design adaptive randomized algorithms for computing the low multilinear rank approximation of tensors and the approximate tensor train decomposition. More results about this topic can be found in \cite{biagioni2015randomized,tensor_sparsification_2015,tensor_fast_2010} and their references. More recently, many researchers propose randomized algorithms for low multilinear rank approximations \cite{ahmadiasl2020randomized,che2020theory,kressner2017recompression,
minster2019randomized,sun2019low,WCW2020}.
Suppose that $\mu_n$ is a given positive integer and $R$ is the oversampling parameter. In the work of \cite{decomposition_big_tensor}, the column space of each mode-$n$ unfolding of $\mathbf{A}_{(n)}$ is approximated by that of $\mathbf{A}_{(n)}\bm{\Omega}_n$, where $\bm{\Omega}_n\in\mathbb{R}^{I^2\times (\mu_n+R)}$ is a standard Gaussian matrix and $\mathbf{A}_{(n)}$ is the mode-$n$ unfolding of $\mathcal{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times I\times I}$. However, the column space of each mode-$n$ unfolding of $\mathbf{A}_{(n)}$ is approximated by that of $\mathbf{A}_{(n)}\bm{\Omega}_n$ with $\bm{\Omega}_n=(\bm{\Omega}_{n,1}\odot\bm{\Omega}_{n,2})$ in \cite{che2018randomized}, where $\bm{\Omega}_{n,1},\bm{\Omega}_{n,2}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times (\mu_n+R)}$ are standard Gaussian matrices. The difference between \cite{che2018randomized} and \cite{decomposition_big_tensor} is that the storage capacity of $\bm{\Omega}_n$ is different. As shown in \cite{che2018randomized,decomposition_big_tensor}, comparison with the deterministic algorithms for low multilinear rank approximations, randomized algorithms are often faster and more robust and the algorithm in \cite{che2018randomized} is faster than that of \cite{decomposition_big_tensor}.
The main contribution of this paper is to design a more effective randomized algorithm for the computation of low multilinear rank approximations of tensors. Our proposed algorithm can be divided into two stages. Suppose that $\mathcal{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2\times I_3}$. In the first stage, for each $n$, the Kronecker product of two standard Gaussian matrices of suitable dimensions are applied to the mode-$n$ unfolding of $\mathcal{A}$, which is an $I_n\times \prod_{m=1,m\neq n}^3L_{n,m}$ matrix $\mathbf{B}_{n,(n)}$. In the second stage, we utilize the singular value decomposition (SVD) to obtain an orthonormal matrix, satisfying the requirement that the column space of the matrix can be used to approximate $\mathbf{B}_{n,(n)}$. Note that Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg3} can be viewed as the generalization of the core idea of the randomized algorithm in \cite{martinsson2011a}. As shown in Section \ref{SUB:sect6}, in terms of CPU times, the proposed algorithm is faster than the existing algorithms for low multilinear rank approximations; and in terms of RLNE, the proposed algorithms are often more accurate than the existing algorithms.
Throughout this paper, we assume that $I$, $J$, and $N$ denote the index upper bounds, unless stated otherwise. We adopt lower case letters $x,u,v,\dots$ for scalars, lower case bold letters $\mathbf{x},\mathbf{u},
\mathbf{v},\dots$ for vectors, bold capital letters $\mathbf{A},\mathbf{B},\mathbf{C},\dots$ for matrices, and calligraphic letters $\mathcal{A},\mathcal{B},\mathcal{C},\dots$ for tensors. This notation is consistently used for lower-order parts of a given structure. For example, the entry with row index $i$ and column index $j$ in a matrix ${\bf A}$, i.e., $({\bf A})_{ij}$, is represented as $a_{ij}$ (also $(\mathbf{x})_i=x_i$ and $(\mathcal{A})_{i_1i_2i_3}=a_{i_1i_2i_3}$).
For a vector $\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^{I}$, we use $\|\mathbf{x}\|_2$ and $\mathbf{x}^\top$ to denote its 2-norm and transpose, respectively. $\mathbf{0}$ denotes the zero vector in $\mathbb{R}^{I}$. $\mathbf{A} \otimes \mathbf{B}$
denotes the Kronecker product of matrices
$\mathbf{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times J}$ and $\mathbf{B}\in\mathbb{R}^{K\times L}$. $\mathbf{A} \odot \mathbf{B}$ is the Khatri-Rao product of matrices
$\mathbf{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times L}$ and $\mathbf{B}\in\mathbb{R}^{J\times L}$. $\mathbf{A}^{\dag}$ represents the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse of $\mathbf{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times J}$. A matrix $\mathbf{Q}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times K}$ with $K<I$ is orthonormal if $\mathbf{Q}^\top\mathbf{Q}=\mathbf{I}_K$.
The rest of our paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{SUB:sect2}, we introduce basic tensor operations and singular values of random matrices. We present the higher-order singular value decomposition and higher-order orthogonal iteration for the low multilinear rank approximation in Section \ref{SUB:sect3}. The randomized algorithms for the low multilinear rank approximation are presented in Section \ref{SUB:sect4}. In the same section, we provide probabilistic error bounds and analyze computational complexity of these three algorithms. The error bounds are analyzed in Section \ref{SUB:sect5}. We illustrate our algorithms via numerical examples in Section \ref{SUB:sect6}. We conclude this paper and discuss future research topics in Section \ref{SUB:sect7}.
\section{Preliminaries}
\label{SUB:sect2}
We introduce the basic notations and concepts involving tensors which will be used in this paper.
The mode-$n$ product \cite{nonnegative,Kolda} of a real tensor $\mathcal{A}\in \mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2\times I_3}$ by a matrix ${\bf B}\in \mathbb{R}^{J\times I_n}$, denoted
by $\mathcal{C}=\mathcal{A}\times_{n}{\bf B}$:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
n=1:\ c_{ji_2i_3}=\sum_{i_1=1}^{I_1}a_{i_1i_2i_3}b_{ji_1};\
n=2:\ c_{i_1ji_3}=\sum_{i_2=1}^{I_2}a_{i_1i_2i_3}b_{ji_2};\
n=3:\ c_{i_1i_2j}=\sum_{i_3=1}^{I_3}a_{i_1i_2i_3}b_{ji_3}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
For a tensor $\mathcal{A}\in \mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2\times I_3}$ and three matrices $\mathbf{F}\in \mathbb{R}^{J_n\times I_n}$, $\mathbf{G}\in \mathbb{R}^{J_m\times I_m}$ and $\mathbf{H}\in\mathbb{R}^{J'_n\times J_n}$, one has \cite{Kolda}
\begin{equation*}
\begin{cases}
&(\mathcal{A}\times_{n}\mathbf{F})\times_{m}\mathbf{G}
=(\mathcal{A}\times_{m}\mathbf{G})\times_{n}\mathbf{F}=\mathcal{A}\times_{n}\mathbf{F}\times_{m}\mathbf{G},\\ &(\mathcal{A}\times_{n}\mathbf{F})\times_{n}\mathbf{H}=\mathcal{A}\times_{n}(\mathbf{H}\cdot \mathbf{F}),
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
where `$\cdot$' represents the multiplication of two matrices.
For two tensors $\mathcal{A},\mathcal{B}\in \mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2\times I_3}$, the {\it Frobenius norm} of a tensor $\mathcal{A}$ is given by $\|\mathcal{A}\|_{F}=\sqrt{\langle\mathcal{A},\mathcal{A}\rangle}$ and the scalar product $\langle\mathcal{A},\mathcal{B}\rangle$ is defined as \cite{hosvd,Kolda}
$$\langle\mathcal{A},\mathcal{B}\rangle=\sum_{i_1,i_2,i_3=1}^{I_1,I_2,I_3}a_{i_{1}i_{2} i_{3}}b_{i_{1}i_{2}i_{3}}.$$
The mode-$n$ unfolding matrix of a third-order tensor can be understood as the process of the construction of a matrix containing all the mode-$n$ vectors of the tensor. The order of the columns is not unique and the unfolding matrix of $\mathcal{A}\in \mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2\times I_3}$, denoted by ${\bf A}_{(n)}$, arranges the mode-$n$ fibers into columns of this matrix. More specifically, a tensor element $(i_1,i_2,i_3)$ maps on a matrix element $(i_n,j)$, where
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
n=1:\ j=i_2+(i_3-1)I_2;\quad n=2:\ j=i_1+(i_3-1)I_1;\quad n=3:\ j=i_1+(i_2-1)I_1.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
\subsection{Singular values of random matrices}
We first review the definition of the sub-Gaussian random variable. Sub-Gaussian variables are an important class of random variables that have strong tail decay properties.
\begin{definition}{{\bf (\cite[Definition 3.2]{shabat2016randomized})}}
\label{SUB:def4}
A real valued random variable $X$ is called a sub-Gaussian random variable if there exist $b>0$ such that for all $t>0$ we have $\mathbf{E}(e^{tX})\leq e^{b^2t^2/2}$. A random variable $X$ is centered if $\mathbf{E}(X)=0$.
\end{definition}
We cite several results adapted from \cite{litvak2005smallest,rudelson2009smallest} about random matrices whose entries are sub-Gaussian. We emphasize the case where $\mathbf{A}$ is an $I\times J$ matrix with $J>(1+1/\ln(I))I$. Similar results can be found in \cite{litvak2012smallest} for the square and almost square matrices.
\begin{definition}
\label{SUB:def5}
Assume that $\mu\geq1$, $a_1>0$ and $a_2>0$. The set $\mathbb{A}(\mu,a_1,a_2,I,J)$ consists of all $I\times J$ random matrices $\mathbf{A}$ whose entries are the centered independent identically distributed real valued random variables satisfying the following conditions: {\rm (a)} moments: $\mathbf{E}(|a_{ij}|^3)\leq \mu^3$; {\rm (b)} norm: $\mathbf{P}(\|\mathbf{A}\|_2>a_1\sqrt{J})\leq e^{-a_2J}$; {\rm (c)} variance: $\mathbf{E}(|a_{ij}|^2)\leq 1$.
\end{definition}
It is proven in \cite{litvak2005smallest} that if $\mathbf{A}$ is sub-Gaussian, then $\mathbf{A}\in\mathbb{A}(\mu,a_1,a_2,I,J)$. For a Gaussian matrix with zero mean and unit variance, we have $\mu=(4/\sqrt{2\pi})^{1/3}$.
\begin{theorem}{{\bf (\cite[Section 2]{litvak2005smallest})}}
\label{SUB:thm4}
Suppose that $\mathbf{A}\in \mathbb{R}^{I\times J}$ is sub-Gaussian with $I\leq J$, $\mu\geq1$ and $a_2>0$. Then
$
\mathbf{P}(\|\mathbf{A}\|_2>a_1\sqrt{J})\leq e^{-a_2J}
$,
where $a_1=6\mu\sqrt{a_2+4}$.
\end{theorem}
Theorem \ref{SUB:thm4} establishes an upper bound for the largest singular value that depends on the desired probability. Theorem \ref{SUB:thm5} bounds from the upper below the smallest singular value of a random sub-Gaussian matrices.
\begin{theorem}{{\bf (\cite[Section 2]{litvak2005smallest})}}
\label{SUB:thm5}
Let $\mu\geq1$, $a_1>0$ and $a_2>0$. Suppose that $\mathbf{A}\in\mathbb{A}(\mu,a_1,a_2,I,J)$ with $J>(1+1/\ln(I))I$. Then, there exist positive constants $c_1$ and $c_2$ such that
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{P}(\sigma_I(\mathbf{A})\leq c_1\sqrt{J})\leq e^{-J}+e^{-c''J/(2\mu^6)}+e^{-a_2J}\leq e^{-c_2J}.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
\label{SUB:rem3}
For Theorem {\rm\ref{SUB:thm5}}, the exact values of constants $c_1$, $c_2$ and $c''$ are discussed in {\rm \cite{shabat2016randomized}}.
\end{remark}
\section{HOSVD and HOOI}
\label{SUB:sect3}
A {\it Tucker decomposition} \cite{tucker_1966} of a tensor $\mathcal{A}\in \mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2 \times I_3}$ is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{SUB:eqn4}
\mathcal{A}\approx\mathcal{G}\times_1{\bf U}^{(1)}\times_2{\bf U}^{(2)}\times_3{\bf U}^{(3)},
\end{equation}
where ${\bf U}^{(n)}\in \mathbb{R}^{I_n\times R_n}$ are called the {\it mode-$n$ factor matrices} and $\mathcal{G}\in \mathbb{R}^{R_1\times R_2\times R_3}$ is called the {\it core tensor} of the decomposition with the set $\{R_1,R_2,R_3\}$.
The Tucker decomposition is closely related to the mode-$n$ unfolding matrix $\mathbf{A}_{(n)}$ with $n=1,2,3$. In particular, the relation (\ref{SUB:eqn4}) implies
$$
\begin{cases}
{\bf A}_{(1)}&\approx{\bf U}^{(1)}{\bf G}_{(1)}({\bf U}^{(2)}\otimes {\bf U}^{(3)})^{\top};\\
{\bf A}_{(2)}&\approx{\bf U}^{(2)}{\bf G}_{(2)}({\bf U}^{(1)}\otimes {\bf U}^{(3)})^{\top};\\
{\bf A}_{(3)}&\approx{\bf U}^{(3)}{\bf G}_{(3)}({\bf U}^{(1)}\otimes {\bf U}^{(2)})^{\top}.
\end{cases}
$$
It follows that the rank of ${\bf A}_{(n)}$ is less than or equal to $R_n$, as the mode-$n$ factor ${\bf U}^{(n)}\in\mathbb{R}^{I_n\times R_n}$ at most has rank $R_n$. We define the multilinear rank of $\mathcal{A}$ as the tuple
$\{R_1,R_2,R_3\}$, where the rank of ${\bf A}_{(n)}$ is equal to $R_n$.
Applying the singular value decomposition (SVD) to $\mathbf{A}_{(n)}$ with $n=1,2,3$, we obtain a special form of the Tucker decomposition of a given tensor, which is called the {\it higher-order singular value decomposition} (HOSVD) \cite{hosvd}.
When $R_n<{\rm rank}(\mathbf{A}_{(n)})$ for one or more $n$, the decomposition is called the {\it truncated HOSVD}. The truncated HOSVD is not optimal in terms of giving the best fitting as measured by the Frobenius norm of the difference, but it is used to initialize iterative algorithms to compute the best approximation of a specified multilinear rank \cite{lathauwer_rank_one_2000,elden_newton_2009,trust_region_2011,quasi_app_2010}. For given three positive integers $\mu_1$, $\mu_2$ and $\mu_3$, the low multilinear rank approximation of $\mathcal{A}$ can be rewritten as the optimization problem
respect to the Frobenius norm
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\min_{\mathcal{G},\mathbf{Q}_1,\mathbf{Q}_2,\mathbf{Q}_3}&\quad
\left\|\mathcal{A}-\mathcal{G}\times_1\mathbf{Q}_1\times_2\mathbf{Q}_2
\times_3\mathbf{Q}_3\right\|_F^2,\\
\text{subject to}&\quad\mathcal{G}\in\mathbb{R}^{\mu_1\times \mu_2\times \mu_3},
\quad\mathbf{Q}_n\in\mathbb{R}^{I_n\times \mu_n}\text{ is orthonormal}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
If $\mathbf{Q}_n^*$ is a solution of the above maximization problem, then we call $\mathcal{A}\times_1\mathbf{P}_1\times_2\mathbf{P}_2
\times_3\mathbf{P}_3$ as a {\it low multilinear rank approximation} of $\mathcal{A}$, where $\mathbf{P}_n=\mathbf{Q}_n^*(\mathbf{Q}_n^*)^\top$.
\section{The proposed algorithm and its analysis}\label{SUB:sect4}
In this section, we present our randomized algorithm for the low multilinear rank approximations of tensors, summarized in Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg3}. We give a slight modification of Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg3} to reduce its computational complexity.
\subsection{Framework for the algorithm}
For each $n$, Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg3} begins by projecting the mode-$n$ unfolding of the input tensor on the Kronecker product of random matrices. The result matrix captures most of the range of the mode-$n$ unfolding of the tensor. Then we compute a basis for this matrix by Lemma \ref{SUB:lem10}. Finally, we project the input tensor on it.
\begin{algorithm}[htb]
\caption{The proposed randomized algorithm for low multilinear rank approximations with $N=3$}
\label{SUB:alg3}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATEx {\bf Input}: A tensor $\mathcal{A}\in \mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2\times I_3}$ to decompose, the desired multilinear rank $\{\mu_1,\mu_2,\mu_3\}$, $L_{3,1}L_{3,2}\geq\mu_3+K$, $L_{2,1}L_{2,3}\geq\mu_2+K$, and $L_{1,2}L_{1,3}\geq\mu_1+K$, where $K$ is a oversampling parameter.
\STATEx {\bf Output}: Three orthonormal matrices $\mathbf{Q}_n$ such that $\|\mathcal{A}\times_1 (\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\times_2 (\mathbf{Q}_2\mathbf{Q}_2^\top)
\times_3 (\mathbf{Q}_3\mathbf{Q}_3^\top)-\mathcal{A}\|_F\leq
\sum_{n=1}^3O(\Delta_{\mu_n+1}(\mathbf{A}_{(n)}))$.
\STATE Form six real matrices $\mathbf{G}_{n,m}\in\mathbb{R}^{L_{n,m}\times I_m}$ whose entries are independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) Gaussian random variables of zero mean and unit variance, where $m,n=1,2,3$ and $m\neq n$.
\STATE Compute three product tensors
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{B}_1=\mathcal{A}\times_2\mathbf{G}_{1,2}\times_3\mathbf{G}_{1,3},\quad
\mathcal{B}_2=\mathcal{A}\times_1\mathbf{G}_{2,1}\times_3\mathbf{G}_{2,3},\quad
\mathcal{B}_3=\mathcal{A}\times_1\mathbf{G}_{3,1}\times_2\mathbf{G}_{3,2}.
\end{equation*}
\STATE Form the mode-$n$ unfolding $\mathbf{B}_{n,(n)}$ of each tensor $\mathcal{B}_n$.
\STATE For each $\mathbf{B}_{n,(n)}$, find a real $I_n\times \mu_n$ matrix $\mathbf{Q}$ whose columns are orthonormal, such that there exists a real $\mu_n\times \prod_{m=1,m\neq n}^3L_{n,m}$ matrix $\mathbf{S}_n$ for which
$$\|\mathbf{Q}\mathbf{S}_n-\mathbf{B}_{n,(n)}\|_2\leq\sigma_{\mu_n+1}(\mathbf{B}_{n,(n)}),$$
where $\sigma_{\mu_n+1}(\mathbf{B}_{n,(n)})$ is the $(\mu_n+1)$st greatest singular value of $\mathbf{B}_{n,(n)}$.
\STATE Set $\mathbf{Q}_n:=\mathbf{Q}(:,1:\mu_n)$ for all $n=1,2,3$.
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{remark}
In Algorithm {\rm\ref{SUB:alg3}}, we use the computer science interpretation of $O(\cdot)$ to refer to the class of functions whose growth is bounded and below up to a constant.
\end{remark}
Suppose that three matrices $\mathbf{Q}_n\in\mathbb{R}^{I_n\times \mu_n}$ are derived from Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg3}, then we have
\begin{equation}\label{SUB:eqn5}
\begin{split}
&\mathcal{A}-\mathcal{A}\times_1({\bf Q}_1{\bf Q}_1^{\top})\times_2({\bf Q}_2{\bf Q}_2^{\top})\times_3({\bf Q}_3{\bf Q}_3^{\top})=\mathcal{A}-\mathcal{A}\times_1({\bf Q}_1{\bf Q}_1^\top)+\mathcal{A}\times_1({\bf Q}_1{\bf Q}_1^\top)\\
&-\mathcal{A}\times_1({\bf Q}_1{\bf Q}_1^\top)\times_2({\bf Q}_2{\bf Q}_2^\top)+\mathcal{A}\times_1({\bf Q}_1{\bf Q}_1^\top)\times_{2}({\bf Q}_{2}{\bf Q}_{2}^{\top})\\
&-\mathcal{A}\times_1({\bf Q}_1{\bf Q}_1^\top)\times_{2}({\bf Q}_{2}{\bf Q}_{2}^{\top})\times_3({\bf Q}_3{\bf Q}_3^{\top}).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
According to (\ref{SUB:eqn5}), we have
\begin{equation}\label{SUB:eqn13}
\left\|\mathcal{A}-\mathcal{A}\times_1({\bf Q}_1{\bf Q}_1^{\top})\times_2({\bf Q}_2{\bf Q}_2^{\top}) \times_3({\bf Q}_3{\bf Q}_3^{\top})\right\|_F^2 \leq\sum_{n=1}^3 \left\|\mathcal{A}-\mathcal{A}\times_n({\bf Q}_n{\bf Q}_n^{\top})\right\|_F^2.
\end{equation}
The result relies on the orthogonality of the projector in the Frobenius norm \cite{vvm_2012_sisc}, i.e., for any $n=1,2,3$,
\begin{equation*}
\|\mathcal{A}\|_F^2=\left\|\mathcal{A}\times_n({\bf Q}_n{\bf Q}_n^{\top})\right\|_F^2+\left\|\mathcal{A}\times_n(\mathbf{I}_{I_n}-{\bf Q}_n{\bf Q}_n^{\top})\right\|_F^2,
\end{equation*}
and the fact that $\|{\bf AP}\|_F\leq\|{\bf A}\|_F$ with ${\bf A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times J}$, where the orthogonal projection $\mathbf{P}$ satisfies \cite{Golub}
\begin{equation*}
{\bf P}^2={\bf P},\quad {\bf P}^\top={\bf P},\quad {\bf P}\in\mathbb{R}^{J\times J}.
\end{equation*}
Hence, when obtaining the error bound of $\|\mathcal{A}-\mathcal{A}\times_n({\bf Q}_n{\bf Q}_n^{\top})\|_F^2$, we present an error bound for Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg3}, summarized in the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}
\label{SUB:thm6}
Suppose that $I_1\leq I_2I_3$, $I_2\leq I_1I_3$ and $I_3\leq I_1I_2$. Let $\mu_1$, $L_{1,2}$ and $L_{1,3}$ be integers such that $(1+1/\ln(\sqrt{\mu_1}))\sqrt{\mu_1}<L_{1,2},L_{1,3}$ and $L_{1,2}L_{1,3}<\min(I_1,I_2I_3)$.
Let $\mu_2$, $L_{2,1}$ and $L_{2,3}$ be integers such that $(1+1/\ln(\sqrt{\mu_2}))\sqrt{\mu_2}<L_{2,1},L_{2,3}$ and $L_{2,1}L_{2,3}<\min(I_2,I_1I_3)$.
Let $\mu_2$, $L_{3,1}$ and $L_{3,2}$ be integers such that $(1+1/\ln(\sqrt{\mu_3}))\sqrt{\mu_3}<L_{3,1},L_{3,2}$ and $L_{3,1}L_{3,2}<\min(I_3,I_1I_2)$. Let $\sqrt{\mu_1}$, $\sqrt{\mu_2}$ and $\sqrt{\mu_3}$ be positive integers.
For each $n$, we define $a_{n}$, $a_{n}'$, $c_{nm}$, and $c_{nm}'$ as in Theorems {\rm\ref{SUB:thm4}} and {\rm\ref{SUB:thm5}} with $m=1,2,3$ and $m\neq n$.
For a given tensor $\mathcal{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2\times I_3}$, three orthonormal matrices $\mathbf{Q}_n$ are obtained by Algorithm {\rm\ref{SUB:alg3}}. Then
\begin{equation}\label{SUB:eqn6}
\left\|\mathcal{A}-\mathcal{A}\times_1({\bf Q}_1{\bf Q}_1^{\top})\times_2({\bf Q}_2{\bf Q}_2^{\top}) \times_3({\bf Q}_3{\bf Q}_3^{\top})\right\|_F\leq 2\sum_{n=1}^3C_n\Delta_{\mu_n+1}(\mathbf{A}_{(n)})
\end{equation}
with probability at least
\begin{equation*} 1-\left(e^{-c_{12}'L_{1,2}}+e^{-c_{13}'L_{1,3}}+e^{-c_{21}'L_{2,1}}+e^{-c_{23}'L_{2,3}}+e^{-c_{31}'L_{3,1}}+e^{-c_{32}'L_{3,2}}+e^{-a_{1}'I_2I_3}+e^{-a_{2}'I_1I_3}+e^{-a_{3}'I_1I_2}\right),
\end{equation*}
where $C_1$, $C_2$ and $C_3$ are given by
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
C_1&=\sqrt{\frac{a_{1}^2I_2I_3}{c_{12}^2c_{13}^2L_{1,2}L_{1,3}}+1}
+\sqrt{\frac{a_{1}^2I_2I_3}{c_{12}^2c_{13}^2L_{1,2}L_{1,3}}},\
C_2=\sqrt{\frac{a_{2}^2I_1I_3}{c_{21}^2c_{23}^2L_{2,1}L_{2,3}}+1}
+\sqrt{\frac{a_{2}^2I_1I_3}{c_{21}^2c_{23}^2L_{2,1}L_{2,3}}},\\
C_3&=\sqrt{\frac{a_{3}^2I_1I_2}{c_{31}^2c_{32}^2L_{3,1}L_{3,2}}+1}
+\sqrt{\frac{a_{3}^2I_1I_2}{c_{31}^2c_{32}^2L_{3,1}L_{3,2}}}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
We assume that $\sqrt{\mu_1}$, $\sqrt{\mu_2}$ and $\sqrt{\mu_3}$ are positive integers in Theorem {\rm \ref{SUB:thm6}}. In general, we can also consider the case that $\sqrt{\mu_1}$, $\sqrt{\mu_2}$ and $\sqrt{\mu_3}$ are not positive integers.
\end{remark}
Suppose that $\mathbf{A}_{(1)}\in\mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2I_3}$ is the mode-1 unfolding of $\mathcal{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2\times I_3}$. Let $\mathbf{A}_{(1)}=\mathbf{U}\bm{\Sigma}\mathbf{V}^\top$ be the singular value decomposition of $\mathbf{A}_{(1)}$, where $\mathbf{U}\in\mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_1}$ and $\mathbf{V}\in\mathbb{R}^{I_2I_3\times I_2I_3}$ are orthogonal and $\bm{\Sigma}\in\mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2I_3}$ is diagonal with positive diagonal elements. If $\mathcal{B}=\mathbf{A}\times_1 \mathbf{Q}_1\times_2 \mathbf{Q}_2\times_3 \mathbf{Q}_3$, where $\mathbf{Q}_n\in\mathbb{R}^{I_n\times I_n}$ are orthogonal with $n=1,2,3$, then we have
$$\mathbf{B}_{(1)}=(\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{U})\bm{\Sigma}(\mathbf{V}(\mathbf{Q}_3\otimes \mathbf{Q}_2))^\top,$$
where $\mathbf{B}_{(1)}$ is the mode-1 unfolding of $\mathcal{B}$. It implies that the singular values of $\mathbf{B}_{(1)}$ are the same as that of $\mathbf{A}_{(1)}$. Similarly, the singular values of the mode-$n$ unfolding of $\mathcal{A}$ are the same as that of the mode-$n$ unfolding of $\mathcal{B}$ with $n=1,2,3$. Thus, the upper bound in Theorem \ref{SUB:thm6} is orthogonal invariant.
For the case of $n=1$, we set $L_{1,2}L_{1,3}\geq\mu_1+K$ in Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg3} and $\min(I_1,I_2I_3)>L_{1,2}L_{1,3}>(1+1/\ln(\mu_1))\mu_1$ in Theorem \ref{SUB:thm6}. In practical, we set $L_{1,2}L_{1,3}$ is the smallest positive integer such that $L_{1,2}L_{1,3}\geq\mu_1+K$ and $\min(I_1,I_2I_3)>L_{1,2}L_{1,3}>(1+1/\ln(\mu_1))\mu_1$. Let $M=\max(\mu_1+K,(1+1/\ln(\mu_1))\mu_1)$. In practice, we set $L_{1,2}={\rm ceil}(\sqrt{M})$ and $L_{1,3}={\rm round}(\sqrt{M})$, where for $x\in\mathbb{R}$, ${\rm ceil}(x)$ rounds the value of $x$ to the nearest integer towards plus infinity and ${\rm round}(x)$ rounds the value of $x$ to the nearest integer.
In practice, in order to reduce the computational complexity of Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg3}, similar to Algorithm 3.2 in \cite{vvm_2012_sisc}, a slight modification of Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg3} is summarized in Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg8}. Based on (\ref{SUB:eqn5}) and the fact $\|\mathbf{A}\mathbf{Q}\|_F\leq\|\mathbf{A}\|_F$ for $\mathbf{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times J}$ and any orthonormal matrix $\mathbf{Q}\in\mathbb{R}^{J\times K}\ (K\leq J)$, the temporary tensor $\mathcal{C}$ in Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg8} is updated for each $n$.
\begin{algorithm}[htb]
\caption{A slight modification of Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg3}}
\label{SUB:alg8}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATEx {\bf Input}: A tensor $\mathcal{A}\in \mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2\times I_3}$ to decompose, the desired multilinear rank $\{\mu_1,\mu_2,\mu_3\}$, $L_{3,1}L_{3,2}\geq\mu_3+K$, $L_{2,1}L_{2,3}\geq\mu_2+K$, $L_{1,2}L_{1,3}\geq\mu_1+K$, and a processing order $\mathbf{p}\in\mathbb{S}_3$, where $K$ is a oversampling parameter.
\STATEx {\bf Output}: Three orthonormal matrices $\mathbf{Q}_n$ such that $\|\mathcal{A}\times_1 (\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\times_2 (\mathbf{Q}_2\mathbf{Q}_2^\top)
\times_3 (\mathbf{Q}_3\mathbf{Q}_3^\top)-\mathcal{A}\|_F\leq
\sum_{n=1}^3O(\Delta_{\mu_n+1}(\mathbf{A}_{(n)}))$.
\STATE Set the temporary tensor: $\mathcal{C}=\mathcal{A}$.
\FOR {$n=p_1,p_2,p_3$}
\STATE Form two real matrices $\mathbf{G}_{n,m}\in\mathbb{R}^{L_{n,m}\times I_m}$ whose entries are i.i.d. Gaussian random variables of zero mean and unit variance, where $m=1,2,3$ and $m\neq n$.
\STATE Compute the product tensor
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{B}_n=\mathcal{C}\times_1\mathbf{G}_{n,1}\dots\times_{m-1}\mathbf{G}_{n,m-1}
\times_{m+1}\mathbf{G}_{n,m+1}\dots\times_3\mathbf{G}_{n,3}.
\end{equation*}
\STATE Form the mode-$n$ unfolding $\mathbf{B}_{n,(n)}$ of the tensor $\mathcal{B}_n$.
\STATE For the $\mathbf{B}_{n,(n)}$, find a real $I_n\times \mu_n$ matrix $\mathbf{Q}_n$ whose columns are orthonormal, such that there exists a real $\mu_n\times \prod_{m=1,m\neq n}^3L_{n,m}$ matrix $\mathbf{S}_n$ for which
$$\|\mathbf{Q}_n\mathbf{S}_n-\mathbf{B}_{n,(n)}\|_2\leq\sigma_{\mu_n+1}(\mathbf{B}_{n,(n)}).$$
\STATE Set $I_n=\mu_n$ and $\mathbf{Q}_n=\mathbf{Q}_n(:,1:\mu_n)$, and compute $\mathcal{C}=\mathcal{C}\times_n\mathbf{Q}_n^\top$.
\ENDFOR
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{remark}
Note that $\mathbb{S}_3$ is the Nth order symmetric group on the set $\{1, 2, 3\}$. Since the cardinality of $\mathbb{S}_3$ is $6$, choosing an optimal processing order is an open problem. In practice, the processing order is chosen with $I_{p_1}\geq I_{p_2}\geq I_{p_3}$.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Computational complexity analysis}
In this paper, for clarity, we assume that $I_1= I_2= I_3= I$, $\mu_1=\mu_2=\mu_3=\mu$ and $L_{n,1}= L_{n,2}= L_{n,3}= L$ with $m=1,2,3$ in complexity estimates\footnote{We can also assume that $I_1\sim I_2\sim I_3\sim I$, $\mu_1\sim\mu_2\sim\mu_3\sim\mu$ and $L_{n,1}\sim L_{n,2}\sim L_{n,3}\sim L$ in complexity estimates \cite[Page A2]{GOS_SISC_2012}, where $I_n\sim I$ means $I_n=\alpha_n I$ for some constant $\alpha_n$.}.
To compute the number of floating points operations in Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg3}, we evaluate the complexity of each step:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(a)] Generating six standard Gaussian matrices requires $6IL$ operations.
\item[(b)] Computing three product tensors $\mathcal{B}_{n}\ (n=1,2,3)$ needs $6(L I^3+L^2 I^2)$ operations for the tensor $\mathcal{A}$.
\item[(c)] Forming the mode-$n$ unfolding $\mathbf{B}_{n,(n)}$ requires $O(IL^2)$ operations.
\item[(d)] Computing $\mathbf{Q}_n$ requires $O(IL^4)$ operations with $n=1,2,3$.
\item[(e)] For each $n$, selecting the first $\mu$ columns (we do not modify them) requires $O(1)$ operations.
\end{enumerate}
By summing up the complexities of all the steps above, then Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg3} necessitates
\begin{equation*}
6(IL+L I^3+L^2 I^2)+O(IL^2+IL^4)
\end{equation*}
operations for tensor $\mathcal{A}$.
In order to compute the number of floating points operations in Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg8}, we set $p_1=1$, $p_2=2$ and $p_3=3$.
For the case of $n=1$, generating two standard Gaussian matrices requires $2IL$ operations, computing the product tensor $\mathcal{B}_{1}$ needs $2(I^3L+I^2L^2)$ operations and computing $\mathcal{C}$ requires $2I^3\mu$ operations. For the case of $n=2$, generating two standard Gaussian matrices requires $I(L+\mu)$ operations, computing the product tensor $\mathcal{B}_{1}$ needs $2(LI^2\mu+I^2L^2)$ operations and computing $\mathcal{C}$ requires $2I^2\mu^2$ operations. For the case of $n=3$, generating two standard Gaussian matrices requires $2\mu L$ operations and computing the product tensor $\mathcal{B}_{1}$ needs $2(LI\mu^2+IL^2\mu)$ operations.
Note that for each $n$, the number of entries of $\mathcal{B}_n$ in Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg8} is $IL^2$, then for each $n$, we have
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item forming the mode-$n$ unfolding $\mathbf{B}_{n,(n)}$ requires $O(IL^2)$ operations;
\item computing $\mathbf{Q}_n$ requires $O(IL^4)$ operations;
\item selecting the first $\mu$ columns (we do not modify them) requires $O(1)$ operations.
\end{enumerate}
By summing up the complexities of all the steps above, then Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg8} necessitates
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&2(LI\mu^2+IL^2\mu+2LI^2\mu+I^2\mu^2+\mu I^3+2I^2L^2+L I^3)\\
&+3I(L+\mu)+O(IL^2+IL^4)
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
operations for tensor $\mathcal{A}$.
Note that the main difference between Algorithms \ref{SUB:alg3} and \ref{SUB:alg8} is that the temporary tensor $\mathcal{C}$ are updated after each $n$. We illustrate the difference via an example. The test tensor is defined as $\mathcal{A}={\rm sptenrand}([400,400,400],8000)\in\mathbb{R}^{400\times 400\times 400}$, where ${\rm sptenrand}([400,400,400],8000)$ creates a random sparse tensor in $\mathbb{R}^{400\times 400\times 400}$ with approximately $8000$ nonzero entries \cite{tensortool}. Figure \ref{SUB:fig3add} shows that Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg8} is more efficient than Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg3} for computing low multilinear rank approximations. In the following, Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg8} is denoted as Tucker-SVD.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7in, height=2.5in]{Gaussian-comparison4142.eps}\\
\caption{Numerical simulation results of applying Algorithms \ref{SUB:alg3} and \ref{SUB:alg8} to tensor $\mathcal{A}$ with $P=5,10,\dots,100$ and $I=400$. Note that RLNE in the left part is defined in (\ref{SUB:eqn21}).}\label{SUB:fig3add}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Comparison with the existing randomized algorithms}
\label{SUB:sect41}
Suppose that the multilinear rank of $\mathcal{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2\times I_3}$ is given as $\{\mu_1,\mu_2,\mu_3\}$, then Algorithm 3.2 in \cite{che2018randomized} can be represented as follows:
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE Set $L_1'\geq\mu_1+K$, $L_2'\geq\mu_2+K$ and $L_3'\geq\mu_3+K$, where $K$ is an oversampling parameter.
\STATE Set the temporary tensor: $\mathcal{C}=\mathcal{A}$.
\FOR {$n=p_1,p_2,p_3$}
\STATE Compute ${\bf B}_{n,(n)}={\bf C}_{(n)}{\bf\Omega}_{(n)}$, where ${\bf \Omega}_{(n)}={\bf \Omega}_{1}'\odot\dots\odot{\bf \Omega}_{n-1}'\odot{\bf\Omega}_{n+1}'\odot\dots\odot{\bf\Omega}_{3}'$ and ${\bf\Omega}_{m}'\in\mathbb{R}^{I_m\times L_m'}$ is a standard Gaussian matrix with $m\neq n$ and $m=1,2,3$.
\STATE Compute ${\bf Q}_n$ as an orthonormal basis of ${\bf Z}_{(n)}$ by using the QR decomposition and let ${\bf Q}_n={\bf Q}_n(:,1:\mu_n)$.
\STATE Set $\mathcal{C}=\mathcal{C}\times {\bf Q}_n^{\top}$ and let $I_n=\mu_n$.
\ENDFOR
\end{algorithmic}
We also list the Randomized Tucker decomposition \cite[Algorithm 2]{decomposition_big_tensor} as follows:
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE Set $L_1'\geq\mu_1+K$, $L_2'\geq\mu_2+K$ and $L_3'\geq\mu_3+K$, where $K$ is an oversampling parameter.
\STATE Set the temporary tensor: $\mathcal{C}=\mathcal{A}$.
\FOR {$n=p_1,p_2,p_3$}
\STATE Compute ${\bf B}_{n,(n)}={\bf C}_{(n)}{\bf\Omega}_{(n)}$, where ${\bf \Omega}_{(n)}$ is an $(\prod_{k\neq n}^3I_k)$-by-$L_n'$ standard Gaussian matrix.
\STATE Compute ${\bf Q}_n$ as an orthonormal basis of ${\bf Z}_{(n)}$ by using the QR decomposition and let ${\bf Q}_n={\bf Q}_n(:,1:\mu_n)$.
\STATE Set $\mathcal{C}=\mathcal{C}\times {\bf Q}_n^{\top}$ and let $I_n=\mu_n$.
\ENDFOR
\end{algorithmic}
Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg8} can be rewritten as follows:
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE Set $L_{1,2}L_{1,3}\geq\mu_1+K$, $L_{2,1}L_{2,3}\geq\mu_2+K$ and $L_{3,1}L_{3,2}\geq\mu_3+K$, where $K$ is an oversampling parameter.
\STATE Set the temporary tensor: $\mathcal{C}=\mathcal{A}$.
\FOR {$n=p_1,p_2,p_3$}
\STATE Compute ${\bf B}_{n,(n)}={\bf C}_{(n)}{\bf\Omega}_{(n)}$, where ${\bf \Omega}_{(n)}={\bf \Omega}_{1}'\otimes\dots\otimes{\bf \Omega}_{n-1}'\times{\bf\Omega}_{n+1}'\otimes\dots\otimes{\bf\Omega}_{3}'$ and ${\bf\Omega}_{n}'\in\mathbb{R}^{L_{n,m}\times I_m}$ is a standard Gaussian matrix with $m\neq n$ and $m=1,2,3$.
\STATE Compute ${\bf Q}_n$ as an orthonormal basis of ${\bf Z}_{(n)}$ by using singular value decomposition and let ${\bf Q}_n={\bf Q}_n(:,1:\mu_n)$.
\STATE Set $\mathcal{C}=\mathcal{C}\times {\bf Q}_n^{\top}$ and let $I_n=\mu_n$.
\ENDFOR
\end{algorithmic}
The main difference among Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg8}, Algorithm 3.2 in \cite{che2018randomized} and Algorithm 2 in \cite{decomposition_big_tensor} is how to generate the matrix ${\bf B}_{n,(n)}$ for each $n$. For all $n$, generating six standard Gaussian matrices requires $3I(L+\mu)$ operations for Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg8}, $3I(L'+\mu)$ operations for Algorithm 3.2 in \cite{che2018randomized} and $I^2L'+IL'\mu+L'\mu^2$ for Algorithm 2 in \cite{decomposition_big_tensor}, where we assume that $L_1'=L_2'=L_3'=L'>L$.
\section{Proof for main theorems}\label{SUB:sect5}
In this section, we provide the proof for our main theorem.
\subsection{Some lemmas}
In this section, we obtain some prerequisite results for proving Theorem \ref{SUB:thm6}.
\begin{lemma}\label{SUB:lemma1add}
Let $I$, $J$ and $K$ be three positive integers such that $K<J<I$. Suppose that $\mathbf{Q}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times K}$ is orthonormal. For a given $\mathbf{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times J}$, we have
$$\sigma_{\max}(\mathbf{Q}^\top\mathbf{A})\leq\sigma_{\max}(\mathbf{A}),\quad
\sigma_{\min}(\mathbf{Q}^\top\mathbf{A})\geq\sigma_{\min}(\mathbf{A}).$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof is straightforward, but tedious, as follows. By the definition of singular values of matrices, we have
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&\sigma_{\min}(\mathbf{Q}^\top\mathbf{A})
=\min_{\mathbf{u}\in\mathbb{R}^{K},\mathbf{u}\neq\mathbf{0}_K;\atop
\mathbf{v}\in\mathbb{R}^{J},\mathbf{v}\neq\mathbf{0}_J}
\frac{\mathbf{u}^\top\mathbf{Q}^\top\mathbf{A}\mathbf{v}}
{\|\mathbf{u}\|_2\|\mathbf{v}\|_2}\\
&=\min_{\mathbf{u}\in\mathbb{R}^{K},\mathbf{u}\neq\mathbf{0}_K;\atop
\mathbf{v}\in\mathbb{R}^{J},\mathbf{v}\neq\mathbf{0}_J}
\frac{(\mathbf{Q}\mathbf{u})^\top\mathbf{A}\mathbf{v}}
{\|\mathbf{u}\|_2\|\mathbf{v}\|_2}=\min_{\mathbf{u}\in\mathbb{R}^{K},\mathbf{u}\neq\mathbf{0}_K;\atop
\mathbf{v}\in\mathbb{R}^{J},\mathbf{v}\neq\mathbf{0}_J}
\frac{(\mathbf{Q}\mathbf{u})^\top\mathbf{A}\mathbf{v}}
{\|\mathbf{Q}\mathbf{u}\|_2\|\mathbf{v}\|_2}\\
&\geq
\min_{\widetilde{\mathbf{u}}\in\mathbb{R}^{I},\widetilde{\mathbf{u}}\neq\mathbf{0}_I;\atop
\widetilde{\mathbf{v}}\in\mathbb{R}^{J},\widetilde{\mathbf{v}}\neq\mathbf{0}_J}
\frac{\widetilde{\mathbf{u}}^\top\mathbf{A}\widetilde{\mathbf{v}}}
{\|\widetilde{\mathbf{u}}\|_2\|\widetilde{\mathbf{v}}\|_2}=\sigma_{\min}(\mathbf{A}).
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
The third equality holds for the fact that $\|\mathbf{Q}\mathbf{u}\|_2=\|\mathbf{u}\|_2$ and the inequality holds for the basic results of optimization theory. Similarly, we can prove $\sigma_{\max}(\mathbf{Q}^\top\mathbf{A})\leq\sigma_{\max}(\mathbf{A})$.
\end{proof}
For two given $\mathbf{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times J}$ and $\mathbf{G}\in\mathbb{R}^{J\times K}$, the following lemma states the singular value of the product $\mathbf{A}\mathbf{G}$ are at most $\|\mathbf{G}\|_2$ times greater than the corresponding singular values of $\mathbf{A}$.
\begin{lemma}{{\bf (\cite[Lemma 3.9]{woolfe2008a})}}
\label{SUB:lem5}
Suppose that $\mathbf{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times J}$ and $\mathbf{G}\in\mathbb{R}^{J\times K}$. Then for all $k=1,2,\dots,\min\{I,J,K\}-1,\min\{I,J,K\}$, the $k$th greatest singular value $\sigma_k(\mathbf{A}\mathbf{G})$ of $\mathbf{A}\mathbf{G}$ is at most a factor of $\|\mathbf{G}\|_2$ times greater than the $k$th greatest singular value $\sigma_k(\mathbf{A})$ of $\mathbf{A}$, that is,
\begin{equation*}
\sigma_k(\mathbf{A}\mathbf{G})\leq\|\mathbf{G}\|_2\sigma_k(\mathbf{A}).
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
Similar to Lemma \ref{SUB:lem5}, we have the following corollary.
\begin{corollary}
\label{SUB:lem6}
Suppose that $\mathbf{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times J}$ and $\mathbf{G}\in\mathbb{R}^{J\times K}$ with $K\leq\min(I,J)$. Then for all $k=1,2,\dots,\min(I,J,K)-1,\min(I,J,K)$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{i=k}^K\sigma_i(\mathbf{A}\mathbf{G})^2
\leq\|\mathbf{G}\|_2^2\sum_{j=k}^{\min(I,J)}\sigma_j(\mathbf{A})^2.
\end{equation*}
\end{corollary}
The following classical lemma provides an approximation $\mathbf{Q}\mathbf{S}$ to $\mathbf{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times J}$ via an orthonormal matrix $\mathbf{Q}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times K}$ and $\mathbf{S}\in\mathbb{R}^{K\times J}$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{SUB:lem10}
Suppose that $K$, $I$ and $J$ are positive integers with $K< J$ and $J\leq I$. Let $\mathbf{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times J}$. Then there exist an orthonormal matrix $\mathbf{Q}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times K}$ and $\mathbf{S}\in\mathbb{R}^{K\times J}$ such that
$$\|\mathbf{Q}\mathbf{S}-\mathbf{A}\|_F\leq\Delta_{K+1}(\mathbf{A}),$$
with $\Delta_{K+1}(\mathbf{A}):=(\sum_{i=K+1}^J\sigma_i(\mathbf{A})^2)^{1/2}$, where $\sigma_{i}(\mathbf{A})$ is the $i$th greatest singular value of $\mathbf{A}$ for all $i=1,2,\dots, J$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof is similar to that of Lemma 3.5 in \cite{martinsson2011a}. We start by form an SVD of $\mathbf{A}$
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{A}=\mathbf{U}\bm{\Sigma}\mathbf{V}^\top,
\end{equation*}
where $\mathbf{U}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times J}$ is orthonormal, $\mathbf{V}\in\mathbb{R}^{J\times J}$ is orthogonal, and $\bm{\Sigma}\in^{I\times J}$ is diagonal with nonnegative diagonal entries. Let $\mathbf{Q}=\mathbf{U}(:,1:K)$ and $\mathbf{S}=\bm{\Sigma}(1:K,1:K)\mathbf{V}(:,1:K)^\top$. Note that $\mathbf{A}_K=\mathbf{U}(:;1:K)\bm{\Sigma}(1:K,1:K)\mathbf{V}(:,1:K)^\top$ is a best rank-$K$ approximation of $\mathbf{A}$. Then we have
$$\|\mathbf{Q}\mathbf{S}-\mathbf{A}\|_F=\|\mathbf{A}_K-\mathbf{A}\|_F\leq\Delta_{K+1}(\mathbf{A}),$$
which implies this lemma.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
\label{SUB:rem2}
In order to compute matrices $\mathbf{Q}$ and $\mathbf{S}$ in Lemma {\rm\ref{SUB:lem10}} from matrix $\mathbf{A}$, we can construct the SVD of $\mathbf{A}$, and then form $\mathbf{Q}$ and $\mathbf{S}$ from this decomposition. For example, details concerning the computation of the SVD can be found in {\rm \cite[Chapter 8]{Golub}}.
\end{remark}
Without loss of generality, we assume that $n=1$. The following lemma states that the product $\mathcal{A}\times_1(\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)$ of $\mathcal{A}$, $\mathbf{Q}_1$ and $\mathbf{Q}_1^\top$ is a good approximation to $\mathcal{A}$, provided that there exist matrices $\mathbf{G}_{1,m}\in\mathbb{R}^{L_{1,m}\times I_m}\ (m=2,3)$ and $\mathbf{S}_1\in\mathbb{R}^{\mu_1\times L_{1,2}L_{1,3}}$ such that
(a) $\mathbf{Q}_1$ is orthonormal; (b) $\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{S}_1$ is a good approximation to $(\mathcal{A}\times_2\mathbf{G}_{1,2}\times_3\mathbf{G}_{1,3})_{(1)}$; (c) there exist a matrix $\mathbf{F}\in\mathbb{R}^{L_{1,2}L_{1,3}\times I_2I_3}$ such that $\|\mathbf{F}\|_2$ is not too large, and $\mathcal{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\mathbf{F}$ is a good approximation to $\mathcal{A}_{(1)}$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{SUB:lem11}
Suppose that $\mathcal{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2\times I_3}$, $\mathbf{Q}_1\in\mathbb{R}^{I_1\times \mu_1}$ is orthonormal with $\mu_1\leq I_1$, $\mathbf{S}_1$ is a real $\mu_1\times L_{1,2}L_{1,3}$ matrix, $\mathbf{F}$ is a real $L_{1,2}L_{1,3}\times I_2I_3$ matrix, and $\mathbf{G}_{1,m}$ is a real $L_{1,m}\times I_m$ matrix with $m=2,3$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{SUB:eqn11}
\begin{split}
\left\|\mathcal{A}-\mathcal{A}\times_1(\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\right\|_F^2
&\leq2\left\|\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\mathbf{F}
-\mathbf{A}_{(1)}\right\|_F^2\\
&+2\|\mathbf{F}\|_2^2\left\|\mathcal{S}_1\times_1\mathbf{Q}_1
-\mathcal{A}\times_2\mathbf{G}_{1,2}\times_3\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\right\|_F^2,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where the entries of $\mathcal{S}_1\in\mathbb{R}^{\mu_1\times L_{1,2}\times L_{1,3}}$ are given by $\mathcal{S}_1(i_1,i_2,i_3)=s_{ij}$, with $i=i_1$ and $j=i_2+(i_3-1)L_{1,2}$
for all $i_1=1,2,\dots,\mu_1$, $i_2=1,2,\dots,L_{1,2}$ and $i_3=1,2,\dots,L_{1,3}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof is straightforward, but tedious, as follows. By using the triangular inequality, we have
\begin{equation}\label{SUB:eqn8}
\begin{split}
\left\|\mathcal{A}-\mathcal{A}\times_1(\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\right\|_F^2&\leq\left\|(\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\mathbf{F}
-(\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\mathbf{A}_{(1)}\right\|_F^2\\
&+\left\|(\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\mathbf{F}
-\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\mathbf{F}\right\|_F^2\\
&+\left\|\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\mathbf{F}
-\mathbf{A}_{(1)}\right\|_F^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
For the first term in the right-hand side of (\ref{SUB:eqn8}), we have
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\left\|(\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\mathbf{F}
-(\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\mathbf{A}_{(1)}\right\|_F^2\leq\left\|\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\mathbf{F}
-\mathbf{A}_{(1)}\right\|_F^2\|\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top\|_2^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Since $\|\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top\|_2\leq1$, then
\begin{equation}\label{SUB:eqn9}
\begin{split}
\left\|(\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\mathbf{F}
-(\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\mathbf{A}_{(1)}\right\|_F^2\leq\left\|\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\mathbf{F}
-\mathbf{A}_{(1)}\right\|_F^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Now, we provide a bound for the second term in the right-hand side of (\ref{SUB:eqn8}). Clearly, we have
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&\left\|(\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\mathbf{F}
-\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\mathbf{F}\right\|_F^2\\
&\leq\left\|(\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_3\otimes\mathbf{G}_2)^\top
-\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\right\|_F^2\|\mathbf{F}\|_2^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
It follows from the triangular inequality that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&\left\|(\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes
\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top
-\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\right\|_F^2\\
&\leq\left\|(\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top
-\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{S}_1\right\|_F^2\\
&+\left\|\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{S}_1
-\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{S}_1\right\|_F^2
+\left\|\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{S}_1-\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\right\|_F^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Since $\mathbf{Q}_1^\top\mathbf{Q}_1=\mathbf{I}_{\mu_1}$, then
$$\left\|(\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{S}_1
-\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{S}_1\right\|_F^2=0.$$
Since $\|\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top\|_2 =1$, then
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\left\|(\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top
-\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{S}_1\right\|_F^2\leq
\left\|\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{S}_1-\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\right\|_F^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Hence we have
\begin{equation}\label{SUB:eqn10}
\begin{split}
&\left\|(\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\mathbf{F}
-\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\mathbf{F}\right\|_F^2\\
&\leq 2
\|\mathbf{F}\|_2^2
\left\|\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{S}_1-\mathcal{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\right\|_F^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Combining (\ref{SUB:eqn8}), (\ref{SUB:eqn9}) and (\ref{SUB:eqn10}) yields (\ref{SUB:eqn11}).
\end{proof}
The upper bound of (\ref{SUB:eqn11}) is given in the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}
\label{SUB:thm9}
Suppose that $\mathcal{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2\times I_3}$. Let $\mathbf{G}_{1,m}$ be a real $L_{1,m}\times I_m$ matrix whose entries are i.i.d. Gaussian random variables with zero mean and unit variance for $m=2,3$. Let $\mu_1$, $L_{1,2}$ and $L_{1,3}$ be integers such that $(1+1/\ln(\sqrt{\mu_1}))\sqrt{\mu_1}<L_{1,2},L_{1,3}$ and $L_{1,2}L_{1,3}<\min(I_1,I_2I_3)$. Let $\sqrt{\mu_1}$ be a positive integer.
We define $a_{1}$, $a_{1}'$, $c_{12}$, $c_{12}'$, $c_{13}$ and $c_{13}'$ as in Theorems {\rm\ref{SUB:thm4}} and {\rm\ref{SUB:thm5}}. Then there exists a matrix $\mathbf{F}\in\mathbb{R}^{L_{1,2}L_{1,3}\times I_2I_3}$ such that
\begin{equation*}
\left\|\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\mathbf{F}
-\mathbf{A}_{(1)}\right\|_F
\leq C_1'\Delta_{\mu_1+1}(\mathbf{A}_{(1)}),
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation*}
\|\mathbf{F}\|_2\leq\frac{1}{c_{1}\sqrt{L_{1,2}L_{1,3}}},\ C_1'=\sqrt{\frac{a_{1}^2I_2I_3}{c_{12}^2c_{13}^2L_{1,2}L_{1,3}}+1}
\end{equation*}
with probability at least $1-e^{-c_{12}'L_{1,2}}-e^{-c_{13}'L_{1,3}}-e^{-a_{1}'I_2I_3}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We begin by applying SVD of to $\mathbf{A}_{(1)}$ such that $\mathbf{A}_{(1)}=\mathbf{U}\bm{\Sigma}\mathbf{V}^{\top}$, where $\mathbf{U}\in\mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_1}$ is orthonormal, $\bm{\Sigma}\in\mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_1}$ is diagonal with nonnegative entries and $\mathbf{V}\in\mathbb{R}^{I_2I_3\times I_1}$ is orthogonal.
Assume that the product of $\mathbf{V}^\top$ and $\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2}$ is
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{V}^\top(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})=\begin{pmatrix}
\mathbf{H}\\
\mathbf{R}
\end{pmatrix},
\end{equation*}
where $\mathbf{H}$ is a $\mu_1\times L_{1,2}L_{1,3}$ matrix and $\mathbf{R}$ is an $(I_1-\mu_1)\times L_{1,2}L_{1,3}$ matrix. Since $\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2}$ is a sub-Gaussian matrix, and $\mathbf{V}$ is an orthogonal matrix, then $\mathbf{V}^\top(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})$ is also a sub-Gaussian matrix. Therefore, $\mathbf{H}$ and $\mathbf{R}$ are also sub-Gaussian matrices. Define $\mathbf{F}=\mathbf{P}\mathbf{V}^\top$, where $\mathbf{P}$ is a matrix of size $L_{1,2}L_{1,3}\times I_1$ such that
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{P}=\begin{pmatrix}
\mathbf{H}^\dag&\mathbf{0}_{L_{1,2}L_{1,3}\times (I_1-\mu_1)}
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{equation*}
Note that $\mathbf{H}=(\mathbf{V}(:,1:\mu_1))^\top(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})$. According to Lemma \ref{SUB:lemma1add} and Theorem \ref{SUB:thm5}, we get
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\|\mathbf{F}\|_2&=\|\mathbf{P}\mathbf{V}^\top\|_2
=\|\mathbf{H}^\dag\|_2=
\leq\frac{1}{\sigma_{\min}(\mathbf{H})}=\frac{1}{\sigma_{\min}(\mathbf{G}_{1,2})}\frac{1}{\sigma_{\min}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3})}
\leq\frac{1}{c_{12}c_{13}\sqrt{L_{1,2}L_{1,3}}}
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
with probability not less than $1-e^{-c_{12}'L_{1,2}}-e^{-c_{13}'L_{1,3}}$.
Now, we can bound $\|\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\mathbf{F}
-\mathbf{A}_{(1)}\|_F$.
By using $\mathbf{A}_{(1)}=\mathbf{U}\bm{\Sigma}\mathbf{V}^{\top}$, we obtain
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top\mathbf{F}
-\mathbf{A}_{(1)}=\mathbf{U}\bm{\Sigma}\left(
\begin{pmatrix}
\mathbf{H}\\
\mathbf{R}\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}
\mathbf{H}^\dag&\mathbf{0}_{L_{1,2}L_{1,3}\times (I_1-\mu_1)}
\end{pmatrix}-\mathbf{I}_{I_1}\right)\mathbf{V}^{\top}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
We define $\bm{\Sigma}_2$ to be the $(I_1-\mu_1)\times (I_1-\mu_1)$ lower-right block of $\bm{\Sigma}$. Then
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\bm{\Sigma}\left(
\begin{pmatrix}
\mathbf{H}\\
\mathbf{R}\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}
\mathbf{H}^\dag&\mathbf{0}_{L_{1,2}L_{1,3}\times (I_1-\mu_1)}
\end{pmatrix}-\mathbf{I}_{I_1}\right)=\bm{\Sigma}
\begin{pmatrix}
\mathbf{0}_{\mu_1\times \mu_1}&\mathbf{0}_{\mu_1\times (I_1-\mu_1)}\\
\mathbf{R}\mathbf{H}^{\dag}&-\mathbf{I}_{I_1-\mu_1}
\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}
\mathbf{0}_{\mu_1\times \mu_1}&\mathbf{0}_{\mu_1\times (I_1-\mu_1)}\\
\bm{\Sigma}_2\mathbf{R}\mathbf{H}^{\dag}&-\bm{\Sigma}_2
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
The Frobenius norm of the last term is
\begin{equation*}
\left\|\begin{pmatrix}
\mathbf{0}_{\mu_1\times \mu_1}&\mathbf{0}_{\mu_1\times (I_1-\mu_1)}\\
\bm{\Sigma}_2\mathbf{R}\mathbf{H}^{\dag}&-\bm{\Sigma}_2
\end{pmatrix}\right\|_F
\leq\left\|\bm{\Sigma}_2\mathbf{R}\mathbf{H}^{\dag}\right\|_F
+\|\bm{\Sigma}_2\|_F.
\end{equation*}
Moreover, we have
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\|\bm{\Sigma}_2\mathbf{R}\mathbf{H}^{\dag}\|_F\leq
\|\mathbf{H}^{\dag}\|_2\|\mathbf{R}\|_2\|\bm{\Sigma}_2\|_F\leq
\|\mathbf{H}^{\dag}\|_2\|\mathbf{G}_{1,2}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\|_2\|\bm{\Sigma}_2\|_F.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
By Theorem \ref{SUB:thm4}, we know
$$\|\mathbf{R}\|_2\leq\|\mathbf{G}_{1,2}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\|_2\leq a_{1}\sqrt{I_2I_3}$$
with probability not less than $1-e^{-a_{1}'I_2I_3}$. Hence, this theorem is completely proved.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proving Theorem \ref{SUB:thm6}}
In this section, we assume that $\mathbf{Q}_1$ in Lemma \ref{SUB:lem11} is derived from Algorithm \ref{SUB:thm5}. The main goal is to estimate the upper bound of $\|\mathcal{A}-\mathcal{A}\times_1(\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\|_F$. As shown in Lemma \ref{SUB:lem11} and Theorem \ref{SUB:thm9}, we only need to derive an upper bound for the second part in the right-hand side of (\ref{SUB:eqn11}).
For a given $\mathbf{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times J}$, suppose that the entries of $\mathbf{G}\in\mathbb{R}^{J\times L}$ are i.i.d. sub-Gaussian random variables of zero mean and unit variance, the following theorem provides a highly probable upper bound on the singular values of the product $\mathbf{A}\mathbf{G}$ in term of the singular values of $\mathbf{A}$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{SUB:thm10}
Let $\mathbf{A}$ be a real $I\times J$ matrix with $I\leq J$. Let $K$ and $L$ be integers such that $K<L<I$. Suppose that $\mu\geq1$, and the entries of $\mathbf{G}\in\mathbb{R}^{J\times K}$ are i.i.d. sub-Gaussian random variables with zero mean and unit variance. We define $a_1$ and $a_2$ as in Theorems {\rm\ref{SUB:thm4}} and {\rm\ref{SUB:thm5}}. Then
\begin{equation*}
\Delta_{K+1}(\mathbf{A}\mathbf{G})\leq a_1\sqrt{J}\Delta_{K+1}(\mathbf{A})
\end{equation*}
with probability at least $1-e^{-a_2J}$, where $a_1=6\mu\sqrt{a_2+4}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By Corollary \ref{SUB:lem6}, we have
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{i=K+1}^L\sigma_{i}(\mathbf{A}\mathbf{G})^2
\leq\|\mathbf{G}\|_2^2\sum_{j=K+1}^I\sigma_{j}(\mathbf{A})^2,
\end{equation*}
that is,
$$\Delta_{K+1}(\mathbf{A}\mathbf{G})\leq \|\mathbf{G}\|_2\Delta_{K+1}(\mathbf{A}).$$
Since the entries of $\mathbf{G}\in\mathbb{R}^{J\times K}$ are i.i.d. sub-Gaussian random variables with zero mean and unit variance, then, according to Theorem \ref{SUB:thm4}, we have $\|\mathbf{G}\|_2\leq a_1\sqrt{J}$ with probability at least $1-e^{-a_2J}$. Hence, the proof is completed.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
\label{SUB:thm11}
Suppose that $\mathcal{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2\times I_3}$. Let $\mathbf{G}_{1,m}$ be a real $L_{1,m}\times I_m$ matrix whose entries are i.i.d. Gaussian random variables with zero mean and unit variance for $m=2,3$. Let $\mu_1$, $L_2$ and $L_3$ be integers such that $(1+1/\ln(\sqrt{\mu_1}))\sqrt{\mu_1}<L_{1,2},L_{1,3}$ and $L_{1,2}L_{1,3}<\min(I_1,I_2I_3)$.
We define $a_{1}$, and $a_{1}'$ as in Theorems {\rm\ref{SUB:thm4}} and {\rm\ref{SUB:thm5}}. Then
\begin{equation*}
\Delta_{\mu_1+1}(\mathbf{A}_{(1)}(\mathbf{G}_{1,3}\otimes\mathbf{G}_{1,2})^\top)
\leq a_{1}\sqrt{I_2I_3}\Delta_{\mu_1+1}(\mathbf{A}_{(1)})
\end{equation*}
with probability at least $1-e^{-a_{1}'I_2I_3}$, where $a_1=6\alpha\sqrt{a_1'+4}$ for $\alpha\geq0$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Combining Theorems \ref{SUB:thm4} and \ref{SUB:thm10}, we can prove this theorem.
\end{proof}
Combining Theorems \ref{SUB:thm9} and \ref{SUB:thm11}, we obtain the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}
\label{SUB:thm13}
Suppose that $I_1\leq I_2I_3$. Let $\mu_1$, $L_{1,2}$ and $L_{1,3}$ be integers such that $L_{1,2}L_{1,3}<\min(I_1,I_2I_3)$ and $(1+1/\ln(\sqrt{\mu_1}))\sqrt{\mu_1}<L_{1,2},L_{1,3}$. Let $\sqrt{\mu_1}$ be a positive integer. We define $a_{1}$, $a_{1}'$, $c_{12}$, $c_{12}'$, $c_{13}$ and $c_{13}'$ as in Theorems {\rm\ref{SUB:thm4}} and {\rm\ref{SUB:thm5}}. For a given tensor $\mathcal{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2\times I_3}$, if $\mathbf{Q}_1$ is derived from Algorithm {\rm\ref{SUB:alg3}} with $n=1$, then
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\left\|\mathcal{A}-\mathcal{A}\times_1(\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\right\|_F\leq
2\left(\sqrt{\frac{a_{1}^2I_2I_3}{c_{1}^2L_{1,2}L_{1,3}}+1}
+\sqrt{\frac{a_{1}^2I_2I_3}{c_{12}^2c_{13}^2L_{1,2}L_{1,3}}}\right)
\Delta_{\mu_1+1}(\mathbf{A}_{(1)})
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
with probability at least $1-e^{-c_{12}'L_{1,2}}-e^{-c_{13}'L_{1,3}}-e^{-a_{1}'I_2I_3}$.
\end{theorem}
Now, we provide a proof for Theorem \ref{SUB:thm6} based on the above discussions.
\begin{proof}
Theorem \ref{SUB:thm6} is derived from (\ref{SUB:eqn13}) and Theorem \ref{SUB:thm13}.
\end{proof}
\section{Numerical examples}
\label{SUB:sect6}
In this section, the codes are written using MATLAB and the MATLAB Tensor Toolbox \cite{tensortool} and the computations
are implemented on a laptop with Intel Core i5-4200M CPU (2.50GHz) and 8.00GB RAM. Floating point numbers in each example have four decimal digits. In order to implement all algorithms in this paper, we set $K=10$. We use three functions `ttv', `ttm' and `ttt' in \cite{tensortool} to implement the tensor-vector product, the tensor-matrix product and the tensor-tensor product, respectively.
We suppose that $I_1=I_2=I_3:=I$, $\mu_1=\mu_2=\mu_3=P$ and $L_{n,1}=L_{n,2}=L_{n,3}:=P+K$ with $n=1,2,3$. Under these assumptions, $\{p_1,p_2,p_3\}$ in Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg8} is set by $\{1,2,3\}$. For a given low multilinear rank approximation $\widehat{\mathcal{A}}=\mathcal{A}\times_{1}({\bf S}_{1}{\bf S}_{1}^\top)\times_{2}({\bf S}_{2}{\bf S}_{2}^\top)\times_{3}({\bf S}_{3}{\bf S}_{3}^\top)$ of $\mathcal{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times I\times I}$, where the matrices ${\bf S}_n\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times \mu}$ are derived form the desired numerical algorithms. The relative least normalized error (RLNE) of the approximation is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{SUB:eqn21}
{\rm RLNE}=\|\mathcal{A}-\widehat{\mathcal{A}}\|_F/\|\mathcal{A}\|_F.
\end{equation}
In this section, we compare Tucker-SVD with the existing deterministic and randomized algorithms for computing low multilinear rank approximations of a tensor via several examples. These algorithms are given by:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[$\bullet$] tucker\_ALS: higher-order orthogonal iteration \cite{tensortool} (the maximum number of iterations is set to 50, the order to loop through dimensions is $\{1,2,3\}$, the entries of initial values are i.i.d. standard Gaussian variables and the tolerance on difference in fit is set to 0.0001);
\item[$\bullet$] mlsvd: truncated multilinear singular value decomposition \cite{vvm_2012_sisc} (the order to loop through dimensions is $\{1,2,3\}$ and a faster but possibly less accurate eigenvalue decomposition is used to compute the factor matrices);
\item[$\bullet$] lmlra\_aca: low multilinear rank approximation by adaptive cross-approximation \cite{tensor_cur_2010,tensorlab} (the relative singular value tolerance in determining the factor matrices is set to $1e-12$ and the factor matrices are orthonormal);
\item[$\bullet$] Adap-Tucker: low multilinear rank approximation by the adaptive randomized algorithm \cite{che2018randomized};
\item[$\bullet$] ran-Tucker: the randomized Tucker decomposition \cite{decomposition_big_tensor};
\item[$\bullet$] mlsvd\_rsi: truncated multilinear SVD \cite{vvm_2012_sisc} by a randomized SVD algorithm based on randomized subspace iteration \cite{random_2011_siamreview} (the oversampling parameter is 10, the number of subspace iterations to be performed is 2 and we remove the parts of the factor matrices and core tensor corresponding due to the oversampling).
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7in, height=2.5in]{Gaussian-smoothA.eps}\\
\caption{Numerical simulation results of applying Tucker-SVD, tucker\_als, mlsvd, lmlra\_aca, Adap-Tucker, ran-Tucker and mlsvd\_rsi to $\mathcal{A}$ with $P=5,10,\dots,100$ and $I=400$.}\label{SUB:fig1}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The test tensors generated by smooth functions}
Now we consider two tensors generated by sampling two families of smooth functions as follows,
\begin{equation*}
a_{ijk}=\frac{1}{i+j+k},\quad b_{ijk}=\frac{1}{\ln(i+2j+3k)},
\end{equation*}
with $i,j,k=1,2,\dots,I$. The type of tensor $\mathcal{A}$ is chosen from \cite{tensor_cur_2010}.
Suppose that $I=400$. We compute a low multilinear rank approximation of $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{B}$ with multilinear rank $\{P,P,P\}$ using Tucker-SVD, tucker\_als, mlsvd, lmlra\_aca, Adap-Tucker, ran-Tucker and mlsvd\_rsi. Figures \ref{SUB:fig1} and \ref{SUB:fig2} compare efficiency and accuracy of different methods on $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{B}$, respectively.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7in, height=2.5in]{Gaussian-smoothB.eps}\\
\caption{Numerical simulation results of applying Tucker-SVD, mlsvd, lmlra\_aca, Adap-Tucker, ran-Tucker and mlsvd\_rsi to $\mathcal{B}$ with $P=5,10,\dots,100$ and $I=400$.}\label{SUB:fig2}
\end{figure}
\subsection{A sparse tensor}
A sparse tensor $\mathcal{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times I\times I}$ is defined as \cite{s_2016_simax,sorensen2016a}
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{A}=\sum_{j=1}^{10}\frac{1000}{j}(\mathbf{x}_j
\circ\mathbf{y}_j\circ\mathbf{z}_j)+
\sum_{j=11}^I\frac{1}{j}(\mathbf{x}_j
\circ\mathbf{y}_j\circ\mathbf{z}_j)
\end{equation*}
where $\mathbf{x}_j,\mathbf{y}_j,\mathbf{z}_j\in\mathbb{R}^I$ are sparse vectors with nonnegative entries in MATLAB,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&\mathbf{x}_j={\rm sprand(I,1,0.015)},\quad\mathbf{y}_j={\rm sprand(I,1,0.025)},\quad \mathbf{z}_j={\rm sprand(I,1,0.035)}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
The symbol `$\circ$' represents the vector outer product. Here we assume that $I=400$.
Figure \ref{SUB:fig3} shows the results of RLNE and CPU time for
Tucker-SVD, tucker\_als, mlsvd, lmlra\_aca, Adap-Tucker, ran-Tucker and mlsvd\_rsi used to find a low multilinear rank approximation of $\mathcal{A}$ with different multilinear ranks $\{P,P,P\}$.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7in, height=2.5in]{Gaussian-sparse.eps}\\
\caption{Numerical simulation results of applying Tucker-SVD, tucker\_als, mlsvd, lmlra\_aca, Adap-Tucker, ran-Tucker and mlsvd\_rsi to the sparse tensor $\mathcal{A}$ with $P=5,10,\dots,100$ and $I=400$.}\label{SUB:fig3}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Tucker form tensors plus the white noise}
Let $\mathcal{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times I\times I}$ be given in the Tucker form \cite{tensor_cur_2010}
$
\mathcal{A}=\mathcal{G}\times_1\mathbf{B}_1\times_2\mathbf{B}_2\times_3\mathbf{B}_3
$,
where the entries of $\mathcal{G}\in\mathbb{R}^{100\times 100\times 100}$ and $\mathbf{B}_n\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times 100}\ (n=1,2,3)$ are i.i.d. Gaussian variables with zero mean and unit variance. The form of this test tensor $\mathcal{C}$ is given as $\mathcal{C}=\mathcal{A}+\beta\mathcal{N}$, where $\mathcal{N}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times I\times I}$ is an unstructured perturbation tensor with different noise level $\beta$. The following signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) measure will be used
\begin{equation*}
{\rm SNR}\ [{\rm dB}]=10\log\left(\frac{\|\mathcal{B}\|_F^2}{\|\beta\mathcal{N}\|_F^2}\right).
\end{equation*}
The FIT value for approximating the tensor $\mathcal{C}$ is defined by
${\rm FIT}=1-{\rm RLNE}$,
where ${\rm RLNE}$ is given in (\ref{SUB:eqn21}). We assume that $I=400$. We compute a low multilinear rank approximation of $\mathcal{C}$ with the given multilinear rank $\{100,100,100\}$ using Tucker-SVD, tucker\_als, mlsvd, lmlra\_aca, ran-Tucker and mlsvd\_rsi. Figure \ref{SUB:fig4} compares efficiency and accuracy of different methods on $\mathcal{C}$ with different SNR values.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7in, height=2.5in]{Gaussian-SNR.eps}\\
\caption{Numerical simulation results of applying Tucker-SVD, tucker\_als, mlsvd, lmlra\_aca, Adap-Tucker and mlsvd\_rsi to the sparse tensor $\mathcal{C}$ with different SNRs and $I=400$.}\label{SUB:fig4}
\end{figure}
\begin{remark}
As shown in Figure {\rm\ref{SUB:fig4}}, for each algorithm, the CPU time of different SNRs is not very different. The reason is that the size of $\mathcal{C}$ is $400\times 400\times 400$ and $P=100$.
\end{remark}
As shown in Figures \ref{SUB:fig1}, \ref{SUB:fig2}, \ref{SUB:fig3} and \ref{SUB:fig4} and in terms of CPU time, Tucker-SVD is the fastest one; in terms of RLNE and FIT, Tucker-SVD is comparable to tucker\_als, mlsvd and mlsvd\_rsi.
\subsection{Handwritten digit classification}
In handwritten digits classification, we train a classifier to classify new unlabeled
images. Savas and Eld\'{e}n \cite{savas2007handwritten} presented two algorithms for handwritten digit classification based on HOSVD. To reduce the training time, Vannieuwenhoven {\it et al.} \cite{vvm_2012_sisc} presented a more efficient ST-HOSVD algorithm. In this section, we compare the performance of Tucker-SVD tucker\_als, mlsvd, ran-Tucker and mlsvd\_rsi on the MNIST database\footnote{The database can be obtained from http://yann.lecun.com/exdb/mnist/.} \cite{lecun1998gradient}, which contains 60,000 training images and 10,000 test images. Here the digit size is $28\times 28$ pixels with the same intensity range. The digit distribution is
given in Table \ref{SUB:tab1}. As seen in Table \ref{SUB:tab1}, The training images are unequally distributed over the ten
classes. Therefore, we restricted the number of training images in every class is less than or equal
to 5421.
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cccccccccccc}
\hline
& 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & Total \\
\hline
Train & 5923 & 6742 & 5958 & 6131 & 5842 & 5421 & 5918 & 6265 & 5851 & 5949 & 60000 \\
\hline
Test & 940 & 1135 & 1032 & 1010 & 982 & 892 & 958 & 1028 & 974 & 1009 & 10000 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{The digit distribution in the MNIST data set.}\label{SUB:tab1}
\end{table}
The training set can be represented by a tensor $\mathcal{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{786\times K\times 10}$, where $K\leq 5421$, this assumption is the same as in \cite{savas2007handwritten}. The first mode is the texel mode. The second mode corresponds to the training images. The third mode corresponds to different classes. Here we use Algorithm 2 in \cite{savas2007handwritten} to handwritten digit classification. We use various algorithms to obtain an approximation $\mathcal{A}\approx\mathcal{G}\times_1 \mathbf{U}\times_2 \mathbf{V}\times_3 \mathbf{W}$ with $\mathcal{G}\in\mathbb{R}^{65\times 142\times 10}$.
For $K=2500$, the related results are summarized in Table \ref{SUB:fig2}. In terms of CPU time, Tucker-SVD is the fastest one. In term of classification accuracy, Tucker-SVD is comparable to Tucker-ALS, mlsvd, Adap-Tucker, ran-Tucker and mlsvd\_rsi.
\begin{remark}
By using the algorithms in {\rm\cite{savas2007handwritten}} to handwritten digit classification, the factor matrices are orthonormal. Hence we do not use Tucker-RRLU for handwritten digit classification.
\end{remark}
\begin{table}[htb]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
\hline
& TT [sec] & RLNE & CA [\%] \\
\hline
Tucker-SVD & 0.8200 & 0.4468 & 91.49 \\
\hline
tucker\_als & 20.0400 & 0.3128 & 93.11 \\
\hline
mlsvd & 13.0600 & 0.3140 & 93.18 \\
\hline
Adap-Tucker & 1.8900 & 0.4628 & 92.50 \\
\hline
ran-Tucker & 44.0500 & 0.4418 & 92.02 \\
\hline
mlsvd\_rsi & 3.9700 & 0.4418 & 93.50 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Comparison on handwritten digits classification. Note that `TT' and `AC' denote the training time and classification accuracy, respectively, and floating point numbers in each example have four
decimal digits.}\label{SUB:tab2}
\end{table}
For different $K$, the results are shown in Figure \ref{SUB:fig5}. From this figure, in terms of running time, Tucker-ALS is the most expensive one; in term of classification accuracy, Tucker-SVD, Tucker-ALS, mlsvd, Adap-Tucker and mlsvd\_rsi are comparable.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7in, height=2.5in]{Gaussian-HDC.eps}\\
\caption{Comparison on handwritten digits classification with $K=500,1000,\dots,5000$.}\label{SUB:fig5}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Generalization for the case of $N=4$}
For the given multilinear rank $\{\mu_1,\mu_2,\mu_3,\mu_4\}$ of $\mathcal{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2\times I_3\times I_4}$, the generalization of Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg8} is summarized in the following algorithm. Without loss of generality, Algorithm \ref{SUB:alg9} is also denoted as Tucker-SVD.
\begin{algorithm}[htb]
\caption{The proposed randomized algorithm for low multilinear rank approximations with $N=4$}
\label{SUB:alg9}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATEx {\bf Input}: A tensor $\mathcal{A}\in \mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2\times I_3\times I_4}$ to decompose, the desired multilinear rank $\{\mu_1,\mu_2,\mu_3,\mu_4\}$, $L_{4,1}L_{4,2}L_{4,3}\geq\mu_4+K$, $L_{3,1}L_{3,2}L_{3,4}\geq\mu_3+K$, $L_{2,1}L_{2,3}L_{2,4}\geq\mu_2+K$, $L_{1,2}L_{1,3}L_{1,4}\geq\mu_1+K$ number of columns to use, and a processing order $\mathbf{p}\in\mathbb{S}_4$, where $K$ is a oversampling parameter.
\STATEx {\bf Output}: Four orthonormal matrices $\mathbf{Q}_n$ such that $\|\mathcal{A}\times_1 (\mathbf{Q}_1\mathbf{Q}_1^\top)\times_2 (\mathbf{Q}_2\mathbf{Q}_2^\top)
\times_3 (\mathbf{Q}_3\mathbf{Q}_3^\top)\times_4 (\mathbf{Q}_4\mathbf{Q}_4^\top)-\mathcal{A}\|_F\leq
\sum_{n=1}^4O(\Delta_{\mu_n+1}(\mathbf{A}_{(n)}))$.
\STATE Set the temporary tensor: $\mathcal{C}=\mathcal{A}$.
\FOR {$n=p_1,p_2,p_3,p_4$}
\STATE Form three real matrices $\mathbf{G}_{n,m}\in\mathbb{R}^{L_{n,m}\times I_m}$ whose entries are i.i.d. Gaussian random variables of zero mean and unit variance, where $m=1,2,3,4$ and $m\neq n$.
\STATE Compute the product tensor
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{B}_n=\mathcal{C}\times_1\mathbf{G}_{n,1}\dots\times_{m-1}\mathbf{G}_{n,m-1}
\times_{m+1}\mathbf{G}_{n,m+1}\dots\times_4\mathbf{G}_{n,4}.
\end{equation*}
\STATE Form the mode-$n$ unfolding $\mathbf{B}_{n,(n)}$ of the tensor $\mathcal{B}_n$.
\STATE For the $\mathbf{B}_{n,(n)}$, find a real $I_n\times \mu_n$ matrix $\mathbf{Q}_n$ whose columns are orthonormal, such that there exists a real $\mu_n\times \prod_{m=1,m\neq n}^4L_{n,m}$ matrix $\mathbf{S}_n$ for which
$$\|\mathbf{Q}_n\mathbf{S}_n-\mathbf{B}_{n,(n)}\|_2\leq\sigma_{\mu_n+1}(\mathbf{B}_{n,(n)}).$$
\STATE Set $I_n=\mu_n$ and $\mathbf{Q}_n=\mathbf{Q}_n(:,1:\mu_n)$.
\STATE Compute $\mathcal{C}=\mathcal{C}\times_n\mathbf{Q}_n^\top$.
\ENDFOR
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7in, height=2.5in]{Gaussian-smoothA_4D.eps}\\
\caption{Numerical simulation results of applying Tucker-SVD, tucker\_als, mlsvd and mlsvd\_rsi to $\mathcal{A}$ with $P=5,10,\dots,40$ and $I=100$.}\label{SUB:fig1add}
\end{figure}
For a given low multilinear rank approximation $\widehat{\mathcal{A}}=\mathcal{A}\times_{1}({\bf S}_{1}{\bf S}_{1}^\top)\times_{2}({\bf S}_{2}{\bf S}_{2}^\top)\times_{3}({\bf S}_{3}{\bf S}_{3})^\top\times_{4}({\bf S}_{4}{\bf S}_{4}^\top)$ of $\mathcal{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{I_1\times I_2\times I_3\times I_4}$, where the matrices ${\bf S}_n\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times \mu}$ are derived form the desired numerical algorithms, its relative least normalized error (RLNE) is defined as
\begin{equation*}
{\rm RLNE}=\|\mathcal{A}-\widehat{\mathcal{A}}\|_F/\|\mathcal{A}\|_F.
\end{equation*}
Now we consider the first test tensor generated by sampling a smooth function as follows
\begin{equation*}
a_{ijkl}=\frac{1}{i+j+k+l},
\end{equation*}
with $i,j,k,l=1,2,\dots,I$.
Suppose that $I=100$. We compute a low multilinear rank approximation of $\mathcal{A}$ with multilinear rank $\{P,P,P,P\}$ using Tucker-SVD, tucker\_als, mlsvd and mlsvd\_rsi, respectively.
Figure \ref{SUB:fig1add} compares efficiency and accuracy of different methods on $\mathcal{A}$. In terms of CPU time, Tucker-SVD is the fastest; in terms of RLNE, Tucker-SVD is comparable to mlsvd\_rsi.
Another test tensor $\mathcal{B}\in\mathbb{R}^{I\times I\times I}$ is a sparse tensor, which is defined as \cite{s_2016_simax,sorensen2016a}
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{B}=\sum_{j=1}^{10}\frac{1000}{j}(\mathbf{x}_j
\circ\mathbf{y}_j\circ\mathbf{z}_j\circ\mathbf{w}_j)+
\sum_{j=11}^I\frac{1}{j}(\mathbf{x}_j
\circ\mathbf{y}_j\circ\mathbf{z}_j\circ\mathbf{w}_j)
\end{equation*}
where $\mathbf{x}_j,\mathbf{y}_j,\mathbf{z}_j,\mathbf{w}_j\in\mathbb{R}^I$ are sparse vectors with nonnegative entries. In MATLAB,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{cases}
\mathbf{x}_j={\rm sprand(I,1,0.015)},\quad\mathbf{y}_j={\rm sprand(I,1,0.025)},\\
\mathbf{z}_j={\rm sprand(I,1,0.035)},\quad\mathbf{w}_j={\rm sprand(I,1,0.045)}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
Here we assume that $I=100$.
Figure \ref{SUB:fig2add} shows three results of RLNE and CPU time for Tucker-SVD, tucker\_als, mlsvd, and mlsvd\_rsi used to find a low multilinear rank approximation of $\mathcal{B}$ with multilinear rank $\{P,P,P,P\}$. In terms of CPU time, Tucker-SVD is the fastest and in terms of RLNE, Tucker-SVD is comparable to tucker\_als, mlsvd, and mlsvd\_rsi.
\begin{figure*}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7in, height=2.5in]{Gaussian-sparse_4D.eps}\\
\caption{Numerical simulation results of applying Tucker-SVD, tucker\_als, mlsvd, and mlsvd\_rsi to the sparse tensor $\mathcal{B}$ with $P=5,10,\dots,40$ and $I=100$.}\label{SUB:fig2add}
\end{figure*}
\section{Conclusion and discussion}
\label{SUB:sect7}
In this paper, based on the SVD and random projections, we propose a randomized algorithm Tucker-SVD for low multilinear rank approximations of tensors. Numerical examples illustrate that Tucker-SVD is fastest in terms of CPU time and the low multilinear rank approximation derived by Tucker-SVD can be used as a criterion for judging the merits and demerits of other algorithms. The error bound in Theorem \ref{SUB:thm6} is a rough estimation. Improving this bound would be an interesting topic. Numerical examples illustrate that in terms of RLNE, Tucker-SVD is worse than these algorithms in some cases. In order to reduce RLNE obtained by Tucker-SVD, Che {\it et al.} \cite{che2018randomized1} obtain another randomized algorithm for solving Problem \ref{SUB:prob1} by combining Tucker-SVD and power scheme.
Che and Wei \cite{che2018randomized} consider the adaptive randomized algorithm for the approximate tensor train decomposition. One of the future considerations is to design more effective randomized algorithms for the approximate tensor train decomposition, based on the idea of the proposed algorithms in this paper. The tensor train structure is a special case of the Hierarchical Tucker decomposition. Our second consideration is to design randomized algorithms for the Hierarchical Tucker approximation of tensors.
{\small
\bibliographystyle{siam}
|
\section{The translation length of the product of hyperbolic
isometries of $\mathbb{R}$-trees}
\label{sect:appendix}
\section*{Matthew J. Conder and Fr\'ed\'eric Paulin}
\newcommand{\begin{prop}}{\begin{prop}}
\newcommand{\end{prop}}{\end{prop}}
\newcommand{\gamma}{\gamma}
As noticed by the first author of this appendix in the first version
of this paper, Assertion $(ii)$ of Proposition 1.6 $(2)$ in
\cite{Paulin} is incorrect. Explicit counter-examples are given after
the proof of \Cref{overlap}. This appendix serves as an erratum of the
paper \cite{Paulin} where Proposition 1.6 $(2)(ii)$ therein should be
replaced by Assertion $(2)(ii)$ of the following Proposition
\ref{prop:appendix}. Except this replacement, the remainder of the
paper \cite{Paulin} is unchanged.
The second author of this appendix is extremely grateful to the first
one for finding the mistake and for fixing it.
\medskip
We keep the notation of \cite{Paulin} in this appendix, in order to
facilitate the checking process. In particular, if $\gamma$ is an
hyperbolic isometry of $T$, then $l(\gamma)$ is its translation length
and $A_\gamma$ is its translation axis. Most of the statements in the
following result also follow from \cite[Propositions 8.1, 8.3]{AB}.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:appendix}
Let $\gamma,\delta$ be two hyperbolic isometries of an $\mathbb{R}$-tree $T$.
\medskip
$(1)$ Assume that $A_\gamma\cap A_\delta=\emptyset$. Let $D$ be the length of the
connecting arc $S$ between $A_\gamma$ and $A_\delta$. Then $S$ is
contained in the translation axis of $\gamma\delta$, and the isometry
$\gamma\delta$ translates $S\cap A_\delta$ towards $S\cap A_\gamma$. We have
$$
l(\gamma\delta)=l(\gamma)+l(\delta)+2D\;.
$$
$(2)$ Assume that $A_\gamma\cap A_\delta\neq\emptyset$. Let $D\in [0,
+\infty]$ be the length of the intersection $A_\gamma\cap A_\delta$, with
$D=0$ if this intersection is reduced to a point, and $D=\infty$ if
this intersection is noncompact.
\begin{enumerate}[label={$(\roman*)$}]
\item
Either if $D>0$ and the translation directions of $\gamma$
and $\delta$ on $A_\gamma\cap A_\delta$ coincide, or if $D=0$, then
$$
l(\gamma\delta)=l(\gamma)+l(\delta)\;.
$$
\item
Assume that $D>0$ and the translation directions of $\gamma$
and $\delta$ are opposite on $A_\gamma\cap A_\delta$. Let $D'\in[0,
+\infty]$ be the length of the (possibly empty or infinite) segment
$A_\delta\cap\,\gamma A_\delta$ (resp.~$A_\gamma\cap\,\delta A_\gamma$) if
$l(\delta)> l(\gamma)$ (resp.~ $l(\delta)<l(\gamma)$), then
\medski
$\bullet$~ $l(\gamma\delta)= l(\gamma)+l(\delta)-2D$ if
$\min\{l(\gamma),l(\delta)\}>D$,
\medski
$\bullet$~ $l(\gamma\delta)= |l(\gamma)-l(\delta)|$ if $\min\{l(\gamma),l(\delta)\}<D<
\max\{l(\gamma), l(\delta)\}$ or \\ \hspace*{0.6cm}
$\max\{l(\gamma),l(\delta)\}\leq D$,
\medski
$\bullet$~ $l(\gamma\delta)= 0$ if $\min\{l(\gamma),l(\delta)\}=D<
\max\{l(\gamma),l(\delta)\}\leq D+2D'$,
\medski
$\bullet$~ $l(\gamma\delta)= \max\{l(\gamma),l(\delta)\}-D-2D'$ if
$\min\{l(\gamma),l(\delta)\}=D$ and \\ \hspace*{0.6cm}
$\max\{l(\gamma),l(\delta)\}> D+2D'$.
\medskip
In all four cases, we have $l(\gamma\delta)<l(\gamma)+l(\delta)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
We may assume that $l(\gamma)\leq l(\delta)$. The proofs of Assertions
$(1)$ and $(2)(i)$, as well as the first two cases of Assertion
$(2)(ii)$, are the same ones as in \cite{Paulin}, see also
\cite[Propositions 8.1, 8.3]{AB}.
Hence we assume that $l(\gamma)=D<l(\delta)$. In particular $D$ is finite
and nonzero, and $A_\gamma\cap A_\delta$ is a compact segment which may
be written $[x,y]$ with $y=\gamma x$. We denote by $z$ the point in $T$
such that $[y,z]=\gamma A_\delta\cap A_\delta$, if this segment is
compact, or the point at infinity of $T$ such that $[y,z[\;=\gamma
A_\delta\cap A_\delta$ otherwise.
\begin{center}
\input{fig_cas1.pdf_t}
\end{center}
Assume first that $l(\delta)> D+2D'$, so that in particular $D'$ is
finite, $z\in T$ and $D'= d(y,z)$. See the above picture. Since
$l(\delta) > D+D'$, the point $x$ belongs to $[z,\delta z]$ and
besides $d(x,\delta z)= \ell(\delta)-D-D'> D'$. Therefore $\gamma\delta
z$ does not belong to $A_\delta$. The germ at $z$ of the segment from
$z$ to $\gamma\delta z$ is hence not sent to the germ at $\gamma\delta z$ of
the segment from $\gamma\delta z$ to $z$. Thus
$$
l(\gamma\delta)= d(z,\gamma\delta z)=d(\gamma\delta z,y)- d(y,z)=
d(\delta z,x)- d(y,z)=\ell(\delta)-D-2D',
$$
as wanted.
\medskip
\begin{center}
\input{fig_cas2.pdf_t}
\end{center}
Assume now that $l(\delta)\leq D+D'$. See the above picture. Note that
$\delta^{-1} x$ does not belong to $A_\gamma$ since $l(\delta)> D$, and
that $d(\delta^{-1} x,y)=l(\delta)- D\leq D'$. Let $m$ be the midpoint
of the segment $[y,\delta^{-1} x]$, so that $d(\delta m,x)= d(m,
\delta^{-1}x) =d(m,y)$. Hence $\gamma\delta m$, which is the point of
$[y,z]$ (or $[y,z[$ if $D'=+\infty$) at distance $d(\delta m,x)$ from
$y$, is equal to $m$ and $l(\gamma\delta)=0$, as wanted.
\medskip
\begin{center}
\input{fig_cas3.pdf_t}
\end{center}
Assume finally that $D+D'<l(\delta)\leq D+2D'$. See the above
picture. In particular $D'$ is finite, $z\in T$ and $D'= d(y,z)$.
Note that $\delta z$ does not belong to $A_\gamma$ since $l(\delta)>
D+D'$, and that
$$
d(\delta z,x)=d(\delta z,z)-d(z,y)-d(y,x)=l(\delta)- D -D' \leq D'\;.
$$
Hence $\gamma\delta z\in [y,z]$ and $d(\gamma\delta z,y)=d(\delta z,x)=
l(\delta)- D -D'$, so that
$$
d(\gamma\delta z,z)=d(z,y)- d(\gamma\delta z,y)=
D'-(l(\delta)- D -D')=D+2D'-l(\delta)\;.
$$
Let $m$ be the midpoint of the segment $[\gamma\delta z,z]$, so that
$d(m,z)=\frac{1}{2}(D+2D'-l(\delta))$. Hence
$$
d(y,m)= d(y,z)-d(z,m)=\frac{1}{2}(l(\delta)-D)\;.
$$
But since $m$ belongs to $A_\delta$ and comes after $z$ on $A_\delta$
oriented by the translation direction of $\delta$, we have
\begin{align*}
d(\delta m,x)=d(\delta m,\delta z)+d(\delta z,x) &=
\frac{1}{2}\big(D+2D'-l(\delta)\big)+\big(l(\delta)- D -D'\big)
\\ & =\frac{1}{2}(l(\delta)-D)=d(y,m)\leq D'\;.
\end{align*}
Hence $\gamma\delta m$, which is the point of $[y,z]$ at distance
$d(\delta m,x)$ from $y$, is equal to $m$ and $l(\gamma\delta)=0$, as
wanted.
\end{proof}
\section{Introduction}
The problem of deciding whether or not two elements of ${\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{R})$ generate a free group of rank two has been widely studied in the literature. For instance, the subgroups generated by matrices of the form $\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
1 & \alpha \\
0 & 1 \end{array} \right]$,
$\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
\alpha & 1 \end{array} \right]$ are known to be free of rank two whenever $|\alpha |\ge 2$; this is an easy consequence of the Ping Pong Lemma, applied to the action of ${\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{R})$ on the hyperbolic plane $\mathbb{H}^2$ via M\"{o}bius transformations. On the other hand, there are many rational values of $\alpha$ in the interval $(-2,2)$ for which the subgroup generated by the above matrices is not free, and it is an open question to decide whether or not this holds for every such rational $\alpha$; see, amongst other papers, \cite{B} and \cite{LU}.
A key observation in \cite{N} is that arguments involving the Ping Pong Lemma can show that some two-generated subgroups of ${\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{R})$ which are free are also discrete, with respect to the topology inherited from $\mathbb{R}^4$. This helped lead to the discovery of necessary and sufficient conditions, depending on matrix trace, for a two-generated subgroup of ${\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{R})$ (or, equivalently, of ${\rm PSL_2}(\mathbb{R})$) to be discrete and free of rank two; see \cite{P} or \cite {R2}. Moreover, given any two elements $A,B \in {\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{R})$, Nielsen transformations can be performed in a `trace minimising' manner to determine whether or not these conditions are satisfied for the subgroup $\langle A, B \rangle \le {\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{R})$. This observation (also made in \cite{G} in the context of determining discreteness) forms the basis of a practical algorithm given explicitly in \cite{SL2}, which determines after finitely many steps whether or not a given two-generated subgroup of ${\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{R})$ (or ${\rm PSL_2}(\mathbb{R})$) is discrete and free. It is also noted in \cite{SL2} that this algorithm can be used to solve the constructive membership problem for discrete and free two-generated subgroups of ${\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{R})$ or ${\rm PSL_2}(\mathbb{R})$; namely, given such a subgroup $G$ and an element $X$ in the corresponding overgroup, one can determine algorithmically whether or not $X$ lies in $G$, and if it does, give an explicit representation of $X$ as a word in the generators of $G$.
Discrete and free two-generated subgroups of ${\rm SL_2}$ over other fields, particularly other locally compact fields, are not as well studied. There has been some work done in the case of ${\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{C})$ (for instance, see \cite{Bow}) but the action of this group on hyperbolic space $\mathbb{H}^3$ is much more complicated to study. Over a non-archimedean local field $K$, however, the group ${\rm SL_2}(K)$ acts by isometries and without inversions on the corresponding Bruhat-Tits tree, and such actions on simplicial trees are very well understood. Given two elements $A,B \in {\rm SL_2}(K)$, we will show that Nielsen transformations can be performed in a `translation length minimising' manner until either the subgroup $\langle A,B \rangle \le {\rm SL_2}(K)$ is shown to contain an elliptic element (which is either of finite order or generates an indiscrete infinite cyclic subgroup), or hyperbolic generators of $\langle A,B \rangle$ are found which satisfy the hypotheses of the Ping Pong Lemma. This helped us form the basis of a practical algorithm (\Cref{treealg}) which determines after finitely many steps whether or not a given two-generated subgroup of ${\rm SL_2}(K)$ (or, equivalently, of ${\rm PSL_2}(K)$) is discrete and free. We will show that this algorithm can also be used more generally (in the context of isometry groups of locally finite simplicial trees) and gives a further algorithm solving the constructive membership problem for such groups that are discrete and free.
\medskip
In Section 2, we provide some background information on non-archimedean local fields and the group ${\rm SL_2}(K)$ defined over such a field $K$. We describe the Bruhat-Tits tree associated to such groups and some general theory of groups acting on simplicial trees by isometries and without inversions.
Section 3 details the key results leading to \Cref{treealg}; in particular, we show that a discrete and free subgroup of ${\rm SL_2}(K)$ cannot contain any elliptic elements, and present a form of the Ping Pong Lemma that gives conditions for a pair of hyperbolic elements to generate a discrete and free subgroup. We also give some important translation length formulae, one of which corrects a formula given in \cite[Proposition 1.6]{Paulin}. In the appendix, joint with the author of \cite{Paulin}, we give a corrected statement and proof of this proposition.
In Section 4 we present \Cref{treealg}, and prove that it terminates after finitely many steps. We discuss its implementation and give some examples which compare and contrast it with the algorithm from \cite{SL2}.
In Section 5, we show that the same method can be applied to determine whether or not two-generated subgroups of the isometry group of a locally finite simplicial tree are free and discrete, with respect to the topology of pointwise convergence (which, in this setting, is equivalent to the compact-open topology). For any of these subgroups (including those of ${\rm SL_2}(K)$) which are discrete and free, we show that there is also a practical algorithm to solve the constructive membership problem.
\section{Background}
A \textit{local field} is a field which is locally compact with respect to the topology induced by some non-trivial absolute value. Such a field $K$ is said to be \textit{non-archimedean} if the corresponding absolute value $|-|$ is non-archimedean, meaning it satisfies the \textit{ultrametric inequality}
\begin{align*}
|a+b|\le \max\{|a|,|b|\},
\end{align*}
for all $a, b \in K$. We note that equality holds when $|a|\ne |b|$.
Any local field that does not satisfy the ultrametric inequality is said to be \textit{archimedean}, and is isomorphic to either $\mathbb{R}$ or $\mathbb{C}$ with the same topology as that induced by the standard absolute values; see \cite[Chapter 3, Theorem 1.1]{LF}. Non-archimedean local fields are a little different, and have an equivalent characterisation in terms of valuations.
A \textit{valuation} on a field $K$ is a group homomorphism $v\colon K^\times \to \mathbb{R}$ such that, when extended by defining $v(0)=\infty$, the ultrametric inequality holds for all $x,y \in K$:
\begin{align*}
v(x+y)\ge \min\{v(x),v(y)\}.
\end{align*}
We say that $v$ is \textit{discrete} if $v(K^\times)\cong \mathbb{Z}$. Given any valuation $v$ on a field $K$, the \textit{ring of integers} $\mathcal{O}=\{x \in K : v(x) \ge 0\}$ is a principal ideal domain with unique maximal ideal $\mathcal{P}=\{x \in K : v(x) > 0\}$. The quotient $k=\mathcal{O}/\mathcal{P}$ is called the \textit{residue field} of $K$. Furthermore, setting $|x|_v=c^{-v(x)}$ for some $c \in (1,\infty)$ defines a non-archimedean absolute value on $K$. A field $K$, equipped with discrete valuation $v$, that is complete with respect to $|-|_v$ and has finite residue field $k$ is a non-archimedean local field. The converse also holds, giving two equivalent definitions of a non-archimedean local field; see \cite[Chapter 4]{LF} for further details.
For a non-archimedean local field $K$, the maximal ideal $\mathcal{P}$ is generated by a \textit{uniformiser} $\pi \in \mathcal{O}$ such that $v(\pi)=1$, and hence the residue field $k$ is of the form $\mathcal{O}/\pi \mathcal{O}$. For a fixed finite set $S$ of representatives of $k$, every $a\in K^\times$ can be uniquely expressed a sum
\begin{align*}
a=\sum\limits_{i=N}^\infty a_i\pi^i,
\end{align*}
with each $a_i \in S$, and for some integer $N$ such that $a_N \ne 0$; see \cite[Chapter 4]{LF}. It follows that non-archimedean local fields satisfy the \textit{Bolzano-Weierstrass property}, that is, every bounded sequence (in terms of the corresponding absolute value) has a convergent subsequence.
A common example of a non-archimedean local field is the $p$-adic numbers, defined using the \textit{$p$-adic valuation} $v_p$ on $\mathbb{Q}$. Namely, if $p$ is a prime and $x\in \mathbb{Q}$ is of the form $p^r\frac{a}{b}$ with $p \nmid a,b$, then $v_p(x)=r$. The corresponding absolute value is usually defined by $|x|_p=p^{-r}$, and the \textit{$p$-adic numbers} $\mathbb{Q}_p$ are the completion of $\mathbb{Q}$ with respect to $|-|_p$. Every non-archimedean local field is isomorphic to a finite extension of either $\mathbb{Q}_p$ or the field of formal Laurent series $\mathbb{F}_p((t))$ for some prime $p$; see \cite[Exercise 25 of Chapter 4 and Lemma 1.1 of Chapter 8]{LF}.
\medskip
Given a non-archimedean local field $K$ with associated valuation $v$, there is a locally finite simplicial tree $T_v$, called the \textit{Bruhat-Tits tree}, upon which the group ${\rm SL_2}(K)$ acts. The vertices of $T_v$ are equivalence classes of free $\mathcal{O}$-modules of rank two (called \textit{lattices}), where lattices $L$ and $L'$ are \textit{equivalent} if $L=xL'$ for some $x\in K^\times$. Furthermore, given a lattice $L$, each equivalence class of lattices has a unique representative $L_0\subseteq L$ for which $L/L_0$ is isomorphic (as an $\mathcal{O}$-module) to $\mathcal{O}/\pi^n\mathcal{O}$, for some $n\in \mathbb{Z}_{\ge 0}$. This gives rise to the edge structure of $T_v$, by having edges between the vertices represented by $L$ and $L_0$ if and only if $n=1$; for further details, see \cite[Chapter II]{Serre}.
There is a natural action of ${\rm GL_2}(K)$ on the set of lattices, and this gives rise to a faithful action of ${\rm PGL_2}(K)$ on $T_v$ by isometries. Moreover, the subgroups ${\rm SL_2}(K)$ and ${\rm PSL_2}(K)$ act on $T_v$ \textit{without inversions}, that is, no element swaps adjacent vertices; see \cite[Corollary II.3.14]{MS}. Isometries of a simplicial tree $T$ acting without inversions can be classified based on their \textit{translation length}: given such an isometry $g$, this is the integer
$$l(g)=\min_{x\in V(T)}d(x,gx),$$
where $V(T)$ denotes the vertex set of $T$, and $d$ is the standard path metric on $T$. Note that $l(g)=l(g^{-1})$ and $l(hgh^{-1})=l(g)$ for all such isometries $g, h$ of $T$. Moreover, if $l(g)=0$, then $g$ fixes a vertex of $T$ and $g$ is said to be \textit{elliptic}. If $l(g)>0$ then $g$ is said to be \textit{hyperbolic}.
\begin{prop}\label{tl}
Suppose that $g$ is a hyperbolic isometry of a simplicial tree $T$. Then $\{p \in V(T) : d(p,gp)=l(g)\}$ is the vertex set of a straight path in $T$ (called the \textup{axis} of $g$) on which $g$ acts by translations of length $l(g)$. Moreover, if a vertex $q\in V(T)$ is at distance $k$ from the axis of $g$, then $d(q,gq)=l(g)+2k$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Chapter I, Proposition 24]{Serre}.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{edgeaxis}
An edge $p-q$ in $T$ is contained in the axis of a hyperbolic element $g$ if and only if $d(p,gp)=d(q,gq)$.
\end{cor}
Elements of ${\rm SL_2}(K)$ can be classified as either elliptic or hyperbolic via their action on the Bruhat-Tits tree $T_v$, and this depends only on the trace:
\begin{prop}\label{tv}
If $A \in {\rm SL_2}(K)$, then $l(A)=-2\min\{0,v({\rm tr}(A))\}$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Proposition II.3.15]{MS}.
\end{proof}
\section{Discrete and free subgroups}
In this section we fix a non-archimedean local field $K$ with valuation $v$, and present key results which underpin our algorithm that determines whether or not a given two-generated subgroup of ${\rm SL_2}(K)$ is discrete and free of rank two. As with the algorithm for two-generated subgroups of ${\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{R})$ in \cite{SL2}, we use Nielsen transformations on pairs of generating elements, but in this case we aim to minimise translation lengths until either an elliptic element or a suitable pair of hyperbolic elements is encountered (a similar `reduction' process is used in Section 4 of \cite{CV} in the context of free groups of rank two acting on $\mathbb{R}$-trees). We also show that a group containing an elliptic element cannot be both discrete and free, and give some translation length formulae which allow us to check when a pair of hyperbolic elements generate a discrete and free group of rank two.
\medskip
First recall that a \textit{Nielsen transformation} takes an $n$-tuple of elements $(g_1, \dots, g_n)$ of a group and performs some finite sequence of the following operations:
\begin{itemize}
\item Swap $g_i$ and $g_j$ (for $i \ne j$);
\item Replace $g_i$ by $g_i^{-1}$;
\item Replace $g_i$ by $g_j^{-1}g_i$ (for $i \ne j$).
\end{itemize}
This preserves generation of the subgroup generated by $g_1, \dots, g_n$.
Recall also that a \textit{topological group} is a group equipped with a topology such that the inversion and multiplication maps are continuous. A topological group is said to be \textit{discrete} if the corresponding topology is discrete. Since multiplication by any element is a homeomorphism, such a group is discrete if and only if the set $\{1\}$ is open. Hence any metrisable topological group (in particular, ${\rm SL_2}(K)$ - via the subspace topology and metric it inherits from $K^4$) is discrete if and only if any sequence of elements in the group converging to the identity is eventually constant.
\begin{prop}\label{disck}
Let $A \in {\rm SL_2}(K)$. Then the subgroup $\langle A \rangle \le {\rm SL_2}(K)$ is discrete if and only if either $A$ has finite order or $v({\rm tr}(A))<0$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Set $A=\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
a & b \\
c & d \end{array} \right]$ and $t={\rm tr}(A)$. If $A$ has finite order then it generates a discrete group, so suppose that $v(t)<0$, that is, $|t|_v>1$. Using the ultrametric inequality, we may also assume that $|a|_v>1$. Let $a_n$ denote the top left entry of the matrix $A^n$ for each $n \in \mathbb{N}$. By the Cayley-Hamilton Theorem we have $A^n=tA^{n-1}-A^{n-2}$ so, if $|a_{n-1}t|_v>|a_{n-2}|_v$, then the ultrametric inequality implies
\begin{align*}
|a_nt|_v>|a_{n-1}t-a_{n-2}|_v=|a_{n-1}t|_v>|a_{n-1}|_v.
\end{align*}
Since $|a_1t|_v>1=|a_0|_v$, this inductively proves that $|a_nt|_v>|a_{n-1}|_v$ and hence that $|a_{n+1}|_v=|a_nt|_v$ for all $n \in \mathbb{N}$. Thus $|a_n|_v$ tends to $\infty$ as $n$ does, so $\langle A \rangle$ is discrete.
On the other hand, suppose $A$ has infinite order and $v(t)\ge 0$, that is, $|t|_v\le 1$. Let $a_n, b_n, c_n$ and $d_n$ denote the corresponding entries of the matrix $A^n$. Note that if both $|a_{n-1}|_v$ and $|a_{n-2}|_v$ are bounded above, then so is $|a_n|_v$ by the ultrametric inequality and the Cayley-Hamilton Theorem. It follows by induction that $|a_n|_v$ is bounded above for all $n \in \mathbb{N}$. Similarly, $|b_n|_v, |c_n|_v$ and $|d_n|_v$ are bounded above for all $n \in \mathbb{N}$. The Bolzano-Weierstrass property then implies that $\langle A \rangle$ is not discrete.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{noell}
If $G \le {\rm SL_2}(K)$ is discrete and free then $l(g)>0$ for all $g \in G$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $g \in G$ is elliptic. Then either $g$ has finite order, whereby $G$ is not free, or otherwise \Cref{tv} implies that $v({\rm tr}(A))\ge 0$. But then $G$ cannot be discrete by \Cref{disck}.
\end{proof}
We will frequently make use of the following version of the Ping Pong Lemma. As stated, it applies only to metrisable topological groups acting continuously on a topological space; this makes it more specialised than other statements of the lemma (for instance, see \cite{SL2} or \cite{LU}) but it enables us to determine when such a group is not only free, but discrete as well.
Recall that a topological group $G$ acts \textit{continuously} on a topological space $X$ if the map $G\times X \to X$ (given by $(g,x) \mapsto gx$) is continuous with respect to the product topology. Note that the action of ${\rm SL_2}(K)$ on the Bruhat-Tits tree $T_v$ is defined by polynomials and is hence continuous.
\begin{lem}[The Ping Pong Lemma]\label{PPLemma}
Let $G$ be a metrisable topological group acting continuously on a topological space $X$ and let $g,h \in G\backslash\{1\}$. Suppose that $U_+, U_-, V_+, V_-$ are non-empty closed pairwise disjoint subsets of $X$ which do not cover $X$ and satisfy
\begin{align*}
& g(X\backslash U_-) \subseteq U_+; &g^{-1}(X\backslash U_+) \subseteq U_-; \\
& h(X\backslash V_-) \subseteq V_+; &h^{-1}(X\backslash V_+) \subseteq V_-.
\end{align*}
Then the subgroup $H=\langle g,h \rangle\le G$ is discrete and free of rank two.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Fix some $x\in D=X\backslash (U_+\cup U_-\cup V_+\cup V_-)\neq \varnothing$. If $w\in H$ is a non-trivial word in $g,h$ then note that $w(x)\in X\backslash D$ by hypothesis. In particular, this implies $w\neq 1$ in $H$ and thus $H$ is free of rank two. On the other hand, suppose that $H$ is not discrete. Then one can find a sequence $(h_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$ of non-identity elements of $H$ which converges to $1 \in H$. Since $h_n(x) \in X\backslash D$ for each $n \in \mathbb{N}$ and $G$ acts continuously on $X$, this gives a sequence $(h_n(x))_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$ of elements of $X\backslash D$ which converges to $x\in D$. But $X\backslash D$ is closed, so this is impossible. Thus $H$ is discrete and free of rank two. See \Cref{PPL}.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
[scale=1,auto=left]
\draw (0,0) circle (3.5cm);
\draw [dotted] (3.4,0.83) to [out=220,in=220, distance=2 cm] (0.83,3.4) ;
\draw [dotted] (3.4,-0.83) to [out=140,in=140, distance=2 cm] (0.83,-3.4) ;
\draw [dotted] (-3.4,0.83) to [out=320,in=320, distance=2 cm] (-0.83,3.4) ;
\draw [dotted] (-3.4,-0.83) to [out=40,in=40, distance=2 cm] (-0.83,-3.4) ;
\draw [dashed, ->-] (2.47,-2.47) to [out=140,in=220, distance=2 cm] (2.47, 2.47);
\draw [dashed, ->-] (-2.47,-2.47) to [out=40,in=320, distance=2 cm] (-2.47, 2.47);
\node at (-1,0) {$g$};
\node at (1,0) {$h$};
\node at (-1.5,2.5) {$U_+$};
\node at (-1.5,-2.5) {$U_-$};
\node at (1.5,2.5) {$V_+$};
\node at (1.5,-2.5) {$V_-$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The Ping Pong Lemma} \label{PPL}
\end{figure}
Using a version of the Ping Pong Lemma that does not involve discreteness, Lemma 2.6 of \cite{CM} shows that two hyperbolic isometries of a $\mathbb{R}$-tree generate a free group of rank two when their axis overlap is sufficiently small. Lemma 3.2 of \cite{UZ} generalises this to $\Lambda$-trees (where distances take values in some totally ordered abelian group $\Lambda$, not necessarily $\mathbb{R}$ or $\mathbb{Z}$). Here we use our version of the Ping Pong Lemma to prove a similar, but stronger, result for certain hyperbolic isometries of a simplicial tree:
\begin{prop}\label{hyptree}
Let $G$ be a metrisable topological group acting continuously, by isometries and without inversions on a simplicial tree $T$. Suppose that $A, B \in G$ are hyperbolic, and their axes are either disjoint or intersect along a path of length $0\le\Delta(A,B)<\min\{l(A),l(B)\}$. Then the subgroup $\langle A, B \rangle\le G$ is discrete and free of rank two.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
First of all, if the axes of $A$ and $B$ are disjoint, then there is a unique path $P$ of minimal distance from a vertex $p'$ on the axis of $A$ to a vertex $q'$ on the axis of $B$. Choose vertices $p$ and $q$ (on the axes of $A$ and $B$ respectively) so that the interior of the path between $p$ and $Ap$ contains $p'$, and the interior of the path between $q$ and $Bq$ contains $q'$ (if either $A$ or $B$ has translation length one, then it may be necessary to subdivide each edge of $T$ at its midpoint in order to find such vertices); see the left-hand diagram of \Cref{TreePPL}. On the other hand, if the axes of $A$ and $B$ intersect along a common subpath $P$ of length $\Delta(A,B) < \min\{l(A),l(B)\}$, then choose vertices $p$ and $q$ (on the axes of $A$ and $B$ respectively) such that the interior of the paths between $p$ and $Ap$, and $q$ and $Bq$, each contain $P$ (if either $A$ or $B$ has translation length $\Delta(A,B)+1$, then it may be necessary to subdivide each edge of $T$ at its midpoint in order to find such vertices); see the right-hand diagram of \Cref{TreePPL}.
In each case, define $U_+$ (respectively $U_-$) to be the maximal subtree of $T$ containing all vertices on the axis of $A$ from $Ap$ onwards (respectively up to, and including $p$) with respect to the direction of translation, but no other vertices on the axis of $A$. Similarly define $V_+$ (respectively $V_-$) as the maximal subtree containing the vertices of the axis of $B$ from $Bq$ onwards (respectively up to, and including, $q$) but no other vertices on the axis of $B$. Then, in each case, $U_-,U_+, V_-$ and $V_+$ are non-empty, pairwise disjoint closed subsets that do not cover $T$. Moreover, \Cref{tl} implies that $A(T\backslash U_-) \subseteq U_+$, $A^{-1}(T\backslash U_+) \subseteq U_-$, $B(T\backslash V_-) \subseteq V_+$ and $B^{-1}(T\backslash V_+) \subseteq V_-$. The result then follows from the Ping Pong Lemma.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
[scale=1,auto=left]
\draw [dashed] (-4,-1.5) to (-4,-0.5) ; \draw [dashed] (-4,1.5) to (-4,-0.5) ;
\node[circle,inner sep=0pt,minimum size=3,fill=black] (1) at (-4,1.5) {};
\node[circle,inner sep=0pt,minimum size=3,fill=black] (1) at (-4,0) {};
\draw [dashed,->] (-4,1.5) to (-4,3);
\node[circle,inner sep=0pt,minimum size=3,fill=black] (1) at (-4,-1.5) {};
\draw [dashed,>-] (-4,-3) to (-4,-1);
\node at (-4.2,-1.5) {$p$}; \node at (-4.2,0) {$p'$}; \node at (-4.3,1.65) {$Ap$};
\node at (-4, -3.3) {${\rm Axis}(A)$}; \node at (-4, 3.3) {${\rm Axis}(A)$};
\draw [dashed] (-1.5,-1.5) to (-1.5,-0.5) ; \draw [dashed] (-1.5,-0.5) to (-1.5,1.5) ;
\node[circle,inner sep=0pt,minimum size=3,fill=black] (1) at (-1.5,1.5) {};
\node[circle,inner sep=0pt,minimum size=3,fill=black] (1) at (-1.5,0) {};
\draw [dashed,->] (-1.5,1.5) to (-1.5,3);
\node[circle,inner sep=0pt,minimum size=3,fill=black] (1) at (-1.5,-1.5) {};
\draw [dashed,>-] (-1.5,-3) to (-1.5,-1.5);
\node at (-1.25,-1.5) {$q$}; \node at (-1.25,0) {$q'$};\node at (-1.15,1.65) {$Bq$};
\node at (-1.5, -3.3) {${\rm Axis}(B)$}; \node at (-1.5, 3.3) {${\rm Axis}(B)$};
\draw [dotted] (-5,2.5) to [out=285,in=255, distance=2 cm] (-3,2.5) ;
\node at (-3.6,2.2) {$U_+$};
\draw [dotted] (-2.5,2.5) to [out=285,in=255, distance=2 cm] (-0.5,2.5) ;
\node at (-1.9,2.2) {$V_+$};
\draw [dotted] (-5,-2.5) to [out=70,in=110, distance=2 cm] (-3,-2.5) ;
\node at (-3.6,-2.2) {$U_-$};
\draw [dotted] (-2.5,-2.5) to [out=70,in=110, distance=2 cm] (-0.5,-2.5) ;
\node at (-1.9,-2.2) {$V_-$};
\draw [dashed, |-|] (3.3,1) to (3.3,-1); \node at (4,0) {$\Delta(A,B)$};
\node[circle,inner sep=0pt,minimum size=3,fill=black] (1) at (3,-1) {};
\draw [dashed] (3,-1) to (3,1);
\node[circle,inner sep=0pt,minimum size=3,fill=black] (1) at (3,1) {};
\draw [dashed] (3,1) to (2,1.5) ;
\node[circle,inner sep=0pt,minimum size=3,fill=black] (1) at (2,1.5) {};
\draw [dashed] (3,1) to (4,1.5) ;
\node[circle,inner sep=0pt,minimum size=3,fill=black] (1) at (4,1.5) {};
\draw [dashed,->] (4,1.5) to (4.25,3);
\draw [dashed,->] (2,1.5) to (1.75,3);
\draw [dashed] (3,-1) to (2,-1.5) ;
\node[circle,inner sep=0pt,minimum size=3,fill=black] (1) at (4,-1.5) {};
\draw [dashed] (3,-1) to (4,-1.5) ;
\node[circle,inner sep=0pt,minimum size=3,fill=black] (1) at (2,-1.5) {};
\draw [dashed,>-] (1.75 ,-3) to (2,-1.5);
\draw [dashed,>-] (4.25,-3) to (4,-1.5);
\node at (1.8,-1.5) {$p$}; \node at (1.7,1.65) {$Ap$};
\node at (4.2,-1.5) {$q$}; \node at (4.3,1.65) {$Bq$};
\node at (1.75, 3.3) {${\rm Axis}(A)$}; \node at (1.75, -3.3) {${\rm Axis}(A)$};
\node at (4.25, 3.3) {${\rm Axis}(B)$}; \node at (4.25, -3.3) {${\rm Axis}(B)$};
\draw [dotted] (1.1,2.5) to [out=285,in=255, distance=2 cm] (2.9,2.5) ;
\node at (2.3,2.2) {$U_+$};
\draw [dotted] (3.1,2.5) to [out=285,in=255, distance=2 cm] (4.9,2.5) ;
\node at (3.8,2.2) {$V_+$};
\draw [dotted] (1.1,-2.5) to [out=70,in=110, distance=2 cm] (2.9,-2.5) ;
\node at (2.3,-2.2) {$U_-$};
\draw [dotted] (3.1,-2.5) to [out=70,in=110, distance=2 cm] (4.9,-2.5) ;
\node at (3.8,-2.2) {$V_-$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Applying the Ping Pong Lemma on trees} \label{TreePPL}
\end{figure}
Given two hyperbolic isometries $A$ and $B$ of a simplicial tree, determining how their axes interact relies on the following proposition. It is effectively a reformulation of \cite[Proposition 1.6]{Paulin} for isometries of simplicial trees, however we provide an extra case (given by case $(2)(iii)$ in our version of the proposition) which was not considered in \cite{Paulin}. In the appendix, we give an erratum to \cite[Proposition 1.6]{Paulin} with the author of \cite{Paulin} and prove this extra case in the context of $\mathbb{R}$-trees.
\begin{prop}\label{overlap}
Let $A$ and $B$ be hyperbolic isometries of a simplicial tree, such that $AB$ and $A^{-1}B$ act without inversions. Then precisely one of the following holds:
\begin{enumerate}[label={$(\arabic*)$}]
\item The axes of $A$ and $B$ do not intersect. If $k$ is the minimum distance between the two axes, then
$$l(AB)=l(A^{-1}B)=l(A)+l(B)+2k.$$
\item The axes of $A$ and $B$ intersect along a (possibly infinite) path of length $\Delta=\Delta(A,B)\ge 0$,
$$\max\{l(AB), l(A^{-1}B)\}=l(A)+l(B),$$
and either:
\begin{enumerate}[label={$(\roman*)$}]
\item $\Delta<\min\{l(A),l(B)\}$ and $\min\{l(AB), l(A^{-1}B)\}=l(A)+l(B)-2\Delta$; \\ or
\item $\Delta>\min\{l(A),l(B)\}$ and $\min\{l(AB), l(A^{-1}B)\}=|l(A)-l(B)|$; \\ or
\item $\Delta=\min\{l(A),l(B)\}$, either the axes of $B$ and $A^{-1}BA$ (if $l(A) \le l(B)$) or the axes of $A$ and $B^{-1}AB$ (if $l(A) > l(B)$) intersect along a (possibly infinite) path of length $\Delta' \ge 0$ and \\
$$\hspace{2cm} \min\{l(AB), l(A^{-1}B)\}=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
|l(A)-l(B)|-2\Delta' & \textup{ if } \Delta' < \frac{|l(A)-l(B)|}{2} \\
0 & \textup{ otherwise. }\\
\end{array}
\right.$$
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
\Cref{overlap} follows from \Cref{prop:appendix}, with essentially the same proof. The only difference is that the proof of the third subcase of \Cref{prop:appendix} $(2)(ii)$ (corresponding to the second case of \Cref{overlap} $(2)(iii)$) uses the fact that an isometry of an $\mathbb{R}$-tree which fixes the midpoint $m$ of some path is elliptic. In the context of simplicial trees, however, this midpoint $m$ could be a vertex or the midpoint of an edge. One can check that the assumption that both $AB$ and $A^{-1}B$ act without inversions is sufficient to ensure that this midpoint $m$ is indeed a vertex and thus $\min\{l(AB), l(A^{-1}B)\}=0$, as desired.
\end{proof}
We note that the missing case from \cite[Proposition 1.6]{Paulin} was discovered when considering various examples in ${\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{Q}_7)$. Namely, given the matrices
$$X=\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
7^3 & 0 \\ [6pt]
0 & \frac{1}{7^3} \end{array} \right],
Y=\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
\frac{2}{7^7} & 7^3 \\ [6pt]
\frac{1}{7^3} & 7^7 \end{array} \right],$$
setting $A=XY$ and $B=X^3Y^3$ yields hyperbolic elements with respective translation lengths of 8 and 32. Moreover, the axes of $A^{-1}$ and $B$ overlap with opposite directions of translation. However $l(A^{-1}B)=16$, and this is inconsistent with the formula given in case $(2)(ii)$ of \cite[Proposition 1.6]{Paulin}; this value is neither $l(B)-l(A)$ nor of the form $l(A)+l(B)-2\Delta$ for some $\Delta<8$.
\begin{cor}\label{compare}
Let $G$ be a metrisable topological group acting continuously, by isometries and without inversions on a simplicial tree. If $A, B\in G$ are hyperbolic and $|l(A)-l(B)|<\min\{l(AB), l(A^{-1}B)\}$, then $\langle A, B \rangle\le G$ is discrete and free of rank two.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
We consider the cases given in \Cref{overlap}. If the axes of $A$ and $B$ do not intersect then $$l(AB)=l(A^{-1}B)\ge l(A)+l(B)>|l(A)-l(B)|.$$
If the axes of $A$ and $B$ do intersect, and $\Delta(A,B) < \min\{l(A),l(B)\}$, then $$\min\{l(AB), l(A^{-1}B)\}=l(A)+l(B)-2\Delta(A,B) > |l(A)-l(B)|.$$
Otherwise, we have $\Delta(A,B) \ge \min\{l(A),l(B)\}$ and $$\min\{l(AB), l(A^{-1}B)\} \le |l(A)-l(B)|.$$
Hence $|l(A)-l(B)|<\min\{l(AB), l(A^{-1}B)\}$ if and only if the axes of $A$ and $B$ either do not intersect, or intersect along a path of length $0\le \Delta(A,B) < \min\{l(A),l(B)\}$. By \Cref{hyptree}, this implies $\langle A, B \rangle \le G$ is discrete and free of rank two.
\end{proof}
We conclude this section by noting that determining whether or not a finitely generated subgroup of ${\rm SL_2}(K)$ is discrete and free is equivalent to the same problem for the corresponding subgroup in ${\rm PSL_2}(K)$ (which inherits the quotient topology from ${\rm SL_2}(K)$).
\begin{prop}\label{psl}
Let $K$ be a local field and suppose $G \le {\rm SL_2}(K)$ is $n$-generated. Then $G$ is discrete and free of rank $n$ if and only if the corresponding subgroup $\overline{G}\le {\rm PSL_2}(K)$ (its image under the quotient map) is discrete and free of rank $n$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
It is easy to check that $G$ is discrete if and only if $\overline{G}$ is. So consider the restriction of the quotient map $\pi\colon {\rm SL_2}(K) \to {\rm PSL_2}(K)$ to the epimorphism $\pi_G \colon G \to \overline{G}$. Note that $\pi(g)=1$ if and only if $g=\pm I_2$. So if $G$ is free of rank $n$ then $\pi_G$ is 1-to-1. Thus $G \cong \overline{G}$ and so $\overline{G}$ must also be free of rank $n$.
Similarly, if $\overline{G}$ is free of rank $n$ then, by the universal property of free groups, there exists a unique homomorphism $\overline{G} \to G$ sending the generators of $\overline{G}$ back to their corresponding elements in $G$. This is an inverse to $\pi_G$, showing that $G \cong \overline{G}$ and so $G$ must also be free of rank $n$.
\end{proof}
\section{The algorithm}
In this section we present our algorithm, which determines after finitely many steps whether or not a two-generated subgroup of ${\rm SL_2}(K)$ is discrete and free of rank two. The key idea is to use \Cref{tv} to compute translation lengths on the Bruhat-Tits tree, and perform Nielsen transformations on the generators until these produce either an elliptic element, or two hyperbolic elements satisfying the hypotheses of \Cref{compare}. By \Cref{psl}, the algorithm can also be applied to two-generated subgroups of ${\rm PSL_2}(K)$ by taking representatives in ${\rm SL_2}(K)$.
\begin{alg}\label{treealg}
Let $K$ be a non-archimedean local field. Given two elements $A, B \in {\rm SL_2}(K)$, we proceed as follows. If $G=\langle A, B \rangle \le {\rm SL_2}(K)$ is discrete and free of rank two then the algorithm will return true and output a generating pair for $G$ which satisfy the hypotheses of the Ping Pong Lemma; otherwise it will return false.
\begin{enumerate}[label={$(\arabic*)$}]
\item Set $X=A$, $Y=B$. If $l(X)=0$ or $l(Y)=0$ then return false.
\item If $l(X)> l(Y)$ then swap $X$ and $Y$.
\item Compute $m=\min\{l(XY), l(X^{-1}Y)\}$.
\item If $m=0$ then return false.
\item If $m\le l(Y)-l(X)$ then replace $Y$ by an element from $\{XY, X^{-1}Y\}$ which has translation length $m$ and return to $(2)$.
\item Otherwise return true and the generating pair $(X,Y)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{alg}
\begin{thm}\label{pf1}
\Cref{treealg} terminates after finitely many steps and produces the correct output.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
If at any point the algorithm encounters an elliptic element then $G$ is not discrete and free by \Cref{noell}. So suppose that the algorithm only ever encounters hyperbolic elements. Then it must reach step $(5)$. If $m>l(Y)-l(X)$ then, by \Cref{compare}, $G$ is discrete and free and the elements $X$ and $Y$ satisfy the hypotheses of the Ping Pong Lemma. Otherwise the algorithm performs a Nielsen transformation, and outputs a new pair of generators for $G$ on which to run the algorithm.
If this sequence of Nielsen transformations never terminates, then there is an infinite sequence $(x_n,y_n)=(l(X_n),l(Y_n))$ of integral translation length pairs which satisfies $0<x_n\le y_n$ for all $n\in\mathbb{N}$ and is decreasing in each component; such a sequence must converge. Moreover, for each pair $(X_n, Y_n)$ of generators, we are in either case $(2)(ii)$ or the first subcase of $(2)(iii)$ of \Cref{overlap}. Hence, at each stage $(x_n, y_n)$ is replaced by either $(y_n-x_n-k_n,x_n)$ or $(x_n, y_n-x_n-k_n)$ for some $0\le k_n < y_n-x_n$. In particular, this implies that $x_{n+1}+y_{n+1}=y_n-k_n$ for all $n\in \mathbb{N}$. Rearranging and taking limits, it follows that $\lim\limits_{n\to\infty}x_n=-\lim\limits_{n\to\infty}k_n\le 0$, a contradiction since each $x_n$ is a positive integer. Hence this algorithm must eventually terminate, proving the theorem.
\end{proof}
In terms of implementing this algorithm in a computational package such as {\sc magma}, the software needs to be able to perform matrix multiplications over $K$, and compute traces and valuations. Since each non-zero element of $K$ can be expressed uniquely in the form $\sum\limits_{i=N}^\infty a_i\pi^i$ for some integer $N$ with $a_N \neq 0$ and some uniformiser $\pi$, computing valuations and performing both addition and multiplication over $K$ is straightforward. But there is a clear obstacle in the computational storage space needed for elements of $K$ with an infinite expression of the above form. This can theoretically be overcome by storing elements of $K$ in terms of the data $\lbrace\pi; a_N, a_{N+1}, \dots, a_M\rbrace$ up to some appropriate finite $M$.
Indeed, given matrices $$A=\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
a & b \\
c & d \end{array} \right],
B=\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
e & f \\
g & h \end{array} \right],$$
one iteration of \Cref{treealg} requires firstly computing $l(A)=-2\min\{0,v(a+d)\}$ and $l(B)=-2\min\{0,v(e+h)\}$. Since any non-negative valuation gives a translation length of 0, calculating these accurately requires storing the entries of $A$ and $B$ only up to the coefficient of $\pi^0$ (that is, $M=0$ will suffice). On the other hand, assuming that $0<l(A)\le l(B)$, the first iteration of \Cref{treealg} will also require computing $l(AB)=-2\min\{0,v(ae+bg+cf+dh)\}$ and $l(A^{-1}B)=-2\min\{0,v(de-bg-cf+ah)\}$. Storing the entries of $A$ and $B$ up to the coefficient of $\pi^{-\min\{0, v(a),v(b), \dots, v(h)\}}$ is sufficient to compute these valuations accurately. It follows inductively that storing the $\pi^i$-coefficients of entries of $A$ and $B$ up to $M=-r\min\{0,v(a),v(b), \dots, v(h)\}$ is enough to correctly apply $r$ iterations of \Cref{treealg}. Thus, given any two elements of ${\rm SL_2}(K)$, choosing large enough $M$ (compared with $-\min\{0,v(a),v(b), \dots, v(h)\}$) allows the algorithm to run correctly; if, however, at any point the number of iterations exceeds $\frac{M}{-\min\{0,v(a),v(b), \dots, v(h)\}}$, then a higher bound $M$ will need to be chosen and the algorithm restarted.
The examples we discuss below avoid this issue entirely for the case where $K=\mathbb{Q}_p$ for some prime $p$. By restricting our interest to pairs of matrices in ${\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{Q})$, we can perform matrix multiplication and compute traces in the usual sense, and then consider $p$-adic valuations separately. In this particular case, it is interesting to view the subgroups generated as subgroups of both ${\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{Q}_p)$ and ${\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{R})$, and compare the properties of each. For instance, it is a well known consequence of the Ping Pong Lemma that the matrices
$$A=\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
1 & 2 \\
0 & 1 \end{array} \right],
B=\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
2 & 1 \end{array} \right]$$
generate a discrete and free subgroup of ${\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{R})$, whereas the matrices
$$A=\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
1 & 1 \\
0 & 1 \end{array} \right],
B=\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
1 & 1 \end{array} \right]$$ do not. However, neither of these pairs of matrices generate a discrete and free subgroup of ${\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{Q}_p)$ for any prime $p$ since a matrix of the form $\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
1 & \alpha \\
0 & 1 \end{array} \right]$ or
$\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
\alpha & 1 \end{array} \right]$ over a non-archimedean local field is elliptic.
One iteration of \Cref{treealg} also shows that, for any prime $p$, the matrices
$$A=\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
p & p-1 \\ [6pt]
\frac{-1}{p} & \frac{1}{p^2} \end{array} \right],
B=\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
\frac{2}{p^4} & p^3 \\ [6pt]
\frac{1}{p^3} & p^4 \end{array} \right]$$
generate a subgroup of ${\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{Q}_p)$ which is discrete and free of rank two. Using the same matrices as input for the algorithm in \cite{SL2} shows that they do not generate a free and discrete subgroup of ${\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{R})$ (this follows since ${\rm tr}(AB)=\frac{p+1}{p^3}<2$, so $AB$ is conjugate to a rotation matrix). On the other hand, for any prime $p\neq 2$, the matrices
$$A=\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
p & p-1 \\ [6pt]
\frac{-1}{p} & \frac{1}{p^2} \end{array} \right],
B=\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
\frac{2}{p^3} & p^4 \\ [6pt]
\frac{1}{p^4} & p^3 \end{array} \right]$$
generate subgroups of both ${\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{Q}_p)$ and ${\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{R})$ which are discrete and free of rank two; this follows from \Cref{compare} and \cite[Theorem 4.4 (b)(iv)]{SL2} respectively.
Each of these examples requires only one iteration of \Cref{treealg}, but this is certainly not always the case. Indeed, given a prime $p \neq 2$ and positive integer $r$, the matrices
$$A=\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
p^3 & 0 \\ [6pt]
0 & \frac{1}{p^3} \end{array} \right],
B=\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
\frac{2}{p^{3r+1}} & p^3 \\ [6pt]
\frac{1}{p^3} & p^{3r+1} \end{array} \right]$$ generate a discrete and free subgroup of ${\rm SL_2}(\mathbb{Q}_p)$, and this requires $r+2$ iterations of \Cref{treealg}.
\section{Generalisations and applications}
In this final section we discuss a generalisation of \Cref{treealg} to two-generator subgroups of the isometry group of any locally finite simplicial tree, and some applications to the constructive membership problem. Recall that, given a finitely generated subgroup $G=\langle g_1, \dots, g_n \rangle$ of some group $H$, and an element $h\in H$, the constructive membership problem involves determining whether or not $h$ is an element of $G$, and if it is, finding a word in $g_1, \dots, g_n$ that represents $h$.
Given any proper metric space $X$ (for instance, a locally finite simplicial tree) the isometry group ${\rm Isom}(X)$ (viewed as a subspace of $X^X$, the space of all continuous maps $X\to X$ equipped with the product topology) is a metrisable topological group; see \cite[Lemmas 5.B.3 and 5.B.5]{CH}. This topology is often known as the \textit{topology of pointwise convergence}, in the sense that a sequence $(f_i)$ in ${\rm Isom}(X)$ converges to $f\in {\rm Isom}(X)$ if and only if the sequence $(f_i(x))$ converges to $f(x)$ for each $x \in X$. Note that, for a non-archimedean local field $K$, the group ${\rm PSL_2}(K)$ (as a subgroup of the isometry group of the corresponding Bruhat-Tits tree) inherits the topology of pointwise convergence, and this coincides with the standard topology on ${\rm PSL_2}(K)$ used in this paper.
In the setting of isometry groups, the topology of pointwise convergence is equivalent to the well-known \textit{compact-open topology}; see \cite[Lemmas 5.B.1 and 5.B.2]{CH}. The pointwise convergence property of these equivalent topologies leads to an analogue of \Cref{noell} for isometries of a locally finite simplicial tree. Note that, by subdividing each edge of the tree at its midpoint, if necessary, every element of such an isometry group can be assumed to act without inversions.
\begin{prop}\label{elltree}
Let $T$ be a locally finite simplicial tree and suppose that $G \le {\rm Isom}(T)$ is discrete (with respect to the topology of pointwise convergence) and free. Then $G$ contains no elliptic elements.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $G$ contains some elliptic element $g$, which fixes some vertex $p$ of $T$. There are only finitely many vertices adjacent to $p$ and $g$ acts to permute these. This implies there is some integer $n_1$ for which $g^{n_1}$ fixes $p$ and all adjacent vertices. One continues inductively to obtain a sequence $(g^{n_i})$ of elements of ${\rm Isom}(T)$, where $g^{n_i}$ fixes all vertices at distance at most $i$ from $p$. But then $(g^{n_i}(x))$ converges to $x$ for each vertex $x$ of $T$, so $(g^{n_i})$ converges to the identity. Thus either $g$ has finite order or $G$ is not discrete.
\end{proof}
For any proper metric space $X$, the natural map ${\rm Isom}(X)\times X \to X$ is continuous; see \cite[Lemma 5.B.4 (2)]{CH}. This implies that \Cref{compare} can also be applied to the isometry group of a locally finite simplicial tree, when equipped with the topology of pointwise convergence. Thus we have the following generalisation of \Cref{treealg}:
\begin{alg}\label{isomalg}
Given two elements $A$ and $B$ in the isometry group of a locally finite simplicial tree $T$, and a method of computing translation lengths, we proceed through steps $(1)-(6)$ of \Cref{treealg}. If $G=\langle A, B \rangle \le {\rm Isom}(T)$ is discrete (with respect to the topology of pointwise convergence) and free of rank two, then the algorithm will return true and output a generating pair for $G$ which satisfies the hypotheses of the Ping Pong Lemma; otherwise it will return false.
\end{alg}
\begin{thm}
\Cref{isomalg} terminates after finitely many steps and produces the correct output.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
The only difference from the proof of \Cref{pf1} is that if the algorithm encounters an elliptic element then $G$ cannot be both discrete and free by \Cref{elltree}, instead of \Cref{noell}.
\end{proof}
\Cref{isomalg} can be applied, for instance, to certain amalgamated free products. Suppose that $\Gamma=H *_C K$ is the amalgamated free product of groups $H$ and $K$ over some subgroup $C$ which is finite index in both $H$ and $K$. It is well-known that, given fixed transversals $T_H$ and $T_K$ of right coset representatives of $C$ in $H$ and $K$ respectively, each element $g \in \Gamma$ has a unique normal form
$$g=cx_1\dots x_n,$$
for some integer $n\ge 0$, where $c \in C$ and for each $i\ge 1$, either $x_i\in T_H$ and $x_{i+1} \in T_K$ or vice versa. Moreover, $\Gamma$ acts faithfully, by isometries, and without inversions, on a locally finite tree $T$ with vertices given by cosets of the form $gH$ or $gK$ and edges given by cosets $gC$, for $g \in \Gamma$; see \cite[Chapter I, Section 4]{Serre}.
Consider the shortest normal form $cx_1\dots x_{n_0}$ of all conjugates of $g$ in $\Gamma$; such a form is \textit{cyclically reduced} in the sense that either $n_0= 0,1$ or $x_1$ and $x_{n_0}$ lie in different transversals. If $n_0$ is $0$ or $1$, then $g$ is conjugate into either $A$ or $B$ and hence $l(g)=0$. On the other hand, if $n_0>1$ then $l(g)=n_0$, which is an even integer; this follows from \cite[Lemma 2.25]{A} and \cite[Proposition 1.7]{Paulin}. Thus, given such a group $\Gamma$ and a method of computing a cyclically reduced normal form of each element (such algorithms exist since the transversals $T_H$ and $T_K$ are finite), \Cref{isomalg} can be applied to determine whether or not any two-generated subgroup of $\Gamma$ is both discrete and free.
\medskip
We conclude this paper by showing that, as is the case in \cite{SL2}, these algorithms to determine whether or not a subgroup of a certain group is both discrete and free of rank two have applications to the constructive membership problem. This requires the notion of a \textit{fundamental domain}: given a group $G$ acting on a topological space $X$, this is an open set $D\subseteq X$ such that, if $\overline{D}$ denotes the closure of $D$ in $X$, then
\begin{enumerate}[label={$(\roman*)$}]
\item $\bigcup_{g\in G}g\overline{D}=X$;
\item $gD\cap hD=\varnothing$ for all distinct $g,h \in G$.
\end{enumerate}
In the proof of \Cref{hyptree}, given a metrisable topological group $G$ (acting continuously, by isometries, and without inversions on a simplicial tree $T$) and two hyperbolic elements $A, B \in G$ whose axes are either disjoint or intersect along a sufficiently short path, we found vertices $p$ and $q$ (on the axes of $A$ and $B$ respectively) and considered their images $Ap$ and $Bq$ in order to construct subtrees $U_+, U_-, V_+, V_-\subseteq T$ satisfying the conditions of the Ping Pong Lemma; see \Cref{TreePPL}. Note that in each case $D_A$, which we define to be the interior of the path between $p$ and $Ap$ (this is isometric to an open interval in $\mathbb{R}$ with integral endpoints, and is hence open in $T$), is a fundamental domain for the action of $\langle A \rangle$ on ${\rm Axis}(A)$. Similarly the open set $D_B$, defined to be the interior of the path between $q$ and $Bq$, is a fundamental domain for the action of $\langle B \rangle$ on ${\rm Axis}(B)$.
If the axes of $A$ and $B$ do not intersect, then set $D$ to be the union of $D_A$ and $D_B$ with the path between $p'$ and $q'$; otherwise, set $D=D_A\cup D_B$. Then the union of images of $\overline{D}$ under the action of $\langle A, B \rangle$ forms a subtree $S\subseteq T$ for which $D$ is a fundamental domain for the action of $\langle A, B \rangle$ on $S$; see the proof of \cite[Lemma 2.6]{CM} for further details. If one replaces the role of $T$ by this subtree $S$, then $D=T \backslash (U_+ \cup U_- \cup V_+ \cup V_-)$, where $U_+, U_-, V_+, V_-$ are as in \Cref{TreePPL}. Moreover, it follows from the proof of \Cref{hyptree} that there is at least one vertex in $D$. These observations yield the following algorithm:
\begin{alg}\label{cmp}
Given a discrete and free two-generated subgroup $G=\langle A, B \rangle$ of ${\rm SL_2}(K)$ (respectively the isometry group of a locally finite simplicial tree $T$, along with a method of computing translation lengths) and an element $C$ of the corresponding overgroup, we proceed as follows. If $C \in G$ then the algorithm will return true and output a word $w=w(a,b)$ (where $a,b$ are abstract elements generating a free group $F$ of rank two) such that $w(A,B)=C$; otherwise it will return false.
\begin{enumerate}[label={$(\arabic*)$}]
\item Run \Cref{treealg} (respectively \Cref{isomalg}) on $G$ to obtain generators $X=X(A,B), Y=Y(A,B)$ which satisfy the hypotheses of \Cref{hyptree}.
\item Replacing $T$ by an appropriate subtree, if necessary, find a fundamental domain $D=T \backslash (U_+ \cup U_- \cup V_+ \cup V_-)$ for the action of $G$ on $T$, and choose a vertex $z' \in D$.
\item Set $w=1 \in F$ and $z=Cz'$.
\item While $z \notin D$:
\begin{enumerate}[label={$(\roman*)$}]
\item If $z\in U_\pm$, then replace $z$ by $X^{\mp 1}z$ and $w$ by $wa^{\pm 1}$;
\item If $z \in V_\pm$ then replace $z$ by $Y^{\mp 1}z$ and $w$ by $wb^{\pm 1}$.
\end{enumerate}
\item If $w(X(A,B),Y(A,B))=C$ and $z=z'$ then return true and the word $w=w(X(a,b),Y(a,b))$; otherwise return false.
\end{enumerate}
\end{alg}
\begin{thm}
\Cref{cmp} terminates after finitely many steps and produces the correct output.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We already know that step $(1)$ is correct and terminates after finitely many steps, and step $(2)$ is discussed in the paragraphs preceding the statement of the algorithm. The proof that the rest of the algorithm terminates after finitely many steps, and is correct, is as in \cite[Algorithm 1]{SL2}.
\end{proof}
\Cref{cmp} is another practical algorithm which can be implemented, so long as there is a method to determine whether or not a vertex lies in the fundamental domain $D$ and, if it doesn't, which of the subtrees $U_-,U_+, V_-, V_+$ it belongs to. Note that the proof of \Cref{tl} implies that, for any hyperbolic isometry $A$ of a simplicial tree $T$ and any vertex $x$ of $T$ (for instance, for the Bruhat-Tits tree $T_v$, one could take $x$ to be the vertex representing the standard lattice $\mathcal{O}^2$), the midpoint of the path between $x$ and $Ax$ lies on the axis of $A$. Similarly, one can obtain a vertex on the axis of a second hyperbolic element $B$. Thus, after translating these vertices along each axis by appropriate powers of $A$ and $B$, and comparing distances between them, one should be able to obtain a rough idea of the vertices lying on each axis and hence a method of distinguishing between vertices in $U_-,U_+, V_-, V_+$ and $D$.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The author would like to acknowledge his PhD supervisor Dr Jack Button for his advice and support, especially in helping identify the missing case from \cite[Proposition 1.6]{Paulin}. The author is also very grateful to the reviewer for their helpful comments on a previous version of this paper. This work was supported by the Cambridge and Woolf Fisher Trusts.
|
\section{Introduction}
The Berezinskii-Kosterlitz-Thouless (BKT) transition \cite{berezinskii71,berezinskii72,kosterlitz71,kosterlitz72} is
a topological phase transition of two-dimensional systems, which divides a low-temperature phase with bound vortex-antivortex pairs from a high temperature phase with free vortices. The phenomenon was first analyzed in terms of the $XY$ model, and one of its most important impacts was that it showed that superfluidity and superconductivity can be realized even in two dimensions. Even though in two dimensions long-range order with continuous symmetry is forbidden by the Coleman-Mermin-Wagner (CMW) theorem \cite{Coleman:1973ci,mermin66,Hohenberg:1967zz}, there is a possibility of quasi-long-range order, which shows algebraically decaying correlations. The BKT transition realizes this scenario, and it also has the unique feature of being a continuous phase transition without breaking any symmetry.
It has been experimentally confirmed in various condensed matter systems
such as
$^4$He films \cite{Bishop}, thin superconductors \cite{Gubser,Hebard,Voss,Wolf,Epstein}, Josephson-junction arrays \cite{Resnick,Voss2}, colloidal crystals \cite{Halperin,Young,Zahn,Nakamura}, and ultracold atomic Bose gases \cite{Hadzibabic}.
The $XY$ model shares common properties including the BKT transition
with the two-dimensional linear O(2), or Goldstone model
at large distances or low energies,
which is a regular version of the $XY$ model described by one complex scalar field,
in which the U(1) Goldstone mode for the $XY$ model
is complemented by a massive amplitude (Higgs) mode.
One of the merits of the latter is to allow vortices as regular solutions
in contrast to the $XY$ model in which vortices are singular configurations.
$XY$-like models do not necessarily show the BKT transition. For example, for sharply increasing spin-spin potential, the phase transition between the paramagnetic and ferromagnetic phases can be of first order \cite{domany84}. It is not surprising that the so-called modified $XY$ model, where on a square lattice the Hamiltonian of the rotor is extended with a $\pi$ periodic term
\bea
\label{Eq:modXY}
{\cal H}_{\rm mXY}=-J\sum_{\langle i,j \rangle} \cos (\vartheta_i-\vartheta_j)-J' \sum_{\langle i,j \rangle} \cos [2(\vartheta_i-\vartheta_j)], \nonumber\\
\eea
also shows a different scenario. It was predicted long ago that for large enough $J'$ coupling, there exists a nematic phase separated from the ferromagnet and the transition between them is of Ising type \cite{korshunov85,lee85}.
This was also confirmed by numerical calculations \cite{carpenter89}.
The Ising-type transition is related to the presence of domain walls in this model. Moreover,
it was conjectured that molecules and anti molecules of half-quantized vortices play a crucial role for phase transitions,
in contrast to a pair of vortices and anti vortices in the $XY$ model.
As of today, the model (\ref{Eq:modXY}) and its various modifications \cite{dian11,shi11,bonnes12,huebscher13,serna17,nui18,canova16,zukovic17,zukovic18} are of great importance and interest, especially due to their relevance in condensed matter physics applications, e.g., superfluidity in atomic Bose gases \cite{radzihovsky08}, arrays of unconventional Josephson junctions \cite{korshunov10}, or high-temperature superconductivity \cite{komendova10}.
The BKT transition of the $XY$ model was originally analyzed via a real-space renormalization group (RG) approach \cite{kosterlitz72}, which is rather unconventional and not easily linkable to the Wilsonian picture of the RG \cite{herbut}. In the past, the functional RG (FRG) approach, which adopts the Wilsonian idea of mode elimination and averaging to the level of the effective action \cite{kopietz}, was also applied and developed in regard to the BKT transition in both continuum \cite{grater95,gersdorff01,jakubczyk14,jakubczyk17,defenu17} and lattice formulations \cite{machado10,krieg17}. It turned out that the conventional, Wetterich formulation of the method was capable of showing signs in the two-dimensional linear O(2) or Goldstone model of the line of fixed points that is responsible for the topological nature of the phase transition. This is remarkable in the sense that no vortices need to be introduced explicitly, as opposed to the older real-space RG description \cite{kosterlitz72}. One of the shortcomings of the treatment, however, is that because one is typically solving the RG flow equation of the scale-dependent effective average action via a derivative expansion, as an artifact, only a line of quasi-fixed points is found. That is, the RG flow does not stop along this line, but only slows down significantly compared to other regions of the parameter space. It is worth pointing out that recently in a dual lattice formulation of the FRG, Krieg and Kopietz \cite{krieg17} exactly reproduced the RG flow equations derived by Kosterlitz and Thouless \cite{kosterlitz72} and therefore the existence of a true line of fixed points was established in terms of a momentum space RG. It would be interesting, however, to develop a scheme in the ordinary Wetterich formulation of the FRG, which could also lead to a similar result.
The goal of this study is twofold. On the one hand, we aim to show a rather simple approximation scheme of the FRG flow equations that can show significant improvement on the possibility of reaching a true line of fixed points in the continuum version of the $XY$ model, and more importantly argue that it can also be applied naturally to the modified $XY$ model, i.e., the continuum version of (\ref{Eq:modXY}). In the framework of a momentum space RG, we describe the two-step transition in the latter model and we will also predict that fluctuations may completely make the topological transition disappear. On the other hand, we also aim to provide full numerical simulation of the system and show that depending on the value of the self-coupling of the scalar field, the structure of the transitions is even richer than it is predicted by the RG.
The paper is organized as follows. In Sec.~\ref{Sec:basics}
we introduce the modified Goldstone model and construct classical solutions,
an integer vortex, a soliton, and a vortex molecule of two half-integer vortices connected by a soliton in that model.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:FRG},
after giving a brief review of the FRG, we reproduce some earlier results of the BKT transition via the FRG and also show the improvement announced above. Then this scheme is applied to the modified $XY$ model and we show how a two-step transition can emerge in the system. In Sec.~\ref{sec:numerics} we confirm this scenario via full numerical simulations and reveal the nature of the corresponding transitions. Section ~\ref{sec:summary} is devoted to a summary.
In Appendix A
we show how to derive the Hamiltonian of the modified Goldstone model from the microscopic lattice model of the modified $XY$ model, while in Appendix B
we derive some of the corresponding flow equations of the FRG.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.71\linewidth]{stat-000-001.png} \\[5pt]
\includegraphics[width=.71\linewidth]{stat-770-001.png} \\[5pt]
\includegraphics[width=.71\linewidth]{stat-780-001.png} \\[5pt]
\includegraphics[width=.71\linewidth]{stat-850-001.png}
\caption{Vortex solution of the field equations for $\lambda = 8$, $\rho_0 = 1/2$, and (a) $\theta = 0^\circ$, (b) $\theta = 77^\circ$, (c) $\theta = 78^\circ$, (c) $\lambda = 85^\circ$.
It transforms into a half-quantized vortex molecule around $\theta \approx 78^\circ$.}
\label{Fig1}
\end{figure}
\section{Model and Solutions}
\label{Sec:basics}
\subsection{Modified Goldstone model}
In this study we are interested in the continuum version of the $XY$ model, i.e., the Goldstone model and its modification [for its derivation from the microscopic Hamiltonian (\ref{Eq:modXY}) see Appendix A]
\bea
\label{Eq:Ham}
{\cal H}&=&\int_x \left[ a|\nabla \psi|^2 +b|\nabla \psi^2|^2+\frac{\lambda}{2}\big(|\psi|^2/2-\rho_0\big)^2\right],
\eea
where $\psi$ is a complex scalar field, and $\lambda$, $a$, and $b$ are positive coupling constants. The continuum version of the standard $XY$ model refers to $b=0$ and in the modified $XY$ model we have $b> 0$. The field equation can be obtained from
the Hamiltonian (\ref{Eq:Ham}) as
\bea
\!\!\!0 = \frac{\delta \mathcal{H}}{\delta \psi^\ast} = - a\, \Delta \psi - 2 b\, \psi^\ast\, \Delta\psi^2 + \frac{\lambda}{2} \left(\frac{|\psi|^2}{2} - \rho_0 \right) \psi,
\label{Eq:modified-GP}
\eea
which we call the modified Gross-Pitaevskii equation.
\subsection{Classical solutions}
Field equations (\ref{Eq:modified-GP})
of the modified Goldstone model admit superfluid (or global) vortex solutions.
Here we show how such a vortex solution transforms into a half-quantized vortex molecule, when the second term of Eq.~(\ref{Eq:Ham}) becomes large enough. As we wish to compare our results with earlier works \cite{carpenter89}, in what follows we work in a simplified parameter space, where $a^2+b^2=1$, and thus the $a=\cos\theta$ and $b=\sin\theta$ parametrization can be used. As it turns out, this choice also helps perform the full numerical simulations of the thermodynamics of the system more easily. The transformation of the vortex solution can be seen in Fig.~\ref{Fig1}. One observes that around $\theta \approx 78^\circ$, a clear picture of a vortex molecule emerges, where two half-quantized vortices are connected by a one-dimensional soliton. One expects that at finite temperature, as a function of $\theta$, somewhere close to the aforementioned value, the emergence of the molecules will have an effect on the phase structure of the system.
\if0
:
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
&\quad \mathcal{H}_{\rm 1D}= \\
& \int dx\: \left[ a|\nabla \psi|^2 +b|\nabla \psi^2|^2 + \frac{\lambda}{2}\left(|\psi|^2/2-\rho_0\right)^2\right], \\
& 0 = \frac{\delta \mathcal{H}_{\rm 1D}}{\delta \psi^\ast} \\
& \phantom{0} = - a\, \Delta \psi - 2 b\, \psi^\ast\, \Delta\psi^2 + \frac{\lambda}{2} \left(\frac{|\psi|^2}{2} - \rho_0 \right) \psi,
\end{split}
\label{Eq:modified-GP}
\end{align}
\fi
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{soliton-profile.pdf} \\[10pt]
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.99\linewidth]{soliton-energy.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.99\linewidth]{soliton-energy-diff.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{
\label{Fig:soliton-energy}
(a) Profiles of the amplitude $|\psi|^2$ of the soliton solutions for the modified Gross-Pitaevskii equation [Eq. \eqref{Eq:modified-GP}] with $\theta = 10^\circ$ (black), $\theta = 45^\circ$ (red), $\theta = 80^\circ$ (blue), and $\theta = 90^\circ$ (green).
(b) Dependence of the energy, $\mathcal{H}_{\rm 1D}$, on $\theta$ and $\varphi$.
(c) Dependence of the maximal angle $\varphi_{\rm max}$ and the energy barrier $\Delta \mathcal{H}_{\rm 1D}$ on $\theta$.
In the both panels, we set $\lambda = 8$ and $\rho_0 = 1 / 2$.
}
\end{figure}
In a vortex molecule shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig1}, each of the two vortices has a half-quantized circulation $\int d\vec{l} (\vec{\nabla} \mathrm{arg}[\psi]) = \pi$ and the soliton connecting them has a $\pi$-phase jump. To analyze the stability of the soliton, we determine the following one-dimensional stable solution of the modified
Gross-Pitaevskii equation (\ref{Eq:modified-GP}) in one dimension with the boundary condition $\psi(y \to -\infty) = \sqrt{2 \rho_0}$, and $\psi(y \to \infty) = \sqrt{2 \rho_0} e^{i \varphi}$.
Fig.~\ref{Fig:soliton-energy} (a) shows the profiles of the soliton solutions, while
Fig.~\ref{Fig:soliton-energy} (b) shows the total energy $\mathcal{H}_{\rm 1D}$ as a function of $\varphi$ and $\theta$.
It is clear that if $\mathcal{H}_{\rm 1D}$ takes the maximum value at some $\varphi < \pi$, then the soliton solution with $\varphi = \pi$ becomes
locally stable (metastable) by having a positive energy barrier $\Delta \mathcal{H}_{\rm 1D} \equiv \mathcal{H}_{\rm 1D}(\varphi = \varphi_{\rm max}) - \mathcal{H}_{\rm 1D}(\varphi = \pi)$, where the maximal angle $\varphi_{\rm max}$ is the value of $\varphi$ at which $\mathcal{H}_{\rm 1D}$ takes the maximum.
Fig.~\ref{Fig:soliton-energy} (c) shows the maximal angle $\varphi_{\rm max}$ and the energy barrier $\Delta \mathcal{H}_{\rm 1D}$.
The former starts to take a nonzero value, $\Delta \mathcal{H}_{\rm 1D} > 0$, with $\varphi_{\rm max} < \pi$ at around $\theta \approx 15^\circ$, above which the soliton is, therefore, energetically stable. That is to say, the appearance of vortex molecules and the stability of the soliton are not related, and thus it is not the (de)stabilization of the domain wall that lets molecules emerge.
It is worth noting that these configurations become singular in the limit of $\lambda \to \infty$, in which the model reduces to the modified $XY$ model. Therefore, the modified $XY$ model does {\it not} allow these configurations as solutions to the field equations, while the modified Goldstone model does.
\subsection{Type of symmetry and (quasi) breaking of symmetry}
Here, we discuss the symmetry properties of the Hamiltonian
[Eq.~\eqref{Eq:Ham}] and show the possible
(quasi-)breaking patterns of symmetries.
The symmetry of the Hamiltonian with generic parameters is of $\mathrm{U}(1)$ as a phase shift of the field, $\psi \to \psi e^{i \alpha}$ for the arbitrary $\alpha \in [0, 2\pi)$.
In the case of $a = 0$ and $b > 0$, the two fields $\psi$ and $\psi\, e^{i \pi}$ are identifiable, because the Hamiltonian [Eq. \eqref{Eq:Ham}] is the functional of $\psi^2$ rather than $\psi$.
Therefore, the symmetry of the Hamiltonian is only $\mathrm{U}(1) / \mathbb{Z}_2$, where the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry comes from the identification of $\psi \sim \psi\, e^{i \pi}$.
This $\mathbb{Z}_2$ factor is essential for the presence of (deconfined) half-quantized vortices.
Depending on the parameter regions,
the $\mathrm{U}(1)$ or $\mathrm{U}(1)/\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry is spontaneously broken in the ground state in different patterns summarized as follows:
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:ssb}
\begin{align}
&\mathrm{U}(1) \stackrel{\mathrm{U}(1)}{\dashrightarrow} 1 \qquad && \text{for $a > 0$ and $b = 0$}, \label{eq:ssb-simple-BKT} \\
&\mathrm{U}(1)/\mathbb{Z}_2 \stackrel{\mathrm{U}(1)/\mathbb{Z}_2}{\dashrightarrow} 1 \qquad && \text{for $a = 0$ and $b > 0$}, \label{eq:ssb-half-BKT} \\
&\mathrm{U}(1) \stackrel{\mathrm{U}(1)/\mathbb{Z}_2}{\dashrightarrow} \mathbb{Z}_2 \stackrel{\mathbb{Z}_2}{\longrightarrow} 1 \qquad && \text{for $b \gg a > 0$}, \label{eq:ssb-two-step} \\
&\mathrm{U}(1) \stackrel{\mathrm{U}(1)}{\Longrightarrow} 1 \qquad && \text{for $a \approx b$} \label{eq:ssb-BKT-TT}.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Here the arrows $\dashrightarrow$, $\longrightarrow$, and $\Longrightarrow$
denote quasi-breaking of symmetry via a BKT transition, ordinary symmetry breaking with a thermodynamic phase transition, and simultaneous
(quasi)breaking of symmetry, respectively. Here, quasibreaking means that the symmetry is not exactly broken due to the CMW theorem in the thermodynamic limit but is locally broken at semi macroscopic scales with an algebraically decaying correlation function.
Now let us explain each breaking pattern.
In the simplest case, i.e., for $a > 0$ and $b = 0$ [Eq. \eqref{eq:ssb-simple-BKT}], the standard BKT transition occurs with the quasibreaking of the $\mathrm{U}(1)$ symmetry.
In the opposite case, i.e., for $a = 0$ and $b > 0$ [Eq. \eqref{eq:ssb-half-BKT}],
the BKT transition occurs with the quasi breaking of the $\mathrm{U}(1) / \mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry, for which half-quantized and anti-half-quantized vortices start to form in pairs.
In the case of $b \gg a > 0$ [Eq. \eqref{eq:ssb-two-step}],
two successive spontaneous (quasi)breaking processes occur.
At the first stage (at higher temperature)
the $\mathrm{U}(1)$ symmetry is quasi broken to
a $\mathbb{Z}_2$ subgroup
accompanied by the BKT transition.
At the second stage, at
a temperature lower than the BKT transition temperature, the remaining $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry is further spontaneously broken due to a thermodynamic transition.
In this case, half-quantized and anti-half-quantized vortices start to form pairs at the BKT transition and domain walls appear at the thermodynamic transition.
Some domain walls have no endpoint forming loops as well as those in the Ising model, but some others appear between two half-quantized or two anti-half-quantized vortices forming vortex or anti-vortex molecules as shown in Fig. ~\ref{Fig1}.
In the remaining case of $a \approx b$ [Eq.~(\ref{eq:ssb-BKT-TT})], rather than a conventional BKT transition, the BKT transition occurs with the quasibreaking of $\mathrm{U}(1) / \mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry and the thermodynamic transition with breaking of $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry simultaneously.
All vortices are integers and domain walls do not have endpoints.
In the following sections, we study the modified Goldstone model
by the FRG and Monte Carlo simulation.
\section{Functional renormalization group calculations}\label{sec:FRG}
In this section, after giving a brief review of FRG,
we apply it to the modified Goldstone model approximately, at the leading order of the derivative expansion, and obtain the phase structure.
\subsection{Flow equation: a review}
Here we review the basics of the FRG. At the core of the formalism lies the $\Gamma_k$ average effective action, in which fluctuations of the dynamical fields are incorporated up to a momentum scale $k$. The $\Gamma_k$ function obeys the flow equation:
\bea
\label{Eq:flow1}
\partial_k \Gamma_k = \frac12 \int \,\textrm{Tr}\, [(\Gamma_k^{(2)}+R_k)^{-1}\partial_k R_k],
\eea
where $\Gamma_k^{(2)}$ is the second derivative matrix of $\Gamma_k$ with respect to the dynamical variables and $R_k$ is a regulator function, which is defined (in Fourier space) through a momentum-dependent mass term
\bea
\frac12 \int_{p,q} \psi^i (q) R^{ij}_k (q,p) \psi^j (p),
\eea
added to the classical Hamiltonian (or Euclidean action). We denoted the set of fluctuating field variables by $\psi$. Here $R_k$ is supposed to give a large mass to modes that have momenta $q \lesssim k$ and leave the ones with $q\gtrsim k$ untouched. The classical Hamiltonian by definition does not contain any fluctuations; therefore, it serves as an initial condition for the RG flow of $\Gamma_{k=\Lambda}$ at some microscopic scale $\Lambda$. The flow equation (\ref{Eq:flow1}) then needs to be integrated down to $k=0$, where one obtains the full free energy (or quantum effective action). One is free to choose the $R_k$ function such that it fulfills the requirement of suppressing low-momentum modes, and in this paper we employ the so-called optimal version:
\bea
\label{Eq:optreg}
R_k(q,p)=Z_k(2\pi)^2 (k^2-q^2)\Theta(k^2-q^2) \delta(q+p),
\eea
where $\Theta(x)$ is the Heaviside step function, and $Z_k$ is the wave function renormalization factor.
\subsection{Local potential approximation'}
Here we solve flow equation (\ref{Eq:flow1}) for the modified Goldstone model approximately, using the ansatz for $\Gamma_k$,
\bea
\label{Eq:LPAp}
\Gamma_k = \int d^2x \left[ \frac{Z_k(\rho)}{2} (\nabla \psi^i)^2 + \frac{\lambda_k}{2}(\rho-\rho_{0,k})^2\right],
\eea
where instead of a complex variable, the $\psi^i$ field is considered as a two-component real vector: $\psi^i=(\psi^1, \psi^2)$, while $\rho=\psi^i\psi^i/2$, and we have only kept the original couplings in the effective potential. Namely, Eq.~(\ref{Eq:LPAp}) is compatible with the form of Eq.~(\ref{Eq:Ham}), but it comes with $k$-dependent couplings and a field-dependent wave function renormalization factor [$Z_k(\rho)$]. In what follows we will consider the $Z_k(\rho)$ function in two separate approximations: $i)$ $Z_k(\rho)\approx Z_k(\rho_0)$, and $ii)$ $ Z_k(\rho)\approx Z_k(\rho_0)+Z_k'(\rho_0)(\rho-\rho_0)$. Approximation i) is sometimes called the local potential approximation' (LPA'), with the prime referring to nontrivial wave function renormalization. First we work with the LPA' and the next section is devoted to approximation $ii)$.
Projecting the flow equation (\ref{Eq:flow1}) onto a subspace spanned by homogeneous field configurations, we get (see also Appendix B)
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\raisebox{0.05cm}{
\includegraphics[bb = 100 0 255 200,scale=0.65,angle=0]{flowa.pdf}}
\includegraphics[bb = -140 0 255 200,scale=0.65,angle=0]{flowb.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of (a) the leading order flow diagram with (b) the wave function renormalization improved one. The red flows are stopped at (a) $t=-\log(k/\Lambda)=10$ and (b) $t=200$ (b), which shows that a significant stabilization of the line of fixed points is achieved with the improved approximation. For completeness, the blue flows are stopped at (a) $t=1,5,5,8$ and (b) $t=2,8.5,20,40$ (b), respectively.}
\label{Fig:flows}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{subequations}
\label{Eq:lambdarhoflow}
\bea
\label{Eq:lambdaflow}
k\partial_k \bar{\lambda}_k= -2\bar{\lambda}_k [1 - \eta^{(0)}_k]&+&\frac{\bar{\lambda}_k^2}{2\pi} \left(1-\frac{\eta_k^{(0)}}{4}\right) \nonumber\\
&\times& \left[1+\frac{9}{(1+2\bar{\rho}_{0,k}\bar{\lambda}_k)^3}\right], \\
\label{Eq:rhoflow}
k\partial_k \bar{\rho}_{0,k}=-\eta^{(0)}_k\bar{\rho}_{0,k}&+&\frac{1}{4\pi}\left(1-\frac{\eta^{(0)}_k}{4}\right) \nonumber\\
&\times&\left[1+\frac{3}{(1+2\bar{\rho}_{0,k}\bar{\lambda}_k)^2}\right],
\eea
\end{subequations}
where we have introduced dimensionless rescaled variables $\bar{\lambda}_k=\lambda_k k^{-2}Z_k^{-2}$ and $\bar{\rho}_{0,k}=\rho_{0,k}Z_k$. Here, $\eta^{(0)}_k=-k\partial_k Z_k/Z_k$ is the anomalous dimension at this order of the approximation, where the wave function renormalization is evaluated at the minimum point of the effective potential, $Z_k\equiv Z_k(\bar{\rho}_{0,k})$ (from now on we think of the wave function renormalization as a function of the rescaled field). If we project Eq.~(\ref{Eq:flow1}) onto $\sim (\nabla \psi^t)^2$, where the index refers to the transverse direction, we arrive at the flow equation for $Z_k$ (see, again, Appendix B for details),
\bea
\label{Eq:Zkflow}
k\partial_k Z_k(\bar{\rho})= -Z_k(\bar{\rho}) \frac{\bar{\rho}\bar{\lambda}_k^2/\pi}{(1+\bar{M}_{l,k}^2)^2(1+\bar{M}_{t,k}^2)^2},
\eea
where $\bar{M}_{l,k}^2=M_{l,k}^2/Z_kk^2$ and $\bar{M}_{t,k}^2=M_{t,k}^2/Z_kk^2$, while $M_{l,k}^2$ and $M_{t,k}^2$ are the longitudinal and transverse components of the momentum independent part of the $\Gamma_k^{(2)}$ matrix, respectively,
\bea
M_{l,k}^2=\lambda_k(3\rho-\rho_{0,k}), \quad M_{t,k}^2=\lambda_k(\rho-\rho_{0,k}),
\eea
and thus
\bea
\bar{M}_{l,k}^2=\bar{\lambda}_k(3\bar{\rho}-\bar{\rho}_{0,k}), \quad \bar{M}_{t,k}^2=\bar{\lambda}_k(\bar{\rho}-\bar{\rho}_{0,k}).
\eea
Since in Eqs.~(\ref{Eq:lambdarhoflow}) it is $Z_k=Z_k(\bar{\rho}_{0,k})$ that appears through $\eta_k^{(0)}$, we evaluate Eq.~(\ref{Eq:Zkflow}) at $\bar{\rho}=\bar{\rho}_{0,k}$ and get
\bea
\label{Eq:eta0flow}
\eta^{(0)}_k = \frac{\bar{\rho}_{0,k}\bar{\lambda}_k^2}{\pi(1+2\bar{\rho}_{0,k}\bar{\lambda}_k)^2}.
\eea
Now we can search for fixed points of Eqs.~(\ref{Eq:lambdarhoflow}) and (\ref{Eq:eta0flow}). The flow diagram in terms of $\bar{\lambda}_k$ and $\bar{\rho}_{0,k}$ can be seen on the left side of Fig.~\ref{Fig:flows}. We observe the line of quasifixed points and notes that the flow, even though significantly slowed down, is clearly nonzero in the aforementioned region.
\subsection{Wave function renormalization improvement}
The key to the improvement to be described here is to realize how crucial the role of the wave function renormalization factor $Z_k$ is in the previous description. In order to escape from the CMW theorem, in the low-temperature phase $Z_k$ has to diverge so that the renormalized field can condense (the expectation value of the bare field is always zero). Since any rescaling of the field should lead to the same description of the system, one expects that any field derivative of the wave function renormalization factor is proportional to $Z_k$ itself, $Z^{(n)}_k \sim Z_k$, which means that they also diverge, and in principle none of them should be neglected, as also pointed out, e.g., in \cite{jakubczyk14}. As announced in the preceding section, here we take into account the first derivative of $Z_k$, which will indeed lead to a significant improvement in stabilizing the flow along the (quasi)line of fixed points, but more importantly, it also makes it possible to treat the modified Goldstone model in the FRG.
If we keep track of the field derivative of $Z_k$, then it is possible to take into account in $\eta_k$ the implicit $k$ dependence coming from the change of the minimum of the effective potential when the RG scale is varied, similarly to what was done in earlier works, e.g., \cite{tetradis94,rose17}. In principle, we should have
\bea
\eta_k &=& -\frac{kd_k Z_k}{Z_k}=-\frac{k\partial_k Z_k+Z_k'k\partial_k \bar{\rho}_{0,k}}{Z_k} \nonumber\\
&=&\eta_k^{(0)}-w_kk\partial_k\bar{\rho}_{0,k}\equiv \eta_k^{(0)}+\Delta \eta_k,
\eea
where $d_k$ refers to total differentiation and on the right-hand side both $Z_k$ and $Z_k'$ are evaluated at $\bar{\rho}=\bar{\rho}_{0,k}$. We have also introduced the notation $\Delta \eta_k=-w_k k\partial_k \bar{\rho}_{0,k}$ with $w_k=Z_k'/Z_k$. Since $Z_k'$ has appeared in our formula, we also need to derive a flow equation for it. This can be obtained from Eq.~(\ref{Eq:Zkflow}) after applying $d/d\bar{\rho}$ to the both sides (note that $\partial_k$ does not commute with $d/d\bar{\rho}$). Using that $d\bar{M}^2_{l,k}/d\bar{\rho}=3\bar{\lambda}_k$ and $d\bar{M}^2_{t,k}/d\bar{\rho}=\bar{\lambda}_k$, we get
\bea
\label{Eq:Zprimeflow}
k\partial_k Z_k'(\bar{\rho}_{0,k})&&/Z_k(\bar{\rho}_{0,k})=\\
&&\frac{4\bar{\rho}_{0,k}^2\bar{\lambda}_k^2+6\bar{\rho}_{0,k}\bar{\lambda}_k+2\bar{\rho}_{0,k}w_k-1}{\pi(1+2\bar{\lambda}_k\bar{\rho}_{0,k})^3}+w_k\eta_k^{(0)},\nonumber
\eea
which leads to
\bea
\label{Eq:wkflow}
k\partial_k w_k &=&\frac{4\bar{\rho}_{0,k}^2\bar{\lambda}_k^2+6\bar{\rho}_{0,k}\bar{\lambda}_k+2\bar{\rho}_{0,k}w_k-1}{\pi(1+2\bar{\lambda}_k\bar{\rho}_{0,k})^3}\nonumber\\
&+&2w_k\eta_k^{(0)}-w_k^2k\partial_k\bar{\rho}_{0,k}.
\eea
At this point, it is important to mention that Eq.~(\ref{Eq:Zprimeflow}) is not exact, as deriving Eq.~(\ref{Eq:Zkflow}) we let the field operators act only on the potential part of the two-point correlation function and not on $Z_k(\rho)$. This would have introduced a further $Z_k'(\rho)$ dependence on the right-hand side of Eq.~(\ref{Eq:Zkflow}), which is neglected here. The reason behind this is that we think of the scheme in question as a first correction to the LPA' in the sense that we are motivated to derive the flow of $w_k$ in the background flows of $Z_k$, $\bar{\lambda}_k$, and $\bar{\rho}_{0,k}$ of the LPA', which by definition are not affected explicitly by $w_k$ itself.
Now, once we return to the aforementioned flows, i.e., Eqs. (\ref{Eq:lambdarhoflow}), we notice that they do depend implicitly on $w_k$, but only because of the new expression of the anomalous dimension $\eta_k^{(0)} \rightarrow \eta_k= \eta_k^{(0)}+\Delta \eta_k$. This does not make much of a difference in the flow of $\bar{\lambda}_k$, but changes that of $\bar{\rho}_{0,k}$. The reason is that Eq.~(\ref{Eq:rhoflow}) becomes an implicit equation, since $k\partial_k \bar{\rho}_{0,k}$ also appears on the right-hand side through $\Delta \eta_k \equiv -w_kk\partial_k \bar{\rho}_{0,k}$. After some algebra we arrive at
\bea
\label{Eq:rhoflow2}
k\partial_k \bar{\rho}_{0,k}=\frac{-\eta_k^{(0)}\bar{\rho}_{0,k}+\frac{1}{4\pi}\left(1-\frac{\eta_k^{(0)}}{4}\right)\left[1+\frac{3}{(1+2\bar{\rho}_{0,k}\bar{\lambda}_k)^2}\right]}{1-w_k\left[\bar{\rho}_{0,k}+\frac{1}{16\pi}\left(1+\frac{3}{(1+2\bar{\rho}_{0,k}\bar{\lambda}_k)^2}\right)\right]}. \nonumber\\
\eea
The flow of $\bar{\lambda}_k$ is analogous to Eq.~(\ref{Eq:lambdaflow}), but $\eta_k^{(0)}$ is replaced by $\eta_k$:
\bea
\label{Eq:lambdaflow2}
k\partial_k \bar{\lambda}_k = -2\bar{\lambda}_k [1 - \eta_k]&+&\frac{\bar{\lambda}_k^2}{2\pi} \left(1-\frac{\eta_k}{4}\right) \nonumber\\
&\times& \left[1+\frac{9}{(1+2\bar{\rho}_{0,k}\bar{\lambda}_k)^3}\right].
\eea
Now we solve the coupled equations (\ref{Eq:eta0flow}), (\ref{Eq:wkflow}), (\ref{Eq:rhoflow2}) and (\ref{Eq:lambdaflow2}). The corresponding flow diagram can be seen on the right-hand side of Fig.~\ref{Fig:flows}. The comparison shows that taking into account the derivative of the wave function renormalization factor in the anomalous dimension significantly stabilizes the flow along the line of (quasi-)fixed points, as in the improved case the freezing of the flow holds on $\sim 20$ times longer in RG time $t=-\log(k/\Lambda)$.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[bb = 10 0 255 155,scale=1,angle=0]{newflow.pdf}
\caption{Flow diagram for the modified $XY$ model with the initial condition $w_\Lambda=0.4$. The red curves end on the line of fixed points, while the blue ones deviate from it. The fixed line is terminating at two endpoints, the left one corresponding to the high-temperature transition (BKT) and the right one controlling the low-temperature transition. The position of the latter depends on the initial value $w_\Lambda$ (note that the position of the former is not sensitive to $w_\Lambda$, if it exists). The flows become divergent in the shaded region of the parameter space in accordance with (\ref{Eq:ineq}).}
\label{Fig:newflow}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Phase structure}
Now we are in a position to show that in the modified $XY$ model fluctuations can dramatically change the structure of the line of fixed points,
as seen in Fig.~\ref{Fig:flows}. First, note that, the ansatz of Eq.~(\ref{Eq:LPAp}) and the approximation $Z_k(\bar{\rho})\approx Z_k(\bar{\rho}_{0,k})+Z_k'(\bar{\rho}_{0,k})(\bar{\rho}-\bar{\rho}_{0,k})$ is compatible with the microscopic Hamiltonian of the modified $XY$ model, since from Eq.~(\ref{Eq:LPAp}) we have
\bea
\label{Eq:LPApp}
\Gamma_k = \int d^2x &&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\Big[ \frac{Z_k+Z_k^2w_k({\rho}-{\rho}_{0,k})}{2} (\nabla {\psi}^i)^2 \nonumber\\
&+& \frac{\lambda_k}{2}({\rho}-{\rho}_{0,k})^2\Big],
\eea
which is equivalent to
\bea
\label{Eq:LPApp2}
\Gamma_k = \int d^2x &&\bigg[ a_k(\nabla {\psi}^i)^2+4b_k({\psi}^j)^2(\nabla {\psi}^i)^2\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{\lambda_k}{2}\left(\rho-{\rho}_{0,k}\right)^2\bigg],
\eea
where $a_k=(Z_k-Z_k^2w_k{\rho}_{0,k})/2$ and $b_k=Z_k^2w_k/16$. Eq. ~(\ref{Eq:LPApp2}) is now of the form of the original Hamiltonian in Eq.~(\ref{Eq:Ham}) using the $\psi^i$ vector notation.
The reason why the RG flows of the ordinary $XY$ model can change dramatically is that depending on the initial value $w_\Lambda$ (or $b_\Lambda$, equivalently) at the UV scale, $\bar{\rho}_{0,k}$ can approach a singularity, which sends the flows in the $\bar{\lambda}_k$-$\bar{\rho}_k$ plane away from the line of fixed points. What essentially happens is that the line of quasifixed points terminates also at another end point (Fig.~\ref{Fig:newflow}). The end point on the left corresponds to a BKT transition at higher temperature and the new one on the right signals another transition at lower temperature. Even though the method does not make a definite prediction, this should correspond to the Ising transition already reported in earlier papers \cite{lee85,korshunov85,carpenter89}.
Analyzing the flow of $\bar{\rho}_k$, we note that already in the ordinary $XY$ model, i.e., for $w_\Lambda=0$, at first sight it might seem possible that the denominator on the right-hand side of Eq.~(\ref{Eq:rhoflow2}) becomes zero, but it turns out that this never happens. The flow equation always makes $w_k$ decrease as fluctuations are integrated out, and therefore the flows are regular. Note, however, if at the microscopic scale, $w_\Lambda>0$, then $k\partial_k \bar{\rho}_{0,k}$ can indeed blow up.
The condition that needs to be met for a diverging flow is
\bea
\label{Eq:ineq}
w_\Lambda^{-1}<\bar{\rho}_{0,\Lambda}+\frac{1}{16\pi}\left(1+\frac{3}{(1+2\bar{\rho}_{0,\Lambda}\bar{\lambda}_\Lambda)^2} \right),
\eea
which shows that for positive $w_\Lambda$ values the line of fixed points can also terminate on the right (see Fig.~\ref{Fig:newflow}), leading to a two-step transition. For later reference, just as in Sec.~\ref{Sec:basics}, we restrict ourselves to the case
\bea
\label{Eq:a-b-restriction}
a_\Lambda^2+b_\Lambda^2=1,
\eea
i.e., we may use the parametrization $a_\Lambda=\cos \theta$ and $b_\Lambda=\sin \theta$ $(\theta \in [0,\pi/2])$, which leads to the following constraints:
\bea
\cos \theta &=& Z_\Lambda(1-Z_\Lambda w_\Lambda\rho_{0,\Lambda})/2, \\
\sin \theta &=& Z_\Lambda^2w_\Lambda/16.
\eea
Solving them for $w_\Lambda$ and $Z_\Lambda$, we get
\bea
Z_\Lambda=2(\cos\theta+8\rho_{0,\Lambda}\sin\theta), \\
w_\Lambda=\frac{4\sin\theta}{(\cos\theta+8\rho_{0,\Lambda} \sin\theta)^2}.
\eea
Dropping the last term in the large parantheses of the right-hand side of Eq.~(\ref{Eq:ineq}) (we are interested in a rough estimate), we can get the following condition for the critical value of $\rho_{0,\Lambda}$ belonging to the second endpoint of the line of (quasi)fixed points:
\bea
0&=&-\frac{(\cos\theta+8\rho_{0,\Lambda} \sin\theta)^2}{4\sin\theta} \nonumber\\
&+&2(\cos\theta+8\rho_{0,\Lambda}\sin\theta){\rho}_{0,\Lambda}+\frac{1}{16\pi}.
\eea
For a given $\theta$, we solve this equation for $\rho_{0,\Lambda}$ (see the endpoint on the right-side of Fig.~\ref{Fig:newflow}). Surprisingly, if $\theta\neq 0$ is small, i.e. we are close to the $XY$ model, the solution $\rho_{0,\Lambda}|_{\sol}$ is always negative. This means that since the flows blow up for initial values $\rho_{0,\Lambda}>\rho_{0,\Lambda}|_{\sol}$, unless $\bar{\rho}_{0,\Lambda}|_{\sol} \equiv Z_\Lambda \rho_{0,\Lambda}|_{\sol} \approx 0.5$ (which is the location of the original endpoint of the BKT transition), the line of fixed points completely disappears. The critical angle at which this happens is
\bea
\theta_c \approx 86.8^{\circ}.
\eea
That is to say, for $0\neq\theta<\theta_c$, if there is a transition in the system, it cannot be of topological type, no matter how close we are to the $XY$ model (still, at $\theta=0$ we have one, and only one BKT transition). However, once $\theta>\theta_c$, the line of fixed points starts to return to the picture, now equipped with another end point, which indicates that there exist two transitions. A higher-temperature transition has to be of BKT type and a lower-temperature transition, presumably an Ising transition \cite{carpenter89}, is expected to be of second order. Note that the aforementioned structure heavily relies on the assumption $a_\Lambda^2+b_\Lambda^2=1$. Had we not had this constraint and just set, e.g., $a_\Lambda\equiv 1$, we would have found a two-step transition for $0<b<b_c$ (the higher-temperature one being topological), and no topological transition for $b>b_c$ (here $b_c>0$ is some positive constant).
\section{Numerical simulations}\label{sec:numerics}
In this section we numerically investigate the equilibrium properties of the modified Goldstone model defined in Eq.~\eqref{Eq:Ham}.
\subsection{Preparation}
The discretized Hamiltonian ${\cal H}_{\Delta x}$ from Eq.~\eqref{Eq:Ham} becomes
\begin{align}
\label{Eq:Ham-discretized}
\begin{split}
& \mathcal{H}_{\Delta x} = \mathcal{H}_1 + \mathcal{H}_{2} , \\
& \mathcal{H}_1 = a \sum_{\langle i,j \rangle} |\psi_i - \psi_j|^2 + b \sum_{\langle i,j \rangle}|\psi_i^2 - \psi_j^2|^2, \\
& \mathcal{H}_2 = \frac{\lambda \Delta x^2}{2} \sum_i (|\psi_i|^2 / 2 - \rho_0)^2,
\end{split}
\end{align}
where $\psi_i$ is the field $\psi$ at the discretized point $\Vec{x} = \Vec{x}_i$ and $\Delta x$ is the lattice spacing (which serves as an ultraviolet cutoff scale).
In the limit of $\lambda \to \infty$ and rewriting $\psi = \sqrt{2 \rho_0} e^{i \theta_i}$, the discretized Hamiltonian $\mathcal{H}_{\Delta x}$ becomes equivalent to the Hamiltonian $\mathcal{H}_{\rm mXY}$ in Eq.~\eqref{Eq:modXY} for the modified $XY$ model with $J = 4 a \rho_0$ and $J^\prime = 8 b \rho_0^2$.
Now we numerically calculate equilibrium ensemble averages
\begin{align}
\langle f \rangle = \frac{\displaystyle \int \left( \prod_{i} d\psi_i d\psi_i^\ast \right) \sum_i f e^{-\mathcal{H}_{\Delta x} / T}}{\displaystyle \int \left( \prod_{i} d\psi_i d\psi_i^\ast \right) \sum_i e^{-\mathcal{H}_{\Delta x} / T}},
\end{align}
by using the Monte Carlo technique.
First, by fixing the amplitude $|\psi_i|$ of the field, we use the cluster Monte Carlo technique with the Wolff algorithm \cite{Wolff}. Then, to accelerate the equilibration process, we alternately apply the Wolff algorithm to equilibrate the phase $\theta_i = \mathrm{arg}[\psi_i]$ and the standard Metropolis-Hastings algorithm to equilibrate the amplitude $|\psi_i|$.
For numerical parameters, we have used $\Delta x = 1$, $\rho_0 = 1/2$.
Similarly to the preceding section, we parametrize $a$ and $b$ as in
Eq.~\eqref{Eq:a-b-restriction},
\begin{align}
a = \cos\theta, \quad b = \sin\theta, \quad a^2 + b^2 = 1.
\end{align}
\subsection{Correlation function and transition temperature}
We first show our results for the two correlation functions
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
& G_1(r) = \sum_i \sum_{r \leq |x_j| < r + \Delta x} \frac{\displaystyle \Delta x^2 \langle \psi^\ast_{i+j} \psi_i \rangle}{N(r) L^2}, \\
& G_2(r) = \sum_i \sum_{r \leq |x_j| < r + \Delta x} \frac{\displaystyle \Delta x^2 \langle \psi^{\ast\: 2}_{i+j} \psi_i^2 \rangle}{N(r) L^2},
\end{split}
\end{align}
where $L$ is the system size and $N(r)$ is the number of points, $x_i$, that satisfy $r \leq |x_i| < r + \Delta x$.
When $\theta = 0$ ($\theta = \pi/2$), we expect the standard BKT transition triggered by integer vortices (half-quantized vortices) for $\psi_i$ ($\psi_i^2$) and the algebraic decay $G_1(r) \propto r^{-\eta}$ [$G_2(r) \propto r^{-\eta}$] below the BKT transition temperature.
At the BKT transition temperature, the critical exponent satisfies $\eta = 1/4$ \cite{kosterlitz71,kosterlitz72}.
To obtain the BKT transition temperature, therefore, we can use the finite-size scaling of the correlation functions, in which $G^{(1,2)} / r^{-1/4}$ is expected to be a universal function of $r/L$.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.55\linewidth]{correlation1-000-08.pdf}
\caption{
\label{Fig:correlation1}
Finite-size scaling of $G_1(r)$ with $\theta = 0$ and $\lambda = 8$ at the BKT transition temperature $T_1^{\rm BKT} = 0.60 T^\ast$ with the critical exponent $\eta = 1/4$.
The system sizes are $L = 32$ (crosses), $L = 64$ (open squares), and $L = 128$ (open circles).
We use the same symbols for the system size $L$ in all other figures unless otherwise noted.
}
\end{figure}
Figure ~\ref{Fig:correlation1} shows the dependence of $G_1(r) / L^{-1/4}$ with $\theta = 0$ and $\lambda = 8$ as a function of $r / L$ at $T = 0.6 T^\ast$ where $T^\ast$ is the BKT transition temperature for the standard $XY$ model with $\theta = 0$ and $\lambda \to \infty$.
The expected universality of $G_1(r)$ is sufficiently satisfied at large $r$, which, therefore, predicts that the BKT transition temperature is $T_1^{\rm BKT} \simeq 0.6 T^\ast$. In the same way, we can estimate the temperature $T_2^{\rm BKT} \simeq 0.21 T^\ast$ with $\theta = \pi/2$ and $\lambda = 8$ from the finite-size scaling of $G_2(r)$.
We further expect the appearance of a second-order, Ising-type phase transition \cite{carpenter89}, where the domain of definition for the phase of the $\psi$ field is spontaneously broken from [$0$,$2\pi$] to [$0$,$\pi$], which can be thought of as a spontaneous breaking of a discrete $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry.
At the critical temperature for this phase transition, the correlation function also shows algebraic decay.
Since the critical exponent $\eta$ takes the same value as that of the BKT transition temperature, i.e., $\eta = 1/4$ for the two-dimensional Ising-type transition, we can use the same finite-size scaling analysis as shown in
Fig.~\ref{Fig:correlation1}.
We here define the temperature $T_1$ ($T_2$) at which $G_1(r)$ [$G_2(r)$] shows the algebraic decay $G_1 \propto r^{-1/4}$ [$G_2(r) \propto r^{-1/4}$].
Then, by definition, $T_1 = T_1^{\rm BKT}$ at $\theta = 0$ and $T_2 = T_2^{\rm BKT}$ at $\theta = \pi/2$.
Denoting by $\theta_1$ and $\theta_2$ critical angles, we have found the following results for $T_{1}$ and $T_{2}$.
\begin{enumerate}
\parskip 0pt
\item
When $\theta$ is small, i.e., $\theta \leq \theta_1$, then $T_1 > T_2$.
\item
When $\theta$ is large, i.e., $\theta_2 < \theta < \pi/2$, then $T_1 < T_2$.
\item
When $\lambda$ is finite, then $\theta_1 < \theta_2$.
For $\theta_1 < \theta \leq \theta_2$, neither $G_1(r)$ nor $G_2(r)$ satisfies $G_{1,2}(r) \propto r^{-1/4}$ at any temperatures and both $T_1$ and $T_2$ are absent.
\item
When $\lambda \to \infty$ for the modified $XY$ model, then $\theta_1 = \theta_2$, i.e., both $T_1$ and $T_2$ always exist at any $\theta$.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{table}[htb]
\begin{tabular}{c|cc}
$\lambda$ & $\theta_1$ & $\theta_2$ \\ \hline
$8$ & $50.8^\circ$ & $84.5^\circ$ \\
$16$ & $66.0^\circ$ & $79.6^\circ$ \\
$\infty$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$64.2^\circ$} \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{
\label{TABLE:transition-theta}
Specific values of $\theta_1$ and $\theta_2$ at $\lambda = 8$, $16$, and $\infty$ (modified $XY$ model).
}
\end{table}
The specific values of $\theta_1$ and $\theta_2$ are shown in Table \ref{TABLE:transition-theta}.
\subsection{Superfluid density and specific heat}
To determine the type of the transitions, we calculate the superfluid density $\rho_{\rm s}$ defined as \cite{Chaikin,Thijssen}
\begin{align}
\rho_{\rm s} = \frac{1}{(a + 4 b) L^2} \lim_{\delta \to 0} \frac{F(\delta) - F(0)}{\delta^2}
\end{align}
and the specific heat $C = d\langle \mathcal{H} \rangle / dT$, where $F(\delta) = - T \log \langle e^{- \mathcal{H} / T} \rangle$ is the free energy under the argument-twisted boundary condition $\psi(x + L) = e^{i \delta \cdot L} \psi(x)$.
When a BKT transition occurs at the transition temperature $T^{\rm BKT}$, the universal jump $\Delta \rho_{\rm s}$ of the superfluid density is
\begin{align}
\Delta \rho_{\rm s} = \frac{T^{\rm BKT}}{\pi}.
\label{Eq:universal-relation}
\end{align}
On the other hand, for second-order transitions we expect close to the corresponding critical temperature ($T^{\rm 2nd}$) that the superfluid density obeys $\rho_{\rm s} \propto (T^{\rm 2nd} - T)^\zeta$.
The critical exponent $\zeta$ is obtained by the Josephson relation $\zeta = 2 \beta - \nu \eta$, where $\beta$, $\nu$, and $\eta$ are the critical exponents of the order parameter, the correlation length, and the correlation function, respectively.
By inserting $\beta = 1/8$, $\nu = 1$, and $\eta = 1/4$ for the Ising-type transition, we obtain $\zeta = 0$, i.e., the superfluid density also jumps at the transition temperature, similarly to the BKT transition. However, no universal relation holds, which allows for a distinction between the two.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.99\linewidth]{rhos-000-08.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.99\linewidth]{rhos-100-08.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{
\label{Fig:rhos-small-08}
Temperature dependence of the superfluid density $\rho_{\rm s}$ for $\lambda = 8$ at (a) $\theta = 0^\circ$ and (b) $\theta = 10^\circ$ [the panel (b)].
The solid, dashed, and dash-dotted lines show the relation $\rho_{\rm s} = T / \pi$, where $T = T_1$, and $T = T_2$, respectively.
}
\end{figure}
Figure ~\ref{Fig:rhos-small-08} shows the dependence of the superfluid density with respect to the temperature for $\theta = 0^\circ$ [Fig. 6(a)] and $\theta = 10^\circ$ [Fig. 6(b)].
The solid line shows the relation $\rho_{\rm s} = T / \pi$.
In Fig. 6(a) this line intersects $\rho_{\rm s}$ with a good accuracy at $T_1$, suggesting the standard universal relation related to the BKT transition temperature, i.e., we indeed observe a topological transition.
In Fig. 6(b), however, $\rho_{\rm s}$ deviates from the aforementioned line at $T_1$ and therefore we expect that the transition is of second order, with a nonuniversal jump at the transition temperature. Here we relabel $T_1 \equiv T_1^{\rm 2nd}$.
In neither of the panels do we find any characteristic structure in $\rho_{\rm s}$ at $T = T_2$.
We therefore conclude that the property of the correlation function $G_2 \propto r^{-1/4}$ is just the crossover and we relabel $T_2$ as the crossover temperature $T_2 \equiv T_2^{\rm CO}$.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.99\linewidth]{rhos-600-08.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.99\linewidth]{rhos-870-08.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{
\label{Fig:rhos-large-08}
Temperature dependence of the superfluid density $\rho_{\rm s}$ for $\lambda = 8$ and (a) $\theta = 60^\circ$ and (b) $\theta = 87^\circ$.
The solid line shows the relation $\rho_{\rm s} = T / \pi$.
The dash-double-dotted line in (a) shows the estimated first-order transition temperature $T_\ast^{\rm 1st}$.
The dashed and the dash-dotted lines (b) show $T = T_1$ and $T = T_2$, respectively.
}
\end{figure}
Figure ~\ref{Fig:rhos-large-08} shows the dependence of the superfluid density on the temperature for $\theta = 60^\circ$ [Fig. 7(a)] and $\theta = 85^\circ$ [Fig. 7(b)].
As shown in Table \ref{TABLE:transition-theta}, the value $\theta = 60^\circ$ is between $\theta_1$ and $\theta_2$ for $\lambda = 8$, and we find neither a BKT nor a second-order phase transition.
Instead, what we see is a first order phase transition due to the sharp jump of the superfluid density $\rho_{\rm s}$ [see Fig.~\ref{Fig:rhos-large-08} (a)].
Because the temperature at which the superfluid density $\rho_{\rm s}$ jumps does not really depend on the system size $L$, its estimation is fairly simple. We denote this transition temperature by $T_\ast^{\rm 1st}$.
In Fig.~\ref{Fig:rhos-large-08} (b), i.e., for $\theta = 87^\circ$, $\theta$ is larger than $\theta_2$ and the superfluid density $\rho_{\rm s}$ does show the universal relation \eqref{Eq:universal-relation} at the corresponding temperature, $T = T_2$. Therefore, we find again a BKT transition with the aforementioned transition temperature, relabeling it as $T_2 \equiv T_2^{\rm BKT}$.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.95\linewidth]{rhoc-008.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.95\linewidth]{rhoc-016.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{
\label{Fig:rhoc}
Jump of the superfluid density $\Delta \rho_{\rm s}$ normalized by $\Delta \rho_{\rm s0}$ for (a) $\lambda = 8$ and (b) $\lambda = 16$.
The dashed and dash-doted lines show $\theta_1$ and $\theta_2$, respectively.
}
\end{figure}
Figure ~\ref{Fig:rhoc} shows the jump of the superfluid density $\Delta \rho_{\rm s}$ at the phase transition as a function of $\theta$, normalized by $\Delta \rho_{\rm s0}$, which is the value for the universal jump \eqref{Eq:universal-relation} for the BKT transition. It is specifically defined as (note that $T_1$, $T_*^{\rm 1st}$, and $T_2$ depend on $\theta$)
\begin{align}
\Delta \rho_{\rm s0} = \begin{cases}
\displaystyle \frac{T_1}{\pi}, & \displaystyle 0 \leq \theta < \theta_1 \\[5pt]
\displaystyle \frac{T_\ast^{\rm 1st}}{\pi}, & \displaystyle \theta_1 \leq \theta < \theta_2 \\[5pt]
\displaystyle \frac{T_2}{\pi}, & \displaystyle \theta_2 \leq \theta \leq \frac{\pi}{2}.
\end{cases}
\end{align}
We estimate the value of the jump $\Delta \rho_{\rm s}$ by fitting the superfluid density $\rho_{\rm s}$ at the transition temperature, i.e. $T_1$ for $0 \leq \theta < \theta_1$, $T_\ast^{\rm 1st}$ for $\theta_1 \leq \theta < \theta_2$, and $T_2$ for $\theta_2 \leq \theta \leq \pi/2$, via the function
\begin{align}
\rho_{\rm s}(\theta,L) = \Delta \rho_{\rm s}(\theta) + \frac{a(\theta)}{L},
\end{align}
where $a$ is a $\theta$-dependent constant.
For $\theta = 0$ and $\theta > \theta_2$, the relation $\Delta \rho_{\rm s} \simeq \Delta \rho_{\rm s0}$ is satisfied; therefore, we find BKT transitions with the transition temperature $T_1^{\rm BKT}$ for $\theta = 0$ and $T_2^{\rm BKT}$ for $\theta_1 \leq \theta \leq \pi/2$.
For other values, the universal relation does not hold and the transition becomes of second order for $0 < \theta < \theta_1$, and of first order for $\theta_1 < \theta \leq \theta_2$.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.99\linewidth]{C-000-08.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.99\linewidth]{C-100-08.pdf}
\end{minipage} \\[5pt]
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.99\linewidth]{C-600-08.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.99\linewidth]{C-870-08.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{
\label{Fig:specific-heat-08}
Temperature dependence of the specific heat $C$ for $\lambda = 8$ and (a) $\theta = 0^\circ$, (b) $\theta = 10^\circ$, (c) $\theta = 60^\circ$, and (d) $\theta = 87^\circ$.
The dash-double-dotted line in (c) shows the estimated first-order transition temperature $T_\ast^{\rm 1st}$.
The dashed and dash-dotted lines in (a), (b), and (d) show $T = T_1$ and $T = T_2$, respectively.
}
\end{figure}
Figure ~\ref{Fig:specific-heat-08} shows the specific heat $C$.
Whereas the specific heat has a single peak near the transition temperature for $\theta < \theta_2$, i.e., in Figs. 9(a)-(c), it has double peaks for $\theta \geq \theta_2$, suggesting two-step transitions.
In the latter case, the first and second peaks of the specific heat correspond to the temperatures $T_1$ and $T_2$, respectively.
Because the correlation function $G_1$ becomes $G_1 \propto r^{-1/4}$ at $T = T_1$ and the phase at $T < T_1$ should be continuously connected from the phase with $\theta < \theta_2$ (see Fig.~\ref{Fig:phase-diagram}), the transition at $T_1$ should indeed be of second order.
The absence of the peak at $T = T_2$ for $\theta < \theta_1$ consolidates our conclusion that here $T_2$ gives not the transition, but only a crossover as $T_2^{\rm CO}$.
\subsection{Phase diagram}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.99\linewidth]{tc-08.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.99\linewidth]{tc-16.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{
\label{Fig:phase-diagram}
Phase diagram in the $\theta$-$T$ plane for (a) $\lambda = 8$ and (b) $\lambda = 16$.
The thick line at $\theta = 0$ is the quasi-long-range order phase with bounded integer vortex pairs.
The violet and pink regions indicate the true long-range-order phase and the quasi-long-range order phase with bounded half-quantized vortex pairs, respectively.
The solid, dashed, and dash-dotted lines correspond to the phase boundaries for the BKT, second-order, and first-order transition temperatures $T_2^{\rm BKT}$, $T_1^{\rm 2nd}$, and $T_\ast^{\rm 1st}$, respectively.
The dotted line indicates the crossover temperature $T_2^{\rm CO}$.
}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{Fig:phase-diagram} shows the phase diagram of the modified Goldstone model in Eq.~\eqref{Eq:Ham-discretized}.
For $\theta = 0$, there is the standard BKT transition with the transition temperature $T_1\equiv T_1^{\rm BKT}$.
At $T < T_1^{\rm BKT}$, integer vortex pairs are bounded to show a quasi-long-range ordered phase.
For $0 < \theta < \theta_1$, this BKT transition changes to a second-order phase transition with the transition temperature $T_1 \equiv T_1^{\rm 2nd}$,
implying a true long-range-order phase for $T<T_1^{\rm 2nd}$ with the breaking of the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry.
For $\theta_1 \leq \theta < \theta_2$, the two temperatures $T_1^{\rm 2nd}$ and $T_2^{\rm CO}$ defined for $0 < \theta < \theta_1$ merge to one first-order transition temperature, $T_\ast^{\rm 1st}$.
For $\theta_2 \leq \theta \leq \pi/2$, this transition temperature, $T_\ast^{\rm 1st}$, splits again into two transition temperatures $T_1^{\rm 2nd}$ and $T_2^{\rm BKT}$.
The second-order phase transition ultimately disappears, as while $\theta \rightarrow \pi/2$, $T_1^{\rm 2nd} \rightarrow 0$.
Unlike the BKT transition for $\theta = 0$, the BKT transition for $\theta_2 \leq \theta \leq \pi/2$ is triggered by the correlation function $G_2$ (not $G_1$), and therefore we expect the quasi-long-range order phase by the bounding of half-quantized vortex pairs at $T_1^{\rm 2nd} < T < T_2^{\rm BKT}$.
Because the low-temperature phases, i.e., $T < T_\ast^{\rm 1st}$ for $\theta_1 \leq \theta < \theta_2$ and $T < T_1^{\rm 2nd}$ for $\theta_2 \leq \theta \leq \pi/2$, should be continuously connected to the long-range-order phase at $0 < \theta < \theta_1$, these phases should also be of true long-range order.
Here we wish to establish the relationship between the phase diagram and the (quasi-)breaking patterns of symmetry summarized in Eqs.~\eqref{eq:ssb-simple-BKT}-\eqref{eq:ssb-BKT-TT}.
The BKT transition at the temperature $T_1^{\rm BKT}$ with $\theta = 0^\circ$ gives the quasibreaking $\mathrm{U}(1) \dashrightarrow 1$ in Eq.~\eqref{eq:ssb-simple-BKT}.
The second and first-order phase transitions at the temperatures $T_1^{\rm 2nd}$ and $T_\ast^{\rm 1st}$ with $0^\circ < \theta \leq \theta_2$, respectively, give the simultaneous (quasi)breaking $\mathrm{U}(1) \Longrightarrow 1$ in Eq.~\eqref{eq:ssb-BKT-TT}.
The two-step transition at the temperatures $T_2^{\rm BKT}$ and $T_1^{\rm 2nd}$ with $\theta_2 < \theta < 90^\circ$ gives the two successive (quasi)breaking of symmetries $\mathrm{U}(1) \dashrightarrow \mathbb{Z}_2 \longrightarrow 1$ in Eq.~\eqref{eq:ssb-two-step}.
As for $\theta = 90^\circ$, the BKT transition at the temperature $T_2^{\rm BKT}$ gives the quasi-breaking $\mathrm{U}(1)/ \mathbb{Z}_2 \dashrightarrow 1$.
Here the second-order phase transition does not occur because of $T_1^{\rm 2nd} = 0$ for $\theta = 90^\circ$.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.99\linewidth]{rhoc-inf.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.99\linewidth]{tc-inf.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{
\label{Fig:phase-diagram-inf}
(a) Jump of the superfluid density $\Delta \rho_{\rm s}$ and (b) phase diagram in the $\theta$-$T$ plane for $\lambda = \infty$.
The dashed line in (a) and those in the colored regions in (b) are the same as those in Figs.~\ref{Fig:rhoc} and ~\ref{Fig:phase-diagram}, respectively.
}
\end{figure}
Finally, in Fig.~\ref{Fig:phase-diagram-inf}
we show the jump of the superfluid density $\Delta \rho_{\rm s}$ and the phase diagram in the $\lambda = \infty$ limit,
in which the modified Goldstone model reduces to the modified $XY$ model.
As the coupling $\lambda$ increases, the region of the first-order phase transition for $\theta_1 < \theta \leq \theta_2$ shrinks and ultimately disappears.
\subsection{Vortex configurations}
Here we discuss the relationship between topological defects (such as integer and half-integer vortices and one-dimensional solitons considered
in Sec.~\ref{Sec:basics}) and the corresponding phase transitions.
At the BKT transition temperature $T_1^{\rm BKT}$ with $\theta = 0^\circ$, the number of integer vortex-antivortex pairs is changing rapidly due to their bounding.
At the second and first-order transition temperatures $T_2^{\rm 2nd}$ and $T_1^{\rm 1st}$, the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry breaking causes the rapid decrease of one-dimensional solitons.
At the BKT transition temperature $T_2^{\rm BKT}$ with $\theta > \theta_2$, the number of half-integer vortex-antivortex pairs changes rapidly.
The vortexmolecules, which contain two half-quantized vortices should be stable in order for the BKT transition to exist at the temperature $T_2^{\rm BKT}$.
On the other hand, the stability of one-dimensional solitons is enough for the existence of the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry breaking.
The stability of vortex molecules for $\theta \gtrsim 78^\circ$ and of one-dimensional solitons for $\theta \gtrsim 15^\circ$ in the case of $\lambda = 8$ is consistent with the existence of $T_2^{\rm BKT}$ for $\theta > \theta_2 \approx 84.5^\circ$, and the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry breaking at $T_1^{\rm 2nd}$ or $T_\ast^{\rm 1st}$ for $\theta > 0$.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.99\linewidth]{vortex-100-008-150.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.99\linewidth]{vortex-600-008-150.pdf}
\end{minipage} \\[10pt]
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.99\linewidth]{vortex-870-008-104.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.99\linewidth]{vortex-870-008-066.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{
\label{Fig:vortex-08}
Snapshots of the vortex configurations and the phase profiles for $L = 64$, $\lambda = 8$ and (a) $\theta = 10^\circ$ and $T = T_1^{\rm 2nd}$, (b) $\theta = 60^\circ$ and $T = T_\ast^{\rm 1st}$, (c) $\theta = 87^\circ$ and $T = T_2^{\rm BKT}$, and (d) $\theta = 87^\circ$ and $T = T_1^{\rm 2nd}$.
The blue and red closed (open) circles denote the positions of integer (half-integer) vortices and antivortices, respectively.
}
\end{figure}
We next show snapshots of vortex configurations and the phase profile at the transition temperatures in Fig.~\ref{Fig:vortex-08}.
In all the panels, most vortices and antivortices form paired states with short distances.
Furthermore, most of them lie on the solitons that appear as boundaries between the two phases $\mathrm{arg}[\psi] \sim 0$ and $\mathrm{arg}[\psi] \sim \pi$.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.9\linewidth]{histgram-low.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.494\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.9\linewidth]{histgram-high.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{
\label{Fig:histgram}
Distribution functions $P(\mathrm{arg}[\psi])$ corresponding to the snapshots of the phase profile with $L = 128$, $\lambda = 8$ and (a) $\theta = 10^\circ$ and $T = T_1^{\rm 2nd}$ (black) and $\theta = 60^\circ$ and $T = T_\ast^{\rm 1st}$ (green), and (b) $\theta = 87^\circ$ and $T = T_2^{\rm BKT}$ (red) and (d) $\theta = 87^\circ$ and $T = T_1^{\rm 2nd}$ (black).
}
\end{figure}
Figure ~\ref{Fig:histgram} shows the distribution function $P(\mathrm{arg}[\psi])$ corresponding to the snapshot of the phase profile.
In Fig.~\ref{Fig:histgram} (b) for $\theta = 87^\circ$, the stability of one-dimensional solitons can be clearly seen from the double-peaked structure of $P(\mathrm{arg}[\psi])$ at $\mathrm{Arg}[\psi] = 0$ and $\mathrm{arg}[\psi] = \pi$.
At $T = T_2^{\rm BKT}$, the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry is not broken and the heights of two peaks are the same.
On the other hand, breaking of the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry at $T = T_1^{\rm 2nd}$ can be confirmed via the existence of imbalanced peaks $P(0) > P(\pi)$.
This imbalanced distribution can also be seen in Fig.~\ref{Fig:vortex-08} (d), where the region with $\mathrm{arg}[\psi] \sim 0$ is apparently larger than that with $\mathrm{arg}[\psi] = \pi$ and $\mathrm{Arg}[\psi] = -\pi$.
Note that, in Fig.~\ref{Fig:histgram} (a) for $\theta = 10^\circ$ and $\theta = 60^\circ$, however, the double peaked structure is absent and there is only one single peak at $\mathrm{arg}[\psi] = 0$. We believe that this absence comes from finite-size effects and it is expected that the double-peaked structure is restored with larger system size.
We note that all the peaked structures shown in Figs.~\ref{Fig:histgram}(a) and \ref{Fig:histgram}(b) come from finite-size effects and they become completely flat in the thermodynamic limit due to the CMW theorem.
\section{Summary}\label{sec:summary}
In this paper,
we first defined the modified Goldstone model in Eq.~(\ref{Eq:Ham}) as a regular and continuum version of the modified $XY$ model and constructed a soliton, an integer vortex and a molecule of half-quantized vortices connected by a soliton.
Then we analyzed the phase structure of the modified
Goldstone model in two dimensions via two different
approaches. First, by using the functional renormalization group technique, we
showed how to describe BKT transitions by
calculating the scale evolution of the effective Hamiltonian. Based on
earlier works, we constructed an approximation scheme of the
RG flow equations, where the field dependence of the
wave function renormalization is taken into account at the lowest order. In the standard
Goldstone model it has led to a more accurate description of the underlying
structure of a line of fixed points, and it has also turned out to be of
particular importance when one is interested in the role of the modified
kinetic term $\sim |\vec{\nabla} \psi^2|^2$, by revealing a second endpoint of
the line of fixed points. The FRG method predicts that in the modified
model there can exist a two-step phase transition, depending on the ratio
between the coefficients of the standard and modified kinetic terms. It has
also been shown that even if the coefficient of the modified kinetic term is
not large enough to split the phase transition into two, it is capable of
completely destroying its topological nature.
In addition,
this scenario has been verified to great accuracy via full numerical simulation
of the system by the Monte Carlo method. Through predicting critical
temperatures and calculating the superfluid density with the specific heat
numerically, we have confirmed the following properties of the phase
structure. If only the standard or modified kinetic terms are present, the
system undergoes one, and only one phase transition, which is of BKT type,
corresponding to vortex and half-vortex unbinding, respectively. If both
terms are present, depending on the ratio between their coefficients, and
by assuming that their square sum equals unity ($a^2+b^2=1$), there exist
either one or two transitions. If there is only one transition, it is never
topological and can be of both first and second order. If there are two
transitions, then the one corresponding to the higher temperature is of BKT
type, presumably related to half-vortex unbinding, while the other
transition is of Ising type.
It would be interesting to improve upon the present renormalization group
approximation scheme. Since higher-field derivatives of the wave function
renormalization factor could also play an important role for BKT-like
transitions, it would be interesting to derive a tower of equations for the
aforementioned factors, and solve them simultaneously \cite{tetradis94,rose17}. Furthermore, the
present scheme has only predicted the existence of a different end point of the
line of fixed points, which indicated a second transition, but
due to the singular nature of the flows below temperatures of the aforementioned
transition, details of the transition could not have been explored.
It would be particularly important to find a scheme
which can overcome this shortcoming.
The results of this paper can be contrasted to another model admitting
a vortex molecule solution of half-quantized vortices connected by a soliton,
that is, coherently coupled Bose-Einstein condensates or two-gap superconductors \cite{Kobayashi:2018ezm} and spin-1 spinor Bose-Einstein condensates under the quadratic Zeeman field \cite{Kobayashi:2019}.
In this case, a two-step phase transition does not occur
when two components are coupled by a Josephson interaction or a quadratic Zeeman field,
while it can occur when they are decoupled.
Essential differences between this case and that of
the modified Goldstone model discussed in this paper are yet to be clarified.
As an important application of the modified Goldstone model, we suggest a two-dimensional crystal system, where the perfect crystal is forbidden by the CMW theorem.
In this system, there are two different kinds of topological excitations; a dislocation and a disclination corresponding to spontaneous breaking of the translational and rotational symmetries, respectively.
The dislocation can be topologically equivalent to a pair of disclinations.
The Kosterlitz-Thouless-Nelson-Halperin-Young theory predicts a two-step transition \cite{Halperin,Young}, i.e., the BKT-like transition from the disordered phase to the isotropic hexatic phase in which only the quasi-long-range rotational order appears and disclinations are not bounded into dislocations and the first-order transition from the hexatic phase to the crystal phase having the quasi-long-range rotational order and the long-range translational order.
The mechanism for the two-step transition in this system has almost the same scenario as that for the modified Goldstone model, i.e., dislocations and disclinations correspond to integer and half-integer vortices, respectively.
Whereas a two-step transition has been observed in a two-dimensional colloidal crystal \cite{Zahn}, single first-order transitions have been observed in several two-dimensional crystal systems \cite{Naumovets}, and both single and two-step transitions have been reported in a helium film at low temperatures \cite{Nakamura}, depending on the density of helium atoms.
Our modified Goldstone model \eqref{Eq:Ham} can become a toy model for these systems, i.e., $a/b$ and $\lambda$ correspond to the ratio between the energies of disclinations and dislocations, and the compressibility of the system, respectively, and may give some intuitive guiding principle about the type of phase transitions in this system.
Our study of the modified Goldstone model in two Euclidean dimensions has revealed that there exist two-step phase transitions related to half-quantized vortex molecules connected by domain walls.
It is an open question whether there is any higher dimensional model
allowing a two-step phase transition.
For instance, in three dimensions, a pair of a monopole and an anti-monopole connected by a string may play a crucial role.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
This work was supported by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science (MEXT)-Supported Program for the Strategic Research Foundation at Private Universities ``Topological Science'' (Grant No. S1511006).
This work was also supported in part by JSPS KAKENHI Grants No.
16H03984 (M.\ K. and M.\ N.),
19K14713 (C.\ C.),
and 18H01217 (M.\ N.).
G.F. was also supported by the Hungarian National Research, Development and Innovation Office (Project No. 127982), by the János Bolyai Research Scholarship of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, and by the ÚNKP-19-4 New National Excellence Program of the Ministry for Innovation and Technology of Hungary.
The work of M.\ N. is also supported in part
by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research on Innovative Areas
``Topological Materials Science" (KAKENHI Grant No. 15H05855)
from MEXT of Japan.
\makeatletter
\@addtoreset{equation}{section}
\makeatother
\renewcommand{\theequation}{A\arabic{equation}}
|
\section{Introduction}
Networks provide an effective way to organize heterogeneous relevant data, which can often be leveraged to facilitate downstream applications. For example, the huge amount of textual and relationship data in social networks contains abundant information on people's preferences, and thus can be used for personalized advertising and recommendation. To this end, traditionally a matrix representing the network structure is often built first, then subsequent tasks proceed. However, matrix methods are computationally expensive and cannot be applied to large-scale networks.
Network embedding (NE) maps every node of a network into a low-dimensional vector, while seeking to retain the original network information. Subsequent tasks ({\em e.g.} similar vertices search, linkage prediction) can proceed by leveraging these low-dimensional features. To obtain network embeddings, \cite{perozzi2014deepwalk} proposed to first generate sequences of nodes by randomly walking along connected nodes. Word embedding methods are then employed to produce the embeddings for nodes by noting the analogies between node sequences and sentences in natural languages. Second-order proximity information is further taken into account in \cite{tang2015line}. To gather the network connection information more efficiently, the random walking strategy in \cite{perozzi2014deepwalk} is modified to favor the important nodes in \cite{grover2016node2vec}. However, all these methods only took the network structure into account, ignoring the huge amount of textual data. In Twitter social network, for example, tweets posted by a user contain valuable information on the user's preferences, political standpoints, and so on \cite{Bandyopadhyay2018SaC2Vec}.
To include textual information into the embeddings, \cite{tu2017cane} proposed to first learn embeddings for the textual data and network structure respectively, and then concatenate them to obtain the embeddings of nodes. The textual and structural embeddings are learned with an objective that encourages embeddings of neighboring nodes to be as similar as possible. Attention mechanism is further employed to highlight the important textual information by taking the impacts of texts from neighboring nodes into account. Later, \cite{shen2018improved} proposed to use the fine-grained word alignment mechanism to replace the attention mechanism in \cite{tu2017cane} in order to absorb the impacts from neighboring texts more effectively. However, both methods require the textual and structural embeddings from neighboring nodes to be as close as possible even if the nodes share little common contents. This could be problematic since a social network user may be connected to users who post totally different viewpoints because of different political standpoints. If two nodes are similar, it is the node embeddings, rather than the individual textual or structural embeddings, that should be close. Forcing representations of dissimilar data to be close is prone to yield bad representations. Moreover, since the structural and textual embeddings contain some common information, if they are concatenated directly, as done in \cite{tu2017cane,shen2018improved}, the information contained in the two parts is entangled in some very complicated way, increasing the difficulties of learning representative network embeddings.
In this paper, we propose a novel deep neural {\bf I}nformation {\bf F}usion {\bf A}rchitecture for textual {\bf N}etwork {\bf E}mbedding (NEIFA) to tackle the issues mentioned above. Instead of forcing the separate embeddings of structures and texts from neighboring nodes to be close, we define the learning objective based on the node embeddings directly. For the problem of information entanglement, inspired by the gating mechanism of long short-term memory (LSTM) \cite{hochreiter1997long}, we extract the complementary informations from texts and structures and then use them to constitute the node embeddings. A mutual gate is further designed to highlight the node's textual information that is consistent with neighbors' textual contents, while diminishing those that contracdict to each other. In this way, the model provides a mechanism to only allow the information that is consistent among neighboring nodes to flow into the node embeddings. The proposed network embedding method is evaluated on the tasks of link prediction and vertex classification, using three real-world datasets from different domains. It is shown that the proposed method outperforms state-of-the-art network embedding methods on the task of link prediction by a substantial margin, demonstrating that the obtained embeddings well retain the information in original networks. Similar phenomenons can also be observed in the vertex classification task. These results suggest the effectiveness of the proposed neural information fusion architecture for textual network embeddings.
\section{Related Work}
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{overallModel.pdf}
\caption{The overall framework of NEIFA.}
\label{fig:model}
\end{figure*}
\noindent {\bf Text Embedding} \quad There has been various methods to embed textual information into vector representations for NLP tasks. The classical method for embedding textual information could be one-hot vector, term frequency inverse document frequency (TF-IDF), etc. Due to the high-dimension and sparsity problems in here, \cite{mikolov2013efficient} proposed a novel neural network based skip-gram model to learn distributed word embeddings via word co-occurrences in a local window of textual content. To exploit the internal structure of text, convolutional neural networks (CNNs) \cite{blunsom2014convolutional,kim2014convolutional} is applied to obtain latent features of local textual content. Then, by following a pooling layer, fixed-length representations are generated. To have the embeddings better reflect the correlations among texts, soft attention mechanisms \cite{bahdanau2014neural,vaswani2017attention} is proposed to calculate the relative importances of words in a sentence by evaluating their relevances to the content of comparing sentences. Alternatively, gating mechanism is applied to strengthen the relevant textual information, while weakening the irrelevant one by controlling the information-flow path of a network in \cite{dauphin2017language,zhou2017selective}.
\noindent {\bf Network Embedding} \quad Network embedding methods can be categorized into two classes: (1) methods that solely utilize structure information; and (2) methods that consider both structure and textual content associated with vertices. For the first type of methods, DeepWalk \cite{perozzi2014deepwalk} was the first to introduce neural network technique into the network embedding field. In DeepWalk, node sequences are generated via randomly walking on the network, dense latent representations are by feeding those node sequences into the skip-gram model. LINE \cite{tang2015line} exploited the first-order and second-order proximity information of vertices in network by optimizing the joint and condition probability of edges. Further, Node2Vec \cite{grover2016node2vec} proposed a biased random walk to search a network and generate node sequences based on the depth-first search and width-first search. However, those methods only embed the structure information into vector representations, while ignoring the informative textual contents associated with vertices. To address this issue, some recent work seeks to the joint impact of structure and textual contents to obtain better representations. TADW \cite{yang2015network} proved that DeepWalk is equivalent to the matrix factorization and the textual information can be incorporated by simply adding the textual feature into the matrix factorization. CENE \cite{sun2016general} extends the original networks by transforming the textual content into another kinds of vertices, and the vertices are embedded into low-dimensional representations on the extended network. CANE \cite{tu2017cane} proposed to learn separate embeddings for the textual and structural information, and obtain the network embeddings by simply concatenating them, in which a mutual attention mechanism is used to model the semantic relationship between textual contents. WANE \cite{shen2018improved} modified the semantic extraction strategy in CANE by introducing a fine-grained word alignment technique to learn word-level semantic information more effectively. However, {most of recent} methods force the textual and structural embeddings of two neighboring nodes close to each other irrespective of their underlying contents.
\section{The Proposed Method}
A textual network is defined as $G$ = \{$V$, $E$, $T$\}, where $V$, $E$ and $T$ denote the vertices in the graph, edges between vertices and textual content associated with vertices, respectively. Each edge $e_{i,j} \in E$ suggests there is a relationship between vertex $v_i$ and $v_j$.
\subsection{Training Objective}
Suppose the structural and textual features of node $i$ are given and are denoted as $s_i$ and $t_i$, respectively. Existing methods are built on the objectives that encourage the structural and textual features of neighboring nodes to be as similar as possible. As discussed in the previous sections, this may make the node embeddings deviate from the true information in the nodes. In this paper, we define the objective based on the node embeddings directly, that is,
\begin{equation}
\label{lossRepresentation}
\mathcal{L} = \sum_{\{i, j\} \in E} \log p(h_i|h_j),
\end{equation}
where $h_i$ is the network embedding of node $i$, and is constructed from $s_i$ and $t_i$ by
\begin{equation}
h_i = {\mathcal{F}}(s_i, t_i);
\end{equation}
${\mathcal{F}}(\cdot, \cdot)$ is the fusion function that maps the structural and textual features into the network embeddings; and $p(h_i|h_j)$ denotes the conditional probability of network embedding $h_i$ given the network embedding $h_j$. Following LINE \cite{tang2015line}, the conditional probability in \eqref{lossRepresentation} is defined as:
\begin{equation}
\label{conditionalProbabilityH}
p(h_i|h_j) = \frac{\exp (h_i \cdot h_j)}{\sum_{z \in V} \exp (h_i \cdot h_z)}.
\end{equation}
Note that the structural feature $s_i$ is randomly initialized and will be learned along with the other model parameters. For the textual feature $t_i$, it is obtained via a trainable feature extraction function from the given texts, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
t_i = {\mathcal{T}}(x_i),
\end{equation}
where $x_i$ represents the texts associated with node $i$. From the definition of objective function (1), it can be seen that it is the network embeddings of nodes, rather than the individual structural or textual embeddings, that are encouraged to be close for neighboring nodes.
Details on how to realize the fusion function $\mathcal{F}(\cdot, \cdot)$ and feature extraction function ${\mathcal{T}}(\cdot)$ are deferred to Section \ref{Sec:fuse} and Section \ref{Sec:text}, respectively. The overall framework of our proposed NEIFA is shown in Fig.\ref{fig:model}.
\subsection{Fusion of Structural and Textual Features ${\mathcal{F}}(s_i, t_i)$}
\label{Sec:fuse}
\begin{figure}[!tp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.1]{complementary.pdf}
\caption{The Fusion Module.}
\label{fig:complementary}
\end{figure}
In this section, we will present how to fuse the structural and textual features to yield the embeddings for nodes. The fusion module ${\mathcal{F}}(s_i, t_i)$ is illustrated in Fig.\ref{fig:complementary}. The simplest way to obtain network embeddings is to concatenate them directly, {\em i.e.} $h_i=[s_i;t_i]$. However, it is known that the structural and textual features are not fully exclusive, and often contain some common information. Thus, if the network embeddings are generated by simply concatenating the two features, different parts of the embeddings become entangled to each other in some unknown but complex way. This may make the process of optimizing the objective function more difficult and hinder the model to learn representative embeddings for the nodes. In this paper, we instead distill the information that is complementary to the textual feature $t_i$ from $s_i$ first, and then concatenate the two complementary information to constitute the embeddings of nodes.
To distill the complementary information from the structural feature $s_i$, inspired by LSTM, an input gate is designed to eliminate the information in $s_i$ that has already appeared in $t_i$. Specifically, the gate is designed as
\begin{equation}
g_i = 1- \sigma(({\mathbf{P}}s_i + b_g) \odot t_i),
\end{equation}
where $\sigma(\cdot)$ is the sigmoid function; $\odot$ denotes the element-wise multiplication; ${\mathbf{P}}$ and $b_g$ are used to align the structural feature $s_i$ to the space of textual features $t_i$. From the definition of $g_i$, it can be seen that if the values on some specific dimension of ${\mathbf{P}}s_i + b_g$ and $t_i$ are both large, which indicates the same information appears in both $s_i$ and $t_i$, the gate $g_i$ will be closed. So, if $({\mathbf{P}}s_i + b_g)\odot t_i$ is multiplied to the gate $g_i$, only the information that is not contained in both $s_i$ and $t_i$ is allowed to pass through. Thus, $(({\mathbf{P}}s_i + b_g) \odot t_i)\odot g_i$ can be understood as the information in $s_i$ that is complementary to $t_i$. In practice, we untie the values of ${\mathbf{P}}$ and $b_g$, and use a new trainable matrix ${\mathbf{Q}}$ and bias $b_c$ instead. The complementary information is eventually computed as
\begin{equation}
z_i = (({\mathbf{Q}}s_i + b_c) \odot t_i)\odot g_i.
\end{equation}
Then, we concatenate complementary information $z_i$ to the textual features $t_i$ to produce the final network embedding
\begin{equation}
h_i = [z_i;t_i].
\end{equation}
In this way, given the structural and textual features $s_i$ and $t_i$, we successfully extract the complementary information from $s_i$ and generate the final network embedding $h_i$.
\subsection{Textual Feature Extraction ${\mathcal{T}(x_i)}$}
\label{Sec:text}
When extracting textual features for the embeddings of nodes, the impacts from neighboring nodes should also be taken into account, {\em i.e.} highlighting the consistent information, while dampening the inconsistent ones. To this end, we first repersent words with their corresponding embeddings, and then apply a one-layer CNN followed by an average pooling operator to extract the raw features for texts \cite{tu2017cane, shen2018baseline}. Given the raw textual features $r_i$ and $r_j$ of two neighboring nodes $i$ and $j$, we diminish the information that are not consistent in the two raw features. Specifically, the final textual features are computed for nodes $i$ and $j$ as
\begin{equation}
\label{iGatej}
t_{i} = r_i \odot \sigma(r_j),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{jGatei}
t_{j} = r_j \odot \sigma(r_i),
\end{equation}
where $\sigma(\cdot)$ serves as the role of gating. Since the raw textual feature $r_i$ often exhibits specific meanings on different dimensions, the expressions \eqref{iGatej} and \eqref{jGatei} can be understood as a way to control which information is allowed to flow into the embeddings. Only the information that is consitent among neighboring nodes can appear in the textual feature $t_i$, which is then fused into the network embeddings. There are a variety of other nonlinear functions that can serve as the role of gating, but in this work, the simplest but effective sigmoid function is employed.
\subsection{Training Details}
Maximizing the objective function in \eqref{lossRepresentation} requires to compute the expensive softmax function repeatedly, in which the summation over all nodes of the networks is needed for iteration. To address this issue, for each edge $e_{i,j} \in E$, we introduce negative sampling \cite{mikolov2013distributed} to simplify the optimization process. Therefore, the conditional distribution $p(h_i|h_j)$ into the following form:
\begin{equation}
\log \sigma (h_i\cdot h_j) + \sum_{k=1}^{K}E_{h_k\sim P(h)} [\log \sigma(-h_k\cdot h_i)]
\end{equation}
where $K$ is the number of negative samples, and $P(v) \propto d_v^{3/4}$ is the distribution of vertices with $d_v$ representing the out-degree of vertex $v$. Adam \cite{kingma2014adam} is employed to optimize the entire model based on randomly mini-batch of edges in each step.
\section{Experiments}
To evaluate the quality of the network embeddings generated by the proposed method, we apply them in two tasks: link prediction and vertex classification. Link prediction aims to predict whether there exists a link between two randomly chosen nodes based on the similarities of embeddings of the two nodes. Vertex classification, on the other hand, tries to classify the nodes into different categories based on the embeddings, provided that there exists some supervised information. Both tasks can achieve good performances only when the embeddings retain important information of the nodes, including both the structural and textual information. In the following, we will first introduce the datasets and baselines used in this paper, then describe the evaluation metric and experimental setups, and lastly report the performance of the proposed model on the tasks of link prediction and vertex classification, respectively.
\subsection{Datasets and Baselines}
\begin{table}[!htp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l|rrr}
\toprule
Datasets & {Zhihu} & {Cora} & {HepTh} \\
\midrule
Vertices & 10000 & 2277 & 1038 \\
Edges & 43894 & 5214 & 1990 \\
\#(Edges) & 2191 & 93 & 24 \\
*(Text) & 190 & 90 & 54\\
Labels & - & 7 & - \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Statistics of datasets, where \#(Edges) denotes the max number of the connective relationship of a node, and *(Text) denotes the average lengths of the text.}
\label{table:datasets}
\end{table}
Experiments are conducted on three real-world datasets: Zhihu \cite{sun2016general}, Cora \cite{mccallum2000automating} and HepTh \cite{leskovec2005graphs}. Below shows the detailed descriptions of the three datasets, with their statistics summaries given in Table \ref{table:datasets}. {The preprocessing procedure of the above datasets is the same as that in \cite{tu2017cane} \footnote[1]{https://github.com/thunlp/CANE}.}
\begin{itemize}
\item {\emph{Zhihu}} \cite{sun2016general} is a Q\&A based community social network. In our experiment, 10000 active users and the descriptions of their interested topics are collected as the vertices and texts of the social network to be studied. There are total 43894 edges which indicate the relationship between active users.
\item {\emph{Cora}} \cite{mccallum2000automating} is a citation network that consists of 2277 machine learning papers with text contents divided into 7 categories. The citation relations among the papers are reflected in the 5214 edges.
\item {\emph{HepTh}} \cite{leskovec2005graphs} (High Energy Physics Theory) is a citation network from the e-print arXiv. In our experiment, 1038 papers with abstract information are collected, among which 1990 edges are observed.
\end{itemize}
To evaluate the effectiveness of our proposed model, several strong baseline methods are compared with, which are divided into two categories as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\emph{Structure-only:}} DeepWalk \cite{perozzi2014deepwalk}, LINE \cite{tang2015line}, Node2vec \cite{grover2016node2vec}.
\item {\emph{Structure and Text:}} TADW \cite{yang2015network}, CENE \cite{sun2016general}, CANE \cite{tu2017cane}, WANE \cite{shen2018improved}.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Evaluation Metrics and Experimental Setups}
\begin{table*}[t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lrrrrrrrrr}
\toprule
\% Training Edges & 15\% & 25\% & 35\% &45 \% & 55\% & 65\% & 75\% & 85\% & 95\% \\
\midrule
DeepWalk$^\dag$ & 56.6 & 58.1 & 60.1 & 60.0 & 61.8 & 61.9 & 63.3 & 63.7 & 67.8 \\
LINE$^\dag$ & 52.3 & 55.9 & 59.9 & 60.9 & 64.3 & 66.0 & 67.7 & 69.3 & 71.1 \\
node2vec$^\dag$ & 54.2 & 57.1 & 57.3 & 58.3 & 58.7 & 62.5 & 66.2 & 67.6 & 68.5 \\
\midrule
TADW$^\dag$ & 52.3 & 54.2 & 55.6 & 57.3 & 60.8 & 62.4 & 65.2 & 63.8 & 69.0 \\
CENE$^\dag$ & 56.2 & 57.4 & 60.3 & 63.0 & 66.3 & 66.0 & 70.2 & 69.8 & 73.8 \\
CANE$^\dag$ & 56.8 & 59.3 & 62.9 & 64.5 & 68.9 & 70.4 & 71.4 & 73.6 & 75.4 \\
WANE$^\ddag$ & 58.7 & 63.5 & 68.3 & 71.9 & 74.9 & 77.0 & 79.7 & 80.0 & 82.6 \\
\midrule
NEIFA & {\bf 68.9} & {\bf 73.7} & {\bf 78.3} & {\bf 81.0} & {\bf 84.5} & {\bf 87.3} & {\bf 88.2} & {\bf 89.6} & {\bf 90.1} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{AUC scores for link prediction on Zhihu. Note that $\dag$ and $\ddag$ indicate the results are taken from \cite{tu2017cane} and \cite{shen2018improved}, respectively.}
\label{table:Zhihu}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lrrrrrrrrr}
\toprule
\% Training Edges & 15\% & 25\% & 35\% &45 \% & 55\% & 65\% & 75\% & 85\% & 95\% \\
\midrule
DeepWalk$^\dag$ & 56.0 & 63.0 & 70.2 & 75.5 & 80.1 & 85.2 & 85.3 & 87.8 & 90.3 \\
LINE$^\dag$ & 55.0 & 58.6 & 66.4 & 73.0 & 77.6 & 82.8 & 85.6 & 88.4 & 89.3 \\
node2vec$^\dag$ & 55.9 & 62.4 & 66.1 & 75.0 & 78.7 & 81.6 & 85.9 & 87.3 & 88.2 \\
\midrule
TADW$^\dag$ & 86.6 & 88.2 & 90.2 & 90.8 & 90.0 & 93.0 & 91.0 & 93.4 & 92.7 \\
CENE$^\dag$ & 72.1 & 86.5 & 84.6 & 88.1 & 89.4 & 89.2 & 93.9 & 95.0 & 95.9 \\
CANE$^\dag$ & 86.8 & 91.5 & 92.2 & 93.9 & 94.6 & 94.9 & 95.6 & 96.6 & 97.7 \\
WANE$^\ddag$ & {\bf 91.7} & {\bf 93.3} & 94.1 & 95.7 & 96.2 & 96.9 & 97.5 & 98.2 & 99.1 \\
\midrule
NEIFA & 89.0 & 92.2 & {\bf 95.3} & {\bf 96.5} & {\bf 97.1} & {\bf 97.4} & {\bf 97.6} & {\bf 98.5} & {\bf 99.2} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{AUC scores for link prediction on Cora. Note that $\dag$ and $\ddag$ indicate the results are taken from \cite{tu2017cane} and \cite{shen2018improved}, respectively.}
\label{table:Cora}
\end{table*}
In link prediction, the performance criteria of area under the curve (AUC) \cite{hanley1982meaning} is used, which represents the probability that vertices in a random unobserved link are more similar than those in a random non-existent link.
For the vertex classification task, a logistic regression model is first trained to classify the embeddings into different categories based on the provided labels of nodes. Then, the trained model is used to classify the network embeddings in test set, and the classification accuracy is used as the performance criteria of this task.
To have a fair comparison with competitive methods, the dimension of network embeddings is set to 200 for all considered methods. The number of negative samples is set to 1 and the mini-batch size is set to 64 to speed up the training processes. Adam \cite{kingma2014adam} is employed to train our model with a learning rate of $1 \times 10^{-3}$.
\subsection{Link Prediction}
\begin{table*}[!htp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lrrrrrrrrr}
\toprule
\% Training Edges & 15\% & 25\% & 35\% &45 \% & 55\% & 65\% & 75\% & 85\% & 95\% \\
\midrule
DeepWalk$^\dag$ & 55.2 & 66.0 & 70.0 & 75.7 & 81.3 & 83.3 & 87.6 & 88.9 & 88.0 \\
LINE$^\dag$ & 53.7 & 60.4 & 66.5 & 73.9 & 78.5 & 83.8 & 87.5 & 87.7 & 87.6 \\
node2vec$^\dag$ & 57.1 & 63.6 & 69.9 & 76.2 & 84.3 & 87.3 & 88.4 & 89.2 & 89.2 \\
\midrule
TADW$^\dag$ & 87.0 & 89.5 & 91.8 & 90.8 & 91.1 & 92.6 & 93.5 & 91.9 & 91.7 \\
CENE$^\dag$ & 86.2 & 84.6 & 89.8 & 91.2 & 92.3 & 91.8 & 93.2 & 92.9 & 93.2 \\
CANE$^\dag$ & 90.0 & 91.2 & 92.0 & 93.0 & 94.2 & 94.6 & 95.4 & 95.7 & 96.3 \\
WANE$^\ddag$ & {\bf 92.3} & 94.1 & 95.7 & 96.7 & {\bf 97.5} & 97.5 & 97.7 & 98.2 & 98.7 \\
\midrule
NEIFA & 91.7 & {\bf 94.2} & {\bf 95.9} & {\bf 96.8} & 97.4 & {\bf 97.6} & {\bf 98.0} & {\bf 98.6} & {\bf 99.1} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{AUC scores for link prediction on HepTh. Note that $\dag$ and $\ddag$ indicate the results are taken from \cite{tu2017cane} and \cite{shen2018improved}, respectively.}
\label{table:HepTh}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\subfigure[Zhihu]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.33\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.07in]{zhihu.pdf}
\end{minipage}
}%
\subfigure[Cora]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.33\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.10in]{cora.pdf}
\end{minipage}%
}%
\centering
\subfigure[HepTh]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.33\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.08in]{hepth.pdf}
\end{minipage}%
}%
\caption{Ablation study of NEIFA model on different datasets on link prediction task.}
\label{fig:ablation}
\end{figure*}
We randomly extract a portion of edges from the whole edges to constitute the training datasets, and use the rest as the test datasets. The AUC scores of different models under proportions ranging from 15\% to 95\% on Zhihu, Cora and HepTh datasets are shown in Table \ref{table:Zhihu}, Table \ref{table:Cora} and Table \ref{table:HepTh}, respectively, with the best performance highlighted in bold.
As can be seen from Table \ref{table:Zhihu}, our proposed method outperforms all other baselines in Zhihu dataset substantially, with approximately a 10 percent improvement over the current state-of-the-art WANE model. This may be partially attributed to the complicated Zhihu dataset, in which both the structures and texts contain important informations. If the two individual features are concatenated directly, there may be sever information overlapping problem, limiting the models to learning good embeddings. The proposed complementary information fusion method alleviate the issue by disentangling the structural and textual features. In adition, the proposed mutual gate mechanism that removes inconsistent textual information from a node's textual feature also contribute to the performance gains.
On the other hand, the substantial gain may also be partially attributed to the objective function that is directly defined on the network embeddings. That is because the inconsistencies of the structural or textual information among neighboring nodes are more likely to happen in complex networks.
For the other two datasets, as shown in Table \ref{table:Cora} and Table \ref{table:HepTh}, our proposed method outperforms baseline methods overall. The results strongly demonstrate that the network embeddings generated by the proposed model are easier to preserve the original information in the nodes. It can be also seen that the performance gains observed in the Cora and HepTh datasets are not as substantial as that in Zhihu dataset. The relatively small improvement may be attributed to the fact that the number of edges and neighbors in Cora and HepTh datasets are much smaller that Zhihu datasets. We speculate that the information in structures of the two datasets is far less than that in texts, implying that the overlapping issue is not as sever as that in Zhihu. Hence, direct concatenation will not induce significant performance loss.
\noindent {\bf Ablation Study} \quad To demonstrate the effectiveness of proposed fusion method and mutual gate mechanism, three variants of the proposed model are evaluated: (1)NEIFA(w/o FM): NEIFA without both fusion process and mutual gated mechanism where the raw textual features $r$ are directly regarded as network embeddings. (2) NEIFA(w/o F): NEIFA without fusion process where the textual features $t$ are directly regarded as network embeddings. (3) NEIFA(w/o M): NEIFA without mutual gated mechanism where the network embeddings are obtained by fusing the structural features and raw textual features. The three variants are compared with original NEIFA model on the three datasets above. The results are showed in Fig.\ref{fig:ablation}. It can be seen that for networks with very sparse structure, such as Hepth, the method that simply uses the raw textual features as their network embeddings can achieve pretty good performance. In the simple datasets, the proposed model even exhibits worse performance in the case of small proportion of training edges. As the datasets become larger and more complex network structure is included, the performance of only using the textual embeddings decreases rapidly. The reason may be that as the networks grow, the differences of structural or textual data among neighboring nodes become more apparent, and the advantages of the mutual gate mechanism and information fusion method will show up.
\subsection{Vertex Classification}
To demonstrate the superiority of proposed method, the vertex classification experiment is also considered on the Cora dataset. This experiment is established on the basis that if the original network contains different types of nodes, good embeddings mean that they can be classified into specific classes by a simple classifier easily. For the proposed method, the embedding of a node varies as it interacts with different nodes. To have the embedding fixed, we follow procedures in \cite{tu2017cane} to yield a node's embedding by averaing the embeddings that are obtained when the node interacts with different neighbors.
To this end, we randomly split the node embeddings of all nodes with a proportion of 50\%-50\% into a training and testing set, respectively. A logistic regression classifier regularized by $L_2$ distance \cite{fan2008liblinear} is then trained on the node embeddings from training set. The classification performance is tested on the hold-out testing set. The above procedures are repeated 10 times and their average value is reported as the final performance. It can be seen from Fig.\ref{fig:bar} that methods considering both structural and textual information show better classification accuracies than methods leveraging only structural information, demonstrating the importance of incorporating textual information into the embeddings. Moreover, NEIFA outperforms all methods considered, which further proves the superiority of our proposed model.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{bar.pdf}
\caption{Vertex classification result on Cora dataset}
\label{fig:bar}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.33]{tsne.pdf}
\caption{$t-$SNE visualization of our learned network embeddings on Cora dataset.}
\label{fig:tsen}
\end{figure}
To intuitively understand the embeddings produced by the proposed model, we employ $t$-SNE to map our learned embeddings to a 2-D space. The result is shown in Fig.\ref{fig:tsen}, where different colors indicate that the nodes belong to different categories. Note that, although the mapping in t-SNE is trained without using any category labels, the latent label information is still partially extracted out. As shown in Fig.\ref{fig:tsen}, the points with the same color are closer to each other, while the ones with different colors are far apart.
\section{Conclusions}
In this paper, a novel deep neural architecture is proposed to effectively fuse the structural and textual informations in networks. Unlike existing embeddings methods which encourage both textual and structural embeddings of two neighboring nodes close to each other, we define the training objective based on the node embeddings directly. To address the information duplication problem in the structural and textual features, a complementary information fusing method is further developed to fuse the two features. Besides, a mutual gate is designed to highlight the textual information in a node that is consistent with the textual contents of neighboring nodes, while diminishing those that are conflicting to each other. Exhaustive experimental results on several tasks manifest the advantages of our proposed model.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We thank Wei Liu and Wenxuan Li for their helps. This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) under Grant No. 61806223, U1711262, U1501252, U1611264 and U1711261, and National Key R\&D Program of China (2018YFB1004404).
\newpage
|
\section{Introduction}
Many basic properties in Tutte's flow theory for unsigned graphs do not have their counterparts for signed graphs.
For instance Tutte's $5$-flow conjecture \cite{Tutte54} states that every flow-admissible unsigned graph has a nowhere-zero 5-flow.
The best approximation so far is that every flow-admissible unsigned graph has a nowhere-zero 6-flow \cite{Seymour1981}.
Flow-admissible signed graphs which do not admit a nowhere-zero 5-flow are known.
Therefore, the 5-flow conjecture is not true for signed graphs in general. But a 6-flow theorem might be true for flow-admissible
signed graphs as conjectured by Bouchet \cite{Bouchet1983}. This conjecture is verified
for several classes of signed graphs (see e.g.~\cite{Kaiser2016, Khelladi87, LuLuoZhang, MaRo15, RSS2018, signed_regular_graphs, {2-negative-edges}}).
It is well known that cycles are fundamental elements in flow theory since it is the
support of 2-flows. For unsigned graphs, every element in the cycle space is the support of a 2-flow.
However, some element (long barbells) in the cycle space of a signed graph is the
support of a 3-flow but not a $2$-flow. Therefore, we may expect signed graphs without long barbells to inherit
some nice properties from unsigned graphs, which naturally motivates the question
whether signed graphs without long barbells have
almost similar properties as unsigned graphs in Tutte's flow theory.
Unfortunately, the answer is no. For example, the unsigned Petersen graph admits a
nowhere-zero 5-flow, while the signed Petersen graph of Figure \ref{fig: signed petersen graph}, which
has no long barbells, admits a nowhere-zero $6$-flow but no nowhere-zero $5$-flow.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.8]
\path (18:1.2cm) coordinate (1);\draw [fill=black] (1) circle (0.08cm);
\path (18:2.3cm) coordinate (6);\draw [fill=black] (6) circle (0.08cm);
\path (90:1.2cm) coordinate (2);\draw [fill=black] (2) circle (0.08cm);
\path (90:2.3cm) coordinate (7);\draw [fill=black] (7) circle (0.08cm);
\path (162:1.2cm) coordinate (3);\draw [fill=black] (3) circle (0.08cm);
\path (162:2.3cm) coordinate (8);\draw [fill=black] (8) circle (0.08cm);
\path (234:1.2cm) coordinate (4);\draw [fill=black] (4) circle (0.08cm);
\path (234:2.3cm) coordinate (9);\draw [fill=black] (9) circle (0.08cm);
\path (306:1.2cm) coordinate (5);\draw [fill=black] (5) circle (0.08cm);
\path (306:2.3cm) coordinate (10);\draw [fill=black] (10) circle (0.08cm);
\draw[line width=0.85pt] (1) -- (6)(2) -- (7)(3) -- (8)(4) -- (9)(5) -- (10)(6) -- (7)(7) -- (8)(8) -- (9)(9) -- (10)(10) -- (6);
\draw[dotted, line width=1pt] (1) -- (3) (3) -- (5) (5) -- (2) (2) -- (4) (4) -- (1);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{\small\it A signed Petersen graph admits a nowhere-zero $6$-flow, but no nowhere-zero $5$-flow. \\ Positive edges are solid and negative edges
are dashed.}
\label{fig: signed petersen graph}
\end{figure}
Khelladi verified Bouchet's $6$-flow conjecture for flow-admissible $3$-edge-connected signed graphs without long barbells.
\begin{theorem}{\rm (Khelladi \cite{Khelladi87})}
\label{TH: 3-edge-connected}
Let $(G,\sigma)$ be a flow-admissible $3$-edge-connected signed graph. If $(G,\sigma)$ contains no long barbells, then it admits a nowhere-zero $6$-flow.
\end{theorem}
Lu et al. \cite{LuLuoZhang} also showed that every flow-admissible cubic signed graph without long barbells admits a nowhere-zero $6$-flow.
In Section \ref{M-I-flow} we will verify Bouchet's 6-flow conjecture for the family of signed graphs without long barbells.
We further study the relation between
modulo flows and integer flows on signed graphs.
The equivalency of modulo flow and integer flow is a fundamental result in the theory of flows on unsigned graphs.
\begin{theorem}
\label{TH: Tutte mod-int}
{\rm (Tutte \cite{Tutte1947}, or see Younger \cite{Younger83})}
An unsigned graph admits a nowhere-zero modulo $k$-flow if and only if it admits a nowhere-zero $k$-flow.
\end{theorem}
Almost all landmark results in flow theory, such as, the $4$-flow and $8$-flow theorems
by Jaeger \cite{Jaeger1979}, the $6$-flow theorem
by Seymour \cite{Seymour1981}, the $3$-flow theorems
by Thomassen \cite{Thomassen2012} and by Lov\'asz et al. \cite{Lovasz2013}, are proved for modulo flows.
However, there is no equivalent result in regard to Theorem~\ref{TH: Tutte mod-int} for signed graphs in general.
Bouchet \cite{Bouchet1983} proved for signed graphs that the admission of a modulo $k$-flow implies the admission of a $2k$-flow,
which is a well known result of this kind.
We will prove an analog of
Theorem~\ref{TH: Tutte mod-int} for the family of signed graphs without long barbells.
We show that the admittance of a nowhere-zero modulo $k$-flow and a nowhere-zero $k$-flow are equivalent for $k = 3$ or $k \geq 5$.
In Section \ref{Sum-flow} we study the decomposition of flows.
For unsigned graphs, a positive $k$-flow can be expressed as the sum of some $2$-flows.
\begin{theorem}
\label{TH: sum Tutte}
{\rm (Little, Tutte and Younger \cite{Little1988})}
Let $G$ be an unsigned graph and $(\tau, f)$ be a positive $k$-flow of $G$.
Then
$$(\tau,f) ~ = ~\sum_{i=1}^{k-1}(\tau, f_i),$$ where each $(\tau, f_i)$ is a non-negative $2$-flow.
\end{theorem}
We extend Theorem~\ref{TH: sum Tutte} to the class of signed graphs without long barbells.
The paper closes with the study of circular flows in Section \ref{C-flow}.
For an unsigned graph $G$, Goddyn et al. \cite{Goddyn} showed $\Phi_i(G)=\lceil\Phi_c(G)\rceil$.
Raspaud and Zhu \cite{Raspaud_Zhu_2011} conjectured this to be true for a signed graph $(G,\sigma)$ as well, and
they proved that $\Phi_i(G,\sigma) \leq 2 \lceil \Phi_c(G,\sigma) \rceil - 1$. The conjecture was disproved in \cite{signed_regular_graphs} by constructing a family of signed graphs where the supremum of $\Phi_i(G,\sigma) - \Phi_c(G,\sigma)$ is 2 (see one member of the family depicted in Figure \ref{not_G1}). This result was further improved in \cite{maca_stef} by showing that the supremum of $\Phi_i(G,\sigma) - \Phi_c(G,\sigma)$ is $3$ which is best possible. We show that $\Phi_i(G,\sigma)=\lceil\Phi_c(G,\sigma)\rceil$ for a signed graph $(G,\sigma)$ without long barbells and verify the conjecture of Raspaud and Zhu for this family of signed graphs.
The result is a consequence of a normalization theorem for signed graphs which states that every nowhere-zero $\frac{p}{q}$-flow on a signed graph can be normalized in such a way, that each flow value is a multiple of $\frac{1}{2q}$. For unsigned graphs it is known that every nowhere-zero $\frac{p}{q}$-flow on a signed graph can be normalized in such a way, that each flow value is a multiple of $\frac{1}{q}$ \cite{Steffen_2001}. We show that this is also true for signed graphs without long barbells.
\section{Notations and Terminology}
Let $G$ be a graph. For $S \subseteq V(G)$, the set $V(G)-S$ is denoted by $S^c$.
For $U_1, U_2\subseteq V(G)$, the set of edges with one end in $U_1$ and the other in $U_2$ is denoted by $\delta_{G}(U_1, U_2)$.
For convenience, we write $\delta_G(U_1, U_1^c)$ for $\delta_G(U_1)$ and $\delta_G(\{v\})$ for $\delta_G(v)$.
The degree of $v$ is $d_G(v)=|\delta_G(v)|$.
A signed graph $(G,\sigma)$ consists of a graph $G$ and a {\em signature} $\sigma : E(G) \rightarrow \{-1,+1\}$ that partitions the edges into negative and positive edges.
\label{P: implicit}
The set $E_N(G,\sigma)$ denotes the set of all negative edges in $(G,\sigma)$. An unsigned graph can also be considered as a signed graph
with the all-positive signature, i.e.~$E_N(G,\sigma)=\emptyset$.
A circuit $(C,\sigma|_{E(C)})$, or shortly $C$, is a connected $2$-regular subgraph
of $(G,\sigma)$. A circuit $C$
is {\em balanced} if $|E_N(C)|\equiv 0 \pmod 2$, and it is {\em unbalanced} otherwise.
A signed graph is {\em balanced} if it does not contain an unbalanced circuit and it is {\em unbalanced} otherwise.
A {\em signed circuit} is a signed graph of one of the following three types:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(1)] a balanced circuit;
\item[(2)] a short barbell, the union of two unbalanced circuits that meet at a single vertex;
\item[(3)] a long barbell, the union of two disjoint unbalanced circuits with a path that meets the circuits only at its ends.
\end{itemize}
Following Bouchet \cite{Bouchet1983}, we view an edge $e=uv$ of a signed graph $(G,\sigma)$ as two {\em half-edges} $h_e^u$ and $h_e^v$, one incident with $u$ and one incident with $v$. Let $H_G(v)$ (abbreviated $H(v)$) be the set of all half-edges incident with $v$, and $H(G)$ be the set of all half-edges in $(G,\sigma)$. An {\em orientation} of $(G,\sigma)$ is a mapping $\tau: H(G)\rightarrow \{-1, +1\}$ such that for every $e=uv\in E(G)$, $\tau(h_e^u)\tau(h_e^v)=-\sigma(e)$. If $\tau(h_e^u)=1$, then $h_e^u$ is oriented away from $u$; if $\tau(h_e^u)=-1$, then $h_e^u$ is oriented toward $u$. Thus, based on the signature, a positive edge can be directed like
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.8]
\path (0.8,0) coordinate (2);\draw [fill=black] (2) circle (0.08cm);
\path (-0.8,0) coordinate (1);\draw [fill=black] (1) circle (0.08cm);
\draw[directed, redirected, line width=0.85pt] (1) -- (2);
\end{tikzpicture}
or like
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.8]
\path (0.8,0) coordinate (1);\draw [fill=black] (1) circle (0.08cm);
\path (-0.8,0) coordinate (2);\draw [fill=black] (2) circle (0.08cm);
\draw[redirected, directed, line width=0.85pt] (1) -- (2);
\end{tikzpicture}
and a negative edge can be directed like
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.8]
\path (0.8,0) coordinate (2);\draw [fill=black] (2) circle (0.08cm);
\path (-0.8,0) coordinate (1);\draw [fill=black] (1) circle (0.08cm);
\draw[redirected, dotted, line width=0.8pt] (1) -- (2);
\draw[redirected, dotted, line width=0.8pt] (2) -- (1);
\end{tikzpicture}
or like
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.8]
\path (0.8,0) coordinate (2);\draw [fill=black] (2) circle (0.08cm);
\path (-0.8,0) coordinate (1);\draw [fill=black] (1) circle (0.08cm);
\draw[directed, dotted, line width=0.8pt] (2) -- (1);
\draw[directed, dotted, line width=0.8pt] (1) -- (2);
\end{tikzpicture}.
A signed graph $(G,\sigma)$ together with an orientation $\tau$ is called an {\em oriented signed graph}, denoted by $(G,\tau)$, with underlying signature $\sigma_{\tau}$.
\begin{definition}
\label{DE: Flow}
Let $(G,\tau)$ be an oriented signed graph and $f: E(G) \to \mathbb R$ be a mapping. Let $r\ge 2$ be a real number and $k\ge 2$ be an integer.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(1)] The {\em boundary} of $(\tau,f)$ is the mapping $\partial (\tau,f): V(G)\to \mathbb R$ defined as
$$\partial (\tau, f)(v)=\sum_{h\in H(v)}\tau(h)f(e_h)
$$
for each vertex $v$, where $e_h$ is the edge of $(G,\sigma_{\tau})$ containing $h$.
\item[(2)]The {\em support} of $f$, denoted by $\supp (f)$, is the set of edges $e$ with $|f(e)| >0$.
\item [(3)] If $\partial (\tau,f)=0$, then $(\tau,f)$ is called a {\em flow} of $(G,\sigma_{\tau})$.
A flow $(\tau,f)$ is said to be {\em nowhere-zero} of $(G,\sigma_{\tau})$ if $\supp (f)=E(G)$.
\item [(4)] If $1\leq |f(e)|\leq r-1$ for each $e\in E(G)$,
then the flow $(\tau,f)$ is called a {\em circular $r$-flow} of $(G,\sigma_{\tau})$.
\item [(5)] If $f(e)\in \mathbb Z$ and $1\leq |f(e)|\leq k-1$ for each $e\in E(G)$,
then the flow $(\tau,f)$ is called a {\em nowhere-zero $k$-flow} of $(G,\sigma_{\tau})$.
\item [ (6)] If $\partial (\tau,f)\equiv 0 \pmod k$ and $f(e)\in \mathbb{Z}_k\setminus \{0\}$ for each $e \in E(G)$, then the flow $(\tau,f)$ is called a {\em nowhere-zero modulo $k$-flow} or a {\em nowhere-zero $\mathbb{Z}_k$-flow} of $(G,\sigma_{\tau})$.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
A signed graph is {\em flow-admissible} if it admits a nowhere-zero $k$-flow for some integer $k$. In a signed graph,
{\em switching} at a vertex $u$ means reversing the signs of all edges incident with $u$. Two signed graphs are {\em equivalent} if one can be obtained from the other
by a sequence of switches. Then a signed graph is balanced if and only if it is equivalent to a graph without negative edges.
Note that switching at a vertex does not change the parity of the number of negative edges in a circuit and it does not change the flows either. Bouchet \cite{Bouchet1983} gave a characterization for flow-admissible signed graphs.
\begin{proposition} {\rm (Bouchet~\cite{Bouchet1983})}\label{flow admissible}
A connected signed graph $(G,\sigma)$ is flow-admissible if and only if it is not equivalent to a signed graph with exactly one negative edge and has no cut-edge $b$ such that $(G-b,\sigma|_{G-b})$ has a balanced component.
\end{proposition}
The following lemma is a direct consequence of Proposition \ref{flow admissible} and the definition of long barbell.
\begin{lemma}
\label{LE: bridgeless}
Let $(G,\sigma)$ be a signed graph without long barbells. Then for each $X\subseteq V(G)$,
one of $(G[X],\sigma|_{E(G[X])})$ and $(G[X^c],\sigma|_{E(G[X^c])})$ is balanced. Thus, if $(G,\sigma)$ is flow-admissible,
then $(G,\sigma)$ is bridgeless.
\end{lemma}
For a flow-admissible signed graph $(G,\sigma)$, its {\em circular flow number} and {\em integer flow number}
are defined respectively by
\begin{eqnarray*}
\Phi_c(G,\sigma)&=&\inf\{r : \mbox{$(G,\sigma)$ admits a circular $r$-flow}\},\\
\Phi_i(G,\sigma)&=&\min\{k : \mbox{$(G,\sigma)$ admits a nowhere-zero $k$-flow}\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Raspaud and Zhu \cite{Raspaud_Zhu_2011} showed that $\Phi_c(G,\sigma)$ is a rational number for any
flow-admissible signed graph $(G,\sigma)$ and
$\Phi_c(G,\sigma) = \min \{r : \mbox{$(G,\sigma)$ admits a circular $r$-flow}\}$, just like for unsigned graphs.
\section{Integer flows and modulo flows}
\label{M-I-flow}
\subsection{Integer flows}
This subsection will extend Khelladi's result (Theorem \ref{TH: 3-edge-connected}) to the class of all signed graphs without long barbells.
For the proof of our result we will need the following two results:
\begin{theorem}{\rm (Seymour~\cite{Seymour1981})}
\label{6-flow}
Every bridgeless unsigned graph admits a nowhere-zero $6$-flow.
\end{theorem}
\begin{lemma}{\rm (Lu, Luo and Zhang \cite{LuLuoZhang})}
\label{extend k-flow}
Let $G$ be an unsigned graph with an orientation $\tau$ and assume that $G$ admits a nowhere-zero $k$-flow. If a vertex $u$ of $G$ has degree at most $3$ and $\gamma: \delta_G(u)\to \{\pm 1, \dots, \pm (k-1)\}$ satisfies $\partial(\tau,\gamma)(u)= 0$, then there is a nowhere-zero $k$-flow $(\tau,\phi)$ of $G$ so that $\phi|_{\delta(u)}=\gamma$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{theorem}
\label{TH: 6-flow}
Let $(G,\sigma)$ be a flow-admissible signed graph. If $(G,\sigma)$ contains no long barbells, then it admits a nowhere-zero $6$-flow.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} Suppose to the contrary that the statement is not true.
Let $(G,\sigma)$ be a counterexample with $|E(G)|$ minimum. We will deduce a contradiction to Theorem \ref{TH: 3-edge-connected},
by showing that $G$ is 3-edge-connected.
If $G$ has vertices of degree two, then the graph $\overline{G}$ obtained by suppressing all vertices of degree two remains flow-admissible and contains no long barbells. Thus by the minimality of $G$, $\overline{G}$ admits a nowhere-zero $6$-flow, so does $G$, a contradiction. Hence $G$ contains no vertices of degree two. Since $(G,\sigma)$ is flow-admissible, it contains no vertices of degree one and thus the minimum degree of $G$ is at least three. Furthermore, by Lemma~\ref{LE: bridgeless}, $(G,\sigma)$ is bridgeless since it contains no long barbells.
Suppose that $(G,\sigma)$ has a $2$-edge-cut, say $\{u_1u_2,w_1w_2\}$. Let $(G_1,\sigma|_{E(G_1)})$ and $(G_2,\sigma|_{E(G_2)})$ be the two components of $G - \{e_1,e_2\}$ where $e_1=u_1u_2$ and $e_2=w_1w_2$ with $u_i,w_i \in V(G_i)$ for $i=1,2$.
By Lemma~\ref{LE: bridgeless} again, one of $(G_1,\sigma|_{E(G_1)})$ and $(G_2,\sigma|_{E(G_2)})$ is balanced. We may assume that $(G_1,\sigma|_{E(G_1)})$ is balanced.
By switching, we may further assume that all edges in $(G_1,\sigma|_{E(G_1)})$ are positive. Fix an arbitrary $\tau$ on $H(G)$. Let $G'_1$ be the unsigned graph obtained from $(G,\sigma)$ by contracting $H(G_2)\cup \{h_{e_1}^{u_2}, h_{e_2}^{w_2}\}$ into a vertex $v_1$, and let $(G'_2,\sigma|_{E(G'_2)})$ be the signed graph obtained from $(G,\sigma)$ by contracting $H(G_1)$ into a vertex $v_2$. An illustration on $G_1'$ and $(G'_2,\sigma|_{E(G'_2)})$ is shown in Figure \ref{FIG: contract}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.5]
\path(-2,1) coordinate (u1);\draw [fill=black] (u1) circle (0.1cm);
\path(2,1) coordinate (u2);\draw [fill=black] (u2) circle (0.1cm);
\path(-2,-1) coordinate (w1);\draw [fill=black] (w1) circle (0.1cm);
\path(2,-1) coordinate (w2);\draw [fill=black] (w2) circle (0.1cm);
\draw [directed,dotted,line width=0.85] (u1)--(0,1);
\draw [directed,dotted,line width=0.85] (u2)--(0,1);
\draw [redirected,directed,line width=0.85] (w1)--(w2);
\draw [line width=0.85] (-2.5,0) ellipse (1.35 and 2.5);
\draw [line width=0.85] (2.5,0) ellipse (1.35 and 2.5);
\node[left] at (-2,1){$u_1$};
\node[right] at (2,1){$u_2$};
\node[left] at (-2,-1){$w_1$};
\node[right] at (2,-1){$w_2$};
\node[below] at (-3.25,0.5){\small $G_1$};
\node[below] at (3.25,0.5){\small $G_2$};
\node[below] at (0,-2){\small $G$};
\node[below] at (5,0.5){\small $\Rightarrow$};
\node[below] at (-5,0.5){\small $\Leftarrow$};
\path(-9,1) coordinate (u11);\draw [fill=black] (u11) circle (0.1cm);
\path(-9,-1) coordinate (w11);\draw [fill=black] (w11) circle (0.1cm);
\node[left] at (-9,1){$u_1$};
\node[left] at (-9,-1){$w_1$};
\draw [line width=0.85] (-9.5,0) ellipse (1.35 and 2.5);
\node[below] at (-10.25,0.5){\small $G_1$};
\node[below] at (-8,-2){\small $G_1'$};
\node[right] at (-7,0){$v_1$};
\path(-7,0) coordinate (v1);\draw [fill=black] (v1) circle (0.1cm);
\draw [directed,line width=0.85] (u11)--(v1);
\draw [directed,line width=0.85] (w11)--(v1);
\path(11,1) coordinate (u21);\draw [fill=black] (u21) circle (0.1cm);
\node[below] at (12.25,0.5){\small $G_2$};
\node[below] at (10,-2){\small $G_2'$};
\path(11,-1) coordinate (w21);\draw [fill=black] (w21) circle (0.1cm);
\node[right] at (11,1){$u_2$};
\node[right] at (11,-1){$w_3$};
\draw [line width=0.85] (11.5,0) ellipse (1.35 and 2.5);
\node[left] at (7,0){$v_2$};
\path(7,0) coordinate (v2);\draw [fill=black] (v2) circle (0.1cm);
\draw [redirected,dotted,line width=0.85] (u21)--(v2);
\draw [redirected,dotted,line width=0.85] (v2)--(u21);
\draw [redirected,directed,line width=0.85] (v2)--(w21);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{\small\it An illustration on how to construct $G_1'$ and $(G'_2,\sigma|_{E(G'_2)})$ from $(G,\sigma)$.}
\label{FIG: contract}
\end{figure}
From the definition of $(G'_2,\sigma|_{E(G'_2)})$, we know that $(G'_2,\sigma|_{E(G'_2)})$ is flow-admissible and contains no long barbells. So $(G'_2,\sigma|_{E(G'_2)})$ admits a nowhere-zero $6$-flow $(\tau|_{H(G_2')},f_2)$ by the minimality of $(G,\sigma)$. Assign $\gamma(v_1u_1) = f_2(v_2u_2)$ and $\gamma(v_1w_1) = f_2(v_2w_2)$. Since $G_1'$ is an unsigned graph, the restriction of $\tau$ on $H(G_1)\cup \{h_{e_1}^{u_1}, h_{e_2}^{w_1}\}$ can be considered as an orientation of $G_1'$, denoted by $\tau_1$. Then we have $\partial (\tau_1,\gamma) (v_1) =\partial (\tau|_{H(G_2')},f_2)(v_2)= 0$. By Theorem~\ref{6-flow} and Lemma~\ref{extend k-flow}, there is a nowhere-zero $6$-flow $(\tau_1,f_1)$ of $G'_1$ such that $f_1|_{\delta_{G'_1}(v_1)}=\gamma=f_2|_{\delta_{G'_2}(v_2)}$. Thus $(\tau_1,f_1)$ and $(\tau|_{H(G_2')},f_2)$ can be combined to a nowhere-zero $6$-flow of $(G,\sigma)$, a contradiction. Therefore $G$ is $3$-edge-connected, and thus Theorem \ref{TH: 6-flow} is true.
\end{proof}
\subsection{From modulo flows to integer flows}
In flow theory, an integer flow and a modulo flow are different by their definitions,
but they are equivalent for unsigned graphs as shown by Tutte \cite{Tutte54} (see Theorem \ref{TH: Tutte mod-int}).
However, Tutte's result cannot be applied for signed graphs (see e.g.~\cite{Xu2005}).
That is, there is a gap between modulo flows and integer flows for signed graphs.
In this subsection, we will extend Tutte's result and show that the equivalence between nowhere-zero $\mathbb{Z}_k$-flows and
nowhere-zero $k$-flows still holds for signed graphs without long barbells when $k= 3$ or $k\geq 5$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{TH: mod flow}
Let $(G,\sigma)$ be a signed graph without long barbells
and let $ k$ be an integer with $k = 3$ or $k\geq 5$. Then $(G,\sigma)$ admits a nowhere-zero $\mathbb{Z}_k$-flow if and only if it admits a nowhere-zero $k$-flow.
\end{theorem}
The ``if'' part of Theorem \ref{TH: mod flow} is trivial since every nowhere-zero $k$-flow is also a nowhere-zero $\mathbb{Z}_k$-flow in a signed graph. For the ``only if'' part of Theorem \ref{TH: mod flow}, by Lemma~\ref{LE: bridgeless}, the case of $k=3$ is an immediate corollary of a result about $\mathbb Z_3$-flow in \cite{Xu2005} and the case of $k\ge 6$ follows from Theorem \ref{TH: 6-flow}, and thus we only need to consider the case of $k=5$, which is a corollary of the following stronger result.
\begin{theorem}
\label{TH: mod flow-odd}
Let $k \geq 3$ be an odd integer and $(G,\sigma)$ be a signed graph with a nowhere-zero $\mathbb Z_k$-flow $(\tau, f_1)$. If $(G,\sigma)$ does not contain a long barbell, then there is a nowhere-zero $k$-flow $(\tau, f_2)$ such that $ f_1(e) \equiv f_2(e) \pmod{k}$.
\end{theorem}
In order to prove Theorem~\ref{TH: mod flow-odd}, we introduce some new concepts.
\begin{definition}
\label{DEF: diwalk}
Let $W=x_0e_1x_1e_2x_2 \dots e_{t-1}x_{t-1}e_tx_t$ be a signed walk with an orientation $\tau$.
(1) $W$ is called a
{\em diwalk} from $x_0$ to $x_t$ if $\tau(h_{e_1}^{x_0})=1$ and $\tau(h_{e_i}^{v_i})+\tau(h_{e_{i+1}}^{v_i})=0$ for each $i \in \{1, \dots, t-1\}$.
(2) The diwalk $W$ from $x_0$ to $x_t$ is {\em positive} if $\tau(h_{e_{t}}^{x_t})=-1$. Otherwise, it is {\em negative}.
(3) A diwalk is {\em all-positive} if all its edges are positive.
(4) A {\em ditrail} from $x$ to $y$ is a diwalk from $x$ to $y$
without repeated edges.
(5) A {\em dipath} from $x$ to $y$ is a diwalk from $x$ to $y$
without repeated vertices (see Figure \ref{FIG: dipath}).
\end{definition}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.6]
\path(-10,1) coordinate (x1);\draw [fill=black] (x1) circle (0.1cm);
\path(-8,1) coordinate (x2);\draw [fill=black] (x2) circle (0.1cm);
\path(-6,1) coordinate (x3);\draw [fill=black] (x3) circle (0.1cm);
\path(-4,1) coordinate (x4);\draw [fill=black] (x4) circle (0.1cm);
\path(-2,1) coordinate (x5);\draw [fill=black] (x5) circle (0.1cm);
\draw [redirected,directed,line width=0.85] (x4)--(x3);
\draw [redirected,directed,line width=0.85] (x1)--(x2);
\draw [directed,dotted,line width=0.85] (-3,1)--(x4);
\draw [directed,dotted,line width=0.85] (-3,1)--(x5);
\draw [directed,dotted,line width=0.85] (x2)--(-7,1);
\draw [directed,dotted,line width=0.85] (x3)--(-7,1);
\node[below] at (-10,1){$x_1$};
\node[below] at (-8,1){$x_2$};
\node[below] at (-6,1){$x_3$};
\node[below] at (-4,1){$x_4$};
\node[below] at (-2,1){$x_5$};
\node[below] at (-6,0){(a)};
\path(10,1) coordinate (x11);\draw [fill=black] (x11) circle (0.1cm);
\path(8,1) coordinate (x21);\draw [fill=black] (x21) circle (0.1cm);
\path(6,1) coordinate (x31);\draw [fill=black] (x31) circle (0.1cm);
\path(4,1) coordinate (x41);\draw [fill=black] (x41) circle (0.1cm);
\path(2,1) coordinate (x51);\draw [fill=black] (x51) circle (0.1cm);
\draw [redirected,directed,line width=0.85] (x31)--(x41);
\draw [directed,dotted,line width=0.85] (x11)--(9,1);
\draw [directed,dotted,line width=0.85] (x21)--(9,1);
\draw [directed,dotted,line width=0.85] (x41)--(3,1);
\draw [directed,dotted,line width=0.85] (x51)--(3,1);
\draw [directed,dotted,line width=0.85] (7,1)--(x21);
\draw [directed,dotted,line width=0.85] (7,1)--(x31);
\node[below] at (10,1){$x_5$};
\node[below] at (8,1){$x_4$};
\node[below] at (6,1){$x_3$};
\node[below] at (4,1){$x_2$};
\node[below] at (2,1){$x_1$};
\node[below] at (6,0){(b)};
\node[above] at (9,1){$e_4$};
\node[above] at (7,1){$e_3$};
\node[above] at (5,1){$e_2$};
\node[above] at (3,1){$e_1$};
\node[above] at (-9,1){$e_1$};
\node[above] at (-7,1){$e_2$};
\node[above] at (-5,1){$e_3$};
\node[above] at (-3,1){$e_4$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{\small\it (a) A positive dipath from $x_1$ to $x_5$; (b) A negative dipath from $x_1$ to $x_5$.}
\label{FIG: dipath}
\end{figure}
\begin{definition}
\label{DEF: tadpole}
An oriented signed graph is called a
{\em tadpole} with tail end $x$ (see Figure \ref{FIG: tadpole}) if
(1) it consists of a ditrail $C$ and a dipath $P$ with
$V(C) \cap V(P) = \{ v_1\}$;
(2) $P$ is a positive dipath from $x$ to $v_1$;
(3) $C$ is a closed negative ditrail from $v_1$ to $v_1$.
\end{definition}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.6]
\path(-8,0) coordinate (x1);\draw [fill=black] (x1) circle (0.1cm);
\path(-6,0) coordinate (x2);\draw [fill=black] (x2) circle (0.1cm);
\path(-4,0) coordinate (x3);\draw [fill=black] (x3) circle (0.1cm);
\path(-2,0) coordinate (x4);\draw [fill=black] (x4) circle (0.1cm);
\path(0,0) coordinate (x5);\draw [fill=black] (x5) circle (0.1cm);
\draw [redirected,directed,line width=0.85] (x4)--(x3);
\draw [redirected,directed,line width=0.85] (x1)--(x2);
\draw [directed,dotted,line width=0.85] (-1,0)--(x4);
\draw [directed,dotted,line width=0.85] (-1,0)--(x5);
\draw [directed,dotted,line width=0.85] (x2)--(-5,0);
\draw [directed,dotted,line width=0.85] (x3)--(-5,0);
\path(1,2) coordinate (y1);\draw [fill=black] (y1) circle (0.1cm);
\path(3,2) coordinate (y2);\draw [fill=black] (y2) circle (0.1cm);
\path(5,1) coordinate (y3);\draw [fill=black] (y3) circle (0.1cm);
\path(1,-2) coordinate (z1);\draw [fill=black] (z1) circle (0.1cm);
\path(3,-2) coordinate (z2);\draw [fill=black] (z2) circle (0.1cm);
\path(5,-1) coordinate (z3);\draw [fill=black] (z3) circle (0.1cm);
\draw [redirected,directed,line width=0.85] (x5)--(y1);
\draw [redirected,directed,line width=0.85] (y1)--(y2);
\draw [redirected,directed,line width=0.85] (y2)--(y3);
\draw [redirected,directed,line width=0.85] (x5)--(z1);
\draw [redirected,directed,line width=0.85] (z1)--(z2);
\draw [redirected,directed,line width=0.85] (z2)--(z3);
\draw [directed,dotted, line width=1] (y3)--(5,0);
\draw [directed,dotted, line width=1] (z3)--(5,0);
\node[below] at (-8,0){\small $x$};
\node[below] at (-0.25,0){\small $v_1$};
\node[below] at (-4,-0.35){\small $P$};
\node[below] at (2.5,0.15){\small $C$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{\small\it A tadpole with tail end $x$.}
\label{FIG: tadpole}
\end{figure}
Note that it is possible that
$x=v_1$ in the above definition. In this case, the tadpole is called a {\em tailless tadpole}.
\begin{definition}
Let $(G,\tau)$ be an oriented signed graph and $f: E(G) \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$.
(1) A vertex $x $ is a {\em source} (resp., {\em sink}) of $(\tau, f)$ if $\partial (\tau,f)(x)> 0$ (resp., $\partial (\tau,f)(x)< 0$).
(2) An edge $e$ is a {\em source} (resp., {\em sink}) of $(\tau, f)$ if the boundary at $e$, $\partial (\tau, f)(e) = -(\tau(h_1)+\tau(h_2))f(e)$, is positive (resp., negative), where $h_1$ and $h_2$ are the two half-edges of $e$.
\end{definition}
Note that an edge is a source or a sink if and only if it is negative. A sink is either a sink vertex or a sink edge and a source is either a source vertex or a source edge.
\begin{observation}
\label{OB: total defects}
Let $(G,\tau)$ be an oriented signed graph and $f: E(G) \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$.
The total sum of boundaries on $V(G)\cup E(G)$ is zero. In particular, if $f$ is a flow, then the total sum of the boundaries on $E(G)$ is zero.
\end{observation}
The following is a trivial fact in network theory.
\begin{observation}
\label{OB: source to sink}
Let $(G,\tau)$ be an oriented signed graph and $f: E(G) \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^+\cup \{0\}$.
For each source $x$, there must exist a sink $t_x$ such that there is an all-positive dipath from $x$ to $t_x$.
\end{observation}
\begin{definition}
\label{DEF: minus}
Let $(G,\tau)$ be an oriented signed graph, $E_0\subseteq E(G)$, and $f: E(G) \to \mathbb{Z}_k$ be a mapping. The operation {\em minusing} of $(\tau,f)$ on $E_0$ is done by reversing the directions of both half-edges of $e$ and changing $f(e)$ to $k-f(e)$ for every $e\in E_0$. The resulting pair obtained from $(\tau,f)$ is denoted by $(\tau_{\widetilde{E}_0},f_{\widetilde{E}_0})$.
\end{definition}
We are ready to prove Theorem~\ref{TH: mod flow-odd}.
\medskip
\noindent
{\bf Proof of Theorem~\ref{TH: mod flow-odd}.}
Let $(G_0,\sigma_0)$ be a counterexample and $(\tau_0,f_1)$ be a nowhere-zero $\mathbb Z_k$-flow of $(G_0,\sigma_0)$.
We can choose a triple $(G,\tau,f)$ obtained from $(G_0,\tau_0,f_1)$ by a sequence of switching and minusing operations such that
\begin{itemize}
\item[(S1)] $0<f(e)<k$ for $e\in E(G)$;
\item[(S2)] Subject to (S1), $\partial (\tau, f)(v)\equiv 0 \pmod k$ for $v\in V(G)$;
\item[(S3)] Subject to (S1) and (S2), $\eta(\tau,f)=\sum_{v\in V(G)}|\partial (\tau, f)(v)|$ is as small as possible;
\item[(S4)] Subject to (S1), (S2) and (S3),
the number of source vertices of $(\tau,f)$ is as large as possible.
\end{itemize}
\medskip
Let $X$ be the set of source vertices of $(\tau,f)$.
\begin{claim}
\label{cl: no sink vertex}
$X=\{x\in V(G) : \partial(\tau,f) (x)\neq 0)\}$. That is, there is no sink vertices in $(\tau,f)$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
Suppose to the contrary that there is a vertex $v\in V(G)$ such that $\partial (\tau, f)(v)< 0$. Let $(G',\tau')$ be the resulting oriented signed graph obtained from $(G,\tau)$ by switching at $v$ and let $X'=X\cup \{v\}$. Note that switching at $v$ is done by reversing all directions of half-edges in $H_G(v)$. Thus $(G',\tau', f)$ satisfies (S1)$\sim$(S3) and $X'$ is the set of source vertices of $(\tau',f)$. This contradicts (S4).
\end{proof}
\begin{claim}
\label{cl: source nonempty}
$X\neq \emptyset$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $X=\emptyset$. Then $(\tau,f)$ is a nowhere-zero $k$-flow of the signed graph $(G,\sigma)$. Since $(G,\tau,f)$ is obtained from $(G_0,\tau_0,f_1)$ by a sequence of switching and minusing operations, there are $V_0\subseteq V(G_0)$, $E_0\subseteq E(G_0)$ and an orientation $\tau_1$ of $(G,\sigma)$ such that $(G,\tau_1)$ is obtained from $(G_0,\tau_0)$ by switching on $V_0$ and $(\tau,f)$ is obtained from $(\tau_1,f_1)$ by minusing on $E_0$. Note that $V(G)=V(G_0)$ and $E(G)=E(G_0)$. Let $f': E(G)\to \mathbb{Z}$ be defined as follows,
$$
f'(e)= \left\{
\begin{array}{rl}
f(e) & \mbox{ if $e\notin E_0$};\\
-f(e) & \mbox{ if $e\in E_0$}.
\end{array}
\right.
$$
Since $(\tau,f)$ is a nowhere-zero $k$-flow of $(G,\sigma)$ and is obtained from $(\tau_1,f_1)$ by minusing on $E_0$, $(\tau_1,f')$ is also a nowhere-zero $k$-flow of $(G,\sigma)$ and satisfies $f'(e)\equiv f_1(e) \pmod k$ for every $e\in E(G)$. Thus $(\tau_0,f')$ is a desired nowhere-zero $k$-flow of $(G_0,\sigma|_{E(G_0)})$ since $(G,\tau_1)$ is obtained from $(G_0,\tau_0)$ by switching on $V_0$. This contradicts that $(G_0,\sigma|_{E(G_0)})$ is a counterexample.
\end{proof}
By (S2), every vertex $x$ in $X$ satisfies
$$\partial (\tau, f)(x) = \mu k$$ for some positive integer $\mu$.
\begin{claim}
\label{cl: no negative ditrail}
There is no negative ditrail of $(G,\tau)$ between two distinct vertices in $X$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof} Suppose to the contrary that $X$ contains two distinct vertices $x_1$ and $x_2$ such that there exists a negative ditrail $P$ from $x_1$ to $x_2$ in $(G,\tau)$.
By the definition of negative ditrails
(see Definition~\ref{DEF: diwalk})
and by Definition~\ref{DEF: minus},
it is not difficult to check that
$$
\eta(\tau_{\widetilde{E(P)}},f_{\widetilde{E(P)}})=\sum_{i=1}^2(\partial (\tau, f)(x_i)-k)+\sum_{v\in V(G)\setminus \{x_1,x_2\}}\partial (\tau, f)(v)=\eta(\tau,f)-2k.
$$
This contradicts (S3).
\end{proof}
Pick an arbitrary vertex $x$ from $X$ by Claim \ref{cl: source nonempty} and let
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& Y_x^+=\{y\in V(G) : \mbox{$(G,\tau)$ contains a positive dipath from $x$ to $y$}\}, \\
&& Y_x^-=\{y\in V(G)\setminus Y_x^+ : \mbox{$(G,\tau)$ contains a negative dipath from $x$ to $y$}\}, \mbox{ and}\\
&& Y_x=Y_x^+\cup Y_x^-.
\end{eqnarray*}
By Claim \ref{cl: no negative ditrail}, $Y_x^-\cap X=\emptyset$, so $\partial (\tau, f)(y)=0$ for each $y\in Y_x^-$.
Switch at every vertex in $Y_x^-$ and denote the resulting pair obtained from $(G,\tau)$ by $(G_1,\tau_1)$. Then $(G_1,\sigma_{\tau_1})$ is equivalent to $(G,\sigma_{\tau})$ and $\tau_1$ is an orientation of $(G_1,\sigma_{\tau_1})$. Since $\partial (\tau, f)(y)=0$ for $y\in Y_x^-$, it is easy to see that the triple $(G_1, \tau_1,f)$ also satisfies (S1)$\sim$(S4). Moreover, by the definitions of $Y_x^+$ and $Y_x^-$, $(G_1,\tau_1)$ contains a positive dipath from $x$ to $y$ for every $y\in Y_x$.
Without loss of generality, we can assume
\begin{equation}
Y_x^-=\emptyset ~~\mbox{and} ~~ Y_x=Y_x^+,
\label{EQ: all source}
\end{equation} and consider
$(G_1,\tau_1,f)=(G,\tau,f)$. Then the following claim holds.
\begin{claim}
\label{cl: positive ditrail}
For every $y\in Y_x$, $(G,\tau)$ contains a positive dipath from $x$ to $y$.
\end{claim}
\begin{claim}
\label{CL: tadpole}
$(G[Y_x],\tau)$ contains a tadpole with tail end $x$ (see Definition~\ref{DEF: tadpole}).
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
By Observation~\ref{OB: source to sink}, there is a sink $t_x$ of $(\tau,f)$ such that $(G,\tau)$ contains an all-positive dipath from $x$ to $t_x$.
Note that $(\tau,f)$ contains no sink vertices by Claim \ref{cl: no sink vertex}. Hence $t_x$ must be a sink edge, say $t_x=u'u''$. Let $P_x'$ be the all-positive dipath from $x$ to $u'$.
Then $u' \in Y_x$, $t_x\notin E(P_x')$, and $P_x'+t_x$ is a negative dipath from $x$ to $u''$ since $t_x$ is a sink edge. Thus $u''\in Y_x = Y_x^+$ (by Equation~(\ref{EQ: all source})).
This implies that $(G[Y_x],\tau)$ has a positive dipath from $x$ to $u''$. Let $P_x''=xe_1x_1\cdots e_{t-1}x_{t-1}e_tx_t$ ($x_t=u''$) be a positive dipath from $x$ to $u''$ in $(G[Y_x],\tau)$.
Then $t_x\notin E(P_x'')$ since $t_x$ is a sink edge. If $E(P_x')\cap E(P_x'')=\emptyset$, then $P_x'+t_x+P_x''$ is a tailless tadpole with tail end $x$. If $E(P_x')\cap E(P_x'')\neq \emptyset$, then let $s$ be the maximum index in $\{1,2,\dots,t\}$ such that $e_s\in E(P_x')$. Thus $P_x'+t_x+P_x''(x_s,u'')$ is a tadpole with tail end $x$, where $P_x''(x_s,u'')$ is the segment of $P_x''$ from $x_s$ to $u''$.
\end{proof}
By Claim \ref{CL: tadpole}, let $P_x+C_x$ be a tadpole with tail end $x$ in $(G[Y_x],\tau)$. Here, $P_x$ is an all-positive dipath from $x$ to a vertex, denoted by $y_x$, $C_x$ is a closed negative ditrail from $y_x$ to $y_x$ and $V(P_x)\cap V(C_x)=\{y_x\}$. Note that it is possible that $P_x$ is the single vertex $x$.
\begin{claim}
\label{CL: one k}
$\partial (\tau,f)(x)=k$ and if $y_x\neq x$, then $\partial (\tau,f)(y_x)=0$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
Suppose to the contrary $\partial (\tau,f)(x) \not =k$. Then $\partial (\tau,f)(x)\ge 2k$ since $x$ is a source vertex and $\partial (\tau,f)(x) = \mu k$ for some positive integer $\mu$.
If $\partial (\tau,f)(y_x)=0$, then $y_x\neq x$, so $|E(P_x)|\ge 1$. We can check easily that the new triple $(G, \tau_{\widetilde{E(P_x)}}, f_{\widetilde{E(P_x)}})$ satisfies (S1)$\sim$(S3) and the set of source vertices is $X\cup \{y_x\}$, a contradiction to (S4).
If $\partial (\tau,f)(y_x)\neq 0$, since $P_x+C_x$ is a negative ditrail from $x$ to $y_x$, the new triple $(G,\tau_{\widetilde{E'}}, f_{\widetilde{E'}})$ (where $E'=E(P_x+C_x)$) satisfies (S1) and (S2). However, the total sum of boundaries
is reduced by $2k$. This contradicts (S3) and so the claim holds. Therefore $\partial (\tau,f)(x)=k$.
Now assume $y_x\neq x$. Since $P_x+C_x$ is a negative ditrail from $x$ to $y_x$, by Claim \ref{cl: no negative ditrail}, $y_x\notin X$ and thus $\partial (\tau,f)(y_x)=0$.
\end{proof}
For the sake of convenience, let $(G,\tau_{\widetilde{E(P_x)}},f_{\widetilde{E(P_x)}})=(G,\tau_x,f_x)$ and let $X'$ be the set of source vertices of $(\tau_x,f_x)$.
\begin{claim}
\label{cl: new triple}
The following statements for $(G,\tau_x,f_x)$ are true.
(a) $C_x$ is a tailless tadpole with tail end $y_x$ in $(G,\tau_x)$;
(b) $X'=(X\setminus \{x\})\cup \{y_x\}$;
(c) $(G,\tau_x,f_x)$ satisfies (S1)$\sim$(S4).
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
The statement (a) is trivial since $E(C_x)\cap E(P_x)=\emptyset$ and $C_x$ is a tailless tadpole with tail end $y_x$ in $(G,\tau)$. Now we show the statements (b) and (c). In fact, if $y_x=x$, then $X'=X$ and $(\tau_x,f_x)=(\tau,f)$, and thus both (b) and (c) are trivial; if $y_x\neq x$, then by Claim \ref{CL: one k}, we can also check directly that both (b) and (c) hold.
\end{proof}
Similar to Claims \ref{cl: no sink vertex} and \ref{cl: no negative ditrail}, it follows from Claim \ref{cl: new triple}-(c) that $(\tau_x,f)$ contains no sink vertices
and $(G,\tau_x)$ contains no negative ditrails between two distinct vertices of $X'$.
\begin{claim}
\label{cl: to Cx}
For every $x'\in X'\setminus \{y_x\}$, $(G,\tau_x)$ contains no dipath from $x'$ to $C_x$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
Suppose to the contrary that $P$ is a dipath from $x'$ to $y$ with $V(P)\cap V(C_x)=\{y\}$ in $(G,\tau_x)$. Since $C_x$ is a closed negative ditrail from $y_x$ to $y_x$
(by Claim \ref{cl: new triple}-(a))
and $y\in V(C_x)$, $C_x$ can be decomposed into two edge-disjoint ditrails from $y_x$ to $y$, denoted by $C_1$ and $C_2$. Since $C_x$ is negative, one of $C_1$ and $C_2$ is positive and the other one is negative. Thus either $P+C_1$ or $P+C_2$
is a negative dipath from $x'$ to $y_x$.
This contradicts that $(G,\tau_x)$ contains no negative ditrails between two distinct vertices of $X'$.
\end{proof}
\begin{claim}
\label{CL: X=1}
$X=\{x\}$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
Suppose to the contrary $x'\in X\setminus \{x\}$. Then $x'\in X'\setminus \{y_x\}$ by Claim \ref{cl: new triple}-(b). Let
$$
Y_{x'}=\{y\in V(G) : \mbox{$(G,\tau_x)$ contains a dipath from $x'$ to $y$}\}.
$$
By Claim \ref{cl: to Cx}, $Y_{x'}\cap V(C_x)=\emptyset$. Note that $(G,\tau_x,f_x)$ satisfies (S1)$\sim$(S4) by Claim \ref{cl: new triple}-(c). Similar to the discussion in Claims \ref{cl: positive ditrail} and \ref{CL: tadpole}, $(G[Y_{x'}],\tau_x)$ contains a tadpole with tail end $x'$. By the definition, there is an unbalanced circuit, denoted by $C_{x'}$, in this tadpole.
Since $(G,\sigma)$ contains no long barbells, $V(C_x)\cap V(C_{x'}) \not = \emptyset$, so $Y_{x'}\cap V(C_x)\neq \emptyset$. This contradicts $Y_{x'}\cap V(C_x)=\emptyset$.
\end{proof}
\medskip \noindent
{\bf Final step.}
By Claim~\ref{CL: X=1}, $X = \{ x\}$.
By Claim~\ref{CL: one k}, $\partial(\tau,f)(x)=k$ which is an odd number.
Since the boundary of every negative edge is an even number, the total sum of the boundaries of $(\tau,f)$ on $V(G)\cup E(G)$ must be odd since $x$ is the only source/sink vertex with an odd boundary.
This contradicts Observation~\ref{OB: total defects}. Hence the proof of
Theorem \ref{TH: mod flow-odd} is complete.
\hfill $\Box$
\medskip
There are precisely two abelian groups of order 4, namely the Klein Four Group $\mathbb{K}_4$ and the cyclic group $\mathbb{Z}_4$. Clearly,
the elements of the Klein Four Group are self-inverse and therefore, a signed cubic graph $G$ has a nowhere-zero $\mathbb{K}_4$-flow
if and only if $G$ is 3-edge-colorable. We will show that this is also true for signed graphs without long barbells which admit
a nowhere-zero $\mathbb{Z}_4$-flow. We will apply a result of Ma\v{c}ajova and \v Skoviera.
A signed graph $(G,\sigma)$ is {\em antibalanced} if it is equivalent to a signed graph $(G,\sigma')$ with $E_N(G,\sigma') = E(G)$.
\begin{theorem}{\rm (Ma\v{c}ajova and \v Skoviera \cite{MS2015})}\label{z4-nzf}
A signed cubic graph admits a nowhere-zero $\mathbb{Z}_4$-flow if and only if it admits an antibalanced $2$-factor.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem}\label{cubic without long bb}
Let $(G,\sigma)$ be a flow-admissible signed cubic graph. If $(G,\sigma)$ contains no long barbells,
then $(G,\sigma)$ admits a
nowhere-zero $\mathbb{Z}_4$-flow if and only if it is $3$-edge-colorable.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} First assume that $(G,\sigma)$ admits a
nowhere-zero $\mathbb{Z}_4$-flow.
By Theorem \ref{z4-nzf}, $(G,\sigma)$ has an antibalanced $2$-factor $\mathcal{F}$.
Since $(G,\sigma)$ contains no long barbells and $\sum_{C\in \cal F}|V(C)|=|V(G)|\equiv 0 \pmod 2$, it follows that
that every circuit of $\cal F$ is of even length, so $(G,\sigma)$ is $3$-edge-colorable.
Now assume that $G$ is 3-edge-colorable. Then $E(G)$ can be decomposed into three edge-disjoint $1$-factors $M_1, M_2$ and $M_3$.
Without loss of generality, assume $|M_1\cap E_N(G,\sigma)| \equiv |M_2\cap E_N(G,\sigma)| \pmod 2$.
Let $C= M_1\cup M_2$. Clearly, $C$ is a $2$-factor of $G$.
Since $|E(C)\cap E_N(G,\sigma)|=|M_1\cap E_N(G,\sigma)|+|M_2\cap E_N(G,\sigma)| \equiv 0 \pmod 2$,
$C$ contains an even number $n$ of unbalanced circuits. Since $(G,\sigma)$ contains no long barbells, it follows $n=0$. This implies that each component of $C$ is a balanced circuit with even length and thus is antibalanced.
By Theorem \ref{z4-nzf}, $(G,\sigma)$ admits a nowhere-zero $\mathbb{Z}_4$-flow.
\end{proof}
Theorem~\ref{TH: mod flow} doesn't hold for $k=4$. There is a signed $W_5$ which has a nowhere-zero $\mathbb Z_4$-flow but doesn't have a nowhere-zero $4$-flow (see \cite{lixw}).
However, we don't know whether Theorem~\ref{TH: mod flow-odd} can be extended to all even positive integers $k\geq 6$.
\begin{problem}
\label{TH: mod flow-odd-conj}
Let $k \geq 6$ be an even integer and $(G,\sigma)$ be a signed graph with a nowhere-zero $\mathbb Z_k$-flow $(\tau, f_1)$. If $(G,\sigma)$ contains no long barbells, does there exist a nowhere-zero $k$-flow $(\tau, f_2)$ such that $$ f_1(e) \equiv f_2(e) \pmod{k}.$$
\end{problem}
\section{Circuit decomposition and sum of $2$-flows}
\label{Sum-flow}
The following theorem is well-known for unsigned graphs.
\begin{theorem}
\label{TH: circuit decomposition unsigned}
Every eulerian unsigned graph has a circuit decomposition.
\end{theorem}
Theorem~\ref{TH: circuit decomposition unsigned} for unsigned graphs is extended to the class of signed graphs without long barbells.
\begin{theorem}
\label{TH: decomposition long BB free}
Let $(G,\sigma)$ be a flow-admissible signed eulerian graph with $|E_N(G,\sigma)|$ even. If $(G,\sigma)$ contains no long barbells,
then $(G,\sigma)$ has a decomposition ${\cal C}$ such that each member of ${\cal C}$ is either a balanced circuit or a short barbell.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Suppose to the contrary that $(G,\sigma)$ is a counterexample.
Since $(G,\sigma)$ is a signed eulerian graph, it has a decomposition
$\mathcal{C}=\{C_1,\dots, C_h, C_{h+1},\dots, C_{h+m}, C_{h+m+1},\dots, C_{h+m+n}\}$,
where $h, m$ and $n$ are three non-negative integers, and $C_i$ is an balanced circuit if $ i \in \{1, \dots,h\}$, a short barbell if $i \in \{h+1, \dots,h+m\}$, and a unbalanced circuit otherwise.
We choose such a decomposition that $h+m$ is as large as possible. Then $n\neq 0$.
Furthermore, $n \ge 2$ is even since $|E_N(G,\sigma)|\equiv |E_N(C_i,\sigma|_{E(C_i)})|\equiv 0 \pmod 2$ for
each $i \in \{1, \dots,h+m\}$.
Since $(G,\sigma)$ contains no long barbells, it also contains no vertex disjoint unbalanced circuits, and thus,
$C_{h+m+1}$ and $C_{h+m+2}$ have at least two common vertices. Let $x_1$ and $x_2$ be two common vertices of $C_{h+m+1}$ and
$C_{h+m+2}$ such that $C_{h+m+1}$ has a path $P_1$ from $x_1$ to $x_2$ containing no vertex of $C_{h+m+2}$ as internal vertex.
Let $P_2$ and $P_3$ be the two paths from $x_1$ to $x_2$ in $C_{h+m+2}$. Since $C_{h+m+2}$ is an unbalanced circuit,
there is exact one of $P_2$ and $P_3$, say $P_2$, such that $|E_N(P_1)|\equiv |E_N(P_2)| \pmod 2$, so $P_1+P_2$
is a balanced circuit of $(G \setminus \cup_{i=1}^{h+m}E(C_i))$. This contradicts the choice of $\mathcal C$.
\end{proof}
Next we are going to study the decomposition of nowhere-zero $k$-flows into elementary 2-flows. One of the basic theorems in flow theory for unsigned graphs is Theorem \ref{TH: sum Tutte}. The next theorem extends this result to the class of signed graphs without long barbells.
\begin{theorem}
\label{TH: sum LBB-free}
Let $(G,\sigma)$ be a signed graph without long barbells and $(\tau, f)$ be a non-negative $k$-flow of $(G,\sigma)$ where $k \geq 2$.
Then
$$(\tau,f) ~ = ~\sum_{i=1}^{k-1}(\tau, f_i),$$ where each $(\tau, f_i)$ is a non-negative $2$-flow.
\end{theorem}
We need some lemmas to prove Theorem~\ref{TH: sum LBB-free}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{LE: even odd}
Let $(G,\sigma)$ be a signed graph and $(\tau, f)$ be a $k$-flow of $(G,\sigma)$.
Then the total number of negative edges with odd flow values is even.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Denote $F = \{e\in E_N(G,\sigma) : f(e) ~ \mbox{is odd} \}$. By Observation \ref{OB: total defects},
$ \sum_{e \in E_N(G,\sigma)} (-2\tau(h))f(e) = 0$, and thus $ \sum_{e \in E_N(G,\sigma)} \tau(h)f(e) = 0$, where $h$ is a half-edge of $e$. Thus
$|F| \equiv \sum_{e \in F} \tau(h)f(e) \equiv 0 \pmod 2.$
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}{\rm (Xu and Zhang~\cite{Xu2005})}
\label{TH: Xu-Zhang2}
A signed graph $(G,\sigma)$ admits a nowhere-zero $2$-flow if and only if each component of $(G,\sigma)$ is eulerian and has an even number of negative edges.
\end{theorem}
\begin{lemma}
\label{LE: balanced odd}
Let $(G,\sigma)$ be a signed graph without long barbells and $(\tau, f)$ be a $k$-flow of $(G,\sigma)$. Let $(Q,\sigma|_{E(Q)})$ be the subgraph of $(G,\sigma)$ induced by the edges of $\{ e : f(e) \equiv 1 \pmod{2}\}$. Then every component of $(Q,\sigma|_{E(Q)})$ has an even number of negative edges and thus $(Q,\sigma|_{E(Q)})$ admits a nowhere-zero $2$-flow.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Obviously, $(Q,\sigma|_{E(Q)})$ is an even subgraph of $(G,\sigma)$. By Lemma ~\ref{LE: even odd}, $(Q,\sigma|_{E(Q)})$ has an even number of negative edges and thus the number of components of $(Q,\sigma|_{E(Q)})$ with an odd number of negative edges is even. By Theorem~\ref{TH: Xu-Zhang2}, if a component of $(Q,\sigma|_{E(Q)})$ has an odd number of negative edges, then it is unbalanced.
Thus $(Q,\sigma|_{E(Q)})$ has an even number of unbalanced components. Since $(G,\sigma)$ contains no long barbells, $(Q,\sigma|_{E(Q)})$ doesn't contain two vertex-disjoint unbalanced circuits. Therefore, each component of $(Q,\sigma|_{E(Q)})$ is balanced and thus by Theorem~\ref{TH: Xu-Zhang2} again, it admits a nowhere-zero $2$-flow.
\end{proof}
Now we are ready to prove Theorem~\ref{TH: sum LBB-free}.
\medskip
\noindent
{\bf Proof of Theorem~\ref{TH: sum LBB-free}.}
Prove by induction on $k$. It is trivial if $k = 2$. Now assume that the theorem is true for all $t \leq k-1$.
Let $(\tau, f)$ be a non-negative $k$-flow of $(G,\sigma)$. For convenience, every flow is a flow of $(G,\sigma)$ under the orientation $\tau$ in the following.
We first consider the case when $k$ is odd. Let $(Q,\sigma|_{E(Q)})$ be the subgraph of $(G,\sigma)$ induced by the edges of $\{ e : f(e) \equiv 1 \pmod{2}\}$. By Lemma~\ref{LE: balanced odd}, $(G,\sigma)$ admits a $2$-flow
$g$ with $\supp(g)=E(Q)$. Then each
$$ g_1~=~ \frac{f+g}{2}, ~~\mbox{and} ~~~ g_2~=~ \frac{f-g}{2}$$
is a non-negative $(\frac{k-1}{2}+1)$-flows. By induction hypothesis, each $g_i$ is the sum of $\frac{k-1}{2}$ non-negative $2$-flows. Thus $f = g_1 + g_2$ is the sum of $k-1$ non-negative $2$-flows.
Now assume that $k$ is even. Then $k-1$ is odd. Consider $f$ as a modulo $(k-1)$-flow. Then by Theorem~\ref{TH: mod flow-odd}, $(G,\tau)$ has a $(k-1)$-flow $g$ such that $f(e) \equiv g(e) \pmod k$ for each edge $e\in E(G)$ and $\supp(g) = \supp(f) \setminus \{e\in E(G): f(e) = k-1\}$. Since $1\leq f(e) \leq k-1$ and $-(k-2) \leq g(e) \leq k-2$, $(f-g)(e) = 0,$ or $k-1$ for every edge and $\{e\in E(G) : f(e) = k-1\} \subseteq \supp(f-g)$. Thus $f_1 = \frac{f-g}{k-1}$ is a non-negative $2$-flow with $\{e\in E(G) : f(e) = k-1\} \subseteq \supp(f_1)$. Therefore $f-f_1$ is a non-negative $(k-1)$-flow. By induction hypothesis, $f-f_1$ is the sum of $k-2$ non-negative $2$-flows. Together with $f_1$, $f$ can be expressed as the sum of $k-1$ non-negative $2$-flows.
This completes the proof of the theorem.
\hfill $\Box$
\section{Integer and circular flow numbers}
\label{C-flow}
As mentioned in the introduction, $\Phi_i(H)=\lceil\Phi_c(H)\rceil$ holds for each unsigned graph $H$ (Goddyn et al. \cite{Goddyn}) but there are
signed graphs with $\Phi_i(G,\sigma) - \Phi_c(G,\sigma) \geq 1$.
In this section we study the circular flow numbers of signed graphs and prove that signed graphs without long barbells behave like unsigned graphs in this context.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=5cm]{example_1.pdf}
\caption{A nowhere-zero circular 4-flow of a graph $(G,\sigma)$ with $\Phi_i(G,\sigma) = 5$
\label{not_G1}}
\end{figure}
Up to today, all examples with the property
$\lceil\Phi_c(G,\sigma)\rceil < \Phi_i(G,\sigma)$ contain a star-cut.
A star-cut is an induced subgraph $S$ isormorphic to $K_{1,t}$ of $G$ such that every edge of $S$ is an edge-cut of $G$.
It becomes natural to ask whether for each $2$-edge-connected signed graph $(G,\sigma)$ the numbers $\lceil\Phi_c(G,\sigma)\rceil$ and $\Phi_i(G,\sigma)$ are same. We deny this question by giving an infinite family of counterexamples.
\begin{proposition}
Let $t$ be a positive integer and $G_t$ be the unsigned graph obtained by identifying $t$ copies of $K_4$ at a common edge $v_1v_2$. Let $(G,\sigma)$ be the signed graph obtained from $G_t$ by deleting $v_1v_2$ and adding two negative loops $L_1, L_2$
at $v_1$ and $v_2$, respectively. Then $\Phi_c(G,\sigma) \leq 3$ and $\Phi_i(G,\sigma)\ge 4.$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} Note that it is easy to check that $G_t$ doesn't admit a nowhere-zero $3$-flow but admits a positive nowhere-zero $4$-flow $(D,f)$ with precisely one edge $v_1v_2$ with flow value $3$.
We first claim that $(G,\sigma)$ admits a circular nowhere-zero $3$-flow.
Assume that $v_1v_2$ is oriented away from $v_1$ and toward $v_2$. Orient $L_1$ away from $v_1$ and orient $L_2$ toward $v_2$ and define a mapping $\phi$ on $E(G)$ from $f$ by $\phi(e) = f(e)$ for each $e \notin \{L_1,L_2\}$ and $\phi(L_1) = \phi(L_2) = 1.5$. Then $\phi$ is a circular $3$-flow of $(G,\sigma)$, so $\Phi_c(G,\sigma)\leq 3$.
Now we claim that $(G,\sigma)$ does not
admit a nowhere-zero $3$-flow. Suppose to the contrary that $(G,\sigma)$ admits a nowhere-zero $3$-flow and thus admits a nowhere-zero $\mathbb{Z}_3$-flow $(\tau,g)$ such that $g(e)=1$ for every $e\in E(G)$.
Since every vertex in $V(G)\setminus \{v_1,v_2\}$ is of degree three in $G$, every copy of $K_4-v_1v_2$ contributes zero to $\partial (\tau,g)(v_i)$ for each $i \in \{1,2\}$. Thus $|\partial (\tau,g)(v_i)|=2|g(L_i)|\not \equiv 0 \pmod 3$, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
The following structural lemma is needed in the proofs of Theorems~\ref{TH: 2k property} and \ref{LE: 2.4}.
Given a circular $(\frac{p}{q}+1)$-flow $(\tau,\psi)$ of a signed graph $(G,\sigma)$, let
$F_{\psi} = \{e\in E(G)$ : $q\psi(e) \notin \mathbb{Z} \}$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{LE: 1:2 value}
Let $(G,\sigma)$ be a signed graph admitting a circular $(\frac{p}{q}+1)$-flow and let $(\tau,\phi)$ be a circular $(\frac{p}{q}+1)$-flow of $(G,\sigma)$ such that $F_{\phi}$ has minimum cardinality. If $F_{\phi} \not = \emptyset$, then
(1) the signed induced graph $(G[F_\phi],\sigma|_{F_{\phi}})$ consists of a set of
vertex-disjoint unbalanced circuits;
(2)
for every edge $e \in E(G)\setminus F_{\phi}$, $2q\phi(e)$ is an even integer, while
for every edge $e \in F_{\phi}$, $2q\phi(e)$ is an odd integer.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Without loss of generality, we may assume $\phi(e)>0$ for every edge $e\in E(G)$.
\medskip
\textbf{I.} $(G[F_\phi],\sigma|_{F_{\phi}})$ contains no signed circuits.
Suppose to the contrary that $(G[F_\phi],\sigma|_{F_{\phi}})$ contains a signed circuit $C$.
Then $(G,\sigma)$ admits an integer $2$- or $3$-flow $(\tau,\phi_1)$ with $\supp(\phi_1) = E(C)$ (see \cite{Bouchet1983}). Let $\epsilon= \min_{e \in E(C)} \min\{\frac{1}{\phi_1(e)}(\frac{p}{q} - \phi(e)),\frac{1}{\phi_1(e)}(\phi(e) - 1)\}$.
Then both
$(\tau,\phi + \epsilon \phi_2)$ and $(\tau,\phi - \epsilon \phi_2)$ are circular
$(\frac{p}{q}+1)$-flows and
at least one of $F_{\phi + \epsilon \phi_2}$ and $F_{\phi - \epsilon \phi_2}$ is a proper subset of $F_{\phi}$, contradicting the choice of $\phi$.
\medskip
\textbf{II.} $G[F_\phi]$ is $2$-regular.
It is easy to see that the minimum degree $\delta(G[F_\phi])\ge 2$ since
$(\tau,q\phi)$ is a flow with integer value in $E(G)\setminus F_\phi$ and non-integer value only in $F_\phi$.
Suppose that $Q$ is a component of $G[F_\phi]$ with maximum degree $\Delta(Q)\ge 3$. Then $Q$ must contain at least two distinct circuits $C_1$ and $C_2$, otherwise $Q$ itself
is a circuit. By {\textbf I}, both $C_1 $ and $ C_2$ are unbalanced.
Hence, one may find either a balanced circuit or a short barbell if $C_1$ and $C_2$ intersect each other,
or a long barbell if $C_1$ and $C_2$ are vertex-disjoint, contradicting {\textbf I}.
\medskip
Obviously, (1) is a corollary of {\textbf I} and \textbf{II}. To prove (2), let $e\in E(G)$.
Since $q\phi(e)$ is not an integer if and only if $e \in F_\phi$, $2q\phi(e)$ is an even integer if $e\in E(G)\setminus F_{\phi}$. Assume $e\in F_\phi$ below. By (1), let $C$ be the unbalanced circuit in $(G[F_\phi],\sigma|_{F_\phi})$ containing $e$. Without loss of generality, further assume that $e$ is the unique negative edge of $C$ after switching.
Hence, by (1) again, $$|2q\phi(e)|\equiv |\sum_{v\in V(C)}\partial (\tau,q\phi)(v)|\equiv 0 \pmod 1.$$
Thus $2q\phi(e)$ is an odd integer since $q\phi(e)$ is not an integer. This completes the proof of the lemma.
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}
\label{DEF: 1/k property}
Let $\mu$ be a positive integer. A signed graph $(G, \sigma)$ is {\em $\frac{1}{\mu q}$-flow-normalizable} if it admits a circular $\frac{p}{q}$-flow with rational flow values in $\{ 1, 1+ \frac{1}{\mu q}, 1 + \frac{2}{\mu q}, \dots, \frac{p}{q}-1-\frac{1}{\mu q}, \frac{p}{q}-1 \}$ whenever it admits a circular $\frac{p}{q}$-flow with real flow values in $[1, \frac{p}{q}-1]$. By ${\cal G}_\mu$ we denote the family of signed graphs which are $\frac{1}{\mu q}$-flow-normalizable.
\end{definition}
For unsigned graphs we have ${\cal G}_1 = {\cal G}_\mu = \{G: G \mbox{ is a bridgeless graph}\}$ for each $\mu \geq 2$ (see \cite{Steffen_2001}). However, for general signed graphs this does not hold. As an example we refer to the graph depicted in Figure \ref{not_G1} with $\Phi_c(G,\sigma) = 4$ where it is easy to see that every circular 4-flow must contain an edge with flow value $1+\frac{1}{2}$.
The following theorem is a direct corollary of Lemma~\ref{LE: 1:2 value}-(2) and the definition of ${\cal G}_2$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{TH: 2k property}
A signed graph $(G,\sigma)$ is flow-admissible if and only if $(G,\sigma) \in {\cal G}_2$.
\end{theorem}
The following lemma gives some sufficient conditions for $\lceil\Phi_c(G,\sigma)\rceil = \Phi_i(G,\sigma)$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{LE: G1}
Let $(G,\sigma) \in {\cal G}_1$. Then $\lceil\Phi_c(G,\sigma)\rceil = \Phi_i(G,\sigma)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $(G, \sigma) \in {\cal G}_1$ with a circular $\frac{p}{q}$-flow $(\tau,f)$. Let $k=\lceil\frac{p}{q}\rceil$. Since $(\tau,f)$ can also be considered as a circular $\frac{k}{1}$-flow, by Definition~\ref{DEF: 1/k property}, $(G, \sigma)$ admits a circular $\frac{k}{1}$-flow $(\tau,f')$ with rational flow values in $\{ 1, 1+\frac{1}{1}, 1+\frac{2}{1}, \dots, k-1-\frac{1}{1}, k-1\}$. Obviously, $(\tau,f')$ is a nowhere-zero $k$-flow.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
\label{LE: 2.4}
Let $(G, \sigma)$ be a signed graph containing no long barbells. Then $(G, \sigma) \in {\cal G}_1$ and thus
$\lceil\Phi_c(G,\sigma)\rceil = \Phi_i(G,\sigma)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $(G,\sigma)$ admits a circular $(\frac{p}{q}+1)$-flow. Without loss of generality, assume that $G$ is connected. We choose a circular $(\frac{p}{q} +1)$-flow $(\tau,\phi)$ of $(G,\sigma)$ such that $F_{\phi}=\{e\in E(G) : q\phi(e)\notin \mathbb{Z}\}$ has minimum cardinality. If $F_{\phi} = \emptyset$, then $(G, \sigma) \in {\cal G}_1$ by the definition of ${\cal G}_1$.
Now assume $F_{\phi} \not = \emptyset$. Then by Lemma~\ref{LE: 1:2 value}-(1), $G[F_{\phi}]$ consists of a set of vertex-disjoint unbalanced circuits. Since $G$ is connected and $(G,\sigma)$ has no long barbells, $(G,\sigma)$ doesn't contain two vertex-disjoint unbalanced circuits. Thus $(G[F_{\phi}],\sigma|_{F_\phi})$ is an unbalanced circuit.
By switching, we may assume that $G[F_{\phi}]$ is an unbalanced circuit with precisely one negative edge, denoted by $e_0$.
Since $(\tau,\phi)$ is a circular flow of $(G,\sigma)$, so does $(\tau,q\phi)$. By Observation~\ref{OB: total defects}, the total sum of the boundaries on $E(G)$ is zero for $(\tau,q\phi)$. By Lemma~\ref{LE: 1:2 value}-(2),
$$0=\sum_{e\in E(G)}\partial (\tau,q\phi)(e) \equiv \sum_{e \in E_N(G,\sigma)\cap F_{\phi}} 2q \phi(e) \equiv 2q\phi(e_0)\equiv 1 \pmod 2.$$
This contradiction completes the proof of the theorem.
\end{proof}
\medskip \noindent
{\bf Acknowledgement.} We thank Prof. Jiaao Li for providing an example to show that Theorem~\ref{TH: mod flow} doesn't hold for $k = 4$.
|
\section{Convergence as $\sigma \to 0$}
\label{sec:cvg}
We are now ready to study the limit of the relaxed solution $n_\sg$ towards a solution of the DCH equation,
Our main result is as follows.
\begin{theorem}[Limit $\sg =0$]
Let $(n_{\sg,\epsilon}, \vp_{\sg,\epsilon})$ be a sequence of weak solutions of the RDHC system~\eqref{eq:reg_pb} with initial conditions $n^0$, $0\leq n^0 <1$, with finite energy and entropy. Then, as $\e, \; \sg \to 0$, we can extract a subsequence of $(n_{\sg,\epsilon}, \vp_{\sg,\epsilon})$ such that
\begin{equation}
\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \rightharpoonup - \gamma \Delta n + \psi'_-( n) \quad \text{ weakly in } \; L^2(\Omega_T),
\label{eq:weak-phi-conv}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
n_{\sg,\gamma}-\f\sg\gamma\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \rightarrow n \quad \text{ strongly in } \; L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega)),
\label{eq:strong-n-vp-conv}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
n_{\sg,\epsilon}, \; \nabla n_{\sg,\epsilon} \rightarrow n, \; \nabla n \quad \text{ strongly in } \; L^2(\Omega_T), \text{ and }\; 0 \leq n \leq1,
\label{eq:strong-n-conv}
\end{equation}
and $n_\sg <1$ a.e. if $b$ vanishes fast enough at $1$ so that $\phi(1)=\infty$.
\begin{equation}
\p_t n_{\sg,\epsilon} \rightharpoonup \p_t n \text{ weakly in } L^2\big(0,T;(H^1(\Omega))^\prime \big).
\label{cv:time derivative}
\end{equation}
This limit $n$ satisfies the DCH system \eqref{eq:CH} in the weak sense.
\label{th:sgto0}
\end{theorem}
We recall the definition of weak solutions; for all $\chi \in L^2(0,T;H^2(\Omega))\cap L^\infty(\Omega_T)$ with $\nabla \chi \cdot \nu =0$ on $\p \Omega \times (0,T)$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
\int_0^T <\chi, \p_t n> &= \int_{\Omega_T} J \cdot \nabla \chi, \\
\int_{\Omega_T} J \cdot \nabla \chi &= - \int_{\Omega_T} \gamma \Delta n \left[ b'(n)\nabla n \cdot\nabla \chi + b(n) \Delta \chi \right] + (b\psi^{\prime \prime})(n) \nabla n \cdot \nabla \chi.
\end{cases}
\label{eq:weak-system}
\end{equation}
\begin{proof} We gathered, from the energy and entropy estimates of section~\ref{sec:estimates}, the a priori bounds of the section~\ref{sec:inequalities}. \par
\vspace{5pt}
\textit{Step 1. Weak limits.}
From the above mentioned inequalities, we can extract subsequences of $(n_{\sg,\epsilon},\vp_{\sg,\epsilon})$ such that the following convergences hold for all $T>0$. From \eqref{eq:vp-est} and \eqref{eq:grad-vp-est}, we immediately have
\begin{equation}
\sg \vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \to 0 \text{ in } L^2 \big((0,T); H^1(\Omega ) \big).
\label{eq:conv_svp}
\end{equation}
Next, from \eqref{eq:grad-est}, and the above convergence, we conclude
\[
n_{\sg,\epsilon} \rightharpoonup n \text{ weakly in } L^2\big(0,T; H^1(\Omega) \big),
\]
and \eqref{eq:lap-est} gives directly
\begin{equation}
\Delta (n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} )\rightharpoonup \Delta n \text{ weakly in } L^2(\Omega_T).
\label{eq:conv_lapn}
\end{equation}
This latter convergence is obtained in the distribution sense using integration per parts, for all test function $\chi \in \mathcal{D}(\Omega_T)$
\[
\int_{\Omega_T} \Delta \big(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \big) \chi = - \int_{\Omega_T} \nabla \big(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \big) \nabla \chi.
\]
Then using \eqref{eq:conv_svp}, we obtain \eqref{eq:conv_lapn}.
The system of equations can also be used to complement these results. We find
\[
\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \rightharpoonup \vp \text{ weakly in } L^2(\Omega_T),
\]
using the second equation of the system \eqref{eq:reg_pb} and triangular inequality,
\[
\|\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \|_{L^2(\Omega_T)} \le \gamma \|\Delta(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f{\sg}{\gamma} \vp_{\sg,\epsilon})\|_{L^2(\Omega_T)} + \| \psi_-^\prime(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f{\sg}{\gamma} \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}) \|_{L^2(\Omega_T)} .
\]
Finally from \eqref{eq:flux-est} and the equation on $n_{\sg,\epsilon}$ itself, we conclude~\eqref{cv:time derivative}.
\\[5pt]
\textit{Step 2. Strong convergence.} We continue with proving the strong convergences in~\eqref{eq:strong-n-conv}. From the inequality~\eqref{eq:lap-est}, we know that $\Delta \left( n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}\right)$ is uniformly bounded in $L^2(\Omega_T)$. We also have the boundary conditions, $\nabla\left( n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp \right)\cdot \nu =0$ and the conservation of both quantities. Therefore elliptic regularity theory gives us
\[
\| n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \|_{L^2(0,T;H^2(\Omega))} \le C.
\]
Therefore strong compactness in space holds for the quantities $ n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f{\sg}{\gamma} \vp$ and $\nabla[ n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp]$. Furthermore, from the limit~\eqref{eq:conv_svp}, it means that both $ n_{\sg,\epsilon}$ and $\nabla n_{\sg,\epsilon}$ are compact in space.
Compactness in time is also obtain for the quantity $n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}$ from \eqref{eq:control-deriv-n-vp}. Again from Lions-Aubin lemma, we have the strong convergence \eqref{eq:strong-n-conv}. The conclusion \eqref{eq:weak-phi-conv} follows from this results.
The bounds $0\leq n <1$ can be obtained as in the case $\e \to 0$ , see Theorem~\ref{th:existence} and we do not repeat the argument.
\\[5pt]
\textit{Step 3. Limiting equation.} Next, we need to verify that the limit of the subsequence $n_{\sg,\epsilon}$ satisfies the DCH equation. The argument is different from the case $\e \to 0$ because we do not control $\nabla \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}$ in the case at hand. From the $L^2$ bound in \eqref{eq:flux-est}, we need to identify the weak limit
\begin{equation}
J_{\sg,\epsilon}:= -B_{\epsilon}(n_{\sg,\epsilon})\nabla(\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} + \psi^\prime_{+,\epsilon}(n_{\sg,\epsilon})) \rightharpoonup -b(n)\nabla(\vp + \psi^\prime_{+}(n)) \quad \text{weakly in } L^2(\Omega_T).
\label{eq:conv_J}\end{equation}
For a test function $\eta \in L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega,\mathbb{R}^d))\cap L^\infty(\Omega_T,\mathbb{R}^d)$ and $\eta \cdot \mu = 0$ on $\partial \Omega \times (0,T)$, we integrate the left-hand side to obtain
\[
\int_{\Omega_T} J_{\sg,\epsilon} \cdot \eta = -\int_{\Omega_T} \gamma \Delta \left(n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f{\sg }{\gamma} \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}\right) \nabla \cdot (B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon})\eta) + B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon})\nabla \left(\psi^\prime_{+,\epsilon}(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) + \psi^\prime_-(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon})\right) \cdot \eta.
\]
We have mainly two types of terms on the right-hand side ~{$\int_{\Omega_T} \gamma \Delta \left(n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f{\sg }{\gamma} \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}\right) \nabla \cdot (B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon})\eta)$} and $\int_{\Omega_T} B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon})\nabla \left(\psi^\prime_{+,\epsilon}(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) + \psi^\prime_-(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon})\right) \cdot \eta $.
Let us focus on the first term
\[
\begin{aligned}
\int_{\Omega_T} \gamma \Delta \left(n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f{\sg }{\gamma} \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}\right)\nabla \cdot (B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon})\eta) =& \int_{\Omega_T} \gamma \Delta \left(n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f{\sg }{\gamma} \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}\right) B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \nabla \cdot \eta
\\
&+ \int_{\Omega_T} \gamma \Delta \left(n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f{\sg }{\gamma} \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}\right) B^\prime_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \nabla n_{\sg,\epsilon} \cdot\eta.
\end{aligned}
\]
From the strong convergence \eqref{eq:strong-n-conv} and the weak one \eqref{eq:conv_lapn} with the fact that $B_\epsilon(\cdot) \rightarrow b(\cdot)$ uniformly, we obtain the convergence of the first term of the right-hand side
\[
\int_{\Omega_T} \gamma \Delta \left(n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f{\sg }{\gamma} \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}\right) B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \nabla \cdot \eta \rightarrow \int_{\Omega_T} \gamma \Delta n \; b(n) \nabla \cdot \eta,
\]
as $\sg,\epsilon \rightarrow 0$ and thus we have passed to the limit in the first term of the right hand side. For the second term, we
use that the derivative $B^\prime_\epsilon(\cdot) \to b^\prime(\cdot)$ uniformly. We also use the strong convergence of $\nabla n_{\sg,\epsilon}$ from \eqref{eq:strong-n-conv}.
From the results above and a generalized version of the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem we obtain
\[
\int_{\Omega_T} \gamma \Delta \left(n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f{\sg }{\gamma} \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}\right) B^\prime_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \nabla n_{\sg,\epsilon} \cdot\eta \rightarrow \int_{\Omega_T} \gamma \Delta n b^\prime(n) \nabla n \cdot\eta ,
\]
as $\sg,\epsilon \rightarrow 0$.
Let us now pass to the limit in $\int_{\Omega_T} B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon})\nabla \left(\psi^\prime_{+,\epsilon}(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) + \psi^\prime_-(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon})\right) \cdot \eta$. As in the case of the convergence $\epsilon \to 0$, we have that
\[
\int_{\Omega_T} B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon})\nabla \left(\psi^\prime_{+,\epsilon}(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \right)\cdot \eta,
\]
using the fact that ${B_\epsilon(\cdot) \psi^{\prime\prime}_{+,\epsilon}(\cdot) \rightarrow b(\cdot)\psi^{\prime\prime}_{+}(\cdot)}$ uniformly and the strong convergence \eqref{eq:strong-n-conv}.
Since ${B_\epsilon(\cdot) \rightarrow b(\cdot)}$, we have ${\left(B_\epsilon\psi^{\prime\prime}_-\right)(\cdot) \rightarrow \left(b\psi^{\prime\prime}_-\right)(\cdot)}$.
\noindent Therefore, we pass to pass to the limit in ${\int_{\Omega_T} B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon})\nabla \left(\psi^\prime_{-}(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\frac{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}) \right)\cdot \eta}$ using the convergence \eqref{eq:strong-n-vp-conv}. Altogether, we obtain the following convergence
\[
\int_{\Omega_T} B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon})\nabla \left(\psi^\prime_{+,\epsilon}(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) + \psi^\prime_-(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon})\right) \cdot \eta \rightarrow \int_{\Omega_T} b(n)\nabla \left(\psi^\prime_{+}(n) + \psi^\prime_-(n)\right) \cdot \eta
\]
\par
This finishes the proof of \eqref{eq:conv_J}, i.e. that the limit solution $n$ satisfies the weak formulation of the DCH equation~\eqref{eq:CH}, and also the proof of Theorem~\ref{th:sgto0}.
\end{proof}
\section{The regularized problem}
\label{sec:reg-ineq-exi}
To prove that the system \eqref{eq:CH-relax}, admits solutions and to precise the functional spaces, we first define a regularized problem. Then we prove the existence of solutions and estimates based on energy and entropy relations.
\subsection{Regularization procedure}
We consider a small positive parameter $0 < \epsilon \ll 1$ and define the regularized mobility
\begin{equation}
B_\epsilon(n) = \begin{cases}
b(1-\epsilon) &\text{ for } n \ge 1-\epsilon, \\
b(\epsilon) &\text{ for } n \le \epsilon, \\
b(n) &\text{ otherwise}.
\end{cases}
\label{eq:reg_mob}
\end{equation}
Then, there are two positive constants $b_1$ and $B_1$, such that
\begin{equation}
b_1 < B_\epsilon(n) < B_1,\quad \forall n \in \mathbb{R}.
\label{eq:bn-assumption}
\end{equation}
Thus, the regularized mobility satisfies
\begin{equation}
B_\epsilon \in C(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R}^+).
\label{eq:reg-mob-continuity}
\end{equation}
To define a regular potential, we smooth out the singularity located at $n=1$ which only occurs in $\psi_+$, see~\eqref{eq:psi-plus}--\eqref{eq:psi-minus}, and preserve the assumption \eqref{eq:assbpsi} by setting
\begin{equation}
\psi_{+,\epsilon}^{\prime \prime}(n) =
\begin{cases}
\psi_+^{\prime \prime}(1-\epsilon) &\text{ for } n \ge 1-\epsilon, \\[5pt]
\psi_+^{\prime \prime}(\epsilon) &\text{ for } n \le \epsilon , \\[5pt]
\psi_+^{\prime \prime}(n) &\text{ otherwise}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
It is useful to notice that, for some positive constants $D_1$ independent of $0< \epsilon \leq \epsilon_0$ and $D_\epsilon$, we have
\begin{equation}
\psi_{+,\epsilon}(n) \in C^2(\mathbb{R}, \mathbb{R})\quad \psi_{+,\epsilon}(n) \geq -D_1, \quad |\psi_\epsilon^{\prime} (n)|\le D_\epsilon(1+|n|) , \quad \forall n \in \mathbb{R} .
\label{eq:assume-psi}
\end{equation}
See also \cite{agosti_cahn-hilliard-type_2017} for details about the extensions needed for the potential~\eqref{eq:pot1}.
\par
We can now define the regularized problem
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
\p_t n_{\sg,\epsilon} &= \nabla \cdot \left[ B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \nabla(\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} + \psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) ) \right], \\
- \sg \Delta \vp_{\sg,\epsilon} + \vp_{\sg,\epsilon} &= -\gamma\Delta n_{\sg,\epsilon} + \psi_-^\prime(n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f \sg \gamma \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}),
\end{aligned}
\right.
\label{eq:reg_pb}
\end{equation}
with zero-flux boundary conditions
\begin{equation}
\f{\p (n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f{\sigma}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}) }{\p \nu} = \f{\p \big(\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} + \psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \big)}{\p \nu} = 0 \qquad \text{ on } \; \p \Omega \times (0,+\infty).
\label{eq:bound_reg}
\end{equation}
It is convenient to define the flux of the regularized system as
\[
J_{\sigma,\epsilon} = - B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon})\nabla \left(\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} + \psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \right).
\]
\subsection{Existence for the regularized problem}
We can now state the existence theorem for the regularized problem~\eqref{eq:reg_pb}.
\begin{theorem} [Existence for $\e >0$]
Assuming $n^0 \in H^1(\Omega)$, there exists a pair of functions $(n_{\sigma,\epsilon},\vp_{\sigma,\epsilon})$ such that for all $T>0$,
\begin{align*}
n_{\sigma,\epsilon} &\in L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega)), \qquad
\partial_t n_{\sigma,\epsilon} \in L^2(0,T;(H^1(\Omega))') ,\\
\vp_{\sigma,\epsilon} &\in L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega)), \\
n_{\sigma,\epsilon}-\f\sg\gamma \vp_{\sigma,\epsilon} &\in L^2(0,T;H^2(\Omega)), \qquad \p_t \left(n_{\sigma,\epsilon}-\f\sg\gamma \vp_{\sigma,\epsilon}\right) \in L^2(0,T;(H^1(\Omega))') ,
\end{align*}
which satisfies the regularized-relaxed degenerate Cahn-Hilliard equation~\eqref{eq:reg_pb}, \eqref{eq:bound_reg} in the following weak sense: for all test function $\chi \in L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega))$, it holds
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\int_0^T <\chi, \p_t n_{\sigma,\epsilon}> &= \int_{\Omega_T} B_\epsilon(n_{\sigma,\epsilon}) \nabla\left(\vp_{\sigma,\epsilon} + \psi^\prime_{+,\epsilon}(n_{\sigma,\epsilon}) \right) \nabla \chi ,\\
\sigma \int_{\Omega_T} \nabla \vp_{\sigma,\epsilon} \nabla \chi &+ \int_{\Omega_T} \vp_{\sigma,\epsilon} \chi = \gamma\int_{\Omega_T} \nabla n_{\sigma,\epsilon} \nabla \chi + \int_{\Omega_T} \psi_-^\prime(n_{\sigma,\epsilon}-\frac{\sigma}{\gamma}\vp_{\sigma,\epsilon}) \chi .
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:limit-reg-rel-sys}
\end{equation}
\label{th:existence-regularized}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We adapt the proof of the theorem $2$ in \cite{elliott_cahn-hilliard_1996} where the authors prove the existence of solutions of the Cahn-Hilliard system with positive mobilities. Since the regularized mobility here is positive due to \eqref{eq:bn-assumption}, we can apply the same theorem.
The proof of existence follows the following different stages
\\[5pt]
\textit{Step 1. Galerkin approximation.} Firstly, we make an approximation of the regularized problem \eqref{eq:reg_pb}. We define the family of eigenfunctions $\{\phi_i\}_{i\in \mathbb{N}}$ of the Laplace operator subjected to zero Neumann boundary conditions.
\[
-\Delta \phi_i = \lambda_i\phi_i \text{ in } \Omega\quad \text{ with } \quad \nabla \phi_i \cdot \nu = 0 \text{ on } \partial \Omega.
\]
The family $\{\phi_i\}_{i\in \mathbb{N}}$ form an orthogonal basis of both $H^1(\Omega)$ and $L^2(\Omega)$ and we normalize them, i.e. $(\phi_i,\phi_j)_{L^2(\Omega)} = \delta_{ij}$ to obtain an orthonormal basis. We assume that the first eigenvalue is $\lambda_1 =0$ (which does not introduce a lack of generality).
We consider the following discretization of \eqref{eq:reg_pb}
\begin{align}
n^N(t,x) &= \sum_{i=1}^N c_i^N(t) \phi_i(x),\quad \vp^N(t,x) = \sum_{i=1}^N d_i^N(t) \phi_i(x), \label{eq:semi-discr1} \\
\int_\Omega \partial_t n^N \phi_j &= -\int_\Omega B_\epsilon(n^N) \nabla\left(\vp^N + \Pi^N\left(\psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n^N)\right) \right) \nabla \phi_j, \quad \text{for } j=1,...,N, \label{eq:semi-discr2}\\
\int_\Omega \vp^N \phi_j &= \gamma \int_\Omega \nabla\left(n^N - \frac{\sigma}{\gamma} \vp^N \right)\nabla \phi_j + \int_\Omega \psi_-^\prime(n^N- \frac{\sigma}{\gamma} \vp^N ) \phi_j, \quad \text{for } j=1,...,N, \label{eq:semi-discr3}\\
n^N(0,x) &= \sum_{i=1}^N \left(n_0,\phi_i \right)_{L^2(\Omega)}\phi_i. \label{eq:semi-discr4}
\end{align}
We have used the $L^2$ projection $\Pi^N: L^2(\Omega) \to V$, where $V= \text{span}\{\phi_1,...,\phi_N \}$.
This gives the following initial value problem for a system of ordinary differential equations, for all $j=1,...,N$,
\begin{align}
\partial_t c^N_j &= - \int_\Omega B_\epsilon(\sum_{i=1}^N c^N_i \phi_i) \nabla \left( \vp^N+ \Pi^N\left(\psi_{+,\epsilon}^{\prime}(\sum_{i=1}^N c^N_i \phi_i)\right) \right) \nabla \phi_j , \label{eq:init-val1} \\
d^N_j &= \gamma \lambda_j c^N_j - \sigma \lambda_j d^N_j + \int_\Omega \psi_-^\prime(\sum_{k=1}^N (c^N_k - \frac{\sigma}{\gamma} d^N_k)\phi_k) \phi_j, \label{eq:init-val2} \\
c_j^N(0) &= \left(n_0,\phi_j \right)_{L^2(\Omega)}.
\label{eq:init-val3}
\end{align}
Since the right-hand side of equation \eqref{eq:init-val1} depends continuously on the coefficients $c^N_j$, the initial value problem has a local solution.
\\[5pt]
\textit{ Step 2. Inequalities and convergences.}
Multiplying equation \eqref{eq:init-val1}, by $\phi_i \big(\vp^N+\psi_+^\prime(n^N) \big)$, then summing over $i$ and integrating over the domain leads to
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\f{d}{dt} \int_\Omega \psi_{+,\epsilon}(n^N) &+ \int_\Omega \partial_t(n^N) \vp^N \\
&= \int_\Omega \sum_i (\vp^N+ \psi^\prime_{+,\epsilon}(n^N))\phi_i \int_\Omega \nabla \phi_i \left(B_\epsilon(n^N) \nabla\left(\vp^N + \Pi^N\left(\psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n^N)\right) \right) \right) \, \mathop{\kern0pt\mathrm{d}}\!{} y \, \mathop{\kern0pt\mathrm{d}}\!{} x.
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:energy-discrete-1}
\end{equation}
Let us focus on the left-hand side with
\[
\int_\Omega \partial_t(n^N) \vp^N = \int_\Omega\partial_t(n^N-\f\sg\gamma \vp^N)\vp^N + \f12 \f \sg\gamma \f{d}{dt} \int_\Omega |\vp^N|^2.
\]
Then, using the equation \eqref{eq:semi-discr3}, we have that
\[
\int_\Omega\partial_t(n^N-\f\sg\gamma \vp^N)\vp^N = \f\gamma 2 \f{d}{dt} \int_\Omega |\nabla (n^N-\f{\sg}{\gamma} \vp^N) |^2 + \f{d}{dt}\int_\Omega \psi_-(n^N - \f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp^N).
\]
The right-hand side of equation \eqref{eq:energy-discrete-1} gives
\[
\begin{aligned}
-\int_\Omega \sum_i &(\vp^N+ \psi^\prime_{+,\epsilon}(n^N)) \phi_i \int_\Omega \nabla \phi_i \left(B_\epsilon(n^N) \nabla\left(\vp^N + \Pi^N\left(\psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n^N)\right) \right) \right) \, \mathop{\kern0pt\mathrm{d}}\!{} y \, \mathop{\kern0pt\mathrm{d}}\!{} x \\
&= - \int_\Omega B_\epsilon(n^N) \left|\nabla\left(\vp^N + \Pi^N\left(\psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n^N) \right)\right)\right|^2.
\end{aligned}
\]
Altogether, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\f{d}{dt} E(t) + \int_\Omega B_\epsilon(n^N) \left|\nabla\left(\vp^N + \Pi^N\left( \psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n^N)\right) \right)\right|^2 \le 0,
\end{equation}
where
\[
E(t) = \int_\Omega \psi_{+,\epsilon}(n^N) + \f\gamma 2\int_\Omega |\nabla (n^N-\f{\sg}{\gamma} \vp^N) |^2 + \f12 \f \sg\gamma \int_\Omega |\vp^N|^2+\int_\Omega \psi_-(n^N - \f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp^N).
\]
Next, to prove the compactness in space of $\nabla n^N$, we write
\[
\min_{n^N} \left(\frac{1+\f\sg\gamma \psi_{+,\epsilon}^{\prime\prime}}{\psi_{+,\epsilon}^{\prime\prime}} \right)^2 \int_\Omega \left|\nabla \psi_{+,\epsilon}^{\prime}(n^N) \right|^2
\le \int_{\Omega} \left(\frac{1+\f\sg\gamma \psi_{+,\epsilon}^{\prime\prime}}{\psi_{+,\epsilon}^{\prime\prime}} \right)^2 \left|\nabla \psi_{+,\epsilon}^{\prime}(n^N) \right|^2 \le \int_\Omega \left|\nabla \left(n^N + \f\sg\gamma \psi_{+,\epsilon}^{\prime}(n^N) \right) \right|^2.
\]
Therefore, for some $\theta >0$, we have
\[
\begin{aligned}
\left(\left(\f\sg\gamma \right)^2 +\theta\right) \int_\Omega \big|\nabla \psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n^N)\big|^2 \le &\int_\Omega \big|\nabla\left(n^N-\f\sg\gamma \vp^N \right) + \f\sg\gamma \nabla \left(\vp^N + \Pi^N\left(\psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n^N)\right) \right) \\&+ \f\sg\gamma\nabla\left(\psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n^N) - \Pi^N\left(\psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n^N) \right) \right) \big|^2 .
\end{aligned}
\]
Finally, we obtain
\[
\begin{aligned}
\left(\left(\f\sg\gamma \right)^2 +\theta \right) \int_\Omega \big|\nabla \psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n^N)\big|^2 &\le C(T) + \left(\f\sg\gamma \right)^2 \int_\Omega \left|\nabla\left( \psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n^N) - \Pi^N\left(\psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n^N) \right)\right) \right|^2 \\
& \le C(T) + \left(\f\sg\gamma \right)^2 \int_\Omega \left|\nabla \psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n^N) \right|^2,
\end{aligned}
\]
and we proved that
\[
\theta \int_\Omega \big|\nabla \psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n^N) \big|^2 \le C(T).
\]
\begin{comment}
To prove the existence of global solutions, we need to find uniform bounds for the $H^1-$norm of the unknowns.
Let us choose $\vp^N$ as a test function in \eqref{eq:semi-discr2} to obtain
\[
\int_\Omega \p_t n^N \vp^N = -\int_\Omega B_\epsilon(n^N) |\nabla \vp^N|^2 + B_\epsilon(n^N) \psi_{+,\epsilon}^{\prime\prime}(n^N)\nabla n^N \nabla \vp^N.
\]
Using the same method as to obtain the energy in the proof of the proposition \ref{prop:energy}, we have the following
\[
\f{d}{dt} \int_\Omega \f \gamma 2 \nabla (n^N-\f{\sigma}{\gamma}\vp^N)|^2 + \f{\sg}{2 \gamma} |\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}|^2 + \psi_-(n^N-\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp^N) = -\int_\Omega B_\epsilon(n^N) |\nabla \vp^N|^2 + B_\epsilon(n^N) \psi_{+,\epsilon}^{\prime\prime}(n^N)\nabla n^N \nabla \vp^N.
\]
Integrating the previous equation from $O$ to $T>0$ (which is a fixed time) and using the fact that $B_\epsilon(r) > 0$ for all $r\in \mathbb{R}$ and the properties of the regularized potential, namely $|\psi^{\prime \prime}_{+,\epsilon}| < C$, we have
\begin{equation}
b_1 \int_{\Omega_T} |\nabla \vp^N|^2 + (b_1 \psi^{\prime\prime}_{+,\epsilon,\text{min}}) \int_{\Omega_T} \nabla n^N \nabla \vp^N + \int_\Omega \f \gamma 2 \nabla (n^N-\f{\sigma}{\gamma}\vp^N)|^2 + \f{\sg}{2 \gamma} |\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}|^2 + \psi_-(n^N-\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp^N) \le C_0.
\label{eq:ineq-simi-energy}
\end{equation}
Where $C_0$ is a constant depending on the $H^1$-norm of the initial conditions.
In order to be able to use this inequality, we need to verify $\int_{\Omega_T}\nabla n^N \nabla \vp^N $ is bounded from below. Using $\vp^N$ as a test function in \eqref{eq:semi-discr3}, we obtain that
\[
\int_{\Omega_T} \nabla n^N \nabla \vp^N = \f1\gamma \int_\Omega \left[ \sigma |\nabla \vp^N |^2 + |\vp^N|^2 - \psi_-^\prime(n^N-\f\sg\gamma \vp^N) \vp^N \right].
\]
We need to probe that due to the boundedness of $|\psi_-^\prime|$ the term $\int_{\Omega_T} \psi_-^\prime(n^N-\f\sg\gamma \vp^N) \vp^N $ is bounded from below.
From Young's inequality, we have that
\[
\int_{\Omega_T} \psi_-^\prime(n^N-\f\sg\gamma \vp^N) \vp^N \le \f12 \int_{\Omega_T} \left( |\psi^\prime_-(n^N-\f\sg\gamma \vp^N) |^2 + |\vp^N|^2 \right),
\]
\textcolor{red}{To verify.\\}
Since $\psi^\prime_-$ is a bounded continuous function and the measure of $\Omega_T$ is finite, it is in $L^2(\Omega_T)$. Thus,
\begin{equation}
\int_{\Omega_T} \nabla n^N \nabla \vp^N \ge \f1\gamma \int_\Omega \left[ \sigma |\nabla \vp^N |^2 + \f12 |\vp^N|^2 -C \right],
\label{eq:nablan-nablavp}
\end{equation}
and is bounded from below.
\end{comment}
Therefore, we can obtain from the previous inequalities the following
\begin{align}
\f{\gamma}{2}\int_\Omega &|\nabla (n^N-\f{\sigma}{\gamma}\vp^N)|^2\le C, \label{eq:semi-discr-ineq1}\\
\f{\sg}{2 \gamma} \int_\Omega &|\vp^N|^2 \le C, \label{eq:semi-discr-ineq2} \\
\int_{\Omega_T} B_\epsilon(n^N) &\big| \nabla \left(\vp^N + \Pi^N\left(\psi^\prime_{+,\epsilon}(n^N)\right)\right) \big|^2 \le C, \label{eq:semi-discr-ineq3} \\
\theta \min_{r\in\mathbb{R}}\left(\psi_{+,\epsilon}^{\prime\prime}(r) \right) \int_\Omega &|\nabla n^N|^2 \le C(T), \label{eq:semi-discr-ineq4}
\end{align}
which hold for positive values of $\gamma, \sigma, \theta$ and also for all finite time $T\ge 0$. Therefore, from these inequalities we can extract subsequences of $(n^N,\vp^N)$ such that the following convergences hold for any time $T\ge 0$ and small positive values of $\gamma, \sigma$.\par
Taking $j=1$ in \eqref{eq:semi-discr2}, gives the results that $\f{d}{dt}\int n^N = 0$.
Then, using the inequality \eqref{eq:semi-discr-ineq4} and the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality, we obtain
\begin{equation}
n^N \rightharpoonup n_{\sg,\epsilon} \text{ weakly in } L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega)).
\label{eq:semi-discr-n-weak}
\end{equation}
This result, in turn, implies that the coefficients $c^N_j$ are bounded and a global solution to ~\eqref{eq:init-val1}--\eqref{eq:init-val3} exists.
Choosing $j=1$ in \eqref{eq:semi-discr3} gives
\[
\int_\Omega \vp^N = \int_\Omega \psi_-\left(n^N-\f\sg\gamma n^N \right),
\]
and combining \eqref{eq:semi-discr-ineq1}, \eqref{eq:semi-discr-n-weak} and the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality gives
\begin{equation}
\vp^N \rightharpoonup \vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \text{ weakly in } L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega)).
\label{eq:semi-discr-conv-vp}
\end{equation}
We also obtain from \eqref{eq:semi-discr-n-weak} and \eqref{eq:semi-discr-conv-vp}
\begin{equation}
n^N - \f \sg\gamma \vp^N \rightharpoonup n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f \sg\gamma \vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \text{ weakly in } L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega)).
\label{eq:semi-discr-conv-n-vp}
\end{equation}
From the previous convergence, we conclude that $\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}\in L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega))$, therefore, using elliptic regularity we know that
\begin{equation}
n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f\sg\gamma \vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \in L^2(0,T;H^2(\Omega)).
\label{eq:H^2-n-vp}
\end{equation}
To be able to prove some strong convergence in $L^2(0,T;L^2(\Omega))$ of $n^N$, we need an information about the temporal derivative $\partial_t n^N$. From the first equation of the system, we have for all test functions $\phi \in L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega))$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\left|\int_{\Omega_T} \partial_t n^N \phi \right| &= \left|\int_{\Omega_T} \partial_t n^N \Pi_N \phi \right| \\
&= \left|\int_{\Omega_T} b(n^N) \nabla\left(\vp^N + \Pi^N\left(\psi^\prime_{+,\epsilon}(n^N)\right) \right) \nabla \Pi_N \phi \right| \\
& \le \left( B_1\int_{\Omega_T} B_\epsilon(n^N) \left| \nabla\left(\vp^N + \Pi^N\left(\psi^\prime_{+,\epsilon}(n^N)\right) \right)\right|^2 \right)^\frac{1}{2} \left(\int_{\Omega_T}\left| \nabla \Pi_N \phi \right|^2\right)^\frac{1}{2}.
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:semi-discr-ineq-dtn-1}
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{eq:semi-discr-ineq3}, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\left|\int_{\Omega_T} \partial_t n^N \phi \right| \le C \left(\int_{\Omega_T}\left| \nabla \Pi_N \phi \right|^2\right)^\frac{1}{2} .
\label{eq:semi-discr-ineq-dtn}
\end{equation}
Thus we can extract a subsequence such that
\begin{equation}
\partial_t n^N \rightharpoonup \partial_t n_{\sg,\epsilon}\text{ weakly in } L^2(0,T;(H^1(\Omega))').
\label{eq:semi-discr-ptn}
\end{equation}
From \eqref{eq:semi-discr-n-weak} and \eqref{eq:semi-discr-ptn} and using the Lions-Aubin Lemma, we obtain the strong convergence
\begin{equation}
n^N \to n_{\sg,\epsilon} \text{ strongly in } L^2(0,T;L^2(\Omega)).
\label{eq:semi-discr-conv-strong-n}
\end{equation}
Next, we need to prove the strong convergence of $n^N-\f\sg\gamma \vp^N$ in $L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega))$.
In order to do that we must bound the $L^2(0,T;(H^1(\Omega))')$ norm of its time derivative.
Starting from the equation \eqref{eq:init-val2}, multiplying it by $-\f{\sg}{\gamma}$, adding $c^N_j$ and calculating its time derivative, we obtain
\[
\f{d}{dt}\left(c^N_j-\f\sg\gamma d^N_j\right) = \f{d}{dt} c^N_j -\sg \lambda_j\f{d}{dt} \left(c^N_j-\f\sg\gamma d^N_j\right) - \f\sg\gamma \f{d}{dt}\int_\Omega \psi_-^\prime\left(n^N-\f\sg\gamma \vp^N \right)\phi_j.
\]
Multiplying the previous equation by $\phi_j \p_t\left(n^N - \f{\sg}{\gamma} \vp^N\right)$, summing over $j$ and integrating over $\Omega$, we obtain
\[
\begin{aligned}
\int_\Omega \left(\p_t\left(n^N-\f\sg\gamma \vp^N\right)\right)^2 &+ \sg \int_\Omega \big|\nabla \left(\p_t\left(n^N-\f\sg\gamma \vp^N \right) \right) \big|^2= \int_\Omega \p_t n^N \p_t\left(n^N-\f\sg\gamma \vp^N\right) \\
& - \sum_j \int_\Omega \phi_j \p_t\left(n^N-\f\sg\gamma \vp^N \right)\f\sg\gamma \f{d}{dt}\int_\Omega \psi_-^\prime\left(n^N-\f\sg\gamma \vp^N \right)\phi_j \,\mathop{\kern0pt\mathrm{d}}\!{} x\,\mathop{\kern0pt\mathrm{d}}\!{} y.
\end{aligned}
\]
Let us define $U^N=\p_t\left( n^N-\f\sg\gamma \vp^N\right)$ and rewrite the previous equation
\[
\sg \int_\Omega |\nabla U^N|^2 + \int_\Omega |U^N|^2 = \int_\Omega \p_t n^N U^N - \f{\sg}{\gamma}\int_\Omega |U^N|^2 \psi^{\prime\prime}_-(n^N-\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp^N) .
\]
From the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, we obtain
\begin{equation}
0 \le ||\nabla U^N||_{L^2(\Omega)}^2 + \left(1-\f{\sg}{\gamma} ||\psi_-^{\prime\prime}||_\infty \right) ||U^N||_{L^2(\Omega)}^2 \le ||\p_t n^N||_{L^2(\Omega)} ||U^N||_{L^2(\Omega)}.
\label{eq:boundUN}
\end{equation}
\begin{comment}
We need to find an $L^2(\Omega)$ bound for $\p_t n^N$. Starting from the equation \eqref{eq:init-val1}, multiplying it by $\phi_j \p_t n^N$, summing over $j$ and integrating over $\Omega$ gives
\[
\int_\Omega |\p_t n^N|^2 = -\int_\Omega B_\epsilon(n^N) \nabla\left(\vp^N + \Pi^N \left(\psi_+^\prime(n^N)\right)\right)\nabla\left(\Pi^N\left(\p_t n^N \right)\right).
\]
Since
\[
\begin{aligned}
\nabla\left(\Pi^N\left(\p_t n^N\right)\right) &= \sum_j \f{d}{dt} c^N_j \nabla \phi_j,\\
&= \sum_j \left(- \int_\Omega B_\epsilon(n^N)\nabla\left(\vp^N+\Pi^N\left(\psi_+^\prime(n^N)\right) \right)\nabla \phi_j \,\mathop{\kern0pt\mathrm{d}}\!{} x\right) \nabla \phi_j,
\end{aligned}
\]
we obtain that
\[
\int_\Omega |\p_t n^N|^2 \le \left(\int_\Omega \left| B_\epsilon(n^N) \nabla\left(\vp^N + \Pi^N \left(\psi_+^\prime(n^N)\right)\right) \right|^2\right)^{\f12} \left(\int_\Omega \left|\nabla\left(\Pi^N\left(\p_t n^N \right)\right)\right|^2\right)^{\f12}.
\]
But, we have that
\[
\begin{aligned}
\int_\Omega \left|\nabla\left(\Pi^N\left(\p_t n^N \right)\right)\right|^2 &= \sum_j\int_\Omega \left| \left(\int_\Omega B_\epsilon(n^N)\nabla\left(\vp^N+\Pi^N\left(\psi_+^\prime(n^N)\right) \right)\nabla \phi_j \,\mathop{\kern0pt\mathrm{d}}\!{} x\right) \nabla \phi_j\right|^2 \, \mathop{\kern0pt\mathrm{d}}\!{} y , \\
&\le \sum_j \int_\Omega \left|\int_\Omega B_\epsilon(n^N)\nabla\left(\vp^N+\Pi^N\left(\psi_+^\prime(n^N)\right) \right)\nabla \phi_j \,\mathop{\kern0pt\mathrm{d}}\!{} x \right|^2 \left|\nabla \phi_j \right|^2 \, \mathop{\kern0pt\mathrm{d}}\!{} y\\
&\le C,
\end{aligned}
\]
where the last line is obtained from \eqref{eq:semi-discr-ineq3}.
Finally, from the previous bound, \eqref{eq:boundUN} and \eqref{eq:psi-minus} we obtain that
\end{comment}
Finally, from the \eqref{eq:psi-minus} we obtain that
\[
|| U^N ||_{L^2\left(0,T;\left(H^1(\Omega)\right)'\right)} \le C.
\]
\begin{comment}
Starting from the second equation of the system \eqref{eq:CH-relax}, we can obtain an equation on the time derivative of $\vp$ (for details of this calculation we refer the reader to Proposition~\ref{prop:control-time-deriv}, here, in addition, we use the Galerkin discretization). Using this equation in its weak form and applying the previous Galerkin method, we obtain
\[
\sigma \int_\Omega \nabla U^N \nabla \phi + \int_\Omega U^N\phi = \int_\Omega \p_t n^N \phi - \f\sg\gamma \int_\Omega U^N \psi^{\prime\prime}_-(n^N-\f\sg\gamma\vp^N)\phi,
\]
where $U^N=\p_t\left( n^N-\f\sg\gamma \vp^N\right)$.
If we replace in the previous equation the test function by $U^N$, we obtain
\[
\sg \int_\Omega |\nabla U^N|^2 + \int_\Omega |U^N|^2 = \int_\Omega \p_t n^N U^N - \f{\sg}{\gamma}\int_\Omega |U^N|^2 \psi^{\prime\prime}_-(n^N-\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp^N) .
\]
From the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, we obtain
\[
0 \le ||\nabla U^N||_{L^2(\Omega)}^2 + \left(1-\f{\sg}{\gamma} ||\psi_-^{\prime\prime}||_\infty \right) ||U^N||_{L^2(\Omega)}^2 \le ||\p_t n^N||_{L^2(\Omega)} ||U^N||_{L^2(\Omega)}.
\]
Taking into account the assumptions \eqref{eq:psi-minus} and \eqref{eq:semi-discr-ineq-dtn}, the following inequality holds
\[
||U^N||_{L^2(0,T;(H^1(\Omega))')} \le C.
\]
\textcolor{red}{Sure of the space here?}
\end{comment}
Therefore, we can extract a subsequence such that
\begin{equation}
\p_t\left(n^N-\f \sg\gamma \vp^N \right) \rightharpoonup \p_t\left(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f \sg\gamma \vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \right) \text{ weakly in } L^2(0,T;(H^1(\Omega))').
\label{eq:semi-discr-conv-dt-n-vp}
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{eq:semi-discr-conv-dt-n-vp} and \eqref{eq:H^2-n-vp} and the Lions-Aubin lemma we obtain the following strong convergence
\begin{equation}
n^N-\f \sg\gamma \vp^N \to n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f \sg\gamma \vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \text{ strongly in } L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega)).
\label{eq:semi-discr-conv-strong-n-vp}
\end{equation}
\\[5pt]
\textit{Step 3. Limiting equation.}
The main difficulty to pass to the limit in the equation \eqref{eq:semi-discr3} relies mainly on the convergence of the term $\int_\Omega \psi_-^\prime(n^N-\f\sg\gamma \vp^N) \phi_j$ which is solved using the strong convergence \eqref{eq:semi-discr-conv-strong-n-vp} and the properties \eqref{eq:psi-minus}. Therefore, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\psi_-^\prime(n^N-\f \sg\gamma \vp^N) \to \psi_-^\prime(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f \sg\gamma \vp_{\sg,\epsilon})\quad \text{ a.e. in } \Omega_T.
\label{eq:conv_ponct_psim}
\end{equation}
Then combining the convergences \eqref{eq:semi-discr-conv-n-vp}, \eqref{eq:semi-discr-conv-vp}, \eqref{eq:conv_ponct_psim} and the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem, we pass to the limit in the equation \eqref{eq:semi-discr3}.
We can also pass to the limit in the first equation \eqref{eq:semi-discr2} by the standard manner (see \cite{lions_quelques_1969}), using the strong convergence \eqref{eq:semi-discr-conv-strong-n}, the properties of the mobility \eqref{eq:reg-mob-continuity} and the potential \eqref{eq:assume-psi}.
Altogether, we obtain the limiting system \eqref{eq:limit-reg-rel-sys}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Energy, entropy and a priori estimates}
\label{sec:estimates}
The relaxed and regularized system~\eqref{eq:reg_pb} comes with an energy and an entropy. These provide us with estimates which are useful to prove the existence of global weak solutions of~\eqref{eq:reg_pb} and their convergence to the weak solutions of the original DHC equation or to the RDHC as $\epsilon$ and/or $ \sg \rightarrow 0$.
Being given a solution $(n_{\sg,\epsilon},\vp_{\sg,\epsilon})$ satisfying Theorem~\ref{th:existence-regularized}, we define the energy associated with the regularized potential $\psi_{+,\epsilon}$ and relaxed system as
\begin{equation}
\cae_{\sigma,\epsilon} [n_{\sg,\epsilon}] = \int_\Omega \left[ \psi_{+,\epsilon}(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) + \f{\gamma}{2}|\nabla (n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f{\sigma}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon})|^2 + \f{\sg}{2 \gamma} |\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}|^2 + \psi_-(n_{\sg,\epsilon} -\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}) \right] ,
\label{eq:energy}
\end{equation}
where $\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}$ is obtained from $n_{\sg,\epsilon}$ by solving the elliptic equation in~\eqref{eq:reg_pb}.
Notice that $\cae_{\sigma,\epsilon}[n_{\sg,\epsilon}]$ is lower bounded, uniformly in $\epsilon$ and $\sigma$, thanks to the assumptions on $\psi_-$ in~\eqref{eq:psi-minus} and the construction of $\psi_{\epsilon,+}$ in~\eqref{eq:assume-psi}.
\begin{proposition}[Energy]
Consider a solution $(n_{\sg,\epsilon}, \vp_{\sg,\epsilon})$ of~\eqref{eq:reg_pb}--\eqref{eq:bound_reg} defined by Theorem~\ref{th:existence-regularized}, then, the energy of the system $\cae_{\sigma,\epsilon} $ satisfies
\begin{equation}
\f{d}{dt} \cae_{\sigma,\epsilon} [n_{\sg,\epsilon}(t)] = -\int_\Omega B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \big|\nabla (\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} + \psi'_{+,\epsilon}(n_{\sg,\epsilon}))\big|^2 \leq 0 .
\label{eq:deriv-energy}
\end{equation}
\label{prop:energy}
\end{proposition}
As a consequence, we obtain a first a priori estimate
\begin{equation}
\cae_{\sigma,\epsilon} [n_{\sg,\epsilon}(T)] +\int_0^T \int_\Omega B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \big|\nabla (\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} + \psi'_{+,\epsilon}(n_{\sg,\epsilon}))\big|^2 = \cae_{\sigma,\epsilon} [n^0].
\label{eq:energy-0}
\end{equation}
\begin{proof}
To establish the energy of the regularized system, we begin with multiplying the first equation of~\eqref{eq:reg_pb} by $\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} + \psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n_{\sg,\epsilon})$. Then, we integrate on the domain $\Omega$ and use the second boundary condition~\eqref{eq:bound_reg} to obtain
\[
\int_\Omega [ \vp_{\sg,\epsilon} + \psi'_{+,\epsilon}(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) ]\p_t n_{\sg,\epsilon} = - \int_\Omega B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) |\nabla ( \vp_{\sg,\epsilon} + \psi_{+,\epsilon}' (n_{\sg,\epsilon}))|^2 .
\]
Since $ \psi'_{+,\epsilon}(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \p_t n_{\sg,\epsilon} = \p_t \psi_{+,\epsilon}(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) $, to retrieve the energy equality~\eqref{eq:deriv-energy} we need to focus on the calculation of $\int_\Omega \vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \p_t n_{\sg,\epsilon}$. We write
\[
\int_\Omega \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}\p_t n_{\sg,\epsilon} = \int_\Omega \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}\p_t [n_{\sg,\epsilon} -\f{\sigma}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}]
+ \frac{d}{dt}\int_\Omega \f{\sg}{2 \gamma} |\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}|^2,
\]
and using the second equation of \eqref{eq:reg_pb}, we rewrite the first term as
\[ \begin{aligned}
\int_\Omega \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}\p_t [n_{\sg,\epsilon} -\f{\sigma}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}]
&=\int_\Omega [- \gamma \Delta (n_{\sg,\epsilon} -\f{\sigma}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}) + \psi_-^\prime(n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f \sg \gamma \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}) ] \p_t [n_{\sg,\epsilon} -\f{\sigma}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}]
\\
& = \f{d}{dt} \int_\Omega \f \gamma 2 \nabla (n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f{\sigma}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon})|^2 + \psi_-(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}),
\end{aligned} \]
where we have used the first boundary condition~\eqref{eq:bound_reg}.
Altogether, we have recovered the expression~\eqref{eq:energy} and the equality~\eqref{eq:deriv-energy}.
\end{proof}
\medskip
We can now turn to the entropy inequality. It is classical to define the mapping $\phi_\epsilon: [0,\infty)\mapsto [0,\infty)$
\begin{equation}
\phi^{\prime \prime}_\epsilon(n) = \f{1}{B_\epsilon(n)}, \qquad \phi_\epsilon(0) = \phi_\epsilon'(0)=0,
\label{eq:assumption-entropy}
\end{equation}
which is well defined because $B_\epsilon \in C(\mathbb{R}, \mathbb{R}^+)$ from~\eqref{eq:bn-assumption}. For a nonnegative function $n(x)$, we define the entropy as
\[
\Phi_{\epsilon}[n] = \int_\Omega \phi_\epsilon\big(n(x)\big)dx.
\]
\begin{proposition}[Entropy]
Consider a solution of~\eqref{eq:reg_pb}--\eqref{eq:bound_reg} defined by Theorem~\ref{th:existence-regularized}, then the entropy of the system satisfies
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\f{ d \Phi_{\epsilon}[n_{\sg,\epsilon}(t)]}{dt} = -\int_\Omega \gamma \left| \Delta\left( n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f{\sg}{\gamma} \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}\right)\right|^2 + \f{\sg}{\gamma}|\nabla \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}|^2
&+ \psi''_-(n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f{\sg}{\gamma} \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}) \left| \nabla(n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}) \right|^2 \\
&+ \psi^{\prime\prime}_{+,\epsilon}(n_{\sg,\epsilon})|\nabla n_{\sg,\epsilon}|^2.
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:entropy}
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
Notice that the dissipation terms are all well defined by our definition of solution in Theorem~\ref{th:existence-regularized}. However,
the equality \eqref{eq:entropy} does not provide us with a direct a priori estimate because of the negative term $\psi^{\prime \prime}_-$, therefore we have to combine it with the energy identity to write
\[
\begin{aligned}
\Phi_{\epsilon}[n_{\sg,\epsilon}(T)] + \int_{\Omega_T} & \left[ \gamma \left| \Delta\left( n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f{\sg}{\gamma} \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}\right)\right|^2 + \f{\sg}{\gamma}|\nabla \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}|^2 + \psi^{\prime\prime}_{+,\epsilon}(n_{\sg,\epsilon})|\nabla n_{\sg,\epsilon}|^2\right]
\\
&\leq \Phi_{\epsilon}[n^0] + \frac{2T}{\gamma} \| \psi''_- \|_\infty \; \cae_{\sg,\epsilon}[n^0].
\end{aligned}
\]
\begin{proof}
We compute, using the definition of $\phi^{\prime \prime}_\epsilon$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\int_\Omega \p_t \phi_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon})
&= \int_\Omega \p_t n_{\sg,\epsilon} \phi^\prime_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \\
&= \int_\Omega \nabla \cdot \left[ B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \nabla(\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} + \psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) ) \right] \phi^\prime_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \\
&= - \int_\Omega B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \nabla(\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} + \psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) ) \phi^{\prime\prime}_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \nabla n_{\sg,\epsilon} \\
&= - \int_\Omega \nabla(\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} + \psi_{+,\epsilon}^\prime(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) ) \nabla n_{\sg,\epsilon}
\\
&= - \int_\Omega \nabla \vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \nabla( n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f \sg \gamma \vp_{\sg,\epsilon} ) + \psi_{+,\epsilon}^{\prime \prime}(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) |\nabla n_{\sg,\epsilon}|^2 +\f \sg \gamma | \nabla \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}|^2 .
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:entropy-reg-debut}
\end{equation}
To rewrite the term $\int_\Omega \nabla \vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \nabla( n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f \sg \gamma \vp_{\sg,\epsilon} ) $, we use the second equation of the regularized system~\eqref{eq:reg_pb}
\begin{equation}
\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} = -\gamma \Delta\left(n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}\right) + \psi_-^\prime(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}).
\label{eq:rewrite-2-reg}
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{eq:rewrite-2-reg} and the boundary condition~\eqref{eq:bound_reg}, we can rewrite the term under consideration as
\[
\begin{aligned}
\int_\Omega \vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \Delta\left(n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \right) &= \int_\Omega -\gamma \left| \Delta\left( n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f{\sg}{\gamma} \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}\right)\right|^2 + \psi^{\prime}_-(n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f{\sg}{\gamma} \vp_{\sg,\epsilon})\Delta\left(n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \right)
\\
&= - \int_\Omega \gamma \left| \Delta\left( n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f{\sg}{\gamma} \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}\right)\right|^2
+ \psi''_-(n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}) \left| \nabla (n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} ) \right|^2.
\end{aligned} \]
Injecting this equality into \eqref{eq:entropy-reg-debut}, we obtain the identity~\eqref{eq:entropy}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Inequalities}
\label{sec:inequalities}
From the energy and entropy properties, we can conclude the following a priori bounds, where we assume that the initial data has finite energy and entropy,
\begin{equation}
\f{\sg}{2\gamma} \int_\Omega \left|\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}(t)\right|^2 \leq \cae_{\sigma,\epsilon} [n^0], \qquad \forall t \geq 0,
\label{eq:vp-est}
\end{equation}
%
\begin{equation}
\f{\sg}{\gamma} \int^T_0 \int_\Omega |\nabla \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}|^2
\leq \Phi_{\epsilon}[n^0] + \frac{2T}{\gamma} \| \psi^{\prime \prime}_-\|_{\infty} \cae_{\sg,\epsilon}[n^0], \qquad \forall T\geq 0 ,
\label{eq:grad-vp-est}
\end{equation}
%
\begin{equation}
\f{\gamma}{2} \int_\Omega \left|\nabla \big(n_{\sg,\epsilon}(t)-\f{\sigma}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}(t)\big) \right|^2 \leq \cae_{\sigma,\epsilon} [n^0], \qquad \forall t \geq 0,
\label{eq:grad-est}
\end{equation}
%
\begin{equation}
\int_0^T \int_\Omega \left| \Delta\big( n_{\sg,\epsilon} - \f{\sg}{\gamma} \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}\big)\right|^2 \leq \Phi_{\epsilon}[n^0] + \frac{2T}{\gamma}\| \psi^{\prime \prime}_-\|_{\infty} \cae_{\sg,\epsilon}[n^0], \qquad \forall T\geq 0,
\label{eq:lap-est}
\end{equation}
%
\begin{equation}
\int_0^T \int_\Omega B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \big|\nabla (\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} + \psi'_{+,\epsilon}(n_{\sg,\epsilon}))\big|^2 \le \cae_{\sigma,\epsilon} [n^0], \qquad \forall T\geq 0.
\label{eq:flux-est}
\end{equation}
\begin{proposition}[Compactness of time derivatives]
Consider a solution $(n_{\sg,\epsilon}, \vp_{\sg,\epsilon})$ of~\eqref{eq:reg_pb}--\eqref{eq:bound_reg} defined by Theorem~\ref{th:existence-regularized}, then, the following inequalities hold for $\sigma$ small enough
\begin{align}
||\p_t n_{\sg,\epsilon}||_{L^2(0,T;(H^1(\Omega))^\prime)} &\le C, \label{eq:control-deriv-n}\\
||\p_t \left( n_{\sg,\epsilon} -\f\sg\gamma \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}\right)||_{L^2(0,T;(H^1(\Omega))^\prime)} &\le C.\label{eq:control-deriv-n-vp}
\end{align}
\label{prop:control-time-deriv}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
For any test function $\chi\in L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega))$ we obtained from \eqref{eq:flux-est}
\[
\begin{aligned}
\left|\int_{\Omega_T} \p_t n_{\sg,\epsilon} \chi \right| &= \left| \int_{\Omega_T}B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \nabla\left(\vp_{\sg,\epsilon}+\psi^\prime_{+,\epsilon}(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \right) \nabla \chi\right|\\
&\le \left( \int_{\Omega_T} \left|B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \nabla\left(\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} +\psi^\prime_{+,\epsilon}(n_{\sg,\epsilon}) \right) \right|^2 \right)^{1/2} || \nabla \chi ||_{L^2(\Omega_T)},\\
&\le C || \nabla \chi ||_{L^2(\Omega_T)}.
\end{aligned}
\]
This proves \eqref{eq:control-deriv-n}. \par
To prove \eqref{eq:control-deriv-n-vp}, we compute the time derivative of equation for $\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} $ in the distribution sense
\[
\sg \int_{\Omega_T} \nabla U_{\sg,\epsilon} \nabla \chi + \int_{\Omega_T} U_{\sg,\epsilon} \chi = \int_{\Omega_T} \p_t n_{\sg,\epsilon}\chi -\f{\sg}{\gamma}\int_{\Omega_T} U_{\sg,\epsilon} \psi^{\prime\prime}_-(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f\sg\gamma \vp_{\sg,\epsilon})\chi,
\]
where $U_{\sg,\epsilon} = \p_t\left(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f\sg\gamma\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \right)$ and we have used the fact that $\left(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f\sg\gamma\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \right)$, $n_{\sg,\epsilon}$ and $\psi^{\prime}_-(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f\sg\gamma \vp_{\sg,\epsilon})$ are smooth.
Then, we can choose $\chi = U_{\sg,\epsilon}$, to obtain
\[
\sg \int_{\Omega_T} |\nabla U_{\sg,\epsilon}|^2 + \int_{\Omega_T} |U_{\sg,\epsilon}|^2 = \int_{\Omega_T} \p_t n_{\sg,\epsilon} U_{\sg,\epsilon} -\f{\sg}{\gamma}\int_{\Omega_T} |U_{\sg,\epsilon}|^2 \psi^{\prime\prime}_-(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f\sg\gamma \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}).
\]
Using the fact that $\f\sg\gamma ||\psi_-^{\prime\prime}||_\infty<1$ from \eqref{eq:psi-minus}, the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality gives
\[
||\nabla U_{\sg,\epsilon}||^2_{L^2(\Omega_T)} + \alpha ||U_{\sg,\epsilon}||^2_{L^2(\Omega_T)} \le ||\p_t n_{\sg,\epsilon}||_{L^2(\Omega_T)} ||U_{\sg,\epsilon}||_{L^2(\Omega_T)},
\]
where $\alpha = 1-\f\sg\gamma \|\psi_-^{\prime\prime}\|_\infty>0$. Altogether, we obtain the bound~\eqref{eq:control-deriv-n-vp}.
\begin{comment}
To prove \eqref{eq:control-deriv-n-vp}, we start from the second equation of \eqref{eq:CH-relax} and calculate its time derivative, we obtain
\[
-\sg \Delta U + U = \p_t n - \f{\sg}{\gamma} U \psi^{\prime\prime}_-(n-\f\sg\gamma \vp),
\]
where $U = \p_t\left(n-\f\sg\gamma\vp \right)$.
Using the previously defined regularization, we calculate the weak form of this equation from which we have
\[
\sg \int_{\Omega_T} \nabla U_{\sg,\epsilon} \nabla \chi + \int_{\Omega_T} U_{\sg,\epsilon} \chi = \int_{\Omega_T} \p_t n_{\sg,\epsilon}\chi -\f{\sg}{\gamma}\int_{\Omega_T} U_{\sg,\epsilon} \psi^{\prime\prime}_-(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f\sg\gamma \vp_{\sg,\epsilon})\chi,
\]
where $U_{\sg,\epsilon} = \p_t\left(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f\sg\gamma\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \right)$.
We can choose $\chi = U_{\sg,\epsilon}$, to obtain
\[
\sg \int_{\Omega_T} |\nabla U_{\sg,\epsilon}|^2 + \int_{\Omega_T} |U_{\sg,\epsilon}|^2 = \int_{\Omega_T} \p_t n_{\sg,\epsilon} U_{\sg,\epsilon} -\f{\sg}{\gamma}\int_{\Omega_T} |U_{\sg,\epsilon}|^2 \psi^{\prime\prime}_-(n_{\sg,\epsilon}-\f\sg\gamma \vp_{\sg,\epsilon}).
\]
Using the fact that $\f\sg\gamma ||\psi_-^{\prime\prime}||_\infty<1$ from \eqref{eq:psi-minus}, the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality gives
\[
||\nabla U_{\sg,\epsilon}||^2_{L^2(\Omega_T)} + \alpha ||U_{\sg,\epsilon}||^2_{L^2(\Omega_T)} \le ||\p_t n_{\sg,\epsilon}||_{L^2(\Omega_T)} ||U_{\sg,\epsilon}||_{L^2(\Omega_T)},
\]
where $\alpha = 1-\f\sg\gamma \|\psi_-^{\prime\prime}\|_\infty>0$. Altogether, we obtain the bound~\eqref{eq:control-deriv-n-vp}.
\end{comment}
\end{proof}
\section{Existence: convergence as $\epsilon \to 0$}
\label{sec:existence}
The next step is to prove the existence of global weak solutions for the RDCH system~\eqref{eq:CH-relax} by letting $\e$ vanish. This means that for all test functions $\chi \in L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega))\cap L^\infty(\Omega_T)$ with $\nabla \chi \cdot \nu =0$ on $\p \Omega \times (0,T)$, it holds
\[
\begin{aligned}
\int_0^T <\chi,\p_t n_\sigma> &= \int_{\Omega_T} b(n_\sigma) \nabla\left(\vp_\sigma + \psi_+^\prime(n_\sigma)\right)\nabla \chi ,\\
\sigma \int_{\Omega_T} \nabla \vp_\sigma \nabla \chi + \int_{\Omega_T} \vp_\sigma \chi & = \gamma \int_{\Omega_T} \nabla n_\sigma \nabla \chi + \int_{\Omega_T} \psi_-^\prime(n_\sigma-\frac{\sigma}{\gamma} \vp_\sigma) \chi.
\end{aligned}
\]
We establish the following
\begin{theorem} [Existence for $\sg >0, \, \e=0$] \label{th:existence}
Assume an initial condition satisfying $0\leq n^0 \leq 1$, with finite energy and entropy. Then, for $\sg$ small enough, there exists a global weak solution $(n_\sigma,\vp_\sigma)$ of the RDCH equation~\eqref{eq:CH-relax}, \eqref{eq:CH-bound-relax} such that
\begin{align}
n_\sigma& \in L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega)), \qquad \p_t n_\sigma \in L^2\big(0,T;(H^1(\Omega))^\prime \big).
\\
\vp_\sigma& \in L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega)),\\
n_\sigma - \f\sg\gamma \vp_\sg &\in L^2(0,T;H^2(\Omega)), \qquad \p_t \left(n_\sigma-\f\sg\gamma \vp_\sg \right) \in L^2\big(0,T;(H^1(\Omega))^\prime \big).
\end{align}
\begin{equation}
0\le n_\sigma \leq 1, \qquad \text{ a.e. in } \Omega_T,
\label{eq:threshold}
\end{equation}
and $n_\sg <1$ a.e. if $b$ vanishes fast enough at $1$ so that $\phi(1)=\infty$ (see \eqref{eq:assumption-entropy_L}).
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The proof relies on compactness results and the inequalities presented in section~\ref{sec:inequalities}. From these inequalities, we can extract subsequences of $(n_{\sg,\epsilon},\vp_{\sg,\epsilon})$ such that the following convergences for $\epsilon \to 0$ hold for all $T>0$. \par
\noindent \textit{ Step 1. Weak limits.}
From \eqref{eq:vp-est} and \eqref{eq:grad-vp-est}, we immediately have
\begin{equation}
\vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \rightharpoonup \vp_\sigma \text{ in } L^2 \big((0,T); H^1(\Omega ) \big).
\label{eq:conv_svp-exist}
\end{equation}
Next, from \eqref{eq:grad-est}, and the above convergence, we conclude
\begin{equation}
n_{\sg,\epsilon} \rightharpoonup n_\sigma \text{ weakly in } L^2\big(0,T; H^1(\Omega) \big),
\label{eq:conv-weak-n-vp-exist}
\end{equation}
Finally from \eqref{eq:control-deriv-n} and \eqref{eq:control-deriv-n-vp}, we have
\begin{align*}
\p_t n_{\sg,\epsilon} &\rightharpoonup \p_t n_\sigma \text{ weakly in } L^2\big(0,T;(H^1(\Omega))^\prime \big),\\
\p_t \left(n_{\sg,\epsilon} -\f\sg\gamma \vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \right)&\rightharpoonup \p_t \left(n_\sigma -\f\sg\gamma \vp_\sg \right)\text{ weakly in } L^2\big(0,T;(H^1(\Omega))^\prime \big).
\end{align*}
\noindent{\em Step 2. Strong convergence.}
Therefore, from the Lions-Aubin lemma and Proposition~\ref{prop:control-time-deriv} we obtain the strong convergences
\begin{equation}
n_{\sigma,\epsilon} \to n_\sigma \in L^2(0,T;L^2(\Omega)).
\label{eq:conv-n-exist}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
n_{\sigma,\epsilon} - \f\sg\gamma \vp_{\sg,\epsilon} \to n_\sigma- \f\sg\gamma \vp_{\sg} \in L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega)).
\label{eq:conv-n-vp-exist}
\end{equation}
\noindent \textit{Step 3. Bounds $0\leq n_\sigma \le 1$.}
To prove these bounds on $n_\sg$, several authors have used the entropy relation. In the context of DCH equation with double-well potentials featuring singularities at $n=1$ and $n=-1$, the solution lies a.e. in the interval $-1<n<1$. Elliott and Garcke~\cite{elliott_cahn-hilliard_1996} prove this result using the definition of the regularized entropy and by a contradiction argument. For single-well potential, Agosti~\textit{et~al.}~\cite{agosti_cahn-hilliard-type_2017} used a reasoning on the measure of the set of solutions outside the set $0\le n <1$ and find contradictions with the boundedness of the entropy. This is the route we follow here. In the following, all functions are defined almost everywhere.
\par
We begin by the upper bound . For $\alpha >0$, we consider the set
\[
V^\e_\alpha = \{(t,x) \in \Omega_T | n_{\sigma,\epsilon}(t,x) \ge 1+\alpha \}.
\]
For $A>0$, there exists a small $\epsilon_0$ such that the following estimate holds for every $\epsilon \le \epsilon_0$
\[
\phi_{\epsilon}^{\prime\prime}(n) = \frac{1}{b(1-\epsilon)}\geq 2 A \qquad \forall n \geq 1, \; \forall \epsilon > 0.
\]
Thus, integrating this quantity twice, we obtain
\[
\phi_{\epsilon}(n) \geq A (n-1)^2 \qquad \forall n \geq 1.
\]
Also, from \eqref{eq:entropy}, we know that the entropy is uniformly bounded in $\e$. Therefore, we obtain
\[
| V^\e_\alpha | A \alpha^2 \leq \int_{\Omega_T} \phi_{\epsilon}(n_{\sigma,\epsilon}(t,x)) \leq C(T), \qquad | V^\e_\alpha | \leq \frac{C(T)}{ A \alpha^2}.
\]
In the limit $\e \to 0$, using Fatou's lemma and the strong convergence of $n_{\sg,\epsilon}$, we conclude that
\[
\big| \{(t,x) \in \Omega_T | n_{\sigma}(t,x) \ge 1+\alpha \} \big| \leq \frac{C(T)}{ A \alpha^2}, \qquad \forall A>0.
\]
In other words $n_{\sigma}(t,x) \le 1+\alpha$ for all $\alpha>0$, which means $n_{\sigma}(t,x) \le 1$.
The same argument also gives $n_\sg \geq 0$ and we do not repeat it.\par
The second statement, $n_\sg <1$ under the assumption $\phi(1)=+\infty$, is a consequence of the bound
\[
\int_{\Omega_T} \phi (n_{\sigma}(t,x)) \leq C(T),
\]
which holds true by strong convergence of $n_{\sigma,\epsilon}$ and because $\phi_\e \nearrow \phi$ as $\e \searrow 0$.\par
\noindent \textit{Step 4. Limiting equation.}
Finally, it remains to show that the limit of subsequences satisfies the RDCH equation in the weak form.
Firstly, using the weak convergences ~\eqref{eq:conv_svp-exist}--\eqref{eq:conv-weak-n-vp-exist}, the strong convergence \eqref{eq:conv-n-vp-exist} and the properties of $\psi_-^\prime$ gathered from \eqref{eq:psi-minus}, we can pass to the limit in the standard way to obtain the second equation of the limit system.\par
\noindent To conclude the proof, we need to prove the following weak convergence, recalling that~\eqref{eq:flux-est} provides a uniform $L^2$ bound over $\Omega_T$, on $J_{\sigma,\epsilon}$
\begin{equation}
J_{\sigma,\epsilon} := -B_\epsilon(n_{\sigma,\epsilon})\nabla(\vp_{\sigma,\epsilon} + \psi^\prime_{+,\epsilon}(n_{\sigma,\epsilon})) \rightharpoonup -b(n_\sigma) \nabla(\vp_\sigma + \psi_+^\prime(n_\sigma)) \text{ weakly in } L^2(\Omega_T).
\end{equation}
The convergence of $B_\epsilon(n_{\sigma,\epsilon})\nabla\vp_{\sigma,\epsilon} $ follows from the weak convergence in $L^2(\Omega_T)$ of $\nabla\vp_{\sigma,\epsilon}$ and the strong convergence $B_\epsilon(n_{\sigma,\epsilon}) \rightarrow b(n_{\sigma})$ in all $L^p(\Omega_T)$, $1\leq p <\infty$ which follows from~\eqref{eq:conv-n-exist} and the fact that $B_\epsilon(.) \rightarrow b(.)$ uniformly.
Because of the singularity $\psi'_+(1)=\infty$, we use the assumption~\eqref{eq:assbpsi}
and that $B_\epsilon(\cdot) \psi^{\prime\prime}_{+,\epsilon}(\cdot) \rightarrow b(\cdot)\psi^{\prime\prime}_{+}(\cdot)$ uniformly and thus
$B_\epsilon(n_{\sg,\e}) \psi^{\prime\prime}_{+,\epsilon}(n_{\sg,\e}) \rightarrow b(n_{\sg,\e})\psi^{\prime\prime}_{+}(n_{\sg,\e})$ a.e. in $\Omega_T$
This achieve the proof.
\end{proof}
\medskip
It is easy to check that the energy and entropy relations~\eqref{eq:energy_L}, \eqref{eq:entropy_L} hold, at least as inequalities. In the sequel we only use the a priori bounds coming from the limiting procedure.
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
The Degenerate Cahn-Hilliard equation (DCH in short) is a standard model, widely used in the mechanics of living tissues, \cite{Benamar_Goriely_2005, wise_three-dimensional_2008, BenAmar_C_F, agosti_cahn-hilliard-type_2017, agosti_self-organised_nodate,frigeri_multi-species_2018}. It is usual to set this problem in a smooth bounded domain $\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^d$ with the zero flux boundary condition
\begin{equation}
\p_t n = \nabla \cdot \left( b(n) \nabla \left( -\gamma \Delta n + \psi^\prime(n) \right) \right) \quad \text{in} \quad \Omega \times (0,+\infty),
\label{eq:CH}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\f{\p n}{\p \nu} = b(n)\f{ \p \left(- \gamma \Delta n + \psi^\prime(n) \right)}{\p \nu} = 0 \qquad \text{on} \quad \p \Omega \times (0,+\infty),
\label{eq:CH-bound}
\end{equation}
where $\nu$ is the outward normal vector to the boundary $\p \Omega$ and $n = \frac{n_1}{n_1+n_2}$ represents the relative density or volume fraction of one of the two cell types.
Degeneracy of the coefficient $b(n)$ and singularity of the potential $\psi(n)$ make this problem particularly difficult to solve numerically and in particular, to preserve the apriori bound $0\leq n <1$ . Motivated by the use of standard software for elliptic or parabolic equations, we propose to study the following relaxed degenerate Cahn-Hilliard equation (RDHC in short)
\begin{equation}\left\{
\begin{aligned}
\p_t n &= \nabla \cdot \left(b(n) \nabla \left(\vp + \psi_+^\prime(n) \right) \right) \quad &\text{ in } \Omega \times (0,+\infty),
\\
- \sg \Delta \vp + \vp &= -\gamma \Delta n + \psi_-^\prime \big(n-\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp \big)\quad &\text{ in } \Omega \times (0,+\infty).
\end{aligned}\right.
\label{eq:CH-relax}
\end{equation}
supplemented with zero-flux boundary conditions
\begin{equation}
\f{\p ( \gamma n- \sg \vp)}{\p \nu} = b(n) \f{\p \big( \vp + \psi_{+}^\prime(n) \big)}{\p \nu} = 0 \qquad \text{ on } \p \Omega \times (0,+\infty).
\label{eq:CH-bound-relax}
\end{equation}
Our purpose is to study existence for this system, to prove that as $\sg \to 0$, the solution of RDCH system converges to the solution of the DCH equation and study the possible long term limits to steady states.
\\
We make the following assumptions for the different inputs of the system~\eqref{eq:CH-relax}.
For the mechanics of living tissues, the usual assumption is that the potential $\psi$ is concave degenerate near $n=0$ (short-range attraction) and convex for $n$ not too small (long-range repulsion). Additionally, a singularity at $n=1$ is desired to represent saturation by one phase \cite{byrne_modelling_2004}. For these reasons, we call the potential {\em single-well logarithmic} and we decompose it in a convex and a concave part $\psi_\pm$
\begin{equation}
\psi(n) = \psi_+(n) + \psi_-(n), \qquad \pm \psi_\pm''(n) \geq 0, \qquad 0\leq n < 1.
\label{eq:psi-dec}
\end{equation}
The singularity is contained in the convex part of the potential and we assume that
\begin{equation}
\psi_+ \in C^2\big([0,1) \big), \quad \psi'_+(1)=\infty,
\label{eq:psi-plus}
\end{equation}
and we extend the smooth concave part on $[0, 1]$ to the full line with
\begin{equation}
\psi_- \in C^2(\mathbb{R}) \qquad \psi_-, \; \psi^\prime_-,\; \psi''_- \quad \text{are bounded and } \f{\sg}{\gamma} ||\psi_-^{\prime\prime}||_\infty < 1.
\label{eq:psi-minus}
\end{equation}
In practice, typical examples of potentials are, for some $n^* \in (0,1)$, see \cite{colombo_towards_2015,chatelain_morphological_2011}
\begin{equation}
\psi(n)= -(1-n^*)\ln(1-n) - \frac{n^3}{3} -(1-n^*)\frac{n^2}{2} -(1-n^*)n + k,
\label{eq:pot1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\psi(n)= \frac 1 2 n \ln n + (1-n) \ln (1-n) - (n-\frac 1 2 )^2.
\label{eq:pot2}
\end{equation}
The potential \eqref{eq:pot1} fulfills our assumptions and the convex/concave decomposition reads for $n\in [0, 1)$
\[
\psi_+(n) = -(1-n^*)\log(1-n) - \frac{n^3}{3}, \qquad \psi_-(n) = -(1-n^*)\frac{n^2}{2} -(1-n^*)n + k.
\]
In this case $\psi_+$ is convex if $n^*\le 0.7$.
Potential \eqref{eq:pot2} does not satisfy our assumptions because of the additional singularity at $0$ (and thus is not treated here), however, it can also be decomposed as needed with
\[
\psi_+(n) = \frac 1 2 n \ln n + (1-n) \ln (1-n) , \qquad \psi_-(n) = - (n-\frac 1 2 )^2.
\]
To satisfy the assumptions \eqref{eq:psi-plus} and \eqref{eq:psi-minus}, we need to extend the potential $\psi_-$ to all $\mathbb{R}$ since the above examples are defined for $n\in [0, 1)$, which is an immediate task.
The potential \eqref{eq:pot1} has been used to model the interaction between cancer cells from a glioblastoma multiforme and healthy cells by Agosti \textit{et al.} \cite{agosti_computational_2018} and promising results have been obtained.
We also use the degeneracy assumption on $b\in C^1([0,1]; \mathbb{R}^+)$,
\begin{equation}
b(0)=b(1)= 0, \qquad b(n) >0 \text{ for }0<n< 1.
\label{eq:assb}
\end{equation}
The typical expression in the applications we have in mind is $b(n)=n (1-n)^2$. Consequently, when considered as transport equations, both~\eqref{eq:CH} and~\eqref{eq:CH-relax} impose formally the property that $0 \leq n \leq 1$. However, we need an additional technical assumption, namely that there is some cancellation at $1$ such that
\begin{equation}
b(\cdot) \psi^{\prime\prime}(\cdot) \in C([0,1]; \mathbb{R}).
\label{eq:assbpsi}
\end{equation}
We implicitly assume~\eqref{eq:psi-dec}--\eqref{eq:assbpsi} in this paper. Also, we always impose an initial condition satisfying
\begin{equation}
n^0 \in H^1(\Omega), \qquad 0 \le n^0 < 1 \quad \text{a.e. in } \Omega.
\end{equation}
The assumption $n^0\in [0,1)$ is consistent with the degeneracy of mobility at $0$ which allows solutions to vanish on open sets. But the singularity of the potential at $1$ and the energy bound make that $n=1$ cannot be achieved except of a negligible set.
Thanks to the boundary condition~\eqref{eq:CH-bound}, the system conserves the initial mass
\[
\int_\Omega n(x,t) dx =\int_\Omega n^0(x) dx =: M, \quad \forall t \ge 0.
\]
We denote the flux associated with the RDCH system by
\begin{equation}
J_\sg(n,\vp) := -b(n)\nabla\left(\vp+\psi^\prime_+(n) \right).
\end{equation}
The system~\eqref{eq:CH-relax} comes with energy and entropy structures, namely, the energy is defined as
\begin{equation}
\cae_{\sigma} [n_{\sg}] = \int_\Omega \left[ \psi_{+}(n_{\sg}) + \f{\gamma}{2}|\nabla (n_{\sg}-\f{\sigma}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg})|^2 + \f{\sg}{2 \gamma} |\vp_{\sg}|^2 + \psi_-(n_{\sg} -\f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg}) \right] .
\label{eq:energy_L}
\end{equation}
The energy is bounded from below thanks to the assumptions above and satisfies
\begin{equation}
\f{d}{dt} \cae_{\sigma} [n_{\sg}(t)] = -\int_\Omega b(n_{\sg}) \big|\nabla (\vp_{\sg} + \psi'_{+}(n_{\sg}))\big|^2 \leq 0 .
\label{eq:deriv-energy_L}
\end{equation}
For the entropy, we set for $0< n <1$ the singular function
\begin{equation}
\phi^{\prime \prime}(n) = \f{1}{b(n)}, \qquad \Phi[n] = \int_\Omega \phi \big(n(x)\big)dx.
\label{eq:assumption-entropy_L}
\end{equation}
The entropy functional behaves as follows in the case $b(n)= n (1-n)^2$
\[
\phi (n)= n \log(n), \; n \approx 0^+, \qquad \phi (n)= - \log(1-n), \; n \approx 1^-.
\]
The relation holds
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\f{ d \Phi[n_{\sg}(t)]}{dt} = -\int_\Omega \gamma \left| \Delta\left( n_{\sg} - \f{\sg}{\gamma} \vp_{\sg}\right)\right|^2 + \f{\sg}{\gamma}|\nabla \vp_{\sg}|^2
&+ \psi''_-(n_{\sg} - \f{\sg}{\gamma} \vp_{\sg}) \left| \nabla(n_{\sg} - \f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_{\sg}) \right|^2 \\
&+ \psi^{\prime\prime}_{+}(n_{\sg})|\nabla n_{\sg}|^2.
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:entropy_L}
\end{equation}
Notice that entropy equality does not provide us with a direct a priori estimate because of the term $\psi^{\prime \prime}_-$ can be negative. Therefore we have to combine it with the energy dissipation to write
\[
\begin{aligned}
\Phi [n_{\sg}(T)] + \int_{\Omega_T} & \left[ \gamma \left| \Delta\left( n_{\sg} - \f{\sg}{\gamma} \vp_{\sg}\right)\right|^2 + \f{\sg}{\gamma}|\nabla \vp_{\sg}|^2 + \psi^{\prime\prime}_{+}(n_{\sg})|\nabla n_{\sg}|^2\right]
\\
&\leq \Phi[n^0] + \frac{2T}{\gamma} \| \psi''_- \|_\infty \; \cae_{\sg}[n^0].
\end{aligned}
\]
The first use of the Cahn-Hilliard equation is to model the spinodal decomposition occurring in binary materials during a sudden cooling~ \cite{cahn_free_1958,cahn_spinodal_1961}. The bilaplacian $-\gamma \Delta^2 n$ is used to represent surface tension and the parameter $\gamma$ is the square of the width of the diffuse interface between the two phases. In both equations~\eqref{eq:CH} and~\eqref{eq:CH-relax}, $n = n(x,t)$ is a relative quantity: for our biological application this represents a relative cell density as derived from phase-field models~\cite{byrne_modelling_2004} and for this reason the property $n\in [0,1)$ is relevant. The biological explanation of the fact that $1$ is excluded from the interval of definition of $n$ is due to the observation that cells tend to not form aggregates that are too dense. For instance, the two phases can be the relative density of cancer cells and the other component represents the extracellular matrix, liquid, and other cells. This binary mixture tends to form aggregates in which the density of one component of the binary mixture is larger than the other component. The interest of the Cahn-Hilliard equation stems from solutions that reproduce the formation of such clusters of cells {\em in vivo} or on dishes.
Several variants are also used. A Cahn-Hilliard-Hele-Shaw model is proposed by Lowengrub {\em et al}~\cite{lowengrub_analysis_2013} to describe the avascular, vascular and metastatic stages of solid tumor growth. They proved the existence and uniqueness of a strong solution globally for $d\le 2$ and locally for $d=3$ as well as the long term convergence to steady-state. The case with a singular potential is treated in~\cite{GIGr2018}. Variants can include the coupling with fluid equations and chemotaxis, see for instance~\cite{EbeGarcke2019} and the references therein.
\par
The analysis of the long-time behavior of the solution of the Cahn-Hilliard equation has also attracted much attention since the seminal paper~\cite{ElliottBlowey91}. A precise description of the $\omega$-limit set has been obtained in one dimension for the case of smooth polynomial potential and constant mobility in \cite{songmu_asymptotic_1986}. In this work, the effect of the different parameters of the model such as the initial mass, the width of the diffuse interface are investigated. In fact, the authors show that when $\gamma$ is large, the solution converges to a constant as $t\to \infty$.
The same happens when the initial mass is large. However when $\gamma$ is positive and small enough, the system admits nontrivial steady-states. For logarithmic potentials and constant mobility, Abels and Wilke~\cite{abels_convergence_2007} prove that solutions converge to a steady-state as time goes to infinity using the Lojasiewicz–Simon inequality. Other works have been made on the long term behavior of the solutions of some Cahn-Hilliard models including a source term~\cite{cherfils_generalized_2014}, with dynamic boundary conditions~\cite{gilardi_long_2010}, coupled with the Navier-Stokes equation~\cite{gal_asymptotic_2010}, for non-local interactions and a reaction term~\cite{iuorio_long-time_2017}.
\par
Many difficulties, both analytical and numerical, arise in the context of Cahn-Hilliard equation and its variants. Because of the bilaplacian term, most of the numerical methods require to change the equation \eqref{eq:CH} into a system of two coupled equations
\begin{equation}\left\{
\begin{aligned}
\p_t n &= \nabla \cdot \left(b(n) \nabla v \right),\\
v &= -\gamma \Delta n + \psi^\prime(n).
\end{aligned}\right.
\label{eq:CH-coupled}
\end{equation}
This system of equations has been analyzed in the case where the mobility is degenerate and the potential is a logarithmic double-well functional by Elliott and Garcke \cite{elliott_cahn-hilliard_1996}. They establish the existence of weak solutions of this system. Agosti \textit{et al} \cite{agosti_cahn-hilliard-type_2017} establish the existence of weak solutions when $\psi$ is a single-well logarithmic potential which is more relevant for biological applications (see \cite{byrne_modelling_2004}). They also prove that this system preserves the positivity of the cell density and the weak solutions belong to
\[
n\in L^\infty(0,T;H^1(\Omega)) \cap L^2(0,T;H^2(\Omega)) \cap H^1(0,T;(H^1(\Omega))^\prime), \quad J \in L^2( (0,T) \times \Omega, \mathbb{R}^d) \quad
\forall T>0,
\]
\par
The Cahn-Hilliard equation can be seen as an approximation of the famous microscopic model in \cite{GL1, GL2}. With our notations, it reads
\[
\p_t n = \nabla \cdot \left[b(n) \nabla \big( K_\sg \star n+\psi'(n) \big) \right],
\]
with a symmetric smooth kernel $K_\sg \underset{ \sg \to 0 }{\longrightarrow} \Delta \delta$. The convergence to the DCH equation has been answered recently in \cite{davoli_degenerate_2019} in the case of periodic boundary conditions. Although, very similar in its form, our relaxation model undergoes different a priori estimates which allow us to study differently the limit $\sg \to 0$ for \eqref{eq:CH-relax}.
\par
For a full review about the mathematical analysis of the Cahn-Hilliard equation and its variants, we refer the reader to the recent book of Miranville \cite{miranville_cahn?hilliard_2019}.
Numerical simulations of the DCH system have been also performed in the context of double-well potentials in~\cite{elliott_cahn-hilliard_1986,barrett_finite_1999}. To keep the energy inequality is a major concern in numerical methods and the survey paper by Shen {\em et al}~\cite{ShenJieXY2019} presents a general method applied to the present context.
\par Numerics is also our motivation to propose a relaxation of equation~\eqref{eq:CH} in a form close to the writing~\eqref{eq:CH-coupled}. We recover the system~\eqref{eq:CH-relax} by introducing a new potential $\vp$ and a regularizing equation which defines $v$ through $\nabla \vp$. We use the decomposition~\eqref{eq:psi-dec} of the potential to keep the convex and stable part in the main equation for $n$, rejecting the concave and unstable part in the regularized equation. The relaxation parameter is $\sigma$ and we need to verify that, in the limit $\sg \rightarrow 0$, we recover the original DCH equation~\eqref{eq:CH}. This is the main purpose of the present paper.
\par
As a first step towards the existence of solutions of~\eqref{eq:CH-relax}, in section \ref{sec:reg-ineq-exi}, we introduce a regularized problem which is not anymore degenerate and we prove the existence of weak solutions for this regularized-relaxed Cahn-Hilliard system. We show energy and entropy estimates from which we obtain a priori estimates which are used later on.
In section~\ref{sec:existence}, we pass to the limit in the regularization parameter $\epsilon$ and show the existence of weak solutions of the RDCH system.
Then, in section~\ref{sec:cvg}, we prove the convergence as $\sigma \to 0$ to the full DCH model. Section~\ref{sec:ltb} is dedicated to the study of the long term convergence of the solutions to steady-states. We end the paper with some conclusions and perspectives.
\section{Conclusion}
The proposed relaxation system of the degenerate Cahn-Hilliard equation with single-well potential reduces the model to two parabolic/elliptic equations which can be solved by standard numerical solvers. The relaxation uses a regularization in space of the new unknown used to transform the original fourth-order equation into two second-order equations. This new system is a non-local relaxation of the original equation which is similar in a sense to the Cahn-Hilliard equation with a spatial interaction kernel derived in \cite{GL1, GL2}.
We proved that in the limit of vanishing relaxation, we retrieve the original weak solutions of the DCH equation using compactness methods and estimates borrowed from energy and entropy functionals. The long-time behavior of the solutions of the RDCH system can also be studied along the same lines. We showed that a global solution of the system converges to a steady-state as time goes to infinity, with zero flux.
The stationary states exhibit some interesting properties due to the degeneracy of the mobility. More precisely, they are split into two distinct zones: whether the mobility is zero, which is possible only in the pure phases, or the flux is null.
\par
The RDCH system aims at the design of a numerical method to simulate the DCH equation using only second order elliptic problems. Such a numerical scheme may depend on details of the relaxed model. For example, the solution represents a density and its numerical positivity is a desired property. Also, the discrete stability is useful and a change of unknown in the RDCH system might be better adapted, using $U=\vp-\frac{\gamma}{\sigma}n$,
\[
\begin{aligned}
\p_t n &= \nabla\cdot \left(b(n) \nabla\left(U +\f \gamma \sigma n + \psi_+^\prime(n)) \right) \right), \\
-\sigma \Delta U + U &= -\f \gamma \sigma n +\psi^\prime_-(-\f \sigma \gamma U).
\end{aligned}
\]
Even though this model also consists of a parabolic transport equation coupled with an elliptic equation, the regularity is enhanced. On the one hand, in the first equation, the term $\f \gamma \sigma n$ increases the diffusion for~$n$. On the other hand, the second equation regularizes for the new variable~$U$ because it depends on $n$ rather than $\Delta n$.
In a forthcoming work, we will propose a numerical scheme based on the RDCH system, that preserves the physical properties of the solutions.
\bibliographystyle{siam}
\section{Long-time behavior}
\label{sec:ltb}
To complete our study of the RDCH model, we give some insights concerning the long-time behavior and convergence to steady states, $(n_\infty,\vp_\infty)$ determined by the steady problem
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
&
\nabla \cdot \left(b(n_\infty) \nabla \left(\vp_\infty + \psi_+^\prime(n_\infty) \right) \right) = 0 \quad \text{ in }\; \Omega ,
\\[5pt]
&-\sg \Delta \vp_\infty + \vp_\infty = -\gamma \Delta n_\infty + \psi^\prime_-(n_\infty - \f{\sg}{\gamma} \vp_\infty )\text{ in } \Omega ,
\\[5pt]
&\f{ \p \left( n_\infty- \frac{\sigma}{\gamma}\vp_\infty\right) }{\p \nu} = b(n_\infty)\f{\p \left( \vp_\infty + \psi_+^\prime(n_\infty) \right) }{\p \nu} = 0 \quad \text{ on } \; \p \Omega.
\end{cases}
\label{eq:ststRDCH}
\end{equation}
The analysis of the steady-states is not performed in this paper, however, numerical simulations can help us to have an idea of their shape for different initial situations.
The steady-states of the RDCH model present a configuration which minimizes the energy of the system. The solution obtained at the end of the simulation depends mainly on three parameters: the initial mass $M$, the width of the diffuse interface $\sqrt{\gamma}$ and the relaxation parameter $\sigma$. \par
In fact, if the initial mass is large enough, saturated aggregates are formed and we can describe two regions in the domain: the aggregates and the absence of cells. Between these two regions, the transition is smooth and the length of this interface is $\sqrt{\gamma}$.
If the initial mass is small, aggregates are still formed but they are thicker and their maximum concentration does not reach $1$ or the critical {value~$n^\star$} as in the definition of the potential \eqref{eq:pot1}. \par
The formation of aggregates happens only if $\gamma$ is small enough. If $\gamma$, the initial mass $M$ or the relaxation parameter $\sigma$ is too large, the solution converges to the constant one
\[
n_\infty = \frac{1}{|\Omega|}\int_\Omega n^0 dx, \quad \text{a.e. in } \Omega.
\]
A surprizing fact about these observations is that the long-time behavior of the solutions of the RDCH system seems to follow the analytical description of the steady-states made by Songmu \cite{songmu_asymptotic_1986}.
To state our convergence result of the weak solutions of the RDCH model to steady-states, we consider a global weak solution $(n,\vp)$ of the RDCH system with $\sg >0$, according to Theorem~\ref{th:existence}. The initial condition satisfies $0 \le n^0 < 1$ and has finite energy and entropy. so that we can use the a priori estimates from the transport structure, the energy and entropy dissipations \eqref{eq:deriv-energy} and \eqref{eq:entropy} (or \eqref {eq:energy_L}--\eqref{eq:entropy_L}), in particular
\begin{equation}
0 \le n < 1 \text{ a.e. } (0, \infty)\times \Omega.
\label{eq:n-0-1}
\end{equation}
Based on the controls provided by these relations, and using a standard method, we are going to study the large time behavior as the limit for large $k$ of the sequence of functions
\[
n_k(t,x) = n(t+k,x), \qquad \text{and} \qquad \vp_k(t,x) = \vp(t+k,x).
\]
\begin{proposition} [Long term convergence along subsequences]
Let $(n,\vp)$ be a weak solution of \eqref{eq:CH-relax}, \eqref{eq:CH-bound-relax} and initial condition $n^0$ with $0\le n^0 < 1$, finite energy and entropy.
Then, we can extract a subsequence, still denoted by index $k$, of $(n_k, \vp_k)$ such that
\begin{equation}
\lim_{k\to \infty} n_k(x,t) = n_{\infty}(x) , \quad \lim_{k\to \infty} \vp_k(x,t) = \vp_{\infty}(x) \qquad \text{ strongly in } L^2\big((-T,T)\times \Omega\big), \quad \forall T>0,
\label{eq:conv-nk}
\end{equation}
where $(n_{\infty}, \vp_{\infty})$ are solutions of \eqref{eq:ststRDCH} satisfying
\begin{equation}
b(n_\infty) \nabla \left(\vp_\infty + \psi^\prime_+(n_\infty)\right) =0.
\label{zeroflusststs}
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} The proof uses the energy and entropy inequalities to obtain both uniform (in $k$) a priori bounds and zero entropy dissipation in the limit, which imply the result. We write these arguments in several steps.
\\
\noindent \textit{1st step. A priori bounds from energy.} Energy decay implies that $\cae [n_k(t)]$ remains bounded in $k$ for $t> -k$. As a consequence, the sequence $(n_k,\vp_k)$ satisfies
\begin{equation}
\f{\sg}{2\gamma} \int_\Omega \left|\vp_k(t)\right|^2 \leq \cae [n^0], \qquad \forall t \geq 0,
\label{eq:vp-est-time}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\f{\gamma}{2} \int_\Omega \left|\nabla \big(n_k(t)-\f{\sigma}{\gamma}\vp_k(t)\big) \right|^2 \leq \cae [n^0], \qquad \forall t \geq 0,
\label{eq:grad-est-time}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\int_{-T}^T \int_\Omega b(n_k) \big|\nabla (\vp_k + \psi'_{+}(n_k))\big|^2 := L_k(T) , \qquad L_k(T) \to 0 \; \text{ as }\; k \to \infty,
\label{eq:flux-est-time}
\end{equation}
and this last line is because
\[
\int_{0}^\infty \int_\Omega b(n) \big|\nabla (\vp+ \psi'_{+}(n))\big|^2 \le \cae [n^0], \quad L_k(T) \leq \int_{k-T}^\infty \int_\Omega b(n) \big|\nabla (\vp+ \psi'_{+}(n))\big|^2 ] \underset{ k \to \infty }{\longrightarrow} 0 .
\]
\noindent \textit{2nd step. A priori bounds from entropy.} Because the right hand side in the entropy balance has a positive term (since $\psi''_-(n)\le 0, \forall n\in [0, 1]$), it cannot be used as easily as the energy. However, we can integrate~\eqref{eq:entropy_L} from $k-T$ to $k+T$, and, using the control of the negative term including $\psi_-$ as after~\eqref{eq:entropy_L}, we obtain the inequality
\[
\begin{aligned}
\int_{-T}^T &\left[ \left| \Delta\left( n_k - \f{\sg}{\gamma} \vp_k \right)\right|^2 + \f{\sg}{\gamma}|\nabla \vp_k|^2 + \psi^{\prime\prime}_{+}(n_k)|\nabla n_k|^2\right]
\\ & \le \Phi[n(k-T)] - \Phi[n(k+T)] + \| \psi''_- \|_\infty \left\|\nabla\left(n_k - \f{\sg}{\gamma}\vp_k \right)\right\|^2_{L^2((-T,T)\times \Omega)}
\\ & \le \Phi[n(k-T)] - \Phi[n(k+T)] + \| \psi''_- \|_\infty \frac{4T}{\gamma} \cae [n(k-T)]
\\ & \le \Phi[n(k-T)] - \Phi[n(k+T)] + \| \psi''_- \|_\infty \frac{4T}{\gamma} \cae [n^0].
\end{aligned}
\]
\noindent \textit{3rd step. Extracting subsequences.}
From these inequalities, we can extract subsequences of $(n_k, \vp_k)$ such that for $k \to \infty$, the following convergences hold toward some functions $n_\infty(x,t)$ and $ \vp_\infty(x,t)$.
We can conclude from inequalities \eqref{eq:vp-est-time} and the entropy control that, as $k\to \infty$,
\begin{equation}
\vp_k \rightharpoonup \vp_\infty \text{ weakly in } L^2\big(-T,T;H^1(\Omega)\big).
\label{eq:conv-weak-vp}
\end{equation}
From the gradient bound \eqref{eq:grad-est-time}, the $L^2$ bound in \eqref{eq:vp-est-time} and $0\leq n_k <1$, we obtain
\begin{equation}
n_k-\f{\sigma}{\gamma}\vp_k \rightharpoonup n_\infty - \f{\sigma}{\gamma}\vp_\infty \text{ weakly in } L^2\big(0,T; H^1(\Omega) \big),
\label{eq:weakcv1}
\end{equation}
and thus
\begin{equation}
n_k \rightharpoonup n_\infty \text{ weakly in } L^2\big(0,T; H^1(\Omega) \big).
\label{eq:conv-weak-nk}
\end{equation}
Finally, we obtain from \eqref{eq:flux-est-time} and the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality,
\begin{equation}
\p_t n_k \rightharpoonup \p_t n_\infty =0 \text{ weakly in } L^2\big(0,T; (H^1(\Omega))' \big) .
\label{eq:conv-weak-dtnk}
\end{equation}
Indeed, for any test function $\phi \in C^\infty_0((-T,T)\times\Omega)$, it holds
\[
\int_{-T}^T \int_\Omega \p_t n_{k} \phi dx dt = -\int_{-T}^T \int_\Omega b(n_{k}) \nabla\left(\vp_{k} + \psi^\prime_+(n_{k})\right) \cdot \nabla \phi ,
\]
\[
\left| \int_{-T}^T \int_\Omega \p_t n_{k} \phi dx dt \right|^2 \leq 2T |\Omega| \| b\| _\infty \| \nabla \phi \|_\infty^2
\int_{-T}^T \int_\Omega b(n_{k})\left| \nabla\left(\vp_{k} + \psi^\prime_+(n_{k})\right) \right|^2 \to 0
\]
as $k \to \infty$. This also shows that $n_\infty$ only depends on $x$.
\par
\noindent \textit{4th step. Strong limits.}
The strong compactness of $n_k$ and $\vp_{k}$ follows from~\eqref{eq:grad-est-time} and the entropy control. Then, time compactness of $n_k$, stated in~\eqref{eq:conv-nk} follows from the Lions-Aubin lemma, thanks to~\eqref{eq:conv-weak-dtnk}.
The strong convergence of $\vp_{k}$ is a consequence of the elliptic equation for $\vp_{k}$ and of \eqref{eq:control-deriv-n-vp} which gives compactness in time of the quantity $n_k - \frac{\sg}{\gamma }\vp_k$.
And we also have, from the strong convergence of $n_k$ and \eqref{eq:weakcv1}, thanks to the above argument,
\begin{equation}
b(n_k) \nabla\left(\vp_{k}+\psi^\prime_+(n_{k})\right) \to b(n_\infty) \nabla \left(\vp_\infty + \psi^\prime_+(n_\infty)\right) = 0,
\label{eq:limit-conv}
\end{equation}
which establishes the zero-flux equality~\eqref{zeroflusststs}.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
Over the past two decades, the cost of sequencing the human genome -- i.e., determining a person's complete DNA sequence -- has plummeted from millions to thousands of dollars, and continues to drop~\cite{genome2017org}.
As a result, sequencing has not only become routine in biology and biomedics research, but is also increasingly used in clinical contexts, %
with treatments tailored to the patient's genetic makeup~\cite{ashley2016towards}.
At the same time, the ``direct-to-consumer'' genetic testing market is booming~\cite{adoption} with companies like 23andMe and AncestryDNA attracting millions of customers, and providing them with easy access to reports on their ancestry or genetic predisposition to health-related conditions.
Progress and investments in genomics have also enabled public initiatives to gather genomic data for research purposes.
For instance, in 2015, the US launched the ``All of Us'' program~\cite{allofus2017}, which aims to sequence one million people, while, in the UK, Genomics England is sequencing the genomes of 100,000 patients with rare diseases or cancer~\cite{genomicsengland}.
Alas, as more and more genomic data is generated, collected, and shared, serious privacy, security, and ethical concerns also become increasingly relevant.
The genome contains very sensitive information related to, e.g., ethnic heritage, disease predispositions, and other phenotypic traits~\cite{ayday2013chills}.
Furthermore, even though most published genomes have been anonymized, previous work has shown that anonymization does not provide an effective safeguard for genomic data~\cite{gymrek_identifying_2013}.
While some individuals choose to donate their genome to science, or even publicly share it%
~\cite{pgp}, others might be concerned about their privacy, or fear discrimination by employers, government agencies, insurance providers, etc.~\cite{burns_gop_nodate}. %
Worse yet, consequences of genomic data disclosure are not limited in time or to the data owner: due to its hereditary nature, access to one's sequenced genome inherently implies access to many features that are relevant to their progeny and their close relatives.
A case in point is the story of Henrietta Lacks, a patient who died of cancer in 1951.
Some of her cancerous cells revealed to be useful for research because of their ability to keep on dividing.
Unbeknownst to her family, the cells became the most commonly used ``immortal cell line,'' and their genome was eventually sequenced and published~\cite{landry2013genomic}.
This prompted serious privacy concerns among her family members, even 60 years later~\cite{callaway2013hela}.
Motivated by these challenges, the research community has produced a large body of work aiming to protect genomic privacy and enable privacy-preserving sharing and testing of human genomes~\cite{sok}.
Available solutions mostly rely on cryptographic tools, including encryption as well as Secure Computation, Homomorphic Encryption, Oblivious RAM, etc.~\cite{aziz2017privacy}.
However, modern encryption algorithms provide security guarantees only against computationally bounded adversary; essentially, their security is assumed to last for 30 to 50 years~\cite{enisa}.
While this timeframe is acceptable for most uses of encryption, it is not for genomic data.
To address the problem of ``long-term security,'' Huang et al.~\cite{huang_genoguard:_2015} introduce GenoGuard, a tool based on Honey Encryption (HE)~\cite{HE2} to provide confidentiality of genomic data even in the presence of an adversary who can brute force all possible encryption keys.
GenoGuard uses a distribution transforming encoder (DTE) together with symmetric (password-based) encryption. In essence, whenever an attacker would try to decrypt a GenoGuard ciphertext using a wrong password, the decryption will give a wrong but plausible looking plaintext, which we denote as a {\em honey sequence.}
HE schemes based on DTE-then-encrypt constructions (as is the case for GenoGuard) only provide security in the message recovery context.
That is, having access to the ciphertext only gives an unbounded adversary a negligible advantage in guessing the correct plaintext.
However, as first discussed by Jaeger et al.~\cite{jaeger2016honey}, ciphertexts obtained from DTE-then-encrypt HE might still leak a significant amount of information about the plaintexts.
\descr{Technical Roadmap.} We evaluate GenoGuard security by analyzing ciphertexts obtained using easily guessable (low-entropy) passwords as well as hard (high-entropy) ones.
In other words, in both cases, we decrypt a GenoGuard ciphertext using a corpus of passwords and analyze the resulting decryptions (honey sequences).
In the low-entropy setting, we consider an adversary who aims to identify the correct sequence among a pool of honey sequences, whereas, in the high-entropy case, one that uses the GenoGuard ciphertext in order to obtain more information about the target sequence as opposed to inference methods for genomic data.
In our experimental evaluation, we show that, under a low-entropy password setting, an adversary who has access to side information about the target sequence can quickly eliminate the decoy sequences in order to have an increased advantage of guessing the correct sequence. This draws attention to the fact that if the attacker obtains a list of known passwords for a user (as passwords are often compromised and/or re-used), together with some side information about the user's sequence, she can have a significant advantage in guessing the correct sequence.
In the high-entropy setting, not only we observe that access to the GenoGuard ciphertext improves an adversary's accuracy in guessing SNVs from a target sequence when 10\% or less of the target sequence is available to her as side information, but also draws attention to the fact that with enough side information, %
the adversary can predict a significant part of the target genome just by using state of the art inference methods for genomic sequences.
\descr{Contributions.}
In summary, our paper makes two main contributions.
First, under a low-entropy password setting, we formally show that, if the adversary obtains side information about the target sequence, there is a significant lower bound in her advantage. This highlights that the system offers low security when the adversary has access to side information, as supported by empirical evidence.
Second, in the high-entropy password setting, we quantify the privacy loss for a user as a result of using GenoGuard, compared to the best inference methods for genomic data; once again, showing that that it is non-negligible.
\descr{Paper Organization.} The rest of the paper is organized as follows. The next section reviews notions used throughout the paper, then, in Section~\ref{sec:genoguard}, we introduce GenoGuard.
Section~\ref{sec:evaluation} presents our evaluation methodology for low and high-entropy settings, %
while Section~\ref{sec:results} reports our experimental results.
Finally, after reviewing related work in Section~\ref{sec:related work}, the paper concludes in Section~\ref{sec:conc}.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{sec:preliminaries}
This section provides some relevant background information used throughout the paper.
\subsection{Genomics Primer}\label{sec:genomics}
\descr{Genome.} In the nucleus of an organism's cell, double stranded deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) molecules are packaged into thread-like structures called chromosomes.
DNA molecules consist of two long and complementary polymer chains of four units called nucleotides, described with the letters A, C, G, and T.
All chromosomes together make up the {\em genome}, which represents the entirety of the organism's hereditary information; in humans, the genome includes 3.2 billion nucleotides.
A {\em gene} is a particular region of the genome that contain the information to produce functional molecules, in particular proteins.
For instance, the BRCA2~\cite{yoshida_role_2004} is a human tumor suppressor gene (it encodes a protein responsible for repairing the DNA),
and a mutation in that gene increases significantly the risk for breast cancer~\cite{friedenson2007brca1}.
{\em Alleles} are the different versions of genes, as organisms inherit two alleles for each gene, one from each parent.
The set of genes is also called the {\em genotype.}
Finally, the {\em haplotype} is a group of alleles in an organisms that are inherited together from a single parent \cite{clarke_disentangling_2005}.
\descr{SNPs and SNVs.} Humans share about 99.5\% of the genome, while the rest differs due to genetic variations.
The most common type of variants are Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs)~\cite{reference_what_nodate}, which occur at a single position and in at least 1\% of the population.
More generally, variants at specific positions of a genome are referred to as Single-Nucleotide Variants (SNVs); they may be due to SNPs, to rare variants in the population, or to new mutations.
Typically, SNPs and SNVs are encoded with a value in $\{0,1,2\}$, with $0$ denoting the most common variant (allele) in the population, and $1$ and $2$ denoting alternative alleles.
\descr{Allele Frequency (AF).} The frequency of an allele at a certain position in a given population is known as Allele Frequency (AF).
More specifically, it is the ratio of the number of times the allele appears in the population over the total number of copies of the gene.
In a nutshell, it shows the genetic diversity of a species' population.
\descr{Linkage Disequilibrium (LD).} LD refers to the non-random association of alleles at two or more positions in the general population, defined as the difference between the frequency of a particular combination of alleles at different positions and the one expected by random association.
\descr{Recombination Rate (RR).} The process of determining the frequency with which characteristics are inherited together is known as recombination.
This is due to two chromosomes of similar composition coming together and performing a molecular crossover, thus, exchanging the genetic content.
Because recombination can occur with small probability at any location along the chromosome, the frequency of recombination between two locations depends on the distance separating them.
Therefore, for genes sufficiently distant on the same chromosome, the amount of crossover is high enough to destroy the correlation between alleles~\cite{li_modeling_2003}.
The recombination rate (RR), as defined in \cite{philips__nodate}, is the probability that a transmitted haplotype constitutes a new combination of alleles different from that of either parental haplotype. An example of how a haplotype is created by copying parts from the other haplotypes is illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:recomb}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.735\columnwidth]{figures/Recomb.png}
\caption{An example of a haplotype, $h_4$, built as an imperfect mosaic from $h_1, h_2, h_3$. $h_4$ is created by (imperfectly) ``copying'' parts from $h_1, h_2$, and $h_3$. Each column of circles represents a SNP locus, with the black and white circles denoting the two alleles -- major and minor. (Adapted from~\cite{li_modeling_2003}).}
\label{fig:recomb}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Markov Chains}
A Markov chain is a probabilistic model encoding a sequence of possible events: the probability of each one of them depends only on the state attained in the previous event~\cite{MarCha}.
In the context of genomes, a Markov chain can represent a series of SNVs ordered by their positions.
In particular, a $k$-th order Markov chain, on genome sequences, can be used to encode a set of SNVs, where the value of each SNV$_i$ depends on the values of the $k$ preceding ones:\vspace*{-0.1cm}
\begin{equation}
\Pr(SNV_i) = \Pr(SNV_i|SNV_{i-1},\hdots,SNV_{i-k})
\end{equation}
\subsection{SNV Correlation Modeling}\label{sec:correlation}
In order to model correlations between SNVs, and perform sequence inference (i.e. predicting the values of SNVs from a sequence), one can use a few different approaches
(for more details on various SNV correlations, please refer to~\cite{samani_quantifying_2015}).
We choose three models; see next.
\descr{Most likely genotype.} First, we use a model based on the 1st order Markov chain model from AF and LD. Given allele frequencies (AF) and linkage disequilibrium (LD), we predict each SNV using the highest conditional probability of the SNV occurring.
For each SNV, the joint probability matrix is computed taking into consideration the LD with previous one and the AF.
If a SNV is not in LD with the previous one, the probability is computed using only the allele frequency.
When this model is used for inference, the highest value from the joint probability matrix or the highest probability given by the AF is chosen to predict the specific SNV.
\descr{Sampled genotype.} The second model is built from the 1st order Markov chain model from AF and LD.
For this model, the conditional probabilities are computed in a similar way as in the most likely genotype model.
The main difference is in the choice of the value of the SNV, given the three computed probabilities for major homozygous $\Pr_0$, heterozygous $\Pr_1$, and minor homozygous allele $\Pr_2$.
A seed $s$ is chosen uniformly at random from the interval $[0,1)$. If $s<\Pr_0$, then choose the SNV to be major homozygous; if $\Pr_0 \leq s<\Pr_1 +\Pr_0$, then the SNV is heterozygous; and minor homozygous otherwise.
\descr{RR Model.} This is a high-order correlation model that relates LD patterns to the underlying recombination rate~\cite{Li2213}.
Given a set of $n$ sampled haplotypes, $\{h_1, h_2,...,h_n\}$, the model relates their distribution to the underlying recombination rate.
Given the recombination parameter, $\rho$, we have:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\Pr(h_1,...,h_n|\rho) =\\
&=\Pr(h_1|\rho)\cdot\Pr(h_2|h_1;\rho)\cdot\ldots\cdot\Pr(h_n|h_1,\hdots ,h_{n-1};\rho)
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We use this model to determine the value of a SNP at a given position.
At each SNP, $h_k$ is a possibly imperfect copy of one of $h_1,...,h_{k-1}$. Let $H_i$ denote which haplotype is copied at a position $i$.
For instance, in the example presented in Figure~\ref{fig:recomb}, for $h_4$, we have $(H_1,H_2,H_3, H_4) = (3,2,2,1)$.
For a generic $h_k$, each $H_i$ can be modeled as a Markov chain on $\{1,\hdots, k-1\}$.
Assuming that one part of $h_{k}$ comes from $h_i$, the next adjacent part can be copied from any of the $k-1$ haplotypes, and the probability depends on the recombination rates between these two parts.
Overall, the probability of a particular haploid genotype $h_{k}$ can be computed as the sum over all possible event sequences of recombination and mutation that could lead to $h_{k}$.
Let $h_{i,j+1}$ denote the allele found at position $j+1$ in haplotype $i$, and $h_{i,\leq j}$ denote the values of the first $j$ positions of haplotype $i$ (i.e. the prefix sequence of $h_{i,j+1}$).
Then, we can compute the conditional probability of an allele $h_{k,j+1}$, given all preceding alleles as:
\begin{equation}
\Pr(h_{k,j+1}| h_{k,j}, \hdots h_{k,1}) = \frac{\Pr(h_{k,\leq j+1})}{\Pr(h_{k,\leq j)}}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Honey Encryption}\label{sec:he}
Honey Encryption (HE)~\cite{HE2} %
is a cryptographic primitive used to provide confidentiality guarantees in the presence of possible brute-force attacks.
It is a variant of Password-based Encryption (PBE), in that it also uses an arbitrary string (password) to perform randomized encryption of a plaintext.
Its main property is that all decryptions of a ciphertext will yield a plausible-looking plaintext, which is thus indistinguishable from the correct one.
The main building block of HE is the Distribution-Transforming Encoder (DTE).
A DTE is a randomized encoding scheme {\fontfamily{cmtt}\selectfont(encode,\\ decode)} tailored on the target distribution.
The {\fontfamily{cmtt}\selectfont encode} algorithm takes as input a message $M$ from the message space $\mathcal{M}$, and outputs a value $S$ in a set $\mathcal{S}$, i.e., the seed space.
Whereas, {\fontfamily{cmtt}\selectfont decode} takes a seed $S \in \mathcal{S}$ and outputs a message $M \in \mathcal{M}$.
A DTE scheme is {\em correct} if, for any $M \in \mathcal{M}$, $\Pr[${\fontfamily{cmtt}\selectfont decode$($encode$(M))$}$=M]=1$.
The DTE-then-encrypt scheme presented in~\cite{HE2} applies {\fontfamily{cmtt}\selectfont encode} to a message, and then performs encryption using a secure symmetric encryption scheme (e.g., AES).
Similarly, to decrypt a ciphertext, one first decrypts using the underlying cipher (e.g., AES), and then applies the {\fontfamily{cmtt}\selectfont decode} algorithm.
\descr{Terminology.} In the rest of the paper, to denote sequences decrypted from GenoGuard, we use the term \emph{honey sequences}.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{figures/tree.png}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\caption{Toy example describing the encoding process for a sequence $(1, 0, 2)$. The green dashed line represents the correct encoding of the sequence. When the final leaf (interval $[0.224, 0.24]$) is reached, a seed is picked at random from this range. }
\label{fig:tree}
\end{figure*}
\section{GenoGuard}\label{sec:genoguard}
In this section, we review GenoGuard~\cite{huang_genoguard:_2015}, along with a security analysis of the framework.%
\subsection{Construction}\label{subsec:ggdesc}
GenoGuard is a framework %
providing long-term confidentiality for genomic data based on Honey Encryption~\cite{HE2}.
More specifically, it allows to encode genomic data, encrypt it using a secret password, and store in a database, in such a way that its confidentiality is preserved even against an attacker that can brute-force all possible passwords.
In GenoGuard, genomes are represented as a sequence of single-nucleotide variants (SNVs), i.e., values in $\{0,1,2\}$.
\descr{Encoding.} The construction uses a DTE scheme optimized for genome sequences.
It assigns subspaces of seed space $\mathcal{S}$ to the prefixes of a sequence $M$, i.e., all the subsequences in the set $\{M_{1,i}| 1\leq i \leq n\}$, where $n$ is the length of the sequence.
For example, the prefixes of the sequence $01102$ are $\{0, 01, 011, 0110, 01102\}$.
The seed space $\mathcal{S}$ is the interval $[0,1)$, with each seed being a real number in this interval.
Let $\mathcal{M}$ be the set of all possible sequences (the plaintext space).
To calculate the cumulative distribution function (CDF) of each sequence, a total order $\mathcal{O}$ is assigned to all sequences in $\mathcal{M}$.
For any two different sequences $M$ and $M'$, we assume that they start to differ at SNV$_i$ and SNV$'_i$. %
If the value of SNV$_i$ is smaller than that of SNV'$_i$, then, $\mathcal{O}(M)< \mathcal{O}(M')$, and $\mathcal{O}(M)> \mathcal{O}(M')$ otherwise.
The CDF of a sequence $M$ is then calculated as:
\begin{center}
$CDF(M)=\sum_{M' \in \mathcal{M},\mathcal{O}(M')\leq \mathcal{O}(M)} \Pr_{SNV}(M')$
\end{center}
where $\Pr_{SNV}(M')$ is the probability of the sequence $M'$.
The encoding of a sequence can be performed using a perfect ternary tree, as depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:tree}.
(Note that the plot was generated using code obtained from GenoGuard's Github page.\footnote{\url{https://github.com/acs6610987/GenoGuard}})
Each node in the tree represents a prefix of a sequence, and each leaf a complete sequence.
Nodes have an interval $[L_i^j, U_i^j)$, where $i$ is the depth of the node in the tree and $j$ its order at a given depth $i$.
The first node has the interval $[L_0^0, U_0^0) = [0,1)$.
Depending on the value of the SNV at position $i{+}1$, the encoding proceeds from the node that represents $M_{1,i}$ with order $j$ at depth $i$ to depth $i+1$ as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item[$\bullet$] If SNV$_{i+1} = 0$, go to the left branch and attach an interval $[L_{i+1}^{3j},U_{i+1}^{3j}) = [L_i^j, L_i^j + (U_i^j-L_i^j)\times \Pr(SNV_{i+1}=0|M_{1,i}))$
\item[$\bullet$] If SNV$_{i+1}=1$, go to the middle branch and attach an interval $[L_{i+1}^{3j+1},U_{i+1}^{3j+1}) = [L_i^j + (U_i^j-L_i^j)\times \Pr(SNV_{i+1}=0|M_{1,i}), L_i^j + (U_i^j-L_i^j)\times( \Pr(SNV_{i+1}=0|M_{1,i} + \Pr(SNV_{i+1}=1|M_{1,i})))$
\item[$\bullet$] If SNV$_{i+1} = 2$, go to the right branch and attach an interval $[L_{i+1}^{3j+2},U_{i+1}^{3j+2}) = [L_i^j + (U_i^j-L_i^j)\times( \Pr(SNV_{i+1}=0|M_{1,i} + \Pr(SNV_{i+1}=1|M_{1,i})), U^j_i)$.
\end{itemize}
In order to compute the conditional probabilities, Huang et al.~\cite{huang_genoguard:_2015} consider several models and compare their goodness of fit for real-world genome datasets.
Specifically, they experiment with Linkage Disequilibrium (LD), Allele Frequencies (AF), building $k$-th order Markov chains on the dataset and recombination rates (RR), and find the latter to perform best.
Finally, when a leaf is reached, a seed is picked uniformly from this range as the encoding of the corresponding sequence, and then fed into a Password-based Encryption (PBE) scheme to perform encryption, using a password chosen by the user. %
\descr{Decoding.} To decode an encoded-then-encrypted sequence, the ciphertext is first decrypted (as per the PBE scheme) using the user-chosen password; this recovers the seed.
Then, the decoding process proceeds similar to the encoding one.
That is, given the seed $S \in [0,1)$, at each step, the algorithm computes three intervals for the three branches, chooses the interval in which the seed $S$ falls, and moves down the tree.
Once a leaf node is reached, the path from the root to the leaf is outputted as the decoded sequence.
\descr{Finite Precision.} Note that the Honey Encryption encoding model, as described in Section~\ref{subsec:ggdesc}, requires the seed space $\mathcal{S}$ to be a real number domain with infinite precision.
In the case of DNA sequences, this would yield a very long floating-point representation, and thus a high storage overhead.
Therefore, GenoGuard uses a modification of the DTE scheme for finite precision. %
Specifically, for a sequence of length $n$, where each SNV takes three possible values, at least $n \cdot \log_23$ bits are needed for storing the sequence.
Hence, a storage overhead parameter $h > \log_23$ is selected, and each sequence is encoded over $h\cdot n$ bits.
The algorithm works as before, by selecting intervals according to the values of the respective SNVs based on conditional probabilities. The root interval is $[0,2^{hn}{-}1]$.
At each branch at depth $i$, the algorithm will allocate a seed space of size $3^{n-i-1}$, and each following step will segment an input interval into three parts of equal size.
Hence, any subinterval of the $j$-th node at depth $i$ will contain $3^{n-i-1}$ integers.
\subsection{Security}\label{sec:security}
Huang et al.~\cite{huang_genoguard:_2015} evaluate the security of GenoGuard vis-\`a-vis the probability of an unbounded adversary recovering the encrypted sequence.
That is, given the encryption of a message, what is the probability of the adversary recovering the correct message, even if she can brute-force all possible encryption keys for the underlying PBE scheme?
\descr{Upper Bound.} More formally, they prove an upper bound to the probability an adversary recovers the correct message to be:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:secu}
Pr_{p_m,p_k} \leq w(1+\delta) + \frac{3^n +1/w}{2^{(h-\log_23)n}}
\end{equation}
where $p_m$ is the original sequence distribution with maximum sequence probability $\gamma$, $p_k$ is a key (password) distribution with maximum weight $w$ (i.e., the most probable password has probability $w$), $n$ is the length of the sequence, $h$ the overhead parameter, and $\delta$ a parameter depending on $w$ and $\gamma$.
Let $\Delta$ denote the fraction $\frac{3^n +1/w}{2^{(h-\log_23)n}}$ in Equation~\ref{eq:secu}.
Note that $\Delta$ is a security loss term, since the upper bound on plaintext recovery probability should be $w$, as an adversary who trivially decrypts the ciphertext with the most probable key and outputs the result can recover the original message with probability $w$.
$\Delta$ is essentially the security lost due to DTE imperfectness when moving to finite precision, i.e., given by the difference between the original message distribution and the DTE distribution.
As shown in~\cite{huang_genoguard:_2015}, for $n = 20{,}000$, $h=4$, $w = \frac{1}{100}$, and $\gamma = 2.89\times 10^{-44}$, $\Delta$ is approximately $2^{-16600}$.
\descr{Empirical Evaluation.} Huang et al.~\cite{huang_genoguard:_2015} also present an {\em empirical} security analysis based on two experiments.
In both, the chromosome 22 of a victim is encrypted using a password pool consisting of numbers from 1 to 1000, with ``539'' assumed to be the correct one.
Then, in order to rule out wrong passwords, the interval size of each of the decrypted sequences is computed.
In the first experiment, a genome is encoded by assuming a uniform distribution (i.e., each branch has weight $1/3$ at all depths), and a PBE scheme is used to encrypt the seed. %
In the second experiment, GenoGuard is used to encrypt the victim's sequence.
Hence, the size of the interval of a leaf in the ternary tree is proportional to the probability of the corresponding sequence.
The results of their experiments, reported in Figure 10 in~\cite{huang_genoguard:_2015}, show that a simple classifier can distinguish the correct sequence in the first experiment, while, in the second one, it is ``buried'' among all the decrypted sequences.
\section{Evaluation Methods}\label{sec:evaluation}
We now describe our evaluation methods, for both low and high-entropy password settings.
Before doing so, we introduce the notation used in the rest of the paper in Table~\ref{tab:notations}.
\subsection{Low-Entropy vs High-Entropy Password}
We use different approaches for evaluating GenoGuard under two different password types, namely low-entropy and high-entropy passwords. In other words, we encrypt a sequence with GenoGuard using either an easy to guess, low-entropy password ($\approx$7 bits), or using a harder password with a higher entropy ($\approx$72 bits).
The difference in the evaluation of the two approaches is given by the adversary's goal.
Specifically, in the low-entropy password case, the adversary attempts to use the side information in order to distinguish the original encrypted sequence among a pool of honey sequences.
By contrast, in the high-entropy setting, the adversary uses both the honey sequences and the side information in order to predict the value of each SNV at each position in the target sequence.
\begin{table}
\small
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{l|l}
{\bf Symbol} & {\bf Meaning}\\ \hline
MR & Message recovery\\ %
SI & Side information \\ %
HEnc & Honey Encryption \\ %
HDec & Honey Decryption \\ %
$\mathcal{K}$ & Key space\\ %
$\mathcal{M}$ & Message space\\ %
$p_k$ & Key distribution\\ %
$p_m$ & Message distribution \\ %
$\adv$ & Adversary \\ %
$\adv^{SI}$ & Adversary with access to side information \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Notation.}
\label{tab:notations}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{Threat Model}\label{subsec:threat-low}
We use the same system and threat model presented in the GenoGuard paper~\cite{huang_genoguard:_2015},
i.e., we assume a genomic sequence of a user is to be stored, encrypted, at a third-party database, e.g., a biobank.
We consider an adversary that has access to the encrypted data (for instance, she breaks into the biobank and gets access to the encrypted database, or the biobank itself is adversarial) and has access to public knowledge as well as to some side information (as discussed below).
\descr{Low-Entropy Password.}
The main adversarial goal in this case is to identify the target sequence among a pool of honey sequences, using the side information available, i.e. ``message recovery'' with side information (\textbf{MR-SI}).
\descr{High-Entropy Password.} The main adversarial goal is to obtain as much information as possible about the sequence that was encrypted.
Note that this adversarial goal is different from ``message recovery,'' according to which Huang et al.~\cite{huang_genoguard:_2015} evaluate GenoGuard's security (cf.~Section~\ref{sec:security}).
The main intuition is that, as also hypothesized by \cite{jaeger2016honey}, using Honey Encryption might actually leak non-negligible information about the sequences encrypted using GenoGuard, even if the adversary cannot correctly recover the full plaintext with non-negligible probability.
\subsection{Adversary's Side Information}\label{subsec:adv}
As mentioned above, the adversary has access to the victim's encrypted sequence as well as to public information such as, Linkage Disequilibrium, Allele Frequencies, Recombination Rate (see Section~\ref{sec:genomics}).
In addition, we assume that the adversary may have some side information about the victim.
When referring to side information, note that we do {\em not} consider knowledge of common traits from phenotype-genotype associations, e.g., gender, ancestry, or other information about the victim that could be obtained, e.g., from social media.
In fact, this is covered by GenoGuard's guidelines, which state that the user should include as much side information about their genome as possible when performing the encoding.
Whereas, even though assuming the user can knowingly enumerate all possible side information is quite a strong assumption, we actually consider the case where the victim undertakes some specific tests, and the adversary learns additional information about the victim from the outcome of those tests.
Additionally, the victim might choose to re-encrypt their genome after obtaining the test results in order to incorporate them in the encoding, and the adversary could use the new ciphertext to extract information about the old ciphertext.
In the high-entropy password setting, we also evaluate the case where an adversary has no side information about the target sequence, in order to quantify the information leakage that might occur from using GenoGuard against baseline inference methods for genomic sequences.
Overall, we consider different types of side information available to the adversary:
\begin{compactenum}
\item \emph{No Side Information:} The adversary has access only to the encrypted sequence. (NB: this is only evaluated for the high-entropy password setting)
\item \emph{Sparse SNVs:} The adversary has access to SNV values sparsely distributed in the target sequence.
\item \emph{Consecutive SNVs:} The adversary has access to values from a cluster of consecutive SNVs in the target sequence.
\end{compactenum}
\subsection{Low-Entropy Password} \label{sec:low ent}
We now formally provide a lower bound for the adversary's advantage in the case where she obtains side information about the target sequence and encryption is done using a low-entropy password.
We present a lower bound on the adversary's advantage when she has access to side information about the encrypted sequence and can exhaustively search the message space.
We prove the bound formally, building on~\cite{jaeger2016honey}, which shows the impossibility of known-message attack (KMA) security with low-entropy passwords.
However, instead of the adversary having access to message-ciphertext pairs, we assume that the adversary has access to (position, value) pairs from the encrypted sequence.
The game defining message recovery security with side information is denoted as \textbf{MR-SI$^\adv_{HE,p_m, p_k}$} and illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:mrsi}.
Given a ciphertext $C^*$, an adversary $\adv^{SI}$, with access to side information, is allowed to guess the message by brute force. The adversary $\adv^{SI}$ wins the game if her output message is the same as the original message.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\center
\framebox{
\begin{tabular}[t]{l}
\underline{MR-SI$^\adv_{HE,p_m, p_k}$:}\\
$\centerdot$ $\mathrm{K}^* \gets_{p_k} \mathcal{K}$\\
$\centerdot$ $\mathrm{M}^* \gets_{p_m} \mathcal{M}$\\
$\centerdot$ $\mathrm{C}^* \sample \mathrm{HEnc}(\mathrm{K}^*, \mathrm{M}^*)$\\
$\centerdot$ $\mathrm{M} \sample \adv^{SI}(\mathrm{C}^*)$\\
$\centerdot$ If $\mathrm{M = M}^*$: Return 1\\
~~Else: Return 0\\
\end{tabular}
}
\vspace*{-0.2cm}
\caption{Definition of Message Recovery Security with Side Information (MR-SI).}\label{fig:mrsi}
\vspace*{-0.2cm}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tp]
\center
\framebox{
\begin{tabular}[t]{l}
\underline{Adversary $\adv^{SI}$(C$^*$):}\\
$\centerdot$ Let $q$ be the $ \mathrm{number\ of\ known\ SNVs}$\\
$\centerdot$ Let $SI$ be the $\mathrm{ set\ of\ }q \mathrm{\ pairs\ } (pos_i, val_i) \mathrm{\ from\ M}^*$\\
$\centerdot$ $K_q \leftarrow \emptyset $\\
$\centerdot$ For $ \mathrm{K} \in \mathcal{K}$:\\
\hspace{3mm}If$(\forall i \ \mathrm{HDec(K, C^*})[pos_i] = val_i)$:\\
\hspace{5mm} $K_q \leftarrow K_q \cup \{K\}$\\
$\centerdot$ $K \sample K_q $\\
$\centerdot$ Return $HDec(K, C^*)$\\
\end{tabular}
}
\vspace*{-0.2cm}
\caption{Adversary strategy for MR-SI, having access to $q$ pairs of (position, value) from the original message.}\label{fig:a-si}
\end{figure}
Our intuition is that the advantage of the adversary \adv$^{SI}$ (Figure~\ref{fig:a-si}), for a number $q$ ($q\leq 2n$, where $n= [\log_2|\mathcal{K}|]$) of positions and values, from the original sequence, is equal to the probability that a randomly chosen key that decrypts correctly all values at the given positions, will also decrypt the rest of the sequence, i.e., \advantage{MR-SI}{HE,p_m,p_k} = $\Pr[\mathrm{MR-SI}_{HE,p_m,p_k}^\adv]$. We denote by $K_q$ the number of keys consistent with the positions and values used as side information.
Hence, we use Lemma 4.2 from \cite{jaeger2016honey}, as follows:
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma}
If $s_0, s_1, ..., s_{n}$ are positive integer-valued random variables such that $s_0\leq2^{n}$ and $s_{q+1}\leq s_q$, for $q\in \mathbb{Z}_{n}$, then $\mathrm{max}_{q\in \mathbb{Z}_{n}} \expect{s_{q+1}/s_q}\geq \frac{1}{2n}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
See \cite{jaeger2016honey}.
\end{proof}
Using Lemma~\ref{lemma}, we can compute the adversary's advantage as follows:
\begin{theorem}
Let HE be an encryption scheme and $n = [\log_2|K|]$. Then, for any $p_m, p_k$, the adversary \adv$^{SI}$ who obtains at most $n-1$ positions and values from the original sequence will have advantage:
\begin{center}
\advantage{MR-SI}{HE,p_m,p_k}[(\adv^{SI})] $\geq \frac{1}{2n^2}$
\end{center} \label{thm}
\end{theorem}
\begin{figure}[tp]
\center
\framebox{
\begin{tabular}[t]{l}
\underline{Game 1:}\\
$\centerdot$ $\mathrm{K}^* \gets_{p_k} \mathcal{K}$\\
$\centerdot$ $\mathrm{M}^* \gets_{p_m} \mathcal{M}$\\
$\centerdot$ $\mathrm{C}^* \sample \mathrm{HEnc}(\mathrm{K}^*, \mathrm{M}^*)$\\
$\centerdot$ Let $q$ be the $ \mathrm{number\ of\ known\ SNVs}$\\
$\centerdot$ Let $SI$ be the $\mathrm{ set\ of\ }q \mathrm{\ pairs\ } (pos_i, val_i) \mathrm{\ from\ M}^*$\\
$\centerdot$ $K_q \leftarrow \emptyset $\\
$\centerdot$ For $ \mathrm{K} \in \mathcal{K}$:\\
\hspace{3mm}If$(\forall i \ \mathrm{HDec(K, C^*})[pos_i] = val_i)$:\\
\hspace{5mm} $K_q \leftarrow K_q \cup \{K\}$\\
$\centerdot$ $K \sample K_q $\\
$\centerdot$ $\mathrm{M} \leftarrow HDec(K, C^*)$\\
$\centerdot$ If $\mathrm{M = M}^*$: Return 1\\
~~Else: Return 0\\
\end{tabular}
}
\vspace*{-0.2cm}
\caption{Game 1, used in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm}. }\label{fig:g1}
\end{figure}
\begin{proof}
The advantage $\advantage{MR-SI}{HE,p_m,p_k}[(\adv^{SI})]$, is equal to $\Pr[\mathrm{Game\ 1\ Retuns\ 1}]$ where Game 1 is defined in Figure~\ref{fig:g1}. This is due to the fact that Game 1 is MR-SI$^\adv_{HE,p_m, p_k}$ together with Adversary $\adv^{SI}$(C$^*$).
By applying a few transformations to Game 1 and changing the final check, i.e. instead of checking if $M=M^*$ before returning 0 or 1, it checks if the key $K$ is in the subset that decrypts $C^*$ to $M^*$ we obtain an equivalent game, Game 2 (Figure~\ref{fig:g2}). Thus, $\Pr[\mathrm{Game\ 1} \mathrm{\ Returns\ } 1] = \Pr[\mathrm{Game\ 2} \mathrm{\ Returns\ } 1]$.
Since $K_{q+1}\subseteq K_q$, for fixed $q$, the probability that Game 2 will return 1 is $\expect{\frac{|K_{q+1}|}{|K_q|}}$. So we have $\Pr[\mathrm{Game\ 2} \mathrm{\ Returns\ } 1] = \sum^{n}_{q=0}\frac{1}{n}\expect{\frac{|K_{q+1}|}{|K_q|}}\vspace{0.1cm}$.
We then define Experiment 1 (Figure~\ref{fig:e1}), which shows that the distribution of $K_{q+1}$ and $K_q$ for $q \in \mathbb{Z}_n$ is the same as the distribution in Game 1. Let $s_q$ denote $|K_q|$ and $\epsilon = max_{q\in \mathbb{Z}_n}\expect{\frac{s_{q+1}}{s_q}}$, where the expectation is taken in Experiment 1. Since all $K_q$ contain at least the key $K^*$, they all are positive. Thus, by applying Lemma~\ref{lemma} we have $\epsilon \geq \frac{1}{2n}$. Then:
\begin{center}
\advantage{MR-SI}{HE,p_m,p_k}[(\adv^{SI})] = $\Pr[\mathrm{Game\ 2\ Returns\ 1} ]\newline = \sum^{n}_{q=0}\frac{1}{n}\expect{\frac{|K_{q+1}|}{|K_q|}} \geq \frac{1}{n}\cdot \epsilon \geq \frac{1}{2n^2}$
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\end{proof}
This shows that the security of the systems is weak even with a small number of pairs (position, value) from the target sequence available to the attacker, as opposed to having multiple known ciphertext-plaintext pairs.
\begin{figure}[tp]
\vspace*{-0.3cm}
\center
\framebox{
\begin{tabular}[t]{l}
\underline{Game 2:}\\
$\centerdot$ $\mathrm{K}^* \gets_{p_k} \mathcal{K}$\\
$\centerdot$ $\mathrm{M}^* \gets_{p_m} \mathcal{M}$\\
$\centerdot$ $\mathrm{C}^* \sample \mathrm{HEnc}(\mathrm{K}^*, \mathrm{M}^*)$\\
$\centerdot$ Let $q$ be the $ \mathrm{number\ of\ known\ SNVs}$\\
$\centerdot$ Let $SI$ be the $\mathrm{ set\ of\ }q \mathrm{\ pairs\ } (pos_i, val_i) \mathrm{\ from\ M}^*$\\
$\centerdot$ $K_0 \leftarrow \mathcal{K}; K_1, K_2, ...K_{q+1} \leftarrow \emptyset $\\
$\centerdot$ For $ (pos_i, val_i) \in SI$:\\
\hspace{3mm}For $ \mathrm{K} \in K_{i-1}$:\\
\hspace{5mm}If$(\mathrm{HDec(K, C^*})[pos_i] = val_i)$:\\
\hspace{7mm} $K_i\leftarrow K_i \cup \{K\}$\\
$\centerdot$ For $K \in K_q $:\\
\hspace{3mm} If $HDec(K, C^*) = M^*$\\
\hspace{5mm} $K_{q+1} \leftarrow K_q \cup \{K\}$\\
$\centerdot$ $K \sample K_q $\\
$\centerdot$ If $K \in K_{q+1}$: Return 1\\
~~Else: Return 0\\
\end{tabular}
}
\vspace*{-0.2cm}
\caption{Game 2, a transformed version of Game 1.}\label{fig:g2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tp]
\center
\framebox{
\begin{tabular}[t]{l}
\underline{Experiment 1:}\\
$\centerdot$ $K_0 \leftarrow \mathcal{K}; K_1, K_2, ...K_{n} \leftarrow \emptyset $\\
$\centerdot$ $\mathrm{K}^* \gets_{p_k} \mathcal{K}$\\
$\centerdot$ $\mathrm{M}^* \gets_{p_m} \mathcal{M}$\\
$\centerdot$ $\mathrm{C}^* \sample \mathrm{HEnc}(\mathrm{K}^*, \mathrm{M}^*)$\\
$\centerdot$ Let $n$ be the $ \mathrm{number\ of\ known\ SNVs }$\\
$\centerdot$ Let $SI$ be the $\mathrm{ set\ of\ }n \mathrm{\ pairs\ } (pos_i, val_i) \mathrm{\ from\ M}^*$\\
$\centerdot$ For $ (pos_i, val_i) \in SI$:\\
\hspace{3mm}For $ \mathrm{K} \in K_{i-1}$:\\
\hspace{5mm}If$(\mathrm{HDec(K, C^*})[pos_i] = val_i)$:\\
\hspace{7mm} $K_i\leftarrow K_i \cup \{K\}$\\
\end{tabular}
}
\vspace*{-0.2cm}
\caption{Experiment 1, used in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm}.}\label{fig:e1}
\end{figure}
\subsection{High-Entropy Password}\label{sec:attacks-high}
We now give an overview of our inference strategy using the GenoGuard ciphertext and discuss the baseline inference methods we evaluate our strategy against.
\subsubsection{Baseline Inferences}\label{sec:inference}
We compare the performance of our inference strategy to baselines for genomic sequence inference. %
For these baselines, we assume that the adversary has access only to side information, as discussed in Section~\ref{subsec:adv}, but not the ciphertext resulting from GenoGuard's encode-then-encrypt method.
As done by Samani et al.~\cite{samani_quantifying_2015}, we set to infer the value of an unknown SNV$_i$, given a probabilistic modeling of genome sequences.
More specifically, we use the following models for SNV correlation:
\begin{compactitem}
\item \emph{B1:} 1st order Markov chain model from AF and LD: most likely genotype.
\item \emph{B2:} 1st order Markov chain model from AF and LD: sampled genotype.
\item \emph{B3:} RR Model.
\end{compactitem}
\subsubsection{GenoGuard Inference Methods} \label{subsec:attack-high}
Our method is based on exploiting the similarities between the honey sequences in order to obtain information about the target sequence. More specifically, we use two strategies:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{G1.} Side information-weighted SNVs: We assign a weight to each of the honey sequences according to the amount of side information contained. We then consider only the sequences with the highest weight and output the most common SNVs among them as our candidate SNVs for the target sequence. In the case of no side information, we consider the most common SNVs across all honey sequences.
\item \emph{G2.} Interval and Side information-weighted SNVs: Similar to the previous method, however, we also adjust the weight of each sequence when considering the most common SNVs by the size of the interval that the seed of the respective sequence will fall into. In the case of no side information, we take the most common SNVs from all honey sequences, weighted by the previously mentioned interval size.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{1.0\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\columnwidth]{figures/easy_rnd_noseqs.png}
\caption{\textmd{\#Candidate sequences vs \% revealed sparse SNVs from target sequence}}
\label{fig:low_rnd_seqs}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[b]{1.0\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\columnwidth]{figures/easy_rnd_adv.png}
\caption{\textmd{Adv's advantage vs \% revealed sparse SNVs from target sequence}}
\label{fig:low_rnd}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\caption{Results of our evaluation in the low-entropy setting vis-\`a-vis an adversary with access to side information in the form of sparse SNVs from the target sequence.}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\end{figure*}
\section{Experimental Evaluation} \label{sec:results}
In this section, we present the datasets used for the experimental evaluation and the results obtained for both evaluation methods, %
i.e., low-entropy and high-entropy passwords.
\subsection{Dataset} \label{subsec:data}
We use the Phase III data from the HapMap dataset, i.e., the third release from the HapMap project.\footnote{\url{https://www.sanger.ac.uk/resources/downloads/human/hapmap3.html}}
HapMap was an international project~\cite{international2003international}, run between 2002 and 2009, aimed at developing a haplotype map of the human genome, and describe the common patterns of human genetic variation.
The HapMap data has been made publicly available and used for various research purposes, e.g., to research genetic variants affecting health, disease and responses to drugs and environmental factors, etc.
The Phase III release increased the number of DNA samples to 1,301 and included 11 different populations.
In our experiments, we select data from three populations:
\begin{compactenum}
\item ASW (African ancestry in Southwest USA),
\item CEU (Utah residents with Northern and Western European ancestry from the CEPH collection),
\item CHB (Han Chinese in Beijing, China).
\end{compactenum}
We sample 50 sequences at random from each of them, for a total of 150 sequences.
For all three populations presented above, we test the same SNVs positions.
\subsection{Low-Entropy Password} \label{subsec:low-results}
\subsubsection{Experiment Overview} \label{subsec:attack-low}
We use the following strategy for our evaluation:
\begin{compactenum}
\item Encrypt a sequence using GenoGuard's DTE-then-encrypt method: for each of the 150 sequences, we select and encrypt 1,000 positions from chromosome 13, with a storage overhead $h = 4$ (the same as in the experimental evaluation of GenoGuard), using a low-entropy password.
\item Decrypt the ciphertext, using the top 10,000 most common passwords released by Daniel Miessler\footnote{\url{https://github.com/danielmiessler/SecLists/blob/master/Passwords/Common-Credentials/10k-most-common.txt}} (with the encryption password in the set), to obtain plausible looking honey sequences;
\item Exclude the sequences which do not contain the side information.
\item Output the number of remaining sequences, given how many of the possible passwords match the side information.
\end{compactenum}
\subsubsection{Adversary's Advantage.} The performance of the adversary is calculated as the probability of the adversary guessing the target sequence within the remaining pool of honey sequences.
\subsubsection{Sparse SNVs from the Target Sequence}
Figure~\ref{fig:low_rnd_seqs} illustrates how the log number of candidate sequences decreases with more side information available. With 1\% side information (10 SNVs), the number of sequences that match the side information reduces to approximately 44 on average across the three populations.
Figure~\ref{fig:low_rnd} shows the increase of the adversary's advantage, averaged over 1000 rounds, vis-\`a-vis the number of SNVs available to her. 2.5\% side information (25 SNVs) gives the adversary an advantage of approximately 80\% on average for the ASW and CEU populations and close to 90\% for the CHB population. With more side information, the adversary's advantage increases to over 90\% for all populations.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{1.03\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.835\columnwidth]{figures/easy_consec_noseqs.png}
\caption{\textmd{\#Candidate sequences vs \% revealed consecutive SNVs from target sequence}}
\label{fig:low_consec_seqs}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[b]{1.03\columnwidth}
\centering\includegraphics[width=0.835\columnwidth]{figures/easy_consec_adv.png}
\caption{\textmd{Adv's advantage vs \% revealed consecutive SNVs from target sequence}}
\label{fig:low_consec}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{Results of our evaluation in the low-entropy setting vis-\`a-vis an adversary with access to side information in the form of a cluster of consecutive SNVs from the target sequence.}
\vspace{-0.1cm}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.35\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.99\columnwidth]{figures/ASW_rnd.png} \vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{\textmd{ASW}}
\label{fig:ASW_rnd}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.35\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.99\columnwidth]{figures/CEU_rnd.png}\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{\textmd{CEU}}
\label{fig:CEU_rnd}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.35\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.99\columnwidth]{figures/CHB_rnd.png} \vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{\textmd{CHB}}
\label{fig:CHB_rnd}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{Inference accuracy results in the high-entropy password setting for all three populations for side information available to the attacker in the form of sparse SNVs from the target sequence.}
\label{fig:sparse_high}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Consecutive SNVs form the Target Sequence}
When the adversary has access to side information as a cluster of consecutive SNVs, she needs more side information to achieve comparable results to the Sparse SNVs case.
Figure~\ref{fig:low_consec_seqs} shows the decrease of the log number of candidate sequences with increasing side information available. We observe the fastest decrease in the number of sequences with increasing side information available is for the ASW population when less than 10\% of the sequence available. Figure~\ref{fig:low_consec} shows the increase of the adversary's advantage, averaged over 1000 rounds, vis-\`a-vis the number of SNVs available to her. The increase in the adversary's advantage is slower as well, with an average of 70\% across the three populations for 20\% of the sequence available to the attacker.
\subsection{High-Entropy Password}\label{subsec:high-results}
\subsubsection{Experiment Overview}\label{subsec:overview}
The brute-force experiment presented in GenoGuard %
indicates that, when decrypting the same ciphertext with multiple passwords, the correct sequence would be ``buried'' among the incorrect ones.
Hence, there is some similarity between the original sequence and the honey sequences.
As a result, we set to quantify the corresponding privacy loss, i.e. {\bf\em how much more information does an adversary obtain via access to ciphertext encrypted using GenoGuard obtains, compared to one that was not}.
Overall, we use the following evaluation strategy:
\begin{compactenum}
\item Encrypt a sequence using GenoGuard's DTE-then-encrypt method: for each of the 150 sequences, we select and encrypt 1,000 positions from chromosome 13, with a storage overhead $h = 4$, using a random, high-entropy password (approx.~72 bits).
\item Decrypt the ciphertext, using the top 10,000 most common passwords released by Daniel Miessler, to obtain plausible looking honey sequences;
\item Infer the victim's sequence using the honey sequences.
\end{compactenum}
\subsubsection{Accuracy} To measure the performance and assess the potential leakage that access to the GenoGuard ciphertext might yield, we measure the accuracy as the number of correctly guessed SNVs over the total number or SNVs guessed.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{minipage}{0.99\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\columnwidth]{figures/delta_rnd.png}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{Difference in accuracy between the best performing GenoGuard and baseline inference methods, vis-\`a-vis an adversary with side information of sparse SNVs from the target sequence, in the high-entropy password setting.}
\label{fig:delta random}
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\setcounter{figure}{12}
\begin{minipage}{0.99\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{figures/delta_consec.png}
\vspace*{-0.2cm}
\caption{
Difference in accuracy between the best performing GenoGuard and baseline inference methods, vis-\`a-vis an adversary with side information in the form of consecutive SNVs from the target sequence, in the high-entropy password setting.}
\label{fig:delta_consec}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure*}
\setcounter{figure}{11}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.35\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.99\columnwidth]{figures/ASW_consec.png} \vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{\textmd{ASW}}
\label{fig:ASW_consec}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.35\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.99\columnwidth]{figures/CEU_consec.png}\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{\textmd{CEU}}
\label{fig:CEU_consec}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.35\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.99\columnwidth]{figures/CHB_consec.png}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{\textmd{CHB}}
\label{fig:CHB_consec}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{Inference accuracy results in the high-entropy password setting for all three populations for side information available to the attacker in the form of a cluster of consecutive SNVs from the target sequence.}
\label{fig:consec_high}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Sparse SNVs from the Target Sequence}
Figure~\ref{fig:sparse_high} shows the inference results in this case for the three population groups, averaged over 1,000 rounds. In the case where no side information is available to the attacker, for all populations, the attacker can infer approximately 2\% more of the target sequence from the GenoGuard ciphertext than just by using baseline inferences based on the population.
For the ASW population (Figure~\ref{fig:ASW_rnd}), over 80\% of the target SNVs are guessed correctly with 2.5\% (25 SNVs) or more of the target sequence available to the attacker. For the CEU population (Figure~\ref{fig:CEU_rnd}), approximately 79\% of the target SNVs are guessed correctly with 2.5\% of the original sequence available to the attacker and over 83\% of the target SNVs are guessed correctly with 5\% (50 SNVs) or more are available. In the case of the CHB population (Figure~\ref{fig:CHB_rnd}), the accuracy is of the GenoGuard inference is the lowest among the three populations, with over 73\% accuracy in the cases where 2.5\% SNVs are available to the attacker. The accuracy surpasses 80\% for the CHB population when 10\% or more of the target SNVs are available to the attacker.
In Figure~\ref{fig:delta random}, we illustrate the difference between the best performing inference method using the GenoGuard ciphertext and the best performing baseline inference method. On average, having access to the GenoGuard ciphertext improves the inference accuracy. The peak of the improvement in accuracy (approximately 15\%) over the baseline models can be observed when the attacker has access to 5\% sparse SNVs from the target sequence. After this, we can see a decline in this difference with increasing SNVs available for the attacker, as the baseline inference becomes more accurate with more information available. In fact, for the CHB population, the best performing baseline (B3) for the case when 20\% of the target sequence is available to the attacker provides an accuracy comparable to the GenoGuard inferences ($\approx$83.8$\%$).
\subsubsection{Consecutive SNVs form the Target Sequence}
In Figure~\ref{fig:consec_high}, we illustrate the accuracy of the inference methods across the three populations when the adversary obtains, as side information, a cluster of consecutive SNVs, averaged over 1,000 rounds.
For the ASW population (Figure~\ref{fig:ASW_consec}), the accuracy of inferred SNVs from the correct sequence using the GenoGuard ciphertext is over 73\% for 2.5\% or more of the target SNVs available as side information, and over 80\% when 10\% or more of the sequence is available to the attacker. The GenoGuard inference for the CEU population (Figure~\ref{fig:CEU_consec}) is over 70\% when 2.5\% or more of the target sequence is available to the attacker. For the CHB population (Figure~\ref{fig:CHB_consec}), the GenoGuard inferences have the lowest accuracy across the three populations, obtaining 70\% or more accuracy only when 5\% or more of the target sequence is available to the attacker.
Figure~\ref{fig:delta_consec} shows the difference between the best performing GenoGuard inference method and the best performing baseline inference method. On average, the inference using the GenoGuard ciphertext gives better accuracy than the baseline methods, but overall less than the previous case where sparse SNVs are available as side information. In this case, the peak in the improvement of accuracy compared to the baseline methods is approximately 7\%, on average, across the three populations, when 5\% of the target SNVs are available to the attacker.
For the CHB population, when 20\% of the sequence is available as side information to the attacker, we observe, as in the case of sparse SNVs, that the best performing baseline inference method (B3) obtains a comparable accuracy to that of the GenoGuard inferences ($\approx$73$\%$).
\subsection{Take-Aways}
Overall, our experimental evaluation shows that, when the adversary has access to some side information, access to a ciphertext encrypted using GenoGuard can help her recover a remarkably high percentage of the SNVs from the target sequence or significantly increase her advantage in recovering the correct sequence.
Therefore, users need to include as much side information as possible when encrypting their genomic sequence. However, this prompts a parallel problem, with respect to how much that user is willing to publicly share (as this information is saved together with the ciphertext), considering that even without access to the GenoGuard ciphertext, it can enable attackers to correctly predict most of the target genome.
\section{Related Work}\label{sec:related work}
In this section, we review relevant prior work on genome privacy and honey encryption.
\subsection{Genome Privacy}
\descr{Re-identification.} Genomic data is hard to anonymize, due to the genome's uniqueness as well as correlations within different regions.
For instance, Gymrek et al.~\cite{gymrek_identifying_2013} demonstrate that surnames of genomic data donors can be inferred using data publicly available from recreational genealogy databases. %
They also discuss how, through deep genealogical ties, publishing even a few markers can lead to the identification of another person who might have no acquaintance with the one who released their genetic data. %
In follow-up work, Erlich et al.~\cite{Erlich690} show that a genetic database which covers only 2\% of the target population can be used to find a third-cousin of nearly any individual.
\descr{Membership inference.} Homer et al.~\cite{homer_resolving_2008} present a membership inference attack in which they infer the presence of an individual's genotype within a complex genomic DNA mixture.
Wang et al.~\cite{wang2009learning} improve on the attack using correlation statistics of just a few hundreds SNPs, while Im et al.~\cite{im2012sharing} rely on regression coefficients.
Shringarpure and Bustamante~\cite{beacon_SB} perform membership inference against the Beacon network.\footnote{Beacons are web servers that answer questions e.g. ``does your dataset include a genome that has a specific nucleotide at a specific genomic coordinate?'' to which the Beacon responds yes or no, without referring to a specific individual; see: \url{https://github.com/ga4gh-beacon/specification}.}
They use a likelihood-ratio test to predict whether an individual is present in the Beacon, detecting membership within a Beacon with 1,000 individuals using 5,000 queries. %
Also, Von Thenen et al.~\cite{von_Thenen200147} reduce the number of queries to less than 0.5\%.
Their best performing attack uses a high-order Markov chain to model the SNP correlations, as described in~\cite{samani_quantifying_2015}.
Note that, as part of the attacks described in this paper, we use inference methods from~\cite{samani_quantifying_2015} as our baseline inference methods.
\descr{Data sharing.} Progress in genomics research is dependent on collaboration and data sharing among different institutions.
Given the sensitive nature of the data, as well as regulatory and ethics constraints, this often proves to be a challenging task.
Kamm et al.~\cite{kamm_new_2013} propose the use of secret sharing to distribute data among several entities and, using secure multi-party computations, support privacy-friendly computations across multiple entities.
Wang et al.~\cite{Wang2015} present GENSETS, a genome-wide, privacy-preserving similar patients querying system using genomic edit distance approximation and private set difference protocols.
Then, Chen et al.~\cite{chen_princess:_2017} use Software Guard Extensions (SGX) to build a privacy-preserving international collaboration tool; this enables secure and distributed computations over encrypted data, thus supporting the analysis of rare disease genetic data across different continents.
Finally, Oprisanu and De Cristofaro~\cite{oprisanu2018anonimme} present a framework (``AnoniMME'') geared supporting anonymous queries within the Matchmaker Exchange platform, which allows researchers to perform queries for rare genetic disease discovery over multiple federated databases.
\descr{Privacy-friendly testing.} Another line of work focuses on protecting privacy in the context of personal genomic testing, i.e., computational tests run on sequenced genomes to assess, e.g., genetic susceptibility to diseases, determining the best course of treatment, etc.
Baldi et al.~\cite{baldi2011countering} assume that each individual keeps a copy of their data and consents to tests done in such a way that only the outcome is disclosed.
They present a few cryptographic protocols allowing researchers to privately search mutations in specific genes.
Ayday et al.~\cite{ayday_protecting_2013} rely on a semi-trusted party to store an encrypted copy of the individual's genomic data: using additively homomorphic encryption and proxy re-encryption, they allow a Medical Center to privately perform disease susceptibility tests on patients' SNPs.
Naveed et al.~\cite{naveed14} introduce a new cryptographic primitive called Controlled Functional Encryption (CFE),
which allows users to learn only certain functions of the (encrypted) data, using keys obtained from an authority; however, the client is required to send a fresh key request to the authority every time they want to evaluate a function on a ciphertext.
Overall, for an overview of privacy-enhancing technologies applied to genetic testing, we refer the reader to~\cite{sok}.
\descr{Long-term security.} %
As the sensitivity of genomic data does not degrade over time, access to an individual's genome poses a threat to her descendants, even years after she has deceased.
To the best of our knowledge, GenoGuard~\cite{huang_genoguard:_2015} is the only attempt %
to provide long-term security.
GenoGuard, reviewed in Section~\ref{sec:genoguard}, relies on Honey Encryption~\cite{HE2}, aiming to provide confidentiality in the presence of brute-force attacks;
it only serves as a storage mechanism, i.e., it does not support selective retrieval or testing on encrypted data (as such, it is not ``composable'' with other techniques supporting privacy-preserving testing or data sharing).
In this paper, we provide a security analysis of GenoGuard.
In parallel to our work, Cheng et al.~\cite{cheng} recently propose attacks against probability model transforming encoders, and also evaluate them on GenoGuard.
Using machine learning, they train a classifier to distinguish between the real and the decoy sequences, and exclude all decoy data for approximately 48\% of the individuals in the tested dataset.
\subsection{Honey Encryption}
Juels and Ristenpart~\cite{HE2} %
introduce Honey Encryption (HE) as a general approach to encrypt messages using low min-entropy keys such as passwords.
HE, reviewed in Section~\ref{sec:he}, is designed to yield plausible-looking ciphertexts, called honey messages, even when decrypted with a wrong password.
In a nutshell, it uses a distribution-transforming-encoder (DTE) to encode a-priori knowledge of the message distribution,
aiming to provide {\em message recovery} security against computationally unbounded adversaries.
It was originally designed to encrypt credit card information, RSA secret keys, etc.~\cite{tyagi2015honey}.
Message recovery security can be defined as follows~\cite{jaeger2016honey}: given a message encrypted under a key whose maximum probability of taking on any particular value is at most $1/2^\mu$, an unbounded adversary's ability to guess the correct message, even given the ciphertext, is at most $1/2^\mu$ plus a negligible amount.
However, Jaeger et al.~\cite{jaeger2016honey} discuss deficiencies of message recovery security as per modern security goals.
More specifically, not only they prove the impossibility of known-message attack security in the case of low-entropy keys, but also mention that schemes meeting message recovery security might actually leak a significant amount of information about the plaintexts, even if the adversary cannot correctly recover the full message with non-negligible probability.
Although this serves as an inspiration to our work, note that the context of our evaluation is different, as in the low-entropy setting, we show that a lower bound also applies to the adversary's advantage when partial information from the target sequence is available to the attacker, compared to having pairs of ciphertext and plaintext.
Another work studying attacks against HE is that by Cheng et al.~\cite{cheng}, which we have reviewed above.
\descr{Honeywords.} Before Honey Encryption~\cite{HE2}, Juels and Rivest~\cite{juels2013honeywords} introduced the concept of ``honeywords'' to improve the security of password databases.
They propose adding honeywords (false passwords) to a password database together with the actual password (hashed with salt) of each user.
This way, an adversary who hacks into the password database and inverts the hash function cannot know whether she has found the password or a honeyword.
Wang et al.~\cite{wang2018security} present an evaluation of the honeyword system~\cite{juels2013honeywords}, finding it to be vulnerable to a number of attacks. %
More specifically, an adversary that wants to distinguish between real and decoy passwords can do so with a success rate of 30\% compared to an expected 5\%. In the case of a targeted attack, when the adversary is assumed to know some personal information about the user, they show that the adversary's success rate is further improved to about 60\%. %
Our attacks differ from those in~\cite{wang2018security}, first, as they target the honeywords system~\cite{juels2013honeywords}, while we focus on Honey Encryption~\cite{HE2}, and in particular its application to GenoGuard~\cite{huang_genoguard:_2015}.
Moreover, their attack only aims to identify the correct password from a given password pool, while we also examine the case when the correct password is not found within the tried passwords.
\section{Conclusion} \label{sec:conc}
Motivated by the decreasing cost of genomic sequencing and the related arising privacy challenges, the research community has produced a large body of work on genomic privacy. Most of the techniques focus on cryptographic tools, but fail to address the need for long term confidentiality for genomic data. %
In fact, GenoGuard~\cite{huang_genoguard:_2015} is the only tool available for ensuring the long term encryption needed for genomic data \cite{sok}.
In this paper, we set to determine whether GenoGuard can be safely used as an encryption tool, quantifying the additional privacy leakage arising from using it. We analyzed GenoGuard under two scenarios, based on the encryption password, for an adversary which has access to side information about the target sequence in the form of some values of SNVs from the target sequence. First, we assumed that the user encrypts his genomic sequence using a low-entropy, easily guessable password. In this case, we found that the adversary can easily exclude decoy passwords from the pool of possible passwords, and can guess the correct sequence with high probability by having access to 2.5\% sparse SNVs or 20\% or more consecutive SNVs from the target sequence.
Second, we assumed that the user encrypts his sequence using a high-entropy password. In this case, since elimination of decoy passwords might not yield any sequence, we use the honey sequences to obtain as much information as possible from the target sequence, exploiting the similarity between the original sequence and the honey sequences \cite{huang_genoguard:_2015}. We then compared the sequence obtained from the honey sequences to state-of-the-art methods from genome sequence inference in order to observe the privacy leakage. Even with no side information available to the attacker, the sequence obtained from the honey sequences had a 2\% improvement on average over all tested baseline methods. With side information in the form of sparse SNVs from the target sequence, the improvement in accuracy compared to the baseline inference models raises to up to 15\% on average when 5\% of the target sequence is available to the attacker, predicting more than 82\% (on average) of the target sequence correctly. When the attacker obtains consecutive SNVs from the target sequence, the accuracy of the attacker decreases slightly from the previous case, yielding 73\% accuracy when 5\% of the target sequence is known, with an average improvement of 7\% over the baseline methods.
In conclusion, we argue that the research community should invest more resources toward the design of long-term encryption tools for genomic data.
Overall, GenoGuard could be a viable solution when the user incorporates {\em all} side information into the encryption.
However, given the fact that all this information needs to be stored together with the ciphertext, it also prompts the question of how much is a user willing to disclose, considering that only the baseline methods can predict, with high accuracy, the correct sequence (e.g. with 20\% sparse SNVs available to the attacker, her accuracy is, on average, over 82\%).
Users who have already used GenoGuard for long-term encryption purposes need to be aware that if further genomic information can be obtained by the attacker, it will severely diminish the security of the system.
As part of future work, we plan to analyze the security of GenoGuard for side information arising from kinship associations.
\descr{Acknowledgments.} This work was supported by a Google Faculty Award on ``Enabling Progress in Genomic Research via Privacy Preserving Data Sharing,'' the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation program under the Marie Sk\l{}odowska-Curie ``Privacy\&Us'' project (GA No. 675730), and the Swiss National Science Foundation (Grant 150654).
\balance
\bibliographystyle{abbrv}
\input{no_comments.bbl}
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
\subsection{Overview}
\label{ssec:overview}
The recent surge in media coverage of nation-state efforts to influence public perception in online communities, as well as the release of large datasets by major social media platforms such as Facebook \cite{schrage_ginsberg_2018}, Reddit \cite{redditsuspicious}, and Twitter \cite{twitterei}, has led to a notable increase in research into the detection of online influence campaigns.
In haste to develop countermeasures, with particular concern for the possibility of foreign interference in upcoming elections, research focused on separating genuine user accounts from accounts linked to online influence campaigns (hereafter referred to as ``influence accounts") has rapidly outpaced research into characterizing the behaviour of these classification models. An understanding of the shortcomings of existing state-of-the-art methods is important to demonstrate the fairness and legitimacy of such models as a means of arbitrating online communities. These concerns are particularly important as the automated suppression of speech presents significant ethically considerations. As such, the development of robust techniques for evaluation and reduction of algorithmic bias must develop alongside new detection methods.
In the context of this paper, ``L1" refers to an individual's first (native) language, while ``L2" refers to an individual's second (non-native) language. Historically, the largest reported online influence campaigns targeting English users have been operated by countries with populations that do not typically speak L1 English. As a result of this, content-based natural language processing (NLP) models trained on text from past influence campaigns may inadvertently develop a significant bias towards detection of writing by L2 English speakers --- particularly those who share an L1 language with the country to which the influence campaign has been attributed.
\subsection{Reddit}
\label{ssec:reddit}
Reddit is a news aggregation and discussion website that has dramatically risen in popularity over the last several years. At the time of writing it is currently the fifth most popular website in both Canada and the U.S. according to Alexa rankings \cite{alexaus}\cite{alexaca}, placing it ahead of Twitter, Instagram, and Wikipedia. Reddit allows for comments on submitted posts, and allows users to reply and vote to the comments of other users. This results in a volume of discussion not found on other popular social media platforms. Comments on Reddit are limited to 10,000 characters, allowing for much more verbose discussion than is easily possible on Twitter, which officially doubled its maximum character length to 280 in November, 2017 \cite{twitterlength}.
Reddit enables users to create communities around specific topics with few restrictions. Concern has been expressed by Reddit users and moderators within that the site may be the target of ongoing nation-state efforts to influence popular opinion in order to support political goals. Reddit CEO Steve Huffman addressed the community during the website's 2017 Transparency Report to address these concerns and report the staff's findings \cite{RedditTransparencyReport}. This report included a release of 944 accounts ``of suspected Russian Internet Research Agency origin". The sentences within comments from these 944 suspect accounts are considered the positive case for our classification task.
This paper is limited to open-source data that can be leveraged by independent researchers without special access to internal company data. Open-source methods are valuable as they increase the number of individuals who can scrutinize activity in online spaces, exposing interference by coordinated groups, without requiring a privileged relationship with the platform holder. With this in mind, however, the most effective techniques will likely require access to the platform's internal data.
\subsection{Ethical Focus}
\label{ssec:ethicalintro}
There is a distinction between authentic speech from those representing themselves online, and speech written under the direction of a government with the intent of manipulating a populace --- particularly when it is designed to misrepresent the author or spread misinformation. The goal of detection systems should be to differentiate genuine expression from deliberate manipulation, focusing on signs that may indicate that online activity is disingenuous and directed.
It is not unexpected that a model trained to positively classify sentences written by Russia-operated influence accounts would demonstrate increased false positive rates (proportion of negative examples erroneously classified as positive) on English comments by L1 Russian speakers. Similarly, it is reasonable that the false positive rate increases if the sentence contains named entities frequently found within the training data, such as those referring to American politics or cryptocurrency. The combination of these tendencies, however, sets the groundwork for the automated suppression of speech --- and in particular, political speech --- by native Russian speakers. This represents a serious ethical consideration that should influence the decision to deploy any content-based influence campaign detection model. Influence campaigns operated by other countries with a high proportion of non-native English speakers will likely cause other language populations to face a similar risk.
User-submitted comments provide a significant variety of features that are useful for classification problems. Features derived from the textual content of the comment itself --- or content-based features --- have been shown to hold predictive power on a number of classification problems related to the writer of the text \cite{stylometry}, including work specifically on detection of online influence campaigns \cite{redditbert}. It is unrealistic to expect that future development in influence campaign detection should ignore a rich set of feature data. Development of content-based models is encouraged to continue with careful consideration to potential algorithmic bias against language communities at high-risk of false positive classification. Such mitigations may include negative training examples from L2 English language communities, or ensemble metadata classifiers to differentiate between genuine accounts and influence accounts with otherwise similar content features.
\section{Related Work}
\label{sec:pastwork}
Past work during the 2017 NLI Shared Task \cite{malmasi-etal-2017-report} has explored the state-of-the-art in NLI, demonstrating successful combinations of semantic and syntactic features for differentiating language learners from native English speakers. However, this task did not reflect highly fluent advanced non-native speakers, which represent a much more challenging classification task. Further research identified that the language level of L2 English Reddit users posting in European communities was much more sophisticated than most English learners and approached the level of the majority-English Reddit community as a whole \cite{DBLP:journals/tacl/RabinovichTW18}\cite{Kyle_Crossley_2014}. Classification of sophisticated non-native English speakers on Reddit was the subject of a comprehensive analysis that included both comment content and metadata \cite{DBLP:conf/emnlp/GoldinRW18}.
NLI research has also contributed the concept of ``topic bias" \cite{malmasi-etal-2017-report}\cite{Brooke2012MeasuringIN} as an undesirable property in NLI datasets. Topic bias may occur when the key themes and topics of texts are not evenly distributed across classes. Within online influence campaigns, there is a significant skew towards political topics within comments by influence accounts. As a result, positive detection may be heavily influenced by the presence of these topics. This creates weaknesses in the classification model as future influence campaigns may not refer to the same topics as past influence campaigns, and presence of discussion of specific topics may cause a classifier to perform well on randomly sampled data, but poorly on data with similar topic content. Named entity masking (NEM) has been used as an effective means of reducing topic bias in past NLI work \cite{DBLP:journals/tacl/RabinovichTW18}\cite{malmasi-dras-2014-arabic}\cite{malmasi-2016-subdialectal}, and should be applied to diminish topic bias within content-based influence campaign detection as well.
Prior work on detection of influence campaigns has mentioned L2 language features, such as differing stopword frequencies \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1901-11162}. Much of the more formal research on influence campaigns focuses around Twitter due to the substantial quantity of available data \cite{twitterei}. Past work has demonstrated a holistic approach to troll detection designed to incorporate features intended to match propaganda agents as well \cite{Fornacciari2018}. While Reddit has seen an enormous surge in popularity, little formal research has been performed so far on online influence campaigns on Reddit, with a handful of graduate research projects forming the current state-of-the-art for classification \cite{redditbert}\cite{commentprediction}.
The project which currently claims the highest classification accuracy on this problem \cite{redditbert}, leverages vector representations of sentences (sentence embeddings) created using recently released deep NLP model BERT \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1810-04805}. BERT, which stands for ``bidirectional encoder representations from transformers", leverages the Transformer architecture and attention mechanism discussed in the paper ``Attention is All You Need" \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/VaswaniSPUJGKP17} and applies them to a language modelling task. The result is a network that allows for the creation of fixed-length vectors that contain both forward and backward contextual information for every token in the input text. When using BERT, an additional token, referred to as \texttt{[CLS]}, is inserted at the start of the sentence, and can be used to obtain a fixed-length vector representation of sentences of variable length. BERT has demonstrated state-of-the-art performance on a number of sentence and sentence-pair classification tasks, and is utilized in this paper to demonstrate the relevance of the findings to current state-of-the-art models.
There is some similarity between the work in this paper and the field of forensic linguistics, which has seen useful applications for NLI in cybercrime investigations \cite{10.1093/police/pay097}. A forensic attribution of an influence campaign to a particular nation based on linguistic data is beyond the scope of this paper, and would necessitate evaluating linguistic similarities between not just English and Russian, but other commonly used languages as well.
\section{Methodology}
\label{sec:methodology}
This paper focuses on analyzing the language characteristics of comments posted by accounts ``of suspected Russian Internet Research Agency origin" released by link-aggregation and discussion website Reddit within their 2017 transparency report on April 10, 2018 \cite{RedditTransparencyReport}. Using state-of-the-art natural language processing (NLP) model BERT \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1810-04805}, contextual embeddings for sentences within these comments will be generated, and a classifier will be trained to distinguish between sentences from randomly sampled Reddit accounts and those from suspected influence accounts. This classification methodology and training dataset is designed to be comparable to that used by the project that currently claims state-of-the-art classification performance on Reddit \cite{redditbert}, with the distinction of being a sentence-level, rather than comment-level, task. This process will be repeated with the same data after performing ``named entity masking" (NEM) to replace named entities with their corresponding parts-of-speech (POS) tag.
The performance of this model will be evaluated not only against a holdout test set of suspect sentences and random sentences (described in \S \ref{sssec:dataset1} and \S \ref{sssec:dataset2} respectively), but also against two separate evaluation datasets based on the L1 language of the user (described in \S \ref{sssec:dataset3}). We create a dataset of sentences from comments by users who self-identify as being from L1 English countries, as well as a set of comments by users who self-identify as being from Russia. These datasets are constructed using similar methodology to recent work in native language identification \cite{DBLP:conf/emnlp/GoldinRW18}. This test is used to demonstrate the tendency of each model to generate more false positives when considering English comments written by users who speak Russian as a first language, as opposed to English native speakers. Also evaluated is a more demanding test set which filters these sentences to those that contain ``frequent named entities" (FNE): the top ten named entities most frequently mentioned in suspect comments within the ground-truth data.
The purpose of this paper is to form a compelling case for the development of safeguards in the deployment of content-based moderation methods, particularly those that may target distinctive linguistic characteristics (e.g. L2 English) shared by users outside of the target group. Online influence campaign detection offers a useful example where this problem is evident. The results of this work offer some future direction for the leveraging of content-based features for influence account detection, which may be integrated into an ensemble model for influence campaign detection on Reddit, similar to recent work in building ensemble troll detection models on Twitter \cite{Fornacciari2018}. Synthesizing these features with past work on ensemble approaches to influence campaign detection on Reddit \cite{commentprediction} may contribute to an ethically sound and effective approach.
\section{Experimental Setup}
\label{sec:experimentalsetup}
All experiments were conducted on a n1-standard-2 (2 vCPUs, 7.5 GB memory) Google Cloud instance, with a Tensor Processing Unit (TPU) v3-8. The code for the experiment is available online \cite{papercode}.
\subsection{Datasets}
\label{ssec:datasets}
This analysis relies on three corpora, as detailed below.
\subsubsection{Corpus I: Comments from 2017 Reddit transparency report}
\label{sssec:dataset1}
This dataset is comprised of Reddit comments made by accounts on a list released by Reddit staff on April 10, 2018 as ``of suspected Russian Internet Research Agency origin" \cite{redditsuspicious}\cite{RedditTransparencyReport}. These accounts were preserved for the purposes of transparency, allowing users to scrape their comment histories for further analysis. A full export of all comments made by these suspect accounts was performed by Alberto Coscia and is available on GitHub \cite{ALCC01}.
This corpus represents the only official collection of Reddit accounts released to date as ``suspicious" in the context of coordinated influence campaigns. While other independent researchers have collected other lists of accounts which exhibit some suspicious behavior \cite{joshrussel}, the official designation of these accounts represents a stronger confidence level not found in other sources. As such, for this analysis, we will only use the officially designated suspect accounts as ground-truth training examples.
As a platform holder, Reddit has access to additional data not publicly available. This includes access to IP logs, private actions (such as upvotes/downvotes), and more granular user activity tracking. These features, as well as Reddit's access and subject-matter expertise in their data, allows for this attribution to be considered accurate with a high degree of confidence.
\subsubsection{Corpus II: Randomly sampled Reddit comments}
\label{sssec:dataset2}
This dataset of random sampled comments was created by Brandon Punturo \cite{punturo}, and has been used in two past online influence detection projects on Reddit \cite{redditbert}\cite{commentprediction}. The dataset represents a typical random sampling approach to acquiring a negative class for influence campaign detection. We use this dataset to compare our results to past work in the field. It is important to note that more sophisticated sampling techniques may better address false positive similarities between influence accounts and genuine accounts.
For the purpose of this study, we assume that none of these randomly-sampled comments are attached to an influence campaign, based on the current understanding of the scale of past influence campaigns \cite{redditsuspicious} and the volume of daily comments on Reddit \cite{pushshiftio}.
\subsubsection{Corpus III: Augmented L2 Reddit dataset}
\label{sssec:dataset3}
Reddit has been the data source for past work on Native-Language Identification (NLI) on sophisticated second-language speakers \cite{DBLP:journals/tacl/RabinovichTW18}\cite{DBLP:conf/emnlp/GoldinRW18}. This work entailed the creation of datasets of Reddit comments from users of a variety of different languages by looking for self-identified ``flair" in European subreddits. This dataset includes a sizeable number of comments from self-identified Russian users: 31,167 from European subreddits and 586,398 comments from other subreddits \cite{l2redditdataset}.
We augment the Russian content of this dataset by leveraging the user-specified flair in the subreddit ``AskARussian", which has 4,072 users at the time of writing. We collect the comments of users with self-identified flairs that indicate Russia or a specific Russian region. Deduplication is performed, and users who are already present in the original L2-Reddit dataset are discarded, as are self-declared bot accounts. The results in a total of 774,702 comments. When tokenized into sentences greater than 10 characters long, the result is 1.9 million sentences. We believe this is the most comprehensive dataset of online comments made by highly-fluent L1 Russian / L2 English language speakers. It is hoped this dataset will assist in future work into research of algorithmic bias.
The L2-Reddit dataset also includes comments by users who self-identify as being from countries that typically speak L1 English. We assess Australia, Ireland, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America as fulfilling this criterion. These L1 English comments will be compared to the L1 Russian comments to determine the difference in classification accuracy.
Similar to Corpus II, we assume that none of these comments are affiliated with online influence campaigns, based on the current understanding of the scale of past influence campaigns \cite{redditsuspicious} and the volume of daily comments on Reddit \cite{pushshiftio}.
\subsection{Data Preprocessing}
\label{sec:preproc}
The first two corpora are considered the two distinct classes for the classification task, and are used together to train a classifier. Corpus III will be used to evaluate false positive rates of this classifier against native English and Russian speakers.
As this is a dataset composed of real comments in original formatting, data preprocessing is an important consideration. The comment data is cleaned according to a multi-step process.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Normalize datasets into similar formats using regular expressions to remove extraneous escape characters.
\item Perform sentence tokenization using Python NLTK \cite{Loper02nltk:the} to extract sentences from comments.
\item Remove newline characters, Reddit quote markdown characters, and horizontal tab characters (\texttt{\&\#009;}).
\item Remove all URLs and replace with [URL] token.
\item Discard sentences shorter than 10 characters. Very small sentences are poorly-suited to the classifier and may introduce noise.
\item Run full BERT tokenization pipeline \cite{bertgit}, which includes converting to lowercase, WordPiece \cite{wordpiece} tokenization, punctuation splitting, and invalid character removal.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{BERT Sentence Embedding Classification}
Sentence embedding refers to the family of techniques whereby sentences are mapped to vector representations within a continuous vector space, as in the case of word and phrase embedding \cite{Bengio:2003:NPL:944919.944966}\cite{DBLP:journals/corr/MikolovSCCD13}. These ``sentence embeddings" are useful for classification and clustering of sentences. Fixed-length sentence embeddings are particularly valuable as they convert variable length sentences into fixed-length feature vectors.
Fixed-length sentence embeddings are obtained from BERT by feeding the WordPiece tokenized input into the BERT model and reading the final layer activations for the prepended special classification token (\texttt{CLS}), as per the intent of the model \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1810-04805}. A simple configuration is used for BERT in order to emphasize repeatability, and avoid undue emphasis on the specifics of the neural network's construction.
A single layer classifier is trained on sentence embeddings from the BERT model, as is standard for fine-tuning BERT for sentence classification tasks. A maximum sequence length of 128 is chosen for the model. While BERT supports sequence lengths up to 512, a shorter sequence length is recommended by Google Research \cite{bertgit} as the relationship between Transformer attention and sequence length is quadratic \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1810-04805}, leading to dramatic increases in computation time. A training batch size of 64 is used to maximize the efficiency of the TPU v3-8. We use the uncased variant of the BERT base model (12-layer, 768-hidden, 12-heads, 110M parameters) for our experiment.
\subsection{Masking}
\label{sec:masking}
The available data on influence campaigns contains frequent mentions of specific named entities. As a result, past classification work using BERT embeddings for classification on Reddit \cite{redditbert} has highlighted posts containing these words as a prominent failure case. In order to demonstrate the impact that these keywords have on BERT feature classification, we perform named-entitiy recognition (NER) to extract named entities (NEs) from sentences in the three corpora described in \S \ref{ssec:datasets}. These will be used to form three additional datasets, with each named entity replaced by the corresponding tag. This approach, similar to that taken in native language identification research on Reddit \cite{DBLP:journals/tacl/RabinovichTW18}, emphasizes the other content features in the text, such as grammatical structure and word choice. To perform named entity masking, we use the largest (and most accurate) implementation available in the ``spaCy" Python package, which supports detection of a broad range of entities at accuracy comparable to state-of-the-art \cite{spaCy}\cite{Kiperwasser2016SimpleAA}.
Table \ref{tab:ner-table-suspicious} shows the ten most frequent named entities in Corpus I, omitting less-distinctive results for ``DATE", ``CARDINAL", and ``PERCENT" entities. We have also omitted one named ``PERSON" entity: ``\texttt{:D}". While the frequent presence of this emoji within the suspicious comments may be a distinguishing feature, it does not meet the criteria of a valid named entity for this analysis. Each unique named entity is only counted once per comment that it occurs in, to prevent highly repetitive comments in which a named entity is mentioned multiple times from dominating the results.
The entities in Table \ref{tab:ner-table-suspicious} will be considered ``frequent named entities" (FNEs) which we will used to filter the prepared datasets to create a final evaluation dataset that emphasizes known failure modes in content-based models.
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{@{}lllll@{}}
\toprule
Entity & Entity Type & Count & & \\ \midrule
US & GPE & 79 & & \\
TIE & ORG & 79 & & \\
Trump & ORG & 67 & & \\
Bitcoin & ORG & 52 & & \\
Hillary & PERSON & 39 & & \\
America & GPE & 38 & & \\
Russia & GPE & 37 & & \\
Russian & NORP & 31 & & \\
ISIS & ORG & 29 & & \\
BTC & ORG & 28 & & \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\vspace{0.3cm}
\caption{Most common named entities within Corpus I, used to generate additional ``frequent named entity" (FNE) evaluation dataset.} \label{tab:ner-table-suspicious}
\end{table}
\section{results}
\label{sec:results}
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{@{}lll@{}}
\toprule
& Unmasked Model & Masked Model \\ \midrule
Accuracy & \textbf{0.7409} & 0.7266 \\
AUC & \textbf{0.7409} & 0.7266 \\
F1 Score & \textbf{0.7433} & 0.7302 \\
Precision & \textbf{0.7359} & 0.7202 \\
Recall & \textbf{0.7512} & 0.7409 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\vspace{0.3cm}
\caption{Mean evaluation results on masked and unmasked models trained to differentiate between suspect sentences (positive class derived from Corpus I) and random comments (negative class derived from Corpus II).} \label{tab:test-results}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{@{}lll|ll@{}}
\toprule
Dataset & Unmasked Model & Masked Model & $t$-statistic \\ \midrule
L1Ru & 63.82\% & \textbf{43.72\%} & 9.92 \\
L1En & 38.82\% & \textbf{36.10\%} & 3.67 \\
L1Ru-FNE & 70.09\% & \textbf{56.55\%} & 20.46 \\
L1En-FNE & 54.46\% & \textbf{51.97\%} & 3.80 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\vspace{0.3cm}
\caption{Type I error rates on Corpus III sentences written by L1 Russian and L1 English users, as well as $t$-statistic of performance difference.} \label{tab:l1ru-results}
\end{table}
Table \ref{tab:test-results} illustrates that the performance of the NE masked model (NEMM) is comparable to that of the unmasked model when distinguishing between sentences written by randomly sampled Reddit users and sentences written by suspected influence accounts. The unmasked model does however retain a slight advantage on the trained classification task.
Table \ref{tab:l1ru-results} shows the performance of both models on an evaluation dataset of randomly sampled English-language comments by L1 Russian (L1Ru) and L1 English users (L1En). Both models demonstrate a significant increase in false positives when applied to the L1Ru dataset compared to the L1En dataset. The false positive rate is highest for the unmasked model when classifying comments by L1 Russian speakers that contain a named entity frequently mentioned within the training data (L1Ru-FNE), followed by the false positive rate on arbitrary L1 Russian comments (L1Ru). The increased error caused by the presence of frequent named entities is substantially improved by the NEMM.
The results of each test in this experiment were rigorously validated by repeating 10 runs of 10-fold cross-validation (10x10 fold CV). Each run was performed with a new set of random samples from the corpora. We then perform significance testing by using the corrected repeated k-fold CV test to calculate the t-statistic \cite{Nadeau2003}\cite{10.1007/978-3-540-24775-3_3}. For the accuracy of differentiating random sentences from suspect sentences as displayed in Table \ref{tab:test-results}, we attain a score of $t=4.9394$ (two-tailed $p<0.00001$). Significance testing results for the difference in false positive rates are displayed alongside results in Table \ref{tab:l1ru-results}, computed using a paired-sample t-test. All of the readings fall within a two-tailed significance level of $p < 0.001$.
\section{analysis}
\label{sec:analysis}
The results described in \S \ref{sec:results} indicate that models trained exclusively on content features of existing influence campaigns disproportionately misclassify speakers of that language, as well as users who use specific named entities common to past influence accounts. When both of these conditions coincide, the effect is magnified substantially, giving the highest percentage of false positives in the evaluation set.
Simply put: users with Russian as a first language, particularly those who are discussing the United States, politics, or cryptocurrency, are at increased risk of false positive classification when writing in English.
When the classification model and test data is masked, the model becomes more resistant to the presence of FNEs and topic bias in L1 Russian comments, but a pronounced gap between the performance on L1 English and L1 Russian sentences remains.
\section{Acknowledgements}
Research supported with Cloud TPUs from Google's TensorFlow Research Cloud (TFRC).
\section{Conclusion}
We conclude that the use of content-based features without safeguards creates the potential for discrimination against users of specific language backgrounds, especially when they are engaged in speech that contains common named entities that often reflect political topics. As protection of genuine free expression of political opinions on the Internet is a value of many organizations and governments, online influence detection models designed by social media platforms or government organizations should consider constructing test datasets of L2 English speakers using contextual data clues, such as flair or IP address, for the purpose of identifying potential avenues of discrimination. While some measurable bias towards detection of users who speak the same L1 language as the target distribution is expected, this behaviour should be tracked and mitigated whenever possible.
\subsection{Future Work}
The evaluation of language classification models with regard to ethical considerations is a challenging and worthwhile area of research. Broader analysis that evaluates a greater number of classifiers, and deeper research into mitigations against discrimination in the domain of influence campaign detection, would be a promising direction for future research.
The study of linguistic features that accurately target deceptive or manipulative behaviours may assist in addressing the ethical concerns highlighted in this paper. A related field, the detection of hate speech inciting violence, is another worthwhile area of future development both in improving detection methods and in answering ethical questions around the classification boundary between personal opinion and hate speech.
Due to the observed linguistic similarities between English sentences by self-identified Russian users and sentences from influence accounts, our results may be interpreted in the context of attribution of influence campaigns to their originators. Such an analysis is beyond the scope of this paper. As the existing online influence campaign datasets released by Twitter \cite{twitterei} and Reddit \cite{redditsuspicious}\cite{ALCC01} do not contain any IP information that may be approached using geolocation techniques, it is difficult to independently determine the origin of suspect accounts. A more thorough linguistic analysis similar to that performed by Goldin et al. \cite{DBLP:conf/emnlp/GoldinRW18} may provide more insight into online influence campaigns on this platform. Furthermore, this could allow for detection of future trends, such as recruitment of native language speakers, or the use of generative text models, such as GPT-2 \cite{radford2019language}.
Detection of online influence campaigns is a field that is likely to change rapidly over the coming years as new advances in detection prompt corresponding advances in evasion. Successful classifiers will likely require diverse content-based and metadata features to attain a solution that is both effective and ethical.
\bibliographystyle{ieeebib}
|
\section{}
In this paper by a {\it graph} we will mean a {\it simple graph};
i.e. a usual graph with no multiple edges or loops. Let $\Gamma$ be a
graph on $n$ vertices. We label the vertices of $\Gamma$ and attach to
the $i$-th vertex an independent variable $x_i$. The {\it independence
polynomial}~\cite[Ch.6]{barnikov} of $\Gamma$ is a polynomial in the
variables $x=(x_1,\ldots, x_n)$ defined as follows.
\begin{equation}
\label{defn-indep-pol}
I_\Gamma(x)=\sum_Ix^I,
\end{equation}
where $I\subseteq \{1,\ldots,n\}$ runs over the independent sets of
vertices of $\Gamma$ and
$$
x^I:=\prod_{i\in I} x_i\,.
$$
An {\it independent} set $I\subseteq \{1,\ldots,n\}$ is a subset of
vertices of $\Gamma$ such that no pair of elements of~$I$ are
connected by an edge in $\Gamma$. Note that $I_\Gamma$ has constant
term $1$ for every graph $\Gamma$.
The independence polynomial plays a role in statistical mechanics: it
is the partition function of a lattice gas in the hard-core case; its
vanishing locus is also important because of its connection to the
Lov\'asz local lemma in probability theory (see~\cite{sokal}).
For example, if $\Gamma:=L_n$ is the line graph
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (-1,0) node[anchor=east]{$L_n$};
\draw[fill=black] ( 0, 0) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 1, 0) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 3, 0) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 4, 0) circle (.07);
\draw[thick] (0,0) -- (1,0);
\draw[dashed] (1,0) -- (1.5,0);
\draw[dashed] (2.5,0) -- (3,0);
\draw[thick] (3,0) -- (4,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
then $I_{\Gamma}(x)=\sum_I x^I$, where $I\subseteq \{1,\ldots,n\}$
runs over the subsets containing no consecutive numbers $i,i+1$ for
$i=1,\ldots, n-1$. The first few values of $I_{L_n}$ are
\begin{align*}
I_{L_1}&= 1+x_1\,,\\
I_{L_2}&= 1+x_1+x_2\,,\\
I_{L_3}&= 1+x_1+x_2+x_3+x_1x_3\,,\\
I_{L_4}&= 1+x_1+x_2+x_3+x_4+x_1x_3+x_2x_4+x_1x_4\,.
\end{align*}
These polynomials are in fact, up to re-indexing, the multivariate
Fibonacci polynomials defined by the recursion
\begin{equation}
\label{fibonacci-defn}
F_n=F_{n-1}+x_{n-2}F_{n-2}\,, \qquad n >1,\qquad F_0=0, \quad F_1=1.
\end{equation}
We have $I_{L_n}=F_{n+2}$.
A graph $\Gamma$ is called {\it chordal} if it has no induced subgraph
isomorphic to the cycle graph~$C_n$
with $n\geq 4$~\cite[Ch.4, \S1]{golumbic}.
By {\it induced subgraph} defined by a subset $J$ of vertices
of~$\Gamma$ we mean the subgraph $\Gamma(J)\subseteq \Gamma$
obtained by deleting from~$\Gamma$ the vertices not in $J$
and all their attached edges. The {\it cycle graph} $C_n$ consists
of $n>2$ vertices $1,2,\dots,n$ with an edge joining~$i$ with $i+1$,
where the indices are read modulo~$n$.
For example, the following graph is not chordal
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[fill=black] ( 0, 0) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 2, 0) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 2, 2) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 0, 2) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 1, 1) circle (.07);
\draw[thick] (0,0) -- (2,0);
\draw[thick] (2,0) -- (2,2);
\draw[thick] (2,2) -- (0,2);
\draw[thick] (0,2) -- (0,0);
\draw[thick] (0,0) -- (1,1);
\draw[thick] (2,0) -- (1,1);
\draw[thick] (2,2) -- (1,1);
\draw[thick] (0,2) -- (1,1);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
since removing the central vertex leaves the graph $C_4$
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (-.5,1) node[anchor=east]{$C_4$};
\draw[fill=black] ( 0, 0) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 2, 0) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 2, 2) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 0, 2) circle (.07);
\draw[thick] (0,0) -- (2,0);
\draw[thick] (2,0) -- (2,2);
\draw[thick] (2,2) -- (0,2);
\draw[thick] (0,2) -- (0,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
The following graph on the other hand is chordal
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[fill=black] ( 0, 0) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 2, 0) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 2, 2) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 0, 2) circle (.07);
\draw[thick] (0,0) -- (2,0);
\draw[thick] (2,0) -- (2,2);
\draw[thick] (2,2) -- (0,2);
\draw[thick] (0,2) -- (0,0);
\draw[thick] (0,2) -- (2,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
Finally, a power series
$$
F(x)=\sum_{m\geq 0} c_m x^m, \qquad m=(m_1,\ldots,m_n), \quad
x^m:=x_1^{m_1}\cdots x_n^{m_n}
$$
is called {\it Horn hypergeometric} if $c_m$ is nonzero
for all $m\ge0$ and
$$
\frac{c_{m+e_i}}{c_m}, \qquad
e_i:=(0,\ldots,\stackrel i 1,\ldots,0)
$$
is a rational function of $m_1,\ldots, m_n$ for every $i=1,\ldots, n$.
\begin{remark}
In the definition of Horn hypergeometric the assumption that $c_m$
is nonzero could be relaxed (see~\cite{abramov-petkovsek} for a
general discussion) but it simplifies the arguments and is all we
will need.
\end{remark}
We can now state our main result.
\begin{theorem}
\label{main-thm}
The following are equivalent.
1) The graph $\Gamma$ is chordal.
2) The power series expansion
$$
\frac 1{I_\Gamma(x)}=\sum_{m\geq 0} (-1)^{|m|}c_m x^m, \qquad
|m|:=m_1+\cdots + m_n\,,
$$
is Horn hypergeometric.
3) The power series expansion
$$
I_\Gamma(x)^{-s}=\sum_{m\geq 0} (-1)^{|m|}c_m(s) x^m, \qquad
|m|:=m_1+\cdots + m_n\,,
$$
is Horn hypergeometric for all $s\not\in{\mathbb Z}_{\le0}$.
\end{theorem}
The proof of the main theorem is spread over the next several
sections. In Corollary~\ref{main-thm-1} we prove that 1) $\Rightarrow$ 3).
We then prove that 2) $\Rightarrow$ 1), which takes longer
and is completed in Proposition~\ref{main-thm-2}. This finishes the
proof as the remaining implication 3)$\Rightarrow$ 2) is trivial.
We include in the last section~\S\ref{misc} some miscellaneous
results that arose in the process of proving the main result.
We should mention that by a theorem of
Cartier-Foata~\cite{cartier-foata} the coefficients $c_m$
in Theorem~\ref{main-thm} 2) have a combinatorial interpretation and
are in particular positive integers. Indeed, consider the algebra
$A_\Gamma$
generated over ${\mathbb Q}$ by elements $w_1,\ldots,w_n$ with relations
$$
w_iw_j=w_jw_i,
$$
if and only if $i$ and $j$ are not connected by an edge in
$\Gamma$. Then Cartier-Foata~\cite{cartier-foata} prove that
\begin{equation}
\label{cartier-foata}
\frac 1{\sum_I (-1)^{\#I} w^I}=\sum_J w^J,
\end{equation}
where the sum on the left runs over subsets $I\subseteq \{1,\ldots,n\}$
such that all $w_i$ with $i\in I$ commute with each other, whereas
the sum on the right runs over distinct monomials $w^J$ in the algebra.
Now consider the abelianization map
$$
\begin{array}{cccc}
\Phi:\quad & A_\Gamma &\rightarrow &{\mathbb Q}[x_1,\ldots,x_n]\\
& w_i& \mapsto &x_i\,.
\end{array}
$$
Applied to the left hand side of~\eqref{cartier-foata} we obtain
$I_\Gamma(-x)^{-1}$. Hence we deduce that
$$
c_m=\#\{ J \,|\, \Phi(w^J)=x^m\}\,.
$$
In other words, $c_m$ counts all the rearrangements of the monomial
$w_1^{m_1}\cdots w_n^{m_n}$ that give distinct monomials in $A_\Gamma$.
For example, if $\Gamma=K_n$ is the complete graph on $n$ vertices
then $I_{K_n}(x)=1+x_1+\cdots +x_n$ and
$$
\frac 1 {1-x_1-\cdots-x_n}=\sum_{m\geq 0}
\frac{(m_1+\cdots+m_n)!}{m_1!\cdots m_n!}x^m.
$$
In fact, the right hand side is Horn hypergeometric and this is a
simple instance of the main theorem since $K_n$ is clearly chordal.
\section{}
To any integral matrix $A\in {\mathbb Z}^{n\times n}$ we associate the
following Nahm system of equations
\begin{equation}
\label{nahm-syst}
1-z_i=x_i\prod_{j=1}^nz_j^{a_{i,j}},\qquad i =1,\ldots, n.
\end{equation}
We call it a Nahm system, because it specializes (for $A$
symmetric and positive-definite) to the system considered by Nahm
in his conjecture on the modularity of certain associated
$q$-hypergeometric series when $x_i=1$ (see~\cite[p.~42]{nahm},
\cite[eq.~(25)]{zagier-dilog}). We think of the system as expressing
the $z's$ as algebraic functions of the $x's$ and we are interested in
the corresponding power series expressions for~$z_i$. Note that $z_i=1$
when $x_i=0$, so these power series have constant term equal to $1$.
It follows from the multivariate Lagrange inversion
(see~\cite{frv-A-pol} for details) that for any $s_1,\ldots, s_n$
we have
\begin{equation}
\label{z-power-series}
z_1^{s_1}\cdots z_n^{s_n}= \frac1 D
\sum_{m\geq 0} (-1)^{|m|}\prod_{j=1}^n\binom{s_j+a_j(m)}{m_j} x^m,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\label{D-power-series}
D:=\sum_{m\geq 0} (-1)^{|m|}\prod_{j=1}^n\binom{a_j(m)}{m_j} x^m,
\end{equation}
and
$$
a_j(m)=\sum_{i=1}^na_{i,j}m_j
$$
are the linear forms determined by the columns of~$A$.
Here we interpret the binomial coefficients as polynomials
of the top entry
$$
\binom xm:=\frac{x(x-1)\cdots(x-m+1)}{m!}\,,
$$
for any non-negative integer~$m$. We also have
\begin{equation}
\label{D-det}
D^{-1}=\det\left(I_n +
\diag\left(\frac{1-z_1}{z_1},\ldots,\frac{1-z_n}{z_n}\right)A\right),
\end{equation}
where~$I_n$ is the identity matrix of size~$n$.
If $A$ is upper triangular with $1$'s along the diagonal then we can
recursively solve for the~$z's$ in terms of the~$x's$. In particular,
$z_i$ is a rational function of $x_1,\ldots,x_n$. It also follows
easily from~\eqref{D-det} that in this case
\begin{equation}
\label{D-prod}
D=z_1\cdots z_n\,.
\end{equation}
It appears to be rare for non upper triangular matrices~$A$
(more precisely, for matrices that are not permutation-similar
to an upper triangular matrix) to give rise to rational~$z's$,
but it does happen. A simple but interesting example
(related to the $5$-term relation for the
dilogarithm~\cite{frv-non-orientable}) is the following. Take
$A=\left(\begin{smallmatrix}0&1\\1&0\end{smallmatrix}\right)$
then one easily checks that
$$
D=\frac1{1-x_1x_2}\,,\qquad
z_1=\frac{1-x_1}{1-x_1x_2}\,,\qquad
z_2=\frac{1-x_2}{1-x_1x_2}\,.
$$
We have the following recursion for~$D$.
\begin{proposition}
Let $A$ be upper-triangular with
$1$'s along the diagonal. Let $A^*$ be the $(n-1)\times(n-1)$ matrix
obtained by removing the $n$-th row and column of $A$ and let $D^*$ be
the corresponding value of $D$ as in~\eqref{D-power-series} for
$A^*$. Then
\begin{equation}
\label{D-recursion}
D(x_1,\ldots,x_n)=\frac 1{1+x_n}
D^*\left(\frac{x_1}{(1+x_n)^{a_{1,n}}},
\ldots,\frac{x_{n-1}}{(1+x_n)^{a_{n-1,n}}}\right)\,.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The claim follows from
$$
\sum_{m\geq 0}(-1)^m\binom{a+m}mx^m=\frac1{(1+x)^{a+1}}\,.
$$
We leave the details to the reader.
\end{proof}
The following corollary is immediate.
\begin{corollary}
If $A$ is an upper-triangular matrix with $1$'s along
the diagonal, then $D$ is rational with denominator
of the form
$$
\prod_{j=1}^n(1+x_j)^{k_j}
$$
for certain non-negative integers $k_j$.
\end{corollary}
We associate to a graph $\Gamma$ with $n$ labeled vertices the
following upper-triangular matrix $A=(a_{i,j})$ with $1's$ along
the diagonal.
\begin{equation}
\label{A-defn}
a_{i,j}=
\begin{cases}
1\,, & i=j\,,\\
1\,, & i\sim j\,, \quad i<j\\
0\,,& {\text otherwise}\,,
\end{cases},
\end{equation}
where $i\sim j$ means that the two vertices~$i$ and~$j$ are connected
by an edge in~$\Gamma$. In other words,~$A$ is basically the top half
of the adjacency matrix of~$\Gamma$.
\section{}
\label{perf-elim-ord}
A (reverse) {\it perfect elimination ordering} of the
vertices of~$\Gamma$ is a labeling of the vertices such
that for each $1\leq k\leq n$ the
subgraph $\Gamma_k\subseteq \Gamma$ induced by the set
of vertices with labels $1\leq i<k$ connected to the $k$-th
vertex is a complete graph~\cite[Ch.4, \S2]{golumbic},~\cite{fulkerson-gross}.
For example, the following is a perfect elimination ordering of the
graph $\Gamma$.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (0,0) node[anchor=east]{$1$};
\draw (2,0) node[anchor=west]{$2$};
\draw (0,2) node[anchor=east]{$3$};
\draw (2,2) node[anchor=west]{$4$};
\draw[fill=black] ( 0, 0) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 2, 0) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 0, 2) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 2, 2) circle (.07);
\draw[thick] (0,0) -- (2,0);
\draw[thick] (2,0) -- (2,2);
\draw[thick] (0,0) -- (0,2);
\draw[thick] (0,2) -- (2,2);
\draw[thick] (2,0) -- (0,2);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{$\Gamma$}
\end{figure}
These are the corresponding subgraphs $\Gamma_k$.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (2,1.5) node[anchor=east]{$\Gamma_4$};
\draw (2,0) node[anchor=west]{$2$};
\draw (0,2) node[anchor=east]{$3$};
\draw[fill=black] ( 2, 0) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 0, 2) circle (.07);
\draw[thick] (2,0) -- (0,2);
\end{tikzpicture}
\quad
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (1,1) node[anchor=north]{$\Gamma_3$};
\draw (0,0) node[anchor=east]{$1$};
\draw (2,0) node[anchor=west]{$2$};
\draw[fill=black] ( 0, 0) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 2, 0) circle (.07);
\draw[thick] (0,0) -- (2,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
\quad
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (0,1) node[anchor=north]{$\Gamma_2$};
\draw (0,0) node[anchor=east]{$1$};
\draw[fill=black] ( 0, 0) circle (.07);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{figure}
\begin{proposition}
Let $\Gamma$ be a graph with a given perfect elimination ordering
of its vertices. Let $A$ be the corresponding upper triangular
matrix defined above. Then
\begin{equation}
\label{D-indep}
D(x_1,\ldots,x_n)=\frac 1{I_\Gamma(x_1,\ldots,x_n)}\,,
\end{equation}
where $I_\Gamma$ is the independence polynomial of~$\Gamma$
and~$D$ is defined in~\eqref{D-power-series}.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We prove the claim by induction in $n$ with the
recursion~\eqref{D-recursion} as the key step, the case of
one vertex being trivial. We identify the vertices of~$\Gamma$
with $\{1,\ldots,n\}$ using the given perfect elimination
ordering. Let~$\Gamma^*$ be the graph obtained from~$\Gamma$
by deleting the vertex~$n$ and all of its attached edges.
Let $I^*\subseteq \{1,\ldots,n-1\}$
be an independent set of $\Gamma^*$.
It can contain at most one vertex connected to $n$
in $\Gamma$ since by definition of perfect elimination
ordering any two such vertices are connected by an edge.
We conclude that an independent set~$I$ of~$\Gamma$
properly contains~$I^*$ if and only if no vertex in $I^*$
is connected to~$n$, in which case $I=I^*\cup\{n\}$.
In terms of the independence polynomial this can be
formulated as follows. Let
$$
y_i:=\begin{cases}
x_i/(1+x_n)\,,& i\sim n\,,\\
x_i\,, &{\text otherwise}\,.
\end{cases}
$$
Then
$$
I_{\Gamma}(x_1,\ldots,x_n)=(1+x_n)I_{\Gamma^*}(y_1,\ldots,y_{n-1})\,.
$$
This is precisely the recursion satisfied by $\frac{1}{D}$ in terms
of $\frac{1}{D^*}$ by~\eqref{D-recursion} and the claim follows.
\end{proof}
To prove that 1) implies 3) in Theorem~\ref{main-thm} we need the
following (compare with~\cite{RRV}[\S12.4]).
\begin{corollary}
\label{main-corollary}
With the hypothesis of the proposition we have for all $s$
\begin{equation} \label{eq:main-corollary}
I_\Gamma(x_1,\ldots,x_n)^{-s}=
\sum_{m\geq 0} (-1)^{|m|}\prod_{j=1}^n\binom{s-1+a_j(m)}{m_j}\, x^m\,.
\end{equation}
In particular, if $s$ is not an integer $\le 0$, then
$I_\Gamma(x_1,\ldots,x_n)^{-s}$ is Horn hypergeometric.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
The first claim follows from the above proposition by
using~\eqref{z-power-series} and~\eqref{D-prod}.
Since $a_j(m)$ is an integer and $a_j(m)\ge m_j$,
the binomial coefficient in~\eqref{eq:main-corollary} can vanish
only if~$s$ is a non-positive integer.
\end{proof}
As an example of~\eqref{D-indep} we have the following expansion. For
any positive integer $n$
$$
\frac 1{F_{n+2}(x_1,\ldots,x_n)}=
\sum_{m\geq 0} (-1)^{|m|}
\prod_{j=2}^{n}\binom{m_j+m_{j-1}}{m_j}\,x^m\,,
$$
where $F_n$ is the Fibonacci polynomial~\eqref{fibonacci-defn}.
It is clear that the labeling
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (0,0) node[anchor=south]{$1$};
\draw (1,0) node[anchor=south]{$2$};
\draw (3,0) node[anchor=south]{$n-1$};
\draw (4,0) node[anchor=south]{$n$};
\draw[fill=black] ( 0, 0) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 1, 0) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 3, 0) circle (.07);
\draw[fill=black] ( 4, 0) circle (.07);
\draw[thick] (0,0) -- (1,0);
\draw[dashed] (1,0) -- (1.5,0);
\draw[dashed] (2.5,0) -- (3,0);
\draw[thick] (3,0) -- (4,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
of the vertices of $L_n$ is a perfect elimination ordering.
Note that Corollary~\ref{main-corollary} implies, in particular,
that if a graph $\Gamma$ has a perfect elimination ordering then
its independence polynomial $I_\Gamma$ satisfies that the expansion
of $I_\Gamma^{-s}$ in power series is Horn hypergeometric
for all $s\not\in{\mathbb Z}_{\le 0}$. Not every
graph has a perfect elimination ordering. It is a
remarkable fact~\cite[Thm.~4.1]{golumbic} that a graph has a
perfect elimination ordering if and only if it is chordal.
We conclude the following.
\begin{corollary}
\label{main-thm-1}
Let $\Gamma$ be a chordal graph. Then its independence
polynomial $I_\Gamma$ satisfies that the expansion of
$I_\Gamma^{-s}$ in a power series is Horn hypergeometric
for all $s\not\in{\mathbb Z}_{\le 0}$.
\end{corollary}
This is one direction in our main theorem. To prove the reverse
direction will take a bit more work.
The first observation is that if $\Gamma(J)\subseteq \Gamma$ is the
subgraph induced by a subset $J$ of its vertices then
$I_{\Gamma(J)}$ is obtained from $I_\Gamma$ by setting $x_j=0$ for
every $j$ not in $J$. It follows that the independence polynomial
$I_\Gamma$ of a non-chordal graph~$\Gamma$ specializes to the
independence polynomial $I_n$ of the cycle graph $C_n$ for some $n \geq
4$ by setting appropriate variables equal to zero.
The second observation is that for a power series the property of
being Horn hypergeometric is preserved by the specialization to zero
of any number of its variables. Hence, to finish the proof of the main
theorem it is enough to show that $I_n$ is not Horn
hypergeometric for any $n\geq 4$.
Notice that $I_3^{-1}(x)$ {\it is} Horn hypergeometric.
Indeed, we have
$$
I_3(x_1,x_2,x_3)=1+x_1+x_2+x_3,\quad \quad
\frac 1 {I_3(x_1,x_2,x_3)}=\sum_{m_1,m_2,m_3\geq 0}
(-1)^{|m|}\frac{(m_1+m_2+m_3)!}{m_1!m_2!m_3!}
x_1^{m_1}x_2^{m_2}x_3^{m_3}.
$$
In fact, we have a case of the {\it strong law of small numbers}: the
cycle graph $C_n$ and the complete graph $K_n$ coincide for $n=3$ but
not for any $n\geq 4$.
\section{}
\bigskip
Recall that $I_n(x_1,\ldots,x_n)$ denotes the independence
polynomial of the cycle graph $C_n$ for $n\geq 3$.
It will be convenient to extend the definition and include
$$
I_1(x_1):=1+x_1\,,\qquad I_2(x_1,x_2):=1+x_1+x_2\,.
$$
We would like to describe the coefficients in the power series
expansion of $I_n(x)^{-1}$. We will make use of the Nahm
system~\eqref{nahm-syst} associated to the following matrix
$$
A:=\left(
\begin{array}{cccccc}
1&0&0&\cdots&0&1\\
1&1&0&\cdots&0&0\\
0&1&1&\cdots&0&0\\
\vdots&\vdots&\vdots&\ddots&\vdots&\vdots\\
0&0&0&\cdots&1&0\\
0&0&0&\cdots&1&1
\end{array}
\right)\,,
\qquad a_{i,j}:=\begin{cases}
1\,,& j = i \quad {\text or} \quad
j\equiv i-1\bmod n\,,\\
0\,,& {\text otherwise}\,.
\end{cases}
$$
Namely, consider the system
\begin{equation}
\label{cyclic-syst}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ccc}
1-z_1&=& x_1z_1z_n\,,\\
1-z_2&=&x_2z_2z_1\,,\\
\vdots&\vdots&\vdots\\
1-z_n&=& x_{n-1}z_nz_{n-1}\,.
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
Then
$$
D=
\sum_{m\geq 0}
(-1)^{|m|}\binom{m_1+m_2}{m_1}\binom{m_2+m_3}{m_2}\cdots
\binom{m_{n}+m_{1}}{m_n}\,x^m\,.
$$
\begin{proposition}
\label{cyclic-syst-fmlae}
Let
$$
u:=z_1\cdots z_n,\qquad \qquad v:=(-1)^nx_1\cdots x_n
$$
and
\begin{equation}
\label{M-defn}
M:=
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1&-1\\-x_1&0
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1&-1\\-x_2&0
\end{array}
\right)
\cdots
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1&-1\\-x_n&0
\end{array}
\right)\,.
\end{equation}
Then the following statements hold.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)]
$$
\tr(M)=I_n(x_1,\ldots,x_n), \qquad \det(M)=v.
$$
\item[(ii)]
$$
M\left(\begin{array}{c}z_n\\1\end{array}\right)=uv
\left(\begin{array}{c}z_n\\1\end{array}\right).
$$
\item[(iii)]
The polynomial $X^2-I_n(x_1,\ldots,x_n)X+v$ has
roots $u^{-1}$ and~$uv$.
\item[(iv)]
$$
I_n(x_1,\dots,x_n)=u^{-1}+uv\,
$$
\item[(v)]
$$
D^{-1}=u^{-1}-uv\,
$$
\item[(vi)]
$$
D^{-2}=I_n(x_1,\ldots,x_n)^2-(-1)^n4x_1\cdots x_n\,.
$$
\item[(vii)]
$$
\frac1{\sqrt{I_n(x_1,\ldots,x_n)^2-(-1)^n4x_1\cdots x_n}}=
\sum_{m\geq 0}
(-1)^{|m|}\binom{m_1+m_2}{m_1}\binom{m_2+m_3}{m_2}\cdots
\binom{m_{n}+m_1}{m_n} x^m.
$$
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
(i) The second identity is immediate.
For the first identity we expand the trace as
$$
\tr(M)=\sum_{i_1,\dots,i_n\in\{1,2\}}
a_{i_1i_2}^{(1)}\dots a_{i_ni_1}^{(n)}
\,,
$$
where $a_{ij}^{(k)}$ are the entries of the $k$-th
matrix in the product defining~$M$, and note that if we
encode $(i_1,\dots,i_n)$ by $I=\{j\in\{1,\dots,n\}\colon i_j=2\}$,
then the $I$-th term vanishes if $I$ contains two indices
consecutive modulo $n$ (since $a_{22}^{(k)}=0$) and is equal
to $\prod_{i\in I}x_i$ otherwise.
(ii) Note that from the Nahm system~\eqref{cyclic-syst}
we have
$$
\left\{
\begin{array}{ccl}
z_{n-1}&=&(1-z_n)/x_nz_n\\
z_{n-2}&=& (1-z_{n-1})/x_{n-1}z_{n-1}\\
\vdots&\vdots&\quad\vdots\\
z_1&=& (1-z_2)/x_2z_2\\
z_n&=& (1-z_1)/x_1z_1\\
\end{array}
\right.
$$
This is equivalent to the claim.
(iii) It follows from (ii) that $uv$ is an eigenvalue of $M$.
From the determinant value in (i) the other eigenvalue
is $u^{-1}$. The quadratic polynomial is the characteristic
polynomial of $M$ by (i).
(iv) Follows immediately from (iii).
(v) By~\eqref{D-det} using the system equations $D^{-1}$
is the determinant of the $n\times n$ matrix $W=(w_{i,j})$
with $w_{i,j}=z_i^{-1}$ for $j=i$ and $x_iz_i$ for $j\equiv i-1\bmod n$.
Consequently,
$$
D^{-1}=\prod_{i=1}^nz_i^{-1}-(-1)^n\prod_{i=1}^nx_iz_i,
$$
which is what we wanted to prove.
(vi) From (iii) and (v) we see that $D^{-2}$ is the discriminant of the
quadratic polynomial in (iii) and the claim follows.
(vii) This is just a restatement of (vi).
\end{proof}
The expansion (vii) was proved earlier by
Carlitz~\cite{carlitz},~\cite[\S4.4]{riordan}.
\section{}
\label{diagonal}
As mentioned, we are interested in the coefficients of the power series
expansion of $I_n(x_1,\ldots,x_n)^{-1}$. To obtain these we will
extend the results of the previous section. Let
$$
c_{m,j}:=\binom{m_1+m_2}{m_1+j}\binom{m_2+m_3}{m_2+j}\cdots
\binom{m_{n}+m_{1}}{m_n+j}\,, \qquad |j|\leq \min(m)\,.
$$
Note that
$$
c_{m,j}=\frac{(m_1+m_2)!\cdots (m_{n-1}+m_n)!(m_n+m_1)!}
{(m_1+j)!(m_1-j)!\cdots (m_n+j)!(m_n-j)!}.
$$
In particular, $c_{m,-j}=c_{m,j}$. Let
\begin{equation}
\label{R-power-series}
R(z;x_1,\ldots,x_n):=\sum_{m\geq 0}\sum_{|j|\leq
\min(m)} (-1)^{|m|}c_{m,j} z^jx^m
\end{equation}
be the generating series of these coefficients.
Note that the coefficient of $z^0$ of $R(z;x_1,\ldots,x_n)$
is equal to~$D$.
Fix some non-negative integer $j$. The coefficient of $z^j$ in~$R$
can be expressed in the form
$$
v^j\sum_{m\geq 0}(-1)^{|m|} \binom{m_1+m_2+2j}{m_1}\binom{m_2+m_3+2j}{m_2}\cdots
\binom{m_{n}+m_{1}+2j}{m_n} x^m
$$
after replacing $m_i$ by $m_i-j$, where recall that $v=(-1)^nx_1\cdots
x_n$. By Lagrange inversion~\eqref{z-power-series} we find that this in turn
equals $Dv^j(z_1\cdots z_n)^{2j}.$
To simplify the notation let $w:=v(z_1\cdots z_n)^2$. From the
coefficients of $R$ in powers of $z$ we can reconstruct the series;
summing the geometric series we find that
$$
R=D\left(1+\frac{wz}{1-wz}+\frac{wz^{-1}}{1-wz^{-1}}\right).
$$
Alternatively,
\begin{equation}
\label{R-fmla1}
R^{-1}=\frac1D
\left(\frac{1+w}{1-w}-\left(z^{\tfrac12}+z^{-\tfrac12}\right)^2\frac
w{1-w^2}\right)=\frac1D \frac{(w-z)(w-z^{-1})}{1-w^2}\,.
\end{equation}
\begin{proposition}
The power series $R(z;x_1,\ldots,x_n)$ is the Taylor expansion of a
rational function. More precisely,
\begin{equation}
\label{R-fmla}
R(z;x_1,\ldots,x_n)=\frac{I_n(x_1,\ldots,x_n)}{I_n(x_1,\ldots,x_n)^2
-(-1)^n\left(z^{\tfrac12}+z^{-\tfrac12}\right)^2
x_1\cdots x_n}.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Using~\eqref{R-fmla1} it is enough to show that
$$
I_n(x_1,\ldots,x_n)=\frac1D\left(\frac{1+w}{1-w}\right)=Dv
\left(\frac{1-w^2}w\right)
$$
and this follows easily from
Proposition~\ref{cyclic-syst-fmlae} noting that $w=vu^2$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
\label{I_n-power-series}
The following power series expansion holds
\begin{equation}
I_n(x_1,\ldots,x_n)^{-1}=\sum_{m\geq 0}(-1)^{|m|} \sum_{|j|\leq
\min(m)}(-1)^j \binom{m_1+m_2}{m_1+j}\binom{m_2+m_3}{m_2+j}\cdots
\binom{m_{n}+m_1}{m_n+j}x^m.
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
It follows from the proposition by taking $z=-1$.
\end{proof}
We are now ready to finish the proof of our main result.
\begin{proposition}
\label{main-thm-2}
For $n\geq 4$ the power series expansion of $I_n(x)^{-1}$ is not Horn
hypergeometric.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $c_m$ be the coefficients in the expansion of $I_n(x)^{-1}$
$$
I_n(x)^{-1}=\sum_{m\geq 0}(-1)^{|m|} c_m x^m.
$$
To prove the claim it is enough to show that if the one variable series
(the main diagonal)
$$
H_n(x):=\sum_{k\geq 0}c_kx^k, \qquad \qquad c_k:=c_{(k,\ldots,k)}
$$
is Horn hypergeometric then $n\leq 3$.
The case $n=1$ being trivial we may assume $n>1$. By
Corollary~\ref{I_n-power-series} we have
$$
c_k=\sum_{|j|\leq k} (-1)^j\binom{2k}{k+j}^n, \qquad n >1.
$$
These numbers are known as de Bruijn numbers in the literature and are
denoted by $S(n,k)$. De Bruijn in his book~\cite{de-bruijn} computed
the asymptotic behaviour of $S(n,k)$ for fixed $n$ and large~$k$. It
follows from his computation that
$$
c_{k+1}/c_k\rightarrow \kappa_n, \qquad k \rightarrow\infty,
$$
where
$$
\kappa_n:=(2\cos(\pi/2n))^{2n}\,.
$$
We now apply de Bruijn's argument: if $H_k(x)$ is Horn
hypergeometric then $\kappa_n$ has to be rational, and
hence $n\le 3$. (Here is a short proof of this:
$2\cos(\pi/2n)$ is an algebraic integer, it generates a real
cyclotomic extension of~${\mathbb Q}$ of degree~$\varphi(4n)/2$, and all of
its $\varphi(4n)/2$ conjugates are real numbers in $(-2,2)$.
Therefore, if $\kappa_n$ is rational, then there can be at most
two conjugates, since their absolute values have to be equal,
and hence $\varphi(4n)\le 4$, thus $n\le 3$.)
\end{proof}
\section{}
\label{misc}
In this section we sketch very briefly several miscellaneous results
stemming from the previous discussion; these will be expanded on in a
later publication.
\medskip
1) We can expand the right hand side of~\eqref{R-fmla} in the variable
$t:=\frac12\left(z^{\tfrac12}+z^{-\tfrac12}\right)$ and compare
coefficients to the left hand side to obtain some interesting
identities. We will make this explicit for $n=3$ where the identity
generalizes that of Dixon (corresponding to the appropriate
formulation for $k=0$).
\begin{proposition}
\label{dixon-gen}
For $k>0$ and $m=(m_1,m_2,m_3)$ a triple of non-negative integers we
have
\begin{equation*}
\frac 1{k!}\sum_{j=0}^{\min(m)}(-1)^j \frac{(2j+k)(j+k-1)!}{j!}
\binom{m_1+m_2+k}{m_2+k+j}\binom{m_2+m_3+k}{m_3+k+j}\binom{m_3+m_1+k}{m_1+k+j}
=\frac{(k+m_1+m_2+m_3)!}{k!m_1!m_2!m_3!}\,.
\end{equation*}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We give a sketch of the proof and leave the details to the
reader. With the definition of~$t$
$$
T_{2j}(t)=\tfrac12\left(z^j+z^{-j}\right),
$$
where $T_{2j}(t)$ is the $(2j)$-th Chebyshev polynomial. We have
$$
T_{2j}(t)=j\sum_{l=0}^j(-1)^{l+j}\frac{(j+l-1)!}{(j-l)!(2l)!}(2t)^{2l}\,,
\qquad j>0\,.
$$
Expanding the right hand side of~\eqref{R-fmla} in the
variable~$t$ we find in general for any $l>0$
$$
\frac{v^l}{I_n(x)^{2l+1}}\\
=\frac1{2(2l)!}\sum_{m\geq 0}(-1)^{|m|}
\sum_{j=l}^{\min(m)}(-1)^{l+j}\frac{(j+l-1)!}{(j-l)!}
\binom{m_1+m_2}{m_1+j}\binom{m_2+m_3}{m_2+j}\cdots
\binom{m_{n}+m_1}{m_n+j}\,x^m.
$$
Specializing to $n=3$, expanding both sides in and comparing
coefficients yields the claim for~$k$ even.
A similar argument works for~$k$ odd.
Alternatively, since both sides of the identity are polynomial
functions in~$k$, we obtain the case of odd $k$ by interpolation.
\end{proof}
It is curious that the visible $4$-fold symmetry on the right hand
side is far from clear on the left hand side.
\bigskip
2) The Horn-Kapranov parametrization determined by the Horn hypergeometric
series in~\eqref{R-power-series} is the following
\begin{equation}
\label{horn-param}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
\phi_0&= \frac{(\lambda_1+\lambda_0)\cdots(\lambda_n+\lambda_0)}
{(\lambda_1-\lambda_0)\cdots(\lambda_n-\lambda_0)}\\
\phi_1&= -\frac{(\lambda_1-\lambda_0)(\lambda_1+\lambda_0)}
{(\lambda_1+\lambda_2)(\lambda_1+\lambda_n)}\\
\vdots&\qquad\vdots\\
\phi_n&= -\frac{(\lambda_n-\lambda_0)(\lambda_n+\lambda_0)}
{(\lambda_n+\lambda_1)(\lambda_n+\lambda_{n-1})}
\end{aligned}
\right.
\end{equation}
Since the singularities of the series occur at the points of vanishing
of the denominator of~$R$
\begin{equation}
\label{Delta-defn}
\Delta(z;x_1,\ldots,x_n):= I_n(x_1,\ldots,x_n)^2
-(-1)^n\left(z^{\tfrac12}+z^{-\tfrac12}\right)^2 x_1\cdots x_n
\end{equation}
we have $\Delta(\phi_0;\phi_1,\ldots,\phi_n)=0$. It follows that
$$
I_n(\phi_1,\ldots,\phi_n)=
\frac{\prod_{i=1}^n(\lambda_i+\lambda_0) +
\prod_{i=1}^n(\lambda_i-\lambda_0)}
{\prod_{i=1}^n(\lambda_i+\lambda_{i+1})}\,,
$$
where the indices are read modulo $n$. This identity
follows from part~(iv) of Proposition~\ref{cyclic-syst-fmlae},
since for $x_i=\phi_i$ we can solve the Nahm system explicitly by
taking~$z_i=\frac{\lambda_i+\lambda_{i+1}}{\lambda_{i+1}+\lambda_{0}}$.
If we set $\lambda_0=0$ and $u_i:=\lambda_{i+1}/\lambda_i$ then
\begin{equation}
\label{u-param}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
\phi_0&= 1\\
\phi_1&= -1/(1+u_1)(1+u_n^{-1})\\
\vdots&\qquad\vdots\\
\phi_n&= -1/(1+u_n)(1+u_{n-1}^{-1})\\
\end{aligned}
\right.
\end{equation}
If we relax the condition that $u_1\cdots u_n=1$ that is a
consequence of their definition and treat them as independent variables
then plugging in the rational map~\eqref{u-param} we obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{cyclic-u-fmla}
I_n\left(-\frac1{(1+u_1)(1+u_n^{-1})},\ldots,
-\frac1{(1+u_n)(1+u_{n-1}^{-1})}\right)
= \frac{1+u_1\ldots u_n}
{\prod_{i=1}^n(1+u_i)}\,.
\end{equation}
Again, this identity follows from part~(iv)
of Proposition~\ref{cyclic-syst-fmlae} by taking~$z_i=1+u_i^{-1}$.
Writing this identity explicitly for $n=2$ and $n=3$ we find
$$
1-\frac1{(1+u_1)(1+u_2^{-1})}-\frac1{(1+u_2)(1+u_1^{-1})}=\frac{1+u_1u_2}
{(1+u_1)(1+u_2)}
$$
and
$$
1-\frac1{(1+u_1)(1+u_3^{-1})}-\frac1{(1+u_2)(1+u_1^{-1})} -
\frac1{(1+u_3)(1+u_2^{-1})} =\frac{1+u_1u_2u_3}
{(1+u_1)(1+u_2)(1+u_3)}\,.
$$
The naive analogue of this identity does not hold for more than three
variables as the left hand side no longer is the specialization of~$I_n$.
\bigskip
3) The varieties defined by the vanishing of
$\Delta(z;x_1,\ldots,x_n)$ seem to be quite interesting. Here we
discuss a few cases in the special case of $z=1$ for small $n$, where
the varieties are classical. Let
$$
\Delta(x_1,\ldots,x_n):=\Delta(1;x_1,\ldots,x_n)=
I_n(x_1,\ldots,x_n)^2-(-1)^n4 x_1\cdots x_n\,.
$$
It is a polynomial of degree $n$. Let $\Delta_n(x_0,x_1,\ldots,x_n)$ be
the homogenization of $\Delta$ and $X_n\subseteq\P^n$ its zero
locus.
For $n=2$ we have
$$
\Delta_2(x_0,x_1,x_2)=x_0^2+x_1^2+x_2^2 + 2x_0x_1 +2x_0x_2 -2x_1x_2
$$
and $X_2\subseteq \P^2$ is a smooth conic.
For $n=3$ we have
$$
\Delta_3(x_0,x_1,x_2,x_3)=x_0(x_0+x_1+x_2+x_3)^2+4x_1x_2x_3\,.
$$
We find that $X_3\subseteq \P^3$ is a cubic surface with the
four double points
$$
(-1 : 1 : 1 : 1),\quad (-1 : 0 : 0 : 1),\quad (-1 : 0 : 1 : 0),\quad
(-1 : 1 : 0 : 0).
$$
It follows that $X_3$ is projectively isomorphic to the Cayley
surface~\cite[p.~500]{dolgachev},~\cite[p.~75]{hunt}.
For $n=4$ we find that $X_4\subseteq \P^4$ is a quartic threefold
non-singular except for $15$ lines. These lines meet in appropriate
groups of three lines at $15$ points. The resulting configuration is
known as the Cremona-Richmond configuration~\cite[\S 9]{coxeter}. The
variety $X_4$ is isomorphic to the Castelnuovo-Richmond
quartic~\cite[p.~532]{dolgachev} (also known as the Igusa
quartic~\cite[\S 3.3]{hunt}).
\bigskip
4) Let us analyze the Nahm system~\eqref{cyclic-syst}
a bit more closely. We have the following.
\begin{proposition}
\label{quadr-ext}
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)]
Let $n>1$. The Nahm system~\eqref{cyclic-syst} has the following
solution in~$K:=F\left(\sqrt{\Delta}\right)$, where
$F:={\mathbb Q}(x_1,\ldots,x_n)$ and
$$
\Delta(x_1,\ldots,x_n):= I_n(x_1,\ldots,x_n)^2-(-1)^n4 x_1\cdots x_n.
$$
For $i=1,\ldots,n$
\begin{equation}
\label{z-fmla}
z_i=\frac{-b_i+\sqrt{\Delta}}{2a_i},\qquad
a_i:=x_{i}F_n(x_{i+2},x_{i+3},\ldots,x_{i-1}), \quad
b_i:=I_n(x_1,\ldots,-x_{i},\ldots,x_n),
\end{equation}
where $F_n$ is the Fibonacci polynomial~\eqref{fibonacci-defn} in
$n-2$ variables.
\item[(ii)]
For $i=1,\ldots, n$ let $c_i:=-F_n(x_{i},x_{i+1},\ldots,x_{i-3})$ then
$$
\Delta=b_i^2-4a_ic_i.
$$
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
We see that $z_1,\ldots,z_n$ are rational functions on the double
cover~$Z_n$ of $\P^n$ ramified at~$X_n$. These double covers
are also classical varieties: $Z_3$ is Segre's
primal~\cite[p. 530]{dolgachev},~\cite[\S 3.2]{hunt} and $Z_4$
is Coble's variety~\cite[\S 3.5]{hunt}.
\bigskip
5) There is a connection between the varieties $X_n$
of 4) and wild character varieties~\cite[\S 5]{boalch}. Consider the
following matrix in invertible variables $y_1,\ldots,y_n$
\begin{equation}
\label{Y-defn}
Y:=
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
y_1^{-1}&1\\1&0
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
y_2^{-1}&1\\1&0
\end{array}
\right)
\cdots
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
y_n^{-1}&1\\1&0
\end{array}
\right)\,.
\end{equation}
If we insert in between each pair of factors the diagonal matrices
$$
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
-y_i&0\\0&1
\end{array}
\right)
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1&0\\0&-y_i
\end{array}
\right),
\qquad i=1,\ldots,n
$$
using that
$$
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1&0\\0&-x
\end{array}
\right)
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
y^{-1}&1\\1&0
\end{array}
\right)
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
-y&0\\0&1
\end{array}
\right)=
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
-1&1\\xy&0
\end{array}
\right)
$$
we obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{Y-M}
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1&0\\0&-y_n
\end{array}
\right)
Y
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1&0\\0&-y_n
\end{array}
\right)^{-1}=
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
y^{-1}&0\\0&y^{-1}
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
-1&1\\y_1y_n&0
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
-1&1\\y_2y_1&0
\end{array}
\right)
\cdots
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
-1&1\\y_ny_{n-1}&0
\end{array}
\right)\,,
\end{equation}
where $y:=(-1)^ny_1\cdots y_n$.
Assume now that $n=2k$ is even. We may insert
$P=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
0&1\\1&0\end{array}\right)$
appropriately in the definition of $Y$~\eqref{Y-defn} and find that
\begin{equation}
\label{Y-wild}
Y:=
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1&y_1^{-1}\\0&1
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1&0\\y_2^{-1}&1
\end{array}
\right)
\cdots
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1&y_{n-1}^{-1}\\0&1
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1&0\\y_n^{-1}&1
\end{array}
\right)\,.
\end{equation}
It follows by~\eqref{Y-M} that the matrices $Y$
and $M$
of~\eqref{M-defn} are related and hence by~\eqref{Y-wild} $M$
is related to the equations involved in the definition of certain wild
character varieties (loc.cit.). The difference is that we impose the
condition that the characteristic polynomial of $M$
has a double root instead of prescribing its entries. This should
correspond to taking the Zariski closure of the $2\times 2$
Jordan block instead of a torus element as the target of the moment
map.
|
\section{Introduction}
In this article, we are interested in the question of existence of weak solutions to the following singular weighted $p$-Laplace equation
\begin{equation*}
(P_\la)\left\{
\begin{split}
-\Delta_{p,w} u &= g_{\la}(u),\;u>0\; \text{in}\; \Om,\\
u&=0 \; \text{on}\; \partial \Om,
\end{split}\right.
\end{equation*}
where $ \Om \subset \mb R^n$ is a smooth bounded domain, $n\geq 3$, $\la>0$ and $p>1$.
We consider the nonlinearity $g_{\la}$ of the following two types:\begin{enumerate}
\item[Case (I)] $g_{\la}(u) = \la f(u)u^{-q}$ where $q\in (0,1)$ and $f:[0,\infty)\to \mb R$ satisfies
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(f1)] $f(0)>0$ such that $f$ is non decreasing and satisfies the following hypothesis:
$$
\lim_{t\to\infty}\frac{f(t)}{t^{q+p-1}}=0\text{ and } \lim_{t\to 0}\frac{f(t)}{t^q}=\infty.
$$
\end{enumerate}
\item[Case (II)] $g_{\la}(u)= \la u^{-q}+ u^{r}$ where $q\in (0,1)$, $r\in(p-1,p^*_s-1)$. Here $p^*_s= \frac{np_s}{n-p_s}$ for $1\leq p_s <n$ where $p_s=\frac{ps}{s+1}$ and $s\in [\frac{1}{p-1},\infty) \cap (\frac{n}{p},\infty)$.
\end{enumerate}
We observe that in both the cases, Case (I) and Case (II), $g_\la$ is singular in the sense that
$$
\lim_{t\to 0^{+}}\,g_{\la}(t)=+\infty.
$$
Here
$$
\Delta_{p,w}u :=\text{div}(w(x)|\nabla u|^{p-2}\nabla u)
$$
is the weighted $p$-Laplace operator for some weight function $w$. When $w\equiv 1$, $\Delta_{p,w}=\Delta_{p}u$ (which is the usual $p$-Laplace operator) which further reduces to the classical Laplace operator '$\Delta$' for $p=2$.
In this article, we discuss the existence of weak solutions to the problem $(P_\la)$ depending on the range of $\la$. The study of singular elliptic problems has been a topic of considerable attention throughout the last three decade and there is a colossal amount of work done in this direction. Now, we state some known results in this direction which are essential to understand the difficulties and the framework of our problem. The following quasilinear singular problem has been investigated in quite a large number of papers:
\begin{equation}\label{plap}
\left\{
\begin{split}
-\Delta_{p} u &= \la\frac{h(x,u)}{u^q}+\mu u^{r},\;u>0\; \text{in}\; \Om,\\
u&=0 \; \text{on}\; \partial \Om.
\end{split}\right.
\end{equation}
When $p=2$, $\la>0$ and $\mu=0$ (that is the purely singular case) Crandall, Rabinowitz and Tartar \cite{CRT} proved the existence of a unique classical solution $u_\la\in C^2(\Om)\cap C(\overline{\Om})$ of the problem \eqref{plap} for any $q>0$ and $h(x,u)=h(x)$ being nonnegative and bounded in $\Om$. For the same problem, existence of a weak solution in $H_0^1(\Om)$ was proved by Lazer-Mckenna \cite{LMckena} when $0<q<3$. Boccardo-Orsina \cite{BL} investigated the following purely singular problem in case of arbitrary $q>0$ with a weight function
\begin{equation}\label{2lap}
\left\{
\begin{split}
-\text{div}(w(x)\nabla u) &= \frac{h(x)}{u^q},\;u>0\; \text{in}\; \Om,\\
u&=0 \; \text{on}\; \partial \Om,
\end{split}\right.
\end{equation}
where $w(x)$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{wgtcondition}
w(x)\eta\cdot\eta\geq \alpha|\eta|^2,\,|w(x)|\leq\beta
\end{equation}
for some positive constants $\alpha,\beta$ and $\eta\in \mb R^n$. They proved existence of a weak solution $u\in H_{0}^1(\Om)$ for $0<q\leq 1$ and $u\in H^{1}_{loc}(\Om)$ for $q>1$ such that $u^\frac{q+1}{2}\in H_{0}^1(\Om)$. Recently, Canino-Sciunzi-Trombetta \cite{Canino1} generalized the problem \eqref{2lap} for the $p$-Laplace operator and obtained both the existence and uniqueness of weak solutions. This problem in the weighted case has been studied in \cite{PG}. When $h(x,u)=h(u)\geq 0$ and $\mu =0$, \eqref{plap} was investigated by Ko-Lee-Shivaji in \cite{KLS} for any $p>1$ and $0<q<1$ in a certain range of $\la$.
Concerning the perturbed case i.e. $\mu>0$, Haitao \cite{haitoh} proved the existence of at least two solutions for \eqref{plap} using Perron's method and assuming $p=2,0<q<1<r\leq\frac{n+2}{n-2}$, $h \equiv 1$ and $\mu=1$ for certain range of $\la>0$. Simultaneously, using the Nehari manifold approach, Hirano-Saccon-Shioji \cite{hirano1} proved multiplicity result for the problem \eqref{plap} with the assumptions as in \cite{haitoh} in a certain range of $\la>0$. In a natural way of extension, the weighted Laplace equation with singular nonlinearity and a perturbation term that is
\begin{equation}\label{3lap}
\left\{
\begin{split}
-\text{div}(w(x)\nabla u) &= \frac{\la}{u^q}+u^r,\;u>0\; \text{in}\; \Om,\\
u&=0 \; \text{on}\; \partial \Om,
\end{split}\right.
\end{equation}
where $w(x)$ satisfies the hypothesis \eqref{wgtcondition}, existence of a weak solution for \eqref{3lap} has been proved in \cite{Boc3} for any $q>0$ and multiplicity result has been established in \cite{arcoya} under the restriction $0<q<1.$ Later on, authors in \cite{DArcoya} obtained multiplicity results for the problem \eqref{3lap} for any $q>0$ when $w\equiv 1$ and $\la$ lies in an appropriate range. Moving on to the quasilinear case, multiplicity result for the following singular $p$-Laplace equation
\begin{equation}\label{4lap}
\left\{
\begin{split}
-\Delta_{p}u &= \frac{\la}{u^q}+u^r,\;u>0\; \text{in}\; \Om,\\
u&=0 \; \text{on}\; \partial \Om,
\end{split}\right.
\end{equation}
has been established by Giacomoni-Schindler-Tak\'{a}\v{c} in \cite{Giacomoni} assuming $0<q<1$ and $p-1<r\leq p^*{-1}$ for certain $\la>0.$ The problem \eqref{4lap} with $q\geq 1$ has been recently settled in \cite{KBal}. We refer to \cite{book-radu} for a comprehensive list of bibliography related to semilinear singular Dirichlet problems.
From the above literature it is clear that singular problems has been almost settled for the $p$-Laplace operator which is degenerate for $p>2$ and singular for $1<p<2$ at the critical points (see \cite{PLin}). Such degeneracy behavior of the operator also depends on the weight function '$w$' as in our case for the operator $\Delta_{p,w}$, even in the case $p=2$ (since $\Delta_{2,w}=w(x)\Delta u+\nabla w\cdot\nabla u$). Motivated by the singular problems with weighted p-Laplace operator studied in literature, it is natural to ask the question of existence when $w$ violates the hypothesis \eqref{wgtcondition}, specially if $w\to 0$ or $w\to\infty$ (e.g.,\,$w(x)=|x|^\alpha$) which captures the degenerate behavior of $\Delta_{p,w}$. For more details on such operators, we refer to \cite{Drabek, EFabes, Juh}.
The problem $(P_\la)$ for Case (I) when $w(x) \equiv 1$ has been studied by Ko, Lee and Shivaji in \cite{KLS} and $(P_\la)$ for Case (II) has been studied by Arcoya and Bocardo in \cite{arcoya} when $p=2$ and $w(x)$ satisfying \eqref{wgtcondition}. Our main focus in this article is to provide a class of weights $w$ which assures the existence of weak solutions to the problem $(P_{\la})$ in both Case (I) and Case (II).
We start with choosing the weight function in the class of Muckenhoupt weights $A_p$ (refer to section 2 for definition and see \cite{Muc} for more details). Then we define a subclass $A_s$ of $A_p$ which ensures some crucial embedding results (see section 2). When $w\in A_s$, Garain in \cite{PG} proved existence of solution to
\[-\Delta_{p,w}u = u^{-q},\; u>0\; \text{in}\; \Om,\; u=0\;\text{on}\; \partial \Om\]
such that $u(x)\geq c_K>0$ when $x \in K \subset \subset \Om$. We use this property of solutions to the purely singular problem with $-\Delta_{p,w}$ very efficiently to construct sub solution for $(P_\la)$. Then using Perron's idea, we show that $(P_\la)$ in Case (I) possesses a bounded weak solution. To prove the multiplicity result, later we consider a parameter dependent perturbed problem $(P_\la)$ in Case (II). Here, we consider an approximated problem $(P_{\la,\epsilon})$ and showed existence of two weak solutions $\zeta_\epsilon,\nu_\epsilon$ to it using the Mountain pass Lemma. Next, we lead to passing the limit as $\epsilon \to 0$ on $\{\zeta_\epsilon\}$ and $\{\nu_\epsilon\}$ which contributes two weak solutions to $(P_\la)$ in Case (II). The key point of this article is that we do not require any regularity results and proved our main theorems using purely variational techniques although the weight $w$ here can be possibly singular. The results proved here are completely new concerning the singular problem with weighted $p$-Laplace operator.\\
We have divided our paper into four sections: Section 2 contains the variational framework and preliminaries. Section 3 contains the main result related to $(P_\la)$ in Case (I) and Section 4 contains the multiplicity result for $(P_\la)$ in Case (II).
\section{Variational Framework}
We begin this section by briefly introducing the weighted Sobolev space corresponding to the Muckenhoupt weight, for more details refer to \cite{Drabek, EFabes, Juh, Tero, Muc}.
\begin{Definition}{(Muckenhoupt Weight)}
Let $w$ be a locally integrable function in $\mathbb{R}^n$ such that $0<w<\infty$ a.e. in $\mathbb{R}^n$. Then we say that $w$ belong to the Muckenhoupt class $A_p$, $1<p<\infty$ if there exists a positive constant $c_{p,w}$ (called the $A_p$ constant of $w$) depending only on $p$ and $w$ such that for all balls $B$ in $\mathbb{R}^n$,
$$
\left(\frac{1}{|B|}\int_{B}w \,dx\right)\left(\frac{1}{|B|}\int_{B}w^{-\frac{1}{p-1}} \,dx\right)^{p-1}\leq c_{p,w}.
$$
\end{Definition}
\textbf{Example} $w(x) = |x|^\alpha \in A_p$ if and only if $-n < \alpha < n(p-1)$ for any $1<p<\infty$, see \cite{Juh, Tero}.
\begin{Definition}(Weighted Sobolev Space)
For any $w \in A_p$, we define the weighted Sobolev space $W^{1,p}(\Omega,w)$ by
$$
W^{1,p}(\Omega,w)=\{u:\Omega\to\mathbb{R}\text{ measurable }:\|u\|_{1,p,w}<\infty\},
$$
with respect to the norm $\|.\|_{1,p,w}$ defined by
\begin{equation}\label{norm1}
\|u\|_{1,p,w} = \left(\int_{\Omega}|u(x)|^{p} w(x)\,dx\right)^\frac{1}{p} + \left(\int_{\Omega}|\nabla u|^{p} w(x)\,dx\right)^\frac{1}{p}.
\end{equation}
\end{Definition}
Also we define the space $W_{0}^{1,p}(\Omega,w)=\overline{(C_c^\infty(\Omega),\|\cdot\|_{1,p,w})}$ and denote it by $X$.
\begin{Lemma}(Poincar\'e inequality \cite{Juh})\label{Poincare inequality}
For any $w \in A_p$, we have
\begin{equation}
\int_{\Omega}|\phi|^{p} w(x) \,dx \leq C\,(\mbox{diam}\;\Omega)^p\int_{\Omega}|\nabla\phi|^{p} w(x) \,dx,\;\forall\;\phi\in C_{c}^\infty(\Omega),
\end{equation}
for some constant $C>0$ independent of $\phi$.
\end{Lemma}
Using Lemma \ref{Poincare inequality}, an equivalent norm to $(\ref{norm1})$ on the space $X$ can be defined by
\begin{equation}\label{norm2}
\|u\|=\left(\int_{\Omega}|\nabla u(x)|^pw(x)dx\right)^\frac{1}{p}.
\end{equation}
\noi \textbf{A subclass of $A_p$:} Let us define a subclass of $A_p$ by
$$
A_s = \left\{w\in A_p: w^{-s}\in L^{1}(\Omega)\,\,\text{for some}\,\,s\in[\frac{1}{p-1},\infty)\cap(\frac{n}{p},\infty)\right\}.
$$
For example, $w(x)=|x|^\alpha\in A_s$ for any $-\frac{n}{s}<\alpha<\frac{n}{s}$, provided $1<p<n$.
\begin{Lemma}\label{alg-ineq}{(Algebraic Inequality, Lemma A.0.5 \cite{Peral})}
For any $x,y\in\mb{R}^n$, one has
\begin{equation*}
\langle|x|^{p-2}x-|y|^{p-2}y,x-y\rangle\geq \left\{
\begin{split}
& c_p|x-y|^p, \text{ if } p\geq 2,\\
& c_p\frac{|x-y|^2}{(|x|+|y|)^{2-p}}, \text{ if } 1<p<2,
\end{split}\right\}
\end{equation*}
where $\langle.,.\rangle$ denotes the standard inner product in $\mb{R}^n$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{Lemma}\label{embedding}(Embedding)
For any $w \in A_s$, we have the following continuous inclusion map
\[
X\hookrightarrow W_{0}^{1,p_s}(\Omega)\hookrightarrow
\begin{cases}
L^q(\Omega),& \text{for } p_s\leq q\leq p_s^{*}, \text{in case of } 1\leq p_s<n, \\
L^q(\Omega),& \text{for } 1\leq q< \infty, \text{in case of } p_s=n, \\
C(\overline{\Omega}),& \text{in case of } p_s>n,
\end{cases}
\]
where $p_s = \frac{ps}{s+1}$ and $p_s^*=\frac{np_s}{n-p_s}$ is the critical Sobolev exponent.
Moreover, the above embeddings are compact except for $q=p_s^{*}$ in case of $1\leq p_s<n$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
For proof refer to Theorem 2.15 of \cite{PG}.\hfill{\hfill {$\square$}\goodbreak \medskip}
\end{proof}
\begin{Definition}{(Weighted Morrey space)}
Let $1<p<\infty$, $t>0$ and $w\in A_p$. Then we say that $u$ belong to the weighted Morrey space $L^{p,t}(\Omega,w)$, if $u\in L^p(\Omega,w)$, where
$$
L^p(\Om,w)=\left\{u:\Om\to\mb{R}\text{ measurable }:\int_{\Om}|u|^p\,w(x)\,dx<\infty\right\}
$$
and
$$
\|u\|_{L^{p,t}(\Omega,w)}:=\sup_{{x\in\Omega},{{0<r<d_0}}} \left(\frac{r^t}{\mu(\Omega\cap B(x,r))}\int_{\Omega\cap B(x,r)}|u(y)|^pw(y)\,dy\right)^\frac{1}{p}<\infty,
$$
where $d_0=\text{diam}(\Omega)$ and $\mu(\Omega\cap B(x,r))=\int_{\Omega\cap B(x,r)}w(x)\,dx,$ and $B(x,r)$ denotes the ball with center $x$ and radius $r.$
\end{Definition}
\textbf{Assumption on the weight function '$w$':} Throughout the paper, we assume the following
\begin{itemize}
\item for $p_s>n$, the weight function $w\in A_s$ and
\item for $1\leq p_s\leq n$, the weight function $w\in A_s$ such that
$$\frac{1}{w}\in L^{q,pn-\alpha q(p-1)}(\Omega,w),$$
for some $q>n$ and $0<\alpha<\text{min}\{1,\frac{pn}{q(p-1)}\}$.
\end{itemize}
\begin{Lemma}\label{Uniform}
Let $u\in X$ be positive which solves the equation $-\Delta_{p,w}u=g$ for some $g\in L^\infty(\Omega)$. Then $u\geq c_K>0$ for every $K\subset\subset\Omega$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $p_s>n$, then the result follows by Lemma \ref{embedding}. If $1\leq p_s\leq n$, then arguing similarly as in Theorem 3.13 of \cite{PG} we get $u\in L^\infty$. Now applying Theorem 1.3 of \cite{Peng} we get the desired result. \hfill{\hfill {$\square$}\goodbreak \medskip}
\end{proof}
\begin{Definition}
We say that $u\in X$ is a weak solution of $(P_\la)$ if $u>0$ in $\Om$ and for all $\phi\in C_c^{\infty}(\Om)$, one has
\begin{equation}\label{weak-sol}
\int_{\Om}w(x)|\nabla u|^{p-2}\nabla u\cdot\nabla\phi\,dx=\int_{\Om}g_{\la}(u)\phi\,dx.
\end{equation}
\end{Definition}
Moreover we say a function $u\in X$ to be a subsolution (or supersolution) of $(P_\la)$ if
\begin{equation}\label{subsup-sol}
\int_{\Om}w(x)|\nabla u|^{p-2}\nabla u\cdot\nabla\phi\,dx\leq (\text{or }\geq)\int_{\Om}g_{\la}(u)\phi\,dx
\end{equation}
for every $0\leq \phi\in C_c^\infty(\Om)$.
Throughout the article we denote by $X_{+}=\{u\in X:u\geq 0 \text{ a.e. in }\Om\}$, $v^{+}(x)=\text{max}\{v(x),0\},\,v^{-}(x)=\text{max}\{-v(x),0\},$ $|S|=\text{Lebesgue measure of }S,\,p'=\frac{p}{p-1}$ for $p>1.$ Then we have the following property of weak solutions.
\begin{Lemma}\label{testfn}
\eqref{weak-sol} holds for every $\phi\in X$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
Following the proof of Lemma A.1 of \cite{hirano1}, we get for any $v\in X_{+}$, there exists a sequence $\{v_n\}\in X$ such that each $v_n$ has a compact support in $\Omega$, $0\leq v_1\leq v_2\leq\ldots$ and $\{v_n\}$ converges strongly to $v$ in $X$. Now arguing similarly as in Lemma 9 of \cite{hirano1} we get the result.
\end{proof} \hfill{\hfill {$\square$}\goodbreak \medskip}
Our main results related to problem $(P_\la)$ reads as:
\begin{Theorem}\label{MT1}
There exists a weak solution to $(P_\la)$ for every $\la>0$ under the assumption $(f1)$ in Case (I).
\end{Theorem}
\begin{Theorem}\label{MT3}
There exists a $\Lambda>0$ such that when $\la \in (0, \Lambda)$, $(P_{\la})$ admits at least two weak solutions in Case (II).
\end{Theorem}
\section{Existence result in Case (I)}
In this section, we head towards proving our first main result that is Theorem \ref{MT1} using the method of sub and supersolution. Let us first define our energy functional $E_\la: X \to \mb R \cup \{\pm\infty\}$ corresponding to $(P_\la)$ as
\[E_\la(u)= \frac{1}{p}\int_{\Om} w(x)|\nabla u|^p~dx - \la \int_{\Om}F(u)~dx \]
where
\begin{equation*}
F(t)=\left\{
\begin{split}
&\int_0^t \frac{f(\tau)}{\tau^q}~d\tau,\; \text{if}\; t>0,\\
&0, \; \text{if}\; t\leq 0.
\end{split}\right.
\end{equation*}
Then the following Lemma is a crucial result to obtain the existence of solution and we follow \cite{haitoh}.
\begin{Lemma}\label{Subsuplemma}
Let $\underline{u}, \overline{u} \in X \cap L^\infty(\Om)$ be sub and supersolution of $(P_{\la})$ respectively such that $0\leq \underline{u} \leq \overline{u}$ and $\uline{u}\geq c_K >0$ for every $K \subset \subset \Om$, for some constant $c_K$. Then there exists a weak solution $u\in X \cap L^\infty(\Om)$ of $(P_\la)$ satisfying $\uline{u}\leq u\leq \oline{u}$ in $\Om$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
Consider the set
$$
M=\{v\in X:\uline{u}\leq v\leq \oline{u}\text{ in }\Om\}.
$$
By the given condition $\uline{u}\leq \oline{u}$ in $\Om$, so $M\neq \emptyset$. Also it is standard to check that $M$ is closed and convex. \\
\textbf{Claim (1):} $E_\la$ is weakly sequentially lower semicontinuous on $M$.\\
To show this, consider a sequence $\{v_k\} \subset M$ such that $v_k \rightharpoonup v$ weakly in X. Then using (f1) we have
\[F(v_k) \leq \int_0^{\oline{u}} \frac{f(\tau)}{\tau^q}~d\tau \leq \frac{f(\|\oline{u}\|_\infty)}{(1-q)}\|\oline{u}\|_\infty^{1-q}.\]
Therefore from Lebesgue Dominated Convergence theorem and weak lower semicontinuity of norms, the claim follows. So there exists a minimizer $u \in M$ of $E_\la$ that is $E_\la(u)= \inf\limits_{v\in M}E_\la(v)$.\\
\textbf{Claim (2):} $u$ is a weak solution of $(P_\la)$.\\
Let $\phi \in C_c^\infty(\Om)$ and $\epsilon>0$ then we define
\begin{equation*}
\eta_{\epsilon}=\left\{
\begin{split}
&\oline{u} \;\;\;\text{if} \; u+\epsilon \phi \geq \oline{u}\\
&u+\epsilon \phi \;\;\;\text{if}\; \uline{u}\leq u+\epsilon \phi \leq \oline{u}\\
&\uline{u} \;\;\;\text{if} \; u+\epsilon \phi \leq \uline{u}.
\end{split}\right.
\end{equation*}
Observe that $\eta_{\epsilon}=u+\epsilon\phi-\phi^{\epsilon}+\phi_{\epsilon}\in M.$
For notational convenience, let us denote $\phi^{\epsilon}= (u+\epsilon \phi -\oline{u})^+$ and $\phi_{\epsilon}= (u+\epsilon \phi -\uline{u})^-$. Now from definition of $u$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq1}
\begin{split}
0 & \leq \lim_{t \to 0} \frac{E_\la(u+t(\eta_{\epsilon}-u))- E_\la(u)}{t}\\
& = \lim_{t \to 0} \frac{1}{p} \frac{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega} w(x)(|\nabla u+t\nabla(\eta_\epsilon-u)|^p-|\nabla u|^p)~dx }{t} - \la\lim_{t \to 0} \frac{\displaystyle \int_\Om (F(u+t(\eta_\epsilon-u))- F(u)) ~dx}{t}\\
&= I_1-\la I_2 \;\text{(say)}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
It is easy to see that
\[I_1 = \int_\Om w(x)|\nabla u|^{p-2}\nabla u. \nabla (\eta_\epsilon-u)~dx.\]
Next, we consider the quantity $I_2$ and get that
\[I_2 = \lim_{t\to 0} \int_\Om \frac{(\eta_\epsilon-u)f(u+\theta t (\eta_\epsilon-u))}{(u+\theta t (\eta_\epsilon-u))^q}~dx,\; \text{for some}\; \theta \in(0,1).\]
If $(\eta_\epsilon-u)\geq 0$ then from Fatou's Lemma, it follows that
\[I_2 \geq \int_\Om \frac{(\eta_\epsilon-u)f(u)}{u^q}~dx.\]
Otherwise if $(\eta_\epsilon-u) <0$ then since $(\eta_\epsilon-u)\geq \epsilon\phi$, so $\phi \leq 0$. Hence in this case
\[\left| \frac{(\eta_\epsilon-u)f(u+\theta t (\eta_\epsilon-u))}{(u+\theta t (\eta_\epsilon-u))^q} \right|\leq \frac{-(\eta_\epsilon-u)f(||\oline{u}||_{\infty})}{\uline{u}^q}\leq \frac{-\epsilon\phi f(||\oline{u}||_\infty)}{\uline{u}^q}\in L^1(\Om)\]
since $\phi\in C_c^{\infty}(\Om)$ and $\uline{u}\geq c_{K}>0,$ whenever $K\subset\subset\Om$.
By Lebesgue Dominated Convergence theorem,
$$
\la I_2=\la\int_{\Om}\frac{(\eta_\epsilon-u)f(u)}{u^q}\,dx.
$$
Using these in \eqref{eq1} we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq2}
\begin{split}
&0\leq \int_\Om w(x)|\nabla u|^{p-2}\nabla u. \nabla (\eta_\epsilon-u)~dx - \la \int_\Om \frac{(\eta_\epsilon-u)f(u)}{u^q}~dx\\
& \implies \frac{1}{\epsilon}(Q^\epsilon-Q_\epsilon)\leq \int_\Om w(x)|\nabla u|^{p-2}\nabla u. \nabla \phi~dx - \la \int_\Om \frac{f(u)}{u^q}\phi~dx
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where
\[Q^\epsilon= \int_\Om w(x)|\nabla u|^{p-2}\nabla u. \nabla \phi^\epsilon~dx - \la \int_\Om \frac{f(u)}{u^q}\phi^\epsilon~dx \]
\[\text{and}\;Q_\epsilon= \int_\Om w(x)|\nabla u|^{p-2}\nabla u. \nabla \phi_\epsilon~dx - \la \int_\Om \frac{f(u)}{u^q}\phi_\epsilon~dx .\]
Now we estimate $Q^\epsilon $ and $Q_\epsilon$ separately. So consider
\begin{align*}
\frac{1}{\epsilon}Q^\epsilon &\geq \frac{1}{\epsilon} \int_\Om w(x)(|\nabla u|^{p-2}\nabla u- |\nabla \oline{u}|^{p-2}\nabla \oline{u}). \nabla \phi^\epsilon~dx + \frac{\la}{\epsilon}\int_\Om \frac{f(\oline{u})}{\oline{u}^q}\phi^\epsilon~dx-\frac{\la}{\epsilon}\int_\Om \frac{f({u})}{{u}^q}\phi^\epsilon~dx\\
&=\frac{1}{\epsilon}\int_{\Om^{\epsilon}}w(x)(|\nabla u|^{p-2}\nabla u-|\nabla\oline{u}|^{p-2}\nabla\oline{u}).\nabla(u-\oline{u})\,dx\\
& \quad \quad +\int_{\Om^{\epsilon}}w(x)(|\nabla u|^{p-2}\nabla u-|\nabla\oline{u}|^{p-2}\nabla\oline{u}).\nabla\phi\,dx
+\frac{\la}{\epsilon}\int_{\Om}\left(\frac{{f({u})}}{\oline{u}^q}-\frac{f(u)}{u^q}\right)\phi^{\epsilon}\,dx\\
&\geq \int_{\Om^{\epsilon}}w(x)(|\nabla u|^{p-2}\nabla u-|\nabla\oline{u}|^{p-2}\nabla\oline{u}).\nabla\phi\,dx+\frac{\la}{\epsilon}\int_{\Om^{\epsilon}}{f(u)}\left(\frac{1}{\oline{u}^q}-\frac{1}{u^q}\right)(u-\oline{u})\,dx\\
&\quad \quad+\la\int_{\Om^{\epsilon}}f(u)\left(\frac{1}{\oline{u}^q}-\frac{1}{u^q}\right)\phi\,dx\\
&\geq O(1)
\end{align*}
using Lemma \ref{alg-ineq}, $\oline{u}$ is a supersolution of $(P_{\la})$, $u\leq\oline{u}$ and $\displaystyle\int_{\Om^{\epsilon}}\frac{f(u)}{\oline{u}^q}\phi\,dx\leq\frac{f(||\oline{u}||_{\infty})}{c_K^q}||\phi||_{\infty}<+\infty$, where $\Om^{\epsilon}= \text{supp}\;\phi^\epsilon$. Next we consider
\begin{align*}
\frac{1}{\epsilon}Q_\epsilon &\leq -\frac{1}{\epsilon}\int_{\Om_{\epsilon}} w(x)|\nabla u|^{p-2}\nabla u. \nabla(u+\epsilon \phi -\uline{u})~dx+\frac{1}{\epsilon}\int_{\Om_{\epsilon}}w(x)|\nabla\uline{u}|^{p-2}\nabla\uline{u}.\nabla(u+\epsilon\phi-\uline{u})\,dx\\
&\quad \quad+\frac{\la}{\epsilon}\int_{\Om}\frac{f(\uline{u})}{\uline{u}^q}\phi_{\epsilon}\,dx-\frac{\la}{\epsilon}\int_{\Om}\frac{f(u)}{u^q}\phi_{\epsilon}\,dx\\
&\leq \int_{\Om_{\epsilon}}w(x)(|\nabla\uline{u}|^{p-2}\nabla\uline{u}-|\nabla u|^{p-2}\nabla u).\nabla\phi\,dx-\frac{\la}{\epsilon}\int_{\Om_{\epsilon}}f(u)\left(\frac{1}{\uline{u}^q}-\frac{1}{u^q}\right)(u-\uline{u})\,dx\\
& \quad \quad-\la\int_{\Om_{\epsilon}}f(u)\left(\frac{1}{\uline{u}^q}-\frac{1}{u^q}\right)\phi\,dx\\
&\leq O(1)
\end{align*}
using Lemma \ref{alg-ineq}, $\uline{u}$ is a subsolution of $(P_\la)$, $u \geq \uline{u}$ and $\displaystyle \int_{\Om_{\epsilon}}f(u)\left(\frac{1}{\uline{u}^q}-\frac{1}{u^q}\right)\phi\,dx \leq \frac{2f(\|\oline{u}\|_\infty)}{c_K^q}\|\phi\|_\infty<+\infty$
.\end{proof}
Putting these in \eqref{eq2} we obtain
\[0 \leq \int_\Om w(x)|\nabla u|^{p-2}\nabla u. \nabla \phi~dx - \la \int_\Om \frac{f(u)}{u^q}\phi~dx,\]
but since $\phi\in C_c^\infty(\Om)$ is arbitrary, Claim (2) follows. This completes the proof. \hfill{\hfill {$\square$}\goodbreak \medskip}
\subsection{Sub and Supersolutions of $(P_\la)$}
We begin this section with the construction of our pair of sub and supersolutions and gradually prove our first main result, Theorem \ref{MT1}. The idea has been earlier used in \cite{KLS}. Let $e_1\in X$ denotes the first eigenfunction of $-\Delta_{p,w}$ which solves
\[-\Delta_{p,w}e_1 = \la_1 e_1^{p-1} \; \text{in}\; \Om, \;\; e_1=0\;\text{on}\; \partial \Om.\]
Then $e_1>0$, $e_1\in L^\infty(\Om)$, refer \cite{Drabek} and moreover, $e_1 \geq c_K>0$ on every $K \subset \subset \Om$ by Lemma \ref{Uniform}. By the hypothesis $(f_1)$ since $\lim\limits_{t\to 0} \frac{f(t)}{t^q}=\infty$, one can choose $a_\la>0$ sufficiently small such that
\[\la_1 (a_\la e_1)^{p-1} \leq \la \frac{f(a_\la e_1)}{(a_\la e_1)^q}.\]
Denoting by $\uline{u}=a_{\la}e_1$ we get
\[-\Delta_{p,w}\uline{u} \leq \la \frac{f(a_\la e_1)}{(a_\la e_1)^q}=\la \frac{f(\uline{u})}{\uline{u}^q}\;\text{in}\; \Om.\]
Now let $\oline{u}:= A_\la v_0$ where $0<v_0\in X\cap L^\infty(\Om)$ uniquely solves the problem
\[-\Delta_{p,w}v_0 = v_0^{-q},\; v_0>0 \; \text{in}\; \Om,\; v_0=0\;\text{on}\; \partial\Om,\]
for details, refer \cite{PG}. By the hypothesis $(f_1)$ since $\lim\limits_{t\to \infty}\frac{f(t)}{t^{q+p-1}}=0$, we choose $A_\la>0$ sufficiently large such that
\[\frac{f({A_\la \|v_0\|_\infty)}}{(A_\la \|v_0\|_\infty)^{q+p-1}}\leq \frac{1}{\la \|v_0\|^{q+p-1}_\infty} \]
which gives
\[-\Delta_{p,w}\oline{u} = \frac{A_\la^{p-1}}{v_0^q} \geq \la\frac{f({A_\la \|v_0\|_\infty)}}{(A_\la v_0)^{q}} \geq \la \frac{f(\oline{u})}{\oline{u}^q}\; \text{in}\; \Om \] where we have also used the non decreasing property of $f$ follows from $(f_1)$.
Therefore $\uline{u}$ and $\oline{u}$ forms sub and supersolution of $(P_\la)$ respectively and the constants $a_\la, A_\la$ can be chosen appropriately so that $\uline{u}\leq \oline{u}$.
\textbf{Proof of Theorem \ref{MT1}:} From above construction and using Lemma \ref{Subsuplemma}, we infer that $(P_\la)$ admits a weak solution $u\in X \cap L^\infty(\Om)$ such that $u \in [\uline{u}, \oline{u}]$. This proves Theorem \ref{MT1}. \hfill{\hfill {$\square$}\goodbreak \medskip}
\section{Multiplicity result in Case (II)}
This section is devoted to prove our second main result that is Theorem \ref{MT3} using the method of approximation. We follow \cite{arcoya} here. Let us denote the energy functional $I_\la: X \to \mb R\cup \{\pm \infty\}$ corresponding to the problem $(P_\la)$ for Case (II)
\[I_\la(u) = \frac{1}{p}\int_\Om w(x)|\nabla u|^p~dx -\frac{\la}{1-q}\int_\Om (u^+)^{1-q}~dx -\frac{1}{r+1}\int_\Om (u^+)^{r+1}~dx.\]
For $\epsilon>0$, let us consider the approximated problem
\begin{equation*}
(P_{\la,\epsilon})\left\{
\begin{split}
-\Delta_{p,w}u &= \frac{\la}{(u^+ +\epsilon)^q}+ (u^+)^r\;\text{in}\; \Om,\\
u&=0 \; \text{on}\; \partial \Om
\end{split}\right.
\end{equation*}
for which the corresponding energy functional is given by
\[I_{\la,\epsilon}(u) = \frac{1}{p}\int_\Om w(x)|\nabla u|^p~dx -\frac{\la}{1-q}\int_\Om [(u^+ +\epsilon)^{1-q}-\epsilon^{1-q}]~dx -\frac{1}{r+1}\int_\Om (u^+)^{r+1}~dx.\]
It is easy to verify that $I_{\la,\epsilon}\in C^1(X,\mb R)$, $I_{\la,\epsilon}(0)=0$ and $I_{\la,\epsilon}(v)\leq I_{0,\epsilon}(v)$ for all $v\geq 0.$ We recall the definition of $e_1$ from last section and w.l.o.g. assume that $\|e_1\|_\infty=1$. Our next Lemma states that $I_{\la,\epsilon}$ satisfies the Mountain Pass geometry.
\begin{Lemma}\label{MP-geo}
There exists $R,\;\rho>0$ and $\Lambda>0$ depending on $R$ such that whenever $\la \in (0,\La)$
$$
\inf\limits_{\|v\|\leq R}I_{\la,\epsilon}(v)<0\;\text{and}\;
\inf\limits_{\|v\|=R}I_{\la,\epsilon}(v)\geq \rho.
$$
Moreover there exists $T>R$ such that
$
I_{\la,\epsilon}(Te_{1})<-1$ for $\la\in (0,\La)$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
We fix $l=|\Om|^{\frac{1}{(\frac{p_s^*}{r+1})'}}$. Then using H\"{o}lder's inequality and Lemma \ref{embedding}, we get that
\begin{equation*}\label{MP1}
\int_\Om (v^+)^{r+1}~dx \leq \left( \int_\Om |v|^{p_s^*}\right)^{\frac{r+1}{p_s^*}} |\Om|^{\frac{1}{(\frac{p_s^*}{r+1})'}}\leq Cl||v||^{r+1}
\end{equation*}
for some positive constant $C$ independent of $v$. We now observe that
$$
\lim_{t\to 0}\frac{I_{\la,\epsilon}(te_1)}{t}=-\la\epsilon^{-q}\int_{\Omega}e_{1}\,dx<0,
$$
which implies that it is possible to choose $k\in(0,1)$ sufficiently small and to set $||v||=R :=k(\frac{r+1}{pCl})^\frac{1}{r+1-p}$ such that $\inf\limits_{\|v\|\leq R}I_{\la,\epsilon}(v)<0.$
Moreover, since $R<(\frac{r+1}{pCl})^\frac{1}{r+1-p}$ we obtain
\begin{align*}
I_{0,\epsilon}(v)\geq \frac{R^p}{p}-\frac{ClR^{r+1}}{r+1}&=\frac{k^p}{p}(\frac{r+1}{pCl})^\frac{p}{r+1-p}-\frac{Clk^{r+1}}{r+1}(\frac{r+1}{pCl})^\frac{r+1}{r+1-p}\\
& = \left(\frac{r+1}{pCl}\right)^{\frac{p}{r+1-p}}\left(\frac{k^p}{p}-\frac{Clk^{r+1}}{p}\right):=
2\rho\,(\text{say})>0.
\end{align*}
We define $$\Lambda:=\frac{\rho}{\sup\limits_{\|v\|=R} \left(\frac{1}{1-q}\int_\Om |v|^{1-q}~dx \right)}$$
which is a positive constant and since $\rho,R$ depends on $k,r,p,|\Omega|,C$ so does $\Lambda$. We know that
$$
((v^{+}+\epsilon)^{1-q}-\epsilon^{1-q})\leq (v^+)^{1-q}
$$
which gives
$$
I_{\lambda,\epsilon}(v)\geq \frac{\|v\|^p}{p}-\frac{1}{r+1}\int_{\Om}(v^+)^{r+1}\,dx-\frac{\la}{1-q}\int_{\Om}(v^{+})^{1-q}\,dx\\
\geq I_{0,\epsilon}(v)-\frac{\la}{1-q}\int_{\Om}(v^{+})^{1-q}\,dx.
$$
Therefore
$$
\inf\limits_{\|v\|=R} I_{\la,\epsilon}(v)\geq\inf\limits_{\|v\|=R}I_{0,\epsilon}(v)-\la \sup\limits_{\|v\|=R} \left(\frac{1}{1-q}\int_\Om |v|^{1-q}~dx \right)\geq 2\rho -\la \sup\limits_{\|v\|=R} \left(\frac{1}{1-q}\int_\Om |v|^{1-q}~dx \right)\geq \rho
$$
if $\la\in(0,\Lambda).$
Lastly, it is easy to see that $I_{0,\epsilon}(te_1) \to -\infty$ as $t\to +\infty$ which implies that we can choose $T>R$ such that $I_{0,\epsilon}(te_1)<-1$. Hence
\[I_{\la,\epsilon}(Te_1)\leq I_{0,\epsilon}(Te_1)<-1\]
which completes the proof.
\hfill{\hfill {$\square$}\goodbreak \medskip}
\end{proof}\\
\noi As a consequence of Lemma \ref{MP-geo}, we have
\[\inf\limits_{\|v\|=R}I_{\la,\epsilon}(v) \geq \rho \max\{I_{\la,\epsilon}(te_1), I_{\la,\epsilon}(0)\} = 0.\]
Our next Lemma ensures that $I_{\la,\epsilon}$ satisfies the Palais Smale $(PS)_c$ condition.
\begin{Proposition}\label{PS-cond}
$I_{\la,\epsilon}$ satisfies the $(PS)_c$ condition, for any $c \in \mb R$ that is if $\{u_k\}\subset X$ is a sequence satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{PS1}
I_{\la,\epsilon}(u_k)\to c \; \text{and}\; I_{\la,\epsilon}^\prime(u_k) \to 0
\end{equation}
as $k \to \infty$ then $\{u_k\}$ contains a strongly convergent subsequence in $X$.
\end{Proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $\{u_k\} \subset X$ satisfies \eqref{PS1} then we claim that $\{u_k\}$ must be bounded in $X$. To see this, we consider
\begin{equation}\label{PS2}
\begin{split}
I_{\la,\epsilon}(u_k)- \frac{1}{r+1}I_{\la,\epsilon}^\prime(u_k)u_k &= \left( \frac{1}{p}-\frac{1}{r+1}\right)\|u_k\|^p -\frac{\la}{1-q} \int_\Om [(u_k^+ +\epsilon)^{1-q}-\epsilon^{1-q}]~dx\\
& \quad +\frac{\la}{r+1}\int_\Om (u_k^+ +\epsilon)^{-q}u_k~dx\\
& \geq \left( \frac{1}{p}-\frac{1}{r+1}\right)\|u_k\|^p -\frac{\la}{1-q}\int_\Om (u_k^+)^{1-q}~dx+\frac{\la}{r+1}\int_\Om (u_k^+ +\epsilon)^{-q}u_k~dx\\
& \geq \left(\frac{1}{p}-\frac{1}{r+1}\right)\|u_k\|^p -C_1\int_\Om (u_k^+)^{1-q}~dx-C_{2}\epsilon^{1-q}\\
& \geq C_3\|u_k\|^p -C_4 \|u_k\|^{1-q}-C_{2}\epsilon^{1-q}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where we have used the embedding theorems and $C_1,C_2, C_3, C_4>0$ are constants. Also from \eqref{PS1} it follows that for $k$ large enough
\begin{equation}\label{PS3}
\left| I_{\la,\epsilon}(u_k)- \frac{1}{r+1}I_{\la,\epsilon}^\prime(u_k)u_k\right| \leq c+o(\|u_k\|).
\end{equation}
Combining \eqref{PS2} and \eqref{PS3}, our claim follows. By reflexivity of $X$, we get that there exists a $u_0\in X$ such that up to a subsequence, $u_k \rightharpoonup u_0$ weakly in $X$ as $k \to \infty$.\\
\textbf{Claim:} $u_k \to u_0$ strongly in $X$ as $k \to \infty$.\\
By \eqref{PS1}, we already have that
\[\lim_{k\to \infty}\left(\int_\Om w(x)|\nabla u_k|^{p-2}\nabla u_k.\nabla u_0~dx - \la \int_\Om (u_k^+ +\epsilon)^{-q}u_0~dx - \int_\Om (u_k^+)^{r} u_0~dx\right)=0\]
and
\[\lim_{k\to \infty}\left(\int_\Om w(x)|\nabla u_k|^{p-2}\nabla u_k.\nabla u_k~dx - \la \int_\Om (u_k^+ +\epsilon)^{-q}u_k~dx - \int_\Om (u_k^+)^r u_k~dx\right)=0.\]
Now
\begin{equation}\label{PS4}
\begin{split}
&\lim\limits_{k\to\infty}\int_{\Omega}w(x)(|\nabla u_k|^{p-2}\nabla u_k-|\nabla u_0|^{p-2}\nabla u_0).\nabla(u_k-u_0)\,dx\\
&=\lim\limits_{k\to\infty} \left( \la \int_\Om (u_k^+ +\epsilon)^{-q}u_k~dx + \int_\Om (u_k^+)^r u_k~dx - \la \int_\Om (u_k^+ +\epsilon)^{-q}u_0~dx - \int_\Om (u_k^+)^r u_0~dx\right)\\
&\quad -\lim_{k\to \infty}\left(\int_\Om w(x)|\nabla u_0|^{p-2}\nabla u_0. \nabla u_k~dx - \int_\Om w(x) |\nabla u_0|^p~dx\right).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
From weak convergence of $\{u_k\}$ we get
\begin{equation}\label{PS5}
\lim_{k\to \infty}\left(\int_\Om w(x)|\nabla u_0|^{p-2}\nabla u_0. \nabla u_k~dx - \int_\Om w(x) |\nabla u_0|^p~dx\right)=0.
\end{equation}
Also $|(u_k^++\epsilon)^{-q}u_0| \leq\epsilon^{-q}u_0$ and Lebesgue Dominated convergence theorem gives that
\begin{equation}\label{PS6}
\lim_{k \to \infty} \int_\Om (u_k^+ +\epsilon)^{-q}u_0~dx = \int_\Om (u_0^+ +\epsilon)^{-q}u_0~dx.
\end{equation}
Since $u_k \to u_0$ a.e. in $\Om$ and for any measurable subset $E$ of $\Om$ we have
\[\int_E |(u_k^++\epsilon)^{-q}u_k |~dx \leq \int_E\epsilon^{-q}u_k~dx \leq C_1\|u_k\|_{L^{p_s^*}(\Om)}|E|^{\frac{p_s^*-1}{p_s^*}}\leq C_2|E|^{\frac{p_s^*-1}{p_s^*}}, \]
so from Vitali convergence theorem it follows that
\begin{equation}\label{PS7}
\lim\limits_{k\to\infty} \la \int_\Om (u_k^+ +\epsilon)^{-q}u_k~dx = \la \int_\Om (u_0^+ +\epsilon)^{-q}u_0~dx .
\end{equation}
Similarly, we have
\[\int_E |(u_k^+)^ru_0|~dx \leq \|u_0\|_{L^{p_s^*}(\Om)} \left(\int_E (u_k^+)^{rp_s^{*'}}~dx\right)^{\frac{1}{p^{*'}_s}}\leq C_3 |E|^{\alpha} \]
and
\[\int_E |(u_k^+)^ru_k|~dx \leq \|u_k\|_{L^{p_s^*}(\Om)} \left(\int_E (u_k^+)^{rp_s^{*'}}~dx\right)^{\frac{1}{p^{*'}_s}}\leq C_3 |E|^{\beta} \]
for some constants $\alpha>0,\beta>0$ which using Vitali convergence theorem implies that
\begin{equation}\label{PS8}
\lim_{k \to \infty} \int_\Om (u_k^+)^ru_0~dx =\int_\Om (u_0^+)^ru_0~dx \text{ and } \lim_{k \to \infty} \int_\Om (u_k^+)^ru_k~dx =\int_\Om (u_0^+)^ru_0~dx.
\end{equation}
Putting \eqref{PS5}, \eqref{PS6}, \eqref{PS7} and \eqref{PS8} in \eqref{PS4} we obtain
\[\lim\limits_{k\to\infty}\int_{\Omega}w(x)(|\nabla u_k|^{p-2}\nabla u_k-|\nabla u_0|^{p-2}\nabla u_0).\nabla(u_k-u_0)\,dx =0.\]
From \cite{PG}, we know that
\begin{align*}
&\int_{\Omega}w(x)(|\nabla u_k|^{p-2}\nabla u_k-|\nabla u_0|^{p-2}\nabla u_0).\nabla(u_k-u_0)\,dx\\
& \quad \quad \quad \geq (\|u_k\|^{p-1}-\|u_0\|^{p-1})(\|u_k\|-\|u_0\|)
\end{align*}
which proves our claim. \hfill{\hfill {$\square$}\goodbreak \medskip}
\end{proof}
From Lemma \ref{MP-geo}, Proposition \ref{PS-cond} and Mountain Pass Lemma, we get that there exists a $\zeta_\epsilon \in X$ such that $I_{\lambda,\epsilon}^\prime(\zeta_\epsilon)=0$ such that
$$
I_{\lambda,\epsilon}(\zeta_{\epsilon})=\inf_{\gamma\in\Gamma}\max_{t \in [0,1]}I_{\la,\epsilon}(\gamma (t)) \geq \rho >0
$$
where $\Gamma = \{\gamma \in C([0,1];X): \gamma(0)=0, \gamma(1))=Te_1\}.$ Furthermore, as a consequence of Lemma \ref{MP-geo}, since $\inf\limits_{\|v\|\leq R} I_{\la,\epsilon}(v)<0$, from weak lower semicontinuity of the functional $I_{\la,\epsilon}$ we get that there exists $\nu_\epsilon \not\equiv 0$ such that $\|\nu_\epsilon\| \leq R$ and
\begin{equation}\label{limit-pass}
\inf\limits_{\|v\|\leq R} I_{\la,\epsilon}(v) =I_{\la,\epsilon}(\nu_\epsilon)<0 < \rho \leq I_{\la,\epsilon}(\zeta_\epsilon).
\end{equation}
Thus, $\zeta_\epsilon$ and $\nu_\epsilon$ are two different non trivial critical points of $I_{\la,\epsilon}$. Testing $(P_{\la,\epsilon})$ with $\min\{\zeta_\epsilon,0\}$ and $\min\{\nu_\epsilon,0\}$, it is easy to verify that $\zeta_\epsilon,\nu_\epsilon\geq 0$ since the R.H.S. of $(P_{\la,\epsilon})$ remains a non negative quantity.
\begin{Lemma}\label{apriori}
There exists a $\Theta>0$ (independent of $\epsilon$) such that $\|v_\epsilon\| \leq \Theta$ where $v_\epsilon = \zeta_\epsilon$ or $\nu_\epsilon$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
The result trivially holds if $v_\epsilon = \nu_\epsilon$ so we deal with the case $v_\epsilon= \zeta_\epsilon$. Recalling the terms from Lemma \ref{MP-geo}, we define $A = \max\limits_{t \in [0,1]}I_{0,\epsilon}(tTe_1)$ then
\[A \geq \max_{t \in [0,1]} I_{\la,\epsilon}(tTe_1) \geq\inf_{\gamma\in\Gamma}\max_{t \in [0,1]}I_{\la,\epsilon}(\gamma (t)) = I_{\la,\epsilon}(\zeta_\epsilon).\]
Therefore
\begin{equation}\label{ap1}
\frac{1}{p}\int_\Om w(x)|\nabla \zeta_{\epsilon}|^p~dx -\frac{\la}{1-q}\int_\Om [(\zeta_{\epsilon}+\epsilon)^{1-q}-\epsilon^{1-q}]~dx -\frac{1}{r+1}\int_\Om \zeta_{\epsilon}^{r+1}~dx \leq A.
\end{equation}
Choosing $\phi=-\frac{\zeta_{\epsilon}}{r+1}$ as a test function in $(P_{\la,\epsilon})$ we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{ap2}
-\frac{1}{r+1}\int_{\Om}w(x)|\nabla \zeta_{\epsilon}|^{p}\,dx+\frac{\la}{r+1}\int_{\Om}\frac{\zeta_{\epsilon}}{(\zeta_{\epsilon}+\epsilon)^q}\,dx+\frac{1}{r+1}\int_{\Om}\zeta_{\epsilon}^{r+1}\,dx=0.
\end{equation}
Adding \eqref{ap1} and \eqref{ap2} we get
\begin{align*}
\left(\frac{1}{p}-\frac{1}{r+1}\right)\int_{\Om}w(x)|\nabla \zeta_{\epsilon}|^p\,dx
&\leq \frac{\la}{1-q}\int_\Om [(\zeta_{\epsilon} +\epsilon)^{1-q}-\epsilon^{1-q}]~dx -\frac{\la}{r+1}\int_{\Om}\frac{\zeta_{\epsilon}}{(\zeta_{\epsilon}+\epsilon)^q}\,dx+A\\
& \leq \frac{\la}{1-q}\int_\Om [(\zeta_{\epsilon} +\epsilon)^{1-q}-\epsilon^{1-q}]~dx +A\\
& \leq \frac{\la}{1-q}\int_\Om \zeta_{\epsilon}^{1-q}~dx +A\leq C \|\zeta_{\epsilon}\|^{1-q}+A,
\end{align*}
where we have used H\"older inequality along with the embedding result Lemma \ref{embedding} and $C>0$ is a constant independent of $\epsilon$. This implies that $\{\zeta_{\epsilon}\}$ is uniformly bounded in $X$ with respect to $\epsilon$. This completes the proof.\hfill{\hfill {$\square$}\goodbreak \medskip}
\end{proof}\\
Now as a resultant of Lemma \ref{apriori}, up to a subsequence we get that $\zeta_\epsilon \rightharpoonup \zeta_0$ and $\nu_\epsilon \rightharpoonup \nu_0$ weakly in $X$ as $\epsilon \to 0^+$, for some non negative $\zeta_0,\nu_0\in X$. In the sequel, we establish that $\zeta_0\neq \nu_0$ and forms a weak solution to our problem $(P_\la)$.
For convenience we denote by $v_0$ either $\zeta_0$ or $\nu_0$.
\begin{Lemma}\label{Solution}
$v_0\in X$ is a weak solution to the problem $(P_{\la})$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
We observe that for any $\epsilon\in(0,1)$ and $t\geq 0$
$$
\frac{\la}{(t+\epsilon)^q}+t^r\geq \frac{\la}{(t+1)^q}+t^r\geq \text{min}\{1,\frac{\la}{2^q}\}.
$$
As a consequence we get
$$
-\Delta_{p,w} v_\epsilon=\frac{\la}{(v_\epsilon+\epsilon)^q}+v_\epsilon^r\geq \text{min}\{1,\frac{\la}{2^q}\}:=C,\text{say}.
$$
Consequently, if $\xi\in X$ satisfies
$$
-\Delta_{p,w}\xi =C\text{ in }\Om
$$
we get
\begin{equation}\label{strict positivity}
\int_{\Om}w(x)|\nabla v_\epsilon|^{p-2}\nabla v_\epsilon.\nabla \phi\,dx\geq \int_{\Om} w(x)|\nabla \xi|^{p-2}\nabla \xi.\nabla \phi\,dx
\end{equation}
for every non negative $\phi\in X$. Therefore choosing $\phi=(\xi- v_\epsilon)^{+}\in X$ as a test function in \eqref{strict positivity} we obtain using algebraic inequality Lemma \ref{alg-ineq} that
$$
v_\epsilon\geq \xi\text{ in }\Om.
$$
Now by the Strong maximum principle (see \cite{Juh}) we obtain $\xi>0$ in $\Om$. Now by Lemma \ref{Uniform} we obtain that $\xi\geq c_K>0$ for every $K\subset\subset\Om$. Therefore
\begin{equation}\label{uniform}
v_\epsilon\geq c_K>0
\end{equation}
for every $K\subset\subset\Om$. Therefore using Lemma \ref{apriori} and the fact \eqref{uniform} we can apply Theorem 2.20 of \cite{PG} to pass the limit and obtain
$$
\int_{\Om}w(x)|\nabla v_0|^{p-2}\nabla v_0.\nabla \phi\,dx=\la\int_{\Om}\frac{\phi}{v_0^q}\,dx+\int_{\Om}v_0^{r}\phi\,dx.
$$
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\noi \textbf{Proof of Theorem \ref{MT3}:}
Using Lemma \ref{Solution} we get that $\zeta_0$ and $\nu_0$ are two positive weak solution of $(P_{\la})$. Now we are going to prove that $\zeta_0\neq \nu_0$. Choosing $\phi=v_\epsilon\in X$ as a test function in $(P_{\la,\epsilon})$ we get
$$
\int_{\Omega}w(x)|\nabla v_\epsilon|^p\,dx=\la\int_{\Om}\frac{v_\epsilon}{(v_\epsilon+\epsilon)^q\,dx}+\int_{\Om}(v_\epsilon)^{r+1}\,dx
$$
Since $r+1<p_s^{*}$, using Lemma \ref{embedding} we obtain
$$
\lim\limits_{\epsilon\to 0}\int_{\Om}(v_\epsilon)^{r+1}\,dx=\int_{\Om}v_0^{r+1}\,dx.
$$
Moreover, since
$$
0\leq \frac{v_\epsilon}{(v_\epsilon+\epsilon)^q}\leq v_\epsilon^{1-q},
$$
by Vitali convergence theorem
$$
\la\lim\limits_{\epsilon\to 0}\int_{\Om}\frac{v_\epsilon}{(v_\epsilon+\epsilon)^q}\,dx=\la\int_{\Om}(v_0)^{1-q}\,dx.
$$
Therefore
$$
\lim\limits_{\epsilon\to 0}\int_{\Om}w(x)|\nabla v_\epsilon|^{p}\,dx=\la\int_{\Om}(v_0)^{1-q}\,dx+\int_{\Om}(v_0)^{r+1}\,dx.
$$
Using Lemma \ref{testfn} we can choose $\phi=v_0$ as a test function in $(P_\la)$ to deduce that
$$
\int_{\Om}w(x)|\nabla v_0|^{p}\,dx=\la\int_{\Om}(v_0)^{1-q}\,dx+\int_{\Om}(v_0)^{r+1}\,dx.
$$
Hence we obtain
$$
\lim\limits_{\epsilon\to 0}\int_{\Om}w(x)|\nabla v_\epsilon|^{p}\,dx=\int_{\Om}w(x)|\nabla v_0|^{p}\,dx
$$
and we get the strong convergence of $v_\epsilon$ to $v_0$ in $X$.
Now by the Lebesgue dominated theorem, we get
$$
\lim\limits_{\epsilon\to 0}\int_{\Om}[(v_\epsilon+\epsilon)^{1-q}-\epsilon^{1-q}]\,dx=\int_{\Om}(v_0)^{1-q}\,dx,
$$
which together with the strong convergence of $v_\epsilon$ implies
$
\lim\limits_{\epsilon\to 0}I_{\la,\epsilon}(v_\epsilon)=I_{\la}(v_0).
$
Hence from \eqref{limit-pass} we get $\zeta_0\neq \nu_0.$ \hfill{\hfill {$\square$}\goodbreak \medskip}
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We thank T.I.F.R. CAM-Bangalore for the financial support.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
Positron Emission Tomography (PET) \cite{baetal05} utilizes an isotope produced in a cyclotron to provide dynamical images of the metabolism-based isotope accumulation in the biological tissue. PET dynamic images of the tracer distribution are obtained by applying a reconstruction algorithm to the measured radioactivity and provide a reliable estimate of the tracer-related metabolism in the tissue \cite{nawu01,shva82}.
From a technical viewpoint, compartmental analysis \cite{guetal01,sctu02,waetal06} allows processing these dynamic PET data in order to estimate a set of physiological kinetic parameters that explain such metabolism in a quantitative manner (specifically, these parameters express the effectiveness of the tracer in changing its functional status within the tissue).
Compartmental analysis requires, first, the formulation of a forward model for the tracer concentration represented by a Cauchy problem, in which the kinetic parameters are the coefficients of the differential equations; then, the numerical solution of the corresponding nonlinear inverse problem, in which the kinetic parameters are the unknowns and the tracer concentrations in the tissue are the input data.
Relying on compartmental analysis, parametric imaging \cite{guetal97,kaetal13,reve14} allows the pixel-wise determination of the kinetic parameters by means of two possible alternative approaches. On the one hand, direct parametric imaging \cite{kaetal05,waqi13} utilizes as input the PET raw sinograms and solves the inverse problem that relates them to the parameters; on the other hand, indirect parametric imaging \cite{guetal97,kaetal13,caetal17,Scussolini} is applied to the reconstructed PET images and solves pixel-wise the compartmental analysis problem. Direct approaches do not need the application of image reconstruction methods but have typically to deal with the intertwining of spatial and temporal correlations, which makes the optimization process more complex; this same optimization is more straightforward in indirect approaches but requires a higher computational burden, due to the need of solving a large number of nonlinear inverse problems.\newline
\noindent The present paper deals with indirect parametric imaging and introduces a regularized optimization method for the solution of the nonlinear ill-posed inverse problem of compartmental analysis. The idea of the method is to introduce a regularizing strategy \cite{Wang} in the standard affine-scaling Trust Region method \cite{Coleman,Bellavia_2006}, which allows a better reduction of the numerical instabilities induced by the presence of the experimental noise in the measured data.
From a formal viewpoint, we prove a convergence result for the regularized algorithm, which enables a generalization to the non-negatively constrained case of the
convergence analysis developed in \cite{Wang} for the unconstrained problem. The numerical validation of the method is performed against synthetic data realized from an 'ad hoc' modification of the Hoffman Brain Phantom often used in PET and CT imaging (http://depts.washington.edu/petctdro/DROhoffman\_main.html). Specifically, we mimicked a two-compartment experiment for the kinetics of [18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG), which is the mostly utilized tracer in PET diagnostic and prognostic activities \cite{boetal10,fletal01,kaetal16,maetal18,maetal13}. Using this simulation we could compare the computational effectiveness and reconstruction accuracy of the method with respect to the performances provided by two frequently used indirect parametric imaging methods.
The structure of the paper is as follows. Section 2 sets up the two-compartment problem for FDG kinetics. Section 3 describes in detail the nonlinear optimization method for the solution of this problem. Section 4 illustrates the validation experiment and its results. Our conclusions are offered in Section 5.
\section{Compartmental analysis of dynamic PET data} \label{sec:comp-analysis}
Compartmental analysis of nuclear medicine data is the mathematical framework for the quantitative assessment of tracer kinetics in the biological tissue \cite{Carson,Cherry,Morris,Schmidt,gaetal15,gaetal14}. The compartmental model of a specific organ comprises compartments representing the functional states of the tracer radioactive molecules
(e.g.: physical location as intravascular space, extracellular space, intracellular space, etc., or chemical state as metabolic form, binding state, etc.), and kinetic parameters, which are the input/output tracer rates for each compartment. Figure \ref{fig:model-2C} illustrates the standard two-compartmental model describing the FDG metabolism in the organ under consideration \cite{Sokoloff}. This model reproduces the main steps of the FDG path in a PET experiment. First, the tracer is injected into the blood with a concentration mathematically modelled by the Input Function (IF), here assumed as known and represented by the tracer concentration $C_b$ in the arterial blood compartment. Then, the FDG metabolism within the tissue is characterized by two functional states: the free compartment with concentration $C_f$, associated to the tracer molecules outside the tissue cells, and the metabolized compartment with concentration $C_m$, associated to FDG molecules within the cytoplasm. Finally, the FDG kinetics is described by four rate constants connecting the model compartments: $k_1$ and $k_2$ describe the exchange rates between the input and free pools, and $k_3$ and $k_4$ describe the exchange rates at the basis of the phosphorylation/dephosphorylation process.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figure_1}
\caption{Compartmental model for FDG kinetics in a living tissue: external arterial blood compartment of concentration $C_b$, free tracer compartment of concentration $C_f$, metabolized tracer compartment of concentration $C_m$, and four kinetic parameters $k_1,k_2,k_3,k_4$.}
\label{fig:model-2C}
\end{figure}
The system of Ordinary Differential Equations (ODEs) for the two-compartment model is
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ODE_2C}
\frac{d\bC}{dt}(t) = \dot{\bC}(t) = \bM \bC(t) + k_1 C_b(t) \be_1 ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ODE_2C_matrix}
\bC = \begin{pmatrix} C_f \\ C_m \end{pmatrix} , \quad
\bM = \begin{pmatrix} -(k_2+k_3) & k_4 \\ k_3 & -k_4 \end{pmatrix} , \quad
\be_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} ,
\end{equation}
where $t$
is the time variable, and $\pm k_i$, $i =1,2,3,4$, represent incoming and outgoing fluxes.
In standard applications of compartmental analysis, the initial conditions are $C_f(0) = C_m(0) = 0$, meaning that the PET experiment starts at time $t = 0$ when there is no available tracer into the biological system.
The analytical solution of \eqref{eq:ODE_2C} represents the forward model equation of determining the compartment concentrations given
the kinetic parameters, and takes the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq:sol_2C}
\bC(t;\bk) = k_1 \int_0^t \exp(\bM(t-u)) C_b(u) \be_1 \, du ,
\end{equation}
where the entries of the vector $\bk = (k_1,k_2,k_3,k_4)^T \in \R^4$ have to be non-negative real values.
The compartmental input function $C_b(t)$ can be obtained experimentally either from serial sampling of the arterial blood or reconstructed dynamic images \cite{suetal15}, when a large arterial pool such as the left ventricle is in the field of view for many frames, or by using reference tissue methods \cite{saetal15,scetal18}. However, PET images cannot offer enough resolution power to provide information on $\bC(t;\bk)$. Therefore the measurement equation
\begin{equation}\label{eq:inv_2C}
\tilde{C}_{(p,q)}(t;\ve k) = \ve \alpha^T \ve C_{(p,q)}(t;\bk) + V_{(p,q)} C_b(t) \ , \quad \ve \alpha = \begin{pmatrix} 1-V_{(p,q)} \\ 1-V_{(p,q)} \end{pmatrix} ,
\end{equation}
should be added to equation (\ref{eq:sol_2C}) to connect the compartment model to the PET data. In this equation $(p,q)$ represents a specific image pixel, $\tilde{C}_{(p,q)}$ denotes the measured tracer concentration at pixel $(p,q)$ of the organ image, $\ve C_{(p,q)}$ is the formal analytic solution of \eqref{eq:sol_2C}, and $V_{(p,q)}$ is the fraction of tissue volume occupied by the blood. In general, the blood volume fraction depends on the pixel position, but within a homogeneous tissue it can be assumed as a known constant.
In equation (\ref{eq:inv_2C}) the unknown kinetic parameters are functions of $(p,q)$ and therefore the inverse problem represented by this equation should be solved numerically and pixel-wise. Rather coarse approximations allow a linearization of this equation \cite{paetal83,lo00}. However, the pixel-wise solution of the exact nonlinear equation requires the availability of an effective optimization scheme for the regularization of the ill-posed nonlinear compartmental inverse problem represented by the equation and eventually for the reconstruction of the four parametric images associated to $k_1$, $k_2$, $k_3$, and $k_4$.
\section{Computational approaches for nonlinear ill-posed problems} \label{sec:TR}
The compartmental inverse problem described in the previous section is a special case of the following more general formulation.
Given a set of measurements $\ve y^0$
of tracer concentration provided by PET images, corresponding to a finite sample of $N$ time points
$t_1,...,t_N$, we have to determine the kinetic parameters $\ve k \in\R^n$, $n\leq N$, by solving the
non-negatively constrained nonlinear system
\begin{equation}\label{nonlinearsystem}
{\ve F}(\ve k)= {\ve{y}^0},\quad \quad \mbox{subject to }{\ve k}\geq 0.
\end{equation}
Here $\ve{y}^0 = (\tilde{C}_{(p,q)}(t_1,\ve{k}),...,\tilde{C}_{(p,q)}(t_N,\ve{k}))^T$, and $\ve {F}\colon\R^n\rightarrow \R^N$
is the continuously differentiable function at the right hand side of (\ref{eq:inv_2C}). In real experiments a noisy version $\ve {y}^{\delta}$ of $\ve{y}^0$ is at disposal, where $\delta$ is a known bound on the measurement error, with $\delta\leq \|\ve{y}^0\|$.
A standard approach to address equation (\ref{nonlinearsystem}) \cite{Engl,Kalten}
consists in approximating a solution $\ve k^\dag$ of this nonlinear system by solving the following non-negatively
nonlinear least squares problem via an iterative regularization technique with semiconvergent behaviour:
\begin{equation}\label{problem}
\min_{\ve{k}\geq 0}\ \Phi(\ve k) \equiv \frac{1}{2}\|\ve {y^\delta} - {\ve F}(\ve k)\|^2.
\end{equation}
In view of the discrepancy principle \cite{Engl}, the iterative method is stopped at the iteration ${\bar{j}(\delta)}$ satisfying the following condition
\begin{equation}\label{stopcrit}
\|\ve {y}^\delta - \ve F(\ve k^{\bar{j}(\delta)})\|\leq \tau \delta <\|\ve {y}^\delta - \ve F(\ve k^{{j}})\|\quad 0\leq j\leq {\bar{j}(\delta)},
\end{equation}
for a suitable $\tau>1$.
In this section, we describe a method for computing a regularized solution of problem~\eqref{problem}; in particular, we combine the regularizing approach developed in~\cite{Wang} for unconstrained ill-posed problems with the affine scaling trust-region (TR) schemes for a box-constrained minimization problem~\cite{Coleman,Macconi}. The key point to link these methods is represented by the following Proposition~\ref{mono_proj}, which shows that possible projection
steps do not prevent the convergence of the iterative scheme. Therefore, the main contribution of this section is to show that the theoretical framework developed for the unconstrained problem \cite{Wang} still holds also in the non-negatively constrained case.
\subsection{A regularizing affine scaling trust-region method for non-negatively nonlinear least-squares problems} \label{subsec:reg-TR-nonneg}
For unconstrained nonlinear ill-posed least-squares problems, the state-of-the-art approaches are the regularized Levenberg-Marquadt (LM) method, proposed by Hanke~\cite{Hanke}, and its reformulation within a Trust-Region~(TR) framework, proposed by Wang et al.~\cite{Wang} and, more recently, by Bellavia et al. \cite{Bellavia}.
As in the standard TR algorithm, the regularizing TR iteration requires to compute,
at each iteration, a trial step $\ve p^j$,
by minimizing the quadratic model $m_j(\ve p)$ within a region around the current iterate $\ve{k}^j$:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eqn:tr}
&&\min_{\ve p}\ m_j(\ve{p})\equiv \frac{1}{2} \ve p^T \ve B^j \ve p+ \ve p^T\ve g^j \nonumber \\%J(\ve{k}^j)^T(\ve F(\ve{k}^j)-\ve{y}^\delta)\nonumber\\
&& \mbox{s.t. }\ \|\ve p\|\leq \Delta_j
\end{eqnarray}
where $\ve B^j\equiv \ve J(\ve{k}^j)^T \ve J(\ve{k}^j)$ is the Gauss-Newton approximation of the Hessian of $\ve F$,
$\ve g^{j}\equiv \nabla \Phi(\ve{k}^j)=\ve J(\ve{k}^j)^T(\ve F(\ve{k}^j)-\ve{y}^\delta)$ and $\Delta_j$ denotes the TR radius; this can be expanded or reduced depending on whether a sufficient reduction of the model is achieved or not, i.e. if the ratio $\rho_j = \displaystyle \frac{\Phi(\ve k^j + \ve { p}^j)-\Phi(\ve k^j) } {m_j(\ve{ p}^j)}$ between the actual reduction in the objective functional and the predicted reduction in the quadratic model is lower than some
positive threshold $\beta\in(0, 1)$.
The regularizing property is accomplished by requiring that
the TR constraint is active at the solution,
i.e., the solution $\ve p^j$ of \eqref{eqn:tr} must be such that $\|\ve p^j\|=\Delta_j$ so that the associated Lagrange multiplier $\alpha_j$ plays the role of a penalization parameter in a Tikhonov-like regularization. Indeed, given $\ve{k}^j$, the new iterate can be viewed as the solution of the penalized subproblem arising at the iteration of LM method:
\begin{equation}\label{lmHanke}
\ve k^{j+1} = \ve{k}^j+ \ve{p}^j = \argmin_{\ve k} \{ \|\ve {y}^{\delta} - \ve F(\ve k^j) - \ve J(\ve k^j) (\ve k - \ve k^j) \|^2 + \alpha_j \| \ve k -\ve k^j\|^2 \}.
\end{equation}
This regularization technique for an unconstrained problem can be combined with the TR methods for box-constrained nonlinear least-squares problems. To this aim, we introduce a regularizing technique in the affine-scaling TR method~\cite{Bellavia_2006,Coleman,Macconi}
requiring that the TR constraint in the subproblem \eqref{eqn:tr} is active at the solution. In particular,
given $\ve k^j>0$ and $\ve g^j\neq 0$,
we find the solution $\alpha_j >0$ of the nonlinear equation $\Delta_j-\|\ve p(\alpha)\|=0$,
where $\displaystyle \ve p(\alpha)=(\ve J(\ve k^j)^T \ve J(\ve k^j) +\alpha \ve I_n)^{-1} \ve J(\ve k^j)^T (\ve y^\delta -\ve F(\ve k^j))$.
By setting $\ve p^j=\ve p(\alpha_j)$, in order to ensure the strict feasibility of a new iterate,
the $i$-th entry of $\ve k^{j+1} = \ve{k}^j+\ve{\bar{p}}^j$ is computed in accordance with the following rule:
\begin{equation} \label{proj_step}
\ve{\bar{p}}_i^j= \left\{\begin{array}{cc}
\ve p_i^j & \quad \mbox{if } (\ve{k}^j+\ve{p}^j)_i> 0 \quad \\
t(\Pi(\ve{k}^j+\ve{p}^j)-\ve k^j)_i & \mbox{if } (\ve k^j+\ve p^j)_i\leq 0
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
where $\Pi(\cdot)$ denotes the Euclidean projection onto the non-negative orthant of $\R^n$ and $t\in (0,1)$.
Clearly, in view of the properties of the projection operator, $\|\ve{\bar{p}}^j\|\leq \|\ve p^j\|$.
As emphasized in~\cite{Coleman}, a key point to assure
the convergence
of the affine-scaling TR method is that the new iterate $\ve{k}^j+\ve{\bar{p}}^j$
must be able to achieve at least as much reduction in the quadratic model as
the one achieved by the generalized Cauchy point $\ve{p}_C^j = - \lambda_C^j \ve D(\ve k^j) \ve g^j$,
where $\ve D(\ve k)$ is a diagonal matrix such that
\begin{equation}\label{scaling}
\ve D(\ve k)_{i,i} = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
|\ve k_i| & \mbox{if }\nabla\Phi(\ve k)_i\geq 0 \\
1& \mbox{otherwise}\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
and $\lambda_C^j$ is defined as follows
{\footnotesize \begin{equation} \label{proj_cauchy}
\hskip -2cm\lambda^j_C= \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
\min\left\{ \displaystyle \frac{\Delta_j}{\|\ve D(\ve k^j) \ve g^j\|},
\displaystyle \frac{\|\ve D^{1/2}(\ve k^j) \ve g^j\|^2}{\|\ve J(\ve k^j) \ve D(\ve k^j) \ve g^j \|^2 }\right\} & \mbox{if } \left(\ve{k}^j-\hat{\lambda}^j_C \ve D(\ve k^j) \ve g^j\right)_i> 0 \quad \\
t \min_i \left\{\displaystyle \frac{\ve k_i^j}{(\ve D(\ve k^j) \ve g^j)_i} \colon (\ve D(\ve k^j) \ve g^j)_i> 0 \right\} & \mbox{if } \left(\ve{k}^j-\hat{\lambda}^j_C \ve D(\ve k^j) \ve g^j\right)_i\leq 0
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}}
\hskip -0.2cm with $t\in (0,1)$.
If $\rho_j^C=\displaystyle \frac{m_j(\ve{\bar{p}}^j)}{m_j(\ve{p}^j_C)}>\beta_C\in (0,1)$ and $\rho_j>\beta\in [0.25,1)$,
the current trial step is accepted and the next iterate is updated as $\ve k^{j+1}=\ve k^{j}+\ve{\bar{p}}^j$, otherwise the TR radius is reduced. In particular,
if $\rho_j^C \leq \beta_C$,
the unsatisfactory reduction of the quadratic model at $\ve{\bar{p}}^j$ with respect to the reduction obtained with the generalized Cauchy step highlights that
we have to increase the effect of the regularization term by reducing
the TR radius and computing a new reduced step;
this vector tend to line up with $\ve g^j$ and the new generalized Cauchy step,
so that the sufficient reduction of the quadratic model is obtained.
Furthermore, when $\|\ve g ^j\| \neq 0$,
after a successful iteration of the method, the TR radius can be further adjusted by increasing or reducing it within a prefixed range, accordingly to a strategy proposed in~\cite{Bellavia} (see Eq.~(5.5)-(5.6)),
as follows:\newline
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:mu}
\Delta_{j+1} = \max\left(\mu_{j+1}\|\ve F(\ve k^{j+1})- \ve{ y}^{\delta}\|,1.2 \frac{(1-q)\|\ve g^{j+1}\|}{\|\ve B^{j+1}\|}\right) ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\mu_{j+1}=\left\{ \begin{array}{cc}
\theta \mu_j & \quad \mbox{if } q_j<q \quad \\
\frac{\mu_j}{\eta} & \ \ \qquad \mbox{if } q_j>1.1q\ \quad \\
\mu_j & \quad \mbox{otherwise}
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
with
$q\in(0, 1)$, $q_j = \displaystyle \frac{\|\ve{y}^\delta-\ve F(\ve{k}^j)-\ve{J}(\ve{k}^j)\ve{\bar{p}}^j\|}{ \|\ve{y}^\delta-\ve F(\ve{k}^j)\|}$ and $\theta, \eta\in (0,1)$.
The regularizing affine-scaling TR method, called in the following reg-AS-TR, is summarized in Algorithm \ref{Alg:TR}; for data affected by noise, the stopping criterion is based on the discrepancy principle~\eqref{stopcrit}.
The convergence analysis of reg-AS-TR requires to prove Proposition~\ref{mono_proj}, which is analogous to Theorem 2.1 of \cite{Wang}, i.e., we need to prove that the distance between $\ve k^j$ and the exact solution $\ve k^\dag$ decreases for $j\leq \bar{j}(\delta)$.
To this aim, we give two essential assumptions on the local properties of the nonlinear system \eqref{nonlinearsystem}, very similar to the ones used in \cite{Hanke,Wang} to handle ill-posed problems
\begin{itemize}
\item[{A1}.] Given an initial guess $\ve k^0 > 0$, there exist $\nu, c>0$ such that $\ve k^{\dag}\in B_{\nu}(\ve k^0)=\{\ve k\geq 0:
\|\ve k-\ve k^0\|\leq \nu\}$
and for all $\ve{\bar{k}},\ve{k} \in B_{2\nu}(\ve k^0)=\{\ve k\geq 0:
\|\ve k-\ve k^0\|\leq 2\nu\}$ the following condition holds:
\begin{equation}
\|\ve F(\ve{\bar{k}})- \ve F(\ve k) -\ve J(\ve k)(\ve{\bar{k}}-\ve k)\| \leq c \| \ve{\bar{k}}-\ve k\| \| \ve F(\ve{\bar{k}})- \ve F(\ve k) \|
\end{equation}
\item[{A2}.] $\|\ve k^0-\ve k^{\dag}\|< \min(\frac{q}{c},\nu)$ for noisy-free data ($\delta=0$) and $\|\ve k^0-\ve k^{\dag}\|< \min(\frac{q\tau-1}{c(1+\tau)},\nu)$ for noisy data ($\delta>0$) with $\tau>1/q$.
\end{itemize}
We highlight that, when at the first steps of the algorithm these assumptions are not verified, the initial iterations
can enable to restrict the domain so that they hold from a certain~$j$.
Now, we are able to state the following key proposition (for the proof see the Appendix).
\begin{proposition}\label{mono_proj}
Let assume that
$\ve J(\ve k^j)^T \ve J(\ve k^j)+\alpha_j \ve I_n$ is positive definite, $\ve g^j\neq 0$ and
\begin{equation}\label{qcond}
\|\ve{y}^\delta-\ve F(\ve{k}^j)-\ve{J}(\ve{k}^j)\ve {\ve {\bar p}}^j \|\geq q \|\ve{y}^\delta-\ve F(\ve{k}^j)\|
\end{equation}
for a suitable $q\in(0,1)$,
with $j\geq 0$ and with $j\leq \bar{j}(\delta)$ when $\delta>0$.
Moreover, let assume that, for a suitable $\gamma_{\delta}>1$, the following condition holds for $\ve k^j>0$:
\begin{equation}\label{gamma_cond1}
\|\ve y^{\delta}- \ve F(\ve k^j) -\ve J(\ve k^j)(\ve{k}^\dag-\ve k^j)\| \leq \frac{q}{\gamma_\delta} \| \ve y^{\delta}- \ve F(\ve k^j) \|.
\end{equation}
Thus we have
\begin{equation}
\|\ve{k}^\dag-\ve k^j\|^2-\|\ve{k}^\dag-\ve{k}^{j+1}\|^2> \frac{2t(\gamma_{\delta}-1)q}{\gamma_{\delta}} \|\ve{y}^\delta-\ve F(\ve{k}^j)\| \|\ve{v}^j\| \label{primawang}
\end{equation}
with $\ve{v}^j= (\ve J(\ve{k}^j)\ve J(\ve{k}^j)^T+\alpha_j \ve I_N )^{-1}(\ve{y}^\delta-\ve F(\ve{k}^j))$.
\end{proposition}
We remark that condition~\eqref{gamma_cond1} with $j=0$ follows directly from the assumptions A1-A2 with
$\gamma_0\geq\displaystyle \frac{q}{c\|\ve k^{\dag}-\ve k^0\|}>1$ for noise-free data. For $\delta>0$, condition~\eqref{gamma_cond1} with $j=0$
is obtained with $\gamma_{\delta}\geq \displaystyle \frac{q\tau}{1+c\|\ve k^{\dag}-\ve k^0\|(1+\tau)}>1$,
combining the assumptions A1-A2 with the inequality $\displaystyle \frac{\|\ve y^\delta- \ve F(\ve k^j)\|}{\delta}>\tau$ which is satisfied for $j\leq \bar{j}(\delta)$ (see \eqref{stopcrit}).
As a consequence of Proposition~\ref{mono_proj}, $\ve k^1$ belongs to $B_{2\nu}(\ve k^0)$
and to $B_{\nu}(\ve k^\dag)$. Therefore, for the same argument above, condition~\eqref{gamma_cond1} holds by induction for $j\geq 0$ and
for $j\leq \bar{j}(\delta)$ when $\delta>0$; as a consequence, the sequence $\|\ve k^j -\ve k^\dag\|$ is decreasing.
Based on the above proposition and the convergence results of the affine-scaling TR methods,
the same properties of the regularizing TR method for an unconstrained nonlinear least-squares problem can be easily extended to the non-negatively constrained case.
Under Assumptions A1-A2 on the exact solution $\ve k^\dag$, reg-AS-TR
terminates after $\bar{j}(\delta)<\infty$ iterations, where $\delta$ is the noise level on the data,
whereas for $\delta=0$ or $\delta\rightarrow 0$ the sequence $\{\ve k^j\}$ generated by Algorithm \ref{Alg:TR} converges to a solution of the
original problem.
As a final remark, we point out that the ill-posedness and nonlinearity of the method, together with the local properties of reg-AS-TR imply that the effectiveness of our numerical scheme may be significantly influenced by the accuracy of both the initialization and the noise estimate. The reliability with which these two aspects are addressed is an essential requirement for the accuracy of the reconstruction results.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{Regularizing affine-scaling Trust-Region (reg-AS-TR) method \label{Alg:TR}}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
{\scriptsize
\begin{tabular}{p{1.0\textwidth}}
{\bf Initialize}: \ Choose $\ve{k}^{0}>0, \beta\in [0.25, 1), \gamma,\beta_C \in(0,1)$,\\
$0<\Delta_{min}<\Delta_{max}, \ q\in(0,1),\ \mu_0=0.001$\\[.1cm
\ $j=0$; \\%[.1cm]
\While {the stopping rule is not satisfied}\vspace{.1cm}
\State Evaluate $\ve B_j = \ve J(\ve k^j)^T J(\ve k^j)$ and $\ve g^j =\ve{J}^T(\ve{k}^j)(\ve F(\ve{k}^j) - {\ve{y}^\delta})$ \vspace{.1cm}
\State $\Delta_j = \max\left(\mu_j\|\ve F(\ve{k}^j) - {\ve{y}^{\delta}}\|, \ 1.2\frac{(1-q)\|\ve g^j \| }{\|\ve B_j \|} \right) \in \left[ \Delta_{min}, \Delta_{max}\right] $ \vspace{.1cm}
\Repeat \vspace{.1cm}
\State Compute a feasible solution $\ve {\bar p}^j$ to the trust-region problem \eqref{eqn:tr} \vspace{.1cm
\State Compute the Cauchy point $\ve{ p}_C^j$
\State Compute $\rho_j^C = \frac{m_j(\ve {\bar p}^j)}{m_j(\ve{ p}_C^j)}$ and $\rho^j = \frac{\Phi(\ve k^j + \ve {\bar p}^j)-\Phi(\ve k^j) } {m_j(\ve{\bar p}^j)}$ \vspace{.1cm}
\State If $\rho_j^C\leq\beta_C $ or $\rho_j\leq\beta$ then set $\Delta_j = \gamma\Delta_j$ \vspace{.1cm}
\Until $\rho_j^C>\beta_C $ and $\rho_j>\beta$ \vspace{.1cm}
\State $\ve k^{j+1}=\ve k^j +\ve{\bar{p}}^j$ \vspace{.1cm}
\State j = j+1 \vspace{.1cm}
\State Update $\mu_{j+1}$ as specified in \eqref{eqn:mu}\vspace{.1cm}
\EndWhile
\end{tabular}
}
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\section{Numerical experiments} \label{sec:num-exp}
The numerical validation of reg-AS-TR is performed using synthetic PET data generated by means of a digital phantom of the human brain. All simulations were realized on a workstation equipped with an Intel Xeon QuadCore E5620 processor at 2,40 GHz and 18 Gb of RAM, by implementing the method in the Matlab$^\circledR$ R2019a environment.
\subsection{Simulation setting} \label{subsec:simulation}
The starting point was the 3D Hoffman Digital Reference Object, a digital representation of the Hoffman Brain Phantom used in PET and CT imaging studies, freely available from the Imaging Research Laboratory of the Department of Radiology at the Medical Center of the University of Washington (http://depts.washington.edu/petctdro/DROhoffman\_main.html).
The 3D Hoffman brain phantom is composed of 250 slices, covering the entire head, consisting in black/white images of size $256\times 256$. We reduced the image size to $128 \times 128$ to resemble typical PET acquisitions, preserving the shape and features of the original phantom.
For sake of simplicity, we selected a middle slice including eight anatomical structures that can be subdivided into the four homogeneous functional regions in Figure \ref{subfig:regions}: grey matter (region 1), white matter (region 2), basal ganglia (region 3), and thalamus (region 4).
Then, for each region, we assigned a ground-truth set of rate constants of the two-compartment model for FDG kinetics (described in Section 2) and a specific blood volume fraction $V$. The numerical values of such parameters, as reported in Table~\ref{table:1}, have been chosen in order to reproduce a realistic framework for the FDG uptake of a human brain \cite{Guo,Huang,Wang-Qi2,Wang-Qi1}. The ground-truth parametric images are shown in \figurename~\ref{fig:k-images-gt}.
In order to model the IF we implemented the following procedure \cite{Vriens}. We considered a mathematical function (see Eq. (2) in \cite{Vriens}) consisting of an increasing linear component followed by a tri-exponential decay; we fitted the free parameters of this function against measurements for $80$ subjects; we selected the median estimated parameters computed over all $80$ subjects (see Table 2 in \cite{Vriens}), a median initial distribution volume ($12.7$ L corresponding to $0.1683$ L/kg body weight), and an Administered Activity (AA) of $350$ MBq (typical of human PET acquisitions).
The resulting simulated IF is shown in \figurename~\ref{subfig:IF}.
The dynamic PET data were generated by solving the compartmental forward problem for each pixel of the processed Hoffman brain image. In particular, the two-compartment concentrations were evaluated by means of the integral equation \eqref{eq:sol_2C} with the ground truth values of the compartmental parameters and the simulated IF, at 28 time frames (6 $\times$ 10 sec, 3 $\times$ 20 sec, 3 $\times$ 30 sec, 4 $\times$ 60 sec, 3 $\times$ 150 sec, 9 $\times$ 300 sec) with a time sampling typical of standard PET experiments, for a total time interval of 60 minutes.
Then, the measurement equation \eqref{eq:inv_2C} was computed to create the time concentration curves characteristic for each brain region (\figurename~\ref{subfig:TACs}). The last frame of the obtained dynamic PET images is reported in \figurename~\ref{subfig:last-frame}.
Once the noise-free dynamic PET images were obtained, we projected the images into the sinogram space by means of the Radon transform, and we added Poisson noise to the projected data through the Matlab function \emph{poissrnd}. In this way, we created ten independent identically-distributed noisy data.
In addition to the noise-free IF case, we considered two
further instances where the IF was perturbed by two Gaussian noise levels:
$C_b^{c} = C_b(t_i)(1 + c \cdot r)$, for time points $t_i$, $i=1,\dots, N$, where $r$ is randomly generated from a standard normal distribution of mean~$0$ and standard deviation~$1$, and $c = 0.10, \ 0.20$ (\figurename~\ref{subfig:IF}).
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[Brain regions \label{subfig:regions}]
{\includegraphics[width=0.26\textwidth]{figure_2a}} \quad \hspace{1.4cm}
\subfigure[Last frame PET data \label{subfig:last-frame}]
{\includegraphics[width=0.26\textwidth]{figure_2b}} \\
\subfigure[Time concentration curves \label{subfig:TACs}]
{\includegraphics[width=0.28\textwidth]{figure_2c}} \quad\hspace{1.3cm}
\subfigure[IF \label{subfig:IF}]
{\includegraphics[width=0.28\textwidth]{figure_2d}}
\caption{Simulation layout: (a) $128 \times 128$ Hoffman brain image subdivided into four homogeneous regions; (b) last frame of the simulated PET dynamic data ; (c) time-dependent concentration curves of all brain regions; (d) simulated IF for AA of 350 MBq as noise-free, and with $10\%$, and $20\%$ of noise.}
\label{fig:phantom}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Ground truth values of the kinetic parameters $k_1$, $k_2$, $k_3$, $k_4$, (min$^{-1}$) and the blood volume fraction $V$, for each one of the four homogeneous regions.}\label{table:1}
\begin{tabular}{cccccr}
\hline
& $k_1$ & $k_2$ & $k_3$ & $k_4$ & $V$ \\
\hline
region 1 & 0.100 & 0.250 & 0.100 & 0.020 & 0.050 \\
region 2 & 0.050 & 0.150 & 0.050 & 0.020 & 0.030 \\
region 3 & 0.070 & 0.050 & 0.100 & 0.007 & 0.040 \\
region 4 & 0.080 & 0.100 & 0.050 & 0.007 & 0.050 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure[$k_1$ \label{subfig:k1-gt}]
{\includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth]{figure_3a}} \quad \hspace{0.8cm}
\subfigure[$k_2$ \label{subfig:k2-gt}]
{\includegraphics[width=0.205\textwidth]{figure_3b}} \quad \\% \hspace{0.5cm}
\subfigure[$k_3$ \label{subfig:k3-gt}]
{\includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth]{figure_3c}} \quad \hspace{0.8cm}
\subfigure[$k_4$ \label{subfig:k4-gt}]
{\includegraphics[width=0.205\textwidth]{figure_3d}}
\caption{Ground truth parametric images.}
\label{fig:k-images-gt}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Setup of the algorithms} \label{subsec:results}
The parametric reconstruction by means of reg-AS-TR was performed as follows.
In order to remove blurring artifacts from the images of each dataset, we applied a well-known deblurring technique based on the minimization of the Kullback-Leibler divergence with a smooth total-variation regularization term referred to as \emph{hypersurface potential}; this minimization is performed by means of the Scaled Gradient Projection (SGP) method proposed in \cite{Bonettini-etal-2009} (see also \cite{Crisci_etal2019}),
starting from the inverse Radon transform of the noisy sinogram data. The deblurring procedure exploits the parallel toolbox of Matlab enabling the use of \texttt{GPUarray} and it requires about $7$ minutes overall.\\
The stopping criterion of reg-AS-TR is the following:
\begin{equation}\label{stop}
\epsilon_{j} < \tau_1 \quad \text{or} \quad
\left( \epsilon_{j} < \tau_2 \quad \text{and} \quad \left|1 - \frac{\epsilon_{j-1}}{\epsilon_j}\right| <10^{-2} \right)
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon_{j}$ = $\|\ve y^{\delta} - \ve F(\ve k^j) \|$,
$\tau_1$ is the sample standard deviation computed at the current pixel and~$\tau_2$ is a multiple of~$\tau_1$, which changes accordingly when the procedure switches between boundary ($\tau_2 =10 \tau_1$ ) and inner pixels ($\tau_2 =3 \tau_1$ ) of a region.
In addition, if condition~(\ref{stop}) is not satisfied, the execution terminates when stagnation
or the maximum number of iterations are reached.
The stopping rule implemented allows to diversify the initialization procedure of reg-AS-TR.
In general, the initial vector is randomly chosen in an interval determined by a priori knowledges on the physiology.
However, when the current pixel is strictly inside a functional region and some neighboring pixels have been already successfully processed, the initialization value is the mean over the values obtained on these neighboring pixels.
The reconstruction accuracy of reg-AS-TR has been assessed by comparison with both the ground truth and the parametric images provided by a recently introduced regularized Gauss-Newton method (reg-GN) \cite{Scussolini}. For sake of comparison, the setup of reg-GN is coherent with what is done in that paper, i.e.:
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Deblurring.} The noise on the PET datasets was reduced by applying a Gaussian smoothing filter (mean~$0$, standard deviation~$1$, window 3$\times$3) directly to the noisy PET images.
\item \emph{Initialization.} The starting point of the kinetic parameters was chosen randomly in intervals determined by knowledge on the physiology.
\item \emph{Stopping criterion.} The iterative scheme is stopped when the relative error between the experimental dynamic concentration and the model-predicted one is less than an appropriate threshold, or the maximum number of iterations is reached.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Results}
Figure \ref{fig:k-rec-noise-free}, Figure \ref{fig:k-rec-noise-10p}, and Figure \ref{fig:k-rec-noise-20p} show the mean images computed over the ten reconstructions obtained by the methods reg-AS-TR, reg-GN, and by the Matlab routine \emph{lsqcurvefit} implementing a standard Trust-Region-Reflective least-squares algorithm \cite{Coleman,Coleman1994}. We used the noise-free IF and the perturbed IF with $10\%$ and $20\%$ of noise, respectively.
\figurename~\ref{fig:k-rec-all} contains mean and standard deviation values of the kinetic parameters computed over the ten reconstructions and over each one of the four homogeneous regions, for each one of the three noise levels on the IF.
Finally, \figurename~\ref{fig:data-rec} represents the last frame of the dynamic PET data reconstructed with the mean parametric values returned by reg-AS-TR, reg-GN, and \emph{lsqcurvefit}, with respect to the noise-free, 10$\%$-noise, and 20$\%$-noise IFs.
\section{Comments and conclusions}
In general, reg-AS-TR and \emph{lsqcurvefit} seem to provide similar mean reconstructions, although uncertainties associated to \emph{lsqcurvefit} are significantly bigger. On the other hand reg-GN seems to systematically underestimate the parameter values within region~$1$. Furthermore and as expected, for all methods the quality of the parametric reconstructions deteriorates with increasing noise levels; this is more clear from the $k_3$ and $k_4$ parametric images, probably due to the different sensitivities of the data with respect to the model parameters \cite{scetal19}. In reg-GN and \emph{lsqcurvefit} some artifacts can be observed at the edges of the homogeneous regions, especially around region $1$ and region $2$, whereas the effect of regularization in reg-AS-TR results in a reduced presence of artifacts while the structure of the regions is preserved. This general trend is confirmed by the error-bar plots of~\figurename~\ref{fig:k-rec-all}. Finally, the frames in \figurename~\ref{fig:data-rec} corresponding to reg-AS-TR show a significant improvement of the image quality with respect to what is provided by the other two approaches.
The mean execution time for a single parametric reconstruction differs considerably between the reconstruction methods: reg-AS-TR requires about $20$ minutes, reg-GN needs a computational time in the range $75-120$ minutes with run time increasing with noise level on IF (as a consequence of the stopping criterion implemented) and Matlab \emph{lsqcurvefit} takes about $90$ minutes. Therefore reg-AS-TR seems to be the most efficient approach in terms of both computational time and reconstruction accuracy.
Next steps for this piece of research activity will be the validation of reg-AS-TR against several experimental datasets in the case of both humans' and small animals' dynamic PET images. Further, we are going to generalize reg-AS-TR to the case of more complex compartmental models like the ones for the assessment of FDG kinetics in liver \cite{gaetal15} and kidneys \cite{gaetal14}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_4a}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_4b}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_4c}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_4d}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_4e}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_4f}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_4g}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_4h}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_4k}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_4j}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_4i}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_4l}
\caption{From left to right: mean parametric images corresponding to $k_1$, $k_2$, $k_3$, $k_4$, obtained by using reg-AS-TR (first row), reg-GN (second row), \emph{lsqcurvefit} (third row). Case noise-free IF.}
\label{fig:k-rec-noise-free}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_5a}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_5b}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_5c}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_5d}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_5e}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_5f}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_5g}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_5h}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_5k}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_5j}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_5i}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_5l}
\caption{From left to right: mean parametric images corresponding to $k_1$, $k_2$, $k_3$, $k_4$, obtained by using reg-AS-TR (first row), reg-GN (second row), \emph{lsqcurvefit} (third row). Case $10\%$-noise IF.}
\label{fig:k-rec-noise-10p}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_6a}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_6b}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_6c}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_6d}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_6e}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_6f}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_6g}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_6h}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_6k}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_6j}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_6i}\quad \hspace{0.55cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{figure_6l}
\caption{From left to right: mean parametric images corresponding to $k_1$, $k_2$, $k_3$, $k_4$, obtained by using reg-AS-TR (first row), reg-GN (second row), \emph{lsqcurvefit} (third row). Case $20\%$-noise IF.}
\label{fig:k-rec-noise-20p}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure[$k_1$ \label{subfig:k1-rec}]
{\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{figure_7a}} \quad \hspace{0.7cm}
\subfigure[$k_2$ \label{subfig:k2-rec}]
{\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{figure_7b}} \\
\subfigure[$k_3$ \label{subfig:k3-rec}]
{\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{figure_7c}} \quad \hspace{0.7cm}
\subfigure[$k_4$ \label{subfig:k4-rec}]
{\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{figure_7d}}
\caption{Mean and standard deviation values of the kinetic parameters for the four homogeneous region as error bars over the reconstructions: reg-AS-TR (green bars), reg-GN (purple bars), \emph{lsqcurvefit} (blue bars); noise-free IF (circle), $10\%$-noise IF (cross), $20\%$-noise IF (square).}
\label{fig:k-rec-all}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth]{figure_8a}\quad \hspace{1cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth]{figure_8b}\quad \hspace{1cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth]{figure_8c}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth]{figure_8d}\quad \hspace{1cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth]{figure_8e}\quad \hspace{1cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth]{figure_8f}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth]{figure_8g}\quad \hspace{1cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth]{figure_8h}\quad \hspace{1cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth]{figure_8k}
\caption{Last frame of the dynamic reconstruction obtained by using reg-AS-TR (first row), reg-GN (second row), and \emph{lsqcurvefit} (third row). From left to right: noise-free IF, $10\%$-noise IF, $20\%$-noise IF.}
\label{fig:data-rec}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\section*{Appendix}
|
\section{Full Waymo Open Dataset Results}
\input{sections/waymo_table_full}
\section{Discussion}
In this work, we presented a non-convolutional detection system that operates on native point cloud data. The goal of the proposed method is to better match the sparsity of point cloud data, and also allow the system to be flexibly targeted across a range of computational priorities. We demonstrate that the resulting detector is competitive with state-of-the-art detection systems on the KITTI object detection benchmark \cite{geiger2013vision}, and can outperform a competitive convolutional baseline on the large-scale Waymo Open Dataset.
The system allows for targeted computation, enabling the use of temporal context from detection outputs of prior frames. We show up to a 40\% relative improvement in mAP using prior frames to inform where to target computation for the current frame. We further demonstrate how in principle the detection system can target spatial locations without retraining nor sacrificing the prediction quality. For instance, depending on evaluation settings, a single trained pedestrian model can exceed the predictive performance of a baseline convolutional model by $\sim 48\%$ at a similar FLOPS; or, the same model may achieve the same predictive performance but with $\sim20\%$ of the FLOPS.
We foresee multiple avenues for further improving the fidelity of the system including: multi-sensor fusion with cameras
\cite{yang2018ipod, qi2018frustum,liang2019multi}, employing semantic information such as road maps to spatially target detections \cite{yang2018hdnet}, or restoring global context by removing conditional independence from each proposal \cite{xie2018attentional}.
While we have focused this first work on relatively simple sampling methods for proposals, more expensive or learned methods may further improve the system \cite{faster_rcnn}. For example, one could learn a ranking function to order the relative importance of proposals for a self-driving planning system \cite{cohen1998learning,burges2005learning,cao2007learning}.
Finally, we are particularly interested in studying how this system may be amenable to object tracking
\cite{bertinetto2016fully, held2016learning,gordon2018re} as we suspect that because of the design, the computational demands may scale as the {\it difference} between successive time points as opposed to operating on the entirety of the scene \cite{feichtenhofer2017detect}.
\section{Introduction}
Detecting and localizing objects forms a critical component of any autonomous driving platform \cite{geiger2013vision, nuscenes2019}.
As a result, self-driving cars (SDC) are equipped with a variety of sensors such as cameras, LiDARs, and radars \cite{cho2014multi, thrun2006stanley}, which the perception system must use to create an accurate 3D representation of the world.
Due to the nature of the driving task, the perception system must operate in real-time and in a highly variable operating environment \cite{kim2013parallel}.
LiDAR is one of the most critical sensors as it natively provides high resolution, accurate 3D data about the environment.
However, LiDAR based object detection systems for SDCs look remarkably similar to systems designed for generic camera imagery.
\ifcvprfinal\blfootnote{$^{*}$ Denotes equal contribution and authors for correspondence. JN proposed the idea and implemented the model. BC, JN, BY, YC, ZF and VV developed the infrastructure and experimented with the model. WH, VV, PS, JS built the evaluation framework. XY, YZ, PN and OA developed early pieces of infrastructure and the dataset. JS, JN, VV, BC and others wrote the manuscript.}\fi
Object detection research has matured for camera images with systems evolving to solve camera-specific challenges such as multiple overlapping objects, large intra-class scale variance due to camera perspective, and object occlusion \cite{girshick2014rich, girshick2015fast, faster_rcnn, lin2016feature, lin2017focal}.
These modality-specific challenges make the task of localizing and classifying objects in imagery uniquely difficult,
as an object may occupy any pixel, and neighboring objects may be as close as one pixel apart.
This necessitates treating every location and scale in the image equally, which naturally aligns with the use of convolutional networks for feature extraction \cite{girshick2014rich,girshick2015fast}.
While convolutional operations have been heavily optimized for parallelized hardware architectures, scaling these methods to high resolution images is difficult as computational cost scales quadratically with image resolution.
In contrast, LiDAR is naturally sparse; 3D objects have real world scale with no perspective distortions, and rarely overlap.
Additionally, in SDC perception, every location in the scene is not equally important \cite{zeng2019end, bojarski2016end, bansal2018chauffeurnet}, and that importance can change dynamically based on the local environment and context.
Despite large modality and task-specific differences, the best performing methods for 3D object detection re-purpose camera-based detection architectures.
Several methods apply convolutions to discretized representations of point clouds in the form of a projected Birds Eye View (BEV) image \cite{yang2018pixor,luo2018fast,yang2018hdnet,lang2018pointpillars}, or a 3D voxel grid \cite{zhou2018voxelnet, yan2018second}.
Alternatively, methods that operate directly on point clouds have re-purposed two stage object detector design, replacing feature extraction operations but still adopting the same camera-inspired region proposal stage \cite{yang2018ipod, shi2019pointrcnn, qi2018frustum}.
In this paper, we revisit the design of object detection systems in the context of 3D LiDAR data, and propose a new framework which better matches the data modality and the demands of SDC perception.
We start by recognizing that 3D region proposals are fundamentally distinct. Every reflected point must belong to an object or surface. In this setting, we demonstrate that efficient sampling schemes on point clouds -- with zero learned parameters -- are sufficient for generating region proposals. In addition to being computationally inexpensive, sampling has the advantage of implicitly exploiting the sparsity of the data by matching the data distribution of the scene.
Departing from the trend of increasing use of global context, we process each proposed region completely independently. This independence, and non-learned proposal mechanism also allows us to inject priors into the proposal process, which we show the value of by leveraging temporal context in the form of seeding sampling with the previous frames detections. Finally, we entirely avoid any discretization procedure and instead featurize the native point cloud \cite{qi2017pointnet, qi2017pointnet++}
in order to classify objects and regress bounding box locations \cite{faster_rcnn, ren2015faster}.
The resulting detector is as accurate as the state of the art at lower inference cost, and more accurate at similar inference costs.
In addition, these design decisions result in several key benefits.
First, the model does not waste computation on empty regions because the proposal method naturally exploits point cloud sparsity.
Second, one can dynamically vary the number of proposals and the number of points per proposal at inference time since the model operates locally. This feature permits a single trained model to operate at different computational budgets.
Third, the model can easily leverage contextual information (HD maps, temporal context) to target computation. For example, detection outputs from preceding frames can be used to inform the current frame's sampling locations.
In summary, our main contributions are as follows:
\begin{compactitem}
\item Introduce a flexible, local point-based object detector geared towards SDC perception. In the process we demonstrate that cheap proposals on point clouds, paired with a point-based network, results in a system that is competitive with state-of-the-art performance on self-driving car benchmarks.
\item Demonstrate the computational-flexibility of our model through showing how a single model designed in this fashion may adapt its inference cost. For instance, a single trained pedestrian model may exceed the predictive performance of a baseline convolutional model by $\sim48\%$ at similar computational demand; or, the same model without retraining may achieve similar predictive performance but with $\sim20\%$ of the computational demand.
\item Demonstrate the ability of the model to selectively target specific locations of interest. We show how temporal context (using only the \emph{outputs} of previous frames) can be used with the model to improve detection mAP scores by $\sim40\%$.
\end{compactitem}
\section{Methods}
\label{sec:methods-approach}
Our goal is to construct a detector that better aligns with the requirements of a SDC perception system, taking advantage of the sparsity of the data, allowing us to target where to spend computation, and operating on the native data.
To address these goals, we propose a sparse targeted object detector, termed {\it StarNet} (Figure \ref{fig:overview}):
Given a sparse sampling of locations in the point cloud, the model extracts a small (random) subset of neighboring points. The model featurizes the point cloud \cite{qi2017pointnet}, classifies the region, and regresses bounding box parameters.
The object location is predicted {\it relative} to the selected location and only uses local information. This setup ensures that each spatial location may be processed by the detector independently.
The structure of the proposed system confers two advantages. First, inference on each cell proposal occurs completely independently, enabling computation of each location to be parallelized to decrease inference latency. Second, contextual information information \cite{bojarski2016end,yang2018hdnet} may be used to inform importance of each proposal.
The rest of this section describes the architecture of StarNet\ in more detail.
\subsection{Center selection}
\label{sec:center-selection}
We propose using an inexpensive, data-dependent algorithm to generate proposals from LiDAR with high recall. In contrast to prior work \cite{yang2018pixor,lang2018pointpillars,yan2018second}, we do not base proposals on fixed grid locations, but instead generate proposals to respect the observed data distribution in a scene.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{figures/rus.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{figures/fps.png}
\captionof{figure}{Example of random uniform sampling (left) and farthest point sampling (right) with the \textit{same number of samples}. Red indicate selected centers. Green indicate pedestrians. Note that random uniform sampling biases towards high density regions, while farthest point sampling evenly covers the space. Neither place any proposals in empty space.}
\label{fig:center-selection}
\vspace{-5pt}
\end{figure}
Concretely, we sample $N$ points from the point cloud, and use their $(x, y)$ coordinates as proposals. To avoid sampling regions on the ground, we follow previous works \cite{yan2018second, lang2018pointpillars} and only allow sampling of points between a certain $z$-dimension range. For KITTI \cite{geiger2013vision} this is $z \in [-1.35, \inf]$, and for the Waymo Open Dataset\ \cite{waymo_open_dataset} we calculate the $10^{th}$ and $90^{th}$ percentile of the center z location of all objects. Note that these points are only excluded for sampling, and will be present in later stages.
In this work, we explore three sampling algorithms: random uniform sampling, farthest point sampling (FPS), and a hybrid approach of seeding FPS with preceding frame detections (Figure \ref{fig:center-selection}, Section \ref{temporal_proposals}). Random uniform sampling provides a simple and effective baseline because the sampling method biases towards densely populated regions of space. In contrast, farthest point sampling (FPS) selects individual points sequentially such that the next point selected is maximally far away from all previous points selected, maximizing the spatial coverage across the point cloud. Finally, in Section \ref{temporal_proposals}, we show how to leverage the previous frame detection outputs as seed locations for FPS. We show that this is a light-weight and effective way to leverage temporal information.
\subsection{Featurizing local point clouds}
After obtaining a proposal location, we featurize the local point cloud around the proposal. We randomly select $K$ points within a radius of $R$ meters of each proposal center. In our experiments, $K$ is typically between 32 to 1024, and $R$ is 2-3 meters. All local points are re-centered to an origin for each proposal. LiDAR features associated with each point are also used as part of the input.
We experimented with several architectures for featurizations of native point cloud data \cite{qi2017pointnet++, wu2018pointconv} but most closely followed \cite{xu2018powerful}. The resulting architecture is agnostic to the number of points provided as input \cite{qi2017pointnet++, wu2018pointconv, xu2018powerful}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{figures/StarNet_Block_Cropped.pdf}
\caption{\textbf{StarNet\ Block}.
We annotate edges with tensor dimensions for clarity: (\# points, 64) represents a point cloud with \# points, where each point has an associated 64-dimensional feature.
}
\label{fig:starnet_block}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{figures/Stacked_Featurizer_Cropped.pdf}
\caption{\textbf{StarNet\ point cloud featurizer.} StarNet blocks are stacked, where each block's output is read out using mean aggregation. The readouts are concatenated together to form the featurization for the point cloud. }
\label{fig:starnet_point_featurzier}
\vspace{-10pt}
\end{figure}
StarNet blocks (Figure \ref{fig:starnet_block}) take as input a set of points, where each point has an associated feature vector. Each block first computes aggregate statistics (max) across the point cloud. Next, the global statistics are concatenated back to each point's feature. Finally, two fully-connected layers are applied, each composed of batch normalization (BN), linear projection, and ReLU activation. StarNet Blocks are stacked to form a 5-layer featurizer (Figure \ref{fig:starnet_point_featurzier}) that outputs a 384-dimensional feature.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{figures/Coverage_KITTI_Car.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{figures/Coverage_Waymo_OD_Vehicle.pdf}
\caption{{\bf Simple sampling procedures have good coverage over ground truth bounding boxes.} The coverage of proposals for cars and vehicles is plotted against the number of samples on KITTI (left) and Waymo Open Dataset\ (right). Error bars (not shown) range from 0.5\%-3.0\%. See text for details.}
\vspace{-10pt}
\label{fig:recall-for-proposals}
\end{figure*}
The StarNet point featurizer (Figure \ref{fig:starnet_point_featurzier}) stacks multiple StarNet blocks, following ideas from graph neural networks \cite{xu2018powerful}. We experimented with different choices network architectures and found that using max aggregation, concatenate combination, and mean readout performed well. By design, the same trained network can be used with varying number of input points, giving it a large degree of flexibility.
\subsection{Constructing final predictions from bounding box proposals.}
For each cell center, a grid of $G \times G$ total anchor offsets are placed relative to each cell center, where each offset can employ different rotations or anchor dimension priors. We emphasize that unlike single-stage detectors \cite{lang2018pointpillars, yan2018second}, the anchor grid placement is data-dependent since it is based on the proposals.
For each grid offset, we compute a $D$ dimensional feature vector using a learned linear projection from the cell's 384-dimensional feature; each offset has a different projection. The $D$ dimensional feature is shared across the rotations and dimensions at the grid offset. From this feature, we predict classification and regression logits. The bounding box regression logits predict $\delta x, \delta y, \delta z$ corresponding to residuals of the location of the anchor bounding box; $\delta h, \delta w, \delta l$ corresponding to residuals on height, width and length; and a residual on the heading orientation $\delta \theta$.
We use a smoothed-L1 loss on each predicted variate \cite{yan2018second,lang2018pointpillars,yin2019multiview}. For the rotation loss,
We use a direction invariant loss $\textrm{SmoothL1}(sine(\delta \theta - {\delta \theta}_{\textrm{gt}}))$ for all experiments, except for models where we report heading accuracy weighted average precision (mAPH). For direction aware models, we use $\textrm{SmoothL1}(WrapAngle(\delta \theta - {\delta \theta}_{\textrm{gt}}))$, where WrapAngle ensures the angular difference is between $-\pi$ to $\pi$. The classification logits are trained with a focal cross-entropy loss on the class label \cite{lin2017focal}.
Ground truth labels are assigned to anchors based on their intersection-over-union (IoU) overlap~\cite{yan2018second, lang2018pointpillars}. We compute the IoU for each anchor and ground truth label and assign labels to foreground if $IoU > 0.6$ or background if $IoU < 0.45$. Anchors with IoU matches between the two thresholds are ignored. We also perform force-matching if an object is not assigned as foreground to any anchor: we assign the object as foreground to its highest matching anchor if (a) the highest matching anchor is not assigned to foreground of any object and (b) the IoU with the matching anchor is greater than zero. Final predictions use an oriented, multi-class non-maximal suppression (NMS) \cite{girshick2014rich}.
\section{Background}
\subsection{Object detection in images}
Early object detection systems consist of two stages: first, to propose candidate detection locations, and next, to discriminate whether a given proposal is an object of interest \cite{felzenszwalb2010object, dean2013fast,sermanet2013pedestrian,uijlings2013selective}. The advent of convolutional neural networks (CNN) \cite{krizhevsky2012imagenet,lecun2015deep},
showed that a CNN-based featurization may provide superior proposals as well as improve the second discriminative stage \cite{girshick2014rich,ren2015faster,girshick2015fast}.
Modern CNN-based detection systems maximize prediction performance by densely sampling an image for all possible object locations. This requires a computationally-heavy first stage featurization to provide high quality bounding box proposals \cite{girshick2014rich, girshick2015fast}. In addition, the second stage of an object detector will need to be run on each proposal within a {\it single} image.
These heavy computational demands are prohibitive in constrained environments (e.g. mobile and edge devices) such that speed versus accuracy trade-offs must be considered \cite{huang2017speed}.
To address these concerns, recent work has focused on {\it one stage} object detectors that attempt predict bounding box locations and object identity in a single inference operation of a CNN \cite{liu2016ssd,redmon2016you}. Although single-stage systems provide faster inference, these systems generally exhibit worse predictive performance than two-stage systems \cite{huang2017speed}. That said, recent advances in redesigning the loss functions have mitigated this disadvantage significantly
\cite{lin2017focal,zhou2019bottom,law2018cornernet}.
The speed and reduced complexity advantages associated with a one stage model do however come with an associated cost: by basing the inference procedure on convolutions which densely sample an image, the resulting model must treat all spatial locations equally. In the context of self-driving cars, this design decision hampers the ability to adapt computation to the current scene or latency requirements.
\subsection{Point cloud featurization}
Raw data arising from many types of sensors come in the form of point cloud data (e.g. LIDAR, RGB-D). A point cloud consists of a set of $N$ 3-D points $\{\vec{x}_i\}$ indexed by $i$ which may contain an associated feature vector $\{\vec{f}_i\}$. The set of points are unordered and may be of arbitrary size depending on the number of reflections identified by a sensor on a single scan. Ideally, learned representations for point clouds aim to be permutation invariant with respect to $i$ and agnostic to the number of points $N$ in a given example \cite{qi2017pointnet, qi2017pointnet++}. On-going efforts have attempted to design models that operate directly on point cloud data, some of which are derived to mimic convolutions \cite{wang2018deep,zaheer2017deep}.
\subsection{Object detection with point clouds}
\label{sec:point-cloud-detection}
Object detection in point clouds has started with porting ideas from the image-based object detection literature. By voxelizing a point cloud (i.e. identifying a grid location for individual points $\vec{x}_i$) into a series of stacked image slices describing occupancy, one may employ traditional CNN techniques for object detection on the resulting images or voxel grids \cite{yang2018pixor,zhou2018voxelnet,yan2018second,luo2018fast,yang2018hdnet,yin2019multiview,meyer2019lasernet}.
VoxelNet partitions 3-D space and encodes LiDAR points within each partition with a point cloud featurization \cite{zhou2018voxelnet}. The result is a fixed-size feature map, on which a conventional CNN-based object detection architecture may be applied.
Likewise, PointPillars \cite{lang2018pointpillars} proposes an object detector that employs a point cloud featurization, providing input into a grid-based feature representation for use in a feature pyramid network \cite{lin2016feature}; the resulting per-pillar features are combined with anchors for every pillar to perform joint classification and regression.
The resulting network achieves a high level of predictive performance with minimal computational cost on small scenes, but its fixed grid increases in cost notably on larger scenes and cannot adapt to each scene's unique data distribution.
LaserNet \cite{meyer2019lasernet} opts to work on the Range Image representation of the LiDAR instead of a point cloud or a voxelized view. The range image data takes on a dense perspective view that LaserNet applies convolutions to. While this method has the advantage of working on a dense representation, it also faces challenges (similar to camera images) of having a perspective effect on the scale objects. Objects in a range image may have a large variance in scale.
In the vein of two stage detection systems, PointRCNN \cite{shi2019pointrcnn} employs a point cloud featurizer \cite{qi2017pointnet++} to make proposals via an expensive per-point segmentation network into foreground and background. Subsequently, a second stage operates on cropped featurizations to perform the final classification and localization. Other works propose bounding boxes through a computationally intensive, learned proposal system operating on paired camera images~\cite{yang2018ipod,qi2018frustum}, with the goal of improving predictive performance by leveraging a camera image to seed a proposal system to maximize recall.
\section{Results}
We present results on the KITTI object detection benchmark \cite{geiger2013vision} and the Waymo Open Dataset\ \cite{waymo_open_dataset}. We train models using the Adam \cite{kingma2014adam} optimizer with an exponentially-decaying learning rate schedule starting at 1e-3 and decaying over 650 epochs for KITTI, and 75 epochs for the Waymo Open Dataset. We perform some hyper-parameter tuning on the validation set and perform final evaluations on the corresponding test datasets. Full hyperparameters can be found in our already open-sourced code (\ifcvprfinal \url{http://github.com/tensorflow/lingvo}\else \url{http://github.com/anonymized}\fi).
\subsection{Sampling strategies for point cloud detections}
We first investigate sampling strategies for center selection, evaluating on KITTI and Waymo Open Dataset. We explore two strategies for naively sampling point clouds: random sampling and farthest point sampling (Section \ref{sec:center-selection}). We observe that random sampling samples many centers in dense locations, whereas farthest point sampling maximizes spatial coverage of the scene.
To quantify the efficacy of each proposal method, we measure the coverage as a function of the number of proposals. Coverage is defined as the fraction of annotated objects with 5+ points that have IoU $> 0.5$ with the our sampled anchor boxes. Figure \ref{fig:recall-for-proposals} plots the coverage for each method for a fixed IOU of 0.5 for cars in KITTI \cite{geiger2013vision} and the Waymo Open Dataset\ \cite{waymo_open_dataset}. All methods achieve monotonically higher coverage with greater number of proposals with coverage on KITTI exceeding 98\% within 256 samples.
Because random sampling is heavily biased to regions which contain many points, there is a tendency to oversample large objects and undersample regions containing few points. Farthest point sampling (FPS) uniformly distributes samples across the spatial extent of the point cloud data (see Methods). We observe that FPS provides uniformly better coverage across a fixed number of proposals and we employ this technique for the rest of the work.
\subsection{KITTI Dataset}
\label{sec:two-stage-kitti}
When evaluating StarNet~on the KITTI dataset, we found that data augmentation important to obtain good performance. We employed standard data augmentations for point clouds and bounding box labels \cite{yang2018pixor, zhou2018voxelnet, yan2018second, luo2018fast, yang2018hdnet, lang2018pointpillars}. We found that the gains in predictive performance due to data augmentation (up to +18.0, +16.9 and +30.5 mAP on car, pedestrian and cyclist respectively) were substantially larger than gains in performance observed across advances in detection architectures. Additionally, we found checkpoint selection to be extremely important due to the small size of the dataset, and submission filtering (e.g. removing detections where the 2D projected height of our 3D bounding box predictions were smaller than 25 pixels so they are not erroneously labeled as false positives) unique challenges to the KITTI benchmark.
We take our best system for 3-D object detection with the same data augmentations and compare the efficacy of this model to previously reported state-of-the-art systems that only operate on point cloud data \cite{zhou2018voxelnet, yan2018second, lang2018pointpillars, yang2018hdnet}. Table \ref{table:kitti-test} reports the 3-D
detection results on the KITTI {\it test} server. StarNet\ provides
competitive mAP scores on car, pedestrian and cyclist to other state-of-the-art methods, exceeding subsets of each category strata.
We found that decisions apart from model design play a significant role in KITTI test set performance: this included data augmentation, checkpoint selection, post process filtering, among others. Since we are interested in determining the efficacy of our modeling approach, we focus the majority of our following experiments on the larger Waymo Open Dataset, which is annotated with high quality labels.
\input{sections/waymo_table}
\input{sections/waymo_val_table_mvf}
\subsection{Waymo Open Dataset}
\label{sec:real-world}
We now focus on the performance of StarNet\ on the Waymo Open Dataset\ \cite{waymo_open_dataset}, which is substantially larger and exhibits tremendous diversity.
\begin{figure*}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{figures/Figure7_Pedestrian_64to384points_gte_5_point_v0.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{figures/Figure7_Vehicle_64to384points_gte_5_point_v1.pdf}
\caption{\textbf{Flexible computational cost of detection} for (left) pedestrians and (right) vehicles.
Across 5 separately-trained PointPillars models \cite{lang2018pointpillars}, computational cost grows quadratically with increased spatial resolution for the LiDAR pseudo-image.
All curves for StarNet\ arise from a {\it single} set of saved model weights.
Each curve traces out StarNet\ accuracy on the \textit{Validation set} for a fixed number of point cloud points.
Points along on a single curve indicate 64 to 1024 selected centers.}
\label{fig:waymo-detection}
\end{figure*}
To demonstrate the relative merits of StarNet, we trained models on pedestrians and vehicles and compared the relative performance of each model to a family of baseline models. Data augmentation was not used in these experiments. We employed PointPillars as a baseline model\footnote{We note that our custom implementation of PointPillars achieves 74.5, 57.1, and 59.0 mAP for for cars, pedestrians, and cyclists, respectively on KITTI validation at moderate difficulty. This is slightly lower than \cite{lang2018pointpillars}.}, training 5 different grid resolutions of this model for each class and validated accuracy on all annotated bounding boxes with 5+ LiDAR points. Each version employs a different input spatial resolution for the pseudo-image (128, 192, 256, 384, and 512 pixel spatial grids), with 16K to 32K non-zero featurized locations (pillars). In slight deviation from the original PointPillars paper \cite{lang2018pointpillars}, we use an output stride of 1 for both vehicles and pedestrian models, as it exhibits substantially higher performance. We hypothesize that a single-stage object detector would exhibit trade-offs in detecting small objects based on the resolution of the image projection. Indeed, we observe in Figure \ref{fig:waymo-detection} (black points) that higher spatial resolutions achieve higher precision for pedestrians and vehicles, but with a computational cost that grows quadratically.
We also examined the performance of a {\it single} StarNet\ model across
two strategies for altering computational demand: varying the number of proposals, and varying the number of points supplied to the model per proposed region.
Each blue curve in Figure \ref{fig:waymo-detection} traces out the computational cost versus predictive performance for a given number of points per region, while varying the number of proposals from 64 to 1024. Many of these points lie above the baseline model indicating that StarNet\ provides favorable performance.
In particular, the same pedestrian detection model (e.g., StarNet-128 with 1024 centers) may achieve $\sim48\%$ relative gain in predictive performance for a similar computational budget as the baseline pillars model ($\sim100GFlops$); or, the same model achieves similar predictive performance as the most accurate Pillars model but with $\sim20\%$ of the computational budget.
We emphasize that all StarNet~points arise from a {\it single} trained model, showing how to use a single trained StarNet\ in a flexible manner through manipulations at inference time.
Finally, we took the highest performing StarNet\ and PointPillars \cite{lang2018pointpillars} models from Figure \ref{fig:waymo-detection}, and evaluated them on the Waymo Open Dataset \cite{waymo_open_dataset} \textit{Test set}. These results are summarized in Table \ref{waymo_test_results}, with full numbers including range based breakdowns available in Appendix A. StarNet\ is competitive on Vehicle detection to our PointPillars \cite{lang2018pointpillars} baseline, and significantly outperforms it for Pedestrians. If a directional loss is used, we outperform PointPillars by 7.8 mAP and 12.6 mAPH, and 10.1 mAP if a directionless loss is used. Note that forcing the network to learn directionality slightly hinders mAP. Additionally, using temporal context, detailed next, further improves performance.
We also compare to Multi-View Fusion \cite{yin2019multiview} in Table~\ref{waymo_val_table}, showing validation set results as the Multi-View Fusion method does not yet report test set numbers.
\subsection{Targeting computation with temporal context}
\label{temporal_proposals}
One design benefit of StarNet\ is the ability to target computation. We now show how using the outputs of the previous time-step can significantly improve mAP over a single frame, while keeping the computation cost unchanged.
Intuitively, high-confidence bounding box proposals output on previous time-steps in 3D are a good prior on the location of objects in the current frame since objects have limited ranges of motion. Hence, one natural approach is to leverage these priors when sampling centers, combining them with random or farthest-point sampling. StarNet\ permits us to use the locations of the $K$ highest-confidence bounding box predictions from the previous frame quite easily (Figure~\ref{fig:starnet_seed}): we can replace the last $K$ farthest-point-sampled (or random) center proposals for the current frame using the pose-corrected locations of the previous top $K$ detection bounding boxes from the prior frame.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\linewidth]{figures/seeded.pdf}
\caption{\textbf{Leveraging previous proposals}. Using the highest confidence predicted centers from the previous frames can help improve detection mAP in the next frame.
}
\label{fig:starnet_seed}
\vspace{-10pt}
\end{figure}
We apply this method to Pedestrian detection (Table~\ref{table:previous detects}). When using just 32 of the high-confidence predicted bounding box centers from the previous frame and a total of 384 centers, detection mAP on the validation set increases by over 10 absolute mAP, matching the (single frame) performance of sampling a total of 512 centers. When we seed the 384 sampled centers with the top 192 detects from the previous frame, detection mAP improves by nearly 17 absolute mAP, or 40\% higher. Surprisingly, when using 1024 total centers, using the best 512 previous detection centers improved mAP by about 3 mAP (2 mAP on the test set), showing that there is room for improvement even when sampling already covers much of the scene.
This experiment demonstrates that using StarNet\ enables research into smarter and efficient detection and tracking systems. One could employ the use of a tracker to estimate the velocity of detected objects in order to more precisely predict where to ``look" in the next frame.
\begin{table}
\footnotesize
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ c | c | c }
\hline
\# Previous Frame & \# Total Centers & Detection mAP \\
Detection Centers & & Pedestrians \\
\hline
0 & 384 & 41.8 \\
32 & 384 & 53.2 \\
192 & 384 & 58.0 \\
\hline
0 & 1024 & 66.8 \\
512 & 1024 & 69.7
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{0.1cm}
\caption{\textbf{Previous frame detection centers are good centers to use in the current frame.} StarNet\ enables using data-dependent centers from the detection outputs of the previous frame to improve detection performance in the current frame. Results reported on the \textit{Validation set}.}
\label{table:previous detects}
\vspace{-8pt}
\end{table}
|
\section{Introduction}
Optically pumped atomic magnetometers (AMs) have proved an immensely productive area of research, characterized by laser-based atomic techniques \cite{Budker07}. Sensitivity of AMs has approached and even exceeded superconducting quantum interference devices (SQUID) in the laboratory, without the requirement of cryogenics \cite{Dang10,Sheng13}. In addition to high sensitivity, other specific characteristics of magnetic detection devices are often required in different application scenarios, such as compact and wearable in biomagnetic monitoring \cite{Lembke14,Borna17,Zhang19,Boto18} and low power consumption in outdoor abnormal magnetic field detection \cite{Alexandrov92,Xu08} or space magnetic field measurement \cite{Zhang05}.
In this paper, we discuss and investigate an AM operated with a single elliptically polarized beam, which can be identified as an elliptically polarized laser-pumped $M_x$ atomic magnetometer (EPMx AM). This kind of configuration transplants the advantage of optical rotation (OR) detection mode to the conventional $M_x$ AM, where a circularly polarized pump beam is tuned to be resonant with $\rm D_1$ transition of the alkali atoms to simultaneously polarize the atomic spins and measure the spin polarization in the optical absorption (OA) detection mode \cite{Bloom62,Bison05}. It is a common sense that the OA mode facilitates a compact configuration of the sensor probe, since no extra beam is required to convey the atomic polarization information. The OR mode measures the atom-induced Faraday rotation angle of an additional off-resonance linearly polarized probe beam by the balanced polarimetry technique. The commonly used balanced polarimetry method involves a polarizing beam splitter (PBS) whose axis is rotated by $\pi/4$ with respect to the axis of a front linear polarizer. Then the two split beams severally fall onto photodetectors with differential outputs. Therefore the OR mode can suppress common mode noise and possess higher signal to noise ratio \cite{Miao19}. Treated as a combination of circular component and linear component, the elliptically polarized laser has been introduced to realize a compact atomic magnetometer working in the spin-exchange-relaxation-free (SERF) regime \cite{Shah09}.
Circular component of the light creates relatively uniform spin polarization while the linear component is used to measure optical
rotation generated by the atoms. The SERF AM allows for femtotesla sensitivity. However, the SERF condition strongly depends on well magnetic shielding environment (below 10 nT) and high temperature atomic vapor (usually over 150 $^{\circ}$C).
The limitations exclude SERF AMs for the use in magnetically unshielded environments and low-power scenarios. EPMx AMs preserve the compact potential of the single beam configuration, while promise a higher sensitivity than circularly polarized $M_x$ atomic magnetometer (CPMx AM). However, the condition of near-resonant light-atom interaction in EPMx AMs leads to a different optimization process, comparing with SERF AM using far off-resonance elliptically polarized light.
Here we theoretically and experimentally optimize the parameters of EPMx AM, including frequency, ellipticity and intensity of the laser. Finally the EPMx AM shows significant superiority in sensitivity, compared with the optimized $M_x$ AM using OA detection mode. A sensitivity of 300 $\rm fT/\sqrt{Hz}$ at 45 $^{\circ}$C is achieved
with a 2$\times$2$\times2$ cm uncoated Rb vapor cell.
The outperformance is particularly remarkable in the room temperature. At 24 $^{\circ}$C, the sensitivity is improved from 7.57 $\rm pT/\sqrt{Hz}$ to 0.69 $\rm pT/\sqrt{Hz}$ by introducing elliptically polarized laser.
Our experimental results also show that the sensitivity of EPMx AM is less dependent on temperature than its conventional counterpart.
\section{Principle of EPMx AM}
\subsection{Basic configuration and experimental setup of EPMx AM}
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering\includegraphics[width=8cm]{setup}
\caption{{Schematic diagram of the experimental setup. BE: beam expander, LP: linear polarizer, $\lambda$/4: quarter-wave plate, $\lambda$/2: half-wave plate, PBS: polarized beam splitter, PD: photodiode.}}
\label{setup}
\end{figure}
The optical system to realize an EPMx AM is shown in Fig. \ref{setup}, representing the experimental arrangement used in this work. A cubic cell with a volume of 8 $\mathrm{cm^3}$ contains a drop of enriched $^{87}$Rb atoms and 200 Torr of $\mathrm{N_2}$ gas for quenching and slowing atomic diffusion. The cell is placed inside a five-layer magnetic shield cylinder, where three pairs of orthogonal internal coils can generate a stable, well-defined magnetic bias field in the xz-plane and an oscillating radio frequency (rf) magnetic field along the y-axis.
The cell could be heated in a nonmagnetic oven by high-frequency ac currents at 70 kHz and its temperature is stabilized by a closed loop. An extended-cavity diode laser along the z-axis, tuned close to $^{87}$Rb $\rm D_1$ transition, was used in our experiment. Before illuminating the cell, the light passed through a linear polarizer and a quarter-waveplate with its optic axis oriented at an angle $\phi$ relative to the linear polarizer. The ellipticity of the light could be adjusted by changing the angle $\phi$. In this configuration, the electric feld of the light injected into the cell could be represented as a superposition of left-circular ($\sigma^+$, $ \bm{{\cal L}} = {{e^{i2\pi \nu t}}/\sqrt 2 }$) and right-circular ($\sigma^-$, $\bm{{\cal R}} = {{e^{ - i2\pi \nu t}/\sqrt 2}}$) basis components, in the form
\begin{equation}
{E_{in}}\left( {z = 0} \right) = {E_0}\left( {\frac{{\cos \phi + \sin \phi }}{{\sqrt 2 }}\bm{{\cal L}} + \frac{{\cos \phi - \sin \phi }}{{\sqrt 2 }}\bm{{\cal R}}} \right),
\label{injectlight}
\end{equation}
where $\nu$ is the laser frequency. The probabilities of a photon being in the $\sigma^+$ and $\sigma^-$ states are $\left( {1 + s} \right)/2$ and $\left( {1 - s} \right)/2$, respectively. $s= \sin (2 \phi)$ characterizes the average photon spin component along z direction. It ranges from -1 to +1, where $s=-1$ corresponds to $\sigma ^-$ light, $s=0$ corresponds to linearly polarized light, and $s=+1$ corresponds to $\sigma ^+$ light. The optical rotation from atoms was subsequently converted to an electric signal through a balanced polarimeter, consisting of a half-wave plate, a PBS and a balanced photodetector. The half-wave plate was rotated to balance the intensity in the balanced photodetector in the absence of optical rotation from atoms. The optoelectronic signal was fed to the input of a lock-in amplifier. The digital lock-in amplifier demodulated the oscillating signal from optical rotation with reference to the applied oscillating rf magnetic field.
In our experiment, the diameters of the laser beam is 6 mm. The internal side length of the cell is 17 mm. Plenty of $\mathrm{N_2}$ gas (200 Torr) make the diffusion of $^{87}$Rb atoms negligible. The cross-talk free distance of $^{87}$Rb atoms are about 0.8 mm at 100 $^{\circ}$C \cite{Kim14}. Therefore, the whole sensing zone is actually a cylinder with a diameter of laser beam and a length of the internal cell. The sensing volume is about 0.48 $\mathrm{cm^3}$.
\subsection{Laser-pumped $M_x$ magnetometer}
The $M_x$ magnetometer is sensitive to the modulus of the external magnetic field by measuring the Larmor frequency of atoms. A static magnetic field $\bm {\mathrm B_0}$ is aligned in xz plane. Magnetic resonance technique is
introduced by employing an oscillating magnetic field ${\bm {\mathrm {B_{rf}}}} = 2{B_{rf}}\cos {\omega _{rf}}\hat y$ perpendicular to $\bm {\mathrm B_0}$ and the propagation direction of light. The amplitude $B_{rf}$ is much smaller than $B_0$. The overall evolution of the atomic spin angular momentum $\bm {\mathrm S}$ is well-described by the Bloch equation
\begin{equation}
\frac{d \bm {\mathrm S}}{\rm{dt}}=\gamma \cdot \bm {\mathrm S}\times \bm {\mathrm B}+\Gamma _P\cdot \left(\bm {\mathrm {S_0}}-\bm {\mathrm S}\right)-{\Gamma_{rel}} \cdot \bm {\mathrm S},
\label{bloch}
\end{equation}
Where $\gamma=7$ Hz/nT is the gyromagnetic ratio of $^{87}$Rb atomic spins, $\bm {\mathrm B} = \bm {\mathrm B_0} + \bm {\mathrm {B_{rf}}}$ is the total magnetic field, $\Gamma _P$ is the pumping rate,
${\bm {\mathrm {S_0}}}=\hat zs{\Gamma _p}/[2\left( {{\Gamma _p} + {\Gamma _{rel}}} \right)]$ is the equilibrium atomic spin angular momentum in the absence of the oscillating excitation and $\Gamma_{rel}$ is the spin-relaxation rate. We further define $\Gamma_{rel}^1$ ($\Gamma_{rel}^2$) as the longitudinal (transverse) spin-relaxation rate.
The fist term of the Bloch equation describes the precession of $\bm {\mathrm S}$ around the magnetic field $\bm {\mathrm B}$, the second term represents the optical pumping process,
and the third term describes the spin relaxation process. The projection of the precessing polarization onto the propagation direction of the light beam then leads to an oscillating polarization component along that axis, and therefore to a periodic modulation of the optical rotation. Through the steady-state solution to Eq.\ref{bloch} in the rotating frame with angular frequency $\omega _{rf}$, we can obtain the quadrature amplitude $P_{\rm{qu}}$ and in-phase amplitude $P_{\rm{ip}}$ of the photocurrent with respect to the oscillating magnetic field, which are given by
\begin{equation}
{P_{{\rm{qu}}}}\left( \delta \right) = {P_0}\sin \left( {2\vartheta } \right)\frac{{\Omega {\Gamma _2}}}{{{\Omega ^2}{\Gamma _2}/{\Gamma _1} + {\Gamma _2}^2 + {\delta ^2}}}.
\label{pqu}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
{P_{{\rm{ip}}}}\left( \delta \right) = {P_0}\sin \left( {2\vartheta } \right)\frac{{\delta \Omega }}{{{\Omega ^2}{\Gamma _2}/{\Gamma _1} + {\Gamma _2}^2 + {\delta ^2}}}
,\label{pip}
\end{equation}
Here $\vartheta$ is the angle between the direction of laser beam and $\bm {\mathrm B_0}$, $\Omega$ is the Rabi frequency, \begin{math}\delta=\omega_{rf}-\gamma B_0\end{math} is the detuning of the oscillating field $\bm {\mathrm {B_{rf}}}$ from the Larmor frequency, ${\Gamma _{1(2)}} = \Gamma _{rel}^{1(2)} + {\Gamma _P}$ is the effective longitudinal (transverse) polarization-relaxation rate. $P_0$ is the equilibrium atomic polarization and is defined as
\begin{equation}
{P_0} = 2\left\langle {{S_0}} \right\rangle = \frac{{s{\Gamma _p}}}{{{\Gamma _p} + {\Gamma _{rel}}}}.
\label{P0}
\end{equation}
We set $\vartheta=45^ \circ$ to maximize the signal amplitude. We can see that $P_{\rm{qu}}$ has an absorptive Lorentzian line shape, and $P_{\rm{ip}}$ has a dispersive Lorentzian line shape with the same half-width expressed as
\begin{equation}
\Delta {\omega _{{\rm{HW}}}} = \sqrt {{\Omega ^2}{\Gamma _2}/{\Gamma _1} + {\Gamma _2}^2} .
\end{equation}
The phase $\theta$ between $P_{\rm{ip}}$ and $P_{\rm{qu}}$ can be calculated as
\begin{equation}
\tan \left( \theta \right) = \frac{{{P_{{\rm{ip}}}}}}{{{P_{{\rm{qu}}}}}} = \frac{{{\delta}}}{\Gamma _2}.
\label{theta}
\end{equation}
The width of the phase signal is smaller than $\Delta {\omega _{\rm{HW}}}$ since it is immune to rf power broadening and can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
\Delta \omega _{\rm{HW}}^\theta = \Gamma _2.
\label{halfwidth}
\end{equation}
In resonance the phase is $90^\circ$ and near resonance it has a linear dependence on the detuning $\delta$. Therefore the Larmor frequency and hence the magnetic field can be inferred by measuring the phase $\theta$.
For a $B_{\rm{rf}}$ frequency scan at a fixed $B_0$,
the quadrature output X, in-phase output Y and phase output $\theta$ of the lock-in amplifier, as well as their fitted Lorentzian line shapes, are shown in Fig \ref{xytheta}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{lockin}
\caption{Measured magnetic-resonance line shapes of the
quadrature (top), in-phase (middle) and their relative phase (bottom) signals by scanning $B_{\rm{rf}}$ frequency. The blue dots represent the experimental data, while the red solid lines are their fitted Lorentzian line shapes. The fitted
half-widths are 32 Hz, 31 Hz and 26.7 Hz for X, Y and $\theta$ outputs, respectively.}
\label{xytheta}
\end{figure}
\section{Mechanism analysis and optimization}
\subsection{Optical pumping}
The natural broadening due to limited lifetime of the excited state, pressure broadening due to collisions with buffer gas, and Doppler broadening due to atomic thermal velocity, are three main effects contributing to the form of atomic frequency response to photons. For the transition $F$ (ground state) $\to$ $F'$ (excited state), the photon absorption cross-section can be generally expressed by a voigt profile \cite{Happer67,Seltzer08}, as
\begin{equation}
{\sigma _{F,F'}}\left( \nu \right) = \pi {r_e}c{f_{D1}}{\mathop{\rm Re}\nolimits} \left[ {{\cal V}\left( {\nu - {\nu _{F,F'}}} \right)} \right],
\end{equation}
where $\nu_{F,F'}$ is the resonance frequency of the related transition, $r_e$ is the classical electron radius, $c$ is the speed of light and ${f_{D1}} \approx {1 \mathord{\left/{\vphantom {1 3}} \right. \kern-\nulldelimiterspace} 3}$ is the transition strength for alkali atoms. The voigt profile is calculated by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{V}\left(\nu -\nu _{F,F'}\right) =\int_0^{\infty } \mathcal{L} \left(\nu -\nu '\right) \mathcal{G} \left(\nu ' -\nu _{F,F'}\right)\, d\nu '.
\label{voigt}
\end{equation}
It is a comprehensive result of a Lorentzian curve $\mathcal{L}(\nu)$ with full width at half maximum(FWHM) $\Gamma _L =\Gamma _{\rm{nature}}+\Gamma _{\rm{pressure}}$ and a Gaussian curve $\mathcal{G}(\nu)$ with FWHM $\Gamma _{\rm{Doppler}}$. The Voigt profile has a explicit complex form \cite{Seltzer08}
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{V}\left(\nu -\nu _0\right) =\frac{2 \sqrt{{\ln 2}/{\pi }}}{\Gamma _G} w\left(\frac{2 \sqrt{{\ln 2}}\left(\nu -\nu _0\right)+{i \Gamma _L}/{2}}{\Gamma _G}\right),
\label{wvoigt}
\end{equation}
where function \begin{math}w\left(x\right)\end{math} is the complex error function, given by
\begin{equation}
w\left(x\right)=e^{-x^2} (1-\rm{erf} (-i x)).
\label{w}
\end{equation}
Under our experimental condition, the Doppler broadening is about 0.53 GHz and pressure broadening is about 4.36 GHz. They are comparable to the hyperfine splitting of $^{87}$Rb atoms (6.84 GHz for the ground state ${}^2{S_{{1 \mathord{\left/{\vphantom {1 2}} \right. \kern-\nulldelimiterspace} 2}}}$, 0.81 GHz for the excited state ${}^2{P_{{1 \mathord{\left/{\vphantom {1 2}} \right. \kern-\nulldelimiterspace} 2}}}$). Therefore
it is necessary to separately consider the four individual resonances in D$_1$ transition. The total photon absorption cross-section is given by
\begin{equation}
\sigma _{\rm{total}}\left(\nu\right)=\pi r_ecf_{D1}\sum _{F,F'} A^{abs}_{F,F'} {\mathop{\rm Re}\nolimits} \left[ {{\cal V}\left( {\nu - {\nu _{F,F'}}} \right)} \right],
\label{totalcrosssection}
\end{equation}
where $A^{abs}_{F,F'}$ is the normalized relative strength for the transition $F$ $\to$ $F'$. Their values for atoms with nuclear spin $I = 3/2$ are given in Tab. \ref{table}. The lineshape of $\sigma _{\rm{total}}$, which determines the optical absorption lineshape of $^{87}$Rb atoms near the D$_1$ transition, is shown in Fig. \ref{crosssection}.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering\includegraphics[width=8cm]{table}
\caption{Relative strengths $A^{abs}_{F,F'}$ of the individual D$_1$ hyperfine resonances for photon absorption and relative strengths $A_{F,F'}^{rot}$ for optical rotation as functions of polarization $P$ \cite{Seltzer08}.}
\label{table}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering\includegraphics[width=8cm]{crosssection}
\caption{Atomic frequency response for optical absorption
near the $^{87}$Rb D$_1$ transition, taking into account the hyperfine splitting of the ground and excited states (Eq. (\ref{totalcrosssection})). Frequency is expressed as detuning from the transition $F=2$ $\to$ $F'=1$. Corresponding to our experimental condition, we set $\Gamma _G$=0.53 GHz (Doppler broading at 333$K$) and $\Gamma _L$=4.36 GHz (pressure broadening caused by 200 torr nitrogen gas).}
\label{crosssection}
\end{figure}
The pumping rate $\Gamma_P\left(\nu\right)$ at which an atom absorbs photons of frequency $\nu$ is
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_P\left(\nu\right)=\sigma _{\rm{total}}\left(\nu\right)\Phi\left(\nu\right),
\label{pumpingrate}
\end{equation}
where $\Phi\left(\nu\right)$ is the total flux of photons of frequency $\nu$ incident on the atom in units of number of photons per area per time. The equilibrium atomic polarization of Eq. (\ref{P0}) can be rewritten as
\begin{equation}
{P_0} = \frac{{s{\sigma _{\rm{total}}}\left( \nu \right)\Phi \left( \nu \right)}}{{{\sigma _{\rm{total}}}\left( \nu \right)\Phi \left( \nu \right) + {\Gamma _{rel}}}}.
\label{pumpingrate}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Optical rotation}
Polarized atomic ensemble is a birefringent medium and can induce
the phenomenon of optical rotation. That is, the polarization plane of the light rotates by an angle $\varphi$ when it passes through the vapor cell due to the
different refractive indices for $\sigma^+$ light and $\sigma^-$ light, which can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
{n_ + }\left( \nu \right) = 1 + \frac{{n{r_e}{c^2}{f_{{\rm{D1}}}}}}{{2\nu }}\frac{{1 + {P}}}{2}\sum\limits_{F,F'} {A_{F,F'}^{{rot}}} Im\left[ {{\cal V}\left( {\nu - {\nu _{F,F'}}} \right)} \right],
\label{nzheng}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
{n_ - }\left( \nu \right) = 1 + \frac{{n{r_e}{c^2}{f_{{\rm{D1}}}}}}{{2\nu }}\frac{{1 - {P}}}{2}\sum\limits_{F,F'} {A_{F,F'}^{{rot}}} Im\left[ {{\cal V}\left( {\nu - {\nu _{F,F'}}} \right)} \right],
\label{nfu}
\end{equation}
where $n$ is the atomic number density of $^{87}$Rb vapor, $P$ is the atomic polarization along the propagation direction of the light. The atomic polarization
somewhat deviates from the propagation direction of the light under the continuous radiation of the radio-frequency field. In fact, we have taken this deviation into account during the derivation of the output in the $M_x$ configuration (Eq. \ref{pqu}, Eq. \ref{pip}), so we have $P = {P_{ip}}\cos \omega_{rf} t + {P_{qu}}\sin \omega_{rf} t$ with amplitude $A_P = \sqrt {{P_{qu}}^2 + {P_{ip}}^2}$. Hyperfine splittings are necessarily considered when we pursue an accurate quantitative description of optical rotation. Similar to $A_{F,F'}^{abs}$, $A_{F,F'}^{rot}$ are defined as the normalized relative strengths concerning the optical rotation process. $A_{F,F'}^{rot}$ are functions of the polarization $P$. We list their functional relations with $P$ for $^{87}$Rb D$_1$ transition in Tab. \ref{table}.
When the incident elliptically polarized light in the form of Eq. \ref{injectlight} passes through the vapor cell, the $\sigma^+$ and $\sigma^-$ components separately accumulate phases under their own refractive indices. Assuming the length of the cell is $l$, the emergent light at the end of the cell can be written as
\begin{equation}
{E_{out}}\left( {z = l} \right) = {E_1}\left( {\frac{{\cos \phi_1 + \sin \phi_1}}{{\sqrt 2 }}{e^{i{\varphi_+}}}\bm{{\cal L}} + \frac{{\cos \phi_1 - \sin \phi_1}}{{\sqrt 2 }}{e^{i{\varphi_-}}}\bm{{\cal R}}} \right),
\label{Eout}
\end{equation}
where $\varphi_{+(-)}={2\pi \nu l{n_ {+(-)} }}/c$. Note that different symbols $E_1$ and $\phi_1$ are used here, comparing with Eq. (\ref{injectlight}). It indicates that changes take place in intensity and ellipticity after the near-resonant light passes through the cell due to optical
absorption. We will discuss this topic in the next section. Ignoring the common phase, we get the optical rotation angle
\begin{equation}
\varphi = \frac{{{\varphi _ + } - {\varphi _ - }}}{2} =\frac{ \pi \nu l}{c}\left(n_+-n_-\right).
\label{rotationangle}
\end{equation}
As we know, in general cases the endpoint of the electric field vector traces out an ellipse in one cycle. Correspondingly, the optical rotation can be regarded as
a rotation of the major axis of the ellipse, which is
diagrammatically shown in Fig. \ref{rotation}. Then the optical rotation is measured by the balanced polarimeter shown in Fig. \ref{setup}. The differential signal $\cal D$ of the photodetector is given by
\begin{equation}
{\cal D} \propto {{E_1}}^{2}\sqrt {1 - {{s_1}^2}} \sin \left( {2\varphi } \right) \\
\propto {{\Phi_1}}\sqrt {1 - {{s_1}^2}} \sin \left( {2\varphi } \right),
\label{Dsignal}
\end{equation}
where $\Phi_1$ is the photon flux of the emergent light. When the magnetic resonance condition $\delta=\omega_{rf}-\gamma B_0=0$ is satisfied, the amplitude of the oscillating photoelectric signal is
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
Sig\left( {s,\nu } \right) &\propto {{\Phi_1}}\sqrt {1 - {{s_1}^2}} \frac{{2\pi \nu l}}{c}\left( {{n_ + } - {n_ - }} \right) \\
&\propto {{\Phi_1}}\sqrt {1 - {{s_1}^2}} P{C_{rot}} \\
&\propto {{\Phi_1}}\sqrt {1 - {{s_1}^2}} {P_0}\frac{{{\Gamma _2}}}{{{\Omega ^2}{\Gamma _2}/{\Gamma _1} + {\Gamma _2}^2}}{C_{rot}} \\
&\propto s\sqrt {1 - {{s_1}^2}} \frac{{{{\Phi_1}}{\Phi _0}{\sigma _{{\rm{total}}}}}}{{{\sigma _{{\rm{total}}}}{\Phi_0} + {\Gamma _{rel}}}}\frac{{{\Gamma _2}}}{{{\Omega ^2}{\Gamma _2}/{\Gamma _1} + {\Gamma _2}^2}}{C_{rot}},
\end{split}
\label{sig}
\end{equation}
where ${{\Phi _0}}$ is the photon flux of the incident light and ${C_{rot}}{\rm{ = }}\sum\nolimits_{F,F'} {A_{F,F'}^{{rot}}Im\left[ {{\cal V}\left( {\nu - {\nu _{F,F'}}} \right)} \right]} $. In our experiments, the optical rotation $\varphi$ is small, so the assumption $\sin \left( {2\varphi } \right) \approx 2\varphi $ has been employed in Eq. \ref{sig}. However, in the case where $\varphi$
is relatively large, a more complete description without this approximation is also available for numerically optimizing the parameters of EPMx AMs.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering\includegraphics[width=8cm]{rotation.pdf}
\caption{Optical rotation of an elliptically polarized light. The major axis of the polarization ellipse rotates an angle $\varphi$ when the light experiences optical rotation.}
\label{rotation}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Light intensity and ellipticity analysis}
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering\includegraphics[width=8cm]{ellipticity.pdf}
\caption{The signal amplitude as a function of the $\lambda/4$ waveplate angle $\phi$. Red hollow dots represent experimentally measured results. The blue solid line is the theoretical prediction taking ellipticity variations into account. The dashed line shows the function of $\left| {\sin \left( {4\phi } \right)} \right|$.}
\label{ellipticity}
\end{figure}
Before revealing the optical frequency response of the EPMx AM signal, the influences of the optical absorption to the light intensity as well as its ellipticity need to be investigated. The incident photon fluxes of $\sigma^+$ and $\sigma^-$ components are $\frac{{{\rm{1 + }}s}}{2}{\Phi _0}$ and $\frac{{{\rm{1 - }}s}}{2}{\Phi _0}$, respectively. In the cell, polarized atoms present different absorption rates to $\sigma^+$ and $\sigma^-$ photons. Assuming that the polarization of atoms is spatially uniform, the emergent photon fluxes of $\sigma^+$ and $\sigma^-$ parts decay to
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\Phi _1^ + &= \frac{{{\rm{1 + }}s}}{2}{\Phi _0}{e^{ - nl{\sigma _{total}}\left( {1 - p} \right)}}, \\
\Phi _1^ - &= \frac{{{\rm{1 - }}s}}{2}{\Phi _0}{e^{ - nl{\sigma _{total}}\left( {1 + p} \right)}}.
\end{split}
\label{photonflux}
\end{equation}
Then we can get the photon flux and ellipticity of the emergent light as ${\Phi _1} = \Phi _1^ + + \Phi _1^ -$ and ${s_1} = {{\left( {\Phi _1^ + - \Phi _1^ - } \right)} \mathord{\left/
{\vphantom {{\left( {\Phi _1^ + - \Phi _1^ - } \right)} {\left( {\Phi _1^ + + \Phi _1^ - } \right)}}} \right.
\kern-\nulldelimiterspace} {\left( {\Phi _1^ + + \Phi _1^ - } \right)}}$.
Therefore the light absorbing medium, i.e., the polarized alkali-metal atomic ensemble, makes a change in the light ellipticity. The variation is more obvious in resonant or near-resonant condition due to bigger absorption cross-section. Besides, greater atomic number density and longer cell length will exacerbate this effect. It is easy to find that $1/{\sqrt 2 }$ is the optimal value of $s$ by maximizing $s\sqrt {1 - {s^2}} $, provided we treat ellipticity as a constant. The corresponding $\lambda/4$ waveplate angle $\phi=\pi/8$ has become a standard configuration when we employ elliptically polarized laser in AMs \cite{Shah09, Ding06}. However we find that a slight deviation of $\phi$ from $\pi/8$ facilitate a better performance of AMs, especially in the near-resonant condition in our case. The experimentally measured amplitude of the photoelectric signal of our EPMx AM, at low light intensity of 150 uW and temperature of 60 $^{\circ}$C, is shown in Fig. \ref{ellipticity} as a function of $\phi$. A mismatch from the behavior as $\left| {\sin \left( {4\phi } \right)} \right|$ is confirmed, while introducing the change of ellipticity makes the theoretical description more consistent with experimental results. In this case, the effect of ellipticity variation reaches a considerable extent and the
optimal angle $\phi_{opt}={18.2^ \circ }$ can be determined, corresponding to an initial ellipticity of $s \approx 0.59$.
\subsection{Laser frequency optimization}
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering\includegraphics[width=8cm]{frequency.pdf}\caption{The signal amplitude as a function of frequency detuning from D$_1$ $F=2$ $\to$ $F'=1$ transition. Red dots represent experimental data. The blue line is theoretical prediction as Eq. (\ref{sig}). The experiment is taken at temperature of 60 $^{\circ}$C and light intensity of 0.83 $\rm{\mu}$W/$\rm{mm^2}$.}
\label{frequency}
\end{figure}
Having modified the parameters of light intensity and ellipticity, now we turn to an investigation on the laser frequency optimization. As shown in Eq. (\ref{sig}), the laser frequency response lineshape of EPMx AM signal strongly depends on $\sigma_{\rm{total}}$ and $C_{\rm{rot}}$, which closely relate to the pumping and detecting processes, respectively. We can not choose the resonant frequency like the conventional $M_x$ magnetometer, since the value of $C_{\rm{rot}}$ is too close to zero at this frequency, although it allows a strongest absorption cross-section $\sigma_{\rm{total}}$. Far off-resonant frequencies which are usually employed in conventional OR detection mode or high atomic density condition \cite{Shah09} are also not suitable due to a significant reduction of pump rate. Not only that but far off-resonant frequencies are adverse to obtaining a big refraction factor $C_{\rm{rot}}$. To seek a optimal point in the near-resonant region, we measured the amplitudes of the photoelectric signals as scanning the laser frequency. A frequency-stabilized laser was used to form a beat frequency system with the concerned laser to measure the amount of detuning. The experimental data are shown in Fig. \ref{frequency} as a function of the frequency deviation from the transition $F=2$ $\to$ $F'=1$ of $^{87}$Rb D$_1$ line. The experimental results are well consistent with the theoretical frequency response curve depicted by Eq. (\ref{sig}). Both theoretical and experimental results point to the blue shift of 2-4 GHz as an optimal operating range for an EPMx AM.
\section{Experimental results and discussion}
Choosing the phase signal for following studies, we can characterize the sensitivity of the magnetometer in terms of the noise equivalent magnetic flux density $\delta$B \cite{Groeger06}, expressed as
\begin{equation}
\text{$\delta $B}=\frac{ V_n \Delta \omega _{\text{HW}}^\theta }{ \gamma k}.
\label{sensitivity}
\end{equation}
Here $V_n$ is the noise level charactered by the square root of the power spectral density (PSD) of the phase output of lock-in amplifier in resonant condition. We estimate $V_n$ as the average noise level between 1 and 10 Hz. Although it's called ``noise level'', $V_n$
is actually closely determined by the signal-to-noise ratio of the magnetometer signal. $k=\frac{9}{\pi }$ V$/$rad is the phase scale factor of lock-in amplifier, by which we can convert the voltage output to phase representation. Therefore the noise level $V_n$ and the half resonance width $\Delta \omega _{\text{HW}}^\theta$ are two essential indicators for the sensitivity analysis of an EPMx AM and its comparison with the CPMx AM.
Besides the laser frequency and ellipticity, laser intensity is another important parameter greatly influencing the performance of AMs. A stronger laser usually means a more intense signal, while it also results in a wider resonance linewidth. For the sake of a comparison between the EPMx AM and its conventional counterparts at respective optimal conditions, we measured the resonance linewidths and noise level of both configurations as varying the incident light intensity. The results are shown in Fig. \ref{noise}. As expected, the resonance linewidth linearly dependents on the light intensity due to the linearly growing pumping rate.
It is readily comprehensible that the linewidth of EPMx AM is narrower than CPMx AM at the same laser power on account of a laser frequency detuning of several gigahertzes and a small ellipticity in the EPMx AM. However, at respective optimal operating points (10 uW for CPMx AM and 90 uW for EPMx AM, Fig. \ref{noise}c), there is no significant difference in linewidths between these two AMs. We also conducted the experiments at temperatures of 24 $^{\circ}$C and 45 $^{\circ}$C, respectively. As main mechanisms contributing to the intrinsic relaxation rate, the rates of spin-exchange collisions and spin-destruction collisions are little affected in this temperature region. Therefore, we observed almost coincident linewidth curves at 24 $^{\circ}$C and 45 $^{\circ}$C. An intrinsic linewidth of about 10 Hz can be inferred at zero light power from the measured results. From Fig. \ref{noise}b, we can see that $V_n$ decreases when the light power ${\cal {I}}_{in}$ increases. The decay behavior can be well described as the tendency $1/\sqrt{{\cal {I}}_{in}}$. The EPMx AM shows its advantage in noise level by greatly suppressing common mode noise with OR detection mode. The suppression effect is particularly pronounced in the case where the atomic number density is low, or at a low temperature. At high temperature, more atoms are involved into interaction with the light, pushing the signal-to-noise ratio to the limit. This is why the CPMx shows a comparable $v_n$ at high temperature.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering\includegraphics[width=10cm]{noise.pdf}
\caption{Sensitivity characterizations of CPMx and EPMx AMs as a function of incident light power at temperatures of 24 $^{\circ}$C and 45 $^{\circ}$C. Red dots and blue pentacles represent the measured results at 24 $^{\circ}$C and 45 $^{\circ}$C, respectively.
(a) The half resonance width. The solid lines are linear fitting results. Note that two curves of each AM configuration are almost overlapped. (b) The noise level. The solid lines are fitting results with the function $1/\sqrt{{\cal {I}}_{in}}$. (c) The noise equivalent magnetic flux density. The solid lines are obtained by substituting $V_n$ and $\Delta \omega _{\text{HW}}^\theta$ of Eq. \ref{sensitivity} with the fitting results of (a) and (b).}
\label{noise}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering\includegraphics[width=10cm]{sensitivity.pdf}
\caption{Sensitivity comparison between CPMx and EPMx AMs as varying the incident light power and temperature in the range 24 $^{\circ}$C to 75 $^{\circ}$C.}
\label{sensitivity}
\end{figure}
At different temperatures from 24 $^{\circ}$C to 75 $^{\circ}$C, we present the sensitivities of CPMx AM and EPMx AM as a function of the light power in Fig. \ref{sensitivity}. The light power affect CPMx AM more severely, while it has little effect on EPMx AM over 50 uW. At 24 $^{\circ}$C and respective optimal light powers, we obtained a sensitivity of 0.69 $\rm pT/\sqrt{Hz}$ with EPMx AM, which is an order of magnitude improvement than CPMx AM. The optimal sensitivity increases as the temperature rises. At 45 $^{\circ}$C, the sensitivity of EPMx AM is 0.32 $\rm pT/\sqrt{Hz}$, while it's 1 $\rm pT/\sqrt{Hz}$ for CPMx AM. When the temperature is higher than 45 $^{\circ}$C, we won't get much in return by increasing the temperature. The sensitivity is still around 0.3 $\rm pT/\sqrt{Hz}$ for EPMx AM even at 75 $^{\circ}$C, while the sensitivity of CPMx AM approaches 0.4 $\rm pT/\sqrt{Hz}$ at this temperature.
\section{Conclusions}
In conclusion, we have presented and characterized a $M_x$ magnetometer with a single near-resonant beam of elliptically polarized light based on $^{87}$Rb atoms. Theoretical analyses have been carried to clarify main mechanisms affecting the performance of an EPMx AM. Taking the light intensity and ellipticity variations into account, we present the output signal of EPMx AM in the analytical form. Moreover, main theoretical results in this paper were experimentally verified. Based on these theoretical and experimental results, we optimized the important optical parameters, such as light ellipticity, frequency and power. A great portion of effort has been contributed to the comparison between CPMx AM and EPMx AM. At respective optimal conditions, EPMx AM shows a substantial improvement in sensitivity. Especially at relatively low temperatures, where the atomic number density is low, more than one order of sensitivity improvement has been obtained. To be specific, at room temperature of 24 $^{\circ}$C, a sensitivity of 0.69 $\rm pT/\sqrt{Hz}$ has been achieved with EPMx AM, much better than 7.6 $\rm pT/\sqrt{Hz}$ of CPMx AM working at its optimal condition. We found that it's not necessary to continue to raise the temperature of our EPMx AM after 45 $^{\circ}$C, since there will be no significant improvement than 0.32 $\rm pT/\sqrt{Hz}$ obtained at 45 $^{\circ}$C. Finally, we optimized the sensitivities of CPMx AM and EPMx AM to 0.4 $\rm pT/\sqrt{Hz}$ and 0.29 $\rm pT/\sqrt{Hz}$ at 75 $^{\circ}$C, respectively.
The results in this paper show that introducing elliptically polarized laser to $M_x$ magnetometer is of great significance. It not only preserves the compact potential with one single beam configuration, but also allows a great sensitivity improvement. Excellent performance extends the application range of $M_x$ AM with uncoated cell in unheated environment. As an example, we have designed a compact probe of EPMx AM and
realized high-quality magnetocardiography measurements at low temperature. The EPMx AM is particularly suitable for practical applications of magnetometer array. Using uncoated cells can eliminate the inconsistency caused by coating process and reduce the cost. Working at room temperature avoids the structural complexity caused by heating and insulation units. The EPMx AM also has low power consumption characteristic, which is important in some practical applications, such as long-term outdoor geomagnetic measurements and wearable magnetocardiography measurements.
\section{ACKNOWLEDGMENTS}
This work are supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (Grant No. 2017YFC0601602) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11605153, 61727821, 61475139).
\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
|
\section{Dirac quantum walks}
We consider QW both over the square and the triangular grid. More precisely we consider periodic tilings of the plane, where the tiles are either squares or equilateral triangles, of alternating grey and white colours, as in Fig. \ref{fig:operator}. The walker lives over the middle points of each side (aka facet) of each tile. For the square grid we can label these points by their positions in $\mathbb{Z}^2$, for the triangular grid this would be a subset of $\mathbb{Z}^2$. To any such point ${\bf x}$ we assign a complex number representing the amplitude of the walker being there, which we denote by $\psi^+({\bf x})$ (resp. $\psi^-({\bf x})$) if the tile is white (resp. grey). Of course wherever two facets are glued, so are their middle points, and so the two complex numbers form a spinor $\psi({\bf x})=(\psi^+({\bf x})\ \ \psi^-({\bf x}))^\top$ in $\mathcal{H}_2$. Letting $\ket{v_+}=(1\ \ 0)^\top$ and $\ket{v_-}=(0\ \ 1)^\top$ we may then write $\psi({\bf x})=\psi^+({\bf x}) \ket{v_+}+\psi^-({\bf x}) \ket{v_-}$. This degree of freedom at a single point is referred to as the walker's `coin' or `spin'. For the full square grid, the overall state of the walker therefore lies in the composite Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}_2\otimes \mathcal{H}_{\mathbb{Z}^2}$ and can be written $\ket{\psi}=\sum_{{\bf x}} \psi^-({\bf x}) \ket{v_-}\otimes\ket{{\bf x}} + \psi^+({\bf x}) \ket{v_+}\otimes\ket{{\bf x}}$. For the full triangular grid the amplitude of one in every two position needs be zero. For a grid with a missing white (resp. grey) tile the corresponding $\psi^+({\bf x})$ (resp. $\psi^-({\bf x})$) for ${\bf x}$ on a side of the tile, needs be zero.\\
The class of evolution operators that we consider in this paper are QW of the form:
\begin{equation}
\ket{\psi(t+\varepsilon/l)}=WR \ket{\psi(t)}\label{eq:main}
\end{equation}
with $l=2$ for the square grid and $l=3$ for the triangular grid. Here, $R$ stands for the synchronous anti-clockwise rotation of all tiles. Notice that, wherever there is no missing tile, the simultaneous rotations of the two tiles glued at ${\bf x}$ precisely \GDM{coincides with the implementation of }a partial shift $T_{k,\varepsilon}$ along a direction ${\bf u}_k$:
\begin{equation}
T_{k,\varepsilon} \begin{pmatrix}\psi^+ ({\bf x})\\ \psi^- ({\bf x})\end{pmatrix} =\begin{pmatrix}\psi^+ ({\bf x} + {\bf u}_k \varepsilon)\\ \psi^- ({\bf x} - {\bf u}_k \varepsilon)\end{pmatrix}.
\end{equation}
Moreover, $W$ stands for the synchronous application of a $2\times 2$ unitary $W({\bf x})$ on the spins $\psi({\bf x})$. This unitary depends on ${\bf x}$ only in a very simple way which we now clarify. First of all, if it so happens that a tile is missing at ${\bf x}$, then the spinor $\psi({\bf x})$ is incomplete, and so $W({\bf x})=I$. Second of all, if there is no missing tile, then $W({{\bf x}})=W_k$, where the $k$ is that corresponding to the partial translation direction ${\bf u}_k$ occurring at ${\bf x}$.\\
It follows that, in the case of a full grid, any given walker will undergo $T_{k,\varepsilon}$ and then $W_k$ for $k=0\ldots l-1$ successively, amounting to
\begin{align}
\ket{\psi(t+\varepsilon)} &=W_{\textrm{$l$}-1}T_{\textrm{$l$}-1,\varepsilon}\ldots W_0T_{0,\varepsilon} \ket{\psi(t)}\nonumber\\
&= \Pi_k W_kT_{k,\varepsilon} \ket{\psi(t)}. \label{eq:main2}
\end{align}
The way we choose these $W_k$ is so that QW is Dirac QW, meaning that
\begin{equation}
\Pi_k W_kT_{k,\varepsilon}\approx \exp(i\varepsilon H_D) \label{eq:main3}
\end{equation}
as we neglect the second order terms in $\varepsilon$, with $H_D$ the Dirac Hamiltonian in natural $\hbar=c=1$ units, i.e.
$$H_{D}=p_{x}\sigma_{x}+p_{y}\sigma_{y}+m\sigma_{z}.$$
Therefore, on the full grid, these QW simulate the Dirac Equation, more and more closely as $\varepsilon$ goes to zero.
\paragraph{Square grid.} Let us consider the unit vectors along the $x$--axis and $y$--axis, namely $\{{\bf u}_x,{\bf u}_y\}$ and use them to specify the directions of the translations $T_{x,\varepsilon}$ and $T_{y,\varepsilon}$. Eq. \eqref{eq:main2} then reads:
\begin{equation}
U = W_+ T_{y,\varepsilon}W_- T_{x,\varepsilon}
\label{eq:mainSQ}
\end{equation}
where $W_\pm = \exp(i \sigma_x \theta_\pm )$ with $\theta_\pm = \pm (\frac{\pi}{4} \pm \varepsilon m)$ and $m$ a is real constant, namely the mass. In the formal limit for $\varepsilon \rightarrow 0$, Eq.\eqref{eq:mainSQ} recovers the Dirac Hamiltonian in $(2+1)$--spacetime. Iterations of the walk observationally converge towards solutions of the Dirac Eq., as was proven in full rigor in \cite{arrighi2014dirac}, \GDM{which motivated the above choice of $U$ on the square grid in the following.}
\paragraph{Triangular grid.} For the Triangular grid let us consider the unit vectors $\{{\bf u}_0,{\bf u}_1,{\bf u}_2\}$, as in Fig. \ref{fig:operator} and defined by
\begin{equation}
{\bf u}_k = \cos\left({\frac{2 k \pi}{3}}\right) {\bf u}_x + \sin\left({\frac{2 k \pi}{3}}\right) {\bf u}_y \hspace{0.25cm} \text{for}\hspace{0.25cm} k= 0,1,2.
\end{equation}
and use them to specify the directions of the translations $T_{i,\varepsilon}$. Eq. \eqref{eq:main2} then reads:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:mainTR}
e^{-i\varepsilon H_D} = WT_{2,\varepsilon}WT_{1,\varepsilon}WT_{0,\varepsilon}
\end{equation}
with $W = e^{i\frac{\pi}{3}}e^{ -i \frac{\alpha}{2} \sigma_y}e^{- i \frac{\pi}{3}\sigma_z}e^{i \frac{\alpha}{2} \sigma_y}e^{-i\varepsilon\frac{3}{\sqrt{5}}m\sigma_z}$ the coin operator, which turns out not to depend on the direction ${\bf u}_k$. In \cite{arrighi_dirac_2018} it has been proved in detail by some of the authors how this particular choice also leads, in the continuum limit, to the Dirac Hamiltonian in $(2+1)$--spacetime, \GDM{which again motivated us to adopt the above $W$ on the triangular grid in presence of defects.}
\paragraph{Defects.} A sector of a crystal lattice may be inaccessible, e.g. due to surface defects such as the vacancy of an atom (e.g. Schottky point defect) and others. These affect the physical and chemical properties of the material, including electrical resistivity or conductivity \cite{ibach1995solid}.
Here we model these defects in the simplest possible way: locally, a small number of squares or triangles are missing, thereby breaking the translational invariance of the lattice. In other words, the walker is forbidden access to a ball $\mathcal{B}$ of unit radius, as in Fig. \ref{fig:holes}.This is done by reflecting those signals that reach the boundary $\mathcal{\partial B}$ of the ball, simply by letting $W=I$ on the facets around $\mathcal{\partial B}$.
Notice that, wherever we replace the coin $W$ by identity, both Dirac walks reduce to just anti-clockwise rotation $R$ as in Eq. \eqref{eq:main}, see Fig. \ref{fig:holes}. Still, the operators \eqref{eq:mainSQ} and \eqref{eq:mainTR} may have different topological properties around $\mathcal{\partial B}$. For instance, the square grid QW has vanishing Chern number and trivial topological properties \cite{kitagawa2012topological} for vanishing $m$, which can still become non-trivial from $m>0$ \cite{asboth2015edge}. The triangular walk on the other hand is always topologically non-trivial and has Chern number equal to one \cite{kitagawa2010exploring}. In the triangular case the positive and negative component decouple respectively in the grey and the white triangles, and may be thought of as inducing polarized local topological currents of spin, called edge states \cite{verga2017edge}. According to \cite{verga2017edge}, this phenomenon will be observed whenever initial states have an overlap with $\mathcal{\partial B}$, elsewhere the walker does not localize and explores the lattice with ballistic speed. Thus, we expect these topological effects to become significant in the triangular case and it is indeed the case.
Our conjecture is that, starting from a uniformly superposed wavefunction, the walker will, in finite time, localise around the defect in $O(\sqrt{N})$ steps, with probability in $O(1/\log(N))$, with $N$ the total number of squares/triangles. In the following we discuss the numerical evidence we have for such a conjecture.
\section{Grover search}
\begin{figure}
{\center
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{oscSQ.pdf}
}
\caption{{\em Square grid periodic localization.} Probability of being localized around the center of the defect versus time. For $m=0$ and $N=2500$.}
\label{fig:perio}
\end{figure}
Our numerical simulations over the square and triangular grids are exactly in line with a series of results \cite{childs2004spatial,aaronson2003quantum,tulsi2008faster} showing that $2D$ spatial search can be performed in $O(\sqrt{N})$ steps with a probability of success in $O(1/\log{N})$. With $O(\log{N})$ repetitions of the experiment one makes the success probability an $O(1)$, yielding an overall complexity of $O(\sqrt{N}\log{N})$. Making use of quantum amplitude amplification \cite{brassard2002quantum}, however, one just needs $O(\sqrt{\log{N}})$ repetitions of the experiment in order to make the probability an $O(1)$, yielding an overall complexity of $O(\sqrt{N\log{N}})$. This bound is unlikely to be improved, given the strong arguments given by \cite{magniez2012hitting, santha2008quantum,patel2010search}.\\
These works were not using Dirac QW, nor defects. Our aim here is demonstrate that QW which recover the Dirac equation, also perform a Grover search, as they propagate over the discrete surface and localise around its defects. More concretely we proceed as follows: (i) Prepare, as the initial state the wavefunction which is uniformly superposed over every square or triangle, and whose coin degree of freedom is also the uniformly superposed $(\ket{v^+}+\ket{v^-})/\sqrt{2}$. Notice that amplitude inside the defect is zero; (ii) Let the walker evolve with time; (iii) Quantify the number of steps \GDM{$t(N)$} before the walker reaches its probability peak \GDM{$p(N)$} of being localized in a ball of radius $2$ around the center of the defect, \GDM{namely the peak recurrence time} and estimate this probability peak, at fixed $N$; (iv) Characterize $t(N)$ and $p(N)$, i.e. the way the peak recurrence time and the probability peak depend upon the total number of squares/triangles $N$.
We indeed observe that the probability of being found around the defect has a periodic behaviour, see in Fig. \ref{fig:perio} for the case of the square lattice: for instance with $N=2500$ sites, for $m=0$, the peak recurrence time is at $t \sim 25$, with maximum probability is $p \simeq 10^{-1}$. The dependencies in $N$ were interpolated from the data set, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:sq}.a. We observe that $t(N) = \sqrt{N}$ and $p(N)\simeq 1/\log{N}$ asymptotically, with a prefactor that depends on $m$. In this massless case the interpolation $p(N)\simeq 1/\log{N}$ works right-away, but when the mass gets larger, the curve remains longer along a $p(N)\simeq 1/N$ trajectory, before it eventually enters its asymptotic $p(N)\simeq 1/\log{N}$ regime. \GDM{Moreover, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:sq}.b, in presence of more than one topological defects we the way the peak recurrence time and the probability depend upon $N$ is the same. Notice that the prefactors do not depend on the number of defects but only depend on $m$, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:sq}.a.}
Clearly, repeating the experiment an $O(\log N)$ number of times will make the probability of finding the defect as close to $1$ as desired, leading to an overall time complexity in $O(\sqrt{N}\log N)$. Again we could, instead, propose to use quantum amplitude amplification \cite{brassard2002quantum} in order to bring the needed number of repetitions down an $O(\sqrt{\log N})$, leading to an overall time complexity in $O(\sqrt{N\log N})$. But it seems that this would defeat the purpose of this paper to some extent: since our aim is to show that there is a `natural implementation' of the Grover search, we must not rely on higher-level routines such as quantum amplitude amplification.
\begin{figure}
{\center
\includegraphics[scale=0.325]{2D_SQ.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.325]{mult_def.pdf}
}
\caption{{\em Square grid scalings}. \GDM{(Top) Probability peak of being localized around one defect, versus the number of squares in the grid for different value of the mass $m$. (Bottom) Probability peak of being localized around two, three and four defects respectively, versus the number of squares in the grid for $m=0$. The inset shows the peak recurrence time.}}
\label{fig:sq}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
{\center
\includegraphics[scale=0.325]{proba.pdf}
}
\caption{{\em Triangular grid scalings. } Recurring probability peak of being localized around the defect, versus the number of triangles in the grid. The inset shows the peak recurrence time.}
\label{fig:tr}
\end{figure}
Over the triangular grid the Grover search is again at play. Indeed the data set of Fig. \ref{fig:tr}, confirms the results obtained over the square grid: the peak recurrence time is again $t(N)\simeq O(\sqrt{N})$, and its corresponding probability peak is again $p(N)\simeq O(1/\log{N})$ for large $N$, again with a prefactor that depends on the mass. Again this leads to an overall complexity of $O(\sqrt{N}\log{N})$, or $O(\sqrt{N\log{N}})$ using amplitude amplification.\\
\section{Conclusion}
It is now common knowledge that Quantum Walks (QW) implement the Grover search, and that some QW mimic the propagation of the free 1/2-spin fermion.
Yet, could this mean that these particles naturally implement the Grover search? Answering this question positively may be the path to a serious technological leap, whereby experimentalist would bypass the need for a full-fledged scalable and error-correcting Quantum Computer, and take the shortcut of looking for `natural occurrences' of the Grover search instead. So far, however, this idea has remained unexplored. The QW used to implement the Grover diffusion step were unrelated to the Dirac QW used to simulate the 1/2-spin fermion, with the noticeable exception of \cite{patel2010search}. More crucially, the Grover oracle step seemed like a rather artificial, involved controlled-phase, far from something that could occur in nature. This contribution begins to remedy both these objections.
We used Dirac QW over both the triangular and the square grid as the Grover diffusion step and, instead of alternating this with an extrinsic oracle step, we coded for the solution directly inside the grid, by introducing a \PA{topological} defect. We obtained strong numerical evidence showing that the Dirac QW localize around the defect in $O(\sqrt{N})$ steps with probability $O(1/\log{N})$, just like previous QW search would.
\GDM{Our next step is to use QW to locate not just a hole defect, but a particular QR code--like defect, amongst many possible others that could be present on the lattice. This would bring us one step closer to a natural implementation of an unstructured database Grover search.}
Replacing the Grover oracle step by surface defects seems way more practical in terms of experimental realizations, whatever the substrate, possibly even in a biological setting \cite{patel2011efficient}. \PA{At a more abstract level, this suggests using QW to search, not just for 'good' configurations within a space, but rather for topological properties of the configuration space itself.}
\paragraph{Acknowledgements} The authors acknowledge inspiring conversations with Fabrice Debbasch, that sparked the idea of Grover searching for surface defects; enlightening discussions on topological effects with Alberto Verga; and useful remarks on how to better present this work by Janos Asboth, Tapabrata Ghosh, Apoorva Patel and the anonymous referees. This work has been funded by the P\'epini\`ere d'Excellence 2018, AMIDEX fondation, project DiTiQuS and the ID\# 60609 grant from the John Templeton Foundation, as part of the ``The Quantum Information Structure of Spacetime (QISS)'' Project.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Compressive sensing (CS), an emerging sampling and reconstructing strategy, can recover original signal from dramatically fewer measurements with a sub-Nyquist sampling rate \cite{CS}. As CS has the potentials of significantly improving the sampling speed and sensor energy efficiency, it has been applied in many practical applications, including single pixel imaging \cite{singlecamera}, fast magnetic resonance imaging \cite{MRI}, high-speed video cameras \cite{Video} and image encryption \cite{cqli:meet:JISA19}.
To deal with high-dimensional natural images efficiently, block-based CS is proposed as a lightweight CS approach \cite{BCS,SPL,BCS-1}. In such strategy, a scene under view is partitioned into some small blocks, which are then sampled and reconstructed independently. Meaningful information is usually not uniformly distributed in an image, so the block partition benefits more fair allocation of the sensing resources for the whole image \cite{BCS-Salie}.
Although block-based CS enjoys the advantages of low-cost sampling, lightweight reconstruction, and capability of adaptively assigning sensing resources, it also usually suffers from reduced quality of image reconstruction due to blocking artifacts \cite{BCS-1, BCS-2}. To address the issue, some methods using an iterative block-based CS algorithm (BCS) are proposed \cite{BCS,BCS-1}. In each iteration, the projection operation is used to build an approximation of each block, while denoising operation acts on the full image reassembled by the approximative blocks. Results demonstrate that the recovered image blocks can be improved, while blocking artifacts can also be ameliorated as the iterations progress. This approach, however, may increase the reconstructing time, since small blocks still need to be concatenated into large-size full images to remove blocking artifacts.
\IEEEpubidadjcol
Inspired by the powerful learning ability of deep neural networks in image representation \cite{DNN-C,DNN-S}, several network-based CS methods are proposed \cite{Icassp,Reconnet,Ldamp,Im-recon,ISTA}, which are significantly faster than the traditional CS reconstruction algorithms. Using a fully connected layer to mimic the CS sampling, the network models can jointly optimize the sampling matrix and the reconstruction process, improving the qualities of recovered images. Although the CS network models are carefully constructed to enhance learning capabilities, several specific models have to been trained with various sampling rates, ignoring the mutual relationships among them. Consequently, blocking artifacts still exist in the existing deep network methods \cite{Reconnet,Im-recon,ISTA}, especially when
the employed sampling rates are very low. Moreover, most network-based image CS methods are trained as a black box, ignoring structural insight of CS reconstruction algorithms. Consequently, the reconstruction accuracy is decreased.
In this paper, we propose a multi-channel deep learning architecture for casting BCS algorithm into a learning network. It can benefit from the speed and learning capacities of deep networks while retaining the advantages of the previous BCS algorithms. To facilitate description, we term the multi-channel deep architecture as BCS-Net, which consists of a channel-specific sampling network and a unified deep reconstruction network. The channel-specific architecture is specifically designed to handle block-based allocation of sensing resources. The blocks with various sampling rates can then be fed into the same deep reconstruction network to exploit inter-block correlation for removing blocking artifacts. We further divide the reconstruction network into a fixed number of residual layers, each of which corresponds to an iteration of the BCS algorithm. To enable training, a modified version of the famous DnCNN network designed in \cite{DnCNN} is used to replace the denoising operation in traditional BCS approach, which easily propagates gradients.
Our contributions of the paper are summarized below:
\begin{itemize}
\item A multi-channel sampling architecture specifically for block-based image CS is designed. Using this multi-channel architecture, block-wise CS measuring processed with a variety of sampling rates can be integrated into a single model to utilize the correlation among the blocks with different CS sampling rates.
\item A deep reconstruction architecture based on the BCS algorithm
is proposed using block-wise approximation and full-image-based denoising.
\item Performances of the proposed approaches are verified by extensive experiments on three widely used benchmark datasets. The results show that the proposed multi-channel deep network can significantly outperform the state-of-the-art CS methods and network-based ones in terms of both subjective and objective metrics.
\end{itemize}
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Sec.~\ref{sec:rela}, the related work on CS methods and network-based methods are reviewed. Section~\ref{sec:bcsdamp} introduces the idea of block-wise approximation and full-image-based denoising in BCS algorithm, and presents an extended version of the well-known Damp algorithm. The proposed multi-channel deep architecture is presented
in Sec.~\ref{sec:dnn} and test results on its performance are given in Sec.~\ref{sec:simu}. The last section concludes the paper.
\section{The related work}
\label{sec:rela}
In this section, we present the background of CS theory, then review the representative work on block-based image CS and deep network approaches.
\subsection{Preliminary of CS theory}
\label{sec:cs}
Compressive sensing consists of two main steps: sampling/measuring process and reconstructing process. Let $\vct{x}$ and $\Phi$ denote a sparse signal of size $1\times n$ and an $m \times n$ measurement/sampling matrix, respectively.
Then, the sampling process can be presented as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:cs}
y=\Phi \vct{x},
\end{equation}
where $y$ is the $m$-length measurement vector sampled from $\vct{x}$. If signal $\vct{x}$ is not sparse but compressible, the sampling process has to be further deduced from Eq.~(\ref{eq:cs}).
That is, $y=\Fee x = \Fee \cdot \psi \alpha = \phi \alpha_0 + \upsilon$, where $\upsilon$ represents measurement noise, $\psi$ denotes the sparse transform, $\alpha$ is the coefficient vector in the corresponding transform domain, $\phi=\Fee \psi$, and $\alpha_0$ is considered as a sparse vector approximating to $\alpha$. In general, a natural image is not strictly sparse signal, but often approximately sparse in some spare transform domain.
The process of reconstructing signal $\vct{x}$ needs much more computational complexity than the sampling process. It has been proven in \cite{CS} that if the sampling matrix obeys the restricted isometry property (RIP), it is possible to recover $\vct{x}$ by solving an $l_1$-norm optimization problem: $\min \|\alpha\|_1$, subjecting to $\pnorm{2}{y-\phi\alpha}^2 \le \lambda$, even if $m\ll n$. Here $\lambda$ is a small constant, and one has $x=\psi^{-1}\alpha$ when $\vct{x}$ is a compressible signal.
In the past two decades, a number of CS reconstruction algorithms have been developed, including basis pursuit \cite{BP}, orthogonal matching pursuit \cite{OMP}, and the latest iteration-based Damp algorithm \cite{Damp}. Although these algorithms enjoy solid mathematical foundations, they usually need long reconstructing time due to high computational complexity.
\subsection{Block-based image CS}
\label{sec:bcs}
Block-based CS is more effective for processing natural images because of increased dimensionality of such signals \cite{BCS, BCS-1, BCS-Small}. The scene under view is partitioned into relatively smaller non-overlapping blocks. The measurement matrixes corresponding to the small-size blocks are observed.
Then, the image is sampled and reconstructed on a block-by-block basis \cite{BCS-1}. This block-independent approach results in a reduced computational complexity for reconstruction with a much simplified sampling process.
As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:block}, the meaningful information in different blocks of an image is non-uniform. Depending on the volume of information contained in each block, different sampling rates are adopted to reduce the overall sampling rate. Taking the two images in Fig.~\ref{fig:block} as an example, lower CS sampling rates can be allocated for the block marked ``C" in the image ``Cameraman" and block ``G" in image ``Parrot".
As a consequence, sensing resources should be reasonably allocated to each block, instead of equally assigned. In \cite{BCS-Salie}, less sampling rates are allocated to non-salient image blocks but more to salient ones using the characteristics of human visual system. Concretely, a low-resolution sensor is used produce an initially sampled image, such that the adaptive sampling can be achieved for the input scene. In \cite{adaptive}, the CS procedure is initialized with a low fixed-rate pre-sampling and an initial recovery. Then, the important regions are extracted by computing the saliency map of the initially recovered image. The adaptive CS strategy is further validated on some real video sequences \cite{adaptive-tip}. In \cite{Asymmetric}, we also propose an asymmetric approach to ensure fairer allocation of sampling rates among image blocks.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\OneImW]{partition-camera}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\OneImW]{partition-parrot}
\caption{Dividing two images for allocation of the sensing resources.}
\label{fig:block}
\end{figure}
Due to the fact that block partition breaks the global correlation of the whole image, block-based CS prone to generate reconstructed image of low quality. In \cite{BCS}, an iterative BCS reconstruction approach is proposed to remove the blocking artifacts. The recovered images via BCS algorithm are approximated on a block-by-block basis, but hard-thresholding denoising in each iteration is imposed on the full image, not image blocks. As a result, the artifacts incurred by block partition can be smoothed as the iteration progress. However, this can result in substantially increasing reconstruction complexity because of full-image denoising, which violates the motivation of lightweight design.
\subsection{Deep network approach for image CS}
The tremendous success of deep learning in computer vision as shown in \cite{DNN-C,DNN-S} attracted application of deep neural networks in image CS \cite{Ldamp,Reconnet,ISTA,CSnet}. When an imaging system acquires CS measurements, the reconstructing process is performed with a deep network. Compared with the traditional CS, deep network approaches generally enjoy much faster reconstruction speed, while still achieving high-quality recovered images owing to their significant learning capabilities.
In \cite{Reconnet}, a network-based ReconNet approach is introduced to learn the inverse mapping from block-wise CS measurements to their desired image blocks. It is further improved in \cite{Im-recon}
that the measurement matrix and the reconstruction process are jointly learned. In \cite{ISTA,Ldamp}, traditional CS algorithms and deep networks are blended by treating parameters of the algorithm as weights to be learned. Unfortunately, full-image reconstruction is prone to overfitting due to the potentially overwhelming number of parameters of the sampling layer. So block-independent image recovery has to be performed instead of reconstructing the full image directly. As a consequence, blocking artifacts can be observed in the recovered images. To address the issue, the recovered images are fed into the BM3D denoiser designed in \cite{BM3D} to remove blocking artifact \cite{Reconnet,Im-recon}.
However, the benefit of using an traditional off-the-shelf denoiser is not convincingly demonstrated.
For each sampling rate, the corresponding network model has to be trained to learn the inverse CS mapping. This may be not desirable for block-based CS, since a large number of model parameters need to be stored. In \cite{Ldamp}, a neural network architecture is applied to a variety of measurement matrices. Unfortunately, its performance improvement is less significant than traditional CS methods because the measurement matrices cannot participate in the network training. Inspired by the multi-scale super-resolution method given in \cite{Enhanced}, \cite{Multi} introduce a multi-scale CS approach, where the main network is shared across multiple sampling rates. However, their method only reuses a portion of parameters, and a CS sampling rate still correspond to a specific network model. In other words, they do not consider block partition and the corresponding problem of blocking artifacts.
\section{Block-wise approximation and full-image-based denoising}
\label{sec:bcsdamp}
In this section, we first introduce the key idea of the popular BCS algorithm \cite{BCS}, i.e., block-wise approximation and full-image-based denoising. Then we propose an extended version of the well known Damp approach \cite{Damp} by exploiting this idea.
\subsection{Block-wise approximation and full-image-based denoising in BCS}
\label{sec:spl}
The BCS algorithm is an iterative reconstruction approach specialized for block-based image CS. It solves the image reconstruction problem by using approximation with projection onto the convex set and hard thresholding denoising in the iteration process, as shown in
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{split}
r_i^{t+1} &=\hat{x}_i^{t}+\Fee_{\rm B}^*(y_i-\Fee_{\rm B} \hat{x}_i^{t}),\\
\hat{X}^{t+1} &=\mathcal{H}(R^{t+1}),
\end{split}
\right.
\label{eq:spl}
\end{equation}
where $\Fee_{\rm B}$ is the measurement matrix corresponding to a block and $\Fee_{\rm B}^*$ is its pseudo-inverse, $r_i^{t+1}$ denotes the $(t+1)^{th}$ approximation of the recovered block $\hat{x}_i$, and all $\{r_i^{t+1}\}_{i=1}^K$ are reassembled into a full image $R^{t+1}$. Here we assume that the original image are divided into $K$ blocks, $y_i$ is the measurement sampled from block $x_i$. The reconstruction starts from some initial approximation $\hat{X}^{0}$ and forms the recovered image $\hat{X}^{t+1}$ at $(t+1)^{th}$ iteration. In the BCS approach, $\mathcal{H}(\cdot)$ represents hard thresholding, which is widely used in removing Gaussian noise. In the special case when $\Fee_{\rm B}$ is an orthonormal matrix, we can deduce that $\Fee_{\rm B}^* =\Fee_{\rm B}^T$, where $\Fee_{\rm B}^T$ is the transpose of $\Fee_{\rm B}$.
We can conclude that, the key idea of BCS algorithm is block-wise approximation, as illustrated in the first equation in (\ref{eq:spl}). The denoising operation, on the contrary, is imposed on the full image, not each block, as shown in the second equation in (\ref{eq:spl}). In this way, blocking artifacts can be removed while still maintaining block-wise CS sampling.
\subsection{BCS-Damp algorithm}
Inspired by BCS algorithm, in this subsection, we propose an extension for Damp algorithm, called BCS-Damp, to reconstruct the images with block partition.
Damp is a state-of-the-art CS reconstruction algorithm, which is also an iterative approach like BCS. Let $\Fee$ be the measurement matrix of image $\vct{x}$, and $y$ is the corresponding measurements. Damp algorithm takes the form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:damp-ori}
\left\{
\begin{split}
z^t &=y-\Fee \hat{x}^t+z^{t-1} {\rm div}(\hat{x}^{t})/m,\\
(\hat{\sigma}^t)^2 &= \pnorm{2}{z^t}^2/m,
\end{split}
\right.
\end{equation}
where $\hat{x}^{t}=\mathcal{D}_{\hat{\sigma}^{t-1}}(\hat{x}^{t-1}+\Fee^*z^{t-1})$.
The part $\hat{x}^t+\Fee^*z^t$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:damp-ori}) can be written as $x+v^t$, where $\vct{x}$ is the original image and $v^t$ can be regarded as a Gaussian noise at iteration $t$. $\hat{\sigma}^t$ is an estimate of the standard deviation of that Gaussian noise. $m$ is the number of CS measurements. div$D(\cdot)$ denotes the operation of partial derivative, and div$\mathcal{D}_{\hat{\sigma}^t}$ represents the divergence of the denoiser.
However, Damp is not specially designed for block-based CS, and correspondingly it does not consider blocking artifacts as a result. With the idea of BCS in mind, that is, block-wise approximation is employed to decrease computation complexity, while full-image-based denoising is imposed to remove blocking artifacts, we propose an extension of Damp for block-based image CS. Our proposed BCS-Damp algorithm is illustrated as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:damp}
\left\{
\begin{split}
r_i^{t+1}&=\hat{x}_i^{t}+\Fee_{B}^* \cdot z_i^t,\\
z_i^t&=y_i-\Fee_{B}\hat{x}_i^t+z_i^{t-1} \{{\rm div} \mathcal{D}_{\hat{\sigma}^{t-1}}(R^t)\}_i/m,\\
\hat{X}^{t+1}&=\mathcal{D}_{\hat{\sigma}^t}(R^{t+1}),
\end{split}
\right.
\end{equation}
where $\{\cdot\}_i$ represents the $i^{th}$ block in an image. Here we maintain the operation of ${\rm div}\mathcal{D}_{\hat{\sigma}^{t-1}}$ in Damp algorithm. The modification we have to introduce is that, $\mathcal{D}_{\hat{\sigma}^t}(\cdot)$ does not run on the blocks, but on the full image $R^{t+1}$, obtained by concatenating all approximated blocks $\{r_i^{t+1}\}_{i=1}^K$, as shown in the last equation in (\ref{eq:damp}).
In the following section, block-wise approximation but full-image-based denoising, along with the iterative structure of BCS algorithm, will be further casted into a carefully designed deep network for removing artifacts and improving the recovered image.
\section{Multi-channel deep network architecture}
\label{sec:dnn}
In this section, we propose a multi-channel deep network architecture, termed BCS-Net, to reconstruct the images acquired by block-wise CS sampling. The proposed BCS-Net is composed of a multi-channel sampling network and a deep reconstructing network, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:framework}. These two networks consist of an integrated end-to-end model, of which the learnable parameters are jointly trained by our proposed two-stage training strategy.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.5cm,width=8cm]{bcs-net}
\caption{BCS-Net architecture, which is composed of a multi-channel sampling network and a reconstruction network including an initial reconstruction part and a deep reconstruction part.}
\label{fig:framework}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Multi-channel sampling architecture}
\label{sec:samp}
This subsection investigates a $k$-channel network architecture, named $f_{\rm samp}$, to mimic the adaptive sampling process of block-based CS, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:sample}.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\OneImW]{samp}
\captionsetup{font={small}}
\caption{$k$-channel sampling network $f_{\rm samp}$, with which the blocks with different sampling rates are fed into the network via their respective channels.}
\label{fig:sample}
\end{figure}
The proposed $f_{\rm samp}$ has $k$ channels, each of which corresponds to a sampling rate assigned to a specific image block. A higher value of $k$ indicates a more detailed division of sampling rates of image blocks, thereby block partition can benefit the fairer allocation of the sensing resources, but resulting in more complex sampling architecture. The full scene under view, $X$, is partitioned into $K$ non-overlapping image blocks of size $B \times B$. Using the schematic image $X$ in Fig. \ref{fig:sample} as an example, $K$ is set to 9. According to CS theory, for image block $x_i$, the sampling process can be represented as $y_i=\Fee_{B,j} \cdot x_i$. Here $\Fee_{B,j}$ ($1 \le j \le k$) is the $m_j\times n_{\rm B}$ measurement matrix of block $x_i$, $n_{\rm B}=B^2$, $1 \le i \le K$, and $y_i$ is the corresponding measurements. We have $m_j=s_j \cdot n_{\rm B}$, where $s_j$ is the sampling rate assigned to block $x_i$. With our sampling network, a channel is related to a sampling rate, and $k$ channels can then correspond to a number of target sampling rates by employing linear combination of those $k$ sampling rates.
For the $j^{th}$ channel in $f_{\rm samp}$, we use a convolutional layer, in which we do not set bias and activation, to mimic the sampling process. This convolutional layer is defined as $w_j^{\rm samp}\otimes x_i$, where $w_j^{\rm samp}$ denotes $m_j$ convolution kernels of size $B \times B \times 1$. In other words, $w_j^{\rm samp}$ corresponds to measurement matrix $\Fee_{B,j}$. Note that the measurements among different channels are different from each other, since each channel corresponds to its own convolutional kernel. However, the blocks within the same image are spatially correlated. As a consequence, the measurements of those blocks among different channels are related to each other. If $x_i$ is fed into $j^{th}$ channel, we have
\begin{equation}
y_i=f_{\rm samp}(x_i, w_j^{\rm samp}).
\label{eq:samp}
\end{equation}
The size of the convolution kernel $w_j^{\rm samp}$ depends on the sampling rate $s_j$ and the size of image blocks. We should note that, compared with traditional measurement matrix, the weights of $w_j^{\rm samp}$ are learnable. In this perspective, it is more rigorous that network-based CS approaches should be referred to as the ones inspired by CS, instead of being CS.
We note that $k$ channels in our sampling network corresponds to $k$ sampling rates, respectively, and $k$ may be less than $K$, the total number of the blocks in an image. With our multi-channel model, the blocks have to be measured via their respective channels, and the number of the channels, $k$, is then related to the number of blocks of an image, $K$. Ideally, a block corresponds to a unique channel. In this case, we have $k=K$. If several blocks within an image are similar to each other, such as those blocks belonging to the background, they can be considered to assign the same sampling rates. At this point, we have $k<K$. Fortunately, all $k$ channels can be trained sufficiently in the training process, since we have enough training images, and thus each of these $k$ channels will receive enough training blocks regardless of the allocation strategies employed.
Obviously, if the full image is not partitioned into blocks, too many parameters may be needed to store the weights and it will be easily prone to overfitting. This may also be the main reason that most existing deep network approaches reconstruct the full image with block-by-block strategy. In this paper, we are going to further investigate the problem of blocking artifacts due to block partition.
\subsection{Deep reconstructing architecture}
In this subsection, we construct a deep reconstruction architecture to cast the idea of iterative block-wise approximation but full-image-based denoising into the network, achieving model-level removal of blocking artifacts. Our deep architecture is composed of an initial reconstruction network $f_{\rm init}$ and a deep reconstruction network $f_{\rm deep}$, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:recon}.
\begin{figure*}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.6\OneImW]{deep}
\caption{Deep reconstruction architecture, in which the image is approximated by block at each residual phase, while these approximated blocks are reassembled into a full image to perform denoising by employing a modified version of DnCNN phase by phase.}
\label{fig:recon}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\OneImW]{deep-approx}
\caption{Deep reconstruction .}
\label{fig:approx}
\end{figure}
The initial reconstruction network, $f_{\rm init}$, has $k$ inputs, each of which corresponds to a sampling channel in $f_{\rm samp}$ as illustrated in Section \ref{sec:samp}. The $j^{th}$ ($1 \le j \le k$) input is connected to the corresponding $j^{th}$ convolutional layer, which uses $B^2$ kernels of size $1\times 1 \times m_j$ and generates $B^2$ values by convolving them with $y_i$. Here $y_i$ is the measurement of block $x_i$ entering $j^{th}$ channel. All these $B^2$ values are combined into one $B \times B$ feature map, $\hat{x}_i^0$, and we refer to it as the initially reconstructed result of block $x_i$. From the network's point of view, we have
\begin{equation}
\hat{x}_i^{0}=f_{\rm init}(y_i, w_j^{\rm init}),
\label{eq:init}
\end{equation}
where $w_j^{\rm init}$ denotes the above mentioned $1\times 1 \times m_j$ convolutional kernel corresponding to the $j^{th}$ channel in the sampling network. As we can see from Fig. \ref{fig:recon}, our initial reconstruction network includes only one convolutional layer for simplification reason, and the initially recovered images is going to be improved by our deep reconstruction network.
The proposed deep reconstruction network, $f_{\rm deep}$, is further divided into $T$ phases, so that the iterative BCS algorithm can be unrolled along with these $T$ phases. In $f_{\rm deep}$, each phase corresponds to one iteration in BCS algorithm consisting of approximation and denoising operations. At $(t+1)^{th}$ phase the block-wise approximation is implemented by using a formula slightly different from (\ref{eq:spl}) in Sec.~\ref{sec:spl}, as shown in
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:proj-spl}
r_i^{t+1}=\hat{x}_i^{t}+\Fee_{\rm{B},j}^*(y_i-\Fee_{B,j}\hat{x}_i^{t})
\end{equation}
for each block $x_i$, where $\Fee_{B,j}$ is the measurement matrix specialized for block $x_i$, if $x_i$ is fed into the network via $j^{th}$ channel in our multi-channel sampling model. Note that the matrix $\Fee_{{\rm B},j}$ is learnable, and it may be not an orthogonal matrix. Thus, its pseudo-inverse, $\Fee_{{\rm B},j}^*$, can not be simplified into $\Fee^T_{{\rm B},j}$ as in the traditional BCS or Damp algorithm.
We then reassemble all approximated blocks $\{r_i^{t+1}\}_{i=1}^K$ to build a full, approximated image, $R^{t+1}$, for further denoising processing. To enable training of the deep reconstruction network, we modify the famous DnCNN network to implement full-image denoising. Traditional denoising methods, such as hard thresholding in BCS and BM3D in Damp algorithm, will not work in deep network architecture, since they cannot propagate gradients. This restricts us to focus on feed-forward convolutional neural networks. DnCNN is our choice, which fortunately offers improved performance on image deblocking and Gaussian denoising. Our deep reconstruction network is composed of $T$ phases. Each phase has 5 convolutional layers, and the configuration is designed by referring to the DnCNN network. The first layer generates $d$ feature maps with the $d$ kernels of size $f\times f \times 1$, and last layer generates 1 feature map with one $f \times f \times d$ kernel. All three other layers employ $d$ kernels, each of which is of the size of $f\times f\times d$. It should be noted that all conventional layers explore the RELU activation function except the last layer. In DnCNN, 20 convolutional layers are employed to form a deep network for image denoising. In our network model, 5 convolutional layers form a phase, and $T$ phases are employ to deal with both image denoising and image approximation. In our experiments, $d$, $f$ and $T$ are set to 64, 3 and 10, respectively. Let $w_t^{\rm deep}$ be the parameters of convolutional kernels in $t^{th}$ phase. Then one has
\begin{equation}
\hat{X}^{T}=f_{\rm deep}(R^{1}, \{w_t^{\rm deep}\}_{t=1}^T),
\label{eq:phase}
\end{equation}
where $R^1$ is the approximated image in the first phase in the deep network.
\subsection{Two-stage training}
We propose to divide the training process into two stages to improve the recovered images by training sampling matrix $\{\Fee_{{\rm B},j}\}_{j=1}^k$ while being able of utilizing $\{\Fee_{{\rm B},j}^*\}_{j=1}^k$ in deep reconstruction process.
As illustrated in Section \ref{sec:samp}, in our network sampling matrixes $\{\Fee_{{\rm B},j}\}_{j=1}^k$ are implemented by employing convolution operations. That is, the elements in $\Fee_{{\rm B},j}$ and $\Fee_{{\rm B},j}^*$ have to be taken from the convolution kernel in the $j^{th}$ channel in the sampling network. However, we find that, if both $\Fee_{{\rm B},j}$ and $\Fee_{{\rm B},j}^*$ participate in the training process, we cannot achieve a desired recovered image. This is because, in the training process, $\Fee_{{\rm B},j}$ has to be updated in real time along with each back propagation. Unfortunately, back propagation is based on the gradient decent rule, which will be hindered due to the real-time computing of $\Fee_{{\rm B},j}^*$ in the deep reconstruction network.
In view of this, in the first stage, we aim to obtain the training parameters of the sampling network. That is, we have to achieve $k$ optimal sampling matrices $\{\Fee_{{\rm B},j}\}_{j=1}^k$ and the corresponding matrices $\{\Fee_{{\rm B},j}^*\}_{j=1}^k$. It is observed that, our deep architecture consists of an initial reconstruction network $f_{\rm init}$ without including $\Fee_{{\rm B},j}^*$ and a deep reconstruction network $f_{\rm deep}$ where $\Fee_{{\rm B},j}^*$ is utilized to improve the recovered images. In this way, we combine the sampling network and the initial reconstruction part of our reconstruction network into a training network, i.e., $f_{\rm init}(f_{\rm samp}(\cdot), \cdot)$, which is used to train the sampling matrix $\{\Fee_{{\rm B},j}\}_{j=1}^k$. Given the training images $\{X_n\}_{n=1}^N$, the cost function $L_{\rm samp}$ is
\begin{multline}
L_{\rm samp}=\frac{1}{2N}\sum_{n=1}^N \Vert f_{\rm init}(f_{\rm samp}(X_n, \{w_j^{\rm samp}\}_{j=1}^k), \\
\{w_j^{\rm init}\}_{j=1}^k)-X_n \Vert^2,
\label{eq:loss-fir}
\end{multline}
where $N$ is the number of images in the training dataset.
In the second stage, we further train the reconstructing network consisting of an initial reconstruction part and a deep reconstruction part, i.e., $f_{\rm deep}(f_{\rm init}(\cdot), \cdot)$, where the parameters in $\{\Fee_{{\rm B},j}^*\}_{j=1}^k$ come from $\{\Fee_{{\rm B},j}\}_{j=1}^k$. That is, the sampling weights $\{w_j^{\rm samp}\}_{j=1}^k$ are fixed while the parameters $\{\{w_j^{\rm init}\}_{j=1}^k, \{w_t^{\rm deep}\}_{t=1}^T\}$ are updated in the training process. Our reconstructing network $f_{\rm deep}(f_{\rm init}(\cdot), \cdot)$ directly learns the mapping between the CS measurements and the ground truth, and the loss function minimizing the error between the input and the output is on the basis of full images instead of image blocks. Mean square error is adopted to design an end-to-end cost function
\begin{multline}
L_{\rm deep}=\frac{1}{2N}\sum_{n=1}^N \parallel f_{\rm deep}(f_{\rm init}(\{y_{i,n}\}_{i=1}^K, \\
\{w_j^{\rm init}\}_{j=1}^k), \{w_t^{\rm deep}\}_{t=1}^T)-X_n \parallel_2^2,
\label{eq:loss}
\end{multline}
where $y_{i,n}$ denotes the CS measurement vector of the $i^{th}$ block in $n^{th}$ training image.
\section{Performance evaluation}
\label{sec:simu}
In this section, we conduct extensive experiments to evaluate the performance of the proposed BCS-Net and BCS-Damp schemes, and compare them with state-of-the-art methods, including traditional BCS \cite{BCS}, Damp \cite{Damp}, network-based Ista \cite{ISTA}, ReconNet \cite{Reconnet} and its improved version, I-Recon \cite{Im-recon}, in terms of reconstruction quality, time complexity and visual effect.
\subsection{Training and testing}
\label{sec:tr_te}
\subsubsection{Constructing a training set}
\label{sec:trainset}
The training images are from the training set (200 images) and testing set (200 images) of the BSDS500 database \cite{BSD500}, in which we randomly crop 89600 images with the size of $96 \times 96$ as the training set. Each training image, $X$, is further partitioned into 9 image blocks of size $32 \times 32$, $\{x_{i}\}_{i=1}^9$. That is, there are a total of 806400 blocks in our training set. Visual saliency of the scene was exploited in \cite{saliency, BCS-Salie}. In the experiments, the methods in reference \cite{BCS-Salie} is used to compute the saliency map of training images. Suppose that $v$ represents the amount of the saliency information embodied in image $X$. Then we have $v=\frac{1}{n} \sum\limits_{j\in X_s}l_j$, where $n$ is the total number of pixels on image $X$, $X_s$ denotes the saliency map of $X$, and $l_j$ is the saliency value of location $j$ on $X_s$. Let $v_{i}$ be the saliency information of image block $x_{i}$, and $p_{i} = \frac{v_{i}}{v}$ denotes the proportion of the saliency information of block $x_{i}$. We can then construct the training data pair for our network, as shown in
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:saliency}
(X, \{(x_{i}, p_{i})\}_{i=1}^{K}).
\end{equation}
where $K=9$ and there are a total of $N = 89600$ training image pairs.
For three existing network-based approaches, Ista, ReconNet and I-Recon, 806400 image blocks are randomly cropped. These blocks and themselves consists of 806400 training block pairs for training, since these approaches are all based on block-independent image recovery.
\subsubsection{Training details}
\label{sec:train}
We set $k=7$ for our $k$-channel network model, and the sampling rates are in the range of $\{0.01, 0.03, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4\}$. Each image pair $(X, \{(x_{i}, p_{i})\}_{i=1}^9)$ is further processed in order to find out the most appropriate channels in the network. For a given target sampling rate ($SR$), we calculate sub-rate $s_{i}$ of block $x_{i}$ as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sr}
s_{i}=SR \cdot p_{i} \cdot \frac{n}{n_{\rm B}},
\end{equation}
where $p_{i}$ is defined in Section \ref{sec:trainset}, $n$ and $n_{\rm B}$ are the sizes of an image and its block, respectively. In the training process, the space of sampling rates is divided into seven intervals, each of which corresponds to a channel. If $s_{i}$ falls within the interval $[T_c, T_{c+1}]$ corresponding to $c^{th}$ channel, then block $x_{i}$ is pushed into the network via channel $c$.
In the experiment, we train the network with 50 epoches. The batch size is set to 1, since each image have to be partitioned into 9 blocks and these blocks are reassembled in our multi-channel network. The mean square error between the original image and the output of the network is calculated as the loss for back-gradient propagation. Adam optimization \cite{adam} with a learning rate of 0.0001 is adopted to optimize the parameters. We use TensorFlow 1.4 \cite{Tensor} to train the proposed multi-channel network at a desktop platform configured with one NVIDIA 1060 GPU, one CPU @ 4.00 GHz of Intel(R) Core (TM) i7-4790K and 32GB of memory. The training processes takes about 3 hours for one epoch.
\subsubsection{Testing set}
We test our multi-channel networks with three widely used benchmark datasets, Set5, Set11 and BSD100, where Set5 and Set11 are shown in Fig. 5 and Fig. 6, respectively.
Set5 consists of 5 gray images, where the sizes of ``Bird" and ``Head" are $288\times 288$, ``Baby", ``Butterfly" and ``Woman" are with the size of $512 \times 512$, $256\times 256$ and $224 \times 352$, respectively. Set11 has 11 gray images, where the sizes of ``Fingerprint" and ``Flintstones" are $512\times 512$, and the other 9 images are all with the size of $256\times 256$. BSD100 includes 100 images with the size of $320 \times 480$ or $480 \times 320$. These test images are with a various types of spatial distribution of key visual information. For example, the main meaningful information in images ``Cameraman" and ``Parrot" in Set11 is located in the single connected region. In contract, the visual information of ``Bird" in Set5, ``Fingerprint", ``Flintstones" and ``Peppers" in Set11 uniformly distributes in the whole images. Note that all those test images are strictly separate from the training datasets.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[t]{\twofigwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\twofigwidth]{baby}
a)
\end{minipage}\enspace
\begin{minipage}[t]{\twofigwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\twofigwidth]{bird}
b)
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[t]{\twofigwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\twofigwidth]{butterfly}
c)
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[t]{\twofigwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\twofigwidth]{head}
d)
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[t]{\twofigwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=\twofigwidth]{woman-288}\\
e)
\end{minipage}
\caption{Five typical images owning different spatial information distribution: a) ``Baby"; b) ``Bird"; c) ``Butterfly"; d) ``Head"; e) ``Woman".}
\label{fig:set5}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2\OneImW]{set11}
\caption{Elven images with a variety of spatial information distribution in Test dataset ``Set11".}
\label{fig:set11}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Results and analysis}
\label{sim:result}
\subsubsection{Comparisons with the state-of-the-art methods}
\label{sim:compa}
In this subsection, we evaluate the performance of the proposed BCS-Net with adaptive allocation of sampling rate and BCS-Damp, and compare them with the existing methods.
For our BCS-Net, all test images are reprocessed to simulate the initial CS sampling by conforming to the following simulations. Each original test image is first resized to one percent of its original size, which mimics the scene under view pre-sampled by a low-resolution imaging sensor. After that, the saliency of the pre-sampled image is computed. This small-size saliency map is further normalized and bilinearly interpolated to a map with the original size. The saliency information of the original test images, $v$, is then estimated. As a consequence, the sampling resources can be allocated to all blocks by using (\ref{eq:sr}), instead of being equally allocated.
To guarantee the average rate of the sampling rates corresponding to each channel being equal or close to the target rate, $SR$, the following procedure is employed. As with the training process, the space of sampling rates is first divided into seven intervals. The $c^{th}$ internal corresponds to $c^{th}$ channel, and is represented as $[T_c, T_{c+1}]$, where $1\le c \le k$ and $k$ is the total number of channels in our multi-channel model. Then we compute the sampling rate $s_i$ for $i^{th}$ block by using (\ref{eq:sr}), where $1 \le i \le b$ and $b$ is the total number of blocks. If $s_i$ falls into the interval $[T_c, T_{c+1}]$, the value of $s_i$ is changed to $c_t$. Here $c_t$ is the sampling rate corresponding to $c^{th}$ channel and $1\le t \le k$. If $\sum\nolimits_{i=1}^b s_i = b\cdot SR$, then the average sampling rate of all block is exactly equal to the target sampling rate. Otherwise, we carry out fine tune by changing some blocks to the higher or lower channel according to the positive or negative difference, i.e., $b\cdot SR - \sum\nolimits_{i=1}^b s_i$. We should note that the average sampling rates can be very close to the target rates, and thus we ignore the differences between them in the experiments.
The average PSNR (peak signal-to-noise ratios) and SSIM (structural similarity index) with BCS-Net are reported in Table \ref{tab:compa}. The comparison of running times of reconstructing the images in Set5 and Set11 is shown in Table \ref{tab:time}. Here the running times are the average values of all 16 test images in Set5 and Set11 with the sampling rate of 0.1. We should note that, 0.1 is the target sampling rate of an image, and our running time contains the time of reconstructing all blocks with different channels in the multi-channel architecture.
\begin{table*}[htbp]
\centering
\caption{The average PSNR in dB and SSIM on Set5, Set11 and BSD100 with a range of sampling rates.}
\begin{tabular}{c|ccccccc}
\hline
\multicolumn{8}{c}{Set5 (PSNR/SSIM)}\\
\hline
\diagbox[width=10em]{Algorithm}{Sampling rate} &0.01 &0.03 &0.05 &0.1 &0.2 &0.3 &0.4\\
\hline
BCS \cite{BCS} &16.20/0.3613 &20.80/0.5088 &22.54/0.5974 &24.87/0.7280 &28.50/0.8130 &30.54/0.8539 &32.32/0.8899\\
Damp \cite{Damp} &6.51/0.0311 &19.95/0.4821 &21.56/0.5667 &24.24/0.6997 &28.49/0.8527 &32.29/0.9137 &34.25/0.9395\\
\textbf{BCS-Damp} &19.97/0.4827 &22.28/0.6267 &24.10/0.6962 &27.95/0.8247 &32.47/0.9105 &\underline{36.46}/0.9397 &\underline{39.53}/0.9565\\
ReconNet \cite{Reconnet} &18.46/0.4492 &21.54/0.5699 &23.33/0.6462 &25.70/0.7422 &28.16/0.8197 &30.03/0.8620 &31.00/0.8793\\
I-Recon \cite{Im-recon} &\underline{21.49}/\underline{0.5571} &\underline{25.00}/\underline{0.7113} &\underline{26.97}/\underline{0.7908} &28.49/0.8329 &30.53/0.8823 &34.51/0.9403 &35.30/0.9465\\
Ista \cite{ISTA} &18.06/0.4589 &21.50/0.5624 &25.15/0.7307 &\underline{28.89}/\underline{0.8405} &\underline{33.21}/\underline{0.9152} &36.00/\underline{0.9456} &38.14/0.9622\\
\textbf{BCS-Net (WA)} &\textbf{22.98}/\textbf{0.6103} &\emph{26.69}/\textbf{0.7702} &\emph{28.72}/\textbf{0.8371} &\emph{31.86}/\textbf{0.9034} &\emph{35.43}/\textbf{0.9488} &\emph{37.87}/\emph{0.9681} &\textbf{39.88}/\textbf{0.9785}\\
\textbf{BCS-Net} &\textbf{22.98}/\textbf{0.6103} &\textbf{27.09}/\emph{0.7699} &\textbf{28.81}/\emph{0.8237} &\textbf{32.71}/\emph{0.9030} &\textbf{36.12}/\emph{0.9483} &\textbf{38.64}/\textbf{0.9694} &\textbf{39.88}/\textbf{0.9785}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{8}{c}{Set11 (PSNR/SSIM)}\\
\hline
\diagbox[width=10em]{Algorithm}{Sampling rate} &0.01 &0.03 &0.05 &0.1 &0.2 &0.3 &0.4\\
\hline
BCS \cite{BCS} &15.65/0.3973 &19.40/0.5146 &20.89/0.5768 &23.15/0.6836 &25.74/0.7778 &27.78/0.8331 &29.75/0.8783\\
Damp \cite{Damp} &5.49/0.0582 &18.47/0.4986 &20.14/0.5588 &22.73/0.6873 &26.85/0.8335 &30.09/0.8994 &32.93/0.9339\\
\textbf{BCS-Damp} &18.53/0.4692 &21.03/0.5795 &22.61/0.6471 &26.20/0.7919 &30.75/\underline{0.8976} &\underline{34.21}/\underline{0.9415} &\textbf{37.09}/\underline{0.9648}\\
ReconNet \cite{Reconnet} &16.99/0.4145 &19.80/0.5110 &21.14/0.5935 &23.28/0.6896 &25.54/0.7719 &27.11/0.8155 &28.32/0.8411\\
I-Recon \cite{Im-recon} &\underline{19.80}/\underline{0.5018} &\underline{22.59}/\underline{0.6540} &\underline{24.54}/\underline{0.7442} &25.97/0.7888 &27.92/0.8457 &31.45/0.9135 &32.26/0.9243\\
Ista \cite{ISTA} &16.55/0.4139 &19.74/0.5154 &22.83/0.6792 &\underline{26.49}/\underline{0.8010} &\underline{30.79}/0.8950 &33.76/0.9345 &36.03/0.9547\\
\textbf{BCS-Net (WA)} &\textbf{20.88}/\textbf{0.5505} &\emph{24.05}/\emph{0.7048} &\emph{25.89}/\textbf{0.7851} &\emph{28.63}/\emph{0.8628} &\emph{32.08}/\emph{0.9220} &\underline{34.65}/\emph{0.9506} &\emph{36.70}/\textbf{0.9662}\\
\textbf{BCS-Net} &\textbf{20.88}/\textbf{0.5505} &\textbf{24.47}/\textbf{0.7807} &\textbf{26.04}/\emph{0.7723} &\textbf{29.43}/\textbf{0.8676} &\textbf{33.06}/\textbf{0.9283} &\textbf{35.60}/\textbf{0.9554} &\emph{36.70}/\textbf{0.9662}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{8}{c}{BSD100 (PSNR/SSIM)}\\
\hline
\diagbox[width=10em]{Algorithm}{Sampling rate} &0.01 &0.03 &0.05 &0.1 &0.2 &0.3 &0.4\\
\hline
BCS \cite{BCS} &18.53/0.4213 &20.93/0.4797 &21.54/0.4996 &23.21/0.5843 &25.04/0.6742 &26.48/0.7384 &27.75/0.7875\\
Damp \cite{Damp} &7.00/0.0495 &19.57/0.4260 &20.54/0.4706 &21.92/0.5333 &24.29/0.6286 &26.00/0.6970 &27.57/0.7541\\
\textbf{BCS-Damp} &19.90/0.4255 &21.58/0.4896 &22.47/0.5216 &24.10/0.5842 &26.48/0.6745 &28.79/0.7490 &31.44/0.8184\\
ReconNet \cite{Reconnet} &18.74/0.3960 &20.56/0.4647 &21.52/0.5120 &23.00/0.5837 &24.68/0.6694 &25.83/0.7204 &26.71/0.7611\\
I-Recon \cite{Im-recon} &\underline{21.15}/\underline{0.4654} &\underline{23.09}/\underline{0.5662} &\underline{24.19}/\underline{0.6320} &\underline{25.35}/\underline{0.7098} &26.87/0.7872 &29.24/\underline{0.8593} &30.07/0.8812\\
Ista \cite{ISTA} &17.86/0.3957 &20.47/0.4699 &22.65/0.5692 &24.79/0.6726 &\underline{27.64}/\underline{0.7906} &\underline{29.86}/0.8580 &\underline{31.70}/\underline{0.9003}\\
\textbf{BCS-Net (WA)} &\textbf{22.03}/\textbf{0.4997} &\emph{24.10}/\emph{0.6085} &\emph{25.16}/\textbf{0.6709} &\emph{26.97}/\emph{0.7651} &\emph{29.52}/\emph{0.8609} &\emph{31.59}/\emph{0.9107} &\textbf{33.44}/\textbf{0.9405}\\
\textbf{BCS-Net} &\textbf{22.03}/\textbf{0.4997} &\textbf{24.43}/\textbf{0.6108} &\textbf{25.58}/\emph{0.6669} &\textbf{27.84}/\textbf{0.7709} &\textbf{30.59}/\textbf{0.8672} &\textbf{32.64}/\textbf{0.9160} &\textbf{33.44}/\textbf{0.9405}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:compa}
\end{table*}
The best performance is labeled in bold, the second best is italic, and the second best is underlined.
\begin{table*}[htbp]
\centering
\captionsetup{font={small}}
\caption{The average time for reconstructing the images in Set5 and Set11 with the sampling rate of 0.1 (in second).}
\begin{tabular}{c|cccccccc}
\hline
Algorithm &BCS &Damp &BCS-Damp &ReconNet &I-Recon &Ista &BCS-Net(WA) &BCS-Net\\
\hline
Time &100s &228s &611s &0.87s &0.89s &1.05s & &2.02s \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:time}
\end{table*}
As shown in Table \ref{tab:compa}, our BCS-Net yields higher-quality recovered image in terms of both PSNR and SSIM than other existing methods, including BCS, Damp, ReconNet, I-Recon, and Ista, for Set5, Set11, and BSD100, respectively. From Table \ref{tab:compa}, we can easily observe a significant performance improvement of, for instance, 3.82 dB and 2.98 dB on Set5 and Set11 with the sampling rate of 0.1, and 2.95 dB on BSD 100 with the sampling rate of 0.2, respectively. We notice that, along with the increase of the sampling rate, the improvement of our scheme slows down. The possible cause is that, when the sampling rate is as high as 0.1 or 0.2, the recovered images for the competing approach are of relatively high quality. And there is not too much space for improvement with even more sampling rates.
We can also see from Table \ref{tab:compa} that, in existing methods I-Recon has relatively better reconstruction quality at extremely low sampling rates of 001, 0.03 and 0.05, while Ista usually performs better at the sampling rates of 0.2 and above. However, our BCS-Net always outperforms the traditional BCS and Damp algorithms, as well as the network-based ReconNet, I-Recon and Ista algorithms. We think that, the performance improvement of our scheme is mainly due to the following two factors, i.e., adaptive allocation of sampling rate in our multi-channel sampling network, and block-wise approximation and full-image denoising in our deep reconstruction network. We notice that BCS-Net has slightly longer running time than network-based ReconNet, I-Recon and Ista because of our multi-channel sampling and block reassembling, but it runs significantly far faster than optimization-based BCS and Damp reconstruction algorithm.
The proposed BCS-Damp approach also outperforms Damp and BCS algorithm, as shown in Table \ref{tab:compa}. This is because, compared with Damp algorithm, in our BCS-Damp, BM3D denoising is imposed on the full image instead of each block, and blocking artifacts can then ameliorated. And compared with BCS approach, our BCS-Damp has better denoising performance, since BM3D denoising outperforms the hard thresholding employed in BCS approach. We notice that the proposed BCS-Damp even outperforms BCS-Net in terms of PSNR for Set11 at very high sampling rate of 0.4. We think this is another indication that network-based approaches generally offer more advantages over relatively lower sampling rates. Note that our BCS-Damp has much longer running time than BCS and Damp due to our full-image denoising strategy in the iteration process and relatively higher computation complexity of BM3D denoising algorithm.
\renewcommand\tabcolsep{4pt}
\begin{table*}[!htb]
\centering
\caption{Detailed comparison of PSNR in dB and SSIM in the range of [0, 1] on the images of Set5.}
\begin{tabular}{*{9}{c|}c}
\hline
Images &SR &BCS &Damp &\textbf{BCS-Damp} &ReconNet& I-Recon& Ista& \textbf{BCS-Net}& \textbf{BCS-Net(WA)}\\
\hline
\multirow{7}*{Baby} & 0.01 &18.20/0.4838 &4.46/0.0288 &24.29/0.6615 &21.19/0.5582 &24.22/0.6430 &20.87/0.5778 &\textbf{26.35}/\textbf{0.6988} &\textbf{26.35}/\textbf{0.6988}\\
& 0.03 &24.60/0.7020 &23.37/0.6554 &25.50/0.7403 &24.24/0.6482 &27.88/0.7614 &23.67/0.6347 &\textbf{30.66}/\textbf{0.8274} &\emph{29.59}/\emph{0.8013}\\
& 0.05 &26.10/0.7646 &25.30/0.7265 &27.34/0.7850 &25.77/0.7084 &29.80/0.8294 &27.68/0.7671 &\textbf{32.07}/\textbf{0.8689} &\emph{31.27}/\emph{0.8493}\\
& 0.1 &28.81/0.8684 &27.37/0.8034 &29.90/0.8746 &28.03/0.7749 &30.86/0.8605 &30.23/0.8381 &\textbf{34.72}/\textbf{0.9137} &\emph{33.63}/\emph{0.9075}\\
& 0.2 &31.57/0.9328 &30.10/0.8968 &33.73/0.9502 &30.56/0.8459 &32.58/0.8997 &33.25/0.9055 &\textbf{37.74}/\textbf{0.9579} &\emph{36.52}/\emph{0.9525}\\
& 0.3 &33.31/0.9583 &32.95/0.9508 &37.38/0.9760 &31.93/0.8770 &36.12/0.9451 &35.52/0.9410 &\textbf{39.94}/\textbf{0.9755} &\emph{38.59}/\emph{0.9715}\\
& 0.4 &34.89/0.9730 &34.91/0.9732 &\textbf{40.56}/\textbf{0.9872} &32.84/0.8911 &36.65/0.9461 &37.41/0.9611 &\emph{40.52}/0.9822 &\emph{40.52}/0.9822\\
\hline
\multirow{7}*{Bird} &0.01 &17.90/0.3885 &8.33/0.0225 &19.98/0.4757 &19.38/0.4609 &22.14/0.5726 &19.00/0.4628 &\textbf{23.35}/\textbf{0.6391} &\textbf{23.35}/\textbf{0.6391} \\
&0.03 &20.72/0.4550 &20.87/0.4850 &22.35/0.6164 &22.25/0.6085 &26.07/0.7543 &22.49/0.5930 &\emph{27.60}/\emph{0.7871} &\textbf{27.98}/\textbf{0.8142} \\
&0.05 &23.70/0.6481 &21.67/0.5280 &24.43/0.7029 &24.32/0.6827 &28.22/0.8325 &26.32/0.7657 &\emph{28.96}/\emph{0.8286} &\textbf{30.55}/\textbf{0.8832} \\
&0.1 &26.67/0.7584 &25.27/0.7030 &29.40/0.8570 &27.02/0.7964 &30.25/0.8942 &31.20/0.8852 &\textbf{34.88}/\emph{0.9369} &\emph{34.40}/\textbf{0.9454} \\
&0.2 &30.41/0.8583 &31.50/0.8963 &37.51/0.9644 &29.71/0.8740 &32.70/0.9350 &36.83/0.9576 &\textbf{39.60}/\emph{0.9770} &\emph{39.20}/\textbf{0.9790} \\
&0.3 &33.22/0.9085 &36.89/0.9623 &42.26/0.9862 &32.12/0.9148 &37.65/0.9745 &40.50/0.9785 &\textbf{42.69}/\emph{0.9889} &\emph{42.29}/\textbf{0.9895} \\
&0.4 &35.50/0.9362 &37.21/0.9753 &\textbf{45.56}/\emph{0.9928} &33.22/0.9308 &38.62/0.9788 &43.10/0.9867 &\emph{44.67}/\textbf{0.9937} &\emph{44.67}/\textbf{0.9937} \\
\hline
\multirow{7}*{Butterfly} &0.01 &11.98/0.2601 &5.23/0.0006 &13.08/0.3317 &13.36/0.2766 &15.47/0.3802 &12.97/0.2851 &\textbf{15.68}/\textbf{0.4078} &\textbf{15.68}/\textbf{0.4078}\\
& 0.03 &14.88/0.3615 &13.10/0.3215 &15.28/0.4779 &15.77/0.4041 &19.36/0.6211 &15.71/0.4032 &\textbf{21.01}/\emph{0.6988} &\emph{20.62}/\textbf{0.7046}\\
& 0.05 &16.32/0.4330 &14.98/0.4477 &17.41/0.5913 &17.52/0.5319 &21.58/0.7326 &19.31/0.6666 &\textbf{23.56}/\emph{0.7947} &\emph{23.55}/\textbf{0.8211}\\
& 0.1 &18.71/0.5545 &17.65/0.6308 &22.21/0.7999 &20.11/0.6581 &22.78/0.7511 &24.56/0.8479 &\textbf{27.94}/\emph{0.8968} &\emph{27.46}/\textbf{0.9015}\\
& 0.2 &21.44/0.6622 &22.80/0.8348 &26.84/0.8994 &22.74/0.7596 &24.85/0.8200 &\emph{30.17}/0.9355 &30.96/\emph{0.9386} &\textbf{31.24}/\textbf{0.9504}\\
& 0.3 &23.50/0.7233 &26.46/0.9052 &29.99/0.9375 &24.80/0.8227 &29.54/0.9286 &33.66/0.9604 &\textbf{33.98}/\emph{0.9680} &\emph{33.67}/\textbf{0.9698}\\
& 0.4 &25.26/0.7698 &29.77/0.9387 &34.24/0.9648 &25.81/0.8401 &30.34/0.9362 &\textbf{36.50}/0.9741 &\emph{35.60}/\textbf{0.9791} &\emph{35.60}/\textbf{0.9791}\\
\hline
\multirow{7}*{Head} &0.01 &17.60/0.3134 &9.44/0.0964 &24.62/0.4831 &21.33/0.5025 &25.30/0.6133 &21.08/0.5199 &\textbf{28.19}/\textbf{0.6603} &\textbf{28.19}/\textbf{0.6603} \\
& 0.03 &24.79/0.5102 &24.42/0.4616 &27.37/0.6304 &25.09/0.6025 &28.21/0.6939 &25.54/0.6128 &\textbf{30.73}/\textbf{0.7368} &\emph{30.54}/\emph{0.7351} \\
& 0.05 &25.97/0.5512 &26.65/0.5626 &28.62/0.6692 &26.97/0.6408 &29.71/0.7469 &19.31/0.6831 &\textbf{31.96}/\textbf{0.7813} &\emph{31.74}/\emph{0.7792} \\
& 0.1 &29.86/0.7232 &28.50/0.6380 &30.31/0.7282 &28.90/0.7115 &30.88/0.8091 &30.82/0.7561 &\textbf{33.89}/\textbf{0.8426} &\emph{33.60}/\emph{0.8400} \\
& 0.2 &31.74/0.7876 &31.17/0.7610 &32.37/0.7926 &30.41/0.7694 &32.46/0.8574 &33.34/0.8352 &\textbf{35.99}/\textbf{0.8996} &\emph{35.81}/\emph{0.8977}\\
& 0.3 &33.10/0.8320 &32.67/0.8036 &33.50/0.8238 &32.08/0.8054 &35.51/0.8975 &35.07/0.8819 &\textbf{37.71}/\textbf{0.9311} &\emph{37.43}/\emph{0.9285}\\
& 0.4 &34.27/0.8650 &33.92/0.8380 &34.55/0.8513 &32.53/0.8276 &36.02/0.9100 &36.38/0.9117 &\textbf{38.85}/\textbf{0.9485} &\textbf{38.85}/\textbf{0.9485}\\
\hline
\multirow{7}*{Woman} & 0.01 &15.29/0.3608 &5.10/0.0074 &17.89/0.4613 &17.06/0.4475 &20.30/0.5762 &16.41/0.4490 &\textbf{21.30}/\textbf{0.6457} &\textbf{21.30}/\textbf{0.6457} \\
& 0.03 &19.01/0.5153 &18.01/0.4867 &20.92/0.6684 &20.32/0.5861 &23.47/0.7258 &20.08/0.5684 &\textbf{25.44}/\textbf{0.7995} &\emph{24.71}/\emph{0.7958} \\
& 0.05 &20.63/0.5902 &19.19/0.5684 &22.72/0.7325 &22.06/0.6674 &25.55/0.8125 &23.97/0.7711 &\textbf{27.50}/\emph{0.8450} &\emph{26.48}/\textbf{0.8529} \\
& 0.1 &24.13/0.7354 &22.41/0.7235 &27.95/0.8640 &24.45/0.7702 &27.67/0.8497 &27.62/0.8753 &\textbf{32.12}/\textbf{0.9247} &\emph{30.22}/\emph{0.9226} \\
& 0.2 &27.36/0.8242 &26.88/0.8747 &31.88/0.9456 &27.36/0.8497 &30.06/0.8994 &32.46/0.9421 &\textbf{36.30}/\textbf{0.9684} &\emph{34.37}/\emph{0.9645} \\
& 0.3 &29.55/0.8724 &32.50/0.9465 &\textbf{39.19}/0.9751 &29.23/0.8898 &33.77/0.9557 &35.24/0.9661 &\emph{38.90}/\textbf{0.9835} &37.38/\emph{0.9811} \\
& 0.4 &31.64/0.9053 &35.46/0.9722 &\textbf{42.74}/\emph{0.9865} &30.59/0.9068 &34.90/0.9615 &37.32/0.9773 &\emph{39.74}/\textbf{0.9888} &\emph{39.74}/\textbf{0.9888}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:set5psnr}
\end{table*}
\renewcommand\tabcolsep{4pt}
\begin{table*}[!htb]
\centering
\caption{Detailed comparison of PSNR in dB and SSIM in the range of [0, 1] on the images of Set11. }
\begin{tabular}{*{9}{c|}c}
\hline
Images &SR &BCS &Damp &\textbf{BCS-Damp} &ReconNet &I-Recon& Ista &\textbf{BCS-Net} &\textbf{BCS-Net(WA)}\\
\hline
\multirow{7}*{House} &0.01 &17.70/0.5555 &5.01/0.0704 &21.76/0.6336 &19.10/0.5401 &22.16/0.6125 &19.30/0.5487 &\textbf{23.65}/\textbf{0.6767} &\textbf{23.65}/\textbf{0.676}7 \\
& 0.03 &22.04/0.6457 &20.59/0.6651 &25.74/0.7618 &22.47/0.6046 &25.51/0.7173 &22.48/0.6034 &\textbf{29.76}/\textbf{0.8128} &\emph{28.28}/\emph{0.7914} \\
& 0.05 &23.70/0.6766 &24.38/0.7092 &28.53/0.8049 &24.00/0.6678 &27.70/0.7814 &26.68/0.7607 &\textbf{31.21}/\textbf{0.8413} &\emph{30.29}/\emph{0.8281} \\
& 0.1 &26.36/0.7372 &27.25/0.7951 &32.45/0.8525 &26.55/0.7398 &29.06/0.8016 &30.55/0.8366 &\textbf{33.62}/\textbf{0.8795} &\emph{32.75}/\emph{0.8734}\\
& 0.2 &29.72/0.8104 &32.12/0.8540 &35.48/0.8828 &28.90/0.7927 &30.96/0.8430 &35.10/0.8921 &\textbf{37.30}/\textbf{0.9183} &\emph{36.23}/\emph{0.9134}\\
& 0.3 &31.49/0.8390 &35.05/0.8833 &38.12/0.9326 &30.40/0.8220 &34.42/0.8984 &37.17/0.9198 &\textbf{38.62}/\textbf{0.9386} &\emph{38.16}/\emph{0.9360}\\
& 0.4 &33.92/0.8921 &37.08/0.9177 &\textbf{40.15}/0.9532 &31.57/0.8379 &35.24/0.9057 &38.67/0.9400 &\emph{39.71}/\textbf{0.9557} &\emph{39.71}/\textbf{0.9557}\\
\hline
\multirow{7}*{Cameraman} &0.01 &16.56/0.4689 &6.33/0.1057 &17.98/0.4725 &17.01/0.4502 &19.65/0.5543 &16.33/0.4624 &\textbf{20.38}/\textbf{0.6148} &\textbf{20.38}/\textbf{0.6148} \\
&0.03 &18.70/0.5384 &17.64/0.5119 &20.52/0.6318 &19.12/0.5225 &21.65/0.6490 &19.44/0.5151 &\textbf{23.56}/\textbf{0.7430} &\emph{22.64}/\emph{0.7117} \\
& 0.05 &20.05/0.5863 &18.95/0.5920 &21.68/0.6760 &20.08/0.5774 &23.00/0.7143 &20.82/0.6598 &\textbf{25.43}/\textbf{0.7935} &23.82/\emph{0.7666} \\
& 0.1 &21.71/0.6478 &20.92/0.6640 &24.44/0.7635 &21.76/0.6553 &23.81/0.7380 &23.50/0.7559 &\textbf{28.02}/\textbf{0.8612} &\emph{26.06}/\emph{0.8376} \\
& 0.2 &24.30/0.7380 &23.67/0.7711 &28.54/0.8463 &23.27/0.7194 &25.43/0.7948 &27.46/0.8556 &\textbf{30.74}/\textbf{0.9142} &\emph{29.05}/\emph{0.9004} \\
& 0.3 &25.97/0.7880 &26.33/0.8266 &30.97/0.8805 &24.60/0.7618 &28.12/0.8739 &30.20/0.9025 &\textbf{32.44}/\textbf{0.9392} &\emph{31.11}/\emph{0.9285} \\
& 0.4 &27.90/0.8334 &27.86/0.8570 &\textbf{34.50}/0.9435 &25.53/0.7853 &29.03/0.8862 &32.25/0.9274 &\emph{32.62}/\textbf{0.946}3 &\emph{32.62}/\textbf{0.9463} \\
\hline
\multirow{7}*{Parrot} &0.01 &17.58/0.5604 &5.85/0.0690 &20.09/0.6576 &17.26/0.5491 &20.75/0.6509 &16.75/0.5325 &\textbf{22.23}/\textbf{0.7164} &\textbf{22.23}/\textbf{0.7164} \\
&0.03 &20.46/0.6447 &20.16/0.6586 &22.14/0.7185 &20.53/0.6197 &22.79/0.7377 &20.41/0.6269 &\textbf{25.35}/\textbf{0.8229} &\emph{24.23}/\emph{0.8014} \\
& 0.05 &22.30/0.7160 &21.23/0.6935 &23.45/0.7705 &21.68/0.6868 &24.53/0.8031 &23.32/0.7585 &\textbf{27.87}/\textbf{0.8638} &\emph{25.50}/\emph{0.8405}\\
& 0.1 &24.05/0.7771 &22.83/0.7693 &28.12/0.8563 &23.52/0.7562 &26.03/0.8293 &26.72/0.8499 &\textbf{31.14}/\textbf{0.9126} &\emph{28.39}/\emph{0.8957}\\
& 0.2 &26.21/0.8375 &25.60/0.8418 &\emph{32.90}/0.9073 &25.84/0.8171 &28.00/0.8731 &29.54/0.9101 &\textbf{34.36}/\textbf{0.9496} &31.67/\emph{0.9389}\\
& 0.3 &28.18/0.8754 &28.19/0.8878 &\emph{35.55}/0.9351 &27.20/0.8453 &31.35/0.9286 &32.92/0.9398 &\textbf{36.90}/\textbf{0.9668 } &34.71/\emph{0.9602}\\
& 0.4 &30.00/0.9057 &30.82/0.9169 &\textbf{38.17}/0.9574 &28.38/0.8648 &31.85/0.9344 &35.41/0.9579 &\emph{37.23}/\textbf{0.9736} &\emph{37.23}/\textbf{0.9736}\\
\hline
\multirow{7}*{Peppers} &0.01 &14.53/0.4051 &5.78/0.0621 &17.37/0.5129 &16.57/0.4309 &19.20/0.5369 &15.94/0.4263 &\textbf{20.67}/\textbf{0.6088} &\textbf{20.67}/\textbf{0.6088} \\
& 0.03 &17.96/0.4620 &18.58/0.5333 &19.93/0.6371 &19.36/0.5086 &22.28/0.6969 &19.47/0.5328 &\emph{23.69}/\emph{0.7542} &\textbf{23.90}/\textbf{0.7607} \\
& 0.05 &20.99/0.5872 &19.87/0.5936 &21.58/0.6839 &20.63/0.6023 &24.15/0.7776 &22.49/0.6901 &\emph{24.87}/\emph{0.7996} &\textbf{25.46}/\textbf{0.8254} \\
& 0.1 &23.76/0.6694 &22.60/0.7055 &25.97/0.7939 &22.91/0.7002 &25.26/0.7986 &27.28/0.8170 &\textbf{28.35}/\textbf{0.8897} &\emph{28.30}/\emph{0.8868} \\
& 0.2 &24.86/0.6751 &28.10/0.8371 &31.10/0.8854 &25.02/0.7691 &26.91/0.8459 &\textbf{32.52}/0.9075 &31.99/\emph{0.9305} &\emph{32.08}/\textbf{0.9337} \\
& 0.3 &26.83/0.7374 &31.01/0.8925 &\emph{34.85}/0.9262 &26.73/0.8167 &31.33/0.9141 &\textbf{35.45}/0.9383 &34.59/\textbf{0.9506} &34.38/\emph{0.9502} \\
& 0.4 &29.88/0.8303 &34.02/0.9213 &\emph{37.08}/0.9435 &28.00/0.8349 &31.27/0.9214 &\textbf{37.47}/0.9537 &36.10/\textbf{0.9617} &36.10/\textbf{0.9617} \\
\hline
\multirow{7}*{Boats} &0.01 &16.46/0.3843 &5.46/0.0593 &19.42/0.4605 &18.29/0.4089 &20.85/0.4837 &17.54/0.4058 &\textbf{22.05}/\textbf{0.5402} &\textbf{22.05}/\textbf{0.5402} \\
& 0.03 &20.66/0.4870 &17.82/0.4902 &21.55/0.5623 &20.97/0.5073 &23.95/0.6375 &20.95/0.5030 &\textbf{25.67}/\textbf{0.7043} &\emph{25.27}/\emph{0.6946} \\
& 0.05 &21.31/0.5552 &20.78/0.5396 &23.21/0.6315 &22.48/0.5823 &25.80/0.7234 &23.93/0.6708 &\textbf{27.54}/\emph{0.7777} &27.27/\textbf{0.7782} \\
& 0.1 &22.65/0.6355 &23.46/0.6514 &26.27/0.7502 &24.55/0.6790 &27.55/0.7891 &27.46/0.7966 &\textbf{30.39}/\textbf{0.8679} &\emph{30.01}/\emph{0.8672}\\
& 0.2 &24.54/0.7426 &27.76/0.8147 &31.41/0.8873 &26.93/0.7698 &29.60/0.8565 &31.94/0.9057 &\textbf{33.67}/\emph{0.9244} &\emph{33.49}/\textbf{0.9326}\\
& 0.3 &28.59/0.8024 &31.11/0.8973 &\emph{35.87}/0.9469 &28.61/0.8256 &33.04/0.9234 &35.27/0.9479 &\textbf{36.14}/\emph{0.9546} &35.69/\textbf{0.9550}\\
& 0.4 &30.49/0.8506 &35.55/0.9471 &\textbf{39.14}/\textbf{0.9702} &29.76/0.8509 &34.02/0.9335 &37.75/0.9668 &\emph{37.63}/\emph{0.9686} &\emph{37.63}/\emph{0.9686}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:set11psnr}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[!htb]
\centering
\caption{Detailed comparison of PSNR in dB and SSIM in the range of [0, 1] on the images of Set11. }
\begin{tabular}{*{9}{c|}c}
\hline
Images &SR &BCS &Damp &\textbf{BCS-Damp} &ReconNet &I-Recon& Ista &\textbf{BCS-Net} &\textbf{BCS-Net(WA)}\\
\hline
\multirow{7}*{Monarch} &0.01 &13.38/0.3399 &6.25/0.0462 &14.94/0.3961 &14.69/0.3612 &17.43/0.4803 &14.35/0.3708 &\textbf{17.82}/\textbf{0.4981} &\textbf{17.82}/\textbf{0.4981}\\
&0.03 &16.68/0.4536 &15.51/0.4449 &17.77/0.5305 &17.92/0.5005 &21.11/0.6781 &17.40/0.4917 &\textbf{23.30}/\emph{0.7287} &\emph{22.72}/\textbf{0.7409}\\
& 0.05 &18.43/0.5281 &17.05/0.5321 &20.01/0.6324 &19.06/0.5875 &23.47/\emph{0.7758} &21.13/0.6930 &\emph{24.65}/0.7718 &\textbf{25.54}/\textbf{0.8295}\\
& 0.1 &21.08/0.6369 &20.09/0.6519 &24.07/0.7821 &21.82/0.7020 &24.61/0.8016 &25.53/0.8366 &\textbf{29.32}/\emph{0.8937} &\emph{28.86}/\textbf{0.9065}\\
& 0.2 &24.14/0.7480 &24.87/0.8413 &28.76/0.9005 &24.45/0.7960 &26.67/0.8620 &30.98/0.9335 &\textbf{33.23}/\emph{0.9527} &32.77/\textbf{0.9563}\\
& 0.3 &26.79/0.8144 &28.49/0.9181 &32.79/0.9499 &26.24/0.8468 &31.03/0.9396 &34.87/0.9640 &\textbf{36.11}/\textbf{0.9743} &\emph{35.30}/\emph{0.9742}\\
& 0.4 &28.49/0.8527 &31.76/0.9519 &\textbf{37.98}/0.9750 &27.54/0.8685 &31.91/0.9481 &\emph{37.73}/0.9766 &37.35/\textbf{0.9826} &37.35/\textbf{0.9826}\\
\hline
\multirow{7}*{Foreman} &0.01 &18.06/0.5834 &4.92/0.1082 &23.52/0.7136 &19.71/0.5991 &23.68/0.6997 &19.00/0.5895 &\textbf{26.22}/\textbf{0.7565} &\textbf{26.22}/\textbf{0.7565} \\
&0.03 &24.22/0.7102 &23.81/0.7271 &28.49/0.8314 &23.77/0.6807 &27.15/0.8056 &23.5/0.6740 &\emph{30.68}/\emph{0.8442} &\textbf{30.70}/\textbf{0.8579} \\
& 0.05 &25.95/0.7359 &26.06/0.7846 &30.96/0.8664 &25.73/0.7466 &29.33/0.8534 &28.49/0.8272 &\textbf{32.35}/\emph{0.8752} &\emph{32.27}/\textbf{0.8886} \\
& 0.1 &29.04/0.8149 &30.64/0.8518 &33.78/0.9066 &27.79/0.8039 &29.90/0.8549 &33.18/0.8995 &\textbf{35.85}/\textbf{0.9325} &\emph{35.18}/\emph{0.9293}\\
& 0.2 &32.01/0.8674 &34.74/0.9193 &36.62/0.9325 &30.03/0.8551 &31.94/0.8892 &37.75/0.9456 &\textbf{39.00}/\textbf{0.9619} &\emph{38.29}/\emph{0.9608}\\
& 0.3 &34.48/0.9019 &37.28/0.9396 &38.80/0.9484 &31.81/0.8802 &35.96/0.9421 &\emph{40.32}/0.9647 &\textbf{40.99}/\textbf{0.9753} &40.23/\emph{0.9738}\\
& 0.4 &36.40/0.9253 &38.60/0.9497 &41.24/0.9649 &32.73/0.8887 &36.20/0.9425 &\textbf{42.33}/0.9757 &\emph{41.77}/\textbf{0.9811} &\emph{41.77}/\textbf{0.9811}\\
\hline
\multirow{7}*{Barbara} &0.01 &16.89/0.3458 &5.66/0.0402 &19.38/0.4291 &18.17/0.3727 &20.82/0.4607 &17.51/0.3665 &\textbf{21.75}/\textbf{0.4959} &\textbf{21.75}/\textbf{0.4959}\\
&0.03 &20.66/0.4694 &19.53/0.4380 &20.90/0.4804 &20.43/0.4642 &22.61/0.5813 & 20.32/0.4681 &\emph{23.24}/\emph{0.5996} &\textbf{23.32}/\textbf{0.6216}\\
& 0.05 &21.31/0.5193 &20.86/0.4716 &21.71/0.5128 &21.13/0.5157 &23.40/0.6388 &21.80/0.5661 &\emph{23.64}/\emph{0.6380} &\textbf{23.75}/\textbf{0.6570}\\
& 0.1 &22.65/0.5961 &22.36/0.5683 &23.52/0.6199 &22.20/0.5859 &23.88/0.6915 &23.53/0.6842 &\textbf{24.73}/\textbf{0.7283} &\emph{24.50}/\emph{0.7270}\\
& 0.2 &24.53/0.7091 &25.12/0.7253 &\emph{29.26}/\emph{0.8764} &23.08/0.6525 &24.75/0.7571 &26.76/0.8331 &\textbf{29.29}/\textbf{0.8805} &26.64/0.8279\\
& 0.3 &26.06/0.7814 &29.76/0.8777 &\textbf{35.40}/\textbf{0.9553} &23.87/0.7019 &27.99/0.8616 &30.76/0.9255 &\emph{33.03}/\emph{0.9479} &30.78/0.9225\\
& 0.4 &27.47/0.8356 &34.29/0.9527 &\textbf{38.03}/\textbf{0.9735} &25.14/0.7598 &29.56/0.8986 &34.09/0.9606 &\emph{34.23}/\emph{0.9637} &\emph{34.23}/\emph{0.9637}\\
\hline
\multirow{7}*{Lena} &0.01 &14.79/0.3779 &5.83/0.0700 &19.35/0.5126 &17.81/0.4427 &21.02/0.5437 &17.22/0.4371 &\textbf{22.00}/\textbf{0.5956} &\textbf{22.00}/\textbf{0.5956} \\
&0.03 &20.55/0.5481 &19.66/0.5570 &22.34/0.6565 &20.94/0.5322 &23.89/0.6788 &20.91/0.5453 &\textbf{25.88}/\textbf{0.7504} &\emph{25.64}/\emph{0.7461} \\
& 0.05 &22.41/0.6115 &20.96/0.6153 &23.80/0.7082 &22.52/0.6285 &25.85/0.7614 &24.69/0.7265 &\emph{26.11}/\emph{0.7824} &\textbf{27.15}/\textbf{0.8047}\\
& 0.1 &24.20/0.6803 &24.19/0.7137 &26.32/0.7794 &24.45/0.7079 &26.86/0.7957 &27.69/0.8227 &\textbf{30.62}/\textbf{0.8895} &\emph{29.36}/\emph{0.8737}\\
& 0.2 &26.43/0.7736 &27.05/0.8172 &30.93/0.8895 &26.55/0.7825 &28.82/0.8581 &31.37/0.9067 &\textbf{34.36}/\textbf{0.9481} &\emph{32.29}/\emph{0.9316}\\
& 0.3 &28.87/0.8301 &29.01/0.8677 &34.82/0.9432 &27.99/0.8235 &32.18/0.9261 &33.83/0.9419 &\textbf{36.71}/\textbf{0.9686} &\emph{35.07}/\emph{0.9612}\\
& 0.4 &30.44/0.8680 &31.31/0.9063 &\textbf{37.49}/0.9655 &29.24/0.8521 &33.13/0.9372 &36.25/0.9622 &\emph{37.30}/\textbf{0.9755} &\emph{37.30}/\textbf{0.9755}\\
\hline
\multirow{7}*{Flintstones} &0.01 &12.23/0.2009 &4.33/0.0060 &14.50/0.2814 &13.59/0.2421 &16.13/0.3335 &13.45/0.2500 &\textbf{16.65}/\textbf{0.3800} &\textbf{16.65}/\textbf{0.3800} \\
&0.03 &14.96/0.3500 &14.48/0.3242 &16.04/0.4268 &15.87/0.3365 &18.72/0.4968 &15.92/0.3458 &\textbf{19.74}/\textbf{0.5683} &\emph{19.49}/\emph{0.5664} \\
&0.05 &15.07/0.3575 &15.56/0.4251 &17.21/0.5738 &17.32/0.4397 &20.51/0.6134 &18.99/0.5629 &\textbf{22.61}/\emph{0.6708} &\emph{21.38}/\textbf{0.6751} \\
&0.1 &18.22/0.6299 &17.64/0.6448 &21.62/0.8325 &19.65/0.5663 &22.63/0.6929 &23.47/0.7489 &\textbf{25.29}/\emph{0.8044} &\emph{25.03}/\textbf{0.8065} \\
&0.2 &20.99/0.7820 &22.87/0.8816 &28.20/\textbf{0.9540} &22.74/0.7061 &25.37/0.7852 &28.56/0.8586 &\textbf{29.37}/0.8792 &\emph{29.23}/\emph{0.8876} \\
&0.3 &23.26/0.8617 &27.51/0.9512 &30.47/\textbf{0.9701} &24.59/0.7637 &29.00/0.8758 &30.86/0.8920 &\textbf{31.63}/0.9127 &\emph{31.26}/\emph{0.9141} \\
&0.4 &25.18/0.9040 &29.92/0.9690 &31.80/\textbf{0.9761} &25.87/0.7915 &29.73/0.8862 &32.31/0.9142 &\textbf{32.60}/\emph{0.9300} &\textbf{32.60}/\emph{0.9300} \\
\hline
\multirow{7}*{Fingerprint} &0.01 &13.96/0.1487 &4.93/0.0027 &15.48/0.0913 &14.74/0.1625 &16.08/0.1634 &14.64/0.1631 &\textbf{16.29}/\textbf{0.1722} &\textbf{16.29}/\textbf{0.1722} \\
&0.03 &16.78/0.3512 &15.37/0.1338 &15.89/0.1378 &16.39/0.3438 &\textbf{18.81}/\textbf{0.5152} &16.38/0.3629 &18.30/0.4676 &\emph{18.32}/\emph{0.4686} \\
&0.05 &17.55/0.4712 &15.89/0.1905 &16.61/0.2580 &17.87/0.4935 &\emph{22.23}/\textbf{0.7433} &18.83/0.5556 &21.18/0.6812 & \textbf{22.39}/\emph{0.7430}\\
&0.1 &19.68/0.6941 &18.05/0.5441 &21.64/0.7736 &20.93/0.6896 &26.04/0.8843 &22.50/0.7626 &\emph{26.36}/\emph{0.8847} &\textbf{26.49}/\textbf{0.8872}\\
&0.2 &22.77/0.8718 &23.46/0.8654 &25.01/0.9111 &24.18/0.8308 &28.68/0.9383 &26.76/0.8903 &\emph{30.35}/\emph{0.9513} &\textbf{31.10}/\textbf{0.9590}\\
&0.3 &25.06/0.9329 &27.28/0.9515 &28.72/0.9687 &26.13/0.8829 &31.55/0.9644 &29.69/0.9426 &\emph{34.46}/\textbf{0.9806} &\textbf{34.47}/\textbf{0.9806}\\
&0.4 &27.08/0.9633 &31.03/0.9836 &32.39/0.9900 &27.77/0.9180 &32.88/0.9738 &32.10/0.9663 &\textbf{37.19}/\textbf{0.9894} &\textbf{37.19}/\textbf{0.9894}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:set11psnr2}
\end{table*}
\subsubsection{Performance evaluation without assigning sampling resources}
In this subsection, we evaluate the performance of our BCS-Net scheme without assigning sampling rate (WA), since the sensing resources may not be allocated in certain scenarios. That is, all blocks in an image are assigned the same sampling rate, and accordingly, they are fed into our model from the same channel corresponding to the target rate. In this case, our multi-channel architecture becomes a unified deep network for $k$ target sampling rates. In the simulation, $k$ is set to 7, and these seven channels are in a range of $\{0.01, 0.03, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4\}$. The comparison of average PSNR and SSIM of recovered Set5, Set11 and BSD100 can be observed in Table \ref{tab:compa}. The detailed comparison of PSNR and SSIM for Set5 and Set11 is illustrated in Table \ref{tab:set5psnr} and \ref{tab:set11psnr}, where we omit the results of testing set BSD100 due to limited space.
We should note that, our multi-channel model decreases large amount of storage requirements, since we use a unified deep reconstruction network to serve all sampling rates. For instance, Ista approach for seven different sampling rates has about 0.34 million (M) parameters each, totaling 2.4M, while our reconstruction network has only 1.1M parameters.
Table \ref{tab:compa} shows that, the proposed WA scheme still achieves higher PSNR and SSIM than the best results of the existing BCS, Damp, ReconNet, I-Recon and Ista, thanks to the strategy of block-wise approximation and full-image based denoising. We can see from Table \ref{tab:compa} that, our WA scheme always has lower PSNR than the proposed BCS-Net with adaptive allocation at the sampling rates of $\{0.03, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3\}$ for Set5, Set11 and BSD100. We also notice that, for Set5, our WA scheme achieves slightly better SSIM than BCS-Net with adaptive allocation. From Table \ref{tab:set5psnr}, \ref{tab:set11psnr}, the quality gap between BCS-Net and BCS-Net (WA) increases in some images, but decreases in other images. For example, the gap of recovered ``Cameraman" and ``Parrot" is about 28.02-26.06=1.96(dB) and 31.14-28.39=2.59(dB), but it drops to 25.29-25.03=0.26(dB) and 26.36-24.49=-0.13(dB) for ``Flintstones" and ``Fingerprint" with sampling rate of 0.1, respectively. This is because, the foreground objects of ``Cameraman" and ``Parrot" can be clearly distinguished from background information. In other words, the main meaning information in these images is limited to some local regions. As a consequence, the average assignment of sampling rate is obviously less efficient than adaptive allocation. However, the meaning information in ``Flintstones" and ``Fingerprint" is almost uniformly distributed in their respective image, and thus the effect of adaptive allocation is not so obvious. From Table \ref{tab:compa}, our WA scheme has the same values of PSNR and SSIM with adaptive allocation at the target rates of 0.01 and 0.4. The reason is, in our experiment 0.01 and 0.4 are set to be minimal and maximal sampling rates respectively. According to (\ref{eq:sr}) illustrated in Section \ref{sec:train}, the adaptive allocation strategy degenerate to equal allocation, i.e., WA scheme.
\begin{figure*}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.6\OneImW]{visual-parrot}
\caption{Comparison of visual effect of the recovered ``Parrot" with different sampling rates: a) 0.03;
b) 0.3.}
\label{fig:visual}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Comparison of visual effects}
Using test image ``Parrot" as an example, this section gives the visual effect of recovered images with our BCS-Net, BCS-Damp and other existing methods.
As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:visual}(a), in the case of very low sampling rate of 0.03, the proposed BCS-Net has obviously better visual effect than other approaches. We can observe significant blocking artifacts in recovered ``Parrot" with traditional Damp and network-based Ista, ReconNet and I-Recon. This is because all these algorithms reconstruct ``Parrot" block by block, without consideration of blocking artifacts due to block partition. We also notice that the block artifacts in BCS and our proposed BCS-Damp are not so obvious as other competing methods. The reason is that, in BCS and BCS-Damp, block-wise approximation is interleaved with full-image-based denoising, and the artifacts can then be gradually ameliorated as iterations progress. Our BCS-Net synthesizes the common merits of BCS algorithm and deep network approach, and thus achieves the best performance.
As we can see from Fig.~\ref{fig:visual}(b), when the sampling rate increases to 0.3, the recovered ``Parrot" with seven approaches are all improved. However, we can still observe obvious blocking artifacts for Damp and ReconNet algorithms. With I-Recon and Ista, some weak blocking artifacts are also noted. Compared with those competing approaches, our BCS-Net is capable of reconstructing more details and sharper edges, and has not more blocking artifacts.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we further studied the problem of block-based image compressive sensing, and proposed a multi-channel deep neural network architecture, termed `BCS-Net'. The proposed architecture originates from the popular block-based CS algorithm, where block-wise iterative approximation together with full-image-based denoising is key for improving the recovered image. We then cast this idea into a carefully designed deep network, so that our proposed BCS-Net is capable of benefitting both from the learning capacities of deep network and from the hand-designed structure of BCS algorithm. Extensive experimental results show that our BCS-Net with adaptive sensing resource allocation achieves far better reconstruction quality and superb visual effect compared with state-of-the-art methods. At the same time, BCS-Net with WA approach also has excellent reconstruction performance with significantly reduced number of network parameters.
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran_doi}
|
\section{Introduction}
The concept of passivity is a foundation of circuit theory \cite{anderson2006}. It led to the generalized
concept of dissipativity \cite{willems1972}, \cite{willems1972b}, which has become a foundation of
nonlinear system theory \cite{hill1980,schaft2010}.
Yet the applications of nonlinear system theory have been dominated by mechanical
and electro-mechanical systems \cite{brogliato2007}, \cite{Desoer2009}, \cite{ortega1998}, \cite{sepulchre1997},
with significantly less attention to nonlinear circuits \cite{brayton1964,Camlibel2002}.
Starting with the seminal work of Chua \cite{chua1980} and the textbook of Chua and Desoer \cite{chua1987}, the
research on nonlinear circuits has somewhat diverged from the research on nonlinear dissipative
systems. The emphasis in nonlinear circuit theory has been on non-equilibrium behaviors
whereas the focus of dissipativity theory is an interconnection framework for systems that converge
to equilibrium.
Negative resistance devices are the essence of non-equilibrium behaviors such as
switches \cite{chen2009}, \cite{goto1960}, \cite{kennedy1991}, nonlinear
oscillations \cite{hu1986}, \cite{li2000}, or chaotic behavior \cite{kennedy1993}, \cite{saito1995}.
In contrast, dissipativity theory is a stability theory for physical systems that only dissipate energy and that relax to equilibrium
when disconnected from an external source of energy.
The present paper is a step towards generalizing passivity theory to the analysis of negative resistance circuits. In the spirit of passivity theory, we seek to analyze nonlinear circuits through
dissipation inequalities that are preserved by interconnection.
The two basic elements of dissipativity theory are the storage function and the supply function.
A dissipative system obeys a dissipation inequality, which expresses that the rate of change
of the storage does not exceed the supply. The physical interpretation is that the storage is
a measure of the internal energy, whereas the integral of the supply is a measure of the supplied energy.
For stability analysis purposes, the storage becomes a Lyapunov function.
The approach in this paper is based on two modifications of the basic theory. First, the analysis is in terms
of {\it incremental} variables, that is, differences of voltages and currents rather than voltages and currents.
Incremental analysis is classical in nonlinear circuit theory. Starting with the seminar work of \cite{lohmiller1998}, incremental
analysis has also been increasingly used in nonlinear stability theory \cite{angeli2002},
\cite{forni2014b},
and in nonlinear dissipativity theory \cite{forni2013}, \cite{proskurnikov2015}, \cite{stan2007}, \cite{schaft2013}.
Second, we allow for
dissipation inequalities that combine {\it signed} storage functions and {\it signed} supply rates.
Signed storage functions have the interpretation of a difference of energy stored in different storage
elements whereas signed supply rates account for ports that can deliver rather than absorb energy.
For analysis purposes, the interconnection theory developed in the present paper makes contact with the
dominance theory recently proposed in \cite{forni2017}, \cite{Forni2017b}. Signed Lyapunov functions
with a restricted number of negative terms are used to prove convergence to low-dimensional
dynamics that dominate the asymptotic behavior. A one-dimensional dominant behavior is sufficient
to model bistable switches whereas a two-dimensional dominant behavior is sufficient to model
nonlinear oscillators. Combined with the interconnection theory of this paper, dominance theory
opens the way to analysis of nonlinear switches and nonlinear oscillators in large nonlinear circuits.
We deliberately restrict the scope of the present paper to nonlinear circuits with negative resistance
to facilitate a concrete interpretation of the results. Not surprisingly,
the concepts are not restricted to electrical circuits and have a more general interpretation
in the general framework of dissipativity theory. For concreteness,
the entire paper is restricted to the passivity supply, an inner product between currents and voltages,
with the convenient interpretation of electrical power.
The paper is organized as follows. Section \ref{section:motivation} deals with the dissipation properties
of negative resistance devices and Section \ref{section:differential} extends dominance theory
in an incremental framework that is suitable for the analysis of circuits with piecewise linear characteristics.
In Section \ref{section:circuits:lossless:lure} we analyze basic electrical
switches and oscillators with one or two storage elements, whereas Section \ref{section:circuits:connection} covers the
design of coupling networks that allows us to interconnect circuits with different signatures in the supply rates.
{\small \textbf{Preamble.}
The circuits studied in this paper are built from interconnections of \emph{linear passive}
elements, such as capacitors and inductors, and \emph{nonlinear active} resistors. In concrete,
the time evolution of the family of circuits studied here is described by the state-space model
\begin{equation}
\Sigma: \begin{cases}
\dot{x} = f(x) + B u \quad x(0) = x_{0}
\\
y = C x + D u
\end{cases}
\label{eq:circuit:ss}
\end{equation}
where $x \in \RE^{n}$ is the state of the system and $u, y \in \RE^{m}$
are the so-called manifest variables.
For electrical circuits, the manifest variables are conjugated in terms of voltages
$v$, and currents $i$,
that is, the inner product $u^{\top} y$ has units of power.
The map $f: \RE^{n} \to \RE^{n}$ is Lipschitz continuous and models interactions between linear storage elements
and nonlinear resistors.
Moreover, the matrices $B$, $C$, and $D$ are of the appropriate dimensions and such that
the system is well-posed.
Henceforth, every circuit in this paper is assumed to be of the form \eqref{eq:circuit:ss}.
In what follows we will adopt a \emph{differential} (or incremental) approach, that is,
we will study circuit properties by looking at the difference between trajectories. For simplicity, we
denote the difference between any two generic signals $w_{1}, w_{2}$ as
$\Delta {w} := w_{1} - w_{2}$. In this way,
the mismatches between any two states/currents/voltages are denoted as
$\Delta {x}$, $\Delta {i}$ and $\Delta {v}$ respectively.
Finally, we will use symmetric matrices $P \in \RE^{n \times n}$ constrained
to have inertia $(p, 0, n-p)$, that is, with $p$ negative eigenvalues and $n-p$ positive
eigenvalues.}
\section{Signed supply rates for nonlinear resistors}
\label{section:motivation}
The nonlinear element shown in Figure \ref{fig:tunnelDiode} is a fundamental element
of nonlinear circuits. The voltage range where the nonlinear characteristic has a negative slope models
an element that can deliver energy rather than dissipating energy. Such an element is called
{\it active} in contrast to {\it passive} elements that can only absorb energy.
We follow the common terminology of {\it negative resistance} device \cite{chua1983}, \cite{kaplan1968}, with the usual caveat
that {\it negative} refers to the {\it increment }$\Delta {v}$ rather than to the value of the voltage $v$.
A more precise (but also heavier) terminology would be {\it negative incremental (or differential)}
resistance. The analysis in this paper will be exclusively in terms of {\it incremental} quantities,
which is common practice in nonlinear circuit theory.
\begin{figure}[htpb]
\centering
\includegraphics{tunnelDiode.eps} \quad
\raisebox{-8.0ex}{\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[
xtick = {-1.78, -0.7, 0.7},
xticklabels = {0, $\overline{v}$, $\underline{v}$},
ytick = {-1.7, -0.7, 0.7},
yticklabels = {0, $\underline{i}$, $\overline{i}$},
x grid style={},
xlabel={$v \, [V]$},
xmajorgrids,
xmin=-2.5, xmax=2.5,
ylabel={$i \, [A]$},
ymajorgrids,
ymin=-2.5, ymax=2.5,
scale=0.5
]
\addplot [thick, black, forget plot] table [x=Y1, y=Y2, col sep=comma]{vi_nr_smooth.csv};
\addplot [black, no markers] coordinates {
(-1.44, -0.7)
(-1.44, -1.25)
(-1.66, -1.25)
};
\addplot [black, no markers] coordinates {
(-0.17, 0.26)
(0.17, 0.26)
(0.17, -0.28)
};
\node[] at (axis cs: -1.1, -1.2, 0.16) {$G^{d}$};
\node[] at (axis cs: 0.4, 0.4, 0.16) {$-G^{g}$};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\caption{Slope-bounded voltage-current characteristic of a tunnel diode. Tunnel diodes are
(incrementally) negative resistance devices. The region of
negative slope is called the \emph{active} region.}
\label{fig:tunnelDiode}
\end{figure}
We are motivated by the property that this nonlinear element satisfies the two inequalities
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
0 & \leq \Delta {i} \Delta {v} + G^{g} (\Delta {v})^{2}
\label{eq:tunnel:supply:1}
\\
0 & \leq -\Delta {i} \Delta {v} + G^{d} (\Delta {v})^{2}
\label{eq:tunnel:supply:2}
\end{align}
\label{eq:tunnel:supply}
\end{subequations}
where $G^{d} > 0$ and $-G^{g} < 0$ represent, respectively, the maximum positive slope and negative slope of the
voltage-current characteristic of Figure \ref{fig:tunnelDiode}. Both inequalities have an obvious energetic interpretation: the first inequality
expresses the shortage of passivity of the element: the element becomes passive when connected in parallel with a resistor
of resistance lesser than ${1/G^g}$. The second inequality expresses the shortage of anti-passivity of the element: the element
becomes purely a source of energy when connected to a negative resistance larger than $-1/G^d$.
In the language of dissipativity theory \cite{willems1972}, both inequalities are dissipation inequalities of the form $ \sigma(\Delta {i}, \Delta {v}) \ge 0$
for the family of quadratic supply rates
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:supply:1}
\sigma(\Delta {i}, \Delta {v}) =
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {i} \\ \Delta {v}
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
\mathcal{Q} & \mathcal{I}
\\
\mathcal{I} & \mathcal{R}
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {i} \\ \Delta {v}
\end{bmatrix}
\end{equation}
where the signature matrix $\mathcal{I} \in \RE^{m \times m}$ is a diagonal matrix
with $\pm 1$ in the main diagonal
$\mathcal{I} = \diag [ \pm 1, \pm 1, \dots, \pm 1 ]$,
and $\mathcal{Q} \in \RE^{m \times m}$,
$\mathcal{R} \in \RE^{m \times m}$ are symmetric matrices. In the special case $\mathcal{I}=I$, this family
of supply rates characterize incrementally passive elements with an excess or a shortage
of passivity in the external variables \cite{sepulchre1997}. When $\mathcal{Q} = 0$,
the dissipativity property $\sigma(\Delta {i}, \Delta {v}) \ge 0$ is also equivalent
to the monotonicity of the voltage-current characteristic $i = g(v)$ \cite{bauschke2011}.
The map $g$ is called
strongly monotone for $\mathcal{R} >0$, hypomonotone for $\mathcal{R} < 0$ and monotone
for $\mathcal{R} = 0$.
We call (\ref{eq:supply:1}) a {\it signed} passivity supply
rate to stress that the only difference with respect to the conventional passivity supply is the signature
matrix $\mathcal{I}$ generalizing the conventional identity matrix $I$.
The element in Figure \ref{fig:tunnelDiode} is called a voltage-controlled resistor,
Figure \ref{fig:nr:vc:cc} (left). Namely, the current flowing through a voltage-controlled resistor
is a singled-valued function of the voltage across its terminals: $i = g(v)$. The nonlinear resistor is passive
when the function $g: \RE \to \RE$ is monotone increasing, otherwise it is active.
It follows from \eqref{eq:tunnel:supply} that whenever $G^{d} \neq G^{g}$, a voltage-controlled resistor fulfills
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:supply:nr}
0 \leq
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {i} \\ \Delta {v}
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
\mathcal{Q} & \mathcal{I}
\\
\mathcal{I} & \mathcal{R}
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {i} \\ \Delta {v}
\end{bmatrix}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{I} = \sign(G^{d} - G^{g})$, $\mathcal{Q} = -\frac{2}{\vert G^{d} - G^{g} \vert}$
and $\mathcal{R} = \frac{2 G^{g} G^{d}}{\vert G^{d} - G^{g} \vert}$.
The dual element is the current-controlled resistor defined by
a singled-valued function of its flowing current: $v = r(i)$.
An active current-controlled resistor satisfies the sector condition
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sector:ccnr}
-R^{g} (\Delta {i})^{2} \leq \Delta {i} \Delta {v} \leq R^{d} (\Delta {i})^{2}
\end{equation}
Equivalently, a current-controlled resistor satisfies \eqref{eq:supply:nr} with
$\mathcal{I} = \sign(R^{d} - R^{g})$, $\mathcal{Q} = \frac{2 R^{g} R^{d}}{ \vert R^{d} - R^{g} \vert}$
and $\mathcal{R} = - \frac{2}{ \vert R^{d} - R^{g} \vert}$.
Both types of controlled resistors appear naturally in devices such as tunnel diodes, DIAC's or neon lamps.
Additionally, they can be built from off-the-shelf components like transistors and operational amplifiers
\cite{chua1983}, \cite{kaplan1968}.
\begin{figure}[htpb]
\centering
\includegraphics{nr_vc_cc.eps}
\caption{Voltage-controlled resistor (left) and current-controlled resistor (right). The functions
$g$ and $r$ are assumed singled-valued and Lipschitz continuous. If $g$ or $r$ are monotone increasing
then the resistor is passive, otherwise it is active.}
\label{fig:nr:vc:cc}
\end{figure}
Describing negative resistors in terms of dissipation inequalities opens the way to the
use of dissipativity theory to characterize circuit interconnections.
As an illustration, consider the parallel interconnection
of a voltage-controlled negative resistance element with a capacitor (Figure \ref{fig:basic:sw:vc}, left).
Let $i^{c}, v^{c}$ and $i^{r}, v^{r}$ be the currents and voltages associated to the capacitor and the
controlled resistor, respectively.
The capacitor is a classical lossless element that satisfies the power-preserving equality
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:supply:capacitor}
\frac{d}{dt} {C \frac {(\Delta v^{c})^2}{2}} = \Delta {v^{c}} \Delta {i^{c}}
\end{equation}
In the language of dissipativity theory, the quantity on the left-hand side is the time-derivative of the
{\it storage} $C \frac{(\Delta v^{c})^2}{2}$.
The negative resistance element satisfies $-\Delta {v^{r}} \Delta {i^{r}} + G^{d} (\Delta v^{r})^{2} \ge 0$.
The parallel interconnection defined by $v^{cc}=v^{c}=v^{r}$ and $i^{cc}=i^{c}+i^{r}$~\footnote{The superindices in the variables
$i^{cc}$ and $v^{cc}$ indicate that the port under consideration is current-driven. In a similar way, $i^{vc}$ and
$v^{vc}$ will denote the variables associated to a voltage-driven port.} satisfies the dissipation (in)equality
\begin{equation}
-\frac{d}{dt} {C \frac {(\Delta {v}^{cc})^{2}}{2}} \le -\Delta v^{cc} \Delta i^{cc} + G^{d} (\Delta {v}^{cc})^{2}
\label{eq:sw1:ineq:dissipation}
\end{equation}
The quantity that appears on the left hand-side is the time-derivative of a {\it negative} storage.
More generally, the storage functions in this paper will be quadratic forms defined by a symmetric
matrix $P=P^T$ with $p$ negative eigenvalues (and $n-p$ positive eigenvalues). Such {\it signed} storage
functions generalize the conventional {\it positive definite} storages of passivity theory. Positive definite
storages are natural candidates for the stability analysis of closed equilibrium systems.
In its incremental form, stability analysis appears in the literature under different names,
including {\it contraction} theory \cite{lohmiller1998}, {\it incremental} stability analysis \cite{angeli2002},
or differential Lyapunov analysis \cite{forni2014b}.
{\it Signed} storages generalize this stability analysis for non-equilibrium behaviors characterized by a low-dimensional asymptotic behavior.
This generalization is the topic of dominance analysis, reviewed in the next section.
\begin{figure}[htpb]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={0.3cm, 0.35cm, 0.35cm, 0.35cm}, clip]{basic_switch_vc_cc.eps}
\caption{Basic prototype circuits of a current-driven (left) and a voltage-driven (right)
$1$-passive circuit. The resistors $R_{vc}$ and $R_{cc}$ are voltage-controlled and current-controlled
resistors respectively.}
\label{fig:basic:sw:vc}
\end{figure}
\section{Differential dissipativity}
\label{section:differential}
\subsection{Dominant systems}
\label{section:dominance}
Dominance theory extends stability analysis to non-equilibrium behaviors. The approach
is based on the intuitive idea that the long run behavior of the system
is dictated by low-dimensional dynamics, identified through the study of the system
linearization \cite{forni2014b}, \cite{forni2017}, \cite{Forni2017b}.
In what follows we adapt the differential approach of \cite{Forni2017b} into
an incremental setting.
\begin{defn}
Let $f: \RE^{n} \setto \RE^{n}$ be a Lipschitz continuous map. A system of the form
%
\begin{equation}
\dot{x} \in f(x), \quad x \in \RE^{n},
\label{eq:inclusion}
\end{equation}
%
is $p$-dominant with rate $\lambda \geq 0$ if there exists a matrix
$P = P^{\top} \in \RE^{n \times n}$ with inertia $(p, 0, n-p)$ such that
%
\begin{equation}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {\dot{x}} \\ \Delta {x}
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & P
\\
P & 2 \lambda P + \varepsilon I
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {\dot{x}} \\ \Delta {x}
\end{bmatrix}
\leq 0.
\label{eq:dominance}
\end{equation}
The property is strict if $\varepsilon > 0$.
\label{def:dominance}
\end{defn}
When $P$ is positive definite, \eqref{eq:dominance}
becomes the incremental analogue of the classical Lyapunov inequality, meaning that any two trajectories
converge to each other with decay rate at least $\lambda \geq 0$, \cite{Boyd1994}.
When $f$ is a differentiable map, \eqref{eq:dominance}
reduces to the simple matrix inequality
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial f(x)}{\partial x}^{\top} P + P \frac{\partial f(x)}{\partial x}
+ 2 \lambda P \leq -\varepsilon I,
\label{eq:dominance:smooth}
\end{equation}
which provides a basic test for dominance, \cite{forni2017}, \cite{Forni2017b}.
\begin{thm}
Let $f: \RE^{n} \to \RE^{n}$ be a differentiable map. The closed system
\eqref{eq:inclusion} is $p$-dominant if and only if, there exists a matrix $P =
P^{\top}$
with inertia $(p, 0, n-p)$ such that \eqref{eq:dominance:smooth} holds.
\label{thm:dominance:smooth}
\end{thm}
\begin{pf}
First assume that \eqref{eq:inclusion} is $p$-dominant. Expanding the left-hand side of
\eqref{eq:dominance} and dividing by $\Vert \Delta {x} \Vert^{2} \neq 0$ yields,
%
\begin{displaymath}
\frac{\Delta {f}^{\top} P \Delta {x} +
\Delta {x}^{\top} P \Delta {f}
+ 2 \lambda \Delta {x}^{\top} P \Delta {x} +
\varepsilon \Delta {x}^{\top} \Delta {x}}{\Vert \Delta {x} \Vert^{2}} \leq 0.
\end{displaymath}
%
By letting $\delta_{x} = \lim_{\Delta {x} \to 0} \frac{\Delta {x}}{\Vert \Delta {x} \Vert}$ we
arrive to \eqref{eq:dominance:smooth}.
For the converse statement, let $x (\alpha) = \alpha x_{1} + (1 - \alpha) x_{2}$ and
let $\phi:\RE \to \RE$ be such that
%
\begin{multline*}
\phi(\alpha) = 2 \left( f(x(\alpha)) - f(x_{2}) + \lambda (
x(\alpha) - x_{2}) \right)^{\top} P \Delta {x}
\\
+ \varepsilon (x(\alpha) - x_{2})^{\top}
\Delta {x}
\end{multline*}
%
where $\Delta x = x_{1} - x_{2}$. Hence,
%
\begin{multline*}
\frac{d \phi(\alpha)}{d \alpha} = \Delta {x}^{\top} \left( \frac{\partial f(x)}{\partial x}^{\top}
P + P \frac{\partial f(x)}{\partial x} \right.
\\
\left. \phantom{\frac{1}{2}} + 2 \lambda
P + \varepsilon I \right) \Delta {x}
\leq 0.
\end{multline*}
The above inequality implies that $\phi$ is a non-increasing function. Therefore,
$\phi(1) \leq \phi(0) = 0$ and \eqref{eq:dominance} follows. This concludes the proof. $\hfill\qed$
\end{pf}
The property of dominance strongly constrains the asymptotic behavior
of the system as described for the following theorem.
\begin{thm}[{\cite[Theorem 2]{Forni2017b}}]
\label{theorem:dominance:constrain}
Let \eqref{eq:inclusion}
be strictly $p$-dominant with rate $\lambda \geq 0$.
For any given $x \in \mathbb{R}^n$, let $\Omega(x)$ be the $\omega$-limit set of $x$.
Then the flow of \eqref{eq:inclusion} on $\Omega(x)$ is topologically equivalent to the flow of
a $p$-dimensional system.
\label{eq:dominance:constrain}
\end{thm}
Additionally, the following corollary becomes useful in characterizing
the asymptotic behavior of a dominant system.
\begin{cor}
Under the assumptions of Theorem \ref{theorem:dominance:constrain},
every bounded trajectory of \eqref{eq:inclusion} converges to
%
\begin{itemize}
\item A unique equilibrium point if $p = 0$.
\item An equilibrium point if $p = 1$.
\item A simple attractor if $p = 2$.
\end{itemize}
\label{corollary:behavior}
\end{cor}
Summing up, closed dynamic systems with smaller degrees of dominance will show simpler behaviors
compared with systems with higher degrees. The following subsection extends the property of
dominance to open systems under the framework of dissipative systems.
\subsection{Signed dissipation inequalities}
Dissipativity theory \cite{willems1972}, \cite{willems1972b} is grounded in dissipation inequalities,
which generalize the physical characterization of a passive circuit as a system that can only absorb energy:
the variation of energy {\it stored} in the elements of the circuit (capacitors and inductors) is upper bounded
by the electrical power {\it supplied} to the circuit. For a linear circuit, the storage is a quadratic function of the state,
and the dissipation inequality takes the standard form
$$ \frac{d}{dt} x^{\top}Px \le - \lambda x^{\top} P x + v^{\top} i + i^{\top} v $$
The scalar $\lambda \ge 0$ determines a dissipation rate. Each pair of voltage $v_k$ and current $i_k$ appearing in
the voltage vector $v$ and voltage current $i$ determines a port of the circuit.
In matrix form, the quadratic dissipation inequality characterizing passivity reads
\begin{equation}
\begin{bmatrix}
\dot{x} \\
x
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & P
\\
P & 2 \lambda P
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\dot{x}
\\
x
\end{bmatrix}
\leq
\begin{bmatrix}
v \\ i
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & I
\\
I & 0
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
v \\ i
\end{bmatrix}
\label{eq:passivity:inequality}
\end{equation}
An incremental dissipation inequality is in term of the increments rather than absolute variables:
\begin{equation}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta \dot{x} \\
\Delta x
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & P
\\
P & 2 \lambda P
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta \dot{x}
\\
\Delta x
\end{bmatrix}
\leq
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta v \\ \Delta i
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & I
\\
I & 0
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta v \\ \Delta i
\end{bmatrix}
\label{eq:inc-passivity:inequality}
\end{equation}
Motivated by the signed supply rates and signed storages introduced in Section \ref{section:motivation}, we generalize the incremental passivity dissipation inequality (\ref{eq:inc-passivity:inequality}) to {\it signed} dissipation inequalities of the form
%
\begin{equation}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {\dot{x}} \\
\Delta {x}
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & P
\\
P & 2 \lambda P + \varepsilon I
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {\dot{x}}
\\
\Delta {x}
\end{bmatrix}
\leq
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {v} \\ \Delta {i}
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
\mathcal{Q} & \mathcal{I}
\\
\mathcal{I} & \mathcal{R}
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {v} \\ \Delta {i}
\end{bmatrix}
\label{eq:dissipation:inequality}
\end{equation}
for an arbitrary circuit with state $x \in \RE^n$ and $m$ ports defining the current $i \in \RE^m$ and voltage $v \in \RE^m$.
We only consider circuits composed of linear capacitors, linear inductors, and nonlinear resistors. The {\it signed} quadratic storage is
determined by the symmetric matrix $P$ with $p$ negative eigenvalues and $n-p$ positive eigenvalues. The {\it signed} supply
is determined by the signature matrix $\mathcal{I}$. The scalar $\lambda \geq 0$ is the dissipation rate.
The matrices $\mathcal{Q}, \mathcal{R}$ are symmetric as in \eqref{eq:supply:1}.
\begin{defn}
A nonlinear circuit is called {\it signed} passive if the inequality (\ref{eq:dissipation:inequality}) holds along any pair of trajectories.
The property is strict if $\varepsilon > 0$.
\label{def:signed:passive}
\end{defn}
Definition \ref{def:signed:passive} is very close to the classical definition of incremental passivity. The only
difference is that (i) we consider {\it signed} storages, i.e. {\it differences}
of positive storages and (ii) {\it signed} supply rates, i.e. {\it differences} of the classical {\it passivity} supply rates.
As illustrated in Section \ref{section:motivation}, such storages and supply rates appear naturally when considering
circuits with both passive and active elements and ports that can both absorb and deliver energy.
\subsection{Dissipative interconnections}
The central property of passivity theory is that passivity is preserved by interconnection. More precisely, port interconnections
of passive circuits are passive. In order to generalize this property to signed-passivity, we introduce the following definition.
\begin{defn}
\label{def:dissipative:connection}
Let $\Sigma_{a}$ and $\Sigma_{b}$ be signed-passive with a common rate $\lambda \ge 0$.
Their interconnection is called \emph{dissipative} if
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:dissipative:connection}
\Delta {i^{a}}^{\top} \mathcal{I}_{a} \Delta {v^{a}} + \Delta {i^{b}}^{\top} \mathcal{I}_{b} \Delta {v^{b}}
\leq \Delta {i} \mathcal{I} \Delta {v}
\end{equation}
If equality holds in (\ref{eq:dissipative:connection}), then the interconnection is called {\it neutral}.
\end{defn}
The conventional passivity supply assumes $\mathcal{I}=I$. In this case, an interconnection is {\it neutral}
if
$$ \Delta {i^{a}}^{\top} \Delta {v^{a}} + \Delta {i^{b}}^{\top} \Delta {v^{b}}
= \Delta {i}^{\top} \Delta {v}
$$
Hence, port interconnections of passive circuits are neutral. More generally,
let us consider the port interconnection of two signed-passive systems as
\begin{align}
\nonumber
i^{a} & = - i^{b} + i^{cc} & i^{b} & = - i^{vc}
\\
v^{a} & = v^{b} + v^{vc} & v^{a} & = v^{cc}
\label{eq:simple:pattern}
\end{align}
where we have set $i = [i^{cc \top}, i^{vc \top} ]^{\top}$ and
$v = [v^{cc \top}, v^{vc \top}]^{\top}$. Here the pairs $(i^{cc}, v^{cc})$ and $(i^{vc}, v^{vc})$
are associated to current-controlled and voltage-controlled ports, respectively,
see Figures \ref{fig:basic:sw:vc} and \ref{fig:basic:osc}.
Substitution of \eqref{eq:simple:pattern} on the left-hand side of \eqref{eq:dissipative:connection}
shows that port interconnections of signed-passive systems with supplies
sharing the same signature (i.e., $\mathcal{I}_{a} = \mathcal{I}_{b}$)
are neutral.
Note that a circuit is closed or terminated whenever $i^{cc} = 0$ and $v^{vc} = 0$.
The question of how to realize a neutral or dissipative interconnection when interconnecting signed-passive circuits
is deferred to Section \ref{section:circuits:connection}. But the definition allows for the following generalization
of the passivity theorem.
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:interconnection}
The dissipative interconnection of two signed-passive systems with a common dissipation rate
is signed-passive with the same rate. The storage of the interconnected system is the sum of the storages.
\end{thm}
\begin{pf}
Let us consider the aggregated state $x = [x_{a}^{\top}, x_{b}^{\top}]^{\top}$, and the block-diagonal
matrix $P = \diag [P_{a}, P_{b} ]$. The sum of storages satisfies,
%
\begin{multline}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta \dot{x} \\ \Delta x
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & P
\\
P & 2 \lambda P + \varepsilon I
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta \dot{x} \\ \Delta x
\end{bmatrix} \leq
\\
\sum_{k \in {a, b}}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta i^{k} \\ \Delta v^{k}
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
\mathcal{Q}_{k} & \mathcal{I}_{k}
\\
\mathcal{I}_{k} & \mathcal{R}_{k}
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta i^{k} \\ \Delta v^{k}
\end{bmatrix}
\label{eq:sum:supplies}
\end{multline}
Simple, yet cumbersome, computations show that the substitution of the interconnection
pattern \eqref{eq:simple:pattern} into \eqref{eq:sum:supplies} together with
the dissipativity of the interconnection yield,
%
\begin{multline}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta \dot{x} \\ \Delta x
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & P
\\
P & 2 \lambda P + \varepsilon I
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta \dot{x} \\ \Delta x
\end{bmatrix} \leq
\\
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta i^{cc} \\ \Delta i^{vc} \\ \Delta v^{cc} \\ \Delta v^{vc}
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
\hat{\mathcal{Q}} & \hat{\mathcal{I}}
\\
\hat{\mathcal{I}} & \hat{\mathcal{R}}
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta i^{cc} \\ \Delta i^{vc} \\ \Delta v^{cc} \\ \Delta v^{vc}
\end{bmatrix}
\label{eq:supply:connection}
\end{multline}
%
where $\hat{\mathcal{I}} = \diag [\mathcal{I}_{a}, \mathcal{I}_{b}]$ and
\begin{align*}
\hat{\mathcal{Q}} & =
\begin{bmatrix}
\mathcal{Q}_{a} & - \mathcal{Q}_{a}
\\
- \mathcal{Q}_{a} & \mathcal{Q}_{a} + \mathcal{Q}_{b}
\end{bmatrix}
&
\hat{\mathcal{R}} & =
\begin{bmatrix}
\mathcal{R}_{a} + \mathcal{R}_{b} & - \mathcal{R}_{b}
\\
- \mathcal{R}_{b} & \mathcal{R}_{b}
\end{bmatrix}
\end{align*}
and the result follows. $\hfill\qed$
\end{pf}
A key consequence of the passivity theorem is the property that when a passive system is terminated, it leads
to a stable equilibrium system. The storage becomes a Lyapunov function for the closed system.
The generalization of that result is as follows.
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:dominance:closedLoop}
Let $\Sigma_{a}$ be a strictly signed-passive circuit with rate $\lambda > 0$ and dominance degree $p$.
The terminated circuit built from the dissipative interconnection of $\Sigma_{a}$ with a resistor ($\Sigma_{b}$) defines a
$p$-dominant system with the same rate $\lambda > 0$ provided that
$\mathcal{Q}_{a} + \mathcal{Q}_{b} \leq 0$ and $\mathcal{R}_{a} + \mathcal{R}_{b} \leq 0$.
\end{thm}
\begin{pf}
Recall that a resistor (linear or nonlinear) satisfies \eqref{eq:supply:nr}. Thus, from Theorem \ref{thm:interconnection},
the interconnection satisfies \eqref{eq:supply:connection}. In addition, the termination of the ports,
i.e., $i^{cc} = 0$ and $v^{vc} = 0$, transforms \eqref{eq:supply:connection} into
%
\begin{multline*}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta \dot{x} \\ \Delta x
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & P
\\
P & 2 \lambda P + \varepsilon I
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta \dot{x} \\ \Delta x
\end{bmatrix} \leq
\\
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta i^{vc} \\ \Delta v^{cc}
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
\mathcal{Q}_{a} + \mathcal{Q}_{b} & 0
\\
0 & \mathcal{R}_{a} + \mathcal{R}_{b}
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta i^{vc} \\ \Delta v^{cc}
\end{bmatrix} \leq 0
\end{multline*}
%
and the conclusion follows directly
from Definition \ref{def:dominance}. $\hfill\qed$
\end{pf}
\section{Elementary switching and oscillating circuits}
\label{section:circuits:lossless:lure}
In this section we review classical elementary circuits and illustrate their signed passivity properties.
\subsection{Switching circuits}
We start with the parallel nonlinear $RC$ circuit and the
series nonlinear $RL$ circuit shown in Figure \ref{fig:basic:sw:vc}.
For the nonlinear $RC$ circuit, we rewrite the dissipation inequality \eqref{eq:sw1:ineq:dissipation} in the matrix form with state $x = v^{c}$
\begin{multline}
\label{eq:cc_sw:ineq}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {\dot x} \\ \Delta {x}
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & -\frac{C}{2}
\\
-\frac{C}{2} & - \lambda C
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {\dot x} \\ \Delta {x}
\end{bmatrix}
\leq
\\
\frac{1}{2}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {i}^{cc} \\ \Delta {v}^{cc}
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & -1
\\
-1 & 2(G^{d} - \lambda C)
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {i}^{cc} \\ \Delta {v}^{cc}
\end{bmatrix}
\end{multline}
The dissipation inequality
involves the standard storage of a capacitor and the standard supply of a one port circuit,
but both with a negative signature.
The circuit is the port interconnection of a capacitor with a negative resistor. The interconnection
is neutral as a port interconnection of elements with negative signature ${\mathcal I}=-1$.
Terminating the circuit, that is, setting $i^{cc} = 0$, results in a $1$-dominant system when $G^{d} - \lambda C < 0$.
This closed circuit has one or three equilibria. With three equilibria, one of which unstable, the circuit is an elementary
example of bistable switch.
The dissipativity analysis of the series $RL$ circuit in Figure \ref{fig:basic:sw:vc} is similar.
Taking as state variable $\xi$, the circuit satisfies the dissipation inequality
\begin{multline}
\label{eq:vc_sw:ineq}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {\dot \xi} \\ \Delta {\xi}
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & -\frac{L}{2}
\\
-\frac{L}{2} & - \lambda L
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {\dot \xi} \\ \Delta {\xi}
\end{bmatrix}
\leq
\\
\frac{1}{2}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {i}^{vc} \\ \Delta {v}^{vc}
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
2(R^{d} - \lambda L) & -1
\\
-1 & 0
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {i}^{vc} \\ \Delta {v}^{vc}
\end{bmatrix}
\end{multline}
The circuit is a bistable switch when
$R^{d} - \lambda L < 0$. Both circuits can be seen as abstract realizations of the classical Schmitt trigger circuit in which the negative
resistor is usually made by using an operational amplifier in positive feedback \cite{miranda2018a}.
\subsection{Oscillating circuits}
We proceed with the analysis of the nonlinear RLC circuits
shown in Figure \ref{fig:basic:osc}.
\begin{figure}[hptb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[trim={0.5cm, 0.3cm, 0.45cm, 0.3cm}, clip]{basic_oscillator_vc_cc.eps}
\end{center} \vspace{-3mm}
\caption{Basic prototype circuits of a current-controlled (left) and a voltage-controlled (right)
signed-passive circuits with degree of dominance $2$. }
\label{fig:basic:osc}
\end{figure}
The parallel nonlinear $RLC$ circuit is the port interconnection of the nonlinear $RC$
circuit in the previous section with a lossless inductor. The port interconnection is neutral
as an interconnection of two circuits with supply signature ${\mathcal I} = -1$. The total storage
is the sum of two negative storages
$$ - \frac{C}{2} (\Delta x)^2 - \frac{L}{2} (\Delta \xi)^2. $$
Defining the state $\Delta z = [ \Delta x \; \Delta \xi]^T$ and
$$ P = \left [ \begin{array}{cc} -\frac{C}{2} & 0 \\ 0 & -\frac{L}{2} \end{array} \right ] ,
$$
the interconnection satisfies the dissipation inequality
\begin{multline}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {\dot{z}} \\
\Delta {z}
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & P
\\
P & 2 \lambda P
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {\dot{z}}
\\
\Delta {z}
\end{bmatrix}
\leq
\\
\frac{1}{2}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {i}^{cc} \\ \Delta {v}^{cc}
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
-2 \lambda L & -1
\\
-1 & 2(G^{d} - \lambda C)
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {i}^{cc} \\ \Delta {v}^{cc}
\end{bmatrix}
\end{multline}
The storage has a dominance degree 2 and the supply has a negative signature ${\mathcal I} =-1$.
When terminated, that is, when $i^{cc} = 0$, the circuit is 2-dominant for $G^{d} < \lambda C $.
It is a prototype of negative resistance nonlinear oscillator, such as the circuits studied by
Van der Pol \cite{vanDerPol1926} and Nagumo \cite{nagumo1962}.
The series interconnection in Figure \ref{fig:basic:osc} can be studied in a similar way,
as a neutral interconnection between the nonlinear $RL$ circuit in the previous section and a
lossless capacitor. The circuit is signed dissipative with the same storage and with the supply
$$
\sigma(\Delta_{i}, \Delta v) = \frac{1}{2}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta i^{vc} \\ \Delta v^{vc}
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
2(R^{d} -\lambda L) & -1
\\
-1 & -2 \lambda C
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta {i}^{vc} \\ \Delta {v}^{vc}
\end{bmatrix}
$$
\section{Dissipative interconnections}
\label{section:circuits:connection}
We return to question of realizing dissipative interconnections satisfying (\ref{eq:dissipative:connection}). We illustrate the construction with
the \emph{static} coupling network shown in Figure \ref{fig:dissipative:interconnection}.
\begin{figure}[htpb]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={0.4cm, 0.25cm, 0.3cm, 0.25cm}, clip]{dissipativeInterconnection2.eps}
\caption{Dissipative interconnection of circuits $\Sigma_{a}$ and $\Sigma_{b}$ through the coupling network $\Sigma_{c}$.}
\label{fig:dissipative:interconnection}
\end{figure}
The interconnection equations are
\begin{align}
\nonumber
i^{k} & = - \tilde{i}^{k} + i^{k, cc}, & \tilde{i}^{k} & = - i^{k, vc}
\\
v^{k} & = \tilde{v}^{k} + v^{k, vc}, & v^{k} & = v^{k, cc}
\label{eq:connection:pattern}
\end{align}
where the variables $i^{k, cc}$, $v^{k, cc}$, $i^{k, vc}$ and $v^{k, vc}$, $k \in \{a, b \}$, represent
the range of possible ports available after interconnection.
With this notation, a port is closed or terminated when $i^{k, cc} = 0$ and $v^{k, vc} = 0$, $k \in \{a, b \}$ which
is the case shown in Figure \ref{fig:dissipative:interconnection}.
The following theorem provides conditions on the coupling network $\Sigma_{c}$ guaranteeing a dissipative interconnection.
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:dissipative:coupling}
The interconnection between $\Sigma_{a}$ and $\Sigma_{b}$ is dissipative if and only if the coupling network $\Sigma_{c}$ is
signed-passive without any shortage of signed-passivity, i.e., if and only if $\Sigma_{c}$ satisfies,
%
\begin{equation}
0 \leq
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta \tilde{i}^{a} \\ \Delta \tilde{i}^{b} \\ \Delta \tilde{v}^{a} \\ \Delta \tilde{v}^{b}
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
\tilde{\mathcal{Q}}_{a} & 0 & \mathcal{I}_{a} & 0
\\
0 & \tilde{\mathcal{Q}}_{b} & 0 & \mathcal{I}_{b}
\\
\mathcal{I}_{a} & 0 & \tilde{\mathcal{R}}_{a} & 0
\\
0 & \mathcal{I}_{b} & 0 & \tilde{\mathcal{R}}_{b}
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta \tilde{i}^{a} \\ \Delta \tilde{i}^{b} \\ \Delta \tilde{v}^{a} \\ \Delta \tilde{v}^{b}
\end{bmatrix}
\label{eq:coupling:passive}
\end{equation}
with $\tilde{\mathcal{Q}}_{k} \leq 0$, $\tilde{\mathcal{R}}_{k} \leq 0$ for all $k \in \{a, b\}$. In addition, the interconnection is
neutral if and only if,
%
\begin{equation}
0 = \Delta \tilde{i}^{a} \mathcal{I}_{a} \Delta \tilde{v}^{a} + \Delta \tilde{i}^{b} \mathcal{I}_{b} \Delta \tilde{v}^{b}
\label{eq:coupling:neutral}
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{pf}
Computation of the left-hand side of \eqref{eq:dissipative:connection} under the
interconnection pattern \eqref{eq:connection:pattern} lead us to,
\begin{align*}
& \Delta i^{a} \mathcal{I}_{a} \Delta v^{a} + \Delta i^{b} \mathcal{I}_{b} \Delta v^{b}
\\
& = \sum_{k \in \{a, b \}} \left( -\Delta \tilde{i}^{k} + \Delta i^{k, cc} \right) \mathcal{I}_{k} \Delta v^{k}
\\
& = \sum_{k \in \{a, b \}} - \Delta \tilde{i}^{k} \mathcal{I}_{k} \left( \Delta \tilde{v}^{k} + \Delta v^{k, vc} \right) +
\Delta i^{k, cc} \mathcal{I}_{k} \Delta v^{k, cc}
\\
& = \sum_{k \in \{a, b \}} - \Delta \tilde{i}^{k} \mathcal{I}_{k} \Delta \tilde{v}^{k}
\\
& \qquad + \sum_{k \in \{a, b\}} \Delta i^{k, cc} \mathcal{I}_{k} \Delta v^{k, cc} + \Delta i^{k, vc} \mathcal{I}_{k} \Delta v^{k, vc}
\\
& \leq \sum_{k \in \{a, b\}} \Delta i^{k, cc} \mathcal{I}_{k} \Delta v^{k, cc} + \Delta i^{k, vc} \mathcal{I}_{k} \Delta v^{k, vc}
\end{align*}
where we have made use of \eqref{eq:coupling:passive} in the last step.
Hence, the conclusion follows by taking
\begin{align}
\nonumber
i & = [i^{a, cc}, i^{b, cc}, i^{a, vc}, i^{b, vc}]^{\top}
\\
v &= [v^{a, cc}, v^{b, cc}, v^{a, vc}, v^{b, vc}]^{\top}
\label{eq:vi:vector}
\end{align}
and $\mathcal{I} = \diag [\mathcal{I}_{a}, \mathcal{I}_{b}, \mathcal{I}_{a}, \mathcal{I}_{b} ]$. $\hfill\qed$
\end{pf}
The addition of the network $\Sigma_{c}$ adds \emph{signed} dissipation to both systems, allowing the following
generalization of Theorem \ref{thm:dominance:closedLoop}.
\begin{cor}
Let $\Sigma_{a}$ be a strictly signed-passive circuit with rate $\lambda > 0$ and dominance degree $p$.
The terminated circuit built from dissipative interconnection of $\Sigma_{a}$ with a resistor ($\Sigma_{b}$) through
a coupling $\Sigma_{c}$ defines a
$p$-dominant system with the same rate $\lambda > 0$ provided that
\begin{equation}
\sum_{k \in \{a, b \}}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta i^{k} \\ \Delta v^{k}
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
\mathcal{Q}_{k} + \tilde{\mathcal{Q}}_{k} & 0
\\
0 & \mathcal{R}_{k} + \tilde{\mathcal{R}}_{k}
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\Delta i^{k} \\ \Delta v^{k}
\end{bmatrix} \leq 0
\label{eq:dominance:condition:gral}
\end{equation}
\end{cor}
\begin{pf}
The proof is the same as in Theorem \ref{thm:dominance:closedLoop} but considering Theorem \ref{thm:dissipative:coupling} and
the interconnection pattern \eqref{eq:connection:pattern} instead. $\hfill\qed$
\end{pf}
Figures \ref{fig:dissipative:T}-\ref{fig:dissipative:Pi} illustrate practical realizations of dissipative interconnections
where resistive elements model power losses.
\begin{figure}[htpb]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={0.4cm, 0cm, 0.3cm, 0.2cm}, clip]{activeInterconnection_T.eps}
\caption{``T'' interconnection of systems $\Sigma_{a}$ and $\Sigma_{b}$ using a current-controlled current source
for the cases when $\mathcal{I}_{a} = -\mathcal{I}_{b}$.}
\label{fig:dissipative:T}
\end{figure}
The ``T'' connection in Figure \ref{fig:dissipative:T} imposes the constraints
\begin{align*}
i^{a} & = -\tilde{i}^{a}, \quad i^{b} = -\tilde{i}^{b}
\\
v^{a} & = \tilde{v}^{a} = R_{a} \tilde{i}^{a} - \frac{R_{c}}{\alpha - 1}(\tilde{i}^{a} + \tilde{i}^{b})
\\
v^{b} & = \tilde{v}^{b} = R_{b} \tilde{i}^{b} - \frac{R_{c}}{\alpha - 1}(\tilde{i}^{a} + \tilde{i}^{b})
\end{align*}
where $\alpha > 1$. Without loss of generality we assume that $\mathcal{I}_{a} = -1$ and $\mathcal{I}_{b} = 1$.
It follows from direct computations that the ``T'' bridge satisfies \eqref{eq:coupling:passive} with
\begin{align*}
\tilde{\mathcal{Q}}_{a} & = R_{a} - \frac{R_{c}}{\alpha - 1}, & \tilde{\mathcal{R}}_{a} & = 0
\\
\tilde{\mathcal{Q}}_{b} & = \frac{R_{c}}{\alpha - 1} - R_{b}, & \tilde{\mathcal{R}}_{b} & = 0
\end{align*}
Hence, according to Theorem \ref{thm:dissipative:coupling}, the interconnection of $\Sigma_{a}$ and $\Sigma_{b}$ via the ``T'' bridge
is dissipative for the case $\mathcal{I}_{a} = -1$ and $\mathcal{I}_{b} = 1$ whenever $R_{a} \leq \frac{R_{c}}{\alpha -1} \leq R_{b}$.
The dual version of the ``T'' connection in Figure \ref{fig:dissipative:T} is the ``$\Pi$'' connection
as shown in Figure \ref{fig:dissipative:Pi}.
\begin{figure}[htpb]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={0.4cm, 0cm, 0.3cm, 0.2cm}, clip]{activeInterconnection_Pi.eps}
\caption{``$\Pi$'' interconnection of systems $\Sigma_{a}$ and $\Sigma_{b}$ using a current-controlled current source
for the cases when $\mathcal{I}_{a} = -\mathcal{I}_{b}$.}
\label{fig:dissipative:Pi}
\end{figure}
In this case the connection imposes the relations
\begin{align*}
v^{a} & = \tilde{v}^{a}, \quad v^{b} = \tilde{v}^{b}
\\
-i^{a} & = \tilde{i}^{a} = \frac{1}{R_{a}} \tilde{v}^{a} - \frac{\alpha - 1}{R_{c}} \left( \tilde{v}^{a} - \tilde{v}^{b} \right)
\\
-i^{b} & = \tilde{i}^{b} = \frac{1}{R_{b}} \tilde{v}^{b} + \frac{\alpha - 1}{R_{c}} \left( \tilde{v}^{a} - \tilde{v}^{b} \right)
\end{align*}
where $\alpha > 1$. Hence direct computations show that the ``$\Pi$'' bridge
also satisfies \eqref{eq:coupling:passive} with
\begin{align*}
\tilde{\mathcal{Q}}_{a} & = 0, & \tilde{\mathcal{R}}_{a} & = \frac{1}{R_{a}} - \frac{\alpha - 1}{R_{c}}
\\
\tilde{\mathcal{Q}}_{b} & = 0, & \tilde{\mathcal{R}}_{b} & = \frac{\alpha - 1}{R_{c}} - \frac{1}{R_{b}}
\end{align*}
Following again Theorem \ref{thm:dissipative:coupling}, the
``$\Pi$'' bridge provides an interconnection that is dissipative whenever
$\frac{1}{R_{a}} \leq \frac{\alpha - 1}{R_{c}} \leq \frac{1}{R_{b}}$.
Both dissipative interconnections above can be implemented by using negative resistance devices as shown
in Figure \ref{fig:connections:T:Pi:implementation}. One should stress that the implementations in Figure \ref{fig:connections:T:Pi:implementation}
only consider the active range of the controlled resistors $R_{vc}$ and $R_{cc}$.
\begin{figure}[htpb]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={0.4cm, 0cm, 0.3cm, 0.2cm}, clip]{activeInterconnection_wControlledResistor.eps}
\includegraphics[trim={0.4cm, 0cm, 0.3cm, 0.2cm}, clip]{activeInterconnection_wControlledResistor2.eps}
\caption{Implementation of dissipative ``T'' and ``$\Pi$'' interconnections via controlled resistors. Both interconnection networks are
dissipative for systems with opposite supply signature $\mathcal{I}_{a} = -\mathcal{I}_{b}$ in the active range of the controlled resistors.}
\label{fig:connections:T:Pi:implementation}
\end{figure}
\section{An example}
\begin{figure*}[htpb]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={0.4cm, 0cm, 0.3cm, 0.2cm}, clip]{nagumo_passive3.eps}
\caption{Negative resistance oscillator connected to a passive load through a ``$\Pi$'' dissipative interconnection.}
\label{fig:fn}
\end{figure*}
We conclude this paper with an analysis of the circuit shown in Figure \ref{fig:fn}. The circuits $\Sigma_{a_{1}}$ and $\Sigma_{a_{2}}$ are the
negative resistance switches analyzed in Section \ref{section:circuits:lossless:lure}.
From \eqref{eq:cc_sw:ineq}-\eqref{eq:vc_sw:ineq} it becomes clear that their interconnection (denoted as $\Sigma_{a}$) is
neutral. In addition, Theorem \ref{thm:interconnection} reveals that the resulting circuit is signed-passive with a negative storage
(of dominance degree 2) and a passivity supply with negative signature $-1$, for all
$\lambda >\max\{ \frac{G^{d}}{C_0}, \frac{R^{d}}{L_{0}} \}$, where $G^{d}$ and $R^{d}$ are the positive slopes of the voltage-current characteristics
of $R_{cc}^{a}$ and $R_{vc}^{a}$ respectively.
The circuit $\Sigma_{b}$ is a classical linear $RC$ passive load. It has a positive definite storage and is passive, that is signed-passive with
positive signature supply $+1$, for $\lambda < \min_{k \in \{1, 2, 3 \} } \left\{ \frac{1}{R_{k} C_{k}} \right\}$.
The two circuits are interconnected through the ``$\Pi$'' bridge discussed in the previous section. This element makes the interconnection
of $\Sigma_{a}$ and $\Sigma_{b}$ dissipative. As a consequence, the interconnected circuit is signed-passive. Its storage is the difference
of two positive definite storages. It has a dominance degree 2. The supply of the interconnected system is a passivity supply with
positive signature $+1$. The terminated circuit is 2 dominant for any rate $\lambda$ satisfying
$$\max \left\{ \frac{G^{d}}{C_0}, \frac{R^{d}}{L_{0}} \right \} < \lambda < \min_{k \in \{1, 2, 3 \} } \left\{ \frac{1}{R_{k} C_{k}} \right\}.$$
The simulation in Figure \ref{fig:fn:trajectories:dissipative} is for the set of parameters $L_{0} = 50 mH$,
$C_{0} = 10 \mu F$, $C_{1} = C_{2} = C_{3} = 0.1 \mu F$, $R_{1} = R_{2} = R_{3} = R_{12} = R_{23} = 1 \Omega$,
$R_{a} = 20 \Omega$, and $R_{b} = 10 \Omega$.
The active resistors $R_{vc}^{a}$, $R_{cc}^{a}$ and $R_{vc}^{c}$ have voltage-current characteristics given by
\begin{align*}
g_{1}(x_{1}) &=
\begin{cases}
0.1 x_{1} & x_{1} < 2 V
\\
-0.1 x_{1} + 0.4 & 2 V \leq x_{1} \leq 3 V
\\
0.1 x_{1} - 0.2 & 3V < x_{1}
\end{cases}
\\
r_{2}(x_{2}) &=
\begin{cases}
10 x_{2} + 5 & x_{2} < -0.2 A
\\
-10 x_{2} + 1 & -0.2A \leq x_{2} \leq -0.1 A
\\
10 x_{2} + 3 & -0.1A < x_{2}
\end{cases}
\\
g_{2}(v) & =
\begin{cases}
0.1375 v + 0.9625 & v < -5 V
\\
-0.055 v & -5 V \leq v \leq 5 V
\\
0.1375 v - 0.9625 & 5 V \leq v
\end{cases}
\end{align*}
Note that the active resistor $R_{vc}^{c}$ has an active region with negative slope of $-0.055$ and satisfies
$\frac{1}{R_{a}} \leq 0.055 \leq \frac{1}{R_{b}}$, thus providing a dissipative coupling locally.
Also, with these set of parameters the circuit has a unique unstable equilibrium. The simulated behavior is bounded
and entirely in the active range of the controlled resistors.
By 2-dominance of the circuit, the trajectory must converge to a limit cycle.
\begin{figure}[htpb]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[
xtick = {0.0, 0.1, 0.2},
xticklabels = {0.0, 0.1, 0.2},
ytick = {-30, -15, 0, 10},
yticklabels = {-30, -15, 0, 10},
x grid style={white!80.0!black},
xlabel={$t [s]$},
xmajorgrids,
xmin=-0.01, xmax=0.21,
y grid style={white!80.0!black},
ylabel={$x_{3}^{b} [mV]$},
ymajorgrids,
ymin=-30, ymax=10,
height=3.5cm, width=0.45\textwidth,
]
\addplot [thick, black, forget plot] table [x=t, y=Y2, col sep=comma]{nagumo-passive2.csv};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Time trajectory of the voltage across the capacitor $C_{3}$ of the circuit in Figure \ref{fig:fn}.}
\label{fig:fn:trajectories:dissipative}
\end{figure}
\linespread{0.98}
|
\section{\label{Introduction}Introduction}
In the past two decades, maximally localized Wannier functions (MLWFs) became a well established tool in solid state calculations. Due to their localized nature they are superior to the equivalent Bloch representation in terms of chemical interpretation. They provide inexpensive access to both single-particle eigenvalues and eigenfunctions at any point in reciprocal space in terms of the so called Wannier interpolation scheme. Typically, the starting point for the calculation of MLWFs for a quantum mechanical system is a set of single-particle Kohn--Sham (KS) wave functions obtained from density-functional theory (DFT). The nowadays most commonly used approach to MLWFs in solids is based on works by \citet{Marzari1997} (MV) and \citet{Souza2001}. Given a set of single-particle orbitals, the MV algorithm approaches a set of MLWFs by an iterative minimization of the target functional $\Omega$, measuring the spread of the Wannier functions (WFs). In general, this optimization problem is non-linear and high-dimensional. Consequently, the result may strongly depend on the starting point for the minimization, and the algorithm can be easily trapped in false local minima unless a sufficiently good starting point is provided. The latter is usually done by specifying a set of projection functions that approximate the sought WFs. In many cases, however, it is not easy to find a reasonable guess for the projection functions. This is particularly difficult when it comes to the construction of WFs from wide energy ranges of entangled bands, in systems with complex geometries or when the states are strongly hybridized. Although a recent study has proposed methods that are not based on projection \cite{Damle2015}, the MV algorithm is still the standard approach in the construction of MLWFs. A great improvement of the projection method has been made by \citet{Mustafa2015} who have introduced an algorithm that automatically constructs a set of optimized projection functions (OPFs) from a large pool of localized trial orbitals. For the valence bands of many materials such as SiO$_2$ and Cr$_2$O$_3$, the spread $\Omega$ of the initial guess obtained from the OPF method was shown to be just a few percent larger than the aimed global minimum \cite{Mustafa2015}.
Among the various ways of solving the KS equations of DFT, the full-potential linearized augmented planewave (LAPW) method, is considered to be the most accurate one. Highest numerical precision can be reached by selectively adding so-called local orbitals (LOs) to the LAPW basis set. The LOs are strongly localized atomic like functions. Hence, it is natural to employ the LOs in the construction of WFs within the LAPW+LO method. In this work, we combine the well established MV approach \cite{Marzari1997,Souza2001} with the more recent OPF technique \cite{Mustafa2015}. We employ the latter to automatically construct suitable initial guesses to MLWFs from a set of LOs. We demonstrate that this approach is capable to robustly construct MLWFs in a vast variety of materials without the need of manually providing a starting point. We apply the obtained WFs to study chemical bonding in a series of elemental and binary semiconductors. Further, electronic properties are calculated for more complex bulk and two-dimensional semiconductors as well as a hybrid organic-inorganic interface by the use of WFs based on (generalized) KS states and quasi-particle energies, respectively. We demonstrate that Wannier interpolation is capable to easily provide electronic energies with an accuracy in the meV~range over the entire Brillouin zone.
\section{\label{Methodology}Methodology}
\subsection{Theory of Wannier functions}
Here, we briefly discuss the basic steps in the construction of MLWFs and their application to interpolation. For an extensive overview over the MV approach, we refer to Ref.~\onlinecite{Marzari2012}.
Let $\psi_{n,\ve{k}}(\ve{r})$ be a set of single-particle Bloch wave functions describing a quantum-mechanical system as they may be obtained from a DFT calculation or any other method providing single (quasi-)particle eigenstates. In solids, the description of a quantum state in terms of Bloch functions is the natural choice, and the quantum numbers $n$ and $\ve{k}$ label an energy band and a wave vector in the first Brillouin zone (BZ), respectively. The Bloch formalism, however, is not the only way to describe quantum states in solids, and WFs provide an alternative representation. The transformation between a Bloch function $\phi_{n,\ve{k}}$ and a WF $w_{n,\ve{R}}$ reads \cite{Wannier1937}
\begin{equation}\label{eq-WFdef}
w_{n,\ve{R}}(\ve{r}) = \frac{1}{N_{\ve{k}}} \sum\limits_{\ve{k}} \e^{-\,\mathrm{i}\ve{k}\cdot\ve{R}}\, \phi_{n,\ve{k}}(\ve{r})\;,
\end{equation}
where $\ve{R}$ is a real-space lattice vector labeling a unit cell within a supercell conjugate to the $\ve{k}$-point grid. Eq.~\eqref{eq-WFdef} holds for Bloch functions describing an isolated energy band. In solids, typically only deep-lying \mbox{(semi-)core} states form isolated bands. Therefore, it is desirable to generalize this transformation to a multitude of bands. To this end, we first consider an isolated group of energy bands, i.e. a group of $J$ bands that remains separated from all other bands by a finite energy gap throughout the BZ. The states $\psi_{n,\ve{k}}$ within this group span a subspace of the full space of solutions to the single-particle problem. Thus, they can be mixed according to some unitary transformation $U^{\ve{k}}$. The mixed states
\begin{equation}\label{eq-BlochMix}
\phi_{n,\ve{k}}(\ve{r}) = \sum\limits_{m=1}^J U^{\ve{k}}_{mn} \psi_{m,\ve{k}}(\ve{r})
\end{equation}
form an equally valid basis of the considered subspace and so do the WFs constructed according to Eq.~\eqref{eq-WFdef}. The unitary $J\times J$ matrix $U^{\ve{k}}$ reflects a generalization of the phase freedom of a single state and can be chosen freely. This freedom allows for the construction of WFs that are maximally localized according to some localization criterion. From another perspective, the matrices $U^\ve{k}$ define a gauge and are chosen such that the mixed states $\phi_{n,\ve{k}}$ are as smooth in $\ve{k}$ as possible, and consequently the Fourier transform in Eq.~\eqref{eq-WFdef} results in spatially well localized WFs. Although the valence bands in insulating or semi-conducting materials usually form such isolated groups, the conduction bands or the bands in metals often do not. In the case of such \textit{entangled} bands, first, at each $\ve{k}$-point a $J$-dimensional subspace
\begin{equation}\label{eq-DisStates}
\tilde{\psi}_{m,\ve{k}}(\ve{r}) = \sum\limits_{\mu=1}^{\mathcal{J}_{\ve{k}}} \mathcal{U}^{\ve{k}}_{\mu m}\psi_{\mu,\ve{k}}(\ve{r})
\end{equation}
has to be disentangled from the $\mathcal{J}_{\ve{k}}\geq J$ bands that fall inside a given (outer) energy window. This subspace is described by a rectangular $\mathcal{J}_{\ve{k}}\times J$ matrix $\mathcal{U}^{\ve{k}}$ which is semi-unitary (i.e. $\mathcal{U}^{\ve{k}\dagger} \mathcal{U}^{\ve{k}} = \openone_J$). Here, $J$ is the number of WFs one aims to construct from the bands inside an energy window of interest, and the $\psi_{\mu,\ve{k}}$ are single-particle wave functions whose eigenvalues fall inside that window. Furthermore, a second (inner) energy window can be introduced within which the states $\tilde{\psi}_{m,\ve{k}}$ in the disentangled subspace remain unchanged (i.e. $\mathcal{U}^{\ve{k}}_{\mu m} = \delta_{\mu m}$ for all states $\mu, m$ inside the inner window). Once the $J$-dimensional subspace is found, the construction of MLWFs is equivalent to the case of isolated bands with $\psi_{m,\ve{k}}$ replaced by $\tilde{\psi}_{m,\ve{k}}$ in Eq.~\eqref{eq-BlochMix}.
The MLWFs obtained from the above procedure form an excellent tight-binding basis which makes them suitable for an effective reciprocal-space interpolation in terms of a Slater--Koster interpolation \cite{Slater1954}. This Wannier interpolation scheme is based on the inversion of Eq.~\eqref{eq-WFdef} at an arbitrary point $\ve{q}$ in reciprocal space for which an interpolation is needed:
\begin{equation}\label{eq-AuxFromWan}
\phi_{m,\ve{q}}(\ve{r}) = \sum\limits_{\ve{R}} \e^{\,\mathrm{i}\ve{q}\cdot\ve{R}}\, w_{m,\ve{0}}(\ve{r-R})\;.
\end{equation}
Eq.~\eqref{eq-AuxFromWan} describes the classical tight-binding approach and diagonalising the Hamiltonian matrix
\begin{equation}\label{eq-HamInt}
\mathcal{H}^{\ve{q}}_{mn} = \braket{\phi_{m,\ve{q}}|\ve{\hat{H}}|\phi_{n,\ve{q}}}
\end{equation}
gives rise to the single-particle eigenvalues $\epsilon^{\ve{q}}_n$ and eigenfunctions $\psi_{n,\ve{q}}$ at $\ve{q}$ expressed in terms of the auxiliary basis $\phi_{m,\ve{q}}$. The reason for the efficiency of this approach is that $\mathcal{H}^{\ve{q}}$ is easy to construct and typically much smaller than the Hamiltonian expanded in the original first-principles basis in which the states $\psi_{n,\ve{k}}$ are expressed. $\mathcal{H}^{\ve{q}}$ has the dimension $J$ (the number of bands under consideration) and therefore is easily diagonalized using standard linear-algebra routines.
\subsection{The (L)APW+LO method}
The approach described in detail below has been implemented into the full-potential all-electron code {\usefont{T1}{lmtt}{b}{n}exciting}\;\cite{exciting} which is a realization of the (L)APW+LO method. This package implements DFT and many-body perturbation theory (MBPT). The latter is used to compute quasi-particle energies within the $G_0W_0$ approximation.
The APW method employs a partitioning of the unit cell into so called muffin-tin spheres (non-overlapping spheres centered at the nuclei) and an interstitial region (space between the muffin-tin spheres). The basis functions are planewaves in the interstitial region which are smoothly augmented into the muffin-tin spheres by atomic-like functions. The latter are expanded in terms of spherical harmonics around the nuclei. The corresponding radial functions $u_l(r;E_l)$ are solutions of the radial Schr\"odinger equation and parametrically depend on the energy $E_l$. In principle, the parameters $E_l$ have to be set to the band energies. In practice, however, these are not known a priori, and the basis itself would depend on the solution of the KS equations resulting in a non-linear eigenvalue equation. In order to linearize the eigenvalue problem, $E_l$ is set to a fixed value typically chosen to lie inside the respective band. In order to add more variational flexibility, the energy derivatives ${\dot{u}(r;E_l) = \partial u(r;E_l)/\partial E_l}$ can be added to the radial functions resulting in LAPWs.
This basis set can be further extended by the addition of so-called local orbitals (LOs). These functions are non-vanishing only inside one particular muffin-tin sphere at the atomic site $\ve{R}_{\alpha_\mathsf{L}}$, where they are given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq-LO}
\phi_\mathsf{L}(\ve{r}) = \left[\sum\limits_{o} a^\mathsf{L}_o\, u^{\alpha_\mathsf{L}}_{l_\mathsf{L},o}(|\ve{r}-\ve{R}_{\alpha_\mathsf{L}}|)\right]Y_{l_\mathsf{L} m_\mathsf{L}} (\widehat{\ve{r}-\ve{R}_{\alpha_\mathsf{L}}})\;.
\end{equation}
The coefficients $a^\mathsf{L}_o$ are chosen such that $\phi_\mathsf{L}$ is normalized and continuous at the muffin-tin boundary. The radial functions $u^{\alpha_\mathsf{L}}_{l_\mathsf{L},o}$ are solutions of the radial Schr\"odinger equation with a spherically symmetric potential inside the muffin-tin sphere, and the parameter $o$ denotes the linearization order (order of the derivative w.r.t. the energy parameter $E_l$). The addition of LOs results in a highly flexible and tunable basis set and allows for a smaller planewave cut-off.
Whenever high numerical precision is demanded, the full-potential (L)APW+LO method is considered the gold standard approach to first-principles calculations based on DFT and allows for the most precise numerical treatment of both ground state \cite{Gulans2018} and excited state properties \cite{Nabok2016}.
\subsection{Wannier functions from local orbitals}
The MV approach aims to find a set of unitary matrices $U^{\ve{k}}$ that minimizes the WF spread
\begin{equation}\label{eq-Omega}
\Omega = \sum_n [\braket{w_{n,\ve{0}}|r^2|w_{n,\ve{0}}} - \braket{w_{n,\ve{0}}|\ve{r}|w_{n,\ve{0}}}^2]\;.
\end{equation}
In order to ensure a convergence of the iterative minimization of $\Omega$ and to minimize the risk of becoming trapped in false local minima a good starting point is indispensable. In our implementation, we avoid to manually provide suitable projection functions by the use of the OPF method \cite{Mustafa2015}. This method finds a guess to the MLWFs that is expanded as a linear combination of localized trial orbitals. Then, this guess is taken as the starting point for the MV approach. We construct OPFs from a pool of LOs from Eq.~\eqref{eq-LO} as they are part of the (L)APW+LO basis. The choice of LOs as trial functions is appealing for several reasons: i) They are already well localized by definition (non-zero only inside one muffin-tin sphere). ii) They fit any specific problem at hand since they depend on the actual potential in the system. iii) All integrals needed are already available within the (L)APW+LO method. In practice, we proceed as follows. For each atom, we successively add local orbitals with different angular character $Y_{l_\mathsf{L} m_\mathsf{L}}$ and a different number of nodes in the radial function to the pool of trial orbitals according to the aufbau principle. Then, if linear dependencies occur, we remove linearly dependent functions from the pool. Since the cost of the construction of OPFs strongly depends on the size of the pool, the amount of local orbitals can be further reduced to a specified number $N_\mathsf{L}$ by selecting the $N_\mathsf{L}$ local orbitals with the largest overlap with the states $\psi_{n,\ve{k}}$ in the considered subgroup (isolated bands) or energy window (entangled bands).
\section{Results}
\subsection{Construction and chemical analysis}
\label{Construction}
The localized nature of WFs and their formal exactness make the Wannier representation superior to the Bloch representation in terms of interpretation and chemical analysis. As an example for the chemical interpretation of MLWFs, we consider various group IV and III--V compounds crystallizing in the diamond or zinc-blende structure. All 16 considered materials (listed in Table~\ref{tab:ionicity}) are semiconductors and exhibit similar electronic properties. In particular, they form an isolated group of four distinct valence bands with hybridized $sp^3$-character for which we construct a set of four MLWFs. They transform into one another under symmetry operations, and each of them corresponds to one of the four tetrahedral bonds that each atom in these systems forms. The results are depicted in Fig.~\ref{ionicityAll}.
\begin{table}[htb]
\caption{\label{tab:ionicity}%
WF spreads $\Omega$ and shifts $\sigma$ of the WF centers calculated for 16 group IV and III-V compounds in the diamond (D) and zinc-blende (ZB) structure. The given lattice constants $a$ are adopted from Ref.~\onlinecite{Abu-Farsakh2007}.}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begingroup
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{5pt}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.1}
\begin{tabular}{lcrrrrr}
&
&
$a$ (\AA) &
\multicolumn{2}{c}{$\Omega$ (\AA$^2$)}&
\multicolumn{2}{c}{$\sigma$}\\
& & &
\textrm{Present} &
\textrm{Ref.~\onlinecite{Abu-Farsakh2007}} &
\textrm{Present} &
\textrm{ Ref.~\onlinecite{Abu-Farsakh2007}}\\
\hline
Si & D & 5.431 & 8.200 & 8.232 & 0.000 & 0.000 \\
Ge & D & 5.658 & 10.078 & 10.116 & 0.000 & 0.000 \\
Sn & D & 6.490 & 13.752 & 13.801 & 0.000 & 0.000 \\
BP & ZB & 4.540 & 5.532 & 5.479 & 0.034 & 0.032 \\
BAs & ZB & 4.777 & 6.207 & 6.211 & 0.048 & 0.052 \\
GaSb& ZB & 6.100 & 11.390 & 11.527 & 0.146 & 0.154 \\
InSb& ZB & 6.480 & 12.484 & 12.251 & 0.202 & 0.220 \\
GaP & ZB & 5.450 & 8.071 & 7.637 & 0.220 & 0.240 \\
GaAs& ZB & 5.650 & 9.266 & 8.871 & 0.222 & 0.236 \\
AlSb& ZB & 6.140 & 10.275 & 10.135 & 0.234 & 0.228 \\
InP & ZB & 5.870 & 9.370 & 8.492 & 0.274 & 0.308 \\
InAs& ZB & 6.060 & 10.730 & 10.138 & 0.274 & 0.302 \\
SiC & ZB & 4.360 & 4.741 & 4.651 & 0.302 & 0.308 \\
AlAs& ZB & 5.660 & 8.197 & 8.090 & 0.310 & 0.310 \\
AlP & ZB & 5.460 & 7.250 & 7.146 & 0.312 & 0.314 \\
BN & ZB & 3.620 & 2.857 & 2.820 & 0.314 & 0.316 \\
\end{tabular}
\endgroup
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table}
\onecolumngrid
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{ionicity_all.pdf}
\caption{\label{ionicityAll}MLWFs corresponding to the valence bands in 16 group IV and III--IV compounds in the diamond and zincblende structure. The white sphere on the central bond axis illustrates the WF center. All functions are real valued, and surfaces for the same positive (negative) iso-value are shown in red (green).}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\twocolumngrid
Indeed, the corresponding WFs have the character of a bonding $\sigma$-orbital, i.e. they are formed by a linear combination of the two $sp^3$-hybridized orbitals from both bonding atoms \cite{Marzari1997}. From visual inspection of these orbitals qualitative information about the bond character can be gained. For purely covalently bound systems (e.g. Ge) the WFs are symmetric and centered right in the middle of the bond while for more ionic bonds (e.g. c-BN) they are asymmetric and pushed towards the more electronegative atom (nitrogen in this example). Built upon this observation, \citet{Abu-Farsakh2007} proposed a first-principles parameter-free ionicity scale based on the position of the WF centers ${\braket{\ve{r}}_n = \braket{w_{n,\ve{0}}|\ve{r}|w_{n,\ve{0}}}}$. For 32 compounds of the type A$^N$B$^{8-N}$ ($N=1,\dots,4$), they defined the bond ionicity based on the parameter $\sigma$, describing the shift of the WF center away from the bond center ($\sigma=0$) towards the anion ($\sigma=1$). We use their findings to check our automated construction of MLWFs against an existing implementation for the 16 compounds studied here. As far as possible, the numerical parameters (lattice constants, $\ve{k}$-grids for obtaining the density and WFs, xc-type) are adopted from Ref~\onlinecite{Abu-Farsakh2007}. The results are shown in Fig.~\ref{ionicity}.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{ionicity3.pdf}
\caption{\label{ionicity}{Spread $\Omega$ of the WFs (left) and shift $\sigma$ of their centers (right) for 16 group IV and III-V compounds. The results obtained within the present work are compared against Ref.~\onlinecite{Abu-Farsakh2007}. For both quantities, the relative deviation $\Delta = (A - A_{\rm ref})/A_{\rm ref}$ ($A=\Omega,\,\sigma$) is within 10\% (top). One purely covalent system (Ge) and the most ionic compound (c-BN) are highlighted by a red square and a yellow diamond, respectively.}}
\end{figure}
In all examples, our implementation finds the global minimum of the spread $\Omega$. It is worth noting that for this class of materials with bond-centered WFs the choice of LOs (which are strictly atom-centered and even vanish along the bond direction) as projection functions seems counterintuitive. Indeed, we find that the use of mere $s$- and $p$-like LOs as projection functions can result in a local minimum of the spread $\Omega$ corresponding to atom-centered WFs. However, this issue is fully resolved by employing suitable linear combinations of LOs obtained by the use of the OPF method.
In Table~\ref{tab:ionicity} we present both the spread $\Omega$ and the shift $\sigma$ for all 16 materials. With a relative deviation $\Delta$ of at most 10\%, both quantities are in good agreement with Ref.~\onlinecite{Abu-Farsakh2007} (top of Fig~\ref{ionicity}). We attribute these discrepancies to different approximations in the underlying first-principles calculation resulting in different densities and wave functions. While we employ a full-potential all-electron approach within the (L)APW+LO basis, in Ref.~\onlinecite{Abu-Farsakh2007} pseudopotentials and planewaves were used.
\subsection{Interpolation of energy eigenvalues}
\label{EnergyInterpolation}
The most obvious application of WFs is the interpolation of single-particle eigenenergies. For an arbitrary point $\ve{q}$ in reciprocal space, the corresponding energies $\epsilon_n^\ve{q}$ are given as the eigenvalues of the Hamiltonian matrix from Eq.~\eqref{eq-HamInt}. In practice, $\ve{q}$ is usually a point along a path connecting high-symmetry points in the BZ, when it comes to the calculation of band-structures, or a point on a grid which is denser than the original grid on which the first-principles calculation was carried out. Such dense grids are often used to approximate integrations over the BZ by a discrete sum over a finite set of points. One key quantity of interest that involves such a BZ-integration is the density of states (DOS). We use our implementation to investigate the joint DOS (JDOS) in aluminum. The JDOS is the phase space contribution to optical excitations and can be calculated as
\begin{equation}\label{eq-JDOS}
{\rm JDOS}(\omega) = \int\limits_{\rm BZ} \sum\limits_{o,u} \delta[ \epsilon_u(\ve{k}) - \epsilon_o(\ve{k}) - \omega]\,\,\mathrm{d}\ve{k}\;,
\end{equation}
where $o$ and $u$ denote the occupied and unoccupied states for a given $\ve{k}$, respectively, and $\omega$ is the excitation energy. Note that the JDOS divided by $\omega^2$ is proportional to the independent-particle optical spectrum with constant transition matrix-elements. The spectrum of metals such as Al can be described well within the independent-particle picture since excitonic effects play a minor role due to the effective screening. Earlier calculations of optical spectra in Al showed that very dense integration grids containing several thousands irreducible $\ve{k}$-points are needed to obtain convergence of the spectra \cite{Lee1994,Ambrosch-Draxl2006}. In particular, also a strong dependence of the peak positions was observed \cite{Ambrosch-Draxl2006}. To investigate the influence of the BZ-grid on the JDOS in Al, we perform a DFT calculation within the generalized gradient approximation (GGA) using the PBE xc-functional \cite{Perdew1996} on a $12\times 12\times 12$ $\ve{k}$ mesh. From an outer (inner) energy window of -15\,eV to 80\,eV (-15\,eV to 40\,eV) 25 MLWFs are constructed using the disentanglement procedure. Hereby, the zero-energy point corresponds to the Fermi level. We interpolate the eigenvalues on different uniform integration grids by the use of MLWFs, and the improved tetrahedron method \cite{Kawamura2014} is employed to evaluate the integral in Eq.~\eqref{eq-JDOS}. The structural parameters used in this and all other calculations can be found in Table~\ref{tab:lattice}. The resulting JDOS is shown in Fig.~\ref{JDOS_Al}. We observe both a red shift and a significant sharpening of the two major peaks in the investigated energy region. Both peaks eventually converge at around 0.6\,eV and 1.6\,eV for $120^3$ and $80^3$ $\ve{k}$-points, respectively. We notice that it is more difficult to achieve convergence in the low-energy region. For energies below 0.4\,eV grids with more than $200^3$ uniformly spaced points are needed (solid red line). The position of the two peaks around 0.6\,eV and 1.6\,eV in the converged curve are in excellent agreement with earlier calculations of the JDOS \cite{Lee1994,Szmulowicz1981} as well as calculations \cite{Lee1994,Szmulowicz1981,Ambrosch-Draxl2006} and measurements \cite{Szmulowicz1981} of optical spectra. The red shift and sharpening with increasing grid densities was also found in calculations of optical spectra \cite{Ambrosch-Draxl2006}, where obviously the ratio of the peak heights differs from the optical spectra since transition probabilities are not taken into account in the JDOS.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{JDOS_Al.pdf}
\caption{\label{JDOS_Al}{Joint density of states for aluminum obtained from Wannier interpolation on different BZ-integration grids ranging from $20\times 20\times 20$ to $230\times 230\times 230$.}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Accuracy of energy interpolations}
\label{InterpolationAccuracy}
The claim that the WFs constructed according to Eq.~\eqref{eq-WFdef} form an equivalent description of the subspace spanned by the Bloch states $\psi_{n,\ve{k}}$ under consideration only holds rigorously for isolated groups and in the limit of an exact BZ integral. In practice, however, the BZ is sampled by a finite set of points. As a result, the computed WFs become periodic with respect to a supercell conjugate to the BZ grid. This can lead to a non-vanishing overlap between a WF and its periodic images in neighboring supercells and ruins the exactness of the tight-binding basis from Eq.~\eqref{eq-AuxFromWan} which is given in the limit of an exact BZ integral. In turn, the interpolated eigenvalues at some point $\ve{q}$ that does not belong to the original first-principles grid deviates from the exact solution. Note that \textit{exact} is meant within the limitations of the first-principles calculations, i.e. the interpolated energy deviates from the result one would obtain by directly performing the calculations at the point $\ve{q}$. MLWFs associated with isolated bands are reported to be exponentially localized \cite{He2001}. This claim was proved for insulators with time-reversal symmetry \cite{Brouder2007}. As a consequence, we expect the overlap with supercell images and thus the error in the interpolation to decay exponentially with increasing grid size. To investigate this behavior for the materials studied in this work, we proceed as follows. We consider a set of different grids $\lbrace\ve{k}\rbrace_1, \dots, \lbrace\ve{k}\rbrace_n$ (ordered with increasing grid density) for which we want to predict the accuracy of interpolated eigenenergies. First, we compute the self-consistent KS-potential and electron density on the densest grid under consideration $\lbrace\ve{k}\rbrace_n$. This self-consistent density serves as a starting point for further calculations. We use it to obtain the eigenvalues $\hat{\epsilon}_n^\ve{q}$ on a much denser interpolation grid $\lbrace\ve{q}\rbrace$ by a non self-consistent diagonalization of the KS-Hamiltonian. The dense interpolation grid is chosen to be shifted to ensure a sampling on inequivalent points. This set of energies $\hat{\epsilon}_n^\ve{q}$ forms the reference to which we compare the interpolated energies. Now, for each of the grids $\lbrace\ve{k}\rbrace_1, \dots, \lbrace\ve{k}\rbrace_{n-1}$ both wave functions and eigenenergies are calculated non self-consistently starting from the density obtained on the grid $\lbrace\ve{k}\rbrace_n$. Lastly, for all grids $\lbrace\ve{k}\rbrace_1, \dots, \lbrace\ve{k}\rbrace_n$ MLWFs are constructed and used to interpolate the eigenvalues onto the dense shifted interpolation grid $\lbrace\ve{q}\rbrace$. The interpolated energies are denoted by $\epsilon_n^\ve{q}$. For each grid, we compute the interpolation error as the root mean square deviation of the interpolated energies from the calculated reference energies:
\begin{equation}
\delta\epsilon_{\rm RMS} = \sqrt{\frac{1}{J N_\ve{q}}\sum\limits_{n,\ve{q}} (\epsilon_n^\ve{q} - \hat{\epsilon}_n^\ve{q})^2}\;.
\end{equation}
In order to compare BZ samplings for systems with different unit cell size and dimensionality, we introduce the linear $\ve{k}$-point density which is given by $(N_\ve{k}/V_{{\rm BZ},d})^{1/d}$, where $N_\ve{k}$ is the total number of non-reduced $\ve{k}$-points, $d$ is the dimensionality of the system, and $V_{{\rm BZ},d}$ is the volume of the corresponding $d$-dimensional BZ.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{kconv_raw.pdf}
\caption{\label{kconv}{Wannier interpolation error as a function of the $\ve{k}$-grid density. The filled (empty) circles mark the error of interpolated eigenvalues obtained from MLWFs representing isolated (entangled) bands in various systems for both valence (v) and conduction (c) bands. The lines serve as guides to the eye.}}
\end{figure}
We carry out DFT calculations for various materials using the PBE xc-functional and follow the procedure described above. The results are presented in Fig.~\ref{kconv}. The graphs indicate that an exponential decay of the interpolation error is an overall suitable assumption for most of the systems studied within this work. It is even found for the interpolation of entangled bands (empty circles, dashed lines) although there is no reason to assume an exponential localization of WFs obtained from the disentanglement procedure. The exponential decay is observed particularly well in the case of $\beta$-Ga$_2$O$_2$ for both the valence and the conduction bands. For TiO$_2$, however, the behavior differs considerably from a pure exponential decay. Similar investigations have been performed before for a set of isolated bands in lead and for entangled bands in lithium \cite{Yates2007}. There, the same behavior of a decreasing rate of decay for increasing grid densities (as it is clearly visible for TiO$_2$ in our calculations) was observed. Further, it was shown for 1D systems that the localization of energy matrix-elements follows a power law times an exponential \cite{He2001}. Such a model also fits well to our results obtained for 2- and 3-dimensional systems. For all systems studied, an interpolation accuracy in the meV~regime can be reached with manageable grid densities. Going to higher accuracies, however, will require higher grid densities than presented in Fig.~\ref{kconv} which may be feasible for KS-DFT eigenvalues but become rather cumbersome for the interpolation of generalized KS-eigenvalues obtained from hybrid xc-functionals or quasi-particle energies obtained from the $GW$ approach.
\subsection{Effective masses and band extrema}
\label{EffectiveMasses}
The accurate and inexpensive energy interpolation using WFs allows for a systematic search for band extrema. In semiconductors, the most interesting extremal points of the energy dispersion $\epsilon_n(\ve{k})$ typically are the highest occupied state (valence band maximum, VBM) and the lowest unoccupied state (conduction band minimum, CBm) determining the band gap and its type (direct or indirect). Finding their position is challenging when they are not located at a high-symmetry point in the BZ. In this case, they are usually not contained in the uniform BZ sampling employed in the DFT calculation. We use our implementation to determine the exact position of the VBM and CBm in $\beta$-Ga$_2$O$_3$ \cite{Furthmuller2016}, focusing on the effect of different xc-treatments and levels of theory. To this extent, the KS-equations are solved within the local-density approximation (LDA) parametrized by \citet{LDA_PW}, GGA using PBEsol \cite{Perdew2008}, and the non-local hybrid functional PBE0 with 25\% of Hartree--Fock exchange \cite{Ernzerhof1999}. Furthermore, quasi-particle self-energy corrections to the PBEsol eigenvalues are computed using the $G_0W_0$-approximation. The (generalized) KS calculations are carried out using $8\times 8\times 4$ $\ve{k}$-points in the full BZ. In the $G_0W_0$ calculation, a $4\times4\times4$ $\ve{k}$-mesh and all empty states are used following the prescription in Ref.~\onlinecite{Nabok2016}. The set of 18~valence bands is transformed into MLWFs using the algorithm for isolated groups. The spread $\Omega$ of the initial guess obtained from local orbitals using the OPF method is only 1\% larger than the global minimum for all xc-treatments. The WFs describing the conduction bands are obtained by the disentanglement procedure using an outer (inner) energy window of 30\,eV (20\,eV) above the Fermi level which was set to the middle of the band-gap.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Ga2O3_VBM.pdf}
\caption{\label{Ga2O3_VBM}{a) Brillouin zone of $\beta$-Ga$_2$O$_3$. The line on which the valence band maximum (VBM) is found is highlighted in yellow. b) Highest valence band in $\beta$-Ga$_2$O$_3$ along the high-symmetry lines $\Gamma$--L and L--I for different theoretical approaches. The Fermi level is set to the VBM. Inset: Region around the VBM. The parameter $\beta$ describes its position between the high-symmetry points L ($\beta = 0$) and I ($\beta = 1$).}}
\end{figure}
The CBm in $\beta$-Ga$_2$O$_3$ is known to be located at the zone-center $\Gamma$. This is confirmed by our calculations. The position of the VBM, however, is not at one of the high-symmetry points in the BZ. It was reported to be on the line connecting the high-symmetry points L and I \cite{Peelaers2015} (see Fig.~{\ref{Ga2O3_VBM}a}) which is in accordance with our findings. In Fig.~{\ref{Ga2O3_VBM}b}, we show the highest valence band and the position of the VBM for the different theoretical approaches. We find a weak dependence of the exact position of the VBM on the used xc-treatment. Although the position is nearly the same for LDA and PBEsol, it is slightly closer to L for the hybrid functional and the $G_0W_0$ calculation. The exact values are reported in Table~\ref{tab:meff_ana} by the parameter $\beta$ varying from 0 to 1 between the points L and I.
Further in Table~\ref{tab:meff_ana}, we present the resulting band gaps. A comparison of the $\Gamma$--$\Gamma$ gap with the experimental gap of about 4.9\,eV \cite{Orita2000,Janowitz2011} reveals that the non-local hybrid functional yields the best agreement with a direct gap of 5.0\,eV. As expected, the (semi-)local functionals LDA and PBEsol severely under estimate the gap. Also the quasi-particle gap of 4.5\,eV is underestimated. However, none of the theoretical values consider band renormalization effects due to electron-phonon interaction which makes a direct comparison with experimental results difficult. In all cases, the indirect gap is about 30\,meV smaller than the $\Gamma$--$\Gamma$ gap.
\begin{table}[hbt]
\caption{\label{tab:meff_ana}%
Position of the band extrema, effective masses (in units of $m_0$), and fundamental band gaps (in eV) in $\beta$-Ga$_2$O$_3$ for different xc-treatments determined analytically using Wannier interpolation. The parameter $\beta$ describes the position of the VBM along the line between the high-symmetry points L ($\beta = 0$) and I ($\beta = 1$).}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begingroup
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{0pt}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.1}
\begin{tabular}{ldddd}
&
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\textrm{LDA}}&
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\textrm{PBE}}&
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\textrm{PBE0}}&
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$G_0W_0$@PBE}\\
\hline
VBM&&&\\
$\beta$ & 0.2132 & 0.2136 & 0.2081 & 0.1953\\
$m^*_{xx}$& 2.94 & 2.95 & 2.97 & 3.20 \\
$m^*_{yy}$& 3.15 & 3.14 & 2.90 & 3.41 \\
$m^*_{zz}$& 4.30 & 4.39 & 4.73 & 3.02 \\
$m^*_{xz}$& 0.232 & 0.258 & 0.572 & 0.089 \\
\hline
CBm&&&\\
$m^*_{xx}$& 0.238 & 0.234 & 0.275 & 0.294 \\
$m^*_{yy}$& 0.263 & 0.263 & 0.280 & 0.333 \\
$m^*_{zz}$& 0.253 & 0.251 & 0.273 & 0.280 \\
\hline
$E_{\rm g}$ (eV)&&&\\
indirect & 2.271 & 2.290 & 5.009 & 4.490 \\
$\Gamma$--$\Gamma$ & 2.297 & 2.314 & 5.033 & 4.525 \\
\end{tabular}
\endgroup
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table}
The simple form of the single-particle wave functions expressed in the WF tight-binding basis (see Eq.~\ref{eq-AuxFromWan}) allows for an analytic expression of $\ve{k}$-space derivatives since the dependence on the wave vector only comes from the exponential factor while the WFs themselves are $\ve{k}$-independent. Thus, the use of finite differences or numerical fitting methods (which are usually used to calculate derivatives) can be avoided. This analytical approach allows for the direct calculation of the particle group-velocity
\begin{equation}\label{eq-vel}
\ve{v}_n(\ve{k}) = \nabla_{\ve{k}} \epsilon_n(\ve{k})
\end{equation}
and the effective-mass tensor
\begin{equation}\label{eq-mass}
\ve{m}^*_n(\ve{k}) = \left[ \nabla_{\ve{k}} \nabla_{\ve{k}}^{\rm T} \epsilon_n(\ve{k}) \right]^{-1}\;.
\end{equation}
Note that atomic units are used in Eqs.~\eqref{eq-vel} and \eqref{eq-mass}, and $\nabla_{\ve{k}}$ is a column vector. We follow the derivations by \citet{Yates2007} in order to evaluate the analytic expression of the first and second $\ve{k}$-derivative of the band dispersion in $\beta$-Ga$_2$O$_3$ to determine the effective masses at the CBm and VBM. The results are given in Table~\ref{tab:meff_ana}. We find $\ve{m}^*_{\rm CBm}$ to be almost diagonal and isotropic. The electron effective mass varies from 0.237 to 0.333 electron rest-masses depending on the direction and the xc-treatment. Again, there are no noticeable differences between LDA and PBEsol. For the hybrid functional PBE0 the CBm is more isotropic compared to LDA and PBEsol, and the electrons are slightly heavier with effective masses between 0.273\,$m_0$ and 0.280\,$m_0$. These values are in perfect agreement with the (almost isotropic) value of 0.281\,$m_0$ previously reported for the hybrid functional HSE06 \cite{Varley2010}. The results for LDA and PBEsol are in good agreement with values of around 0.23\,$m_0$ that were previously obtained for LDA \cite{Yamaguchi2004}. For the quasi-particles we find even higher effective masses between 0.280\,$m_0$ and 0.333\,$m_0$.
At the VBM, the effective-mass tensor takes the following form:
\begin{equation}
\ve{m}^*_{\rm VBM} = \begin{pmatrix}
m^*_{xx} & 0 & m^*_{xz} \\
0 & m^*_{yy} & 0 \\
m^*_{xz} & 0 & m^*_{zz}
\end{pmatrix}\;,
\end{equation}
where the $m^*_{xy}$ and $m^*_{yz}$ components do not vanish completely but are about three orders of magnitude smaller than the diagonal components and therefore neglected. According to our calculations, the VBM is more anisotropic. For LDA, PBEsol, and PBE0, we obtain similar hole effective masses in the $x$- and $y$-direction of around 3\,$m_0$ and values between 4.3\,$m_0$ (LDA) and 4.7\,$m_0$ (PBE0) in the $z$-direction. The quasi-particle calculation differs noticeably from the other three approaches and suggests heavier holes in the $x$- and $y$-direction and lighter holes in the $z$-direction. Overall, our results are comparable with those of Ref.~\onlinecite{Yamaguchi2004} for the $y$- and $z$-direction but differ noticeably in the $x$-direction for which Ref.~\onlinecite{Yamaguchi2004} reported a hole effective mass of $m^*_{xx}=6.14\,m_0$ which is about twice the value we find. However, both the exact position of the VBM and the band curvature are difficult to determine accurately due to the very low dispersion in the valence band top region and the occurrence of multiple maxima that differ only little in energy. For instance, there is another maximum at $\Gamma$ only 30\,meV below the VBM see Fig.~\ref{Ga2O3_VBM}). We are not aware of any reports on experimental hole effective masses in $\beta$-Ga$_2$O$_3$ to compare with.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{kconv_mass.pdf}
\caption{\label{kconv_mass}{Diagonal effective masses for electrons (blue, solid lines) and holes (red, dashed lines) in $\beta$-Ga$_2$O$_3$ obtained from Wannier interpolation on top of PBE as a function of the first-principles $\ve{k}$-grid density.}}
\end{figure}
In order to estimate the accuracy of the determined effective masses, we perform a similar convergence test as it is done in Section \ref{InterpolationAccuracy} for the predicted energies. In Fig.~\ref{kconv_mass} we present the diagonal entries of the effective mass tensor for electrons at the CBm (blue, solid lines) and holes at the VBM (red, dashed lines) obtained from the analytic approach starting from PBEsol calculations on different $\ve{k}$-grids. The values presented in Table~\ref{tab:meff_ana} (with the exception of $G_0W_0$) are obtained on a grid corresponding to a linear $\ve{k}$-point density of about 4.8\,\AA. Fig.~\ref{kconv_mass} shows that for this grid density the hole effective masses are almost converged and we estimate an uncertainty of about 0.1\,$m_0$ ($\approx 3$\%). In contrast, the noticeably smaller electron effective masses are much harder to predict accurately. They are not yet fully converged in the studied range of $\ve{k}$-point densities and thus we estimate a larger relative uncertainty for the numbers in Table~\ref{tab:meff_ana} of about 0.02\,$m_0$ ($\approx 10$\%).
\subsection{Interpolation of wave functions}
\label{WavefunctionInterpolation}
The diagonalization of the Wannier-interpolated Hamiltonian $\mathcal{H}^\ve{q}_{mn}$ gives also rise to the interpolated wave functions. They are expressed in the form
\begin{equation}
\psi_{n,\ve{q}}(\ve{r}) = \sum\limits_m V^\ve{q}_{mn} \phi_{m,\ve{q}}(\ve{r})\;,
\end{equation}
where $V^\ve{q}_{:n}$ is the eigenvector of $\mathcal{H}^\ve{q}$ corresponding to the eigenvalue $\epsilon^\ve{q}_n$, and $\phi_{m,\ve{q}}$ is defined by Eq.~\eqref{eq-AuxFromWan}. The analysis of these wave functions offers deeper physical and chemical insights. To this extent, we decompose $\psi_{n,\ve{q}}$ in particular atomic states by an expansion in a series of spherical harmonics $Y_{lm}$ times radial functions $\varphi^\alpha_{n,\ve{q},lm}$ inside the individual muffin-tin spheres $\alpha$:
\begin{equation}
\psi_{n,\ve{q}}^\alpha(\ve{r}) = \sum\limits_l \sum\limits_{m=-l}^l \varphi^\alpha_{n,\ve{q},lm}(|\ve{r-R}_\alpha|) Y_{lm}(\widehat{\ve{r-R}_\alpha})\;.
\end{equation}
Within the (L)APW+LO basis, this expansion is straightforward. Now, we calculate the contribution of the state $\psi_{n,\ve{q}}$ to the number of electrons inside the muffin-tin sphere~$\alpha$ with radius $R_\alpha$ by integrating the partial density $\rho_{n,\ve{q}}(\ve{r}) = |\psi_{n,\ve{q}}(\ve{r})|^2$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq-bandchar}
\begin{aligned}
\int\limits_{{\rm MT}_\alpha} \rho_{n,\ve{q}}(\ve{r})\,\,\mathrm{d}\ve{r} &= \sum\limits_l \sum\limits_{m=-l}^l \int\limits_0^{R_\alpha} r^2 |\varphi^\alpha_{n,\ve{q},lm}(r)|^2\,\,\mathrm{d} r \\
&= \sum\limits_l b^{\alpha, l}_{n,\ve{q}}\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The second line of Eq.~\eqref{eq-bandchar} defines the band character $b^{\alpha,l}_{n,\ve{q}}$ which is interpreted as the contribution of electrons with angular character $l$ and wave vector $\ve{q}$ inside the muffin-tin sphere $\alpha$ to the $n$-th energy band.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{PBNDDOS_TiO2+WF.pdf}
\caption{\label{PBNDDOS_TiO2}{Wannier interpolated band-structure and DOS (a) for TiO$_2$ in the rutile structure calculated using PBE0. The Fermi level is set to the middle of the gap. The different shades of colors display the individual contributions of the wave functions at titanium (blue) and oxygen (red) atoms with different angular character ($l$). MLWFs corresponding the valence (b) and lowest conduction (c) bands. Note that the MLWFs are real-valued. Positive (negative) iso-surfaces are displayed in red (green).}}
\end{figure}
We interpolate the band character for TiO$_2$ in the rutile structure and for a monolayer of the 2D material ZrS$_2$. The calculation of TiO$_2$ is carried out using the hybrid xc-functional PBE0 and a $6\times 6\times 9$ $\ve{k}$-point grid. The 12 valence bands and the 10 lowest conduction bands are transformed into MLWFs separately using the algorithm for isolated bands. Again, the spread $\Omega$ of the initial guess is only 1\% and 2\% off the global minimum for the two groups, respectively. For the higher conduction bands, 148~WFs are disentangled using an outer (inner) energy window of 8\,eV to 130\,eV (8\,eV to 76\,eV). In the case of ZrS$_2$, quasi-particle energies are calculated within the $G_0W_0$ approximation on top of PBE for $8\times 8\times 1$ $\ve{k}$-points. The six valence bands are treated as an isolated group. We disentangle the three Zr $d$-like bands which intersect with higher energy conduction bands around the $\Gamma$-point from the energy window between 0\,eV and 4.75\,eV. For both the valence bands and the three disentangled conduction bands, the initial guess is 2\% larger than the global minimum. The remaining conduction bands are represented by 27~WFs disentangled from an outer (inner) energy window of 3.75\,eV to 20\,eV (4.75\,eV to 10\,eV). In the top panels of Figs.~\ref{PBNDDOS_TiO2} and \ref{PBNDDOS_ZrS2}, we present the interpolated band-structure and DOS for TiO$_2$ and ZrS$_2$, respectively. For obtaining the DOS, the energies and the band characters are interpolated on a grid of $60\times 60\times 90$ and $300\times 300\times 1$ points in the BZ for TiO$_2$ and ZrS$_2$, respectively. The bands and the DOS are colored according to the band character, i.e. the contribution of electrons from different atom species and with different angular character. Since the band character does not account for contributions from the interstitial region, the sum of the projected DOS (colored area) differs from the total DOS (black solid line). In the case of TiO$_2$, the 12 valence bands almost entirely originate from oxygen $p$-like states. The 12 symmetry-equivalent WFs corresponding to this group of bands (one illustrated in Fig.~\ref{PBNDDOS_TiO2}b) clearly reflect this character. The same holds for the isolated group of the 10 lowest conduction bands which exhibit dominantly titanium $d$ character with some admixture of oxygen $p$-like states. Again, this is clearly reflected in the corresponding Wannier functions (Fig.~\ref{PBNDDOS_TiO2}c). A similar behavior can be found in ZrS$_2$. The valence bands show a strong sulphur $p$ character since the corresponding Wannier functions (Fig.~\ref{PBNDDOS_ZrS2}b) are almost purely $p$-like and centered at sulphur atoms. The Wannier functions corresponding the three zirconium $d$-like bands in the lower conduction band region (Fig.~\ref{PBNDDOS_ZrS2}c) clearly reflect the dominant Zr $d$-character but also show contributions from sulphur $p$-like states.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{PBNDDOS_ZrS2+WF.pdf}
\caption{\label{PBNDDOS_ZrS2}{Same as Fig.~\ref{PBNDDOS_TiO2} for a ZrS$_2$ monolayer calculated using the $G_0W_0$ approximation on top of PBE. The upper (lower) illustration of the MLWFs show the side (top) view.}}
\end{figure}
Within the $G_0W_0$ approximation, a self-energy correction to the KS eigenvalues is calculated in order to obtain the quasi-particle energies. Often, these corrections (obtained on a uniform $\ve{k}$-grid) are used to deduce a rigid scissors shift from which the band-structure is then obtained. This approach, however, is not always justified, like for instance in hybrid inorganic-organic systems. The prototypical compound shown here \cite{Turkina2019} consists of pyridine molecules chemisorbed on the ($10\overline{1}0$) surface of a ZnO slab with 43 atoms in the unit cell (see bottom panel in Fig.~\ref{PBND_PyZnO}). The quasi-particle energies are computed on $4\times4\times1$ $\ve{k}$-points corresponding to a linear $\ve{k}$-point density of 3.9\,\AA. From an outer (inner) window of 13.6\,eV (8.2\,eV) above the Fermi level 60~WFs are disentangled to compute the quasi-particle band-structure and compare it to the KS band-structure (Fig.~\ref{PBND_PyZnO}). Using the band character, we can attribute the individual energy bands to the constituents of the system. Bands displayed in blue are attributed to the organic molecule while red bands originate from the inorganic ZnO slab. Hybridized bands are colored in shades of green, yellow and orange. In the bottom of Fig.~\ref{PBND_PyZnO}, KS orbitals at $\Gamma$ are shown, attributed to ZnO (red), pyridine (blue), and a hybridized state (yellow), respectively. It is evident that the quasi-particle self-energy correction has significantly different effects on the individual energy bands depending on their origin. While all conduction bands experience a general shift towards higher energies, the two flat molecular bands (blue) are subject to a much stronger upwards shift with respect to the four parabolic ZnO bands (red). In contrast, the strongly hybridized band (yellow) is slightly shifted downwards with respect to ZnO bands.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{PBND_LDA_GW_PyZnO+WF.pdf}
\caption{\label{PBND_PyZnO}{Energy dispersion for the lowest KS and quasi-particle conduction bands in a hybrid inorganic-organic system (top left and top right, respectively). The bands are colored according to their origin. Bands attributed to the inorganic ZnO slab and the organic pyridine molecule are drawn in red and blue, respectively. The KS wave function for a hybridized state (yellow dot) as well as for states originating from ZnO (red dot) and pyridine (blue dot) are illustrated in the lower part.}}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
We have presented an implementation of MLWFs within the (L)APW+LO method. By combining the well established algorithm developed by \citet*{Souza2001} with the more recently presented OPF technique \cite{Mustafa2015}, we are able to robustly construct MLWFs for various classes of materials without the need of projection functions being selected by the user. We use LOs as projection functions within the (L)APW+LO method. It is appealing due to its simplicity although they are strictly atom-centered and vanishing in the interstitial region. This lack of flexibility can be overcome reliably by the use of the OPF approach. By automatically and systematically adding and selecting LOs from the pool of projection functions, we are able to calculate MLWFs for both isolated and entangled bands in 2D and bulk semiconductors with small and medium sized unit cells, in metals as well as in complex hybrid systems containing an inorganic semiconductor and organic molecules.
This procedure gives access to accurate band structures and DOS based on more sophisticated methods such as generalized hybrid KS-DFT or quasi-particle calculations which otherwise would not be available due to the immense computational cost these methods come with. The same holds for other quantities that can be derived from the band structure directly such as band gaps, group velocities, and effective masses. According to our findings, a linear density of about {4 $\ve{k}$-points per \AA$^{-1}$} in reciprocal space in the underlying calculation suffices to predict electronic energies at an arbitrary point with an accuracy in the meV-range. A deeper analysis of the interpolated wave function gives access to the band character and allows for a detailed interpretation of band structures and DOS. The results are in excellent agreement with calculations carried out in the original basis indicating that not just eigenenergies but also wave functions can be predicted accurately.
Future applications may involve MLWFs as basis functions in excited state calculations using MBPT which often come with high effort simultaneously requiring dense $\ve{k}$-grids. A reduction of the basis size and the simple access to wave functions and energies at arbitrary points in reciprocal space may help to reduce the computational cost of these approaches retaining the high precision of the (L)APW+LO method.
\begin{acknowledgments}
This work was partially performed in the framework of GraFOx, a Leibniz-ScienceCampus supported by the Leibniz association. Parts of this work were funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) - Projektnummer 182087777 - SFB 951. All input and output files can be downloaded from the NOMAD Repository, DOI: 10.17172/NOMAD/2019.08.28-1. The LDA and $G_0W_0$ calculations of the Py@ZnO interface underlying our investigations were performed by Olga Turkina, the $G_0W_0$ calculation of $\beta$-Ga$_2$O$_3$ by Dmitrii Nabok. We thank them for providing the data.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction}
Let $G$ be a finite group and $K$ a subgroup of $G$. Denote by $L(G)$ the set of complex-valued functions on $G$. This is an algebra under the convolution product
$$
f \star g (x) = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{y \in G} f(xy^{-1})g(y).
$$
\noindent The pair $(G,K)$ is said to be a {\em Gelfand pair} if the subalgebra $L(K \backslash G / K)$ of $K$-biinvariant functions in $L(G)$ is commutative.
Gelfand pairs are well-studied in the context of Lie groups, where there is an analogous definition in terms of the algebra of integrable $K$-biinvariant functions on the group $G$. (See, for example, \cite{BR2}.) In the Lie group setting, the Gelfand pair structure can be used to construct irreducible unitary representations of $G$ from representations of the subgroup $K$. Historically, these techniques played a pivotal role in describing the representation theory of semi-simple Lie groups \cite{H}. In the finite group setting, the theory of Gelfand pairs is less-developed, and has found surprising applications outside of group theory including statistics, experimental design, and combinatorics. For example, in \cite{D}, Diaconis uses finite Gelfand pairs to determine the rate at which certain Markov chains converge to stationary distributions, and the authors of \cite{B} apply finite Gelfand pairs to the study of association schemes. In \cite{AC}, finite Gelfand pairs are used to study parking functions, a useful tool in algebraic combinatorics.
This paper concerns a construction introduced by Aker--Can in \cite{AC} which produces families of finite Gelfand pairs associated to a fixed finite group. The construction proceeds as follows. Given a finite group $\Gamma$, the symmetric group $S_n$ acts on $\Gamma^n$ by permuting the factors, and we form the wreath product $G_n := \Gamma^n \rtimes S_n$ of $\Gamma$ with $S_n$. Let $\Delta_n$ be the diagonal subgroup of $\Gamma^n$. Then $K_n := \Delta_n \times S_n$ is a subgroup of $G_n$, and for certain values of $n$, the pair $(G_n,K_n)$ is a Gelfand pair.
In particular, when $\Gamma$ is abelian, $(G_n,K_n)$ is a Gelfand pair for all values of $n$ \cite{CST}. Such Gelfand pairs are relevant in the study of parking functions when $\Gamma$ is cyclic \cite{AC}. For non-abelian $\Gamma$, Benson--Ratcliff establish the following two results.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \cite[Theorem 1.2]{BR} The pair $(G_{|\Gamma|},K_{|\Gamma|})$ is not a Gelfand pair.
\item \cite[Theorem 1.1]{BR} There is some integer $N(\Gamma)$ with $3 \leq N(\Gamma) \leq |\Gamma|$ such that $(G_n,K_n)$ is a Gelfand pair for $n < N(\Gamma)$, and is not a Gelfand pair for $n \geq N(\Gamma)$.
\end{enumerate}
We refer to $N(\Gamma)$ as the {\em cracking point} of $\Gamma$ and say that $\Gamma$ {\em cracks} at $N(\Gamma)$.
Aker--Can showed through GAP computations that there are groups for which this upper bound is reached and also groups for which this lower bound is reached \cite{AC}. For example, the symmetric group $S_3$ has a cracking point of $6$, whereas the group $GL(2,\mathbb{F}_3)$ has a cracking point of $3$. On the other hand, Benson--Ratcliff show that in certain infinite families of groups with no bound on order, the cracking point remains constant. For example, they show that for all odd primes $p$, the dihedral group $D_p$ has a cracking point of $6$ \cite{BR}. In general, the relationship between the finite group $\Gamma$ and its cracking point remains rather mysterious. The main result of this paper is to establish the cracking points of the symmetric groups.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm}
Let $G_n:=(S_k)^n\rtimes S_n$ and $K_n:=\Delta_n \times S_n$, where $\Delta_n \subset (S_k)^n$ is the diagonal subgroup. For $k\geq 5$, the pair $(G_n, K_n)$ is a Gelfand pair for $n=1,2$ and is not a Gelfand pair for $n\geq 3$; that is, in the notation above, $N(S_k)=3$ for $k\geq 5$. Moreover, $N(S_4) = 4$ and $N(S_3) = 6$.
\end{theorem}
We prove Theorem \ref{thm} using a general observation (Lemma \ref{Me Prop}) which simplifies the computation of cracking points.
Our paper is structured as follows. In Section 2, we discuss a decomposition of the $G_n$-representation $L(G_n/K_n)$, following the setup in \cite{BR}. This gives us the vocabulary necessary to establish our key observation, Lemma \ref{Me Prop}. In Section 3, we apply Lemma \ref{Me Prop} to prove our main result.
\subsection*{Acknowledgments}
We would like to extend our gratitude toward Gail Ratcliff for introducing us to this problem and for sharing her expertise and enthusiasm about Gelfand pairs. We would also like to thank the University of Utah Department of Mathematics REU program for funding our project.
\section{Background}
Let $\Gamma$ be a finite group and $K_n \subset G_n$ as above. By general results about Gelfand pairs, the pair $(G_n,K_n)$ is a Gelfand pair if and only if the left quasi-regular representation $ind_{K_n}^{G_n}(triv_{K_n})$ of $G_n$ in $L(G_n/K_n)$ is multiplicity free \cite[Ch. 3F Thm. 9]{D}. Benson--Ratcliff give a decomposition of the space $L(G_n/K_n)$ into irreducible $G_n$-representations in \cite{BR}. In this section, we review some of the details of this decomposition in order to establish our key lemma.
As $G_n = \Gamma^n \rtimes S_n$, it is perhaps unsurprising that the irreducible representations of $G_n$ can be constructed from those of $\Gamma$ and certain subgroups of $S_n$. The construction is as follows. Let $\{\pi_\ell\}_{\ell \in S}$ be the irreducible representations of $\Gamma$, where $S$ is an indexing set in bijection with the conjugacy classes of $\Gamma$. The irreducible representations of $\Gamma^n$ are all of the form $\pi := \pi_{\ell_1} \hat{\otimes} \cdots \hat{\otimes} \pi_{\ell_{n-1}} \hat{\otimes} \pi_{\ell_n}$, where $\hat{\otimes}$ denotes the exterior tensor product, and $\ell_i \in S$ (note that we allow for $\ell_i = \ell_k$ for $i \neq k$). The symmetric group $S_n$ acts on any such $\pi$ by permuting the factors, and we denote by $S_\pi$ the stabilizer of $\pi$ in $S_n$. Denote by $\omega$ the intertwining representation of $S_\pi$; that is,
\[
\omega: S_\pi \rightarrow GL(V_1 \otimes \cdots \otimes V_n),\ \ \omega(\sigma)(v_1 \otimes \cdots \otimes v_n) = v_{\sigma^{-1}(1)} \otimes \cdots \otimes v_{\sigma^{-1}(n)}
\]
where $V_i$ is the vector space of the representation $\pi_{\ell_i}$. Then for any irreducible representation $\rho$ of $S_\pi$, the induced representation $R_{\pi,\rho} := ind_{\Gamma^n \rtimes S_\pi}^{G_n}((\pi \circ \omega)\hat{\otimes} \rho)$ is an irreducible $G_n$-representation, and all irreducible representations of $G_n$ are of this form \cite[Sec. 3.2]{BR}. Throughout this paper, for a representation $\pi$ of a group $G$, we denote by $\chi_\pi$ its character.
Benson--Ratcliff provide a useful method for determining the multiplicity of $R_{\pi,\rho}$ in $L(G_n/K_n)$. In particular, they show that the dimension of the space of $K_n$-fixed vectors in $R_{\pi,\rho}$ (which is equal to the multiplicity of $R_{\pi,\rho}$ in $L(G_n/K_n)$) is equal to the dimension of the space of $K_\pi$-fixed vectors in $(\pi \circ \omega)\hat{\otimes}\rho$, where $K_\pi := \Delta_n \rtimes S_\pi$ \cite[Lem. 3.3]{BR}. This can be calculated by taking the inner product of the character of $(\pi \circ \omega)\hat{\otimes}\rho$, with the trivial character on $K_\pi$:
\begin{equation}
\label{trivial char}
\frac{1}{|\Delta_n \times S_\pi|}\sum_{(\delta,\sigma) \in K_\pi}\chi_{\pi \circ \omega}(\delta,\sigma)\chi_\rho(\sigma) = \frac{1}{|S_\pi|}\sum_{\sigma \in S_\pi} \bigg( \frac{1}{|\Delta_n|}\sum_{\delta \in \Delta_n} \chi_{\pi \circ \omega}(\delta,\sigma) \bigg) \chi_\rho(\sigma).
\end{equation}
The inner sum on the right hand side of (\ref{trivial char}) is a class function on $S_\pi$. This class function plays an important role in our story so we give it a name:
\begin{equation}
\label{M pi}
M_\pi(\sigma) := \frac{1}{|\Delta_n|}\sum_{\delta\in \Delta_n} \chi_{\pi \circ \omega}(\delta,\sigma).
\end{equation}
Equation (\ref{trivial char}) determines the coefficient of $\chi_\rho$ in the decomposition of $M_\pi$ into irreducible characters of $S_\pi$. Therefore, we see that $(G_n,K_n)$ is a Gelfand pair if and only if for each choice of $\pi$, the coefficient of $\chi_\rho$ in $M_\pi$ is less than or equal to 1 for all irreducible representations $\rho$ of $S_\pi$.
Now we wish to highlight a key observation concerning $M_\pi(e)$, the value of $M_\pi$ on the identity $e \in S_\pi$. First, note that for $\delta \in \Delta_n$,
\[
\chi_{\pi \circ \omega}(\delta,e) = \prod_{i = 1}^{n}\chi_{\pi_{\ell_i}}(\delta).
\]
Thus, substituting this into (\ref{M pi}), we have
\begin{equation}
\label{M pi identity}
M_\pi(e) = \frac{1}{|\Delta_n|} \sum_{\delta\in \Delta_n} \big(\prod_{i = 1}^{n}\chi_{\pi_{\ell_i}}(\delta)\big) = \frac{1}{|\Gamma|}\sum_{C} \big(\prod_{i = 1}^{n}\chi_{\pi_{\ell_i}}(C)\big)|C|,
\end{equation}
where $C$ runs over the conjugacy classes of $\Gamma$. The second equality follows from the fact that $\Delta_n \simeq \Gamma$ by the obvious isomorphism. Now, the right hand side of (\ref{M pi identity}) is also equal to the inner product of the $\Gamma$-representation $\pi_{\ell_1} \otimes \cdots \otimes \pi_{\ell_{n-1}}$ with $\pi_{\ell_n}$ whenever $\chi_{\pi_{\ell_n}}$ is real-valued. Hence we have proven the following result.
\begin{lemma}
\label{Me Prop}
Let $\Gamma$ be a finite group, and let $\{\pi_\ell\}_{\ell \in S}$ be the irreducible representations of $\Gamma$. Then for $\pi = \pi_{\ell_1} \hat{\otimes}\cdots \hat{\otimes} \pi_{\ell_n}$, $M_\pi(e)$ is equal to the multiplicity of $\pi_{\ell_n}$ in $\pi_{\ell_1} \otimes\cdots \otimes \pi_{\ell_{n-1}}$, if $\chi_{\pi_{\ell_n}}$ is real-valued.
\end{lemma}
\begin{rmk}
Note that the product in (\ref{M pi identity}) is not changed by reordering the $\chi_{\pi_{\ell_i}}$. Thus, more generally, we have shown that $M_\pi(e)$ is equal to the multiplicity of $\pi_{\ell_i}$ in $\pi_{\ell_1} \otimes \cdots \otimes \pi_{\ell_{i-1}} \otimes \pi_{\ell_{i + 1}} \otimes \cdots \otimes \pi_{\ell_n}$ whenever $\chi_{\pi_{\ell_i}}$ is real-valued. For our purposes, we will only consider the case when $i = n$, as in Lemma \ref{Me Prop}.
\end{rmk}
With this, we can simplify the calculations used in computing cracking points. In particular, we can use Lemma \ref{Me Prop} to make statements about $M_\pi$ based solely on the dimensions of $\pi_{\ell_n}$ and $\pi_{\ell_1} \otimes\cdots \otimes \pi_{\ell_{n-1}}$, which allows us to circumvent the necessity for complete character tables in some cases. An example of such utility is given in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm} below.
\section{Cracking Points of $S_k$}
\noindent In this section we use Lemma \ref{Me Prop} to compute the cracking points of the symmetric groups. We start with the following observation.
\begin{lemma}
\label{SummerLemma}
Let $S_\pi$ be the stabilizer of $\pi = \pi_{\ell_1} \hat{\otimes} \cdots \hat{\otimes} \pi_{\ell_n}$ in $S_n$. If $M_\pi(e) > \sum_{\rho \in \widehat{S}_\pi} \dim{\rho}$, then $(G_n,K_n)$ is not a Gelfand pair.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Because $M_{\pi}$ is a class function on $S_{\pi}$, it can be expressed uniquely as a linear combination of irreducible characters $\chi_{\rho}$ of $S_{\pi}$:
\[
M_{\pi}= \sum_{\rho \in \widehat{S}_\pi} a_\rho \chi_{\rho}
\]
\noindent where $\{a_\rho\}_{\rho \in \widehat{S}_\pi}$ are complex coefficients. Now by (\ref{trivial char}), $a_\rho= \langle M_{\pi}, \chi_{\rho} \rangle$ counts the dimension of the space of $K_{\pi}$-fixed vectors in the $\Gamma^n \rtimes S_\pi$-representation $(\pi \circ \omega) \hat{\otimes} \rho$. Thus, we see that $a_\rho \in \Z^{\geq 0}$ for all $\rho \in \widehat{S}_\pi$. Therefore, if
\[
M_{\pi}(e) = \sum_{\rho \in \widehat{S}_\pi}a_\rho \dim{\rho} > \sum_{\rho \in \widehat{S}_\pi} \dim{\rho}
\]
there must be some $\rho \in \widehat{S}_\pi$ such that $a_\rho > 1$. Hence, $(G_n, K_n)$ is not a Gelfand pair.
\end{proof}
\subsection*{Proof of Theorem 1}
Fix $k\geq 5$, and let $\pi_m$ be the highest dimensional irreducible representation of $S_k$. We claim that there is an irreducible representation $\psi$ of $S_k$ such that for $\pi = \pi_m \hat{\otimes} \pi_m \hat{\otimes} \psi$, there is some irreducible character $\chi_\rho$ of $S_\pi$ which has a coefficient greater than 1 in the decomposition of $M_\pi$. By \cite[Lem. 3.3]{BR}, this implies that the irreducible $G_3$-representation $R_{\pi, \rho}$ has multiplicity greater than $1$ in $L(G_3/K_3)$, and hence $(G_3,K_3)$ is not a Gelfand pair.
To show that such a representation $\psi$ exists, there are two cases to consider. The first case is when $\psi = \pi_m$ and $S_\pi = S_3$. The other case is when $\psi \neq \pi_m$, in which case $S_\pi = S_2 \times S_1 \simeq S_2$. We will prove that $(G_3,K_3)$ is not a Gelfand pair by showing that $M_\pi(e) > 4$ in the first case, $M_\pi(e) > 2$ in the second case, and then applying Lemma 3.1. By Lemma \ref{Me Prop}, this is equivalent to showing that the coefficient of $\pi_m$ in $\pi_m \otimes \pi_m$ is greater than 4, or that the coefficient of $\pi_i$ in $\pi_m \otimes \pi_m$ is greater than 2 for some $\pi_i \in \widehat{S}_k$ different than $\pi_m$. To do this, we will show that the following inequality holds for all $k \geq 5$:
\[
(\dim{\pi_{m}})^2 > 4\dim{\pi_{m}} + \sum_{\pi_i \in \widehat{S}_k,\ \pi_i \neq \pi_m} 2\dim{\pi_{i}}.
\]
As $\pi_m$ is of maximal dimension in $\widehat{S}_k$, it is enough to show that
\[
(\dim{\pi_{m}})^2 \geq 4\dim{\pi_{m}} + 2(p(k) - 1)\dim{\pi_{m}}
\]
where $p(k)$ is the number of partitions of $k$, which is equal to the number of irreducible representations of $S_k$. Simplifying, this amounts to establishing the inequality
\begin{equation}
\label{ineq}
\dim{\pi_m} \geq 2p(k) + 2.
\end{equation}
An asymptotic lower bound is given for $\dim{\pi_m}$ in \cite[Thm.1]{VK}, namely
\[
\dim{\pi_m} \geq e^{-c\sqrt{k}}\sqrt{k!}
\]
where $c = \frac{\pi}{\sqrt{6}}$. Similarly, an asymptotic upper bound was found for $p(k)$ in \cite{HR}:
\[
p(k) \leq \frac{1}{4k\sqrt{3}} e^{\pi\sqrt{\frac{2k}{3}}}.
\]
Combining these results with (\ref{ineq}), we see that $(G_3,K_3)$ fails to be a Gelfand pair if
\[
e^{-c\sqrt{k}}\sqrt{k!} \geq \frac{1}{2k\sqrt{3}} e^{\pi\sqrt{\frac{2k}{3}}} + 2.
\]
This is equivalent to the condition that the ratio
\[
r(k) := \frac{2k\sqrt{3}e^{-c\sqrt{k}}\sqrt{k!} - 4k\sqrt{3}}{e^{\pi\sqrt{\frac{2k}{3}}}}
\]
is greater than or equal to 1. A direct calculation shows that this holds for $k = 12$. For $k > 12$, note that, after replacing $k!$ with the Gamma function $\Gamma(k+1)$ restricted to the positive real axis, the derivative $\frac{d}{dk}r(k)$ is positive and hence $r(k)$ is increasing. Thus, $r(k) \geq 1$ for $k \geq 12$ and $N(S_k) = 3$ in that case. The rest we calculate through a case-by-case analysis.
The cracking points of $S_k$ for $k = 4,5,6,$ and $7$ can be computed directly using their character tables. Here we show $N(S_5) = 3$ as an example. To do this, we will calculate $M_\pi$ directly for a specific choice of an irreducible representation $\pi$ of $S_5 \times S_5 \times S_5$. Consider the following partial character table of $S_5$, which contains the characters of the highest dimensional and second highest dimensional irreducible representations:
\[
\begin{matrix}
&(1) & (10) & (15) & (20) & (20) & (24) & (30) \\
& I & 2 & 2,2 & 3 & 3,2 & 5 & 4 \\
\pi_1 & 5 & 1 & 1 & -1 & 1 & 0 & 1 \\
\pi_2 & 6 & 0 & -2 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0
\end{matrix}
\]
Now let $\pi = \pi_2 \hat{\otimes} \pi_2 \hat{\otimes} \pi_1$, which has a stabilizer of $S_\pi \simeq S_2$ in $S_3$. Then calculating $M_\pi(\sigma)$ directly from (\ref{M pi identity}), we see that $M_\pi(\sigma) = 2$ for both $\sigma$ in $\widehat{S}_\pi$. Hence, $M_\pi = 2\chi_{triv}$, and $(G_3,K_3)$ is not a Gelfand pair for $\Gamma = S_5$. Similarly, for $k = 6$ and $k = 7$ we take $\pi$ to be the representation consisting of two copies of the highest dimensional irreducible representation of $S_k$ and one copy of the second highest. Again from (\ref{M pi identity}), we calculate that $M_\pi(e) = 4$ in the case of $S_6$, and $M_\pi(e) = 5$ for $S_7$. Thus, by Lemma \ref{SummerLemma}, $(G_3,K_3)$ is not a Gelfand pair in either case. Finally, for $\Gamma = S_4$, taking $\pi$ to be four copies of the standard representation of $S_4$ suffices to show that $(G_4,K_4)$ is not a Gelfand pair. Calculating the decomposition of $M_\pi$ into irreducible $S_\pi$-representations for each choice of $\pi$ when $n = 3$, one finds no cases of multiplicity, and hence $N(S_4) = 4$.
For $S_8$ through $S_{11}$, we show directly that (\ref{ineq}) holds. The computations are contained in the table below. The values for $\dim{\pi_{m}}$ are given in \cite[Ch. 7B]{D}.
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{||c c c||}
\hline
$k$ & $\dim{\pi_{m}}$ & $2p(k) + 2$ \\ [0.5ex]
\hline\hline
8 & 90 & 46 \\
9 & 216 & 62 \\
10 & 768 & 86 \\
11 & 2310 & 114 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\qed
\bibliographystyle{alpha}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec-introduction}
In the age of Digital Humanities, scholarly editing \cite{plachta} involves
the combination of natural language text with machine processable semantic
knowledge, typically expressed as markup. The best developed machine support
for scholarly editing is the XML-based \name{TEI} format \cite{tei}, mainly
targeted at rendering for different media and extraction of metadata, achieved
through semantics-oriented or declarative markup. Recent efforts stretch \name{TEI}\xspace
by aspects that are orthogonal to its original \name{ordered hierarchy of
content objects (OHCO)} text model, through support for entities like
\name{names, dates, people, and places} as well as structuring with
\name{linking, segmentation, and alignment} \cite[Chap.~13 and~16]{tei}. Also
ways to combine \name{TEI}\xspace with Semantic Web techniques, data modeling and
ontologies are investigated \cite{eide:2015}. Nevertheless, there are various
demands in today's practical scholarly editing as well as with respect to
future perspectives that are not well covered by \name{TEI}\xspace and the associated XML
processing workflow, which we will address here:
\begin{enumerate}
\item An economic workflow for scholarly editing should be supported. Only
very few people from the Humanities seem willing to write XML documents.
But it should be possible for them to create, review and validate text
annotations as well as fact bases with metadata and knowledge on entities
such as persons and places.
\item It should be possible to generate high-quality print and hypertext
presentations in an economic way.
\item Linking with external knowledge bases should be supported. These
include results of other edition projects as well as large fact bases such
as authority files like \name{Gemeinsame Normdatei
(GND)},\footnote{\url{http://www.dnb.de/gnd}.} metadata repositories like
\name{Kalliope},\footnote{\url{http://kalliope-verbund.info}.} domain
specific bases like \name{GeoNames}, or aggregated bases like \name{YAGO}
\cite{yago2} and \name{DBpedia} \cite{dbpedia}.
\item It should be possible to incorporate advanced semantics related
techniques such as named entity recognition or statistics-based text
analysis.
\item It should be possible to couple object text with associated information
in ways that are more flexible than in-place markup: Markup can be by
different authors or automatically generated and can be for some specific
purpose. Queries and transformations should remain applicable also after
changes of the markup.
\item It should be possible to associate proper logic-based semantics with
annotations and links. Ontology reasoning alone is not sufficient, as
classification seems not the main operation of interest. The \name{GND}\xspace fact base
on persons, institutions and works, for example, gets by with a quite small
ontology.
\end{enumerate}
Our environment \mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace (\name{K}nowledge-\name{B}ased Support for
\name{S}cholarly \name{E}diting and \name{T}ext Processing) is on the one
hand a practical workflow that combines different systems and is applied in
a large project, the edition of the correspondence of philosopher and
polymath Johann Georg Sulzer (1720--1779) with author, critic and poet
Johann Jakob Bodmer (1698--1783). The print version will be published as
\cite[Vol.~10]{sulzer:gs} and, including commentaries and registers, spans
about 2000~pages. On the other hand, \mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace is a prototype system that
allows to experiment with various advanced features.
As basic format for scholarly editing \mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace suggests to use \LaTeX\xspace with a set
of newly defined custom commands that provide semantics-oriented markup
adequate for the application domain, which currently is the edition of
correspondences. This is complemented by a core system written in Prolog which
includes a \LaTeX\xspace parser, an internal representation of text and annotations,
support for the representation of entities like persons, places and dates as
well as a named entity identifier based on the \name{GND}\xspace as gazetteer.
The core version of \mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace is available as free software from its
homepage
\begin{center}
\url{http://cs.christophwernhard.com/kbset.}
\end{center}
It comes with a demo application, the draft edition of a book from the 19th
century. Release of the extended version of \mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace used for the Sulzer/Bodmer
correspondence is planned together with the release of the digital edition in
the near future. Most importantly, the forthcoming version adds the
specification and support for descriptive \LaTeX\xspace markup for correspondences
and supports the generation of a HTML presentation, similar to
\href{http://www.pueckler-digital.de}{\name{www.pueckler-digital.de}}
\cite{puecklerdigital}. The 2016 version of \name{KBSET} was presented at
DHd~2016 \cite{Kittelmann:Wernhard:DHd:2016} and AITP~2016
\cite{Kittelmann:Wernhard:AITP:2016}.
The rest of this system description is structured as follows: In
Sect.~\ref{sec-workflows} we discuss the practical workflows for digital
scholarly editing supported by \mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace. Prolog plays various roles in the
environment, which are outlined in Sect.~\ref{sec-roles-prolog}. In
Sect.~\ref{sec-components} the Prolog-implemented core components of the
system are described. We conclude the paper in Sect.~\ref{sec-conclusion}
with sketching future perspectives of scholarly editing and logic-based
knowledge processing.
\section{Workflows of Scholarly Editing Supported by KBSET}
\label{sec-workflows}
Three phases can be identified for machine assisted scholarly editing:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Creating the object text, enhanced by markup and other statements in
formal languages.
\item Generating intermediate representations for inspection by humans or
machines, analogously to debugging.
\item Generating consumable presentations.
\end{enumerate}
Support for all phased should be of high quality, which implies the
incorporation of existing specialized systems, in our case only free software,
in particular the GNU Emacs text editor and the \LaTeX\xspace document preparation
and typesetting system along with various packages.
\input{fig_kbset2019_input}
Figure~\ref{fig-overview} shows an overview on \mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace. The basic way to use
the system is the standard \LaTeX\xspace workflow, however, with \LaTeX\xspace commands
restricted to elements for semantics-oriented markup according to the
application domain. For example, correspondences with letters with a sender,
recipient, date, mentioned persons, works and locations as well as scholarly
comments that are associated with specific text positions in the letters. The
user has to manage a text editor and to know how to handle the markup
elements, which directly reflect tasks of scholarly editing. \LaTeX\xspace packages
implement these markup commands, such that the standard \LaTeX\xspace workflow
immediately provides some validation and yields a formatted PDF document with
hyperlinks, realizing support for phase~(2) and also for phase~(3) with
respect to print editions. Support to express some fact bases on entities
such as persons, works, locations and events in \LaTeX\xspace syntax is supported, to
allow the user to stay in this workflow as far as possible.
Advanced functionality such as complex consistency validation, re-ordering of
document fragments such as letters and commentaries, alignment with large
external fact bases such as the \name{GND}\xspace, automated named entity identification,
and merging with annotations that are automatically generated or maintained in
external documents, as well as conversion to other output formats like a HTML
presentation is implemented in Prolog and basically invoked through the Prolog
interpreter, although this can be hidden behind shell scripts and a GNU Emacs
interface for the named entity identification.
Figure~\ref{fig-nei} shows a screenshot with the presentation of named entity
identification results in Emacs. In the object text buffer the system
highlights words or phrases about which it assumes that they denote a person,
place or date. In the lower buffer additional information on the selected
occurrence of \name{Gleim} is displayed, including a rationale for the entity
identification and a listing of lower ranked alternate candidate entities.
Further aspects of named entity identification in \mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace will be outlined
below in Sect.~\ref{sec-nei}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{screenshot_kbset_en.png}
\caption{Screenshot: Named entity identification with \mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace}
\label{fig-nei}
\end{figure}
Prolog syntax is used for so-called \name{assistance documents}, that is,
configuration files where external fact bases are specified and information is
given to bias or override automated inferencing in named entity
identification. The idea is that the user, instead of annotating identified
entities manually lets the system do it automatically and mainly gives hints
in \emph{exceptional} cases, where the automatic method would otherwise not
recognize an entity correctly. That method was used in the example document
supplied with \mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace. For the Sulzer/Bodmer correspondence, the primary
method was more traditional manual annotation, motivated since the mentioned
entities often need to be carefully commented anyways. Like Prolog program
files, the assistance documents can be re-loaded, which effects updating of
the associated settings.
\section{Roles of Prolog in \mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace}
\label{sec-roles-prolog}
The implementation language of the \mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace core system is Prolog. Actually,
Prolog, and in particular \name{SWI-Prolog}\xspace \cite{swiprolog} with its extension packages
to access modern formats like XML and RDF, is for \mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace not just a
programming language, but covers different essential requirements within a
single system:
\begin{description}
\item[Representation Mechanism for Relational Fact Bases.] We basically
use\linebreak \name{SWI-Prolog}\xspace's standard indexing facilities. Some relations are
supplemented with semantically redundant extracts whose standard indexing
supports specific access patterns. We call these here \name{caches}.
\item[Query Language.] The standard predicates \name{findall} and
\name{setof} provide powerful means to specify queries in a declarative
manner. Complex tests and constructions can be smoothly incorporated, as
query and programming language are identical, without much impedance
mismatch. Problems of the interplay between different systems like difficult
debugging and communication overhead are avoided. Of course, queries
written in Prolog can not rely on an optimizer, and have to be designed
``manually'' such that their evaluation is done efficiently. A further
useful feature of Prolog is sorting based on a standard order of terms. We
used this to implement ranked answers, or top-k querying, which seems
adequate for tasks such as searching entities that are most plausibly
denoted by a given name.
\item[Representation Mechanism for Structured Documents.] As in Lisp, data
structures are in Prolog by default terms that are print- and readable, a
feature which is supplemented to ``non-AI'' languages often as XML
serialization. In our application context it is particularly useful as it
allows to represent XML and HTML documents directly as Prolog data
structures.
\item[Parser for Semantic Web Formats.] \name{SWI-Prolog}\xspace comes with powerful interfaces
to Semantic Web formats, of which we use in particular the XML parser and
the RDF parser, which provides a call-back interface that allows to process
in succession the triples represented in a large RDF document (the \name{GND}\xspace has
about 160~million triples, the size of its RDF/XML representation is about
2~GB).
\item[Workflow Model.] Workflow aspects of experimental AI programming seem
also useful in the Digital Humanities: loading and re-loading documents with
formal specifications as well as invocation of functionality and running of
experiments through an interpreter. In AI as well as in DH all of this
should be manageable by the researcher herself instead of further parties.
\end{description}
\section{Main Components of the Prolog-Based Core System}
\label{sec-components}
Main components of the \mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace core system are a \LaTeX\xspace parser, a certain
approach to integrate large fact bases for efficient access, and a subsystem
for named entity identification that makes use of such fact bases as
gazetteers.
\subsection{\LaTeX\xspace Parser} The system includes a \LaTeX\xspace parser written in
Prolog that yields a list of items, terms whose argument is a sequence of
characters represented as atom, and whose functor indicates a type such as
\name{word}, \name{punctuation}, \name{comment}, \name{command}, or
\name{begin} and \name{end of an environment}. A special type \name{opaque} is
used to represent text fragments that are not further parsed, such as \LaTeX\xspace
preambles. \LaTeX\xspace commands and environments can be made known to the parser
to effect proper handling of their arguments. The parser aims to be
practically useful, without claiming completeness for \LaTeX\xspace in full. It does
not permit, for example, a single-letter command argument without enclosing
braces. The parser is supplemented by conversions of parsing result to \LaTeX\xspace
and to plain text.
\subsection{Representation of Entities from External Knowledge Bases}
\mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace incorporates large fact bases which are typically available in Semantic
Web formats by converting them in a preprocessing phase to a set of
\name{caches}, that is, Prolog relations with extracts adapted to the
application scope (for example, retaining only data on persons born before
creation of the edited text) and access patterns required by queries (for
example, accessing a person via last name or via a \name{GND}\xspace identifier). These
caches can be stored in \name{SWI-Prolog}\xspace's \name{quick-load} format, allowing to load
them typically in a few seconds when initializing the system with application
data. Keeping the data then in main memory does not raise problems with fact
bases such as the \name{GND}\xspace which includes about 12 million fact triples on persons
born before 1850. To access the relations, \mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace supports interfaces with
predicates for entity types such as persons and locations.
\subsection{Named Entity Identifier (NEI)}
\label{sec-nei}
\mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace includes a system for named entity identification, which detects dates
by parsing as well as persons and locations based on the \name{GND}\xspace and
\name{GeoNames} as gazetteers, using additional knowledge from \name{YAGO} and
\name{DBpedia}. Differently from systems like the \name{Stanford Named Entity
Recognizer} \cite{ner:stanford}, the \mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace NEI does not just associate
entity types such as \name{person} or \name{location} with phrases but
attempts to actually \emph{identify} the entities. The identification is
based on single word occurrences with access to a context representation that
includes the text before and after the respective occurrence. Hence an
association of \emph{word occurrences} to entities is computed, which is
adequate for indexes of printed documents and for hypertext presentations, but
not fully compatible with \name{TEI}\xspace, where the idea is to enclose a \emph{phrase
that denotes an entity} in markup.
The named entity identification is controlled by rules which can be specified
and configured and determine the evaluation of syntactic features matched
against the considered word, for example, \name{is-no-stopword} or
\name{is-no-common-sub\-stan\-tive}, and of semantic features matched against
candidate entities, for example, \name{is-in-wikipedia},
\name{is-linked-to-others-identified-in-context},
\name{has-an-occupation-mentioned-in-context}, or
\name{date-of-birth-matches-context}. Evaluation of these features is done
with respect to the mentioned context representation, which includes general
information like the date of text creation and inferred information such as a
set of entities already identified near the evaluated text position. Features
that are cheaply to compute and have great effect on restricting the set of
candidate entities are evaluated first. This allows, for example, to apply
named entity identification of persons on the demo book provided with the
system, which involves several 10.000s queries against the underlying fact
bases, in about 7~seconds on a modern notebook computer.
Feature evaluation results are mapped to Prolog terms whose standard order
represent their plausibility ranking, realizing a form of top-k query
evaluation. Information about the features that contributed to selection of a
candidate entity is preserved and can be presented to the user in the form of
an explanation \emph{why} the system believes the entity to be a plausible
candidate for being referenced by a word occurrence. The Emacs interface of
\mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace allows to browse through these candidate solutions, displaying the
explanations as well as hyperlinks to the \name{GND}\xspace, \name{Wikipedia}, and
\name{GeoHack}, which may help to judge them (see Fig.~\ref{fig-nei} in
Sect.~\ref{sec-workflows}). After adapting the \name{assistance document}
accordingly and re-loading it, the system will produce more accurate results
in the next run of named entity identification.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec-conclusion}
Digital scholarly editing involves the interplay of natural language text with
formal code and with knowledge bases in ways that suggests various interesting
possibilities related to computational logic in a long-term perspective:
There are parallels of digital scholarly editing and a classical AI scenario,
where an agent in an environment makes decisions on actions to perform, which
indicates a potential relevance of AI methods to scholarly editing: General
background knowledge in the AI scenario corresponds to knowledge bases like
\name{GND}\xspace and \name{GeoNames}; the position of the agent in the environment
corresponds to a position in the text; temporal order of events corresponds to
the order of word occurrences; the environment which is only incompletely
sensed or understood by the agent corresponds to incompletely understood
natural language text; coming to decisions about actions to take corresponds
to decisions about denotations of text phrases and about annotations to
associate with text components.
A key requirement of a modern system to support scholarly editing is the
interplay of knowledge that is inferred by automated and statistic-based
techniques, which is inherently incomplete and not fully incorrect, with
manually supplied knowledge. Non-monotonic reasoning should be applicable to
provide a systematic logic-based approach to mediate between the two types of
knowledge.
\mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace already supports abstract ways to specify \name{positions} in text that
are used as target of external annotations. It seems an interesting topic of
further research to investigate this more systematically, also taking
approaches to programming into account such as the composition of information
in \name{aspect-oriented programming (AOP)} \cite{aop:97}, where items
relevant in scholarly editing roughly match concepts from AOP as follows:
Position in text -- joint point; set of positions -- pointcut; specifier of a
set of positions -- pointcut designator; action to be performed at all
positions in a set -- advice; effecting execution of ``advices'' -- weaving.
If queries are written in a suitable fragment of Prolog, they can be
automatically optimized, abstracting from caring about indexes (relation
caches), the order of subgoals and the ways in which answer components are
combined. Recent approaches to interpolation based query reformulation might
be applicable there \cite{toman:wedell:book,benedikt:book}. The optimized
version of a query is extracted there as a variant of a Craig interpolant from
a proof obtained from a first-order prover. It seems also possible to apply
this approach to determine from a given set of queries the caches that need to
be constructed for efficient evaluation of the queries.
For now, we have seen with \mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace an environment for digital scholarly editing
that has proved to be economic and practically workable in serious edition
projects. So far, the user from the Humanities applies \mbox{\name{KBSET}}\xspace mainly in a
\LaTeX\xspace workflow, although advanced functionality is implemented as free
software in Prolog, which is successfully and efficiently used there in a
variety of roles.
\newpage
\bibliographystyle{splncs04}
|
\section{Introduction}
Given a graph $G=(V, E)$ with edge cost function $c$, the minimum-cost
(or minimum-weight) perfect matching problem is to find a perfect matching
$E' \subseteq E$ (a subset such that every vertex $v \in V$ is covered
by exactly one $uv \in E'$) so that the sum of the costs of $E'$ is minimized.
As mentioned in \cite{cook_rohe_1999}, the minimum-cost perfect matching
problem is a classical problem in combinatorial optimization with numerous and
varied applications.
Since Edmonds \cite{edmonds1965a} introduced the blossom algorithm (a
polynomial-time combinatorial method of solving the problem), a number of
efficient
implementations have been developed over the years, with Kolmogorov's Blossom
V~\cite{kolmogorov_blossom_2009} being a recent notable version.
The problem can also be formulated as a binary integer program:
\begin{align*}
\min \sum_{e \in E}& c(e) x(e) \\
{\mbox{s.t.}} \sum_{uv \in E} x(uv) &= 1 & \forall~v \in V \\
x(e) &\in \{0,1\} &\forall~e \in E.
\end{align*}
To use linear programming (LP) techniques to solve the problem, the constraints
$x(e) \in \{0,1\}$ are first relaxed to $x(e) \in [0, 1]$ and then to
$x(e) \geq 0$ since the upper bounds are then implied. The linear program
that results turns out to be exact for bipartite graphs in the sense that a
basic optimal solution is the incidence vector of a minimum-weight perfect
matching. Edmonds \cite{edmonds1965b} provides an LP formulation for
non-bipartite graphs that has the same property. It requires the addition of
``blossom inequalities":
\begin{align*}
\min \sum_{e \in E}& c(e) x(e) \\
{\mbox{s.t.}} \sum_{uv \in E} x(uv) &= 1 &\forall~v \in V \\
\sum_{\substack{uv \in E \\ u \in S, v\notin S}} x(uv) &\geq 1, &\forall
S\subseteq
V,~|S|\mbox{ odd},~ 3 \leq |S| \leq |V|-3 \\
x(e) &\geq 0 &\forall~e \in E.
\end{align*}
Unfortunately, the presence of an exponential number of constraints in
this formulation precludes polynomial-time solvability via a generic LP
solver. As a result, researchers in the past have experimented with a
cutting-plane approach, solving the relaxation first without the blossom
inequalities, then iteratively finding and adding violated inequalities until the problem
has an integral solution. A polynomial-time (though impractical) algorithm
follows using the equivalence of separation and optimization via the
ellipsoid method (see Grötschel \textit{et al.}~\cite{GLS}) and the
polynomial-time identification of violated blossom inequalities due to Padberg
and Rao~\cite{padberg_rao_1982}. The existence of a practical LP-based cutting
plane method for the minimum-weight perfect matching remained uncertain until
2016, when Chandrasekaran~\textit{et al.}~\cite{chandrasekaran_cutting_2016}
gave a cutting-plane algorithm which uses only a polynomial number of linear
programs.
Their approach involves carefully selecting the blossom inequalities to be
included at each iteration and requires that the optimal solution to the linear
program be unique. As this uniqueness property does not always hold in
general, their method introduces an edge ordering and a perturbation on the
edge costs. (The edge costs are assumed to be integers.) In particular, if
$c_0(i)$ is the original cost for the $i$-th edge, then the perturbed cost is
$c(i)=c_0(i)+2^{-i}$. Such a perturbation turns out to be sufficient for
providing the required uniqueness property. Even though the increase in
size in representing the perturbed costs is polynomial, when the graph is large
(say with hundreds of edges), the precision required to represent the
perturbed costs exceeds what is typical of the floating-point formats used by
most LP solvers \cite{gunluk_exact_2011}. (For example, $4+2^{-100}=
\frac{5070602400912917605986812821505}{1267650600228229401496703205376}$ requires a mantissa of over 100 bits.)
To overcome the potential numerical difficulties caused by
perturbation, we present a variant of the algorithm which does not require
an explicit perturbation to ensure uniqueness. It works instead by solving a
sequence of linear programs for each single linear program that the original
algorithm would solve. We present a method whereby, given the solutions to
these programs, we can derive the optimal solution to a hypothetical perturbed
linear program without any explicit calculations on perturbed costs. After
this, the rest of the proof follows just as it did for the original algorithm.
The trade-off is that our algorithm has a worse runtime than that of
Chandrasekaran \textit{et al.} Theirs requires solving $O(n \log n)$ linear
programs, while ours solves $O(mn \log n)$. This is, however, still
polynomial.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. After defining some terms
(Section~\ref{sec:prelim}) and
summarizing the algorithm from \cite{chandrasekaran_cutting_2016}
(Section~\ref{sec:cvv}), we give
examples of graphs which show that this algorithm requires some form of perturbation in both the primal and dual problems.
In particular, without perturbing the edge costs, we cannot guarantee that the
intermediate solutions will always be half-integral (Section~\ref{NonHalf})
or that the algorithm will terminate (Section~\ref{sec:cycling}).
This occurs even if we force the primal solution to be the same as it
would have been with perturbations. This motivates our new method, which uses
multiple linear programs to accurately emulate the perturbations. We first explain this in a general case
(Section~\ref{sec:perturb}) and then apply it to the specific problem of finding
perfect matchings (Section~\ref{sec:newalg}).
\section{Notation and definitions}\label{sec:prelim}
The set of $m \times n$ matrices with real entries is denoted by $\mathbb{R}^{m\times
n}$.
For a matrix $A\in\mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$, $A_{i,j}$ denotes the $(i,j)$-entry
of $A$; that is, the entry of $A$ at the intersection of the $i$-th row and the
$j$-th column. $A_{:,j}$ denotes the $j$-th column of $A$ and
$A_{i,:}$ the $i$-th row. The transpose of $A$ is denoted by $A^{\mathsf{T}}$.
Following common usage in combinatorics, for a finite set $E$, $\mathbb{R}^E$ denotes
the set of tuples of real numbers indexed by elements of $E$. For $y \in
\mathbb{R}^E$, $y(i)$ denotes the entry indexed by $i \in E$. For a positive integer
$n$, $\mathbb{R}^n$ is an abbreviation for $\mathbb{R}^{\{1,\ldots,n\}}.$ Depending on the
context, elements of $\mathbb{R}^n$ are treated as if they were elements of
$\mathbb{R}^{n\times 1}$.
We assume familiarity with basic terminology related to matchings and linear
programming. A refresher of the former can be found at \cite[Chapter
5]{cook_combinatorial_1998}, and of the latter at
\cite{schrijver_theory_2000}. We next recall some definitions in
Chandrasekaran \textit{et al.}~\cite{chandrasekaran_cutting_2016} to facilitate
discussion of their minimum-cost perfect matching algorithm.
Let $G=(V,E)$ be an simple undirected graph with integer edge costs given by
$c \in \mathbb{Z}^E$. A family $\mathscr{F}$ of subsets of $V$ is said to be
\textit{laminar} if for all $U,W \in \mathscr{F}$, $U \cap W = \emptyset$ or $U
\subseteq W$ or $W \subseteq U$. For a set $S \subseteq V$,
$\delta(S)$ denotes the set of edges incident to one vertex in $S$ and one
vertex not in $S$. For a vertex $u$, $\delta(u)$ denotes $\delta(\{u\})$. For
$x \in \mathbb{R}^E$ and $T \subseteq E$, $x(T)$ denotes the sum $\sum_{e \in T}
x(e)$.
Let $M$ be a matching of a graph $H = (V, E)$. Let $U \subseteq V$, and let $\mathscr{F}$ be a laminar family
of subsets of $V$. Then $M$ is a \textit{$(U, \mathscr{F})$-perfect-matching} if
${|\delta(S) \cap M|} \leq 1$ for every $S \in \mathscr{F}$ and $M$ covers exactly the
vertex set $U$. A set of vertices $S \in \mathscr{F}$ is said to be \textit{$(H,
\mathscr{F})$-factor-critical} for a graph $H$ if, for every $u \in S$, there exists an
$(S \setminus \{u\}, \mathscr{F})$-perfect-matching using the edges of $H$.
For a laminar family $\mathscr{F}$ of odd subsets of $V$, define the
following primal-dual pair of linear programming problems:
\begin{align*}
\min \sum_{uv\in E}& c(uv) x(uv)\tag{$P_\mathscr{F}(G, c)$}\label{Pf}\\
{\mbox{s.t.}}\ x(\delta(u))&=1&\forall u\in V\\
x(\delta(S))&\ge 1& \forall S\in {\mathscr{F}}\\
x&\ge0,\\
\\
\max \sum_{S\in V \cup \mathscr{F}}&\Pi(S)\tag{$D_\mathscr{F}(G, c)$}\label{Df}\\
{\mbox{s.t.}}\ \sum_{S\in V \cup \mathscr{F}:uv\in \delta(S)} \Pi(S)&\le c(uv) & \forall uv\in E \\
\Pi(S)&\ge0&\forall S\in \mathscr{F}.
\end{align*}
Let $\Pi$ be a feasible solution to \ref{Df}.
$G_\Pi$ denotes the graph $(V,E_\Pi)$ where
$E_\Pi = \{ uv \in E :
\sum_{S\in V \cup \mathscr{F}:uv\in \delta(S)} \Pi(S) = c(uv)\}$. Colloquially,
$E_\Pi$ is the set of ``tight" edges with respect to $\Pi$. We say that $\Pi$
is an \textit{$\mathscr{F}$-critical dual} if every $S \in \mathscr{F}$ is $(G_\Pi,
\mathscr{F})$-factor-critical and $\Pi(T) > 0$ for every non-maximal $T \in \mathscr{F}$. If
$\Pi$ is an $\mathscr{F}$-critical dual except that some sets $S \in \mathscr{F}$ for which
$\Pi(S)=0$ may not be $(G_\Pi, \mathscr{F})$-factor-critical, we say that $\Pi$ is an
$\mathscr{F}$-positively-critical dual.
Finally, we define a metric on solutions to \ref{Df}
$$\Delta(\Gamma, \Pi)=\sum_{S \in V \cup\mathscr{F}} \frac{1}{|S|}
|\Gamma(S)-\Pi(S)|.$$ It can be easily verified that this has the properties of a metric.
For a given fixed $\Gamma$, we say that $\Pi$ is \textit{$\Gamma$-extremal} if
it minimizes $\Delta(\Gamma, \Pi)$. Given $\Gamma$ and a primal solution $x$,
we may find a $\Gamma$-extremal dual optimal solution by solving the following
linear program \cite[Section 5]{chandrasekaran_cutting_2016}:
\begin{align*}
\min \sum_{S \in V \cup \mathscr{F}}&\frac{1}{|S|}r(S)\tag{$D^*_\mathscr{F}(G,
c)$}\label{D*}\\
{\mbox{s.t.}}\ r(S)+\Pi(S)&\geq\Gamma(S)&\forall S \in V \cup \mathscr{F}_x\\
-r(S)+\Pi(S)&\leq\Gamma(S)&\forall S \in V \cup \mathscr{F}_x\\
\sum_{uv \in \delta(S)}\Pi(S)&=c(uv)&\forall uv \in \operatorname{supp}(x)\\
\sum_{uv \in \delta(S)}\Pi(S)&\leq c(uv)&\forall uv \notin \operatorname{supp}(x)\\
\Pi(S)&\geq0& \forall S \in \mathscr{F}_x\\
\Pi(S)&=0&\forall S \in \mathscr{F} \setminus \mathscr{F}_x\\
r(s)&=0&\forall S \in \mathscr{F} \setminus \mathscr{F}_x,
\end{align*}
where $\mathscr{F}_x=\{S \in \mathscr{F} : x(\delta(S))=1\}$. The solution will give us values
for $r$ and $\Pi$; we ignore $r$ and take $\Pi$ to be our $\Gamma$-extremal
solution.
\section{The Chandrasekaran-Végh-Vempala algorithm}\label{sec:cvv}
Algorithm~\ref{alg:cvv} for finding a minimum-cost perfect matching on $G$
is due to Chandrasekaran \textit{et al.}~\cite{chandrasekaran_cutting_2016}.
It assumes, as we will from now on, that the edge costs are integers.
\begin{algorithm}[H]\caption{C-P-Matching Algorithm}\label{alg:cvv}
\KwIn{A graph $G=(V, E)$ with edge costs $c \in \mathbb{Z}^E$.}
\KwOut{A binary vector $x$ representing a minimum-cost perfect matching on
$G$.}
Let $c$ be the cost function on the edges after perturbation (i.e., after
ordering the edges arbitrarily and increasing the cost of each edge $i$ by
$2^{-i}$). \label{cvv:OrderEdges}
$\mathscr{F} \leftarrow \emptyset$, $\Gamma \leftarrow 0$
\While{$x$ is not integral}{
Find an optimal solution $x$ to \ref{Pf}.\label{cvv:primalstep}
Find a $\Gamma$-extremal dual optimal solution $\Pi$ to \ref{Df}
(possibly by solving \ref{D*}).
\label{cvv:extremal}
$\mathscr{H}'\leftarrow\{S\in {\mathscr{F}}: \Pi(S)>0\}$ \label{cvv:H'}
Let $\mathscr{C}$ denote the set of odd cycles in $\operatorname{supp}(x)$. For each
$C\in \mathscr{C}$, define $\hat C$ as the union of $V(C)$ and the
maximal sets of $\mathscr{H}'$ intersecting it.
$\mathscr{H}''\leftarrow \{\hat C: C\in \mathscr{C}\}$
$\mathscr{F} \leftarrow \mathscr{H}'\cup \mathscr{H}''$, $\Gamma
\leftarrow \Pi$
}
\KwRet{$x$}
\end{algorithm}
The authors of the algorithm showed that $\mathscr{F}$ is always a laminar
family and that the algorithm terminates after $O(n \log n)$ iterations,
assuming that \ref{Pf} has a unique optimal solution in every
iteration of the algorithm. This is ensured through the use of perturbations
in the first step. The authors further demonstrate that a $\Gamma$-extremal
dual solution, with an $\mathscr{F}$-critical $\Gamma$, is an $\mathscr{F}$-positively-critical
dual optimal to \ref{Df}, so the result of step~\ref{cvv:extremal} is
$\mathscr{F}$-positively-critical. When combined with the uniquness assumption, this
leads to $x$ being half-integral in each iteration.
The choice of using powers of $\frac{1}{2}$ for the perturbations is to keep
the increases in input size polynomial. However, to guarantee uniqueness,
powers of a sufficiently small $\epsilon > 0$ can be used instead.
\begin{lemma}\label{cvvepsilon}
There exists a $\delta>0$ such that the perturbations used in Algorithm
\ref{alg:cvv} may be replaced with powers of $\epsilon$ for any
$\delta>\epsilon>0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Consider the proof given for the efficacy of the $2^{-i}$ perturbation in
\cite[Section 7]{chandrasekaran_cutting_2016}. This uses only one property
of the perturbation: that, if $\sum_{i=1}^m a(i) 2^{-i}=\sum_{k=1}^n
b(k) 2^{-k}$, with $a(i), b(k) > 0$, then $m = n$
and $a(i)=b(i)$ for all $i$. We prove this for a class of arbitrary $\epsilon > 0$, after which the
desired result follows.
Assume $\sum_{i=1}^m a(i)\epsilon^i = \sum_{k=1}^n b(k) \epsilon^k$.
Assume further, without loss of generality, that $m \leq n$. Then
$\sum_{i=1}^m (a(i)-b(i))\epsilon^i - \sum_{k=m+1}^n b(k) \epsilon^k = 0$.
Take $m < n$. For $\epsilon$ sufficiently small, either $a(i)=b(i)$ for
all $i \in \{1, \ldots, m\}$ or $\sum_{i=1}^m |(a(i)-b(i))|\epsilon^i >
\sum_{k=m+1}^n b(k) \epsilon^k$. In the first case, $ \sum_{k=m+1}^n b(k)
\epsilon^k = 0$, a contradiction since $\epsilon$ and all $b(k)$ are
positive; in the second, $\sum_{i=1}^m (a(i)-b(i))\epsilon^i -
\sum_{k=m+1}^n b(k) \epsilon^k \neq 0$. Therefore $m = n$.
Assume there exists a minimal $l$ such that $a(l)-b(l) \neq 0$. Then
\[
0=\sum_{i=1}^m(a(i)-b(i))\epsilon^i = (a(l)-b(l))\epsilon^l +
\epsilon^{l+1}\sum_{i=l+1}^n(a(i)-b(i))\epsilon^{i-l-1}.
\]
For sufficiently small $\epsilon$, $|(a(l)-b(l))\epsilon^l| >
|\epsilon^{l+1}\sum_{i=l+1}^n(a(i)-b(i))\epsilon^{i-l-1}|$, so
$(a(l)-b(l))\epsilon^l + \epsilon^{l+1} \sum_{i=l+1}^n(a(i)-b(i))
\epsilon^{i-l-1} \neq 0$.
This shows that, for any given $a$ and $b$, there exists a $\delta$ such
that if $\sum a(i)\delta^i = \sum b(k)\delta^k,$ then $a=b$ for all
$\delta > \epsilon > 0$. In fact, we need only consider the cases where
$a$ and $b$ are basic feasible solutions to \ref{Pf}, because if there
exists an optimal solution that is not a basic feasible solution then there
exist two distinct basic feasible solutions that are optimal. Therefore,
if optimal basic feasible solutions are unique, so are optimal solutions in
general.
Fix $\mathscr{F}$. Then, because \ref{Pf} is bounded and finite-dimensional, it
has a finite number of basic feasible solutions $s_1, \dots, s_k$. Every
pair $(s_p, s_q)$ gives us a $\delta$ by setting $a=s_p$, $b=s_q$ and
running through the logic above. Take the smallest of these $\delta$s to
complete the proof.
\end{proof}
For reasons that will become clear later (see Section~\ref{sec:perturb}),
it will be more convenient to use powers of a sufficiently small $\epsilon > 0$
as perturbations instead of powers of $\frac{1}{2}$. In any case, increasing
the bit-length required to represent the edge costs can lead to practical
computation challenges since most LP solvers employ fixed-length floating-point
formats. (Notable exceptions exist, such as
QSopt-Exact~\cite{ApplegateDavidL.2007Estl} and the SoPlex rational
solver~\cite{GleixnerAmbrosM.2016IRfL}, but they are significantly slower than
non-exact solvers.) We feel strongly that the key to a successful
implementation of Algorithm~\ref{alg:cvv} is to not work with any explicit
numerical perturbation.
An obvious way of modifying the algorithm is simply to not perturb the edge
costs and run the rest of the procedure as stated, but this violates the uniqueness assumption, and as easily demonstrated in \cite[Section 1]{chandrasekaran_cutting_2016}, can lead to non-half-integrality and cycling.
Instead, we may emulate perturbations by ordering the edges (as in step
\ref{cvv:OrderEdges} of Algorithm~\ref{alg:cvv}) and then finding a
lexicographically-minimal optimal solution to \ref{Pf}, where $c$ is now an
unperturbed cost function. This may be accomplished using Algorithm
\ref{alg:LexMinPrimal}, which shows the process in a more general case.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{Lexicographically-Minimal Primal Algorithm}\label{alg:LexMinPrimal}
\KwIn{A linear program $P$ of the form $\min c^{\mathsf{T}} x\ {\mbox{s.t.}}\ Ax \geq b$, where
$x \in \mathbb{R}^n$.}
\KwOut{The lexicographically-minimal solution $x$ to $P$.}
Solve $P$ and let its opimal value be $\gamma$.
$K \leftarrow \emptyset$, $x \leftarrow 0$
\For{$i \leftarrow 1$ \KwTo $n$}{
Set $x$ to an optimal solution to
\abovedisplayskip=0pt
\belowdisplayskip=0pt
\begin{align}
\min \ & x_i\notag \\
{\mbox{s.t.}}\ c^{\mathsf{T}} x &= \gamma \notag \\
x_j &=z & \forall (j, z) \in K \notag\\
Ax&\geq b. \notag
\end{align}
$K \leftarrow K \cup \{(i, x_i)\}$
}
\KwRet{$x$}
\end{algorithm}
By \cite[p. 138]{schrijver_theory_2000}, the
lexicographically-minimal optimal solution to \ref{Pf} is the same
as the optimal solution to the perturbed \ref{Pf}.
Unfortunately, this on its own ensures neither half-integrality nor
convergence: for an arbitrarily small nonzero value there exist graphs such
that the lexicographically-minimal optimal solution to \ref{Pf} contains
smaller values, and there exist graphs on which this modification of the
algorithm enters an infinite loop. Before giving a slightly more complex
modification of the algorithm that uses a multi-stage approach to mimic solving
with perturbation without actually working with perturbations, we first give
some examples of graphs that demonstrate the problems just mentioned.
\section{Non-half-integral solution}\label{NonHalf}
The following example, which we call the ``dancing robot," shows that, if
the edge costs are not perturbed at all, having an $\mathscr{F}$-critical dual is not
sufficient to guarantee that all lexicographically-minimal optimal primal
solutions are half-integral. Chandrasekaran \textit{et
al.}~\cite{chandrasekaran_cutting_2016} provide an example early in their paper
of a graph on which their algorithm as written does not maintain
half-integrality, but this does not entirely suffice for our purposes, as the
lexicographically-minimal primal solution on this graph, for any edge ordering,
is integral.
The graph shown in Figures \ref{DRPerfect}-\ref{DR3}, with all edges having
cost 1, eventually gives non-half-integral values when run through the original
algorithm without any perturbation while enforcing a lexicographically-minimal
optimal primal. During each iteration, an optimal dual solution is given by
$\Pi$, the vector having value $\frac{1}{2}$ on the entries indexed by the
vertices and $0$ on entries indexed by the sets in $\mathscr{F}$. Note that all edges
in the graph are tight with respect to $\Pi$. We can see that, although the
primal solutions in the first and second iterations are half-integral
(shown in Figures~\ref{DR1} and~\ref{DR2}), the solution in the third iteration
no longer is. The $\frac{1}{3}$- and $\frac{2}{3}$-edges are shown in
Figure~\ref{DR3}.
Meanwhile, the dual solution $\Pi$ is a positively-critical
optimal dual for the current $\mathscr{F}$ in every iteration, as well as a critical
dual for the next $\mathscr{F}$. For instance, the $\Pi$ from the second iteration,
feasible to the dual problems from both the second and third iterations, is
trivially an $\mathscr{F}$-positively-critical optimal dual for the second iteration,
since none of the sets $S \in \mathscr{F}$ have positive dual value. For the third
iteration, since there exists an $(S\setminus\{u\}, \mathscr{F})$-perfect-matching for
any node $u \in S \in \mathscr{F}$, and since $\mathscr{F}$ only has maximal sets, that same
$\Pi$ is an $\mathscr{F}$-critical dual.
\begin{figure}
\begin{minipage}{0.84\textwidth}
\begin{minipage}{0.5\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick, yscale=0.6]
\tikzset{
font={\fontsize{18pt}{12}\selectfont}}
\coordinate (0) at (-3.46, 2);
\coordinate (1) at (0, 4);
\coordinate (2) at (6, -5);
\coordinate (3) at (-7.46, 2);
\coordinate (4) at (0, -4);
\coordinate (5) at (3.46, 2);
\coordinate (6) at (6.5, -8);
\coordinate (7) at (-7.46, -2);
\coordinate (8) at (-3, -11);
\coordinate (9) at (-1, -12);
\coordinate (10) at (1, -12);
\coordinate (11) at (0, -8);
\coordinate (12) at (-3.46, -2);
\coordinate (13) at (3.46, -2);
\coordinate (14) at (3, -11);
\coordinate (15) at (6.92, 0);
\draw (4) -- (12);
\draw[integral] (8) -- (9);
\draw (0) -- (12);
\draw[integral] (0) -- (3);
\draw (0) -- (1);
\draw [integral] (1) -- (5);
\draw (2) -- (13);
\draw[integral] (2) -- (6);
\draw (3) -- (7);
\draw (4) -- (13);
\draw[integral] (4) -- (11);
\draw (5) -- (13);
\draw (5) -- (15);
\draw[integral] (7) -- (12);
\draw (8) -- (11);
\draw (9) -- (11);
\draw[integral] (10) -- (14);
\draw (10) -- (11);
\draw (11) -- (14);
\draw[integral] (13) -- (15);
\node at (0)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{0};
\node at (1)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{1};
\node at (2)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{2};
\node at (3)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{3};
\node at (4)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{4};
\node at (5)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{5};
\node at (6)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{6};
\node at (7)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{7};
\node at (8)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{8};
\node at (9)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{9};
\node at (10)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{10};
\node at (11)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{11};
\node at (12)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{12};
\node at (13)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{13};
\node at (14)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{14};
\node at (15)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{15};
\draw [rounded corners = 4pt] (-7.4,-3.5) rectangle (-1.5, -9);
\draw (-7, -4.5) -- (-3, -4.5) [integral];
\draw (-7, -5.5) -- (-3, -5.5) [half integral];
\draw (-7, -6.5) -- (-3, -6.5) [one third];
\draw (-7, -7.5) -- (-3, -7.5) [two thirds];
\node at (-2.25,-4.5){\Large 1};
\node at (-2.25,-5.5){\Large 1/2};
\node at (-2.25,-6.5){\Large 1/3};
\node at (-2.25,-7.5){\Large 2/3};
\node at (-4.45, -8.5) {\Large Zero otherwise};
\end{tikzpicture}}
\caption{Perfect Matching}
\label{Legend}
\label{DRPerfect}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.5\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick, yscale=0.6]
\tikzset{
font={\fontsize{18pt}{12}\selectfont}}
\coordinate (0) at (-3.46, 2);
\coordinate (1) at (0, 4);
\coordinate (2) at (6, -5);
\coordinate (3) at (-7.46, 2);
\coordinate (4) at (0, -4);
\coordinate (5) at (3.46, 2);
\coordinate (6) at (6.5, -8);
\coordinate (7) at (-7.46, -2);
\coordinate (8) at (-3, -11);
\coordinate (9) at (-1, -12);
\coordinate (10) at (1, -12);
\coordinate (11) at (0, -8);
\coordinate (12) at (-3.46, -2);
\coordinate (13) at (3.46, -2);
\coordinate (14) at (3, -11);
\coordinate (15) at (6.92, 0);
\draw (4) -- (12) [integral];
\draw (8) -- (9) [integral];
\draw (0) -- (12);
\draw (0) -- (3);
\draw (0) -- (1) [integral];
\draw (1) -- (5);
\draw (2) -- (13);
\draw (2) -- (6) [integral];
\draw (3) -- (7) [integral];
\draw (4) -- (13);
\draw (4) -- (11);
\draw (5) -- (13) [half integral];
\draw (5) -- (15) [half integral];
\draw (7) -- (12);
\draw (8) -- (11);
\draw (9) -- (11);
\draw (10) -- (14) [half integral];
\draw (10) -- (11) [half integral];
\draw (11) -- (14) [half integral];
\draw (13) -- (15) [half integral];
\node at (0)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{0};
\node at (1)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{1};
\node at (2)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{2};
\node at (3)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{3};
\node at (4)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{4};
\node at (5)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{5};
\node at (6)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{6};
\node at (7)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{7};
\node at (8)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{8};
\node at (9)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{9};
\node at (10)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{10};
\node at (11)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{11};
\node at (12)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{12};
\node at (13)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{13};
\node at (14)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{14};
\node at (15)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{15};
\end{tikzpicture}}
$\Pi_1(v)=\frac{1}{2}$ $\forall{v} \in \mathcal{V}$, $\mathscr{F}_1=\emptyset$
\caption{First Iteration}
\label{DR1}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.5\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick, yscale=0.6]
\tikzset{
font={\fontsize{18pt}{12}\selectfont}}
\coordinate (0) at (-3.46, 2);
\coordinate (1) at (0, 4);
\coordinate (2) at (6, -5);
\coordinate (3) at (-7.46, 2);
\coordinate (4) at (0, -4);
\coordinate (5) at (3.46, 2);
\coordinate (6) at (6.5, -8);
\coordinate (7) at (-7.46, -2);
\coordinate (8) at (-3, -11);
\coordinate (9) at (-1, -12);
\coordinate (10) at (1, -12);
\coordinate (11) at (0, -8);
\coordinate (12) at (-3.46, -2);
\coordinate (13) at (3.46, -2);
\coordinate (14) at (3, -11);
\coordinate (15) at (6.92, 0);
\draw (4) -- (12) [half integral];
\draw (8) -- (9) [half integral];
\draw (0) -- (12) [half integral];
\draw (0) -- (3);
\draw (0) -- (1) [half integral];
\draw (1) -- (5) [half integral];
\draw (2) -- (13);
\draw (2) -- (6) [integral];
\draw (3) -- (7) [integral];
\draw (4) -- (13) [half integral];
\draw (4) -- (11);
\draw (5) -- (13);
\draw (5) -- (15) [half integral];
\draw (7) -- (12);
\draw (8) -- (11) [half integral];
\draw (9) -- (11) [half integral];
\draw (10) -- (14) [integral];
\draw (10) -- (11);
\draw (11) -- (14);
\draw (13) -- (15) [half integral];
\node at (0)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{0};
\node at (1)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{1};
\node at (2)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{2};
\node at (3)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{3};
\node at (4)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{4};
\node at (5)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{5};
\node at (6)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{6};
\node at (7)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{7};
\node at (8)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{8};
\node at (9)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{9};
\node at (10)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{10};
\node at (11)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{11};
\node at (12)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{12};
\node at (13)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{13};
\node at (14)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{14};
\node at (15)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{15};
\end{tikzpicture}}
$\Pi_2(v)=\frac{1}{2}$ $\forall{v} \in \mathcal{V}$,
$\mathscr{F}_2 = \{\{5, 15, 13\}, \{10, 11, 14\}\}$, $\Pi_2(S)= 0 $ $\forall{S} \in \mathscr{F}_2$
\caption{Second Iteration}
\label{DR2}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.5\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick, yscale=0.6]
\tikzset{
font={\fontsize{18pt}{12}\selectfont}}
\coordinate (0) at (-3.46, 2);
\coordinate (1) at (0, 4);
\coordinate (2) at (6, -5);
\coordinate (3) at (-7.46, 2);
\coordinate (4) at (0, -4);
\coordinate (5) at (3.46, 2);
\coordinate (6) at (6.5, -8);
\coordinate (7) at (-7.46, -2);
\coordinate (8) at (-3, -11);
\coordinate (9) at (-1, -12);
\coordinate (10) at (1, -12);
\coordinate (11) at (0, -8);
\coordinate (12) at (-3.46, -2);
\coordinate (13) at (3.46, -2);
\coordinate (14) at (3, -11);
\coordinate (15) at (6.92, 0);
\draw (4) -- (12) [two thirds];
\draw (8) -- (9) [integral];
\draw (0) -- (12);
\draw (0) -- (3) [one third];
\draw (0) -- (1) [two thirds];
\draw (1) -- (5) [one third];
\draw (2) -- (13);
\draw (2) -- (6) [integral];
\draw (3) -- (7) [two thirds];
\draw (4) -- (13);
\draw (4) -- (11) [one third];
\draw (5) -- (13) [one third];
\draw (5) -- (15) [one third];
\draw (7) -- (12) [one third];
\draw (8) -- (11);
\draw (9) -- (11);
\draw (10) -- (14) [two thirds];
\draw (10) -- (11) [one third];
\draw (11) -- (14) [one third];
\draw (13) -- (15) [two thirds];
\node at (0)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{0};
\node at (1)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{1};
\node at (2)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{2};
\node at (3)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{3};
\node at (4)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{4};
\node at (5)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{5};
\node at (6)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{6};
\node at (7)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{7};
\node at (8)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{8};
\node at (9)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{9};
\node at (10)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{10};
\node at (11)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{11};
\node at (12)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{12};
\node at (13)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{13};
\node at (14)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{14};
\node at (15)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 3.5pt]{15};
\end{tikzpicture}}
$\Pi_3(v)=\frac{1}{2}$ $\forall{v} \in \mathcal{V}$,
$\mathscr{F}_3 = \{\{0, 1, 5, 15, 13, 4, 12\}, \{8, 11, 9\}\}$, $\Pi_3(S)= 0 $ $\forall{S} \in \mathscr{F}_3$
\caption{Third Iteration}
\label{DR3}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.15\textwidth}
\centering
\begin{flushright}
\textbf{Edge ordering:}\\
(1, 5)\\
(2, 13)\\
(10, 14)\\
(0, 3)\\
(4, 12)\\
(5, 13)\\
(7, 12)\\
(5, 15)\\
(3, 7)\\
(8, 9)\\
(0, 1)\\
(11, 14)\\
(0, 12)\\
(4, 13)\\
(2, 6)\\
(10, 11)\\
(9, 11)\\
(4, 11)\\
(8, 11)\\
(13, 15)\\
\end{flushright}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
Even worse, the algorithm will eventually enter into an infinite loop on this
example. The details are tedious, so we will not go into them --- the example
in the next section also loops but does not lose half-integrality.
On their own, then, a lexicographically-minimal primal and an $\mathscr{F}$-critical
dual can guarantee neither half-integrality nor termination. It is worth
mentioning that we could expand the graph to get one with more
non-half-integral edges by making the $2$-$6$ edge (the ``arm" of the dancing
robot) overlap with another dancing robot's $6$-$2$ edge. This combination
would have twice as many non-half-integral edges, spread across twice as many
non-half-integral paths, as the original dancing robot. By combining multiple
dancing robots in such a manner, we can get as many non-half-integral paths as
we want, which indicates that we cannot avoid these non-half-integral edges via
a simple combinatorial linear- or constant-time algorithm.
We can even alter the dancing robot in order to give us arbitrarily small but
nonzero values in a lexicographically-minimal optimal solution. Say we want a
primal solution $x$ such that, for some $uv$, $x(uv)=\frac{1}{2n+1}$ for some
$n \in \mathbb{Z}_{\geq 0}$. We add $2(n-1)$ new edges between $0$ and the $0$-$1$
edge, alternately without and with adjoining $4$-cycles. The next example shows
how this works for $n=2$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{minipage}{0.84\textwidth}
\begin{minipage}{0.5\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick, yscale=0.6]
\tikzset{
font={\fontsize{18pt}{12}\selectfont}}
\coordinate (0) at (-3.46, 2);
\coordinate (1) at (3, 5);
\coordinate (2) at (6, -5);
\coordinate (3) at (-7.46, 2);
\coordinate (4) at (0, -4);
\coordinate (5) at (3.46, 2);
\coordinate (6) at (6.5, -8);
\coordinate (7) at (-7.46, -2);
\coordinate (8) at (-3, -11);
\coordinate (9) at (-1, -12);
\coordinate (10) at (1, -12);
\coordinate (11) at (0, -8);
\coordinate (12) at (-3.46, -2);
\coordinate (13) at (3.46, -2);
\coordinate (14) at (3, -11);
\coordinate (15) at (6.92, 0);
\coordinate (16) at (-3, 5);
\coordinate (17) at (0, 6);
\coordinate (18) at (-3.8, 8);
\coordinate (19) at (-0.8, 9);
\draw (4) -- (12);
\draw (8) -- (9) [integral];
\draw (0) -- (12) [integral];
\draw (0) -- (3);
\draw (0) -- (16);
\draw (1) -- (5) [integral];
\draw (2) -- (13);
\draw (2) -- (6) [integral];
\draw (3) -- (7) [integral];
\draw (4) -- (13);
\draw (4) -- (11) [integral];
\draw (5) -- (13);
\draw (5) -- (15);
\draw (7) -- (12);
\draw (8) -- (11);
\draw (9) -- (11);
\draw (10) -- (14) [integral];
\draw (10) -- (11);
\draw (11) -- (14);
\draw (13) -- (15) [integral];
\draw (16) -- (17) [integral];
\draw (1) -- (17);
\draw (16) -- (18);
\draw (18) -- (19) [integral];
\draw (17) -- (19);
\foreach \n in {0,...,19}
\node at (\n)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 2.8pt]{\n};
\draw [rounded corners = 4pt] (-8,-3.5) rectangle (-3.5, -11.25);
\draw (-7.5, -4.5) -- (-5, -4.5) [integral];
\draw (-7.5, -5.5) -- (-5, -5.5) [half integral];
\draw (-7.5, -6.5) -- (-5, -6.5) [one third];
\draw (-7.5, -7.5) -- (-5, -7.5) [two fifths];
\draw (-7.5, -8.5) -- (-5, -8.5) [three fifths];
\draw (-7.5, -9.5) -- (-5, -9.5) [two thirds];
\node at (-4.25,-4.5){\Large 1};
\node at (-4.25,-5.5){\Large 1/2};
\node at (-4.25,-6.5){\Large 1/5};
\node at (-4.25,-7.5){\Large 2/5};
\node at (-4.25,-8.5){\Large 3/5};
\node at (-4.25,-9.5){\Large 4/5};
\node at (-5.75,-10.5) {\Large Zero otherwise};
\end{tikzpicture}}
\caption{Perfect Matching}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.5\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick, yscale=0.6]
\tikzset{
font={\fontsize{18pt}{12}\selectfont}}
\coordinate (0) at (-3.46, 2);
\coordinate (1) at (3, 5);
\coordinate (2) at (6, -5);
\coordinate (3) at (-7.46, 2);
\coordinate (4) at (0, -4);
\coordinate (5) at (3.46, 2);
\coordinate (6) at (6.5, -8);
\coordinate (7) at (-7.46, -2);
\coordinate (8) at (-3, -11);
\coordinate (9) at (-1, -12);
\coordinate (10) at (1, -12);
\coordinate (11) at (0, -8);
\coordinate (12) at (-3.46, -2);
\coordinate (13) at (3.46, -2);
\coordinate (14) at (3, -11);
\coordinate (15) at (6.92, 0);
\coordinate (16) at (-3, 5);
\coordinate (17) at (0, 6);
\coordinate (18) at (-3.8, 8);
\coordinate (19) at (-0.8, 9);
\draw (4) -- (12) [integral];
\draw (8) -- (9) [integral];
\draw (0) -- (12);
\draw (0) -- (3);
\draw (0) -- (16) [integral];
\draw (1) -- (5) ;
\draw (2) -- (13);
\draw (2) -- (6) [integral];
\draw (3) -- (7) [integral];
\draw (4) -- (13);
\draw (4) -- (11);
\draw (5) -- (13) [half integral];
\draw (5) -- (15) [half integral];
\draw (7) -- (12);
\draw (8) -- (11);
\draw (9) -- (11);
\draw (10) -- (14) [half integral];
\draw (10) -- (11) [half integral];
\draw (11) -- (14) [half integral];
\draw (13) -- (15) [half integral];
\draw (16) -- (17);
\draw (1) -- (17) [integral];
\draw (16) -- (18);
\draw (18) -- (19) [integral];
\draw (17) -- (19);
\foreach \n in {0,...,19}
\node at (\n)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 2.8pt]{\n};
\end{tikzpicture}}
\caption{First Iteration}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.5\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick, yscale=0.6]
\tikzset{
font={\fontsize{18pt}{12}\selectfont}}
\coordinate (0) at (-3.46, 2);
\coordinate (1) at (3, 5);
\coordinate (2) at (6, -5);
\coordinate (3) at (-7.46, 2);
\coordinate (4) at (0, -4);
\coordinate (5) at (3.46, 2);
\coordinate (6) at (6.5, -8);
\coordinate (7) at (-7.46, -2);
\coordinate (8) at (-3, -11);
\coordinate (9) at (-1, -12);
\coordinate (10) at (1, -12);
\coordinate (11) at (0, -8);
\coordinate (12) at (-3.46, -2);
\coordinate (13) at (3.46, -2);
\coordinate (14) at (3, -11);
\coordinate (15) at (6.92, 0);
\coordinate (16) at (-3, 5);
\coordinate (17) at (0, 6);
\coordinate (18) at (-3.8, 8);
\coordinate (19) at (-0.8, 9);
\draw (4) -- (12) [half integral];
\draw (8) -- (9) [half integral];
\draw (0) -- (12) [half integral];
\draw (0) -- (3);
\draw (0) -- (16) [half integral];
\draw (1) -- (5) [half integral];
\draw (2) -- (13);
\draw (2) -- (6) [integral];
\draw (3) -- (7) [integral];
\draw (4) -- (13) [half integral];
\draw (4) -- (11);
\draw (5) -- (13);
\draw (5) -- (15) [half integral];
\draw (7) -- (12);
\draw (8) -- (11) [half integral];
\draw (9) -- (11) [half integral];
\draw (10) -- (14) [integral];
\draw (10) -- (11);
\draw (11) -- (14);
\draw (13) -- (15) [half integral];
\draw (16) -- (17) [half integral];
\draw (1) -- (17) [half integral];
\draw (16) -- (18);
\draw (18) -- (19) [integral];
\draw (17) -- (19);
\foreach \n in {0,...,19}
\node at (\n)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 2.8pt]{\n};
\end{tikzpicture}}
\caption{Second Iteration}
\label{alteredrobot}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.5\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick, yscale=0.6]
\tikzset{
font={\fontsize{18pt}{12}\selectfont}}
\coordinate (0) at (-3.46, 2);
\coordinate (1) at (3, 5);
\coordinate (2) at (6, -5);
\coordinate (3) at (-7.46, 2);
\coordinate (4) at (0, -4);
\coordinate (5) at (3.46, 2);
\coordinate (6) at (6.5, -8);
\coordinate (7) at (-7.46, -2);
\coordinate (8) at (-3, -11);
\coordinate (9) at (-1, -12);
\coordinate (10) at (1, -12);
\coordinate (11) at (0, -8);
\coordinate (12) at (-3.46, -2);
\coordinate (13) at (3.46, -2);
\coordinate (14) at (3, -11);
\coordinate (15) at (6.92, 0);
\coordinate (16) at (-3, 5);
\coordinate (17) at (0, 6);
\coordinate (18) at (-3.8, 8);
\coordinate (19) at (-0.8, 9);
\draw (4) -- (12) [two thirds];
\draw (8) -- (9) [integral];
\draw (0) -- (12);
\draw (0) -- (3) [one third];
\draw (0) -- (16) [two thirds];
\draw (1) -- (5) [one third];
\draw (2) -- (13);
\draw (2) -- (6) [integral];
\draw (3) -- (7) [two thirds];
\draw (4) -- (13);
\draw (4) -- (11) [one third];
\draw (5) -- (13) [two fifths];
\draw (5) -- (15) [two fifths];
\draw (7) -- (12) [one third];
\draw (8) -- (11);
\draw (9) -- (11);
\draw (10) -- (14) [three fifths];
\draw (10) -- (11) [two fifths];
\draw (11) -- (14) [two fifths];
\draw (13) -- (15) [three fifths];
\draw (16) -- (17);
\draw (1) -- (17) [two thirds];
\draw (16) -- (18) [one third];
\draw (18) -- (19) [two thirds];
\draw (17) -- (19) [one third];
\foreach \n in {0,...,19}
\node at (\n)[draw, thick, circle, fill=white, inner sep = 2.8pt]{\n};
\end{tikzpicture}}
\caption{Third Iteration}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.15\textwidth}
\centering
\begin{flushright}
\textbf{Edge ordering:}\\
(1, 5)\\
(2, 13)\\
(10, 14)\\
(0, 3)\\
(17, 19)\\
(4, 12)\\
(5, 13)\\
(7, 12)\\
(16, 18)\\
(5, 15)\\
(3, 7)\\
(18, 19)\\
(8, 9)\\
(0, 16)\\
(1, 17)\\
(11, 14)\\
(0, 12)\\
(16, 17)\\
(4, 13)\\
(2, 6)\\
(10, 11)\\
(9, 11)\\
(4, 11)\\
(8, 11)\\
(13, 15)
\end{flushright}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
Simply by following the algorithm through, we see that we will eventually end
up with a cut ($\{4, 12, 0, 16, 17, 1, 5, 15,
13\}$ in Figure~\ref{alteredrobot}) with $2n+1$ edges coming out of it.
Furthermore, by the conditions of the matching ($x(\delta(u))=1$) and the fact
that these edges form a path in the matching, each edge coming out of this cut
must have the same value, which we will call $\zeta$. Since $x(\delta(S)) \geq
1$, the minimum cost is when $(2n+1)\zeta=1$ or $\zeta=\frac{1}{2n+1}$.
\section{Cycling example}\label{sec:cycling}
Even when seeking a lexicographically-minimal optimal solution to \ref{Pf}
with half-integrality maintained throughout, cycling can still occur in the
absence of perturbation. The graph in Figures \ref{Step1} and \ref{Step2}
(which is easily seen to have a perfect matching), with each edge having cost
$1$, exhibits such behavoir. At all times, an optimal $\mathscr{F}$-positively critical dual is given by a
vector with the vertices having value $\frac{1}{2}$ and the odd sets in $\mathscr{F}$
having value $0$. Since Algorithm \ref{alg:cvv} only retains cuts which have
nonzero values in the dual (step \ref{cvv:H'}), no cuts are preserved between
iterations. Thus, the blossom inequalities which were violated in the previous
iteration are once again allowed to be violated in the next iteration, leading
to cycling.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\begin{minipage}{0.41\textwidth}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick, xscale=1]
\coordinate (Zero) at (1,4);
\coordinate (One) at (1,0);
\coordinate (Two) at (5,-1);
\coordinate (Three) at (3,4);
\coordinate (Four) at (5,4);
\coordinate (Five) at (5,0);
\coordinate (Six) at (1,-1);
\coordinate (Seven) at (2,1.5);
\coordinate (Eight) at (3,5.5);
\coordinate (Nine) at (3,2);
\draw (One) -- (Five) [half integral thin];
\draw (Five) -- (Six);
\draw (Three) -- (Five);
\draw (Four) -- (Eight) [integral thin];
\draw (Zero) -- (Nine) [half integral thin];
\draw (Two) -- (Five);
\draw (Five) -- (Seven) [half integral thin];
\draw (Zero) -- (Three) [half integral thin];
\draw (One) -- (Seven) [half integral thin];
\draw (Zero) -- (Eight);
\draw (One) -- (Six);
\draw (Five) -- (Nine);
\draw (Three) -- (Four);
\draw (Three) -- (Eight);
\draw (Four) -- (Five);
\draw (Two) -- (Six) [integral thin];
\draw (Three) -- (Nine) [half integral thin];
\draw (Zero) -- (One);
\node at (Zero)[draw, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt]{0};
\node at (One)[draw, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt]{1};
\node at (Two)[draw, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt]{2};
\node at (Three)[draw, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt]{3};
\node at (Four)[draw, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt]{4};
\node at (Five)[draw, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt]{5};
\node at (Six)[draw, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt]{6};
\node at (Seven)[draw, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt]{7};
\node at (Eight)[draw, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt]{8};
\node at (Nine)[draw, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt]{9};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Odd iterations}
\label{Step1}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.41\textwidth}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick, xscale=1]
\coordinate (Zero) at (1,4);
\coordinate (One) at (1,0);
\coordinate (Two) at (5,-1);
\coordinate (Three) at (3,4);
\coordinate (Four) at (5,4);
\coordinate (Five) at (5,0);
\coordinate (Six) at (1,-1);
\coordinate (Seven) at (2,1.5);
\coordinate (Eight) at (3,5.5);
\coordinate (Nine) at (3,2);
\draw (One) -- (Five);
\draw (Five) -- (Six) [half integral thin];
\draw (Three) -- (Five);
\draw (Four) -- (Eight) [half integral thin];
\draw (Zero) -- (Nine) [integral thin];
\draw (Two) -- (Five) [half integral thin];
\draw (Five) -- (Seven);
\draw (Zero) -- (Three);
\draw (One) -- (Seven) [integral thin];
\draw (Zero) -- (Eight);
\draw (One) -- (Six);
\draw (Five) -- (Nine);
\draw (Three) -- (Four) [half integral thin];
\draw (Three) -- (Eight)[half integral thin];
\draw (Four) -- (Five);
\draw (Two) -- (Six) [half integral thin];
\draw (Three) -- (Nine);
\draw (Zero) -- (One);
\node at (Zero)[draw, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt]{0};
\node at (One)[draw, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt]{1};
\node at (Two)[draw, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt]{2};
\node at (Three)[draw, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt]{3};
\node at (Four)[draw, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt]{4};
\node at (Five)[draw, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt]{5};
\node at (Six)[draw, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt]{6};
\node at (Seven)[draw, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt]{7};
\node at (Eight)[draw, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt]{8};
\node at (Nine)[draw, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt]{9};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Even iterations}
\label{Step2}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.15\textwidth}
\raggedleft
\textbf{Edge ordering:}\\
(5, 9)\\
(3, 5)\\
(4, 5)\\
(1, 6)\\
(3, 9)\\
(0, 8)\\
(5, 7)\\
(3, 4)\\
(1, 5)\\
(5, 6)\\
(0, 3)\\
(0, 1)\\
(1, 7)\\
(0, 9)\\
(2, 6)\\
(3, 8)\\
(2, 5)\\
(4, 8)
\end{minipage}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\sloppy
This precludes us from ensuring termination of an approach using a
lexicographically-minimal primal with an unperturbed dual. More significantly,
it also means we could not even implement a heuristic version which, in the
event of cycling, would restart the algorithm with randomized edge orderings.
Were half-integrality to occur in tandem with cycling, as it does in Section
\ref{NonHalf}, we could simply verify half-integrality at each iteration, and,
in rare cases of non-half-integrality, begin the entire algorithm again with a
different edge ordering, giving us a good average-case runtime.\footnote{We
discovered the dancing robot after searching through over two thousand randomly-generated graphs, all of which were rapidly and correctly solved by the use of
a lexicographically-minimal primal and unperturbed dual. Furthermore, if a random edge ordering is applied to the dancing robot for example, it is very likely that a perfect matching will be found without issue.} However, this graph
shows that when a possibility of cycling exists, it is likely undetectable by
any means other than direct comparison between iterations. This forces us to
adopt an algorithm which simulates perturbations in the dual.
\section{Solving LP problems with perturbed costs}\label{sec:perturb}
Chandrasekaran \textit{et al.}~\cite{chandrasekaran_cutting_2016} chose a
specific perturbation of the costs, namely, adding $2^{-i}$ on each edge $i$.
In general, perturbation in linear programming (usually for the purpose of
eliminating degeneracy, as in \cite{charnes_optimality_1952}) is of the form
$\epsilon^i$ where $\epsilon$ is sufficiently small. In theoretical analysis,
$\epsilon$ is simply left unspecified. In the same spirit, we show in this
section how we could obtain optimal solutions to both the primal and dual
problems with perturbed costs, working with the fact that $\epsilon$ is
sufficiently small yet not given exactly, without the need of an optimal basis.
The method we describe is therefore able to avoid working
directly with cost values that exceed the representation capacity of
fixed-length floating-point formats typically used by LP solvers. Our method
is applicable to any situation in which the objective function of a generic LP
problem is perturbed in order to enforce uniqueness of the optimal solution.
In the next section, we specialize it to Algorithm \ref{alg:cvv}.
Let $A \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$,
$b \in \mathbb{R}^m$, and
$c_0,\ldots,c_k \in \mathbb{R}^n$ for some nonnegative integer $k$.
Let $N \subseteq \{1,\ldots,n\}$.
Let $F = \{1,\ldots,n\}\setminus N$.
Define $c_\epsilon$ as $\sum_{p = 0}^k c_p \epsilon^p$ where $\epsilon \geq 0$.
Consider the linear programming problem:
\begin{align*}
\min \ c_\epsilon^{\mathsf{T}} x \tag{$P(\epsilon)$}\label{eqn:Peps}\\
{\mbox{s.t.}} \
A x & \geq b \\
x_j & \geq 0 & \forall~j \in N.
\end{align*}
Its dual is
\begin{align*}
\max \ & y^{\mathsf{T}} b \tag{$D(\epsilon)$}\label{eqn:Deps}\\
{\mbox{s.t.}} \ y^{\mathsf{T}} A_{:,j} & \leq c_\epsilon(j) & \forall~j \in N \\
y^{\mathsf{T}} A_{:,j} & = c_\epsilon(j) & \forall~j \in F \\
y &\geq 0.
\end{align*}
\begin{algorithm}[H]\label{alg:perturb}
\SetAlgoLined
\caption{Algorithm for perturbed LP primal-dual pair}
\KwIn{\ref{eqn:Peps} with $\epsilon > 0$ sufficiently small.}
\KwOut{An optimal $x'$ to \ref{eqn:Peps} and an optimal $y'$ to
\ref{eqn:Deps}.}
$E \leftarrow \emptyset$, $J \leftarrow \emptyset$
\For{$p \leftarrow 0$ \KwTo $k$}{
$\overline{J} \leftarrow N \setminus J$
\abovedisplayskip=0pt
\belowdisplayskip=-\baselineskip
Set $x_p$ to an optimal solution to
\begin{align*}
\min \displaystyle\sum_{j \in \overline{J}} & c_p(j) x(j) \\
{\mbox{s.t.}}
\displaystyle\sum_{j \in \overline{J}}{A_{i,j}} x(j) & \geq b(i) & \forall~i \notin E \\
\displaystyle\sum_{j \in \overline{J}}{A_{i,j}} x(j)& = b(i) & \forall~i \in E \\
x(j)& \geq 0 & \forall~j \in \overline{J}
\end{align*}
\label{alg:perturb:primal}\\
and $y_p$ to an optimal solution to its dual.
$E \leftarrow E\cup \{ i : y_{p}(i) > 0\}$
$J \leftarrow J \cup \{ j : {y_{p}}^{\mathsf{T}} A_{:,j} < b(j)\}$
}
Form $x' \in \mathbb{R}^n$ such that $x'(j) = x_k(j)$ for all $j \notin J$ and
$x'(j) = 0$ for all $j \in J$.
$y' \leftarrow \displaystyle\sum_{p=0}^k \epsilon^p y_p$
\KwRet{$x', y'$}
\end{algorithm}
The correctness of Algorithm \ref{alg:perturb} follows from
Lemma~\ref{cheunglp} below. Before we give the proof, we illustrate the
algorithm with an example. For each $p$, let $M_p$ denote the LP problem in
step \ref{alg:perturb:primal} of the algorithm. Consider \ref{eqn:Peps} with
\begin{align*}
A = \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 1 & 2 \end{pmatrix},&&
b = \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix},&&
c_0 = \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 1 \\ 3 \end{pmatrix},&&
c_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 4 \\ 2 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix},&&
c_2 = \begin{pmatrix} -2 \\ -1 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix},&&
N = \{1,2\}.
\end{align*}
The dual problem is
\[\begin{array}{rrrrcl}
\max & y(1) & + & y(2) \\
{\mbox{s.t.}}
& y(1) & & & \leq & 1+4\epsilon-2\epsilon^2 \\
& & & y(2) & \leq & 1+2\epsilon-\epsilon^2 \\
& y(1) & + & 2y(2)& = &3+\epsilon^2 \\
& y(1) &, & y(2) & \geq & 0.
\end{array}\]
Note that $x_0 = \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 1 & 0\end{pmatrix}^{\mathsf{T}}$
and $y_0= \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 1 \end{pmatrix}^{\mathsf{T}}$
are optimal solutions to $P(0)$ and $D(0)$, respectively, which are in turn equivalent to $M_0$ and its dual.
Since $y_0(1), y_0(2) > 0$ and all the constraints in
$D(0)$ are satisfied with equality at $y_0$, $M_1$ is
\[\begin{array}{rrrrrrcl}
\min & 4x(1) & + & 2x(2) \\
{\mbox{s.t.}}
& x(1) & & & + & x(3) & = & 1 \\
& & & x(2) & + & 2x(3) & = & 1 \\
& x(1) &, & x(2) & & & \geq & 0.
\end{array}\]
The dual of $M_1$ is
\[\begin{array}{rrrrcl}
\max & y(1) & + & y(2) \\
{\mbox{s.t.}}
& y(1) & & & \leq & 4 \\
& & & y(2) & \leq & 2 \\
& y(1) & + & 2y(2)& = & 0.
\end{array}\]
An optimal solution to $M_1$ is $x_1 = \begin{pmatrix} \frac{1}{2} & 0 &
\frac{1}{2}\end{pmatrix}^{\mathsf{T}}$. An optimal dual solution is
$y_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 4 & -2\end{pmatrix}^{\mathsf{T}}$.
The second constraint in the dual is not active at $y_1$.
Hence, $M_2$ is
\[\begin{array}{rrrrcl}
\min & -2x(1) & + & x(3) \\
{\mbox{s.t.}}
& x(1) & + & x(3) & = & 1 \\
& & & 2x(3) & = & 1 \\
& x(1) & & & \geq & 0.
\end{array}\]
The dual of $M_2$ is
\[\begin{array}{rrrrcl}
\max & y(1) & + & y(2) \\
{\mbox{s.t.}}
& y(1) & & & \leq & -2 \\
& y(1) & + & 2y(2)& = & 1.
\end{array}\]
An optimal solution to $M_2$ is
$\begin{pmatrix} \frac{1}{2} & 0 & \frac{1}{2}\end{pmatrix}^{\mathsf{T}}$.
An optimal dual solution is
$y_2 = \begin{pmatrix} -2 & \frac{3}{2} \end{pmatrix}^{\mathsf{T}}$.
Setting
\[
y' = y_0 + \epsilon y_1 + \epsilon^2 y_2 =\begin{pmatrix}
1+ 4\epsilon - 2\epsilon^2 \\
1 -2\epsilon + \frac{3}{2}\epsilon^2
\end{pmatrix},\]
we have that $y'$ is a feasible solution to \ref{eqn:Deps}
and satisfies complementary slackness with
$x' = \begin{pmatrix} \frac{1}{2} & 0 & \frac{1}{2}\end{pmatrix}^{\mathsf{T}}$ for the
primal-dual pair \ref{eqn:Peps} and \ref{eqn:Deps}
for a sufficiently small $\epsilon > 0$.
\begin{lemma}\label{cheunglp}
Let $M_p$ denote the LP problem solved in step \ref{alg:perturb:primal}
of Algorithm~\ref{alg:perturb}.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
For every $p \in \{1,\ldots,k\}$,
$x_p$ is an optimal solution to $M_0,\ldots,M_{p-1}$.
\item $x'$ and $y'$ are feasible to
\ref{eqn:Peps} and \ref{eqn:Deps}, respectively,
and satisfy complementary slackness.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For each $j = 1,\ldots,p$, $M_j$ is obtained from $M_{j-1}$
by adding constraints to enforce complementary slackness with $y_{j-1}$.
Removing $x(j)$ can be viewed as adding the constraint $x(j) = 0$. It
follows that $x_p$ is feasible to $M_j$ and satisfies complementary slackness
with $y_j$ for all $j \in \{0,\ldots,p-1\}$.
To prove the second part, we start by noting that $x'$ is feasible to \ref{eqn:Peps}. Let $E_p$, $J_p$, and $\overline{J_p}$ be the sets $E$, $J$, and $\overline{J}$ referred to in $M_p$. The dual of $M_p$ is
\begin{align*}
\max \ & y^{\mathsf{T}} b \\
{\mbox{s.t.}} \
y^{\mathsf{T}} A_{:,j}& \leq c_p(j) & \forall~j \in \overline{J_p} \\
y^{\mathsf{T}} A_{:,j}& = c_p(j) & \forall~j \in F \\
y(i) &\geq 0 & \forall~i \notin E_p.
\end{align*}
Clearly, $y'^{\mathsf{T}} A_{:,j} = c_\epsilon(j)$ for all $j \in F$.
Next, we show that $y'^{\mathsf{T}} A_{:,j} \leq c_\epsilon(j)$ for all $j \in N$.
Suppose that $j \in \overline{J_k}$.
Since $\overline{J_p} \subseteq \overline{J_{p-1}}$ for $p = 1,\ldots, k$,
we have $y_p^{\mathsf{T}} A_{:,j} \leq c_p(j)$.
Thus, $$y'^{\mathsf{T}} A_{:,j} =
\sum_{p = 0}^k \epsilon^p y_p^{\mathsf{T}} A_{:,j}
\leq \displaystyle\sum_{p = 0}^k \epsilon^p c_p(j) = c_\epsilon(j).$$
Now, suppose that $j \in J_k$. Then, there exists $r < n$ such that
$y_r^{\mathsf{T}} A_{:,j} < c_r(j)$.
Let $s_i = c_i(j) - y_i^{\mathsf{T}} A_{:,j}$ for $i = 1,\ldots,m$.
Thus,
\begin{align*}
c_\epsilon(j) - {y'}^{\mathsf{T}} A_{:,j}
& = \sum_{p = 0}^k \epsilon^p s_p \\
& = \sum_{p = 0}^r \epsilon^p s_p + \sum_{p = r+1}^k \epsilon^p s_p \\
& \geq \epsilon^r \left(s_r + \sum_{p = r+1}^k \epsilon^{p-r} s_p\right) \\
& = \epsilon^r \left(s_r + \epsilon\sum_{q = 0}^{k-r-1} \epsilon^{q} s_{q+r+1}\right) \\
& > 0
\end{align*}
for $\epsilon > 0$ sufficiently small.
We now show that $y' \geq 0$.
Consider $y'(j)$ for some $j \in \{1,\ldots,m\}$. If $j \notin E_k$,
then $y_p(j) \geq 0$ for $p = 0,\ldots,k$, implying that $y'(j) \geq 0$.
Otherwise, $j \in E_r$ for some $r \in \{1,\ldots,k\}$. Choose $r$
as small as possible. We must have $y_{r-1}(j) > 0$.
Then,
\begin{align*}
y'(j)
& = \sum_{p = 0}^k \epsilon^p y_p(j) \\
& \geq \sum_{p = r}^k \epsilon^p y_p(j) \\
& = \epsilon^r \left(y_r(j)_ + \epsilon\sum_{p = 0}^{k-r-1} \epsilon^{p} y_{p+r+1}(j)\right) \\
& > 0
\end{align*}
for $\epsilon > 0$ sufficiently small.
Finally, to see that $x'$ and $y'$ satisfy complementary slackness, note that,
by part 1, if $x'(j) > 0$, then $y_p^{\mathsf{T}} A_{:,j} = c_p(j)$ for all $p \in
\{0,\ldots,k\}$. Thus ${y'}^{\mathsf{T}} A_{:,j} = c_\epsilon(j)$. Furthermore, if
$A_{i,:}x' < b(i)$ for some $i$, ${y_p}(i) = 0$ for all $p \in
\{0,\ldots,k\}$. This implies that $y'(i) = 0$.
\end{proof}
We now make two observations that will be useful in the next section. First,
we can see from the proof of Lemma~\ref{cheunglp} that the dual of $M_p$ can be
obtained directly from the dual of $M_{p-1}$ and an associated optimal solution
$y_{p-1}$ by removing constraints (including the nonnegativity bound
constraints) that are not active at $y_{p-1}$. It follows that one can work
exclusively with the duals of $M_0,\ldots,M_k$ if one is only interested in
obtaining an optimal solution to \ref{eqn:Deps}. Moreover, in practice, $y'$
hardly needs to be worked out for a particular value of $\epsilon$ and can be
represented by the list $y_0,\ldots,y_k$. Then, to determine if $y'(i) \neq 0$
for some $i$, simply check if there exists a $p$ such that $y_p(i) \neq 0$,
since, for sufficiently small $\epsilon$, $y'(i) = 0$ if and only if $y_p(i) =
0$ for all $p$.
\section{Modified Chandrasekaran-Végh-Vempala algorithm}\label{sec:newalg}
We now modify Algorithm~\ref{alg:cvv} to circumvent the need to utilize an
explicit perturbation of the edge costs. First, we arbitrarily order the edges
and increase the cost of each edge $i$ by $\epsilon^i$ for some sufficiently
small $\epsilon > 0$ that will remain unspecified. By Lemma~\ref{cvvepsilon},
we may assume that with such a perturbation, Algorithm~\ref{alg:cvv} will still
return a minimum-cost perfect matching. In Algorithm~\ref{alg:cvv},
step~\ref{cvv:primalstep} and step~\ref{cvv:extremal} involve solving \ref{Pf}
and \ref{D*} respectively with perturbed data. We emulate perturbations in the
first of these by finding a lexicographically-minimal optimal solution. The
other is handled through the method developed in the previous section applied
to the following LP, which is easily seen to be equivalent to \ref{D*}:
\begin{align*}
\max \displaystyle \sum_{S \in \mathscr{V} \cup \mathscr{F}_x} & -\frac{1}{|S|}r(S) \\
{\mbox{s.t.}} \ -r(S)-\Pi(S) & \leq-\Gamma(S) & \forall~S \in \mathscr{V} \cup \mathscr{F}_x \\
-r(S)+\Pi(S) & \leq\Gamma(S) & \forall~S \in \mathscr{V} \cup \mathscr{F}_x \\
\displaystyle \sum_{S \in \mathscr{V} \cup \mathscr{F}_x: uv \in \delta(S)}\Pi(S) & =c(uv) & \forall~uv \in \operatorname{supp}(x) \\
\displaystyle \sum_{S \in \mathscr{V} \cup \mathscr{F}_x: uv \in \delta(S)}\Pi(S) & \leq c(uv) & \forall~uv \in E\setminus\operatorname{supp}(x) \\
\Pi(S) & \geq0 & \forall~S \in \mathscr{F}_x, \\
r(S) & \geq0 & \forall~S \in \mathscr{V} \cup \mathscr{F}_x
\end{align*}
where $\mathscr{V} = \{ \{v\} : v \in V \}$ and $\mathscr{F}_x = \{ S \in \mathscr{F} :
x(\delta(S)) = 1\}$. With explicit perturbation of the edge costs, $\Gamma$
and $c$ will be polynomials in $\epsilon$. Intuitively, we define $\Gamma_i$
and $c_i$ to be the coefficients of $\epsilon^i$ in $\Gamma$ and $c$; we will
define these rigorously in a moment.
The reason for writing \ref{D*} as above is to make it plain that it can be
viewed as the dual problem \ref{eqn:Deps} of some
\ref{eqn:Peps} with cost values given by polynomials in $\epsilon$.
However, in an actual algorithm as seen below, we can work directly with
\ref{D*} as originally written.
With these changes and the following definitions, we obtain
Algorithm~\ref{alg:new}.
Given an ordering $\sigma : E \mapsto \{1, \dots, |E|\}$ on the edges of $G$,
define the following cost function:
$$ c_i(uv)=\begin{cases}
c(uv) & i = 0\\
1 & i > 0,\ \sigma(uv) = i\\
0 & i > 0,\ \sigma(uv) \neq i
\end{cases}$$
With this, we define the following linear program:
\begin{align*}
\min \displaystyle \sum_{S \in \mathscr{V} \cup \mathscr{F}_x} & \frac{1}{|S|}r(S)
\tag{$D^i_\mathscr{F}(G, c, \sigma, \Gamma, L, M, N, Q)$}\label{Di} \\
{\mbox{s.t.}} \ r(S)+\Pi(S) & \geq\Gamma_i(S) & \forall~S \in (\mathscr{V} \cup \mathscr{F}_x)\setminus L \\
-r(S)+\Pi(S) & \leq\Gamma_i(S) & \forall~S \in (\mathscr{V} \cup \mathscr{F}_x)\setminus M \\
\displaystyle \sum_{S \in \mathscr{V} \cup \mathscr{F}_x: uv \in
\delta(S)}\Pi(S) & =c_i(uv) & \forall~uv \in \operatorname{supp}(x) \\
\displaystyle \sum_{S \in \mathscr{V} \cup \mathscr{F}_x: uv \in
\delta(S)}\Pi(S) & \leq c_i(uv) & \forall~uv \notin \operatorname{supp}(x) \cup N \\
\Pi(S) & \geq0 & \forall~S \in \mathscr{F}_x\setminus Q.
\end{align*}
Intuitively, $c_i$ and $\Gamma_i$ correspond to the coefficients of
$\epsilon^i$ in $c$ and $\Gamma$ if we were to perturb the edge costs on the
graph by $\epsilon^i$ and run Algorithm \ref{alg:cvv}.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{Unperturbed C-P-Matching Algorithm}\label{alg:new}
\KwIn{A graph $G=(V, E)$ with edge costs $c \in \mathbb{Z}^E$ and an
ordering $\sigma : E \mapsto \{1, \dots, |E|\}$.}
\KwOut{A binary vector $x$ representing a minimum-cost perfect matching on $G$.}
$\mathscr{F} \leftarrow \emptyset$; $\Gamma_0, \dots, \Gamma_{|E|} \leftarrow 0$
\While{$x$ is not integral}{
Let $x$ be the lexicographically-minimal optimal solution to \ref{Pf}
with respect to $\sigma$.
$L \leftarrow \emptyset; M \leftarrow \emptyset; N \leftarrow
\emptyset; Q \leftarrow \emptyset; D_0, \dots, D_{|E|} \leftarrow 0$
$\mathscr{F}_x \leftarrow \{ S \in \mathscr{F} : x(\delta(S)) = 1\}$
\For{$i \leftarrow 0$ \KwTo $|E|$}{
\label{dualline}Obtain an optimal solution $r, \Pi$ to \ref{Di}.\\
\vspace{\baselineskip}
$L \leftarrow L \cup \{S \in V \cup \mathscr{F}_x :
r(S)+\Pi(S)\neq\Gamma_{i}(S)\}$ \label{removeconstraints_start}
$M \leftarrow M \cup \{S \in V \cup \mathscr{F}_x : -r(S) + \Pi(S) \neq
\Gamma_i(S)\}$
$N \leftarrow N \cup \{uv \in E : \sum_{uv \in \delta(S)} \Pi(S) \neq c_i(uv)\}$
$Q \leftarrow Q \cup \{S \in \mathscr{F}_x : \Pi(S) \neq 0
\}$\label{removeconstraints_end}\\
\vspace{\baselineskip}
$D_i \leftarrow \Pi$
}
$\mathscr{H}' \leftarrow \{S \in \mathscr{F} : \exists\ i\ \mathrm{s.t.}\ D_i(S) > 0\}$
Let $\mathscr{C}$ be the set of odd cycles in $\operatorname{supp}(x)$. For each $C \in \mathscr{C}$, let $V(C)$ be the union of $C$ with all sets in $\mathscr{H}'$ intersecting it.
$\mathscr{H}'' \leftarrow \{V(C) : C \in \mathscr{C}\}$
$\mathscr{F} \leftarrow \mathscr{H}' \cup \mathscr{H}''$
$\Gamma \leftarrow D$
}
\end{algorithm}
Steps \ref{removeconstraints_start} through \ref{removeconstraints_end} exist
to remove the slack constraints from the next iterations of \ref{Di}, as in
Algorithm \ref{alg:perturb}.
A reference implementation, written in Python 3, is available at
\cite{kielstra_code_2019}.
\begin{lemma}
In every iteration of the Unperturbed C-P-Matching Algorithm (\ref{alg:new}), $x$ is equal to its
counterpart in the C-P-Matching Algorithm (\ref{alg:cvv}) with perturbations $c(i)=\epsilon^i$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
As mentioned in Section \ref{sec:cvv}, by \cite{schrijver_theory_2000}, the
lexicographically-minimal unperturbed primal solution is equal to the
unique perturbed optimal primal solution for a given $\mathscr{F}$, so we need only
show that $\mathscr{F}$ is always equal to its counterpart.
Consider $\Gamma$ as a single vector of polynomials in $\epsilon$, with
the coefficients of the $\epsilon^i$ terms given by $\Gamma_i$. Then, by Lemma
\ref{cheunglp}, $y=\sum_i \epsilon^iD_i$ is an optimal solution to the linear
program in step \ref{dualline}, and $y(S)>0$ if and only if $\max (D_i) > 0$.
But the linear program in question is exactly that which the C-P-Matching
algorithm uses to obtain a $\Gamma$-extremal dual optimal solution. Therefore
$\mathscr{H}'$, which is defined solely based on whether $y(S)>0$ or not, is
equal to its counterpart in the C-P-Matching algorithm. Since $\mathscr{H}''$
is defined exactly the same way as its counterpart, the two are equal, so $\mathscr{F}$
is equal to its counterpart as well.
\end{proof}
Since, by Lemma \ref{cvvepsilon}, neither the correctness nor the complexity of
Algorithm \ref{alg:cvv} are affected by changing from the perturbation
$c(i)=2^{-i}$ to the perturbation $c(i)=\epsilon^i$, we can rephrase this to
give
\begin{theorem}
The Unperturbed C-P-Matching Algorithm gives a minimum-cost perfect matching.
\end{theorem}
The lemma also has the following
\begin{corollary}
\sloppy
The Unperturbed C-P-Matching algorithm requires solving $O(mn \log n)$ linear programming problems in the worst case.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
According to \cite[Theorem 1]{chandrasekaran_cutting_2016}, the
C-P-Matching Algorithm takes at most $O(n \log n)$ iterations. The Unperturbed
C-P-Matching Algorithm has the same number of iterations, but each iteration
utilizes $2(m+1)$ linear programming problems, which is $O(m)$. Therefore, the
Unperturbed C-P-Matching Algorithm requires solving $O(m) \times O(n \log n) =
O(mn \log n)$ linear programming problems in total.
\end{proof}
\section{Final remarks}
We have developed a general method for solving perturbed linear programs in
polynomial time without performing explicitly perturbed calculations, and
demonstrated that it applies to the minimum-cost perfect matching problem. The
use of perturbations to guarantee uniqueness is common in linear programming,
and it remains to be seen whether or not our method could be applied to other
algorithms or used to solve other problems. We do not yet know if our new
algorithm, when properly implemented and optimized, can be made competitive
with combinatorial methods such as Edmonds's blossom algorithm. According to
\cite{kolmogorov_blossom_2009}, the best known asymptotic runtime for such an
implementation is $O(n(m + \log n))$. Our algorithm, which solves $O(mn \log
n)$ linear programs, each of which requires the use of a theoretically
polynomial-time solver, is significantly slower in the worst case.
We encountered a number of interesting phenomena regarding the subroutine for
finding the lexicographically-minimal primal optimal solution. Although, as
written,
it requires solving a fixed number of linear programs ($|E|+1$), we noticed in
empirical testing that it often gave this solution far more quickly than that,
with the last few linear programs all giving the same answer. We did not
investigate this any further, but hypothesize that shortcuts exist
to decrease the runtime by a factor
of $\frac{1}{4}$ or more.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The authors would like to thank James Addis, as well as the organizers and
supporting organizations of the Fields Undergraduate Summer Research Program
--- Brittany Camp, Bryan Eelhart, Huaxiong Huang, Michael McCulloch, and the
Fields Institute and Fields Centre for Quantitative Analysis and Modelling
(Fields CQAM) --- without whom this research would not have been possible.
\bibliographystyle{splncs04}
|
\section{Introduction}
Superconductivity in granular aluminum (grAl) films was first reported by Cohen and Abeles in 1968~\cite{Cohen1968}. The material consists of crystalline nanometer-sized aluminum (Al) grains embedded in an amorphous aluminum oxide matrix; the grains form when Al is evaporated in an oxygen (O$_2$) atmosphere~\cite{Cohen1968,Deutscher1973}. Granular aluminum was originally studied due to its increased critical temperature of up to 3\,K~\cite{Deutscher1973} and its critical field of more than 3\,T~\cite{Chui1981_2}. A detailed study on the origin of the increased critical temperature of grAl was recently presented by Pracht~\textit{et al.}~\cite{Pracht2016}. Transport measurements in the normal state of grAl thin films demonstrated Kondo-like behavior of the film resistivity~\cite{Bachar2013}, and modeling superconducting grAl as an array of Josephson junctions showed good agreement with experiments on superconducting microwave resonators~\cite{Maleeva2018}.
From an application point of view, grAl is interesting due to the fact that it can exhibit large kinetic inductance values and low losses in the microwave domain~\cite{Sun2012,Rotzinger2017,Grunhaupt2018}. The susceptibility of the kinetic inductance to temperature, changes in the superfluid density, and bias current suggests the use of grAl elements in kinetic inductance detectors~\cite{Day2003,Valenti2018} and tunable microwave resonators~\cite{Vissers2015}. Furthermore, compact high impedance components are needed for the implementation of advanced qubit designs~\cite{Manucharyan2009,Pop2010,Grunhaupt2018_2}.
Here we present switching current measurements on grAl DC-SQUIDs (direct current superconducting quantum interference devices), which can be complementary to radio-frequency (rf) measurements. Unlike rf measurements, which provide information in a narrow frequency band in the vicinity of the eigenmodes of the measured structures, switching current measurements are sensitive to a broad spectrum of frequencies. Concretely, the switching dynamics of the measured SQUIDs can indicate changes at the high end of the spectrum close to the superconducting gap~\cite{Tinkham1996}, where it is difficult to perform accurate rf experiments. As we will show in section~\ref{sec:results}, our main result is the observation of a change in the temperature dependence of the switching current histogram width~$\sigma_\mathrm{sw}$. For standard Al SQUIDs, $\sigma_\mathrm{sw}$ increases with temperature, as expected~\cite{Li2011}, while for high impedance grAl SQUIDs $\sigma_\mathrm{sw}$ decreases with temperature. This indicates the onset of phase diffusion~\cite{Krasnov2005,Kivioja2005,Mannik2005}, which could be linked to additional damping at frequencies comparable to the plasma frequency~$\omega_\mathrm{p}$~\cite{Tinkham1996}.
\section{Experimental}
\subsection{Sample fabrication}
The measured micro-SQUIDs consist of a superconducting loop with an area of 1\,$\upmu\mathrm{m}^2$, interrupted by two identical geometric constrictions with a length $l\sim300$\,nm and width $w\sim80$\,nm. An SEM image of a typical sample is shown in the inset of \fref{fig:1}. The layout is patterned by electron-beam lithography into a double layer PMMA resist stack on a degenerately p-doped Si/SiO$_2$ wafer. The grAl and Al films are deposited by electron beam evaporation at ambient substrate temperature, with thicknesses between 20\,nm and 30\,nm. The grAl normal state resistivity is tuned by adjusting the partial pressure of O$_2$ in the chamber. The resulting normal state resistivities of the three grAl samples measured at room temperature are 250\,$\upmu\Omega\,\mathrm{cm}$, 3200\,$\upmu\Omega\,\mathrm{cm}$ and 5550\,$\upmu\Omega\,\mathrm{cm}$.
In order to get an estimate of the coherence length~$\xi$ of our films, we describe grAl as a superconductor in the dirty limit~\cite{Likharev1979}. We derive the electron mean free path~$l_\mathrm{F}$ from the resistivity~\cite{Cohen1968} and use the coherence length $\xi_0=1.6\,\upmu$m of pure Al~\cite{deGennes1966} to calculate the effective coherence length \mbox{$\xi\approx 0.85\sqrt{\xi_0l_\mathrm{F}}$}~\cite{Tinkham1996} of our grAl films. The results are listed in table~\ref{tab:lengths} for the three grAl films, together with the normal state resistivity~$\rho_\mathrm{n}$, the London penetration depth~$\lambda_\mathrm{L}$ and the plasma frequency~$\omega_\mathrm{p}$ of the films. Note that $\xi$ approaches the grain size for the highest resistive samples, which is the limit for an array of Josephson junctions formed by the Al grains and the surrounding aluminum oxide matrix~\cite{Maleeva2018}. Moreover, the coherence length is smaller than the width of the geometric constrictions for all films, which means they do not form so-called constriction weak links~\cite{Tinkham1996}, but rather should be viewed as an array of effective Josephson junctions with lower critical current compared to the rest of the SQUID loop. The London penetration depth~$\lambda_\mathrm{L}$ of the grAl films, also derived from the normal state resistivity of the samples~\cite{Barone1982}, is on the scale of a few micrometers and much larger than the width and thickness of the grAl circuit traces, implying a homogeneous current density.
\begin{table}
\caption{\label{tab:lengths}Coherence lenght~$\xi$, London penetration depth~$\lambda_\mathrm{L}$ and plasma frequency $\omega_\mathrm{p}$ of the presented grAl samples. The coherence length and penetration depth are derived from the measured resistivities; $\xi$ is obtained using the coherence length of a dirty superconductor and is only a rough approximation. For large resistivities, it approaches the grain size. The plasma frequency of a grAl film similar to sample grAl~B was measured in~\cite{Maleeva2018}, the other two values are estimated from the results in the same reference.}
\begin{indented}
\lineup
\item[]\begin{tabular}{@{}*{5}{l}}
\br
Sample & $\rho_\mathrm{n}$ ($\upmu\Omega$\,cm) & $\xi$ (nm) & $\lambda_\mathrm{L}$ ($\upmu$m) & $\omega_\mathrm{p}/2\pi$ (GHz)\cr
\mr
grAl A & $\0250\pm \020$ & $27.2\pm1.1$ & $1.11\pm 0.04$ & $300$\cr
grAl B & $3200\pm 400$ & $\07.6\pm0.7$ & $4.0\0\pm 0.2$ & $\070$\cr
grAl C & $5550\pm \090$ & $\05.8\pm0.1$ & $5.54\pm 0.04$ & $\055$\cr
\br
\end{tabular}
\end{indented}
\end{table}
\subsection{Switching current measurements}
When biasing a DC-SQUID with a constantly increasing current, it switches to the resistive state before the critical current~$I_\mathrm{c}$ is reached. This behavior can be understood as arising from the motion of a phase particle in the two dimensional SQUID potential~\cite{Lefevre_Seguin1992}, which is equivalent to the resistively and capacitively shunted junction model of a single Josephson junction. As the height of the potential barrier that separates the metastable states of the phase particle decreases with increasing bias current, thermal activation (TA) over the barrier or macroscopic quantum tunneling (MQT) through it will trigger switching events at bias currents smaller than $I_\mathrm{c}$. This stochastic escape results in a distribution of switching currents~$I_\mathrm{sw}$ with defined mean value and standard deviation. Switching current distributions have already been extensively studied in various experiments~\cite{Fulton1974,Clarke1988,Wallraff2003} and show good agreement with theoretical descriptions~\cite{Kurkijarvi1972,Garg1995} of the escape of a particle over a bias dependent barrier.
We investigate the magnetic field modulation of the SQUIDs' switching currents to assess the influence of the kinetic inductance in the loop (see \fref{fig:1} and \fref{fig:2}). To examine the dynamics of the phase across the junctions in the SQUID, we present measurements of switching current distributions at different temperatures, starting from the base temperature of 20\,mK of our dilution refrigerator (see \fref{fig:3}).
The measurements are controlled by an ADwin Gold II real-time system~\cite{adwin}. Switching currents are determined by ramping the current bias until a jump in the measured voltage is detected. Before repeating the measurement, the system is allowed to thermalize. The filtering system used in our experiments was previously presented in the supplementary material of Ref.~\cite{Cleuziou2006}.
\section{Results and Discussion}\label{sec:results}
\subsection{SQUID modulation}\label{ssec:SQUIDModulation}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1]{figure1.pdf}
\caption{Switching current modulation of the Al and the grAl SQUIDs with applied magnetic field. The modulation of grAl A is offset from zero due to trapped flux. Please note the breaks and different scales on the y-axis. The inset shows a scanning electron microscope image of sample grAl B. The scale bar represents a 400\,nm length. The design of all samples is identical.}
\label{fig:1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We measured the modulation of the switching current as a function of the magnetic field~$H_\mathrm{z}$ applied perpendicular to the SQUID plane at 20\,mK for all samples. The modulation curves are shown in \fref{fig:1}. The Al SQUID shows an almost cosine modulation with a period of approximately 2\,mT, which is in good agreement with the estimated loop area of 1\,$\upmu\mathrm{m}^2$. The cosine modulation is expected for an Al SQUID with micro-bridge junctions, as the loop inductance is small compared to the junction inductance and the coherence length in pure Al thin films is larger than the width and the length of the constrictions. In this case, the current phase relation does not differ too much from the sinusoidal shape in tunnel junctions~\cite{Hasselbach2002}, resulting in a similar modulation of the switching current.
In comparison to the Al SQUID, the modulation curves of the grAl micro-SQUIDs show a pronounced triangular shape with a much smaller relative modulation depth. The asymmetric modulation is attributed to non-symmetric cooling after a switching event. For the grAl samples, the definition of the junction and of the corresponding current phase relation is much more subtle. As the coherence length of all samples (see table~\ref{tab:lengths}) is much shorter than the length of the constrictions, one cannot strictly speak of the constrictions as Josephson junctions~\cite{Likharev1979}. Instead, the description of grAl as an effective array of tunnel junctions suggests that the weakest junction (or junctions) in each constriction dominate the switching behavior.
For a Josephson junction array with the Josephson energy dominating over the charging energy, one expects a saw-tooth like current-phase relation~\cite{Pop2010,Pop2008}. However, the influence of the loop inductance~$L_\mathrm{loop}$ alone is sufficient to explain the triangular shape and the reduced modulation observed in our experiments~\cite{Faucher2002}. We measure the SQUID modulation of sample grAl~A at different temperatures between 20\,mK and 1.6\,K. The results are shown in \fref{fig:2}. For SQUIDs with large loop inductance, the slope in the triangular modulation is determined by the screening factor \mbox{$\beta_\mathrm{L} = I_\mathrm{c}^\mathrm{max}L_\mathrm{loop}/\Phi_0$}~\cite{Faucher2002}, where $I_\mathrm{c}^\mathrm{max}$ is the maximum critical current in the modulation. This directly relates the modulation depth~$\Delta I_\mathrm{c}$ to $\beta_\mathrm{L}$~\cite{Granata2016a}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\Delta I_\mathrm{c}}{I_\mathrm{c}^\mathrm{max}}=\frac{1}{1+\beta_\mathrm{L}}.\label{eq:beta}
\end{eqnarray}
For junctions with critical currents in the range of tens of $\upmu\mathrm{A}$ or more, the measured switching currents will be very close to the critical current. Thus, using the relation in \eref{eq:beta}, we can calculate the loop inductance of the SQUID from the measured curves in \fref{fig:2}~(a) and compare it to the inductance estimated from the geometry and normal-state sheet resistance of the SQUID loop. As the geometric inductance~\cite{Jaycox1981} of our SQUIDs is small compared to the kinetic inductance, its contribution to $L_\mathrm{loop}$ is neglected. The kinetic inductance of a ring that consists of $N_\mathrm{sq}$ sheets with a sheet resistance~$R_\mathrm{sq}$ is given by~\cite{Annunziata2010}
\begin{eqnarray}
L_\mathrm{k} = N_\mathrm{sq}\frac{\hbar R_\mathrm{sq}}{\pi\Delta(T)}\tanh^{-1}\left(\frac{\Delta(T)}{2k_\mathrm{B} T}\right),\label{eq:lkin}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\Delta(T)$ is the superconducting gap parameter at temperature~$T$. $N_\mathrm{sq}$ includes the sheets in the constrictions, as they also contribute to the total inductance of the SQUID loop. Using the BCS-temperature dependence of the gap~\cite{Carrington2003}, $N_\mathrm{sq}=18\pm1$ extracted from a scanning electron microscope image of the sample, and the measured values of $R_\mathrm{sq}=(83\pm6)\,\Omega$ and $T_\mathrm{c}=(2.2\pm0.1)\,\mathrm{K}$, we can calculate $L_\mathrm{k}$ for all temperatures investigated. In \fref{fig:2}~(b), this value is compared to $L_\mathrm{loop}$ extracted from the relative modulation depth. We find good agreement between the calculated kinetic loop inductance and the value extracted from the measured modulation curves up to 1.1\,K, above which the modulation vanishes. For samples grAl B and C, the uncertainty of the loop inductance deduced from the modulation is large due to the wide histogram in comparison to the modulation. Still, the agreement between the loop inductance and the calculated kinetic inductance is within one order of magnitude (not shown).
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1]{figure2a_2c.pdf}
\caption{(a)~Modulation of the switching current of sample grAl~A measured at different temperatures. Switching events from excited flux states and the triangular shape of the modulation are only visible at temperatures below 1.1\,K. (b)~Loop inductance of the grAl SQUID. Black dots are extracted from the modulation in (a) and equation\,\eref{eq:beta}, red dots are calculated from equation\,\eref{eq:lkin}. (c)~Screening factor derived from the data in (b).}
\label{fig:2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Switching events below the main modulation are observed for sample grAl A. In the two-dimensional SQUID potential, these events are explained by escapes from excited states, that exist for $\beta_\mathrm{L}>1$~\cite{Lefevre_Seguin1992}, which is the case for all of our samples (for sample grAl A cf. \fref{fig:2}~(c), others not shown). In the experiment, this corresponds to additional flux quanta trapped in the SQUID ring, resulting in a larger circulating current and therefore lower switching current. For sample grAl A such switching events are detected only below 900 mK. No switching events from excited states were observed for samples grAl~B and grAl~C. This indicates the existence of two different switching dynamics in the grAl junctions, which also appear in the measured switching current distributions, discussed in the following.
\subsection{Switching current distributions}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1]{figure3a_3b.pdf}
\caption{(a) Mean value~$\langle I_\mathrm{sw}\rangle$ of the measured switching current distributions normalized to $\langle I_\mathrm{sw}\rangle$ measured at 20\,mK. Different current sweep rates were used for each sample: 0.5\,mA/s for Al, 186\,mA/s for grAl A, and 15\,$\upmu$A/s for grAl B and grAl C. (b) Normalized standard deviation~$\sigma_\mathrm{sw}$ corresponding to the measurements in (a). For the Al SQUID $\sigma_\mathrm{sw}$ increases with rising temperature, while $\sigma_\mathrm{sw}$ decreases for the high resistivity grAl B and grAl C SQUID. The low resistivity grAl A SQUID shows a crossover behavior. In order to obtain sufficient statistics on the switching current distributions, at least 3000 measurements are recorded at each temperature.}
\label{fig:3}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
The mean value~$\langle I_\mathrm{sw}\rangle$ and the standard deviation~$\sigma_\mathrm{sw}$ of the measured switching current distributions as a function of temperature are shown in \fref{fig:3} for all four samples. For samples with relatively large critical currents (Al, grAl~A), the measured mean switching currents are expected to closely follow the temperature dependence of the critical current, due to the large potential barrier in the SQUID potential, which scales with $I_\mathrm{c}$. For a SQUID with a maximum switching current of about 1\,$\upmu$A (grAl~B, C), $\langle I_\mathrm{sw}\rangle$ is expected to deviate from $I_\mathrm{c}$ significantly~\cite{Garg1995}. However, no pronounced qualitative difference between the normalized curves is visible, apart from the larger critical temperature~$T_\mathrm{c}$ of the grAl thin films compared to pure Al. The relative width of the distributions~\mbox{$\sigma_\mathrm{sw}/\langleI_\mathrm{sw}^0\rangle$}, in contrast, differs significantly for all samples and its temperature dependence gives insight into the phase dynamics in the micro-SQUIDs. The Al SQUID shows the expected temperature dependence of $\sigma_\mathrm{sw}$ for switching events that are triggered by a single escape of the phase particle across the potential barrier: at low temperatures, temperature independent MQT of the phase particle through the barrier dominates the escape, resulting in a constant width of the switching current up to 300\,mK. Above this temperature, the contribution of TA to the escape events surpasses that of MQT and the width increases due to the increasing thermal fluctuations. In the regime of TA, the temperature dependence of the switching current distribution is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma_\mathrm{sw}\propto T^{1/\alpha}I_\mathrm{c}(T)^{1-1/\alpha},\label{eq:width}
\end{eqnarray}
with $\alpha$ depending on the current-phase relation of the Josephson junctions~\cite{Li2011} \mbox{($\alpha=3/2$} for a sinusoidal current-phase relation). At temperatures close to the critical temperature, the increase of $\sigma_\mathrm{sw}$ is larger than expected from \eref{eq:width}, by up to a factor of two. We attribute this deviation to small temperature fluctuations of less than 1\,mK in our experiment, which artificially broaden the distribution.
For the grAl samples we observe a fundamentally different behavior of $\sigma_\mathrm{sw}$ with temperature. For sample grAl~A, $\sigma_\mathrm{sw}$ first increases, then decreases starting from $~900\,\mathrm{mK}$ and saturates above 1.3\,K. The width of the measured distributions of sample grAl~B and grAl~C decreases starting from the lowest measurement temperature and remains almost constant above 1\,K. A similar temperature dependence of the width has been reported for different kinds of Josephson junctions in~\cite{Krasnov2005,Kivioja2005,Mannik2005} and was attributed to a diffusive motion of the phase particle through the potential, before the junctions switch to the resistive state. This is referred to as phase diffusion.
\subsection{Phase diffusion}
The diffusive motion of the phase particle in the junction or SQUID potential is a result of multiple consecutive escape and retrapping events. In the phase diffusion regime, a single escape of the particle does not necessarily lead to a switching of the junction to the resistive state. Evidence for phase diffusion can be found in the decrease of the switching current distribution width with increasing temperature. The reduction of the width occurs as escape events at lower bias currents are more likely to be retrapped and thus less likely to lead to a switching event~\cite{Fenton2008}. As the temperature increases, the retrapping probability for the escaped particle also increases and the width further decreases.
Although a decreasing critical current also leads to a reduced distribution width~\cite{Li2011}, the dependence of $\sigma_\mathrm{sw}$ on $I_\mathrm{c}$ in \eref{eq:width} is insufficient to explain the measured curves in \fref{fig:3} (b) and does not result in the saturation of $\sigma_\mathrm{sw}$ at temperatures close to $T_\mathrm{c}$. In contrast, the measurements are qualitatively similar to the results obtained by Fenton and Warburton~\cite{Fenton2008} from Monte Carlo simulations on moderately damped Josephson junctions (quality factor~$Q=7$), assuming a finite retrapping probability in the regime where the escape probability is non-zero. The simulations not only describe the decrease of the width with increasing temperature but also reproduce the relatively constant $\sigma_\mathrm{sw}$ for temperatures close to $T_\mathrm{c}$.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1]{figure4a_4b.pdf}
\caption{(a) Measured I-V curves of sample grAl~B at selected temperatures. The arrows mark the sweeping direction of the respective curve. After the initial switching of the junctions, the behavior is dominated by ohmic heating. (b) Zoom into the \mbox{I-V} characteristics at temperatures ranging from base temperature to 1.7\,K. At temperatures above 1.3\,K, we detect an increase in the voltage before the jump of the SQUID to the resistive state, indicative of phase diffusion.}
\label{fig:4}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
In \fref{fig:4}~(a), we depict selected \mbox{I-V} curves of sample grAl~B, measured at three different temperatures. After the switching to the resistive state occurred, heat propagation turns large parts of the sample, including the leads, into the normal state, as can be deduced from the measured resistance \mbox{($\sim31\,\mathrm{k}\Omega$)}, which is much larger than the estimated normal state resistance of the geometric constrictions \mbox{($\sim4\,\mathrm{k}\Omega$)}. After the maximum bias current is reached, the current is continuously decreased to zero. Several steps in the down sweep indicate that different parts of the sample progressively become superconducting again. As a consequence, the measured current at which the voltage drops back to zero is not the intrinsic retrapping current of the SQUID, which is determined by the damping of the phase particle, but is rather defined by the thermalization of the circuit. This is also confirmed by the fact that the measured retrapping current is independent of the applied magnetic field (not shown)~\cite{Angers2008}.
In addition to the data presented in \fref{fig:3}~(b), further evidence for the presence of phase diffusion in the higher resistivity grAl films can be found in the zoom-in of the measured \mbox{I-V} curves shown in \fref{fig:4}~(b). Phase slips, individual jumps of the superconducting phase by $2\pi$, that do not lead to a switching event, only slowly change the phase across the junction and are therefore not detected as a sharp step in the \mbox{I-V} characteristic. If the phase slip rate is sufficiently high before the switching of the junction, a small but continuous increase of the voltage can be detected. The effect was previously reported, among others, by Sahu \textit{et al.} in a superconducting nanowire junction~\cite{Sahu2009} and is also observed in our measurements. At temperatures above 1.2 K, we measure a small increase of the voltage, before the SQUID switches to the resistive state. From the maximum voltage measured right before the switching event, which is roughly 50\,$\upmu$V at 1.7 K, a phase slip rate of \mbox{$\sim 2\times10^{10}$} phase slips per second can be calculated. This is in good agreement with the plasma frequency of 70\,GHz predicted and measured for a similar grAl film with a resistivity of 3000\,$\upmu\Omega$\,cm~\cite{Maleeva2018}. The lack of detectable voltage tails at lower temperatures can be explained by a reduced phase slip rate, which only leads to a voltage drop smaller than the experimental noise. The reduction of phase slips might be due to a smaller retrapping probability and hence switching at smaller bias currents.
The experimental results obtained from the switching current measurements suggest the presence of phase diffusion in grAl micro-SQUIDs. For high resistivity films, phase diffusion is present starting from the the lowest measurement temperature, while sample grAl~A with a lower normal state resistivity shows a crossover between a regime without and with phase diffusion. The absence of switching events from excited states in the SQUID modulation is in accordance with the observed phase diffusion. As soon as multiple escapes are necessary to trigger the switching of the SQUID, the switching event always occurs from the ground state of the SQUID potential. Therefore, no excited flux states are visible for sample grAl~B and grAl~C and they disappear at the crossover temperature for sample grAl~A, although $\beta_\mathrm{L}\gg 1$ for all grAl SQUIDs.
We suggest two possible explanations for the onset of phase diffusion in the high resistivity samples. One reason might be a change of the quality factor~$Q=\omega_\mathrm{p}RC$ of our SQUIDs, where $R$ and $C$ account for dissipation and shunt capacitance of the SQUID, respectively. From measurements presented in \cite{LevyBertrand2019} we know that the plasma frequency of the high resistivity samples is in the range of 50-75\,GHz, well below the spectroscopic gap of grAl. Therefore, the fact that these films show increased dissipation compared to sample grAl~A and pure Al, for which the plasma frequency is above the spectroscopic gap, is intriguing, as quasiparticle excitations should be diminished for the high resistivity samples. However, the value of $R$ (in the RCSJ model) could potentially be strongly influenced by the increased amount of oxide in samples grAl B and C. Concretely, at the plasma frequency the quality factor will be susceptible to the intrinsic loss tangent of the aluminum oxide in between the Al grains. Precise information about the value of $Q$ and the origin of increased dissipation requires further investigations, such as direct microwave spectroscopy at the plasma frequency or local scanning microscopy. The other possible reason for the observed phase diffusion is an additional damping mechanism at frequencies comparable to $\omega_\mathrm{p}$, originating from strongly coupled and dissipative environmental modes (such as box modes). The increased density of plasmon modes in high resistive samples already reported in \cite{Maleeva2018} could increase the coupling to these environmental modes.
\section{Conclusion}
We measured the switching currents of grAl micro-SQUIDs to investigate the phase dynamics in constrictions made of grAl thin films of various normal-state resistivities. The switching current modulation with applied magnetic field is reduced and shows a triangular shape, due to the large kinetic inductance in the SQUID loop. The measured temperature dependence of the switching current distribution widths suggests the presence of phase diffusion of the SQUID junctions for high resistivity films. In these samples, a measured increase of the voltage in the \mbox{I-V} characteristic of the SQUID before switching to the resistive state further supports the presence of individual phase slips, leading to phase diffusion. \\
\\
Our results might indicate the presence of increased dissipation at frequencies comparable to the plasma frequency for the most resistive films, which could originate either from intrinsic losses in the aluminum oxide barriers between the Al grains, or from stronger coupling to dissipative environmental modes. These films are particularly attractive for high impedance quantum electronics~\cite{Grunhaupt2018_2}. Determining the exact mechanism responsible for phase diffusion requires additional work, such as high frequency microwave spectroscopy~\cite{Dupre2017}, local probing using scanning tunneling microscopy or terahertz reflectometry~\cite{Pracht2013}.
\ack
We thank A Quintilla for performing the electron beam lithography of our samples. Facilities use was supported by the KIT Nanostructure Service Laboratory (NSL). We acknowledge support from the Initiative and Networking Fund of the Helmholtz Association, within the Helmholtz Future Project Scalable solid state quantum computing. KB is grateful to the Helmholtz Foundation IVF Solid State Spin Quantum Computing project. IMP acknowledges the support of the Alexander von Humboldt foundation in the framework of a Sofja Kovalevskaja award endowed by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research. WW acknowledges funding from the Alexander von Humboldt foundation.
|
\section{\label{sec:intro}INTRODUCTION}
A prerequisite for analyzing and understanding the electronic properties and the function of surfaces is the detailed knowledge of the surface composition and atomistic geometry under realistic conditions. The structure of a surface at thermodynamic equilibrium with its environment is in fact a configurational statistical average over adsorption, desorption, and diffusion processes
\par A temperature-pressure phase diagram describes the composition and structure of a system at thermal equilibrium and is an essential tool for understanding material properties. The \textit{ab initio} atomistic thermodynamics (aiAT) approach \cite{weinert1986chalcogen, scheffler1, PhysRevB.35.9625, PhysRevB.38.7649, PhysRevB.58.4566} has been very successful in predicting phase diagrams for surfaces \cite{PhysRevB.68.045407, PhysRevLett.90.046103} and gas-phase clusters \cite{QUA:QUA24503, PhysRevLett.111.135501, 1367-2630-16-12-123016} at realistic \textit{T}, \textit{p} conditions. The key assumption is, however, that \textit{all} relevant local minima of the potential energy surface (PES) of a given system are enumerated, a (strong) limitation in case of unexpected surface stoichiometries or geometries. Such limitation can only be overcome by an unbiased sampling of configurational and compositional space. A further assumption in most work has been that the vibrational contributions to the change of the free energy are largely canceled and can be neglected. We will see below that this is not always justified.
\par In this paper, we introduce a Replica-Exchange (RE) Grand-Canonical (GC) Monte-Carlo (MC)/Molecular-Dynamics (MD) algorithm, that enables the efficient calculation of complete temperature-pressure phase diagrams of surfaces, nanoparticles, or clusters in contact with reactive gas atmospheres. The RE and GC steps of the algorithm are formulated in the Metropolis MC framework, while the canonical sampling of configurations (diffusion) is supported via both MC and MD. In the case of surface in contact with a gas phase reservoir, the gas molecules can physi-/chemisorb on the surface, while adsorbed molecules or single atoms can desorb from the surface to the gas phase. At thermodynamic equilibrium , the number of desorbed molecules/atoms balances the adsorbed one, so that on average a constant number of molecules/atoms is present on the surface. We specifically target thermodynamically open systems in the GC ensemble, aiming at describing (nano)structured surfaces in a reactive atmosphere at realistic $T$, $p$ condition, so that the surfaces can exchange particles with the gas reservoir. The initial idea of RE \cite{PhysRevLett.57.2607, 0295-5075-19-6-002, doi:10.1080/01621459.1995.10476590, SUGITA1999141} is to allow for an efficent sampling of the configurational space by shuttling configurations from regions of low $T$ to regions of high $T$. Later, de Pablo \textit{et al.} \cite{doi:10.1063/1.480282, doi:10.1063/1.1456504} extended the concept to other intensive thermodynamic variables, such as the chemical potential ($\mu$) in order to simulate the phase equilibria of Lennard-Jones (LJ) systems. This allows systems with different number of particles (the conjugate variable of $\mu$) to be shuttled across different values of $\mu$, thus enhancing the sampling, following the same spirit of the temperature replicas in traditional RE. By combining advantages of both GC and RE, our massively parallel algorithm requires no prior knowledge of the phase diagram and takes only the potential energy function together with the desired $\mu$ and $T$ ranges as inputs. The partition function is estimated using the output of the simulation, thus calculating thermodynamic observables is straightforward.
\par The structure of this paper is as follows. In Sec. \ref{sec:method} the method and implementation of our REGC algorithm will be discussed in details.
In section \ref{sec:results} we show two applications of the REGC method. The first, in section\ref{ssec:lj}, proof-of-concept application is the determination of the $p$-$T$ phase diagram of a system composed of a LJ (frozen) surface in contact with a LJ gas phase. Next, in section \ref{ssec:si-clus}, we address the calculation of the phase diagram of the Si$_2$ dimer and Si$_4$ cluster in a reactive atmosphere of H$_2$ molecules by performing REGC with aiMD using Perdew-Burke-Ernzerhof (PBE)\cite{PhysRevLett.78.1396} xc approximation.
During the last several decades, silicon hydrides have attracted a lot of attention because of their potential applications in semiconductors, optoelectronics, and surface growth processes.\cite{sari2003mono, wang2001theoretical, xu1998photoelectron,kasdan1975laser} The binary clusters of silicon and hydrogen play key roles in the chemical vapor deposition of thin films, and photoluminescence of porous silicon. However, most of the previous research on silicon hydrides focused on the search of global minima structures, but the decisive issue of stability and metastability of silicon hydrides at realistic conditions (exchange of atoms with an environment) has not been addressed so far. The purpose of this application is to investigate the phase diagrams of silicon hydrides in reactive hydrogen atmosphere.
In the outlook section (\ref{sec:concl}), the capabilities and current limitations of our REGC method will be discussed.
\section{\label{sec:method}METHOD AND IMPLEMENTATION}
The sampling of complex systems, e.g., thermodynamically open systems, composed of many atoms arranged in molecules, clusters, condensed phases, etc., remains a challenge.
The main factors that limit sampling efficiency is $(i)$ that systems' configurations get easily trapped --- especially at low temperatures --- in local minima and $(ii)$ the inherently long characteristic relaxation times in complex many-molecules systems (e.g., atoms' diffusion that require collective motions involving several degrees of freedom).
During the last decades, many powerful methods have been developed to deal with the first difficulty, e.g., J-walking \cite{doi:10.1063/1.458863, ORTIZ199866}, multicanonical sampling \cite{BERG1991249, PhysRevLett.68.9}, nested sampling \cite{PhysRevB.93.174108}, simple tempering \cite{doi:10.1063/1.462133, 0295-5075-19-6-002}, 1/k sampling \cite{PhysRevLett.74.2151}, expanded ensembles \cite{doi:10.1063/1.472257}, , and parallel tempering \cite{PhysRevLett.57.2607, SUGITA1999141}. While these methods are effective in overcoming kinetic barriers, they do little to ‘‘accelerate’’ the slow relaxation at low temperatures. \\
Open ensembles, described at equilibrium by the grand-canonical-ensemble formalism, provide an effective mean to overcome slow-relaxation problems: atoms can get in and out of a system, effectively generating thermodynamically possible defects, along unphysical pathways (e.g., atoms' insertion or removal), thereby circumventing diffusional bottlenecks by disentangling degrees of freedom. We took advantage of both the replica-exchange and grand-canonical-ensemble concepts to design an algorithm that alleviate both kinetic trapping and slow phase space diffusion. In Sec. \ref{ssec:regc}, we describe our replica-exchange grand-canonical algorithm. Later, in Sec. \ref{sec:citeref} we describe how to use the results from replica-exchange grand-canonical simulations to calculate phase diagrams and free energy surfaces.
\subsection{\label{ssec:regc}Replica-Exchange Grand-Canonical Monte Carlo / Molecular Dynamics}
Our Replica-Exchange Grand-Canonical Monte Carlo or Molecular-Dynamics approach is outlined in Fig. \ref{fig:scheme}. In a REGCMC or REGCMD simulation, $S$ replicas of the original system of interest are considered, each evolving in a different thermodynamical states (${T}_{i}$ , ${\mu}_i$, where $i$ is the index of the replica). During the simulation, first the system has a probability $x_0$ $(0 \leq x_0 \leq 1)$ to attempt exchanging a particle with the reservoir and probability $(1-x_0)$ to perform a replica-exchange move (see below). After the particle/replica-exchange attempt, $S$ parallel molecular dynamics or Monte Carlo runs follow, to diffuse the system in the canonical ensemble. i.e., at temperature ${T}_{i}$, with fixed number of particles $N$ and volume $V$ of the system ($NVT$ ensemble). Then, the procedure is iterated until convergence of defined quantities is achieved. See further for the convergence criterion we adopted.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={0.02cm 0.0cm 0.02cm 0.0cm}, clip, width=0.56\textwidth]{Figure1.jpg}
\caption{The flow chart of Replica-Exchange Grand-Canonical Monte Carlo/Molecular Dynamics algorithm. Here rand is a (pseudo) random number generated uniformly distributed between 0 and 1.}
\label{fig:scheme}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{\label{ssec:gc}Grand-Canonical Monte Carlo}
The particle insertion/removal step is handled by applying the formalism of the grand-canonical ensemble, where the subsystem of our interest (e.g., a surface or a cluster in contact with a gas phase), defined in a volume ($V$), is in equilibrium with a reservoir at given temperature ($T$), and chemical potential ($\mu$) of one species (or more species, each with its own chemical potential). In practice, the reservoir is modeled as an ideal gas and $\mu$ depends on $T$ and the pressure $p$, as will be specified in the application cases. The number of atoms or molecules in the subsystem is a fluctuating variable, determined by specifying the chemical potential and temperature of the reservoir of (ideal) gas-phase atoms or molecules. The probability density of a grand-canonical ensemble of identical particles is:\cite{frenkel}
\begin{equation}
\label{Ngrand}
\mathscr{N}_{\mu, V, T} (\bm{R};N) \varpropto \frac{e^{(\beta\mu N)}V^N}{\Lambda^{3N}N!} e^{[-\beta E(\bm{R};N)]}
\end{equation}
where $\beta= 1/k_\textrm{B}T$, $\Lambda = h/\sqrt{2 \pi m k_\textrm{B} T}$ is the thermal wavelength of a particle of mass $m$, and $E(\bm{R})$ is the potential energy of a configuration $\bm{R}$ of the $N$-particle system. The GCMC algorithm consists of the following MC moves: 1) insertion of a gas atom/molecule into the system at a random position, 2) removal of a randomly selected gas atom/molecule from the system, 3) displacement of a gas atom to a new random position in the system to sample the potential energy surface (PES). In our algorithm, the displacement (diffusion) is taken care of separately (see section \ref{sec:displ}) and can be done via either Monte Carlo or MD. Here, we consider the insertion and removal moves, where microscopic reversibility (also called `detailed balance', a \textit{sufficient} condition for an MC scheme to converge the evaluation of observable properties in the desired ensemble \cite{frenkel}) is ensured by having equal number of insertion and removal attempts, for all particles described by the given chemical potential. In practice, we first randomly select if a particle will be inserted or removed, i.e., by generating a (pseudo)random number $y^{\textsc{gc}}_1$ uniformly distributed between 0 and 1 and performing a removal if $y^{\textsc{gc}}_1<0.5$.
For a removal, a particle (an atom or a molecule) is selected at random (by generating a new random number $y^{\textsc{gc}}_2$ and selecting particle $i$ if $(i-1)/N \leq y^{\textsc{gc}}_2 <i/N$).
In order to fulfill detailed balance, a possible (and common) choice for accepting the removal of the selected particle is with probability\cite{frenkel}:
\begin{equation}
P_{(N \rightarrow N-1)} = \min\Big[1,\frac{\Lambda^{3}N}{V}e^{-\beta [\mu+E_{N-1}-E_{N}]}\Big]
\end{equation}
where $N$ is the number of atoms (or molecules) for which a reservoir at given temperature $T$ and chemical potential $\mu$ is defined, and which are in the system before the attempted removal. $E_{N}$ is the energy of the system of $N$ particles, $E_{N-1}$ is the energy of the same system, without the selected particle, and and $V$ is the system volume, which is fixed during the simulation. According to this formula, if the change in energy due to the particle removal is similar in value to $\mu$, there is a high probability that the removal is accepted.
For the insertion, first a location is randomly chosen, uniformly in the simulation volume (in a rectangular cell, by driving three independent uniformly distributed random numbers, one for each Cartesian coordinate). Then, a particle is positioned in the selected location and its insertion is accepted with probability \cite{frenkel}:
\begin{equation}
P_{(N \rightarrow N+1)} = \min\Big[1,\frac{V}{\Lambda^{3}(N+1)}e^{-\beta [\mu-E_{N+1}-E_{N}]}\Big]
\end{equation}
The probability of accepting an insertion can be low in dense systems as random locations will have high probability to end up too close to already-present particles, henceforth yielding large $E_{N+1}-E_{N}$ and consequent rejection of the insertion. Since we are modeling adsorption on surfaces or clusters in contact with a gas phase, we have a relatively rarefied system, especially if the considered volume of particle insertion (and removal) does not include the subsurface (see further).
\subsubsection{\label{ssec:re}Replica Exchange in the Grand-Canonical ensemble}
We define an extended ensemble that is the collection of $S = L \times M$ replica of a given system, arranged in $L$ values of temperature and $M$ values of the chemical potential, as illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:mesh1}a. In this paper, we consider only one species that exchange particles with the reservoir, hence, one chemical potential.
The \textit{partition function} of this extended ensemble is the product of the partition functions of the individual $(\mu_{m},V,T_{l})$ ensembles, where $l = 1, 2, \ldots, L$ and $m = 1, 2, \ldots, M$:
\begin{equation}
Q_\textrm{extended} = \prod_{l=1}^{L}\prod_{m=1}^{M}\frac{e^{\beta_l \mu_m N_{l,m}} V^{N_{l,m}}} {\Lambda_l N_{l,m}!} \int d \bm{R} \, e^{-\beta_{l} E \left( \bm{R}; N_{l,m} \right) }
\end{equation}
In the following, we label the temperature indifferently by $T_l$ or $\beta_l = 1 / k_\textrm{B}T_l$.
The key observation is that taken one configuration along the evolution of a replica at given $(\mu_{m},V,T_{l})$, statistical mechanics allows us to write a well defined probability that the same configuration belongs to the another state $(\mu_{o},V,T_{k})$.
We now randomly select a pair of replicas. The replica at state $(\mu_{m},V,T_{l})$ is in configuration $\bm{R}_i$ (e.g., represented by the $3\times N_{l,m}$ matrix of coordinates) and the replica at state $(\mu_{o},V,T_{k})$ is in configuration $\bm{R}_j$. We then aim at defining a rule for accepting the swap of the configurations between the two replicas, in order to satisfy the detailed balance in the extended ensemble. To the purpose, one has to impose the following equality:
\begin{IEEEeqnarray}{Cl}
\nonumber & \mathscr{N}_{(\beta_l, \mu_m, \bm{R}_i)}\mathscr{N}_{(\beta_k, \mu_o, \bm{R}_j)} \\
\nonumber & \times P_{[(\beta_l, \mu_m, \bm{R}_i), (\beta_k, \mu_o, \bm{R}_j)\rightarrow (\beta_l, \mu_m, \bm{R}_j), (\beta_k, \mu_o, \bm{R}_i)]} \\
\nonumber = & \mathscr{N}_{(\beta_l, \mu_m, \bm{R}_j)}\mathscr{N}_{(\beta_k, \mu_o, \bm{R}_i)} \\
& \times P_{[(\beta_l, \mu_m, \bm{R}_j), (\beta_k, \mu_o, \bm{R}_i) \rightarrow (\beta_l, \mu_m, \bm{R}_i),(\beta_k, \mu_o, \bm{R}_j)]}
\end{IEEEeqnarray}
where $\mathscr{N}$ is the probability density in the grand-canonical ensemble (Eq. \ref{Ngrand}), and $P$ is the probability to swap configurations.
Our choice of $P$ that satisfies the detailed balance is:
\begin{IEEEeqnarray}{Cl}
& \nonumber P_{[(\beta_l, \mu_m, \bm{R}_i)(\beta_k, \mu_o, \bm{R}_j)\rightarrow(\beta_l, \mu_m, \bm{R}_j)(\beta_k, \mu_o, \bm{R}_i)]} \\
= \nonumber & \min \big [1, (\frac{\beta_l}{\beta_k})^{\frac{3}{2}(N_{l,m}-N_{k,o})} \times \\
& \label{eq:Pacc} e^{[-(\beta_l-\beta_k)(E(\bm{R}_j)-E(\bm{R}_i)+(\beta_l\mu_m-\beta_k\mu_o)(N_{l.m}-N_{k,o})]} \big]
\end{IEEEeqnarray}
A similar swap-acceptance probability has been proposed in Refs. \citenum{doi:10.1063/1.480282} and \citenum{doi:10.1063/1.1456504}, but we include a factor $(\frac{\beta_l}{\beta_k})^{\frac{3}{2}(N_{l,m}-N_{k,o})}$ that is probably neglected in those papers. Furthermore, our scheme adopts a two-dimensional grid of values of temperatures and chemical potentials, while in Refs. \citenum{doi:10.1063/1.480282} and \citenum{doi:10.1063/1.1456504} the values of $T$ and $\mu$ are constrained to be along a phase boundary of the studied system (vapor-fluid coexistence for the LJ system), therefore being a uni-modal scheme, i.e., one-dimensional in practice.
It is clear from Eq. \ref{eq:Pacc} that swap trial moves are more likely to be accepted the larger the overlap between the energy distributions of the two replicas. A large overlap of energy distribution is verified if the values of the thermodynamic variables $(\mu,T)$ defining the two replicas are not too dissimilar. In traditional one-dimensional RE, swap moves are attempted only between neighbor replicas. In that case, each replica has two neighbors (or one, for the largest an smallest values of the chosen replicated thermodynamic variable, typically $T$). In our two-dimensional scheme (Fig. \ref{fig:mesh1}), each replica has between 3 and 8 neighbors, thus enhancing the possibility for configurations to ``diffuse'' across replicas.
We adopted a ``collective'' scheme for the attempted swaps that involves the definition of four different types of neighboring swaps, as illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:mesh1}. At each RE move, one type of swaps is selected at random (each with probability $1/4$). This choice has the advantage to involve all replicas (when the number of $T$-replicas and $\mu$-replicas is even) in one attempted swap. An alternative scheme could be to select randomly one replica and independently one neighbor to perform the attempted swap, then to repeat until no replica has an unselected neighbor. We are exploring this scheme for higher-dimensional settings (e.g., $T$ and more than one $\mu$ for more than one type of particles that are exchanged with the reservoir).
\subsubsection{Atoms' displacement} \label{sec:displ}
At each cycle of our REGC scheme, after the RE or GC move has been performed, the atoms in each replica perform in parallel a sampling of the canonical (fixed $N$, fixed $V$, fixed $T$) ensemble. This is achieved with the standard Metropolis MC or with MD.
According to MC, one atom-displacement step requires to select at random one atom and assigning to it a random displacement, typically uniformly distribute in a cube or sphere of size comparable with the typical interatomic distances at equilibrium.
The move is accepted with probability\cite{frenkel}:
\begin{equation}
P_{(\bm{r} \rightarrow \bm{r} + \Delta\bm{r})} = \min\Big[1,e^{-\beta [E(\bm{r} + \Delta\bm{r},\bm{r}^{N-1})-E(\bm{r},\bm{r}^{N-1})]}\Big]
\end{equation}
where $\bm{r}$ is the position before the random displacement $\Delta\bm{r}$ of the selected atom and $[E(\bm{r} + \Delta\bm{r},\bm{r}^{N-1})-E(\bm{r}^N,\bm{r}^{N-1})]$ is the potential-energy difference between the system with one atom displaced and all the other $N-1$ atoms kept in place, and the system before displacement.
In MC schemes, one cycle is the application of the attempted displacement $N$ times, so that on average each atom is attempted to be displacement once.
According to MD, the forces among atoms are calculated and the Newton equation is numerically integrated in order to obtain one displacement step for all atoms \cite{frenkel}. This scheme samples the constant energy, constant $V$, constant $N$ ensemble (microcanonical). In order to sample the canonical ensemble, the velocities of the atoms need to be modified in order to obey the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution at the desired $T$. This is achieved via numerical thermostats \cite{frenkel}.
The choice between the two schemes, MC or MD, for the canonical sampling step of our REGCMC or REGCMD algorithm is dictated only by convenience. In both case our choice is to perform few (about 10) MD steps or MC cycles between two applications of the REMC step, in order to take full advantage of the enhanced sampling allowed by the REGC accepted moves.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={0.06cm 0.06cm 0.02cm 0.05cm}, clip, width=0.6\textwidth]{Figure2.jpg}
\caption{The 2D schematic of of Replica-Exchange Grand-Canonical method.}
\label{fig:mesh1}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{\label{sec:code}Implementation}
Due to the inherently parallel nature of replica exchange, the REGC method is particularly suitable to implement on super computers in parallel. MD or MC simulation of each replica at different $T$ are performed simultaneously and independently for the same time steps/MC moves. The whole computation resources are propotional to the number of replicas $S$, e.g., if each replica requires $q$ cores, in total, $S\times q$ cores are assigned to this REGC simulation.
\subsection{\label{sec:citeref}Calculating Phase Diagrams}
After a REGC simulation, we obtain $\Omega_{l,m}$ equilibrium samples from each of the $S=L \times M$ thermodynamic states $(\mu_m, V, T_l)$ within the grand-canonical ensemble. For each sample, a wide range of observable values can be collected, starting from the potential energy, the number of particles, and going to properties that are not related to the sampling rules. For instance, structural quantities like the radial distribution function or electronic properties such as the HOMO-LUMO gap of the system.
In order to construct a phase diagram for the studied system, one has first to define which \textit{phases} are of interest. For instance, we can define as one phase all samples with the same number of particles $N$. The task is then to evaluate the free energy $f_i(\mu,T)$ of phase $i$, as function of $\mu$ and $T$, and for each value of $(\mu,T)$ the most stable phase is the one with lowest free energy.
From textbook statistical mechanics, the free energy is related to the probability $p_i$ to find the sampled system in a certain phase (i.e., having a certain value of an observable quantity) as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber f_i(\mu,T) & = & -k_{\ce{B}}T \ln p_i(\mu,T) \\ \label{eq:textbook} &=& -k_{\ce{B}}T \ln \frac{\int_\Gamma d\bm{R} \, \chi_i(\bm{R}) \, q(\bm{R};\mu,\beta)}{\int_\Gamma d\bm{R} \, q(\bm{R};\mu,\beta)}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\bm{R}$ denotes the configuration of the system, $\chi_i$ is the indicator function for the state $i$ --- e.g., equal to 1 when $N$ is a given $N^*$ and 0 otherwise ---, and $q(\bm{R};\mu,\beta)$ is the density function for the specific statistical ensemble. The integrals are over the whole configuration space $\Gamma$.
The normalization term at the denominator of Eq. \ref{eq:textbook} is known as the \textit{partition function}, $c(\mu,\beta)$. Once $q(\bm{R};\mu,\beta)$ is defined for the sampled ensemble (see further), the nontrivial task is to estimate $c(\mu,\beta)$, in order to evaluate the free energy and find its minimum.
To efficiently estimate the partition function from our REGC sampling, we adopted the multistate Bennett acceptance ratio (MBAR)\cite{doi:10.1063/1.2978177} approach, as implemented in the pymbar code (\url{https://github.com/choderalab/pymbar}). The MBAR method starts from defining the reduced potential function for the grand-canonical ensemble $U(\bm{R};\mu,\beta)$ for state $(\mu,\beta)$~\cite{doi:10.1063/1.2978177}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:grandpot}
U(\bm{R};\mu,\beta) = \beta \Big[E(\bm{R})-\mu N(\bm{R})\Big]
\end{equation}
where $N(\bm{R})$ is the number of particles for the considered configuration. We note that there is a sign mistake in front of $ \mu N $ for the corresponding formula in the original MBAR paper~\cite{ doi:10.1063/1.2978177privateComm}.
The grand-canonical density function is then $q(\bm{R};\mu,\beta) = \exp [ - U(\bm{R};\mu,\beta)]$.\\
The MBAR approach provides the lowest-variance estimator for $c(\mu,\beta)$, first by determining its value over the set of actually sampled states, via the set of coupled nonlinear equations \cite{doi:10.1063/1.2978177}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:normlizationconstant}
\hat{c}_{l,m} = \sum_{l=1}^L \sum_{m=1}^M \sum_{i=1}^{\Omega_{l,m}}\frac{q(\bm{R}_{i,l,m};\mu_m,\beta_l)}{\sum_{l=1}^L \sum_{m=1}^M \Omega_{l,m} \hat{c}_{l,m}^{-1}q(\bm{R}_{i,l,m};\mu_m,\beta_l)}
\end{equation}
where the index $i$ runs over all the samples in one state. Crucially, all samples enter the estimator for $\hat{c}_{l,m}$, at state $(l,m)$, irrespective of the state they were sampled in. Once the set of equations for the $L\times M$ $\hat{c}_{l,m}$'s is solved, $c(\mu,\beta)$ can be estimated for any new state $(\mu,\beta)$ via the same formula, with the observation that the $\hat{c}_{l,m}$'s at the denominator are now known.
Next, Eq. \ref{eq:textbook} can be evaluated. Following the example where the phase $i$ is identified by the number of particles in the system, the values of $N$ that minimizes $f_i(\mu,\beta)$ is the stable phase at the particular value of $(\mu,\beta)$.
Graphically, one can assign a color to each value of $N$ and, for each $(\mu_i,\beta_j)$ on a grid, the color is assigned to a pixel of size $(\delta\mu,\delta\beta)$ centered at $(\mu_i,\beta_j)$ (see Fig. \ref{fig:pd1}).
In order to obtain a more familiar $(p,T)$ phase diagram from the evaluated $(\mu,\beta)$, we use the relationship $\mu(p,T)= k_{\ce{B}}T \ln (p/p_0)$, where $p_0$ is chosen such that $-k_{\ce{B}}T \ln (p_0)$ summarizes all the pressure-independent components of $\mu$, i.e., translational, rotational, etc. degrees of freedom. \cite{PhysRevB.68.045407,beret2014reaction,bhattacharya2014efficient}
We now turn our attention to evaluating the ensemble-averaged value of some property, at a given state point $(\mu,\beta)$. To give a concrete example for which we actually give results in section \ref{ssec:ljs}, let's consider the radial distribution function $g(r)$, i.e., the probability to find a particle at a given distance $r$ from any selected particles, averaged over all particles and samples. Here, we are in particular interested in the average (or expected) value of a property like $g(r)$ when the system is in a given phase, e.g., has a certain number of particles $N$.
The ensemble average value of $g(r)$ at a given $r$ and given state point $\mu,\beta)$, and phase $i$ is:
\begin{equation}
\langle g(r) \rangle _{\mu,\beta,i} = \frac{\int_\Gamma d\bm{R} \, \chi_i(\bm{R}) \, g(r;\bm{R}) \, q(\bm{R};\mu,\beta)}{\int_\Gamma d\bm{R} \, q(\bm{R};\mu,\beta)}
\end{equation}
where the function $g(r;\bm{R})$ at any given $r$ depends on the whole configuration $\bm{R}$.
In the MBAR formalism, the integrals are estimated over the sampled points via:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:avegr}
\langle g(r) \rangle_{\mu,\beta,i} = \sum_{n=1}^{\Omega_i} \frac{g(r;\bm{R}_n) \, c_{\mu,\beta}^{-1} \, q(\bm{R}_n;\mu,\beta)}{\sum_{l,m} \Omega_{l,m,i} c_{\mu_m,\beta_l}^{-1}q(\bm{R}_{l,m,i};\mu_m,\beta_l)}
\end{equation}
where $\Omega_i$ is the number of samples in phase $i$ and therefore the sum over $n$ runs over all samples belonging to phase $i$. Similarly, $\Omega_{l,m,i}$ is the number of samples in phase $i$ in each sampled state point $(m,l)$.
In practice, $g(r)$ is discretized into a histogram, in which bin $k$ counts how many particles are found between distance $r_{k−1}$ and $r_k$ (see section section \ref{ssec:ljs} for more details). One should note that the average value of each bin in the histogram is evaluated independently by MBAR.
\section{\label{sec:results}RESULTS}
\subsection{\label{ssec:lj} Lennard-Jones surface}
As first example, we applied our REGC algorithm to a two-species Lennard-Jones (LJ) system, consisting of a fcc(111) frozen surface of species A, in contact with a gas phase of species-B particles. Details on the interactions between BB and AB LJ particles are given in the Appendix, here we mention that we chose them so that AB interactions are much stronger than BB (being the A particles forzen, there is no interaction defined among them). The equilibrium distances $d_{ij}^\textrm{eql}$ are mismatched such that $d_{AB}^\textrm{eql} > d_{BB}^\textrm{eql}$, and both are shorter than the fixed AA first-neighbor distances. Other choices are possible, but here we focus on only one choice, in order to show in depth the type of \textit{a posteriori} analysis an REGC run allows for. The sub-system labeled as A$_{18}$ is a 2-layer slab with a $ 3 \times 3$ lateral supercell (i.e., 18 A atoms), periodically replicated in the $x$ and $y$ direction, while the $z$ direction is aligned with the [111] direction of the slab. The gas particle B is only allowed to insert in the ``surface" zone. We defined the ``surface" zone as a slab of height 48.0 {\AA} above (i.e., in the positive $z$ direction), starting from the $z$ position of the topmost atoms of A$_{18}$. At the same time, particles B are inserted at all $x$ and $y$ coordinates, uniformly. Insertion and deletion attempts have been performed with equal probabilities. Ten sequential MC moves are performed after each particle/replica exchange attempt.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={4.5cm 2.5cm 6.5cm 0.5cm}, clip, width=0.5\textwidth]{Figure3.jpg}
\caption{Phase diagrams of a LJ gas-phase (particles B) in contact with a frozen fcc(111) LJ frozen surface calculated via by MBAR from the REGCMC sampling (panel a) and aiAT (panel b) at $(p_\textrm{B},T)$ conditions corresponding to a range from zero adsorbed particles (all in gas phase, region labeled as ``pristine'', referred to the surface) to the deposition of the LJ B particles into a bulk solid. The red line is the melting line for the LJ B particles, the sublimation line is blue, and the vaporization line is cyan. The cyan, green and pink stars correspond to the ``corner'' states for the REGCMC sampling: (650 K, -0.9 eV), (650 K, -2.4 eV) and (200 K, -0.9 eV), respectively. The fourth corner, (200 K, -2.4 eV) falls outside the $(p,T)$ window shown in the plot. The blue circle indicates (600 K, \num{8.89e-2} atm) and (200 K, \num{2.03e-17}atm) is exactly the pink star, corresponding to two states in Fig. \ref{fig:lj-rdf2}c and Fig. \ref{fig:lj-rdf2}b, respectively.}
\label{fig:pd1}
\end{figure}
In the calculations, 160 replicas are defined i.e., 10 temperatures ranging from 200 to 650 K, with an interval of 50 K, and 16 chemical potentials ranging from -2.4 to -0.9 eV, with an interval of 0.1 eV. The range of chemical potentials is selected such that the lowest value of $\mu$ is comparable to and slightly lower than the adsorption energy of one B particle on A$_{18}$, in order to assure that the sampling includes states where zero or few particles are adsorbed (in order to have the pristine surface appearing in the phase diagram). The highest value of $\mu$ is ideally always close to zero, in order to scan up to the condensation of B particles and formation of a bulk B phase. The range of temperature was chosen to be slightly lower than the solid/liquid/gas triple point of the B particles and ranging to few times (here, four) its critical temperature \cite{doi:10.1080/00268977600100281}. In practice, pre-knowledge of the studied system can be applied in order to frame a suitable ($\mu,T$) window containing phases of interest. The spacing between $T$ and $\mu$ values is more difficult to estimate \textit{a priori}. During the simulation, one has to check that the acceptance ratio of RE attempted moves is not too low, in order to ensure a proper diffusion of replicas in the $(\mu,T)$ window. For instance, the present choice ensured an acceptance ratio of about 25\%.
Configuration swaps were attempted every 100 REGC steps, and $x_0$ was set equal to 0.99; a total of $1.2 \times 10^5$ REGC steps were performed to reach convergence, that is, there was no change in the density of reduced-energy states $\rho(U)$, with increasing simulation steps. The density $\rho(U)$ is sampled by binning the sampled configurations according to their value of $U$.
\subsubsection{\label{ssec:LJpd}Phase diagram}
The phase diagram shown in Fig. \ref{fig:pd1}(a) is constructed by using MBAR and shows the $(p_\textrm{B},T)$ regions where different number of adsorbed B particles are in thermodynamic equilibrium with their gas phase. The B reservoir is assumed to be an ideal gas, so the chemical potential of the reference state is defined as $\mu^0_{id.gas}\equiv k_{\ce{B}}T\ln(\Lambda^3)$. The relationship between pressure $p_{id.gas}$ in the reservoir and the chemical potential $\mu$ is $\beta\mu\equiv \beta\mu^0_{id.gas}+\ln(\beta p_{id.gas})$, that is $p_0=(k_{\ce{B}}T)^{\frac{5}{2}}(\frac{2\pi m}{h^2})^{\frac{3}{2}}$. The whole output data of REGCMC is sub-sampled every 100 REGC steps, that is, recording data after every attempted replica exchange, to remove correlations in the sampled quantities.
The MBAR@REGC phase diagram is compared to the aiAT@REGC phase diagram (Fig. \ref{fig:pd1}(b)), which is calculated via the following steps: $(i)$ For each observed number $N_\textrm{B}$ of adsorbed (B) particles in the REGCMC sampling, the lowest energy configuration is selected. We note that identifying phases (the phase is identified by $N_\textrm{B}$) via grand-canonical sampling is not the usual strategy for aiAT. Typically phases are enumerated on the basis of pre-knowledge and local minimization (at fixed number of adsorbed particles. In other words, the aiAT study presented in this paragraph is already richer than usual due to the unbiased structure sampling. $(ii)$ The formation Gibbs free energy for each of these phases is calculated via:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:aiTherm}
\Delta G^f_{N_\textrm{B}}(T,p_B) = F_{N_\textrm{B}} - F_{\textrm{A}_{18}}-N_\textrm{B}\mu(T,p_\textrm{B})
\end{equation}
Here, the free energy of $F_{N_\textrm{B}}$ of the system $\textrm{A}_{18}\textrm{B}_{N_\textrm{B}}$ and $F_{\textrm{A}_{18}}$ of the pristine $\textrm{A}_{18}$ slab is approximated by the LJ energies of the two systems, i.e., all the vibrational contributions to the free energy are assumed to cancel out. This is often a justified assumption for systems studies via aiAT\cite{PhysRevB.68.045407}. As we will see, it is not a good approximation for this LJ system, at least at larger $N_\textrm{B}$. $(iii)$ As for MBAR@REGC, at each $(T_i, \mu_j)$ on a grid the phase with the lowest $\Delta G^f$ determines the color of the pixel of size $(\delta T,\delta\mu)$ centered at $(T_i,\mu_j )$. This aiAT@REGC approach, used here only for comparing to MBAR@REGC in order single out the role of the vibrational contribution to free energy, including anharmonic effects, is similar to the method recently proposed in Ref.~\onlinecite{doi:10.1021/acs.jpcc.8b11093}. There, the configurations are sampled by means of an approximated GC scheme at one temperature only and without replica exchange for either temperature or chemical potential. The effect of the reservoir to the free energy is taken care of by an expression similar to Eq. \ref{eq:aiTherm}.\\
By comparing the two panels of Fig. \ref{fig:pd1}, we note that up to $N_\textrm{B}\,=\,18$, the two phase diagrams almost coincide, especially at lower temperatures (in the Suppl. Material, we show a zoom-in of the region between 60 and 350 K). There are, however, significant differences at larger $N_\textrm{B}$: There are many more phases in Fig. \ref{fig:pd1})(a) that are missing in Fig. \ref{fig:pd1})(b) for $N_\textrm{B}>18$ and the region of stability of larger coverages is shifted to higher temperatures and lower pressures. This can be understood as due to increasingly larger vibrational contributions, especially in the direction $z$, perpendicular to the slab, while at low coverage the free energy is indeed essentially given by the LJ energy. We come back to this in the next section, after analyzing the structural properties of the different phases.\\
The analysis of the phase diagram Fig. \ref{fig:pd1})(b) reveals that for many values of number of adsorbed B particles, $N_\textrm{B}$, there is a region of stability in the phase diagram, however, for some specific values of $N_\textrm{B}$ larger stability areas are found. Besides $N_\textrm{B}\,=\,0$(the pristine surface), we recognize $N_\textrm{B}\,=\,18$ as the first complete mono-layer, $N_\textrm{B}\,=\,45$ as the addition of a second complete monolayer, plus a third phase, $N_\textrm{B}\,=\,59$ with a thicker second monolayer (see further). We also identify a large-coverage phase, $N_\textrm{B}\,=\,85$ which can be described by the formation of a ``third'' layer around 1.9 {\AA}, but in this case the particle distribution does not go completely to zero between second and third layer as it does between first and second, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:lj-sdf}.
The diagram extends till the melting (red), vaporization (cyan), and sublimation (blue) line for bulk B particles. The phase transition curves are derived from the published equations of state for the LJ system.\cite{nicolas1979equation, johnson1993lennard, kolafa1994lennard, tang1999phase, okrasinski2001mathematical, van2000free, van2002gas} We underline that the phase diagram outside the $(p,T)$ region sampled directly via the REGC run is not \textit{extrapolated}. It is obtained as for all the diagram by Boltzmann re-sampling the configurations actually visited, using the measured (reduced) potential energies.
\begin{figure}[hb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={9cm 4.5cm 10cm 2cm}, width=0.35\textwidth]{Figure4.jpg}
\caption{Axial distribution function of adsorbed particles for each $N_\textrm{B}$ composition generated in REGC sampling. The curves are displaced by 20 units and each dash line is a zero reference line for the curve with the same color.}
\label{fig:lj-sdf}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{\label{ssec:ljs}Structural properties}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={4.3cm 5.0cm 6cm 0.9cm}, clip, width=0.5\textwidth]{Figure5.jpg}
\caption{Lateral radial distribution functions $g_{xy}(r)$ for (a) first monolayer, and (b) second monolayer (I), respectively. The blue and pink balls in the insets indicate A and B particles, respectively.}
\label{fig:lj-rdf1}
\end{figure}
The REGC sampling allows for much deeper analysis than the evaluation of the phase diagram. For instance, the structural properties of the adsorbed phases can be characterized in a statistical way.
The axial distribution function $\rho(z)$ was calculated by dividing the cell into slabs of width 0.12 {\AA}, parallel to the surface, and collecting a histogram of the number of particles in each slab along the REGC sampling. As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:lj-sdf}, the adsorbate has a clear layered structure up to the second layer. For larger $N_\textrm{B}$, i.e., $N_\textrm{B} > 59$, there are more and more particles adsorbed in the range $1.2\! \le z \! \le 1.8$ \AA, though another noticeable peak around 1.9 {\AA} occurs. As intuitively predictable, the first layer consists of 18 B particles located in all the hollow sites of the $3\times 3$ surface. When the second full monolayer $N_\textrm{B}\,=\,45$ is stable, the B particles occupy the 27 bridge sites of the A$_9$ surface layer.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={8.cm 0cm 11cm 0.2cm}, clip, width=0.5\textwidth]{Figure6.jpg}
\caption{Lateral radial distribution function $g_{xy}(r)$ for (a) relaxed second monolayer (II) $\textrm{A}_9\textrm{B}_{59}$, average distribution function $<g_{xy}(r)>$ at (200 K, $2.03 \times 10^{-17}$ atm) state (b), and at (600 K, $8.89 \times 10^{-2}$ atm) (c) for the same composition. The blue and pink balls in the insets indicate A and B particles, respectively. }
\label{fig:lj-rdf2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={0.8cm 3.0cm 0cm 2.2cm}, width=\textwidth, height=10cm]{Figure7.jpg}
\caption{Phase diagrams of Si$_\mathrm{2}$ with H$_\mathrm{2}$ reactive gas phase calculated by (a) aiAT@REGC (b) MBAR@REGC. MBAR@REGC phase diagrams of (c) chemisorbed Si$_\mathrm{2}$H$_N$ and (d) HOMO-LUMO gap of Si$_\mathrm{2}$H$_N$. Phase diagrams of Si$_\mathrm{4}$ with H$_\mathrm{2}$ reactive gas phase calculated by (e) aiAT@REGC and (f) MBAR@REGC. MBAR@REGC phase diagrams of (g) chemisorbed Si$_\mathrm{4}$H$_N$ and (h) HOMO-LUMO gap of Si$_\mathrm{4}$H$_N$ at PBE0 level. HOMO-LUMO gaps in panels (d) and (h) are in eV.}
\label{fig:pd2}
\end{figure*}
To better characterize the structure of the adsorbate layers, in Figs. \ref{fig:lj-rdf1}a--b and Figs. \ref{fig:lj-rdf2}a--c we show the $g_{xy}(r)$, i.e., the radial distribution functions (RDF) in the $xy$-plane for the different adsorbate layers (i.e., for B-particles in a slab $z_0 \pm \delta z_0$ as specified in each panel). The structures shown in Fig. \ref{fig:lj-rdf2}b--c are obtained via MBAR by evaluating Eq. \ref{eq:avegr}. We observe that the first monolayer and second monolayer (I) $N_\textrm{B} = 45$ have a $g_{xy}(r)$ characteristic of the solid phase with well-defined peaks and long-range order, whereas for the second monolayer (II) $N_\textrm{B} = 59$, the $g_{xy}(r)$ is more disordered. In the relaxed structure of $\textrm{A}_9\textrm{B}_{59}$ (Fig. \ref{fig:lj-rdf2}a), B particles occupy approximately both hollow and bridge sites, relative to the top A$_9$ layer and form a ring-like structure around the projection of the A particles. At (200 K, $2.03 \times 10^{-17}$ atm), the average radial distribution function $\langle g_{xy}(r) \rangle $ of this phase shares some similar peak positions with that of its lowest-energy isomer. It is clear that the ring structure formed by B particles can be still found in the average adsorbate structure though there are a few B particles diffusing around the projection of the A particles. At (600 K, $8.89 \times 10^{-2}$ atm), more and more B particles diffuse and the ring structure is not as noticeable as before. Consistently, the $\langle g_{xy}(r) \rangle$ shares a few major peaks with that of its lowest-energy isomer, but they appear more smeared. \\ The example of $\langle g_{xy}(r)\rangle $ at the two state points was selected in order to demonstrate the power of the REGC sampling to reveal detailed thermodynamic information on the simulated system. A crucial observation is that such information is already contained in the REGC sampling, no further simulation is needed, only post-processing statistical analysis of the sampled data points is required. \\
Coming back to the differences between aiAT@REGC and MBAR@REGC phase diagrams (Fig.~\ref{fig:pd1}), we observe, in Fig.~\ref{fig:lj-sdf} that up to the complete first monolayer ($N_\textrm{B}=18$), the adsorbed particles have essentially no freedom to move in the $z$ direction. As soon as the second monolayer is established, the adsorbed particles display a broader and broader distribution along the $z$ direction. The distribution becomes even bimodal for
$N_\textrm{B}\ge 62$. This enhanced configurational freedom creates a large, negative, vibrational free energy contribution that stabilizes the higher coverages compared to when only the energetic contribution is taken into account (as in the aiAT@REGC phase diagram).
\subsection{\label{ssec:si-clus} \textit{Ab initio} \ce{Si2H_$N$} and \ce{Si4H_$N$}clusters}
The REGC algorithm coupled to \textit{ab initio} MD was applied to identify the thermodynamically stable and metastable compositions and structures of Si$_M$H$_N$ ($M$=2, 4) clusters at realistic temperatures and pressure of the molecular hydrogen gas.
\subsubsection{\label{ssec:sipd}Phase diagram}
\paragraph{Si$_2$} Twenty replicas of Si\textsubscript{2} are selected in contact with different thermodynamic states, that is, with temperatures of 500, 650, 800, and 950 K and \ce{H2} chemical potentials of -0.2, -0.16, -0.12, -0.08, and -0.05 eV. The selection of the temperature range is made according to the experimental deposition temperature of chemical vapor deposited silicon films \cite{doi:10.1063/1.347215,1347-4065-30-2R-233}, which starts from around 600 K. Ideally, the lowest $\mu_{\ce{H}}$ should be around $-1.2$~eV, which is the half adsorption energy of H$_2$ on Si$_2$, according to our DFT calculations (see details in appendix). However, in order to focus the sampling on a more interesting region, where more H atoms are adsorbed, we started from a much higher minimum $\mu_{\textrm{H}_2}$. The studied Si$_{2,4}$H$_N$ systems are confined in a sphere with radius 4 {\AA}, by applying reflecting boundaries. This avoids that H atoms diffuse at arbitrary distance from the Si$_M$ cluster, without perturbing the statistics as the cutoff distance is such that the H atoms are not any more interacting with the Si cluster. \textit{Ab initio} molecular dynamics is performed for each system after exchanging particle with the reservoir or swapping with neighboring replicas. For this REGCMD study, $x_0$ is chosen as 0.9.
For comparison, we analyzed the stability of Si$_{\mathrm{2}}$H$_N$ clusters using \textit{ab initio} atomistic thermodynamics (aT) in Fig. \ref{fig:pd2}a. For each number of adsorbed hydrogens $N_\textrm{H}$, the lowest DFT energy isomer is identified among all the configurations obtained along the REGC \textit{ab initio} MD sampling. The Gibbs free energy of each phase is calculated as:
\begin{equation}
\Delta G_f(T,p_{\ce{H2}}) = F_{\ce{Si_{2,4}}\ce{H}_N}-F_{\ce{Si_{2,4}}}-N\mu_{\ce{H}}(T,p_{\ce{H2}})
\end{equation}
Here, $F_{\ce{Si_{2,4}}\ce{H}_N}$ and $F_{\ce{Si}_{2,4}}$ are the Helmholtz free energies of the Si$_{\mathrm{2,4}}$H$_N$ and the pristine Si$_{\mathrm{2,4}}$ cluster (at their configurational ground state), respectively. $\mu_{\textrm{H}_2}$ is the chemical potential of the hydrogen molecule. $F_{\ce{Si_2}\ce{H}_N}$ and $F_{\ce{Si_2}}$ are calculated using DFT information and are expressed as the sum of DFT total energy, DFT vibrational free energy in the quasi-harmonic approximation, as well as translational, and rotational free-energy contributions. The dependence of $\mu_{\ce{H_2}}$ on $T$ and $p_{\ce{H_2}}$ is calculated using the ideal (diatomic) gas approximation with the same DFT functional as for the clusters.\cite{beret2014reaction, bhattacharya2013stability, bhattacharya2014efficient} So $p_0$ here is calculated as follows:
\begin{equation}
p_0 = [(\frac{2 \pi m}{h^2})^{\frac{3}{2}}(k_{\ce{B}}T)^{\frac{5}{2}}(\frac{8 \pi^2 I_{\ce{A}} k_{\ce{B}}T}{h^2})\frac{e^{(\frac{k_{\ce{B}}T}{E_{\ce{DFT}}})}}{e^{(\frac{hv_{\ce{HH}}}{k_{\ce{B}}T})-1}}]
\end{equation}
$E_{\ce{DFT}}$ is the DFT total energy, $m$ is the mass, $I_{\ce{A}}$ is the inertia moments, $v_{\ce{HH}}$ is the H-H stretching frequency of 3080 $\textrm{cm}^{-1}$, and \ce{E_{DFT}} of -31.74 eV. The ($p_{\ce{H_2}}, T$) phase diagram of Si$_2$H$_N$ cluster is also constructed via the MBAR@REGC method. As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:pd2}b, besides Si$_2$, Si$_2$H$_2$, and Si$_2$H$_6$, which have their wide stability regions revealed in both phase diagrams, there is a narrow $(T,p_{\ce{H_2}})$ stability domain for Si$_2$H$_4$, which is only revealed by the MBAR@REGC phase diagram that includes without approximation all the anharmonic contributions to the free energy. Another difference between two phase diagrams is that the stable ($p_{\ce{H_2}}, T$) range of each phase is quite different.
The Si$_2$H$_N$ phases in Fig. \ref{fig:pd2}b include not only chemically adsorbed H atom, but also H$_{2}$ molecule or isolated H atoms. In order to further investigate the chemisorbed phase stability, we construct the phase diagram (Fig. \ref{fig:pd2}c) for a new observable: the number of adsorbed H atoms. A H atom is considered adsorbed on the Si cluster when the distance to the closest Si is smaller than 1.7 \AA.
\paragraph{Si$_4$} Twenty thermodynamic states for the Si$_4$H$_N$ system are selected, with temperature of 560, 685, 810, and 935 K, and chemical potentials of -0.3, -0.2, -0.17, -0.14, and -0.11 eV. The lowest value of $\mu_{\textrm{H}}$ is selected as a bit larger than the half adsorption energy (-0.6 eV) of $\ce{H_2}$ on Si$_4$.
The other settings are the same as in Si$_2$ simulation.
As for the Si$_2$H$_N$ case, we construct both the aiAT@REGC and MBAR@REGC phase diagram, for comparison, plus the MBAR@REGC phase diagram for the adsorbed H atoms.
In Fig \ref{fig:pd2}e and \ref{fig:pd2}f, the results indicate that two stable Si$_4$H$_4$ and Si$_4$H$_6$ are missing in aT phase diagram. Si$_4$H$_4$ and Si$_4$H$_6$ have considerable larger stable range in chemisorbed phase diagram shown in Fig \ref{fig:pd2}g than in both physi- and chemisorbed one. Besides, the stable ($p_{\ce{H_2}}, T$) range of each phase transitions are quite different in phase diagrams calculated by two method.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={0.08cm 0.03cm 0cm 0.06cm}, clip, width=0.5\textwidth]{Figure8.jpg}
\caption{Structures of Si$_\mathrm{2}$H$_N$ and Si$_\mathrm{4}$H$_N$, found by the REGC sampling, that have a region of thermodynamic stability in the phase diagrams of Fig. \ref{fig:pd2}.}
\label{fig:structs}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{\label{ssec:sis}Structural and electronic properties of silicon hydrides}
In Fig. \ref{fig:structs}, we show the structures of each thermodynamically stable cluster size appearing in the phase diagrams. All previously reported structures are found in our REGC \textit{ab initio} MD simulations and illustrated in Fig. S2.
Besides, we identified many other isomers at each composition, via the REGC \textit{ab initio} MD sampling, as shown in Fig. S2.
The HOMO-LUMO gap $E_\textrm{g}$ is also chosen as further observable for the evaluation of phase diagrams for Si$_\mathrm{2}$H$_N$ Fig. \ref{fig:pd2}d and Si$_\mathrm{4}$H$_N$ Fig. \ref{fig:pd2}h. $E_\textrm{g}$ is evaluated as the difference between the vertical electron affinity (VEA) and vertical ionization potential (VIP). The VEA (VIP) is evaluated ---via the PBE0 hybrid \cite{doi:10.1063/1.478522} xc functional, with the Tkatchenko-Scheffler\cite{PhysRevLett.102.073005} pairwise vdW correction--- as the energy difference between the neutral cluster and its monovalent anion (cation), at fixed geometry of the neutral species . It has been clearly shown Fig. \ref{fig:pd2}d and \ref{fig:pd2}h that the HOMO-LUMO gap increases with increasing $N_\textrm{H}$ for both Si$_\mathrm{2}$H$_N$ and Si$_\mathrm{4}$H$_N$, as the VEA decreases with increasing $N_\textrm{H}$ (Fig. S1b and S1e) while VIP increases (Fig. S1c and S1f). This electronic-structure phase diagram can be used to provide guidance to synthesize the material with desired electronic properties, by tuning the environmental conditions, i.e, the temperature and pressure of reactive gas phase.
\section{\label{sec:concl}CONCLUSION AND OUTLOOK}
In summary, we have developed a massively parallel Replica-Exchange Grand-Canonical Monte Carlo/\textit{ab initio} Molecular-Dynamics (REGCMC/MD) algorithm to perform simulations on surfaces/nanoclusters in contact with reactive $(T,p)$ gas and demonstrated how it can be used, in combination with the multistate-Bennet-acceptance-ratio (MBAR) reweighting approach to determine $(T,p)$ phase diagrams. This massively parallel algorithm requires no prior knowledge of the phase diagram and takes only the potential energy function together with the desired $\mu$ and $T$ ranges as inputs. The particle insertion/removal Monte Carlo move, which implements the GC sampling, together with the exchange of configurations among thermodynamic states introduced by RE, allows for an efficient sampling of the configurational space. The approach is appled to an a model surface described by the Lennard-Jones empirical force-fields and small Si clusters in reactive \ce{H2} atmosphere described at the \textit{ab initio} DFT level. Besides free-energy $(T,p)$ phase diagrams, the combination of the REGC sampling and \textit{a posteriori} analysis via MBAR allows for the determination of phase diagrams for any (atom position dependent) observables, therefore indicating how to tune the environmental condition ($T$ and $p$) to get a material with desired properties. It can therefore be applied to a wide range of practical issues, e.g., dopant profiles, surface segregation, crystal growth and more. Such as an undertaking has its limitation in the cost of \textit{ab initio} molecular dynamics needed for the REGC sampling. However, its embarrassingly parallel nature makes our approach ``towards exascale'' friendly, and can be regarded as a very efficient and internally consistent high-throughput approach. An obvious and indeed currently investigated generalization of the method is to consider more than one reactive gas in the so-called ``constrained equilibrium'' \cite{PhysRevLett.90.046103,PhysRevB.68.045407}(different species do not react in the gas phase, but only at the surface). In order to avoid a dimensional explosion, an algorithm with an adaptive $\mu_i$ grid is under development.
\section{\label{sec:acknow}ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS}
We thank Fawzi R. Mohamed for crucial help in the parallel implementation of the REGC algorithm and helpful discussions. We thank Chunye Zhu for helpful discussions and a critical reading of the manuscript.
\bibliographystyle{apsrev4-1}
|
\section{Introduction}
A \emph{$K_3$-decomposition} of a graph $G$ is a set of triangles in $G$ whose edge sets partition $E(G)$. A \emph{fractional $K_3$-decomposition} of a graph $G$ is an assignment of nonnegative weights to the triangles of $G$ so that, for each edge of $G$, the sum of the weights of all the triangles containing that edge is 1. A $K_3$-decomposition can be viewed as a fractional $K_3$-decomposition in which each assigned weight is 0 or 1.
Obviously for a graph $G$ to have a $K_3$-decomposition, all its degrees must be even and its number of edges must be divisible by 3. We call such graphs \emph{$K_3$-divisible}. Kirkman \cite{Kir1847} showed that every complete graph $K_n$ which is $K_3$-divisible has a $K_3$-decomposition. Such a decomposition is equivalent to a Steiner triple system of order $n$; here, $K_3$-divisibility reduces to the familiar congruence condition $n \equiv 1$ or $3 \pmod{6}$. Nash-Williams \cite{Nas1970} conjectured that a $K_3$-decomposition exists for every $K_3$-divisible graph with sufficiently high minimum degree. Although he equivocated somewhat on the degree threshold, his conjecture is usually stated as follows.
\begin{conjecture}[\cite{Nas1970}]\label{C:nashWilliams}
Every $K_3$-divisible graph of order $n$ with minimum degree at least $\frac{3}{4}n$ has a $K_3$-decomposition.
\end{conjecture}
For any positive $h \equiv 3 \mod{6}$, the graph $C_4 \cdot K_h$, in which each vertex of a $4$-cycle is blown up into a complete graph of order $h$,
is $(3h-1)$-regular and $K_3$-divisible but can be shown not to have a $K_3$-decomposition nor even a fractional $K_3$-decomposition. This construction appeared first in Ron Graham's addendum to \cite{Nas1970}, and shows that the value of $\frac{3}{4}$ in Conjecture~\ref{C:nashWilliams} cannot be lowered, even if we weaken the conjecture to demand only fractional $K_3$-decompositions. Here we establish the following.
\begin{theorem}\label{T:fracMain}
There is an integer $N$ such that every graph of order $n > N$ and minimum degree at least $0.852n$ has a fractional $K_3$-decomposition.
\end{theorem}
This result is an improvement on a similar theorem of Dross \cite{Dro}, in which the minimum degree threshold is $0.9n$. Our proof follows the same general method of pushing triangle weights along $4$-cliques; indeed, our work in essence explores the limits of this approach. This is the latest in a sequence of minimum degree bounds of the form $(1-\delta)n$ sufficient for $K_3$-decompositions, starting with Gustavsson who showed \cite{Gus1991} that one can take $\delta=10^{-24}$, and followed by better values of $\delta$, \cite{Yus2005} then \cite{Gar2014} and finally \cite{Dro}, for the fractional relaxation.
Shortly after this paper appeared as a preprint, Delcourt and Postle \cite{DP} posted a preprint proving that one can take $\delta=0.1727$.
Together with \cite[Theorem 1.3]{BaKuLoOs2016}, Theorem~\ref{T:fracMain} immediately implies the following.
\begin{theorem}\label{T:intMain}
For each real number $\epsilon>0$, there is an integer $N'$ such that every $K_3$-divisible graph of order $n > N'$ and minimum degree at least $(0.852+\epsilon)n$ has a $K_3$-decomposition.
\end{theorem}
In fact, $\epsilon$ can be taken to equal $0$, as we discuss following the proof of Theorem~\ref{T:fracMain}.
The outline of the paper is as follows. In Section~\ref{S:Dross}, we review the method of \cite{Dro} in detail and set up some notation to be used later.
In particular, we recall a sufficient condition for fractional $K_3$-decomposition of $G$ in terms of the number of $4$-cliques across a partition $(A,B)$ of $E(G)$. We also provide examples that demonstrate that the approach of \cite{Dro} (and likewise ours) cannot by itself solve the problem for $\delta > \frac{1}{6}$. We apply somewhat different strategies depending on the value of two key parameters: the size $|A|$ of one side of our partition and the average over $e \in A$ of the number of triangles containing $e$. Section~\ref{S:bounds} establishes some basic bounds on these and other parameters. In Section~\ref{S:outer-alpha}, estimates on crossing $4$-cliques are obtained by convexity arguments inspired by those in \cite{Dro}. These are generally less effective when our cut $(A,B)$ is close to balanced. Section~\ref{S:middle-alpha} finishes these remaining cases by classifying vertices according to the number of edges in $A$ induced by their neighbourhoods.
\section{The approach of Dross and a barrier to it}
\label{S:Dross}
For a graph $G$, let $\mathcal{T}(G)$ be the set of all triangles in $G$. For any assignment $\omega$ of weights to the triangles of a graph $G$ and any edge $xy \in E(G)$, we denote by $\omega(xy)$ the sum of $\omega(X)$ over all triangles $X$ in $G$ that contain the edge $xy$. We refer to $\omega(xy)$ as the \emph{weight on the edge $xy$}. For a set $V$, we denote the complete graph on vertex set $V$ by $K_V$. For a graph $G$ and a subset $U$ of $V(G)$, let $G[U]$ denote the subgraph of $G$ induced by $U$.
Let $n \geq 7$ be an integer and $\d$ be a real number such that $0 < \d < 1$. We say that a graph $G$ is an \emph{$(n,\delta)$-reduced graph} if $G$ has order $n$ and minimum degree at least $(1-\d) n$, and each triangle in $G$ has at least one vertex of degree at most $\lceil(1-\d)n+1\rceil$. To prove that every graph of order $n$ and minimum degree at least $(1-\d)n$ has a fractional $K_3$-decomposition, it suffices to show that every $(n,\delta)$-reduced graph has a fractional $K_3$-decomposition. To see this, note that if $G$ and $G'$ are graphs such that $G'$ is obtained from $G$ by deleting the edges of a triangle $X$ in $G$, then a fractional $K_3$-decomposition of $G'$ can be extended to a fractional $K_3$-decomposition of $G$ by simply assigning weight 1 to $X$ and weight 0 to each other triangle in $\mathcal{T}(G) \setminus \mathcal{T}(G')$.
To find a fractional $K_3$-decomposition of an $(n,\delta)$-reduced graph $G$ with $m$ edges, Dross begins by assigning weight $\frac{m}{3|\mathcal{T}(G)|}$ to each triangle in $G$. This means that the sum of the weights on the edges of $G$ is $m$, because each triangle in $G$ contributes its weight to three edges. He then repeatedly uses an elegant switch, which we encapsulate in Lemma~\ref{L:drossSwitch}, to modify this initial assignment of weights until a fractional $K_3$-decomposition of $G$ is obtained. We call a pair of non-adjacent edges $\{ab,cd\}$ in a graph $G$ a \emph{rooted pair} if $G[\{a,b,c,d\}]$ is a copy of $K_4$.
\begin{lemma}[\cite{Dro}]\label{L:drossSwitch}
Let $G$ be a graph, and let $\omega:\mathcal{T}(G) \rightarrow \R$ be an assignment of weights to the triangles of $G$. Let $\epsilon$ be a positive real number, let $ab$ and $cd$ be a rooted pair of edges in $G$, and take a new assignment of weights $\omega':\mathcal{T}(G) \rightarrow \R$ defined by
\[\omega'(X)=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\omega(X)-\frac{\epsilon}{2}, & \hbox{if $X \in \{(a,b,c),(a,b,d)\}$;} \\
\omega(X)+\frac{\epsilon}{2}, & \hbox{if $X \in \{(a,c,d),(b,c,d)\}$;} \\
\omega(X), & \hbox{otherwise.}
\end{array}
\right.\]
Then $\omega'(ab)=\omega(ab)-\epsilon$, $\omega'(cd)=\omega(cd)+\epsilon$, and $\omega'(xy)=\omega(xy)$ for each $xy \in E(G) \setminus \{ab,cd\}$.
\end{lemma}
We will refer to applying Lemma~\ref{L:drossSwitch} as \emph{sending weight $\epsilon$ from $ab$ to $cd$}. Given an initial assignment of weight $\frac{m}{3|\mathcal{T}(G)|}$ to each triangle of a sufficiently dense graph $G$, we can repeatedly apply Lemma~\ref{L:drossSwitch} to adjust the weighting to one in which each edge has weight 1. This assignment will only be a fractional decomposition, however, if we can ensure that the final weight of each triangle is nonnegative.
We introduce some notation that we will employ frequently throughout the remainder of the paper. All of this notation is implicitly dependent on a fixed $(n,\delta)$-reduced graph $G$ that will always be clear from context. We define $m=|E(G)|$. For each edge $e=uv$ of $G$, we let $T_{e}$ be the set of vertices adjacent in $G$ to both $u$ and $v$, and let $t_{e}=|T_{e}|$. For $S \subseteq E(G)$, let $t_S=\frac{1}{|S|}\sum_{e \in S}t_e$ and let $t_\av=t_{E(G)}=\frac{3|\mathcal{T}(G)|}{m}$. Note that the initial weight Dross assigns to each triangle is equal to $\frac{1}{t_\av}$. Let $A$ be a subset of $E(G)$. We abbreviate $\frac{|A|}{m}$ to $\alpha$. We say that a rooted pair $\{e_1,e_2\}$ in $G$ is \emph{separated by} $A$ when $|\{e_1,e_2\} \cap A|=1$ and we define $\kappa_A$ to be the number of rooted pairs in $G$ that are separated by $A$. Finally we let
\[\lambda_A = \tfrac{3}{2}|A|\lceil(1-\d)n-1\rceil(t_A-t_\av).\]
In order to determine where to use Lemma~\ref{L:drossSwitch}, Dross employs an auxiliary flow network. We synthesise the argument in Lemma~\ref{L:flowNetwork}. For the purposes of the next two lemmas, we define
\[c_{\max}=\mfrac{2}{3t_{\av}\lceil(1-\d)n-1\rceil}.\]
\begin{lemma}[\cite{Dro}]\label{L:flowNetwork}
An $(n,\delta)$-reduced graph $G$ has a fractional $K_3$-decomposition if, for each subset $A$ of $E(G)$ with $t_A > t_\av$, we have $\kappa_A \geq \lambda_A$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $E^+=\{e \in E(G):t_e > t_{\av}\}$ and $E^-=\{e \in E(G):t_e < t_{\av}\}$. Let $w_{\av}=\frac{1}{t_{\av}}=\frac{m}{3|\mathcal{T}(G)|}$ and let $\omega$ be the weighting of the triangles in $G$ that assigns weight $w_{\av}$ to each triangle. Observe that each edge $e \in E(G)$ has $\omega(e)=t_ew_{\av}$ and that this is $t_ew_{\av}-1$ greater than the desired weight of 1 if $e \in E^+$ and $1-t_ew_{\av}$ smaller than $1$ if $e \in E^-$. Let $z=\sum_{e \in E^+}(t_ew_{\av}-1)$ be the sum of the excess weights on the edges of $E^+$ and note that we also have $z=\sum_{e \in E^-}(1-t_ew_{\av})$ because the sum of the weights on all the edges of $E(G)$ is $m$.
We construct a flow network $N$ on vertex set $E(G) \cup \{s,t\}$, where is $s$ a source and $t$ a sink, whose arcs are given as follows.
\begin{itemize}[nosep]
\item
For each rooted pair of edges $\{e_1,e_2\}$ in $G$, there are arcs of capacity $c_{\max}$ from $e_1$ to $e_2$ and from $e_2$ to $e_1$.
\item
For each edge $e \in E^+$ there is an arc of capacity $t_ew_{\av}-1$ from $s$ to $e$.
\item
For each edge $e \in E^-$ we add an arc of capacity $1-t_ew_{\av}$ from $e$ to $t$.
\end{itemize}
We now prove that if $N$ admits a flow of magnitude $z$, then $G$ has a fractional $K_3$-decomposition.
Suppose that $N$ admits a flow of magnitude $z$. Such a flow uses each arc of $N$ adjacent to either the source or the sink at full capacity and thus, for each $e \in E(G)$, $e$ has a net flow out from it of $t_ew_{\av}-1$ if $e \in E^+$ and $e$ has a net flow into it of $1-t_ew_{\av}$ if $e \in E^-$. Furthermore, the flow from $e_1$ to $e_2$ is at most $c_{\max}$ for any rooted pair $\{e_1,e_2\}$. Let $\omega'$ be the weighting of the triangles in $G$ obtained by beginning with $\omega$ and, for each arc $(e_1,e_2)$ of $N$ such that $e_1,e_2 \in E(G)$, using Lemma~\ref{L:drossSwitch} to shift weight $\epsilon$ from $e_1$ to $e_2$ where $\epsilon$ is the flow along the arc $(e_1,e_2)$. Then we have $\omega'(e)=1$ for each $e \in E(G)$ by the properties of the flow. Furthermore, the weight sent through any rooted pair is at most $c_{\max}$, and each triangle is in at most $\lceil(1-\d)n-1\rceil$ copies of $K_4$ (recall $G$ is $(n,\delta)$-reduced) and hence in at most $3\lceil(1-\d)n-1\rceil$ rooted pairs. So, for each $X \in \mathcal{T}(G)$,
\[\omega'(X) \geq w_{\av}-\tfrac{3}{2}\lceil(1-\d)n-1\rceil c_{\max}=0.\]
Thus $\omega'$ is a fractional $K_3$-decomposition of $G$.
So it suffices to show that $N$ admits a flow of magnitude $z$ if the hypothesis of the lemma is satisfied. By the max-flow min-cut theorem, $N$ admits a flow of magnitude $z$ if and only if the capacity of $N$ across each cut is at least $z$. Let $\{A \cup \{s\},B \cup \{t\}\}$ be a cut of $N$, where $(A,B)$ is a bipartition of $E(G)$. The capacity across this cut is
\begin{equation}\label{E:cutCapacity}
\medop\sum_{e \in A \cap E^-}(1-t_ew_{\av})+\medop\sum_{e \in B \cap E^+}(t_ew_{\av}-1)+\kappa_{A} c_{\max}.
\end{equation}
Now $\sum_{e \in B \cap E^+}(t_ew_{\av}-1)=z-\sum_{e \in A \cap E^+}(t_ew_{\av}-1)$ and hence \eqref{E:cutCapacity} is equal to
\begin{equation}\label{E:cutCapacity2}
z+\kappa_{A}c_{\max} - \medop\sum_{e \in A}(t_ew_{\av}-1)=z+\kappa_{A}c_{\max} - |A|(t_{A}w_{\av}-1).
\end{equation}
If $t_A \leq t_\av$, then $t_Aw_\av \le 1$ and \eqref{E:cutCapacity2} is clearly at least $z$. So we may assume that $t_A > t_\av$. Using $w_{\av}=\frac{1}{t_{\av}}$ and the definition of $c_{\max}$, we see that this last expression is at least $z$ exactly when $\kappa_A \geq \lambda_A$. Thus $N$ admits a flow of magnitude $z$ by the hypotheses of the lemma.
\end{proof}
Roughly speaking, when $G$ has high minimum degree, we expect that it will contain many copies of $K_4$ and hence, for any subset $A$ of $E(G)$, many rooted pairs separated by $A$. That is, $\kappa_A$ will be large and we can hope that $\kappa_A \geq \lambda_A$.
Our overall strategy here is the same as that of \cite{Dro} in that we ultimately use Lemma~\ref{L:flowNetwork} to prove our result. However, we improve the analysis of \cite{Dro} in several ways. Firstly, we obtain stronger bounds on some key parameters of $G$ (see Lemmas~\ref{L:mBound} and \ref{L:tavBound} to follow). Secondly, we extend arguments from \cite{Dro} to produce a new bound on $\kappa_A$ that is particularly effective when $t_A$ is low (see Lemmas~\ref{L:window} and \ref{L:windowCor}). Finally, to deal with the remaining cases, which occur when $\alpha$ is in a middle range, we introduce a new approach to bound $\kappa_A$ (see Section~\ref{S:middle-alpha}). This approach considers, for each vertex $v$ of $G$, the set of edges in $A$ whose endpoints are both neighbours of $v$ and investigates how these sets intersect.
We now observe that using Lemma~\ref{L:drossSwitch} cannot, by itself, solve the problem for $\delta>\frac{1}{6}$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{L:ConstructionImmuneDross}
For each real $\epsilon>0$, there is an $(n,\delta)$-reduced graph $G$ with $\d<\frac{1}{6}+\epsilon$ for which a fractional $K_3$-decomposition cannot be obtained by first assigning each triangle weight $\frac{1}{t_{\av}}$ and then applying Lemma~\ref{L:drossSwitch} in such a way that each rooted pair in $G$ has weight at most $c_{\max}$ sent through it.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $h$ be a positive integer sufficiently large that $\frac{h+5}{6h+2}<\frac{1}{6}+\epsilon$. We will construct a $(6h+2,\delta)$-reduced graph $G$ with $\d=\frac{h+5}{6h+2}$. Let $G$ be a graph of order $6h+2$ with vertex set $V_1 \cup \cdots \cup V_6 \cup \{u,v\}$ such that
\begin{itemize}[nosep]
\item
for each $i \in \{1,\ldots,6\}$, $|V_i|=h$ and $G[V_i]$ is empty;
\item
for each $x \in \{u,v\}$, $x$ is adjacent to each other vertex in $G$; and
\item
for all distinct $i,j \in \{1,\ldots,6\}$, $G[V_i \cup V_j]$ is isomorphic to the graph obtained from $K_{h,h}$ by removing the edges of a $1$-factor.
\end{itemize}
Then $\deg_G(x)=6h+1$ for each $x \in \{u,v\}$ and $\deg_G(x)=5h-3$ for each $x \in V(G) \setminus \{u,v\}$, and hence $G$ is indeed $(6h+2,\delta)$-reduced with $\d=\frac{h+5}{6h+2}$.
The edge $uv$ is in $6h$ triangles in $G$ and so initially receives weight $\frac{6h}{t_{\av}}$. Furthermore, the edge $uv$ is in $\binom{6}{2}h(h-1)$ rooted pairs. So if each of these has weight at most $c_{\max}$ sent through it, then the final weight of the edge $uv$ will be at least
\[\mfrac{6h}{t_{\av}}-\mbinom{6}{2}h(h-1)c_{\max} = 1+\mfrac{210h^2-269h+89}{3(5h-4)(10h^2-15h+8)}.\]
Because the right hand expression is strictly greater than 1, this proves the result. The equality can be established by noting that $\d=\frac{h+5}{6h+2}$, that $t_{\av}=\frac{3|\mathcal{T}(G)|}{m}$, that $m=15h^2-3h+1$ by a degree sum argument, and that $|\mathcal{T}(G)|=2h(10h^2-15h+8)$ (because there are $\binom{6}{3}h(h-1)(h-2)$ triangles in $G$ that contain neither $u$ nor $v$, $2\binom{6}{2}h(h-1)$ that contain exactly one of $u$ or $v$, and $6h$ that contain both $u$ and $v$).
\end{proof}
\section{Bounds on parameters of \texorpdfstring{$\bm{G}$}{G}}
\label{S:bounds}
In this section we prove some bounds on $\lambda_A$, $m$, $t_{\av}$ and $t_A$ that will be useful later.
\begin{lemma}\label{L:reqNumBound}
For any $(n,\delta)$-reduced graph $G$ and subset $A$ of $E(G)$,
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)]
$\lambda_A \leq \tfrac{3}{2}\alpha(1-\alpha)m\lceil(1-\d)n-1\rceil(t_A-(1-2\d)n)$; and
\item[(ii)]
$\lambda_A \leq \tfrac{3}{2}(1-\alpha)m\lceil(1-\d)n-1\rceil(t_\av-(1-2\d)n)$
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $B=E(G) \setminus A$. Because $G$ has minimum degree at least $(1-\d)n$, we have that $t_e \geq (1-2\d)n$ for each $e \in E(G)$ and hence that $t_B \geq (1-2\d)n$. So, because $t_\av = \alpha t_A + (1-\alpha)t_B$,
\begin{equation}\label{E:tavObvious}
t_\av \geq \alpha t_A + (1-\alpha)(1-2\d)n.
\end{equation}
Now (i) follows by using \eqref{E:tavObvious} in the definition of $\lambda_A$. Rewriting \eqref{E:tavObvious} as $t_A \leq \frac{1}{\alpha}(t_\av-(1-\alpha)(1-2\d)n)$ and using this in the definition of $\lambda_A$ produces (ii).
\end{proof}
For convenience we will often slightly weaken these bounds by replacing $\lceil(1-\d)n-1\rceil$ with $(1-\d)n$.
\begin{lemma}\label{L:mBound}
For any $(n,\delta)$-reduced graph $G$,
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)]
$\medop\sum_{v \in U}\deg_G(v) < |U|((1-\d)n+2)+\tfrac{1}{2}(\d n -2)^2$ for any $U \subseteq V(G)$; and
\item[(ii)]
$m < \left(\mfrac{2-2\d+\d^2}{4}\right)n^2+(1-\d)n+1.$
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Note that (ii) follows from (i) by letting $U=V(G)$. We now prove (i). Let $U \subseteq V(G)$ and put $U^*= \{v \in U:\deg_G(v) \geq (1-\d)n+2\}$. Let $u$ be a vertex in $U$
of largest degree in $G$. If $U^*=\emptyset$, then clearly (i) holds, so we may assume $u \in U^*$. Let $x=|U^* \setminus N_G(u)|$. Clearly $\deg_G(u) \leq n-x$ and hence $\deg_G(v) \leq n-x$ for each $v \in U$. Let $y=|U^* \cap N_G(u)|$ and note that $G[U^* \cap N_G(u)]$ is empty because $G$ is $(n,\delta)$-reduced and hence $G[U^*]$ is triangle-free. So the $y$ vertices in $U^* \cap N_G(u)$ each have degree at most $n-y$. The $|U|-x-y$ vertices in $U \setminus U^*$ each have degree less than $(1-\d)n+2$ by the definition of $U^*$. Thus,
\[\medop\sum_{v \in U}\deg_G(v) < x(n-x)+y(n-y)+(|U|-x-y)((1-\d)n+2).\]
The latter expression is maximised when $x=y=\frac{1}{2}(\d n -2)$, and (i) follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{L:tavBound}
For any $(n,\delta)$-reduced graph $G$,
\[t_\av \leq 3(1-\d)n- \mfrac{2n-3\d n+2}{m}\mbinom{n}{2}.\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $V=V(G)$. Let $G^c$ be the complement of $G$ and let $m^c=\binom{n}{2}-m$. For $i \in \{0,1,2,3\}$, let $t_i$ be the number of triangles in $K_V$ that contain exactly $i$ edges of $G$. For a vertex $v \in V$, the number of triangles in $K_V$ that contain two edges incident with $v$ that are not in $G$ is $\binom{\deg_{G^c}(v)}{2}$ and hence
\begin{equation}\label{E:t1Count}
t_1+3t_0=\sum_{v \in V} \mbinom{\deg_{G^c}(v)}{2}.
\end{equation}
For an edge $uv \in E(G^c)$, the number of triangles in $K_V$ that contain $uv$ is $n-2$, and hence
$3t_0+2t_1+t_2=m^c(n-2)$. Thus, using \eqref{E:t1Count},
\begin{equation}\label{E:triComplementCount}
t_0+t_1+t_2=m^c(n-2)+t_0-\sum_{v \in V} \mbinom{\deg_{G^c}(v)}{2}.
\end{equation}
Because $\sum_{v \in V}\deg_{G^c}(v)=2m^c$ and $0 \leq \deg_{G^c}(v) \leq \d n - 1$ for each $v \in V$, $\sum_{v \in V} \binom{\deg_{G^c}(v)}{2}$ is maximised when $\lfloor \frac{2m^c}{\d n -1} \rfloor$ vertices in $G^c$ have degree $\d n-1$ and all but one (or all) other vertices have degree $0$.
Thus $\sum_{v \in V} \binom{\deg_{G^c}(v)}{2} \leq \frac{2m^c}{\d n -1}\binom{\d n -1}{2}=m^c(\d n -2)$. So it follows from \eqref{E:triComplementCount} and $t_0 \geq 0$, that $t_0+t_1+t_2 \geq (1-\d)m^cn$. Thus, using $m^c=\binom{n}{2}-m$,
\[t_\av=\mfrac{3t_3}{m}=\mfrac{3}{m}\left(\mbinom{n}{3}-(t_0+t_1+t_2)\right) \leq \mfrac{3}{m}\left(\mbinom{n}{3}-(1-\d)n\left(\mbinom{n}{2}-m\right)\right).\]
By simplifying this last expression, we obtain the result.
\end{proof}
\section{Low \texorpdfstring{$\bm{t_A}$}{tA} or low/high \texorpdfstring{$\bm{\alpha}$}{alpha}}
\label{S:outer-alpha}
We first give two results which supply bounds on $\kappa_A$. Lemma~\ref{L:dross} is effectively used in \cite{Dro} and Lemma~\ref{L:window} is our own. We then establish some consequences of these bounds for comparison with $\lambda_A$. Lemmas~\ref{L:windowCor}, \ref{L:drossFowardCor} and \ref{L:drossRevCor} show that $\kappa_{A} \geq \lambda_A$ when $t_A$ is not too large, $\alpha$ is small and $\alpha$ is large, respectively.
\begin{lemma}[\cite{Dro}]\label{L:dross}
For any $(n,\delta)$-reduced graph $G$ and subset $S$ of $E(G)$,
\[\kappa_{S} \geq \tfrac{1}{2}|S|t_S(t_S-\d n)-|S|(|S|-1).\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $e$ be an edge in $S$. Now, $e$ is in at least $\frac{1}{2}t_e(t_e-\d n)$ copies of $K_4$ because $G[T_e]$ must contain at least this many edges. At most $|S|-1$ edges of $G[T_e]$ can be in $S$, and hence $e$ is an edge of at least $r_e=\frac{1}{2}t_e(t_e-\d n)-|S|+1$ rooted pairs separated by $S$. Taking the sum of $r_e$ over all $e \in S$ and using the convexity of $r_e$ in $t_e$, the result follows.
\end{proof}
Later, we use Lemma~\ref{L:dross} with $S$ taking the role of each of our subsets $A$ and $B$ of $E(G)$.
\begin{lemma}\label{L:window}
For any $(n,\delta)$-reduced graph $G$ and subset $A$ of $E(G)$,
\[\kappa_A \geq \tfrac{1}{2}\alpha(1-\alpha)m(t_A-2\delta n)(t_A-3\delta n).\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $B=E(G) \setminus A$. First suppose, for all $U \subseteq V(G)$ with $|U|=\lceil(1-2\d)n\rceil$, that $|E(G[U]) \cap A| \geq \frac{1}{2}\alpha(t_A-2\d n)(t_A-3\d n)$. For each edge $e \in B$, it follows from our supposition that $e$ is in at least $\frac{1}{2}\alpha(t_A-2\d n)(t_A-3\d n)$ rooted pairs separated by $A$ because $t_{e} \geq \lceil(1-2\d)n\rceil$. So the result follows because $|B| = (1-\alpha)m$.
Now suppose that there is a set $U \subseteq V(G)$ with $|U|=\lceil(1-2\d)n\rceil$ such that $|E(G[U]) \cap A| < \frac{1}{2}\alpha(t_A-2\d n)(t_A-3\d n)$. Let $uv$ be an edge in $A$. Then $|T_{e} \cap U| \geq |T_{e}|-2\d n$ and there must be at least $\frac{1}{2}(|T_{e}|-2\d n)(|T_{e}|-3\d n)$ edges in $G[T_{e} \cap U]$. By our definition of $U$, at most $\frac{1}{2}\alpha(t_A-2\d n)(t_A-3\d n)$ of those edges are in $A$ and hence $uv$ is in at least
\[\tfrac{1}{2}(|T_{e}|-2\d n)(|T_{e}|-3\d n)-\tfrac{1}{2}\alpha(t_A-2\d n)(t_A-3\d n)\]
rooted pairs separated by $A$. Noting that the above expression is convex in $|T_{e}|$ we see that, by taking a sum over the edges in $A$, we are guaranteed that $\kappa_A \geq |A| \cdot \tfrac{1}{2}(1-\alpha)(t_A-2\d n)(t_A-3\d n)$, as required.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{L:windowCor}
For an $(n,\delta)$-reduced graph $G$ and subset $A$ of $E(G)$, we have $\kappa_A \geq \lambda_A$ if $\d=0.148$ and $t_A \leq 0.7619n$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Take $\d=0.148$. Applying Lemma~\ref{L:window} together with Lemma~\ref{L:reqNumBound}(i), we have $\kappa_A \geq \lambda_A$ whenever
\begin{equation}\label{E:windowCorEq}
(t_A-2\d n)(t_A-3\d n)-3n(1-\d)(t_A-(1-2\d)n)
\end{equation}
is nonnegative. It can be seen that \eqref{E:windowCorEq} is decreasing in $t_A$ for $t_A \leq n$ and so we obtain a lower bound on it by letting $t_A$ be as large as possible. Then, for $t_A \le 0.7619n$, the resulting quadratic in $n$ is nonnegative for all positive integers $n$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{L:drossFowardCor}
For any $(n,\delta)$-reduced graph $G$ and subset $A$ of $E(G)$, we have $\kappa_A \geq \lambda_A$ if $\d = 0.148$, $\alpha \leq 0.446$ and $n$ is large.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Take $\d=0.148$. By Lemma~\ref{L:dross} with $S=A$ and Lemma~\ref{L:reqNumBound}(i), we have that $\kappa_{A} \geq \lambda_A$ whenever
\begin{equation}\label{E:drossFowardCorEq}
t_A(t_A-\d n)-2(\alpha m-1)-3n(1-\alpha)(1-\d)(t_A-(1-2\d)n)
\end{equation}
is nonnegative.
As a quadratic in $t_A$, \eqref{E:drossFowardCorEq} is minimised for $t_A= \frac{1}{2}n(3 - 3 \alpha(1-\d) - 2 \delta)$. With $\d=0.148$ and $\alpha \le 0.275$, the critical point occurs when $t_A > n$ and it is easily checked that \eqref{E:drossFowardCorEq} is nonnegative using the boundary condition $t_A \le n$ and the bound on $m$ from Lemma~\ref{L:mBound}(ii). For the rest of the range of $\alpha$, we use the critical point for $t_A$ and the bound on $m$ from Lemma~\ref{L:mBound}(ii). With this, \eqref{E:drossFowardCorEq} becomes
a quadratic in $n$ with leading coefficient
$$-0.02848 + 0.793336 \alpha - 1.633284 \alpha^2.$$
This is positive for $0.275 \le \alpha \le 0.446$, and so $\kappa_{A} \geq \lambda_A$ holds for large $n$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{L:drossRevCor}
For any $(n,\delta)$-reduced graph $G$ and subset $A$ of $E(G)$, we have $\kappa_A \geq \lambda_A$ if $\d = 0.148$, $\alpha \geq 0.692$ and $n$ is large.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $B=E(G) \setminus A$ and note that $\kappa_A=\kappa_B$. Applying Lemma~\ref{L:dross} with $S=B$ and noting that $t_B \geq (1-2\d)n$ shows that
$\kappa_{A} \geq \frac{1}{2}|B|(1-2\d)(1-3\d)n^2-|B|(|B|-1)$. Using this together with Lemma~\ref{L:reqNumBound}(ii) and $|B|=(1-\alpha)m$, we have $\kappa_A \geq \lambda_A$ whenever
\begin{equation}\label{E:drossBackCorEq}
(1-2\d)(1-3\d)n^2-2((1-\alpha)m-1) - 3n(1-\d)(t_\av-(1-2\d)n)
\end{equation}
is nonnegative.
Take $\d=0.148$. By calculating the sign of the appropriate partial derivative at each stage, noting that $n$ is large, we can obtain a sequence of lower bounds for \eqref{E:drossBackCorEq} by successively substituting: the bound of Lemma~\ref{L:tavBound} for $t_\av$, then $0.692$ for $\alpha$, and finally the bound of Lemma~\ref{L:mBound}(ii) for $m$. The leading term of the resulting quadratic in $n$ can be seen to be positive.
\end{proof}
\section{High \texorpdfstring{$\bm{t_A}$}{tA} and middle \texorpdfstring{$\bm{\alpha}$}{alpha}}
\label{S:middle-alpha}
In this section we deal with the cases not covered by the previous section, that is, cases where $0.446 < \alpha < 0.692$ and $t_A > 0.7619n$. Throughout this section we assume that $n$ is large and all asymptotic notation is with respect to this. For a graph $G$ and subset $A$ of $E(G)$, let $E_A$ and $e_A$ be the functions with domain $V(G)$ such that $E_A(u)$ is the set of all edges of $G[N_G(u)]$ that are in $A$, and $e_A(u)=|E_A(u)|$.
\begin{lemma}\label{L:edgeNeighProperties}
Let $G$ be an $(n,\d)$-reduced graph and $A$ be a subset of $E(G)$.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)]
For each $u \in V(G)$, $\frac{1}{2}(1-\d)(1-2\d)n^2-(1-\alpha)m \leq e_A(u) \leq \alpha m$.
\item[(ii)]
$\sum_{u \in V(G)}e_A(u)=\alpha m t_A$.
\item[(iii)]
For each $U \subseteq V(G)$,
\[\sum_{u \in U}e_A(u) \leq \alpha m |U|-\tfrac{1}{2}\d n\sqrt{2\alpha m}\left(|U|-(1+\tfrac{1}{2}\d) n+\sqrt{2\alpha m}\right)+q(\alpha,\delta,m,n),\]
where $q$ is $O(n^2)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} We prove (i), (ii) and (iii) separately.
\noindent{\bf (i).}
Let $u \in V(G)$. Clearly $e_A(u) \leq \alpha m$ because $E_A(u) \subseteq A$. There are at least $\frac{1}{2}(1-\d)(1-2\d)n^2$ edges in $G[N_G(u)]$ and at most $|B|=(1-\alpha)m$ of these are in $B$. The remainder must be in $E_A(u)$ and hence $e_A(u) \geq \frac{1}{2}(1-\d)(1-2\d)n^2-(1-\alpha)m$.
\noindent{\bf (ii).}
Each edge $e$ in $A$ is counted $t_{e}$ times in the sum $\sum_{u \in V(G)}e_A(u)$. So, by the definition of $t_A$, we have $\sum_{u \in V(G)}e_A(u)=\alpha m t_A$.
\noindent{\bf (iii).}
Let $G^c$ be the complement of $G$ and let $V(G)=\{v_1,\ldots,v_n\}$ where $|N_{G^c}(v_1) \cap U| \leq \cdots \leq |N_{G^c}(v_n) \cap U|$. Note that $\sum_{u \in U}e_A(u) \leq \alpha m |U| - z$, where
\begin{align}
z &= |\{(u,v_i,v_j): \mbox{$u \in U$, $1 \leq j < i \leq n$, $uv_i \in E(G^c)$, $v_iv_j \in A$}\}| \nonumber\\
&= \medop\sum_{i=1}^n a_i|N_{G^c}(v_i) \cap U|, \label{E:phiEq}
\end{align}
where $a_i=|\{j \in \{1,\ldots,i-1\}:v_iv_j \in A\}|$ for each $i \in \{1,\ldots,n\}$. We will prove (iii) by establishing that
\begin{equation}\label{E:desiredPhiBound}
z \geq \tfrac{1}{2}\d n\sqrt{2\alpha m}\left(|U|-(1+\tfrac{1}{2}\d) n+\sqrt{2\alpha m}\right)-q(\alpha,\delta,m,n),
\end{equation}
where $q$ is $O(n^2)$. To set up the proof of \eqref{E:desiredPhiBound}, let $r$ be the greatest integer such that $\binom{r}{2} \leq \alpha m$. Because of our indexing $\{v_1,\ldots,v_n\}$, and subject to $\sum_{i=1}^n a_i = \alpha m$, \eqref{E:phiEq} is minimised when $a_i=i-1$ for each $i \in \{1,\ldots,r\}$ and $a_{r+1}=\alpha m-\tbinom{r}{2}$. Thus, from \eqref{E:phiEq}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{E:phiBound}
z \geq \medop\sum_{i=1}^r(i-1)|N_{G^c}(v_i) \cap U|.
\end{equation}
Now, $\sum_{i=1}^n|N_{G^c}(v_i) \cap U| = \sum_{u \in U}\deg_{G^c}(u)$ and hence, by Lemma~\ref{L:mBound}(i), $\sum_{i=1}^n|N_{G^c}(v_i) \cap U| \geq \d n(|U|-\tfrac{1}{2} \d n)+O(n)$. Also, $|N_{G^c}(v_i) \cap U| \leq \d n$ for each $i \in \{1,\ldots,n\}$. Subject to these facts, recalling our indexing of $\{v_1,\ldots,v_n\}$, the bound of \eqref{E:phiBound} is minimised when $|N_{G^c}(v_i) \cap U| = \d n$ for $i \in \{r+1,\ldots,n\}$ and
\[|N_{G^c}(v_i) \cap U| = \mfrac{\d n}{r}\big(|U|-\tfrac{1}{2}\d n-n+r+O(1)\big)\]
for $i \in \{1,\ldots,r\}$.
Given this, using the fact that $r=\sqrt{2 \alpha m}+O(1)$ and $|U| \le n$, it can be seen that \eqref{E:desiredPhiBound} follows from \eqref{E:phiBound}.\qedhere
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{L:edgeNeighIntersection}
Let $G$ be an $(n,\delta)$-reduced graph, let $A$ be a subset of $E(G)$, and let $B=E(G) \setminus A$.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)]
For each edge $uv \in B$, then there are at least $e_A(u)+e_A(v)-\alpha m$ rooted pairs separated by $A$ that contain $uv$.
\item[(ii)]
$\displaystyle{\kappa_A \geq \sum_{uv \in B}\big(e_A(u)+e_A(v)\big)-\alpha(1-\alpha)m^2.}$
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We first prove (i). Let $uv \in B$. The set of edges of $G[T_{uv}]$ in $A$ is $E_A(u) \cap E_A(v)$, and so $|E_A(u) \cap E_A(v)|$ is the number of rooted pairs separated by $A$ that contain $uv$. By inclusion-exclusion $|E_A(u) \cap E_A(v)| \geq e_A(u)+e_A(v)-\alpha m$ because $|A|=\alpha m$. So (i) holds. By applying (i) to each edge in $B$, and recalling that $|B|=(1-\alpha)m$, we obtain (ii).
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{L:worstCaseEValues}
Let $G$ be an $(n,\delta)$-reduced graph on vertex set $V$, let $A$ be a subset of $E(G)$ and let $B=E(G) \setminus A$. Then, for $0 < \d \leq \frac{1}{4}$, $2\d+\frac{1}{2}\d^2 < \alpha <1$, and $n$ sufficiently large,
\[\kappa_A \geq \sum_{uv \in B}\big(f^\dag(u)+f^\dag(v)\big)-\alpha(1-\alpha)m^2\]
where $f^\dag: V \rightarrow \R$ is a function such that $|\{v \in V:f^\dag(v)=e_i\}|=n_i+O(1)$ for $i \in \{1,2,3\}$, and
\begin{itemize}[itemsep=0mm]
\item
$n_2=(1+\tfrac{1}{2}\d) n-\sqrt{2\alpha m}$ and $e_2=\alpha m$;
\item
$e_1=\alpha m-\tfrac{1}{2}\d n\sqrt{2\alpha m}$;
\item
$e_0=\frac{1}{2}(1-\d)(1-2\d)n^2-(1-\alpha)m$;
\item
$n_0=\frac{1}{e_1-e_0}\big((n-n_2)e_1-\alpha m(t_A-n_2)\big)$ and $n_1=n-n_0-n_2$.
\end{itemize}
Moreover, $0 < e_0 < e_1 < e_2$ and $2e_1 > e_0+e_2$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We first show that $0 < e_0 < e_1 < e_2$ and $2e_1 > e_0+e_2$. Obviously $e_1 < e_2$ because $\alpha$ and $\delta$ are positive, and $e_0>0$ using the bound of Lemma~\ref{L:mBound}(ii), $\alpha > 2\d+\frac{1}{2}\d^2$ and the fact that $n$ is large. Because $e_1 < e_2$, showing that $2e_1 > e_0+e_2$ will also establish that $e_0 < e_1$. Routine manipulation shows that $2e_1 > e_0+e_2$ provided that
\[m-\d n\sqrt{2\alpha m}- \tfrac{1}{2}(1-\d)(1-2\d)n^2\]
is positive. This can be seen to be the case by considering the expression as a quadratic in $\sqrt{m}$ and noting $0 < \d \leq \frac{1}{4}$.
For each $v \in V(G)$, let $\deg_B(v)$ denote the number of edges in $B$ that are incident with $v$. Let $V=\{v_1,\ldots,v_n\}$ where $\deg_{B}(v_1) \leq \cdots \leq \deg_{B}(v_n)$. Let $\mathcal{E}$ be the set of all functions $f$ from $V$ to $\R$ that obey the following conditions:
\begin{itemize}[itemsep=0mm]
\item[(i)]
$e_0 \leq f(v_i) \leq e_2$ for each $i \in \{1,\ldots,n\}$;
\item[(ii)]
$\sum_{i=1}^nf(v_i)=e_2t_A$;
\item[(iii)]
$\sum_{i=1}^s f(v_i) \leq se_2-\tfrac{1}{2}\d n\sqrt{2e_2}\left(s-(1+\tfrac{1}{2}\d) n+\sqrt{2e_2}\right)+q(\alpha,\delta,m,n)$ for each $s \in \{1,\ldots,n\}$,
where $q$ is the $O(n^2)$ function given in Lemma~\ref{L:edgeNeighProperties}(iii).
\end{itemize}
Note that $e_A \in \mathcal{E}$ by Lemma~\ref{L:edgeNeighProperties}. For any function $f \in \mathcal{E}$, let
\[\sigma(f)=\sum_{u \in V}f(u)\deg_{B}(u)-\alpha(1-\alpha)m^2.\]
Let $\sigma_{\min}$ be the minimum value of $\sigma(f)$ over all functions $f \in \mathcal{E}$. Note that $\kappa_A \geq \sigma(e_A) \geq \sigma_{\min}$ by Lemma~\ref{L:edgeNeighIntersection}(ii) and the definition of $\sigma_{\min}$. Let $f^\dag$ be a function in $\mathcal{E}$ such that
\begin{itemize}[itemsep=0mm]
\item[(a)]
$\sigma(f^\dag)=\sigma_{\min}$;
\item[(b)]
of all the functions in $\mathcal{E}$ obeying (a), $f^\dag$ is one for which the tuple $(f^\dag(v_1),\ldots,f^\dag(v_n))$ is lexicographically maximal.
\end{itemize}
Because $\kappa_A \geq \sigma_{\min}=\sigma(f^\dag)$, to prove the lemma it only remains to show that $|(f^\dag)^{-1}(e_i)|=n_i+O(1)$ for $i \in \{1,2,3\}$.
Let $\epsilon$ be an arbitrarily small positive real number and let $k$ be an arbitrary element of $\{1,\ldots,n-1\}$. Let $f^\ddag_{k}$ be the function from $V$ to $\R$ such that $f^\ddag_{k}(v_{k})=f^\dag(v_{k})+\epsilon$, $f^\ddag_{k}(v_{k+1})=f^\dag(v_{k+1})-\epsilon$ and $f^\ddag_{k}(v_i)=f^\dag(v_i)$ for each $i \in \{1,\ldots,n\}\setminus\{k,k+1\}$. Note that $\sigma(f^\ddag_{k})= \sigma(f^\dag)-\epsilon(\deg_{B}(v_{k+1})-\deg_{B}(v_{k}))$ and hence $\sigma(f^\ddag_{k}) \leq \sigma(f^\dag)$ by our indexing of $\{v_1,\ldots,v_n\}$. Thus, $f^\ddag_{k}$ cannot be in $\mathcal{E}$, for otherwise it would violate either (a) or (b) of the definition of $f^\dag$. Since $f^\ddag_{k}$ clearly obeys (ii), $f^\ddag_{k}$ must violate (i) or (iii).
From the previous paragraph we can make the key observation that, for any $i \in \{1,\ldots,n-1\}$, either $f^\dag(v_{i+1})=e_0$ or $f^\dag(v_i)=h_i$ where $h_i$ is the minimum of $e_2$ and the bound on $f^\dag(v_i)$ implied by (iii) with $s=i$ given the values of $f^\dag(v_1),\ldots,f^\dag(v_{i-1})$. Let $x$ be the unique integer such that the bound of (iii) is at least $se_2$ for $s \leq x$, but is less than $se_2$ for $s \geq x+1$. Note that $x=n_2+O(1)$. Then $h_i=e_2$ for $i \in \{1,\ldots,x\}$, $e_1 \leq h_i \leq e_2$ for $i =x+1$, and $h_i=e_1$ for $i \in \{x+2,\ldots,n\}$. Let $y$ be the smallest element of $\{1,\ldots,n\}$ such that $f^\dag(v_{y})=e_0$ (or let $y=n+1$ if no such integer exists). By inductively applying our observation with $i=y,\ldots,n-1$, noting that $e_0 < e_1 \leq h_i$, we can conclude that $f^\dag(v_{i})=e_0$ for each $i \in \{y,\ldots,n\}$. Next, inductively applying our observation with $i=1,\ldots,y-2$, we can conclude that $f^\dag(v_{i})=h_i$ for each $i \in \{1,\ldots,y-2\}$ and hence, by our comments on $h_i$, that $f^\dag(v_{i})=e_2$ for $i \in \{1,\ldots,x\}$ and $f^\dag(v_{i})=e_1$ for $i \in \{x+2,\ldots,y-2\}$.
So we have established that $f^\dag$ maps $x$ vertices to $e_2$, $n-y+1$ vertices to $e_0$ and all but at most two of the remaining vertices to $e_1$. Thus, given that $x=n_2+O(1)$, it follows from the fact that $f^\dag$ obeys (ii) that
\[(n-y)e_0+(y-n_2)e_1+n_2e_2=e_2t_A+O(n^2).\]
So we can calculate that $n-y=n_0+O(1)$ and $y-x=n_1+O(1)$. This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
We remark that $n_0$ is a rational expression in $n,\delta,t_A$ and $\sqrt{\alpha m}$. Moreover, since $e_0 < e_1$, the expression is defined and smooth in the parameters.
\begin{lemma}
\label{L:middleAlpha}
For any $(n,\delta)$-reduced graph $G$ and subset $A$ of $E(G)$, we have $\kappa_A \geq \lambda_A$ if $\d=0.148$, $0.446 \le \alpha \le 0.692$, $t_A \ge 0.7619n$, and $n$ is sufficiently large.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $B=E(G) \setminus A$ and, for $i \in \{0,1,2\}$, let $e_i$ and $n_i$ be defined as in Lemma~\ref{L:worstCaseEValues}. Let $f^\dag$ be the function given by Lemma~\ref{L:worstCaseEValues}. For $i \in \{0,1,2\}$, let $V_i=\{v \in V(G):f^\dag(v)=e_i\}$ and $n'_i=|V_i|$, and note that $n'_i=n_i+O(1)$ by Lemma~\ref{L:worstCaseEValues}. The following gives a classification of pairs $\{u,v\}$ of distinct vertices of $G$ according to their values of $f^\dag(u)+f^\dag(v)$.
\begin{itemize}[itemsep=0mm]
\item
The $\binom{n'_0}{2}$ pairs in $\{\{u,v\}: u,v\in V_0\}$ each have $f^\dag(u)+f^\dag(v)=2e_0$.
\item
The $n'_0n'_1$ pairs in $\{\{u,v\}: u \in V_0, v \in V_1\}$ each have $f^\dag(u)+f^\dag(v)=e_0+e_1$.
\item
The $n'_0n'_2$ pairs in $\{\{u,v\}: u \in V_0, v \in V_2\}$ each have $f^\dag(u)+f^\dag(v)=e_0+e_2$.
\item
All but at most $O(n)$ of the remaining pairs have $f^\dag(u)+f^\dag(v) \geq 2e_1$.
\end{itemize}
Observe that $2e_0<e_0+e_1<e_0+e_2<2e_1$ from Lemma~\ref{L:worstCaseEValues}. Let $b= |B| = (1-\alpha)m$. Then $B$ contains $b$ of the pairs we classified above and from our discussion so far it can be seen that
\begin{equation}\label{E:gFuncDefn}
\sum_{uv \in B}\big(f^\dag(u)+f^\dag(v)\big) \geq g(\alpha,t_A,m)+O(n^3),
\end{equation}
where
\[g(\alpha,t_A,m)=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
g_1(\alpha,t_A,m) & \hbox{if $b \leq \frac{1}{2}n_0^2;$} \\
g_2(\alpha,t_A,m) & \hbox{if $\frac{1}{2}n_0^2<b \leq n_0(\frac{1}{2}n_0+n_1);$} \\
g_3(\alpha,t_A,m) & \hbox{if $n_0(\frac{1}{2}n_0+n_1)<b \leq n_0(\frac{1}{2}n_0+n_1+n_2);$} \\
g_4(\alpha,t_A,m) & \hbox{if $b>n_0(\frac{1}{2}n_0+n_1+n_2),$}
\end{array}
\right.\]
and $g_1,g_2,g_3,g_4$ are the functions defined by
\begin{align*}
g_1(\alpha,t_A,m) &= 2be_0 \\
g_2(\alpha,t_A,m) &= n_0^2e_0+(b-\tfrac{1}{2}n_0^2)(e_0+e_1) \\
g_3(\alpha,t_A,m) &= n_0^2e_0+n_0n_1(e_0+e_1)+\big(b-n_0(\tfrac{1}{2}n_0+n_1)\big)(e_0+e_2) \\
g_4(\alpha,t_A,m) &= n_0^2e_0+n_0n_1(e_0+e_1)+n_0n_2(e_0+e_2)+2 \big(b-n_0(\tfrac{1}{2}n_0+n_1+n_2)\big)e_1.
\end{align*}
Note that the $O(n^3)$ term in \eqref{E:gFuncDefn} allows us to neglect the $O(1)$ differences between $n_i$ and $n'_i$ for $i \in \{0,1,2\}$ and also the $O(n)$ edges not covered by our classification above.
By \eqref{E:gFuncDefn} and Lemma~\ref{L:worstCaseEValues}, we have $\kappa_A>\lambda_A$ provided that
\begin{equation}
\label{E:limit}
\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \frac{g(\alpha,t_A,m) - k(\alpha,t_A,m)}{n^4}>0,
\end{equation}
where
\[k(\alpha,t_A,m)=\alpha(1-\alpha)m \big( m+\tfrac{3}{2}n(1-\d)(t_A-(1-2\d)n)\big)\]
comes from the $\alpha(1-\alpha)m^2$ term in Lemma~\ref{L:worstCaseEValues} and our upper bound on $\lambda_A$ from Lemma~\ref{L:reqNumBound}(i). It is enough to compare the $O(n^4)$ terms in both $g$ and $k$.
The difference $g-k$ is a piecewise differentiable function in the parameters $\alpha,\mu,\tau$, where
$t_A=\tau n$ and $m=\mu \binom{n}{2}=\frac{1}{2}\mu n^2+O(n)$. From our hypotheses we have $0.446 \le \alpha \le 0.692$ and $\tau \geq 0.761$. From Lemma~\ref{L:mBound}(ii), taking $\d=0.148$, we have $0.852 \leq \mu \leq 0.863$. By \eqref{E:tavObvious}, because $\alpha \geq 0.446$, we have $t_{\av} \geq 0.446t_A+0.554(1-2\d)n$. Furthermore, from Lemma~\ref{L:tavBound}, substituting the bound of Lemma~\ref{L:mBound}(ii), we obtain $t_{\av} \leq \frac{2-6\d+9\d^2-3\d^3}{2-2\d+\d^2} n +O(1)$. Combining these two inequalities and solving for $t_A$, we see that $\tau \leq 0.814$. So our parameters take values in the box
\[\Xi = \{(\alpha,\tau,\mu):
0.446 \le \alpha \le 0.692,~
0.761 \le \tau \le 0.814,~
0.852 \le \mu \le 0.863\}.\]
It is not hard to obtain strong numerical evidence that \eqref{E:limit} holds for all $(\alpha,\tau,\mu) \in \Xi$ and hence for the truth of this lemma. Below we give a rigorous computer-assisted verification that \eqref{E:limit} holds for all $(\alpha,\tau,\mu) \in \Xi$.
For this verification, we invoke the following procedure:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
check that, for some positive constant $\rho$, the stronger estimate $g-k > \rho n^4$ holds at each combination of the parameters on a discrete grid $\Xi_h \subset \Xi$ having sub-interval width $h$;
\item
obtain an upper bound on the gradient norms $||\nabla g_i||$, $i=1,2,3,4$ and $||\nabla k||$ over $\Xi$.
\end{enumerate}
Here, gradients are with respect to $\alpha,\tau,\mu$.
Note in particular that, even though $g$ is piecewise defined on $\Xi$, step 2 above actually gives that each $g_i$ (and of course $h$) is well-behaved on the entire box $\Xi$.
Now, as long as
$\rho n^4/h > \max_i ||\nabla g_i|| + ||\nabla k||$,
the mean value theorem ensures that $g-k >0$ on $\Xi$. We carried out step 1 over $\Xi_h$ with $h=0.00001$ and $\rho = 0.00022$. Hence it suffices to show that $\max_i ||\nabla g_i|| + ||\nabla k|| \leq 22n^4+ o(n^4)$ for all $(\alpha,\tau,\mu) \in \Xi$.
Using Mathematica to symbolically optimise $||\nabla k||$ we have that $||\nabla k|| \leq 0.187$. For the bounds on the gradients $||\nabla g_i||$, we first compute bounds on the leading terms of the constituent functions and their gradients. We present a summary of results in Table~\ref{T:DetailedBounds}. With the exception of the bounds on $||\nabla n_i||$ for $i \in \{0,1\}$, these were again obtained by using Mathematica to symbolically maximise the norms of the gradients.
\begin{table}[H]
\[
\begin{array}{r|ccc}
i & 0 & 1 & 2 \\
\hline
|e_i| n^{-2} \le &0.169 &0.242 &0.299\\
||\nabla e_i|| n^{-2} \le &0.513 &0.501 &0.554\\
|n_i| n^{-1} \le &0.448 &0.490 &0.458\\
||\nabla n_i|| n^{-1} \le & 7.589 &9.372 &0.783\\
\end{array}
\hspace{1cm}
\begin{array}{rc}
|b| n^{-2} \le &0.240 \\
||\nabla b|| n^{-2} \le & 0.513 \\
\end{array}\]
\caption{Bounds on the leading terms of the constituent functions and gradients in $\Xi$.}
\label{T:DetailedBounds}
\end{table}
To obtain the bound on $||\nabla n_0||$, we considered our expression for $n_0$ as a quotient with numerator $n_0^{\rm n}=(n-n_2)e_1-\alpha m(t_A-n_2)$ and denominator $n_0^{\rm d}=e_1-e_0$. A calculation shows that $n_0^{\rm n}=\frac{1}{2}\alpha \mu(1-\d-\tau)+\frac{1}{4}\d^2\sqrt{\alpha \mu}+o(n^3)$.
We again used Mathematica to show that $|n_0^{\rm n}|n^{-3} \leq 0.0315$, $|n_0^{\rm d}|n^{-2} \geq 0.0692 $, and $||\nabla n_0^{\rm d}||n^{-2} \leq 0.477$, and
\[||\nabla n_0^{\rm n}||n^{-3} \leq ||\nabla(\tfrac{1}{2}\alpha \mu(1-\d-\tau))||+ ||\nabla(\tfrac{1}{4}\d^2\sqrt{\alpha \mu})|| \leq 0.308.\] Using the quotient rule then gives
\[
||\nabla n_0|| \leq \mfrac{||\nabla n_0^{\rm n}||}{|n_0^{\rm d}|}+\mfrac{|n_0^{\rm n}|\,||\nabla n_0^{\rm d}||}{|n_0^{\rm d}|^2} \leq 7.589n + o(n).
\]
From this, because $n_1=n-n_0-n_2$, we have
\[
||\nabla n_1|| \leq 1+||\nabla n_0||+||\nabla n_2|| \leq 9.372n + o(n).
\]
So, with the bounds in Table~\ref{T:DetailedBounds} now established, we can now bound $||\nabla g_i||$ for $i \in \{1,2,3,4\}$. Using the chain rule and triangle inequality,
\begingroup
\allowdisplaybreaks
\begin{align*}
||\nabla g_1|| &\leq 2\bigl(|b|\,||\nabla e_0|| + |e_0|\,||\nabla b||\bigr) \\
&\leq 0.420 n^4 + o(n^4),\\
&\\
||\nabla g_2|| &\le |n_0|\bigl(|n_0|\,||\nabla e_0||+2|e_0|\,||\nabla n_0||\bigr) +\bigl(|b|+\tfrac{1}{2}|n_0|^2\bigr)(||\nabla e_0||+||\nabla e_1||)\\
&\mathrel{\phantom{\leq}}+\bigl(|e_0|+|e_1|\bigr)\bigl(||\nabla b||+|n_0|||\nabla n_0||\bigr)\\
& \leq 3.206n^4+ o(n^4),\phantom{\big)}\\
&\\
||\nabla g_3|| &\leq |n_0|\bigl(|n_0|\,||\nabla e_0||+2|e_0|\,||\nabla n_0||\bigr)+|n_0|\,|n_1|\bigl(||\nabla e_0||+||\nabla e_1||\bigr)\phantom{\Big)}\\
&\mathrel{\phantom{\leq}} + \bigl(|e_0|+|e_1|\bigr)\bigl(|n_0|\,||\nabla n_1||+|n_1|\,||\nabla n_0||\bigr) +\Bigl(|b|+|n_0|\bigl(\tfrac{1}{2}|n_0|+|n_1|\bigr)\Bigr)\bigl(||\nabla e_0||+||\nabla e_2||\bigr)\\
&\mathrel{\phantom{\leq}}+\bigl(|e_0|+|e_2|\bigr)\Bigl(||\nabla b||+|n_0|\bigl(\tfrac{1}{2}||\nabla n_0||+||\nabla n_1||\bigr)+\bigl(\tfrac{1}{2}|n_0| +|n_1|\bigr)||\nabla n_0||\Bigr)\\
& \leq 10.863 n^4+ o(n^4),\phantom{\Big)}\text{and}\\
&\\
||\nabla g_4|| &\leq |n_0|\bigl(|n_0|\,||\nabla e_0||+2|e_0|\,||\nabla n_0||\bigr)+|n_0|\,|n_1|\bigl(||\nabla e_0||+||\nabla e_1||\bigr)\phantom{\Big)}\\
&\mathrel{\phantom{\leq}} + \bigl(|e_0|+|e_1|\bigr)\bigl(|n_0|\,||\nabla n_1||+|n_1|\,||\nabla n_0||\bigr)+|n_0|\,|n_2|\bigl(||\nabla e_0||+||\nabla e_2||)\phantom{\Big)}\\
&\mathrel{\phantom{\leq}} + \bigl(|e_0|+|e_2|\bigr)\bigl(|n_0|\,||\nabla n_2||+|n_2|\,||\nabla n_0||\bigr)+\Bigl(2|b|+|n_0|\bigl(|n_0|+2|n_1|+2|n_2|\bigr)\Bigr)||\nabla e_1||\\
&\mathrel{\phantom{\leq}}+|e_1|\Bigl(2||\nabla b||+|n_0|\bigl(||\nabla n_0||+2||\nabla n_1||+2||\nabla n_2||\bigr)+\bigl(|n_0| +2|n_1| +2|n_2|\bigr)||\nabla n_0||\Bigr)\\
&\leq 15.083n^4+ o(n^4).\phantom{\Big)}
\end{align*}
\endgroup
So $\max_i ||\nabla g_i|| + ||\nabla k|| \leq 22n^4+ o(n^4)$ for all $(\alpha,\tau,\mu) \in \Xi$ as required and our verification is complete.
\end{proof}
We are now able to complete the proof of our main result.
\begin{proof}[\textbf{\textup{Proof of Theorem~\ref{T:fracMain}.}}]
By Lemma~\ref{L:flowNetwork}, it suffices to show that $\kappa_A \geq \lambda_A$ for each subset $A$ of $E(G)$. When $t_A \leq 0.7619n$, this is established by Lemma~\ref{L:windowCor}. When $t_A > 0.7619n$, this is established by Lemma~\ref{L:drossFowardCor} for $\alpha \leq 0.446$, by Lemma~\ref{L:drossRevCor} for $\alpha \geq 0.692$, and by Lemma~\ref{L:middleAlpha} for $0.446 < \alpha < 0.692$.
\end{proof}
As a concluding remark, it is straightforward to check that Lemmas~\ref{L:mBound}(ii), \ref{L:windowCor}, \ref{L:drossFowardCor} and \ref{L:drossRevCor} lead to continuous bounds on the parameters $\alpha,m,t_A$ in a neighbourhood of $\delta=0.148$. And \eqref{E:limit} was verified in Lemma~\ref{L:middleAlpha} as a strict inequality. Since the $g_i(\alpha,t_A,m)$ and $k(\alpha,t_A,m)$ are all continuous in an open set slightly larger than $\Xi$, it follows that the unsightly $\epsilon$ can be eliminated in Theorem~\ref{T:intMain}.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The authors are grateful for the careful reading of the referees, which helped to clarify and tighten up the presentation in a few places.
|
\section{Introduction}
Consider the law of $N$ interacting particles $\mu_1>\ldots>\mu_N$ given by the density:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:GbE} \frac1{Z_N^\beta} \prod_{i < j} |\mu_i - \mu_j|^\beta e^{-\frac{\beta}{4} \sum_{i=1}^N \mu_i^2}\;,\end{equation}
where $\beta > 0$ is an inverse temperature and $Z_N^\beta$ is a partition function. This law is usually referred to as the (Gaussian) $\beta$-ensemble. In the special cases $\beta=1$, $2$ and $4$, this measure coincides with the law of the eigenvalues of the Gaussian Orthogonal, Unitary and Symplectic ensembles, which are laws of random matrices invariant under conjugation with respectively orthogonal, unitary and symplectic matrices. However, the connection with random matrices is not restricted to these three particular values of $\beta$: Dumitriu and Edelman~\cite{DumEde} showed that for any $\beta >0$, one can build a symmetric, tridiagonal random matrix whose eigenvalues distribution is given by \eqref{Eq:GbE}.\\
The repulsion between particles increases with the parameter $\beta$: in particular, for fixed $N$ and $\beta$ goes to $0$, the particles, multiplied by $\sqrt{\beta}$, converge in law to $N$ IID Gaussian random variables. The behavior of these ensembles when $N$ goes to infinity and the inverse temperature $\beta$ is sent to zero has been the subject of recent works. In~\cite{BGP} the regime where $N$ goes to infinity and $\beta$ goes to $0$ but $N\beta$ remains constant is considered: the local statistics in the bulk of the spectrum are shown to converge to a Poisson point process. In~\cite{DuyNak} an alternative proof of this convergence is presented and the intensity measure of the Poisson point process is given explicitly. Let us also cite the work~\cite{Pakzad} where it is shown that for $N\beta \to 0$ the bottom of the spectrum, properly rescaled, converges to a Poisson point process.
In the present work, we consider the case where $N$ goes to infinity first, and then $\beta$ is sent to $0$: loosely speaking, we are in the case where $N\beta$ goes to infinity. We prove the convergence of the bottom of the spectrum, properly rescaled, to a Poisson point process and also a localization phenomenon for the corresponding eigenfunctions. We believe that our strategy of proof could be adapted to treat the case where $\beta$ is sent to $0$ slowly enough with $N$.
\medskip
Let us comment on the underlying physical motivations of the model. The invariant ensembles of random matrices were originally introduced to model energy levels of heavy nuclei. For general $\beta >0$, the $\beta$-ensembles can be seen as a Coulomb-gas with logarithmic interaction: the parameter $\beta$ then plays the role of an inverse temperature. As mentioned above, there has been some research activity on the behavior of this gas of particles when the temperature is sent to infinity: in the present article, we focus on the extremal particles and aim at understanding their statistical behavior.
\medskip
The scaling limit of the edge of the $\beta$-ensemble, in the regime where $N$ goes to infinity and $\beta > 0$ is fixed, was obtained by Ram\'{\i}rez, Rider and Vir\'ag~\cite{RamRidVir}. They showed that for any $k\ge 1$, the $k$-dimensional vector $\big(N^{1/6}(2\sqrt N - \mu_i); i=1\ldots k\big)$ converges in distribution to the $k$ lowest eigenvalues of the following random operator called Stochastic Airy Operator (SAO)
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:SAO}
\mathcal{A}_\beta = -\partial^2_x + x + \frac{2}{\sqrt \beta} \xi\;,\quad x\in(0,\infty)\;,
\end{equation}
endowed with homogeneous Dirichlet boundary condition at $x=0$. The potential $\xi$ appearing in this operator is a white noise on $(0,\infty)$, that is, the derivative in the sense of distributions of a Brownian motion. This operator is self-adjoint in $L^2(0,\infty)$ with pure point spectrum $\mu_1 < \mu_2 < \ldots$ of multiplicity one and the corresponding eigenfunctions $(\psi_k)_{k\ge 1}$, normalized in $L^2(0,\infty)$, are H\"older functions of regularity index $3/2^-$, see~\cite{RamRidVir,Gaudreau}.
Up to rescaling the eigenvalues / eigenfunctions appropriately (see Remark \ref{Rk:Scaling} below), it is equivalent to consider the operator
$$\mathcal{L}_\beta = -\partial_x^2 + \frac{\beta}{4}x + \xi\;,\quad x\in(0,\infty)\;,$$
endowed with homogeneous Dirichlet boundary condition at $x=0$. For simplicity, we will also call $\mathcal{L}_\beta$ the Stochastic Airy Operator: this will not cause any confusion in the sequel. We denote by $\lambda_1 < \lambda_2 < \ldots$ its eigenvalues and $(\varphi_k)_{k\ge 1}$ the associated normalized eigenfunctions. The asymptotic behavior of $\mathcal{L}_\beta$ as $\beta\downarrow 0$ will rely on the deterministic quantity $L=L_\beta$ defined by
\begin{align}\label{def:L}
L_\beta := \frac{1}{\beta \big(\frac38 \ln 1/\beta\big)^{1/3}}\;.
\end{align}
Notice that $L\to \infty$ when $\beta\to 0$, and that $\beta\mapsto L$ is injective on $(0,\beta_0)$ for some $\beta_0>0$. We will also rely on a deterministic function $a_L$, whose precise definition will be given later on (see \eqref{Eq:DefaL}) and whose asymptotic behavior is given by $a_L \sim (3/8 \ln L)^{2/3}$ as $L\to\infty$.\\
In~\cite{AllezDumazTW}, the asymptotic behavior as $\beta\downarrow 0$ of the first eigenvalue $\lambda_1$ of $\mathcal{L}_\beta$ was studied: using a representation (originally introduced in~\cite{RamRidVir}) of the eigenvalues / eigenfunctions in terms of a family of time-inhomogeneous diffusions, it was shown that $\lambda_1 \sim -a_L$ and that $-4\sqrt{a_L} (\lambda_1 + a_L)$ converges to a Gumbel law. The convergence of the joint law of the smallest eigenvalues towards a Poisson point process was left as a conjecture.
\bigskip
In the present paper, we obtain a complete description of the bottom of the spectrum of $\mathcal{L}_\beta$ when $\beta\downarrow 0$. We show that the properly rescaled eigenvalues converge to a Poisson point process with explicit intensity, and that the eigenfunctions converge to Dirac masses localized at IID points with exponential distribution. Furthermore, we obtain a precise description of the microscopic behavior of the eigenfunctions near their localization centers.\\
To state precisely our results, we let $U_{k}$ be the first point in $(0,\infty)$ where $|\varphi_k|$ reaches its maximum. We also build probability measures on $(0,\infty)$ from the rescaled eigenfunctions:
$$ m_k(dx) := L \varphi_k^2\big(x L\big) dx\;,\quad x\in (0,\infty)\;.$$
Our first main result is the following.
\begin{theorem}\label{Th:Main}
As $\beta \downarrow 0$, we have the following convergence in law
$$ \Big(4\sqrt{a_L} (\lambda_k + a_L),U_{k} / L, m_k\Big)_{k\ge 1} \Longrightarrow \Big(\Lambda_k,I_k,\delta_{I_k}\Big)_{k\ge 1}\;,$$
where $(\Lambda_k,I_k)_{k\ge 1}$ are the atoms of a Poisson point process on ${\symb R}\times{\symb R}_+$ with intensity $e^x e^{-t} dx\otimes dt$.
\end{theorem}
\noindent Here convergence takes place in the set of sequences of elements in ${\symb R}\times{\symb R}_+\times\mathcal{P}({\symb R}_+)$ endowed with the product topology, where $\mathcal{P}({\symb R}_+)$ is the space of probability measures on ${\symb R}_+$ endowed with the topology of weak convergence.
A natural question is then to determine the length scale of localization, together with the behavior of the eigenfunctions near their localization centers. This is the content of our next result, which relies on the following notations. We set for $x\in{\symb R}$
\begin{align*}
h_{k,\beta}(x) := \frac{\sqrt 2}{a_L^{1/4}} \varphi_k\Big(U_k + \frac{x}{\sqrt{a_L}}\Big)\;,\quad b_{k,\beta}(x) := \frac1{\sqrt{a_L}} \Big(B(U_k + \frac{x}{\sqrt{a_L}}) - B(U_k)\Big)\;,
\end{align*}
where $B(x) := \int_0^x \xi(dy)$. We also define $h(x) = 1/{\cosh x}$ and $b(x) = -2\tanh(x)$ for all $x\in{\symb R}$.
\begin{theorem}\label{Th:Shape}
For every $k\ge 1$, the random processes $h_{k,\beta},b_{k,\beta}$ converge to $h,b$ in probability locally uniformly on ${\symb R}$.
\end{theorem}
More can be said on the eigenfunctions. First, they decay at the exponential rate $\sqrt{a_L}$ from their localization centers. Second, if we let $0=z_0 < z_1 < \ldots < z_{k-1} < z_k=\infty$ be the zeros of $\varphi_k$ and if we let $\ell_*$ be such that the localization center $U_k$ lies in $[z_{\ell_*-1},z_{\ell*}]$, then on every $[z_{i-1},z_i]$ with $i < \ell_*$ (resp.~$i>\ell_*$) the function $\varphi_k$ admits a local maximum which is very close to the localization center of some eigenfunction $\varphi_j$ with $j< k$ and which is also very close to $z_i$ (resp.~to $z_{i-1}$). These estimates can be established using the material presented in this article but with some additional effort: we chose not to include their proofs in the present paper, but we refer the interested reader to~\cite{DL17} where similar results were established for the continuous Anderson Hamiltonian.
\begin{remark}\label{Rk:Scaling}
One can couple the two operators $\mathcal{A}_\beta$ and $\mathcal{L}_\beta$ and get the almost sure identities:
$$ \lambda_k = (\beta/4)^{2/3} \mu_k\;,\quad \varphi_k(x) = (\beta/4)^{1/6} \psi_k(x (\beta/4)^{1/3})\;,\quad x\in (0,\infty)\;.$$
Setting $c_\beta := (\frac{3}{2\beta} \ln \frac1{\pi\beta})^{2/3}$ and letting $E_k$ be the point where $|\psi_k|$ reaches its maximum, Theorem \ref{Th:Main} then reads
$$ \Big(\beta \sqrt{c_\beta} (\mu_k + c_\beta),E_{k} \beta \sqrt{c_\beta}, m_k\Big)_{k\ge 1} \Longrightarrow \Big(\Lambda_k,I_k,\delta_{I_k}\Big)_{k\ge 1}\;,$$
and the limit is the same as in the statement of the theorem. Furthermore, if one takes
$$ h_{k,\beta}(x) := \frac{\sqrt 2}{c_\beta^{1/4}} \Big|\psi_k\Big(E_{k} + \frac{x}{\sqrt{c_\beta}}\Big)\Big|\;,\quad b_{k,\beta}(x) := \frac{(\beta/4)^{1/6}}{\sqrt{c_\beta}} \Big(W\Big(E_{k} + \frac{x}{\sqrt{c_\beta}}\Big)-W\Big(E_{k}\Big)\Big)\;,$$
where $W$ is the Brownian motion associated to the white noise that drives $\mathcal{A}_\beta$, then the statement of Theorem \ref{Th:Shape} still holds.
\end{remark}
\section{The Riccati transform and the strategy of proof}\label{Section:Riccati}
It was shown in~\cite[Section 3]{RamRidVir} that the study of the eigenvalues / eigenfunctions of $\mathcal{A}_\beta$ could be carried out at the level of a family of diffusions obtained through the so-called Riccati transform. The same transform can be applied to $\mathcal{L}_\beta$ and this yields the following family of diffusions
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:Za}
dZ_a(t) = (a + \frac{\beta}{4} t - Z_a(t)^2) dt + dB(t)\;,\quad Z_a(0)=+\infty\;,\quad a \in {\symb R}\;,
\end{equation}
with the Brownian motion $B$ introduced above. This is a time-inhomogeneous diffusion that evolves in the potential
$$V(t,x) = \frac{x^3}{3} - \Big(a + \frac{\beta}{4}t\Big) x\;.$$
At any time $t\ge 0$ and for $a>0$, the function $V(t,\cdot)$ has a local minimum at $x=\sqrt{a+\frac{\beta}{4} t}$ and a local maximum at $x=-\sqrt{a+\frac{\beta}{4} t}$: the region in between these two points will be referred to as \emph{the barrier of potential} since, there, the diffusion feels a very strong drift towards the local minimum.\\
The diffusion $Z_a$ may explode to $-\infty$ in finite time: we then restart it immediately from $+\infty$. It is shown in~\cite[Section 3]{RamRidVir} that almost surely for every $k\ge 1$, the event $\{\lambda_k \le -a\}$ coincides with the event $\{Z_a$ explodes to $-\infty$ at least $k$ times$\}$, and that we have
$$ \frac{\varphi_k'}{\varphi_k}(t) = Z_{-\lambda_k}(t)\;,\quad \forall t\ge 0\;.$$
The map $\varphi_k \mapsto Z_{-\lambda_k}$ is usually referred to as the Riccati transform.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\begin{minipage}{7.4cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 3.7cm]{Za.png}
\caption{\small A typical realization of the diffusion $Z_a$. Note that it takes a very short time to come down from infinity, spends most of its time near the curve $\sqrt{a+\frac{\beta}{4}t}$ and does not spend much time near the curve $-\sqrt{a+\frac{\beta}{4}t}$.}\label{Fig:Za}
\end{minipage}\hfill
\begin{minipage}{8cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 3.7cm]{Y1.png}
\caption{\small A typical realization of the Riccati transform $\chi_1$ of the first eigenfunction. After having crossed the barrier of potential, the process oscillates forever around $-\sqrt{-\lambda_1+\frac{\beta}{4}t}$. Note that this behavior is unlikely for the diffusion $Z_a$.}\label{Fig:Y1}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Strategy of proof}
By rescaled eigenvalues, we mean the values $4\sqrt{a_L}(\lambda_k + a_L)$, $k\ge 1$. To prove the convergence of the eigenvalues, the main step consists in showing that, for any $p\ge 1$ and any disjoint intervals $[a_i,b_i]$, $i=1,\ldots,p$, the numbers of rescaled eigenvalues that fall into $[a_i,b_i]$ converge to independent Poisson r.v.~with intensities $\int_{a_i}^{b_i} e^{x} dx$.\\
To that end, we subdivide the time-interval $[0,\infty)$ of the diffusions into $2^n$ intervals $[t^n_j L,t^n_{j+1} L)$ with $0=t^n_0 < \ldots < t^n_{2^n}=\infty$. We consider the stochastic Airy operator restricted to every such interval and endowed with Dirichlet b.c. We then show that with large probability in the large $L$ and $n$ limit:
\begin{enumerate}
\item each restricted SAO has at most one (rescaled) eigenvalue in $\cup_{i=1}^n [a_i,b_i]$,
\item the number of (rescaled) eigenvalues in $[a_i,b_i]$ for the SAO equals the sum of the number of (rescaled) eigenvalues in $[a_i,b_i]$ of the restricted SAO's.
\end{enumerate}
Since the restricted SAO's are independent from each other, and since we are able to estimate the probability that they have one eigenvalue in $[a_i,b_i]$, a standard argument (see Lemma \ref{Lemma:CVQn}) yields convergence towards a vector of independent Poisson r.v. The proof of the convergence of the eigenvalues is presented in Subsection \ref{Subsec:PPP} and relies on a technical result established in Section \ref{Section:Explo}: these two parts can be read independently of the rest of the paper.
\bigskip
To prove the statements about the eigenfunctions, we observe that it suffices to prove their equivalent versions at the level of the Riccati transforms of the eigenfunctions: therefore, we only deal with the random processes $\chi_k := Z_{-\lambda_k}$. For simplicity, let us explain only the case $k=1$ in this introduction (the behavior of the next ones is illustrated on Figure \ref{Fig:Yk}).
We will show that $\chi_1$ comes down from infinity very quickly, then oscillates for a time of order $L$ around the curve $\sqrt{-\lambda_1+\frac{\beta}{4}t}$ and, at some point, crosses the ``barrier of potential'' to reach the curve $-\sqrt{-\lambda_1+\frac{\beta}{4}t}$ and then oscillates forever around this latter curve. This is illustrated on Figure \ref{Fig:Y1}. Moreover, the process crosses the barrier of potential by staying very close to a deterministic curve given by a hyperbolic tangent.\\
Inverting the Riccati transform, one deduces that $\varphi_1$ has exponential growth (resp. decay) when $\chi_1$ oscillates around $\sqrt{-\lambda_1+\frac{\beta}{4}t}$ (resp. around $-\sqrt{-\lambda_1+\frac{\beta}{4}t}$), and that the crossing of the barrier corresponds to the inverse of a hyperbolic cosine.
It is striking to compare this behavior with that of a ``typical'' realization of the diffusion $Z_a$ for a fixed parameter $a$, see Figures \ref{Fig:Za} and \ref{Fig:Y1}: the diffusion $Z_a$ would \emph{not} spend time around the curve $-\sqrt{-\lambda_1+\frac{\beta}{4}t}$ as it corresponds to an unstable line of its (time-inhomogeneous) potential.
\medskip
To prove the above assertions, we need two preliminary results. First of all, we establish that $L$ defined in \eqref{def:L} is indeed the relevant length scale of the localization centers of the eigenfunctions and that the associated value $a_L$ (see \eqref{Eq:DefaL}) is the order of magnitude of the eigenvalues. This is carried out by showing that a diffusion $Z_a$ with $a$ close enough to $a_L$ explodes \textit{finitely} many times and that all its explosion times are of order $L$ with large probability, uniformly over all $\beta$ small enough. This is a delicate result that relies on approximations of the time-inhomogeneous diffusion $Z_a$ by some time-homogeneous ones. In particular, an important part of the paper is devoted to prove that the diffusions $Z_a$ with $a$ close enough to $a_L$ typically do not explode after a time $C L$ for some large constant $C$, see Section \ref{Section:Explo}.
Second, to obtain a precise description of the eigenfunctions, we rely on the monotonicity of the diffusions: if for $a<a'$, the diffusion $Z_a$ explodes once and $Z_{a'}$ never explodes, then $\chi_1$ is squeezed in between these two diffusions until the explosion time of the former. To carry on the analysis after this explosion time, we apply a similar strategy but backward in time.\\
We start by showing that there exists a unique process $\hat{Z}_a$ that solves
\begin{equation*}
d\hat{Z}_a(t) = (a+\frac{\beta}{4}t - \hat{Z}_a(t)^2)dt + dB(t)\;,\quad \hat{Z}_a(+\infty) = -\infty\;.
\end{equation*}
We also show that the diffusion $Z_a$ converges to either $+\infty$ or $-\infty$ when $t\to\infty$, and that in the latter case it necessarily coincides with $\hat{Z}_a$. This provides an alternative characterization of the eigenvalues: $-a$ is an eigenvalue if and only if $\hat{Z}_a(0) = +\infty$. We refer to Theorem \ref{Th:TimeReversal} and Corollary \ref{Cor:bc}.\\
Building on these backward diffusions, we then track $\chi_1$ \emph{backward in time} by squeezing it in between two diffusions $\hat{Z}_a$ and $\hat{Z}_{a'}$. Then, an important part of our proof is devoted to patching together the forward and backward controls that we have on $\chi_1$.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 6cm]{Yk.png}
\caption{\small A typical realization of the Riccati transform $Y_3$ of the third eigenfunction. Until the second crossing of the barrier of potential, the process is similar to $Z_a$. Then, it is similar to the backward diffusion $\hat{Z}_a$.}\label{Fig:Yk}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Connection with the Anderson Hamiltonian}
As mentioned above, an important tool in our approach is a discretization scheme which boils down to comparing the original SAO with independent, restricted SAO's. It turns out that the interval lengths on which we consider the restricted SAO's will be of order $2^{-n} L$: at such a scale, the term $(\beta/4) x$ in the expression of the operator is essentially constant. Therefore, it is tempting to (and we will) approximate any such restricted SAO by the so-called Anderson Hamiltonian (shifted by a constant $c$ that approximates $(\beta/4) x$ on the corresponding interval $\mathcal{I}$):
$$ \mathcal{H} := -\partial_x^2 + c + \xi\;,\quad x\in \mathcal{I}\;,$$
endowed with Dirichlet b.c. Actually, this approximation will be made at the level of the Riccati transforms, see Sections \ref{Sec:Techos} and \ref{Sec:Fine}.
In a recent work~\cite{DL17} we obtained a complete description of the bottom of the spectrum of the Anderson Hamiltonian when the size of the underlying interval goes to $\infty$. In particular, we showed that the smallest eigenvalues converge to a Poisson point process of intensity $e^{x}dx$ and the corresponding eigenfunctions are localized at some IID uniform points and are close to the inverse of a hyperbolic cosine near their localization centers. The present results can therefore be seen as a time-inhomogeneous extension of those in~\cite{DL17}.
\subsection{Organization of the paper} In Section \ref{Section:Reversal}, we construct the backward diffusions needed for the
study of the eigenfunctions. In Section \ref{Section:Explo}, we prove the convergence of the point process of explosion times of $Z_a$ towards a Poisson point process. In Section \ref{Section:Proofs} we present the proofs of the main theorems. The reader interested in the sole convergence of the eigenvalues can skip Section \ref{Section:Reversal}, and will find all the arguments in Section \ref{Section:Explo} and Subsection \ref{Subsec:PPP}. In Section \ref{Sec:Techos} we present estimates on the diffusion $Z_a$ when it comes down from infinity, explodes and oscillates near the bottom of its time-inhomogeneous well, and we prove some intermediate results stated in the previous sections. Section \ref{Sec:Fine} is dedicated to delicate estimates on the behavior of $Z_a$ when it crosses its barrier of potential: these estimates are very similar to estimates established in~\cite{DL17} on a time-homogeneous diffusion and the proofs in that section therefore rely extensively on~\cite{DL17}.
\subsection*{Acknowledgements} The work of LD is supported by the project MALIN ANR-16-CE93-0003. The work of CL is supported by the project SINGULAR ANR-16-CE40-0020-01.
\section{Construction of the backward diffusions}\label{Section:Reversal}
As mentioned in the previous section, the diffusions defined in \eqref{Eq:Za} play an important role in the study of the eigenfunctions. The present section is devoted to introducing the associated backward diffusions, as they will be instrumental in proving the localization of the eigenfunctions. In the whole section, the parameter $\beta > 0$ (or equivalently, the parameter $L$) is fixed.
For any $a\in {\symb R}$, and for any space-time point $(t_0,x_0) \in {\symb R}_+ \times {\symb R}$ one can consider the \emph{forward diffusion} that starts from $x_0$ at time $t_0$
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:Riccati}
\begin{cases}
dZ_a^{(t_0,x_0)}(t) &= (a+\frac{\beta}{4}t - Z_a^{(t_0,x_0)}(t)^2)dt + dB(t)\;,\quad t >t_0\;,\\
Z_a^{(t_0,x_0)}(t_0) &= x_0\;,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
but one can also consider the \emph{backward diffusion} that ends at $x_0$ at time $t_0$
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:RiccatiReversed}
\begin{cases}
d\hat{Z}_a^{(t_0,x_0)}(t) &= (a+\frac{\beta}{4}t - \hat{Z}_a^{(t_0,x_0)}(t)^2)dt + dB(t)\;,\quad t \in [0,t_0)\;,\\
\hat{Z}_a^{(t_0,x_0)}(t_0) &= x_0\;.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Concatenating $Z_a^{(t_0,x_0)}$ and $\hat{Z}_a^{(t_0,x_0)}$, one obtains a path\footnote{By path, we mean a function from some interval of ${\symb R}$ into ${\symb R}\cup\{+\infty\}\cup\{-\infty\}$.} that coincides with $Z_a^{(0,x)}$ for $x= \hat{Z}_a^{(t_0,x_0)}(0)$.\\
Note that it is natural to consider the backward diffusion with time run backward. Setting $Y(t) := \hat{Z}_a^{(t_0,x_0)}(t_0-t)$ leads to the following:
$$\begin{cases}
dY(t) &= (-a-\frac{\beta}{4}(t_0-t) + Y(t)^2)dt - dB(t_0-t)\;,\quad t \in (0,t_0]\;,\\
Y(0) &= x_0\;.\end{cases}
$$
\begin{remark}
The diffusion $Y$ evolves in the time-inhomogeneous potential $(a+\beta(t_0-t)/4)x - x^3/3$: for $a>0$, the bottom of the well at time $t$ is located at $-\sqrt{a+ \beta(t_0-t)/4}$. This means that the backward diffusion $\hat{Z}_a$ tends to be close to $-s_a(t)$ while the forward diffusion typically lies in a neighborhood of $s_a(t)$, with $s_a(t) =\sqrt{a+\beta t/4}$.
\end{remark}
\medskip
At this point, let us make a few technical comments. First of all, the construction of these diffusions is totally deterministic: once we are given a standard Brownian motion $B$, we can work deterministically and construct all the above processes as solutions to ODEs driven by the continuous trajectory $t\mapsto B_t(\omega)$. Second, simple arguments applied to the ODE show that the forward diffusion is well-defined when starting from $x_0 = +\infty$ since the associated ODE comes down from infinity; similarly, the backward diffusion is well-defined when starting from $x_0 = -\infty$. Furthermore, the forward diffusion may hit $-\infty$ in finite time: then, it restarts immediately from $+\infty$. Similarly, the backward diffusion - when run backward in time - may hit $+\infty$ in finite time and then restarts from $-\infty$. Third, the diffusion inherits a monotonicity property from the ODE. Namely, for all $a\le a'$, all $(t_0,x_0), (t_0',x_0')$ and all $s\in [t_0\vee t_0',\infty)$, if we have $Z_{a}^{(t_0,x_0)} (s) \le Z_{a'}^{(t_0',x_0')} (s)$ then
$$ Z_{a}^{(t_0,x_0)} (s+\cdot) \le Z_{a'}^{(t_0',x_0')} (s+\cdot)\;,$$
up to the next explosion time of $Z_{a}^{(t_0,x_0)}$. A similar statement holds for the backward diffusion.
\medskip
We aim at understanding the possible behaviors of the forward diffusions as $t\to\infty$. This is intimately linked to the construction of the backward diffusion starting from some point $x_0$ at time $t_0 = +\infty$. The main result of this section is the following.
\begin{theorem}\label{Th:TimeReversal}
There exists an event of probability one on which the following holds. For all $a\in{\symb R}$ and all $(t_0,x_0) \in {\symb R}_+ \times ({\symb R}\cup\{+\infty\})$, the forward diffusion $Z_a^{(t_0,x_0)}(t)$ goes to either $+\infty$ or $-\infty$ as $t\to\infty$. Additionally, for all $a\in{\symb R}$ there exists a unique path $\hat{Z}_a^{(+\infty,-\infty)}$ that solves
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:RiccatiReversed2}
\begin{cases}
d\hat{Z}_a(t) &= (a+\frac{\beta}{4}t - \hat{Z}_a(t)^2)dt + dB(t)\;,\quad t \in [0,\infty)\;,\\
\hat{Z}_a(+\infty) &= -\infty\;.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
From this result, we deduce that for any given $a\in{\symb R}$, there exists a unique starting point $x_0\in{\symb R}\cup \{+\infty\}$ such that $Z_a^{(0,x_0)}(t)$ goes to $-\infty$ as $t\to\infty$: this starting point coincides with $\hat{Z}_a^{(+\infty,-\infty)}(0)$. Any other starting point makes the forward diffusion go to $+\infty$ (this prevents uniqueness of a backward diffusion starting from $(+\infty,+\infty)$).
\begin{remark}
The discussion at the end of~\cite[Sec 3]{RamRidVir} shows that either $Z_a$ goes to $+\infty$ or $\int^t Z_a(s) ds$ is asymptotically smaller than $- C t^{3/2}$ for some positive constant $C$. While this result almost covers the statement of our theorem, it does not imply that $Z_a$ goes to $-\infty$ in the second case.
\end{remark}
In Subsection \ref{Subsec:Symmetry}, we collect important consequences of the above theorem for the study of the eigenfunctions of $\mathcal{L}_\beta$. The subsequent subsections are devoted to the proof of Theorem \ref{Th:TimeReversal}.
\medskip
From now on, we will implicitly view the backward diffusions as evolving backward in time (even though their evolution equations are stated forward in time). For the sake of clarity, we will put under quotation marks the words after or until when time is run backward. For instance, the sentence
\begin{center}
``until'' its first explosion time, the diffusion $\hat{Z}^{(t_0,x_0)}$ does [...]\end{center}
\noindent means that on the interval $[\tau,t_0]$ the diffusion does [...], where $\tau := \sup\{t < t_0: \hat{Z}^{(t_0,x_0)}(t) = +\infty\}$.
\subsection{Backward diffusions and eigenfunctions}\label{Subsec:Symmetry}
In the sequel, we abbreviate $Z_a^{(0,+\infty)}$ and $\hat{Z}_a^{(+\infty,-\infty)}$ into $Z_a$ and $\hat{Z}_a$.
\begin{corollary}\label{Cor:bc}
Almost surely, the set of eigenvalues $\{\lambda_k, k\ge 1\}$ coincides with the set
$$\{-a\in {\symb R}: \lim_{t\to\infty} Z_a(t) = -\infty\} = \{-a\in {\symb R}: \hat{Z}_a(0) = +\infty\}\;.$$
Furthermore, the event $\{\lambda_k \le -a\}$ coincides with the event $\{Z_a$ explodes to $-\infty$ at least $k$ times$\}$, and we have
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:vep}
\frac{\varphi_k'}{\varphi_k}(t) = Z_{-\lambda_k}(t) = \hat{Z}_{-\lambda_k}(t)\;,\quad \forall t\ge 0\;.
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
The discussion at the beginning of~\cite[Section 3]{RamRidVir} shows that the Riccati transform applied to $\varphi_k$ yields a process that starts from $+\infty$ at time $0$ (due to the Dirichlet b.c.~imposed on $\mathcal{L}_\beta$) and satisfies the same differential equation as $Z_a$ with $a=-\lambda_k$. Let us show that it necessarily goes to $-\infty$ at $+\infty$. Since $\varphi_k$ is in $L^2((0,\infty))$, the associated process $Z_a$, with $a=-\lambda_k$, cannot go to $+\infty$ at $+\infty$: by Theorem \ref{Th:TimeReversal} we deduce that $Z_a$ necessarily goes to $-\infty$.\\
Conversely, if $\hat{Z}_a(0) = +\infty$ (or equivalently $Z_a(t)\to -\infty$ as $t\to\infty$) then the reverse Riccati transform provides an $L^2((0,\infty))$ function that solves the eigenproblem associated to $\mathcal{L}_\beta$, thus concluding the proof.\\
Finally the monotonicity property of the diffusions implies that $\{\lambda_k \le -a\}$ coincides with the event $\{Z_a$ explodes to $-\infty$ at least $k$ times$\}$.
\end{proof}
Here is a simple consequence of identity \eqref{Eq:vep}. Let us denote by $0 < \zeta_a(1) < \zeta_a(2) < \ldots$ the successive explosion times (to $-\infty$) of $Z_a$, and by $0 < \hat{\zeta}_a(1) < \hat{\zeta}_a(2) < \ldots$ the successive explosion times (to $+\infty$) of $\hat{Z}_a$. For convenience we set $\zeta_a(0) := 0$.
\begin{lemma}[Ordering of the explosions]\label{Lemma:Symmetry}
Almost surely for every $k\ge 1$, if $Z_a$ explodes $k$ times then $\hat{Z}_a$ explodes $k$ times as well and we have for every $i\in\{1,\ldots,k\}$
\begin{align*}
\zeta_a(i-1) \le \hat{\zeta}_a(i) \le \zeta_a(i) \;.
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The events ``$Z_a$ explodes $k$ times'' and ``$\hat{Z}_a$ explodes $k$ times'' both coincide with the event ``$\lambda_k \le -a$'' so that they are almost surely equal.
Assume that we have $\hat{\zeta}_a(i) < \zeta_a(i-1)$ and take some rational number $t_0$ in between these two values. The operator $-\partial^2_x + \frac{\beta}{4}x + \xi$ restricted to $[0,t_0]$ has strictly less than $i-1$ eigenvalues below $-a$ due to $\zeta_a(i-1) > t_0$. On the other hand by monotonicity, the diffusion $\hat{Z}^{(t_0,-\infty)}_a$ explodes at least $i-1$ times since $\hat{Z}_a$ explodes at least $i$ times on $[0,t_0]$: consequently, the aforementioned operator must have at least $i-1$ eigenvalues below $-a$ thus raising a contradiction. Similar arguments yield the other inequality.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Construction of the backward diffusions}\label{Subsec:Construction}
We will construct a solution of \eqref{Eq:RiccatiReversed2} by approximations. More precisely, for every $a\in{\symb R}$, we consider the two sequences of processes (indexed by $N\ge 1$)
$$\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(t) \quad \mbox{ and }\quad \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(t)\;,\quad t\in [0,\frac{N}{\beta}]\;.$$
Note that these two diffusions, when run backward in time, start at time $N/\beta$ one above the other and, by the monotonicity property presented previously, remain ordered ``until'' the first explosion time to $+\infty$ of $\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a$.\\
One expects these two processes to be close to the parabola $-s_a(t) := -\sqrt{a+\beta t/4}$, at least for large enough $t$. Indeed, for the diffusion run backward in time, this parabola corresponds to the bottom of the well of its time-inhomogeneous potential, see Figures \ref{Fig:Za}, \ref{Fig:Y1} and \ref{Fig:Yk}.
Very informally, we will construct a solution of \eqref{Eq:RiccatiReversed2} by taking the limit of the sequence $\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a$ on some (random) neighborhood of $+\infty$ where this sequence is non-decreasing. Regarding uniqueness, since any solution $Y$ of \eqref{Eq:RiccatiReversed2} tends to $-\infty$, there exists some $N_0$ such that for all $N\ge N_0$ we have
$$ -\infty = \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(\frac{N}{\beta}) \le Y(\frac{N}{\beta}) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(\frac{N}{\beta}) = 0\;,$$
and, consequently, $Y$ is squeezed in between the two sequences for large enough times: we will thus prove that the difference between these two processes tends to $0$ to conclude.\\
\begin{remark}
We consider the (seemingly complicated) sequence of times $(\frac{N}{\beta})_{N\ge 1}$ in order for our later estimates to be uniform over all $\beta > 0$. Indeed, these estimates will be applied in the next section for different purposes. However, for the sole proof of Theorem \ref{Th:TimeReversal}, we could have ``started'' our processes at time $N$ instead of $\frac{N}{\beta}$.
\end{remark}
The key technical result for the proof is the following proposition.
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:ZmZp}
Fix $\ell \in {\symb Z}$ and $\beta >0$. As $k_0\to\infty$, the probability of the following event goes to $1$. For all $a\in[\ell-1,\ell]$ and for all $N \geq k_0+1$,
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:BoundZmZp}
\forall t\in[\frac{k_0}{\beta},\frac{N-1}{\beta}]\;,\quad -\frac32 s_a(t) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(t) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(t) \le -\frac12 s_a(t)\;,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{align*}
\forall t\in[\frac{N-1}{\beta},\frac{N}{\beta}],\quad \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(t) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(t) \le 1\;.
\end{align*}
\end{proposition}
To control the behavior of the forward diffusions, we will need a companion result to the previous proposition. We consider the diffusion $Z_a^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}$ that starts from $0$ at time $\frac{N}{\beta}$ and goes \emph{forward} in time.
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:BoundFwd}
Fix $\ell \in {\symb Z}$ and $\beta >0$. As $k_0\to\infty$, the probability of the following event goes to $1$. For all $a\in[\ell-1,\ell]$ and for all $N \geq k_0$,
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:BoundFwd}
\frac12 s_a(t) \le Z_a^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}(t) \le \frac32 s_a(t)\;,\quad \forall t \ge \frac{N+1}{\beta}\;.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
We defer the proof of these two results until Subsection \ref{Subsec:Lemma} and now prove Theorem \ref{Th:TimeReversal}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{Th:TimeReversal}]
If we prove that for any given $\ell\in{\symb Z}$, the statement of the theorem holds almost surely for all $a\in[\ell-1,\ell]$, then it obviously holds almost surely for all $a\in {\symb R}$. Therefore, $\ell \in{\symb Z}$ is fixed until the end of the proof.
\smallskip
Let us first prove the existence of solutions of \eqref{Eq:RiccatiReversed2} for $a \in [\ell-1,\ell]$. From Proposition \ref{Prop:ZmZp}, there exists a random integer $k_0 >0$ such that for all $a\in[\ell-1,\ell]$ and for every $N\ge k_0+1$, we have
$$ \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(t) \le -\frac12 s_a(t)\;,\quad t\in [\frac{k_0}{\beta}, \frac{N-1}{\beta}]\quad \mbox{ and }\quad \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(t) \le 1\;,\quad t\in [\frac{N-1}{\beta},\frac{N}{\beta}]\;.$$
By monotonicity, we thus deduce that for every $t \in [k_0/\beta,\infty)$, the sequence $\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(t)$, $N \ge t \beta$ is bounded non-decreasing and therefore converges pointwise: we call $\hat{Z}_a(t)$ its limit. This limit satisfies $\hat{Z}_a(t) \le -(1/2) s_a(t)$ and therefore goes to $-\infty$ as $t\to+\infty$. Furthermore, by passing to the limit on the equation solved by $\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a$, we deduce that almost surely
$$ d\hat{Z}_a(t) = \Big(a+\frac{\beta}{4}t - \hat{Z}_a(t)^2\Big)dt + dB(t)\;,\quad t \in [\frac{k_0}{\beta},\infty)\;.$$
In addition, we set $\hat{Z}_a(t) := \hat{Z}_a^{(k_0/\beta,x_0)}(t)$ for all $t\in [0,k_0/\beta]$, where $x_0 = \hat{Z}_a(k_0/\beta)$.
\smallskip
For uniqueness, let us first observe that on the event where \eqref{Eq:BoundZmZp} holds, for every given $t\ge k_0/\beta$ we have $(\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a-\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a)(t) \to 0$ as $N\to\infty$. Indeed, solving the differential equation satisfied by the difference of these two processes we obtain that for all $t \in [\frac{k_0}{\beta}, \frac{N-1}{\beta}]$,
\begin{align*}
(\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a-\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a)(t) &= (\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a-\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a)(\frac{N-1}{\beta}) e^{\int_t^{\frac{N-1}{\beta}} (\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a + \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a)(u) du}\\
&\le s_a(\frac{N-1}{\beta}) e^{-\int_t^{\frac{N-1}{\beta}}s_a(u) du}\;,
\end{align*}
which goes to $0$ as $N\to\infty$.\\
Let $Y_a$ be another solution of \eqref{Eq:RiccatiReversed2}. Since it goes to $-\infty$ as $t\to\infty$, there exists a random time $s_0$ after which $Y_a$ remains negative. As a consequence, almost surely for every $N \ge s_0 \beta$, $\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(\frac{N}{\beta}) < Y_a(\frac{N}{\beta}) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a$ so that monotonicity ensures that $Y_a$ remains in between the two curves $\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a$ and $\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a$ on $[(k_0\vee s_0)/\beta, N/\beta]$. Passing to the limit on $N$, we thus deduce that $Y_a$ must coincide with $\hat{Z}_a$.
\medskip
We turn to the statement regarding the limit of $Z=Z_a^{(t_0,x_0)}$. We distinguish two cases. If $Z(\frac{N}{\beta}) \le 0$ occurs for infinitely many $N\ge 1$, then the argument presented right above to prove uniqueness shows that $Z$ actually coincides with $\hat{Z}_a$: it therefore goes to $-\infty$ as $t\to\infty$.\\
Otherwise, there exists a random $N_0$ such that for all $N\ge N_0$, we have $Z(\frac{N}{\beta}) > 0$. Using Proposition \ref{Prop:BoundFwd} and monotonicity, we deduce that $Z(t)$ remains above $(1/2)s_a(t)$ for all $t\in [t_0,\infty)$ for some random $t_0$ and therefore $Z(t)$ goes to $+\infty$ as $t\to\infty$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Exit time of Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process}
For $\theta > 0$ consider the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process
$$ dU(t) = -\theta U(t) dt + dB(t)\;,\quad U(0) = 0\;.$$
For $b>0$ introduce the exit time
$$ H := \inf\Big\{t\ge 0: U(t) \notin \Big(-\frac{b}{\sqrt{2\theta}},\frac{b}{\sqrt{2\theta}}\Big)\Big\}\;.$$
In the next subsection, we will use the following estimate.
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:OU}
There exists $C>0$ and $b_0 >0$ such that for all $\theta > 0$, all $\nu \in (0,1)$ and all $b > b_0$
$$ \mathbb{E}[e^{-\theta \nu H}] \le \frac{C}{1 + \frac{\nu}{b^2} e^{\frac{b^2}{2}}}\;.$$
\end{proposition}
\begin{remark}
This estimate indicates that, for $b$ large, the typical value of $H$ is of order $e^{\frac{b^2}{2}}$ (up to polynomial corrections). This is in line with the large deviation theory that asserts that the diffusion $U$, which evolves within the potential $V(x) = \theta x^2/2$, hits level $\pm b/\sqrt{2\theta}$ at a time of order $e^{2V(b/\sqrt{2\theta})}$.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
By~\cite[II.7.3.0.1 p.548 and Appendix 2.9 p.639]{Handbook} we have
$$ \mathbb{E}[e^{-\theta \nu H}] = e^{-\frac{b^2}{4}} \frac{2 D_{-\nu}(0)}{D_{-\nu}(-b)+D_{-\nu}(b)}\;,$$
where $D_{-\nu}$ is the so-called parabolic cylinder function. From its expression~\cite[Appendix 2.9 p.639]{Handbook}, we deduce that
\begin{align*}
\frac1{\mathbb{E}[e^{-\theta \nu H}]} &= 1+\sum_{k\ge 1} \frac{\nu(\nu+2)\times\ldots \times (\nu+2k-2)}{(2k)!}b^{2k}\\
&\ge 1+ \nu \sum_{k\ge 1} \frac{2 \times 4 \times\ldots \times(2k-2)}{(2k)!}b^{2k}\;.
\end{align*}
Since
$$\frac{2 \times 4 \times \ldots \times (2k-2)}{(2k)!}\,b^{2k} = \frac1{1 \times 3 \times \ldots \times (2k-1) \times (2k)}\, b^{2k} \ge \frac1{b^2} (\frac{b^2}{2})^{k+1} \frac1{(k+1)!}\;,$$
we deduce that
$$ \frac1{\mathbb{E}[e^{-\theta \nu H}]} \ge 1 + \frac{\nu}{b^2} (e^{\frac{b^2}{2}} - 1 - \frac{b^2}{2})\;.$$
The asserted bound follows.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proofs of intermediate results}\label{Subsec:Lemma}
We will present in details the proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:BoundFwd}, and we will then present the main steps of the proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:ZmZp} since it is quite similar. The main argument is the following. On a small interval of time, the increment of the Brownian motion is small with large probability: the diffusion $Z^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_{a}$ is then very close to the solution of the deterministic ODE obtained by removing the Brownian motion from its evolution equation. This ODE has an explicit solution that goes very quickly to a neighborhood of the curve $t\mapsto s_a(t)$.\\
The proof is split into two lemmas. The first one controls the behavior of $Z^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a$ on $[\frac{N}{\beta},\frac{N+1}{\beta}]$.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:ZfwdInit}
There exist $A>0$ and $c>0$ such that, for all $\ell\in{\symb Z}$ and all $N\ge 1$ such that $\ell+N \ge A$, the following holds with probability at least $1-e^{-(\ell+N)^{1/3}}-\beta^{-1} e^{-c(\ell+N)^{3/2}}$. For all $a\in [\ell-1,\ell]$, we have
$$ \inf_{t\in [\frac{N}{\beta},\frac{N+1}{\beta}]} Z_a^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}(t) \ge -1\;,\quad\mbox{ and }\qquad\frac23 s_a(\frac{N+1}{\beta}) \le Z_a^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}(\frac{N+1}{\beta}) \le \frac43 s_a(\frac{N+1}{\beta})\;.$$
\end{lemma}
\noindent The second lemma will allow to bound the process $Z_a^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}$ between two deterministic curves through a recursion in time.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:ZfwdRecur}
There exist $A>0$ and $c>0$ such that for all $\ell\in{\symb Z}$ and all $k\ge 1$ such that $\ell+k \ge A$, the following holds with probability at least $1-e^{-(\ell+k)^{1/3}} - \beta^{-1} e^{-c(\ell+k)^{3/2}}$. For all $N \le k-1$ and all $a\in [\ell-1,\ell]$, if
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:BoundZ0}
\frac23 s_a(\frac{k}{\beta}) \le Z^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(\frac{k}{\beta}) \le \frac43 s_a(\frac{k}{\beta})\;,
\end{equation}
then we have
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:BoundZ}
\frac12 s_a(t) \le Z^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(t) \le \frac32 s_a(t)\;,\quad \forall t\in [\frac{k}{\beta},\frac{k+1}{\beta}]\;,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:BoundZ2}
\frac23 s_a(\frac{k+1}{\beta}) \le Z^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(\frac{k+1}{\beta}) \le \frac43 s_a(\frac{k+1}{\beta})\;,
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:BoundFwd}]
Fix $\ell\in{\symb Z}$. Take $k_0 \ge 1$ such that $\ell+k_0\ge A$ where $A$ is the maximum of the $A$'s appearing in the above two lemmas. Applying the first lemma and iterating the second, we see that the probability of the event of the statement of the proposition is at least
$$1 - \sum_{k\ge k_0} (e^{-(\ell+k)^{1/3}}+\beta^{-1} e^{-c(\ell+k)^{3/2}}) - \sum_{N\ge k_0} (e^{- (\ell+N)^{1/3}}+\beta^{-1} e^{-c(\ell+N)^{3/2}})\;.$$
This probability goes to $1$ as $k_0\to\infty$, thus concluding the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:ZfwdInit}]
To alleviate notations, we will simply write $Z_a$ for $Z_a^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}$. Set
$$\kappa_N := \frac{\ln s_\ell(\frac{N}{\beta})}{s_\ell(\frac{N}{\beta})}\;.$$
Note that $s_\ell(N/\beta) = \sqrt{\ell+N}$ is well-defined as soon as $\ell+N \ge 0$. Note also that as $\ell+N \to\infty$ we have
$$ \frac{s_\ell(N/\beta)}{s_{\ell-1}(N/\beta)} \to 1\;,$$
so that, in the sequel, we will implicitly assume that this ratio is as close as desired to $1$.
Consider the event
$$\mathcal{A}:=\Big\{\forall t\in [\frac{N}{\beta},\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N],\; |B(t)-B(\frac{N}{\beta})| < 1\Big\}\;,$$
and note that ${\symb P}(\mathcal{A}^\complement) \le 2e^{-\frac12\kappa_N^{-1}}$. Since $\kappa_N^{-1} \gg (\ell+N)^{1/3}$ as $\ell+N$ goes to $\infty$, we deduce that ${\symb P}(\mathcal{A}^\complement) \le e^{-(\ell+N)^{1/3}}$ for $\ell+N$ large enough.\\
We first prove that on the event $\mathcal{A}$ and as soon as $N$ is large enough, we can squeeze all the processes $Z_a$, $a\in [\ell-1,\ell]$, in between simple deterministic curves on the time interval $[\frac{N}{\beta},\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N]$.
\medskip
By monotonicity, we have for all $a\in [\ell-1,\ell]$
$$ Z_{\ell-1} \le Z_a \le Z_{\ell}\;,$$
until the first explosion time of $Z_{\ell-1}$ to $-\infty$. Consequently, it suffices to bound from below $Z_{\ell-1}$ and from above $Z_{\ell}$. We start with the bound of the former, and set $R(t) := Z_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta}+t) - B(\frac{N}{\beta}+t) + B(\frac{N}{\beta})$ for all $t\ge 0$. We have
$$ dR(t) = s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta}+t)^2 dt - Z_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta}+t)^2 dt\;.$$
We now work on the event $\mathcal{A}$ and on the time-interval $[0,\kappa_N]$. If $|Z_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta}+t)| \in [0,(1/2) s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})]$ then for all $N$ large enough
$$ dR(t) \ge s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})^2 \Big(1 - \frac3{s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})}\Big)dt - R(t)^2dt\;,$$
and if $|Z_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta}+t)| \ge (1/2) s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})$ then
$$ dR(t) \ge s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})^2 dt - R(t)^2 \Big(1 + \frac5{s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})}\Big)dt\;.$$
Therefore, if we take $G$ as the solution of $G(0) = 0$ and
$$ dG(t) = s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})^2 \Big(1 - \frac3{s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})}\Big)dt - G(t)^2 \Big(1 + \frac5{s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})}\Big)dt\;,$$
then on the event $\mathcal{A}$ we have $R(t) \ge G(t)$ for $t\in [0,\kappa_N]$. The function $G$ is explicit:
$$ G(t) = s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta}) \sqrt{\frac{1 - \frac3{s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})}}{1 + \frac5{s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})}}} \tanh\Big(s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})\, t\,\sqrt{(1 - \frac3{s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})})(1 + \frac5{s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})})} \Big)\;.$$
It is non-negative and for all $\ell+N$ large enough, we have $G(\kappa_N) \ge \frac56 s_{\ell}(\frac{N+1}{\beta}) + 1$. Since
$$Z_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta}+t) \ge R(t) - |B(\frac{N}{\beta}+t)-B(\frac{N}{\beta})| \ge G(t) - |B(\frac{N}{\beta}+t)-B(\frac{N}{\beta})|\;,$$
we deduce that on the event $\mathcal{A}$
$$ Z_{\ell-1}(t) \ge -1\;,\quad t\in [\frac{N}{\beta},\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N]\;,\qquad Z_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N) \ge \frac56 s_\ell(\frac{N+1}{\beta})\;.$$
To bound from above $Z_{\ell}$, we proceed similarly. We set $R(t) = Z_{\ell}(\frac{N}{\beta}+t) - B(\frac{N}{\beta}+t) + B(\frac{N}{\beta})$, and one can check that for all $N$ large enough, on the event $\mathcal{A}$ and for $t\in [0,\kappa_N]$ we have $R(t) \le F(t)$ where $F(0) = 0$ and
$$ dF(t) = s_{\ell}(\frac{N+1}{\beta})^2\Big( 1 + \frac{3}{s_{\ell}(\frac{N+1}{\beta})} \Big) dt - F^2(t) \Big( 1 - \frac{5}{s_{\ell}(\frac{N+1}{\beta})} \Big) dt\;.$$
Here again, it can be checked that $F(\kappa_N) \le \frac76 s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N+1}{\beta}) -1$ for all $N$ large enough. Consequently, on the event $\mathcal{A}$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:IneqZZ} \frac56 s_\ell(\frac{N+1}{\beta}) \le Z_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N) \le Z_{\ell}(\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N) \le \frac76 s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N+1}{\beta})\;.\end{equation}
To conclude, it suffices to prove that, conditionally given the filtration of the Brownian motion up to time $\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N$, $Z_{\ell-1}$ remains above $(2/3) s_{\ell}(\frac{N+1}{\beta})$ and $Z_{\ell}$ remains below $(4/3) s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N+1}{\beta})$ on the time-interval $[\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N,\frac{N+1}{\beta}]$. This is achieved by a comparison with a reflected Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process: let us give the details for the upper bound.\\
For all $\ell+N$ large enough, $s_\ell(t) \le (7/6) s_{\ell-1}((N+1)/\beta)$ for all $t\in [\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N,\frac{N+1}{\beta}]$. An elementary computation yields
$$ d Z_{\ell}(t) \le -2s_\ell(t)(Z_\ell - s_\ell(t)) dt + dB(t) \le -2s_\ell(t)(Z_\ell - (7/6) s_{\ell-1}((N+1)/\beta)) dt + dB(t)\;,$$
and therefore $Z_\ell(t) \le R(t) + (7/6) s_{\ell-1}((N+1)/\beta)$ for all $t\in [\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N,\frac{N+1}{\beta}]$ where $R$ is a non-negative process satisfying
$$ dR(t) = -2s_\ell(N/\beta) R(t) + dB(t) + dL(t)\;,\quad R(\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N) = 0\;,$$
and $L$ is a reflection measure supported by the zeros of $R$. The process $R$ is equal in law to $|U|$ where $U$ is the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process
$$ dU(t) = -2s_\ell(N/\beta) U(t) + dB(t)\;,\quad U(\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N) = 0\;.$$
As a consequence, there exists a constant $d>0$ such that, conditionally given \eqref{Eq:IneqZZ}, the probability that $Z_\ell$ hits $(4/3) s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N+1}{\beta})$ on the time interval $[\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N,\frac{N+1}{\beta}]$ is bounded from above by the probability that $U$ exits $[-d s_{\ell}(N/\beta),d s_{\ell}(N/\beta)]$ on the same time interval. Applying Proposition \ref{Prop:OU} with $\nu = \beta/(2s_\ell(N/\beta))$, the latter is bounded by $\beta^{-1} \exp(-c(\ell+N)^{3/2})$, for some constant $c>0$ as soon as $\ell+N$ is large enough.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:ZfwdRecur}]
Assume that \eqref{Eq:BoundZ0} holds for some $k$. Similarly as in the previous proof, by a comparison with reflected Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes, one can deduce that \eqref{Eq:BoundZ} holds with a probability at least $1 - \beta^{-1} e^{-c(\ell + k)^{3/2}}$ for some constant $c>0$.
To prove \eqref{Eq:BoundZ2}, we set $\kappa_k := \ln(s_\ell(k/\beta)) / s_\ell(k/\beta)$ and we work on the event
$$ \mathcal{A} := \Big\{\forall t\in [\frac{k+1}{\beta}-\kappa_k,\frac{k+1}{\beta}],\; |B(t)-B(\frac{k+1}{\beta}-\kappa_k)| \le 1\Big\}\;.$$
On this event, one can squeeze the trajectory of $Z_a^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}$ in between two deterministic curves that get close to $s_a(\frac{k+1}{\beta})$ in a short time so that \eqref{Eq:BoundZ2} is satisfied: the proof is very similar to that of the last lemma so we do not provide the details. The probability of $\mathcal{A}$ is larger than $1-e^{-(\ell+k)^{1/3}}$ provided that $\ell+k$ is large enough. This concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
\bigskip
The proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:ZmZp} is very similar. It relies on two intermediate lemmas and a recursion \emph{backward} in time. We only state the two lemmas since the arguments are essentially the same as above.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:Z-Z+}
There exist $A>0$ and $c>0$ such that, for all $\ell\in{\symb Z}$ and all $N\ge 1$ such that $\ell+N \ge A$, the following holds with probability at least $1-e^{-(\ell+N)^{1/3}}-\beta^{-1} e^{-c(\ell+N)^{3/2}}$. For all $a\in [\ell-1,\ell]$, we have
$$ \sup_{t\in [\frac{N-1}{\beta},\frac{N}{\beta}]} \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(t) \le \sup_{t\in [\frac{N-1}{\beta},\frac{N}{\beta}]} \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(t) \le 1\;,$$
and
$$ -\frac43 s_a(\frac{N-1}{\beta}) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(\frac{N-1}{\beta}) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(\frac{N-1}{\beta}) \le -\frac23 s_a(\frac{N-1}{\beta})\;.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:ZmZpRecur}
There exist $A>0$ and $c>0$ such that for all $\ell\in{\symb Z}$ and all $k\ge 1$ such that $\ell+k \ge A$, the following holds with probability at least $1-e^{-(\ell+k)^{1/3}}-\beta^{-1} e^{-c(\ell+k)^{3/2}}$. For all $N$ such that $k_0 \le N \le k-1$ and all $a\in [\ell-1,\ell]$, if
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:BoundhZ0}
-\frac43 s_a(\frac{k}{\beta}) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(\frac{k}{\beta}) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(\frac{k}{\beta})\le -\frac23 s_a(\frac{k}{\beta})\;,
\end{equation}
then we have
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:BoundhZ}
-\frac32 s_a(t) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(t) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(t) \le -\frac12 s_a(t)\;,\quad \forall t\in [\frac{k-1}{\beta},\frac{k}{\beta}]\;,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:BoundhZ2}
-\frac43 s_a(\frac{k-1}{\beta}) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(\frac{k-1}{\beta}) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(\frac{k-1}{\beta})\le -\frac23 s_a(\frac{k-1}{\beta})\;.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\medskip
\section{Convergence of the point process of explosion times}\label{Section:Explo}
Let $0 < \zeta_a(1) < \zeta_a(2) < \ldots$ be the successive explosion times of $Z_a := Z_a^{(0,+\infty)}$. For a function $a_L \sim (\frac38 \ln L)^{2/3}$ whose precise definition will be given in the next subsection, we have the following result.
\begin{theorem}\label{Th:Explo}
Fix $r\in{\symb R}$ and set $a=a_L - \frac{r}{4\sqrt{a_L}}$. As $L\to\infty$, the random measure
$$ \sum_{k\ge 1} \delta_{\zeta_{a}(k)/L}\;,$$
converges in law for the topology of weak convergence of finite measures to a Poisson point process on ${\symb R}_+$ with intensity $e^r e^{-t} dt$.
\end{theorem}
This result strengthens~\cite[Th 4.1]{AllezDumazTW}: therein, the aforementioned convergence is established in the topology of vague convergence of Radon measures. This topology does not allow to control the mass at infinity while this is required in order to study the eigenvalues of the operator $\mathcal{L}_\beta$. Actually, even to compute the limiting fluctuations of the first eigenvalue, one needs to evaluate the probability of non-explosion of $Z_{a}$ and this requires to control the mass at infinity of the above random point process.
To prove the theorem, we subdivide $[0,\infty)$ into three regions. First, in $[0,\varepsilon^{-1}L]$ the process makes a finite number of explosions and the point process of explosion times restricted to this interval converges to a Poisson point process of the asserted intensity thanks to~\cite[Th 4.1]{AllezDumazTW}. Second, for any given $C_0>0$, in $[\varepsilon^{-1}L, C_0 L {\ln L}]$ we will prove that the process does not explode with a probability that goes to $1$ as $\varepsilon\to 0$, uniformly over all $L$ large enough. Third, in $[C_0L{\ln L},\infty)$ the process remains in between two deterministic curves with a probability going to $1$ as $L\to \infty$, provided $C_0>0$ is chosen large enough: this relies on exactly the same arguments as those presented in the proof of Theorem \ref{Th:TimeReversal}.
\subsection{The time-homogeneous diffusion}\label{Subsec:TimeHomo}
In this subsection, we introduce time-homogeneous versions of the diffusions $Z_a$: at many occasions in this article we will rely on comparison arguments involving this diffusion. For every $a\in{\symb R}$ and every $(t_0,x_0)\in {\symb R}_+\times (-\infty,+\infty]$ we define $X_a^{(t_0,x_0)}$ as the solution of the following SDE
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
dX_a(t) &= (a - X_a(t)^2)dt + dB(t)\;,\quad t >t_0\;,\\
X_a(t_0) &= x_0\;.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Each time $X_a$ hits $-\infty$, it restarts immediately from $+\infty$. This family of diffusions satisfies the following monotonicity property. Almost surely for all $a\le a'$, all $(t_0,x_0), (t_0',x_0')$ and all $s\in [t_0\vee t_0',\infty)$, if we have $X_{a}^{(t_0,x_0)} (s) \le X_{a'}^{(t_0',x_0')} (s)$ then we have $X_{a}^{(t_0,x_0)} (s+\cdot) \le X_{a'}^{(t_0',x_0')} (s+\cdot)$ up to the next explosion time of $X_{a}^{(t_0,x_0)}$.
Notice that this is a diffusion in the potential $V_a(x) = x^3/3 - a x$. When $a>0$, this potential admits a well centered at $x=\sqrt a$ and an unstable equilibrium point at $x=-\sqrt a$. A typical sample path of the diffusion spends most of its time near the bottom of the well, and from time to time manages to reach the unstable equilibrium point from where it either explodes to $-\infty$ or comes back to the bottom of the well within a short time.
Let us recall the following convergence result due to McKean~\cite{McKean}. If we let $\gamma_a$ be the first time at which $X_a$ explodes, and if we let $m(a) = \mathbb{E}[\gamma_a]$, then $\gamma_a / m(a)$ converges in law to an exponential r.v.~of parameter $1$ as $a\to\infty$.
Observe that from the stochastic monotonicity of $a\mapsto \gamma_a$, the map $a\mapsto m(a)$ is non-decreasing. McKean~\cite{McKean} showed that it satisfies:
$$ m(a) = \frac{\pi}{\sqrt a} \exp(\frac83 a^{3/2})(1+o(1))\;,\quad a\to\infty\;.$$
Let us collect two estimates on $m(a)$ for the sequel. Simple computations show that for all $x\in {\symb R}$
$$ \frac{m(a + \frac{x}{4\sqrt a})}{m(a)} \to e^x\;,\quad a \to\infty\;,$$
and that, for any $x_0 \in{\symb R}$, there exists a constant $c>0$ such that for all $a$ large enough and for all $x > x_0$
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:mac} \frac{m(a + \frac{x}{4\sqrt a})}{m(a)} > ce^{x}\;.\end{equation}
We define the function $L\mapsto a_L$ as the inverse of $a\mapsto m(a)$. We have as $L\to\infty$
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:DefaL} a_L = \Big(\frac38 \ln L\Big)^{2/3}\Big(1+ \frac29 \frac{\ln\ln L}{\ln L} + (-\frac23 \ln \pi + \frac29 \ln \frac38) \frac1{\ln L} + o(\frac1{\ln L})\Big)\;.\end{equation}
Recall that $L=L(\beta)$ and note that as $\beta \to 0$ (which is equivalent to $L\to\infty$) we have
$$ a_L = \Big(\frac38 \ln \frac1{\beta}\Big)^{2/3}\Big(1- \frac23 \frac{ \ln \pi}{\ln(1/\beta)} + o(\frac1{\ln (1/\beta)})\Big)\;.$$
\subsection{An estimate on McKean's convergence result}
In~\cite{McKean}, McKean showed that the first explosion time $\gamma_a$ of the time-homogeneous diffusion $X_a$, rescaled by $m(a)$, converges in distribution to an exponential r.v.~with parameter $1$. The following proposition gives more precise information about the probability that the diffusion explodes at a time much smaller than $m(a)$.
Let $\mathcal{E}(1)$ denote an exponential r.v.~of parameter $1$.
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:CVrate}We have
$$ \varlimsup_{a\to\infty} \sup_{x\in [(\ln a)^{-3}, 1]} \frac1{x} \Big| \ln\Big( \frac{{\symb P}(\mathcal{E}(1) > x)}{{\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > x)}\Big)\Big| = 0\;.$$
\end{proposition}
\noindent This convergence takes the following equivalent form:
$$ \varlimsup_{a\to\infty} \sup_{x\in [(\ln a)^{-3}, 1]} \frac1{x} \Big|{\symb P}(\mathcal{E}(1) \le x) - {\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) \le x)\Big| = 0\;.$$
\begin{proof}
By monotonicity and from the explicit expression of the exponential density, it suffices to prove
$$ \varlimsup_{a\to\infty} \sup_{n=1,\ldots, (\ln a)^3} n \Big| \ln\Big( \frac{{\symb P}(\mathcal{E}(1) > 1/n)}{{\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1/n)}\Big)\Big| = 0\;.$$
For every $n\ge 1$, we let $X^j_a := X_a^{(t_j^n,+\infty)}$ be the diffusion that starts from $+\infty$ at time $t_j^n := (j/n)m(a)$ and solves the same SDE as $X_a$. We then let $A_n$ be the event on which $X_a$ explodes on $[0,m(a)]$ if and only if there exists $j\in \{0,\ldots,n-1\}$ such that $X_a^j$ explodes on $[t_j^n,t_{j+1}^n]$. Let us denote by $\gamma_a^j:= \inf\{t\ge 0: X_a^j(t_j^n+t) = -\infty\}$. We write
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1) = {\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1; A_n^\complement) + {\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1; A_n)\;.
\end{align*}
The first term can be bounded by ${\symb P}(A_n^\complement)$ while the second term satisfies
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1; A_n) &= {\symb P}(\cap_{j=0}^{n-1} \{\gamma_a^j / m(a) > 1/n\} \cap A_n)\\
&= {\symb P}(\cap_{j=0}^{n-1} \{\gamma_a^j/m(a) > 1/n\}) - {\symb P}(\cap_{j=0}^{n-1} \{\gamma_a^j/m(a) > 1/n\} \cap A_n^\complement)\\
&= {\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1/n)^n - {\symb P}(\cap_{i=1}^n \{\gamma_a^j/m(a) > 1/n\} \cap A_n^\complement)\;,
\end{align*}
since the $\gamma_a^j$'s are IID with the same law as $\gamma_a$. Hence
$$ \big|{\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1) - {\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1/n)^n\big| \le 2\,{\symb P}(A_n^\complement)\;,$$
for all $n\ge 1$. Since ${\symb P}(\mathcal{E}(1) > 1/n)^n = {\symb P}(\mathcal{E}(1)> 1)$, we get
\begin{align*}
n\Big|\ln\Big( \frac{{\symb P}(\mathcal{E}(1) > 1/n)}{{\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1/n)}\Big)\Big| &= \Big|\ln\Big( \frac{{\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1/n)^n}{{\symb P}(\mathcal{E}(1) > 1)}\Big)\Big|\\
&\le \Big|\ln\Big( \frac{{\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1)}{{\symb P}(\mathcal{E}(1) > 1)}\Big)\Big| + \Big|\ln\Big( \frac{{\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1/n)^n}{{\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1)}\Big)\Big|\;.
\end{align*}
The first term on the r.h.s.~converges to $0$ as $a\to\infty$. The second term is bounded by $C {\symb P}(A_n^\complement)$ for some constant $C>0$ uniformly over all $n\ge 1$ and all $a$ large enough. Therefore, we are left with proving that $\sup_{n\le (\ln a)^3} {\symb P}(A_n^\complement) \to 0$ as $a\to\infty$.\\
Using the proof of \cite[Prop. 2.6]{DL17} at times $t_j^n$, we easily deduce that with a probability greater than $1- n \exp(-b(\ln\ln a)^2)$ for some $b>0$, $X_a$ explodes on $[0,m(a)]$ if and only if there exists $j\in\{0,\ldots,n-1\}$ such that $X_a^j$ explodes on $[t^n_j,t^n_{j+1}]$, as long as the explosion times of $X_a$ are at a distance at least $C/\sqrt{a}$ from the times $t_j^n$. The latter holds true with large probability thanks to \cite[Cor. 4.8]{DL17}: indeed, it is shown therein that with a probability greater than $1- n \exp(-b(\ln\ln a)^2)$ the diffusion $X_a$ remains close to a stationary diffusion up to its $n$-th explosion time and it is easy to control the probability that a stationary diffusion does not explode in small neighborhoods of the $t^n_j$ using the estimates in \cite[Lemma 4.1]{DL17}. Since $(\ln a)^3 \ll e^{b(\ln \ln a)^2}$, this completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The delicate region}\label{Subsec:Delicate}
The goal of this subsection is to prove the following result.
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:ExploDelicate}
Fix $C_0>0$. For all $\varepsilon$ small enough and all $L$ large enough, the probability that $Z_{a_L}$ does not explode on $(\varepsilon^{-1}L,C_0 L {\ln L}]$ is larger than $1-\varepsilon$.
\end{proposition}
To prove the proposition, we cover $(\varepsilon^{-1}L,C_0 L {\ln L}]$ by the disjoint intervals $(s_{i-1},s_{i}]$, for $i=1,\ldots,i_1$ with $s_i := e^i \varepsilon^{-1} L$ and where $i_1$ is the smallest integer such that $s_i \ge C_0 L \ln L$. Note that $i_1 \le 2 \ln\ln L$ as soon as $L$ is large enough.
For any $i\ge 0$, set $a(s_i) := a_L + \frac{\beta}{4} s_i$. We then let $X^i$ be the time-homogeneous diffusion starting from $+\infty$ at time $s_i$ and with parameter $a_-(s_i) := a(s_i) - \frac1{4\sqrt{a(s_i)}}$. We also set $\gamma^i := \inf\{t\ge 0: X^i(s_i+t) = -\infty\}$. We define $A_L$ as the event on which an explosion of $Z_{a_L}$ on $(\varepsilon^{-1} L, C_0L {\ln L}]$ implies the existence of some $i \in \{0,\ldots, i_1-1\}$ such that $X^i$ explodes on $(s_i,s_{i+1}]$.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:AL}
The probability of $A_L$ goes to $1$ as $L\to\infty$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Set $\kappa_i = \frac{\ln a(s_i)}{\sqrt{a(s_i)}}$. Let $\mathcal{D}$ be the event where for all $i\in\{0,\ldots,i_1-1\}$ we have
\begin{equation*}
\sqrt{a(s_i)} - \frac14 \le Z_{a_L}(t) \le \sqrt{a(s_i)} + \frac14\;, \quad\forall t\in [s_i,s_i + 9 \kappa_i]\;,
\end{equation*}
together with
\begin{equation*}
\inf_{t\in [s_i,s_i + 9 \kappa_i]} X^i(t) \ge \sqrt{a(s_i)} - \frac14 \;,\quad \sup_{t\in [s_i + 2\kappa_i ,s_i + 9 \kappa_i]} X^i(t)\le \sqrt{a(s_i)} + \frac14\;.
\end{equation*}
Recall that $i_1 \le 2 \ln\ln L$. By the forthcoming Lemma \ref{Lemma:XZSqueeze} (note that the diffusion $Z_{a_L}$ on the time interval $[s_i,\infty)$ can be obtained from the diffusion $Z_{a(s_i)}$ on $[0,\infty)$) we have
$${\symb P}(\mathcal{D}^\complement) \le i_1 C a_L^{-2} \to 0\;.$$
We now work on the event $\mathcal{D}$. The processes $X^i$ and $Z_{a_L}$ lie in the strip $[(1/2) \sqrt{a(s_i)},(3/2)\sqrt{a(s_i)}]$ on the time-interval $[s_i + 2\kappa_i ,s_i + 9 \kappa_i]$. The difference $D(t) := Z_{a_L}(t) - X^i(t)$ solves
$$ dD(t) = \Big(\frac{\beta}{4}(t-s_i) + \frac1{4\sqrt{a(s_i)}} - (Z_{a_L}(t)+X^i(t)) D(t) \Big)dt\;.$$
If $D(s_i + 2\kappa_i) \ge 0$ then $D$ remains non-negative until the next explosion time of $X^i$. Otherwise, observe that as long as $D$ is negative we have on the time-interval $[s_i + 2\kappa_i ,s_i + 9 \kappa_i]$
$$ dD(t) \ge \Big(\frac1{4\sqrt{a(s_i)}} - 3\sqrt{a(s_i)} D(t)\Big)dt\;,$$
so that a simple computation shows that $D$ becomes positive on the time-interval $[s_i + 2\kappa_i ,s_i + 9\kappa_i]$.\\
Then, monotonicity ensures that $D$ remains non-negative until the next explosion time of $X^i$. Henceforth, if $Z_{a_L}$ explodes on $(s_i,s_{i+1}]$ then necessarily $X^i$ explodes as well.
\end{proof}
With this result at hand, we can prove our proposition.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:ExploDelicate}]
By independence we have
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}(Z_{a_L}\mbox{ does not explode on }(\varepsilon^{-1} L, C_0 L {\ln L}]) &\ge {\symb P}(Z_{a_L}\mbox{ does not explode on }(\varepsilon^{-1} L, C_0 L {\ln L}] ; A_L)\\
&\ge\prod_{i=0}^{i_1-1} {\symb P}(X^i \mbox{ does not explode on }(s_i,s_{i+1}]) - {\symb P}(A_L^\complement)\\
&= \prod_{i=0}^{i_1-1} {\symb P}(\gamma^i > (e-1)s_i) - {\symb P}(A_L^\complement)\;.
\end{align*}
Note that $\sqrt{a(s_i)} \ge \sqrt{a_L}$. For $\epsilon$ small enough, by \eqref{Eq:mac} we have
$$ \mathbb{E}[\gamma^i] = m(a_-(s_i)) \ge cL e^{\frac12 e^i \varepsilon^{-1}}\;,$$
and therefore
$$ \frac{(e-1)s_i}{m(a_-(s_i))} \le c^{-1}(e-1)e^i \varepsilon^{-1} e^{-\frac12 e^i \varepsilon^{-1}} =: \kappa_i \;.$$
By Proposition \ref{Prop:CVrate} we deduce that for all $L$ large enough we have
$$ \sup_{i=0,\ldots,i_1} \frac1{\kappa_i \vee \ln(a_L)^{-3}} \Big|\ln\Big( \frac{{\symb P}(\mathcal{E}(1) > \kappa_i \vee (\ln a_L)^{-3})}{{\symb P}(\gamma_i/m(a_-(s_i)) > \kappa_i \vee (\ln a_L)^{-3})}\Big)\Big| \le \varepsilon\;.$$
We thus get
$$ {\symb P}(\gamma^i > (e-1)s_i) \ge e^{-(1+\varepsilon)(\kappa_i \vee (\ln a_L)^{-3})}\;.$$
Recall that $i_1 \le 2 \ln\ln L$. A simple computation then shows that the product over $i\in\{0,\ldots,i_1-1\}$ of the last expression is larger than $1-\varepsilon$ for all $L$ large enough and all $\varepsilon$ small enough.
\end{proof}
\subsection{End of proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:NoExploInfinity}
With a probability going to $1$ as $L\to\infty$, provided $C_0>0$ is chosen large enough, the process $Z_{a_L}$ remains in between the deterministic curves
$$ \frac12 \sqrt{a_L + \frac{\beta}{4} t}\quad \mbox{ and }\quad \frac32 \sqrt{a_L + \frac{\beta}{4} t}\;,$$
on the time interval $[C_0 L{\ln L},\infty)$, and therefore does not explode on this time interval.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Set $N := \lfloor C_0 L \ln L \beta \rfloor$. By the forthcoming Lemma \ref{Lemma:Stabil}, the probability that $Z_{a_L}(N/\beta) \ge 0$ goes to $1$ as $L\to\infty$. On the event where this happens, we know that $Z_{a_L}$ remains above $Z^{(N/\beta,0)}_{a_L}$ until the next explosion time of the latter.\\
Note that $N \sim C_0(8/3)^{1/3} (\ln L)^{2/3}$ as $L\to\infty$. Applying Lemma \ref{Lemma:ZfwdInit} and Lemma \ref{Lemma:ZfwdRecur}, we deduce that the probability that $Z^{(N/\beta,0)}_{a_L}$ does not remain above $\frac12 \sqrt{a_L + \frac{\beta}{4} t}$ on the time interval $[C_0L{\ln L}, \infty)$ is bounded from above by a term of order $\sum_{k\ge N} (e^{-k^{1/3}} + \beta^{-1} e^{-k^{3/2}}) \lesssim e^{-\frac12 N^{1/3}} + \beta^{-1} e^{-\frac12 N^{3/2}}$. The first term goes to $0$ as $L\to\infty$. Since $\ln(1/\beta) \sim \ln L$ as $L\to\infty$, it suffice to take $C_0>0$ large enough for the second term to go to $0$ as $L\to\infty$.\\
The proof of the upper bound follows from exactly the same type of arguments.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{Th:Explo}]
To simplify the notations, we consider the case $r=0$: since $m(a_L) = L$ and $m(a_L-r/4\sqrt{a_L})/m(a_L)$ goes to $e^{-r}$ as $L\to\infty$, it is immediate to deduce the general case by a simple time-change. We already know that the convergence of the theorem holds for the vague topology by~\cite[Theorem 4.1]{AllezDumazTW}. To complete the proof, we argue as follows. Fix $\delta > 0$. By Proposition \ref{Prop:ExploDelicate} and Lemma \ref{Lemma:NoExploInfinity}, there exists $\varepsilon >0$ such that for all $L$ large enough, the probability that $Z_{a_L}$ never explodes after time $\varepsilon^{-1} L$ is larger than $1-\delta$ uniformly over all $L$ large enough. This estimate suffices to strengthen the topology in which the aforementioned convergence holds.
\end{proof}
\section{Proofs of the main theorems}\label{Section:Proofs}
To prove our theorems, we introduce a discretization scheme and define approximations of the eigenfunctions: these approximations possess more independence so that they are easier objects to deal with.
\medskip
First of all, we discretize the interval $[0,\infty)$. Let $0=:t^n_0 < t^n_1 < \ldots < t^n_{2^n} := +\infty$ be the points that satisfy
$$ \int_{t^n_j}^{t^n_{j+1}} e^{-t} dt = \frac{1}{2^n}\;,\quad \forall j \in \{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}\;.$$
In other words, $t^n_j$ is the point where the cumulative distribution function of the exponential law reaches $j2^{-n}$: this discretization is adapted to the limiting intensity of the point process of explosion times from Theorem \ref{Th:Explo}. Indeed, this theorem shows that as $L\to\infty$, the number of explosions of the diffusion $Z_{a_L-r/(4\sqrt a_L)}$ in the time interval $[t^n_j L,t^n_{j+1}L]$ converges to a Poisson r.v.~of intensity $2^{-n} e^r$.
\medskip
Second, by Theorem \ref{Th:Explo}, the first eigenvalues of $\mathcal{L}_\beta$ typically deviate from $a_L$ like $1/\sqrt{a_L}$. Therefore we discretize the axis of eigenvalues by introducing for $\varepsilon > 0$ the grid
$$ \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon} := \Big\{ a_L + p \frac{\varepsilon}{4\sqrt a_L}: p\in {\symb Z}\cap [-1/\varepsilon^2,1/\varepsilon^2]\Big\}\;.$$
\subsection{Convergence of the point process of eigenvalues}\label{Subsec:PPP}
For every $j\in\{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}$ and every $a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$, we introduce the diffusion $Z_{a}^j := Z_{a}^{(t^n_j L, +\infty)}$ and use it to approximate the diffusion $Z_{a}$ on the time interval $[t^n_j L, t^n_{j+1} L]$. The justification behind this approximation is provided by the following lemma, whose proof is postponed to Subsection \ref{Subsec:ApproxZZ}.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:ApproxZZ}
With a probability going to $1$ as $L$ goes to $\infty$ and then $n$ goes to $\infty$, the following holds. For all $a\in\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and all $j\in\{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}$:\begin{itemize}
\item the diffusion $Z_{a}$ explodes at most one time on $(t^n_j L,t^n_{j+1} L]$,
\item the diffusion $Z_{a}$ explodes on $(t^n_j L,t^n_{j+1} L]$ if and only if the diffusion $Z_{a}^j$ explodes on $(t^n_j L,t^n_{j+1} L]$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
Denote by $(q_i)_{i=1\ldots m}$ the elements of $\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ listed in \textit{decreasing} order $q_1 > q_2 > \ldots > q_m$ and let $r_i$ be such that
$$ q_i = a_L - \frac{r_i}{4\sqrt a_L}\;,\quad i=1,\ldots,m\;.$$
Set $V_j(i) = 1$ if the diffusion $Z_{q_i}^j$ explodes on $(t_j^n L, t_{j+1}^n L]$, and $V_j(i) = 0$ otherwise. We also set $V_j(0) = 0$, $q_0=+\infty$ and $r_0 := -\infty$. We define
$$ {Q}^{(n)}_L(i) := \sum_{j=0}^{2^n - 1} \Big(V_j(i) - V_j(i-1) \Big)\;,\quad i=1,\ldots,m\;.$$
For every $i$, the r.v.~${Q}^{(n)}_L(i)$ counts the number of intervals $(t^n_j L,t^n_{j+1} L]$ where the diffusion $Z^j_{q_i}$ explodes but the diffusion $Z^j_{q_{i-1}}$ does not. By Lemma \ref{Lemma:ApproxZZ}, $Q_L^{(n)}(i)$ is a good approximation of the total number of explosions of $Z_{q_i}$ minus the total number of explosions of $Z_{q_{i-1}}$ in the large $L$ and $n$ limit.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:CVQn}
The vector $\big({Q}^{(n)}_L(i)\big)_{i=1,\ldots,m}$ converges in distribution as $L\to\infty$ and $n\to\infty$ to a vector of independent Poisson r.v.~with parameters $p_i = \int_{r_{i-1}}^{r_{i}} e^{x} dx$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that, for any given $j\in \{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}$, the diffusions $(Z_{q_i}^j, i=1,\ldots,m)$ on the time interval $[t_j^n L, \infty)$ are ordered up to their first explosion times. This implies that for all $j\in\{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}$, the r.v.~$(V_j(i),i =1,\ldots, m)$ satisfy the following monotonicity property:
$$ V_j(1) \le V_j(2) \le \ldots \le V_j(m)\;.$$
Since in addition these r.v.~are $\{0,1\}$-valued, we get the very simple identities:
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}\big(V_j(1)=0,\ldots, V_j(i-1)=0, V_j(i)=1,\ldots,V_j(m) = 1\big) &= {\symb P}\big(V_j(i)=1\big)-{\symb P}\big(V_j(i-1)=1\big)\;,\\
{\symb P}\big(V_j(1)=0,\ldots,V_j(m) = 0\big) &= {\symb P}\big(V_j(m)=0\big)\;,\\
{\symb P}\big(V_j(1)=1,\ldots,V_j(m)=1\big) &= {\symb P}\big(V_j(1)=1\big)\;,
\end{align*}
so that the only knowledge of the one-dimensional marginals suffices to determine the law of the vector. By Theorem \ref{Th:Explo}
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:ExploU}
{\symb P}\big(V_j(i)=1\big) \rightarrow 1-\exp\big(-2^{-n} e^{r_i}\big)\quad\mbox{ as }L\to\infty\;.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, the $m$-dimensional vectors $(V_j(1), V_j(2), \ldots ,V_j(m))$, $j=0,\ldots,2^n-1$, are independent since they depend on the evolution of the Brownian motion $B$ on disjoint intervals. We then perform the computation of the law of $\big({Q}^{(n)}_L(i)\big)_{i=1,\ldots,m}$. For any given integers $\ell_1,\ldots,\ell_m$, set $\ell = \sum_i \ell_i$. Then
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}\big({Q}^{(n)}_L = (\ell_1,\ldots,\ell_m)\big) &= \sum_{\substack{S_1,\ldots,S_m \subset \{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}\\S_i \cap S_{i'} = \emptyset\\ \#S_i = \ell_i}} \prod_{i=1}^m \prod_{j\in S_i} \Big({\symb P}\big(V_j(i)=1\big)-{\symb P}\big(V_j(i-1)=1\big)\Big)\\
&\qquad\qquad\quad\qquad\times \prod_{j\notin S_1\cup\ldots\cup S_m} {\symb P}(V_j(m)=0)\;.
\end{align*}
Using \eqref{Eq:ExploU}, we deduce that the $L\to \infty$ limit of the last expression equals
\begin{align*}
{2^n \choose \ell_1, \ldots, \ell_m, 2^n-\ell} \prod_{i=1}^m \Big(\exp(-2^{-n} e^{r_{i-1}})-\exp(-2^{-n}e^{r_i})\Big)^{\ell_i}\Big(\exp(-2^{-n} e^{r_m})\Big)^{2^n -\ell}\;.
\end{align*}
Taking the limit as $n\to\infty$, a computation shows that this last quantity converges to
$$ \prod_{i=1}^m \frac{p_i^{\ell_i}}{\ell_i !} e^{-p_i}\;,$$
as required.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[First part of the proof of Theorem \ref{Th:Main}]
We define $\mathcal{Q}_L := \sum_{k\ge 1} \delta_{4\sqrt a_L(\lambda_k+a_L)}$ and we view this object as a r.v.~in the space of measures on $(-\infty,\infty)$ which are finite on all intervals bounded to the right (but possibly unbounded to the left). Note that for every $L$, since there is a smallest eigenvalue, the random measure $\mathcal{Q}_L$ indeed belongs to this space.\\
We endow this space with the topology that makes continuous the maps $m \mapsto \langle f, m\rangle$ for any continuous and bounded function $f$ with support bounded to the right: in other words, this is the weak topology towards $-\infty$ and the vague topology towards $+\infty$. The reason for this topology is simple: it permits to control the increasing sequence of atom locations of $\mathcal{Q}_L$.
\smallskip
If we prove that $\mathcal{Q}_L$ converges in law (for the sigma field associated with this topology) to a Poisson point process of intensity $e^x dx$, then standard arguments ensure that the increasing sequence of its atom locations converges in law for the product topology to the increasing sequence of atom locations of this Poisson point process.
\smallskip
Let us show that for any $\varepsilon > 0$ (recall that $\varepsilon$ controls the mesh of $\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$), the random vector
$$\mathcal{Q}_L((r_{i-1},r_i])\;,\quad i=1,\ldots,m\;,$$
converges in distribution as $L\to\infty$ to a vector of independent Poisson random variables of intensity $e^{r_i}-e^{r_{i-1}}$. On the event on which the assertions of Lemma \ref{Lemma:ApproxZZ} hold true, we have for every $i\in\{1,\ldots,m\}$:
$$ \mathcal{Q}_L((r_{i-1},r_i]) = {Q}^{(n)}_L(i)\;,$$
so that Lemma \ref{Lemma:CVQn} yields the desired result.
We deduce from this convergence the tightness of $(\mathcal{Q}_L)$: indeed the above convergence provides the required control on the mass given by $\mathcal{Q}_L$ to $(-\infty,r]$ for any given $r$. Furthermore, the marginals of any limiting point are uniquely identified thanks to this convergence: for instance by considering the marginals coming from dyadic points and by choosing $\varepsilon$ appropriately.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Typical diffusions}
In this subsection, we collect several estimates on the diffusions $Z_a$ for $a\in\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$, the proofs of which are postponed to Sections \ref{Sec:Techos} and \ref{Sec:Fine} in order not to interrupt the line of argument. The statements of these estimates are rather long, however, a look at the form of the time-inhomogeneous potential in which $Z_a$ evolves (see Figure \ref{Fig:Yk}) allows to see that these estimates are natural.\\
We rely on the following notations: $\tau^{(i)}_{-\infty}$ denotes the $i$-th explosion time of $Z_a$ and $\tau^{(i)}_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}$ denotes its first hitting time of $-2\sqrt{a_L}$ after the $(i-1)$-th explosion time. Moreover, we adopt the convention $\tau^{(0)}_{-\infty} = 0$ and the notation $ \fint_s^t f := (t-s)^{-1} \int_s^t f$. We also set $t_L := \frac{\ln a_L}{\sqrt{a_L}}$.\\
A typical realization of $Z_a$ for $a\in\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ behaves as follows:\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{Entrance.} For any $i\ge 0$, after its $i$-th explosion time, the diffusion comes down from $+\infty$ in an almost deterministic way and quickly reaches a small neighborhood of $\sqrt{a_L}$:
$$ \sup_{t\in (\tau^{(i)}_{-\infty},\tau^{(i)}_{-\infty}+(3/8)t_L]} |Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a_L}\coth(\sqrt{a_L} (t-\tau^{(i)}_{-\infty}))| \le 1 \;.$$
\item \emph{Explosion.} For any $i\ge 1$, after time $\tau^{(i)}_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}$, the diffusion behaves almost deterministically and reaches $-\infty$ within a very short time:
$$ \sup_{t\in (\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}^{(i)},\tau_{-\infty}^{(i)}]} |Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a_L}\coth(\sqrt{a_L}(t-\tau_{-\infty}^{(i)}))| \le 1 \;.$$
\item \emph{Oscillations.} For any $i\ge 0$, in between the explosion times $\tau^{(i)}_{-\infty}$ and $\tau^{(i+1)}_{-\infty}$, the diffusion spends most of its time near $\sqrt{a_L}$:
$$ \fint_{\tau^{(i)}_{-\infty}+(3/8)t_L}^t Z_a(s) ds \in [\sqrt{a_L} -10, \sqrt{a_L}+10]\;,\quad \forall t\in [\tau^{(i)}_{-\infty}+(3/8)t_L,\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}^{(i+1)}\wedge ({\varepsilon^{-2}}L)]\;.$$
\item \emph{Long-time behavior.} The diffusion does not explode after time ${\varepsilon^{-2}}L$.
\end{enumerate}
\medskip
Note that the choice ${\varepsilon^{-2}}$ is relatively arbitrary here: it is taken such that (4) holds true for all $a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ with a probability $1-\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon)$.
On the other hand, in estimate (3), the time parameter is taken smaller than $\varepsilon^{-2}L$ for a simple reason: the typical location of the diffusion is given by the bottom of the well of its time-inhomogeneous potential, and the latter remains around $\sqrt a_L$ as long as time is not too large (actually, much smaller than $L\ln L$).
\medskip
Similar estimates hold for the backward diffusion, however the situation is slightly different in that case for the obvious reason that time is run backward and the process explodes to $+\infty$. We then let $\hat{\tau}^{(1)}_{+\infty}$ be the largest time $t\ge 0$ at which $\hat{Z}_a$ hits $+\infty$, and recursively, $\hat{\tau}^{(i)}_{+\infty}$ the largest time $t\in [0,\hat{\tau}^{(i-1)}_{+\infty})$ at which $\hat{Z}_a$ hits $+\infty$. Furthermore, we let $\hat{\tau}^{(i)}_{2\sqrt{a_L}}$ be the largest time $t \in [0, \hat{\tau}^{(i-1)}_{+\infty})$ at which $\hat{Z}_a$ hits $2\sqrt{a_L}$. For convenience we set $\hat{\tau}^{(0)}_{+\infty} = +\infty$.\\
Take $C_0 > 0$ large enough (in view of Lemma \ref{Lemma:NoExploInfinity}). A typical realization of $\hat{Z}_a$ behaves as follows (recall that the quotation marks are used when we view the diffusion evolving backward in time):
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{Oscillations at infinity.} On the time-interval $[C_0 L {\ln L}, \infty)$, $\hat{Z}_a \le -(1/2) \sqrt{a_L}$. Then ``after'' $C_0L{\ln L}$ and ``until'' time $\varepsilon^{-2} L$, the diffusion remains most of the time below $-(1/2)\sqrt{a_L}$:
$$ \fint_{\varepsilon^{-2}L}^{t} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds \le -\frac12 \sqrt{a_L}\;,\quad t\in [2\varepsilon^{-2} L, C_0L\ln L]\;.$$
Furthermore, the diffusion does not explode ``until'' time $\varepsilon^{-2} L$.
\item \emph{Entrance.} For any $i\ge 1$, ``after'' its $i$-th explosion time, the diffusion exits from $-\infty$ almost deterministically:
$$\sup_{t\in (\hat\tau^{(i)}_{+\infty}-(3/8)t_L,\hat\tau^{(i)}_{+\infty}]} |\hat{Z}_a(t) - \sqrt{a_L}\coth(\sqrt{a_L} (t-\hat\tau^{(i)}_{+\infty}))| \le 1\;.$$
\item \emph{Explosion.} For any $i\ge 1$, ``after'' time $\hat{\tau}^{(i)}_{2\sqrt{a_L}}$, the diffusion behaves almost deterministically and reaches $+\infty$ within a very short time:
$$\sup_{t\in (\hat{\tau}^{(i)}_{+\infty},\hat{\tau}^{(i)}_{2\sqrt{a_L}}]} |\hat{Z}_a(t) - \sqrt{a_L}\coth(\sqrt{a_L}(t-\hat{\tau}^{(i)}_{+\infty}))| \le 1\;.$$
\item \emph{Oscillations.} The diffusion spends most of its time near $-\sqrt{a_L}$. More precisely for every $i\ge 1$
$$\fint_{t}^{\hat\tau^{(i)}_{+\infty}-(3/8)t_L} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds \in [- \sqrt{a_L}-10,-\sqrt{a_L}+10]\;,\quad \forall t\in [\hat{\tau}^{(i+1)}_{2\sqrt{a_L}},\hat\tau^{(i)}_{+\infty}-(3/8)t_L]\;,$$
and
$$\fint_{t}^{2\varepsilon^{-2}L} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds \in [- \sqrt{a_L}-10,-\sqrt{a_L}+10]\;,\quad \forall t\in [\hat{\tau}^{(1)}_{2\sqrt{a_L}},2\varepsilon^{-2}L]\;.$$
\end{enumerate}
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:TypicalZ}
There exists $c>0$ such that for all $L$ large enough, the following holds with a probability larger than $1-c \, \varepsilon$: For all $a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$, the diffusions $Z_a$ and $\hat{Z}_a$ satisfy the above estimates.
\end{proposition}
\noindent We refer to Subsection \ref{Subsec:ProofTypicalZ} for the proof of this result.
\medskip
We also need some precise information on the behavior of $Z_a$ when it crosses the barrier of potential of its time-inhomogeneous potential: namely, when it goes from the curve $\sqrt{a+\beta t /4}$ to the curve $-\sqrt{a+\beta t/4}$. Here again, the statement is long and technical, however the underlying observation is relatively simple: the theory of large deviations shows that the behavior of the diffusion $Z_a$, when it crosses the barrier of potential, is essentially deterministic and is given by a hyperbolic tangent.\\
To state precisely the estimates, we need to introduce some notations. For every $a\in\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and every $j\in \{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}$, we define $\theta_a^j$ as the first hitting time by $Z_a$ of $-\sqrt{a_L}$ after time $t^n_j L$. We also let $\iota_a^j$ and $\upsilon_a^j$ be the last hitting times of $\sqrt{a_L}$ and $0$ respectively before time $\theta_a^j$. We finally let $\zeta_a^j$ be the first hitting time of $-\infty$ by the diffusion $Z_a$ after time $\theta_a^j$. We call \emph{excursion to $-\sqrt{a_L}$} a portion of the trajectory that starts from $+\sqrt{a_L}$, hits $-\sqrt{a_L}$ and comes back to $+\sqrt{a_L}$ (possibly after an explosion). We refer to Figure \ref{Fig:ZaCross} for an illustration.\\
We take similar definitions for the backward diffusions. We let $\hat{\theta}_a^j$ be the first hitting time of $\sqrt{a_L}$ ``after'' time $t^n_{j+1}L$, that is,
$$ \hat{\theta}_a^j := \sup\{t\in (0,t^n_{j+1}L]: \hat{Z}_a(t) = \sqrt{a_L}\}\;.$$
We then let $\hat{\iota}_a^j$ and $\hat{\upsilon}_a^j$ be the last hitting times of $-\sqrt{a_L}$ and $0$ ``before'' time $\hat{\theta}_a^j$, and we let $\hat{\zeta}_a^j$ be the first hitting time of $+\infty$ ``after'' time $\hat{\theta}_a^j$.\\
To alleviate the notations, we will often omit writing the superscript $j$.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10cm,height=8cm]{ZaCross.png}
\caption{\small A very schematic plot of the diffusion $Z_a$ when it crosses its barrier of potential: the trajectory between $\iota_a$ and $\theta_a$ is very close to a hyperbolic tangent.}\label{Fig:ZaCross}
\end{figure}
The statement of the following proposition is long and technical: at first reading, one can go directly to Subsections \ref{Subsec:first} and \ref{Subsec:second} where these estimates are used whenever needed.
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:TypicalPairZ}
There exist two constants $C,c>0$ such that for all $L$ and $n$ large enough, with a probability larger than $1-c\varepsilon$ the following holds for all $a \le a' \in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and all $j\in \{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}$ such that $t^n_{j+1} < {\varepsilon^{-2}}$.\\
We have $Z_a(t^n_j L) \in [(1/2)\sqrt{a_L},(3/2)\sqrt{a_L}]$ and the diffusions are ordered $Z_a(t^n_j L) \le Z_{a'}(t^n_j L)$. The process $Z_a$ makes at most one excursion to $-\sqrt{a_L}$ on the time interval $[t^n_j L, t^n_{j+1} L]$ and if it does then:\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{Behavior of $Z_a$.} We have
\begin{align*}
\upsilon_a - \iota_a \ge (3/8)t_L - C\frac{\ln\ln a_L}{\sqrt{a_L}}\;,\\
|\theta_a - \upsilon_a - \frac38 t_L| \le C \frac{\ln\ln a_L}{\sqrt{a_L}}\;.
\end{align*}
Moreover, the diffusion $Z_a$ is close to a hyperbolic tangent near $\upsilon_a$
\begin{align*}
&\sup_{t\in [\iota_a,\theta_a]}|Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a_L} \tanh(-\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_a))| \le C \frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L} \;.\\
\end{align*}
In addition, if $Z_a$ explodes after $\theta_a$ before coming back to $\sqrt{a_L}$ then $|\zeta_a - \theta_a -(3/8)t_L| \le C (\ln\ln a_L)^2 / \sqrt a_L$.
\item \emph{Coupling with $Z_{a'}$.} We have
\begin{align*}
|Z_{a'}(t)-Z_a(t)| \le 1\;,\quad &t\in [\upsilon_a - (1/16)t_L,\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L]\;,\\
Z_{a'}(t) \le -\sqrt{a_L} + Ca_L^{3/7}\;,\quad &t\in [\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L,\theta_a - (1/16)t_L]\;,\\
Z_{a'}(t) \le \sqrt{a_L} - 1\;,\quad &t\in [\theta_a - (1/16)t_L,\theta_a]\;.
\end{align*}
\item \emph{Explosion of $Z_{a'}$.} If in addition $Z_{a'}$ explodes on $[t^n_j L, t^n_{j+1}L]$, then so does $Z_a$ and we have the estimates
\begin{align*}
|\upsilon_a-\upsilon_{a'}| &< \frac{C}{\sqrt{a_L} \ln a_L}\;,\\
|\theta_a-\theta_{a'}| &< C \frac{\ln\ln a_L}{\sqrt{a_L}}\;,\\
|\zeta_a-\zeta_{a'}| &< C \frac{(\ln\ln a_L)^2}{\sqrt{a_L}}\;,
\end{align*}
and $Z_{a'}$ remains below $-\sqrt{a_L}+1$ on $[\theta_{a'},\zeta_{a'}]$. Moreover the explosion times of $Z_a$ and $Z_{a'}$ remain at distance at least $2^{-2n}L$ from $t^n_j L$ and $t^n_{j+1} L$.
\item \emph{Coupling with the backward diffusions.} If there exists $a'' \in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ such that $a'' < a$ and $\hat{Z}_{a''}$ does not explode on $[\theta_a + 10 t_L,t^n_{j+1}L]$ then $\hat{Z}_{a'}(t) \le -\sqrt{a_L} + (\ln a_L)/a_L^{1/4}$ for all $t\in [\theta_a,\theta_a+ 5t_L]$, and furthermore for all $t\in [{\theta}_a,t^n_{j+1} L]$ we have
\begin{align*}
&-(3/2) \sqrt{a_L} \le \fint_{\theta_a}^t \hat{Z}_{a'}(s) ds \le -(1/2) \sqrt{a_L}\;.
\end{align*}
\end{enumerate}
The analogous statements hold for the backward diffusions $\hat{Z}_a$ and $\hat{Z}_{a'}$.
\end{proposition}
\noindent The proof of this proposition can be found in Subsection \ref{Subsec:ProofTypicalPairZ}.
\subsection{The key event}\label{Subsec:Key}
Fix $k\ge 1$ and $\varepsilon > 0$: we aim at controlling the $k$ first eigenvalues / eigenfunctions on an event of probability at least $1-\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon)$. Recall that our setup relies on the following two parameters: $\varepsilon$, which is the mesh of the approximation grid for the eigenvalues and $n$ which controls the mesh of the approximation grid of $[0,\infty)$.\\
We define $\mathcal{E}$ as the event on which the following holds:
\medskip
(a) \textbf{Squeezing of the $k$ first eigenvalues.} There exists a random subset
$$\mathcal{A}= \{\alpha'_{k+1} < \alpha_k < \alpha'_k < \alpha_{k-1} < \ldots < \alpha'_2 < \alpha_1 < \alpha'_1 < \alpha_0\}\;,$$
\hspace{22pt} of $\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ such that:
$$ -\lambda_{k+1} < \alpha'_{k+1} < \alpha_k < - \lambda_k < \alpha'_k < \alpha_{k-1} < \ldots <\alpha'_2 < \alpha_1 < -\lambda_1 < \alpha'_1 < \alpha_0\;.$$
(b) \textbf{Typical diffusions I.} The estimates of Proposition \ref{Prop:TypicalZ} are satisfied.
\medskip
(c) \textbf{Typical diffusions II.} The estimates of Proposition \ref{Prop:TypicalPairZ} are satisfied.
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:E}
Fix $\varepsilon > 0$. There exists $C>0$ such that $\varliminf_{n\to\infty} \varliminf_{L\to\infty} {\symb P}(\mathcal{E}) \ge 1-C\varepsilon$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The probability of (b) and (c) is already estimated in Propositions \ref{Prop:TypicalZ} and \ref{Prop:TypicalPairZ}. Regarding (a), we already know that $(4\sqrt{a_L}(\lambda_i+a_L))_{i=1,\ldots,k+1}$ converges in law to the $k+1$ first atoms of a Poisson point process of intensity $e^x dx$ on ${\symb R}$. Consequently, there exists a constant $c>0$ such that the probability that the spacing between any two consecutive elements of this $(k+1)$-uplet is larger than $3\varepsilon$ is at least $1-c \varepsilon$ uniformly over all $L$ large enough. On the event where this property holds true, we can squeeze two consecutive elements of $\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ in between two consecutive eigenvalues and (a) follows.
\end{proof}
In the next two subsections, we will work on the event $\mathcal{E}$ and will establish the convergences stated in Theorems \ref{Th:Main} and \ref{Th:Shape}.
\subsection{Control of the first eigenfunction}\label{Subsec:first}
We aim at controlling the process $\chi_1$, obtained from the first eigenfunction $\varphi_1$ after applying the Riccati transform:
$$ \chi_1(t) = \frac{\varphi_1'(t)}{\varphi_1(t)}\;,\quad t\ge 0\;.$$
We will do that by using typical diffusions $Z_a$ whose parameters $a$ belong to the random subset $\mathcal{A}$.
Thanks to (a) of $\mathcal{E}$, we have $- \lambda_2 < \alpha'_2 < \alpha_1 < -\lambda_1 < \alpha'_1$. Set $a=\alpha_1$. By monotonicity, $Z_{\alpha'_2} \le Z_{a} \le \chi_1$ until the first explosion time of $Z_{\alpha'_2}$, and $\chi_1 \le \hat{Z}_{a}$ ``until'' the first explosion time of $\hat{Z}_{a}$. Since $- \lambda_2 < a < -\lambda_1$ and in view of Corollary \ref{Cor:bc}, the diffusion $Z_{a}$ explodes exactly once and by (c)-(3) its explosion time falls in some interval $[t_j^n L + 2^{-2n}L,t_{j+1}^n L - 2^{-2n}L]$ with $t^n_{j+1} < \varepsilon^{-2}$.
\medskip
Let $\zeta_a,\hat{\zeta}_a$ be the explosion times of $Z_a,\hat{Z}_a$. Let us first prove the following ordering of the stopping times:
\begin{align}
t_j^n L + 2^{-2n}L < \hat \zeta_a < \hat \theta_a < \theta_a < \zeta_a < t_{j+1}^n L - 2^{-2n}L\,.\label{ineqstoppingtimesfirst}
\end{align}
We already know that $t_j^n L + 2^{-2n}L < \zeta_a < t_{j+1}^n L - 2^{-2n}L$. By Lemma \ref{Lemma:Symmetry}, the explosion time of $\hat{Z}_{a}$ lies before the explosion time of $Z_{a}$, and by monotonicity, in between those two explosion times we have $Z_a \le \chi_1 \le \hat{Z}_a$. By (c), we know that $Z_a(t^n_j L) \in [(1/2)\sqrt{a_L},(3/2)\sqrt{a_L}]$ and $\hat{Z}_a(t^n_j L) \in [-(3/2) \sqrt{a_L},-(1/2) \sqrt{a_L}]$ so that necessarily $\hat{Z}_a(t^n_j L) < Z_a(t^n_j L)$. Therefore the explosion time of $\hat{Z}_a$ must lie in $(t^n_j L+ 2^{-2n}L, \zeta_a]$.
In order to see that the diffusion $\hat Z_a$ does not reach $\sqrt{a_L}$ too early, we use the diffusion $\hat{Z}_{\alpha'_2}$. The latter cannot explode on $[\theta_a + 10 t_L,t^n_{j+1} L]$. Indeed, if it exploded there then by (c)-(3) the explosion time of the diffusion $\hat{Z}_a$ would lie in $[\theta_a + 9 t_L,t^n_{j+1} L]$ and since $\zeta_a < \theta_a + 9 t_L$ by (c)-(1), this would contradict the inequality $\hat{\zeta}_a \le \zeta_a$.
By (c)-(4) applied with $a'' = \alpha'_2$ and $a'=a$, we have $\hat{\theta}_a \notin [\theta_a,\theta_a + 5t_L]$. By (c)-(1), we know that $|\theta_a-\zeta_a|$ and $|\hat{\theta}_a-\hat{\zeta}_a|$ are less than $t_L$: in order not to contradict the inequality $\hat{\zeta}_a \le \zeta_a$ we see that $\hat{\theta}_a$ cannot lie to the right of $\theta_a + 5t_L$, and therefore satisfies $\hat{\theta}_a < \theta_a$. It finishes the proof of the inequalities \eqref{ineqstoppingtimesfirst}.\\
Let us show that for all $t\in [0,\hat\theta_a]$
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:fintZa} \fint_t^{\hat{\theta}_a} Z_{a}(s) ds \ge \frac14 \sqrt{a_L}\;.\end{equation}
By (b)-Entrance and (b)-Oscillations applied to $Z_a$, and by (c)-(4) applied to $\hat{Z}_a$ and $\hat{Z}_{a''}$ (using that $Z_{a''}$ does not explode on $[t_j^n, \hat \theta_a-10 t_L]$), we have
\begin{align*}
\sqrt{a_L}-1 \le Z_a(t)\;,\quad &\forall t\in [0,(3/8)t_L]\;,\\
\fint_{(3/8)t_L}^t Z_a(s) ds \in [\sqrt{a_L} -10, \sqrt{a_L}+10]\;,\quad &\forall t\in [(3/8)t_L,\hat{\theta}_a]\;,\\
(1/2) \sqrt{a_L} \le \fint_t^{\hat{\theta}_a} {Z}_{a}(s) ds \le (3/2) \sqrt{a_L}\;,\quad &\forall t\in [t^n_j L, \hat{\theta}_a]\;.
\end{align*}
If $t\in [t^n_jL,\hat{\theta}_a]$, then \eqref{Eq:fintZa} immediately follows. On the other hand, if $t\in [(3/8)t_L,t^n_j L]$ then
\begin{align*}
\int_t^{\hat{\theta}_a} Z_{a}(s) ds &= -\int_{(3/8)t_L}^t Z_a(s) + \int_{(3/8)t_L}^{t^n_j L} Z_a(s) + \int_{t^n_j L}^{\hat{\theta}_a} {Z}_{a}(s) ds\\
&\ge -(\sqrt{a_L}+10)(t-\frac38 t_L) + (\sqrt{a_L}-10)(t^n_j L - \frac38 t_L) + \frac12 \sqrt{a_L}(\hat{\theta}_a - t^n_j L) \\
&\ge -20(t-\frac38 t_L) + (\sqrt{a_L} - 10)(t^n_jL - t) + \frac12 \sqrt{a_L}(\hat{\theta}_a - t^n_j L)\\
&\ge -20(t-\frac38 t_L) + \frac12 \sqrt{a_L}(\hat{\theta}_a-t)\;.
\end{align*}
Note that by \eqref{ineqstoppingtimesfirst}, we have $\hat{\theta}_a-t \ge \hat{\theta}_a-t^n_jL \ge 2^{-2n} L$. Note also that $t-\frac38 t_L \le t^n_j L \le \varepsilon^{-2} L$. Therefore the last quantity is larger than $\frac14 \sqrt{a_L}(\hat{\theta}_a-t)$ as required. This proves \eqref{Eq:fintZa} in that case. Finally, if $t\in [0,(3/8)t_L]$ then the bound we just proved together with the inequality $\sqrt{a_L}-1 \le Z_a(t)$ that holds for all $t\in [0,(3/8)t_L]$ allows to conclude. We have therefore proven \eqref{Eq:fintZa}.
Note that $\varphi_1(t) = \varphi_1(\hat{\theta}_a) \exp(-\int_{t}^{\hat{\theta}_a} \chi_1(s) ds)$ for all $t\in [0,\hat\theta_a]$. Since $\chi_1$ remains above $Z_{a}$ on $[0,\hat\theta_a]$, we obtain:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EigenStart}
\frac{\varphi_1(t)}{\varphi_1(\hat\theta_a)} \le e^{-\frac14 \sqrt{a_L}(\hat\theta_a-t)}\;,\quad t\in [0,\hat\theta_a]\;.
\end{equation}
Similarly, combining (b)-Oscillations at infinity, (b)-Oscillations and (c)-(4), we deduce that for all $t\in [\theta_a,\infty)$ we have
$$ \fint_{{\theta}_a}^t \hat{Z}_{a}(s) ds \le -\frac14 \sqrt{a_L}\;.$$
Since $\chi_1$ remains below $\hat{Z}_a$ on $[\theta_a,\infty)$, we get
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EigenEnd}
\frac{\varphi_1(t)}{\varphi_1(\theta_a)} \le e^{-\frac14 \sqrt{a_L}(t-\theta_a)}\;,\quad t\in [\theta_a,\infty)\;.
\end{equation}
It remains to control $\varphi_1$ on $[\hat\theta_a,\theta_a]$. Set $a=\alpha_1$ and $a'=\alpha_1'$. On this interval, we have $Z_a \le \chi_1 \le Z_{a'}$. Using (c)-(1) and (c)-(2), we deduce that for all $t\in [\upsilon_a - (1/16)t_L,\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L]$
$$ -C \frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L} \le \chi_1(t) - \sqrt{a_L}\tanh(-\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_a)) \le 2C \frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L}\;.$$
We deduce that for all $t\in[\upsilon_a - (1/16)t_L,\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L]$
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EigenBulk}
\frac1{\cosh(\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_a))}(1-2C|t-\upsilon_a|\frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L}) \le \frac{\varphi_1(t)}{\varphi_1(\upsilon_a)} \le \frac1{\cosh(\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_a))}(1+2C|t-\upsilon_a|\frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L})\;.
\end{equation}
By (c)-(2), we also deduce that $\chi_1$ remains below $-(1/2) \sqrt{a_L}$ on the time interval $[\upsilon_a +(1/16)t_L,\theta_a -(1/16)t_L]$ which is of length $(1/4 + o(1))t_L \ge (1/5)t_L$ thanks to (c)-(1). Consequently, $|\varphi_1|$ is decreasing there and satisfies
$$ |\varphi_1(\theta_a-(1/16)t_L)| \le |\varphi_1(\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L)| e^{-\sqrt{a_L} t_L / 10}\;.$$
Again by (c)-(2), we know that $\chi_1$ remains below $\sqrt a_L$ on $[\theta_a-(1/16)t_L,\theta_a]$ and therefore
$$ \sup_{t\in[\theta_a-(1/16)t_L,\theta_a]} |\varphi_1(t)| \le |\varphi_1(\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L)|\;.$$
Putting everything together, we deduce that all the points where $|\varphi_1|$ reaches its maximum over $[\upsilon_a - (1/16)t_L,\theta_a]$ lie at distance at most $4C /(\sqrt a_L \ln a_L)$ from $\upsilon_a$.\\
Using the very same arguments but on the backward diffusions, we deduce that the same result holds over $[\hat\theta_a,\hat\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L]$ and with $\upsilon_a$ replaced by $\hat{\upsilon}_a$.\\
If we show that $[\hat{\upsilon}_a - \frac1{\sqrt{a_L}},\hat{\upsilon}_a + \frac1{\sqrt{a_L}}] \subset [\upsilon_a - (1/16)t_L,\theta_a]$ and $[{\upsilon}_a - \frac1{\sqrt{a_L}},{\upsilon}_a + \frac1{\sqrt{a_L}}] \subset [\hat\theta_a,\hat\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L]$, then we will deduce that $\upsilon_a$ and $\hat{\upsilon}_a$ lie at distance at most $4C /(\sqrt a_L \ln a_L)$ from each other. By symmetry, we only give the details on the first inclusion.\\
Since $\hat{Z}_a$ remains above $Z_a$ over $[\hat{\zeta}_a, \theta_a]$, and that $Z_a$ is bounded from below by $\sqrt{a_L} \tanh(-\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_a)) - C \sqrt{a_L} / \ln a_L$ on $[\iota_a,\upsilon_a]$ we deduce that $\hat{\theta}_a > \iota_a$ and $\hat\upsilon_a > \upsilon_a - 2C/(\sqrt{a_L} \ln a_L)$. As a consequence $\hat{\upsilon}_a - \frac1{\sqrt{a_L}} > \upsilon_a - (1/16)t_L$. On the other hand, applying again (c)-(4) with $a'' = \alpha'_2$ and $a'=a$, we deduce that $\hat{Z}_{a}(t) \le -\sqrt{a_L} + (\ln a_L)/a_L^{1/4}$ for all $t\in [\theta_a,\theta_a + 5t_L]$. Recall that $\hat{\theta}_a < \theta_a$. By (c)-(1) and (c)-(2), we see that $\hat{Z}_{a}(t) \ge -\sqrt{a_L} +1$ on $[\hat{\theta}_a,\hat{\upsilon}_a + \frac1{\sqrt{a_L}}]$. Consequently, we must have the inequality $\hat{\upsilon}_a + \frac1{\sqrt{a_L}} \le \theta_a$. The first inclusion follows.\\
We have therefore proven that $\upsilon_a$ and $\hat{\upsilon}_a$ lie at distance at most $4C /(\sqrt a_L \ln a_L)$ from each other\\
Consequently
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EigenBulk2}
\sup_{t\in[\hat{\theta}_a, \upsilon_a - (1/16)t_L] \cup [\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L,\theta_a]} |\varphi_1(t)| \le |\varphi_1(\upsilon_a - (1/16)t_L)| \vee |\varphi_1(\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L)|\;.
\end{equation}
Putting together \eqref{Eq:EigenBulk}, \eqref{Eq:EigenBulk2}, \eqref{Eq:EigenStart} and \eqref{Eq:EigenEnd}, we deduce that all the points where $|\varphi_1|$ reaches its global maximum, in particular $U_1$, lie at distance at most $4C / (\sqrt{a_L} \ln a_L)$ from $\upsilon_a$. Integrating \eqref{Eq:EigenBulk} and \eqref{Eq:EigenBulk2} we get the estimate:
$$ m_1([\hat\theta_a/L,\theta_a/L]) = \varphi_1^2(U_1) \frac2{\sqrt{a_L}} (1+o(1))\;.$$
On the other hand, \eqref{Eq:EigenStart} and \eqref{Eq:EigenEnd} yield
$$ m_1([0,\hat\theta_a/L]) \le \varphi_1(\hat\theta_a)^2 \mathcal{O}(1/\sqrt{a_L})\;,\quad m_1([\theta_a/L,\infty)) \le \varphi_1(\theta_a)^2 \mathcal{O}(1/\sqrt{a_L})\;.$$
By \eqref{Eq:EigenBulk} and \eqref{Eq:EigenBulk2}, we deduce that $|\varphi_1(\hat\theta_a)|$ and $|\varphi_1(\theta_a)|$ are negligible compared to $|\varphi_1(U_1)|$. Since $m_1$ is a probability measure, this ensures that
$\varphi_1^2(U_1) \sim \sqrt{a_L}/2$, that $m_1$ is asymptotically as close as desired to $\delta_{U_1/L}$ and that $|\varphi_1|$, appropriately rescaled around $U_1$, converges to the inverse of a hyperbolic cosine.
Regarding the behavior of the Brownian motion around $U_1$, using the identity
$$ \chi_1(t) = \chi_1(U_1) + \int_{U_1}^t (-\lambda_1+\frac{\beta}{4}s - \chi_1(s)^2)ds + B(t) - B(U_1)\;,$$
and the fact that $\chi_1$ is close to a hyperbolic cosine, a simple computation yields the asserted convergence. This completes the proof of Theorems \ref{Th:Main} and \ref{Th:Shape} regarding the first eigenfunction, except for the limiting law of the localization center which will be proven in Subsection \ref{Subsec:Expo}.
\subsection{Control of the $i$-th eigenfunction}\label{Subsec:second}
We treat in detail the case $i=2$, since the general case follows from exactly the same arguments combined with a simple recursion. The diffusion $Z_{\alpha_2}$ explodes twice while the diffusion $Z_{\alpha'_2}$ explodes only once. There exist $j_1 < j_2$ such that the two explosion times of $Z_{\alpha_2}$ fall within $[t_{j_1}^n L,t_{j_1+1}^n L]$ and $[t_{j_2}^n L,t_{j_2+1}^n L]$, and $t_{j_1+1}^n, t^n_{j_2+1} < \varepsilon^{-2}$. By (c)-(3), the explosion time of $Z_{\alpha'_2}$ falls within one of these two intervals. Without loss of generality, let us assume that it falls in the first interval.
\medskip
On $[t_{j_1}^n L,t_{j_1+1}^n L]$, we use the ordering $Z_{\alpha_2} \le \chi_2 \le Z_{\alpha'_2}$ that holds up to the first explosion time of $Z_{\alpha_2}$, together with the estimates (c)-(1) and (c)-(3) to deduce that
$$ \chi_2(t) \ge \sqrt{a_L} \tanh(-\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_1)) - C\frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L}\;,\quad \forall t\in [\iota_1,\theta_1]\;,$$
and
$$ \chi_2(t) \le \sqrt{a_L} \tanh(-\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_1)) + 2C\frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L}\;,\quad \forall t\in [\iota'_1,\theta'_1]\;.$$
Here $\iota_1, \theta_1$ and $\iota_1',\theta_1'$ are shorthands for $\iota_{\alpha_2}^{j_1},\theta_{\alpha_2}^{j_1}$ and $\iota_{\alpha_2'}^{j_1},\theta_{\alpha_2'}^{j_1}$. By monotonicity, we necessarily have $\theta_1 < \theta'_1$. Consequently, we get
$$ \sup_{t\in [\iota_1 \vee \iota'_1,\theta_1]} |\chi_2(t) - \sqrt{a_L} \tanh(-\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_1))| \le 2C\frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L}\;,$$
so that for all $t\in [\iota_1 \vee \iota'_1,\theta_1]$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EigenBulk221}
\frac1{\cosh(\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_1))}(1-2C|t-\upsilon_1|\frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L}) \le \frac{\varphi_2(t)}{\varphi_2(\upsilon_1)} \le \frac1{\cosh(\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_1))}(1+2C|t-\upsilon_1|\frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L})\;.
\end{equation}
By (b)-Entrance, we deduce that
$$ \sup_{t\in (0,(3/8)t_L]} |\chi_2(t) - \sqrt{a_L}\coth(\sqrt{a_L}t)| \le 1\;,$$
By (b)-Oscillations, we obtain for all $t\in [(3/8)t_L,\theta_1]$
$$ \fint_{(3/8)t_L}^{t} \chi_2(s) ds \in [\sqrt{a_L}-10, \sqrt{a_L}+10]\;,$$
Therefore all the points where $|\varphi_2|$ reaches its maximum over $ [0,\theta_1]$ lie at a distance negligible compared to $L$ from $\theta_1$.\\
To control the eigenfunction after time $\theta_1$, the situation is slightly different from the case of the first eigenfunction. We use the fact that $Z_{\alpha_2}$ and $Z_{\alpha'_2}$ remain close to each other and explode within a time of order $(3/8)t_L$ by (c)-(3) and (b)-Explosion, to deduce that
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EigenEnd2}
-2\sqrt{a_L} \le \chi_2(t) \le -\frac12 \sqrt{a_L}\;,\quad t\in [\theta_1,\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(\chi_2)]\;,
\end{equation}
and
$$ \sup_{t\in (\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(\chi_2),z_1]} |\chi_2(t) - \sqrt{a_L}\coth(\sqrt{a_L} (t-z_1))| \le 1\;.$$
where $z_1$ is the first explosion time of $\chi_2$. Regarding this second estimate, note that $z_1$ falls in between the two explosion times of $Z_{\alpha_2}$ and $Z_{\alpha'_2}$, and that these two times are at a distance negligible compared to $t_L$ from each other by (c)-(3): consequently the control on the Brownian motion required to establish the second estimate is granted on the event $\mathcal{E}$.\\ We deduce from these bounds that
\begin{align*}
\frac{\varphi_2(t)}{\varphi_2(\theta_1)} &\le e^{-\frac12 \sqrt{a_L}(t-\theta_1)}\;,\quad t\in [\theta_1,z_1]\;,\\
\frac{\varphi_2(t)}{\varphi_2(\theta_1)} &\ge e^{-2 \sqrt{a_L}(t-\theta_1)}\;,\quad t\in [\theta_1,\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(\chi_2)]\;,
\end{align*}
and
$$ \varphi_2(t) = \varphi_2'(z_1) \frac{\sinh(\sqrt{a_L}(t-z_1))}{\sqrt{a_L}}(1+o(1))\;,\quad t\in[\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(\chi_2),z_1]\;.$$
All these arguments suffice to obtain the following (rough) bound:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:m2z1}
m_2([0,z_1]) \le \big(\varphi_2'(z_1)\big)^2 e^{o(L) \sqrt{a_L}}\;,
\end{equation}
for all $L$ large enough.
\medskip
After time $z_1$, the process $\chi_2$ comes down from $+\infty$ in an almost deterministic way:
$$ \sup_{t\in (z_1,z_1+(3/8)t_L]} |\chi_2(t) - \sqrt{a_L}\coth(\sqrt{a_L} (t-z_1))| \le 1\;.$$
Indeed, the proof of this estimate for the diffusions $Z_a$ relies on a control of the Brownian motion on an interval of length $t_L$ right after the explosion time: on the event $\mathcal{E}$ we do have such a control since $z_1$ is very close to the explosion times of $Z_{\alpha_2}$ and $Z_{\alpha'_2}$. From this estimate, we deduce that
$$ \varphi_2(t) = \varphi_2'(z_1) \frac{\sinh(\sqrt{a_L}(t-z_1))}{\sqrt{a_L}}(1+o(1))\;,\quad t\in[z_1,z_1+(3/8)t_L]\;.$$
Let $\theta_2,\upsilon_2$ be shorthands for $\theta_{a_2}^{j_2},\upsilon_{a_2}^{j_2}$. On the time interval $[z_1,\infty)$, it suffices to apply the same arguments as for the first eigenfunction in order to show that
\begin{align}\label{Eq:EigenStart2}
\frac{\varphi_2(t)}{\varphi_2(\hat\theta_2)} &\le e^{-\frac14 \sqrt{a_L}(t-\hat\theta_2)}\;,\quad t\in [z_1,\hat\theta_2]\;,\\
\frac{\varphi_2(t)}{\varphi_2(\theta_2)} &\le e^{-\frac14 \sqrt{a_L}(t-\theta_2)}\;,\quad t\in [\theta_2,\infty)\;.
\end{align}
as well as, for all $t\in[\upsilon_2 - (1/16)t_L,\upsilon_2 + (1/16)t_L]$
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EigenBulk22}
\frac1{\cosh(\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_2))}(1-2C|t-\upsilon_2|\frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L}) \le \frac{\varphi_2(t)}{\varphi_2(\upsilon_2)} \le \frac1{\cosh(\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_2))}(1+2C|t-\upsilon_2|\frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L})\;,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EigenBulk222}
\sup_{t\in[\hat{\theta}_2, \upsilon_2 - (1/16)t_L] \cup [\upsilon_2 + (1/16)t_L,\theta_2]} |\varphi_2(t)| \le |\varphi_2(\upsilon_2 - (1/16)t_L)| \vee |\varphi_2(\upsilon_2 + (1/16)t_L)|\;.
\end{equation}
These estimates ensure that all the points where $|\varphi_2|$ reach its maximum over $[z_1,\infty)$ lie at a distance smaller than $4C/(\ln a_L \sqrt{a_L})$ from $\upsilon_2$.
By (c)-(3) (applied to $\hat{Z}_{\alpha_2}$), we know that $\hat{\theta}_2$ lies at distance at least $2^{-2n} L$ from $z_1$ so that the previous estimates ensure that
\begin{align*}
|\varphi_2(\upsilon_2)| &\ge |\varphi_2(\hat{\theta}_2)| \ge |\varphi_2(z_1+\frac38 t_L)| \exp(\frac14 \sqrt{a_L}(\hat{\theta}_2-z_1-\frac38 t_L))\;,\\
|\varphi_2(z_1+\frac38 t_L)| &= |\varphi_2'(z_1)| a_L^{-1/8} (1+o(1))\;.
\end{align*}
We thus deduce that
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:Derivups}
|\varphi_2(\upsilon_2)| \ge |\varphi_2'(z_1)| \exp({\frac18 \sqrt{a_L} 2^{-2n} L})\;.
\end{equation}
As a consequence all the points where the global maximum of $\varphi_2$ is attained, in particular $U_2$, lie at a distance smaller than $4C/(\ln a_L \sqrt{a_L})$ from $\upsilon_2$. Consequently,
$$ m_2([\hat{\theta}_2/L,\theta_2/L]) = \varphi_2^2(U_2) \frac2{\sqrt{a_L}} (1+o(1))\;,$$
and
$$ m_2([z_1/L,\infty)\backslash[\hat{\theta}_2/L,\theta_2/L]) \ll \varphi_2^2(U_2/L) \frac2{\sqrt{a_L}}\;.$$
Furthermore \eqref{Eq:EigenBulk22} gives the convergence towards the inverse of a hyperbolic cosine, and a simple computation gives the convergence of the rescaled Brownian motion near $U_2$ (denoted $b_{2,\beta}$ in Theorem \ref{Th:Shape}). Putting together \eqref{Eq:m2z1} and \eqref{Eq:Derivups}, we deduce that $m_2$ gives a negligible mass to $[0,z_1/L]$, and is (asymptotically in $L$) as close as desired to a Dirac mass at $U_2/L$.
\subsection{Convergence towards exponential r.v.}\label{Subsec:Expo}
Recall that $(\Lambda_i,I_i)_{i\ge 1}$ are the atoms of a Poisson point process on ${\symb R}\times{\symb R}_+$ of intensity $e^x e^{-t} dx\otimes dt$. We already know that $(4\sqrt{a_L}(\lambda_i+a_L))_{i\ge 1}$ converges in law to $(\Lambda_i)_{i\ge 1}$. The goal of this subsection is to prove that $(4\sqrt{a_L}(\lambda_i+a_L),U_i/L)_{i\ge 1}$ converges in law to $(\Lambda_i,I_i)_{i\ge 1}$.\\
Let $\nu$ be the law of $(\Lambda_i,I_i)_{1\le i \le k}$. Let $(\mathcal{I}_i)_{i=1,\ldots,k}$ be a collection of $k$ disjoint closed intervals of ${\symb R}$ such that\footnote{Here we mean that any point in $\mathcal{I}_1$ is smaller than any point in $\mathcal{I}_2$ and so on.} $\mathcal{I}_1 < \mathcal{I}_2 <\ldots < \mathcal{I}_k$ and $\mathcal{I}_k$ is unbounded to the right. Let also $(\mathcal{U}_i)_{i=1,\ldots,k-1}$ be a collection of disjoint closed intervals in ${\symb R}_+$ and set $\mathcal{U}_k = {\symb R}_+$. If we show that as $L\to\infty$
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:CVExpo}
{\symb P}\Big((4\sqrt{a_L}(\lambda_i+a_L),U_i/L)_{i=1,\ldots,k} \in \prod_{i=1}^k \mathcal{I}_i\times\mathcal{U}_i\Big)\to \nu\Big(\prod_{i=1}^k \mathcal{I}_i\times\mathcal{U}_i\Big)\;,
\end{equation}
then (recall that $k$ is arbitrary) standard arguments yield the convergence of $(4\sqrt{a_L}(\lambda_i+a_L),U_i/L)_{i\ge 1}$ to $(\Lambda_i,I_i)_{i\ge 1}$ as stated in Theorem \ref{Th:Main}.
\medskip
Consider a ``microscopic'' product set of the form
$$ \mathcal{C} = \Big(\prod_{i=1}^{k-1} ((b_i-1) \varepsilon, b_i \varepsilon] \times (t^n_{j_i},t^n_{j_i+1}] \Big) \times \big((b_k\varepsilon,\infty) \times {\symb R}_+\big)\;,$$
for some distinct $j_i \in \{0,\ldots, 2^{n}-1\}$ and some $b_i \in {\symb Z} \cap [-(1/\varepsilon^2),1/\varepsilon^2]$ satisfying $b_1 < b_2 < \ldots < b_k$. Recall that $q_1 > \ldots > q_m$ denote the elements of $\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ in decreasing order. There exist $\ell_1 < \ell_2 < \ldots < \ell_k$ such that $q_{\ell_i} = a_L - b_i \varepsilon/(4\sqrt{a_L})$.
\smallskip
Let $\mathcal{G}$ be the event implicitly defined in Lemma \ref{Lemma:ApproxZZ} and recall the event $\mathcal{E}$ from Subsection \ref{Subsec:Key}. Recall also the r.v.~$V_j(i)$ defined in Subsection \ref{Subsec:PPP}. On the event $\mathcal{G}\cap \mathcal{E}$, we claim that
$$ \big\{ (4\sqrt{a_L}(\lambda_i+a_L),U_i/L)_{i=1,\ldots,k} \in \mathcal{C} \big\}\;,$$
coincides with
$$ \big\{ V_{j_i}(\ell_i)-V_{j_i}(\ell_i-1)=1,\;\;\;\forall i\in\{1,\ldots,k-1\} \,;\quad V_j(\ell_k) = 0,\;\;\; \forall j\notin \{j_1,\ldots,j_{k-1}\}\big\}\;.$$
Indeed, on the event $\mathcal{G}$, the latter event coincides with the event where:\begin{itemize}
\item $Z_{q_1}, \ldots, Z_{q_{\ell_1-1}}$ do not explode on $[0,\infty)$,
\item $Z_{q_{\ell_1}}, \ldots, Z_{q_{\ell_2-1}}$ explode once on $[0,\infty)$ and their explosion times lie in $(t^n_{j_1}L,t^n_{j_1+1} L]$,
\item $\ldots$
\item $Z_{q_{\ell_{k-2}}}, \ldots, Z_{q_{\ell_{k-1}-1}}$ explode $k-2$ times on $[0,\infty)$ and their explosion times lie in $(t^n_{j_1}L,t^n_{j_1+1} L]$,$\ldots$, $(t^n_{j_{k-2}}L,t^n_{j_{k-2}+1}L]$,
\item $Z_{q_{\ell_{k-1}}}, \ldots, Z_{q_{\ell_k}}$ explode $k-1$ times on $[0,\infty)$ and their explosion times lie in $(t^n_{j_1}L,t^n_{j_1+1}L]$, $\ldots$, $(t^n_{j_{k-1}}L,t^n_{j_{k-1}+1}L]$.
\end{itemize}
In turn, on $\mathcal{E}$, this event coincides with the first event of the claim, thus concluding the proof of the claim.
\smallskip
A direct computation shows that
$$ \nu(\mathcal{C}) = e^{-e^{b_k\varepsilon}} \prod_{i=1}^{k-1} 2^{-n}(e^{b_i\varepsilon} - e^{(b_i-1)\varepsilon}) \;.$$
From the arguments in the proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:CVQn}, we deduce that
\begin{align*}
&\lim_{L\to\infty} {\symb P}\big( V_{j_i}(\ell_i)-V_{j_i}(\ell_i-1)=1,\;\;\;\forall i\in\{1,\ldots,k-1\} \,;\quad V_j(\ell_k) = 0,\;\;\; \forall j\notin \{j_1,\ldots,j_{k-1}\}\big)\\
&= e^{-(1-(k-1)2^{-n})e^{b_k\varepsilon}} \prod_{i=1}^{k-1} (e^{-2^{-n} e^{(b_i-1)\varepsilon}} - e^{-2^{-n} e^{b_i\varepsilon}})\\
&=\nu(\mathcal{C}) e^{(k-1)2^{-n} e^{b_k\varepsilon}} \prod_{i=1}^{k-1} \delta_i\;,
\end{align*}
where
$$ \delta_i = \frac{e^{-2^{-n} e^{(b_i-1)\varepsilon}} - e^{-2^{-n} e^{b_i\varepsilon}}}{2^{-n}(e^{b_i\varepsilon} - e^{(b_i-1)\varepsilon})}\;.$$
As $n\to\infty$ we have
$$ e^{(k-1)2^{-n} e^{b_k\varepsilon}} \prod_{i=1}^{k-1} \delta_i \to 1\;,$$
uniformly over all $b_1\varepsilon,\ldots,b_k\varepsilon$ in a compact set.
\medskip
Then, one can approximate from above and below (for the inclusion of sets) any set $\prod_{i=1}^k \mathcal{I}_i\times\mathcal{U}_i$ as above by the union of $\mathcal{O}(2^{nk}\varepsilon^{-k})$ microscopic sets and use the previous convergence, together with the fact that ${\symb P}(\mathcal{G}\cap\mathcal{E})$ is of order $1 - \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon)$ for all $L$ and $n$ large enough, to deduce \eqref{Eq:CVExpo}.
\section{Simple estimates on $Z_a$}\label{Sec:Techos}
In this section, we provide some simple estimates on the diffusion $Z_a$ and we prove Lemma \ref{Lemma:ApproxZZ}, and Proposition \ref{Prop:TypicalZ}.\\
All the estimates that we need concern the process $Z_a$, for some $a\in\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and on the time interval $[0,C_0 L {\ln L}]$ for some large enough constant $C_0>0$ (recall that after time $C_0 L{\ln L}$ these processes are almost deterministic by Lemma \ref{Lemma:NoExploInfinity}). We therefore introduce $\tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ as the smallest interval that contains all points
$$ a + \frac{\beta t}{4}\;,\quad t\in [0, C_0 L {\ln L}]\;,\quad a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}\;.$$
Recall that $\beta =(L \sqrt{a_L})^{-1} (1+o(1))$. There exists $C>0$ such that $\sup_{a\in \tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}} a \le C a_L$.\\
We also introduce $\bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ as the smallest interval that contains all points
$$ a + \frac{\beta t}{4}\;,\quad t\in [0, \varepsilon^{-2} L ]\;,\quad a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}\;.$$
The parameter $\varepsilon$ being fixed, there exists $C>0$ such that for all $L$ large enough
$$ \sup_{a\in \tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}} |a - a_L| \le C a_L^{-1/2}\;.$$
For $a\in{\symb R}$ we set $a(t) := a + \beta t/4$. First, we state a bound on the probability that $Z_a$ remains close to the bottom of the well of its time-inhomogeneous potential.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:RBM}
Fix $a >0$. For any $0<t_0<t_1$, any $0<d<D<\sqrt{a(t_0)}$ and any $x\in[\sqrt{a(t_0)}-d,\sqrt{a(t_0)}+d]$, we have
$$ {\symb P}\big(\exists t \in [t_0,t_1], Z_a(t) \notin [\sqrt{a(t_0)}-D,\sqrt{a(t)}+D] \, |\, Z_a(t_0) =x\big) \le 4 e^{-\frac{(D-d)^2}{2(t_1-t_0)}}\;.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Consider the reflected Brownian motion $R(t),t\ge t_0$ starting from $d$:
$$ dR(t) = dB(t) + d\ell(t)\;, \quad \int_{t\ge t_0} R(t) d\ell(t) = 0\;,\quad R(t_0) = d\;.$$
If $Z_a(t_0)$ lies in $[\sqrt{a(t_0)}-d,\sqrt{a(t_0)}+d]$, then $R(t) - (Z_a(t)-\sqrt{a(t)}) \ge 0$ for all $t\ge t_0$. Indeed, the inequality is satisfied at time $t_0$, and if this quantity vanishes at some time $t\ge t_0$ then either $R(t) = 0$ in which case we have
$$ d R(t) - d(Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a(t)}) = d\ell(t) + \frac{a'(t)}{2\sqrt{a(t)}} > 0\;,$$
or $R(t) > 0$ in which case
$$ d R(t) - d(Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a(t)}) = Z_a(t)^2 - a(t) + \frac{a'(t)}{2\sqrt{a(t)}} > 0\;.$$
Standard estimates on the reflected Brownian motion then show that
$$ {\symb P}\big(\sup_{t\in [t_0,t_1]} R(t) > D\big) \le 2 e^{-\frac{(D-d)^2}{2(t_1-t_0)}}\;.$$
A similar argument allows to control the probability that $Z_a$ crosses $\sqrt{a(t_0)} - D$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Entrance, exit and return to the bottom of the well}
We start with the deterministic behavior of the diffusion $Z_a$ when it comes down from infinity and explodes. We denote by $\tau_x(Z_a)$ the first hitting time of $x$ by the process $Z_a$. Sometimes, we will simply write $\tau_x$.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:Entrance}
Let $Z_a$ be the diffusion starting at time $0$ from $+\infty$. For any $b>0$, there exists $C=C(b)>0$ such that for all $L$ large enough, for all $a\in \tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$, with a probability at least $1-a_L^{-b}$ we have
$$ \sup_{t\in (0,\frac{\ln a}{\sqrt{a}}]} |Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a}\coth(\sqrt{a} t)| \le C \frac{\ln a_L}{a_L^{1/4}} \;.$$
Similarly, let $Z_a$ be the diffusion starting at time $0$ from $-\sqrt{a}+(\ln a)^2 / a^{1/4}$. For any $b>0$, there exists $C=C(b)>0$ such that for all $L$ large enough, for all $a\in \tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$, with a probability at least $1-a_L^{-b}$ we have
$$ \sup_{t\in (0,\tau_{-\infty}]} |Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a}\coth(\sqrt{a}(t-\tau_{-\infty}))| \le C \frac{\ln a_L}{a_L^{1/4}} \;.$$
Finally, if $a\in\bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ then $\sqrt{a}\coth(\sqrt{a} \cdot)$ can be replaced by $\sqrt{a_L}\coth(\sqrt{a_L} \cdot)$ in the above estimates.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First of all, note that the derivative of the function $x\mapsto x \coth(x)$ is bounded on ${\symb R}$. Consequently there exists a constant $K>0$ such that
$$ \sup_{t > 0} \frac1{t} |\sqrt{a}t \coth(\sqrt a t)- \sqrt{a_L}t\coth(\sqrt{a_L} t)| \le K |\sqrt{a_L} - \sqrt{a}|\;.$$
This last term is of order $a_L^{-1}$ uniformly over all $a\in\bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$. Consequently, the last part of the statement is proved.\\
The idea of the proof of the first part of the statement is very simple: when the process $Z_a$ is close to $\pm \infty$, the SDE that it solves is essentially deterministic. Let us provide the details in the case where $Z_a$ starts from $+\infty$. Consider the process $R(t) = Z_a(t)-B(t)$ and note that it solves
$$ dR(t) = a\, dt - R(t)^2 \Big[ (1 + \frac{B(t)}{R(t)})^2 - \frac{\beta t}{4 R(t)^2}\Big] dt\;.$$
Fix $\ell \ge x:= \sqrt a + (\ln a)^2/a^{1/4}$ and $M=c \ln a / a^{1/4}$. Consider the solutions $F_1,F_2$ of
$$ dF_i(t) = (a- C_i F_i(t)^2)dt\;,\quad F_i(0)=+\infty\;,$$
with
$$ C_1 = (1 - \frac{M}{\ell-M})^2 - \frac{\beta}{4(\ell-M)^2} \frac{\ln a}{\sqrt a}\;,\quad C_2 = (1 + \frac{M}{\ell-M})^2\;.$$
Let $\mathcal{A} := \{\sup_{t\in [0,\ln a / \sqrt a]} |B_t| \le M\}$ and note that ${\symb P}(\mathcal{A}^\complement) \le 2a^{-c^2/2}$. On the event $\mathcal{A}$ and as long as $Z_a$ is above $\ell$, we have
$$ F_2(t) \le R(t) \le F_1(t)\;.$$
Consequently
$$ F_2(t) - M \le Z_a(t) \le F_1(t) + M\;,\quad \forall t\in[0, \tau_{\ell}(Z_a) \wedge \frac{\ln a}{\sqrt a}]\;.$$
Note that $F_i(t) = \sqrt{a/C_i} \coth(\sqrt{aC_i} t)$. A straightforward computation shows that, in the case where $\ell = x$, the first hitting times of $\ell$ by $F_2-M$ and $F_1+M$ both have the following expansion
$$ \frac38 \frac{\ln a}{\sqrt a} + \frac1{2\sqrt a} \ln \frac2{(\ln a)^2} (1+o(1))\;.$$
As a consequence on the event $\mathcal{A}$, for all $\ell \ge x$ we have $\tau_{\ell}(Z_a) < \ln a / \sqrt a$ and
$$ F_2(t) - M \le Z_a(t) \le F_1(t) + M\;,\quad \forall t\in[0, \tau_{\ell}(Z_a)]\;.$$
Note that this implies that
$$ \tau_{2\ell+M}(F_2)\le \tau_{2\ell}(Z_a) \le \tau_{\ell}(Z_a) \le \tau_{\ell-M}(F_1)\;.$$
One can check that
$$F_2(t)-M \le F_2(t) \le \sqrt{a} \coth(\sqrt{a} t) \le F_1(t) \le F_1(t)+M\;,\quad \forall t\ge 0\;.$$
Hence, for all $\ell \in [x,\infty)$
\begin{align*}
\sup_{t\in [\tau_{2\ell},\tau_{\ell}]}\big|Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a} \coth(\sqrt{a} t)\big| &\le \sup_{t\in[\tau_{2\ell+M}(F_2),\tau_{\ell-M}(F_1)]} \big|(F_1(t)+M) - (F_2(t) - M)\big|\\
&\le \sup_{t\in[\tau_{2\ell+M}(F_2),\tau_{\ell-M}(F_1)]} \Big|\frac{F_1(t)}{F_2(t)}-1\Big| F_2(t) + 2M\;.
\end{align*}
From the explicit expressions of $F_1$ and $F_2$, we obtain:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:F1F2} \sup_{t>0}\Big|\frac{F_1(t)}{F_2(t)} - 1\Big| \lesssim \frac{M}{\ell}\;,\end{equation}
uniformly over all choices of $\ell \in [x,\infty)$. Therefore,
$$ \sup_{t\in [\tau_{2\ell+M}(F_2),\tau_{\ell-M}(F_1)]}\Big|\frac{F_1(t)}{F_2(t)} - 1\Big|F_2(t) \lesssim M\;,$$
so that
$$ \sup_{t\in [\tau_{2\ell},\tau_{\ell}]}\big|Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a} \coth(\sqrt{a} t)\big| \lesssim M\;,$$
uniformly over all choices of $\ell \in [x,\infty)$. Patching together these estimates, we get
$$ \sup_{t\in [0,\tau_{x}]}\big|Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a} \coth(\sqrt{a} t)\big| \lesssim M\;,$$
To complete the proof of the lemma, it remains to control the diffusion on the interval $[\tau_{x}(Z_a),\ln a / \sqrt a]$ and on the event $\mathcal{A}$. To that end, we take $\ell = \sqrt{a}/2$ and, by the arguments at the beginning of the proof, we find
$$ F_2(t)-M \le Z_a(t) \le F_1(t)+M\;,\qquad t\in[0,\tau_{\ell}(Z_a)\wedge \frac{\ln a}{\sqrt a}]\;.$$
Note that $F_2(t) - M > \sqrt{a}/2$ for all $t>0$. We deduce that $\tau_{\ell}(Z_a)> \ln a / \sqrt a$. This and the estimate \eqref{Eq:F1F2} (which is also valid with the present choice of $\ell$) yield
$$ \sup_{t\in [0,\ln a /\sqrt a]}\big|Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a} \coth(\sqrt{a} t)\big| \lesssim M\;.$$
\end{proof}
The following lemma shows that, whatever point $Z_a$ starts from, with large probability it comes back within a short time to a neighborhood of the bottom of the well of its time-inhomogeneous potential.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:Stabil}
For any $c>0$ there exists a constant $C>0$ such that the following holds for all $L$ large enough:
\begin{itemize}
\item Uniformly over all $a\in\tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and all $y\in (-\infty,+\infty]$, if $Z_a$ starts from $y$ at time $0$ then with a probability at least $1- Ca_L^{-2}$, it lies in the interval $[\sqrt{a}-c, \sqrt{a} + c]$ at time $\frac{(\ln a)^6}{\sqrt a}$,
\item Uniformly over all $a\in\bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and all $y\in (-\infty,+\infty]$, if $Z_a$ starts from $y$ at time $0$ then with a probability at least $1 - C \frac{\ln\ln a_L}{{\ln a_L}}$, it lies in the interval $[\sqrt{a}-c, \sqrt{a} + c]$ at time $2 t_L$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
The proof of this lemma requires fine estimates on the behavior of $Z_a$ when it crosses the barrier of potential and is therefore postponed to Section \ref{Sec:Fine}. With this result at hand, we can prove the following.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:XZSqueeze}
Let $X_a$ start from $+\infty$ and let $Z_a$ start from some $y\in (-\infty,+\infty]$. For any $c>0$ there exists a constant $C>0$ such that for all $L$ large enough the following has probability at least $1-Ca_L^{-2}$ uniformly over all $a\in \tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and all $y\in (-\infty,+\infty]$:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:XaLSqueeze}
\inf_{t\in [0,10 \frac{\ln a}{\sqrt a}]} X_a(t) \ge \sqrt{a} - c \;,\quad \sup_{t\in [\frac{\ln a}{\sqrt a},10 \frac{\ln a}{\sqrt a}]} X_a(t)\le \sqrt{a} + c\;,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:ZaLSqueeze}
\sqrt{a} - c \le Z_{a}(t) \le \sqrt{a} + c \;, \quad\forall t\in \Big[\frac{(\ln a)^6}{\sqrt a},\frac{(\ln a)^6}{\sqrt a}+10 \frac{\ln a}{\sqrt a}\Big]\;.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The estimate on $Z_a$ follows from Lemmas \ref{Lemma:Stabil} and \ref{Lemma:RBM}: the cost in probability is bounded by $(C+1)a_L^{-2}$ where $C$ is the constant from Lemma \ref{Lemma:Stabil}. The estimate on $X_a$ follows from the counterparts of Lemmas \ref{Lemma:Entrance}, see~\cite[Lemma 4.2]{DL17}, and \ref{Lemma:RBM}, see~\cite[Lemma 4.4]{DL17}: the cost in probability is of the same magnitude.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Oscillations}
In this subsection, we collect estimates needed for the proof of ``Oscillations'' and ``Oscillations at infinity'' from Proposition \ref{Prop:TypicalZ}.
At several occasions, we will use the following argument. Let $I_1,\ldots,I_k$ be $k$ disjoint intervals, let $f$ be some function and fix $[a,b] \subset {\symb R}$. We have
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:Convexity}\fint_{I_j} f(s) ds \in [a,b]\;,\quad \forall j\in \{1,\ldots,k\}\qquad \Longrightarrow\qquad\fint_{I_1\cup \ldots\cup I_k} f(s) ds \in [a,b]\;.\end{equation}
Indeed, setting $I := I_1\cup \ldots\cup I_k$ we have
$$ \fint_{I} f(s) ds = \sum_{j=1}^k \frac{|I_j|}{|I|} \fint_{I_j} f(s) ds\;,$$
so by convexity the result follows.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:Osc}
Fix $c>0$. We have as $L\to\infty$ uniformly over all $a\in \bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and all $x\in [\sqrt{a_L}-1,\sqrt{a_L}+1]$
$$ {\symb P}_x\Big(\fint_0^t Z_a(s) \in [\sqrt{a_L}-c,\sqrt{a_L}+c]\;,\quad \forall t\in [0, \tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(Z_a) \wedge \varepsilon^{-2} L]\Big) \rightarrow 1\;.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For $n\ge 1$ introduce $s_i := i2^{-n}$ and let $I:=\min(i\ge 1: s_i > \varepsilon^{-2})$. If we show that there exists $C'>0$ such that for all $n$ and for all $L$ large enough
$$ \sup_{i\le I}\sup_{a\in \bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}} {\symb P}_x(\fint_{s_i L}^t Z_a(s)ds \in [\sqrt{a_L}-c,\sqrt{a_L}+c]\;,\quad \forall t\in [s_i L, \tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(Z_a) \wedge s_{i+1}L]) < C' 2^{-2n}\;,$$
then, by \eqref{Eq:Convexity}, we deduce the statement of the lemma. We will restrict ourselves to estimating the lower bound, namely $\fint_{s_i L}^t Z_a(s) ds \ge \sqrt{a_L}-c$. The upper bound follows from similar (and actually simpler) arguments.\\
So let us fix $i\ge 1$ and consider the time-homogeneous diffusion $X^i$ whose parameter $a$ is taken to be $a^i:=a + (\beta/4)s_i L - \frac1{4\sqrt{a_L}}$. From McKean's result recalled in Section \ref{Subsec:TimeHomo}, the probability that this diffusion explodes twice or more on $(s_i L, s_{i+1} L]$ is of order $2^{-2n}$. Similarly, the probability that this diffusion explodes on $(s_i L, (s_i+2^{-2n})L]$ is of order $2^{-2n}$: we can therefore exclude these two events in the sequel.\\
Until the end of the proof, we say that an event holds ``with large probability'' if its probability goes to $1$ as $L\to\infty$, uniformly over all parameters $a \in \bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and $i\le I$.\\
Recall that $t_L = (\ln a_L)/\sqrt{a_L}$. Take $c' = c/8$. By Lemma \ref{Lemma:XZSqueeze} with large probability
$$ Z_a(t) \in [\sqrt{a_L}-c',\sqrt{a_L}+c']\;,\quad \forall t\in [s_i L, s_i L +9 t_L]\;.$$
Furthermore, by~\cite[Lemmas 4.3, 4.4. and 4.7]{DL17} with large probability we have
$$ \fint_{s_i L+(3/8) t_L}^t X^i(s) ds \in [\sqrt{a_L}-c',\sqrt{a_L}+c']\;,\quad \forall t\in [s_i L+(3/8) t_L, \tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i)]\;,$$
as well as $\tau_{-\infty}(X^i) - \tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i) \le t_L$. By the same computation as in the proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:AL}, we can show that $X^i$ passes below $Z_a$ by time $s_i L +5 t_L$. Patching together these estimates we deduce that
$$ \fint_{s_i L}^t Z_a(s) ds \ge \sqrt{a_L}-3c'\;,\quad \forall t\in [s_i L, \tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i)]\;.$$
If $\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i) > s_{i+1} L$ then we are done. Otherwise $\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i) \le s_{i+1} L$. By Lemma \ref{Lemma:Stabil}, with large probability $Z_a$ lies in $[\sqrt{a_L} - c',\sqrt{a_L}+c']$ at time $\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i)+2t_L$. If $Z_a$ hits $-2\sqrt{a_L}$ on the interval of time $[\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i), \tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i)+2t_L]$ then, using the fact that $\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i) \ge \tau_{-\infty}(X^i) - t_L \ge s_i L +(1/2) 2^{-2n} L$ it is easy to check that
$$ \fint_{s_i^n L}^t Z_a(s) ds \ge \sqrt{a_L}-4c'\;,\quad \forall t\in [s_i L, \tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(Z_a)]\;,$$
and we are done.\\
If $Z_a$ does not hit $-2\sqrt{a_L}$ on the interval of time $[\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i), \tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i)+2t_L]$, then it is also easy to check that
$$ \fint_{s_i L}^t Z_a(s) ds \ge \sqrt{a_L}-4c'\;,\quad \forall t\in [s_i L, \tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i) + 2 t_L]\;.$$
Furthermore, one can iterate the above arguments starting from time $\tau_{-\infty}(X^i)$ and complete the proof.
\end{proof}
We now prove a result specific to the backward diffusions.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:OscInfty}
Fix $C_0 >0$. There exists $c>0$ such that for all $\varepsilon > 0$ small enough and all $L$ large enough the probability of the following event is larger than $1-c\varepsilon$. For all $a\in {\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$, we have
$$ \fint_{\varepsilon^{-2} L}^{t} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds \le -\frac12\sqrt{a_L}\;,\quad \forall t\in [2\varepsilon^{-2}L, C_0 L \ln L]\;.$$
\end{lemma}
Note that $\sqrt{a+\frac{\beta}{4}t}$ can be larger than $\sqrt{a_L}$ for $a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and $t\in [2\varepsilon^{-2}L, C_0 L \ln L]$, therefore we need to be careful in this proof at the current value of the bottom of well.
\begin{proof}
Since there are $\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^{-2})$ elements in ${\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$, it suffices to prove that uniformly over all $a \in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$, the probability of the estimate of the statement is larger than $1-\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^3)$. So we now fix $a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$. Consider the sequence
$$ s_i := e^i \varepsilon^{-2} L\;,\quad i\ge 0\;,$$
and let $i_1$ be the smallest integer such that $s_{i_1} \ge C_0 L \ln L$. Note that $i_1 \le 2 \ln\ln L$. Set $a(s_i) := a + \frac{\beta s_i}{4}$. Assume that for every $i\in\{0,\ldots i_1-1\}$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:Bdsi}
\fint_t^{s_{i+1}} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds \in [-\sqrt{a(s_i)} - 10, -\sqrt{a(s_i)} + 10]\;,\quad \forall t \in [s_i,s_{i+1}]\;.
\end{equation}
Note that $a(s_i) \ge a_L$ for all $i$. Then, for any $t\in [2\varepsilon^{-2}L, C_0 L \ln L]$, setting $i$ such that $s_i \le t < s_{i+1}$ we get
\begin{align*}
\int_{\varepsilon^{-2} L}^{t} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds &= \int_{\varepsilon^{-2} L}^{s_i} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds + \int_{s_i}^{s_{i+1}} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds - \int_{t}^{s_{i+1}} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds\\
&\le (-\sqrt{a_L}+10)(s_i-\varepsilon^{-2} L) + (-\sqrt{a(s_i)} + 10) (s_{i+1}-s_i) - (-\sqrt{a(s_i)}-10)(s_{i+1}-t)\\
&\le (-\sqrt{a_L}+10)(t-\varepsilon^{-2} L) + 20(s_{i+1}-t)\;.
\end{align*}
Note that $t-\varepsilon^{-2}L \ge \frac12 s_i$ so that for all $L$ large enough
$$ \frac14(-\sqrt{a_L}+10) (t-\varepsilon^{-2} L) + 20(s_{i+1}-t) \le -\frac1{16} \sqrt{a_L}s_i + 20(e-1)s_i < 0\;.$$
Hence
$$ \int_{\varepsilon^{-2} L}^{t} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds \le -\frac12 \sqrt{a_L} (t-\varepsilon^{-2} L)\;,$$
as required. Consequently it suffices to evaluate the probability of \eqref{Eq:Bdsi}. We will only prove the upper bound since the lower bound is proved analogously. Fix $i\in \{0,\ldots,i_1-1\}$. Consider the backward time-homogeneous diffusion $\hat{X}$ whose parameter $a$ is given by $a(s_i)$ and that starts from $-\infty$ at time $s_{i+1}$. Let us now define the event $\mathcal{A}_i$ on which
\begin{align*}
\hat{Z}_a(t) \le -\sqrt{a(s_i)} + 1\;,\quad \forall t\in [s_{i+1} - 10 t_L,s_{i+1} ]\;,\\
\hat{X}(t) \le -\sqrt{a(s_i)} + 1\;,\quad \forall t\in [s_{i+1} - 10 t_L,s_{i+1}]\;,\\
-\sqrt{a(s_i)} - 1 \le \fint_{t}^{s_{i+1} - (3/8)t_L} \hat{X}(s) ds \le -\sqrt{a(s_i)} + 1\;,\quad \forall t\in [s_{i}, s_{i+1} - (3/8)t_L]\;,
\end{align*}
and $\hat{X}$ does not hit $2\sqrt{a(s_i)}$ on $[s_{i}, s_{i+1})$.\\
Let us prove that the probability of $\cap_{i=0}^{i_1-1} \mathcal{A}_i$ goes to $1$ as $L\to\infty$, uniformly over all parameters $a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$. To that end, it suffice to show that $i_1 {\symb P}(\mathcal{A}_i^\complement)$ goes to $0$, uniformly over all parameters $a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and over all $i\in\{0,\ldots,i_1-1\}$. Recall that $i_1 \le 2\ln\ln L$. The two first estimates follow from (the backward version of) Lemma \ref{Lemma:XZSqueeze}: the cost in probability being of order $a_L^{-2}$. Provided that the fourth estimate is proven, the third estimate is a consequence of~\cite[Lemma 4.7]{DL17} whose cost in probability is of order $e^{-b(\ln\ln a_L)^2}$. We turn to the fourth estimate. The probability that $\hat{X}$ explodes on $[s_{i}-1, s_{i+1})$ is equal to
$$ {\symb P}(\gamma_{a(s_i)} \le s_{i+1} - s_i +1) \le {\symb P}(\frac{\gamma_{a(s_i)}}{m(a(s_i))} \le \frac{(e-1) s_i + 1}{m(a(s_i))})\;.$$
By \eqref{Eq:mac}, we have for some constant $C>0$
$$ \frac{(e-1)s_i +1}{m(a(s_i))} \le \frac{es_i}{m(a(s_i))} \le \frac{e^{i+1} \varepsilon^{-2}L}{cm(a) e^{\frac12 e^i \varepsilon^{-2}}} \le C e^{\varepsilon^{-1}} e^{-\frac14 e^i \varepsilon^{-2}}\;.$$
Consequently by Proposition \ref{Prop:CVrate}, a simple computation shows that, for some $i\in\{0,\ldots,i_1-1\}$, the probability that $\hat{X}$ explodes on $[s_{i}-1, s_{i+1})$ is less than $\varepsilon$ for all $L$ large enough and all $\varepsilon$ small enough, uniformly over all $a\in\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$. By the analogue of Lemma \ref{Lemma:Entrance} for time-homogeneous diffusions, see~\cite[Lemma 4.2]{DL17}, we know that if $\hat{X}$ hits $2\sqrt{a(s_i)}$ on $[s_{i}, s_{i+1})$ then with large probability it explodes to $+\infty$ on $[s_{i}-1, s_{i+1})$. This concludes the proof of the fourth estimate.\\
We now work on the event $\mathcal{A}_i$. By estimating the difference between $\hat{X}$ and $\hat{Z}_a$, as in the proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:AL}, it is easy to deduce that $\hat{X}$ lies above $\hat{Z}_a$ at time $s_{i+1}-5 t_L$, and by monotonicity these two diffusions remain in this order on the interval $[s_i,s_{i+1} - 5 t_L]$. We thus deduce that for any $t\in [s_i , s_{i+1} - 10 t_L]$ we have
\begin{align*}
\int_{t}^{s_{i+1} - 5 t_L} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds &\le \int_{t}^{s_{i+1} - 5 t_L} \hat{X}(s) ds = \int_{t}^{s_{i+1} - (3/8) t_L} \hat{X}(s) ds - \int_{s_{i+1} - 5 t_L}^{s_{i+1} - (3/8) t_L} \hat{X}(s) ds\\
&\le (s_{i+1}-(3/8) t_L - t) (-\sqrt{a(s_i)} +1) - (5-(3/8))t_L (-\sqrt{a(s_i)} - 1)\\
&\le (s_{i+1}-5t_L-t) (-\sqrt{a_L} + 3)\;.
\end{align*}
On the other hand for any $t\in [s_{i+1} - 10 t_L,s_{i+1} - 5 t_L]$, the bound on $\hat{Z}_a$ stated in event $\mathcal{A}_i$ yields
$$ \fint_{t}^{s_{i+1} - 5t_L} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds \le - \sqrt{a_L} +1 \;.$$
Consequently by \eqref{Eq:Convexity} for any $t\in [s_i , s_{i+1} - 5 t_L]$ we have
$$ \fint_{t}^{s_{i+1} - 5t_L} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds \le - \sqrt{a_L} +3 \;.$$
Again, the bound on $\hat{Z}_a$ stated in event $\mathcal{A}$ yields for any $t\in [s_{i+1} - 5 t_L,s_{i+1}]$
$$ \fint_{t}^{s_{i+1}} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds \le - \sqrt{a_L} +1 \;.$$
Thus \eqref{Eq:Convexity} ensures that the upper bound in \eqref{Eq:Bdsi} holds.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:ApproxZZ}}\label{Subsec:ApproxZZ}
In this proof, $C_\varepsilon$ denotes a (large) constant that only depends on $\varepsilon$, it may change from line to line. By Theorem \ref{Th:Explo}, for $a=a_L - r/(4\sqrt{a_L})$ and $j\in\{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}$ the probability that $Z_{a}$ explodes more than once in $(t^n_j L,t^n_{j+1}L]$ converges to $(1-\exp(-2^{-n}e^{r})-2^{-n}e^{r}\exp(-2^{-n}e^{r}))$ as $L\to\infty$. Consequently, the probability that there exists $a\in\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and $j$ such that $Z_{a}$ explodes more than once in $(t^n_j L,t^n_{j+1}L]$ is bounded by $C_\varepsilon 2^{-n}$ uniformly over all $L$ large enough. This quantity goes to $0$ as $n$ goes to $\infty$. This proves the first part of the lemma.\\
We now prove that there exists a constant $C_\varepsilon$ such that, for any given $j \in \{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}$ with a probability larger than $1-C_\varepsilon 2^{-2n}$ for all $L$ large enough, the diffusion $Z_{a}$ explodes on $(t^n_j L, t^n_{j+1} L]$ if and only if the diffusion $Z_{a}^j$ explodes on this same interval. We first treat the case $j=2^n-1$. The probability that there exists $a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ such that $Z_a$ explodes on $[t^n_{2^n-1}L,\infty)$ is bounded by a quantity of order $\varepsilon^{-2} e^{\varepsilon^{-1}} 2^{-n}$ as $L\to\infty$: this quantity vanishes as $n\to\infty$. Consequently, we can restrict ourselves to $j\in\{0,\ldots,2^{n}-2\}$ in the sequel.
Set $a(t^n_j L) := a +(\beta/4) t^n_jL$ and $a_-(t^n_j L) := a(t^n_j L) - 1/(4\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)})$. We introduce the time-homogeneous diffusion $X^j$ that starts from $+\infty$ at time $t^n_j L$ and whose parameter $a$ equals $a_-(t^n_j L)$. Define $\tilde{\tau}_{-2\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)}}$ and $\tilde{\tau}_{-\infty}$ as the first times after $t^n_j L$ at which $Z_a$ hits $-2\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)}$ and $-\infty$. We introduce $\kappa_j := \ln (a(t^n_j L)) / \sqrt{a(t^n_j L)}$ and the events
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{D}_1 &:=\Big\{\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)} - (1/2) \le Z_{a}(t) \le Z_{a}^j(t) \le \sqrt{a(t^n_j L)} + (1/2)\;,\quad \forall t\in [t^n_j L + \kappa_j,t^n_j L + 9 \kappa_j]\Big\}\\
&\qquad\cap \Big\{\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)} - 1 \le Z_{a}(t)\;,\quad \forall t\in [t^n_j L, t^n_j L+ \kappa_j]\Big\} \;,\\
\mathcal{D}_2 &:=\Big\{\fint_{t^n_j L + 9 \kappa_j}^{t} Z_a(s)ds \in \Big[\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)} - 1,\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)} + 1\Big]\;,\quad \forall t\in[t^n_j L + 9 \kappa_j,\tilde{\tau}_{-2\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)}}]\Big\}\;,\\
\mathcal{D}_3 &:=\{t_j^n L + 9 \kappa_j \le \tilde{\tau}_{-2\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)}}\}\cap\{ \tilde{\tau}_{-\infty}-\tilde{\tau}_{-2\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)}} \le \kappa_j\}\\
&\qquad\cap\{ {\tau}_{-\infty}(Z_a^j)-{\tau}_{-\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)}-1}(Z_a^j) \le \kappa_j\}\;,
\end{align*}
Finally let $\mathcal{D}_4$ be the event on which $Z_a$ explodes at most once on $(t^n_j L,t^{n+1}_j L]$ and does not explode on $[(t^{n+1}_j-2^{-2n})L,t^{n+1}_j L]$. We then set $\mathcal{D}:=\cap_i \mathcal{D}_i$.\\
Let us evaluate the probability of $\mathcal{D}$. By Lemmas \ref{Lemma:Entrance} and \ref{Lemma:XZSqueeze} and by monotonicity, ${\symb P}(\mathcal{D}_1^\complement \cup \mathcal{D}_3^\complement)$ goes to $0$ as $L\to\infty$ uniformly over all $j$. By Theorem \ref{Th:Explo} the probability of $\mathcal{D}_4^\complement$ is bounded by $C_\varepsilon 2^{-2n}$ uniformly over all $L$ large enough and all $j$. Regarding $\mathcal{D}_2$, it suffices to apply Lemma \ref{Lemma:Osc}. Consequently $2^n \sup_{a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}} \sup_j {\symb P}(\mathcal{D}^\complement) \to 0$ as $L\to\infty$ and $n\to\infty$.\\
From now on, we work on the event $\mathcal{D}$. If $\tilde{\tau}_{-\infty} > t^{n}_{j+1} L$, none of the diffusions explode on $(t^n_j L, t^{n+1}_j L]$. Otherwise, the diffusion $Z_a$ explodes before time $t^n_{j+1} L$ and we aim at showing that $Z_a^j$ explodes too. Consider the process $D(t) := Z^j_{a}(t) - Z_{a}(t)$ that solves
$$ dD(t) = -(Z^j_{a} + Z_{a})(t) D(t) dt\;.$$
Note that $D(t) = D(t_0) \exp(-\int_{t_0}^t (Z^j_{a} + Z_{a})(s) ds)$ for all $t_0 \le t$. By $\mathcal{D}_2\cap\mathcal{D}_3$, we find
$$ D(\tilde{\tau}_{-2\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)}}) \le D(t^n_j L + 9 \kappa_j)\;.$$
Then a simple computation based on $\mathcal{D}_1$ shows that the last term is smaller than $1$ for all $L$ large enough. Consequently $Z^j_a$ is below $-2\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)} + 1$ at time $\tilde{\tau}_{-2\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)}}$. By $\mathcal{D}_3$, it explodes within a time smaller than $\kappa_j$. By $\mathcal{D}_3\cap \mathcal{D}_4$, $\tilde{\tau}_{-2\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)}}$ is smaller than $(t^n_{j+1} L - 2^{-2n})L$ and therefore $Z^a_j$ explodes before time $t^n_{j+1} L$. This concludes the proof.
\subsection{Proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:TypicalZ}}\label{Subsec:ProofTypicalZ}
We start with the forward diffusions. By monotonicity, for any $a\in\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ the number of explosions of $Z_a$ is bounded by the number of explosions of $Z_{a_<}$ where $a_< = \min \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$. From Theorem \ref{Th:Explo}, we deduce that there exists $C,N_\varepsilon > 0$ such that the probability that $Z_{a_<}$ explodes more than $N_\varepsilon$ times or explodes after time ${\varepsilon^{-2}}L$ is bounded by $C \varepsilon$ uniformly over all $L$ large enough. Consequently, in the sequel we only have to deal with the $N_\varepsilon$ first explosions of the diffusions, and the Long-time behavior is proved.\\
To prove the Entrance and Explosion estimates, it suffices to iterate (at most $N_\varepsilon$ times) Lemma \ref{Lemma:Entrance}. Regarding the Oscillation estimates, it suffices to combine the Entrance estimate with Lemma \ref{Lemma:Osc}.\\
Concerning the backward diffusions, the situation is the same except for the Oscillations at infinity for which we apply Lemma \ref{Lemma:OscInfty}.
\section{Crossing the barrier of potential}\label{Sec:Fine}
This section is devoted to a fine description of the diffusion $Z_a$ when it crosses the barrier of potential, and to the proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:Stabil} and Proposition \ref{Prop:TypicalPairZ}
\subsection{Escaping the well}\label{Subsec:Crossing}
In this subsection, we collect several precise estimates on the trajectory of $Z_a$ when it escapes the bottom of the well of its time-inhomogeneous potential: these estimates will be the core of the proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:TypicalPairZ}.\\
Since the diffusion escapes the well in a very short time, the time-inhomogeneity of its drift is negligible and therefore its behavior is almost the same as that of the time-homogeneous diffusion $X_a$. The estimates stated in this subsection are therefore very close to those collected in~\cite[Section 5]{DL17} on $X_a$. Consequently, the proofs will make references to estimates obtained therein.\\
In the sequel, we denote by ${\symb P}^{(a)}_x$ the law of $Z_a$ starting from $x$ (in the proofs below, we will sometimes only write ${\symb P}_x$), and by $\tau_x$ the first hitting time of $x$ by $Z_a$. We also set (recall that $t_L = \ln a_L / \sqrt{a_L}$) :
$$ T := \frac34 t_L\;,\quad \delta := \frac{(\ln a_L)^2}{a_L^{1/4}}\;.$$
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:Cross1}
For any $c>0$, there exists $C>0$ such that for all $L$ large enough, for all $a\in \bar\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ we have
$$ {\symb P}^{(a)}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}[E(C) \,|\, \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta} < \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta/2} \wedge T] \le a_L^{-c}\;,$$
where $E=E(C)$ is defined by
\begin{align*}
E &= \Big\{ \sup_{t\in [0,\tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}]} |Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a_L} \tanh(-\sqrt{a_L}(t-\tau_0))| \ge C \frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L} \Big\}\\
&\cup \Big\{|\tau_0 - \frac{3}{8} t_L| \ge C \frac{\ln \ln a_L}{\sqrt{a_L}}\Big\} \cup \Big\{|\tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta} - \tau_0 - \frac{3}{8} t_L| \ge C \frac{\ln \ln a_L}{\sqrt{a_L}}\Big\}\;.
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let us write $\tau_-$ and $\tau_+$ as shortcuts for $\tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}$ and $\tau_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta/2}$. Consider the diffusion
$$ dH(t) = (-a+H^2(t)) + dB(t)\;,$$
and let $\mathbf{P}_x$ be its law when it starts from $x$ at time $0$. The Radon-Nikodym derivative of ${\symb P}_x$ w.r.t.~$\mathbf{P}_x$ up to time $t$ is given by $\exp(G_t(H))$ where
$$ G_t(H) = \frac23 (H_0^3 - H_t^3) - 2 a(H_0 - H_t) + \frac{\beta}{4} t H_t + (2- \frac{\beta}{4}) \int_0^t H_s ds - \frac{\beta}{4} \int_0^t (a + \frac{\beta}{8} s - H^2_s)s ds\;.$$
Consequently
\begin{align*}
\frac{{\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(E ; \tau_- < \tau_+ \wedge T)}{{\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(\tau_- < \tau_+ \wedge T)} &= \frac{\mathbf{P}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(E ; \tau_- < \tau_+ \wedge T ; e^{G_{\tau_-}(H)})}{\mathbf{P}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(\tau_- < \tau_+ \wedge T ; e^{G_{\tau_-}(H)})}\\
&\le e^{5 \sqrt{a_L} T} \frac{\mathbf{P}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(E ; \tau_- < \tau_+ \wedge T )}{\mathbf{P}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(\tau_- < \tau_+ \wedge T )}\;,
\end{align*}
where the last bound follows from an elementary computation performed on $G_{\tau_-}(H)$. The proof of~\cite[Lemma 5.1]{DL17} shows that for any $r>0$ we have
$$ \frac{\mathbf{P}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(E ; \tau_- < \tau_+ \wedge T )}{\mathbf{P}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(\tau_- < \tau_+ \wedge T )} \lesssim a_L^{-r}\;,$$
for all $L$ large enough. This concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:Cross2}
For any $c>0$, for all $L$ large enough and for all $a\in \bar\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ we have
$$ {\symb P}^{(a)}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}[\tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta} > T \,|\, \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta} < \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta/2}] \le a_L^{-c}\;.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Applying the same Girsanov transform as in the previous proof, one can apply the arguments in the proof of~\cite[Lemma 5.2]{DL17}.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:Cross3}
Take $C>1$ and set $S = C\ln\ln a_L / \sqrt{a_L}$. There exists $C'>0$ such that for all $L$ large enough and for all $a\in \bar\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ we have
$$ {\symb P}^{(a)}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}[\tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} > S \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}+2\delta} \,|\, \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} < \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta/2}] \le C' (\ln a_L)^{2-2C}\;,$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For simplicity, we set $\tau_- :=\tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}}$, $\tau_+ := \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}+2\delta}$ and $\tau_{++} := \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta/2}$. Set
$$ I(a) = \exp(\frac23 ((-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta)^3 -(-\sqrt{a_L})^3) - 2 a((-\sqrt{a_L} + \delta) - (-\sqrt{a_L})))\;.$$
and note that $\ln I(a)$ coincides with the sum of the two first terms of $G_{\tau_-}$. For $S' = \sqrt L$, we are going to show that as $L\to\infty$
\begin{align}
{\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(\tau_- < S\wedge \tau_+) &\gtrsim I(a) e^{-2\sqrt a S}\;,\label{Eq:tau-+1}\\
{\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(S\wedge \tau_+ \le \tau_- < S'\wedge \tau_{++}) &\lesssim I(a) e^{-2\sqrt a S} (\ln a_L)^{2-2C}\;,\label{Eq:tau-+2}\\
{\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(\tau_{-} \wedge \tau_{++} > S') &\lesssim I(a) e^{-2\sqrt a S} (\ln a_L)^{2-2C}\;.\label{Eq:tau-+3}
\end{align}
These three bounds suffice to deduce the statement of the lemma. Indeed, the term on the l.h.s.~of the bound of the statement equals
\begin{align*}
\frac{{\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(S\wedge \tau_+ \le \tau_- < \tau_{++})}{{\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(\tau_- < \tau_+)} &\le \frac{{\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(S\wedge \tau_+ \le \tau_- < S'\wedge\tau_{++})+{\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(S' < \tau_{-}<\tau_{++})}{{\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(\tau_- < S\wedge\tau_+)}\\
&\lesssim (\ln a_L)^{2-2C}\;.
\end{align*}
We start with \eqref{Eq:tau-+1}. Using the same Girsanov transform as before, we obtain
$$ {\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(\tau_- < S\wedge \tau_+) = \mathbf{P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(\tau_- < S\wedge \tau_+ ; e^{G_{\tau_-}})\;.$$
A simple computation shows that on the event $\tau_- < S\wedge \tau_+$ we have
$$ e^{G_{\tau_-}} \ge I(a) e^{-2\sqrt a S} (1+o(1))\;,$$
where $o(1)$ is a deterministic quantity that goes to $0$ as $L\to\infty$. In addition, it was shown in the proof of~\cite[Lemma 5.3]{DL17} that $\mathbf{P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(\tau_- < S\wedge \tau_+)$ goes to $1$ as $L\to\infty$. This concludes the proof of \eqref{Eq:tau-+1}.
Regarding \eqref{Eq:tau-+2}, using again the Girsanov transform we get
$$ {\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(S\wedge \tau_+ \le \tau_- < S'\wedge \tau_{++}) = \mathbf{P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(S\wedge \tau_+ \le \tau_- < S'\wedge \tau_{++} ; e^{G_{\tau_-}})\;.$$
A simple computation shows that on the event $S\wedge \tau_+ \le \tau_- < S'\wedge \tau_{++}$ we have
$$ e^{G_{\tau_-}} \le I(a) (1+o(1)) e^{2 \int_0^{\tau_-} H(s) ds}\;,$$
where $o(1)$ is a deterministic quantity that goes to $0$ as $L\to\infty$. Moreover, it was shown in the proof of~\cite[Lemma 5.3]{DL17} that
$$ \mathbf{P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(S\wedge \tau_+ \le \tau_- < S'\wedge \tau_{++} ; e^{2 \int_0^{\tau_-} H(s) ds} ) \lesssim (\ln a_L)^{2-2C}\;,$$
consequently \eqref{Eq:tau-+2} follows.
Finally, we prove \eqref{Eq:tau-+3}. To that end, we consider the time-homogeneous diffusion
$$ dX_a(t) = (a - X_a(t)^2) dt + dB(t)\;,$$
and we denote by ${\symb Q}_x$ its law when it starts from $x$. The Radon-Nikodym derivative of ${\symb P}_x$ w.r.t.~${\symb Q}_x$ is given by $\exp(U_t(X))$ where
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:UtX}
U_t(X) = \frac{\beta}{4} \Big(t X_a(t) - \int_0^t [X_a(s)+s(a-X_a(s)^2)] ds\Big) - \frac{\beta^2}{96} t^3\;.
\end{equation}
Note that on the event $\tau_{-} \wedge \tau_{++} > S'$, the r.v.~$\exp(U_{S'}(X))$ is bounded by $2$ almost surely for all $L$ large enough. Henceforth
$${\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(\tau_{-} \wedge \tau_{++} > S') \le 2 {\symb Q}_{-\sqrt{a}+\delta}(\tau_{-} \wedge \tau_{++} > S') \le \frac{2}{S'} {\symb Q}_{-\sqrt{a}+\delta}(\tau_{-} \wedge \tau_{++})\;.$$
Using the classical formula for the expectation of the exit time from an interval for a diffusion, see for instance~\cite[Th VII.3.6]{RevuzYor}, one can show that
$$ {\symb Q}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(\tau_{-} \wedge \tau_{++}) \le t_L\;.$$
Hence
$${\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(\tau_{-} \wedge \tau_{++} > S') \le 2 t_L L^{-1/2} \ll I(a) e^{-2\sqrt a S} (\ln a_L)^{2-2C}\;.$$
\end{proof}
The following lemma shows that if the diffusion $Z$ starts from $\sqrt{a_L}-\delta$ and hits $-\sqrt{a_L}$ before $\sqrt{a_L}$, then it does not hit $\sqrt{a_L}-\delta/2$ with large probability. Intuitively: if the diffusion is conditioned to cross the barrier of potential, then it does it right away. At a technical level, this estimate is easy to establish for the time-homogeneous diffusion thanks to an estimate on its scale function, see~\cite[Sec 5, proof of Prop 3.3]{DL17}. Here the situation is slightly more involved since the drift is time-inhomogeneous.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:ImmediateDescent}
There exists $c>0$ such that for all $a\in\bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and all $L$ large enough, we have
$$ {\symb P}^{(a)}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta}(\tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} < \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta/2} \,|\, \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} < \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}) \ge 1 - e^{-c(\ln a_L)^4}\;.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We set $\tau_- := \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}}$, $\tau_+:= \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta/2}$ and $\tau_{++} := \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}$. We have
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{+} \,|\, \tau_{-} < \tau_{++}) &= \frac{{\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{+} )}{{\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++})}\\
&=1 - \frac{{\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta}(\tau_{+} < \tau_{-} < \tau_{++})}{{\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++})}\;.
\end{align*}
We then bound separately the two terms in the fraction. First
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta}(\tau_{+} < \tau_{-} < \tau_{++}) &\le {\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta/2}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++})\\
&\le \mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L} - \delta/2}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++})\;.
\end{align*}
The second inequality comes from the trivial coupling under which $X_a \le Z_a$ until the first explosion time of $X_a$.\\
Second, taking $S=L^{1/4}$ and using the expression of the Radon-Nikodym derivative \eqref{Eq:UtX} (which we bound from below by $1/2$) we get
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++}) &\ge {\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++} \wedge S)\\
&\ge (1/2) \mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++} \wedge S)\;.
\end{align*}
We claim that
$$ \mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++} \wedge S) \sim \mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++})\;.$$
With this claim at hand, we deduce that
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{+} \,|\, \tau_{-} < \tau_{++}) \ge 1 - 4 \frac{\mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L} - \delta/2}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++})}{\mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++})}\;,
\end{align*}
so that an estimate in~\cite[Section 5 - Proof of Proposition 3.3]{DL17} shows that this is of order $1-\exp(-c(\ln a)^4)$ for some $c>0$.\\
We are left with proving the claim. First of all, by~\cite[Prop. VII.3.2]{RevuzYor} and a computation on the scale function one can prove that for any $\kappa > 0$ and for all $L$ large enough
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EvalExitProba}
\mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++}) \ge L^{-1-\kappa}\;.
\end{equation}
Second, we have
$$ \sup_{y\in [-\sqrt{a_L} + \delta,\sqrt{a_L}]} \mathbf{Q}_y(\tau_{++} > T) < a^{-1}\;.$$
Indeed if one starts the diffusion $X_a$ at any point in $[-\sqrt{a_L} + \delta,\sqrt{a_L}]$ then using a comparison with a deterministic ODE, on an event of probability at least $1-a^{-1}/2$, we can show that $X_a$ passes above $\sqrt{a_L} -\delta$ by time $T/2$, and then using a comparison with an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process, one can show that it hits $\sqrt{a_L}$ within an additional time $T/2$ with probability at least $1-a^{-1}/2$.\\
Third, for any $\lambda \in (0,1)$
$$ \sup_{y\in [-\sqrt{a_L},-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta]} \mathbf{Q}_y[e^{\lambda \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} \,\wedge\, \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L} + \delta}}] \le 2\;.$$
Indeed, let $Y = X_a + \sqrt a$. We have
$$ d|Y|(t) = |Y|(t) (2\sqrt a - Y(t))dt + dW(t) + d\ell(t)\;,$$
where $\ell$ is the local time of $Y$ at $0$ and $W$ is Brownian motion. We thus deduce that the first exit time of $[-\sqrt{a_L},-\sqrt{a_L} + \delta]$ by $X_a$ starting from $-\sqrt{a_L} +x$ is stochastically smaller than the first hitting time of $\delta$ by a reflected Brownian motion starting at $x+\sqrt a - \sqrt{a_L}$. Hence standard estimates on reflected Brownian motion yield the asserted (crude) estimate.\\
Consequently for $\lambda \in (0,1)$, using the Markov property at time $\tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}\wedge T$ we get
$$ \sup_{y\in [-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta,\sqrt{a_L}]} \mathbf{Q}_y[e^{\lambda \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}}] \le e^{\lambda T} + e^{\lambda T} a^{-1}G\;.$$
where
$$ G:= \sup_{y\in [-\sqrt{a_L},\sqrt{a_L}]} \mathbf{Q}_y[e^{\lambda \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}}]\;.$$
Then,
$$\sup_{y\in [-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta,\sqrt{a_L}]} \mathbf{Q}_y[e^{\lambda \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}}] \le e^{\lambda T} + e^{\lambda T} a^{-1} G\;,$$
and
\begin{align*}
&\sup_{y\in [-\sqrt{a_L},-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta]} \mathbf{Q}_y[e^{\lambda \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}}]\\
&\le \sup_{y\in [-\sqrt{a_L},-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta]} \mathbf{Q}_y[e^{\lambda \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L} + \delta}}](1+\mathbf{Q}_{-\sqrt{a_L} + \delta}[e^{\lambda \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}}])\;.
\end{align*}
Consequently, $G \le 4e^{\lambda T}(1+ a^{-1} G)$ so that
$$ G \le 4e^{\lambda T} \sum_{n\ge 0} (4e^{\lambda T} a^{-1})^n\;.$$
For $L$ |arge enough we thus get $G\le 8e^{\lambda T}$ and
$$ \mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L} - \delta}[e^{\lambda \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}}] \le e^{\lambda T} + e^{\lambda T} a^{-1} G \le 2 e^{\lambda T}\;.$$
Therefore, we find
$$ \mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(S < \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} < \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}) \le \mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(S < \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}) \le 2 e^{\lambda T} e^{-\lambda S}\;,$$
which is negligible compared to $\mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(\tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} < \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}})$ thanks to \eqref{Eq:EvalExitProba}.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:aa'}
Take $\kappa \in (0,1)$. There exists $C>0$ such that the following holds for all $L$ large enough and for all $a\in\bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ with a probability at least $1- \mathcal{O}(1/\ln a_L)$. Set $a' = a +\kappa$ and assume that $Z_a(0) = \sqrt{a_L} - \delta$ and that $Z_{a'}(0) \in (\sqrt{a_L} - \delta, 10 \sqrt{a_L})$. Conditionally given $\tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}}(Z_a) < \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}(Z_a)$, we have:
\begin{align*}
|Z_{a'}(t)-Z_a(t)| \le 1\;,\quad &t\in [\upsilon_a - (1/16)t_L,\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L]\;,\\
Z_{a'}(t) \le -\sqrt{a_L} + Ca_L^{3/7}\;,\quad &t\in [\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L,\theta_a - (1/16)t_L]\;,\\
Z_{a'}(t) \le \sqrt{a_L} - 1\;,\quad &t\in [\theta_a - (1/16)t_L,\theta_a]\;.
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Consider the process $R(t) = Z_{a'}(t) - Z_a(t)$ and note that
$$ dR(t) =\kappa dt - R(t) (Z_a(t) + Z_{a'}(t))dt\;.$$
Using the estimates on the behavior of $Z_a$ collected in Lemmas \ref{Lemma:Cross1}, \ref{Lemma:Cross2},\ref{Lemma:Cross3} and \ref{Lemma:ImmediateDescent}, it is a straightforward computation to deduce the above estimates: actually, the same computation was performed in the proof of~\cite[Lemma 5.4]{DL17}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{From the unstable equilibrium point}\label{Subsec:Crossing2}
In this subsection, we collect estimates that we will need up to time $C_0L \ln L$: consequently we consider $a\in\tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$. In the estimates below, we let the diffusion start from a point at distance of order $a^{-1/4}$ from $-\sqrt{a}$: whenever $a\in \bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$, this is equivalent with starting from a point at distance of order $a_L^{-1/4}$ from $-\sqrt{a_L}$ so that these estimates can be patched with those obtained in the previous subsection.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:OscUnstable}
Fix $x\in {\symb R}$. Uniformly over all $a\in\tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ we have the convergence
$${\symb P}^{(a)}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} < \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta}) \to {\symb P}(\mathcal{N}(0,1) > x)\;,\quad L\to\infty\;.$$
Furthermore, for all $L$ large enough, for all $a\in\tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and for any $s\in [0,L^{1/4}]$ we have
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}^{(a)}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} > s \,|\, \tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} < \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta}) &\lesssim \frac{\ln\ln a}{s \sqrt a}\;.
\end{align*}
Finally, there exists $c>0$ such that for all $L$ large enough, for all $a\in\tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and for any $s\in [0,L^{1/4}]$ we have
$$ \sup_{x\in [-\sqrt a -\delta,-\sqrt a + \delta]} {\symb P}^{(a)}_x(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta} > s) \lesssim \frac{\ln\ln a}{s \sqrt a} \wedge e^{-c s / \delta^2}\;.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let ${\symb Q}_y$ be the law of $X_a$ starting from $y$. Using the scale function associated to the diffusion $X_a$, see~\cite[Section 4]{DL17}, we obtain
$$ {\symb Q}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} < \tau_{-\sqrt a +\delta}) = \frac{\int_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}^{-\sqrt a +\delta} e^{2V_a(u)} du}{\int_{-\sqrt a -\delta}^{-\sqrt a +\delta} e^{2V_a(u)} du}\;,$$
where $V_a(u) =u^3/3 - au$. Writing $V_a(u) = V_a(-\sqrt a) - (u+\sqrt a)^2 \sqrt a + (u+\sqrt a)^3 /3$ and noticing that the cubic terms are negligible, we find
$$ {\symb Q}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} < \tau_{-\sqrt a +\delta}) \sim \frac{\int_{\frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}^{\delta} e^{-2\sqrt a u^2} du}{\int_{-\delta}^{\delta} e^{-2\sqrt a u^2} du} \to {\symb P}(\mathcal{N}(0,1) > x)\;.$$
By~\cite[Lemma 5.7]{DL17}, we know that there exists $C>0$ such that for all $y\in [-\sqrt a -\delta,-\sqrt a + \delta]$
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:ExpectQy}
{\symb Q}_{y}(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta} ) \le C \frac{\ln\ln a}{\sqrt a}\;.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, given the expression \eqref{Eq:UtX} of the Radon-Nikodym derivative of ${\symb P}_x$ w.r.t.~${\symb Q}_x$, we have
$$ {\symb P}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} < L^{1/4} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta}) = (1+o(1)) {\symb Q}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} < L^{1/4} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta})\;,$$
$$ {\symb P}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(s \le \tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} < L^{1/4} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta}) = (1+o(1)) {\symb Q}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(s \le \tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} < L^{1/4} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta})\;,$$
and (note that we only have to compute the Radon-Nikodym derivative up to time $L^{1/4}$)
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(L^{1/4} < \tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} < \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta}) &\le {\symb P}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(L^{1/4} < \tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta})\\
& \le(1+o(1)) {\symb Q}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(L^{1/4} < \tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta})\\
& \le \frac{2C}{L^{1/4}} \frac{\ln\ln a}{\sqrt a}\;\end{align*}
The two first bounds of the statement then follow by combining all these estimates and by using the Markov inequality on \eqref{Eq:ExpectQy}.\\
Regarding the third bound, given the expression \eqref{Eq:UtX} of the Radon-Nikodym derivative of ${\symb P}_x$ w.r.t.~${\symb Q}_x$, we have for any $s\in [0,L^{1/4}]$
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}_x(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta} > s) &= (1+o(1)){\symb Q}_x(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta} > s)\;
\end{align*}
so that using \eqref{Eq:ExpectQy}, we deduce that
$$ {\symb P}_x(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta} > s) \lesssim \frac{\ln\ln a}{s\sqrt a}\;.$$
Furthermore, we also have for any $\lambda > 0$
$${\symb P}_x(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta} > s) \le (1+o(1)) e^{-\lambda s} {\symb Q}_x(\exp(\lambda \tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta}))\;.$$
To conclude, it suffices to compute the exponential moment on the r.h.s. Let $Y = X_a + \sqrt a$. We have
$$ d|Y|(t) = |Y|(t) (2\sqrt a - Y(t))dt + dW(t) + d\ell(t)\;,$$
where $\ell$ is the local time of $Y$ at $0$ and $W$ is Brownian motion. Consequently, the first exit time of $[-\sqrt a-\delta,-\sqrt a + \delta]$ by $X_a$ is stochastically smaller than the first exit time of a reflected Brownian motion from $[0,\delta]$: standard estimate yield for all $\lambda \in [0,\pi^2(8\delta^2)^{-1}]$
$$ \sup_{x\in [-\sqrt a-\delta,-\sqrt a + \delta]} {\symb Q}_x(\exp(\lambda \tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta})) \le \frac1{\cos(\delta \sqrt{2\lambda})}\;,$$
thus concluding the proof.
\end{proof}
We now show that when $Z$ starts from $-\sqrt a + \delta$, with large probability it gets back to $\sqrt a$ within a time $\ln a / \sqrt a$.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:DownTop}
For any $C > 1$, for all $L$ large enough and for all $a\in \tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ we have
$$ {\symb P}^{(a)}_{-\sqrt{a}+\delta}(\tau_{\sqrt{a}} < \tau_{-\sqrt{a}} \wedge C\frac{\ln a}{\sqrt a}) \ge 1 - 2a^{-2} - a^{-\frac32 (C-1)}\;.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\kappa := \ln a / \sqrt a$. We first note that by monotony for $a'>a$ we have
$$ {\symb P}^{(a')}_{\sqrt a - \delta}(\tau_{\sqrt{a}} < (C-1)\kappa \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a} -2\delta}) \ge {\symb P}^{(a)}_{\sqrt a - \delta}(\tau_{\sqrt{a}} < (C-1)\kappa \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a} -2\delta})\;.$$
Applying the strong Markov property at time $\tau_{\sqrt{a}-\delta}$ we get
$$ {\symb P}^{(a)}_{-\sqrt a + \delta}(\tau_{\sqrt a} < C\kappa \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a}) \ge {\symb P}^{(a)}_{-\sqrt a + \delta}(\tau_{\sqrt a-\delta} < \kappa \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt{a}}) {\symb P}^{(a)}_{\sqrt a - \delta}(\tau_{\sqrt{a}} < (C-1)\kappa \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a} -2\delta})\;.$$
We are going to estimate the two factors on the r.h.s.~independently.\\
Regarding the first factor, set $R(t) = Z_a(t) - B(t)$ and note that
$$ dR(t) = \Big(a + \frac{\beta t}{4} - (R(t)+B(t))^2\Big)dt\;.$$
Consider the event $\mathcal{A}:=\{\sup_{t \le \kappa} |B(t)| < M\}$ with $M=2\ln a / a^{1/4}$: this event has probability at least $1-2a^{-2}$. On the event $\mathcal{A}$ and as long as the process $Z_a$ remains in $[-\sqrt a, +\sqrt a]$ we have
$$ dR(t) \ge a (1-\frac{3M}{\sqrt a}) - R^2(t) (1+ \frac{4 M}{\sqrt a})^2\;.$$
Indeed, if $|Z_a| \in [\frac12 \sqrt a,\sqrt a]$ we have
$$ a + \frac{\beta t}{4} - (R(t)+B(t))^2 \ge a - R(t)^2(1+ \frac{M}{\frac{\sqrt a}{2} - M})^2 \ge a - R(t)^2 (1 + \frac{4 M}{\sqrt a})^2\;.$$
While if $|Z_a|\le \sqrt a$ then
$$ a + \frac{\beta t}{4} - (R(t)+B(t))^2 \ge a - M^2 -2\sqrt a M - R(t)^2 \ge a(1- \frac{3M}{\sqrt a}) - R(t)^2\;.$$
Hence on the event $\mathcal{A}$, we have $Z_a (t) \ge F(t) - M$ as long as $Z_a$ has not hit $\pm \sqrt a$, where $F$ is the solution of
$$ dF(t) = a (1-\frac{3M}{\sqrt a}) - F^2(t) (1+ \frac{4 M}{\sqrt a})^2\;,\quad F(0) = -\sqrt{a} + \delta\;,$$
Simple computations show that
$$ F- M \ge -\sqrt a\;,\quad F(\ln a / \sqrt a) > \sqrt a - \delta/2\;.$$
We thus deduce that on the event $\mathcal{A}$, the process $Z_a$ hits $\sqrt a - \delta$ by time $\kappa$ without hitting $-\sqrt a$.\\
We turn to the second factor. Let $A(t) = Z_{a}(t) - \sqrt{a}$ and note that
$$ dA(t) = a dt + \frac{\beta t}{4} dt - (A(t)+\sqrt{a})^2 dt + dB(t) \ge -A(t) (2\sqrt{a} + A(t)) + dB(t)\;.$$
Let $U$ be the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process
$$ dU(t) = -2U(t)(\sqrt{a} - \delta) + dB(t)\;,\quad U(0) = -\delta\;.$$
Let $\tau_-$ and $\tau_+$ be the first hitting times of $\sqrt{a} - 2\delta$ and $\sqrt{a}$ by $Z_{a}$. Note that these stopping times coincide with the first hitting times of $-2\delta$ and $0$ by $A$. Note that until time $\tau_-\wedge \tau_+$, we have
$$ -A(t) (2\sqrt{a} + A(t)) \ge -2A(t) (\sqrt{a}-\delta)\;,$$
and therefore $A(t) \ge U(t)$. If we denote by $\mathbf{P}$ the law of $U$, then
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}_{\sqrt a - \delta}^{(a)}(\tau_+ < (C-1)\kappa \wedge \tau_-)&\ge \mathbf{P}(\tau_0 < (C-1)\kappa \wedge \tau_{-2\delta})\\
&\ge \mathbf{P}(\tau_0 < (C-1)\kappa) - \mathbf{P}(\tau_0 > \tau_{-2\delta})
\end{align*}
Using standard estimates on the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process, see for instance~\cite[II.7.2.0.2 and II.7.2.2.2]{Handbook}, we deduce that
$$ {\symb P}^{(a)}_{\sqrt a - \delta}(\tau_+ < (C-1)\kappa \wedge \tau_-) \ge 1 - \mathcal{O}(\delta a^{1/4} e^{-2(\sqrt a-\delta)(C-1)\kappa}) \ge 1 - a^{-\frac32 (C-1)}\;.$$
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:Stabil}}
Fix $c>0$. We start with the first part of the statement. Let $a\in \tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$. We distinguish several cases according to the value $y$. First, if $y=+\infty$ then Lemma \ref{Lemma:Entrance} shows that with a probability at least $1-a_L^{-3}$ the process lies in $[\sqrt a - c/2,\sqrt a + c/2]$ at time $(3/8) \ln a /\sqrt{a}$. Second if $y\in [\sqrt{a}-c/2,\sqrt{a}+c/2]$ then Lemma \ref{Lemma:RBM} with a probability at least $1-a_L^{-3}$ the process remains in the strip $[\sqrt{a}-c,\sqrt{a}+c]$ until time $(\ln a)^6/\sqrt a$. Third if $y=-\sqrt a + \delta$ then Lemma \ref{Lemma:DownTop} shows that the diffusion comes back to $\sqrt{a}$ before time $10 \ln a / \sqrt a$ with probability at least $1-3a^{-2}$. Fourth if $y = -\sqrt a-\delta$, then Lemma \ref{Lemma:Entrance} shows that with a probability at least $1-a_L^{-3}$ the process explodes and comes back to $[\sqrt a - c/2,\sqrt a + c/2]$ by time $(3/4)t_L$.\\
By monotonicity and using Lemma \ref{Lemma:RBM}, we thus deduce the first statement of the lemma for any $y \notin [-\sqrt a - \delta, -\sqrt a + \delta]$. It remains to treat the case where $y$ lies in $[-\sqrt a - \delta, -\sqrt a + \delta]$. By Lemma \ref{Lemma:OscUnstable}, the diffusion exits the interval $[-\sqrt{a} - \delta,-\sqrt{a} + \delta]$ by time $(\ln a)^6/(2\sqrt a)$ with a probability of order $1-a^{-c'(\ln a_L)^2}$, and then, one can apply the estimates already established for $y= -\sqrt{a} \pm \delta$.\\
Let us now adapt the above argument to prove the second part of the statement. Let $a\in \bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$. The two first cases remain unchanged. In the third case where $y=-\sqrt a + \delta$, we apply Lemma \ref{Lemma:DownTop} to show that the diffusion comes back to $\sqrt{a}$ before time $(6/5) \ln a / \sqrt a$ with probability at least $1-Ca_L^{-3/10}$. Finally if $y$ lies in $[-\sqrt a - \delta, -\sqrt a + \delta]$, then by Lemma \ref{Lemma:OscUnstable}, the diffusion exits the interval $[-\sqrt{a} - \delta,-\sqrt{a} + \delta]$ by time $\ln a/(3\sqrt a)$ with a probability of order $1-\mathcal{O}(\ln\ln a_L / \ln a_L)$, and then, one can apply the estimates already established for $y= -\sqrt{a} \pm \delta$.
\subsection{Proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:TypicalPairZ}}\label{Subsec:ProofTypicalPairZ}
We need a last lemma before we proceed with the proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:TypicalPairZ}. It turns out that the process $X_a$ introduced in Section \ref{Section:Explo} admits an explicit invariant measure, we refer to~\cite[Section 4.1]{DL17}. We will call stationary time-homogeneous diffusion a process $X_a$ that starts from the invariant measure.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:4}
Fix $\varepsilon > 0$. For all $L$ large enough and all $n$ large enough, for all $a \le a'\in\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$, for all $j\in\{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}$ such that $t^n_{j+1} < \varepsilon^{-2}$, with a probability at least $1-(\ln a_L)^{-1/2}$ the following holds. If $\theta^j_a < t^n_{j+1}L$ and if there exists $a'' \in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ such that $a'' < a$ and $\hat{Z}_{a''}$ does not explode on $[\theta^j_a + 10 t_L,t^n_{j+1}L]$ then $\hat{Z}_{a'}(t) \le -\sqrt{a_L} + (\ln a_L)/a_L^{1/4}$ for all $t\in [\theta_a^j,\theta_a^j+ 5t_L]$, and furthermore for all $t\in [\theta_a^j,t^n_{j+1} L]$ we have
\begin{align*}
-(3/2) \sqrt{a_L} \le \fint_{\theta_a^j}^t \hat{Z}_{a'}(s) ds \le -(1/2) \sqrt{a_L}\;.
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof is an adaptation of~\cite[Lemma 3.6]{DL17}. We abbreviate $\theta_a^j$ in $\theta$. The r.v.~$\theta\wedge t^n_{j+1}L$ is a stopping time in the filtration $\mathcal{F}_t,t\ge 0$ of the underlying Brownian motion $B$. By the strong Markov property, the process $(B(t+\theta\wedge t^n_{j+1}L)-B(\theta\wedge t^n_{j+1}L),t\ge 0)$ is a standard Brownian motion, independent from $\mathcal{F}_{\theta\wedge t^n_{j+1}L}$. Hence, conditionally given $\theta\wedge t^n_{j+1}L$, the process $(\hat{Z}_{a'}(t),t\in [\theta\wedge t^n_{j+1}L,t^n_{j+1} L])$ has the law of the backward diffusion.\\
We introduce a stationary time-homogeneous diffusion $\hat{Y}$ driven by $\hat B$ and whose parameter $a$ is taken to be
$$ a^Y := \frac{a' + \frac{\beta}{4} t^n_j L + a'' + \frac{\beta}{4} t^n_{j+1} L}{2}\;.$$
Note that for $n$ large enough w.r.t.~$\varepsilon$ we have
$$(a' + \frac{\beta}{4} t^n_j L) - (a'' + \frac{\beta}{4} t^n_{j+1} L) \ge \frac{\varepsilon}{8 \sqrt{a_L}}\;.$$
We introduce the event
$$\mathcal{A} := \Big\{\hat{Y}(t) \leq -\sqrt a + \frac{(\ln a)^2}{a^{1/4}} \mbox{ for all }t\in[\theta\wedge (t^n_{j+1} L),(\theta + 11 t_L)\wedge (t^n_{j+1} L)]\Big\}\;.$$
As in the proof of~\cite[Lemma 3.6]{DL17}, we can check that ${\symb P}(\mathcal{A}) \ge 1 - (\ln a_L)^{-1}$.\\
Then, we define $\mathcal{B}$ as the event on which $\hat{Z}_{a'}$, $\hat{Z}_{a''}$ and $\hat{Y}$ lie in $[-\sqrt{a_L}-1,-\sqrt{a_L}+1]$ on $[t^n_{j+1}L-10 t_L,t^n_{j+1}L]$. By Lemma \ref{Lemma:XZSqueeze} and by~\cite[Lemma 4.1]{DL17}, the probability of $\mathcal{B}$ is at least $1-(\ln a_L)^{-1}$. By the same computation as in the proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:AL} one can check that on $\mathcal{B}$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:a'Ya''}
\hat{Z}_{a'}(t) \le \hat{Y}(t) \le \hat{Z}_{a''}(t)\;,\quad \forall t\in[q'', t^n_{j+1}L - 10 t_L]\;,
\end{equation}
where $q'':= \sup\{t\le t^n_{j+1} L: \hat{Z}_{a''}(t) = +\infty\}$, and
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:a'Y}
\hat{Z}_{a'}(t) \le \hat{Y}(t) \;,\quad \forall t\in[q, t^n_{j+1}L - 10 t_L]\;,
\end{equation}
where $q:= \sup\{t\le t^n_{j+1} L: \hat{Y}(t) = +\infty\}$.\\
Define now the event $\mathcal{C}$ on which
$$ \fint_{\theta\wedge t^n_{j+1} L}^{t} \hat{Y}(s) ds \le -\sqrt a + \frac{(\ln a_L)^2}{2a_L^{1/4}}\;,\quad \forall t\in [\theta\wedge t^n_{j+1} L,t^n_{j+1} L]\;.$$
It is shown in the proof of~\cite[Lemma 3.6]{DL17} that ${\symb P}(\mathcal{C}) > 1-\exp(-c(\ln a_L)^2)$ for some $c>0$.\\
We now work on the event $\mathcal{A}\cap \mathcal{B} \cap \mathcal{C}$. If $\hat{Z}_{a''}$ does not explode on $[\theta + 10 t_L,t^n_{j+1}L]$ and if $\theta < t^n_{j+1} L$ then we claim that $\hat Y$ does not explode on $[\theta,t^n_{j+1} L]$. Indeed, by $\mathcal{B}$ and \eqref{Eq:a'Ya''}, $\hat{Y}$ explodes ``after'' $\hat{Z}_{a''}$ and since $\hat{Z}_{a''}$ does not explode on $[\theta + 10 t_L,t^n_{j+1}L]$, we deduce that $\hat{Y}$ would explode on $[\theta,\theta + 10 t_L]$. But this would raise a contradiction with $\mathcal{A}$.\\
Consequently by \eqref{Eq:a'Y} we have:
$$\hat{Z}_{a'}(t) \le -\sqrt{a}+\frac{(\ln a_L)^2}{a_L^{1/4}}\;,\quad \forall t\in [\theta,\theta+10\, t_L]\;,$$
so that $\hat{Z}_{a'}$ does not explode on $[\theta,t^n_{j+1} L]$. Moreover the bound of event $\mathcal{C}$ combined with the condition of event $\mathcal{B}$ yields
$$ \sup_{t\in [{\theta},t^n_{j+1} L]} \fint_{\theta}^t \hat{Z}_{a'}(s) ds \le -(1/2) \sqrt{a_L}\;.$$
The proof of the lower bound of the statement can be carried out using similar (and actually simpler) arguments.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:TypicalPairZ}]
An adaptation of Theorem \ref{Th:Explo} shows that, for any $a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$, if we write $a= a_L - r/(4\sqrt{a_L})$ and if we let $(t_i)_{i\ge 1}$ be the starting times (in the increasing order) of the successive excursions to $-\sqrt{a_L}$ of $Z_a$ then the point process $(t_i / L)_{i\ge 1}$ restricted to $[0,\varepsilon^{-2} L]$ converges in law to a Poisson point process of intensity $2e^r e^{-t} dt$. The intensity is twice that of the Poisson point process that appears in Theorem \ref{Th:Explo}: this is a consequence of Lemma \ref{Lemma:OscUnstable} since this result shows that, with a probability going to $1/2$, over an excursion to $-\sqrt{a_L}$ the process $Z_a$ explodes.\\
We thus deduce that the probability that there exists an interval $(t^n_jL,t^n_{j+1}L]$ with $t^n_{j+1} < \varepsilon^{-2}$ and some $a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ such that the diffusion $Z_a$ makes at least two excursions to $-\sqrt{a_L}$ is of order $\mathcal{O}(2^{-n})$ uniformly over all $L$ large enough. Therefore we can assume from now on that there are at most one excursion to $-\sqrt{a_L}$ on every interval $(t^n_jL,t^n_{j+1}L]$ with $t^n_{j+1} < \varepsilon^{-2}$.\\
From now on, we fix an interval $(t^n_jL,t^n_{j+1}L]$ with $t^n_{j+1} < \varepsilon^{-2}$. We will write ``with large probability'' to say that an event holds with a probability that goes to $1$ as $L\to\infty$ uniformly over all $j$ and all $a$. By Lemma \ref{Lemma:XZSqueeze} and the same computation as in the proof Lemma \ref{Lemma:AL}, we deduce that with large probability, for all $a\le a' \in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$, $Z_a(t^n_j L)$ lies in $[(1/2 )\sqrt{a_L}, (3/2) \sqrt{a_L}]$ and $Z_a(t^n_j) \le Z_{a'}(t^n_j)$.\\
Property (4) is a consequence of Lemma \ref{Lemma:4}. Regarding Properties (1), (2) and (3), we argue as follows. For any $a\in\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$, after its first hitting time of $\sqrt{a_L}-\delta$ we decompose the trajectory of $Z_a$ into two types of bridges:\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Type I}: Bridges that start from $\sqrt{a_L}-\delta$, hit $\sqrt{a_L}$ before $-\sqrt{a_L}$ and then come back to $\sqrt{a_L}-\delta$,
\item \emph{Type II}: Bridges that start from $\sqrt{a_L}-\delta$, hit $-\sqrt{a_L}$ before $\sqrt{a_L}$, and then come back to $\sqrt{a_L}-\delta$ (possibly after an explosion).
\end{itemize}
We already know that there are at most one bridge of Type II on $(t^n_jL,t^n_{j+1}L]$. By Lemma \ref{Lemma:ImmediateDescent} we deduce that, with large probability, if there is a bridge of Type II on $(t^n_jL,t^n_{j+1}L]$ then it does not hit $\sqrt{a_L}-\delta/2$ before $-\sqrt{a_L}$. The estimates stated in Lemma \ref{Lemma:Cross1}, \ref{Lemma:Cross2}, \ref{Lemma:Cross3} and \ref{Lemma:aa'} then yield Properties (1), (2) and (3) of the statement.\end{proof}
\bibliographystyle{Martin}
\section{Introduction}
Consider the law of $N$ interacting particles $\mu_1>\ldots>\mu_N$ given by the density:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:GbE} \frac1{Z_N^\beta} \prod_{i < j} |\mu_i - \mu_j|^\beta e^{-\frac{\beta}{4} \sum_{i=1}^N \mu_i^2}\;,\end{equation}
where $\beta > 0$ is an inverse temperature and $Z_N^\beta$ is a partition function. This law is usually referred to as the (Gaussian) $\beta$-ensemble. In the special cases $\beta=1$, $2$ and $4$, this measure coincides with the law of the eigenvalues of the Gaussian Orthogonal, Unitary and Symplectic ensembles, which are laws of random matrices invariant under conjugation with respectively orthogonal, unitary and symplectic matrices. However, the connection with random matrices is not restricted to these three particular values of $\beta$: Dumitriu and Edelman~\cite{DumEde} showed that for any $\beta >0$, one can build a symmetric, tridiagonal random matrix whose eigenvalues distribution is given by \eqref{Eq:GbE}.\\
The repulsion between particles increases with the parameter $\beta$: in particular, for fixed $N$ and $\beta$ goes to $0$, the particles, multiplied by $\sqrt{\beta}$, converge in law to $N$ IID Gaussian random variables. The behavior of these ensembles when $N$ goes to infinity and the inverse temperature $\beta$ is sent to zero has been the subject of recent works. In~\cite{BGP} the regime where $N$ goes to infinity and $\beta$ goes to $0$ but $N\beta$ remains constant is considered: the local statistics in the bulk of the spectrum are shown to converge to a Poisson point process. In~\cite{DuyNak} an alternative proof of this convergence is presented and the intensity measure of the Poisson point process is given explicitly. Let us also cite the work~\cite{Pakzad} where it is shown that for $N\beta \to 0$ the bottom of the spectrum, properly rescaled, converges to a Poisson point process.
In the present work, we consider the case where $N$ goes to infinity first, and then $\beta$ is sent to $0$: loosely speaking, we are in the case where $N\beta$ goes to infinity. We prove the convergence of the bottom of the spectrum, properly rescaled, to a Poisson point process and also a localization phenomenon for the corresponding eigenfunctions. We believe that our strategy of proof could be adapted to treat the case where $\beta$ is sent to $0$ slowly enough with $N$.
\medskip
Let us comment on the underlying physical motivations of the model. The invariant ensembles of random matrices were originally introduced to model energy levels of heavy nuclei. For general $\beta >0$, the $\beta$-ensembles can be seen as a Coulomb-gas with logarithmic interaction: the parameter $\beta$ then plays the role of an inverse temperature. As mentioned above, there has been some research activity on the behavior of this gas of particles when the temperature is sent to infinity: in the present article, we focus on the extremal particles and aim at understanding their statistical behavior.
\medskip
The scaling limit of the edge of the $\beta$-ensemble, in the regime where $N$ goes to infinity and $\beta > 0$ is fixed, was obtained by Ram\'{\i}rez, Rider and Vir\'ag~\cite{RamRidVir}. They showed that for any $k\ge 1$, the $k$-dimensional vector $\big(N^{1/6}(2\sqrt N - \mu_i); i=1\ldots k\big)$ converges in distribution to the $k$ lowest eigenvalues of the following random operator called Stochastic Airy Operator (SAO)
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:SAO}
\mathcal{A}_\beta = -\partial^2_x + x + \frac{2}{\sqrt \beta} \xi\;,\quad x\in(0,\infty)\;,
\end{equation}
endowed with homogeneous Dirichlet boundary condition at $x=0$. The potential $\xi$ appearing in this operator is a white noise on $(0,\infty)$, that is, the derivative in the sense of distributions of a Brownian motion. This operator is self-adjoint in $L^2(0,\infty)$ with pure point spectrum $\mu_1 < \mu_2 < \ldots$ of multiplicity one and the corresponding eigenfunctions $(\psi_k)_{k\ge 1}$, normalized in $L^2(0,\infty)$, are H\"older functions of regularity index $3/2^-$, see~\cite{RamRidVir,Gaudreau}.
Up to rescaling the eigenvalues / eigenfunctions appropriately (see Remark \ref{Rk:Scaling} below), it is equivalent to consider the operator
$$\mathcal{L}_\beta = -\partial_x^2 + \frac{\beta}{4}x + \xi\;,\quad x\in(0,\infty)\;,$$
endowed with homogeneous Dirichlet boundary condition at $x=0$. For simplicity, we will also call $\mathcal{L}_\beta$ the Stochastic Airy Operator: this will not cause any confusion in the sequel. We denote by $\lambda_1 < \lambda_2 < \ldots$ its eigenvalues and $(\varphi_k)_{k\ge 1}$ the associated normalized eigenfunctions. The asymptotic behavior of $\mathcal{L}_\beta$ as $\beta\downarrow 0$ will rely on the deterministic quantity $L=L_\beta$ defined by
\begin{align}\label{def:L}
L_\beta := \frac{1}{\beta \big(\frac38 \ln 1/\beta\big)^{1/3}}\;.
\end{align}
Notice that $L\to \infty$ when $\beta\to 0$, and that $\beta\mapsto L$ is injective on $(0,\beta_0)$ for some $\beta_0>0$. We will also rely on a deterministic function $a_L$, whose precise definition will be given later on (see \eqref{Eq:DefaL}) and whose asymptotic behavior is given by $a_L \sim (3/8 \ln L)^{2/3}$ as $L\to\infty$.\\
In~\cite{AllezDumazTW}, the asymptotic behavior as $\beta\downarrow 0$ of the first eigenvalue $\lambda_1$ of $\mathcal{L}_\beta$ was studied: using a representation (originally introduced in~\cite{RamRidVir}) of the eigenvalues / eigenfunctions in terms of a family of time-inhomogeneous diffusions, it was shown that $\lambda_1 \sim -a_L$ and that $-4\sqrt{a_L} (\lambda_1 + a_L)$ converges to a Gumbel law. The convergence of the joint law of the smallest eigenvalues towards a Poisson point process was left as a conjecture.
\bigskip
In the present paper, we obtain a complete description of the bottom of the spectrum of $\mathcal{L}_\beta$ when $\beta\downarrow 0$. We show that the properly rescaled eigenvalues converge to a Poisson point process with explicit intensity, and that the eigenfunctions converge to Dirac masses localized at IID points with exponential distribution. Furthermore, we obtain a precise description of the microscopic behavior of the eigenfunctions near their localization centers.\\
To state precisely our results, we let $U_{k}$ be the first point in $(0,\infty)$ where $|\varphi_k|$ reaches its maximum. We also build probability measures on $(0,\infty)$ from the rescaled eigenfunctions:
$$ m_k(dx) := L \varphi_k^2\big(x L\big) dx\;,\quad x\in (0,\infty)\;.$$
Our first main result is the following.
\begin{theorem}\label{Th:Main}
As $\beta \downarrow 0$, we have the following convergence in law
$$ \Big(4\sqrt{a_L} (\lambda_k + a_L),U_{k} / L, m_k\Big)_{k\ge 1} \Longrightarrow \Big(\Lambda_k,I_k,\delta_{I_k}\Big)_{k\ge 1}\;,$$
where $(\Lambda_k,I_k)_{k\ge 1}$ are the atoms of a Poisson point process on ${\symb R}\times{\symb R}_+$ with intensity $e^x e^{-t} dx\otimes dt$.
\end{theorem}
\noindent Here convergence takes place in the set of sequences of elements in ${\symb R}\times{\symb R}_+\times\mathcal{P}({\symb R}_+)$ endowed with the product topology, where $\mathcal{P}({\symb R}_+)$ is the space of probability measures on ${\symb R}_+$ endowed with the topology of weak convergence.
A natural question is then to determine the length scale of localization, together with the behavior of the eigenfunctions near their localization centers. This is the content of our next result, which relies on the following notations. We set for $x\in{\symb R}$
\begin{align*}
h_{k,\beta}(x) := \frac{\sqrt 2}{a_L^{1/4}} \varphi_k\Big(U_k + \frac{x}{\sqrt{a_L}}\Big)\;,\quad b_{k,\beta}(x) := \frac1{\sqrt{a_L}} \Big(B(U_k + \frac{x}{\sqrt{a_L}}) - B(U_k)\Big)\;,
\end{align*}
where $B(x) := \int_0^x \xi(dy)$. We also define $h(x) = 1/{\cosh x}$ and $b(x) = -2\tanh(x)$ for all $x\in{\symb R}$.
\begin{theorem}\label{Th:Shape}
For every $k\ge 1$, the random processes $h_{k,\beta},b_{k,\beta}$ converge to $h,b$ in probability locally uniformly on ${\symb R}$.
\end{theorem}
More can be said on the eigenfunctions. First, they decay at the exponential rate $\sqrt{a_L}$ from their localization centers. Second, if we let $0=z_0 < z_1 < \ldots < z_{k-1} < z_k=\infty$ be the zeros of $\varphi_k$ and if we let $\ell_*$ be such that the localization center $U_k$ lies in $[z_{\ell_*-1},z_{\ell*}]$, then on every $[z_{i-1},z_i]$ with $i < \ell_*$ (resp.~$i>\ell_*$) the function $\varphi_k$ admits a local maximum which is very close to the localization center of some eigenfunction $\varphi_j$ with $j< k$ and which is also very close to $z_i$ (resp.~to $z_{i-1}$). These estimates can be established using the material presented in this article but with some additional effort: we chose not to include their proofs in the present paper, but we refer the interested reader to~\cite{DL17} where similar results were established for the continuous Anderson Hamiltonian.
\begin{remark}\label{Rk:Scaling}
One can couple the two operators $\mathcal{A}_\beta$ and $\mathcal{L}_\beta$ and get the almost sure identities:
$$ \lambda_k = (\beta/4)^{2/3} \mu_k\;,\quad \varphi_k(x) = (\beta/4)^{1/6} \psi_k(x (\beta/4)^{1/3})\;,\quad x\in (0,\infty)\;.$$
Setting $c_\beta := (\frac{3}{2\beta} \ln \frac1{\pi\beta})^{2/3}$ and letting $E_k$ be the point where $|\psi_k|$ reaches its maximum, Theorem \ref{Th:Main} then reads
$$ \Big(\beta \sqrt{c_\beta} (\mu_k + c_\beta),E_{k} \beta \sqrt{c_\beta}, m_k\Big)_{k\ge 1} \Longrightarrow \Big(\Lambda_k,I_k,\delta_{I_k}\Big)_{k\ge 1}\;,$$
and the limit is the same as in the statement of the theorem. Furthermore, if one takes
$$ h_{k,\beta}(x) := \frac{\sqrt 2}{c_\beta^{1/4}} \Big|\psi_k\Big(E_{k} + \frac{x}{\sqrt{c_\beta}}\Big)\Big|\;,\quad b_{k,\beta}(x) := \frac{(\beta/4)^{1/6}}{\sqrt{c_\beta}} \Big(W\Big(E_{k} + \frac{x}{\sqrt{c_\beta}}\Big)-W\Big(E_{k}\Big)\Big)\;,$$
where $W$ is the Brownian motion associated to the white noise that drives $\mathcal{A}_\beta$, then the statement of Theorem \ref{Th:Shape} still holds.
\end{remark}
\section{The Riccati transform and the strategy of proof}\label{Section:Riccati}
It was shown in~\cite[Section 3]{RamRidVir} that the study of the eigenvalues / eigenfunctions of $\mathcal{A}_\beta$ could be carried out at the level of a family of diffusions obtained through the so-called Riccati transform. The same transform can be applied to $\mathcal{L}_\beta$ and this yields the following family of diffusions
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:Za}
dZ_a(t) = (a + \frac{\beta}{4} t - Z_a(t)^2) dt + dB(t)\;,\quad Z_a(0)=+\infty\;,\quad a \in {\symb R}\;,
\end{equation}
with the Brownian motion $B$ introduced above. This is a time-inhomogeneous diffusion that evolves in the potential
$$V(t,x) = \frac{x^3}{3} - \Big(a + \frac{\beta}{4}t\Big) x\;.$$
At any time $t\ge 0$ and for $a>0$, the function $V(t,\cdot)$ has a local minimum at $x=\sqrt{a+\frac{\beta}{4} t}$ and a local maximum at $x=-\sqrt{a+\frac{\beta}{4} t}$: the region in between these two points will be referred to as \emph{the barrier of potential} since, there, the diffusion feels a very strong drift towards the local minimum.\\
The diffusion $Z_a$ may explode to $-\infty$ in finite time: we then restart it immediately from $+\infty$. It is shown in~\cite[Section 3]{RamRidVir} that almost surely for every $k\ge 1$, the event $\{\lambda_k \le -a\}$ coincides with the event $\{Z_a$ explodes to $-\infty$ at least $k$ times$\}$, and that we have
$$ \frac{\varphi_k'}{\varphi_k}(t) = Z_{-\lambda_k}(t)\;,\quad \forall t\ge 0\;.$$
The map $\varphi_k \mapsto Z_{-\lambda_k}$ is usually referred to as the Riccati transform.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\begin{minipage}{7.4cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 3.7cm]{Za.png}
\caption{\small A typical realization of the diffusion $Z_a$. Note that it takes a very short time to come down from infinity, spends most of its time near the curve $\sqrt{a+\frac{\beta}{4}t}$ and does not spend much time near the curve $-\sqrt{a+\frac{\beta}{4}t}$.}\label{Fig:Za}
\end{minipage}\hfill
\begin{minipage}{8cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 3.7cm]{Y1.png}
\caption{\small A typical realization of the Riccati transform $\chi_1$ of the first eigenfunction. After having crossed the barrier of potential, the process oscillates forever around $-\sqrt{-\lambda_1+\frac{\beta}{4}t}$. Note that this behavior is unlikely for the diffusion $Z_a$.}\label{Fig:Y1}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Strategy of proof}
By rescaled eigenvalues, we mean the values $4\sqrt{a_L}(\lambda_k + a_L)$, $k\ge 1$. To prove the convergence of the eigenvalues, the main step consists in showing that, for any $p\ge 1$ and any disjoint intervals $[a_i,b_i]$, $i=1,\ldots,p$, the numbers of rescaled eigenvalues that fall into $[a_i,b_i]$ converge to independent Poisson r.v.~with intensities $\int_{a_i}^{b_i} e^{x} dx$.\\
To that end, we subdivide the time-interval $[0,\infty)$ of the diffusions into $2^n$ intervals $[t^n_j L,t^n_{j+1} L)$ with $0=t^n_0 < \ldots < t^n_{2^n}=\infty$. We consider the stochastic Airy operator restricted to every such interval and endowed with Dirichlet b.c. We then show that with large probability in the large $L$ and $n$ limit:
\begin{enumerate}
\item each restricted SAO has at most one (rescaled) eigenvalue in $\cup_{i=1}^n [a_i,b_i]$,
\item the number of (rescaled) eigenvalues in $[a_i,b_i]$ for the SAO equals the sum of the number of (rescaled) eigenvalues in $[a_i,b_i]$ of the restricted SAO's.
\end{enumerate}
Since the restricted SAO's are independent from each other, and since we are able to estimate the probability that they have one eigenvalue in $[a_i,b_i]$, a standard argument (see Lemma \ref{Lemma:CVQn}) yields convergence towards a vector of independent Poisson r.v. The proof of the convergence of the eigenvalues is presented in Subsection \ref{Subsec:PPP} and relies on a technical result established in Section \ref{Section:Explo}: these two parts can be read independently of the rest of the paper.
\bigskip
To prove the statements about the eigenfunctions, we observe that it suffices to prove their equivalent versions at the level of the Riccati transforms of the eigenfunctions: therefore, we only deal with the random processes $\chi_k := Z_{-\lambda_k}$. For simplicity, let us explain only the case $k=1$ in this introduction (the behavior of the next ones is illustrated on Figure \ref{Fig:Yk}).
We will show that $\chi_1$ comes down from infinity very quickly, then oscillates for a time of order $L$ around the curve $\sqrt{-\lambda_1+\frac{\beta}{4}t}$ and, at some point, crosses the ``barrier of potential'' to reach the curve $-\sqrt{-\lambda_1+\frac{\beta}{4}t}$ and then oscillates forever around this latter curve. This is illustrated on Figure \ref{Fig:Y1}. Moreover, the process crosses the barrier of potential by staying very close to a deterministic curve given by a hyperbolic tangent.\\
Inverting the Riccati transform, one deduces that $\varphi_1$ has exponential growth (resp. decay) when $\chi_1$ oscillates around $\sqrt{-\lambda_1+\frac{\beta}{4}t}$ (resp. around $-\sqrt{-\lambda_1+\frac{\beta}{4}t}$), and that the crossing of the barrier corresponds to the inverse of a hyperbolic cosine.
It is striking to compare this behavior with that of a ``typical'' realization of the diffusion $Z_a$ for a fixed parameter $a$, see Figures \ref{Fig:Za} and \ref{Fig:Y1}: the diffusion $Z_a$ would \emph{not} spend time around the curve $-\sqrt{-\lambda_1+\frac{\beta}{4}t}$ as it corresponds to an unstable line of its (time-inhomogeneous) potential.
\medskip
To prove the above assertions, we need two preliminary results. First of all, we establish that $L$ defined in \eqref{def:L} is indeed the relevant length scale of the localization centers of the eigenfunctions and that the associated value $a_L$ (see \eqref{Eq:DefaL}) is the order of magnitude of the eigenvalues. This is carried out by showing that a diffusion $Z_a$ with $a$ close enough to $a_L$ explodes \textit{finitely} many times and that all its explosion times are of order $L$ with large probability, uniformly over all $\beta$ small enough. This is a delicate result that relies on approximations of the time-inhomogeneous diffusion $Z_a$ by some time-homogeneous ones. In particular, an important part of the paper is devoted to prove that the diffusions $Z_a$ with $a$ close enough to $a_L$ typically do not explode after a time $C L$ for some large constant $C$, see Section \ref{Section:Explo}.
Second, to obtain a precise description of the eigenfunctions, we rely on the monotonicity of the diffusions: if for $a<a'$, the diffusion $Z_a$ explodes once and $Z_{a'}$ never explodes, then $\chi_1$ is squeezed in between these two diffusions until the explosion time of the former. To carry on the analysis after this explosion time, we apply a similar strategy but backward in time.\\
We start by showing that there exists a unique process $\hat{Z}_a$ that solves
\begin{equation*}
d\hat{Z}_a(t) = (a+\frac{\beta}{4}t - \hat{Z}_a(t)^2)dt + dB(t)\;,\quad \hat{Z}_a(+\infty) = -\infty\;.
\end{equation*}
We also show that the diffusion $Z_a$ converges to either $+\infty$ or $-\infty$ when $t\to\infty$, and that in the latter case it necessarily coincides with $\hat{Z}_a$. This provides an alternative characterization of the eigenvalues: $-a$ is an eigenvalue if and only if $\hat{Z}_a(0) = +\infty$. We refer to Theorem \ref{Th:TimeReversal} and Corollary \ref{Cor:bc}.\\
Building on these backward diffusions, we then track $\chi_1$ \emph{backward in time} by squeezing it in between two diffusions $\hat{Z}_a$ and $\hat{Z}_{a'}$. Then, an important part of our proof is devoted to patching together the forward and backward controls that we have on $\chi_1$.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 6cm]{Yk.png}
\caption{\small A typical realization of the Riccati transform $Y_3$ of the third eigenfunction. Until the second crossing of the barrier of potential, the process is similar to $Z_a$. Then, it is similar to the backward diffusion $\hat{Z}_a$.}\label{Fig:Yk}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Connection with the Anderson Hamiltonian}
As mentioned above, an important tool in our approach is a discretization scheme which boils down to comparing the original SAO with independent, restricted SAO's. It turns out that the interval lengths on which we consider the restricted SAO's will be of order $2^{-n} L$: at such a scale, the term $(\beta/4) x$ in the expression of the operator is essentially constant. Therefore, it is tempting to (and we will) approximate any such restricted SAO by the so-called Anderson Hamiltonian (shifted by a constant $c$ that approximates $(\beta/4) x$ on the corresponding interval $\mathcal{I}$):
$$ \mathcal{H} := -\partial_x^2 + c + \xi\;,\quad x\in \mathcal{I}\;,$$
endowed with Dirichlet b.c. Actually, this approximation will be made at the level of the Riccati transforms, see Sections \ref{Sec:Techos} and \ref{Sec:Fine}.
In a recent work~\cite{DL17} we obtained a complete description of the bottom of the spectrum of the Anderson Hamiltonian when the size of the underlying interval goes to $\infty$. In particular, we showed that the smallest eigenvalues converge to a Poisson point process of intensity $e^{x}dx$ and the corresponding eigenfunctions are localized at some IID uniform points and are close to the inverse of a hyperbolic cosine near their localization centers. The present results can therefore be seen as a time-inhomogeneous extension of those in~\cite{DL17}.
\subsection{Organization of the paper} In Section \ref{Section:Reversal}, we construct the backward diffusions needed for the
study of the eigenfunctions. In Section \ref{Section:Explo}, we prove the convergence of the point process of explosion times of $Z_a$ towards a Poisson point process. In Section \ref{Section:Proofs} we present the proofs of the main theorems. The reader interested in the sole convergence of the eigenvalues can skip Section \ref{Section:Reversal}, and will find all the arguments in Section \ref{Section:Explo} and Subsection \ref{Subsec:PPP}. In Section \ref{Sec:Techos} we present estimates on the diffusion $Z_a$ when it comes down from infinity, explodes and oscillates near the bottom of its time-inhomogeneous well, and we prove some intermediate results stated in the previous sections. Section \ref{Sec:Fine} is dedicated to delicate estimates on the behavior of $Z_a$ when it crosses its barrier of potential: these estimates are very similar to estimates established in~\cite{DL17} on a time-homogeneous diffusion and the proofs in that section therefore rely extensively on~\cite{DL17}.
\subsection*{Acknowledgements} The work of LD is supported by the project MALIN ANR-16-CE93-0003. The work of CL is supported by the project SINGULAR ANR-16-CE40-0020-01.
\section{Construction of the backward diffusions}\label{Section:Reversal}
As mentioned in the previous section, the diffusions defined in \eqref{Eq:Za} play an important role in the study of the eigenfunctions. The present section is devoted to introducing the associated backward diffusions, as they will be instrumental in proving the localization of the eigenfunctions. In the whole section, the parameter $\beta > 0$ (or equivalently, the parameter $L$) is fixed.
For any $a\in {\symb R}$, and for any space-time point $(t_0,x_0) \in {\symb R}_+ \times {\symb R}$ one can consider the \emph{forward diffusion} that starts from $x_0$ at time $t_0$
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:Riccati}
\begin{cases}
dZ_a^{(t_0,x_0)}(t) &= (a+\frac{\beta}{4}t - Z_a^{(t_0,x_0)}(t)^2)dt + dB(t)\;,\quad t >t_0\;,\\
Z_a^{(t_0,x_0)}(t_0) &= x_0\;,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
but one can also consider the \emph{backward diffusion} that ends at $x_0$ at time $t_0$
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:RiccatiReversed}
\begin{cases}
d\hat{Z}_a^{(t_0,x_0)}(t) &= (a+\frac{\beta}{4}t - \hat{Z}_a^{(t_0,x_0)}(t)^2)dt + dB(t)\;,\quad t \in [0,t_0)\;,\\
\hat{Z}_a^{(t_0,x_0)}(t_0) &= x_0\;.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Concatenating $Z_a^{(t_0,x_0)}$ and $\hat{Z}_a^{(t_0,x_0)}$, one obtains a path\footnote{By path, we mean a function from some interval of ${\symb R}$ into ${\symb R}\cup\{+\infty\}\cup\{-\infty\}$.} that coincides with $Z_a^{(0,x)}$ for $x= \hat{Z}_a^{(t_0,x_0)}(0)$.\\
Note that it is natural to consider the backward diffusion with time run backward. Setting $Y(t) := \hat{Z}_a^{(t_0,x_0)}(t_0-t)$ leads to the following:
$$\begin{cases}
dY(t) &= (-a-\frac{\beta}{4}(t_0-t) + Y(t)^2)dt - dB(t_0-t)\;,\quad t \in (0,t_0]\;,\\
Y(0) &= x_0\;.\end{cases}
$$
\begin{remark}
The diffusion $Y$ evolves in the time-inhomogeneous potential $(a+\beta(t_0-t)/4)x - x^3/3$: for $a>0$, the bottom of the well at time $t$ is located at $-\sqrt{a+ \beta(t_0-t)/4}$. This means that the backward diffusion $\hat{Z}_a$ tends to be close to $-s_a(t)$ while the forward diffusion typically lies in a neighborhood of $s_a(t)$, with $s_a(t) =\sqrt{a+\beta t/4}$.
\end{remark}
\medskip
At this point, let us make a few technical comments. First of all, the construction of these diffusions is totally deterministic: once we are given a standard Brownian motion $B$, we can work deterministically and construct all the above processes as solutions to ODEs driven by the continuous trajectory $t\mapsto B_t(\omega)$. Second, simple arguments applied to the ODE show that the forward diffusion is well-defined when starting from $x_0 = +\infty$ since the associated ODE comes down from infinity; similarly, the backward diffusion is well-defined when starting from $x_0 = -\infty$. Furthermore, the forward diffusion may hit $-\infty$ in finite time: then, it restarts immediately from $+\infty$. Similarly, the backward diffusion - when run backward in time - may hit $+\infty$ in finite time and then restarts from $-\infty$. Third, the diffusion inherits a monotonicity property from the ODE. Namely, for all $a\le a'$, all $(t_0,x_0), (t_0',x_0')$ and all $s\in [t_0\vee t_0',\infty)$, if we have $Z_{a}^{(t_0,x_0)} (s) \le Z_{a'}^{(t_0',x_0')} (s)$ then
$$ Z_{a}^{(t_0,x_0)} (s+\cdot) \le Z_{a'}^{(t_0',x_0')} (s+\cdot)\;,$$
up to the next explosion time of $Z_{a}^{(t_0,x_0)}$. A similar statement holds for the backward diffusion.
\medskip
We aim at understanding the possible behaviors of the forward diffusions as $t\to\infty$. This is intimately linked to the construction of the backward diffusion starting from some point $x_0$ at time $t_0 = +\infty$. The main result of this section is the following.
\begin{theorem}\label{Th:TimeReversal}
There exists an event of probability one on which the following holds. For all $a\in{\symb R}$ and all $(t_0,x_0) \in {\symb R}_+ \times ({\symb R}\cup\{+\infty\})$, the forward diffusion $Z_a^{(t_0,x_0)}(t)$ goes to either $+\infty$ or $-\infty$ as $t\to\infty$. Additionally, for all $a\in{\symb R}$ there exists a unique path $\hat{Z}_a^{(+\infty,-\infty)}$ that solves
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:RiccatiReversed2}
\begin{cases}
d\hat{Z}_a(t) &= (a+\frac{\beta}{4}t - \hat{Z}_a(t)^2)dt + dB(t)\;,\quad t \in [0,\infty)\;,\\
\hat{Z}_a(+\infty) &= -\infty\;.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
From this result, we deduce that for any given $a\in{\symb R}$, there exists a unique starting point $x_0\in{\symb R}\cup \{+\infty\}$ such that $Z_a^{(0,x_0)}(t)$ goes to $-\infty$ as $t\to\infty$: this starting point coincides with $\hat{Z}_a^{(+\infty,-\infty)}(0)$. Any other starting point makes the forward diffusion go to $+\infty$ (this prevents uniqueness of a backward diffusion starting from $(+\infty,+\infty)$).
\begin{remark}
The discussion at the end of~\cite[Sec 3]{RamRidVir} shows that either $Z_a$ goes to $+\infty$ or $\int^t Z_a(s) ds$ is asymptotically smaller than $- C t^{3/2}$ for some positive constant $C$. While this result almost covers the statement of our theorem, it does not imply that $Z_a$ goes to $-\infty$ in the second case.
\end{remark}
In Subsection \ref{Subsec:Symmetry}, we collect important consequences of the above theorem for the study of the eigenfunctions of $\mathcal{L}_\beta$. The subsequent subsections are devoted to the proof of Theorem \ref{Th:TimeReversal}.
\medskip
From now on, we will implicitly view the backward diffusions as evolving backward in time (even though their evolution equations are stated forward in time). For the sake of clarity, we will put under quotation marks the words after or until when time is run backward. For instance, the sentence
\begin{center}
``until'' its first explosion time, the diffusion $\hat{Z}^{(t_0,x_0)}$ does [...]\end{center}
\noindent means that on the interval $[\tau,t_0]$ the diffusion does [...], where $\tau := \sup\{t < t_0: \hat{Z}^{(t_0,x_0)}(t) = +\infty\}$.
\subsection{Backward diffusions and eigenfunctions}\label{Subsec:Symmetry}
In the sequel, we abbreviate $Z_a^{(0,+\infty)}$ and $\hat{Z}_a^{(+\infty,-\infty)}$ into $Z_a$ and $\hat{Z}_a$.
\begin{corollary}\label{Cor:bc}
Almost surely, the set of eigenvalues $\{\lambda_k, k\ge 1\}$ coincides with the set
$$\{-a\in {\symb R}: \lim_{t\to\infty} Z_a(t) = -\infty\} = \{-a\in {\symb R}: \hat{Z}_a(0) = +\infty\}\;.$$
Furthermore, the event $\{\lambda_k \le -a\}$ coincides with the event $\{Z_a$ explodes to $-\infty$ at least $k$ times$\}$, and we have
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:vep}
\frac{\varphi_k'}{\varphi_k}(t) = Z_{-\lambda_k}(t) = \hat{Z}_{-\lambda_k}(t)\;,\quad \forall t\ge 0\;.
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
The discussion at the beginning of~\cite[Section 3]{RamRidVir} shows that the Riccati transform applied to $\varphi_k$ yields a process that starts from $+\infty$ at time $0$ (due to the Dirichlet b.c.~imposed on $\mathcal{L}_\beta$) and satisfies the same differential equation as $Z_a$ with $a=-\lambda_k$. Let us show that it necessarily goes to $-\infty$ at $+\infty$. Since $\varphi_k$ is in $L^2((0,\infty))$, the associated process $Z_a$, with $a=-\lambda_k$, cannot go to $+\infty$ at $+\infty$: by Theorem \ref{Th:TimeReversal} we deduce that $Z_a$ necessarily goes to $-\infty$.\\
Conversely, if $\hat{Z}_a(0) = +\infty$ (or equivalently $Z_a(t)\to -\infty$ as $t\to\infty$) then the reverse Riccati transform provides an $L^2((0,\infty))$ function that solves the eigenproblem associated to $\mathcal{L}_\beta$, thus concluding the proof.\\
Finally the monotonicity property of the diffusions implies that $\{\lambda_k \le -a\}$ coincides with the event $\{Z_a$ explodes to $-\infty$ at least $k$ times$\}$.
\end{proof}
Here is a simple consequence of identity \eqref{Eq:vep}. Let us denote by $0 < \zeta_a(1) < \zeta_a(2) < \ldots$ the successive explosion times (to $-\infty$) of $Z_a$, and by $0 < \hat{\zeta}_a(1) < \hat{\zeta}_a(2) < \ldots$ the successive explosion times (to $+\infty$) of $\hat{Z}_a$. For convenience we set $\zeta_a(0) := 0$.
\begin{lemma}[Ordering of the explosions]\label{Lemma:Symmetry}
Almost surely for every $k\ge 1$, if $Z_a$ explodes $k$ times then $\hat{Z}_a$ explodes $k$ times as well and we have for every $i\in\{1,\ldots,k\}$
\begin{align*}
\zeta_a(i-1) \le \hat{\zeta}_a(i) \le \zeta_a(i) \;.
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The events ``$Z_a$ explodes $k$ times'' and ``$\hat{Z}_a$ explodes $k$ times'' both coincide with the event ``$\lambda_k \le -a$'' so that they are almost surely equal.
Assume that we have $\hat{\zeta}_a(i) < \zeta_a(i-1)$ and take some rational number $t_0$ in between these two values. The operator $-\partial^2_x + \frac{\beta}{4}x + \xi$ restricted to $[0,t_0]$ has strictly less than $i-1$ eigenvalues below $-a$ due to $\zeta_a(i-1) > t_0$. On the other hand by monotonicity, the diffusion $\hat{Z}^{(t_0,-\infty)}_a$ explodes at least $i-1$ times since $\hat{Z}_a$ explodes at least $i$ times on $[0,t_0]$: consequently, the aforementioned operator must have at least $i-1$ eigenvalues below $-a$ thus raising a contradiction. Similar arguments yield the other inequality.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Construction of the backward diffusions}\label{Subsec:Construction}
We will construct a solution of \eqref{Eq:RiccatiReversed2} by approximations. More precisely, for every $a\in{\symb R}$, we consider the two sequences of processes (indexed by $N\ge 1$)
$$\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(t) \quad \mbox{ and }\quad \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(t)\;,\quad t\in [0,\frac{N}{\beta}]\;.$$
Note that these two diffusions, when run backward in time, start at time $N/\beta$ one above the other and, by the monotonicity property presented previously, remain ordered ``until'' the first explosion time to $+\infty$ of $\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a$.\\
One expects these two processes to be close to the parabola $-s_a(t) := -\sqrt{a+\beta t/4}$, at least for large enough $t$. Indeed, for the diffusion run backward in time, this parabola corresponds to the bottom of the well of its time-inhomogeneous potential, see Figures \ref{Fig:Za}, \ref{Fig:Y1} and \ref{Fig:Yk}.
Very informally, we will construct a solution of \eqref{Eq:RiccatiReversed2} by taking the limit of the sequence $\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a$ on some (random) neighborhood of $+\infty$ where this sequence is non-decreasing. Regarding uniqueness, since any solution $Y$ of \eqref{Eq:RiccatiReversed2} tends to $-\infty$, there exists some $N_0$ such that for all $N\ge N_0$ we have
$$ -\infty = \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(\frac{N}{\beta}) \le Y(\frac{N}{\beta}) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(\frac{N}{\beta}) = 0\;,$$
and, consequently, $Y$ is squeezed in between the two sequences for large enough times: we will thus prove that the difference between these two processes tends to $0$ to conclude.\\
\begin{remark}
We consider the (seemingly complicated) sequence of times $(\frac{N}{\beta})_{N\ge 1}$ in order for our later estimates to be uniform over all $\beta > 0$. Indeed, these estimates will be applied in the next section for different purposes. However, for the sole proof of Theorem \ref{Th:TimeReversal}, we could have ``started'' our processes at time $N$ instead of $\frac{N}{\beta}$.
\end{remark}
The key technical result for the proof is the following proposition.
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:ZmZp}
Fix $\ell \in {\symb Z}$ and $\beta >0$. As $k_0\to\infty$, the probability of the following event goes to $1$. For all $a\in[\ell-1,\ell]$ and for all $N \geq k_0+1$,
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:BoundZmZp}
\forall t\in[\frac{k_0}{\beta},\frac{N-1}{\beta}]\;,\quad -\frac32 s_a(t) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(t) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(t) \le -\frac12 s_a(t)\;,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{align*}
\forall t\in[\frac{N-1}{\beta},\frac{N}{\beta}],\quad \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(t) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(t) \le 1\;.
\end{align*}
\end{proposition}
To control the behavior of the forward diffusions, we will need a companion result to the previous proposition. We consider the diffusion $Z_a^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}$ that starts from $0$ at time $\frac{N}{\beta}$ and goes \emph{forward} in time.
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:BoundFwd}
Fix $\ell \in {\symb Z}$ and $\beta >0$. As $k_0\to\infty$, the probability of the following event goes to $1$. For all $a\in[\ell-1,\ell]$ and for all $N \geq k_0$,
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:BoundFwd}
\frac12 s_a(t) \le Z_a^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}(t) \le \frac32 s_a(t)\;,\quad \forall t \ge \frac{N+1}{\beta}\;.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
We defer the proof of these two results until Subsection \ref{Subsec:Lemma} and now prove Theorem \ref{Th:TimeReversal}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{Th:TimeReversal}]
If we prove that for any given $\ell\in{\symb Z}$, the statement of the theorem holds almost surely for all $a\in[\ell-1,\ell]$, then it obviously holds almost surely for all $a\in {\symb R}$. Therefore, $\ell \in{\symb Z}$ is fixed until the end of the proof.
\smallskip
Let us first prove the existence of solutions of \eqref{Eq:RiccatiReversed2} for $a \in [\ell-1,\ell]$. From Proposition \ref{Prop:ZmZp}, there exists a random integer $k_0 >0$ such that for all $a\in[\ell-1,\ell]$ and for every $N\ge k_0+1$, we have
$$ \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(t) \le -\frac12 s_a(t)\;,\quad t\in [\frac{k_0}{\beta}, \frac{N-1}{\beta}]\quad \mbox{ and }\quad \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(t) \le 1\;,\quad t\in [\frac{N-1}{\beta},\frac{N}{\beta}]\;.$$
By monotonicity, we thus deduce that for every $t \in [k_0/\beta,\infty)$, the sequence $\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(t)$, $N \ge t \beta$ is bounded non-decreasing and therefore converges pointwise: we call $\hat{Z}_a(t)$ its limit. This limit satisfies $\hat{Z}_a(t) \le -(1/2) s_a(t)$ and therefore goes to $-\infty$ as $t\to+\infty$. Furthermore, by passing to the limit on the equation solved by $\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a$, we deduce that almost surely
$$ d\hat{Z}_a(t) = \Big(a+\frac{\beta}{4}t - \hat{Z}_a(t)^2\Big)dt + dB(t)\;,\quad t \in [\frac{k_0}{\beta},\infty)\;.$$
In addition, we set $\hat{Z}_a(t) := \hat{Z}_a^{(k_0/\beta,x_0)}(t)$ for all $t\in [0,k_0/\beta]$, where $x_0 = \hat{Z}_a(k_0/\beta)$.
\smallskip
For uniqueness, let us first observe that on the event where \eqref{Eq:BoundZmZp} holds, for every given $t\ge k_0/\beta$ we have $(\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a-\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a)(t) \to 0$ as $N\to\infty$. Indeed, solving the differential equation satisfied by the difference of these two processes we obtain that for all $t \in [\frac{k_0}{\beta}, \frac{N-1}{\beta}]$,
\begin{align*}
(\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a-\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a)(t) &= (\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a-\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a)(\frac{N-1}{\beta}) e^{\int_t^{\frac{N-1}{\beta}} (\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a + \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a)(u) du}\\
&\le s_a(\frac{N-1}{\beta}) e^{-\int_t^{\frac{N-1}{\beta}}s_a(u) du}\;,
\end{align*}
which goes to $0$ as $N\to\infty$.\\
Let $Y_a$ be another solution of \eqref{Eq:RiccatiReversed2}. Since it goes to $-\infty$ as $t\to\infty$, there exists a random time $s_0$ after which $Y_a$ remains negative. As a consequence, almost surely for every $N \ge s_0 \beta$, $\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(\frac{N}{\beta}) < Y_a(\frac{N}{\beta}) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a$ so that monotonicity ensures that $Y_a$ remains in between the two curves $\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a$ and $\hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a$ on $[(k_0\vee s_0)/\beta, N/\beta]$. Passing to the limit on $N$, we thus deduce that $Y_a$ must coincide with $\hat{Z}_a$.
\medskip
We turn to the statement regarding the limit of $Z=Z_a^{(t_0,x_0)}$. We distinguish two cases. If $Z(\frac{N}{\beta}) \le 0$ occurs for infinitely many $N\ge 1$, then the argument presented right above to prove uniqueness shows that $Z$ actually coincides with $\hat{Z}_a$: it therefore goes to $-\infty$ as $t\to\infty$.\\
Otherwise, there exists a random $N_0$ such that for all $N\ge N_0$, we have $Z(\frac{N}{\beta}) > 0$. Using Proposition \ref{Prop:BoundFwd} and monotonicity, we deduce that $Z(t)$ remains above $(1/2)s_a(t)$ for all $t\in [t_0,\infty)$ for some random $t_0$ and therefore $Z(t)$ goes to $+\infty$ as $t\to\infty$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Exit time of Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process}
For $\theta > 0$ consider the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process
$$ dU(t) = -\theta U(t) dt + dB(t)\;,\quad U(0) = 0\;.$$
For $b>0$ introduce the exit time
$$ H := \inf\Big\{t\ge 0: U(t) \notin \Big(-\frac{b}{\sqrt{2\theta}},\frac{b}{\sqrt{2\theta}}\Big)\Big\}\;.$$
In the next subsection, we will use the following estimate.
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:OU}
There exists $C>0$ and $b_0 >0$ such that for all $\theta > 0$, all $\nu \in (0,1)$ and all $b > b_0$
$$ \mathbb{E}[e^{-\theta \nu H}] \le \frac{C}{1 + \frac{\nu}{b^2} e^{\frac{b^2}{2}}}\;.$$
\end{proposition}
\begin{remark}
This estimate indicates that, for $b$ large, the typical value of $H$ is of order $e^{\frac{b^2}{2}}$ (up to polynomial corrections). This is in line with the large deviation theory that asserts that the diffusion $U$, which evolves within the potential $V(x) = \theta x^2/2$, hits level $\pm b/\sqrt{2\theta}$ at a time of order $e^{2V(b/\sqrt{2\theta})}$.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
By~\cite[II.7.3.0.1 p.548 and Appendix 2.9 p.639]{Handbook} we have
$$ \mathbb{E}[e^{-\theta \nu H}] = e^{-\frac{b^2}{4}} \frac{2 D_{-\nu}(0)}{D_{-\nu}(-b)+D_{-\nu}(b)}\;,$$
where $D_{-\nu}$ is the so-called parabolic cylinder function. From its expression~\cite[Appendix 2.9 p.639]{Handbook}, we deduce that
\begin{align*}
\frac1{\mathbb{E}[e^{-\theta \nu H}]} &= 1+\sum_{k\ge 1} \frac{\nu(\nu+2)\times\ldots \times (\nu+2k-2)}{(2k)!}b^{2k}\\
&\ge 1+ \nu \sum_{k\ge 1} \frac{2 \times 4 \times\ldots \times(2k-2)}{(2k)!}b^{2k}\;.
\end{align*}
Since
$$\frac{2 \times 4 \times \ldots \times (2k-2)}{(2k)!}\,b^{2k} = \frac1{1 \times 3 \times \ldots \times (2k-1) \times (2k)}\, b^{2k} \ge \frac1{b^2} (\frac{b^2}{2})^{k+1} \frac1{(k+1)!}\;,$$
we deduce that
$$ \frac1{\mathbb{E}[e^{-\theta \nu H}]} \ge 1 + \frac{\nu}{b^2} (e^{\frac{b^2}{2}} - 1 - \frac{b^2}{2})\;.$$
The asserted bound follows.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proofs of intermediate results}\label{Subsec:Lemma}
We will present in details the proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:BoundFwd}, and we will then present the main steps of the proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:ZmZp} since it is quite similar. The main argument is the following. On a small interval of time, the increment of the Brownian motion is small with large probability: the diffusion $Z^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_{a}$ is then very close to the solution of the deterministic ODE obtained by removing the Brownian motion from its evolution equation. This ODE has an explicit solution that goes very quickly to a neighborhood of the curve $t\mapsto s_a(t)$.\\
The proof is split into two lemmas. The first one controls the behavior of $Z^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a$ on $[\frac{N}{\beta},\frac{N+1}{\beta}]$.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:ZfwdInit}
There exist $A>0$ and $c>0$ such that, for all $\ell\in{\symb Z}$ and all $N\ge 1$ such that $\ell+N \ge A$, the following holds with probability at least $1-e^{-(\ell+N)^{1/3}}-\beta^{-1} e^{-c(\ell+N)^{3/2}}$. For all $a\in [\ell-1,\ell]$, we have
$$ \inf_{t\in [\frac{N}{\beta},\frac{N+1}{\beta}]} Z_a^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}(t) \ge -1\;,\quad\mbox{ and }\qquad\frac23 s_a(\frac{N+1}{\beta}) \le Z_a^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}(\frac{N+1}{\beta}) \le \frac43 s_a(\frac{N+1}{\beta})\;.$$
\end{lemma}
\noindent The second lemma will allow to bound the process $Z_a^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}$ between two deterministic curves through a recursion in time.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:ZfwdRecur}
There exist $A>0$ and $c>0$ such that for all $\ell\in{\symb Z}$ and all $k\ge 1$ such that $\ell+k \ge A$, the following holds with probability at least $1-e^{-(\ell+k)^{1/3}} - \beta^{-1} e^{-c(\ell+k)^{3/2}}$. For all $N \le k-1$ and all $a\in [\ell-1,\ell]$, if
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:BoundZ0}
\frac23 s_a(\frac{k}{\beta}) \le Z^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(\frac{k}{\beta}) \le \frac43 s_a(\frac{k}{\beta})\;,
\end{equation}
then we have
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:BoundZ}
\frac12 s_a(t) \le Z^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(t) \le \frac32 s_a(t)\;,\quad \forall t\in [\frac{k}{\beta},\frac{k+1}{\beta}]\;,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:BoundZ2}
\frac23 s_a(\frac{k+1}{\beta}) \le Z^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(\frac{k+1}{\beta}) \le \frac43 s_a(\frac{k+1}{\beta})\;,
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:BoundFwd}]
Fix $\ell\in{\symb Z}$. Take $k_0 \ge 1$ such that $\ell+k_0\ge A$ where $A$ is the maximum of the $A$'s appearing in the above two lemmas. Applying the first lemma and iterating the second, we see that the probability of the event of the statement of the proposition is at least
$$1 - \sum_{k\ge k_0} (e^{-(\ell+k)^{1/3}}+\beta^{-1} e^{-c(\ell+k)^{3/2}}) - \sum_{N\ge k_0} (e^{- (\ell+N)^{1/3}}+\beta^{-1} e^{-c(\ell+N)^{3/2}})\;.$$
This probability goes to $1$ as $k_0\to\infty$, thus concluding the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:ZfwdInit}]
To alleviate notations, we will simply write $Z_a$ for $Z_a^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}$. Set
$$\kappa_N := \frac{\ln s_\ell(\frac{N}{\beta})}{s_\ell(\frac{N}{\beta})}\;.$$
Note that $s_\ell(N/\beta) = \sqrt{\ell+N}$ is well-defined as soon as $\ell+N \ge 0$. Note also that as $\ell+N \to\infty$ we have
$$ \frac{s_\ell(N/\beta)}{s_{\ell-1}(N/\beta)} \to 1\;,$$
so that, in the sequel, we will implicitly assume that this ratio is as close as desired to $1$.
Consider the event
$$\mathcal{A}:=\Big\{\forall t\in [\frac{N}{\beta},\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N],\; |B(t)-B(\frac{N}{\beta})| < 1\Big\}\;,$$
and note that ${\symb P}(\mathcal{A}^\complement) \le 2e^{-\frac12\kappa_N^{-1}}$. Since $\kappa_N^{-1} \gg (\ell+N)^{1/3}$ as $\ell+N$ goes to $\infty$, we deduce that ${\symb P}(\mathcal{A}^\complement) \le e^{-(\ell+N)^{1/3}}$ for $\ell+N$ large enough.\\
We first prove that on the event $\mathcal{A}$ and as soon as $N$ is large enough, we can squeeze all the processes $Z_a$, $a\in [\ell-1,\ell]$, in between simple deterministic curves on the time interval $[\frac{N}{\beta},\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N]$.
\medskip
By monotonicity, we have for all $a\in [\ell-1,\ell]$
$$ Z_{\ell-1} \le Z_a \le Z_{\ell}\;,$$
until the first explosion time of $Z_{\ell-1}$ to $-\infty$. Consequently, it suffices to bound from below $Z_{\ell-1}$ and from above $Z_{\ell}$. We start with the bound of the former, and set $R(t) := Z_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta}+t) - B(\frac{N}{\beta}+t) + B(\frac{N}{\beta})$ for all $t\ge 0$. We have
$$ dR(t) = s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta}+t)^2 dt - Z_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta}+t)^2 dt\;.$$
We now work on the event $\mathcal{A}$ and on the time-interval $[0,\kappa_N]$. If $|Z_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta}+t)| \in [0,(1/2) s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})]$ then for all $N$ large enough
$$ dR(t) \ge s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})^2 \Big(1 - \frac3{s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})}\Big)dt - R(t)^2dt\;,$$
and if $|Z_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta}+t)| \ge (1/2) s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})$ then
$$ dR(t) \ge s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})^2 dt - R(t)^2 \Big(1 + \frac5{s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})}\Big)dt\;.$$
Therefore, if we take $G$ as the solution of $G(0) = 0$ and
$$ dG(t) = s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})^2 \Big(1 - \frac3{s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})}\Big)dt - G(t)^2 \Big(1 + \frac5{s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})}\Big)dt\;,$$
then on the event $\mathcal{A}$ we have $R(t) \ge G(t)$ for $t\in [0,\kappa_N]$. The function $G$ is explicit:
$$ G(t) = s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta}) \sqrt{\frac{1 - \frac3{s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})}}{1 + \frac5{s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})}}} \tanh\Big(s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})\, t\,\sqrt{(1 - \frac3{s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})})(1 + \frac5{s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta})})} \Big)\;.$$
It is non-negative and for all $\ell+N$ large enough, we have $G(\kappa_N) \ge \frac56 s_{\ell}(\frac{N+1}{\beta}) + 1$. Since
$$Z_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta}+t) \ge R(t) - |B(\frac{N}{\beta}+t)-B(\frac{N}{\beta})| \ge G(t) - |B(\frac{N}{\beta}+t)-B(\frac{N}{\beta})|\;,$$
we deduce that on the event $\mathcal{A}$
$$ Z_{\ell-1}(t) \ge -1\;,\quad t\in [\frac{N}{\beta},\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N]\;,\qquad Z_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N) \ge \frac56 s_\ell(\frac{N+1}{\beta})\;.$$
To bound from above $Z_{\ell}$, we proceed similarly. We set $R(t) = Z_{\ell}(\frac{N}{\beta}+t) - B(\frac{N}{\beta}+t) + B(\frac{N}{\beta})$, and one can check that for all $N$ large enough, on the event $\mathcal{A}$ and for $t\in [0,\kappa_N]$ we have $R(t) \le F(t)$ where $F(0) = 0$ and
$$ dF(t) = s_{\ell}(\frac{N+1}{\beta})^2\Big( 1 + \frac{3}{s_{\ell}(\frac{N+1}{\beta})} \Big) dt - F^2(t) \Big( 1 - \frac{5}{s_{\ell}(\frac{N+1}{\beta})} \Big) dt\;.$$
Here again, it can be checked that $F(\kappa_N) \le \frac76 s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N+1}{\beta}) -1$ for all $N$ large enough. Consequently, on the event $\mathcal{A}$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:IneqZZ} \frac56 s_\ell(\frac{N+1}{\beta}) \le Z_{\ell-1}(\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N) \le Z_{\ell}(\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N) \le \frac76 s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N+1}{\beta})\;.\end{equation}
To conclude, it suffices to prove that, conditionally given the filtration of the Brownian motion up to time $\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N$, $Z_{\ell-1}$ remains above $(2/3) s_{\ell}(\frac{N+1}{\beta})$ and $Z_{\ell}$ remains below $(4/3) s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N+1}{\beta})$ on the time-interval $[\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N,\frac{N+1}{\beta}]$. This is achieved by a comparison with a reflected Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process: let us give the details for the upper bound.\\
For all $\ell+N$ large enough, $s_\ell(t) \le (7/6) s_{\ell-1}((N+1)/\beta)$ for all $t\in [\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N,\frac{N+1}{\beta}]$. An elementary computation yields
$$ d Z_{\ell}(t) \le -2s_\ell(t)(Z_\ell - s_\ell(t)) dt + dB(t) \le -2s_\ell(t)(Z_\ell - (7/6) s_{\ell-1}((N+1)/\beta)) dt + dB(t)\;,$$
and therefore $Z_\ell(t) \le R(t) + (7/6) s_{\ell-1}((N+1)/\beta)$ for all $t\in [\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N,\frac{N+1}{\beta}]$ where $R$ is a non-negative process satisfying
$$ dR(t) = -2s_\ell(N/\beta) R(t) + dB(t) + dL(t)\;,\quad R(\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N) = 0\;,$$
and $L$ is a reflection measure supported by the zeros of $R$. The process $R$ is equal in law to $|U|$ where $U$ is the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process
$$ dU(t) = -2s_\ell(N/\beta) U(t) + dB(t)\;,\quad U(\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N) = 0\;.$$
As a consequence, there exists a constant $d>0$ such that, conditionally given \eqref{Eq:IneqZZ}, the probability that $Z_\ell$ hits $(4/3) s_{\ell-1}(\frac{N+1}{\beta})$ on the time interval $[\frac{N}{\beta}+\kappa_N,\frac{N+1}{\beta}]$ is bounded from above by the probability that $U$ exits $[-d s_{\ell}(N/\beta),d s_{\ell}(N/\beta)]$ on the same time interval. Applying Proposition \ref{Prop:OU} with $\nu = \beta/(2s_\ell(N/\beta))$, the latter is bounded by $\beta^{-1} \exp(-c(\ell+N)^{3/2})$, for some constant $c>0$ as soon as $\ell+N$ is large enough.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:ZfwdRecur}]
Assume that \eqref{Eq:BoundZ0} holds for some $k$. Similarly as in the previous proof, by a comparison with reflected Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes, one can deduce that \eqref{Eq:BoundZ} holds with a probability at least $1 - \beta^{-1} e^{-c(\ell + k)^{3/2}}$ for some constant $c>0$.
To prove \eqref{Eq:BoundZ2}, we set $\kappa_k := \ln(s_\ell(k/\beta)) / s_\ell(k/\beta)$ and we work on the event
$$ \mathcal{A} := \Big\{\forall t\in [\frac{k+1}{\beta}-\kappa_k,\frac{k+1}{\beta}],\; |B(t)-B(\frac{k+1}{\beta}-\kappa_k)| \le 1\Big\}\;.$$
On this event, one can squeeze the trajectory of $Z_a^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}$ in between two deterministic curves that get close to $s_a(\frac{k+1}{\beta})$ in a short time so that \eqref{Eq:BoundZ2} is satisfied: the proof is very similar to that of the last lemma so we do not provide the details. The probability of $\mathcal{A}$ is larger than $1-e^{-(\ell+k)^{1/3}}$ provided that $\ell+k$ is large enough. This concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
\bigskip
The proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:ZmZp} is very similar. It relies on two intermediate lemmas and a recursion \emph{backward} in time. We only state the two lemmas since the arguments are essentially the same as above.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:Z-Z+}
There exist $A>0$ and $c>0$ such that, for all $\ell\in{\symb Z}$ and all $N\ge 1$ such that $\ell+N \ge A$, the following holds with probability at least $1-e^{-(\ell+N)^{1/3}}-\beta^{-1} e^{-c(\ell+N)^{3/2}}$. For all $a\in [\ell-1,\ell]$, we have
$$ \sup_{t\in [\frac{N-1}{\beta},\frac{N}{\beta}]} \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(t) \le \sup_{t\in [\frac{N-1}{\beta},\frac{N}{\beta}]} \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(t) \le 1\;,$$
and
$$ -\frac43 s_a(\frac{N-1}{\beta}) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(\frac{N-1}{\beta}) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(\frac{N-1}{\beta}) \le -\frac23 s_a(\frac{N-1}{\beta})\;.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:ZmZpRecur}
There exist $A>0$ and $c>0$ such that for all $\ell\in{\symb Z}$ and all $k\ge 1$ such that $\ell+k \ge A$, the following holds with probability at least $1-e^{-(\ell+k)^{1/3}}-\beta^{-1} e^{-c(\ell+k)^{3/2}}$. For all $N$ such that $k_0 \le N \le k-1$ and all $a\in [\ell-1,\ell]$, if
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:BoundhZ0}
-\frac43 s_a(\frac{k}{\beta}) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(\frac{k}{\beta}) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(\frac{k}{\beta})\le -\frac23 s_a(\frac{k}{\beta})\;,
\end{equation}
then we have
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:BoundhZ}
-\frac32 s_a(t) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(t) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(t) \le -\frac12 s_a(t)\;,\quad \forall t\in [\frac{k-1}{\beta},\frac{k}{\beta}]\;,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:BoundhZ2}
-\frac43 s_a(\frac{k-1}{\beta}) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},-\infty)}_a(\frac{k-1}{\beta}) \le \hat{Z}^{(\frac{N}{\beta},0)}_a(\frac{k-1}{\beta})\le -\frac23 s_a(\frac{k-1}{\beta})\;.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\medskip
\section{Convergence of the point process of explosion times}\label{Section:Explo}
Let $0 < \zeta_a(1) < \zeta_a(2) < \ldots$ be the successive explosion times of $Z_a := Z_a^{(0,+\infty)}$. For a function $a_L \sim (\frac38 \ln L)^{2/3}$ whose precise definition will be given in the next subsection, we have the following result.
\begin{theorem}\label{Th:Explo}
Fix $r\in{\symb R}$ and set $a=a_L - \frac{r}{4\sqrt{a_L}}$. As $L\to\infty$, the random measure
$$ \sum_{k\ge 1} \delta_{\zeta_{a}(k)/L}\;,$$
converges in law for the topology of weak convergence of finite measures to a Poisson point process on ${\symb R}_+$ with intensity $e^r e^{-t} dt$.
\end{theorem}
This result strengthens~\cite[Th 4.1]{AllezDumazTW}: therein, the aforementioned convergence is established in the topology of vague convergence of Radon measures. This topology does not allow to control the mass at infinity while this is required in order to study the eigenvalues of the operator $\mathcal{L}_\beta$. Actually, even to compute the limiting fluctuations of the first eigenvalue, one needs to evaluate the probability of non-explosion of $Z_{a}$ and this requires to control the mass at infinity of the above random point process.
To prove the theorem, we subdivide $[0,\infty)$ into three regions. First, in $[0,\varepsilon^{-1}L]$ the process makes a finite number of explosions and the point process of explosion times restricted to this interval converges to a Poisson point process of the asserted intensity thanks to~\cite[Th 4.1]{AllezDumazTW}. Second, for any given $C_0>0$, in $[\varepsilon^{-1}L, C_0 L {\ln L}]$ we will prove that the process does not explode with a probability that goes to $1$ as $\varepsilon\to 0$, uniformly over all $L$ large enough. Third, in $[C_0L{\ln L},\infty)$ the process remains in between two deterministic curves with a probability going to $1$ as $L\to \infty$, provided $C_0>0$ is chosen large enough: this relies on exactly the same arguments as those presented in the proof of Theorem \ref{Th:TimeReversal}.
\subsection{The time-homogeneous diffusion}\label{Subsec:TimeHomo}
In this subsection, we introduce time-homogeneous versions of the diffusions $Z_a$: at many occasions in this article we will rely on comparison arguments involving this diffusion. For every $a\in{\symb R}$ and every $(t_0,x_0)\in {\symb R}_+\times (-\infty,+\infty]$ we define $X_a^{(t_0,x_0)}$ as the solution of the following SDE
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
dX_a(t) &= (a - X_a(t)^2)dt + dB(t)\;,\quad t >t_0\;,\\
X_a(t_0) &= x_0\;.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Each time $X_a$ hits $-\infty$, it restarts immediately from $+\infty$. This family of diffusions satisfies the following monotonicity property. Almost surely for all $a\le a'$, all $(t_0,x_0), (t_0',x_0')$ and all $s\in [t_0\vee t_0',\infty)$, if we have $X_{a}^{(t_0,x_0)} (s) \le X_{a'}^{(t_0',x_0')} (s)$ then we have $X_{a}^{(t_0,x_0)} (s+\cdot) \le X_{a'}^{(t_0',x_0')} (s+\cdot)$ up to the next explosion time of $X_{a}^{(t_0,x_0)}$.
Notice that this is a diffusion in the potential $V_a(x) = x^3/3 - a x$. When $a>0$, this potential admits a well centered at $x=\sqrt a$ and an unstable equilibrium point at $x=-\sqrt a$. A typical sample path of the diffusion spends most of its time near the bottom of the well, and from time to time manages to reach the unstable equilibrium point from where it either explodes to $-\infty$ or comes back to the bottom of the well within a short time.
Let us recall the following convergence result due to McKean~\cite{McKean}. If we let $\gamma_a$ be the first time at which $X_a$ explodes, and if we let $m(a) = \mathbb{E}[\gamma_a]$, then $\gamma_a / m(a)$ converges in law to an exponential r.v.~of parameter $1$ as $a\to\infty$.
Observe that from the stochastic monotonicity of $a\mapsto \gamma_a$, the map $a\mapsto m(a)$ is non-decreasing. McKean~\cite{McKean} showed that it satisfies:
$$ m(a) = \frac{\pi}{\sqrt a} \exp(\frac83 a^{3/2})(1+o(1))\;,\quad a\to\infty\;.$$
Let us collect two estimates on $m(a)$ for the sequel. Simple computations show that for all $x\in {\symb R}$
$$ \frac{m(a + \frac{x}{4\sqrt a})}{m(a)} \to e^x\;,\quad a \to\infty\;,$$
and that, for any $x_0 \in{\symb R}$, there exists a constant $c>0$ such that for all $a$ large enough and for all $x > x_0$
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:mac} \frac{m(a + \frac{x}{4\sqrt a})}{m(a)} > ce^{x}\;.\end{equation}
We define the function $L\mapsto a_L$ as the inverse of $a\mapsto m(a)$. We have as $L\to\infty$
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:DefaL} a_L = \Big(\frac38 \ln L\Big)^{2/3}\Big(1+ \frac29 \frac{\ln\ln L}{\ln L} + (-\frac23 \ln \pi + \frac29 \ln \frac38) \frac1{\ln L} + o(\frac1{\ln L})\Big)\;.\end{equation}
Recall that $L=L(\beta)$ and note that as $\beta \to 0$ (which is equivalent to $L\to\infty$) we have
$$ a_L = \Big(\frac38 \ln \frac1{\beta}\Big)^{2/3}\Big(1- \frac23 \frac{ \ln \pi}{\ln(1/\beta)} + o(\frac1{\ln (1/\beta)})\Big)\;.$$
\subsection{An estimate on McKean's convergence result}
In~\cite{McKean}, McKean showed that the first explosion time $\gamma_a$ of the time-homogeneous diffusion $X_a$, rescaled by $m(a)$, converges in distribution to an exponential r.v.~with parameter $1$. The following proposition gives more precise information about the probability that the diffusion explodes at a time much smaller than $m(a)$.
Let $\mathcal{E}(1)$ denote an exponential r.v.~of parameter $1$.
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:CVrate}We have
$$ \varlimsup_{a\to\infty} \sup_{x\in [(\ln a)^{-3}, 1]} \frac1{x} \Big| \ln\Big( \frac{{\symb P}(\mathcal{E}(1) > x)}{{\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > x)}\Big)\Big| = 0\;.$$
\end{proposition}
\noindent This convergence takes the following equivalent form:
$$ \varlimsup_{a\to\infty} \sup_{x\in [(\ln a)^{-3}, 1]} \frac1{x} \Big|{\symb P}(\mathcal{E}(1) \le x) - {\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) \le x)\Big| = 0\;.$$
\begin{proof}
By monotonicity and from the explicit expression of the exponential density, it suffices to prove
$$ \varlimsup_{a\to\infty} \sup_{n=1,\ldots, (\ln a)^3} n \Big| \ln\Big( \frac{{\symb P}(\mathcal{E}(1) > 1/n)}{{\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1/n)}\Big)\Big| = 0\;.$$
For every $n\ge 1$, we let $X^j_a := X_a^{(t_j^n,+\infty)}$ be the diffusion that starts from $+\infty$ at time $t_j^n := (j/n)m(a)$ and solves the same SDE as $X_a$. We then let $A_n$ be the event on which $X_a$ explodes on $[0,m(a)]$ if and only if there exists $j\in \{0,\ldots,n-1\}$ such that $X_a^j$ explodes on $[t_j^n,t_{j+1}^n]$. Let us denote by $\gamma_a^j:= \inf\{t\ge 0: X_a^j(t_j^n+t) = -\infty\}$. We write
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1) = {\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1; A_n^\complement) + {\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1; A_n)\;.
\end{align*}
The first term can be bounded by ${\symb P}(A_n^\complement)$ while the second term satisfies
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1; A_n) &= {\symb P}(\cap_{j=0}^{n-1} \{\gamma_a^j / m(a) > 1/n\} \cap A_n)\\
&= {\symb P}(\cap_{j=0}^{n-1} \{\gamma_a^j/m(a) > 1/n\}) - {\symb P}(\cap_{j=0}^{n-1} \{\gamma_a^j/m(a) > 1/n\} \cap A_n^\complement)\\
&= {\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1/n)^n - {\symb P}(\cap_{i=1}^n \{\gamma_a^j/m(a) > 1/n\} \cap A_n^\complement)\;,
\end{align*}
since the $\gamma_a^j$'s are IID with the same law as $\gamma_a$. Hence
$$ \big|{\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1) - {\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1/n)^n\big| \le 2\,{\symb P}(A_n^\complement)\;,$$
for all $n\ge 1$. Since ${\symb P}(\mathcal{E}(1) > 1/n)^n = {\symb P}(\mathcal{E}(1)> 1)$, we get
\begin{align*}
n\Big|\ln\Big( \frac{{\symb P}(\mathcal{E}(1) > 1/n)}{{\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1/n)}\Big)\Big| &= \Big|\ln\Big( \frac{{\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1/n)^n}{{\symb P}(\mathcal{E}(1) > 1)}\Big)\Big|\\
&\le \Big|\ln\Big( \frac{{\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1)}{{\symb P}(\mathcal{E}(1) > 1)}\Big)\Big| + \Big|\ln\Big( \frac{{\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1/n)^n}{{\symb P}(\gamma_a/m(a) > 1)}\Big)\Big|\;.
\end{align*}
The first term on the r.h.s.~converges to $0$ as $a\to\infty$. The second term is bounded by $C {\symb P}(A_n^\complement)$ for some constant $C>0$ uniformly over all $n\ge 1$ and all $a$ large enough. Therefore, we are left with proving that $\sup_{n\le (\ln a)^3} {\symb P}(A_n^\complement) \to 0$ as $a\to\infty$.\\
Using the proof of \cite[Prop. 2.6]{DL17} at times $t_j^n$, we easily deduce that with a probability greater than $1- n \exp(-b(\ln\ln a)^2)$ for some $b>0$, $X_a$ explodes on $[0,m(a)]$ if and only if there exists $j\in\{0,\ldots,n-1\}$ such that $X_a^j$ explodes on $[t^n_j,t^n_{j+1}]$, as long as the explosion times of $X_a$ are at a distance at least $C/\sqrt{a}$ from the times $t_j^n$. The latter holds true with large probability thanks to \cite[Cor. 4.8]{DL17}: indeed, it is shown therein that with a probability greater than $1- n \exp(-b(\ln\ln a)^2)$ the diffusion $X_a$ remains close to a stationary diffusion up to its $n$-th explosion time and it is easy to control the probability that a stationary diffusion does not explode in small neighborhoods of the $t^n_j$ using the estimates in \cite[Lemma 4.1]{DL17}. Since $(\ln a)^3 \ll e^{b(\ln \ln a)^2}$, this completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The delicate region}\label{Subsec:Delicate}
The goal of this subsection is to prove the following result.
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:ExploDelicate}
Fix $C_0>0$. For all $\varepsilon$ small enough and all $L$ large enough, the probability that $Z_{a_L}$ does not explode on $(\varepsilon^{-1}L,C_0 L {\ln L}]$ is larger than $1-\varepsilon$.
\end{proposition}
To prove the proposition, we cover $(\varepsilon^{-1}L,C_0 L {\ln L}]$ by the disjoint intervals $(s_{i-1},s_{i}]$, for $i=1,\ldots,i_1$ with $s_i := e^i \varepsilon^{-1} L$ and where $i_1$ is the smallest integer such that $s_i \ge C_0 L \ln L$. Note that $i_1 \le 2 \ln\ln L$ as soon as $L$ is large enough.
For any $i\ge 0$, set $a(s_i) := a_L + \frac{\beta}{4} s_i$. We then let $X^i$ be the time-homogeneous diffusion starting from $+\infty$ at time $s_i$ and with parameter $a_-(s_i) := a(s_i) - \frac1{4\sqrt{a(s_i)}}$. We also set $\gamma^i := \inf\{t\ge 0: X^i(s_i+t) = -\infty\}$. We define $A_L$ as the event on which an explosion of $Z_{a_L}$ on $(\varepsilon^{-1} L, C_0L {\ln L}]$ implies the existence of some $i \in \{0,\ldots, i_1-1\}$ such that $X^i$ explodes on $(s_i,s_{i+1}]$.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:AL}
The probability of $A_L$ goes to $1$ as $L\to\infty$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Set $\kappa_i = \frac{\ln a(s_i)}{\sqrt{a(s_i)}}$. Let $\mathcal{D}$ be the event where for all $i\in\{0,\ldots,i_1-1\}$ we have
\begin{equation*}
\sqrt{a(s_i)} - \frac14 \le Z_{a_L}(t) \le \sqrt{a(s_i)} + \frac14\;, \quad\forall t\in [s_i,s_i + 9 \kappa_i]\;,
\end{equation*}
together with
\begin{equation*}
\inf_{t\in [s_i,s_i + 9 \kappa_i]} X^i(t) \ge \sqrt{a(s_i)} - \frac14 \;,\quad \sup_{t\in [s_i + 2\kappa_i ,s_i + 9 \kappa_i]} X^i(t)\le \sqrt{a(s_i)} + \frac14\;.
\end{equation*}
Recall that $i_1 \le 2 \ln\ln L$. By the forthcoming Lemma \ref{Lemma:XZSqueeze} (note that the diffusion $Z_{a_L}$ on the time interval $[s_i,\infty)$ can be obtained from the diffusion $Z_{a(s_i)}$ on $[0,\infty)$) we have
$${\symb P}(\mathcal{D}^\complement) \le i_1 C a_L^{-2} \to 0\;.$$
We now work on the event $\mathcal{D}$. The processes $X^i$ and $Z_{a_L}$ lie in the strip $[(1/2) \sqrt{a(s_i)},(3/2)\sqrt{a(s_i)}]$ on the time-interval $[s_i + 2\kappa_i ,s_i + 9 \kappa_i]$. The difference $D(t) := Z_{a_L}(t) - X^i(t)$ solves
$$ dD(t) = \Big(\frac{\beta}{4}(t-s_i) + \frac1{4\sqrt{a(s_i)}} - (Z_{a_L}(t)+X^i(t)) D(t) \Big)dt\;.$$
If $D(s_i + 2\kappa_i) \ge 0$ then $D$ remains non-negative until the next explosion time of $X^i$. Otherwise, observe that as long as $D$ is negative we have on the time-interval $[s_i + 2\kappa_i ,s_i + 9 \kappa_i]$
$$ dD(t) \ge \Big(\frac1{4\sqrt{a(s_i)}} - 3\sqrt{a(s_i)} D(t)\Big)dt\;,$$
so that a simple computation shows that $D$ becomes positive on the time-interval $[s_i + 2\kappa_i ,s_i + 9\kappa_i]$.\\
Then, monotonicity ensures that $D$ remains non-negative until the next explosion time of $X^i$. Henceforth, if $Z_{a_L}$ explodes on $(s_i,s_{i+1}]$ then necessarily $X^i$ explodes as well.
\end{proof}
With this result at hand, we can prove our proposition.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:ExploDelicate}]
By independence we have
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}(Z_{a_L}\mbox{ does not explode on }(\varepsilon^{-1} L, C_0 L {\ln L}]) &\ge {\symb P}(Z_{a_L}\mbox{ does not explode on }(\varepsilon^{-1} L, C_0 L {\ln L}] ; A_L)\\
&\ge\prod_{i=0}^{i_1-1} {\symb P}(X^i \mbox{ does not explode on }(s_i,s_{i+1}]) - {\symb P}(A_L^\complement)\\
&= \prod_{i=0}^{i_1-1} {\symb P}(\gamma^i > (e-1)s_i) - {\symb P}(A_L^\complement)\;.
\end{align*}
Note that $\sqrt{a(s_i)} \ge \sqrt{a_L}$. For $\epsilon$ small enough, by \eqref{Eq:mac} we have
$$ \mathbb{E}[\gamma^i] = m(a_-(s_i)) \ge cL e^{\frac12 e^i \varepsilon^{-1}}\;,$$
and therefore
$$ \frac{(e-1)s_i}{m(a_-(s_i))} \le c^{-1}(e-1)e^i \varepsilon^{-1} e^{-\frac12 e^i \varepsilon^{-1}} =: \kappa_i \;.$$
By Proposition \ref{Prop:CVrate} we deduce that for all $L$ large enough we have
$$ \sup_{i=0,\ldots,i_1} \frac1{\kappa_i \vee \ln(a_L)^{-3}} \Big|\ln\Big( \frac{{\symb P}(\mathcal{E}(1) > \kappa_i \vee (\ln a_L)^{-3})}{{\symb P}(\gamma_i/m(a_-(s_i)) > \kappa_i \vee (\ln a_L)^{-3})}\Big)\Big| \le \varepsilon\;.$$
We thus get
$$ {\symb P}(\gamma^i > (e-1)s_i) \ge e^{-(1+\varepsilon)(\kappa_i \vee (\ln a_L)^{-3})}\;.$$
Recall that $i_1 \le 2 \ln\ln L$. A simple computation then shows that the product over $i\in\{0,\ldots,i_1-1\}$ of the last expression is larger than $1-\varepsilon$ for all $L$ large enough and all $\varepsilon$ small enough.
\end{proof}
\subsection{End of proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:NoExploInfinity}
With a probability going to $1$ as $L\to\infty$, provided $C_0>0$ is chosen large enough, the process $Z_{a_L}$ remains in between the deterministic curves
$$ \frac12 \sqrt{a_L + \frac{\beta}{4} t}\quad \mbox{ and }\quad \frac32 \sqrt{a_L + \frac{\beta}{4} t}\;,$$
on the time interval $[C_0 L{\ln L},\infty)$, and therefore does not explode on this time interval.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Set $N := \lfloor C_0 L \ln L \beta \rfloor$. By the forthcoming Lemma \ref{Lemma:Stabil}, the probability that $Z_{a_L}(N/\beta) \ge 0$ goes to $1$ as $L\to\infty$. On the event where this happens, we know that $Z_{a_L}$ remains above $Z^{(N/\beta,0)}_{a_L}$ until the next explosion time of the latter.\\
Note that $N \sim C_0(8/3)^{1/3} (\ln L)^{2/3}$ as $L\to\infty$. Applying Lemma \ref{Lemma:ZfwdInit} and Lemma \ref{Lemma:ZfwdRecur}, we deduce that the probability that $Z^{(N/\beta,0)}_{a_L}$ does not remain above $\frac12 \sqrt{a_L + \frac{\beta}{4} t}$ on the time interval $[C_0L{\ln L}, \infty)$ is bounded from above by a term of order $\sum_{k\ge N} (e^{-k^{1/3}} + \beta^{-1} e^{-k^{3/2}}) \lesssim e^{-\frac12 N^{1/3}} + \beta^{-1} e^{-\frac12 N^{3/2}}$. The first term goes to $0$ as $L\to\infty$. Since $\ln(1/\beta) \sim \ln L$ as $L\to\infty$, it suffice to take $C_0>0$ large enough for the second term to go to $0$ as $L\to\infty$.\\
The proof of the upper bound follows from exactly the same type of arguments.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{Th:Explo}]
To simplify the notations, we consider the case $r=0$: since $m(a_L) = L$ and $m(a_L-r/4\sqrt{a_L})/m(a_L)$ goes to $e^{-r}$ as $L\to\infty$, it is immediate to deduce the general case by a simple time-change. We already know that the convergence of the theorem holds for the vague topology by~\cite[Theorem 4.1]{AllezDumazTW}. To complete the proof, we argue as follows. Fix $\delta > 0$. By Proposition \ref{Prop:ExploDelicate} and Lemma \ref{Lemma:NoExploInfinity}, there exists $\varepsilon >0$ such that for all $L$ large enough, the probability that $Z_{a_L}$ never explodes after time $\varepsilon^{-1} L$ is larger than $1-\delta$ uniformly over all $L$ large enough. This estimate suffices to strengthen the topology in which the aforementioned convergence holds.
\end{proof}
\section{Proofs of the main theorems}\label{Section:Proofs}
To prove our theorems, we introduce a discretization scheme and define approximations of the eigenfunctions: these approximations possess more independence so that they are easier objects to deal with.
\medskip
First of all, we discretize the interval $[0,\infty)$. Let $0=:t^n_0 < t^n_1 < \ldots < t^n_{2^n} := +\infty$ be the points that satisfy
$$ \int_{t^n_j}^{t^n_{j+1}} e^{-t} dt = \frac{1}{2^n}\;,\quad \forall j \in \{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}\;.$$
In other words, $t^n_j$ is the point where the cumulative distribution function of the exponential law reaches $j2^{-n}$: this discretization is adapted to the limiting intensity of the point process of explosion times from Theorem \ref{Th:Explo}. Indeed, this theorem shows that as $L\to\infty$, the number of explosions of the diffusion $Z_{a_L-r/(4\sqrt a_L)}$ in the time interval $[t^n_j L,t^n_{j+1}L]$ converges to a Poisson r.v.~of intensity $2^{-n} e^r$.
\medskip
Second, by Theorem \ref{Th:Explo}, the first eigenvalues of $\mathcal{L}_\beta$ typically deviate from $a_L$ like $1/\sqrt{a_L}$. Therefore we discretize the axis of eigenvalues by introducing for $\varepsilon > 0$ the grid
$$ \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon} := \Big\{ a_L + p \frac{\varepsilon}{4\sqrt a_L}: p\in {\symb Z}\cap [-1/\varepsilon^2,1/\varepsilon^2]\Big\}\;.$$
\subsection{Convergence of the point process of eigenvalues}\label{Subsec:PPP}
For every $j\in\{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}$ and every $a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$, we introduce the diffusion $Z_{a}^j := Z_{a}^{(t^n_j L, +\infty)}$ and use it to approximate the diffusion $Z_{a}$ on the time interval $[t^n_j L, t^n_{j+1} L]$. The justification behind this approximation is provided by the following lemma, whose proof is postponed to Subsection \ref{Subsec:ApproxZZ}.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:ApproxZZ}
With a probability going to $1$ as $L$ goes to $\infty$ and then $n$ goes to $\infty$, the following holds. For all $a\in\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and all $j\in\{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}$:\begin{itemize}
\item the diffusion $Z_{a}$ explodes at most one time on $(t^n_j L,t^n_{j+1} L]$,
\item the diffusion $Z_{a}$ explodes on $(t^n_j L,t^n_{j+1} L]$ if and only if the diffusion $Z_{a}^j$ explodes on $(t^n_j L,t^n_{j+1} L]$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
Denote by $(q_i)_{i=1\ldots m}$ the elements of $\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ listed in \textit{decreasing} order $q_1 > q_2 > \ldots > q_m$ and let $r_i$ be such that
$$ q_i = a_L - \frac{r_i}{4\sqrt a_L}\;,\quad i=1,\ldots,m\;.$$
Set $V_j(i) = 1$ if the diffusion $Z_{q_i}^j$ explodes on $(t_j^n L, t_{j+1}^n L]$, and $V_j(i) = 0$ otherwise. We also set $V_j(0) = 0$, $q_0=+\infty$ and $r_0 := -\infty$. We define
$$ {Q}^{(n)}_L(i) := \sum_{j=0}^{2^n - 1} \Big(V_j(i) - V_j(i-1) \Big)\;,\quad i=1,\ldots,m\;.$$
For every $i$, the r.v.~${Q}^{(n)}_L(i)$ counts the number of intervals $(t^n_j L,t^n_{j+1} L]$ where the diffusion $Z^j_{q_i}$ explodes but the diffusion $Z^j_{q_{i-1}}$ does not. By Lemma \ref{Lemma:ApproxZZ}, $Q_L^{(n)}(i)$ is a good approximation of the total number of explosions of $Z_{q_i}$ minus the total number of explosions of $Z_{q_{i-1}}$ in the large $L$ and $n$ limit.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:CVQn}
The vector $\big({Q}^{(n)}_L(i)\big)_{i=1,\ldots,m}$ converges in distribution as $L\to\infty$ and $n\to\infty$ to a vector of independent Poisson r.v.~with parameters $p_i = \int_{r_{i-1}}^{r_{i}} e^{x} dx$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that, for any given $j\in \{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}$, the diffusions $(Z_{q_i}^j, i=1,\ldots,m)$ on the time interval $[t_j^n L, \infty)$ are ordered up to their first explosion times. This implies that for all $j\in\{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}$, the r.v.~$(V_j(i),i =1,\ldots, m)$ satisfy the following monotonicity property:
$$ V_j(1) \le V_j(2) \le \ldots \le V_j(m)\;.$$
Since in addition these r.v.~are $\{0,1\}$-valued, we get the very simple identities:
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}\big(V_j(1)=0,\ldots, V_j(i-1)=0, V_j(i)=1,\ldots,V_j(m) = 1\big) &= {\symb P}\big(V_j(i)=1\big)-{\symb P}\big(V_j(i-1)=1\big)\;,\\
{\symb P}\big(V_j(1)=0,\ldots,V_j(m) = 0\big) &= {\symb P}\big(V_j(m)=0\big)\;,\\
{\symb P}\big(V_j(1)=1,\ldots,V_j(m)=1\big) &= {\symb P}\big(V_j(1)=1\big)\;,
\end{align*}
so that the only knowledge of the one-dimensional marginals suffices to determine the law of the vector. By Theorem \ref{Th:Explo}
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:ExploU}
{\symb P}\big(V_j(i)=1\big) \rightarrow 1-\exp\big(-2^{-n} e^{r_i}\big)\quad\mbox{ as }L\to\infty\;.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, the $m$-dimensional vectors $(V_j(1), V_j(2), \ldots ,V_j(m))$, $j=0,\ldots,2^n-1$, are independent since they depend on the evolution of the Brownian motion $B$ on disjoint intervals. We then perform the computation of the law of $\big({Q}^{(n)}_L(i)\big)_{i=1,\ldots,m}$. For any given integers $\ell_1,\ldots,\ell_m$, set $\ell = \sum_i \ell_i$. Then
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}\big({Q}^{(n)}_L = (\ell_1,\ldots,\ell_m)\big) &= \sum_{\substack{S_1,\ldots,S_m \subset \{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}\\S_i \cap S_{i'} = \emptyset\\ \#S_i = \ell_i}} \prod_{i=1}^m \prod_{j\in S_i} \Big({\symb P}\big(V_j(i)=1\big)-{\symb P}\big(V_j(i-1)=1\big)\Big)\\
&\qquad\qquad\quad\qquad\times \prod_{j\notin S_1\cup\ldots\cup S_m} {\symb P}(V_j(m)=0)\;.
\end{align*}
Using \eqref{Eq:ExploU}, we deduce that the $L\to \infty$ limit of the last expression equals
\begin{align*}
{2^n \choose \ell_1, \ldots, \ell_m, 2^n-\ell} \prod_{i=1}^m \Big(\exp(-2^{-n} e^{r_{i-1}})-\exp(-2^{-n}e^{r_i})\Big)^{\ell_i}\Big(\exp(-2^{-n} e^{r_m})\Big)^{2^n -\ell}\;.
\end{align*}
Taking the limit as $n\to\infty$, a computation shows that this last quantity converges to
$$ \prod_{i=1}^m \frac{p_i^{\ell_i}}{\ell_i !} e^{-p_i}\;,$$
as required.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[First part of the proof of Theorem \ref{Th:Main}]
We define $\mathcal{Q}_L := \sum_{k\ge 1} \delta_{4\sqrt a_L(\lambda_k+a_L)}$ and we view this object as a r.v.~in the space of measures on $(-\infty,\infty)$ which are finite on all intervals bounded to the right (but possibly unbounded to the left). Note that for every $L$, since there is a smallest eigenvalue, the random measure $\mathcal{Q}_L$ indeed belongs to this space.\\
We endow this space with the topology that makes continuous the maps $m \mapsto \langle f, m\rangle$ for any continuous and bounded function $f$ with support bounded to the right: in other words, this is the weak topology towards $-\infty$ and the vague topology towards $+\infty$. The reason for this topology is simple: it permits to control the increasing sequence of atom locations of $\mathcal{Q}_L$.
\smallskip
If we prove that $\mathcal{Q}_L$ converges in law (for the sigma field associated with this topology) to a Poisson point process of intensity $e^x dx$, then standard arguments ensure that the increasing sequence of its atom locations converges in law for the product topology to the increasing sequence of atom locations of this Poisson point process.
\smallskip
Let us show that for any $\varepsilon > 0$ (recall that $\varepsilon$ controls the mesh of $\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$), the random vector
$$\mathcal{Q}_L((r_{i-1},r_i])\;,\quad i=1,\ldots,m\;,$$
converges in distribution as $L\to\infty$ to a vector of independent Poisson random variables of intensity $e^{r_i}-e^{r_{i-1}}$. On the event on which the assertions of Lemma \ref{Lemma:ApproxZZ} hold true, we have for every $i\in\{1,\ldots,m\}$:
$$ \mathcal{Q}_L((r_{i-1},r_i]) = {Q}^{(n)}_L(i)\;,$$
so that Lemma \ref{Lemma:CVQn} yields the desired result.
We deduce from this convergence the tightness of $(\mathcal{Q}_L)$: indeed the above convergence provides the required control on the mass given by $\mathcal{Q}_L$ to $(-\infty,r]$ for any given $r$. Furthermore, the marginals of any limiting point are uniquely identified thanks to this convergence: for instance by considering the marginals coming from dyadic points and by choosing $\varepsilon$ appropriately.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Typical diffusions}
In this subsection, we collect several estimates on the diffusions $Z_a$ for $a\in\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$, the proofs of which are postponed to Sections \ref{Sec:Techos} and \ref{Sec:Fine} in order not to interrupt the line of argument. The statements of these estimates are rather long, however, a look at the form of the time-inhomogeneous potential in which $Z_a$ evolves (see Figure \ref{Fig:Yk}) allows to see that these estimates are natural.\\
We rely on the following notations: $\tau^{(i)}_{-\infty}$ denotes the $i$-th explosion time of $Z_a$ and $\tau^{(i)}_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}$ denotes its first hitting time of $-2\sqrt{a_L}$ after the $(i-1)$-th explosion time. Moreover, we adopt the convention $\tau^{(0)}_{-\infty} = 0$ and the notation $ \fint_s^t f := (t-s)^{-1} \int_s^t f$. We also set $t_L := \frac{\ln a_L}{\sqrt{a_L}}$.\\
A typical realization of $Z_a$ for $a\in\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ behaves as follows:\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{Entrance.} For any $i\ge 0$, after its $i$-th explosion time, the diffusion comes down from $+\infty$ in an almost deterministic way and quickly reaches a small neighborhood of $\sqrt{a_L}$:
$$ \sup_{t\in (\tau^{(i)}_{-\infty},\tau^{(i)}_{-\infty}+(3/8)t_L]} |Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a_L}\coth(\sqrt{a_L} (t-\tau^{(i)}_{-\infty}))| \le 1 \;.$$
\item \emph{Explosion.} For any $i\ge 1$, after time $\tau^{(i)}_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}$, the diffusion behaves almost deterministically and reaches $-\infty$ within a very short time:
$$ \sup_{t\in (\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}^{(i)},\tau_{-\infty}^{(i)}]} |Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a_L}\coth(\sqrt{a_L}(t-\tau_{-\infty}^{(i)}))| \le 1 \;.$$
\item \emph{Oscillations.} For any $i\ge 0$, in between the explosion times $\tau^{(i)}_{-\infty}$ and $\tau^{(i+1)}_{-\infty}$, the diffusion spends most of its time near $\sqrt{a_L}$:
$$ \fint_{\tau^{(i)}_{-\infty}+(3/8)t_L}^t Z_a(s) ds \in [\sqrt{a_L} -10, \sqrt{a_L}+10]\;,\quad \forall t\in [\tau^{(i)}_{-\infty}+(3/8)t_L,\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}^{(i+1)}\wedge ({\varepsilon^{-2}}L)]\;.$$
\item \emph{Long-time behavior.} The diffusion does not explode after time ${\varepsilon^{-2}}L$.
\end{enumerate}
\medskip
Note that the choice ${\varepsilon^{-2}}$ is relatively arbitrary here: it is taken such that (4) holds true for all $a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ with a probability $1-\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon)$.
On the other hand, in estimate (3), the time parameter is taken smaller than $\varepsilon^{-2}L$ for a simple reason: the typical location of the diffusion is given by the bottom of the well of its time-inhomogeneous potential, and the latter remains around $\sqrt a_L$ as long as time is not too large (actually, much smaller than $L\ln L$).
\medskip
Similar estimates hold for the backward diffusion, however the situation is slightly different in that case for the obvious reason that time is run backward and the process explodes to $+\infty$. We then let $\hat{\tau}^{(1)}_{+\infty}$ be the largest time $t\ge 0$ at which $\hat{Z}_a$ hits $+\infty$, and recursively, $\hat{\tau}^{(i)}_{+\infty}$ the largest time $t\in [0,\hat{\tau}^{(i-1)}_{+\infty})$ at which $\hat{Z}_a$ hits $+\infty$. Furthermore, we let $\hat{\tau}^{(i)}_{2\sqrt{a_L}}$ be the largest time $t \in [0, \hat{\tau}^{(i-1)}_{+\infty})$ at which $\hat{Z}_a$ hits $2\sqrt{a_L}$. For convenience we set $\hat{\tau}^{(0)}_{+\infty} = +\infty$.\\
Take $C_0 > 0$ large enough (in view of Lemma \ref{Lemma:NoExploInfinity}). A typical realization of $\hat{Z}_a$ behaves as follows (recall that the quotation marks are used when we view the diffusion evolving backward in time):
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{Oscillations at infinity.} On the time-interval $[C_0 L {\ln L}, \infty)$, $\hat{Z}_a \le -(1/2) \sqrt{a_L}$. Then ``after'' $C_0L{\ln L}$ and ``until'' time $\varepsilon^{-2} L$, the diffusion remains most of the time below $-(1/2)\sqrt{a_L}$:
$$ \fint_{\varepsilon^{-2}L}^{t} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds \le -\frac12 \sqrt{a_L}\;,\quad t\in [2\varepsilon^{-2} L, C_0L\ln L]\;.$$
Furthermore, the diffusion does not explode ``until'' time $\varepsilon^{-2} L$.
\item \emph{Entrance.} For any $i\ge 1$, ``after'' its $i$-th explosion time, the diffusion exits from $-\infty$ almost deterministically:
$$\sup_{t\in (\hat\tau^{(i)}_{+\infty}-(3/8)t_L,\hat\tau^{(i)}_{+\infty}]} |\hat{Z}_a(t) - \sqrt{a_L}\coth(\sqrt{a_L} (t-\hat\tau^{(i)}_{+\infty}))| \le 1\;.$$
\item \emph{Explosion.} For any $i\ge 1$, ``after'' time $\hat{\tau}^{(i)}_{2\sqrt{a_L}}$, the diffusion behaves almost deterministically and reaches $+\infty$ within a very short time:
$$\sup_{t\in (\hat{\tau}^{(i)}_{+\infty},\hat{\tau}^{(i)}_{2\sqrt{a_L}}]} |\hat{Z}_a(t) - \sqrt{a_L}\coth(\sqrt{a_L}(t-\hat{\tau}^{(i)}_{+\infty}))| \le 1\;.$$
\item \emph{Oscillations.} The diffusion spends most of its time near $-\sqrt{a_L}$. More precisely for every $i\ge 1$
$$\fint_{t}^{\hat\tau^{(i)}_{+\infty}-(3/8)t_L} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds \in [- \sqrt{a_L}-10,-\sqrt{a_L}+10]\;,\quad \forall t\in [\hat{\tau}^{(i+1)}_{2\sqrt{a_L}},\hat\tau^{(i)}_{+\infty}-(3/8)t_L]\;,$$
and
$$\fint_{t}^{2\varepsilon^{-2}L} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds \in [- \sqrt{a_L}-10,-\sqrt{a_L}+10]\;,\quad \forall t\in [\hat{\tau}^{(1)}_{2\sqrt{a_L}},2\varepsilon^{-2}L]\;.$$
\end{enumerate}
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:TypicalZ}
There exists $c>0$ such that for all $L$ large enough, the following holds with a probability larger than $1-c \, \varepsilon$: For all $a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$, the diffusions $Z_a$ and $\hat{Z}_a$ satisfy the above estimates.
\end{proposition}
\noindent We refer to Subsection \ref{Subsec:ProofTypicalZ} for the proof of this result.
\medskip
We also need some precise information on the behavior of $Z_a$ when it crosses the barrier of potential of its time-inhomogeneous potential: namely, when it goes from the curve $\sqrt{a+\beta t /4}$ to the curve $-\sqrt{a+\beta t/4}$. Here again, the statement is long and technical, however the underlying observation is relatively simple: the theory of large deviations shows that the behavior of the diffusion $Z_a$, when it crosses the barrier of potential, is essentially deterministic and is given by a hyperbolic tangent.\\
To state precisely the estimates, we need to introduce some notations. For every $a\in\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and every $j\in \{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}$, we define $\theta_a^j$ as the first hitting time by $Z_a$ of $-\sqrt{a_L}$ after time $t^n_j L$. We also let $\iota_a^j$ and $\upsilon_a^j$ be the last hitting times of $\sqrt{a_L}$ and $0$ respectively before time $\theta_a^j$. We finally let $\zeta_a^j$ be the first hitting time of $-\infty$ by the diffusion $Z_a$ after time $\theta_a^j$. We call \emph{excursion to $-\sqrt{a_L}$} a portion of the trajectory that starts from $+\sqrt{a_L}$, hits $-\sqrt{a_L}$ and comes back to $+\sqrt{a_L}$ (possibly after an explosion). We refer to Figure \ref{Fig:ZaCross} for an illustration.\\
We take similar definitions for the backward diffusions. We let $\hat{\theta}_a^j$ be the first hitting time of $\sqrt{a_L}$ ``after'' time $t^n_{j+1}L$, that is,
$$ \hat{\theta}_a^j := \sup\{t\in (0,t^n_{j+1}L]: \hat{Z}_a(t) = \sqrt{a_L}\}\;.$$
We then let $\hat{\iota}_a^j$ and $\hat{\upsilon}_a^j$ be the last hitting times of $-\sqrt{a_L}$ and $0$ ``before'' time $\hat{\theta}_a^j$, and we let $\hat{\zeta}_a^j$ be the first hitting time of $+\infty$ ``after'' time $\hat{\theta}_a^j$.\\
To alleviate the notations, we will often omit writing the superscript $j$.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10cm,height=8cm]{ZaCross.png}
\caption{\small A very schematic plot of the diffusion $Z_a$ when it crosses its barrier of potential: the trajectory between $\iota_a$ and $\theta_a$ is very close to a hyperbolic tangent.}\label{Fig:ZaCross}
\end{figure}
The statement of the following proposition is long and technical: at first reading, one can go directly to Subsections \ref{Subsec:first} and \ref{Subsec:second} where these estimates are used whenever needed.
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:TypicalPairZ}
There exist two constants $C,c>0$ such that for all $L$ and $n$ large enough, with a probability larger than $1-c\varepsilon$ the following holds for all $a \le a' \in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and all $j\in \{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}$ such that $t^n_{j+1} < {\varepsilon^{-2}}$.\\
We have $Z_a(t^n_j L) \in [(1/2)\sqrt{a_L},(3/2)\sqrt{a_L}]$ and the diffusions are ordered $Z_a(t^n_j L) \le Z_{a'}(t^n_j L)$. The process $Z_a$ makes at most one excursion to $-\sqrt{a_L}$ on the time interval $[t^n_j L, t^n_{j+1} L]$ and if it does then:\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{Behavior of $Z_a$.} We have
\begin{align*}
\upsilon_a - \iota_a \ge (3/8)t_L - C\frac{\ln\ln a_L}{\sqrt{a_L}}\;,\\
|\theta_a - \upsilon_a - \frac38 t_L| \le C \frac{\ln\ln a_L}{\sqrt{a_L}}\;.
\end{align*}
Moreover, the diffusion $Z_a$ is close to a hyperbolic tangent near $\upsilon_a$
\begin{align*}
&\sup_{t\in [\iota_a,\theta_a]}|Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a_L} \tanh(-\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_a))| \le C \frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L} \;.\\
\end{align*}
In addition, if $Z_a$ explodes after $\theta_a$ before coming back to $\sqrt{a_L}$ then $|\zeta_a - \theta_a -(3/8)t_L| \le C (\ln\ln a_L)^2 / \sqrt a_L$.
\item \emph{Coupling with $Z_{a'}$.} We have
\begin{align*}
|Z_{a'}(t)-Z_a(t)| \le 1\;,\quad &t\in [\upsilon_a - (1/16)t_L,\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L]\;,\\
Z_{a'}(t) \le -\sqrt{a_L} + Ca_L^{3/7}\;,\quad &t\in [\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L,\theta_a - (1/16)t_L]\;,\\
Z_{a'}(t) \le \sqrt{a_L} - 1\;,\quad &t\in [\theta_a - (1/16)t_L,\theta_a]\;.
\end{align*}
\item \emph{Explosion of $Z_{a'}$.} If in addition $Z_{a'}$ explodes on $[t^n_j L, t^n_{j+1}L]$, then so does $Z_a$ and we have the estimates
\begin{align*}
|\upsilon_a-\upsilon_{a'}| &< \frac{C}{\sqrt{a_L} \ln a_L}\;,\\
|\theta_a-\theta_{a'}| &< C \frac{\ln\ln a_L}{\sqrt{a_L}}\;,\\
|\zeta_a-\zeta_{a'}| &< C \frac{(\ln\ln a_L)^2}{\sqrt{a_L}}\;,
\end{align*}
and $Z_{a'}$ remains below $-\sqrt{a_L}+1$ on $[\theta_{a'},\zeta_{a'}]$. Moreover the explosion times of $Z_a$ and $Z_{a'}$ remain at distance at least $2^{-2n}L$ from $t^n_j L$ and $t^n_{j+1} L$.
\item \emph{Coupling with the backward diffusions.} If there exists $a'' \in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ such that $a'' < a$ and $\hat{Z}_{a''}$ does not explode on $[\theta_a + 10 t_L,t^n_{j+1}L]$ then $\hat{Z}_{a'}(t) \le -\sqrt{a_L} + (\ln a_L)/a_L^{1/4}$ for all $t\in [\theta_a,\theta_a+ 5t_L]$, and furthermore for all $t\in [{\theta}_a,t^n_{j+1} L]$ we have
\begin{align*}
&-(3/2) \sqrt{a_L} \le \fint_{\theta_a}^t \hat{Z}_{a'}(s) ds \le -(1/2) \sqrt{a_L}\;.
\end{align*}
\end{enumerate}
The analogous statements hold for the backward diffusions $\hat{Z}_a$ and $\hat{Z}_{a'}$.
\end{proposition}
\noindent The proof of this proposition can be found in Subsection \ref{Subsec:ProofTypicalPairZ}.
\subsection{The key event}\label{Subsec:Key}
Fix $k\ge 1$ and $\varepsilon > 0$: we aim at controlling the $k$ first eigenvalues / eigenfunctions on an event of probability at least $1-\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon)$. Recall that our setup relies on the following two parameters: $\varepsilon$, which is the mesh of the approximation grid for the eigenvalues and $n$ which controls the mesh of the approximation grid of $[0,\infty)$.\\
We define $\mathcal{E}$ as the event on which the following holds:
\medskip
(a) \textbf{Squeezing of the $k$ first eigenvalues.} There exists a random subset
$$\mathcal{A}= \{\alpha'_{k+1} < \alpha_k < \alpha'_k < \alpha_{k-1} < \ldots < \alpha'_2 < \alpha_1 < \alpha'_1 < \alpha_0\}\;,$$
\hspace{22pt} of $\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ such that:
$$ -\lambda_{k+1} < \alpha'_{k+1} < \alpha_k < - \lambda_k < \alpha'_k < \alpha_{k-1} < \ldots <\alpha'_2 < \alpha_1 < -\lambda_1 < \alpha'_1 < \alpha_0\;.$$
(b) \textbf{Typical diffusions I.} The estimates of Proposition \ref{Prop:TypicalZ} are satisfied.
\medskip
(c) \textbf{Typical diffusions II.} The estimates of Proposition \ref{Prop:TypicalPairZ} are satisfied.
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:E}
Fix $\varepsilon > 0$. There exists $C>0$ such that $\varliminf_{n\to\infty} \varliminf_{L\to\infty} {\symb P}(\mathcal{E}) \ge 1-C\varepsilon$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The probability of (b) and (c) is already estimated in Propositions \ref{Prop:TypicalZ} and \ref{Prop:TypicalPairZ}. Regarding (a), we already know that $(4\sqrt{a_L}(\lambda_i+a_L))_{i=1,\ldots,k+1}$ converges in law to the $k+1$ first atoms of a Poisson point process of intensity $e^x dx$ on ${\symb R}$. Consequently, there exists a constant $c>0$ such that the probability that the spacing between any two consecutive elements of this $(k+1)$-uplet is larger than $3\varepsilon$ is at least $1-c \varepsilon$ uniformly over all $L$ large enough. On the event where this property holds true, we can squeeze two consecutive elements of $\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ in between two consecutive eigenvalues and (a) follows.
\end{proof}
In the next two subsections, we will work on the event $\mathcal{E}$ and will establish the convergences stated in Theorems \ref{Th:Main} and \ref{Th:Shape}.
\subsection{Control of the first eigenfunction}\label{Subsec:first}
We aim at controlling the process $\chi_1$, obtained from the first eigenfunction $\varphi_1$ after applying the Riccati transform:
$$ \chi_1(t) = \frac{\varphi_1'(t)}{\varphi_1(t)}\;,\quad t\ge 0\;.$$
We will do that by using typical diffusions $Z_a$ whose parameters $a$ belong to the random subset $\mathcal{A}$.
Thanks to (a) of $\mathcal{E}$, we have $- \lambda_2 < \alpha'_2 < \alpha_1 < -\lambda_1 < \alpha'_1$. Set $a=\alpha_1$. By monotonicity, $Z_{\alpha'_2} \le Z_{a} \le \chi_1$ until the first explosion time of $Z_{\alpha'_2}$, and $\chi_1 \le \hat{Z}_{a}$ ``until'' the first explosion time of $\hat{Z}_{a}$. Since $- \lambda_2 < a < -\lambda_1$ and in view of Corollary \ref{Cor:bc}, the diffusion $Z_{a}$ explodes exactly once and by (c)-(3) its explosion time falls in some interval $[t_j^n L + 2^{-2n}L,t_{j+1}^n L - 2^{-2n}L]$ with $t^n_{j+1} < \varepsilon^{-2}$.
\medskip
Let $\zeta_a,\hat{\zeta}_a$ be the explosion times of $Z_a,\hat{Z}_a$. Let us first prove the following ordering of the stopping times:
\begin{align}
t_j^n L + 2^{-2n}L < \hat \zeta_a < \hat \theta_a < \theta_a < \zeta_a < t_{j+1}^n L - 2^{-2n}L\,.\label{ineqstoppingtimesfirst}
\end{align}
We already know that $t_j^n L + 2^{-2n}L < \zeta_a < t_{j+1}^n L - 2^{-2n}L$. By Lemma \ref{Lemma:Symmetry}, the explosion time of $\hat{Z}_{a}$ lies before the explosion time of $Z_{a}$, and by monotonicity, in between those two explosion times we have $Z_a \le \chi_1 \le \hat{Z}_a$. By (c), we know that $Z_a(t^n_j L) \in [(1/2)\sqrt{a_L},(3/2)\sqrt{a_L}]$ and $\hat{Z}_a(t^n_j L) \in [-(3/2) \sqrt{a_L},-(1/2) \sqrt{a_L}]$ so that necessarily $\hat{Z}_a(t^n_j L) < Z_a(t^n_j L)$. Therefore the explosion time of $\hat{Z}_a$ must lie in $(t^n_j L+ 2^{-2n}L, \zeta_a]$.
In order to see that the diffusion $\hat Z_a$ does not reach $\sqrt{a_L}$ too early, we use the diffusion $\hat{Z}_{\alpha'_2}$. The latter cannot explode on $[\theta_a + 10 t_L,t^n_{j+1} L]$. Indeed, if it exploded there then by (c)-(3) the explosion time of the diffusion $\hat{Z}_a$ would lie in $[\theta_a + 9 t_L,t^n_{j+1} L]$ and since $\zeta_a < \theta_a + 9 t_L$ by (c)-(1), this would contradict the inequality $\hat{\zeta}_a \le \zeta_a$.
By (c)-(4) applied with $a'' = \alpha'_2$ and $a'=a$, we have $\hat{\theta}_a \notin [\theta_a,\theta_a + 5t_L]$. By (c)-(1), we know that $|\theta_a-\zeta_a|$ and $|\hat{\theta}_a-\hat{\zeta}_a|$ are less than $t_L$: in order not to contradict the inequality $\hat{\zeta}_a \le \zeta_a$ we see that $\hat{\theta}_a$ cannot lie to the right of $\theta_a + 5t_L$, and therefore satisfies $\hat{\theta}_a < \theta_a$. It finishes the proof of the inequalities \eqref{ineqstoppingtimesfirst}.\\
Let us show that for all $t\in [0,\hat\theta_a]$
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:fintZa} \fint_t^{\hat{\theta}_a} Z_{a}(s) ds \ge \frac14 \sqrt{a_L}\;.\end{equation}
By (b)-Entrance and (b)-Oscillations applied to $Z_a$, and by (c)-(4) applied to $\hat{Z}_a$ and $\hat{Z}_{a''}$ (using that $Z_{a''}$ does not explode on $[t_j^n, \hat \theta_a-10 t_L]$), we have
\begin{align*}
\sqrt{a_L}-1 \le Z_a(t)\;,\quad &\forall t\in [0,(3/8)t_L]\;,\\
\fint_{(3/8)t_L}^t Z_a(s) ds \in [\sqrt{a_L} -10, \sqrt{a_L}+10]\;,\quad &\forall t\in [(3/8)t_L,\hat{\theta}_a]\;,\\
(1/2) \sqrt{a_L} \le \fint_t^{\hat{\theta}_a} {Z}_{a}(s) ds \le (3/2) \sqrt{a_L}\;,\quad &\forall t\in [t^n_j L, \hat{\theta}_a]\;.
\end{align*}
If $t\in [t^n_jL,\hat{\theta}_a]$, then \eqref{Eq:fintZa} immediately follows. On the other hand, if $t\in [(3/8)t_L,t^n_j L]$ then
\begin{align*}
\int_t^{\hat{\theta}_a} Z_{a}(s) ds &= -\int_{(3/8)t_L}^t Z_a(s) + \int_{(3/8)t_L}^{t^n_j L} Z_a(s) + \int_{t^n_j L}^{\hat{\theta}_a} {Z}_{a}(s) ds\\
&\ge -(\sqrt{a_L}+10)(t-\frac38 t_L) + (\sqrt{a_L}-10)(t^n_j L - \frac38 t_L) + \frac12 \sqrt{a_L}(\hat{\theta}_a - t^n_j L) \\
&\ge -20(t-\frac38 t_L) + (\sqrt{a_L} - 10)(t^n_jL - t) + \frac12 \sqrt{a_L}(\hat{\theta}_a - t^n_j L)\\
&\ge -20(t-\frac38 t_L) + \frac12 \sqrt{a_L}(\hat{\theta}_a-t)\;.
\end{align*}
Note that by \eqref{ineqstoppingtimesfirst}, we have $\hat{\theta}_a-t \ge \hat{\theta}_a-t^n_jL \ge 2^{-2n} L$. Note also that $t-\frac38 t_L \le t^n_j L \le \varepsilon^{-2} L$. Therefore the last quantity is larger than $\frac14 \sqrt{a_L}(\hat{\theta}_a-t)$ as required. This proves \eqref{Eq:fintZa} in that case. Finally, if $t\in [0,(3/8)t_L]$ then the bound we just proved together with the inequality $\sqrt{a_L}-1 \le Z_a(t)$ that holds for all $t\in [0,(3/8)t_L]$ allows to conclude. We have therefore proven \eqref{Eq:fintZa}.
Note that $\varphi_1(t) = \varphi_1(\hat{\theta}_a) \exp(-\int_{t}^{\hat{\theta}_a} \chi_1(s) ds)$ for all $t\in [0,\hat\theta_a]$. Since $\chi_1$ remains above $Z_{a}$ on $[0,\hat\theta_a]$, we obtain:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EigenStart}
\frac{\varphi_1(t)}{\varphi_1(\hat\theta_a)} \le e^{-\frac14 \sqrt{a_L}(\hat\theta_a-t)}\;,\quad t\in [0,\hat\theta_a]\;.
\end{equation}
Similarly, combining (b)-Oscillations at infinity, (b)-Oscillations and (c)-(4), we deduce that for all $t\in [\theta_a,\infty)$ we have
$$ \fint_{{\theta}_a}^t \hat{Z}_{a}(s) ds \le -\frac14 \sqrt{a_L}\;.$$
Since $\chi_1$ remains below $\hat{Z}_a$ on $[\theta_a,\infty)$, we get
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EigenEnd}
\frac{\varphi_1(t)}{\varphi_1(\theta_a)} \le e^{-\frac14 \sqrt{a_L}(t-\theta_a)}\;,\quad t\in [\theta_a,\infty)\;.
\end{equation}
It remains to control $\varphi_1$ on $[\hat\theta_a,\theta_a]$. Set $a=\alpha_1$ and $a'=\alpha_1'$. On this interval, we have $Z_a \le \chi_1 \le Z_{a'}$. Using (c)-(1) and (c)-(2), we deduce that for all $t\in [\upsilon_a - (1/16)t_L,\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L]$
$$ -C \frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L} \le \chi_1(t) - \sqrt{a_L}\tanh(-\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_a)) \le 2C \frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L}\;.$$
We deduce that for all $t\in[\upsilon_a - (1/16)t_L,\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L]$
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EigenBulk}
\frac1{\cosh(\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_a))}(1-2C|t-\upsilon_a|\frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L}) \le \frac{\varphi_1(t)}{\varphi_1(\upsilon_a)} \le \frac1{\cosh(\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_a))}(1+2C|t-\upsilon_a|\frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L})\;.
\end{equation}
By (c)-(2), we also deduce that $\chi_1$ remains below $-(1/2) \sqrt{a_L}$ on the time interval $[\upsilon_a +(1/16)t_L,\theta_a -(1/16)t_L]$ which is of length $(1/4 + o(1))t_L \ge (1/5)t_L$ thanks to (c)-(1). Consequently, $|\varphi_1|$ is decreasing there and satisfies
$$ |\varphi_1(\theta_a-(1/16)t_L)| \le |\varphi_1(\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L)| e^{-\sqrt{a_L} t_L / 10}\;.$$
Again by (c)-(2), we know that $\chi_1$ remains below $\sqrt a_L$ on $[\theta_a-(1/16)t_L,\theta_a]$ and therefore
$$ \sup_{t\in[\theta_a-(1/16)t_L,\theta_a]} |\varphi_1(t)| \le |\varphi_1(\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L)|\;.$$
Putting everything together, we deduce that all the points where $|\varphi_1|$ reaches its maximum over $[\upsilon_a - (1/16)t_L,\theta_a]$ lie at distance at most $4C /(\sqrt a_L \ln a_L)$ from $\upsilon_a$.\\
Using the very same arguments but on the backward diffusions, we deduce that the same result holds over $[\hat\theta_a,\hat\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L]$ and with $\upsilon_a$ replaced by $\hat{\upsilon}_a$.\\
If we show that $[\hat{\upsilon}_a - \frac1{\sqrt{a_L}},\hat{\upsilon}_a + \frac1{\sqrt{a_L}}] \subset [\upsilon_a - (1/16)t_L,\theta_a]$ and $[{\upsilon}_a - \frac1{\sqrt{a_L}},{\upsilon}_a + \frac1{\sqrt{a_L}}] \subset [\hat\theta_a,\hat\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L]$, then we will deduce that $\upsilon_a$ and $\hat{\upsilon}_a$ lie at distance at most $4C /(\sqrt a_L \ln a_L)$ from each other. By symmetry, we only give the details on the first inclusion.\\
Since $\hat{Z}_a$ remains above $Z_a$ over $[\hat{\zeta}_a, \theta_a]$, and that $Z_a$ is bounded from below by $\sqrt{a_L} \tanh(-\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_a)) - C \sqrt{a_L} / \ln a_L$ on $[\iota_a,\upsilon_a]$ we deduce that $\hat{\theta}_a > \iota_a$ and $\hat\upsilon_a > \upsilon_a - 2C/(\sqrt{a_L} \ln a_L)$. As a consequence $\hat{\upsilon}_a - \frac1{\sqrt{a_L}} > \upsilon_a - (1/16)t_L$. On the other hand, applying again (c)-(4) with $a'' = \alpha'_2$ and $a'=a$, we deduce that $\hat{Z}_{a}(t) \le -\sqrt{a_L} + (\ln a_L)/a_L^{1/4}$ for all $t\in [\theta_a,\theta_a + 5t_L]$. Recall that $\hat{\theta}_a < \theta_a$. By (c)-(1) and (c)-(2), we see that $\hat{Z}_{a}(t) \ge -\sqrt{a_L} +1$ on $[\hat{\theta}_a,\hat{\upsilon}_a + \frac1{\sqrt{a_L}}]$. Consequently, we must have the inequality $\hat{\upsilon}_a + \frac1{\sqrt{a_L}} \le \theta_a$. The first inclusion follows.\\
We have therefore proven that $\upsilon_a$ and $\hat{\upsilon}_a$ lie at distance at most $4C /(\sqrt a_L \ln a_L)$ from each other\\
Consequently
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EigenBulk2}
\sup_{t\in[\hat{\theta}_a, \upsilon_a - (1/16)t_L] \cup [\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L,\theta_a]} |\varphi_1(t)| \le |\varphi_1(\upsilon_a - (1/16)t_L)| \vee |\varphi_1(\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L)|\;.
\end{equation}
Putting together \eqref{Eq:EigenBulk}, \eqref{Eq:EigenBulk2}, \eqref{Eq:EigenStart} and \eqref{Eq:EigenEnd}, we deduce that all the points where $|\varphi_1|$ reaches its global maximum, in particular $U_1$, lie at distance at most $4C / (\sqrt{a_L} \ln a_L)$ from $\upsilon_a$. Integrating \eqref{Eq:EigenBulk} and \eqref{Eq:EigenBulk2} we get the estimate:
$$ m_1([\hat\theta_a/L,\theta_a/L]) = \varphi_1^2(U_1) \frac2{\sqrt{a_L}} (1+o(1))\;.$$
On the other hand, \eqref{Eq:EigenStart} and \eqref{Eq:EigenEnd} yield
$$ m_1([0,\hat\theta_a/L]) \le \varphi_1(\hat\theta_a)^2 \mathcal{O}(1/\sqrt{a_L})\;,\quad m_1([\theta_a/L,\infty)) \le \varphi_1(\theta_a)^2 \mathcal{O}(1/\sqrt{a_L})\;.$$
By \eqref{Eq:EigenBulk} and \eqref{Eq:EigenBulk2}, we deduce that $|\varphi_1(\hat\theta_a)|$ and $|\varphi_1(\theta_a)|$ are negligible compared to $|\varphi_1(U_1)|$. Since $m_1$ is a probability measure, this ensures that
$\varphi_1^2(U_1) \sim \sqrt{a_L}/2$, that $m_1$ is asymptotically as close as desired to $\delta_{U_1/L}$ and that $|\varphi_1|$, appropriately rescaled around $U_1$, converges to the inverse of a hyperbolic cosine.
Regarding the behavior of the Brownian motion around $U_1$, using the identity
$$ \chi_1(t) = \chi_1(U_1) + \int_{U_1}^t (-\lambda_1+\frac{\beta}{4}s - \chi_1(s)^2)ds + B(t) - B(U_1)\;,$$
and the fact that $\chi_1$ is close to a hyperbolic cosine, a simple computation yields the asserted convergence. This completes the proof of Theorems \ref{Th:Main} and \ref{Th:Shape} regarding the first eigenfunction, except for the limiting law of the localization center which will be proven in Subsection \ref{Subsec:Expo}.
\subsection{Control of the $i$-th eigenfunction}\label{Subsec:second}
We treat in detail the case $i=2$, since the general case follows from exactly the same arguments combined with a simple recursion. The diffusion $Z_{\alpha_2}$ explodes twice while the diffusion $Z_{\alpha'_2}$ explodes only once. There exist $j_1 < j_2$ such that the two explosion times of $Z_{\alpha_2}$ fall within $[t_{j_1}^n L,t_{j_1+1}^n L]$ and $[t_{j_2}^n L,t_{j_2+1}^n L]$, and $t_{j_1+1}^n, t^n_{j_2+1} < \varepsilon^{-2}$. By (c)-(3), the explosion time of $Z_{\alpha'_2}$ falls within one of these two intervals. Without loss of generality, let us assume that it falls in the first interval.
\medskip
On $[t_{j_1}^n L,t_{j_1+1}^n L]$, we use the ordering $Z_{\alpha_2} \le \chi_2 \le Z_{\alpha'_2}$ that holds up to the first explosion time of $Z_{\alpha_2}$, together with the estimates (c)-(1) and (c)-(3) to deduce that
$$ \chi_2(t) \ge \sqrt{a_L} \tanh(-\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_1)) - C\frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L}\;,\quad \forall t\in [\iota_1,\theta_1]\;,$$
and
$$ \chi_2(t) \le \sqrt{a_L} \tanh(-\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_1)) + 2C\frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L}\;,\quad \forall t\in [\iota'_1,\theta'_1]\;.$$
Here $\iota_1, \theta_1$ and $\iota_1',\theta_1'$ are shorthands for $\iota_{\alpha_2}^{j_1},\theta_{\alpha_2}^{j_1}$ and $\iota_{\alpha_2'}^{j_1},\theta_{\alpha_2'}^{j_1}$. By monotonicity, we necessarily have $\theta_1 < \theta'_1$. Consequently, we get
$$ \sup_{t\in [\iota_1 \vee \iota'_1,\theta_1]} |\chi_2(t) - \sqrt{a_L} \tanh(-\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_1))| \le 2C\frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L}\;,$$
so that for all $t\in [\iota_1 \vee \iota'_1,\theta_1]$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EigenBulk221}
\frac1{\cosh(\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_1))}(1-2C|t-\upsilon_1|\frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L}) \le \frac{\varphi_2(t)}{\varphi_2(\upsilon_1)} \le \frac1{\cosh(\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_1))}(1+2C|t-\upsilon_1|\frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L})\;.
\end{equation}
By (b)-Entrance, we deduce that
$$ \sup_{t\in (0,(3/8)t_L]} |\chi_2(t) - \sqrt{a_L}\coth(\sqrt{a_L}t)| \le 1\;,$$
By (b)-Oscillations, we obtain for all $t\in [(3/8)t_L,\theta_1]$
$$ \fint_{(3/8)t_L}^{t} \chi_2(s) ds \in [\sqrt{a_L}-10, \sqrt{a_L}+10]\;,$$
Therefore all the points where $|\varphi_2|$ reaches its maximum over $ [0,\theta_1]$ lie at a distance negligible compared to $L$ from $\theta_1$.\\
To control the eigenfunction after time $\theta_1$, the situation is slightly different from the case of the first eigenfunction. We use the fact that $Z_{\alpha_2}$ and $Z_{\alpha'_2}$ remain close to each other and explode within a time of order $(3/8)t_L$ by (c)-(3) and (b)-Explosion, to deduce that
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EigenEnd2}
-2\sqrt{a_L} \le \chi_2(t) \le -\frac12 \sqrt{a_L}\;,\quad t\in [\theta_1,\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(\chi_2)]\;,
\end{equation}
and
$$ \sup_{t\in (\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(\chi_2),z_1]} |\chi_2(t) - \sqrt{a_L}\coth(\sqrt{a_L} (t-z_1))| \le 1\;.$$
where $z_1$ is the first explosion time of $\chi_2$. Regarding this second estimate, note that $z_1$ falls in between the two explosion times of $Z_{\alpha_2}$ and $Z_{\alpha'_2}$, and that these two times are at a distance negligible compared to $t_L$ from each other by (c)-(3): consequently the control on the Brownian motion required to establish the second estimate is granted on the event $\mathcal{E}$.\\ We deduce from these bounds that
\begin{align*}
\frac{\varphi_2(t)}{\varphi_2(\theta_1)} &\le e^{-\frac12 \sqrt{a_L}(t-\theta_1)}\;,\quad t\in [\theta_1,z_1]\;,\\
\frac{\varphi_2(t)}{\varphi_2(\theta_1)} &\ge e^{-2 \sqrt{a_L}(t-\theta_1)}\;,\quad t\in [\theta_1,\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(\chi_2)]\;,
\end{align*}
and
$$ \varphi_2(t) = \varphi_2'(z_1) \frac{\sinh(\sqrt{a_L}(t-z_1))}{\sqrt{a_L}}(1+o(1))\;,\quad t\in[\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(\chi_2),z_1]\;.$$
All these arguments suffice to obtain the following (rough) bound:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:m2z1}
m_2([0,z_1]) \le \big(\varphi_2'(z_1)\big)^2 e^{o(L) \sqrt{a_L}}\;,
\end{equation}
for all $L$ large enough.
\medskip
After time $z_1$, the process $\chi_2$ comes down from $+\infty$ in an almost deterministic way:
$$ \sup_{t\in (z_1,z_1+(3/8)t_L]} |\chi_2(t) - \sqrt{a_L}\coth(\sqrt{a_L} (t-z_1))| \le 1\;.$$
Indeed, the proof of this estimate for the diffusions $Z_a$ relies on a control of the Brownian motion on an interval of length $t_L$ right after the explosion time: on the event $\mathcal{E}$ we do have such a control since $z_1$ is very close to the explosion times of $Z_{\alpha_2}$ and $Z_{\alpha'_2}$. From this estimate, we deduce that
$$ \varphi_2(t) = \varphi_2'(z_1) \frac{\sinh(\sqrt{a_L}(t-z_1))}{\sqrt{a_L}}(1+o(1))\;,\quad t\in[z_1,z_1+(3/8)t_L]\;.$$
Let $\theta_2,\upsilon_2$ be shorthands for $\theta_{a_2}^{j_2},\upsilon_{a_2}^{j_2}$. On the time interval $[z_1,\infty)$, it suffices to apply the same arguments as for the first eigenfunction in order to show that
\begin{align}\label{Eq:EigenStart2}
\frac{\varphi_2(t)}{\varphi_2(\hat\theta_2)} &\le e^{-\frac14 \sqrt{a_L}(t-\hat\theta_2)}\;,\quad t\in [z_1,\hat\theta_2]\;,\\
\frac{\varphi_2(t)}{\varphi_2(\theta_2)} &\le e^{-\frac14 \sqrt{a_L}(t-\theta_2)}\;,\quad t\in [\theta_2,\infty)\;.
\end{align}
as well as, for all $t\in[\upsilon_2 - (1/16)t_L,\upsilon_2 + (1/16)t_L]$
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EigenBulk22}
\frac1{\cosh(\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_2))}(1-2C|t-\upsilon_2|\frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L}) \le \frac{\varphi_2(t)}{\varphi_2(\upsilon_2)} \le \frac1{\cosh(\sqrt{a_L}(t-\upsilon_2))}(1+2C|t-\upsilon_2|\frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L})\;,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EigenBulk222}
\sup_{t\in[\hat{\theta}_2, \upsilon_2 - (1/16)t_L] \cup [\upsilon_2 + (1/16)t_L,\theta_2]} |\varphi_2(t)| \le |\varphi_2(\upsilon_2 - (1/16)t_L)| \vee |\varphi_2(\upsilon_2 + (1/16)t_L)|\;.
\end{equation}
These estimates ensure that all the points where $|\varphi_2|$ reach its maximum over $[z_1,\infty)$ lie at a distance smaller than $4C/(\ln a_L \sqrt{a_L})$ from $\upsilon_2$.
By (c)-(3) (applied to $\hat{Z}_{\alpha_2}$), we know that $\hat{\theta}_2$ lies at distance at least $2^{-2n} L$ from $z_1$ so that the previous estimates ensure that
\begin{align*}
|\varphi_2(\upsilon_2)| &\ge |\varphi_2(\hat{\theta}_2)| \ge |\varphi_2(z_1+\frac38 t_L)| \exp(\frac14 \sqrt{a_L}(\hat{\theta}_2-z_1-\frac38 t_L))\;,\\
|\varphi_2(z_1+\frac38 t_L)| &= |\varphi_2'(z_1)| a_L^{-1/8} (1+o(1))\;.
\end{align*}
We thus deduce that
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:Derivups}
|\varphi_2(\upsilon_2)| \ge |\varphi_2'(z_1)| \exp({\frac18 \sqrt{a_L} 2^{-2n} L})\;.
\end{equation}
As a consequence all the points where the global maximum of $\varphi_2$ is attained, in particular $U_2$, lie at a distance smaller than $4C/(\ln a_L \sqrt{a_L})$ from $\upsilon_2$. Consequently,
$$ m_2([\hat{\theta}_2/L,\theta_2/L]) = \varphi_2^2(U_2) \frac2{\sqrt{a_L}} (1+o(1))\;,$$
and
$$ m_2([z_1/L,\infty)\backslash[\hat{\theta}_2/L,\theta_2/L]) \ll \varphi_2^2(U_2/L) \frac2{\sqrt{a_L}}\;.$$
Furthermore \eqref{Eq:EigenBulk22} gives the convergence towards the inverse of a hyperbolic cosine, and a simple computation gives the convergence of the rescaled Brownian motion near $U_2$ (denoted $b_{2,\beta}$ in Theorem \ref{Th:Shape}). Putting together \eqref{Eq:m2z1} and \eqref{Eq:Derivups}, we deduce that $m_2$ gives a negligible mass to $[0,z_1/L]$, and is (asymptotically in $L$) as close as desired to a Dirac mass at $U_2/L$.
\subsection{Convergence towards exponential r.v.}\label{Subsec:Expo}
Recall that $(\Lambda_i,I_i)_{i\ge 1}$ are the atoms of a Poisson point process on ${\symb R}\times{\symb R}_+$ of intensity $e^x e^{-t} dx\otimes dt$. We already know that $(4\sqrt{a_L}(\lambda_i+a_L))_{i\ge 1}$ converges in law to $(\Lambda_i)_{i\ge 1}$. The goal of this subsection is to prove that $(4\sqrt{a_L}(\lambda_i+a_L),U_i/L)_{i\ge 1}$ converges in law to $(\Lambda_i,I_i)_{i\ge 1}$.\\
Let $\nu$ be the law of $(\Lambda_i,I_i)_{1\le i \le k}$. Let $(\mathcal{I}_i)_{i=1,\ldots,k}$ be a collection of $k$ disjoint closed intervals of ${\symb R}$ such that\footnote{Here we mean that any point in $\mathcal{I}_1$ is smaller than any point in $\mathcal{I}_2$ and so on.} $\mathcal{I}_1 < \mathcal{I}_2 <\ldots < \mathcal{I}_k$ and $\mathcal{I}_k$ is unbounded to the right. Let also $(\mathcal{U}_i)_{i=1,\ldots,k-1}$ be a collection of disjoint closed intervals in ${\symb R}_+$ and set $\mathcal{U}_k = {\symb R}_+$. If we show that as $L\to\infty$
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:CVExpo}
{\symb P}\Big((4\sqrt{a_L}(\lambda_i+a_L),U_i/L)_{i=1,\ldots,k} \in \prod_{i=1}^k \mathcal{I}_i\times\mathcal{U}_i\Big)\to \nu\Big(\prod_{i=1}^k \mathcal{I}_i\times\mathcal{U}_i\Big)\;,
\end{equation}
then (recall that $k$ is arbitrary) standard arguments yield the convergence of $(4\sqrt{a_L}(\lambda_i+a_L),U_i/L)_{i\ge 1}$ to $(\Lambda_i,I_i)_{i\ge 1}$ as stated in Theorem \ref{Th:Main}.
\medskip
Consider a ``microscopic'' product set of the form
$$ \mathcal{C} = \Big(\prod_{i=1}^{k-1} ((b_i-1) \varepsilon, b_i \varepsilon] \times (t^n_{j_i},t^n_{j_i+1}] \Big) \times \big((b_k\varepsilon,\infty) \times {\symb R}_+\big)\;,$$
for some distinct $j_i \in \{0,\ldots, 2^{n}-1\}$ and some $b_i \in {\symb Z} \cap [-(1/\varepsilon^2),1/\varepsilon^2]$ satisfying $b_1 < b_2 < \ldots < b_k$. Recall that $q_1 > \ldots > q_m$ denote the elements of $\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ in decreasing order. There exist $\ell_1 < \ell_2 < \ldots < \ell_k$ such that $q_{\ell_i} = a_L - b_i \varepsilon/(4\sqrt{a_L})$.
\smallskip
Let $\mathcal{G}$ be the event implicitly defined in Lemma \ref{Lemma:ApproxZZ} and recall the event $\mathcal{E}$ from Subsection \ref{Subsec:Key}. Recall also the r.v.~$V_j(i)$ defined in Subsection \ref{Subsec:PPP}. On the event $\mathcal{G}\cap \mathcal{E}$, we claim that
$$ \big\{ (4\sqrt{a_L}(\lambda_i+a_L),U_i/L)_{i=1,\ldots,k} \in \mathcal{C} \big\}\;,$$
coincides with
$$ \big\{ V_{j_i}(\ell_i)-V_{j_i}(\ell_i-1)=1,\;\;\;\forall i\in\{1,\ldots,k-1\} \,;\quad V_j(\ell_k) = 0,\;\;\; \forall j\notin \{j_1,\ldots,j_{k-1}\}\big\}\;.$$
Indeed, on the event $\mathcal{G}$, the latter event coincides with the event where:\begin{itemize}
\item $Z_{q_1}, \ldots, Z_{q_{\ell_1-1}}$ do not explode on $[0,\infty)$,
\item $Z_{q_{\ell_1}}, \ldots, Z_{q_{\ell_2-1}}$ explode once on $[0,\infty)$ and their explosion times lie in $(t^n_{j_1}L,t^n_{j_1+1} L]$,
\item $\ldots$
\item $Z_{q_{\ell_{k-2}}}, \ldots, Z_{q_{\ell_{k-1}-1}}$ explode $k-2$ times on $[0,\infty)$ and their explosion times lie in $(t^n_{j_1}L,t^n_{j_1+1} L]$,$\ldots$, $(t^n_{j_{k-2}}L,t^n_{j_{k-2}+1}L]$,
\item $Z_{q_{\ell_{k-1}}}, \ldots, Z_{q_{\ell_k}}$ explode $k-1$ times on $[0,\infty)$ and their explosion times lie in $(t^n_{j_1}L,t^n_{j_1+1}L]$, $\ldots$, $(t^n_{j_{k-1}}L,t^n_{j_{k-1}+1}L]$.
\end{itemize}
In turn, on $\mathcal{E}$, this event coincides with the first event of the claim, thus concluding the proof of the claim.
\smallskip
A direct computation shows that
$$ \nu(\mathcal{C}) = e^{-e^{b_k\varepsilon}} \prod_{i=1}^{k-1} 2^{-n}(e^{b_i\varepsilon} - e^{(b_i-1)\varepsilon}) \;.$$
From the arguments in the proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:CVQn}, we deduce that
\begin{align*}
&\lim_{L\to\infty} {\symb P}\big( V_{j_i}(\ell_i)-V_{j_i}(\ell_i-1)=1,\;\;\;\forall i\in\{1,\ldots,k-1\} \,;\quad V_j(\ell_k) = 0,\;\;\; \forall j\notin \{j_1,\ldots,j_{k-1}\}\big)\\
&= e^{-(1-(k-1)2^{-n})e^{b_k\varepsilon}} \prod_{i=1}^{k-1} (e^{-2^{-n} e^{(b_i-1)\varepsilon}} - e^{-2^{-n} e^{b_i\varepsilon}})\\
&=\nu(\mathcal{C}) e^{(k-1)2^{-n} e^{b_k\varepsilon}} \prod_{i=1}^{k-1} \delta_i\;,
\end{align*}
where
$$ \delta_i = \frac{e^{-2^{-n} e^{(b_i-1)\varepsilon}} - e^{-2^{-n} e^{b_i\varepsilon}}}{2^{-n}(e^{b_i\varepsilon} - e^{(b_i-1)\varepsilon})}\;.$$
As $n\to\infty$ we have
$$ e^{(k-1)2^{-n} e^{b_k\varepsilon}} \prod_{i=1}^{k-1} \delta_i \to 1\;,$$
uniformly over all $b_1\varepsilon,\ldots,b_k\varepsilon$ in a compact set.
\medskip
Then, one can approximate from above and below (for the inclusion of sets) any set $\prod_{i=1}^k \mathcal{I}_i\times\mathcal{U}_i$ as above by the union of $\mathcal{O}(2^{nk}\varepsilon^{-k})$ microscopic sets and use the previous convergence, together with the fact that ${\symb P}(\mathcal{G}\cap\mathcal{E})$ is of order $1 - \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon)$ for all $L$ and $n$ large enough, to deduce \eqref{Eq:CVExpo}.
\section{Simple estimates on $Z_a$}\label{Sec:Techos}
In this section, we provide some simple estimates on the diffusion $Z_a$ and we prove Lemma \ref{Lemma:ApproxZZ}, and Proposition \ref{Prop:TypicalZ}.\\
All the estimates that we need concern the process $Z_a$, for some $a\in\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and on the time interval $[0,C_0 L {\ln L}]$ for some large enough constant $C_0>0$ (recall that after time $C_0 L{\ln L}$ these processes are almost deterministic by Lemma \ref{Lemma:NoExploInfinity}). We therefore introduce $\tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ as the smallest interval that contains all points
$$ a + \frac{\beta t}{4}\;,\quad t\in [0, C_0 L {\ln L}]\;,\quad a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}\;.$$
Recall that $\beta =(L \sqrt{a_L})^{-1} (1+o(1))$. There exists $C>0$ such that $\sup_{a\in \tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}} a \le C a_L$.\\
We also introduce $\bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ as the smallest interval that contains all points
$$ a + \frac{\beta t}{4}\;,\quad t\in [0, \varepsilon^{-2} L ]\;,\quad a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}\;.$$
The parameter $\varepsilon$ being fixed, there exists $C>0$ such that for all $L$ large enough
$$ \sup_{a\in \tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}} |a - a_L| \le C a_L^{-1/2}\;.$$
For $a\in{\symb R}$ we set $a(t) := a + \beta t/4$. First, we state a bound on the probability that $Z_a$ remains close to the bottom of the well of its time-inhomogeneous potential.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:RBM}
Fix $a >0$. For any $0<t_0<t_1$, any $0<d<D<\sqrt{a(t_0)}$ and any $x\in[\sqrt{a(t_0)}-d,\sqrt{a(t_0)}+d]$, we have
$$ {\symb P}\big(\exists t \in [t_0,t_1], Z_a(t) \notin [\sqrt{a(t_0)}-D,\sqrt{a(t)}+D] \, |\, Z_a(t_0) =x\big) \le 4 e^{-\frac{(D-d)^2}{2(t_1-t_0)}}\;.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Consider the reflected Brownian motion $R(t),t\ge t_0$ starting from $d$:
$$ dR(t) = dB(t) + d\ell(t)\;, \quad \int_{t\ge t_0} R(t) d\ell(t) = 0\;,\quad R(t_0) = d\;.$$
If $Z_a(t_0)$ lies in $[\sqrt{a(t_0)}-d,\sqrt{a(t_0)}+d]$, then $R(t) - (Z_a(t)-\sqrt{a(t)}) \ge 0$ for all $t\ge t_0$. Indeed, the inequality is satisfied at time $t_0$, and if this quantity vanishes at some time $t\ge t_0$ then either $R(t) = 0$ in which case we have
$$ d R(t) - d(Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a(t)}) = d\ell(t) + \frac{a'(t)}{2\sqrt{a(t)}} > 0\;,$$
or $R(t) > 0$ in which case
$$ d R(t) - d(Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a(t)}) = Z_a(t)^2 - a(t) + \frac{a'(t)}{2\sqrt{a(t)}} > 0\;.$$
Standard estimates on the reflected Brownian motion then show that
$$ {\symb P}\big(\sup_{t\in [t_0,t_1]} R(t) > D\big) \le 2 e^{-\frac{(D-d)^2}{2(t_1-t_0)}}\;.$$
A similar argument allows to control the probability that $Z_a$ crosses $\sqrt{a(t_0)} - D$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Entrance, exit and return to the bottom of the well}
We start with the deterministic behavior of the diffusion $Z_a$ when it comes down from infinity and explodes. We denote by $\tau_x(Z_a)$ the first hitting time of $x$ by the process $Z_a$. Sometimes, we will simply write $\tau_x$.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:Entrance}
Let $Z_a$ be the diffusion starting at time $0$ from $+\infty$. For any $b>0$, there exists $C=C(b)>0$ such that for all $L$ large enough, for all $a\in \tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$, with a probability at least $1-a_L^{-b}$ we have
$$ \sup_{t\in (0,\frac{\ln a}{\sqrt{a}}]} |Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a}\coth(\sqrt{a} t)| \le C \frac{\ln a_L}{a_L^{1/4}} \;.$$
Similarly, let $Z_a$ be the diffusion starting at time $0$ from $-\sqrt{a}+(\ln a)^2 / a^{1/4}$. For any $b>0$, there exists $C=C(b)>0$ such that for all $L$ large enough, for all $a\in \tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$, with a probability at least $1-a_L^{-b}$ we have
$$ \sup_{t\in (0,\tau_{-\infty}]} |Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a}\coth(\sqrt{a}(t-\tau_{-\infty}))| \le C \frac{\ln a_L}{a_L^{1/4}} \;.$$
Finally, if $a\in\bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ then $\sqrt{a}\coth(\sqrt{a} \cdot)$ can be replaced by $\sqrt{a_L}\coth(\sqrt{a_L} \cdot)$ in the above estimates.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First of all, note that the derivative of the function $x\mapsto x \coth(x)$ is bounded on ${\symb R}$. Consequently there exists a constant $K>0$ such that
$$ \sup_{t > 0} \frac1{t} |\sqrt{a}t \coth(\sqrt a t)- \sqrt{a_L}t\coth(\sqrt{a_L} t)| \le K |\sqrt{a_L} - \sqrt{a}|\;.$$
This last term is of order $a_L^{-1}$ uniformly over all $a\in\bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$. Consequently, the last part of the statement is proved.\\
The idea of the proof of the first part of the statement is very simple: when the process $Z_a$ is close to $\pm \infty$, the SDE that it solves is essentially deterministic. Let us provide the details in the case where $Z_a$ starts from $+\infty$. Consider the process $R(t) = Z_a(t)-B(t)$ and note that it solves
$$ dR(t) = a\, dt - R(t)^2 \Big[ (1 + \frac{B(t)}{R(t)})^2 - \frac{\beta t}{4 R(t)^2}\Big] dt\;.$$
Fix $\ell \ge x:= \sqrt a + (\ln a)^2/a^{1/4}$ and $M=c \ln a / a^{1/4}$. Consider the solutions $F_1,F_2$ of
$$ dF_i(t) = (a- C_i F_i(t)^2)dt\;,\quad F_i(0)=+\infty\;,$$
with
$$ C_1 = (1 - \frac{M}{\ell-M})^2 - \frac{\beta}{4(\ell-M)^2} \frac{\ln a}{\sqrt a}\;,\quad C_2 = (1 + \frac{M}{\ell-M})^2\;.$$
Let $\mathcal{A} := \{\sup_{t\in [0,\ln a / \sqrt a]} |B_t| \le M\}$ and note that ${\symb P}(\mathcal{A}^\complement) \le 2a^{-c^2/2}$. On the event $\mathcal{A}$ and as long as $Z_a$ is above $\ell$, we have
$$ F_2(t) \le R(t) \le F_1(t)\;.$$
Consequently
$$ F_2(t) - M \le Z_a(t) \le F_1(t) + M\;,\quad \forall t\in[0, \tau_{\ell}(Z_a) \wedge \frac{\ln a}{\sqrt a}]\;.$$
Note that $F_i(t) = \sqrt{a/C_i} \coth(\sqrt{aC_i} t)$. A straightforward computation shows that, in the case where $\ell = x$, the first hitting times of $\ell$ by $F_2-M$ and $F_1+M$ both have the following expansion
$$ \frac38 \frac{\ln a}{\sqrt a} + \frac1{2\sqrt a} \ln \frac2{(\ln a)^2} (1+o(1))\;.$$
As a consequence on the event $\mathcal{A}$, for all $\ell \ge x$ we have $\tau_{\ell}(Z_a) < \ln a / \sqrt a$ and
$$ F_2(t) - M \le Z_a(t) \le F_1(t) + M\;,\quad \forall t\in[0, \tau_{\ell}(Z_a)]\;.$$
Note that this implies that
$$ \tau_{2\ell+M}(F_2)\le \tau_{2\ell}(Z_a) \le \tau_{\ell}(Z_a) \le \tau_{\ell-M}(F_1)\;.$$
One can check that
$$F_2(t)-M \le F_2(t) \le \sqrt{a} \coth(\sqrt{a} t) \le F_1(t) \le F_1(t)+M\;,\quad \forall t\ge 0\;.$$
Hence, for all $\ell \in [x,\infty)$
\begin{align*}
\sup_{t\in [\tau_{2\ell},\tau_{\ell}]}\big|Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a} \coth(\sqrt{a} t)\big| &\le \sup_{t\in[\tau_{2\ell+M}(F_2),\tau_{\ell-M}(F_1)]} \big|(F_1(t)+M) - (F_2(t) - M)\big|\\
&\le \sup_{t\in[\tau_{2\ell+M}(F_2),\tau_{\ell-M}(F_1)]} \Big|\frac{F_1(t)}{F_2(t)}-1\Big| F_2(t) + 2M\;.
\end{align*}
From the explicit expressions of $F_1$ and $F_2$, we obtain:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:F1F2} \sup_{t>0}\Big|\frac{F_1(t)}{F_2(t)} - 1\Big| \lesssim \frac{M}{\ell}\;,\end{equation}
uniformly over all choices of $\ell \in [x,\infty)$. Therefore,
$$ \sup_{t\in [\tau_{2\ell+M}(F_2),\tau_{\ell-M}(F_1)]}\Big|\frac{F_1(t)}{F_2(t)} - 1\Big|F_2(t) \lesssim M\;,$$
so that
$$ \sup_{t\in [\tau_{2\ell},\tau_{\ell}]}\big|Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a} \coth(\sqrt{a} t)\big| \lesssim M\;,$$
uniformly over all choices of $\ell \in [x,\infty)$. Patching together these estimates, we get
$$ \sup_{t\in [0,\tau_{x}]}\big|Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a} \coth(\sqrt{a} t)\big| \lesssim M\;,$$
To complete the proof of the lemma, it remains to control the diffusion on the interval $[\tau_{x}(Z_a),\ln a / \sqrt a]$ and on the event $\mathcal{A}$. To that end, we take $\ell = \sqrt{a}/2$ and, by the arguments at the beginning of the proof, we find
$$ F_2(t)-M \le Z_a(t) \le F_1(t)+M\;,\qquad t\in[0,\tau_{\ell}(Z_a)\wedge \frac{\ln a}{\sqrt a}]\;.$$
Note that $F_2(t) - M > \sqrt{a}/2$ for all $t>0$. We deduce that $\tau_{\ell}(Z_a)> \ln a / \sqrt a$. This and the estimate \eqref{Eq:F1F2} (which is also valid with the present choice of $\ell$) yield
$$ \sup_{t\in [0,\ln a /\sqrt a]}\big|Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a} \coth(\sqrt{a} t)\big| \lesssim M\;.$$
\end{proof}
The following lemma shows that, whatever point $Z_a$ starts from, with large probability it comes back within a short time to a neighborhood of the bottom of the well of its time-inhomogeneous potential.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:Stabil}
For any $c>0$ there exists a constant $C>0$ such that the following holds for all $L$ large enough:
\begin{itemize}
\item Uniformly over all $a\in\tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and all $y\in (-\infty,+\infty]$, if $Z_a$ starts from $y$ at time $0$ then with a probability at least $1- Ca_L^{-2}$, it lies in the interval $[\sqrt{a}-c, \sqrt{a} + c]$ at time $\frac{(\ln a)^6}{\sqrt a}$,
\item Uniformly over all $a\in\bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and all $y\in (-\infty,+\infty]$, if $Z_a$ starts from $y$ at time $0$ then with a probability at least $1 - C \frac{\ln\ln a_L}{{\ln a_L}}$, it lies in the interval $[\sqrt{a}-c, \sqrt{a} + c]$ at time $2 t_L$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
The proof of this lemma requires fine estimates on the behavior of $Z_a$ when it crosses the barrier of potential and is therefore postponed to Section \ref{Sec:Fine}. With this result at hand, we can prove the following.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:XZSqueeze}
Let $X_a$ start from $+\infty$ and let $Z_a$ start from some $y\in (-\infty,+\infty]$. For any $c>0$ there exists a constant $C>0$ such that for all $L$ large enough the following has probability at least $1-Ca_L^{-2}$ uniformly over all $a\in \tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and all $y\in (-\infty,+\infty]$:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:XaLSqueeze}
\inf_{t\in [0,10 \frac{\ln a}{\sqrt a}]} X_a(t) \ge \sqrt{a} - c \;,\quad \sup_{t\in [\frac{\ln a}{\sqrt a},10 \frac{\ln a}{\sqrt a}]} X_a(t)\le \sqrt{a} + c\;,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:ZaLSqueeze}
\sqrt{a} - c \le Z_{a}(t) \le \sqrt{a} + c \;, \quad\forall t\in \Big[\frac{(\ln a)^6}{\sqrt a},\frac{(\ln a)^6}{\sqrt a}+10 \frac{\ln a}{\sqrt a}\Big]\;.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The estimate on $Z_a$ follows from Lemmas \ref{Lemma:Stabil} and \ref{Lemma:RBM}: the cost in probability is bounded by $(C+1)a_L^{-2}$ where $C$ is the constant from Lemma \ref{Lemma:Stabil}. The estimate on $X_a$ follows from the counterparts of Lemmas \ref{Lemma:Entrance}, see~\cite[Lemma 4.2]{DL17}, and \ref{Lemma:RBM}, see~\cite[Lemma 4.4]{DL17}: the cost in probability is of the same magnitude.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Oscillations}
In this subsection, we collect estimates needed for the proof of ``Oscillations'' and ``Oscillations at infinity'' from Proposition \ref{Prop:TypicalZ}.
At several occasions, we will use the following argument. Let $I_1,\ldots,I_k$ be $k$ disjoint intervals, let $f$ be some function and fix $[a,b] \subset {\symb R}$. We have
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:Convexity}\fint_{I_j} f(s) ds \in [a,b]\;,\quad \forall j\in \{1,\ldots,k\}\qquad \Longrightarrow\qquad\fint_{I_1\cup \ldots\cup I_k} f(s) ds \in [a,b]\;.\end{equation}
Indeed, setting $I := I_1\cup \ldots\cup I_k$ we have
$$ \fint_{I} f(s) ds = \sum_{j=1}^k \frac{|I_j|}{|I|} \fint_{I_j} f(s) ds\;,$$
so by convexity the result follows.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:Osc}
Fix $c>0$. We have as $L\to\infty$ uniformly over all $a\in \bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and all $x\in [\sqrt{a_L}-1,\sqrt{a_L}+1]$
$$ {\symb P}_x\Big(\fint_0^t Z_a(s) \in [\sqrt{a_L}-c,\sqrt{a_L}+c]\;,\quad \forall t\in [0, \tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(Z_a) \wedge \varepsilon^{-2} L]\Big) \rightarrow 1\;.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For $n\ge 1$ introduce $s_i := i2^{-n}$ and let $I:=\min(i\ge 1: s_i > \varepsilon^{-2})$. If we show that there exists $C'>0$ such that for all $n$ and for all $L$ large enough
$$ \sup_{i\le I}\sup_{a\in \bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}} {\symb P}_x(\fint_{s_i L}^t Z_a(s)ds \in [\sqrt{a_L}-c,\sqrt{a_L}+c]\;,\quad \forall t\in [s_i L, \tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(Z_a) \wedge s_{i+1}L]) < C' 2^{-2n}\;,$$
then, by \eqref{Eq:Convexity}, we deduce the statement of the lemma. We will restrict ourselves to estimating the lower bound, namely $\fint_{s_i L}^t Z_a(s) ds \ge \sqrt{a_L}-c$. The upper bound follows from similar (and actually simpler) arguments.\\
So let us fix $i\ge 1$ and consider the time-homogeneous diffusion $X^i$ whose parameter $a$ is taken to be $a^i:=a + (\beta/4)s_i L - \frac1{4\sqrt{a_L}}$. From McKean's result recalled in Section \ref{Subsec:TimeHomo}, the probability that this diffusion explodes twice or more on $(s_i L, s_{i+1} L]$ is of order $2^{-2n}$. Similarly, the probability that this diffusion explodes on $(s_i L, (s_i+2^{-2n})L]$ is of order $2^{-2n}$: we can therefore exclude these two events in the sequel.\\
Until the end of the proof, we say that an event holds ``with large probability'' if its probability goes to $1$ as $L\to\infty$, uniformly over all parameters $a \in \bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and $i\le I$.\\
Recall that $t_L = (\ln a_L)/\sqrt{a_L}$. Take $c' = c/8$. By Lemma \ref{Lemma:XZSqueeze} with large probability
$$ Z_a(t) \in [\sqrt{a_L}-c',\sqrt{a_L}+c']\;,\quad \forall t\in [s_i L, s_i L +9 t_L]\;.$$
Furthermore, by~\cite[Lemmas 4.3, 4.4. and 4.7]{DL17} with large probability we have
$$ \fint_{s_i L+(3/8) t_L}^t X^i(s) ds \in [\sqrt{a_L}-c',\sqrt{a_L}+c']\;,\quad \forall t\in [s_i L+(3/8) t_L, \tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i)]\;,$$
as well as $\tau_{-\infty}(X^i) - \tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i) \le t_L$. By the same computation as in the proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:AL}, we can show that $X^i$ passes below $Z_a$ by time $s_i L +5 t_L$. Patching together these estimates we deduce that
$$ \fint_{s_i L}^t Z_a(s) ds \ge \sqrt{a_L}-3c'\;,\quad \forall t\in [s_i L, \tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i)]\;.$$
If $\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i) > s_{i+1} L$ then we are done. Otherwise $\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i) \le s_{i+1} L$. By Lemma \ref{Lemma:Stabil}, with large probability $Z_a$ lies in $[\sqrt{a_L} - c',\sqrt{a_L}+c']$ at time $\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i)+2t_L$. If $Z_a$ hits $-2\sqrt{a_L}$ on the interval of time $[\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i), \tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i)+2t_L]$ then, using the fact that $\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i) \ge \tau_{-\infty}(X^i) - t_L \ge s_i L +(1/2) 2^{-2n} L$ it is easy to check that
$$ \fint_{s_i^n L}^t Z_a(s) ds \ge \sqrt{a_L}-4c'\;,\quad \forall t\in [s_i L, \tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(Z_a)]\;,$$
and we are done.\\
If $Z_a$ does not hit $-2\sqrt{a_L}$ on the interval of time $[\tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i), \tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i)+2t_L]$, then it is also easy to check that
$$ \fint_{s_i L}^t Z_a(s) ds \ge \sqrt{a_L}-4c'\;,\quad \forall t\in [s_i L, \tau_{-2\sqrt{a_L}}(X^i) + 2 t_L]\;.$$
Furthermore, one can iterate the above arguments starting from time $\tau_{-\infty}(X^i)$ and complete the proof.
\end{proof}
We now prove a result specific to the backward diffusions.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:OscInfty}
Fix $C_0 >0$. There exists $c>0$ such that for all $\varepsilon > 0$ small enough and all $L$ large enough the probability of the following event is larger than $1-c\varepsilon$. For all $a\in {\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$, we have
$$ \fint_{\varepsilon^{-2} L}^{t} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds \le -\frac12\sqrt{a_L}\;,\quad \forall t\in [2\varepsilon^{-2}L, C_0 L \ln L]\;.$$
\end{lemma}
Note that $\sqrt{a+\frac{\beta}{4}t}$ can be larger than $\sqrt{a_L}$ for $a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and $t\in [2\varepsilon^{-2}L, C_0 L \ln L]$, therefore we need to be careful in this proof at the current value of the bottom of well.
\begin{proof}
Since there are $\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^{-2})$ elements in ${\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$, it suffices to prove that uniformly over all $a \in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$, the probability of the estimate of the statement is larger than $1-\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^3)$. So we now fix $a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$. Consider the sequence
$$ s_i := e^i \varepsilon^{-2} L\;,\quad i\ge 0\;,$$
and let $i_1$ be the smallest integer such that $s_{i_1} \ge C_0 L \ln L$. Note that $i_1 \le 2 \ln\ln L$. Set $a(s_i) := a + \frac{\beta s_i}{4}$. Assume that for every $i\in\{0,\ldots i_1-1\}$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:Bdsi}
\fint_t^{s_{i+1}} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds \in [-\sqrt{a(s_i)} - 10, -\sqrt{a(s_i)} + 10]\;,\quad \forall t \in [s_i,s_{i+1}]\;.
\end{equation}
Note that $a(s_i) \ge a_L$ for all $i$. Then, for any $t\in [2\varepsilon^{-2}L, C_0 L \ln L]$, setting $i$ such that $s_i \le t < s_{i+1}$ we get
\begin{align*}
\int_{\varepsilon^{-2} L}^{t} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds &= \int_{\varepsilon^{-2} L}^{s_i} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds + \int_{s_i}^{s_{i+1}} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds - \int_{t}^{s_{i+1}} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds\\
&\le (-\sqrt{a_L}+10)(s_i-\varepsilon^{-2} L) + (-\sqrt{a(s_i)} + 10) (s_{i+1}-s_i) - (-\sqrt{a(s_i)}-10)(s_{i+1}-t)\\
&\le (-\sqrt{a_L}+10)(t-\varepsilon^{-2} L) + 20(s_{i+1}-t)\;.
\end{align*}
Note that $t-\varepsilon^{-2}L \ge \frac12 s_i$ so that for all $L$ large enough
$$ \frac14(-\sqrt{a_L}+10) (t-\varepsilon^{-2} L) + 20(s_{i+1}-t) \le -\frac1{16} \sqrt{a_L}s_i + 20(e-1)s_i < 0\;.$$
Hence
$$ \int_{\varepsilon^{-2} L}^{t} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds \le -\frac12 \sqrt{a_L} (t-\varepsilon^{-2} L)\;,$$
as required. Consequently it suffices to evaluate the probability of \eqref{Eq:Bdsi}. We will only prove the upper bound since the lower bound is proved analogously. Fix $i\in \{0,\ldots,i_1-1\}$. Consider the backward time-homogeneous diffusion $\hat{X}$ whose parameter $a$ is given by $a(s_i)$ and that starts from $-\infty$ at time $s_{i+1}$. Let us now define the event $\mathcal{A}_i$ on which
\begin{align*}
\hat{Z}_a(t) \le -\sqrt{a(s_i)} + 1\;,\quad \forall t\in [s_{i+1} - 10 t_L,s_{i+1} ]\;,\\
\hat{X}(t) \le -\sqrt{a(s_i)} + 1\;,\quad \forall t\in [s_{i+1} - 10 t_L,s_{i+1}]\;,\\
-\sqrt{a(s_i)} - 1 \le \fint_{t}^{s_{i+1} - (3/8)t_L} \hat{X}(s) ds \le -\sqrt{a(s_i)} + 1\;,\quad \forall t\in [s_{i}, s_{i+1} - (3/8)t_L]\;,
\end{align*}
and $\hat{X}$ does not hit $2\sqrt{a(s_i)}$ on $[s_{i}, s_{i+1})$.\\
Let us prove that the probability of $\cap_{i=0}^{i_1-1} \mathcal{A}_i$ goes to $1$ as $L\to\infty$, uniformly over all parameters $a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$. To that end, it suffice to show that $i_1 {\symb P}(\mathcal{A}_i^\complement)$ goes to $0$, uniformly over all parameters $a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and over all $i\in\{0,\ldots,i_1-1\}$. Recall that $i_1 \le 2\ln\ln L$. The two first estimates follow from (the backward version of) Lemma \ref{Lemma:XZSqueeze}: the cost in probability being of order $a_L^{-2}$. Provided that the fourth estimate is proven, the third estimate is a consequence of~\cite[Lemma 4.7]{DL17} whose cost in probability is of order $e^{-b(\ln\ln a_L)^2}$. We turn to the fourth estimate. The probability that $\hat{X}$ explodes on $[s_{i}-1, s_{i+1})$ is equal to
$$ {\symb P}(\gamma_{a(s_i)} \le s_{i+1} - s_i +1) \le {\symb P}(\frac{\gamma_{a(s_i)}}{m(a(s_i))} \le \frac{(e-1) s_i + 1}{m(a(s_i))})\;.$$
By \eqref{Eq:mac}, we have for some constant $C>0$
$$ \frac{(e-1)s_i +1}{m(a(s_i))} \le \frac{es_i}{m(a(s_i))} \le \frac{e^{i+1} \varepsilon^{-2}L}{cm(a) e^{\frac12 e^i \varepsilon^{-2}}} \le C e^{\varepsilon^{-1}} e^{-\frac14 e^i \varepsilon^{-2}}\;.$$
Consequently by Proposition \ref{Prop:CVrate}, a simple computation shows that, for some $i\in\{0,\ldots,i_1-1\}$, the probability that $\hat{X}$ explodes on $[s_{i}-1, s_{i+1})$ is less than $\varepsilon$ for all $L$ large enough and all $\varepsilon$ small enough, uniformly over all $a\in\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$. By the analogue of Lemma \ref{Lemma:Entrance} for time-homogeneous diffusions, see~\cite[Lemma 4.2]{DL17}, we know that if $\hat{X}$ hits $2\sqrt{a(s_i)}$ on $[s_{i}, s_{i+1})$ then with large probability it explodes to $+\infty$ on $[s_{i}-1, s_{i+1})$. This concludes the proof of the fourth estimate.\\
We now work on the event $\mathcal{A}_i$. By estimating the difference between $\hat{X}$ and $\hat{Z}_a$, as in the proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:AL}, it is easy to deduce that $\hat{X}$ lies above $\hat{Z}_a$ at time $s_{i+1}-5 t_L$, and by monotonicity these two diffusions remain in this order on the interval $[s_i,s_{i+1} - 5 t_L]$. We thus deduce that for any $t\in [s_i , s_{i+1} - 10 t_L]$ we have
\begin{align*}
\int_{t}^{s_{i+1} - 5 t_L} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds &\le \int_{t}^{s_{i+1} - 5 t_L} \hat{X}(s) ds = \int_{t}^{s_{i+1} - (3/8) t_L} \hat{X}(s) ds - \int_{s_{i+1} - 5 t_L}^{s_{i+1} - (3/8) t_L} \hat{X}(s) ds\\
&\le (s_{i+1}-(3/8) t_L - t) (-\sqrt{a(s_i)} +1) - (5-(3/8))t_L (-\sqrt{a(s_i)} - 1)\\
&\le (s_{i+1}-5t_L-t) (-\sqrt{a_L} + 3)\;.
\end{align*}
On the other hand for any $t\in [s_{i+1} - 10 t_L,s_{i+1} - 5 t_L]$, the bound on $\hat{Z}_a$ stated in event $\mathcal{A}_i$ yields
$$ \fint_{t}^{s_{i+1} - 5t_L} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds \le - \sqrt{a_L} +1 \;.$$
Consequently by \eqref{Eq:Convexity} for any $t\in [s_i , s_{i+1} - 5 t_L]$ we have
$$ \fint_{t}^{s_{i+1} - 5t_L} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds \le - \sqrt{a_L} +3 \;.$$
Again, the bound on $\hat{Z}_a$ stated in event $\mathcal{A}$ yields for any $t\in [s_{i+1} - 5 t_L,s_{i+1}]$
$$ \fint_{t}^{s_{i+1}} \hat{Z}_a(s) ds \le - \sqrt{a_L} +1 \;.$$
Thus \eqref{Eq:Convexity} ensures that the upper bound in \eqref{Eq:Bdsi} holds.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:ApproxZZ}}\label{Subsec:ApproxZZ}
In this proof, $C_\varepsilon$ denotes a (large) constant that only depends on $\varepsilon$, it may change from line to line. By Theorem \ref{Th:Explo}, for $a=a_L - r/(4\sqrt{a_L})$ and $j\in\{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}$ the probability that $Z_{a}$ explodes more than once in $(t^n_j L,t^n_{j+1}L]$ converges to $(1-\exp(-2^{-n}e^{r})-2^{-n}e^{r}\exp(-2^{-n}e^{r}))$ as $L\to\infty$. Consequently, the probability that there exists $a\in\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and $j$ such that $Z_{a}$ explodes more than once in $(t^n_j L,t^n_{j+1}L]$ is bounded by $C_\varepsilon 2^{-n}$ uniformly over all $L$ large enough. This quantity goes to $0$ as $n$ goes to $\infty$. This proves the first part of the lemma.\\
We now prove that there exists a constant $C_\varepsilon$ such that, for any given $j \in \{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}$ with a probability larger than $1-C_\varepsilon 2^{-2n}$ for all $L$ large enough, the diffusion $Z_{a}$ explodes on $(t^n_j L, t^n_{j+1} L]$ if and only if the diffusion $Z_{a}^j$ explodes on this same interval. We first treat the case $j=2^n-1$. The probability that there exists $a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ such that $Z_a$ explodes on $[t^n_{2^n-1}L,\infty)$ is bounded by a quantity of order $\varepsilon^{-2} e^{\varepsilon^{-1}} 2^{-n}$ as $L\to\infty$: this quantity vanishes as $n\to\infty$. Consequently, we can restrict ourselves to $j\in\{0,\ldots,2^{n}-2\}$ in the sequel.
Set $a(t^n_j L) := a +(\beta/4) t^n_jL$ and $a_-(t^n_j L) := a(t^n_j L) - 1/(4\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)})$. We introduce the time-homogeneous diffusion $X^j$ that starts from $+\infty$ at time $t^n_j L$ and whose parameter $a$ equals $a_-(t^n_j L)$. Define $\tilde{\tau}_{-2\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)}}$ and $\tilde{\tau}_{-\infty}$ as the first times after $t^n_j L$ at which $Z_a$ hits $-2\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)}$ and $-\infty$. We introduce $\kappa_j := \ln (a(t^n_j L)) / \sqrt{a(t^n_j L)}$ and the events
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{D}_1 &:=\Big\{\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)} - (1/2) \le Z_{a}(t) \le Z_{a}^j(t) \le \sqrt{a(t^n_j L)} + (1/2)\;,\quad \forall t\in [t^n_j L + \kappa_j,t^n_j L + 9 \kappa_j]\Big\}\\
&\qquad\cap \Big\{\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)} - 1 \le Z_{a}(t)\;,\quad \forall t\in [t^n_j L, t^n_j L+ \kappa_j]\Big\} \;,\\
\mathcal{D}_2 &:=\Big\{\fint_{t^n_j L + 9 \kappa_j}^{t} Z_a(s)ds \in \Big[\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)} - 1,\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)} + 1\Big]\;,\quad \forall t\in[t^n_j L + 9 \kappa_j,\tilde{\tau}_{-2\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)}}]\Big\}\;,\\
\mathcal{D}_3 &:=\{t_j^n L + 9 \kappa_j \le \tilde{\tau}_{-2\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)}}\}\cap\{ \tilde{\tau}_{-\infty}-\tilde{\tau}_{-2\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)}} \le \kappa_j\}\\
&\qquad\cap\{ {\tau}_{-\infty}(Z_a^j)-{\tau}_{-\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)}-1}(Z_a^j) \le \kappa_j\}\;,
\end{align*}
Finally let $\mathcal{D}_4$ be the event on which $Z_a$ explodes at most once on $(t^n_j L,t^{n+1}_j L]$ and does not explode on $[(t^{n+1}_j-2^{-2n})L,t^{n+1}_j L]$. We then set $\mathcal{D}:=\cap_i \mathcal{D}_i$.\\
Let us evaluate the probability of $\mathcal{D}$. By Lemmas \ref{Lemma:Entrance} and \ref{Lemma:XZSqueeze} and by monotonicity, ${\symb P}(\mathcal{D}_1^\complement \cup \mathcal{D}_3^\complement)$ goes to $0$ as $L\to\infty$ uniformly over all $j$. By Theorem \ref{Th:Explo} the probability of $\mathcal{D}_4^\complement$ is bounded by $C_\varepsilon 2^{-2n}$ uniformly over all $L$ large enough and all $j$. Regarding $\mathcal{D}_2$, it suffices to apply Lemma \ref{Lemma:Osc}. Consequently $2^n \sup_{a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}} \sup_j {\symb P}(\mathcal{D}^\complement) \to 0$ as $L\to\infty$ and $n\to\infty$.\\
From now on, we work on the event $\mathcal{D}$. If $\tilde{\tau}_{-\infty} > t^{n}_{j+1} L$, none of the diffusions explode on $(t^n_j L, t^{n+1}_j L]$. Otherwise, the diffusion $Z_a$ explodes before time $t^n_{j+1} L$ and we aim at showing that $Z_a^j$ explodes too. Consider the process $D(t) := Z^j_{a}(t) - Z_{a}(t)$ that solves
$$ dD(t) = -(Z^j_{a} + Z_{a})(t) D(t) dt\;.$$
Note that $D(t) = D(t_0) \exp(-\int_{t_0}^t (Z^j_{a} + Z_{a})(s) ds)$ for all $t_0 \le t$. By $\mathcal{D}_2\cap\mathcal{D}_3$, we find
$$ D(\tilde{\tau}_{-2\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)}}) \le D(t^n_j L + 9 \kappa_j)\;.$$
Then a simple computation based on $\mathcal{D}_1$ shows that the last term is smaller than $1$ for all $L$ large enough. Consequently $Z^j_a$ is below $-2\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)} + 1$ at time $\tilde{\tau}_{-2\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)}}$. By $\mathcal{D}_3$, it explodes within a time smaller than $\kappa_j$. By $\mathcal{D}_3\cap \mathcal{D}_4$, $\tilde{\tau}_{-2\sqrt{a(t^n_j L)}}$ is smaller than $(t^n_{j+1} L - 2^{-2n})L$ and therefore $Z^a_j$ explodes before time $t^n_{j+1} L$. This concludes the proof.
\subsection{Proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:TypicalZ}}\label{Subsec:ProofTypicalZ}
We start with the forward diffusions. By monotonicity, for any $a\in\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ the number of explosions of $Z_a$ is bounded by the number of explosions of $Z_{a_<}$ where $a_< = \min \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$. From Theorem \ref{Th:Explo}, we deduce that there exists $C,N_\varepsilon > 0$ such that the probability that $Z_{a_<}$ explodes more than $N_\varepsilon$ times or explodes after time ${\varepsilon^{-2}}L$ is bounded by $C \varepsilon$ uniformly over all $L$ large enough. Consequently, in the sequel we only have to deal with the $N_\varepsilon$ first explosions of the diffusions, and the Long-time behavior is proved.\\
To prove the Entrance and Explosion estimates, it suffices to iterate (at most $N_\varepsilon$ times) Lemma \ref{Lemma:Entrance}. Regarding the Oscillation estimates, it suffices to combine the Entrance estimate with Lemma \ref{Lemma:Osc}.\\
Concerning the backward diffusions, the situation is the same except for the Oscillations at infinity for which we apply Lemma \ref{Lemma:OscInfty}.
\section{Crossing the barrier of potential}\label{Sec:Fine}
This section is devoted to a fine description of the diffusion $Z_a$ when it crosses the barrier of potential, and to the proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:Stabil} and Proposition \ref{Prop:TypicalPairZ}
\subsection{Escaping the well}\label{Subsec:Crossing}
In this subsection, we collect several precise estimates on the trajectory of $Z_a$ when it escapes the bottom of the well of its time-inhomogeneous potential: these estimates will be the core of the proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:TypicalPairZ}.\\
Since the diffusion escapes the well in a very short time, the time-inhomogeneity of its drift is negligible and therefore its behavior is almost the same as that of the time-homogeneous diffusion $X_a$. The estimates stated in this subsection are therefore very close to those collected in~\cite[Section 5]{DL17} on $X_a$. Consequently, the proofs will make references to estimates obtained therein.\\
In the sequel, we denote by ${\symb P}^{(a)}_x$ the law of $Z_a$ starting from $x$ (in the proofs below, we will sometimes only write ${\symb P}_x$), and by $\tau_x$ the first hitting time of $x$ by $Z_a$. We also set (recall that $t_L = \ln a_L / \sqrt{a_L}$) :
$$ T := \frac34 t_L\;,\quad \delta := \frac{(\ln a_L)^2}{a_L^{1/4}}\;.$$
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:Cross1}
For any $c>0$, there exists $C>0$ such that for all $L$ large enough, for all $a\in \bar\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ we have
$$ {\symb P}^{(a)}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}[E(C) \,|\, \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta} < \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta/2} \wedge T] \le a_L^{-c}\;,$$
where $E=E(C)$ is defined by
\begin{align*}
E &= \Big\{ \sup_{t\in [0,\tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}]} |Z_a(t) - \sqrt{a_L} \tanh(-\sqrt{a_L}(t-\tau_0))| \ge C \frac{\sqrt{a_L}}{\ln a_L} \Big\}\\
&\cup \Big\{|\tau_0 - \frac{3}{8} t_L| \ge C \frac{\ln \ln a_L}{\sqrt{a_L}}\Big\} \cup \Big\{|\tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta} - \tau_0 - \frac{3}{8} t_L| \ge C \frac{\ln \ln a_L}{\sqrt{a_L}}\Big\}\;.
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let us write $\tau_-$ and $\tau_+$ as shortcuts for $\tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}$ and $\tau_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta/2}$. Consider the diffusion
$$ dH(t) = (-a+H^2(t)) + dB(t)\;,$$
and let $\mathbf{P}_x$ be its law when it starts from $x$ at time $0$. The Radon-Nikodym derivative of ${\symb P}_x$ w.r.t.~$\mathbf{P}_x$ up to time $t$ is given by $\exp(G_t(H))$ where
$$ G_t(H) = \frac23 (H_0^3 - H_t^3) - 2 a(H_0 - H_t) + \frac{\beta}{4} t H_t + (2- \frac{\beta}{4}) \int_0^t H_s ds - \frac{\beta}{4} \int_0^t (a + \frac{\beta}{8} s - H^2_s)s ds\;.$$
Consequently
\begin{align*}
\frac{{\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(E ; \tau_- < \tau_+ \wedge T)}{{\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(\tau_- < \tau_+ \wedge T)} &= \frac{\mathbf{P}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(E ; \tau_- < \tau_+ \wedge T ; e^{G_{\tau_-}(H)})}{\mathbf{P}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(\tau_- < \tau_+ \wedge T ; e^{G_{\tau_-}(H)})}\\
&\le e^{5 \sqrt{a_L} T} \frac{\mathbf{P}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(E ; \tau_- < \tau_+ \wedge T )}{\mathbf{P}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(\tau_- < \tau_+ \wedge T )}\;,
\end{align*}
where the last bound follows from an elementary computation performed on $G_{\tau_-}(H)$. The proof of~\cite[Lemma 5.1]{DL17} shows that for any $r>0$ we have
$$ \frac{\mathbf{P}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(E ; \tau_- < \tau_+ \wedge T )}{\mathbf{P}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(\tau_- < \tau_+ \wedge T )} \lesssim a_L^{-r}\;,$$
for all $L$ large enough. This concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:Cross2}
For any $c>0$, for all $L$ large enough and for all $a\in \bar\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ we have
$$ {\symb P}^{(a)}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}[\tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta} > T \,|\, \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta} < \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta/2}] \le a_L^{-c}\;.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Applying the same Girsanov transform as in the previous proof, one can apply the arguments in the proof of~\cite[Lemma 5.2]{DL17}.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:Cross3}
Take $C>1$ and set $S = C\ln\ln a_L / \sqrt{a_L}$. There exists $C'>0$ such that for all $L$ large enough and for all $a\in \bar\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ we have
$$ {\symb P}^{(a)}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}[\tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} > S \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}+2\delta} \,|\, \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} < \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta/2}] \le C' (\ln a_L)^{2-2C}\;,$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For simplicity, we set $\tau_- :=\tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}}$, $\tau_+ := \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}+2\delta}$ and $\tau_{++} := \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta/2}$. Set
$$ I(a) = \exp(\frac23 ((-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta)^3 -(-\sqrt{a_L})^3) - 2 a((-\sqrt{a_L} + \delta) - (-\sqrt{a_L})))\;.$$
and note that $\ln I(a)$ coincides with the sum of the two first terms of $G_{\tau_-}$. For $S' = \sqrt L$, we are going to show that as $L\to\infty$
\begin{align}
{\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(\tau_- < S\wedge \tau_+) &\gtrsim I(a) e^{-2\sqrt a S}\;,\label{Eq:tau-+1}\\
{\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(S\wedge \tau_+ \le \tau_- < S'\wedge \tau_{++}) &\lesssim I(a) e^{-2\sqrt a S} (\ln a_L)^{2-2C}\;,\label{Eq:tau-+2}\\
{\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(\tau_{-} \wedge \tau_{++} > S') &\lesssim I(a) e^{-2\sqrt a S} (\ln a_L)^{2-2C}\;.\label{Eq:tau-+3}
\end{align}
These three bounds suffice to deduce the statement of the lemma. Indeed, the term on the l.h.s.~of the bound of the statement equals
\begin{align*}
\frac{{\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(S\wedge \tau_+ \le \tau_- < \tau_{++})}{{\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(\tau_- < \tau_+)} &\le \frac{{\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(S\wedge \tau_+ \le \tau_- < S'\wedge\tau_{++})+{\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(S' < \tau_{-}<\tau_{++})}{{\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(\tau_- < S\wedge\tau_+)}\\
&\lesssim (\ln a_L)^{2-2C}\;.
\end{align*}
We start with \eqref{Eq:tau-+1}. Using the same Girsanov transform as before, we obtain
$$ {\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(\tau_- < S\wedge \tau_+) = \mathbf{P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(\tau_- < S\wedge \tau_+ ; e^{G_{\tau_-}})\;.$$
A simple computation shows that on the event $\tau_- < S\wedge \tau_+$ we have
$$ e^{G_{\tau_-}} \ge I(a) e^{-2\sqrt a S} (1+o(1))\;,$$
where $o(1)$ is a deterministic quantity that goes to $0$ as $L\to\infty$. In addition, it was shown in the proof of~\cite[Lemma 5.3]{DL17} that $\mathbf{P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(\tau_- < S\wedge \tau_+)$ goes to $1$ as $L\to\infty$. This concludes the proof of \eqref{Eq:tau-+1}.
Regarding \eqref{Eq:tau-+2}, using again the Girsanov transform we get
$$ {\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(S\wedge \tau_+ \le \tau_- < S'\wedge \tau_{++}) = \mathbf{P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(S\wedge \tau_+ \le \tau_- < S'\wedge \tau_{++} ; e^{G_{\tau_-}})\;.$$
A simple computation shows that on the event $S\wedge \tau_+ \le \tau_- < S'\wedge \tau_{++}$ we have
$$ e^{G_{\tau_-}} \le I(a) (1+o(1)) e^{2 \int_0^{\tau_-} H(s) ds}\;,$$
where $o(1)$ is a deterministic quantity that goes to $0$ as $L\to\infty$. Moreover, it was shown in the proof of~\cite[Lemma 5.3]{DL17} that
$$ \mathbf{P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(S\wedge \tau_+ \le \tau_- < S'\wedge \tau_{++} ; e^{2 \int_0^{\tau_-} H(s) ds} ) \lesssim (\ln a_L)^{2-2C}\;,$$
consequently \eqref{Eq:tau-+2} follows.
Finally, we prove \eqref{Eq:tau-+3}. To that end, we consider the time-homogeneous diffusion
$$ dX_a(t) = (a - X_a(t)^2) dt + dB(t)\;,$$
and we denote by ${\symb Q}_x$ its law when it starts from $x$. The Radon-Nikodym derivative of ${\symb P}_x$ w.r.t.~${\symb Q}_x$ is given by $\exp(U_t(X))$ where
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:UtX}
U_t(X) = \frac{\beta}{4} \Big(t X_a(t) - \int_0^t [X_a(s)+s(a-X_a(s)^2)] ds\Big) - \frac{\beta^2}{96} t^3\;.
\end{equation}
Note that on the event $\tau_{-} \wedge \tau_{++} > S'$, the r.v.~$\exp(U_{S'}(X))$ is bounded by $2$ almost surely for all $L$ large enough. Henceforth
$${\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(\tau_{-} \wedge \tau_{++} > S') \le 2 {\symb Q}_{-\sqrt{a}+\delta}(\tau_{-} \wedge \tau_{++} > S') \le \frac{2}{S'} {\symb Q}_{-\sqrt{a}+\delta}(\tau_{-} \wedge \tau_{++})\;.$$
Using the classical formula for the expectation of the exit time from an interval for a diffusion, see for instance~\cite[Th VII.3.6]{RevuzYor}, one can show that
$$ {\symb Q}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(\tau_{-} \wedge \tau_{++}) \le t_L\;.$$
Hence
$${\symb P}_{-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta}(\tau_{-} \wedge \tau_{++} > S') \le 2 t_L L^{-1/2} \ll I(a) e^{-2\sqrt a S} (\ln a_L)^{2-2C}\;.$$
\end{proof}
The following lemma shows that if the diffusion $Z$ starts from $\sqrt{a_L}-\delta$ and hits $-\sqrt{a_L}$ before $\sqrt{a_L}$, then it does not hit $\sqrt{a_L}-\delta/2$ with large probability. Intuitively: if the diffusion is conditioned to cross the barrier of potential, then it does it right away. At a technical level, this estimate is easy to establish for the time-homogeneous diffusion thanks to an estimate on its scale function, see~\cite[Sec 5, proof of Prop 3.3]{DL17}. Here the situation is slightly more involved since the drift is time-inhomogeneous.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:ImmediateDescent}
There exists $c>0$ such that for all $a\in\bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and all $L$ large enough, we have
$$ {\symb P}^{(a)}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta}(\tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} < \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta/2} \,|\, \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} < \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}) \ge 1 - e^{-c(\ln a_L)^4}\;.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We set $\tau_- := \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}}$, $\tau_+:= \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta/2}$ and $\tau_{++} := \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}$. We have
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{+} \,|\, \tau_{-} < \tau_{++}) &= \frac{{\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{+} )}{{\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++})}\\
&=1 - \frac{{\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta}(\tau_{+} < \tau_{-} < \tau_{++})}{{\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++})}\;.
\end{align*}
We then bound separately the two terms in the fraction. First
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta}(\tau_{+} < \tau_{-} < \tau_{++}) &\le {\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta/2}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++})\\
&\le \mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L} - \delta/2}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++})\;.
\end{align*}
The second inequality comes from the trivial coupling under which $X_a \le Z_a$ until the first explosion time of $X_a$.\\
Second, taking $S=L^{1/4}$ and using the expression of the Radon-Nikodym derivative \eqref{Eq:UtX} (which we bound from below by $1/2$) we get
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++}) &\ge {\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++} \wedge S)\\
&\ge (1/2) \mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++} \wedge S)\;.
\end{align*}
We claim that
$$ \mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++} \wedge S) \sim \mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++})\;.$$
With this claim at hand, we deduce that
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}_{\sqrt{a_L} -\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{+} \,|\, \tau_{-} < \tau_{++}) \ge 1 - 4 \frac{\mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L} - \delta/2}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++})}{\mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++})}\;,
\end{align*}
so that an estimate in~\cite[Section 5 - Proof of Proposition 3.3]{DL17} shows that this is of order $1-\exp(-c(\ln a)^4)$ for some $c>0$.\\
We are left with proving the claim. First of all, by~\cite[Prop. VII.3.2]{RevuzYor} and a computation on the scale function one can prove that for any $\kappa > 0$ and for all $L$ large enough
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EvalExitProba}
\mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(\tau_{-} < \tau_{++}) \ge L^{-1-\kappa}\;.
\end{equation}
Second, we have
$$ \sup_{y\in [-\sqrt{a_L} + \delta,\sqrt{a_L}]} \mathbf{Q}_y(\tau_{++} > T) < a^{-1}\;.$$
Indeed if one starts the diffusion $X_a$ at any point in $[-\sqrt{a_L} + \delta,\sqrt{a_L}]$ then using a comparison with a deterministic ODE, on an event of probability at least $1-a^{-1}/2$, we can show that $X_a$ passes above $\sqrt{a_L} -\delta$ by time $T/2$, and then using a comparison with an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process, one can show that it hits $\sqrt{a_L}$ within an additional time $T/2$ with probability at least $1-a^{-1}/2$.\\
Third, for any $\lambda \in (0,1)$
$$ \sup_{y\in [-\sqrt{a_L},-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta]} \mathbf{Q}_y[e^{\lambda \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} \,\wedge\, \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L} + \delta}}] \le 2\;.$$
Indeed, let $Y = X_a + \sqrt a$. We have
$$ d|Y|(t) = |Y|(t) (2\sqrt a - Y(t))dt + dW(t) + d\ell(t)\;,$$
where $\ell$ is the local time of $Y$ at $0$ and $W$ is Brownian motion. We thus deduce that the first exit time of $[-\sqrt{a_L},-\sqrt{a_L} + \delta]$ by $X_a$ starting from $-\sqrt{a_L} +x$ is stochastically smaller than the first hitting time of $\delta$ by a reflected Brownian motion starting at $x+\sqrt a - \sqrt{a_L}$. Hence standard estimates on reflected Brownian motion yield the asserted (crude) estimate.\\
Consequently for $\lambda \in (0,1)$, using the Markov property at time $\tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}\wedge T$ we get
$$ \sup_{y\in [-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta,\sqrt{a_L}]} \mathbf{Q}_y[e^{\lambda \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}}] \le e^{\lambda T} + e^{\lambda T} a^{-1}G\;.$$
where
$$ G:= \sup_{y\in [-\sqrt{a_L},\sqrt{a_L}]} \mathbf{Q}_y[e^{\lambda \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}}]\;.$$
Then,
$$\sup_{y\in [-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta,\sqrt{a_L}]} \mathbf{Q}_y[e^{\lambda \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}}] \le e^{\lambda T} + e^{\lambda T} a^{-1} G\;,$$
and
\begin{align*}
&\sup_{y\in [-\sqrt{a_L},-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta]} \mathbf{Q}_y[e^{\lambda \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}}]\\
&\le \sup_{y\in [-\sqrt{a_L},-\sqrt{a_L}+\delta]} \mathbf{Q}_y[e^{\lambda \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L} + \delta}}](1+\mathbf{Q}_{-\sqrt{a_L} + \delta}[e^{\lambda \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}}])\;.
\end{align*}
Consequently, $G \le 4e^{\lambda T}(1+ a^{-1} G)$ so that
$$ G \le 4e^{\lambda T} \sum_{n\ge 0} (4e^{\lambda T} a^{-1})^n\;.$$
For $L$ |arge enough we thus get $G\le 8e^{\lambda T}$ and
$$ \mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L} - \delta}[e^{\lambda \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}}] \le e^{\lambda T} + e^{\lambda T} a^{-1} G \le 2 e^{\lambda T}\;.$$
Therefore, we find
$$ \mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(S < \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} < \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}) \le \mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(S < \tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}) \le 2 e^{\lambda T} e^{-\lambda S}\;,$$
which is negligible compared to $\mathbf{Q}_{\sqrt{a_L}-\delta}(\tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}} < \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}})$ thanks to \eqref{Eq:EvalExitProba}.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:aa'}
Take $\kappa \in (0,1)$. There exists $C>0$ such that the following holds for all $L$ large enough and for all $a\in\bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ with a probability at least $1- \mathcal{O}(1/\ln a_L)$. Set $a' = a +\kappa$ and assume that $Z_a(0) = \sqrt{a_L} - \delta$ and that $Z_{a'}(0) \in (\sqrt{a_L} - \delta, 10 \sqrt{a_L})$. Conditionally given $\tau_{-\sqrt{a_L}}(Z_a) < \tau_{\sqrt{a_L}}(Z_a)$, we have:
\begin{align*}
|Z_{a'}(t)-Z_a(t)| \le 1\;,\quad &t\in [\upsilon_a - (1/16)t_L,\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L]\;,\\
Z_{a'}(t) \le -\sqrt{a_L} + Ca_L^{3/7}\;,\quad &t\in [\upsilon_a + (1/16)t_L,\theta_a - (1/16)t_L]\;,\\
Z_{a'}(t) \le \sqrt{a_L} - 1\;,\quad &t\in [\theta_a - (1/16)t_L,\theta_a]\;.
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Consider the process $R(t) = Z_{a'}(t) - Z_a(t)$ and note that
$$ dR(t) =\kappa dt - R(t) (Z_a(t) + Z_{a'}(t))dt\;.$$
Using the estimates on the behavior of $Z_a$ collected in Lemmas \ref{Lemma:Cross1}, \ref{Lemma:Cross2},\ref{Lemma:Cross3} and \ref{Lemma:ImmediateDescent}, it is a straightforward computation to deduce the above estimates: actually, the same computation was performed in the proof of~\cite[Lemma 5.4]{DL17}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{From the unstable equilibrium point}\label{Subsec:Crossing2}
In this subsection, we collect estimates that we will need up to time $C_0L \ln L$: consequently we consider $a\in\tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$. In the estimates below, we let the diffusion start from a point at distance of order $a^{-1/4}$ from $-\sqrt{a}$: whenever $a\in \bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$, this is equivalent with starting from a point at distance of order $a_L^{-1/4}$ from $-\sqrt{a_L}$ so that these estimates can be patched with those obtained in the previous subsection.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:OscUnstable}
Fix $x\in {\symb R}$. Uniformly over all $a\in\tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ we have the convergence
$${\symb P}^{(a)}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} < \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta}) \to {\symb P}(\mathcal{N}(0,1) > x)\;,\quad L\to\infty\;.$$
Furthermore, for all $L$ large enough, for all $a\in\tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and for any $s\in [0,L^{1/4}]$ we have
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}^{(a)}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} > s \,|\, \tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} < \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta}) &\lesssim \frac{\ln\ln a}{s \sqrt a}\;.
\end{align*}
Finally, there exists $c>0$ such that for all $L$ large enough, for all $a\in\tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ and for any $s\in [0,L^{1/4}]$ we have
$$ \sup_{x\in [-\sqrt a -\delta,-\sqrt a + \delta]} {\symb P}^{(a)}_x(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta} > s) \lesssim \frac{\ln\ln a}{s \sqrt a} \wedge e^{-c s / \delta^2}\;.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let ${\symb Q}_y$ be the law of $X_a$ starting from $y$. Using the scale function associated to the diffusion $X_a$, see~\cite[Section 4]{DL17}, we obtain
$$ {\symb Q}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} < \tau_{-\sqrt a +\delta}) = \frac{\int_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}^{-\sqrt a +\delta} e^{2V_a(u)} du}{\int_{-\sqrt a -\delta}^{-\sqrt a +\delta} e^{2V_a(u)} du}\;,$$
where $V_a(u) =u^3/3 - au$. Writing $V_a(u) = V_a(-\sqrt a) - (u+\sqrt a)^2 \sqrt a + (u+\sqrt a)^3 /3$ and noticing that the cubic terms are negligible, we find
$$ {\symb Q}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} < \tau_{-\sqrt a +\delta}) \sim \frac{\int_{\frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}^{\delta} e^{-2\sqrt a u^2} du}{\int_{-\delta}^{\delta} e^{-2\sqrt a u^2} du} \to {\symb P}(\mathcal{N}(0,1) > x)\;.$$
By~\cite[Lemma 5.7]{DL17}, we know that there exists $C>0$ such that for all $y\in [-\sqrt a -\delta,-\sqrt a + \delta]$
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:ExpectQy}
{\symb Q}_{y}(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta} ) \le C \frac{\ln\ln a}{\sqrt a}\;.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, given the expression \eqref{Eq:UtX} of the Radon-Nikodym derivative of ${\symb P}_x$ w.r.t.~${\symb Q}_x$, we have
$$ {\symb P}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} < L^{1/4} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta}) = (1+o(1)) {\symb Q}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} < L^{1/4} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta})\;,$$
$$ {\symb P}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(s \le \tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} < L^{1/4} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta}) = (1+o(1)) {\symb Q}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(s \le \tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} < L^{1/4} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta})\;,$$
and (note that we only have to compute the Radon-Nikodym derivative up to time $L^{1/4}$)
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(L^{1/4} < \tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} < \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta}) &\le {\symb P}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(L^{1/4} < \tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta})\\
& \le(1+o(1)) {\symb Q}_{-\sqrt a + \frac{x}{2a^{1/4}}}(L^{1/4} < \tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta})\\
& \le \frac{2C}{L^{1/4}} \frac{\ln\ln a}{\sqrt a}\;\end{align*}
The two first bounds of the statement then follow by combining all these estimates and by using the Markov inequality on \eqref{Eq:ExpectQy}.\\
Regarding the third bound, given the expression \eqref{Eq:UtX} of the Radon-Nikodym derivative of ${\symb P}_x$ w.r.t.~${\symb Q}_x$, we have for any $s\in [0,L^{1/4}]$
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}_x(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta} > s) &= (1+o(1)){\symb Q}_x(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta} > s)\;
\end{align*}
so that using \eqref{Eq:ExpectQy}, we deduce that
$$ {\symb P}_x(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta} > s) \lesssim \frac{\ln\ln a}{s\sqrt a}\;.$$
Furthermore, we also have for any $\lambda > 0$
$${\symb P}_x(\tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta} > s) \le (1+o(1)) e^{-\lambda s} {\symb Q}_x(\exp(\lambda \tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta}))\;.$$
To conclude, it suffices to compute the exponential moment on the r.h.s. Let $Y = X_a + \sqrt a$. We have
$$ d|Y|(t) = |Y|(t) (2\sqrt a - Y(t))dt + dW(t) + d\ell(t)\;,$$
where $\ell$ is the local time of $Y$ at $0$ and $W$ is Brownian motion. Consequently, the first exit time of $[-\sqrt a-\delta,-\sqrt a + \delta]$ by $X_a$ is stochastically smaller than the first exit time of a reflected Brownian motion from $[0,\delta]$: standard estimate yield for all $\lambda \in [0,\pi^2(8\delta^2)^{-1}]$
$$ \sup_{x\in [-\sqrt a-\delta,-\sqrt a + \delta]} {\symb Q}_x(\exp(\lambda \tau_{-\sqrt a -\delta} \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a+\delta})) \le \frac1{\cos(\delta \sqrt{2\lambda})}\;,$$
thus concluding the proof.
\end{proof}
We now show that when $Z$ starts from $-\sqrt a + \delta$, with large probability it gets back to $\sqrt a$ within a time $\ln a / \sqrt a$.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:DownTop}
For any $C > 1$, for all $L$ large enough and for all $a\in \tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$ we have
$$ {\symb P}^{(a)}_{-\sqrt{a}+\delta}(\tau_{\sqrt{a}} < \tau_{-\sqrt{a}} \wedge C\frac{\ln a}{\sqrt a}) \ge 1 - 2a^{-2} - a^{-\frac32 (C-1)}\;.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\kappa := \ln a / \sqrt a$. We first note that by monotony for $a'>a$ we have
$$ {\symb P}^{(a')}_{\sqrt a - \delta}(\tau_{\sqrt{a}} < (C-1)\kappa \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a} -2\delta}) \ge {\symb P}^{(a)}_{\sqrt a - \delta}(\tau_{\sqrt{a}} < (C-1)\kappa \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a} -2\delta})\;.$$
Applying the strong Markov property at time $\tau_{\sqrt{a}-\delta}$ we get
$$ {\symb P}^{(a)}_{-\sqrt a + \delta}(\tau_{\sqrt a} < C\kappa \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt a}) \ge {\symb P}^{(a)}_{-\sqrt a + \delta}(\tau_{\sqrt a-\delta} < \kappa \wedge \tau_{-\sqrt{a}}) {\symb P}^{(a)}_{\sqrt a - \delta}(\tau_{\sqrt{a}} < (C-1)\kappa \wedge \tau_{\sqrt{a} -2\delta})\;.$$
We are going to estimate the two factors on the r.h.s.~independently.\\
Regarding the first factor, set $R(t) = Z_a(t) - B(t)$ and note that
$$ dR(t) = \Big(a + \frac{\beta t}{4} - (R(t)+B(t))^2\Big)dt\;.$$
Consider the event $\mathcal{A}:=\{\sup_{t \le \kappa} |B(t)| < M\}$ with $M=2\ln a / a^{1/4}$: this event has probability at least $1-2a^{-2}$. On the event $\mathcal{A}$ and as long as the process $Z_a$ remains in $[-\sqrt a, +\sqrt a]$ we have
$$ dR(t) \ge a (1-\frac{3M}{\sqrt a}) - R^2(t) (1+ \frac{4 M}{\sqrt a})^2\;.$$
Indeed, if $|Z_a| \in [\frac12 \sqrt a,\sqrt a]$ we have
$$ a + \frac{\beta t}{4} - (R(t)+B(t))^2 \ge a - R(t)^2(1+ \frac{M}{\frac{\sqrt a}{2} - M})^2 \ge a - R(t)^2 (1 + \frac{4 M}{\sqrt a})^2\;.$$
While if $|Z_a|\le \sqrt a$ then
$$ a + \frac{\beta t}{4} - (R(t)+B(t))^2 \ge a - M^2 -2\sqrt a M - R(t)^2 \ge a(1- \frac{3M}{\sqrt a}) - R(t)^2\;.$$
Hence on the event $\mathcal{A}$, we have $Z_a (t) \ge F(t) - M$ as long as $Z_a$ has not hit $\pm \sqrt a$, where $F$ is the solution of
$$ dF(t) = a (1-\frac{3M}{\sqrt a}) - F^2(t) (1+ \frac{4 M}{\sqrt a})^2\;,\quad F(0) = -\sqrt{a} + \delta\;,$$
Simple computations show that
$$ F- M \ge -\sqrt a\;,\quad F(\ln a / \sqrt a) > \sqrt a - \delta/2\;.$$
We thus deduce that on the event $\mathcal{A}$, the process $Z_a$ hits $\sqrt a - \delta$ by time $\kappa$ without hitting $-\sqrt a$.\\
We turn to the second factor. Let $A(t) = Z_{a}(t) - \sqrt{a}$ and note that
$$ dA(t) = a dt + \frac{\beta t}{4} dt - (A(t)+\sqrt{a})^2 dt + dB(t) \ge -A(t) (2\sqrt{a} + A(t)) + dB(t)\;.$$
Let $U$ be the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process
$$ dU(t) = -2U(t)(\sqrt{a} - \delta) + dB(t)\;,\quad U(0) = -\delta\;.$$
Let $\tau_-$ and $\tau_+$ be the first hitting times of $\sqrt{a} - 2\delta$ and $\sqrt{a}$ by $Z_{a}$. Note that these stopping times coincide with the first hitting times of $-2\delta$ and $0$ by $A$. Note that until time $\tau_-\wedge \tau_+$, we have
$$ -A(t) (2\sqrt{a} + A(t)) \ge -2A(t) (\sqrt{a}-\delta)\;,$$
and therefore $A(t) \ge U(t)$. If we denote by $\mathbf{P}$ the law of $U$, then
\begin{align*}
{\symb P}_{\sqrt a - \delta}^{(a)}(\tau_+ < (C-1)\kappa \wedge \tau_-)&\ge \mathbf{P}(\tau_0 < (C-1)\kappa \wedge \tau_{-2\delta})\\
&\ge \mathbf{P}(\tau_0 < (C-1)\kappa) - \mathbf{P}(\tau_0 > \tau_{-2\delta})
\end{align*}
Using standard estimates on the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process, see for instance~\cite[II.7.2.0.2 and II.7.2.2.2]{Handbook}, we deduce that
$$ {\symb P}^{(a)}_{\sqrt a - \delta}(\tau_+ < (C-1)\kappa \wedge \tau_-) \ge 1 - \mathcal{O}(\delta a^{1/4} e^{-2(\sqrt a-\delta)(C-1)\kappa}) \ge 1 - a^{-\frac32 (C-1)}\;.$$
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:Stabil}}
Fix $c>0$. We start with the first part of the statement. Let $a\in \tilde{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$. We distinguish several cases according to the value $y$. First, if $y=+\infty$ then Lemma \ref{Lemma:Entrance} shows that with a probability at least $1-a_L^{-3}$ the process lies in $[\sqrt a - c/2,\sqrt a + c/2]$ at time $(3/8) \ln a /\sqrt{a}$. Second if $y\in [\sqrt{a}-c/2,\sqrt{a}+c/2]$ then Lemma \ref{Lemma:RBM} with a probability at least $1-a_L^{-3}$ the process remains in the strip $[\sqrt{a}-c,\sqrt{a}+c]$ until time $(\ln a)^6/\sqrt a$. Third if $y=-\sqrt a + \delta$ then Lemma \ref{Lemma:DownTop} shows that the diffusion comes back to $\sqrt{a}$ before time $10 \ln a / \sqrt a$ with probability at least $1-3a^{-2}$. Fourth if $y = -\sqrt a-\delta$, then Lemma \ref{Lemma:Entrance} shows that with a probability at least $1-a_L^{-3}$ the process explodes and comes back to $[\sqrt a - c/2,\sqrt a + c/2]$ by time $(3/4)t_L$.\\
By monotonicity and using Lemma \ref{Lemma:RBM}, we thus deduce the first statement of the lemma for any $y \notin [-\sqrt a - \delta, -\sqrt a + \delta]$. It remains to treat the case where $y$ lies in $[-\sqrt a - \delta, -\sqrt a + \delta]$. By Lemma \ref{Lemma:OscUnstable}, the diffusion exits the interval $[-\sqrt{a} - \delta,-\sqrt{a} + \delta]$ by time $(\ln a)^6/(2\sqrt a)$ with a probability of order $1-a^{-c'(\ln a_L)^2}$, and then, one can apply the estimates already established for $y= -\sqrt{a} \pm \delta$.\\
Let us now adapt the above argument to prove the second part of the statement. Let $a\in \bar{\mathcal{M}}_{L,\varepsilon}$. The two first cases remain unchanged. In the third case where $y=-\sqrt a + \delta$, we apply Lemma \ref{Lemma:DownTop} to show that the diffusion comes back to $\sqrt{a}$ before time $(6/5) \ln a / \sqrt a$ with probability at least $1-Ca_L^{-3/10}$. Finally if $y$ lies in $[-\sqrt a - \delta, -\sqrt a + \delta]$, then by Lemma \ref{Lemma:OscUnstable}, the diffusion exits the interval $[-\sqrt{a} - \delta,-\sqrt{a} + \delta]$ by time $\ln a/(3\sqrt a)$ with a probability of order $1-\mathcal{O}(\ln\ln a_L / \ln a_L)$, and then, one can apply the estimates already established for $y= -\sqrt{a} \pm \delta$.
\subsection{Proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:TypicalPairZ}}\label{Subsec:ProofTypicalPairZ}
We need a last lemma before we proceed with the proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:TypicalPairZ}. It turns out that the process $X_a$ introduced in Section \ref{Section:Explo} admits an explicit invariant measure, we refer to~\cite[Section 4.1]{DL17}. We will call stationary time-homogeneous diffusion a process $X_a$ that starts from the invariant measure.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:4}
Fix $\varepsilon > 0$. For all $L$ large enough and all $n$ large enough, for all $a \le a'\in\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$, for all $j\in\{0,\ldots,2^n-1\}$ such that $t^n_{j+1} < \varepsilon^{-2}$, with a probability at least $1-(\ln a_L)^{-1/2}$ the following holds. If $\theta^j_a < t^n_{j+1}L$ and if there exists $a'' \in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ such that $a'' < a$ and $\hat{Z}_{a''}$ does not explode on $[\theta^j_a + 10 t_L,t^n_{j+1}L]$ then $\hat{Z}_{a'}(t) \le -\sqrt{a_L} + (\ln a_L)/a_L^{1/4}$ for all $t\in [\theta_a^j,\theta_a^j+ 5t_L]$, and furthermore for all $t\in [\theta_a^j,t^n_{j+1} L]$ we have
\begin{align*}
-(3/2) \sqrt{a_L} \le \fint_{\theta_a^j}^t \hat{Z}_{a'}(s) ds \le -(1/2) \sqrt{a_L}\;.
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof is an adaptation of~\cite[Lemma 3.6]{DL17}. We abbreviate $\theta_a^j$ in $\theta$. The r.v.~$\theta\wedge t^n_{j+1}L$ is a stopping time in the filtration $\mathcal{F}_t,t\ge 0$ of the underlying Brownian motion $B$. By the strong Markov property, the process $(B(t+\theta\wedge t^n_{j+1}L)-B(\theta\wedge t^n_{j+1}L),t\ge 0)$ is a standard Brownian motion, independent from $\mathcal{F}_{\theta\wedge t^n_{j+1}L}$. Hence, conditionally given $\theta\wedge t^n_{j+1}L$, the process $(\hat{Z}_{a'}(t),t\in [\theta\wedge t^n_{j+1}L,t^n_{j+1} L])$ has the law of the backward diffusion.\\
We introduce a stationary time-homogeneous diffusion $\hat{Y}$ driven by $\hat B$ and whose parameter $a$ is taken to be
$$ a^Y := \frac{a' + \frac{\beta}{4} t^n_j L + a'' + \frac{\beta}{4} t^n_{j+1} L}{2}\;.$$
Note that for $n$ large enough w.r.t.~$\varepsilon$ we have
$$(a' + \frac{\beta}{4} t^n_j L) - (a'' + \frac{\beta}{4} t^n_{j+1} L) \ge \frac{\varepsilon}{8 \sqrt{a_L}}\;.$$
We introduce the event
$$\mathcal{A} := \Big\{\hat{Y}(t) \leq -\sqrt a + \frac{(\ln a)^2}{a^{1/4}} \mbox{ for all }t\in[\theta\wedge (t^n_{j+1} L),(\theta + 11 t_L)\wedge (t^n_{j+1} L)]\Big\}\;.$$
As in the proof of~\cite[Lemma 3.6]{DL17}, we can check that ${\symb P}(\mathcal{A}) \ge 1 - (\ln a_L)^{-1}$.\\
Then, we define $\mathcal{B}$ as the event on which $\hat{Z}_{a'}$, $\hat{Z}_{a''}$ and $\hat{Y}$ lie in $[-\sqrt{a_L}-1,-\sqrt{a_L}+1]$ on $[t^n_{j+1}L-10 t_L,t^n_{j+1}L]$. By Lemma \ref{Lemma:XZSqueeze} and by~\cite[Lemma 4.1]{DL17}, the probability of $\mathcal{B}$ is at least $1-(\ln a_L)^{-1}$. By the same computation as in the proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:AL} one can check that on $\mathcal{B}$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:a'Ya''}
\hat{Z}_{a'}(t) \le \hat{Y}(t) \le \hat{Z}_{a''}(t)\;,\quad \forall t\in[q'', t^n_{j+1}L - 10 t_L]\;,
\end{equation}
where $q'':= \sup\{t\le t^n_{j+1} L: \hat{Z}_{a''}(t) = +\infty\}$, and
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:a'Y}
\hat{Z}_{a'}(t) \le \hat{Y}(t) \;,\quad \forall t\in[q, t^n_{j+1}L - 10 t_L]\;,
\end{equation}
where $q:= \sup\{t\le t^n_{j+1} L: \hat{Y}(t) = +\infty\}$.\\
Define now the event $\mathcal{C}$ on which
$$ \fint_{\theta\wedge t^n_{j+1} L}^{t} \hat{Y}(s) ds \le -\sqrt a + \frac{(\ln a_L)^2}{2a_L^{1/4}}\;,\quad \forall t\in [\theta\wedge t^n_{j+1} L,t^n_{j+1} L]\;.$$
It is shown in the proof of~\cite[Lemma 3.6]{DL17} that ${\symb P}(\mathcal{C}) > 1-\exp(-c(\ln a_L)^2)$ for some $c>0$.\\
We now work on the event $\mathcal{A}\cap \mathcal{B} \cap \mathcal{C}$. If $\hat{Z}_{a''}$ does not explode on $[\theta + 10 t_L,t^n_{j+1}L]$ and if $\theta < t^n_{j+1} L$ then we claim that $\hat Y$ does not explode on $[\theta,t^n_{j+1} L]$. Indeed, by $\mathcal{B}$ and \eqref{Eq:a'Ya''}, $\hat{Y}$ explodes ``after'' $\hat{Z}_{a''}$ and since $\hat{Z}_{a''}$ does not explode on $[\theta + 10 t_L,t^n_{j+1}L]$, we deduce that $\hat{Y}$ would explode on $[\theta,\theta + 10 t_L]$. But this would raise a contradiction with $\mathcal{A}$.\\
Consequently by \eqref{Eq:a'Y} we have:
$$\hat{Z}_{a'}(t) \le -\sqrt{a}+\frac{(\ln a_L)^2}{a_L^{1/4}}\;,\quad \forall t\in [\theta,\theta+10\, t_L]\;,$$
so that $\hat{Z}_{a'}$ does not explode on $[\theta,t^n_{j+1} L]$. Moreover the bound of event $\mathcal{C}$ combined with the condition of event $\mathcal{B}$ yields
$$ \sup_{t\in [{\theta},t^n_{j+1} L]} \fint_{\theta}^t \hat{Z}_{a'}(s) ds \le -(1/2) \sqrt{a_L}\;.$$
The proof of the lower bound of the statement can be carried out using similar (and actually simpler) arguments.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:TypicalPairZ}]
An adaptation of Theorem \ref{Th:Explo} shows that, for any $a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$, if we write $a= a_L - r/(4\sqrt{a_L})$ and if we let $(t_i)_{i\ge 1}$ be the starting times (in the increasing order) of the successive excursions to $-\sqrt{a_L}$ of $Z_a$ then the point process $(t_i / L)_{i\ge 1}$ restricted to $[0,\varepsilon^{-2} L]$ converges in law to a Poisson point process of intensity $2e^r e^{-t} dt$. The intensity is twice that of the Poisson point process that appears in Theorem \ref{Th:Explo}: this is a consequence of Lemma \ref{Lemma:OscUnstable} since this result shows that, with a probability going to $1/2$, over an excursion to $-\sqrt{a_L}$ the process $Z_a$ explodes.\\
We thus deduce that the probability that there exists an interval $(t^n_jL,t^n_{j+1}L]$ with $t^n_{j+1} < \varepsilon^{-2}$ and some $a\in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$ such that the diffusion $Z_a$ makes at least two excursions to $-\sqrt{a_L}$ is of order $\mathcal{O}(2^{-n})$ uniformly over all $L$ large enough. Therefore we can assume from now on that there are at most one excursion to $-\sqrt{a_L}$ on every interval $(t^n_jL,t^n_{j+1}L]$ with $t^n_{j+1} < \varepsilon^{-2}$.\\
From now on, we fix an interval $(t^n_jL,t^n_{j+1}L]$ with $t^n_{j+1} < \varepsilon^{-2}$. We will write ``with large probability'' to say that an event holds with a probability that goes to $1$ as $L\to\infty$ uniformly over all $j$ and all $a$. By Lemma \ref{Lemma:XZSqueeze} and the same computation as in the proof Lemma \ref{Lemma:AL}, we deduce that with large probability, for all $a\le a' \in \mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$, $Z_a(t^n_j L)$ lies in $[(1/2 )\sqrt{a_L}, (3/2) \sqrt{a_L}]$ and $Z_a(t^n_j) \le Z_{a'}(t^n_j)$.\\
Property (4) is a consequence of Lemma \ref{Lemma:4}. Regarding Properties (1), (2) and (3), we argue as follows. For any $a\in\mathcal{M}_{L,\varepsilon}$, after its first hitting time of $\sqrt{a_L}-\delta$ we decompose the trajectory of $Z_a$ into two types of bridges:\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Type I}: Bridges that start from $\sqrt{a_L}-\delta$, hit $\sqrt{a_L}$ before $-\sqrt{a_L}$ and then come back to $\sqrt{a_L}-\delta$,
\item \emph{Type II}: Bridges that start from $\sqrt{a_L}-\delta$, hit $-\sqrt{a_L}$ before $\sqrt{a_L}$, and then come back to $\sqrt{a_L}-\delta$ (possibly after an explosion).
\end{itemize}
We already know that there are at most one bridge of Type II on $(t^n_jL,t^n_{j+1}L]$. By Lemma \ref{Lemma:ImmediateDescent} we deduce that, with large probability, if there is a bridge of Type II on $(t^n_jL,t^n_{j+1}L]$ then it does not hit $\sqrt{a_L}-\delta/2$ before $-\sqrt{a_L}$. The estimates stated in Lemma \ref{Lemma:Cross1}, \ref{Lemma:Cross2}, \ref{Lemma:Cross3} and \ref{Lemma:aa'} then yield Properties (1), (2) and (3) of the statement.\end{proof}
\bibliographystyle{Martin}
|
\section{Introduction}
The mapping class group ${\rm Mod}(\Sigma_g)$ of a closed connected orientable surface of genus $g$ is known to be perfect, i.e. equal to its commutator subgroup, when $g \geq 3$ \cite{Powell}. We prove the following peculiar result:
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:1}
The mapping class group ${\rm Mod}(\Sigma_g)$ is generated by two commutators if $g\geq 5$, and by three commutators if $g \geq 3$.
\end{theorem}
Our result is clearly sharp when $g \geq 5$, for $\mod(\Sigma_g)$ is not cyclic. When $g=1$ and $2$, the abelianization of ${\rm Mod}(\Sigma_g)$ is ${\mathbb{Z}}_{12}$ and ${\mathbb{Z}}_{10}$, respectively, so the mapping class group cannot be generated by commutators in these low genera cases.
A geometric implication of Theorem~\ref{thm:1} is that any pair of genus \mbox{$g \geq 5$} surface bundle over the circle are cobordant through a finite sequence of basic building blocks, which are fibrations over two-holed tori, prescribed by the two commutator generators and their inverses.
Since the action of mapping classes on the integral first homology group
$H_1(\Sigma_g)$ of $\Sigma_g$ induces an epimorphism from ${\rm Mod}(\Sigma_g)$
onto the symplectic group ${\rm Sp} (2g,{\mathbb{Z}})$, another immediate implication is the following:
\begin{corollary}
The symplectic group ${\rm Sp}(2g,{\mathbb{Z}})$ is generated by two commutators if $g\geq 5$, and by three commutators if $g\geq 3$.
\end{corollary}
Theorem~\ref{thm:1} adds to the ever-growing literature on minimal generating sets for ${\rm Mod}(\Sigma_g)$; e.g. by $2g+1$ Dehn twists \cite{Dehn, Lickorish, Humphries}, by three involutions \cite{BrendleFarb, KorkmazInvolutions}, or by two general elements \cite{Wajnryb1996, Korkmaz}.
It is interesting to know for which perfect groups the minimal number of generators is equal to the minimal number of commutator generators. There are numerous other groups satisfying this property. For example; any finite non-abelian simple group, such as the alternating group $A_n$ for $n \geq 5$, is a perfect group generated by two elements, whereas by the resolution of Ore's conjecture \cite{LiebeckEtAl}, any element in such a group is a commutator. The same holds for the special linear group $SL(n, R)$ for various $n \geq 3$ and coefficient rings $R$, which goes back to the classical works of Thompson \cite{Thompson}. However, the situation is much more subtle for the mapping class group, since $\mod(\Sigma_g)$, for $g \geq 3$, is not even uniformly perfect \cite{EndoKotschick}, i.e. there is no fixed positive number that any element in ${\rm Mod}(\Sigma_g)$ can be expressed as a product of that many commutators, let it be one.
The explicit set of generators we provide for Theorem~\ref{thm:1} consists of a finite order mapping class and an infinite order one (or two) that is a product of disjoint Dehn twists. In Section~\ref{sec:prelim}, we review the basic results regarding Dehn twists. The torsion elements, and their expressions as commutators, come from the symmetries of the surface, and are discussed in Section~\ref{sec:RandT}. Various new generating sets for $\mod(\Sigma_g)$ featuring the above mapping classes are obtained in Section~\ref{sec:gen}, and the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:1} is given in Section~\ref{sec:final}.
\vspace{0.2in}
\noindent \textit{Acknowledgements.} The first author was partially supported by the NSF Grant DMS-$1510395$. The second author thanks UMass Amherst for its generous support and wonderful research environment during this project.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{sec:prelim}
The \emph{mapping class group} ${\rm Mod}(\Sigma)$ of a compact connected oriented surface $\Sigma$
is the group of orientation--preserving diffeomorphisms of $\Sigma\to \Sigma$, which restrict to identity near the boundary $\partial \Sigma$, modulo isotopies of the same type. We will be primarily interested in the
case when $\Sigma= \Sigma_g$, the closed surface of genus $g$.
We denote simple closed curves on $\Sigma$ by lowercase letters such as $a,b,c,d$, and denote \emph{positive (right-handed) Dehn twists} $t_a, t_b, t_c, t_d$ about them by the corresponding capital letters $A,B,C, D$, all with indices. In our notation, both the curves on $\Sigma$ and self-diffeomorphisms of $\Sigma$ should be understood up to isotopy. We use the functional notation for the composition of diffeomorphisms (i.e. for $\phi \psi$, $\psi$ acts on $\Sigma$ first), yet we still express the \emph{commutator of $\phi$ and $\psi$} as $[\phi, \psi]= \phi \psi \phi^{-1} \psi^{-1}$.
We will make repeated use of the following basic relations in ${\rm Mod}(\Sigma)$, without referring to them explicitly: for two simple closed curves
$a$ and $b$ on $\Sigma$, and for any $f \in {\rm Mod}(\Sigma)$,
\begin{itemize}
\item (\emph{Conjugation}) \ \ \ \ $ft_af^{-1}=t_{f(a)}$,
\item (\emph{Commutativity}) $AB=BA$, if $a$ and $b$ are disjoint,
\item (\emph{Braid relation}) \ \ $ABA= BAB$, if $a$ and $b$ intersect transversely at one point.
\end{itemize}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
We will also need
\begin{itemize}
\item (\emph{Lantern relation}) for $x_i, y_j$ the simple closed curves on the four-holed sphere in Figure~\ref{fig:lantern} (embedded in $\Sigma$), $X_1 X_2 X_3=Y_1 Y_2 Y_3 Y_4.$
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3cm]{lantern.eps}
\caption{The curves of the lantern relation} \label{fig:lantern}
\end{figure}
All the relations above appeared in the pioneering work of Dehn \cite{Dehn}, who then proved that $\mod(\Sigma_g)$ is generated by finitely many Dehn twists. Later works of Lickorish~\cite{Lickorish} and Humphries~\cite{Humphries} led to the following minimal collection of Dehn twist generators $\{A_i, B_j, C_k\}$ along the curves $\{a_i, b_j, c_k\}$ on $\Sigma_g$ in Figure ~\ref{fig:models} below.
\begin{theorem} {\rm\bf(Dehn-Lickorish-Humphries)}\label{thm:DLK}
The mapping class group ${\rm Mod}(\Sigma_g)$ is generated by
$\{ A_1,A_2, B_1,B_2,\ldots ,B_g,C_1,C_2,\ldots ,C_{g-1}\}.$
\end{theorem}
\bigskip
\section{Finite order mapping classes as commutators}\label{sec:RandT}
\input{newmodel}
Consider the three different embeddings of the closed surface $\Sigma_g$ in ${\mathbb{R}}^3$ as depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:models}. The surface in (ii) is the boundary of the solid handlebody which consists of two thickened $(g+1)$--gons, stacked on top of each other, and $(g+1)$ solid handles joining their corresponding vertices. There are orientation-preserving diffeomorphisms between the three models which identify the curves labeled as $a_i, b_j, c_k$ in each one. These models allow us to easily introduce and study certain torsion elements in $\mod(\Sigma_g)$ coming from the symmetries of the surface. The surface $\Sigma_g$ is invariant under the following maps:
\begin{itemize}
\item the clockwise $\frac{2\pi}{g}$--rotation $R$ about the $x$--axis in Figure~\ref{fig:models}(i),
\item the clockwise $\frac{2\pi}{g+1}$--rotation $S$ about the $x$--axis in Figure~\ref{fig:models}(ii),
\item the rotations $\rho_1$ and $\rho_2$ by $\pi$ about the $z$--axis and the line $\ell$, respectively,
in Figure~\ref{fig:models}(i),
\item the rotations $\sigma_1$ and $\sigma_2$ by $\pi$ about the $z$--axis and the line $\ell$, respectively,
in Figure~\ref{fig:models}(ii),
\item the rotations $\sigma$ and $h$ by $\pi$ about the $z$--axis and the $y$--axis, respectively,
in Figure~\ref{fig:models}(iii).
\end{itemize}
Clearly, in $\mod(\Sigma_g)$, the rotations $R$ and $S$ yield torsion elements of orders $g$ and $g+1$, respectively, and
$\rho_i, \sigma_i, \sigma, h$ yield involutions (elements of order $2$), where $h$ is a \emph{hyperelliptic involution}. It is easy to check (say by Alexander's method applied to the maximal chain $a_1, b_1, c_1, c_2, \ldots, c_{g-1}, b_g$) that the involutions $\sigma$ and $h$ we described on the model~(iii) correspond on the model~(ii) to $\sigma_1$ and the involution $h_1$ which interchanges the top and bottom thickened $(g+1)$--gons by a rotation along a central circle through the mid-points of the solid handles. Under these identifications, we define one more torsion element:
\begin{itemize}
\item $T$ is the ``alternating rotation'' of the surface in Figure~\ref{fig:models}(ii), prescribed as $T=S h_1$.
\end{itemize}
Here $S$ and $h_1$ commute, so $T= h_1 S$ as well. Note that $T$ is of order $g+1$ if $g$ is odd, and $2(g+1)$ if $g$ is even.
\begin{proposition} \label{torsioncomm}
In $\mod(\Sigma_g)$, the mapping classes $R$ when $g= 2k +1$, $k \geq 1$, and $S, h, T$ when $g= 2k$, $k \geq 1$, are all commutators, which can be expressed as
\begin{enumerate}
\item $R = [R^{k+1}, \rho_1]$,
\item $S = [S^{k+1} , \sigma_1]$,
\item \,$h = \,[\sigma, \, P^{-(2k+1)}]$,
\item $T =[ S^{k+1} P^{2k+1} \, , P^{-(2k+1)} \sigma_1 P^{2k+1}]$,
\end{enumerate}
where $P=A_1 B_1 (C_1 B_2) \cdots (C_{k-1} B_{k}) $.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
From the dihedral symmetries of the models (i) and (ii) in Figure~\ref{fig:models}, we easily deduce that
\indent $R = \rho_2 \rho_1$ and $\rho_2 = R^{k+1} \rho_1 \, R^{-{(k+1)}}$, when $g= 2k+1 \geq 3$, and
\indent $S = \sigma_2 \sigma_1$ and $\sigma_2 = S^{k+1} \sigma_1 S^{-(k+1)}$, when $g= 2k \geq 2$.
\noindent Therefore $R= \rho_2 \rho_1 = (R^{k+1} \rho_1 \, R^{-{(k+1)}}) \rho_1 = [R^{k+1}, \rho_1]$, as $\rho_1^{-1} = \rho_1$, and similarly $S = [S^{k+1} , \sigma_1]$. This proves (1) and (2).
For (3), let $g=2k$ and let $\delta$ be the separating curve that is the intersection of $\Sigma_g$ with the $xz$--plane in Figure~\ref{fig:models}(iii), such that $\delta$ is the common boundary of two compact genus--$k$ subsurfaces $\Sigma$ and $\Sigma'$. The surfaces $\Sigma$ and $\Sigma'$ are tubular neighborhoods of the $(2k)$--chains $a_1, b_1, c_1, b_2, \ldots, c_{k-1}, b_k$ and $a_g, b_g, c_{g-1}, b_{g-1}, \ldots c_{k+1}, b_{k+1}$.
We first show that the hyperelliptic involution $h$ can be expressed as
\[
h =(A_1 B_1 C_1 B_2 \cdots C_{k-1} B_k )^{2k+1} (A_g B_g C_{g-1} B_{g-1}\cdots C_{k+1} B_{k+1})^{-(2k+1)} \, .
\]
Let $P=A_1 B_1 C_1 B_2 \cdots C_{k-1} B_k$ and $P'= A_g B_g C_{g-1} B_{g-1} \cdots C_{k+1} B_{k+1}$. Note that the diffeomorphism $P^{2k+1}$ is a $\pi$--rotation of the subsurface $\Sigma$ along the $y$--axis, followed by isotoping the boundary back to its original position, so that its square $P^{4k+2}= t_\delta$. (The latter equality is known as the \emph{$(2k)$--chain relation}; see e.g. \cite{FarbMargalit}.) This can be easily checked by the Alexander's method: $P^{2k+1}$ maps each one of the curves $a_1,b_1,c_1,\ldots,c_{k-1},b_k$ to itself, but with reversed orientation, whereas it maps the arc $\alpha$ to the arc $\beta$ in Figure~\ref{fig:hypellinv}. By the same token, $(P')^{2k+1}$ is a similar $\pi$--rotation of the subsurface $\Sigma'$ along the $y$--axis, albeit in the opposite direction. So taking the inverse of one, as we did above, we get a \mbox{$\pi$--rotation} of the whole surface $\Sigma_g = \Sigma \cup_{\delta} \Sigma'$, which is the hyperelliptic involution $h$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[every node/.style={inner sep=0pt}, scale=0.7]
\draw[very thick,rounded corners=15pt] (3.6,1.5) -- (-8,1.5)--(-8.7,0)-- (-8,-1.5) -- (3.6,-1.5);
\draw[very thick, xshift=-6.5cm] (0,0) circle [radius=0.6cm];
\draw[very thick, xshift=-3.9cm] (0,0) circle [radius=0.6cm];
\draw[very thick,fill, xshift=-2cm] (0,0) circle [radius=0.03cm];
\draw[very thick,fill, xshift=-1.65cm] (0,0) circle [radius=0.03cm];
\draw[very thick,fill, xshift=-1.3cm] (0,0) circle [radius=0.03cm];
\draw[very thick, xshift=0.6cm] (0,0) circle [radius=0.6cm];
\draw[thick, red, xshift=-6.5cm] (0,0) circle [radius=0.9cm];
\draw[thick, red, xshift=-3.9cm] (0,0) circle [radius=0.9cm];
\draw[thick, red, xshift=0.6cm] (0,0) circle [radius=0.9cm];
\draw[thick, red, rounded corners=8pt, xshift=-7.8cm] (-0.7,-0.03) -- (-0.4,-0.23)--(0.4,-0.23) --(0.7,-0.03);
\draw[thick, red, dashed, rounded corners=8pt, xshift=-7.8cm] (-0.7,0.03) -- (-0.4,0.23)--(0.4,0.23) --(0.7,0.03);
\draw[thick, red, rounded corners=8pt, xshift=-5.2cm] (-0.7,-0.03) -- (-0.4,-0.23)--(0.4,-0.23) --(0.7,-0.03);
\draw[thick, red, dashed, rounded corners=8pt, xshift=-5.2cm] (-0.7,0.03) -- (-0.4,0.23)--(0.4,0.23) --(0.7,0.03);
\draw[thick, red, rounded corners=8pt, xshift=-2.6cm] (-0.7,-0.03) -- (-0.4,-0.23)--(0.3,-0.23) ;
\draw[thick, red, dashed, rounded corners=8pt, xshift=-2.6cm] (-0.7,0.03) -- (-0.4,0.23)--(0.3,0.23);
\draw[thick, red, rounded corners=8pt, xshift=-0.7cm] (-0.3,-0.23)--(0.4,-0.23) --(0.7,-0.03);
\draw[thick, red, dashed, rounded corners=8pt, xshift=-0.7cm] (-0.3,0.23)--(0.4,0.23) --(0.7,0.03);
\draw[thick, red, rounded corners=8pt, xshift=-2.6cm] (3.8,-0.03) -- (4.5,-0.23)--(5.9,-0.3) ;
\draw[thick, red, dashed, rounded corners=8pt, xshift=-2.6cm] (3.8,-0.03) -- (4.5,0.23)--(6.5,0.3) ;
\draw[thick, blue, rounded corners=6pt, xshift=-2.6cm] (3.75,-0.2) -- (4.1,-0.43)--(4.6,-1.3) --(5,-1.5);
\draw[thick, blue, dashed, rounded corners=6pt, xshift=-2.6cm] (5,-1.5) -- (5.4,-1.3) --(6.2,0.2)--(6.5,0.3) ;
\draw[thick, blue, dashed, rounded corners=6pt, xshift=-2.6cm] (3.75,-0.2) -- (4.3,0) --(4.8,1.3)--(5,1.5) ;
\draw[thick, blue, rounded corners=6pt, xshift=-2.6cm] (5,1.5) -- (5.2,1.3) --(5.7,0)--(5.9,-0.3) ;
\draw[very thick, rounded corners=4pt] (3.6,1.5) ..controls (3.2,1.4) and (3.2,-1.4)..(3.6,-1.5);
\draw[very thick, rounded corners=4pt] (3.6,1.5) ..controls (4,1.4) and (4,-1.4)..(3.6,-1.5);
\node[red, scale=0.9] at (-7.8 ,-0.6) {$a_1$};
\node[red, scale=0.9] at (-5.2 ,-0.6) {$c_1$};
\node[red, scale=0.9] at (-2.6 ,-0.6) {$c_2$};
\node[red, scale=0.9] at (-0.6 ,-0.6) {$c_{k-1}$};
\node[red, scale=0.9] at (-6 ,-1.1) {$b_{1}$};
\node[red, scale=0.9] at (-3.4 ,-1.1) {$b_2$};
\node[red, scale=0.9] at (1.2 ,-1.1) {$b_k$};
\node[red, scale=0.9] at (2.85 ,-0.5) {$\alpha$};
\node[blue, scale=0.9] at (2.1 ,-1) {$\beta$};
\node[scale=0.9] at (4.1 ,1) {$\delta$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The genus--$k$ subsurface $\Sigma$ with boundary $\delta$.}
\label{fig:hypellinv}
\end{figure}
Next, we observe that the involution $\sigma$ on $\Sigma_g$ interchanges these two $2k$--chains. It follows that $P'= \sigma P \sigma^{-1}$, and therefore
\begin{equation*}
h=(\sigma P \sigma^{-1})^{-(2k+1)} \, P^{2k+1} = \sigma P^{-(2k+1)} \sigma^{-1} P^{2k+1} = [ \sigma , P^{-(2k+1)} ].
\end{equation*}
Lastly, since $\sigma$ and $h$ correspond to $\sigma_1$ and $h_1$ in model (ii), we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
T & = & S h_1 \\
&=& [S^{k+1} , \sigma_1] [\sigma_1, \, P^{-(2k+1)}] \\
&=& (S^{k+1} \sigma_1 S^{-(k+1)} \sigma_1^{-1}) (\sigma_1 P^{-(2k+1)} \sigma_1^{-1} P^{2k+1}) \\
&=& S^{k+1} \sigma_1 S^{-(k+1)} P^{-(2k+1)} \sigma_1^{-1} P^{2k+1} \\
&=& S^{k+1} (P^{2k+1} P^{-(2k+1)}) \sigma_1 (P^{2k+1} P^{-(2k+1)}) S^{-(k+1)} P^{-(2k+1)} \sigma_1^{-1} P^{2k+1} \\
&=& (S^{k+1} P^{2k+1}) (P^{-(2k+1)} \sigma_1 P^{2k+1}) (S^{k+1} P^{2k+1} )^{-1} (P^{-(2k+1)} \sigma_1 P^{2k+1})^{-1} \\
&=& [ S^{k+1} P^{2k+1} \, , P^{-(2k+1)} \sigma_1 P^{2k+1}],
\end{eqnarray*}
which\footnote{In general, $[x, y] [y, z] = [ x z^{-1}, zyz^{-1}]$ for \emph{any} group elements $x, y, z \in G$ \cite{Carmichael}.}
concludes (4).
\end{proof}
\bigskip
\section{New generating sets for the mapping class group}\label{sec:gen}
Here we obtain several new generating sets for $\mod(\Sigma_g)$, focusing on generators that can be expressed as commutators (for suitable $g$).
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:G=Mod}
For $g\geq 3$, the mapping class group
${\rm Mod}(\Sigma_g)$ is generated by $A_1B_1^{-1}, A_2B_2^{-1}, B_1C_1^{-1},$
$B_iB_{i+1}^{-1}$ and $C_jC_{j+1}^{-1}$, where $1\leq i\leq g-1$ and $1\leq j\leq g-2$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\Gamma$ be the subgroup of ${\rm Mod}(\Sigma_g)$ generated by the set
\[
\{ A_1B_1^{-1}, A_2B_2^{-1}, B_1C_1^{-1}, B_iB_{i+1}^{-1},C_jC_{j+1}^{-1} \, \}_{\forall i, j}.
\]
Then
\begin{equation*}
\{ A_2 A_1^{-1}, B_iB_j^{-1}, C_iC_j^{-1}, B_iC_j^{-1}, A_1B_i^{-1}, A_2B_i^{-1}, A_1C_j^{-1}, A_2C_j^{-1}\}_{\forall i, j} \subset \Gamma.
\end{equation*}
\noindent For example, we have $A_2 C_1^{-1} =(A_2 B_2^{-1}) (B_1 B_2^{-1})^{-1}(B_1 C_1^{-1}) \in \Gamma$. Since $C_j C_{j+1}^{-1} \in \Gamma$, multiplying these elements in increasing index, we get $C_1 C_j^{-1} \in \Gamma$. So $A_2 C_j^{-1} \in \Gamma$. The others can be easily verified in a similar fashion.
\input{00lantern}
By the lantern relation, the following holds in $\mod(\Sigma_g)$:
\[
A_1C_1C_2A_3=A_2D_1D_2,
\]
where the curves are as in Figure~\ref{fig:lanternembed}. We can rewrite this relation as
\begin{equation}
A_3=(A_2 C_1^{-1})(D_1 C_2^{-1})(D_2 A_1^{-1}), \label{eqn:lantern}
\end{equation}
as $C_1, C_2$ and $A_3$ commute with all the other Dehn twists here.
Note that $A_2 C_1^{-1}\in \Gamma$. One can check that the diffeomorphism
\[
F=(A_1B_2^{-1}) (A_1C_1^{-1}) (A_1C_2^{-1}) (A_1B_2^{-1})
\]
maps the pair of simple closed curves $(a_2,a_1)$ to $(d_2,a_1)$. Since $F \in \Gamma$, we have $F(A_2A_1^{-1})F^{-1}=D_2A_1^{-1} \in \Gamma$ by the conjugation relation. We also have
$D_2C_2^{-1}=(D_2A_1^{-1})(A_1C_2^{-1})\in \Gamma$.
Likewise, the diffeomorphism
\[
G=(C_2B_1^{-1}) (C_2A_1^{-1}) (C_2C_1^{-1}) (C_2B_1^{-1})
\]
maps the pair of simple closed curves $(d_2,c_2)$ to $(d_1,c_2)$, and is in $\Gamma$. Therefore, the element
$G(D_2C_2^{-1})G^{-1}=D_1C_2^{-1}$ is also in $\Gamma$, once again by the conjugation relation.
Now the equality~\eqref{eqn:lantern} implies that the Dehn twist $A_3$ is in $\Gamma$.
Also, $A_3 (B_3B_1^{-1}) A_3 (B_1B_3^{-1})A_3 ^{-1}=B_3$ is in $\Gamma$.
It now follows easily
that $A_1, A_2, B_1,B_2,\ldots, B_g$ and $C_1,C_2,\dots, C_{g-1}$ are all contained in $\Gamma$.
We conclude from Theorem~\ref{thm:DLK} that $\Gamma={\rm Mod}(\Sigma_g)$.
\end{proof}
We now present various new generators for the mapping class group $\mod(\Sigma_g)$ we need for our main theorem.
\begin{theorem} \label{prop:g=odd}
For $g\geq 5$, the mapping class group ${\rm Mod}(\Sigma_g)$ is generated by
$R$ and $A_1A_2C_2^{-1}B_4^{-1}.$
\end{theorem}
\input{00newproof-g=5}
\begin{proof}
First note that the rotation $R$ on $\Sigma_g$ maps each $a_i, b_i, c_i$ to
$a_{i+1}, b_{i+1}, c_{i+1}$. Here, the indices are considered modulo $g$.
Let $F_1:=A_1A_2C_2^{-1}B_4^{-1}$ and let $\Gamma$ be the subgroup of $\mod(\Sigma_g)$ generated
by $R$ and $F_1$. We make the following series of observations:
$F_2:=RF_1R^{-1}=A_2A_3C_3^{-1}B_5^{-1} \in \Gamma$.
$F_3:=(F_2F_1)F_2(F_2F_1)^{-1}=A_2A_3B_4^{-1}B_5^{-1} \in \Gamma$.
\noindent Let us spell out the details of this calculation, as we will have several others akin to this one.
It is easy to see that the diffeomorphism $F_2F_1$ maps
the curves $a_2, a_3,c_3,b_5$ to $a_2, a_3,b_4,b_5$, respectively, so that
\begin{eqnarray*}
F_3
& :=& (F_2F_1)F_2(F_2F_1)^{-1} \\
& = & (F_2F_1) (A_2A_3C_3^{-1}B_5^{-1}) (F_2F_1)^{-1} \\
& = & A_2A_3B_4^{-1}B_5^{-1} .
\end{eqnarray*}
We then have
$F_3^{-1}F_2=B_4C_3^{-1}\in \Gamma$ and $ F_3F_2^{-1}=B_4^{-1}C_3\in \Gamma.$
By conjugating these elements with powers of $R$, we see that
\[
B_i C_{i-1}^{-1} \in \Gamma \ \mbox{ and }\ B_i^{-1}C_{i-1}\in \Gamma
\]
for all $i$.
We also have
\begin{eqnarray*}
F_4
&:=& R^{-1}F_3^{-1}R=A_1^{-1}A_2^{-1}B_3B_4 \in \Gamma,\\
F_5
&:=& (F_4F_3)F_4(F_4F_3)^{-1}=A_1^{-1}A_2^{-1}A_3B_4 \in \Gamma.
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus,
$F_5F_4^{-1}=A_3B_3^{-1}\in \Gamma $ and $ F_5^{-1}F_4=A_3^{-1}B_3\in \Gamma$.
Again,
by conjugating with powers of $R$, we conclude that
\begin{eqnarray} \label{F=aibi}
A_iB_i^{-1}, A_i^{-1}B_i \in \Gamma,
\end{eqnarray}
and in turn,
\[
A_iC_{i-1}^{-1}\in \Gamma
\]
as well, as we already have $B_i C_{i-1}^{-1} \in \Gamma$.
Furthermore,
\begin{eqnarray*}
F_6&:=&(C_g A_1^{-1})F_1(B_4C_3^{-1})=C_gA_2 C_2^{-1}C_3^{-1} \in \Gamma,\\
F'_6&:=& R^{-4} F_6R^4= C_{g-4} A_{g-2} C_{g-2}^{-1}C_{g-1}^{-1} \in \Gamma,\\
F_7&:=&(F'_6)^{-1} (C_{g-1}^{-1}B_g)= C_{g-4}^{-1} A_{g-2} ^{-1}C_{g-2}B_g \in \Gamma
\end{eqnarray*} and
\begin{eqnarray*}
F_8&:=&(F_7F_6)F_7(F_7F_6)^{-1}= C_{g-4}^{-1} A_{g-2} ^{-1}C_{g-2}C_g \in \Gamma,
\end{eqnarray*}
by a similar calculation to the one we had for $F_3$ above.
From these, we get
$ F_7F_8^{-1}=B_gC_g^{-1}\in \Gamma$,
so that
\begin{eqnarray} \label{F=bici}
B_iC_i^{-1}\in \Gamma
\end{eqnarray}
by the action of $R$.
\noindent Hence we have all of the following elements in $\Gamma$:
\begin{eqnarray}
B_iB_{i+1}^{-1}&=&(B_iC_i^{-1})(C_iB_{i+1}^{-1}), \label{F=bler}\\
C_iC_{i+1}^{-1}&=&(C_iB_{i+1}^{-1})(B_{i+1}C_{i+1}^{-1}).\label{F=cler}
\end{eqnarray}
It follows from~\eqref{F=aibi}--\eqref{F=cler} and
Lemma~\ref{lem:G=Mod} that $\Gamma={\rm Mod}(\Sigma_g)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem} \label{prop:g=ufak}
For $g\geq 3$, the mapping class group $\mod(\Sigma_g)$ is generated by
$T, A_1A_2^{-1}$ and $A_1B_1C_1C_2^{-1}B_3^{-1}C_3^{-1}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\Gamma$ be the subgroup of ${\rm Mod}(\Sigma_g)$ generated by $T, A_1A_2^{-1}$ and
$F:=A_1B_1C_1C_2^{-1}B_3^{-1}C_3^{-1}$.
Below we will repeatedly use the conjugation relation, both when conjugating with $F$ and with powers of $T$. The action of $T$ on $\Sigma_g$ maps $a_1$ to $c_1$, $c_i$ to $c_{i+1}$ for each $i = 1, \ldots, g-2$, $c_{g-1}$ to $a_g$, and $a_g$ back to $a_1$, whereas it maps $b_i$ to $b_{i+1}$ for each $i=1, \ldots g$, and $b_{g+1}$ back to $b_1$.
Note that $F(a_2)=a_2$. Since $F(a_1)=b_1$ and $F(b_1)=c_1$,
\[
F(A_1A_2^{-1})F^{-1}=B_1A_2^{-1}\in\Gamma
\]
and
\[
F(B_1A_2^{-1})F^{-1}=C_1A_2^{-1}\in\Gamma.
\]
It follows that
\[
A_1B_1^{-1},B_1C_1^{-1}\in\Gamma.
\]
Hence, the elements
\begin{eqnarray*}
C_1B_2^{-1}&=&T(A_1B_1^{-1})T^{-1} ,\\
A_2B_2^{-1}&=&(A_2C_1^{-1})(C_1B_2^{-1}) ,\\
B_2C_2^{-1}&=&T(B_1C_1^{-1})T^{-1} ,\\
C_1C_2^{-1}&=&(C_1B_2^{-1})(B_2C_2^{-1}) ,\\
B_1B_2^{-1}&=&(B_1C_1^{-1})(C_1B_2^{-1}) , \\
C_jC_{j+1}^{-1}&=&T^{j-1}(C_1C_{2}^{-1})T^{-(j-1)} \mbox{ for } 1\leq j\leq g-2 ,\\
B_iB_{i+1}^{-1}&=&T^{i-1}(B_1B_{2}^{-1})T^{-(i-1)} \mbox{ for } 1\leq i\leq g-1
\end{eqnarray*}
are all in $\Gamma$. It follows now from Lemma~\ref{lem:G=Mod} that
$\Gamma={\rm Mod}(\Sigma_g)$.
\end{proof}
\input{00proof-g=even}
\begin{theorem} \label{prop:g=even}
For $g\geq 6$, the mapping class group ${\rm Mod}(\Sigma_g)$ is generated by $T$ and $A_1A_2C_2^{-1}B_4^{-1}.$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\Gamma$ be the subgroup of $\mod(\Sigma_g)$ generated by $T$ and $G_1:=A_1A_2C_2^{-1}B_4^{-1}$.
Let $d=T(a_2)$.\footnote{To view the action of $T$ (specifically on the curve $a_2$) in the ``standard'' model as in Figure~\ref{fig:even}, one can observe that $S=(A_1B_1C_1B_2C_2\cdots B_{g-1}C_{g-1}B_gA_g)^2$.}
We then have
\[
G_2:=TG_1T^{-1}=C_1DC_3^{-1}B_5^{-1} \in \Gamma.
\]
Since $G_2G_1$ maps the curve $c_3$ to $b_4$ and fixes
$c_1,d,b_5$, the conjugation of $G_2$ with $G_2G_1$ gives\footnote{Here we use the fact that $a_2$ is disjoint from
$d=T(a_2)$, which would \emph{not} be the case for $S(a_2)$. This is essentially the reason why we preferred to work with the slightly more complicated torsion element $T$ rather than $S$.}
\begin{eqnarray*}
G_3 & :=& (G_2G_1) G_2(G_2G_1)^{-1}\\
& = & C_1 D B_4^{-1} B_5^{-1} \in \Gamma.
\end{eqnarray*}
Hence, the subgroup $\Gamma$ contains the elements $G_2G_3^{-1}=C_3^{-1}B_4$ and
$G_2^{-1}G_3=C_3B_4^{-1}$. Thus, by conjugating by powers of $T$, we see that
\begin{equation}
A_1B_1^{-1}\in \Gamma \mbox{ and } C_{i}B_{i+1}^{-1}\in \Gamma \label{G=a1b1}
\end{equation}
for $1\leq i \leq g-1$.
We also have
\[
G_4:=G_1^{-1}(C_2^{-1}B_3)=A_1^{-1}A_2^{-1} B_3B_4 \in \Gamma
\]
and
\[
G_5:=(G_3G_4)G_3(G_3 G_4)^{-1}=C_1B_3B_4^{-1}B_5^{-1} \in \Gamma
\]
by a similar calculation to that of $G_3$ above. From this we get
\[
G_3G_5^{-1}=DB_3^{-1} \in \Gamma
\]
and hence
\begin{equation}
T^{-1}(DB_3^{-1})T=A_2B_2^{-1}\in \Gamma. \label{G=a2b2}
\end{equation}
Let
\[
G_6:=T^{-1} (B_2C_1^{-1})G_5T= B_1B_2B_3^{-1}B_4^{-1} \in \Gamma
\]
and
\[
G_7:=(T^3 G_5T^{-3})=C_4B_6B_7^{-1}B_8^{-1} \in \Gamma.
\]
Here, we take $B_8=B_1$ if $g=6$. It is then easy to see that
\[
G_8:=(G_7G_6^{-1})G_7(G_7G_6^{-1})^{-1}= B_4B_6B_7^{-1}B_8^{-1} \in \Gamma.
\]
We then have
\[
G_8G_7^{-1}= B_4C_4^{-1} \in \Gamma.
\]
\noindent Thus, by the action of $T$, we get
\begin{equation}
B_iC_i^{-1}\in \Gamma \label{G=bici}
\end{equation}
for all $i$.
As in the proof of Theorem~\ref{prop:g=odd} , we obtain that
\begin{equation}
B_iB_{i+1}^{-1}, C_iC_{i+1}^{-1}\in \Gamma. \label{G=blercler}
\end{equation}
Once again from~\eqref{G=a1b1}--\eqref{G=blercler} and Lemma~\ref{lem:G=Mod},
we conclude $\Gamma={\rm Mod}(\Sigma_g)$.
\end{proof}
\bigskip
\section{Proof of the main theorem}\label{sec:final}
The proof of our main theorem now follows easily from the array of results we have obtained thus far.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:1}] We will obtain our sharpest results in four cases:
\smallskip
\noindent \underline{$g\geq 5$ is odd:} By Theorem~\ref{prop:g=odd}, the mapping class group ${\rm Mod}(\Sigma_g)$ is generated by $R$ and $A_1A_2C_2^{-1}B_4^{-1}.$ By Proposition~\ref{torsioncomm}, $R$ is a single commutator. On the other hand, there is clearly a diffeomorphism $\phi$ of $\Sigma_g$ mapping the pair
$(a_1,a_2)$ to $(b_4, c_2)$ so that
\begin{eqnarray*}
A_1A_2C_2^{-1}B_4^{-1}
&=& A_1A_2 (B_4 C_2)^{-1} \\
&=& A_1A_2 (\phi A_1 A_2 \phi^{-1})^{-1} \\
&=& A_1A_2 \phi (A_1 A_2)^{-1} \phi^{-1} \\
&=& [A_1A_2, \phi].
\end{eqnarray*}
\smallskip
\noindent \underline{$g\geq 6$ is even:} By Theorem~\ref{prop:g=even}, the mapping class group ${\rm Mod}(\Sigma_g)$ is generated by $T$ and $A_1A_2C_2^{-1}B_4^{-1}$. Again $T$ is a commutator by Proposition~\ref{torsioncomm}, and $A_1A_2C_2^{-1}B_4^{-1}=[A_1 A_2, \phi]$ as above.
\smallskip
\noindent \underline{$g=3$:} By similar arguments we had in Section~\ref{sec:gen}, one can show that when $g \geq 3$, ${\rm Mod}(\Sigma_g)$ is generated by the elements $R, A_1A_2^{-1},$ and $A_1B_1C_1C_2^{-1}A_3^{-1}B_3^{-1}$; see Corollary 6 in~\cite{KorkmazInvolutions}. Once again $R$ is a commutator by Proposition~\ref{torsioncomm}. Clearly there is a diffeomorphism $\psi$ of $\Sigma_3$ mapping $a_1$ to $a_2$ and a diffeomorphism $\varphi$ mapping $(a_1, b_1, c_1)$ to $(c_3, b_3, c_2)$. It follows that $ A_1A_2^{-1} = [A_1, \psi]$ and $A_1B_1C_1C_2^{-1}B_3^{-1}C_3^{-1} = [A_1B_1C_1, \varphi]$.
\smallskip
\noindent \underline{$g=4$:} In this case, by Proposition~\ref{prop:g=ufak}, ${\rm Mod}(\Sigma_4)$ is generated by the three elements $T, A_1A_2^{-1}$ and $A_1B_1C_1C_2^{-1}B_3^{-1}C_3^{-1}$.
Once again $T$ is a commutator by Proposition~\ref{torsioncomm} and so are the other two elements, as we have argued above.
This completes the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:1}.
\end{proof}
\bigskip
|
\section{Introduction}\label{intro}
There is a story/parable attributed to the great particle theorist James Bjorken (aka BJ) that goes roughly as follows: In the old days theorists were generally humble. We would propose a new modification to present theory or a prediction based on our favorite model. Because we were aware that experimentalists were able to test this hypothesis very quickly, we did not attach ourselves to the predictions too highly - they might be immediately be shown to be wrong. If the idea was wrong we would drop it, if correct we would follow up. In the present days, there are many theoretical modifications to present theory that we all know will never be tested in our lifetimes. Yet the proponents are generally committed to working on these ideas for the rest of their careers. That requires a deep personal commitment. One comes to believe that one's own approach is the most promising, and that those of others are less valid. It develops a style like religion - one has to believe in what one is doing in order to continue spending your career on it. That is why the fights between the different approaches are so bitter - they are like religious wars.
If you think about it, this is a striking rebuke to much of what we do in philosophy of/and science. We often think ``what is the nature of reality?'' or ``what is the theory of everything?''. Yet BJ emphasizes that the question is really ``what is the next step in our understanding of reality `now'?" The qualifier `now' means primarily the experimental frontier but also the frontier of our understanding of techniques - the frontiers of energy, emergence, understanding. We have gotten away from thinking of these frontiers as the limits of our knowledge and changed to the remarkable hubris that we can hope to solve everything without further experimental input.
But there is also a different take-away message to this story that I wish to emphasize here, and that is about the {\em tools} that we use in dealing with our theories. Back in the ``old days'' we had primarily two types of tools - models and full quantum field theories (designed to be valid at all scales). For some problems - such as nuclear physics or low-energy hadronic physics - neither of these is very good. The correct full quantum field theory - QCD - is not analytically tractable at low energies, and other possible renormalizeable field theories just do not match up with the complexity of the phenomena. Using phenomenological models was frustrating because they were uncontrolled and suffered from adjustable assumptions. So one of the reasons that we were humble in the old days is that we did not have the tools to trust our predictions\footnote{I am being somewhat unfair here. There was also a tradition of using dispersive techniques which in principle are fully rigorous. But in practice one had to make various approximations in applying dispersion relations to complex problems, and so also here the reliability was suspect. Dispersive techniques have been married to effective field theory successfully enhancing the power of both.}.
This changed when effective field theory came around. With effective field theory we could start making controlled and rigorous predictions. We could use only the degrees of freedom that we knew experimentally, and the symmetries that we had uncovered, and use these to make predictions which would hold independent of what the right QFT was at higher energies. Yes, there were many more unknown parameters, but that was OK because we had experiments to measure them. We theorists could be a little less humble and stand behind our predictions. Yet we could only this by embracing our ignorance of physics beyond the known frontiers.
This essay is a contribution to a volume on the relation of effective field theory (and the philosophy thereof) to the practice of nuclear physics. For the reasons mentioned above, the use of effective field theory was first adopted enthusiastically by the fields of low energy hadronic physics and nuclear physics. In some ways, the development of chiral perturbation theory is a good way to learn about the practical uses of effective field theory. I can always recommend my favorite text \cite{Donoghue:1992dd} as a good place to read about this. However, this essay is partially about another effective field theory, which I will argue is purer and illustrates the concepts even better - that of quantum general relativity. This illustrates how we can proceed with limited knowledge, but that the nature of reality could in principle change if were were able to push forward the experimental frontier. I then address a limit of nuclear physics which shares many of the nice features of the gravitational case.
\section{General comments}\label{comments}
We appear to have a closed self-consistent layer of reality in the Standard Model plus General Relativity. If we are to be humble, we have to admit that we do not know what comes next. We do not even know what are the right degrees of freedom - the basic building blocks. At the present energies, everything looks like we are dealing with quantum fields. But there is a cautionary tale from condensed matter. In matter, the fundamental physics is described by the interactions between the atoms. This can be described by a potiential which is always close to a harmonic oscillator at small fluctuations. In one dimension,
\begin{eqnarray}
S &=& \int d t L\left[y_{i}, \dot{y}_{i}\right]=\int d t \sum_{i}\left[\frac{1}{2} m \dot{y}_{i}^{2}-V\left(y_{i}-y_{i-1}\right)\right] \nonumber \\
&\approx& \int d t \sum_{i}\left[\frac{1}{2} m \dot{y}_{i}^{2}-\frac{1}{2} k\left(y_{i}-y_{i-1}\right)^{2}\right]
\end{eqnarray}
If you quantize this and take the continuum limit, you end up with phonons. These are described by a quantum field with the action
\begin{equation}
S=\int d x d t \frac{1}{2}\left[\frac{1}{v^{2}}\left(\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}\right)^{2}-\left(\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial x}\right)^{2}\right]=\int d x d t \frac{1}{2} \partial_{\mu} \phi \partial^{\mu} \phi
\end{equation}
We see that phonons behave as massless fields and have an emergent Lorentz-like symmetry. Neither the fields nor the symmetry are properties of the underlying system. These latter facts are instructive for model building. We cannot count on the fact that our degrees of freedom, their interactions, nor even their symmetries hold at all scales. In one of my favorite speculations about the structure of the ultimate theory - Holger Nielsen's Random Dynamics \cite{Nielsen:1983qj}- the idea that there are {\em all} possible types of fluctuations at the smallest scales. But the hypothesis is that the only type of fluctuations that can survive to long distances are those where the masslessness of the fluctuation are protected by a symmetry - gauge bosons and chiral fermions. These are the important features of our world. So even the symmetries of the Standard Model may be emergent.
One use of effective field theories is to test for unusual properties even before one can access the new degrees of freedom. In our phonon example, we would expect that the emergent Lorentz-like symmetry would be broken by non-harmonic forces. That is, if we expand
\begin{equation}
V([y_i]) = \frac12 k \left(y_{i}-y_{i-1}\right)^{2}+\frac{1}{4} \lambda\left(y_{i}-y_{i-1}\right)^{4}+\ldots
\end{equation}
in the continuum limit the Lagrangian would obtain a term which breaks this symmetry
\begin{equation}
S=\int d x d t \frac{1}{2}\left[\frac{1}{v^{2}}\left(\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}\right)^{2}-\left(\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial x}\right)^{2}-\overline{\lambda}\left(\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial x}\right)^{4}\right] \ \ .
\end{equation}
Searching for such a new operator in the Lagrangian is one classic use of effective field theories.
However, effective field theory is not just the use of effective Lagrangians - it involves the full use of quantum field theory including loop diagrams. Indeed this is its most interesting use. You can even do this in cases where you do not know the full theory or do not have a renormalizeable description. It answers a fundamental apparent problem in quantum physics. In perturbation theory you are instructed to sum over all intermediate states
\begin{equation}
\sum_{I} \frac{<f|V| I><I|V| i>}{E_{i}-E_{I}}
\end{equation}
including those which have not been discovered yet, and including possible interactions at the highest energies. How can we do such a calculation if we have no experimental information about these interactions? The solution to this problem involves the uncertainty principle. Although we do not know the high energy degrees of freedom or their interactions, we do know that they do not propagate far at low energy, so that their effect is basically local. By populating the effective Lagrangian with all possible local terms, with coefficients that are a-priori unknown, we would encompass the residual high energy effects. And most of these effective Lagrangians are not very relevant. They are suppressed by many powers of the low energy scale divided by the high energy scale and have effects which are numerically smaller than whatever precision we are working towards.
But the quantum physics of the light degrees of physics is not local, and is cannot be modified by any unknown physics that happens at high energy\footnote{Of course, effective field theory can also be used as a simplification of a known theory. The same rules apply, but the coefficients in this case can be known from matching to the full theory.}. But the key feature is that the quantum effects from the low energy parts of loops are reliable predictions of the effective field theory.
The above is just a very brief statement about the nature of an effective field theory. Some people also put a premium on naturalness, the requirement that the size of the corrections from higher order Lagrangians match some expected size - for example the size arising from loop effects. However, this is not a requirement for the existence of the effective field theory. The EFT accepts whatever parameters experiment measures. Moreover, the real quantum predictions of the EFT are independent of the parameters. The range of utility of the theory may depend on the parameters, but the existence of the EFT is independent of them. I will illustrate this in the discussion of the gravitational effective field theory in the next section.
\section{Gravity}\label{gravity}
General Relativity is an ideal case for the use of effective field theory. The theory contains gravitational waves, and quantum mechanics tells us that these imply massless gravitons as degrees of freedom. It is not hard to quantize General Relativity - it was done correctly by Feynman \cite{Feynman:1963ax} and DeWitt \cite{DeWitt:1967ub}. Propagators and gravitational vertices are well defined.
This is not the place to get too technical about the gravitational effective field theory, but in fact the basic features can be simply understood. The action which leads to the Einstein equations is notationally simple - it just involves the curvature scalar
\begin{equation}\label{EH}
S_{g r a v}=\int d^{4} x \sqrt{-g}\left[\frac{2}{\kappa^{2}} R\right]
\end{equation}
with the identification $\kappa^2 =32\pi G$ with $G$ being Newton's constant. However the keys to unpacking this simplified notation is to note that the field involved is the metric tensor $g_{\mu\nu}(x)$, and the curvatures are all second order in derivatives in the metric. Specifically,
\begin{eqnarray}
R_{\mu \nu} &=\partial_{\nu} \Gamma_{\mu \lambda}^{\lambda}-\partial_{\lambda} \Gamma_{\mu \nu}^{\lambda}+\Gamma_{\mu \lambda}^{\sigma} \Gamma_{\nu \sigma}^{\lambda}-\Gamma_{\mu \nu}^{\sigma} \Gamma_{\lambda \sigma}^{\lambda} \\ \Gamma_{\alpha \beta}^{\lambda} &=\frac{g^{\lambda \sigma}}{2}\left(\partial_{\alpha} g_{\beta \sigma}+\partial_{\beta} g_{\alpha \sigma}-\partial_{\sigma} g_{\alpha \beta}\right)
\end{eqnarray}
plus $R=g^{\mu\nu}R_{\mu\nu}$.
All of the tensor indices in these equations are just distractions from the physics. The only key point for us is to follow the derivatives. When matrix elements are taken, a derivative becomes a factor of an energy. So this action is of order $E^2$ or $\partial^2$. For the kinetic energy terms, this is similar to the Lagrangians of other massless fields. In addition it implies that the interaction terms in the Lagrangian are of order $E^2$.
If you look past all the tensor indices, the structure of GR is quite simple. If we look at the gravitational field $h_{\mu\nu}$ close to flat spacetime, with $g_{\mu\nu} = \eta_{\mu\nu} + \kappa h_{\mu\nu}$, the Lagrangian would become (schematically)
\begin{equation}\label{powers}
{\cal L}= \frac12 \partial h \partial h + \kappa h \partial h \partial h + \kappa^2 h^2 \partial h \partial h +....
\end{equation}
where the ellipses refer to yet higher powers of the field $h$. However, here we also see the potentially scary part for a quantum theory. The interaction terms are of the form that is labeled ``non-renormalizeable''. This is a misnomer, and the theory can be renormalized order by order in perturbation theory. However, in the old days (pre-EFT) this fact caused a lot of hand-wringing about the supposed incompatibility of quantum theory and general relativity. The reader has certainly seen ominous quotes to this effect - they still are seen even in the post-EFT world. Even though I once shared this concern, in retrospect it is puzzling to think why it got phrased this way. Yes, everyone was aware that these theories had extra divergences and general relativity would need to be changed in some way if it was to become renormalizeable. But that is not the same thing as a fundamental incompatibility with quantum mechanics.
In fact, Feynman first solved the only technical problem in quantizing GR in 1963 \cite{Feynman:1963ax}. That problem is that the metric tensor has more components than does the physical graviton degrees of freedom (two). Ever after gauge fixing, these extra components give extra spurious contributions in loops. The solution was to add an ``extra dopey particle'' (Feynman's phrase) with a minus sign to cancel off the spurious effects. This was formalized by DeWitt \cite{DeWitt:1967ub} and these are the Feynman-DeWitt-Fadeev-Popov ghosts, and the procedure is familiar to anyone who has gone through the quantization of QCD \footnote{For pedagogic treatments of this I recommend my lecture notes written up in Ref. \cite{Donoghue:2017pgk} and those of Veltman \cite{Veltman:1975vx}}. I often joke that the quantization of GR can be given as a homework exercise in a QFT class that has just quantized QCD, although I have never had the courage to actually do that. But quantization itself is not the problem.
Renormalization is also not a problem, although here we start to move into EFT territory. Early works in gravity QFT tend to focus on the divergences. These are high energy effects, and so they are equivalent to local terms in the Lagrangian. There are techniques, such as the background field method, that shows that they respect the symmetries of GR. But they are not just a renormalization of the Einstein-Hilbert action, Eq. \ref{EH}. One loop divergences occur at order of the curvature-squared \cite{tHooft:1974toh}, two loop at order curvature-cubed \cite{Goroff:1985sz}, etc. This power counting follow straightforwardly from the two derivative nature of the interaction terms, or equivalently to the dimensional coupling constant $\kappa$. However in a generally covariant action, these terms are not forbidden. If you include them in the action, the coefficients of the various terms can be used to renormalize all the divergences. These divergences are probably spurious, because the ultimate high energy theory is probably different from low energy GR, but that does not matter. There are probably also finite effects from the ultimate high energy theory - these also do not matter. All we need to know is that there is some parameter in a local action which encompasses the effects from the unknown high energy theory and which in principle can be measured by experiment.
Predictability was thought to be a problem. With new parameters popping up at each loop order, how could you make any predictions? Here is where EFT really comes to the rescue in a more significant way \cite{Donoghue:1994dn}. It shifts the focus from the UV, where we do not have any clue as to the ultimate theory, to the infrared, where we know gravitons and their interactions. The key here is non-locality - low energy gravitons can propagate long distances, and this is distinct from any local term in the action. In momentum space this manifests itself as non-analytic terms, powers of $\sqrt{q^2}$ and $\log q^2$. Local terms in the action are simple powers of derivatives, corresponding to analytic terms which cannot be confused with the non-analytic counterparts. The non-local/non-analytic terms can be reliable predictions of the low energy part of the theory because they cannot be modified by any change in the theory that is made at high energy.
We can see the EFT predictability in action by looking at the results of some of the calculations. For example, there is the quantum correction to the Newtonian potential, which with an appropriate definition is found \cite{BjerrumBohr:2002kt}\cite{Khriplovich:2002bt} to be the final term in the expression
\begin{equation}
V(r)=-\frac{G m_{1} m_{2}}{r}\left[1+3 \frac{G\left(m_{1}+m_{2}\right)}{r}+\frac{41}{10 \pi} \frac{G \hbar}{r^{2}}\right] \ \ .
\end{equation}
The middle term is a classical correction due to GR. The important point is that the quantum correction is finite and independent of any parameters. The local terms in the action would yield a $\delta^3(x)$ correction to the potential in this particular case. The quantum correction therefore cannot be modified by anything that is done at high energy - it is a low energy theorem of quantum gravity. Moreover it is universal \cite{Bjerrum-Bohr:2013bxa} - independent of the nature of the scattering particles.
Another similar prediction
is the bending angle of light or other massless particles in the presence of a large mass, which is found to be \cite{Bjerrum-Bohr:2014zsa}\cite{Bjerrum-Bohr:2016hpa}\cite{Bai:2016ivl}\cite{Chi:2019owc}
\begin{equation}
\theta =\frac{4 G M}{b}+\frac{15}{4} \frac{G^{2} M^{2} \pi}{b^{2}}+\frac{8 \mathrm{bu}^{\eta}-47+64 \log \frac{2 r_{0}}{b}}{\pi} \frac{G^{2} \hbar M}{b^{3}}
\end{equation}
where $b$ is the impact parameter. Again, none of the parameters from the local Lagrangian enter the result. Here, $r_0$ is related to an infrared divergence due to IR radiation. The bending angle is not universal, as the coefficient $ \mathrm{bu}^{\eta}$ takes on different values for a photon, a massless scalar and a graviton, with $\mathrm{bu}^{\eta} = (371/120,~ 113/120, ~-29/8)$ for $\eta = $ (scalar, photon, graviton) respectively. But including this spin dependence, this is another low energy theorem of quantum gravity. One consequence of this is that in quantum gravity there is no longer the concept of a lightcone nor universal geodesics in the presence of matter. This is possible because of the non-locality of the quantum correction - the quantum physics samples more than just the region of the classical trajectory.
These particular examples were chosen because it was clear (to an effective field theorist) that they would be independent of the local parameters. Other calculations may not be as fortunate. But still, even in such cases there are relations between reactions which would be independent of the parameters. In practice, for gravity these quantum effects are far too small to be measured. Depending on what one is doing, they are of order $10^{-50}\to 10^{-100}$ compared to the leading term. But we can turn this into a positive. Perturbation theory works best when the corrections are small. Quantum gravity is not the worst quantum theory as we used to think, but the best perturbative theory ever seen.
These examples highlight the real contribution of the effective field theory. It is not the divergences, nor the parameters, but only the low energy propagation, which is the real content of the theory.
This also tells us that naturalness is not a requirement of the EFT. In this case, naturalness would refer to the coefficients of the terms higher order in the curvature, for example $c_1R^2$. The parameter $c_1$ is dimensionless, and naturalness would have it of order unity. In this case the energy expansion would work up to close to the Planck scale, and the effective field theory would potentially be valid to this scale. But if something drastic happened at lower energies, such as new dimensions opening up just beyond the weak scale, the coefficient could be very much larger because the EFT would break down at this much lower scale. It does not matter - the EFT will take whatever Nature tells us. But still the low energy predictions stand, independent of whether the coefficients are natural or not.
Of course, the effective field theory does not solve all the problems of quantum gravity. The effective field theory falls apart at or below the Planck scale. We do not have any experimental clue about what comes next - not even if it is a quantum field theory. It is nevertheless a fascinating theoretical area because we only vaguely understand the possibilities for a UV completionn for gravity and it is fun to explore the possibilities. But the field is not likely to become an experimental field.
The effective field theory has taught us a very important lesson: It is not an incompatibility of quantum theory with general relativity that we are confronted with, but rather a need to uncover the UV completion for gravity. Given the experimental realities, the EFT may be all that we can hope for in our lifetimes.
Since I opened this essay with a story from Bjorken, let me also use a quote from him to summarize this section.
{\it I also question the assertion that we presently have no quantum field theory of
gravitation. It is true that there is no closed, internally consistent theory of quantum
gravity valid at all distance scales, But such theories are hard to come by, and in
any case, are not very relevant in practice. But as an open theory, quantum gravity
is arguably our best quantum field theory, not the worst. Feynman rules for interaction
of spin-two gravitons have been written down, and the tree-diagrams (no closed
loops) provide an accurate description of physical phenomena at all distance scales between cosmological scales, down to near the Planck scale of $10^{{\rm -}33}$ cm. The divergent
loop diagrams can be renormalized at the expense of an in-principle infinite number
of counterterms appended to the Einstein-Hilbert action. However their effects are
demonstrably small until one probes phenomena at the Planck scale of distances and
energies
One way of characterizing the success of a theory is in terms of bandwidth, defined
as the number of powers of ten over which the theory is credible to a majority
of theorists (not necessarily the same as the domain over which the theory has been
experimentally tested). From this viewpoint, quantum gravity, when treated|as described above|as an effective feld theory, has the largest bandwidth; it is credible
over 60 orders of magnitude, from the cosmological to the Planck scale of distances.} \cite{Bjorken:2000zz}
\begin{figure*}
\resizebox{0.95\textwidth}{!}{%
\includegraphics{pionpotential2.pdf}
}
\caption{The Feynman diagrams of the nucleon potential due to two pion exchange.}
\label{potentialfig}
\end{figure*}
\section{Nuclear Physics}\label{nuclear}
The EFT of gravity is exceptionally ``clean'' because the graviton is massless. For nuclear physics, the pion mass introduces an additional scale, besides the QCD scale. In fact, the mass happens to have a value which, along with the values of the various coupling constants, introduces more scales - the binding energy per nucleon, the average nucleon momentum, the energy level spacings. This complicates the separation of scales in nuclei. That is why this conference/volume invokes a tower of effective field theories\footnote{As a sociological observation related to the BJ story at the start of this essay, I would also note that the differences between these variants of nuclear EFTs seemed to bring out the religious fervor of many participants.}. The interplay of these scales is very subtle and is responsible for the variety of nuclear structure. It may even have anthropic implications \cite{Damour:2007uv}\cite{Donoghue:2016tjk}.
It is interesting to consider an imaginary world where pions were strictly massless. In this world, there would be only one scale in nuclei and nuclear physics would relatively clean (up to the inclusion of QED and the electron mass). I wonder if this might be a useful starting point for a treatment of nuclear physics.
\label{potential}
If the pions were strictly massless they would play a role in everyday life. The Sun would emit them and they would be almost as ubiquitous as light. Condensed matter systems and atomic physics would also involve pions. Classical physics would have identified the currents involving pions, similar to the electromagentic current. We would have been searching for a reason for the masslessness of the pions and probably would have invoked a symmetry. It is even possible that someone clever (Albert Pionstein?) would propose a non-linear effective Lagrangian, which is the chiral Lagrangian,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}=\frac{F^{2}}{4} {\rm Tr}\left(\partial_{\mu} U \partial^{\mu} U^{\dagger}\right)
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
U=\exp \left[\frac{i \tau \cdot \pi}{F}\right] \ \ .
\end{equation}
This would set off a long discussion of deep reasons why quantum mechanics and pion physics were incompatible. Finally EFT would come to the rescue and we could make clean predictions for the nuclear potential.
The calculation of the internucleon potential would be relatively straightforward in the EFT. Because the pion has an isospin quantum number there are several isospin components to the potential, i.e.
\begin{equation}
V(r)=V_{S}(r)+V_{T}(r) \tau_{1} \cdot \tau_{2}\left(\sigma_{1} \cdot \hat{r} \sigma_{1} \cdot \hat{r}-\frac{1}{3} \sigma_{1} \cdot \sigma_{2}\right)+\ldots . \ \ .
\end{equation}
The most important one for nuclear physics is the isoscalar and spin-scalar potential $V_S(r)$ which provides much of the binding force. A calculation, see Fig. \ref{potentialfig}, tells us that this has the form
\begin{equation}
V_{S}(r)=\frac{9}{16 \pi^{2} F_{\pi}^{2}}\left[\frac{g_{A}^{2} c_{3}}{r^{6}}-\frac{2 \overline{c}^{2}}{\pi r^{7}}\right] \ \ .
\end{equation}
The parameters $F_\pi$ and $g_A$ are well known. There are also two pion couplings, $c_i$, which influence higher order corrections \footnote{The gravitational effective field theory has fewer parameters than the pionic one, because gravitons couple to the energy momentum tensor, which is independently known.}. There are various conventions in the literature, and I am using those of Epelbaum et al. \cite{Epelbaum:2002gb}\cite{Epelbaum:2003gr}, see also \cite{Ordonez:1995rz}\cite{Beane:2002xf}. Here
\begin{equation}
\overline{c}^{2}=\left[c_{3}+\frac{c_{2}}{6}\right]^{2}+\frac{c_{2}^{2}}{45}
\end{equation}
Likewise the isospin tensor contribution is
\begin{equation}
V_{T}(r)=\frac{1}{16 \pi^{4}} \frac{g_{A}^{2}}{F_{\pi}^{2}} \frac{1}{r^{3}}\left[1-\frac{c_{4}}{\pi F_{\pi}^{2}} \frac{1}{r^{3}}\right] \ \ .
\end{equation}
The numbers for the various parameters in these potentials can be extracted from experiment. Those which we obtain in the real world have some contamination from the pion mass. But for our purposes, we can use these numbers. The scientists in this imaginary world will have discovered a new scale - the QCD scale. Numerically these potentials become
\begin{equation}
V_{S}(r)=-300~ \mathrm{MeV}~\left[\left(\frac{r_{0}}{r}\right)^{6}+0.24\left(\frac{r_{0}}{r}\right)^{7}\right]
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
r_{0}=1~ \mathrm{fm}=(200 ~\mathrm{MeV})^{-1} \ \ .
\end{equation}
Similarly
\begin{equation}
V_{T}(r)=-29 ~\mathrm{MeV}~\left[\left(\frac{r_{0}}{r}\right)^{3}-0.66\left(\frac{r_{0}}{r}\right)^{6}\right] \ \ .
\end{equation}
The QCD scale plays a role for these potentials that the Planck scale played for gravity.
In practice these potentials need to be supplemented by contact interactions, such as $C_S \bar{\psi}\psi\bar{\psi}\psi$, which carry coefficients (here $C_S$) which encode the residual information from the full theory. When dealing with potentials which are singular at $r\to 0$, there would need to be a regularization scheme to deal with the short distance divergences, and these regularization effects would appear in the renormalized values of the coefficients \cite{Long:2007vp}. But the basic point is that the structure of the long distance internucleon potential can be well understood in this limit.
Despite the fact that this hypothetical world looks somewhat distant from the real world, this might be an interesting starting point for nuclear calculations. I have spent some time exploring the nuclear force in the limit of massless pions \cite{Donoghue:2006du}\cite{Donoghue:2006rg} and was struck by how much the central potential in the chiral limit resembles that of sigma exchange, which is often used to model this component in nuclear potentials. The comparison is shown in Fig. \ref{scalar}. This is important because sigma exchange is the least reliable aspect of the theory of nuclear potentials. The sigma appears not to be a fundamental state in QCD, but is generated as a strong-coupling effect far from the real axis in pion-pion scattering \cite{Leutwyler:2008xd}. Having a rigorous way to treat the two-pion channel near $m_\pi=0$, and then extrapolating towards the physical value, would provide insight
\begin{figure}
\resizebox{0.5\textwidth}{!}{%
\includegraphics{Scalarpotential.pdf}
}
\caption{The comparison between the scalar-isoscalar potential in the chiral limit and a potential describing sigma exchange. }
\label{scalar}
\end{figure}
In these studies, I did not have the tools to provide a fully many-body treatment of nuclei, and instead used a different variant of effective field theory to convert the nuclear potential to binding energies \cite{Furnstahl:1999rm}. While in retrospect, I might have done the matching between the two effective field theories slightly differently, this also illustrates the power of effective field theory. The binding energy can be described by pion physics and a few extra low energy parameters. Calculating the mass dependence of the parameters allows on to bypass the complicated many-body calculations. In this approach, the binding energy per nucleon does have significant change as one heads to the chiral limit. This is shown in Fig. \ref{binding}.
\begin{figure}
\resizebox{0.5\textwidth}{!}{%
\includegraphics{Bindingenergy2.pdf}
}
\caption{The binding energy as a function of the pion mass. }
\label{binding}
\end{figure}
The utility of this approach would depend on the ability to interpolate the results between the chiral limit and the physical pion mass. A lot of this dependence is kinematic - calculable dependence on the pion mass in propagators. The hidden dependence in the mass dependence of low energy parameters such as $g_A$ is more difficult, but lattice techniques are getting much better at calculating the mass dependence in such quantities.
\section{Final comments}\label{final}
The techniques of theoretical physics are also able to advance. One very useful development has been that of effective field theory. This allows us to admit that we are ignorant of the physics which occurs at higher energy beyond our experimental frontier, yet still make real predictions using what we do know at low energy. Philosophically this is very important. We do not have to resolve deep questions such as ``what is the ultimate nature of reality''. We can just humbly do our job with the understanding that experiment has already taught us. This is useful in many areas, but in gravitational physics it is especially so. The experimental resolution of the ultimate nature of quantum gravity is likely beyond reach. But we do have a quantum theory of general relativity, valid at ordinary energies. This allows General Relativity to be included in our present Core Theory along with the Standard Model.
\section*{Acknowledgements} I would like to thank the organizers and participants at the workshop ``The tower of the effective field theories and the emergence of the nuclear phenomena'' (January 2017, CEA Saclay) for lively discussions, most particularly U. Meissner, U. van Kolck and P. Vanhove. I also thank J. Bjorken for confirming the story used in the introduction. This work has been supported in part by the National Science Foundation under grant NSF PHY15-20292 and PHY18-20675
|
\section{Introduction}
Every holomorphic Abelian differential $h$ on a Riemann surface $M$ induces a {\it translation structure} on the surface $M$, that is, an equivalence class of atlases
on $M\setminus\{h=0\}$ whose changes of coordinates are given by translations on $\R^2$.
It follows that the horizontal and vertical directions, as well as all directions, are well
defined on the translation surface $(M, h)$ and we can consider horizontal, vertical, or in general directional flows with normalized unit speed.
Such {\it translation flows} are only defined on the complement finitely many one-dimensional immersed sub-manifolds given by all trajectories which end up in the finite set $\Sigma_h=\{h=0\}$ either forward or
backward. However, since their domain of definitions has full area the ergodic theory of translation flows makes perfect sense and has been well-studied.
\smallskip
We state below the main results in the ergodic theory of translation flows.
Let $\mathcal H(\kappa)$ denote the stratum of the moduli space of Abelian differentials of unit total area with zeros of multiplicities~$\kappa:=(k_1, \dots, k_\sigma)$ with $\sum_{i=1}^\sigma k_i= 2g-2$. There exists a natural action of the group $SL(2, \R)$ on $\mathcal H(\kappa)$ given by post-composition of translation charts with elements
of the group (as linear maps on $\R^2$).
Each stratum $\mathcal H(\kappa)$ is endowed with a unique absolutely continuous $SL(2, \R)$-invariant probability measure $\mu_\kappa$, called a {\it Masur--Veech} measure.
Since Masur--Veech measure are $SL(2, \R)$-invariant, hence rotation invariant, results for translation flows, for the ``typical'' Abelian differential (with respect to a Masur--Veech measure), in the ``typical'' direction (with respect to the Lebesgue measure on the circle) can equivalently be stated for the horizontal (or the vertical) translation flow alone.
The following foundational theorem was proved independently by H.~Masur \cite{Ma82} and W.~Veech \cite{Ve82}.
\begin{theorem} \cite{Ma82}, \cite{Ve82} For almost all Abelian differential $h \in \mathcal H(\kappa)$ with respect to the Masur--Veech measure, the horizontal translation flow is uniquely ergodic, hence the directional translation flow in almost all directions $\theta \in \T$ with respect to the Lebesgue measure is also uniquely ergodic.
\end{theorem}
The above unique-ergodicity theorem was later refined by S.~Kerckhoff, H.~Masur and J.~Smillie in \cite{KMS86}:
\begin{theorem} \cite{KMS86} For all $h \in \mathcal H(\kappa)$, the directional translation flow is uniquely ergodic in almost all directions $\theta \in \T$
with respect to the Lebesgue measure.
In particular, for almost all $h\in \mathcal H(\kappa)$ with respect to any $SL(2, \R)$-invariant probability measure, the horizontal translation flow is uniquely ergodic.
\end{theorem}
It is known since the work of A.~Katok \cite{Ka80} that interval exchange transformations (IET's) and translation flows are never mixing. However, it was conjectured that the typical IET and translation flow are weakly mixing. After partial results of several authors (see \cite{KS67}, \cite{Ve84}, \cite{GK88}, \cite{NR97}, \cite{Lu98}), the conjecture was proved by A.~Avila and the author:
\begin{theorem} \cite{AvF07}
For almost all Abelian differential $h \in \mathcal H(\kappa)$, a stratum of higher genus surfaces, with respect to the Masur--Veech measure $\mu_\kappa$ on
$\mathcal H(\kappa)$, the horizontal translation flow is weakly mixing.
\end{theorem}
As a consequence of this theorem and of the above-mentioned result of A.~Katok, typical IET's and translation flows are perhaps the simplest natural example of weakly mixing dynamical systems which are not mixing
(the first examples, starting with the Chacon map~\cite{C69}, were constructed by cutting-and-stacking).
These examples are perhaps not surprising in view of the Halmos-Rokhlin Theorem which asserts that (with respect to the weak topology) weak mixing is a generic property, while mixing is meager.
\medskip
An effective version of Kerckhoff--Masur--Smillie unique ergodicity theorem, establishing a polynomial (power-law) speed of convergence of ergodic averages, was later proved by J.~Athreya and the author.
For every holomorphic Abelian differential $h$ on $M$, let $(\phi^\theta_t)$ denote the directional translation flow on~$M$ in the direction $\theta\in \T$, that is, a the horizontal translation flow of the Abelian differential $e^{2\pi \imath \theta} h$. Let $\omega_h$ denote the area-form of the translation surface $(M,h)$, which is invariant under all translation flows $(\phi^\theta_t)$ on $(M,h)$.
Let $H^1(M)$ denote the Sobolev space of square-integrable functions with square-integrable weak first derivative of the compact surface $M$, and for any function $f \in H^1(M)$ let $\vert f \vert_1$ denote its Sobolev norm in the space $H^1(M)$.
\begin{theorem} \cite{AtF08}
\label{thm:AtF08}
There exists a real number $\alpha_\kappa >0$ and, for all $h \in \mathcal H(\kappa)$, there is a measurable function $C_h: \T \to \R^+$ such that for Lebesgue almost all $\theta \in \T$, for all functions $f\in H^1(M)$ and for all $(x,\mathcal T) \in M\times \R^+$, we have
$$
\vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} f \circ \phi^S_t (x) dt - {\mathcal T}\int_M f d\omega_h \vert \leq C_h(\theta) \vert f\vert_1 {\mathcal T}^{1-\alpha_\kappa}\,.
$$
\end{theorem}
A more complete picture of the finer behavior of ergodic integrals for almost all translation flows,
which include lower bounds of the ergodic integrals along subsequences of times for almost all $x\in M$ was proposed conjecturally in the work of A. Zorich~and M.~Kontsevich \cite{Zo97}, \cite{Ko97}. A proof of a substantial part of the Kontsevich--Zorich conjectures was given by the author in~\cite{F02}, and later completed
by the result of A.~Avila and M.~Viana~\cite{AV07} who proved the simplicity of the
Kontsevich--Zorich spectrum.
\bigskip
In this paper we prove effective unique ergodicity results for typical product translation flows on the product translation $3$-manifold $M\times \T$, analogous to the above mentioned result by Athreya and the author.
It is a standard result of ergodic theory that the ergodicity of a product of ergodic flows follows from
the weak mixing property of one of the factors.
Let $\Phi^{S,\lambda}_t$ denote the flow $\phi^S_t \times R^\lambda_t$ on $M\times \T$, product of the translation flow $(\phi^S_t)$ and of the linear flow with speed $\lambda \in \R\setminus \{0\}$ on $\T$, which is generated by the vector field $S + \lambda \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta}$ on $M\times \T$.
We recall that, by basic ergodic theory, the product flow $\Phi^{S,\lambda}_t$ is ergodic whenever the flow~$\phi^S_t$ is weakly mixing. The latter property holds for almost all holomorphic differential $h$ in any stratum of the moduli space by the result of A.~Avila and the author~\cite{AvF07}. In fact, it is proved in~\cite{AvF07}, by a ``linear elimination'' argument and by a weak mixing criterion of Veech~\cite{Ve84}, that the set of holomorphic differentials with non weakly mixing horizontal translation flows has Hausdorff codimension (at least) $g-1$ in every stratum of translation surfaces of genus $g\geq 2$. A well-known argument by Furstenberg implies that every ergodic product flow $\Phi^{S,\lambda}_t$ such that $\phi^S_t$ is uniquely ergodic is also uniquely ergodic.
\smallskip
Our goal is to prove the following results. For any $s>0$, let $H^s(\T, H^1(M))$ denote the
Sobolev space of square-integrable functions with square integrable first derivatives in the directions
tangent to $M$ and square-integrable derivatives up to order $s>0$ in the circle direction.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:Effect_Erg} There exists a real number $\alpha''_\kappa >0$ and, for almost all Abelian differentials $h\in \mathcal H(\kappa)$ with respect to the
Masur--Veech measure and for all $\lambda \in \R\setminus \{0\}$, there exists a constant $C_{\lambda}(h) >0$ such that, for all functions $F\in H^s(\T, H^1(M))$, with $s>s_\kappa$ (for some $s_\kappa>1$), and for all $(x,\theta, {\mathcal T}) \in M\times \T \times \R^+$, we have
$$
\vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} F\circ \Phi^{S, \lambda}_t (x,\theta) dt - {\mathcal T}\int_{M\times \T} F d\omega_h d\theta
\vert \leq C_{ \lambda}(h) \Vert F \Vert_{ H^s(\T, H^1(M)) } {\mathcal T}^{1-\alpha''_\kappa}\,.
$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark} It follows from the argument that the exponent power saving $\alpha''_\kappa$ in Theorem \ref{thm:Effect_Erg} can be taken to be the minimum of the
exponent power savings $\alpha_\kappa$ of Theorem~\ref{thm:AtF08} and $\alpha'_\kappa$ of Theorem~\ref{thm:Twist_Erg} below.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark} The higher differentiability assumption in the above Theorem~\ref{thm:Effect_Erg}, as well as in Corollary~\ref{cor:Eff_WM} below, follows from the fact that
the proofs of these results require better estimates, with respect to the phase parameter $\lambda \in \R$, than those of Theorem~\ref{thm:twist_integral_bound} below.
These sharper bounds are derived from those of Theorem~\ref{thm:twist_integral_bound} by sufficiently many integration by parts (with respect to time) to counter the
possible polynomial blow up of the constant with respect to the phase parameter. As a consequence, the differentiability threshold $s_\kappa>1$ is at least as large as the
difference $N_\kappa-\beta_\kappa$ of the constants of Theorem~\ref{thm:twist_integral_bound} (see \S~\ref{sec:Proofs} for details).
\end{remark}
A.~Bufetov and B.~Solomyak \cite{BS18b} have derived from uniform estimates on twisted ergodic integrals for suspension flows over substitution systems (or a self-similar translation flow) an interesting result on the speed of ergodicity for ergodic flows which are product of such a flow with a general ergodic flow. Their result is a generalization of the above theorem (since the twisted flow is defined as a product with a rotation flow on a circle). We do not know whether it is possible to generalize their result to almost all translation flows, or equivalently, our result above to general ergodic transformations.
\smallskip
The above theorem is derived from the following effective result on twisted ergodic integrals for translation flows:
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:Twist_Erg} There exist real numbers $\alpha_\kappa' >0$, $\beta_\kappa>0$ and
$N_\kappa>0$ and, for almost all Abelian differentials $h\in \mathcal H(\kappa)$ with respect to the Masur--Veech measure, there exists a constant $C_\kappa(h) >0$ such that, for all $\lambda \in \R\setminus \{0\}$, for all zero average functions $f\in H^1(M)$ and for all $(x,\mathcal T) \in M \times \R^+$, we have
$$
\vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{2\pi \imath \lambda t} f\circ \phi^{S}_t (x) dt
\vert \leq C_\kappa(h) \frac{(1+ \lambda^2)^{\frac{N_\kappa}{2}}}{\vert \lambda\vert^{\beta_\kappa}} \vert f \vert_{ H^1(M) } {\mathcal T}^{1-\alpha'_\kappa}\,.
$$
\end{theorem}
We remark that Theorem~\ref{thm:Effect_Erg} and Theorem~\ref{thm:Twist_Erg} are in fact almost equivalent.
In Theorem~\ref{thm:Twist_Erg} we have additional control on the twisted integral for small frequencies, which
is important in the proof of the effective weak mixing result stated below.
In the paper we prove Theorem~\ref{thm:Twist_Erg} and derive Theorem~\ref{thm:Effect_Erg} from it.
In case of self-similar translation flows (related to substitutions) and for the Masur--Veech measures
on the strata ${\mathcal H}(2)$ and ${\mathcal H}(1,1)$ in genus $2$ this result has been proved by A.~Bufetov and B.~Solomyak~\cite{BS14}, \cite{BS18a}, \cite{BS18c}. After our paper was completed\footnote{A complete draft of the present paper was sent by the author to B.~Solomyak on May 22, 2019.}, Bufetov and Solomyak~\cite{BS19} were able to extend their symbolic approach, based on a twisted version of the Rauzy--Veech cocycle, to all genera (and to all $SL(2, \mathbb R)$-invariant orbifolds of rank higher than one), drawing in part on our refinement of the key ``linear elimination'' argument of~\cite{AvF07}, Appendix A.
A similar result on twisted integrals of horocycle flows was proved by L.~Flaminio, the author and J.~Tanis~\cite{FFT16}, improving on earlier result by A.~Venkatesh \cite{V10} and J.~Tanis and P.~Vishe~\cite{TV15}. Twisted ergodic integrals of nilflows are ergodic integrals of product nilflows, hence they are covered by results on deviation of ergodic averages of nilflows. The Heisenberg (and the general step $2$) nilflow case are better understood, by renormalization methods (see for instance \cite{FlaFo06}), while the higher step case is not renormalizable, hence harder (see for instance \cite{GT12}, \cite{FlaFo14}). We remark that the nilpotency class is unchanged by taking the product of a nilmanifold with a circle.
\smallskip
Theorem~\ref{thm:Twist_Erg} is related to H\"older estimates on spectral measures.
In particular we derive the following result.
\begin{corollary} \label{cor:spectral}
There exist real numbers $\alpha_\kappa' >0$, $\beta_\kappa>0$ and $N_\kappa>0$ and, for almost all Abelian differentials $h\in \mathcal H(\kappa)$ with respect to the
Masur--Veech measure, there exists a constant $C_h>0$ such that the spectral measure $\sigma_f$ of any function $f \in H^1(M)$ satisfies the bound
$$
\sigma_f ([\lambda-r, \lambda +r]) \leq C_h \frac{(1+ \vert \lambda\vert)^{N_\kappa}}{ \vert \lambda\vert^{\beta_\kappa} } \vert f \vert_{H^1(M)} r^{2\alpha'_\kappa} \,, \quad \text { for all }
\lambda \in \R \text{ and } r >0\,.
$$
In particular, the lower local dimension $\underline{d}_f(\lambda)$ of the spectral measure $\sigma_f$ satisfies the inequality
$$
\underline{d}_f( \lambda):= \underline{\lim}_{r\to 0^+} \frac{\log \sigma_f ([\lambda-r, \lambda +r]) }{\log r} \,\, \geq \,\, 2 \alpha'_\kappa \,, \quad \text{ for all } \lambda \in \R\,.
$$
\end{corollary}
\begin{remark} The positive exponents $\alpha_\kappa'0$, $\beta_\kappa$ and $N_\kappa$ of Corollary~\ref{cor:spectral} are indeed the same as the exponents
of Theorem~\ref{thm:Twist_Erg} above.
\end{remark}
Finally, {\it uniform} H\"older estimates on spectral measures are known to imply power-law quantitative weak mixing estimates (see for instance ~\cite{Kn98}, Corollary~3.8). However we do not know {\it a priori} whether uniform
H\"older estimates on spectral measures hold for almost all translation flows.
We are nevertheless able to
derive the following effective weak mixing result directly from the bounds on twisted integrals of~Theorem~\ref{thm:Twist_Erg}.
\begin{corollary} \label{cor:Eff_WM}
There exist a real number $\alpha'''_\kappa>0$ and, for almost all Abelian differentials $h\in \mathcal H(\kappa)$ with respect to the Masur--Veech measure, there exists a constant $C_h>0$ such that, for any zero-average functions $f \in H^{s}(M)$ with $s>s'_\kappa$ (for some $s'_\kappa>1$) and $g\in L^2_h(M)$, and for all $\mathcal T>0$ we have
$$
\frac{1}{{\mathcal T}} \int_0^{\mathcal T} \left\vert \< f\circ \phi^S_t, g\>_{L^2_h(M)} \right\vert^2 dt \leq C_h \vert f \vert^2_{H^s(M)} \vert g \vert^2_{L^2_h(M)}
{\mathcal T}^{-\alpha'''_\kappa}\,.
$$
\end{corollary}
From the effective weak mixing result, we can then derive {\it a posteriori} uniform estimates on twisted ergodic integrals of sufficiently differentiable functions (see Corollary~\ref{cor:Twist_Erg}), which in turn imply uniform H\"older estimates on spectral measures, following a suggestion
of O.~Khalil. In fact, by following a general argument of A.~Venkatesh (see Lemma~3.1 in~\cite{V10}), for sufficiently smooth functions it is possible to upgrade the upper bound on twisted ergodic integrals of Theorem~\ref{thm:Twist_Erg} to an upper bound uniform with respect to the phase constant $\lambda\in \R$, as a consequence of the effective ergodicity result of Theorem~\ref{thm:AtF08} and the effective weak mixing result of Corollary~\ref {cor:Eff_WM}. We can therefore state (without proof) the following result:
\begin{corollary} \label{cor:Twist_Erg}
There exist a real number $\alpha^{(iv)}_\kappa>0$ and, for almost all Abelian differentials $h\in \mathcal H(\kappa)$ with respect to the Masur--Veech measure, there exists a constant $C_h>0$ such that, for all $\lambda \in \R\setminus \{0\}$, for all zero-average functions $f \in H^{s}(M)$ with $s>s_\kappa$ (for some $s_\kappa>1$) and for all $(x,\mathcal T) \in M \times \R^+$, we have
$$
\vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{2\pi \imath \lambda t} f\circ \phi^{S}_t (x) dt
\vert \leq C_\kappa(h) \vert f \vert_{ H^s(M) } {\mathcal T}^{1-\alpha^{(iv)}_\kappa}\,.
$$
\end{corollary}
\begin{remark} \label{remark} It is not difficult to extend all of the above results to almost everywhere statements with respect to absolutely continuous $SL(2, \R)$-invariant measures on any $SL(2, \R)$-invariant orbifold $\mathcal M$ of rank at least $2$. In fact, the ``linear elimination'' argument of section~\ref{sec:Tor_KZ}, which is a strengthened version of the argument given in the Appendix of \cite{AvF07}, is based on the condition that the restriction of the Kontsevich--Zorich cocycle to the projection $p(T\mathcal M)$ of the tangent space $T\mathcal M$ has at least $2$ strictly positive exponents. It is known from the work of S.~Filip (see \cite{Fi17} , Corollary 1.3) that in fact all the Kontsevich--Zorich exponents on $p(T\mathcal M)$ are non-zero (this conclusion can also be derived from the cylinder deformation theorem of A.~Wright (see Theorem 1.10 of \cite{Wri15}) and the criterion of \cite{F11}). Since the (cylinder) rank $r$ of $\mathcal M$ is by definition (see \cite{Wri15}, Definition 1.11) equal to half of the complex dimension of $p(T\mathcal M)$ the conclusion follows. In particular, the Hausdorff dimension bound of Lemma \ref{lemma:growth_2} holds for any sub-orbifold $\mathcal M$ with the genus $g\geq 2$ replaced by the rank $r\geq 1$, and for rank at least $2$ it follows that the results hold almost everywhere on $\mathcal M$ since we have $r+1 < 2r =\text{\rm dim}_{\mathbb C} (T\mathcal M)$.
\end{remark}
\smallskip
The paper is organized as follows. We recall definitions and basic facts about translation surfaces and flows
in section~\ref{sec:TFlows}. In section~\ref{sec:Twist_Int} we establish relations between twisted integrals of translation flows and ergodic integrals of the twisted flow on the product $3$-dimensional translation manifold, and we describe them in terms of $1$-dimensional (closed) currents. In section~\ref{sec:Twist_Co} we introduce the twisted cohomology space and the twisted cocycle over the Teichm\"uller flow, which is in fact a cocycle over the toral quotient of the Kontsevich--Zorich cocycle. The core of our approach comes in section~\ref{sec:Var_For}
where we prove a first variation formula for the Hodge norm of the twisted cocycle. In section~\ref{sec:Tor_KZ} we prove a result about a generalized weak stable space of the toral Kontsevich--Zorich cocycle, inspired by the
``linear elimination'' argument of~\cite{AvF07}. Finally, in section \ref{sec:Proofs} we prove all the main results and corollaries stated above in this Introduction (with the only exception of Corollary~\ref{cor:Twist_Erg} whose proof we leave to the reader). Rather standard facts on the relations between bounds on twisted ergodic integrals, local dimension of spectral measures and effective weak mixing are postponed to section~\ref{sec:spectral_dim} at the end of the paper.
\section*{Acknowledgements} The motivation for this work came from conversations with Corinna Ulcigrai and
Selim Ghazouani about Bufetov's and Solomyak's work~\cite{BS14},~\cite{BS18a} on twisted cohomology and twisted ergodic integrals of translation flows. We wish to thank Simion Filip and Carlos Matheus for enlightening conversations which inspired the final form of the twisted cocycle. We are grateful to W.~Goldman for explaining to us his argument from~\cite{G84} given in our proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma:cohom_dim}. Finally, Jenny Rustad read a draft of the paper and with her criticism helped improve the exposition and correct mistakes. This research was supported by the NSF grant DMS 1600687 and by a Research Chair of the Fondation Sciences Math\'ematiques de Paris (FSMP). The author is grateful to the Institut Math\'ematiques de Jussieu (IMJ)
for its hospitality.
\section{Translation Surfaces and Flows}
\label{sec:TFlows}
Let $\Sigma_{h}:=\{p_{1},\dots,p_{\sigma}\}\subset M_h$ be the set of zeros of the holomorphic Abelian differential~$h$ on a Riemann surface $M$, of orders $(k_{1},\dots,k_{\sigma}) \in (\N \setminus \{0\})^\sigma$ respectively with~$k_{1} + \dots + k_{\sigma}=2g-2$. Let $R_{h}:=\vert h\vert$ be the flat metric with cone singularities at $\Sigma_{h}$ induced by the Abelian differential $h$ on $M$ and let $\omega_h$ denote its area form. With respect to a holomorphic local coordinate $z=x+\imath y$ at a regular point, the Abelian differential
$h$ has the form $h=\phi(z)dz$, where $\phi$ is a locally defined holomorphic function, and, consequently,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:metric}
R_h= |\phi(z)| (dx^2 +dy^2)^{1/2}\,,\quad \omega_h=|\phi(z)|^2\,dx\wedge dy\,.
\end{equation}
\noindent The metric $R_{h}$ is flat, degenerate at the finite set $\Sigma_{h}$ of zeroes of $h$
and has trivial holonomy, hence $h$ induces on $M$ the structure of a {\it translation
surface}.
\smallskip
\noindent The weighted $L^{2}$ space is the standard space $L^{2}_{h}(M):= L^{2}(M,\omega_{h})$ with respect to the area element $\omega_{h}$ of the metric $R_{h}$. Hence the weighted $L^{2}$ norm $\vert \cdot\vert_{0}$ (the dependence on the Abelian differential is suppressed in the notation) is induced by the hermitian product $\<\cdot, \cdot\>_{h}$ defined as follows: for all functions $u$,$v\in L^{2}_{h}(M)$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:0norm}
\< u ,v\>_{h} := \int _{M} u\,\bar v \, \omega_{h}\,\,.
\end{equation}
Let $\mathcal F_{ \im (h)}$ be the {\it horizontal foliation}, $\mathcal F_{\re (h)}$ be the {\it vertical foliation} for
the holomorphic Abelian differential $h$ on $M$. The foliations $\mathcal F_{\im (h)}$ and $\mathcal F_{\re(h)}$
are measured foliations (in the sense of Thurston): $\mathcal F_{\im(h)}$ is the foliation given by the equation $\im (h)=0$ endowed with the invariant transverse measure
$\vert \im (h) \vert$, $\mathcal F_{\re(h)}$ is the foliation given by the equation $\re (h)=0$ endowed with the
invariant transverse measure $\vert \re (h) \vert$. Since the metric $R_h$ is flat with trivial holonomy, there exist commuting vector fields $S_h$
and $T_h$ on $M\setminus \Sigma_{h}$ such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item The frame $\{S_h,T_h\}$ is a parallel orthonormal frame with respect to the metric $R_{h}$ for the restriction of the tangent bundle $TM$ to the complement $M\setminus \Sigma_{h}$ of the set of cone points;
\item the vector field $S_{h}$ is tangent to the horizontal foliation $\mathcal F_{\im(h)}$, the vector field $T_{h}$
is tangent to the vertical foliation $\mathcal F_{\re(h)}$ on $M\setminus \Sigma_{h}$ \cite{F97}, \cite{F07}.
\end{enumerate}
In the following we will often drop the dependence of the vector fields $S_{h}$, $T_{h}$ on the Abelian differential in order to simplify the notation. The symbols
$\mathcal L _{S}$, $\mathcal L _{T}$ denote the Lie derivatives, and $\imath_S$, $\imath_T$ the contraction operators with respect to the vector field $S$, $T$ on $M\setminus \Sigma_h$. We have:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\mathcal L _{S} \omega_{h} = \mathcal L_{T}\omega_{h} =0$ on $M\setminus \Sigma_{h}$ , that is, the
area form $\omega_{h}$ is invariant with respect to the flows generated by $S$ and $T$;
\item $\imath_{S} \omega_{h}= \im (h)$ and $\imath_{T} \omega_{h}= -\re (h)$, hence
the $1$-forms $\eta_{S} :=\imath_{S} \omega_{h}$, $\eta_{T} :=-\imath_{T} \omega_{h}$ are smooth
and closed on $M$ and $\omega_{h}= \eta_{T}\wedge \eta_{S}$.
\end{enumerate}
It follows from the area-preserving property $(1)$ that the vector field $S$, $T$ are anti-symmetric
as densely defined operators on $L^{2}_{h}(M)$, that is, for all functions $u$, $v \in C_0^{\infty} (M\setminus\Sigma_h)$, (see \cite{F97}, $(2.5)$),
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:antisymm}
\< Su ,v\>_{h} = -\< u ,Sv\>_{h}\,\,, \quad \text{ respectively } \,\, \< Tu ,v\>_{h} =-\< u ,Tv\>_{h} \,\,.
\end{equation}
In fact, by Nelson's criterion~\cite{Ne59}, Lemma 3.10, the anti-symmetric operators $S$, $T$ are {\it essentially skew-adjoint} on the Hilbert space $L^{2}_{h}(M)$.
\smallskip
\noindent The {\it weighted Sobolev norms} $\vert \cdot\vert_{k}$, with integer exponent $k>0$, are the euclidean norms, introduced in \cite{F97}, induced by the hermitian product defined as follows: for all
functions $u$, $v\in L^{2}_{h}(M)$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:knorm}
\< u,v \>_{k} := \frac{1}{2}\sum_{i+j\leq k}\<S^{i}T^{j}u, S^{i}T^{j}v\>_{h} +
\<T^{i}S^{j}u, T^{i}S^{j}v\>_{h}\,.
\end{equation}
The {\it weighted Sobolev norms } $\vert \cdot\vert_{-k}$, with integer exponent $-k<0$ are defined to be the dual norms of the norms $\vert \cdot\vert_{k}$ on the maximal {\it common invariant domain}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:cid}
H^{\infty}_h(M):= \bigcap_{i,j\in \N} \text{\rm Dom}( \bar S^i \bar T^j) \cap \text{\rm Dom}( \bar T^i \bar S^j)
\end{equation}
of the closures $\bar S$, $\bar T$ of the essentially skew-adjoint operators $S$, $T$ on $L^2_h(M)$.
The {\it weighted Sobolev space }$H^{k}_h(M)$, with integer exponent $k\in\Z$, is the
Hilbert space obtained as the completion with respect to the norm $\vert \cdot \vert _{k}$ of the
space $ H^{\infty}_h(M)$ endowed with the norm $\vert \cdot\vert_{k}$.
The weighted Sobolev space $H^{-k}_h(M)$ is isomorphic to the dual space of the Hilbert space $H^{k}_h(M)$, for all $k\in \Z$.
The weighted Sobolev norms can be extended to differential forms as follows.
Let $\Omega^1 H^\infty_h (M)$ denote the space of $1$-forms
$$
\Omega^1 H^\infty_h (M):= \{ \alpha_T \eta_T + \alpha_S \eta_S \vert (\alpha_T, \alpha_S) \in
H^{\infty}_h(M)^2 \}\,.
$$
Since the space $\Omega^1 H^\infty_h (M)$ is by definition identified with the square $H^{\infty}_h(M)^2$, it
is possible to define, for all~$k\in \N$, the Sobolev norms $\vert \cdot \vert_k$ on $\Omega^1 H^\infty_h (M)$
as follows: for all $\alpha = \alpha_T \eta_T + \alpha_S \eta_S\in \Omega^1 H^\infty_h (M)$ we let
$$
\vert \alpha \vert_{k} = \left ( \vert \alpha_T \vert^2_k + \vert \alpha_S \vert_k^2 \right)^{1/2} \,.
$$
The {\it weighted Sobolev space }$\Omega^1 H^{k}_h(M)$, with integer exponent $k\in \N$, is the
Hilbert space obtained as the completion with respect to the norm $\vert \cdot \vert _{k}$ of the
space $\Omega^1 H^{\infty}_h(M)$ endowed with the norm $\vert \cdot\vert_{k}$.
The {\it weighted Sobolev space }$\Omega^1 H^{-k}_h(M)$, with negative integer exponent $-k$, is the
Hilbert space obtained as the completion with respect to the norm $\vert \cdot \vert _{-k}$ of the
space $ \Omega^1 H^{\infty}_h(M)$ endowed with the norm $\vert \cdot\vert_{-k}$. Since $M$ has
dimension $2$, it is isomorphic to the space of currents of degree $1$ (and dimension $1$) dual to the
Hilbert space $\Omega^1 H^{k}_h(M)$ of $1$-forms.
The {\it weighted Sobolev space }$\Omega^2 H^{k}_h(M)$, with integer exponent $k\in \N$,
of differential $2$-forms is defined by identification of the Sobolev space of functions $H^k_h(M)$ with the space of
$2$-forms given by multiplication times the area form $\omega_h$. The {\it weighted Sobolev space }$\Omega^2 H^{-k}_h(M)$,
with negative exponent $-k$, is defined as the dual of the Hilbert space $\Omega^2 H^{k}_h(M)$. It is a space of currents of
degree $0$ and dimension $2$.
Finally, the weighted Sobolev spaces $\Omega^* H^{s}_h(M)$ of differential forms, with arbitrary real exponent $s >0$, can be defined by interpolation,
and the weighted Sobolev space $\Omega^* H^{-s}_h(M)$, with negative real exponent $-s$, is defined as the dual Hilbert space of the
space $\Omega^* H^{s}_h(M)$. It is by definition a space of currents.
\medskip
\noindent We recall below some basic results of analysis on translation (flat) surfaces which will be relevant in the following.
Let $H^{s}(M)$, $s\in \R$, denote a family of standard Sobolev spaces on the compact
manifold $M$ (defined with respect to a Riemannian metric).
\begin{lemma} (\cite{F07}, Lemma 2.11)
\label{lemma:comparison}
For any Abelian differential $h\in {\mathcal H}(\kappa)$, the following continuous embedding and isomorphisms of Banach spaces hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $ \,\, H^{s}(M) \,\, \subset \,\, H_{h}^{s}(M) \,,
\quad\text{for }0\leq s<1$;
\item $\,\,H^{s}(M) \,\, \equiv \,\, H_{h}^{s}(M) \,,
\quad\text{for }s=1$;
\item $\,\,H_{q}^{s}(M) \,\, \subset \,\, H^{s}(M)\,,
\quad\text{for }s >1$.
\end{enumerate}
For $s \in [0,1]$, the space $H^{s}(M)$ is dense in $H_{h}^{s}(M)$ and, for $s >1$, the closure
of $H_{h}^{s}(M)$ in $H^s(M)$ has finite codimension.
\end{lemma}
\noindent {\bf Notation} : {\it In the following the symbols $C_\star$, $C'_\star$ or $C(\star)$ will denote positive constants generally independent of the
Abelian differential and depending on the quantities $\star$.}
\medskip
For any Abelian differential $h\in {\mathcal H}(\kappa)$, let $\delta(h)$ denote the length of the shortest saddle connection on the translation
surface $(M,h)$.
\begin{lemma}[Sobolev embedding theorem]
\label{lemma:Sob_embed} For any $s>1$ there exists a constant $C_s>0$ such that the following holds.
For any stratum $\mathcal H(\kappa)$, for any Abelian differential $h\in \mathcal H(\kappa)$ and for any function $u\in H^s_h(M)$, we have
$$
\max_{x\in M} \vert u(x) \vert \leq \frac{C_s}{\delta(h)} \vert u \vert_{H^s_h(M)} \,.
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} It is proved in \cite{F07}, Lemma 2.1, that for $s>1$ the weighted Sobolev space $H^s_h(M)$ embeds into the standard Sobolev space $H^s(M)$ of the
compact surface $M$ (defined by local charts or by any given Riemannian metric). It follows by the Sobolev embedding theorem (see for instance
Th. 5. 4 in \cite{Ad}) that $H^s_h(M)$ embeds into the space $C^0(M)$ of continuous functions on $M$ endowed with the uniform norm.
It remains to analyze the dependence of the norm of the embedding on the Abelian differential $h\in {\mathcal H}(\kappa)$.
For any $x \in M$, there exists an embedded open flat rectangle $R (x) \subset M_h$ with edges of length at least $\delta(h)/4$ such that $x\in R(x)$.
The Sobolev embedding theorem for an arbitrary flat rectangle can be derived by scaling of the variables from the result in the case of a unit square or
by Fourier series expansion: let $R_{a,b}= [0, a] \times [0,b]$ denote a closed flat rectangle with edges of length $a, b \in (0, 1)$, and for all $s\in \R$ let
$H^s(R_{a,b})$ denote the Sobolev space of the domain $R_{a,b}$. For any $s>1$, there exists a constant $C'_s>0$ such that, for any function
$u \in H^s(R_{a,b})$ we have
$$
\max_{x\in R_{a,b}} \vert u(x) \vert \leq \frac{C'_s}{(ab)^{1/2} } \vert u \vert_{H^s(R_{a,b})} \,.
$$
The result follows by applying the above statement to the embedded flat rectangle $R(x)$ whose edges have by construction length $a, b \geq \delta(h)/4$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}[Sobolev trace theorem]
\label{lemma:Sob_trace} For any stratum ${\mathcal H}(\kappa)$ and any $s>1/2$ there exists a constant $C_{\kappa,s}>0$ such that the following holds.
For any Abelian differential $h\in \mathcal H(\kappa)$, any regular geodetic segment $\gamma\subset M$
of finite $R_h$-length $L_h(\gamma)$ defines by integration a current of degree $1$ (and dimension $1$) $\gamma \in \Omega^{1} H^{-s}_h(M)$ such that
$$
\vert \gamma \vert_{\Omega^{1} H^{-s}_h(M)} \leq C_{\kappa,s}(1+ \frac{L_h( \gamma)}{\delta(h)}) \,.
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} The result was proved in \cite{F02}, Lemma~9.2, for the case of a horizontal or vertical regular arc (and for $s=1$). It can be generalized to any regular arc by rotation
of the Abelian differential (and to any $s >1/2$ by following the argument and invoking the general Sobolev trace theorem for rectangles).
We outline the argument below.
The regular arc $\gamma$ can be decomposed as union $\gamma = \cup_{i=0}^{N} \gamma_i$ of consecutive sub-arcs such that the following properties hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item the length $L_h( \gamma_i)$ of the arcs $\gamma_i$, with respect to the flat metric $R_h$ induced by the Abelian differential $h$, satisfy the bounds
$$
\begin{aligned}
\delta(h)/3 \leq L_h( \gamma_i) &\leq 2 \delta(h) /3 \,, \text{ for all } i\in \{1, \dots, N-1\} \,, \\
L_h( \gamma_0) \,, L_h( \gamma_N) &\leq 2 \delta(h) /3 ;
\end{aligned}
$$
\item the rectangle $R_i = [0, L_h(\gamma_i)] \times (-\delta(h)/3, \delta(h)/3) \subset \R^2$ embeds isometrically in the flat surface $(M \setminus \Sigma_h, R_h)$, so that the arc $ \bar \gamma_i :=[0, L_h(\gamma_i)] \times \{0\}$ has image equal to $\gamma_i \subset M$, for all $i\in \{0, \dots, N\}$.
\end{enumerate}
The statement then follows from the Sobolev trace theorem (in $\R^2$) applied to each arc $\bar \gamma_i \subset R_i \subset \R^2$, for $i \in \{0, \dots, N\}$.
Let
$$
R_{a,b}:=\{(x,y)\in {\R}^2\,|\,0<x<a\,,\,\,-b<y<b\}\,.
$$
By a rescaling argument, that is, by reducing to the case of $a=b=1$ by an affine change of coordinates,
and by the Sobolev trace theorem~(see for instance \cite{Ad}, Th. 5.4 (5)), for every $s>1/2$ there exists a constant $K_s >0$,
$$
\Bigm\vert\int_0^a f(x,0)dx\,\Bigm\vert\leq K_s\,\Bigl(\frac{a} {b}\Bigr)^{1/2}
\max\{a,b,1\}^s\,|f|_{ H^s (R_{a,b})}\,\,,
$$
hence (by taking into account that the systole function is uniformly bounded above on each stratum, see~\cite{MS91}, Corollary 5.6), there exists a constant
$C_{\kappa,s}>0$ such that
$$
\vert \gamma_i \vert_{\Omega^{1} H^{-s}_h(M)} \leq C_{\kappa,s} \,, \quad \text{ for all } i\in \{0, \dots, N\}\,.
$$
The estimate in the statement then follows by taking into account the inequality $N-1\leq 3 L_h(\gamma) /\delta(h)$, which is an immediate consequence of the above lower bounds
on the lengths of the sub-arcs $\gamma_i$ for $i\in \{1, \dots, N-1\}$.
\end{proof}
For every $h \in {\mathcal H}(\kappa)$, let ${\mathcal Q}_h: H^1_h(M) \times H^1_h(M) \to {\mathbb C}$ denote the hermitian form
\begin{equation}
{\mathcal Q}_h (u, v) := \<S_h u, S_h v \>_h + \<T_h u, T_h v \>_h \,, \quad \text{ for every} u,v \in H^1_h(M).
\end{equation}
\section{Twisted Integrals}
\label{sec:Twist_Int}
For every holomorphic Abelian differential $h$ on $M$, let $(\phi^S_t)$ denote the horizontal directional translation flows on $M$, that is, a flow with generator a vector field $S$ on $M\setminus \Sigma_h$. We are interested in bounds on twisted ergodic integrals for the flow $(\phi^S_t)$, that is, for all $\lambda \in \R$ and for all $f\in H^1(M)$, the integrals
$$
\int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{2\pi \imath \lambda t} f\circ \phi^S_t (x) dt \,, \quad \text{ for all } {\mathcal T}>0\,.
$$
These integrals can be viewed as ergodic integrals for a product flow as follows. Let $\Phi^{S, \lambda}_t$ denote the (translation) flow with generator the vector field
$S_\lambda:= S + \lambda \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta}$ on $M \times \T$, that is, the product flow $(\phi^S_t) \times (R^\lambda_t)$ of the horizontal translation flow $\phi^S_t$
times the linear flow $(R^\lambda_t)$ on $\T$. There is an immediate Fourier decomposition of $L^2(M\times \T)$ into eigenspaces of the circle action on $M\times \T$
with generator $\Theta:= \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta}$ on $\T$: for all $f \in L^2(M\times \T)$,
$$
f (x, \theta) = \sum_{n\in \Z} {\bar f }_n(x) e^{2\pi \imath n \theta}\,, \quad \text{ with } {\bar f}_n (x) := \int_\T f(x,\theta) e^{-2\pi \imath n \theta} d\theta \in L^2_h(M)\,.
$$
Let $f_n (x, \theta) = {\bar f }_n(x) e^{2\pi \imath n \theta}$. We have
$$
\int_0^{\mathcal T} f_n \circ \Phi^{S, \lambda}_t (x,\theta) dt = e^{2\pi \imath n \theta} \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{2\pi \imath n \lambda t} {\bar f}_n \circ \phi^S_t (x) dt \,.
$$
Ergodic integrals on $M\times \T$ can be extended as linear functionals on $1$-forms, that is, as currents of dimension $1$ and degree $2$. Since any orbit can
be decomposed as a union of arcs which can then be closed by the addition of uniformly bounded (transverse) arcs, we are especially interested in {\it closed currents }of
degree $2$.
\smallskip
For any vector bundle $V$ over $M\times\T$, let $\mathcal E (M\times \T, V):= C^\infty(M\times \T, V)$ denote the space of infinitely
differentiable sections of $V$ over $M\times \T$, and let $\mathcal E' (M\times \T, V)$ denote the dual
space of currents. Let $\Omega^2(M\times \T):= C^\infty(M\times \T, \wedge^2 T^\ast (M\times \T))$ be the space of smooth $2$-forms on $M\times \T$. Since $T^\ast (M\times \T)$ has a splitting
$$
T^\ast (M\times \T) = T^\ast M \oplus \R \, d\theta
$$
(with the natural identification of $T^\ast M$ and $T^\ast \T=\R d\theta$ to subspaces of $T^\ast (M\times \T)$
via the canonical projections $M\times \T \to M$ and $M\times \T \to \T$), there exists
a direct splitting of the space $\Omega^2(M\times \T)$ and a dual splitting of the space $\Omega^2(M\times \T)'$
of currents of degree $2$ (and dimension $1$):
$$
\begin{aligned}
\Omega^2(M\times \T) &= C^\infty (M\times \T, T^*M) \wedge d\theta \oplus C^\infty (M\times \T, \wedge^2 T^\ast M) \,, \\
\Omega^2(M\times \T)' &\equiv \mathcal E' (M\times \T, T^*M) \oplus \mathcal E' (M\times \T, \wedge^2 T^\ast M) \,.
\end{aligned}
$$
As a consequence, {\it any} current $C$ of degree $2$ (and dimension $1$) on $M\times \T$ is of the form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:CAB}
C = A + \imath_\Theta B \,,
\end{equation}
with $A\in \mathcal E' (M\times \T, T^*M) $ a current of degree $2$ (and dimension $1$), and
$B$ a current of degree $3$ (and dimension $0$), a distribution, on $M\times \T$ (the symbol $\imath_\Theta$
denotes the contraction operator on currents, with respect to the vector field $\Theta$ on $M\times \T$).
It is also possible to decompose any current
on $M\times \T$ into a sum of Fourier components with respect to the circle action:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:CAN_n}
C = \sum_{n\in \Z} C_n = \sum_{n\in \Z} A_n + \imath_\Theta B_n \,.
\end{equation}
Let $d_M$ denote the exterior derivative on currents on $M$.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:closed} A current $C$ of degree $2$ (and dimension $1$) on $M\times \T$ is closed if and only if $d_MA_0= 0$ and, for all $n\in \Z\setminus\{ 0\}$,
$$
d_M A_n +2\pi \imath n B_n =0 \,.
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} By a straightforward calculation, for any closed current $C$ on $M\times \T$ we have
$$
dC = \sum_{n\in \Z} d_M A_n + \mathcal L_\Theta B_n = \sum_{n\in \Z} d_M A_n + 2\pi \imath n B_n =0\,,
$$
hence the statement follows by the orthogonality of the Fourier decomposition. \end{proof}
The $1$-form $\lambda \eta_T - d\theta$ has kernel the vector field $S + \lambda \Theta= S+ \lambda \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta}$, hence
the current of integration along an orbit of the flow $\Phi^{S, \lambda}_t$ (which is generated by $S + \lambda \Theta$)
has zero wedge product with~$\lambda \eta_T - d\theta$.
\smallskip
Let $K_{h,\lambda}(M\times \T)$ denote the space of all currents of degree $2$ (and dimension $1$) which have zero wedge product with the $1$-form $\lambda \eta_T - d\theta$.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:kernel} A current $C= A+ \imath_\Theta B$ of degree $2$ (and dimension $1$) on $M\times \T$, as in formula~\eqref{eq:CAB}, belongs to the subspace $K_{h,\lambda}(M\times \T)$ of currents in the perpendicular of the $1$-form $\lambda \eta_T - d\theta$ if and only if
$$
C = A - \lambda \imath_\Theta (A \wedge \eta_T)\,.
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Since $C= A + \imath_\Theta B$ we have
$$
C\wedge (\lambda \eta_T - d\theta)= \lambda A \wedge \eta_T -\imath_\Theta B \wedge d\theta =0
\quad\Leftrightarrow \quad \imath_\Theta B=-\lambda \imath_\Theta(A\wedge \eta_T)\,.
$$
\end{proof}
Finally we have a characterization of the subspace of closed currents
$$ZK_{h,\lambda} (M\times \T) := \mathcal Z (M\times \T) \cap K_{h,\lambda}(M\times\T) \subset K_{h,\lambda}(M\times \T)\,.$$
\begin {lemma} \label{lemma:kernel_closed} A current $C= \sum_{n\in \Z} A_n + \imath_\Theta B_n$, as in formula~\eqref{eq:CAN_n}, belongs to the subspace $ZK_{h,\lambda} (M\times \T) $ of closed currents in $K_{h,\lambda} (M\times \T)$ if and only if
$$
d_M A_n + 2\pi \imath \lambda n \, \eta_T \wedge A_n =0 \,, \quad \text{ for all } n\in \Z\,.
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin {proof} By Lemma~\ref{lemma:closed} we have
$$
d_M A_n + 2\pi \imath n B_n =0, \quad \text{ for all } n\in \Z\,,
$$
and by Lemma~\ref{lemma:kernel}
$$
\imath_\Theta B= -\lambda \imath_\Theta(A \wedge \eta_T)\,, \quad \text{ or, equivalently,} \quad
B= -\lambda (A \wedge \eta_T) \,,
$$
hence for all $n\in \Z$ we have $B_n= -\lambda (A_n \wedge \eta_T)$, so that
$$
d_M A_n - 2\pi \imath \lambda n (A_n \wedge \eta_T) = d_M A_n + 2\pi \imath n B_n =0\,.
$$
\end{proof}
Bounds on currents in the subspace $ZK_{h,\lambda} (M\times \T)$ are therefore reduced to bounds on currents of degree~$1$ (and dimension~$1$)
on the surface~$M$, which are closed with respect to the twisted exterior derivatives $d_{h,\lambda}$, defined as follows:
$$
d_{h,\lambda} \alpha := d_M \alpha + 2\pi \imath \lambda \eta_T\wedge \alpha\,, \quad \text{ for all } \alpha \in \Omega^1(M) \,.
$$
For any $\lambda \in \R$ and $(x, \theta, {\mathcal T}) \in M\times \T\times \R$, we can define the current
$C_{h,\lambda}(x, \theta, {\mathcal T})$ of degree $2$ (and dimension $1$) on $M\times \T$ as follows: for every $1$-form $\hat \alpha$ on $M\times \T$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Ccurrent}
C_{h,\lambda}(x, \theta, {\mathcal T}) (\hat \alpha) = \int_0^{\mathcal T} \imath_{S_\lambda} \hat \alpha \circ \Phi^{S, \lambda} _t (x,\theta) dt
\end{equation}
(the symbol $\imath_{S_\lambda}$ in the above formula denotes the contraction operator on forms, with respect to the vector field $S_\lambda= S + \lambda \Theta$
on $M\times \T$).
Since the current $C_{h,\lambda}(x, \theta, {\mathcal T})$ belongs to the subspace $K_{h,\lambda}(M\times \T)$ (that is, the subspace of all currents of degree $2$ and dimension $1$ which have zero wedge product with the $1$-form $\lambda \eta_T - d\theta$), by Lemma~\ref{lemma:kernel} there exists a current $A_{h,\lambda}(x,\theta, {\mathcal T})$ of degree $2$ (and dimension $1$) such that
$$
C_{h,\lambda}(x,\theta, {\mathcal T}) = A_{h,\lambda}(x,\theta, {\mathcal T}) - \lambda \imath_\Theta \left(A_{h,\lambda}(x,\theta, {\mathcal T}) \wedge \eta_T\right)\,.
$$
There exists a Fourier decomposition
$$
A_{h,\lambda}(x,\theta, {\mathcal T}) = \sum_{n\in \Z} e^{-2\pi \imath n \theta} A^{(n)}_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) \,.
$$
\begin{lemma}
For every $n\in \N$, the current $A^{(n)}_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) $ is given, for all $1$-forms $\alpha$ on~$M$, by the formula
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Acurrent}
A^{(n)}_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) (\alpha) = \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{2\pi \imath \lambda n t} \imath_S \alpha \circ \phi^S_t (x) dt
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} For every $1$-form $\alpha$ on $M$, let $\alpha^{(n)} = e^{2\pi \imath n\theta} \alpha$.
We have
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
A^{(n)}_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) (\alpha) &= e^{-2\pi \imath n\theta} A^{(n)}_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) (\alpha^{(n)}) \\ &=
e^{-2\pi \imath n\theta} C_{h,\lambda}(x,\theta, {\mathcal T}) (\alpha)
= \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{2\pi \imath \lambda n t} \imath_S \alpha \circ \phi^S_t(x) dt \,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\end{proof}
The analysis is therefore reduced to bounds on currents of degree $1$ (and dimension $1$) on $M$ of the form
$$
A_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) (\alpha) = \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{2\pi \imath \lambda t} \imath_S \alpha \circ \phi^S_t (x) dt
$$
In fact, for any $1$-form $\alpha$ such that $\imath_S \alpha \in {\mathbb C}$ is constant, we can readily compute
$$
A_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) (\alpha) = \frac{ e^{2\pi\imath \lambda {\mathcal T}} -1}{2\pi \imath \lambda} (\imath_S \alpha)
= A_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T})(\eta_T) \int_M \alpha \wedge \eta_S \,.
$$
It follows that it is enough to prove bounds for currents of the form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:A_diesis}
A^{\#}_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) = A_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) + A_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) (\eta_T) \eta_S \,.
\end{equation}
given for any $1$-form $\alpha \in \Omega^1 H^1(M)$ by the formula
$$
A^{\#}_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T})(\alpha) = \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{2\pi \imath \lambda t} \imath_S \alpha \circ \phi^S_t (x) dt
- \frac{ e^{2\pi\imath \lambda {\mathcal T}} -1}{2\pi \imath \lambda} \int_M \imath_S \alpha \,\omega_h\,.
$$
We estimate below the distance of such currents $A^{\#}_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T})$ from the subspace of $d_{h,\lambda}$-closed
currents and prove that it is uniformly bounded (even as the phase parameter $\lambda\in \R$ degenerates to zero). The argument will be based
on a ``twisted'' version of the Poincar\'e inequality, which we now state. Let $\delta(h)$ denote, as above, the length of the shortest
saddle connection on the translation surface $(M,h)$.
\begin{lemma}[Twisted Poincar\'e inequality] \label{lemma:Poincare_twisted} For every $s>1/2$ and for every stratum ${\mathcal H}(\kappa)$ of Abelian differentials,
there exists a constant $C_{\kappa,s} >0$ such that, for every $h \in {\mathcal H}(\kappa)$ and for any $\lambda
\in \R$, we have the following a priori bounds. For every function $u \in H^s_h(M)$, we have
$$
\max_{x\in M} \vert u (x) \vert \leq \frac{1}{2\pi \vert \lambda \vert} \vert d_{h, \lambda} u \vert_{ \Omega^1 L^2_h(M)}+ \frac{C_{\kappa,s}}{\delta(h)^2} \vert d_{h, \lambda} u \vert_{ \Omega^1 H^s_h(M)}\,,
$$
and we also have
$$
\max_{x\in M} \vert u (x) -\int_M u \omega_h \vert \leq \frac{C_{\kappa,s}}{\delta(h)^2} \vert d_{h, \lambda} u \vert_{ \Omega^1 H^s_h(M)}\,,
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Let $\gamma_{x,y}$ denote any regular geodesic segment on $M$ for the flat metric $R_h$ of the Abelian differential, of length
$L_h(\gamma_{x,y})>0$,
possibly with endpoints at the set $\Sigma_h$ of conical points, of endpoints $x, y\in M$, oriented from $x$ to $y$. By integrating along the
path $\gamma_{x,y}$, for any smooth function $u$ on $M$ we have
$$
e^{2\pi \imath \lambda L_h (\gamma_{x,y})} u(y) - u(x) = \int_{\gamma_{x,y}} d_{h, \lambda} u\,.
$$
For any $x, y\in M$ there exists a piece-wise regular minimizing geodesic with endpoints at $x, y$, which is a union of at
most $\text{\rm card}(\Sigma_h) +1$ regular segments. Let $d_h(x,y)$ denote the distance of $x, y\in M$ with respect to the flat metric $R_h$.
By the Sobolev trace theorem (see Lemma~\ref{lemma:Sob_trace}), we then derive that, for any $s>1/2$, there exists a constant $C_{\kappa,s} >0$
such that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:dtwist_bound}
\vert e^{2\pi \imath \lambda d_h (x,y)} u(y) - u(x) \vert \leq C_{\kappa,s} \left (1+ \frac{d_h(x,y)}{\delta(h)} \right)\vert d_{h, \lambda} u \vert_{\Omega^1 H^s(M)} \,.
\end{equation}
By definition of the twisted differential $d_{h, \lambda}$ we also have
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:average}
2\pi \imath \lambda \int_M u \omega_h = \int_M d_{h, \lambda}u \wedge \im (h) \,,
\end{equation}
hence there exists $x_{min} \in M$ such that
$$
\vert u(x_{min}) \vert \leq \frac{1}{2\pi \vert \lambda \vert } \vert d_{h, \lambda}u \vert_{\Omega^1L^2_h(M)} \,.
$$
As a consequence, since on each stratum there exists a constant $C_\kappa>1$ such that $\text{\rm diam}(M, R_h) \leq C_\kappa/ \delta(h)$,
we conclude that there exists a constant $C'_{\kappa,s}>0$ such that, for all $x\in M$, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:away_0}
\begin{aligned}
\vert u(x) \vert &\leq \vert e^{2\pi \imath \lambda d_h (x,x_{min})} u(x) - u(x_{min}) \vert + \vert u(x_{min}) \vert \\ & \leq \frac{1}{2\pi \vert \lambda \vert } \vert d_{h, \lambda} u \vert_{\Omega^1L^2_h(M)} +
\frac{C'_{\kappa,s}}{\delta(h)^2} \vert d_{h, \lambda} u \vert_{\Omega^1 H^s(M)} \,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The first inequality in the statement is thus proved. The second inequality follows from the first if there exists a constant $c_\kappa>0$ such that
$\vert \lambda \vert \geq c_\kappa \delta(h)^2$.
We then consider the case when $\vert \lambda \vert \leq c_\kappa \delta(h)^2$ for some constant $c_\kappa>0$ to be fixed below. For $\lambda =0$, by integration we have
$$
\vert u(y) - u(x)\vert = \vert \int_{\gamma_{x,y}} d u \vert = \vert \int_{\gamma_{x,y}} d_{h, \lambda} u \vert + 2\pi \vert \lambda \vert L_h(\gamma_{x,y}) \max_{x\in M} \vert u(x)\vert\,,
$$
hence, under the hypothesis that $\int_M u\omega_h=0$, we derive the estimate
$$
\max_{x\in M} \vert u(x) \vert \leq \frac{C'_{\kappa,s}}{\delta^2(h)} \vert d_{h, \lambda} u \vert_{\Omega^1 H^s(M)} + \frac{2 \pi C_\kappa}{\delta(h)} \vert \lambda\vert \max_{x\in M} \vert u(x)\vert \,.
$$
Let $c_\kappa>0$ be a constant such that $ 4 \pi C_\kappa c_\kappa \delta(h) <1$ for all $h\in \mathcal H(\kappa)$. Such a constant exists since the systole function is bounded
above on every stratum. For $\vert \lambda \vert \leq c_\kappa \delta(h)^2$, we then have $4 \pi C_\kappa \vert \lambda\vert < \delta(h)$, hence by bootstrap
$$
\max_{x\in M} \vert u(x) \vert \leq \frac{2C'_{\kappa,s}}{\delta^2(h)} \vert d_{h, \lambda} u \vert_{\Omega^1 H^s(M)} \,,
$$
which concludes the argument in the case of zero average functions. For a general function we have
$$
\max_{x\in M} \vert u(x) - \int_M u\omega_h \vert \leq \frac{2C'_{\kappa,s}}{\delta^2(h)} \left ( \vert d_{h, \lambda} u \vert_{\Omega^1 H^s(M)}
+ \vert 2 \pi \lambda \int_M u\omega_h \vert \right)\,.
$$
hence the estimate follows from the identity in formula~\eqref{eq:average}.
\end{proof}
Let $Z^{-1}_{h, \lambda} (M)$ denote the space of $d_{h,\lambda}$-closed $1$-dimensional
currents which belong to the Sobolev space $\Omega^1 H^{-1}_h (M)$ (that is, currents which are continuous functionals on the space of $1$-forms with coefficients in the Sobolev space $H^1_h(M)$, with respect to
the product norm. See section~\ref{sec:TFlows}).
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:dist_closed} There exists a constant $C_\kappa>0$ (depending only on the stratum
${\mathcal H}(\kappa)$) such that for any Abelian differential $h\in {\mathcal H}(\kappa)$, for any $\lambda \in \R$ and $(x,{\mathcal T}) \in M\times \R$, the current
$A^{\#}_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) \in \Omega^1 H^{-1}_h (M)$ (defined in formula \eqref{eq:A_diesis}) has uniformly bounded distance from the
closed subspace $Z^{-1}_{h, \lambda} (M)$ of $d_{h,\lambda}$-closed $1$-currents:
$$
\inf_{Z\in Z^{-1}_{h, \lambda} (M)} \vert A^{\#}_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) - Z\vert_{\Omega^1 H^{-1}_h(M)} \leq \frac{C_\kappa}{\delta(h)^2} \,.
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} We give two arguments.
\smallskip
{\it First argument}.
Let ${E}^1_{h,\lambda} (M)$ be the closure in $\Omega^1 H^1_h(M)$ of the subspace $d_{h, \lambda} [H^2_h(M)]$ of exact forms
(in fact, it can be proved that the subspace $d_{h, \lambda} [H^2_h(M)]$ is closed in $\Omega^1 H^1_h(M)$ since the exterior derivative is
an elliptic operator). By Hilbert space theory there exists an orthogonal decomposition
$$
\Omega^1 H^1_h(M) = {E}^1_{h, \lambda} (M) \oplus {E}^1_{h, \lambda}(M)^\perp\,.
$$
Let $C\in \Omega^1 H^{-1}_h(M)$ be the current defined on ${E}^1_{h, \lambda}(M)$ as
$$
C(\alpha) := A^{\#}_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) (\alpha)\,, \quad \text{ for all } \alpha \in {E}^1_{h, \lambda} (M)\,,
$$
extended so that $C \vert {E}^1_{h,\lambda}(M)^\perp =0$. By definition we have that
$$
d_{h,\lambda} C = d_{h,\lambda} A^{\#}_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T})\,,
$$
hence the current $Z:= C- A^{\#}_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T})$ is $d_{h,\lambda}$-closed. We finally estimate the Sobolev norm
of the current $C\in \Omega^1 H^{-1}_h (M)$. We claim that there exists a constant $C_\kappa>0$ such that
$$
\vert C(\alpha) \vert \leq \frac{C_\kappa}{\delta^2(h)} \vert \alpha \vert_{\Omega H^1_h(M)}\,, \quad \text{for all } \alpha \in \Omega H^1_h(M) \,.
$$
For any $u\in H^2_h(M)$, let $\bar u:= u - \int_M u \omega_h$. By a direct calculation we have
$$
\begin{aligned}
A^{\#}_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) ( d_{h,\lambda} u) &= \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{2\pi \imath \lambda t} (\imath_S d_{h,\lambda} \bar u) \circ \phi^S_t (x) dt
\\ &=
\int_0^{\mathcal T}\frac{d}{dt} ( e^{2\pi \imath \lambda t} \bar u \circ \phi^S_t (x) ) dt = e^{2\pi \imath \lambda {\mathcal T}} \bar u(\phi^S_{\mathcal T}(x))
- \bar u(x)\,.
\end{aligned}
$$
hence from the Poincar\'e inequality of Lemma~\ref{lemma:Poincare_twisted} and from the definition of the current $C$, it follows that
$$
\vert C(d_{h, \lambda} u) \vert = \vert A^{\#}_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) (d_{h, \lambda} u) \vert \leq \frac{C_\kappa}{\delta^2(h)} \vert d_{h, \lambda} u \vert_{\Omega H^1_h(M)}\,,
\quad \text{for all } u \in H^2_h(M) \,.
$$
By continuity it follows that
$$
\vert C(\alpha) \vert \leq \frac{C_\kappa}{\delta^2(h)} \vert \alpha \vert_{\Omega H^1_h(M)} \,, \quad \text{ for all } \alpha \in {E}^1_{h,\lambda} (M)\,,
$$
hence the claim follows, since $C$ is extended as zero on ${E}^1_{h,\lambda} (M)^\perp$. The first argument is thus completed.
\smallskip
{\it Second argument}. For all $s, t \geq 0$, let $\Omega^1 H^{s,t}_h(M \times \T)$ denote the Sobolev space
of $1$-forms endowed with the following Hilbert norm: for any $1$-form
$\alpha = \sum_{n\in \Z} e^{2\pi \imath n \theta} \alpha_n$ on $M\times \T$, let
$$
\Vert \alpha \Vert_{s,t} := \left ( \sum_{n\in \Z} (1+n^2)^{t/2} \vert \alpha_n \vert^2_{\Omega^1 H^s_h(M)} \right)^{1/2}
$$
and let $\Omega^1 H^{-s,-t}_h(M \times \T)$ denote the dual space.
\smallskip
Let $C_{h, \lambda}(x,{\mathcal T})$ be the current of integration, defined in formula~\eqref{eq:Ccurrent}, along an orbit of the
flow $\Phi^{S,\lambda}_t$ on $M\times \T$.
It follows by the Sobolev trace theorem (see Lemma~\ref{lemma:Sob_trace}) that the current $C_{h, \lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) \in \Omega^1 H^{-s, -t}_h(M \times \T)$
for $s, t >1/2$.
By definition of the current $C_{h, \lambda}(x,{\mathcal T})$ there exists a geodesic arc $\gamma$ in $M\times \T$, of length bounded above by the diameter of
$M\times \T$ with respect to the flat product metric, such that
$ C_{h, \lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) + \gamma$ is a closed current on $M\times \T$. Let $\bar \gamma$ denote the projection, along the subspace $\mathcal Z^{-s, -t}_h (M\times \T)$
of closed currents, of the current of integration along the arc $\gamma$ on the closed subspace $K^{-s, -t}_{h,\lambda} (M\times \T)$, defined as
$$
K^{-s, -t}_{h,\lambda} (M\times \T):= K_{h,\lambda} (M\times \T) \cap
\Omega^1 H^{-s, -t}_h(M \times \T)\,.
$$
The current $\bar \gamma$ is given by the following formula:
$$
\bar \gamma = \gamma + \gamma (\eta_T - \lambda^{-1} d\theta) \eta_S\,.
$$
In fact, the form $\eta_S$ is closed and by definition
$$
\bar \gamma (\lambda\eta_T -d\theta) =0\,, \quad \text{ hence } \,\, \bar \gamma \in K_{h,\lambda} (M\times \T) \,.
$$
Since $C_{h, \lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) \in K^{-s, -t}_{h,\lambda} (M\times \T)$ and $ C_{h, \lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) + \gamma$ is closed, it follows that
$$
C_{h, \lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) + \bar \gamma \in ZK_{h,\lambda} (M\times \T)\,.
$$
It then follows from the definitions that, on $\Omega^1 H^1_h(M) \subset \Omega^1 H^1_h(M\times \T)$,
$$
A^{\#}_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) = C^{\#}_{h, \lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) := C_{h, \lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) + C_{h, \lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) (\eta_T) \eta_S\,.
$$
We can now write
$$
C^{\#}_{h, \lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) = (C_{h, \lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) + \bar \gamma)^{\#} - \bar \gamma^{\#}
$$
and since the current $(C_{h, \lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) + \bar \gamma)^{\#}$ is closed, it is enough to prove a bound on the current
$\bar \gamma^{\#}$. By the definition of the current $\bar\gamma$ we have
$$
\bar \gamma^{\#}= \bar \gamma + \bar \gamma (\eta_T) \eta_S = \gamma + \gamma (\eta_T) \eta_S = \gamma^{\#}
$$
and from Lemma~\ref{lemma:Sob_trace} it follows that
$$
\inf_{z\in Z^{-1}_{h, \lambda} (M)} \vert A^{\#}_{h,\lambda}(x,{\mathcal T}) - z\vert_{\Omega^1 H^{-1}_h(M)} \leq
\vert \gamma^{\#} \vert_{\Omega H^{-1}_h(M)} \leq \vert \gamma \vert_{\Omega^1 H^{-1}_h(M)}\,.
$$
It follows from the Sobolev trace theorem (see Lemma \ref{lemma:Sob_trace}) and from the bound on the diameter of a translation surface in terms
of the systolic length that
$$
\vert \gamma \vert_{\Omega H^{-1}_h(M)} \leq \frac{C'_\kappa}{\delta(h)} \text{\rm diam} (M, h) \leq \frac{C_\kappa}{\delta^2(h)} \,.
$$
The second argument is therefore completed.
\end{proof}
\section{The twisted cocycle}
\label{sec:Twist_Co}
For any smooth closed $1$-form $\eta$ on $M$, we introduce the twisted differential
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:twisted_diff}
d_\eta:= d + 2\pi \imath \eta \wedge \,,
\end{equation}
which is a linear operator defined on the space $\Omega^\ast(M)$ of differential forms on $M$, and
maps the subspace $\Omega^k(M)$ of $k$-forms into the subspace $\Omega^{k+1}(M)$ of $(k+1)$-forms,
for all $k\in \N$. The twisted differential $d_{h, \lambda}$ introduced above corresponds to a special
case:
$$
d_{h, \lambda} = d_{\eta} \,, \quad \text{ for } \eta= \lambda \re (h) \,.
$$
The twisted differential $d_\eta: d + 2\pi\imath \eta \wedge$, introduced in formula~\eqref{eq:twisted_diff}, defines a connection on the trivial bundle $M\times {\mathbb C}$
(\cite{We80}, Chap II, \S 1). It is flat since, for all complex-valued form $\alpha\in \Omega^*(M)$
$$
d_\eta^2 \alpha= (d + 2\pi \imath \eta\wedge) (d\alpha + 2\pi \imath \eta \wedge \alpha) =
d^2\alpha + 2\pi \imath d\eta \wedge \alpha =0 \,.$$
By the above flatness condition the operators
$$
d_\eta: \Omega^k (M) \to \Omega^{k+1}(M)
$$
define a {\it complex}, which is {\it elliptic} since the principal symbols of the twisted differentials
are the same as those of the standard exterior derivative elliptic complex (see \cite{We80}, Chap. IV, \S 2).
For $k\in \{0, 1, 2\}$, we let $H^k_\eta (M, {\mathbb C})$ be the corresponding cohomology, which is called {\it twisted
cohomology}. The twisted cohomology $H^\ast_\eta (M, {\mathbb C})$ in the particular case when $\eta= \lambda \re (h)$ with be denote
by $H^\ast_{h,\lambda} (M, {\mathbb C})$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:invariants} The cohomology space $H^0_\eta(M, {\mathbb C})$ (which is isomorphic to $H^2_\eta(M, {\mathbb C})$
by Poincar\'e duality) is non-trivial if and only if $[\eta] \in H^1(M, \Z) \subset H^1(M, \R)$ and in that case it has complex dimension equal to $1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Let us assume that there exists a non-zero function $f \in C^\infty(M)$ such that
$$
d_\eta f= df + 2\pi \imath \eta f =0 \,.
$$
If follows from the above equation that the function $f$ is constant along each leaf of the measured foliation
$\mathcal F_\eta= \{ \eta=0\}$, hence all the non-singular leaves of $\mathcal F_\eta$ are compact. We have
$$
d (f \bar f) = (df) {\bar f} + (\overline {df}) f = - 2\pi \imath \eta f \bar f + 2\pi \imath \eta f \bar f =0\,,
$$
hence there exists $c_f\in {\mathbb C}\setminus \{0\}$ such that $f/c_f: M \to U(1)= \{z \in {\mathbb C} \vert \vert z\vert =1\}$ and there exists a real-valued function $\theta: M\to \R/\Z$ such that
$$
f(x) = c_f \exp \left(-2\pi \imath \theta(x)\right) \,, \quad \text{ for all } x\in M\,.
$$
By definition we have $df = -2\pi \imath f d\theta$, and since by assumption $f\in Z^0_\eta(M, {\mathbb C})$, the space of $d_\eta$-closed $0$-forms, that is, complex valued functions,
and $f(x) \not=0$ for all $x\in M$, it follows that $d\theta = \eta$. Since $\theta: M\to \R/\Z$, we conclude that $\eta \in H^1(M, \Z)$.
\smallskip
Conversely, let us assume that $[\eta]\in H^1(M, \Z)$. Given any point $p\in M$, the function
$$
f_p (x) = \exp \left(-2\pi \imath \int_p^x \eta \right) \,, \quad \text{ for all }\, x\in M,
$$
is a well-defined, non-zero element of $Z^0_\eta(M, {\mathbb C})$ since
$$
df_p = -2\pi \imath f_p \eta \,.
$$
In addition, given any $g \in Z^0_\eta(M, {\mathbb C})$ we have
$$
d (\bar {f_p} g) = (\overline{ df_p}) g + \bar{ f_p } (dg) = 2\pi \imath {\bar {f_p}} g \eta - 2\pi \imath \bar {f_p} g \eta =0\,,
$$
hence $\bar {f_p} g$ is a constant, which implies that $H^0_\eta(M, {\mathbb C})$ has dimension equal to $1$.
\end{proof}
Since the complex is elliptic, after endowing the vector spaces $\Omega^k(M)$ of $k$-forms with the
Hodge $L^2$ hermitian product associated to a holomorphic $1$-form $h$ on the Riemann surface $M$,
by standard Hodge theory it is possible to represent every cohomology class by a twisted harmonic form.
In fact, there exists a decomposition
$$
d_\eta = d^{1,0} +2\pi \imath \eta^{1,0} + d^{0,1} + 2\pi \imath \eta^{0,1}
$$
such that $d^{1,0}_\eta:= d^{1,0} +2\pi \imath \eta^{1,0}$ and $d^{0,1}_\eta:= d^{0,1} +2\pi \imath \eta^{0,1}$
are maps
$$
d^{1,0}_\eta :\Omega^{p,q}(M) \to \Omega^{p+1,q}(M) \quad \text{ and } \quad \quad
d^{0,1}_\eta :\Omega^{p,q}(M) \to \Omega^{p,q+1}(M)\,,
$$
so that by the Hodge-Dolbeault theory (\cite{We80}, Chap. IV, \S 5)
$$
H^1_\eta (M, {\mathbb C}) = H^{1,0}_\eta (M, {\mathbb C}) \oplus H^{0,1}_\eta (M, {\mathbb C}) \,.
$$
\begin{lemma} The twisted cohomology $H^1_\eta (M, {\mathbb C})$ only depends, up to Hodge unitary equivalence, on the cohomology class $[\eta] \in H^1(M, \R)$ and in fact only on the equivalence class $[[\eta]] \in H^1(M, \R) / H^1(M,\Z)$. The Hodge unitary equivalence is not unique as it depends on the choice
of a base point. A change of base point induces a unitary automorphism of the twisted cohomology given by
the multiplication times a constant of unit modulus.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} For any closed smooth $1$-form~$\eta$, let $Z^1_\eta(M, {\mathbb C})$ and $B^1_\eta (M, {\mathbb C})$ denote the
kernel of the twisted exterior differential $d_\eta : \Omega^1(M, {\mathbb C}) \to \Omega^2(M, {\mathbb C})$ and the range
of the twisted exterior differential $d_\eta : \Omega^0(M, {\mathbb C}) \to \Omega^1(M, {\mathbb C})$. By definition of
twisted cohomology we have
$$
H^1_\eta(M, {\mathbb C}) := Z^1_\eta(M,{\mathbb C}) / B^1_\eta(M,{\mathbb C})\,.
$$
Let $\eta$ and $\eta'$ be closed smooth $1$-forms in the same real cohomology class. By definition there exists a smooth function $f$ on $M$ such that $\eta'-\eta =df$.
Let $U_f: \Omega^k(M, {\mathbb C}) \to \Omega^k(M, {\mathbb C})$
denote the linear multiplication operator
$$
U_f (\alpha) = e^{2\pi \imath f} \alpha\,.
$$
By a direct calculation we have
$$
(d_\eta \circ U_f )(\alpha) = e^{2\pi \imath f} ( d_\eta \alpha + 2\pi \imath \, df \wedge \alpha) = (U_f \circ d_{ \eta'}) (\alpha)\,.
$$
It follows that the restrictions of $U_f$ to linear operators $Z^1_{\eta'}(M,{\mathbb C}) \to Z^1_{\eta}(M,{\mathbb C})$ and $B^1_{\eta'}(M,{\mathbb C}) \to B^1_{\eta}(M,{\mathbb C})$ are isomorphisms. In addition, since by definition $U_f$ is an operator of multiplication times a function of constant unit modulus, the projected operator $U_f: H^1_{\eta'}(M,{\mathbb C})\to H^1_{\eta}(M,{\mathbb C})$ is unitary with respect to the $L^2$ norm on forms, hence with respect to the Hodge norm.
Similarly, let us assume that $[\eta'-\eta] \in H^1(M, \Z)$. Given $p\in M$, the formula
$$
F_p^{\eta,\eta'} (x) := \int_p ^x \eta'-\eta
$$
gives a well-defined function on $M$ with values in $\R/\Z$ such that $dF_p^{\eta,\eta'} = \eta' -\eta$.
It follows that the function $\exp (2\pi \imath F_p^{\eta,\eta'})$ is well-defined on $M$. We define the
operator
$$
U_p^{\eta',\eta}(\alpha) = \exp (2\pi \imath F_p^{\eta,\eta'}) \alpha
$$
and compute that
$$
(d_\eta \circ U_p^{\eta',\eta})(\alpha) = e^{ 2\pi \imath F_p^{\eta,\eta'} } ( d_\eta \alpha + 2\pi \imath\, d F_p^{\eta,\eta'} \wedge \alpha) =
(U_p^{\eta',\eta} \circ d_{ \eta'}) (\alpha)\,.
$$
By the latter formula there is an induced isomorphism, unitary with respect to the Hodge norm,
$$
U_p^{\eta',\eta} : H^1_{\eta'} (M,{\mathbb C}) \to H^1_{\eta} (M, {\mathbb C})\,.
$$
Finally a change of the base point induces a unitary isomorphism given by multiplication times a
constant of unit modulus.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:cohom_dim} The dimension of the first twisted cohomology $H^1_\eta(M, {\mathbb C})$ is given by the following formula:
$$
\text{ \rm dim}_{\mathbb C} \,H^1_\eta (M, {\mathbb C}) = \begin{cases} 2g\,, \quad &\text{ if }\, [\eta] \in H^1(M, \Z)\,; \\
2g-2\,, \quad &\text{ if }\, [\eta] \not\in H^1(M, \Z)\,.
\end{cases}
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The cohomology $H_\eta^1(M, {\mathbb C})$ is isomorphic to the cohomology of the local system $\mathcal L_\eta$ defined by the representation $\rho_\eta: \pi_1 (M, \ast) \to U(1)$ defined as
$$
\rho_\eta (\gamma ) = \exp (2\pi \imath \int_\gamma \eta ) \,, \quad \text{ for all } \gamma \in \pi_1 (M, \ast)\,.
$$
In fact, let $p: \hat M \to M$ denote the universal cover. The form $p^*(\eta)$ is closed, hence exact on
$\hat M$, so that there exists a function $F :\hat M \to \R$ such that $p^*(\eta)= dF$. We have that
$$
p^* (d_\eta \alpha ) = \exp (-2\pi \imath F) d ( p^*(\alpha) \exp (2\pi \imath F)) \,, \quad \text{ for all }\alpha \in \Omega^*(M)\,.
$$
Let then $\mathcal L_\eta$ denote the local system on $M$ defined as the sub-bundle of the space
$\Omega^*(\hat M, {\mathbb C})$ of complex-valued forms $\hat \alpha$ on $\hat M$ such that
$$
\gamma^* (\hat \alpha) = \exp (2\pi \imath \int_\gamma \eta ) \hat \alpha \,, \quad \text{ for all } \gamma \in \pi_1 (M, \ast)\,.
$$
The twisted cohomology $H^*_\eta(M, {\mathbb C})$, defined as the cohomology of the complex of the twisted differential
$d_\eta$ on complex-valued forms $\Omega^*(M,{\mathbb C})$, is therefore isomorphic to the cohomology $H^*_{\rho_\eta} (M, U(1)):= H^*(M, {\mathcal L}_\eta)$, defined as the cohomology of the complex of the exterior differential
$d$ on $\mathcal L_\eta$-valued forms $\Omega^*(M, \mathcal L_\eta)$.
The computation of the dimension of the cohomology $H^1_\rho(M, G)$ has been carried out by W.~Goldman
in \cite{G84}, section 1.5, for a general reductive group $G$. We~reproduce the argument in our case for the convenience of the reader.
For any representation $\rho: \pi_1(M, \ast) \to U(1)$, the cohomology $H^1_\rho(M, U(1)) \equiv H^1(M, \mathcal L_\rho)$, defined as the de Rham cohomology of the corresponding local system $\mathcal L_\rho$, can be identified with other cohomologies such as the singular, \v{C}ech, simplicial, cohomologies with local coefficients in the local system $\mathcal L_\rho$. By working in simplicial cohomology, we note that the (finite-dimensional) cochain complex is independent of the flat connection, so its Euler characteristic equals $2-2g$, since the local system $\mathcal L_\rho$ has rank equal to $1$. Now the Euler characteristic is invariant under taking the cohomology of the complex so the Euler characteristic of the graded cohomology space also equals $2-2g$.
In the case $H^0(M, \mathcal L_\rho) = 0$, since $M$ is a closed orientable surface, by Poincar\'e duality
$H^2 (M, \mathcal L_\rho) = 0$. By definition of Euler characteristic of a complex, we have
$$ 0 - \text{ \rm dim}_{\mathbb C}\, H^1 (M,\mathcal L_\rho) + 0 = 2- 2g\,,$$
so that $\text{ \rm dim}_{\mathbb C} H^1 (M,\mathcal L_\rho) = 2g-2$ as stated.
In the case $H^0(M, \mathcal L_\rho) \equiv H^0_\eta (M, {\mathbb C}) \not =0$, by definition of the twisted cohomology there exists a non-zero function $f \in C^\infty(M)$ such that $d_\eta f=0$. The linear map $U_f$ defined as
$$
U_f (\alpha) = {\bar f} \alpha \,, \quad \text{ for all } \alpha \in \Omega^*(M, {\mathbb C})\,,
$$
has the property that
$$
d \circ U_f = U_f \circ d_\eta\,,
$$
hence it establishes a (unitary) isomorphism between $H^1_\eta(M, {\mathbb C})$ and $H^1(M, {\mathbb C})$. By Lemma~\ref{lemma:invariants}, we have that $H^0_\eta(M, {\mathbb C}) \not =0$ if and
only if $[\eta] \in H^1(M, \Z)$, and in that case $H^0_\eta(M, {\mathbb C})$ has complex dimension $1$. It then follows by the formula for the Euler characteristic
that the dimension of $H^1_\eta(M, {\mathbb C})$ is equal to $2g$.
\end{proof}
The Teichm\"uller geodesic flow lifts by parallel transport to the Kontsevich--Zorich cocycle on the bundle with fiber $H^1(M, \R)$ over the moduli space of Abelian differentials. The Kontsevich--Zorich cocycle projects onto
a flow on the bundle with fiber the real de Rham moduli space $H^1(M, \R) / H^1(M, \Z)$. We define a twisted cohomology bundle over the latter space. The linear model for our construction is given by the bundle of
cohomologies of flat connections over the de Rham moduli space in the case of purely imaginary connections
(see \cite{GX08}, section 2.2).
\smallskip
The mapping class group $\Gamma_g$ acts on the stratum $\hat{ \mathcal H} (\kappa)$ in the Teichm\"uller space of Abelian differentials,
and it also acts by pull-back on the cohomology $H^1(M, \R)$ and on the quotient $H^1(M, \R)/ H^1(M, \Z)$.
We consider the space
$$
H^1_\kappa(M,\T) = \left (\hat{ \mathcal H} (\kappa) \times H^1(M, \R)/ H^1(M, \Z) \right)/\Gamma_g\,
$$
and the bundle with fiber $H^1_\eta (M, {\mathbb C})$ at each point $[(h, \eta)] \in H^1_\kappa(M,\T)$, that is,
$$
{\mathcal T}^1_\kappa(M, {\mathbb C}) := \{ (h, \eta, \alpha)\vert [(h, \eta)] \in H^1_\kappa(M,\T) \text{ and } \alpha \in H^1_\eta (M, {\mathbb C})\} / \Gamma_g\,.
$$
We remark that strictly speaking the elements of this bundle are only defined up to equivalence relation
given by a unitary action of $H^1(M, \Z)$ on the twisted cohomology bundle and up to the multiplicative action
of the group of complex numbers of modulus one. In other terms, we can define
the real Hodge bundle
$$
H^1_\kappa(M,\R) = \left (\hat{ \mathcal H}(\kappa) \times H^1(M, \R) \right)/\Gamma_g\,
$$
and the twisted cohomology bundle over the Hodge bundle
$$
\hat {\mathcal T}^1_\kappa(M, {\mathbb C}) := \{ (h, \eta, \alpha)\vert [(h, \eta)]\in H^1_\kappa(M,\R) \text{ and } \alpha \in H^1_\eta (M, {\mathbb C})\} / \Gamma_g\,.
$$
In the above formula the symbol $[(h, \eta)]$ denotes the equivalence class of the pair $(h, \eta)$ with respect to
the action of the mapping class group $\Gamma_g$ by pull-back on the toral Hodge bundle over the lift $\hat{ \mathcal H} (\kappa)$ of the stratum ${ \mathcal H}(\kappa)$ to the Teichm\"uller space.
\smallskip
The elements of the bundle $\hat {\mathcal T}^1_\kappa(M, {\mathbb C}) $ are defined up to the multiplicative action
of the group complex numbers of modulus one. The subgroup $H^1(M, \Z)$ acts linearly on the bundle
$\hat {\mathcal T}^1_\kappa(M, {\mathbb C})$ by unitary transformations and by definition we have
$$
{\mathcal T}^1_\kappa(M, {\mathbb C}) = \hat {\mathcal T}^1_\kappa(M, {\mathbb C})/ H^1(M, \Z) \,.
$$
The Teichm\"uller flow lifts to the bundle $H^1_\kappa(M,\T)$, then to the bundle ${\mathcal T}^1_\kappa(M, {\mathbb C})$
by parallel transport. In other terms the action is given by the formulas
$$
g_t [(h, \eta, \alpha)]= [(g_t(h), \eta, \alpha)] \,, \quad \text{ for all } \, [(h , \eta,\alpha)] \in {\mathcal T}^1_\kappa(M, {\mathbb C}) \,.
$$
We remark that this action comes from an action of $SL(2, \R)$: for all $g\in SL(2, \R)$ we define
$$
g [(h, \eta, \alpha)] = [(g (h), \eta, \alpha)] \,, \quad \text{ for all } \, [(h , \eta,\alpha)] \in {\mathcal T}^1_\kappa(M, {\mathbb C}) \,.
$$
In the above formulas the symbol $[(h, \eta, \alpha)]$ denotes the equivalence class of the triple $(h, \eta,\alpha)$ with respect to the action of the mapping class group $\Gamma_g$ by pull-back on the twisted cohomology bundle over the lift $\hat{ \mathcal H} (\kappa) \times H^1(M, \T)$ of the toral Hodge bundle $H^1_\kappa(M,\T)$ to the Teichm\"uller space.
\section{First Variational Formulas}
\label{sec:Var_For}
We compute below variational formulas for the Hodge norm of real classes in
$$
H^1_{\eta} (M, {\mathbb C}) \oplus H^1_{-\eta} (M, {\mathbb C}) \,.
$$
Let $h\in \mathcal H(\kappa)$ be any Abelian differential. Since $h$ determines a complex structure
on the surface, we can write $\eta= \eta^{1,0} + \eta^{0,1}$, according to the Hodge decomposition, so that there exists a smooth function $f_\eta$ on $M$ such that
$$
\eta^{1,0} = f_\eta h \quad \text{ and } \quad \eta^{0,1} = \bar {f_\eta} \bar h \,.
$$
We can therefore introduce the Hodge decomposition
$$
d_\eta = d^{1,0}_\eta + d^{0,1}_\eta = d^{1,0} + 2\pi \imath \eta^{1,0} + d^{0,1} + 2\pi \imath \eta^{0,1}
$$
and the twisted Cauchy-Riemann operators
$$
\partial^+_{h,\eta} = \partial^+_h + 2\pi \imath \bar {f_\eta} \quad \text{ and } \quad \partial^-_{h,\eta} =
\partial^-_h + 2\pi \imath f_\eta\,.
$$
In fact, writing $\eta= a \re (h)+ b \im (h)$, we have
$$
\eta = a \frac{h +\bar h}{2} -\imath b \frac{h -\bar h}{2} = \frac{ a-\imath b} {2} h + \frac{ a+\imath b} {2} \bar h\,,
$$
hence in particular $f_\eta = \frac{ a-\imath b} {2}$ and we have
$$
\begin{aligned}
\partial^+_{h,\eta} = (S+\imath T) + \pi \imath (a +\imath b) = (S+ \pi \imath a) + \imath (T +\pi \imath b) \,, \\
\partial^-_{h,\eta} = (S-\imath T) + \pi \imath (a -\imath b) = (S+ \pi \imath a) - \imath (T +\pi \imath b) \,.
\end{aligned}
$$
Let us now consider the Teichm\"uller deformation $g_t (h, \eta) = (h_t, \eta)$ with
$$
\re (h_t) = e^{-t} \re (h ) \quad \text{ and } \quad \im (h_t) = e^t \im (h)\,.
$$
We have $\eta = a_t \re (h_t)+ b_t \im (h_t)$ with
$$
a_t = e^t a \quad \text{ and } \quad b_t = e^{-t} b\,,
$$
hence
$$
\begin{aligned}
\partial^+_{h_t,\eta} = (e^tS+\imath e^{-t} T) + \pi \imath (e^t a +\imath e^{-t} b) =
e^t (S+ \pi \imath a) + \imath e^{-t} (T +\pi \imath b) \,, \\
\partial^-_{h_t,\eta} = (e^tS-\imath e^{-t}T) + \pi \imath (e^t a -\imath e^{-t}b) = e^t (S+ \pi \imath a) - \imath e^{-t}(T +\pi \imath b)
\end{aligned}
$$
From these formula we derive the basic fact that
$$
\frac{d}{dt} ( \partial^+_{h_t, \eta} ) = \partial^- _{h_t, \eta} \quad \text{ and } \quad
\frac{d}{dt} ( \partial^-_{h_t, \eta} ) = \partial^+ _{h_t, \eta} \,.
$$
Let $\mathcal M^\pm_{h,\eta} \subset L^2_h(M)$ denote the kernels of the Cauchy-Riemann operators
$\partial^\pm_{h,\eta}$ and, for simplicity of notation, let $\mathcal M^\pm_{\eta, t} =
\mathcal M^\pm_{h_t,\eta}$ denote the kernels of the Cauchy-Riemann operators
$$\partial^\pm_{\eta, t} = \partial^\pm_{h_t, \eta}$$ along the orbit $g_t(h, \eta) =
(h_t, \eta)$. Any real class $c$ in the direct sum above can be represented as in the form
$$
c = \re ( [ m_{\eta, t} h_t ] + [m_{ -\eta, t} h_t] )\,.
$$
with functions $m_{\eta, t} \in \mathcal M^+_{\eta, t}$ and $m_{-\eta, t} \in \mathcal M^+_{-\eta, t}$.
\begin{definition} The Hodge norm of the real twisted cohomology class $c \in H^1_\eta (M, {\mathbb C})$ represented
as $c= \re ( [ m_{\eta} h ] + [m_{ -\eta} h] )$ with $m_{\pm \eta} \in {\mathcal M}^+_{h,\pm \eta}$ is defined as
$$
\Vert (h, \eta, c) \Vert := \left( \vert m_\eta \vert_0^2 + \vert m_{-\eta} \vert_0^2 \right)^{1/2} \,.
$$
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma} The variation of the Hodge norm is given by the formula
$$
\begin{aligned}
\frac{d}{dt} (\vert m_{\eta, t} \vert_0^2 + \vert m_{-\eta, t}\vert_0^2) &= 2 \re ( \<\overline{m}_{\eta, t}, m_{-\eta, t} \> + \<\overline{m}_{-\eta, t}, m_{\eta, t}\>) \\ &= 4\re \<\overline{m}_{\eta, t}, m_{-\eta,t} \> \,.
\end{aligned}
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\pi^\pm_{\eta,t}:L^2_h(M) \to \mathcal M^\pm_{\eta,t}$
denote the orthogonal projections. By the condition that
$m_{\eta, t} \in \mathcal M^+_{\eta, t}$ and $m_{-\eta, t} \in \mathcal M^+_{-\eta, t}$, for all $t\in \R$, we claim that there exist
$(v_t), (w_t) \subset H^1(M)$, and
$\phi_{\eta, t} \in \mathcal M^+_{\eta, t}$ and $\psi_{-\eta, t} \in \mathcal M^+_{-\eta, t}$ such that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:var}
\begin{cases} m_{\eta, t} &= \partial^+_{\eta,t} v_t + \pi^-_{\eta,t} (m_{\eta, t}) \\
\frac{d }{dt} m_{\eta, t} &= -\partial^-_{\eta,t} v_t + \phi_{\eta, t} \end{cases} \, \text{and } \,
\begin{cases} m_{-\eta, t} &= \partial^+_{-\eta,t} w_t + \pi^-_{-\eta,t} (m_{-\eta, t}) \\
\frac{d }{dt} m_{-\eta, t}&= -\partial^-_{-\eta,t} w_t + \psi _{-\eta, t}\,.\end{cases}
\end{equation}
The proof of the above formulas follows the argument in the untwisted case given in \cite{F02}, Lemma 2.1.
For the reader's convenience we give the argument below.
Since $m_{\eta, t} \in \mathcal M^+_{\eta, t}$ and $m_{-\eta, t} \in \mathcal M^+_{-\eta, t}$, it follows from
the definitions that $\partial^+_{\eta, t} m_{\eta, t} = \partial^+_{-\eta, t} m_{-\eta, t}=0$, for all $t\in \R$, hence
by a straightforward calculation we have
$$
\begin{aligned}
&\partial^-_{\eta, t} m_{\eta, t} + \partial^+_{\eta, t} (\frac{d m_{\eta, t}}{dt} ) = \frac{d }{dt} ( \partial^+_{\eta, t} m_{\eta, t}) = 0 \,; \\
& \partial^-_{-\eta, t} m_{-\eta, t} + \partial^+_{-\eta, t} (\frac{dm_{-\eta, t}}{dt} ) = \frac{d }{dt} ( \partial^+_{-\eta, t} m_{-\eta, t}) = 0 \,.
\end{aligned}
$$
Moreover, by the definition of the cocycle, since the action of the Teichm\"uller flow on the twisted cohomology bundle is by parallel transport, the $d_\eta$-cohomology
class of the real $d_{\eta}$-closed $1$-form $\re (m_{\eta, t} h_t + m_{-\eta, t} h_t )$ is constant with respect to $t\in \R$, hence there exists a one-parameter family of smooth functions $(f_t)$ such that
$$
\frac{d}{dt} \re (m_{\eta, t} h_t + m_{-\eta, t} h_t ) = d_{\eta} f_t + d_{-\eta} \bar{f_t}\,.
$$
Since $\frac{d h_t}{dt} = -\overline{h_t}$ we have
$$
\begin{aligned}
\frac{d m_{\eta, t}}{dt} + \frac{d m_{-\eta, t}}{dt} - ( \overline{m}_{\eta, t} +\overline{m}_{-\eta, t}) &= -\partial^-_{\eta,t} (v_t + \bar{w_t}) -\partial^-_{-\eta,t} (\bar{v_t } +w_t)
\\
&+ \phi_{\eta, t} + \psi_{-\eta, t} -\overline{ \pi^-_{\eta,t} (m_{\eta, t})} - \overline{ \pi^-_{-\eta,t} (m_{-\eta, t})}\,,
\end{aligned}
$$
which implies that $f_t = -(v_t + \bar{w_t})$, and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:phipsi}
\phi_{\eta, t} = \overline{ \pi^-_{-\eta,t} (m_{-\eta, t})} \quad \text{ and } \quad \psi_{-\eta, t}= \overline{ \pi^-_{\eta,t} (m_{\eta, t})}\,.
\end{equation}
The formulas claimed above are therefore proven.
The variation of the Hodge norm is then given by the formula
$$
\begin{aligned}
\frac{d}{dt} (\vert m_{\eta, t} \vert_0^2 + \vert m_{-\eta, t}\vert_0^2) &= 2 \re ( \<m_{\eta, t}, \frac{d m_{\eta, t}}{dt}\> + \<m_{-\eta, t}, \frac{dm_{-\eta, t}}{dt}\>) \\
&= 2 \re ( \<m_{\eta, t}, \overline{ \pi^-_{-\eta,t} (m_{-\eta, t})} \> + \<m_{-\eta, t},\overline{ \pi^-_{\eta,t} (m_{\eta, t})}\>) \\
&= 2 \re ( \<\overline{m}_{\eta, t}, \pi^-_{-\eta,t} (m_{-\eta, t}) \> + \<\overline{m}_{-\eta, t},\pi^-_{\eta,t} (m_{\eta, t})\>) \\
&= 2 \re ( \<\overline{m}_{\eta, t}, m_{-\eta, t} \> + \<\overline{m}_{-\eta, t}, m_{\eta, t}\>) =
4\re \<\overline{m}_{\eta, t}, m_{-\eta, t} \> \,.
\end{aligned}
$$
In the above chain of identities, we argue as follows. The first identity is given by the general formula for the derivative of the square of a Hilbert norm. The second follows from
formulas~\eqref{eq:var} and \eqref{eq:phipsi}, since the conditions that $m_{ \eta, t} \in {\mathcal M}^+_{\eta,t}$ and $m_{ -\eta, t} \in {\mathcal M}^+_{-\eta,t}$
imply respectively that
$$
\begin{cases}
\<m_{\eta, t}, \partial^-_{\eta,t} v_t \> = - \<m_{\eta, t}, ( \partial^+_{\eta,t})^\ast v_t \> =0 \,, \\
\<m_{-\eta, t}, \partial^-_{-\eta,t} w_t \> = - \<m_{\eta, t}, ( \partial^+_{\eta,t})^\ast w_t \> = 0\,.
\end{cases}
$$
The third identity holds since the real part of a complex number equals the real part of its conjugate. Finally, the fourth identity follows from formula \eqref{eq:var}
since, as a consequence of the fact that $\overline{m}_{\eta, t} \in {\mathcal M}^-_{-\eta,t}$ and $\overline{m}_{-\eta, t} \in {\mathcal M}^-_{\eta,t}$, we have respectively
$$
\begin{cases}
\<\overline{m}_{\eta, t}, \partial^+_{-\eta,t} w_t \> = - \<\overline{m}_{\eta, t}, ( \partial^-_{-\eta,t})^\ast w_t \> =0 \,, \\
\<\overline{m}_{-\eta, t}, \partial^+_{\eta,t} v_t \> = - \<\overline{m}_{\eta, t}, ( \partial^-_{\eta,t})^\ast v_t \> = 0\,,
\end{cases}
$$
The fifth and last identity again follows by taking complex conjugation inside the (second) real part. The argument is thus complete.
\end{proof}
Let $\Lambda_\kappa : H^1_\kappa (M, \T) \to \R^+ \cup \{0\}$ be the function defined as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Lambda_kappa}
\Lambda_\kappa(h, [\eta]) := \sup \left\{ \frac{2 \vert \<\overline{m}_{\eta}, m_{-\eta} \> \vert}{ \vert m_{\eta} \vert_0^2 + \vert m_{-\eta}\vert_0^2 } \, : \, ( m_\eta, m_{-\eta}) \in \mathcal M^+_\eta\times \mathcal M^+_{-\eta}
\setminus \{(0,0)\} \right \} \,.
\end{equation}
As an immediate consequence of the first variational formulas, we derive an upper bound for the growth
of the Hodge norm of twisted cohomology classes under the twisted cocycle.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:growth_1} Let $c \in H^1_\eta(M, {\mathbb C})$. We have
$$
\Vert g_t ([h,\eta, c]) \Vert \leq \Vert [h, \eta, c] \Vert \exp \left( \int_0^t \Lambda_\kappa(g_s([h, \eta]) ) ds \right)\,.
$$
\end{lemma}
We finally prove that the function $\Lambda_\kappa \leq 1$ everywhere and $\Lambda_\kappa<1$ outside
of any neighborhood of the zero section $H^1(M, \Z)$ of $H^1(M, \T)$.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:Lambda_gap} The function $\Lambda_\kappa$ is continuous with values in $[0,1]$ and
$$
\Lambda_\kappa(h, [\eta]) <1\,, \quad \text{ \rm for all } (h,[\eta])\,\, \text{\rm such that }\,\, [\eta] \not \in H^1(M, \Z) \,.
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} The holomorphic and anti-holomorphic part, $d^{1,0}$ and $d^{0,1}$ of the
exterior differential $d$ are elliptic, in the sense that for any $1$-form $\alpha$ on $M$ we have
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:d_elliptic}
\vert \alpha \vert_{\Omega^1 H^1_h(M)} \leq \vert \alpha \vert_{\Omega^1 L^2_h(M)} + \min\{ \vert d^{1,0} \alpha \vert_{\Omega^2 L^2_h(M)}, \vert d^{0,1} \alpha \vert_{\Omega^2 L^2_h(M)} \}\,.
\end{equation}
We claim that by Rellich compact embedding theorem (see for instance~\cite{Ad}, Th. 6.2), for all $r>s>1$, the unit ball in the space
$$
\{ (\eta, \alpha_{\eta} , \alpha_{-\eta}) \in \Omega^1 H^r (M) \times \text{ \rm Ker } (d^{0,1}_\eta) \times \text{ \rm Ker } (d^{0,1}_{-\eta} ) \}
$$
that is, the set of $(\eta, \alpha_{\eta}, \alpha_{-\eta})$ such that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:unit_ball}
\vert \eta \vert^2_{\Omega^1H^r (M) }+ \vert \alpha_{\eta} \vert_{\Omega^1 L^2_h(M)} ^2 +\vert \alpha_{-\eta} \vert_{\Omega^1 L^2_h(M)} ^2 \leq 1
\end{equation}
is compact in the space $\Omega^1 H^s (M) \times [\Omega^1 L^2_h(M)]^2$.
In fact, by Rellich embedding theorem the embedding $\Omega^1 H^r (M) \to \Omega^1 H^s (M)$ is compact for any $s>r$. In addition, by Sobolev
embedding theorem, for $r>1$ the space $\Omega^1 H^r (M)$ embeds continuously into the space of $1$-forms with continuous coefficients. It then
follows from the bound in formula~\eqref{eq:d_elliptic} that whenever $\eta$, $\alpha_{\eta}$ and $\alpha_{-\eta}$ belong to the set described in
formula~\eqref{eq:unit_ball}, then $\alpha_{\eta}$ and $\alpha_{-\eta}$ belong to a bounded set in $\Omega^1 H^1_h(M)$, hence by Rellich embedding
theorem, to a compact subset of $\Omega^1 L^2_h(M)$.
It follows, in particular that for each $\eta \in \Omega^1 H^r (M)$ the subspaces $\text{ \rm Ker } (d^{0,1}_{\pm\eta})$, hence also the subspaces
$\text{ \rm Ker } (d^{1,0}_{\pm\eta})$, are finite dimensional, and that
the supremum in the definition of the function $\Lambda_\kappa$ is achieved. We observe that by Hodge theory the complex dimension of
$\mathcal M^\pm_{h, \pm \eta}$ equals half the complex dimension of the twisted cohomology, which we have computed in
Lemma~\ref{lemma:cohom_dim}.
By the ellipticity of the operators $d^{1,0}$ and $d^{0,1}$, that is, from formula \eqref{eq:d_elliptic}, it also follows that the spaces
$\text{ \rm Ker } (d^{1,0}_{\pm \eta})$ and $\text{ \rm Ker } (d^{0,1}_{\pm \eta})$ depend continuously, as subspaces of $\Omega^1L^2_h(M)$, on the closed
$1$-form $\eta \in \Omega^1 H^r (M) $, hence the spaces $\mathcal M^{\pm}_{h,\pm \eta}$ depend continuously on the pair
$(h, \eta)\in \mathcal H (\kappa) \times H^1(M, \T)$. Thus we conclude that the function $\Lambda_\kappa$ is continuous.
\smallskip
By the Schwarz inequality we have
$$
\vert \<\overline{m}_{\eta}, m_{-\eta} \> \vert \leq \vert m_{\eta} \vert_0 \vert m_{-\eta} \vert_0 \leq \frac{1}{2} ( \vert m_{\eta} \vert_0^2 + \vert m_{-\eta}\vert_0^2)\,,
$$
with equality only if there exists a non-zero constant $c\in {\mathbb C}$ (of modulus one) such that $m_{\eta}= c
\overline{m}_{-\eta}$. From this condition, it follows
that $m_{\eta} \in \mathcal M^+_{\eta} \cap \mathcal M^-_{\eta}$, that is, $\partial^+_{\eta} m_{\eta} = \partial^-_{\eta} m_{\eta}=0$
hence in particular
$$
(d + 2\pi \imath \eta) m_{\eta}=0\,.
$$
It follows that $H^0_\eta(M, {\mathbb C})$ is non-trivial, and Lemma~\ref{lemma:invariants} implies that $[\eta ]\in H^1(M, \Z)$.
\medskip
\noindent A direct alternative argument goes as follows. Let $(X, Y)$ be a frame such that $\imath _X \eta =0$ and $\imath _Y \eta =-1$. We then have
$$
X m_\eta =\imath_X (d + 2\pi \imath \eta) m_\eta =0 \quad \text{ and } \quad (Y-2\pi \imath )m_\eta = \imath_Y (d + 2\pi \imath \eta) m_\eta =0\,.
$$
The first condition implies that $\eta$ defines a completely periodic foliation $\mathcal F_\eta$. The second
condition that $M/ \mathcal F_\eta$ endowed with the transverse measure covers a circle of unit length, hence
$[\eta]\in H^1(M, \Z)$ (as all periods are integers).
\end{proof}
\medskip
We conclude that if the Teichm\"uller orbit of $(h, \eta)$ visits the complement of any given neighborhood
of the zero section $H^1(M, \Z)$ with positive frequency, then there exist constants $C>0$ and $\Lambda<1$ such that, for all $c\in H^1_\eta(M, {\mathbb C})$ we have
$$
\Vert g_t ([h,\eta, c]) \Vert \leq C \Vert [h, \eta, c]\Vert e^{\Lambda t}\,, \quad \text{ for all } \, t>0 \,.
$$
In the next section we investigate the dynamics of the lift of the Teichm\"uller flow to the toral bundle
$H^1_\kappa(M,\T)$ over the stratum $\mathcal H (\kappa)$ of the moduli space of Abelian
differential, with fiber $H^1_h(M,\T):= H^1(M,\R)/H^1(M, \Z)$ at any $h\in \mathcal H(\kappa)$, with particular attention to the set of trajectories which asymptotically ``spend all their time'' in any neighborhood of the zero section $H^1(M,\Z)$ of the bundle.
\section{The toral Kontsevich--Zorich cocycle}
\label{sec:Tor_KZ}
The projection of the Kontsevich--Zorich cocycle to the quotient toral bundle $H^1_\kappa(M, \T):=
H^1_\kappa(M, \R) / H^1_\kappa(M, \Z)$ is the
key dynamical system behind the proof of generic weak mixing for translation flows, for interval
exchange transformations \cite{AvF07}, generic translation flows on non-arithmetic Veech surfaces
\cite{AD16}, \cite{AL}. We remark that the bundle $H^1_\kappa(M, \T)$ is isomorphic to the {\it character
variety bundle} introduced in \cite{FG} for the compact group~$U(1)$. In fact, elements of the character variety
for a group $G$ are homomorphisms $\rho: \pi_1(M, \ast) \to G$. For any Abelian group, homomorphisms
of $\pi_1(M, \ast)$ to $G$ factor through the integral homology $H_1(M, \Z)$. Every homomorphism
of $H_1(M, \Z)$ to $U(1)\equiv \R/ \Z$ lifts to a homomorphism from $H_1(M, \Z)$ to $\R$, which is an element
of $H^1(M, \R)$. It follows that the character variety for $G=U(1)$ is isomorphic to $H^1(M, \R)/ H^1(M, \Z)$.
It was proved in~\cite{FG} that the lift of the Teichm\"uller flow to the bundle $H^1_\kappa(M, \T)$
is ergodic, in fact even mixing, with respect to the canonical lift of the any of Masur--Veech measures on
strata of the moduli space of Abelian differentials.
It was proved in \cite{AvF07} that the horizontal translation flow of a translation surface
$(M, h)$ is weakly mixing if the line $\R [\re(h)] \in H^1_h(M, \T)$ does not intersect the {\it weak
stable lamination} of the zero section of the bundle $H^1_\kappa(M, \T)$. (Note that in fact in \cite{AvF07} the vertical flow
was considered, hence the condition was applied to the line $\R [\im(h)]$ instead of $\R [\re(h)]$. The two points of view are equivalent by rotation of the Abelian differentials).
The weak stable lamination is defined as the set of all $c \in H^1_h(M, \T)$ such that the orbit of $c$ under the projected Kontsevich--Zorich cocycle converges to the zero section
along all unbounded sequences of return times to certain compact subsets of the space of zippered rectangles. It was then proved in~\cite{AvF07} by a ``linear elimination'' argument (see \cite{AvF07}, Appendix A) that the set of translation surfaces $(M,h)$ such that $\R [\re(h)]$ intersects the weak stable lamination has Hausdorff codimension at least $g-1$ for the Masur--Veech measures (in general, the Hausdorff codimension is equal to the number of non-tautological positive exponents of the Kontsevich--Zorich cocycle). It was also proved by a ``non-linear elimination'' argument that a similar property holds for Lebesgue almost all interval exchange transformations. By the Veech criterion, the authors derived that almost all interval exchange transformations and almost all translation flows are weakly mixing.
\smallskip
We introduce a version of the weak stable space. Let $K\subset \mathcal H(\kappa)$ be a non-empty compact subset and let $U$ be any open neighborhood of the zero section of the bundle $H^1_\kappa (M, \T)$, that is, the projection of a neighborhood of $H^1_\kappa (M, \Z) \subset H^1(M, \R)$. For every $h\in \mathcal H(\kappa)$, and every
$\epsilon>0$, let $W^{s}_{K,U}(h, \epsilon) \subset H^1_h(M, \T)$ denote the set
$$
W^{s}_{K, U}(h, \epsilon) = \{ c \in H^1_h(M, \T) \,\vert \, \limsup_{t \to +\infty} \frac{ \int_0^t \chi_K(g_\tau (h))\chi_U (g_\tau(h,c) ) d\tau } { \int_0^t \chi_K(g_\tau (h)) d\tau } \geq 1-\epsilon \} \,.
$$
Let $W^s_K(h)$ denote the intersection of all sets $W^{s}_{K,U}(h, \epsilon)$ as $U$ varies over the family $\mathcal U$ of all neighborhoods of the zero section of the bundle $H^1_\kappa (M, \T)$ and $\epsilon \in (0,1)$:
$$
W^{s}_K(h) := \bigcap_{U\in \mathcal U}\bigcup_{\epsilon\in (0, 1)} W^{s}_{K,U}(h, \epsilon)\,.
$$
The following lemma provides a simple but effective way to bound the Hausdorff dimension of a set
defined as an upper limit.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:Hdim} Let $\{W_n\}$ be a sequence of subsets of $\R^d$ and let $W \subset \R^d$ be
the set defined as
$$
W = \limsup_{n \to \infty} W_n= \cap_{n\in \N} \cup_{m\geq n} W_m\,.
$$
Assume that, for each $n\in \N$, the set $W_n$ can be covered by $N_n$ balls of radius $R_n$. Then
the Hausdorff dimension $\text{\rm H-dim}(W)$ satisfies the upper bound
$$
\text{\rm H-dim}(W) \leq \inf \{ \delta >0 \vert \lim_{n\to +\infty} \sum_{m\geq n} N_m R_m^\delta=0\}\,.
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $H^\delta$ denote the $\delta$-dimensional Hausdorff outer measure on $\R^d$. Let $\{\Omega_m\}$
be a cover of the set $W_m$ by $N_m$ balls of radius $R_m$. It follows that, for each $n\in \N$ we have
$$
W \subset \Omega^{(n)} := \bigcup_{m\geq n} \Omega_m \,.
$$
By assumption we have
$$
\sum_{B \in \Omega^{(n)}} \vert B \vert^\delta = \sum_{m\geq n} \sum_{B \in \Omega_m} \vert B \vert^\delta = C_d^\delta \sum_{m\geq n} N_m R_m^\delta \,.
$$
By the definition of outer measure, it follows that
$$
H^{\delta} (W) \leq C_d^\delta \lim_{n\to +\infty} \sum_{m\geq n} N_m R_m^\delta \,.
$$
We conclude that $H^\delta (W)=0$ for any $\delta >0$ such that
$$
\lim_{n\to +\infty} \sum_{m\geq n} N_m R_m^\delta =0\,,
$$
hence $\text{\rm H-dim}(W) \leq \delta$ by the properties of Hausdorff dimension.
The argument is thus complete.
\end{proof}
We generalize below to our setting the ``linear elimination'' argument of \cite{AvF07}.
\smallskip
Let $(t_n)$ a sequence of return times of the Teichm\"uller orbit $\{g_t (h) \vert t>0\}$ to the compact set $K\subset \mathcal H(\kappa)$. Let us define the sets
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Wnsets}
W^{s}_{K,U,n}(h,\epsilon) = \{ c \in H^1_h(M, \T) \,\vert \, \frac{\int_0^{t_n}
\chi_K(g_t(h)) \chi_U (g_t (h,c) ) dt }{ \int_0^{t_n}
\chi_K(g_t(h)) dt} \geq 1-\epsilon \}\,.
\end{equation}
Let $r_K>0$ be a radius such that, for all $h\in K$, the closed Hodge ball of radius $r_K$ in $H^1_h(M, \T)$ centered at the origin is isometric to the closed Hodge ball of the same Hodge radius in $H^1_h(M,\R)$.
Let $U(r)$ denote a neighborhood of radius equal to $r\in (0, r_K)$ (with respect to the Hodge metric) of the zero section of $H^1_\kappa(M,\T)$.
Let $h\in \mathcal H(\kappa)$ be a Birkhoff generic point for the Teichm\"uller geodesic flow and Oseledets regular for the Kontsevich--Zorich cocycle on the Hodge bundle $H^1_\kappa(M, \R)$ with respect to the Masur--Veech measure.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:covering}
There exist constants $C_K>1$, $\nu>0$ and there exists a function $\epsilon_{K}:(0, r_K) \to (0,1)$ such that
$\lim_{r\to 0^+} \epsilon_K(r)=0$ such that the following holds. Let $V$ denote any affine subspace parallel to a subspace $V_0$ transverse to the central-stable space $E^{cs}(h)$ and let $d_u := \text{ \rm dim }(V_0)$ the unstable dimension. The set $W^{s}_{K,U(r),n}(h,\epsilon) \cap V$ is covered by at most $N_n (r,\epsilon)$ balls of Hodge radius at most $R_n(r, \epsilon)$ so that the following bounds hold:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:est_claim}
\begin{aligned}
&\limsup_{n\to +\infty} \frac{1}{t_n} \log R_n(r,\epsilon) \leq - C^{-1}_K \mu_\kappa(K) \nu (1-\epsilon) \,; \\
&\limsup_{n\to +\infty} \frac{1}{t_n} \log N_n(r, \epsilon) \leq C_K d_u(\epsilon+\epsilon_K(r))\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The first estimate follows from the Birkhoff ergodic theorem and from the Oseledets theorem.
For each $n\in \N$, let $\tau_n\in [0,t_n]$ be defined as
$$
\tau_n := \inf_{c\in W^{s}_{K,U(r),n}(h, \epsilon)} \sup \{ t\in [0, t_n] \vert g_{t} (h,c) \in U(r) \text{ and } g_t(h)\in K \}\,.
$$
Since $h$ is Birkhoff generic, by Birkhoff ergodic theorem and by the definition of the set $W^{s}_{K,U(r),n}(h, \epsilon)$, we have
$$
\liminf_{n \to +\infty} \, \frac{\tau_n} {t_n} \geq (1-\epsilon)\mu_\kappa (K) \,.
$$
By compactness and by the Oseledets theorem, there exists $\nu>0$ such that, for each $n\in \N$, every connected component of the set
$W^{s}_{K, U(r),n}(h, \epsilon)\cap V$ is contained in a ball of radius $C_K r e^{-\nu \tau_n}$, hence the estimate on the sequence $(R_n(r,\epsilon))$ holds, for all $r>0$.
The second estimate, on the number $N_n(r,\epsilon)$ of connected components of the set $W^{s}_{K,U(r),n}(h,\epsilon) \cap V$, is proved by coding trajectories
over the time-interval $[0, t_n]$, as follows. The total number of connected components will be estimated by the product of the number of words in the coding times
the number of connected components of the subset of the set $W^{s}_{K,U(r),n}(h,\epsilon) \cap V$ of trajectories with the same coding.
Let us describe the coding. Let $\pi: H^1_\kappa(M,\R) \to \mathcal H(\kappa)$ denote the bundle projection.
We code trajectories according to whether they
are in~$U(r) \cap \pi^{-1}(K)$ (coded by the symbol $u$), in~$U(r)^c\cap \pi^{-1}(K)$ (coded by the symbol~$u'$) or the Teichm\"uller orbit is not
in~$K$ (coded by the symbol~$K'$). In other terms, the coding is based on the following map $c$ from the toral cohomology bundle
$H^1_\kappa (M, \T)$ to the alphabet $\{ u, u', K'\}$ defined as follows:
$$
c (h, [\eta]) := \begin{cases} u\,, \quad \text{ if } (h, [\eta]) \in \pi^{-1}(K) \cap U(r)\,, \\
u' \quad \text{ if } (h, [\eta]) \in \pi^{-1}(K) \cap \left( H^1_\kappa(M, \T) \setminus U(r)\right)\,, \\
K' \quad \text{ if } (h, [\eta]) \in \pi^{-1} (\mathcal H(\kappa) \setminus K) \,, \end{cases}
$$
with the modifications described below.
Maximal trajectory arcs in $\pi^{-1}(K)$, but {\it outside} of the set $U(r)\cap \pi^{-1}(K)$, have time length at least $C^{-1}_K \vert \log r \vert$, since the maximal
expansion rate of the Kontsevich--Zorich cocycle at time $t>0$ with respect to the Hodge norm is bounded above by $e^t$ and above the compact set
$K \subset \mathcal H(\kappa)$ lattice points separation (with respect to the Hodge distance) is bounded below. Hence it is enough to code trajectories in
$K$ at time intervals equal to $C^{-1}_K \vert \log r \vert/2$. In addition, by compactness there exists a
function $\delta_K: (0,1] \to \R^+$ (depending on the compact set $K\subset \mathcal H(\kappa)$) with $\lim_{r\to 0^+} \delta_K(r) =+\infty$,
such that, for all $h\in K$, for all $r>0$ and for $\vert t \vert \leq \delta_K(r)$ the image of the ball $B(0, r) \subset H^1_h(M, \R)$ (in the Hodge metric)
contains a single point (the origin) of the lattice $H^1_{g_t(h)} (M, \Z) \subset H^1_{g_t(h)} (M, \R)$. Hence any trajectory arc which exits $\pi^{-1}(K)$, with
both endpoints in $U(r) \cap \pi^{-1}(K)$, will still be coded by the letter $u$ unless it has time-length larger than $\delta_K(r)>0$.
Let then $\delta'_K(r) = \min \{ C_K^{-1}\vert \log r \vert , \delta_K(r)\}$. By the above remarks, it is enough to code trajectories as follows:
we divide each trajectory segment into segments of equal length $\delta'_K(r)$
(and a remainder which we neglect) and assign to each segment the label $u$ when it intersects $ \pi^{-1}(K) \cap U(r)$, and it is entirely contained in
$\pi^{-1}(K)$, the label $u'$ when it is entirely contained in $\pi^{-1}(K) \cap \left( H^1_\kappa(M, \T) \setminus U(r)\right)$ but not the complement of
$\pi^{-1}(K)$, and finally $K'$ in the remaining case, when it intersects the complement of $\pi^{-1}(K)$.
Let $t_n^K$ denote the total time that the trajectory spends in $\pi^{-1}(K)$ over the time interval $[0, t_n]$. By the ergodic theorem, there exists $\mu_K>0$ (with $\mu_K\to 0^+$
as $\mu_\kappa (\mathcal H(\kappa) \setminus K) \to 0$) such that $t_n -t_n^K \leq \mu_K t_n$.
Since by assumption the total time that the trajectory
spends in $\pi^{-1}(K) \cap U(r)$ is at least $(1-\epsilon) t_n^K$, the total number of different words is at most (by standard bounds on the binomial coefficients)
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:word_counting}
\binom { \frac{t^K_n}{\delta'_K(r)} } {\frac{ \epsilon t^K_n}{\delta'_K(r)}} \binom { \frac{t_n}{\delta'_K(r)} } {\frac{ \mu_K t_n}{\delta'_K(r)}}
\leq \left (\frac{e}{\epsilon} \right)^{\frac{\epsilon t^K_n}{\delta'_K(r)}} \left (\frac{e}{\mu_K} \right)^{\frac{\mu_K t_n}{\delta'_K(r)}} \,.
\end{equation}
For every word $w$, let $\Gamma'_w$ denote the set of arcs of trajectory of the cocycle in
$U(r)^c \cap \pi^{-1}(K)$ with both endpoints in $U(r) \cap \pi^{-1}(K)$ , and let $\Gamma''_w$ denote the set of arcs of trajectory of the cocycle, with both endpoints in $U(r) \cap \pi^{-1}(K)$, which project to a Teichm\"uller arc not contained in $K$ and have time-length at least $\delta_K(r)>0$. In other terms,
\begin{itemize}
\item $\Gamma'_w$ is the set of orbit arcs corresponding to strings $w'= u' \dots u'$ such that $uw'u$ is a substring of $w$\,;
\item $\Gamma''_w$ is the set of orbit arcs corresponding to strings $w''= w_1 w_2 \dots w_\ell$, with $w_i \in \{u', K'\}$ for all $i\in\{1, \dots, \ell\}$, such that $uw''u$
is a substring of $w$.
\end{itemize}
For every orbit arc $\gamma \in \Gamma'_w \cup \Gamma''_w$, let $\tau (\gamma)$ denote its time length.
We claim that there exist constants $C'_K>0$ and $r_K>0$ such that for any fixed word $w$ the number of different connected components with code $w$ is at most
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:comp_counting}
C'_K\prod_{\gamma'\in\Gamma'_w} \max (1, (r/r_K) e^{\tau(\gamma')})^{d_u}\, \prod_{\gamma''\in \Gamma''_w}
\max (1, (r/r_K) e^{\tau(\gamma'')})^{d_u} \,.
\end{equation}
This statement follows from the fact that the maximal expansion of the cocycle in a time $\tau>0$ with respect to the Hodge norm is equal to $e^\tau$, hence the bound follows by a volume estimate on the unstable space.
In fact, we argue as follows. Let $\mathcal C_{w,n}(h) \subset W^s_{K, U(r),n} \cap V$ denote the subset of all cohomology
classes which have a symbolic sequence equal to $w$ up to time $t_n>0$. Every $c \in \mathcal C_{w,n}(h)$
can be labeled by the string $(m_1, \dots, m_k)$ of distinct lattice points in $H^1_h(M, \Z)$ such that $g_t (h,c)$ visits a ball $B_{g_{\tau_i}(h)}(m_i,r)$ in the Hodge metric on $H^1_{g_{\tau_i}h}(M, \Z)$ at a time $\tau_i$ for a sequence of times $0\leq \tau_1 < \tau_2 < \dots < \tau_k <\dots \leq t_n$. Lattice points along the Teichm\"uller orbit $g_\R(h)$ can be identified by parallel transport. On each subinterval $I=[a,b] \subset [0,t_n]$ such that $g_I (h) \subset
U(r) \cap \pi^{-1}(K)$, by definition we have that $g_a(h,c) \in B_{g_a(h)}(m,r)$ implies $g_b(h,c) \in B_{g_b(h)}(m,r)$, for any $c \in \mathcal C_{w,n}(h)$. Now on each maximal subinterval $I=[a,b] \subset [0,t_n]$ such that $g_I (h) \subset K^c$ or $g_I (h,c)\subset U(r)^c \cap \pi^{-1}( K)$ every Hodge ball $B_{g_a(h)}(m,r)$ is mapped by the cocycle into a subset of a Hodge ball of radius at most $r e^{\vert I \vert}$. Since $K$ is compact, there exists a constant $r_K>0$ such that, for any Abelian differential $h\in K$, a Hodge ball of radius at most $re^{\vert I \vert}$ in $H^1_h(M, \R)$ contains at most $ (r/r_K)^{d_u} e^{d_u\vert I \vert}$ lattice points. It follows that for each such subinterval our upper bound on the number of connected components is multiplied times a factor $ (r/r_K)^{d_u}e^{d_u\vert I \vert}$. The claim follows.
Thus by formulas \eqref{eq:word_counting} and \eqref{eq:comp_counting}, for $r\leq r_K$ we have proved the estimate
$$
\begin{aligned}
\log N_n(r,\epsilon) &\leq \log C'_K + \{ \epsilon(1+\vert \log \epsilon \vert) + \mu_K (1+ \vert \log \mu_K \vert) \} \frac{t_n}{ \delta'_K(r)} \\ &+
d_u \left( \sum_{\gamma'\in \Gamma'_w} \max (0, \tau(\gamma') ) + \sum_{\gamma''\in \Gamma''_w}
\max (0, \tau(\gamma'') )\right) \,.
\end{aligned}
$$
It remains to estimate the third and fourth term on the RHS of the above inequality. For the third term,
since
$c \in W^s_{K,U(r),n} (h, \epsilon)$ and $\Gamma'_w$ denote the set of arcs of
trajectory of the cocycle in the complement of $U(r)$, which project to a Teichm\"uller arc in $K$, we have
$$
\sum_{\gamma'\in \Gamma'_w} \max (0, \tau(\gamma') -\delta_K(r)) \, \leq \, \epsilon t_n\,.
$$
Finally, we estimate the fourth term. We distinguish two cases: in case $(a)$ the total time-length of the part
of trajectory $\gamma''_w \in \Gamma''_w$ inside $U(r)^c \cap \pi^{-1} (K)$ is at least $\sigma_K\in (0,1)$ times the total time length of $\gamma''_w \in \Gamma''_w$; in case $(b)$ the total time-length of the part
of trajectory inside $U(r)^c \cap \pi^{-1} (K)$ is at most $\sigma_K$ times the total time length of
$\gamma''_w \in \Gamma''_w$, hence the time-length of the part of the Teichm\"uller trajectory outside $K$ in moduli space is at least $ 1-\sigma_K$ times the total time length of the arc $\gamma''_w$.
The total time-length of trajectories $\gamma''_w$ which are in case $(a)$ is bounded above by
$\sigma_K^{-1}$ times the total time that the trajectory spends in $U(r)^c \cap \pi^{-1}(K)$.
For case $(b)$, let
$t_{n}(r)$ denote the total time-length of those Teichm\"uller trajectories, starting and ending in $K$,
of length at least $\delta_K(r)$, which spend at least a fraction $1-\sigma_K$ of their time outside of $K$
up to time $t_n>0$. Since $\delta_K(r) \to +\infty$ as $r\to 0^+$, there exists $\sigma_K>0$ such that
by the Birkhoff ergodic theorem, for any Birkhoff generic point for the Teichm\"uller flow, we have
$$
\lim_{r\to 0^+} \sup_{n\geq 0} \frac{t_n(r)}{t_n} =0 \,.
$$
We therefore define $\epsilon_{K}: (0, r_K) \to (0,1)$ as
$$
\epsilon_{K}(r):= \sup_{n\in \N} \frac{t_n(r)}{t_n} \,.
$$
Finally we have the estimate
$$
\sum_{\gamma''\in \Gamma''_w} \max (0, \tau(\gamma'') -\delta_K(r)) \leq C_K (\epsilon +\epsilon_{K}(r) )t_n\,.
$$
\smallskip
The estimates claimed in formula \eqref{eq:est_claim} are thus proved.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:HD} Let $h \in \mathcal H (\kappa)$ be any Abelian differential which is forward Birkhoff generic for the Teichm\"uller flow and Oseledets regular for the Kontsevich--Zorich cocycle. For any affine subspace $V \subset H^1_h(M, \T)$, parallel to a linear subspace $V_{0}\subset H^1_h(M, \R)$ which is transverse to the central stable space $E^{cs}(h)$, the Hausdorff dimension of the set $V \cap W^s_{K} (h)$ is equal to $0$. In fact, for any $\delta >0$ there exists an open neighborhood $U\subset H_\kappa^1(M, \T)$ of the zero section and $\epsilon>0$ such that the Hausdorff dimension of $V \cap W^s_{K,U} (h,\epsilon)$ is at most $\delta$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} Recall that for any sequence $({t}_n)$ and for any $\epsilon>0$, the sets
$W^s_{K,U, n} (h, \epsilon)$ have been defined in formula \eqref{eq:Wnsets} as
$$
W^{s}_{K,U, n}(h,\epsilon) = \{ c \in H^1_h(M, \T) \,\vert \, \frac{\int_0^{t_n}
\chi_K(g_t(h)) \chi_U (g_t (h,c) ) dt }{ \int_0^{t_n}
\chi_K(g_t(h)) dt} \geq 1-\epsilon \}\,.
$$
By definition, there exists a diverging sequence $({t}_n)$ of return times of the forward Teichm\"uller
orbit $\{g_t(h) \vert t>0\}$ to the compact subset $K \subset
\mathcal H (\kappa)$, such that for any $\epsilon\in (0, 1)$, we have the inclusion
$$
W^{s}_{K,U}(h) \subset \limsup_{n \to \infty} W^{s}_{K,U, n}(h, \epsilon) = \cap_{n\in \N} \cup_{m\geq n}
W^{s}_{K,U,m}(h,\epsilon)\,.
$$
By Lemma~\ref{lemma:covering} there exists a function $\epsilon_K (r)$ with $\lim_{r\to 0^+} \epsilon_K (r)=0$ such that the set $W^{s}_{K,U(r),n}(h,\epsilon)\cap V$ can be covered by at most $N_n(r, \epsilon)$ balls of radius at most $R_n(r,\epsilon)$ such that $N_n(r, \epsilon)$ and $R_n(r,\epsilon)$ satisfy the bounds in formula \eqref{eq:est_claim}.
By those estimates we have
$$
\begin{aligned}
\sum_{m\geq n} N_m R_m^\delta &\leq \sum_{m\geq n} e^{C_K d_u (\epsilon +\epsilon_K(r)) {t}_m }
e^{- C^{-1}_K \mu_\kappa (K) \delta (1-\epsilon) \nu t_m} \\ &= \sum_{m\geq n}
e^{- (C^{-1}_K \mu_\kappa(K) \delta (1-\epsilon) \nu -C_Kd_u(\epsilon +\epsilon_K(r)) t_m} \,.
\end{aligned}
$$
Let then $\delta > C_K^2 \mu_\kappa (K)^{-1} (\epsilon +\epsilon_K(r)) d_u [(1-\epsilon) \nu]^{-1}$. Since it is possible to assume $t_n \geq n$ (for large $n\in\N$), under this assumption we have
\begin{multline*}
\limsup_{n\to +\infty} \sum_{m\geq n}
e^{- [ C^{-1}_K \mu_\kappa (K)\delta (1-\epsilon) \nu -C_Kd_u(\epsilon+\epsilon_K(r) ] t_m} \\ \leq \lim_{n\to +\infty} \sum_{m\geq n}
e^{- [C^{-1}_K \mu_\kappa(K) \delta (1-\epsilon) \nu -C_Kd_u (\epsilon +\epsilon_K(r)) ] m} \\ \leq \lim_{n\to +\infty} \frac{ e^{- [C^{-1}_K \mu_\kappa(K) \delta (1-\epsilon) \nu -C_Kd_u (\epsilon +\epsilon_K(r))] n}} { 1- e^{- (C^{-1}_K\delta (1-\epsilon) \nu -C_Kd_u (\epsilon+ \epsilon_K(r)) } } = 0 \,.
\end{multline*}
By Lemma~\ref{lemma:Hdim} we derive the following Hausdorff dimension bound
$$\text{\rm H-dim}\left (W^{s}_{U(r)}(h,\epsilon) \cap V \right ) \leq C_K^2 \mu_\kappa (K)^{-1} (\epsilon +\epsilon_K(r)) d_u [(1-\epsilon) \nu]^{-1}\,.$$
For any given $\delta >0$ there exist $r>0$ and $\epsilon >0$ such that
\begin{multline*}
\text{\rm H-dim}\left (W^{s}(h) \cap V \right ) \leq \text{\rm H-dim}\left (W^{s}_{U(r)}(h,\epsilon) \cap V \right )\\ \leq C_K^2 \mu_\kappa (K)^{-1} (\epsilon +\epsilon_K(r)) d_u [(1-\epsilon) \nu]^{-1} < \delta \,,
\end{multline*}
hence the Hausdorff dimension of $W^{s}(h)\cap V$ is equal to zero, as stated.
\end{proof}
We conclude the section with growth estimates for the twisted cocycle.
\smallskip
Let $\Lambda_\kappa: H^1_\kappa (M, \T) \to [0,1)$ be the function defined in formula \eqref{eq:Lambda_kappa}. We recall that, by Lemma~\ref{lemma:growth_1}, the ergodic integrals of
$\Lambda_\kappa$ bound the logarithm of the norms of the twisted cocycle. We also recall that
$\Lambda_\kappa <1$ everywhere except on the zero section of the bundle $H^1_\kappa (M, \T)$
and it is continuous by Lemma \ref{lemma:Lambda_gap}.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:growth_2} Let $h \in \mathcal H (\kappa)$ be any Abelian differential which is forward Birkhoff generic for the Teichm\"uller flow and
forward Oseledets regular for the Kontsevich--Zorich cocycle with respect to the Masur--Veech measure. There exists a set $\R W^s(h) \subset H^1(M, \R)$ of Hausdorff dimension
$g+1$ (which depends only on $[\im(h)]\in H^1(M,\Sigma;\R)$) such that if $[\re (h) ]\not \in \R W^s(h)$ then there exists a constant $\alpha_h>0$, and for all $\lambda \in \R\setminus \{0\}$ there exists a constant $C(h,\lambda)>0$, such that, for all $c\in H^1_{h,\lambda}(M, {\mathbb C})$ and for all $t>0$ we have
$$
\exp\left( \int_0^{t} \Lambda_\kappa ( g_\tau [h,\lambda \re(h)] ) d\tau \right) \leq C(h,\lambda)
e^{(1-\alpha_h)t}\,.
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Let $K\subset \mathcal H (\kappa)$ be a non-empty compact subset and let $\R W^{s}(h)$ denote the
set defined as
$$
\R W^{s}(h):= \{ \R \cdot c \vert c \in W^{s}_{K}(h) \}\,.
$$
For all $h\in \mathcal H(\kappa)$, Osedelets regular with respect to the Masur--Veech measure, the central stable space
(which is equal to the stable space) has codimension equal to the genus $g\geq 2$. By Theorem~\ref{thm:HD} we have that, for any unstable affine subspace $V$, the Hausdorff dimension of the set $W^{s}_{K}(h) \cap V$ is equal to zero, hence (by properties of Hausdorff dimension) it follows that $W^{s}_{K}(h)$ has Hausdorff dimension equal to $g$, and $\R W^{s}(h)$ has Hausdorff dimension equal to $g+1 <2g$.
Let $\mathcal U$ denote, as above, the family of all neighborhoods of the zero section of the bundle $H^1(M, \T)$. Since by definition
$$
W^{s}_{K}(h)= \bigcap_{U \in \mathcal U} \bigcap_{\epsilon\in (0,1)} W^{s}_{K,U}(h, \epsilon)\,,
$$
it follows that for any $[\re (h)]\not \in \R W^{s} (h)$ there exists $U\in \mathcal U$
and $\epsilon>0$ such that $\lambda [\re(h)] \not\in W^s_{K,U}(h, \epsilon)$ for all $\lambda \in \R$.
It follows that there exists a time $t_{h}(\lambda)>0$ such
that, for all $t \geq t_h(\lambda)$, we have
$$
\frac{1}{t} \int_0^{t} \chi_U (g_\tau (h, \lambda [\re (h)]) ) d\tau \leq 1-\epsilon \,.
$$
The statement then follows from Lemma~\ref{lemma:growth_1} and Lemma~\ref{lemma:Lambda_gap}.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:small_meas}
There exist $r_0 \in (0, r_K)$, $\epsilon_0 \in (0, 1)$ such that the following holds.
For every $r\in (0, r_0)$, every $\epsilon\in (0, \epsilon_0)$, there exists $\chi >0$, and
for every forward Birkhoff generic and Oseledets regular $h\in \mathcal H(\kappa)$, there exists a constant
$C_\kappa(\im (h), r, \epsilon)>0$ such that, for all $n\in \N$,
$$
\text{ \rm vol} \left( W_{K, U(r),n} (h, \epsilon) \right) \leq C_\kappa(\im (h), r, \epsilon) e^{-\chi t_n}\,.
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma~\ref{lemma:covering} there exist constants $C_K>1$, $\nu>0$ and there exists a function $\epsilon_{K}:(0, r_K) \to (0,1)$
with $\lim_{r\to 0^+} \epsilon_K(r)=0$ such that the following holds. For any affine unstable subspace $V$ and for $n$ large enough,
the set $W_{K, U(r),n} (h, \epsilon) \cap V$ is covered by $N_n(r,\epsilon)$ balls of radius $R_n(r,\epsilon)$
with
$$
R_n(r,\epsilon) \leq e^{ -\frac{1}{2} C^{-1}_K \mu_\kappa(K) (1-\epsilon)\nu t_n} \quad
\text{ and } \quad N_n(r,\epsilon) \leq e^{2C_K d_u(\epsilon +\epsilon_{K}(r))t_n } \,.
$$
There exists $r_0\in (0, r_K)$ and $\epsilon_0 \in (0,1)$ with
$$
\chi := \frac{1}{2} C^{-1}_K \mu_\kappa(K) (1-\epsilon_0)\nu - 2C_K \left(\epsilon_0 + \sup_{0\leq r \leq r_0} \epsilon_{K}(r)\right) >0\,.
$$
The estimate claimed in the statement then holds for every $r\in (0, r_0)$ and every $\epsilon\in (0, \epsilon_0)$
with the above choice of $\chi>0$. The argument is therefore complete.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:growth_3} There exist constants $\alpha_\kappa$, $\alpha'_\kappa$
and $N_\kappa>0$
such that, for almost all Abelian differential $h \in \mathcal H (\kappa)$ with respect to the Masur--Veech
measure, there exists a constant $C_\kappa (h)>0$ such that, for all $n\in \N$ and for all
$\lambda \in \R$ with $\vert \lambda \vert \geq e^{-\alpha'_\kappa t_n}$, we have
$$
\exp \left( \int_0^{t_n} \Lambda_\kappa (g_t [h,\lambda \re(h)] ) dt \right)\leq C_\kappa (h)
(1+ \lambda^2)^{\frac{N_\kappa}{2} } e^{(1-\alpha_\kappa) t_n}\,.
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let us fix $r>0$ and $\epsilon>0$ such that Lemma~\ref{lemma:small_meas} holds: there exists
$\chi >0$ and $C_\kappa(\im (h), r, \epsilon)$ such that, for all $n\in \N$,
$$
\text{ \rm vol} \left( W_{K, U(r),n} (h, \epsilon) \right) \leq C_\kappa(\im (h), r, \epsilon) e^{-\chi t_n}\,.
$$
Let $\chi' \in (0, \chi/2g)$ and let $\mathcal B_n$ denote the set of Abelian differentials
$h \in \mathcal H(\kappa)$, such that $h$ is forward Birkhoff regular and Oseledets generic, and
in addition
$$
\{ \lambda [\re(h)] \in H^1(M, \T) \vert \lambda \in [e^{-\chi' t_n}, e^{\chi' t_n}] \} \, \cap \, W_{K, U(r),n} (h, \epsilon) =\emptyset\,.
$$
By definition, there exists $\alpha_\kappa:= \alpha(r, \epsilon)>0$ such that, whenever $h$ is forward Birkhoff regular and Oseledets generic, but $h\not\in \cup_{m\geq n} \mathcal B_m$, for all $m\geq n$ and for $\vert \lambda \vert \in [e^{-\chi' t_m}, e^{\chi' t_m}]$, the class $\lambda [\re(h)]$ does not belong to $W_{K, U(r),m} (h, \epsilon)$, hence
by Lemma~\ref{lemma:growth_1} and Lemma~\ref{lemma:Lambda_gap} (as in the proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma:growth_2}) we derive the bound
$$
\exp\left( \int_0^{t_m} \Lambda_\kappa ( g_t [h,\lambda \re(h)] ) dt \right) \leq C(h,\lambda) e^{(1-\alpha_\kappa) {t_m}}\,.
$$
There exists therefore a constant $C_\kappa(\im (h))>0$ such that,
for all $m\geq n$ and for $\lambda \in \R$ with $\vert \lambda \vert \geq e^{-\chi' t_m}$ we have
$$
\exp\left( \int_0^{t_m} \Lambda_\kappa ( g_t [h,\lambda \re(h)] ) dt \right) \leq
C_\kappa(\im (h)) (1+ \lambda^2)^{ \frac{\alpha_\kappa}{2\chi'}}
e^{(1-\alpha_\kappa) t_m}\,.
$$
In addition, for all $n\in \N$, let $[\re (\mathcal B_n)] :=\{ [\re (h)] \in H^1(M, \T) \vert h\in \mathcal B_n\}$. We have the following volume estimate
$$
\text{ \rm vol} \left(\cup_{m\geq n} [\re (\mathcal B_m)] \right) \leq C_\kappa (\im (h),r,\epsilon) e^{ (2g \chi' -\chi) n}\,,
$$
hence the set $\mathcal B = \cap_{n\in \N} \cup_{m\geq n} \mathcal B_m$ has Masur--Veech measure zero.
\end{proof}
\section{Transfer cocycles}
In this section we prove a ``spectral gap'' result for the extension of the twisted cocycle to a bundle
of $1$-currents. The argument follows closely that given in \cite{AtF08}, section 4.2, where a similar result was proved for the extension of the Kontsevich--Zorich cocycle to $1$-currents.
For any Abelian differential $h\in \mathcal H(\kappa)$ and for any real closed $1$-form $\eta\in Z^1(M,\R)$, let $Z^{-1}_{h,\eta} (M)= Z^{-1}_{\eta} (M)$ denote the
subspace of $d_\eta$-closed $1$-currents, that is, the space of $1$-currents $C\in \Omega^1 H^{-1}_h(M)$
such that $d_\eta C=0$. Let $E^{-1}_{h,\eta} (M)$ denote the subspace of $d_\eta$-exact currents, that
is, currents $C$ such that there exists $U \in L^2_h(M)$ with $C=d_\eta U$. Let $ \Omega^1 H^{-1}_\kappa(M)$ denote the bundle with fiber at any $[h, \eta]\in H^1_\kappa(M, \T) $ the space $\Omega^1 H^{-1}_h(M)$ of $1$-currents. Let $\mathcal Z^{-1}_\kappa (M)$ and $\mathcal E^{-1}_{\kappa} (M) \subset \mathcal Z^{-1}_\kappa (M)$ denote
the sub-bundles of twisted closed and twisted exact currents with fiber at $[h,\eta]$ the spaces $Z^{-1}_{h,\eta} (M)$ and $E^{-1}_{h,\eta} (M)$, respectively.
The Teichm\"uller flow extends to a cocycle on the bundle $\mathcal Z^{-1}_\kappa (M)$ over
$H^1_\kappa(M, \T)$. The cocycle is defined by parallel transport with respect to the projection of the trivial connection on the product bundle
$$
\hat {\mathcal H}(\kappa) \times \{ (\eta, C) \vert C \in Z^{-1}_\eta(M) \}\,.
$$
By definition of the de Rham cohomology, the quotient bundle
$$\mathcal Z^{-1}_\kappa (M)/ \mathcal E^{-1}_\kappa (M) \,,$$
is isomorphic to the twisted cohomology bundle $\mathcal T^1_\kappa(M, {\mathbb C})$, hence
the transfer cocycle over the Teichm\"uller flow on the bundle $\mathcal Z^{-1}_\kappa (M)$
projects to the twisted cocycle on the twisted cohomology bundle $\mathcal T^1_\kappa(M, {\mathbb C})$.
It follows that the set of Lyapunov exponents of the transfer cocycle on $\mathcal Z^{-1}_\kappa (M)$
is the union of the set of Lyapunov exponents of the twisted cocycle on $\mathcal T^1_\kappa (M, {\mathbb C})$ with that
of the restriction of the transfer cocycle to the sub-bundle of twisted exact currents $\mathcal E^{-1}_\kappa (M)$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:L_exact}
The restriction of the transfer cocycle to the subbundle
$\mathcal E^{-1}_\kappa (M)$ of twisted exact currents has a continuous invariant norm $\mathcal L_\kappa$, hence the unique Lyapunov exponent of the cocycle is equal to $0$ and has infinite multiplicity. In addition, for all
$(h, \eta) \in \mathcal H^1_\kappa(M, \T)$ and for all $C \in \mathcal E^{-1}_{h, \eta} (M)$ we have
$$
\mathcal L_\kappa (C) \leq (1+ \vert \eta \vert_{\Omega^1 L^2_h(M)}) \vert C \vert_{\Omega^1H^{-1}_h(M)}
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} By definition, for any $h\in \mathcal H(\kappa)$, for any $\eta \in H^1_h(M,\T)$ and for any twisted exact $1$-current $C\in E^{-1}_{h, \eta} (M)$ there exists a unique function $U_C\in L^2_h(M)$ of zero average such that $C =d_\eta U_C$.
The function ${\mathcal L}_\kappa: \mathcal E^{-1}_\kappa (M) \to \R^+$ defined as
$$
{\mathcal L}_\kappa ([h,\eta, C]) = \vert U_C\vert_{L^2_h(M)} \,, \quad \text{ for all } C \in
\mathcal E^{-1}_\kappa (M)\,, $$
is invariant under the twisted cocycle, hence it defines a continuous Lyapunov norm on $\mathcal E^{-1}_\kappa (M)$.
\begin{footnote} {A Lyapunov norm is a norm which varies exponentially in time at a rate approximately equal to the Lyapunov exponent.
For a zero Lyapunov exponent, it is by definition an invariant norm.}
\end{footnote}
In fact, the cocycle is defined by parallel transport with respect to the projection of the trivial connection on
the product bundle
$$
\hat {\mathcal H}(\kappa) \times \{ (\eta, C) \vert (\eta, C) \in H^1_\kappa(M, \T)
\times Z^{-1}_\eta (M) \}
$$
and the norm ${\mathcal L}_\kappa $ is the projection of a $\Gamma_g$-equivariant norm on the product bundle,
which is invariant under the $SL(2, \R)$-action on $\hat {\mathcal H}(\kappa)$.
Finally, for any $C = d_\eta U_C \in E^{-1}_{h,\eta} (M)$ and all $\alpha \in \Omega^1 H^\infty (M)$ we have
$$
\begin{aligned}
\vert \<C, \alpha\>\vert &= \vert \<U_C, d_\eta \alpha\>\vert = \vert \<U_C, d\alpha + \eta \wedge \alpha\>\vert
\\ &\leq \mathcal L_\kappa (C) (1+ \vert \eta \vert_{\Omega^1 L^2_h(M)}) \vert \alpha \vert_{\Omega^1 H^1_h(M)}\,,
\end{aligned}
$$
thereby completing the argument.
\end{proof}
Let $\zeta^{-1}_\kappa: \Omega^1 H^{-1}_\kappa(M) \to \R$ be the (continuous) distance functions to the Hilbert
sub-bundle $\mathcal Z^{-1}_\kappa(M)$ of twisted closed currents defined as follows: for each $h \in \mathcal H(\kappa)$ and all $\eta \in H^1_h (M, \T)$, the restriction $\zeta^{-1}_\kappa \vert \Omega^1 H^{-1}_h(M)$ is equal to the distance function from the closed subspace $Z^{-1}_{h, \eta} (M) \subset \Omega^1 H^{-1}_h(M)$ with respect to the Hilbert space metric on $ \Omega^1 H^{-1}_h(M)$.
For any compact set
$K\subset \mathcal H(\kappa)$ and any $\zeta >0$, we introduce the following closed, $g_\R$-invariant subsets
$\mathcal A_K(\zeta)$ of the bundle $ \Omega^1 H^{-1}_\kappa (M)$. For every Abelian differential $h\in {\mathcal H}(\kappa)$, the intersection of the set
$\mathcal A_K(\zeta)$ with the fiber $ \Omega^1 H^{-1}_h (M)$ of the bundle $ \Omega^1 H^{-1}_\kappa (M)$ of $1$-currents is defined as follows:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:GammaCdelta}
\mathcal A_K(\zeta) \cap \Omega^1 H^{-1}_h (M) =\{ A \in \Omega^1 H^{-1}_h(M) \,\vert \,
g_t (h) \in K \Rightarrow \zeta^{-1}_\kappa \left( g_t (A) \right) \leq \zeta \} \,.
\end{equation}
In other terms, the fibered subset $\mathcal A_K(\zeta)$ contains all currents which stay at bounded distance ($\leq \zeta$) from the sub-bundle of twisted closed currents for all returns of the Teichm\"uller orbit to a given compact set $K\subset \mathcal H(\kappa)$. The relevant examples of non-closed currents in
$\mathcal A_K(\zeta)$ are given by currents of twisted integration along orbits of the horizontal translation flow
in $(M,h)$. In fact, as we have proved in section~\ref{sec:Twist_Int}, for any compact set $K\subset \mathcal H(\kappa)$ there exists $\zeta_K >0$ such that any current represented by a twisted integral along an orbit of the horizontal translation flow in $(M,h)$ belongs to $\mathcal A_K(\zeta)$ for
$\zeta\geq \zeta_K$ (up to projection on the codimension one sub-bundle of currents perpendicular to the sub-bundle $\{{\mathbb C}\im(h) \vert h\in \mathcal H(\kappa)\}$) .
The core technical result of this paper is the following `spectral gap' lemma for the restriction of
the distributional cocycle $\{g_t \vert t\in \R\}$ to any invariant set $\mathcal A_K(\zeta)
\subset \Omega^1 H^{-1}_\kappa(M)$.
For any $h\in\mathcal H(\kappa)$, let $t_0=0$ and let $\{{t}_n \vert n\in\N\}$ denote a non-decreasing sequence of visiting times of the forward orbit $\{g_{t}(h) \vert t \geq 0\}$ to a given compact set $K\subset \mathcal H(\kappa) $.
We will regard any current $A \in \Omega^1 H^{-1}_h(M) $ as an element of the vector bundle $\Omega^1 H^{-1}_\kappa(M)$ of currents over the moduli space of Abelian differentials.
In particular we have
$$
\vert A \vert _{-1} = \vert A \vert _{ H^{-1}_h(M)} \,.
$$
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:iterativest}
For any compact set $K\subset \mathcal H(\kappa)$, there exists a constant $C_K>1$ such that, for any $\zeta>0$,
for any $[h, \eta] \in H^1_\kappa(M, \T)$, for any $A \in \mathcal A_K (\zeta)$ and for all $n\in \N$, the following estimate holds:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:iterativest}
\vert A \vert_{-1} \leq & C_K \, (1+\zeta)
(1+ \vert g_{t_n} (A) \vert_{-1} ) \\ &\times \exp \left(\int_0^{{t}_n} \Lambda_\kappa (g_t [h, \eta] )dt \right)
\left( \sum_{j=0}^{n-1} e^{2({t}_{j+1}-{t}_j)} \right)^3\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} The argument follows closely the proof of Lemma 4.5 in~\cite{AtF08}.
For all $n\in \N$, let $[h_n, \eta_n] = g_{{t}_n} [h, \eta]$ with
$h_n = g_{{t}_n} (h) \in K$. For each $j \in \N$, since $Z^{-1}_{h_j, \eta_j} (M)$ is closed in
$\Omega^1 H^{-1}_{h_j} (M)$, there exists an orthogonal decomposition,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:gammasplit}
g_{{t}_j} (A) = Z_j \, + \, R_j \,, \quad \text{ \rm with } \, Z_j \in Z^{-1}_{h_j, \eta_j}(M) \,,\, \, R_j \perp Z^{-1}_{h_j, \eta_j}(M)\,,
\end{equation}
and, since $A \in \mathcal A_K(\zeta)$ and $h_j\in K$, the following bound holds:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Gammadeltabound}
\vert R_j \vert_{-1} \leq \zeta \,.
\end{equation}
For each $j\in \N$, let $\pi_j: \Omega^1 H^{-1}_{h_j} (M) \to Z^{-1}_{h_j,\eta_j} (M)$ denote the orthogonal projection and let $\tau_j = {t}_{j+1} -{t}_{j}$. By~\eqref{eq:gammasplit} and by orthogonal projection on the $g_t$-invariant bundle $\mathcal Z^{-1}_\kappa(M)$ the following recursive identity holds:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:recid1}
Z_{j} = g_{-\tau_j} (Z_{j+1}) \, + \, \pi_{j}\circ g_{-\tau_j}(R_{j+1}) \in
Z^{-1}_{h_j, \eta_j}(M)\,.
\end{equation}
By definition of the Sobolev norms and by the Teichm\"uller invariance of the $L^2$ norms, it is immediate to prove (see for instance \cite{AtF08}, formula $(3.24)$) that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:cocycleestimate}
\Vert g_t \vert _{\Omega^1 H^{-1}_h} \Vert \leq e^{2\vert t \vert} \,, \quad \text{\rm for all } \, (h,t) \in \mathcal H(\kappa) \times \R \,.
\end{equation}
Thus by the bound in formula~\eqref{eq:Gammadeltabound}, it follows that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:remainderbound1}
\vert \pi_{j}\circ g_{-\tau_j}(R_{j+1}) \vert_{-1} \leq
\vert g_{-\tau_j}(R_{j+1}) \vert_{-1} \leq e^{2\tau_j} \, \zeta \,.
\end{equation}
By projection on the twisted cohomology bundle $\mathcal T^1_\kappa(M,{\mathbb C})$ and by compactness, we derive from the identity \eqref{eq:recid1} and from the bound \eqref{eq:remainderbound1} that there exists $C^{(1)}_K >1$ such that, with respect to the Hodge norm,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:recbound1}
\Vert [Z_j] - g_{-\tau_j} ([Z_{j+1}]) \Vert_{h_j,\eta_j} \leq C^{(1)}_K \, \zeta\,e^{2\tau_j} \,.
\end{equation}
By Lemma \ref{lemma:growth_1} and by formula~\eqref{eq:recbound1} we have
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:recbound2}
\Vert [Z_j] \Vert_{h_j, \eta_j} \leq \Vert [Z_{j+1}] \Vert_{h_{j+1}, \eta_{j+1} }
\exp \left(\int_{{t}_j}^{{t}_{j+1}}
\Lambda_\kappa (g_t[h, \eta] ) dt \right)
\, +\, C^{(1)}_K \, \zeta \,e^{2\tau_j} \,.
\end{equation}
For each $\ell \in \N$, it follows by reverse iteration on $1\leq j < \ell$ that
$$
\Vert [Z_j] \Vert_{h_j, \eta_j} \leq \left ( \Vert [Z_\ell] \Vert_{h_\ell, \eta_\ell} + C^{(1)}_K \, \zeta \sum_{i=j}^{\ell-1} \, e^{2\tau_i- \int_{{t}_i}^{{t}_{\ell}} \Lambda_\kappa (g_t[h, \eta] ) dt }
\right) \exp \left(\int_{{t}_j}^{{t}_{\ell}} \Lambda_\kappa (g_t[h, \eta] ) dt \right) \,,
$$
which, since $\Lambda_\kappa \geq 0$ and $\tau_i\geq 0$ for all $i\in \N$, implies the estimate
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Hbound}
\Vert [Z_j] \Vert_{h_j, \eta_j} \leq C^{(1)}_K (1+\zeta) (1+ \Vert [Z_\ell] \Vert_{h_\ell, \eta_\ell} ) \exp \left(\int_{{t}_j}^{{t}_{\ell}}
\Lambda_\kappa (g_t[h, \eta] ) dt \right) \sum_{i=j}^{\ell-1} \,e^{2\tau_i} \,.
\end{equation}
By the definition of the Hodge norm, for each $j\in \N$, there exists a twisted harmonic form $\omega_j \in
Z^1_{h_j, \eta_j}(M)$ such that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:hrepr}
E_j = Z_j -\omega_j \in E^{-1}_{h_j, \eta_j} (M) \quad \text{ and } \quad
\vert \omega_j \vert_{-1} \leq \Vert [Z_j] \Vert_{h_j, \eta_j} \,.
\end{equation}
For each $j\in \N$, let us define
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Eid1}
F_j= E_j - g_{-\tau_j} (E_{j+1}) \,\, \in \,\, E^{-1}_{h_j, \eta_j}(M)\,.
\end{equation}
By the recursive identity~\eqref{eq:Eid1} the following bound holds with respect to the Lyapunov norm
${\mathcal L}_\kappa$ on the bundle of twisted exact currents:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:recbound3}
{\mathcal L}_{h_j} ( E_j ) \leq {\mathcal L}_{h_{j+1}} (E_{j+1}) +
{\mathcal L}_{h_j} ( F_j )\,.
\end{equation}
In fact, the restriction of the distributional cocycle $\{g_t\vert t\in\R\}$ to the bundle $\mathcal E^{-1}_\kappa(M)$
of twisted exact currents is isometric with respect to the norm ${\mathcal L}_\kappa$. For each $\ell\in \N$, we derive from
\eqref{eq:recbound3} by (reverse) induction on $1\leq j < \ell$ that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Ebound}
{\mathcal L}_{h_1} ( E_1) \leq {\mathcal L}_{h_\ell} (E_\ell) + \sum_{j=1}^{\ell-1}
{\mathcal L}_{h_j} ( F_j ) \,.
\end{equation}
By the splitting \eqref{eq:gammasplit} it follows that
$$
g_{-\tau_j} (Z_{j+1} + R_{j+1}) = g_{-\tau_j} g_{t_{j+1}} (A) = g_{t_j}(A) = Z_j + R_j\,,
$$
hence by the identity \eqref{eq:hrepr}
$$
g_{-\tau_j} (E_{j+1}+ \omega_{j+1} + R_{j+1}) = E_j + \omega_j + R_j\,.
$$
Thus, by the definition in formula~\eqref{eq:Eid1}, we conclude that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Eid2}
F_j= g_{-\tau_j} (\omega_{j+1}+ R_{j+1}) - (\omega_j +R_j)\,,
\end{equation}
hence by compactness, be Lemma \ref{lemma:L_exact}, and by formulas~\eqref{eq:Gammadeltabound} and~\eqref{eq:hrepr}, there exists a constant $C^{(2)}_K>1$ such that
$$
\begin{aligned}
{\mathcal L}_{h_j} ( F_j ) & \leq C^{(2)}_K \left( \vert g_{-\tau_j} (\omega_{j+1}+ R_{j+1}) \vert_{-1}
+\vert \omega_j +R_j\vert_{-1} \right) \\ &\leq C^{(2)}_K \left( e^{2\tau_j} ( \Vert [Z_{j+1}] \Vert_{h_j, \eta_j} + \zeta) + \Vert [Z_{j}] \Vert_{h_j, \eta_j} + \zeta\right) \,,
\end{aligned}
$$
hence, by \eqref{eq:Hbound}, there exists a constant $C^{(3)}_K>0$ such that, for all $\ell>1$, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:remainderbound2}
\begin{aligned}
\sum_{j=1}^{\ell-1} {\mathcal L}_{h_j} ( F_j ) \leq C^{(3)}_K\, (1+\zeta) &(1+\Vert [Z_\ell] \Vert_{h_\ell, \eta_\ell}) \\ &\times \exp \left(\int_{{t}_1}^{{t}_\ell} \Lambda_\kappa (g_t[h, \eta] ) dt \right) \left( \sum_{j=1}^{\ell-1} \,e^{2\tau_j} \right)^2\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
By the splitting \eqref{eq:gammasplit} and by formulas~\eqref{eq:Gammadeltabound}, \eqref{eq:Hbound}, \eqref{eq:hrepr}, \eqref{eq:Ebound} and \eqref{eq:remainderbound2}, there exists a constant $C^{(4)}_K >0$
such that for all $\ell>1$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:finalest}
\begin{aligned}
\vert g_{t_1}(A) \vert_{-1} \leq C^{(4)}_K\, (1+\zeta) \,
&(1+\vert g_{t_\ell}(A) \vert_{-1}) \, \\ &\times \exp\left( \int_{{t}_1}^{{t}_\ell} \Lambda_\kappa(g_t[h,\eta]) \,dt\right)
\left ( \sum_{j=1}^{\ell-1} \,e^{2\tau_j} \right)^2\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Finally, by the bound~\eqref{eq:cocycleestimate}, since ${t}_0=0$,
\begin{equation}
\vert A \vert_{-1} \leq e^{2 {t}_1} \, \vert g_{t_1}(A) \vert_{-1} \,.
\end{equation}
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of the Main Results}
\label{sec:Proofs}
In this section we complete the proof of the main results stated in the Introduction.
For any $h\in\mathcal H(\kappa)$, let $t_0=0$ and let $\{{t}_n \vert n\in\N\}$ denote, as above, a non-decreasing sequence of visiting times of the orbit $\{g_{t}(h) \vert t \geq 0\}$ to a compact set $K\subset
\mathcal H(\kappa) $.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:twist_integral_bound}
There exist constants $\alpha_\kappa$, $\alpha'_\kappa$ and $N_\kappa>0$
such that, for almost all Abelian differential $h \in \mathcal H (\kappa)$ with respect to the Masur--Veech
measure, there exists a constant $C_\kappa (h)>0$ such that the following holds. For any $x\in M$ with forward regular horizontal trajectory,
for all $\lambda \in \R\setminus \{0\}$, for all $n\in \N$ and for all functions $f \in H^1_h(M)$ of zero average, we have
$$
\left\vert \int_0^{e^{t_n} } e^{ 2\pi \imath \lambda t} f \circ \phi^S_t (x) \,dt \right\vert
\leq C_\kappa (h) \vert f \vert_{1} \frac{(1+ \lambda^2)^{\frac{N_\kappa}{2} }}{\vert \lambda \vert^{\frac{\alpha_\kappa}{\alpha'_\kappa}}} e^{(1-\alpha_\kappa) t_n} \left( \sum_{j=0}^{n-1} e^{2({t}_{j+1}-{t}_j)} \right)^3.
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $A:= A_{h, \lambda} (x, e^{t_n})$ denote the current defined, for any $1$-form $\beta$ on $M$, as
$$
A(\beta) := \int_0^{e^{t_n} } e^{ 2\pi \imath \lambda t} \imath_S \beta \circ \phi^S_t (x) \,dt \,.
$$
Let then $A^{\#}$ denote the current
$$
A^{\#} := A+ A(\eta_T) \eta_S\,.
$$
By definition, for any $1$-form $\beta$ on $M$, we have
$$
A^{\#}(\beta) := \int_0^{e^{t_n} } e^{ 2\pi \imath \lambda t} \imath_S \alpha \circ \phi^S_t (x) \,dt -\,\, \frac{e^{ 2\pi \imath \lambda e^{t_n}} -1 } { 2\pi \imath \lambda } \int_M \imath_S \beta \,\omega_h\,.
$$
We prove below a bound for the Sobolev norm of the current $A^{\#}$ in $\Omega^1H_h^{-1}(M)$ and derive the result for large $\lambda\in \R$ from such an estimate applied
to $1$-forms $\beta_f = f \eta_T$ for which, whenever $f \in H^1_h(M)$ has zero average, we have
$$
A^{\#} (\beta_f) = A(\beta_f) = \int_0^{e^{t_n} } e^{ 2\pi \imath \lambda t}f \circ \phi^S_t (x) \,dt \,.
$$
Let $h_n := g_{t_n} (h)$ and let $(S_n, T_n)$ denote its horizontal and vertical vector fields.
By definition, the current $g_{t_n} (A)$ is given by the formula
$$
g_{t_n} (A) (\beta)= \int_0^{1 } e^{ 2\pi \imath e^{t_n}\lambda t} \imath_{S_n} \beta \circ \phi^{S_n}_t (x) \,dt \,,
$$
while the current $g_{t_n} (A^{\#})$ is given by the formula
$$
g_{t_n} (A^{\#}) (\beta)= g_{t_n} (A)^{\#} (\beta) = \int_0^{1 } e^{ 2\pi \imath e^{t_n}\lambda t} \imath_{S_n} \beta \circ \phi^{S_n}_t (x) \,dt
-\,\, \frac{e^{ 2\pi \imath e^{t_n} \lambda} -1 } { 2\pi \imath e^{t_n} \lambda } \int_M \imath_{S_n} \beta \,\omega_h\,.
$$
Since $h_n \in K$, by the Sobolev trace theorem (see Lemma~\ref{lemma:Sob_trace}) there exists a constant $C_K>0$ such that,
for all $n\in \N$, we have
$$
\vert g_{t_n} (A^{\#}) (\beta) \vert \leq \vert g_{t_n} (A) (\beta)\vert \leq \int_0^{1 } \vert \imath_{S_n} \beta \circ \phi^{S_n}_t (x)\vert \,dt
\leq C_K \vert \beta \vert_{H^{-1}_{h_n}(M)} \,,
$$
hence
$$
\vert g_{t_n} (A^{\#})\vert_{-1} \leq \vert g_{t_n} (A)\vert_{-1} \leq C_K \,.
$$
By definition and by Lemma~\ref{lemma:dist_closed}, there exists a constant
$\zeta_K>0$ such that, for any $t>0$ with $g_{t} (h) \in K$ there exists $Z \in
Z^{-1}_{g_{t}(h, \eta)}(M)$ such that
$$
\vert g_{t} (A^{\#}) -Z \vert_{-1} \leq \zeta_K\,,
$$
hence $A^{\#} \in \mathcal A_K (\zeta_K)$. By Lemma~\ref{lemma:iterativest} with $\eta = \lambda \re ( h)$ there exists a constant $C'_K>0$ such that we have the estimate
$$
\vert A^{\#} \vert_{-1} \leq C'_K \exp \left(\int_0^{{t}_n} \Lambda_\kappa (g_t [h, \lambda\re(h)] )dt \right)
\left( \sum_{j=0}^{n-1} e^{2({t}_{j+1}-{t}_j)} \right)^3
$$
and, by Lemma \ref{lemma:growth_3} for almost all $h\in \mathcal H(\kappa)$, there exist constants $\alpha_\kappa$, $\alpha'_\kappa$
and $N'_\kappa>0$ such that, for almost all Abelian differential $h \in \mathcal H (\kappa)$ with respect to the Masur--Veech measure there exists a constant $C_\kappa (h)>0$ such that, for all $n\in \N$, for all
$\lambda \in \R$ with $\vert \lambda \vert \geq e^{-\alpha'_\kappa t_n}$, we have
$$
\exp \left( \int_0^{t_n} \Lambda_\kappa (g_t [h,\lambda \re(h)] ) dt \right)\leq C_\kappa (h)
(1+ \lambda^2)^{\frac{N'_\kappa}{2} } e^{(1-\alpha_\kappa) t_n}\,.
$$
For $\vert \lambda \vert \leq e^{-\alpha'_\kappa t_n}$, by the Sobolev trace theorem (see Lemma~\ref{lemma:Sob_trace}) there exists a constant $C'_\kappa (h) >0$
such that we have
$$
\begin{aligned}
\left\vert \int_0^{e^{t_n} } e^{ 2\pi \imath \lambda t} f \circ \phi^S_t (x) \,dt \right\vert
&\leq C'_\kappa (h) \vert f \vert_1 e^{t_n} \\ & = C'_\kappa (h) \vert f \vert_1 e^{\alpha_\kappa t_n} e^{(1-\alpha_\kappa)t_n}
\leq C'_\kappa (h) \vert f \vert_1 \vert \lambda \vert^{- \frac{\alpha_\kappa}{\alpha'_\kappa} } e^{(1-\alpha_\kappa)t_n}\,.
\end{aligned}
$$
The argument is therefore concluded.
\end{proof}
To conclude the proof of our main results we recall a decomposition lemma from \cite{AtF08} (Lemma 5.1). The point of this decomposition lemma is that it allows to reduce
the proof of upper bounds for (twisted) integrals along arbitrary orbit arcs to upper bounds on integrals along special ``best returns'' orbit arcs, generated by the action of the renormalization (the Teichm\"uller flow), and for which the desired bounds were derived above in Lemma~\ref{lemma:twist_integral_bound}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:chop}
Let $h\in {\mathcal H}(\kappa)$ and let $\{t_n\}_{n \in \N}$ be any non-decreasing divergent sequence of positive real numbers. For any $(x,\mathcal T) \in M \times \R^+$ such that $x\in M$ has forward regular horizontal trajectory, the horizontal orbit segment $\gamma_{h,x}(\mathcal T)$ has a decomposition into consecutive sub-segments,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:chop}
\gamma_{h, x}(\mathcal T) = \sum_{\ell=1}^n \sum_{m=1}^{m_\ell} \gamma_{h, x_{\ell,m}}(\mathcal T_\ell)\,\, + \,\,
\gamma_{h,y}(\tau) \,,
\end{equation}
such that $n:= \max \{ \ell \in \N \vert \mathcal T_\ell \leq \mathcal T\}$ and, for all $1\leq \ell \leq n$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:chopest}
m_\ell \leq e^{t_{\ell+1} - t_\ell}\,, \quad \mathcal T_\ell = e^{t_\ell} \quad \text{\rm and} \quad \tau \leq e^{t_1}\,.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
We are finally ready to complete the proof of our main theorem, stated as Theorem~\ref{thm:Twist_Erg} in the Introduction. We state it again below for the convenience of the reader.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:twist_integral_bound}
There exist constants $\alpha_\kappa$, $\beta_\kappa$ and $N_\kappa>0$
such that, for almost all Abelian differential $h \in \mathcal H (\kappa)$ with respect to the Masur--Veech
measure there exists a constant $C_\kappa (h)>0$ such that for all $\lambda \in \R\setminus \{0\}$, for
all $(x, \mathcal T) \in M\times \R^+$, such that $x\in M$ has forward regular horizontal trajectory, and for all $f \in H^1_h(M)$ of zero average,
we have the estimate
$$
\left\vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{ 2\pi \imath \lambda t} f \circ \phi^S_t (x) \,dt \right\vert
\leq C_\kappa (h) \vert f \vert_{1} \frac{(1+ \lambda^2)^{\frac{N_\kappa}{2} }}{\vert \lambda \vert^{\beta_\kappa}} \, \mathcal T^{1-\alpha_\kappa}.
$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} Let $(t_n)$ denote a sequence of return times of the orbit $\{g_t(h)\}$ to a compact set
$K \subset \mathcal H(\kappa)$ such that $\lim_{n\to +\infty} t_n/n = \mu \not =0$. It follows
that for any $\eta\in (0, \mu)$ there exists $n_\eta\in \N$ such that we have
$$
(\mu -\eta) n \leq t_n \leq (\mu +\eta) n \,, \quad \text{ for all } n\geq n_\eta\,.
$$
It follows in particular that there exists a constant $C(\mu,\eta,h)>0$ such that
$$
\sum_{j=0}^{n-1} e^{2(t_{j+1}-t_j)} \leq C(\mu,\eta,h) \, e^{4 \eta n} \,.
$$
In fact, for $n>n_\eta$, by geometric summation we have
$$
\begin{aligned}
\sum_{j=0}^{n-1} e^{2(t_{j+1}-t_j)} &\leq \sum_{j=0}^{n_\eta-1} e^{2(t_{j+1}-t_j)} + e^{2(\mu+\eta)} \sum_{j=n_\eta}^{n-1} e^{4\eta n}
\\ &\leq \sum_{j=0}^{n_\eta-1} e^{2(t_{j+1}-t_j)} + e^{2(\mu+\eta) } \frac{ e^{4\eta n } - e^{4n_\eta}}{e^{4\eta}-1}\,,
\end{aligned}
$$
hence the above bound holds with
$$
C(\mu,\eta,h):= \sum_{j=0}^{n_\eta-1} e^{2(t_{j+1}-t_j)} + \frac{ e^{2(\mu+\eta) }}{e^{4\eta}-1}\,.
$$
From Lemma~\ref{lemma:twist_integral_bound} we derive, for all $\ell\in \{1, \dots, n\}$, the bounds
$$
\left\vert \int_0^{\mathcal T_\ell } e^{ 2\pi \imath \lambda t} f \circ \phi^S_t (x_{\ell,m}) \,dt \right\vert
\leq C_\kappa (\mu, \eta, h) \vert f \vert_{1} \frac{(1+ \lambda^2)^{\frac{N_\kappa}{2} }}{\vert \lambda \vert^{\frac{\alpha_\kappa}{\alpha'_\kappa}}} e^{(1-\alpha_\kappa)t_\ell + 12\eta \ell} \,\,.
$$
Given the sequence $(t_n)$ and any $(x, \mathcal T) \in M\times \R^+$ such that $x\in M$ has forward regular horizontal trajectory, we consider the induced decomposition of a horizontal orbit segment $\gamma_{h,x}(\mathcal T)$ given by Lemma~\ref{lemma:chop}.
For all $\ell\in \{1, \dots, n\}$ and $m\in \{1, \dots, m_\ell\}$, let $\tau_{\ell,m}$ denote the time of the
point $x_{\ell,m}$ along the orbit. By the definitions $\tau_{\ell,m}=\sum_{j=1}^{\ell-1} m_j\mathcal T_j + (m-1)\mathcal T_\ell$. Since by Lemma~\ref{lemma:chop} we have a decomposition
$$
\begin{aligned}
\int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{ 2\pi \imath \lambda t} f \circ \phi^S_t (x) \,dt &=
\sum_{\ell=1}^n \sum_{m=1}^{m_\ell}
e^{ 2\pi \imath \lambda \tau_{\ell,m} } \int_0^{\mathcal T_\ell} e^{ 2\pi \imath \lambda t} f \circ \phi^S_t (x_{\ell,m}) \,dt \\ &+ \,\, \int_{\mathcal T-\tau} ^{\mathcal T} e^{ 2\pi \imath \lambda t} f \circ \phi^S_t (x) \,dt \,,
\end{aligned}
$$
we derive the bound
$$
\left\vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{ 2\pi \imath \lambda t} f \circ \phi^S_t (x) \,dt \right\vert
\leq C_\kappa (\mu, \eta, h) \vert f \vert_{1} \frac{(1+ \lambda^2)^{\frac{N_\kappa}{2} }}{\vert \lambda \vert^{\frac{\alpha_\kappa}{\alpha'_\kappa}}} \left( \sum_{\ell=1}^n m_\ell e^{(1-\alpha_\kappa)t_\ell + 12\eta \ell} + \tau \right)\,.
$$
Finally we have, since by construction $\mathcal T_n = e^{t_n} \leq \mathcal T$, hence $n \leq (\mu-\eta)^{-1} \log {\mathcal T}$,
\begin{multline*}
\sum_{\ell=1}^n m_\ell e^{(1-\alpha_\kappa)t_\ell + 12\eta \ell} \leq
C'_\eta (\mu, \eta, h) \sum_{\ell=1}^n e^{(1-\alpha_\kappa)(\mu-\eta)\ell + 16\eta \ell} \\ \leq C''_\eta(\mu, \eta,h)
e^{ [(1-\alpha_\kappa)(\mu-\eta) +16\eta] n } \leq C^{(3)}_\eta(\mu, \eta, h) \mathcal T ^{1-\alpha_\kappa + (\mu-\eta)^{-1}16\eta }\,,
\end{multline*}
which, by taking $\eta >0$ such that $(\mu-\eta)^{-1} 32\eta < \alpha_\kappa$, implies the estimate
$$
\left\vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{ 2\pi \imath \lambda t} f \circ \phi^S_t (x) \,dt \right\vert
\leq C_\kappa (h) \vert f \vert_{1} \frac{(1+ \lambda^2)^{\frac{N_\kappa}{2} }}{\vert \lambda \vert^{\frac{\alpha_\kappa}{\alpha'_\kappa}}} \mathcal T ^{ 1-\frac{\alpha_\kappa}{2}}\,.
$$
The argument is therefore complete. (Note that the exponent $\alpha_\kappa$, $\beta_\kappa$, and $N_\kappa$ in the statement are respectively equal to $\alpha_\kappa/2$,
$\alpha_\kappa/\alpha'_\kappa$ and $N_\kappa$ in terms of the positive constants $\alpha_\kappa$, $\alpha'_\kappa$ and $N_\kappa$ of Lemma~\ref{lemma:twist_integral_bound}).\end{proof}
The remaining main results stated in the Introduction are easily derived (see below) from the above Theorem
\ref{thm:twist_integral_bound} (Theorem~\ref{thm:Twist_Erg} in the Introduction) and from the general
results of section~\ref{sec:spectral_dim} below.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:Effect_Erg}]
We have a Fourier decomposition
$$
F(x, \theta) = \sum_{n\in \Z} f_n (x) e^{2\pi \imath n \theta} \,, \quad \text{ for } (x, \theta) \in M\times \T\,.
$$
By the Fourier decomposition we have
$$
\int_0^{\mathcal T} F\circ \Phi^{S, \lambda}(x, \theta) dt = \sum_{n\in \Z} e^{2\pi \imath \lambda n \theta}\int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{2\pi \imath \lambda n t} f_n\circ \phi^S_t (x) dt\,.
$$
By Theorem~\ref{thm:twist_integral_bound} (Theorem~\ref{thm:Twist_Erg}) we have, for $n\not=0$,
$$
\left\vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{2\pi \imath \lambda n t} f_n\circ \phi^S_t (x) dt \right\vert
\leq C_\lambda(h) (1+ n^2)^{\frac{N_\kappa-\beta_\kappa}{2}} \vert f_n \vert_1 {\mathcal T}^{1-\alpha'_\kappa}\,.
$$
For $n=0$, by Theorem~\ref{thm:AtF08} (see \cite{AtF08}) or, in fact, for almost all $h\in \mathcal H(\kappa)$ already by the results of~\cite{F02}, we have
$$
\left\vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} f_0\circ \phi^S_t (x) dt - \mathcal T \int_{M\times \T} F d\omega_h d\theta \right\vert
\leq C_\lambda(h) \vert f_0 \vert_1 {\mathcal T}^{1-\alpha_\kappa}\,.
$$
By definition, for any $s \geq 0$, the Sobolev space $H^s(\T, H^1(M))$ is the completion of the space $C^\infty (M\times \T ) $ with respect to the norm
$$
\Vert F \Vert_{H^s(\T, H^1(M))}:= \left( \sum_{n\in \Z} (1+ n^2)^{s} \vert f_n \vert^2_{H^1(M)} \right)^{1/2}\,.
$$
Since, by H\"older inequality, we have
$$
\sum_{n\in \Z} (1+ n^2)^{\frac{N_\kappa-\beta_\kappa}{2}} \vert f_n \vert_1
\leq \left( \sum_{n\in \Z} (1+ n^2)^{N_\kappa-\beta_\kappa -s} \right)^{1/2} \Vert F \Vert_{H^s(\T, H^1(M))}\,,
$$
it follows that for $s > N_\kappa-\beta_\kappa +1$ there exists a constant $C_{\kappa,s}>0$ such that
$$
\left\vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} F\circ \Phi^{S, \lambda}(x, \theta) dt - \mathcal T \int_{M\times \T} F d\omega_h d\theta\right\vert \leq C_{\kappa,s} C_\lambda(h)
\Vert F \Vert_{H^s(\T, H^1(M))} {\mathcal T}^{1-\alpha''_\kappa}\,,
$$
for any $\alpha''_\kappa \leq \min (\alpha_\kappa, \alpha'_\kappa)$, which completes the proof of the theorem.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Corollary~\ref{cor:spectral}] It is an immediate consequence of Theorem~\ref{thm:twist_integral_bound} (Theorem~\ref{thm:Twist_Erg} in the Introduction) and of Lemma~\ref{lemma:spectral_1} below, which derives a lower bound on spectral dimensions from an upper bound on twisted ergodic integrals.
\end{proof}
Corollary~\ref{cor:Eff_WM} follows from Theorem~\ref{thm:twist_integral_bound}
(Theorem~\ref{thm:Twist_Erg} in the Introduction), the quantitative equidistribution result for translation flows stated in Theorem~\ref{thm:AtF08} (see also \cite{F02}) and Lemma~\ref{lemma:Eff_WM}, which derives
a bound on the speed of weak mixing from bounds on twisted ergodic integrals.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Corollary~\ref{cor:Eff_WM}]
By integration by parts we have
$$
\begin{aligned}
\int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{2\pi \imath \lambda t} f \circ \phi^S_t dt &= \int_0^{\mathcal T}
\frac{1}{2\pi\imath \lambda} (\frac{d}{dt} e^{2\pi \imath \lambda t}) f \circ \phi^S_t dt
\\ &= \frac{1}{2\pi\imath \lambda} \left( e^{2\pi \imath \lambda {\mathcal T}} f \circ \phi^S_{\mathcal T} - f -
\int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{2\pi \imath \lambda t} Sf \circ \phi^S_t dt \right)
\end{aligned}
$$
hence for all $\lambda \not=0$, we have
$$
\begin{aligned}
\vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{2\pi \lambda t} f \circ \phi^S_t dt \vert_{L^2_h(M)} &\leq
\frac{1}{\pi \lambda} \vert f \vert_{L^2_h(M)} \\ &+ \frac{1}{2\pi \lambda} \vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{2\pi \imath \lambda t} Sf \circ \phi^S_t dt \vert_{L^2_h(M)}
\end{aligned}
$$
By iterating the integration by parts (for $\vert \lambda \vert \geq 1$) we derive the bound
$$
\begin{aligned}
\vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{2\pi \lambda t} f \circ \phi^S_t dt \vert_{L^2_h(M)} &\leq
\sum_{j=0}^{k-1} \frac{1}{\vert \pi \lambda\vert^{j+1}} \vert S^j f \vert_{L^2_h(M)} \\ &+ \frac{1}{\vert 2\pi \lambda\vert^k} \vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{2\pi \imath \lambda t} S^k f \circ \phi^S_t dt \vert_{L^2_h(M)}
\end{aligned}
$$
It follows that under the assumption that $S^j f \in L^2_h(M)$, for all $j\in \{0, \dots, N_\kappa\}$, and that
$f$ and $S^{N_\kappa} f \in H^1_h(M)$, the hypothesis of Lemma~\ref{lemma:Eff_WM}, for the part concerning
the bound on twisted integrals, are a consequence of Theorem~\ref{thm:twist_integral_bound}. The
hypothesis of Lemma~\ref{lemma:Eff_WM}, for the part concerning the bounds on ergodic integrals
($\lambda =0$), follows from Theorem~\ref{thm:AtF08} for functions of zero average. The corollary
is therefore proved.
\end{proof}
\section{Spectral dimension and effective weak mixing}
\label{sec:spectral_dim}
The content of this section is standard. We reproduce it here for the convenience of the reader.
We recall that for any measure $\sigma$ on $\R$ we can defined the lower and upper lower local
dimension, $\underline{d}_\sigma(\lambda)$ and $\overline{d}_\sigma(\lambda) $, at $\lambda\in \R$,
as follows:
$$
\begin{aligned}
&\underline{d}_\sigma(\lambda):= \underline{\lim}_{r\to 0^+} \frac{ \log \sigma ([\lambda -r, \lambda +r])}{\log r}\,, \\
& \overline{d}_\sigma(\lambda):= \overline{\lim}_{r\to 0^+} \frac{ \log \sigma ([\lambda -r, \lambda +r])}{\log r}\,.
\end{aligned}
$$
Let $\sigma_f$ denote the spectral measure of a function $f\in L^2(M, \mu)$ for
a flow $(\phi_\R)$ which preserves the probability measure $\mu$ on $M$. The measure $\sigma_f$ is a complex measure on $\R$ of finite total mass equal to
$\Vert f \Vert^2$. Let $\underline{d}_f(\lambda)$ and $\overline{d}_f(\lambda)$ denote the
lower and upper local dimensions of the measure $\sigma_f$ at $\lambda \in \R$.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:spectral_1} Let us assume that given $\lambda \in \R$ and a function $f\in L^2(M, \mu)$ there exist constants $C_f(\lambda)>0$ and $0\leq \alpha_- \leq \alpha_+<1$ such that, for all $\mathcal T\geq {\mathcal T}_0>0$,
$$
C_f(\lambda)^{-1} \mathcal T^{1-\alpha_+} \leq \Vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{-2\pi \imath \lambda t} f\circ \phi_t \,dt \Vert_{L^2(M,\mu)} \leq C_f(\lambda) {\mathcal T}^{1-\alpha_-} \,.
$$
Then there exist constants $C'_f(\lambda)$ and $r_0>0$ such that for all $r\in (0, r_0)$ we have
$$
C'_f(\lambda)^{-1} r ^{\frac{2\alpha_+}{1-\alpha_+} } \leq \sigma_f([\lambda -r, \lambda +r] ) \leq 8 C_f(\lambda) r ^{2\alpha_-}\,.
$$
In particular we derive
$$
2 \alpha_- \leq \underline{d}_f(\lambda) \leq \overline{d}_f(\lambda) \leq \frac{2\alpha_+}{1-\alpha_+}\,.
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} By spectral theory we have
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:spectral}
\begin{aligned}
\Vert &\int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{-2\pi \imath \lambda t} f\circ \phi_t(\cdot) \,dt \Vert^2_{L^2(M,\mu)} =
\Vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{-2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi) t }dt \Vert^2_{L^2(\R,d\sigma_f(\xi))} \\ & =
\int_\R \vert \frac{ e^{-2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi) {\mathcal T}} -1}{ 2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi)}
\vert^2 d\sigma_f(\xi) = {\mathcal T}^2 \int_\R \vert \frac{ e^{-2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi) {\mathcal T}} -1}{ 2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi){\mathcal T}} \vert^2 d\sigma_f(\xi) \,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Let $\chi:\R \to \R^+$ denote the function
$$
\chi (x) := \left\vert \frac{ e^{-2\pi \imath x} -1}{ 2\pi \imath x} \right\vert^2 \,.
$$
Let $c>0$ be the strictly positive constant defined as
$$
c:= \min_{x\in [-1/2, 1/2] } \chi (x) \,\geq\, \frac{1}{2} \,.
$$
It follows that
$$
c {\mathcal T}^2 \sigma_f( [\lambda-\frac{1}{2{\mathcal T}}, \lambda + \frac{1}{2{\mathcal T}}]) \leq \Vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{-2\pi \imath \lambda t} f\circ \phi_t \,dt \Vert^2_{L^2(M,\mu)}\,,
$$
which is equivalent to the estimate
$$
\sigma_f( [\lambda-r, \lambda + r]) \leq 4 c^{-1} r^2 \Vert \int_0^{\frac{1}{2r}} e^{-2\pi \imath \lambda t} f\circ \phi_t \,dt \Vert^2_{L^2(M,\mu)}\,,
$$
Under the hypothesis we have
$$
\sigma_f( [\lambda-r, \lambda + r]) \leq 4 c^{-1} C_f(\lambda) r^2 r^{-2(1-\alpha_-)} =
4 c^{-1} C_f(\lambda) r^{2 \alpha_-}\,.
$$
For the lower bound we write
$$
\begin{aligned}
\int_\R &\vert \frac{ e^{-2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi) {\mathcal T}} -1}{ 2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi){\mathcal T}}
\vert^2 d\sigma_f(\xi)= \int_{\vert \lambda -\xi \vert \leq r} \vert \frac{ e^{-2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi) {\mathcal T}} -1}{ 2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi){\mathcal T}} \vert^2 d\sigma_f(\xi) \\ &+ \int_{\vert \lambda -\xi \vert \geq r} \vert \frac{ e^{-2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi) {\mathcal T}} -1}{ 2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi){\mathcal T}} \vert^2 d\sigma_f(\xi)\,.
\end{aligned}
$$
We have the following bounds: there exists $C>0$ such that
$$
\begin{aligned}
\int_{\vert \lambda -\xi \vert \leq r} \vert \frac{ e^{-2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi) {\mathcal T}} -1}{ 2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi){\mathcal T}} \vert^2 d\sigma_f(\xi) &\leq C \sigma_f([\lambda -r , \lambda + r ])\,, \\
\int_{\vert \lambda -\xi \vert \geq r} \vert \frac{ e^{-2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi) {\mathcal T}} -1}{ 2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi){\mathcal T}} \vert^2 d\sigma_f(\xi) &\leq \frac{C \Vert f \Vert^2}{r^2 {\mathcal T}^2} \,,
\end{aligned}
$$
hence we derive the lower bound
$$
\sigma_f([\lambda -r , \lambda + r ]) \geq \frac{C^{-1}}{{\mathcal T}^2} \Vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{-2\pi \imath \lambda t} f\circ \phi_t \,dt \Vert^2_{L^2(M,\mu)} - \frac{\Vert f \Vert^2}{r^2 {\mathcal T}^2} \,.
$$
Finally, under the assumption that we have a lower bound
$$
\Vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{-2\pi \imath \lambda t} f\circ \phi_t \,dt \Vert_{L^2(M,\mu)} \geq C_f(\lambda)^{-1} {\mathcal T}^{1-\alpha_+}\,,
$$
we derive that there exists $C'_f(\lambda)>0$ such that
$$
\sigma_f([\lambda -r , \lambda + r ]) \geq C'_f (\lambda) {\mathcal T}^{-2\alpha_+} - \frac{ \Vert f \Vert^2 }{r^2 {\mathcal T}^2}
$$
then, by taking ${\mathcal T} = \left(\frac{2\Vert f \Vert}{[C'_f(\lambda)]^{1/2} r}\right)^{\frac{1}{1-\alpha_+}}$, there exists a constant $C_f^{(\alpha)}>0$ such that
$$
\sigma_f([\lambda -r , \lambda + r ]) \geq C_f^{(\alpha)} r^{\frac{2 \alpha_+}{1-\alpha_+}} \,.
$$
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} Let us assume that given $\lambda \in \R$ and a function $f\in L^2(M, \mu)$ there exist constants $C_f(\lambda)>0$, $r_0>0$ and $0\leq \beta_- \leq \beta_+ \leq 1$ such that, for all $0<r\leq r_0$,
$$
C_f(\lambda)^{-1} r ^{2\beta_+ } \leq \sigma_f([\lambda -r, \lambda +r] ) \leq C_f(\lambda) r ^{2\beta_-}\,.
$$
Then there exist constants $C'_f(\lambda)$ and $ \mathcal T_0>0$ such that for all ${\mathcal T}\geq {\mathcal T}_0\geq e$ we have
$$
C'_f(\lambda)^{-1} {\mathcal T}^{1-\beta_+} \leq \Vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{-2\pi \imath \lambda t} f\circ \phi_t \,dt \Vert_{L^2(M,\mu)} \leq C'_f(\lambda) \max\{{\mathcal T}^{1-\beta_-} , (\log {\mathcal T})^{1/2}\} \,.
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} For fixed $\lambda \in \R$ and ${\mathcal T}>0$ and for all $n\in \N$ we let $I_n (\lambda)\subset \R$ denote the set defined as follows:
$$
I_n := \{ \xi \in \R : {\mathcal T}\vert \xi -\lambda \vert \leq 2^{n-2} \}.
$$
By formula \eqref{eq:spectral}, we then write (for $m>1$ to be chosen later)
$$
\begin{aligned}
\Vert &\int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{-2\pi \imath \lambda t} f\circ \phi_t \, dt \Vert^2_{L^2(M,\mu)}
\leq {\mathcal T}^2 \int_{I_0} \vert \frac{ e^{-2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi) {\mathcal T}} -1}{ 2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi){\mathcal T}} \vert^2 d\sigma_f(\xi) \\ &+ {\mathcal T}^2 \sum_{n= 1}^m \int_{I_n\setminus I_{n-1}} \vert \frac{ e^{-2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi) {\mathcal T}} -1}{ 2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi){\mathcal T}} \vert^2 d\sigma_f(\xi) + {\mathcal T}^2 2^{-2(m-2)} \sigma_f (\R\setminus I_m)\,.
\end{aligned}
$$
Let us denote below by $C$, $C_f(\lambda)$, $C'_f(\lambda)$ positive constants, independent of $\mathcal T \in \R$, but possibly dependent on the function $f\in L^2(M, \mu)$ or on the phase constant $\lambda \in \R$, which may vary from line to line throughout the argument.
\smallskip
Since there exists a (universal) constant $C>0$ such that
$$
C^{-1} \leq \vert \frac{ e^{-2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi) {\mathcal T}} -1}{ 2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi){\mathcal T}} \vert \leq C\,,
\quad \text{ for all } \xi \in I_0 \,,
$$
it follows by the assumptions that there exists a constant $C_f(\lambda)>0$ such that
$$
C_f(\lambda)^{-1} {\mathcal T}^{-2\beta_+} \leq \int_{I_0} \vert \frac{ e^{-2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi) {\mathcal T}} -1}{ 2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi){\mathcal T}} \vert^2 d\sigma_f(\xi) \leq C_f(\lambda) {\mathcal T}^{-2\beta_-} \,.
$$
Then from the hypothesis and the inequality
$$
\vert \frac{ e^{-2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi) {\mathcal T}} -1}{ 2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi){\mathcal T}} \vert \leq \frac{2^{-(n-3)} }{\pi } \,, \quad \text{ for all } \xi \not \in I_{n-1}\,,
$$
it follows that there exist constant $C_f(\lambda), C'_f(\lambda)>0$ such that
$$
\begin{aligned}
\int_{I_n\setminus I_{n-1}} \vert \frac{ e^{-2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi) {\mathcal T}} -1}{ 2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi){\mathcal T}} \vert^2 d\sigma_f(\xi) &\leq C_f(\lambda) \frac{ 2^{-2(n-3)} }{\pi^2 }
\left (\frac{2^{n-2} }{ {\mathcal T}} \right)^{2\beta_-} \\ &= \frac{C'_f(\lambda) }{16^{\beta_-} } {\mathcal T}^{-2\beta_-} \, 2^{-(2-2\beta_-)n} \,.
\end{aligned}
$$
It then follows that whenever $\beta_- <1$ there exists a constant $C^{(\beta_-)}_f(\lambda)>0$ such that, for all ${\mathcal T} >{\mathcal T}_0$, we have
$$
\sum_{n= 1}^{+\infty} \int_{I_n\setminus I_{n-1}} \vert \frac{ e^{-2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi) {\mathcal T}} -1}{ 2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi){\mathcal T}} \vert^2 d\sigma_f(\xi) \leq C^{(\beta_-)}_f(\lambda) {\mathcal T}^{-2\beta_-} \,,
$$
hence the argument is completed in this case. For $\beta_-=1$ we have
$$
\sum_{n= 1}^m \int_{I_n\setminus I_{n-1}} \vert \frac{ e^{-2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi) {\mathcal T}} -1}{ 2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi){\mathcal T}} \vert^2 d\sigma_f(\xi) \leq \frac{ C_f(\lambda) }{4} {\mathcal T}^{-2} m\,,
$$
hence, by taking $m= [ \frac{\log {\mathcal T}}{\log 2}]$ we derive that
$$
\sum_{n= 1}^m \int_{I_n\setminus I_{n-1}} \vert \frac{ e^{-2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi) {\mathcal T}} -1}{ 2\pi \imath (\lambda -\xi){\mathcal T}} \vert^2 d\sigma_f(\xi) + 2^{-2(m-2)} \Vert f \Vert^2 \leq
C'_f(\lambda) {\mathcal T}^{-2 } \log {\mathcal T} \,,
$$
thereby completing the argument in all cases.
\end{proof}
We conclude the section with a general lemma on effective weak mixing.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:Eff_WM}
Let $\phi_\R$ be a flow on a probability space $(M,\mu)$ and let $f\in L^2(M, \mu)$. Let us assume that there exists $\alpha$, $\beta>0$ such that there exists a constant $I(f)>1$ such that, for all $\lambda \in \R$ and for all ${\mathcal T}>1$, we have
$$
\begin{aligned}
\Vert &\int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{2\pi \imath \lambda t} f \circ \phi_t \,dt \Vert_{L^2(M,\mu)} \leq I(f)
\vert \lambda \vert^{-\beta} {\mathcal T}^{1-\alpha} \,, \\
&\text{ and } \quad \Vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} f \circ \phi_t \,dt \Vert_{L^2(M,\mu)} \leq I(f) {\mathcal T}^{1-\alpha}\,.
\end{aligned}
$$
Then there exist constants $\alpha' := \alpha' (\alpha, \beta)>0$ and $C>0$ such that
the following effective weak mixing bound holds. For all $g\in L^2(M, \mu)$ and for ${\mathcal T}>1$ we have
$$
\frac{1}{{\mathcal T}} \int_0^{\mathcal T} \vert \langle f\circ \phi_t, g\rangle_{L^2(M, \mu)}\vert^2 dt \leq C I(f) \Vert f \Vert_{L^2(M, \mu)} \Vert g \Vert^2_{L^2(M, \mu)} {\mathcal T}^{-\alpha'} \,.
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\sigma_{f,g}$ denote the spectral measure of the pair $f, g\in L^2(M,\mu)$. By definition, the measure
$\sigma_{f,g}$ is the Fourier transform of the absolutely continuous measure $\langle f \circ \phi_t , g\rangle dt$.
By properties of the Fourier transform, we can write
$$
\begin{aligned}
\int_0^{\mathcal T} \vert \langle f \circ \phi_t , g\rangle \vert^2 dt &= \int_\R \chi_{[0,{\mathcal T}]} \langle f \circ \phi_t , g\rangle
\overline{ \langle f \circ \phi_t , g\rangle} dt \\ &= \int_\R \left ( \int_0^{\mathcal T}
e^{2\pi \imath \lambda t} \langle f \circ \phi_t , g\rangle dt \right) d \bar \sigma_{f,g}(\lambda)
\end{aligned}
$$
Let $\eta>0$ such that $\beta \eta <\alpha$. Since by H\"older inequality
$$
\vert \int_0^{\mathcal T}
e^{2\pi \imath \lambda t} \langle f \circ \phi_t , g\rangle dt \vert \leq \Vert g \Vert_{L^2(M,\mu)} \times \Vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} e^{2\pi \imath \lambda t} f \circ \phi_t \,dt \Vert_{L^2(M,\mu)} \,,
$$
it follows that, for $\vert \lambda \vert \geq \mathcal {\mathcal T}^{-\eta}$, we have
$$
\begin{aligned}
\int_{\vert \lambda\vert \geq {\mathcal T}^{-\eta}} & \left ( \int_0^{\mathcal T}
e^{2\pi \imath \lambda t} \langle f \circ \phi_t , g\rangle dt \right) d \bar \sigma_{f,g}(\lambda)
\\ &\leq I(f) \mathcal T^{1-\alpha + \beta \eta} \Vert f \Vert_{L^2(M,\mu)} \Vert g \Vert^2_{L^2(M,\mu)} \,.
\end{aligned}
$$
Finally, we claim that we have
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:near_zero}
\sigma_{f,g}(-{\mathcal T}^{-\eta}, {\mathcal T}^{-\eta}) \leq [8 I(f)]^{1/2} \Vert g \Vert_{L^2(M,\mu)} {\mathcal T}^{-\alpha \eta}\,.
\end{equation}
In fact, by the hypothesis that
$$
\Vert \int_0^{\mathcal T} f \circ \phi_t \,dt \Vert_{L^2(M,\mu)} \leq I(f) {\mathcal T}^{1-\alpha}\,,
$$
and by Lemma~\ref{lemma:spectral_1} (with $\lambda=0$ and $r={\mathcal T}^{-\eta}$), we derive the bound
$$
\sigma_f (-{\mathcal T}^{-\eta}, {\mathcal T}^{-\eta}) \leq 8 I(f) {\mathcal T}^{-2 \alpha \eta}\,,
$$
then the claim follows from the general inequalities for spectral measures:
$$
\sigma_{f,g} \leq \sigma_f^{1/2}
\sigma_g^{1/2} \leq \Vert g \Vert_{L^2(M,\mu)} \sigma_f^{1/2} \,.
$$
By the bound in formula~\eqref{eq:near_zero} we then conclude that
$$
\begin{aligned}
\int_{\vert \lambda\vert \leq {\mathcal T}^{-\eta}} \left ( \int_0^{\mathcal T}
e^{2\pi \imath \lambda t} \langle f \circ \phi_t , g\rangle dt \right)& d \bar \sigma_{f,g}(\lambda)
\\ &\leq [8 I(f )]^{1/2} \Vert f \Vert_{L^2(M,\mu)} \Vert g \Vert^2_{L^2(M,\mu)} {\mathcal T}^{1-\alpha \eta} \,.
\end{aligned}
$$
The statement of the lemma follows.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
Recently, there has been an interest in ultra-wide-band-gap semiconductors
such as $\beta$-Ga$_2$O$_3$ because of their potential in pushing
high-power transitions to the next level of performance.\cite{Sasaki13,Green16} An important
figure of merit for such applications is the breakdown field and the
latter is directly correlated with the band gap. Here we draw attention to an
even higher band gap material, LiGaO$_2$.
LiGaO$_2$ has a wurtzite-derived crystal structure\cite{Marezio65,Ishii98} and band gap of $\sim$5.3-5.6 eV (at room temperature)
based on optical absorption\cite{Wolan98,Johnson2011,Ohkubo2002,Chen14} but potentially even as large as 6.25 eV (at $T=0$) based on quasi-particle self-consistent (QS) $GW$ calculations,\cite{Boonchun11SPIE} with $G$ the one-particle
Green's function and $W$ the screened Coulomb potential. It can be thought of as a I-III-VI$_2$ ternary analog of wurtzite ZnO, in which each group II Zn atom is replaced
by either a group-I Li or a group III-Ga in a specific ordered pattern
with the $Pbn2_1$ spacegroup. In this structure the octetrule is satisfied
because each O is surrounded tetrahedrally by two Li and two Ga.
The prototype for this crystal structure is
$\beta$-NaFeO$_2$. LiGaO$_2$ can be grown in bulk form by
the Czochralsky method\cite{Marezio65} and because of its good lattice match
has been explored as a substrate for GaN. It can also be
grown by epitaxial methods
on ZnO and vice versa. Mixed ZnO-LiGaO$_2$ alloys have been reported.\cite{Omata08,Omata11}
It has been considered for piezoelectric properties,\cite{Nanamatsu72,Gupta76,Boonchun2010} and is naturally considered as a wide gap
insulator. However, Boonchun and Lambrecht \cite{Boonchun11} suggested
it might be
worthwhile considering as a semiconductor electronic material and
showed in particular that it could possibly be n-type doped by Ge.
That study only used the 16 atom primitive unit cell of LiGaO$_2$
and thus considered rather high (25 \%) Ge$_\mathrm{Ga}$ doping or Mg$_\mathrm{Li}$ doping. It did not study the site competition or native defect compensation
issues. Here we study the native point defects by means of hybrid functional
supercell calculations.
\section{Computational Method}
Our study is based on density functional calculations using
the Heyd-Scuseria-Ernzerhof (HSE) hybrid functional.\cite{HSE03,HSE06} The
calculations are performed using the Vienna Ab-Initio Simulation Package (VASP). \cite{VASP,KresseVasp1}
The electron ion interactions are described by means of the
Projector Augmented Wave (PAW) method.\cite{Blochl94,KresseVasp3} We use a
well-converged energy cut-off of 500 eV for the projector
augmented plane waves. We performed the calculations with
a supercell size of 128 atoms (which corresponds to $2\times2\times2$
the primitive unit cell) and
a single {\bf k}-point shifted away from $\Gamma$
is employed for the Brillouin zone integration. The valence
configurations used were $2s^1$ for Li,
$3d^{10}4s^24p^1$ for Ga and $2s^22p^4$ for O. In the HSE functional,
the Coulomb potential
in the exchange energy is divided into short-range and long-range
parts with a screening length of
10 \AA\ and only the short-range part of the exact Hartree-Fock non-local
exchange is included by mixing it with the generalized gradient
Perdew-Burke-Enrzerhof (PBE) potential with a mixing fraction $\alpha=0.25$.
The band gap obtained in this way ($E_g=5.10$ eV) is still slightly lower
than the experimental value.
\section{Results}
The energy of formation of the defect $D^q$ in charge state $q$
is given by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
E_f(D^q)=E_{tot}(C:D^q)-E_{tot}(C)-\sum_i\Delta n_i \mu_i \\
+q(\epsilon_v+\epsilon_F+V_{align})+E_{cor}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $E_{tot}(C:D^q)$ is the total energy of the supercell containing the
defect and $E_{tot}(C)$ is the total energy of the perfect crystal supercell.
The chemical potentials $\mu_i$ represent the energy for adding or removing
atoms from the crystal to a reservoir in the process of making the defect.
The $\Delta n_i$ is the change in number of atoms of species $i$.
Likewise the chemical potential of the electron determining its charge
state is $\epsilon_F+\epsilon_v+V_{align}$ with $\epsilon_v$ the energy
of an electron at the valence band maximum (VBM) relative
to the average electrostatic potential in bulk and $\epsilon_F$ the Fermi energy in the gap measured from the VBM.
The alignment potential $V_{align}$ represents the alignment of
the average electrostatic potential
in the supercell far away from the defect relative to that in the bulk.
This is calculated using the
Freysoldt \textit{et al.\ } approach.\cite{Freysoldt09,Freysoldt14}
The final term is the image charge
correction term which corrects for the Madelung energy of the periodic
array of net defect point charges in the uniform background that is added
to ensure overall charge neutrality when considering a locally charged
defect state. It is closely related to the alignment potential and
including these corrections allows one to extrapolate the energy of formation
to the dilute limit of an infinitely large supercell.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{Growth_conditions_with_expcondition.png}
\caption{Chemical potential phase diagram, showing the region of stability of
LiGaO$_2$. Note that these are excess chemical potentials indicated
by $\tilde\mu$ in the text. \label{figchempot}}
\end{figure}
The chemical potentials $\mu_i=\mu_i^0+\tilde \mu_i$, where $\mu_i^0$ are the
chemical potentials of each species in its reference state, namely
the phase it occurs in at standard pressure and room temperature, and
$\tilde\mu_i$ are the excess chemical potentials. The latter
are viewed as a tunable
parameter reflecting the growth conditions but must obey certain
restrictions based on thermodynamic equilibrium.
These include
\begin{equation}
\tilde\mu_\mathrm{Li}+\tilde\mu_\mathrm{Ga}+2\tilde\mu_{O}=\tilde\mu_{\mathrm{LiGaO}_2}
\end{equation}
where $\tilde\mu_{\mathrm{LiGaO}_2}$ is the energy of formation of
LiGaO$_2$, which we calculated to be $-8.55$ eV.
Each of the excess chemical potentials $\tilde\mu_i\le0$
on the left must be less than zero in order to avoid precipitation of the
bulk elements Li and Ga or evolving O$_2$ gas. For example,
$\mu_\mathrm{Li}^0$ corresponds to metallic body-centered-cubic Li and
thus $\tilde\mu_\mathrm{Li}=0$
corresponds to the assumption that the crystal with the defect is in equilibrium
with bulk metallic Li as reservoir. Similarly $\tilde\mu_\mathrm{Ga}=0$ corresponds to equilibrium with metallic bulk Ga and $\tilde\mu_\mathrm{O}$
corresponds to O in the O$_2$ molecule. However, we need to also
consider further restrictions imposed by competing binary compounds
Ga$_2$O$_3$ and Li$_2$O.
\begin{eqnarray}
2\tilde\mu_\mathrm{Li}+\tilde\mu_\mathrm{O}&\le& \tilde\mu_{\mathrm{Li}_2\mathrm{O}},\nonumber \\
2\tilde\mu_\mathrm{Ga}+3\tilde\mu_\mathrm{O}&\le&\tilde\mu_{\mathrm{Ga}_2\mathrm{O}_3}.
\end{eqnarray}
These restrictions determine the region of chemical potentials in which
LiGaO$_2$ is stable relative to the competing binaries and elements.
They are bounded by
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde\mu_\mathrm{Li}&\ge&\frac{1}{3}\tilde\mu_\mathrm{Ga}+[\tilde\mu_{\mathrm{LiGaO}_2}-\frac{2}{3}\tilde\mu_{\mathrm{Ga}_2\mathrm{O}_3}], \nonumber \\
\tilde\mu_\mathrm{Li}&\le&\frac{1}{3}\tilde\mu_\mathrm{Ga}+\frac{1}{3}[2\tilde\mu_{\mathrm{Li}_2\mathrm{O}}-\tilde\mu_{\mathrm{LiGaO}_2}].
\end{eqnarray}
with
$\tilde\mu_{\mathrm{LiGaO}_2}-\frac{2}{3}\tilde\mu_{\mathrm{Ga}_2\mathrm{O}_3}=-4.32$ eV and $\frac{1}{3}[2\tilde\mu_{\mathrm{Li}_2\mathrm{O}}-\tilde\mu_{\mathrm{LiGaO}_2}]=-1.00$ eV.
It is represented in the phase diagram shown in Fig. \ref{figchempot}.
The points $A,B,C,D$ correspond respectively to (A) Li-rich, Ga-poor,
(B) Li-poor as well as relative Ga-poor, (C) Ga-rich, Li-poor and
(D) Ga-rich and Li-rich but O-poor.
The shading of the color is darker the higher the
chemical potential of O and the line $AB$ corresponds to
the O-rich limit $\tilde\mu_\mathrm{O}=0$.
In addition to the extreme chemical potential conditions (Ga-rich and Li-rich), we consider an intermediate oxygen chemical potential corresponding to a realistic growth condition during the annealing of LiGaO$_2$.
The oxygen chemical potential is a function of temperature and oxygen partial pressure, as described by Reuter \textit{et al.\ }\cite{Reuter01}
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{O}(T,p)=\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{O}(T,p_0)+\frac{1}{2}k_BT {\rm ln}(p/p_0),
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{O}(T,p_0)$ is the oxygen chemical potential at the standard pressure $p_0=1$ atm, $k_B$ is Boltzmann's constant, and $T$ is the temperature in Kelvin. In the growth experiment of Ref. \onlinecite{Chen14}, the
mixed $\rm Li_2CO_3$ and $\rm Ga_2O_3$ powders were compressed into tablets and
then calcined at 1200 \ensuremath{^\circ \rm C}\ for 20 h in air.\cite{Chen14} We therefore choose an annealing temperature of 1200\ensuremath{^\circ \rm C}\ and an oxygen partial pressure of 0.21 atm which represents the ratio of oxygen gas in ambient environment. The growth conditions at annealing temperature of 1200 \ensuremath{^\circ \rm C}\ and oxygen partial pressure of 0.21 atm is represented by the dashed line $EF$ in Fig. 1.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{conditionAandB.png}
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{conditionCandD.png}
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{conditionEandF.png}
\caption{Energies of formation of various defects in LiGaO$_2$ for chemical potential conditions identified in Fig. \ref{figchempot}.\label{figefor}}
\end{figure}
The defects considered are the vacancies $V_\mathrm{Ga}$, $V_\mathrm{Li}$
and $V_\mathrm{O}$ and the antisites Li$_\mathrm{Ga}$ and Ga$_\mathrm{Li}$. The effects of spin polarization were included for cases with unpaired electrons
in defect levels.
Interstitial defects will be considered in the future but comparison
with II-IV-N$_2$ semiconductors suggest that they would be of high
energy.\cite{Skachkov16,Skachkov17}
The defect energies of formation are shown for the six chemical potential
points $A,B,C,D,E$ and $F$ in Fig. \ref{figefor}.
First we see that Ga$_\mathrm{Li}$ is the lowest energy defect for $\epsilon_F=0$
in all cases. It is a double donor, which is in the
$2+$ charge state over most of the gap. Still, it has a well-defined $2+/0$ transition making it a negative $U$ system.
In Fig. \ref{figrelax} we can see that while for the neutral charge
state, the O around Ga$_\mathrm{Li}$ move outward, they move
inward for the $2+$ charge state with an in-between outward relaxation
for the $1+$ state. The additional stabilization by outward motion of the
O when adding two electrons rather than one causes the negative $U$
behavior where the $1+$ charge state is never the lowest energy one
for any Fermi level position. It is thus not behaving like a simple
shallow donor, consistent with the relatively deep donor binding
energy of 0.74 eV below the conduction band minimum (CBM). We thus
do not expect it to be an effective n-type dopant. We can see that this
defect has negative energy of formation at $\epsilon_F=0$ in most cases.
This reflects that even in the most Ga-poor case, this defect is
hard to avoid because we cannot make the system poor enough in Ga without
reaching the stability limit imposed by Li$_2$O. On the other hand,
a Fermi level $\epsilon_F=0$ is not expected to be realistic
as discussed later.
The Li$_\mathrm{Ga}$ antisite on the other hand is a double acceptor which
can occur in $0,-1,-2$ charge states. It is the lowest energy defect
in its $2-$ charge state near the CBM in cases $A$, $D$ and $E$. These are
the cases richest in Li.
As for the vacancies,
$V_\mathrm{Li}$ occurs in $0,-1$ charge states, while $V_\mathrm{Ga}$ occurs
in $0,-1,-2,-3$ charge states.
We can see that $V_\mathrm{Ga}^0$ has a high energy of formation
in all cases. Although its negative charge states have significantly lower
energy for $\epsilon_F$ close to the CBM, it never becomes the lowest energy
defect and therefore does not play a role in determining the Fermi level.
The $V_\mathrm{Li}$ is more interesting. Although it has high energy
in the Li-rich case $D$ (which is somewhat unrealistic and O-poor)
it has low energy in the Li-poor cases, $B,C,F$. Even in case $E$,
its intersection with the Ga$_\mathrm{Li}^{2+}$ occurs close to that of the
intersection of the latter with Li$_\mathrm{Ga}^{2-}$.
We thus expect that both these acceptors may play a role in
compensating the Ga$_\mathrm{Li}^{2+}$.
Turning now to the O-vacancies,
there are two non-equivalent sites for the oxygen in LiGaO$_2$:
on top of Li (O$_1$) or on top of Ga (O$_2$). We find
that both $V_\mathrm{O1}$ and $V_\mathrm{O2}$ are only stable in
the neutral and $2+$ charge states (with $V_\mathrm{O2}$ slightly lower
in energy than $V_\mathrm{O1}$)
with the transition level (2+/0) at 2.48 eV above the VBM or 2.62 eV below
the CBM. This is a quite deep donor level and indicates that
the vacancy is also a negative $U$ center. In Fig. \ref{figvo}
one can see that also in this case the relaxations are strongly charge-state dependent. This figure shows the relaxations near a $V_\mathrm{O2}$ but
similar results hold for $V_\mathrm{O1}$.
In the neutral charge state, the Ga move inward, while the Li move
outward. In the $2+$ state both move strongly outward.
This is similar to the
$V_\mathrm{O}$ in ZnO\cite{Boonchun11,Boonchun13}
although the level is here even deeper and close to mid gap.
We find that the $V_\mathrm{O}^{2+}$
energy of formation is negative for Fermi levels close to the VBM
for points $C,D,E,F$. They become positive for the O-rich limits ($A$, $B$).
Its energy of formation is always higher than that of the Ga$_\mathrm{Li}^{2+}$
and thus it is not expected to play a significant role in the
charge balance.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=18cm]{Ga_Li.png}
\caption{Structural relaxation for Ga$_\mathrm{Li}$ in different
charge states.
\label{figrelax}}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=18cm]{V_O.png}
\caption{Structural relaxation for $V_\mathrm{O2}$ in different
charge states.
\label{figvo}}
\end{figure*}
Using the charge neutrality condition between free electron
concentration $n_e(T,\epsilon_F)$, free hole concentration $n_h(T,\epsilon_F)$
and the various defect concentrations,
\begin{equation}
c(D^q; T,\epsilon_F)=N_Dg(q)e^{-(E_f(D^q,\epsilon_F=0)+q\epsilon_F)/k_BT}
\end{equation}
where $N_D$ is the number of available sites per cm$^{3}$ and $g(q)$ a
degeneracy factor depending on the charge state, we can find the equilibrium
Fermi level and the defect concentrations for a given temperature
following the procedure of Ref.\onlinecite{Skachkov16}. For the electron
and hole concentrations we use a parabolic band with effective density
of states masses $m_e^*\approx0.4$ and $m_h^*\approx1.8$ (as obtained
from the calculate hybrid functional band structure and averaging over
directons.)
For a temperature of $T=1500$ K close to the growth temperature,
we find that under chemical potential conditions $C$, the equilibrium
Fermi level is $\epsilon_F=3.815$ eV, close to the intersection
of the $V_\mathrm{Li}^{1-}$ and Ga$_\mathrm{Li}^{2+}$. The electron
concentration $n_e=6\times 10^{13}$ cm$^{-3}$ but the
$[V_\mathrm{Li}^{-1}]=2[\mathrm{Ga}_\mathrm{Li}^{2+}]=1.0\times10^{26}$ cm$^{-3}$
are unrealistically high. This is related to the energies of formation
of the main defects Ga$_\mathrm{Li}$ and $V_\mathrm{Li}$
being negative for the equilibrium Fermi level.
For point $E$, the equilibrium Fermi level position is closer to mid gap,
$\epsilon_F=2.75$ eV with $[\mathrm{Ga}_\mathrm{Li}^{2+}]=3.7\times10^{14}$,
$[V_\mathrm{Li}^{-1}]=7.22\times10^{14}$ and $[\mathrm{Li}_\mathrm{Ga}^{2-}]=1\times10^{13}$ cm$^{-3}$, $[V_\mathrm{O}^{2+}]=5\times10^{12}$ cm$^{-3}$.
So, in this case the concentrations of defects
are much smaller and the Ga$_\mathrm{Li}^{2+}$ is still mostly
compensated by $V_\mathrm{Li}^{-1}$ but partially also by Li$_\mathrm{Ga}^{2-}$.
The electron concentration at $n_e=3.2\times10^{12}$ cm$^{-3}$ is then
only slightly higher than the hole concentration
$n_h=1.6\times10^{11}$ cm$^{-3}$
but both free carrier concentrations are in fact negligible under
both chemical potential conditions considered.
Even under the most Ga-poor conditions (point $A$), Ga$_\mathrm{Li}^{2+}$
is the dominant defect and is compensated mostly by $V_\mathrm{Li}^{1-}$.
In this case, $\epsilon_F=1.92$ eV is closest to the VBM
and the material would then be slightly $p$-type with
$n_h=9.7\times10^{13}$ cm$^{-3}$.
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{
Transition levels $\varepsilon(q,q')$ in eV relative to the VBM}
\label{tablevels}
\begin{tabular*}{0.4\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}ccc} \hline
Defect & $q,q'$ & $\varepsilon(q,q')$ \\ \hline
$V_{\rm Li}$&(0/1-)&1.0270 \\
$V_{\rm Ga}$& (0/1-)& 2.1843\\
&(1-/2-) & 3.0899\\
&(2-/3-) & 3.3088\\
$\rm Li_{Ga}$& (0/1-) &1.5464\\
&(1-/2-) &2.1855\\
$\rm Ga_{\rm Li}$& (0/2+) &4.3569\\
$V_{\rm O}$& (0/2+)& 2.4831\\ \hline
\end{tabular*}
\end{table}
It is instructive to compare the defect physics in this system
to that in II-IV-N$_2$ semiconductors
like ZnGeN$_2$,\cite{Skachkov16}. The similarity is that in both cases,
the antisites play a crucial role.
However, the dependence on chemical potentials of the elements is more important here because a wider region of stability occurs. Furthermore the Ga$_\mathrm{Li}$ antisite is here not a shallow but a deep donor and is thus not expected
to lead to unintentional n-type doping. This is consistent with the
insulating behavior of LiGaO$_2$. However, it does not exclude the possibility
of n-type doping by Si or Ge or Sn which will be studied separately.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{transition_level.png}
\caption{Defect transition levels in LiGaO$_2$.\label{figlevels}}
\end{figure}
The main defect transition levels in the gap are summarized in Table
\ref{tablevels} and in Fig. \ref{figlevels}.
\section{Conclusions}
In this paper we have studied the native defects in LiGaO$_2$. We find that
the relative energy of formation of vacancies and antisites depends strongly
on the chemical potential conditions.
The Ga$_\mathrm{Li}$ antisite is a dominant donor defect.
However,
it has a rather deep $2+/0$ donor level
and is a negative $U$ center. It is thus
not expected to lead to significant n-type doping.
It furthermore becomes
compensated mostly by $V_\mathrm{Li}^{1-}$ and
in part by Li$_\mathrm{Ga}^{2-}$ depending
on how rich the system is in Li. The $V_\mathrm{O}$ is found
to be an even deeper double donor negative $U$ center.
The defect transition levels are all
relatively deep in to the gap with no truly shallow levels.
\acknowledgements{The work at CWRU was supported by
the U.S. National Science Foundation under grant No. 1755479.
The work at Kasetsart was supported by Kasetsart University Research and Development Institute (KURDI).}
|
\section{\bf Introduction}
\medskip
As is known, the type $2$ Bernoulli polynomials $B_n(x)$, $(n\geq 0)$, and the type $2$ Euler
polynomials $E_n(x)$, $(n\geq 0)$, are respectively defined by
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq01}
e^{xt} \frac{t}{2} csch \frac{t}{2} =\frac{t}{e^{\frac{t}{2}}-e^{-\frac{t}{2}}} e^{xt}
=\sum_{n=0}^\infty B_n(x) \frac{t^n}{n!},
\end{split}\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq02}
e^{xt} sech \frac{t}{2} =\frac{2}{e^{\frac{t}{2}}+e^{-\frac{t}{2}}}e^{xt}
=\sum_{n=0}^\infty E_n(x) \frac{t^n}{n!}, \quad \text{ (see \cite{ref04})}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
When $x=0$, $B_n=B_n(0)$ (or $E_n=E_n(0)$) are called the type $2$ Bernoulli (or type 2 Euler) numbers.
For $n\geq 0$, the central factorial numbers of the second kind are defined by the generating function to be
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq03}
\frac{1}{k!}\left( e^{\frac{t}{2}} -e^{-\frac{t}{2}} \right)^k
=\sum_{n=k}^\infty T(n,k) \frac{t^n}{n!}, \quad \text{ (see \cite{ref02-1})}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
From \eqref{eq03}, we note that
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq04}
x^n = \sum_{k=0}^n T(n,k) x^{[k]} , \;(n\geq 0), \quad \text{ (see \cite{ref06})},
\end{split} \end{equation}
where $x^{[0]} =1$, $x^{[n]}=x\left(x+\frac{n}{2}-1\right)\left(x+\frac{n}{2}-2\right)
\cdots \left(x-\frac{n}{2}+1\right),\;(n\geq 1)$.
For $\lambda \in \mathbb{R}$, the degenerate exponential functions are defined as
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq05}
e^x_\lambda(t)=(1+\lambda t)^{\frac{x}{\lambda}} ,
e_\lambda (t)=e^1_\lambda (t)=(1+\lambda t)^{\frac{1}{\lambda}}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
By \eqref{eq05}, we get
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq06}
e^x_\lambda(t)=\sum_{n=0}^\infty (x)_{n,\lambda} \frac{t^n}{n!} \quad \text{ (see \cite{ref07, ref08, ref09, ref10})},
\end{split}\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq07}
(x)_{0,\lambda}=1, \; (x)_{n,\lambda}=x(x-\lambda)\cdots(x-(n-1)\lambda), \;\;\;(n\geq 1).
\end{split}\end{equation}
In \cite{ref01, ref02}, Carlitz considered the degenerate Bernoulli polynomials given by
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq08}
\frac{t}{e_\lambda(t)-1} e_\lambda^x(t)
=\sum_{n=0}^\infty \beta_{n,\lambda}(x) \frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
When $x=0$, $\beta_{n,\lambda}=\beta_{n,\lambda}(0)$ are called the degenerate Bernoulli numbers.
In \cite{ref06}, Kim-Kim introduced the degenerate central factorial polynomials of the second kind which are given by
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq09}
\frac{1}{k!}\left( e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)- e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)\right)^k
e_\lambda^x (t)= \sum_{n=k}^\infty T_\lambda(n,k |x) \frac{t^n}{n!},
\end{split}\end{equation}
where $k$ is a nonnegative integer.
When $x=0$, $T_\lambda(n,k)=T_\lambda(n,k|0)$ are called the degenerate
central factorial numbers of the second kind.
Recently, as a degenerate version of \eqref{eq01}, the type $2$ degenerate Bernoulli polynomials
are defined by
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq10}
\frac{t}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)- e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)}
e_\lambda^x (t)= \sum_{n=0}^\infty B_{n,\lambda}(x) \frac{t^n}{n!},\quad \text{ (see \cite{ref04})}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
When $x=0$, $B_{n,\lambda}=B_{n,\lambda}(0)$ are the type $2$ degenerate Bernoulli numbers.
By the same motivation as \eqref{eq10}, the type $2$ Euler polynomials are defined by
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq11}
\frac{2}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t) + e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)}
e_\lambda^x (t)= \sum_{n=0}^\infty E_{n,\lambda}(x) \frac{t^n}{n!},\quad \text{ (see \cite{ref04})}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
When $x=0$, $E_{n,\lambda}=E_{n,\lambda}(0)$ are the type $2$ degenerate Euler numbers.\\
\indent Recently, several authors studied the degenerate Bernoulli and degenerate Euler numbers and polynomials (see \cite{ref01,ref02,ref03,ref04,ref05,ref06,ref07,ref08,ref09,ref10,ref11,ref12,ref13,ref14,ref15}). In addition, Jeong-Kang-Rim introduced symmetry identities for Changhee polynomials of type two closely related to type 2 degenerate Euler polynomials (see \cite{ref04-1}), and Zhang and Lin obtained some interesting identities involving trigonometric functions and Bernoulli numbers (see \cite{ref15}).\\
\indent In \cite{ref05-1}, the authors considered the degenerate Bernoulli and degenerate Euler polynomials of complex variable. By treating the real and imaginary parts separately, they were able to introduce the degenerate cosine-Bernoulli polynomials, degenerate sine-Bernoulli polynomials, degenerate cosine-Euler polynomials and degenerate sine-Euler polynomials, and derived some interesting results for them. \\
\indent In this paper, we study the type 2 degenerate Bernoulli and type 2 degenerate Euler polynomials of complex variable of which the latters are degenerate and type 2 versions of the new type Euler polynomials studied in \cite{ref12}. By treating the real and imaginary parts separately, the type 2 degenerate cosine-Bernoulli and type 2 degenerate sine-Bernoulli polynomials are introduced. We derive some explicit expressions for those polynomials and some identities relating to them. Moreover, the type 2 degenerate cosine-Euler and type 2 degenerate sine-Euler polynomials are investigated and analogous results to the type 2 degenerate cosine-Bernoulli and type 2 degenerate sine-Bernoulli polynomials are obtained for them.
\medskip
\section{\bf Type $2$ degenerate Bernoulli and Euler polynomials
of complex variable}
\medskip
From \eqref{eq10}, we define the type $2$ degenerate Bernoulli polynomials of complex
variable by
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq12}
\frac{t}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t) - e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)}
e_\lambda^{x+iy} (t)= \sum_{n=0}^\infty B_{n,\lambda}(x+iy) \frac{t^n}{n!},
\end{split}\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq13}
\frac{t}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t) - e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)}
e_\lambda^{x-iy} (t)= \sum_{n=0}^\infty B_{n,\lambda}(x-iy) \frac{t^n}{n!},
\end{split}\end{equation}
where $i=\sqrt{-1}$. As is known, the degenerate cosine and
sine functions are defined by
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq14}
cos_\lambda^{(y)} (t)=cos\left( \frac{y}{\lambda} log(1+\lambda t) \right),
\end{split}\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq15}
sin_\lambda^{(y)} (t)=sin \left( \frac{y}{\lambda} log(1+\lambda t) \right),\quad \text{ (see \cite{ref05-1})}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
Note that $\lim_{\lambda \rightarrow 0} cos_\lambda^{(y)}(t)=cos yt$,
$\lim_{\lambda \rightarrow 0} sin_\lambda^{(y)}(t)= sin yt$.
From \eqref{eq12} and \eqref{eq13}, we can derive the following equations.
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq16}
\sum_{n=0}^\infty \left(\frac{B_{n,\lambda}(x+iy)+B_{n,\lambda}(x-iy) }{2} \right)\frac{t^n}{n!}
=\frac{t}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)-e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)} e_\lambda^x(t) cos_\lambda^{(y)}(t),
\end{split}\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq17}
\sum_{n=0}^\infty \left(\frac{B_{n,\lambda}(x+iy)-B_{n,\lambda}(x-iy) }{2i} \right)\frac{t^n}{n!}
=\frac{t}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)-e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)} e_\lambda^x(t) sin_\lambda^{(y)}(t).
\end{split}\end{equation}
Now, we define the type $2$ degenerate cosine-Bernoulli and sine-Bernoulli polynomials
by the generating functions as
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq18}
\frac{t}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)-e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)} e_\lambda^x(t) cos_\lambda^{(y)}(t)
=\sum_{n=0}^\infty B_{n,\lambda}^{(c)}(x,y) \frac{t^n}{n!},
\end{split}\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq19}
\frac{t}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)-e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)} e_\lambda^x(t) sin_\lambda^{(y)}(t)
=\sum_{n=0}^\infty B_{n,\lambda}^{(s)}(x,y) \frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
Therefore, by \eqref{eq16}, \eqref{eq17}, \eqref{eq18} and \eqref{eq19}, we obtain the following theorem.
\begin{thm}
For $n\geq 0$, we have
\begin{equation*}\begin{split}
\frac{B_{n,\lambda}(x+iy)+B_{n,\lambda}(x-iy) }{2} = B_{n,\lambda}^{(c)}(x,y),
\end{split}\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation*}\begin{split}
\frac{B_{n,\lambda}(x+iy)-B_{n,\lambda}(x-iy) }{2i} = B_{n,\lambda}^{(s)}(x,y).
\end{split}\end{equation*}
\end{thm}
From \eqref{eq10}, \eqref{eq14} and \eqref{eq15}, we note that
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq20}
&\frac{t}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)-e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)} e_\lambda^x(t) cos_\lambda^{(y)}(t)\cr
=& \sum_{l=0}^\infty B_{l,\lambda}(x) \frac{t^l}{l!}
\sum_{m=0}^\infty \frac{(-1)^m}{(2m)!} \left( \frac{y}{\lambda}\right)^{2m} \left( \log(1+\lambda t )\right)^{2m} \cr
=&\sum_{l=0}^\infty B_{l,\lambda}(x) \frac{t^l}{l!}
\sum_{m=0}^\infty (-1)^m y^{2m} \lambda^{-2m}
\sum_{k=2m}^\infty S_1(k,2m) \lambda^k \frac{t^k}{k!}\cr
=& \sum_{l=0}^\infty B_{l,\lambda}(x) \frac{t^l}{l!}
\sum_{k=0}^\infty \bigg(\sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{k}{2} \right]}(-1)^m y^{2m} \lambda^{k-2m}
S_1(k,2m) \bigg)\frac{t^k}{k!}\cr
=&\sum_{n=0}^\infty \bigg(\sum_{k=0}^n \sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{k}{2} \right]}
\binom{n}{k} B_{n-k,\lambda}(x) (-1)^m y^{2m} \lambda^{k-2m}
S_1(k,2m) \bigg)\frac{t^n}{n!},
\end{split}\end{equation}
where $S_1(k,l)$ are the Stirling numbers of the first kind.
By the same method as in \eqref{eq20}, we get
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq21}
&\frac{t}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)-e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)} e_\lambda^x(t) sin_\lambda^{(y)}(t)\cr
=&\sum_{l=0}^\infty B_{l,\lambda}(x) \frac{t^l}{l!}
\sum_{k=1}^\infty \bigg(\sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{k-1}{2} \right]} (-1)^m y^{2m+1} \lambda^{k-2m-1}
S_1(k,2m+1) \bigg)\frac{t^k}{k!}\cr
=&\sum_{n=1}^\infty \bigg(\sum_{k=1}^n \sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{k-1}{2} \right]}
\binom{n}{k} B_{n-k,\lambda}(x) (-1)^m y^{2m+1} \lambda^{k-2m-1}
S_1(k,2m+1) \bigg)\frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
Therefore, by \eqref{eq18}, \eqref{eq19} , \eqref{eq20} and \eqref{eq21},
we obtain the following theorem.
\begin{thm}
For $n \in \mathbb{N} \cup \{0\}$, we have
\begin{equation*}\begin{split}
B_{n,\lambda}^{(c)}(x,y)= \sum_{k=0}^n \sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{k}{2} \right]}
\binom{n}{k} B_{n-k,\lambda}(x) (-1)^m y^{2m} \lambda^{k-2m}
S_1(k,2m).
\end{split}\end{equation*}
In addition,
\begin{equation*}\begin{split}
B_{0,\lambda}^{(s)}(x,y)=0,
\end{split}\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}\begin{split}
B_{n,\lambda}^{(s)}(x,y)= \sum_{k=1}^n \sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{k-1}{2} \right]}
\binom{n}{k} B_{n-k,\lambda}(x) (-1)^m y^{2m+1} \lambda^{k-2m-1}
S_1(k,2m+1),
\end{split}\end{equation*}
where $n$ is a positive integer.
\end{thm}
We observe that
\begin{align}\label{eq22}
\sum_{n=0}^\infty B_{n,\lambda}^{(c)}(x,0)\frac{t^n}{n!}
=& \frac{t}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)-e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)} e_\lambda^x(t)\cr
=& \frac{t}{e_\lambda(t)-1} e_\lambda^{x+\frac{1}{2}}(t)\cr
=& \sum_{n=0}^\infty \beta_{n, \lambda}\left(x+\frac{1}{2}\right) \frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{align}
Therefore, by \eqref{eq22}, we obtain the following theorem.
\begin{thm}
For $n\geq 0$, we have
\begin{equation*}\begin{split}
B_{n,\lambda}^{(c)}(x,0)= \beta_{n,\lambda}\left(x+ \frac{1}{2}\right).
\end{split}\end{equation*}
\end{thm}
From \eqref{eq18}, we note that
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq23}
&e_\lambda^x(t) cos_\lambda^{(y)}(t)=\frac{1}{t}\left( e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)-e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)\right)
\sum_{l=0}^\infty B_{l,\lambda}^{(c)}(x,y) \frac{t^l}{l!}\cr
=& \frac{1}{t} \sum_{n=1}^\infty \bigg( \sum_{l=0}^n \binom{n} {l}
\bigg(\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)_{n-l,\lambda}- \left(-\frac{1}{2}\right)_{n-l,\lambda} \bigg)B_{l,\lambda}(x,y)\bigg)
\frac{t^n}{n!}\cr
=& \sum_{n=0}^\infty \left\{\frac{1}{n+1}\sum_{l=0}^{n+1} \binom{n+1} {l}
\bigg(\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)_{n+1-l,\lambda}- \left(-\frac{1}{2}\right)_{n+1-l,\lambda} \bigg)B_{l,\lambda}(x,y)
\right\}\frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
On the other hand,
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq24}
e_\lambda^x(t) cos_\lambda^{(y)}(t)
=&\sum_{l=0}^\infty (x)_{l,\lambda} \frac{t^l}{l!} cos_\lambda^{(y)}(t)\cr
=&\sum_{l=0}^\infty (x)_{l,\lambda}\frac{t^l}{l!}
\sum_{m=0}^\infty \frac{(-1)^m}{(2m)!} \left( \frac{y}{\lambda}\right)^{2m} \left( \log(1+\lambda t)\right)^{2m}\cr
=&\sum_{l=0}^\infty (x)_{l,\lambda}\frac{t^l}{l!}
\sum_{m=0}^\infty (-1)^m \lambda^{-2m} y^{2m} \sum_{k=2m}^\infty S_1(k,2m) \lambda^k
\frac{t^k}{k!}\cr
=&\sum_{l=0}^\infty (x)_{l,\lambda}\frac{t^l}{l!}
\sum_{k=0}^\infty \bigg(\sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{k}{2} \right]} (-1)^m \lambda^{k-2m} y^{2m} S_1(k,2m) \bigg) \frac{t^k}{k!}\cr
=& \sum_{n=0}^\infty \bigg(\sum_{k=0}^n\sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{k}{2} \right]}
\binom{n}{k}(x)_{n-k,\lambda} (-1)^m \lambda^{k-2m} y^{2m} S_1(k,2m) \bigg) \frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
Therefore, by \eqref{eq23} and \eqref{eq24}, we obtain the following theorem.
\begin{thm}
For $n\geq 0$, we have
\begin{equation*}\begin{split}
&\frac{1}{n+1}\sum_{l=0}^{n+1} \binom{n+1} {l}
\bigg(\left( \frac{1}{2}\right)_{n+1-l,\lambda}- \left(-\frac{1}{2}\right)_{n+1-l,\lambda} \bigg)B_{l,\lambda}^{(c)}(x,y)\cr
=&\sum_{k=0}^n\sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{k}{2} \right]}
\binom{n}{k} (x)_{n-k,\lambda} (-1)^m \lambda^{k-2m} y^{2m} S_1(k,2m) .
\end{split}\end{equation*}
Furthermore, for $n \in \mathbb{N}$, we have
\begin{equation*}\begin{split}
&\frac{1}{n+1}\sum_{l=0}^{n+1} \binom{n+1} {l}
\bigg(\left( \frac{1}{2}\right)_{n+1-l,\lambda}- \left( -\frac{1}{2}\right)_{n+1-l,\lambda} \bigg)B_{l,\lambda}^{(s)}(x,y)\cr
=&\sum_{k=1}^n\sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{k-1}{2} \right]}
\binom{n}{k} (x)_{n-k,\lambda} (-1)^m \lambda^{k-2m-1} y^{2m+1} S_1(k,2m+1) .
\end{split}\end{equation*}
\end{thm}
By replacing $t$ by $\frac{1}{\lambda}\left(e^{\lambda t}-1 \right)$ in \eqref{eq18}, we get
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq25}
&\frac{1}{\lambda t}\left(e^{\lambda t}-1 \right)
\left( \frac{t}{e^{\frac{t}{2}}-e^{-\frac{t}{2}}} e^{xt} \cos yt\right)\cr
=& \sum_{k=0}^\infty B_{k,\lambda}^{(c)}(x,y)\frac{1}{k!}\left(e^{\lambda t}-1 \right)^k\lambda^{-k}\cr
=&\sum_{k=0}^\infty B_{k,\lambda}^{(c)}(x,y)\lambda^{-k}
\sum_{n=k}^\infty S_2(n,k)\lambda^n \frac{t^n}{n!}\cr
=&\sum_{n=0}^\infty\left( \sum_{k=0}^n \lambda^{n-k} B_{k,\lambda}^{(c)}(x,y)
S_2(n,k) \right) \frac{t^n}{n!},
\end{split}\end{equation}
where $S_2(n,k)$ are the Stirling numbers of the second kind.
On the other hand,
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq26}
&\frac{1}{\lambda t}\left(e^{\lambda t}-1 \right)
\left( \frac{t}{e^{\frac{t}{2}}-e^{-\frac{t}{2}}} e^{xt} \cos yt\right)\cr
=& \sum_{l=0}^\infty \frac{\lambda^l}{l+1}\frac{t^l}{l!}
\sum_{m=0}^\infty \bigg(\sum_{l=0}^{\left[ \frac{m}{2} \right]}\binom{m}{2l} (-1)^l y^{2l} B_{m-2l}(x)\bigg)\frac{t^m}{m!}\cr
=& \sum_{n=0}^\infty \bigg(\sum_{m=0}^n \frac{\lambda^{n-m}}{n-m+1}\binom{n}{m}
\sum_{l=0}^{\left[ \frac{m}{2} \right]}\binom{m}{2l} (-1)^l y^{2l} B_{m-2l}(x)\bigg)\frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
Therefore, by \eqref{eq25} and \eqref{eq26}, we obtain the following theorem.
\begin{thm}
For $n\geq 0$, we have
\begin{equation*}\begin{split}
\sum_{k=0}^n\lambda^{n-k} B_{k,\lambda}^{(c)}(x,y) S_2(n,k)
= \sum_{m=0}^n\sum_{l=0}^{\left[ \frac{m}{2} \right]} \frac{\lambda^{n-m}}{n-m+1}\binom{n}{m}
\binom{m}{2l} (-1)^l y^{2l} B_{m-2l}(x).
\end{split}\end{equation*}
\end{thm}
Let us replace $t$ by $\frac{1}{\lambda } \log (1+\lambda t)$ in \eqref{eq01}. Then we have
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq27}
\frac{\log(1+ \lambda t)}{\lambda t} \frac{t}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)-e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)}
e^{x+iy}_\lambda (t)
=& \sum_{k=0}^\infty B_k(x+iy) \lambda^{-k} \frac{\left( \log(1+\lambda t)\right)^k}{k!}\cr
=& \sum_{k=0}^\infty B_k(x+iy) \lambda^{-k} \sum_{n=k}^\infty S_1(n,k) \lambda^n \frac{t^n}{n!}\cr
=& \sum_{n=0}^\infty \bigg( \sum_{k=0}^n \lambda^{n-k} B_k (x+iy) S_1(n,k) \bigg) \frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
We recall here that the Bernoulli numbers of the second are given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq27-1}
\frac{t}{\log(1+t)}=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}b_n \frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{equation}
Then, from \eqref{eq18}, \eqref{eq19} and \eqref{eq27}, we have
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq28}
&\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} B_{n,\lambda}^{(c)} (x,y)\frac{t^n}{n!}\cr
&= \sum_{l=0}^{\infty}b_l\lambda^l\frac{t^l}{l!}\sum_{m=0}^{\infty}\bigg(\sum_{k=0}^m \lambda^{m-k}S_1(m,k) \frac{B_k(x+iy)+B_k(x-iy)}{2}\bigg)\frac{t^m}{m!}\cr
&=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\bigg(\sum_{m=0}^{n}\sum_{k=0}^{m}\binom{n}{m}b_{n-m}\lambda^{n-k}
S_1(m,k)\frac{B_k(x+iy)+B_k(x-iy)}{2}\bigg)\frac{t^n}{n!},
\end{split}\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq29}
&\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} B_{n,\lambda}^{(s)} (x,y)\frac{t^n}{n!}\cr
&= \sum_{l=0}^{\infty}b_l\lambda^l\frac{t^l}{l!}\sum_{m=0}^{\infty}\sum_{k=0}^m \lambda^{m-k}S_1(m,k) \left( \frac{B_k(x+iy)-B_k(x-iy)}{2 i} \right)\frac{t^m}{m!}\cr
&=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\bigg(\sum_{m=0}^{n}\sum_{k=0}^{m}\binom{n}{m}b_{n-m}\lambda^{n-k}
S_1(m,k)\frac{B_k(x+iy)-B_k(x-iy)}{2 i}\bigg)\frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
From \eqref{eq01}, we note that
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq30}
\sum_{n=0}^\infty \left(\frac{B_n(x+iy)+B_n(x-iy)}{2}\right) \frac{t^n}{n!}
=& \frac{t}{e^{\frac{t}{2}}-e^{-\frac{t}{2}}}e^{xt} \cos yt\cr
=&\sum_{l=0}^\infty B_l(x) \frac{t^l}{l!}\sum_{m=0}^{\infty} y^{2m}(-1)^m\frac
{t^{2m}}{(2m)!}\cr
=& \sum_{n=0}^\infty \bigg(\sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{n}{2}\right]}\binom{n}{2m}
B_{n-2m}(x) y^{2m} (-1)^m \bigg)\frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
Comparing the coefficients on both sides of \eqref{eq30}, we have
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq31}
\frac{B_n(x+iy)+B_n(x-iy)}{2} = \sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{n}{2}\right]}\binom{n}{2m}
B_{n-2m}(x) y^{2m} (-1)^m ,
\end{split}\end{equation}
where $n$ is a positive integer. By the same method as in \eqref{eq31}, we get
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq31-1}
\frac{B_n(x+iy)-B_n(x-iy)}{2i}
= \sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{n-1}{2}\right]}\binom{n}{2m+1}
B_{n-2m-1}(x) y^{2m+1} (-1)^m ,
\end{split}\end{equation}
where $n$ is a positive integer. Therefore, by \eqref{eq28}, \eqref{eq29}, \eqref{eq31}
\eqref{eq31-1}, we obtain the following theorem.
\begin{thm}
For $n\geq 0$, we have
\begin{equation*}\begin{split}
B_{n,\lambda}^{(c)}(x,y)
= \sum_{m=0}^{n}\sum_{k=0}^{m}\sum_{l=0}^{\left[ \frac{k}{2}\right]}\binom{n}{m}\binom{k}{2l} (-1)^l\lambda^{n-k}S_1(m,k)b_{n-m}B_{k-2l}(x) y^{2l}.
\end{split}\end{equation*}
Furthermore, for $n \in \mathbb{N}$, we have
\begin{equation*}\begin{split}
B_{n,\lambda}^{(s)}(x,y)
=\sum_{m=0}^{n}\sum_{k=0}^{m}\sum_{l=0}^{\left[ \frac{k-1}{2}\right]}\binom{n}{m}\binom{k}{2l+1}(-1)^l\lambda^{n-k}S_1(m,k)b_{n-m}B_{k-2l-1}(x) y^{2l+1}.
\end{split}\end{equation*}
\end{thm}
For $\alpha\in \mathbb{R}$, the type $2$ degenerate Bernoulli polynomials of order $\alpha$
are defined by
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{32}
\left( \frac{t}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)-e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)}\right)^\alpha
e_\lambda^x (t) =\sum_{n=0}^\infty B_{n,\lambda}^{(\alpha)} (x) \frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
When $x=0$, $B_{n,\lambda}^{(\alpha)}=B_{n,\lambda}^{(\alpha)}(0)$ are called
the type $2$ degenerate Bernoulli numbers of order $\alpha$.
For $k \in \mathbb{N}$, let $\alpha=-k$ and $x=0$.
Then we have
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq33}
\sum_{n=0}^\infty B_{n,\lambda}^{(-k)} \frac{t^n}{n!}
=& \frac{1}{t^k} \left( e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)-e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)\right)^k\cr
=& \frac{k!}{t^k} \sum_{n=k}^\infty T_\lambda(n,k) \frac{t^n}{n!}\cr
=& \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{T_\lambda(n+k,k)}{\binom{n+k}{k}} \frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
Thus, by \eqref{eq33}, we get
\begin{equation*}\begin{split}
\binom{n+k}{k} B_{n,\lambda}^{(-k)}= T_\lambda(n+k,k),
\end{split}\end{equation*}
where $n,k$ are nonnegative integers.\\
\indent For $\alpha\in \mathbb{R}$, let us define the type $2$ degenerate cosine-Bernoulli polynomials of order $\alpha$ and the type $2$ degenerate sine-Bernoulli polynomials of order $\alpha$, repsectively by
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq36}
\bigg(\frac{t}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)-e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)}\bigg)^\alpha
e_\lambda^x (t) \cos_\lambda^{(y)}(t) =\sum_{n=0}^\infty B_{n,\lambda}^{(c,\alpha)} (x,y) \frac{t^n}{n!},
\end{split}\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq37}
\bigg(\frac{t}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)-e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)}\bigg)^\alpha
e_\lambda^x (t) \sin_\lambda^{(y)}(t) =\sum_{n=0}^\infty B_{n,\lambda}^{(s,\alpha)} (x,y) \frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
Then, we note that
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq38}
B_{n,\lambda}^{(c,\alpha)} (x,y) =\frac{B_{n,\lambda}^{(\alpha)}(x+iy)+B_{n,\lambda}^{(\alpha)}(x-iy)}{2},
\end{split}\end{equation}
where $n$ is a nonnegative integer.
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq38-1}
B_{n,\lambda}^{(s,\alpha)} (x,y) =\frac{B_{n,\lambda}^{(\alpha)}(x+iy)-B_{n,\lambda}^{(\alpha)}(x-iy)}{2i},
\end{split}\end{equation}
where $n$ is a positive integer.
Proceeding just as in \eqref{eq20} and \eqref{eq21}, we have
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq34}
&\sum_{n=0}^\infty \bigg(\frac{B_{n,\lambda}^{(\alpha)}(x+iy)+B_{n,\lambda}^{(\alpha)}(x-iy)}{2}\bigg) \frac{t^n}{n!}\cr
=& \bigg( \frac{t}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)-e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}}(t)\bigg)^\alpha
e^x_\lambda(t) \cos_\lambda^{(y)}(t)\cr
=& \sum_{n=0}^\infty \bigg(
\sum_{k=0}^n \sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{k}{2} \right]} \binom{n}{k} B_{n-k,\lambda}^{(\alpha)} (x) (-1)^m \lambda^{k-2m}y^{2m} S_1(k,2m)\bigg) \frac{ t^n}{n!},
\end{split}\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq35}
&\sum_{n=0}^\infty \bigg(\frac{B_{n,\lambda}^{(\alpha)}(x+iy)-B_{n,\lambda}^{(\alpha)}(x-iy)}{2i}\bigg) \frac{t^n}{n!}\cr
=& \bigg(\frac{t}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)-e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)}\bigg)^\alpha
e^x_\lambda(t) \sin_\lambda^{(y)}(t)\cr
=& \sum_{n=1}^\infty \bigg(\sum_{k=1}^n \sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{k-1}{2} \right]} \binom{n}{k} B_{n-k,\lambda}^{(\alpha)} (x) (-1)^m \lambda^{k-2m-1}y^{2m+1} S_1(k,2m+1)\bigg) \frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
Therefore, by \eqref{eq38}, \eqref{eq38-1}, \eqref{eq34} and \eqref{eq35}, we obtain the following theorem.
\begin{thm}
For $n\geq 0$, we have
\begin{equation*}\begin{split}
B_{n,\lambda}^{(c,\alpha)} (x,y)
=\sum_{k=0}^n \sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{k}{2} \right]} \binom{n}{k} B_{n-k,\lambda}^{(\alpha)} (x) (-1)^m \lambda^{k-2m}y^{2m} S_1(k,2m).
\end{split}\end{equation*}
Furthermore, for $n \in \mathbb{N}$, we have
\begin{equation*}\begin{split}
&B_{n,\lambda}^{(s,\alpha)} (x,y) \cr
=&\sum_{k=1}^n \sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{k-1}{2} \right]} \binom{n}{k} B_{n-k,\lambda}^{(\alpha)} (x) (-1)^m \lambda^{k-2m-1}y^{2m+1} S_1(k,2m+1).
\end{split}\end{equation*}
\end{thm}
For $k\in \mathbb{N}$, let $\alpha=-k$. Then, by \eqref{eq36}, we get
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq39}
&\sum_{n=0}^\infty B_{n,\lambda}^{(c,-k)} (x,y) \frac{t^n}{n!}\cr
=& \frac{k!}{t^k}\frac{1}{k!} \left( e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)-e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t) \right)^k
e_\lambda^x(t) \cos_\lambda^{(y)}(t)\cr
=& \sum_{l=0}^\infty \frac{T_\lambda(l+k,k|x)}{\binom{l+k}{k}} \frac{t^l}{l!}
\sum_{j=0}^\infty \bigg(\sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{j}{2}\right]}(-1)^m y^{2m}\lambda^{j-2m}S_1(j,2m)\bigg) \frac{t^j}{j!}\cr
=& \sum_{n=0}^\infty \bigg( \sum_{j=0}^n \sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{j}{2}\right]}
\frac{\binom{n}{j}}{\binom{n-j+k}{k}} T_\lambda(n-j+k,k|x)(-1)^m y^{2m}\lambda^{j-2m}S_1(j,2m) \bigg) \frac{t^n}{n!} .
\end{split}\end{equation}
Therefore, by \eqref{eq39}, we obtain the following theorem.
\begin{thm}
For $k\in \mathbb{N}$ and $n \in \mathbb{N}\cup \{0\}$, we have
\begin{equation*}\begin{split}
B_{n,\lambda}^{(c,-k)}(x,y) = \sum_{j=0}^n \sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{j}{2}\right]}
\frac{\binom{n}{j}}{\binom{n-j+k}{k}} T_\lambda(n-j+k,k|x)(-1)^m y^{2m}\lambda^{j-2m}S_1(j,2m).
\end{split}\end{equation*}
\end{thm}
From \eqref{eq11}, we define the type 2 degenerate Euler polynomials of complex variable by
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq40}
\frac{2}{ e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)+e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)}
e_\lambda^{x+iy}(t)=\sum_{n=0}^\infty E_{n,\lambda}(x+iy) \frac{t^n}{n!} .
\end{split}\end{equation}
From \eqref{eq40}, we have
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq41}
\sum_{n=0}^\infty \left(\frac{E_{n,\lambda}(x+iy) + E_{n,\lambda}(x-iy)}{2} \right) \frac{t^n}{n!}
=\frac{2e_\lambda^x(t)}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)+e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t) } \cos_\lambda^{(y)}(t),
\end{split}\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq42}
\sum_{n=0}^\infty \left(\frac{E_{n,\lambda}(x+iy) - E_{n,\lambda}(x-iy)}{2i} \right) \frac{t^n}{n!}
=\frac{2e_\lambda^x(t)}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)+e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}} (t)} \sin_\lambda^{(y)}(t),
\end{split}\end{equation}
Now, we define the type $2$ degenerate cosine-Euler and type $2$ degenerate sine-Euler polynomials
as
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq42-1}
\frac{2}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)+e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)} e_\lambda^x(t) cos_\lambda^{(y)}(t)
=\sum_{n=0}^\infty E_{n,\lambda}^{(c)}(x,y) \frac{t^n}{n!},
\end{split}\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq42-2}
\frac{2}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)+e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t)} e_\lambda^x(t) sin_\lambda^{(y)}(t)
=\sum_{n=0}^\infty E_{n,\lambda}^{(s)}(x,y) \frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
By \eqref{eq11}, we see that
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq43}
&\frac{2}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)+e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t) }e_\lambda^x(t) \cos_\lambda^{(y)}(t)\cr
=& \sum_{l=0}^\infty E_{l,\lambda}(x) \frac{t^l}{l!}\cos_\lambda^{(y)}(t) \cr
=&\sum_{n=0}^\infty \bigg( \sum_{k=0}^n \sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{k}{2}\right]}
\binom{n}{k}E_{n-k,\lambda}(x) (-1)^m \lambda^{k-2m} y^{2m} S_1(k,2m) \bigg) \frac{t^n}{n!} ,
\end{split}\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq44}
&\frac{2}{e_\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}(t)+e_\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}(t) }e_\lambda^x(t) \sin_\lambda^{(y)}(t)\cr
=&\sum_{n=0}^\infty \bigg(\sum_{k=0}^n \sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{k-1}{2}\right]}
\binom{n}{k}E_{n-k,\lambda}(x) (-1)^m \lambda^{k-2m-1} y^{2m+1} S_1(k,2m+1) \bigg) \frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
Therefore, by \eqref{eq42-1}, \eqref{eq42-2}, \eqref{eq43} and \eqref{eq44}, we obtain the following theorem.
\begin{thm}
For $n \in \mathbb{N}\cup \{0\}$, we have
\begin{equation*}\begin{split}
E_{n,\lambda}^{(c)}(x,y)
=\sum_{k=0}^n \sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{k}{2}\right]}
\binom{n}{k}E_{n-k,\lambda}(x) (-1)^m \lambda^{k-2m} y^{2m} S_1(k,2m).
\end{split}\end{equation*}
Moreover, for $n \in \mathbb{N}$,
\begin{equation*}\begin{split}
E_{n,\lambda}^{(s)}(x,y)
=\sum_{k=0}^n \sum_{m=0}^{\left[ \frac{k-1}{2}\right]}
\binom{n}{k}E_{n-k,\lambda}(x) (-1)^m \lambda^{k-2m-1} y^{2m+1} S_1(k,2m+1).
\end{split}\end{equation*}
\end{thm}
By replacing $t$ by $\frac{1}{\lambda}(e^{\lambda t} -1) $ in \eqref{eq40}, we get
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq45}
\frac{2}{e^{\frac{t}{2}}+e^{-\frac{t}{2}} }e^{(x+iy)t}
=& \sum_{k=0}^\infty E_{k,\lambda}(x+iy) \lambda^{-k}\frac{1}{k!}(e^{\lambda t} -1)^k \cr
=& \sum_{k=0}^\infty E_{k,\lambda}(x+iy) \lambda^{-k} \sum_{n=k}^\infty S_2(n,k) \lambda^n\frac{t^n}{n!}\cr
=& \sum_{n=0}^\infty \bigg( \sum_{k=0}^n E_{k,\lambda}(x+iy) S_2(n,k)
\lambda^{n-k} \bigg) \frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
On the other hand,
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq46}
\frac{2}{e^{\frac{t}{2}}+e^{-\frac{t}{2}} }e^{(x+iy)t}
= \sum_{n=0}^\infty E_n (x+iy) \frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
Therefore, by \eqref{eq45} and \eqref{eq46}, we obtain the following theorem.
\begin{thm}
For $n \geq 0 $, we have
\begin{equation*}\begin{split}
E_n(x+iy)=\sum_{k=0}^n E_{k,\lambda}(x+iy) S_2(n,k)\lambda^{n-k}.
\end{split}\end{equation*}
\end{thm}
From \eqref{eq46}, we can easily derive the following equation \eqref{eq47}.
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq47}
& \sum_{n=0}^\infty \bigg(\frac{E_n(x+iy)+E_n(x-iy)}{2} \bigg) \frac{t^n}{n!} \cr
=& \frac{2}{e^{\frac{t}{2}}+ e^{-\frac{t}{2}} }e^{xt} \cos yt \cr
=& \sum_{l=0}^\infty E_l(x) \frac{t^l}{l!}
\sum_{m=0}^\infty \frac{(-1)^m y^{2m} }{(2m)!} t^{2m} \cr
=& \sum_{n=0}^\infty \bigg(\sum_{m=0}^{\left[\frac{n}{2} \right]} \binom{n}{2m}
E_{n-2m}(x) (-1)^m y^{2m} \bigg) \frac{t^n}{n!}.
\end{split}\end{equation}
By \eqref{eq47}, we get
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq48}
\frac{E_n(x+iy)+E_n(x-iy)}{2}= \sum_{m=0}^{\left[\frac{n}{2} \right]}
\binom{n}{2m} E_{n-2m}(x) (-1)^m y^{2m},
\end{split}\end{equation}
where $n$ is a nonnegative integer.
From Theorem 2.10 and \eqref{eq48}, we have
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq49}
& \sum_{m=0}^{[\frac{n}{2}]} \binom{n}{2m} E_{n-2m}(x) (-1)^m y^{2m}\cr
=& \sum_{k=0}^n S_2(n,k) \lambda^{n-k} \left(
\frac{E_{n,\lambda}(x+iy)+E_{n,\lambda}(x-iy)}{2}\right)\cr
=& \sum_{k=0}^n S_2(n,k) \lambda^{n-k}\sum_{l=0}^k \sum_{m=0}^{\left[\frac{l}{2} \right]}
\binom{k}{l} E_{k-l, \lambda}(x) (-1)^m \lambda^{l-2m} y^{2m}S_1(l,2m)\cr
=& \sum_{k=0}^n \sum_{l=0}^k \sum_{m=0}^{\left[\frac{l}{2} \right]}
S_2(n,k) \lambda^{n+l-k-2m} \binom{k}{l} E_{k-l, \lambda}(x) (-1)^m y^{2m}S_1(l,2m).
\end{split}\end{equation}
Thus, by \eqref{eq49}, we get
\begin{equation*}\begin{split}
&\sum_{m=0}^{\left[\frac{n}{2} \right]}
\binom{n}{2m} E_{n-2m}(x) (-1)^m y^{2m}\cr
=& \sum_{k=0}^n \sum_{l=0}^k \sum_{m=0}^{\left[\frac{l}{2} \right]}
S_2(n,k) \lambda^{n+l-k-2m} \binom{k}{l} E_{k-l, \lambda}(x) (-1)^m y^{2m}S_1(l,2m).
\end{split}\end{equation*}
\medskip
\section{\bf Conclusions}
\medskip
In \cite{ref05-1}, the authors considered the degenerate Bernoulli and degenerate Euler polynomials of complex variable. By treating the real and imaginary parts separately, they were able to introduce the degenerate cosine-Bernoulli polynomials, degenerate sine-Bernoulli polynomials, degenerate cosine-Euler polynomials and degenerate sine-Euler polynomials, and derived some interesting results for them. Actually, the degenerate Euler polynomials of complex variable are degenerate versions of the so called 'new type Euler polynomials' studied by Masjed-Jamei, Beyki and Koepf in \cite{ref12}. Furthermore, the results in \cite{ref05-1} gave an affirmative answer to the question asked by Hac\`ene Belbachir in Mathematical Reviews (MR3808565), "Is it possible to obtain their results by considering the classical Euler polynomials of complex variable $z$, and treating the real part and the imaginary part separately?" \\
\indent Carlitz \cite{ref01,ref02} initiated the study of degenerate versions of Bernoulli and Euler polynomials. As it turns out (see \cite{ref02-1,ref03,ref04,ref05-1,ref06,ref07,ref08,ref09} and references therein), studying degenerate versions of some special polynomials and numbers have been very fruitful and is promising. This idea of considering degenerate versions of some special polynomials is not only limited to polynomials but also can be extended to transcendental functions like gamma functions \cite{ref08}. \\
\indent In Section 2, we studied the type 2 degenerate Bernoulli and type 2 degenerate Euler polynomials of complex variable of which the latters are degenerate and type 2 versions of the aforementioned new type Euler polynomials studied in \cite{ref12}. By treating the real and imaginary parts separately, the type 2 degenerate cosine-Bernoulli and type 2 degenerate sine-Bernoulli polynomials were introduced. They were expressed in terms of the type 2 degenerate Bernoulli polynomials and Stirling numbers of the first kind. In addition, they were represented in terms of the type 2 Bernoulli polynomials and Stirling numbers of the first kind. Identities involving the type 2 degenerate cosine-polynomials (or the type 2 degenerate sine-polynomials) and Stirling numbers of the first kind were obtained. Another identity connecting the type 2 degenerate cosine-Bernoulli polynomials, Stirling numbers of the second kind and the type 2 Bernoulli polynomials were derived. As natural extensions of the type 2 degenerate cosine-Bernoulli and type 2 degenerate sine-Bernoulli polynomials, the type 2 degenerate cosine-Bernoulli and type 2 degenerate sine-Bernoulli polynomials of order $\alpha$ were introduced. They were expressed in terms of the type 2 degenerate Bernoulli polynomials of order $\alpha$ and Stirling numbers of the second kind. In addition, the type 2 degenerate cosine-Bernoulli polynomials of negative order were represented in terms of the degenerate central factorial polynomials of the second kind and Stirling numbers of the first kind. Moreover, the type 2 degenerate cosine-Euler and type 2 degenerate sine-Euler polynomials were investigated and analogous results to the type 2 degenerate cosine-Bernoulli and type 2 degenerate sine-Bernoulli polynomials were obtained for them.
\bigskip
{\bf Competing interests:}
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
\bigskip
{\bf Funding:} This research received no external funding.
\bigskip
{\bf Authors' contributions:}
T.K. and D.S.K. conceived of the framework and structured the whole paper; T.K. wrote the paper; All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
|
\section{Multi-species dynamics --- statement of main results}
\subsection{The (hydro-)dynamics of multi-species}
We study the (hydro-)dynamics of multi-species driven by environmental averaging. The `environment' consists of agents, each is identified by a position/velocity pair
$({\mathbf x}^i_\alpha,{\mathbf v}^i_\alpha)\in (\mathbb{R}^d, \mathbb{R}^d)$. The indexing $\{\cdot\}_\alpha^i$ signifies agent ``$i$'' in a species ``$\alpha$''. What distinguishes one species from another is the way they interact with the environment: let $\phi_{\alpha\beta}\geq 0$ be the \emph{communication kernel} between species $\alpha$ and $\beta$, then the dynamics describes the collective motion of agents, each of which aligns its velocity to a \emph{weighted average} of velocities of neighboring agents --- both from its own as well as other species,
\[
\left\{
\begin{split}
& \ \ \dot{{\mathbf x}}^i_\alpha={\mathbf v}_\alpha^i,\\
& \ \ \dot{{\mathbf v}}_\alpha^i=\sum_{\beta\in \mathcal{I}}\frac{1}{N_\beta}\sum_{j=1}^{N_\beta} \phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf x}^j_\beta-{\mathbf x}^i_\alpha|)({\mathbf v}^j_\beta-{\mathbf v}^i_\alpha),
\end{split}
\right.
\qquad i\in 1,2,..., N_\alpha, \quad \alpha\in\mathcal I,
\]
subject to initial data $({\mathbf x}^i_\alpha, {\mathbf v}^i_\alpha)\big|_{t=0}=({\mathbf x}_{{\alpha}0}^i,{\mathbf v}_{{\alpha}0}^i)$. Here $N_\alpha$ is the size of the species $\alpha\in {\mathcal I}$, where ${\mathcal I}$ is a (possibly infinite) index set for the different species. The large-crowd dynamics,
$N_{\alpha\in{\mathcal I}}\gg 1$, is captured by the hydrodynamic description\footnote{Unless otherwise stated, all integrals are taken over ${\mathbb R}^d$.}, consult section \ref{sec:hydrodynamics},
\begin{equation}\label{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs}
\left\{
\begin{split}
& \ \ \partial_t \rho_\alpha +\nabla\cdot({\mathbf u}_\alpha\rho_\alpha)=0; \\
& \ \ \partial_t (\rho_\alpha {\mathbf u}_\alpha)+\nabla\cdot (\rho_\alpha {\mathbf u}_\alpha\otimes {\mathbf u}_\alpha)=\sum_{\beta\in \mathcal{I}} \int \hspace*{-0.1cm}\phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|)\big({\mathbf u}_\beta({\mathbf y})-{\mathbf u}_\alpha({\mathbf x})\big)\rho_\alpha({\mathbf x})\rho_\beta({\mathbf y})\dby.
\end{split}\right.
\end{equation}
Each of the different species is identified by a pair of density/velocity $(\rho_\alpha, {\mathbf u}_\alpha)$, subject to initial condition $(\rho_\alpha,{\mathbf u}_\alpha)\big|_{t=0}=(\rho_{{\alpha}0},{\mathbf u}_{{\alpha}0})\in L_+^1(\mathbb{R}^d)\times W^{1,\infty}(\mathbb{R}^d),\enskip \forall\alpha \in \mathcal{I}$.
There are two extreme cases: when $\phi_{\alpha\beta}\equiv \phi$ the crowd consists of a single species driven by the same communication kernel
\[
\left\{
\begin{split}
& \ \ \partial_t\rho+\nabla\cdot(\rho {\mathbf u}) =0, \\
& \ \ \partial_t(\rho{\mathbf u})+ \nabla\cdot(\rho{\mathbf u}\otimes {\mathbf u}) =\int \phi(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|)({\mathbf u}(t,{\mathbf y})-{\mathbf u}(t,{\mathbf x}))\rho(t,{\mathbf x})\rho(t,{\mathbf y})\dby.
\end{split}
\right.
\]
For the large literature on the single species hydrodynamics (as well as discrete dynamics), we refer to \cite{bellomo2017-19active} and the references therein.
When $\phi_{\alpha\beta}=\phi\delta_{\alpha\beta}$, the crowd of \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs} splits into independent species driven by the same communication kernel, thus we end up with identical copies of the single species dynamics.
In this paper we study all the intermediate cases which involve a genuine \emph{multi}-species dynamics, driven by \emph{symmetric} communication array of radial decreasing kernels,
$\Phi=\{\phi_{\alpha\beta}\}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:symm}
\phi_{\alpha\beta}=\phi_{\beta\alpha}\geq 0, \qquad \phi_{\alpha\beta} \ \text{are radial and decreasing}.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Smooth solutions must flock}
Recall that the long time behavior for the single-species model
is dictated by the communication kernel $\phi$, \cite{TanTadmor, HeTadmor17}: if the communication kernel $\phi$ admits a Pareto-type `fat-tail'' decay\footnote{And in a slightly more general setup --- if $\phi$ is global in the sense that $\displaystyle \int^\infty \hspace*{-0.2cm}\phi(r)\mbox{\textnormal{d}} r = \infty$.}, $\phi(r) \gtrsim (1+r)^{-\theta}$ with $\theta \leq 1$ , then ``smooth solutions must flock'', namely, strong solutions of the single-species model exhibit \emph{flocking behavior} as $\displaystyle \max_{{\mathbf x}\in \mathrm{supp}\,\{\rho(t,\cdot)\}}|{\mathbf u}(t,{\mathbf x})-\buinf| \stackrel{t\rightarrow \infty}{\longrightarrow}0$.
This brings us to our first main result regarding the large-time behavior of the multi-species dynamics. Let $\Phi(r):=\{\phi_{\alpha\beta}(r)\}_{\alpha,\beta\in{\mathcal I}}$ denote the array of communication kernels associated with \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs}. The main feature here is that flocking of multi-species dynamics does \emph{not} require direct, global communication among all species --- we allow $\phi_{\alpha\beta}(r)$ to vanish, indicating lack of communication between some species $\alpha$ and $\beta$.
Instead, what matters is a minimal requirement that the communication among species forms a \emph{connected network} in the sense that there is a connecting path which propagates the information of alignment between every pair of species. To this end, we introduce the \emph{weighted} graph Laplacian associated with $\Phi(r)$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:PhiLap}
(\DelMP(r))_{\alpha\beta}:= \left\{\begin{array}{ll} -\phi_{\alpha\beta}(r)\sqrt{M_{\alpha}M_\beta}, & \alpha\neq \beta;\\ \\
{\displaystyle \mathop{\sum}_{\gamma\neq \alpha}}\phi_{\alpha\gamma}(r)M_\gamma, & \alpha=\beta,\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
where the weights, $\mathscr{M}:=\{M_\alpha\}_{\alpha\in{\mathcal I}}$, consist of the masses of the different species which are constant in time,
\[
M_\alpha:=\int \rho_{\alpha 0}({\mathbf x})\dbx \equiv \int \rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\dbx>0.
\]
Its properties are outlined in section \ref{sec:wFiedler} below. In particular, the communication array $\Phi(r)$ forms a connected graph as long as its second eigenvalue $\lambda_2\big(\DelMP(r)\big)>0$. Our main result shows that inter-species connectivity implies the flocking behavior of the whole crowd.
\begin{thm}[{\bf Strong solutions must flock}]\label{THM_1}\mbox{}\newline
Let $(\rho_{{\alpha}}(t,\cdot),{\mathbf u}_{{\alpha}}(t,\cdot))\in (L^\infty\cap L_+^{1}(\mathbb{R}^d))\times W^{1,\infty}(\mathbb{R}^d), \ \alpha \in \mathcal{I}$ be a strong solution of the multi-species dynamics \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs}, subject to compactly supported initial conditions $(\rho_{\alpha 0},{\mathbf u}_{\alpha 0})$ with finite velocity fluctuations
\[
\delVz:=\max_{\alpha,\beta\in{\mathcal I}}\sup_{{\mathbf x},{\mathbf y}\in{S_0}}|{\mathbf u}_{\alpha 0}({\mathbf x})-{\mathbf u}_{\beta 0}({\mathbf y})| <\infty, \qquad {\mathcal S}_0:= \cup_\alpha \text{supp}\{\rho_{\alpha 0}(\cdot)\}.
\]
Assume that the communication array $\Phi(r)=\{\phi_{\alpha\beta}(r)\}_{\alpha,\beta\in{\mathcal I}}$ satisfies a Pareto-type `fat-tail' connectivity condition
\begin{align}\label{eq:Pareto}
\lambda_2(\DelMP(r)) \gtrsim \frac{1}{(1+r)^\theta}, \ \ \theta<1.
\end{align}
Then the support, $\displaystyle {\mathcal S}(t):= \cup_\alpha \textrm{supp}\{\rho_\alpha(t,\cdot)\}$, remains within a finite diameter $D_\infty< \infty$ (depending on $1-\theta, M, \delVz$), and the different species flock towards a limiting velocity $\buinf$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:revisit}
\sum_{\alpha\in\mathcal{I}}\int |{\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})-\buinf|^2\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}){\mbox{\text{d}}}{\mathbf x} \leq \sum_{\alpha\in\mathcal{I}}\int |{\mathbf u}_{\alpha 0}({\mathbf x})-\buinf|^2\rho_{\alpha 0}({\mathbf x}){\mbox{\text{d}}}{\mathbf x} \cdot e^{\displaystyle -2\rate t},
\end{equation}
at exponential rate, $\rate$, dictated by the spatial scale $D_\infty$
\[
\rate = \zetaM \lambda_2(\DelMP_\infty) \gtrsim \frac{\zetaM}{(1+D_\infty)^\theta},
\qquad \Phi_\infty:=\Phi(D_\infty), \ \ \zetaM:=1-\frac{\max_\alpha M_\alpha}{\sum_\alpha M_\alpha}>0.
\]
\end{thm}
\noindent
The proof of theorem \ref{THM_1}, carried out in section \ref{sec:hydro_flocking} below, is achieved by showing the decay of the fluctuations
\[
\left(\sum_{\alpha,\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\iint|{\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})-{\mathbf u}_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})|^p\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})\dbx\dby\right)^{1/p} \stackrel{t\rightarrow \infty}{\longrightarrow} 0.
\]
In particular, the decay of the \emph{energy fluctuations}, corresponding to $p=2$,
\[
\delta E(t)=\sum_{\alpha,\beta\in {\mathcal I}}\iint |{\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})-{\mathbf u}_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})|^2\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})\dbx\dby,
\]
and the decay of \emph{uniform fluctuations}, corresponding to $p=\infty$,
\[
\delV({\mathbf u}(t))=\max_{\alpha,\beta\in{\mathcal I}}\sup_{{\mathbf x},{\mathbf y}\in{\mathcal S}(t)}
|{\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})-{\mathbf u}_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})|, \qquad {\mathcal S}(t)= \cup_\alpha\text{supp}\{\rho_\alpha(t,\cdot)\},
\]
imply that the whole crowd of different species remains within a uniformly bounded finite diameter,
$D_\infty \leq D_0+C_\theta \cdot\delV_0 < \infty$ (with $C_\theta \lesssim
(1-\theta)^{\frac{\theta}{1-\theta}}$; consult \eqref{eq:Dbd} below). It follows that the fluctuations, $\delE(t), \delV(t)$, decay at exponential rate and that all species `aggregate' around a limiting velocity $\mathbf{u}_\infty$.
Since the total mass $M(t)=\sum_{\alpha} \int \rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}) \dbx$ and the total momentum ${\mathbf m}(t)=\sum_{\alpha} \int \rho_\alpha{\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}) \dbx$
are conserved in time, $M(t)=M$ and ${\mathbf m}(t)={\mathbf m}_0$, it follows that the different species flock together with the only possible limiting velocity $\displaystyle {\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,\cdot) \stackrel{t\rightarrow \infty}{\longrightarrow} \buinf :=\frac{\mathbf{m_0}}{M}$.
\begin{rmk}[{\bf Why weighted Laplacian?}]
In case of equi-weighted species $M_\alpha\equiv 1$, the weighted Laplacian \eqref{eq:PhiLap} amounts to the usual graph Laplacian $\Delta\Phi(r)$.
Its Fiedler number, $\lambda_2(\Delta \Phi(r))$, quantifies the connectivity of the graph associated with the adjacency matrix $\Phi(r)$, \cite{Fiedler75}, \cite[proposition 6.1]{Mohar91}. Here, we advocate the use of the weighted graph Laplacian,
$\DelMP(r)$, whose properties are outlined in section \ref{sec:wFiedler} below; in particular, \emph{if} the number of species is finite, $|{\mathcal I}|<\infty$, then there holds, consult \eqref{eq:compare},
\begin{equation}\label{eq:xcompare}
\frac{M}{\kappa^{2}|{\mathcal I}|} \leq \frac{\lambda_2(\DelMP)}{\lambda_2(\Delta \Phi)} \leq \frac{M\kappa^{2}}{|{\mathcal I}|}, \qquad \kappa=\frac{\max M_\alpha}{\min M_\alpha}, \quad M:=\sum_{\alpha\in {\mathcal I}} M_\alpha,
\end{equation}
and hence $\Phi(r)$ is connected as long as $\lambda_2\big(\DelMP(r)\big) \approx_\mathscr{M} \lambda_2\big(\Delta \Phi(r)\big)>0$. The advantage of using the weighted $\lambda_2(\DelMP(r))$, however, is that it provides the right scaling for the decay rate of multi-species dynamics \eqref{eq:revisit}, \textup{(}i\textup{)} independent of the condition number, $\kappa$, and \textup{(}ii\textup{)} independent of the number of different species, $|{\mathcal I}|$. On the other hand, if we accept $\kappa,|{\mathcal I}|$-dependence, then \eqref{eq:xcompare} implies that for \eqref{eq:Pareto} to hold it suffices to verify the Pareto `fat-tail' connectivity condition $\lambda_2(\Delta \Phi(r)) \, {\gtrsim}_{{}_{\mathscr{M},\kappa,|{\mathcal I}|}} (1+r)^{-\theta}$ with $\theta<1$.
\end{rmk}
\begin{rmk}[{\bf Game of alignment}]\label{rmk:game}
The graph Laplacian of the communication array $\Phi(r)$ is independent of the self-interacting kernels $\{\phi_{\alpha\al}\, | \,\alpha\in{\mathcal I}\}$. Thus, according to theorem \ref{THM_1}, flocking can be viewed as the outcome of a `game' in which agents from one species interact with different species but are \emph{independent} of the interaction with their own kind. Alignment dynamics based on a game within a single species was recently studied in \cite{griffin2019consensus}; a two-species ensemble dynamics in \cite{ha2017emergent}. A main feature in our multi-species alignment game (of two or more species) is that one can \emph{ignore interactions with its own kind}, i.e., set $\phi_{\alpha\al}=0$ in \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs} and yet the information will eventually be reflected through interactions with the other connected species leading to overall flocking.
\end{rmk}
\begin{exm}
Consider the case of two species with $2\times 2$ symmetric communication array,
\[
\Phi= \left[
\begin{array}{cc}
0 & \phi_{12}(r) \\ \\
\phi_{21}(r) & 0 \\
\end{array}
\right], \qquad \phi_{12}(r)=\phi_{21}(r) \gtrsim \frac{1}{(1+r)^\theta}, \ \ \theta<1.
\]
In this case, agents in each of the two groups interact with the other group but \underline{not} with their own kind ($\phi_{11}=\phi_{22}\equiv 0$). The large-time behavior of such `game' leads to flocking.\newline
Similarity, consider the case of four species with $4\times 4$ symmetric communication array
\[
\Phi= \left[\begin{array}{cccc}
0 & \phi_{12} & 0 & \phi_{14} \\
\phi_{21} & 0 & \phi_{23} & 0 \\
0 & \phi_{32} & 0 & \phi_{34}\\
\phi_{41} & 0 & \phi_{43} & 0\\
\end{array} \right], \quad \phi_{\alpha\beta}(r) =\phi_{\beta\alpha}(r)\gtrsim{(1+r)^{-\mu\cdot\min\{\alpha,\beta\}}}, \ \ \mu<1/3.
\]
Again, species do not interact with their own kind, but the connectivity of inter-group interactions is strong enough to induce flocking.
\end{exm}
We close this section by noting that the flocking of multi-species hydrodynamics \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs} infers similar behavior of the underlying discrete multi-species Cucker-Smale dynamics
\[
\left\{
\begin{split}
& \ \ \dot{{\mathbf x}}^i_\alpha={\mathbf v}_\alpha^i,\\
& \ \ \dot{{\mathbf v}}_\alpha^i=\sum_{\beta\in \mathcal{I}}\frac{1}{N_\beta}\sum_{j=1}^{N_\beta} \phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf x}^j_\beta-{\mathbf x}^i_\alpha|)({\mathbf v}^j_\beta-{\mathbf v}^i_\alpha),
\end{split}
\right.
\qquad i\in 1,2,..., N_\alpha, \quad \alpha\in\mathcal I.
\]
The key feature is, again, weighted connectivity.
Thus, if the communication array $\Phi(r)=\{\phi_{\alpha\beta}(r)\}_{\alpha,\beta\in{\mathcal I}}$ satisfies the corresponding Pareto-type `fat-tail' connectivity condition\newline
$\lambda_2(\DelNP(r)) \gtrsim (1+r)^{-\theta}$
(weighted by the sizes of different species $\mathscr{N}:=\{N_\alpha\}_{\alpha\in{\mathcal I}}$),
then the diameter of the different species remains bounded
depending on $1-\theta, \sum_\alpha N_\alpha$ and $\delta{\mathbf v}_0$,
\[
\max_{\alpha,\beta} \max_{i,j} |{\mathbf x}_\alpha^i-{\mathbf x}_\beta^j| \leq D_\infty< \infty,
\qquad \delta{\mathbf v}_0:=\max_{i,j}\max_{\alpha,\beta}|{\mathbf v}_\alpha^i(0)-{\mathbf v}^j_\beta(0)|,
\]
and the different species flock towards a limiting velocity $\bvinf$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:revisit}
\sum_{\alpha\in\mathcal{I}}|{\mathbf v}^i_\alpha(t)-\bvinf|^2 \leq \sum_{\alpha\in\mathcal{I}} |{\mathbf v}^i_{\alpha}(0)-\bvinf|^2 \cdot e^{\displaystyle -2\rate t},
\end{equation}
with exponential rate, $\rate$, dictated by the spatial scale $D_\infty$.
The relation between connectivity and flocking was motivated by our earlier study of flocking for discrete dynamics of one species, $\{({\mathbf x}^i(t), {\mathbf v}^i(t))\}_{i=1}^N$, governed by $\dot{{\mathbf v}}^i=\frac{1}{N}\sum_{j=1}^N \phi(|{\mathbf x}^j-{\mathbf x}^i|)({\mathbf v}^j-{\mathbf v}^i)$
and subject to \emph{short-range interactions}, \cite[Theorem 2.11]{MotschTadmor14}. It was shown that if connectivity persists in time so that
\[
\int^\infty\lambda_2(\Delta {\Phi}(t))\text{d}t=\infty, \qquad \Phi_{ij}(t)=\{\phi(|{\mathbf x}_i(t)-{\mathbf x}_j(t)|)\},
\]
then flocking follows, ${\mathbf v}^i(t) \stackrel{t\rightarrow \infty}{\longrightarrow} {\mathbf v}_\infty$.
\subsection{One- and two-dimensional smoothness --- sub-critical data}
The conditional statement that `smooth solutions must flock' raises the question whether the multi-species dynamics \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs} admits global smooth solutions.
The case of one species was studied in one- and two-spatial dimensions. The one-dimensional well-posedness theory \cite{CCTT16} provided precise characterization of global smooth solutions with sub-critical initial data, $u'_0+\phi*\rho_0\geq 0$. Global smoothness in two dimensions was proved for sub-critical initial data outlined in \cite{TanTadmor,HeTadmor17}. Here we develop the corresponding well-posedness of multi-species dynamics \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs} in one- and two-spatial dimensions.
\medskip\noindent
The one-dimensional result is stated for \emph{non-vacuous} initial data
in the 1D torus.
\begin{thm}[{\bf Existence of smooth solutions --- one-dimensional dynamics}]\label{Thm_2}
Consider the multi-species dynamics \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs} subject to non-vacuous initial data $\{(\rho_{\al0}>0, {u}_{\al0})\}\in (L^\infty\cap L_+^1(\mathbb{T}))\times W^{1,\infty}(\mathbb{T})$. If the initial condition satisfies the sub-critical threshold condition
\begin{equation}
{u}'_{\alpha 0}(x)+\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}} \phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_{\beta 0}(x)\geq 0,\quad \forall x\in\mathbb{T},\alpha\in \mathcal{I},
\end{equation}
then the multi-species dynamics \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs} admits global non-vacuous smooth solution, $(\rho_\alpha,{\mathbf u}_\alpha)\in C(\mathbb{R}_+; L^\infty\cap L^1(\mathbb{T}))\times C(\mathbb{R}_+;\dot W^ {1,\infty}(\mathbb{T}))$.
\end{thm}
Turning to the two-dimensional case, we let $(\rho_\alpha,{\mathbf u}_\alpha)$ be a solution of the 2D multi-species dynamics \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs}. Global smoothness for sub-critical initial data is quantified in terms of the \emph{spectral gap} associated with the (symmetric part of the) $2\times 2$ velocity gradient matrix e.g., \cite{HeTadmor17}
\[
S_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}):=\frac{1}{2}\Big(\nabla {\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})+(\nabla {\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}))^\top\Big), \quad (\nabla {\mathbf u}_\alpha)_{ij}=\partial_j {\mathbf u}^i_\alpha(t,\cdot),\enskip {i,j\in\{1,2\}}.
\]
\begin{thm}[{\bf Existence of smooth solutions --- two-dimensional dynamics}]\label{Thm_3}
Consider the two-dimensional multi-species dynamics \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs} subject to compactly supported initial conditions $\{(\rho_{\al0}, {\mathbf u}_{\al0})\}_{\alpha\in \mathcal{I}} \in (L^\infty\cap L_+^1(\mathbb{R}^2))\times W^{1,\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)$.
Assume a connected communication array $\Phi(r)=\{\phi_{\alpha\beta}(r)\}_{\alpha,\beta\in{\mathcal I}}$ satisfying the `fat-tail' decay \eqref{eq:Pareto},
$\lambda_2(\DelMP(r)) \gtrsim (1+r)^{-\theta},\ \theta <1$.
There exists a constant $C_1=C_1(|\phi'_{\alpha \beta}|_{\infty},{M}, \gamma)$
(specified in \eqref{eq:setC0} below), such that if the initial fluctuations are not too large, $\delV_0\leq C_1$, and the following critical threshold conditions hold
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\diver{{\mathbf u}_{\alpha 0}}&({\mathbf x})+\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_{\al0}({\mathbf x}) >0,\quad \forall{\mathbf x} \in\mathbb{R}^2,\label{eq:eCT}\\
\max_{{\mathbf x},\alpha} & | \lambda_2(S_\alpha(0,{\mathbf x}))-\lambda_1(S_\alpha(0,{\mathbf x}))| <\frac{1}{2} C_1, \quad \label{eq:etaCT}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
then the multi-species dynamics \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs} admits a global smooth solution $(\rho_\alpha,{\mathbf u}_\alpha)\in C(\mathbb{R}_+; L^\infty\cap L^1(\mathbb{R}^2))\times C(\mathbb{R}_+;\dot W^ {1,\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2))$ with large time hydrodynamic flocking behavior
${\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}) \rightarrow \buinf$.
\end{thm}
\subsection{Multi-species aggregation model}
We turn our attention to the multi-species \emph{aggregation} dynamics. The aggregation dynamics of a single-species arises in different contexts of modeling opinion dynamics, the rendezvous problem, etc; see e.g., \cite{BertozziCarrilloLaurent09,HuangBertozzi10,FetecauHuangKolokolnikov11,
CarrilloDiFrancescoFigalliLaurentSlepcev11,Grindrod88,Poupaud02} and the reference therein,
\[
\left\{\begin{split}
\partial_t \rho -\nabla\cdot \big( \big(({\mathbf x}\phi )*\rho\big)\rho\big)&=0\\
\rho(t=0,{\mathbf x})&=\rho_0({\mathbf x}),
\end{split}\right. \qquad \forall{\mathbf x}\in\mathbb{R}^d.
\]
Global smooth solutions tend to a Dirac mass which concentrates at the invariant center of mass. This large time \emph{concentration} reflects the emergence of consensus (in opinion dynamics) and rendezvous problem (in distributed sensor-based dynamics) etc.
There is also an increasing interest in two species-aggregation models, \cite{Grindrod88} and the recent works \cite{FrancescoFagioli2013,KazianouLiaoVauchelet17}, and \cite{EversFetecauKolokolnikov17}. In particular, \cite{FrancescoFagioli2013,KazianouLiaoVauchelet17} study 1D measure-valued solutions of the 2-species dynamics after blow-up in the special case of $\phi_{\alpha\beta}\equiv \phi$, and \cite{EversFetecauKolokolnikov17} categorize the possible steady states of the two-species system.
Here we extend the discussion to the multi-species setting
\begin{equation}\label{EQ:AggregationEq_multi-groups}
\left\{
\begin{split}
\qquad\partial_t \rho_\alpha- \sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}} \nabla\cdot (({\mathbf x}\phi_{\alpha\beta} )*\rho_\beta) \rho_\alpha)&=0, \\
\rho_\alpha(t=0,{\mathbf x})&=\rho_{\alpha 0}({\mathbf x}),
\end{split} \right. \qquad \forall{\mathbf x}\in \mathbb{R}^d, \alpha\in \mathcal{I}.
\end{equation}
The different species are identified by their densities --- $\rho_\alpha$ denotes the agent density in the species $\alpha$, a macroscopic realization of the agent-based dynamics of a species with $N_\alpha$ agents, each has position, ${\mathbf x}_\alpha^i$, and interacts with the other species
\[
\dot {\mathbf x}_\alpha^i=-\sum_{\beta\in{\mathcal I}}\frac{1}{N_\beta}\sum_{j=1}^{N_\beta} \phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf x}_\alpha^i-{\mathbf x}_\beta^j|)({\mathbf x}_\beta^j-{\mathbf x}_\alpha^i).
\]
In this paper, we extend the results to the multi-species setting and give explicit sufficient condition to guarantee consensus under the assumption that the communication array $\Phi=\{\phi_{\alpha\beta}\}$ form a connected network. Our main theorem is summarized in the following.
\begin{thm}[{\bf First-order aggregation}]\label{Thm_4}
Let $\{\rho_\alpha(t,\cdot)\} \in W^1_+(\mathbb{R}^d)$ be a strong solution of the multi-species aggregation system \eqref{EQ:AggregationEq_multi-groups} subject to compactly supported initial data $(\rho_{\al0})_{\alpha\in\mathcal{I}}$ with a finite diameter
\[
D_0= \sup_{{\mathbf x},{\mathbf y}\in{\mathcal S}_0}|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|,\qquad {\mathcal S}_0=\cup_\alpha \textrm{supp}\, \{\rho_{\alpha 0}\}
\]
and governed by radially symmetric decreasing kernels $\{\phi_{\alpha\beta}(r)\}$
\eqref{eq:symm}. Let $\Phi_0$ denote the communication array scaled at the initial diameter, $\Phi_0=\{\phi_{\alpha\beta}(D_0)\}_{\alpha,\beta\in{\mathcal I}}$. There holds
\[
\delD(t) \leq \delD(0)\cdot e^{-\displaystyle 2\zetaM\lambda_2(\DelMP_0)t} , \quad \delD(t):=\sum_{\alpha,\beta\in{\mathcal I}}\iint |{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|^2\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})\dbx\dby
\]
In particular, if the communication array $\Phi_0$ is connected, then the different species $\{\rho_\alpha\}_{\alpha\in {\mathcal I}}$ aggregate towards the limiting position $\overline{{\mathbf x}}_\infty$
\begin{equation}\label{eq:xrevisit}
\sum_\alpha\int |{\mathbf x}-\overline{{\mathbf x}}_\infty|^2\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\dbx \lesssim \sum_\alpha\int |{\mathbf x}-\overline{{\mathbf x}}_\infty|^2\rho_{\alpha 0}({\mathbf x})\dbx \cdot e^{\displaystyle - 2\rate t},
\end{equation}
at exponential rate, $\rate$, dictated by the initial spatial scale $D_0$,
\[
\rate=\zetaM\lambda_2(\DelMP_0), \qquad \Phi_0=\{\phi_{\alpha\beta}(D_0)\}, \quad \zetaM=1-\frac{\max_\alpha M_\alpha}{\sum_\alpha M_\alpha}>0.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{rmk}
The proof of theorem \ref{Thm_4}, carried out in section \ref{sec:agg} below,
implies that if the communication array $\{\phi_{\alpha\beta}(D_0)\}$ forms a connected array then all species `aggregate' around a limiting position $\overline{{\mathbf x}}_\infty$.
Since the center of mass $\displaystyle \frac{1}{M(t)}\sum_\alpha \int \rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}){\mathbf x}\dbx$ is conserved in time, it follows that the different species aggregate around $\overline{{\mathbf x}}_\infty=$ center of mass as the only possible limiting position.
As before, aggregation depends on path connectivity but are independent of the self-interacting kernels, $\{\phi_{\alpha\al} \, | \, \alpha\in{\mathcal I}\}$ which are allowed to vanish.
\end{rmk}
\begin{rmk}[Existence of smooth solution] Assume that ${\mathbf x}\phi_{\alpha\beta}\in W^{1,\infty}(\mathbb{R}^d)$. Then, the multi-species dynamics which we rewrite as
\[
\partial_t \rho_\alpha +\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}(({\mathbf x}\phi_{\alpha\beta} )*\rho_\beta)\cdot \nabla \rho_\alpha=-\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\nabla\cdot (({\mathbf x}\phi_{\alpha\beta} )*\rho_\beta)\rho_\alpha
\]
implies the uniform bound
\[
\frac{d}{dt}|\rho_\alpha|_\infty\leq \sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}|\nabla\cdot({\mathbf x}\phi_{\alpha\beta} )*\rho_\beta|_\infty|\rho_\alpha|_\infty \lesssim \sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}|\nabla\cdot({\mathbf x} \phi_{\alpha\beta})|_\infty M_\beta |\rho_\alpha|_\infty.
\]
The uniform bound of the $\rho_\alpha$'s implies higher $H^s$ Sobolev bounds by standard energy estimates. Thus, for example we have the $H^1$-bound
\begin{align*}
\frac{\text{d}}{\dt}\sum_{\alpha\in\mathcal{I}}|\nabla \rho_\alpha|_2^2=&\sum_{\alpha,\beta\in{\mathcal I}}\int |\nabla \rho_\alpha\nabla (\nabla\cdot(\phi\mathbf{x})*\rho_\beta \rho_\alpha+\phi\mathbf{x}*\rho_\beta\cdot\nabla \rho_\alpha)|\dbx\\
\leq &\sum_{\alpha,\beta\in{\mathcal I}}\left(|\nabla \rho_\alpha|_2| \nabla (\phi \mathbf{x})|_\infty|\nabla \rho_\beta|_2||\rho_\alpha|_\infty+3|\nabla \rho_\alpha|_2^2|\nabla(\phi\mathbf{x})|_\infty|\rho_\beta|_1\right) \\
\lesssim & \sum_{\alpha\in\mathcal{I}}|\nabla \rho_\alpha|_2^2.
\end{align*}
\end{rmk}
The paper is organized as follows: In section \ref{sec:hydrodynamics}, we formally derive the macroscopic model \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs} as the large-crowd dynamic description of the discrete agent-based model. In section \ref{sec:wFiedler} we prepare the weighted Poincar\'e inequality associated with weighted graph Laplacian which will be used in the sequel. In section \ref{sec:hydro_flocking}, we prove the main results of flocking: decay of energy fluctuations in theorem \ref{THM_4_1} and decay of uniform fluctuations in \ref{THM_4_2}, which in turn lead to the proof of theorem \ref{THM_1}. In section \ref{sec:global}, we prove the existence of global smooth solutions --- the one- and two-dimensional setup in theorem \ref{Thm_2} and respectively \ref{Thm_3}. Finally in section \ref{sec:agg}, we treat the multi-species aggregation of system, proving Theorem \ref{Thm_4}.
\section{Derivation of the mesoscopic and hydrodynamic models}\label{sec:hydrodynamics}
In this section, we formally derive the multi-species hydrodynamics \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs} from the underlying multi-species agent-based dynamics.
To this end, we first derive a mesoscopic Vlasov type description which in turn yields the macroscopic description \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs}.
To formulate the mesoscopic equation, we first define the following empirical probability measure associated to the species $\alpha$, which represents the probability of finding an agent from species $\alpha$ at position ${\mathbf x}$ with velocity ${\mathbf v}$:
\begin{align}
f_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x},{\mathbf v})=\frac{1}{N_\alpha}\sum_{i=1}^{N_\alpha}\delta_{{\mathbf x}^i_\alpha(t)}\otimes \delta_{{\mathbf v}^i_\alpha(t)}.\label{empirical_measure_x
\end{align}
Here $N_\alpha$ denotes the number of agents in the group $\alpha$. Evolution of each probability density $f_\alpha$ can be derived by testing $\partial_t f_\alpha$ against an arbitrary smooth function $\test$ through equation \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs}
\begin{align}
\iint\partial_t f_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x},{\mathbf v})\test({\mathbf x},{\mathbf v})\dbx\dbv=&\frac{1}{N_\alpha}\sum_{i=1}^{N_\alpha}\partial_t\test({\mathbf x}^i_\alpha(t),{\mathbf v}^i_\alpha(t))\nonumber\\
=&\frac{1}{N_\alpha}\sum_{i=1}^{N_\alpha}[\dot{{\mathbf x}}^i_\alpha\cdot \nabla_{\mathbf x}\test({\mathbf x}_\alpha^i(t),{\mathbf v}^i_\alpha(t))+\dot{{\mathbf v}}^i_\alpha\cdot\nabla_{\mathbf v}\test({\mathbf x}^i_\alpha,{\mathbf v}^i_\alpha)]\label{mid_step_1}\\
=&\frac{1}{N_\alpha}\sum_{i=1}^{N_\alpha}[{{\mathbf v}}^i_\alpha\cdot \nabla_{\mathbf x}\test({\mathbf x}_\alpha^i,{\mathbf v}^i_\alpha)+{F}^i_\alpha\cdot\nabla_{\mathbf v}\test({\mathbf x}^i_\alpha,{\mathbf v}^i_\alpha)],\nonumber
\end{align}
with an alignment forcing $F_\alpha^i$ given by
\[
\begin{split}
F^i_\alpha=\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\frac{1}{N_\beta}\sum_{j=1}^{N_\beta}\phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf x}^j_\beta-{\mathbf x}^i_\alpha|)({\mathbf v}^j_\beta-{\mathbf v}^i_\alpha)
= \sum_{\beta \in {\mathcal I}}L_{\alpha\beta}(f_\beta)({\mathbf x}^i_\alpha,{\mathbf v}^i_\alpha),
\end{split}
\]
where $\displaystyle L_{\alpha\beta}(f_\beta)({\mathbf x}^i_\alpha,{\mathbf v}^i_\alpha) :=\iint\phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf y}-{\mathbf x}^i_\alpha|)({\mathbf w}-{\mathbf v}^i_\alpha)f_\beta({\mathbf y},{\mathbf w})\dby\dbw$.
Formal integration by parts in \eqref{mid_step_1} yields
\begin{align*}
\iint\partial_t &f_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x},{\mathbf v})\test({\mathbf x},{\mathbf v})\dbx\dbv\\
\qquad =&\iint[{\mathbf v}\cdot\nabla_{\mathbf x}\test({\mathbf x},{\mathbf v})+\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}} L_{\alpha\beta}(f_\beta)({\mathbf x},{\mathbf v})\cdot\nabla_{\mathbf v}\test({\mathbf x},{\mathbf v})]f_\alpha({\mathbf x},{\mathbf v})\dbx\dbv\\
\qquad =&-\iint\left[{\mathbf v}\cdot\nabla_{\mathbf x} f_\alpha({\mathbf x},{\mathbf v})+\nabla_{\mathbf v}\cdot\left(\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}} L_{\alpha\beta}(f_\beta)f_\alpha\right)\right]\test \dbx\dbv.
\end{align*}
Since the test function $\test$ is arbitrary, the above integral equation yields the \emph{mesoscopic scale equation}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{mesoscopic_model}
\partial_t f_\alpha({\mathbf x},{\mathbf v})+{\mathbf v}\cdot\nabla_{\mathbf x} f_\alpha({\mathbf x},{\mathbf v})+\nabla_{\mathbf v}\cdot\left(\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}} L_{\alpha\beta}(f_\beta)f_\alpha\right)=0.
\end{eqnarray}
The bi-linear expression inside the parenthesis on the left represents the inter-species alignment interactions.
This completes the derivation from the microscopic agent-based dynamics to the mesoscopic scale dynamics.
The hydrodynamic description is formally achieved by calculating the time evolution of the `observable moments', e.g., the mass density and the momentum density:
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{split}
\quad \rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}):=&\int_{\mathbb{R}^d} f_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x},{\mathbf v})\dbv;\\
\rho_\alpha {\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}):=&\int_{\mathbb{R}^d} {\mathbf v} f_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x},{\mathbf v})\dbv.\label{Momentum_density}
\end{split}\right.
\end{equation}
By integrating the mesoscopic equation \eqref{mesoscopic_model} in the velocity variable ${\mathbf v}$ and applying integration by parts, we derive the mass equation for $\rho_\alpha$:
\begin{align}\label{Hydrodynamic_scale_continuity_equation}
(\rho_\alpha)_t+\nabla_{\mathbf x}\cdot(\rho_\alpha {\mathbf u}_\alpha)=0,\quad \forall\alpha \in\mathcal{I}.
\end{align}
The dynamics of the momentum $\rho_\alpha{\mathbf u}_\alpha$ is obtained by integrating \eqref{mesoscopic_model} against ${\mathbf v}$,
\begin{align}\label{pre_hydrodynamic_velocity_equation}
0=\int\left[\partial_t({\mathbf v} f_\alpha)+{\mathbf v}({\mathbf v}\cdot\nabla_{\mathbf x} f_\alpha)+{\mathbf v}\nabla_{\mathbf v}\cdot\left(\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}} L_{\alpha\beta}(f_\beta)f_\alpha\right)\right]\dbv=:I+II+III.
\end{align}
The first term is the time derivative of the momentum density, $\rho_\alpha {\mathbf u}_\alpha$ in \eqref{Momentum_density},
\begin{align}
I=\partial_t(\rho_\alpha {\mathbf u}_\alpha);\label{I}
\end{align}
the second term $II$ can be rewritten as
\begin{align}\label{II_and_defn_P}
\begin{split}
II & =\nabla_{\mathbf x}\cdot(\rho_\alpha {\mathbf u}_\alpha\otimes {\mathbf u}_\alpha)+\nabla_{\mathbf x}\cdot {\int ({\mathbf u}_\alpha-{\mathbf v})\otimes ({\mathbf u}_\alpha-{\mathbf v})f_\alpha({\mathbf x},{\mathbf v}_\alpha)\dbv}\\
&=:\nabla_{\mathbf x}\cdot(\rho_\alpha {\mathbf u}_\alpha\otimes {\mathbf u}_\alpha)+\nabla_{\mathbf x} \cdot P_\alpha,
\end{split}
\end{align}
where $P_\alpha$ is interpreted as pressure tensor.
For the third term $III$ in \eqref{pre_hydrodynamic_velocity_equation}, we use integration by parts to rewrite it as follows
\begin{align}
III=&\int {\mathbf v}\nabla_{\mathbf v}\cdot\left(\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}} L_{\alpha\beta}(f_\beta)f_\alpha\right)\dbv
=-\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}} \int L_{\alpha\beta}(f_\beta)f_\alpha \dbv\nonumber\\
=&-\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\iiint \phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf y}-{\mathbf x}|)({\mathbf w}-{\mathbf v})f_\beta({\mathbf y},{\mathbf w})f_\alpha({\mathbf x},{\mathbf v})\dby\dbw\dbv\nonumber\\
=&-\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\iiint \phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf y}-{\mathbf x}|)({\mathbf w} f_\beta({\mathbf y},{\mathbf w}))f_\alpha({\mathbf x},{\mathbf v})\dbw\dby\dbv \nonumber\\
& \qquad +\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\iiint \phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf y}-{\mathbf x}|)f_\beta({\mathbf y},{\mathbf w})({\mathbf v} f_\alpha({\mathbf x},{\mathbf v}))\dbv\dby\dbw\label{III}\\
=&-\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\iint \phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf y}-{\mathbf x}|)(\rho_\beta {\mathbf u}_\beta)({\mathbf y})f_\alpha({\mathbf x},{\mathbf v})\dby\dbv \nonumber\\
& \qquad +\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\iint \phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf y}-{\mathbf x}|)f_\beta({\mathbf y},{\mathbf w})(\rho_\alpha {\mathbf u}_\alpha)({\mathbf x})\dby\dbw\nonumber\\
=& -\sum_\beta\int\phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|)({\mathbf u}_\beta({\mathbf y})-{\mathbf u}_\alpha({\mathbf x}))\rho_\alpha({\mathbf x})\rho_\beta({\mathbf y})\dby.\nonumber
\end{align}
Now combining \eqref{I}, \eqref{II_and_defn_P} and \eqref{III} we obtain the \emph{hydrodynamic momentum equation}
\begin{align*}
\partial_t (\rho_\alpha {\mathbf u}_\alpha)&+\nabla \cdot (\rho_\alpha {\mathbf u}_\alpha\otimes {\mathbf u}_\alpha)+\nabla_{\mathbf x}\cdot P_\alpha=\sum_\beta\int\phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|)({\mathbf u}_\beta({\mathbf y})-{\mathbf u}_\alpha({\mathbf x}))\rho_\alpha({\mathbf x})\rho_\beta({\mathbf y})\dby.
\end{align*}
Similar to the one-species (hydro-)dynamics, \cite{HaTadmor08, KangFigalli17}, we limit ourselves to the \emph{mono-kinetic ansatz} $f_\alpha({\mathbf x},{\mathbf v})=\rho_\alpha({\mathbf x})\delta_{{\mathbf u}_\alpha({\mathbf x})}({\mathbf v})$ to impose the pressure closure $P_\alpha\equiv 0$, and end up with the multi-species hydrodynamics \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs}.
\section{Weighted Poincar\'e inequalities}\label{sec:wFiedler}
Given an $N\times N$ symmetric array $A=\{a_{\alpha\beta}\}$ of non-negative entries, and positive weights $\mathscr{W}:=\{w_\alpha\}$, we are concerned with a \emph{weighted} Poincar\'e inequality of the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq:weighted-Poi}
\sum_{\alpha,\beta} a_{\alpha\beta}|{\sf x}_\alpha-{\sf x}_\beta|^2w_\alphaw_\beta \geq \rate \sum_{\alpha,\beta}|{\sf x}_\alpha-{\sf x}_\beta|^2w_\alphaw_\beta, \qquad \rate>0.
\end{equation}
The standard Poincar\'e (or Courant-Fisher) inequality tells us that, in case of equal weights $w_\alpha\equiv1$, \eqref{eq:weighted-Poi} holds with optimal $\rate$ given by the Fielder number,
$\rate=\lambda_2(\Delta A)/N$, where $\Delta A$ is the graph Laplacian, \cite{Fiedler75}, \cite[proposition 6.1]{Mohar91},
\begin{equation}\label{eq:unwPoi}
\sum_{\alpha,\beta} a_{\alpha\beta}|{\sf x}_\alpha-{\sf x}_\beta|^2 \geq \frac{\lambda_2(\Delta A)}{N} \sum_{\alpha,\beta}|{\sf x}_\alpha-{\sf x}_\beta|^2. \qquad (\Delta A)_{\alpha\beta}:= -(1-\delta_{\alpha\beta})a_{\alpha\beta}+\delta_{\alpha\beta}\sum_{\gamma\neq \alpha} a_{\alpha\gamma}.
\end{equation}
To treat the case of general weights, we let $\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_w A$ denote the \emph{weighted} Laplacian
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Lap}
\left(\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_wA\right)_{\alpha\beta}=\left\{\begin{array}{ll} -a_{\alpha\beta}\sqrt{w_\alphaw_\beta}, & \alpha\neq \beta,\\ \\
\displaystyle \sum_{\gamma\neq \alpha} a_{\alpha\gamma}w_\gamma, & \alpha=\beta.
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
Observe that $\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_w A$ is symmetric yet \emph{not} row stochastic.
Its second eigenvalue dictates the following weighted Poincar\'{e} inequality for arbitrary $N$-vectors ${{\bf x}}=\{{\sf x}_\alpha\}$.
\begin{lem}[{\bf Weighted Poincar\'e inequality -- vectors}]\label{lem:Poin}
There holds
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Poin}
\sum_{\alpha,\beta} a_{\alpha\beta}|{\sf x}_\alpha-{\sf x}_\beta|^2w_\alphaw_\beta \geq \frac{\lambda_2(\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_w A)}{\sum_\beta w_\beta}\sum_{\alpha,\beta}|{\sf x}_\alpha-{\sf x}_\beta|^2w_\alphaw_\beta, \quad \mathscr{W}:=\{w_\alpha\}.
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
\noindent
\begin{rmk}[{\bf Scaling}]\label{rem:scaling} Lemma \ref{lem:Poin} with $w_\alpha \equiv 1$ recovers the regular Poincar\'e inequality \eqref{eq:unwPoi}. Observe that \eqref{eq:unwPoi} together with the obvious $\min w_\alpha^2\leq w_\alphaw_\beta \leq \max w_\alpha^2$ yield a desired bound \eqref{eq:weighted-Poi} with $\rate=\lambda_2(\Delta A)/(\kappa^{2}N)$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:notsharp}
\sum_{\alpha,\beta} a_{\alpha\beta}|{\sf x}_\alpha-{\sf x}_\beta|^2w_\alphaw_\beta \geq \lambda_2(\Delta A)\frac{1}{\kappa^2 N} \sum_{\alpha,\beta}|{\sf x}_\alpha-{\sf x}_\beta|^2w_\alphaw_\beta, \quad \kappa:=\frac{\maxw_\alpha}{\minw_\alpha}.
\end{equation}
The point to note here is that this bound in terms of $\lambda_2(\Delta A)$ depends on $N$ and the condition number $\kappa$. In contrast, the weighted bound \eqref{eq:Poin} which involves $\lambda_2(\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_w(A))$ has the right `scaling', depending on the (usually invariant) total mass of the weights but otherwise it is independent $N,\kappa$. In particular, the size of $A=\{a_{\alpha\beta}\}$ is allowed to grow unboundedly large with $N$ as long as the total weight remains finite, $\sum_{\beta} w_\beta<\infty$.
\end{rmk}
\begin{proof}[{Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:Poin}}] The sum on the left of \eqref{eq:Poin} can be expressed as a bi-linear form in terms of the weighted Laplacian $\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_wA$ in \eqref{eq:Lap} (here and below ${\mathbf w}$ is the vector of weights ${\mathbf w}=(w_1,w_2,\ldots)^\top$ and we abbreviate
$\sqrt{{\mathbf w}}{{\bf x}}=(\sqrt{w_1}{\sf x}_1,\sqrt{w_2}{\sf x}_2,\ldots)^\top$)
\begin{equation}\label{eq:weighted_sum}
\begin{split}
\big\langle \left(\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_wA\right)\sqrt{{\mathbf w}}{{\bf x}},\sqrt{{\mathbf w}}{{\bf x}}\big\rangle
&:= -\sum_\alpha\sum_{\beta\neq \alpha} a_{\alpha\beta}\sqrt{w_\alphaw_\beta}\sqrt{w_\alpha} \sqrt{w_\beta}\,{\sf x}_\alpha {\sf x}_\beta
+\sum_\alpha\sum_{\beta\neq \alpha}a_{\alpha\beta}w_\beta w_\alpha|{\sf x}_\alpha|^2 \\
& \equiv \frac{1}{2} \sum_\alpha\sum_{\beta\neq \alpha} a_{\alpha\beta}|{\sf x}_\beta-{\sf x}_\alpha|^2w_\alphaw_\beta,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
which shows that the symmetric Laplacian $\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_wA $ is positive semi-definite with eigenvalues $0= \lambda_1 \leq \lambda_2 \leq \ldots$. Here, $\lambda_1$ is the zero eigenvalue associated with the eigenvector $\sqrt{{\mathbf w}}:=(\sqrt{w_1}, \sqrt{w_2},\ldots)^\top$,
\[
\Big(\left(\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_w A\right) \sqrt{{\mathbf w}}\Big)_\alpha
= -\sum_{\beta\neq \alpha}a_{\alpha\beta}\sqrt{w_\alphaw_\beta}\sqrt{w_\beta} + \sum_{\beta\neq \alpha} a_{\alpha\beta}w_\beta\sqrt{w_\alpha} \equiv 0,
\]
and hence $\left(\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_w A\right) (\sqrt{{\mathbf w}}\,\overline{{{\bf x}}})=0$ for any constant vector $\overline{{{\bf x}}}=\overline{{\sf x}}(1,1,\ldots, 1)^\top$. In particular, for
$\displaystyle \overline{{\sf x}}=\frac{\sum_\beta w_\beta {\sf x}_\beta}{\sum_\beta w_\beta}$ the orthogonal complement of $\sqrt{{\mathbf w}}\, \overline{{{\bf x}}}$ is given by $\{\sqrt{{\mathbf w}}({{\bf x}}-\overline{{{\bf x}}})\}$,
\[
\big\langle \sqrt{{\mathbf w}}({{\bf x}}-\overline{{{\bf x}}}), \sqrt{{\mathbf w}}\,\overline{{{\bf x}}}\big\rangle =0, \qquad
\overline{{\sf x}}:=\frac{\sum_\beta w_\beta {\sf x}_\beta}{\sum_\beta w_\beta},
\]
hence
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ortho}
\begin{split}
\big\langle \left(\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_wA\right)\sqrt{{\mathbf w}}{{\bf x}},\sqrt{{\mathbf w}}{{\bf x}}\big\rangle
&= \left\langle \left(\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_wA\right)\sqrt{{\mathbf w}}({{\bf x}}-\overline{{{\bf x}}}),\sqrt{{\mathbf w}}({{\bf x}}-\overline{{{\bf x}}})\right\rangle \\
& \geq \lambda_2(\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_wA) \times|\sqrt{{\mathbf w}}({{\bf x}}-\overline{{{\bf x}}})|^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
A straightforward computation yields
\begin{align*}
|\sqrt{{\mathbf w}}({{\bf x}}-\overline{{{\bf x}}})|^2 = & \sum_\alpha w_\alpha |{\sf x}_\alpha|^2-2\sum_\alpha w_\alpha {\sf x}_\alpha \overline{{\sf x}} + \sum_\alphaw_\alpha|\overline{{\sf x}}|^2
= \sum_\alpha w_\alpha |{\sf x}_\alpha|^2 -\frac{|\sum_\beta w_\beta {\sf x}_\beta|^2}{\sum_\betaw_\beta}\\
= & \frac{1}{\sum_\beta w_\beta}\left(\sum_{\alpha,\beta}w_\alphaw_\beta|{\sf x}_\alpha|^2
-\sum_\beta w_\beta^2|{\sf x}_\beta|^2 -\sum_\alpha\sum_{\beta\neq \alpha}w_\alphaw_\beta\, {\sf x}_\alpha{\sf x}_\beta\right)\\
= & \frac{1}{2\sum_\beta w_\beta}\left(\sum_\alpha\sum_{\beta\neq\alpha}w_\alphaw_\beta|{\sf x}_\alpha|^2 + \sum_\alpha\sum_{\beta\neq\alpha}w_\alphaw_\beta|{\sf x}_\beta|^2
-2\sum_\alpha\sum_{\beta\neq\alpha}w_\alphaw_\beta\, {\sf x}_\alpha {\sf x}_\beta\right) \\
\equiv & \frac{1}{2\sum_\beta w_\beta} \sum_\alpha\sum_{\beta\neq\alpha} |{\sf x}_\alpha-{\sf x}_\beta|^2w_\alphaw_\beta,
\end{align*}
and \eqref{eq:Poin} follows from \eqref{eq:weighted_sum} and \eqref{eq:ortho}.
\end{proof}
\begin{rmk}[{\bf Optimality}]\label{rem:compare} The proof of Lemma \ref{lem:Poin} shows the optimality of the weighted Laplacian \textup{(} --- choose $\sqrt{{\mathbf w}}{\mathbf x}$ as the second, Fiedler eigenvector of $\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_w A$\textup{)},
leading to a Courant-Fisher-type characterization
\begin{equation}\label{eq:CF}
\frac{\lambda_2(\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_w A)}{\sum_\beta w_\beta} = \min_{|\delta{{\bf x}}|_w=1} \sum_\alpha\sum_{\beta\neq\alpha} a_{\alpha\beta}|{\sf x}_\alpha-{\sf x}_\beta|^2w_\alphaw_\beta, \qquad |\delta{{\bf x}}|^2_{w}:= \sum_\alpha\sum_{\beta\neq\alpha}|{\sf x}_\alpha-{\sf x}_\beta|^2w_\alphaw_\beta.
\end{equation}
Hence, comparing this with \eqref{eq:notsharp} one concludes
\begin{equation}\label{eq:compare}
\frac{1}{\kappa^{2}N}\lambda_2(\Delta A) \leq \lambda_2(\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_wA)\frac{1}{\sum_\beta w_\beta} \leq \frac{\kappa^{2}}{N}\lambda_2(\Delta A), \qquad \kappa=\frac{\maxw_\alpha}{\minw_\alpha}.
\end{equation}
\end{rmk}
The array $A$ forms a connected graph if it has a positive Fiedler number, $\lambda_2\big(\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_w A\big)>0$.
In particular, $A$ being a connected graph, the degree of its nodes are positive, $\displaystyle \sum_{\beta\neq \gamma} a_{\gamma\beta}w_\beta >0$. To quantify this statement which will be used below, we appeal to \eqref{eq:Poin}
\[
\sum_\alpha\sum_{\beta\neq\alpha}{a}_{\alpha\beta}|{{\sf x}}_\alpha-{{\sf x}}_\beta|^2w_\alphaw_\beta \geq
\frac{\lambda_2(\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_w A)}{\sum_\beta w_\beta}\sum_\alpha\sum_{\beta\neq\alpha}|{{\sf x}}_\alpha-{{\sf x}}_\beta|^2w_\alphaw_\beta.
\]
Fix an index $\gamma$ and test the last inequality with the vector $\left\{{{\bf x}}\ \Big| \ {\sf x}_\alpha=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}0 & \alpha\neq \gamma,\\
\rate, & \alpha=\gamma.\end{array}\right.\right\}$, with normalization factor $\displaystyle \rate=\Big(2\sum_{\beta\neq \gamma}w_\betaw_\gamma\Big)^{-1/2}$ so that $|\delta {{\bf x}}|_w=1$. The sum on the left is reduced to the $(\gamma,\beta)$-terms with $\beta\neq \gamma$, for which $|{\sf x}_{\gamma}-{\sf x}_\beta|^2=\rate^2$ and $(\alpha,\gamma)$-terms with $\alpha\neq \gamma$ for which $|{\sf x}_\alpha-{\sf x}_{\gamma}|^2=\rate^2$ and \eqref{eq:Poin} amounts to
$\displaystyle 2\rate^2\sum_{\beta\neq \gamma} a_{\gamma\beta}w_{\gamma} w_\beta
\geq \frac{\lambda_2(\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_w A)}{\sum_\beta w_\beta}$ and we conclude
\begin{equation}\label{eq:zeta}
\dzA{\gamma}:=\sum_{\beta\neq\gamma} a_{\gamma\beta}w_\beta \geq \frac{\sum_{\beta\neq \gamma} w_\beta}{\sum_\beta w_\beta}\lambda_2(\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_wA) \geq \zeta_\mathscr{W}\lambda_2(\Delta_{\scrW}} %{\Delta_wA), \quad \zeta_\mathscr{W}=1-\frac{\max_\beta w_\beta}{\sum_\beta w_\beta}>0.
\end{equation}
Next, we extend Lemma \ref{lem:Poin} from vectors to vector-\emph{functions}, seeking an inequality of the form
\[
\sum_{\alpha,\beta}a_{\alpha\beta} \iint |u_\alpha({\mathbf x})-u_\beta({\mathbf y})|^2\rho_\alpha({\mathbf x})\rho_\beta({\mathbf y})\dbx\dby \geq \rate \sum_{\alpha,\beta} \iint |u_\alpha({\mathbf x})-u_\beta({\mathbf y})|^2\rho_\alpha({\mathbf x})\rho_\beta({\mathbf y})\dbx\dby.
\]
Clearly we can use $\rate=\min_{\alpha\beta} a_{\alpha\beta}$. But there is a sharper threshold, $\rate=\rate_{A}$, which allows some (-- and in fact most) of the entries $\{a_{\alpha\beta}\}$ to vanish yet $\rate_{A}>0$. In particular, $\rate_{A}$ is \emph{independent} of the (amplitudes of the) self-interacting terms $\{a_{\alpha\alpha}\}$.
\begin{lem}[{\bf Weighted Poincar\'e inequality -- vector-functions}]\label{lem:Poinv} Let $\{w_\gamma\}$ be non-negative weight functions with positive finite masses
$\displaystyle M_\gamma=\int w_\gamma({\mathbf x})\dbx>0$.
There holds
\begin{equation}\label{eq:alphaneqbeta}
\begin{split}
\sum_{\alpha\neq \beta} a_{\alpha\beta} \iint |u_\alpha({\mathbf x})-u_\beta({\mathbf y})|^2&w_\alpha({\mathbf x})w_\beta({\mathbf y})\dbx\dby \\
& \geq \rate \sum_{\alpha,\beta} \iint |u_\alpha({\mathbf x})-u_\beta({\mathbf y})|^2w_\alpha({\mathbf x})w_\beta({\mathbf y})\dbx\dby,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
with $\rate=\rate_{A}$ given by
\[
\rate_{A} = \lambda_2(\Delta_{\scrM} A)\frac{\zetaM}{M}, \qquad \zetaM=1-\frac{\max_\gamma M_\gamma}{M}, \quad M=\sum_\gamma M_\gamma.
\]
\end{lem}
The bound \eqref{eq:alphaneqbeta} is at the heart of matter: note that the self-interacting terms $\sum_{\alpha} \iint |u_\alpha({\mathbf x})-u_\alpha({\mathbf y})|^2w_\alpha({\mathbf x})w_\alpha({\mathbf y})\dbx\dby$ are missing on its left but present in the lower-bound on the right.
\begin{proof}[{Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:Poinv}}] Denote the average, $\displaystyle \overline{u}_\alpha:=\frac{\int w_\alpha u_\alpha({\mathbf x})\dbx}{\int w_\alpha({\mathbf x})\dbx}$. Since
$\displaystyle \int_{\mathbf x} \big(u_\alpha({\mathbf x})-\overline{u}_\alpha\big)w_\alpha({\mathbf x})\dbx$ and $\displaystyle \int_{\mathbf y} \big(u_\beta({\mathbf y})-\overline{u}_\beta\big)w_\beta({\mathbf y})\dby$ vanish, we can decompose the integral on the left of \eqref{eq:alphaneqbeta}
\[
\begin{split}
\iint |u_\alpha({\mathbf x})-u_\beta({\mathbf y})|^2&w_\alpha({\mathbf x})w_\beta({\mathbf y})\dbx\dby \\
& \equiv \iint \Big(|u_\alpha({\mathbf x})-\overline{u}_\alpha|^2 + |\overline{u}_\alpha-\overline{u}_\beta|^2 + |\overline{u}_\beta-u_\beta({\mathbf y})|^2\Big)w_\alpha({\mathbf x})w_\beta({\mathbf y})\dbx\dby.
\end{split}
\]
We bound each of the three integrated terms on the right. Using \eqref{eq:zeta}, the first admits the lower-bound in terms of the weighted Laplacian -- weighted by the vector of masses $\mathscr{M}=\{M_\alpha\}_{\alpha\in {\mathcal I}}$,
\begin{align*}
\sum_{\alpha\neq \beta}a_{\alpha\beta}\iint &|u_\alpha({\mathbf x})-\overline{u}_\alpha|^2 w_\alpha({\mathbf x})w_\beta({\mathbf y})\dbx\dby
= \sum_\alpha \left(\sum_{\beta\neq \alpha} a_{\alpha\beta}M_\beta\right) \int |u_\alpha({\mathbf x})-\overline{u}_\alpha|^2 w_\alpha({\mathbf x})\dbx \\
& = \sum_\alpha \dzA{\alpha} \int |u_\alpha({\mathbf x})-\overline{u}_\alpha|^2 w_\alpha({\mathbf x})\dbx \\
& \geq \lambda_2(\Delta_{\scrM} A)\frac{\zetaM}{M}\sum_{\alpha,\beta} \iint |u_\alpha({\mathbf x})-\overline{u}_\alpha|^2 w_\alpha({\mathbf x})w_\beta({\mathbf y})\dbx\dby.
\end{align*}
Similarly, the third integrand is lower-bounded by
\begin{align*}
\sum_{\alpha\neq \beta}a_{\alpha\beta}\iint |u_\beta({\mathbf x})-\overline{u}_\beta|^2 &w_\alpha({\mathbf x})w_\beta({\mathbf y})\dbx\dby
= \sum_\beta \dzA{\beta} \int |u_\beta({\mathbf x})-\overline{u}_\beta|^2 w_\beta({\mathbf x})\dbx \\
& \geq \lambda_2(\Delta_{\scrM} A)\frac{\zetaM}{M}\sum_{\alpha,\beta} \iint |u_\beta({\mathbf x})-\overline{u}_\beta|^2 w_\alpha({\mathbf x})w_\beta({\mathbf x})\dbx\dby.
\end{align*}
Finally, by the scalar weighted Poincar\'{e} inequality \eqref{eq:Poin}, we bound the second integrand
\begin{align*}
\sum_{\alpha\neq \beta} a_{\alpha\beta}\iint |\overline{u}_\alpha-\overline{u}_\beta|^2 w_\alpha({\mathbf x})w_\beta({\mathbf y})\dbx\dby
& = \sum_{\alpha\neq\beta}a_{\alpha\beta}|\overline{u}_\alpha-\overline{u}_\beta|^2 M_\alpha M_\beta \\
& \geq \frac{\lambda_2(\Delta_{\scrM} A)}{M} \sum_{\alpha,\beta}\iint|\overline{u}_\alpha-\overline{u}_\beta|^2 w_\alpha({\mathbf x})w_\beta({\mathbf y})\dbx\dby.
\end{align*}
Adding the last three lower-bounds we end up with
\begin{align*}
\sum_{\alpha\neq \beta} & a_{\alpha\beta}\iint |u_\alpha({\mathbf x})-u_\beta({\mathbf y})|^2w_\alpha({\mathbf x})w_\beta({\mathbf y})\dbx\dby\\
& \geq \lambda_2(\Delta_{\scrM} A)\frac{\zetaM}{M}\sum_{\alpha,\beta}\iint \Big(|u_\alpha({\mathbf x})-\overline{u}_\alpha|^2 + |\overline{u}_\alpha-\overline{u}_\beta|^2 + |\overline{u}_\beta-u_\beta({\mathbf y})|^2\Big)w_\alpha({\mathbf x})w_\beta({\mathbf y})\dbx\dby\\
& = \lambda_2(\Delta_{\scrM} A)\frac{\zetaM}{M}\iint |u_\alpha({\mathbf x})-u_\beta({\mathbf y})|^2w_\alpha({\mathbf x})w_\beta({\mathbf y})\dbx\dby,
\end{align*}
thus proving \eqref{eq:alphaneqbeta}.
\end{proof}
\begin{rmk}[{\bf Alignment and de-alignment}]\label{rem:dealign} The weighted Poincar\'{e} inequality \eqref{eq:alphaneqbeta} involves the threshold $\displaystyle \rate_{A}=\lambda_2(\Delta_{\scrM} A)\frac{\zetaM}{M}$ which is independent of $\{a_{\alpha\alpha}\}$: if $A$ is connected then the non-diagonal fluctuation terms dominate the self-interacting fluctuations. In fact, this means that we can add self-fluctuations with \emph{negative} amplitudes:\newline
assume that $\displaystyle \left\{\begin{array}{ll}a_{\alpha\beta} \geq 0, & \alpha\neq \beta,\\
a_{\alpha\beta} \geq - \frac{1}{2}\rate_{A}, & \alpha=\beta,\end{array}\right.$ then \eqref{eq:alphaneqbeta} still survives
\[
\begin{split}
\sum_{\alpha,\beta}a_{\alpha\beta} \iint &|u_\alpha({\mathbf x})-u_\beta({\mathbf y})|^2w_\alpha({\mathbf x})w_\beta({\mathbf y})\dbx\dby \\
& \geq \frac{1}{2}\rate_{A}\sum_{\alpha,\beta} \iint |u_\alpha({\mathbf x})-u_\beta({\mathbf y})|^2w_\alpha({\mathbf x})w_\beta({\mathbf y})\dbx\dby, \qquad \rate_{A}= \lambda_2(\Delta_{\scrM} A) \frac{\zetaM}{M}.
\end{split}
\]
\end{rmk}
\section{Smooth solutions must flock}\label{sec:hydro_flocking}
In this section, we prove the main flocking statement in theorem \ref{THM_1}.
The key observation is that the decay of both -- the energy and uniform fluctuations are dictated by the connectivity of the multi-species configuration.
To this end, let $\St$ denote the spatial diameter of the multi-species crowd at time $t$
\begin{equation}\label{eq:diam}
D(t):= \max_{{\mathbf x},{\mathbf y}\in {\mathcal S}(t)}|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|, \qquad {\mathcal S}(t)= \cup_\alpha \text{supp}\{\rho_\alpha(t,\cdot)\}.
\end{equation}
Then $\Phi(\St)=\{\phi_{\alpha\beta}(\St)\}$
quantifies the minimal amplitude of communication between species $\alpha$ and $\beta$ at time $t$.
Our first result quantifies a minimal amount of connectivity which implies the decay of energy fluctuations
\begin{equation}\label{eq:delE}
\delE(t):= \sum_{\alpha,\beta\in{\mathcal I}}\iint|{\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})-{\mathbf u}_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})|^2\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})\dbx\dby.
\end{equation}
\begin{thm}[{\bf Decay of energy fluctuations}]\label{THM_4_1}\mbox{ }\newline
Let $(\rho_{{\alpha}}(t,\cdot),{\mathbf u}_{{\alpha}}(t,\cdot))\in L_+^{1}(\mathbb{R}^d)\times W^{1,\infty}(\mathbb{R}^d), \alpha \in \mathcal{I}$, be a strong solution of the multi-species dynamics \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs}, subject to initial conditions $(\rho_{\alpha 0},{\mathbf u}_{\alpha 0})$ with initial energy fluctuations $\delEz=\delE(0)$.
Then we have the apriori bound
\begin{equation}\label{u_infty}
\delE(t) \leq \delEz \cdot exp\, \Big\{\displaystyle -2\zetaM\int^t_0 \lambda_2(\DelMP(D(\tau))){\mbox{\text{d}}} \tau\Big\}, \qquad \zetaM=1-\frac{\max_\alpha M_\alpha}{\sum_\alpha M_\alpha}.
\end{equation}
In particular, if the crowd dynamics satisfies a `fat-tail' connectivity condition of Pareto type (but observe the dependence on $D(r)$ in contrast to \eqref{eq:Pareto})
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pareto}
\lambda_2(\DelMP(D(r))) \gtrsim \frac{1}{(1+r)^{\theta}}, \qquad \theta<1,
\end{equation}
then $\delE(t)$ decays at fractional-exponential rate
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Efrac}
\delta E(t) \lesssim \delEz\cdot e^{\displaystyle -2\rate_1\!\cdot\! t^{1-\theta}}, \qquad \rate_1=\frac{\zetaM}{1-\theta}.
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{rmk}
Again, we observe that while the diagonal terms in $\delE$ on the left of \eqref{u_infty} account for fluctuations within the same species, $\iint \sum_{\alpha=\beta} |{\mathbf u}_\alpha({\mathbf x},t)-{\mathbf u}_\beta({\mathbf y},t)|^2\rho_\alpha\rho_\beta \dbx\dby$, the upper-bound on the right of \eqref{u_infty} involves $\lambda_2(\DelMP)$ which is independent of (the amplitude of) the self-interaction terms, $\{\phi_{\alpha\al}\}$. One learns about the behavior of its own species by its reflection through interactions with the other connected species. In fact, arguing in view of remark \ref{rem:dealign} we can even allow for self-interactions with \emph{de-alignment}, $\displaystyle \phi_{\alpha\al} \geq -\lambda_2(\DelMP)\frac{\zetaM}{2M}$, and yet the overall inter-species alignment will override, yielding that the crowd will align towards $\buinf$.
\end{rmk}
\begin{proof} Since the total mass, $\displaystyle M=\sum_\alpha \int\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}) \dbx$, and total momentum, $\displaystyle \sum_\alpha \int \rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}) {\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}) \dbx$, are conserved in time, it follows that the decay rate of the fluctuations is the same as the decay rate of the total kinetic energy,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:energy}
\frac{\mbox{\textnormal{d}}}{\mbox{\textnormal{d}} t} \delta E(t) = 2M \frac{\mbox{\textnormal{d}}}{\mbox{\textnormal{d}} t}E(t), \qquad E(t):=\sum_{\alpha\in \mathcal{I}} \int \rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}) |{\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})|^2 \dbx.
\end{eqnarray}
A straightforward computation using the multi-species dynamics \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs} yields
\begin{align*}
\frac{\mbox{\textnormal{d}}}{\mbox{\textnormal{d}} t}\bigg(&\sum_{\alpha\in\mathcal{I}}\int \rho_\alpha |{\mathbf u}_\alpha|^2 \dbx\bigg)=
2\int \sum_{\alpha,\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\big\langle \rho_\alpha {\mathbf u}_\alpha,\, \phi_{\alpha\beta}*(\rho_\beta {\mathbf u}_\beta)- (\phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta) {\mathbf u}_\alpha \big\rangle\dbx\nonumber\\
=& 2\iint \sum_{\alpha,\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\Big(\big\langle \rho_\alpha({\mathbf x}) {\mathbf u}_\alpha({\mathbf x}),\, \phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|)\rho_\beta({\mathbf y}){\mathbf u}_\beta({\mathbf y})\big\rangle \\
& \hspace*{7.9cm} -\rho_\alpha({\mathbf x})|{\mathbf u}_\alpha({\mathbf x})|^2 \phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|)\rho_\beta({\mathbf y})\Big)\dbx\dby\nonumber\\
=& 2\iint \sum_{\alpha,\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\big\langle \rho_\alpha({\mathbf x}) {\mathbf u}_\alpha({\mathbf x}),\,\phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|)\rho_\beta({\mathbf y}) {\mathbf u}_\beta({\mathbf y})\big\rangle\dbx\dby\nonumber \\
& -\iint \sum_{\alpha,\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\Big(\rho_\alpha({\mathbf x})|{\mathbf u}_\alpha({\mathbf x})|^2 \phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|)\rho_\beta({\mathbf y}) + \rho_\beta({\mathbf y})|{\mathbf u}_\beta({\mathbf y})|^2 \phi_{\beta\alpha}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|)\rho_\alpha({\mathbf x})\Big) \dbx\dby\nonumber\\
=& -\iint \sum_{\alpha,\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|) |{\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})-{\mathbf u}_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})|^2\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})\dbx\dby. \nonumber
\end{align*}
Since $\phi_{\alpha\beta}$ are decreasing,
$\phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|) \geq \phi_{\alpha\beta}(\St)$, hence
\begin{equation}\label{eq:thisisE}
\frac{\mbox{\textnormal{d}}}{\mbox{\textnormal{d}} t}E(t) \leq - \sum_{\alpha,\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}(D(t)) \iint|{\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})-{\mathbf u}_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})|^2\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})\dbx\dby.
\end{equation}
We now appeal to the vector-function version of Poincar\'{e} inequality in Lemma \ref{lem:Poinv}, obtaining\footnote{To be precise, here one employs the \emph{vector} statement
\[
\frac{\lambda_2(\DelMP)}{\sum_\alpha M_\alpha}=\min_{|\delta {\mathbf u}|_M=1} \sum_{\alpha \neq \beta \in {\mathcal I}}\Phi_{\alpha\beta}|{\mathbf u}_\alpha-{\mathbf u}_\beta|^2M_{\alpha}M_\beta,
\qquad |\delta {\mathbf u}|_M^2= \sum_{\alpha\neq \beta \in {\mathcal I}}|{\mathbf u}_\alpha-{\mathbf u}_\beta|^2M_{\alpha}M_\beta, \quad {\mathbf u} \in \mathbb{R}^d,
\]
which follows by aggregating the scalar components of \eqref{eq:alphaneqbeta} (as was done in \cite[Sec 3.1]{CS07}).}
\[
\frac{1}{2M}\frac{\mbox{\textnormal{d}}}{\mbox{\textnormal{d}} t}\delE(t) \leq -\lambda_2(\DelMP(D(t)))\frac{\zetaM}{M} \delE(t),
\]
and the desired bound \eqref{u_infty} follows.
\end{proof}
\noindent
The decay of energy fluctuations, $\delE(t)$, implies decay of pointwise fluctuations
\[
\delV({\mathbf u}(t))=\max_{\alpha,\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\max_{{\mathbf x},{\mathbf y}\in{\mathcal S}(t)}|{\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})-{\mathbf u}_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})|.
\]
\begin{thm}[{\bf Decay of uniform fluctuations}]\label{THM_4_2}\mbox{ }\newline
Let $(\rho_{{\alpha}}(t,\cdot),{\mathbf u}_{{\alpha}}(t,\cdot))\in L_+^{1}(\mathbb{R}^d)\times W^{1,\infty}(\mathbb{R}^d), \alpha \in \mathcal{I}$, be a strong solution of the multi-species dynamics \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs}, subject to initial conditions $(\rho_{\alpha 0},{\mathbf u}_{\alpha 0})$, and assume the crowd dynamics satisfies the `fat-tail' connectivity condition \eqref{eq:pareto}. Then $\delV({\mathbf u}(t))$ decays at fractional-exponential rate: there exist constants $\displaystyle C_2=C(\max_{\alpha,\beta}\phi_{\alpha\beta}(0), M)>0$ and $\rate_2=\rate(\theta,M)>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:vfrac}
\delV({\mathbf u}(t)) \lesssim C_2\cdot \delV_0\cdot e^{\displaystyle -2\rate_2\cdot t^{1-\theta}}, \qquad \delVz=\delV({\mathbf u}(0)).
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We consider the strong solution $(\rho_\alpha,{\mathbf u}_\alpha)$ in the non-vacuous region
${\mathbf x},{\mathbf y}\in {\mathcal S}$, where the alignment terms on the right of \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs} admits the usual commutator form \cite{ShvydkoyTadmorI}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{EQ:hydrodynamic_flocking}
\partial_t {\mathbf u}_\alpha+ ({\mathbf u}_\alpha\cdot \nabla) {\mathbf u}_\alpha=\sum_{\beta\in \mathcal{I}}\{
\phi_{\alpha\beta}*(\rho_\beta {\mathbf u}_\beta)-(\phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta){\mathbf u}_\alpha\}, \qquad \forall\alpha,\beta\in {\mathcal I}.
\end{eqnarray}
Arguing along the lines of \cite{HeTadmor17}, we first fix an arbitrary unit vector $\mathbf{w}\in \mathbb{R}^d$ and project \eqref{EQ:hydrodynamic_flocking} onto the space spanned by $\mathbf{w}$ to get
\begin{align*}
(\partial_t+{\mathbf u}_\alpha\cdot\nabla)\langle {\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,\mathbf{x}),\mathbf{w}\rangle=\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\int\phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|)(\langle{\mathbf u}_\beta(t,{\mathbf y}),\mathbf{w}\rangle-\langle{\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}),\mathbf{w}\rangle)\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})\mathrm{d}{\mathbf y}.
\end{align*}
Now we assume that $\langle{\mathbf u}_{\alpha}(t,{\mathbf x}),\mathbf{w}\rangle$ reaches a maximum value at $({\mathbf x}(t),\alpha(t))=({\mathbf x}_+(t),\alpha_+(t))$ and a minimum value at $(({\mathbf x}(t),\alpha(t))=({\mathbf x}_-(t),\alpha_-(t)))$, denoting
\[
u_+(t):=\max_{\alpha\in {\mathcal I}}\sup_{{\mathbf x}\in {\mathcal S}(t)}\langle{\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}), \mathbf{w}\rangle={\mathbf u}_{\alpha_+(t)}({\mathbf x}_+(t)).
\]
We abbreviate $c_{\alpha\beta}(t):=\phi_{\alpha\beta}(D(t))$ and $\displaystyle \overline{{\mathbf u}}_\beta(t):=\frac{1}{M_\beta}\int \rho_\beta{\mathbf u}_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})\dby$. Direct computation of the time evolution of $u_+(t)$ yields,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:uplus}
\begin{split}
\frac{\mbox{\textnormal{d}}}{\mbox{\textnormal{d}} t}u_+(t)=&\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\int\phi_{\alpha_+\beta}(|{\mathbf x}_+-{\mathbf y}|)\big(\langle{\mathbf u}_\beta(t,{\mathbf y}), \mathbf{w}\rangle-\langle{\mathbf u}_{\alpha_+}(t,{\mathbf x}_+),\mathbf{w}\rangle\big)\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})\mathrm{d}{\mathbf y}\\
\leq &\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}c_{\alpha_+\beta}\int \big(\langle {\mathbf u}_\beta(t,{\mathbf y}),\mathbf{w}\rangle-\langle{\mathbf u}_+(t),\mathbf{w}\rangle\big)\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})\mathrm{d}{\mathbf y}
\\
=&\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}c_{\alpha_+\beta}M_\beta \langle\overline{{\mathbf u}}_\beta(t) -{\mathbf u}_+(t),\mathbf{w}\rangle\\
=&\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}c_{\alpha_+\beta}M_\beta \langle\overline{{\mathbf u}}_\beta(t) -\buinf,\mathbf{w}\rangle +\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}c_{\alpha_+\beta}M_\beta \langle\buinf-{\mathbf u}_+(t),\mathbf{w}\rangle=:I + II
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We proceed to show that the first term is bounded by the (rapidly decaying) energy fluctuations while the second term will contribute to the pointwise fluctuations. Indeed, since
\[
c_{\alpha\beta}(t) \leq \max_{\alpha,\beta}\phi_{\alpha\beta}(D_0)=:C_{\phi},
\]
and
$\displaystyle M_\beta \big(\overline{{\mathbf u}}_\beta(t) -\buinf\big)\equiv \frac{1}{M}\sum_\alpha \iint ({\mathbf u}_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})-{\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}))\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y}) \dbx\dby$, then by Cauchy-Schwarz we find
\begin{align*}
I \leq\, &\frac{C_{\phi}}{M}\,\sum_{\alpha,\beta} \Big(\iint|{\mathbf u}_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})-{\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})|^2\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y}) \dbx\dby\Big)^{1/2}\Big(\iint \rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y}) \dbx\dby\Big)^{1/2}\\
\leq\, & \frac{C_{\phi}}{M}\,\Big(\sum_{\alpha,\beta} \iint|{\mathbf u}_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})-{\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})|^2\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y}) \dbx\dby \times \sum_{\alpha,\beta}\iint \rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y}) \dbx\dby\Big)^{1/2}\\
& =C_{\phi} \big(\delE(t)\big)^{1/2}.
\end{align*}
On the other hand, since $\langle \buinf-{\mathbf u}_+,\mathbf{w}\rangle\leq0$, we use the reversed lower bound \eqref{eq:zeta}
\begin{align*}
II \leq \dzPD{\alpha_+}\langle\buinf -{\mathbf u}_+(t),\mathbf{w}\rangle
\leq \zetaM\lambda_2(\DelMP(D(t))) \big(\overline{u}_\infty-u_+(t)\big), \quad \overline{u}_\infty:=\langle\buinf,{\mathbf w}\rangle.
\end{align*}
The last two inequalities yield
\[
\frac{\mbox{\textnormal{d}}}{\mbox{\textnormal{d}} t}u_+(t) \leq C_{\phi}\big(\delE(t)\big)^{1/2} +\zetaM\lambda_2(\DelMP(D(t))) \big(\overline{u}_\infty-u_+(t)\big);
\]
similarly, we estimate the time evolution of
$\displaystyle u_-(t):=\min_{\alpha\in{\mathcal I}}\inf_{{\mathbf x}\in{\mathcal S}}\langle{\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}), \mathbf{w}\rangle$ obtaining
\[
\frac{\mbox{\textnormal{d}}}{\mbox{\textnormal{d}} t}u_-(t) \geq -C_{\phi}\big(\delE(t)\big)^{1/2} +\zetaM\lambda_2(\DelMP(D(t))) \big(\overline{u}_\infty-u_-(t)\big).
\]
The difference of the last two bounds yields the apriori bound on $\delV(u(t)):=u_+(t)-u_-(t)$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:aprioridelV}
\frac{\mbox{\textnormal{d}}}{\mbox{\textnormal{d}} t}\delV(u(t))\leq -\zetaM\lambda_2(\DelMP(D(t)))\cdot \delV(u(t))+
2C_{\phi} (\delE(t))^{1/2}.
\end{equation}
Observe that $\displaystyle \delV(u(t))=\max_{\alpha,\beta\in{\mathcal I}}\sup_{{\mathbf x},{\mathbf y}\in {\mathcal S}(t)}\langle {{\mathbf u}}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})- {{\mathbf u}}_\beta(t,{\mathbf y}),{\mathbf w}\rangle$ is the diameter of projected velocities on arbitrary unit vector ${\mathbf w}$. The assumed \eqref{eq:pareto} implies that $\delE(t)$ admits
the fractional exponential decay \eqref{eq:Efrac}, and we end up with,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dvde}
\frac{\text{d}}{\dt}\delV({\mathbf u}(t)) \leq -\zetaM\lambda_2(\DelMP(D(t)))\cdot\delV({\mathbf u}(t)) + 2C_{\phi}\cdot
(\delEz)^{1/2}e^{\displaystyle -\rate_1\!\cdot\! t^{1-\theta}}.
\end{equation}
Finally, $(\delE_0)^{1/2}\leq M\cdot \delVz$ and by assumption $\lambda_2(\DelMP(D(t))) \gtrsim(1+t)^{-\theta}$, hence \eqref{eq:vfrac} follows by integration of \eqref{eq:dvde}.
\end{proof}
\begin{rmk} Revisiting \eqref{eq:uplus} we find
\begin{align*}
\frac{\mbox{\textnormal{d}}}{\mbox{\textnormal{d}} t}u_+(t)\leq&\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha_+\beta}(D(t))M_\beta \langle\overline{{\mathbf u}}_\beta(t) -{\mathbf u}_+(t),\mathbf{w}\rangle \leq \dzPD{\alpha_+}\max_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\langle\overline{{\mathbf u}}_\beta(t) -{\mathbf u}_+(t),{\mathbf w}\rangle\\
\leq &\zetaM\lambda_2(\DelMP(D(t)))\max_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\langle\overline{{\mathbf u}}_\beta (t)-{\mathbf u}_+(t),{\mathbf w}\rangle,
\end{align*}
and likewise
\begin{align*}
\frac{\mbox{\textnormal{d}}}{\mbox{\textnormal{d}} t}u_-(t)
\geq \zetaM\lambda_2(\DelMP(D(t)))\min_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\langle\overline{{\mathbf u}}_\beta(t)-{\mathbf u}_-(t),{\mathbf w}\rangle.
\end{align*}
The difference of the last two estimates yield the apriori bound
\begin{equation}\label{eq:flucE}
\frac{\mbox{\textnormal{d}}}{\mbox{\textnormal{d}} t}\delV(u(t)\leq \zetaM\lambda_2(\DelMP(D(t)))\cdot\Big(-\delV(u(t))+
\delV(\overline{u}(t))\Big), \qquad \delV(\overline{u}):=\overline{u}_+-\overline{u}_-.
\end{equation}
Since the diameter of averaged velocities $\delV(\overline{u})$ is smaller than the diameter of the velocities $\delV(u)$, \eqref{eq:flucE} implies that the pointwise velocity diameter does not increase
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pointwise}
\delV(\overline{{\mathbf u}}(t)) \leq \delV({\mathbf u}(t)) \ \leadsto \ \delV({\mathbf u}(t)) \leq \delV_0.
\end{equation}
Note that the apriori bound \eqref{eq:pointwise} does not require any connectivity assumption; theorem \ref{THM_4_2} quantifies how an additional `fat-tail' connectivity \eqref{eq:pareto} enforces the fractional exponential decay of $\delV({\mathbf u}(t))$.
\end{rmk}
The last two theorems still require information on the dynamic growth of the supports ${\mathcal S}(t)=\cup_\alpha\text{supp}\, \{\rho_\alpha(t,\cdot)\}$, in order to access the possible growth of $\St$ and the corresponding decay of
$\phi_{\alpha\beta}(\St)$ in \eqref{eq:pareto}. Our next result provides apriori bound how on far the different species can spread out, and this enables us to quantify flocking in terms of the connectivity of $\{\phi_{\alpha\beta}(r)\}$, \emph{independent} of the diameter dynamics. To this end, observe that according to the apriori bound \eqref{eq:pointwise},
the velocities of the different species remain bounded,
and hence the spatial diameter of the support of the crowd can grow at most linearly in time: indeed, tracing the particle paths $({\mathbf x}(t),{\mathbf y}(t))\in {\mathcal S}$ yields
\begin{equation}\label{eq:delVt}
\frac{\text{d}}{\dt} \St \lesssim \delV({\mathbf u}(t)) \ \ \leadsto \ \ \St= \max_{{\mathbf x},{\mathbf y}\in {\mathcal S}(t)} |{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}| \lesssim D_0 + \delV_0\cdot t.
\end{equation}
We conclude the lower-bound (recall that $\phi_{\alpha\beta}$ are decreasing)
$\phi_{\alpha\beta}(\St) \gtrsim \phi_{\alpha\beta}\big(D_0+\delV_0 \cdot t\big)$.
We are now ready to prove theorem \ref{THM_1}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of theorem \ref{THM_1}\nopunct] proceeds in three steps.
\medskip\noindent
{\bf Step \#1. Fractional exponential decay}. The variational characterization of the Fiedler number \eqref{eq:CF}, implies that
$\lambda_2(\cdot)$ is an increasing function of the non-negative entries in its argument,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:delCandV}
\begin{split}
\frac{\lambda_2(\DelMP(D(t)))}{M} & = \min_{|\delta {\mathbf u}|_M=1} \sum_{\alpha,\beta}\phi_{\alpha\beta}(\St)\cdot |u_\alpha-u_\beta|^2M_{\alpha}M_\beta
\\
& \gtrsim \min_{|\delta {\mathbf u}|_M=1} \sum_{\alpha,\beta}\phi_{\alpha\beta}\big(D_0+\delV_0\cdot t\big)\cdot |u_\alpha-u_\beta|^2M_{\alpha}M_\beta \qquad \\
& =
\frac{\lambda_2\big(\DelMP\big(D_0+\delV_0 \cdot t\big)\big)}{M}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Hence, the Pareto decay $\lambda_2(\DelMP(r))\gtrsim (1+r)^{-\theta}$ assumed in \eqref{eq:Pareto} implies $\lambda_2(\DelMP(D(t))) \gtrsim (1+D_0+\delV_0\cdot t)^{-\theta}$ and the apriori estimate \eqref{u_infty} implies
\[
\delta E(t) \lesssim \delEz\cdot e^{\displaystyle -2\rate_3\!\cdot\! t^{1-\theta}} , \quad \rate_3:= \frac{\zetaM}{(1-\theta)\cdot\delV_0}.
\]
\noindent
{\bf Step \#2. Finite diameter}. The Pareto-type condition \eqref{eq:Pareto} implies an improved flocking rate of full exponential rate. Indeed, the apriori bound \eqref{eq:aprioridelV} together with \eqref{eq:delCandV} yield
\[
\frac{\text{d}}{\dt}\delV({\mathbf u}(t)) \lesssim -(1+D_0+\delV_0\cdot t)^{-\theta} \cdot\delV({\mathbf u}(t)) + 2C_\phi\cdot (\delta E_0)^{1/2}e^{\displaystyle -\rate_3\cdot t^{1-\theta}}.
\]
As before we use $(\delta E_0)^{1/2} \leq M\cdot \delV_0$; integrating the last inequality we find that $\delV({\mathbf u}(t))$ satisfies a fractional exponential decay
\[
\delV({\mathbf u}(t)) \lesssim \delV_0\cdot e^{\displaystyle -\rate_4\!\cdot\! t^{1-\theta}}, \qquad \rate_4=\min\{\rate_1,\rate_3\}>0
\]
which in turn implies a bounded spatial diameter uniformly in time\footnote{Tracing the dependence of $C_\theta$ on $\theta$ we find
$\displaystyle C_\theta \lesssim \int_0^\infty e^{-\rate_4\cdot t^{1-\theta}}\text{d}t$ with $\rate_4 \lesssim \frac{1}{1-\theta}$ which yield\newline $C_\theta \sim (1-\theta)^{\frac{\theta}{1-\theta}}$.},
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Dbd}
\frac{\text{d}}{\dt} \St \leq \delV({\mathbf u}(t)) \lesssim \delV_0\cdot e^{\displaystyle -\rate_4\!\cdot\! t^{1-\theta}} \ \leadsto \ \St \leq D_\infty \, \leq D_0+C_\theta \cdot\delV_0 < \infty.
\end{equation}
\noindent
{\bf Step \#3. Exponential decay}. We now have a \emph{uniform} lower bound on the minimal communication, $\phi_{\alpha\beta}(D(t)) \geq \phi_{\alpha\beta}(D_\infty)$. Hence, the monotone increasing dependence of $\lambda_2(\Delta_{\scrM} A)$ on the entries of $A$, consult \eqref{eq:CF}, implies
\begin{equation}\label{eq:laminf}
\lambda_2(\DelMP(D(t))) \geq \lambda_2(\DelMP_\infty)>0, \qquad
\Phi_\infty:=\{\phi_{\alpha\beta}(D_\infty)\}.
\end{equation}
We revisit the energy apriori fluctuations bound \eqref{u_infty}, obtaining the exponential decay
\[
\delta E(t) \leq \delEz \cdot e^{\displaystyle -2\rate t}, \qquad \rate=\zetaM\lambda_2(\DelMP_\infty).
\]
Since $\displaystyle
\sum_\alpha\int|{\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})-\overline{{\mathbf u}}_\infty|^2\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\dbx
\equiv\frac{1}{2M}\delta E(t)$, exponential flocking \eqref{eq:revisit} follows. Moreover, revisiting the uniform fluctuations \eqref{eq:vfrac} with \eqref{eq:laminf} yields the exponential decay
\begin{equation}\label{eq:vexp}
\max_{\alpha\in{\mathcal I}}\sup_{{\mathbf x}\in{\mathcal S}(t)}|{\mathbf u}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})-\overline{{\mathbf u}}_\infty| \lesssim \delV_0\cdot e^{\displaystyle -\rate t}.
\end{equation}
\end{proof}
\section{Existence of global smooth solutions}\label{sec:global}
\subsection{Critical threshold in one-dimensional flocking dynamics}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{Thm_2}]
Taking spatial derivative of the momentum equation \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs} yields
\begin{align}
(\partial_t+u_\alpha\partial_x)\left(\partial_x u_\alpha+\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}} \phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta\right)=-\partial_x u_\alpha\left(\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta+\partial_x u_\alpha\right),\quad \forall \alpha\in \mathcal{I}.\label{EQ:na_x_u_al}
\end{align}
Thus, the ``$e$''-quantities, $e_\alpha:=\partial_x u_\alpha+\sum_{\beta} \phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta$ satisfy $\partial_t e_\alpha +\partial_x(u_\alpha e_\alpha)=0$ and pairing it with the mass equations $\partial_t \rho_\alpha +\partial_x(u_\alpha \rho_\alpha)=0$ yields
\[
\partial_t q_\alpha+u_\alpha \partial_xq_\alpha=0, \qquad q_\alpha:=\frac{e_\alpha}{\rho_\alpha}.
\]
It follows that $q_\alpha\geq 0$ and hence $e_\alpha\geq0$ are invariant zones: if $e_\alpha(t=0,x) \geq 0$ for all $x\in \mathbb{T}$ then
\begin{align}
\partial_x u_{\alpha}+\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}} \phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta \geq 0,\quad \forall t\geq 0.
\end{align}
Moreover, arguing along the lines of \cite[sec. 3]{ShvydkoyTadmorI}
\begin{align*}
\partial_t\rho_\alpha+u_\alpha\partial_x\rho_\alpha &= - \partial_x u_\alpha\rho_\alpha
= -\left(e_\alpha-\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}} \phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta\right)\rho_\alpha
= -q_\alpha\rho^2_\alpha +\rho_\alpha \sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}} \phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta,
\end{align*}
and the uniform bound $|e_\alpha/\rho_\alpha(t,\cdot)|_\infty \leq |e_\alpha/\rho_\alpha(0,\cdot)|_\infty <\infty$ reveals that $\rho_\alpha$ remains bounded away from vacuum.
Since $\phi_{\alpha\beta}$ are uniformly bounded, we obtain the lower bound,
\begin{align}
\partial_x u_\alpha(x,t)\geq -\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}|\phi_{\alpha\beta}|_\infty M_\beta,\quad \forall (t,x)\in (\mathbb{R}_+,\mathbb{T}), \alpha\in \mathcal{I}.
\end{align}
On the other hand we can see directly from the equation \eqref{EQ:na_x_u_al} that $\partial_x u_\alpha$ has an upper bound for all time. Combining this with the lower bound, we have that $|\partial_x u_{\alpha}|_\infty\leq C<\infty$ for all time and the existence of strong solutions follows.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Critical threshold in two-dimensional flocking dynamics}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{Thm_4}]
Our purpose is to show that the derivatives $\{\partial_j{\mathbf u}_{\alpha}^i\}$ are uniformly bounded. We proceed in four steps along the lines of \cite{HeTadmor17} for the case of two-dimensional single species dynamics.
\medskip\noindent
\underline{Step \#1} --- the dynamics of $\diver{{\mathbf u}_\alpha}+\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta$. Differentiation of \eqref{EQ:hydrodynamic_flocking} implies that the velocity gradient matrix, $(\nabla \mathbf{u}_\alpha)_{ij}=\partial_j {\mathbf u}_{\alpha}^i$, satisfies
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:CSM}
(\nabla {\mathbf u}_\alpha)_t+{\mathbf u}_\alpha\cdot\nabla (\nabla {\mathbf u}_\alpha)+(\nabla {\mathbf u}_{\alpha})^2=-\sum_{\beta\in \mathcal
{I}} \phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta \nabla {\mathbf u}_\alpha+R_\alpha,
\end{eqnarray}
where the entries of the residual matrices
\[
(R_{\alpha})_{ij}:=\sum_{\beta\in \mathcal{I}}\int {\partial_j\phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|)}({\mathbf u}_{\beta}^i({\mathbf y})-{\mathbf u}^i_\alpha({\mathbf x}))\rho_\beta({\mathbf y}){\mbox{\text{d}}}{\mathbf y},\nonumber
\]
do not exceed $|(R_{\alpha})_{ij}|\leq \sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}|\phi'_{\alpha\beta}|_\infty M_\beta \cdot \delV(t)$.
The entries of the residual matrix $\{(R_{\alpha})_{ij}\}$ can be estimated using the exponentially decaying velocity fluctuations \eqref{eq:vexp}
\begin{align}\label{R_bound}
|(R_{\alpha})_{ij}|\leq \sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}|\phi'_{\alpha\beta}|_\infty M_\beta \cdot \delV(t) \lesssim \delV_0\cdot e^{-2\rate t}.
\end{align}
The first step is to bound the divergence: taking the trace of \eqref{eq:CSM} we find that ${\mbox{\text{d}}}_\alpha:=\nabla\cdot {\mathbf u}_\alpha$ satisfies
\begin{align}\label{eq:CSd}
(\partial_t+ {\mathbf u}_\alpha\cdot\nabla) {\mbox{\text{d}}}_\alpha + \trace{(\nabla{\mathbf u}_\alpha)^2} = - \left(\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta\right){\mbox{\text{d}}}_\alpha +\trace{R_\alpha}.
\end{align}
Arguing along the lines of \cite{CCTT16} we invoke the mass equation and obtain the following relation,
\begin{align*}
\trace{R}_\alpha= &\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}* \nabla\cdot (\rho_\beta {\mathbf u}_\beta) - \sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}{\mathbf u}_\alpha\cdot\nabla \phi_{\beta}*\rho_\beta =
-\left(\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}* \rho_\beta\right)_t -{\mathbf u}_\alpha\cdot\nabla \left(\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta \right)\\
=& -\left(\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta\right)',
\end{align*}
where $(\cdot)'$ denotes the material derivative, $(\cdot)':=(\partial_t+{\mathbf u}_\alpha\cdot\nabla_{\mathbf x})(\cdot)$.
Similar to \cite{HeTadmor17}, we define the following two quantities
\begin{equation}\label{eq:etasym}
\nabla {\mathbf u}_\alpha=S_\alpha+\Omega_\alpha, \quad S_\alpha=\frac{1}{2}(\nabla {\mathbf u}_\alpha +\nabla {\mathbf u}_\alpha^\top), \quad \Omega_\alpha:=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0 & -\omega_\alpha\\ \omega_\alpha & 0 \end{array}\right),
\end{equation}
where $\omega_\alpha$ is the scaled vorticity $\omega_\alpha=\frac{1}{2}(\partial_1 {\mathbf u}_{\alpha}^2-\partial_2 {\mathbf u}_\alpha^1)$. The symmetric part $S_\alpha$ has two real eigenvalue, i.e., $\lambda_1(S_\alpha) \leq \lambda_2(S_\alpha)$. Next, we recall the identity relating the trace $\trace{(\nabla {\mathbf u}_\alpha)^2}$ to the \emph{spectral gap}, $\lambda_2(S_\alpha)-\lambda_1(S_\alpha)\geq 0$, \cite[eq.(2.11)]{HeTadmor17},
\begin{align}
\trace{(\nabla {\mathbf u}_\alpha)^2}\equiv \frac{{\mbox{\text{d}}}_\alpha^2+\etaS^2_\alpha-4\omega_\alpha^2}{2}, \qquad \etaS_\alpha:=\lambda_2(S_\alpha)-\lambda_1(S_\alpha)\geq 0.
\end{align}
Expressed in terms of $\etaS_\alpha$, the trace dynamics \eqref{eq:CSd} now reads
\[
\left({\mbox{\text{d}}}_\alpha+\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta\right)' = \frac{1}{2}(4\omega_\alpha^2 -\etaS^2_\alpha)-\frac{1}{2} {\mbox{\text{d}}}_\alpha\left({\mbox{\text{d}}}_\alpha+2\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta\right).
\]
This calls for the introduction of the new ``natural'' variable ${\sf{e}}_\alpha={\mbox{\text{d}}}_\alpha+\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta$, satisfying
\begin{align}\label{eq:CSe}
{\sf{e}}_\alpha' = \frac{1}{2} \left(\bigg(\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta\bigg)^2 +4\omega_\alpha^2 -\etaS^2_\alpha -{\sf{e}}_\alpha^2\right).
\end{align}
Our purpose is to show that $\{{\mathbf x} \ | \ {\sf{e}}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}) \geq0,\enskip\forall\alpha\in\mathcal{I}\}$ is invariant region of the dynamics \eqref{eq:CSe}.
\medskip\noindent
\underline{Step \#2} --- bounding the spectral gap $\etaS_\alpha$. Consider the dynamics of the symmetric part of \eqref{eq:CSM}
\[(S_\alpha)_t+{\mathbf u}_\alpha\cdot \nabla S_\alpha+S_\alpha^2-\frac{\omega_\alpha^2}{4}{\mathbb I}_{2\times 2}=-\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}} \phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta S_\alpha+R_{\alpha, sym},\quad R_{\alpha, sym}=\frac{1}{2}(R_\alpha+R_\alpha^\top).
\]
The spectral dynamics of its eigenvalues $\lambda_i(S_\alpha)$ is governed by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:mui}
\lambda'_i + \lambda^2_i =\omega_\alpha^2 -\left(\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta\right)\lambda_i +\big\langle {\mathbf s}_\alpha^i, R_{\alpha,\text{sym}}{\mathbf s}_\alpha^i\big\rangle
\end{equation}
driven by the \emph{orthonormal} eigenpair $\{{\mathbf s}_\alpha^1,{\mathbf s}_\alpha^2\}$ of the symmetric $S_\alpha$.
Taking the difference, we find that $\etaS_\alpha=\lambda_2(S_\alpha)-\lambda_1(S_\alpha)\geq 0$ satisfies,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:etaS}
(\etaS_\alpha)' + {\sf{e}}_\alpha\etaS_\alpha = q_\alpha, \qquad q_\alpha:= \big\langle {\mathbf s}_\alpha^2, R_{\alpha,\text{sym}}{\mathbf s}_\alpha^2\big\rangle - \big\langle {\mathbf s}_\alpha^1, R_{\alpha,\text{sym}}{\mathbf s}_\alpha^1\big\rangle.
\end{equation}
The residual term $q_\alpha$ is upper-bounded by the size of the entries $\{R_{\alpha,j}^i\}$ in \eqref{R_bound}, $|q_\alpha(t,\cdot)|_\infty \leq 2 \max_{ij} |R_{\alpha,j}^i(t,\cdot)|_\infty \lesssim \delV_0\cdot e^{\displaystyle -2\rate t}$.
Hence, as long as ${\sf{e}}_\alpha(t,\cdot)$ remains positive, the spectral gap does not exceed
\begin{equation}\label{eq:etaSbd}
|\etaS_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})| \leq \max_{\mathbf x} |\etaS_\alpha(0,{\mathbf x})| + Const.\frac{\delV_0}{\rate} < C_1.
\end{equation}
The first inequality on the right follows from integration of \eqref{eq:etaS}; the second follows from the assumed bound on $|\etaS_\alpha(0)|\leq \frac{1}{2}C_1$ in \eqref{eq:etaCT}, and our choice of small enough $\delV_0\leq C_1$, so that $\displaystyle Const.\frac{\delV_0}{\rate}\leq \frac{1}{2}C_1$; the constant $C_1$ is yet to be determined.
\medskip\noindent
\underline{Step \#3} --- The invariance of ${\sf{e}}_\alpha(t,\cdot)\geq 0$ . We return to \eqref{eq:CSe}: expressed in terms of the lower bound
$\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta \geq \sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}(D_\infty)M_\beta$ we find
\begin{equation}\label{eq:eq}
{\sf{e}}_\alpha'\geq \frac{1}{2} \left(b_\alpha^2 - {\sf{e}}_\alpha^2\right), \qquad b_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}):=\sqrt{\left(\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}(D_\infty)M_\beta\right)^2-\etaS^2_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})}.
\end{equation}
Observe that $b_\alpha$ are well-defined: we set
\begin{equation}\label{eq:setC0}
C_1:=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \min_\alpha\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}(D_\infty)M_\beta,
\end{equation}
so that the upper-bound \eqref{eq:etaSbd} implies
\[
\left(\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}(D_\infty)M_\beta\right)^2-\etaS^2_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}) \geq \frac{1}{2}C^2_0 \ \ \leadsto \ \
b_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}) \geq c_-:=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}C_1>0.
\]
Since ${\sf{e}}_\alpha' \geq \frac{1}{2}((c_-)^2-{\sf{e}}_\alpha^2)= \frac{1}{2}(c_--{\sf{e}}_\alpha)(c_-+{\sf{e}}_\alpha)$, it follows that ${\sf{e}}_\alpha$ is increasing whenever ${\sf{e}}_\alpha\in (-c_-,c_-)$ and in particular, if ${\sf{e}}_\alpha(0)\geq0$, $\forall\alpha\in\mathcal{I}$ then ${\sf{e}}_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})$ remains positive at later times. Thus, if the initial data are \emph{sub-critical} in the sense that \eqref{eq:eCT} holds
\[
{\sf{e}}_\alpha(0,{\mathbf x})= \diver{{\mathbf u}_\alpha}(0,{\mathbf x})+\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\alpha(0,{\mathbf x}) \geq0, \quad \forall{\mathbf x}\in\mathbb{R}^2,
\]
then ${\sf{e}}_\alpha(t,\cdot)\geq 0$ and $\etaS_\alpha(t,\cdot)$ remains bounded
\medskip\noindent
\underline{Step \#4} --- an upper-bound of ${\sf{e}}_\alpha(t,\cdot)$. The lower-bound ${\sf{e}}_\alpha \geq 0$ implies that the vorticity is bounded. Indeed, the anti-symmetric part of \eqref{eq:CSM} yields that the vorticity $\omega_\alpha$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{eq:vorticity}
\omega_\alpha' +{\sf{e}}_\alpha\omega_\alpha= \frac{1}{2}\trace{JR_\alpha}, \qquad J=\left(\begin{array}{cc} 0 & -1 \\ 1 &0\end{array}\right)
\end{equation}
hence applying \eqref{R_bound} yields
\begin{equation}\label{eq:vort}
|\omega_\alpha|'\leq -{\sf{e}}_\alpha|\omega_\alpha| + \frac{1}{2}|q_\alpha|, \qquad |q_\alpha(t,\cdot)|\lesssim \delV_0\cdot e^{\displaystyle -2\rate t}
\end{equation}
and we end up with same upper-bound on $\omega_\alpha$ as with $\etaS_\alpha$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:vorbd}
|\omega_\alpha(t,\cdot)|_\infty \leq (\omega_\alpha)_+, \qquad (\omega_\alpha)_+:= \max_{\mathbf x} |\omega_\alpha(0,{\mathbf x})| + \frac{1}{2} C_1.
\end{equation}
Returning to \eqref{eq:CSe} we have
\[
{\sf{e}}'_\alpha \leq \frac{1}{2} \Bigg(\bigg(\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta\bigg)^2 +4\omega_\alpha^2 -{\sf{e}}_\alpha^2\Bigg) \leq \frac{1}{2} \Bigg(\bigg(\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}|\phi_{\alpha\beta}|_\infty M_\beta\bigg)^2+ 4(\omega_\alpha)_+^2 -{\sf{e}}_\alpha^2\Bigg),
\]
which implies that $|{\sf{e}}_\alpha(t,\cdot)|_\infty \leq ({\sf{e}}_\alpha)_+ <\infty$.
The uniform bound on ${\sf{e}}_\alpha$ implies that $\diver{{\mathbf u}_\alpha}$ is uniformly bounded,
$|\diver{{\mathbf u}_\alpha}| \leq |{\sf{e}}_\alpha|_\infty+\sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}|\phi_{\alpha\beta}*\rho_\beta|_\infty \leq ({\sf{e}}_\alpha)_+ + \sum_{\beta\in\mathcal{I}}|\phi_{\alpha\beta}|_\infty M_\beta$, and together with the bound on the spectral gap \eqref{eq:etaSbd}, it follows that the symmetric part $\{S_{\alpha}\}$ is bounded.
Finally, together with the vorticity bound \eqref{eq:vorbd} it follows that $\{\partial_j {\mathbf u}_\alpha^i\}$ are uniformly bounded which completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{Multi-species aggregation dynamics}\label{sec:agg}
In this section, we prove Theorem \ref{Thm_4}. We begin by letting
$\overline{{\mathbf x}}_\infty(t)$ denote the \emph{center of mass} at time $t$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{Aggregation_eq_center_of_mass}
\overline{{\mathbf x}}_\infty(t):=\frac{1}{M} \sum_{\alpha\in\mathcal{I}}\overline{{\mathbf x}}_\alpha(t), \qquad
\overline{{\mathbf x}}_\alpha(t)= \int_{\mathbb{R}^d} \rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}) {\mathbf x} d{\mathbf x}.
\end{equation}
The total mass $M=\sum_\alpha \int \rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\dbx$ is conserved in time. Moreover, by the assumed symmetry of the $\Phi=\{\phi_{\alpha\beta}\}$ array, the total first moment is also conserved in time,
\begin{align*}
\frac{\text{d}}{\dt}\sum_{\alpha\in\mathcal{I}}\int \rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}) {{\mathbf x}} \dbx
= -\iint \sum_{\alpha,\beta\in\mathcal{I}} \phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|)({\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}) \rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\dbx \dby=0,
\end{align*}
since the last integrand in anti-symmetric in $({\mathbf x},{\mathbf y})$. Hence the center of mass is invariant in time $\overline{{\mathbf x}}_\infty(t)=\overline{{\mathbf x}}_\infty(0)$.
By assumption, initial densities $\rho_\alpha(0)$'s are compactly supported. What distinguishes the first-order multi-species aggregation dynamics \eqref{EQ:AggregationEq_multi-groups} is the fact that the diameter of this support does not increase in time, in contrast to the possible expansion \eqref{eq:Dbd} of $D(t)$ in the second-order flocking dynamics \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs}.
\begin{thm}[{\bf Uniformly bounded support}]\label{THM_6_1}\mbox{ }\newline
Consider a strong solution of \eqref{EQ:AggregationEq_multi-groups},
$\{\rho_{{\alpha}}(t,\cdot)\in W^1_+(\mathbb{R}^d), \alpha \in \mathcal{I}\}$,
subject to compactly supported initial data $\{\rho_{\alpha 0}\}$. Then the diameter of its support,
\[
D(t):=\sup_{{\mathbf x},{\mathbf y}\in{\mathcal S}(t)}|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|, \qquad
{\mathcal S}(t)=\cup_\alpha \mathrm{supp}\,\{\rho_\alpha(t,\cdot)\}
\]
does not increase in time $D(t) \leq D_0$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof} There are various approaches to trace the diameter $D(t)$ for one-species dynamics, e.g., \cite{BertozziCarrilloLaurent09, CarrilloDiFrancescoFigalliLaurentSlepcev11}. Here we proceed by considering the $p$-weighted diameter ($p$-Wasserstein metric),
\[
W_p(\rho(t)):= \iint \sum_{\alpha,\beta\in{\mathcal I}}|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|^p\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})\dbx\dby.
\]
We abbreviate ${\mbox{\textnormal{d}}}{\sf m}_{\alpha\beta\gamma}(t,{\mathbf x},{\mathbf y},{\mathbf z})=\rho_\gamma(t,{\mathbf z})\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}) \rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})\dbx\dby\dbz$. Differentiation yields
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Wp}
\begin{split}
\frac{1}{2}\frac{\text{d}}{\dt} &W_p(\rho(t)) = \frac{1}{2}\iint \sum_{\alpha,\beta\in{\mathcal I}}|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|^p\big(\partial_t \rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})+\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\partial_t \rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})\big)\dbx\dby\\
& = -\iiint \sum_{\alpha,\beta,\gamma \in{\mathcal I}}p |{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|^{p-2}\langle ({\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}), ({\mathbf x}-{\mathbf z})\rangle\phi_{\alpha\gamma}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf z}|){\mbox{\textnormal{d}}}{\sf m}_{\alpha\beta\gamma}(t,{\mathbf x},{\mathbf y},{\mathbf z}).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The convexity of $|\cdot|^p$ implies
$|{\mathbf w}-{\mathbf v}|^p \geq |{\mathbf w}|^p-p|{\mathbf w}|^{p-2}\langle {\mathbf w},{\mathbf v}\rangle$ which in turn, setting ${\mathbf w}={\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}$ and ${\mathbf v}={\mathbf x}-{\mathbf z}$, shows that the last integral does not exceed
\[
\begin{split}
-\iiint & \sum_{\alpha,\beta,\gamma \in{\mathcal I}}p|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|^{p-2}\langle ({\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}), ({\mathbf x}-{\mathbf z})\rangle\phi_{\alpha\gamma}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf z}|){\mbox{\textnormal{d}}}{\sf m}_{\alpha\beta\gamma}(t,{\mathbf x},{\mathbf y},{\mathbf z})\\
& \leq \iiint \sum_{\alpha,\beta,\gamma \in{\mathcal I}}\left(|{\mathbf z}-{\mathbf y}|^p-|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|^p\right) \phi_{\alpha\gamma}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf z}|){\mbox{\textnormal{d}}}{\sf m}_{\alpha\beta\gamma}(t,{\mathbf x},{\mathbf y},{\mathbf z})\\
& = \iiint \sum_{\alpha,\beta,\gamma \in{\mathcal I}}|{\mathbf z}-{\mathbf y}|^p \phi_{\alpha\gamma}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf z}|){\mbox{\textnormal{d}}}{\sf m}_{\alpha\beta\gamma}(t,{\mathbf x},{\mathbf y},{\mathbf z})\\
& \ \ - \iiint \sum_{\alpha,\beta,\gamma \in{\mathcal I}}|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|^p \phi_{\alpha\gamma}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf z}|){\mbox{\textnormal{d}}}{\sf m}_{\alpha\beta\gamma}(t,{\mathbf x},{\mathbf y},{\mathbf z})=: I + II.
\end{split}
\]
Now exchange $\alpha \leftrightarrow \gamma$ and ${\mathbf x} \leftrightarrow {\mathbf z}$ in $I$ to conclude that $I+II=0$, hence $W_p(\rho(t)) \leq W_p(\rho(0))$. In particular, letting $p\uparrow \infty$ yields the desired result $D(t)\leq D_0$.
\end{proof}
The case $p=2$ deserves special attention: in this case, we can quantify the \emph{strict} decay rate of $W_2(\rho(t))$ in term of the connectivity of the
communication array $\Phi(r)$.
\begin{thm}[{\bf Decay of weighted diameter}]\label{THM_6_2}\mbox{ }\newline
Consider a strong solution of \eqref{Hydrodynamic_Flocking_eqs},
$\{\rho_{{\alpha}}(t,\cdot)\in W^1_+(\mathbb{R}^d), \alpha \in \mathcal{I}\}$,
subject to compactly supported initial data $\rho_{\alpha 0}$ and communication array
$\Phi_0=\{\phi_{\alpha\beta}(D_0)\}_{\alpha,\beta\in{\mathcal I}}$.
Then the weighted diameter $\delD(t)$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{Second_Moment_time_evolution}
\delD(t) \leq e^{\displaystyle -2\zetaM\lambda_2(\DelMP_0)t} \cdot\delD(0) ,\quad \delD(t) =\sum_{\alpha,\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\iint |{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|^2 \rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y}) \dbx\dby.
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We begin with computing the time evolution of $\delD(t)=W_2(\rho(t))$ in \eqref{eq:Wp}: the special case $p=2$ yields, upon exchange ${\mathbf x}\leftrightarrow {\mathbf z}$,
\[
\begin{split}
\frac{\text{d}}{\dt}\left(\sum_{\alpha,\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\right.&\left.\iint |{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|^2\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})\dbx\dby\right) \\
& =-2M\sum_{\alpha,\beta\in\mathcal{I}} \iint \phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|)\langle ({\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}),2{\mathbf x}\rangle\rho_\beta (t,{\mathbf y})\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\dbx \dby.
\end{split}
\]
Alternatively, since the center of mass $\sum_\alpha \int \rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}) {\mathbf x} \dbx$ is invariant in time, the change of the weighted diameter $\displaystyle \frac{\text{d}}{\dt} \delD(t)$ equals the rate of the total second moment $\displaystyle \sum_{\alpha\in\mathcal{I}}\int |{\mathbf x}|^2 \rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}) \dbx$; arguing along the lines of the proof of theorem \ref{THM_4_1} we find
\begin{align*}
\frac{1}{2M}\frac{\text{d}}{\dt}\left(\sum_{\alpha,\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\right.&\left.\iint |{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|^2\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})\dbx\dby\right) = \frac{\text{d}}{\dt} \left(\sum_{\alpha\in\mathcal{I}}\int |{\mathbf x}|^2 \rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x}) \dbx\right)\\
=&-\sum_{\alpha,\beta\in\mathcal{I}} \iint \phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|)\langle ({\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}),2{\mathbf x}\rangle\rho_\beta (t,{\mathbf y})\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\dbx \dby\\
=&-\sum_{\alpha,\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\ \iint \phi_{\alpha\beta}(|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|)|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|^2\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\rho_\beta (t,{\mathbf y})\dbx \dby\\
\leq&-\sum_{\alpha,\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\phi_{\alpha\beta}(D_0) \iint|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|^2\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\rho_\beta (t,{\mathbf y})\dbx \dby.
\end{align*}
The last step follows from $|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|\leq D(t)\leq D_0$ and recalling that $\phi_{\alpha\beta}$ are decreasing.
Using the vector version of Poincar\'{e} inequality \eqref{eq:alphaneqbeta} with $({\mathbf u}_\alpha({\mathbf x}),{\mathbf u}_\beta({\mathbf y}))=({\mathbf x},{\mathbf y})$ we conclude
\begin{align*}
\frac{1}{2M}\frac{\text{d}}{\dt}\sum_{\alpha,\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\iint |{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|^2&\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y})\dbx\dby\\
\leq& -\lambda_2(\DelMP(D_0))\frac{\zetaM}{M}\sum_{\alpha,\beta\in\mathcal{I}}\iint|{\mathbf x}-{\mathbf y}|^2\rho_\alpha(t,{\mathbf x})\rho_\beta(t,{\mathbf y}) \dbx\dby.
\end{align*}
The bound \eqref{Second_Moment_time_evolution} follows.
\end{proof}
\noindent
{\bf Acknowledgments}. We thank Ruiwen Shu for reading out manuscript and offering the proof for the improved bound in theorem \ref{THM_4_2}. Research was supported in part by NSF grants DMS16-13911, RNMS11-07444 (KI-Net) and ONR grant N00014-1812465.
|
\section{Introduction}
Evaluation metric is not merely a performance evaluation and ranking system of competition, but a navigator of optical character recognition(OCR) research because the direction of developing a certain model is heavily affected by its evaluation method.
Therefore, the evaluation metric should reflect actual performance of the model.
In this study, we investigated the theoretical bases of existing evaluation algorithms, and suggest a novel evaluation concept optimized to tasks of which current OCR researches are mainly focused: robust reading.
In summary, our contributions are as follows: 1) We propose a novel character-oriented end-to-end evaluation protocol, compatible with existing benchmark datasets annotated at word level. 2) To confirm the compatibility between PopEval method and the word-level annotated benchmark datasets, we newly reannotated and published the most widely used test datasets for end-to-end system: focused scene text(ICDAR2013) and incidental scene text(ICDAR2015) at character-level as quadrilaterals \cite{Karatzas2013ICDARCompetition, Karatzas2015ICDARReading}. 3) we performed the comparative analysis among evaluation metrics, detection-recognition algorithms and representative test datasets, then the results were compared with human qualitative end-to-end evaluation.
The source code of the PopEval and the test datasets of ICDAR2013 and ICDAR2015 which were newly annotated at character-level are available at: \url{https://github.com/naver/popeval}
\section{Related works}
\subsection{Detection Evaluation}
In ICDAR2013 competition, DetEval was adopted as a detector evaluation metric at object level, that determines the matching objects by using double threshold system based on pixel precision and pixel recall \cite{Wolf2006ObjectAlgorithms}. DetEval also handles one-to-many(split) and many-to-one(merge) matching problems, but as it uniformly handles these match cases as same weight irrespective of the match condition, it results in errors. In addition, there have been similarity measuring methods to solve one-to-many and many-to-one problems, but these approaches required feature extraction \cite{khurshid2012word}.
ICDAR2015 competition adopted the intersection over union(IOU) based PASCAL EVAL as an evaluation metric \cite{Everingham2015TheRetrospective}. If the IOU between two object areas exceeds 0.5, then the objects are considered as a match. In the IOU method, because a ground truth(GT) object only matches one predicted object, the split and merge problems are ignored \cite{Karatzas2015ICDARReading}.
COCO-Text competition adopted average precision(AP) with IOU \cite{Gomez2017ICDAR2017COCO-Text}. It required additional confidence rate values of detected objects to be calculated. The split and merge problems are not handled because it uses the concept of IOU.
\subsection{Recognition Evaluation}
For recognition tasks, total edit distance and correctly recognized words rate were adopted as the evaluation metric \cite{Karatzas2013ICDARCompetition,Karatzas2015ICDARReading}. The above performance indicator values have been calculated for both case sensitive and case insensitive. In correctly recognized words rate, one exactly matched recognized sequence is counted as one matching case regardless of the length of the transcript.
\subsection{End-to-End Evaluation}
Conventional end-to-end evaluation method is a pipeline that consists of detection and recognition phases.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figure_1.png}
\caption{PopEval character removal process scheme. The black box and text are GT and the red box and text are prediction. The order of character removal is indicated as circle character. (A) The GT polygon and text label `POPEVAL' and The predicted polygons and text labels `POP', and `EVAL'; (B) Deletion case: `OP' and 'EVAL' were predicted. There were six removed characters, one remaining character of GT; (C) Insertion case: `POPE' and `EVAL' were predicted. There were seven removed characters, and one remaining character of prediction; (D) Complicated case: `DOP' and `EW' were predicted. There were three removed characters, four remaining characters of GT, two remaining character of prediction; }
\label{fig1}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Detection}
In ICDAR2013, ICDAR2015, and COCO-Text competition, the detected objects of which IOU is greater than 0.5 with the corresponding GT object passes to recognition phase.
\subsubsection{Recognition}
In the ICDAR2013 and ICDAR2015 competitions, the recognition part adopted controlled vocabulary system which defines minimal common conditions to grant meaningful performance comparison.
COCO-Text competition does not use the vocabulary system, and it adopts the case-insensitive correctly recognized words method. By using the correctly recognized words method, the results passed through the detection phase are finally selected, then the corresponding APs are calculated using residues through the both phase\cite{Gomez2017ICDAR2017COCO-Text}. The AP has a drawback that is not intuitive to understand the absolute performance level of a certain model \cite{Moffat2008Rank-BiasedEffectiveness}.
Otherwise, the normalized edit distance(1-NED) can be used. After the detection phase, the edit distance of the GT and the recognized transcript is divided into the most long length of the GT or the recognized transcripts then subtract the average results to 1. If the detected box is not caught in the detection phase, the calculation of 1-NED is performed by assuming that the recognized transcripts were blank \cite{Shi2017ICDAR2017RCTW-17}.
\section{PopEval: Our approach}
PopEval is a character level end-to-end evaluation metric that is based on removing overlapping characters between the GT and the OCR result.
In this criteria, the number of removed characters is considered as true positive count to be used for calculating character recall and precision.
Contrary to existing end-to-end evaluation metrics, PopEval is not just a pipeline structure which consists of detection and recognition parts, but a seamless structure of which character removal is conducted by integration of detection and recognition results.
The principle of PopEval algorithm is to adopt how human beings evaluate a certain recognized result comparing with GT.
Based on the principle, there are three criteria in which characters are removed.
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\SetKwFunction{hi}{hi}
\definecolor{mygray}{gray}{0.6}
\SetKwFor{For}{for}{in \textit{one-to-one-relations}}{end}
\SetKwFor{Forchar}{for}{in \textit{Det\_text}}{end}
\SetKwFor{ForGT}{for}{in \textit{GTs}}{end}
\SetKwFor{ForOneToMany}{for}{in \textit{one-to-many}}{end}
\SetKwProg{ifprog}{if}{}{end}
\SetKwRepeat{repeat}{a}{b}
\SetKwProg{Def}{def}{}{end}
\SetAlgoLined
\textbf{global} removed\_char\_count = 0\\
\Def{main(GTs, Dets):}{
\textit{one-to-one}, \textit{one-to-many} = \textit{InspectRelation(GTs, Dets)}\\
\textcolor{mygray}{
\textit{\# \textit{one-to-one} = [[GT1, Det1], [GT2, Det2], ...]}\\
\textit{\# \textit{one-to-many} = [[GT3, [Det3, Det4]], ...]}\\
}
\textbf{if} \textit{len(one-to-one)} is 0 \textbf{and} \textit{len(one-to-many)} is 0\\
\ \ \ \ \textbf{return} \textit{removed\_char\_count}\\
\textbf{else if} \textit{len(one-to-one)} is 0\\
\ \ \ \ \textbf{return} \textit{HandleOneToMany}(\textit{one-to-many})\\
\textbf{else}\\
\ \ \ \ \textit{remaining\_GTs}, \textit{remaining\_Dets} = \textit{CharacterRemovalProcess}(one-to-one)\\
\ \ \ \ \textbf{return} \textit{main}(\textit{remaining\_GTs}, \textit{remaining\_Dets})\\
\textbf{end}
}
\Def{InspectRelation(GTs, Dets):}{
initialize \textit{one-to-one}, \textit{one-to-many} as array
\ForGT{GT}{
\textit{Dets\_intersect} = filtered \textit{Dets} intersecting \textit{GT}\\
\textbf{if} \textit{len(\textit{Dets\_intersect})} is 1\\
\ \ \ \ \textit{one-to-one}.append( [\textit{GT}, \textit{Dets\_intersect}] )\\
\textbf{else if} \textit{len(\textit{Dets\_intersect})} over 1:\\
\ \ \ \ \textit{one-to-many}.append( [\textit{GT}, \textit{Dets\_intersect}] )\\
\textbf{end}
}
\textbf{return} \textit{one-to-one}, \textit{one-to-many}
}
\Def{HandleOneToMany(\textit{one-to-many}):}{
\textit{GTs}, \textit{Dets} = export \textit{GTs} and \textit{Dets} from \textit{one-to-many}\\
\textit{GT} = closest one to left top of image among GTs \\
\textit{Det} = one with the highest area recall on \textit{GT} among \textit{Dets}\\
\textit{remaining\_GTs}, \textit{remaining\_Dets} = \textit{CharacterRemovalProcess}(\textit{GT, Det, GTs, Dets})\\
\textbf{return} \textit{Main}(\textit{remaining\_GTs}, \textit{remaining\_Dets})
}
\caption{PopEval evaluation metric, part 1 of 2}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Determining the Iteration Order of GT Polygons}
People read English text as images, from top left to bottom right. Likewise, the iteration order of scattered GT on each image is determined as the distance between the GT polygon centroid and left-top point of the image. The shorter the distance, the earlier the iteration sequence order. This approach solves many-to-one problems in relation to GT-to-detection. If there are multiple GTs corresponding to one detection, then the iteration order is predetermined.
\begin{equation}
\newcommand{arg}{arg}
\newcommand{min}{min}
\newcommand{\arg\!min}{\arg\!min}
k \in {\{ 1, .. , n\}}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\newcommand{arg}{arg}
\newcommand{\arg\!min}{\arg\!min}
{f(k)} = \sqrt{{X_{k}}^2 + {Y_{k}}^2}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\newcommand{\arg\!min}{\arg\!min}
D = {\arg\!min_x} {f(x)}
\end{equation}
For each iteration, the index of remaining GT polygons is $k$. The coordinates of $k$-th polygon centroid are $X_k$, $Y_k$.
The distance between origin and the $k$-th polygon centroid is $f$. $D$ indicates the nearest polygon to left-top of the image, that is subjected to next processes.
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\setcounter{AlgoLine}{33}
\SetKwFunction{hi}{hi}
\definecolor{mygray}{gray}{0.6}
\SetKwFor{For}{for}{in \textit{one-to-one-relations}}{end}
\SetKwFor{Forchar}{for}{in \textit{Det\_text}}{end}
\SetKwFor{ForGT}{for}{in \textit{GTs}}{end}
\SetKwFor{ForOneToMany}{for}{in \textit{one-to-many}}{end}
\SetKwProg{ifprog}{if}{}{end}
\SetKwRepeat{repeat}{a}{b}
\SetKwProg{Def}{def}{}{end}
\SetAlgoLined
\Def{CharacterRemovalProcess(\textit{GT, Det, GTs, Dets}):}{
\textit{GT\_text}, \textit{Det\_text} = Extract texts from \textit{GT}, \textit{Det}\\
\Forchar{\textit{Det\_character, Detchar\_index}} {
\ifprog{ \textit{Det\_character} in \textit{GT\_text}}{
\textit{GTchar\_index} = the leftmost character index of \textit{GT\_text} matching \textit{Det\_character}
\textbf{delete} a character of \textit{GTchar\_index} from \textit{GT\_text}\\
\textit{removed\_char\_count} += $1$ \\
\ifprog{GT\_text is empty}{ \textbf{delete} \textit{GT} object from \textit{GTs} \\
}
}
\ifprog{\textit{Det\_character} is last of \textit{Det\_text}}{ \textbf{delete} \textit{Det} object from \textit{Dets} }
}
\textit{GTs}, \textit{Dets} = the deleted \textit{GT} and \textit{Det} objects should be excluded from \textit{GTs}, \textit{Dets}\\
\textbf{return} \textit{GTs}, \textit{Dets}
}
\caption{PopEval evaluation metric, part 2 of 2}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Handling the One-to-Many Relations} \label{handleonetomany}
When the one-to-many relations are encountered in the course of GT-to-detection, it is required to pick one of the detected polygons matching the GT polygon in one-to-one relation.
To solve this problem, PopEval adopted a recursive procedure which repeats inspecting every relation among GT polygons and detected polygons then preferentially taking out the obvious one-to-one relations, until only one-to-many relations remain.
While the recursion is repeatedly executed, the previous one-to-many relations can be converted to one-to-one relationship in the current operation because obvious relations were wiped out in previous execution.
For the last remaining one-to-many relations, the area recall of each detected polygon is adopted as the determinant to select one detected polygon that is matched with the GT: the larger the area recall, the higher the priority.
Generally, only one detected polygon is subjected to character removal process. However, when there are multiple detected polygons with the same highest area recall, these are subjected to the process while being weighted as a reciprocal of the number of the subjected detections.
\subsection{Character Removal Process} \label{crp}
For character removal, the basic unit of comparison is a set of polygon area and the transcript. PopEval compares the units among GTs and predicted results. If the polygon areas of GT and predicted result overlap to each other, the transcriptions of GT and predicted result are compared, then the overlapped character is removed one by one in the predetermined order.
The principle of PopEval algorithm is to adopt the way a human evaluates. In the principle, there are two rules about the order in which characters are removed.
First, in the unit, the removal iteration of characters is conducted in the direction how characters are read. In this study, as the test dataset was in English, the iteration order of character removal was left to right. For (B) in Figure \ref{fig1}, the GT transcript is ``POPEVAL'', and the recognized transcripts are ``OP'', and ``EVAL''. According to \textit{handling the one-to-many relations}(\ref{handleonetomany}), a unit of ``EVAL'' is subjected to the \textit{character removal process}(\ref{crp}) first. The transcript of GT is removed from the characters of ``EVAL'' in order from left to right, then the transcript of GT becomes ``POP''.
Second, if a character of recognized transcript corresponds to multiple characters in the GT, the criteria to remove one character stays the same as above, following the direction in which characters are read in the language. Continuing from the above example where the transcript of GT became ``POP'', and last recognized transcript was ``OP''. According the character removal order, ``O'' is removed first, then ``P'' will drop out of transcripts. However, when ``P'' is removed, there are two candidates of character removal in GT transcript ``POP'', the first and third. As the direction determined above,
the first character of the ``POP'' is picked to be matched and removed together with ``P'' of recognized transcript.
As final result, the remaining GT transcript is ``P'' and there is no remains in recognized transcripts.
Recall and precision are calculated from the lengths of the initial GT and recognized transcript, and the number of removed characters. In this example, the length of the initial GT is seven, the initial total length of recognized transcript is six, and six characters were removed. The precision and recall are 1.0 and 0.8571, respectively.
\section{Experimental Result}
\subsection{Inspection on the Case of Concern in the PopEval}
Currently, there is no perfect metric in the evaluation of OCR \cite{Long2018SceneEra}, and it is important that which metric is actually more accurate.
Since PopEval is a method to remove overlapped character components between objects, there is a room for concern that it may not reflect the permutation problem in which the recognized transcript has different character arrangement compared to GT transcript.
Therefore, the permutation problem was monitored by inspecting how frequently the problem occurs on state-of-the-art recognition models: attentional scene text recognizer with flexible rectification(ASTER) \cite{Shi2018ASTER:Rectification}, and gated recurrent convolution neural network for OCR(GRCNN) \cite{Wang2017GatedOCR}.
Table 1 shows the occurrence of permutation problems on recognition models and test datasets. Test datasets of ICDAR2013 and ICDAR2015 were inspected.
The permutation problem is defined as below:\\\\
\textit{ 1) The transcripts of GT and recognition have the same character component.}\\
\textit{ 2) The character arrangements of the transcripts are different to each other.}\\
The survey showed that the permutation problem has rarely occurred. In the case review of the results, it is found that common permutation occurrences on the two models were both caused by a typing error in the GT. Subsequently, there was no permutation problem in test dataset of ICDAR2013 and out of 1811 images in total, the permutation occurred once with ASTER model, twice with GRCNN model for the dataset of ICDAR2015.
Therefore, the occurrence of permutation problem is rare, considered as scarcely impinge on evaluation.
\begin{table}[!t]
\caption{Among the recognition results which composed of the same alphanumeric components as GT, the proportion that does not exactly match GT.}
\label{table_example}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l c c}
\hline
& ICDAR2013 & ICDAR2015 \\ \hline
ASTER & 0.00\% & 0.05\% \\
GRCNN & 0.00\% & 0.14\% \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{Occurrence of One-to-Many and Many-to-One Relations}
IOU thresholding and exact text matching methods only accept one-to-one relations \cite{Long2018SceneEra}. To inspect the errors caused by ignoring one-to-many and many-to-one relations, PixelLink\cite{Deng2018PixelLink:Segmentation} and EAST\cite{ZhouEAST:Detector} were adopted as the detection model, and the ASTER and the GRCNN recognition models were trained as recognition model and made to predict on the test datasets of ICDAR2013 and ICDAR2015 competition.
One-to-many and many-to-one relations were counted on Table II under below criteria .
\subsubsection{One-to-Many(split)}
If the recognized transcript of either GRCNN and ASTER is included in the GT transcript and the area precision of detection and GT boxes is greater than 0.5, the detection box is counted as a box in one-to-many relation.
\subsubsection{Many-to-One(merge)}
If a GT transcript is a part of the recognized transcript of either GRCNN and ASTER and the area recall of detection and GT boxes is greater than 0.5, the GT box is counted as a box in many-to-one relation.
The assessment found that a non-negligible number of detection boxes and GT boxes were in one-to-many and many-to-one relations. Although there is ambiguity that the boxes in the relations match well each other in terms of shape and area, the transcript of the boxes is still valuable. In the approach ignoring these relations, all of the split detections and merged GTs are evaluated as false negatives. Additionally, since the relation assessment aforementioned relies on an imperfect recognition model, it is expected that there will be more cases of one-to-many or many-to-one relations than the occurrences assessed.
\begin{table}[!t]
\caption{The proportions of split detections and merged GTs among the total detections and GTs, respectively.}
\label{table2}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\hline
& Split Detections & Merged GTs \\
& (one-to-many) & (many-to-one) \\ \hline
EAST - ICDAR2013 & 3.84\% & 1.46\% \\
PIXEL - ICDAR2013 & 6.09\% & 3.29\% \\
EAST - ICDAR2015 & 1.13\% & 1.54\% \\
PIXEL - ICDAR2015 & 2.05\% & 0.35\% \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{PopEval's compatibility with benchmark datasets annotated at word-level and character-level}
Since PopEval is an approach to evaluate the matched character component between GT and detection, it is most accurate when it is used on a character-level annotated benchmark dataset. Because benchmark datasets commonly have been annotated on word-level, we reannotated the test datasets of the ICDAR2013 and ICDAR2015 competitions on character level.
OCR models were evaluated at word-level and character-level then the compatibility between the results at character and word levels was investigated.
Efficient and accurate scene text detector(EAST) and PixelLink were adopted as the detector model and ASTER and GRCNN were adopted as the recognition model. Therefore, the four detector-recognizer models were established, then evaluated on each of word-level and character-level benchmark datasets. As a F1 score, the harmonic means of recall and precision were calculated on Table \ref{table3}.
\begin{table}[!t]
\caption{Comparative analysis of PopEval F-score for word level and character level annotation of benchmark datasets.
}
\label{table3}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l c c c}
\multicolumn{4} {l} {For ICDAR2013 Test Dataset} \\\hline
& Word Level & Character Level & Diff\\ \hline
EAST - ASTER & 0.8649 & 0.8616 & 0.0033\\
PIXEL - GRCNN & 0.8562 & 0.8531 & 0.0031 \\
EAST - ASTER & 0.8540 & 0.8513 & 0.0027\\
PIXEL - GRCNN & 0.8552 & 0.8538 & 0.0014 \\ \hline\\
\multicolumn{4} {l} {For ICDAR2015 Test Dataset} \\\hline
& Word Level & Character Level & Diff\\ \hline
EAST - ASTER & 0.8017 & 0.7991 & 0.0026\\
PIXEL - GRCNN & 0.7696 & 0.7661 & 0.0035 \\
EAST - ASTER & 0.7792 & 0.7783 & 0.0009\\
PIXEL - GRCNN & 0.8003 & 0.7986 & 0.0017 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
The difference of F1 score between the evaluations on word-level and character-level datasets constantly stayed below 0.004. Considering the minor difference between the evaluations on word-level and character-level annotatated datasets, therefore, PopEval is compatible with the existing benchmark datasets which were annotated at word-level .
\subsection{Correlations Between the End-to-End Evaluation Algorithms and Manual Qualitative Evaluation.}
Since each existing evaluation algorithm has its own limitation, it is difficult to quantitatively determine which algorithm is more accurate. In this study, a qualitative evaluation was manually performed as a standard to compare the evaluation algorithms. For the qualitative evaluation, the participants used an assistant tool visualizing locations and transcriptions of GT and OCR result. Considering ``do not care'' marking of ICDAR2015 \cite{Karatzas2015ICDARReading}, the predicted polygons corresponding to the ``do not care'' markings were removed as preprocessing of the qualitative evaluation. The performance was evaluated as a character-oriented method by considering the errors of insertion, deletion, and substitution. A percentile of performance was marked as a five point scale: 0\% to 20\%, 1 point; 20\% to 40\%, 2 point; 40\% to 60\%, 3 point; 60\% to 80\%, 4 point; and 80\% to 100\%, 5 point;
To assess the correlation between evaluation algorithms and the manual qualitative evaluation, the average of three participants' scores and the results of following end-to-end evaluation algorithms were subjected to the assessment: the vocabulary-aided transcript matching with IOU over 0.5; the average precision with IOU over 0.5; the 1-NED; the PopEval using word-level dataset; and the PopEval using character-level dataset;
For OCR model subjected to the assessment, because the Pixelink obtains an object by postprocessing, there is an ambiguity in calculating the confidence rate of the object for measuring average precision(AP). Therefore, the EAST as a detection model and both of the recognition models were subjected to the assessment, then there were two OCR models to be evaluated. For benchmark dataset, the test datasets of ICDAR2013 and ICDAR2015 were subjected to the assessment.
Pearson correlation was adopted to assess linear correlations between the manual qualitative evaluation and the end-to-end evaluation algorithms. As the result of the assessment, the PopEval was found to be the most similar to the manual qualitative evaluation in all cases. For ICDAR2013, the PopEval with character-level dataset showed very high correlation as $0.946$ with the manual qualitative evaluation, nearly followed by the PopEval with word-level dataset. In Pearson correlation, coefficient above 0.8 means strong linear correlation in general. Although the correlation between PopEval and manual evaluation relatively decreased for EAST-GRCNN model with ICDAR2015, it still showed a strong correlation with the manual evaluation, followed by the other algorithms, and the traditional algorithms also showed lower correlation for EAST-GRCNN model than for the other.
This experiment showed that PopEval is the most correlated evaluation method with human qualitative evaluation among existing evaluation methods. Among traditional evaluation algorithms, the 1-NED showed the most correlation with manual qualitative evaluation.
\begin{table}[!t]
\caption{The Pearson correlation coefficients between the manual qualitative evaluation and the end-to-end evaluation algorithms for two OCR model.}
\label{table_example}
\centering
\begin{threeparttable}
\begin{tabular}{m{3.5em}m{3.7em}m{2.3em}m{4em}m{3.5em}m{4.5em}}
\multicolumn{6}{c}{For ICDAR2013 Test Dataset}\\
\hline
& \centering\arraybackslash Vocab &\centering\arraybackslash AP &\centering\arraybackslash 1-NED &\centering\arraybackslash PopEval at word &\centering\arraybackslash PopEval at character\\
\hline
EAST - ASTER &\centering\arraybackslash 0.7858 &\centering\arraybackslash 0.4595 &\centering\arraybackslash 0.8884 &\centering\arraybackslash 0.9305 &\centering\arraybackslash 0.9340 \\
EAST - GRCNN &\centering\arraybackslash 0.7910 &\centering\arraybackslash 0.4437 &\centering\arraybackslash 0.8800 &\centering\arraybackslash 0.9457 &\centering\arraybackslash 0.9461 \\
\hline
\\
\multicolumn{6}{c}{For ICDAR2015 Test Dataset}\\
\hline
& \centering\arraybackslash Vocab &\centering\arraybackslash AP &\centering\arraybackslash 1-NED &\centering\arraybackslash PopEval at word &\centering\arraybackslash PopEval at character\\
\hline
EAST - ASTER &\centering\arraybackslash 0.7776 &\centering\arraybackslash 0.5792 &\centering\arraybackslash 0.8124 &\centering\arraybackslash 0.9272 &\centering\arraybackslash 0.9213 \\
EAST - GRCNN &\centering\arraybackslash 0.6870 &\centering\arraybackslash 0.5410 &\centering\arraybackslash 0.7262 &\centering\arraybackslash 0.8221 &\centering\arraybackslash 0.8204 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tablenotes}[para,flushleft]
\footnotesize
Vocab: vocabulary-aided transcript matching with IOU over 0.5; AP: average precision; 1-NED: normalized edit distance; PopEval at word: PopEval with word level dataset; PopEval at character: PopEval with character level dataset;
\end{tablenotes}
\end{threeparttable}
\end{table}
\section{Discussion and Conclusion}
As referred by Wolf and Jolion in \cite{Wolf2006ObjectAlgorithms}, the drawback of object-oriented matching is the requirement that the bounding box wraps the actual text area tightly. For this reason, the rectangle approach scheme was only suitable for document images. In contrast to document scanning, however, extracting text from natural scene is much more difficult as the texts come with many varieties such as different orientations, varying aspect ratios or even skewed shapes. To account for these varieties, the four-vertices polygon approach was adopted as an annotation method recently. For recent interests of OCR, however, the four-vertices polygon method has the same limitation that the text area should be wrapped tightly, especially for curved texts. Therefore, a new annotation method with polygons of unlimited number of vertices is needed.
In benchmark dataset with polygon of unlimited vertices, the conventional approach is not appropriate, such as IOU, DetEval and average precision at a specific IOU. For GT of quadrilaterals, most of the relations between GT and detection were one-to-one, and the conventional criteria concepts considered only one-to-one relations ignoring the others. However, because the split and merge relation occurs more frequently with datasets with polygons of unlimited vertices such like Total-Text dataset \cite{Chng2017Total-Text:Recognition}, the concept of the object matching should be changed to reflect the actual performance.
In recognition, the vocabulary based evaluations are not adequate for wild scene text. Because the wild scene has varying texts such as unique nouns \cite{Long2018SceneEra}, dictionary based end-to-end evaluation is by its structure incapable of handling wild scene text. Even in strongly and weakly contextualised evaluations \cite{Karatzas2015ICDARReading}, the dictionary based evaluation has a limitation of not reflecting actual performance. Therefore, the current evaluations of recognition are based on edit distance and exact matching method.
When a recognition model recognizes a long string correctly, the model should be rated better than other models that recognized short strings. However, the exact matching method has its own drawback of not considering the various difficulty of each recognition because the method does not take into account partial correctness. The exact matching method causes underestimation of the model's actual performance, and the miscalculation depends on characteristics of benchmark dataset in use. Considering the above drawbacks, it is deemed desirable to approach the character-oriented evaluation rather than the object-oriented evaluation. Because the current OCR interests, such as multi-language transcripts, are more difficult to detect and recognize correctly than the previous tasks, the character-oriented evaluation is essential to evaluate the actual performance. In this aspect, the 1-NED was suggested as an end-to-end evaluation \cite{Shi2017ICDAR2017RCTW-17}. However, because it adopted IOU threshold as the criteria of object detection, this caused limitations due to threshold and ignoring split and merge relations.
Because the character-oriented evaluation requires character-level annotated dataset for accuracy evaluation, the character-level annotation should be provided as a test dataset in the future.
Correspondingly, in order to develop PopEval, we newly annotated the existing benchmark datasets at character level.
Although PopEval was devised to evaluate benchmark datasets annotated at character level, the evaluation method can be applicable to word-level benchmark dataset. The experimental results show that PopEval is compatible with word-level annotation, meaning PopEval can evaluate previous end-to-end tasks at character-oriented level without re-annotating the datasets at word-level.
The PopEval is a consistent performance evaluator for various benchmark datasets. In benchmark datasets annotated as unoriented rectangle box, the texts were not tightly wrapped by the ground truth annotations. This ambiguity necessitates conventional evaluation metrics to use variable thresholds for different benchmark datasets \cite{Wolf2006ObjectAlgorithms}. Different thresholds need to be applied to different benchmark datasets based on their characteristics, and incorrect results can be occurred in this process \cite{Long2018SceneEra}. On the other hand, PopEval does not use the threshold method, but adopts pixel recalls between a GT and each detection, and this enhances the consistency of PopEval for various benchmark datasets.
The PopEval is the most human-like end-to-end evaluation method. Although the concept of the edit distance has been an effective method for recognition evaluation, in the aspect of end-to-end evaluation, the 1-NED contains the incomplete detection evaluation criteria caused by IOU concept.
Through the correlation assessment between human qualitative evaluation and the algorithms, the PopEval showed much higher correlation with the human evaluation than the 1-NED. It means PopEval can handle the imperfection case of 1-NED, making its results more similar to those done with human evaluation.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{figure_2.png}
\caption{The representative evaluation cases showing limitation of traditional evaluation methods. The followings are evaluation results of each image; A: the IOU threshold can not catch the detected objects. 0.9090(PopEval), 0.0(1-NED), 0.0(AP); B: the merge relation occurred. 1.0(PopEval), 0.33(1-NED), 0.0(AP); }
\vspace{-0.2in}
\label{fig_sim2}
\end{figure}
The conventional evaluation methods such as DetEval, criteria of IOU and the edit distance have been adopted as the evaluation standard for a long time. Recently, it has been necessary to optimize the conceptual criteria of evaluation for new challenging tasks of OCR. In contrast to previous evaluation methods that are based on quadrilaterals, PopEval is able to handle polygons consisting of unlimited number of vertices. Above of all, the most innovative aspect is performing character-oriented evaluation with existing benchmark datasets annotated at word-level.
Further study and experiments are expected to enhance the integrity of PopEval. As with the imperfection of the existing evaluation methods, the permutation problem is a point of concern in PopEval. Although the experiment showed that the permutation problem rarely occurred, it is expected that concepts like the n-gram of BLEU can be applied to handle the sequence of characters in further study \cite{Papineni2001BLEU}. The character removal method, which provides compatibility with word-level datasets, is expected to contribute to more accurate model performance evaluation for future OCR tasks.
|
\section{INTRODUCTION}
Nowadays, as music streaming services develop, more and more independent artists get the opportunity to showcase their talents \cite{1}. Across genres, from hip-hop to classical, musicians are attracting large amount of fans who are willing to spend money on them, especially for concerts \cite{2}. With an increasing demand for concerts and ever-changing willingness-to-pay of the customers, independent musicians today face two challeges when planning for their concerts: how to set the ticket price and where to hold the concert.
As average ticket price has increased drastically for concerts in the US, many researches are done to explore the underlying patterns. Summarized by Appelman, the main determinants relating to the concerts are the performance quality, the artist's popularity, the venue, the stakeholders in the value chain and the music style \cite{3}. In addition, Krueger, an economist from Princeton University, suggestes that concert price also respond to economic forces since it is linked to labor market\cite{4}. Thus, we are going to explore the relationship between concert price and concert-specific factors and relative labor-market-specific factors in our regression model.
In terms of the location selection problem, it is crucial for musicians because there is a city can make music and foster stars. To explore the factors that contribute to this decision, we should not ignore economic factors since literature suggests that local economies has great impact on cultural industries, including the music industry \cite{5}. Furthermore, since influence people's taste can be influenced by cultural in different places\cite{6}, music style should also be considered in location selection process. Last but not least, as concert is not a necessity, if the concert price is not affordable for people in one place, that place is probably not a good choice. Thus, the effect of concert price should also be included in our model.
Therefore, our project will experiment on two tasks—— deciding price based on concert-specific and local-economic-specific factors, also identifying location for a given series of musician-related and economy-related features.
\section{The Dataset and Features}
Our datasets come from SeatGeek, Last.fm and City-Data, which are all developer-friendly open sources. As a leading mobile-focused ticket platform, SeatGeek has information about over 100k upcoming entertaining events globally. Thus, we decide to use it to gather concert-related information, namely concert popularity, concert time, locations, musician music types, concert venues and price. In addition, Last.fm is one of the largest online music platform with over 21 million active users from over 200 countries, which makes it a reliable source to derive musicians popularity from. In terms of City-Data, it collects and analyzes data from a variety of government and private sources to serve over 14 million users every month. From City-Data, we gather income per capita and population density information for every city in 2017. Based on this information, we cluster cities into 5 groups.
\par
Overall we collect information about 9,594 concerts in the US from Oct. 2018 to Dec. 2019. To train our models, we split the dataset by 0.2 factor, which means 7,675 observations in our training dataset, and 1,919 observations in our test dataset.
\par
\begin{figure}[h]
\caption{Average price distribution}
\label{nn}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Avg_price_distribution.png}
\end{figure}
\par
When it comes to data preprocessing, we go through four steps. Firstly, we handle missing values by filling the most frequent value. In addition, we create dummies for discrete variables, namely genres and concert time. Limited by the unbalanced time window of the data collecting process, we decide not to use concert month, since it is biased. In this way, we have 39 covariates with concert price as respondent variable for our regression problem, and 34 covariates with concert location as respondent variable for our classification problem. Moreover, as most continuing variables are either exponentially distributed or containing outliers, we use logarithm function to manipulate them. Last but not least, since our dataset contains features highly varying in magnitudes, units and range, we also use MinMax scaler to bring all the features to the same level of magnitude.
\section{Explanation of the Method Used}
\subsection{Regression Problem}
After finishing all the preliminary data processing, we starte our training on the regression problem by using three different models. Explicitly speaking, we try Stochastic Gradient Descent Linear Regression, and Support Vector Regression to explore the pricing pattern of music concerts in the US.
\subsubsection{SGD Linear Regression}
First and foremost, we set up a regularized linear regression with the objective to minimize the root mean squared percentage error (RMSPE), which is described as formula~\ref{eq:1} below. The reason for using RMSPE is that it describes the change in ratio: larger percentage errors, more painful. For instance, underpricing a \$30-concert by \$10 are worse than underpricing a \$100-concert by \$10.
\begin{equation} \label{eq:1}
minimize \quad \sqrt{\frac{1}{M}\sum_{i=1}^M (\frac{(y^{(i)}-f(x)^{(i)})}{y^{(i)}})^2} + \lambda(w)
\end{equation}
\par
As for hyperparameter tuning, we use Random Search instead of Grid Search because it is more efficient in terms of runtime. We test both L1 and L2 regularization and the result demonstrates that L1 is better. The reason behind is probably that there is collinearity among the features. Furthermore, we also tune the generalization term by searching a list of $\alpha$. Last but not least, to reduce miss\-specification errors, we also add a list of polynomial degrees in the searching model.
\par
After Randomized Search, we determine that we should choose l2 penalty, polynomial with zero degree, regularization term $\alpha = 0.1$ as our model.
\subsubsection{Support Vector Regression}
Support Vector Machines are supervised learning models, which can be used to solve both regression and classification problems. For this problem, we are using the formula below as a non-linear model to solve the concert pricing problem. Here, $\xi_i$ are the flexible slack variables, and C is the regularization parameter.
$$minimize\quad \frac{1}{2}\left\Vert{w}\right\Vert^2 + \frac{1}{C}\sum_{1 = 1}^M(\xi_i + \xi_i^\prime)$$
$$s.t.\quad y^{(i)} - (\langle w \,,\phi(x^{(i)})\rangle + w_0) \leq \varepsilon + \xi_i$$
$$s.t.\quad y^{(i)} + (\langle w \,,\phi(x^{(i)})\rangle + w_0) \leq \varepsilon + \xi_i^\prime$$
$$\xi_i, \xi_i^\prime \geq 0$$
For the sake of consistency, RMSPE is still used as the loss function. Since radial basis function (RBF) is recommended by some literature, we use RBF to conduct kernel trick.
$$\vec{w}\cdot \phi(\vec{x}) = \sum_{i}\alpha_{i}y_{i}\exp(-\gamma\left\Vert{\vec{x}_{i} - \vec{x}_{j}}\right\Vert^2)$$
The main hyper-parameters for SVM Regression are the contribution of the i-th training data point to the final solution w, RBF coefficient $\gamma$, and the margin of error tolerance $\varepsilon$. In order to avoid over-fitting, we choose small C to lower the model complexity and small $\gamma$ to restrict the region of influence of a single SV. Furthermore, we set a list of large $\varepsilon$ to include more observations in the tolerance range.
After applying Grid Search, the model is specified as follows:
$C = 0.5$,
$\gamma = 0.01$,
$\varepsilon = 2$
\subsection{Classification Problem}
After solving the regression problem, we try to identify locations for different concerts. As stated before, we cluster five classes for cities by k-means, based on their income per capita and population density. Therefore, our problem is actually building a model to identify which class of cities a concert should take place. Nevertheless, since the weight of different class are not the same, oversampling is used to balance the training dataset. Probing into this problem, we test four models, which are SGD Logistic regression, Support Vector Classifier, Neural Networks and Random Forest.
\subsubsection{Logistic Regression}
First, we start with logistic regression since it is the most basic and simple method in classification problems. Our formula is as follows, where C is the inverse of regularization strength.
$$f(x) = \frac{1}{1+e^{-(w_0 + w^T X)}} + \frac{1}{C}\left\Vert{w}\right\Vert$$
As 26 of our independent variables are dummies, there is a high potential that we can compress the information into a lower-dimension matrix. Thus, we add Principal Component Analysis (PCA) in the pipeline to test if by reducing the dimension of vector space, the benefit of lowering variance could overweight the loss of information. Furthermore, with five classes in the model, we test both one-versus-rest loss fit and multinomial loss fit for each label. Moreover, to reduce over-fitting errors, a regularization term is added.
After tuning all the hyperparameters by using Randomized Search, we decide to set $C$ to be 0.1 and to use L1 penalty. This following function does not include the PCA process because the searching result indicates that the benefit of reducing dimension is not satisfying.
\subsubsection{Support Vector Machines}
Other than logistic regression, we implement a SVM Classifier with RBF kernel \cite{7} to solve this problem. Similar to Support Vector Regression, regularization parameter C, RBF coefficient $\gamma$ are crucial hyperparameters for us to tune. To avoid over-fitting problems, we constrain C and $\gamma$ in a small range to limit the model complexity. After tuning hyper parameters by applying Randomized Search, we decide to set $C$ to be 10 and $\gamma $ to be 0.01. The referred function is as follows.
$$ f(x) = \sum_{i = 1}^{M}y^{(i)}\alpha^{(i)}*\langle\phi(x^{(i)})\,,\phi(x^{(i)})\rangle_\mathcal{H} + w_0 $$
From here we can just optimize this function without intensive calculation \cite{c8}.
$$maximize \quad\sum_{i = 1}^{M}\alpha_i - \frac{1}{2}\sum_{i,j = 1}^{M}y^{(i)}y^{(j)}\alpha^{(i)}\alpha^{(j)}\kappa(x^{(i)},x^{(j)})$$
$$subject\: to \quad \sum_{i = 1}^{N} y_i\alpha_i = 0$$
$$where \quad 0 \leq \alpha_i \leq \frac{1}{\lambda}$$
\subsubsection{Neural Networks}
Since we want a better result, we try to use neural network to improve the accuracy. Since by neural network method, we can tune more parameters, and also by using more layers and layer with more nodes we can filter features thereby generate a better result. However, if not careful enough, there is a big chance for us to over-fit our data, and we actually encounter with this problem. We set the baseline to be a model without any regularization, setting epoch = 1000. This baseline that contains four layers is fully over-fitting: three input layers with 64, 16, and 16 neurons and one output layer with 5 neurons. Except for the last layer, we choose ReLU function since it generally can make the whole neural network system more stable. Since we are solving multiclass classification problem, we use Softmax as our last activation function. To avoid over-fitting and get the best model, we use Keras together with grid search, add more restrictions and dropouts, also decrease the number of layers and neurons to restrain the model.
\subsubsection{Random Forest}
Random Forest is also a good method to conduct a trial, since it is considered as a very handy and easy algorithm, and it’s default hyperparameters often produce a good prediction result. In addition, since it is a bagging method, specifically it contains several small decision trees, we think it should be robust and accurate enough. Because of these convenience, we just build a simple random forest classifier using sklearn, and tune mainly three parameters: one is number of trees, one is the minimum number of samples required to be at a leaf node and the other one is the maximum depth of the tree. Here we use random search, randomly picking number from proper range and see which one gives the best result.
\section{Results}
To evaluate the foregoing models, we set various benchmarks. Explicitly speaking, the RMSPE of the constant model of mean value is used as the measuring standard for the regression problem. Moreover, for the classification problem, the accuracy of a random guess is used as the lower bound and the accuracy of extremely over-fitting model is used as the upper bound. The testing results reveals that the constant model performs the best for the regression problem and the random forest performs the best for the classification problem.
\par
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{Regression Results}
\label{rr}
\label{result1}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{@{}llcc@{}}
\toprule
& Benchmark & \multicolumn{1}{l}{SGD Linear Regression} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{Support Vector Regression} \\ \midrule
Traning RMSPE & 0.131 & 0.131 & 0.156 \\
Testing RMSPE & 0.133 & 0.132 & 0.161 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}%
}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Probing into the regression result, the linear model and SVM regression do not improve the benchmark value significantly. As shown in Table \ref{rr}, baseline indicates that RMSPE is 0.133, SGD Linear Regression has RMSPE 0.132, and SVM yields 0.161. We can see that constant function does the best job and SVM does worst. There are probably two reasons can be identified. First and foremost, since our benchmark result gives us a constant function, so it is possible that only by using constant function we can fit our data with enough complexity and lower variance. When applying SGD linear regression model we are getting similar result: it learns polynomial degree 0 as the best fit. Therefore, by increasing model complexity, in other words, using SVM regression, the result is getting worse. Probably because we are over-fitting and increase the variance, but bias doesn’t change significantly. Second of all, there might be no strong relationship between our covariates and respondent variable, or we do not tune our parameters perfectly, which leads to worse result. We could discuss further if time is permitted.
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{Classification Results}
\label{cr}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{lcccc}
\toprule
& \multicolumn{1}{l}{Logistic Regression} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{SVM} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{Neural Networks} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{Random Forest} \\ \midrule
Benchmark (Low) & 20\% & 20\% & 20\% & 20\% \\
Benchmark (High) & 48.8\% & 49.3\% & 73.4\% & 100\% \\
Training Accuracy & 45.2\% & 45.8\% & 57.0\% & 52.2\% \\
Testing Accuracy & 48.3\% & 49.7\% & 52.1\% & 63.1\% \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}%
}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Despite of the constant pattern in concert pricing, our classification results demonstrates that concert location is significantly influenced by cities’ economic classes. Based on income per capita and population density, cities are clustered into five classes.
With five classes in total, we set our accuracy lower bound to be 20\%, namely the random guess accuracy. As shown in Table \ref{cr}, our best models improve the testing accuracy by 310\%, which verifies the existence of location-selection patterns for concerts in the U.S. Furthermore, comparing with the upper bound of each model, our testing result reaches the 70\% capacity on average. Among all the models, Neural Networks and Random Forest perform better.
\begin{figure}[h]
\caption{Neural Network Diagram}
\label{nn}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Network_Diagram.jpeg}
\end{figure}
\par
Our baseline here, without regularizing anything, we obtain 73.4\% accuracy, and the best model we test for neural networks is presented in Figure \ref{nn}. We can see that here we have totally four layers with 64, 16, 16, and 5 neurons on each layer, respectively.
\begin{figure}[h]
\caption{Accuracy Training Process}
\label{at}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{accuracy.png}
\end{figure}
\par
By setting the activation as ReLU for the first three layers and softmax for the last layer, the training and testing accuracy changes as in Figure \ref{at}. As epochs increases, the accuracy growth for testing set slows down. Finally, we obtain the result with 52.3\% accuracy within 200 epochs.
In addition, Random Forest also provides us a good result in classification. For this model, we set the higher bound to be 100\% with the minimum number of samples equals 1. Namely, this is the extremely over-fitting accuracy. By applying Randomized Search, the best parameters for our model are 105, 47 and 10 for number of trees, max depth, and minimum number of samples respectively. The predicting accuracy of this model is 63.1\% and the confusion matrices are presented in Figure \ref{pncm}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\caption{Plain and Normalized Confusion Matrix}
\label{pncm}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Confusion0.png}
\end{figure}
\par
Last but not least, logistic regression and SVM classification does not perform as well as the others because of the model limitation. The testing results of these models are around 45.5\%, which is 92.9\% of the higher bound, namely the result of over-fitting training data.
\section{Conclusion and Future Work}
In conclusion, our work contribute to the concert planning process for independent musicians from pricing and location selection perspectives.
To begin with, we discover that concert prices always fluctuate in a certain range regardless of different musician-specific and local-economy-specific features. As suggested by other researchers, concert is an "experience good", which people need to attend to know the utility \cite{8}. Since the price is also one of the experiment factor, musicians usually prefer not to charge an unaffordable price to differentiate themselves \cite{9}. Therefore, it is understandable that a constant function with $y = 160.774$ generates the lowest average absolute error.
\par
When it comes to concert location classification, random forest and neural network yield best performance. It is as expected that the bagging method and method involve deep learning have higher accuracy. We improve the random result (baseline = 20\%) by almost triples, 63\% \& 53.5\% respectively, which is already a huge jump. We are now be able to help musicians plan their concert location to proper city class with 60\% accuracy, so they could eventually meet customers expectation in some ways.
\par
Looking forward, we can improve our model by adding more observations and more features. Firstly, limited by our data source, we only know the concerts that are going to happen soon, but we have little information about historical concerts. After gathering a more balanced data set, we could explore the pattern of concert time and improve our current models with lower bias. Furthermore, we could also add more musician-charisma-related and the concert-profit-related features, since the profitability pattern of concerts is not discussed in this paper.
\clearpage
\addtolength{\textheight}{-12cm}
\onecolumn
\pagestyle{empty}
\section{APPENDIX}
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{Variable Specification}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{@{}ll@{}}
\toprule
Feature & Data Description \\ \midrule
average price & The respondent variable in price prediction process. \\
latitude & Latitude of concert city \\
longitude & Longitude of concert city \\
concert\_popularity & A numerical representation of popularity based on ticket sales from SeatGeek \\
playcount & How many times this musician's song have been displayed \\
Population\_Estimate\_2017 & 2017 American city population. A feature to determine city class. \\
market\_heat & How many concerts will be held in this city. \\
Estimated\_per\_capita\_income & Income per capita. A feature to determine price. \\
Population\_density & Population density of a city. A feature to determine city class. \\
Class & After depending on all the city features, the city class be clustered. The respondent variable in classification problem \\
alternative & Dummy. Music Type. \\
blues & Dummy. Music Type. \\
classic-rock & Dummy. Music Type. \\
classical & Dummy. Music Type. \\
country & Dummy. Music Type. \\
electronic & Dummy. Music Type. \\
folk & Dummy. Music Type. \\
hip-hop & Dummy. Music Type. \\
hard-rock & Dummy. Music Type. \\
indie & Dummy. Music Type. \\
jazz & Dummy. Music Type. \\
latin & Dummy. Music Type. \\
punk & Dummy. Music Type. \\
pop & Dummy. Music Type. \\
rap & Dummy. Music Type. \\
reggae & Dummy. Music Type. \\
rnb & Dummy. Music Type. \\
rock & Dummy. Music Type. \\
soul & Dummy. Music Type. \\
techno & Dummy. Music Type. \\
genres\_num & How many music types a musician possess. \\
venue\_concert\_count & How many concerts a venue support. \\
venue\_type & Large, medium or small venue. \\
Sun & Dummy. Concert performance day. \\
Mon & Dummy. Concert performance day. \\
Tue & Dummy. Concert performance day. \\
Wed & Dummy. Concert performance day. \\
Thu & Dummy. Concert performance day. \\
Fri & Dummy. Concert performance day. \\
Sat & Concert performance day. \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}%
}
\end{table}
\clearpage
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{Data Description Without Dummies}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{lrrrrrrrr}
\toprule
{} & count & mean & std & min & 25\% & 50\% & 75\% & max \\
\midrule
average\_price & 7472.0 & 5.090 & 0.655 & 2.565 & 4.673 & 4.997 & 5.438 & 9.418 \\
latitude & 7472.0 & 38.176 & 5.295 & 10.000 & 34.000 & 39.000 & 42.000 & 61.000 \\
longitude & 7472.0 & -94.828 & 17.695 & -158.000 & -115.000 & -89.000 & -80.000 & 9.000 \\
concert\_popularity & 7472.0 & 0.511 & 0.090 & 0.000 & 0.440 & 0.490 & 0.550 & 0.880 \\
playcount & 7472.0 & 15.096 & 1.666 & 9.536 & 13.991 & 15.079 & 16.324 & 19.428 \\
Population\_Estimate\_2017 & 7472.0 & 974887.883 & 1607633.700 & 47929.000 & 187347.000 & 486290.000 & 879170.000 & 8622698.000 \\
market\_heat & 7472.0 & 207.377 & 172.505 & 1.000 & 57.000 & 155.000 & 346.000 & 568.000 \\
Estimated\_per\_capita\_income & 7472.0 & 27178.475 & 7233.040 & 14221.000 & 22180.750 & 26159.000 & 30136.600 & 51686.000 \\
Population\_density & 7472.0 & 5552.186 & 5309.790 & 668.000 & 2594.000 & 3574.000 & 6237.000 & 27714.000 \\
Class & 7472.0 & 1.804 & 1.291 & 0.000 & 1.000 & 2.000 & 2.000 & 4.000 \\
genres\_num & 7472.0 & 0.930 & 0.425 & 0.000 & 0.693 & 1.099 & 1.386 & 1.792 \\
venue\_concert\_count & 7472.0 & 2.498 & 0.902 & 0.000 & 1.946 & 2.639 & 3.135 & 3.970 \\
venue\_type & 7472.0 & 1.943 & 0.861 & 1.000 & 1.000 & 2.000 & 3.000 & 3.000 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}%
}
\end{table}
\clearpage
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro}
High resolution observations of protoplanetary disks in the past decade have found diverse substructures in the disks, including spiral arms (e.g., SAO 206462, \citealp{mu2012}; MWC758, \citealp{gr2013}; HD 100453, \citealp{wa2015}), large-scale asymmetries (e.g., HD 142527, \citealp{ca2013}; Oph IRS 48, \citealp{van2013}), and gaps or rings (e.g., HL Tau, \citealp{al2015}, TW Hya: \citealp{an2016}; HD 163296, \citealp{is2016}; HD 169142, \citealp{fe2017}; AA Tau, \citealp{lo2017}; Elias 2-24, \citealp{ci2017}; AS 209, \citealp{fe2018}; GY 91, \citealp{se2018}; V1094 Scorpii, \citealp{va2018}; HD 143005, \citealp{be2018}; HD 92945, \citealp{ma2019}). Compared to other substructures in the disks, gaps or rings are nearly axisymmetric and concentric.
While these substructures appear common in protoplanetary disks, their physical origin has remained uncertain. For gaps or rings, in particular, a number of scenarios have been proposed as their formation mechanisms. For example, fast pebble growth near the snowlines of abundant volatile molecules was proposed by \citet {zh2015} to explain the observed gaps in HL Tau. However, the presence of eccentric rings \citep{do2018a} and recent observations that gap locations do not correspond to the snowlines of the most common species in many proptoplanetary disks \citep{lo2018,hu2018,van2019} suggest that the snowline scenario is unlikely as a common origin of multiple gaps. Other potential mechanisms include secular gravitational instability \citep{ti2016}, toroidal vortices induced by large-scale instability \citep{lb2016}, self-induced dust vortex \citep{go2015}, disk winds \citep{su2017}, zonal flow \citep{fl2015}, and sintering-induced piling-up of dust aggregates \citep{ok2016}. Although these mechanisms successfully produce rings at the locations close the observed ring radii in specific systems, it is unclear whether they can be applicable to all observed protoplanetary disks with gaps \citep{hu2018}.
Perhaps, the most natural and favored mechanism for gaps/rings may be gravitational interactions between the disk and its embedded planet(s) \citep{lp1979}. Density wakes launched by the gravity of the planet can transfer angular momentum from the regions inside the planet orbit to the outside, making the gas in the disk pushed away from the vicinity of the planet \citep{gt1980,ra2002}. In fact, \citet{ba2018} showed that the disk-planet interactions with differing parameters such as viscosity and dust distribution, etc.\ can create diverse morphology that includes a full disk, a transition disk with an inner cavity, a disk with a single gap and a central continuum peak and a disk with multiple gap and a central continuum peak. Even a single planet can forms multiple gaps in a low-viscosity disk \citep{do2017,ba2017}, because secondary and tertiary spiral arms can also grow enough to induce shocks across which gas loses its angular momentum (see also \citealp{bz2018,mr2019}).
The shape of a gap produced by a planet is determined by the balance between the tidal torque density and the viscous stress. In a disk with scale height $h_p$ and surface density $\Sigma$ around a protostar with mass $M_*$, the tidal torque by a planet with mass $M_p$ at orbital radius $r_p$ is proportional to $q^2 (h_p/r_p)^{-3}\Sigma$ with $q\equiv M_p/M_*$ (e.g., \citealt{gt1980,pap84}), while the viscous stress is proportional to the viscous parameters $\alpha$ of \citet{ss1973}. It was shown that the gap depth in the surface density can be characterized by a single dimensionless parameter $K\equiv q^2(h_p/r_p)^{-5}\alpha^{-1}$ \citep{dm2013,fu2014,ka2015a}, while the gap width can be described solely by $K'\equiv K(h_p/r_p)^2$ \citep{ka2016,ka2017}. These relations were applied to constrain the masses of embedded planets in several systems such as HL Tau \citep{ka2015b,ka2016}, HD169142 \citep{ka2015b}, and HD 97048 \citep{gi2016}.
However, applying these relations for the gap depth and width to observations requires a strict assumption that the distribution of dust particles is well-matched with that of gas \citep{ka2015b}. In reality, the conversion of observed dust continuum to the gas surface density is subject to many uncertainties surrounding dust-to-gas ratio, varying dust properties, and chemical effects \citep{be2013,mi2017}. To directly measure the gap properties in dust continuum profiles, \citet{zha2018} ran numerical simulations by including dust particles and obtained the empirical relations for the gap depth and width in terms of the various dimensionless parameters.
But, they were still unable to incorporate dust evolution, feedback to the gas, and the potential effects of streaming instability in the simulations
that may affect the gap properties significantly.
One way to circumvent the uncertainties in the gap parameters measured from the gas surface density profiles is to use the rotational velocity obtained from gas tracers such as CO that directly probes the kinematic changes in the gas disk induced by an embedded planet. \citet{pe2015,pe2018} showed that kinematic features including circumplanetary disk and large-scale velocity perturbations induced by a Jupiter-mass planet are observable with the ALMA.
In fact, \citet{te2018} and \citet{ke2019} recently compared the observed rotational velocity profiles with the numerical simulations to infer the masses of planets in HD 163296 and PDS 70, respectively. \citet{zha2018} ran extensive numerical simulations to find an empirical relation for the amplitude of the perturbed rotational velocity as a combination of $q$, $h_p/r_p$ and $\alpha$. Since the simulations were run up to $10^3$ planetary orbits, however, it is uncertain whether the gaps in their models reach a steady state, as they noted (see also \citealt{ro2016}). In addition, they found that the width of velocity gaps is roughly 4.4 times $h_p$, insensitive to $q$ and $\alpha$, which needs to be checked in long-term evolution.
In this paper, we run hydrodynamic simulations of protoplanetary disks to systematically investigate the gap properties in not only gas surface density profile but also rotational velocity profile induced by an embedded planet. We vary three parameters, $q$, $h_p/r_p$, and $\alpha$, in a wide range, and explore how the gap depth and width depend on these parameters. Our work extends \citet{zha2018} by exploring a wider range of the parameter space and by running the simulations 10 times longer than their models in order to achieve quasi-steady configurations of the gaps. We also introduce a new definition of the gap width in the surface density and rotational velocity profiles and provide the physical explanation for its dependence on the planet mass.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{sec:Method}, we describe our simulation setups and model parameters. In Section \ref{sec:Results}, we present the gap properties in the surface density rotation velocity profiles. We discuss our results in Sections \ref{sec:Discussion} and give our conclusions in \ref{sec:Summary}.
\section{Numerical Method} \label{sec:Method}
We consider a protoplanetary disk rotating at angular frequency $\Omega$ about a central protostar with mass $M_*$. The disk is assumed to be razor-thin along the vertical direction, unmagnetized, and non-self-gravitating. To
study gravitational interactions between the disk with an embedded planet with mass $M_p$, we run two-dimensional (2D) hydrodynamic simulations using FARGO3D in cylindrical polar coordinates $(r, \phi)$ \citep{m2000,bm2016}. We do not consider the effects of dust and planet migration in the present work. The basic equations we solve are
\begin{gather}
\frac{\partial\Sigma}{\partial t}+\nabla\cdot (\Sigma \mathbf{v}) =0, \label{eq:con}\\
\left(\frac{\partial \mathbf{v}}{\partial t}+\mathbf{v}\cdot\nabla \mathbf{v}\right)=- \frac{1}{\Sigma} \nabla P -\nabla(\Phi_{*}+\Phi_p)-\frac{1}{\Sigma}\nabla\cdot\boldsymbol{\Pi},
\label{eq:mom}
\end{gather}
where $\Sigma$ is the surface density, $\mathbf{v}$ is the velocity, and $P \equiv c_s^2\Sigma$ is a vertically integrated gas pressure with $c_s$ being the isothermal speed of sound. The pressure scale height of the disk is given by $h=c_s/\Omega_K$, where $\Omega_K=(GM_*/r^3)^{1/2}$ is the angular velocity of Keplerian rotation. In Equation \eqref{eq:mom}, $\Phi_*$ and $\Phi_p$ are the gravitational potentials of the central star and the planet located at $\mathbf{r}=\mathbf{r}_p$, respectively, given by
\begin{gather}
\Phi_*=-\frac{GM_*}{|\mathbf{r}|}\quad \text{and}\quad
\Phi_p=-\frac{GM_p}{\sqrt{|\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r}_p|^2+s^2}},
\end{gather}
where $s$ is the softening length taken equal to $0.6h_p$ for $h_p\equiv h(r_p)$. The planet is set to follow the Keplerian rotation with angular velocity $\Omega_{p}\equiv\Omega_K(r_p)$, without undergoing migration.
We ignore the indirect term arising from the motions of the central star relative to the center of mass of the whole system, which are shown to make insignificant differences on the gap properties (Appendix \ref{ap:indirect}; see also \citealp{ka2017})
The last term in Equation \eqref{eq:mom} represents the viscous stress tensor
\begin{equation}
\boldsymbol{\Pi}=\nu\Sigma\left[\nabla\mathbf{v}+(\nabla\mathbf{v})^{\text{T}}-\frac{2}{3}(\nabla\cdot\mathbf{v})\pmb{\mathbb{I}}\right],
\end{equation}
where $\nu$ is the kinematic viscosity and $\pmb{\mathbb{I}}$ is the identity matrix. We adopt an $\alpha$-disk model of \citet{ss1973} with $\nu = \alpha c_s^2/\Omega$, and vary $\alpha$ to control the strength of the viscosity.
The density distribution of our initial disk follows a power-law with an exponential cutoff:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:sigmao}
\Sigma_0(r)=\Sigma_0(r_p)\left(\frac{r}{r_p}\right)^{-m}
\exp\left[1-\left(\frac{r}{r_p}\right)^{2-m}\right],
\end{equation}
corresponding to a quasi-equilibrium solution of viscous disks (e.g., \citealt{lp1974}).
The temperature profile $T(r)$ is set to a simple power-law
\begin{equation}
T_0(r)=T_0(r_p)\left(\frac{r}{r_p}\right)^{-n},
\label{eq:eqT}
\end{equation}
which remains unchanged over time in our simulations.
In this paper, we adopt $m=1$ and $n=0.5$.
These radial density and temperature distributions describe the observed protoplanetary disks reasonably well (e.g., \citealt{an2009,an2010}).
We vary $T_0(r_p)$ or $h_p$ to explore disks with differing temperature. In what follows, the non-uniform disks refer to a power-law
disk with an exponential cutoff, in contrast to uniform disks with constant density and temperature (e.g., \citealt{ka2015a,ka2016,ka2017}).
The initial rotational velocity $v_{\phi,0}$ of gas in equilibrium is very close to the Keplerian velocity (within $\sim 6\%$ of $r\Omega_K$).
Our simulation domain extends from $r=0.3r_p$ to $r=3r_p$ in radius and from 0 to $2\pi$ in azimuth. For the boundary conditions, we adopt the wave-damping zones at $0.3r_p\leq r\leq 0.36r_p$ and $2.7r_p\leq r \leq 3.0r_p $, which is known to prevent wave reflections at the boundaries \citep{de2006}.
For simulations presented in this paper, we set up a non-uniform, logarithmically spaced cylindrical grid with $N_r=512$ radial zones and $N_\phi=$1396 azimuthal zones. This makes the zones almost square-shaped throughout the grid (i.e., $r\Delta\phi/\Delta r\approx 1$). The grid spacing adopted here results from a compromise between computational cost and accuracy. By running simulations with various resolution, we checked that the results with $N_r=512$ agrees with those $N_r=1024$ within $\sim 4\%$.
The fundamental dimensional units for length, time, and mass are the orbital radius $r_p$ and orbital time $t_\text{orb}=2\pi/\Omega_{p}$ of the planet, and the mass of the central star $M_*$. Then, Equations \eqref{eq:con} and \eqref{eq:mom} in dimensionless form depend only on three dimensionless parameters: the mass ratio $q\equiv M_p/M_*$, the disk aspect ratio $h_p/r_p$, and the viscosity parameter $\alpha$. We run a total of 72 simulations that differ in these three parameters. The planet mass is varied in the range between $3\times10^{-5}$ and $3\times10^{-3}$ relative to $M_*$, or between $0.3$ and $9.0$ relative to the thermal mass $M\textsubscript{th}\equiv M_*(h_p/r_p)^{3}$ (e.g., \citealt{gr2001}). We take $0.03, 0.05$, $0.07, 0.10, 0.12$ for $h_p/r_p$, and $3\times10^{-4}, 6\times10^{-4}, 1\times10^{-3}, 3\times10^{-3}$ for the $\alpha$ parameter. All simulations are run up to $t=(10^4+10^2){t_{\rm orb}}$. Table \ref{tb:param} in Appendix \ref{ap:tbl} lists the model parameters and the measured gap properties.
\section{Simulation Results} \label{sec:Results}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{gap_param_ex.pdf}
\vspace*{-7.5mm}
\caption{Distributions of the perturbed density and azimuthal velocity for a model with $q=3\times10^{-4}$ (or $M_p/M_\text{th}=0.87$), $h_p/r_p=0.07$, and $\alpha=1\times 10^{-3}$. (a) Time-averaged distribution of $\Sigma/\Sigma_0$ in the $r$--$\phi$ plane, with the planet location is marked by a dark star symbol at $r=r_p$ and $\phi=0$. (b) Radial distribution of the azimuthally averaged quantity $\langle\Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle$, with $\Delta_\Sigma$ and $\delta_\Sigma$ illustrating the definitions of \citet{ka2015a,ka2016} for the gap width and depth, respectively. (c) Radiation distribution of the logarithmic gradient of $\langle\Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle$. The new gap width $W_\Sigma$ defined as the distance between the extrema of $d\ln\langle\Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle/d\ln r$ is indicated. (d) Radial distribution of the perturbed rotational velocity. The dimensionless amplitude $\delta_V$ of the perturbed velocity and the width $W_V$ of the perturbed regions are indicated.}
\label{fig:Surfsnap}
\end{figure*}
An introduction of the gravitational potential of a planet excites spiral waves in the disk that eventually develop into shocks. For a low-mass planet, perturbations are weak so that they propagate radially away from the planet before turning to shocks \citep{gr2001}. When a planet is massive, however, the shock formation occurs almost instantly near the planet location. Almost inviscid disks with small $\alpha \,(\lesssim 10^{-4})$ may produce up to three spiral shocks, while viscious disks with large $\alpha$ considered here form only one spiral shock \citep{ba2017}. When the gas inside (outside) the orbit of the planet experiences a spiral shock, it loses (gains) angular momentum and thus moves inward (outward) in the radial direction, producing a gap in the surface density profile \citep{ra2002}. Similarly, the disk rotation curve, which is initially close to Keplerian, is also perturbed to become sub- and super-Keplerian in the regions with $r<r_p$ and $r>r_p$, respectively.
The disk reaches a quasi-steady equilibrium by $t\sim10^4t_\text{orb}$ (see Appendix \ref{ap:time}). To quantify the gap properties, we select 11 snapshots from $t=10^4{t_{\rm orb}}$ to $t=(10^4+10^2){t_{\rm orb}}$, separated by a time interval $\Delta t=10{t_{\rm orb}}$, and take their time averages. We then remove the disk material, within the distance $d=2 \max\left[h_p,(M_p/3M_*)^{1/3}\right]$ from the planet, that belongs to the spiral shocks attached to the planet rather than the gap \citep{fu2014}. Figure \ref{fig:Surfsnap} plots the time-averaged distribution of the normalized surface density $\Sigma/\Sigma_0$ in the $r$--$\phi$ plane as well as the radial distributions of $\langle\Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle$, $d\ln\langle\Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle/d\ln r$, and $\langle\delta \tilde{v}_{\phi}\rangle = \langle (v_{\phi}-v_{\phi,0})/v_{\phi,0} \rangle$ for a model with $q=3\times 10^{-4}$ (or $M_p/M_\text{th}=0.87$), $h_p/r_p=0.07$, and $\alpha=1\times 10^{-3}$. Here, the angle brackets $\langle \,\rangle$ denote the temporal and azimuthal average. In what follows, we first present the dependence on the input parameters of the gap depth and width in the $\langle \Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle$ distributions. We then discuss the depth and width in the perturbed velocity profiles.
\subsection{Gap in Surface Density} \label{ssec:surf}
Here we focus on the gap depth ($\delta_{\Sigma}$) and the width ($\Delta_{\Sigma}$) in the surface density profiles and explore their dependence on the combinations of the dimensionless parameters $q$, $h_p/r_p$, and $\alpha$.
\subsubsection{Gap Depth} \label{sssec:sdd}
\citet{ka2015a} defined the gap depth in the surface density as $\delta_\Sigma\equiv \min \langle\Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle$, as illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:Surfsnap}(b).
For disks with uniform density and temperature distributions, they showed that $\delta_{\Sigma}$ depends on $q$, $h_p/r_p$, and $\alpha$ through a single dimensionless parameter $K\equiv q^2(h_p/r_p)^{-5}\alpha^{-1}$.
From the requirement that the planet-induced gravitational torque balances the viscous torque in the linear analysis, \citet{ka2015a} derived the relation
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Surf_depth_K15}
\delta_{\Sigma}^{\rm K15} \approx\frac{1}{1+0.040K},
\end{equation}
consistent with the results of their numerical simulations for uniform disks.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{smin.pdf}
\caption{Gap depth $\delta_{\Sigma}$, based on the definition of \citet{ka2015a}, measured from our simulations as a function of $K\equiv q^2(h_p/r_p)^{-5}\alpha^{-1}$. The solid line is our fit (Equation \eqref{eq:Surf_depth}) for $K<10^3$ to the numerical results for non-uniform disks, while the dotted line draws Equation \eqref{eq:Surf_depth_K15} for uniform disks.}
\label{fig:smin}
\end{figure}
To explore how the gap depth depend on $K$ in our non-uniform disks, Figure \ref{fig:smin} plots the measured $\delta_{\Sigma}$ as a function of $K$ for all models. We fit the data using a functional form same as in Equation \eqref{eq:Surf_depth_K15} but with a different coefficient. The solid line draws our least-square fit
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Surf_depth}
\delta_{\Sigma}=\frac{1}{1+0.046K},
\end{equation}
to the numerical results for $K<10^3$.\footnote{Note that $\delta_\Sigma$ actually measures the height of a density floor from the bottom in the $\langle \Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle$ distribution. The \emph{real} gap depth relative to the unperturbed value is $1-\delta_{\Sigma} = 0.046K/(1+0.046K)$.} Equation \eqref{eq:Surf_depth} is almost equal to Equation \eqref{eq:Surf_depth_K15}, shown as the dotted line, and also to those reported by \citet{dm2013}, \citet{ka2017}, and \citet{df2017}. This suggests that the radial stratification in the initial disks does not affect the gap depth much.
The small differences between Equation \eqref{eq:Surf_depth} (or Equation \eqref{eq:Surf_depth_K15}) and the numerical results at $K\gtrsim 10^3$ for $h_p/r_p\lesssim0.07$ are likely due to the fact that gas responses to such massive planets are highly nonlinear, so that the linear theory of \citet{ka2015a} is not applicable (see also \citealt{ka2015a,ka2017,df2017}).
\subsubsection{Gap Width} \label{sssec:sdw}
\citet{ka2016} defined the gap width $\Delta_\Sigma$ as the radial distance between two points where $\langle \Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle=k$, with the threshold value of $k=1/2$, and showed empirically that $\Delta_\Sigma$ depends on a single dimensionless parameter ${K^\prime} \equiv (h_p/r_p)^2K = q^2 (h_p/r_p)^{-3}\alpha^{-1}$ as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Surf_width_K15}
\frac{\Delta_\Sigma^{\rm K16}}{r_p} = 0.41 {K^\prime}^{1/4},
\end{equation}
for uniform disks (see also \citealt{ka2017}). Figure \ref{fig:swidth} plots $\Delta_\Sigma$ measured in our models with non-uniform disks as a functions of ${K^\prime}$. To fit the data, we use a functional form same as in Equation \eqref{eq:Surf_width_K15} with power index $1/4$ fixed, and allow a proportional coefficient to vary. The solid line draws our least-square fit
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Surf_width}
\frac{\Delta_\Sigma}{r_p}= 0.56 {K^\prime}^{1/4},
\end{equation}
which overall gives a wider gap, by about a factor of 1.4, than Equation \eqref{eq:Surf_width_K15} plotted as the dotted line. The discrepancies between $\Delta_\Sigma^{\rm K16}$ and $\Delta_\Sigma$ may arise from the differences in the initial distributions of the disk surface density and temperature.
Figure \ref{fig:swidth} shows that Equation \eqref{eq:Surf_width} overestimates the width at small $K'$. This is expected since the gap width tends to decreases drastically as $\min\langle \Sigma /\Sigma_0\rangle $ approaches the threshold value $1/2$. In fact, the definition of \citet{ka2016} for the gap width cannot be applicable for shallow gaps with $\min\langle\Sigma /\Sigma_0\rangle > 1/2$. Increasing the threshold may alleviate this problem to some extent, but at the expense of increasing the gap width.\footnote{For the threshold density $\langle\Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle=k$, our numerical results for non-uniform disks are fitted by $\Delta_\Sigma^k/r_p =(0.76k+0.18){K^\prime}^{1/4}$, which can be compared with $ \Delta_\Sigma^{{\rm K16},k}/r_p =(0.50k+0.16){K^\prime}^{1/4}$ of \citet{ka2017} for uniform disks.} Still, using a fixed threshold density in measuring a gap width is somewhat arbitrary and cannot be applied to all possible gaps.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{swidth.pdf}
\caption{Gap width $\Delta_{\Sigma}$, defined as the radial distance between two points with $\langle\Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle=1/2$, as a function of $K'\equiv q^2(h_p/R_p)^{-3}\alpha^{-1}$. The dotted and solid lines draw Equations \eqref{eq:Surf_width_K15} and \eqref{eq:Surf_width}, respectively.}
\label{fig:swidth}
\end{figure}
We thus introduce another definition of a gap width $W_\Sigma$, namely the radial distance between the points where $d\ln\langle\Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle / d\ln r$ achieves extremum values at both sides of the planet location. The new definition based on the radial gradient of the surface density is motivated to relate the gap width in the surface density to the width in the perturbed velocity profile (see Section \ref{sssec:Deltav}). We try to fit the measured $W_\Sigma$ using various combinations of the input parameters, and find that it is best described by the planet mass normalized by the thermal mass.
Figure \ref{fig:delta2} plots $W_\Sigma/h_p$ as a function of $M_p/M\textsubscript{th}$. Note that the range of $W_\Sigma/h_p$ is very narrow for the parameters we adopt, with $W_\Sigma\approx 4.7h_p$ on average.
Still, $W_\Sigma/h_p$ depends weakly on the planet mass, such that it increases as $M_p/M_\text{th}$ decreases or increases from about 1.5. This is unlike $\Delta_{\Sigma}$ which increase monotonically with the planet mass. We fit the data using a linear combination of two power laws in $M_p/M_\text{th}$ with four free parameters (two coefficients and two power indices). Our least-square fit is
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Wsurf}
\frac{W_\Sigma}{h_p}=2.54\left(\frac{M_p}{M_\text{th}}\right)^{-0.43}+2.16\left(\frac{M_p}{M_\text{th}}\right)^{0.39},
\end{equation}
plotted as a solid line on Figure \ref{fig:delta2}. The effect of $\alpha$ on $W_\Sigma$ is almost negligible compared to those of $h_p/r_p$ and $M_p/M_\text{th}$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Delta2.pdf}
\caption{Gap width $W_{\Sigma}$, defined as the radial distance between two extrema in the $d\ln\langle\Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle/d\ln r$ curve, as a function of $M_p/M\textsubscript{th}$. Note that $W_{\Sigma}/h_p$ increases as $M_p/M_\text{th}$ increases or decreases from about 1.5. The solid line draws our fit, Equation \eqref{eq:Wsurf}.}
\label{fig:delta2}
\end{figure}
The dependence of $W_\Sigma$ on $M_p$ can be understood in terms of the shock formation distance. Since perturbations induced by a low-mass planet are weak even in the regions very close to the planet, they have to travel some distance radially before undergoing nonlinear steepening into shocks. \citet{gr2001} showed that the shock formation distance $l_\text{sh}$ from a planet is given by
\begin{equation}
\frac{l_\text{sh}}{h_p} \approx0.93\left(\frac{\gamma+1}{12/5}\frac{M_p}{M_\text{th}}\right)^{-2/5},
\label{eq:lsh}
\end{equation}
where $\gamma$ is an adiabatic index. Note that the power-law dependence of $l_\text{sh}$ on $M_p/M_\text{th}$ is quite similar to that of $W_\Sigma$ for $M_p/M_\text{th} \lesssim1$ in Equation \eqref{eq:Wsurf}. When $M_p/M_\text{th} \gtrsim1$, on the other hand, perturbations are already nonlinear over a range of radii from the planet location, instantly forming shocks there (e.g., \citealt{do2011}). In this case, the regions (i.e., gap) influenced by shocks become wider for larger $M_p$.
To illustrate $W_\Sigma$ is associated with shocks, we calculate the azimuthally-averaged potential vorticity defined as
\begin{equation}
\zeta =\left\langle\frac{|\nabla\times \mathbf{v}|}{\Sigma}\right\rangle.
\end{equation}
Strictly speaking, the potential vorticity in our simulations is not a conserved quantity because the initial disks are not barotropic, so that it is generated not only by the shock fronts but non-vanishing baroclinic terms.
Since the potential vorticity induced by the baroclinic terms is confined to the corotation regions, its change $\delta\zeta \equiv \zeta-\zeta_0 $ relative to the initial profile $\zeta_0$ away from the corotation is mostly caused by curved shocks. Figure \ref{fig:pv} plots the radial distributions of (a) $\delta\zeta/\zeta_0$ and (b) $d\ln \langle \Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle/d\ln r$ at $t=250{t_{\rm orb}}$ for the models with differing $M_p/M_\text{th}=0.29, 0.58$ but with the same $h_p/r_p=0.07$, and $\alpha=3\times10^{-4}$. Apparently, the regions with substantial $\delta\zeta/\zeta_0$ are bounded by the radii
where $d\ln \langle \Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle/d\ln r$ attains its maximum or minimum, marked by the vertical dotted lines. This is observed for all simulation results which hints that $W_\Sigma$ for $M_p/M_\text{th}\lesssim1$ can be explained by the shock formation distance.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{vorticity_subthermal.pdf}
\caption{Radial variations of (a) the perturbed potential vorticity $\delta\zeta/\zeta_0$ relative to the initial value $\zeta_0$ and (b) $d\ln\langle\Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle/d\ln r$ at $t=250t_\text{orb}$ for the models with different mass $M_p/M_\text{th}=0.29$ (brown) and $0.58$ (blue), but with the same $h_p/r_p=0.07$ and $\alpha=3\times10^{-4}$. The vertical dotted lines in (a) and (b) mark the extremum positions of $d\ln\langle\Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle/d\ln r$, which envelop the regions with significant $\delta\zeta/\zeta_0$.}
\label{fig:pv}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:Surfsnap} hints that the extrema in the radial gradient of $\langle\Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle$ occur near the bottom of a gap, making $W_\Sigma$ smaller than $\Delta_\Sigma$ with $k=0.5$. Figure \ref{fig:peaksmin} compares $W_{\Sigma}$ and $\Delta^{k}_{\Sigma}$ with differing threshold $k=0.1$, $0.3$, $0.5$, $0.7$. It is apparent that $\Delta^{k}_{\Sigma}$ is larger for larger $k$. For most cases, $W_{\Sigma}$ is smaller than $\Delta^{k}_{\Sigma}$. Approximately, $W_{\Sigma}$ is similar to $\Delta^{k}_{\Sigma}$ with $k\sim0.3$, indicating that $W_{\Sigma}$ measures the width at the lower part of a gap.
\subsection{Perturbed Rotational Velocity} \label{ssec:rot}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Delta_comp.pdf}
\caption{Comparison between $W_\Sigma$ and $\Delta^{k}_{\Sigma}$ with $k=0.1$, $0.3$, $0.5$, and $0.7$. The dashed line corresponds to $\Delta^{k}_{\Sigma}=W_{\Sigma}$.}
\label{fig:peaksmin}
\end{figure}
The presence of a planet not only produces a gap in the surface density profile but also induce significant distortion in the rotational velocity $v_\phi$. Figure \ref{fig:Surfsnap}(d) plots the exemplary distribution of the azimuthally-averaged, perturbed velocity $\langle\delta \tilde{v}_\phi\rangle$. Clearly, the radial profile of $\langle \delta \tilde{v}_\phi\rangle$ is nearly anti-symmetric with respect to the planet, with the regions inside (outside) the planet moving slower (faster) than the initial near-Keplerian speed. In this subsection, we quantify the amplitude and width of the perturbed rotational velocity, which rapidly reach a quasi-steady state within $t\sim 10^3{t_{\rm orb}}$ (Appendix \ref{ap:time}).
\subsubsection{Amplitude of Perturbed Velocity}
We define the dimensionless amplitude, $\delta_V$, of the perturbed rotational velocity as the difference in $\langle \delta \tilde{v}_\phi\rangle$ between the super-Keplerian peak formed near the outer gap edge and the sub-Keplerian peak near the inner gap edge, as illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:Surfsnap}(d). We measure $\delta_V$ for all models and plot $\delta_V(h_p/r_p)^{-1}$ as a function of $K$ in Figure \ref{fig:vdepth}. Apparently, the perturbed velocity is larger for a more massive planet in a colder and less diffusive disk. We try to fit $\delta_V(h_p/r_p)^{-1}$ using an inverse of a linear combination of two power laws in $K$ with four free parameters. The solid line draws the resulting least-square fit
\begin{equation}\label{eq:deltav}
\delta_V=\left(\frac{h_p}{r_p}\right)\frac{0.007K^{1.38}}{1+0.06K^{1.03}},
\end{equation}
which is within $~18\%$ of the all measured $\delta_V$. This predicts $\delta_V \propto q^{0.7}(h_p/r_p)^{-0.75}\alpha^{-0.35}$ for $K\gg1$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{vdepth.pdf}
\caption{Relationship between $\delta_V(h_p/R_p)^{-1}$ and $K$ for all models. The solid line draws our fit (Equation \eqref{eq:deltav}).}
\label{fig:vdepth}
\end{figure}
The dependence of $\delta_V$ on $h_p/r_p$ and $K$ in Equation \eqref{eq:deltav} results from the fact that the gaps are in hydrostatic equilibrium.
In a quasi-steady state, the force balance in the radial direction reads
\begin{equation}\label{eq:eqSigma}
\frac{v_{\phi}^2}{r}=\frac{GM_*}{r^2}+\frac{1}{\Sigma}\frac{d P}{d r},
\end{equation}
or
\begin{equation}\label{eq:HSE2}
v_{\phi}^2 = v_{\phi,0}^2 + c_s^2 \frac{d\ln(\Sigma/\Sigma_0)}{d\ln r}.
\end{equation}
Since the pressures gradient is negative (positive) near the inner (outer) edge of the gap, the gas there should rotate slower (faster) than the initial velocity in order to maintain an equilibrium (e.g., \citealt{te2018}).
Assuming that the perturbed velocity is much smaller than the initial rotation velocity and that $c_s$ is radially constant, one can show that Equation \eqref{eq:HSE2} reduces to
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dvapp}
\langle \delta\tilde{v}_\phi \rangle \approx \frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{h_p}{r_p}\right)^2\frac{d\ln \langle \Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle}{d\ln r}.
\end{equation}
We numerically confirm that Equation \eqref{eq:dvapp} holds within 20\% for all models, as evidenced by Figure \ref{fig:Surfsnap}(c) and (d). The deviation becomes larger as the radial range influenced by the planet increases, so that the radial dependence of $c_s$ becomes non-negligible. This proves that the gap width $W_\Sigma$ determined by the extremum positions of $d\ln \langle \Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle/d\ln r $ traces the sub/super-Keplerian peaks in the velocity profile.
Under the assumption that the $d\ln \langle \Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle/dr$ profile is anti-symmetric with respect to the planet, Equation \eqref{eq:dvapp} gives
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dvpeak}
\delta_V \sim \left(\frac{h_p}{r_p}\right)^2 \left|\frac{d\ln \langle \Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle}{d\ln r}\right|_\text{peak}.
\end{equation}
There is no obvious way to calculate $d\ln \langle \Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle/d\ln r$ at the sub- and super-Keperian peak positions, but it should be related to the gap depth and width, and scale dimensionally as $\propto r_p(1-\delta_{\Sigma})/W_\Sigma$.\footnote{We empirically find $|{d\ln \langle \Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle}/{d\ln r}|_{\text{peak}}\sim 2.45r_p(1-\delta_\Sigma)^{1.4}/W_\Sigma$ for small $K$.}
Since $\delta_\Sigma$ is a function of $K$ (Figure \ref{fig:smin} and Equation \ref{eq:Surf_depth}) and $W_\Sigma \sim 4.7h_p$ (Figure \ref{fig:delta2}), Equation \eqref{eq:dvpeak} indicates that $\delta_V/(h_p/r_p)$ should be well described by the $K$ parameter alone, consistent with Figure \ref{fig:vdepth}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{vd_comp.pdf}
\caption{Normalized amplitude $\delta_V$ of the perturbed velocities from our simulations as a function of $K_{v_r}\equiv q(h_p/r_p)^{-1.27}\alpha^{-0.41}$ introduced by \citet{zha2018}. The dotted line draws Equation \eqref{eq:vdkvzha}, the result of \citet{zha2018} in disks without an exponential density cutoff.}
\label{fig:vdcomp}
\end{figure}
\citet{zha2018} also studied the dependence on the disk parameters of the amplitude of perturbed velocities by using disk models similar to ours but without the exponential cutoff in the initial density distribution (Equation \ref{eq:sigmao}).
They found that the amplitude of the sub/super-Keplerian peaks in the velocity profile is well fitted by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:vdkvzha}
\delta_V=0.11 K_{v_r}^{0.80},
\end{equation}
where $K_{v_r}\equiv q(h_p/r_p)^{-1.27}\alpha^{-0.41}$. Figure \ref{fig:vdcomp} plots $\delta_V$ measured from our simulations as a function of $K_{v_r}$. Our measured $\delta_V$ agrees, mostly within 30\%, with Equation \eqref{eq:vdkvzha} plotted as a dotted line, with a small discrepancy between the two caused most likely by the difference in the initial density distribution.
\subsubsection{Width of Perturbed Regions} \label{sssec:Deltav}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{vwidth.pdf}
\caption{Dependence on $M_p/M_\text{th}$ of the normalized width $W_V/h_p$ of the regions with significant perturbed velocities. Note that $W_V$ increases as $M_p/M_\text{th}$ decreases or increases from $\sim 1.5$. The solid line is our fit (Equation \ref{eq:Wvel}), while the dashed line draws Equation \eqref{eq:Wsurf} for $W_\Sigma/h_p$. }
\label{fig:vwidth}
\end{figure}
We define the width, $W_V$, of the regions with significant perturbed velocities as the radial distance between the super- and sub-Keplerian peaks in the $\langle \tilde{v}_\phi \rangle$ profile, as indicated in Figure \ref{fig:Surfsnap}(d). As mentioned above, $W_V$ would be similar to $W_\Sigma$ if the disks have constant temperature, but the non-uniform temperature distribution makes them slightly different from each other. Figure \ref{fig:vwidth} plots $W_V/h_p$ as a function of $M_p/M_{\text{th}}$. Similarly to $W_\Sigma/h_p$, we fit the numerical results for $W_V/h_p$ using a linear combination of two power laws in $M_p/M_\text{th}$ with four free parameters. Our least-square fit is
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Wvel}
\frac{W_V}{h_p}=2.66\left(\frac{M_p}{M_{\text{th}}}\right)^{-0.41}
+2.04\left(\frac{M_p}{M_{\text{th}}}\right)^{0.42},
\end{equation}
plotted as a solid line. For comparison, we overplot Equation \eqref{eq:Wsurf} for $W_\Sigma/h_p$ as a dashed line, which is very close to Equation \eqref{eq:Wvel}, suggesting that Equation \ref{eq:dvapp} is a good approximation. As in $W_\Sigma$, the range of $W_V$ is very narrow for the parameters adopted, with $W_V\approx 4.7h_p$ on average. This is in agreement with \citet{zha2018} who found $W_V\approx 4.4h_p$.
Again, $W_V$ follows a power law for $M_p/M_\text{th}< 1$, with an index very close to $-0.4$, suggesting that the width of the perturbed regions is determined by the shock formation distance for a low-mass planet.
\section{Discussion} \label{sec:Discussion}
So far, we have provided the quantitative dependence on the input parameters of the gap depth $\delta_{\Sigma}$ and width $\Delta_{\Sigma}$ or $W_\Sigma$ in the perturbed density profile as well as the amplitude $\delta_V$ and spatial range $W_V$ of the perturbed velocities. Most observations with ALMA trace dust rather than gas in the disks, while the gap parameters measured in the present work are for the surface density and velocity distributions in the gaseous component. One thus needs to convert dust-continuum emissions to surface density maps to obtain $\delta_{\Sigma}$ and $\Delta_\Sigma$ \citep{df2017}, but the conversion process can easily be affected by the dust-to-gas ratio, dust properties, chemical effects, etc., which are quite uncertain \citep{be2013,mi2017}. However, $\delta_V$ and $W_V$ are relatively free of the conversion problem because one can directly measure the perturbed rotational velocities in the gaseous disks \citep{pi2018,te2018}.
Still, the relations presented in the preceding section are based on the 2D simulations, while observed rotational velocities are derived at the emission surface of a certain tracer, which is typically above the disk midplane. To estimate the effects of the vertical disk stratification, we follow \citet{da2003} and \citet{an2012} to consider a thermally-stratified, axisymmetric disk in the $r$--$z$ plane with temperature distribution
\begin{align}
T(r,z)=
\begin{cases}
\footnotesize T_a, &\text{for $z\geq z_q$,} \\
\footnotesize T_a +(T_0 - T_a)\displaystyle\cos^4\left(\frac{\pi z}{2z_q}\right), &\text{for $ z<z_q$,}
\end{cases}
\end{align}
where $T_0(r)$ is the midplane temperature (Equation \ref{eq:eqT}) and $T_a(r)$ is the temperature of the disk atmosphere at $z\geq z_q\equiv3h(r)$. We consider three models with $T_a=nT_0$ for $n=1$, 2, and 3: $n=1$ corresponds to an isothermal disk in $z$.
The condition of hydrostatic equilibrium along the $z$-direction requires that the mass density $\rho$ obeys
\begin{equation}
\frac{\rho(r,z)}{\rho(r,0)}=\frac{c_s^2(r,0)}{c_s^2(r,z)}\exp\left[-\int_0^{z} \frac{1}{c_s^2}\frac{GM_*z'}{(r^2+z'^2)^{3/2}}dz' \right].
\end{equation}
The force balance along the radial direction (cf.~Equation \ref{eq:eqSigma})
allows us to calculate the equilibrium rotational velocity $v_\phi(r,z)$ in the $r$--$z$ plane.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{rz_res_height.pdf}
\vspace*{-5mm}
\caption{(left) Distributions in the $r$--$z$ plane of the gas density in vertically stratified disks with $T_a/T_0=1$, 2, 3 from top to bottom, for the model with $h_p/r_p=0.05$, $M_p/M_*=5\times10^{-4}$, and $\alpha=1.0\times10^{-3}$. (right) Perturbed rotational velocities normalized to the initial velocities $\langle \delta \tilde{v}_\phi\rangle$ at $z/h_p=0$ (black), 1 (red), 2 (green), and 3 (blue). While the width $W_V$ is almost unchanged with $z$, the amplitude $\delta_V$ becomes larger for larger $z$ and $T_a/T_0$ to maintain a hydrostatic equilibrium in the radial direction.}
\label{fig:res_rz}
\end{figure*}
The left panels of Figure \ref{fig:res_rz} plot the logarithm of the mass density in the $r$--$z$ plane of the stratified disk models for $T_a/T_0=1$, 2, 3 from top to bottom. The case with $h_p/r_p=0.05$, $M_p/M_*=5\times10^{-4}$, and $\alpha=1.0\times10^{-3}$ is chosen. The right panels plot the radial distribution of $\langle \delta \tilde{v}_\phi\rangle$ at certain heights $z=h_p$, $2h_p$, $3h_p$ in comparison with the 2D results (i.e., at $z=0$). Note that the width $W_V$ of the perturbed regions is almost independent of $z$. However, the amplitude $\delta_V$ of the perturbed velocity is boosted significantly as $z$ increases in a thermally-stratified disk, and {the amount of the boost is proportional to $T_a/T_0$ through the pressure gradient in the radial direction. This suggests that the 2D results may not be applicable to optically-thick disks for which emission comes from high-$z$ regions. In this case, it is desirable to run three-dimensional simulations with radiation transfer included in order to incorporate the vertical temperature distribution as well as gas mixing induced by a planet.
With the caveat that our empirical relations are based on simulations with a single planet, we apply our empirical results to the observed rotational velocity of the C$^{18}$O(2-1) emission from the HD 163296 disk presented by \citet{te2018}. Because the inner regions of the disk suffer from insufficient spatial resolution in precisely measuring the rotational velocity \citep{te2018}, we focus on the outer two gaps. By using the disk temperature model of \citet{fl2017}, $\alpha = 10^{-3}$ and assuming that C$^{18}$O traces $z/r \sim 0.15$ \citep{te2018}, the observed gap depth corresponds to $\delta_V \sim 0.020$ and $\sim 0.034$ for the middle and outermost gaps at $r=100\,$AU and $165\,$AU, respectively.\footnote{These gap locations are based on the pre-Gaia distance of $122\rm\,pc$ to HD 163296 \citep{van1997}. The corresponding Gaia distance is $101.5\rm\,pc$ \citep{gaia2018}.} Our empirical relation, Equation \eqref{eq:deltav}, then gives $M_p\sim 0.38$--$0.52\,M_J$ and $\sim0.76$--$1.11\,M_J$ allowing for 18\% uncertainties, respectively, for middle and outermost gaps, where $M_J$ is the Jupiter mass. We can also place constraints on the planet mass using the observed gap width in rotation velocities. For the middle gap at 100 AU, we obtain $W_V/h_p = 4.4$ for the observed width $W_V \sim 25$ AU and $h_p/r_p \sim 0.057$. This suggests that the planet mass could be close to the thermal mass ($M_{\text{th}} = 0.42 M_J$), consistent with the above estimate using the gap depth relation, although we should point out that $W_V/h_p = 4.4$ is smaller than the minimum of our best fit (4.7; Equation \ref{eq:Wvel}). We conjecture that this is presumably because the interaction between multiple planets could have modified the gap shape; for the middle gap in particular, it is quite possible that the gap could become narrower than otherwise, as the disk gas is pushed by both inner and outer planets. For the outer gap at 165 AU, the outer $\delta_v$ peak location cannot be well defined in the observations because the signal-to-noise ratio of the CO data drops in the outer disk (see Figure 5 of \citealp{te2018}). Depending on the exact peak location, the gap width ranges from 55 AU to 75 AU, which correspond to $W_V/h_p = 4.8$--$6.6$. Because this covers a broad range of planet mass (Figure \ref{fig:vwidth}), we cannot make a meaningful estimate based on the data presented in \citet{te2018}.
It is worth noting that the above inferred planet masses have to be regarded as a lower limit to the actual planet mass, because the observed rotation velocity deviations are smoothed with a synthesized ALMA beam and thus have to be smaller than the intrinsic values. In \citet{te2018}, they obtained simulated CO rotation velocities by convolving the raw velocity field from a two-dimensional planet-disk interaction simulation with a synthesized ALMA beam ($0.26'' \times 0.18''$). Taking into the beam convolution account, they needed 1.0 and 1.3 $M_J$ planets to reproduce the observation, a factor of 2.3 and 1.5 larger than our estimates, respectively. These discrepancies between the planet mass with and without beam convolution suggest that one should be careful when applying our relation for $\delta_V$ directly to observations.
As a measure of gap width in real observations, \citet{zha2018} suggested the width $\Delta_\Sigma^\text{Z18}$ normalized by the location of the outer gap edge instead of the planet position $r_p$ since the latter is hardly constrained observationally. Assuming that the density gap is symmetric with respect to the planet, one can express $\Delta_\Sigma^\text{Z18}$ in terms of $\Delta_\Sigma$ as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:wapprox}
\Delta_\Sigma^\text{Z18}\approx\frac{\Delta_\Sigma/r_p}{1+\Delta_\Sigma/(2r_p)},
\end{equation}
and a similar expression for the spatial width of the regions with significant velocity perturbations. Using our simulations, we check that Equation \eqref{eq:wapprox} is accurate within 8\%, suggesting that the $\langle \Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle$ is nearly symmetric relative to the planet.
In this paper, we have explored various gap properties produced by planets using simple numerical simulations. There are certainly many caveats that need to be improved in future studies. Our models consider only gaseous disks and neglect the effects of dust. A dust-gas mixture is prone to
streaming instability \citep{yg2005} and the gap structure can be altered by the frictional feedback of dust when a sufficient amount of dust is trapped at the edge of the gap \citep{ka2018}. In addition, our simulations do not allow for planet migration by taking a fixed circular orbit. \citet{na2019} showed that the number and shape of gaps depend on the migration speed of a planet and the drift speed of dust. Also, increasing an inclination angle of the planet orbit relative to the disk midplane tends to make a gap shallower \citep{zh2018}.
Our models adopt viscous disks with $\alpha\geq 3\times 10^{-4}$, so that we are unable to explore multiple gaps launched by a single planet commonly found in low viscosity disks with $\alpha<10^{-4}$ \citep{do2017,ba2017}. A number of studies investigated the spacing, depth, and number of gaps \citep{do2018b,zha2018}, but other gap parameters such as the gap depth in the surface profile and the properties of the associated velocity have yet to be explored for multiple gaps. Comparison of the properties between primary and secondary gaps would help distinguish whether observed multiple gaps are launched by a single or multiple planets.
Finally, our simulations do not include the effects of magnetic fields that may be pervasive in protoplanetary disks. Previous work that ran magnetohydrodynamic simulations of protoplanetary disks reported that gap structure can be changed considerably by magnetic fields \citep{wi2003,np2003,ur2011,zh2013}. The presence of magnetic fields tends to make gaps wider compared to unmagnetized counterparts, there is no consensus on the effect of magnetic fields on the gap depth. For instance, \citet{wi2003} with toroidal fields reported that turbulence driven by magnetorotational instability makes the gaps shallower, while \citet{np2003} and \citet{zh2013} with initial poloidal fields found turbulence makes the gaps deeper that the hydrodynamic cases. It is uncertain whether the discrepancies in the results with magnetic fields are due to filed geometry, disk structure, numerical methods, or resolution. This issue will be addressed by comparing the results of simulations in which one one parameter is varied, while the other parameters are fixed.
\section{Summary} \label{sec:Summary}
We run 2D hydrodynamic simulations of protoplanetary disks with an embedded planet to study the properties of gaps in the surface density profile and the perturbed rotational velocity induced by the planet. We assume that the disks are razor thin, locally isothermal, unmagnetized, non-self-gravitating, and non-uniform in the radial direction. To investigate various situations, we vary the mass ratio $q=M_p/M_*$ of a planet to a central star, the ratio $h_p/r_p$ of the disk scale height to the orbital radius of the planet, and the viscosity parameter $\alpha$. We measure the gap depth and width in the surface density and velocity profiles after $t=10^4{t_{\rm orb}}$ when a system reaches a quasi-steady state, and fit them using various combinations of the input parameters.
Our main results can be summarized as follows.
\begin{enumerate}
\item The gap depth $\delta_{\Sigma}$ in the surface density profile in our non-uniform disks is well described by the $K=q^2(h_p/r_p)^{-5}\alpha^{-1}$ parameter introduced by \citet{ka2015a} as $\delta_{\Sigma}=(1+0.046K)^{-1}$ (see Equation \ref{eq:Surf_depth} and Figure \ref{fig:smin}), which is very close to the well-known relation $\delta_{\Sigma}\approx(1+0.04K)^{-1}$ of \citet{ka2015a} for uniform disks.
\item The gap width $\Delta_{\Sigma}$ defined as the radial distance between two points with $\langle \Sigma/\Sigma_0\rangle=1/2$ behaves as $\Delta_\Sigma/r_p=0.56K^\prime$ (see Equation \ref{eq:Surf_width} and Figure \ref{fig:swidth}), where $K^\prime=q^2(h_p/r_p)^{-3}\alpha^{-1}$ is a dimensionless parameter introduced by \citet{ka2016}. Gaps in our non-uniform disks are wider than those in uniform disks by a factor of $\sim1.4$.
\item An alternative gap width $W_\Sigma$ based on the radial gradient of the surface density profile has a minimum $W_\Sigma\approx 4.7h_p$ at $M_p\sim M_\text{th}$, while depending weakly on $M_p/M_\text{th}$ as $W_\Sigma/h_p=2.54(M_p/M_\text{th})^{-0.43}+2.16(M_p/M_\text{th})^{0.39}$, with $M_\text{th}$ being the thermal mass (see Equation \ref{eq:Wsurf} and Figure \ref{fig:delta2}). The power-law dependence of $W_\Sigma$ on $M_p/M_\text{th}<1$ suggests that the gap formation involves nonlinear steepening of perturbations into shocks for low-mass planets.
\item The dimensionless amplitude of the perturbed rotational velocity $\delta_V$, defined as the difference between the positive peak and the negative peak in the $\langle (v_\phi-v_{\phi,0})/v_{\phi,0}\rangle$ profile can be parameterized by $K$ as $\delta_V(h_p/r_p)^{-1}=0.007K^{1.38}/(1+0.06K^{1.03})$ (see Equation \ref{eq:deltav} and Figure \ref{fig:vdepth}). The perturbed rotational velocity is directly related to the radial gradient of the surface density profile via Equation \eqref{eq:dvapp}.
\item Similarly to $W_\Sigma$, the spatial width $W_V$ of the regions with significant velocity perturbations is minimized to $W_V\approx 4.7h_p$ at $M_p/M_\text{th}\sim1$, and depends weakly on $M_p/M_\text{th}$ as $W_V/h_p=2.66(M_p/M_\text{th})^{-0.41}+2.04(M_p/M_\text{th})^{0.42}$ (see Equation \ref{eq:Wvel} and Figure \ref{fig:vwidth}). This suggests that the width of the perturbed regions is determined by the shock formation distance for a low-mass planet with $M_p/M_\text{th}<1$.
\end{enumerate}
These parameterized gap properties can be applied to observations to infer the planet mass and orbital radius as well as the disk properties that are difficult to constrain observationally, for gaps produced by planets.
\acknowledgements
We are grateful to an anonymous referee for an insightful report. This work was supported by grant 2017R1A4A1015178 of the National Research Foundation of Korea. The computation of this work was supported by the Supercomputing Center/Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information with supercomputing resources including technical support (KSC-2018-CHA-0047).
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
The proceedings of BMVC are published only in electronic form, but it is still assumed
that readers of the papers may wish to print the paper. This document
illustrates the required paper format, which is designed to read well either printed
with two pages per sheet (``2-up''), or on screen. Note that printing with one page
per sheet will produce a ``large print'' version, which in many cases is not what is desired.
To approximate the old BMVC format, print at one page per sheet, but do not choose
the option to ``scale to fit paper''.
\LaTeX\ users should use this template in order to prepare their paper.
Users of other packages should emulate the style and layout of this
example. Note that best results will be achieved using {\tt pdflatex},
which is available in most modern distributions.
\subsection{Paper length}
Paper length of the final version must not exceed 10~pages, {\em not counting} the bibliography. This is one page more than the version submitted for peer review. The extra page should give you the space to add author information, acknowledegements, and address reviewers' comments. Papers must not have altered margins and formatting from those laid down by this style guide.
The bibliography should begin immediately after the paper text. It may
be of any length, within reason. It should {\em not} include
annotations, figures, or any other paraphernalia intended to subvert the
paper length requirement.
\begin{figure}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\bmvaHangBox{\fbox{\parbox{2.7cm}{~\\[2.8mm]
\rule{0pt}{1ex}\hspace{2.24mm}\includegraphics[width=2.33cm]{images/eg1_largeprint.png}\\[-0.1pt]}}}&
\bmvaHangBox{\fbox{\includegraphics[width=2.8cm]{images/eg1_largeprint.png}}}&
\bmvaHangBox{\fbox{\includegraphics[width=5.6cm]{images/eg1_2up.png}}}\\
(a)&(b)&(c)
\end{tabular}
\caption{It is often a good idea for the first figure to attempt to
encapsulate the article, complementing the abstract. This figure illustrates
the various print and on-screen layouts for which this paper format has
been optimised: (a) traditional BMVC print format; (b) on-screen
single-column format, or large-print paper; (c) full-screen two column, or
2-up printing. }
\label{fig:teaser}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Citations}
When citing a multi-author paper, you may save space by using ``{\em et
alia}'', shortened to ``\emph{et al}\bmvaOneDot'' (not ``{\em et.\ al.}'' as ``{\em et}'' is
a complete word.) The provided \verb'\emph{et al}\bmvaOneDot' macro is a useful {\em aide
memoire} in this regard. However, use it only when there are three or more
authors. Thus, the following is correct: `` Frobnication has been trendy
lately. It was introduced by Alpher~\cite{Alpher02}, and subsequently
developed by Alpher and Fotheringham-Smythe~\cite{Alpher03}, and Alpher
\emph{et al}\bmvaOneDot~\cite{Alpher04}.''
This is incorrect: ``... subsequently developed by Alpher \emph{et al}\bmvaOneDot~\cite{Alpher03} ...''
because reference~\cite{Alpher03} has just two authors. If you use the
\verb'\emph{et al}\bmvaOneDot' macro, then you need not worry about double periods
when used at the end of a sentence as in Alpher \emph{et al}\bmvaOneDot.
We use {\tt natbib}, so citations in random order are nicely sorted:
\cite{Alpher03,Alpher02,Authors06b,Authors06}. However, we don't use the
compress option, as we want each reference to have its own hyperlink and
popup window.
\subsection{Footnotes}
Please use footnotes\footnote {This is what a footnote looks like. It
often distracts the reader from the main flow of the argument.} sparingly.
Indeed, try to avoid footnotes altogether and include necessary peripheral
observations in
the text (within parentheses, if you prefer, as in this sentence). If you
wish to use a footnote, place it at the bottom of the column on the page on
which it is referenced. Use Times 8-point type, single-spaced.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\fbox{\rule{0pt}{2in} \rule{.9\linewidth}{0pt}}
\end{center}
\caption{Example of a short caption, which should be centered.}
\label{fig:short}
\end{figure*}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|}
\hline
Method & Frobnability \\
\hline\hline
Theirs & Frumpy \\
Yours & Frobbly \\
Ours & Makes one's heart Frob\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Results. Ours is better.}
\end{table}
\subsection{Mathematics}
Please number all of your sections and displayed equations. It is
important for readers to be able to refer to any particular equation. Just
because you didn't refer to it in the text doesn't mean some future reader
might not need to refer to it. It is cumbersome to have to use
circumlocutions like ``the equation second from the top of page 3 column
1''. (Note that the ruler will not be present in the final copy, so is not
an alternative to equation numbers). All authors will benefit from reading
Mermin's description~\cite{Mermin89} of how to write mathematics.
\subsection{References}
List and number all bibliographical references in 9-point Times,
single-spaced, at the end of your paper. When referenced in the text,
enclose the citation number in square brackets, for
example~\cite{Authors06}. Where appropriate, include the name(s) of
editors of referenced books.
\subsection{Color}
Color is valuable, and will be visible to readers of the electronic copy.
However ensure that, when printed on a monochrome printer, no important
information is lost by the conversion to grayscale.
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
\emph{Element-based} textures~\cite{ijiri2008example,ma2011discreet,ma2013dynamic,loi2017programmable} are
textures formed by nameable recognizable elements, also dubbed \emph{texels}~\cite{ahuja2007extracting}, organized according to specific spatial distributions (see Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}a-b).
They differ from those textures whose main characteristics are defined merely at a \emph{micro} scale, \emph{i.e.}, focusing on materials and material properties (see Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}c).
Element-based textures are of particular importance in the textile, fashion and interior design industry, with thousands of products (clothes, floor tiles, furniture) stored in vast catalogues or websites that the user (shopper, or designer) has to explore to find the preferred item to buy or to take inspiration from~\cite{kovashka2012whittlesearch,kovashka2015whittlesearch}; Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}b illustrates two examples taken from the popular e-commerce Zalando where, as many other fashion companies are doing now, clothing items are always accompanied by zoomed pictures highlighting textures.
\\
In these scenarios, describing textures and their compositional structure with communicative and intuitive features is of primary importance, in order to give a precise semantic content-based blueprint that allows a fast retrieval~\cite{smeulders2000content} or to design usable interfaces for professionals or casual users that create and print their own textile as in the web applications of \textsl{Patternizer, Contrado, Spoonflower, DesignYourFabric}, to quote some.\footnote{\url{https://patternizer.com/d0Wp}, \url{https://www.contrado.com/}, \url{https://www.spoonflower.com/} and \url{https://designyourfabric.ca/} respectively.}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth,height=3cm]{images/edtd}}
\hspace{0.2em}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.40\textwidth,height=3cm]{images/Zalando}}
\hspace{0.2em}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.13\textwidth,height=3cm]{images/dtd-notelementbased}}
\hspace{0.2em}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.13\textwidth,height=3cm]{images/elba}}
\caption{\small \label{fig:exte} (a) Examples of element-based textures in the DTD~\cite{cimpoi2014describing}: the \emph{dotted} (left) and \emph{banded} (right) classes are examples where texels are dots and bands, respectively; (b) Zalando shows for each clothing a particular on the texture; (c) examples of DTD~\cite{cimpoi2014describing} textures which are \emph{not} element-based: (\emph{marbled} on top and \emph{porous} on bottom); here is hard to find clearly nameable local entities; (d) examples of \emph{ElBa} textures: polygon on top, multi-class lined+circle texture on bottom.}
\end{figure}
Attribute-based texture features~\cite{matthews2013enriching,roboticDatasetTex,cimpoi2014describing,surveytex2018} are explicitly suited to give textures nameable yet discriminative descriptions, and have been shown to excel in texture classification tasks.
The most-known texture attributes are the 47 perceptually-driven ones like \emph{dotted, woven, lined,} etc., that can be learned on the Describable Texture Dataset (DTD)~\cite{cimpoi2014describing}.
\\
It is worth noting a limitation of these attributes: they describe the properties of a texture image \emph{as it was a whole atomic entity}: for example, in Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}a,
two different (element-based) attributes are considered, and specifically: \emph{dotted} (left) and \emph{banded} (right). For each attribute, two representative images are arranged in a column. Despite the same attribute that characterizes them, the images are strongly different: on the left, the top image has more, smaller dots; on the right, the top image has thin bands, while on the bottom bands are thick.
In the Zalando examples (Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}b), both the clothes come with the same attribute (``checkered''), despite their diversity (squares have strongly different dimensions).
In all cases, it is evident that for a finer expressivity one needs to focus on the recognizable \emph{texels} that constitute the textures.
\\
\\
In this paper, we present \emph{Texel-Att}, a fine-grained, attribute-based texture representation and classification framework for element-based textures. \\
The representation pipeline of Texel-Att
detects first the single texels, assigning them \emph{individual attributes}. Subsequently, texels are grouped depending on the individual attributes, and groups of texels receive \emph{layout attributes}.
Individual and layout attributes form the Texel-Att final description of the texture, that can be used for classification and retrieval. It is worth noting that the Texel-Att descriptor has no pre-defined dimensionality, as it depends on the attributes one does use. In this paper, we just give some examples to illustrate the general framework.
The texel detection is performed by a Mask-RCNN~\cite{he2017mask}, showing that element-based descriptions can be individuated with current state-of-the-art detection architectures (despite the fact that further improvements are foreseeable as we will discuss later). To train (and test) the detector, we design the first \emph{El}ement-\emph{Ba}sed texture dataset, \emph{ElBa}, taking inspiration by the many online catalogues and printing services cited above. \emph{ElBa} is composed of procedurally-generated realistic renderings, where we vary in a \emph{continuous} way element shapes and colors and their distribution, to generate 30K texture images with different local symmetry, stationarity, and density of (3M) localized texels, whose attributes are thus known by construction.
\\
In the experiments, we show that texels can be detected with high precision on \emph{ElBa}, and even on textures in the wild. To this sake, we consider the DTD~\cite{cimpoi2014describing}, selecting the 12 element-based classes and manually labeling the related almost 900K texels, originating the Element-based DTD (E-DTD).
Subsequently, we show texture classification results where
the pitfalls of current texture descriptors~\cite{cimpoi2016deep, tamura1978textural}do emerge, failing to classify toy examples where instead Texel-Att succeeds.
Beyond the mere classification, Texel-Att descriptions induce reliable partial ordering so beating relative attributes~\cite{parikh2011relative} learned with alternative descriptors on ranking experiments. This fact is exploited in the final experiment to accelerate interactive image search~\cite{kovashka2015whittlesearch}, where a user is asked to find his desired texture among large repositories. Texel-Att allows to reach the goal with a lower number of steps, paving the way for commercial applications.
\section{The Texel-Att Framework}\label{sec:textiler}
Fig. \ref{fig:scheme} shows a block diagram of the Texel-Att description creation pipeline.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{images/schema}
\caption{\small \label{fig:scheme} Block diagram of the formation of the Texel-Att element-based texture descriptor. On the bottom of each plate, the specific choices made in this paper, which can be varied.}
\end{figure}
Briefly speaking, a customized region proposal method processes input images, extracting texels that subsequently are assigned with \emph{individual} attributes, \emph{i.e.},
labelled according to specific texel categories, and characterized with properties related to appearance and size. Individually labeled texels are then grouped, filtered (discarding non-repeated texels) and \emph{layout} attributes describing the spatial layout of groups are estimated. Individual and layout attributes form the composite Texel-Att descriptor.
In the following, each processing block is detailed.
\textbf{Texel Detector}. The texel detection is built on the Mask-RCNN~\cite{he2017mask} model, which localizes and classifies objects providing bounding boxes and segmentation masks.
We learn the model on the training partition of the \emph{ElBa} dataset, allowing to detect and classify as \emph{lines}, \emph{circles}, \emph{polygons} potentially each texel in a given image (see Sec.~\ref{sec:ElBa_dataset}). The message here is that the texels, whose detection a few years ago was quite complicated and limited to specific scenarios (\emph{i.e.}, lattices~\cite{gui2011texel,liu2015patchmatch}), are now easily addressable in whatsoever displacement.
\textbf{Individual description of texels.} Each detected texel is characterized with attributes related to shape properties and human perception, and in particular: (i) the \textit{label} provided by the Mask-RCNN, indicating its shape; (ii) main \textit{color} given by a color naming procedure~\cite{van2009learning} (with 11 possible colors); (iii) element \textit{orientation}, if any; (iv) element \textit{size}, estimated as the area of the region mask.
Textures can be characterized by statistics computed on these features (averages or histograms, see in the following). It is worth specifying that different individual features and statistics could be adopted; in fact here we are not looking for ``the best'' set of features, but we are showing the portability and effectiveness of the general framework.
\textbf{Texel Grouping}
The goal is to cluster texels with the same appearance, to capture choral spatial characteristics via layout attributes. Here we simply group texels according to the assigned class labels (\emph{circle}, \emph{line} or \emph{polygon}).
Only groups including at least 10 texels are kept, the other detections are removed.
\textbf{Layout description of texels.}
To describe spatial patterns of each texel group, we measured attributes
related to the spatial distribution of the texels' centroids.
Among the huge literature in statistics on spatial points patterns' analysis
to evaluate
randomness, symmetry, regularity and more~\cite{diggle1983statistical,velazquez2016evaluation,baddeley2015spatial}, we selected a simple yet general set of measurements. They are:
(i) point \textit{density}, \emph{e.g.} the number of texels per area unit (for circles and polygons) or line density,
\emph{e.g.} the number of lines/bands along the direction perpendicular to their principal orientation (for lines).
(ii) Quadratic counts-based \textit{homogeneity} evaluation~\cite{illian2008statistical}: it amounts to divide the original image into 100 patches and perform a $\chi^2$ test to evaluate the hypothesis of average point density in the sub-parts. Also in this case for lines, we estimated a similar 1D feature on the projection.
(iii) Point pair statistics~\cite{zhao2011translation}: we estimate the point pair vectors for all the texel centers and then use them to estimate the histogram of \textit{vectors orientation}.
(iv) \textit{Local symmetry}: for circles and polygons we considered the centroids' grid and measured average reflective
self-similarity of 4-points neighborhoods of points after their reflection around the central point. The distance function used is the average point distance, normalized by neighborhood size.
Similarly, we measured \textit{translational symmetry} by considering 4-point neighborhoods of the centroids and measuring the average minimum distance of their points from closest points in the grid after translations of the vectors defined by point pairs in the neighborhood. Symmetry descriptors are computed on 1D projections for line texels.
The complete pattern descriptor is finally built joining texel attributes, spatial pattern attributes and the color attributes of the \textit{background}.
The dimensionality for each of these attributes is reported in Tab.~\ref{tab:descriptorSize}. 1-dimensional attributes are averages of all the extracted values, while multi-dimensional ones are histograms. More details on these can be found as supplementary material.
The Texel-Att descriptor is composed by concatenating the attributes and Z-normalizing each one of them.
\begin{table}[t]
\small
\begin{flushleft}
\begin{minipage}{.35\textwidth}
\scalebox{0.6}{
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\toprule
Label & Color & Orientation & Size & \textbf{Total}\\
Histogram & & Histogram & & \\
\toprule
3 & 11 & 3 & 1 & 18\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.60\textwidth}
\scalebox{0.67}{
\begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
\toprule
Density & Homogeneity & Vector & Local & Traslational & Background & \textbf{Total}\\
& & Orientations & Symmetry & Symmetry & Color & \\
\toprule
1 & 1 & 3 & 1 & 1 & 11 & 18\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\end{minipage}
\end{flushleft}
\small
\caption{\small \label{tab:descriptorSize} Dimensionality of descriptor attributes. On the left, the attributes computed from the individual characterization of texels; on the right, attributes computed from statistics resulting from the spatial layout. The total dimensionality of the descriptor is 36. }
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{images/collage-elba2}
\caption{\small \label{fig:toy_images} Images from the \emph{ElBa} dataset.}
\end{figure}
\section{Element-Based Texture Datasets: \emph{ElBa} and E-DTD}
\label{sec:ElBa_dataset}
While element-based textures are common
and relevant to many practical applications (see Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}), no public database focused on this texture domain is available. Existing databases as the DTD~\cite{cimpoi2014describing} include some examples of these textures (Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}(a)), but these are mixed with other texture types.
For these reasons, we build \emph{ElBa}, the first dataset of element-based textures, and \emph{E-DTD}, the element-based portion of the DTD dataset.
\emph{ElBa} includes synthetic photo-realistic images, like those shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}(d).
The advantages of dealing with synthetic textures
are the precise annotations for texels by construction, and the possibility to train adequately a deep classifier, since training with synthetic data is a common practice~\cite{tremblay2018training,barbosa2018looking}.
In particular, we propose a parametric synthesis model where we vary both texel \emph{individual} (addressing the single texel) and \emph{layout} attributes (describing how groups of texels are mutually displaced).
As for individual attributes, we vary texel shape, size and orientation and color as follows.
For the shape, inspired by the 2D shape ontology of~\cite{niknam2011modeling},
we consider general regular entities as \emph{circles}, \emph{lines}, \emph{polygons} (squares, triangles, rectangles)
since they can be thought of as approximations of more complicated shapes and because they encompass a large variety of geometric textiles.
Size and orientation are varied linearly over a bounded domain. Colors are chosen from harmonized color palettes to better represent realistic use of colors.
Texels are placed in 2D space based on a variety of layouts that can be described succinctly using symmetries. We consider both linear and grid-based layouts where the layout attributes are defined by one or two non-orthonormal vectors that define the translation between texels in the plane. This simple description represents several tiling of the plane and their corresponding patterns. We consider both regular and randomized distributions, where the randomization is performed by jittering the regular grid.
By using jittering, we create a continuum between regular and non-regular distributions, and by varying the jitters per-texel we can change the stationarity
Importantly, we take into account distributions of more than one element type
arbitrarily combined in the plane. For example, we can create dotted+striped patterns. Each texel type has its own spatial layout attributes effectively creating arbitrary multi-class element textures (Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}(d), Fig.~\ref{fig:detRes}-right).
We generate the images of \emph{ElBa} using state-of-the-art computer graphics tools. We use Substance Designer for pattern generation
\footnote{\url{https://www.allegorithmic.com/}}. Substance gives high-quality pattern synthesis, easy control and high-quality output including pattern antialiasing. High frequency patterns simulating realistic materials are added to the generated images.
This procedure led to a rough total of 30K of diverse textures rendered at a resolution of $1024 \times 1024$. The texture design process automatically provides ground-truth data for our analysis including texels masks, texels bounding boxes, and spatial distribution attributes. In total this amounts to around 3M annotated texels.
It is very important to note that, differently from the other datasets used in the texture analysis domain, \emph{ElBa} does not come with a rigid partition into classes: semantic labels that define relevant classification tasks like those used in our tests (Sec.~\ref{sec:exp:classification}) can be derived by texels' attributes or by experiments with subjects.
The complete dataset is split in a training part (90\%), used to train the network model and a test part (10\%), used to validate the classification and recovery experiments.
To demonstrate our approach on real images, we created the Element-based DTD (E-DTD) as follows. From the DTD, we extracted textures that are element-based, i.e. characterized by a distribution or recognizable repeated texels with limited perspective distortions.
We manually annotated the bounding boxes of each texel.
E-DTD includes 1440 images belonging to 12 of the original DTD classes: \emph{Banded, Chequered, Dotted, Grid, Honeycombed, Lined, Meshed, Perforated, Polka-dotted, Studded, Waffled. }
These classes have been selected by 7 experts (3 graphic designers and 2 fashion experts and 2 computer scientists) with all of them agreeing on their inclusions. DTD classes with partial consensus have not been inserted into E-DTD.
The annotation of texels was carried out by Mechanical Turk, borrowed from the three-phase ImageNet crowdsourcing annotation protocol~\cite{su2012crowdsourcing}. The protocol consists of (1) a drawing phase,
(2) a quality verification phase, where a second worker validates the goodness of the bounding boxes and (3) a coverage verification phase where a third worker verifies whether all object instances have bounding boxes.
The annotation process produced around 900K texels annotations, some of which are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:texture_labeling}.
It is important to note the very
diverse types of bounding boxes, from very long and thin (addressing line texels) $745\times 5$ pixels bounding boxes to very small $5\times 5$ pixels bounding boxes (on tiny circles).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{./images/ann-dtd2}
\caption{\small Examples of E-DTD $\,$ annotations: ground truth green bounding boxes overlayed to images of the classes \emph{lined, dotted, honeycombed}, respectively. \label{fig:texture_labeling} }
\end{figure}
\section{Experiments}\label{sec:exp}
Experiments focus on four aspects: 1) \emph{detection of texels}, where we show that finding texels is nowadays possible, with a Mask-RCNN trained on \emph{ElBa};
2) \emph{classification}, where we point out the failure of state-of-the-art descriptors in distinguishing textures which are clearly diverse against our Texel-Att that instead is succeeding;
3) \emph{ranking}, where we demonstrate that Texel-Att representation ranks texture w.r.t. expressive yet fine-grained attributes;
4) \emph{image search} where the Texel-Att attributes are exploited for accelerate human-in-the-loop image search~\cite{kovashka2012whittlesearch} onto large image corpora.
\subsection{Detection of texels}\label{sec:exp:detection}
Detection performances have been computed on the testing partition of \emph{ElBa} and on the whole E-DTD. The Mask-RCNN model used in these experiments has been trained on the training partition of \emph{ElBa}.
Fig.~\ref{fig:detRes} reports some Texel-Att detection qualitative results, while Tab.~\ref{tab:detectionResults} reports \emph{per-image} average precision (AP): in practice, AP is computed \emph{for each image}, and averaged over all the images, since we are interested in capturing how much \emph{all of the texels of a single image} are detected, since it is crucial for computing the Texel-Att attributes afterwards. E-DTD dataset gives lower results, since it contains images with dramatic perspective deformation (see Fig.~\ref{fig:detRes}(a)), which was not a factor in the \emph{ElBa} training data. Despite this, the next experiments show that such detection performance is enough to estimate attributes with high accuracy. Mask-RCNN trained on COCO gives dramatically low results (mAP = 1.75e-6), due to the completely different scenario, not reported in Tab.~\ref{tab:detectionResults} for clarity. One may ask how Texel-Att detection works on a texture which is not element-based, like Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}d. Few tests showed that the confidence of the detections, in that case, is definitely lower than in the element-based case, omitted here for the lack of space.
\begin{table}[thb]
\begin{minipage}{.35\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.85}{
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\toprule
\textbf{Dataset} & mAP & AP50 & AP75\\
\midrule
E-DTD & 0.53 & 0.63 & 0.40\\
\emph{ElBa} & 0.91 &0.92 &0.90\\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\end{center}
\captionof{table}{\small \label{tab:detectionResults} Detection \emph{per-image} average precision (see text) on E-DTD and \emph{ElBa} datasets.}
\end{minipage}
\hspace{1.5em}
\begin{minipage}{.60\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.85}{
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\toprule
\textbf{Classes} & Tamura~\cite{tamura1978textural} & FV-CNN~\cite{cimpoi2016deep} & Texel-Att\\
\midrule
Line uniformity & 70.60 & 66.80 &\textbf{85.30}\\
Circle positioning & 54.86 & 53.01 & \textbf{97.33}\\
Circle coloring & 50.19 & 52.94 & \textbf{93.42}\\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
\caption{\small \label{tab:classificationResults} Classification accuracy in three different binary tasks with three different approaches.}
\end{minipage}
\end{table}
\vspace{-1em}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{minipage}[b]{.61\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{images/detection-dtd}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{images/detection-elba}
\caption{\small \label{fig:detRes} Texel-Att detection qualitative results on both E-DTD (left) and \emph{ElBa} (right) datasets. In green the correct detections, in red the false positives (19 in the first, 0 in the second) and in blue the false negatives (35 in the first, 3 in the second). The AP(IoU=.50) are 0.81 and 0.99, respectively.}
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}[b]{.37\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{images/toy_images}
\caption{\small \label{fig:toy_images} Images from the \emph{ElBa} dataset, in columns: mono-colored regular and random circles, bi-colored regular and random circles, uniform and non-uniform lines.}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Classification}\label{sec:exp:classification}
On texel classification into \emph{circles, polygons, lines} categories, Mask-RCNN scores a 99.85\% of accuracy on almost 550K of correctly detected (IoU>0.5) texels. Class labels are used to organize texels into groups, as described in Sec.~\ref{sec:textiler}. Groups are described with layout attributes, and this completes the Texel-Att description.
Three simple experiments on binary classification demonstrate the expressivity of Texel-Att, each one focusing on 200 \emph{ElBa} images
having strongly different attributes, that is \emph{single-color VS bi-color circles}, \emph{regularly VS randomly positioned circles} and \emph{lines with uniform or non-uniform width} (see Fig.~\ref{fig:toy_images}).
Cross-validated 5-fold experiments
compare the 36-dimensional Texel-Att description (see Tab. \ref{tab:descriptorSize}) against
CNN+FV (65536-dimensional)
and the Tamura~\cite{tamura1978textural} classic texture description.
All of the three descriptors are fed into linear SVMs. Accuracies are shown in Tab. \ref{tab:classificationResults}.
Texel-Att obtains the best results as it
captures higher visual semantics, i.e., the texels and how they are mutually related.
FVs and Tamura features are not able to capture objects and spatial layout, focusing on filter outputs or directly on pixel values.
On E-DTD, Texel-Att description individuates strongly different textures within the same class,
ideally defining further, finer-grained level of classes it can separate. For example the \emph{dotted} and \emph{banded} classes (see Fig.~\ref{fig:exte}) are now further specified and classified considering big or small dots, regular or irregular bands. For lack of space, we prefer to skip the fine-grain classification experiments on the E-DTD (where we systematically beat the other descriptors) and instead present in the next section the more compelling experiments on ranking.
\subsection{Ranking}\label{sec:exp:rel_attributes}
Other than capturing fundamental properties of textures (for example, having regularly VS randomly placed texels, see the previous section), Texel-Att attribute values can be used to rank textures. Attributes that can be ranked are the basis for human-in-the-loop search strategies~\cite{kovashka2015whittlesearch}, so it is crucial that the ranking is reliable. Ideally, with the ground-truth texel detection the ranking via Texel-Att attributes will be perfect. In this experiment we evaluate how our detection step corrupts the ranking, and whether the ranking can be better estimated with learning based strategies, avoiding the detection step.
For simplicity, we consider here partial ranking; an attribute that induces partial ranking is said \emph{relative}~\cite{parikh2011relative}; formally, given a set of images I=$\{i,j\}$ and an \emph{ideal} Texel-Att attribute $a$ (\emph{i.e.}, computed on the ground-truth texel detection) , there exists a partial order relation
r$_a^*$ such that $i > j \iff r_a^*(i) > r_a^*(j) \land |r_a^*(i) - r_a^*(j)| > \gamma_a$.
The goal of this experiment is to estimate a function r$_a$(i) as close as possible to r$_a^*$.
Following the protocol of~\cite{parikh2011relative} the \emph{ranking accuracy} of the function r$_a$ is defined as the percentage of pairs correctly ordered by the r$_a$ function over all the possible pairs in the set of images.
Two are the strategies we compare to estimate r$_a$: the first is the Texel-Att pipeline, which measures the attribute on top of the texel detections. The second is
the relative attribute estimation of~\cite{parikh2011relative} using the FV-CNN~\cite{Cimpoi_2015_CVPR} descriptor as input. For this second strategy we can assume x$_i$ as the feature vector in $\mathbb{R}^n$ for the image $i$. In this case r$_a$ is \emph{estimated} by a ranking SVM, following the guidelines in~\cite{parikh2011relative}. We assume r$_a = w^{T}_ax_i$ so that the output of the modeling is the unknown vector $w$. The model is trained using the set of ordered pairs of images $O_a = \{(i,j)\}$ where $(i,j) \in O_a \Rightarrow i \succ j$ and the set of un-ordered pairs of images $S_a = \{(i,j)\}$ where $(i,j) \in S_a \Rightarrow i \sim j$.
We perform this experiment on the \emph{ElBa} dataset (using the partitioning defined in Sec.~\ref{sec:ElBa_dataset}) and the E-DTD dataset (randomly choosing 90\% of the images as training set and the rest as testing set). We consider one attribute at a time. Ground truth r$_a^*$ (i.e. ordered and un-ordered pairs) are computed from the ground truth detections also used in Section~\ref{sec:exp:detection}.
The ranking accuracy across all attributes is shown in Tab.~\ref{tab:resRelativeAttr}. It can be clearly seen that computing explicitly texel detection (\emph{i.e.}, following the Texel-Att pipeline) is the best strategy to rank textures according to the proposed attributes. For space reasons, only three attributes are shown on the table. The remaining ones are reported in the supplementary material.
\begin{table}[t]
\small
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.85}{
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
\toprule
\textbf{Attributes} & Rank SVM~\cite{parikh2011relative} & Texel-Att\\
\midrule
Area &65.52 &\textbf{85.71}\\
Local Symmetry &54.72 &\textbf{64.29}\\
Homogeneity &79.91 &\textbf{90.29}\\
\toprule
Mean &67.56 &\textbf{81.68}\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\hspace{0.4cm}
\scalebox{0.85}{
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
\toprule
\textbf{Attributes} & Rank SVM~\cite{parikh2011relative} & Texel-Att\\
\midrule
Area &70.16 &\textbf{93.86}\\
Local Symmetry &71.06 &\textbf{81.71}\\
Homogeneity &77.06 &\textbf{96.86}\\
\toprule
Mean &65.95 &\textbf{84.55}\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\end{center}
\small
\caption{\small \label{tab:resRelativeAttr} Ranking accuracy of relative attributes on E-DTD (left) and \emph{ElBa} (right) datasets.}
\end{table}
\subsection{Texture Interactive Search}\label{sec:exp:wsearch}
In this experiment we follow the Whittlesearch (WH) feedback scheme~\cite{kovashka2012whittlesearch,kovashka2015whittlesearch} to search a texture among a large repository. It can be considered a coarse-to-fine user-initiated and iterative search, with each iteration at time $t=1,\ldots,T$ presenting on a GUI the \emph{target} image, simulating the user's envisioned picture, and a \emph{reference set} $\mathcal{T}_t$ of $n=8$ images the user has to interact with by giving a feedback. At each iteration, top-ranked images are shown, until the target is ranked in the top $n$ images, or the maximum iteration $T=10$ is completed.
The WH scheme enriches traditional binary relevance feedback mechanism~\cite{kovashka2015whittlesearch} by allowing the user to whittle away specific irrelevant portions of the visual feature space, pinpointing \emph{how} different one image in $\mathcal{T}_t$ is w.r.t. the target by using relative comparisons ("more", "equally", "less"), on a provided set of attributes.
To prove that introducing Texel-Att attributes is beneficial to better describe textures, we set up a task of Interactive Image Search following the non-Active WhittleSearch variant~\cite{kovashka2015whittlesearch}, using our 36 attributes (see Table~\ref{tab:descriptorSize}) estimated on top of the \textit{detection} step. We compare with the attributes extracted from \textit{ground-truth} annotations to understand how much a more accurate estimation leads to a better performance. We also compare with the 47 DTD attributes~\cite{cimpoi2014describing} employed here in their \emph{relative} form (i.e., each attribute has a ranking function indicating how much it is expressed in the image)~\cite{parikh2011relative} and the 6 Tamura~\cite{tamura1978textural} attributes (\emph{coarseness, contrast, directionality, linelikeness, regularity, roughness}). In particular we compare with three different variants: the 47 DTD attributes, the 6 Tamura attributes and the 47+6 DTD+Tamura attributes. The last combination is the most appealing, since the DTD attributes indicate the content of a texture (\emph{i.e.}, dots) and the Tamura attributes models low-level characteristics similar in spirit to ours (\emph{e.g.}, regularity) but computed on the pixels and not on texels.
For all of these, each user is presented with a randomly chosen target image from the databas
. The goal is to navigate the database until the target image is found (i.e. it becomes one of the top $n$ most relevant images in the database). A total of 50 unacquainted users participated in the study (mean age: 24, std: 1), after having performed a brief individual training session on the use of the interface. Each user had three trials and performances are averaged. Users were partitioned equally among the five approaches taken into consideration in this experiment.
Following~\cite{kovashka2015whittlesearch}, performance is measured using the percentile rank of the target image (i.e. the fraction of the database images ranked below the target) after a fixed number of interaction steps. The closer to 100\%, the better the result.
We also compute Search Accuracy: by considering 40 images as the size of a typical image search page~\cite{kovashka2015whittlesearch}, a texture is considered as "found" by the search if it is ranked among the first 40 images. Keeping this in mind we find that on the E-DTD dataset we are able to individuate within 10 iterations the desired texture in the 90\% of cases while using the most performing variant's (DTD+Tamura) attributes accuracy drops down to 71\%. On the \emph{ElBa} dataset, which is much more challenging on this task due to the larger size of the pool of images and the finer grained nature of the textures, we are able to reach 44\% accuracy, while the DTD+Tamura attributes reach only 15\%.
The plot in Fig.~\ref{fig:wh_plot} shows that Texel-Att has the best performance at any iteration. In addition, a good performance is preserved even in the case of predicted attributes, confirming the robustness of the approach against imperfect texel detection. Finally, on average we are able to individuate the desired texture more often with our approach than with other techniques.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{images/WHlegend}
\includegraphics[width=0.24\linewidth, height=0.18\linewidth]{./images/WHpercentilerank_anton}
\includegraphics[width=0.24\linewidth, height=0.18\linewidth]{./images/WHaccuracy_anton}
\hspace{0.01925\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.24\linewidth, height=0.18\linewidth]{./images/WHpercentilerank_dtd}
\includegraphics[width=0.24\linewidth, height=0.18\linewidth]{./images/WHaccuracy_dtd}
\caption{\small \label{fig:wh_plot} Texture Interactive Search (TIS) Percentile Rank and Search Accuracy results on \emph{ElBa} (first two plots) and E-DTD (last two plots). On the x axis the number of feedback iterations. On the y axis the Percentile Rank index/Search accuracy score.}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion}
This paper presents a new way to describe textures, adopting attributes which focus on texels. The proposed framework, Texel-Att, can successfully describe and classify patterns that are not well-handled by the existing texture analysis approach, as demonstrated by the experimental results, supported also by two new datasets, ElBa and E-DTD. In addition, Texel-Att is showed to be highly effective for image search, paving the way to fashion and graphic design applications.
The current implementation has much room for improvement, being trained with few texel types (circles, lines, polygons) and 2D patterns with limited distortions.
In fact, the modular design of the framework makes it easy to customize it for handling different kinds of element-based texture, as it is just a matter of changing the detector to localize and group different texel types, and changing the invariance properties of the layout attributes to handle larger distortions.
\\
\\
\textbf{Acknowledgements:} This work has been partially supported by the project of the Italian Ministry of Education,
Universities and Research (MIUR) "Dipartimenti di Eccellenza 2018-2022", and has been partially supported
by the POR FESR 2014-2020 Work Program (Action 1.1.4,
project No.10066183). We also thank Nicolò Lanza for assistance with Substance Designer software.
\section{Organization of the Supplementary Material}
The supplementary material is organized as follows: qualitative results of the texels' detection on the E-DTD and the \emph{ElBa} datasets are shown in Sec.~\ref{sec:det}. In Sec.~\ref{sec:rank} we show, for each of the attributes we selected, the images corresponding to the minimum, the median and the maximum intensity of that attribute, both on the \emph{ElBa} dataset and within some E-DTD classes. In Sec.~\ref{sec:relatt} we show the ranking accuracies in the \emph{ElBa} and E-DTD dataset for all attributes, for our approach and the comparative one. Finally, we clarify the theoretical foundations for some attributes in Sec.~\ref{sec:symmetry}
\section{Detection Results}\label{sec:det}
\subsection{E-DTD dataset}
In this section, we show an excerpt of the 12 E-DTD classes where detection results (bounding boxes) are shown in green for correct detections, in red for false positives, in blue for false negatives.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures_sup_material/collage-edtd-det.pdf}
\caption{\small First column: Banded; Second column: Chequered; Third Column: Dotted.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures_sup_material/collage-edtd-det2.pdf}
\caption{\small First column: Grid; Second column: Honeycombed; Third Column: Lined.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures_sup_material/collage-edtd-det3.pdf}
\caption{\small First column: Meshed; Second column: Perforated; Third Column: Polka-Dotted.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures_sup_material/collage-edtd-det4.pdf}
\caption{\small First column: Studded; Second column: Waffled; Third Column: Woven.}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\subsection{\emph{ElBa} dataset}
In this section, we show an excerpt of the \emph{ElBa} dataset where detection results (bounding boxes) are shown in green for correct detections, in red for false positives, in blue for false negatives.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures_sup_material/collage-elba-det.pdf}
\caption{\small Detection results on \emph{ElBa} dataset.}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\section{Attributes Ranking}\label{sec:rank}
\subsection{\emph{ElBa} dataset}
In this section, we show an excerpt of the \emph{ElBa} dataset where images are sorted according to a specific attribute.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures_sup_material/area.pdf}
\caption{\small From texture with the smallest average texels' area (left) to the texture with the biggest one (right).}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures_sup_material/orientation.pdf}
\caption{\small From texture with the vertical orientation (left) to the texture with the horizontal one (right).}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures_sup_material/homog.pdf}
\caption{\small From texture with the highest elements' homogeneity (left) to the texture with the lowest one (right).}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures_sup_material/r0.pdf}
\caption{\small From texture with the most regular layout disposition (left) to the texture with the least regular one (right).}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\subsection{E-DTD dataset}
In this section, we show an excerpt of the E-DTD dataset where images from a specific class are sorted according to a specific attribute.
\subsubsection{Banded Class}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures_sup_material/area_banded.pdf}
\caption{\small From texture with the smallest average texels' area (left) to the texture with the biggest one (right).}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures_sup_material/orientation_banded.pdf}
\caption{\small From texture with the vertical orientation (left) to the texture with the horizontal one (right).}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures_sup_material/r0_banded.pdf}
\caption{\small From texture with the most regular layout disposition (left) to the texture with the least regular one (right).}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\subsubsection{Chequered Class}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures_sup_material/area_cheq.pdf}
\caption{\small From texture with the smallest average texels' area (left) to the texture with the biggest one (right).}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures_sup_material/orientation_cheq.pdf}
\caption{\small From texture with the vertical orientation (left) to the texture with the horizontal one (right).}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures_sup_material/r0_cheq.pdf}
\caption{\small From texture with the most regular layout disposition (left) to the texture with the least regular one (right).}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\subsubsection{Dotted Class}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures_sup_material/area_dotted.pdf}
\caption{\small From texture with the smallest average texels' area (left) to the texture with the biggest one (right).}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures_sup_material/orientation_dotted.pdf}
\caption{\small From texture with the vertical orientation (left) to the texture with the horizontal one (right).}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures_sup_material/r0_dotted.pdf}
\caption{\small From texture with the most regular layout disposition (left) to the texture with the least regular one (right).}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\section{Relative Attributes Experiment Results}\label{sec:relatt}
In this section, we show ranking accuracies for each attribute both for the E-DTD dataset and the \emph{ElBa} dataset.
\begin{table}[htb]
\scalebox{0.75}{
\begin{tabular}{|l|p{40mm}|l|l|}
\hline
Attribute Name & Attribute Interpretation & FV-CNN Ranking SVM & Texel-Att \\
& & Accuracy & Accuracy \\
\hline
\hline
\textit{ \% of Circle Texels} & Portion of texels of circular shape & 0.9040 & \textbf{ 1.00}\\\hline
\textit{ \% of Line Texels} & Portion of texels of linear shape & 0.8966 & \textbf{ 1.00}\\\hline
\textit{ \% of Polygon Texels} & Portion of texels of polygonal shape & 0.8661 & \textbf{ 1.00}\\\hline
\textit{ Components of Background Color Histogram} & Portion of the background colored in a particular color & 0.6674 & \textbf{ 0.9071}\\\hline
\textit{ Texel Area} & Average texel size & 0.6552 & \textbf{ 0.8571}\\\hline
\textit{ Texel Density} & Texel density & 0.9055 & \textbf{ 0.9514}\\\hline
\textit{ Components of Texel Orientation Histogram} & Portion of texels oriented on a particular direction & 0.6632 & \textbf{ 0.6916}\\\hline
\textit{ Components of Texel Color Histogram} & Portion of texels colored in a particular color & 0.6674 & \textbf{ 0.9466}\\\hline
\textit{ Texel Homogeneity} & Degree of uniformity in the density of texels & 0.7991 & \textbf{ 0.9029}\\\hline
\textit{ Local Symmetry} & Degree of symmetry in between nearby texels & 0.5472 & \textbf{ 0.6429}\\\hline
\textit{ Traslational Symmetry} & Similarity of positioning between different pairs of texels & 0.5082 & \textbf{ 0.5957}\\\hline
\textit{ Components of Traslation Histogram} & Portion of texel pairs positioned on a particular direction & 0.5747 & \textbf{ 0.6881}\\\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\vspace{0.8em}
\caption{Ranking accuracy for every attribute for the E-DTD dataset. Our approach performs better on every attribute. Histograms are averaged over each single component for the sake of clarity.}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[]
\scalebox{0.75}{
\begin{tabular}{|l|p{40mm}|l|l|}
\hline
Attribute Name & Attribute Interpretation & FV-CNN Ranking SVM & Texel-Att \\
& & Accuracy & Accuracy \\
\hline
\hline
\textit{ \% of Circle Texels} & Portion of texels of circular shape & 0.7271 & \textbf{ 0.9886}\\\hline
\textit{ \% of Line Texels} & Portion of texels of linear shape & 0.8156 & \textbf{ 0.9843}\\\hline
\textit{ \% of Polygon Texels} & Portion of texels of polygonal shape & 0.7166 & \textbf{ 0.9814}\\\hline
\textit{ Components of Background Color Histogram} & Portion of the background colored in a particular color & 0.6302 & \textbf{ 0.9308}\\\hline
\textit{ Texel Area} & Average texel size & 0.7016 & \textbf{ 0.9386}\\\hline
\textit{ Texel Density} & Texel density & 0.8186 & \textbf{ 0.9686}\\\hline
\textit{ Components of Texel Orientation Histogram} & Portion of texels oriented on a particular direction & 0.6347 & \textbf{ 0.8367}\\\hline
\textit{ Components of Texel Color Histogram} & Portion of texels colored in a particular color & 0.6291 & \textbf{ 0.9949}\\\hline
\textit{ Texel Homogeneity} & Degree of uniformity in the density of texels & 0.7706 & \textbf{ 0.9686}\\\hline
\textit{ Local Symmetry} & Degree of symmetry in between nearby texels & 0.7106 & \textbf{ 0.8171}\\\hline
\textit{ Traslational Symmetry} & Similarity of positioning between different pairs of texels & 0.6537 & \textbf{ 0.8714}\\\hline
\textit{ Components of Traslation Histogram} & Portion of texel pairs positioned on a particular direction & 0.6895 & \textbf{ 0.7395}\\\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\vspace{0.8em}
\caption{\small Ranking accuracy for every attribute for the \emph{ElBa} dataset. Our approach performs better on every attribute. Histograms are averaged over each single component for the sake of clarity.}
\end{table}
\newpage
\section{Mathematical description of symmetry attributes} \label{sec:symmetry}
In this section we provide a more detailed explanation for the symmetry attributes.
Given the spatial distribution of the centroids of the detected dots and polygons, we characterize their average center-reflective and translational symmetry as follows.
For the average reflective symmetry, we consider for each centroid a 4-points neighborhood, reflect the points of the neighborhood with respect to the center and estimate the distance from the closest centroid grid point.
The average symmetry score is
\[
S(R) = \frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^{N} \sum_{j=1}^{4} \left | \vec{R_i}( \vec{n}_{ij}) - \vec{c}_{i} \right |
\]
Where N is the total number of centroids in the group, $ \vec{c}_i$ is a centroid, $R_i$ is the reflection around centroid $i$, $\vec{n}_{ij}$ is the $j-th$ nearest neighbor of the centroid $i$ (Fig. \ref{fig:symm1} left).
For the average translational symmetry, we consider for each centroid a 4-points neighborhood, translate the points of the neighborhood of all the $\vec{t_j}$ vectors joining it with the neighbors and estimate the distance from the closest centroid grid point.
The average symmetry score is
\[
S(T) = \frac{1}{4N} \sum_{i=1}^{N} \sum_{j=1}^{4} \sum_{k=1}^{4} \left | \vec{n}_{ik} - \vec{c}_{i} +\vec{t}_{j} \right |
\]
Where N is the total number of centroids in the group, $ \vec{c}_i$ is a centroid, $R_i$ is the reflection around centroid $i$, $\vec{n}_{ij}$ is the $j-th$ nearest neighbor of the centroid $i$ (Fig. \ref{fig:symm1} right).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{figures_sup_material/symm1.eps} \includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{figures_sup_material/symm2.eps}
\caption{
\label{fig:symm1} Symmetry scores are evaluated as an average of local self-similarity of elements' centroid patterns after translation of 4-point neighborhoods of point pairs vectors included in the neighborhood (left) and after reflection with respect to the central point (right).}
\end{figure}
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
Implicit discourse relation recognition is one of the critical components of discourse parsing.
This task is to identify the relationship between two adjacent discourse units (sentence or clause) without explicit connectives (e.g. \emph{because}, \emph{whereas}, etc.).
This task is tough because relation recognition requires a deep understanding of the two discourse units.
Previous works have shown that this task is instrumental to many downstream tasks such as
text summarization~\cite{gerani-EtAl:2014:EMNLP2014} and question answering~\cite{jansen2014discourse}.
The most important benchmark datasets until now for this task is Penn Discourse Treebank 2.0 (PDTB 2.0)~\cite{prasad2008penn}, in which an instance is a tetrad \{\emph{Arg$_1$, Arg$_2$, implicit connective, discourse relation}\}, where the argument pair \emph{Arg$_1$} and \emph{Arg$_2$} are discourse related sentences or clauses, the implicit connectives are annotated by humans and are not known during testing.
Implicit discourse relation recognition is to disclose \emph{discourse relation} for any given \emph{Arg$_1$} and \emph{Arg$_2$} without knowing \emph{implicit connective}.
Here is an example for the instance,
\[
\begin{split}
&\text{[\emph{Arg$_1$}]: Never mind.}\\
&\text{[\emph{Arg$_2$}]: You already know the answer.}\\
&\text{[\emph{Implicit connective}]: Because}\\
&\text{[\emph{Discourse relation}]: Cause}\\
\end{split}
\]
Numerous works have been done for this task.
\citet{lin-kan-ng:2009:EMNLP} and \citet{pitler-louis-nenkova:2009:ACLIJCNLP} first practiced conventional methods with artificial linguistic features.
Since 2015, neural networks dominate the mainstreams by introducing convolutional neural network~(CNN)~\cite{zhang-EtAl:2015:EMNLP4, qin2016conll},
recurrent neural network~(RNN)~\cite{ji-haffari-eisenstein:2016:N16-1, ronnqvist-schenk-chiarcos:2017:Short},
attention mechanism~\cite{liu-li:2016:EMNLP2016, ronnqvist-schenk-chiarcos:2017:Short},
and other network methods~\cite{qin-zhang-zhao:2016:EMNLP2016, schenk-etal-2016-really, lan-EtAl:2017:EMNLP20172, dai2018naacl, guo2018coling}.
For neural network methods, the parameters learned from the training data capture the semantic features.
However, due to the data sparsity issue, these captured features may not well semantically link arguments and their relations, which thus will heavily affect the performance.
So in this work, we propose a novel memory component storing all the semantic representations of training instances and their corresponding relations.
During testing, the model could consult the memory component and find out the similar semantic patterns and utilize the memorized relations.
The hypothesis is that if the similar instances in the training set can be retrieved, the relations of these instances must be helpful.
The training instances are stored through their encoded representations.
These memorized instances can also be considered as a sort of knowledge source, which reflects the links between semantic representations and discourse relations.
The adopted memory component can be theoretically applied to any existing suitable models.
To implement and evaluate the memory component, we integrate the memory component into the state-of-the-art model from \citet{baiCOLING} and let the augmented model be evaluated on the benchmark PDTB 2.0, which shows that the appended memory mechanism can further promote the performance over strong baseline.
This paper is organized as follows.
Section 2 reviews the related works.
Section 3 introduces the baseline model and our proposed memory component.
Section 4 demonstrates the experiments and analyses.
Section 5 states the conclusion.
\section{Related Works}
\subsection{Implicit Discourse Relation Recognition}
Since the PDTB 2.0 corpus was released, a surge of works focusing on implicit discourse relation recognition have been proposed.
And after two shared tasks~\cite{xue-etal-2015-conll,xue-etal-2016-conll} on CoNLL are held, this task attracted more researchers.
Feature-based methods~\cite{pitler-louis-nenkova:2009:ACLIJCNLP,lin-kan-ng:2009:EMNLP,zhou2010predicting} mainly focused on extracting linguistic, or semantic features from the discourse units, or the relations between unit pairs.
Then these features are distilled and sent to a classifier for relation prediction.
\citet{lin-kan-ng:2009:EMNLP} explored several common features and their combination.
\citet{lei2018linguistic} considered some semantic and cohesion features.
Recent years, most of the works focused on using neural networks to extract the features, or to produce more suitable representations for prediction.
\citet{braud2015comparing} found that embeddings trained with neural networks are very useful.
\citet{chen_aaai} and \citet{lei_ijcai} used the relationship between words to help the classification.
\citet{zhang-EtAl:2015:EMNLP4} and \citet{qin2016conll} used CNN to encode the discourse units to representations.
\citet{qin-zhang-zhao:2016:EMNLP2016} used a gated mechanism to enhance their classifier.
\citet{ji-haffari-eisenstein:2016:N16-1} used RNN to model sentences and used graphical models to do inference.
\citet{liu-li:2016:EMNLP2016}, \citet{ronnqvist-schenk-chiarcos:2017:Short}, and \citet{guo2018coling} deployed attention mechanism for better semantic extraction.
\citet{rutherford-etal-2017-systematic} compared several network architectures.
\citet{liu_aaai}, \citet{lan-EtAl:2017:EMNLP20172}, \citet{kishimoto2018coling}, and \citet{xu2018emnlp} tried to use extra information to help the training procedure.
\citet{dai2018naacl} put discourse units to their context and made prediction in series.
Our work is orthogonal and complementary to them.
Our motivation of introducing this is to lighten the existing data-hungry bottleneck of discourse relation recognition problem which only counts on an extremely small dataset.
As the implicit task is more semantically difficult than the explicit one, the state-of-the-art performance of the former only reaches around 50\% until the very recent days, while the latter may reach 80\% or higher.
There are a few existing works trying to alleviate the data sparsity issue.
\citet{rutherford2015improving} directly relabeled explicit instances into implicit ones by manually removing the explicit connectives.
\citet{qin-EtAl:2017:Long} used a generative adversarial training method to force the implicit module to learn from the explicit module.
\citet{xu2018emnlp} utilized active learning to lead more data into training.
In this paper, we straightforwardly apply a memory component to store all possible training instances for this challenging task, which is never explored before.
\subsection{Memory Network}
\citet{memnet_weston} first proposed memory networks to store relevant information. The memory networks can reduce the long-term forgetting issues or can be used for a knowledge base.
\citet{endmemnet_sukhbaatar} optimized the memory network and trained it end-to-end which eases the training significantly.
\citet{miller-EtAl:2016:EMNLP2016} extended this mechanism to a key-value memory for machine reading comprehension.
However, our proposed memory component is not the same.
Their memory networks are to tackle the long-term dependency issue, and the memory is used for each instance temporarily, while our memory component is used for the whole system to store the training set and is fixed after training.
\section{Method}
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{model.pdf}
\caption{Model overview.}
\label{fig:model}
\end{figure*}
The relation recognition model usually encodes the arguments first and classifies the encoded representations.
Our overall model architecture is given in Figure~\ref{fig:model}, in which a baseline module~\cite{baiCOLING} and a memory component are contained.
The baseline model is the current state-of-the-art model for this task and can provide better representations for higher performance.
Besides, we store the pair representations to the memory component to augment the whole system.
\subsection{Baseline Model}\label{sec:base}
In this section, we briefly introduce the baseline model\footnote{Please refer to the original paper for more model details.}, which reaches the current state-of-the-art results for both 11-way and 4-way implicit tasks, and consists of the following four parts.
We adopt the latest deep enhanced representation model in \citet{baiCOLING} as our baseline, which is the current state-of-the-art model which first exceeds the milestone of 48\% accuracy and 50\% $F_1$ in 11-way and 4-way implicit tasks, respectively.
Implementing this strong baseline, we store the representations of discourse unit pairs to the memory.
It provides better representations and leads to a higher performance gain.
The right part of Figure~\ref{fig:model} shows our baseline model.
It demonstrates the four parts.
The first part is the embedding module or the word-level module.
The second part is the encoding module or the sentence-level module.
The third part is the attention module or the pair-level module.
The fourth part is multi-task classifiers.
\subsubsection*{Embedding Module}
The $k$-th word of an input sentence is embedded into a vector $\mathbf{e}_k$,
which is concatenated from three parts,
$
\mathbf{e}_k = [\mathbf{e}_k^w;~ \mathbf{e}_k^s;~ \mathbf{e}_k^c] \in \mathbb{R}^{d_e}
$.
$\mathbf{e}_k^w$ is pre-trained word embedding~(\emph{word2vec})~\cite{mikolov2013distributed}.
$\mathbf{e}_k^s$ is subword-level embedding.
$\mathbf{e}_k^c$ is the ELMo embedding~\cite{Peters2018ELMo}.
Subword units are segmented from training data using byte pair encoding~(BPE)~\cite{sennrich-haddow-birch:2016:P16-12}.
For each word, the subword sequence of the word is mapped to the subword embedding sequence.
Then convolutional operations are applied to the embedding sequence followed by max pooling operation.
Finally, the outputs are concatenated and fed to a highway network~\cite{highway} for subword-level embedding $\mathbf{e}_k^s$.
ELMo~(Embeddings from Language Models) is a pre-trained contextualized word embedding.
The outputs of this pre-trained ELMo encoder are two 1024-dimension vectors for each word.
Given this output, a self-adjusted weighted average is calculated.
Following these processes, the vector is fed to a feed forward network to reduce its dimension.
\subsubsection*{Encoding Module}
The encoding module encodes each argument separately and is composed of stacked encoder blocks.
The output of each layer is delivered to the next layer and the attention module.
\citet{baiCOLING} considers two types of encoder blocks, and we only use the convolutional type here as both types of blocks give similar performance.
Assuming the input for the encoder block is
$\mathbf{x}_k \in \mathbb{R}^{d_e} ~ (k=1, \cdots, N)$,
the input is sent to a convolutional layer and mapped to output
$[\mathbf{A}_k; \mathbf{B}_k] \in \mathbb{R}^{2d_e}$.
After the convolutional operation, a gated linear units~(GLU)~\cite{dauphin2016language} is applied, i.e.,
\[
\mathbf{z}_k = \mathbf{A}_k \otimes \sigma(\mathbf{B}_k) \in \mathbb{R}^{d_e}
\]
There is a residual connection in this block, which adds the output and the input of the block.
Therefore, $\mathbf{z}_k + \mathbf{x}_k$ is the final output of the block corresponding to the input $\mathbf{x}_k$.
The output is delivered to the next layer and the attention module.
\subsubsection*{Attention Module}
The outputs of each layer are sent to the attention module.
Supposing the encoder block layer number is $L$, and the outputs of $l$-th block layer for \emph{Arg$_1$} and \emph{Arg$_2$} are $\mathbf{u}_1^l, \mathbf{u}_2^l \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times d_e}$, $N$ is the sentence length.
They are addressed by a bi-attention module, where the attention matrix is
\[
\mathbf{M}_l = (\mathop{FFN}(\mathbf{u}_1^l)) {\mathbf{u}_2^l}^T
\in \mathbb{R}^{N \times N}
\]
$\mathop{FFN}$ is a feed forward network applied to the last dimension corresponding to the word.
Then
\[
\begin{split}
\mathbf{o}_2^l &= \mathop{softmax}(\mathbf{M}_l) {\mathbf{u}_2^l} \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times d_e}\\
\mathbf{o}_1^l &= \mathop{softmax}(\mathbf{M}_l^T) {\mathbf{u}_1^l} \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times d_e}
\end{split}\]
the \emph{softmax} is applied to each row of the matrix.
We apply 2-max pooling on each of them and concatenate them as output
\[
\mathbf{r}_l = [\mathop{top2}(\mathbf{y}_1^l);~ \mathop{top2}(\mathbf{o}_2^l)]
\in \mathbb{R}^{4d_e}
\]
The final pair representation is (we let $d_r = 4{d_e}L$)
\[
\mathbf{r} = [\mathbf{r}_1; \mathbf{r}_2; \cdots; \mathbf{r}_L] \in \mathbb{R}^{d_r}
\]
This representation is applied as the input of both the classifiers and the memory component.
\subsubsection*{Classifiers}
In this model, two classifiers are used.
One is for the relation prediction, and the other one is for the connective prediction.
\citet{qin-EtAl:2017:Long} and \citet{baiCOLING} demonstrated that connective aware information is essentially useful for the training.
The two classifiers predict the relations and the connectives simultaneously.
The classifiers are multilayer perceptrons~(MLPs) with a \emph{softmax} layer.
The connective classifier helps the model produce better representations, and only works during training. The output of the connective classifier is
\[
\begin{split}
\mathbf{o}_c = \mathop{softmax}[\mathop{MLP_c}(\mathbf{r})] \in \mathbb{R}^{n_c},
\end{split}
\]
and the output of the relation classifier is
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{o}_r = \mathop{softmax}[\mathop{MLP_r}(\mathbf{r})] \in \mathbb{R}^{n_r},
\label{eq:rc}
\end{equation}
where $n_c$ and $n_r$ are the number of connectives and discourse relations respectively.
The loss function for both classifiers is cross entropy loss, and the total loss is the sum of the two losses
\[
Loss = Loss_{relation} + Loss_{connective}.
\]
\subsection{Memory Component}
The left part in Figure~\ref{fig:model} shows a key-value memory component $\mathcal{S}$ to memorize the \emph{(representation, relation)} pairs of all the training instances.
The keys $\mathcal{S}^k$ are the semantic representations of discourse unit pairs in the training set, and the values $\mathcal{S}^v$ are the corresponding relations.
The keys are updated during training for better retrieval, and the memorized keys are retained for testing.
Supposing there are $m$ slots in the memory $\mathcal{S}$, which can contain $m$ training instances.
We intend to sample out $m$ training instances and index them with $1, \cdots, m$.
Therefore, the $i$-th training instance will be stored at the $i$-th memory slot $\mathcal{S}_i$.
(In our experiments, we set $m$ with the number of all training instances, namely, we memorize the entire training set.)
The key part $\mathcal{S}^k$ of the memory component is initialized randomly and is updated during training.
Simultaneously, the value part $\mathcal{S}^v$ is initialized with the one-hot encodings which represent the relations.
These encodings are fixed all the time.
Given $n_r$ relations, the one-hot representation of the $j$-th relation ($j = 1, \cdots, n_r$) is
\[
\begin{split}
[0,\; \cdots,\; 1,\; \cdots,\; 0] \in \mathbb{R}^{n_r},
\end{split}
\]
that is, assign the whole vector to $0$ and the $j$-th number to 1.
\subsubsection*{Update}
The key part $\mathcal{S}^k$ of the memory is updated during training.
The baseline module can produce a pair representation $\mathbf{r}$ for classification, which is used as the semantic representation to update the key part $\mathcal{S}^k$ in the memory.
In each epoch of the training procedure, every instance in the training set will be input once.
Then one representation for each instance is produced in one epoch.
Supposing there is one pre-sampled training instance, for example, the $i$-th instance, then the corresponding output pair representation $\mathbf{r}_i$ will fill the $i$-th key slot $\mathcal{S}^k_i$ of the memory.
In each epoch, all the key slots $\mathcal{S}^k$ of the memory are updated precisely once.
After the training procedure, the memorized information in memory is fixed and can be queried during testing.
The memorized information is the correspondence between fine-tuned representations and discourse relations in the training set.
Through updating, the representations can carry semantic information about discourse arguments and are better for value retrieval.
\subsubsection*{Query}\label{sec:qr}
In this stage, the relevant memorized information is retrieved and delivered to the classifier.
For the query, each candidate in the memory is assigned to a relevance weight reflecting the semantic similarity with the query representation.
Then the useful information in the memory is retrieved by taking their weighted sum using the relevance weights for the response, which reflects the discourse relations of the most similar instances.
Supposing that the pair representation to be classified is $\mathbf{r}_q \in \mathbb{R}^{d_r}$, which is also used for the query, and the representation key in memory slot $\mathcal{S}^k_i$ is $\mathbf{r}_i \in \mathbb{R}^{d_r}$.
The query can be seen as two steps.
The first step is to assign a coefficient to each candidate in the memory component respectively.
During training, our model is kept evaluated on the whole training set.
Supposing after one of the training epochs, the number of correctly predicted training instances for the $j$-th relation~($j = 1, \cdots, n_r$) is $m_j$.
For the $i$-th training instance, if it is mispredicted, then we assign the coefficient $c_i$ with $0$.
Otherwise, if it is correctly predicted, and the relation of it is the $j$-th relation, then we assign $c_i = 1 / m_j$.
In other words, we only select out the correctly predicted instances and assign a coefficient to it to balance the result since the number of different relations is not the same.
The second step is to calculate the relevance weight corresponding to $\mathbf{r}_j$,
\begin{equation}
w_j = f(\mathbf{r}_q, \mathbf{r}_j),
\label{eq:w}
\end{equation}
where $f$ is an attention function.
The $f$ can have different choices, such as dot product:
\begin{equation}
f(\mathbf{r}_q, \mathbf{r}_j) = \mathbf{r}_q^T \mathbf{r}_j;
\label{eq:dot}
\end{equation}
biaffine attention~\cite{dozat2017biaffine, jiaxun2018coling}:
\begin{equation}
f(\mathbf{r}_q, \mathbf{r}_j) = \mathbf{r}_q^T \mathbf{U} \mathbf{r}_j + \mathbf{w}_1^T \mathbf{r}_q + \mathbf{w}_2^T \mathbf{r}_j + b,
\label{eq:biaffine}
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{U} \in \mathbb{R}^{d_r \times d_r}$, $\mathbf{w}_1, \mathbf{w}_2 \in \mathbb{R}^{d_r}$ and $b \in \mathbb{R}$ are parameters;
or other attention methods.
The advanced attention mechanism such as biaffine can learn more query patterns while dot product attention returns the most similar one according to cosine distance without training.
After that, these relevance weights are normalized with \emph{softmax} and used for the response.
\subsubsection*{Response and Classification}
Supposing the value in slot $\mathcal{S}^v_i$ is $\mathbf{v}_i$, which is the one-hot vector for discourse relation, then the final response vector will be
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{v} = \sum_{i=1}^m \mathop{softmax}(w_i) c_i \mathbf{v}_i \in \mathbb{R}^{n_r},
\label{eq_response_v}\end{equation}
where $n_r$ is the number of discourse relations introduced before.
Then this vector is sent to an MLP, and we modify the output of the relation classifier~(Eq.~\ref{eq:rc}) to
\[
\begin{split}
\mathbf{o}_r = \mathop{softmax}[(1-\lambda)\mathop{MLP_r}(\mathbf{r}) + \lambda\mathop{MLP_m}(\mathbf{v})],
\end{split}
\]
where $\lambda$ is a hyperparameter and $\mathop{MLP_m}$ is the MLP for memory response vector.
This response contains the true label information and reflects the links between representations and relations.
Though $\mathbf{r}_i$~($i = 1, \cdots, m$) is used as the key in the memory component, it is also a semantic representation of the corresponding training instance.
So we can still use it as another choice for memory response vector
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{v}\prime = \sum_{i=1}^m \mathop{softmax}(w_i) c_i \mathbf{r}_i \in \mathbb{R}^{d_r},
\label{eq_response_k}\end{equation}
then the output of the relation classifier will be
\[
\begin{split}
\mathbf{o}_r = \mathop{softmax}[(1-\lambda)\mathop{MLP_r}(\mathbf{r}) + \lambda\mathop{MLP_r}(\mathbf{v}\prime)],
\end{split}
\]
here we use the MLP of relation classification for response vector.
This response is the representation from training arguments, and since we use coefficient to filter the memory, so the classifier can correctly classify them.
This response can also help the learning procedure of the classifier.
\section{Experiments\footnote{The code is available at \url{https://github.com/hxbai/IDRR_mem}}}
\subsection{Dataset Settings}
Recent works mainly use PDTB 2.0 as the benchmark dataset and we follow them.
The adopted benchmark PDTB 2.0 has three levels of relations: Level-1 \emph{Class}, Level-2 \emph{Type}, and Level-3 \emph{Subtypes}.
The first level consists of four major relation Classes and the second level contains 16 Types.
According to \citet{TACL536}, on the second level five relation types have no dev and test instances, thus they are removed, so there are 11 types in total.
We conduct evaluations on two levels: 11-way classification on level 2 and 4-way classification on level 1.
We follow the dataset settings of the previous works.
For the 11-way classification, we use two splitting methods:
the first is PDTB-Lin's splitting~\cite{lin-kan-ng:2009:EMNLP}, which uses section 2-21, 22 and 23 as training, dev and test sets respectively.
the second is PDTB-Ji's splitting~\cite{TACL536}, which uses section 2-20, 0-1, and 21-22 as training, dev and test sets respectively.
For 4-way classifications, the splitting is the same as the PDTB-Ji's splitting in 11-way classification without eliminating instances.
During training, the instances with more than one annotated relation types are considered as multiple instances.
At test time, a prediction matching one of the gold types is taken as the correct answer.
All sentences in the dataset are padded or truncated to keep the uniform 100-word length.
\subsection{Model Details}
Most of the hyperparameter settings in our experiments are the same as the baseline model of \citet{baiCOLING}.
For Lin's splitting, we change the layer number of classifiers to 2, the hidden dim of the classifiers to 2048, and the learning rate of it to 0.0012.
We set $\lambda = 0.3$ and the memory dropout to 0.2.
\subsection{Results}
\begin{table*}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tabu}{p{170pt}p{70pt}<{\centering}p{50pt}<{\centering}}
\tabucline[0.65pt]{-}
Model & PDTB-Lin & PDTB-Ji \\ \hline
\citet{lin-kan-ng:2009:EMNLP}
& 40.20 & - \\
\citet{lin-kan-ng:2009:EMNLP} + Brown clusters
& - & 40.66 \\
\citet{TACL536}
& - & 44.59 \\
\citet{qin-zhang-zhao:2016:COLING}
& 43.81 & 45.04 \\
\citet{qin-EtAl:2017:Long}
& 44.65 & 46.23 \\
\citet{baiCOLING}
& 45.73 & 48.22 \\
\hline
Ours
& \textbf{46.08} & \textbf{49.15} \\ \tabucline[0.65pt]{-}
\end{tabu}
\caption{Accuracy~(\%) for 11-way classification.}
\label{table:result}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tabu}{p{130pt}cccccc}
\tabucline[0.65pt]{-}
Model & Comp. & Cont. & Exp. & Temp. & 4-way ($F_1$) & 4-way (Acc) \\ \hline
\citet{rutherford2015improving}
& 34.20 & 43.90 & 69.10 & 14.7 & 40.50 & 57.10 \\
\citet{zhang-EtAl:2015:EMNLP4}
& 33.22 & 52.04 & 69.59 & 30.54 & - & - \\
\citet{TACL536}
& 35.93 & 52.78 & - & 27.63 & - & - \\
\citet{chen-EtAl:2016:P16-13}
& 40.17 & 54.76 & - & 31.32 & - & - \\
\citet{qin-zhang-zhao:2016:EMNLP2016}
& 41.55 & 57.32 & 71.50 & 35.43 & - & - \\
\citet{liu_aaai}
& 34.65 & 46.09 & 69.88 & 31.82 & 44.98 & 57.27 \\
\citet{liu-li:2016:EMNLP2016}
& 39.86 & 54.48 & 70.43 & \textbf{38.84} & 46.29 & 57.57 \\
\citet{qin-EtAl:2017:Long}
& 40.87 & 54.56 & 72.38 & 36.20 & - & - \\
\citet{lan-EtAl:2017:EMNLP20172}
& 40.73 & \textbf{58.96} & 72.47 & 38.50 & 47.80 & 57.39 \\
\citet{lei2018linguistic}
& 43.24 & 57.82 & \textbf{72.88} & 29.10 & 47.15 & - \\
\citet{dai2018naacl}
& - & - & - & - & 48.82 & 58.20 \\
\citet{baiCOLING}
& \textbf{47.85} & 54.47 & 70.60 & 36.87 & 51.06 & - \\
\hline
Ours
& 47.15 & 55.24 & 70.82 & 38.20 & \textbf{52.19} & \textbf{60.69} \\ \tabucline[0.65pt]{-}
\end{tabu}
\caption{$F_1$ score~(\%) comparison on binary classification.
$F_1$ score~(\%) and accuracy~(\%) comparison on 4-way classification. (Only single models are compared.)}
\label{table:result2}
\end{table*}
Table~\ref{table:result} is the comparison on 11-way classification and Table~\ref{table:result2} is the comparison on 4-way classification.
Our memory method yields performance gain and achieves a new state-of-the-art performance in both 11-way and 4-way classification.
For binary classification, three out of four results of our method are better than the baseline.
All the results are averaged from multiple runs.
For Lin's splitting, the result is achieved with the dot product attention~(Eq.~\ref{eq:dot}) and the response from values~(Eq.~\ref{eq_response_v}), and for Ji's splitting, the result is achieved with the biaffine attention~(Eq.~\ref{eq:biaffine}) and the response from keys~(Eq.~\ref{eq_response_k}).
For 4-way and binary classifications, the results are achieved with the biaffine attention~(Eq.~\ref{eq:biaffine}) and the response from keys~(Eq.~\ref{eq_response_k}).
The analyses about the choice of attention methods and responses are in the next subsection.
\subsection{Analysis}\label{sec:ana}
We have conducted some analyses and ablation studies on our memory component to illustrate the effectiveness of our method.
These experiments are conducted with the PTDB-Ji splitting on 11-way classification if not specified.
\subsubsection*{Time Consumption}
The first analysis is about the training time of our method.
We conduct a comparative experiment and find that even with the biaffine attention (which is more complex than the dot product attention), the consumed time of our new model is $7\%$ more than the baseline model since the training set is relatively small.
So the memory component only brings little impact on training time.
\subsubsection*{Key-part Strategy}
Besides the updating strategy mentioned before, we also examine a fixed key scheme to show the advantage of our method, this scheme can only be used with the value response.
In this scheme, we concatenate the pre-trained \emph{word2vec} embeddings and ELMo to a 2348-dimension vector for each word.
Then for each argument~(\emph{Arg$_1$} and \emph{Arg$_2$}), we average the word embeddings as its representation.
Then the two representations are concatenated to the pair representation.
This representation is memorized in the key part and fixed all the time.
The query vector uses the same scheme as the keys.
We use biaffine attention here.
For the query, we test two schemes. The first examines a fixed query representation, which is the same as the representations used in updating.
The second applies the encoded representation $\mathbf{r}_q$ which is introduced before, and we use a one layer MLP to make its dimension the same as the keys.
Then such a setting receives much lower accuracy 47.83\% and 48.32\% respectively compared to our dynamic key results 49.09\%, which indicates that the fixed representation fails to successfully extract features about discourse relations.
The concatenated word embeddings and ELMo are indeed semantic representations, whereas they still lack effective informative clues on the connection between argument pairs, which even makes the performance worse.
Contrarily, the dynamic keys and queries in our memory component can capture more salient relation features for better performance.
\subsubsection*{Coefficient}
As introduced in Section~\ref{sec:qr}, we assign each training instance in the memory component a coefficient, which is used to select out the correctly predicted training instances and balance the instance number of different classes.
For example, the numbers of instances of different classes in the training set of 4-way classification are 689, 3288, 1898, 6900 respectively, which are extremely unbalanced.
Without a balancing control, the class with much more instances will have an overwhelming impact.
The unbalancing issue also exists for 11-way classification.
Then, we try to fix the coefficient, that is, all the training instances can be queried during testing and the coefficient only works for balancing.
The result of this experiment is $48.93\%$, which is lower than dynamic coefficient~($49.15\%$), but higher than the baseline model~($48.22\%$).
It means that incorporating all the training instances in the memory component can bring useful information, but will have more noise than the memory filtered by the coefficient.
\subsubsection*{Attention and Response}
Section~\ref{sec:qr} mentions two attention strategies and two response methods.
Here we did several experiments for them in different settings.
The results are in Table~\ref{table:attres}.
Here we did not have results on combined key and value response (add the two types of responses as the final response) since its performance is similar to that only with the key response.
From the table, we can find the performance is heavily related to the dataset settings.
The performance gain on Lin's splitting is smallest and the results with different settings on it are extremely unstable.
With the key response, the performances are even drastically worse than the baseline.
Except for Lin's splitting, the biaffine attention with key response can achieve the best performance.
As introduced before, Ji's splitting for 11-way classification and the splitting on 4-way classification are the same, which has a larger test set than Lin's splitting.
Thus it is not surprising that a smaller test set makes the results on Lin's splitting insignificant and maybe hardly query from the memory component, or the queried information may be too noisy to promote the performance.
The choice of the combination method of the attention and the response needs to consider the dataset settings and the attention and the response can affect each other.
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tabu}{ccccc}
\tabucline[0.65pt]{-}
\multirow{2}{*}{Model} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{11-way} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{4-way} \\
& Lin & Ji & $F_1$ & Acc. \\ \hline
baseline & 45.73 & 48.22 & 51.06 & - \\ \tabucline[0.1pt on 2pt off 2pt]{-}
D + K & 40.86 & 48.63 & 50.51 & 59.66 \\
D + V & \textbf{46.08} & 48.99 & 51.69 & 60.39 \\
B + K & 38.47 & \textbf{49.15} & \textbf{52.19} & \textbf{60.69} \\
B + V & 45.92 & 49.09 & 51.22 & 60.15 \\
\tabucline[0.65pt]{-}
\end{tabu}
\caption{Comparison for attention and response methods on different settings. D denotes dot product attention, B denotes biaffine attention, K denotes use key response, and V denotes use value response.}
\label{table:attres}
\end{table}
\subsubsection*{Example}
Table~\ref{table:example} shows an example for the queried instances.
We find that the model pays attention to instances of relevant relations and the weight assigned to it is nearly $1$, that is, the model focuses on exactly one instance in the memory.
These retrieved instances indeed help the prediction of the test instance.
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tabu}{p{0.94\columnwidth}}
\tabucline[0.65pt]{-}
\textbf{Test instance} \\ \hline
\textbf{Relation 1:} Contingency.Cause \\
\textbf{Relation 2:} Expansion.List \\
\textbf{Arg$_1$:} The HUD budget has dropped by more than 70\% since 1980. \\
\textbf{Arg$_2$:} We've taken more than our fair share. \\
\tabucline[0.65pt]{-}
\textbf{Queried training instance top 1} \\ \hline
\textbf{Relation:} Contingency.Cause \\
\textbf{Arg$_1$:} At 11.1\% of gross national product, U.S. health costs already are the highest in the world. By contrast, Japan's equal 6.7\% of GNP, a nation's total output of goods and services. \\
\textbf{Arg$_2$:} Management and labor worry that the gap makes U.S. companies less competitive. \\
\tabucline[0.65pt]{-}
\end{tabu}
\caption{A example for the queried training instances.}
\label{table:example}
\end{table}
\subsection{Discussion}
The proposed memory component seems to work like the nearest neighbor method.
However, the whole component is dynamically adjusted rather than the static data setting for the nearest neighbor method.
The keys are updated with optimized pair representations.
If the keys are fixed, the performance will be worse according to our empirical verification.
Eq.~\ref{eq:w} is differentiable, which means the loss can back-propagate through the memory component to facilitate the baseline model, and if $f$ in Eq.~\ref{eq:w} has parameters (such as the biaffine attention), they can also be tuned.
In the meantime, it is not easy for the nearest neighbor method to design a dynamic distance function and a data update method, which are the right powerful designs in our propose memory mechanism according to our discussion in Section ~\ref{sec:ana}.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we propose a novel memory component to enhance state-of-the-art implicit discourse relation recognition model.
The augmented memory component can memorize useful salient knowledge about the pair representations and the discourse relations in the training set.
This knowledge can benefit the prediction performance during the testing procedure.
Our system can dynamically adjust so that query and response can be better during training.
Our experiments show that putting the whole training set into the memory lets our model receive the most favorable results and achieves new state-of-the-art performance for the concerned challenging task.
|
\section{Introduction}
The motion of an ideal fluid of unit density in the plane is governed by the well-known Euler equations
\begin{equation}\label{1-1}
\begin{cases}
\partial_t\mathbf{v}(x,t)+(\mathbf{v}\cdot\nabla)\mathbf{v}(x,t)=-\nabla P(x,t),\,\,x=(x_1,x_2)\in \mathbb R^2, t>0,\\
\nabla\cdot\mathbf{v}(x,t)=0,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{v}=(v_1,v_2)$ is the velocity field and $P$ is the scalar pressure.
By introducing the scalar vorticity $\omega=curl\mathbf{v}:=\partial_1v_2-\partial_2v_1$ and applying the Biot-Savart law, we get the following vorticity form of \eqref{1-1}(see \cite{MB} or \cite{MP4})
\begin{equation}\label{1-2}
\begin{cases}
\partial_t\omega+\mathbf{v}\cdot\nabla\omega=0,\\
\mathbf{v}(x,t)=\omega*\frac{1}{2\pi}\frac{-x^\perp}{|x|^2}:=\int_{\mathbb R^2}-\frac{1}{2\pi}\frac{(x-y)^\perp}{|x-y|^2}\omega(y,t)dy,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $x^\perp:=(x_2,-x_1)$ denotes clockwise rotation through ${\pi}/{2}$. The vorticity equation \eqref{1-2} means that the vorticity $\omega$ is transported by $\mathbf{v}$, a velocity field determined by $\omega$ itself via the Biot-Savart law.
The famous result of Yudovich asserts that for any initial vorticity $\omega_0\in L^1\cap L^\infty(\mathbb R^2)$, there is a unique weak solution $\omega\in L^\infty((0,+\infty);L^1\cap L^\infty(\mathbb R^2))$ to \eqref{1-2}. An important type of weak solutions appropriate for modeling an isolated region of vorticity with discontinuity is the vortex patch solution, that is, the initial vorticity has the form
\begin{equation}
\omega_0(x)=\lambda I_{A_0}:=\begin{cases}\lambda,&x\in A_0,\\
0,&x\notin A_0,\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $\lambda\in \mathbb R$ is a parameter representing the vorticity strength.
Since the vorticity is transported by the divergence-free velocity $\mathbf{v}$, we conclude that the evolved solution $\omega(x,t)$ still has the form $\omega(x,t)=\lambda I_{A_t}$ with $|A_t|=|A_0|$, where $|\cdot|$ denotes the two-dimensional Lebesgue measure. A very special example is when $A_0$ is a disk. In this case, it is easy to check that $A_t=A_0$ for all $t>0$. Another remarkable example discovered by Kirchhoff is that $A_0$ is an ellipse centered at the origin with semi-axis $a$ and $b$. In this situation, it can be proved that
$A_t$ is given by
\begin{equation}
A_t=e^{i\Omega t}A_0:=\{e^{i\Omega t}x\mid x\in A_0\},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
e^{i\Omega t}x:=(|x|\cos(\theta_x+\Omega t),|x|\sin(\theta_x+\Omega t))\,\,\text{for each }x=(|x|\cos\theta_x,|x|\sin\theta_x),
\end{equation}
and $\Omega\in\mathbb R$ is the angular velocity determined by $\Omega=(\lambda ab)/(a+b)^2$. See \cite{MB}, Chapter 8.
An interesting question is that is there any other type of rotating vortex patches in the plane? There are many works in this respect. Here we list some of the relevant and significant ones. In 1978, Deem and Zabusky \cite{DZ} firstly discovered that there exist simply connected rotating vortex patches with a $m$-fold symmetry for $m\geq 2$ by numerical methods. Later in \cite{Z} Zabusky conjectured that: for any steady (or rotating) system of point vortices there exists a family of steady (or rotating) vortex patches shrinking to these point vortices as the vorticity strength goes to infinity.
Burbea in \cite{Burb} partially answered Zabusky's question by using bifurcation theory. In 1988, Wan \cite{W} studied Zabusky's conjecture and proved that for any rotating system of point vortices with some non-degenerate conditions, the conjecture is ture. Moreover, he also analyzed the linear stability of these rotating vortex patches. Recently in \cite{DE} the authors proved existence of doubly connected rotating vortex patches with a $m$-fold symmetry for some $m\geq 3.$ For active scaler equations, existence of corotating and counter-rotating vortex patches is proved in \cite{HM}.
All of the results mentioned above are about the whole plane. As to the disk, we recall the result in \cite{dHHM}, where the authors studied existence of rotating vortex patches with $m$-fold symmetry bifurcating from a circular patch or an annulus patch. We also point out that in \cite{Hm} the author studied the radial symmetry property of rotating patches in the disk.
Our aim in this paper is to construct another type of rotating vortex patches in the disk. For simplicity we only consider the unit disk centered at the origin, denoted by $D=\{x\in\mathbb R^2\mid |x|<1\}$. The Euler equations in $D$ with impermeability boundary condition is
\begin{equation}\label{1}
\begin{cases}
\partial_t\mathbf{v}(x,t)+(\mathbf{v}\cdot\nabla)\mathbf{v}(x,t)=-\nabla P(x,t) &\text{in $D\times(0,+\infty)$},\\
\nabla\cdot\mathbf{v}(x,t)=0 &\text{in $D\times(0,+\infty)$},\\
\mathbf{v}(x,0)=\mathbf{v}_0(x)&\text{in $D$},
\\ \mathbf{v}(x,t)\cdot \vec{n}(x)=0 &\text{on $\partial D\times(0,+\infty)$},
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $\vec{n}(x)$ is the outward unit normal at $x\in\partial D$.
In this situation, we still have the following vorticity equation
\begin{equation}\label{3}
\begin{cases}
\partial_t\omega(x,t)+\nabla\cdot(\mathbf{v}\omega)(x,t)=0 &\text{in $D\times(0,+\infty)$},\\
\omega(\cdot,0)=\omega_0:=curl\mathbf{v}_0 &\text{in } D.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Since $\mathbf{v}$ is divergence-free and $\mathbf{v}\cdot \vec{n}=0$ on $\partial D$, $\mathbf{v}$ can be expressed in terms of $\omega$
\begin{equation}\label{23}
\mathbf{v}=\nabla^\perp G\omega=(\partial_2G\omega,-\partial_1G\omega),
\end{equation}
where $G\omega(x,t)=\int_DG(x,y)\omega(y,t)dy$, and $G$ is the Green's function for $-\Delta$ in $D$ with zero
Dirichlet boundary condition in $D$, that is,
\begin{equation}
G(x,y)=-\frac{1}{2\pi}\ln |x-y|-h(x,y), \,\,\,x,y\in
D,
\end{equation}
where $h(x,y)=-\frac{1}{2\pi}\ln|y|-\frac{1}{2\pi}\ln\big|{x}-\frac{{y}}{|{y}|^2}\big|$ is the regular part of $G(x,y)$.
From \eqref{3} and \eqref{23}, by integration by parts we give the definition of weak solutions to the vorticity equation \eqref{3}.
\begin{definition}
Suppose $p\in[4/3,+\infty]$. We call $\omega(x,t)\in L^\infty((0,+\infty);L^p(D))$ a weak solution to \eqref{3} if
\begin{equation}\label{997}
\int_D\omega_0(x)\xi(x,0)dx+\int_0^{+\infty}\int_D\omega(\partial_t\xi+\nabla\xi\cdot \nabla^\perp G\omega)dxdt=0
\end{equation}
for all $\xi\in C_c^{\infty}(D\times[0,+\infty))$.
\end{definition}
Note that for $\omega\in L^\infty((0,+\infty); L^{4/3}(D))$, we have $G\omega\in L^\infty((0,+\infty); W^{2,{4/3}}(D))$ by $L^p$ estimate, thus $\nabla G\omega\in L^\infty((0,+\infty); L^4(D))$ by Sobolev embedding. So the integral in \eqref{997} makes sense by H\"older's inequality.
The existence and uniqueness result for the vorticity equation when $p=+\infty$ is firstly proved by Yudovich \cite{Y}. For general $p>4/3$, by using an approximation procedure and the DiPerna-Lions theory of linear transport equations \cite{DL}, Burton \cite{B5} proved the following theorem.
\begin{theoremA}\label{A}
Suppose $4/3<p<+\infty$ and $\omega_0\in L^p(D)$. Then there exists a weak solution $\omega(x,t)\in L^\infty((0,+\infty);L^p(D))$ to the vorticity equation \eqref{3}. Moreover,
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] all $L^\infty( (0,+\infty); L^p(D))$ solutions belong to $C( [0,+\infty); L^p(D))$;
\item[(ii)] for any weak solution $\omega(x,t)\in L^{\infty}((0,+\infty);L^p(D))$, we have $\omega(x,t)\in R_{\omega_0}$ for all $t\geq 0$, where $R_{\omega_0}$ denotes the rearrangement class of $\omega_0$,
\begin{equation}
R_{\omega_0}:=\{ v \in L^1_{loc}(D)\mid |\{v>a\}|=|\{\omega_0>a\}| ,\forall a\in \mathbb R\};
\end{equation}
\item[(iii)] for any $L^\infty( (0,+\infty); L^p(D))$ solutions, the angular momentum is conserved, or equivalently,
\[J(t)=J(0),\,\,\forall t\in[0,+\infty),\,\,\text{where }J(t):=\int_D|x|^2\omega(x,t)dx;\]
\item[(iv)] if $p\geq 3/2$, then the kinetic energy of the fluid is conserved, or equivalently,
\[E(t)=E(0),\,\,\forall t\in[0,+\infty),\,\,\text{where }E(t):=\frac{1}{2}\int_D\int_DG(x,y)\omega(x,t)\omega(y,t)dxdy;\]
\end{itemize}
\end{theoremA}
Inspired by the study of rotating vortex patches in the whole plane, our aim in this paper is to construct a vortex patch solution $\omega(x,t)$ in $D$ satisfying
\begin{equation}
\omega(x,t)=w(e^{-i\Omega t}x),\,\,w=\lambda I_{A_0},
\end{equation}
where $\Omega$ represents the angular velocity.
By a simple calculation, it is easy to check $w$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{w}
\nabla\cdot\left(w\nabla^\perp(Gw+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2)\right)=0.
\end{equation}
The weak form of \eqref{w} is
\begin{equation}\label{001}
\int_Dw(x)\nabla\left(Gw(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2\right)\cdot \nabla^\perp \phi(x) dx=0
\end{equation}
for all $\phi\in C_c^{\infty}(D)$.
To find a vortex patch solution satisfying \eqref{001}, we use the vorticity method established by Arnold \cite{A}, which asserts that a steady flow can be seen as a constrained critical point of the kinetic energy, and the flow is stable if and only if this critical point is non-degenerate. A good reference in this respect is \cite{AK}. The vorticity method was later developed by many authors. See \cite{B2,B3,B4,Ta,T,WP}. The method used in this paper is closely related to \cite{T}. In \cite{T}, Turkington solved a variational problem for the vorticity to obtain existence of steady vortex patches in general bounded domains. Let $D_0$ be a simply connected domain with a smooth boundary, $G_0$ be the Green's function for $-\Delta$ in $D_0$ with zero boundary condition. Consider the maximization the kinetic energy
\[{E}(\omega):=\frac{1}{2}\int_{D_0}\int_{D_0}G_0(x,y)\omega(x)\omega(x)dxdy\]
in the admissible class
\begin{equation}\label{K}
K_\lambda(D_0):=\{\omega\in L^\infty(D_0)\mid 0\leq\omega\leq\lambda\text{ a.e. in }D_0,\,\,\int_{D_0}\omega(x)dx=1\}.
\end{equation}
Turkington proved that there exists a maximizer for $E$ over $K_\lambda(D_0)$, and any maximizer $\omega^\lambda$ must be a steady vortex patch with the form $\omega^\lambda=\lambda I_{U^\lambda}$. Moreover, he showed that as $\lambda\rightarrow+\infty$, the vortex core $U^\lambda$ shrinks to a global minimum point of the Robin function of $D_0$, and the scaled version of $\partial U^\lambda$ converges to the unit circle in $C^1$ sense.
Inspired by Turkington's method, we consider the maximization of the following functional
\begin{equation}\label{E}
\mathcal{E}(w):=\frac{1}{2}\int_{D}\int_{D}G(x,y)w(x)w(x)dxdy+\frac{\Omega}{2}\int_D|x|^2w(x)dx
\end{equation}
in the admissible class $K_\lambda(D)$
\begin{equation}\label{KD}
K_\lambda(D):=\{w\in L^\infty(D)\mid 0\leq w\leq\lambda\text{ a.e. in }D,\,\,\int_{D}w(x)dx=1\}.
\end{equation}
It is easy to prove that there exists a maximizer of $\mathcal{E}$ over $K_\lambda(D)$ but with the form $w^\lambda=\lambda I_{A^\lambda}+2\Omega I_{B^\lambda}$, where
\[A^\lambda=\{x\in D\mid Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2>\mu^\lambda\}\text{ and }B^\lambda=\{x\in D\mid Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2=\mu^\lambda\}\]
for some $\mu^\lambda\in\mathbb R$ depending on $\lambda$. If $\lambda=2\Omega$, then obviously $w^\lambda$ is still a vortex patch solution. If $\lambda\neq2\Omega$, we expect $|B^\lambda|=0,$ but it is hard to prove this by using Turkington's technique. To circumvent this difficulty, we use the strict convexity of the functional $\mathcal{E}$ to conclude that the any maximizer $w^\lambda$ is in fact the unique maximizer of the functional
\begin{equation}\label{qqq}
\mathcal{Q}(w):=\int_D(Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2)w(x)dx
\end{equation}
in the admissible $K_\lambda(D)$. From this fact, we can easily deduce that the measure of $B^\lambda$ is zero if $\lambda\neq 2\Omega$. See Proposition \ref{patch} in Section 2. The fact that any maximizer of $\mathcal{E}$ over $K_\lambda(D)$ is a vortex patch solution will be used to prove Theorem \ref{os} below.
In addition, we also analyze the limiting behavior of $w^\lambda$ as $\lambda\rightarrow+\infty$.
The first result of this paper is as follows.
\begin{theorem}\label{Thm}
Let $\Omega,\lambda$ be two positive numbers with $\lambda>|D|^{-1}$, and $\mathcal{E},{K_\lambda(D)}$ be defined by \eqref{E} and \eqref{KD}. Then $\mathcal{E}$ attains its maximum in $K_\lambda(D)$ and any maximizer satisfies \eqref{001}. Moreover,
any maximizer $w^\lambda$ has the following form
\begin{equation}
w^\lambda=\lambda I_{A^\lambda}+2\Omega I_{B^\lambda},
\end{equation}
where
\[A^\lambda=\{x\in D\mid Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2>\mu^\lambda\}\text{ and }B^\lambda=\{x\in D\mid Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2=\mu^\lambda\},\]
and $\mu^\lambda$ is the Lagrange multiplier depending on $\lambda$. If $\lambda\neq2\Omega$, then $|B^\lambda|=0$. Furthermore, as $\lambda\rightarrow+\infty$, the following estimates hold true:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] $diam(A^\lambda)\le R_0\varepsilon$, where $R_0>1$ does not depend on $\lambda$ and $\varepsilon=(\pi\lambda)^{-1/2}$;
\item[(ii)] up to a subsequence, $\int_Dxw^\lambda(x)dx\rightarrow X^*\in D$, where $X^*$ is a global minimum point of $H(x)-\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2$, where $H(x):=\frac{1}{2}h(x,x)$ is the Robin function of $D$;
\item[(iii)]${\lambda}^{-1}w^\lambda(X^\lambda+\varepsilon y)\to I_{B_1(0)}$ weakly star in $L^\infty(B_{R_0}(0))$;
\item[(iv)] $\pi \psi^\lambda(X^\lambda+\varepsilon y)\to V^* ~\text{in}~ C^1_{loc}(\mathbb{R}^2)$, where $\psi^\lambda:=Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2-\mu^\lambda$ and $V^*$ is the Rankine streamfunction defined by
\begin{equation}\label{rank}
\begin{split}
\ V^*(y)
:=\left \{
\begin{array}{cccccc}
\frac{1}{4}(1-|y|^2), & 0 \le|y|\le 1,\\
\frac{1}{2}\ln({|y|}^{-1}), & 1<|y|<\infty.
\end{array}
\right.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}\label{minim}
For $D$, the unit disk centered at the origin, the Robin function has an explicit expression
\[H(x)=-\frac{1}{4\pi}\ln(1-|x|^2).\]
It is easy to check that when $0<\Omega\leq1/\pi$, the unique minimum point of $H-\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2$ in $D$ is the origin.
When $\Omega>\frac{1}{2\pi}$, $H-\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2$ attains its minimum in $D\setminus\{{0}\}$ and all the minimum points are on the circle $\{x\in D\mid |x|=(1-(2\pi\Omega)^{-1})^{1/2}\}$.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
By (i) and (ii) in Theorem \ref{Thm}, as $\lambda\rightarrow+\infty$, the limit of $w^\lambda$ is a Dirac measure with unit strength at $X^*$~in the distributional sense. By Remark \ref{minim}, $X^*\neq {0}$ if and only if $\Omega>\frac{1}{2\pi}.$ This is consistent with the point vortex model. In fact, according to the point vortex model(see \cite{L}), the motion of a point vortex is described by the following Kirchhoff-Routh equation
\begin{equation}
\frac{dx(t)}{dt}=-\nabla^\perp H(x(t)).
\end{equation}
It is easy to check that the angular velocity of the point vortex at $X^*$ is $(2\pi(1-|X^*|^2))^{-1}\in (\frac{1}{2\pi},+\infty).$
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
It is easy to see that the function $u(x):=Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2-\frac{\Omega}{2}$ satisfies the following semilinear elliptic equation
\begin{equation}\label{str}
\begin{cases}
-\Delta u=f(u),&\text{in } D,\\
u=0,&\text{on }\partial D,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $f(u)=\lambda I_{\{x\in D\mid u(x)>\mu^\lambda-{\Omega}/{2}\}}-2\Omega.$
In fact, one can construct steady Euler flows by solving \eqref{str} directly. See \cite{AS,CLW,CPY,SV} for example. It is worth mentioning that in \cite{SV} Smets and Schaftingen proved existence of a rotating Euler flow in a disk. However, the flow they constructed is smooth.
\end{remark}
Since we have constructed a solution $w^\lambda$ satisfying \eqref{001}, it is easy to verify that $\omega^\lambda(x,t):=w^\lambda(e^{-i\Omega t}x)$
is a weak solution to the vorticity equation \eqref{3}, rotating in $D$ with angular velocity $\Omega$. Moreover, for any fixed time $t>0$, the support of $\omega^\lambda(x,t)$ ``shrinks" to a point $X(t)$ as $\lambda\rightarrow+\infty$ in the following sense:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&diam(supp(\omega^{\lambda}(\cdot,t)))\le R_0\varepsilon,\\
\int_Dxw^\lambda&(x)dx\rightarrow X(t)\text{ (up to a subsequence)},
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
where $X(t)$ is the solution to the following Kirchhoff-Routh equation
\[\frac{dX(t)}{dt}=-\nabla^\perp H(X(t)),\,\,X(0)=X^*.\]
The second result of this paper is concerned with the orbital stability of the set of maximizers of $\mathcal{E}$ in $K_\lambda$. Define
\begin{equation}\label{s}
\mathcal{S}_\lambda:=\{\omega\in K_\lambda(D)\mid \mathcal{E}(\omega)=\sup_{K_\lambda(D)}\mathcal{E}\}.
\end{equation}
According to Theorem \ref{Thm}, $\mathcal{S}_\lambda$ is not empty, moreover, any element in $\mathcal{S}_\lambda$ is a vortex patch.
By energy and angular momentum conservation in Theorem A, it is also easy to see that for any $\omega_0\in\mathcal{S}_\lambda$, we have $\omega_t\in\mathcal{S}_\lambda$ for all $t>0$, where $\omega_t$ is a weak solution to the vorticity equation with initial vorticity $\omega_0$. An interesting question is, for any given initial vorticity $\omega_0$ that is sufficiently close to $\mathcal{S}_\lambda$ in some norm, will it be close to $\mathcal{S}_\lambda$ for all $t>0$ in the same norm? If it is true, $\mathcal{S}_\lambda$ is said to be orbitally stable.
There are many results concerning the stability of planar vortex flows in the past few decades. See \cite{B5,B6,CW0,CW,Ta,W,WP} and the references listed therein.
The type of stability we consider here is nonlinear stability, which is usually a very difficult problem in hydrodynamics. A very effective method to prove nonlinear stability for smooth planar Euler flows is established by Arnold \cite{A2}, which was later extended to non-smooth flows, for example, vortex patches. See \cite{CW0,CW,Ta,WP}. In \cite{B5}, Burton proved a very general stability criterion for vortex flows in bounded domains, asserting that any steady vortex flow as the strict local maximizer of the kinetic energy on some given rearrangement class is stable in $L^p$ norm. Based on the similar idea, nonlinear orbital stability for vortex pairs in the whole plane was proved in \cite{B6}. The method used in this paper is mostly inspired by \cite{B5,B6}.
The orbital stability of $\mathcal{S}_\lambda$ is stated as follows.
\begin{theorem}\label{os}
Let $\frac{3}{2}\leq p<+\infty$, $\lambda>|D|^{-1}$, and $S_\lambda$ be defined by \eqref{s}. Then $\mathcal{S}_\lambda$ is orbitally stable in $L^p$ norm, or equivalently, for any $\varepsilon>0$, there exists a $\delta>0$, such that for any $\omega_0\in L^p(D)$ satisfying $dist_p(\omega_0,\mathcal{S}_\lambda)<\delta$, we have $dist_p(\omega_t,\mathcal{S}_\lambda)<\varepsilon$ for all $t>0$, where $\omega_t$ is a weak solution to the vorticity equation with initial vorticity $\omega_0$, and $dist_p(\omega_0,\mathcal{S}_\lambda)$ is defined by
\begin{equation}
dist_p(\omega_0,\mathcal{S}_\lambda):=\inf_{\omega\in\mathcal{S}_\lambda}\|\omega_0-\omega\|_{L^p(D)}.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
To prove Theorem \ref{os}, the key point is compactness. In \cite{B6}, compactness was obtained by a Concentration-Compactness argument. In this paper, compactness comes from the fact any maximizer must be a vortex patch(see Lemma \ref{com} in Section 3). The same idea was also used in \cite{CWW} to prove nonlinear orbital stability for steady vortex patches.
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{Thm}}
In this section we give the proof of Theorem \ref{Thm}. As mentioned in Section 1, we consider the maximization of $\mathcal{E}$ in $K_\lambda(D)$, where $\mathcal{E}$ and $K_\lambda(D)$ are defined by \eqref{E} and \eqref{K}.
Note that by Fubini's theorem and integration by parts, we have for any $w\in K_\lambda(D)$
\begin{equation}\label{301}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{E}(w)&=\frac{1}{2}\int_D\int_DG(x,y)w(x)w(y)dxdy+\frac{\Omega}{2}\int_D|x|^2w(x)dx\\
&=\frac{1}{2}\int_DGw(x)w(x)dx+\frac{\Omega}{2}\int_D|x|^2w(x)dx\\
&=\frac{1}{2}\int_D|\nabla Gw(x)|^2dx+\frac{\Omega}{2}\int_D|x|^2w(x)dx.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We also assume throughout this paper that $\lambda > 1/|D|$ such that $K_\lambda(D)$ is not empty.
An absolute maximizer for $\mathcal{E}$ over $K_\lambda(D)$ can be easily found by the direct method. Indeed, we have
\begin{proposition}\label{802}
There exists $w^\lambda \in K_\lambda(D) $ such that
\begin{equation}\label{303}
\mathcal{E}(w^\lambda)= \sup_{{w} \in K_\lambda(D)}\mathcal{E}({w}).
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Firstly we show that $K_\lambda(D)$ is sequentially compact in $L^\infty(D)$ in the weak star topology.
In fact, since $K_\lambda(D)$ is a closed and convex subset of $L^2(D)$ in the strong topology, we conclude from Mazur's lemma that $K_\lambda(D)$ is closed in the weak topology of $L^2(D)$, which implies that $K_\lambda(D)$ is closed in $L^\infty(D)$ in the weak star topology.
Now we prove that $\mathcal{E}$ is a sequentially weakly star continuous functional in $L^\infty(D)$. Let $\{w_n\}$ be a sequence in $L^\infty(D)$ such that $w_n\rightarrow w$ weakly star in $ L^\infty(D)$ as $n\rightarrow+\infty$. Then it is easy to see that $w_n\rightarrow w$ weakly in $ L^p(D)$
for any $1<p<+\infty$. By $L^p$ estimate we have $Gw_n\rightarrow Gw$ in $ C^1(\overline{D})$. Taking into account \eqref{301} we get $\lim_{n\to\infty}E(w_n)=E(w)$.
Since $G(x,y)\in L^1(D\times D)$, it follows that $E$ is bounded from above in $K_\lambda(D)$, that is, $\sup_{w\in K_{\lambda}(D)}\mathcal{E}(w)<+\infty$. Then we can take a sequence $\{w_n\}$ such that $\lim_{n\rightarrow}\mathcal{E}(w_n)=\sup_{w\in K_{\lambda}(D)}\mathcal{E}(w)$. Without loss of generality, we assume that $w_n\rightarrow w^\lambda$ weakly star in $ L^\infty(D)$ for some $w^\lambda\in K_{\lambda}(D)$ as $n\rightarrow+\infty$. It follows easily from the above discussion that $\mathcal{E}(w^\lambda)= \sup_{{w} \in K_\lambda(D)}\mathcal{E}({w})$.
\end{proof}
In the following lemma, by choosing suitable test functions we study the profile of $w^\lambda$.
\begin{lemma}\label{805}
For any maximizer $w^\lambda$ obtained in Lemma $\ref{802}$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{304}
w^\lambda=\lambda I_{A^\lambda} + 2\Omega I_{B^\lambda} ~\text{~ a.e. in} ~D,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{AB}
A^\lambda=\{x\in D\mid Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2>\mu^\lambda\} ~\text{and}~ B^\lambda=\{x\in D\mid Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2=\mu^\lambda\},
\end{equation}
and the Lagrange multiplier $\mu^\lambda>0$ is determined by $w^\lambda$ as follows
\begin{equation}\label{305}
\begin{split}
\mu^\lambda &={\sup}_{\{x\in D\mid w(x)<\lambda\}}\left(Gw(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2\right)
={\inf}_{\{x\in D\mid w(x)>0\}}\left(Gw(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2\right).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Define a family of test functions $w_s=w^\lambda+s(z_0-z_1)$, $s>0$, where $z_0$ and $z_1$ satisfy
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
z_0,z_1\in L^\infty(D),\,\,z_0,z_1\geq 0\text{ a.e. in }D,
\\ \int_Dz_0(x)dx=\int_D z_1(x)dx,
\\z_0=0 \quad\text{in } D\setminus\{x\in D\mid w^\lambda(x)\leq\lambda-\delta\},
\\z_1=0 \quad\text{in } D\setminus\{x\in D\mid w^\lambda(x)\geq\delta\}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Here $\delta$ is a small positive number. It is easy to see that for fixed $z_0,z_1$ and $\delta$, if $s$ is sufficiently small, $w_s$ belongs to $ K_\lambda(D)$. Since $w^\lambda$ is a maximizer, we have
\[0\geq\frac{d\mathcal{E}(w_s)}{ds}\bigg|_{s=0^+}=\int_Dz_0(x)\left(Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2\right)dx-\int_Dz_1(x)\left(Gw^\lambda(x)
+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2\right)dx.\]
By the choice of $z_0$ and $z_1$ we deduce that
\begin{equation}\label{1-103}
\sup_{\{x\in D\mid w^\lambda(x)<\lambda\}}\left(Gw^\lambda+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2\right)\leq\inf_{\{x\in D\mid w^\lambda(x)>0\}}\left(Gw^\lambda+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2\right).
\end{equation}
By the continuity of $Gw^\lambda+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2$ , \eqref{1-103} is in fact an equality, that is,
\begin{equation}
\sup_{\{x\in D\mid w^\lambda(x)<\lambda\}}\left(Gw^\lambda+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2\right)=\inf_{\{x\in D\mid w^\lambda(x)>0\}}\left(Gw^\lambda+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2\right).
\end{equation}
Set
\[\mu^\lambda:=\sup_{\{x\in D\mid w^\lambda(x)<\lambda\}}\left(Gw^\lambda+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2\right)=\inf_{\{x\in D\mid w^\lambda(x)>0\}}\left(Gw^\lambda+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2\right).\]
It is easy to check that
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
w^\lambda=0\text{\,\,\,\,\,\,a.e.\,} \text{in }\{x\in D\mid Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2<\mu^\lambda\},
\\ w^\lambda=\lambda\text{\,\,\,\,\,\,a.e.\,} \text{in }\{x\in D\mid Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2>\mu^\lambda\}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
On the level set $\{x\in D\mid Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2=\mu^\lambda\}$, by the property of Sobolev functions, we have $-\Delta (G\omega^\lambda+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2)=0\text{\,\,a.e.}$ on $\{x\in D\mid Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2=\mu^\lambda\}$, from which we obtain
$w^\lambda=2\Omega$ a.e. on $\{x\in D\mid Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2=\mu^\lambda\}$. The proof is completed.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
In Lemma \ref{805}, we only show that for fixed $w^\lambda$ the Lagrange multiplier $\mu^\lambda $ is unique, however, the mapping from $\lambda$ to $\mu ^\lambda$ may be multiple-valued.
\end{remark}
\begin{proposition}\label{patch}
Suppose $w^\lambda$ is a maximizer and $\lambda\neq2{\Omega}$, then $|B^\lambda|=0$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We divide the proof into three steps.
\textbf{Step 1:} For any $w_1,w_2\in K_{\lambda}(D)$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{conve} \int_D\int_DG(x,y)w_1(x)w_2(y)dxdy\leq E(w_1)+E(w_2),\end{equation}
where\[E(w):=\frac{1}{2}\int_D\int_DG(x,y)w(x)w(y)dxdy,\,\,w\in K_\lambda(D),\]
and the equality holds if and only if $w_1=w_2$. In fact, we need only to observe that $E(w_1-w_2)\geq0$, and $E(w_1-w_2)=0$ if and only if $w_1=w_2.$
Combining the symmetry of the Green's function, we get \eqref{conve}.
\textbf{Step 2:} $w^\lambda$ is the unique maximizer of the following functional
\begin{equation}\label{qqqq}
\mathcal{Q}(w):=\int_D(Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2)w(x)dx
\end{equation}
in the admissible $K_\lambda(D)$. In fact, by Step 1 we have
\begin{equation}\label{uniq}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{Q}(w)&=\int_DGw^\lambda(x)w(x)dx+\int_D\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2w(x)dx\\
&\leq E(w^\lambda)+E(w)+\int_D\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2w(x)dx\\
&\leq E(w^\lambda)+\mathcal{E}(w^\lambda)\\
&=\mathcal{Q}(w^\lambda).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Moreover, the equality holds if and only if $w=w^\lambda$, which is the desired result.
\textbf{Step 3:} If $\lambda\neq2{\Omega}$, then $|B^\lambda|=0$. In fact, if $\lambda<2\Omega,$ the conclusion is obvious. So we need only to prove the case $\lambda>2\Omega.$ Suppose $|B^\lambda|\neq0$. We define $\bar{w}=\lambda I_{A^\lambda}+2^{-1}({\lambda}+2\Omega) I_{C^\lambda}$, where $C^\lambda$ satisfying $C^\lambda\subset B^\lambda$ and $|C^\lambda|=4\Omega(\lambda+2\Omega)^{-1}|B^\lambda|$. Then it is easy to check that $\bar{w}\in K_\lambda(D)$ and $\bar{w}\neq w^\lambda$. But we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{Q}(\bar{w})&=\int_D(Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2)w(x)dx\\
&=\lambda\int_{A^\lambda}(Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2)dx+\frac{({\lambda}+2\Omega)}{2}\int_{C^\lambda}(Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2)dx\\
&=\lambda\int_{A^\lambda}(Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2)dx+\frac{({\lambda}+2\Omega)}{2}|{C^\lambda}|\mu^\lambda \\
&=\lambda\int_{A^\lambda}(Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2)dx+2\Omega|B^\lambda|\mu^\lambda \\
&=\lambda\int_{A^\lambda}(Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2)dx+2\Omega\int_{B^\lambda}(Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2)dx\\
&=\mathcal{Q}(w^\lambda),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
which is a contradiction to Step 2.
\end{proof}
From Lemma \ref{805} and Proposition \ref{patch}, we can easily deduce the following
\begin{corollary}\label{coro}
For any $\lambda>|D|^{-1}$, any maximizer $w^\lambda$ has the from $w^\lambda=\lambda_{\tilde{A}^\lambda}$ a.e. for some $\tilde{A}^\lambda\subset D$.
\end{corollary}
In the following we analyze the limiting behavior of $w^\lambda$ as $\lambda\rightarrow+\infty$.
For simplicity, we will use $C$ to denote various positive numbers independent of $\lambda$.
\begin{lemma}\label{808}
$\mathcal{E}(w^\lambda)=-({4\pi})^{-1}\ln{\varepsilon}+O(1),$ where $\varepsilon$ satisfies $\lambda \pi \varepsilon^2=1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Choose a test function $\hat{w}\in K_\lambda(D)$ defined by
\begin{equation}\label{311}
\hat{w}=\lambda I_{B_\varepsilon(0)}.
\end{equation}
Since $w^\lambda$ is a maximizer, we have $\mathcal{E}(w^\lambda)\ge \mathcal{E}(\hat{w})$. By a simple calculation, we obtain
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{E}(\hat{w})&=\frac{1}{2}\int_D{\int_DG(x,y)\hat{w}(x)\hat{w}(y)dx}dy+\frac{\Omega}{2}\int_D|x|^2\hat{w}(x)dx\\
&\geq \frac{1}{2}\int_D\int_D-\frac{1}{2\pi}\ln|x-y|\hat{w}(x)\hat{w}(y)dxdy-C\\
&=\frac{\lambda^2}{2}\int_{B_\varepsilon(0)}\int_{B_\varepsilon(0)}-\frac{1}{2\pi}\ln|x-y|dxdy-C\\
&\geq\frac{\lambda^2}{2}\int_{B_\varepsilon(0)}\int_{B_\varepsilon(0)}-\frac{1}{2\pi}\ln(2\varepsilon)dxdy-C\\
&= -({4\pi})^{-1}\ln{\varepsilon}-C,
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
where we used the fact \[\int_D\int_Dh(x,y)\hat{w}(x)\hat{w}(y)dxdy\rightarrow h(0,0) \text{ as }\lambda\rightarrow +\infty.\]
On the other hand,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{E}(w^\lambda)&=\frac{1}{2}\int_D{\int_DG(x,y)w^\lambda(x)w^\lambda(y)dx}dy+\frac{\Omega}{2}\int_D|x|^2w^\lambda(x)dx\\
&\leq \frac{1}{2}\int_D\int_D-\frac{1}{2\pi}\ln|x-y|\hat{w}(x)\hat{w}(y)dxdy+C\\
&\leq -({4\pi})^{-1}\ln{\varepsilon}+C,
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
where we used Riesz's rearrangement inequality(see \cite{LL}, 3.7) and the fact that $h(x,y)$ is bounded from below in $D\times D$.~The proof is completed.
\end{proof}
Now we estimate the energy of the ``vortex core". Define $\psi^\lambda = Gw^\lambda+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2-\mu^\lambda$. The kinetic energy of the ``vortex core" is defined as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{309}
T(w^\lambda)=\frac{1}{2}\int_D{|\nabla\psi^\lambda_+(x)|^2}dx,
\end{equation}
where $\psi^\lambda_+= \max\{\psi^\lambda, 0\}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{810}
$T(w^\lambda)\le C.$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Firstly it is easy to check that $\psi^\lambda$ satisfies the following elliptic equation
\begin{equation}\label{308}
\begin{cases}
-\Delta \psi^\lambda = w^\lambda-2\Omega &\text{in}~~~ D ,\\
~~~~~~~~~\psi^\lambda=\frac{\Omega}{2}-\mu^\lambda&\text{on}~~~\partial D.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Set~$\gamma^\lambda:=\max({\Omega}/{2}-\mu^\lambda,0)\in[0,\Omega/{2}]$. Let us multiply both sides by $\psi^\lambda_+-\gamma^\lambda\in H^1_0(D)$. By integration by parts we have
\begin{equation}\label{vor}
\begin{split}
2T(w^\lambda)&= \int_D{|\nabla\psi^\lambda_+(x)|^2}dx\\
&=\int_D(w^\lambda(x)-2\Omega)\psi^\lambda_+(x)dx-\gamma^\lambda\int_D(w^\lambda(x)-2\Omega)dx\\
&\le\int_Dw^\lambda(\psi^\lambda_+(x)-\gamma^\lambda)dx+C\\
&\le\lambda|\{x\in D\mid\psi^\lambda(x)>\gamma^\lambda\}|^{{1}/{2}}\left(\int_D(\psi^\lambda_+(x)-\gamma^\lambda)^2dx\right)^{{1}/{2}} +C\\
&\le C\lambda|\{x\in D\mid\psi^\lambda(x)>0\}|^{{1}/{2}}\int_D{|\nabla\psi^\lambda_+(x)|}dx+C\\
&\le C\lambda|\{x\in D\mid\psi^\lambda(x)>0\}|\left(\int_D{|\nabla\psi^\lambda_+(x)|^2}dx\right)^{{1}/{2}}+C\\
&\le C(T(w^\lambda))^{{1}/{2}}+C,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where we used H\"older's inequality and Sobolev inequality. From \eqref{vor} we conclude the desired result.
\end{proof}
We are now ready to estimate the Lagrange multiplier $\mu^\lambda$.
\begin{lemma}\label{811}
$\mu^\lambda=-({2\pi})^{-1}\ln{\varepsilon}+O(1)$, as $\lambda\rightarrow+\infty$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Set~$\gamma^\lambda:=\max({\Omega}/{2}-\mu^\lambda,0)$.
By \eqref{vor} we have as $\lambda\rightarrow+\infty$
\begin{equation}\label{890}
\begin{split}
\ 2T(w^\lambda)&=\int_Dw^\lambda(x)\psi^\lambda_+(x)dx-2\Omega\int_D\psi^\lambda_+(x)dx+O(1)\\
&=\int_Dw^\lambda(x)\psi^\lambda(x) dx-2\Omega\int_D\psi^\lambda_+(x)dx+O(1)\\
&=\int_Dw^\lambda(x)(Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2-\mu^\lambda)dx-\frac{\Omega}{2}\int_Dw^\lambda(x)|x|^2dx-2\Omega\int_D\psi^\lambda_+(x)dx+O(1)\\
&=2\mathcal{E}(w^\lambda)-\mu^\lambda-2\Omega\int_D(\psi^\lambda_+(x)-\gamma^\lambda)dx+O(1)\\
&=2\mathcal{E}(w^\lambda)-\mu^\lambda+O(1).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Here we used $\int_D|\psi^+-\gamma^\lambda|dx\le C ({\int_D{|\nabla\psi^+|^2}dx})^{\frac{1}{2}}\leq C$. From Lemma $\ref{808}$ and Lemma $\ref{810}$ we get the desired result.
\end{proof}
In the next lemma we show that the diameter of support of $w^\lambda$ is of order $\varepsilon$.
\begin{lemma}\label{812}
There is a constant $R_0>1$ independent of $\lambda$, such that$
\ \text{diam}(\text{supp}(w^\lambda))\le R_0\varepsilon$,~with $\varepsilon$ satisfying $\lambda\pi\varepsilon^2=1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For any $x\in supp(w^\lambda)$, we have $\psi^\lambda(x)\ge0$. Recalling the definition of $\psi^\lambda$, we deduce that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\mu^\lambda &\le Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2 =\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_D\ln| x-y|^{-1}w^\lambda(y)dy-\int_Dh(x,y)w^\lambda(y)dy+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Taking into account Lemma \ref{811} we obtain
\[\frac{1}{2\pi}\ln{\frac{1}{\varepsilon}}-C\le \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_D\ln|x-y|^{-1}w^\lambda(y)dy,\]
That is to say,
$$-2\pi C\le\int_D\ln\frac{\varepsilon}{|x-y|}w^\lambda(y)dy.$$
Now by choosing $R>1$ to be determined, we calculate as follows
\begin{equation}\label{8888}
\begin{split}
\ -2\pi C&\le\int_D\ln\frac{\varepsilon}{|x-y|}w^\lambda(y)dy\\
&\le\int_{D\cap{B_{R\varepsilon}(x)}}\ln\frac{\varepsilon}{|x-y|}w^\lambda(y)dy+\int_{D\backslash B_{R\varepsilon}(x)}\ln\frac{\varepsilon}{|x-y|}w^\lambda(y)dy\\
&\le\int_{D\cap B_{\varepsilon}(x)}\ln\frac{\varepsilon}{|x-y|}w^\lambda(y)dy-\ln R\int_{D\backslash B_{R\varepsilon}(x)}w^\lambda(y)dy\\
&\le\lambda\int_{B_{\varepsilon}(0)}\ln\frac{\varepsilon}{|y|}dy-\ln R\int_{D\backslash B_{R\varepsilon}(x)}w^\lambda(y)dy\\
&=\frac{1}{2}-\ln R\int_{D\backslash B_{R\varepsilon}(x)}w^\lambda(y)dy.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
From \eqref{8888} we get
\begin{equation*}
\int_{D\backslash B_{R\varepsilon}(x)}w^\lambda(y)dy\le C(\ln R)^{-1}.
\end{equation*}
Taking $R>1$ large enough such that $C(\ln R)^{-1}<1/2$, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{316}
\int_{D\cap{B_{R\varepsilon}(x)}}w^\lambda(y)dy>\frac{1}{2}.
\end{equation}
Now the lemma is proved by taking $R_0=2R.$ In fact, suppose $diam (supp(w^\lambda))> 2R\varepsilon$, then there exist $x_1, x_2\in supp(w^\lambda)$ such that $B_{R\varepsilon}(x_1)\cap B_{R\varepsilon}(x_2)=\varnothing$. By $\eqref{316}$,
$$1=\int_Dw^\lambda(y)dy\ge \int_{D\cap{B_{R\varepsilon}(x_1)}}w^\lambda(y)dy+\int_{D\cap{B_{R\varepsilon}(x_2)}}w^\lambda(y)dy>1,$$
which leads to a contradiction.
\end{proof}
We proceed to study the limiting behavior of $w^\lambda$ as $\lambda \to +\infty.$
Define the center of $w^\lambda$ to be
\begin{equation}\label{317}
\ X^\lambda = \int_Dxw^\lambda(x)dx.
\end{equation}
Since $\bar{D}$ is a compact set, for the remainder of the discussion we may fix a sequence $\lambda=\lambda_j\to+\infty$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{318}
X^\lambda\to X^*\in\bar{D} ~\,\,~~\text{as}~\ ~ \lambda=\lambda_j\to+\infty.
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma}\label{813}
Let $X^*$ be defined by $\eqref{318}$, then
\begin{equation}\label{319}
H(X^*)-\frac{\Omega}{2}|X^*|^2=\min_{x\in D}(H(x)-\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2),
\end{equation}
or equivalently,
\begin{equation}\label{320}
|X^*|=\begin{cases}\sqrt{1-\frac{1}{\pi\Omega}}, &\text{if }\Omega>1/\pi,\\
0, &\text{if }\Omega\leq1/\pi.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For any $\hat{x}\in D$,
we define a test function $\hat{w}^\lambda=\lambda I_{B_\varepsilon(\hat{x})}.$ For sufficiently large $\lambda$, we have $\hat{w}^\lambda\in K_{\lambda}(D)$. So we have by Riesz's rearrangement inequality(see \cite{LL}, 3.2) and the fact that $\mathcal{E}(w^\lambda)\ge \mathcal{E}(\hat{w}^\lambda)$,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\frac{1}{2}\int_D&{\int_Dh(x,y)w^\lambda(x)w^\lambda(y)dx}dy-\frac{\Omega}{2}\int_D|x|^2w^\lambda(x)dx\\
&=\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_D{\int_D~\ln|x-y|^{-1}w^\lambda (x)w^\lambda(y)dx}dy-\mathcal{E}(w^\lambda)\\
&\le\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_D{\int_D~\ln|x-y|^{-1}\hat{w}^\lambda (x)\hat{w}^\lambda(y)dx}dy-\mathcal{E}(\hat{w}^\lambda)\\
&\le\frac{1}{2}\int_D{\int_D~h(x,y)\hat{w}^\lambda(x)\hat{w}^\lambda (y)dx}dy-\frac{\Omega}{2}\int_D|x|^2\hat{w}^\lambda(x)dx.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Letting $\lambda\to+\infty$, we deduce that
$$H(X^*)-\frac{\Omega}{2}|X^*|^2\le H(\hat{x})-\frac{\Omega}{2}|\hat{x}|^2,\,\,\forall\,\hat{x}\in D,$$
from which we obtain \eqref{319}. Firstly by a simple calculation, it is easy to check that $X^*$ satisfies \eqref{320}.
\end{proof}
We now turn to study the small scale asymptotics of the $w^\lambda$. To begin with, we state a result from potential theory which will be frequently used later.
\begin{lemma}\label{807}[\cite{T}, Lemma 4.2]
Let $R\in(1,+\infty)$ be a constant. Define the class $\mathcal{K}_R$ as follows
$$\mathcal{K}_R=\{\zeta \in L^\infty(B_R(0)):0\le \zeta \le 1, \int_{B_R(0)}\zeta(x)dx=\pi \}$$
Let the functional $F$ be defined by
\begin{equation}\label{306}
F(\zeta)=\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{B_R(0)}{\int_{B_R(0)}N(x,y)w(x)w(y)dx}dy,
\end{equation}
where $N(x,y)=({2\pi})^{-1}\ln|x-y|^{-1}.$
Then $\zeta^*=I_{B_1(0)}$ is the unique maximizer of $F$ over $\mathcal{K}_R$ satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{307}
\int_{B_R(0)}x\zeta(x)dx=0.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}\label{815}
Let $R_0$ be the positive number obtained in Lemma $\ref{812}$. Then as $\lambda\to +\infty$, we have $\zeta^\lambda\to \zeta^*:=I_{B_1(0)}$ weakly star in $L^\infty(B_{R_0}(0))$, where
\begin{equation}\label{321}
\ \zeta^\lambda(y)=\frac{1}{\lambda}w^\lambda(X^\lambda+\varepsilon y)\in L^\infty(B_{R_0}(0)).
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Firstly, it is easy to see that $\zeta^{\lambda}\in \mathcal{K}_{R_0}$. Moreover, by the definition of $X^{\lambda}$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{564}
\begin{split}
\int_{B_{R_0}(0)}y \zeta^{\lambda}(y)dy=& \lambda^{-1}\int_{B_{R_0}(0)}y \omega^{\lambda}(X^{\lambda}+\varepsilon y)dy \\
=&\lambda^{-1}\int_{B_{R_0\varepsilon}(X^{\lambda})}\varepsilon^{-1}(x-X^{\lambda})\omega^{\lambda}(x)\varepsilon^{-2}dx \\
=&\pi\varepsilon^{-1}\int_{D}(x-X^{\lambda})\omega^{\lambda}(x)dx \\
=&0,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
that is, the center of $\zeta^{\lambda}$ is 0 for sufficiently large $\lambda$.
Now for any $\tilde{\zeta}\in \mathcal{K}_{R_0}$, define $\tilde{\omega}\in K_{\lambda}(D)$ as follows
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\omega}(x)=\begin{cases}
&\lambda\tilde{\zeta}(\varepsilon^{-1}(x-X^{\lambda})),\,\,\,\,x\in B_{R_0\varepsilon}(X^{\lambda}), \\
&0, \quad\quad \quad\quad\quad \quad\quad \,\,\, x\in D\setminus B_{R_0\varepsilon}(X^{\lambda}).
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Direct calculation shows that as $\lambda\rightarrow +\infty$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{E}(\tilde{\omega})=&\frac{1}{2}\int_{D}\int_{D}G(x,x')\tilde{\omega}(x)\tilde{\omega}(x')dxdx'+\frac{\Omega}{2}\int_{D}|x|^2\tilde{\omega}(x)dx \\
=&\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{D}\int_{D}\ln\frac{1}{|x-x'|}\tilde{\omega}(x)\tilde{\omega}(x')dxdx'-\frac{1}{2}\int_{D}\int_{D}h(x,x')\tilde{\omega}(x)\tilde{\omega}(x')dxdx'+\frac{\Omega}{2}\int_{D}|x|^2\tilde{\omega}(x)dx \\
=&\frac{1}{4\pi}\ln\frac{1}{\varepsilon}+\frac{1}{\pi^2}F(\tilde{\zeta})-H(X^*)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|X^*|^2+o(1).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
By a similar calculation for $\omega^{\lambda}$ and $\zeta^{\lambda}$, we also have
\[\mathcal{E}(\omega^{\lambda})=\frac{1}{4\pi}\ln\frac{1}{\varepsilon}+\frac{1}{\pi^2}F(\zeta^{\lambda})-H(X^*)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|X^*|^2+o(1),\]
as $\lambda\rightarrow +\infty$. Since $\mathcal{E}(\tilde{\omega})\leq \mathcal{E}(\omega^{\lambda})$, we obtain as $\lambda\rightarrow +\infty$
\[F(\tilde{\zeta})\leq F(\zeta^{\lambda})+o(1).\]
On the other hand, since $||\zeta^{\lambda}||_{L^{\infty}(B_{R_0}(0))}\leq 1$, there exists $\zeta\in \mathcal{K}_{R_0}$ such that up to subsequence
\[\zeta^{\lambda}\rightarrow\zeta\ \ \ \ \text{weakly star in }\ L^{\infty}(B_{R_0}(0))\]
as $\lambda\rightarrow +\infty$.
By the continuity of $F$, we deduce that $F(\zeta)=\lim_{m\rightarrow+\infty}F(\zeta^{\lambda})\geq F(\tilde{\zeta})$. Since $\tilde{\zeta}\in \mathcal{K}_{R_0}$ is arbitrary and taking into account the fact that
\[\int_{B_{R_0}(0)}y\zeta(y)dy=\lim_{m\rightarrow+\infty}\int_{B_{R_0}(0)}y\zeta^{\lambda}(y)dy=0,\]
we deduce from Lemma \ref{807} that $\zeta=\zeta^*=I_{B_1(0)}$. Finally, since the maximizer of $F(\zeta)$ over $\mathcal{K}_{R_0}$ is unique, the convergence is independent of the choice of any subsequence, which completes the proof.
\end{proof}
To study the limiting behavior of $\psi^\lambda$, we define
\begin{equation}
\ V^\lambda(y):=\pi \psi^\lambda(X^\lambda+\varepsilon y),\,\,y\in D_\lambda:=\{y\in\mathbb{R}^2: X^\lambda+\epsilon y\in D\}.
\end{equation}
By $L^p$ estimate, for any fixed $R_1>R_0$, if $\lambda$ is sufficiently large, we have $V^\lambda \in C^{1,\alpha}(\overline{{B}_{R_1}(0)})$ for each $0<\alpha<1$.
\begin{lemma}\label{816}
As $\lambda\to +\infty$, we have $V^\lambda\to V^* ~\text{in}~ C^1(\overline{{B}_{R_1}(0)})$, where $V^*$ is defined by \eqref{rank}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Firstly, define $\tilde{V}^{\lambda}(y)\in C^1(\mathbb{R}^2)$ by setting
\[\tilde{V}^{\lambda}(y)=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{\mathbb{R}^2}\ln|y-y'|^{-1}\zeta^{\lambda}(y')dy'.\]
Since $\text{supp}(\zeta^{\lambda})\subset \overline{B_{R_0}(0)}$ and $0\leq \zeta^{\lambda}\leq 1$ in $B_{R_0}(0)$, by standard elliptic theory, we have,
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
&-\Delta\tilde{V}^{\lambda}(y)=\zeta^{\lambda}(y),\ \ \ \ \ \ y\in B_{R_1}(0), \\
&|\nabla\tilde{V}^{\lambda}(y)|\leq C,\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ y\in B_{R_1}(0), \\
&|\nabla\tilde{V}^{\lambda}(y)-\nabla\tilde{V}^{\lambda}(y')|\leq C|y-y'|\ln(1+\frac{2R_1}{|y-y'|}),\ \ y,y'\in B_{R_1}(0).
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
So we know that $\{\tilde{V}^{\lambda}(y)\}$ and $\{\nabla\tilde{V}^{\lambda}(y)\}$ are both equicontinuous in $B_{R_1}(0)$. Since $\zeta^{\lambda}\rightharpoonup \zeta^*$ weakly star in $L^{\infty}(B_{R_1}(0))$, we have $\tilde{V}^{\lambda}(y)\rightarrow V^*(y)$ and $\nabla\tilde{V}^{\lambda}(y)\rightarrow \nabla V^*(y)$ a.e. in $B_{R_1}(0)$. By Arzela-Ascoli's theorem,
\begin{equation}\label{323}
\tilde{V}^{\lambda}\rightarrow V^*\ \ \ \ \text{in}\ \ C^1(\overline{B_{R_1}(0)}),
\end{equation}
as $\lambda\rightarrow+\infty.$
On the other hand, by a simple calculation we know that $V^{\lambda}$ satisfies,
\begin{equation}\label{322}
\begin{cases}
-\Delta V^{\lambda}= \zeta^{\lambda}-\frac{2\Omega}{\lambda}&\text{in } D_{\lambda}, \\
V^{\lambda}=\pi\left(\frac{\Omega}{2}-\mu^{\lambda}\right)&\text{on } \partial D_{\lambda}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Recall that we have obtained the following estimate for $\mu^\lambda$ in Lemma \ref{811}
\[\mu^{\lambda}=\frac{1}{2\pi}\ln\frac{1}{\varepsilon}+O(1),\,\,\text{as }\lambda\rightarrow +\infty.\]
Set $d=\frac{1}{2}dist(X^*,\partial D)>0$. Then for sufficiently large $\lambda$, $d<dist(X^{\lambda}, \partial D)$, which implies ${d}/{\varepsilon}\leq |y| \leq 2/{\varepsilon}$ for any $y\in \partial D_{\lambda}$. Therefore for any $y\in \partial D_{\lambda}$
\[V^{\lambda}(y)=\pi(\frac{\Omega}{2}-\mu^{\lambda})=-\frac{1}{2}\ln\frac{1}{\varepsilon}+O(1)=-\frac{1}{2}\ln|y|+O(1).\]
Meanwhile, for any $y\in \partial D_{\lambda}$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\tilde{V}^{\lambda}(y)=&\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{\mathbb{R}^2}\ln|y-y'|^{-1}\zeta^{\lambda}(y')dy' \\
=&\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{B_{R_0}(0)}\ln|y|^{-1}\zeta^{\lambda}(y')dy'+O(1) \\
=&\frac{1}{2}\ln|y|^{-1}+O(1).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Hence $|V^{\lambda}-\tilde{V}^{\lambda}|\leq C$ on $\partial D_{\lambda}$. Therefore, according to \eqref{322}, we get
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
&\Delta(V^{\lambda}-\tilde{V}^{\lambda})=\frac{2\Omega}{\lambda}\ \ \ \ \text{in}\ \ D_{\lambda}, \\
&|V^{\lambda}-\tilde{V}^{\lambda}|\leq C \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \text{on}\ \ \partial D_{\lambda},
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
which implies
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
&\Delta\left(V^{\lambda}-\tilde{V}^{\lambda}-\frac{\pi\Omega}{2}|X^{\lambda}+\varepsilon y|^2\right)=0\ \ \ \ \text{in}\ \ D_{\lambda}, \\
&\left|V^{\lambda}-\tilde{V}^{\lambda}-\frac{\pi\Omega}{2}|X^{\lambda}+\varepsilon y|^2\right|\leq C \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \text{on}\ \ \partial D_{\lambda},
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where we used $\frac{\pi\Omega}{2}|X^{\lambda}+\varepsilon y|^2\leq C$ for any $y\in \partial D_{\lambda}$.
By the interior gradient estimate for harmonic functions, we deduce that
\[\sup_{y\in \overline{{B}_{{R_1}(0)}}}\left|\nabla V^{\lambda}(y)-\nabla\tilde{V}^{\lambda}(y)-\nabla\left(\frac{\pi\Omega}{2}|X^{\lambda}+\varepsilon y|^2\right)\right|\leq C\varepsilon.\]
Note that $|\nabla\left(\frac{\pi\Omega}{2}|X^{\lambda}+\varepsilon y|^2\right)|\leq C\varepsilon$ for any $y\in \overline{{B}_{{R_1}(0)}}$,~so we obtain
\[\sup_{y\in \overline{{B}_{{R_1}(0)}}}\left|\nabla V^{\lambda}(y)-\nabla\tilde{V}^{\lambda}(y)\right|\leq C\varepsilon.\]
Arzela-Ascoli's theorem yields that\,(up to a subsequence)\, there exists some constant $C^*$ such that
\[V^{\lambda}-\tilde{V}^{\lambda}\rightarrow C^*\ \ \\ \ \text{in}\ \ C^1(\overline{{B}_{{R_1}(0)}}),\]
which together with \eqref{323} gives
\begin{equation*}\label{324}
V^{\lambda}\rightarrow V^*+C^*\ \ \\ \ \text{in}\ \ C^1(\overline{{B}_{{R_1}(0)}}).
\end{equation*}
Recall that if $\lambda>2\Omega$, then $\lambda|\{x\in D \mid \psi^{\lambda}(x)>0\}|= 1$, which yields $|\{y\in B_{R_1}(0)\mid V^{\lambda}(y)>0\}|= \pi$, and thus $C^*=0$. We note that this conclusion is independent of the choice of any subsequence, thus the proof is completed.
\end{proof}
Now we are ready to prove Theorem \ref{Thm}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{Thm}]
It suffices to show that any maximizer $w^\lambda$ satisfies \eqref{001}. For any $\phi\in C^{\infty}_c(D)$ and $x\in D$, consider the following ordinary differential equation
\begin{equation}\label{ORD}
\begin{cases}\frac{d\Phi_s(x)}{ds}=\nabla^\perp\phi(\Phi_s(x)) &s\in\mathbb R, \\
\Phi_0(x)=x.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Since $\nabla^\perp\phi\in C_c^\infty(D;\mathbb R^3)$, $\eqref{ORD}$ has a unique global solution. It is easy to check that $\nabla^\perp\phi$ is divergence-free, so $\Phi_s$ is a measure-preserving transformation from $D$ to $D$, that is, for any measurable set $F\subset D$, we have $|\{\Phi_s(x)\mid x\in F\}|=|F|$. Now we define a family of test functions $\{w_s\}_{t\in\mathbb R}$ by setting
\begin{equation}
w_s(x):=w^\lambda(\Phi_s(x)).
\end{equation}
It is easy to see that $w_s\in K_{\lambda}(D)$. So we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{0000}
\frac{d\mathcal{E}(w_s)}{ds}|_{s=0}=0.
\end{equation}
Expanding $\mathcal{E}(\omega_s)$ at $s=0$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{0002}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{E}(w_s)=&\frac{1}{2}\int_D\int_DG(x,y)w^\lambda(\Phi_s(x))w^\lambda(\Phi_s(y))dxdy+\frac{\Omega}{2}\int_D|x|^2w^\lambda(\Phi_s(x))dx\\
=&\frac{1}{2}\int_D\int_DG(\Phi_{-s}(x),\Phi_{-s}(y))w^\lambda(x)w^\lambda(y)dxdy+\frac{\Omega}{2}\int_D|(\Phi_{-s}(x))|^2w^\lambda(x)dx\\
=&\mathcal{E}(w^\lambda)+s\int_Dw^\lambda(x)\nabla^\perp(Gw^\lambda(x)+\frac{\Omega}{2}|x|^2)\cdot\nabla\phi(x) dx+o(s).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
From \eqref{0000} and \eqref{0002} we get the desired result.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{os}}
In this section we prove Theorem \ref{os}. To this end, we need two lemmas first.
\begin{lemma}\label{com}
Let $\{w_n\}$ be a maximizing sequence for $\mathcal{E}$ in $K_\lambda(D)$, then up to a subsequence there exists $w^\lambda\in \mathcal{S}_\lambda$ such that as $n\rightarrow+\infty$, $w_n\rightarrow w^\lambda$ in $L^p(D)$ for any $p\in[1,+\infty)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $\{w_n\}$ is a bounded sequence in $L^\infty(D)$, it suffices to show that $w_n\rightarrow w^\lambda$ in $L^2(D)$.
Firstly according to the proof of Proposition \ref{802}, for any maximizing sequence $w_n$, there must be a maximizer $w^\lambda\in K_\lambda(D)$ such that $w_n\rightarrow w^\lambda$ weakly star in $L^\infty(D)$. Thus $w_n\rightarrow w^\lambda$ weakly in $L^2(D)$, which implies
\begin{equation}\label{4-1}
\|w^\lambda\|_{L^2(D)}\leq\liminf_{n\rightarrow+\infty}\|w_n\|_{L^2(D)}.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, by Corollary \ref{coro}, $w^\lambda$ must have the form $w^\lambda=\lambda I_{\tilde{A}^\lambda}$ with $\lambda|\tilde{A}^\lambda|=1$, which gives
\begin{equation}\label{4-2}
\|w^\lambda\|_{L^2(D)}=\lambda|\tilde{A}^\lambda|^{1/2}=\lambda^{1/2}.
\end{equation}
But for any $n$,
\begin{equation}\label{4-3}
\|w_n\|_{L^2(D)}=\left(\int_D|w_n(x)|^2dx\right)^{1/2}\leq\lambda^{1/2}\left(\int_D|w_n(x)|dx\right)^{1/2}=\lambda^{1/2}.
\end{equation}
Combining \eqref{4-2} and \eqref{4-3} we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{4-4}
\|w^\lambda\|_{L^2(D)}\geq\limsup_{n\rightarrow+\infty}\|w_n\|_{L^2(D)}.
\end{equation}
Now by \eqref{4-1} and \eqref{4-4} we have
\begin{equation}\label{4-5}
\|w^\lambda\|_{L^2(D)}=\lim_{n\rightarrow+\infty}\|w_n\|_{L^2(D)}.
\end{equation}
By the uniform convexity of $L^2(D)$ we conclude that $w_n\rightarrow w^\lambda$ in $L^2(D)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{dl}[\cite{B5}, Lemma 11, Lemma 12]
Let $w(x,t)\in L^\infty_{loc}(\mathbb R; L^p(D))$ with $3/4<p<+\infty$. Let $\mathbf{u}=\nabla^\perp Gw$, $\zeta_0\in L^p(D)$. Then there exists a unique weak solution $\zeta(x,t)\in L^\infty_{loc}(\mathbb R; L^p(D))\cap C(\mathbb R; L^p(D))$ to the following linear transport equation
\begin{equation}\label{lt}
\begin{cases}
\partial_t\zeta+\mathbf{u}\cdot\nabla\zeta=0, &t\in\mathbb R,\\
\zeta(\cdot,0)=\zeta_0.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Here by weak solution we mean
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\int_{\mathbb R}\int_D\partial_t\phi(x,t)\zeta(x,t)+\zeta(x,t)&(\mathbf{u}\cdot\nabla\phi)(x,t)dxdt=0,\,\,\forall\,\,\phi\in C_c^\infty(D\times\mathbb R),\\
&\lim_{t\rightarrow0}\|\zeta(\cdot,t)-\zeta_0\|_{L^p(D)}=0.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Moreover, we have for any $t\in \mathbb R$
\begin{equation}\label{re}
|\{x\in D\mid \zeta(x,t)>a\}|=|\{x\in D\mid\zeta_0(x)>a\}|,\,\,\forall \,\,a\in\mathbb R.
\end{equation}
As a consequence, we have for any $t\in \mathbb R$
\begin{equation}
\|\zeta(\cdot,t)\|_{L^p(D)}=\|\zeta_0\|_{L^p(D)}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
Now we are ready to prove Theorem \ref{os}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{os}]
We give the proof by contradiction. Suppose that there exists a $\delta_0>0$, $t_n>0,$ $v_0^n\in L^p(D)$ satisfying $dist_p(v_0^n,\mathcal{S}_\lambda)\rightarrow0,$ but
\begin{equation}\label{444}
dist_p(v^n_{t_n},\mathcal{S}_\lambda)>\delta_0.
\end{equation} Here $v^n_{t}$ is a weak solution to the vorticity equation with initial $v^n_0.$
Since $3/2\leq p<+\infty$, by energy and angular momentum conservation in Theorem {A} it is easy to check that $\{v^n_{t_n}\}$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{4-6}
\lim_{n\rightarrow+\infty}\mathcal{E}(v^n_{t_n})=\sup_{K_\lambda(D)}\mathcal{E}.
\end{equation}
\textbf{Case 1:} If $v_0^n\in K_\lambda(D)$, then the proof is easy. In this case, we have $v^n_{t_n}\in K_\lambda(D)$, so by Lemma \ref{com}, up to a subsequence $v^n_{t_n}\rightarrow w^\lambda$ in $L^p(D)$ for some $w^\lambda\in\mathcal{S}_\lambda$, which contradicts \eqref{444}.
\textbf{Case 2:} For general $v^n_{0}\in L^p(D)$, we need Lemma \ref{dl}.
Since $dist_p(v^n_0,\mathcal{S}_\lambda)\rightarrow0$, we can choose $w^n_0\in\mathcal{S}_\lambda$ such that as $n\rightarrow+\infty$
\begin{equation}\label{4-7}
\|w^n_0-v^n_0\|_{L^p(D)}\rightarrow0.
\end{equation}
Now for each $n$, let $w^n(x,t)$ be the solution of the following linear transport equation
\begin{equation}\label{4-8}
\begin{cases}
\partial_tw^n(x,t)+\nabla^\perp Gv^n_t\cdot\nabla w^n(x,t)=0,\\
w^n(x,0)=w^n_0(x).
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
By Lemma \ref{dl}, it is clear that $w^n(\cdot,t)\in K_\lambda(D)$ for any $t>0$, and as $n\rightarrow+\infty$
\begin{equation}\label{4-9}
\|w^n(\cdot,t_n)-v^n_{t_n}\|_{L^p(D)}=\|w^n_0-v^n_0\|_{L^p(D)}\rightarrow0.
\end{equation}
Combining \eqref{4-6} and \eqref{4-9} we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{4-10}
\lim_{n\rightarrow+\infty}\mathcal{E}(w^n(\cdot,t_n))=\sup_{K_\lambda(D)}\mathcal{E}.
\end{equation}
Then by Lemma \ref{com} we conclude that there exists $w^\lambda\in \mathcal{S}_\lambda$ such that $ \|w^n(\cdot,t_n)-w^\lambda\|_{L^p(D)}\rightarrow0$, which gives
\begin{equation}\label{4-11}
dist_p(w^n(\cdot,t_n),\mathcal{S}_\lambda)\rightarrow0.
\end{equation}
Now \eqref{444},\eqref{4-9} and \eqref{4-11} together lead to a contradiction. Thus Theorem \ref{os} is proved.
\end{proof}
\noindent{\bf Acknowledgments:}
Daomin Cao was partially supported by Hua Luo Geng Center of Mathematics,
AMSS, CAS, he was also partially supported by NNSF of China grant No.11331010 and No.11771469.
Guodong Wang was supported by NNSF of China grant No.11771469.
|
\subsection{Minimal plan}
The currently proposed run plan, in terms of energy and luminosity, is illustrated in
Fig.~\ref{fig:H20staged}~\cite{Bambade:2019fyw}.
The initial running of the ILC will be at a CM energy of 250~GeV
with
bunch trains of
1312 $e^-$ or $e^+$ bunches per linac pulse, ramping up to
an instantaneous luminosity of $1.35\times 10^{34}$cm$^{-2}$sec$^{-1}$.
After 6 years, additional RF power will be added, increasing the
number of bunches per linac pulse to 2625 and doubling the
instantaneous luminosity. This is a relatively inexpensive change,
estimated
at 8\%
of the initial ILC cost. It is referred to in the figure as the
``Luminosity Upgrade''. After reaching a total integrated
luminosity of 2 ab$^{-1}$, the linacs would be lengthened to provide
a CM energy of 500~GeV. This is referred to in the figure as the ``Energy
Upgrade''. In fact, if funds are available, most of this upgrade
could be prepared in parallel with physics running at 250~GeV. The
extended machine would then ramp up to an instantaneous luminosity of
$3.6\times 10^{34}$cm$^{-2}$sec$^{-1}$ and acquire 4 ab$^{-1}$ of data, with
a brief interval of running at 350~GeV to measure the top quark mass
with high precision. The luminosity of a linear collider naturally
rises approximately linearly with CM energy, making it easier to
acquire larger luminosity samples as the energy is increased.
The ILC is designed to provide significant polarisation for both the
electron and positron beams. We expect $\pm 80\%$ polarisation for the
electron beam and $\pm 30\%$ polarisation for the positron beam.
Beam polarisation plays an important role
in the ILC physics, both in producing additional observables with
significant physics information and in controlling systematic errors.
The importance of polarisation at the ILC is discussed in detail in
\cite{MoortgatPick:2005cw,Fujii:2018mli}. Thus, for each operating
energy of the ILC, one must also specify the fraction of time that
will be spent in each of the four possible polarisation states. Our
baseline
choices are given in Table~\ref{tab:stageswpol}. Note that the
physics studies at 1~TeV, described below, assumed a positron
polarisation of $\pm 20\%$.
The full calendar duration of the minimal ILC plan shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:H20staged}
is 22~years. However, the plan for the ILC allows additional stages
of running either interleaved with those just described or carried out
after the end of the program. In this report, we will discuss
results for a GigaZ stage at $Z$ resonance and for an ILC stage at
1~TeV.
The GigaZ program, in particular, could
be carried out within or after the 250~GeV stage or within the
500~GeV
stage, whenever its physics results are deemed to be required.
In the following, we will refer to the stages of the ILC as ILC250,
ILC350, {\it etc.}, following the nomenclature of Table~\ref{tab:stageswpol}.
\begin{table}[tb]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lcc|cccc}
& & $\int {\cal L}$ & \multicolumn{4}{c}{fraction
with $\mathrm{sign}(P(e^-),P(e^+))= $ } \\
& $ E_{CM}$ (GeV) & (fb$^{-1}$) & $(-+)$ & $(+-)$ & $(--)$ & $(++)$ \\ \hline
ILC250 & 250 & 2000 & 45\% & 45\% & 5\% & 5\% \\
ILC350 & 350 & 200 & 67.5\% & 22.5\% & 5\% & 5\% \\
ILC500 & 500 & 4000 & 40\% & 40\% & 10\% & 10\% \\ \hline
GigaZ & 91.19 & 100 & 40\% & 40\% & 10\% & 10\% \\
ILC1000 & 1000 & 8000 & 40\% & 40\% & 10\% & 10\% \\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{CM energy, integrated luminosity, and polarisation fractions
for
the stages of ILC discussed in this report. In all cases, the
magnitude of the $e^-$ polarisation is taken to be 80\% and
the magnitude of the $e^+$ polarisation is taken to be 30\%,
except that, at ILC1000, 20\% $e^+$ polarisation was used in the studies quoted.}
\label{tab:stageswpol}
\end{table}
\subsection{GigaZ}
\label{sec:gigazaccel}
Although a physics run at the $Z$ pole is not part of the minimum
baseline run plan of the ILC,
it has always been considered as an important option which should not
be obstructed by the accelerator design. In particular, the GigaZ operation was
considered
in the 2015 study by the Joint Working Group on ILC
Beam Parameters~\cite{Barklow:2015tja}. That group recommended the
following run scenario as the canonical one for physics studies: The
integrated luminosity should be taken as $100$\,fb$^{-1}$. Both beams are
assumed to be polarised, with the polarisation fractions
as in Table~\ref{tab:stageswpol}.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.10}
\begin{tabular}{l|c c c c|c}
\hline
& \multicolumn{4}{c|}{$\mathrm{sign}(P(e^-),P(e^+))= $ } & \\
& $(-,+)$ & $(+,-) $ & $(-,-) $ & $ (+,+) $ & sum \\
\hline
\hline
luminosity [fb$^{-1}$] & 40 & 40 & 10 & 10 & \\
$\sigma(P_{e^-},P_{e^+})$ [nb] & 60.4 & 46.1 & 35.9
& 29.4 & \\
$Z$ events [$10^9$] & 2.4 & 1.8 & 0.36 & 0.29 & 4.9 \\
hadronic $Z$ events [$10^9$] & 1.7 & 1.3 & 0.25 & 0.21 & 3.4 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Integrated luminosities per beam helicity configuration for $Z$ pole running of the ILC, along with the corresponding cross sections and numbers of produced $Z$'s.}
\label{tab:pollumiNZ}
\end{table}
Table~\ref{tab:pollumiNZ} shows the resulting distribution of the
luminosity onto the four polarisation sign configurations, along with
the corresponding polarised cross
sections for $|P_{e^-}|=80\%$ and $|P_{e^+}|=30\%$
and the number of produced (hadronic) $Z$ events.
These have been calculated based on the values for the unpolarised
peak hadronic cross section including QED radiative corrections,
$\sigma= 30$\,nb~\cite{ALEPH:2005ab}, and the left-right asymmetry,
$A_{LR} = (A_e) = 0.1515$~\cite{Tanabashi:2018oca}. The last
column gives the total number of (hadronic) $Z$ events summed over
all data sets. Thus, ``GigaZ'' is actually nearly 5 (3.5) $\times
10^9$ $Z$ events in all (hadronic) decay modes.
The presence of four data sets of different polarisation signs
allows a very precise and robust determination of the left-right
asymmetry of the $Zee$ coupling, as we will
describe in Section~\ref{sec:gigaz}~\cite{MoortgatPick:2005cw}.
There are different schemes for implementing the $Z$ pole operation
at the ILC, depending on the machine stage at the time that this run
is scheduled. The actual running time required to collect the GigaZ
event sample depends on this implementation and can
range between 1 and 3 years.
None of the possible implementations has been studied at a level of
detail comparable to the ILC baseline. Therefore, the estimates in
this report are
very conservative. They are expected to improve
with further optimisation of the machine design.
Originally, the implementation of the GigaZ option was studied for the
case of
the 500\,GeV machine~\cite{ILCpossibilities}. With that as a
starting point, the electron linac would be operated at 5+5 =
10\,Hz,
alternating between pulses accelerated to $M_Z$/2 for collisions and
pulses
accelerated to $150$\,GeV for positron production. Higher luminosities
could be reached by splitting the electron linac into separate halves
devoted to these two purposes.
Recently, the situation was reconsidered assuming that the GigaZ run
would be done after the first stage of the
ILC at 250\,GeV~\cite{Yokoya:2019rhx}. Without assuming the installation of any
additional cryogenic power, the electron linac could be operated at
3.7\,Hz + 3.7\,Hz, alternating between acceleration to $M_Z$/2 and to
the nominal $125$\,GeV. This proposal also takes advantage of a
recent optimisation of the machine design, allowing for a smaller horizontal
emittance achieved in the damping rings.
After a preliminary study of the emittance growth
along the linacs and of the final focus system, an
instantaneous luminosity of about $2.1 \times
10^{33}$cm$^{-2}$s$^{-1}$
seems achievable without major modifications. This luminosity
estimate does not assume the 250~GeV luminosity upgrade, and so
correspondes to 1315 bunches
per pulse. If the GigaZ run is done after the luminosity upgrade,
to 2625 bunches per pulse, this would
double the GigaZ luminosity to about $4.2 \times 10^{33}$cm$^{-2}$s$^{-1}$.
With the standard ILC assumption of $1.6 \times 10^7$\,s of running per
year, the $100$\,fb$^{-1}$ assumed in the physics studies would correspond to
about $3.0$ years if done before the luminosity upgrade, or about
$1.5$ years if done
afterward. If improvement of the precision electroweak measurements
became an important issue, a longer run could be scheduled. In a 4
year run (as requested for FCC-ee), three times as many $Z$
events as assumed above could be collected.
Significant further increases of the luminosity
could be expected from a more modern design of the
damping rings, aiming for a smaller longitudinal
emittance as well as for tighter focusing, and from a better design
of the Beam Delivery System with a larger aperture of the final focus quadrupoles and
a larger momentum band width. To put these improvements
on a solid footing, additional studies are needed.
Therefore we currently
do not increase the assumed size of the data set beyond
$100$\,fb$^{-1}$ for physics studies, although the above
discussion shows that larger data sets could possibly be obtained
if the physics need arises.
\subsection{1 TeV}
\label{sec:TeVaccel}
The ILC can be upgraded in energy to 1~TeV using current
superconducting RF technology. Machine parameters for this upgrade
were presented in the ILC TDR~\cite{Adolphsen:2013jya}, Chapter 12.2.
The machine evolution needed is also described in Sec. 2.4.1 of
\cite{Bambade:2019fyw}. Running of the ILC at 1~TeV looks far enough
into the future that a new generation of accelerator technology will
likely have come into play. However, many proposals presented to the
2019 European Strategy for Particle Physics are extrapolated over such
long time scale -- for example, FCC presents a 50-year program -- so
our projections for 1~TeV should be taken in the same spirit.
The run plan for 1~TeV operation with current technology was
described in Sec.~7 of \cite{Barklow:2015tja}. There, it is proposed to
acquire a total of 8 ab$^{-1}$ of data. Both beams are
assumed to be polarised, with polarisations of 80\% and 20\% for the electrons
and positrons, respectively, with polarisation fractions as detailed
in
Table~\ref{tab:stageswpol}. Since the
luminosity of a linear collider naturally increases with the
CM energy, the calendar time for this run would be similar to that for
the 4 ab$^{-1}$ run at 500~GeV, that is, 7--8 years.
The ILC at 1~TeV has interesting capabilities to search for new
color-singlet particles. It will extend the search reach for pair-production of
dark matter particles, using the mono-photon signature, and for
electroweakinos and similar particles with compressed spectrum to
interesting
and relevant regions of parameter space. In this
report,
however, we will concentrate on the expected results in Higgs boson
physics.
By the end of the 500~GeV ILC program, we hope that a new high-gradient
accelerator technology will be ready to form the basis of a successor
to the ILC. Ideas for electron acceleration at a few GeV/m that are
now being investigated would produce an
electron collider in the same tunnel as the ILC at multi-10~TeV
energies. We see this as the true long-term future of the ILC laboratory. However,
the 1~TeV run of the ILC with current technology
is something that we can propose now and
investigate with our current analysis tools.
\subsection{Measurement of the top quark mass}
The top quark mass is one of the key parameters of the Standard Model
and must be determined experimentally. A precise determination
requires exquisite control over experimental and theoretical
effects. In this section, we give a brief review of the measurement
of $m_t$ at ILC, with references
to the relevant literature.
The current world average, with contributions from the Tevatron and
LHC experiments is $m_{t} =$ 172.9 $\pm$
0.4~GeV~\cite{Tanabashi:2018oca}. The experimental uncertainties are
expected to improve to approximately 200~MeV at the HL-LHC.
Significant theoretical work is still required to connect this quoted value of
$m_t$ to a well-defined short-distance top quark mass
at that level of precision~\cite{Azzi:2019yne}.
At $e^+e^-$ colliders, a very precise measurement of the top
quark mass, with a total uncertainty of approximately 50~MeV, is
possible by scanning the centre-of-mass energy through the $t\bar{t}$
production
threshold~\cite{Simon:2019axh,Abramowicz:2018rjq,Vos:2016til}. The
dominant uncertainty is expected to be the theoretical
uncertainty~\cite{Simon:2016pwp}. The theoretical expression
for the threshold shape is now known to N$^3$LO order, but this still
leaves a small residual theoretical uncertainty~\cite{Beneke:2015kwa}. A measurement with a
precision that surpasses that of the HL-LHC legacy measurement is also
possible from the ILC running at $\sqrt{s}=$ 500~GeV, by
taking advantage of radiative
$e^+e^- \rightarrow t\bar{t}\gamma$ events~\cite{Abramowicz:2018rjq}.
\subsection{Measurement of top quark electroweak couplings}
The third-generation quarks play a special role in many extensions of the
Standard Model. Several proposed extensions predict large deviations of the
electroweak couplings of the bottom and top quark from the Standard Model
value. A precise characterization of the $e^+e^-\rightarrow b\bar{b}$ and
$e^+e^-\rightarrow t\bar{t}$ processes at an electron-positron collider
can probe such models to very high scales.
These measurements are particularly powerful in composite-Higgs models
and Randall-Sundrum models with additional (warped) space-time
dimensions~\cite{Agashe:2006at,Richard:2014upa}, with the discovery
potential extending up to scale of tens of TeV~\cite{Durieux:2018ekg}.
The $e^+e^- \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ process was studied extensively at
LEP and SLC and the electroweak precision tests at the $Z$ pole remain
the most powerful constraint on the $Zb\bar{b}$ vertex today. Operation
of the ILC at $\sqrt{s}=$ 250 GeV allows to determine
the $Z$-boson and photon vector and axial couplings to b-quarks.
With an integrated luminosity of 2 $ab^{-1}$ the form factors in the
general Lagrangian can be measured at the few-per-mille
precision~\cite{Irles:2019int,Bilokin:2017lco}. This implies an order of
magnitude improvement with respect to the LEP combination in the determination
of the right-handed coupling of the $b$-quark.
The results at $\sqrt{s}=$250 GeV complement the $Z$-pole data from
the LEP/SLC experiments and GigaZ~\cite{Irles:2019xny}.
The top quark escaped scrutiny at the previous generation of electron-positron$e^+e^-$
colliders. Measurements at the Tevatron and the LHC have characterized many
of its properties. Rare associated production processes, such as
$pp \rightarrow t\bar{t}X$ with $X$ a $Z$-boson, photon or
Higgs boson, yield direct access to the neutral-current electroweak
interactions and the top quark Yukawa coupling, while single top production
and top decay probe the $tWb$ vertex. A fit of the top quark
effective field theory to the LHC data has recently been
performed~\cite{Hartland:2019bjb}. The constraints on the operator coefficients
that affect the top quark electroweak couplings are still rather weak.
A combined fit of the bottom and top quark sector to LHC and LEP/SLC data
yields slightly improved limits~\cite{Durieux:2019rbz}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
{\includegraphics[width=0.98\textwidth]{figs/manhattan_plot_optobs_v2_2.pdf}}
\caption{Prospects for the precision of the Wilson coefficients in
future high-luminosity operation of the LHC and at a high-energy
$e^+e^-$ collider, from~\cite{Durieux:2019rbz}.
The figure shows the results of a fit to 10 coefficients of SMEFT
operators that modify the electroweak
couplings of the $b$ and $t$ quark.
The solid section of the bars represents the individual constraints,
where each parameter is fitted in isolation; the full length indicates
the marginalized constraint in a ten-parameter fit.}
\label{fig:manhattan_plot}
\end{figure}
The $e^+e^- \rightarrow t\bar{t}$ process opens up at CM energies greater
than twice the top quark mass. Measurements of the cross section and
forward-backward asymmetry for two configurations of the beam polarisation
determine the left- and right-handed couplings
with sub-\% precision~\cite{Amjad:2015mma}. Measuring several further
observables allows us to overconstrain a global fit of all operator
coefficients
that directly affect these couplings~\cite{Durieux:2018tev}.
The prospects for the SMEFT fit of the top and bottom quark electroweak couplings
are summarized in Fig.~\ref{fig:manhattan_plot}. This plot shows the result of a fit to a set of
10 operator coefficients corresponding to shifts in the $b$ and $t$ electroweak vertices. The current bounds are based
on LEP/SLC data and LHC results~\cite{Durieux:2019rbz}. The HL-LHC results are presented for two scenarios, S1 and S2. In the S2
scenario, LHC results are extrapolated to the complete HL-LHC luminosity
assuming that experimental systematic uncertainties scale with the inverse
of the integrated luminosity and that theory uncertainties improve by a
factor two. The ILC prospects are based on the full simulation studies
\cite{Irles:2019int} and \cite{Amjad:2015mma,Abramowicz:2018rjq}. The effect of four-fermion operators involving $b$ and $t$
is not included in this fit, though those should be considered as part of a full SMEFT analysis. This case is discussed in the following
section.
\subsection{Measurement of the top quark Yukawa coupling}
The top quark Yukawa coupling links top and Higgs physics. Several
measurements of Higgs boson production and decay rates, in particular
$gg \rightarrow H$ production and $H \rightarrow gg$,
$H\rightarrow \gamma \gamma$ and $H\rightarrow Z \gamma$ decay, are sensitive
to this coupling. Under a number of model-dependent assumptions,
the Yukawa coupling can be extracted with good precision from the
Higgs fit (see Section~\ref{sec:SMEFT}
and, for instance, Ref~\cite{Boselli:2018zxr}).
The most robust measurement is obtained in associated production of a top quark
pair and a Higgs boson. An ILC run with 4~ab$^{-1}$ at 550 GeV is
expected to reach 3.3\% precision, similar to the precision
envisaged in the HL-LHC S2 scenario~\cite{Cepeda:2019klc}. Operation of the ILC at a
centre-of-mass energy of 1 TeV improves the precision of the Yukawa
coupling by a further factor two~\cite{Durieux:2019rbz}, to 1.6\%.
These results, both for ILC and LHC, are obtained from a 1-parameter fit to the $t\bar t h$
cross section, assuming that the other couplings contributing to this
cross section have their SM values.
In the context of the SMEFT, many dimension 6 operators specifically involving b and t affect the
$t\bar t h$ production cross section. At hadron colliders, there are about 30 distinct operators
that must be considered; at $e^+e^-$ colliders, there are 17.
A robust determination of the operator coefficient $C_{t\varphi}$ that shifts the
Yukawa coupling requires precise constraints on the coefficients of these other operators.
A recent global fit of the
top-quark sector on LHC data~\cite{Hartland:2019bjb} using the complete set of operators finds that the
marginalized fit result on $C_{t\varphi}$ is significantly poorer than
the individual limit, since the operators that affect
the QCD interactions of the top quark (in particular the $q\bar{q}t\bar{t}$ operators) are still only weakly constrained.
At 500~GeV, the ILC data set still cannot
determine the full set of operator coefficients needed in the $e^+e^-$ analysis, because of degeneracy between the effects of
four-fermion operators and shifts of the electroweak couplings. This degeneracy is broken by data from higher energies.
The ILC including data at 1~TeV can provide a robust
result in a global fit, because at that point the data with different beam polarisations and
at two CM energies over-constrain the full set of relevant SMEFT parameters~\cite{Durieux:2019rbz}.
\subsection{Requirements for $b$ and $t$ quark measurements}
The study of the bottom and top quarks leads to several specific
requirements on the
accelerator and operating scenario.
Beam polarisation is a key tool to disentangle the photon
and $Z$-boson contributions to the $b\bar{b}$ and $t\bar{t}$ pair production
processes~\cite{Amjad:2015mma}. The study~\cite{Durieux:2018tev} finds a 15\%
degradation of the overall EFT constraints without positron polarisation
and a 50\% degradation if no beam polarisation is available at all.
Polarisation plays an even larger role in the analysis of the
$e^+e^-\rightarrow b\bar{b}$ process, since final-state polarisation is
accessible only through measurement of the angular distribution with
polarised beams.
While the $e^+e^- \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ is accessible at
the first energy stage of the ILC at 250 GeV, top quark pair production
requires a CM energy of at least 350 GeV. Measurements well
above threshold are desireable to escape uncertainties from threshold
effects and to increase the sensitivity to axial-vector top quark couplings.
The threshold for associated production of
a top quark pair with a Higgs boson lies at approximately 500 GeV.
Operation at still higher energy is very effective in constraining
operators whose
effects that grow with CM energy~\cite{Durieux:2018tev}.
A robust and global characterization of all operators in the effective
field theory requires an extended programme with operation at
250 GeV, $\sqrt{s}=$ 500-550 GeV, and 1 TeV.
Third-generation quarks pose stringent requirements on the detector design
and selection and reconstruction algorithm. Efficient and clean identification
of jets from the hadronization of a bottom quark ($b$-tagging) is crucial
for these analyses. The measurement of the
forward-backward asymmetry in the $e^+e^- \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ analysis
and in the fully hadronic final state in $e^+e^- \rightarrow t\bar{t}$
production moreover requires to distinguish jets from the fragmentation
of $b$ and $\bar{b}$ quarks. In the analysis of~\cite{Bilokin:2017lco}
this is achieved through a combination of
vertex charge measurements and identification of kaons with low and
medium momentum.
The requirements of an effective $b/c$ and $b/\bar{b}$ separation are
important drivers in the design of the vertex detector. The analysis of
$b\bar{b}$ and $t\bar{t}$ pair production is therefore an important
benchmark for the design of the experiments.
The main challenge in the reconstruction of $t\bar{t}$ and $t\bar{t}H$
events is the large jet multiplicity. With up to eight jets in the
final state,
jet clustering becomes a major challenge~\cite{Boronat:2016tgd}. For
CM energies of 1 TeV and beyond the boost of the top quark
is such that dedicated reconstruction algorithms are
required~\cite{Abramowicz:2018rjq}.
\subsection{Searches for $Z'$ bosons}
We first discuss the search for new $s$-channel $Z^\prime$ resonances.
In Table~\ref{tab:Zprime}, we present exclusion and discovery
limits for various types of $Z^\prime$ bosons
that are considered in the literature. A commonly used
metric is the reach for the Sequential Standard Model (SSM) $Z^\prime$
whose couplings are assumed to be identical to the couplings of the $Z$ boson of the SM.
Another benchmark is the ALR model, which features a boson that couples to the right-handed $SU(2)$
acting on SM fermions with the same strength as the weak-interaction left-handed $SU(2)$.
An actual $Z^\prime$ would have couplings orthogonal to the couplings
of the Z, so actually, both the SSM and the ALR models are straw
men. With this in mind, we also quote results for $Z'$ bosons
found in $E_6$ grand unified theories
that extend the SM, canonically taken as the linear combinations
$\psi$,
$\chi$ and $\eta$ of two bosons from the center of $E_6$
orthogonal to the SM directions.
The limits in the table are based on an analysis
of $e^+e^−\to f\bar{f}$, $f= e/\mu/\tau/b/c$, at 250 GeV
using the ILD detector model and the full
simulation framework described in Sec. 6 and 7 of~\cite{Bambade:2019fyw},
assuming a data set of 2~ab$^{-1}$. This analysis is described in
some detail in~\cite{Deguchi:2019tvp};
we also include information from the studies in~\cite{Roman:2019a,Roman:2019b,Daniel:2019}.
The background events in all of those channels are essentially
negligible.
The signal efficiencies in $e$, $\mu$ and $\tau$
channels are rather high, respectively 97\%, 98\% and 90\%. For $b$
and $c$ channels,
mainly due to charge identification,
the efficiencies are much lower, 29\% and 7\%, respectively. The
exclusion and
discovery limits for $Z^\prime$ are obtained
based on a $\chi^2$ fit to the measured differential cross sections
$\mathrm{d}\sigma/\mathrm{d}\cos\theta$ where $\theta$
is the polar angle of the fermion. Systematic errors are taken into
account
in the fit; they are assumed to
0.1\%, 0.1\%, 0.2\%, 0.2\% and 0.5\% respectively for $e/\mu/\tau/b/c$ channels.
We have extrapolated these results to ILC500 with 4 ab$^{-1}$ and to
ILC1000 with 8~ab$^{-1}$.
The results for higher CM energies go beyond the
current reach of the LHC and eventually surpass the reach of the HL-LHC.
It is important to note that, in the event of a discovery of a
$Z^\prime$ at the HL-LHC,
the ILC will provide complementary information
that will be essential in pinning down the nature of the new
resonance.
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{l|cc|cc|cc}
& 250 GeV, & 2 ab$^{-1}$ & 500 GeV, & 4 ab$^{-1}$ & 1 TeV, & 8 ab$^{-1}$ \\
Model & excl. & disc. & excl. & disc. & excl. & disc. \\ \hline
SSM & 7.8 & 4.9 & 13 & 8.4 & 22 & 14 \\
ALR & 9.5 & 6.0 & 17 & 11 & 25 & 18 \\
$\chi$ & 7.0 & 4.5 & 12 & 7.8 & 21 & 13 \\
$\psi$ & 3.7 & 2.4 & 6.4 & 4.1 & 11 & 6.8 \\
$\eta$ & 4.2 & 2.7 & 7.3 & 4.6 & 12 & 7.9
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Projected limits on $Z^\prime$ bosons in standard scenarios,
from the full simulation study of $e^+e^−\to f\bar{f}$ described in the text.
The values presented, given in TeV, are the 95\% exclusion limits and
the 5$\sigma$ discovery limits for the successive stages of the ILC program up to 1 TeV.}
\label{tab:Zprime}
\end{table}
\subsection{Measurement of ``universal'' four-fermion interactions}
The same analyses for probing the $Z^\prime$ can be recast into a set of measurements of the
``universal'' four-fermion interactions characterized by the parameters
${\bf W}$ and ${\bf Y}$ defined in~\cite{Barbieri:2004qk, Farina:2016rws},
\begin{equation}
{\cal L} = {\cal L}_{SM} - {g^2 {\bf W }\over 2 m_W^2} J_{L\mu}^a J^{a\mu}_L - {g^{\prime
2} {\bf Y}\over 2 m_W^2} J_{Y\mu} J^{\mu}_Y \ ,
\eeq{LWYdef}
where $g$ and $g'$ are the SM coupling constants for $SU(2)$ and
$U(1)$ and $J_{L\mu}^a$, $ J_{Y\mu}$ are the corresponding gauge
currents.
The combined results are shown in Table~\ref{tab:WandY} for the three energy stages of the ILC.
It is also interesting to see how the results for each
flavor contribute to the final constraints. This is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:WandY}.
It is important to note that the beam polarisation plays a central role in
this analysis to disentangle the effects from ${\bf W}$ and ${\bf Y}$.
In the last line of Table~\ref{tab:WandY}, we show the comparable results for 4 ab$^{-1}$ of data at 500 GeV with no beam polarisation.
Not only are the results poorer, but also the correlation between
${\bf W}$ and ${\bf Y}$ is significantly increased.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.70\hsize]{figs/WandY_ILC500.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{68\% confidence contours in the ${\bf W}, {\bf Y}$ plane for ILC at 500 GeV,
from the $e^+e^-\to f\bar{f}$ analysis described in the text.
The colored contours show the contributions from each flavor to the final combined limit.}
\label{fig:WandY}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
$\sqrt{s}$ & $\Delta {\bf W}$ & $\Delta {\bf Y}$ &
$\rho$ \\ \hline
HL-LHC & $15\times 10^{-5}$ & $20\times 10^{-5}$ &
-0.97 \\ \hline
ILC250 & $3.4\times 10^{-5}$ & $2.4\times 10^{-5}$ & -0.34 \\
ILC500 & $1.1\times 10^{-5}$ & $0.78\times 10^{-5}$ & -0.35 \\
ILC1000 & $0.39\times 10^{-5}$ & $0.27\times 10^{-5}$ & -0.38 \\
\hline
500 GeV, no beam pol. & $2.0\times 10^{-5}$ & $1.2\times
10^{-5}$
& -0.78 \\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Projections for 1-$\sigma$ errors on ${\bf W}$ and ${\bf Y}$
from a 2-parameter fit to data
on $e^+e^−\to f\bar{f}$ from the analysis described in the text.
The assumed luminosities are those described in
Section~\ref{sec:accel}. The projection for HL-LHC (3~ab$^{-1}$) is
based on the neutral current analysis described in
\cite{Farina:2016rws}, in particular, Fig.~2 of that paper. }
\label{tab:WandY}
\end{table}
\subsection{Measurement of general four-fermion interactions}
A more specific description of the constraints on the 4-fermion contact interactions is given by the ``compositeness parameters''
as defined in~\cite{Tanabashi:2018oca},
\begin{equation}
{\cal L} = {\cal L}_{SM} \pm {\cal L}_{LL} \pm {\cal L}_{LR} \pm {\cal L}_{RL} \pm {\cal L}_{RR}
\eeq{fullL}
with
\begin{Eqnarray}
{\cal L}_{LL}&=&\frac{g^2_\mathrm{contact}}{2\Lambda^2}\sum_{j}\eta_{LL}^{j}
(\bar e_L\gamma_\mu e_L)(\bar{\psi}^j_L\gamma^\mu\psi^j_L), \nonumber \\
{\cal L}_{LR}&=&\frac{g^2_\mathrm{contact}}{2\Lambda^2}\sum_{j}\eta_{LR}^j
(\bar e_L\gamma_\mu e_L)(\bar{\psi}^j_R\gamma^\mu\psi^j_R), \nonumber \\
{\cal L}_{RL}&=&\frac{g^2_\mathrm{contact}}{2\Lambda^2}\sum_{j}\eta_{RL}^j
(\bar e_R\gamma_\mu e_R)(\bar{\psi}^j_L\gamma^\mu\psi^j_L), \nonumber \\
{\cal L}_{RR}&=&\frac{g^2_\mathrm{contact}}{2\Lambda^2}\sum_{j}\eta_{RR}^j
(\bar e_R\gamma_\mu e_R)\bar{\psi}^j_R\gamma^\mu\psi^j_R),
\eeqa{eqn:composite}
where $j$ indexes the final-state fermion flavor. At the ILC,
individual $eeff$-type contact interactions can be measured for each fermion species
$f=e/\mu/\tau/b/c$. In addition, the four parameters $\eta_{LL}$,
$\eta_{RR}$, $\eta_{LR}$ and $\eta_{RL}$
can in principle be determined simultaneously using
the differential cross section measurements with polarised beams. We
have not yet performed a fit for all $\eta$ parameters simultaneously.
Instead, following the conventional approaches
in~\cite{Tanabashi:2018oca}, we give projections for the 95\% exclusion limits on scale $\Lambda$
for several cases of assumed $\eta$ values,
\begin{Eqnarray}
\Lambda&=&\Lambda_{LL}^{\pm} ~\mathrm{for}~ (\eta_{LL},\eta_{RR},\eta_{LR},\eta_{RL})=(\pm1,0,0,0), \nonumber \\
\Lambda&=&\Lambda_{RR}^{\pm}~ \mathrm{for} ~(\eta_{LL},\eta_{RR},\eta_{LR},\eta_{RL})=(0,\pm1,0,0), \nonumber \\
\Lambda&=&\Lambda_{VV}^{\pm}~ \mathrm{for} ~(\eta_{LL},\eta_{RR},\eta_{LR},\eta_{RL})=(\pm1,\pm1,\pm1,\pm1), \nonumber \\
\Lambda&=&\Lambda_{AA}^{\pm}~ \mathrm{for} ~(\eta_{LL},\eta_{RR},\eta_{LR},\eta_{RL})=(\pm1,\pm1,\mp1,\mp1),
\eeqa{eqn:comsim}
and $g^2_\mathrm{contact}/(4\pi)=1$. These results are presented in
Table~\ref{tab:composite}. The first group of limits assumes that the contact interactions
are universal for all fermion species, the following groups give the
results for each specific final-state fermion species.
The comparable limits from LEP were about 8 TeV, that is, about 40 times the CM energy.
With the increased luminosity of the ILC and the use of polarisation,
we expect to be
sensitive to $\Lambda$ values of over 200 times the CM energy.
\begin{table}[p]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lcccc}
$\sqrt{s}$ & $\Lambda_{LL}$ & $\Lambda_{RR}$ & $\Lambda_{VV}$ & $\Lambda_{AA}$ \\ \hline \hline
universal $\Lambda$'s & & & & \\ \hline
ILC250 & 108 & 106 & 161 & 139 \\
ILC500 & 189 & 185 & 280 & 240 \\
ILC1000 & 323 & 314 & 478 & 403 \\ \hline\hline
$e^+e^-\to e^+e^-$ & & & & \\ \hline
ILC250 & 71 & 70 & 118 & 71 \\
ILC500 & 114 & 132 & 214 & 135 \\
ILC1000 & 236 & 232 & 376 & 231 \\ \hline\hline
$e^+e^-\to \mu^+\mu^-$ & & & & \\ \hline
ILC250 & 80 & 79 & 117 & 104 \\
ILC500 & 134 & 133 & 198 & 177 \\
ILC1000 & 224 & 222 & 332 & 296 \\ \hline\hline
$e^+e^-\to \tau^+\tau^-$ & & & & \\ \hline
ILC250 & 72 & 72 & 109 & 97 \\
ILC500 & 127 & 126 & 190 & 168 \\
ILC1000 & 215 & 214 & 321 & 286 \\ \hline\hline
$e^+e^-\to b\bar{b}$ & & & & \\ \hline
ILC250 & 78 & 73 & 103 & 106 \\
ILC500 & 134 & 124 & 175 & 178 \\
ILC1000 & 226 & 205 & 292 & 296 \\ \hline\hline
$e^+e^-\to c\bar{c}$ & & & & \\ \hline
ILC250 & 51 & 52 & 75 & 68 \\
ILC500 & 90 & 90 & 130 & 117 \\
ILC1000 & 153 & 151 & 220 & 199 \\ \hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Projected 95\% CL limits, in TeV, on the compositeness scales
defined in~\cite{Tanabashi:2018oca},
from $e^+e^-\to f\bar{f}$ analysis described in the text.
In all cases,
the limits from constructive ($\Lambda^+$) and destructive
($\Lambda^-$)
interference are identical.
The first group of numbers assumes that the $\Lambda$ parameters are independent of flavor.
The succeeding groups show the limits for the reactions with specific final state flavors.}
\label{tab:composite}
\end{table}
\subsection{Measurements of the weak mixing angle}
\label{sec:weakmixing}
We first discuss measurements of the effective weak mixing angle
$\sin^2\theta_{eff}$,
defined in Eq.~\ref{sstweffdef}, and, more general, the leptonic left-right
asymmetries $A_\ell$ for $\ell = e,\mu,\tau$. At a linear collider with polarised beams the effective weak mixing angle can be extracted in several ways but notably by measuring the left-right asymmetry $A_{LR}$, Eq.~\leqn{ALRmeas}. Using this method, SLD achieved the highest-precision single measurements of $\sin^2\theta_w$, even though LEP had collected about 30 times more luminosity.
At GigaZ, using all hadronic decay modes of the $Z$, the statistical error on $A_{LR}$ will be a few times $10^{-5}$. The measurement will then be dominated by the
systematic error on the polarisation. As we have explained in Sec.~\ref{sec:beampol},
we expect a systematic error on the beam polarisation of 0.05\% for a realistic assumption of
0.25\% of the precision of the polarimeters. Positron polarisation plays a crucial role in reaching this low level of uncertainty.
A precise measurement of $A_{LR}$ at the $Z$ pole requires also excellent control over the value of the beam energy. The observed polarisation asymmetry has
a strong energy-dependence due to the interference of the $s$-channel $Z$ and $\gamma$ diagrams:
$dA_{LR}/dE_{CM}\approx 2\times 10^{-5}/{\mathrm {MeV}}$. But we have argued in
Sec.~\ref{sec:beamenergy} that the beam energy in GigaZ can be measured, by a combination of methods, to a precision of 1~MeV. This is of similar size to the
statistical error. We note that this $A_{LR}$ measurement is specifically a measurement of
$A_e$.
The values of $A_\mu$ and $A_\tau$ can also be improved at GigaZ by measuring
the corresponding left-right forward-backward asymmetries, Eq.~\leqn{ALRmeas}.
Note that, for a lepton species, the left-right forward-backward asymmetry at the $Z$ is 7 times larger than that unpolarised forward-backward asymmetry and less subject to radiative corrections. It is interesting to test lepton universality by comparing these
quantities to
the precisely measured value of $A_e$. The systematic error due to the
polarisation cancels out in the ratios, so $A_\mu$ and
$A_\tau$ can be compared to $A_e$ with a relative uncertainty of about
0.02\%.
The higher
statistics available from GigaZ
will of course improve the
measurements of $R_{\ell}$ for each lepton species. The systematic
errors are small. Also, these are due to knowledge of the acceptance, so
it can be assumed that these errors scale with luminosity. To obtain
the estimates in Table~\ref{tab:PEWresults}, we have simply rescaled the LEP results
given in \cite{ALEPH:2005ab}.
The absolute precision on $\sin^2\theta_{eff}$ of $1.3\cdot10^{-5}$ expected from GigaZ is nearly one order of magnitude better than the precision of the present world average $\sin^2\theta_w$~\cite{Tanabashi:2018oca} and only a factor three worse than that claimed for FCCee~\cite{Abada:2019zxq}. This is reminiscent of the LEP/SLC scenario. It is worth recalling some details of the measurement of $A_e$ at circular colliders. The best method is to use a wonderful formula from LEP: the $\tau$ polarisation at the $Z$ varies with the $\tau$ production angle $\theta$ according to~\cite{Eberhard:1989ve}
\begin{equation}
P_\tau(\cos\theta) = - {A_\tau (1 + \cos^2\theta) + 2 A_e \cos\theta \over
(1 + \cos^2\theta) + {8\over 3} A^\tau_{FB} \cos\theta } \approx
A_\tau + { 2\cos\theta\over (1 + \cos^2\theta)} A_e \ .
\eeq{LEPmagic}
Since $A_e$ controls the $\cos\theta$ asymmetry in this formula,
it is in practice somewhat better
determined than $A_\tau$. This gives the best determination of $\sin^2\theta_{eff}$. The dominant systematic error in this technique is the
uncertainty in the conversion of the measured energies of $\tau$ decay products to
the underlying $\tau$ polarisation. This is complicated by the fact that all $\tau$ decay modes receive feed-down from other modes for which the observed energy spectrum of the
visible decay products has a different dependence on the $\tau$ polarisation.
In the LEP era, this cross-contamination was about 10\% in each mode, but the modelling of $\tau$ decays was understood
well enough to constrain this error on $A_\tau$, $A_e$ to be less than 1\% (relative error). For FCCee, this understanding must be improved by two orders of magnitude. Some difficulties in achieving this are explained in \cite{Vincter}.
\subsection{Measurements of heavy quark production}
\label{sec:gigaZheavy}
Other important observables of the $Z$ pole experiments are the $Z$ couplings to the heavy quarks $b$ and $c$. In this section, we discuss the measurement of these
quantities and some physics implications of those measurements. This subject
is treated more comprehensively in \cite{Irles:2019xny}. Note, though, that \cite{Irles:2019xny} supposes an unpolarised positron beam.
We first present estimates of the precision of the determinations of $R_b$ and $R_c$ and of $A_b$ and $A_c$. The basic methods for these measures were described in
outline in Sec.~\ref{sec:PEW}. For the $b$ observables, the efficiencies that determine the statistical errors are derived from the study of $e^+e^-\to b\bar b$ presented in
\cite{Bilokin:2017lco}. For $c$, the statistical errors are extrapolations of those
presented in \cite{ALEPH:2005ab}.
The systematic errors bring in some more subtle points.
Thanks to the excellent vertex detector and the small beam size, the ILC
experiments are much closer to the SLD detector than the LEP detectors, and so one
might take the SLD heavy quark analyses as a starting point.
The relevant references for this are \cite{Abe:2005nqa} and \cite{Abe:2004hx}. One finds that, apart from Monte Carlo statistics, there is
not a single dominant source of systematic error. Instead, the total systematic error is composed of a number of small contributions. It is safe to assume that most of these contributions will be controlled to a sufficient level at the time of GigaZ, either by improved understanding of QCD or by higher-statistics measurements of
$e^+e^-\to q\bar q$ processes. As an example, one large source of systematic error for $c$ quark observables is the
uncertainty from gluon splitting to a $c \bar{c}$ pair. Consulting the OPAL analysis in \cite{Abbiendi:1999sxa}, one finds that the uncertainty of the splitting fraction was limited by statistics that did not allow for a sufficient reduction of the background from $b$-quark pairs. At GigaZ, it will be possible to take advantage of the much higher
statistics in $q\bar q$ production both at GigaZ and at ILC250, and also the detector will be superior to the OPAL detector. It is therefore justified to assume that the gluon splitting can be controlled to a much better level than it was possible for OPAL. Since the measurements not statistics-limited, we can study the influence of other QCD effects by comparing to a fiducial region in which the heavy quark jets are approximately back-to-back.
Following these considerations, the dominant error source for $A_{b}$ is given by the uncertainty of beam polarisation. In case of $A_{c}$ we assume that the error of sources other than beam polarisation will roughly equal the error of beam polarisation. In case of $R_b$, the general improvement of the measurements justifies an improvement of the systematic error by a factor of five. (This
improvement was already
found in the studies for the TESLA Technical Design Report~\cite{AguilarSaavedra:2001rg}). For $R_c$, it is justified to assume that the component of the systematic error that does not improve with statistics will be improved from SLC by a factor of about two.
We have already pointed out in Sec.~\ref{sec:PEW} that the method for determining
heavy quark forward-backward asymmetries will be much improved from that of LEP using the large sample of double-tagged events. The systematic error from this source in the LEP experiments will become a statistical error that is continuously improvable.
Figure~\ref{fig:alr-gigaz} summarises the precisions expected at GigaZ for the heavy quark observables. These results are also presented in Table~\ref{tab:PEWresults} in Appendix A.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{figs/c1170619.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:alr-gigaz} \sl Summary of the precision achievable at GigaZ compared with LEP/SLC results~\cite{ALEPH:2005ab} and FCCee projections~\cite{Abada:2019zxq} for observables and derived quantities that are described in the text.}
\end{figure}
There are two important physics motivations for studying the heavy quark
couplings to the $Z$ beyond the general idea of finding higher-precision tests of the SM. The first is that the largest deviation of the precision electroweak
observables from the SM predictions observed in the LEP/SLC program
involves the $b$ system. Assuming, following the SM expectation, that $A_b$ is close to 1,
one can extract $A_e$ from a measurement of
the $b$ forward-backward asymmetry, using Eq.~\leqn{AFBmeas}. At LEP, this
determination gave results that differ from the arguably more direct measurements of $A_e$ from the left-right asymmetry and the $\tau$ polarisation asymmetry by about 3.5 standard deviations. Actually, there is a lack of rapport that involves the
three quantities $A_{FB}^b$, $R_b$, and $A_e$ that frustrates theoretical
explanations~\cite{Takeuchi:1994zh}. This issue calls for a new set of experimental
measurements.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{figs/stdv.pdf}
\caption{Visibility of deviations from the SM predictions in $g_{b_j}^Z$ and the helicity amplitudes $Q_{e_i b_j}$, in standard deviations, from combined ILC250/GigaZ running, expected from new physis models with Randall-Sundrum extra dimensions~\cite{ Djouadi:2006rk,Funatsu:2017nfm,Yoon:2018xud}.}
\label{fig:gigaz-rs}
\end{figure}
The second is the real possibility that the $Z$ couplings to the $b$ quark are
altered by new physics. The $b_L$ is in the same electroweak multiplet as the $t_L$,
so if the top quark acquires its large mass from strong dynamics in the Higgs sector,
the $b_L$ also must feel
the effects of this new strong sector. The direct coupling of the $b$ to the Higgs sector can be made small since $m_b \ll m_t$, and the couplings of the $b$ to
photons and gluons are restricted by Ward identities, so the one place where such
corrections are allowed to show up is in the $b$ coupling
to weak-interaction bosons.
The $b$ quark can also couple preferentially to $Z'$ bosons associated with the
Higgs strong interactions. All of these features are explicitly realized in Randall-Sundrum extra-dimensional
models of the Higgs sector~\cite{Djouadi:2006rk,Funatsu:2017nfm,Yoon:2018xud}.
These expectations can be tested through measurements of $e^+e^-\to b\bar b$. For some models, the effects are already large enough to see at ILC250. Using
polarisation and the forward-backward asymmetry, the ILC250 can measure the
four helicity amplitudes associated with $b$ couplings to $Z$ and $Z'$,
\begin{equation}
Q_{e_i b_j} = Q^\gamma_e Q^\gamma_f + {g^Z_{e_i} g^Z_{b_j}\over s - m_Z^2}
+ {g^{Z'}_{e_i} g^{Z'}_{b_j}\over s - m_{Z'}^2} \ .
\eeq{bhelicity}
for $i, j = L, R$. The second term can include effects of $Z$-$Z'$ mixing~\cite{Djouadi:2006rk}. For example, at ILC250, the quantity
$Q_{e_L b_R}$, which has a SM value of about 0.45, can be measured with a
precision of $\Delta Q_{e_L b_R} = 5 \times 10^{-4}$. If there is a deviation from the
SM, we will want to resolve whether it comes from the $Z$ couplings or the couplings
to higher resonances. That could be done with a second measurement at the $Z$ pole.
To match the ILC250 determination, the $Z$ pole measurment should reach a precision
of 0.5\%, achievable at GigaZ but a factor of 10 beyond the current precision from LEP.
The sensitivity of models to combined ILC250/GigaZ running is shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:gigaz-rs}.
The model of \cite{Funatsu:2017nfm} predicts similar perturbation of the helicity
amplitudes for the light fermions, so it is interesting to pursue these measurements also
for the lighter flavors.
\subsection{Measurements of total and partial widths}
Using the improved knowledge of the beam energy discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:beamenergy}, it will be possible to improve the systematic error on the
width of the $Z$ to about 1~MeV, with negligible statistical error~\cite{AguilarSaavedra:2001rg}. This would be an
improvement over the LEP uncertainty by more than a factor of 2. Given this improvement
and the GigaZ improvement in $R_e$, the relative uncertainty in the quantity $\Gamma(Z\to e^+e^-)$ highlighted at the end of Sec.~\ref{sec:return} improves to
$0.56\times 10^{-3}$.
In all, we see that the GigaZ program is surprisingly powerful. It has the capability
to improve all of the $R_f$ snd $A_f$ precision observables by a factor of 10 from
their current LEP and SLC values. In some cases, we obtain a much larger improvement.
The program strongly benefits from the use of polarised beams
and the high level of control that these
give us over the limiting systematic errors. The full set of projected uncertainties
for the GigaZ program is given in Table~\ref{tab:PEWresults}.
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
\input{intro.tex}
\section{ILC accelerator run plan and options}
\label{sec:accel}
\input{accel.tex}
\section{Measurement of polarisation and beam energy at the ILC}
\label{sec:pol}
\input{systematics.tex}
\section{Precision W measurements at 250 GeV}
\label{sec:Wmass}
\input{Wmass.tex}
\section{Precision electroweak observables}
\label{sec:PEW}
\input{PEW.tex}
\section{Precision electroweak at 250 GeV from radiative return}
\label{sec:return}
\input{return.tex}
\section{Precision electroweak from the GigaZ program}
\label{sec:gigaz}
\input{gigaz.tex}
\section{4-fermion processes}
\label{sec:fourfermion}
\input{fourfermion.tex}
\section{ Pair production of $b$ and $t$ quarks}
\label{sec:bt}
\input{bt.tex}
\section{SM EFT Higgs coupling fit at ILC}
\label{sec:SMEFT}
\input{SMEFT.tex}
\section{ Higgs self-coupling}
\label{sec:self}
\input{self.tex}
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
In this paper, we have described the potential of the ILC to improve
precision electroweak measurements and other precision probes of the
Standard Model.
For precision electroweak measurements, we have shown that the capabilities of the ILC are
very powerful, both using data from running at 250~GeV and especially
from a dedicated GigaZ stage of running at the $Z$ pole. The
availability of polarised beams, both for electrons and for positrons,
is an important part of this story. With few exceptions, the limiting
factor in precision electroweak measurements is not statistics but
rather the control of systematic errors. We have explained how the
ILC experiments will control the effective polarisation of beams to
the level of $(3-5)\times 10^{-4}$ and will transfer this level of
precision to the most important electroweak observables.
We have also reviewed and updated the ILC capabilities for studies of
fermion pair production, including $b$ and $t$ quark production. The
ILC will determine the top quark mass to a precision of $2\times
10^{-4}$. It will also give strong bounds on the presence of $Z'$
resonances and contact interactions due to new physics at high
energies. The availability of polarised beams will make these
constraints very specific in terms of the flavor and helicity
structure of the operators probed---or, in the event that a deviation
from the SM is discovered, will make the origin of the corrections to
the SM very clear.
Finally, we have reviewed the ILC capabilities for the measurement of
Higgs boson couplings, including the top quark Yukawa coupling and
the Higgs boson self-coupling. As we learn more about the ILC capabilities
for other measurements, the projection that the ILC will measure the
couplings of the Higgs boson visible in Higgs decay to precisions below 1\%
remains robust.
\newpage
\noindent {\bf Acknowledgements}
We thank the members of the Higgs@Future Colliders working group and
the BSM working group of the current study for the European Strategy
for Particle Physics for stimulating the writing of this paper, and
for many discussions of the analyses presented here. We are
especially grateful to Juan Alcaraz, Jorge de Blas, Beate Heinemann, Aleandro
Nisati, Andrea Wulzer, and Kaoru Yokoya
for discussions of this material and to
Alain Blondel and Patrick Janot for useful correspondence.
We are grateful to many funding agencies around the world for
supporting the research reported here and the preparation of this
document. Among these are: the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
(DFG, German Research
Foundation) under Germany‘s Excellence Strategy
– EXC 2121 "Quantum Universe" – 390833306, the Generalitat Valenciana under grant
PROMETEO 2018/060 and the Spanish national program for particle
physics under grant FPA2015-65652-C4-3-R, the Japan Society for the
Promotion of Science (JSPS) under
Grants-in-Aid for Science Research 15H02083, 16H02173, and 16H02176,
the US National Science Foundation under grant PHY-1607262, and
the US Department of Energy under
contracts DE--AC02--76SF00515, DE--AC05--06OR23177, and DE--SC0017996.
\newpage
\section{\@startsection{section}{0}{\z@}{5.5ex plus .5ex minus
1.5ex}{2.3ex plus .2ex}{\large\bf}}
\def\subsection{\@startsection{subsection}{1}{\z@}{3.5ex plus .5ex minus
1.5ex}{1.3ex plus .2ex}{\normalsize\bf}}
\def\subsubsection{\@startsection{subsubsection}{2}{\z@}{-3.5ex plus
-1ex minus -.2ex}{2.3ex plus .2ex}{\normalsize\sl}}
\renewcommand{\@makecaption}[2]{%
\vskip 10pt
\setbox\@tempboxa\hbox{\small #1: #2}
\ifdim \wd\@tempboxa >\hsize
\small #1: #2\par
\else
\hbox to\hsize{\hfil\box\@tempboxa\hfil}
\fi}
\makeatother
\subsection{Beam polarisation measurement}
\label{sec:beampol}
The polarisation of the electron and positron beams will be measured by Compton polarimeters located
about $1.8$\,km before and $100$\,m behind the $e^+e^-$ interaction point (IP). These polarimeters have been designed to measure the ``instantaneous'' longitudinal polarisations at the polarimeter locations with negligible statistical uncertainties and a systematic uncertainty not larger than $\Delta P/P = 0.25\%$~\cite{Vormwald:2015hla, List:2015lsa}. Optionally, the transverse polarisation components could
also be measured~\cite{Mordechai:2013zwm}.
These polarimeter measurements need to be corrected for the spin transport through the magnets of the Beam Delivery System as well as for the depolarisation in the collisions themselves. These effects have been investigated in detail for ILC500, with the result that
they can be controlled to the level of $0.1\%$~\cite{Beckmann:2014mka}, provided that both the relative alignment of the orbit between the $e^+e^-$ IP and the polarimeter locations as well as other beam parameters (energy, intensity, emittance, $\beta$ function at IP) are sufficiently well known. With such corrections, the luminosity-weighted long-term average of the polarisation at the $e^+e^-$ IP can then in principle be
derived from the polarimeter measurements.
The polarisations of the electron and positron beams can also be measured from the observed $e^+e^-$ cross sections. What makes this strategy effective is that, at energies above the $Z$ pole, well-understood processes such as forward $W$ pair production have cross sections with strong polarisation-dependence. The estimate of polarisation from these
measurements does not rely on the modeling of the accelerator parameters, but high precision is obtained only by integrating over long periods, which washes out time-dependent variations.
Therefore, the extraction of the polarisation from collision data and the measurements by the
polarimeter complement one another and will be combined to achieve
the ultimate level of precision.
The extraction of the luminosity-weighted long-term average polarisations from collision data has been the subject of many studies. The latest status can be found in~\cite{ThesisRobert}. Observations to note are:
\begin{itemize}
\item It is important to have four independent beam settings with positive and negative values for both beam polarisations $P_{e^-}$ and $P_{e^+}$. It is not sufficient to assume that the absolute value of the polarisation stays the same when the polarisation is reversed, as in the modified Blondel
scheme~\cite{Blondel:1987wr,Monig:2000bn}. Instead, it is necessary to correct the results from the Blondel scheme based
on the polarimeter measurements, and it is this effect that actually limits the final precision~\cite{ThesisRobert}.
\item When the total and differential cross sections for 2- and 4-fermion processes are combined to extract the four polarisation parameters, these parameters can be determined to a few parts in $10^4$~\cite{ThesisRobert}, provided
that the efficiencies and purities of the event selections can be controlled at the per mille level. This justifies the estimates used in this paper that the relative systematic errors on left-right asymmetries due to the uncertainty of the beam polarisations is about $3 \times 10^{-4}$ at $\sqrt{s}=250$\,GeV. At the $Z$ pole, no 4-fermion processes
will be available; therefore we expect larger systematic uncertainties of $5 \times 10^{-4}$.
\item We are currently developing a superior method for the estimate of polarisation uncertainties: the inclusion of the polarisation values as nuisance parameters in the extraction of the main observables in
$e^+e^-$ cross section measurements. This has been done routinely in the projections for triple gauge coupling precisions~\cite{Marchesini:2011aka, ThesisRobert}, and has recently been started also for the extraction of other electroweak parameters~\cite{ThesisRobert}. In a simultaneous extraction of
the beam polarisations at the ILC250, the total unpolarised cross sections and the left-right asymmetries of various
2- and 4-fermion processes using a fit to the total and differential cross section measurements of these
processes, precisions of $4.3 \times 10^{-4}$ and $5 \times 10^{-4}$ have been obtained for $A_{LR}(e^+e^- \to q \bar{q})$ and $A_{LR}(e^+e^- \to l^+ l^-)$, respectively. These numbers, which combine the statistical uncertainty and the uncertainty due to the finite knowledge of the polarisation, are even better than the results we present later in this document.
However, since this study is not yet based on full simulation,
we only take it here as additional support that the precisions defined in the previous item can actually be achieved.
\item The availability of positron polarisation is very important to achieve a small systematic uncertainty on the polarisation, since it introduces redundancy which overconstrains the system. Without positron polarisation, the uncertainties on $A_{LR}$ from the global fit discussed in the previous item would be larger by a factor of $10$.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Beam energy measurement}
\label{sec:beamenergy}
For each beam, energy spectrometers~\cite{Boogert:2009ir} will measure the beam energy before and after the collision point to a precision of $\delta E_b / E_b = 10^{-4}$. The upstream and downstream spectrometers are based on complementary
approaches and have been designed to achieve the target precision over the full range of possible ILC beam energies from $45.6$ to $500$\,GeV.
These measurements can be augmented by exploiting the collision data themselves.
In particular, in $e^+e^- \to \mu^+\mu^- \gamma$ events, the transverse momenta
and angles of the muons are precisely measured using the tracking system of the detectors.
Then, from energy and momentum conservation, the
center-of-mass energy of the collision can be extracted without the need to detect the photon.
This method can reach statistical precisions of $\delta E_b / E_b = 10^{-5}$ or better at all center-of-mass energies. The dominant systematic uncertainty is the momentum scale of the detector~\cite{bib:graham_ecfa2013}.
The detector's momentum scale can be calibrated using the
$J/\Psi$, whose mass is known to $1.9 \times 10^{-6}$~\cite{Tanabashi:2018oca}. Based on a run at the $Z$ pole providing $10^{9}$ hadronic $Z$ events, the statistical uncertainty on the reconstructed mass peak position in di-muons will be smaller than $2 \times 10^{-6}$~\cite{bib:graham_awlc2014}. This means that the absolute momentum scale can be determined sufficiently well to match the requirements of the method described in the previous paragraph and produce an absolute
$\delta E_b / E_b$ of $ 10^{-5}$.
The point-to-point energy uncertainty, {\it e.g.}, during a resonance or
threshold scan, will reach similar precisions.
While the absolute energy scale does not affect the measurements
of the point-to-point variations, the statistics of each data set during
a scan will usually be smaller than in the main (peak) sample.
Thus, the in-situ methods will typically be statistically limited: for a 10 times
smaller sample, the statistical precision will be a factor 3 worse.
On the other hand the beam energy spectrometer precision given above is by far
dominated by the absolute calibration of the beam position
monitors. Relative changes in the beam position can be measured much more precisely.
Therefore the combination of in-situ methods and the energy spectrometers will allow a determination of the energy of smaller data sets with precision equal to that of
the absolute energy of a main data set.
\subsection{Luminosity measurement}
\label{sec:beamlumi}
At all lepton colliders, the luminosity spectrum is broadened by initial-state radiation. At linear colliders (and high-luminosity circular colliders) there is additional radiation due to the beam-beam interaction (``beamstrahlung'').
The exact shape of the distribution of the luminosity as a function of the event-by-event CM energy is called the luminosity spectrum. This spectrum has a peak near the nominal CM energy with spread given by the intrinsic energy spread of the beams, which is estimated to be $10^{-3}$~\cite{Adolphsen:2013kya}, and a long tail to lower CM energies due to beamstrahlung. The average energy loss in this tail is a few percent at ILC250 but becomes increasingly important at higher CM energies.
Beamstrahlung depends on the
instantaneous machine parameters and thus must be directly measured. In the study ~\cite{Poss:2013oea} for CLIC at $\sqrt{s} =$~3~TeV, the luminosity spectrum was reconstructed
from radiative Bhabha events bin-by-bin with a maximum error of 5\% over the whole energy range, leading to a residual systematic effect on energy and mass observables of a few 10's of
MeV. At the ILC, with much less beamstrahlung,
the precision is expected to improve to the percent level.
As for the polarisation and beam energy measurements, a long-term determination of the luminosity spectrum from physics events will be combined with fast extractions of beam parameters from the pattern of $e^+e^-$ pairs and photons in the very forward calorimeters BeamCal and GamCal~\cite{Grah:2008zz}, which can be performed every few bunch crossings. An example of propagating
the results from~\cite{Grah:2008zz} to a full physics analysis can be found in~\cite{Habermehl:2018yul}. In this example,
the effect on signal and background predictions is found to be at the few per mille level even when only using the ``online'', BeamCal-based method and not the full Bhabha analysis.
The absolute luminosity above $80\%$ of the nominal center-of-mass energy can be determined from low-angle Bhabha scattering measured in the dedicated forward calorimeters of the ILC detectors to a precision of a few per mille~\cite{Bozovic-Jelisavcic:2013aca}.
\subsection{Measurement of $m_W$}
The $W$ mass has been a prime target for the ILC and has been
understood to be very tractable based on extrapolations of measurements
from LEP2 both well above $W$-pair threshold, and at $W$-pair threshold.
Prior prospects for such measurements are summarized in Tables 1-9
and 1-10 in~\cite{Baak:2013fwa}.
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
$\sigma_{M}$ (GeV) & $\Delta m_W$ (MeV) & $\Delta \Gamma^{a}_{W}$ (MeV) & $\Delta \Gamma^{b}_{W}
$ (MeV) \\ \hline
1.0 & 0.67 & 1.3 & 2.0 \\
2.0 & 0.98 & 1.7 & 2.7 \\
2.5 & 1.1 & 2.0 & 3.2 \\
3.0 & 1.3 & 2.3 & 3.7 \\
4.0 & 1.6 & 2.8 & 5.0 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Statistical uncertainties for
$m_W$ and $\Gamma_{W}$ expected for a sample of
$10^{7}$ reconstructed $W$ bosons at the ILC250. These are estimated
from a simple parametric fit of the Breit-Wigner
lineshape convolved with a range of constant Gaussian
experimental mass resolutions, $\sigma_M$, ranging from 1 to 4 GeV.
The $m_W$ uncertainty is evaluated with a one parameter fit with
the width and mass resolution fixed. The corresponding uncertainties on
the W width are evaluated either with the mass resolution fixed and
known perfectly from a
two parameter fit ($\Gamma^{a}_{W}$), or more realistically,
from a three parameter fit ($\Gamma^{b}_{W}$) that also fits for
the mass resolution.}
\label{tab:Wmass}
\end{table}
Measurements from LEP2, the Tevatron, and ATLAS of $m_W$ have led to
today's precision in the PDG of 12~MeV, with the best single
experiment measurement having a quoted precision of 18~MeV.
Further improvements from long-existing hadron collider data sets
at the Tevatron and LHC are possible, and it was suggested in
\cite{Baak:2013fwa} that the LHC could eventually
improve the uncertainty on the $W$ mass to 5~MeV. But, given the predominant
systematic uncertainties, this goal now looks very challenging.
It is then interesting to study the challenges to a high-precision
measurement of $m_W$ at lepton colliders. Data sets
at LEP2 totalled 0.7 $\rm{fb}^{-1}$ per experiment, leading to
statistically limited measurements. The ILC250 is
expected
to produce a
much larger data set of 2 ab$^{-1}$,
with polarised beams. This data set will provide a sample of more
than $10^7$ reconstructed $W$ bosons. To demonstrate the statistical
power of such a sample, we show in Table~\ref{tab:Wmass} the
expected statistical uncertainties on $m_W$ and $\Gamma_W$ that would
result from fits to the measured $W$ boson invariant mass distribution.
For a typical mass resolution of 2.5~GeV, $10^7$ $W$ bosons would yield a
statistical uncertainty
on $m_W$ of 1.1~MeV. Similarly,
fitting the mass, width, and a Gaussian experimental
mass resolution, the total width could be determined from the
lineshape with a statistical uncertainty of 3.2~MeV. Thus, the
measurements of these quantities at the ILC250 will already reach the regime in
which systematic errors dominate. We will discuss the expected
systematic errors for each proposed method in the remainder of this
section.
The $W$ boson total width can also be determined by the
measurement of the $W$ leptonic branching fractions, since the
absolute leptonic partial widths, including new physics contributions,
can be predicted from precision electroweak observables. We will discuss
the measurement of $BR(W\to \ell \nu)$ in Sec.~\ref{sec:WBR}.
There are a number of promising approaches to measure
the $W$ mass at an $e^+e^-$ collider such as ILC.
Given the data sets that represent more than three orders of
magnitude increase in statistics beyond LEP2, it is appropriate to also
consider $W$ mass measurement methods that may have better
systematic behavior in this high statistics regime.
The various methods for $m_W$ measurement are as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item\label{item:kf} {\bf Constrained reconstruction.}
Kinematically-constrained reconstruction of $\mathrm{W}^+\mathrm{W}^-$
using constraints from {\it four-momentum conservation} and optionally
mass-equality, as was done at LEP2.
\item\label{item:mhad} {\bf Hadronic mass.}
Direct measurement of the {\it hadronic mass}. This can be applied
particularly to single-$W$ events decaying hadronically
or to the hadronic system in
semi-leptonic $\mathrm{W}^+\mathrm{W}^-$ events.
This method does not rely directly on knowledge of the beam energy
or its distribution.
\item\label{item:endpoint} {\bf Lepton endpoints.}
The two-body decay of each $W$ leads to endpoints
in the lepton energy spectrum at
\begin{equation}
E_{\ell } = E_{\rm{b}} (1 \pm \beta)/2 \ ,
\end{equation}
where $\beta$ is the $W$ velocity. These can be used to infer $m_W$.
The endpoints correspond to leptons parallel and anti-parallel
to the $W$ flight direction
This technique can be used for both semi-leptonic and fully-leptonic
$WW$ events with at least one prompt electron or muon.
\item\label{item:pm} {\bf Di-lepton pseudo-mass.}
In $WW$ to dilepton events, with electrons or muons,
one has six unknown quantities, namely, the three-momenta of each neutrino.
Assuming four-momentum conservation and equality of the two $W$ masses,
one has five constraints. By assuming that both neutrinos are in the
same plane as the charged leptons, the kinematics can be solved to
yield two ``pseudo-mass'' solutions that are sensitive to the
true $W$ mass. This technique was discussed in Appendix B
of~\cite{Hagiwara:1986vm} and
used along with the lepton endpoints by the OPAL experiment at
LEP2~\cite{OPAL-mW-lvlv}.
\item\label{item:threshold} {\bf Polarised Threshold Scan.}
Measurement of the $\mathrm{W}^+\mathrm{W}^-$ cross-section near
threshold with longitudinally
polarised beams is discussed in~\cite{Wilson:2016hne} and
references therein.
The ability to ``turn-on'' and ``turn-off'' the signal with polarised
beams, a capability unique to ILC, allows a precise in-situ measurement of the background.
\end{enumerate}
Methods~\ref{item:kf},\ref{item:mhad},\ref{item:endpoint},\ref{item:pm}
can all exploit the standard ILC program at 250~GeV and above.
Method~\ref{item:threshold} needs
dedicated running near $\sqrt{s}=161$~GeV.
Methods for measuring the $W$ mass in $\rm{e}^+\rm{e}^-$ colliders were
explored extensively in the LEP2 era, see~\cite{Kunszt:1996km,Stirling:1995xp} and
references therein.
For ILC-sized data sets, the constrained reconstruction
approach (method~\ref{item:kf})
may need to be restricted to semi-leptonic events in order to
avoid the final-state interaction issues
that beset the fully hadronic channel. With the
large data-sets of $WW$ events expected above threshold, the expectation
is that this measurement will be systematics limited.
With much improved detectors compared to LEP2 and with much better
lepton and jet energy resolution, it is expected
that uncertainties in the few MeV level can be targeted. Table 1-9
in~\cite{Baak:2013fwa} estimates an uncertainty of 2.8~MeV
at $\sqrt{s}=250$~GeV based on extrapolating LEP2 methods using only
the semi-leptonic channels with electrons or muons.
Method~\ref{item:mhad} is based purely on the hadronic mass
and was not used explicitly at LEP2.
With the increased
cross-section for singly-resonant events
($e^+e^- \rightarrow \rm{W} \rm{e} \nu$) at higher $\sqrt{s}$,
the excellent resolution for particles in jets expected from
particle-flow detectors, and the availability of control channels
with hadronic decays of the Z, an opportunity exists to make a
competitive measurement also using this method.
However the demands on the effective jet energy scale calibration are
very challenging. It was estimated
(Table 1-10 in ~\cite{Baak:2013fwa}) that a $m_W$
uncertainty of 3.7~MeV could be reached. This would be dominated
by the hadronic energy scale systematic uncertainty.
The endpoints method~\ref{item:endpoint} was only used for
fully leptonic events at LEP2. It has the inherent advantage that
the systematic uncertainties are dominated simply by
the uncertainties on the lepton energy scale
and the beam energy, given that one can express $m_W$ in terms of the
endpoints as follows:
\begin{equation}
m_W^2 = 4 E_l ( E_{\rm{b}} - E_l ) \ .
\end{equation}
It may be worth considering this as a complementary
method also for semi-leptonic events, that is of course correlated with
the constrained reconstruction method.
The pseudo-mass method and the endpoints method were applied to the
fully leptonic channel in~\cite{OPAL-mW-lvlv}. Very little
correlation (+11\%) was found between the two methods, indicating
that the two methods can be independently effective and can be
combined. The OPAL result achieved a statistical
uncertainty of 390 MeV on $m_W$ using 0.7 fb$^{-1}$ of data.
The lepton energy resolution for ILC detectors is about 0.15\%
based on momentum measurements; this is much better than
the 3\% energy (for electrons) and 8\% momentum (for muons)
resolutions at OPAL.
Assuming a factor of two improvement for ILC detectors,
(note that resolutions much less than $\Gamma_W$ are not necessary), and the
statistics of the 2 ab$^{-1}$ data set at ILC250. we project
a statistical uncertainty on $m_W$ of around 3.6~MeV.
This looks very promising, since the experimental
systematic uncertainties are very straightforward; more detailed
studies should be pursued. With the standard 10 ppm uncertainty
on center-of-mass energy and detector momentum scale, this approach
promises to be very fruitful with the full ILC program.
Method~\ref{item:threshold} needs dedicated running near
$\sqrt{s}=161$~GeV. This is now feasible for
the ILC machine. The expected integrated luminosity is
about 125 fb$^{-1}$/year if the run is done after the Luminosity
Upgrade in Fig.~\ref{fig:H20staged}. The use of a threshold scan with polarised electron and
positron beams to yield a precision measurement of $m_W$ at ILC was
studied in ~\cite{Wilson:2016hne}.
One of the potentially dominant systematic uncertainties,
the background determination, is under very good experimental control
because of the polarised beams. This is difficult to achieve with
an unpolarised collider. Errors at the few MeV level can be envisaged.
With 100~fb$^{-1}$,
and polarisation values of (90\%, 60\%),
the estimated uncertainty is
\begin{equation}
\Delta m_W (\rm{MeV}) = 2.4 \: \rm{(stat)} \oplus 3.1 \: (syst)
\oplus 0.8 \: (\sqrt{s}) \oplus \rm{theory} \ ,
\end{equation}
with these values added in quadrature,
amounting to an experimental uncertainty of 3.9~MeV. With
standard ILC polarisation values of 80\% and 30\% the
estimated precision is 6.1 MeV.
Eventual experimental precision approaching 2 MeV from
this approach can be considered at ILC if one is able to
dedicate 500 fb$^{-1}$ to such a
measurement, and the physics perspective of the day demands it.
There are excellent prospects for very competitive ILC
measurements of the $W$ mass from the four other methods using data
collected above the production threshold for Higgs bosons, and so
it would seem premature to make exclusive
running at $W$-pair threshold a requirement for the ILC run plan.
Nevertheless, given the complementary nature of a threshold-based
measurement it would seem prudent to retain accelerator
compatibility with such a scenario.
Given that the leading experimental
systematic uncertainties for the different methods are
reasonably complementary, it is expected that,
with the combination of these five different methods,
ILC will be able to measure $m_W$ to at least 2.5~MeV.
This uncertainty can potentially already be reached with
data-taking at the ILC250.
\subsection{Measurement of $W$ branching fractions}
\label{sec:WBR}
With the large data sets envisaged at ILC250, one can
also target much improved measurements of
the $WW$ production cross section and the individual W decay branching
fractions. This would use the ten different final state cross sections
available from $WW$ production:
the six $WW$ final states associated with fully leptonic
final states with two charged leptons (dielectrons, dimuons,
ditaus, electron-muon, electron-tau and muon-tau), the three
semileptonic $WW$
final states, one for
each lepton flavor, and the fully hadronic $WW$ final state. This
follows the methodology used at
LEP2~\cite{A-WWBR, D-WWBR, L-WWBR, O-WWBR}.
The ten measured event yields can be fitted for
an overall $WW$ cross section, $\sigma_{WW}$, and the three individual
leptonic branching fractions, $B_{e}$, $B_{\mu}$ and $B_{\tau}$
with the overall constraint that
\begin{equation}
B_{\rm{had}} = 1 - B_{e} - B_{\mu} - B_{\tau} \ ,
\end{equation}
taking into account background contributions in each channel.
With ten channels and four fit parameters, there is some
redundancy in the fitting procedure. This means that the parameters can
be determined well even if the more challenging channels,
namely the fully hadronic, the semileptonic with a tau,
and the di-tau channel would end up being systematically limited.
At LEP2, the signal process was modelled simply through the three
dominant, doubly resonant Feynman diagrams (so called CC03 process),
while other diagrams and their interferences resulting in the
same four fermion final state, such as those for
$ZZ$ or $We\nu$, were treated as background.
These ``4f-CC03'' corrections were typically about 10\% depending on
final state. A complete calculation of $e^+e^-\to 4f$
final states would need to be used in the high statistics regime.
We have looked into the feasibility of this method for ILC250,
building on LEP2 studies
at $\sqrt{s}\approx 200$~GeV, by putting together
a fit ansatz that assumes
identical efficiencies and mis-classification
probabilities for all ten $WW$ channels~\cite{O-WWBR}.
For the purpose of making an estimate for
this report, we concentrate on the impact of a single subsample of the
data. The actual analysis at the ILC will be based on global fit to
the
results from
all polarisation modes, along the lines described in
Sec.~\ref{sec:pol}.
Of the total 2 ab$^{-1}$ to be collected at
ILC250,
0.9 ab$^{-1}$ is to be collected
with $e^-_Le^+_R$ enhanced collisions. These benefit from a $WW$ cross section
enhancement over unpolarised beams of a factor of 2.32 for $-80\%, +30\% $
beam polarisations.
The estimated background per selection channel
depends on the polarisation asymmetry of the different backgrounds
and is estimated to be about +29\% for the important
two-fermion background from hadronic events.
Taking this effect that leads to an increased background,
and the decreased background estimated from $1/s$ scaling,
we find that the unchanged
OPAL background estimate is a good first estimate, and believe
that this is a reasonably conservative estimate. We have based our
estimates of statistical errors on the size of this subsample.
We assume that the other 55\% of the data set with
the less favorable beam polarisation configurations is used to measure
and test the background modeling and have neglected it for now in
estimating statistical sensitivity.
We also include the 6\% reduction in unpolarised cross section
at $\sqrt{s}=250$~GeV. Given that ILC detectors will have
much improved forward hermeticity, jet and lepton
energy resolutions, vertexing, and
electron, muon, and tau identification, it is very
reasonable to expect that the efficiency and background
performance would be much better.
One effect that is more difficult at higher $\sqrt{s}$
is a more forward polar angle distribution of the W decay products.
We find that 94.7\% of leptons in semi-leptonic events have a polar angle
satisfying, $|\cos{\theta}| < 0.975$, whereas at $\sqrt{s}=200$~GeV,
the corresponding fraction is 96.7\%.
It is straightforward to estimate statistical uncertainties
and we have done so for a number of scenarios. For systematic
uncertainties, there are five that come to mind:
\begin{itemize}
\item absolute integrated luminosity: The precision is likely limited
to about 0.1\%; however, to a great extent, this value cancels out
of the determination of branching ratios.
\item lepton efficiencies: This can be measured with high precision using
control samples of di-leptons as was done for precise $Z$ lineshape
measurements preferably using a tag-and-probe method. The key element
is efficiency within the geometrical acceptance. With control samples
totalling $10^{7}$ leptons, statistical uncertainties
of $3\times 10^{-5}$ can be targeted assuming highly efficient lepton
identification.
\item hadronic system modeling: Uncertainties of order 0.03\% seem
feasible based on LEP1 hadronic $Z$ studies targeted at estimating the
hadronic efficiency/acceptance.
\item fake $\tau$ candidates from hadronic events:
One needs to be able to model the rate of isolated tracks from
hadronic systems that can fake tau candidates.
This should be easier to reduce than at LEP2 given the excellent
vertexing performance envisaged.
\item background estimation: This will be controlled with the less
signal-favorable beam polarisation configurations.
\end{itemize}
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lccccc}
Event selections & $B_e$ & $B_{\mu}$ & $B_{\tau}$ & $R_{\mu}$ & $R_{\tau}$ \\ \hline
All 10 & 4.2 & 4.1 & 5.2 & 6.1 & 7.5 \\
9 (not fully-hadronic) & 5.9 & 5.7 & 6.4 & 6.1 & 7.5 \\
9 (not tau-semileptonic) & 4.6 & 4.6 & 7.8 & 6.1 & 10.8 \\
8 (not f-h and not $\tau$-semileptonic) & 8.3 & 8.4 & 7.8 & 6.1 & 12.8 \\
7 (not f-h and not $\tau$-sl and not di-$\tau$) & 9.0 & 9.1 &10.6 & 6.1 & 16.7 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Statistical uncertainties, expressed as relative errors in units of $10^{-4}$ for
the leptonic branching fractions of the $W$ boson ($B_e$, $B_{\mu}$
and $B_{\tau}$)
and the ratios of branching fractions $R_\mu = B_\mu/B_e$, $R_\tau =
B_\tau/B_e$.
The lines of the table refer to different choices of
the included event selections. The values assume ILC measurements
at $\sqrt{s}=250$~GeV using the 45\% of the 2 ab$^{-1}$ integrated
luminosity with enhanced $e^-_Le^+_R$ collisions, with the same
efficiencies and the same background
cross sections as in the OPAL measurement~\cite{O-WWBR}.
The uncertainties given for $R_\mu$, $R_\tau$ are from
a separate fit using the ($B_e$, $R_{\mu}$ and $R_{\tau}$) parametrization.}
\label{tab:WWBRs}
\end{table}
In Table~\ref{tab:WWBRs} we show the expected absolute
statistical uncertainties for two different parameterizations, one based on
the three leptonic branching fractions, ($B_e$, $B_{\mu}$ and $B_{\tau}$)
and one based on $B_{e}$ and the ratios $B_{\mu}/B_e$ and
$B_{\tau}/B_e$. Five different configurations of included event
selections are considered, indicating a reasonable degree of robustness.
The fits also fit for the cross section but the absolute
value is likely to be systematics limited.
It can be seen that fractional statistical uncertainties
on $B_e$ below 0.1\% and as low as 0.04\% can be envisaged.
The fits do not assume lepton universality.
The data set considered consists of 29.7 million
$WW$ candidates. The efficiency systematics seem not to be limiting.
The main systematic issue is likely to be the background
estimation that should be facilitated with the various polarised
data sets. The event selection purity
will likely need to be tightened to reduce systematics from backgrounds,
but the current statistical estimates should be a reasonable
starting point.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
CROSS (Cryogenic Rare-event Observatory with Surface Sensitivity)~\cite{CROSS} is a bolometric experiment devoted to the search of neutrinoless double-$\beta$ decay that will be installed in Canfranc Underground Laboratory (LSC, Spain).
The main innovation of the CROSS experiment with respect to current generation of bolometric experiments, like CUORE~\cite{CUORE}, is the capability to discriminate bulk events from surface background events by using pulse-shape discrimination (PSD).
$\mathrm{0\nu2\beta}$ and $\mathrm{2\nu2\beta}$ candidate events, in fact, are expected to release their energy in the whole bulk of the crystal, while the main sources of background come from surface contamination of the crystal or from the surrounding environment.
The discrimination of surface events in CROSS is possible thanks to ultra-pure superconductive Aluminum thin foils, deposited on the surface of the crystals, which act as energy absorbers for $\alpha$ surface events, providing a different dynamic in the conversion and propagation of phonons, hence a different signal shape.
This technique has been already demonstrated both with Tellurium dioxide ($\mathrm{TeO_2}$)~\cite{AlCoating} and Lithium molybdate ($\mathrm{LiMoO_4}$)~\cite{CROSS} crystals.
The final choice of the $\mathrm{0\nu2\beta}$ candidate material is still under study.
For what concern the phonon sensors, two options are being considered: NTD Germanium thermistors (widely used in bolometric experiments) and NbSi thermistors (faster and more sensitive to athermal phonons).
The adoption of PSD techniques has important implications in the design of both the front-end and back-end electronics.
For what concern the DAQ system, there are some different requirements with respect to present $\mathrm{0\nu2\beta}$ bolometric experiments (CUORE~\cite{CUORE}, CUPID-0~\cite{CUPID0}, etc.):
\noindent\textit{Faster signals --} phonon signals in CROSS have rise times in the order of 1~ms (up to 500~Hz bandwidth), so the DAQ system should allow signal digitization at 5~ksps or faster.
\noindent\textit{Higher pile-up --} Lithium molybdate exhibits higher pile-up due to the higher $\mathrm{2\nu2\beta}$ background, and this also requires a fast sampling rate, in order to properly discriminate pile-up events.
\noindent\textit{Higher resolution --} detector noise will be reduced thanks to the adoption of a quieter cryostat setup, so $\sim$20 bit resolution will allow to exploit the large signal dynamic and the lower noise of both detector and front-end electronics.
\noindent\textit{Continuous acquisition --} this is required in order to apply more complex offline triggers and optimum filtering techniques, as successfully done in CUORE.
\noindent\textit{Spread in detector characteristics --} cut-off frequency should be finely tuned in order to adapt to the characteristics of each detector.
\section{DAQ board for CROSS experiment}
\label{sec:1}
The DAQ board that has been developed for the CROSS experiment is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:scheda}, while Fig.~\ref{fig:schema} shows its block schematic.
The top part of the schematic shows the signal block for one channel out of the 12 available on the board.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig_scheda.pdf}
\caption{Photograph of the DAQ board for CROSS experiment with superimposed functional blocks.}
\label{fig:scheda}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{fig_schema.pdf}
\caption{Block schematic of the DAQ board for CROSS.}
\label{fig:schema}
\end{figure}
Each channel is equipped with a 6-pole Bessel-Thomson anti-aliasing filter with 10-bit digitally selectable cut-off frequency from 24~Hz up to 2.5~kHz using high precision digital trimmers (1\% absolute accuracy, $\mathrm{35\ ppm/^{\circ}C}$ drift). The trimmers have a resistance of $\mathrm{100\ k\Omega}$, which allows to use high quality C0G capacitors of few tens of nF.
Fig..~\ref{fig:canale} shows in more detail the schematic of the analog block.
Inputs are buffered and can be grounded to allow offset self-calibration.
The anti-aliasing filter can be bypassed.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{fig_canale.pdf}
\caption{Analog filtering block schematic. Inputs are buffered and can be grounded. The low pass filter can be bypassed.}
\label{fig:canale}
\end{figure}
Each pair of analog channels is equipped with dual-channel 24-bit $\mathrm{\Delta\Sigma}$ ADCs which are able to digitize the signals up to 25~ksps/ch in 12-channel mode or 250~ksps/ch in 6-channel mode.
The board has output switches that allow it to operate in fully analog mode, with filtered analog signals provided to the external connector, or in fully digital mode, with digital lines to the ADCs provided to the external connector.
In the CROSS experiment, this latter configuration will be used.
The bottom part of the block schematic (Fig.~\ref{fig:schema}) shows the slow control circuitry, responsible of the setting of all the onboard peripherals, as well as monitoring.
The onboard slow control circuit is connected via CAN bus to the experiment slow control server.
When operating in digital mode, as in CROSS, the digitized signals from the on-board ADCs are extracted from the ADCs by a commercial FPGA module (Enclustra Mars MA3) installed on the backpanel that collects the data from 8 boards (96 channels).
The data interface to the ADCs uses 6 high speed (20~MHz) SPI lines, while slow control of the board is mediated by an on-board ARM Cortex-M3 microcontroller interfaced to the FPGA with CAN bus.
This data is then transferred to the storage system using an inexpensive 1~Gbps Ethernet interface (optically decoupled).
The chosen data transfer protocol is UDP (hardware-synthesized in the FPGA), with a maximum data rate of 768~Mbps (6 channels per board at 250~ksps and 64 bit data length).
An illustration of the back-end communication is shown in Fig~\ref{fig:backend}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.55\textwidth]{fig_backend.pdf}
\caption{Back-end block schematic. The FPGA is installed on the backplane and collects data from 8 boards through high speed (20~MHz) SPI lines.}
\label{fig:backend}
\end{figure}
\section{Board performance}
\label{sec:2}
The first samples of the board have been fully characterized in order to evaluate their performance.
A summary of the board specifications and test results are gathered in Table~\ref{tab:spec}.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Summary of specifications and performance of the system.}
\label{tab:spec}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{fig_tabella.pdf}
\end{table}
The plot in Fig.~\ref{fig:filter} shows the adjustment of the cut-off frequency using the digital trimmer.
Six settings between 25~Hz and 2.5~kHz are selected and the transfer function is measured using an Agilent 4395A spectrum analyzer.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig_filter.pdf}
\caption{Analog filter transfer function at different cut-off frequency settings.}
\label{fig:filter}
\end{figure}
The common mode rejection ratio (CMRR) is plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig:cmrr}.
In DC, the CMRR is about $\mathrm{-70\ dB}$, mainly dominated by the mismatch in the gain of the input buffers (i.e. resistor mismatches). This value is largely sufficient for this application where a front-end stage is present.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig_cmrr.pdf}
\caption{Common mode rejection ratio (CMRR) at different cut-off frequency settings.}
\label{fig:cmrr}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig:noise} shows the noise of the analog filter at the same cut-off frequency settings.
At low filter bandwidth ($<100$~Hz), noise is dominated by the series noise of the trimmers ($\mathrm{100\ k\Omega}$ at 24~Hz), while at higher filter bandwidth, series noise of operational amplifiers becomes predominant.
The contribution of both parallel and 1/f noise of the opamps was made negligible with proper selection of the opamps themselves.
The total analog RMS noise is indicated in the legend of Fig.~\ref{fig:noise} and ranges from 5.7~$\mathrm{\mu}$V at 25~Hz up to 7.1~$\mathrm{\mu}$V at 2.5~kHz (0.1~Hz -- 100~kHz bandwidth).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig_noise.pdf}
\caption{Spectra of the analog noise at different cut-off frequency settings. As comparison, the noise spectrum of the digitized data at 5 ksps is also shown.}
\label{fig:noise}
\end{figure}
When the signals are read-out using the internal $\mathrm{\Delta\Sigma}$ ADCs, the effective resolution is dominated by the noise of the ADC and its buffer at sampling frequencies above 5~ksps.
The effective resolution is 22.0 bits at 1~ksps, 21.1 bits at 5~ksps and 19.7 bits at 25~ksps, which correspond to 4.7~$\mathrm{\mu}$V, 9.2~$\mathrm{\mu}$V and 24~$\mathrm{\mu}$V RMS respectively.
A noise spectrum of digitized data at 5 ksps is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:noise}.
The board has also been qualified in a climatic chamber in order to measure its stability against temperature variations, which is very important in this kind of experiments that are expected to run for long times while monitoring detector baseline stability. Offset drift was measured to be $\mathrm{10\ \mu V/^{\circ}C}$ ($\mathrm{1\ ppm/^{\circ}C}$), while gain sensitivity was measured to be $\mathrm{10\ ppm/^{\circ}C}$.
\section{Conclusions and future developments}
\label{sec:3}
The board is already fully operational and characterized.
It offers many improvements over widely used commercial solutions, mainly for what concern noise, stability and power consumption.
Data read-out from the FPGA module has been successfully demonstrated using a provisional backpanel.
Using this setup, a test with prototype CROSS detectors is foreseen in the near future, in order to qualify the system with real data from the bolometers and to compare its performance with standard commercial solutions.
Following this test, the full backpanel will be designed, which will allow to test the system at full output data rate with multiple DAQ boards and also implement the required synchronization between different FPGA modules.
|
\section{Introduction}
Ellipsis resolution is a hard, open problem in NLP, and an important source of error in machine translation, question answering, and dialogue understanding \cite{Vicedo:Ferrandez:00,Dzikovska:ea:06,Chung:Gildea:10,Macketanz:ea:18,Bach:ea:20}. %
There are no large annotated text corpora for this phenomenon, even for English, and we only have annotations for a subset of the known ellipsis constructions. Since annotation is expensive and cumbersome, any synergies with existing NLP tasks could be useful and enable us to leverage auxiliary data when learning models for ellipsis resolution.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{ellipsis-example.pdf}
\caption{Examples of Sluice Ellipsis and Verb Phrase Ellipsis, represented as ``questions" about their associated contexts. Wh-phrases and auxiliary verbs are marked in \textcolor{red}{red} and elided phrases are marked in \textcolor{blue}{blue}.} %
\label{fig:qa_example}
\end{figure}
This paper presents a simple yet strong approach to ellipsis resolution based on a straightforward observation, depicted in Figure \ref{fig:qa_example}, that ellipsis resolution can be converted to a QA problem.
Ellipsis and questions put in focus {\em referentially dependent} expressions \cite{Carlson:06}, or free variables \cite{Partee:78}, that need to be resolved in order to comprehend the discourse. For similar observations about different tasks, see \newcite{McCann:ea:18} and \newcite{Gardner:ea:19}.
\noindent This straightforward observation leads us to suggest treating different forms of ellipsis resolution -- and later, as an auxiliary task, coreference resolution -- as a QA problem, and to apply state-of-the-art architectures for QA to ellipsis resolution tasks, as well as to experiment with using training data for QA and coreference resolution to improve our new ellipsis resolution models.
\paragraph{Contributions} We cast ellipsis as a QA problem, enabling us to induce models for it using neural architectures originally developed for QA. Applying these architectures out of the box enables us to establish strong results\footnote{Though we report state-of-the-art results for both sluice and verb phrase ellipsis, we consider these models as strong baselines for future research as they are obtained purely using existing methods.} for ellipsis resolution tasks, improving significantly over previous work. Using the same architecture for the different ellipsis resolution tasks, as well as for QA and coreference resolution, enables us to explore synergies between the tasks, and we show that training joint models on these tasks leads to even better performance.
\section{Methodology}
In this section, we briefly describe the various datasets used for training, and explain how they are converted into QA format. We then move on to the choice of model architectures and the reasoning behind their selection.
\paragraph{Sluice Ellipsis}
For training and evaluation of Sluice Ellipsis resolution models, we use the corpus introduced by \newcite{anand-esc}, which contains 3,103 annotated examples of embedded sluices, collected from the New York Times section of the English Gigaword corpus. Since the annotators were free to paraphrase the antecedent, in some cases, a string match on the context does not return antecedent span indices. To ensure a fair comparison, we follow previous work \cite{sluice-short}, which is also the current state-of-the-art, in ignoring these instances, and use their split for training, development and testing.
\paragraph{Verb Phrase Ellipsis}
\newcite{bos-vpe} provide Verb Phrase (VP) Ellipsis annotations for the WSJ part of the Penn Treebank. All $25$ sections were annotated, and we follow them in using sections 0-19 for training, and 20-24 for testing. We further hold out sections 18-19 from the training data for development. This also enables to us compare our results directly with the current state-of-the-art for VP Ellipsis \cite{zhang-2019}.
\paragraph{Coreference Resolution}
For coreference resolution, which we use as an auxiliary task, we train and evaluate on two corpora: (i) the English portion of the OntoNotes 5.0\footnote{\url{https://catalog.ldc.upenn.edu/LDC2013T19}} corpus with the standard data split used in the CoNLL-2012 shared task \cite{conll2012}, and (ii) the WikiCoref corpus \cite{wikicoref}, which contains annotations of $30$ documents from the English Wikipedia. From this dataset, we use $22$ documents for training, $4$ documents for development, and $4$ for testing.
\paragraph{QA} We also use SQuAD v1.1 \cite{squad} as an auxiliary reading comprehension dataset.
\begin{table}
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedleft\arraybackslash}m{2.3cm}|
>{\raggedleft\arraybackslash}m{0.8cm}
>{\raggedleft\arraybackslash}m{0.8cm}
>{\raggedleft\arraybackslash}m{0.8cm}
>{\raggedleft\arraybackslash}m{0.8cm}}
\toprule
\textbf{Task} & \textbf{Train} & \textbf{Dev} & \textbf{Test} & \textbf{ACL} \\
\midrule
&\multicolumn{4}{c}{\sc Ellipsis}\\
\midrule
Sluice Ellipsis & 1.4k & 480 & 992 & 351 \\
VP Ellipsis & 264 & 20 & 78 & 984 \\
\midrule
&\multicolumn{4}{c}{\sc Auxiliary}\\
\midrule
OntoNotes & 153k & 18.8k & 19.5k & 463 \\
WikiCoref & 5.6k & 630 & 638 & 2.2k \\
SQuAD & 87.6k& 10.6k&-&117\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{QA pair counts and average context lengths (ACL) for different datasets, after conversion}
\label{tbl:dataset-sizes}
\end{table}
\paragraph{Data Conversion}\label{qa-conversion} For converting the various datasets into the QA format of \texttt{<context, question, answer>} triples, we perform a simple restructuring as shown in Figure \ref{fig:qa_example}. We consider the entire document as the context; the sentence in which the ellipsis/mention is present becomes the question, and the antecedent/entity becomes the answer. In case of coreference resolution, where a single sentence can have $n$ mentions, we create $n$ questions where every question is the same sentence with a different mention $i\in \{1 \dots n\}$ marked for resolution with \texttt{<ref>} and \texttt{</ref>} tags. Table \ref{tbl:dataset-sizes} shows the number of QA pairs created from each dataset and the average number of words in their contexts.
\paragraph{QA Architectures}
Generally, QA models have two main components: (i) an encoder module which learns to represent the question and its context, and (ii) a span selection module which predicts the start and end span indices of the answer if it is present in the context. In this work, we present experiments with three diverse models which take entirely different approaches to build the encoder module: (i) DrQA \cite{drqa}, with an LSTM encoder, (ii) QANet \cite{qanet}, with a CNN encoder, and (iii) BERT \cite{bert}, with a (pretrained) transformer encoder. We use the three different models to show that the between-task synergies are relatively robust across architectures; but one architecture (BERT) is clearly superior to the others and will be the standard baseline we propose for future research.\footnote{Note that there are many differences between these architectures; not only the encoder networks. The number of parameters differ, and BERT is pre-trained on large volumes of data. Our purpose here is not comparing strategies, but simply showing that synergies can be seen across all architectures. For more details, see Appendix \ref{app:qa-models}.}
\begin{table*}
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{@{}r|l|lll|%
lll@{}}
\toprule
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\sc{Task}} & \sc{SotA} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\sc{Single Task}} & %
\multicolumn{3}{c}{\sc{Joint}} \\ \midrule
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\sc{}} & \sc{} & \sc{DrQA} & \sc{QANet} & \sc{BERT} %
& \sc{DrQA} & \sc{QANet} & \sc{BERT} \\
\midrule
\textbf{Sluice Ellipsis} & 70.00 \cite{sluice-short} & \textbf{77.48} & \textbf{75.70} & %
\underline{\textbf{85.10}} & \textbf{80.17} & \textbf{77.11} & \underline{\textbf{86.01}} \\
\textbf{VP Ellipsis} & 72.89 \cite{zhang-2019} & 62.86 & 1.93 & \textbf{76.42} & %
63.54 & 22.49 & \underline{\textbf{78.66}} \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Ellipsis resolution scores are token-level F$_1$. Bold-faced results are better than the previous state-of-the-art; underlined results are the new state-of-the-art. When evaluated, our best joint architecture scores 72.31 on OntoNotes and 65.30 on WikiCoref (macro-averages of MUC, B$^3$, and CEAF$_{\phi_4}$ scores). See Appendix \ref{sec:coref-compat} for why these numbers are not directly comparable to previously reported coreference resolution results in literature.}
\label{tbl:main-results}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{ablation-plots.png}
\caption{Dataset ablations (F$_1$)}
\label{fig:ablation_plots}
\end{figure*}
\section{Experiments \& Results}
We conduct two sets of experiments: (i) the \textsc{Single-Task} experiments, in which we train and evaluate separate models for the two ellipsis resolution tasks; and (ii) the {\sc Joint} modelling experiments, where we train on the best possible combination of ellipsis resolution, coreference resolution and QA data, as determined on the validation set. The results can be seen in Table \ref{tbl:main-results}.\footnote{The reported results are the average of three independent runs with different random seeds.}
\paragraph{Single-Task Setup}
The \textsc{single-task} DrQA model improves the state-of-the-art on sluice ellipsis by $7.48$ F$_1$. %
The \textsc{single-task} QANet model also improves the state-of-the-art on sluice ellipsis by $5.7$ F$_1$, but fails to learn anything meaningful for VP ellipsis. We hypothesise this is due to the fact that $264$ training examples are not enough to train the model's large stack of encoder blocks from scratch.
The \textsc{single-task} BERT model achieves state-of-the-art results in both the ellipsis datasets with absolute error reductions of $50.33\%$ (Sluice Ellipsis) and $13.02\%$ (VP Ellipsis). Interestingly, it also achieves a $17.10\%$ error reduction over the best previously reported results on WikiCoref, but see Appendix \ref{sec:coref-compat} for why such a direct comparison of numbers is not entirely fair.
\paragraph{Joint Setup}
The {\sc Joint} models always perform on-par with, or better than the \textsc{Single-Task} models. In this setup, the BERT models beat the previous state-of-the-art for both Sluice and VP Ellipsis with $53.37\%$ and $21.28\%$ absolute error reductions respectively.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/vpe-analysis.pdf}
\caption{Selected gold and predicted antecedent spans from {\sc Single-Task} Verb Phrase Ellipsis (VPE$_s$ in figure) and {\sc joint} Verb Phrase Ellipsis (VPE$_j$ in figure) models.}
\label{fig:VPE_analysis}
\end{figure*}
\section{Dataset ablations}\label{sec:ablations}
We determine the best task combinations on held-out validation data for each ellipsis resolution task.\footnote{These ablations are performed on the best performing (BERT) model.} For Sluice Ellipsis, the best results are obtained by training the models on a combination of Sluice and VP Ellipsis data. For VP Ellipsis, the best performance is attained when the models are trained with a combination of all datasets. When training a model for a particular task, we sample auxiliary data from other datasets to match the size of the main task's dataset. For each dataset, the variations in its F$_1$ scores of the best performing architecture when combined with other datasets are shown in Figure \ref{fig:ablation_plots}. The most interesting findings from these ablations are mentioned below.
When the two ellipsis datasets are combined, the overall performance of the models increase for both tasks by around $1\%$ each. This shows that the two types of ellipsis are similar, and that when learning ellipsis resolution models, there is considerable synergy between the two resources. If we add subsampled coreference data when training these models, the Verb Phrase Ellipsis models gain up to $2.9$\%. One possible explanation could be more similarities between noun phrases and verb phrases, than between noun phrases and the sentences that are elided in Sluice Ellipsis resolution.
\section{Error Analysis}
We now look at some errors made by our best performing models. First, we compare the errors made by our \textsc{Single-Task} and \textsc{Joint} Sluice Ellipsis resolution models before moving on to VP Ellipsis.\footnote{We also briefly discuss how coreference resolution benefits from synergies with ellipsis in Appendix \ref{sec:coref-analysis}.}
\paragraph{Sluice Ellipsis}
The {\sc Joint} Sluice Ellipsis results improve modestly over the {\sc Single-Task} Sluice Ellipsis results. This is noteworthy, since the added VP Ellipsis data is quite small compared to the size of the sluice data. These models consistently select an antecedent of the right syntactic form, which is normally a complete sentence. Many of the errors consist of empty outputs: {\sc Single-Task} Sluice Ellipsis produces 58 empty outputs, while {\sc Joint} Sluice Ellipsis produces 63. Another source of error is discontiguous antecedents. It is not unusual for the gold antecedent to be a discontiguous span \cite{Donecker:96}, but our models are not permitted to produce such antecedents, so these cases will always be a source of error.
All the systems have problems when the antecedent follows the ellipsis, as in the following example: {\em I don't know why, but they seem to need a story.} We also compared the right and left periphery scores of sluices, and found better results predicting the right periphery: for {\sc Single-Task} Sluice Ellipsis, there were 678 matches on the left edge, and 733 on the right edge; for {\sc Joint} Sluice Ellipsis, there were 703 left matches and 734 right matches.
\paragraph{Verb Phrase Ellipsis}
The {\sc Single-Task} VP models trained with just VP Ellipsis data improves on the current state of the art, and further improvement is observed when trained on auxiliary data, especially the Sluice Ellipsis resolution dataset. While the {\sc Joint} VP Ellipsis model is generally better than the {\sc Single-Task} model, joint training with Sluice Ellipsis resolution data also seems to introduce unfortunate biases. While the {\sc Single-Task} model always selects antecedents of the right syntactic form, i.e., verb phrases, the {\sc Joint}~model may select sentential antecedents. %
See examples in Figure \ref{fig:VPE_analysis}.
In Example (a), the {\sc Joint} VP model incorrectly includes the subject {\it it}, presumably because the sluice data includes complete sentences as antecedents. Similarly in Example (b) -- though the {\sc Single-Task} model correctly chooses an antecedent beginning with the verb {\it make}, it continues with additional material that does not form a coherent antecedent. The {\sc Joint} result is also incorrect, but note that it consists of the complete sentence containing the correct VP antecedent. Example (b) presents the advantages and disadvantages of the joint ellipsis training data. While the two types of ellipsis require antecedents of different forms, they have similar requirements in terms of where in the context the antecedent is to be found. Example (c) further supports this point. Here the {\sc Joint} result is perfect, while the {\sc Single-Task} result finds an antecedent that is in the wrong part of the discourse. The {\sc Single-Task} model is slightly better with left periphery matches than right: we found 58 left and 55 right matches. This is reversed with the {\sc Joint} model, with 54 left and 60 right matches.
\section{Related Work}
We are not the first to use question answering to redefine a set of tasks. Recently,~\newcite{he2015question} showed that semantic role labeling annotations could be solicited by asking simple questions that implicitly target predicate-argument relations in a sentence. Parallel to our work, \newcite{hou2020bridging} cast bridging anaphora resolution as question answering based on context. \newcite{wu-etal-2020-corefqa} and \newcite{li-etal-2020-unified} also reformulate coreference resolution and named entity recognition as QA. In the realm of re-framing relation extraction as a QA problem, \newcite{levy-re} and \newcite{xwikire} create monolingual and multilingual template based QA datasets respectively, which yield relation extraction models which were better at generalizing in the zero-shot setting. Extending this idea, \newcite{mccann2018natural} introduced the DecaNLP challenge, which casts 10 core tasks in NLP as question-answering problems. Similar to our work, their architecture jointly learns across all of these tasks. DecaNLP includes pronoun resolution, a subset of coreference resolution, but it does so only on a small, hand-crafted dataset; it does not address ellipsis.
\paragraph{Limitations of our approach} One limitation of our approach is that, like most previous work, we assume ellipsis and coreference resolution amount to finding antecedent spans that corefer with the target mention. This is not always the case; the elided material can: (i) have extra-linguistic antecedents, and (ii) refer to something that is contextually implied.
\section{Conclusion} We present strong models for Sluice and Verb Phrase ellipsis resolution problems, by reformulating them as machine reading comprehension problems, significantly outperforming the previously best reported results. We also empirically show that training these models jointly and with auxiliary data from coreference resolution and question-answering further improves their performance.
Our code is publicly available at \href{https://github.com/rahular/ellipsis-baselines}{https://github.com/rahular/ellipsis-baselines}.
\section{Acknowledgements}
We thank the reviewers for their valuable feedback. Rahul Aralikatte and Anders S{\o}gaard are funded by
a Google Focused Research Award.
\bibliographystyle{acl_natbib}
\section{Introduction}
Ellipsis resolution is a hard, open problem in NLP, and an important source of error in machine translation, question answering, and dialogue understanding \cite{Vicedo:Ferrandez:00,Dzikovska:ea:06,Chung:Gildea:10,Macketanz:ea:18,Bach:ea:20}.
There are no large annotated text corpora for this phenomenon, even for English, and we only have annotations for a subset of the known ellipsis constructions. Since annotation is expensive and cumbersome, any synergies with existing NLP tasks could be useful and enable us to leverage auxiliary data when learning models for ellipsis resolution.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{ellipsis-example.pdf}
\caption{Examples of Sluice Ellipsis and Verb Phrase Ellipsis, represented as ``questions" about their associated contexts. Wh-phrases and auxiliary verbs are marked in \textcolor{red}{red} and elided phrases are marked in \textcolor{blue}{blue}.}
\label{fig:qa_example}
\end{figure}
This paper presents a simple yet strong approach to ellipsis resolution based on a straightforward observation, depicted in Figure \ref{fig:qa_example}, that ellipsis resolution can be converted to a QA problem.
Ellipsis and questions put in focus {\em referentially dependent} expressions \cite{Carlson:06}, or free variables \cite{Partee:78}, that need to be resolved in order to comprehend the discourse. For similar observations about different tasks, see \newcite{McCann:ea:18} and \newcite{Gardner:ea:19}.
\noindent This straightforward observation leads us to suggest treating different forms of ellipsis resolution -- and later, as an auxiliary task, coreference resolution -- as a QA problem, and to apply state-of-the-art architectures for QA to ellipsis resolution tasks, as well as to experiment with using training data for QA and coreference resolution to improve our new ellipsis resolution models.
\paragraph{Contributions} We cast ellipsis as a QA problem, enabling us to induce models for it using neural architectures originally developed for QA. Applying these architectures out of the box enables us to establish strong results\footnote{Though we report state-of-the-art results for both sluice and verb phrase ellipsis, we consider these models as strong baselines for future research as they are obtained purely using existing methods.} for ellipsis resolution tasks, improving significantly over previous work. Using the same architecture for the different ellipsis resolution tasks, as well as for QA and coreference resolution, enables us to explore synergies between the tasks, and we show that training joint models on these tasks leads to even better performance.
\section{Methodology}
In this section, we briefly describe the various datasets used for training, and explain how they are converted into QA format. We then move on to the choice of model architectures and the reasoning behind their selection.
\paragraph{Sluice Ellipsis}
For training and evaluation of Sluice Ellipsis resolution models, we use the corpus introduced by \newcite{anand-esc}, which contains 3,103 annotated examples of embedded sluices, collected from the New York Times section of the English Gigaword corpus. Since the annotators were free to paraphrase the antecedent, in some cases, a string match on the context does not return antecedent span indices. To ensure a fair comparison, we follow previous work \cite{sluice-short}, which is also the current state-of-the-art, in ignoring these instances, and use their split for training, development and testing.
\paragraph{Verb Phrase Ellipsis}
\newcite{bos-vpe} provide Verb Phrase (VP) Ellipsis annotations for the WSJ part of the Penn Treebank. All $25$ sections were annotated, and we follow them in using sections 0-19 for training, and 20-24 for testing. We further hold out sections 18-19 from the training data for development. This also enables to us compare our results directly with the current state-of-the-art for VP Ellipsis \cite{zhang-2019}.
\paragraph{Coreference Resolution}
For coreference resolution, which we use as an auxiliary task, we train and evaluate on two corpora: (i) the English portion of the OntoNotes 5.0\footnote{\url{https://catalog.ldc.upenn.edu/LDC2013T19}} corpus with the standard data split used in the CoNLL-2012 shared task \cite{conll2012}, and (ii) the WikiCoref corpus \cite{wikicoref}, which contains annotations of $30$ documents from the English Wikipedia. From this dataset, we use $22$ documents for training, $4$ documents for development, and $4$ for testing.
\paragraph{QA} We also use SQuAD v1.1 \cite{squad} as an auxiliary reading comprehension dataset.
\begin{table}
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedleft\arraybackslash}m{2.3cm}|
>{\raggedleft\arraybackslash}m{0.8cm}
>{\raggedleft\arraybackslash}m{0.8cm}
>{\raggedleft\arraybackslash}m{0.8cm}
>{\raggedleft\arraybackslash}m{0.8cm}}
\toprule
\textbf{Task} & \textbf{Train} & \textbf{Dev} & \textbf{Test} & \textbf{ACL} \\
\midrule
&\multicolumn{4}{c}{\sc Ellipsis}\\
\midrule
Sluice Ellipsis & 1.4k & 480 & 992 & 351 \\
VP Ellipsis & 264 & 20 & 78 & 984 \\
\midrule
&\multicolumn{4}{c}{\sc Auxiliary}\\
\midrule
OntoNotes & 153k & 18.8k & 19.5k & 463 \\
WikiCoref & 5.6k & 630 & 638 & 2.2k \\
SQuAD & 87.6k& 10.6k&-&117\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{QA pair counts and average context lengths (ACL) for different datasets, after conversion}
\label{tbl:dataset-sizes}
\end{table}
\paragraph{Data Conversion}\label{qa-conversion} For converting the various datasets into the QA format of \texttt{<context, question, answer>} triples, we perform a simple restructuring as shown in Figure \ref{fig:qa_example}. We consider the entire document as the context; the sentence in which the ellipsis/mention is present becomes the question, and the antecedent/entity becomes the answer. In case of coreference resolution, where a single sentence can have $n$ mentions, we create $n$ questions where every question is the same sentence with a different mention $i\in \{1 \dots n\}$ marked for resolution with \texttt{<ref>} and \texttt{</ref>} tags. Table \ref{tbl:dataset-sizes} shows the number of QA pairs created from each dataset and the average number of words in their contexts.
\paragraph{QA Architectures}
Generally, QA models have two main components: (i) an encoder module which learns to represent the question and its context, and (ii) a span selection module which predicts the start and end span indices of the answer if it is present in the context. In this work, we present experiments with three diverse models which take entirely different approaches to build the encoder module: (i) DrQA \cite{drqa}, with an LSTM encoder, (ii) QANet \cite{qanet}, with a CNN encoder, and (iii) BERT \cite{bert}, with a (pretrained) transformer encoder. We use the three different models to show that the between-task synergies are relatively robust across architectures; but one architecture (BERT) is clearly superior to the others and will be the standard baseline we propose for future research.\footnote{Note that there are many differences between these architectures; not only the encoder networks. The number of parameters differ, and BERT is pre-trained on large volumes of data. Our purpose here is not comparing strategies, but simply showing that synergies can be seen across all architectures. For more details, see Appendix \ref{app:qa-models}.}
\begin{table*}
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{@{}r|l|lll
lll@{}}
\toprule
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\sc{Task}} & \sc{SotA} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\sc{Single Task}} &
\multicolumn{3}{c}{\sc{Joint}} \\ \midrule
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\sc{}} & \sc{} & \sc{DrQA} & \sc{QANet} & \sc{BERT}
& \sc{DrQA} & \sc{QANet} & \sc{BERT} \\
\midrule
\textbf{Sluice Ellipsis} & 70.00 \cite{sluice-short} & \textbf{77.48} & \textbf{75.70} &
\underline{\textbf{85.10}} & \textbf{80.17} & \textbf{77.11} & \underline{\textbf{86.01}} \\
\textbf{VP Ellipsis} & 72.89 \cite{zhang-2019} & 62.86 & 1.93 & \textbf{76.42} &
63.54 & 22.49 & \underline{\textbf{78.66}} \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Ellipsis resolution scores are token-level F$_1$. Bold-faced results are better than the previous state-of-the-art; underlined results are the new state-of-the-art. When evaluated, our best joint architecture scores 72.31 on OntoNotes and 65.30 on WikiCoref (macro-averages of MUC, B$^3$, and CEAF$_{\phi_4}$ scores). See Appendix \ref{sec:coref-compat} for why these numbers are not directly comparable to previously reported coreference resolution results in literature.}
\label{tbl:main-results}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{ablation-plots.png}
\caption{Dataset ablations (F$_1$)}
\label{fig:ablation_plots}
\end{figure*}
\section{Experiments \& Results}
We conduct two sets of experiments: (i) the \textsc{Single-Task} experiments, in which we train and evaluate separate models for the two ellipsis resolution tasks; and (ii) the {\sc Joint} modelling experiments, where we train on the best possible combination of ellipsis resolution, coreference resolution and QA data, as determined on the validation set. The results can be seen in Table \ref{tbl:main-results}.\footnote{The reported results are the average of three independent runs with different random seeds.}
\paragraph{Single-Task Setup}
The \textsc{single-task} DrQA model improves the state-of-the-art on sluice ellipsis by $7.48$ F$_1$.
The \textsc{single-task} QANet model also improves the state-of-the-art on sluice ellipsis by $5.7$ F$_1$, but fails to learn anything meaningful for VP ellipsis. We hypothesise this is due to the fact that $264$ training examples are not enough to train the model's large stack of encoder blocks from scratch.
The \textsc{single-task} BERT model achieves state-of-the-art results in both the ellipsis datasets with absolute error reductions of $50.33\%$ (Sluice Ellipsis) and $13.02\%$ (VP Ellipsis). Interestingly, it also achieves a $17.10\%$ error reduction over the best previously reported results on WikiCoref, but see Appendix \ref{sec:coref-compat} for why such a direct comparison of numbers is not entirely fair.
\paragraph{Joint Setup}
The {\sc Joint} models always perform on-par with, or better than the \textsc{Single-Task} models. In this setup, the BERT models beat the previous state-of-the-art for both Sluice and VP Ellipsis with $53.37\%$ and $21.28\%$ absolute error reductions respectively.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/vpe-analysis.pdf}
\caption{Selected gold and predicted antecedent spans from {\sc Single-Task} Verb Phrase Ellipsis (VPE$_s$ in figure) and {\sc joint} Verb Phrase Ellipsis (VPE$_j$ in figure) models.}
\label{fig:VPE_analysis}
\end{figure*}
\section{Dataset ablations}\label{sec:ablations}
We determine the best task combinations on held-out validation data for each ellipsis resolution task.\footnote{These ablations are performed on the best performing (BERT) model.} For Sluice Ellipsis, the best results are obtained by training the models on a combination of Sluice and VP Ellipsis data. For VP Ellipsis, the best performance is attained when the models are trained with a combination of all datasets. When training a model for a particular task, we sample auxiliary data from other datasets to match the size of the main task's dataset. For each dataset, the variations in its F$_1$ scores of the best performing architecture when combined with other datasets are shown in Figure \ref{fig:ablation_plots}. The most interesting findings from these ablations are mentioned below.
When the two ellipsis datasets are combined, the overall performance of the models increase for both tasks by around $1\%$ each. This shows that the two types of ellipsis are similar, and that when learning ellipsis resolution models, there is considerable synergy between the two resources. If we add subsampled coreference data when training these models, the Verb Phrase Ellipsis models gain up to $2.9$\%. One possible explanation could be more similarities between noun phrases and verb phrases, than between noun phrases and the sentences that are elided in Sluice Ellipsis resolution.
\section{Error Analysis}
We now look at some errors made by our best performing models. First, we compare the errors made by our \textsc{Single-Task} and \textsc{Joint} Sluice Ellipsis resolution models before moving on to VP Ellipsis.\footnote{We also briefly discuss how coreference resolution benefits from synergies with ellipsis in Appendix \ref{sec:coref-analysis}.}
\paragraph{Sluice Ellipsis}
The {\sc Joint} Sluice Ellipsis results improve modestly over the {\sc Single-Task} Sluice Ellipsis results. This is noteworthy, since the added VP Ellipsis data is quite small compared to the size of the sluice data. These models consistently select an antecedent of the right syntactic form, which is normally a complete sentence. Many of the errors consist of empty outputs: {\sc Single-Task} Sluice Ellipsis produces 58 empty outputs, while {\sc Joint} Sluice Ellipsis produces 63. Another source of error is discontiguous antecedents. It is not unusual for the gold antecedent to be a discontiguous span \cite{Donecker:96}, but our models are not permitted to produce such antecedents, so these cases will always be a source of error.
All the systems have problems when the antecedent follows the ellipsis, as in the following example: {\em I don't know why, but they seem to need a story.} We also compared the right and left periphery scores of sluices, and found better results predicting the right periphery: for {\sc Single-Task} Sluice Ellipsis, there were 678 matches on the left edge, and 733 on the right edge; for {\sc Joint} Sluice Ellipsis, there were 703 left matches and 734 right matches.
\paragraph{Verb Phrase Ellipsis}
The {\sc Single-Task} VP models trained with just VP Ellipsis data improves on the current state of the art, and further improvement is observed when trained on auxiliary data, especially the Sluice Ellipsis resolution dataset. While the {\sc Joint} VP Ellipsis model is generally better than the {\sc Single-Task} model, joint training with Sluice Ellipsis resolution data also seems to introduce unfortunate biases. While the {\sc Single-Task} model always selects antecedents of the right syntactic form, i.e., verb phrases, the {\sc Joint}~model may select sentential antecedents.
See examples in Figure \ref{fig:VPE_analysis}.
In Example (a), the {\sc Joint} VP model incorrectly includes the subject {\it it}, presumably because the sluice data includes complete sentences as antecedents. Similarly in Example (b) -- though the {\sc Single-Task} model correctly chooses an antecedent beginning with the verb {\it make}, it continues with additional material that does not form a coherent antecedent. The {\sc Joint} result is also incorrect, but note that it consists of the complete sentence containing the correct VP antecedent. Example (b) presents the advantages and disadvantages of the joint ellipsis training data. While the two types of ellipsis require antecedents of different forms, they have similar requirements in terms of where in the context the antecedent is to be found. Example (c) further supports this point. Here the {\sc Joint} result is perfect, while the {\sc Single-Task} result finds an antecedent that is in the wrong part of the discourse. The {\sc Single-Task} model is slightly better with left periphery matches than right: we found 58 left and 55 right matches. This is reversed with the {\sc Joint} model, with 54 left and 60 right matches.
\section{Related Work}
We are not the first to use question answering to redefine a set of tasks. Recently,~\newcite{he2015question} showed that semantic role labeling annotations could be solicited by asking simple questions that implicitly target predicate-argument relations in a sentence. Parallel to our work, \newcite{hou2020bridging} cast bridging anaphora resolution as question answering based on context. \newcite{wu-etal-2020-corefqa} and \newcite{li-etal-2020-unified} also reformulate coreference resolution and named entity recognition as QA. In the realm of re-framing relation extraction as a QA problem, \newcite{levy-re} and \newcite{xwikire} create monolingual and multilingual template based QA datasets respectively, which yield relation extraction models which were better at generalizing in the zero-shot setting. Extending this idea, \newcite{mccann2018natural} introduced the DecaNLP challenge, which casts 10 core tasks in NLP as question-answering problems. Similar to our work, their architecture jointly learns across all of these tasks. DecaNLP includes pronoun resolution, a subset of coreference resolution, but it does so only on a small, hand-crafted dataset; it does not address ellipsis.
\paragraph{Limitations of our approach} One limitation of our approach is that, like most previous work, we assume ellipsis and coreference resolution amount to finding antecedent spans that corefer with the target mention. This is not always the case; the elided material can: (i) have extra-linguistic antecedents, and (ii) refer to something that is contextually implied.
\section{Conclusion} We present strong models for Sluice and Verb Phrase ellipsis resolution problems, by reformulating them as machine reading comprehension problems, significantly outperforming the previously best reported results. We also empirically show that training these models jointly and with auxiliary data from coreference resolution and question-answering further improves their performance.
Our code is publicly available at \href{https://github.com/rahular/ellipsis-baselines}{https://github.com/rahular/ellipsis-baselines}.
\section{Acknowledgements}
We thank the reviewers for their valuable feedback. Rahul Aralikatte and Anders S{\o}gaard are funded by
a Google Focused Research Award.
\bibliographystyle{acl_natbib}
|
\section*{Introduction}
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a finite alphabet, let $\mathcal{A}^*$ be the set of finite words over $\mathcal{A}$ and let $\mathcal{A}^{\omega}$ be the set of sequences $(a_n)_{n\geq 0}$ with values in $\mathcal{A}$. A sequence in $\mathcal{A}^{\omega}$ is called \textit{purely substitutive} if it is a fixed point of some substitution $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^*$, meaning that the sequence does not change after replacing each letter $a\in\mathcal{A}$ by a finite word $\varphi(a)$. A sequence in $\mathcal{A}^{\omega}$ is called \textit{substitutive} if it arises from a purely substitutive sequence over some alphabet $\mathcal{B}$ after applying a (possibly non-injective) map $\pi\colon \mathcal{B}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}$. We say that a dynamical system $X\subseteq \mathcal{A}^{\omega}$ is \emph{substitutive} if it arises as the orbit closure of a substitutive sequence. Such systems were extensively studied in the context of primitive substitutions \cite{Lothaire-book1,Lothaire-book2,Queffelec-book}, necessarily restricting such studies to minimal systems. There is also a close relationship between substitutive systems and D0L-systems (see, e.g.\ \cite{RS-1}, and compare with \cite{KloudaStarosta-2015}, where the authors solve a problem on D0L-systems that is related to the problems considered below). In the recent years there has been growing interest in the study of nonminimal substitutive systems, e.g.\ with connection to Bratteli diagrams \cite{BKM} and tiling spaces \cite{MR}.
Nevertheless, it seems that treatments of substitutive systems arising from nonprimitive substitutions are still scarce. In particular, the following basic question seems not to have been studied: Is every transitive subsystem of a substitutive system substitutive? In other words, if $X$ is a substitutive system and $x$ is a sequence in $X$, is there a substitutive sequence $y$ such that $x$ and $y$ have the same set of factors? The same question can be posed for $k$-automatic systems (for the precise definitions of substitutive and $k$-automatic systems see Section 1). Note that substitutive systems may contain uncountably many points, while the number of substitutive sequences is countable, and so most sequences in a substitutive system will often not be substitutive.
The aim of this paper is twofold. First, we study general substitutive systems and provide a positive answer to the above question. Second, we apply this result to obtain a finitary version of the classical theorem of Cobham, answering a question posed by Shallit\footnote{Jeffrey Shallit, journal entry, 2 February 2018 (private communication)} (see also the discussion in \cite{MRSS}).
We focus our study on noninvertible substitutive systems, but we briefly present analogous results for invertible systems as well.
Noninvertible substitutive systems have a considerably more complicated and interesting dynamical structure than the invertible ones. For instance, it follows from \cite{MR} that the number of subsystems of an invertible substitutive system is finite (see Remark \ref{remark:twosided}), while noninvertible substitutive systems can have infinitely many subsystems (see e.g.\ Example \ref{infinite}).
Throughout the article, we only consider substitutions that are growing (i.e.\ substitutions $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A} \to \mathcal{A}^*$ such that the length of the words $\varphi^n(a)$ tends to infinity for all letters $a\in \mathcal{A}$). We do not know what happens when this assumption is removed, though we would not be surprised if it could be shown that Theorem \ref{mainthmA} below continues to hold.
Our first main result yields the following description of transitive subsystems of substitutive systems.
\begin{introtheorem}\label{mainthmA} Every transitive subsystem of a substitutive system is substitutive. Every transitive subsystem of a $k$-automatic system is $k$-automatic.
\end{introtheorem}
In fact, we obtain a much more precise description of substitutive (resp., $k$-automatic) sequences generating such subsystems. We present here a simplified version of the result in the noninvertible case.
\begin{introtheorem}\label{mainthmB} Let $x$ be a purely substitutive sequence produced by a substitution $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow\mathcal{A}^*$, and let $X$ be the orbit closure of $x$. There exists a power $\tau=\varphi^m$ of $\varphi$ and a finite set of words $W\subset \mathcal{A}^*$ such that every transitive subsystem $Y\subset X$ can be generated by a sequence $y\in X$ that is a suffix of a biinfinite sequence of the form
\begin{equation}\label{sequence}
\cdots \tau^2(v)\tau(v)vabw\tau(w) \tau^2(w) \cdots
\end{equation}
for some $v\in W$, $w\in W \setminus \{\epsilon\}$, and $a,b\in \mathcal{A}\cup \{\epsilon\}$.
\end{introtheorem}
Substitutive sequences of such a form have been considered before in specific contexts. Let $x$ be a substitutive sequence over an alphabet $\mathcal{A}$. A sequence $z$ in the orbit closure of $x$ is called extremal if it is lexicographically minimal with respect to some total order on the alphabet $\mathcal{A}$. In \cite{CRSZ} it was shown that (under some additional assumptions) all extremal sequences are substitutive. We note here a curious observation that all extremal sequences in (purely) substitutive systems considered in \cite{CRSZ} are of the form \eqref{sequence} (\cite[Lemma 9]{CRSZ}).
In the second part of the article we restrict our attention to automatic sequences. One of the most fundamental results about automatic sequences is Cobham's theorem, which gives a strong relation between $k$-automaticity of a sequence and the chosen base $k$. Recall that two integers $k,l\geq 2$ are called \textit{multiplicatively independent} if they are not both powers of the same integer (equivalently, if they are not rational powers of each other). Cobham's theorem states that a sequence is simultaneously automatic with respect to two multiplicatively independent bases if and only if it is ultimately periodic \cite{Cobham-1969}. This result has sparked a lot of research and has been generalised to a variety of different settings. An extension of Cobham's theorem to the class of substitutive sequences was obtained by Durand in 2011 \cite{Durand-2011}.
A considerable effort went also into strengthening Cobham's original theorem. Let $x$ and $y$ be two automatic sequences defined over multiplicatively independent bases. In \cite{Fagnot-1997}, Fagnot showed that for the claim of Cobham's theorem to hold for $x$ and $y$ it is sufficient that they contain the same factors; that is, if the languages $\mathcal{L}(x)$ and $\mathcal{L}(y)$ coincide, then both $x$ and $y$ are ultimately periodic. In \cite{BK} the first- and second-named authors showed that the claim of Cobham's theorem holds if the sequences $x$ and $y$ agree on a set of upper density 1. In the spirit of Shallit's question, Mol, Rampersad, Shallit and Stipulanti obtained in \cite{MRSS} an explicit bound on the length of a common prefix of $x$ and $y$ that depends on the number of states in the automata generating $x$ and $y$. They further asked for a characterisation of the set $\mathcal{L}(x)\cap \mathcal{L}(y)$ of common factors of $x$ and $y$. Since all ultimately periodic sequences are $k$-automatic for all $k\geq 2$, it is clear that we cannot hope for a bound on the length of common factors of $x$ and $y$. We might hope, however, that the set of common factors exhibits some simple periodic-like structure.
In this paper, we show the following finitary version of Cobham's theorem, which provides a complete characterisation of the sets of words that can appear as common factors of two automatic sequences defined over multiplicatively independent bases. In particular, this set can always be described by a finite amount of data.
\begin{introtheorem}\label{mainthmC} Let $k,l\geq 2$ be multiplicatively independent integers, let $\mathcal{A}$ be an alphabet, and let $U\subset \mathcal{A}^*$. The following conditions are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item\label{thm:maincobhami-0} there exist a $k$-automatic sequence $x$ and an $l$-automatic sequence $y$ such that $U$ is the set of common factors of $x$ and $y$;
\item\label{thm:maincobhamii-0} the set $U$ is a finite nonempty union of sets of the form $\mathcal{L}(^{\omega}vuw^{\omega})$, where $u,v,w$ are (possibly empty) words over $\mathcal{A}$ and $^{\omega}vuw^{\omega}=\cdots v v v u w w w \cdots.$
\end{enumerate}
\end{introtheorem}
Note that Cobham's theorem follows immediately from Theorem \ref{mainthmC}. One of the crucial ingredients in the proof of Theorem \ref{mainthmC} is Theorem \ref{mainthmA} applied to $k$-automatic systems. Indeed, as a simple application of Theorem \ref{mainthmA} and Fagnot's result we can already obtain the following generalisation: if $\mathcal{L}(z)\subset \mathcal{L}(x)\cap\mathcal{L}(y)$ for some $k$-automatic sequence $x$ and $l$-automatic sequence $y$, then $z$ is ultimately periodic (see Corollary \ref{cor:cobpoints}).
Cobham's original result can be understood in the framework of recognisability of subsets of integers in base-$k$ numeration systems. In this context, Cobham's theorem has been seen to hold in many nonstandard numeration systems over the integers as well as in the higher dimensional setting over $\mathbf{N}^d$, the latter due to Semenov \cite{Semenov-1977}. For a comprehensive treatment of these developments and the interplay between substitutions, numeration systems and logic, see the surveys \cite{BHMV} and \cite{DR-2011}.
In the setting of recognisable subsets of $\mathbf{R}^d$, an analogue of Cobham's theorem for integer-based numeration systems was obtained by Boigelot, Brusten and Leroux \cite{BB-2009, BBL-2009} with recognisability being defined with respect to (weak) B{\"u}chi automata (for a weaker result for general B{\"u}chi automata, see \cite{BBB-coprime}). The one-dimensional case was obtained independently by Adamczewski and Bell \cite{AB-2011}, although it was framed in a different language inspired by the kernel-based definition of automaticity. The two approaches were thoroughly linked in \cite{CLR-2015}, providing further connections with (graph directed) iterated function systems and Cobham-like theorems for iterated function systems obtained in \cite{FW-2009} and \cite{EKM-2010}. For more about these developments we refer to \cite{CLR-2015} and references therein.
In another direction, Cobham's theorem proved amenable to various algebraic extensions, in part thanks to the characterisation of automaticity in terms of algebraicity of power series over $\mathbf{F}_p$ obtained by Christol \cite{Christol}. Cobham's theorem has been successfully generalised to the class of regular sequences \cite{Bell-2005}, quasi-automatic functions \cite{AB-2008} (introduced by Kedlaya in \cite{Kedlaya} in order to give a description of the algebraic closure of the field $\mathbf{F}_q(t)$) and Mahler functions (over fields of characteristic 0) \cite{AB-2013}. All these proofs made use of Cobham's original theorem. A much simpler proof of Cobham's theorem for Mahler functions that does not rely on the original result of Cobham has been obtained by Sch\"afke and Singer \cite{SS-2017}.
It would be interesting to see if the finitary version of Cobham's theorem can be generalised to any of these wider settings. It is easy to see that we cannot hope for a straightforward extension to the class of substitutive sequences since we can construct two non-ultimately periodic substitutive sequences $x$ and $y$ over multiplicatively independent bases such that $\mathcal{L}(x) \subset \mathcal{L}(y)$ (see Remark \ref{remark:substitutive} for more details).
It is, however, reasonable to hope that some extension of Theorem \ref{mainthmC} holds in a higher dimensional setting and can lead to a generalisation of the Cobham--Semenov theorem. A possible approach could involve extending Theorem \ref{mainthmA} to automatic systems over $\mathbf{N}^d$.
We briefly discuss the contents of the paper. In the first section, we recap some basic facts about (topological) dynamical systems and substitutions, and introduce the class of substitutive systems that we will work with. In Definition \ref{def:idemsub} we introduce the notion of an idempotent substitution and show that for every substitution $\varphi$ some power $\varphi^n$ is idempotent. Idempotency gathers all the technical assumptions that we need from the substitution in order to carry out the proofs in Section 2. In Lemma \ref{lem:morvarphicseq} we show that certain sequences that will turn out to be closely linked with sequences generating transitive subsystems of substitutive (resp., $k$-automatic) systems are indeed substitutive (resp., $k$-automatic).
The second section is devoted to the classification of minimal and transitive subsystems of substitutive systems, and contains the proofs of Theorems \ref{mainthmA} and \ref{mainthmB}. The analogues of Theorems \ref{mainthmA} and \ref{mainthmB} for invertible substitutive systems are presented at the end of the section.
The proof of Theorem \ref{mainthmC} is given in the third section. The main ingredients in the proof are Theorem \ref{mainthmA} and Theorem \ref{prop:recurrence}, which describes occurrences of cyclic factors in automatic sequences. We also discuss the problem of effective computability of the set of common factors, that is, existence of an algorithm that, given as input two automatic sequences $x,y\in \mathcal{A}^{\omega}$ defined over multiplicatively independent bases, returns a finite set of triples of words $(v,u,w)\in (\mathcal{A}^*)^3$ that describe the set of common factors $\mathcal{L}(x)\cap \mathcal{L}(y)$ in the sense of Theorem \ref{mainthmC}. Our proof of Theorem \ref{mainthmC} uses the compactness of the space $\mathcal{A}^{\omega}$ and is not effective. We believe that the question of whether Theorem \ref{mainthmC} admits an effective proof is interesting and worthy of further study.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
This research was supported by National Science Centre, Poland grant
number 2018/29/B/ST1/01340 (Jakub Byszewski), ERC grant ErgComNum 682150 (Jakub Konieczny) and National Science Centre, Poland grant
number 2012/07/E/ST1/00185 (El\.zbieta Krawczyk).
The authors are very grateful to Jeffrey Shallit, who suggested this line of research, as well as to Dominik Kwietniak, Clemens M\"ullner and Tamar Ziegler. We also wish to thank the anonymous referees for their detailed comments and suggestions, and in particular for pointing out the reference \cite{AS} and suggesting the streamlined proof of Lemma \ref{lem:morvarphicseq}\eqref{lem:morvarphicseq2}.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{sec:preliminaries}
In this section we recall some classical definitions and state a few preliminary lemmas.
\subsection*{Symbolic dynamics}
\textit{A (topological) dynamical system} is a compact metric space $X$ together with a continuous map $T\colon X\rightarrow X$. Let $T^n$ denote the $n$-th iterate of $T$, and let $\Orb(x)=\{T^n(x)\mid n\geq 0\}$ denote the \emph{orbit} of a point $x\in X$. A point $x\in X$ is \textit{periodic} if $T^k(x)=x$ for some $k\geq 1$. A point $x\in X$ is \textit{ultimately periodic} if there exists $m\geq 0$ such that $T^m(x)$ is periodic. A \textit{subsystem} of $X$ is a closed subset of $X$ that is invariant under the map $T$, i.e.\ a closed set $X' \subset X$ with $T(X')\subset X'$. A system $X$ is called \textit{minimal} if $X \neq \emptyset$ and if $X$ has no subsystems other than $\emptyset$ and $X$; equivalently, a system $X\neq \emptyset$ is minimal if the orbit of every point is dense in $X$ \cite[Ex.\ 4.2.1.a]{EinsiedlerWard-book}. A system $X$ is called \textit{transitive} if it has a point with a dense orbit. An easy application of Zorn's lemma shows that every dynamical system has a minimal subsystem \cite[Ex.\ 4.2.1.c]{EinsiedlerWard-book}. We say that a dynamical system $(Y,S)$ is a \textit{(topological) factor} of the system $(X,T)$ if there exists a continuous surjective map $\pi\colon X\rightarrow Y$ such that $\pi\circ T=S\circ \pi$. Such a map $\pi$ is called \textit{a factor map}. We will need the following simple fact.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:factor}
Let $X$ and $Y$ be dynamical systems and let $\pi \colon X \to Y$ be a factor map. Let $Y'$ be a minimal subsystem of $Y$. Then there exists a minimal subsystem $X'$ of $X$ such that $\pi(X')=Y'$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $X''\subset X$ be the preimage of $Y'$ by the map $\pi$. Clearly, $X''$ is a subsystem of $X$. Let $X'$ be some minimal subsystem of $X''$. Then $\pi(X')$ is a subsystem of $Y'$, and since $Y'$ is minimal, $\pi(X')=Y'$.
\end{proof}
In this paper we are interested in dynamical systems coming from substitutive sequences. Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a finite set (called an \emph{alphabet}). Let $\mathcal{A}^*$ denote the set of finite words over $\mathcal{A}$. This is a monoid under concatenation. The empty word is denoted by $\epsilon$. We say that a word $w$ is a \emph{factor} of a word $v$ or that $w$ \textit{appears} in $v$ if $v=ywz$ for some words $y$ and $z$. A word $w$ is a \textit{prefix} of a word $v$ if $v = wz$ for some word $z$. A prefix $w$ is \textit{proper} if $w\neq v$. We similarly define a \textit{suffix}. For a word $w$ we let $|w|$ denote the length of $w$.
Let $\mathcal{A}^{\omega}$ denote the set of sequences over $\mathcal{A}$. For a sequence $x$ and integers $i\leq j$ we write $x_{[i,\,j-1]}$ for the word $x_ix_{i+1}\cdots x_{j-1}$ and $x_{[i,\,\infty)}$ for the sequence $x_ix_{i+1}\cdots$. (In particular, $x_{[i,\,i-1]}=\epsilon$.) The notions of concatenation, factor, prefix and suffix are used for words and sequences as long as they make obvious sense. For a word $w\neq \epsilon$ let $w^{\omega}$ denote the sequence $w^{\omega}=w w w \cdots$, and we put $\epsilon^{\omega}=\epsilon$. While we will always use the notation $x_n$ for the terms of a sequence $x=(x_n)_{n\geq 0}\in\mathcal{A}^{\omega}$, we regard words themselves as not indexed.
The set $\mathcal{A}^{\omega}$ with the product topology (where we use discrete topology on each copy of $\mathcal{A}$) is a compact metrisable space. We define the shift map $T\colon \mathcal{A}^{\omega}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^{\omega}$ by $T((x_n)_n)= (x_{n+1})_n$. The space $\mathcal{A}^{\omega}$ together with the shift map $T$ is a dynamical system. We refer to subsystems $X$ of $\mathcal{A}^{\omega}$ as \textit{subshifts}. Let $\mathcal{L}(X)$ denote the \textit{language} of the subshift $X$, i.e.\ the set of all finite words that appear in some $x\in X$. A subshift $X$ is uniquely determined by its language since \[X=\{x\in \mathcal{A}^{\omega} \mid \text{ all factors of } x \text{ are in } \mathcal{L}(X)\}.\] We also use $\mathcal{L}(y)$ to denote the set of factors of a word or a sequence $y$. By a slight abuse of terminology we say that a sequence of words $w_n$ converges to the sequence $x$ if $|w_n|\to \infty$ and for every $m\geq 0$ the prefixes of $x$ and $w_n$ of length $m$ agree for sufficiently large $n$.
We will occasionally also work with backwards infinite sequences in ${}^{\omega}\!\mathcal{A}$ and biinfinite sequences in ${}^{\omega}\!\mathcal{A}^{\omega}$. The definitions of factor, prefix, suffix and language generalise to these cases in a straightforward manner. We always regard sequences $(a_n)_n$ in $\mathcal{A}^{\omega}$ as indexed by $n\in\{0,1,\ldots\}$, backwards infinite sequences in ${}^{\omega}\!\mathcal{A}$ as indexed by $n\in\{\ldots,-2,-1\}$, and biinfinite sequences in ${}^{\omega}\!\mathcal{A}^{\omega}$ as indexed by $n\in \{\ldots,-2,-1,0,1,\ldots\}$.
\subsection*{Substitutive sequences}
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be an alphabet. A \textit{substitution} is a map $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^*$ that assigns to each letter $a$ some finite word $w$ in $\mathcal{A}^*$. We only consider substitutions that are \textit{growing}, i.e.\ $|\varphi^n(a)|\rightarrow \infty$ as $n\rightarrow \infty$ for each $a\in\mathcal{A}$, and throughout the paper the term `substitution' is used for a growing substitution. A substitution $\varphi$ is called \textit{primitive} if there exists an integer $n \geq 1$ such that for any $a,b\in \mathcal{A}$ the letter $a$ appears in $\varphi^n(b)$. A letter $a\in \mathcal{A}$ is \textit{prolongable} if $a$ is the initial letter of $\varphi(a)$. A letter $a\in \mathcal{A}$ is \textit{backwards prolongable} if $a$ is the final letter of $\varphi(a)$. If $a$ is prolongable (resp., backwards prolongable), then the sequence $\varphi^n(a)$ converges to a sequence in $\mathcal{A}^{\omega}$ (resp., in ${}^{\omega}\!\mathcal{A})$, denoted by $\varphi^{\omega}(a)$ (resp., ${}^{\omega}\!\varphi(a)$). A \textit{coding} is an arbitrary map $\pi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{B}$ between alphabets $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{B}$. A surjective coding $\pi$ naturally extends to a factor map $\pi\colon\mathcal{A}^{\omega}\rightarrow \mathcal{B}^{\omega}$ between dynamical systems.
A substitution $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^*$ induces a natural map $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}^{\omega} \to \mathcal{A}^{\omega}$, denoted by the same letter. We say that a sequence $x$ is \textit{purely substitutive} if it is a fixed point of some substitution $\varphi$, i.e.\ $\varphi(x)=x$. In this case we also say that the sequence $x$ is \emph{produced} by the substitution $\varphi$. Sequences produced by a substitution $\varphi$ are exactly of the form $\varphi^{\omega}(a)$ for a prolongable letter $a$. A \textit{substitutive} sequence is the image of a purely substitutive sequence under a coding.
We say that a substitution $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^*$ is \textit{of constant length $k$} if $|\varphi(a)|=k$ for each $a\in \mathcal{A}$. A fixed point of a substitution of constant length $k$ is called a \textit{purely} $k$-\textit{automatic sequence}. A $k$-\textit{automatic} sequence is the image of a purely $k$-automatic sequence under a coding. The classes of substitutive and $k$-automatic sequences are invariant under changing finitely many terms of a sequence and under the forward and backward shift operations \cite[Cor.\ 6.8.5 and Thm.\ 7.6.1 \& 7.6.3]{AlloucheShallit-book}. We also mention here the trivial case of Cobham's theorem, which says that for any integer $t\geq 1$ the classes of $k$-automatic and $k^t$-automatic sequences coincide \cite[Theorem 6.6.3]{AlloucheShallit-book}.
The term \emph{automatic} has its origin in theoretical computer science. Informally speaking, automata (or more precisely finite deterministic $k$-automata with output) are simple finite computational devices that compute the $n$-th term of a sequence from the base-$k$ digits of $n$. For more details, see \cite{AlloucheShallit-book}. A result of Cobham asserts that the description of $k$-automatic sequences in terms of substitutions of constant length $k$ and in terms of $k$-automata are equivalent \cite[Thm.\ 6.3.2]{AlloucheShallit-book}, \cite{Cobham-1972}. In this paper, we will only work with the former definition.
Note that the assumption that a substitution is growing is trivially satisfied when the substitution is of constant length $k\geq 2$.
Yet another definition of an automatic sequence can be given in terms of kernels. Let $x=(x_n)_{n\geq 0}$ be a sequence over an alphabet $\mathcal{A}$. Let $\N=\{0,1,\dots\}$ denote the nonnegative integers, and let $k\geq 2$ be an integer. The $k$-\textit{kernel} of $x$ is defined as the family of sequences\[\mathrm{K}_k(x)=\{(x_{k^m n +r})_{n\geq 0}\mid m,r \in \N, 0\leq r< k^m\}.\]A theorem of Cobham asserts that a sequence is $k$-automatic if and only if its $k$-kernel is finite (see \cite{Cobham-1972} or \cite[Thm.\ 6.6.2]{AlloucheShallit-book}).
Later we will need the following result.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:morvarphicseq} Let $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^{*}$ be a substitution and let $w\in \mathcal{A}^*$ be nonempty. Consider the sequence $x=w\varphi(w)\varphi^2(w)\cdots$. \begin{enumerate}
\item \label{lem:morvarphicseq1} The sequence $x$ is substitutive.
\item \label{lem:morvarphicseq2} If $\varphi$ is of constant length $k$, then $x$ is $k$-automatic.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Part \eqref{lem:morvarphicseq1} follows from \cite[Lemma 5]{CRSZ}; since the argument is short, we include it for completeness. Let $\spadesuit$ be a letter not belonging to the alphabet $\mathcal{A}$ and consider the substitution $\tau\colon \mathcal{A}\cup\{\spadesuit\}\rightarrow (\mathcal{A}\cup\{\spadesuit\})^*$ given by $\tau(\spadesuit)=\spadesuit w$, $\tau(a)=\varphi(a)$ for $a\in \mathcal{A}$. The sequence $\tau^{\omega}(\spadesuit)$ takes the form $\spadesuit x$ and is clearly substitutive. Therefore, since the class of substitutive sequences is closed under shifts, $x$ is substitutive as well.
We now assume that $\varphi$ is of constant length $k$ and prove part \eqref{lem:morvarphicseq2}. Intuitively, the claim holds since the equation $x=w\varphi(x)$ allows us to express the elements of the kernel of $x$ in terms of codings of finitely many shifts of the sequence $x$. For a formal proof, put $s=|w|$. For an integer $j\in [0,k-1]$ write $j-s=kc_j+r_j$ for integers $c_j, r_j$ with $r_j\in[0,k-1]$. Since $x=w\varphi(x)$, we see that $$x_{kn+j}=(\varphi(x))_{kn+j-s}=(\varphi(x))_{k(n+c_{j})+r_{j}}$$ whenever $kn+j\geq s$. Hence, for all sufficiently large $n$, $x_{kn+j}$ is the $(r_j+1)$-st letter of the word $\varphi(x_{n+c_{j}})$. The claim then follows from \cite[Thm. 2.2]{AS}.
\end{proof}
\subsection*{Substitutive systems}
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be an alphabet. A system $X\subseteq \mathcal{A}^{\omega}$ is called \emph{purely substitutive} (resp., \emph{substitutive}, $k$-\emph{automatic}) if it arises as the orbit closure of a purely substitutive (resp., substitutive, $k$-automatic) sequence. Note that any such system is automatically transitive.
There is a more general notion of systems arising from substitutions. Let $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^*$ be a substitution and let $X_{\varphi}$ denote the dynamical system generated by $\varphi$, i.e.\
\[
X_{\varphi}=\{z\in \mathcal{A}^{\omega} \mid \text{ every factor of } z \text{ appears in }\varphi^n(a) \text{ for some } n\geq 0 \textrm{ and } a\in\mathcal{A}\}.
\]The system $X_{\varphi}$ does not have to be transitive; consider, e.g.\ the substitution $\varphi\colon \{0,1\}\rightarrow \{0,1\}^*$ given by $\varphi(0)=00$, $\varphi(1)=11$ for which $X_{\varphi}=\{0^{\omega},1^{\omega}\}$. It is clear that every substitutive system has the form $\pi(X_{\varphi})$ for some substitution $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^*$ and coding $\pi\colon\mathcal{A}\rightarrow\mathcal{B}$. It is also well-known that if $X_{\varphi}$ is minimal, then it is substitutive \cite[Section 5.2]{Queffelec-book}. Proposition \ref{prop:subsystemsXb} below shows more generally that a system $X_{\varphi}$ is substitutive if and only if it is transitive.
Let $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^*$ be a substitution. For $b\in \mathcal{A}$ let $\mathcal{A}_b$ denote the set of all letters $a\in\mathcal{A}$ appearing in $\varphi^n(b)$ for some $n\geq 0$. The substitution $\varphi$ maps $\mathcal{A}_b$ to $\mathcal{A}_b^*$. For $a,b\in \mathcal{A}$, we write $b\succcurlyeq a$ if $a\in \mathcal{A}_b$. Note that the relation $\succcurlyeq $ is only a preorder on the set $\mathcal{A}$. If $b\succcurlyeq a \succcurlyeq b$, we write $a\sim b$. We also write $b\succ a$ if $b\succcurlyeq a$ and $b\not\sim a$. The relation $\sim$ is an equivalence relation and $\succ$ is a strict partial order on $\mathcal{A}$. These relations clearly depend on the substitution $\varphi$, but we will nevertheless write $ b\succ a$ or $b\succcurlyeq a$ and call a letter minimal, maximal or equivalent to another letter when the substitution is clear from the context. For $b\in \mathcal{A}$ let $X_{\varphi, b}$ denote the subsystem of $X_{\varphi}$ generated by $b$, i.e.\
\[
X_{\varphi, b}=\{ z\in X_{\varphi}\mid \text{ every factor of } z \text{ appears in } \varphi^n(b) \text{ for some } n\geq 0\}.
\]
Thus, $X_{\varphi, b}$ is equal to the system $X_{\varphi'}$, where $\varphi'$ is the substitution $\varphi$ restricted to the alphabet $\mathcal{A}_b$. We will often write $X_b$ instead of $X_{\varphi,b}$ when the substitution $\varphi$ is clear from the context. Note that if $a\succcurlyeq b$, then $X_a\supseteq X_b$. Note also that $X_{\varphi}=\bigcup_{a\in\mathcal{A}} X_a$ and $\varphi(X_b)\subset X_b$ for each $b\in\mathcal{A}$.
The following lemma is a variant of \cite[Lemma 6]{CRSZ} (cf.\ \cite[Prop. 5.10]{BKM} for a version for two-sided dynamical systems).
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:prefix}
Let $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^*$ be a substitution and let $x\in X_{\varphi}$. There exist $y\in X_{\varphi}$ and a proper prefix $u$ of $\varphi(y_0)$ (possibly empty) such that $ux=\varphi(y)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $v_n$ be the prefix of $x$ of length $n\geq 1$. Since $x\in X_{\varphi}$, there exist $b\in\mathcal{A}$ and $k\geq 1$ such that $v_n$ is a factor of $\varphi^k(b)$. Removing from $\varphi^{k-1}(b)$ the longest prefix whose image by $\varphi$ does not intersect $v_n$, we obtain a suffix $w_n$ of $\varphi^{k-1}(b)$ with initial letter $a_n$ and a proper prefix $u_n$ of $\varphi(a_n)$ such that $u_nx$ and $\varphi(w_n)$ agree on the first $n$ positions.
Since there are only finitely many possibilities for $u_n$ and $\mathcal{A}^{\omega}$ is compact, there exist $u\in \mathcal{A}^*$, $y\in X_{\varphi}$ and an increasing sequence $(k_m)_{m\geq 0}$ of positive integers such that $u_{k_m}=u$ for all $m \geq 0$ and $w_{k_m}$ converges to $y$ as $m \to \infty$. By construction, $u$ is then a proper prefix of $\varphi(y_0)$ and we have $ux=\varphi(y)$.
\end{proof}
The following lemma is well-known for primitive substitutions (see, e.g.\ \cite[Prop.\ 5.4]{Queffelec-book}); we will however need the claim under the weaker assumption of transitivity.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:nthpower}
Let $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^*$ be a substitution. If $X_{\varphi}$ is transitive, then $X_{\varphi}=X_{\varphi^n}$ for any $n\geq 1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $n\geq 1$ and for an integer $i\in [0,n-1]$ consider the subsystems $X_i$ of $X_{\varphi}$ defined as
\[
X_i=\{x\in X_{\varphi} \mid \textrm{ every factor of } x \textrm{ appears in } \varphi^k(b) \textrm{ for some } b\in \mathcal{A} \textrm{ and } k\equiv i \bmod n\}.
\] Note that $X_0=X_{\varphi^n}$ and $X_{\varphi}=\bigcup_{i=0}^{n-1} X_i$. Since $X_{\varphi}$ is transitive, $X_{\varphi}=X_j$ for some integer $j\in [0,n-1]$. Let $x\in X_{\varphi}$. By Lemma \ref{lem:prefix} there exist $y\in X_{\varphi}=X_j$ and a proper prefix $u$ of $\varphi(y_0)$ such that $ux=\varphi(y)$. Since every factor of $y$ is a factor of $\varphi^k(b)$ for some $b\in\mathcal{A}$ and $k\equiv j \pmod n$, every factor of $x$ is a factor of $\varphi^{k+1}(b)$ and hence $x$ lies in $X_{j+1}$ (where $X_n=X_0$). Thus $X_{\varphi}=X_{j+1}$. Repeating the argument, we get that $X_{\varphi}=X_i$ for all integers $i\in [0,n-1]$. In particular, $X_{\varphi}=X_0=X_{\varphi^n}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} The result above is not necessarily true without the assumption of transitivity. For an example, consider the substitution $\varphi\colon\{0,1,2\} \to \{0,1,2\}^*$ given by $\varphi(0)=12$, $\varphi(1)=22$, $\varphi(2)=11$. Then \[X_{\varphi}=\{1^n 2^{\omega} \mid n\geq 0\} \cup \{2^n 1^{\omega} \mid n\geq 0\} \quad \text{and} \quad X_{\varphi^2}= \{2^n 1^{\omega} \mid n\geq 0\}\cup \{2^{\omega}\}.\]
\end{remark}
Let $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^*$ be a substitution. We say that a letter $a\in \mathcal{A}$ is \textit{ample} if $a$ appears in $\varphi^n(a)$ for some $n\geq 1$, and \textit{very ample} if $a$ appears at least twice in $\varphi^n(a)$ for some $n\geq 1$. Note that for all $n\geq 1$ the sets of ample and very ample letters with respect to substitutions $\varphi$ and $\varphi^n$ are the same. The set of all ample letters is denoted by $\mathcal{A}'$.
We note two easy properties of ampleness. First, a letter equivalent to an ample letter is itself ample. Second, for any ample letter $a$ the word $\varphi(a)$ contains at least one letter equivalent to $a$. For $a\in \mathcal{A}'$ let $\lambda_{\varphi}(a)$ denote the letter $b$ which is equivalent to $a$ and which occurs in $\varphi(a)$ at the last position among all letters equivalent to $a$. This gives rise to a map $\lambda_{\varphi}\colon \mathcal{A}'\rightarrow \mathcal{A}'$. Finally, we claim that $\lambda_{\varphi}^n=\lambda_{\varphi^n}$ for all $n\geq 1$. In fact, for any letter $a$, we may write $\varphi(a)$ in the form $\varphi(a)=u\lambda_{\varphi}(a)v$ for words $u$ and $v$ such that $v$ contains only letters $b \prec a$. For any such letter $b$, the word $\varphi^{n-1}(b)$ also contains only letters $c \prec b$, and hence none of these letters is equivalent to $a$ (or equivalently $\lambda_{\varphi}(a)$). It follows that $\lambda_{\varphi^n}(a)=\lambda_{\varphi^{n-1}}(\lambda_{\varphi}(a))$, and the claim follows by induction on $n$.
\newcommand{S}{S}
Let $S$ be a set and let $\psi\colon S\rightarrow S$ be a map. We say that $\psi$ is \textit{idempotent} if $\psi^2=\psi$. Note that if $x$ is a (purely) substitutive sequence produced by a substitution $\varphi$, then $x$ is also produced by the substitution $\varphi^n$ for any integer $n\geq 1$. Similarly, the notions of $k$-automatic and $k^n$-automatic sequences coincide \cite[Thm.\ 6.6.4]{AlloucheShallit-book}. For these reasons, we may freely replace $\varphi$ by $\varphi^n$, which will often have nicer properties. In Definition \ref{def:idemsub} we gather all the technical properties of the substitution that we intend to obtain in this manner. We will often need only some of these properties, but for simplicity we will not attempt to always state the precise minimal assumptions.
\begin{definition}\label{def:idemsub} A substitution $\varphi \colon \mathcal{A}\to \mathcal{A}^*$ is called \emph{idempotent} if it satisfies the following conditions:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \label{lem:propofsubs1} for all $a\in\mathcal{A}$ and $n\geq 1$ the set of letters appearing in $\varphi(a)$ is the same as the set of letters appearing in $\varphi^n(a)$;
\item\label{lem:propofsubs1'} for all $a\in\mathcal{A}$ and $n\geq 1$ the set of letters appearing at least twice in $\varphi(a)$ is the same as the set of letters appearing at least twice in $\varphi^n(a)$;
\item \label{lem:propofsubs2} for all $a\in \mathcal{A}$ the initial letter of $\varphi(a)$ is prolongable;
\item \label{lem:propofsubs3} the map $\lambda_{\varphi}\colon \mathcal{A}'\rightarrow \mathcal{A}'$ is idempotent.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
Note that if $\varphi\colon\mathcal{A}\rightarrow\mathcal{A}^*$ is an idempotent substitution, then for each $b\in\mathcal{A}$, $\mathcal{A}_b$ consists exactly of $b$ and the letters appearing in $\varphi(b)$. Furthermore, a letter $b$ is ample if and only if $b$ appears in $\varphi(b)$ and it is very ample if and only if it appears at least twice in $\varphi(b)$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:elementary}
Let $S$ be a finite set, and let $\psi\colon S\rightarrow S$ be a map. There exists an integer $m\geq 1$ such that $\psi^m$ is idempotent.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Take, for example, $m=|S|!$. (This is a special case of a well-known fact that any finite semigroup has an idempotent, which itself is a very special case of the Ellis--Numakura Lemma \cite[Lem.\ 1]{Ellis58}.)
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:propofsubs}
Let $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^*$ be a substitution. There exists an integer $m\geq 1$ such that the substitution $\varphi^m$ is idempotent.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Note first that properties \eqref{lem:propofsubs1}, \eqref{lem:propofsubs1'}, \eqref{lem:propofsubs2} and \eqref{lem:propofsubs3} in Definition \ref{def:idemsub} are preserved after replacing $\varphi$ by its iterate. Thus, it is enough to find an appropriate integer $m$ for each of them separately and then take the final $m$ to be their common multiple. We will first choose $m$ so that properties \eqref{lem:propofsubs1} and \eqref{lem:propofsubs1'} hold for $\varphi^m$. For $a\in \mathcal{A}$ and a substitution $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^*$, let $S_{\varphi}(a)$ denote the set of letters appearing in $\varphi(a)$. Consider the map $\psi\colon 2^{\mathcal{A}}\rightarrow 2^{\mathcal{A}}$ that sends a subset $A$ of $\mathcal{A}$ to the set $\bigcup_{a\in A} S_{\varphi}(a)$. Note that $\psi^n(\{a\})=S_{\varphi^n}(a)$ for all $n\geq 1$ and $a\in \mathcal{A}$. By Lemma \ref{lem:elementary} there exists an integer $m\geq 1$ such that $\psi^m=\psi^{2m}$. This implies that $S_{\varphi^m}(a)=S_{\varphi^{nm}}(a)$ for all $a\in \mathcal{A}$ and $n\geq 1$, and hence the substitution $\varphi^m$ satisfies property \eqref{lem:propofsubs1}. We then obtain property \eqref{lem:propofsubs1'} by repeating the reasoning above with the set $2^{\mathcal{A}}$ replaced by the set $3^{\mathcal{A}}$, which includes the information on whether a letter appears in a word at least twice, exactly once or not at all. Thus, we may assume that properties \eqref{lem:propofsubs1} and \eqref{lem:propofsubs1'} hold.
To prove the remaining properties, let $\alpha_{\varphi}(a)$ denote the initial letter of $\varphi(a)$ for $a\in \mathcal{A}$. Note that $\alpha_{\varphi}^n=\alpha_{\varphi^n}$ for all $n\geq 1$. By Lemma \ref{lem:elementary}, there exists $m'\geq 1$ such that $\alpha_{\varphi}^{m'}=\alpha_{\varphi}^{2m'}$, and hence $\varphi^{m'}$ satisfies property \eqref{lem:propofsubs2}. A similar reasoning applied to the map $\lambda_{\varphi}\colon \mathcal{A'} \to \mathcal{A'}$ proves that some iterate of $\varphi^{m'}$ satisfies the remaining property \eqref{lem:propofsubs3}.\end{proof}
\section{Subsystems of substitutive systems}\label{sec:subsystems}
This section studies subsystems of substitutive systems. Recall that every substitutive system is a topological factor of a purely substitutive system $X$ (the factor map being given by a coding), and that we may assume that the substitutive sequence generating $X$ is produced by an idempotent substitution (see Lemma \ref{lem:propofsubs}). Our main result is Theorem \ref{thm:main} below, which says that transitive subsystems of substitutive systems are still substitutive.
The proof of this result will occupy the whole section. We will first prove the statement for purely substitutive sequences and obtain the general result by an easy reduction. Along the way, we will obtain a more detailed description of all transitive subsystems.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:main}
Every transitive subsystem of a substitutive system is substitutive. Every transitive subsystem of a $k$-automatic system is $k$-automatic.
\end{theorem}
\subsection*{Minimal subsystems of substitutive systems}
We start by investigating minimal subsystems of (purely) substitutive systems. Actually, we work in a slightly more general context of systems of the form $X_{\varphi}$ with $\varphi$ idempotent. We will show that in this case all minimal subsystems arise as $X_b$ for some minimal letter $b$. In particular, every minimal subsystem of a substitutive system is substitutive and every minimal subsystem of a $k$-automatic system is $k$-automatic.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:minimalsubsystems}
Let $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^{*}$ be an idempotent substitution. Let $Y$ be a subsystem of $X_{\varphi}$. Then $Y$ is minimal if and only if $Y=X_b$ for some minimal letter $b\in\mathcal{A}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
First we show that every system $X_b$ with $b$ minimal is minimal. If $b\in\mathcal{A}$ is a minimal letter, then the substitution $\varphi|_{\mathcal{A}_b}\colon \mathcal{A}_b\rightarrow \mathcal{A}_b^{*}$ is primitive. Since every primitive substitution gives rise to a minimal system \cite[Prop.\ 5.5]{Queffelec-book}, $X_b$ is minimal.
Now assume that $Y$ is a minimal subsystem of $X_{\varphi}$. Fix an integer $m \geq 1$. Choosing a sufficiently long word $w\in \mathcal{L}(Y)$, we can find a letter $a\in\mathcal{A}$ such that $\varphi^m(a)$ appears in $w$, and hence $\varphi^m(a) \in \mathcal{L}(Y)$. Since $\mathcal{A}$ is finite, there is some letter $a\in \mathcal{A}$ such that $\varphi^m(a) \in \mathcal{L}(Y)$ for infinitely many $m$. Since $\varphi$ is idempotent, the set of letters appearing in $\varphi^l(a)$ is independent of $l \geq 1$, and hence some minimal letter $b$ appears in $\varphi^{l}(a)$ for all $l \geq 1$. It follows that $\varphi^n(b)\in \mathcal{L}(Y)$ for all $n\geq 0$, and hence $X_b\subset Y$. By minimality of $Y$, we have $X_b=Y$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:minimalfinite}
Let $X$ be a substitutive system. The number of minimal subsystems of $X$ is finite.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
If $X$ is purely substitutive, then it is of the form $X=X_{\varphi}$ for some idempotent substitution $\varphi$, and the claim follows from Proposition \ref{prop:minimalsubsystems}. In the general case, write $X$ as a topological factor of a purely substitutive system and use Lemma \ref{lem:factor}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} A very special case of Proposition \ref{prop:minimalsubsystems} was proven in a different language in \cite[Lemma 2.3]{BK} by the first-named and the second-named author for constant length substitutions and one-point subsystems (and with a slightly weaker notion of idempotency). \end{remark}
\subsection*{Transitive subsystems of substitutive systems}
Let $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^{*}$ be a substitution. If $a$ is a (not necessarily minimal) letter in $\mathcal{A}$, then $X_a$ is a subsystem of $X_{\varphi}$.
It would be tempting to conjecture that all transitive subsystems of $X_{\varphi}$ are of this form. The following examples show that this is not the case.
\begin{example}\label{infinite}\leavevmode \begin{enumerate}[wide]
\item \label{example1} Let $\mathcal{A}=\{0,1,2,3\}$ and let $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^*$ be the substitution given by
\[ \varphi(0)=12,\quad \varphi(1)=11,\quad \varphi(2)=23,\quad \varphi(3)=32.\]
Let $y$ denote the biinfinite sequence $y={}^{\omega}\!\varphi(1)\varphi^{\omega}(2)$. For an integer $n$ consider the suffix $y_{[n,\,\infty)}=y_n y_{n+1}\cdots$ of $y$. This is just the Thue--Morse sequence on the alphabet $\{2,3\}$ with $n$ first symbols removed if $n\geq 0$ or preceded by $1^{|n|}$ if $n<0$, and it lies in $X_{\varphi}$ since every factor of $y$ is a factor of some $\varphi^n(12)=\varphi^{n+1}(0)$. Consider the subsystems $Y_n=\overline{\Orb(y_{[n,\,\infty)})}\subset X_{\varphi}$. For $n\geq 0$, the system $Y_n$ is just the Thue--Morse system (since it is minimal), while for $n<0$ it is equal to the Thue--Morse system with $|n|$ extra points adjoined. Hence, for $n<0$ the systems $Y_n$ are pairwise distinct, and are different from each $X_b$ for $b\in \mathcal{A}$. In fact, $X_{\varphi}=\bigcup_{n\leq 0} Y_n \cup \{1^{\omega}\}$ and $X_0=X_{\varphi}$, $X_1=\{1^{\omega}\}$ and $X_2=X_3=Y_0$ (cf.\ Corollary \ref{cor:dichotomy} below and note that $X_2$ is minimal).
\item \label{example2} Let $\mathcal{A}=\{0,1,2,3\}$ and let $\tau\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^*$ be the substitution given by
\[\tau(0)=01023,\quad \tau(1)=12,\quad \tau(2)=22,\quad \tau(3)=33.
\] Write $v=01$ and $w=23$. Let $z$ denote the biinfinite sequence (indexed so that the $0$ below occurs at the $0$-th position)
\[z=\cdots\tau^2(v)\tau(v)v0w\tau(w)\tau^2(w)\cdots.\]
For an integer $n$ consider the suffix $z_{[n,\,\infty)}=z_nz_{n+1}\cdots$ of $z$. Every factor of $z_{[n,\,\infty)}$ is a factor of some $\tau^m(0)$, and hence $z_{[n,\,\infty)}$ lies in $X_{\tau}$. Consider the subsystems $Z_n=\overline{\Orb(z_{[n,\,\infty)})}\subset X_{\tau}$. It is easy to see that $Z_n= {\Orb(z_{[n,\,\infty)})}\cup\{3^k2^{\omega} \mid k\geq 0\}\cup \{2^k3^{\omega}\mid k\geq 0\}$, and hence the systems $Z_n$ are pairwise distinct and different from each $X_b$ for $b\in \mathcal{A}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{example}
Now assume that $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^{*}$ is an idempotent substitution. The next proposition characterises points $y\in X_{\varphi}$ such that $\overline{\Orb(y)}$ is not equal to any $X_b$ for $b\in\mathcal{A}$. We show that all such points are substitutive. Note that this is by no means obvious. In fact, substitutive systems have often continuum many points (e.g.\ the Thue--Morse system), while the number of substitutive sequences over a given alphabet is only countable.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:dichotomy}
Let $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^{*}$ be an idempotent substitution. Let $y\in X_{\varphi}$ and let $Y$ be the orbit closure of $y$. Then at least one of the following conditions holds:
\begin{enumerate}[label=\textup{(}a.\roman*\textup{)}]
\item\label{prop:dichotomya1} there exists a letter $a$ in $\mathcal{L}(X_{\varphi})$ such that $y\in X_a$;
\item\label{prop:dichotomya2} there exist a backwards prolongable letter $a$ and a prolongable letter $c$ such that $ac\in \mathcal{L}(X_{\varphi})$ and $y$ is a suffix of ${}^{\omega}\!\varphi(a) \varphi^{\omega}(c)$.
\end{enumerate}
Assume moreover that $Y$ is different from each $X_b$ for $b\in \mathcal{A}$. Then at least one of the following conditions holds:
\begin{enumerate}[label=\textup{(}b.\roman*\textup{)}]
\item\label{prop:dichotomyb1} there exists a letter $a$ such that $\varphi(a)=v_a a w_a$ for some words $v_a$ and $w_a$ such that $w_a\neq \epsilon$, $w_a$ contains only letters $b$ such that $b\prec a$, and $y$ is a suffix of \[\cdots \varphi^2(v_a)\varphi(v_a) v_a a w_a \varphi(w_a) \varphi^2(w_a) \cdots; \]
\item\label{prop:dichotomyb2} there exist a backwards prolongable letter $a$ and a prolongable letter $c$ such that $ac\in \mathcal{L}(X_{\varphi})$ and $y$ is a suffix of ${}^{\omega}\!\varphi(a) \varphi^{\omega}(c)$ (i.e.\ the sequence $y$ satisfies condition \ref{prop:dichotomya2}).
\end{enumerate}\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $y^0=y$. Using Lemma \ref{lem:prefix}, we inductively construct for $i\geq 0$ letters $a_i$, sequences $y^i\in X_b$ with initial letters $a_i$, and proper prefixes $u_i$ of $\varphi(a_{i+1})$ such that \[\varphi(y^{i+1})=u_iy^i.\] Note that since $a_i$ appears in $\varphi(a_{i+1})$, we have $a_{i+1} \succcurlyeq a_i$, and hence letters $a_i$ become equivalent for sufficiently large $i$. We will now show that $y$ satisfies one of the properties \ref{prop:dichotomya1} and \ref{prop:dichotomya2}. We consider two cases.
{\bf Case I} (for infinitely many $i$ the length of $u_i$ is strictly smaller than $|\varphi(a_{i+1})|-1$). In this case for infinitely many $i$ the prefix of $y^i$ of length $2$ is a factor of $\varphi(a_{i+1})$. Let $a$ be a letter that occurs infinitely many times among $a_i$. Then $a$ is ample. Since $a$ is the initial letter of some $y^i$, it lies in $ \mathcal{L}(X_{\varphi})$. Since $\varphi$ is growing and $\varphi(y^{i+1})=u_i y^i$, it follows that every prefix of $y$ is a factor of $\varphi^i(a)$ for some $i \geq 0$. In particular, $y\in X_a$ and hence property \ref{prop:dichotomya1} holds.
{\bf Case II} (for all sufficiently large $i$ the length of $u_i$ is equal to $|\varphi(a_{i+1})|-1$). Let $i_0$ be such that we have $|u_i|=|\varphi(a_{i+1})|-1$ and $a_{i+1} \sim a_i$ for all $i\geq i_0$. Take $i\geq i_0$. Then $a_i$ is the final letter of $\varphi(a_{i+1})$, which implies that $a_{i+1}$ is ample and $\lambda(a_{i+1})=a_i$. Since the map $\lambda$ is idempotent, we have $a_{i+1}=a_i$ for all $i\geq i_0$. Put $a=a_{i_0}$, and note that $a$ is backwards prolongable.
For $i\geq i_0$ the sequence $T(y^i)$ is the image of $T(y^{i+1})$ by $\varphi$. Iterating this for $i\geq i_0$, we see that for each $n\geq 0$ and $d=T(y^{i_0+n})_0$ the word $\varphi^n(d)$ is a prefix of $T(y^{i_0})$. Choose some letter $d$ that arises in this manner for infinitely many $n$, and put $c=\varphi(d)_0$. Since $\varphi$ is idempotent, $c$ is prolongable, and the assumption on $d$ shows that $T(y^{i_0})=\varphi^{\omega}(c)$. This shows that $y^{i_0}=a\varphi^{\omega}(c)$ and in particular $ac\in \mathcal{L}(X_{\varphi})$. Since $y$ is a suffix of $\varphi^{i_0}(y^{i_0})$, it is also a suffix of ${}^{\omega}\!\varphi(a)\varphi^{\omega}(c)$ and property \ref{prop:dichotomya2} holds. This ends the proof of the first assertion.
Now assume that $Y$ is different from each $X_b$ for $b \in\mathcal{A}$. To show the second claim, we only need to treat Case I. We will show that in this case $y$ satisfies property \ref{prop:dichotomyb1}. (Recall that the conditions \ref{prop:dichotomyb2} and \ref{prop:dichotomya2} are the same.) As in the reasoning above, let $a$ be a letter that occurs infinitely many times among $a_i$, and recall that $a$ is ample, $a\in \mathcal{L}(X_{\varphi})$ and $y \in X_a$, whence $Y \subsetneq X_a$.
We claim that for sufficiently large $i$ the sequence $y^i$ contains no letters equivalent to $a$ at non-initial positions. Indeed, if $y^i$ contains a letter $c \sim a$ at a non-initial position, then $y$ contains $\varphi^i(c)$. If this happened for infinitely many $i$,
the word $\varphi^n(a)$ would appear in $y$ for each $n \geq 0$, contradicting the assumption that $Y$ is a proper subset of $X_c = X_a$.
Since for sufficiently large $i$ the letters $a_i$ are all equivalent (and hence ample) and since the sequence $y^i$ contains no letters equivalent to $a$ at non-initial positions, we have $\lambda(a_{i+1})=a_i$ for sufficiently large $i$. Since the map $\lambda$ is idempotent, the sequence $a_i$ is eventually constant with value $a$. It follows that $\lambda(a)=a$ and $\varphi(a)=v_aaw_a$ with $w_a$ nonempty (since we are in Case I) and containing only letters $c\prec a$.
Choose $i_0\geq 0$ so that for $i\geq i_0$ we have $a_i=a$ and the sequence $y^i$ contains no letters equivalent to $a$ at non-initial positions. Since $\varphi(y^{i+1})=u_iy^i$, we must have
\[ y^{i_0} = a w_a \varphi(w_a)\varphi^2(w_a)\cdots.
\]
Hence $y$ is a suffix of \[\varphi^{i_0}(y^{i_0})=\varphi^{i_0-1}(v_a) \cdots \varphi^{2}(v_a) \varphi(v_a) v_a a w_a \varphi(w_a)\varphi^2(w_a)\cdots.\qedhere\]
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:dichotomy}
Let $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^{*}$ be an idempotent substitution. Let $y\in X_{\varphi}$ and let $Y$ be the orbit closure of $y$. Assume that $Y$ is different from each $X_b$ for $b\in \mathcal{A}$. Then $y$ is a substitutive sequence. If furthermore $\varphi$ is a substitution of constant length $k$, then $y$ is $k$-automatic.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
This follows immediately from Proposition \ref{prop:dichotomy}, Lemma \ref{lem:morvarphicseq} and the fact that substitutive (resp.,\ $k$-automatic) sequences are closed under backward and forward shifting.
\end{proof}
The next proposition characterises systems $X_{\varphi}$ that are transitive.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:subsystemsXb}
Let $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^{*}$ be a substitution. Let $n\geq 1$ be such that $\varphi^n$ is idempotent. The following conditions are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \label{prop:subsystemsXbi} $X_{\varphi}$ is transitive,
\item \label{prop:subsystemsXbii} $X_{\varphi}=X_{\varphi^n, b}$ for some letter $b\in \mathcal{A}$ that is either prolongable under $\varphi^n$ or very ample.
\end{enumerate}
Moreover, if $X_{\varphi}$ is transitive, then it is substitutive. Furthermore, if $\varphi$ is a substitution of constant length $k$, then $X_{\varphi}$ is $k$-automatic.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} Note first that under either of the assumptions \eqref{prop:subsystemsXbi} and \eqref{prop:subsystemsXbii} we have $X_{\varphi}=X_{\varphi^n}$ (in the former case by Lemma \ref{lem:nthpower}, in the latter case it is obvious). Hence, we may assume that $\varphi$ itself is idempotent and $n=1$.
We first show that \eqref{prop:subsystemsXbii} implies both \eqref{prop:subsystemsXbi} and the final claim. If $b$ is prolongable, then $X_\varphi = X_b$ is the orbit closure of $\varphi^\omega(b)$, from which all the remaining claims follow easily. Suppose that this is not the case. Then $b$ appears at least twice in $\varphi(b)$ and we can write $\varphi(b)=vbw$, where $v,w$ are words such that $b$ appears in $w$. The word $x_n=w\varphi(w)\cdots\varphi^n(w)$ is a suffix of $\varphi^{n+1}(b)$ and hence the sequence $x=w\varphi(w)\varphi^2(w)\cdots$ lies in $X_b$. Since $\varphi^n(b)$ is a factor of $x$ for all $n\geq 0$, the orbit of $x$ is dense in $X_b$. The sequence $x$ is substitutive by Lemma \ref{lem:morvarphicseq}. Furthermore, if $\varphi$ is a substitution of constant length $k$, then $x$ is $k$-automatic.
It remains to prove that \eqref{prop:subsystemsXbi} implies \eqref{prop:subsystemsXbii}. Assume that $X_{\varphi}$ is transitive and let $y$ be a point in $X_{\varphi}$ with a dense orbit. Since $X_{\varphi}=\bigcup_{b \in\mathcal{A}} X_{b}$, there exists $b \in \mathcal{A}$ such that $X_{\varphi}=X_b$; pick a minimal $b$ with this property. Suppose that $b$ is not prolongable and not very ample. It means that $b$ appears in $\varphi(b)$ at most once, and at a non-initial position.
{\bf Case I} ($b$ appears in $\varphi(b)$ exactly once, and at a non-initial and non-final position). Write $\varphi(b)=vbw$ for nontrivial words $v,w \in \mathcal{A}^*$. Since $\varphi$ is idempotent, by property \eqref{lem:propofsubs1'} in Definition \ref{def:idemsub} every word \[\varphi^n(b)=\varphi^{n-1}(v) \cdots \varphi(v) v b w \varphi(w) \cdots \varphi^{n-1}(w)\] contains exactly one occurrence of $b$, and hence every point in $X_b$ contains at most one occurrence of $b$. On the other hand, every suffix of the biinfinite sequence $\cdots \varphi^2(v) \varphi(v) v b w \varphi(w) \varphi^2(w) \cdots$ lies in $X_b$, and hence $X_b$ contains infinitely many points in which $b$ appears. It follows that $X_b$ is not transitive.
{\bf Case II} (either $b$ does not appear in $\varphi(b)$ or appears only at the final position). In this case $b\notin \mathcal{L}(X_b)$ and for all $a\in \mathcal{A}_b$ different from $b$ we have $a\prec b$. Applying Proposition \ref{prop:dichotomy} to the system $X_b$, we see that either $y\in X_a$ for some $a\prec b$ or $y$ is a suffix of ${}^{\omega}\!\varphi(a)\varphi^{\omega}(c)$ for some backwards prolongable letter $a$ and prolongable letter $c$ such that $ac\in \mathcal{L}(X_b)$. The first case implies that $X_{\varphi}=X_a$ and contradicts the choice of $b$. In the second case $ac\in \mathcal{L}(X_b)$ implies that all suffixes of ${}^{\omega}\!\varphi(a)\varphi^{\omega}(c)$ lie in $X_b$. Since the orbit of $y$ is dense in $X_b$, for each $n\geq 1$ the sequence $\varphi^{n}(a)\varphi^{\omega}(c)$ has arbitrarily long prefixes in common with some forward shift of $y$. Since $\varphi^n(a)$ is a suffix of $\varphi^{n+1}(a)$ for each $n\geq 0$ and $y$ has the form $y=u\varphi^{\omega}(c)$ for some finite word $u$, all $\varphi^n(a)\varphi^n(c)$ are in fact factors of $\varphi^{\omega}(c)$. Letting $n$ tend to infinity, we conclude that all suffixes of ${}^{\omega}\!\varphi(a)\varphi^{\omega}(c)$ lie in $X_c$. In particular, $y\in X_c$, which again contradicts the choice of $b$. This ends the proof.\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{mainthmB}] The claim follows from Proposition \ref{prop:dichotomy} and the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:subsystemsXb}. More precisely, we choose $\tau$ to be a power of $\varphi$ such that $\tau$ is idempotent, and construct the required words $a,b,v,w$ and the sequence $y$ as in Proposition \ref{prop:dichotomy}(b) if the subsystem $Y$ is different from $X_{\tau,c}$ for all $c\in \mathcal{A}$ and as in the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:subsystemsXb} otherwise. (In the former case the claim holds for every $y$ whose orbit closure is $Y$.) \end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:main}]
The claim for transitive subsystems of systems of the form $X=X_{\varphi}$ for an idempotent substitution $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A} \to \mathcal{A}^*$ follows immediately from Corollary \ref{cor:dichotomy} and Proposition \ref{prop:subsystemsXb}.
In general, if $Y$ is a transitive subsystem of a substitutive system $X$, we consider $X$ as a topological factor $X=\pi(X_{\varphi})$ of some $X_{\varphi}$ for an idempotent substitution $\varphi$ and a coding $\pi$. Choose $y \in Y$ such that $Y=\overline{\Orb(y)}$ and let $z\in X_{\varphi}$ be such that $\pi(z)=y$. Put $Z=\overline{\Orb(z)}$. By compactness we have $\pi(Z)=Y$. Since $Z$ is a transitive subsystem of $X_{\varphi}$, it is substitutive, and hence so is the system $Y=\pi(Z)$. A similar argument proves the claim concerning $k$-automatic systems.
\end{proof}
\subsection*{Two-sided substitutive shifts and their subsystems}
We close this section with the remark that the results formulated above have their analogues for two-sided shifts. For a substitution $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^*$ let $ X_\varphi^{\Z}$ denote the two-sided dynamical system generated by $\varphi$, i.e.\
\[
X_{\varphi}^{\Z}=\{z\in {}^{\omega}\!\mathcal{A}^\omega \mid \text{ every factor of } z \text{ appears in }\varphi^n(a) \text{ for some } n\geq 0 \textrm{ and } a\in\mathcal{A}\}.
\]
For a letter $a$, the system $X_a^{\Z}$ is defined accordingly. A sequence $y=(y_n)_{n} \in {}^{\omega}\!\mathcal{A}^\omega$ is \textit{substitutive} if both $(y_n)_{n\geq 0}$ and $(y_n)_{n<0}$ are substitutive as one-sided sequences. This is obviously the same as saying that all (one-sided) prefixes and suffixes of $y$ are substitutive. Let $T$ denote the shift map on ${}^{\omega}\!\mathcal{A}^\omega$. For two-sided systems we consider the two-sided orbit ${\Orb}^{\Z}(y) = \{T^n(y) \mid n\in \Z\}$ of a point $y$. A \emph{two-sided substitutive system} is the (two-sided) orbit closure of a two-sided substitutive sequence. We define a two-sided $k$-automatic sequence and a two-sided $k$-automatic system in the same way. The main results for two-sided shifts are the same as or simpler than for the one-sided ones. The proofs are mutatis mutandis the same, and we present them in a briefer manner. The most notable difference between two-sided and one-sided shifts is that in the two-sided case every substitutive system has only finitely many subsystems.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:main-Z}
Every transitive subsystem of a two-sided substitutive system is substitutive. Every transitive subsystem of a two-sided $k$-automatic system is $k$-automatic.
\end{theorem}
To prove this result, we first state three lemmas, which are analogous to the previously described results for one-sided systems.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:twosidquot} Every two-sided substitutive system $X$ arises as the image $X=\pi(X_{\varphi}^{\Z})$ of a transitive system $X_{\varphi}^{\Z}$ generated by a substitution $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A} \to \mathcal{A}^*$ via a coding $\pi\colon \mathcal{A}\to \mathcal{B}$. If $X$ is $k$-automatic, we may choose $\varphi$ to be of constant length $k$.\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Let $X$ be a two-sided substitutive system arising as the orbit closure of a sequence $y=(y_n)_n$. Since $(y_n)_{n\geq 0}$ and $(y_n)_{n<0}$ are one-sided substitutive, we may find substitutions $\varphi_1 \colon \mathcal{A}_1\to \mathcal{A}_1^*$ and $\varphi_2 \colon \mathcal{A}_2\to \mathcal{A}_2^*$, codings $\pi_1 \colon \mathcal{A}_1 \to \mathcal{B}$ and $\pi_2 \colon \mathcal{A}_2 \to \mathcal{B}$, a prolongable letter $a_1\in \mathcal{A}_1$ and a backwards prolongable letter $a_2\in \mathcal{A}_2$ such that $y=\pi_2({}^{\omega}\!\varphi_2(a_2))\pi_1(\varphi_1^{\omega}(a_1))$. We may assume that $\mathcal{A}_1$ and $\mathcal{A}_2$ are disjoint. Define a new alphabet $\mathcal{A}=\mathcal{A}_1\cup\mathcal{A}_2 \cup \{\spadesuit\}$ with a new symbol $\spadesuit \notin\mathcal{A}_1\cup\mathcal{A}_2$. Glue $\varphi_i$ and $\pi_i$ to maps $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A} \to \mathcal{A}^*$ and $\pi\colon\mathcal{A} \to \mathcal{B}$ by putting $\varphi|_{\mathcal{A}_i}=\varphi_i$, $\pi|_{\mathcal{A}_i}=\pi_i$, and $\varphi(\spadesuit)=a_2w$, where $w$ is a prefix of $\varphi^{\omega}(a_1)$ chosen to be of arbitrary length in the substitutive case and of length $k-1$ in the $k$-automatic case. It is easy to see that $X_{\varphi}^{\Z}$ is a transitive system generated by the sequence ${}^{\omega}\!\varphi_2(a_2)\varphi_1^{\omega}(a_1)$ and that $X=\pi(X_{\varphi}^{\Z})$.\end{proof}
The remaining two lemmas are two-sided analogues of Lemmas \ref{lem:prefix} and \ref{lem:nthpower}. The former of these lemmas is proven in \cite[Prop. 5.10]{BKM}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:prefixinv}
Let $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^*$ be a substitution and let $x\in X^{\Z}_{\varphi}$. There exists $y\in X^{\Z}_{\varphi}$ such that $x=T^{l}(\varphi(y))$ for some integer $l \in [0, |\varphi(y_0)|-1]$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:nthpowerinv}
Let $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^*$ be a substitution. If $X^{\Z}_{\varphi}$ is transitive, then $X^{\Z}_{\varphi}=X^{\Z}_{\varphi^n}$ for any $n\geq 1$.
\end{lemma}
The proofs of these lemmas are analogous to those of Lemmas \ref{lem:prefix} and \ref{lem:nthpower}. The main result is derived via essentially the same reasoning as before from Proposition \ref{prop:dichotomy-Z} and \ref{prop:subsystemsXb-Z} below.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:dichotomy-Z}
Let $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^{*}$ be an idempotent substitution. Let $y\in X_{\varphi}^{\Z}$ and let
\[ Y = \{z \in X_{\varphi}^{\Z}\mid \text{every factor of $z$ appears in $y$}\}
\]
be the orbit closure of $y$. Then at least one of the following conditions holds:
\begin{enumerate}[label=\textup{(}\roman*\textup{)}]
\item\label{prop:dichotomya1-Z} there exists $a\in \mathcal{L}(Y)$ such that $Y = X_a^{\Z}$;
\item\label{prop:dichotomya2-Z} there exist a backwards prolongable letter $a$ and a prolongable letter $c$ such that $ac\in \mathcal{L}(y)$ and $y$ is a shift of ${}^{\omega}\!\varphi(a) \varphi^{\omega}(c)$.
\end{enumerate}
In particular, the number of subsystems of $ X_{\varphi}^{\Z}$ is finite.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $y^0=y$. Repeating the reasoning from the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:dichotomy}, we construct letters $c_i$, sequences $y^i \in X_{\varphi}^{\Z}$ with initial letters $c_{i}$ and integers $l_i\in [0, |\varphi(c_{i+1})|-1]$ such that
\[
y^{i} = T^{l_i} \varphi(y^{i+1})
\]
for each $i \geq 0$. We consider two cases depending on the asymptotic behaviour of $l_i$.
Assume first that $l_i = 0$ for all sufficiently large $i$ and put $a_i=y^{i}_{-1}$. For sufficiently large $i$, $c_i$ is the initial letter of $\varphi(c_{i+1})$ and $a_i$ is the final letter of $\varphi(a_{i+1})$. Since $\varphi$ is idempotent, it follows from properties \eqref{lem:propofsubs2} and \eqref{lem:propofsubs3} in Definition \ref{def:idemsub} that $a_i$ and $c_i$ are eventually constant, say $a_i = a$ and $c_i = c$ for $i$ sufficiently large. It follows that $c$ is prolongable, $a$ is backwards prolongable, and $y$ is a shift of ${}^{\omega}\!\varphi(a) \varphi^{\omega}(c)$. Similarly, if we assume that $l_i = |\varphi(c_{i+1})|-1$ for all sufficiently large $i$, then we may apply the same reasoning with $T(y^i)$ in place of $y^i$.
Now assume that $l_i \neq 0$ and $l_i \neq |\varphi(c_{i+1})|-1$ for infinitely many $i$'s. Let $a$ be a letter that occurs infinitely many times among $c_i$. Then $a\in \mathcal{L}(Y)$ and we can find arbitrarily large $j$ such that $\varphi^j(a) = y_{[n_j,m_j-1]}$, where $n_j \to -\infty$ and $m_j \to + \infty$ as $j \to \infty$. It follows that $Y = X_a^{\Z}$.
It follows immediately from our claim that $X_{\varphi}^{\Z}$ has only finitely many transitive subsystems, and hence finitely many subsystems.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{remark:twosided} Two-sided substitutive systems have been considered by Maloney and Rust, mostly under different assumptions on the substitution, namely that it is recognisable and tame (for the definition, see \cite[Definition 2.4]{MR}). Note that all growing substitutions are tame, but not all growing substitutions are recognisable. Under these assumptions, the finiteness of the number of subsystems of $X_{\varphi}^{\Z}$ follows from \cite[Lemma 5.13]{MR}. The authors work with the tiling space $\Omega_{\varphi}$ (see \cite[Section 1.3]{MR}) associated with a substitution $\varphi$ and prove that the number of closed unions of path components of $\Omega_{\varphi}$ is finite. Since there is a bijective correspondence between subsystems of $X_{\varphi}^{\Z}$ and closed unions of path components of $\Omega_{\varphi}$, the claim follows. Finiteness of the number of minimal subsystems of two-sided substitutive systems if the substitution is either aperiodic or growing has also been observed by Bezuglyi--Kwiatkowski--Medynets \cite[Prop.\ 5.6 and Remark 5.7]{BKM}.
\end{remark}
For simplicity we only state the following result for idempotent substitutions, but the more general analogue can readily be derived in the same way as in Proposition \ref{prop:subsystemsXb}.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:subsystemsXb-Z}
Let $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^{*}$ be an idempotent substitution. The following conditions are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \label{prop:subsystemsXbi-Z} $X_{\varphi}^{\Z}$ is transitive;
\item \label{prop:subsystemsXbii-Z} one of the following conditions holds:
\begin{enumerate}[label=\textup{(}\alph*\textup{)}]
\item \label{it:54:A} $ X_{\varphi}^{\Z}=X_{b}^{\Z}$ for some letter $b\in \mathcal{A}$ that is either very ample or ample but neither prolongable nor backwards prolongable;
\item \label{it:54:B} $X_{\varphi}^{\Z} = X_a^{\Z} \cup X_c^{\Z} \cup {\Orb}^{\Z}({}^{\omega}\!\varphi(a)\varphi^{\omega}(c))$ for some backwards prolongable letter $a$ and prolongable letter $c$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
Moreover, if $ X_{\varphi}^{\Z}$ is transitive, then it is substitutive. Furthermore, if $\varphi$ is a substitution of constant length $k$, then $ X_{\varphi}^{\Z}$ is $k$-automatic.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Suppose \eqref{prop:subsystemsXbii} holds. Consider first the case \eqref{prop:subsystemsXbii-Z}.\ref{it:54:A}. If $\varphi(b)=vbw$ with $v,w \in \mathcal{A}^{*}$ nonempty, then $X_b^{\Z}$ is the orbit closure of the point
\[ y = \cdots \varphi^2(v) \varphi(v) v b w \varphi(w) \varphi^2(w) \cdots.\] By Lemma \ref{lem:morvarphicseq}, both one-sided sequences $w \varphi(w) \varphi^2(w) \cdots$ and $v\varphi(v) \varphi^2(v) \cdots$ are substitutive, and thus $y$ is substitutive as well. Otherwise, by \eqref{prop:subsystemsXbii-Z}.\ref{it:54:A} we have $\varphi(b)=bvb$ for some $v\in \mathcal{A}^*$, and $\varphi^2(b)=bvb\varphi(v)bvb$. Thus, the previous property is satisfied for $\varphi^2$ and the claim follows from the equality $X_{\varphi}^{\Z}=X_{\varphi^2}^{\Z}$, which holds since $\varphi^n(b)$ is a prefix of $\varphi^{n+1}(b)$ for all $n\geq 0$. Finally, in case \eqref{prop:subsystemsXbii-Z}.\ref{it:54:B} the system $X_{\varphi}^{\Z}$ is the orbit closure of $y = {}^{\omega}\!\varphi(a)\varphi^{\omega}(c)$.
It remains to show that \eqref{prop:subsystemsXbi} implies \eqref{prop:subsystemsXbii}. Assume that $X_{\varphi}^{\Z}$ is transitive and let $y$ be a point in $X_{\varphi}^{\Z}$ with a dense orbit. Since $X_{\varphi}^{\Z}=\bigcup_{b \in\mathcal{A}} X_{b}^{\Z}$, there exists $b \in \mathcal{A}$ such that $ X_{\varphi}^{\Z}= X_b^{\Z}$; pick minimal $b$ with this property. Suppose that $b$ does not satisfy the conditions in \eqref{prop:subsystemsXbii-Z}.\ref{it:54:A}, and so $b$ appears at most once in $\varphi(b)$, either at the initial or final position. Then $b\notin \mathcal{L}(X_b^{\Z})$ and $a \prec b$ for all $a \in \mathcal{A}_b \setminus \{b\}$. In particular, $ X_b^{\Z} \neq X_a^{\Z}$ for all $a \in \mathcal{L}(X_b^{\Z})$, so Proposition \ref{prop:dichotomy-Z} implies that there exists $ac \in \mathcal{L}( X_b^{\Z})$ such that $y$ is up to a shift equal to ${}^{\omega}\!\varphi(a)\varphi^{\omega}(c)$. Hence, case \eqref{prop:subsystemsXbii-Z}.\ref{it:54:B} holds.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:main-Z}] The proof is analogous to the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:main}, replacing the use of Propositions \ref{prop:dichotomy} and \ref{prop:subsystemsXb} by Propositions \ref{prop:dichotomy-Z} and \ref{prop:subsystemsXb-Z}.
\end{proof}
\section{Finitary version of Cobham's theorem}\label{sec:cobham}
In this section, we prove a finitary generalisation of Cobham's classical theorem. We work again in the context of one-sided sequences. Recall that integers $k,l \geq 2$ are \textit{multiplicatively independent} if $\log k/ \log l \in {\R}\setminus{\Q}$, i.e.\ $k$ and $l$ are not both integer powers (equivalently, rational powers) of the same integer. Let $k,l \geq 2$ be multiplicatively independent integers. The celebrated theorem of Cobham characterises sequences that are simultaneously $k$-automatic and $l$-automatic: these are precisely the sequences that are ultimately periodic. The following theorem provides a complete characterisation of sets of words that can occur as common factors of automatic sequences defined over multiplicatively independent bases.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:maincobham}
Let $k,l\geq 2$ be multiplicatively independent integers, let $\mathcal{A}$ be an alphabet, and let $U\subset \mathcal{A}^*$. The following conditions are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item\label{thm:maincobhami} there exist a $k$-automatic sequence $x$ and an $l$-automatic sequence $y$ such that $U$ is the set of common factors of $x$ and $y$;
\item\label{thm:maincobhamii} the set $U$ is a nonempty finite union of sets of the form $\mathcal{L}(^{\omega}vuw^{\omega})$, where $u,v,w$ are (possibly empty) words over $\mathcal{A}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
Theorem \ref{thm:maincobham} immediately implies Cobham's theorem and its strengthening due to Isabelle Fagnot \cite{Fagnot-1997}, stated below. Unfortunately, this does not give an independent proof of Cobham's theorem since we will use Fagnot's result in the proof.
\begin{theorem}[Fagnot]\label{thm:languagecobham}
Let $k,l\geq 2$ be multiplicatively independent integers. Let $x$ be a $k$-automatic sequence and let $y$ be an $l$-automatic sequence. If $\mathcal{L}(x)=\mathcal{L}(y)$, then both sequences $x$ and $y$ are ultimately periodic.
\end{theorem}
From the result above and Theorem \ref{thm:main} we get the following corollary.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:cobpoints}
Let $k,l \geq 2$ be multiplicatively independent integers and let $\mathcal{A}$ be an alphabet. Let $X, Y \subset \mathcal{A}^{\omega}$ be subsystems such that $X$ is $k$-automatic and $Y$ is $l$-automatic. If a sequence $z$ belongs to both $X$ and $Y$, then it is ultimately periodic.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Let $Z$ be the orbit closure of $z$. Then $Z$ is a transitive subsystem of both systems $X$ and $Y$. By Theorem \ref{thm:main}, there exist a $k$-automatic sequence $x\in X$ and an $l$-automatic sequence $y\in Y$ such that $Z$ is the orbit closure of $x$ and $y$, and hence the sequences $x$ and $y$ have the same language. By Theorem \ref{thm:languagecobham}, the system $Z$ is finite, and hence the sequence $z$ is ultimately periodic.
\end{proof}
The problem of describing common factors of automatic sequences was considered in \cite{MRSS}. The authors obtained, among other things, an upper bound on the length of a common prefix of aperiodic automatic sequences defined over multiplicatively independent bases in terms of the number of states of the automata generating the sequences. They further asked about the structure of the set of common factors of automatic sequences defined over multiplicatively independent bases.
Since every ultimately periodic sequence is $k$-automatic for all integers $k\geq 2$, it is clear that we can get common factors of the form $vu^n$ for some words $v$, $u$ and arbitrarily large $n$. The following example shows that common factors can be somewhat more complicated.
\begin{example} Let $\mathcal{A}=\{0,1,2\}$. Consider the $3$-automatic sequence $x= \varphi^\omega(0)$ produced by the substitution $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A} \rightarrow \mathcal{A}^*$ given by
\[
\varphi(0)=012,\
\varphi(1)=111,\
\varphi(2)=222
\]
and the $4$-automatic sequence $y= \tau^\omega(0)$ produced by the substitution $\tau\colon \mathcal{A} \rightarrow \mathcal{A}^*$ given by
\[
\tau(0)=0121,\
\tau(1)=1111,\
\tau(2)=2222.
\] Then \[x=0121^3 2^3 1^9 2^9 1^{27} 2^{27}\cdots \] and hence \[X_{\varphi}=\Orb(x)\cup \{2^n1^{\omega}\mid n\geq 0\}\cup \{1^n2^{\omega}\mid n\geq 0 \}.\] Similarly, \[y=0121^5 2^4 1^{20} 2^{16} 1^{80} 2^{64} \cdots \] and hence \[X_{\tau}=\Orb(y)\cup \{2^n1^{\omega}\mid n\geq 0 \}\cup \{1^n2^{\omega}\mid n\geq 0\}.\] The common factors of $x$ and $y$ are exactly the words in $\mathcal{L}({}^{\omega}12^{\omega})\cup \mathcal{L}({}^{\omega}21^{\omega})\cup \mathcal{L}(0121^3)$.
\end{example}
We will use Corollary \ref{cor:cobpoints} to show that common factors of automatic sequences defined over multiplicatively independent bases are all of the form suggested by the example above. We need to introduce some additional terminology. Let $\mathcal{A}$ be an alphabet and let $x$ be a sequence over $\mathcal{A}$. Let $X$ denote the orbit closure of $x$. We say that a factor $u$ of $x$ is \textit{cyclic} if $u$ is nonempty and the periodic sequence $u^{\omega}$ lies in $X$. We say that $u$ is \textit{primitive} if it is not of the form $u=v^n$ for some $v\in \mathcal{A}^*$ and $n\geq 2$. Since the orbit closure of a periodic sequence is minimal, it follows from Corollary \ref{cor:minimalfinite} that the set of primitive cyclic factors of a substitutive sequence is finite. We say that a common factor of sequences $x,y\in\mathcal{A}^{\omega}$ is \textit{cyclic} if it is cyclic as a factor of $x$ and as a factor of $y$.
\begin{remark}\label{remark:substitutive} We cannot hope for a straightforward generalisation of Theorem \ref{thm:maincobham} to the class of substitutive sequences. Recall that with every substitution $\varphi\colon\mathcal{A}\rightarrow\mathcal{A}^*$ we can associate a matrix $M=(m_{ij})_{i,j\in \mathcal{A}}$, where $m_{ij}$ is the number of occurrences of the letter $i$ in the word $\varphi(j)$. By the Frobenius--Perron theorem $M$ always has a dominant eigenvalue $\lambda>0$. The eigenvalue $\lambda$ plays the role of a base for a substitutive sequence $x$ produced by $\varphi$ (for details see, e.g.\ \cite{DR-2011}), which allows us to define the class of $\lambda$-substitutive systems. The reason why Theorem \ref{mainthmC} fails in this setting is that transitive subsystems of $\lambda$-substitutive systems need not be $\lambda$-substitutive. Consider the following example. Let $\mathcal{A}=\{0,1\}$ and $\mathcal{B}=\{0,1,2,3\}$, let $x= \varphi^\omega(0)$ be the sequence produced by the substitution $\varphi\colon \mathcal{A} \rightarrow \mathcal{A}^*$ given by
\[
\varphi(0)=01,\
\varphi(1)=10,
\]
and let $y= \tau^\omega(2)$ be the sequence produced by the substitution $\tau\colon \mathcal{B} \rightarrow \mathcal{B}^*$ given by
\[
\tau(0)=01,\
\tau(1)=10,\
\tau(2)=203,\
\tau(3)=3233.
\]
The systems $X=\overline{\mathcal{O}(x)}$ and $Y=\overline{\mathcal{O}(y)}$ are $2$-substitutive and $(2+\sqrt{2})$-substitutive, respectively, and the set of common factors of $x$ and $y$ consists precisely of the factors of $x$.
\end{remark}
\subsection*{Occurrences of cyclic factors in automatic sequences}
Let $x$ be a $k$-automatic sequence. To proceed with the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:maincobham}, we first need to understand the structure of sets of the form \[S_x=\{n\geq 0\mid vu^nw \textrm{ is a factor of } x\}\] for fixed words $v$, $w$ and $u$. This is only interesting if $u$ is a cyclic factor of $x$, since otherwise $S_x$ is finite. If $v$ is a suffix of some power of $u$ or $w$ is a prefix of some power of $u$, then the set $S_x$ is easy to determine, and either consists of all integers, or is finite and consists of all integers smaller than some constant (see Remark \ref{rem:effectiveS} below). Assume conversely that $v$ is not a suffix of any power of $u$ and $w$ is not a prefix of any power of $u$. We will show that the set $S_x$ is up to a finite set a finite union of translates of geometric progressions, and deduce that for automatic sequences $x$ and $y$ defined over multiplicatively independent bases the set $S_x\cap S_y$ is finite.
The problem above was also considered by Fagnot in \cite[Proposition 8]{Fagnot-1997} in the special case when the sequence $x$ takes values in $\{0,1\}$ and $v=w=1$, $u=0$. This result was used to show that if $x$ is a $k$-automatic sequence, $y$ is an $l$-automatic sequence, $k,l\geq 2$ are multiplicatively independent, and $\mathcal{L}(x) \subset \mathcal{L}(y)$, then either $x$ contains only finitely many $1$'s or $1$'s occur in $x$ with bounded gaps (see \cite[Corollaire 10]{Fagnot-1997}). This is the crucial step in her proof of Theorem \ref{thm:languagecobham}. It would be interesting to see if the general statement below could be reduced to the special case considered by Fagnot, but we found no such reduction. We give a proof of the general result that uses similar ideas as the one of Fagnot but seems quite different in details, and we deduce a much stronger finiteness result in Corollary \ref{cor:commonfactors}. We also discuss the question of effectiveness.
\begin{theorem}\label{prop:recurrence}
Let $k\geq 2$ be an integer. Let $x$ be a $k$-automatic sequence over an alphabet $\mathcal{A}$. Let $u,v,w$ be nonempty words over $\mathcal{A}$. Assume that $v$ is not a suffix of $u^n$ and $w$ is not a prefix of $u^n$ for any integer $n$. Let $S=\{n \geq 0\mid vu^nw \textrm{ is a factor of } x\}$. The set $S$ is a finite union of sets of the form $\{ak^{mn}+b\mid n\geq 0\}$ for some $a,b\in\Q$ and $m\in \N$ with $a, b \geq 0$, $a+b\in \Z$ and $(k^m-1)a\in\Z$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} We begin the proof with a few reductions.
{\bf Step I} (reduction to the case when $|u|=|v|=|w|$). First, we show that it is enough to prove the claim under the additional assumption that $|v|\leq |u|$ and $|w|\leq |u|$. Let $j>0$ be an integer such that $\max(|v|,|w|) \leq |u|^{j/2}$. Write
\[ S_i =\{n\in S \mid n\equiv i \pmod j\}.\]
Then $S=\bigcup_{i=0}^{j-1} S_i$, and hence it is enough to show the claim separately for each of the sets $S_i$. For an integer $i\in [0,j-1]$, we put $u'=u^j$, $ v'=vu^{\lfloor (i+1)/2\rfloor}$ and $w'=u^{\lfloor i/2\rfloor}w$. We then have $\max(|v'|,|w'|) \leq|u'|$ and
\[S_i=\{n=jm+i\mid v'(u')^m w' \textrm{ is a factor of } x\}.\]
In order to further obtain $|v'|=|w'|=|u'|$, we consider all possible prolongations of the words $v'$ and $w'$ to words $v''$ and $w''$ of length $|u'|$ and such that $v'$ is a suffix of $v''$ and $w'$ is a prefix of $w''$. Every element of $S_i$ lies in one of the sets \[\{n=jm+i\mid v''(u')^m w'' \textrm{ is a factor of } x\}\] for some choice of $v''$ and $w''$, except for the values $n\in S_i$ corresponding to factors $v'(u')^m w'$ which occur only at starting positions $<|u'|-|v'|$. Since there are only finitely many such values of $m$ (at most one for each starting position), we may assume that $|u|=|v|=|w|$.
{\bf Step II} (reduction to the case when $|u|=|v|=|w|=1$). Write $\ell$ for the common length of $u$, $v$ and $w$. We will now show that we may assume that $\ell=1$ by changing the alphabet. For an integer $i\in[0,\ell-1]$ let
\[\tilde{S}_i=\{n\in S\mid vu^nw=x_{[m,\, m+(n+2)\ell)} \textrm{ for some } m\equiv i\pmod \ell\}
\]
denote the set of all integers $n\in S$ such that the factor $vu^nw$ occurs in $x$ at a position $m\equiv i \pmod \ell$. Clearly, $S$ is the union of the sets $\tilde{S}_i$.
Let $\mathcal{A}^\ell$ denote the set of words of length $\ell$ over $\mathcal{A}$.
Identifying words $u,v,w$ with letters $u',v',w'\in \mathcal{A}^\ell$ and the sequence $x$ with the corresponding sequence $x'\in (\mathcal{A}^\ell)^{\omega}$, we see that the set $\tilde{S}_0$ is equal to the set of all integers $n$ such that $v'(u')^nw'$ is a factor of $x'$. The same reasoning applied to the sequence $T^i(x)$ instead of $x$ shows that the set $\tilde{S}_i$ is equal to the set of all integers $n$ such that $v'(u')^nw'$ is a factor of the $k$-automatic sequence $(T^i(x))'$. This allows us to assume that $u,v,w$ are single letters.
{\bf Step III} (restating the problem in terms of purely automatic sequences).
Write the sequence $x$ as the image of a purely $k$-automatic sequence $y$ produced by a substitution $\varphi\colon\mathcal{B}\rightarrow\mathcal{B}^*$ of constant length $k$ under a coding $\pi\colon \mathcal{B}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}$.
Let $T$, $C$ and $D$ denote the preimages of the letters $u$, $v$ and $w$ under the coding $\pi$, respectively. Note that $C\cap T=D\cap T=\emptyset$. The set $S$ can be expressed in terms of the sequence $y$ as
\[
S=S(C,D,T)=\{n\geq 0\mid cwd \textrm{ is a factor of } y \textrm{ for some } c\in C, d\in D \textrm{ and } w\in T^* \text{ with } |w|=n \}.
\] We will prove that sets $S=S(C,D,T)$ satisfy the claim for all purely $k$-automatic sequences $y$ over an alphabet $\mathcal{B}$ and subsets $T,C,D\subset \mathcal{B}^*$ with $C\cap T=D\cap T=\emptyset$. Dividing $S$ into a finite union, we may further assume that the sets $C$ and $D$ consist of single letters $c,d\in\mathcal{B}\setminus T$, and we write $S(c,d,T)$ for $S(\{c\},\{d\},T)$.
{\bf Step IV} (constructing a recurrence for the set $S$). For $m\geq 1$ by abuse of notation we let $\varphi^{-m}(T)$ denote the set $\varphi^{-m}(T^*)\cap \mathcal{A}$, i.e.\ the set of letters $a\in\mathcal{A}$ such that $\varphi^m (a)\in T^*$. We write $\mathcal{A}_T=\mathcal{A}\setminus \varphi^{-1}(T)$ for the set of letters $a\in\mathcal{A}$ such that $\varphi(a)\notin T^*$. For a letter $a\in \mathcal{A}_T$ let $\alpha(a)$ denote the first letter in $\varphi(a)$ that is not in $T$ and let $\omega(a)$ denote the last letter in $\varphi(a)$ that is not in $T$. We replace the substitution $\varphi$ by its power in order to get the property $\varphi^{-1}(T)=\varphi^{-2}(T)$ (this is possible by Lemma \ref{lem:elementary}); note that this involves replacing $k$ by its power.
With every pair $(a,a')\in \mathcal{A}_T^2$ we associate an integer $q(a,a')$ in the following way. Write $\varphi(a)=v\omega(a)w$ and $\varphi(a')=w'\alpha(a')v'$ for some $w,w'\in T^*$ and $v,v'\in\mathcal{A}^*$. Put $q(a,a')=|w|+|w'|$. Consider the sets \[\Omega_c=\{ a\in\mathcal{A}_T \mid \omega(a)=c\} \quad \text{and} \quad \mathit{A}_d=\{ a\in\mathcal{A}_T \mid \alpha(a)=d\}.\] Let $E\subset S$ denote the set of integers $n\in S$ such that $n<k-1$. We claim that
\begin{equation}\label{union}
S(c,d,T)=\bigcup_{(c',d')\in \Omega_c\times \mathit{A}_d} \left( kS(c',d',\varphi^{-1}(T))+q(c',d') \right) \cup E.
\end{equation} Let $n\geq k-1$. By definition, $n$ lies in $S$ if and only if there exists a word $w\in T^*$ with $|w|=n$ such that $cwd$ is a factor of $y$. Since $\varphi(y)=y$ and $|cwd|\geq k+1$, this happens if and only if there exist a pair $(c',d')\in \Omega_c\times \mathit{A}_d$ and a word $w'\in (\varphi^{-1}(T))^*$ such that $cwd$ is a factor of $\varphi(c'w'd')$. It follows that $n\in S$ if and only if $n\in k S(c',d',\varphi^{-1}(T))+q(c',d')$ for some $(c',d')\in \Omega_c\times \mathit{A}_d$, with the `if' claim not requiring the assumption that $n\geq k-1$. This proves $\eqref{union}$.
Observe that \eqref{union} implies that it is enough to prove the claim for each of the sets $S(c',d',\varphi^{-1}(T))$. By the assumption on $\varphi$, we have that $\varphi^{-1}(\varphi^{-1}(T))=\varphi^{-1}(T)$, and hence it is enough to show the claim for sets of the form $S=S(c,d,T)$ under the additional assumption that $\varphi^{-1}(T)=T$. It follows that $\alpha(\mathcal{A}_{T}) \subset \mathcal{A}_{T}$ and $\omega(\mathcal{A}_{T}) \subset \mathcal{A}_{T}$. Writing temporarily $\alpha_{\varphi}$ and $\omega_{\varphi}$ for the maps $\alpha, \omega \colon \mathcal{A}_{T} \to \mathcal{A}_T$ defined with respect to the substitution $\varphi$, we note that $\alpha_{\varphi}^n=\alpha_{\varphi^n}$ and $\omega_{\varphi}^n=\omega_{\varphi^n}$ for all $n\geq 1$. Another application of Lemma \ref{lem:elementary} shows that after replacing $\varphi$ by an appropriate power we get that the maps $\alpha$ and $\omega$ are idempotent, which we henceforth assume.
If the set $S$ is finite, the claim is obvious, so assume that $S$ is infinite. By \eqref{union}, the sets $\Omega_c$ and $\mathit{A}_d$ are nonempty, and hence (since $\omega$ and $\alpha$ are idempotent) we have $\omega(c)=c$, $\alpha(d)=d$.
We now consider a family of recurrence sequences. For an element $r \in S$, consider the sequence $(n_t^r)_{t\geq 0}$ given by the formula
\begin{align*} n_0^r&=r, \\ n_t^r&= kn_{t-1}^r+q(c,d), \quad t\geq 1.\end{align*}
By \eqref{union} it is clear that $n_t^r \in S$ for all $r\in S$ and $t\geq 0$. We claim that \begin{equation}\label{eqn:formS} S = \{ n_t^r \mid t\geq 0, r\in S, 0\leq r <k^2-1\}.\end{equation}
This will end the proof of the claim, since the recurrence sequence $(n^r_t)_{t\geq 0}$ has the closed form $n_t^r=ak^{t}+b$ with $a=r+q(c,d)/(k-1)$ and $b=-q(c,d)/(k-1)$ satisfying $a+b\in \mathbf{Z}$ and $(k-1)a\in\mathbf{Z}$. (Note that in the process of the proof we have replaced the substitution $\varphi$ by its iterate, which has the effect of replacing the original $k$ by its power.)
{\bf Step V} (proving the formula \eqref{eqn:formS}). We have already remarked that all $n_t^r$ are elements of $S$. For the converse claim (with the extra statement that one can take $r<k^2-1$), we will inductively apply \eqref{union}, which takes a simpler form since $\varphi^{-1}(T)=T$.
Choose $m \in S$ and write $c_0=c$, $d_0=d$, $m_0=m$. If $m\geq k-1$, then by \eqref{union} we may write $m_0=km_1 + q(c_1,d_1)$ for some $c_1, d_1 \in \mathcal{A}_T$ with $\omega(c_1)=c$, $\alpha(d_1)=d$ and $m_1 \in S(c_1,d_1,T)$. If $m_1 \geq k-1$, we may repeat this procedure. In this way, we inductively construct sequences $(c_i)_{0\leq i \leq s}$, $(d_i)_{0\leq i \leq s}$ and $(m_i)_{0\leq i \leq s}$ with $c_i, d_i \in \mathcal{A}_T$, $\omega(c_{i+1})=c_i$, $\alpha(d_{i+1})=d_i$ and $m_i \in S(c_i,d_i,T)$ with $m_i=km_{i+1} + q(c_{i+1},d_{i+1})$. Furthermore, we have $m_i \geq k-1$ for $i<s$ and $m_i<k-1$ for $i=s$.
Since the maps $\omega$ and $\alpha$ are idempotent, the conditions on $(c_i)$ and $(d_i)$ imply that $c_i=c$ and $d_i=d$ for $i\in[0,s-1]$ (but not necessarily for $i=s$). This shows that $m_i=km_{i+1} + q(c,d)$ for $i\in[0,s-1]$, and hence $m=n^r_{t}$ for $t=s-1$ and $r=m_{s-1}$. Since $m_{s-1} = k m_s +q(c_s,d_s)$, $m_s\leq k-2$ and $q(c_s,d_s)\leq 2k-2$, we get that $r=m_{s-1}<k^2-1$, which ends the proof of the claim.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:effectiveS} Note that the proof of Theorem \ref{prop:recurrence} is effective, in the sense that given a $k$-automatic sequence and words $u,v,w$ satisfying the conditions of the proposition, one may explicitly determine the set $S=\{n \geq 0\mid vu^nw \textrm{ is a factor of } x\}$ as a finite union of translates of geometric progressions and a finite set. In fact, even if $u, v, w$ fail to satisfy the assumptions, i.e.\ either $v$ is a suffix of some power of $u$ or $w$ is a prefix of some power of $u$, we may still determine $S$ as either an explicit finite set or as all of $\N$. Indeed, the reasoning in Steps I and II in the proof of Theorem \ref{prop:recurrence} allows us to assume that $u$, $v$ and $w$ are single letters. Fix $u$ and vary $v$ and $w$. If $v,w\neq u$, we already know how to find the corresponding set $S$. The remaining cases reduce to this one since every factor $vu^n w$ of $x$ is either a subfactor of some factor $\tilde{v}u^m\tilde{w}$ of $x$ for some letters $\tilde{v}, \tilde{w}$ with $\tilde{v},\tilde{w}\neq u$ or else arises as a factor of some prefix of $x$ of the form $u^m w$ or finally we have that $x$ is ultimately periodic with suffix $u^{\omega}$, in which case it is easy to find $S$. \end{remark}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:commonfactors}
Let $k,l\geq 2$ be multiplicatively independent integers and let $\mathcal{A}$ be an alphabet. Let $x$ be a $k$-automatic sequence over $\mathcal{A}$ and let $y$ be an $l$-automatic sequence over $\mathcal{A}$. Let $u,v,w$ be nonempty words over $\mathcal{A}$. Assume that $v$ is not a suffix of $u^n$ and $w$ is not a prefix of $u^n$ for any integer $n$. Then the word $vu^nw$ is a common factor of $x$ and $y$ only for finitely many $n$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Let $S_x=\{n\in\N\mid vu^nw \textrm{ is a factor of } x\}$ and $S_y=\{n\in\N\mid vu^nw \textrm{ is a factor of } y\}$. By Theorem \ref{prop:recurrence}, $S_x$ is a finite union of sets of the form $\{ak^{mn}+b\mid n\geq 0\}$ for some $a,b\in\Q$ and $m\geq 0$. Similarly, $S_y$ is a finite union of sets of the form $\{al^{mn}+b\mid n\geq 0\}$ for some $a,b\in\Q$ and $m\geq 0$. In order to prove that the set $S_x\cap S_y$ is finite, it suffices to note that for any multiplicatively independent integers $k,l$ and rational numbers $a,b,c\in \Q$ with $a,b,c$ not all equal to zero the exponential diophantine equation
\[ak^n+bl^m=c\]
has only finitely many integer solutions $m,n\in\N$. This follows, e.g.\ from the finiteness of the number of solutions of $S$-unit equations due to Mahler \cite{Mahler1933} (see also \cite[Ch.\ 4]{book:EG} or \cite[p.\ 28]{Lang60} for a more general, but very convenient, statement).
\end{proof}
\subsection*{Proof of the main result}
We are now ready to prove Theorem \ref{thm:maincobham}. We begin with a lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemmaformainCobham} Let $u,\tilde u, v$ be words over an alphabet $\mathcal{A}$, and let $n, m\geq 0$ be integers. Assume that $u$ and $\tilde u$ are primitive and that $\tilde u^m$ is a suffix of $u^{n} v$ with $m|\tilde u| \geq |v|+ |u|+|\tilde u|-\mathrm{gcd}(|u|,|\tilde u|)$. Then $|u|=|\tilde u|$, $u$ and $\tilde u$ are cyclic shifts of each other, and for any $q \geq 0$
we have $u^{n} v \tilde u^{q} = u^{n+q} v$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Let $\tilde v$ denote the word $\tilde u^m$ with the suffix $v$ removed. It follows from the Fine--Wilf theorem (see, e.g.\ \cite[Thm.\ 1.5.6]{AlloucheShallit-book}) applied to the (backwards infinite) periodic sequences ${}^{\omega}u$ and ${}^{\omega}\tilde u\tilde v$ that ${}^{\omega}u = {}^{\omega}\tilde u\tilde v$, and hence ${}^{\omega}uv = {}^{\omega}\tilde u$. Since $u$ and $\tilde u$ are primitive, $|u|=|\tilde u|$ and $u, \tilde u$ are cyclic shifts of each other. Both the words $u^{n} v \tilde u^{q}$ and $u^{n+q} v$ are suffixes of ${}^{\omega}uv = {}^{\omega}\tilde u$ of the same length, and hence are equal.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:maincobham}]
We first prove that \eqref{thm:maincobhamii} implies \eqref{thm:maincobhami}. Write $U$ in the form \[U=\bigcup_{i=1}^{p} \mathcal{L}( {}^{\omega}v_i u_i w_i^{\omega}), \quad u_i,v_i,w_i \in \mathcal{A}^*, \quad p\geq 1.\]
Replacing $k$ and $l$ with their powers, we may assume that $k,l\geq p+2$. Choose two distinct symbols $\clubsuit$ and $\spadesuit$ not belonging to $\mathcal A$. We will construct a $k$-automatic sequence $x\in(\mathcal{A}\cup\{\clubsuit\})^{\omega}$ whose set of factors not containing $\clubsuit$ coincides with $U$. Consider the sequences $(c^i_n)$ and the backwards infinite sequences $(d^i_n)$ defined as follows: \[c^i= \begin{cases} u_i w_i^{\omega}& \text{if } w_i\neq \epsilon,\\ u_i \clubsuit^{\omega}& \text{if } w_i = \epsilon;\end{cases}\qquad d^i= \begin{cases} {}^{\omega}v_i& \text{if }v_i\neq \epsilon,\\ {}^{\omega}\clubsuit &\text{if } v_i = \epsilon.\end{cases}\] Since these sequences are ultimately periodic, they are both $k$- and $l$-automatic. Define the sequence $x\in (\mathcal{A}\cup\{\clubsuit\})^{\omega}$ by the formula
\[
x_n=
\begin{cases}
c^i_{n-i\cdot k^t} &\text{if } i \cdot k^t\leq n < i\cdot k^t+k^{t-1}, t\geq 1, 1\leq i\leq p,\\
d^i_{n-i\cdot k^t} &\text{if } i\cdot k^t-k^{t-1}\leq n < i\cdot k^t, t\geq 1, 1\leq i\leq p, \\
\clubsuit &\text{otherwise}.
\end{cases}
\]
(Recall that we always regard sequences in $\mathcal{A}^{\omega}$ as indexed with $0,1,\ldots$, and sequences in ${}^{\omega}\!\mathcal{A}$ as indexed with $\ldots,-2,-1$.)
We claim that the sequence $x$ is $k$-automatic; this can be argued using either the characterisation of automaticity in terms of kernels or in terms of finite automata, and is elementary (albeit tedious). For a more precise argument, let $\varpi$ be the lowest common multiple of the lengths of those $w_i$ and $v_i$ that are nonempty, let $\varpi_0$ and $m_0$ be integers such that $\varpi_0>0$ and $k^{t+\varpi_0} \equiv k^{t} \pmod \varpi$ for $t\geq m_0$, and let $m_1 = \max|u_i|$. Then, for a given $n$ the value $x_n$ depends on the following data: a) the first two digits of $n$ in base $k$ (assuming $n\geq k$); b) the value of $n \bmod \varpi$; c) the value of $\lfloor \log_k n \rfloor \bmod \varpi_0$ (assuming $n\neq 0$); d) whether or not $n<\max(k^{m_0},k{m_1})$, and if so, what is $n$; e) whether or not $n$ is of the form $n=i\cdot k^t + j$ for some integers $i,j,t$ with $1\leq i \leq p$, $t\geq 1$ and $0\leq j<m_1$, and if so, what is the value of $j$ (note that the value of $j$ is uniquely determined for $n\geq k{m_1}$). Each of these pieces of information defines a $k$-automatic sequence, and thus $x$ itself is $k$-automatic as a function of finitely many $k$-automatic sequences.
It is immediate that the set of factors of $x$ not containing the symbol $\clubsuit$ coincides with $U$. Replacing $k$ by $l$ and $\clubsuit$ by $\spadesuit$, we define an $l$-automatic sequence $y\in (\mathcal{A}\cup\{\spadesuit\})^{\omega}$ whose set of factors not containing $\spadesuit$ coincides with $U$. It follows that the set of common factors of $x$ and $y$ is exactly $U$. This ends the proof that \eqref{thm:maincobhamii} implies \eqref{thm:maincobhami}.
For the proof that \eqref{thm:maincobhami} implies \eqref{thm:maincobhamii}, let $x$ be a $k$-automatic sequence and let $y$ be an $l$-automatic sequence. For simplicity, in the rest of the proof we will refer to common factors of $x$ and $y$ simply as common factors. It follows from Corollary \ref{cor:minimalfinite} that there are only finitely many primitive cyclic common factors (in fact, both $x$ and $y$ have only finitely many primitive cyclic factors).
Let $\ell$ denote the maximal length of such a factor.
We write common factors $t$ in the form
\begin{equation}\label{representation}
t=v_0 u_1^{n_1}v_1u_2^{n_2}\cdots v_{s-1}u_s^{n_s}v_{s}
\end{equation} for some integer $s\geq 0$, integers $n_i \geq 0$ and words $u_i$, $v_i$ satisfying the following properties: \begin{enumerate} \item the words $u_i$ are primitive cyclic common factors, \item the words $v_i$ have length $|v_i|\leq \ell$, \item the integer $s$, called the \emph{rank}, is the smallest possible, \item given the choice of $s$, the sequence of integers $(n_1,\dots, n_s)$, called the \emph{sequence of exponents}, is lexicographically maximal. \end{enumerate}
The fact that we allow $n_i$ to be zero guarantees the existence of such a representation for $t$, and we will always refer to it as the \emph{representation} of a common factor $t$.
Note that if $t'$ is a prefix of $t$, then the rank of $t'$ is at most equal to the rank of $t$. We will prove that common factors have bounded rank. To this end, we first prove the following claim.
{\bf Claim 1}: For each $i\in \{2,\dots,s-1\}$ if $n_i > 0$, then there exist \begin{enumerate} \item\label{thm:mainCobhamclaim1.1} a suffix $z$ of $v_0 u_1^{n_1} \cdots u_{i-1}^{n_{i-1}} v_{i-1}$ of length $|z| \leq 4\ell$ such that $z$ is not a suffix of $u_i^n$ for any integer $n\geq 0$; and \item\label{thm:mainCobhamclaim1.2} a prefix $z'$ of $v_i u_{i+1}^{n_{i+1}} \cdots u_s^{n_s} v_s$ of length $|z'|\leq 4\ell$ such that $z'$ is not a prefix of $u_i^n$ for any integer $n\geq 0$.\end{enumerate}
\emph{Proof of Claim 1}: We only prove \eqref{thm:mainCobhamclaim1.1}, the proof of \eqref{thm:mainCobhamclaim1.2} being analogous. Write
\[v_0 u_1^{n_1} \cdots u_{i-1}^{n_{i-1}} v_{i-1} = w' w,\]
where $w,w' \in \mathcal{A}^*$, $w$ is a suffix of $u_i^n $ for some $n \geq 0$, and $w$ is chosen as long as possible. Let $m\geq 0$ be the largest integer such that $u_i^m$ is a suffix of $w$, and write $w=w'' u_i^m$. Note that $|w''|<\ell$.
Consider the following cases (which cover all possibilities): \begin{enumerate} \item If $w'=\epsilon$, then $t$ admits the representation $t=w'' u_i^{m+n_i} v_i \cdots v_{s-1} u_s^{n_s}v_s$, which is of rank $s-i+1 <s$. This is a contradiction.
\item If $|u_i^m| > |u_{i-1}^{n_{i-1}} v_{i-1}|$, we claim that $t$ also admits a representation of smaller rank. In fact, the word $w' w''$ is a prefix of $v_0 u_1^{n_1} \cdots u_{i-2}^{n_{i-2}} v_{i-2}$, and hence has a representation of rank at most $i -2$. Concatenating it with $u_i^{m+n_i}v_i\cdots v_{s-1}u_s^{n_s}v_{s}$, we obtain a representation of $t$ of rank $\leq s-1$. This is a contradiction.
\item If $|u_i^m| \leq |u_{i-1}^{n_{i-1}} v_{i-1}|$ and $|w| \geq 4\ell$, then $|u_i^m| > 3\ell$, and hence by Lemma \ref{lemmaformainCobham} we may write $ u_{i-1}^{n_{i-1}} v_{i-1} u_i^{n_i} = u_{i-1}^r v_{i-1}$ with $r=n_{i-1}+n_i$. Replacing in the representation of $t$ the word $ u_{i-1}^{n_{i-1}} v_{i-1} u_i^{n_i} v_i $ by $u_{i-1}^r v_{i-1} u_i^{0}v_i$, we obtain a representation whose sequence of exponents is $(n_1, \dots, n_{i-2}, r, 0, n_{i+1}, \dots, n_s)$, and hence (since $n_i >0$) is lexicographically larger than $(n_1, \dots, n_{i-2}, n_{i-1}, n_i, n_{i+1}, \dots, n_s)$. This is a contradiction.
\item If $|w| <4\ell$ and $w' \neq \epsilon$, then the suffix $z$ of $w'w$ of length $|w|+1$ satisfies the claim.\qed
\end{enumerate}
{\bf Claim 2}: There is a constant $C$ such that for any common factor $t$ the values of $n_2, \dots, n_{s-1}$ in any representation \eqref{representation} of $t$ are bounded by $C$.
\emph{Proof of Claim 2}: Since there are only finitely many primitive cyclic common factors and finitely many words of length $\leq 4\ell$, Corollary \ref{cor:commonfactors} and Claim 1 show that the values of $n_2, \dots, n_{s-1}$ are bounded by a constant independent of $t$. \qed
{\bf Claim 3}: The rank of common factors is bounded.
\emph{Proof of Claim 3}: Let $t$ be a common factor with representation $t=v_0 u_1^{n_1}v_1u_2^{n_2}\cdots v_{s-1}u_s^{n_s}v_{s}$. We claim that any cyclic factor of $t$ (not necessarily primitive) can occur at positions intersecting at most three of the $u_i$'s. Suppose this is not the case and write such a factor in the form $\tilde{u}^n$ for some integer $n\geq 0$ and primitive cyclic common factor $\tilde{u}$. Consider in the representation of $t$ the shortest factor $\tilde{w}$ consisting of a concatenation of $u_i$'s and $v_i$'s and containing $\tilde{u}^n$. Replace the part of the representation of $t$ that is equal to $\tilde{w}$ by an expression of the form $v' \tilde{u}^n v''$ with $|v'|, |v''| \leq \ell$; if the words $v'$ and $v''$ are adjacent to some $v_i$, regard them as separated by $\tilde{u}^0=\epsilon$. In this manner, we obtain a representation of smaller rank; a contradiction.
Now suppose that the rank of common factors is unbounded. Then the words
\[w(t):=u_2^{n_2}v_2\cdots v_{s-2}u_{s-1}^{n_{s-1}}\]
can be arbitrarily long, and hence by compactness of $\mathcal{A}^{\omega}$ there exists a sequence $z$ with arbitrarily long prefixes of the form $w(t)$ for some common factors $t$. Let $X$ and $Y$ denote the orbit closures of $x$ and $y$, respectively. Then $z\in X \cap Y$, and hence by Corollary \ref{cor:cobpoints} it is ultimately periodic. However, any cyclic factor of $w(t)$ occurs at positions intersecting at most three of the $u_i$'s, and hence by Claim 2 it has length at most $(3C+4) \ell$, which is a contradiction. (In fact, a more careful reasoning gives the bound $(3C+2)\ell -2$.) \qed
{\bf Claim 4}: There exists a constant $C'$ such that any common factor $t$ can be written in the form $t=v' u^n v w^m v''$ for integers $n, m \geq 0$, primitive cyclic common factors $u,w$ and words $v, v', v''$ of length at most $C'$.
\emph{Proof of Claim 4}: By Claim 3, the rank $s$ of a common factor $t=v_0 u_1^{n_1}v_1u_2^{n_2}\cdots v_{s-1}u_s^{n_s}v_{s}$ is bounded, and by Claim 2, $n_i\leq C$ for $i=2,\dots, s-1$. Since for all $i$, $|v_i|\leq \ell$ and $|u_i|\leq \ell$, the claim is satisfied with $v'=v_0$, $v''=v_s$, $u=u_1$, $w=u_s$, and $v=v_1u_2^{n_2}\cdots u_{s-1}^{n_{s-1}}v_{s-1}$.\qed
Due to Claim 4, in order to prove our result, it is sufficient to study common factors $t$ of the form $t=v' u^n v w^m v''$ for fixed words $u, w, v, v', v''$. Call a set $S$ of common factors special if it takes the form \begin{align*} S&= \{t=v' u^n v w^m v'' \mid t \text{ is a common factor}, n,m \in \N\}\end{align*} for some words $u,w,v,v',v'' \in \mathcal{A}^*$. If we may further take $w=v''=\epsilon$, we call the set $S$ degenerate. By Claim 4, the set of all common factors is a finite union of special sets. We write $\mathcal{L}(S)$ for the set of all factors of words in $S$. We will prove that for any special set $S$ the set $\mathcal{L}(S)$ is a finite union of sets of the form $\mathcal{L}({}^{\omega}\tilde{u} \tilde{v} \tilde{w}^{\omega})$ with $\tilde{u}, \tilde{v}, \tilde{w} \in \mathcal{A}^*$. This will conclude the proof of the theorem.
We first prove the claim for a degenerate special set \[S= \{t=v' u^n v \mid t \text{ is a common factor}, n\in \N\}.\] If the set $S$ is finite, then it is certainly of the desired form. By Corollary \ref{cor:commonfactors} this is the case if $v'$ is not a suffix of any power of $u$ and $v$ is not a prefix of any power of $u$. If on the other hand $v'$ is a suffix of some power of $u$, and $S$ is infinite, then $\mathcal{L}(S)$ is equal to $\mathcal{L}({}^{\omega}u v)$. A similar reasoning proves the claim if $v$ is a prefix of some power of $u$.
Consider now the case of a general special set \[S= \{t=v' u^n v w^m v'' \mid t \text{ is a common factor}, n,m \in \N\}.\] If $S$ does not contain factors of the form $t=v' u^n v w^m v''$ for arbitrarily large values of both $n$ and $m$, then $S$ can be rewritten as a finite union of degenerate special sets, and the claim follows. Suppose that $S$ contains factors $t$ corresponding to arbitrarily large values of both $n$ and $m$. If either $v w^m$ is a prefix of some power of $u$ for arbitrarily large $m$ or $u^n v$ is a suffix of some power of $w$ for arbitrarily large $n$, then we may again rewrite $S$ as a finite union of degenerate special sets. Finally, if neither is $v w^m$ a prefix of some power of $u$ for sufficiently large $m$ nor is $u^n v$ a suffix of some power of $w$ for sufficiently large $n$, then we conclude from Corollary \ref{cor:commonfactors} that $v'$ is a suffix of some power of $u$ and $v''$ is a prefix of some power of $w$. In this case the set $\mathcal{L}(S)$ is equal to $\mathcal{L}({}^{\omega}u v w^{\omega})$, which finishes the proof.
\end{proof}
It is an interesting question whether Theorem \ref{thm:maincobham} can be made effective.
\begin{question} Is there an algorithm which, given a $k$-automatic sequence $x$ and an $l$-automatic sequence $y$, produces words $u_i$, $v_i$, $w_i$, $1\leq i \leq p$, such that the set $U$ of common factors of $x$ and $y$ is equal to $U=\bigcup_{i=1}^p \mathcal{L}({}^{\omega}v_i u_i w_i^{\omega})$?
\end{question}
\begin{remark} The only place in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:maincobham} where it is not clear if the proof is effective is the bound on the rank of common factors (Claim 3), which uses a compactness argument. Let us briefly comment on how to make other parts of the proof effective.
First of all, we can determine all primitive cyclic factors of an automatic sequence $x$. In fact, write $x$ as the image of a fixed point of a substitution under a coding. Replace the substitution by an idempotent one using Lemma \ref{lem:propofsubs}, which is effective. Proposition \ref{prop:minimalsubsystems} together with Lemma \ref{lem:factor} describe all minimal subsystems of $\overline{\Orb(x)}$ as closures of orbits of explicitly given automatic sequences. To find the cyclic factors of $x$, we need to determine which of these automatic sequences are periodic, for which a decision procedure was given by Honkala \cite{Honkala} (see also \cite{ARS09} for a simpler approach).
Another crucial ingredient of the proof is Corollary \ref{cor:commonfactors}, which uses the $S$-unit equation. Here, solutions can be effectively bounded using Baker's method (for a comprehensive discussion, see \cite{book:EG}). In particular, the constant $C$ in the proof can be effectively computed. Finally, given words $v, v', v'', u, w$ we may effectively determine all common factors of $x$ and $y$ of the form $t=v' u^n v w^m v''$ using Remark \ref{rem:effectiveS} and an effective version of Corollary \ref{cor:commonfactors}. Thus, in order to make the proof fully effective, we need to find a computable bound on the rank of common factors or---equivalently---the constant $C'$. Unfortunately, we do not know how to do this.
\end{remark}
\bibliographystyle{amsplain}
|
\section{Introduction}
In combinatorics of words, the notion of return words to a factor of an infinite word is an analogue to first return map in dynamical systems.
Given an infinite word $\uu = u_0 u_1 u_2 \dots $ with $u_i$ being an element of a finite alphabet, we say that $u_i u_{i+1} \cdots u_{j-1}$ is a return word to a factor $w$ if for each $k$ satisfying $i \leq k \leq j$, the factor $w$ is a prefix of the infinite word $u_{k}u_{k+1}u_{k+2} \dots$ only for $k = i$ and $k = j$.
We study infinite words $\uu$ such that every factor of $\uu$ occurs infinitely many times and has a finite number of return words.
These words are called uniformly recurrent.
This class of words includes purely periodic words.
Obviously, any factor $w$ of a purely periodic word $\uu$ which is longer than the period has just one return word.
On the other hand, if a uniformly recurrent word $\uu$ has a factor having only one return word, then $\uu$ is purely periodic.
In this article, we focus on uniformly recurrent words which have exactly 2 return words to each factor.
As shown by Vuillon in \cite{Vu}, such words are exactly the infinite Sturmian words, i.e., aperiodic words having the least factor complexity possible.
If a factor $w$ of a uniformly recurrent word $\uu$ has $k$ return words, then the order of their occurrences in $\uu$ can be coded by an infinite word over a $k$-letter alphabet.
This word is denoted by $\dd_\uu(w)$ and called the derived word of $w$ in $\uu$.
Derived words to prefixes $w$ of $\uu$ were introduced by Durand in \cite{Durand98} in order to characterize primitively substitutive infinite words.
Among other, Durand showed that if $w$ is a prefix of an infinite word $\uu$ fixed by a primitive substitution, then $\dd_{\uu}(w)$ is fixed by a primitive substitution as well.
Taking all such prefixes $w$, the set of derived words $\dd_{\uu}(w)$ is finite, and thus the set of primitive substitutions fixing these derived words to prefixes is finite. Moreover, if we consider derived words to a prefix of a derived word $\dd_{\uu}(w)$, we obtain again a derived word to some prefix $w'$ of the original word $\uu$.
Thus, we observe that the finite set of primitive substitutions fixing the derived words to prefixes is invariant under taking derived word to a prefix and considering its fixing primitive substitution.
If $w$ is not a prefix, then $\dd_\uu(w)$ need not be fixed by a substitution at all.
To study this phenomenon, we introduce the following definition.
\begin{defi} Let $M$ be a finite set of primitive substitutions.
The set $M$ is said to be \emph{closed under derivation} if the derived word ${\bf d_{\bf u}}(w)$ with respect to any factor $w$ of any fixed point ${\bf u}$ of $\varphi \in M$ is fixed by a primitive substitution $\psi \in M$.
A primitive substitution $\xi$ is called \emph{closeable under derivation} if $\xi$ belongs to a set $M$ closed under derivation.
\end{defi}
Substitutions having Sturmian words as fixed points are very well described (see \cite{Lo2}) and there exists a handy tool to characterize which Sturmian words are fixed by a substitution (see \cite{Ya99}).
It is therefore convenient to start the study of sets closed under derivation by considering Sturmian words and Sturmian substitutions.
In this article, we fully solve this question: in \Cref{neniReflex,jeReflex} we characterize Sturmian substitutions that are closeable under derivation; the characterization is presented in the terms of the representation in the special Sturmian monoid (generated by the morphisms given in \eqref{eq:elem} below) and also alternatively in terms of the slope and the intercept of its fixed point (\Cref{thm:last}).
The article is organized as follows.
\Cref{sec:prelim} contains necessary definitions and notions.
In \Cref{sec:sturm,sec:sturmmor} we introduce needed results on Sturmian words and morphisms.
\Cref{sec:lemmas} contains auxiliary lemmas required in the last \Cref{sec:nonderiv,sec:deriv}, where we deal with the case of Sturmian morphism that are not closed under derivation and Sturmian morphisms that are closed under derivation, respectively.
\section{Preliminaries} \label{sec:prelim}
Let $\A$ denote an \emph{alphabet}, a finite set of symbols called \emph{letters}.
A \emph{finite word} of length $n$ over $\A$ is a concatenation of $n$ letters, i.e., $u=u_0u_1\cdots u_{n-1}$ with $u_i \in \mathcal{A}$.
The \emph{length} of $u$ equals $n$ and is denoted by $|u|$.
The set of all finite words over the alphabet $\A$ and the operation of word concatenation form a monoid $\mathcal{A}^*$.
The unique word of length $0$, the \emph{empty word} $\varepsilon$, is its neutral element.
The \emph{cyclic shift} of the word $u$ is the word
\begin{equation}\label{eq:def_of_cyc}
{\rm cyc}(u) = u_{1}u_{2}\cdots u_{n-1}u_0.
\end{equation}
An \emph{infinite word} over $\mathcal{A}$ is a sequence $\uu = u_0u_1u_2\cdots = \left(u_i\right)_{i\in \mathbb{N}} \in \mathcal{A}^{\mathbb{N}}$ with $u_i \in \mathcal{A}$ for all $i \in \N = \left\{ 0,1,2, \ldots \right \}$.
A finite word $w$ is a \emph{factor} of $\uu$ if there exists an integer $i$ such that $w = u_iu_{i+1}u_{i+2}\cdots u_{i+|w|-1}$.
The index $i$ is an \emph{occurrence} of $w$ in $\uu$.
The \emph{language $\mathcal{L}(\uu)$ of $\uu$} is the set of all its factors.
A factor $w$ is a \emph{right special} factor if there exist at least two distinct letters $a,b \in \mathcal{A}$ such that $wa, wb \in \mathcal{L}(\uu)$.
A \emph{left special} factor is defined analogously.
A factor is \emph{bispecial} if it is left and right special.
Given a word $u$, finite or infinite, and finite words $p,v$ and a word $s$ such that $u = pvs$, then we say that $p$ is a \emph{prefix} of $u$ and $s$ is its \emph{suffix}.
The prefix $p$ is \emph{proper} if $p \neq \varepsilon$ and $p \neq u$.
If each factor of $\uu \in \A^\N$ has infinitely many occurrences in $\uu$, the word $\uu$ is \emph{recurrent}.
Given a recurrent infinite word $\uu$ and its factor $w$, a \emph{return word of $w$ in $\uu$} is a factor $v \in \L(\uu)$ such that $vw \in \L(\uu)$ and the factor $w$ occurs in $vw$ exactly twice --- once as a prefix and once as a suffix.
Assume there is an integer $k$ such that $r_0, r_1, \ldots r_k$ are all return words of $w$ in $\uu$.
We can write $\uu = pr_{s_0}r_{s_1}r_{s_2} \ldots$ with $|p|$ equal the least occurrence of $w$ in $\uu$ and $s_i \in \{0,1, \ldots, k\}$.
We say that the word $\left( s_i \right)_{i=0}^{+ \infty}$ is the \emph{derived word of $\uu$ with respect to $w$}, denoted $\dd_\uu(w)$.
For $w$ being a prefix, these words were introduced in \cite{Durand98}.
For a general factor $w$, they are investigated in~\cite{HoZa99}.
In this article, we consider derived words up to a permutation of letters, i.e., we do take into account the indexing of the return words when comparing derived words.
A mapping $\psi: \mathcal{A}^*\to \mathcal{A}^* $ is a \emph{morphism} over $\mathcal{A}^*$ if $\psi(uv) = \psi(u)\psi(v)$ for each $u,v \in \mathcal{A}^*$.
The domain of $\psi$ is extended to $\mathcal{A}^{\mathbb{N}}$ naturally by $\psi(\uu) = \psi(u_0u_1u_2\dots) = \psi(u_0)\psi(u_1)\psi(u_2)\dots$ for $\uu \in \A^\N$.
If $\psi(\uu) = \uu$, we say that $\uu$ is a \emph{fixed point} of $\psi$.
A morphism $\psi$ is \emph{primitive} if there exists an integer $k$ such that for each pair of letters $a,b \in \mathcal{A}$ the word $\psi^k(a)$ contains the letter $b$.
In \cite{Durand98}, a morphism $\psi$ over $\mathcal{A}$ is called \emph{substitution} if there exists a letter $a \in \mathcal{A}$ such that $\psi(a) =aw$ for some non-empty word $w$ and the length of the $n^{th}$ iteration of $\psi$ applied to $a$ tends to infinity, i.e., $|\psi^n(a)| \to +\infty$.
Clearly, any substitution has at least one fixed point, namely $\uu = aw\psi(w)\psi^2(w)\psi^3(w)\cdots$.
This fixed point is usually denoted as $\lim_{n\to \infty}\psi^{n}(a)$.
A primitive morphism $\psi $ has some power $\psi^k$ which is a substitution.
For example, a morphism given by $\varphi(0) = 100$ and $\varphi(1)=0$ is not a substitution, but it is primitive as $ \varphi^2(0) = 0100100$ and $ \varphi^2(1) = 100$.
The morphism $\varphi^2$ is a substitution and has two fixed points, namely $\lim_{n\to\infty}\varphi^{2n}(0)$ and $\lim_{n\to\infty}\varphi^{2n}(1)$.
If $\uu$ is a fixed point by $\varphi$, then it is also fixed by $\varphi$ for all $k \in \N$.
An infinite word $\uu$ is \emph{rigid} if the set of all morphisms which fix $\uu$ is of the form $\left\{ \varphi^k
\colon k \in \N \right\}$ for some morphism $\varphi$.
\section{Sturmian words} \label{sec:sturm}
Sturmian words are infinite words over a two letter alphabet having the least unbounded factor complexity possible.
In other words, an infinite word is \emph{Sturmian} if for each $n \in \N$ the number of its factors of length $n$ equals $n+1$.
There are many other characterizations of Sturmian words.
For the phenomenon that we investigate, the characterization based on the notion of interval exchange transformation is the most suitable.
For a given parameters $\ell_0, \ell_1 >0$, we consider the partition of the interval $I=[0,\ell_0+\ell_1)$ into $I_0=[0,\ell_0)$ and $I_1=[\ell_0, \ell_0+\ell_1)$ or the partition of $I=(0,\ell_0+\ell_1]$ into $I_0=(0,\ell_0]$ and $I_1=(\ell_0, \ell_0+\ell_1]$.
The transformation $T: I\to I$ defined by
$$
T(x) =
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
x + \ell_1 & \text{ if } x \in I_0,\\
x - \ell_0 & \text{ if } x \in I_1
\end{array}
\right.
$$
is a \textit{two interval exchange transformation}, or shortly \emph{2iet}.
If we take an initial point $ \rho \in I$, the sequence $\uu = u_0u_1u_2 \dots \in \{0,1\}^\N$ defined by
$$
u_n =
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
0 & \text{ if} \ T^n(\rho) \in I_0,\\
1 & \text{ if} \ T^n(\rho) \in I_1
\end{array}
\right.
$$
is a \textit{2iet sequence} with the \textit{parametrs} $\ell_0,\ell_1,\rho$.
In other words, a 2iet sequence is a coding of itineraries $\left( T^n(\rho) \right)_{n=0}^{+\infty} $ with respect to the partition $I_0 \cup I_1$.
The value $ \gamma = \frac{\ell_1}{\ell_0+\ell_1}$ is called the \emph{slope} of $\uu$.
It is well known that the set of all 2iet sequences having an irrational slope coincides with the set of all Sturmian words (see for instance \cite{Lo2}).
If we need to distinguish whether a Sturmian word comes from a transformation with the domain $I=[0,\ell_0+\ell_1)$ or with the domain $I=(0,\ell_0+\ell_1]$ we use the names \emph{lower and upper Sturmian word}, respectively.
For most of the parameters $ \rho \in (0, \ell_0+\ell_1)$ the lower Sturmian word with the parameters $\ell_0,\ell_1,\rho$ equals to the upper Sturmian word with the same parameters.
Clearly, lower (upper) Sturmian words corresponding to the triplets $(\ell_0,\ell_1,\rho)$ and $(c\ell_0,c\ell_1,c\rho)$ coincide for any positive constant $c$.
It is the reason for the triplet of parameters $\ell_0,\ell_1,\rho$ to be often normalized into the form $$\Bigl(\frac{\ell_0}{\ell_0+\ell_1}, \frac{\ell_1}{\ell_0+\ell_1},\frac{\rho}{\ell_0+\ell_1}\Bigr)=(1-\gamma,\gamma,\delta), $$ where $\gamma$ is the slope.
The lower Sturmian word with parameters $(1-\gamma,\gamma,\delta) $ where $\delta \in [0,1)$ is in \cite{Lo2} denoted by $\ss_{\gamma, \delta }$ and
the upper Sturmian word with parameters $(1-\gamma,\gamma,\delta) $ where $\delta \in (0,1]$ is denoted by
${{\ss^\prime}}_{\gamma, \delta}$.
The language $\L(\uu)$ of a Sturmian word $\uu$ is independent of the parameter $\rho$, it depends only on the slope $\gamma=\frac{\ell_1}{\ell_0+\ell_1}$.
Any Sturmian word is uniformly recurrent. Frequencies of the letters $0$ and $1$ are $1-\gamma$ and $\gamma$, respectively.
Among all Sturmian words with a fixed irrational slope $\gamma=\frac{\ell_1}{\ell_0+\ell_1}$, the sequence with the triplet of parameters
$(\ell_0, \ell_1, \ell_1)$ plays a special role.
Such a sequence is called a \textit{standard Sturmian word} and it is usually denoted by ${\bf c}_\gamma$.
Any prefix of ${\bf c}_\gamma$ is a left special factor.
In other words, a Sturmian word $\uu \in \{0,1\}^\N$ is standard if both sequences $0\uu$, $1\uu$ are Sturmian.
The \emph{shift operator} $\sigma$ maps an infinite word $\uu = u_0u_1u_2\dots$ to the word $\sigma(\uu) = u_1u_2u_3\dots$, i.e., $\sigma$ erases the starting letter of the word $\uu$. If $\uu$ is a Sturmian word coding an initial point $\rho$ under a two interval exchange transformation $T$, then $\sigma(\uu)$ is coding of the initial point $T(\rho)$.
\begin{obs}\label{shift}
If $\uu$ is a lower Sturmian word with parameters $\ell_0,\ell_1$, and $\rho$, then $\sigma(\uu)$ is a lower Sturmian word with parameters $\ell_0,\ell_1$, and $\rho'$, where
\[
\rho'= \begin{cases} \rho +\ell_1 & \text{ if } \rho \in [0,\ell_0), \\
\rho -\ell_0 & \text{ if } \rho \in [\ell_0, \ell_0+\ell_1 ).
\end{cases}
\]
If $\uu$ is an upper Sturmian word with parameters $\ell_0,\ell_1$, and $\rho$, then $\sigma(\uu)$ is an upper Sturmian word with parameters $\ell_0,\ell_1$, and $\rho'$, where
\[
\rho'= \begin{cases} \rho +\ell_1 & \text{ if } \rho \in (0,\ell_0], \\
\rho -\ell_0 & \text{ if } \rho \in (\ell_0, \ell_0+\ell_1].
\end{cases}
\]
\end{obs}
\section{Sturmian morphisms} \label{sec:sturmmor}
In this article, we work with these four elementary morphisms:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:elem}
\varphi_a: \begin{cases} 0 \to 0 \\ 1 \to 10 \end{cases}, \quad \quad
\varphi_b: \begin{cases} 0 \to 0 \\ 1 \to 01 \end{cases}, \quad \quad
\varphi_\alpha: \begin{cases} 0 \to 01 \\ 1 \to 1 \end{cases}, \quad \quad
\varphi_\beta: \begin{cases} 0 \to 10 \\ 1 \to 1 \end{cases}.
\end{equation}
Each of these 4 morphisms is a so-called Sturmian morphism, that is a morphism such that any its image of a Sturmian word is a again a Sturmian word.
Moreover, the morphisms $\varphi_b$ and $\varphi_\beta$ map a standard Sturmian word to a standard Sturmian word and are thus called \emph{standard Sturmian morphisms}.
Let $\mathcal{M}$ be the monoid generated by the four morphisms, i.e. $\mathcal{M} = \langle \varphi_a, \varphi_b, \varphi_\alpha, \varphi_\beta \rangle $. The monoid $\mathcal{M}$ is usually called the \emph{special Sturmian monoid}.
For a non-empty word $w = w_0\cdots w_{n-1}$ over the alphabet $\{a,b,\alpha,\beta\}$ we set
\[
\varphi_w = \varphi_{w_0} \varphi_{w_1} \cdots \varphi_{w_{n-1}}.
\]
Each morphism $\varphi_w$ maps a lower (upper) Sturmian word to a lower (upper) Sturmian word. A morphism $\varphi_w$ is primitive if and only if $w$ contains at least one Latin letter and at least one Greek letter.
If $\varphi_w$ is primitive, then $\varphi_w$ is a substitution.
To obtain the monoid of all Sturmian morphisms we have to extend the set of generators by the morphism $E: 0 \mapsto 1, 1 \mapsto 0 $. This morphism maps a lower (upper) Sturmian word to an upper (lower) Sturmian word. If $\psi$ is a Sturmian morphism from the monoid $\langle E, \varphi_a, \varphi_b, \varphi_\alpha, \varphi_\beta \rangle $, then $\psi^2\in \mathcal{M}$.
The four elementary morphisms $ \varphi_a, \varphi_b, \varphi_\alpha, \varphi_\beta$ serve as a basis for a representation of any Sturmian word.
\begin{thm}[\cite{JuPi}] \label{Sadic}
An infinite binary word $\uu$ is Sturmian if and only if there exists an infinite word ${\bf w}=w_0w_1w_2\cdots$ over the alphabet $\{a,b,\alpha, \beta\}$ and an infinite sequence $(\uu_i)_{i\geq 0}$ of Sturmian words such that $\uu = \uu_0$ and
$\uu_{i} = \varphi_{w_i}(\uu_{i + 1})$ for all $i \in \mathbb{N}$.
\end{thm}
Usually, the sequence $(\varphi_{w_i})$ is called an \emph{ S-adic representation} of $\uu$.
In our context, the sequence $(w_i)$ shall be simply called an S-adic representation of $\uu$.
The monoid $\mathcal{M}$ is a proper submonoid of the monoid of all Sturmian morphisms and it is not free.
It is easy to show that for any $k \in \N$ we have
\[
\varphi_{\alpha a^k\beta } = \varphi_{\beta b^k\alpha}\quad \text{ and } \quad \varphi_{a\alpha^kb} = \varphi_{b\beta^ka}.
\]
In fact, these rules give the presentation of the monoid:
\begin{thm}[\cite{See91,ReKa07}] \label{thm:relations}
Let $w,v\in \{a,b,\alpha,\beta\}^*$.
The morphism $\varphi_w$ equals $\varphi_{v}$ if and only if the word $v$ can be obtained from $w$ by possibly repeated application of the rewriting rules
\begin{equation}\label{eq:relations}
\alpha a^k\beta = \beta b^k\alpha \quad \text{ and } \quad a\alpha^kb = b\beta^ka\qquad \text{ for any $k \in \N$ }.
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
Note that the rules~\eqref{eq:relations} preserve positions in $w \in \{a,b,\alpha,\beta\}^*$ of Latin and Greek letters.
Thus, by setting $a<b$ and $\alpha < \beta$ we may define a lexicographic order on all equivalent words in $\{a,b,\alpha,\beta\}^*$.
In~\cite{KlMePeSt18}, this lexicographic order allowed to describe the derived words with respect to the prefixes of Sturmian words.
It is the reason to use a non-traditional notation of the elementary morphisms, which are in~\cite{Lo2} denoted as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{LothairJinak}
\varphi_b = G, \quad \varphi_a = \widetilde{G}, \quad \varphi_\beta = D, \quad \varphi_\alpha = \widetilde{D}.
\end{equation}
\begin{defi}
Let $w \in \{a,b,\alpha,\beta\}^*$.
The lexicographically largest word in $ \{a,b,\alpha,\beta\}^*$ which can be obtained from $w$ by application of rewriting rules \eqref{eq:relations} is denoted $N(w)$.
If $\psi = \varphi_w$, then the word $N(w)$ is the \emph{normalized name} of the morphism $\psi$ and it is also denoted by $N(\psi) = N(w)$.
\end{defi}
The next lemma is a direct consequence of Theorem \ref{thm:relations}.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:normalized_words}
Let $w \in \{a, b, \alpha, \beta\}^*$.
We have $w = N(w)$ if and only if $w$ does not contain $\alpha a^k\beta$ or $a\alpha^kb$ as a factor for any $k \in \mathbb{N}$.
In particular, if $w \in \{ a, b, \alpha, \beta\}^* \setminus \{a, \alpha\}^*$, the normalized name $N(w)$ has prefix either $a^i\beta$ or $\alpha^ib$ for some $i \in \mathbb{N}$.
\end{lem}
The following definition is helpful in the description of derived words with respect to prefixes.
\begin{defi} \label{def:delta}
Let $w\in \{a,b,\alpha,\beta\}^*\setminus \{a,\alpha\}^*$ be the normalized name of a morphism $\psi$. Put
\[
\Delta(w) =
\begin{cases}
N( w'a^k\beta) & \text{ if \ } w = a^k\beta w', \\
N(w'\alpha^kb) & \text{ if \ } w = \alpha^kb w'
\end{cases}
\]
with $k \in \N$.
For $\psi = \varphi_w$ we set
\[
\Delta (\psi) = \varphi_{\Delta(w)}.
\]
\end{defi}
\begin{example} \label{ex:N}
Let $v = aa\beta \alpha \beta \beta a$.
We have $N(v) = aa\beta\beta\beta\alpha a$ and $\Delta(N(v)) = N(\beta\beta\alpha aa\beta\beta) = \beta\beta \beta bb \beta \alpha $.
\end{example}
\begin{remark}\label{vsechny4}
Let us point out several properties of the operation $\Delta$.
Assume $w \in \{a,b,\alpha,\beta\}^*\setminus \{a,\alpha\}^*$ such that $\varphi_w$ is primitive.
\begin{enumerate}[(I)]
\item \label{it:vsechny4:1} If only two letters from $\{a,b,\alpha,\beta\}$ occur in $w$, i.e., $w \in \{b,\beta\}^* \cup \{b,\alpha\}^*\cup
\{a,\beta\}^*$, then $\Delta(w)$ is an iteration of the cyclic shift.
\item \label{it:vsechny4:2}
The function $\Delta$ preserves the length of a word.
The number of the letters $b$ and $\beta$ in the normalized name $N(w)$ of a word $w$ is never smaller than the number of these letters in $w$.
Thus the sequence $\Delta^i(w)$ of iterations of $\Delta$ is eventually periodic and for each sufficiently large index $i$, $\Delta^{i+1}(w)$ of can be computed from $\Delta^i(w)$ by cyclic shift without using normalization.
\item \label{it:vsechny4:3} If $w$ contains at least one letter from $\{a, \alpha\}$, then the form of rewriting rules \eqref{eq:relations} implies that $N(w)$ and $\Delta(w)$ contains at least one letter from $\{a, \alpha\}$.
\item \label{it:vsechny4:4}
If $w$ contains at least 3 letters from $\{a,b,\alpha,\beta\}$, then by Example 31 of \cite{KlMePeSt18}, $\Delta^i(w)$ contains both letters $\beta$ and $b$ for each sufficiently large $i$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{remark}
\begin{thm}[\cite{KlMePeSt18}]\label{thm:main_result_vetsina}
Let $\psi \in \langle\varphi_a, \varphi_b, \varphi_\alpha, \varphi_\beta\rangle$ be a primitive morphism and $ N(\psi) = w \in \{a,b,\alpha,\beta\}^* \setminus \{a, \alpha\}^*$ be its normalized name.
If $\uu$ is the fixed point of $\psi$,
then $\mathbf{x}$ is (up to a permutation of letters) a derived word of $\uu$ with respect to one of its prefixes if and only if $\mathbf{x}$ is the fixed point of the morphism $\Delta^j(\psi)$ for some $j\in \mathbb{N}$.
\end{thm}
\begin{example}[\Cref{ex:N} continued]
Taking $w = aa\beta\beta\beta\alpha a$, we have
\[
\begin{aligned}
\Delta(w) & = \beta\beta \beta bb \beta \alpha, & \Delta^7(w) & = \beta \beta \beta \alpha b b \beta, \\
\Delta^2(w) & = \beta\beta bb \beta \beta \alpha, & \Delta^8(w) & = \beta \beta \alpha b b \beta \beta, \\
\Delta^3(w) & = \beta bb \beta \beta \beta \alpha, & \Delta^{9}(w) & = \beta \alpha b b \beta \beta \beta, \\
\Delta^4(w) & = bb \beta \beta \beta \beta \alpha, & \Delta^{10}(w) & = \alpha b b \beta \beta \beta \beta, \\
\Delta^5(w) & = b \beta \beta \beta \beta \alpha b, & \Delta^{11}(w) & = b \beta \beta \beta \beta \alpha b = \Delta^5(w). \\
\Delta^6(w) & = \beta \beta \beta \beta \alpha b b,
\end{aligned}
\]
Note that for $i > 4$, the element $\Delta^i(w)$ is always a cyclic shift of the previous element $\Delta^{i-1}(w)$, illustrating \Cref{it:vsechny4:2,it:vsechny4:4} of \Cref{vsechny4}.
\end{example}
In \cite{KlMePeSt18}, we considered only derived words to non-empty prefixes.
If we include in our considerations also the empty prefix $\varepsilon$, then the derived word to $\varepsilon$ in $\uu$ is $\uu$ itself and it is fixed by $\psi = \Delta^{0}(\psi)$.
The objective of this article is to detect the sets of primitive Sturmian morphisms that are closed under derivation.
In order to do that, a tool deciding whether a Sturmian word is fixed by such a morphism is needed.
It is easy to see that a Sturmian word $\uu$ is fixed by a primitive morphism if and only if $\uu$ has a purely periodic $S$-adic representation.
Yasutomi \cite{Ya99} found a characterization of such Sturmian words using algebraic properties of their parameters.
To quote his result we recall that a number $\lambda$ is quadratic if it is an irrational root of a quadratic equation $Ax^2+Bx+C=0$ with rational coefficients $A\neq 0, B,C$.
Let $\mathbb{Q}(\lambda)$ denote the minimal number field containing $\mathbb{Q}$ and $\lambda$.
If $\lambda$ is quadratic, then $\mathbb{Q}(\lambda) = \{c+d\lambda \colon c,d \in \mathbb{Q} \}$.
Let $\overline{\lambda}$ be the other root of $Ax^2+Bx+C=0$, i.e., the algebraic conjugate of $\lambda$.
Since the mapping $z = c+d\lambda\mapsto \overline{z} = c+d\overline{\lambda }$ is an automorphism of the field $\mathbb{Q}(\lambda)$, we have $ \overline{z+y}= \overline{z}+\overline{y}$ and $ \overline{z\cdot y}= \overline{z}\cdot \overline{y}$ for each $z,y \in \mathbb{Q}(\lambda)$.
\begin{thm}[\cite{Ya99}]\label{Yasutomi0}
Let $ \gamma, \delta \in [0,1]$ and $\gamma$ be irrational.
A Sturmian word coding the two interval exchange transformation with parameters $ \ell_0=1-\gamma,\ell_1= \gamma, \rho = \delta $
is fixed by a primitive morphism if and only if
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\gamma $ and $\delta$ belong to the same quadratic field $\Q(\gamma)$; and
\item $\overline{\gamma }\notin (0,1)$; and
\item If $\overline{\gamma }>1$, then $\overline{\delta} \in [1-\overline{\gamma },\overline{\gamma}]$; \ \ if $\overline{\gamma }<0$, then $\overline{\delta} \in [ \overline{\gamma}, 1-\overline{\gamma }]$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
A quadratic number $\gamma\in (0,1)$ with conjugate $ \overline{\gamma} \notin (0,1)$ is called a \emph{Sturm number}.
The notion Sturm number was originally defined via properties of coefficients in the continued fraction expansion of $\gamma$, later Allauzen \cite{Allauzen} found an algebraic characterization of Sturm numbers.
The parameters $(\ell_0,\ell_1,\rho)$ of a Sturmian word in the previous theorem satisfy $\ell_0+\ell_1 = 1$, i.e., the parameter
$\ell_1$ equals the slope.
We rewrite this theorem to a form which is more convenient for our considerations.
We normalize the parameters $\ell_0,\ell_1$ of a two interval exchange $T$ to satisfy the condition that the longer interval is of length 1 and the shorter one is of length $\theta$. Clearly, $\theta \in (0,1)$ and the slope $\gamma$ equals $\tfrac{\theta}{1+\theta}$ or $\tfrac{1}{1+\theta}$.
This kind of normalization is also used in \cite[Chapter 6]{Fogg} in order to reveal the relation of Sturmian words to the Ostrowski numeration system.
\begin{thm}\label{Yasutomi}
Let $\theta \in (0,1)$ be irrational and $\rho \in [0,1+ \theta]$. A Sturmian word with parameters $ 1, \theta,\rho$ or
$\theta,1, \rho$ is fixed by a primitive morphism if and only if
\begin{enumerate}[(1)]
\item $\theta$ and $\rho$ belong to the same quadratic field; and
\item $\overline{\theta} <0$; and
\item \label{it:Yasutomi:3} $\overline {\theta} \leq \overline{\rho}\leq 1$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
The relation between the parameters $\gamma$ and $\delta$ in \Cref{Yasutomi0} and the parameters in our modification is $\gamma= \tfrac{\theta}{1+\theta}$ or $\gamma= \tfrac{1}{1+\theta}$ and $\delta = \tfrac{\rho}{1+\theta}$.
Equivalently, $$\Bigl(\theta= \tfrac{1-\gamma}{\gamma}\ \ \text{and} \ \ \rho = \tfrac{\delta}{ \gamma}\Bigr) \quad \text{or } \quad
\Bigl(\theta= \tfrac{\gamma}{1-\gamma}\ \ \text{and} \ \ \rho = \tfrac{\delta}{1-\gamma}\Bigr)\,.$$
Clearly, $\gamma$ and $\delta$ belong to the same quadratic field if and only if $\theta$ and $\rho$ belong to the same quadratic field.
The fact that the quadratic slope $\gamma$ is a Sturm number implies $$ \overline{\gamma}\notin (0,1) \ \ \Longleftrightarrow \ \ \overline{\gamma}(1-\overline{\gamma})<0 \ \ \Longleftrightarrow \ \ \tfrac{\overline{\gamma}}{1-\overline{\gamma}}<0 \quad \text{ and } \quad \tfrac{1-\overline{\gamma}}{\overline{\gamma}} <0
\ \ \Longleftrightarrow \ \ \overline{\theta} <0 \,.
$$
If $\overline{\gamma} >1$, \Cref{it:Yasutomi:3} of \Cref{Yasutomi} can be equivalently rewritten
$$1-\overline{\gamma }\leq \overline{\delta}\leq \overline{\gamma}\ \ \Longleftrightarrow \ \
1\geq \tfrac{\overline{\delta}}{1-\overline{\gamma}}\geq \tfrac{ \overline{\gamma}}{1-\overline{\gamma}} \quad \text{ and } \quad
\tfrac{ 1-\overline{\gamma}}{\overline{\gamma}}\leq \tfrac{\overline{\delta}}{\overline{\gamma}}\leq 1
\ \ \Longleftrightarrow \ \ 1\geq \overline{\rho} \geq \overline{\theta}\,.$$
If $\overline{\gamma} < 0$, then
\[\overline{\gamma }\leq \overline{\delta}\leq 1-\overline{\gamma}\ \ \Longleftrightarrow \ \ \tfrac{ \overline{\gamma}}{1-\overline{\gamma}} \leq
\tfrac{\overline{\delta}}{1-\overline{\gamma}}\leq \ 1 \quad \text{ and } \quad 1 \geq
\tfrac{\overline{\delta}}{\overline{\gamma}}\geq \ \tfrac{1- \overline{\gamma}}{\overline{\gamma}} \ \ \Longleftrightarrow \ \ \overline{\theta}\leq \overline{\rho} \leq 1. \qedhere
\]
\end{proof}
\section{Auxiliary lemmas} \label{sec:lemmas}
\begin{lem}\label{prolong}
Let $w$ be a factor of an aperiodic word $\uu$.
\begin{enumerate}[(1)]
\item \label{it:prolong1} There exists $s$ such that $ws$ is right special in $\uu$, and $ws'$ is not right special for any proper prefix $s'$ of $s$.
Moreover, $\dd_{\uu}(w) =\dd_{\uu}(ws)$.
\item \label{it:prolong2} There exists $p$ such that $pw$ is left special in $\uu$, and $p'w$ is not left special for any proper suffix $p'$ of $u$.
Moreover, if $p'w$ is a prefix of $\uu$ for some proper suffix $p'$ of $p$, then $\dd_{\uu}(w) =\dd_{\uu}(p'w)$.
Otherwise, $\dd_{\uu}(w) =\dd_{\uu}(pw)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
\Cref{it:prolong1}:
As $\uu$ is aperiodic, the factor $w$ is a factor of some right special factor.
Let $ws$ be the shortest such right special factor.
Thus, the word $s$ is unique.
Let $r_1,r_2,\ldots,r_k$ be all the return words of $w$.
As the factor $s$ always occurs after $w$, the word $r_iws \in \L(\uu)$.
Since $w$ is a prefix of $r_iw$, the word $ws$ is a prefix of $r_iws$, and so $r_i$ is a return word of $ws$.
To conclude, the return words of $w$ and $ws$ are identical, and thus so are the derived words with respect to $w$ and $ws$.
\Cref{it:prolong2}:
The factor $w$ is a factor of some left special factor.
Let $pw$ be the shortest such left special factor.
Let $r_1,r_2,\ldots,r_k$ be all the return words of $w$.
Similarly to the previous case, the word $p'r_iw$ contains exactly two occurrences of $p'w$ for each prefix $p'$ of $p$.
Thus, $p'r_i$ is a return word of $p'w$.
The occurrences of $r_i$ are occurrences of $p'r_i$ shifted by $p'$ for all $i$ maybe except for the first occurrence.
Thus, if $p'w$ is a prefix of $\uu$ for some suffix of $p'$ of $p$, then $\dd_{\uu}(w) =\dd_{\uu}(p'w)$.
In the other case, $\dd_{\uu}(w) =\dd_{\uu}(pw)$.
\end{proof}
As a consequence of the last lemma, to describe the derived words to all factors of $\uu$ we can restrict our study to factors $w$ such that $w$ is either a right special prefix of $\uu$ or $w$ is a bispecial factor of $\uu$ but not a prefix of $\uu$.
The next proposition is borrowed from our previous article, where we investigated derived words to prefixes of Sturmian words.
\begin{prop}[\cite{KlMePeSt18}]\label{prop:der_of_preimage_fi_b}
Let $\uu$ and $\uu'$ be Sturmian words such that $\uu = \varphi_{b}(\uu')$ and let $w'$ be a non-empty right special prefix of $\uu'$.
We have $d_{\uu'}(w') = d_{\uu}(w)$ with $w = \varphi_{b}(w')0$.
\end{prop}
\begin{coro}\label{jinak} Let $\ww$ be a Sturmian word and $k\in \mathbb{N}$.
\begin{enumerate}[(1)]
\item \label{Claim1}
Denote $\uu= \varphi^k_b(\ww)$.
The word $0^k$ is a bispecial prefix of $\uu$ and $\dd_\uu(0^k) = \ww$.
\item \label{Claim2}
If $1\ww$ is a Sturmian word, then $\varphi^k_a(1\ww) =1\varphi^k_b(\ww)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{coro}
\begin{proof}
\Cref{Claim1}: The proof is done by induction on $k$.
If $k=0$, then the empty word is right special factor of $\uu=\ww$ and the derived word with respect to the empty word is the word $\ww$ itself.
Now $k>1$. First, write the explicit form of the morphism $\varphi_b^k: 0\mapsto 0\text{ and } 1\mapsto 0^k1$. Therefore, in the word $\uu$ two neighbouring occurrences of the letter 1 are separated either by the block $0^k$ or $0^{k+1}$. It means that $0^k$ is a bispecial factor of $\uu$. Let us assume that $ \uu' = \varphi^{k-1}_b(\ww)$ has a right special prefix $0^{k-1}$ and $\dd_{\uu'}(0^{k-1}) = \ww$. Clearly, $0^k = \varphi_b(0^{k-1})0$ is a right special prefix of $\uu=\varphi_b(\uu') = \varphi^k_b(\ww)$.
By Proposition \ref{prop:der_of_preimage_fi_b},
$\dd_{\uu}(0^{k})= \dd_{\uu'}(0^{k-1}) = \ww$.
\Cref{Claim2}: We proceed by induction on $k$. The case $k=0$ is trivial. If $k>0$,
we use the fact that the morphisms $\varphi_a$ and $\varphi_b$ are conjugate, in particular
$ 0\varphi_a(x) = \varphi_b(x)0 \ \text{ for every }\ x \in \{0,1\}^*$.
It implies $ 0\varphi_a({\bf x}) = \varphi_b({\bf x})$ for every ${\bf x} \in \{0,1\}^\mathbb{N}$.
Applying this property to the word $1\ww$ and using the induction hypothesis, we obtain
$\varphi^k_a(1\ww) = \varphi_a\bigl(\varphi^{k-1}_a(1\ww)\bigr) = \varphi_a\bigl(1 \varphi_b^{k-1}(\ww) \bigr) = \varphi_a(1)\bigl(\varphi_b^{k-1}(\ww) \bigr) = 10 \varphi_a\bigl(\varphi_b^{k-1}(\ww) \bigr) = 1 \varphi_b\bigl(\varphi_b^{k-1}(\ww) \bigr) =1\varphi_b^{k}(\ww)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{image}
Let $\uu$ be a Sturmian word with parameters $\ell_0$, $\ell_1$ and $\rho$.
The Sturmian word
\begin{itemize}
\item $\varphi_b(\uu)$ has parameters $\ell_0+\ell_1$, $\ell_1$ and $\rho $;
\item $\varphi_a(\uu)$ has parameters $\ell_0+\ell_1$, $\ell_1$ and $\rho +\ell_1$;
\item $\varphi_\beta(\uu)$ has parameters $\ell_0$, $\ell_0+\ell_1$ and $\rho +\ell_0$;
\item $\varphi_\alpha(\uu)$ has parameters $\ell_0$, $\ell_0+\ell_1$ and $\rho $.
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
\cite[Lemma 2.2.18]{BeSe_Lothaire} claims that $G= \varphi_b$ maps the lower Sturmian word $\ss_{\gamma,\delta}$ to the word
$\ss_{\frac{\gamma}{1+\gamma},\frac{\delta}{1+\gamma}}$. And analogously, the upper Sturmian word
$\ss'_{\gamma,\delta}$ is mapped by $G$ to to the upper Sturmian word
$\ss'_{\frac{\gamma}{1+\gamma},\frac{\delta}{1+\gamma}}$.
Thus, using our notation, a Sturmian word with the triplet of parameters
$\frac{1}{\ell_0 + \ell_1} \left (\ell_0, \ell_1,\rho \right ) = (1-\gamma,
\gamma, \delta)$ is mapped by $\varphi_b$ to a Sturmian word with the triplet of parameters
$$ (\ell_0^{new}, \ell_1^{new} ,\rho^{new})=c(1- \tfrac{\gamma}{1+\gamma}, \tfrac{\gamma}{1+\gamma}, \tfrac{\delta}{1+\gamma}),$$ where $c$ is an arbitrary positive constant.
If we choose $c ={1+\gamma}$, we obtain the triplet
$$ \ell_0^{new}=1 =\ell_0+\ell_1, \quad \ell_1^{new}=\gamma =\ell_1 \quad \text{and} \quad \rho^{new}=\delta = \rho.$$
Proof of the remaining part of the lemma is analogous.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{interceptzustava}
Let the two word $u= u_1u_2\cdots u_n\in \{a,b,\alpha, \beta\}^*$ and $v= v_1v_2\cdots v_n\in \{a,b,\alpha, \beta\}^*$ satisfy for each $k=1,2,\ldots,n$\ :
\begin{equation}\label{podobne}
\text {if } v_k \in \{a,b\} \text{, then } u_k\in \{a,b\} \quad \quad \text{ and } \quad \quad \text{if } v_k \in \{\alpha,\beta\} \text{, then } u_k\in \{\alpha,\beta\}.
\end{equation}
If $\uu$ and $\vv$ are Sturmian words with the same slope, then the slopes of $\varphi_u(\uu)$ and $\varphi _v(\vv)$ are equal.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} By \Cref{image}, both morphisms $\varphi_b$ and $\varphi_a$ change the original slope
$\tfrac{\ell_1}{\ell_0+\ell_1}$ to the same new slope $\tfrac{\ell_1}{\ell_0+2\ell_1}$. And analogously, both morphisms $\varphi_\beta$ and $\varphi_\alpha$ change the original slope
$\tfrac{\ell_1}{\ell_0+\ell_1}$ to the same new slope $\tfrac{\ell_1}{2\ell_0+\ell_1}$.
\end{proof}
\section{Sturmian morphisms non-closeable under derivation} \label{sec:nonderiv}
The following example shows that not every Sturmian morphism is closeable under derivation.
\begin{example}
Consider a Sturmian morphism $\Psi = \varphi_{ab\beta}$.
We have
\[
\Psi: \begin{cases}
0 \mapsto 100,\\
1 \mapsto 10010.
\end{cases}
\]
Let $\uu$ be its fixed point:
\[
\uu = 1001010010010010100 \dots .
\]
We claim that $\uu$ is a Sturmian word with parameters $\vec{x} = \left( \sqrt{3}-1, 2-\sqrt{3}, \frac{3-\sqrt{3}}{2} \right) $.
Let $\vv$ be the lower Sturmian word with parameters $\vec{x}$.
By \Cref{image},
\begin{itemize}
\item $\varphi_{\beta}(\vv)$ has parameters $\left( \sqrt{3}-1, 1, \frac{1+\sqrt{3}}{2} \right) $,
\item $\varphi_{b\beta}(\vv)$ has parameters $\left( \sqrt{3}, 1, \frac{1+\sqrt{3}}{2} \right) $,
\item $\varphi_{ab\beta}(\vv)$ has parameters $\left( \sqrt{3}+1, 1, \frac{3+\sqrt{3}}{2} \right) = \frac{1}{2-\sqrt{3}} \vec{x}$.
\end{itemize}
Thus, $\vv$ is fixed by $\Psi$, and so $\uu = \vv$.
Next, we show that the derived word with respect to $0 \in \L(\uu)$ is not fixed by any primitive substitution, which implies that $\Psi$ is not closeable under derivation.
The factor $0$ is not a prefix of $\uu$.
It is a prefix of $\sigma(\uu)$.
By~\Cref{shift}, the word $\sigma(\uu)$ has parameters $\left( \sqrt{3}-1, 2 - \sqrt{3}, \frac{7-3\sqrt{3}}{2} \right) $.
The return words to $0$ in $\uu$ (and $\sigma(\uu)$) are $r_0 = 0$ and $r_1 = 01$.
Thus, we may write
\[
\sigma(\uu) = r_0r_1r_1r_0r_1r_0r_1r_0r_1r_1r_0 \dots .
\]
Since $r_0 = \varphi_b(0)$ and $r_1 = \varphi(1)$, we obtain
\[
\sigma(\uu) = \varphi_b(\dd_\uu(0)).
\]
By \Cref{image}, the derived word $\dd_\uu(0)$ has parameters $\left( 2\sqrt{3}-3, 2-\sqrt{3},\frac{7-3\sqrt{3}}{2} \right) $.
In order to use \Cref{Yasutomi0}, we normalize the parameters to $\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}-1} \left( 2\sqrt{3}-3, 2-\sqrt{3},\frac{7-3\sqrt{3}}{2} \right) $.
Using the notation of \Cref{Yasutomi0}, we have $\gamma = \frac{2-\sqrt{3}}{\sqrt{3}-1} = \frac{\sqrt{3}-1}{2}$ and $\rho = \frac{7-3\sqrt{3}}{2(\sqrt{3}-1)} = \frac{2\sqrt{3}-1}{2}$.
Considering the algebraic conjugates $\overline{\gamma} = \frac{-\sqrt{3}-1}{2}$ and $\overline{\rho} = \frac{-2\sqrt{3}-1}{2}$, we notice
\[
\overline{\gamma} < 0 \quad \text{ and } \quad \overline{\rho} < \overline{\gamma}.
\]
Therefore, the third condition of \Cref{Yasutomi0} is not satisfied, and thus $\dd_\vv(0) = \dd_\uu(0)$ is not fixed by a primitive substitution.
\end{example}
In the general case, we prove later the following theorem on Sturmian substitutions that are not closeable under derivation.
\begin{thm}\label{neniReflex}
Let $\psi= \varphi_w$ be a Sturmian morphism such that $w \in \{a,b,\alpha,\beta\}^*$.
If at least three distinct letters from $ \{a,b,\alpha,\beta\}$ occur in $w$, then $\psi$ is not closeable under derivation.
\end{thm}
First we prepare several auxiliary statements exploited in the proof of the above theorem.
\begin{lem}\label{vRovinePulka1}
Let a Sturmian word $\uu$ with parameters $(\ell_0, \ell_1,\rho)$ be fixed by a primitive morphism $\varphi_w$.
\begin{enumerate}[(1)]
\item If $w \in \{ b,\beta\}^*$, then $\rho = \ell_1$; \label{it:vRovinePulka1}
\item If $w \in \{ b,\alpha\}^*$, then $\rho = 0$; \label{it:vRovinePulka2}
\item If $w \in \{ a,\beta\}^*$, then $\rho =\ell_0+\ell_1 $; \label{it:vRovinePulka3}
\item If $w \in \{ a,\alpha\}^*$, then $\rho = \ell_0$. \label{it:vRovinePulka4}
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We define four planes
\[
\begin{aligned}
P_1 &= \left \{(x,y,z) \in \R^3 \colon z=y \right\}, & \quad P_2 &= \left \{(x,y,z) \in \R^3 \colon z=0 \right\}, \\
P_3 &= \left \{(x,y,z) \in \R^3 \colon z=x+y \right\}, & \text{ and } \quad P_4 &= \left \{(x,y,z) \in \R^3 \colon z=x \right\}.
\end{aligned}
\]
Applying \Cref{image}, it is straightforward to verify that if the triplet of parameters $(\ell_0, \ell_1,\rho)$ of
a Sturmian word $\vv $ belongs
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item to $P_1$, then the parameters of $\varphi_b(\vv)$ and the parameters of $\varphi_\beta(\vv)$ belong to $P_1$;
\item to $P_2$, then the parameters of $\varphi_b(\vv)$ and the parameters of $\varphi_\alpha(\vv)$ belong to $P_2$;
\item to $P_3$, then the parameters of $\varphi_a(\vv)$ and the parameters of $\varphi_\beta(\vv)$ belong to $P_3$;
\item to $P_4$, then the parameters of $\varphi_a(\vv)$ and the parameters of $\varphi_\alpha(\vv)$ belong to $P_4$.
\end{enumerate}
Let us start with \Cref{it:vRovinePulka4} and assume that $\uu$ is fixed by a morphism $\varphi_w$ with $w \in \{ a,\alpha\}^*$.
Since the word $\varphi_w(0)$ has a prefix $0$ and $\varphi_w(1)$ has a prefix $1$, the morphism $ \varphi_w$ has two fixed points. Denote $\uu^{(1)}$ the lower Sturmian word coding the two interval exchange with the domain $[0, \ell_0+\ell_1)$ and the initial point $\rho =\ell_0 \in I_1=[\ell_0, \ell_0+\ell_1)$.
Let $\uu^{(0)}$ denote the upper Sturmian word coding two interval exchange with the domain $(0, \ell_0+\ell_1]$ and the initial point $\rho =\ell_0 \in I_0$.
It means that $\uu$, $\uu^{(0)}$ and $\uu^{(1)}$ have the same slope $\gamma = \tfrac{\ell_1}{\ell_0+\ell_1}$.
The word $\uu$ is fixed by $\varphi_w$ and thus the slopes $\varphi(\uu)$ and $\uu$ are the same, namely $\gamma$.
By \Cref{interceptzustava}, the slope of $\varphi_w(\uu^{(0)})$ and $\varphi_w(\uu^{(1)})$ is $\gamma$ as well.
Moreover, parameters of $\uu^{(0)}$ and $\uu^{(1)}$ belong to the plane $P_4$, which is preserved under the action of $\varphi_w$.
It follows that $\uu^{(0)}$ and $\uu^{(1)}$ are the two fixed points of $\varphi_w$ and thus $\uu$ equals $\uu^{(0)}$ or $\uu^{(1)}$.
Both these words have the initial point $\rho=\ell_0$.
\medskip
The proof of Items \ref{it:vRovinePulka1}--\ref{it:vRovinePulka3} is analogous. The only difference is that the morphism $\varphi_w$ has only one fixed point.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{vRovinePulka2} Let $\theta$ be a quadratic irrational such that $0<\theta <1$, $\overline{\theta}<0$ and let $\rho \in \mathbb{R}$, $0\leq \rho \leq 1+\theta$.
Let $\uu$ be a Sturmian word with parameters $\ell_0 = 1, \ell_1 =\theta$ and $\rho$, or with parameters $\ell_0=\theta, \ell_1= 1$ and $\rho$.
\begin{enumerate}[(1)]
\item If $\rho = \ell_1$, then $\uu$ is fixed by a primitive morphism $\varphi_w$ with $w \in \{ b,\beta\}^*$; \label{it:vRovine1}
\item If $\rho = 0$, then $\uu$ is fixed by a primitive morphism $\varphi_w$ with $w \in \{ b,\alpha\}^*$; \label{it:vRovine2}
\item If $\rho =\ell_0+\ell_1 $, then $\uu$ is fixed by a primitive morphism $\varphi_w$ with $w \in \{ a,\beta\}^*$; \label{it:vRovine3}
\item If $\rho = \ell_0$, then $\uu$ is fixed by a primitive morphism $\varphi_w$ with $w \in \{ a,\alpha\}^*$. \label{it:vRovine4}
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We assume without loss of generality that $\uu$ has parameters $\ell_0 = 1, \ell_1 =\theta$ and $\rho$. In particular, the slope of $\uu$ is $\gamma = \tfrac{\theta}{1+\theta}$.
The parameter $\theta$ and all four possible choices for the parameter $\rho$ from the set $\{\ell_1,0,\ell_0+\ell_1, \ell_0\} = \{ 1, \theta, 0, \theta+1\}$ satisfy the Yasutomi condition in \Cref{Yasutomi} and thus in all four cases $\uu$ is fixed by a primitive morphism.
\Cref{it:vRovine1}: If $\rho = \ell_1=\theta $, then $\uu$ is a standard Sturmian word. By \cite{Crisp}, it is fixed by a standard substitution, that is, by a substitution $\varphi_u$ with $u= u_1u_2\cdots u_n \in \{b, \beta\}^*$.
\Cref{it:vRovine2}:
We use the word $u= u_1u_2\cdots u_n \in \{b, \beta\}^*$ from the proof of \Cref{it:vRovine1} to define the word $v= v_1v_2\cdots v_n \in \{b, \alpha\}^*$.
We set $v_k= b$ if $u_k= b$, and $v_k= \alpha$ if $u_k= \beta$.
Let $\vv$ denote the fixed point of $\varphi_v$
By \Cref{interceptzustava}, the fixed point of $\varphi_v$ has the same slope as the fixed point of $\varphi_u$, namely $\gamma = \tfrac{\theta}{1+\theta}$.
By \Cref{vRovinePulka1}, the third parameter of $\vv$ is $0$.
It means that $\vv$ has parameters $(\ell_0, \ell_1, 0)$ and coincides with $\uu$.
Consequently, the word $\uu$ is fixed by $\varphi_v$ with $v\in \{b, \alpha\}^*$.
The proof of the remaining two parts is analogous.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem} \label{neniFixed}
Let $\vv$ be a Sturmian word fixed by a primitive substitution $\psi = \varphi_{w}$, where $w =\beta e b a^k$ for some $e\in \{a,b,\alpha,\beta\}^*$ and $k\geq 0$.
No primitive substitution fixes the Sturmian word $\sigma(\vv)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
As $w$ starts with $\beta$, the letter $1$ is the more frequent letter in $\vv$ and $1$ is the starting letter of $\vv$.
Thus, $\vv$ is coding of the interval exchange with parameters $\ell_0=\theta \in (0,1)$, $\ell_1 = 1$ and $\rho$ satisfying $\theta \leq \rho \leq 1+\theta$.
The word $\vv$ can be written in the form $1\vv'$, where $\vv' = \sigma(\vv)$.
By \Cref{shift}, the word $\vv'$ has parameters $\ell_0'=\theta$, $\ell_1' = 1$ and $\rho'=\rho-\theta$.
We prove by contradiction that no substitution fixes $\vv'$.
Let us assume that $\vv'$ is fixed by a primitive substitution.
\Cref{Yasutomi} gives
\begin{equation} \label{nerovnosti}
\overline{\theta}\leq \overline{ \rho} - \overline{\theta}\leq 1\quad \text{and} \quad \overline{\theta} < 0.
\end{equation}
Put $w^{(1)} = \beta e$ and $w^{(2)} = ba^k$ and denote $\psi_1=\varphi_{w^{(1)}}$ and $\psi_2=\varphi_{w^{(2)}}$.
Clearly, $\psi = \psi_1\circ\psi_2$ and
\[
\vv = \psi_1\left(\psi_2(\vv)\right) \ \ \Longrightarrow \ \ \psi_2(\vv) = \psi_2\psi_1\left(\psi_2(\vv)\right).
\]
Thus the word $\vv''=\psi_2(\vv)$ is fixed by the primitive substitution $\psi_2\circ\psi_1$.
By \Cref{image}, the word $\vv'' $ has parameters $ 1+k +\theta, 1, k+\rho$, which we normalize to
$\ell_0'' =1, \ell_1'' = \tfrac{1}{1+k +\theta}$ and $ \rho'' =\tfrac{ k+\rho}{1+k +\theta}$.
These parameters satisfy the condition given by \Cref{Yasutomi}, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{nerovnosti2}
\frac{1}{1+k +\overline{\theta}}<0
\quad \text{ and } \quad \frac{1}{1+k +\overline{\theta}} \leq \frac{ k+\overline{\rho}}{1+k +\overline{\theta}} \leq 1.
\end{equation}
By \eqref{nerovnosti2} and \eqref{nerovnosti} we obtain $\overline{\rho} \leq \overline{\theta} +1$ and $\overline{\rho} \geq \overline{\theta} +1$, respectively.
It means that $\rho = 1+\theta = \ell_0+\ell_1$.
By \Cref{it:vRovine3} of \Cref{vRovinePulka2}, the word $\vv$ is fixed by a substitution $\varphi_u$ with $u \in \{\beta, a\}^*$.
Since such word $u$ cannot be rewritten using \eqref{eq:relations}, by \Cref{thm:relations} the substitution $\varphi_u$ and every its power are elements of $\langle \varphi_\beta, \varphi_a \rangle$.
Similarly by \Cref{thm:relations} we obtain $\varphi_w^k \not \in \langle \varphi_\beta, \varphi_a \rangle$ for all $k \in \N$.
Since every Sturmian word is rigid (see \cite{RiSe12}), we obtain a contradiction as the Sturmian word $\vv$ cannot be fixed by both $\varphi_u$ and $\varphi_w$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of \Cref{neniReflex}]
Let ${\bf w}$ be a fixed point of $\psi = \varphi_w$.
By \Cref{thm:main_result_vetsina}, the derived word to any prefix of ${\bf w}$ is fixed by a substitution $\Delta^i(w)$ for some $i$.
By \Cref{vsechny4} there exists $i_0\in \mathbb{N}$ such that for each $i>i_0$, both letters $b$ and $\beta$ occur in $\Delta^i(w)$ and $\Delta(\Delta^i(w)) = {\rm cyc}_j(\Delta^i(w))$ for some $j$. By the same remark, at least one of the letters from $\{a,\alpha\}$ occurs in $\Delta^i(w)$.
Therefore, there exists $i>i_0$ such that
$$\text{for some } \ e \in\{a,b,\alpha,\beta\}^* \ \text{and} \ k\in \mathbb{N}, k\geq 1 ,\ \ \text{ either }
\Delta^i(w) = a^k\beta e b \ \text{ or } \ \Delta^i(w) = \alpha^kb e \beta.$$
We first treat the case $ \Delta^i(w) = a^k\beta e b $.
Let $\uu$ denote the fixed point of $\varphi_{\Delta^i(w)}$.
It follows that $ \uu$ has an S-adic representation $(a^k\beta e b)^\omega$.
Let $\vv$ denote the Sturmian word with the S-adic representation $(\beta e ba^k)^\omega$.
The word $\vv$ begins with the letter $1$ and thus $\vv=1 \vv'$ for some Sturmian word $\vv'$.
Moreover,
\[
\uu= \varphi_a^k(\vv) = \varphi_a^k(1\vv').
\]
By Corollary \ref{jinak} \Cref{Claim2}, $\uu = 1\varphi_b^k(\vv')$.
By Corollary \ref{jinak} \Cref{Claim1}, $0^k$ is a factor of $\uu$ and $\dd_\uu(0^k) = \vv' = \sigma(\vv)$.
\Cref{neniFixed} implies that $\vv'$ is not fixed by any primitive substitution.
\medskip
To sum up:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\uu$ is a derived word to a prefix of the fixed point $\ww$ of the substitution $\psi$;
\item $0^k$ is a factor of $\uu$ and the derived word of $\dd_\uu(0^k) $ is not fixed by any primitive substitution.
\end{itemize}
It implies that the fixed point $\ww$ of the primitive substitution $\psi$ is not closeable under derivation.
The second case $\Delta^i(w) = \alpha^kb e \beta$ follows easily from the first case by exchanging the letters $0$ and $1$.
\end{proof}
\section{closeable under derivation Sturmian substitutions} \label{sec:deriv}
The aim of this section is to prove the following theorem.
\begin{thm} \label{jeReflex}
If $\psi= \varphi_w$ is a primitive Sturmian substitution such that $w \in \{b,
\beta\}^*\cup\{b,
\alpha\}^*\cup\{a,
\beta\}^*\cup\{a,
\alpha\}^*$,
then $\psi$ is closeable under derivation.
\end{thm}
The proof will be split into four cases according to the couple of letters which appear in the name $w$ determining the substitution $\varphi_w$.
To abbreviate the notation we set
\[
C(w) = \{\varphi_{v} \colon v={\rm cyc}^k(w), k \in \mathbb{N} \} \quad \text{ for } w \in \{a,b,\alpha, \beta\}^*.
\]
\subsection{Case \texorpdfstring{$w \in \{b,\beta\}^*$}{w in {b,beta}*}} \label{standard}
The substitution $\varphi_w$ is composed from the standard Sturmian substitutions $\varphi_\beta$ and $\varphi_b$.
Therefore, the fixed point $\uu$ of $\varphi_w$ is a standard Sturmian word.
Any bispecial factor of a standard Sturmian word is one of its prefixes.
Thus by \Cref{prolong} the derived word to an arbitrary factor of $\uu$ coincides with the derived word to a prefix of $\uu$.
\Cref{thm:main_result_vetsina} implies that the derived word to a prefix of $\uu$ is fixed by a substitution $\varphi_v$ with $v={\rm cyc}^k(w)$ for some $k$, i.e., $\varphi_v \in C(w)$.
Clearly, $v$ belongs to $\{b,\beta\}^*$ and thus $\varphi_v$ is again a standard Sturmian substitution.
Thus, we may repeat this argument, and we can conclude the following.
\begin{claim}\label{betab}
For any $w \in \{b,\beta\}^*$, the set $C(w)$ is closed under derivation.
\end{claim}
Discussion of the other cases uses a consequence of \Cref{vRovinePulka1,vRovinePulka2}.
Recall that the shift operator $\sigma$ erases the starting letter of an infinite word, i.e., maps the word $\uu = u_0u_1u_2 \dots$ to the word $\sigma(\uu) = u_1u_2u_3 \dots$.
To abbreviate the notation we define two projections $H$ and $F$: $\{a,b,\alpha,\beta\}^* \to \{a,b, \alpha,\beta\}^*$ by
\[
H(a)=H(b)=b, H(\alpha)= \alpha, H(\beta) = \beta \quad \text{ and } \quad F(a)=a, F(b)=b, F(\alpha)= F(\beta) = \beta.
\]
\begin{lem}\label{Shift}
Let $ \uu$ be fixed by a substitution $\varphi_w$.
\begin{enumerate}[(1)]
\item If $w \in \{ a,\beta\}^*$, then $\sigma(\uu)$ is a standard Sturmian word which is fixed by the substitution $\varphi_{H(w)}$. \label{it:Shift1}
\item If $w \in \{ b,\alpha\}^*$, then $\sigma(\uu)$ is a standard Sturmian word which is fixed by the substitution $\varphi_{F(w)}$. \label{it:Shift2}
\item If $w \in \{ a,\alpha\}^*$ and $\uu$ has a prefix $1$, then $\sigma(\uu)$ is fixed by the substitution $\varphi_{H(w)}$. \label{it:Shift3}
\item If $w \in \{ a,\alpha\}^*$ and $\uu$ has a prefix $0$, then $\sigma(\uu)$ is fixed by the substitution $\varphi_{F(w)}$. \label{it:Shift4}
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $(\ell_0, \ell_1, \rho)$ be the parameters of $\uu$.
\Cref{it:Shift1}: By \Cref{vRovinePulka1}, $\uu$ has parameters $\ell_0, \ell_1, \rho= \ell_0 +\ell_1$.
In particular, $\uu$ is an upper Sturmian word.
By \Cref{shift}, $\sigma(\uu)$ has parameters $\ell_0, \ell_1, \rho= \ell_1$, i.e., $\sigma(\uu)$ is a standard Sturmian word.
Clearly, the slopes of $\sigma(\uu)$ and $\uu$ coincide.
Using \Cref{interceptzustava,vRovinePulka2}, the word $\sigma(\uu)$ is fixed by the substitution $\varphi_{H(w)}$.
\Cref{it:Shift2}: Analogous to the proof of \Cref{it:Shift1}.
\Cref{it:Shift3}: The substitution $\varphi_w$ has two fixed points, one starting with the letter $0$ and one starting with the letter $1$.
By \Cref{vRovinePulka1}, both fixed points represent a coding of a two interval exchange transformation $T$ with parameter $\rho$ satisfying $\rho = \ell_0$.
If $\uu$ starts with $1$, then $\uu$ is a coding of the transformation $T$ with the domain $[0, \ell_0+\ell_1)$.
In this case, $T(\rho) = 0$ and by \Cref{vRovinePulka2} the word $ \sigma(\uu)$ is fixed by the substitution $\varphi_{H(w)}$.
\Cref{it:Shift4}: Analogous to the proof of \Cref{it:Shift3}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{ Case \texorpdfstring{$w\in \{b,\alpha\}^*$}{w in {b,alpha}*}}
Theorem \ref{thm:main_result_vetsina} implies that a derived word to a prefix of $\uu$ is fixed by one of the substitutions from $C(w)$.
Using \Cref{prolong}, we can focus on derived words to bispecial non-prefixes of $\uu$.
By \Cref{Shift}, the word $\sigma(\uu)$ is a standard Sturmian word and thus any bispecial factor $v$ of $\uu$ occurs as a prefix of $\sigma(\uu)$.
Therefore, $\dd_{\uu}(v) =\dd_{\sigma(\uu)}(v)$.
By \Cref{Shift}, the word $\sigma(\uu)$ is fixed by the standard substitution $\varphi_{F(w)}$, i.e., $F(w) \in \{b, \beta\}^*$.
Using \Cref{betab} we conclude the following.
\begin{claim}\label{alphab}
For any $w \in \{b, \alpha\}^*$, the set $C(w) \cup C\bigl(F(w)\bigr)$ is closed under derivation.
\end{claim}
\subsection{Case \texorpdfstring{$w\in \{a, \beta\}^*$}{w in {a,beta}*}}
This case is analogous to the previous one. Indeed,
the words $\uu$ and $E(\uu)$ have the same (up to the permutation of letters) set of derived words.
Since $\uu$ is fixed by $\varphi_w$, the word $E(\uu)$ is fixed by $E\varphi_w E$.
As $\varphi_a = E\varphi_\alpha E$ and $\varphi_b = E\varphi_\beta E$, the substitutions $E\varphi_w E = \varphi_{v}$, where $v \in \{b,
\alpha\}^*$.
\begin{claim}\label{abeta}
For any $w \in \{a, \beta\}^*$, the set $C(w) \cup C\bigl(H(w)\bigr)$ is closed under derivation.
\end{claim}
\subsection{ Case \texorpdfstring{$w\in \{a,\alpha\}^*$}{w in {a,alpha}*}}
The substitution $\varphi_w$ has two fixed points.
The derived words to prefixes of the fixed points of $\varphi_w$ are described in \cite{KlMePeSt18}:
\begin{prop}[\cite{KlMePeSt18}] \label{lem:revers_of_standard}
Let $a$ be the first letter of the word $w \in\{a,\alpha\}^*$.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item \label{it:reverse:1} Let $\uu$ be the fixed point of $\varphi_w$ starting with $0$ and $p$ be a non-empty prefix of $\uu$.
Denote $v =b^{-1}N(wb)\in \{a,\beta\}^*$.
The derived word ${\bf d_{\bf u}}(p)$ equals a derived word ${\bf d_{\bf v}}(q)$, where
${\bf v }$ is the unique fixed point of the substitution $\varphi_v$ and $q$ is a prefix of $\vv$.
\item \label{it:reverse:2} Let $\uu$ be the fixed point of $\varphi_w$ starting with $1$ and $p$ be a non-empty prefix of $\uu$.
Put $v ={\rm cyc} (w)$.
The word ${\bf d_{\bf u}}(p)$ equals a derived word ${\bf d_{\bf v}}(q)$, where
${\bf v }$ is the fixed point of the substitution $\varphi_v$ starting with $1$ and $q$ is a prefix of $\vv$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
An analogous proposition can be stated if $\alpha$ is the first letter of $w \in\{a,\alpha\}^*$.
In this case, the roles of the letters $0$ and $1$ in \Cref{it:reverse:1,it:reverse:2} are then interchanged.
In particular, the word $v$ in \Cref{it:reverse:1} is defined by $v = \beta^{-1}N(w\beta)\in \{b,\alpha\}^*$.
Nevertheless, in the following example we show that in both cases the word $v$ belongs either to $\{ {\rm cyc}^k(F(w)) : k \in \mathbb{N}\}$ or to $
\{ {\rm cyc}^k(H(w)) : k \in \mathbb{N}\} $.
\begin{example}
Consider $w=a^4\alpha^2a^2\alpha a^3 \in \{a,\alpha\}^*$.
The starting letter of this word is $a$.
The word $v =b^{-1}N(wb)$ from \Cref{lem:revers_of_standard} satisfies $v= a^3\beta^2a^2\beta a^4$.
Therefore, we have $v = {\rm cyc}(F(w))$.
Consider $w= \alpha a^3\alpha^4a \in \{a,\alpha\}^* $.
It follows that $v=\beta^{-1}N(w\beta) = b^3\alpha^4b$, and thus $v = {\rm cyc}(H(w))$.
\end{example}
\Cref{lem:revers_of_standard} has the following direct corollary.
\begin{coro}\label{proprefix}
Let $\uu$ be a fixed point of $\varphi_w$ with $w \in \{a,\alpha\}^*$ and $p\neq \varepsilon$ be a prefix of $\uu$.
The word ${\bf d_{\bf u}}(p)$ is fixed by a substitution from $C(F(w)) \cup C(H(w))$.
\end{coro}
\begin{claim}\label{alphaa} For any $w \in \{a,
\alpha\}^*$, the set $C(w) \cup C\bigl(H(w)\bigr)\cup C\bigl(F(w)\bigr) \cup C\bigl(HF(w)\bigr) $ is closed under derivation.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
We deduce a stronger statement, namely that the set $M:= \{\varphi_w\}\cup C\bigl(H(w)\bigr)\cup C\bigl(F(w)\bigr) \cup C\bigl(HF(w)\bigr) $ is closed under derivation.
First, we realize that $H(w) \in \{b,
\alpha\}^*$, $F(w) \in \{a,
\beta\}^*$ and $HF(w) \in\{b,
\beta\}^*$.
By virtue of \Cref{betab,alphab,abeta}, the set $N:=M\bigl(H(w)\bigr)\cup C\bigl(F(w)\bigr) \cup C\bigl(HF(w)\bigr) $ is closed under derivation.
To demonstrate that $M= \{\varphi_w\} \cup N$ is closed under derivation, we only need to show that the
derived word to any factor $v$ of any fixed point $\uu$ of $\varphi_w$ is fixed by a morphism from $M$.
Indeed:
\begin{enumerate}[a)]
\item if $v = \varepsilon$, then ${\bf d_{\bf u}}(\varepsilon) = \uu$ and thus ${\bf d_{\bf u}}(\varepsilon)$ is fixed by $\varphi_w \in M$;
\item if $v $ is a non-empty prefix of $\uu$, then by \Cref{proprefix} ${\bf d_{\bf u}}(v) $ is fixed by a substitution from $N\subset M$;
\item if $v $ is a non-prefix factor of $\uu$, then $v$ is a factor of $\sigma(\uu)$ and $\dd_{\uu}(v) =\dd_{\sigma(\uu)}(v)$. By \Cref{it:Shift3,it:Shift4} of \Cref{Shift}, the word $\sigma(\uu)$ is fixed by a substitution from $N$. Since $N$ is closed under derivation, ${\bf d_{\bf u}}(v) $ is fixed by a substitution from $N\subset M$. \qedhere
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
The following theorem is a direct consequence of \Cref{vRovinePulka1,neniFixed} and \Cref{neniReflex}.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:last}
Let $\uu$ code the two interval exchange transformation with parameters $\ell_0 =1- \gamma, \ell_1 = \gamma, \rho = \delta$, where $\gamma, \delta \in [0,1]$ and $\gamma$ irrational.
If $\uu$ is fixed by a primitive substitution $\varphi$, then $\varphi$ is closeable under derivation if and only if $\delta \in \{0,\gamma, 1-\gamma, 1\}$.
\end{theorem}
\section{Comments}
We presented examples of finite sets $M$ of Sturmian substitutions that are closed under derivation.
We used two tools: $S$-adic representation of Sturmian words and algebraic characterization of Sturmian words that are fixed by a primitive substitution.
Probably the most explored class of words generalizing Sturmian words is the class of ternary Arnoux--Rauzy words.
Therefore, it is natural to generalize our results to this class, more specifically, to the substitutions fixing ternary Arnoux--Rauzy words.
However, there is no analogue of the Yasutomi's characterization of fixed points in this class.
Another well studied class that generalizes Sturmian words are words coding $k$-interval exchange transformations.
In the case $k=3$ and the permutation of interval exchange being $(321)$, an analogue to Yasutomi's conditions is provided in \cite{BaMaPe2008}.
Our example of sets $M$ which are closed under derivation are composed of Sturmian substitutions and thus all elements of $M$ act on the same alphabet.
The same property would hold for substitutions fixing ($k$-ary) Arnoux--Rauzy words and for substitutions fixing three interval exchange with the permutation $(321)$.
However, there exists an example of a set $M$ closed under derivation which contains substitutions acting on a binary alphabet and substitutions acting on a ternary alphabet such that no proper subset of $M$ is closed under derivation.
This example is given in~\cite{KoSta19} and the set $M$ contains substitutions fixing derived words to non-empty factors of the period doubling sequence.
Recall that the period doubling sequence is fixed by the substitution $a \mapsto ab, b\mapsto aa$.
The derived words of the period doubling sequence were described in~\cite{HuangWen17}.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
Edita Pelantová acknowledges financial support by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic, project no. CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16\_019/0000778.
Štěpán Starosta acknowledges the support of the OP VVV MEYS funded project
CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16\_019/0000765.
The authors are also grateful for the hospitality of Erwin Schr\"odinger International Institute for Mathematics and Physics, where a part of the work was done.
\bibliographystyle{siam}
|
\section{The \logicname{FO(ID)} specification of the delegation revocation framework}
\begin{lstlisting}
{ chain(t,SOA,TT).
chain(t,p1,a1) <- ?p2: chain(t,p2,a) &
pos_perm(t,p2,p1,a1) &
R(a,a1).
chain(t,p,a) <- chain(t,p,a1) &
Stronger(a1,a). }
{ active_chain(t,SOA,TT).
active_chain(t,p1,a1) <- ?p2: active_chain(t,p2,a) &
pos_perm(t,p2,p1,a1) &
R(a,a1) &
~inactive(t,p2,p1,a1).
active_chain(t,p,a) <- active_chain(t,p,a1) &
Stronger(a1,a). }
{ can_grant(t,i,a) <- ?a1: chain(t,i,a1) &
R(a1,a). }
{ can_actively_grant(t,i,a) <- ?a1: active_chain(t,i,a1) &
R(a1,a). }
{ ind(t,SOA,p,a) <- SOA ~= p.
ind(t,p1,p2,a) <- p1 ~= p2 &
?p: ind(t,p,p2,a1) &
pos_perm(t,p,p1,a) &
(a=TT | a=TF) &
R(a1,a). }
{ access_right(t,p) <- active_chain(t,p,a).
access_right(t,p) <- ?p1:can_actively_grant(t,p1,a) &
pos_perm(t,p1,p,a) &
~inactive(t,p1,p,a). }
//Here we define which authorizations to delete under the different delete revocation schemes
{ delete(Next(t),i,j,a)<- pos_perm(t,i,j,a) &
action(t,s,i,j) &
(s=WLD | s=SLD | s=WGD | s=SGD).
//Define deletion via rooted delegation chains:
delete(Next(t),j,k,a)<-pos_perm(t,j,k,a) &
~ can_grant(Next(t),j,a).//We don't use can_actively_grant here, because even an inactive delegation chain can prevent deletion
//Extra deletion rule for Strong Local Delete scheme:
delete(Next(t),k,j,a)<-action(t,SLD,i,j) &
pos_perm(t,k,j,a) &
~ ?a1: (ind(t,k,i,a1)& R(a1,a)).
//Extra deletion rule for Strong Global Delete scheme:
delete(Next(t),z,w,a)<-action(t,SGD,i,j) &
delete(Next(t),p,w,a1) &
pos_perm(t,z,w,a) &
~ ?a2: (ind(t,z,i,a2)& R(a2,a)). }
{ // A delegation scheme leads to a new positive authorization if the principal performing it has the right to grant such an authorization:
new(Next(t),i,j,a) <- ? ds:(ds=grantTT | ds=grantTF | ds=grantFT | ds=grantFF) &
action(t,ds,i,j) &
// The following three conditions ensure that when i cannot grant permission a, the strongest permission that i can grant and that is still weaker than a will actually be granted:
Relation(a,ds)&
can_actively_grant(t,i,a) &
~ ? a1: (can_actively_grant(t,i,a1) & Relation(a1,ds) & Stronger(a1,a)).
// In local revocation schemes, if an authorization from i to z is revoked and an authorization from z to another node k is getting deleted, there should be a new authorization from i to k.
new(Next(t),i,k,a) <- ?j s:(s=WLD | s=SLD | s=WLN | s=SLN) &
action(t,s,i,j) &
//check that there was an active authorization from z to k authorization was active:
(? z: pos_perm(t,z,k,a) & can_actively_grant(t,z,a)) &
//and that the authorization is is about to be deleted or inactivated:
~(? z: pos_perm(t,z,k,a) & can_actively_grant(Next(t),z,a)).
// An authorization from j to k that gets deleted because j loses her right to grant it gets replaced by the strongest authorization that j can grant and that is weaker than the deleted authorization.
new(Next(t),j,k,a1) <- pos_perm(t,j,k,a) &
~can_grant(Next(t),j,a) &
can_grant(Next(t),j,a1) &
Stronger(a,a1) &
// a1 is the strongest possible authorization that j can grant:
~ ? a2: (can_grant(Next(t),j,a2) & Stronger(a,a2) & Stronger(a2,a1)).
// The same as above but for inactivation rather than deletion of the authorization from j to k:
new(Next(t),j,k,a1) <- ?i RS:(RS=WLN | RS=WGN) &
action(t,RS,i,j) &
pos_perm(t,j,k,a) &
can_actively_grant(Next(t),j,a) &
can_actively_grant(Next(t),j,a1) &
Stronger(a,a1) &
// a1 is the strongest possible authorization that j can grant.
~ ? a2: (can_actively_grant(Next(t),j,a2) & Stronger(a,a2) & Stronger(a2,a1)). }
// Here we define which links to inactivate under the different negative revocation schemes. The definitions are analogous to the definitions of the delete predicate for delete revocation schemes.
{ inactive(Next(t),i,j,a)<-action(t,s,i,j)&
pos_perm(Next(t),i,j,a) &
(s=WLN | s=SLN | s=WGN | s=SGN).
inactive(t,j,k,a)<-pos_perm(t,j,k,a) &
~ can_actively_grant(t,j,a).
inactive(Next(t),z,j,a)<-?i:action(t,rs,i,j) &
(rs=SLN | rs=SGN) &
pos_perm(t,z,j,a) &
~ ?a1: (ind(t,z,i,a1)& R(a1,a)).
inactive(Next(t),z,w,a)<-action(t,SGN,i,j) &
inactive(Next(t),p,w,a1) & ~inactive(t,p,w,a1)&
pos_perm(t,z,w,a) &
~ ?a2: (ind(t,z,i,a2)& R(a2,a)).
inactive(Next(t),i,j,a) <- inactive(t,i,j,a) &
pos_perm(Next(t),i,j,a). }
// When a negative revocation scheme is granted from i to j, a negative permission from i to j is created:
{ new_neg_perm(Next(t),i,j)<-action(t,RS,i,j)&
(RS = WLN | RS = SLN | RS=WGN | RS=SGN). }
{ pos_perm(Start,p1, p2,a)<-pos_perm_start(p1, p2,a).
pos_perm(Next(t), p1, p2,a)<-pos_perm(t, p1, p2,a) & ~delete(Next(t), p1, p2,a).
pos_perm(Next(t), p1, p2,a)<-new(Next(t), p1, p2,a). }
{ neg_perm(Start,p1,p2)<-neg_perm_start(p1,p2).//initiating neg-perm
neg_perm(Next(t),p1,p2)<-neg_perm(t,p1,p2).
neg_perm(Next(t),p1,p2)<-new_neg_perm(Next(t),p1,p2). }
{R(TT,TT). R(TF,TF). R(TT,TF). R(TT,FT). R(TF,FF).R(TT,FF).}
{Stronger(TT,TF).Stronger(TT,FT).Stronger(TT,FF). Stronger(TF,FF). Stronger(FT,FF). }
{ Relation(TT,grantTT). Relation(TF,grantTT). Relation(FT,grantTT). Relation(FF,grantTT). Relation(TF,grantTF). Relation(FF,grantTF). Relation(FT,grantFT). Relation(FF,grantFF). }
//At most one revocation scheme at every Time point.
?<2 s p1 p2: action(t,s,p1,p2).
\end{lstlisting}
\section{The delegation revocation framework}
\label{sec:rs}
In this section we present Hagstr\"om et al.'s \cite{Hagstrom} delegation revocation framework.
Let $P$ be the set of principals (users or processes) in the system, let $O$ be the set of objects for which authorizations can be stated, and let $A$ be the set of access types, i.e.\ of actions that principals may perform on objects. For every object $o \in O$, there is a \emph{source of authority} (\emph{SOA}), for example the owner of file $o$, which is a principal that has full power over object $o$ and is the ultimate authority with respect to accesses to object $o$. For any $a \in A$ and $o \in O$, the SOA of $o$ can grant the right to access $a$ on object $o$ to other principals in the system, and can also delegate the right to grant access and to grant this delegation right. Additionally, the framework allows for negative authorizations,
which can be used to block a principal's access or delegation rights without deleting any authorization.
We assume that all authorizations in the system are stored in an
authorization specification, and that every authorization is of the form
$(i,j,a,o,\langle\mathit{sign}\rangle,b^1,b^2)$, where $i,j \in P$, $a \in A$, $o \in O$,
$\langle\mathit{sign}\rangle$ is $+$ or $-$,
and $b^1$ and $b^2$ are booleans ($T$ or $F$). The meaning of this authorization is that principal $i$ is granting some permission concerning access type $a$ on object $o$ to principal $j$.
If $\langle\mathit{sign}\rangle$ is $+$, then the permission is a positive permission, else it is a negative permission.
If $b^1$ is $T$, the permission contains the right to delegate the permission further, i.e.\ to issue positive permissions. If $b^2$ is $T$, the permission contains the right to issue negative permissions.
Since it does not make sense to combine a negative permission with the right to delegate a positive or negative permission, $b^1$ and $b^2$ have to be both $F$ if $\langle\mathit{sign}\rangle$ is $-$.
\begin{table}
\label{fig:R}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|}
\hline
$(+,T,T)R(+,T,T)$\\
\hline
$(+,T,T)R(+,T,F)$\\
\hline
$(+,T,T)R(+,F,T)$\\
\hline
$(+,T,T)R(+,F,F)$\\
\hline
$(+,T,F)R(+,T,F)$\\
\hline
$(+,T,F)R(+,F,F)$\\
\hline
$(+,T,T)R(-,F,F)$\\
\hline
$(+,F,T)R(-,F,F)$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\captionof{table}{Definition of $R$}
\end{table}
Hagstr\"om et al.\ define a \emph{permission} to be a triple $(\langle\mathit{sign}\rangle, b^1,b^2)$, where $\langle\mathit{sign}\rangle$ is $+$ or $-$, and
$b^1$ and $b^2$ are booleans. They formalize the meaning of the two booleans $b^1$ and $b^2$ by defining a binary relation $R$ between permissions. $R$ is defined to hold precisely for those pairs of permissions shown in Table 1.\footnote{Note that in \cite{Hagstrom}, the definition of $R$ also includes the pair $(+,F,T)R(+,F,F)$ of permissions. The inclusion of this pair however contradicts the informal explanations that Hagst\"om et al.\ have given, so that we assume that it was included by mistake.} Informally $\pi R \rho$ means that a principal with permission $\pi$ can grant permission $\rho$ to other principals.
We say that a permission $\pi$ is \emph{stronger} than a permission $\rho$ iff the set of permissions that a principal with permission $\pi$ can grant is a strict superset of the set of permissions that a principal with permission $\rho$ can grant. So $(+,T,T)$ is stronger than any other permission, and all permissions other than $(+,F,F)$ and $(-,F,F)$ are stronger than both $(+,F,F)$ and $(-,F,F)$.\footnote{Note that Hagstr\"om et al.\ use the word ``stronger'' in a different sense, namely as a synonym for the relation $R$. This however is a rather misleading way to use the word ``stronger''. Hagstr\"om et al.\ do not define the notion that we call ``stronger'', but this notion is needed in order to formalize Hagstr\"om et al.'s system.}
Note that there is no interaction between the rights of principals concerning different access-object pairs $(a,o)$, so we can consider $a$ and $o$ to be fixed for the rest of the paper. For these two reasons, we simplify an authorization $(i,j,a,o,+,b^1,b^2)$ to $(i,j,+,b^1,b^2)$.
\subsection{Delegation chains and connectivity property}
\label{delegation}
In this subsection we focus on the part of the system that does not involve negative authorizations. In Subsection \ref{negative} we will introduce negative authorizations.
Hagstr\"om et al.\ use the notion of a principal $p$ \emph{having a permission} $\pi$ without formally defining it. The intended meaning of this can be formalized using the notion of a \emph{rooted delegation chain}:\footnote{The idea to formalize Hagstr\"om et al.'s notion of \emph{having a permission} in this way was first proposed by Aucher et al.\ \cite{Aucher}.}
\begin{definition}
A \emph{rooted delegation chain} for principal $i$ with respect to permission $\pi$ is a sequence $p_1,\dots,p_n$ of principals satisfying the following properties:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $p_1$ is the source of authority.
\item $p_n$ is $i$.
\item For every integer $k$ such that $1 \leq k < n$, an authorization $(p_k,p_{k+1},+,b^1_k,b^2_k)$ is in place.
\item For every integer $k$ such that $1 \leq k < n-1$, it holds that $(+,b^1_k,b^2_k) R (+,b^1_{k+1},b^2_{k+1})$.
\item $(+,b^1_{n-1},b^2_{n-1})$ is stronger or equal to $\pi$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
We say that a principal $p$ \emph{has permission} $\pi$ iff there is a rooted delegation chain for principal $p$ with respect to permission $\pi$.
\end{definition}
Hagstr\"om et al.'s framework allows an authorization of the form $(i,j,\langle\mathit{sign}\rangle,b^1,b^2)$ to be in the authorization specification only if $i$ has a permission that allows $i$ to grant this authorization. This is called the \emph{connectivity property}:
\vspace{4mm}
\noindent \textbf{Connectivity property:} \\
\textit{For every authorization $(i,j,\langle\mathit{sign}\rangle,b^1,b^2)$ in the authorization specification, $i$ has a permission $\rho$ with $\rho R (\langle\mathit{sign}\rangle,b^1,b^2)$.}
\vspace{4mm}
This property can be viewed as an invariant that any system based on Hagstr\"om et al.'s framework needs to satisfy.
We visualize an authorization specification by a labelled directed graph as in the following example:
\begin{figure}[H]
\center
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',auto,node distance=4cm and 4cm,
main node/.style={rectangle,rounded corners=5,draw}]
\node[main node] (A) at (0,1) {~A~~};
\node[main node] (B) at (2,1) {~B~~};
\node[main node] (C) at (4,1) {~C~~};
\node[main node] (D) at (4,0) {~D~~};
\node[main node] (E) at (6,0) {~E~~};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\tiny},pos=0.5, sloped]
(A) edge node [above=-.1] {$+, T, T$} (B)
(B) edge node [above=-.1] {$+, T, F$} (C)
(B) edge node [above=-.1] {$+, T, T$} (D);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Authorization specification visualized as labelled directed graph}
\end{figure}
In this example, in which $A$ is the SOA (as in all forthcoming examples), the principals $A,B$ and $D$ have permission $(+,T,T)$, $C$ has permission $(+,T,F)$, and $E$ has no rights concerning the access type and object in question.
\subsection{Negative authorizations and inactivation of authorizations}
\label{negative}
A negative authorization from $i$ to $j$ can inactivate a positive authorization from $i$ to $j$ without deleting it. Hagstr\"om et al.\ \cite{Hagstrom} give two motivations for the use of negative authorizations: They can make a revocation resilient, i.e.\ make its effect time-persistent, and it can be used for temporarily taking away rights from a user without deleting anything from the authorization specification, so that it is easier to go back to the state that was in place before this temporary removal of rights.
Hagstr\"om et al.\ leave it open whether negative permissions dominate positive ones or the other way round. If the system has a positive-takes-precedence conflict resolution policy, then positive permission take precedence; in this case, the resilient effect of a negative authorization is not given, so the only motivation to use negative authorizations in such a system it for a temporary removal of rights. If the system has a negative-takes-precedence conflict resolution policy, then negative permission take precedence; in this case, the distinction (explained below) between weak negative revocations and strong negative revocations disappears. In this paper, we assume the system to have a system has a positive-takes-precedence conflict resolution policy.
We assume the set of authorizations in the authorization specification to be divided into a set of \emph{active} authorizations and a set of \emph{inactive} authorizations. The revocation schemes that revoke a right by issuing a negative authorization inactivate some authorizations, i.e.\ turn some active authorizations into inactive authorizations. Negative authorizations are always active.
We define a rooted delegation chain to be active iff every authorization in it is active. We say that a principal $p$ \emph{actively has permission} $\pi$ iff there is an active rooted delegation chain for principal $p$ with respect to permission $\pi$.
Additionally to the connectivity property mentioned, we can also define an \emph{active connectivity property} as follows:
\vspace{4mm}
\noindent \textbf{Active-connectivity property:} \\
\textit{For every active authorization $(i,j,\langle\mathit{sign}\rangle,b^1,b^2)$ in the authorization specification, $i$ actively has a permission $\rho$ with $\rho R (\langle\mathit{sign}\rangle,b^1,b^2)$.}
\vspace{4mm}
Unlike the connectivity property, the active-connectivity property is not mentioned by Hagstr\"om et al., but is actually also an invariant of the system they define.
\subsection{The three dimensions}
Hagstr\"om et al.\ \cite{Hagstrom} have introduced three dimensions according to which revocation schemes can be classified. These are called \emph{propagation}, \emph{dominance} and \emph{resilience}:
\textbf{Propagation.}
The decision of a principal $i$ to revoke an authorization previously granted to a principal $j$ may either be intended to affect only the direct recipient $j$ or to affect all the other users in turn authorized by $j$. In the first case, we say that the revocation is \emph{local}, in the second case that it is \emph{global}.
\textbf{Dominance.}
This dimension deals with the case when a principal losing a permission in a revocation still has permissions from other grantors.
If these other grantors' are \emph{dependent} on the revoker, she can dominate these grantors and revoke the permissions from them. This is called a \emph{strong} revocation. The revoker can also choose to make a \emph{weak} revocation, where permissions from other grantors to a principal losing a permission are kept.
In order to formalize this dimension, we need to define what we mean by a principal's delegation rights to be \emph{independent} of another principal:
\begin{definition}
A principal $j$ \emph{has delegation rights independent of} a principal $i$ with respect to permission $\pi$ iff there is an rooted delegation chain for $j$ with respect to $\pi$ that does not contain the principal $i$.
\end{definition}
\textbf{Resilience.}
This dimension distinguishes revocation by removal of positive authorizations from revocation by negative authorizations which just inactivate positive authorizations. Given that we concentrate on the fragment of Hagstr\"om et al.'s framework without negative revocations, we will not explain this dimension in detail.
\subsection{The revocation schemes}
Since there are two options along each of the three dimensions, Hagstr\"om et al.\ defined eight different revocation schemes.
Below we give semi-formal explanations of these eight revocation schemes. Fully formalized definitions are provided by the specification in Appendix A, which we describe in Subsection \ref{sec:spec}. We illustrate each revocation scheme with an example in which the authorization from $A$ to $B$ in the following authorisation specification is revoked according to the revocation scheme under consideration:
\begin{figure}[H]
\center
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',auto,
main node/.style={rectangle,rounded corners=5,draw}]
\node[main node] (A) at (0,1) {~A~~};
\node[main node] (B) at (2,1) {~B~~};
\node[main node] (C) at (4,1) {~C~~};
\node[main node] (D) at (1,0) {~D~~};
\node[main node] (E) at (4,0) {~E~~};
\node[main node] (F) at (6,0) {~F~~};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\tiny},pos=0.5, sloped]
(A) edge node [above=-.1] {$+, T, T$} (B)
edge node [above=-.1] {$+, T, T$} (D)
(B) edge node [above=-.1] {$+, T, F$} (C)
edge node [above=-.1] {$+, T, T$} (E)
(D) edge node [above=-.1] {$+, F, F$} (B)
edge node [above=-.1] {$+, T, T$} (E)
(E) edge node [above=-.1] {$+, F, F$} (F);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Example authorization specification before revocation}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Weak Local Delete}
A \emph{Weak Local Delete} (WLD) of a positive authorization from $i$ to $j$ has the following effect:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The authorization from $i$ to $j$ is deleted.
\item If step 1 causes $j$ to lose a permission, all authorizations emerging from $j$ that $j$ is no longer entitled to grant are deleted.
\item If $j$ still has another permission, each authorization deleted in step 2 is replaced by the strongest possible authorization that $j$ is entitled to grant and that is weaker than the deleted authorization.
\item For every authorization $(j,k,+,b^1,b^2)$ deleted in step 2, an authorization of the form $(i,k,+,b^1,b^2)$ is issued.
\end{enumerate}
Step 2 ensures that the connectivity property is satisfied at $j$. This being a local revocation scheme, step 4 ensures that all rights that users other than $j$ had before the operation are intact.
\begin{figure}[H]
\center
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',auto,node distance=4cm and 4cm,
main node/.style={rectangle,rounded corners=5,draw}]
\node[main node] (A) at (0,1) {~A~~};
\node[main node] (B) at (2,1) {~B~~};
\node[main node] (C) at (4,1) {~C~~};
\node[main node] (D) at (1,0) {~D~~};
\node[main node] (E) at (4,0) {~E~~};
\node[main node] (F) at (6,0) {~F~~};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\tiny},pos=0.5, sloped]
(A) edge [bend left=20, in=150, out=30, above=-.1] node {$+, T, F$} (C)
edge node [above=-.1] {$+, T, T$} (D)
edge [bend right, in=215,out=270] node [below] {$+, T, T$} (E)
(D) edge node [above=-.1] {$+, F, F$} (B)
edge node [above=-.1] {$+, T, T$} (E)
(E) edge node [above=-.1] {$+, F, F$} (F);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Weak Local Delete from $A$ to $B$}
\end{figure}
In this example, the authorizations from $B$ to $C$ and from $B$ to $E$ were deleted and not replaced by any authorization, because the permission $(+,F,F)$ that $B$ still has does no entitle $B$ to grant any authorization.
\subsubsection{Weak Global Delete}
A \emph{Weak Global Delete} (WGD) of a positive authorization from $i$ to $j$ has the following effect:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The authorization from $i$ to $j$ is deleted.
\item Recursively, any authorization emerging from a principal $k$ who loses a permission in step 1 or step 2 is deleted and replaced by the strongest possible authorization that $k$ is entitled to grant and that is weaker than the deleted authorization.
\end{enumerate}
The recursive step 2 ensures that the connectivity property is satisfied for the whole authorization specification after this operation.
\begin{figure}[H]
\center
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',auto,node distance=4cm and 4cm,
main node/.style={rectangle,rounded corners=5,draw}]
\node[main node] (A) at (0,1) {~A~~};
\node[main node] (B) at (2,1) {~B~~};
\node[main node] (C) at (4,1) {~C~~};
\node[main node] (D) at (1,0) {~D~~};
\node[main node] (E) at (4,0) {~E~~};
\node[main node] (F) at (6,0) {~F~~};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\tiny},pos=0.5, sloped]
(A) edge node [above=-.1] {$+, T, T$} (D)
(D) edge node [above=-.1] {$+, F, F$} (B)
edge node [above=-.1] {$+, T, T$} (E)
(E) edge node [above=-.1] {$+, F, F$} (F);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Weak Global Delete from $A$ to $B$}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Strong Local Delete}
A \emph{Strong Local Delete} (SLD) of a positive authorization from $i$ to $j$ has the following effect:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The authorization from $i$ to $j$ is deleted.
\item Every authorization of the form $(k,j,+,b^1,b^2)$ such that $k$ is not independent of $i$ with respect to $(b^1,b^2)$ is deleted.
\item If steps 1 and 2 cause $j$ to lose a permission, all authorizations emerging from $j$ that $j$ is no longer entitled to grant are deleted.
\item If $j$ still has another permission, each authorization deleted in step 3 is replaced by the strongest possible authorization that $j$ is entitled to grant and that is weaker than the deleted authorization.
\item For every authorization $(j,k,+,b^1,b^2)$ deleted in step 3, an authorization of the form $(i,k,+,b^1,b^2)$ is issued.
\end{enumerate}
The only difference to the Weak Local Delete is step 2, which is the step that makes this a strong revocation scheme.
\begin{figure}[H]
\center
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',auto,node distance=4cm and 4cm,
main node/.style={rectangle,rounded corners=5,draw}]
\node[main node] (A) at (0,1) {~A~~};
\node[main node] (B) at (2,1) {~B~~};
\node[main node] (C) at (4,1) {~C~~};
\node[main node] (D) at (1,0) {~D~~};
\node[main node] (E) at (4,0) {~E~~};
\node[main node] (F) at (6,0) {~F~~};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\tiny},pos=0.5, sloped]
(A) edge [bend left=20, in=150, out=30] node {$+, T, F$} (C)
edge node [above=-.1] {$+, T, T$} (D)
edge [bend right, in=215,out=270] node [below] {$+, T, T$} (E)
(D) edge node [above=-.1] {$+, T, T$} (E)
(E) edge node [above=-.1] {$+, F, F$} (F);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Strong Local Delete from $A$ to $B$}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Strong Global Delete}
A \emph{Strong Global Delete} (SGD) of a positive authorization from $i$ to $j$ has the following effect:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The authorization from $i$ to $j$ is deleted.
\item Recursively, do the following
\begin{enumerate}
\item For any principal $k$ who has lost a permission in step 1, step 2.(a) or step 2.(c), all authorizations emerging from $k$ that $k$ is no longer entitled to grant are deleted.
\item If $k$ still has another permission, each authorization deleted in step 2.(a) is replaced by the strongest possible authorization that $k$ is entitled to grant and that is weaker than the deleted authorization.
\item Any authorization of the form $(l,m,+,b^1,b^2)$, where $m$ is a principal who loses a permission in step 1, step 2.(a) or step 2.(c) and $l$ is not independent of $i$ with respect to $(b^1,b^2)$, is deleted.
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
Here the recursive deletion procedure contains two different kinds of deletions: 2.(a) makes it a global revocation scheme and 2.(c) makes it a strong revocation scheme.
\begin{figure}[H]
\center
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',auto,node distance=4cm and 4cm,
main node/.style={rectangle,rounded corners=5,draw}]
\node[main node] (A) at (0,1) {~A~~};
\node[main node] (B) at (2,1) {~B~~};
\node[main node] (C) at (4,1) {~C~~};
\node[main node] (D) at (1,0) {~D~~};
\node[main node] (E) at (4,0) {~E~~};
\node[main node] (F) at (6,0) {~F~~};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\tiny},pos=0.5, sloped]
(A) edge node [above=-.1] {$+, T, T$} (D);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Strong Global Delete from $A$ to $B$}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Negative revocations}
The negative revocations are similar to the positive revocations, only that instead of deleting positive authorizations, we inactivate them by issuing negative authorizations. We show this on the example of the Weak Local Negative. The other three negative revocation schemes are adapted versions of the corresponding delete revocations in a similar way.
A \emph{Weak Local Negative} (WLN) of a positive authorization from $i$ to $j$ has the following effect:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The negative authorization $(i,j,-,F,F)$ is added to the authorization specification.
\item Any positive authorization from $i$ to $j$ is inactivated.
\item If step 2 causes a permission of $j$ to ne inactivated, all authorizations emerging from $j$ that $j$ is no longer entitled to grant are inactivated.
\item If $j$ still actively has another permission, each authorization deleted in step 3 is replaced by the strongest possible authorization that $j$ is entitled to grant and that is weaker than the inactivated authorization.
\item For every authorization $(j,k,b^1,b^2)$ inactivated by step 3, an authorization of the form $(i,k,b^1,b^2)$ is issued.
\end{enumerate}
Unlike in the Weak Local Delete, we do not delete any authorizations, but just inactivate them. We graphically represent inactivated authoriazations by dashed lines.
\begin{figure}[H]
\center
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',auto,node distance=4cm and 4cm,
main node/.style={rectangle,rounded corners=5,draw}]
\node[main node] (A) at (0,1) {~A~~};
\node[main node] (B) at (2,1) {~B~~};
\node[main node] (C) at (4,1) {~C~~};
\node[main node] (D) at (1,0) {~D~~};
\node[main node] (E) at (4,0) {~E~~};
\node[main node] (F) at (6,0) {~F~~};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\tiny},pos=0.5, sloped]
(A) edge [bend left=20, in=160, out=45] node [above=-.1] {$+,T, F$} (C)
edge [bend left=20] node [above=-.1] {$-,F, F$} (B)
edge [dashed,bend right=10] node [above=-.1] {$+,T, T$} (B)
edge node [below=-.1] [above=-.1] {$+,T, T$} (D)
edge [bend right, in=215,out=270] node [below] {$+,T, T$} (E)
(B) edge [dashed] node [above=-.1] {$+,T, F$} (C)
edge [dashed] node [above=-.1] {$+,T, T$} (E)
(D) edge node [above=-.1] {$+,F, F$} (B)
edge node [above=-.1] {$+,T, T$} (E)
(E) edge node [above=-.1] {$+,F, F$} (F);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Weak Local Negative from $A$ to $B$}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
In this paper, we have explained the benefits of the knowledge base paradigm when applied to delegation revocation.
The knowledge base paradigm proposes a strict separation between knowledge and problem solving.
In our application, the knowledge is represented by an \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})} specification of Hagstr\"om et al.\ \cite{Hagstrom} delegation revocation framework.
By applying various logical inferences to this specification, multiple tasks that arise when implementing or using a delegation revocation system were solved.
This way, the same information was reused for solving various problems.
Our work constitutes a proof of concept, and we hope that it will inspire other researchers in computer security to consider the possibility of applying the methodology of the knowledge base paradigm to their research.
\section{Introduction}
In ownership-based frameworks for access control, it is common to allow principals (users or processes) to grant both permissions and administrative rights to other principals in the system. Often it is desirable to grant a principal the right to further grant permissions and administrative rights to other principals. This may lead to delegation chains starting at a \emph{source of authority} (the owner of a resource) and passing on certain permissions to other principals in the chain \cite{Li,Tamassia,Chander,Yao}.
Furthermore, such frameworks commonly allow a principal to revoke a permission that she granted to another principal \cite{Hagstrom,Zhang,Chander,BarkerBoella}. Depending on the reasons for the revocation, different ways to treat the chain of principals whose permissions depended on the second principal's delegation rights can be desirable \cite{Hagstrom,Cramer}. For example, if one is revoking a permission given to an employee because he is moving to another position in the company, it makes sense to keep the permissions of principals who received them from this employee; but if one is revoking a permission from a user who has abused his rights and is hence distrusted by the user who granted the permission, it makes sense to delete the permissions of principals who received them from this user. Any algorithm that determines which permissions to keep intact and which permissions to delete when revoking a permission is called a \emph{revocation scheme}.
Hagstr\"om et al.\ \cite{Hagstrom} have presented a framework for classifying possible revocation schemes along three different dimensions: the extent of the revocation to other grantees (propagation), the effect on other grants to the same grantee (dominance), and the permanence of the negation of rights (resilience). Since there are two options along each dimension, there are in total eight different revocation schemes in Hagstr\"om et al.'s framework. This classification was based on revocation schemes that had been implemented in database management systems \cite{Griffiths,Fagin,Bertino96,Bertino97}.
In this paper, we investigate the problem of delegation revocation from the perspective of the \emph{knowledge base paradigm}, a declarative programming paradigm based on the idea of strictly separating information and problem solving.
A \emph{knowledge base} is a formal specification of domain knowledge in a rich formal language.
Multiple forms of inference can be applied to this formal specification in order to solve various problems and tasks that arise in the domain.
The \logicname{IDP} system is an implementation of the knowledge base paradigm with associated formal language \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})}, an extension of first-order logic \mycite{decat2018predicate}.
In this paper we present an application of the knowledge base paradigm to delegation revocation, realized in the \logicname{IDP} system.
We have written a formal specification of the eight revocation schemes in Hagstr\"om et al.'s framework, which formally described their effects.
By applying different inferences to this specification, we can solve various tasks that can be useful both for implementing a system which allows for these revocation schemes and for supporting a user of such a system:
Given a certain state of the system and a certain action (delegation or revocation), one inference determines the state of the system after this action.
Another inference can interactively simulate the progression of the system state through time.
A third determines whether a user has a certain permission or administrative right given a certain state of the system.
A fourth inference allows to verify that the system satisfies certain invariants.
Finally, there is an inference that allows a user to specify a set of desired outcomes (e.g.\ that a certain user should no longer have a certain right while another user is unaffected) and determine which actions give rise to this outcome.
This work constitutes a proof of concept, and we hope that it will inspire other researchers in computer security to consider the possibility of applying the methodology of the knowledge base paradigm to their research.
The paper is structured as follows: We introduce Hagstr\"om et al.'s delegation revocation framework in Section \ref{sec:rs}. In Section \ref{sec:KB} we motivate and describe the knowledge base paradigm, the \logicname{IDP} system and its specification language \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})}. Section \ref{sec:KBrs} presents the application of the knowledge base paradigm to Hagstr\"om et al.'s framework. Section \ref{sec:related} discusses related work and section \ref{sec:conclusion} concludes.
\section{The knowledge base paradigm and \\ the \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})} KB project}
\label{sec:KB}
Declarative systems have proven their merit in many application domains: From planning to scheduling to security contexts, many challenges have been tackled using declarative approach. For example, Barker et al.\ \cite{sacmat/Barker2009} used a rule-based approach to determine access rights in an access control system. Advantages of such an approach are readability and maintainability of a specification. However, only one task is supported in a rule based system, or in any other decalarative system. Every system has its own syntactical style, terminology, conceptualization, and designated style of inference (rule based systems do chaining, databases do querying, answer set programming generates answer sets, etc.). Yet, in all of them, propositions need to be expressed. Take, e.g., “each lecture takes place at some
time slot”. This proposition could be an expression to be deduced from a formal
specification if the task was a verification problem, or to be queried in a database,
or it could be a constraint for a scheduling problem. It is, in the first place, just a
piece of information and we see no reason why depending on the task to be solved, it should be expressed in a different formalism.
The \emph{knowledge base} (\emph{KB}) \emph{paradigm} \mycite{KBS} was proposed
as an answer to this. The KB paradigm applies a strict separation of concerns
to information and problem solving. A KB system allows information to be stored
in a knowledge base, and provides a range of inference methods. With these inference
methods various types of problems and tasks can be solved using the same
knowledge base. As such the knowledge base is neither a program nor a description
of a problem, it cannot be executed or run. It is nothing but information. However,
this information can be used to solve multiple sorts of problems. Many declarative
problem solving paradigms are mono-inferential: they are based on one form of inference.
In comparison, the KB paradigm is multi-inferential.
The $\logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})}$ KB project is a research project in which an implementation of the KB paradigm is being developed. Its aim is to integrate different useful language constructs
and forms of inference from different declarative paradigms in one rich declarative
language and a KB system. So far, it has led to the KB language $\logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})}$ \mycite{fodot} and the KB system \logicname{IDP}~\mycite{decat2018predicate}, which are used in this paper.
\subsection{The specification language \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})}}
\logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})} refers to a class of extensions of first-order logic (FO). The language of the current version of the
IDP system (IDP 3) is FO(T, ID, Agg, arit, PF): FO extended with types, inductive definitions, aggregates, arithmetic
and partial functions (see \cite{tocl/DeneckerT08,tplp/PelovDB07}). In this work, we will only work (and as such, introduce) a subset of this language: $FO(T,ID)$: typed first-order logic with inductive definitions. Abusing notation, we will use $\logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})}$ as an abbreviation of this language.
\subsection{An \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})} specification}
A specification of domain knowledge in \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})} can consist of 3 types of building blocks: a vocabulary $\Sigma$, a theory $\T$ and a (partial) structure $\pS$.
\paragraph{Vocabulary $\Sigma$.}
A \emph{vocabulary} is a declaration of the symbols used in the associated theories and structures.
It is a set $\Sigma$ of type symbols (denoted as $\Sigma_T$) and predicate symbols (denoted as $\Sigma_P$).
Every predicate $P$ of arity $n$ has a fixed type $[\tau_1,\ldots,\tau_n]$, where $\tau_1,\dots,\tau_n$ are type symbols.
Variables, atoms and first-order formulas are defined as usual.
\paragraph{Theory $\T$.}
A \emph{theory} is a set of first-order formulas and inductive definitions.
An inductive definition $\Delta$ in $\logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})}$ is a set of rules $\delta$ of the form $P(\overline{t})\leftarrow \varphi$, with $\varphi$ a first-order formula.
We call $P(\bar t)$ the head ($head(\delta)$) and $\varphi$ the body ($body(\delta)$) of the rule.
The symbols that occur in the head of a rule $\delta$ in $\Delta$ are called the defined symbols in $\Delta$. All other symbols that occur in $\Delta$ are called the parameters of $\Delta$.
The semantics used for inductive definitions is the well-founded semantics; as argued in \cite{tocl/DeneckerT08}, this captures the intended meaning of all forms of inductive definitions commonly used in mathematics and computer science.
A structure $\mathcal{S}$ satisfies $\Delta$ if the interpretation of a defined predicate $P$ in the well-founded model of $\mathcal{S}$, constructed relative to the restriction of $\mathcal{S}$ to the parameters of $\Delta$, is exactly the relation $P^{\mathcal{S}}$.
The following example illustrates the use of an inductive definition in a theory by presenting the defintion of ``reachable'' in $\logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})}$.
\begin{example}
Assume a vocabulary containing a type $Node$, and two predicates: $Edge(Node, Node)$ and $Reachable(Node,Node)$. Informally, $Edge$ states that there is an edge between two nodes, while $Reachable$ states that there is a path of edges between two nodes. We define what reachability means in terms of the edges, using an inductive definition $\Delta$ in $\logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})}$:
\begin{ltheo}
\begin{ldef}
\forall x: \LRule{Reachable(x,x)}\\
\forall x\ y: \LRule{Reachable(x,y)}{\parbox[t]{0.2\textwidth}{$\exists z: Reachable(x,z) \; \land$ \\
$Edge(z,y).$}}
\end{ldef}
\end{ltheo}
\end{example}
\paragraph{Structure $\pS$.}
Given a vocabulary $\Sigma$, a \emph{partial structure} gives an interpretation to (a subset of) the elements of $\Sigma$.
Before we define formally what an interpretation is, we define the concept of a \emph{partial set}, which is a generalisation of a set in a 3-valued context:
A \emph{partial set} on domain $D$ is a function from $D$ to $\{\ltrue,\lunkn,\lfalse\}$.
A partial set is two-valued (or total) if $\lunkn$ does not belong to its range.
A \textit{(partial) structure} $\pS$ consists of a domain $D_\tau$ for all types $\tau$ in $\Sigma_T$ and an assignment of a partial set $P^\pS$ to each predicate or function symbol $P\in\Sigma_P$, called the \emph{interpretation} of $P$ in $\pS$.
The interpretation $P^\pS$ of a predicate symbol $P$ with type $[\tau_1,\ldots,\tau_n]$ in $\pS$ is a
partial set on domain $D_{\tau_1}\times \ldots \times D_{\tau_n}$.
In case the interpretation of a predicate $P$ in $\pS$ is a
two-valued set, we abuse notation and use $P^\pS$ as shorthand for
$\{\m{\overline{d}}|P^\pS(\m{\overline{d}})=\ltrue\}$.
We call a partial structure \emph{total} if the interpretation $P^\pS$ of every predicate symbol $P\in\Sigma_P$ is a total set. Note that with the abuse of notation just explained, a total structure as we have defined it can be identified with a first-order structure as it is usually defined.
Given two partial structures $\pS = (D,\mathcal{I})$ and $\pS'=(D,\mathcal{I}')$, we write $\pS {\m{\,\leq_p\,}} \pS'$ (and say $S$ \emph{is more precise than} $S'$, or $S'$ \emph{expands} $S$) iff
for every predicate symbol $P\in\Sigma_P$ with type $[\tau_1,\ldots,\tau_n]$ and every tuple $\bar d \in D_{\tau_1}\times \ldots \times D_{\tau_n}$ such that $P^\mathcal{I}(\bar d) \neq \lunkn$, we have $P^{\mathcal{I}'}(\bar d) = P^\mathcal{I}(\bar d)$.
\subsection{The reasoning engine}
In the $\logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})}$ KB project, a implementation of a KB System was developed: the \logicname{IDP} system \mycite{decat2018predicate}.
\logicname{IDP} takes an $\logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})}$ specification (that is, a combination of vocabularies, theories and/or structures) and can do a number of reasoning tasks, by applying a suitable form of inference on this specification.
Below, we present the inferences that we need in this paper:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Modelexpand($\T,\pS$):} Input: theory ${\T}$ and partial structure $\pS$.
Output: either a total structure $\m{\mathcal{I}}$ such that $\m{\mathcal{I}}$ is a model of $\T$ and $\pS{\m{\,\leq_p\,}}\m{\mathcal{I}}$, or \textit{UNSAT} if there is no such $\m{\mathcal{I}}$.
Modelexpand~\cite{lash08/WittocxMD08} is a generalization for $\logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})}$ theories of the modelexpansion task as defined in Mitchell et al.~\cite{MitchellT05}.
\item \textbf{Allmodels($\T,\pS$):} Input: theory ${\T}$ and partial structure $\pS$.
Output: the set of all total structures $\m{\mathcal{I}}$ such that $\m{\mathcal{I}}$ is a model of $\T$ and $\pS{\m{\,\leq_p\,}}\m{\mathcal{I}}$.
\item \textbf{Query($\pS,E$):} Input: a (partial) structure $\pS$ and a set expression
$E=\{\overline{x}\mid \varphi(\overline{x})\}$. %
Output: the set $A_Q=\{\overline{x}\mid\varphi(\overline x)^\pS=\ltrue\}$.
\item \textbf{Progression($\T,\pS_i$):} In~\cite{iclp/Bogaerts14}, LTC theories (Linear Time Calculus) are proposed, a syntactic subclass of \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})} theories that allow to naturally model dynamic systems.
An LTC theory consists of three types of constraints: constraints about the initial situation,
invariants,
and ``bistate'' formulas that relate the state on the current point in time with that of the next.
Note that the specification presented in Subsection \ref{sec:spec} below is an LTC theory.
The \emph{Progression inference}: Input: an LTC theory $T$ and a structure $\pS_i$ that provides information about the state of the system on a time point $t$. Output: a structure $\pS_{t+1}$ that represents the next state (or a next possible state) at time point $t+1$. Repeating this process, we can compute all subsequent states, effectively simulating the dynamic system defined by $\T$.
\end{itemize}
\section{Delegation revocation in the KB paradigm}
\label{sec:KBrs}
In this section, we explain how the KB paradigm can be applied to delegation revocation. For this purpose, we show how the delegation revocation framework defined in Section \ref{sec:rs} can be specified in \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})}, and how inferences on this specification can solve various tasks that arise in the domain. Some of these tasks are tasks that any system implementing the delegation revocation framework needs to solve, while others are tasks that support a user of such a system.
We have built a prototype in IDP in which this application of the KB paradigm is realized. This prototype also covers the negative authorizations and negative revocation schemes that this paper does not explain due to space restrictions.
This prototype can be downloaded at \url{http://icr.uni.lu/mcramer/downloads/hagstrom-RDS.zip} and run in IDP 3.
\subsection{The \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})} specification of the delegation revocation framework}
\label{sec:spec}
In this subsection, we describe how Hagstr\"om et al.'s delegation revocation framework, which we defined semi-formally in Section \ref{sec:rs}, can be formally specified in \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})}. The full specification can be found in Appendix A.
Both in this subsection and in the appendix, we use IDP syntax for \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})}: The symbols \texttt{\&}, \texttt{|}, \texttt{\~}, \texttt{!} and \texttt{?} mean $\land$, $\lor$, $\neg$, $\forall$ and $\exists$ respectively, and the symbol sequence \texttt{<-} means $\leftarrow$ (in inductive definitions).
The \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})} specification models the change of the authorization specification over time. Principals are modelled as objects of the theory's domain, whereas positive authorizations are modelled by the predicate \texttt{pos\_auth}.
The authorizations cannot be modelled as objects, because they change over time, while \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})} assumes a constant domain of objects.
We allow for four types of objects: \texttt{Time}, \texttt{principal}, \texttt{scheme} and \texttt{permission}.
Time points are integers. There is a constant \texttt{SOA} of type \texttt{principal} that denotes the source of authority. The type \texttt{scheme} consists of the four delete revocation schemes (\texttt{WLD}, \texttt{WGD}, \texttt{SLD} and \texttt{SGD}), the four negative revocation schemes (\texttt{WLN}, \texttt{WGN}, \texttt{SLN}, \texttt{SGN})
and four schemes for granting the four different kinds of permissions (\texttt{grantTT}, \texttt{grantTF}, \texttt{grantFT} and \texttt{grantFF}). The permissions are \texttt{TT}, \texttt{TF}, \texttt{FT} and \texttt{FF}.
The sign is not part of the permission, because the information provided by the sign is included in the choice between \texttt{pos\_auth} and \texttt{neg\_auth}.
As IDP only works with finite domains, the type \texttt{Time} actually just consists of a finite set of consecutive integers. There is a constant \texttt{Start} for the first time point, i.e.\ the smallest integer in the domain of time points in a given structure. The unary partial function \texttt{Next} maps a time point \texttt{t} to the next time point \texttt{t+1}, as long as \texttt{t} is not the last time point included in the domain.
The predicate \texttt{pos\_auth} for positive authorizations takes four arguments: \texttt{pos\_auth(t,i,j,a)} means that at time \texttt{t}, a positive authorization from principal \texttt{i} to principal \texttt{j} for permission \texttt{a} is in place.
The predicate \texttt{neg\_auth}, on the other hand, only takes three arguments, as no permssion needs to be specified for a negative authorization: \texttt{neg\_auth(t,i,j)} means that at time \texttt{t}, a negative authorization from principal \texttt{i} to principal \texttt{j} is in place.
There are two predicates, the tertiary \texttt{pos\_{}auth\_{}start} and the binary \texttt{neg\_{}auth\_{}start}, for specifying the positive and negative authorizations that are in place at the first time point \texttt{Start}.
Changes in the authorization specification are always triggered by some action by a principal: \texttt{action(t,s,i,j)} means that at time \texttt{t}, principal \texttt{i} performs an action of the (revocation or grant) scheme \texttt{s} affecting principal \texttt{j}. In the case of delete revocations and grants, these actions can lead to authorizations being deleted and/or new authorizations being included in the authorization specification. \texttt{delete(t,i,j,a)} means that between time points \texttt{t-1} and \texttt{t}, the positive authorization from \texttt{i} to \texttt{j} for permission \texttt{a} gets deleted. \texttt{new(t,i,j,a)} means that between time points \texttt{t-1} and \texttt{t}, a new positive authorization from \texttt{i} to \texttt{j} for permission \texttt{a} gets added to the authorization specification.
\texttt{pos\_{}auth} is defined inductively by setting its values at the \linebreak first time point \texttt{Start} to the start configuration specified by \linebreak \texttt{pos\_{}auth\_{}start}, and by modifying its values between time \texttt{t} and \texttt{t+1} according to the changes specified by \texttt{delete} and \texttt{new}:
\begin{lstlisting}
{pos_auth(Start,p1,p2,a) <-
pos_auth_start(p1,p2,a).
pos_auth(Next(t),p1,p2,a) <-
pos_auth(t,p1,p2,a) &
~delete(Next(t),p1,p2,a).
pos_auth(Next(t),p1,p2,a) <-
new(Next(t),p1,p2,a).}
\end{lstlisting}
Additionally, there are predicates \texttt{FF\_{}delete} and \texttt{new\_{}FF} that specify changes on the negative authorizations, and \texttt{FF} is defined in a way analogous to \texttt{pos\_{}auth} using these change predicated instead of \texttt{delete} and \texttt{new}.
The predicate \texttt{chain(t,i,a)} expresses that at time \texttt{t}, there exists a rooted delegation chain for principal \texttt{i} with respect to permission \texttt{a}. In Section \ref{sec:rs}, rooted delegation chains are defined by quantifying over sequences of principals. This is in effect a second-order quantification, which is not possible in the first-order language \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})}. However, \texttt{chain(t,i,a)} can be equivalently defined through an inductive definition as follows:\footnote{Note that first-order logic with inductive definitions has an expressivity that lies strictly between the expressivity of first-order and second-order logic.}
\begin{lstlisting}
{chain(t,SOA,TT).
chain(t,p1,a1) <-
?p2: chain(t,p2,a) &
pos_auth(t,p2,p1,a1) &
R(a,a1).
chain(t,p,a) <-
chain(t,p,a1) &
Stronger(a1,a). }
\end{lstlisting}
The predicate \texttt{can\_{}grant(t,i,a)} expresses that principal \texttt{i} has a permission that entitles him to grant the permission \texttt{a}. The predicate \texttt{ind(t,i,j,a)} models the independence of principal \texttt{i} from principal \texttt{j} with respect to a permission \texttt{a}, and the access right of principal \texttt{i}. These two predicates are defined as follows:
\begin{lstlisting}
{can_grant(t,i,a) <-
?a1: chain(t,i,a1) & R(a1,a).}
{ind(t,SOA,p,a) <-
~ SOA = p.
ind(t,p1,p2,a) <-
~ p1 = p2
& ?p: ind(t,p,p2,a1) &
pos_auth(t,p,p1,a) &
(a=TT | a=TF) &
R(a1,a).}
\end{lstlisting}
Analogously to \texttt{chain} and \texttt{can\_{}grant}, there are predicates \linebreak \texttt{active\_{}chain} and \texttt{can\_{}actively\_{}grant} that additionally take care of the authorizations in the chain being active.
The different effects of the different deletion revocation schemes are captured by the definitions of the predicates \texttt{delete}, \texttt{inactive} and \texttt{new}. \texttt{delete} is defined via an inductive definition with four clauses:
\begin{lstlisting}
{delete(Next(t),i,j,a) <-
pos_auth(t,i,j,a) &
action(t,s,i,j) &
(s=WLD | s=SLD | s=WGD | s=SGD).
delete(Next(t),i,j,a) <-
pos_auth(t,i,j,a) &
~ can_grant(Next(t),i,a).
delete(Next(t),k,j,a) <-
pos_auth(t,k,j,a) &
action(t,SLD,i,j) &
?a1: (ind(t,k,i,a1)& R(a1,a)).
delete(Next(t),z,w,a) <-
pos_auth(t,z,w,a) &
action(t,SGD,i,j) &
delete(Next(t),p,w,a1) &
~ ?a2: (ind(t,z,i,a2) &
R(a2,a)).}
\end{lstlisting}
The first clause just states that in any deletion revocation scheme from $i$ to $j$, the positive authorization from $i$ to $j$ is deleted. The second clause defines the propagation of deletion by specifying that any positive authorization from $i$ to $j$ gets deleted if $i$ is losing its delegation right. The last two clauses capture the meaning of \emph{strong} vs. \emph{weak} dominance by specifying the additional deletions that are needed in strong revocation schemes.
The predicate \texttt{inactive} specifies which authorizations are inactive. The conditions for inactivating authorizations are analogous to the conditions for deleting authorization, only that they come into play in negative revocations rather than in delete revocations:
\begin{lstlisting}
{inactive(Next(t),i,j,a) <-
action(t,s,i,j) &
pos_perm(Next(t),i,j,a) &
(s=WLN | s=SLN | s=WGN | s=SGN).
inactive(t,j,k,a) <-
pos_perm(t,j,k,a) &
~ can_actively_grant(t,j,a).
inactive(Next(t),z,j,a) <-
?i:action(t,rs,i,j) &
(rs=SLN | rs=SGN) &
pos_perm(t,z,j,a) &
~ ?a1: (ind(t,z,i,a1)& R(a1,a)).
inactive(Next(t),z,w,a) <-
action(t,SGN,i,j) &
inactive(Next(t),p,w,a1) &
~inactive(t,p,w,a1)&
pos_perm(t,z,w,a) &
~ ?a2: (ind(t,z,i,a2)& R(a2,a)).
inactive(Next(t),i,j,a) <-
inactive(t,i,j,a) &
pos_perm(Next(t),i,j,a). }
\end{lstlisting}
The last clause of \texttt{inactive} specifies that an inactivated authorization stays inactive. If an action of undoing a negative revocation was included in the framework, this clause would have to be modified so as to allow for reactivation. But since Hagstr\"om et al. do not define such an undoing of negative revocations, we do not include it in our formal specification of their framework either.
The meaning of \emph{local} vs. \emph{global} propagation is captured by the inductive definition of the predicate \texttt{new}. It consists of four clauses which take care of four different reasons for adding new authorizations. For simplicity, we only present two of these clauses here:
\begin{lstlisting}
new(Next(t),i,j,a) <-
? ds:(ds=grantTT | ds=grantTF |
ds=grantFT | ds=grantFF) &
action(t,ds,i,j) &
Relation(a,ds)&
can_actively_grant(t,i,a) &
~ ? a1: (can_actively_grant(t,i,a1) &
Relation(a1,ds) & Stronger(a1,a)).
new(Next(t),i,k,a) <-
?j s:(s=WLD | s=SLD) &
action(t,s,i,j) &
(? z: pos_auth(t,z,k,a) &
can_grant(t,z,a)) &
~(? z: pos_auth(t,z,k,a) &
can_grant(Next(t),z,a)).
\end{lstlisting}
The first clause ensures that new positive authorizations are added when a granting action is performed by a principal.\footnote{The last tree conditions in this first clause ensure that when \texttt{i} cannot grant permission \texttt{a}, the strongest permission that \texttt{i} can grant and that is still weaker than \texttt{a} will actually be granted.} The second clause takes care of adding the authorizations that are added in the last item of each of the definitions of Weak Local Delete and Strong Local Delete in Section \ref{sec:rs}. Informally, this clause says that if in a local revocation scheme revoking a positive authorization from principal \texttt{i} to principal \texttt{j}, \texttt{j} is losing its delegation right, then every positive authorization from \texttt{j} to another principal \texttt{k} must be replaced by a positive authorization of the same authorization type from \texttt{i} to \texttt{k}. This new authorization from \texttt{i} to \texttt{k} ensure that the propagation defined in the second clause of the definition of \texttt{delete} does not continue beyond \texttt{j}.
The predicate \texttt{access\_{}right(t,i)} means that principal \texttt{i} has access right at time \texttt{t}:
\begin{lstlisting}
{access_right(t,p) <-
active_chain(t,p,a).
access_right(t,p) <-
?p1:can_actively_grant(t,p1,a)&
pos_auth(t,p1,p,a) &
~inactive(t,p1,p,a).}
\end{lstlisting}
\subsection{Using inferences to solve various tasks}
In this subsection we explain how different logical inferences, when applied to the \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})} specification explained above, can solve various tasks that can be useful both for implementing a system which allows for delegation revocation and for supporting a user of such a system.
Let us first consider tasks that a system that implements Hagstr\"om et al.'s delegation revocation framework needs to solve. Given a certain state of the system, defined by which authorizations are currently included in the authorization specification, and a given action (a delegation or revocation performed by some principal), the new state of the system after this action needs to be determined. This task can be performed using the Modelexpand inference as follows: Let $T$ be the \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})} specification of the delegation revocation framework. Let $\pS$ be a partial structure with the following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item The time domain of $\pS$ contains only the two time points $0$ and $1$.
\item $\pS$ assigns to the predicate \texttt{pos\_{}auth\_{}start} the set of all authorizations currently included in the authorization specification.
\item $\pS$ assigns to the predicate \texttt{action} the given action at time $0$.
\item The value of all other predicates is undefined in $\pS$.
\end{itemize}
In this case, Modelexpand($T$,$\pS$) is a total structure that expands $\pS$ and that is a model of $\T$. Being a total structure, it assigns to \texttt{pos\_{}auth} a set $A$ of quintuples of the form $(t,i,j,\langle\mathit{sign}\rangle,a)$, where $t$ is a time point ($0$ or $1$), $i$ and $j$ are principals, $\langle\mathit{sign}\rangle$ is a sign, and $a$ is a permission. Then the set $A' := \{(i,j,\langle\mathit{sign}\rangle,a) \;|\; (1,i,j,\langle\mathit{sign}\rangle,a) \in A \}$ is the set of authorizations that constitutes the authorization specification after the action. (Note that since all predicates other than \texttt{pos\_{}auth\_{}start} and \texttt{action} are defined in $T$ through an inductive definition, there is a unique model of $T$ that expands $\pS$, so that the result of this inference is deterministic.)
This way we can determine the effect of a single action. It could be iterated by setting the value of \texttt{pos\_{}auth\_{}start} to be $A'$ for the next iteration of this procedure. But the IDP system also supports an inference, namely the Progression inference, that is designed for this kind of temporal progression of a structure based on a theory with a type for time. The input structure of this inference provides information about the state of the system on a time point $t$; in our case that is the authorization specification at a given time. The output is a structure that represents the state of the authorization specification at time point $t+1$. So the step of extracting $A'$ from $A$ that was required for iterating the above inference is no longer needed. So this inference can more straightforwardly be iterated, giving rise to an interactive simulation of the progression of the system state through time.
Of course, a system implementing Hagstr\"om et al.'s framework does not only need to determine how the authorization specification changes over time, but also needs to determine whether a principal requesting access or performing a certain administrative action actually has access right or the right to perform the action in question. This can be done with the Query inference: For example, if $\pS$ is the partial structure that assigns to the predicate \texttt{pos\_{}auth\_{}start} the set of all authorizations currently included in the authorization specification, Query($\pS$,$\{\texttt{i} \; | \; \texttt{access\_{}right(Start,i)} \}$) returns the set of principals that have access right according to the current authorization specification.
When designing a system, one can avoid an erroneous design by specifying invariants that the system must satisfy at any moment during the execution of the system, and verify that these invariants are actually satisfied by the system. In the case of a system based on Hagstr\"om et al.'s delegation revocation system, examples of invariants that the system must satisfy are the connectivity property and the active-connectivity property defined in subsections \ref{delegation} and \ref{negative}. We must, of course assume, that the system starts in a state that satisfies these two properties. All that remains to be shown, then, is that if the connectivity property holds at some time point $t$, it must also hold at the next time point $t+1$, and similarly for the active-connectivity property.
One way that this can be done is by calling an automated theorem prover to prove this implication. However, this is not always viable, as the theory may be too complex for an automated theorem prover to be able to find a proof of the invariant. This is the case for our specification.
Another possibility is to prove that the invariant holds in fixed structures. In our case, we can fix a partial structure $\pS$ with time points $0$ and $1$ and without any information about the predicates. In this case, the only information that we are fixing is the number of principals. We can then prove that the invariant holds for a fixed number of principals by establishing, using Modelexpand($T'$,$\pS$), that there is no total structure expanding $\pS$ that is a model of the theory $T'$ consisting of our specification $T$ together with the statement that the connectivity property holds at time point $0$ but not at time point $1$. With this method, we have verified the connectivity property for any system with $n$ principals for $n \leq 8$.
Despite this limitation to very small domains, this limited verification can be useful for avoiding erroneous design, as errors tend to already show up at relatively small domains. It should be added that the logical methodology of the KB paradigm lends itself well to the usage of interactive theorem provers common in software verification in order to fully verify invariants over complex specifications. The integration of IDP and interactive theorem provers is, however, still future work.
Finally, let us turn to a task that supports a user of a system based on Hagstr\"om et al.'s delegation revocation framework: A principal $i$ may want to reach a certain outcome, e.g.\ that a given principal $j$ should no longer have a certain right while another principal $k$ is unaffected. $i$ may want to find out all revocation schemes that lead to the desired outcome. This can be achieved by computing Allmodels($T_2$,$\pS$), where $\pS$ is the structure that assigns the current authorization specification to \texttt{pos\_{}auth\_{}start}, and $T_2$ is the theory consisting of our specification of the delegation revocation framework together with the statement that the action at time point $0$ is performed by $i$, and the statement that the desired outcome holds at time point $1$. The values of the predicate \texttt{action} at time point $0$ in the models returned by Allmodels($T_2$,$\pS$) are the actions that $i$ can perform in order to get the desired outcome.
Furthermore, $i$ may want to reach a certain outcome for some given principals while minimally influencing the permissions of other principals. In that case, $i$ can define a cost function, e.g.\ that every change in a permission of a principal has a cost of $1$, and search the models returned by Allmodels($T_2$,$\pS$) for the one with the minimal cost.
The IDP prototype that we have built can perform all the different tasks described in this subsection.
\section{Related work}
\label{sec:related}
While the KB paradigm and its implementation \logicname{IDP}, are fairly young, its applicability has been investigated and illustrated in multiple domains. In \cite{iclp/VanHertum13}, the connection with Business Rules was investigated. Business Rules are well-represented in industry for knowledge-intensive applications and as such were used as a comparison to evaluate the KB paradigm. A typical Business Rules application, the EU-Rent Car-Rental company, was modelled in \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})}, and two use cases were investigated.
In \cite{ppdp/VlaeminckVD09}, the authors looked at applications of the \logicname{IDP} system, for interactive configuration systems, where the system is used to guide a user through a search space, looking for a valid configuration. The advantages of an explicit modeling of domain knowledge in configuration were large: the adaptability in case the domain knowledge changes and the fact that the same specification of knowledge could be reused in different tasks being the most important. This work was extended in \cite{padl/VanHertumDJD16}, where eight different reasoning tasks used in a configuration system were identified and implemented using logical inferences on 1 knowledge base, containing all domain knowledge.
While the KB paradigm has not been previously applied to the problem of delegation revocation, other logical methods have been applied to this access control problem: Aucher et al.\ \cite{Aucher} presented a formalization of Hagstr\"om et al.'s eight revocation schemes in a dynamic variant of propositional logic that resembles imperative programming languages. Furthermore, they extended their formalization with a notion of trust. Unlike our specification, which specifies the eight revocation schemes by specifying the formal properties of the three dimensions of the classification, their formalization defines each of the eight revocation schemes separately. Their formalization only supports the tasks of determining the state of the system after a certain action and of determining whether a user has a certain permission given a certain state of the system; the other tasks described in this paper are not supported by their formalization.
The main author of the current paper has defined a modified version of Hagstr\"om et al.'s delegation revocation framework \cite{postulates} as well as \emph{Trust Delegation Logic}, a logic of trust designed for studying the reasons for performing different revocation schemes defined \cite{Cramer}. This work was motivated by problems we encountered with Hagstr\"om et al.'s delegation revocation framework when we produced the first \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})} specification of the framework; these problems are documented in \cite{postulates}, \cite{Cramer} and \cite{Cramer16}. In general, it should be noted that formally specifying something in \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})} can help understanding it better and uncovering problematic features. As a further example of this, our work on \logicname{FO(\ensuremath{\cdot})} specifications of delegation revocation frameworks has also shown us that Aucher et al.'s \cite{Aucher} formalization actually deviates from Hagstr\"om et al.'s delegation revocation framework in multiple respects (see \cite{Cramer16} for details).
|
\section{Introduction}
The Anti-de Sitter/Conformal Field Theory correspondence (AdS/CFT)
\citep{Aharony:1999ti} has been tremendously successful in providing
a framework for addressing questions in quantum gravity, that goes
far beyond the successes of perturbative string theory. In particular
it provides a detailed accounting of black hole entropy and important
information about the nonperturbative vacuum structure of string theory/quantum
gravity. The holographic mapping from conformal field theory operators
to bulk spacetime operators is however only well-understood as a perturbative
expansion around asymptotically AdS regions \citep{Hamilton:2005ju,Hamilton:2006az},
and there is much current debate about how (or even whether) the holographic
mapping can be extended deep into the bulk spacetime, where the presence
of apparent horizons and global horizons make the application of the
perturbative holographic mapping problematic.
To make progress on these issues, it is necessary to develop an understanding
of the holographic mapping that is less dependent on the special conformal
symmetry of AdS, and instead can work in much more general backgrounds.
In a series of papers, it has been argued a more general holographic
mapping should take the form of a mean field theory approximation,
where the bulk degrees of freedom are to be extracted after suitable
averaging over the microscopic exact representation \citep{Lowe:2014vfa,Lowe:2015eba,Lowe:2016mhi,Lowe:2017ehz}.
In some sense, this is not a new idea, and similar proposals have
been made in the context of loop quantum gravity, fuzzballs, etc.
However what is new about the current work is that a specific class
of Hamiltonia are proposed to describe black hole interiors, and a
specific form of the mean field approximation is developed that may
then be tested in detail.
In earlier work \citep{Lowe:2017ehz}, this idea was developed for
the simpler case of a general (typically long-range, random) two-spin
interaction. However the simple form of the interaction opens the
door to questions about whether such systems can really exhibit quantum
chaos. Since the systems have finite dimensional Hilbert spaces, by
construction, the Hamiltonian may always be diagonalized, and questions
of chaos boil down to whether the spectrum of energy eigenvalues is
suitably dense, and whether the ``local'' basis of states one might
be interested in have a simple representation in terms of energy eigenstates.
The latter condition is not satisfied if we restrict to interactions
with a range comparable to the system extent. So it remains to ensure
the energy spectrum is not too sparse as to induce time recurrences.
This effect emerged as a feature in some of the toy model calculations
of \citep{Lowe:2017ehz}, and in part motivates the present work.
By considering a four-spin interaction, the system is expected to
exhibit quantum chaos, with recurrences only expected on timescales
parametrically larger than the scrambling time. However, in addition,
the couplings will be chosen to follow a random distribution, ensuring
the spectrum of energy eigenvalues is suitably dense.
The starting point for translating states in such a description to
bulk states is to suppose that at some given time one can pick a basis
corresponding to bulk fields localized on some shell of fixed proper
radius in the vicinity of the horizon of a black hole. For the present
work we will not consider additional charges, nor rotation and presume
we have a simple Schwarzschild black hole. For now, the number of
spacetime dimensions will be left arbitrary. Such a shell can be viewed
as our holographic screen, and for bulk excitations localized on such
a shell, the holographic map will be particularly simple. As time
evolves, the excitations will move forward in time, typically to smaller
radii. In the limit of a large black hole, we expect these test probes
to follow timelike geodesics ending on the singularity.
We assume a good approximation to this choice of basis can be made,
which amounts to conjugating some initial Hamiltonian by a unitary
transformation. The main physical assumptions we make are that this
Hamiltonian exhibits fast scrambling, in a sense to be defined below,
and that the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy of the black hole is chosen
to match the log of the Hilbert space dimension
\begin{equation}
S_{BH}=N\log2\,.\label{entropyrel}
\end{equation}
For the purposes of the numerics below we further assume a random
four-spin Hamiltonian is sufficiently general to capture the relevant
properties, with the black hole is represented by some randomly chosen
vector in the Hilbert space of a large number $N$ of spins,
To represent a bulk probe, a smaller system of spins is tensored to
this Hilbert space and a pure state is constructed in this Hilbert
subspace. The full state is then a product of two pure states. Under
the exact time evolution, these states become entangled, and the reduced
density matrix in the probe Hilbert subspace becomes mixed. However
this exact evolution is at odds with what is expected from time evolution
of bulk fields with respect to a local Lagrangian. The primary goal
of the present work is to test the idea that this mixing can be neglected
for times less than the scrambling time, and explore a variety of
measures that are diagnostics of this mixing. This in turn will lead
to a definition of the global thermalization (or scrambling) time
as we detail below, and we will see that even in this high temperature
limit, the spin model exhibits a version of fast scrambling, where
the scrambling time is logarithmic in the system size.
\section{Holographic Model}
The basic form of the holographic model to be studied in the present
paper is a $N$ spin-$1/2$ system with a 4-spin non-local coupling
\begin{equation}
H=\sum_{1\leq i<j<k<l\leq N}J_{ijkl}\overrightarrow{s}_{i}\overrightarrow{s}_{j}\overrightarrow{s}_{k}\overrightarrow{s}_{l}\label{fourspinham}
\end{equation}
where $J_{ijkl}$ are random couplings proportional to $J$ times
a unit normal distribution, completely symmetric in the indices $i,j,k,l$
and pointing in a random direction in spin space. The $\overrightarrow{s}_{i}$
are spin-$1/2$ operators acting on site $i$ where $i=1,\cdots,N$.
The limit of interest is to take $N$ large while keeping
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{var}(H)=N^{0}\label{variance}
\end{equation}
where the variance is taken over the full Hilbert space. This corresponds
to taking
\[
J^{-2}=\left(\begin{array}{c}
N\\
4
\end{array}\right)\,.
\]
This condition will be discussed further below. We note this large
$N$ limit is different than the SYK model, where instead one scales
for fast scrambling at low temperatures, where an additional conformal
symmetry emerges, and the holographic dual includes an entire AdS
asymptotic region. High temperature scrambling in this (and a more
general class of such models) has been studied in \citep{Bentsen:2018uph}.
In practice, we will perform numerical computations at finite $N$,
imposing the condition \eqref{variance} to normalize the couplings
$J_{ijkl}$. One of our goals will be to show that such a system fast
scrambles in the limit of large temperature, in the sense that the
scrambling time to be defined below behaves as
\begin{equation}
t_{scr}\sim N^{0}\log N\label{tscram}
\end{equation}
We note in this theory nothing yet depends on the dimensionality of
spacetime. The theory is intended to reproduce the correct chaotic
physics of the horizon for timescales of order the scrambling time.
In future work, local dimension dependent modifications of the theory
will be studied which can allow the holographic mapping to the bulk
to be further completed, with a view to including the correct local
interactions, beyond geodesic propagation.
\subsection*{Matching with the bulk}
The theory in question may be viewed as a model for the stretched
horizon theory, in the sense of \citep{Thorne:1986iy}. For simplicity
we consider a Schwarzschild black hole in general spacetime dimension
$D$
\[
ds^{2}=\left(1-\frac{2M}{r^{D-3}}\right)dt^{2}-\left(1-\frac{2M}{r^{D-3}}\right)^{-1}dr^{2}+r^{2}d\Omega_{D-2}^{2}
\]
where we work in units where $G=1=c=\hbar$. Since we will match the
Bekenstein-Hawking entropy with $N$ via \eqref{entropyrel}, it will
be helpful to tabulate the $N$ dependence of the thermodynamic observables
of the black hole
\[
M\sim N^{\frac{D-3}{D-2}},\,T_{BH}\sim N^{-\frac{1}{D-2}},\,r_{H}\sim N^{\frac{1}{D-2}},\,\left(\delta M\right)^{2}=T_{BH}^{2}\frac{\partial M}{\partial T_{BH}}\sim-N^{\frac{D-4}{D-2}}
\]
With respect to Schwarzschild time, which measures proper time near
$r=\infty$, the energy is simply $M$. The set of states associated
with the microscopic Hamiltonian $H$ will split this energy into
a band of states and we choose to normalize the width of this band
according to the following relation
\begin{equation}
E=M(N)+N^{-\frac{1}{D-2}}H\label{microenergy}
\end{equation}
where $M(N)$ represents the classical black hole mass, which may
be treated as an $N$ dependent constant shift in the Hamiltonian.
This scaling corresponds to choosing to define the position of the
stretched horizon such that the redshift with respect to infinity
converts a Planck energy down to an energy equal to the Hawking temperature.
With this scaling, we recover the expected expression \citep{Sekino:2008he}
for the scrambling time in Schwarzschild coordinates from the relation
\eqref{tscram}
\[
t_{scr,S}\sim\frac{1}{T_{BH}}\log S_{BH}
\]
One can also look at the contribution of the microscopic Hamiltonian
to the width of the energy spectrum
\begin{equation}
(\delta E)^{2}\sim-N^{\frac{D-4}{D-2}}+\mathcal{O}(N^{-\frac{2}{D-2}})\label{energyfluc}
\end{equation}
where the first term is the semiclassical result, reflecting the negative
specific heat of the black hole, and the second term is due to the
width of the microscopic spectrum of spin states. We see this extra
width matches the energy scale associated with a single Hawking particle
of energy $T_{BH}$, which is a physically reasonable result. It is
also compatible with treating the holographic model in the high temperature
limit, since the physical temperature $T_{BH}$ induces a much larger
scale for fluctuations via the semiclassical term (the first term
in \eqref{energyfluc}) versus the term arising from the microscopic
Hamiltonian. Our goal is to use the Hamiltonian $H$ to model the
dynamics of the black hole on timescales below the Page time ($t_{Page}\sim N^{\frac{D-1}{D-2}}\gg t_{S})$,
when we may approximate the black hole as having an a constant mass
(and hence $N$).
To derive black hole thermodynamics from the microscopic energy \eqref{microenergy}
one can use the relation $S=\log\Omega$ where $\Omega$ is the dimension
of the Hilbert space of the spin model. This statement implicitly
assumes one is coarse graining over energies of order $T_{BH}$, allowing
one to simply count all the states in the spin model. With such a
coarse graining, one may also drop the second term in \eqref{microenergy}.
Applying the usual rules of thermodynamics to $S(E)$ then reproduces
all the expected relations of black hole thermodynamics.
In general, the holographic mapping to the dual gravity variables
is expected to be highly non-local. However in the present situation,
we can take advantage of the infinite range interactions to simplify
this map. At any given time, we can try to perform a general unitary
transformation on our $2^{N}$dimensional Hilbert space to organize
the space into $N$ sites with a spin $1/2$ degree of freedom at
each site, where each site is to be thought of as some point on a
sphere of some fixed radius inside or near the horizon. As time progresses,
this map will become much more complicated, but we will be chiefly
interested in the early time behavior, prior to the scrambling time
$t_{scr}$, where this quasi-local bulk interpretation of the Hilbert
space is a good approximation. The immediate goal then is to build
a candidate for the bulk Hamiltonian, which is local, and which provides
an alternative evolution to the exact time evolution, which is essentially
indistinguishable in this range of times.
Now there is no guarantee this procedure will work, chiefly because
we have little insight into the detailed form of the correct interactions,
and whether this quasi-localization basis can actually be constructed
for the Hamiltonian that descends from some complete theory of quantum
gravity. But as we will see in the present work, the results are largely
insensitive to the details of the interaction chosen, so a goal of
the present work is to present this picture in as general a context
as possible so it may one day be applied to some correct Hamiltonian
of the black hole.
\begin{figure}[H]
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{ntrace_dist}
\caption{\label{fig:ntrdist}$N\ D\left(\rho_{1}(t),\rho_{1}^{MF}(t)\right)$
for various $N$. For each $N$ , trace distance divergence is averaged
over random Page states and over the ensemble of $H$. In the second
panel, the early time region is shown and compared to $\frac{1}{2}\left(1-\sqrt{2P-1}\right)$
with dashed lines, where the bound \eqref{eq:tbound} is close to
being saturated.}
\end{figure}
\subsection*{Observables}
The Hilbert space is the tensor product of individual spin sites $\mathcal{H}=\otimes_{i=1}^{N}\mathcal{H}_{i}$.
Under the assumption the system exhibits quantum chaos for typical
states, then such a typical state will scramble in a timescale of
order $t_{scr}$ and we can use such a state to describe a black hole.
In practice, we will simply choose a random unitary vector in the
Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}$ to generate candidate black hole states.
To represent an observer (or test particle) entering the black hole,
we enlarge the Hilbert space (for example taking $N\to N+1$ and begin
in a product state
\begin{equation}
|\psi(0)\rangle=|\psi_{1}\rangle\otimes|\psi_{0}^{bh}\rangle\label{eq:prodstate}
\end{equation}
where $|\psi_{1}\rangle$ is the spin state representing the observer,
and is chosen to be $|\uparrow\rangle$ and $|\psi_{0}^{bh}\rangle$
describes the state of the black hole. The Hamiltonian $H$ generates
the exact time evolution of the system. However in a scrambling time
the observer's spin becomes entangled with the black hole. Certainly
with respect to the original local basis, the observer's reduced density
matrix becomes highly mixed, and they do not experience the expected
laws of quantum mechanics following from time evolution along a bulk
geodesic. On the other hand, the efficient averaging of the maximally
non-local interaction suggests mean field can be appropriate. As we
now see, this leads to evolution that preserves the pure state tensor
structure \eqref{eq:prodstate}, as we would expect for a particle
moving along a bulk geodesic.
\section{Mean Field Versus Exact Evolution}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{tracedistvspurity}
\caption{The trace distance (solid lines) is compared to the purity bound $\frac{1}{2}\left(1-\sqrt{2P-1}\right)$
(dashed lines). The bound \eqref{eq:tbound} is close to being saturated.}
\end{figure}
The mean field Hamiltonian is defined as
\begin{equation}
H^{MF}(t)=\sum_{i=1}^{N}H_{i}^{MF}(t)=\sum_{i=1}^{N}Tr_{i^{c}}(H\rho^{MF}(t)),
\end{equation}
where $\rho^{MF}(t)$ is the unitary time evolution of the same initial
state evolved by mean field Hamiltonian, and satisfies the von Neumann
equation
\begin{equation}
\dfrac{d\rho^{MF}(t)}{dt}=-i\left[H^{MF}(t),\rho^{MF}(t)\right].\label{eq:meantime}
\end{equation}
Note that each $H_{i}^{MF}$ is a local operator in the Hilbert subspace
associated with spin $i$. The trace is over the complement $i^{c}$
to the Hilbert subspace associated with spin $i$. The mean field
time evolution is therefore guaranteed to preserve the product form
\eqref{eq:prodstate}. However this operator depends on the state
of the other spins, so the time evolution \eqref{eq:meantime} is
inherently nonlinear.
The mean field state will deviate from the exact time evolution. To
measure this deviation, one can consider the trace distance between
reduced density matrices
\[
D(\rho_{1}(t),\rho_{1}^{MF}(t))\equiv\frac{1}{2}\left\Vert \rho_{1}(t),\rho_{1}^{MF}(t)\right\Vert _{1}=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{Tr}\,\sqrt{\left(\rho_{1}(t)-\rho_{1}^{MF}(t)\right)^{2}}
\]
which offers a metric to measure distinguishability between two quantum
states. In the case $\rho_{1}^{MF}(t)$ is a pure state, as is the
case here, the trace distance is bounded from below by $\dfrac{1}{2}(1-\sqrt{2P-1})$
where $P$ is the purity of $\rho_{1}(t)$, as shown in appendix \ref{sec:Bounding-the-Trace}.
Trace distance may also be bounded from above by a Lieb-Robinson bound
\citep{Lashkari:2011yi,Lowe:2017ehz}. Combining the purity bound
with Lieb-Robinson bound we obtain
\begin{equation}
\dfrac{8}{3N}t^{2}<D\left(\rho_{1}(t),\rho_{1}^{MF}(t)\right)<\dfrac{c'}{N}e^{ct}.\label{eq:tracebounds}
\end{equation}
Here $c$ and $c'$ are constants independent of $N$. This is enough
to ensure that the decoherence is an $1/N$ effect. If the exponential
behavior is saturated from early times to times well before the purity
levels off at $1/2$, the scrambling timescale \eqref{tscram} will
emerge, as the timescale over which the trace distance increases to
some fixed fraction (say $10\%$ for example). The trace distance
between these density matrices measures what is usually termed decoherence
of the pure probe state at site 1. However because the interactions
are maximally non-local, in this particular model, we expect this
to also be a good measure of the global thermalization properties
of the system, and hence we will use this method to define our notion
of scrambling time. As we will see later, it corresponds well to other
definitions considered in the literature.
In figure \ref{fig:ntrdist} we plot $N\:D\left(\rho_{1}(t),\rho_{1}^{MF}(t)\right)$
which clearly indicates the universal behavior for early times. Eventually
the trace distance saturates, as the purity of $\rho_{1}(t)$ approaches
its minimum of $1/2$. The time at which this saturation occurs increases
with $N$ as expected from \eqref{eq:tracebounds}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{TrdistvsTvsN}\caption{\label{fig:Fit-of-the}Fit of the averaged trace distance, as a function
of time $t$ and $N$. The surface shows a fit to $at^{2}/N$ where
$a\approx2.6$ in good agreement with the $8/3$ prediction.}
\end{figure}
Following \citep{Yao:2016ayk} one my try a fit of $D\left(\rho_{1}(t),\rho_{1}^{MF}(t)\right)$
to the phenomenologically motivated exponential form
\begin{equation}
D\left(\rho_{1}(t),\rho_{1}^{MF}(t)\right)=a\left(e^{bt}-1\right)^{\Delta}N^{-\gamma}\label{eq:tracefit}
\end{equation}
which yields the values $a=5.5,\,b=0.5,\Delta=1.8$ and $\gamma=.92$.
The value for $\gamma$ is consistent with the analytic bounds \eqref{eq:tracebounds}.
The values for the other parameters are not well determined when looking
at the early time limit. Instead a better fit is obtained simply by
the quadratic form
\[
D\left(\rho_{1}(t),\rho_{1}^{MF}(t)\right)=\frac{a}{N}t^{2}
\]
which yields a better least squares fit with fewer parameters, with
$a=2.6$, agreeing well with the $8/3$ prediction of appendix \eqref{sec:Bounding-the-Trace}.
With this purely quadratic form we do not see evidence of fast scrambling
until we exit this early time limit. In fact, the quadratic approximation
holds very well up until just before the point of inflection in the
curves. This point of inflection then provides one means of defining
the scrambling time. As we see later this matches well with some alternative
measures we study below, which indicate the model does indeed fast
scramble with in a timescale of order $\log N$. In the meantime,
we see the results establish the validity of the mean field approximation
in the window of time prior to the scrambling time.
Rather than study the trace distance between mean field and exact
evolution for a subsystem (in this case a single qubit) we can instead
examine the trace distance between the mean field evolution and the
exact evolution of the full global state over the $N$ qubits. In
line with the expectations of \citep{Hayden:2007cs} we expect a rapid
deviation to emerge. We find a linear increase in the trace distance,
saturating at late times, with behavior largely independent of $N$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{global_td}\caption{Trace distance between mean field and exact evolution for the global
state.}
\end{figure}
The behavior of the purity of $\rho_{1}(t)$, $P(t)=\mathrm{Tr}\rho_{1}^{2}$
is shown in figure \ref{fig:Purity}. The eigenvalues of the Hamiltonians
are sufficiently dense, due to the choice of random couplings, that
no recurrence is observed over the time range explored. This is an
improvement over \citep{Lowe:2017ehz}, though the early time results
there remain valid despite the simplicity of those models.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{Purity}
\caption{\label{fig:Purity}Purity of $\rho_{1}(t)$ for various values of
$N$. For $N>6$ these approach $1/2$ monotonically, as expected
for a system exhibiting quantum chaos.}
\end{figure}
Finally we show a fit of the purity as a function of $t$ and $N$,
verifying the form valid for early times found in appendix \ref{sec:Bounding-the-Trace}.
Fitting the form
\[
P(t)=1-aN^{-\delta}t^{2}
\]
for early times yields $\delta=-0.8$ and $a=-2.8$. Errors with the
expected form arise from the relatively small values of $N$ considered.
Rounding errors also play a role for larger values of $N$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{purity_fit}\caption{Purity on the probe site as a function of time $t$ and $N$. Fit
to $1-at^{2}/N$ with $a\approx5.3$ close to the prediction of $16/3$
of appendix \ref{sec:Bounding-the-Trace}.}
\end{figure}
In summary, we have studied numerically and analytically the trace
distance between the mean field and exact evolution for states corresponding
to local probes of black holes in this model. We see the trace distance
remains small for a timescales shorter than the scrambling time \eqref{tscram}.
We have also shown the trace distance is bounded below by the purity,
which depends only on decoherence of a local spin with respect to
the exact time evolution. Moreover this bound is apparently saturated
at early times. These results are consistent with the holographic
interpretation of the mean field as a bulk worldline Hamiltonian advocated
in \citep{Lowe:2017ehz}. At this level of approximation the mean
field approximation is essentially free evolution (more generally
an arbitrary local Hamiltonian can be chosen without changing the
validity of mean field). In future work, we consider adding nearest
neighbor interactions to the spin model to reproduce local field theory
interactions in the bulk. For now we turn to a study of the extent
to which one sees evidence for fast scrambling in this class of models.
\section{Evidence For Fast Scrambling}
The observables studied above are arguably simply studying the thermalization
of the subsystem as interactions place it in contact with the rest
of the system, which acts as the environment, decohering the subsystem.
For a general Hamiltonian, those observables would not be indicative
of global scrambling or quantum chaos. However for the particular
class of Hamiltonians studied here, which are maximally non-local,
we find the results match well with other diagnostics of scrambling
studied in the literature. We now turn to the study of these observables.
\subsection*{OTOC}
The Out-Of-Time-Order-Correlator (OTOC) is one of the first studied
diagnostics of quantum chaos \citep{larkin1969quasiclassical}, where
it was noticed that chaotic dynamics can lead to exponential variation
in such quantities. In particular, the expectation value of the square
of the commutator of a pair of Hermitian operators $V$ and $W$,
$C_{2}(t)=\langle[W(t),V(0)]^{\dagger}[W(t),V(0)]\rangle$ is expected
to grow exponentially in time: $C_{2}(t)\sim e^{\lambda_{L}t}$. Here
$\lambda_{L}$ is to be identified as an analog of a Lyapunov exponent.
Here we study this quantity where $V=s_{z,1}$ and $W=s_{z,2}$.
\begin{figure}[H]
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{NC2}
\caption{Commutator $C_{2}(t)$ as a function of time for various values of
$N$. The result has been rescaled by $N^{2.28}$ to illustrate the
universal early time behavior, prior to saturation/scrambling in the
late time regime.}
\end{figure}
For early time evolution, each line can be fitted by $at^{2}/N^{\delta}$,
where $a$ and $\delta$ are fitting coefficients.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{c2vstvsN}\caption{Here the OTOC is fit to the form $at^{2}/N^{\delta}$ with $a\approx175\pm4,\,\delta\approx2.28\pm0.02$,
showing the early time growth of the commutator.}
\end{figure}
The growth in $C_{2}(t)$ provides the first hint of scrambling. For
the numerically accessible values of $N$ the expected exponential
growth seems to saturate well before there is a clear separation from
the perturbative early time regime (which is only sensitive to the
$t^{2}$ term in an expansion around $t=0$). The behavior of $C_{2}$
is qualitatively very similar to the behavior of the trace distance
(exact vs. mean field) considered in the previous section. To do better
in measuring the scrambling timescale, our strategy will be to perform
a measurement of the cross-over timescale between these different
regimes, and we will study observables where this cross-over can be
measured with greater precision.
\subsection*{Entanglement Entropy}
Since the Hamiltonian is maximally non-local in the spin basis, we
expect studying the entanglement entropy of pairs of spins provides
a useful measure of the global entanglement of the system, and hence
the extent to which scrambling has taken place. Recalling that we
start the system in a product pure state \eqref{eq:prodstate} we
can compute the entanglement entropy of the spin at site 1, via
\[
S_{ent}(t)=-Tr\left(\rho_{1}\ln\rho_{1}\right).
\]
Below we carry out numerical simulations of the system to obtain entropy
growth as a function of holographic time as shown in figure \ref{fig:Scrambling-time-extracted}.
\begin{figure}[H]
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{ententropy_n}\caption{\label{fig:Entanglement-entropy-as}Entanglement entropy as a function
of time for various $N$. For each $N$ entropy growth is averaged
over random Page states and over the ensemble of $H$. A rescaling
by $N^{.67}$ illustrates the universality of the early time regime.Early
time regime, fit well by $at^{\gamma}/N^{\delta}$ with $a\approx3.7\pm0.1,\gamma\approx1.62\pm0.01,\delta\approx0.67\pm0.01$}
\end{figure}
Entanglement entropy growth in a strongly coupled gapless system with
a gravity dual has been studied intensely in \citep{Casini:2015zua,Liu:2013iza,Liu:2013qca}.
It was proposed that the growth in entanglement entropy can be visualized
as the spreading of an ``entanglement tsunami''. The region covered
by the wave-front is entangled with the rest of the system, and the
system achieves saturation when fully covered by the tsunami. For
a wide class of black hole systems, entropy growth exhibit three stages
of development: 1. pre-local-equilibration quadratic growth; 2. post-local
equilibration linear growth; 3. saturation, exactly matched by our
numeric simulation. It was discussed in \citep{Liu:2013iza} that
the linear growth regime characterizes the late-time memory loss:
the wave front forms a uniform circle and propagates in the same way
regardless of what the initial configuration is. For us, we are interested
in this timescale to reach the linear regime. From the data in fig.
\ref{fig:Entanglement-entropy-as} we can study the position where
the point of inflection of the curves.
\begin{figure}[H]
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{t_scr_errbars}\caption{\label{fig:Scrambling-time-extracted}Scrambling time extracted from
entropy as a function of $N$.}
\end{figure}
The results are shown in figure \ref{fig:Scrambling-time-extracted}.
The timescale shows an obvious $\log N$ dependence $t_{scr}=0.21\log N$.
We note this one parameter fit produces a better fit than a three
parameter power law fit $aN^{\delta}+c$, which offers the strongest
numerical evidence of fast scrambling we have found. The entanglement
entropy does not depend on a choice of operators (as in the OTOC)
nor on the mean field approximation (as in the previous section),
so for us is the most numerically useful quantity to study in the
approach to global scrambling.
\section{Summary}
We have explored a four-spin interacting system that exhibits fast
scrambling feature in the high temperature limit which is conjectured
to be holographically dual to a black hole spacetime in the vicinity
of the horizon. This is in contrast with SYK model, where chaotic
behaviors emerge when the couplings $\beta J$ are taken to be large,
corresponding to a low temperature limit, and holographically to a
complete asymptotically anti-de Sitter spacetime. We extend early
work of the mean field construction to this new holographic Hamiltonian.
The trace distance between the exact and mean field Hamiltonian remain
small for at least a scrambling time which indicates the local mean
field viewpoint, which may be reinterpreted in terms of a bulk description
can be valid for timescales smaller than the scrambling time. This
supports the conjecture that decoherence of the in-falling state is
a dual to the disruptive bulk effects near the space-time singularity.
\begin{acknowledgments}
This work was supported by Brown University through the use of the
facilities of its Center for Computation and Visualization. D.L. is
supported in part by DOE grant de-sc0010010. D.L. acknowledges support
from the Simons Center for Geometry and Physics, Stony Brook University
during the completion of this work. D.L. thanks L. Thorlacius for
discussions.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction}
Due to the study of Cosmic-Ray Ensembles (CRE) in large areas and the correlation between specific events, the project requires a large and widely dispersed research infrastructure. CREDO wants to rely not only on specialized detectors, such as those found in professional observatories (eg. Pierre Auger), which are available only to the scientific staff, but also on detectors that could be used by people who are not necessarily scientists (citizen science) [1]. Detectors that could be used in a large-scale experiment should be generally available, easy to use, and above all - cheap. This approach resulted in the implementation of smartphones in the CREDO project as cosmic ray detectors [2]. It is estimated that nowadays about 2.7 billion people are smartphone users [3]. Telephones as detectors unfortunately have quite limited "field of view" - the matrix has an average size of 1/2.3”, also require permanent connection to the charger while operating the CREDO application. Thus, in a scenario in which we would like to "catch" particles in areas that are difficult to access, i.e. forests or deserts, mobile phones will not pass the exam. Detectors according to the scenario are to be deployed in both urbanized and uninhabited areas. This means that not everywhere will be access to the Internet, 3G or GSM.
An alternative to the GSM or WiFi network is ISM bandwidth, which does not require any infrastructure. Available ISM bands are 915 MHz, 868 MHz, 433 MHz and 169 MHz. The largest range is obtained for the lowest frequencies, because the attenuation of the signal through obstacles is proportional to the square of the frequency [4] (Formula \ref{kwadrat}). The aim was to select a universal carrier that will provide communication in any environment. Therefore, the ISM 169 MHz band was selected for transmitting information in CREDO scenario.
\begin{equation}
L = L_{x}f^2
\label{kwadrat}
\end{equation}
where $L_{x}$ is constant characteristic to the material of the obstacle.
\section{System Topology}
The system is organized in the star topology, which ensures the lowest energy consumption (does not require the use of retransmitters). The center is a collecting station (sink) equipped with a specialized antenna for communication at the frequency of 169 MHz. The sink being in the mode of continuous listening, waiting for the packages with data that are sent by the broadcasting stations requires mains power. Sink is connected to the computer by a COM port through which it transmits data received from transmitting stations to the terminal.
Transmission stations are intended for integration with mobile devices (in the case of the CREDO project with mobile detectors), therefore, when designing them, particular emphasis was placed on minimizing energy consumption. The diagram of the system architecture is shown in Figure \ref{star_topology}.
\noindent
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{star_topology.png}
\caption{Topology of CREDO communication system}
\label{star_topology}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\vspace{5cm}
\section{Radio waves as a carrier of wireless communication}
There are many ready-made solutions on the market that provide wireless communication on ISM bands, eg. LoRa and SigFox [5]. Unfortunately, the use of such solutions requires infrastructure (receivers placed on masts), which are only available in larger cities. In this case, it is not possible to use the communication system in non-urbanized areas.
The range and mobility of the station is a critical parameter when choosing the technology for the communication system for the CREDO project. During the system design, tests were carried out on starter-kit STM equipped with LoRa modules [6]. However, the LoRa protocol was not used because it was known that it could not be used in non-urbanized locations and only the LoRa’s modulation mode was tested. Unfortunately, no satisfactory coverage has been achieved (~300 m in urban area). Similar tests were conducted on starter-kit sets equipped with module SPIRIT1 [7], similarly, satisfactory test results were not obtained - in the built-up area the range was 100 m.
Due to the fact that it is required to provide communication for data readings from detectors both in urban and secluded areas, it finally became clear that it would be necessary to design our own broadcasting and receiving stations that were autonomous and dedicated to the project.
\section{Transmission protocol}
The system is based on one-way transmission of detectors to the receiving station. To avoid collisions between individual transmissions, clock synchronization based on the DCF clock and transmission in the "time slots" designated by the ID number of the transmitting stations, was used. In places where the DCF clock is unavailable, the transmitting station has the ability to emulate the DCF signal. Each of the transmitting stations sends the frame to the sink in case of an event (particle detection) in the nearest "time slot". In addition to that, once an hour a status frame is sent, including its GPS position.
The DCF signal is transmitted on the 77.5 kHz frequency from Germany and can be received within a radius of 2000 km. In places where DCF reception is not possible, the receiving station emulates a DCF signal to synchronize the time in broadcasting stations.
Each of the transmitting stations is assigned an ID number, which is an integer in the range $<1,+\infty)$. In the experimental system, it was assumed that the transmitting stations within one receiving unit is at most 60 pcs. and that they have ID numbers from 1 to 60. These ID numbers correspond to time slots $n$, where $n = IDnumber -1$, i.e. numbers from 0 to 59 corresponding to subsequent minutes.
The format of the frame sent by the sending station is presented on the Figure \ref{frame}.
\noindent
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{frame.PNG}
\caption{Frame format sent to the sink}
\label{frame}
\end{figure}
The end frame marker is not necessary, as a used radio module Semtech [8] recognizes the end of the frame on its own.
The average life time of a battery at the sending station is presented below is ~2 years in a scenario where the data is sent once per hour from a detector, and the frame transmission time is 2.2 s.
The battery lifetime was calculated by Formula \ref{bateria}.
\begin{equation}
battery life [h] =\frac{B [mAh]}{\bar{I} [mA]}
\label{bateria}
\end{equation}
where $B$ is battery capacity, and $\bar{I}$ is average current.
The average current was calculated by Formula \ref{srednia}.
\begin{equation}
\bar{I}[A] =\frac{t[s] p[A] n}{q[s]}
\label{srednia}
\end{equation}
where $t$ is transmission time, $p$ is power consumption when transmitting, $n$ is number of frames per day and $q$ is the number of seconds per day.
\section{Antenna}
Matching the right type and parameters of the antenna had a huge impact on the results obtained during the experiment. The experiment showed that the type of antenna not only affects the range but also the quality of the transmission.
The basic parameters of the antenna are:
\begin{itemize}
\item Gain in relation to the reference antenna (dipole with a length of $\frac{1}{2}$ wave)
\item Impedance
\item Directionality
\end{itemize}
Wavelength is another important parameter for determination of antenna length - the distance that the radio wave travels during one complete cycle of the wave.
The project uses antennas with $50\Omega$ impedance. The required length of the rod antenna should be at least $\frac{1}{4}$ of the radio wavelength. This means, the lower frequency, the longer antenna rod is required; it is a serious problem for mobile devices that should be miniaturised.
Small size constructions use antenna other than rods, which are shorter with good gain. The project uses transmitting antennas with a length of 110 mm and a gain of 2 dBi, while the rod antenna would have to have a length of about 400 mm.
The antenna in the receiving station does not have to be miniaturised. A full wave antenna (approx. 1500 mm long) and a gain of over 10 dBi was used.
\section{The scope of the coverage experiment}
The experiment was conducted in the most difficult of possible conditions, including potential scenarios of using the communication system in the CREDO project - meaning a high urban development in the city of Bytom. It should be remembered that the waves are reflected and absorbed by buildings, hence the range in urban areas is always smaller than in open areas. Figure \ref{path_map} shows the satellite map of the area in which the trials were carried out. About 20 tests were carried out with various types of amplifiers and radio modules and antennas on the track marked in color.
The system consisted of one transmitting station, where the 8 bytes size frame was sent every 5 s, and one receiving station. The transmitting station (adapted to work with mobile devices) was mixed up at a walking pace. The person who carried out the experiment went for a walk with the sending station. Receiving station (sink) is marked with a yellow dot on the Figure \ref{path_map}.
The sending station is based on a standard implementation of the SX1276, transceiver LoRa [8]. The sink station is equipped with same type of the transceiver, however it has added very sensitive amplifier LNA.
Places where communication failed - frames from the transmitting station did not reach the sink at all, are marked in red on the Figure \ref{path_map}. The best results have been obtained so far for the configuration presented in the current work.
The system configuration may seem very simple, but it should be noted that a more complicated configuration is not required to test the transmission range.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{mapa_bytom_path.PNG}
\caption{Satellite map, source: https://www.google.pl/maps}
\label{path_map}
\end{figure}
To carry out the communication coverage test, the transmitting station sends data about the transmission, which are then collected at the terminal on the computer. The data is the device $ID$, $frame number$, $RSSI$ and $SNR$, where:
SNR (Signal Noise to Radio) is described by the Formula \ref{snr_long}:
\begin{equation}
SNR(dB) =10\log_{10}\frac{P_{signal}}{P_{noise}}
\label{snr_long}
\end{equation}
if all levels are expressed in decibels, then the formula can be simplified to the Formula \ref{snr_short}
\begin{equation}
SNR(dB) = P_{signal}(dB) - P_{noise}(dB)
\label{snr_short}
\end{equation}
and RSSI (Received Signal Strength Indication), that is the value of the signal measured in decibels (dB) from $0$ to $-120$. The closer to $0$, the stronger the signal is.
Some examples of collected frames during the experiment are presented in Table \ref{tab}. Data marked on blue are form the parts of blue area from the Figure \ref{path_map}. Data marked on red are from parts of the red area from the Figure \ref{path_map}. The data which did not arrived to the sink are marked with $x$.
The transmission parameters for the entire path shown on Figure \ref{path_map} can be found at https://github.com/kashiakashia/The-CREDO-communication-system/wiki
\vspace{0.5cm}
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{| >{\columncolor[RGB]{230, 242, 255}}p{0.5cm} |>{\columncolor[RGB]{230, 242, 255}} p{0.7cm} |>{\columncolor[RGB]{230, 242, 255}} p{1cm} |>{\columncolor[RGB]{230, 242, 255}} p{1cm} |>{\columncolor[RGB]{230, 242, 255}} p{1cm}|||>{\columncolor[RGB]{238, 210, 210}} p{0.5cm} |>{\columncolor[RGB]{238, 210, 210}} p{0.7cm} |>{\columncolor[RGB]{238, 210, 210}} p{1cm} | >{\columncolor[RGB]{238, 210, 210}}p{1cm} |>{\columncolor[RGB]{238, 210, 210}} p{1cm} |}
\hline
n & ID & frame & RSSI & SNR & n&ID & frame & RSSI & SNR \\
\hline
\hline
392& 12& 597& -49& 6& 1& x& 160& -69& -16\\
393& 12& 598& -55& 12& 2& x& 165& -70& -15\\
394& 12& 599& -55& 11& 3& 12& 167& -69& -15\\
395& 12& 600& -54& 11& 4& 12& 168& -69& -15\\
396& 12& 601& -50& 7& 5& x& 169& -69& -16\\
397& 12& 602& -47& 6& 6& x& x& -69& -17\\
398& 12& 603& -45& 9& 7& x& 176& -69& -15\\
399& 12& 604& -44& 7& 8& 12& x& -69& -16\\
400& 12& 605& -44& 7& 9& x& x& -68& -17\\
401& 12& 606& -44& 7& 10& x& x& -76& -17\\
402& 12& 607& -44& 6& 11& x& x& -69& -16\\
403& 12& 608& -44& 7& 12& 12& 182& -69& -15\\
404& 12& 609& -55& 7& 13& x& x& -77& -17\\
405& 12& 610& -52& 12& 14& 12& 186& -68& -17\\
406& 12& 611& -53& 11& 15& 12& 4& -68& -17\\
407& 12& 612& -52& 11& 16& x& 189& -69& -15\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Transmission parameters from the range limit area (red) compared with transmission parameters for the very good range area (blue)} \label{tab}
\end{table}
\section{New $\mu C$ for CosmicWatch}
One of the devices, able to detect cosmic rays, is an MIT product called CosmicWatch (CW) [9]. CW is a small device contains Silicon Photomultiplier (SiMP) diode attached to the plastic scintillator and electronic for analyze and save incoming events. Heart of the CW is ATmega328P (ATmega) microprocessor ($\mu C$) working on 16 MHz, without another modules. During the test, CW have problems with time slew. After a few hours the two ATmega32s without synchronization can have different times which is a challenge for data analysis. A solution to this problem is to use a GPS module which for the STM32 device family worked acceptably.
As a test the STM32F446ZE (STM) on 180 MHz was used, with FGPMMOPA6H GPS module [10][11]. The internal two counters are used for timestamp for nanoseconds time frame and one timer for synchronization with GPS. In fact, the accuracy of time depends mainly from GPS module and conditions of GPS signal. Ideally this GPS module should have only 10 ns jitter, but in fact this parameter is worse. Replacing $\mu C$ in CW to STM with GPS module provide great increase of performance and time precision than original solution of CW. STM is 11.25 times faster than original used ATmega and direct memory access (DMA) used in STM is solution for dead time caused by communication with GPS module and data receiver (server) existing in ATmega.
While better software or using bespoke hardware such as FPGA can further improve the system it is not required. Our aim was to achieve an optimal price to performance ratio with sufficient timing precision, for that the $\mu C$ solution was satisfactory. The software to connect CW and solution on STM with CREDO database is created software written in Python available at https://github.com/credo-science/Credo-Desktop-Detector.
\section{Conclusion and future work}
To obtain a fully autonomous and mobile system for the detection of CRE, it is necessary to create our own low-power and mobile detector equipped with a reference real time clock. Unfortunately, CosmicWatch detectors take too much electricity to power them with the battery, and synchronization of their time base is not satisfactory for very accurate measurements. An important aspect is also further improvement of the communication system. At the moment we are moving through 2D space; going down to lower frequencies, such as 27 MHz, would allow the possibility of communication through the the ionospheric reflection of radio waves. This would allow the bypassing of obstacles (such as high buildings, ascents) in 3D space.
Assuming the detection station has access to a power supply, it would be worthwhile using simple systems to control the climatic conditions inside the measuring station. In the prototype station the Peltier Modules and the water cooling system were used, to estimate its efficiency and reliability. Low power heaters were also used to dry the station interior and guarantee a safe and convenient operating temperature, even in temperatures below zero (centigrade). The system is also equipped with condensate pumps and an emergency ventilation system, based on compressed air, inside the chamber. Taking into account the physics of the detection process, the key element is to ensure the appropriate conditions, mainly thermal ones. In addition, most plastic scintillators significantly change their properties after repeated exposure to temperature changes above certain limits. When using the detection technique based on semiconductor components (SiPM, amplifiers) in the analog path, the temperature differences can also significantly affect the measurement results. For this purpose, it is necessary to conduct accurate thermal tests of the detectors used in a station, and to select the optimal measurement conditions for them, using active methods (controlled, autonomous climate chambers), as well as passive ones - radiators and housings allowing the most favorable heat distribution.
By optimizing detection techniques for use in a stations with the lowest possible power consumption (battery, photovoltaic), it is necessary to choose the proper detection technique for changeable environmental conditions. It is therefore advisable to make thermal calibration of analog circuits, and to take into account the results of calibration in subsequent data analysis. It is also necessary to test the influence of temperature on the scintillator parameters and to select the right material, guaranteeing the best results in a wide temperature range, while maintaining the lowest possible price and highest durability.
|
\section{Introduction}
Transfer learning is widely applied in the development of machine learning systems and has been integrated into commercialized machine learning services, e.g., Google Cloud AI~\cite{GoogleAI}.
It facilitates effortless derivation of new models (Student models) through tuning a pre-trained (Teacher model) on a relevant task with less training data and computation cost~\cite{Pan10}.
For example, the InceptionV3 classifier training on ImageNet~\cite{DengJ09} with 1.2 million images requires more than 2 weeks using 8 GPUs~\cite{Szegedy16}.
By contrast, in transfer learning, a quality face recolonization Student model can be developed from a Teacher model with only several hundred training images in several minutes~\cite{Wang18,Pan10}.
While expediting the training and curtailing the demands of the data for Student models, transfer learning encounters severe threats~\cite{Wang18,Ji18,Zhao18}, as conventional machine learning systems.
Well-trained Teacher models become attractive targets, as they are commonly hosted on public platforms and are extensively utilized.
Recent attacks targeting transfer learning~\cite{Wang18} generate adversarial examples to induce misclassification competently.
Based on the boundary conditions revealed from the Teacher models, attackers can imitate and manipulate the input's internal features in the associated Student models, even when these Student models are not accessible to the attackers.
Such attacks are powerful, since the transferability of the adversarial manipulation preserves, i.e., no matter whether the structures and parameters of the Student models are modified or not.
To our best knowledge, most of the existing defences against adversarial examples are not suitable in transfer learning.
For instances, adversarial detection~\cite{Feinman17} loses its ability since the new model structures and weights are modified, and adversarial training~\cite{Tramer17,Kurakin16} based approaches are not optimized for the targeted Student models in transfer learning.
Wang \emph{et al.} proposed two basic defences for transfer learning, i.e., Randomizing Input via Dropout and Injecting Neuron Distances~\cite{Wang18}, which are either of limited model accuracy or high training difficulty. More importantly, they both fall short of improving the overall robustness of the model, i.e., less effective to non-targeted attacks.
Detailed comparisons can be found in our experiments in Section~\ref{sec:exp}.
To address these drawbacks, we aim to make a first step towards effectively mitigating the advanced misclassification attacks against transfer learning~\cite{Wang18}.
Our goal is to scalably strengthen the trained customized models (Student models) to detect and reject the adversarial inputs while retaining the model accuracy.
\noindent \textbf{Challenges and Technical Insights:}
There are several challenges yet to be resolved to achieve the above goal.
The first is how to reduce the transferability of the attacks.
The targeted Student models are highly vulnerable, since the misclassification attacks feature strong transferability among the Student models that are simply developed from a public Teacher model.
To break such transferability, we design dedicated classifiers, called differentiators, in a non-trivial manner.
In particular, we carefully apply network pruning to make them highly distilled and vary widely from the Teacher model.
To expand these dissimilarities, we adapt pruning based on the activation from only two classes, which causes the utmost-possible dissimilarity between the differentiator and the Teacher model.
Each of the differentiators can only mitigate the attacks between two specific classes, and thus employing a single differentiator is not robust to the variance of attacks among other classes.
To overcome this limitation, one can use the ensemble method and group the differentiators with every class pair to cover all possible attacks against arbitrary classes.
Despite being highly effective, we realize that these differentiators developed by only two classes increase the size of the ensemble models for complex classification tasks.
A practical challenge here is how to reduce long inference latency caused by the bloated ensemble models.
To improve scalability, our observation is that given a certain adversarial example, not all the differentiators are related to the source or target class of it.
Accordingly, we pare our design by selecting differentiators classifying between the preliminary inference class from the Student model and other classes.
The preliminary inference is either the correct source class from a clean example, or the target one from an adversarial example.
Therefore, the differentiators corresponding to the preliminary inference class are able to validate the clean inputs or reject the attacker's inputs.
Because a significant portion of our differentiators can successfully reject the adversarial examples, randomly selecting a few of the corresponding ones for ensemble is sufficient for defence in inference.
\vspace{2pt}
\noindent \textbf{Contributions:} The main contributions of our work are summarized as follows:
\vspace{-10pt}
\begin{itemize}
\item To our best knowledge, we are the first to propose effective yet comprehensive defences for transfer learning.
Our design mitigates both the targeted and non-targeted misclassification attacks~\cite{Wang18}. The former attacks generate adversarial inputs which can be identified to a target class, while the latter ones can misclassify the inputs to any other classes.
\item We carefully utilize network pruning to build differentiators, where each differentiator is designed to infer two specific classes dedicatedly and to be immune to adversarial inputs.
To deduct the transferability of the attacks, we apply activation pruning when developing the distilled models.
To preserve the accuracy, we choose flexible pruning ratios for different layers to reduce the accuracy loss caused by pruning, and iteratively retrain the pruned models.
For efficiency, we further adopt independent pruning for each layer to curtail the time cost of the design implementation.
\item We incorporate an ensemble structure into our defence to improve the robustness of the overall models against the attacks among all classes.
We instantiate our ensemble structure using a general developing Student model and a group of our two-class differentiators.
In the first phase, the preliminary inference result is utilized from the Student model to narrow down the possible source or target classes of the inputs.
In the second phase, only a small, fixed number of the differentiators that correspond to these classes validate clean or reject adversarial inputs.
As a result, our design satisfies the defence rate, model accuracy, and scalability.
\item We implement our defence for two transfer learning applications, i.e., Face Recognition (83 classes) and Traffic Sign Recognition (43 classes).
We evaluate our design on the defence rate, model accuracy, efficiency of the model development and inference, and even effectiveness against general attacks like FGSM~\cite{Goodfellow14} and DeepFool~\cite{Moosavi16}.
The results for both tasks confirm that our ensemble models can reject over 91\% of the adversarial examples only with 5 differentiators in 2 seconds.
It achieves more than 90\% defence rates with different attack configurations on attack layers and perturbation budgets.
Meanwhile, our design preserves the accuracy above 90\% after decent pruning and retraining.
Last but not least, we conduct comprehensive comparisons with prior arts to demonstrate that our defence achieves higher defence rates, particularly for the non-targeted attacks.
Our defence rates are $\sim$90\% for both tasks, while prior arts proposed in~\cite{Wang18} only reach $\sim$20\% for Face and $\sim$40\% for Traffic Sign Recognition.
\end{itemize}
\vspace{-3pt}
\noindent \textbf{Organization:}
The rest of our paper is organized as follows.
Section~\ref{sec:background} provides the background knowledge of misclassification attacks in transfer learning and network pruning used in our design.
Section~\ref{sec:defence} presents our defence design in details.
Section~\ref{sec:exp} shows the experimental results of our defence and the comparisons among our design to others.
Section~\ref{sec:discussion} discusses effectiveness of our design in broader scenarios.
Section~\ref{sec:relatedwork} introduces related work on attacks and defences of machine learning and transfer learning systems.
Section~\ref{sec:conclusion} gives a conclusion and future directions.
\section{Background}
\label{sec:background}
\subsection{Misclassification Attacks against Transfer Learning}
\noindent \textbf{Transfer Learning:}
Transfer learning is proposed to learn knowledge from a completed model and prediction task, and improve the training of new models for different tasks.
The knowledge can be either domain information, which consists of the feature space and the marginal probability distribution of the training data, or the learning task, which consists of a label space of the training data and the pre-trained model fitting the objective predictive function of this task~\cite{Pan10}.
Based on existing knowledge, transfer learning speeds up the development of the new models even when their domains or learning tasks are different.
A simple way of transfer learning is developing a new model based on both weights and architectures of the layers from a well-trained model.
If the new model has a similar domain or learning task as the pre-trained model, it can be directly built by fine-tuning the parameters to fit its task.
For a transfer learning process, the Student model first copies both the architecture and weights from the Teacher model. After that, the last classification layer of the Student model is tailored to fit the new classification task. Then, the Student model is tuned based on the similarity of two tasks. One common methodology of tuning is to freeze several layers and retrain the rest of them as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:TransferLearning1}.
As we mentioned before, reusing the Teacher model introduces the vulnerability of the Student models.
Recent studies have exploited it and propose adversarial attacks specifically targeting transfer learning systems.
To our best knowledge, the most effective and easily deployable ones are the misclassification attacks introduced by Wang \textit{et al.}~\cite{Wang18}.
\noindent \textbf{Attacks Assumption:}
To be consistent, we follow the same assumption as Wang \textit{et al.}~\cite{Wang18}.
The attacks assume white-box access to Teacher models and black-box to Student models.
\noindent \textit{White-box Teacher Model:}
We first assume that the attackers have full access to the Teacher model. This is realistic because most of the well-trained models are publicly available. The attackers can pretend to be one of the students so that they can know both the weights and the architecture of the Teacher models. We also assume that the attackers can find the corresponding Teacher model when they are targeting at a Student model. ~\cite{ Wang18} introduces this Teacher model fingerprinting method.
\noindent \textit{Black-box Student Model:}
The attackers are assumed to have no access to the Student models. Namely, the Student models are considered as black boxes. We assume that neither the model parameters (including the weights and the architecture) nor the training datasets for Student models are accessible to the attackers. In real situations, this information may include sensitive and private data that is normally considered proprietary to Student model owners.
Besides, we assume that the attackers can only use limited queries to the implemented Student models, which makes them hard to reproduce the shadow models.
To make coherent assumptions as~\cite{Wang18}, we do not consider the case where the Student models are reproduced or leaked.
If the attackers can directly gain enough information from the Student models rather than from the Teacher models, the implementation of the attacks will not be impacted by the transfer learning method.
Namely, this case will become a generic attack and defence problem in machine learning.
Nevertheless, our design further considers a stronger attacker according to a guiding principle introduced in~\cite{Carlini19}, which suggests that the adversaries might obtain some knowledge of the defence algorithm.
More details can be found in Section~\ref{sec:discussion}.
\noindent \textbf{Misclassification Attacks Methodology:}
Figure~\ref{fig:TransferLearningAttack1} depicts the idea of how the misclassification attacks~\cite{Wang18} conduct in transfer learning.
The key insight is that the attacks can make the internal features of a certain layer output in Teacher models for two different input images being very similar.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{figs/transfer_learning.pdf}\\
\caption{Transfer Learning}
\label{fig:TransferLearning1}
\vspace{-15pt}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[htp]{0.9\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{figs/TransferLearningAttack.pdf}
\caption{Misclassification Attacks in Transfer Learning~\cite{Wang18}}
\label{fig:TransferLearningAttack1}
\end{minipage}
\vspace{-15pt}
\end{figure}
We refer to this certain layer as \textit{attack layer}.
Given a transfer learning system, the attackers expect a carefully chosen layer where the layers before it may be frozen or just be slightly tuned during the development of the Student models.
In this case, the internal features of the attack layer outputs can still be similar in the Student models.
Since the models are feedforward networks, each layer's output will only depend on the preceding output.
Once two internal features of the output from the attack layer are close enough, the outputs for the rest are also likely to be very similar even they are retrained.
Such similarity will be maintained to the final prediction.
As a result, the misclassification takes place since two inputs with different labels have a similar prediction.
For realisation, it can be translated into an optimized problem which minimizes the distance for the internal outputs by limited perturbations.
More details can be found in Appendix~\ref{app:attack_details}.
\subsection{Network Pruning}
Network pruning aims to remove the unimportant connectivities of a network which makes a dense neural network become a sparser one.
By carefully choosing the pruned connectivities and further tuning the networks, the accuracy loss of the pruned networks can be acceptable.
According to prior work~\cite{Han15,Wang19}, most of the model structures have redundant neurons and connectives.
These connectives are less active during the classification tasks.
Pruning these unnecessary components can improve the efficiency of both inferring and storing for the machine learning models.
Figure~\ref{fig:Pruning1} overviews the pruning over a three-layer neural network.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{figs/Pruning_with_filters.pdf}\\
\caption{Network Pruning}
\label{fig:Pruning1}
\vspace{-15pt}
\end{figure}
In particularly, there are two approaches for pruning.
\textbf{(1) Weight-based pruning.} It is a simple and direct way.
A threshold weight value can be chosen and all connectives with fewer weight values than the threshold can be removed~\cite{Han15}.
\textbf{(2) Activation-based pruning.} It considers how the weights are activated by the expected inputs~\cite{Polyak15}.
It removes the connectives with fewer activation compared to the threshold.
Besides, for large neural networks with convolution layers, the convolution matrix (also called kernel or filter) rather than each connectives can be pruned.
It is shown that removing entire filters can produce a network with a more regular structure compared to remove ~\cite{Han15,Polyak15}.
After pruning, the further process should be applied to reduce the loss of accuracy.
A simple way is retraining the pruned network.
In prior work~\cite{Han15,Polyak15}, in order to achieve a high pruning rate with less accuracy loss, the network is pruned and retrained iteratively by gradually increasing the pruning rates.
\section{Defence Design}
\label{sec:defence}
\subsection{Defence Goal and Evaluation}
\noindent \textbf{Goal:} Our goal is to develop a defence approach to address the attacks described above.
Considering the real application scenarios for the defenders, several assumptions are made.
Since robust machine learning systems against the adversarial inputs are desired for users, our defense's development can be fully supported by the customers owning the Student models.
Naturally, the defenders are assumed to have access to both weights and structures of the Student models as well as their training data.
They are also assumed to be able to modify the Student models and make them more robust to the adversarial images.
\noindent \textbf{Evaluation:}
In particular, the defence will be evaluated in terms of both efficiency and effectiveness as follows:
\noindent \textit{Classification Accuracy:} The models with our defence should be able to classify the clean images successfully.
These models should restrain the decrease of accuracy on clean inputs within $10\%$ compared to the original models.
\noindent \textit{Defence Success Rate:}
Our defence is expected to detect most of the adversarial inputs for both the targeted and non-targeted and reject them.
\noindent \textit{Time Consuming:} As one of the motivations of transfer learning is to save cost for large scale learning tasks, our defence should introduce a comparable inference time cost to the ordinary inference or prior other defences.
\noindent \textit{Model Size:} Our defence is also expected to consume acceptable storage resources.
Our defence should be scalable for large models, because transfer learning will be widely adopted when the Teacher models become large and complex.
\subsection{Defence Intuition}
We first present the design intuition of our defence against the misclassification attacks.
As introduced in Section~\ref{sec:background}, the effectiveness of the misclassification attacks relies on manufacturing a similar internal representation at an attack layer.
To address these attacks, a direct and effective solution is modifying the models to make them different from the original ones.
Among others, network pruning has been shown effective in modifying the model structure and restrain the transferability of the attacks~\cite{Liu18,Wang18}.
As introduced in Section~\ref{sec:background}, pruning removes lots of connectivities of the models, which makes them far from the original dense ones.
The difference between the pruned models and targeted models can reduce the effectiveness of the attacks.
Besides, the sparse networks are also more efficient for development (fine-tuning) and application (inference of the models) later, which conforms to the advantages of using transfer learning.
To further reduce the attack success rate while extending the defence to non-targeted attacks, we adapt ensemble models, which are widely used in a machine learning system
The intuition is that, with limited perturbation, it is hard for the adversarial inputs to maintain the transferability to the variance of models.
The adversarial images can only fool parts of these models and loss their transferability to the rest of them.
The overall ensemble models with difference classifiers achieve stronger robustness against these attacks.
While extending the defence to non-targeted attacks, a naive approach that combines differentiators for all possible attack pairs results in a large ensemble model, which contains $(K-1)K/2$ differentiators for a $K$ label classification problem).
To improve the scalability of our design and reduce the inference latency caused by the large size of the ensemble models, we design a two-phase inference.
The inputs are first predicted by the Student model trained by general transfer learning without pruning.
The inference result should be either the correct source class from a clean example or the target one from an adversarial example.
Therefore, differentiators classifying between the source or target class and other classes are chosen to validate or reject the inputs.
The distinctiveness among these differentiators and the Student model is sufficient to reduce the attack effectiveness due to the activation pruning based on only the activation of their corresponding classes.
As a result, a small group of randomly selected differentiators can still be different, making it hard for the adversarial inputs to fool all of them.
The ensemble models consisted of them can be robust to the adversarial examples.
\subsection{Defence Implementation}
This section introduces the details of our proposed defence implementation.
Specifically, we will describe how to construct the ensemble models and then develop the differentiators.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[!t]{1\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{figs/ensemblesturcture_2020.pdf}\\
\caption{Inference Strategy}
\label{fig:EnsembleStructure11}
\end{minipage}
\vspace{-15pt}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Ensemble Construction}
\label{subsubsec:ensemble}
\begin{algorithm}[!t
\caption{Inference Strategy}\label{alg_defence1}
\begin{flushleft}
\hspace*{\algorithmicindent}\textbf{Input:} \\
\hspace*{\algorithmicindent}$x$, input image; \\
\hspace*{\algorithmicindent}$S_o$, general Student model; \\
\hspace*{\algorithmicindent}$S_{1,2}$, $S_{1,3}$, ... $S_{K-1,K}$, differentiators classifying between
\hspace*{\algorithmicindent} every two classes in a K classes classification problem,
\hspace*{\algorithmicindent} their outputs are labels from 1 to K;\\
\hspace*{\algorithmicindent}$k$, size of the ensemble models, where $k<K$. \\
\hspace*{\algorithmicindent}\textbf{Output:} \\
\hspace*{\algorithmicindent}$y$, final prediction.
\end{flushleft}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Function{inference}{$x, S_o, S_{1,2}, S_{1,3}, \dots S_{K-1,K}$}
\State $//$ Phase 1: preliminary inference
\State $pre\_result \gets S_o(x)$
\State $//$ Phase 2: validate clean or reject adversarial inputs
\State Obtain $\{S_{i,j}\}$, where $pre\_result$ is $i$ or $j$
\State Randomly select $\{S\}_{k}$ from $\{S_{i,j}\}$
\For {each $S \in \{S\}_k$}
\State $valid\_result \gets S(x)$
\If{$valid\_result \neq pre\_result$}
\State $//$ reject adversarial input defined as class 0
\State \Return{0}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\State $//$ clean input passes the validation
\State $y \gets pre\_result$
\State \Return{$y$}
\EndFunction
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
The inference consists of two steps: a preliminary inference by the original Student model and a validation inference by a group of differentiators.
For a classification problem with $K$ classes, the inputs are first predicted by the general Student model.
For any inference results as class $c_i$, there are $K-1$ possible label pairs $(c_i,c_j)$, where each of them corresponds to a differentiator trained by their corresponding subsets
They are expected to be fully pruned and robust to the adversarial inputs according to the design goals of the differentiators.
Figure~\ref{fig:EnsembleStructure11} illustrates an example of the above progress.
For any clean inputs, the Student model is likely to provide a correct preliminary prediction.
All the differentiators then can validate this result as they are trained by a subset training data consisted of the correct label dataset.
For an adversarial input, the Student model might be easily fooled and provide a wrong prediction.
However, it is difficult for the adversarial input to fool all differentiators.
If one of the differentiators comes to a different prediction, the input is considered as an adversarial example and rejected.
To reduce the latency of our design, our observation is that a small numbers of randomly selected corresponding differentiators are sufficient to reject almost all the adversarial images.
Besides, inferring among more differentiators may reduce the accuracy of the whole ensemble models due to False Negative.
As a result, our implementation aims to minimize the number of differentiators in regard to the defence specification of the applications.
The detailed strategy is described in Algorithm~\ref{alg_defence1}.
Later in our experiments, 5 differentiators achieve balance on defence rate and accuracy for both small and large tasks.
\subsubsection{Distilled Differentiator}
In our design, network pruning is applied to develop the distilled differentiators.
To reduce the accuracy loss of pruning, they are pruned based on the activation of their whole training data, which is shown in Algorithm~\ref{defence2}.
\begin{algorithm}[!t]
\caption{Differentiator Generator}\label{defence2}
\begin{flushleft}
\hspace*{\algorithmicindent}\textbf{Input:} \\
\hspace*{\algorithmicindent}$D_i,D_j$, two training datasets for the differentiator; \\
\hspace*{\algorithmicindent}$S_{teacher}$, the Teacher model of the transfer learning task. \\
\hspace*{\algorithmicindent}$act$, the activation of the two class for Teacher model. \\
\hspace*{\algorithmicindent}\textbf{Output:} \\
\hspace*{\algorithmicindent}$S_d$, a distilled differentiator.
\end{flushleft}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Function{DifferentiatorTraining}{$D_i, D_j, S_{teacher}$}
\For{each $layer$ in $S_{teacher}$}
\If{$layer$ is convolution layer}
\State Filter Pruning in $layer$ based on $act$
\EndIf
\If{$layer$ is full-connected layer}
\State Connective Pruning in $layer$ based on $act$
\EndIf
\EndFor
\State $S_{student} \gets TransferLearning(D_i, D_j, S_{teacher})$
\For{$i=1$ to $IterationTimes$}
\For{each $UnfrozenLayer$ in $S_{student}$}
\State Pruning in $UnfrozenLayer$ based on $act$
\EndFor
\State $S_d \gets FineTuning(S_{student})$
\EndFor
\State \Return{$S_d$}
\EndFunction
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
As we introduced above, each differentiator is trained to classify between two classes by its corresponding dataset.
To save the training cost, our design applies the general transfer learning method to build the differentiators.
As introduced in Section~\ref{sec:background}, some of the layers copied from the Teacher model are frozen, and the rest of them will be retrained by the dataset for the differentiator's tasks.
After that, these differentiators are distilled via pruning each layer.
The details are presented as follows.
\noindent \textbf{Activation Pruning:}
We use activation pruning which has been demonstrated comprehensive by considering the effect of both inputs and models parameters.
In our design, the differentiators are expected to be highly distilled and variant to each other.
The activation pruning based on different training data increases the disparity among these differentiators, which can improve the robustness of ensemble models.
Meanwhile, activation pruning is also shown to have less accuracy loss comparing the weight pruning.
Therefore, the distilled models via activation pruning are more adaptive to the Student model tasks.
Note that our differentiators only focus on the corresponding two classes.
Therefore, they can still achieve high accuracy, even pruned and tuned by a small dataset, which is desired in transfer learning scenarios.
\noindent \textbf{Pruning via Ratio:}
Our design prunes the models via ratio rather than threshold values.
Based on our observation, the values of the activation can be entirely different for each differentiator while the pruning ratios can be limited in a small range, which expedites our defence development.
\noindent \textbf{Different Ratio for Different Layers:}
In our defence, different pruning rates are chosen for different layers in each differentiator.
According to previous work~\cite{Li16}, each layer has a different sensitivity corresponding to the final model accuracy.
Therefore, pruning ratios for different layers in our design correspond to their pruning sensitivity~\cite{Han15}.
They are chosen following general pruning strategies~\cite{Han15,Polyak15} to maintain the overall accuracy while pruning the redundant components as much as possible.
Since each differentiator is pruned based on activation, using similar pruning ratios still results in contrasting models.
Based on our experiments, more than half of the differentiators can share the same pruning ratios while achieving a high defence rate.
As a result, the efforts of tuning pruning rates are somehow limited.
\noindent \textbf{Filters and Connectives:}
To distil the differentiators better, we apply diverse strategies for different types of layers.
For the full-connected layers, we prune every single connectivity evaluating their activation.
For the convolution layers, we prune the filters consisting of correlative connectives.
While the work~\cite{Li16} shows that pruning the filters in the convolution layers makes the networks more efficient, we find it also improves the defence.
\noindent \textbf{Independent Pruning:}
We prune each layer separately, where the pruning for each layer is not affected by the others.
By pruning each layer independently, every layer can be pruned in parallel which makes our pruning more efficient.
The activation of each class for activation pruning are calculated once and reused when developing other differentiators.
\noindent \textbf{Iteration Pruning and Retraining:}
To preserve accuracy, we propose to retrain and prune the last several layers of the models iteratively.
As directly pruning the networks will harm the accuracy of the models, the classifiers can regain accuracy by performing iteration pruning and retraining the whole models~\cite{Han15}.
To limit the computation cost, only the iterative method is only applied to the unfrozen layers
\section{Experimental Results}
\label{sec:exp}
In this section, we report the experimental results of our defence.
We demonstrate that our design highly improves the robustness of the models against the misclassification attacks in transfer learning.
We also show that our defence is scalable for various classification tasks and adversarial examples with different configurations.
Specifically, we evaluate our defence in accuracy and defence success rates, and compare it with prior arts over two typical tasks.
We also evaluate a popular attack in conventional machine learning systems, i.e. FGSM~\cite{Goodfellow14} to show that our design is applicable to general attacks of adversarial samples.
\subsection{Experimental Setup}
This section introduces the setups of our experiments. Specifically, we will propose the application tasks, the transfer learning scenarios and then the attack setup.
\subsubsection{Teacher and Student Models Selection}
To evaluate our defence, we apply the misclassification attacks to two popular transfer learning tasks: (1) Face Recognition (recognizing 83 public persons in a dataset called PubFig~\cite{Pinto11}), and (2) Traffic Sign Recognition (recognizing 43 traffic signs in a dataset called GTSRB~\cite{Stallkamp11}).
\noindent \textit{Face Recognition:} The task is to classify human faces.
It is a common task used to evaluate both attacks and defences.
The Teacher model is a popular and public pre-trained model, called VGG-Face~\cite{Parkhi15} which is well trained by 2.6M faces with an accuracy of over 90\%.
The Student model will be trained to classify 83 persons chosen from PubFig dataset~\cite{kumar09} with only 7470 images.
\noindent \textit{Traffic Sign Recognition:}
This task is to classify different traffic signs for an auto-driving system.
The Teacher model is a normal VGG16 model~\cite{Simonyan14} trained via the ImageNet dataset with 14 million images.
The top-5 test accuracy of this pre-trained model is about 90.1\%.
The training data for our Student model comes from the GTSRB dataset~\cite{Stallkamp12} which includes 39209 images of 43 traffic signs.
As mentioned in Section~\ref{sec:background}, transfer learning is commonly used with benefits when developing a Student model with relatively small-scale training data.
To simulate this scenario, both Teacher models used in our experiments are popular pre-trained models derived from a large amount of data, while both Student models are using the much smaller-scale training datasets comparing the Teacher models.
\subsubsection{Transfer Method Selection}
In particular, there are three approaches for realization of transfer learning based on the extent of the tuning~\cite{Wang18}.
One is called Deep-layer Feature Extractor, where only the last layer is changed and trained by the Student model training datasets.
The second one is Mid-layer Feature Extractor that unfreezes and retrains some of the layers.
The third one named Full Model Fine-tuning unfreezes and tunes all of the layers.
According to previous work~\cite{Wang18}, the misclassification attacks are less effective for the Student models developed using Full Model Fine-tuning.
Therefore, only the applications for the former two approaches are evaluated in our experiments.
For the first task, both the Teacher model and the Student model focus on face recognition.
Therefore, the transfer learning system can be applied in a direct and simple way.
Based on the observation in~\cite{Wang18}, a Face Recognition model developed as a Deep-layer Feature Extractor achieves higher accuracy than other transfer processes.
As a result, the Deep-layer Feature Extractor is built for the Face Recognition in our experiments.
For the second task, the Teacher model is classifying general objects, while the Student model focuses on traffic signs.
Therefore, we again follow the same configuration as~\cite{Wang18} and use Mid-layer Feature Extractor in this task.
The cut-off layer is chosen to be layer 10 out of 16 for the VGG16 Model when developing the Student model to achieve high accuracy.
\subsubsection{Attack Setup}
In our experiments, we generate the adversarial images following the same steps as~\cite{Wang18} as discussed above which are sufficient to evaluate our defence.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[htp]{0.8\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth, height=0.57\textwidth]{figs/Defence_performance_Face.pdf}
(a) Face Recognition
\end{minipage}
\\
\begin{minipage}[htp]{0.8\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth, height=0.57\textwidth]{figs/Defence_performance_Traffic.pdf}
(b) Traffic Sign Recognition
\end{minipage}
\caption{Performance of defence with different numbers of differentiators in Face and Traffic Sign}
\label{fig:Defence_number}
\vspace{-15pt}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[htp]{0.33\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth, height=0.57\textwidth]{figs/LayervsAttack_Face.pdf
(a) Face Recognition
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[htp]{0.33\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth, height=0.57\textwidth]{figs/perturbationVSattack_Face.pdf}
(a) Face Recognition
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[htp]{0.33\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth, height=0.57\textwidth]{figs/iterationVSaccuracy_Face.pdf}
(a) Face Recognition
\end{minipage}
\\
\begin{minipage}[htp]{0.33\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth, height=0.57\textwidth]{figs/LayervsAttack_Traffic_new.pdf}
(b) Traffic Sign Recognition
\caption{Attack Layer}
\label{fig:LayervsAttack}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[htp]{0.33\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth, height=0.57\textwidth]{figs/perturbationVSattack_Traffic.pdf
(b) Traffic Sign Recognition
\caption{Perturbation Budget}
\label{fig:PerturbationvsAttack}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[htp]{0.33\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth, height=0.57\textwidth]{figs/iterationVSaccuracy_Traffic.pdf}
(b) Traffic Sign Recognition
\caption{Iteration Number}
\label{fig:IterationvsAccuracy}
\end{minipage}
\vspace{-15pt}
\end{figure*}
\noindent \textbf{Attack Pairs:}
Both the source and target images are randomly chosen from the test dataset, and they are not used for training the Student model.
This treatment matches the assumption that the Student model is black-box, and the attacker cannot obtain the training data.
For the targeted attacks, we randomly choose 1K source and target image pairs to generate adversarial images.
For the non-targeted attacks, we also generate 1K adversarial images by randomly choosing source images and 5 target images with different classes for each of them.
After that, we evaluate the distance between the internal feature vectors of the adversarial and target images.
The source and target pair with the smallest internal representation distance will be chosen to generate the final adversarial images of the non-targeted attacks.
\noindent \textbf{Attack Configuration:}
The adversarial images are generated to target at different attack layers.
The optimal attack layer with the highest attack success rate will be considered as the final attack layer~\cite{Wang18}.
The perturbation budget of the adversarial images is $0.003$ in the DSSIM metric~\cite{WangZ03} for the Face Recognition task and $0.01$ for the Traffic Sign Recognition task, which is considered as less detectable thresholds~\cite{Wang18}.
We use Adadelta~\cite{Zeiler12} as the optimizer of the adversarial sample generator.
The optimized problem of the adversarial images generation uses $2000$ for the iteration times and $1$ for the learning rate.
\subsection{Evaluation}
We evaluate our design by comparing the robustness of the systems with and without our design. We also compare our design with other defences to demonstrate the advantages.
In particular, we appraise both the effectiveness and efficiency of our design.
Regarding the effectiveness, we evaluate metrics, including our defence rate against the attacks targeting at different layers.
We also demonstrate the defence rate in the perturbation budget of the attacks and show that our design is effective for variance attack configurations.
Besides, we indicate the accuracy preservation of our defence by showing the relationship between iteration number and model accuracy for the clean inputs.
In addition, we apply other attacks to our design and show that our design methodology can readily be deployed to address general attacks in machine learning systems.
Regarding efficiency, we evaluate the memory and time cost of our design.
Finally, we compare benign input accuracy, defence performance, and efficiency of our design with prior defences in~\cite{Wang18}.
\subsubsection{Effectiveness}
The effectiveness of our defence is evaluated by both the defence rate and model accuracy.
On the one hand, our models should be able to reject the adversarial inputs.
So we evaluate our design by the false positive rate (FPR) of the attacker's inputs.
It equals to the number of inputs detected and rejected as negative divides the number of total adversarial inputs.
High FPR shows the robustness of our defence against adversaries.
On the other hand, the models are expected to classify the benign inputs correctly.
As a result, we also evaluate the accuracy of the models for the clean inputs by using the true positive rate (TPR).
It is defined as the number of inputs validated as positive benign inputs divides the number of total testing clean inputs.
High TPR means that our defence has less hit on the original classification performance.
Firstly, we compare the performance for the Student models with the defence and the original Student models without any defence.
The results confirm that models with our method reject most of the adversarial inputs of the misclassification attacks.
Our defence reduces the FPRs from $100\%$ and $97\%$ for the Face Recognition and Traffic Sign Recognition model to $6\%$ and $1\%$ for the targeted attacks, and $8\%$ and $7\%$ for the non-targeted attacks.
The size of the ensemble models are set $5$ for both two tasks with $83$ and $43$ classes.
With a single CPU core, the Student model inference costs $0.54$s on average, and the total cost of the same preliminary inference and ensemble latency is around $2.11$s. Due to our small ensemble models, the overhead introduced in the inference does not appear to be the bottleneck in transfer learning systems.
We also evaluate our defence by applying attacks with different configurations such as number of differentiators, attack layer, perturbation budget, to show the scalability of our defence in details.
It is shown that our design is robust for variant of attacks.
\begin{table}[!t]
\footnotesize
\normalsize
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c}
\hline
& Targets & FGSM~\cite{Goodfellow14} & DF~\cite{Moosavi16} & CW~\cite{Carlini17Attack} \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Face} & Student & $98.2\%$ & $99.8\%$ & $97.9\%$ \\ \cline{2-5}
& Ensemble & $6.7\%$ & $2.0\%$ & $3.2\%$ \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Traffic Sign} & Student & $90.0\%$ & $95.2\%$ & $98.1\%$ \\ \cline{2-5}
& Ensemble & $4.3\%$ & $1.7\%$ & $4.2\%$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Defending against General Attacks}
\label{tb:DefendGeneralAttacks}
\vspace{-15pt}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[!t]
\footnotesize
\normalsize
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c}
\hline
& Unguarded Models & Models w. our design \\
\hline
\# of Parameters & $1.34 \times 10^8$($512.33MB$) & $1.35 \times 10^8$($513.58MB$) \\
\hline
Pruning Tags & $0$($0MB$) & $1.20 \times 10^8$($14.25MB$) \\
\hline
Total Size & $512.33MB$ & $527.83MB$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Memory Consuming of Models with VGG Structure}
\label{tb4:MemoryConsuming1}
\vspace{-15pt}
\end{table}
\noindent \textbf{Number of differentiators:}
We evaluate our defence by gradually increase the number of differentiators in the second step.
The results show that small number of differentiators ($5$ in our experiments) used in the second phase of our design can be sufficient to defend against the attacks.
Figure~\ref{fig:Defence_number} $a$ shows the relationship among the FPR of both targeted and non-targeted adversarial inputs, the TPR and the number of differentiators in the step two inference for Face Recognition task.
For Deep-layer Feature Extractor, based on the experience of prior work~\cite{Wang18}, the attack success rates to the original Student model without our defence are more than $95\%$ for both the targeted and non-targeted attacks.
After applying our design, about $90\%$ for both targeted and non-targeted attacks are detected and rejected with a few accuracy loss after $5$ differentiators inference.
Figure~\ref{fig:Defence_number}$b$ shows the relationship for the Traffic Signs Recognition.
It can be seen that the FPR drops to less than $10\%$ after $4$ differentiators.
We also evaluate how our defence affects the classification of the clean inputs.
Figure~\ref{fig:Defence_number} also shows the TPR.
As Figure~\ref{fig:Defence_number}$b$ shown, the TPR is evidently reduced after combining more than $5$ differentiators.
It is caused by the false negative when increasing the number of models.
As seen, the small-scale ensemble models can also preserve the accuracy of our design.
Besides, we evaluate setting a threshold when validating or rejecting in the second phase inference.
We introduce this threshold value to reduce the contingency when judging inputs based on only one negative result.
The inputs are rejected only if the number of negative results is greater than the threshold.
Figure~\ref{fig:Defence_number} compares the FPRs and TPRs when setting threshold as $1$(our baseline design) and increasing it to $2$.
For both tasks, the TPRs are slightly improved for the larger threshold due to the drop of the False Negative.
However, the FPRs that represent the attack effectiveness increase dramatically.
Therefore, more differentiators should be applied to compensate for these rising FPRs.
To minimize the latency and the number of inference differentiators, our implementation keeps the threshold to be $1$.
\noindent \textbf{Attack Layer:}
We evaluate our defence by applying attacks aiming at different layers.
Since the attackers do not know which transfer method is used for the development of the Student models, they generate small sets of adversarial images targeting several layers to find the optimal attack layer.
Our design is expected to mitigate the attacks aiming at all layers.
For Deep-layer Feature Extractor, based on the experience of prior work~\cite{Wang18}, the optimal attack layer is at the last frozen layer.
In Figure~\ref{fig:LayervsAttack}$a$, our defence is quite effective.
For the original Student model without our defence, the success rates for the attack aiming at the last layer are almost $100\%$ for both the targeted and non-targeted attacks.
After applying our design, the FPR of the adversarial examples drops to about $4\%$ for the targeted attacks and $9\%$ for the non-targeted attacks.
Figure~\ref{fig:LayervsAttack}$b$ shows the relationship between the attack layers and the FPR of the adversarial examples with and without the defence for the Traffic Signs Recognition.
It can be seen that the FPR of the adversarial inputs targeting at different layers keeps small, where most of them are less than $10\%$ for the targeted attacks and $20\%$ for the non-targeted attacks.
Unlike the unguarded models which have an obvious increase of the FPR of the adversarial examples when the attack layers close to the optimal layer, the variation tendency for our design is flat.
As seen, it is difficult for the attackers to find the optimal layer with a small set of adversarial images.
In addition, even when the attackers successfully find the optimal attack layer, the FPR of these adversarial examples is still limited below $20\%$.
\noindent \textbf{Perturbation Budget:}
In practice, the attack configurations like the perturbations added to the inputs can be various.
A larger perturbation budget makes the adversarial inputs stronger to fool the classifiers.
In order to justify our defense's ability in different situations, we evaluate our design for different perturbation budgets.
Figure~\ref{fig:PerturbationvsAttack} shows the relationships between perturbation budgets and the FPR of the adversarial images for both Face and Traffic Sign Recognition.
We choose the optimal attack layers which have the highest attack success rates as shown in Figures~\ref{fig:LayervsAttack}.
According to the results, our design is robust to the perturbation.
For the Face Recognition, when the perturbation budgets are in the range of $0.0004$ and $0.003$, the FPR of attacker's inputs targeting unguarded models increases to almost $1$.
And for a larger perturbation budget, the FPR increases observably.
For the Traffic Signs Recognition, the attack is effective when the perturbation budget is larger than 0.01.
On the contrary, the models with our defence are more robust to the perturbation variation.
In the test region, the FPRs are less than $10\%$.
\begin{table*}[!t]
\footnotesize
\normalsize
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|c|c}
\hline
\multirow{3}{*}{} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Face } & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Traffic Sign } \\
\cline{2-7}
~ & \multirow{2}{*}{Accuracy} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Attack Success Rate} & \multirow{2}{*}{Accuracy} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Attack Success Rate} \\
\cline{3-4}
\cline{6-7}
~ & ~ & Targeted & Non-targeted & ~ & Targeted & Non-targeted \\
\hline
Original Unguarded Model & $98.1\%$ & $92.5\%$ & $99.8\%$ & $96.5\%$ & $43.5\%$ & $95.2\%$ \\
\hline
Randomizing Input via Dropout~\cite{Wang18} & $49.0\%$ & $4.8\%$ & $90.8\%$ & $90.5\%$ & $2.3\%$ & $40.9\%$ \\
\hline
Injecting Neuron Distances~\cite{Wang18} & $95.1\%$ & $20.6\%$ & $79.0\%$ & $94.0\%$ & $8.4\%$ & $62.7\%$ \\
\hline
Ensemble Differentiators & $91.6\%$ & $6.1\%$ & $8.5\%$ & $92.9\%$ & $5.6\%$ & $8.1\%$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Performance Comparison among Different Defences}
\label{tb3:DefenceComparison1}
\vspace{-15pt}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[!t]
\footnotesize
\normalsize
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c}
\hline
~ & Original Attacks & \tabincell{c}{Defence Unknown} & \tabincell{c}{Defence Known} & \tabincell{c}{ Pruning Ratios Unknown}\\
\hline
Targeted Attacks & $92.5\%$ & $6.1\%$ & $26.2\%$ & $10.1\%$ \\
\hline
Non-targeted Attacks & $99.8\%$ & $8.5\%$ & $80.1\%$ & $40.0\%$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Comparison for Different Adversarial Capability}
\label{tb6:Difference_Adversarial_Capability1}
\vspace{-15pt}
\end{table*}
\noindent \textbf{Extending to Other General Attacks:}
We also evaluate our defence over some common attacks targeting at conventional machine learning systems to demonstrate the generality of our design.
We apply FGSM, DeepFool and Carlini-Wagner attacks~\cite{Goodfellow14,Moosavi16,Carlini17Attack} to the Teacher models known to the adversaries and evaluate their adversarial examples by the targeted Student models.
The results show that they are less effective for transfer learning system where most of their attack success rate drops from almost $100\%$ to about $2\%$.
As we introduced in section~\ref{sec:relatedwork}, these general attacks do lost their effectiveness when the targeted models transfer to new tasks.
We further evaluate our design assuming the Student model is known while our defence is unknown to the attackers.
The experiments show that they are also ineffective in this case. The attack success rates of all three attacks drop from above $90\%$ to less than $10\%$ since most of the adversarial examples are rejected by our defence.
As a result, our design also provides robustness when defending against general attacks.
\noindent \textbf{Iteration Number:}
The models applying our design can still maintain the acceptable accuracy for the benign inputs after several iteration periods.
Some defence approaches may affect the performance of classification.
As introduced in Section~\ref{sec:defence}, the original neural networks are pruned in our design.
Previous studies~\cite{Polyak15,Han15} show that pruning the neural network of classifiers will affect the model accuracy, while iteratively pruning and retraining can help the models regain their accuracy.
In our design, the weights in the frozen layers are fixed, and thus the damage caused by the pruning cannot be recovered by retraining these layers.
Our experiments show that the iteration pruning and retraining for only the unfrozen layers can still regain an acceptable model accuracy for the clean inputs.
In addition, the pruned models with more iteration numbers for pruning and retraining will lead to higher model accuracy.
Figure~\ref{fig:IterationvsAccuracy} illustrates the connection between the iteration times and the accuracy of the Student models for the benign inputs of our two tasks.
It can be found that the model accuracy for both Face and Traffic Signs Recognition tasks increases to more than $90\%$ after $5$ iterations.
As a result, with iteration pruning and retraining, the accuracy of the ensemble models rises back to an acceptable value.
\subsubsection{Memory Efficiency Evaluation}
Here, we evaluate the memory consumption of our design.
Table~\ref{tb4:MemoryConsuming1} shows the parameters for the original model and our ensemble models.
In our design, the parameters consist of two parts.
One is the original weights and bias of the Teacher model, which are directly reused in the differentiators.
The memory consumption is the same as a Student model developed by general transfer learning.
Another part is the pruning tags and the individual weights and bias of the last classification layer for each differentiator.
It can be found that most of the parameters of the models are reused.
As seen, our design only consumes extra $3\%$ memory compared to the original
\subsubsection{Comparison with Others Defences}
As introduced in Section~\ref{sec:relatedwork}, two basic defence approaches against transfer learning are introduced.
They are \textit{Randomizing Input via Dropout} and \textit{Injecting Neuron Distances}.
We further compare our design with these two defences.
The experimental results can be shown as Table~\ref{tb3:DefenceComparison1}.
\noindent \textbf{Comparison to Randomizing Input via Dropout:}
In Randomizing Input via Dropout, several random pixels of the input images are dropped to decrease the attack success rates of adversarial images.
Although it makes the models more robust, the accuracy of the Student models is severely affected.
On the contrary, our design maintains much better accuracy of the Student models.
Table~\ref{tb3:DefenceComparison1} reports the comparison between our defence and Randomizing Input via Dropout method.
For Randomizing Input via Dropout method, the accuracy drops from $98\%$ to $49\%$ after the attacks being conducted.
Our design still maintains the classification accuracy at about $92\%$ by doing iteration pruning and retraining.
Moreover, the defence rates of both targeted attacks and non-targeted attacks in our design are higher.
\noindent \textbf{Comparison to Injecting Neuron Distances:}
Another defence method is Injecting Neuron Distances.
It retrained the whole Student model to increase the distances of the internal feature vectors at the cut-off layer for the inputs.
The ability of Injecting Neuron Distances defending against the non-targeted attacks is less effective.
In our design, multiple Differentiators are trained for defending against multiple targeted attacks or non-targeted attacks. Such treatment makes our models more robust to these attacks.
Detailed comparison is shown as Table~\ref{tb3:DefenceComparison1}.
The attack success rate for the non-targeted attacks for Injecting Neuron Distances is about $79\%$ and $63\%$ for two tasks; it is much higher than our design which is $8.5\%$ and $8.1\%$.
In addition, this method sometimes does not accommodate transfer learning applications with small-scale datasets according to our experiments.
As introduced in Section~\ref{sec:relatedwork}, Injecting Neuron Distances retrains the whole models to increase the dissimilarities of the internal features at the attack layers.
However, this obstacle of training will increase when the targeted Student model has less training data.
In contrast, our defence only fine-tunes a few layers, which still facilitates the strength of transfer learning.
We also compare the time cost of both defence approaches.
Our experiments with 1 GPU gtx1070 take about 25 minutes to generate a model with injected neuron distance, while about 36 minutes for our design.
Note that this cost is one-time, which is only incurred during setup.
\section{Discussion}
\label{sec:discussion}
\noindent \textbf{Classifying Adversarial Images:}
To fit broader range of applications which require deep analysis on the adversarial inputs, we also provide a design correctly classifying the adversarial images rather than just rejecting them.
Based on our experiments, the differentiators in our design can be highly robust to the adversarial examples whose both source and target class are in their training subset.
Namely, a differentiator trained by a subset consisted of class $i$ and $j$ can correctly classify the adversarial examples that are class $i$ and target at $j$ or the reverse.
Since each differentiators can classify the adversarial examples corresponding to a attack pairs, the ensemble models for all of them can be used to classify every possible attack pairs.
$K(k-1)/2$ differentiators should be trained in this proposed design. However, this is also one-time cost during setup.
Our experiments achieve about $91\%$ and $96\%$ classification rate for the Face and Traffic Sign Recognition tasks.
Detailed ensemble design can be found in Appendix~\ref{app:classify}.
\noindent \textbf{Attack Efficiency with Known Defence Methodology:}
Based on the guidance principle discussed by Carlini et al. in~\cite{Carlini19}, where the defence algorithm might not be held secret, we enhance the knowledge of the attackers on the defence strategy.
The attackers are assumed to know our defence strategies, including the activation pruning and the ensemble structure we developed.
However, the pruning ratios for each differentiator designed for the defence are assumed unknown to the adversaries.
It is reasonable and practical to assume that those ratios are secret parameters and not easily inferred by querying from the attackers due to the ensemble structures of our design.
As a result, it is difficult for the attackers to build the same pruned models exactly as ours, which makes them still hard to attack our design.
Table~\ref{tb6:Difference_Adversarial_Capability1} shows the attack success rates when the attackers apply the attacks on one distilled model but pruned via different ratios.
It can be found that the attacks are less effective even for a single differentiator.
We also strengthen the capabilities of the attackers by assuming they can develop exactly the same pruned models as we built.
Namely, the attackers have full access to the Student models and are able to apply the white-box attacks.
The experimental results are also shown in Table~\ref{tb6:Difference_Adversarial_Capability1}.
Since our differentiators are pruned and highly distilled, it is difficult for the attackers to generate the adversarial examples in limited perturbation budgets.
It is even harder for the adversarial to generate adversarial examples for randomly selected groups of differentiators.
Therefore, our defence still maintains the robustness of the system, assuming our defence strategy is known.
\section{Related Work}
\label{sec:relatedwork}
\noindent \textbf{Adversarial Attacks Against Machine Learning Systems:}
One of the common adversarial attacks is to build adversarial examples to cause misclassification during inference.
Adversarial examples are (misclassified) inputs to machine learning models but slightly different from the clean (correctly classified) inputs.
Lots of prior studies show that numbers of machine learning models are vulnerable to these adversarial inputs~\cite{Goodfellow14,Sabour15,Moosavi16,Su19}.
However, it is worthy noting that the above general attacks are less effective in transfer learning systems~\cite{Wang18}.
Recent studies about how to attack the transfer learning system follow two different approaches.
One tries to demonstrate attacks by generating adversarial models during their development periods~\cite{Ji18}.
Another approach is to generate adversarial inputs for both targeted and non-targeted attacks~\cite{Wang18}.
In pracitce, it is easier for attackers in practice to use adversarial inputs rather than generating adversarial models during system development~\cite{Goodfellow18}.
Therefore, in this paper, we focus on the latter one proposed by Wang \textit{et al.}~\cite{Wang18} and aim to mitigate the most practical misclassification attacks in current literature.
\noindent \textbf{Defences Against Adversarial Machine Learning:}
Several approaches can increase the robustness of machine learning systems against adversarial examples.
The first is adversarial training, which adds adversarial images to the training datasets during system development~\cite{Kurakin16,Tramer17}.
Others propose to preprocess the inputs before they are sent to the classifiers by extra layers or networks~\cite{Bendale16,Abbasi17,Feinman17}.
Note that defences such as adversarial training and dropout affect the model accuracy, which are not applicable to sensitive applications.
Recently, Liu \textit{et al.} develop a defence against backdoor attacks via pruning ~\cite{Liu18}.
However, since the structures and weights of the Student Models are changed during development, their defence cannot be directly used for the transfer learning attacks we target~\cite{Wang18}.
We have not found effective yet efficient methods of defeating the transfer learning misclassification attacks~\cite{Wang18}.
Wang \textit{et al.} suggest two basic approaches which either suffer from accuracy loss or expensive cost.
One is called Randomizing Input via Dropout which applies dropout for the input layer of the Models while affecting the model accuracy.
Another is Injecting Neuron Distances, which proposes to break the effectiveness of the attacks by increasing the dissimilarities of the internal features at attack layers.
The parameters of the whole models are retrained, which requires large computation costs, especially for large and deep neural networks, and reduces the advantages of transfer learning.
Besides, the non-targeted attacks can still be effective to the above approaches, as demonstrated in~\cite{Wang18}.
As a general defence philosophy, ensemble models have been exploited in~\cite{Bagnall17,Kariyappa19,Liu19}.
However, they can hardly address the attacks in transfer learning scenarios.
Bagnall's defence~\cite{Bagnall17} losses accuracy in the sophisticated models which are the common targets for transfer learning.
Others~\cite{Kariyappa19,Liu19} retrain the entire network for each ensemble models, which is not effective with limited data and computation cost.
Our design employs customized approaches in the transfer learning system, which overcomes the limitations of the above methods.
A recent study~\cite{He17} observes that assembling several weak defences is not sufficient to develop a strong defence. We note that their results are different from our scenarios and not applicable to our design.
In our design, it is the distilled differentiator which reduces the attack transferability.
Each of our differentiators is considerably effective against the corresponding attacks, and this defence for the specific attacks between two classes is extended to all possible attacks by using the ensemble structure.
In other words, we effectuate the strong defence of the differentiators rather than combining weak defence by ensemble methods.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
In this paper, we propose and implement a practical defence against the strong misclassification attacks in the transfer learning applications.
We use network pruning to develop distilled differentiators that reduce the transferability of the attacks and improve their robustness against the adversarial examples.
Activation pruning and flexible pruning ratio selection are applied to preserve accuracy.
In addition, we introduce ensemble methods to further improve the robustness of our design based on a two-phase inference constructing by the Student model and a small-scale of two-class differentiators.
We demonstrate that the ensemble models can effectively defend against both the targeted and non-targeted attacks by rejecting most of the adversarial examples.
We also show that our design preserves the scalability, effectiveness and comparable clean input accuracy with small size of ensemble models.
Besides, we further evaluate our defence compared to other defence approaches.
Our design is shown to be more effective and accessible to be implemented.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
3D shape representation learning plays a central role in shape analysis and understanding, which has a wide range of applications such as shape classification \cite{qi2017pointnet,han20193dviewgraph,komarichev2019cnn}, retrieval \cite{han2019view,han2019parts,han2019seqviews2seqlabels}, semantic segmentation \cite{liu2019sequence,lei2019octree} and instance segmentation \cite{wang2019associatively,hou20193d}.
Among the multiple representation forms of 3D shapes, 3D point clouds, benefited from its easy access, have become one of the most popular 3D shape forms in recent years. Specifically, the point clouds consist of a set of unordered points, each of which is composed of 3D coordinates, possibly with some additional attributes such as normal, color and material.
\begin{figure}[!tp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{comparison.pdf}
\caption{The illustration of comparison between the max-pooling based PointNet and the dynamic routing based Point2SpatialCapsule in terms of local region feature aggregation. Given an example 2D point cloud like a shape of ``P'', the point cloud is split into some local regions (left), from which the corresponding local region features are extracted with sampling and grouping (middle). The comparison of two methods is shown at the right side of this figure. Here, denoted by black dotted line, the max-pooling only keeps the most significant geometric characteristics in local regions (top right), while this causes the spatial relationships between local regions are filtered out. In contrast, the dynamic routing based Point2SpatialCapsule can handle both the geometric characteristics and the spatial relationships of local regions (bottom right), denoted by the red dotted line.
}
\label{fig:comparison}
\end{figure}
However, learning discriminative shape representation directly on point clouds is still challenging in 3D shape analysis and understanding. Recent studies for learning point cloud representations usually involve the following three steps. Each input point cloud is first split into some local regions. Then, the corresponding features of local regions are extracted using shared Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) \cite{qi2017pointnet} or kd-trees \cite{klokov2017escape}. Finally, the extracted local region features are aggregated into a global feature vector as the shape representation \cite{qi2017pointnet++,li2018pointcnn,liu2019sequence}.
Most of the previous methods mainly focus on how to enhance the process of local region feature extraction, while often employ a simple pooling-based layer \cite{qi2017pointnet,qi2017pointnet++,li2018pointcnn} to aggregate these extracted features. However, such pooling-based feature aggregation methods do not take adequately the spatial relationships among local regions into account.
So far, how to aggregate those learned local region features and their spatial relationships still remains the challenges in existing methods of point cloud representation learning.
In this paper, we first argue the importance of learning spatial relationships for aggregating local region features with respect to the following two reasons. (1) For point clouds with similar local regions, the differences in the spatial arrangements of these local regions are important for learning the discriminative features. (2) Considering the permutation invariant nature of point clouds, it is important to learn the intrinsic spatial relationship between each part and the whole, in order to constitute the permutation invariant knowledge for point cloud recognition.
\begin{figure}[!tp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{why_netvlad.pdf}
\caption{The illustration of directly applying capsule network to the point cloud (a) and the clustering based Point2SpatialCapsule (b). The shifting and rotation of point cloud change the locations of local regions in 3D space and also change their corresponding log priors. Therefore, routing in 3D space (green dotted line) will cause the shifting of log priors, making the routing algorithm fail to learn the spatial relationships between local regions.
In contrast, the geometric feature aggregation aggregates the input local region features into relatively invariant cluster centers. Therefore, routing between clusters (red dotted line) can efficiently learn the log priors for aggregating spatial relationships between local regions.}
\label{fig:why_netvlad}
\end{figure}
The common strategy for feature aggregation in previous methods \cite{qi2017pointnet++,qi2017pointnet,li2018so,shen2018mining} is to extract the most significant characteristics (such as the engine of an airplane) in local regions of the point cloud step by step, through a deep neural network with the pooling structure (such as max-pooling).
However, the problem is that the pooling-based methods will filter out the spatial relationships of different areas on the feature map \cite{sabour2017dynamic}. Thus, it only considers the existences of characteristics in local regions, while the spatial arrangements between these regions will not be preserved.
As a result, most of the existing methods usually fail to learn the spatial relationships among the local regions, which further limits the ability of the network for learning discriminative 3D shape representation.
To address the aforementioned problem, we propose a novel deep learning network, named Point2SpatialCapsule, for aggregating geometric features and spatial relationships of local regions on point clouds, which aims to learn more discriminative shape representation. Inspired by the recently developed capsule network \cite{sabour2017dynamic}, Point2SpatialCapsule employs the dynamic routing to aggregate the local region features and their spatial relationships. Fig. \ref{fig:comparison} illustrates the comparison between our dynamic routing based Point2SpatialCapsule and the previous feature aggregation methods like max-pooling used in PointNet \cite{qi2017pointnet}. Note that the max-pooling feature aggregation in PointNet \cite{qi2017pointnet} only considers the existences of characteristics in local regions, but in contrast our Point2SpatialCapsule can explicitly handle the spatial relationships between local region features through dynamic routing of capsule network. This advantage encourages us to consider adopting capsule network for 3D point clouds representation learning.
However, the problem is that, the original implementation of capsule network is designed for 2D image recognition, where the log priors in capsule network are bounded to the fixed locations on the 2D feature maps \cite{sabour2017dynamic}. In contrast, for 3D point clouds, the locations of random sampled input points are disordered and their absolute position coordinates may not always keep consistent. As a result, it is difficult to find a direct mapping that can generate the features encoded with fixed spatial locations.
What's worse, the previous capsule based methods failed to address such problem, most of which directly generate the capsules from a single global feature vectors. Such practice leads to the loss of spatial relationships between local regions. As a result, the log priors in routing algorithm between capsules can not learn the spatial relationships of local regions, which greatly limits the representation ability of capsules.
In this paper, we argue the importance for encoding the fixed spatial locations into capsules, which aims to efficiently utilize the representation ability of log priors for learning the spatial relationships between local regions on point clouds.
In order to solve the above limitations, two novel modules are specially designed in Point2SpatialCapsule to achieve local region feature aggregation as follows. (1) The first module, named \emph{geometric feature aggregation}, aims to aggregate the extracted local region features in the feature space. Here, the term ``\emph{geometric}'' indicates that this module aggregates the geometric information, like the coordinates of central points and the shapes of local regions represented by the feature vectors, into the centers of local feature clusters, which aims to resolve the disorder problem of local regions. (2) The second module, named \emph{spatial relationship aggregation}, is to apply routing algorithm on the learned feature clusters.
The term ``\emph{spatial-aware}'' indicates that the capsules are encoded with the spatial locations, which is to guarantee the direct mapping between the log priors and the fixed locations in the 3D space. Therefore, we call them the \emph{spatial-aware capsules}, which allows the network to efficiently learn the spatial relationships between local regions.
Fig. \ref{fig:why_netvlad} shows the visualized demonstration of the advantage of spatial relationship aggregation. Because of the shifting and rotation of point clouds, the changing locations of local region features in 3D space also change the log priors.
To resolve this issue, the geometric feature aggregation clusters the input local region features into the learnable cluster centers, which are irrelevant to the input points and relatively invariant in the feature space. Therefore, the routing algorithm can efficiently learn the log priors for aggregating the spatial relationships between local regions.
Our main contributions are summarized as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item We propose a novel deep network, i.e. Point2SpatialCapsule, for learning more discriminative shape representations of point clouds. Compared with the traditional pooling-based methods, Point2SpatialCapsule can explicitly learn not only geometric features of local regions but also the spatial relationships among them.
\item We propose the geometric feature aggregation to resolve the disorder problem of local regions, where the local region features are aggregated into the learnable cluster centers, which are explicitly encoded with the spatial locations from the original 3D space.
\item We propose the spatial relationship aggregation to further utilize the spatial locations encoded in the feature clusters. Compared to the previous capsule network based methods, the spatial relationship aggregation can learn more discriminative spatial relationships between local regions by establishing a direct mapping between log priors and the spatial locations through feature clusters.
\end{itemize}
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. First, the related work is introduced in Sec.\ref{sec:related_work}. Then we detail the proposed Point2SpatialCapsule in Sec.\ref{sec:model_description}. The experiments and the ablation studies are given in Sec.\ref{sec:experiments}. Finally, we conclude this paper in Sec.\ref{sec:conclusions}.
\section{Related Work}
\label{sec:related_work}
In this section, we mainly review the methods related to 3D shape representation learning based on deep learning networks. The existing methods can be roughly divided into four categories according to various 3D shape forms that are learned from, including voxels, point clouds, views and meshes.
\subsection{Point Cloud Based Methods}
Recent studies of point cloud representation learning mainly focus on the local feature extraction and integration. PointNet \cite{qi2017pointnet} is the pioneering work of introducing deep learning into point cloud representation learning, which independently learns the features of each point and aggregates the learned features into a global feature with the max-pooling layer. After that, plenty of the follow-up studies \cite{li2018pointcnn,liu2019sequence,xu2018spidercnn,wang2018dynamic} focus on how to better integrate the contextual information of local regions on point clouds.
For example, PointNet++ \cite{qi2017pointnet++} designed the hierarchical feature learning architecture based on PointNet to encode multi-scale local areas. Following the convolutional structure of PointNet++, successors such as PointCNN \cite{li2018pointcnn} and SpiderCNN \cite{xu2018spidercnn} investigated some improved convolution operations which aggregate the neighbors of a given point by edge attributes in the local region graph.
Different from the idea of using convolution structure, Point2Sequence \cite{liu2019sequence} introduced the sequential model (i.e. RNN) to capture the fine-grained contextual information of features in local regions. Specifically, Point2Sequence arranges the features into a sequence according to the size of the region scale, and then uses a RNN to capture the contextual information within the local regions.
However, the problem is that most of the above methods fail to consider the spatial relationships among different local regions when aggregating the extracted local region features, where the usual practice for these methods is to use the pooling layer to learn the global feature from the local ones.
More recent studies focus on how to improve the local region feature extraction \cite{komarichev2019cnn,liu2019relation,zhao2019pointweb}. These methods have shown impressive potentials in the semantic segmentation task on point cloud. For examples, A-CNN \cite{komarichev2019cnn} was proposed to annularly arrange the neighbor points and apply the convolution network on these arranged points to learn the local region features. RS-CNN \cite{liu2019relation} designed a shape-aware convolution to learn the local region features from the relation between points.
The proposed Point2SpatialCapsule mainly focus on how to aggregate the feature and relationships of local regions after extracting local features. The usual practice for previous methods is to apply the strategy of bottom-to-top point cloud feature aggregation \cite{klokov2017escape,wang2017cnn,li2018so,lei2019octree,riegler2017octnet}. For example, Kd-Net \cite{klokov2017escape} performs multiplicative transformations according to the subdivisions of point clouds based on the kd-trees.
SO-Net \cite{li2018so} employs a SOM to build the spatial distribution of the input point cloud, which allows hierarchical feature extraction on both individual points and SOM nodes.
However, most of the above methods use max-pooling as a feature aggregation method, which inevitably filters out the spatial relationships among local regions.
On the other hand, PVNet \cite{you2018pvnet} is also a notable method that considers the local feature aggregation, which focuses on mining the difference in importance between the local features.
It employs high-level global features from the multi-view data of input 3D shapes to mine the relative correlations between different local features from the point cloud data. Same as the above-mentioned methods, PVNet only learns the different contributions among local regions, while the spatial relationships among these regions are not considered.
\subsection{View-based Methods}
The dominant performance of multi-view based methods on the task of 3D shape retrieval comes from the research progress of measuring the similarities between 2D image features \cite{han20193d2seqviews,bai2017gift,han2019multi,han20182seq2seq}. As one of the pioneering work, GIFT \cite{bai2017gift} adopted the Hausdorff distance to measure the similarity between the view sets of two 3D shapes. Another notable research direction is to focus on PANORAMA views of 3D shapes, where a PANORAMA view can be regarded as the seamless aggregation of multiple views captured on a circle. For examples, DeepPano \cite{shi2015deeppano} introduced a row-wise max-pooling to relief the effect of rotation about the up-oriented direction, and Sfikas et al. \cite{sfikas2017panorama} introduced CNN for learning the global features from the PANORAMA views in a consisitent order. To explore the potential of attention mechanism, the methods like 3DViewGraph \cite{han20193dviewgraph} have been proposed to integrate the spatial pattern correlations of unordered views with attention weights, and Part4Features \cite{han2019parts} developed a novel multi-attention mechanism for aggregating the learned local parts.
More recently, SeqViews2SeqLabels \cite{han2019seqviews2seqlabels} was proposed to learn 3D features via aggregating sequential views by RNN, which aims to eliminate the effect of rotation of 3D shapes. Compared with the previous pooling based methods, the RNN-based SeqViews2SeqLabels suffers less from the content and the spatial location loss. Similarly, as an unsupervised approaches, VIP-GAN \cite{han2019view} trains an RNN-based neural network architecture to solve multiple view inter-prediction tasks for each shape.
\subsection{Voxel-based Methods}
Voxel-based methods often rasterize a 3D shape as a function or distribution sampled on voxels \cite{Liu11pami,Liu12cad}.
For supervised learning the representation of 3D voxels, 3DShapeNets \cite{wu20153d} adopted the convolutional restricted Boltzmann machine to learn the representation of 3D voxels. O-CNN \cite{wang2017cnn} learns the representation of 3D voxel based on a novel octree structure. And Han et al. \cite{HanCyber17a} proposed a novel permutation voxelization strategy to learn high-level and hierarchical 3-D local features from raw 3-D voxels. For unsupervised learning, methods like VConv-DAE \cite{sharma2016vconv} use the fully convolutional autoencoder for unsupervised learning the voxel representation by reconstruction.
However, the problem is, considering the induced complexity and limitations of directly exploiting the sparsity of voxel grids, it is difficult to introduce the large scale or flexible deep networks for representation learning.
Therefore, more recent methods such as OctNet \cite{riegler2017octnet} and kd-net \cite{klokov2017escape} consider to utilize the scalable indexing structures for solving this problem, where deep neural networks can be further adopted for achieving more impressive results.
\subsection{Mesh-based Methods}
As for mesh-based methods, to explore the effectiveness of the heat diffusion based descriptor, Xie et al. \cite{xie2015deepshape} proposed a shape feature learning scheme based on auto-encoders, where the model can extract the features that are insensitive to the deformations. By fully utilizing the spectral domain, Xie et al. \cite{xie2016learned} further proposed to learn a novel binary spectral shape descriptor with the deep neural network for 3D shape correspondence. Recently,
BoSCC \cite{Liu17TIP-BoSCC} was introduced for a spatially
enhanced 3D shape representation based on bag of spatial context
correlations. And more recently, Deep Spatiality \cite{han2018deep} was also proposed to simultaneously learn 3D global and local features with novel coupled softmax.
\subsection{Capsule Networks}
The ability of capsule network \cite{sabour2017dynamic} for capturing spatial relationships comes from the dynamic routing algorithm and the log priors, which are bound to the absolute location on the input feature maps.
Specifically, the capsule network learns the log priors by considering the relationships between the absolute locations on the feature map and the high-level capsules. Then, through the dynamic routing algorithm, which is based on the learned log priors, the high-level capsules can integrate the low-level features and their spatial relationships among different locations on the feature maps. This advantage promotes us to consider applying the capsule network to 3D point cloud representation learning.
So far, the capsule network has shown the great potentials in many research areas, such as image processing \cite{jaiswal2018capsulegan,lalonde2018capsules} and natural language processing (NLP) \cite{yang2018investigating,xiao2018mcapsnet,ning2018capsule}.
However, as for the application of capsule network in 3D shape representation learning, there are a few methods proposed in recent years. For example, 3D-CapsNet \cite{burak2018capsules} adopts the capsule network for 3D shape classification tasks based on volumetric data, and 3D-Point-Capsule \cite{zhao2018capsule} learns the point cloud representation and part segmentations in an unsupervised way. And for supervised learning, 3DCapsule \cite{che2019capsule} applies the capsule network as an extension of fully-connected layers for point cloud classification.
An important problem of the above methods is that they all build the capsule layers over the global feature (usually produced by the fully-connected layer or max-pooling) of point clouds, where the spatial relationships between local region features have been filtered out by the network. Therefore, the log priors in routing algorithm cannot learn the spatial distribution among the extracted local features, which limits the biggest advantage of capsule network for aggregation spatial relationships of local regions.
Therefore, to address this problem of previous methods, Point2SpatialCapsule aggregates the features into clusters in feature space, and applies the routing algorithm between these aggregated clusters. In the research of point cloud representation learning, methods like PointNetVLAD \cite{mik2019pointnetvlad} have adopted the similar clustering strategy, i.e. NetVLAD \cite{arandjelovic2016netvlad}, for feature aggregation. However, different from the previous methods that only cluster features for aggregating regions with similar geometric characteristics (e.g. shapes), our method takes one step further to not only considering geometric characteristics, but also explore the potentials for aggregating spatial relationships between these regions.
Specifically, Point2SpatialCapsule produces the clusters for both the features and their coordinates, in order to explicitly preserve the features and their spatial location.
\begin{figure*}[!tp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{overview.pdf}
\caption{The architecture of our proposed Point2SpatialCapsule. For input point clouds, (a) the multi-scale local feature extraction first extracts features from multi-scale areas, (b) then the geometric feature aggregation encodes the extracted multi-scale local region features and their locations into the learnable clustering centers to produce the feature-spatial embeddings. The spatial relationship aggregation aggregates the feature-spatial embeddings by considering both the embeddings and their spatial relationships. (c) The task oriented network is adopted for performing on different tasks.}
\label{fig:overview}
\end{figure*}
\section{Shape Representation Learning with Point2SpatialCapsule}
\label{sec:model_description}
An overview of shape representation learning network with Point2SpatialCapsule is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:overview}. The whole network consists of three main parts as follows. (1) The first part is the {multi-scale local feature extraction}, which is a PointNet++ based network for extracting the features from multi-scale local regions on point clouds (see Sec. \ref{sec:model_description:1}). (2) The second part is Point2SpatialCapsule, which is composed of two main modules for aggregating the learned features into the global shape representation. Here, the first module, i.e. \textit{geometric feature aggregation}, is to aggregate local region features into clusters (see Sec. \ref{sec:model_description:2}). The second module, i.e. \textit{spatial relationship aggregation}, is to aggregate the feature clusters and their spatial relationships into global feature representation (see Sec. \ref{sec:model_description:3}). In this section, we will also detail the training procedure of Point2SpatialCapsule (see Sec. \ref{sec:model_description:4}). (3) The third part is the task oriented network used for various tasks such as shape segmentation (see Sec. \ref{sec:model_description:5}).
\subsection{Multi-scale Local Feature Extraction}
\label{sec:model_description:1}
The first part of our network is the multi-scale local feature extraction, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:overview}(a). Given a set of input points $\mathbf{X}=\{\boldsymbol{x}_1, \boldsymbol{x}_2,..., \boldsymbol{x}_{n} \}$, by following the practice of PointNet++ \cite{qi2017pointnet++} and ShapeContextNet \cite{xie2018attentional}, we iteratively produce a subsampling $\{\boldsymbol{x}_{k_1}, \boldsymbol{x}_{k_2},..., \boldsymbol{x}_{k_M} \}$ with $M$ points as the centroids of the local regions using farthest point sampling (FPS), such that the newly added point $\boldsymbol{x}_{k_j}$ is the farthest point (in metric distance) from the rest sampled points $\{\boldsymbol{x}_{k_1}, \boldsymbol{x}_{k_2},..., \boldsymbol{x}_{k_{j-1}} \}$. Then, for each sampled point, the $K$ nearest neighbor (kNN) searching is employed to find $\{K_i|i=1,...,T\}$ neighbors for this point, under $T$ different scale areas. Followed by a grouping layer, the sampled point and its neighbors are grouped as a $K_i \times 3$ tensor for scale $K_i$. After that, a simple but effective MLP layer is employed to extract the features of all neighbor points, producing a tensor with shape $K_i \times C$. Finally, a max-pooling layer is applied to integrate the point features in each scale to produce the scale feature of dimension $C$ for scale $K_i$. For $M$ points in total and $T$ scales for each point, the multi-scale local feature extraction layer produces $M \times T$ multi-scale features, forming a tensor of shape $M \times T \times C$ as its output.
In the implementation, we apply two layers of multi-scale local feature extraction for hierarchically extracting features from point clouds.
\subsection{Point2SpatialCapsule: Geometric Feature Aggregation}
\label{sec:model_description:2}
In this subsection, we detail the first module of Point2SpatialCapsule, which aims to aggregate the extracted features into clusters and encodes these features with spatial locations.
As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:overview}(b), before clustering features, the module of geometric feature aggregation first applies the multi-scale shuffling to enhance the diversity of features. Then the features are aggregated into clusters and encoded with the spatial locations (e.g. the absolute locations in the 3D space) from the original 3D space.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{multiscale_shuffle-cmp.pdf}
\caption{Illustration of feature similarity between adjacent points. Features of small scales are not very similar because of the small overlap in sampled points. On the contrary, the features of large scales are more similar because of a larger overlap.}
\label{fig:scale-cmp}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Multi-scale Shuffling}
Different from the previous methods that apply the pooling-based strategy for integrating the features extracted from multi-scale regions, we propose the multi-scale shuffling layer to build the shuffled features.
The reason for adding this layer is demonstrated in Fig. \ref{fig:scale-cmp}, as explained below. When searching the neighbor points in a large scale, the searching areas of two adjacent centroids will overlap with each other and output the same neighbor points. As a result, the adjacent points will tend to have the similar features for large scale, which can reduce the diversity of features and introduce an initial clustering center for the subsequent clustering layer.
On the other hand, the features of small scales between two centroids are dissimilar because of small overlaps. Therefore, the multi-scale shuffling is introduced to smooth the perceived range of features between different scales and enhance the feature diversity, by mixing the dissimilar features of small scales with the similar features of large scales. As a result, the multi-scale shuffling can promote the network to consider all input features equally and alleviate the problem of similar features.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{multiscale_shuffle.pdf}
\caption{Illustration of the multi-scale shuffling, which is the solution to the problem of feature similarity.}
\label{fig:multiscale_shuffle}
\end{figure}
The effect of multi-scale shuffling is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:multiscale_shuffle}. Specifically, given a point with $T$ scale features of $C$ dimension, which forms a tensor with the shape $T\times C$, the multi-scale shuffling periodically rearranges the elements in the $T\times C$ tensor into a tensor of shape $rT\times (C/r)$, where $r$ is an integer. Thus, for $M$ points in total, the multi-scale shuffling will produce $M\times rT$ shuffled features of dimension $C/r$, resulting in a tensor of size $(M\times rT)\times (C/r)$.
The multi-scale shuffling is inspired by the subpixel convolution \cite{shi2016real} for image upsampling, where the number of area scales $T$ can be considered as the size of image, and the feature dimension $C$ can be regarded as the channels of feature maps.
However, different from subpixel convolution which is designed for speeding up the calculations and reducing the amount of parameters in the network, the multi-scale shuffling used in our method aims to enhance the diversity of scale features.
We will quantitatively explore the importance of the multi-scale shuffling in ablation studies in Sec. \ref{subsec:ablation}.
\subsubsection{Feature Aggregation with Spatial Encodings}
The purpose of this layer is to aggregate the shuffled features into the learnable feature cluster centers, which can be regarded as the latent embeddings describing the semantic patterns of the local regions features. To achieve this purpose, we propose to cluster the features in the feature space and their coordinates in the original 3D space. After that, the cluster centers in both the feature space and the 3D space are fused to produce \emph{the feature-spatial embeddings}, as illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:comparison_vlad}(a).
Although the traditional clustering methods like k-means can be adopted to produce the feature cluster centers, their computational cost may be very high because of the huge number of features to be clustered. Therefore, inspired by the recent development of NetVLAD \cite{arandjelovic2016netvlad}, we adopt the soft-assignment for learning the clustering centers for the input shuffled local features. Specifically, the network learns $Q$ cluster centers for input features, denoted as $\{\boldsymbol{q}_1, \boldsymbol{q}_2,...,\boldsymbol{q}_Q | \boldsymbol{q}_k \in \mathbb{R}^{C/r}\}$, as colored by yellow in Fig. \ref{fig:comparison_vlad}(a). For each cluster center $\boldsymbol{q}_k$, the layer produces a \emph{feature embedding} $C(\boldsymbol{q}_k)\in \mathbb{R}^{C/r}$, which is an aggregated representation over the whole input shuffled features $\{\boldsymbol{\hat{p}}_i\}$, denoted by
\begin{equation}
C(\boldsymbol{q}_k) = \sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{e^{\boldsymbol{w}_k^T \boldsymbol{\hat{p}}_i}+b_k}{\sum_{k'}e^{\boldsymbol{w}_{k'}^T \boldsymbol{\hat{p}}_i}+b_{k'}}(\boldsymbol{\hat{p}}_i - \boldsymbol{q}_k),
\end{equation}
where $\{\boldsymbol{w}_k\}$ and $\{b_k\}$ are the weights and biases, respectively, that determine the contribution of each local feature to the cluster center $\boldsymbol{q}_k$. During training, all the weights, biases and the cluster centers are updated through back-propagation algorithm.
To explicitly encode the spatial locations of local features into their cluster centers, we first cluster the coordinates $\{\boldsymbol{x}_i\}$ of input points into the coordinates cluster centers $\{\boldsymbol{y}_1, \boldsymbol{y}_2,...,\boldsymbol{y}_Q | \boldsymbol{y}_k \in \mathbb{R}^{C/r}\}$, which is the same process as described above and colored by green in Fig. \ref{fig:comparison_vlad}(a). The \emph{spatial embeddings} $C(\boldsymbol{y}_k)\in \mathbb{R}^{C/r}$ for coordinates is given as
\begin{equation}
C(\boldsymbol{y}_k) = \sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{e^{\boldsymbol{w}_k^T \boldsymbol{x}_i}+{b'}_k}{\sum_{k'}e^{\boldsymbol{w}_{k'}^T \boldsymbol{x}_i}+{b'}_{k'}}(\boldsymbol{x}_i - \boldsymbol{y}_k).
\end{equation}
Then, the produced local feature embedding and its corresponding spatial embedding are concatenated to form an explicit \emph{feature-spatial embedding} $C(\boldsymbol{s}_k) = [C(\boldsymbol{y}_k):C(\boldsymbol{x}_k)]$.
\begin{figure*}[!tp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{comparison-vlad.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of the strategies for applying dynamic routing in local region features between (a) Point2SpatialCapsule and (b) the previous methods \cite{zhao2018capsule,che2019capsule}. The previous methods directly use a feature aggregator (e.g. max-pooling) to aggregates all local region features, and generate the capsules based on the aggregated global feature. In contrast, Point2SpatialCapsule proposes to cluster the local region features and the point coordinates, and then combines them as spatial-aware cluster centers. The spatial-aware capsules of Point2SpatialCapsule are independently generated according to each cluster centers.}
\label{fig:comparison_vlad}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Point2SpatialCapsule: Spatial Relationship Aggregation}
\label{sec:model_description:3}
In Fig. \ref{fig:comparison_vlad}(b), we show the overall architecture of previous methods \cite{zhao2018capsule,che2019capsule} for building the capsules, and compare it with our proposed Point2SpatialCapsule shown in Fig. \ref{fig:comparison_vlad}(a). The main difference is that Point2SpatialCapsule builds the spatial-aware capsules based on cluster centers with spatial encodings, while the previous studies simply build the capsules based on the single representation vector generated by fully-connection or pooling based local feature aggregator. As a result, the previous methods fail to preserve the spatial relationships between local regions, which further limits the representation learning ability of dynamic routing.
In this subsection, in order to efficiently learn the prior logs, we first independently generate the spatial-aware capsules from the feature-spatial embeddings using \emph{rearrange} and \emph{squashing}. Then, we propose to apply routing algorithm between the spatial-aware capsules.
\subsubsection{Rearrange and Squashing}
To build the spatial-aware capsules from the feature-spatial embeddings produced by the geometric feature aggregation module, we deviate from the 2D practice of the original capsule network \cite{sabour2017dynamic}. In the original capsule network, the spatial-aware capsule aggregates its representation vector by collecting the output logits across different channels at the same location on the feature maps. In Point2SpatialCapsule, since we have built the feature-spatial embeddings encoded with the spatial locations, we can consider that each embedding corresponds to a fixed location, which is the learnable cluster center. Therefore, we can directly rearrange the output and use the fully-connected layer with a squashing activation to produce the spatial-aware capsules. The rearrange layer is to split the feature-spatial embeddings $C(\boldsymbol{s}_k)$ into several short vectors $\{\boldsymbol{u}_i\}$. As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:spatial-shuffling}, the input feature-spatial embedding is split into $K=3$ vectors, each of which is combined with the spatial embedding. Then, we follow a squashing layer, as denote by
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{squashing}(\boldsymbol{u}_i)=\frac{\|\boldsymbol{u}_i\|^2}{1+\|\boldsymbol{u}_i\|^2}\frac{\boldsymbol{u}_i}{\|\boldsymbol{u}_i\|},
\end{equation}
where the spatial-aware capsules $\{\boldsymbol{u}_i\}$ are generated as the final output of this layer.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{spatial-shuffling.pdf}
\caption{Illustration of rearrange and squashing layer. The green block is the 3D spatial embedding, while the yellow, blue and red block together constitute a feature embedding.}
\label{fig:spatial-shuffling}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Routing Algorithm}
Given the input spatial-aware capsules, we follow \cite{sabour2017dynamic} to apply dynamic routing algorithm to obtain the digit capsule. Specifically, the digit capsule $\boldsymbol{v}_j$ is the output of weighted sum of the prediction vector $\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}_{ij}$ followed by the squashing layer, which can be formulated as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:u_ij}
\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}_{ij} = W_{ij}\boldsymbol{u}_{i},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:v_j}
\boldsymbol{v}_j = \mathrm{squashing}(\sum_{i}c_{ij}\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}_{ij}),
\end{equation}
where $\boldsymbol{u}_{i}$ is the $i$th spatial-aware capsule and $W_{ij}$ is a learnable matrix. The \emph{coupling coefficients} \cite{sabour2017dynamic} $c_{ij}$ is determined by the iterative dynamic routing process, denote by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:c_ij}
c_{ij} = \frac{e^{b_{ij}}}{\sum_k e^{b_{ik}}}.
\end{equation}
In 2D capsule network, the $\{b_{ij}\}$ are log priors that only depend on the fixed locations and the type of two capsules. In our network, because the disordered input features are clustered as the feature-spatial embeddings by soft-assignment, these features are bounded to the fixed locations (which are the cluster centers) in the feature space. Therefore, the dynamic routing can learn the log priors between these centers and the digit capsules.
Before training, all of the log priors $\{b_{ij}\}$ are initialized to zero. During training, $\{b_{ij}\}$ are learned discriminatively at the same time with other parameters in the network, by adding the scalar product of $\boldsymbol{v}_{ij}$ and $\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}_{ij}$, i.e.
\begin{equation}
b_{ij} \leftarrow b_{ij}+ \boldsymbol{v}_{ij}\cdot \boldsymbol{\hat{u}}_{ij}.
\end{equation}
\iffalse
\begin{algorithm}[!t]
\caption{Dynamic routing algorithms.}
\label{algo:jimgan}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require{Spatial-aware capsules $\{\boldsymbol{u}_i\}$;}
\State initialized log priors: $b_{ij}\leftarrow 0$.
\For{r iterations}
\State For capsules i in spatial-aware capsules:
\State $\boldsymbol{c}_{i}\leftarrow \mathrm{softmax}(\boldsymbol{b}_i)$, Eq.\ref{eq:c_ij}
\State For capsules j in digit capsules:
\State $\boldsymbol{v}_j\leftarrow\mathrm{squashing}(\sum_{i}c_{ij}\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}_{ij})$, Eq.\ref{eq:u_ij} Eq.\ref{eq:v_j}
\State For all log priors:
\State $b_{ij} \leftarrow b_{ij}+\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}_{ij}\boldsymbol{v}_j$
\EndFor
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\fi
\subsection{Point2SpatialCapsule: Training}
\label{sec:model_description:4}
Following the practice of \cite{sabour2017dynamic}, Point2SpatialCapsule uses the reconstruction loss and the classification loss for supervised point cloud representation learning.
The length of each digit capsule indicates the probability that the characteristic represented by this capsule exists in the input point clouds \cite{sabour2017dynamic}. During training, the margin loss $\mathcal{L}_{cls}$ is adopted for shape classification defined as
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{L}_{cls}= & \sum_{j}T_j\max(0,m^{+}-\|\boldsymbol{v}_j\|)^2+ \\
& \sum_{j}T_j\lambda(1-T_j)\max(0,\|\boldsymbol{v}_j\|-m^{-})^2,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $T_j=1$ if class $j$ is the true label; otherwise, $T_j=0$. $m^{+}$, $m^{-}$ and $\lambda$ are the hyper parameters.
We further reconstruct the input point clouds using four fully-connected layers, with each layer followed by a $relu$ activation and batch normalization except for the last layer. The digit capsule corresponding to the true label is used as the input representation vector to the reconstruction network. The chamfer loss between the original point cloud $\mathbf{X}$ and the reconstructed point cloud $\mathbf{\hat{X}}=\{\hat{\boldsymbol{x}}_i\}$ is adopted as the reconstruction loss $\mathcal{L}_{rec}$, as denoted by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{rec}=\frac{1}{|\mathbf{X}|}\sum_{\boldsymbol{x}\in \mathbf{X}}\min_{\boldsymbol{\hat{x}}\in \mathbf{\hat{X}}}\| \boldsymbol{x} - \boldsymbol{\hat{x}} \| + \frac{1}{|\mathbf{\hat{X}}|}\sum_{\boldsymbol{\hat{x}}\in \mathbf{\hat{X}}}\min_{\boldsymbol{x}\in \mathbf{X}}\| \boldsymbol{\hat{x}} - \boldsymbol{x} \|.
\end{equation}
The total loss for training is the weighted sum of margin loss and the reconstruction loss, as denote by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:total_loss}
\mathcal{L}=\mathcal{L}_{cls} + \alpha \mathcal{L}_{rec},
\end{equation}
where $\alpha = 0.0001$ for all the experiments in this paper.
\subsection{Model Adjustments for Part Segmentation}
\label{sec:model_description:5}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{segmentation.pdf}
\caption{Illustration of the segmentation network in our Point2SpatialCapsule.}
\label{fig:segmentation}
\end{figure}
The goal of part segmentation is to predict a semantic label for each point in the point cloud.
There are two alternative ways for acquiring the per-point feature for each point from the global feature: duplicating the global feature with $N$ times \cite{qi2017pointnet,wang2018dynamic}, or performing upsampling by interpolation \cite{qi2017pointnet++,li2018so}.
In this paper, we follow the second way to duplicate the vectors in digit capsules belonging to the true label. Then we concatenate the duplicated vectors with the shuffled features. The interpolation layers are used for propagating the features from shape level to point level by upsampling, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:segmentation}.
\section{Experiments}
\label{sec:experiments}
\subsection{Experimental Setup}
\label{subsec:implementation}
\subsubsection{Datasets}
The 3D shape classification and retrieval experiments are conducted on two subsets of the Princeton ModelNet dataset \cite{wu20153d}, i.e. ModelNet40 and ModelNet10. The ModelNet40 dataset contains 12,311 shapes which belong to 40 categories. We follow the same training and split settings as \cite{li2018so}, which contains 9,843 shapes for training and 2,468 shapes for testing, respectively. The ModelNet10 dataset is a relatively small dataset which contains the 10 common categories of ModelNet40. Following \cite{li2018so}, we split the ModelNet10 into 2,468 training samples and 909 testing samples. Since the original ModelNet provides CAD models represented by vertices and faces, we use the prepared ModelNet10/40 data from \cite{qi2017pointnet++} for fair comparison.
The part segmentation task is conducted on the ShapeNet part dataset \cite{savva2016shrec}, which contains 16,881 models from 16 categories and is split into training, validation and testing following PointNet++.
There are 2048 points sampled for each 3D shape, where each point in a point cloud object belongs to certain one of 50 part classes and each point cloud contains 2 to 5 parts.
\subsubsection{Classification and Retrieval Settings}
Because the length of representation vector in digit capsule indicates the probability that certain characteristic exists in the input point clouds. In the case of Point2SpatialCapsule, the characteristic of digit capsule is the class label. Thus, we choose the digit capsule $\boldsymbol{v}_j$ with the biggest length $\|\boldsymbol{v}_j\|$ as the predicted label for shape classification.
For the shape retrieval task, we use the Euclidean distances between the length vectors $V=[\|\boldsymbol{v}_1\|,\|\boldsymbol{v}_2\|,...,\|\boldsymbol{v}_m\|]$ of point clouds for similarity measurement. Such similarity measurement is in accordance with the way how capsule stores information.
What's more, a direct comparison between the length vectors requires less computational cost than comparing representation vectors in capsules.
\subsubsection{Implementation Details}
In this paper, we use two multi-scale local feature extraction layer for hierarchically extracting features from point clouds. For the first feature extractor, the input is 1024 points associated with their x, y and z coordinates, from which 512 points is sampled using farthest point sampling. For each sampled point, we select $[8, 16, 32, 64]$ nearest neighbor points of four scales. The MLPs used in the first block have $[32,32,64]$ units for each layer. The second feature extractor samples 256 points out of the 512 points. The number of points for kNN search is the same as the first block. The MLPs for the second block have the units of $[64,64,128]$ for each layer. The parameter $r$ for multi-scale shuffling is 2. The number of the cluster centers is $Q=64$ and the dimension is $C=256$. In the rearrange and squashing layer, we split each embedding into 16 16-dimensional short vectors, which form 1024 16-dimensional spatial-aware capsules in total.
\subsection{3D Shape Classification}
Table \ref{table:cls} compares Point2SpatialCapsule with the existing state-of-the-art methods of point cloud representation learning in terms of shape classification accuracy under ModelNet10 and ModelNet40, respectively. For fair comparison, all the results in Table \ref{table:cls} are obtained under the same input, which handles with raw point sets. Point2Capusule achieves a superior result ($93.4\%$) under ModelNet40, which is higher than the baseline method PointNet++ by $2.7\%$. Specially, Point2Capusule with additional normal vectors achieves the best results ($95.9\%$ and $93.7\%$), compared with the best additional-input method SO-Net \cite{li2018so} ($95.7\%$ and $93.4\%$), under ModelNet10 and ModelNet40, respectively.
We note that both PointNet++ and Point2SpatialCapsule use a multi-scale local feature extraction strategy, where the difference lies in the method used for aggregating local features. The PointNet++ applies max-pooling for aggregating the local features, while Point2SpatialCapsule uses the geometric feature aggregation with spatial relationship aggregation for learning the global representation. Therefore, the improvement in classification accuracy of Point2SpatialCapsule proves the effectiveness of the proposed network for local feature aggregations.
3DCapsule \cite{che2019capsule} is the work most related to our Point2SpatialCapsule in Table \ref{table:cls}. As already discussed in Sec.\ref{sec:related_work}, 3DCapsule simply applies the capsule network on the global features produced by a pooling/full-connected layer, which falls into the scenario of information loss of the spatial locations.
In contrast, our Point2SpatialCapsule applies dynamic routing on the feature-spatial embeddings generated by the geometric feature aggregation module, which can aggregate both the features and their spatial location.
The experimental results in Table \ref{table:cls} shows the implementation of capsule network in our Point2SpatialCapsule is more effective than the implementation of 3DCapsule.
Compared with PointCNN \cite{li2018pointcnn} and DGCNN \cite{wang2018dynamic}, Point2SpatialCapsule still achieves the best results. We note that, PointCNN and DGCNN are also CNN-based neural network, which aims to preserve the spatial locations and spatial relationships of local regions. However, both of them use the max-pooling for aggregating the local region features, which filters out the spatial locations and relationships, especially when aggregating the local features into the global features. As shown Table \ref{table:cls}, the proposed Point2SpatialCapsule yields better performance than the PointCNN and DGCNN, which demonstrates the superior advantages of Point2SpatialCapsule for preserving the spatial locations and relationships.
As seen in Table \ref{table:cls}, our Point2SpatialCapsule outperforms most of the xyz-input methods on point clouds. Specifically, our result is ranked the first place under ModelNet10 ($95.8\%$), and ranked the second place under ModelNet40 ($93.4\%$) which is slightly lower than RS-CNN \cite{liu2019relation} by $0.2\%$. As claimed in \cite{liu2019relation}, RS-CNN performed ``ten voting tests with random scaling and averages the predictions'' during testing. In contrast, we only apply the single model prediction for fair comparison with most of the existing methods \cite{li2018so,che2019capsule,klokov2017escape}. Moreover, when using additional normal vectors as the input, the proposed Point2SpatialCapsule can achieve the best performance among all reported results under ModelNet10 ($95.9\%$) and ModelNet40 ($93.7\%$), respectively. This convincingly verifies the effectiveness of Point2SpatialCapsule.
\iffalse
\begin{table}[!t]
\centering
\caption{The shape classification accuracy (\%) comparison on ModelNet10 and ModelNet40.}
\begin{tabular}{l|c|C{0.7cm}C{0.7cm}|C{0.7cm}C{0.7cm}}
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Method} &\multicolumn{1}{c|}{\multirow{2}{0.5cm}{Input}} &\multicolumn{2}{c|}{ModelNet10}&\multicolumn{2}{c}{ModelNet40} \\
& &Class & Ins. &Class &Ins. \\ \hline
PointNet \cite{qi2017pointnet} &$1024 \times 3 $ &- &- &86.2 &89.2 \\
PointNet++ \cite{qi2017pointnet++} &$1024 \times 3 $ &- &- &- &90.7 \\
SCN \cite{xie2018attentional} &$1024 \times 3 $ &- &- &- &90.0 \\
Kd-Net \cite{klokov2017escape} &$2^{15} \times 3$ &93.5 &94.0 &88.5 &91.8 \\
KC-Net \cite{shen2018mining} &$1024 \times 3$ &- &94.4 &- &91.0 \\
PointCNN \cite{li2018pointcnn} &$1024 \times 3$ &- &- &- &91.7 \\
DGCNN \cite{wang2018dynamic} &$1024 \times 3$ &- &- &90.2 &92.2 \\
SO-Net \cite{li2018so} &$2048 \times 3$ &93.9 &94.1 &87.3 &90.9 \\
$\Psi$-tree \cite{lei2019octree} &$2048 \times 3$ &94.4 &94.6 &88.7 &92.0 \\
3DCapusle \cite{che2019capsule} &$1024 \times 3$ &- &- &- &91.5 \\ \hline
PATs \cite{yang2019modeling} &$1024 \times 3$
Ours &$1024 \times 3$ &\textbf{95.3} &\textbf{95.8} &\textbf{90.0} &\textbf{93.44} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:cls}
\end{table}
\fi
\begin{table}[!t]
\centering
\caption{The shape classification accuracy (\%) comparison on ModelNet10 and ModelNet40.}
\begin{tabular}{l|c|cc}
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Method} &\multicolumn{1}{c|}{\multirow{2}{*}{Input}} &\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}{*}{ModelNet10}}&\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}{*}{ModelNet40}} \\
& \multicolumn{1}{c|}{} &\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{} \\ \hline
PointNet \cite{qi2017pointnet} &$1024 \times 3 $ &- &89.2 \\
PointNet++ \cite{qi2017pointnet++} &$1024 \times 3 $ &- &90.7 \\
PointNet++ \cite{qi2017pointnet++} &$1024 \times 3$ + norm &- &91.9 \\
SCN \cite{xie2018attentional} &$1024 \times 3 $ &- &90.0 \\
Kd-Net \cite{klokov2017escape} &$2^{15} \times 3$ &94.0 &91.8 \\
KC-Net \cite{shen2018mining} &$1024 \times 3$ &94.4 &91.0 \\
PointCNN \cite{li2018pointcnn} &$1024 \times 3$ &- &91.7 \\
DGCNN \cite{wang2018dynamic} &$1024 \times 3$ &- &92.2 \\
SO-Net \cite{li2018so} &$2048 \times 3$ &94.1 &90.9 \\
SO-Net \cite{li2018so} &$5000 \times 3$ + norm &95.7 &93.4 \\
Point2Sequence \cite{liu2019sequence} &$2048 \times 3$ &95.3 &92.6 \\
$\Psi$-tree \cite{lei2019octree} &$2048 \times 3$ &94.6 &92.0 \\
PATs \cite{yang2019modeling} &$1024 \times 3$ &- &92.2 \\
PointWeb \cite{zhao2019pointweb} &$1024 \times 3$ &- &92.3 \\
A-CNN \cite{komarichev2019cnn} &$1024 \times 3$ &95.5 &92.6 \\
RS-CNN \cite{liu2019relation} &$1024 \times 3$ &- &93.6 \\
PointConv \cite{wu2019pointconv} &$1024 \times 3$ &- &92.5 \\
3DCapusle \cite{che2019capsule} &$1024 \times 3$ &- &91.5 \\ \hline
Point2SpatialCapsule(Ours) &$1024 \times 3$ &95.8 &93.4 \\
Point2SpatialCapsule(Ours) &$1024 \times 3$ + norm &\textbf{95.9} &\textbf{93.7} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:cls}
\end{table}
\subsection{3D Shape Retrieval}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{The shape retrieval accuracy in terms of mAPs on ModelNet10 and ModelNet40. }
\begin{tabular}{l|c|cc}
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Method} &\multicolumn{1}{c|}{\multirow{2}{*}{Input}} &\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}{*}{ModelNet10}}&\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}{*}{ModelNet40}} \\
& \multicolumn{1}{c|}{} &\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{} \\ \hline
PointNet* \cite{qi2017pointnet} & $1024\times 3$ &67.98 &62.41 \\
PointNet++* \cite{qi2017pointnet++} &$1024\times 3$ &72.52 &68.97 \\
3DShapeNets \cite{savva2016shrec} &Multi-View &68.26 &49.23 \\
DeepPano \cite{shi2015deeppano} &Multi-View &84.18 &76.81 \\
MVCNN \cite{qi2016volumetric} &Multi-View &- &83.0 \\
PANORAMA \cite{sfikas2017panorama} &Multi-View &87.39 &83.45 \\
GIFT \cite{bai2017gift} &Multi-View &91.12 &81.94 \\
SequenceViews \cite{han2019seqviews2seqlabels} &Multi-View &89.55 &89.0 \\
SPNet \cite{yavartanoo2018spnet} &Multi-View &\textbf{94.20} &85.21 \\
VIPGAN \cite{han2019view} &Multi-View &90.69 &89.23 \\\hline
Point2SpatialCapsule(Ours) &$1024 \times 3$ &\textbf{93.43} &\textbf{89.43} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:retrieval}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{pr_40.pdf}
\caption{The comparison of precision and recall curves obtained by different methods under (a) ModelNet40 and (b) ModelNet10.}
\label{fig:PR}
\end{figure}
\begin{table*}[!t]
\caption{The accuracies (\%) of part segmentation on ShapeNet part segmentation dataset.}
\label{table:part_segmentaion}
\begin{tabular}{l|c|cccccccccccccccccccc}
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{}&
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{\multirow{2}{*}{mean}} &
\multicolumn{16}{c}{Intersection over Union (IoU)}\\
& \multicolumn{1}{c|}{}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{air.}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{bag}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{cap}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{car}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{cha.}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{ear.}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{gui.}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{kni.}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{lam.}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{lap.}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{mot.}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{mug}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{pis.}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{roc.}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{ska.}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{tab.}
\\ \hline
\# SHAPES & &2690 &76 &55 &898 &3758 &69 &787 &392 &1547 &451 &202 &184 &283 &66 &152 &5271 \\ \hline
PointNet \cite{qi2017pointnet} &83.7&83.4&78.7&82.5&74.9&89.6&73.0&91.5&85.9&80.8&95.3&65.2&93.0&81.2&57.9&72.8&80.6 \\ \hline
PointNet++ \cite{qi2017pointnet++} &85.1&82.4&79.0&87.7&77.3&90.8&71.8&91.0&85.9&83.7&95.3&{71.6}&94.1&81.3&58.7&{76.4}&82.6 \\ \hline
SCN \cite{xie2018attentional} &84.6 &83.8 &80.8 &83.5 &{79.3} &90.5 &69.8 &{91.7} &86.5 &82.9 &{96.0 }&69.2 &93.8 &82.5 &{62.9} &74.4 &80.8 \\ \hline
Point2Seq \cite{liu2019sequence} &{85.2} &82.6 &81.8 &87.5 &77.3 &90.8 &77.1 &91.1 &86.9 &83.9 &{95.7}&70.8&94.6&79.3&58.1&75.2&82.8 \\ \hline
Kd-Net \cite{klokov2017escape} &82.3&80.1&74.6&74.3&70.3&88.6&73.5&90.2&87.2&81.0&94.9&57.4&86.7&78.1&51.8&69.9&80.3 \\ \hline
O-CNN \cite{wang2017cnn} &85.2 &84.2 &86.9 &84.6 &74.1 &90.8 &81.4 &91.3 &87.0 &82.5 &94.9 &59.0 &94.9 &79.7 &55.2 &69.4 &84.2 \\ \hline
KCNet \cite{shen2018mining} &84.7&82.8&81.5&86.4&77.6&90.3&76.8&91.0&87.2&{84.5}&95.5&69.2&94.4&81.6&60.1&75.2&81.3 \\ \hline
DGCNN \cite{wang2018dynamic} &85.1 &84.2 &83.7 &84.4 &77.1 &90.9 &78.5 &91.5 &87.3 &82.9 &96.0 &67.8 &93.3 &82.6 &59.7 &75.5 &82.0 \\ \hline
SO-Net \cite{li2018so}&84.9&82.8&77.8&{88.0}&77.3&90.6&73.5&90.7&83.9&82.8&94.8&69.1&94.2&80.9&53.1&72.9&{83.0} \\ \hline
RS-CNN \cite{liu2019relation}&86.2 &83.5 &84.8 &{88.8}&79.6 &91.2 &81.1 &91.6 &88.4 &86.0 &96.0 &73.7 &94.1 &83.4 &60.5 &77.7 &{83.6} \\ \hline
PointCNN \cite{li2018pointcnn}&86.1 &84.1 &86.5 &{86.0} &80.8 &90.6 &79.7 &92.3 &88.4 &85.3 &96.1 &77.2 &95.3 &84.21 &64.23 &80.0 &{83.0} \\ \hline
Ours &{85.3}&83.5&83.4&{88.5}&77.6&{90.8}&{79.4}&90.9&86.9&84.3&{95.4}&{71.7}&{95.3}&{82.6}&60.6&75.3&82.5 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{seg_visual.pdf}
\caption{Visualization of part segmentation results. In each shape pair, the first row is the ground truth (GT), and the second row is our predicted result. Parts with the same color are in the same part class.}
\label{fig:seg_visual}
\end{figure*}
In Table \ref{table:retrieval}, we compare the proposed Point2Capusules with counterpart methods in 3D shape retrieval task, in terms of \emph{mean average precisions} (mAPs). Since most of the methods focusing on 3D shape retrieval are based on multi-views of 3D models, in this subsection, we also quote the experimental results of the multi-view based methods to verify the effectiveness of Point2SpatialCapsule. Note that, the results of PointNet and PointNet++ are obtained by following the same training procedure as described in their original papers, which are denoted by $*$ in this table.
As shown in Table \ref{table:retrieval}, our method has achieved a comparable retrieval accuracy compared with multi-view based methods on both ModelNet10 and ModelNet40. Specifically, Point2SpatialCapsule achieves the best retrieval accuracy $89.43\%$ on ModelNet40, among all reported retrieval results. Point2Capusles achieves the second place result ($93.43\%$) on ModelNet10, which is slight lower than SPNet \cite{yavartanoo2018spnet} by $0.77\%$. However, Point2SpatialCapsule still beats SPNet by $4.22\%$ on ModelNet40 in terms of mAPs, which shows a more balanced performance of Point2SpatialCapsule over different scales of datasets. The comparison of precision-recall (PR) curves under ModelNet40 and ModelNet10 are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:PR}, where the results of Point2SpatialCapsule show the high performance for the 3D shape retrieval task.
The better performance of Point2SpatialCapsule can be dedicated to the following two reasons. First, the Point2SpatialCapsule is able to learn to encode the spatial locations of local features, which can produce a more discriminative representation for point clouds. Second, the digit capsules provide a more interpretable features for representing the point clouds, which is the length vector. Compared with the traditional single vector representations, in which the high-level characteristics are implicitly encoded in the latent feature space, the length of digit capsule explicitly indicates the probability that the characteristics appear in the point clouds.
Therefore, using the distance between length vectors of digit capsules is more effective and interpretable for 3D shape retrieval.
\subsection{3D Shape Part Segmentation}
In Table \ref{table:part_segmentaion}, we also report the performance of Point2SpatialCapsule on the part segmentation task in terms of the Intersection over Union (IoU) \cite{qi2017pointnet}.
As shown in Table \ref{table:part_segmentaion}, our Point2SpatialCapsule achieves the mean instance IoU of $85.3\%$, which outperforms the baseline method PointNet++ on 13 categories out of total 16 categories. Note that, same as PointNet++, Point2SpatialCapsule also employs the multi-scale sampling and grouping strategy for local feature extraction. Therefore, the experimental results prove that Point2Sequence improves the quality of local feature extraction, and leads to the better performance on the segmentation task. Fig. \ref{fig:seg_visual} visualizes some examples of our segmentation results, where our results are highly consistent with the ground truth.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{reconstruction.pdf}
\caption{The visualization of reconstruction results on the test set of ModelNet40. The top roll is the input original point cloud, and the bottom roll is the reconstructed point cloud from the Point2SpatialCapsule's reconstruction network. }
\label{fig:reconstruct}
\end{figure*}
Note that, segmentation application needs discriminative features of local regions. Although Point2Capsule is proposed for global shape features by encoding the information of spatial locations in local regions, rather than producing more discriminative features of local regions like RS-CNN \cite{liu2019relation} and PointCNN \cite{li2018pointcnn}, we still achieve comparable results in segmentation results.
\subsection{Ablation Studies}
\label{subsec:ablation}
In this section, we keep the settings of the network the same as described in Sec.\ref{sec:model_description}, except for the specified part for ablation study. We first investigate the influence of each part to our model, and then we analyze three important hyper-parameters in terms of classification accuracy on ModelNet40.
\begin{table}[!htp]
\centering
\caption{The effect of each part of Point2SpatialCapsule on ModelNet40.}
\label{table:shuffle}
\begin{tabular}{C{1.4cm}|cccc}\hline
Model &No-Multi &No-VLAD &No-Caps &Full-Model\\ \hline
Acc (\%)&92.5&91.4&92.1&\textbf{93.44}\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{The Influence of Each Part to Point2SpatialCapsule}
In order to investigate the effect of each part in Point2SpatialCapsule, we develop and evaluate three different variations of our model as follows. (1) `No-Multi' is the model without multi-scale shuffling, where the output of the multi-scale feature extractor is the direct input to the soft-assignment layer. (2) `No-VLAD' is the model without the geometric feature aggregation, where the output of multi-scale feature extraction layer is directly reshaped as spatial-aware capsules and input to the dynamic routing layer. (3) `No-Caps' is the model without the capsule net, where the output of geometric feature aggregation module is concatenated as a single vector and directly fed into the fully-connected layer for shape classification.
The experimental results are shown in Table \ref{table:shuffle}. From the results we can find that each part of Point2SpatialCapsule contributes to the model performance. We note that, the No-VLAD model achieves the worst performance among the four models, which means that directly applying the capsule network on the point cloud impairs the model's representational ability. The result of No-VLAD model supports our point of view that dynamic routing cannot learn the log priors directly from the disordered point clouds, and verifies the effectiveness of the proposed geometric feature aggregation.
The results of No-Multi proves the importance of applying multi-scale shuffling for smoothing the perceived range between features of different scales. The significant improvement of Full-Model compared to the No-Caps verifies the superior advantage of capsule network for aggregating local features in point cloud recognition.
\subsubsection{The Analysis of Capsules Net}
\begin{table}[!htp]
\centering
\caption{The effect of the iterations of dynamic routing on ModelNet40.}
\label{table:num_capsule}
\begin{tabular}{C{1.4cm}|C{1.4cm}C{1.4cm}C{1.4cm}}\hline
Iterations &{1}&{3}&{5}\\\hline
Acc (\%)&\textbf{93.44} &92.22 &91.98\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
Following the common practice of \cite{sabour2017dynamic}, we investigate the influence of iterations in dynamic routing. As shown in Table \ref{table:num_capsule}, we report the model performance with 1, 3 and 5 iterations of dynamic routing. According to \cite{sabour2017dynamic}, multiple iterations will increase the model's learning ability but may also cause the problem of overfitting. As for Point2SpatialCapsule, we find that dynamic routing with 1 iteration is already enough for learning the point cloud features.
\subsubsection{The Analysis of Geometric Feature Aggregation}
\begin{table}[!htp]
\centering
\caption{The influence of the number of cluster centers in geometric feature aggregation module on ModelNet40.}
\label{table:centers_VLAD}
\begin{tabular}{C{1.4cm}|C{1.2cm}C{1.2cm}C{1.2cm}C{1.2cm}}\hline
Number&{16}&{32}&64&128\\ \hline
Acc (\%) &92.70 &92.93 &\textbf{93.44} &93.21\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
We also analysis the influence of cluster centers in NetVLAD. As shown in Table \ref{table:centers_VLAD}, the model achieves the best result with 64 cluster centers. The explanations are two-fold: (1) the small number of cluster centers could reduce the representational ability of feature embeddings; (2) the slight reduce in performance of the large number of cluster centers is the result of producing similar feature embeddings, which leads to the information redundancy and hinders the model learning more discriminative local features.
\subsubsection{The Analysis of Reconstruction Loss}
\begin{table}[!htp]
\centering
\caption{The influence of reconstruction loss on ModelNet40.}
\label{table:reconstruct}
\begin{tabular}{C{1.4cm}|C{1.2cm}C{1.2cm}C{1.2cm}C{1.2cm}}\hline
$\alpha$&$10^{-3}$&$10^{-4}$&$10^{-5}$&0\\ \hline
Acc (\%) &91.69 &\textbf{93.44} &92.79 &92.46\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
In Table \ref{table:reconstruct}, we discuss the influence of reconstruction loss, where $\alpha$ is the weight factor as specified in Eq. (\ref{eq:total_loss}). From the results, we find that a large $\alpha$ leads to the decreasing of model performance, which in our opinion is the result of a slower learning process cause by the large reconstruction loss weight, especially during the early stage of training.
On the other hand, the experimental results also prove the reconstruction loss useful. Compared with a small weight ($\alpha=10^{-5}$) and the model without reconstruction ($\alpha=0$), the model with $\alpha=10^{-4}$ outperforms them by 0.65\% and 0.98\%, respectively. In Fig. \ref{fig:reconstruct}, we visualize the reconstruction results on the test set of ModelNet40, from which we can find that Point2SpatialCapsule can learn to produce a relatively satisfactory result, despite of the simple reconstruction network employed in the model.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conclusions}
In this paper, we propose a spatial-aware network, named Point2SpatialCapsule, to jointly aggregate geometric feature and spatial relationships of local regions on point cloud.
The proposed Point2SpatialCapsule has a wide range of potential applications, which can be combined with other local feature extraction methods of multi-scale regions for learning the global shape representation of 3D point clouds.
Compared with the previous feature aggregation methods, Point2SpatialCapsule has the ability to integrate both the geometric features of local regions and the spatial relationships among them. The features of local regions are aggregated by spatial-ware capsules with dynamic routing, which can preserve the spatial relationships between the extracted features.
Experiments show that our network can achieve superior performance on point cloud classification, retrieval and part segmentation tasks under differen datasets.
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
Knowing the depth of your surroundings is essential for navigating within an environment. We perceive the majority of our depth information visually without any substantial effort or thought. The importance of depth information becomes more apparent when visual stimuli are diminished or absent. For example visually impaired individuals require a white cane or guide dog to scan their surroundings for obstacles. In the animal kingdom, there are numerous animal species that have evolved to live in low-light conditions or complete darkness and use echolocation to know where they are and what surrounds them. Without explicitly learning how, we are able to perceive the relative distances of objects in our environment.
Depth information is also important for technologies such as adaptive cruise control and autonomous emergency braking or for use in autonomous systems such as robots and self-driving vehicles. In these systems depth information can be used to decide whether to accelerate, brake or steer. Sonar, radar, and lidar\footnote{Radar that uses laser instead of radio waves} are examples of technologies that can be used to measure this information directly. As a complementary source of information or as a cost-effective alternative, depth can be predicted from camera data. Ground truth depth data collected using one of the aforementioned techniques can be used to train a depth estimation model in a supervised manner. As an alternative, similar to depth perception in the natural world, it is possible to train a depth estimation model using a self-supervised approach, using no ground truth depth information but only stereo image pairs \cite{garg_unsupervised_2016} or video data from a single camera \cite{zhou_unsupervised_2017}.
A single image depth prediction model can be trained using image reconstruction as the supervision signal. This reconstruction is done using image pairs, where the images are of the same scene, but taken from different positions. If a depth prediction is made for one of the images from such a pair, using information about the change of camera position, the first image can be reconstructed from the second image. By minimizing the difference between the original image and the reconstruction the task of depth prediction is learned.
The idea of learning depth by image reconstruction was used by \cite{garg_unsupervised_2016} on stereoscopic images with a known fixed camera transformation. \cite{zhou_unsupervised_2017} showed that it is possible to train depth prediction models on video data using image reconstruction as a supervision signal, by adding a parallel network that predicts the image-pair camera transformation that is required for image reconstruction. The reconstruction computation will be discussed in further detail in the methods section.
Compared to using stereoscopic images, learning this task from video has some unique challenges. Stereoscopic images can be taken simultaneously capturing a scene at a single point in time, whereas video frames are inherently captured at different points in time. If a video contains a dynamic scene (e.g. objects are moving) and this is not taken into consideration during training, moving objects will appear incorrectly in the reconstructed image and thereby corrupt the learning signal.
The authors of \cite{zhou_unsupervised_2017} tried to tackle the dynamic scene problem by predicting a ‘motion explanation mask’ that can be used to ignore such regions. In later implementations of their work that are available online\footnote{\url{https://github.com/tinghuiz/SfMLearner}}, this mask was disabled, producing better results. In \cite{casser_depth_2018} , instance segmentation masks are used to handle object motion. These instance segmentation masks are only created for known object categories, using a pretrained mask R-CNN model \cite{he_mask_2017}.
Another challenge is that the camera transformations between video frames vary, in contrast to the fixed camera-distance of stereo image pairs. When there is little to no camera movement, adjacent frames are nearly identical, and hardly provide any learnable information. \cite{zhou_unsupervised_2017} attempts to reduce this problem by filtering out the nearly identical frames from the training data.
When not taking object motion into account during training, a model may learn to make incorrect depth predictions to compensate for the reconstruction mistakes caused by object motion. For example, objects that during training were often observed while they were moving at the same velocity as the camera, will incorrectly be predicted as being far away. This happens because the observed behavior of same-velocity-objects and distant stationary objects is similar; Their appearance does not change (much) from frame to frame.
To counter this phenomenon \cite{godard_digging_2018} applies a mask (called automask) to ignore pixels that do not change appearance from one frame to the adjacent frame. In addition of ignoring objects which appear static because they move with the same velocity as the camera, this mask will also ignore entire frames when the camera does not move.
One of the phenomena encountered when training a depth prediction model using image reconstruction is called occlusion. Occlusion relates to parts of a scene that can only be observed from one of two camera positions. For example, regions at the image boundaries may move in or out of view when the camera position changes. Another cause of occlusion is parallax, where for two different camera positions the apparent position of closer objects changes more, hiding or revealing what is behind them. Both types of occlusion effects can be seen in figure \ref{fig:occlusion_example}.
Incorporating these occlusion effects in the loss function during training can negatively impact the predictive performance of a depth prediction model since they do not provide meaningful information about the correctness of the depth predictions.
\input{figures/occlusion_example.tex}
Various solutions have been proposed to ignore these occlusion effects during training. In \cite{mahjourian_unsupervised_2018} a mask is applied in the loss function to account for occlusion effects at the image boundaries. \cite{godard_digging_2018} tackles both types of occlusion at the same time using a loss function called \enquote{Per-pixel minimum reprojection loss}, which at each pixel location selects the best reconstruction and ignores the other ones. The idea behind this loss function is that when a pixel is occluded in the adjacent video frame, a correct reconstruction of the pixel is unlikely, and the reconstruction of that pixel will not be used to optimize the depth prediction model.
Since the per-pixel minimum reprojection loss selects which reconstruction will be used per pixel location, it effectively creates a binary mask for each of the reconstructions. This is illustrated in figure \ref{fig:ppmrl_example}. The frame which is the target for image reconstruction is shown at the top of the figure. On the second row of the figure, two reconstructed images are shown, made from the next and previous video frames respectively. A binary map\footnote{Using the word \enquote{map}, instead of \enquote{mask} since it is not actively used to mask.}is located below each of these reconstructions. These maps display for each pixel of the reconstruction above it whether it is used or ignored by the per-pixel minimum reprojection loss.
\input{figures/ppmrl_example.tex}
From these binary maps, it can be observed that regions which are mostly black coincide with occlusion effects. This indicates that per-pixel minimum reprojection loss is able to ignore occlusion effects successfully. What also can be observed is that the pixels of the reconstruction target image for which the contents are visible in both adjacent frames, still only one of the reconstructions is selected to be used in the loss, and the other one is ignored.
The hypothesis that I will test in this work is that by limiting the amount of information which is ignored during training to only those regions that suffer from occlusion, more useful information will be available for training the model.
The approach I propose is \textit{occlusion mask}, a mask that during training can be used to specifically discard regions that cannot be reconstructed due to occlusions. The images at the bottom row of figure \ref{fig:ppmrl_example} illustrate the concept. Occlusion mask is based entirely on depth information.
We will test the hypothesis by incorporating the proposed occlusion mask method into two novel loss functions, use these loss functions to train depth prediction models, and compare their performance with that of a model trained with per-pixel minimum reprojection loss.
Additionally we will compare the behavioral differences of the loss functions, i.e. those that incorporate the proposed method and the per-pixel minimum reprojection loss, by visualizing the computed loss on training examples. With the occlusion mask we hope to improve the performance of future single image depth prediction models.
\section{Method}
We start by reviewing the framework introduced by \cite{zhou_unsupervised_2017} for training a single-view depth network from unlabeled video data, including its core concept: image reconstruction.
This will be followed by a review of the loss function computation of the method and implementation\footnote{\url{https://github.com/nianticlabs/monodepth2}} by Godard et al \cite{godard_digging_2018}, which serves as the foundation for our modifications as well as the baseline in our experiments.
We will finish the method section by describing our proposed occlusion mask and introducing two novel loss formulations which incorporate it.
\subsection{Self-supervised training}
\subsubsection{Framework}
All of the models in our experiments are trained using the same framework introduced by \cite{zhou_unsupervised_2017} consisting of one network predicting a depth map from a single image (i.e. in this case a frame from a video), and a pose network predicting camera transformation from two consecutive images (figure \ref{fig:network}). The two networks are trained together using the same loss but can be used separately after training.
\input{figures/network.tex}
The loss used for training is based on warping nearby frames, to create a new image that conforms (as best as possible) to the image for which the depth map is being predicted.
This ‘warping’ means that each pixel is sampled at their new location in the nearby frame, which can be computed using the predictions of the depth map and camera transformation.
\subsubsection{Image reconstruction}
\label{image_reconstruction}
A frame is reconstructed by sampling from one of the adjacent video frames.
Equation \ref{eq:sampling} shows how the sample location in the adjacent frame is computed for each pixel in the reconstruction. In this equation the subscript is used to indicate the point in time, $t$ is “now”, i.e. the time of the frame for which when the depth is predicted, $t'$ is the time point of the next or previous frame, and $t \to t'$ is the transition from one to the other.
The used formulation of the image reconstruction has the following implicit assumptions \cite{zhou_unsupervised_2017}:
1) the scene is static without moving objects;
2) there is no occlusion/disocclusion between the target view and the source views;
3) the surfaces appear uniformly bright from all directions of view so that the photo-consistency error is meaningful
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sampling}
\begin{pmatrix} x_{t \to t'}z_{t \to t'} \\ y_{t \to t'}z_{t \to t'} \\ z_{t \to t'} \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} = K T_{t \to t'} K^{-1} \begin{pmatrix} x_{t }z_{t} \\ y_{t}z_{t} \\ z_{t} \\ 1 \end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
We will first describe equation \ref{eq:sampling} and follow with an example that illustrates the computational steps. The purpose of this equation is to compute the sampling location $(x_{t \to t'}, y_{t\to t'})$ in frame $I_{t'}$ for each pixel at position $(x_t, y_t)$ in frame $I_t$. In this equation the rightmost column vector consists of the homogeneous coordinates of a pixel in frame $I_t$ where $z_t$ is the predicted depth of that pixel. The leftmost column vector consists of the homogeneous coordinates of the pixel after projection, i.e. the location at which the pixel is to be expected in frame $I_{t'}$ given the predicted depth and camera transformation. The 4x4 camera transformation matrix $T_{t\to t'}$ contains the rotation and translation of the camera as predicted by the pose network. The matrices $K$ and $K^{-1}$ denote the camera intrinsics matrix and its inverse, which transforms camera coordinates to image coordinates using camera properties such as focal length and principal point offset.\footnote{ To get an idea of how the camera transformation matrix and the camera intrinsics matrix affect what is seen in an image, you can have a look at this interactive tool: \url{https://ksimek.github.io/perspective_camera_toy.html}}
In figure \ref{fig:reproject_original} \& \ref{fig:reproject_disp} you can see a picture and its predicted depth map. Figure \ref{fig:reproject_grid} shows the outline of an image (the black rectangle) and its pixels neatly arranged in a grid (the blue dots). The depth information of \ref{fig:reproject_disp} can be added to each pixel in \ref{fig:reproject_grid} to create the point cloud shown in \ref{fig:reproject_grid_depth}, where the dots are bigger when the point is closer to the camera. \ref{fig:reproject_next_frame} shows the frame that comes next after frame \ref{fig:reproject_original}. The camera transformation (from \ref{fig:reproject_original} to \ref{fig:reproject_next_frame}) predicted by the pose network can be used to calculate where the points of \ref{fig:reproject_grid_depth} will end up, this is shown in \ref{fig:reproject_grid_proj_to_next}. Figure \ref{fig:reproject_grid_proj_to_next_no_depth} shows the points from \ref{fig:reproject_grid_proj_to_next} but with the depth information removed. Frame \ref{fig:reproject_original} can be reconstructed by sampling at the new pixel positions (\ref{fig:reproject_grid_proj_to_next_no_depth}) in \ref{fig:reproject_next_frame}. Figure \ref{fig:reproject_proj_from_next} shows this reconstruction.
\input{figures/reproject_example.tex}
Effects of the sample locations can be seen in the reconstruction, for example pixels where the sample location is outside of the image (the black rectangle) the closest border pixel is used instead. Another example is the small area near the tail light of the (red) car from which there is no sampling as can be seen in \ref{fig:reproject_grid_proj_to_next_no_depth}. This area in \ref{fig:reproject_next_frame} shows the headlamp of the car in the rear, which is not visible (occluded) in the target image \ref{fig:reproject_original}.
The sample coordinates $(x_{t \to t'}, y_{t \to t'})$ are continuous values. The reconstructed frame $I_{t' \to t}$ can be made by sampling at these projected pixel coordinates in frame $I_{t'}$ using the (sub-)differentiable bilinear sampling mechanism proposed in \cite{jaderberg_spatial_2015}. This sampling method linearly interpolates the values of the four pixels that surround the sample location.
\subsection{Baseline loss function}
In this section we will discuss the components of the loss function used in the baseline \cite{godard_digging_2018}. The loss used for training (eq. \ref{eq:loss}) consists of two components, which will be discussed in this section. One component is the smoothness loss ($L_s$) over the predicted depth map. This loss remains unchanged in the experiments, and is scaled with smoothness term $\lambda$ set to 0.001.
The other component of the loss function is the photometric loss multiplied with a binary mask in order to ignore certain areas of a reconstruction. This mask ($\mu$ in the equation), called automask is the same in all of the experiments. The photometric loss ($L_p$) is computed differently in each of the experiments.
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:loss}
L = \lambda L_s + \mu L_p
\end{equation}
The final loss is averaged over each pixel location, the various scales, and the images in a batch.
\subsubsection{Multiple scales}
Due to the sampling mechanism described in \ref{image_reconstruction}, the gradient is derived from the difference between the target pixel value and the pixel value in the reconstruction which is an interpolation of the four pixels surrounding the sample location. Using this gradient will mean that the depth prediction is changed in the direction that moves the sample location closer to one of the four pixels that surround the current sample location and that matches the target pixel most closely.
This change in depth prediction is not necessarily in the right direction, for example when there is no gradual color transition of the pixels that lie between the current sample location and the correct sample location. This can happen if the current sample location is far from the correct sample location, or when the scene is complex e.g. many surfaces with different color gradients, or multiple color gradients in a single surface.
To prevent getting stuck in these local optima, the loss (and therefore also the gradient) is usually computed on multiple scales which allows the gradient to be derived from larger spatial regions directly.\cite{zhou_unsupervised_2017} This is done by making reprojections using the intermediate depth map predictions of the network, which have a lower resolution.
The authors of \cite{godard_digging_2018} observed that projecting the input images with the resolution of the depth map, has the tendency to create artefacts when the depth map resolution is low and there are large low-texture regions in the image. They overcome this problem by upsampling the predicted depth maps to the resolution of the input image instead of downsampling the input image to the resolution of the depth map.\cite{godard_digging_2018} This preserves the details in low-texture regions which reduces ambiguity. Using this method values in the lower resolution depth map will influence a larger spatial region in the higher resolution reconstruction.
\subsubsection{Smoothness loss}
There are many incorrect depth map predictions which could also provide accurate image reconstructions, for example in homogeneous regions of an image. To steer the network to learn more realistic predictions a loss is used that enforces smoothness of the predicted depth map. In this implementation an edge-aware smoothness loss is used (eq. \ref{eq:smoothness_loss}) \cite{godard_unsupervised_2016}.
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:smoothness_loss}
L_s = | \partial_x d^*_t | e^{- | \partial_x I_t |} + |\partial_y d^*_t | e^{-| \partial_y I_t |}
\end{equation}
In this formulation depth discontinuities, i.e. high disparity gradients ($| \partial d^*_t |$), contribute less to the loss when the image gradients ($| \partial I_t |$) are relatively high. The used (inverse) depth map is normalized ($d_t^*$) by its mean value. This normalization is done to prevent that the loss is minimized by lowering the depth gradients through scaling down the entire depth map. This would be possible since the other loss component (i.e. the photometric error) is unaffected by scale, the depth and pose network would together scale down their predictions which negatively affects training. \cite{wang_learning_2018}
\subsubsection{Automask}
A mask, called automask, is used to ignore the stationary pixels, which come either from objects that move with the same velocity as the observer or when the camera is not moving. It is supposed to prevent the pixels which remain stationary in the image from contaminating the loss. It does this by ignoring the loss of pixels where the photometric error of the original, unwarped frame $I_t'$ is lower than the warped frame $I_{t' \to t}$. Equation \ref{eq:automask} shows the mask definition where $pe$ stands for photometric error, which will be described in the next section.
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:automask}
\mu = \begin{cases} 1 & \text{if } \displaystyle \min_{t'} pe(I_t, I_{t'}) > \displaystyle \min_{t'} pe(I_t, I_{t' \to t}) \\ 0 & \text{otherwise} \end{cases}
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Photometric error}
The photometric error (eq. \ref{eq:photometric_error}) used in the photometric loss component is a combination of the L1 loss of the pixel value differences and the structural similarity (SSIM) index \cite{zhou_wang_image_2004} of the image for which the depth is predicted and its reconstruction made from the adjacent frame . SSIM is used because it is a measure of structural information change and the human visual system is adapted to extract structural information. In the experiments $\alpha = 0.85$ is used. Figure \ref{fig:photometric_error_example} shows an example of the photometric error (\ref{fig:photometric_error_example}c) computed on the target “reference” image (\ref{fig:photometric_error_example}a) and the reprojected image (\ref{fig:photometric_error_example}b).
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:photometric_error}
pe(I_a, I_b) = \alpha \frac{1 - SSIM(I_a, I_b)}{2} + (1 - \alpha) \| I_a - I_b\|_1
\end{equation}
\input{figures/photometric_error_example.tex}
\subsubsection{Per-Pixel Minimum Reprojection Loss}
\label{ppmr_loss}
In the baseline per-pixel minimum reprojection loss (equation \ref{eq:ppmr_loss}) is used as the photometric loss . Which means that at each pixel location, the reconstruction with the lowest error is used in the loss. This is different to previous self-supervised depth estimation methods which instead use the average of the reconstructions.
Selecting the reconstruction with lowest error at that pixel location is done to account for regions in the reconstruction target (image), that are not visible in some of the images that are used to make the reconstructions. Even when the depth of these regions is predicted correctly, a correct reconstruction is not likely, which would give a high photometric error for such a region. \cite{godard_digging_2018}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ppmr_loss}
L_p = \min_{t'} pe(I_t, I_{t'\to t})
\end{equation}
\subsection{Occlusion}
\subsubsection{The occlusion mask}
The hypothesis in this thesis is that by selectively ignoring only the occluded regions of a reconstructed image, compared with the per-pixel minimum reprojection loss, more relevant information is available to learn the task of depth prediction. To this end we design an occlusion mask for discarding regions that cannot be reconstructed due to occlusions. Our solution for the occlusion mask utilizes the previously unused depth information of the point/pixel cloud after it has been projected in order to reconstruct the target image (figure \ref{fig:reproject_grid_proj_to_next} in section \ref{image_reconstruction}).
Figure \ref{fig:occlusion_mask_example} illustrates the computation steps of the occlusion mask. Consider \ref{fig:occlusion_mask_original} as the frame for which the depth map is predicted and the target of the reconstruction, and \ref{fig:occlusion_mask_previous_frame} the previous video frame. Similar to \ref{fig:reproject_grid_proj_to_next} from the example in section \ref{image_reconstruction} , figure \ref{fig:occlusion_mask_grid_project_to_previous} shows the projected points, i.e. where the pixels of the reconstruction target image will end up after the camera transformation to the previous video frame. In contrast with that earlier example, we will use the depth information that is removed from the point cloud visible in \ref{fig:occlusion_mask_grid_project_to_previous} to get the sample locations \ref{fig:occlusion_mask_grid_project_to_previous_no_depth}. This information gives the depths that are expected at the sample locations.
\input{figures/occlusion_mask_example.tex}
These depth expectations are visualized in \ref{fig:occlusion_mask_expected_sample_depth}, important to note is that it is not an actual depth map of a point in time, but the depths that you would expect to see if you would sample at the locations of \ref{fig:occlusion_mask_grid_project_to_previous_no_depth} in the depth map of the previous video frame. Figure \ref{fig:occlusion_mask_disp_previous_frame} show the depth map prediction of the previous frame. Figure \ref{fig:occlusion_mask_sampled_disp_previous_frame} shows the depths that are sampled from the prediction \ref{fig:occlusion_mask_disp_previous_frame} using the sample locations from \ref{fig:occlusion_mask_grid_project_to_previous_no_depth}. By comparing the expected depths at the sample locations \ref{fig:occlusion_mask_expected_sample_depth} with the observed depths, i.e. those sampled from the adjacent frame depth map prediction \ref{fig:occlusion_mask_sampled_disp_previous_frame}, the occluded regions can be determined \ref{fig:occlusion_mask_mask}. When the sampled observed depth is closer than what is expected from reprojection, it means something is blocking the view (i.e. occlusion). This occlusion mask can be used to ignore these regions in the reconstruction \ref{fig:occlusion_mask_proj_from_previous}.
Equation \ref{eq:occlusion_mask} shows the definition of the occlusion mask, which indicates which of the pixels of the target image are visible in the image from which is sampled and thus can be used to ignore the occluded pixels in the reconstruction. In this formula $z_{t'*}$ is the value of the depth map prediction of frame $I_{t'}$ sampled at location $(x_{t \to t'}, y_{t\to t'})$, i.e. the location after the projection.
If due to variation in the depth map predictions, an object is predicted closer in the adjacent frame, this could introduce regions that are incorrectly recognized as occlusion. To avoid this we propose to add the parameter $tolerance$ so that only regions with a sufficiently high ratio of predicted and expected (i.e. projected) depth are considered occluded. In our experiments we used $tolerance=0.3$ since this value produced occlusion mask that were good enough for performing our experiments. See section \ref{occlusion_mask_parameter_value_appendix} of the appendix for further considerations on choosing the parameter value.
The second case of equation \ref{eq:occlusion_mask} ignores the occlusion that is due to projected coordinates being outside of the image boundaries, just like the principled mask in \cite{mahjourian_unsupervised_2018}.
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:occlusion_mask}
\omega_{t \to t'} = \begin{cases} 0 & \text{if } z_{t'*} > z_{t \to t'} * (1 - tolerance) \\ 0 & \text{if } x_{t \to t'} \text{ or } y_{t \to t'} \text{ outside of image}\\ 1 & \text{otherwise} \end{cases}
\end{equation}
This computation of the occlusion mask does not introduce any new learnable parameters. Furthermore the adjacent frames depth map predictions are only used for determining the occlusion mask and not for backpropagation, therefore no gradients have to be computed which limits the computational overhead and thus the additional training time.
\subsubsection{Non-occluded average loss}
\label{owa_loss}
Equation \ref{eq:owa_loss} shows the non-occluded average loss, a photometric loss function that uses the occlusion mask to average the reconstruction errors. The resulting loss map consists of the pixel wise average of the non-occluded regions of the reconstructions. For example, if a region is visible in both of the adjacent images, the loss for that region will be the average of both their reconstruction errors. If a region is only visible in one of the adjacent images, only the reconstruction error of that image is used. When a region is somehow occluded in both the adjacent images, none of the reconstruction errors will be used for training the model.
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:owa_loss}
L_p = \frac{\displaystyle\sum_{t'} \omega_{t \to t'} pe(I_t, I_{t' \to t})}{\max(\displaystyle\sum_{t'} \omega_{t \to t'}, 1)}
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Non-occluded minimum reprojection loss}
\label{nomr_loss}
A photometric loss function that more resembles the one used in the baseline can be seen in equation \ref{eq:nomr_loss}. This loss function has the same properties as the per-pixel minimum reprojection loss, however it also incorporates the occlusion mask as a penalty. Per-pixel minimum reprojection loss uses only one reconstruction per pixel location in the loss. It is not known whether selecting only one reconstruction in a non-occluded region has an effect on the trained model. It is possible that this effect is beneficial to the model performance. If this were the case, averaging the non-occluded regions as done in equation \ref{eq:owa_loss} might harm performance. We will show experimentally that this is indeed the case: it helps to consider the per-pixel minimum also for non-occluded regions.
In equation \ref{eq:nomr_loss} you can see the photometric loss function that has the same behavior as equation \ref{eq:ppmr_loss} for non-occluded regions while further preventing occluded pixels from being used in the loss function, by using the mask as an additional error term. The implementation of the photometric error function has a convenient range of $[0,1]$, which makes scaling the occlusion mask unnecessary. For the model variant that uses this photometric loss, the occlusion mask is used in the same manner in the automask computation, i.e. as an additional error term on the right hand side of equation \ref{eq:automask}. This is done in order to prevent that areas that are occluded in both adjacent images, will be used to update the model.
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:nomr_loss}
L_p = \min_{t'} (pe(I_t, I_{t'\to t}) + (1 -\omega_{t \to t'}))
\end{equation}
\section{Experiments}
We will evaluate the performance of models trained using the introduced photometric losses and compare them with the baseline. Additionally we will visualize the effect of the photometric loss function on the learning signal during training using examples from the training set.
\subsection{KITTI dataset}
In our experiment we will use the KITTI dataset since it is a widely used dataset in single-view depth estimation literature. This dataset contains short videos that are captured while driving through and around Karlsruhe in a car equipped with multiple cameras, a laser scanner and a GPS system.\cite{geiger_are_2012} We will use the split of this dataset introduced in \cite{eigen_depth_2014} with the static frames filtered out as described in \cite{zhou_unsupervised_2017}. This split uses 33 drives (the short videos) to produce 39,810 triplets for training and 4,424 for validation, and for testing 697 images sampled balanced from 28 other drives.
\subsubsection{Results}
The results in table \ref{tab:kitti_results} show that incorporating the occlusion mask into the used loss function improves the accuracy of depth prediction models. The model trained with non-occluded minimum reprojection loss outperforms the baseline, i.e. the per-pixel minimum reprojection loss model, on all metrics. Incorporating the occlusion mask gives a larger accuracy improvement for the average reprojection loss function (table \ref{tab:kitti_results}a) than for the per-pixel minimum reprojection loss function (table \ref{tab:kitti_results}b). This can be explained by the fact that per-pixel minimum reprojection loss already ignores occlusion effects based on reconstruction error, and that further improvement can only come from ignoring occlusion effects that are missed by per-pixel minimum reprojection loss but are recognized by the occlusion mask.
\input{figures/results_table.tex}
Although the observed performance improvements validate the benefit of incorporating occlusion mask into the loss function, the results do not validate the hypothesis, which states that more useful information is available for model training if only those regions that suffer from occlusion are ignored. Given this hypothesis, it would be expected that the non-occluded average reprojection model outperforms the per-pixel minimum reprojection model.
We can think of various explanations for this result: the occlusion mask fails to mask occluded regions, the occlusion mask incorrectly masks non-occluded regions, or per-pixel minimum reprojection loss ignores regions which are not occluded but that do have a negative effect on training the model. We will try to answer this question in the next section by analyzing the loss images created by the discussed photometric losses.
\FloatBarrier
\subsubsection{Visualizing Photometric Losses}
In this section we will compare loss images of the two proposed photometric losses (i.e. the non-occluded average reprojection loss from section \ref{owa_loss} and the non-occluded minimum reprojection loss from section \ref{nomr_loss}) with loss images created by the baselines photometric loss (i.e. per pixel minimum reprojection loss, section \ref{ppmr_loss}). These loss images are computed on training examples and provide an idea of how important the regions of a reconstructed image are for optimization during training.
We intend to identify the differences between the loss functions. For example if one of the methods fails to ignore occluded regions or unexpectedly ignores non-occluded regions. Additionally this analysis can demonstrate whether the occlusion mask is able to mask occlusion. Since the loss function is used to guide the learning behavior during training, we will apply our analysis on the data from the training set. The loss images are all created using depth predictions made by the same model, i.e. one trained with per-pixel minimum reprojection loss. We assume that model choice has limited influence on the results of this analysis. Training examples for visualization will be selected randomly as well as based on the computed loss values. The criterion for selection is a large absolute difference between the computed per-pixel minimum reprojection loss and the non-occluded average reprojection loss. To avoid having many similar examples, we filter the data by only looking at images from one camera and at every tenth frame recorded.
Figure \ref{fig:loss_diff_highest} shows the example with the highest difference in the computed loss.
The first five images of this figure show the target frame, both reconstructions, and the photometric errors of the reconstructions. In the photometric error images, a brighter color means a higher value. The images of the third row show the calculated binary occlusion masks, where white areas mean there is no occlusion and black means there is occlusion. The last three rows show for each photometric loss, the calculated loss maps, the absolute difference to the baseline photometric loss and if applicable a mask displaying for each pixel location which of the photometric errors is used in the loss (black means from reconstruction 1, white from reconstruction 2). An important remark is that the shown loss maps are the photometric loss where the automask has not yet been applied.
\input{figures/loss_analysis/highest_loss_diff_example.tex}
This example has a high absolute difference for the two loss methods, because there is an area that is occluded in both of the adjacent frames and per-pixel minimum reprojection loss is only able to ignore one of the reconstructions. This example shows that the occlusion mask (\ref{fig:loss_diff_highest}f+g) is indeed able to mask the occluded areas, i.e. the black regions of the occlusion masks match with regions that are visible in the target image but not in the reconstructions. The piece of road that is visible in the target frame is occluded by the first car in the previous frame (\ref{fig:loss_diff_highest}b) and the tailgating car in the later frame (\ref{fig:loss_diff_highest}c). Together these occlusions make it impossible to reconstruct that area of the target image. What the example also shows, is that the occlusion mask is able to handle thin objects, which can be seen by the traffic sign in \ref{fig:loss_diff_highest}b,d and f.
The areas that are occluded in both of the adjacent images are visible as the black regions in the non-occluded average loss image (\ref{fig:loss_diff_highest}m), because they are directly ignored using the occlusion mask. In the loss image of the non-occluded minimum reprojection loss (\ref{fig:loss_diff_highest}j) these areas are clearly visible as the yellow areas because the occlusion mask is added to the loss, and consequently will be ignored by the automask.
Figure \ref{fig:loss_diff_random1} shows one of the examples that was selected randomly. We can observe that the per-pixel minimum reprojection loss is able to ignore some of the reprojection error that is caused by object motion instead of occlusion. In the image which shows the loss difference between the non-occluded average loss and the minimum reprojection loss (fig\ref{fig:loss_diff_random1}n), we can see that there is a loss difference for moving objects, in this case the cars, which are not occluded. Although this behavior is not the originally intended effects of the per-pixel minimum reprojection loss it does help training, since the current reprojection computation (eq. \ref{eq:sampling}) does not account for object movement, and consequently any gradient coming from a moving object can interfere with learning correct depth predictions.
\input{figures/loss_analysis/random_loss_diff_example.tex}
\section{Discussion}
The goal of this thesis was to design an occlusion mask that can be used to specifically discard regions that cannot be reconstructed due to occlusions and to test whether this method can help improve the performance of depth prediction models. We hypothesized that by limiting the amount of information which is ignored during training to only those regions that suffer from occlusion, more useful information will be available for training the model.
Here, we have introduced an occlusion mask that is based entirely on depth predictions and can be used to specifically ignore regions where occlusion is expected. We have shown that incorporating the occlusion mask in the photometric loss function improves model performance.
Contrary to our hypothesis, the results of our experiments show that ignoring only regions where occlusion is expected (non-occluded average loss) did not give better results compared with per-pixel minimum reprojection loss. We further investigated this outcome by performing a visual analysis of the difference between the photometric losses obtained by both methods.
In the visual analysis of the photometric losses, we observed (in fig. \ref{fig:loss_diff_highest}) that with the occlusion mask it is possible to ignore areas of reconstructions that are occluded in both of the adjacent frames. This is an improvement compared to the per-pixel minimum reprojection loss which is only able to ignore one of the reconstructions.
During this analysis we have also discovered (in fig. \ref{fig:loss_diff_random1}n) that the per-pixel minimum reprojection loss unexpectedly reduces the loss being contaminated with photometric error caused by object motion. This effect takes place because the per-pixel minimum reprojection loss always ignores one of the reconstructions at each pixel location based entirely on a high photometric error, which itself is not caused exclusively by occlusion. The ability to partially ignore moving objects is useful for models that do not take object motion into account.
It makes sense that a model which does not take object motion into account does not benefit from incorporating errors caused by object motion into the loss function. This however does not give a complete answer about the reason for the observed performance gap between the non-occluded average photometric loss and the per-pixel minimum reprojection loss. It is possible that for the per-pixel minimum reprojection loss the improvement in model performance which is gained by ignoring motion artefacts is at the same time reduced by ignoring regions which are not affected by occlusion or motion and do have a valid gradient.
The question of whether ignoring only the areas of reconstructions that are affected by occlusion during training gives a better performing model, remains for models that do take object motion into account.
It is possible that (partially) ignoring object-motion related photometric error, as is done by the per-pixel minimum reprojection loss, could be disadvantageous for models that do take object motion into consideration since it allows the model to achieve a lower loss while making incorrect predictions about object movement. Occlusion mask does not have this problem because it can specifically ignore occlusion effects, while preserving the photometric error caused by object movement which is valuable information when optimizing the model.
Looking back to the implicit assumptions underlying self-supervised training using image reconstruction\footnote{\begin{enumerate}[noitemsep]
\item the scene is static without moving objects;
\item there is no occlusion/disocclusion between the target view and the source views;
\item the surfaces appear uniformly bright from all directions of view so that the photo-consistency error is meaningful
\end{enumerate}
} that were mentioned in section \ref{image_reconstruction}, and combining them with our earlier observations we can see that the per-pixel minimum reprojection loss is able to ignore some or most of the photometric error related to the first two assumptions, i.e. the scene is static and there is no occlusion. We can imagine that per-pixel minimum reprojection loss is also able to ignore some of the photometric error related to the third assumption, i.e. surface appearance changes with direction of view. Or changes in surface appearance caused by a change in illumination due to moving objects, e.g. shade or reflection.
\section{Conclusion}
In this work we have introduced occlusion mask, a mask that during training can be used to specifically ignore regions that cannot be reconstructed due to occlusions. \mbox{Occlusion} mask is based entirely on predicted depth information. We have demonstrated that (i) incorporating occlusion mask in the used photometric loss function can improve the performance of single image depth prediction models. (ii) per-pixel minimum reprojection loss also ignores some of the reprojection error caused by object motion.
\FloatBarrier
\bibliographystyle{ieee}
|
\section{Introduction}
In this text, $K$ will be a number field. By a \emph{finite place} $\nu$ of $K$
we mean a non--archimedean absolute value on $K$ that restricts to the
$p$--adic absolute value on $\Q$ for some rational prime $p$.
We thus have $|p|_\nu = p^{-1}$.
The integer $d_v$ will denote the degree of the completion of $K$ with respect to
the valuation $\nu$ over the field $\Q_p$. We define the (absolute logarithmic) height
of an algebraic number $j$ by
\begin{displaymath}
h(j) = \frac 1{[K:\Q]} \left( \sum_\sigma \log \max \{1,|\sigma(j)|\}
+ \sum_\nu d_\nu \log \max\{1,|j|_\nu\} \right),
\end{displaymath}
where $K$ is any number field containing $j$ and $\sigma$ runs over all field
embeddings $\sigma\colon K \rightarrow \C$ and $\nu$ runs over all finite places of $K$.
This definition is independent of the choice of $K$.
Note that $j$ is an algebraic integer if and only if $|j|_\nu \le 1$ holds for
all finite places.
Thus the height of an algebraic integer is given by
\begin{displaymath}
h(j) = \frac 1{[K:\Q]} \sum_{|\sigma(j)|>1} \log |\sigma(j)|.
\end{displaymath}
Since $h(j) = h(j^{-1})$ holds for all algebraic numbers, we obtain for
an algebraic integer the equality
\begin{align*
h(j) &= \frac 1{[K:\Q]} \sum_{|\sigma(j)|>1} \log |\sigma(j)| \notag \\
&= -\frac 1{[K:\Q]} \left( \sum_{|\sigma(j)|<1} \log |\sigma(j)|
+ \sum_\nu d_\nu \log |j|_\nu \right).
\end{align*}
Let $j$ be an algebraic unit, so that it has norm $\pm 1$. The height of $j$ then reduces to
\begin{equation}\label{eq:alg_int_height}
h(j) = \frac 1{\left[K:\Q\right]} \sum_{\lvert \sigma(j) \rvert > 1} \log \lvert \sigma(j) \rvert
= -\frac 1{\left[K:\Q\right]} \sum_{\lvert \sigma(j) \rvert < 1} \log \lvert \sigma(j) \rvert
\end{equation}
where $D = \left[K:\Q\right]$, and $\sigma$ runs over all $\Q$--homomorphisms $K \hookrightarrow \C$.
Note that $h$ also denotes the Faltings height (with the $\frac 12\log\pi$--term) but
there should be no ambiguity.
The multiplicative height will be denoted by $H(\cdot) = e^{h(\cdot)}$ and satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ht_sum_lower_bound}
H(\alpha\beta) \le 2H(\alpha)H(\beta)
\end{equation}
for any two algebraic numbers $\alpha$ and $\beta$.
We will denote Klein's modular function by $j\colon \H \rightarrow \C$.
For a fixed $\alpha \in \bar\Q$ the number of $j$--invariants $j$ of elliptic curves
with complex multiplication such that $j-\alpha$ is a unit can be effectively bounded.
See \cite{bhk} and \cite{cmcase} for details.
We want to look at a similar problem where $j$ does not have complex multiplication.
Without further assumptions the number of such $j$ can not be bounded.
We thus fix an elliptic curve without complex multiplication, and denote by $j_0$ its
$j$--invariant. Assume that the curve is defined over a number field $K$ contained
in $\C$.
Our aim is to prove the following result.
\begin{theorem}
\input{noncm_finite_thm}
\end{theorem}
To be precise, we give an effective bound for the degree of the minimal isogeny. This leaves
only finitely many possibilities for $j$.
We can also look a slightly different problem and fix the $j$--invariant $\alpha$ of an elliptic
curve with complex multiplication. We have the same result as stated in the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}
\input{noncm_ja_finite}
\end{theorem}
Again we give a bound on the degree of the minimal isogeny and our bounds are effective.
\section{Isogenous points in the fundamental domain}
Recall that $j_0$ is the $j$--invariant of a fixed elliptic curve without CM.
Assume $j(\tau_0) = j_0$ for $\tau_0 \in \F$.
For any number field $K$ and any embedding $\sigma\colon K \hookrightarrow \C$ there is a $\tau_0^\sigma \in \F$
such that $j(\tau_0^\sigma) = \sigma(j_0)$.
For $\xi \in \bar\F$ and $\tau \in \H$
we define the sets
\begin{displaymath}
\Sigma(\xi, \varepsilon) = \left\{ \tau \in \F; \lvert j(\tau) - j(\xi) \rvert < \varepsilon \right\}
\end{displaymath}
and
\begin{displaymath}
\Gamma(\xi, \varepsilon) = \left\{ \sigma\colon K \rightarrow \C; \tau_0^\sigma \in \Sigma(\xi,\varepsilon) \right\}.
\end{displaymath}
We will write $\Sigma_\varepsilon$ and $\Gamma_\varepsilon$ for $\Sigma(\zeta,\varepsilon)$ and $\Gamma(\zeta,\varepsilon)$,
respectively, where $\zeta = e^{2\pi i/6}$.
We want to give an explicit bound for the number of elements in the Galois orbit of $j_0$ satisfying the
condition above. First, we will bound the number of points in the Hecke orbit, and then use a
result of Lombardo to estimate the total number. Two (equivalence classes of isomorphic) elliptic
curves are in the same Hecke orbit if they are isogenous.
We will need the following counting lemma. We translate points in the upper
half--plane into the fundamental domain with matrices in $\sl2z$, and thus get restrictions
on then entries of the matrices.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:ellipse}
Let $\xi \in \bar\F$ and $\varepsilon \in (0,\frac{\sqrt{3}}{3|\xi|+2}]$. Let $\tau \in \H$
satisfy $|\tilde\tau - \xi| \le \varepsilon$, where $\tilde\tau \in \F$ is in the $\sl2z$--orbit of $\tau$.
Pick
\begin{displaymath}
\gamma = \begin{pmatrix}a&b\\c&d\end{pmatrix} \in \sl2z
\end{displaymath}
such that $\gamma\tau = \tilde\tau$.
Then there exist $\nu \in \{\pm 1\}$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:matrixentries}
\left\lvert a^2 + \nu 2 |\Re(\xi)| ac + |\xi|^2 c^2 - \frac{\Im(\xi)}{\Im(\tau)}\right\rvert
\le 7\frac{4|\xi|+1}{\sqrt 3} |\xi|^2 \frac{\varepsilon^{1/2}}{\Im(\tau)},
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bound_a2_c2}
\max\left\{a^2,c^2\right\} \le \frac{4|\xi|+1}{\sqrt 3} \frac 1{\Im(\tau)}.
\end{equation}
Moreover, we have
\begin{displaymath}
|d| \le |c| |\Re(\tau)| + \frac{4|\xi|+1}{\sqrt{3}}
\end{displaymath}
and
\begin{displaymath}
|b| \le |a| |\Re(\tau)| + \frac{4|\xi|+1}{\sqrt 3}.
\end{displaymath}
\end{lem}
\noindent The lemma tells us, that the first column of $\gamma$, considered as a point in the
plane, is close to a conic section.
Since
\begin{displaymath}
(2\nu |\Re(\xi)|)^2 - 4|\xi|^2 = 4(\Re(\xi)^2 - \Re(\xi)^2- \Im(\xi)^2) = -4\Im(\xi) < 0
\end{displaymath}
the equation actually defines an ellipse.
The ellipse is defined in terms of $\xi$ and $\tau$.
\begin{proof}
Let $R = |\xi|$ and $A = \Im(\xi)$.
Moreover write $\tau = x + iy$. We have
\begin{displaymath}
\Im(\gamma\tau) = \frac{\Im\tau}{(cx+d)^2+c^2y^2} \ge A - \varepsilon
\ge A - \frac{\sqrt{3}}{3R+2} \ge \frac{\sqrt{3}}{4R+1}
\end{displaymath}
by definition of $\varepsilon$ and $A \ge \frac{\sqrt{3}}2$.
Define $\delta_1 := \Im(\gamma\tau)^{-1}$. Then $\delta_1 \le 1/(A-\varepsilon)$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cddependence}
(cx+d)^2 + c^2y^2 = \delta_1 y.
\end{equation}
This yields $c^2 \le \delta_1/y \le (A-\varepsilon)^{-1}y^{-1}$, which implies the bound on $c^2$, and
\begin{displaymath}
|cx+d||c|y \le \frac 12 \left( (cx+d)^2 + c^2y^2\right) = \frac 12 \delta_1 y \le \frac 1{2(A-\varepsilon)} y.
\end{displaymath}
Further we get
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dequation}
|cx+d||c| \le \frac1{2(A-\varepsilon)} \le \frac{4R+1}{\sqrt{3}}
\end{equation}
and hence
\begin{displaymath}
|d| \le |c||\Re(\tau)| + \frac{4R+1}{\sqrt{3}}
\end{displaymath}
if $c \not= 0$.
Thus the inequality for $d$ in the statement is true in the case $c \not= 0$. But if $c = 0$,
then $d = \pm 1$, and $|d| = 1 \le \frac 5{\sqrt{3}} \le \frac{4R +1}{\sqrt{3}}$. Thus, the
inequality for $d$ holds in both cases.
Put $\gamma' = \begin{pmatrix}0&-1\\1&0\end{pmatrix}\gamma$.
Then $\gamma'\tau = -\frac 1{\tilde\tau}$. Define $\delta_2 := \Im(\gamma'\tau)^{-1}$,
i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{eq:abdependence}
(ax+b)^2 + a^2y^2 = \delta_2y.
\end{equation}
We put $r = |\tilde\tau|$ and $B = \Im(\tilde\tau)$.
Now by the general rule of transformation of the imaginary part under fractional linear
transformations
\begin{displaymath}
\delta_2 = \Im(\gamma'\tau)^{-1} = \Im\left(-\frac 1{\tilde\tau}\right)^{-1}
= \left( \frac{\Im(\tilde\tau)}{|\tilde\tau|^2} \right)^{-1} = \frac{r^2}B.
\end{displaymath}
We remark that $B/r = \Im(\tilde\tau/|\tilde\tau|) \ge \sqrt{3}/2$ since
$\tilde\tau/r \in \bar\F$, and similarly $A/R \ge \sqrt{3}/2$.
This implies
\begin{displaymath}
\delta_2 \le \frac 2{\sqrt{3}} r \le \frac 2{\sqrt{3}}(R + \varepsilon) \le \frac{2R+1}{\sqrt{3}}.
\end{displaymath}
We proceed as before with the bound on $d$ and $c^2$. From \eqref{eq:abdependence}
we obtain $a^2 \le \delta_2/y \le (3R+1)/(\sqrt{3}y)$,
which is the desired inequality of the statement. Moreover, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bequation}
|ax+b||a| \le \delta_2/2 \le (R+1)/\sqrt{3}
\end{equation}
and hence
\begin{displaymath}
|b| \le |a||\Re(\tau)| + \frac{R+1}{\sqrt{3}},
\end{displaymath}
whenever $a \not= 0$. Again, if $a=0$, then $|b| = 1 \le \frac{4R+1}{\sqrt{3}}$, as claimed.
It remains to prove \eqref{eq:matrixentries}.
We deal with the case $c=0$ first. Then $a=d=\pm 1$ and $y = \delta_1^{-1} = \Im\tilde\tau = \Im\tau$,
and thus $|y-A| \le |\tilde\tau - \xi| \le \varepsilon$.
This implies
\begin{displaymath}
\left\vert \frac 1A - \frac 1y \right\vert \le \frac \varepsilon{Ay} \le \frac 1A \frac{\varepsilon^{1/2}}y.
\end{displaymath}
Multiplying by $A$ shows that Equation \eqref{eq:matrixentries} is true for any value of $\nu$.
Now assume $c \not= 0$.
We want to prove
$|\delta_2 - \frac{|\xi|^2}{\Im \xi}| = |\delta_2 - \frac{|\xi|^2}{A}| \ll \varepsilon$.
We compute
\begin{equation}\label{eq:inequalityfora0}
\begin{split}
\left\vert\delta_2 - \frac{R^2}A\right\vert &= \left\vert\frac{r^2}B - \frac{R^2}A\right\vert
= \left\vert\frac{R^2B - r^2A}{AB}\right\vert \\
&= \left\vert\frac{R^2B - BRr + BRr - ARr + ARr - r^2A}{AB}\right\vert \\
&\le RB\left\vert\frac{r-R}{AB}\right\vert + Rr\left\vert\frac{A-B}{AB}\right\vert
+ rA\left\vert\frac{r-R}{AB}\right\vert \\
&\le \frac 2{\sqrt 3}\varepsilon + \frac 43 \varepsilon + \frac 2{\sqrt 3}\varepsilon \\
&\le 4\varepsilon,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where we have used $|R - r| = ||\xi|-|\tilde\tau|| \le |\xi - \tilde\tau| \le \varepsilon$
and $|A - B| = |\Im(\xi) - \Im(\tilde\tau)| \le |\xi - \tilde\tau| \le \varepsilon$ in the
second last inequality.
Suppose $a=0$ for now. Then $b=-c=\pm 1$ and $y = \delta_2^{-1}$. Multiplying \eqref{eq:inequalityfora0} by
$\Im(\xi) = A$ shows \eqref{eq:matrixentries} as the following argument shows.
We have $\delta_2^{-1} = \Im(\gamma'\tau) = \frac{\Im(\tau)}{|b|^2} = \Im(\tau)$ by the
usual transformation formula for the imaginary part of the action of $\sl2z$ by fractional
linear transformations.
Thus
\begin{align*}
|A\delta_2 - R^2| = \left\vert R^2 - \frac A{\Im(\tau)}\right\vert
= \left\vert |\xi|^2 - \frac{\Im(\xi)}{\Im(\tau)}\right\vert \le 4A\varepsilon \le 4R \varepsilon^{1/2}.
\end{align*}
We have $\Im(\tau) \le 2/\sqrt{3}$ since $a=0$ and $\gamma$ translates $\tau$ into the fundamental domain.
Therefore, the inequality remains true after multiplying the right--hand side by $2/\sqrt{3}\Im(\tau)^{-1}$.
This shows equation \eqref{eq:matrixentries}.
Finally, assume $ac \not=0$.
Put $X := x +d/c$ and $Y := x + b/a$. Consider the difference of the two
\begin{displaymath}
X - Y = \left( x + \frac dc \right) - \left( x + \frac ba \right) = \frac 1{ac}.
\end{displaymath}
If we divide \eqref{eq:cddependence} by $c^2$ and rewrite the result in terms of $Y$ we get
\begin{displaymath}
0 = X^2 + y^2 - \frac{\delta_1 y}{c^2} = \left( Y + \frac 1{ac} \right)^2 + y^2 - \frac{\delta_1 y}{c^2}
= Y^2 + \frac 2{ac} Y + \frac 1{(ac)^2} + y^2 - \frac{\delta_1 y}{c^2}.
\end{displaymath}
Similarly, if we divide \eqref{eq:abdependence} by $a^2$ we find
\begin{displaymath}
0 = Y^2 + y^2 - \frac{\delta_2 y}{a^2}
\end{displaymath}
Computing the resultant of the last two displays as polynomials in $Y$, and multiplying the result by
$(ac)^4$ to kill the denominators, gives us the expression
\begin{equation}\label{eq:resultant}
a^4y^2\delta_1^2 - 2a^2c^2y^2\delta_1\delta_2 + c^4y^2\delta_2^2 + 4a^2c^2y^2 - 2a^2y\delta_1 - 2c^2y\delta_2 + 1 = 0.
\end{equation}
Now write $\delta_1 = \frac 1A + \varepsilon_1$ and $\delta_2 = \frac{R^2}A + \varepsilon_2$.
Then
\begin{displaymath}
|\varepsilon_1| = \left\vert\delta_1 - \frac 1A\right\vert
= \left\vert \frac{A-\Im(\tilde\tau)}{A\Im(\tilde\tau)} \right\vert \le \frac 2{\sqrt{3}A} \varepsilon
\end{displaymath}
since $\Im(\tilde\tau) \ge \sqrt{3}/2$ and $|\Im(\xi)-\Im(\tilde\tau)| \le |\xi-\tilde\tau| \le \varepsilon$.
Also $|\varepsilon_2| \le 4\varepsilon$ by \eqref{eq:inequalityfora0}.
Put $\sigma = \Re(\xi)$. If we substitute these expressions for $\delta_1$ and $\delta_2$ in
\eqref{eq:resultant} we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:resultant_times_const}
\begin{split}
0 =& a^4y^2\left( \frac 1A + \varepsilon_1 \right)^2
- 2a^2c^2y^2\left( \frac 1A + \varepsilon_1 \right)\left( \frac{R^2}A + \varepsilon_2 \right) \\
&+ c^4y^2\left( \frac{R^2}A + \varepsilon_2 \right)^2 + 4a^2c^2y^2
- 2a^2y\left( \frac 1A + \varepsilon_1 \right) - 2c^2y\left( \frac{R^2}A + \varepsilon_2 \right) + 1.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
After multiplying the equation by $A^2/y^2$ the terms that do not include $\varepsilon_1$ and $\varepsilon_2$
are given by
\begin{align*}
a^4 - 2a^2c^2A \frac{R^2}A &+ c^4A^2 \frac{R^4}{A^2} + 4a^2c^2A^2
- 2a^2\frac Ay - 2c^2\frac{R^2}A \frac{A^2}y + \frac{A^2}{y^2} \\
&= a^4 - 2a^2c^2 R^2 + c^4R^4 + 4a^2c^2A^2 - 2a^2\frac Ay - 2c^2R^2 \frac Ay + \frac{A^2}{y^2} \\
&= a^4 - 2a^2c^2 R^2 + c^4R^4 + 4a^2c^2(R^2 - \sigma^2) - 2a^2\frac Ay - 2c^2R^2 \frac Ay + \frac{A^2}{y^2} \\
&= \left( a^2 - 2\sigma ac + R^2c^2 - \frac Ay \right) \left( a^2 + 2\sigma ac + R^2c^2 - \frac Ay \right)
\end{align*}
The terms that involve $\varepsilon_1$ and $\varepsilon_2$ in \eqref{eq:resultant_times_const} after
multiplying it by $A^2/y^2$ are given by
\begin{align*}
A^2 \left( \left(a^4 \frac 2A - 2a^2c^2 \frac{R^2}A - 2a^2 \frac 1y \right) \varepsilon_1\right.
&+ \left(-2a^2c^2\frac 1A + 2c^4 \frac{R^2}A - 2c^2 \frac 1y\right) \varepsilon_2 \\
&+ \left.\left(a^4\varepsilon_1^2 - 2a^2c^2\varepsilon_1\varepsilon_2 + c^4\varepsilon_2^2 \right)
\vphantom{\frac{R^2}A}\right) \\
= A^2 \left( a^2\left(a^2 \frac 2A - 2c^2 \frac{R^2}A - 2 \frac 1y \right) \varepsilon_1\right.
&+ c^2\left(-2a^2\frac 1A + 2c^2 \frac{R^2}A - 2 \frac 1y\right) \varepsilon_2 \\
&+ \left.\left(a^2\varepsilon_1 - c^2\varepsilon_2 \right)^2
\vphantom{\frac{R^2}A}\right).
\end{align*}
Putting everything together in one equation again we obtain
\begin{align*}
\lefteqn{\left( a^2 - 2\sigma ac + R^2c^2 - \frac Ay \right) \left( a^2 + 2\sigma ac + R^2c^2 - \frac Ay \right)} \\
&&= -A^2 \left( 2a^2\left(a^2 \frac 1A - c^2 \frac{R^2}A - \frac 1y \right) \varepsilon_1\right.
+ 2c^2\left(-a^2\frac 1A + c^2 \frac{R^2}A - \frac 1y\right) \varepsilon_2 \\
&&+ \left.\left(a^2\varepsilon_1 - c^2\varepsilon_2 \right)^2
\vphantom{\frac R{\sin\varphi}}\right).
\end{align*}
We are now ready to prove \eqref{eq:matrixentries}. Choose $\nu \in \{\pm 1\}$ such that
\begin{displaymath}
\left\vert a^2 + 2\nu|\sigma| ac + R^2c^2 - \frac Ay \right\vert
\le \left\vert a^2 - 2\nu|\sigma| ac + R^2c^2 - \frac Ay \right\vert.
\end{displaymath}
Then
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bounding_ellipse}
\begin{split}
\left\vert a^2 + 2\nu|\sigma| ac + R^2c^2 - \frac Ay \right\vert^2
\le& \left\vert a^2 - 2\sigma ac + R^2c^2 - \frac Ay \right\vert \left\vert a^2 + 2\sigma ac + R^2c^2 - \frac Ay \right\vert \\
\le& A^2 \max\left\{a^2,c^2\right\} \left( 2 \left( a^2\frac 1A + c^2\frac{R^2}A + \frac 1y\right) |\varepsilon_1|\right. \\
&+ 2 \left( a^2\frac 1A + c^2\frac{R^2}A + \frac 1y\right) |\varepsilon_2| \\
&\left.+ \max\{a^2,c^2\}\left(|\varepsilon_1| + |\varepsilon_2|\right)^2 \vphantom{\left(\frac 1A\right)}\right).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Note that $1/A \le 2/\sqrt{3}$ and $R^2/A \le 2R/\sqrt{3}$ as remarked on page \pageref{eq:abdependence}.
We also have acquired a bound for $\max\{a^2,c^2\}$ in the beginning of the proof displayed in \eqref{eq:bound_a2_c2}.
Therefore,
\begin{align*}
a^2\frac 1A + c^2 \frac{R^2}A + \frac 1y &\le \frac{4R+1}{\sqrt{3}}\frac 1y\frac 1A + \frac{4R+1}{\sqrt{3}}\frac 1y\frac{R^2}{A} + \frac 1y \\
&\le \frac{4R+1}{\sqrt{3}}\frac 1y\left(\frac 1A + \frac{R^2}{A} + \frac 2{\sqrt{3}}\right) \\
&\le \frac{4R+1}{\sqrt{3}} \frac{6R}{\sqrt{3}}\frac 1y.
\end{align*}
Using the bounds for $\varepsilon_1$ and $\varepsilon_2$ we get
\begin{align*}
2\left(a^2\frac 1A + c^2\frac{R^2}A + \frac 1y\right)|\varepsilon_1|
&\le 2\frac{4R+1}{\sqrt{3}} \frac{6R}{\sqrt{3}} \frac 1y\frac{2}{\sqrt{3}A}\varepsilon
\le 10\frac{4R+1}{\sqrt{3}} \frac \varepsilon{y}, \\
2\left(a^2\frac 1A + c^2\frac{R^2}A + \frac 1y\right)|\varepsilon_2|
&\le 2\frac{4R+1}{\sqrt{3}} \frac{6R}{\sqrt{3}} \frac 1y 4\varepsilon
\le 28R\frac{4R+1}{\sqrt{3}} \frac \varepsilon{y}
\end{align*}
and
\begin{displaymath}
\left(|\varepsilon_1| + |\varepsilon_2|\right)^2
\le \left(\frac 1A \frac 2{\sqrt 3}\varepsilon + 4\varepsilon\right)^2
\le \varepsilon^2\left(\frac 1A \frac 2{\sqrt 3} + 4\right)^2
\le \varepsilon^2\left(\frac 4{3} + 4\right)^2
\le 29 \varepsilon^2
\le 11 \varepsilon
\end{displaymath}
since $\varepsilon \le \sqrt{3}/5$.
Using these inequalities for \eqref{eq:bounding_ellipse} and applying \eqref{eq:bound_a2_c2} again we obtain
\begin{align*}
\left\vert a^2 + 2\nu|\sigma| ac + R^2c^2 - \frac Ay \right\vert^2
&\le A^2 \max\left\{a^2,c^2\right\} \left( 38R\frac{4R+1}{\sqrt{3}} \frac\varepsilon y
+ 11\max\{a^2,c^2\}\varepsilon \right) \\
&\le 49 A^2 R \left(\frac{4R+1}{\sqrt{3}}\right)^2 \frac \varepsilon{y^2}.
\end{align*}
Taking the square--root on both sides gets us
\begin{align*}
\left\vert a^2 + 2\nu|\sigma| ac + R^2c^2 - \frac Ay \right\vert
&\le 7 A R^{1/2} \left(\frac{4R+1}{\sqrt{3}}\right) \frac{\varepsilon^{1/2}}{y}.
\end{align*}
Using $A \le R$ and $y = \Im(\tau)$ we get
\begin{align*}
\left\vert a^2 + 2\nu|\sigma| ac + R^2c^2 - \frac Ay \right\vert
&\le 7R^2 \left(\frac{4R+1}{\sqrt 3}\right) \frac{\varepsilon^{1/2}}{\Im(\tau)}.
\end{align*}
This proves \eqref{eq:matrixentries}.
\end{proof}
Note that the estimates might be improved slightly, especially when $\xi = \zeta$ or $\xi = \zeta^2$ with
$\zeta = e^{2\pi i /6}$.\\
We want to use the last lemma to prove the following proposition.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:clusterbound}
Let $N$ be an integer, and let $E_0$ be an elliptic curve, and
$\xi \in \bar\F$. Further, assume that $0 \le \varepsilon \le (100^{-1}|\xi|^{-3}\Im(\xi))^2$.
Then the number of $\tau \in \bar\F$
with $|\xi - \tau| \le \varepsilon$ and such that $E_0$ is $N$--isogenous to a curve
corresponding to $j(\tau)$ is bounded by
\begin{displaymath}
10^7|\tau_0||\xi|^5 \left( \sqrt{N} \sigma_0(N) + \sqrt\varepsilon \psi(N) \right).
\end{displaymath}
\end{prop}
\noindent For the remainder of the section we are going to prove this proposition.
For fixed $\tau \in \H$ with bounded real part we want to bound the number of matrices that
satisfy the conditions in the lemma.
For this we define
\begin{displaymath}
\M(\xi;x;y;\varepsilon) = \#\{ \gamma \in \SL_2(\Z) ; \exists\tau = \tilde x+iy, |\tilde x|\le |x|,
|\gamma\tau - \xi| \le \varepsilon \text{ and } \gamma\tau \in \bar\F \}.
\end{displaymath}
Note that the last lemma tells us that all $\tau$ on horizontal lines in the upper half--plane satisfy the
same equation for $(a,c)$. Thus, if we look at horizontal line segments the number $\M(\xi;x;y;\varepsilon)$
can be bounded independent in terms of $x$.
If $\gamma$ is as in the last lemma, then the first column $(a,c)$ is close to one of the two ellipses
\begin{displaymath}
X^2 \pm 2|\Re(\xi)|XY + |\xi|^2Y^2 = \frac{\Im(\xi)}{\Im(\tau)}.
\end{displaymath}
More precisely, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ellipse}
\left| \lambda - \frac{\Im(\xi)}{\Im(\tau)}\right| \le 50 |\xi|^3 \frac{\varepsilon^{1/2}}{\Im(\tau)},
\quad \text{where} \quad \lambda = a^2 \pm 2|\Re(\xi)|ac + |\xi|^2c^2.
\end{equation}
We need an upper bound for the number $N(\Im(\tau),\varepsilon)$ of lattice points $(a,c) \in \Z^2$ that satisfy \eqref{eq:ellipse}.
Each of these points lies in a neighborhood of an ellipse defined above. We are going to use a result by Davenport \cite{davenport}.
The following theorem is a special case of the result of Davenport.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:davenport}
Let $\mathcal{R}$ be a region in the two--dimensional plane with smooth boundary. If $V(\mathcal{R})$ denotes
the volume of $\mathcal{R}$ and $N(\mathcal{R})$ the number of points with integral coordinates in $\mathcal{R}$,
then
\begin{displaymath}
|N(\mathcal{R}) - V(\mathcal{R})| < 4(L+1),
\end{displaymath}
where $L$ is the length of the boundary of $\mathcal{R}$.
\end{theorem}
Thus, we need to compute the volume and the circumference of the ellipses that bound the given neighborhood.
Let us assume that
\begin{displaymath}
\varepsilon \le \left(\frac{\Im(\xi)}{100|\xi|^3}\right)^2
\end{displaymath}
is small enough.
We consider the case when $\nu = 1$. The ellipses are then given by
\begin{displaymath}
E_\pm \colon A a^2 + B ab + C b^2 = 1
\end{displaymath}
with
\begin{align*}
A = \frac{\Im(\tau)}{\Im(\xi)\pm 50|\xi|^3\varepsilon^{1/2}},
\quad B = \frac{2|\Re(\xi)|\Im(\tau)}{\Im(\xi)\pm 50|\xi|^3\varepsilon^{1/2}},
\quad C = \frac{|\xi|^2\Im(\tau)}{\Im(\xi)\pm 50|\xi|^3\varepsilon^{1/2}}.
\end{align*}
The area of the bigger ellipse is then given by
\begin{displaymath}
\vol(E_+) = \frac{2\pi}{\sqrt{4AC - B^2}}
= \pi \frac{\Im(\xi) + 50|\xi|^3\varepsilon^{1/2}}{\Im(\tau)\sqrt{|\xi|^2 - \Re(\xi)^2}}
= \pi \frac{\Im(\xi) + 50|\xi|^3\varepsilon^{1/2}}{\Im(\tau)\Im(\xi)}.
\end{displaymath}
Similarly, we have
\begin{displaymath}
\vol(E_-) = \pi \frac{\Im(\xi) - 50|\xi|^3\varepsilon^{1/2}}{\Im(\tau)\Im(\xi)}
\end{displaymath}
for the smaller ellipse.
\noindent We now want to bound the circumference of $E_\pm$. For this we will use the
following lemma.
\begin{lem}
Let $E$ be an ellipse given by $Aa^2 + Bac + Cc^2 = 1$. Then the circumference $L$
of $E$ is bounded by
\begin{displaymath}
L \le \sqrt{2(A+C)}\vol(E).
\end{displaymath}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
To prove this we rotate the ellipse, so that the new equation becomes
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ellipse_defeq}
A'a^2 + C'b^2 = 1.
\end{equation}
The coef{}f{}icients are given by
\begin{displaymath}
A' = \frac{A+C}2 + \frac{A-C}2\cos(2\theta) - \frac B2\sin(2\theta)
\end{displaymath}
and
\begin{displaymath}
C' = \frac{A+C}2 - \frac{A-C}2\cos(2\theta) + \frac B2\sin(2\theta),
\end{displaymath}
where $\theta$ satisfies $\cot 2\theta = \frac{A-C}B$ or $\tan 2\theta = \frac{B}{A-C}$.
Note if $B = 0$, we have $\theta = 0$, so that $A'=A$ and $C'=C$.
Now the circumference of an ellipse in the form of \eqref{eq:ellipse_defeq}
can be estimated by
\begin{displaymath}
L \le \sqrt{2} \pi \sqrt{\frac 1{A'} + \frac 1{C'}}
\le \sqrt{2} \pi \sqrt{\frac{A'+C'}{A'C'}}
= 2\sqrt{2} \pi \sqrt{\frac{A'+C'}{4A'C'}}.
\end{displaymath}
But if we put $B'=0$, then $A'+C' = A+C$ and $4A'C' = 4A'C' - B'^2 = 4AC - B^2$
since the discriminant is an invariant.
Thus
\begin{displaymath}
L \le \sqrt{2} \sqrt{A+C}\frac{2\pi}{4AC-B^2}
= \sqrt{2} \sqrt{A+C}\vol(E),
\end{displaymath}
as desired.
\end{proof}
If $L_+$ denotes the circumference of $E_+$, then we have by the previous lemma
\begin{align*}
L_+ &\le \sqrt{2}\pi \sqrt{\frac{\Im(\tau) + |\xi|^2\Im(\tau)}{\Im(\xi) + 50|\xi|^3\varepsilon^{1/2}}}
\frac{\Im(\xi) + 50|\xi|^3\varepsilon^{1/2}}{\Im(\tau)\Im(\xi)} \\
&\le \sqrt{2}\pi \frac{\sqrt{1 + |\xi|^2}}{\Im(\xi)} \sqrt{\frac{\Im(\xi) + 50|\xi|^3\varepsilon^{1/2}}{\Im(\tau)}}.
\end{align*}
Now we use the bound on $\varepsilon$ to get
\begin{align*}
L_+ &\le \sqrt{2}\pi \frac{\sqrt{1 + |\xi|^2}}{\Im(\xi)} \sqrt{\frac{\Im(\xi) + \frac 12 \Im(\xi)}{\Im(\tau)}} \\
&= \sqrt{3}\pi \sqrt{\frac{1 + |\xi|^2}{\Im(\xi)}} \frac{1}{\sqrt{\Im(\tau)}}.
\end{align*}
We have $\frac{|\xi|}{\Im(\xi)} \le \frac 2{\sqrt{3}}$ since $\xi$ is in the fundamental domain.
Hence $\frac{|\xi|^2}{\Im(\xi)} \le \frac 4{3}\Im(\xi)$ and therefore
\begin{align*}
\frac{1 + |\xi|^2}{\Im(\xi)} = \frac{1}{\Im(\xi)} + \frac{|\xi|^2}{\Im(\xi)} \le
\frac 2{\sqrt{3}} + \frac 4{{3}}\Im(\xi) \le \frac 83\Im(\xi).
\end{align*}
Using this for the bound of $L_+$ yields
\begin{displaymath}
L_+ \le 2\pi \frac{\sqrt{2\Im(\xi)}}{\sqrt{\Im(\tau)}}.
\end{displaymath}
Clearly this bound also holds for $L_-$, the circumference of the smaller ellipse.
Let $N(E_\pm)$ denote the number of lattice points contained in $E_\pm$ as defined in Theorem \ref{thm:davenport}.
By this same theorem, the number of points contained
in the elliptical annulus can be estimated by
\begin{align*}
N(E_+) - N(E_-) &= N(E_+) - \vol(E_+) - (N(E_-) - \vol(E_-)) + \vol(E_+) - \vol(E_-) \\
&\le 4(L_++1) + 4(L_-+1) + \vol(E_+) - \vol(E_-) \\
&\le 8(L_+ + 1) + \frac{100\pi|\xi|^3\varepsilon^{1/2}}{\Im(\tau)\Im(\xi)} \\
&\le 16\pi \frac{\sqrt{2\Im(\xi)} + \sqrt{\Im(\tau)}}{\sqrt{\Im(\tau)}}
+ \frac{100\pi|\xi|^3\varepsilon^{1/2}}{\Im(\tau)\Im(\xi)}.
\end{align*}
Therefore, a bound for $N(\Im(\tau),\varepsilon)$ is given by twice this number since the ellipse for $\nu = -1$
gives the same bound.
To obtain a bound for the number of matrices satisfying the conditions in Lemma \ref{lem:ellipse},
we need to estimate the possible pairs
$(b,d)$ when $(a,c)$ is fixed.
Let $(a,c)$ be fixed, and assume that $(b,d)$ and $(b',d')$
satisfy $ad-bc=1$ and $ad'-b'c=1$, respectively. Then $(b-b',d-d') = (ak,ck)$ for some integer $k$.
Lemma \ref{lem:ellipse} now implies
\begin{displaymath}
|k| \le 2|\Re(\tau)| + 2\frac{4|\xi|+1}{\sqrt 3} \le 2|\Re(\tau)| + 6|\xi|.
\end{displaymath}
Thus, $\M(\xi;x;y;\varepsilon)$ is bounded by
\begin{align}\label{eq:numberofmatrices}
N(y,\varepsilon) &\cdot \left( 2\cdot(2x + 6|\xi|) + 1\right)
\le N(y,\varepsilon) \cdot (4x + 13|\xi|) \notag\\
&\le 2\left(16\pi \frac{\sqrt{2\Im(\xi)} + \sqrt{y}}{\sqrt{y}}
+ \frac{100\pi|\xi|^3\varepsilon^{1/2}}{y\Im(\xi)}\right)
\left(4x + 13|\xi|\right).
\end{align}
We now want to apply this result to estimate the number of points close to a fixed point which are
given by a cyclic isogeny of degree $N$.
Let $\tau_0 \in \H$ be fixed. Let $N \in \N$.
We will be working with matrices $M$ of the form $\begin{smatrix}m&l\\0&n\end{smatrix}$
with $N = mn$ and $0 \le l < n$. We will denote $M.\tau_0$ by $\tau_M$.
We want to bound the number of points $\tau_M$ satisfying $|\tilde\tau_M - \xi| \le \varepsilon$ with $\tilde\tau_M$ in
the $\SL_2(\Z)$--orbit of $\tau_M$ and in $\bar\F$.
For this we momentarily fix a divisor $n$ of $N$ with $n \ge \sqrt{N}$ and a matrix $M$
with $M = \begin{smatrix}m&l\\0&n\end{smatrix}$ and $0 \le l < n$. Then $y := \Im(\tau_M) = \frac mn\Im(\tau_0)$
for any $0 \le l < n$. Figure \ref{fig:isogenouspts} shows an example with $\tau = 1+i$ and $N=10$.
\begin{figure}\label{fig:isogenouspts}
\begin{center}
\pgfmathsetmacro{\myxlow}{-1}
\pgfmathsetmacro{\myxhigh}{3}
\pgfmathsetmacro{\myiterations}{2}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1.5]
\draw[-latex](\myxlow-0.1,0) -- (\myxhigh+0.2,0);
\pgfmathsetmacro{\succofmyxlow}{\myxlow+0.5}
\foreach \x in {\myxlow,\succofmyxlow,...,\myxhigh}
{ \draw (\x,0) -- (\x,-0.05) node[below,font=\tiny] {\x};
}
\foreach \y in {0.5,1,...,2}
{ \draw (0.02,\y) -- (-0.02,\y) node[left,font=\tiny] {\pgfmathprintnumber{\y}};
}
\draw[-latex](0,-0.05) -- (0,2.6);
\coordinate (zeta) at (1/2,{sqrt(3)/2});
\coordinate (zeta2) at (-1/2,{sqrt(3)/2});
\draw[domain=60:120] plot ({cos(\x)}, {sin(\x)});
\path[bottom color=black,top color=white] (zeta) rectangle +(.2pt,2.5cm);
\path[bottom color=black,top color=white] (zeta2) rectangle +(-.2pt,2.5cm);
\coordinate (tau) at (1, 1);
\draw (tau) circle (.3pt) node[below,font=\tiny] {$\tau$};
\foreach \n in {2,5,10}
{
\pgfmathsetmacro\ratio{10/\n/\n}
\pgfmathsetmacro\up{\n-1}
\foreach \l in {0,...,\up}
{
\pgfmathsetmacro\ratiol{\l/\n}
\filldraw ($\ratio*(tau) + (\ratiol,0)$) circle (.3pt) {};
}
}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{\small$\tau_0$ and all except one $\tau_M$ for $N=10$}
\end{figure}
Since $y$ does not depend on $l$ and $|\Re(\tau_M)| \le |\Re(\tau_0)|+1$, the bound
for $\M(\xi;|\Re(\tau_0)|+1;y;\varepsilon)$ is independent of $l$. This number
does not estimate all the $\tau_M$ that are translated close to $\xi$ as
we will see later.
The bound in \eqref{eq:numberofmatrices} translates to
\begin{align*}
\M(\xi;|\Re(\tau_0)|+1;y;\varepsilon)
\le 8\left(4\pi \frac{\sqrt{2\Im(\xi)} + \sqrt{\frac mn\Im(\tau_0)}}{\sqrt{\Im(\tau_0)}}\sqrt{\frac nm}
+ \frac{25\pi|\xi|^3\varepsilon^{1/2}}{\Im(\tau_0)\Im(\xi)}\frac nm\right) \\
\cdot\left(4|\Re(\tau_0)| + 13|\xi| + 4\right).
\end{align*}
But $\frac mn \le 1$ since $n \ge \sqrt{N}$ and hence
\begin{align*}
\M(\xi;&|\Re(\tau_0)|+1;y;\varepsilon) \\
&\le 8\left(4|\Re(\tau_0)| + 17|\xi|\right)
\left(4\pi \frac{\sqrt{2\Im(\xi)} + \sqrt{\Im(\tau_0)}}{\sqrt{\Im(\tau_0)}}\sqrt{\frac nm}
+\frac{25\pi|\xi|^3\varepsilon^{1/2}}{\Im(\tau_0)\Im(\xi)}\frac nm\right)
\\
&\le 8\left(4|\Re(\tau_0)| + 17|\xi|\right)
\left(8\pi \frac{\sqrt{2\Im(\xi)} + \sqrt{\Im(\tau_0)}}{\sqrt{\Im(\tau_0)}}\sqrt{\frac nm}
+\frac{35\pi|\xi|^2\varepsilon^{1/2}}{\Im(\tau_0)}\frac nm\right)
\end{align*}
if we also apply $|\xi|^2/\Im(\xi) \le 4|\xi|/3$.
Further we get
\begin{align}\label{eq:taul_matrices}
\M(\xi;|\Re(\tau_0)|+1;y;\varepsilon)
\notag
\le 64\pi&\left(4|\Re(\tau_0)| + 17|\xi|\right) \\
&\cdot \max\left\{\frac{\sqrt{2\Im(\xi)} + \sqrt{\Im(\tau_0)}}{\sqrt{\Im(\tau_0)}},5\frac{|\xi|^2}{\Im(\tau_0)}\right\} \\
&\cdot\left(\sqrt{\frac nm} + \frac nm \varepsilon^{1/2}\right).
\notag
\end{align}
Now different $\tau_M$ (entry $l$ different) can be translated close to $\xi$ by the same matrix,
so we have to restrict those.
So if $\tau_M$ is translated into the disc around $\xi$ by a matrix $\begin{smatrix}a&b\\c&d\end{smatrix}$ then
the real part $x$ of $\tau_M$ satisfies
\begin{displaymath}
\left|cx+d\right||c| \le 3|\xi|
\quad \text{and} \quad
\left|ax+b\right||a| \le 3|\xi|
\end{displaymath}
by \eqref{eq:dequation} and \eqref{eq:bequation}.
Assume that $c\not=0$. Then $\left\vert x+d/c\right\vert \le 3|\xi| c^{-2}$, so that
$x$ lies in an interval $I$ with center $-d/c$ and of length bounded by $6|\xi| c^{-2}$.
This implies
\begin{displaymath}
\left\vert\left\{l \in \{0, \dotsc, n-1 \} : (m\Re(\tau_0) + l)/n \in I \right\}\right\vert
\le n|I| + 1 \le 6|\xi| \frac{n}{c^2} + 1.
\end{displaymath}
A similar result is obtained if $a\not=0$. So in any case
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bound_taul_ac}
\left\vert\left\{l \in \{0, \dotsc, n-1 \} : (m\Re(\tau_0) + l)/n \in I \right\}\right\vert
\le 6|\xi| \frac{n}{\max\{|a|,|c|\}^2} + 1
\end{equation}
independent of whether the interval is centered around $-d/c$ or $-b/a$.
Moreover, $\max\{|a|,|c|\}^2$ can be bounded by
\begin{align*}
3|\xi|^2\max\{|a|,|c|\}^2 &\ge a^2 + \nu 2 |\Re(\xi)| ac + |\xi|^2 c^2 \\
&\ge \frac{\Im(\xi) - 50|\xi|^3\varepsilon^{1/2}}{y}
= \frac{\Im(\xi) - 50|\xi|^3\varepsilon^{1/2}}{\Im(\tau_0)}\frac nm \;,
\end{align*}
where the last inequality follows from Equation \eqref{eq:matrixentries}.
Using the upper bound on $\varepsilon$ we obtain
\begin{displaymath}
3|\xi|^2\max\{|a|,|c|\}^2 \ge \frac{\Im(\xi)}{2\Im(\tau_0)}\frac nm \;,
\end{displaymath}
and hence
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bound_taul}
6|\xi| \frac{n}{\max\{|a|,|c|\}^2}
\le 36|\xi|^3 \frac{\Im(\tau_0)}{\Im(\xi)} m
\le 50|\xi|^2 \Im(\tau_0) m
\end{equation}
since $|\xi|/\Im(\xi) \le 2/\sqrt{3}$.
Recall that the matrix $M$ is of the form $\begin{smatrix}m&l\\0&n\end{smatrix}$
with $N = mn$ and $0 \le l < n$ and $\tau_M = M\tau_0$.
As before, $\tilde\tau_M$ is in the $\SL_2(\Z)$--orbit of $\tau_M$ and in $\bar\F$.
Let $\Lambda(\tau_0;N;\varepsilon)$ be the set of $\tau_M$ satisfying $|\tilde\tau_M - \xi| \le \varepsilon$,
where $\tau_M$ is as before.
The number of elements in $\Lambda(\tau_0;N;\varepsilon)$ is surely bounded by the number of matrices $M$ with
lower right entry greater than $\sqrt N$ satisfying the condition
plus the total number of matrices with $n \le \sqrt{N}$. The latter is bounded by
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{\twostack{n|N}{0 < n \le \sqrt{N}}} n \le \sqrt{N} \sum_{n|N} 1 = \sqrt{N} \sigma_0(N).
\end{equation*}
For $n \le \sqrt{N}$ we are going to count $\tilde\tau_M$ independent of whether $|\tilde\tau_M - \xi| \le \varepsilon$
or not since the number $\sqrt{N}\sigma_0(N)$ does not grow too fast.
Now by the arguments we just made, we can bound the number of $\tau_M$ and thus the total number
of points in $\Lambda(\tau_M;N;\varepsilon)$ as follows. Recall that $N=mn$.
\begin{align*}
|\Lambda(\tau_0;N;\varepsilon)| \le& \sum_{\twostack{n|N}{n \ge \sqrt{N}}}
\M\left(\xi;|\Re(\tau_0)|+1;\frac N{n^2}\Im(\tau_0);\varepsilon\right) \left(
6|\xi| \frac{n}{\max\{|a|,|c|\}^2} + 1 \right) \\
&+ \sqrt{N}\sigma_0(N).
\end{align*}
Here, for fixed $n$ the number $\M\left(\xi;|\Re(\tau_0)|+1;\frac N{n^2}\Im(\tau_0);\varepsilon\right)$
bounds the matrices
that translate any $\tau_M$ of the form $\begin{smatrix}m&l\\0&n\end{smatrix}$ with varying $l$ close to $\xi$.
But since different $\tau_M$ can be translated into
the disc around $\xi$ by the same matrix we have to compensate this with the inequality in \eqref{eq:bound_taul_ac}.
This in turn can be estimated as displayed in \eqref{eq:bound_taul} so that
\begin{align*}
|\Lambda(\tau_0;N;\varepsilon)|
\le& \sum_{\twostack{n|N}{n \ge \sqrt{N}}}
\M\left(\xi;|\Re(\tau_0)|+1;\frac N{n^2}\Im(\tau_0);\varepsilon\right)
\left( 50|\xi|^2 \Im(\tau_0) \frac Nn + 1 \right) \\
&+ \sqrt{N}\sigma_0(N).
\end{align*}
By the inequality for $\M\left(\xi;|\Re(\tau_0)|+1;\frac N{n^2}\Im(\tau_0);\varepsilon\right)$
in \eqref{eq:taul_matrices} and $1 \le m$ we get
\begin{align*}
|\Lambda(\tau_0;N;\varepsilon)|
\le \sqrt{N}\sigma_0(N) +
\sum_{\twostack{m|N}{m \le \sqrt{N}}}m
\cdot \mathcal{I}(\tau_0,\xi)
\cdot\left(\sqrt{\frac N{m^2}} + \frac N{m^2} \varepsilon^{1/2}\right)
\end{align*}
where
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{I}(\tau_0,\xi) = 64\pi&\left(4|\Re(\tau_0)| + 17|\xi|\right)\left( 50|\xi|^2 \Im(\tau_0) + 1 \right) \\
&\cdot\max\left\{\frac{\sqrt{2\Im(\xi)} + \sqrt{\Im(\tau_0)}}{\sqrt{\Im(\tau_0)}},5\frac{|\xi|^2}{\Im(\tau_0)}\right\}.
\end{align*}
We can continue the estimate
\begin{align*}
|\Lambda(\tau_0;N;\varepsilon)|
&\le \sqrt{N}\sigma_0(N) + \mathcal{I}(\tau_0,\xi)
\sum_{\twostack{m|N}{m \le \sqrt{N}}} m
\left(\frac{\sqrt{N}}{m} + \frac N{m^2} \varepsilon^{1/2}\right) \\
&= \sqrt{N}\sigma_0(N) + \mathcal{I}(\tau_0,\xi)
\sum_{\twostack{m|N}{m \le \sqrt{N}}}
\left(\sqrt{N} + \frac N{m} \varepsilon^{1/2}\right).
\end{align*}
We split the sum to get
\begin{align}
\notag
|\Lambda(\tau_0;N;\varepsilon)|
&\le \sqrt{N}\sigma_0(N) + \mathcal{I}(\tau_0,\xi)
\left(\sum_{\twostack{m|N}{m \le \sqrt{N}}}\sqrt{N} +
\sum_{\twostack{m|N}{m \le \sqrt{N}}} \frac N{m} \varepsilon^{1/2}\right) \\
\notag
&= \sqrt{N}\sigma_0(N)(1 + \mathcal{I}(\tau_0,\xi)) + \mathcal{I}(\tau_0,\xi)
\varepsilon^{1/2} \sum_{\twostack{n|N}{n \ge \sqrt{N}}} n \\
&= \sqrt{N}\sigma_0(N)(1 + \mathcal{I}(\tau_0,\xi)) + \mathcal{I}(\tau_0,\xi)
\varepsilon^{1/2} \sigma_1(N).
\label{eq:isogeny_cluster_bound}
\end{align}
\begin{lem}
Let $N$ be a positive integer. Then $\sigma_1(N) \le \frac{\pi^2}6 \psi(N)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
It is well--known that $\sigma_1$ is multiplicative. The function $\psi$ is also multiplicative,
see page 53 of \cite{LangEllFunc}.
We have $\sigma_1(p^k) = \frac{p^{k+1}-1}{p-1}$ and $\psi(p^k) = p^{k-1}(p+1)$.
Thus
\begin{align*}
\frac{\sigma_1(p^k)}{\psi(p^k)} = \frac{p^{k+1} - 1}{(p-1)(p+1)p^{k-1}} \le \frac{p^2}{p^2-1} = \frac 1{1-p^{-2}}.
\end{align*}
For general $N$ this yields
\begin{align*}
\frac{\sigma_1(N)}{\psi(N)} \le \prod_{p^k \Vert N} \frac 1{1-p^{-2}} \le \prod_{p} \frac 1{1-p^{-2}} = \zeta(2),
\end{align*}
where $\zeta$ denotes the Riemann zeta function. This proves the claim.
\end{proof}
\noindent Altogether we get
\begin{lem}
Fix $\tau_0 \in \H$ and $\xi \in \bar\F$. Let $0 < \varepsilon \le \left(\frac{\Im(\xi)}{100|\xi|^3}\right)^2$.
Let $\Lambda(\tau_0;N;\varepsilon)$ be the number of $M\tau_0$,
$M = \begin{smatrix}m&l\\0&n\end{smatrix}$ with $N=mn$ and $0\le l < n$,
that satisfy $|\gamma M\tau_0 - \xi| \le \varepsilon$ for some $\gamma \in \sl2z$.
Then
\begin{displaymath}
|\Lambda(\tau_0;N;\varepsilon)|
\le \sqrt{N}\sigma_0(N)(1 + \mathcal{I}(\tau_0,\xi)) + \frac{\pi^2}6 \mathcal{I}(\tau_0,\xi)
\varepsilon^{1/2} \psi(N).
\end{displaymath}
with
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{I}(\tau_0,\xi) = 64\pi&\left(4|\Re(\tau_0)| + 17|\xi|\right)\left( 50|\xi|^2 \Im(\tau_0) + 1 \right) \\
&\cdot\max\left\{\frac{\sqrt{2\Im(\xi)} + \sqrt{\Im(\tau_0)}}{\sqrt{\Im(\tau_0)}},5\frac{|\xi|^2}{\Im(\tau_0)}\right\}.
\end{align*}
\end{lem}
To complete the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:clusterbound} we restrict $\tau_0$ to the fundamental domain.
Then $\Im(\tau_0) \ge \sqrt{3}/2$ and $|\Re(\tau_0)| \le 1/2$.
Therefore we get
\begin{align*}
\frac{\sqrt{2\Im(\xi)} + \sqrt{\Im(\tau_0)}}{\sqrt{\Im(\tau_0)}}
=1 + \frac{\sqrt{2\Im(\xi)}}{\sqrt{\Im(\tau_0)}}
\le 1 + 2\sqrt{\Im(\xi)}
\le 6|\xi|^2
\end{align*}
and hence
\begin{align*}
\max\left\{1+\mathcal{I}(\tau_0,\xi),\frac{\pi^2}6\mathcal{I}(\tau_0,\xi)\right\}
\le 64\pi&\left(2 + 17|\xi|\right) \cdot 60|\xi|^2 |\tau_0|
\cdot 6|\xi|^2
\le 10^7|\tau_0| |\xi|^5.
\end{align*}
Recall that an $N$--isogeny (i.e.~a cyclic isogeny of degree $N$) is related to a matrix
of the form $M = \begin{smatrix}m&l\\0&n\end{smatrix}$ with $N=mn$, $0\le l < n$ and
$\gcd(m,n,l) = 1$. We have considered such matrices without a condition
on the greatest common divisor.
Therefore we are done with the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:clusterbound}.
\section{Bounding the height}
Recall that we have fixed an elliptic curve without complex multiplication defined over a number field $K$
and $j_0$ is its $j$--invariant.
Two points in the fundamental domain are in the same Hecke orbit if there exists an isgoeny between them.
We are going to compare the Galois orbit of $j_0$ to the Hecke orbit of all conjugates of $E_0$.
We now want to bound the number of elements in $\Gamma(\xi,\varepsilon)$. For this we use the connection
between the isogeny orbit and the Galois orbit of Serre's open image theorem. See Th\'eor\`eme 3 in §4 of
\cite{openimage}.
More precisely, we will be using a version proved by Lombardo \cite{lombardo}, that gives us an explicit bound.
Let $G_K = \Gal(\bar{K}/K)$ be the absolute Galois group of $K$. Recall that $G_K$ acts on the
$N$--torsion points of $N$, and we thus get a representation
\begin{displaymath}
\rho_N\colon G_K \rightarrow \Aut(E[N]).
\end{displaymath}
The group $\Aut(E[N])$ is isomorphic to $\GL_2(\Z/N\Z)$.
It is possible to choose a suitable basis of $\GL_2(\Z/N\Z)$ so that
we obtain a representation
\begin{displaymath}
\rho_\infty\colon G_K \rightarrow \GL_2(\hat\Z)
\end{displaymath}
after taking the inverse limit (over $N$.)
Serre proved in \cite{openimage} that $[ \GL_2(\hat\Z) : \rho_\infty(G_K)]$ is finite.
The result by Lombardo implies
\begin{equation}\label{eq:lombardo}
\left[ \GL_2(\hat\Z) : \rho_\infty(G_K) \right]
< \gamma_1 \cdot [K:\Q]^{\gamma_2} \cdot \max\left\{1,h(E),\log[K:\Q]\right\}^{2\gamma_2}
\end{equation}
where $\gamma_1 = \exp\left(10^{21483}\right)$ and $\gamma_2 = 2.4 \cdot 10^{10}$.
In particular, we obtain
\begin{displaymath}
\left[ \GL_2(\Z/N\Z) : \rho_N(G_K) \right]
< \gamma_1 \cdot [K:\Q]^{\gamma_2} \cdot \max\left\{1,h(E),\log[K:\Q]\right\}^{2\gamma_2}.
\end{displaymath}
Note that Lombardo's result actually uses the original definition of the Faltings height.
This information was acquired through a private conversation with the author.
Since the original definition of the Faltings height
is smaller than the normalization of Deligne,
we can just substitute $h(E)$ into Lombardo's result.
The cyclic isogenies of degree $N$ correspond in a one--to--one fashion to the cyclic subgroups of order $N$
in $\Z/N\Z \times \Z/N\Z \simeq E[N]$.
The action of $\GL_2(\Z/N\Z)$ on these subgroups is transitive as the next lemma states.
We start with some group theory. We denote by $\varphi$ Euler's totient function
given by $\varphi(N) = \#(\Z/N\Z)^\times = N \prod_{p|N} (1-1/p)$, where the product
runs over all primes $p$ dividing $N$.
Recall $\psi(N) = N \prod_{p|N} (1+ 1/p)$.
\begin{lem}
The cardinality of $\GL_2(\Z/N\Z)$ is equal to $\varphi(N)^2 \psi(N) N$.
Let $\Delta \subset \GL_2(\Z/N\Z)$ denote the subgroup of upper triangular matrices.
Then $\#\Delta = N\varphi(N)^2$.
There are $\psi(N)$ cyclic subgroups of $\Z/N\Z \times \Z/N\Z$.
The group $\GL_2(\Z/N\Z)$ acts transitively on the cyclic subgroups of order $N$ in
$(\Z/N\Z)^2$.
\end{lem}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:serre_index_bound}
Let $E/K$ be an elliptic curve, $N$ an integer, and $\Phi \subset E[N]$ a cyclic subgroup of $N$--torsion points.
Put $B = |\{ \sigma(\Phi) : \sigma \in \Gal(\bar K/K)\}|$. Then we have
\begin{displaymath}
\frac{\psi(N)}B \le \left[ \GL_2(\Z/N\Z) : \rho_N(G_K) \right].
\end{displaymath}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $\Phi$ is generated by $P \in E[N]$. After choosing a basis, we may assume that $P$ corresponds
to $(1,0)$ in $\Z/N\Z \times \Z/N\Z$. For any $\sigma \in \Gal(\bar K/K)$, the group $\sigma(\Phi)$
is generated by a point $(a,c) \in Z/N\Z \times \Z/N\Z$
where $\left(\begin{smallmatrix}a&b\\c&d\end{smallmatrix}\right)$ is the image of $\sigma$ under $\rho_N$. \\
Let $\Delta$ be the subgroup of upper triangular matrices of $\GL_2(\Z/N\Z)$. The equality $\sigma(\Phi) = \Phi$
holds if and only if $\sigma$ is mapped into $\Delta$ under $\rho_N$. We thus have
\begin{displaymath}
B = \frac{\#\im \rho_N}{\#(\Delta \cap \im \rho_N)} \ge \frac{\#\im \rho_N}{\#\Delta} = \frac{\#\im \rho_N}{N\varphi(N)^2}.
\end{displaymath}
This implies
\begin{align*}
\frac{\psi(N)}B \le \frac{\psi(N)\varphi(N)^2 N}{\#\im \rho_N}
&= \frac{\psi(N)\varphi(N)^2 N}{\#\GL_2(\Z/N\Z)} \left[ \GL_2(\Z/N\Z) : \rho_N(G_K) \right] \\
&=\left[ \GL_2(\Z/N\Z) : \rho_N(G_K) \right],
\end{align*}
as desired.
\end{proof}
We want to estimate a Mertens' type of sum. In fact, we are going to use a result by Mertens.
\begin{lem}
Let $n \ge 4$ be a positive integer. Then
\begin{displaymath}
\sum_{p | n} \frac{\log p}p \le 5.25 \log\log n,
\end{displaymath}
where the sum runs over all prime divisors of $n$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The function $\log x/x$ is decreasing on $(e,\infty)$.
Note that $(\log 2)/2 < (\log 3)/3$. So let $n = p^a$ be a prime power with $p \not= 2$. Then
\begin{displaymath}
\frac{\log p}p \le \frac{\log 3}3 \le 5\log\log 3 \le 5\log\log p
\end{displaymath}
and the claim holds. If $n = 2^a$ with $a \ge 2$, then
\begin{displaymath}
\frac{\log 2}2 < 1 \le 5\log\log(4).
\end{displaymath}
Now let $n = p^a q^b$ with different primes $p,q$ and $a,b \ge 1$. We have $(\log 5)/5 < (\log 2)/2$
and $(\log p)/p < 0.5$. Thus
\begin{displaymath}
\frac{\log p}p + \frac{\log q}q \le \frac{\log 2}2 + \frac{\log 3}3 \le 1 < 5\log\log 6 \le 5\log\log n.
\end{displaymath}
So the claim is true for all $4\le n \le 29$.
let us now assume that $n$ is composite with $\omega(n) \ge 3$.
We can bound the sum by looking at the first $\omega(n)$ primes
\begin{displaymath}
\sum_{p | n} \frac{\log p}p
\le \frac{\log p_1}{p_1} + \frac{\log p_2}{p_2} + \cdots + \frac{\log p_{\omega(n)}}{p_{\omega(n)}}.
\end{displaymath}
Note that $(\log 2)/2 < (\log 3)/3$, so that if $3$ occurs in the prime decomposition of $n$ and $2$
does not, we can just estimate the largest prime divisor of $n$ by $(\log 2)/2$ and get the same inequality.
It is a well--known result by Cipolla in \cite{cipolla1902determinazione}, that the $n$--th prime $p_n$ is
bounded from above by $n(\log n + \log \log n)$ for sufficiently large $n$.
Indeed Rosser proved in Theorem 2 of \cite{rosser1939n} that $p_n \le n(\log n + 2\log\log n)$ for all $n \ge 4$.
Also compare to the bound in \cite{rosser1962approximate}.
Hence $p_n \le 2n\log n$ for all $n \ge 3$ since this bound also holds for $p_3 = 5$.
Since we have $\omega(n) \ge 3$ we can apply this to the last inequality to obtain
\begin{displaymath}
\sum_{p | n} \frac{\log p}p \le \sum_{p \le 2\omega(n)\log\omega(n)} \frac{\log p}{p}.
\end{displaymath}
By Mertens' Theorem (see \cite{mertens1874beitrag}) the sum on the right--hand side is bounded by
\begin{displaymath}
\sum_{p \le 2\omega(n)\log\omega(n)} \frac{\log p}{p} \le 2\log(2\omega(n)\log\omega(n))
\end{displaymath}
for all $n \ge 1$ composite of at least $3$ distinct primes.
We have the trivial inequality
\begin{displaymath}
\omega(n) \le \frac{\log n}{\log 2}.
\end{displaymath}
This gives us
\begin{align*}
\sum_{p | n} \frac{\log p}p
&\le 2\log\left(2\frac{\log n}{\log 2}\log\frac{\log n}{\log 2}\right) \\
&\le 2\log\log n + 2\log\left(\log \log n - \log \log 2\right) + 2.12
\end{align*}
and if $n \ge 5$ this gets us
\begin{align*}
\sum_{p | n} \frac{\log p}p
&\le 2\log\log n + 2\log\left(2\log \log n\right) + 2.12 \\
&\le 2\log\log n + 2\log\log\log n + 3.51.
\end{align*}
But we have $\log\log n \le \frac{36}{100} \log n$ since $x \mapsto (\log \log x)/\log x$ is decreasing
for $x \ge 16$ and $(\log \log 30)/(\log 30) < 0.36$.
Because of $3.51 + 2\log 0.36 < 1.25 \log \log 30$ we obtain
\begin{displaymath}
\sum_{p \le 2\omega(n)\log\omega(n)} \frac{\log p}{p} \le 5.25\log\log n,
\end{displaymath}
as desired.
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}
Let $E/\bar{\Q}$ and $E_0/K$ be elliptic curves without CM such that there exists a cyclic isogeny
of degree $N$ from $E_0$ to $E$.
Let $\rho_N$ be the Galois representation associated to $E_0$.
If $N \ge 4$, we have
\begin{displaymath}
h(E) \ge h(E_0) + \frac 12 \log N - 7 \cdot [\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)]\log\log N.
\end{displaymath}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
We denote by $h(E)$ and $h(E_0)$ the stable Faltings height of $E$ and $E_0$, respectively.
(The stated inequality does not depend on the normalization of the Faltings height.)
We consider the action of $\Gal(\bar\Q/K)$ on the set of $\bar\Q$--isomorphism classes of
elliptic curves.
Let $E = E_1, \ldots, E_{\psi(N)}$ be representatives of elliptic curves that are $N$--isogenous
to $E_0$.
Note that the group $\Gal(\bar\Q/K)$ acts on the set $\{ E_1, \ldots, E_{\psi(N)} \}$.
By Corollaire 3.3 in \cite{autissier} we have
\begin{displaymath}
\frac 1{\psi(N)}\sum_{i=1}^{\psi(N)} h(E_i) = h(E_0) + \frac 12 \log N - \lambda_N
\end{displaymath}
where $N = p_1^{\alpha_1} \cdots p_r^{\alpha_r}$ and
$\lambda_N = \sum_{i=1}^r \frac{p_i^{\alpha_i} - 1}{(p_i^2-1)p_i^{\alpha_i-1}}\log p_i$.
Rearranging and using $|h(E_0)-h(E_i)| \le 1/2 \log N$ (e.g.~\cite[Corollaire 2.1.4, page 207]{raynaud})
we obtain
\begin{align*}
\frac{n_1}{\psi(N)} h(E_1)
&\ge h(E_0) + \frac 12 \log N - \lambda_N - \sum_{j} \frac{n_j}{2\psi(N)}\log N - \sum_{j} \frac{n_j}{\psi(N)}h(E_0)\\
&= h(E_0) + \frac 12 \log N - \lambda_N - \frac{\psi(N)-n_1}{2\psi(N)}\log N - \frac{\psi(N)-n_1}{\psi(N)}h(E_0) \\
&= \frac{n_1}{\psi(N)}h(E_0) + \frac{n_1}{2\psi(N)}\log N - \lambda_N,
\end{align*}
where we have grouped curves into $\Gal(\bar\Q/K)$--orbits, each of size $n_j$.
The number $n_1$ is the number of elliptic curves up to $\bar\Q$--isomorphism that
are in the $\Gal(\bar\Q/K)$--orbit of $E_1$.
This implies
\begin{displaymath}
h(E_1) \ge h(E_0) + \frac 12\log N - \frac{\psi(N)}{n_1}\lambda_N.
\end{displaymath}
We have
\begin{displaymath}
\frac{p_i^{\alpha_i} - 1}{(p_i^2-1)p_i^{\alpha_i-1}} \le \frac{p_i^{\alpha_i}}{(p_i^2-1)p_i^{\alpha_i-1}}
= \frac{p_i}{p_i^2-1} \le \frac 4{3p_i}.
\end{displaymath}
It follows from the last lemma and Lemma \ref{lem:serre_index_bound} that
\begin{displaymath}
h(E_1) \ge h(E_0) + \frac 12\log N - \frac{21}3\left[\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)\right]\log\log N,
\end{displaymath}
as desired.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{cor:lowerbound}
In the setting of the previous proposition,
let $j_0$ and $j$ be the $j$--invariants of $E_0$ and $E$, respectively.
We have
\begin{align*}
h(j_0) &- 6\log(1+h(j_0))
+ 6\log N - 84\left[\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)\right]\log\log N \\
&\le h(j) + 16.212
\end{align*}
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Compare the proof to Proposition 2.1 in \cite{silverman86heightsEC}.
Using Proposition 3.2 of \cite{loebrich} in the first step and Lemme 7.8 of \cite{gaudronremond}
on the third we obtain
\begin{align*}
\frac 1{12}h(j_0) &- \frac 12\log(1+h(j_0)) - 2.071
+\frac 12\log N - 7\left[\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)\right]\log\log N \\
&\le h(E_0) +\frac 12\log N - 7\left[\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)\right]\log\log N
+ \frac 12 \log\pi \\
&\le h(E) + \frac 12 \log\pi \\
&\le \frac 1{12}h(j) - \frac 12\log(1+h(j)) -0.72 \\
&\le \frac 1{12}h(j) - 0.72.
\end{align*}
Note that the authors of both cited papers use the normalization of the Faltings height of Deligne.
Multiplying the inequality by $12$ and rearranging the terms yields the desired inequality.
\end{proof}
In the proof of the next lemma we will use the function
\begin{displaymath}
D(z) = \max\{1,\lvert \Re(z)\rvert, \Im(z)^{-1} \}, \qquad \text{ for all } z \in \H.
\end{displaymath}
It appears in \cite{habBeyAO}. Note that if $z$ is in $\bar\F$, then $D(z) \le 2/\sqrt{3}$.
The height of an element in $\Mat_2(\Q)$ will be the height of that element when
regarded as a member of $\Q^4$.
The following result can be found in a slightly weaker form in \cite{habBeyAO}.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:ht_rhoz}
If $z \in \H\setminus\sl2z\zeta$, then for any $\rho \in \sl2z$ with $\rho z\in \F$
we have $H(\rho) \le 264 D(z)^9$. If $z \in \sl2z\zeta$, then we have $H(\rho)\le 1056D(z)^9$
for any $\rho \in \sl2z$ with $\rho z \in \F$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The result follows from the theory in Chapter 2 of \cite{DiamondShurman05}.
The result of Habegger and Pila states, that $H(\rho) \le 264D(z)^9$ for some $\rho \in \sl2z$.
Note that $H(\rho) = H(-\rho)$.
If $\rho' \in \sl2z$ satisfies $\rho z = \rho'z$, then $\rho^{-1}\rho'$ lies
in the isotropy subgroup $\sl2z_z$ of $z$.
Assume $z$ is neither in the $\sl2z$--orbit of $i$ nor of $\zeta$.
Then since $z$ is not an elliptic point
we have $\{\pm I\}\sl2z_z = \{\pm I\}$ with $I$ the $2$--by--$2$ identity matrix.
Thus we have $H(\rho) \le 264D(z)^9$ in any case.
Assume $z \in \sl2z i$. Then $\rho^{-1}\rho' \in \sl2z_i = \langle S \rangle$
with $S = \begin{smatrix}0&-1\\1&0\end{smatrix}$. But then $H(\rho) = H(\rho')$
and the result follows.
Finally, assume $z \in \sl2z \zeta$.
Then $\rho^{-1}\rho' \in \sl2z_\zeta = \langle \begin{smatrix}0&-1\\1&1\end{smatrix}\rangle$,
so that $H(\rho') \le 4H(\rho) \le 1056D(z)^9$.
\end{proof}
Let $N, m, n, l$ be integers satisfying $1 < N = mn$ and $0 \le l < n$. Then
we have $\lvert \Re\left(\frac{m\tau + l}n\right) \rvert \le N \left(\lvert\Re(\tau)\rvert + 1\right) \le N (D(\tau)+1)$,
and we can similarly bound the inverse of the imaginary part by $N (D(\tau) + 1)$.
Thus
\begin{equation}\label{eq:fd_dist}
D\left(\frac{m\tau + l}n\right) \le N (D(\tau) + 1).
\end{equation}
We will use this for the proof of Lemma \ref{lem:linform}, but first
\begin{lem}\label{lem:tau_less_htj}
We have $|\tau_0^\sigma|/[K:\Q] \le 3 \max\{1, h(j_0)\}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Put $D = [K:\Q]$. We have
\begin{align*}
|\tau_0^\sigma| \le \frac 32 \log \max\{e,|j(\tau_0^\sigma)|\}
\end{align*}
by Lemme 1 item (iv) in \cite{faisant1987quelques}. Thus
\begin{align*}
\frac{|\tau_0^\sigma|}D &\le \frac 32 \frac 1D \log \max\{e,|j(\tau_0^\sigma)|\} \\
&\le \frac 32 \frac 1D \left(1 + \log \max\{1,|j(\tau_0^\sigma)|\}\right) \\
&= \frac 32 \frac 1D \left(1 + \log \max\{1,|\sigma(j(\tau_0))|\}\right) \\
&\le \frac 32 \frac 1D \left(1 + \sum_{\nu \in M_K} d_\nu \log \max\{1,|j(\tau_0)|_\nu\}\right) \\
&\le \frac 32 + \frac 32 h(j_0).
\end{align*}
This gives the desired inequality.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:linform}
Let $E_0\colon y^2 = 4x^3 - g_2x - g_3$ be the Weierstrass form of an elliptic curve without complex multiplication
defined over a number field $K$.
Let $j_0$ be the $j$--invariant of $E_0$ and put $h = \max\{1, h(1,g_2,g_3), h(j_0)\}$.
Let $\omega_1$ and $\omega_2$ be periods of the elliptic curve
such that $\tau_0 = \omega_2/\omega_1$ is in $\F$.
Suppose that $\xi$ is an algebraic number of degree $2$.
Let $N, m, n, l$ be integers satisfying
\begin{displaymath}
N \ge \left({\max\{e^{18\pi h}, [K:\Q], {(4\cdot 10^{11} H(\xi)})^{20}\}} \right)^{1/20}
=: \mathcal{N}(E_0,\xi),
\end{displaymath}
$N = mn$ and $0 \le l < n$.
Let $\rho \in \sl2z$ satisfy $\rho\begin{smatrix}m&l\\0&n\end{smatrix}.\tau_0 \in \bar\F$.
Write $\begin{smatrix}\alpha&\beta\\\gamma&\delta\end{smatrix} = \rho\begin{smatrix}m&l\\0&n\end{smatrix}$.
Then there exists an explicit constant $c_1' \ge 1$ such that
\begin{displaymath}
\log \lvert (\alpha-\xi\gamma)\omega_2 + (\beta-\xi\delta)\omega_1 \rvert \ge -c_1' \cdot (\log N)^4.
\end{displaymath}
The constant $c_1'$ depends on the elliptic curve $E_0$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
This is a special case of Th\'eor\`eme 2.1 in \cite{davidlinearforms}.
We set $D = [K:\Q]$.
Also see \cite{davidhiratakohno} for a similar result with a computable constant.
We put $\mathcal{L}(z_0,z_1,z_2) = (\alpha-\xi\gamma) z_1 + (\beta-\xi\delta)z_2$.
Our elliptic curve and the coefficients are in a number field of degree at most $2D$
since $\xi$ is quadratic.
Note that $(\alpha-\xi\gamma) \omega_2 + (\beta-\xi\delta)\omega_1 \not= 0$ otherwise we would have
\begin{displaymath}
\tau_0 = \frac{\xi\delta-\beta}{\alpha-\xi\gamma} = \begin{pmatrix}\delta&-\beta\\-\gamma&\alpha\end{pmatrix}.\xi
\end{displaymath}
i.e.~there is a isogeny of degree $N$ between elliptic curves with $j$--invariant $j(\tau_0)$
and $j(\xi)$.
But one has complex multiplication and the other does not, so this is impossible.
We choose the variables $u_1, u_2$ in the theorem to be $\omega_2$ and $\omega_1$, respectively.
Then $\gamma_1 = \gamma_2 = (0,0,1)$ and $v = (1,\omega_2,\omega_1)$.
We have to estimate the height of the coefficients of the linear form.
For this, let $H$ denote the multiplicative height.
Let $\rho = \begin{smatrix}a&b\\c&d\end{smatrix}$. Then $\alpha = ma$ and $\gamma = cm$,
and by \ref{eq:ht_sum_lower_bound} we obtain
\begin{align*}
H(\alpha-\xi \gamma) &\le 2H(\alpha)H(-\xi\gamma) \\
&\le 2H(\alpha)H(\xi)H(\gamma) \\
&= 2H(am)H(\xi)H(cm) \\
&\le 2H(a)H(m)H(\xi)H(c)H(m) \\
&= 2H(a)H(\xi)H(c)m^2.
\end{align*}
Now $m \le N$ and $H(a),H(c) \le H(\rho)$ so that
\begin{displaymath}
H(\alpha-\xi \gamma) \le 2H(\rho)^2H(\xi)N^2.
\end{displaymath}
Note that $\begin{smatrix}m&l\\0&n\end{smatrix}.\tau_0$ does not have CM and
is thus not an elliptic point for $\sl2z$. This means that if $\rho' \in \sl2z$
transfers the point to the same points as $\rho$ does, then $\rho' = \pm \rho$.
Since $H(\rho) = H(-\rho)$
we can use Lemma \ref{lem:ht_rhoz} together with \eqref{eq:fd_dist} to obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ht_rho}
H(\rho) \le 264 D\left(\frac{m\tau_0+l}n\right)^9 \le 264 (D(\tau_0)+1)^9 N^9
\le 2\cdot 10^5 N^9,
\end{equation}
because $\tau_0 \in \F$.
Altogether we have
\begin{displaymath}
H(\alpha-\xi\gamma) \le 8\cdot 10^{10} H(\xi) N^{20}.
\end{displaymath}
We have $\beta = al+bn$ and $\delta = cl+dn$. Recall $0 \le l < n \le N$ and thus
\begin{displaymath}
H(\beta) = |al+bn| \le |al|+|bn| \le (|a|+|b|)N \le 2H(\rho) N
\end{displaymath}
and
\begin{displaymath}
H(\delta) = |cl+dn| \le |cl|+|dn| \le (|c|+|d|)N \le 2H(\rho) N.
\end{displaymath}
For the height of $H(\beta-\xi\delta)$ we obtain
\begin{align*}
H(\beta-\xi \delta)
&\le 2H(\beta)H(\xi)H(\delta) \\
&\le 8H(\rho)^2H(\xi)N^2.
\end{align*}
Using \eqref{eq:ht_rho} again this yields
\begin{displaymath}
H(\beta-\xi \delta) \le 4\cdot 10^{11} H(\xi) N^{20}.
\end{displaymath}
Put $V_1 = V_2 = e^{18\pi h}$.
We have
\begin{align*}
\frac{3\pi |u_1|^2}{|\omega_1|^2 \Im(\tau_0) 2D}
\le \frac{3\pi |u_1|^2}{|\omega_1|^2 \Im(\tau_0) D}
\le \frac{3\pi |\tau_0|^2}{\Im(\tau_0) D}
\le \frac{6\pi}D |\tau_0|
\le 18\pi h
\end{align*}
where we used the previous lemma on the last inequality
and we also have
\begin{align*}
\frac{3\pi |u_2|^2}{|\omega_1|^2 \Im(\tau_0) D}
\le \frac{3\pi}{\Im(\tau_0) D}
\le 6\pi
\end{align*}
since $|\tau_0|^2/\Im(\tau_0) \le 2|\tau_0|/\sqrt{3}$ and $\Im(\tau_0) \ge \sqrt{3}/2$ for $\tau_0 \in \bar\F$.
Therefore, equation (3) of Th\'eor\`eme 2.1 in \cite{davidlinearforms} is satisfied independently
of whether $\xi$ is in $K$ or not.
Assume
\begin{displaymath}
N \ge \left({\max\{e^{18 \pi h}, D, {(4\cdot 10^{11} H(\xi)})^{20}\}} \right)^{1/20}.
\end{displaymath}
Define
\begin{displaymath}
B = N^{21}.
\end{displaymath}
We picked $N$ large enough so that
\begin{displaymath}
B \ge \max\{e^{18\pi h},H(\alpha-\xi\gamma), H(\beta-\xi\delta)\}.
\end{displaymath}
This implies $B \ge V_1^{1/D} = V_2^{1/D}$. Thus, equations (1) and (2) of
the theorem in \cite{davidlinearforms} are satisfied, and
we are in the situation of the theorem to obtain as a result the lower bound
\begin{align*}
\log \lvert \mathcal{L}(v) \rvert &\ge -C \cdot 2^6\cdot D^6 (\log B + \log(2D))\cdot(\log\log B+h+\log(2D))^3\log V_1 \log V_2 \\
&\ge -C \cdot 2^6 \cdot D^6 \cdot 54\cdot(18\pi h)^2 \cdot (\log B)^4
\end{align*}
since $h \le \log B$ and $\log(2D) \le \log B$.
If we substitute $B$ and take $C$ from \cite{davidlinearforms} we get
\begin{align*}
\log \lvert \mathcal{L}(v) \rvert
&\ge -C \cdot 2^6 \cdot D^6 \cdot 54\cdot(18\pi h)^2 \cdot 21^4\cdot (\log N)^4 \\
&\ge -10^{54} \cdot D^6 \cdot h^2 \cdot (\log N)^4.
\end{align*}
This gives the desired inequality of the lemma.
\end{proof}
We use the definitions
\begin{displaymath}
\F_+ = \{ \tau \in \F; 0 \le \Re(\tau) \le 1/2 \}
\end{displaymath}
and
\begin{displaymath}
\F_- = \{ \tau \in \F; -1/2 \le \Re(\tau) \le 0 \}.
\end{displaymath}
The following lemma can be found in \cite{bilulucapizarro}.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:jbound}
For $\tau \in \F_+$ we either have $|\tau-\zeta| \ge 10^{-3}$ and $|j(\tau)| \ge 4.4\cdot 10^{-5}$
or $|\tau-\zeta| \le 10^{-3}$ and
\begin{displaymath}
44000|\tau-\zeta|^3 \le |j(\tau)| \le 47000|\tau-\zeta|^3.
\end{displaymath}
For $\tau \in \F_-$ we either have $|\tau-\zeta^2| \ge 10^{-3}$ and $|j(\tau)| \ge 4.4\cdot 10^{-5}$
or $|\tau-\zeta^2| \le 10^{-3}$ and
\begin{displaymath}
44000|\tau-\zeta|^3 \le |j(\tau)| \le 47000|\tau-\zeta|^3.
\end{displaymath}
\end{lem}
We fix $E_0$ given by a Weierstrass equation $y^2 = 4x^3 - g_2x - g_3$, and assume
it is defined over a number field $K$. Let $j_0$ be its $j$--invariant and pick
$\tau_0 \in \F$ with $j(\tau_0) = j_0$.
Let $E$ be an elliptic curve with $j$--invariant $j$ that is $N$--isogenous to $E_0$.
As before, we set $j(\tau_0^\sigma) = \sigma(j(\tau_0))$ with $\tau^\sigma_0 \in \F$
for any field embedding $\sigma\colon K \rightarrow \C$. By $E_0^\sigma$ and $E^\sigma$
we denote the Galois conjugates of $E_0$ and $E$, respectively.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:conjbound}
Let $N \ge \mathcal{N}(E_0^\sigma, \zeta)$.
We have $\log \lvert \sigma(j) \rvert \ge -c_1 \cdot (\log N)^6 - c_2$ for
any $\Q$--homomorphism $\sigma\colon K \rightarrow \C$,
where the constants are explicit and only depend on the fixed elliptic curve $E_0$.
We have $c_1 \ge 1$ and we can have $c_2 \ge 0$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We assume $|\sigma(j)| \le 10^{-3}$ for now.
We have an $N$--isogeny between $E_0^\sigma$ and $E^\sigma$ since $E_0$ and $E$ are $N$--isogenous.
Let $E_0^\sigma(\C) \simeq \C/(\omega_{0,1}^\sigma \Z + \omega_{0,2}^\sigma \Z)$
with $\tau_0^\sigma = \omega_{0,2}^\sigma/\omega_{0,1}^\sigma$
in the fundamental domain.
Similarly, let $\tau^\sigma$ correspond to $E^\sigma(\C)$.
We can choose $ \omega_{1}^\sigma$ and $\omega_{2}^\sigma$ such
that $\tau^\sigma = \rho \begin{smatrix}m&l\\0&n\end{smatrix}\tau_0^\sigma$ and
such that $\tau^\sigma$ is in the fundamental domain $\F$.
Write $\begin{smatrix}\alpha&\beta\\\gamma&\delta\end{smatrix} = \rho\begin{smatrix}m&l\\0&n\end{smatrix}$.
A similar estimate to the one in the proof of Lemma \ref{lem:linform} shows
\begin{align}\label{eq:scaledfp}
\begin{split}
\lvert \gamma\omega_{0,2}^\sigma + \delta\omega_{0,1}^\sigma \rvert
&\le 3N \max\{|\omega_{0,1}^\sigma|,|\omega_{0,2}^\sigma|\} H(\rho) \\
&\le 792 (D(\tau_0^\sigma)+1)^9 \max\{|\omega_{0,1}^\sigma|,|\omega_{0,2}^\sigma|\} N^{10} \\
&\le 10^6 \max\{|\omega_{0,1}^\sigma|,|\omega_{0,2}^\sigma|\} N^{10},
\end{split}
\end{align}
since $D(\tau_0^\sigma) \le 2/\sqrt{3}$.
Note that we have $\tau^\sigma \not= \zeta$ since $E$ does not have CM.
We have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:linlog_trans}
\begin{split}
\log \lvert \tau^\sigma - \zeta \rvert
&= \log \left\lvert \begin{smatrix}\alpha&\beta\\\gamma&\delta\end{smatrix}.\tau_0^\sigma - \zeta \right\rvert \\
&= \log \left\lvert \frac{\alpha\tau_0^\sigma + \beta}{\gamma\tau_0^\sigma + \delta} - \zeta \right\rvert \\
&= \log \left\lvert \frac{\alpha\omega_{0,2}^\sigma + \beta\omega_{0,1}^\sigma}{\gamma\omega_{0,2}^\sigma + \delta\omega_{0,1}^\sigma}
- \zeta \right\rvert \\
&= \log\left( \frac 1{\lvert\gamma\omega_{0,2}^\sigma + \delta\omega_{0,1}^\sigma\rvert}
\lvert \alpha\omega_{0,2}^\sigma + \beta\omega_{0,1}^\sigma
- \zeta(\gamma\omega_{0,2}^\sigma + \delta\omega_{0,1}^\sigma) \rvert \right) \\
&= -\log \lvert\gamma\omega_{0,2}^\sigma + \delta\omega_{0,1}^\sigma\rvert
+ \log\lvert (\alpha-\zeta\gamma)\omega_{0,2}^\sigma + (\beta-\zeta\delta)\omega_{0,1}^\sigma \rvert.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We can use \eqref{eq:scaledfp} in the first step and Lemma \ref{lem:linform} the second to get
\begin{align*}
\log \lvert \tau^\sigma - \zeta \rvert
&\ge -\log\left(10^6 \max\{|\omega_{0,1}^\sigma|,|\omega_{0,2}^\sigma|\} N^{10}\right)
+ \log\lvert (\alpha-\zeta\gamma)\omega_{0,2}^\sigma + (\beta-\zeta\delta)\omega_{0,1}^\sigma \rvert \\
&\ge -\log\left(10^6 \max\{|\omega_{0,1}^\sigma|,|\omega_{0,2}^\sigma|\} N^{10}\right)
- c_1' \cdot (\log N)^6,
\end{align*}
where $c_1'$ is the constant from Lemma \ref{lem:linform}.
The same bound holds for $\zeta$ replaced by $\zeta^2$ since $\mathcal{N}(E,\zeta) = \mathcal{N}(E,\zeta^2)$.
Assuming that $\tau^\sigma$ is closer to $\zeta$, Lemma \ref{lem:jbound} says
\begin{displaymath}
\lvert \sigma(j) \rvert = \lvert j(\tau^\sigma) \rvert
\ge 44000|\tau^\sigma-\zeta|^3.
\end{displaymath}
This implies
\begin{align*}
\log\lvert \sigma(j) \rvert =& \log\lvert j(\tau^\sigma) \rvert
\ge \log 44000 + \log|\tau^\sigma-\zeta|^3 \\
\ge& \log 44000 -3\log\left( 10^6\max\{|\omega_{0,1}^\sigma|,|\omega_{0,2}^\sigma|\} \right) \\
&-10 \log N - 3c_1' \cdot (\log N)^6 \\
\ge& -14 -3\log\left( \max\{|\omega_{0,1}^\sigma|,|\omega_{0,2}^\sigma|\} \right) \\
&- 4\cdot 10^{54} \cdot D^6 \cdot h^2\cdot (\log N)^6.
\end{align*}
So we can put $c_1 = 2\cdot 10^{51} \cdot D^6 \cdot h^2 \ge 1$. Since
$|\omega_{0,1}^\sigma|$ and $|\omega_{0,2}^\sigma|$ can be small we put
$c_2 = 14 +3\log\left( \max\{1,|\omega_{0,1}^\sigma|,|\omega_{0,2}^\sigma|\} \right)$.
If $|\sigma(j)| \ge 10^{-3}$, then
\begin{displaymath}
\log(|\sigma(j)|) \ge \log(10^{-3}) \ge -7 > -c_2,
\end{displaymath}
so the bound is true.
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}\label{prop:j_isogeny_bound}
Let $j_0$ and $j$ be $j$--invariants of elliptic curves, where $j_0$
is associated to the elliptic curve $E_0/K$
given by $E_0\colon y^2 = 4x^3 - g_2x -g_3$.
Put $h = \max\{1, h(1,g_2,g_3), h(j_0)\}$ and $j(\tau_0) = j_0$ with $\tau_0 \in \F$.
Assume we have a cyclic isogeny of degree $N$ between $E_0$ and an
elliptic curve corresponding to $j$.
Further assume that $j$ is an algebraic unit.
If
\begin{displaymath}
N \ge \max\left\{ 4\cdot 10^{11}, [K:\Q], e^{18\pi h} \right\},
\end{displaymath}
then the height of $j$ can be estimated by
\begin{align*}
h(j)
\le& {6\cdot 10^7 h [K:\Q] [\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_{K})]}\left(N^{-1/10}
+ \sqrt\varepsilon\right) \left(c_1 (\log N)^6 + c_2\right) \\
&+ 3\lvert \log \varepsilon \rvert
\end{align*}
where $0 < \varepsilon < 10^{-5}$ is arbitrary.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $E$ be an elliptic curve corresponding to $j$, so
that there is a cyclic isogeny of degree $N$ between $E_0$ and $E$.
Let $\Phi \subset E_0[N]$ be the kernel of the given isogeny $E_0 \rightarrow E$.
Put $G = \{ \sigma \in \Gal(K(E_0[N])/K); \sigma(\Phi) = \Phi \}$, and let
$K^\Phi = \{ \alpha \in K(E_0[N]); \sigma(\alpha) = \alpha \text{ for all } \sigma \in G\}$ be the
fixed field of $\Phi$. By basic Galois theory $\Gal(K(E_0[N])/K^\Phi)$ is
equal to $G$, and hence
$\sigma(\Phi) = \Phi$ for all $\sigma \in \Gal(\overline{K^\Phi}/K^\Phi)$.
This implies
\begin{align*}
B &= \left|\left\{ \sigma(\Phi) : \sigma \in \Gal(K(E_0[N])/K)\right\}\right| \\
&= \frac{|\Gal(K(E_0[N])/K)|}{|G|} \\
&= |\Gal(K^\Phi/K)| = [K^\Phi:K].
\end{align*}
By Remark III.4.13.2 in \cite{silverman86AEC} the elliptic curve $E$ is defined over $K^\Phi$,
and hence $j \in K^\Phi$.
Let $D$ be the degree of $K^\Phi$ over $\Q$.
Put $\varepsilon_0 = 44000\varepsilon^3$.
By \eqref{eq:alg_int_height} we have
\begin{align}\label{eq:ht_eps0}
\notag
h(j) &= -\frac 1D \left( \sum_{\lvert \sigma(j) \rvert < \varepsilon_0} \log \lvert \sigma(j) \rvert
+ \sum_{\varepsilon_0 \le \lvert \sigma(j) \rvert < 1} \log \lvert \sigma(j) \rvert \right) \\
&\le -\frac 1D \sum_{\lvert \sigma(j) \rvert < \varepsilon_0} \log \lvert \sigma(j) \rvert
+ \lvert \log \varepsilon_0 \rvert.
\end{align}
Recall the definitions
\begin{displaymath}
\Gamma_\varepsilon = \left\{ \sigma\colon K \rightarrow \C; \tau^\sigma \in \Sigma_\varepsilon \right\}
\end{displaymath}
with
\begin{displaymath}
\Sigma_\varepsilon = \left\{ \tau \in \F; \lvert j(\tau) \rvert < \varepsilon \right\}.
\end{displaymath}
If $|\sigma(j)| = |j(\tau^\sigma)| < \varepsilon_0 \le 10^{-3}$ and $\tau^\sigma \in \F_+$,
then by Lemma \ref{lem:jbound}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:close_pts}
|\tau^\sigma-\zeta|^3 \le \frac{|j(\tau^\sigma)|}{44000} < \frac{\varepsilon_0}{44000} = \varepsilon^3,
\end{equation}
i.e.~$|\tau^\sigma-\zeta| < \varepsilon$. If $\tau^\sigma$ is not in $\F_+$ but in $\F_-$, then
$|\tau^\sigma-\zeta^2| < \varepsilon$ also follows from $|\sigma(j)| < \varepsilon_0$ and Lemma \ref{lem:jbound}.
We have $\sigma \in \Gamma_{\varepsilon}$ since
\begin{displaymath}
|\sigma(j)| = |j(\tau^\sigma)| < \varepsilon_0 = 47000\varepsilon^3 \le 47000\cdot 10^{-10}\varepsilon \le \varepsilon.
\end{displaymath}
Continuing the estimate of \eqref{eq:ht_eps0} this gives
\begin{align}\label{eq:j_ht_eps}
\notag
h(j) &\le -\frac 1D \sum_{\lvert \sigma(j) \rvert < \varepsilon_0} \log \lvert \sigma(j) \rvert
+ \lvert \log \varepsilon_0 \rvert \\
\notag
&\le \frac{\#\Gamma_{\varepsilon_0}}D \max_{|\sigma(j)|<\varepsilon_0}\left\{\log \left\lvert \sigma(j)^{-1} \right\rvert\right\}
+ 3\lvert \log \varepsilon \rvert - \log 44000 \\
&\le \frac{\#\Gamma_{\varepsilon_0}}D \max_{|\sigma(j)|<\varepsilon_0}\left\{\log \left\lvert \sigma(j)^{-1} \right\rvert\right\}
+ 3\lvert \log \varepsilon \rvert.
\end{align}
Since $\varepsilon \le 10^{-5} < 3/200^2$ we can apply Proposition \ref{prop:clusterbound} to each
pair $(E_0^\sigma, \zeta)$ and $(E_0^\sigma, \zeta^2)$ where $\sigma$ runs over all embeddings
$\sigma\colon K \hookrightarrow \C$ as follows.
For each $\sigma \in \Gamma_{\varepsilon_0}$ the number $\tau^\sigma$ is close to either $\zeta$ or $\zeta^2$
as we have seen in \eqref{eq:close_pts} and gives an $N$--isogeny from $E_0^\sigma$ to $E^\sigma$.
Thus we can bound $\#\Gamma_{\varepsilon_0}$ by
\begin{displaymath}
\#\Gamma_{\varepsilon_0} \le 6\cdot 10^7 h [K:\Q]^2 \left(\sqrt{N}\sigma_0(N) + \sqrt\varepsilon\psi(N)\right).
\end{displaymath}
after applying Lemma \ref{lem:tau_less_htj}.
We also have $\varepsilon_0 \le 10^{-3}$ and $N \ge \mathcal{N}(E_0^\sigma, \zeta)$ by assumption
and the previous lemma,
so we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:conjbound} to get
\begin{displaymath}
\max_{|\sigma(j)|<\varepsilon_0}\left\{\log \left\lvert \sigma(j)^{-1}\right\lvert\right\}
\le c_1(\log N)^6 + c_2.
\end{displaymath}
Using the last two inequalities for \eqref{eq:j_ht_eps} we obtain
\begin{align*}
h(j)
\le \frac{6\cdot 10^7 h [K:\Q] \left(\sqrt{N}\sigma_0(N) + \sqrt\varepsilon\psi(N)\right)}{B} \left(c_1 (\log N)^6 + c_2\right)
+ 3\lvert \log \varepsilon \rvert
\end{align*}
since we have $D = [K^\Phi:\Q] = B\cdot [K:\Q]$.
Nicolas shows on page 229 in \cite{nicolas1987hcn} that $\sigma_0(N) \le N^{2/5}$ for $N \ge 10^7$.
Moreover, we have
\begin{align*}
\sqrt{N}\sigma_0(N) \cdot B^{-1} \le N^{9/10}\cdot B^{-1} &\le N^{9/10} \cdot \psi(N)^{-1} \cdot [\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)] \\
&\le N^{-1/10} \cdot [\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)].
\end{align*}
by Lemma \ref{lem:serre_index_bound}.
Using this in the inequality for the height above, and Lemma \ref{lem:serre_index_bound} again, we get
\begin{align*}
h(j)
\le& {6\cdot 10^7\cdot h[K:\Q] [\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_{K})]}\left(N^{-1/10}
+ \sqrt\varepsilon\right) \left(c_1 (\log N)^6 + c_2\right) \\
&+ 3\lvert \log \varepsilon \rvert,
\end{align*}
as desired.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:noncm_finitude}
\input{noncm_finite_thm}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $E_0$ and $E$ be elliptic curves with $j$--invariants $j_0$ and $j$, respectively. Suppose that there is
an isogeny of degree $N$ between them. We may assume that $N$ is minimal. By Lemma 6.2 in \cite{masserwustholz}
the isogeny is cyclic. If $N$ is large enough, then Corollary \ref{cor:lowerbound} gives a lower bound for
the height of $j$
\begin{equation}\label{eq:iso_lowerbound}
\begin{split}
h(j) \ge h(j_0) &- 6\log(1+h(j_0)) + 6\log N \\&- 84\left[\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)\right]\log\log N
- 16.212
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Moreover, if $j$ is an algebraic unit and $N$ is large as in Proposition \ref{prop:j_isogeny_bound},
that proposition yields the upper bound
\begin{align*}
h(j)
\le& {6\cdot 10^7\cdot h[K:\Q] [\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_{K})]}\left(N^{-1/10}
+ \sqrt\varepsilon\right) \left(c_1 (\log N)^6 + c_2\right) \\
&+ 3\lvert \log \varepsilon \rvert,
\end{align*}
For large enough $N$, the preconceived restrictions on $\varepsilon$ are met
if we take $\varepsilon = 1/(\log N)^{12}$ since $N \ge 10^7$ and thus $\varepsilon < 10^{-5}$.
Therefore, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:iso_upperbound}
\begin{split}
h(j) \le {6\cdot 10^7\cdot h[K:\Q] [\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)]}&\left(N^{-1/10} + \frac 1{(\log N)^6}\right) \\
&\cdot\left(c_1 (\log N)^6 + c_2\right) \\
&+ 36\log \log N.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Recall that Serre proved that
$[\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)]$ is uniformly bounded in $N$. Also Lombardo gives an explicit bound in \cite{lombardo}.
As we have seen in Corollary \ref{cor:lowerbound} the lower bound for $h(j)$ grows as $\log N$
and the upper bound as $\log \log N$.
This clearly gives a contradiction
for large enough $N$, which leaves us with only finitely many $N$, and hence finitely many isogenies.
\end{proof}
The next proposition bounds the number of $j$ satisfying the conditions in the theorem. Note that
the index $[\GL_2(\hat\Z):\rho_\infty(G_K)]$ can be bounded explicitly by the result of Lombardo. See \cite{lombardo}
or page \pageref{eq:lombardo}.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:noncm_N_bound}
\input{noncm_finite_bound}
\end{prop}
Note that $c_3 < 26$ since $-x+6\log(1+x)$ has a maximum at $5$ and $-5 + 6\log(6) < 6$.
\begin{proof}
We proceed as in the proof of the theorem.
The inequalities \eqref{eq:iso_lowerbound} and \eqref{eq:iso_upperbound} in the proof of the theorem give
\begin{align*}
6\log N \le& C\left(N^{-1/10} + \frac 1{(\log N)^6}\right)
\left(c_1 (\log N)^6 + c_2\right) \\
&+ 36\log \log N + 84\left[\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)\right]\log\log N \\
&- h(j_0) + 6\log(1+h(j_0)) + 16.212
\end{align*}
and thus
\begin{align}
\notag
6 \le& \frac 1{\log N}\left( Cc_1 N^{-1/10} (\log N)^6 + Cc_2 N^{-1/10} + Cc_1 + \frac{Cc_2}{(\log N)^6} \right. \\
\notag
&\left. + (84[\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)] + 36) \log\log N \vphantom{\frac{c_2}{(\log N)^6}} + c_3 \right) \\
\notag
\le& \left( Cc_1 N^{-1/10} (\log N)^5 + Cc_2 \frac{N^{-1/10}}{\log N}
+ \frac{Cc_1 + Cc_2 + c_3}{\log N} \right. \\
&\left. + 120[\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)] \frac{\log\log N}{\log N} \vphantom{\frac{c_2}{(\log N)^6}} \right)
\label{eq:j_bound_N}
\end{align}
We are going to bound each term by $1$ individually. This will give a contradiction to the lower bound $6$.
We will work our way from the back to the front.
We have $\log\log x < (\log x)^{1/2}$ for all $x \ge 10$. Thus
\begin{displaymath}
120[\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)] \le \log N/\log \log N
\end{displaymath}
follows from
\begin{displaymath}
120[\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)] \le (\log N)^{1/2} \le \log N/\log \log N,
\end{displaymath}
which is true for all $N \ge e^{(120[\GL_2(\hat\Z):\rho_\infty(G_K)])^2}$. \\
The next term is $(Cc_1 + Cc_2 + c_3)/\log N$. This is bounded by $1$ for all $N \ge e^{Cc_1+Cc_2+c_3}$.
The second term is less than $1$ if $Cc_2 \le N^{1/10}$ is satisfied and $N\ge 3$.
This is true for all $N \ge \max\{(Cc_2)^{10},3\}$.
For the first term we need
\begin{displaymath}
Cc_1 \le \frac{N^{1/10}}{(\log N)^5}.
\end{displaymath}
We have $\log x \le 40 x^{1/100}$ for all $x \ge 10^{45}$. Thus the bound holds if
\begin{displaymath}
Cc_1 \le 10^{-9} N^{1/20} = 10^{-9} 40^5 \frac{N^{1/10}}{(40 N^{1/100})^5} \le \frac{N^{1/10}}{(\log N)^5}.
\end{displaymath}
This is true for $N \ge 10^{180} (Cc_1)^{20}$.
All those assumptions on $N$ together with the constraint
\begin{displaymath}
N \ge \max\left\{ 4\cdot 10^{11}, [K:\Q], e^{18\pi h} \right\}
\end{displaymath}
we made in the previous proposition gives the desired bound.
\end{proof}
This finishes the case $j-\alpha$ when $\alpha$ is zero. In the next section we are going to discuss the
case when $\alpha$ is different from $0$.
\section{Translates}
Fix $\alpha \in \bar\Q$ the $j$--invariant of an elliptic curve with complex multiplication,
and let $j_0$ be the $j$--invariant of an elliptic curve without complex multiplication.
We further assume $\alpha \not= 0$ since this is the case discussed in the last section.
We now want to bound the $j$--invariants $j$ such that
the corresponding elliptic curve is isogenous to the elliptic curve $E_0$, and such that $j-\alpha$
is an algebraic unit. Note that the previous case is a special case of this where $\alpha = 0$.
Let $\xi$ be imaginary quadratic with $j(\xi) = \alpha$. We proceed as before, i.e.~we want to give
lower and upper bounds of $h(j-\alpha)$ that contradict each other. \\
On the one hand we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:trivhtbound}
h(j-\alpha) \ge h(j) - h(\alpha) - \log 2
\end{equation}
as remarked in \eqref{eq:ht_sum_lower_bound}. So if there is a cyclic $N$--isogeny between the curves
corresponding to $j$ and $j_0$, then Corollary \ref{cor:lowerbound} yields
\begin{align*}
h(j-\alpha) \ge h(j_0) &- 6\log(1+h(j_0)) + 6\log N \\
&- 84\left[\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)\right]\log\log N - 20 - h(\alpha).
\end{align*}
Now we want to bound the height from above. We need a similar statement to the one in Lemma \ref{lem:conjbound}.
First we want to introduce the following constant
\begin{displaymath}
c(\xi) = \begin{cases}
|j'(\xi)|\delta/2 & \text{if } \xi \in (\partial\F_+\cup\partial\F_-)\setminus\{i\} \\
|j''(i)|\delta^2/4 & \text{if } \xi = i \\
\min\left\{|\Im(j(\xi))|, |j'(\xi)|\delta/2 \right\} & \text{otherwise}
\end{cases}
\end{displaymath}
where $\delta$ is defined as the minimum of $\frac{A}{12A + 108B}$ and half the distance
of $\xi$ to any geodesic of $\partial\F_+$ not containing $\xi$, $B$ is defined
as $4\cdot 10^5 \max\{1,|j(\xi)|\}$ and $A = |j''(i)|$
if $\xi = i$ and $A = |j'(\xi)|$ otherwise. We also assumed $\xi \not = \zeta, \zeta^2$.
More details can be found in Lemma 3.8 of \cite{cmcase}.
Recall the definition
\begin{displaymath}
\mathcal{N}(E_0,\xi) := \left({\max\{e^{6\pi|\tau_0|/[K:\Q]}, e^{e\cdot h}, [K:\Q], {(4\cdot 10^{11} H(\xi)})^{20}\}} \right)^{1/20}.
\end{displaymath}
\begin{lem}
Let $j(\tau)$ be $N$--isogenous to $E_0$ and $N \ge \mathcal{N}(E_0^\sigma, \xi^\sigma)$.
\begin{displaymath}
\log|\sigma(j-\alpha)| \ge -c_1 (\log N)^6 - c_2
\end{displaymath}
for any embedding $\sigma\colon K \hookrightarrow \C$.
Here the constants are effective and depend on the fixed elliptic curve $E_0$ and $c_2$
additionally depends on $\xi$.
We also have $c_1 \ge 1$ and we can have $c_2 \ge 0$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The setup is the same as in Lemma \ref{lem:conjbound}.
Let $E$ be an elliptic curve with $j$--invariant $j(\tau)$ and $E^\sigma$ be the elliptic curve $E$ conjugated by $\sigma$.
Then there is an $N$--isogeny between $E_0 = E_0^\sigma$ and $E^\sigma$ since $E_0$ and $E$ are $N$--isogenous.
Let $E_0^\sigma(\C) \simeq \C/(\omega_{0,1}^\sigma \Z + \omega_{0,2}^\sigma \Z)$
with $\tau_0^\sigma = \omega_{0,2}^\sigma/\omega_{0,1}^\sigma$
in the fundamental domain.
Similarly, let $\tau^\sigma$ correspond to $E^\sigma(\C)$.
We can choose $ \omega_{1}^\sigma$, $\omega_{2}^\sigma$ and $\rho \in \sl2z$ such
that $\tau^\sigma = \rho \begin{smatrix}m&l\\0&n\end{smatrix}\tau_0^\sigma$ and
such that $\tau^\sigma$ is in the fundamental domain $\F$.
Write $\begin{smatrix}\alpha&\beta\\\gamma&\delta\end{smatrix} = \rho\begin{smatrix}m&l\\0&n\end{smatrix}$.
Assume $|\sigma(j-\alpha)| < c(\xi^\sigma)$ for a moment.
Put $A^\sigma = |j''(\xi^\sigma)|$ if $\xi^\sigma = i$ and $A^\sigma = |j'(\xi^\sigma)|$ otherwise.
By Lemma 3.9 in \cite{cmcase} we obtain $|\tau^\sigma - M\xi^\sigma| < \delta^\sigma$
for some $M \in \ensuremath{\mathcal{T}}$ with
$\ensuremath{\mathcal{T}} = \{ \begin{smatrix}1&0\\0&1\end{smatrix}, \begin{smatrix}1&\pm 1\\0&1\end{smatrix}, \begin{smatrix}0&-1\\1&0\end{smatrix} \}$.
The number $\delta^\sigma$ is the $\delta$ stated above but associated to $\xi^\sigma$.
Since $\delta^\sigma$ satisfies by definition $\delta^\sigma \le \frac{A^\sigma}{12A^\sigma+108B^\sigma}$,
where $B^\sigma = 4\cdot 10^5 \max\{1,|j(\xi^\sigma)|\}$,
we obtain by Lemma 3.7 in \cite{cmcase} the inequality
\begin{equation}\label{eq:j_to_pts}
|j(\tau^\sigma) - j(\xi^\sigma)| \ge \frac{A^\sigma}4 \lvert \tau^\sigma - M\xi^\sigma \rvert^2
\end{equation}
for some $M \in \ensuremath{\mathcal{T}}$.
Equation \eqref{eq:scaledfp} says
$|\gamma\omega_{0,2}^\sigma + \delta\omega_{0,1}^\sigma| \le 10^6 \max\{|\omega_{0,1}^\sigma|,|\omega_{0,2}^\sigma|\} N^{10}$.
Note that we also have $\tau^\sigma \not= M\xi^\sigma$ since $\xi$ comes from a curve with
complex multiplication. We can substitute $M\xi^\sigma$ for $\zeta$ in \eqref{eq:linlog_trans}
to get the equality
\begin{displaymath}
\log \lvert \tau^\sigma - M\xi^\sigma \rvert
= -\log \lvert\gamma\omega_{0,2}^\sigma + \delta\omega_{0,1}^\sigma\rvert
+ \log\lvert (\alpha-M\xi^\sigma\gamma)\omega_{0,2}^\sigma + (\beta-M\xi^\sigma\delta)\omega_{0,1}^\sigma \rvert.
\end{displaymath}
Since $\xi^\sigma$ is algebraic of degree two so is $M\xi^\sigma$. We have
\begin{displaymath}
\log|\tau^\sigma - M\xi^\sigma|
\ge -\log\left(10^6 \max\{|\omega_{0,1}^\sigma|,|\omega_{0,2}^\sigma|\} N^{10}\right)
- c_1' \cdot (\log N)^6.
\end{displaymath}
as in the proof of Lemma \ref{lem:conjbound}. Here $c_1'$ is the constant from Lemma \ref{lem:linform}.
As before we obtain by \eqref{eq:j_to_pts}
\begin{align*}
\log\lvert \sigma(j-\alpha) \rvert =& \log\lvert j(\tau^\sigma) - j(\xi^\sigma) \rvert
\ge \log\frac{A^\sigma}{4} + \log|\tau^\sigma-M\xi^\sigma|^2 \\
\ge& \log\left(\frac{A^\sigma}{4}\right)
-2\log\left(10^6\max\{|\omega_{0,1}^\sigma|,|\omega_{0,2}^\sigma|\} \right) \\
&-10 \log N - 2c_1' \cdot (\log N)^6 \\
\ge& \log\left(\frac{A^\sigma}{4}\right)
-2\log\left(10^6 \max\{|\omega_{0,1}^\sigma|,|\omega_{0,2}^\sigma|\} \right) \\
&- 3c_1' \cdot (\log N)^6
\end{align*}
where we have used the fact that $N \ge \mathcal{N}(E_0,\xi^\sigma) \ge 4\cdot 10^{11}$.
If we put
\begin{displaymath}
c_2 = \log\max\left\{1, c(\xi^\sigma), \frac 4{A^\sigma}10^{12} |\omega_{0,1}^\sigma|^2,
\frac 4{A^\sigma}10^{12} |\omega_{0,1}^\sigma|^2\right\}
\end{displaymath}
the claim holds independently of whether $|\sigma(j-\alpha)| < c(\xi^\sigma)$ or not.
\end{proof}
We want to apply this lemma.
Recall that $\alpha = j(\xi)$ is a singular modulus. Let $\Delta$ be the discriminant
of the associated endomorphism ring. For any $\sigma\colon K \hookrightarrow \C$ the
singular moduli $j(\xi^\sigma)$ have the same associated discriminant.
The following function can also be found in \cite{cmcase}
\begin{displaymath}
\Pen(\xi) = \log\max_\sigma\left\{1, c(\xi^\sigma)^{-1}\right\}.
\end{displaymath}
\begin{prop}\label{prop:j-a_N_bound}
Let $j_0$ and $j$ be $j$--invariants of elliptic curves, where $j_0$
is associated to the elliptic curve $E_0/K$
defined by $E_0\colon y^2 = 4x^3 - g_2x -g_3$.
Put $h = \max\{1, h(1,g_2,g_3), h(j_0)\}$.
Assume we have a cyclic isogeny of degree $N$ between $E_0$ and an
elliptic curve corresponding to $j$.
Further assume that $j$ is an algebraic unit.
If
\begin{displaymath}
N \ge {\max\{e^{18\pi h}, [K:\Q], 4\cdot 10^{11} \sqrt{|\Delta|}\}}
\end{displaymath}
then the height of $j$ can be estimated by
\begin{align*}
h(j-\alpha)
\le& \frac{10^8 h [K:\Q]^2 |\Delta|^5 [\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)]}{[\Q(\alpha):\Q]}(N^{-1/10} + \sqrt{\varepsilon})
\left(c_1 (\log N)^6 + c_2\right)\\
&+ \Pen(\xi) +2|\log \varepsilon|.\qedhere
\end{align*}
where
\begin{displaymath}
0 < \varepsilon < 10^{-4}\min_{\sigma\colon K \hookrightarrow \C}\{|\xi^\sigma|^{-4}\}
\end{displaymath}
is arbitrary.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Recall from the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:j_isogeny_bound} the field $K^\Phi$ for which
we have $j \in K^\Phi$. We also showed that $[K^\Phi:\Q] = B[K:\Q]$ and $B = [K^\Phi:K]$.
Let
\begin{displaymath}
\varepsilon_0
= \varepsilon^2 \cdot \min_{\sigma\colon K \hookrightarrow \C}\left\{1, c(\xi^\sigma)\right\}.
\end{displaymath}
Let $|\sigma(j-\alpha)| < \varepsilon_0 < c(\xi^\sigma)$.
We have $N \ge \mathcal{N}(E_0^\sigma, \xi^\sigma)$ since we have $\sqrt{|\Delta|} \ge H(\xi^\sigma)$
by Lemma 5 of \cite{habSM} and the statement of Lemma \ref{lem:tau_less_htj}.
So the previous lemma says
\begin{displaymath}
\log|\sigma(j-\alpha)| \ge -c_1 (\log N)^6 - c_2,
\end{displaymath}
where we now can take $c_2$ to be the maximum over all constants that we get from the lemma for each $\xi^\sigma$.
We have $\sigma \in \Gamma(\xi^\sigma, \varepsilon)$ since we assumed $|\sigma(j-\alpha)| < \varepsilon_0 < \varepsilon$.
The same argument as in the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:j_isogeny_bound} shows
\begin{align
\notag
h(j-\alpha) &\le -\frac 1D \sum_{\lvert \sigma(j-\alpha) \rvert < \varepsilon_0} \log \lvert \sigma(j-\alpha) \rvert
+ \lvert \log \varepsilon_0 \rvert \\
\notag
&\le \frac{\sum_{\sigma\colon K \hookrightarrow \C}\#\Gamma(\xi^\sigma, \varepsilon_0)}D
\max_{|\sigma(j-\alpha)|<\varepsilon_0}\left\{\log \left\lvert \sigma(j-\alpha)^{-1} \right\rvert\right\}
+ \lvert \log \varepsilon_0 \rvert \\
&\le \frac{\sum_{\sigma\colon K \hookrightarrow \C}\#\Gamma(\xi^\sigma, \varepsilon_0)}D
\left(c_1 (\log N)^6 + c_2\right)
+ \lvert \log \varepsilon_0 \rvert,\label{eq:j-a_ht_bound}
\end{align}
where $D$ is the degree of $K^\Phi(\alpha)$ over $\Q$.
Now if $\rho \in \Gamma(\xi^\sigma, \varepsilon_0)$, then $|j(\tau^\rho)-j(\xi^\sigma)|<\varepsilon_0 \le c(\xi^\sigma)$.
With $\delta^\sigma$ as before we get from Lemma 3.9 in \cite{cmcase}
\begin{displaymath}
|\tau^\rho - M\xi^\sigma| < \delta^\sigma
\end{displaymath}
for some $M \in \ensuremath{\mathcal{T}}$.
As before we put $A^\sigma = |j''(i)|$ if $\xi^\sigma = i$ and $A^\sigma = |j'(\xi)|$ otherwise.
Recall that $\delta^\sigma \le 1$ so that $c(\xi^\sigma) \le A^\sigma/2$ or $c(\xi^\sigma) \le A^\sigma/4$.
Lemma 3.7 of \cite{cmcase} then implies
\begin{displaymath}
\frac{A^\sigma}{2^k} |\tau^\rho-M\xi^\sigma|^2 \le |j(\tau^\rho)-j(\xi^\sigma)| < \varepsilon_0 \le c(\xi^\sigma) \varepsilon^2
\le \frac{A^\sigma}{2^k} \varepsilon^2,
\end{displaymath}
where $k \in \{1,2\}$ depending on whether $M\xi^\sigma = i$ or not.
Therefore we have $|\tau^\rho-M\xi^\sigma| < \varepsilon$. So every $\rho \in \Gamma(\xi^\sigma,\varepsilon_0)$ gives
a point satisfying $|\tau^\rho - M\xi^\sigma| \le \varepsilon$ and an $N$--isogeny between $E_0^\rho$ and $E^\rho$.
Note that $M$ can only be different from the identity if $\xi^\sigma$ lies on the boundary of $\F$.
In any case since $\xi$ (and all $M\xi^\sigma$) is imaginary quadratic, some conjugate lies
on the imaginary axis and is the largest with respect to the absolute value.
It is given by $i|\Delta|^{1/2}/2$.
Moreover, $\varepsilon$ satisfies the conditions of Proposition \ref{prop:clusterbound}.
We thus can apply Proposition \ref{prop:clusterbound} to bound
\begin{displaymath}
\#\Gamma(\xi^{\sigma}, \varepsilon_0) \le
4\cdot 10^7[K:\Q]^2 |\Delta|^5 h \left( \sqrt{N} \sigma_0(N) + \sqrt\varepsilon \psi(N) \right).
\end{displaymath}
Note that $\varepsilon \le (100^{-1}|M\xi^\sigma|\Im(M\xi^\sigma))^2$ holds since if $M$ is
different from the identity, then $\xi^\sigma$ lies on the boundary of the fundamental domain
and we obtain $|M\xi^\sigma| = |\xi^\sigma|$ and $\Im(M\xi^\sigma) = \Im(\xi^\sigma)$.
We can continue the height estimate in \eqref{eq:j-a_ht_bound}
\begin{align*}
h(j-\alpha)
\le& [K:\Q]\frac{4[K:\Q]^2 10^7 |\Delta|^5 h\left(\sqrt{N}\sigma_0(N) + \sqrt\varepsilon\psi(N)\right)}D
\left(c_1 (\log N)^6 + c_2\right) \\
&+ \lvert \log \varepsilon_0 \rvert \\
\le& [K:\Q]\frac{4[K:\Q]^2 10^7 |\Delta|^5 h \left(\sqrt{N}\sigma_0(N) + \sqrt\varepsilon\psi(N)\right)}{[K^\Phi:\Q][\Q(\alpha):\Q]}
\left(c_1 (\log N)^6 + c_2\right) \\
&+ \lvert \log \varepsilon_0 \rvert \\
\le& \frac{4[K:\Q]^2 10^7 |\Delta|^5 h \left(\sqrt{N}\sigma_0(N) + \sqrt\varepsilon\psi(N)\right)}{B[\Q(\alpha):\Q]}
\left(c_1 (\log N)^6 + c_2\right)
+ \lvert \log \varepsilon_0 \rvert.
\end{align*}
We have bounded the term $\left(\sqrt{N}\sigma_0(N) + \sqrt\varepsilon\psi(N)\right)/B$ in Proposition \ref{prop:j_isogeny_bound},
so that we obtain
\begin{align*}
h(j-\alpha)
\le& \frac{10^8 [K:\Q]^2 |\Delta|^5 h [\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)]}{[\Q(\alpha):\Q]}(N^{-1/10} + \sqrt{\varepsilon})
\left(c_1 (\log N)^6 + c_2\right) \\
&+ \lvert \log \varepsilon_0 \rvert.
\end{align*}
Now
\begin{align*}
|\log \varepsilon_0|
= 2|\log \varepsilon| + |\log \min_{\sigma}\left\{1, c(\xi^\sigma)\right\}|
= 2|\log \varepsilon| + \Pen(\xi).
\end{align*}
Replacing this into the height bound be obtain
\begin{align*}
h(j-\alpha)
\le& \frac{10^8 [K:\Q]^2 |\Delta|^5 h[\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)]}{[\Q(\alpha):\Q]}(N^{-1/10} + \sqrt{\varepsilon})
\left(c_1 (\log N)^6 + c_2\right)\\
&+ \Pen(\xi) +2|\log \varepsilon|.\qedhere
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:noncm_ja_finitude}
\input{noncm_ja_finite}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
In the same situation as before we get an additional $-\log 2-h(\alpha)$ term from \eqref{eq:trivhtbound}
for the lower bound and obtain
\begin{align*}
h(j_0) &- 6\log(1+h(j_0)) + 6\log N - 84\left[\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)\right]\log\log N \\
&- 20 - h(\alpha) \le h(j-\alpha).
\end{align*}
We want to pick $\varepsilon = 1/(\log N)^{12}$ again.
Thus, $N$ must be large enough so that
\begin{displaymath}
\varepsilon = 1/(\log N)^{12} \le 10^{-4} \min_\sigma\{|\xi^\sigma|^{-4}\}
\end{displaymath}
or equivalently
\begin{displaymath}
(\log N)^{12} \ge 10^{4} \max_\sigma\{|\xi^\sigma|^{4}\}.
\end{displaymath}
But as mentioned in the previous proof, $\xi$ and $|\xi^\sigma|$ are imaginary quadratic
and one of its conjugates is $i|\Delta|/2$ and has maximal modulus amongst them.
Hence it suffices for $N$ to satisfy $\log N \ge 3 |\Delta|$, i.e.
\begin{displaymath}
N \ge e^{3 |\Delta|}.
\end{displaymath}
If $N$ additionally satisfies the conditions of the previous proposition then
\begin{align*}
h(j-\alpha) \le& \frac{10^8 h [K:\Q]^2 |\Delta|^5 [\GL_2(\Z/N\Z):\rho_N(G_K)]}{[\Q(\alpha):\Q]} \\
&\cdot\left(N^{-1/10} + \frac 1{(\log N)^6}\right) \left(c_1 (\log N)^6 + c_2\right) \\
&+ \Pen(\xi) + 24\log \log N.
\end{align*}
The growth of the bounds for $h(j-\alpha)$ is as before, and we get the same contradiction.
\end{proof}
\noindent In total we obtain the following result. We also recall that $c_3 < 26$.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:noncm_ja_bound}
Let $E_0\colon y^2 = 4x^3 - g_2x -g_3$ be an elliptic curve without complex multiplication
defined over a number field $K$ of degree $D$. Let $j_0$ be its $j$--invariant with $j(\tau_0) = j_0$
and $\tau_0 \in \F$.
Define $h = \max \{1,h(1,g_2,g_3),h(j_0)\}$.
Let $\xi \in \F$ be imaginary quadratic and let $\Delta$ be the discriminant of the
endomorphism ring. Put $\alpha = j(\xi)$.
If $j$ is the $j$--invariant of an elliptic curve
isogenous to the elliptic curve $E_0$ and $j-\alpha$ is a unit,
then the degree of the minimal isogeny is bounded by
\begin{gather*}
\max\left\{10^{180}(\hat{C}c_1)^{20}, (\hat{C}c_2)^{10}, e^{\hat{C}c_1+\hat{C}c_2+c_3+\Pen(\xi)},
e^{120^2[\GL_2(\hat\Z):\rho_\infty(G_K)]^2}, \right. \\
\left. e^{18\pi h}, [K:\Q], e^{3|\Delta|}, 4\cdot 10^{11}\sqrt{|\Delta|} \right\},
\end{gather*}
where $\hat C = 10^8 h [K:\Q]^2|\Delta|^5 [\GL_2(\hat\Z):\rho_\infty(G_K)]/[\Q(\alpha):\Q]$
and $c_3 = 20 - h(j_0) + 6 \log(1+h(j_0))$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The bounds from the previous proof give the same inequality as in \eqref{eq:j_bound_N}
with $C$ replaced by the new constant $\hat C$ and the third term becomes
\begin{displaymath}
\frac{\hat{C}c_1+\hat{C}c_2+c_3 + \Pen\left(\xi \right)}{\log N}.
\end{displaymath}
Also we have the additional prerequisites $N \ge e^{3|\Delta|}$ and $N \ge 4\cdot 10^{11} \sqrt{|\Delta|}$
from the proof of the last theorem.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
Similarity search aims to find items that look most similar to the query one from a huge amount of data ~\cite{wang2018survey}, and are found in extensive applications like plagiarism analysis ~\cite{stein2007strategies}, collaborative filtering ~\cite{koren2008factorization,wang2016learning}, content-based multimedia retrieval ~\cite{lew2006content}, web services ~\cite{dong2004similarity} etc. Semantic hashing is an effective way to accelerate the searching process by representing every document with a compact binary code. In this way, one only needs to evaluate the hamming distance between binary codes, which is much cheaper than the Euclidean distance calculation in the original feature space.
Existing hashing methods can be roughly divided into data-independent and data-dependent categories. Data-independent methods employ random projections to construct hash functions without any consideration on data characteristics, like the locality sensitive hashing (LSH) algorithm \cite{datar2004locality}. On the contrary, data dependent hashing seeks to learn a hash function from the given training data in a supervised or an unsupervised way. In the supervised case, a deterministic function which maps the data to a binary representation is trained by using the provided supervised information (e.g. labels) ~\cite{liu2012supervised,shen2015supervised,liu2016deep}. However, the supervised information is often very difficult to obtain or is not available at all. Unsupervised hashing seeks to obtain binary representations by leveraging the inherent structure information in data, such as the spectral hashing ~\cite{weiss2009spectral}, graph hashing ~\cite{liu2011hashing}, iterative quantization ~\cite{gong2013iterative}, self-taught hashing ~\cite{zhang2010self} etc.
Generative models are often considered as the most natural way for unsupervised representation learning ~\cite{miao2016neural,bowman2015generating, yang2017improved}. Many efforts have been devoted to hashing by using generative models. In ~\cite{chaidaroon2017variational}, variational deep semantic hashing (VDSH) is proposed to solve the semantic hashing problem by using the variational autoencoder (VAE) ~\cite{kingma2013auto}. However, this model requires a two-stage training since a separate step is needed to cast the continuous representations in VAE into binary codes. Under the two-stage training strategy, the model is more prone to get stuck at poor performance ~\cite{xu2015convolutional,zhang2010self,wang2013semantic}. To address the issue, the neural architecture for generative semantic hashing (NASH) in ~\cite{shen2018nash} proposed to use a Bernoulli prior to replace the Gaussian prior in VDSH, and further use the straight-through (ST) method ~\cite{bengio2013estimating} to estimate the gradients of functions involving binary variables. It is shown that the end-to-end training brings a remarkable performance improvement over the two-stage training method in VDSH. Despite of superior performances, only the simplest priors are used in these models, i.e. Gaussian in VDSH and Bernoulli in NASH. However, it is widely known that priors play an important role on the performance of generative models ~\cite{goyal2017nonparametric,chen2016variational,jiang2016variational}.
Motivated by this observation, in this paper, we propose to produce high-quality hashing codes by imposing appropriate mixture priors on generative models. Specifically, we first propose to model documents by a VAE with a Gaussian mixture prior. However, similar to the VDSH, the proposed method also requires a separate stage to cast the continuous representation into binary form, making it suffer from the same pains of two-stage training. Then we further propose to use a Bernoulli mixture as the prior, in hopes to yield binary representations directly. An end-to-end method is further developed to train the model, by resorting to the straight-through gradient estimator for neural networks involving binary random variables. Extensive experiments are conducted on benchmark datasets, which show substantial gains of the proposed mixture-prior methods over existing ones, especially the method with a Bernoulli mixture prior.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{model_1.pdf}
\vspace{-2.5mm}
\caption{The architectures of the GMSH and BMSH. The data generative process of GMSH is done as follows: (1) Pick a component $c\in\{1,2,...,K\}$ from $Cat(\pi)$ with $\pi=[\pi_{1},\pi_{2},...,\pi_{K}]$; (2) Draw a sample $z$ from the picked Gaussian distribution $\mathcal{N} \left( \mu_{c}, diag(\sigma_{c}^{2})\right)$; (3) Use $g_{\theta}(z)$ to decode the sample $z$ into an observable $\hat x$. The process of generating data in BMSH can be described as follows: (1) Choose a component $c$ from $Cat(\pi)$; (2) Sample a latent vector from the chosen distribution $Bernoulli(\gamma_{c})$; (3) Inject data-dependent noise into $z$, and draw $z'$ from $\mathcal{N}(z, diag(\sigma_{c}^{2}))$; (4) Then use decoder $g_{\theta}(z')$ to reconstruct $\hat x$.}
\label{fig:model}
\vspace{-5mm}
\end{figure*}
\section{Semantic Hashing by Imposing Mixture Priors}
In this section, we investigate how to obtain similarity-preserved hashing codes by imposing different mixture priors on variational encoder.
\subsection{Preliminaries on Generative Semantic Hashing}
Let $x \in \mathcal{Z}^{|V|}_{+}$ denote the bag-of-words representation of a document and $x_{i} \in \{0,1\}^{|V|}$ denote the one-hot vector representation of the $i$-{th} word of the document, where $|V|$ denotes the vocabulary size. VDSH in ~\cite{chaidaroon2017variational} proposed to model a document $\mathcal{D}$, which is defined by a sequence of one-hot word representations $\{x_i\}_{i=1}^{|\mathcal{D}|}$, with the joint PDF
\begin{equation} \label{pdf}
p(\mathcal{D}, z)=p_{\theta}(\mathcal{D}|z)p(z),
\end{equation}
where the prior $p(z)$ is the standard Gaussian distribution ${\mathcal{N}}(0, I)$; the likelihood has the factorized form $p_{\theta}(\mathcal{D}|z)=\prod_{i=1}^{|\mathcal{D}|}p_{\theta}(x_i|z)$, and
\begin{equation} \label{decoder1}
p_{\theta}(x_{i}|z) = \frac{\exp(z^{T}\mathnormal{E}x_{i}+b_{i})}{\sum_{j=1}^{|V|}\exp(z^{T}\mathnormal{E}x_{j}+b_{j})};
\end{equation}
$E\in {\mathbb{R}}^{m\times |V|}$ is a parameter matrix which connects latent representation $z$ to one-hot representation $x_i$ of the $i$-th word, with $m$ being the dimension of $z$; $b_i$ is the bias term and $\theta = \{ E, b_{1}, ... , b_{|V|}\}$. It is known that generative models with better modeling capability often imply that the obtained latent representations are also more informative.
To increase the modeling ability of \eqref{pdf}, we may resort to more complex likelihood $p_{\theta}(\mathcal{D}|z)$, such as using deep neural networks to relate the latent $z$ to the observation $x_i$, instead of the simple softmax function in \eqref{decoder1}. However, as indicated in ~\cite{shen2018nash}, employing expressive nonlinear decoders likely destroy the distance-keeping property, which is essential to yield good hashing codes. In this paper, instead of employing a more complex decoder $p_{\theta}(\mathcal{D}|z)$, more expressive priors are leveraged to address this issue.
\subsection{Semantic Hashing by Imposing Gaussian Mixture Priors}\label{gm}
To begin with, we first replace the standard Gaussian prior $p(z)={\mathcal{N}}(0, I)$ in \eqref{pdf} by the following Gaussian mixture prior
\begin{equation}
p(z) = \sum_{k=1}^K\pi_k \cdot {\mathcal{N}}\left(\mu_k, \text{diag}\left(\sigma_k^2\right)\right),
\end{equation}
where $K$ is the number of mixture components; $\pi_k$ is the probability of choosing the $k$-th component and $\sum_{k}^{K}\pi_{k} = 1$; $\mu_k\in {\mathbb{R}}^m$ and $\sigma_k^2\in {\mathbb{R}}_+^m$ are the mean and variance vectors of the Gaussian distribution of the $k$-th component; and $\text{diag}(\cdot)$ means diagonalizing the vector.
For any sample $z \sim p(z)$, it can be equivalently generated by a two-stage procedure: 1) choosing a component $c\in \{1, 2, \cdots, K\}$ according to the categorical distribution $\text{Cat}(\pi)$ with $\pi = [\pi_1, \pi_2, \cdots, \pi_K]$; 2) drawing a sample from the distribution $\mathcal{N}\left(\mu_{c},\text{diag}\left(\sigma_c^2\right)\right)$. Thus, the document ${\mathcal{D}}$ is modelled as
\begin{equation}
p({\mathcal{D}}, z, c) = p_{\theta}({\mathcal{D}}|z)p(z|c)p(c),
\end{equation}
where $p(z|c) = \mathcal{N}\left(\mu_{c},\text{diag}\left(\sigma_c^2\right)\right)$, $p(c) = \text{Cat}(\pi)$ and $p_{\theta}({\mathcal{D}}|z)$ is defined the same as \eqref{decoder1}.
To train the model, we seek to optimize the lower bound of the log-likelihood
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L} = \mathnormal{E}_{q_{\phi}(z,c|x)}\left[\log\frac{p_{\theta}({\mathcal{D}}|z)p(z|c)p(c)}{q_{\phi}(z,c|x)}\right], \end{equation}
where $q_\phi(z, c|x)$ is the approximate posterior distribution of $p(z, c|x)$ parameterized by $\phi$; here $x$ could be any representation of the documents, like the bag-of-words, TFIDF etc. For the sake of tractability, $q_{\phi}(z,c|x)$ is further assumed to maintain a factorized form, i.e., $q_{\phi}(z,c|x) = q_\phi(z|x)q_\phi(c|x)$. Substituting it into the lower bound gives
\begin{align} \label{GM_elbo}
{\mathcal{L}} =& {\mathbb{E}}_{q_\phi(z|x)}\left[\log p_{\theta}({\mathcal{D}}|z) \right] - KL\left(q_\phi(c|x) || p(c)\right) \nonumber \\
&- {\mathbb{E}}_{q_\phi(c|x)} \left[ KL\left(q_\phi(z|x) || p(z|c) \right) \right].
\end{align}
For simplicity, we assume that $q_\phi(z|x)$ and $q_\phi(c|x)$ take the forms of Gaussian and categorical distributions, respectively, and the distribution parameters are defined as the outputs of neural networks. The entire model, including the generative and inference arms, is illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:model}(a). Using the properties of Gaussian and categorical distributions, the last two terms in \eqref{GM_elbo} can be expressed in a closed form. Combining with the reparameterization trick in stochastic gradient variational bayes (SGVB) estimator \cite{kingma2013auto}, the lower bound ${\mathcal{L}}$ can be optimized w.r.t. model parameters $\{\theta, \pi, \mu_k, \sigma_k, \phi\}$ by error backpropagation and SGD algorithms directly.
Given a document $x$, its hashing code can be obtained through two steps: 1) mapping $x$ to its latent representation by $z=\mu_{\phi}(x)$, where the $\mu_{\phi}(x)$ is the encoder mean $\mu_{\phi}(\cdot)$; 2) thresholding $z$ into binary form. As suggested in ~\cite{wang2013semantic,chaidaroon2018deep,chaidaroon2017variational} that when hashing a batch of documents, we can use the median value of the elements in $z$ as the critical value, and threshold each element of $z$ into $0$ and $1$ by comparing it to this critical value. For presentation conveniences, the proposed semantic hashing model with a Gaussian mixture priors is referred as GMSH.
\subsection{Semantic Hashing by Imposing Bernoulli Mixture Priors}
To avoid the separate casting step used in GMSH, inspired by NASH~\cite{shen2018nash}, we further propose a {\it{S}}emantic {\it{H}}ashing model with a {\it{B}}ernoulli {\it{M}}ixture prior (BMSH). Specifically, we replace the Gaussian mixture prior in GMSH with the following Bernoulli mixture prior
\begin{equation}
p(z) = \sum_{k=1}^K\pi_k \cdot \text{Bernoulli}\left(\gamma_k\right),
\end{equation}
where $\gamma_k \in [0, 1]^m$ represents the probabilities of $z$ being 1.
Effectively, the Bernoulli mixture prior, in addition to generating discrete samples, plays a similar role as Gaussian mixture prior, which make the samples drawn from different components have different patterns. The samples from the Bernoulli mixture can be generated by first choosing a component $c\in \{1, 2, \cdots, K\}$ from $\text{Cat}(\pi)$ and then drawing a sample from the chosen distribution $\text{Bernoulli}(\gamma_c)$.
The entire model can be described as
$
p({\mathcal{D}},z,c) = p_{\theta}({\mathcal{D}}|z) p(z|c)p(c),
$
where $ p_{\theta}({\mathcal{D}}|z)$ is defined the same as \eqref{decoder1}, and $p(c) = \text{Cat}(\pi)$ and $p(z|c) = \text{Bernoulli}(\gamma_{c}).$
Similar to GMSH, the model can be trained by maximizing the variational lower bound, which maintains the same form as \eqref{GM_elbo}. Different from GMSH, in which $q_\phi(z|x)$ and $p(z|c)$ are both in a Gaussian form, here $p(z|c)$ is a Bernoulli distribution by definition, and thus $q_\phi(z|x)$ is assumed to be the Bernoulli form as well, with the probability of the $i$-th element $z_i$ taking 1 defined as
\begin{equation}
q_\phi(z_i=1|x) \triangleq \sigma\left(g_\phi^i(x)\right)
\end{equation}
for $i=1, 2, \cdots, m$. Here $g_\phi^i(\cdot)$ indicates the $i$-th output of a neural network parameterized by $\phi$.
Similarly, we also define the posterior regarding which component to choose as
\begin{equation}
q_\phi(c = k |x) = \frac{\exp\left(h_\phi^k(x)\right)}{\sum_{i=1}^K\exp\left(h_\phi^i(x)\right)},
\end{equation}
where $h_\phi^k(x)$ is the $k$-th output of a neural network parameterized by $\phi$.
With denotation $\alpha_i = q_\phi(z_i=1|x)$ and $\beta_k = q_\phi(c=k|x)$, the last two terms in \eqref{GM_elbo} can be expressed in close-form as
\begin{equation*}
KL\left(q_\phi(c|x)||p(c)\right) = \sum_{c=1}^{K}\beta_{c}\log\frac{\beta_{c}}{\pi},
\end{equation*}
\vspace{-4mm}
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&\mathbb{E}_{q_\phi(c|x)}\left[ KL\left(q_\phi(z|x) || p(z|c) \right) \right]\\
&=\!\sum_{c=1}^{K}\beta_{c}\!\sum_{i=1}^{m}\! \left(\! \alpha_{i} \log \!\! \frac{ \alpha_{i} }{ \gamma_{c}^{i}}+\! (1 \!- \alpha_{i}) \log \! \frac{1 \!- \alpha_{i}}{1 \!- \gamma_{c}^{i} }\right),
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
where $\gamma_{c}^{i}$ denotes the $i$-th element of $\gamma_{c}$.
Due to the Bernoulli assumption for the posterior $q_\phi(z|x)$, the commonly used reparameterization trick for Gaussian distribution cannot be used to directly estimate the first term ${\mathbb{E}}_{q_\phi(z|x)}\left[\log p_{\theta}({\mathcal{D}}|z) \right] $ in \eqref{GM_elbo}. Fortunately, inspired by the straight-through gradient estimator in \cite{bengio2013estimating}, we can parameterize the $i$-th element of binary sample $z$ from $q_\phi(z|x)$ as
\begin{equation}\label{x_to_z_BM}
z_i = 0.5\times \left(sign \left(\sigma( g_\phi^i(x) ) - \xi_i \right) + 1\right),
\end{equation}
where $sign(\cdot)$ the is the sign function, which is equal to 1 for nonnegative inputs and -1 otherwise; and $\xi_i \sim \text{Uniform}(0, 1)$ is a uniformly random sample between 0 and 1.
The reparameterization method used above can guarantee generating binary samples. However, backpropagation cannot be used to optimize the lower bound ${\mathcal{L}}$ since the gradient of $sign(\cdot)$ w.r.t. its input is zero almost everywhere. To address this problem, the straight-through(ST) estimator ~\cite{bengio2013estimating} is employed to estimate the gradient for the binary random variables, where the derivative of $z_i$ w.r.t $\phi$ is simply approximated by $0.5\times\frac{\partial \sigma(g_\phi^i(x))}{\partial \phi}$. Thus, the gradients can then be backpropagated through discrete variables. Similar to NASH ~\cite{shen2018nash}, data-dependent noises are also injected into the latent variables when reconstructing the document $x$ so as to obtain more robust binary representations. The entire model of BMSH, including generative and inference parts, is illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:model}(b).
To understand how the mixture-prior model works differently from the simple prior model, we examine the main difference term ${\mathbb{E}}_{q_\phi(c|x)} \left[ KL\left(q_\phi(z|x) || p(z|c) \right) \right]$ in \eqref{GM_elbo}, where $q_{\phi}(c|x)$ is the approximate posterior probability that indicates the document $x$ is generated by the $c$-th component distribution with $c\in \{1, 2, \cdots, K\}$. In the mixture-prior model, the approximate posterior $q_\phi(z|x)$ is compared to all mixture components $p(z|c)={\mathcal{N}}\left(\mu_c, \text{diag}(\sigma^2_c)\right)$. The term ${\mathbb{E}}_{q_\phi(c|x)} \left[ KL\left(q_\phi(z|x) || p(z|c) \right) \right]$ can be understood as the average of all these KL-divergences weighted by the probabilities $q_{\phi}(c|x)$. Thus, comparing to the simple-prior model, the mixture-prior model is endowed with more flexibilities, allowing the documents to be regularized by different mixture components according to their context.
\subsection{Extensions to Supervised Hashing}
When label information is available, it can be leveraged to yield more effective hashing codes since labels provide extra information about the similarities of documents. Specifically, a mapping from the latent representation $z$ to the corresponding label $y$ is learned for each document. The mapping encourages latent representations of documents with the same label to be close in the latent space, while those with different labels to be distant. A classifier built from a two-layer MLP is employed to parameterize this mapping, with its cross-entropy loss denoted by ${\mathcal{L}}_{dis}(z, y)$. Taking the supervised objective into account, the total loss is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eqsupervised}
{\mathcal{L}}_{total} = -{\mathcal{L}} +\alpha {\mathcal{L}}_{dis}(z, y),
\end{equation}
where ${\mathcal{L}} $ is the lower bound arising in GMSH or BMSH model; $\alpha$ controls the relative weight of the two losses. By examining the total loss ${\mathcal{L}}_{total}$, it can be seen that minimizing the loss encourages the model to learn a representation $z$ that accounts for not only the unsupervised content similarities of documents, but also the supervised similarities from the extra label information.
\begin{table*}
\vspace{-3mm}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{23mm}{
\begin{tabular}{|c|cccc|cccc|cccc|}
\toprule
Datasets&\multicolumn{4}{c|}{TMC}&\multicolumn{4}{c|}{20Newsgroups}&\multicolumn{4}{c|}{Reuters}\\
\midrule
Method&16bit&32bit&64bit&128bit&16bit&32bit&64bit&128bit&16bit&32bit&64bit&128bit\\
\midrule
LSH &0.4393&0.4514&0.4553&0.4773&0.0597&0.0666&0.0770&0.0949&0.3215&0.3862&0.4667&0.5194\\
S-RBM&0.5108&0.5166&0.5190&0.5137&0.0604&0.0533&0.0623&0.0642&0.5740&0.6154&0.6177&0.6452\\
SpH &0.6055&0.6281&0.6143&0.5891&0.3200&0.3709&0.3196&0.2716&0.6340&0.6513&0.6290&0.6045\\
STH&0.3947&0.4105&0.4181&0.4123&0.5237&0.5860&0.5806&0.5433&0.7351&0.7554&0.7350&0.6986\\
VDSH&0.6853&0.7108&0.4410&0.5847&0.3904&0.4327&0.1731&0.0522&0.7165&0.7753&0.7456&0.7318\\
NASH&0.6573&0.6921&0.6548&0.5998&0.5108&0.5671&0.5071&0.4664&0.7624&0.7993&0.7812&0.7559\\
\hline
GMSH&0.6736&0.7024&0.7086&0.7237&0.4855&0.5381&0.5869&0.5583&0.7672&0.8183&0.8212&0.7846\\
BMSH&\textbf{0.7062}&\textbf{0.7481}&\textbf{0.7519}&\textbf{0.7450}&\textbf{0.5812}&\textbf{0.6100}&\textbf{0.6008}&\textbf{0.5802}&\textbf{0.7954}&\textbf{0.8286}&\textbf{0.8226}&\textbf{0.7941}\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\caption{The precisions of the top 100 retrieved documents on three datasets with different numbers of hashing bits in unsupervised hashing.}
\vspace{-3mm}
\label{tab:results}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{5cm
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.33]{ng20.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{5cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.33]{tmc.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{5cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.33]{reuters.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{The performance of unsupervised hashing models on three datasets with various numbers of hashing bits.}
\label{drop}
\vspace{-5mm}
\end{figure*}
\section{Related Work}
Existing hashing methods can be categorized into data independent and data dependent methods. A typical example of data independent hashing is the local-sensitive hashing (LSH) ~\cite{datar2004locality}. However, such method usually requires long hashing codes to achieve satisfactory performance. To yield more effective hashing codes, more and more researches focus on data dependent hashing methods, which include unsupervised and supervised methods. Unsupervised hashing methods only use unlabeled data to learn hash functions. For example, spectral hashing (SpH) ~\cite{weiss2009spectral} learns the hash function by imposing balanced and uncorrelated constraints on the learned codes. Iterative quantization (ITQ) ~\cite{gong2013iterative} generates the hashing codes by simultaneously maximizing the variance of each binary bit and minimizing the quantization error. In ~\cite{zhang2010self}, the authors proposed to decompose the learning procedure into two steps: first learning hashing codes for documents via unsupervised learning, then using $\ell$ binary classifiers to predict the $\ell$-bit hashing codes. Since the labels provide useful guidance in learning effective hash functions, supervised hashing methods are proposed to leverage the label information. For instance, binary reconstruction embedding (BRE) ~\cite{kulis2009learning} learns the hash function by minimizing the reconstruction error between the original distances and the hamming distances of the corresponding hashing codes. Supervised hashing with kernels (KSH) ~\cite{liu2012supervised} is a kernel-based method, which utilizes the pairwise information between samples to generate hashing codes by minimizing the hamming distances on similar pairs and maximizing those on dissimilar pairs.
Recently, VDSH ~\cite{chaidaroon2017variational} proposed to use a VAE to learn the latent representations of documents and then use a separate stage to cast the continuous representations into binary codes. While fairly successful, this generative hashing model requires a two-stage training. NASH ~\cite{shen2018nash} proposed to substitute the Gaussian prior in VDSH with a Bernoulli prior to tackle this problem, by using a straight-through estimator ~\cite{bengio2013estimating} to estimate the gradient of neural network involving the binary variables. This model can be trained in an end-to-end manner. Our models differ from VDSH and NASH in that mixture priors are employed to yield better hashing codes, whereas only the simplest priors are used in both VDSH and NASH.
\section{Experiments}
\subsection{Experimental Setups}
{\textbf{Datasets}}
Three public benchmark datasets are used in our experiments. $i)\ Reuters21578$: A dataset consisting of 10788 news documents from 90 different categories; $ii)\ 20Newsgroups$: A collection of 18828 newsgroup posts that are divided into 20 different newsgroups; $iii)\ TMC$: A dataset containing the air traffic reports provided by NASA, which includes 21519 training documents with 22 labels.
{\textbf{Training Details}}
We experiment with the four models proposed in this paper, i.e., GMSH and BMSH for unsupervised hashing, and GMSH-S and BMSH-S for supervised hashing. The same network architectures as VDSH and NASH are used in our experiments to admit a fair comparison. Specifically, a two-layer feed-forward neural network with 500 hidden units and ReLU activation function is employed as the encoder and the extra classifier in the supervised case, while the decoder is the same as that stated in \eqref{decoder1}. Similar to VDSH and NASH \cite{chaidaroon2017variational,shen2018nash}, the TFIDF feature of a document is used as the input to the encoder. The Adam optimizer \cite{kingma2014adam} is used in the training of our models, and its learning rate is set to be $1 \times 10^{-3}$, with a decay rate of 0.96 for every 10000 iterations. The component number $K$ and the parameter $\alpha$ in \eqref{eqsupervised} are determined based on the validation set.
{\textbf{Baselines}}
For unsupervised semantic hashing, we compare the proposed GMSH and BMSH with the following models: locality sensitive hashing (LSH), stack restricted boltzmann machines (S-RBM), spectral hashing (SpH), self-taught hashing (STH), variational deep semantic hashing (VDSH) and neural architecture for semantic hashing(NASH). For supervised semantic hashing, we also compare GMSH-S and BMSH-S with the following baselines: supervised hashing with kernels (KSH) ~\cite{liu2012supervised}, semantic hashing using tags and topic modeling (SHTTM) ~\cite{wang2013semantic}, supervised VDSH and supervised NASH.
\begin{table*}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{18mm}{
\begin{tabular}{|c|cccc|cccc|cccc|}
\toprule
Datasets&\multicolumn{4}{c|}{TMC}&\multicolumn{4}{c|}{20Newsgroups}&\multicolumn{4}{c|}{Reuters}\\
\midrule
Method&16bit&32bit&64bit&128bit&16bit&32bit&64bit&128bit&16bit&32bit&64bit&128bit\\
\midrule
KSH&0.6842&0.7047&0.7175&0.7243&0.5559&0.6103&0.6488&0.6638&0.8376&0.8480&0.8537&0.8620\\
SHTTM&0.6571&0.6485&0.6893&0.6474&0.3235&0.2357&0.1411&0.1299&0.8520&0.8323&0.8271&0.8150\\
VDSH-S&0.7887&0.7883&0.7967&0.8018&0.6791&0.7564&0.6850&0.6916&0.9121&0.9337&0.9407&0.9299\\
NASH-DN-S&0.7946&0.7987&0.8014&0.8139&0.6973&0.8069&0.8213&0.7840&0.9327&0.9380&0.9427&0.9336\\
\hline
GMSH-S&0.7806&0.7929&0.8103&0.8144&0.6972&0.7426&0.7574&0.7690&0.9144&0.9175&0.9414&0.9522\\
BMSH-S&\textbf{0.8051}&\textbf{0.8247}&\textbf{0.8340}&\textbf{0.8310}&\textbf{0.7316}&\textbf{0.8144}&\textbf{0.8216}&\textbf{0.8183}&\textbf{0.9350}&\textbf{0.9640}&\textbf{0.9633}&\textbf{0.9590}\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\caption{The performances of different supervised hashing models on three datasets under different lengths of hashing codes.}
\vspace{-3mm}
\label{tab:su_results}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure*}[]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{5cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.330]{VDSH-S.pdf}
\caption*{(a) VDSH-S}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{5cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.33]{GMSH-S.pdf}
\caption*{(b) GMSH-S}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{5cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.33]{BMSH-S.pdf}
\caption*{(c) BMSH-S}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Visualization of the 32-dimensional document latent semantic embeddings learned by VDSH-S, GMSH-S and MBSH-S on 20Newsgroups dataset. Each data point in the figure denotes a document, with each color representing one category. The number shown with the color is the ground-true category ID.}
\vspace{-4mm}
\label{fig:embedding}
\end{figure*}
{\textbf{Evaluation Metrics}}
For every document from the testing set, we retrieve similar documents from the training set based on the hamming distance between their hashing codes. For each query, 100 closest documents are retrieved, among which the documents sharing the same label as the query are deemed as the relevant results. The ratio between the number of relevant ones and the total number, which is 100, is calculated as the similarity search precision. The averaged value over all testing documents is then reported. The retrieval precisions under the cases of 16 bits, 32 bits, 64 bits, 128 bits hashing codes are evaluated, respectively.
\subsection{Performance Evaluation of Unsupervised Semantic Hashing}
Table \ref{tab:results} shows the performance of the proposed and baseline models on three datasets under the unsupervised setting, with the number of hashing bits ranging from 16 to 128. From the experimental results, it can be seen that GMSH outperforms previous models under all considered scenarios on both TMC and Reuters. It also achieves better performance on 20Newsgroups when the length of hashing codes is large, e.g. 64 or 128. Comparing to VDSH using the simple Gaussian prior, the proposed GMSH using a Gaussian mixture prior exhibits better retrieval performance overall. This strongly demonstrates the benefits of using mixture priors on the task of semantic hashing. One possible explanation is that the mixture prior enables the documents from different categories to be regularized by different distributions, guiding the model to learn more distinguishable representations for documents from different categories. It can be further observed that among all methods, BMSH achieves the best performance under different datasets and hashing codes length consistently. This may be attributed to the imposed Bernoulli mixture prior, which offers both the advantages of producing more distinguishable codes with a mixture prior and end-to-end training enabled by a Bernoulli prior. BMSH integrates the merits of NASH and GMSH, and thus is more suitable for the hashing task.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{supervised.pdf}
\caption{The retrieval precisions of GMSH and BMSH on three datasets in both unsupervised and supervised scenarios.}
\label{fig:supervised_ours}
\vspace{-5mm}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{drop} shows how retrieval precisions vary with the number of hashing bits on the three datasets. It can be observed that as the number increases from 32 to 128, the retrieval precisions of most previous models tend to decrease. This phenomenon is especially obvious for VDSH, in which the precisions on all three datasets drop by a significant margin. This interesting phenomenon has been reported in previous works \cite{shen2018nash,chaidaroon2017variational,wang2013semantic,liu2012supervised}, and the reason could be overfitting since the model with long hashing codes is more likely to overfitting \cite{chaidaroon2017variational,shen2018nash}. However, it can be seen that our model is more robust to the number of hashing bits. When the number is increased to 64 or 128, the performance of our models is kept almost unchanged. This may be also attributed to the mixture priors imposed in our models, which can regularize the models more effectively.
\begin{table*}
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|cc|cc|cc|}
\hline
\multirow{2}*{\diagbox{$K$}{D}}&\multicolumn{2}{c|}{20Newsgroups}&\multicolumn{2}{c|}{TMC}&\multicolumn{2}{c|}{Reuters}\\
\cline{2-7}
~&GMSH&BMSH&GMSH&BMSH&GMSH&BMSH\\
\hline
5&0.4708&0.5977&0.6886&0.7492&0.7888&0.8152\\
10&0.4778&0.6007&0.6862&0.7479&0.8039&0.8226\\
20&0.5381&0.6100&0.6883&\textbf{0.7495}&0.8182&0.\textbf{8286}\\
40&0.5197&0.6015&0.7024&0.7481&0.8169&0.8258\\
80&0.5188&0.6012&\textbf{0.7033}&0.7467&0.8087&0.8253\\
GT&\textbf{0.5381}&\textbf{0.6100}&0.6960&0.7443&\textbf{0.8183}&0.8279\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Precisions of top 100 retrieved documentswith different numberer of clusters, $K$ denotes the number of components, D represents datasets, GT represents the ground truth number of classes for each dataset.}
\vspace{-5mm}
\label{tab:cluster}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Performance Evaluation of Supervised Semantic Hashing}
We evaluate the performance of supervised hashing in this section. Table \ref{tab:su_results} shows the performances of different supervised hashing models on three datasets under different lengths of hashing codes. We observe that all of the VAE-based generative hashing models (i.e VDSH, NASH, GMSH and BMSH) exhibit better performance, demonstrating the effectiveness of generative models on the task of semantic hashing. It can be also seen that BMSH-S achieves the best performance, suggesting that the advantages of Bernoulli mixture priors can also be extended to the supervised scenarios.
To gain a better understanding about the relative performance gain of the four proposed models, the retrieval precisions of GMSH, BMSH, GMSH-S and BMSH-S using 32-bit hashing codes on the three datasets are plotted together in Figure \ref{fig:supervised_ours}. It can be obviously seen that GMSH-S and BMSH-S outperform GMSH and BMSH by a substantial margin, respectively. This suggests that the proposed generative hashing models can also leverage the label information to improve the hashing codes' quality.
\subsection{ Impacts of the Component Number}\label{impact}
To investigate the impacts of component number, experiments are conducted for GMSH and BMSH under different values of $K$. For demonstration convenience, the length of hashing codes is fixed to 32. Table \ref{tab:cluster} shows the precisions of top 100 retrieved documents when the number of components $K$ is set to different values. We can see that the retrieval precisions of the proposed models, especially the BMSH, are quite robust to this parameter. For BMSH, the difference between the best and worst precisions on the three datasets are 0.0123, 0.0052 and 0.0134, respectively, which are small comparing to the gains that BMSH has achieved. One exception is the performance of GMSH on 20Newsgroups dataset. However, as seen from Table \ref{tab:cluster}, as long as the number $K$ is not too small, the performance loss is still acceptable. It is worth noting that the worst performance of GMSH on 20Newsgroups is 0.4708, which is still better than VDSH's 0.4327 as in Table \ref{tab:results}. For the BMSH model, the performance is stable across all the considered datasets and $K$ values.
\subsection{Visualization of Learned Embeddings}
To understand the performance gains of the proposed models better, we visualize the learned representations of VDSH-S, GMSH-S and BMSH-S on 20Newsgroups dataset. UMAP ~\cite{mcinnes2018umap-software} is used to project the 32-dimensional latent representations into a 2-dimensional space, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:embedding}. Each data point in the figure denotes a document, with each color representing one category. The number shown with the color is the ground truth category ID. It can be observed from Figure \ref{fig:embedding} (a) and (b) that more embeddings are clustered correctly when the Gaussian mixture prior is used. This confirms the advantages of using mixture priors in the task of hashing. Furthermore, it is observed that the latent embeddings learned by BMSH-S can be clustered almost perfectly. In contrast, many embeddings are found to be clustered incorrectly for the other two models. This observation is consistent with the conjecture that mixture prior and end-to-end training are both useful for semantic hashing.
\section{Conclusions}
In this paper, deep generative models with mixture priors were proposed for the tasks of semantic hashing. We first proposed to use a Gaussian mixture prior, instead of the standard Gaussian prior in VAE, to learn the representations of documents. A separate step was then used to cast the continuous latent representations into binary hashing codes. To avoid the requirement of a separate casting step, we further proposed to use the Bernoulli mixture prior, which offers the advantages of both mixture prior and the end-to-end training. Comparing to strong baselines on three public datasets, the experimental results indicate that the proposed methods using mixture priors outperform existing models by a substantial margin. Particularly, the semantic hashing model with Bernoulli mixture prior (BMSH) achieves state-of-the-art results on all the three datasets considered in this paper.
\section{Acknowledgements}
This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) under Grant No. 61806223, U1711262, U1501252, U1611264 and U1711261, and National Key R\&D Program of China (2018YFB1004404).
\nocite{fu2019cyclical}
|
\subsection{Experimental Setup}
Functions \haskell{linkTree}, \haskell{cutTree}, \haskell{link}, \haskell{cut}, \haskell{connected}, and the ones described as ``helper functions" were implemented by the author in Haskell and compiled with \haskell{ghc} version 8.0.1 with optimisation \haskell{-O2}. The experiments were performed on a 2.2 GHz Intel Core i7 MacBook Pro with 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3 running macOS High Sierra version 10.13.1 (17B1003). We imported the following libraries into our code from the online package repository Hackage: \cite{HaskellFT} code for finger trees, \cite{HaskellSet} for conventional sets and \cite{HaskellEdison} for lazy sets.
The running time of a given computation was determined by the mean of three executions.
\subsection{Data structure}
The values maintained by the data structures (sets and finger trees) are stored as fixed-precision \haskell{Int} types, holding values from $-2^{63}$ up to $2^{63}-1$ although we test only the positive values. The structures are initialized with a fixed number of nodes (or vertices) $n$; this number does not change during the execution. This allows us to know the initial size of the forest and we subtract it from the benchmarking.
Since \textsc{FunSeqSet}\ is not called by any application, the random generation of nodes for \haskell{link} or \haskell{cu}t will not necessarily be effective. Actually, around 70\% of the generated nodes $x$ and $y$ passed to \haskell{link} and \haskell{cut} were not valid, that is, their result turned out to be the original forest. In order to overcome this, we stored the randomly generated nodes that were effective into plain files and from there benchmarking the dynamic tree operations.
\subsection{Incremental operations}
We start with an empty forest (just singleton-trees); given $n=20,000$ nodes we perform $1 \ldots 20,000$ \haskell{link} operations. Upon reaching a target length, we plot the total time taken. Then, we divide the time taken by the number of operations to calculate the time per operation and then multiply it by a constant (x1000) to make the curve visible in the same chart, Fig~\ref{fig:incLink}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{./images/plotLink}
\end{center}
\caption{Sequence of {\haskell{link}}s from empty forest up to a single tree in such forest}
\label{fig:incLink}
\end{figure}
\textit{\emph{Results}}. The behaviour of the curve regarding the time per \haskell{link} operation shows that in practice it takes $\mathcal{O}(1)$, as expected. Same applies to the case when $n$ operations are applied in bulk, that is $\mathcal{O}(n)$.
\subsection{Fully dynamic operations}
We start with the incremental process as before for $n=10,000$. Then, for \haskell{cut} we start in the opposite direction, that is, cutting from a single tree in the forest until only singleton-trees remain in such forest. To this performance we subtract the time taken for the incremental bit. For \haskell{connected} performance we compute first an interleaved operation of \haskell{link} and \haskell{cut} (not necessarily in this order). We measure the time taken for \haskell{connected} followed by the corresponding \haskell{link} or \haskell{cut} and then we subtract the interleaved process. Figures \ref{fig:sub1} and \ref{fig:sub2} show our three dynamic operations in bulk and per operation.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{./images/plotEach}
\caption{In bulk}
\label{fig:sub1}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{./images/plotOpsIndividual}
\caption{Per operation}
\label{fig:sub2}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Time taken by operation}
\label{fig:EachOp}
\end{figure}
\textit{\emph{Results}}. We observe that \haskell{cut} and \haskell{connected} obey the same pattern as \haskell{link}. That is, $\mathcal{O}(1)$ time per operation being \haskell{connected} the fastest of the dynamic tree operations, as expected. From the above analyses, we notice that \haskell{link} performs better when it is interleaved with \haskell{cut}. To see this behaviour closer, we present the bulk and individual cases in the following charts, Figures \ref{fig:ssub1} and \ref{fig:ssub2}, varying the forest size under the same amount of operations.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{./images/plotForests}
\caption{In bulk}
\label{fig:ssub1}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{./images/plotLCForests}
\caption{Per operation}
\label{fig:ssub2}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Time taken when \haskell{link} and \haskell{cut} are interleaved with different forest sizes}
\label{fig:EachOp}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Selection of the set data structure}
The set-like data structure is crucial in our implementation and testing of \textsc{FunSeqSet} since is the search engine for the nodes when any operation is applied to a forest. There are plenty of implementations for such set-like structure, mostly as binary balanced search trees. In our case, where Haskell is a lazy-evaluation language by default, we select two main choices to compare: \haskell{Data.Set} which is a strict data type definition and \haskell{Data.Edison.Coll.LazyPairingHeap} which is semi-lazy or semi-strict data type. Figure \ref{fig:plotSets} shows the performance for each.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{./images/plotSets}
\end{center}
\caption{Dynamic operations through different sets structures as monoidal annotations}
\label{fig:plotSets}
\end{figure}
The above curves show that, although by a constant factor, laziness speeds up the running time in the computation of dynamic tree operations through the set-like data structures.
\section{Motivation}
\label{Sec-Motivation}
Inserting and deleting edges are among the most fundamental and also most commonly encountered operations in trees, especially in the dynamic setting. In this paper we deal with trees of degree $n$ and not necessarily rooted or with a specific shape. In \cite{WerneckR-PhD}, Werneck gives a thorough explanation and classification for such a trees and the performance for the aforementioned operations of insertion (i.e. link) and deletion (i.e. cut). For all the cases, the running time is $\mathcal{O}(\log n)$ per operation where $n$ is the number of vertices.
This encourages simplicity and efficiency at the time of the computation so any application can use them. In this section, we motivate the approach of functional programming for these angles.
\subsection{Applications where dynamic trees operations take place}
Since the definition of the \emph{dynamic trees problem} data structure by Sleator and Tarjan \cite{DS-DynTs}, two major structural operations arise: \emph{link} and \emph{cut}, therefore the term \emph{Link-Cut} trees for this data structure. Besides obvious applications like \textsc{Union-Split-Find} problems \cite{LaiK-ME}, dynamic trees computations are frequently needed in a wide spectrum of applications, to name a few:
\begin{itemize}
\item Flows on Networks; (\cite{LittleBook}, \cite{VertexConn-Nanongkai}) link and cut operations are used to maintain the residual capacities of edges and that of changing labels in the network.
\item Rearrangement of Labelled Trees; recently applied to the problem of comparing trees representing the evolutionary histories of cancerous tumors. Bernardini et al. (\cite{RearrangeLabelledTs}) analyse two updating operations: \emph{link-and-cut} and \emph{permutation}. The former is due to transform the topology of the input trees whereas the latter operation updates the labels without mutating its topology.
\item Geomorphology; Ophelders et al. \cite{Geomorphology} models the evolution of channel networks. Linking and cutting trees are used to model the dynamic behaviour of the growth and shrunk of areas in a river bed.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Dynamic trees in Functional Programming}
Literature has shown a lot about updating edges in trees and graphs, see for instance the handbook for data structures regarding this topic in \cite{DynTs}, but practically little work has been done for the functional programming, specifically for the dynamic setting.
Some efforts have been done in the real of functional programming. In the case of graph structures, Erwig \cite{InductiveGs} introduces a functional representation of graphs where a graph is defined by induction. Although an interface and some applications have been provided, none of these refer to the dynamic trees problem. For the case of trees, Kmett \cite{LinkCut-Kmett} defines a functional programming version (i.e. in Haskell) of that of the one defined by Sleator and Tarjan \cite{DS-DynTs}; unfortunately Kmett's work relies completely on monads and stateful computation making difficult to reason about the operations and its potential parallelization. Also, the element of a forest is missing in Kmett's work.
\subsection{Data types for trees}
In order to manage a sequence of pairs (representing an Euler-tour tree) we define pairs of type \haskell{a} as \haskell{(a,a)} on the leaves of a finger tree \haskell{FT}\ where the inner nodes are actual \emph{sets} of type \haskell{Set (a,a)} to support searching within the sequence. We shall denote a prefix \haskell{S.} on sets to refer that data types or functions next to the dot belong to library \haskell{Data.Set} imported as \haskell{S}. We then define such a structure as follows, with its corresponding initial element, the empty tree
\begin{lstlisting}
type TreeEF a = FingerTree (S.Set (a,a)) (a,a)
emptyTree :: Ord a => TreeEF a
emptyTree = FT.empty
\end{lstlisting}
\subsection{Helper functions}
We consider the first pair within an Euler-tour tree as the root of a tree, that is
\begin{lstlisting}
root :: Ord a => TreeEF a -> Maybe a
root tree = case viewl tree of
EmptyL -> Nothing
x :< _ -> Just ( fst x )
\end{lstlisting}
Since \haskell{viewl} takes constant time, \haskell{root} also returns the successful vertex or \haskell{Nothing} in constant time since we just pattern match on its data constructors \haskell{EmptyL} and \haskell{(:<)}.
When linking two trees, $t_u$ and $t_v$, we consider $t_u$ as a rooted tree at vertex $u$ prior to the insertion of a new edge $(u,v)$. The following is the snippet for such a function, called \haskell{reroot}.
\begin{lstlisting}
reroot :: Ord a => TreeEF a -> a -> TreeEF a
reroot tree vertex = case (FT.search pred tree) of
Position left _ right -> root <| (right >< left)
_ -> tree
where root = (vertex,vertex)
pred before _ = (S.member root) before
\end{lstlisting}
Recall that prefixes with a dot mean that the following functions or types are members of the predefined library through its identifier. In the case of \haskell{FT.search}, \haskell{search} is a function imported from \haskell{Data.FingerTree} through the prefix \haskell{FT}. In particular, \haskell{search} returns the data constructor \haskell{Position} following its type, according to Table~\ref{tab-signatures}. The underscore \haskell{_}, one line later, is a wild card. It works as a guard similar to the keyword \haskell{otherwise}, which means that any result from \haskell{search} other than \haskell{Position} will lead to \haskell{tree}, that is, the original tree passed as argument to \haskell{reroot}.
So, rerooting a tree $t$ at vertex $v$ is either $t$, when $v$ is not in $t$, or the pair $(v,v)$ inserted from the left (i.e. the very first element in the sequence) to the concatenation of the right and left subtrees when splitting $t$ at $v$. Since \haskell{reroot} involves one \haskell{search}, one $\triangleleft$ and one $\bowtie$ (i.e. $\mathcal{O}(\log n) + \mathcal{O}(1) + \mathcal{O}(\log n)$), its performance is $\mathcal{O}(\log n)$.
Testing whether a pair (i.e. edge or vertex) belongs to a tree (i.e. \haskell{FT}) requires only a boolean answer rather than splitting such a tree, that is,
\begin{lstlisting}
pairIn :: (Measured (S.Set a) a, Ord a)
=> a -> FingerTree (S.Set a) a
-> Bool
pairIn p monFT = case (FT.search pred monFT) of
Position _ _ _ -> True
_ -> False
where
pred before _ = (S.member p) before
\end{lstlisting}
evaluates the case when the pair \haskell{p} (either a vertex or an edge) is in the given \haskell{FT} . As soon as \haskell{p} if found or the bottom of the \haskell{FT}\ is reached, a boolean value is returned. Since a single \haskell{search} is called, \haskell{pairIn} takes $\mathcal{O}(\log n)$.
\subsection{Main functions}
We show that the procedures \emph{link\{v,w\}} and \emph{cut\{v,w\}} by Tarjan in \cite{DynTsETT} regarding Euler-tour Trees (ETT for short) can be implemented declaratively.
We start with the \emph{link} operation:
\begin{displayquote}
Specifically, suppose $link(\{v,w\})$ is selected. Let $T_1$ and $T_2$ be the trees containing $v$ and $w$ respectively, and let $L_1$ and $L_2$ be the lists representing $T_1$ and $T_2$. We split $L_1$ just after $(v,v)$, into lists $L_1^1,L_1^2$, and we split $L_2$ just after $(w,w)$ into $L_2^1,L_2^2$. Then we form the list representing the combined tree by catenating the six lists $L_1^2,L_1^1,[(v,w)],L_2^2,L_2^1,[(w,v)]$ in order. Thus linking takes two splits and five catenations; two of the latter are the special case of catenation with singleton lists.
\end{displayquote}
We call this procedure \haskell{linkTree} and defined like
\begin{lstlisting}
linkTree :: Ord a => a -> TreeEF a -> a -> TreeEF a -> Maybe (TreeEF a)
linkTree u tu v tv = case (pairIn (u,u) tu, pairIn (v,v) tv) of
(False, _ ) -> Nothing
(_ , False) -> Nothing
(True , True ) -> Just £
let from = reroot tu u
(Position left _ right) = FT.search pred tv
in ((left >| (v,v)) >| (v,u)) >< from >< ((u,v) <| right)
where
pred before _ = (S.member (v,v)) before
\end{lstlisting}
The first four lines confirm that the vertices \haskell{u} and \haskell{v} belong to their corresponding trees \haskell{tu} and \haskell{tv}. The tree \haskell{from} is transformed in such a way that left vertex (\haskell{u}) is now the root. Now, by \haskell{search}ing vertex \haskell{v} in tree \haskell{tv} (i.e. \haskell{FT.search pred tv}) we are actually splitting tree \haskell{tv} into subtrees \haskell{left} and \haskell{right}. Now, the remaining task is simply gluing all subtrees with the new edges in order. Thus, in our function we required two splits (one local and one from \haskell{reroot}) and three catenations ($\bowtie$: two local and one from \haskell{reroot}) rather than five from Tarjan's procedure. Like Tarjan's procedure, our function \haskell{linkTree} guarantees termination as it is not recursive, hence is computed in a $\mathcal{O}(1)$ number of steps. Unlike Tarjan's procedure, our function is not only the declarative specification but the actual computation of the \emph{link} operation of dynamic trees problem with a reduced number of concatenations, that is, $\mathcal{O}(\log n)$ amortised.
Now, for the \emph{cut} operation, following Tarjan's definition we have:
\begin{displayquote}
Similarly, suppose we wish to perform $cut(\{v,w\})$. Let $T$ be the tree containing $\{v,w\}$, represented by list $L$. We split $L$ before and after $(v,w)$ and $(w,v)$, into $L^1$, $[(v,w)]$, $L^2$, $[(w,v)]$, $L^3$ (or symmetrically $L^1$, $[(w,v)]$, $L^2$, $[(v,w)]$, $L^3$). The lists representing the two trees formed by the cut are $L^2$ and the list formed by catenating $L^1$ and $L^3$. Thus cutting takes four splits (of which two are the special case of splitting off one element) and one catenation.
\end{displayquote}
We call the above procedure \haskell{cutTree} and is defined as
\begin{lstlisting}
cutTree :: Ord a => a -> a -> TreeEF a -> Maybe (TreeEF a,TreeEF a)
cutTree u v tree = case FT.search predUV tree of
Position left _ right ->
case (FT.search predVU left ) of
Position leftL _ rightL -> -- (v,u) is on the left
Just (rightL, leftL >< right)
_ -> -- (v,u) is on the right
case (FT.search predVU right) of
Position leftR _ rightR ->
Just (leftR, left >< rightR)
_ -> Nothing -- BAD Formed tree since (v,u) is missing
_ -> Nothing -- BAD Formed tree since (u,v) is missing
where
predUV before _ = (S.member (u,v)) before
predVU before _ = (S.member (v,u)) before
\end{lstlisting}
With the help of case analyses, we verify that input edge $(u,v)$ (and its corresponding $(v,u)$) is a member of the input tree \haskell{tree}. If that is not the case, \haskell{Nothing} is return, meaning the input edge is not in \haskell{tree}. Otherwise, like in Tarjan's procedure, we compute one catenation and unlike Tarjan, we perform at most three splits, that is, in the worst case we have $1 \times \mathcal{O}(\bowtie) + 3 \times \mathcal{O}($\haskell{search}$)$, that is, $\mathcal{O}(\log n)$ amortised per \haskell{cutTree} operation.
\subsection{Managing forests}
Recalling the \emph{forest property} within the context of the dynamic trees problem, we are at the point to define the structure that holds everything in place,
\begin{lstlisting}
type ForestEF a = FingerTree (S.Set (a,a)) (TreeEF a)
emptyForest :: Ord a => ForestEF a
emptyForest = FT.empty
\end{lstlisting}
We take advantage once again of the \haskell{FT}\ benefits about updates and look ups of, in this case, trees as atomic elements. Prior to performing the update operations within a forest, we define the lookup ones.
When looking for a single vertex $v$ (i.e. the pair \haskell{(v,v)}), we simply apply the \haskell{search} function from \haskell{Data.FingerTree} to the forest \haskell{f} provided as second argument. Recall, from its Haskell type, that the simplest element in \haskell{f} is a tree (i.e. an ETT). Then, the successful search on a \haskell{FT}\ returns three elements: left subtree, searched element, and the right subtree. In this case, the left and right subtrees are actually subforests which are discarded. We then return \haskell{tree}, the tree containing vertex $v$ and its root wrapped as \haskell{Maybe} type. In case of unsuccessful search, we simply return \haskell{Nothing}.
\begin{lstlisting}
searchFor :: Ord a => a -> ForestEF a -> Maybe (TreeEF a, a)
searchFor v f =
case FT.search pred f of
Position _ tree _ -> Just (tree, fromJust (root tree) )
_ -> Nothing
where
pred before _ = (S.member (v,v)) before
\end{lstlisting}
Since we just apply \haskell{search} once, this function takes $\mathcal{O}(\log n)$.
Now, for the claimed forest property for dynamic trees problem, we define the function \haskell{connected} as the following case analysis. We input two vertices \haskell{x} and \haskell{y}, as an edge, and a forest \haskell{f}. If the search of any of the vertices \haskell{x} or \haskell{y} on \haskell{f} is unsuccessful we return \haskell{Nothing}, otherwise we test equality on the roots of the returning trees. If both roots turn out to be the same then claim that edge $\{x,y\} \in f$, specifically $\{x,y\}$ is in the same component; on the other hand, if roots are different we return the corresponding trees (and their roots) altogether with \haskell{False} as an answer to the connectivity question within the forest.
\begin{lstlisting}
type PairTreeVertex a = (TreeEF a, a, TreeEF a, a)
connected :: Ord a => a -> a -> ForestEF a -> (Bool, Maybe (PairTreeVertex a))
connected x y f =
case (searchFor x f, searchFor y f) of
(Nothing , _ ) -> (False, Nothing)
(_ , Nothing ) -> (False, Nothing)
(Just (tx,rx) , Just (ty,ry)) -> if rx == ry
then (True, Just(tx,rx,tx,rx))
else (False, Just(tx,rx,ty,ry))
\end{lstlisting}
We have applied \haskell{searchFor} twice, hence \haskell{connected} is performed in $\mathcal{O}(\log n)$ amortised.
We proceed to define the update operations over a forest. In the case of a \emph{link}, we firstly pattern match the trivial case (i.e. input vertices are the same) and cases for whether the new edge is already in the same component (i.e. same tree). On an unsuccessful connectivity, we perform \haskell{link} through \haskell{linkTree}, otherwise we return the original forest \haskell{f}. Returning the same input forest does not offer feedback when unsuccessful linking but allows the computation of dynamic operations as a sequence fluently.
\begin{lstlisting}
link :: Ord a => a -> a -> ForestEF a -> ForestEF a
link x y f
| x == y = f
| otherwise =
case connected x y f of
(False, Just (tx,rx,ty,ry)) -> case (linkTree x tx y ty) of
Nothing -> f
Just result -> linkAll result
_ -> f
where
Position lf' _ rf' = FT.search predX f
Position lf _ rf = FT.search predY (lf' >< rf')
linkAll tree = tree <| (lf >< rf)
predX before _ = (S.member (x,x)) before
predY before _ = (S.member (y,y)) before
\end{lstlisting}
The overall performance of a \emph{link} operation is two splits and two catenations alongside the performance of \haskell{connected} and \haskell{linkTree}, that is, $2\times \mathcal{O}(\log n) + 2\times \mathcal{O}(\log n) + \mathcal{O}(\log n) + \mathcal{O}(\log n)$. Since this function is static at runtime, the performance for \haskell{link} is $\mathcal{O}(\log n)$ amortised.
Finally, the \haskell{cut} operation over forests. Like \haskell{link}, we case analysis on the trivial case and on connectivity. If the latter is successful we perform \haskell{cutTree}. Again, if cutting a tree is not possible we return the same input forest to allow fluency when applying a sequence of operations over a forest.
\begin{lstlisting}
cut :: Ord a => a -> a -> ForestEF a -> ForestEF a
cut x y f
| x == y = f
| otherwise =
case connected x y f of
(True, Just (tx,_,_,_)) -> case (cutTree x y tx) of
Nothing -> f
Just result -> buildForest result
_ -> f
where
buildForest (t2,t3) = t2 <| (t3 <| (lf >< rf))
Position lf _ rf = FT.search pred f
pred before _ = (S.member (x,x)) before
\end{lstlisting}
The overall performance of a \emph{cut} operation is one split, one catenation, one connectivity testing and the application of \haskell{cutTree} once, that is, $\mathcal{O}(\log n) + \mathcal{O}(\log n) + \mathcal{O}(\log n) + \mathcal{O}(\log n)$. Since this function is static at runtime, the performance for \haskell{cut} is $\mathcal{O}(\log n)$ amortised.
\subsection{Final remarks}
For the first time, the purely functional programming approach is discussed for the dynamic trees problem, in particular for the linearisation case. All data structures we discuss above can solve the dynamic connectivity problem for trees maintaining a forest under a finite sequence of edge insertions and deletions and supporting queries asking whether two vertices belong to the same tree or not. We have presented \textsc{FunSeqSet} , a new approach to two existent functional data structures (i.e. finger trees and sets) for maintaining dynamic trees. This structure can manage $k$-degree trees, rooted or unrooted persistently whilst solving the dynamic trees problem.
Although the updates are conceptually very simple, namely \haskell{link} and \haskell{cut}, the proof that both indeed take $\mathcal{O}(\log n)$ time is rather inherited from the core structures. Such definitions are acyclic and involve $\mathcal{O}(1)$ number of steps to perform each. Our experimental analysis has shown that the three operations we have implemented meet the theoretical bounds of $\mathcal{O}(\log n)$. Also, a native mechanism in the Haskell programming language, the lazy evaluation, is a crucial factor to achieve such performance. Despite the fact that the \haskell{link} operation is the slowest, it still runs within the $\mathcal{O}(\log n)$ bound.
\subsection{Further work}
Uniqueness on edges allow to carry labels, therefore \textsc{FunSeqSet}\ could solve the dynamic trees problem from other approaches such as path-decomposition (i.e. link-cut trees) and tree-contraction.
Parallelism can play an important speed up when calling functions such \haskell{connected}. Recalling the its first lines, we have
\begin{lstlisting} [mathescape]
connected x y forest =
case (searchFor x forest, searchFor y forest) of
$\ldots$
\end{lstlisting}
Since the result of the leftist \haskell{searchFor} is independent from the right one, both are suitable candidates to be evaluated in parallel. The pending research here is the time and space analysis between the sequential (both strict and lazy) against the parallel cases.
\section{Introduction}
\input{sections/intro/intro}
\section{Fundamentals}
\input{sections/fundamentals/fundamentals}
\section{Implementation}
\input{sections/implem/ETTfun}
\section{Experimental Analysis}
\input{sections/experimental/experimental}
\section{Conclusions and Further Work}
\input{sections/conclusion/conclusion}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
The NLP community is revisiting the role of linguistic structure in applications with the advent of contextual word representations (\textsc{cwr}s\xspace) derived from pretraining language models on large corpora~\cite{Peters:18,Radford:18,Howard:18,Devlin:18}.
Recent work has shown that downstream task performance may benefit from explicitly injecting a syntactic inductive bias into model architectures \citep{Kuncoro:18}, even when \textsc{cwr}s\xspace are also used \cite{Strubell:18}.
However, high quality linguistic structure annotation at a large scale remains expensive---a trade-off needs to be made between the quality of the annotations and the computational expense of obtaining them.
Shallow syntactic structures (\citealp{Abney:91}; also called chunk sequences) offer a viable middle ground, by providing a flat, non-hierarchical approximation to phrase-syntactic trees (see Fig.~\ref{fig:chunk_tree} for an example).
These structures can be obtained efficiently, and with high accuracy, using sequence labelers.
In this paper we consider shallow syntax to be a proxy for linguistic structure.
\begin{figure}
\footnotesize
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.37]{chunk-tree.pdf}
\caption{
A sentence with its phrase-syntactic tree (brown) and shallow syntactic (chunk) annotations (red).
Nodes in the tree which percolate down as chunk labels are in red.
Not all tokens in the sentence get chunk labels; e.g., punctuation is not part of a chunk.}
\label{fig:chunk_tree}
\end{figure}
While shallow syntactic chunks are almost as ubiquitous as part-of-speech tags in standard NLP pipelines \cite{Jurafsky:00}, their relative merits in the presence of \textsc{cwr}s\xspace remain unclear.
We investigate the role of these structures using two methods.
First, we enhance the ELMo architecture \citep{Peters:18b} to allow pretraining on predicted shallow syntactic parses, instead of just raw text, so that contextual embeddings make use of shallow syntactic context (\sect{sec:pretraining}).
Our second method involves classical addition of chunk features to \textsc{cwr}\xspace-infused architectures for four different downstream tasks (\S\ref{sec:shallow_features}).
Shallow syntactic information is obtained automatically using a highly accurate model (97\% $F_1$ on standard benchmarks).
In both settings, we observe only modest gains on three of the four downstream tasks relative to ELMo-only baselines (\sect{sec:experiments}).
Recent work has probed the knowledge encoded in \textsc{cwr}s\xspace and found they capture a surprisingly large amount of syntax~\cite{Blevins:18,Liu:19,Tenney:18}.
We further examine the contextual embeddings obtained from the enhanced architecture and a shallow syntactic context, using black-box probes from \citet{Liu:19}.
Our analysis indicates that our shallow-syntax-aware contextual embeddings do not transfer to linguistic tasks any more easily than ELMo embeddings (\sect{sec:probes}).
Overall, our findings show that while shallow syntax can be somewhat useful, ELMo-style pretraining discovers representations which make \textit{additional} awareness of shallow syntax largely redundant.
\section{Pretraining with Shallow Syntactic Annotations}
\label{sec:pretraining}
We briefly review the shallow syntactic structures used in this work, and then present a model architecture to obtain e\textbf{m}beddings from shallow \textbf{Syn}tactic \textbf{C}ontext (\textbf{mSynC}\xspace).
\subsection{Shallow Syntax}
\label{sec:chunks}
Base phrase chunking is a cheap sequence-labeling--based alternative to full syntactic parsing, where the sequence consists of non-overlapping labeled segments (Fig.~\ref{fig:chunk_tree} includes an example.)
Full syntactic trees can be converted into such shallow syntactic chunk sequences using a deterministic procedure \cite{Jurafsky:00}.
\citet{Tjong:00} offered a rule-based transformation deriving non-overlapping chunks from phrase-structure trees as found in the Penn Treebank \citep{Marcus:93}.
The procedure percolates some syntactic phrase nodes from a phrase-syntactic tree to the phrase in the leaves of the tree.
All overlapping embedded phrases are then removed, and the remainder of the phrase gets the percolated label---this usually corresponds to the head word of the phrase.
In order to obtain shallow syntactic annotations on a large corpus, we train a BiLSTM-CRF model \cite{Lample:16,Peters:17}, which achieves 97\% $F_1$ on the CoNLL 2000 benchmark test set.
The training data is obtained from the CoNLL 2000 shared task \cite{Tjong:00}, as well as the remaining sections (except \S 23 and \S 20) of the Penn Treebank, using the official script for chunk generation.\footnote{\url{https://www.clips.uantwerpen.be/conll2000/chunking/}}
The standard task definition from the shared task includes eleven chunk labels, as shown in Table \ref{tab:chunk_labels}.
\begin{table}[tbh]
\centering
\begin{tabulary}{\columnwidth}{@{}l rr@{}}
\toprule
Label & \% Occurrence \\%& Average Width
\midrule
Noun Phrase (\texttt{NP}) & 51.7\\
Verb Phrase (\texttt{VP}) & 20.0\\
Prepositional Phrase (\texttt{PP}) & 19.8 \\
Adverbial Phrase (\texttt{ADVP}) & 3.7\\
Subordinate Clause (\texttt{SBAR}) & 2.1\\
Adjective Phrase (\texttt{ADJP}) & 1.9\\
\midrule[0.03em]
Verb Particles (\texttt{PRT}) & 0.5\\
Conjunctive Phrase (\texttt{CONJ}) & 0.06\\
Interjective Phrase (\texttt{INTJ}) & 0.03\\
List Marker (\texttt{LST}) & 0.01\\
Unlike Coordination Phrase (\texttt{UCP}) & 0.002 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabulary}
\caption{Shallow syntactic chunk phrase types from CoNLL 2000 shared task \citep{Tjong:00} and their occurrence \% in the training data. \swabha{Also add averg width and frequency of occurrence}}
\label{tab:chunk_labels}
\end{table}
\subsection{Pretraining Objective}
\label{sec:training}
Traditional language models are estimated to maximize the likelihood of each word $x_i$ given the words that precede it, $p(x_i \mid \seq{x}_{<i})$.
Given a corpus that is annotated with shallow syntax, we propose to condition on both the preceding words \emph{and} their annotations.
We associate with each word $x_i$ three additional variables (denoted $c_i$): the indices of the beginning and end of the last completed chunk \emph{before} $x_i$, and its label.
For example, in Fig.~\ref{fig:chunks}, $c_4=\langle 3, 3, \text{VP}\rangle$ for $x_4=\text{the}$.
Chunks, $\seq{c}$ are only used as conditioning context via $p(x_i \mid \seq{x}_{<i}, \seq{c}_{\leqslant i})$;
they are not predicted.\footnote{A different objective could consider predicting the next chunks, along with the next word.
However, this chunker would have access to strictly less information than usual, since the entire sentence would no longer be available.}
Because the $\seq{c}$ labels depend on the entire sentence through the CRF chunker, conditioning each word's probability on any $\seq{c}_i$ means that our model is, strictly speaking, not a language model, and it can no longer be meaningfully evaluated using perplexity.
A right-to-left model is constructed analogously, conditioning on $\seq{c}_{\geqslant i}$ alongside $\seq{x}_{>i}$.
Following \citet{Peters:18}, we use a joint objective maximizing data likelihood objectives in both directions, with shared softmax parameters.
\subsection{Pretraining Model Architecture}
\label{sec:architecture}
Our model uses two encoders: $e_{\mathit{seq}}$ for encoding the sequential history ($\seq{x}_{<i}$), and $e_{\mathit{syn}}$ for shallow syntactic (chunk) history ($\seq{c}_{\leqslant i}$).
For both, we use transformers \cite{Vaswani:17}, which consist of large feedforward networks equipped with multiheaded self-attention mechanisms.
\swabha{{While transformers are shown to have slightly lower performance on downstream tasks than RNNs for pretraining \textsc{cwr}s\xspace \cite{Peters:18b}, this model trains almost twice as fast on two NVIDIA Tesla V100s, and is hence cost-effective.}
\matt{I'd just remove this footnote as BERT, GPT use transformers}}
\begin{figure}[tbh]
\footnotesize
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{msync.pdf}
\caption{
Model architecture for pretraining with shallow syntax.
A sequential encoder converts the raw text into \textsc{cwr}s\xspace(shown in blue).
Observed shallow syntactic structure (chunk boundaries and labels, shown in red) are combined with these \textsc{cwr}s\xspace in a shallow syntactic encoder to get contextualized representations for chunks (shown in orange).
Both representations are passed through a projection layer to get \textbf{mSynC}\xspace embeddings (details shown only in some positions, for clarity), used both for computing the data likelihood, as shown, as well as in downstream tasks.
}
\label{fig:chunks}
\end{figure}
As inputs to $e_{\mathit{seq}}$, we use a context-independent embedding, obtained from a CNN character encoder~\cite{Kim:2016:CNL:3016100.3016285} for each token $x_i$.
The outputs $\seq{h}_i$ from $e_{\mathit{seq}}$ represent words in context.
Next, we build representations for (observed) chunks in the sentence by concatenating a learned embedding for the chunk label with $\seq{h}$s for the boundaries and applying a linear projection ($f_\mathit{proj}$).
The output from $f_\mathit{proj}$ is input to $e_{\mathit{syn}}$, the shallow syntactic encoder, and results in contextualized chunk representations, $\seq{g}$.
Note that the number of chunks in the sentence is less than or equal to the number of tokens.
Each $\seq{h}_i$ is now concatentated with $\seq{g}_{c_i}$, where $\seq{g}_{c_i}$ corresponds to $c_i$, the last chunk before position $i$.
Finally, the output is given by $\mbox{\textbf{mSynC}\xspace}_i = {u}_\mathit{proj}(\seq{h}_i, \seq{g}_{c_i}) = \seq{W}^\top[\seq{h}_i; \seq{g}_{c_i}]$, where $\seq{W}$ is a model parameter.
For training, $\mbox{\textbf{mSynC}\xspace}_i$ is used to compute the probability of the next word, using a sampled softmax~\cite{Bengio:03}.
For downstream tasks, we use a learned linear weighting of all layers in the encoders to obtain a task-specific \textbf{mSynC}\xspace, following \citet{Peters:18}.
\paragraph{Staged parameter updates}
\label{sec:strategy}
Jointly training both the sequential encoder $e_{\mathit{seq}}$, and the syntactic encoder $e_{\mathit{syn}}$ can be expensive, due to the large number of parameters involved.
To reduce cost, we initialize our sequential \textsc{cwr}s\xspace $\seq{h}$, using \textit{pretrained} embeddings from ELMo-transformer\xspace.
Once initialized as such, the encoder is fine-tuned to the data likelihood objective~(\S\ref{sec:training}).
This results in a staged parameter update, which reduces training duration by a factor of 10 in our experiments.
We discuss the empirical effect of this approach in \S\ref{sec:ablations}.
\section{Shallow Syntactic Features}
\label{sec:shallow_features}
Our second approach incorporates shallow syntactic information in downstream tasks via token-level chunk label embeddings.
Task training (and test) data is automatically chunked, and
chunk boundary information is passed into the task model via BIOUL encoding of the labels.
We add randomly initialized chunk label embeddings to task-specific input encoders, which are then fine-tuned for task-specific objectives.
This approach does not require a shallow syntactic encoder or chunk annotations for pretraining \textsc{cwr}s\xspace, only a chunker.
Hence, this can more directly measure the impact of shallow syntax for a given task.\footnote{In contrast, in \S\ref{sec:pretraining}, the shallow-syntactic encoder itself, as well as predicted chunk quality on the large pretraining corpus could affect downstream performance.}
\section{Experiments}
\label{sec:experiments}
Our experiments evaluate the effect of shallow syntax, via contextualization (\textbf{mSynC}\xspace, \S\ref{sec:pretraining}) and features (\S\ref{sec:shallow_features}).
We provide comparisons with four baselines---ELMo-transformer\xspace \cite{Peters:18b}, our reimplementation of the same, as well as two \textsc{cwr}\xspace-free baselines, with and without shallow syntactic features.
Both ELMo-transformer\xspace and \textbf{mSynC}\xspace are trained on the 1B word benchmark corpus \citep{Chelba:13}; the latter also employs chunk annotations~(\sect{sec:chunks}).
Experimental settings are detailed in Appendix~\sect{sec:supp-hyperparameters}.
\subsection{Downstream Task Transfer}
\label{sec:downstream}
We employ four tasks to test the impact of shallow syntax.
The first three, namely, coarse and fine-grained named entity recognition (NER), and constituency parsing, are \emph{span-based}; the fourth is a sentence-level sentiment classification task.
Following \citet{Peters:18}, we do not apply finetuning to task-specific architectures, allowing us to do a controlled comparison with ELMo.
\todo{Not entirely correct...}
Given an identical base architecture across models for each task, we can attribute any difference in performance to the incorporation of shallow syntax or contextualization.
Details of downstream architectures are provided below, and overall dataset statistics for all tasks is shown in the Appendix, Table \ref{tab:downstream_datas_stats}.
\begin{table*}[tbh]
\small
\center
\begin{tabulary}{\columnwidth}{@{} lrrrr @{}}
\toprule
& \bf\begin{tabular}[x]{@{}r@{}}NER\end{tabular}
& \bf\begin{tabular}[x]{@{}r@{}}Fine-grained NER\end{tabular}
& \bf\begin{tabular}[x]{@{}r@{}}Constituency Parsing\end{tabular}
& \bf\begin{tabular}[x]{@{}r@{}}Sentiment\end{tabular}\\
\midrule
Baseline (no \textsc{cwr}\xspace)
& 88.1 $\pm$ 0.27
& 78.5 $\pm$ 0.19
& 88.9 $\pm$ 0.05
& 51.6 $\pm$ 1.63\\
\quad + shallow syn. features
& 88.6 $\pm$ 0.22
& 78.9 $\pm$ 0.13
& 90.8 $\pm$ 0.14
& 51.1 $\pm$ 1.39\\
\midrule[0.03em]
ELMo-transformer\xspace~\citep{Peters:18b}
& 91.1 $\pm$ 0.26
& ---
& 93.7 \textcolor{white}{$\pm$ 0.00}
& ---\\
ELMo-transformer\xspace (our reimplementation)
& 91.5 $\pm$ 0.25
& 85.7 $\pm$ 0.08
& 94.1 $\pm$ 0.06
& 53.0 $\pm$ 0.72 \\
\quad + shallow syn. features
& 91.6 $\pm$ 0.40
& 85.9 $\pm$ 0.28
& 94.3 $\pm$ 0.03
& 52.6 $\pm$ 0.54 \\
Shallow syn. contextualization (\textbf{mSynC}\xspace)
& 91.5 $\pm$ 0.19
& 85.9 $\pm$ 0.20
& 94.1 $\pm$ 0.07
& 53.0 $\pm$ 1.07 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabulary}
\caption{
Test-set performance of ELMo-transformer\xspace~\cite{Peters:18b}, our reimplementation, and \textbf{mSynC}\xspace, compared to baselines without \textsc{cwr}\xspace.
Evaluation metric is $F_1$ for all tasks except sentiment, which reports accuracy.
Reported results show the mean and standard deviation across 5 runs for coarse-grained NER and sentiment classification and 3 runs for other tasks.
}
\label{tab:downstream-results}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[tbh]
\small
\center
\begin{tabulary}{\columnwidth}{@{} l rrrrrrrrrrr @{}}
\toprule
& \bf CCG
& \bf \begin{tabular}[x]{@{}r@{}}PTB\\POS\\\end{tabular}
& \bf \begin{tabular}[x]{@{}r@{}}EWT\\POS\\\end{tabular}
& \bf Chunk
& \bf NER
& \begin{tabular}[x]{@{}r@{}}\textbf{Sem.}\\\textbf{Tagging}\\\end{tabular}
& \begin{tabular}[x]{@{}r@{}}\textbf{Gramm.}\\\textbf{Err.~D}\\\end{tabular}
& \begin{tabular}[x]{@{}r@{}}\textbf{Prep.}\\\textbf{Role}\\\end{tabular}
& \begin{tabular}[x]{@{}r@{}}\textbf{Prep.}\\\textbf{Func.}\\\end{tabular}
& \begin{tabular}[x]{@{}r@{}}\textbf{Event}\\\textbf{Fact.}\\\end{tabular} \\
\midrule
ELMo-transformer\xspace
& 92.68
& 97.09
& 95.13
& 92.18
& 81.21
& 93.78
& 30.80
& 72.81
& 82.24
& 70.88 \\
\textbf{mSynC}\xspace
& 92.03
& 96.91
& 94.64
& 96.89
& 79.98
& 93.03
& 30.86
& 70.83
& 82.67
& 70.39 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabulary}
\caption{Test performance of ELMo-transformer\xspace \cite{Peters:18b} vs. \textbf{mSynC}\xspace on several linguistic probes from \citet{Liu:19}.
In each case, performance of the best layer from the architecture is reported.
Details on the probes can be found in~\sect{sec:appendixprobe}. }
\label{tab:probing}
\end{table*}
\paragraph{NER} We use the English portion of the CoNLL 2003 dataset \citep{Tjong:03}, which provides named entity annotations on newswire data across four different entity types (\texttt{PER, LOC, ORG, MISC}).
A bidirectional LSTM-CRF architecture \citep{Lample:16} and a BIOUL tagging scheme were used.
\paragraph{Fine-grained NER} The same architecture and tagging scheme from above is also used to predict fine-grained entity annotations from OntoNotes 5.0 \citep{Weischedel:11}.
There are 18 fine-grained NER labels in the dataset, including regular named entitities as well as entities such as date, time and common numerical entries.
\paragraph{Phrase-structure parsing} We use the standard Penn Treebank splits, and adopt the span-based model from \citet{Stern:17}.
Following their approach, we used predicted part-of-speech tags from the Stanford tagger \citep{Toutanova:03} for training and testing.
About 51\% of phrase-syntactic constituents align exactly with the predicted chunks used, with a majority being single-width noun phrases.
Given that the rule-based procedure used to obtain chunks only propagates the phrase type to the head-word and removes all overlapping phrases to the right, this is expected.
We did not employ jack-knifing to obtain predicted chunks on PTB data; as a result there might be differences in the quality of shallow syntax annotations between the train and test portions of the data.
\paragraph{Sentiment analysis} We consider fine-grained (5-class) classification on Stanford Sentiment Treebank \citep{Socher:13}.
The labels are \texttt{negative}, \texttt{somewhat\_negative}, \texttt{neutral}, \texttt{positive} and \texttt{somewhat\_positive}.
Our model was based on the biattentive classification network \citep{Mccann:17}.
We used all phrase lengths in the dataset for training, but test results are reported only on full sentences, following prior work.
Results are shown in Table~\ref{tab:downstream-results}.
Consistent with previous findings, \textsc{cwr}s\xspace offer large improvements across all tasks. Though helpful to span-level task models without \textsc{cwr}s\xspace, shallow syntactic features offer little to no benefit to ELMo models. \textbf{mSynC}\xspace's performance is similar.
This holds even for phrase-structure parsing, where (gold) chunks align with syntactic phrases, indicating that task-relevant signal learned from exposure to shallow syntax is \emph{already} learned by ELMo.
On sentiment classification, chunk features are slightly harmful on average (but variance is high); \textbf{mSynC}\xspace again performs similarly to ELMo-transformer\xspace.
Overall, the performance differences across all tasks are small enough to infer that shallow syntax is not particularly helpful when using \textsc{cwr}s\xspace.
\subsection{Linguistic Probes}
\label{sec:probes}
We further analyze whether awareness of shallow syntax carries over to other linguistic tasks, via probes from \citet{Liu:19}.
Probes are linear models trained on frozen \textsc{cwr}s\xspace to make predictions about linguistic (syntactic and semantic) properties of words and phrases.
Unlike \S\ref{sec:downstream}, there is minimal downstream task architecture, bringing into focus the transferability of \textsc{cwr}s\xspace, as opposed to task-specific adaptation.
\subsubsection{Probing Tasks}
\label{sec:appendixprobe}
The ten different probing tasks we used include CCG supertagging \cite{Hockenmaier:07}, part-of-speech tagging from PTB \cite{Marcus:93} and EWT (Universal Depedencies \citealp{Silveira:14}), named entity recognition \cite{Tjong:03}, base-phrase chunking \cite{Tjong:00}, grammar error detection \cite{Yannakoudakis:11}, semantic tagging \cite{Bjerva:16}, preposition supersense identification \cite{Schneider:18}, and event factuality detection \cite{Rudinger:18}.
Metrics and references for each are summarized in Table~\ref{tab:moreprobing}. For more details, please see \citet{Liu:19}.
Results in Table~\ref{tab:probing} show ten probes.
Again, we see the performance of baseline ELMo-transformer\xspace~and \textbf{mSynC}\xspace are similar, with \textbf{mSynC}\xspace doing slightly worse on 7 out of 9 tasks.
As we would expect, on the probe for predicting chunk tags, \textbf{mSynC}\xspace achieves 96.9 $F_1$ vs.~92.2 $F_1$ for ELMo-transformer\xspace, indicating that \textbf{mSynC}\xspace is indeed encoding shallow syntax.
Overall, the results further confirm that explicit shallow syntax does not offer any benefits over ELMo-transformer\xspace.
\subsection{Effect of Training Scheme}
\label{sec:ablations}
We test whether our staged parameter training~(\sect{sec:strategy}) is a viable alternative to an end-to-end training of both $e_{\mathit{syn}}$ and $e_{\mathit{seq}}$.
We make a further distinction between fine-tuning $e_{\mathit{seq}}$ vs.~not updating it at all after initialization (frozen).
\begin{table}[tbh]
\small
\center
\begin{tabulary}{\columnwidth}{@{}ll r@{}}
\toprule
& \textbf{Model}
& \begin{tabular}[x]{@{}r@{}}\textbf{Fine-grained}\\\textbf{NER $F_1$}\end{tabular}\\
\midrule
\multirow{2}{*}[-3pt]{end-to-end}
& ELMo
& 86.90 $\pm$ 0.11 \\
\cmidrule{2-3}
&\textbf{mSynC}\xspace end-to-end
& 86.89 $\pm$ 0.04 \\
\midrule
\multirow{2}{*}[-3pt]{staged}
& \textbf{mSynC}\xspace frozen
& 87.36 $\pm$ 0.02 \\
&\textbf{mSynC}\xspace fine-tuned
& 87.44 $\pm$ 0.07 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabulary}
\caption{Validation $F_1$ for fine-grained NER across syntactic pretraining schemes, with mean and standard deviations across 3 runs.}
\label{tab:pretraining}
\end{table}
Downstream validation-set $F_1$ on fine-grained NER, reported in Table \ref{tab:pretraining}, shows that the end-to-end strategy lags behind the others, perhaps indicating the need to train longer than 10 epochs.
However, a single epoch on the 1B-word benchmark takes 36 hours on 2 Tesla V100s, making this prohibitive.
Interestingly, the frozen strategy, which takes the least amount of time to converge (24 hours on 1 Tesla V100), also performs almost as well as fine-tuning.
\section{Conclusion}
We find that exposing \textsc{cwr}\xspace-based models to shallow syntax, either through new \textsc{cwr}\xspace learning architectures or explicit pipelined features, has little effect on their performance, across several tasks.
Linguistic probing also shows that \textsc{cwr}s\xspace aware of such structures do not improve task transferability.
Our architecture and methods are general enough to be adapted for richer inductive biases, such as those given by full syntactic trees (RNNGs; \citealp{Dyer:16}), or to different pretraining objectives, such as masked language modeling (BERT; \citealp{Devlin:18}); we leave this pursuit to future work.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:introduction}
Data quality is an issue that is currently not receiving as much attention as it deserves in the age of big data and data science. Traditional careful analysis of small data sets involves a study of marginal distributions, which easily finds data quality challenges such as skewness and suggests remedies such as the Box-Cox transformation \citep{Box1964}. Direct implementation of this type of operation is challenging with high dimensional data, as there are too many marginal distributions to individually visualize. Automatic methods such as those of \citet{Feng2016} are available, but direct visualization is still very useful. This hurdle can be overcome by using summary statistics to select a representative set for visualization and potential remediation. Conventional summaries such as the sample mean, standard deviation, skewness and kurtosis can be very useful for this process. However, as seen in Figure \ref{fig:mdp_bw_skew_L_skew_bottom} and Section \ref{sec:TCGA_data}, those have some limitations for this purpose, e.g. they can be strongly influenced by outliers. In some situations outliers are important and well worth finding. But in other cases summaries that are dominated by outliers, e.g. the conventional summaries stated earlier, can miss more important distributional features of variables such as skewness and bimodality. Such variables can be of keen interest in cancer research.
As measures of skewness and bimodality of a distribution, we first introduce the conventional theoretical (moment-based) \textit{skewness} $\gamma_1$ and (excess) \textit{kurtosis} $\gamma_2$ of a random variable $X$ defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:convention_skewness_kurtosis}
\gamma_1=\frac{E\left(X-EX\right)^3}{\left\{E\left(X-EX\right)^2\right\}^{3/2}},\quad
\gamma_2=\frac{E\left(X-EX\right)^4}{\left\{E\left(X-EX\right)^2\right\}^2}-3.
\end{equation}
See \citet{Pearson1905} for the origin of the word \textit{excess}. We use the word \textit{conventional} to distinguish these traditional measures from other measures that will be introduced in upcoming sections. The conventional \textit{sample skewness} $\hat{\gamma}_1$ and \textit{kurtosis} $\hat{\gamma}_2$ are typical sample-moment-based estimators of the conventional theoretical skewness and kurtosis, and are defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:sample_skewness_kurtosis}
\hat{\gamma}_1=\frac{\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\left(X_i-\bar{X}\right)^3}
{\left(\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\left(X_i-\bar{X}\right)^2\right)^{3/2}},
\quad\hat{\gamma}_2=\frac{\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\left(X_i-\bar{X}\right)^4}
{\left(\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\left(X_i-\bar{X}\right)^2\right)^2}-3.
\end{equation}
Many papers including \citet{Brys2004,Brys2006} pointed out that those estimators can be highly affected by outliers in real data analysis.
In Section \ref{sec:TCGA_data}, the limitation of conventional summary statistics in practice is demonstrated in detail using a modern high dimensional data set from cancer research. These data are part of the TCGA project \citep{Weinstein2013}, and were first studied in \citet{Ciriello2015} and \citet{Hu2015}. The precise version of the data here was used in \citet{Feng2016}. The data include gene expression profiles of 16,615 genes and 817 breast cancer patients, each of whom is classified according to five cancer subtypes of major importance in modern cancer treatment. While much is known about this data, as discussed in \citet{Feng2016}, the sheer data size means that there have only been relatively cursory studies of the marginal, or individual gene, distributions. In this study we do a much deeper search for genes with unexpected marginal structure, especially those related to non-Gaussianity. This can yield relationships between genes and biologically meaningful features such as breast cancer subtypes.
The top two rows of Figure \ref{fig:mdp_bw_skew_L_skew_bottom} show the marginal distributions of seven variables, i.e. genes, with the smallest conventional sample skewness values. The upper left plot shows the sample quantile curve of these summary statistic values as a function of their ranks. The left arrow in the plot indicates that the seven shown marginal distribution plots have the smallest sample skewness values. These remaining plots are sorted in ascending order of the sample skewness values that are given near the top of each plot. Each symbol with a different shade of gray represents a breast cancer patient by subtypes; see Table \ref{tab:breast_cancer_subtype}. The height of each symbol provides visual separation based on the order of observations in the data set. The black solid lines are kernel density estimates of marginal distributions and gray solid lines are sub-densities corresponding to different subtypes. The aim of including subtype-related information in marginal distribution plots is to check whether skewness or bimodality of a marginal distribution comes from different distributions of cancer subtypes. Some genes can have skewed distributions that do not result from cancer subtypes, and we check whether such genes indeed convey biological meanings in a quantitative way in Section \ref{subsec:GSEA}.
Figure \ref{fig:mdp_bw_skew_L_skew_bottom} shows that even though the genes with the smallest sample skewness values were selected, genes such as CSTF2T, C1orf172 and BET1L have a couple of outliers on their left sides rather than distributional skewness to the left. Only the gene CBLC has several Her2-type samples forming a small cluster on the left side, but its marginal distribution seems to be symmetric rather than skewed. The sample skewness seems inadequate for effectively screening interesting genes in terms of skewness of their distributional bodies. The color version of Figure \ref{fig:mdp_bw_skew_L_skew_bottom} is reproduced in Section \ref{supp:sec:TCGA_supplement} of the Supplementary Material.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.96\textwidth]{Figure/mdp_bw_skew_bottom}\\\\
\includegraphics[width=0.96\textwidth]{Figure/mdp_bw_L_skew_bottom}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{The marginal distribution plots of seven genes, i.e. variables, with the smallest conventional sample skewness (top two rows) and L-skewness values (bottom two rows). Each of the seven genes in the top two rows is driven by a few strong outliers that tend to obscure distributional shapes, while the seven genes in the bottom two rows appear because of distributional structure.}
\label{fig:mdp_bw_skew_L_skew_bottom}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[!b]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c||c|c|c|c|c}
Subtype&LumA&LumB&Her2&Basal&Normal-like\\\hline
Symbol&{\color[rgb]{0,0,0}+}&{\color[rgb]{0.2,0.2,0.2}$\times$}&{\color[rgb]{0.4,0.4,0.4}*}&
{\color[rgb]{0.6,0.6,0.6}$\vartriangleleft$}&{\color[rgb]{0.8,0.8,0.8}$\vartriangleright$}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{The symbols and gray-levels corresponding to the 5 breast cancer subtypes in the marginal distribution plots.}
\label{tab:breast_cancer_subtype}
\end{table}
This challenge is well addressed using another notion of skewness as shown in the bottom two rows of Figure \ref{fig:mdp_bw_skew_L_skew_bottom}. That alternative robust measure of skewness is related to the \textit{L-moments} whose $r$-th term is defined in \citet{Hosking1990} as
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:L_moments_defn_1}
\lambda_r=\frac{1}{r}\sum_{k=0}^{r-1}(-1)^k\left(\!
\begin{array}{c}r-1\\k\end{array}\!\right)E\!\left(X_{(r-k):r}\right)
\end{equation}
where $X_{i:n}$ is the $i$-th order statistic of the random sample $X_1,X_2,\cdots,X_n$. We call these the \textit{classical L-moments} to distinguish them from other moments that we will study in Section \ref{sec:GCL_moments}. The \textit{L-skewness} $\lambda_3^*$ \citep{Hosking1990} is defined as the ratio of the third and second L-moments, $\lambda_3^*=\lambda_3/\lambda_2$. The L-moments are known to have some robustness properties against outliers, and this is confirmed in the bottom two rows of Figure \ref{fig:mdp_bw_skew_L_skew_bottom}. The seven genes with the smallest \textit{sample L-skewness} \citep{Hosking1990} values show distributional skewness in contrast to the genes screened by the conventional skewness. Especially, all the genes except GSTT1 have clusters of Basal-type samples (gray triangles) and the gene GSTT1 has a small cluster of LumA samples (black crosses). These show that the L-skewness screens genes with distributional skewness especially coming from cancer subtypes rather than those with outliers, which is desirable in the sense that the former is clinically much more interesting than the latter.
With the goal of screening interesting non-Gaussian variables, a limitation of the classical L-moments is that they are not centered at the Gaussian distributions, which typically and frequently appear in real data. Instead the classical L-moments are zero at the uniform distributions, which hinders interpreting the signs and magnitude of the L-moments especially in terms of the critical notion of kurtosis represented by the \textit{L-kurtosis} $\lambda_4^*=\lambda_4/\lambda_2$ \citep{Hosking1990}. The paper \citet{Hosking1990} proposed using the L-skewness to perform the goodness-of-fit test for Gaussianity against skewed distributions, but it did not consider using the L-kurtosis against kurtotic alternative distributions. A simple approach is to subtract the L-kurtosis value at the Gaussian distributions from itself. However, this can result in loss of theoretical soundness of the definition of the L-moments because they are no longer differences of expected order statistics as in Equation (\ref{eqn:L_moments_defn_1}). Note that the conventional excess kurtosis bases its theoretical justification in the \textit{cumulant} theory (see \citet{Feller1968} and \citet{Marcinkiewicz1939}), which is more convincing than simply subtracting its value at the Gaussian distributions.
These ideas motivate development of improved Gaussian centered versions of the L-moments. The paper \citet{Decurninge2014} discovered a variant of the classical L-moments that have strength in multivariate analysis. The new moments were called \textit{Hermite L-moments} (\textit{HL-moments}). While it was seen that the HL-moments have advantages over the classical L-moments in a multivariate setting, no attention was paid to the potential of the HL-moments for univariate summary statistics, nor was its distributional centering at the Gaussian distributions mentioned. In this paper, we comprehensively investigate the possibilities of the HL-moments as univariate summaries, especially focusing on their third and fourth moments.
To this end, we propose two classes of moments that share robustness of the L-moments while also having zeros at the Gaussian distributions by their theoretical nature. The first is based on the family of Hermite polynomials, and the second uses spacing between the expected order statistics of the standard Gaussian distribution. These \textit{Gaussian Centered L-moments} are developed in Section \ref{sec:GCL_moments}. Their abilities to screen variables with interesting marginal distributions are visualized and quantitatively analyzed in Section \ref{sec:TCGA_data}. Their theoretical properties such as asymptotic Gaussianity and robustness are shown in Sections \ref{sec:estimation_GCL_moments} and \ref{sec:robustness}, respectively.
\section{Mathematical preliminaries}\label{sec:math}
Assume that two random variables $X$ and $Y$ follow cumulative distribution functions $F$ and $G$ with probability density functions $f$ and $g$, respectively. We denote the distribution of $aX+b$ for $a\neq0$ and $b\in\mR$ by $F_{a,b}$. Also, a random sample $X_1,X_2,\cdots,X_n$ is assumed to be generated from $F$, and $X_{i:n}$ denotes the i-th order statistic of the random sample, i.e. $X_{1:n}\leq X_{2:n}\leq\cdots\leq X_{n:n}$. In this paper we consider only an absolutely continuous and strictly increasing cumulative distribution function, in the sense that it is strictly increasing on its support $S(F)=\overline{\{x|0<F(x)<1\}}$ where $\overline{A}$ indicates the closure of a set $A\subset\mR$. Let $\cF$ be the class of such distribution functions and the quantile function $F^{-1}:(0,1)\rightarrow\mR$ be the inverse of $F\in\cF$. It is always assumed that the composition of $G^{-1}$ and $F$, $G^{-1}\circ F$, is defined on $S_F$. When $F$ is symmetric, we denote its \textit{point of symmetry} \citep{Doksum1975} by $m(F)$.
Various kinds of orthogonal polynomials are used throughout this paper. One is the \textit{shifted Legendre polynomials} $\left\{P_r^*|r=1,2,\cdots\right\}$ which have been comprehensively investigated in Chapter 4 of \citet{Szego1959}. The shifted Legendre polynomials are orthogonal to each other on the unit interval $(0,1)$ with respect to the weight function $w(x)=1$. Other orthogonal polynomials of interest are the \textit{Hermite polynomials} presented in Chapter 5 of \citet{Szego1959}. There are two versions of the Hermite polynomials, and here we focus on the \textit{probabilists' Hermite polynomials} $\left\{H_r|r=1,2,\cdots\right\}$ which are orthogonal to each other on the real line $\mR$ with respect to the weight function $w(x)=e^{-x^2/2}$. The first four shifted Legendre and Hermite polynomials are given in Table \ref{tab:first_four_shifted_Legendre_Hermite}.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{r|r}
Shifted Legendre $P_r^*:(0,1)\rightarrow\mR$&
Hermite $H_r:\mR\rightarrow\mR$\\\hline\hline
$P_0^*(u)=1$&$H_0(x)=1$\\
$P_1^*(u)=2u-1$&$H_1(x)=x$\\
$P_2^*(u)=6u^2-6u+1$&$H_2(x)=x^2-1$\\
$P_3^*(u)=20u^3-30u^2+12u-1$&$H_3(x)=x^3-3x$
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{The first four shifted Legendre and Hermite polynomials.}
\label{tab:first_four_shifted_Legendre_Hermite}
\end{table}
\subsection{L-statistics and L-moments}\label{subsec:L_statistic_L_moment}
The term \textit{L-statistic} is used to indicate a statistic in the form of a \textit{linear combination of order statistics}. An L-statistic is generally expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:L_statistic}
\hat{\theta}_n=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^nc_{ni}X_{i:n}
\end{equation}
where $c_{ni}$ is a function of the sample size $n$ and the rank $i$ of the order statistic $X_{i:n}$. The L-statistics were first proposed in the general research area of robust statistics; see \citet{Stigler1973} for a description of the origins of the L-statistics. Also, Section 11.4 of \citet{David2003} surveys the literature on various sets of conditions on the coefficients $\left\{c_{ni}|n\geq1,1\leq i\leq n\right\}$ and the distribution function $F$ which ensure that $\hat{\theta}_n$ almost surely converges in the limit as $n\rightarrow\infty$ to the quantity
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:L_functional}
\theta(F)=\int_{-\infty}^\infty\!xf(x)J(F(x))\,\mathrm{d}x
\end{equation}
where $J:(0,1)\rightarrow\mR$ is a measurable function, and further follow an asymptotic Gaussian distribution. We call a functional in the form of Equation (\ref{eqn:L_functional}) an \textit{L-functional}, the term used in the papers \citet{Welsh1990} and \citet{Necir2010}.
A connection between L-statistics and location, scale, skewness and kurtosis of a distribution has been made by \citet{Hosking1990}. In addition to the intuitive definition of the $r$-th L-moment in Equation (\ref{eqn:L_moments_defn_1}), the other form is given in that paper as
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:L_moments_integ}
\lambda_r=\int_{-\infty}^\infty xf(x)P_{r-1}^*(F(x))\!\,\mathrm{d}x=\int_0^1F^{-1}(u)P_{r-1}^*(u)\!\,\mathrm{d}u,
\end{equation}
which shows that the L-moments are L-functionals. \citet{Hosking1990} adopted the U-statistics-based estimators
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:sample_L_moment_U_statistic}
\hat{\lambda}_{n,r}=\left(\!\begin{array}{c}n\\r\end{array}\!\right)^{-1}
\multsums_{1\leq i_1<i_2<\cdots<i_r\leq n}\frac{1}{r}\sum_{k=0}^{r-1}(-1)^k
\left(\!\begin{array}{c}r-1\\k\end{array}\!\right)X_{i_{r-k}:n},
\end{equation}
and called these the \textit{sample L-moments}. The \textit{sample L-moment ratios} are defined as $\hat{\lambda}_{n,r}^*=\hat{\lambda}_{n,r}/\hat{\lambda}_{n,2}$ accordingly.
\subsection{Oja's criteria}\label{subsec:Oja_criteria}
When defining new measures of location, scale, skewness and kurtosis, a challenge is to ensure that the new measures reflect the intuitive meaning of those distributional properties. This challenge can be addressed by the framework of \citet{Oja1981} using stochastic dominance ideas, which are applied here. To do this we say that a function $f:I\rightarrow\mR$ is \textit{convex of order k} if $f^{(k)}(x)\geq0$ for all $x\in I$ where $I$ is an open interval and $f^{(k)}$ is the $k$-th order derivative of $f$. Note that if $X\sim F$, then $G^{-1}\circ F(X)\sim G$, so $G^{-1}\circ F$ is a natural link between the distributions $F$ and $G$.
\begin{defn}[\citet{Oja1981}]\label{defn:Oja_criteria}
The functional $\theta:\cF\rightarrow\mR$ is a
\bed
\item[a.] \textit{measure of location} in $\cF$ if $\theta\!\left(F_{a,b}\right)=a\theta(F)+b$ for all $a,b\in\mR,F\in\cF$ and $\theta(F)\leq\theta(G)$ whenever $G^{-1}\circ F$ is convex of order 0.
\item[b.] \textit{measure of scale} in $\cF$ if $\theta\!\left(F_{a,b}\right)=|a|\theta(F)$ for all $a,b\in\mR,F\in\cF$ and $\theta(F)\leq\theta(G)$ whenever $G^{-1}\circ F$ is convex of order 1.
\item[c.] \textit{measure of skewness} in $\cF$ if $\theta\!\left(F_{a,b}\right)=\text{sign}(a)\theta(F)$ for all $ a\neq0,b\in\mR,F\in\cF$ and $\theta(F)\leq\theta(G)$ whenever $G^{-1}\circ F$ is convex (of order 2). In this case, we say $F$ \textit{is not more skew to the right than} $G$.
\item[d.] \textit{measure of kurtosis} in a family of symmetric distributions $\cF_s\subset\cF$ if $\theta\!\left(F_{a,b}\right)=\theta(F)$ for all $a\neq0,b\in\mR,F\in\cF_s$ and $\theta(F)\leq\theta(G)$ whenever $F,G\in\cF_s$, $G^{-1}\circ F$ is concave on $\{x|x\leq m(F)\}$ and convex on $\{x|x>m(F)\}$. In this case, we say $F$ \textit{does not have more kurtosis than} $G$.\hfill\qedsymbol
\eed
\end{defn}
\section{Gaussian Centered L-moments}\label{sec:GCL_moments}
As mentioned in Section \ref{sec:introduction}, investigation about distributional shape is often performed relative to the Gaussian distributions. Since many distributions are aggregations of small, independent errors, they tend to have a Gaussian shape by the Central Limit Theorem. For non-Gaussian distributions such as the marginal distributions in the bottom two rows of Figure \ref{fig:mdp_bw_skew_L_skew_bottom}, it is often not easy to find a suitable transformation that yields approximately Gaussian distributions. In addition, transforming data can result in loss of some useful information such as subtype-driven bimodality. For example, the cluster of the Her2-enriched samples on the left side of the marginal distribution of the gene CBLC in Figure \ref{fig:mdp_bw_skew_L_skew_bottom} can disappear after transformation. This suggests that a search for non-Gaussianity is an important subject of exploratory data analysis. The term excess kurtosis is an example of the importance of measuring the difference between the shape of a distribution and the Gaussian distribution. Based on the zero of the excess kurtosis, distributions are often classified into \textit{platykurtic} and \textit{leptokurtic} distributions depending on their relationship with the Gaussian distributions.
However, as discussed in \citet{Hosking1990}, the L-moments satisfy
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:L_moments_uniform}
\lambda_r(\cU(a,b))=\int_0^1\!\{(b-a)x+a\}P_{r-1}^*(x)\,\mathrm{d}x=0
\end{equation}
for all $-\infty<a<b<\infty$ and $r=3,4,\cdots$. Thus the signs and absolute values of the L-moments measure the directions and magnitude of departure from the uniform distributions, which is a limitation of the L-moments as distributional summaries. This motivates introducing a definition.
\begin{defn}\label{defn:distr_center}
A sequence of functionals $\left\{\theta_r|r=1,2,\cdots\right\}$ is \textit{centered at the family of distributions} $\cF$ when it satisfies $\theta_r(F)=0$ for all $r=3,4,\cdots$ and $F\in\cF$.\hfill\qedsymbol
\end{defn}
Important functionals centered at the Gaussian distributions are the cumulants. The main goal of this research is to develop different types of moments with their distributional centers at the Gaussian family. For that purpose, we introduce the following definition.
\begin{defn}\label{defn:GCL_moments}
We call functionals $\{\theta_r:\cF\rightarrow\mR|r=1,2,\cdots\}$ \textit{Gaussian Centered L-moments} in $\cF$ if they are L-functionals and centered at the Gaussian distributions.\hfill\qedsymbol
\end{defn}
The letter `L' generally referred to the linear combination of expected order statistics, but here it refers to any L-functionals in the form of Equation (\ref{eqn:L_functional}).
\subsection{Hermite L-moments}\label{subsec:HL_moments}
As pointed out in Equation (\ref{eqn:L_moments_uniform}), the L-moments are centered at the uniform distributions due to the orthogonality property of the shifted Legendre polynomials. This motivates us to consider adopting another family of orthogonal polynomials to locate the center of L-functionals at the Gaussian distributions. Given the $r$-th degree polynomial $J_r:(0,1)\rightarrow\mR$, define the L-functional
\[\theta_r(F)=\int_{-\infty}^\infty\!xf(x)J_{r-1}(F(x))\,\mathrm{d}x.\]
In order to be a Gaussian Centered L-moment, $\theta_r$ should satisfy
\[\theta_r(\Phi)=\int_{-\infty}^\infty\!x\phi(x)J_{r-1}(\Phi(x))\,\mathrm{d}x=0,\]
where $\Phi$ is the cumulative distribution function of the standard Gaussian distribution. This results in one possible solution
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:HL_moment}
\eta_r=\int_{-\infty}^\infty\!xf(x)H_{r-1}\left(\Phi^{-1}(F(x))\right)\,\mathrm{d}x
=\int_0^1\!F^{-1}(u)H_{r-1}\left(\Phi^{-1}(u)\right)\,\mathrm{d}u.
\end{equation}
Note that
\[\eta_r(\Phi(\cdot|\mu,\sigma^2))=\int_{-\infty}^\infty\!(\mu+\sigma x)\phi(x)H_{r-1}(x)\,\mathrm{d}x=0\]
where $\phi$ is the probability density function of the standard Gaussian distribution for all $\mu\in\mR,\sigma>0$ and $r=3,4,\cdots$ by the orthogonality of the Hermite polynomials. As mentioned in Section \ref{sec:introduction}, the paper \citet{Decurninge2014} called these L-functionals the \textit{Hermite L-moments} (\textit{HL-moments}).
Recall from Definition \ref{defn:Oja_criteria}.c and d that a measure of skewness or kurtosis should be invariant under linear transformation of a random variable. This need for scale invariance motivates us to introduce \textit{Hermite L-moment ratios} (\textit{HL-moment ratios}) defined as $\eta_r^*=\eta_r/\eta_2$ for $r=3,4,\cdots$. The \textit{HL-skewness} and \textit{HL-kurtosis} are defined as $\eta_3^*$ and $\eta_4^*$, respectively. A central issue is whether or not the HL-skewness and kurtosis actually measure the skewness and kurtosis of a distribution in the sense of Definition \ref{defn:Oja_criteria}.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:Oja_criteria_HL}
The HL-moments-based measures $\eta_1,\eta_2,\eta_3^*$ and $\eta_4^*$ satisfy Oja's criteria for measures of location, scale, skewness and kurtosis, respectively.
\end{thm}
\begin{pf}
See Subsection \ref{supp:subsec:proof_Oja_criteria_HL} of the Supplementary Material.\hfill\qedsymbol
\end{pf}
\noindent This theorem shows that the HL-moments are not only useful in a multivariate setting but also can be useful summary statistics in data analysis.
Note that the HL-moments are closely related to the inverse Edgeworth expansion
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:inverse_Edgeworth}
F^{-1}(u)\approx\mu+\sigma\Phi^{-1}(u)+\sigma\sum_{r=3}^\infty\frac{EH_r(Y)}{r!}H_{r-1}\!\left(\Phi^{-1}(u)\right)
\end{equation}
where $\mu$ and $\sigma$ are the mean and standard deviation of the random variable $X\sim F$ and $Y=(X-\mu)/\sigma$ is a standardized random variable; see \citet{Hall1983} for detailed discussion. Note that the terms $H_{r-1}\!\left(\Phi^{-1}(u)\right)$ in this expansion also appear in the definition of the HL-moments in Equation (\ref{eqn:HL_moment}). \citet{Brown1996} focused on the fact that the coefficients $EH_r(Y)$ before terms $H_{r-1}\!\left(\Phi^{-1}(u)\right)$ will be zero for the Gaussian distributions, and claimed that those coefficients can be indicators of departure from Gaussianity. Instead of directly estimating the coefficients $EH_r(Y)$, which are functions of high-order moments, they considered the least squares estimation problem
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:inverse_Edgeworth_minimization}
\left\{\tilde{\eta}_{n,r}\right\}_{r\geq1}=\argmin_{\eta_r,r\geq1}
\bigintsss_0^1\!\left\{F_n^{-1}(u)-\eta_1-\eta_2\Phi^{-1}(u)+\eta_2\sum_{r=3}^\infty\frac{\eta_r}{r!}H_{r-1}\!\left(\Phi^{-1}(u)\right)\right\}^2
\,\mathrm{d}u,
\end{equation}
where $F_n(x)=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^nI\left(X_i\leq x\right)$ is the \textit{empirical distribution function} (\textit{EDF}), to obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:sample_HL_moments_BH}
\tilde{\eta}_{n,r}=\int_0^1\!F_n^{-1}(u)H_{r-1}\left(\Phi^{-1}(u)\right)\,\mathrm{d}u
=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\left(\int_{(i-1)/n}^{i/n}\!H_{r-1}\left(\Phi^{-1}(u)\right)\,\mathrm{d}u\right)X_{i:n}.
\end{equation}
Note that this estimator coincides with the estimator of Equation (7.18) in \citet{Decurninge2014} when $d=1$ in that paper. Replacing $F_n$ by $F$ in Equation (\ref{eqn:sample_HL_moments_BH}) yields the theoretical HL-moments $\eta_r$.
Based on simulation, \citet{Brown1996} claimed that $\tilde{\eta}_{n,3}/\tilde{\eta}_{n,2}$ and $\tilde{\eta}_{n,4}/\tilde{\eta}_{n,2}$ can be used as estimators of skewness and heavy-tailedness, but did not provide theoretical analysis such as verifying Oja's criteria. Particularly, they did not show that negative values of $\eta_4^*$ correspond to flat shoulders or bimodality of a distribution. Our Theorem \ref{thm:Oja_criteria_HL} shows that the HL-moment ratios $\eta_3^*$ and $\eta_4^*$ are actually measures of skewness and kurtosis in Oja's sense. In Section \ref{sec:estimation_GCL_moments}, we will present different sample estimators from $\tilde{\eta}_{n,r}$ that show better performances in our TCGA data analysis. To strengthen value of the HL-moments, we analyze the robustness properties of $\eta_3^*$ and $\eta_4^*$ in Section \ref{sec:robustness}.
\subsection{Rescaled L-moments}\label{subsec:RL_moments}
Additional insights come from another view of why the L-moments are centered at the uniform distributions. Note that the third and fourth theoretical L-moments are
\begin{align*}
\lambda_3&=\frac{1}{3}\left\{E\left(X_{3:3}-X_{2:3}\right)-E\left(X_{2:3}-X_{1:3}\right)
\right\},\\
\lambda_4&=\frac{1}{4}\left\{E\left(X_{4:4}-X_{3:4}\right)
-2E\left(X_{3:4}-X_{2:4}\right)+E\left(X_{2:4}-X_{1:4}\right)\right\}.
\end{align*}
These expressions indicate that if $F$ has equally spaced expected order statistics, then its third and higher order L-moments are zero. Figure \ref{fig:expected_OS_uniform_Gaussian} shows the four expected order statistics of the distributions $\cU(0,1)$ and $\cN(0,1)$ as four vertical dashed lines. Note that the vertical lines of the uniform distribution in the left plot are equally spaced; if $F\sim\cU(0,1)$, then $EX_{j:4}=j/5$ for $j=1,2,3,4$. However, for the standard Gaussian distribution in the right plot, the space between the inner pair of expected order statistics is smaller than the spaces between the two outer pairs.
\begin{figure}[!b]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Figure/expected_OS_uniform_Gaussian}
\end{center}
\caption{The four expected order statistics of $\cU(0,1)$ (left plot) and $\cN(0,1)$ (right plot). These are equally spaced for $\cU(0,1)$ while the inner pair of expected order statistics is closer than the outer pairs of expected order statistics for $\cN(0,1)$.}
\label{fig:expected_OS_uniform_Gaussian}
\end{figure}
This motivates us to rescale the spaces between adjacent expected order statistics by the corresponding spaces of the standard Gaussian distribution. The following theorem shows that an equivalent definition of the L-moments can be derived by re-expressing Equation (\ref{eqn:L_moments_defn_1}) in terms of spaces between expected order statistics.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:L_moments_expected_spacings}
The $r$-th theoretical L-moment $\lambda_r$ can be expressed as
\[\lambda_r=\frac{1}{r}\sum_{k=0}^{r-2}(-1)^k\left(\!
\begin{array}{c}r-2\\k\end{array}\!\right)E\left(X_{(r-k):r}-X_{(r-k-1):r}\right)\]
for $r=2,3,\cdots$.
\end{thm}
\begin{pf}
See Section \ref{supp:subsec:proof_L_moments_expected_spacings} of the Supplementary Material.\hfill\qedsymbol
\end{pf}
We first show that when any symmetric distribution is used for rescaling, the resulting measures of scale, skewness and kurtosis are linear functions of the corresponding measures based on the classical L-moments. This implies that subtracting the L-kurtosis value of a target distribution from the L-kurtosis itself is actually equivalent to rescaling based on the spaces between adjacent expected order statistics of that target distribution. Let $\delta_{i,j:k}(F)=E\left(X_{j:k}-X_{i:k}\right)$ for $1\leq i<j\leq k$ be the space between the $i$-th and $j$-th expected order statistics. Then we define the theoretical \textit{Rescaled L-moments based on the distribution $F_0$} as
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:RL_moments_based_on_F0}
\rho_{F_0,r}=\frac{1}{r}\sum_{k=0}^{r-2}\frac{(-1)^k}{\delta_{(r-k-1),(r-k):r}\left(F_0\right)}\left(\!
\begin{array}{c}r-2\\k\end{array}\!\right)E\left(X_{(r-k):r}-X_{(r-k-1):r}\right)
\end{equation}
for $r=2,3,\cdots$. We let $\rho_{F_0,1}=\lambda_1$. The corresponding theoretical \textit{Rescaled L-moment ratios based on the distribution $F_0$} are defined as $\rho_{F_0,r}^*=\rho_{F_0,r}/\rho_{F_0,2}$ for $r=3,4,\cdots$.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:Oja_criteria_RL}
Suppose that $F_0$ is a symmetric distribution. Then we have
\begin{align}\label{eqn:relationship_RL_symmetric_L}
\rho_{F_0,1}&=\lambda_1,\notag\\
\rho_{F_0,2}&=\frac{1}{\delta_{1,2:2}\left(F_0\right)}\lambda_2,\notag\\
\rho_{F_0,3}^*&=\frac{\delta_{1,2:2}\left(F_0\right)}{\delta_{1,2:3}\left(F_0\right)}\lambda_3^*,\notag\\
\rho_{F_0,4}^*&=\frac{\delta_{1,2:2}\left(F_0\right)}{5}\left\{\frac{3}{\delta_{2,3:4}\left(F_0\right)}+\frac{2}{\delta_{3,4:4}\left(F_0\right)}\right\}\lambda_4^*\notag\\
&\quad-\frac{3\delta_{1,2:2}\left(F_0\right)}{5}\left\{\frac{1}{\delta_{2,3:4}\left(F_0\right)}-\frac{1}{\delta_{3,4:4}\left(F_0\right)}\right\}.
\end{align}
These four measures satisfy Oja's criteria for a measure of location, scale, skewness and kurtosis, respectively.
\end{thm}
\begin{pf}
See Subsection \ref{supp:subsec:proof_Oja_criteria_RL} of the Supplementary Material.\hfill\qedsymbol
\end{pf}
\noindent Based on this theorem, we define the $r$-th \textit{Rescaled L-moment} (\textit{RL-moment}) as $\rho_r=\rho_{\Phi,r}$. Note that we have $\rho_4^*(F)\approx1.7560\left(\lambda_4^*(F)-\lambda_4^*(\Phi)\right)$.
Using Equation (\ref{eqn:RL_moments_based_on_F0}), it can easily be shown that the RL-moments are L-functionals such that
\[\rho_r=\int_{-\infty}^\infty\!xf(x)R_{r-1}(F(x))\,\mathrm{d}x=\int_0^1\!F^{-1}(u)R_{r-1}(u)\,\mathrm{d}u\]
where $R_r:(0,1)\rightarrow\mR$ is an $r$-th degree polynomial that satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:relationship_R_P}
R_r(u)=\sum_{k=1}^r\alpha_{k,r}P_k^*(u)
\end{equation}
for all $0<u<1$ with constants $\alpha_{j,r}\in\mR$ for $j=1,2,\cdots,r$. For example, we have $\alpha_{1,2}=0$ and $\alpha_{2,2}=1/\delta_{1,2:2}\left(\Phi\right)$. Equation (\ref{eqn:RL_moments_based_on_F0}) also implies that the RL-moments are centered at the Gaussian distributions. The first four polynomials of $R_r$ can be obtained using the results in \citet{Hosking1986} as
\[\begin{array}{ll}
R_0(u)=P_0^*(u),&R_1(u)=c_1P_1^*(u),\\
R_2(u)=c_2P_2^*(u),&R_3(u)=c_4\left\{(6c_3+2)u^3-3(3c_3+1)u^2+(3c_3+3)u-1\right\}.
\end{array}\]
where $c_1\approx0.8862,\,c_2\approx1.1816,\,c_3\approx3.4658$ and $c_4\approx1.3654$.
The RL-moment ratios based on a symmetric distribution $F_0$ of higher orders than 4 are not necessarily linear functions of the classical L-moment ratios of the same orders. For example, we have
\[\rho_{F_0,5}^*=\alpha_{F_0,5,5}^*\lambda_5^*+\alpha_{F_0,3,5}^*\lambda_3^*\]
where
\begin{align*}
\alpha_{F_0,5,5}^*&=\frac{\delta_{1,2:2}\left(F_0\right)}{7}\left\{\frac{6}{\delta_{3,4:5}\left(F_0\right)}+\frac{1}{\delta_{4,5:5}\left(F_0\right)}\right\},\\
\alpha_{F_0,3,5}^*&=-\frac{6\delta_{1,2:2}\left(F_0\right)}{7}\left\{\frac{1}{\delta_{3,4:5}\left(F_0\right)}-\frac{1}{\delta_{4,5:5}\left(F_0\right)}\right\},
\end{align*}
whose proof follows the same steps of derivation as the proof of Equation (\ref{eqn:relationship_RL_symmetric_L}). This implies that if a distribution $F$ satisfies $\lambda_3^*(F)\neq0$, then we have
\[\rho_5^*(F)=\alpha_{\Phi,5}\lambda_5^*(F)+\beta_{\Phi,5}\lambda_3^*(F)\neq\alpha_{\Phi,5}\lambda_5^*(F)=\alpha_{\Phi,5}\left\{\lambda_5^*(F)-\lambda_5^*(\Phi)\right\}\]
where the last equality results from $\lambda_5^*(\Phi)=0$. In conclusion, the RL-moment ratios based on a symmetric distribution $F_0$ are generally different from the classical L-moment ratios subtracted by their values evaluated at $F_0$.
As we mentioned in Section \ref{sec:introduction}, we are looking for moments that have zero values at the Gaussian distributions in a theoretical sense. The odd terms of the classical L-moments already have zero values at the Gaussian distributions, and the even terms can be centered at the Gaussians distributions by subtracting their numerical values at the Gaussians. However, this does not result from any characteristic of the Gaussian distributions except that those are symmetric. The RL-moments are much more intuitively appealing because of much better correspondence with the expected order statistics. Furthermore, this more mathematically principled approach gives a natural extension for developing analogs targeting any other symmetric distribution as shown in Theorem \ref{thm:Oja_criteria_RL}. Even though the RL-kurtosis turns out to be equivalent to the classical L-kurtosis, we value theoretical soundness of the RL-moments compared to numerical manipulation of the classical L-moments.
\section{TCGA data analysis}\label{sec:TCGA_data}
The goal of our TCGA data analysis is to discover biologically meaningful genes out of 16,615 genes based on their expression profiles measured on 817 breast cancer patients. As seen in Figure \ref{fig:mdp_bw_skew_L_skew_bottom}, one important biological feature that can be inferred from marginal distributions of expression profiles is the distributions of breast cancer subtypes. While cancer subtypes are of interest, there are many other biological features of interest as well, so the focus here is on distributional aspects, not simply discriminating cancer subtypes. To this end, we focus on departure from Gaussianity as a measure of screening genes in our TCGA data. As mentioned in Section \ref{sec:introduction}, we choose summary statistics to generate ranked lists of genes.
Note that skewness and bimodality of a distribution are not totally independent concepts. It was shown in \citet{Wilkins1944} and \citet{Hosking1990} that the conventional sample moments and theoretical L-moments satisfy the following relationships
\begin{align*}
\hat{\gamma}_{n,1}^2+1&\leq\hat{\gamma}_{n,2},\\
\frac{1}{4}\left(5\left(\lambda_3^*\right)^2-1\right)&\leq\lambda_4^*<1.
\end{align*}
This implies that a skewness or kurtosis estimate alone is not enough to describe skewness and bimodality of a distribution. Bimodal distributions should have low kurtosis measures when they are symmetric, but this does not hold for asymmetric bimodal distributions. Hence, we check both of the ranked lists of genes generated by skewness and kurtosis estimators and comprehensively diagnose the performances of different estimators. Joint use of skewness and kurtosis estimators such as the Jarque-Bera statistic \citep{Jarque1980} can be considered as a method of sorting genes. However, this can hinder us from interpreting the sorted lists of genes. A gene with a high Jarque-Bera statistic value can have a high degree of departure from Gaussianity, but we cannot decide whether that departure mainly comes from skewness, kurtosis or a combination of both.
\subsection{Marginal distribution plots}\label{subsec:mdp}
We investigate whether L-statistics based skewness and kurtosis estimators capture more interesting and genetically useful departures from the Gaussian distributions. Comparison of the kurtosis estimators based on their abilities in detecting bimodality did not show much visual difference, so we focus on skewness estimators here and present the results of visual comparisons between kurtosis estimators in Section \ref{supp:sec:TCGA_supplement} of the Supplementary Material. The sorted list of genes generated by the L- and RL-moments should be the same based on Theorem \ref{thm:Oja_criteria_RL}, so we omit marginal distribution analysis of the RL-moments.
On top of the conventional and Gaussian Centered L-moments, we also consider some quantile-based measures which are known to be robust as baseline measures. Bowley's skewness measure \citep{Bowley1920} is a typically used quantile-based measure of skewness defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:Bowley_skewness}
\gamma_p=\frac{F^{-1}(1-p)-F^{-1}(1/2)-\left\{F^{-1}(1/2)-F^{-1}(p)\right\}}
{F^{-1}(1-p)-F^{-1}(p)}
\end{equation}
where $p$ is usually set to $0.25$, which results in $\gamma_p$ being based on quartiles.
On the other hand, Ruppert's interfractile range ratio \citep{Ruppert1987} is frequently used as a measure of kurtosis and defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:Ruppert_kurtosis}
\gamma_{p_1,p_2}=\frac{F^{-1}\left(1-p_1\right)-F^{-1}\left(p_1\right)}
{F^{-1}\left(1-p_2\right)-F^{-1}\left(p_2\right)}
\end{equation}
where the parameters $p_1$ and $p_2$ were set to 0.1 and 0.3, respectively, in that paper. Note that Bowley's skewness measure is zero at the Gaussian distributions, but Ruppert's kurtosis measure is not zero there. Both Bowley's and Ruppert's estimators were shown to satisfy Oja's criteria for measures of skewness and kurtosis, respectively, in those papers.
In Section \ref{sec:robustness} of this paper, it will be shown that skewness measures can be ordered in terms of robustness as Bowley's, the L-, HL- and conventional skewness from the most robust to the least robust measures. To visually check whether such relationships between the influence functions is effective for finding interesting variables, we present the seven genes with the smallest HL- and Bowley's skewness in the top and bottom two rows of Figure \ref{fig:mdp_bw_HL_Q_skew_bottom}, respectively. Similarly to the genes given in the lower two rows of Figure \ref{fig:mdp_bw_skew_L_skew_bottom} screened by the L-skewness, the HL-skewness finds the genes with left-skewness in their distributional bodies and show good separation of subtypes. All the seven genes selected by the HL-skewness except SLC44A4 and GATA3 were also selected by the L-skewness. Interestingly, the three genes with the smallest L- and HL-skewness values were the same, indicating that both of the L-statistics based estimators share a similar level of robustness. However, the two genes that were selected by one estimator but not by the other motivate us to consider a quantitative analysis of the whole ranked lists generated by those two measures. A much more quantitative comparison of gene rankings is done in the next subsection.
The seven genes with the smallest Bowley's skewness estimator presented at the bottom two rows of Figure \ref{fig:mdp_bw_HL_Q_skew_bottom} show quite different patterns. Those genes generally show strong bimodality rather than distributional skewness. Especially, the genes such as RPS27 and C10orf82 may not be viewed as strongly skewed. This seems to happen because Bowley's measure ignores the distribution of data outside of the quartiles, which can result in some unintuitive notions of skewness. Whether this property is advantageous or not in screening biologically interesting genes is analyzed in the next subsection.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.96\textwidth]{Figure/mdp_bw_HL_skew_bottom}\\\\
\includegraphics[width=0.96\textwidth]{Figure/mdp_bw_Bowley_skew_bottom}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{The marginal distribution plots of seven genes with the smallest sample HL-skewness (top two rows) and Bowley's skewness values (bottom two rows). The seven genes in the upper two rows possess distributional skewness to the left side and focus better on subtypes, while those in the lower two rows sometimes exhibit asymmetric bimodality.}
\label{fig:mdp_bw_HL_Q_skew_bottom}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Gene Set Enrichment Analysis}\label{subsec:GSEA}
One of the main goals of the TCGA data analysis done here is to assess the performances of various measures of skewness and kurtosis by their abilities to screen biologically meaningful genes. The marginal distribution plot analysis results given in the preceding subsection show that skewness estimators are able to screen genes that are related to cancer subtypes which are a type of biologically meaningful feature. We conjecture that genes with non-Gaussian distributional shape can be related to other biological features as well as cancer subtypes, and confirm this based on \textit{Gene Set Enrichment Analysis} (\textit{GSEA}) which was introduced in \citet{Subramanian2005}.
A basic goal of GSEA is to assess goodness of a ranked list of genes in terms of how well the list places biologically interesting genes near its top or bottom, i.e. how well the list finds interesting genes. Since a measure of skewness or kurtosis provides an ordering of the genes, its screening ability can be assessed by applying GSEA to the ranked list generated by it. In our GSEA, we will study performances of various measures over many gene sets published by the Broad Institute. A collection of 15,312 such gene sets, with a minimum of 15 and maximum of 10,000 genes, is available in the public database MSigDB v.6.0. Our main results are GSEA output which is how many times those gene sets are located at the top and bottom of a ranked list of genes, i.e. how many times interesting gene sets are screened by the ranked list of genes.
Figure \ref{fig:es_plot} shows an example, based on our data, generated by the Gene Set Enrichment software v2.2.4 released by the Broad Institute. Here we used the ranked list of genes generated by the HL-kurtosis and the independent gene set whose name is given near the top of Figure \ref{fig:es_plot}. The reason for selecting this gene set is its particularly strong result. The middle panel shows a ranked list of genes $L=\left\{g_1,g_2,\cdots,g_N\right\}$ where the locations of genes in the independent gene set $S=\left\{g_1',g_2',\cdots,g_{N'}'\right\}$ are denoted by black vertical lines. The gene set consists of 316 genes; hence there are 316 black lines. The bottom panel shows the sample quantile plot of rank metrics which are the sample HL-kurtosis values. The values are sorted in descending order and represented by the heights of gray vertical lines, yielding two half mounds of gray colors. We compute the probabilities of finding and missing interesting genes $S$ in the top $n$ list of genes extracted from the ranked list $L$ as
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:GSEA_hit_miss}
P_{\text{hit}}(S,n)=\frac{\sum_{j\leq n,g_j\in S}\left|r_j\right|^p}
{\sum_{g_j\in S}\left|r_j\right|^p},\quad
P_{\text{miss}}(S,n)=\frac{\sum_{j\leq n,g_j\notin S}1}{\sum_{g_j\notin S}1}
\end{equation}
where the parameter $p$ was recommended to take the value of one (or sometimes zero) in \citet{Subramanian2005}. As we increase the size $n$ of the top-$n$ list, both $P_{\text{hit}}(S,n)$ and $P_{\text{miss}}(S,n)$ become functions of $n$ whose maximum difference is of interest. The \textit{enrichment score} (\textit{ES}) of the gene set $S$ is defined as $\text{ES}(S)=\text{ES}(S,n')$ where $n'=\argmax_{1\leq n\leq N}\left|\text{ES}(S,n)\right|$ and
\[\text{ES}(S,n)=P_{\text{hit}}(S,n)-P_{\text{miss}}(S,n)\]
to assess the significance of difference between them. The top panel of Figure \ref{fig:es_plot} plots the values of $\text{ES}(S,n)$ as a function of $n$ so that the $\text{ES}(S)$ is obtained as the minimum value of that function. If interesting genes are gathered at the top of the ranked list, the enrichment score will be highly positive, and if they are gathered at the bottom, the score will be highly negative. It can be seen in Figure \ref{fig:es_plot} that most of the genes in that gene set have negatively large HL-kurtosis estimates, yielding the ES value of -0.304.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{Figure/es_plot}
\end{center}
\caption{The enrichment score plot. The top panel shows the values of $\text{ES}(S,n)$ and the middle panel shows the locations of interesting genes in this gene set. The bottom panel shows the sample quantiles of the HL-kurtosis estimates. It can be seen that the biologically meaningful genes mostly gather at the bottom of the ranked list yielding a negative enrichment score.}
\label{fig:es_plot}
\end{figure}
One important difference between our analysis and the conventional GSEA is that different measures of skewness and kurtosis have different scales. For example, the conventional kurtosis $\gamma_2$ is only bounded below by 0, but the L-kurtosis was shown in \citet{Hosking1990} to be bounded by -1 and 1. This type of difference of scales can yield unexpected results in the GSEA analysis. The paper \citet{Subramanian2005} suggested that the option $p=0$, called the \textit{classic scoring scheme} will not be much affected by the type of statistic in Equation (\ref{eqn:GSEA_hit_miss}), so we use that here.
To evaluate the statistical significance on enrichment score, $\text{ES}(S)$, we randomly permute the ranks of genes in the ranked list to compute the $k$-th permuted enrichment score $\text{ES}_k(S)$ for the $k$-th permuted list. We repeat the permutation for $K=1,000$ times to obtain the null distribution of $\text{ES}_k(S)$ and a nominal p-value of $\text{ES}(S)$. For multiple gene sets $S_m$ for $m=1,2,\cdots,M$, we control the \textit{False Discovery Rate} (\textit{FDR}) which is the proportion of permuted gene lists with larger absolute values and the same sign of enrichment scores with $\text{ES}(S)$,
\begin{align*}
\text{FDR}(S)&= \frac{\sum_{m=1}^M\sum_{k=1}^KI\left(\text{ES}_k\left(S_m\right)>\text{ES}(S)\right)}
{\sum_{m=1}^M\sum_{k=1}^KI\left(\text{ES}_k\left(S_m\right)>0\right)}\quad\text{if ES}(S)>0,\\
\text{FDR}(S)&= \frac{\sum_{m=1}^M\sum_{k=1}^KI\left(\text{ES}_k\left(S_m\right)\leq\text{ES}(S)\right)}
{\sum_{m=1}^M\sum_{k=1}^KI\left(\text{ES}_k\left(S_m\right)\leq0\right)}\quad\text{if ES}(S)\leq0.
\end{align*}
If the $\text{FDR}(S)$ is less than a given level, then it is said that the corresponding gene set $S$ is significantly enriched. We investigate both the FDR levels 0.05 and 0.25 based on the recommendations of the GSEA User Guide (\url{http://software.broadinstitute.org/gsea/doc/GSEAUserGuideFrame.html}).
\subsection{Comparison among skewness estimators}\label{subsec:GSEA_skewness}
Table \ref{tab:GSEA_results_skew_FDR025} shows the results of comparison between different skewness estimators when the FDR level is fixed at 0.25. The title row shows the names of the skewness estimators and the numbers of respective enriched gene sets. For example, the ranked list of genes generated by the HL-skewness screened 6,316 biologically meaningful gene sets, i.e. the FDR's of those gene sets were less than 0.25. The columns show, from left to right, the best to worst performing skewness estimators by the number of interesting gene sets screened by them. The title column shows the skewness estimators in the same order with the last estimator removed. We do a pairwise comparison of the performances of estimators in terms of how many gene sets are flagged as enriched and assess statistical significance using Fisher's exact test. The values given in the middle of the table are the p-values. For example, the p-value 0.6093 in the second row and the third column shows that the difference in the numbers of enriched gene sets by the HL-skewness (6,316) and L-skewness (6,271) are not significantly different. Since each pair of skewness estimators need only one comparison, we colored cells corresponding to repetitive comparisons gray. The boldfaced numbers indicate that corresponding p-values are significant, before adjusting for multiple comparisons, and will continue to be after Bonferroni correction.
It can be seen in Table \ref{tab:GSEA_results_skew_FDR025} that the HL-skewness performs the best while Bowley's skewness performs the worst. The L-statistics based skewness estimators perform better than the conventional skewness, but the degree of superiority is not statistically significant. The conventional skewness is in third place, but its inferiority to the HL-skewness yields a p-value of 0.1011, which is not significant. This motivates further investigation into relationships between those estimators, which will be shown in Table \ref{tab:GSEA_results_skew_FDR005} with the FDR level 0.05. Interestingly, Bowley's skewness is not good in terms of its screening ability. It performs the worst and its inferiority to the other estimators is very significant, as shown in the last column of the table. It seems that this results from the property of Bowley's skewness that it focuses on the locations of the sample quartiles and ignores too much information in other parts of a distribution. The TCGA data have 5 subtypes, and consideration of only the first and third sample quartiles seems to result in a strong loss of subtype information. This also implies that visual comparisons as shown in Subsection \ref{subsec:mdp}, where Bowley's skewness appeared to screen subtype driven genes quite well, are not enough to fully evaluate the relative performances between estimators.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c||c|c|c|c}\hline
Estimator&HL-skewness&L-skewness&Skewness&Bowley's skewness\\
(No. of enriched genes)&(6,316)&(6,271)&(6,174)&(4,242)\\\hline\hline
HL-skewness (6,316)&\cellcolor{lightgray}&0.6093&0.1011&$\boldsymbol{<0.001}$\\\hline
L-skewness (6,271)&\cellcolor{lightgray}&\cellcolor{lightgray}&0.264&$\boldsymbol{<0.001}$\\\hline
Skewness (6,174)&\cellcolor{lightgray}&\cellcolor{lightgray}&\cellcolor{lightgray}&$\boldsymbol{<0.001}$\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{The numbers of gene sets enriched by different skewness estimators with the FDR level 0.25 and the significance of their differences based on Fisher's exact test. The HL- and L-skewness perform the best and Bowley's skewness performs the worst. The superiority of the HL-skewness over the conventional skewness is not statistically significant, which motivates further comparison. The inferiority of Bowley's skewness to the other estimators is very significant.}
\label{tab:GSEA_results_skew_FDR025}
\end{table}
Table \ref{tab:GSEA_results_skew_FDR005} shows a similar result as Table \ref{tab:GSEA_results_skew_FDR025} at FDR level 0.05. Overall, L-statistics based estimators better capture biologically meaningful departures from Gaussianity in the direction of skewness. The L-skewness performs significantly better than all the other estimators as shown in Table \ref{tab:GSEA_results_skew_FDR005} row two. The superiority of the L-skewness over the HL-skewness is not really significant after considering multiplicity; the p-value is about 0.0498 which was shown as 0.050 in the table after rounding. The HL-skewness performs better than the conventional skewness and the degree of difference is statistically significant. This coincides with our observations made in Subsection \ref{subsec:mdp} that the conventional skewness is driven by outliers too much to be able to screen subtype-driven meaningful genes. Bowley's skewness is again not successful in screening interesting genes. It's inferiority to the other estimators is again very significant as seen in the last column. Based on Tables \ref{tab:GSEA_results_skew_FDR025} and \ref{tab:GSEA_results_skew_FDR005}, we claim that the L-statistics based skewness estimators screen interesting genes significantly better than the other estimators, but any difference between the HL- and L-skewness is hard to conclude.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c||c|c|c|c}\hline
Estimator&L-skewness&HL-skewness&Skewness&Bowley's skewness\\
(No. of enriched genes)&(3,300)&(3,159)&(2,993)&(2,005)\\\hline\hline
L-skewness (3,300)&\cellcolor{lightgray}&0.050&$\boldsymbol{<0.001}$&$\boldsymbol{<0.001}$\\\hline
HL-skewness (3,159)&\cellcolor{lightgray}&\cellcolor{lightgray}&0.019&$\boldsymbol{<0.001}$\\\hline
Skewness (2,993)&\cellcolor{lightgray}&\cellcolor{lightgray}&\cellcolor{lightgray}&$\boldsymbol{<0.001}$\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{The numbers of gene sets enriched by different skewness estimators with FDR level 0.05 and the significance of their differences based on Fisher's exact test. All differences are statistically significant. Similarly to Table \ref{tab:GSEA_results_skew_FDR025}, the L-statistics based estimators perform the best and Bowley's skewness performs the worst. This confirms that L-statistics are more useful in finding biologically meaningful genes than other estimators.}
\label{tab:GSEA_results_skew_FDR005}
\end{table}
\subsection{Comparison among kurtosis estimators}\label{subsec:GSEA_kurtosis}
In this subsection, we compare performances of kurtosis estimators in finding biologically meaningful genes in terms of GSEA. This case is more interesting than skewness, since different kurtosis measures usually have different distributional centers as mentioned in Section \ref{sec:introduction}. For example, the distributional center of the L-kurtosis is the uniform distributions, and that of Ruppert's kurtosis depends on its parameters $p_1$ and $p_2$. It was shown in Supplementary Material Section \ref{supp:sec:TCGA_supplement} that kurtosis estimators did not show much difference in the marginal distributions of the genes with the smallest kurtosis estimates. Here we check if the weak difference still holds in the quantitative analysis done by the GSEA.
Table \ref{tab:GSEA_results_kurt_FDR025} shows the comparison results when the FDR level is fixed at 0.25. The HL-kurtosis dominates all the other estimators with p-values close to zero. Ruppert's kurtosis performs significantly worse than the other measures, which confirms our observation made in Subsection \ref{subsec:GSEA_skewness} that Bowley's skewness, which is based on the sample quantiles, is not efficient in screening biologically meaningful genes. Interestingly, the L-kurtosis performs worse than the conventional kurtosis with p-value less than 0.001 (third row, fourth column), but it will be seen in Table \ref{tab:GSEA_results_kurt_FDR005} that their difference becomes insignificant as we change the FDR level to 0.05.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c||c|c|c|c}\hline
Estimator&HL-kurtosis&Kurtosis&L-kurtosis&Ruppert's kurtosis\\
(No. of enriched genes)&(4,992)&(4,085)&(3,369)&(2,692)\\\hline\hline
HL-kurtosis (4,992)&\cellcolor{lightgray}&$\boldsymbol{<0.001}$&$\boldsymbol{<0.001}$&$\boldsymbol{<0.001}$\\\hline
Kurtosis (4,085)&\cellcolor{lightgray}&\cellcolor{lightgray}&$\boldsymbol{<0.001}$&$\boldsymbol{<0.001}$\\\hline
L-kurtosis (3,369)&\cellcolor{lightgray}&\cellcolor{lightgray}&\cellcolor{lightgray}&$\boldsymbol{<0.001}$\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{The numbers of gene sets enriched by different kurtosis estimators with FDR level 0.25 and the significance of their differences based on Fisher's exact test. The HL-kurtosis performs the best and Ruppert's kurtosis performs the worst. The L-kurtosis performs worse than the conventional kurtosis (third row, fourth column).}
\label{tab:GSEA_results_kurt_FDR025}
\end{table}
Table \ref{tab:GSEA_results_kurt_FDR005} shows that the order of kurtosis estimators of their GSEA performances remains the same even though we change the FDR level to 0.05. The HL-kurtosis performs the best and Ruppert's kurtosis performs the worst at this FDR level. The conventional kurtosis again performs better than the L-kurtosis, but the degree of superiority is not statistically significant (p-value $\approx$ 0.394). This implies that the competition between the conventional kurtosis and L-kurtosis is inconclusive. Ruppert's kurtosis again performs the worst with p-values less than 0.001. Overall, it seems that the HL-kurtosis is particularly useful in screening biologically meaningful genes in the direction of kurtosis.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c||c|c|c|c}\hline
Estimator&HL-kurtosis&Kurtosis&L-kurtosis&Ruppert's kurtosis\\
(No. of enriched genes)&(2,067)&(1,500)&(1,455)&(684)\\\hline\hline
HL-kurtosis (2,067)&\cellcolor{lightgray}&$\boldsymbol{<0.001}$&$\boldsymbol{<0.001}$&$\boldsymbol{<0.001}$\\\hline
Kurtosis (1,500)&\cellcolor{lightgray}&\cellcolor{lightgray}&0.394&$\boldsymbol{<0.001}$\\\hline
L-kurtosis (1,455)&\cellcolor{lightgray}&\cellcolor{lightgray}&\cellcolor{lightgray}&$\boldsymbol{<0.001}$\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{The numbers of enriched gene sets based on classic enrichment scores. The HL-kurtosis and L-kurtosis perform the best and Ruppert's kurtosis performs the worst. The superiority of the HL-kurtosis over the conventional kurtosis is statistically significant, which indicates that L-statistics perform better than sample moments or sample quantiles in screening biologically meaningful genes.}
\label{tab:GSEA_results_kurt_FDR005}
\end{table}
\section{Estimation of the Gaussian Centered L-moments}\label{sec:estimation_GCL_moments}
This section contains details of the derivation of the methods used in this paper. One of the main strengths of the Gaussian Centered L-moments is their interpretability; their values indicate direction and magnitude of departure from the Gaussian distributions. For such a strength to be effective in real data analysis, the sample Gaussian Centered L-moments should converge to theoretical parallels yielding the desired interpretability. We first focus on the HL-moments. There are multiple ways to estimate L-functionals in Equation (\ref{eqn:L_functional}) by L-statistics in Equation (\ref{eqn:L_statistic}). Our estimator starts from the following approximation
\begin{align}\label{eqn:sample_HL_approximation}
\eta_r=E_F\left(H_{r-1}\left(\Phi^{-1}(F(X))\right)X\right)
&\approx\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^nH_{r-1}\left(\Phi^{-1}\left(F\left(X_i\right)\right)\right)X_i\notag\\
&=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^nH_{r-1}\left(\Phi^{-1}\left(F\left(X_{i:n}\right)\right)\right)X_{i:n}
\end{align}
where the approximation can be replaced by the almost sure convergence as $n\rightarrow\infty$ when suitable assumptions are made on the distribution $F$. Note that the Brown-Hettmansperger estimator in Equation (\ref{eqn:sample_HL_moments_BH}) results from a different approximation
\[E_F\left(H_{r-1}\left(\Phi^{-1}(F(X))\right)X\right)\approx E_{F_n}\left(H_{r-1}\left(\Phi^{-1}(F(X))\right)X\right)\]
where $F_n$ is the EDF. For the last expression in Equation (\ref{eqn:sample_HL_approximation}) to actually play the role of an estimator, the terms including $F$ should be estimated. A typical L-statistic can be derived from the following approximation
\begin{align}\label{eqn:L_statistics_HL_moments}
\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^nH_{r-1}\left(\Phi^{-1}\left(\underline{F\left(X_{i:n}\right)}\right)\right)
X_{i:n}
&\approx\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^nH_{r-1}\left(\Phi^{-1}\left(
\underline{E\left(F\left(X_{i:n}\right)\right)}\right)\right)X_{i:n}\notag\\
&=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^nH_{r-1}\left(\Phi^{-1}\left(E\left(U_{i:n}\right)\right)\right)X_{i:n}\notag\\
&=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^nH_{r-1}\left(\Phi^{-1}\left(\frac{i}{n+1}\right)\right)X_{i:n}
\end{align}
where the underlined expressions present approximated (left) and approximating (right) terms and $U_{i:n}$ is the $i$-th uniform order statistic. This is consistent with the idea given in \citet{Harter1984} that L-statistics base their performance on how well the coefficient $i/(n+1)$ approximates $F\left(X_{i:n}\right)$.
Another estimator can be obtained from a different approximation in Equation (\ref{eqn:L_statistics_HL_moments}) as
\begin{align}\label{eqn:sample_HL_moments_origin}
\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\underline{H_{r-1}\left(\Phi^{-1}\left(F\left(X_{i:n}\right)\right)\right)}
X_{i:n}&\approx\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n
\underline{E\left(H_{r-1}\left(\Phi^{-1}\left(F\left(X_{i:n}\right)\right)\right)\right)}X_{i:n}\notag\\
&=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n
E\left(H_{r-1}\left(Z_{i:n}\right)\right)X_{i:n}
\end{align}
where $Z_{i:n}$ is the $i$-th standard Gaussian order statistic. The key idea is that careful choice of location of the expectation can increase accuracy of approximation of an L-functional by an L-statistic. Since the quantile function $\Phi^{-1}$ is a highly nonlinear function, taking expectation outside $\Phi^{-1}$ can yield better approximation in Equation (\ref{eqn:sample_HL_moments_origin}). The \textit{sample Hermite L-moments} (\textit{sample HL-moments}) are defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:sample_HL_moments}
\hat{\eta}_{n,r}=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^nE\left(H_{r-1}\left(Z_{i:n}\right)\right)X_{i:n}.
\end{equation}
This can be understood as the inner product between the order statistics $X_{i:n}$ and polynomials of the expected order statistics of the standard Gaussian distribution. By changing the degree of the polynomial, $r$, different distributional aspects of $F$ are compared with the standard Gaussian distribution $\Phi$. For example, the third and fourth sample HL-moments are
\begin{align*}
\hat{\eta}_{n,3}&=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n
\left\{E\left(Z_{i:n}^2\right)-1\right\}X_{i:n},\\
\hat{\eta}_{n,4}&=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n
\left\{E\left(Z_{i:n}^3\right)-3E\left(Z_{i:n}\right)\right\}X_{i:n}.
\end{align*}
We perform numerical integration to compute the values $E\left(Z_{i:n}^k\right)$ for $k=1,2,\cdots$. Note that the sample HL-moments are biased, e.g. we have $E_\Phi\left(\hat{\eta}_{20,4}\right)\approx-0.2833$ and $E_\Phi\left(\hat{\eta}_{50,4}\right)\approx-0.1733$. To correct these biases, we derive their means by Monte-Carlo simulation based on 10,000 simulations and subtracted the means from estimates. Note that \citet{Brown1996} adopted the same approach for their estimators. The comparison between the estimators in Equations (\ref{eqn:L_statistics_HL_moments}), (\ref{eqn:sample_HL_moments_origin}) and the estimator of \citet{Brown1996} given in Equation (\ref{eqn:sample_HL_moments_BH}) is given in Subsection \ref{supp:subsec:comparison_HL_GSEA} of the Supplementary Material.
Since the $r$-th RL-moment is a linear combination of the classical L-moments as shown in Subsection \ref{subsec:RL_moments}, the $r$-th \textit{sample Rescaled L-moment} (\textit{sample RL-moment}) is naturally derived as a linear combination of the classical sample L-moments. From Equation (\ref{eqn:relationship_R_P}), we define the $r$-th sample RL-moment as $\hat{\rho}_{n,1}=\hat{\lambda}_{n,1}$ and
\[\hat{\rho}_{n,r}=\sum_{k=1}^r\alpha_{k,r}\hat{\lambda}_{n,r}\]
for $r=2,3,\cdots$. As a result, the estimators of the RL-moments-based measures of location, scale, skewness and kurtosis given in Theorem \ref{thm:Oja_criteria_RL} are derived as follows,
\begin{align}\label{eqn:relationship_sample_RL_L}
\hat{\rho}_{n,1}&=\hat{\lambda}_{n,1},\notag\\
\hat{\rho}_{n,2}&=\frac{1}{\delta_{1,2:2}\left(\Phi\right)}\hat{\lambda}_{n,2},\notag\\
\hat{\rho}_{n,3}^*&=\frac{\delta_{1,2:2}\left(\Phi\right)}{\delta_{1,2:3}\left(\Phi\right)}\hat{\lambda}_{n,3}^*,\notag\\
\hat{\rho}_{n,4}^*&=\frac{\delta_{1,2:2}\left(\Phi\right)}{5}\left\{\frac{3}{\delta_{2,3:4}\left(F_0\right)}+\frac{2}{\delta_{3,4:4}\left(\Phi\right)}\right\}\hat{\lambda}_{n,4}^*
-\frac{3\delta_{1,2:2}\left(\Phi\right)}{5}\left\{\frac{1}{\delta_{2,3:4}\left(\Phi\right)}-\frac{1}{\delta_{3,4:4}\left(\Phi\right)}\right\}.
\end{align}
We have the following theorem on asymptotic Gaussianity of the sample HL-moment ratios, RL-skewness and RL-kurtosis.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:asymptotic_sample_HL_RL}
Let $r_1,r_2=3,4,\cdots$ such that $r_1\neq r_2$. If $E\left|X_1\right|^{2+\epsilon}<\infty$ for some $\epsilon>0$, then we have
\[n^{1/2}\left(\left(\begin{array}{c}\hat{\eta}_{n,r_1}^*\\\hat{\eta}_{n,r_2}^*\end{array}\right)
-\left(\begin{array}{c}\eta_{r_1}^*\\\eta_{r_2}^*\end{array}\right)\right)
\converge^d\cN\left(0,\Psi^H\right)\]
where the matrix $\Psi^H$ is defined in Subsubsection \ref{supp:subsubsec:proof_asymptot_sample_HL} of the Supplementary Material.
If $E\left|X_1\right|^2<\infty$, then we have
\[n^{1/2}\left(\left(\begin{array}{c}\hat{\rho}_{n,3}^*\\\hat{\rho}_{n,4}^*\end{array}\right)
-\left(\begin{array}{c}\rho_3^*\\\rho_4^*\end{array}\right)\right)
\converge^d\cN\left(0,\Psi^R\right).\]
The matrix $\Psi^R$ is defined in Subsubsection \ref{supp:subsubsec:proof_asymptot_sample_RL} of the Supplementary Material.
\end{thm}
\begin{pf}
See Subsection \ref{supp:subsec:proof_asymptotic_sample_HL_RL} of the Supplementary Material.\hfill\qedsymbol
\end{pf}
\section{Robustness}\label{sec:robustness}
Now we carefully study the relative robustness of these methods. We use the \textit{influence function} as a primary tool for robustness analysis. Note from \citet{Huber2009} that the influence function of a functional $\theta$ evaluated at a distribution $F$ is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:influence_functions}
\text{IF}(x;F,\theta)=\lim_{\eps\downarrow0}\frac{\theta\left(F_{\eps,x}\right)-\theta(F)}{\eps}
\end{equation}
where $F_{\eps,x}=(1-\eps)F+\eps\delta_x$ and $\delta_x$ is a degenerate distribution putting mass 1 at the point $x$. As can be seen from Equation (\ref{eqn:influence_functions}), the influence function measures the effect of contamination of a distribution by a point $x$ on the functional $\theta$. Hence, if a functional is sensitive to an outlier, its influence function should have large values for large absolute values of $x$. If the distribution $F$ changes, the same outlier $x$ can affect the functional in a different way. In this paper, we compare the robustness of various measures of skewness and kurtosis based on their influence functions evaluated at a family of distributions.
The papers \citet{Groeneveld1991} and \citet{Ruppert1987} compared various measures of skewness and kurtosis, respectively, using the influence function. As a criterion of comparison, both the papers compared the degrees of polynomials that are \textit{asymptotic tight bounds} of the influence functions. Suppose that $J_1,J_2:\mR\rightarrow\mR_+$ are two functions where $\mR_+=\{x\in\mR|x\geq0\}$. We write $J_1(x)=\Theta\left(J_2(x)\right)$ to mean that there exist $a_1,a_2>0$ and $x'>0$ such that
\[a_1J_2(x)\leq J_1(x)\leq a_2J_2(x)\]
for all $|x|\geq x'$. This roughly means that asymptotic behavior of both the functions $J_1$ and $J_2$ are the same. Using the asymptotic tight bounds, those papers compared the robustness of different measures. For example, if two functionals $\theta_1$ and $\theta_2$ satisfy $\left|\text{IF}\left(x;F,\theta_1\right)\right|=\Theta(|x|)$ and $\left|\text{IF}\left(x;F,\theta_2\right)\right|=\Theta\left(x^2\right)$, then $\theta_1$ was considered to be more robust than $\theta_2$ for the distribution $F$.
An interesting family of distributions for evaluation of the influence functions is \textit{Tukey's $g$ and $h$ distributions} which contain all the transformed random variables of the form
\[\left(\frac{e^{gZ}-1}{g}\right)\exp\left[\frac{hZ^2}{2}\right]\]
where $g\in\mR,h\geq0$ and $Z$ is the standard Gaussian random variable; see \citet{Martinez1984} for detailed explanation. By convention, the case when $g=0$ is defined as the random variable $Z\exp\left(hZ^2/2\right)$. We denote the distribution function of $\text{Tukey}(g,h)$ by $T_{g,h}$. An important special case, where the distributions are symmetric, $T_{0,h}$ is called \textit{Tukey's $h$ distributions}. As shown in \citep{Brys2004,Brys2006}, Tukey's $g$ and $h$ family is ideal for our study because it allows direct application of Oja's criteria. For example, $\Phi$ does not have more kurtosis than $T_{0,h}$ (Definition \ref{defn:Oja_criteria}.d) if we have $g=0$ and $h>0$. This implies that Tukey's $h$ distributions have heavier tails than the Gaussian distributions in Oja's sense. Note that heavier tails of a distribution indicate a higher chance of existence of extreme outliers. This indicates the value of checking the influence functions not only for the standard Gaussian distribution but also for Tukey's $h$ distributions with $h>0$.
Before we derive the influence functions of measures of skewness and kurtosis based on the Gaussian Centered L-moments, we introduce the previous results for the conventional skewness and kurtosis. Note that \citet{Ruppert1987} used the notion of \textit{symmetric influence function} defined as
\[\text{SIF}(x;F,\theta)=
\lim_{\eps\downarrow0}\frac{\theta\left(\left(F_{\eps,x}+F_{\eps,-x}\right)/2\right)-\theta(F)}{\eps}.\]
The symmetric influence function measures the sensitivity of a functional to symmetric contamination by points $-x$ and $x$ so it is suitable for comparison of kurtosis measures.
\begin{thm}[\citet{Groeneveld1991},\citet{Ruppert1987}]\label{thm:IF_conventional_skew_kurt}
Suppose that $F$ is a symmetric distribution such that $\mu(F)=0$ and $\sigma^2(F)=1$. Then we have
\[\text{IF}\left(x;F,\gamma_1\right)=x^3-3x=H_3(x),\,
\text{SIF}\left(x;F,\gamma_2\right)=x^4-6x^2+3=H_4(x).\tag*{$\blacksquare$}\]
\end{thm}
Before we derive the influence functions of the measures of skewness and kurtosis based on the L-, RL- and HL-moments at various distributions, we first show the relationships between their influence functions and symmetric influence functions.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:relation_IF_SIF_GCL_moments}
If $F$ is a symmetric distribution, we have
\begin{align*}
\text{SIF}\left(x;F,\lambda_4^*\right)&=\text{IF}\left(x;F,\lambda_4^*\right),\\
\text{SIF}\left(x;F,\rho_4^*\right)&=\text{IF}\left(x;F,\rho_4^*\right),\\
\text{SIF}\left(x;F,\eta_4^*\right)&=\text{IF}\left(x;F,\eta_4^*\right).
\end{align*}
\end{thm}
\begin{pf}
See Subsection \ref{supp:subsec:proof_relation_IF_SIF_GCL_moments} of the Supplementary Material.
\hfill\qedsymbol
\end{pf}
As noted above, we adopt Tukey's $h$ distributions as grounds for comparison between different measures of skewness and kurtosis. The main result is given as the following theorem.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:IF_Tukey_g_h}
We have
\begin{align*}
\left|\text{IF}\left(x;T_{0,h},\gamma_{0.25}\right)\right|=
\left|\text{IF}\left(x;T_{0,h},\gamma_{0.1,0.3}\right)\right|&=\Theta(1),\\
\left|\text{IF}\left(x;T_{0,h},\lambda_r^*\right)\right|=
\left|\text{IF}\left(x;T_{0,h},\rho_r^*\right)\right|&=\Theta(|x|),\\
\left|\text{IF}\left(x;T_{0,h},\eta_r^*\right)\right|&=
\Theta\!\left(|x|\left\{\log(|x|+1)\right\}^{(r-1)/2}\!\right)\\
\left|\text{IF}\left(x;T_{0,h},\gamma_1\right)\right|&=\Theta\left(|x|^3\right)\\
\left|\text{IF}\left(x;T_{0,h},\gamma_2\right)\right|&=\Theta\left(|x|^4\right)
\end{align*}
for all $h>0$ and $r=3,4,\cdots$.
\end{thm}
\begin{pf}
See Subsection \ref{supp:subsec:proof_IF_Tukey_g_h} of the Supplementary Material.\hfill\qedsymbol
\end{pf}
Theorem \ref{thm:IF_Tukey_g_h} implies that the Gaussian Centered L-moments are much more robust than the conventional skewness and kurtosis on Tukey's $h$ distributions. Note that the influence function of $\eta_r^*$, $\text{IF}\left(x;T_{0,h},\eta_r^*\right)$, does not depend on the parameter $h$. This indicates that even slightly heavier tails than the standard Gaussian distribution result in better robustness of the HL-moments than the conventional moments. The RL-moments have the same levels of robustness with the L-moments, which makes sense since the definitions of the RL-moments have the same forms as the L-moments except the constants of the polynomials inside their definitions. An interesting point is that the RL-moments are more robust than the HL-moments. This shows that even though different functionals have the same distributional centers and are estimated by L-statistics, they can have different levels of robustness.
The influence functions of Bowley's and Ruppert's measures, $\gamma_{0.25}$ and $\gamma_{0.1,0.3}$, given in Theorem \ref{thm:IF_Tukey_g_h} were obtained from the results of \citet{Ruppert1987} and \citet{Groeneveld1991}. Those papers showed that the influence functions of such quantile-based measures evaluated at symmetric distributions are bounded, while we showed in Theorem \ref{thm:IF_Tukey_g_h} of this paper and will complement in Theorem \ref{supp:thm:IF_standard_Gaussian} of the Supplementary Material that the L-statistics based measures have unbounded influence functions for some symmetric distributions. This justifies the use of quantile based measures as baseline robust estimators in the TCGA data analysis given in Section \ref{sec:TCGA_data}.
\bigskip
\begin{center}
{\large\bf SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL}
\end{center}
\begin{description}
\item[Supplementary Material:] All the proofs of the theorems in the manuscript. Figures of marginal distribution plots of the TCGA lobular freeze data. (pdf file)
\end{description}
\bigskip
\begin{center}
{\large\bf ACKNOWLEDGEMENT}
This research was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1016441, 1512945, 1633074, DMS-1613112 and IIS-1633212. We give our special thanks to Youli Xia who provided input in GSEA data analysis.
\end{center}
\bibliographystyle{Chicago}
|
\section{Introduction}
For two smooth components $Y_1,Y_2$ meeting in a smooth divisor $D$ a folkloristic statement says that a necessary condition for $X=Y_1\cup Y_2$ to have a smoothing is that the two normal bundles are dual to each other, i.e., $\shN_{D/Y_1}\otimes\shN_{D/Y_2}\cong\shO_D$. This statement is actually incorrect. It is true only with the further requirement that the total space of the smoothing be itself smooth.
Conceptually, $\shN_{D/Y_1}\otimes\shN_{D/Y_2}\cong \shE xt^1(\Omega_X,\shO_X)=:\shT^1_X$ and Friedman famously coined the notion of \emph{d-semistability} which is saying $\shT^1_X\cong\shO_D$ \cite{fri}.
We are going to generalize the situation by only requiring $\shT^1_X$ to be \emph{generated by global sections} (and beyond).
For a choice of $s\in\Gamma(D,\shT^1_X)$, the total space of the smoothing will then be of the local form $xy=tf$ where $t$ is the deformation parameter, $Y_1=V(x), Y_2=V(y)$ and $f$ represents $s$ in a local trivialization of $\shT^1_X$. The total space of the smoothing has singularities precisely along $s=0$.
The local form $xy=tf$ has been found to be abundant in mirror symmetry applications \cite{CKYZ,GrossSiebertI,GrossSiebertII,gs,CLL12,GKR,AAK,RS19}.
We work more generally with a \emph{normal crossing space}, that is, a connected variety $X$ over $\CC$ \'etale locally of the form $z_1\cdot...\cdot z_k=0$ for varying $k\le \dim X+1$. We call a flat map $\shX\ra\DD$ for $\DD$ a holomorphic disk a \emph{smoothing} of $X$ if the central fiber is isomorphic to $X$ and the general fiber is smooth.
If a smoothing exists, then we call $X$ \emph{smoothable}.
We say that a normal crossing space has \emph{effective anti-canonical class} if the dual of its dualizing sheaf $\omega_X$ can be represented by a reduced divisor $E$ that meets the strata of $X$ transversely, that is, \'etale locally along $E$, $X$ is equivalent to $E\times\AA^1$.
We prove the following theorem.
\begin{theorem} \label{maintheorem-nc}
Let $X$ be a proper normal crossing space with effective anti-canonical class.
If $\shT^1_X$ is generated by global sections and $X_\sing$ is projective, then $X$ is smoothable.
\end{theorem}
The only purpose of the projectivity condition is to apply Bertini's theorem to have available a ``nice'' section of the line bundle $\shT^1_X$ on $X_\sing$.
Both the projectivity assumption as well as the global generatedness assumption on $\shT^1_X$ can thus be removed if there exists a \emph{schön} section of $\shT^1_X$, that is, a section whose vanishing locus $Z$ is reduced and $X_\sing$ is locally along $Z$ equivalent to $Z\times\AA^1$.
We also prove a more general theorem for toroidal crossing spaces that we give down below (Theorem~\ref{maintheorem-tc}). Theorem~\ref{maintheorem-nc} provides a lot more flexibility than existing smoothing results, notably Friedman's \cite{fri} for surfaces, Kawamata--Namikawa's \cite{KawamataNamikawa1994} for d-semistable Calabi--Yaus and Gross--Siebert's \cite{gs} allowing a singular total space but with much stronger requirements on $X$, see also \cite{tzi,NYot,NYot2,Sano,Lee21}.
\begin{example}
The union $X$ of $d$ hyperplanes in general position in $\PP^n$ is smoothable to a degree $d$ hypersurface, but none of the existing results is able to predict the smoothability of $X$ abstractly.
Indeed, the total space of the smoothing is singular since it requires blowing up the base locus of the smoothing pencil. On the other hand, $\shT^1_X$ is generated by global sections. Theorem~\ref{maintheorem-nc} predicts the smoothability if $d\le n+1$.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
The simplest type of normal crossing space is one with two smoothly intersecting components:
let $Y$ be a smooth Fano manifold with $-K_Y$ very ample, let $D$ be a smooth section of $-K_Y$ and $X$ be the normal crossing space obtained by identifying two copies of $Y$ along $D$.
Then $\shT^1_X\cong\shN^{\otimes 2}_{D/Y}$ is generated by global sections and $X$ is Calabi--Yau, so Theorem~\ref{maintheorem-nc} provides a smoothing of $X$.
For Fano threefolds $Y$ that are complete intersections in products of weighted projective spaces the smoothing gives Calabi--Yau threefolds of Euler numbers $-106, -122, -138, -156,$ $-128, -156, -176, -256, -260, -296$. While double intersection situations can be birationally modified to be tractable by the smoothing result in \cite{KawamataNamikawa1994}, this is no longer true for triple (and higher) intersection situations \cite{Lee2018}, but Theorem~\ref{maintheorem-nc} provides smoothings.
\end{example}
Theorem~\ref{maintheorem-nc} considerably facilitates the construction of Calabi--Yau and Fano manifolds.
Our work generalizes the Gross--Siebert program toward allowing non-toric components in the central fiber as well as more flexibility in the local structure, cf.~Example~\ref{exampleGS}.
We generalize Tziolas's smoothing result for Fanos by dropping its cohomological condition \cite{tzi}.
While we work with toric local models, non-toric deformations of toric local models have applications for smoothing singular toric Fanos or the construction of versal deformations of non-isolated Gorenstein singularities, see.~\cite{CFP,coa2}.
For Whitney umbrella local models, the $\shT^1$-sheaf has recently been computed in \cite{Fantechi2020}.
If the pushforward of the sheaf of differentials from the log smooth locus can be verified to commute with base change for other types of local models, then our smoothing result extends to such situations.
Our results enable the construction of versal Calabi--Yau families and conjecturally a logarithmic Frobenius manifold structure in a formal neighborhood of the extended moduli space, see \cite{bar-kon}, \cite[Theorem~1.3]{CLM}.
Theorem~\ref{rel-degen} below can be viewed as the statement that the Hodge bundles extend trivially over boundary divisors in the moduli space that have toroidal families above them, see also \cite{LSC}.
Since the smoothing deformations are constructed via the Batalin--Vilkovisky formalism in the Gerstenhaber algebra of (log) polyvector fields \S\ref{sec-maurer-Cartan}, the connection to homological mirror symmetry can be made via \cite{bar-kon},\cite{kkp}.
\subsection{Method of Proof}
The first step toward proving Theorem~\ref{maintheorem-nc} is to furnish $X$ with a log structure, an idea already found in \cite{KawamataNamikawa1994,gs}. We build a connection between these two works.
A sheaf of sets $\shL\shS_X$ on $X$ classifying log smooth structures locally on $X$ over the standard log point $S$ has been defined and studied in \cite{GrossSiebertI}.
We show in \S\ref{sec-log-infini} there is a canonical map $\shL\shS_X\ra\shT^1_X$ with the property that a section $s\in\Gamma(X_\sing,\shT^1_X)$ yields a log smooth structure on $U:=X\setminus V(s)$, i.e., we obtain a log smooth morphisms $U\ra S$.
The complement $Z:=V(s)$ has codimension two in $X$. Using Bertini's theorem with the projectivity of $X_\sing$, we can assume that $Z$ is schön as defined above.
In the fashion of Zariski--Steenbrink--Danilov, we consider the differential forms $W^k_{X/S}:=j_*\Omega^k_{U/S}$ for $j:U\hra X$ the inclusion.
In the logarithmic context, these complexes were defined and studied independently by \cite{Nakayama2010} and \cite{GrossSiebertII}.
A key ingredient for the smoothing of $X$ is the knowledge that the Hodge--de Rham spectral sequence for $W^\bullet_{X/S}$ degenerates at $E_1$, a very hard problem.
We use the close control over $W^k_{X/S}$\label{define-W} along $Z$ which we gain by using~\cite{GrossSiebertII,rud} to obtain a particular type of \emph{elementary log toroidal} local models for the log structure near $Z$.
For the proof of the Hodge--de Rham degeneration, we follow the approach by Deligne--Illusie \cite{Deligne1987}: spreading out to finite characteristic and using the Cartier isomorphism.
However, the lack of coherence poses serious new challenges.
The hardest technical part is to show the sheaves $W^\bullet_{X/S}$ commute with base change because $j_*$ and $\otimes$ do not commute in general.
Base change may fail for low characteristics by Example~\ref{baChaViolation}.
However, if the characteristic of the base field is sufficiently large we prove by explicit computation in the elementary log toroidal local models that the sheaves $W^\bullet_{X/S}$ commute with base change.
As a second difficulty, underived pushforward $j_*$ does not ordinarily pass to the derived category and we find a workaround here.
We settle a conjecture by Danilov \cite[15.9]{Danilov1978} along the way (Theorem~\ref{danilov-thm} below).
To show the unobstructedness of log deformations of $X$, we use recent advancements of the Bogomolov--Tian--Todorov theory motivated by the study of mirror symmetry, starting with \cite{kkp} and \cite{bar-kon} which got cultivated to work in algebraic geometry by \cite{iac-man}.
All these works however produce equisingular deformations (because they are intended for deforming smooth spaces).
The crucial difference to our setup is that while we prescribe local deformations by the log structure, these are not locally trivial deformations.
Building on \cite{FMM12}, recently this difficulty in the theory has been addressed in \cite{CLM,CM} which adapts perfectly to our situation to produce a formal deformation in the prescribed local models, see \S\ref{section-smoothing}. We found the framework of Gerstenhaber algebras to be the most effective to think about the theory which governs our way of parsing \cite{CLM} in \S\ref{sec-maurer-Cartan}, see also \cite{SFel}.
At this point, the assumption about effectiveness of $\omega_X^{-1}$ enters the proof, so that one obtains an isomorphism of $W^\bullet_{X/S}(\log E)$ with the Gerstenhaber algebra of log polyvector fields $\operatorname{PV}^\bullet$ and has the Batalin--Vilkovisky operator $\Delta$ available by transporting the de Rham differential to $\operatorname{PV}^\bullet$ which is used in \S\ref{MC-from-BV}.
To improve the resulting formal smoothing to an analytic smoothing, we use the Grauert--Douady space and Artin approximation as already done in \cite{RS19}.
\subsection{Toroidal Pairs and Danilov's Conjecture}
A \emph{toroidal pair} $(X,D)$ is a variety $X$ over a field $\kk$ of characteristic zero with Weil divisor $D\subset X$ such that $X$ is \'etale locally equivalent to an affine toric variety with $D$ identified with a reduced toric divisor (not necessarily the entire toric boundary). Danilov defined the sheaf of differentials $\tilde\Omega^p_X(\log D)$ as the push-forward of the usual K\"ahler differentials $\Omega^p_{X_{reg}}(\log D|_{X_{reg}})$ with log poles from the locus $X_{reg} \subset X$ where the space is regular.
\begin{theorem}[Danilov's conjecture] \label{danilov-thm}
Given a proper toroidal pair $(X,D)$, the Hodge--de Rham spectral sequence
$$E_1^{p,q}=H^q(X,\tilde\Omega^p_X(\log D))\Rightarrow \HH^{p+q}(X,\tilde\Omega^\bullet_X(\log D))$$
degenerates at $E_1$.
\end{theorem}
Special cases of this theorem were known before:
when $X$ has at worst orbifold singularities \cite{Steenbrink1976}, for $D=\emptyset$ \cite{Blickle2001}, and for $D$ locally the entire toric boundary \cite{Tsuji1999,Illusie2002a}.
We believe that our methods can be extended to prove generalizations of the Akizuki--Nakano--Kodaira vanishing theorem.
\subsection{Toroidal Crossing Spaces, their Log Structures, and Orbifold Smoothings}
If $V=\Spec\kk[P]$ is an affine toric variety given by some toric monoid $P$, consider the map of sheaves $a:\underline P\ra\shO_V, p\mapsto z^p,$ with $\underline P$ denoting the constant sheaf.
We obtain a sheaf of monoids $\shP_V=\underline P/a^{-1}(\shO_V^\times)$.
Now $V$ is Gorenstein if and only if the toric boundary $D$ in $V$ is a Cartier divisor, hence given as the zero locus of a monomial $\one\in P$.
\begin{definition}[Siebert,\,Schr\"oer\,\cite{sch-sie}]
A \emph{toroidal crossing space} is an algebraic space $X$ over $\kk$ together with a sheaf of monoids $\shP$ with global section $\one\in\Gamma(X,\shP)$ such that for every point $x\in X$, \'etale locally at $x$, $X$ permits a smooth map to the toric boundary $D_x$ in $V_x=\Spec \kk[\shP_x]$ so that $\shP$ is isomorphic to the pullback of $\shP_{V_x}$ and mapping $\one_x$ to the monomial in $\shP_x$ whose divisor is $D_x$.
\end{definition}
A toroidal crossing space $X$ is automatically Gorenstein, we denote its dualizing line bundle by $\omega_X$.
The boundary divisor in a Gorenstein toric variety is naturally a toroidal crossing space.
General hyperplane sections of projective toroidal crossing spaces are again naturally toroidal crossing spaces.
\begin{lemma}
A normal crossing space is naturally a toroidal crossing space by setting $\shP_x:=\NN^k$ and $\one_x=(1,1,...,1)\in\NN^k$ whenever $X$ is locally at $x$ given by $z_1\cdot...\cdot z_k=0$.
(While there are other possibilities to turn a normal crossing space into a toroidal crossing space, we will always refer to this one.)
\end{lemma}
The class of toroidal crossing spaces is closed under forming products (but not so the class of normal crossing spaces).
The sheaf $\shP$ provides what Gross and Siebert call a \emph{ghost structure} for $X$ (\cite[Definition~3.16]{GrossSiebertI}), an ingredient to define the sheaf $\shLS_X$ (\cite[Definition~3.19]{GrossSiebertI}) whose sections are in bijection with log structures on $X$ together with a log smooth map to the standard log point $S$.
By \cite{GrossSiebertI}, $\shLS_X$ embeds into the coherent sheaf $\bigoplus_C j_{C,*}\shN_{\tilde C}$ where the sum is over the irreducible components $C$ of $X_\sing$, $j_C: \tilde C\ra C\ra X$ is the composition of normalization and closed embedding, and $\shN_{\tilde C}$ is a line bundle on $\tilde C$.
The sheaf $\shLS_X$ often does not have global sections.
It suffices however to give a section $s$ of $\shLS_X$ on a dense open set $U$ that contains the generic points of the minimal strata of $X$ so that each component $s_C\in \Gamma(U\cap C,\shN_C)$ of $s$ extends to a section of $\shN_C$ on all of $C$ by acquiring simple zeros.
The zeros define a reduced Cartier divisor $Z_{\tilde C}$ for each $\tilde C$.
Set $Z=\bigcup_C j_C(Z_{\tilde C}) \subset X$.
The construction of local models along $Z$ in \cite{GrossSiebertII} was generalized in \cite{rud}: locally the coherent log structure, given by $s$ on $U$, extends to an incoherent log structure on $X$ that is still given by certain toric local models, namely from a divisor in an affine toric variety that is not the entire toric boundary, e.g.~like in the definition of toroidal pair above.
A section $s$ of $\shLS_X$ on a dense open set $U$ will be called \emph{simple} if it extends to $X$ by simple zeros and the resulting $Z_{\tilde C}$ satisfy the simpleness~criterion in \S\ref{sec-log-TC}.
Our most general smoothing result is the following.
\begin{theorem} \label{maintheorem-tc}
Let $X$ be a proper toroidal crossing space with a simple~section $s$ of $\shLS_X$ on a dense open set $U$.
Assume that $\omega^{-1}_X$ permits a section whose divisor of zeros $E$ meets all strata of $X$ and $Z$ transversely (e.g.~when $\omega^{-1}_X\cong\shO_X$, $E=\emptyset$), then $X$ is smoothable to an orbifold with terminal singularities.
\end{theorem}
There is a precise derivation of the types of singularities of the orbifold smoothing from knowing $\shP$ and $Z$, e.g.~for a normal crossing space there will be no singularities in the general fiber of the smoothing and thus combined with the Bertini argument and linking $\shLS_X$ with $\shT^1_X$, we find that Theorem~\ref{maintheorem-tc} implies Theorem~\ref{maintheorem-nc}, see Proposition~\ref{prop-tc-implies-nc}.
A section of $\shLS_X$ is of complete intersection type (c.i.t.)~as defined in \cite{rud}, roughly speaking, if the log singular set satisfies a transversality assumption. A c.i.t.~section gives rise to a log toroidal morphism. Theorem~\ref{locally-unique-defos} does not hold for the general c.i.t.~case but we obtain the following.
\begin{example} \label{exampleGS}
We follow \cite{GrossSiebertI}. Let $(B,\P,\varphi)$ be a closed oriented tropical manifold with singular locus combinatorially c.i.t.; then the associated space $X_0(B,\shP,s)$ with its vanilla gluing data and log structure satisfies the assumptions of Theorem~\ref{maintheorem-tc} for $E=\emptyset$ if the orbifold nearby fiber models are terminal (given by elementary simplices).
Smoothings for such spaces had been constructed in \cite{gs} under the stronger assumption of local rigidity, e.g.~the quintic threefold degeneration in $\PP^4$ is not locally rigid but c.i.t..
\end{example}
\subsection{The Hodge--de Rham Spectral Sequence}
We refer to \cite{kkatoFI,Kato1996,GrossSiebertI,LoAG18} for basic notions of log geometry.
Let $f:X\ra S$ be a log toroidal family as defined in Definition~\ref{toroidDef} below.
A toroidal pair $(X,D)$ yields an example by giving $X$ the divisorial log structure from $D$ and making $S$ the log trivial point.
The families $X$ over the standard log point featured in Theorem~\ref{maintheorem-tc} give further examples.
Also, a saturated relatively log smooth morphism $f:X\ra S$ in the sense of \cite{Nakayama2010} is an example.
The complex $W^\bullet_{X/S}$ (see page~\pageref{define-W}) gives rise to a spectral sequence
$$E(X/S): E^{pq}_1 = R^qf_*W^p_{X/S} \Rightarrow R^{p + q}f_*W^\bullet_{X/S}.$$
Let $Q$ be a sharp toric monoid and $\kk$ be a field of characteristic zero. We prove the following theorems.
\begin{theorem}\label{absDegen}
Let $S=\Spec (Q\ra\kk)$ and $f: X \to S$ be a proper log toroidal family (with respect to $S \to A_Q$).
Then $E(X/S)$ degenerates at $E_1$.
\end{theorem}
Theorem~\ref{absDegen} implies Theorem~\ref{danilov-thm} since $W^p_{X/S}=\tilde\Omega^p_X(\log D)$ whenever $f$ comes from a toroidal pair.
We conjecture the statement of Theorem~\ref{absDegen} to hold also for an arbitrary coherent base $S$ over a field of characteristic zero.
To prove Theorem~\ref{absDegen}, we adapt the proof of the degeneration in \cite{Deligne1987} as follows: since $f$ is proper,
it suffices to verify
\begin{equation}
\sum_{p + q = n} \mathrm{dim}\ R^qf_*W^p_{X/S} = \mathrm{dim}\ R^nf_*W^\bullet_{X/S}. \tag{\textasteriskcentered} \label{ast}
\end{equation}
In \S\ref{TorSpreadOut}, we show that $f: X \to S$ spreads out to a log toroidal family $\phi: \X \to \mathcal{S} = \Spec (Q \to B)$ where
$\ZZ \subset B \subset \kk$ is a subring such that $B/\ZZ$ is of finite type.
Spreading out of log smooth morphisms over a log trivial base has been done before in \cite[Lemma~4.11.1]{Tsuji1999} and we generalize the construction to more general bases and show that the local model in the log toroidal case can be preserved.
Then for suitable fields $k \supset \FF_p$, with $W_2(k)$ denoting the ring of second Witt vectors,
we obtain by base change a diagram with Cartesian squares
\begin{equation}
\tag{SO}\label{SO}
\quad \begin{aligned}
\xymatrix{
X \ar[r]\ar_f[d]& \X\ar^{\phi}[d] &\ar[l]\ar^{\phi_W}[d] \X_W & \ar[l] \X_k\ar^{\phi_k}[d] \\
S \ar[r]& \mathcal{S} &\ar[l] \Spec W_2(k)& \ar[l] \Spec k.
}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
In \S\ref{TorBaCha} we investigate the behavior of $W^\bullet$ under base change which leads to
equalities like $\mathrm{dim}_\kk R^qf_*W^p_{X/S} = \mathrm{dim}_k R^q(\phi_k)_*W^p_{\X_k/k}$, i.e., it suffices to show \eqref{ast} for
$\phi_k: \X_k \to \Spec k$. In \S\ref{TorCarIso} we construct the Cartier isomorphism for log toroidal families in
positive characteristic which we then apply in \S\ref{TorDecompo} to obtain the Frobenius decomposition of
$F_*W^\bullet_{\X_k/k}$ where $F$ is the relative Frobenius. Finally, in \S\ref{TorAbsDeg}, we put the pieces together and prove Theorem~\ref{absDegen}.
We prove a modest but important generalization of Theorem~\ref{absDegen} to the relative case using Katz's method that first appeared in \cite{Steenbrink1976}.
This requires a detailed understanding of the analytification of the absolute differentials $W^{\bullet,an}_{X}$ with respect to base change as given in \S\ref{subsec-local-analytic} and \S\ref{sec-relative-degen}.
\begin{theorem}\label{rel-degen}
Let $S = S_m := \Spec (\NN \stackrel{1\mapsto t}\to \CC[t]/(t^{m + 1}))$ and let $f: X \to S$ be a proper log toroidal family with respect to $S \to A_\NN$. Then:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $R^qf_*W^p_{X/S}$ is a free $\CC[t]/(t^{m + 1})$-module whose formation commutes with base change.
\item The spectral sequence $R^qf_*W^p_{X/S} \Rightarrow R^{p + q}f_*W^\bullet_{X/S}$ degenerates at $E_1$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
There are problems with similar theorems in earlier works: the generalization from a one-dimensional base to higher dimensions in \cite[p.\,404]{KawamataNamikawa1994} is flawed which then also affects \cite[Theorem 4.1]{GrossSiebertII}.
In addition, there is a gap in the proof of \cite[Theorem~4.1]{GrossSiebertII} related to the fact that the de Rham differential of $\Omega^\bullet_{X/S}$ is not $\shO_X$-linear.
Since our result encompasses the one-parameter base case of \cite[Theorem~4.1]{GrossSiebertII}, Theorem~\ref{rel-degen} closes the latter gap.
\begin{acknowledgement}
\small The last author feels indebted to Arthur Ogus for almost a decade of communication on the challenges in proving Theorem~\ref{absDegen}.
We thank Mark Gross for connecting the authors with K.\,Chan, C.\,Leung and Z.N.\,Ma whom we also thank for supportive communication and harmonization of our projects.
We thank H\'el\`ene Esnault and Bernd Siebert for valuable communication and Stefan M\"uller-Stach for bringing the first and last author together.
Our gratitude for hospitality goes to JGU Mainz and what concerns the last author also to IAS Princeton and Univ.~Hamburg.
\end{acknowledgement}
\begin{conventions}
We use $\underline X$ to refer to the underlying scheme of a log scheme $X$.
Given a map $P\ra A$ from a monoid $P$ into the multiplicative monoid of a ring $A$, we refer to the associated log scheme by $\Spec\big(P\ra A\big)$.
\end{conventions}
\begin{comment}
\section{Preliminaries}
\todo{Streichen?}
A log scheme is a scheme $X$ together with a sheaf of monoids $\shM_X$ and a map $\alpha:\shM_X\ra\shO_X$ of sheaves of monoids (using multiplication on $\shO_X$) whose restriction to
$\alpha^{-1}(\shO_X^\times)$ gives an isomorphism with $\shO_X^\times$. One similarly defines a log complex analytic space.
We refer to \cite{kkatoFI,Kato1996,GrossSiebertI,LoAG18} for the notions of chart, coherent/fine/saturated/divisorial log structures, strict/integral/saturated/log smooth morphisms (cf. \cite[Definition 3.1]{Kato1996}).
We call the quotient $\overline\shM_X:=\shM_X/\alpha^{-1}(\shO_X^\times)$ the \emph{ghost sheaf}.
For a monoid $P$, we refer to its universal group by $P^\gp$, similarly for sheaves of monoids.
Recall that a strict morphism is log smooth if and only if it is smooth in the ordinary sense (\cite[Proposition 3.8]{Kato1996}).
To refer to the underlying scheme of a log scheme $X$, we use the symbol $\underline X$. By abuse of notation, $\underline X$ might also refer to the underlying scheme equipped with the trivial log structure.
Given a map from a monoid $P$ to a ring $A$, we refer to the associated log scheme by $\Spec(P\ra A)$.
A crucial feature of our approach starting in \S\ref{Pretoroid} is to deal with log structures that are potentially incoherent on a subset of codimension two.
\subsection{Log Derivations and Differentials} \label{sec-der-diff}
Let $f:X\ra S$ be a morphism of log schemes.
\begin{definition}
A \emph{log derivation} on $X$ over $S$ with values in a sheaf of $\mathcal{O}_X$-modules $\mathcal{E}$ is a pair $(D,Dlog)$, where $D:\mathcal{O}_X\to \mathcal{E}$ is an ordinary derivation over $S$ and $Dlog:\mathcal{M}_X^{\gp}\to \mathcal{E}$ is a homomorphism of sheaves of abelian groups satisfying
$$D(\alpha(m))=\alpha(m)\cdot Dlog(m)$$
for all $m\in \mathcal{M}_X$. We denote the $\shO_X$-module of log derivations of $X$ over $S$ with values in $\shE$ by $\shD er_{X/S}(\shE)$ and $\Theta_{X/S}:=\shD er_{X/S}(\shO_X)$
\end{definition}
\begin{example}
If $D\subset X$ is a divisor and $\mathcal{M}_X$ its divisorial log structure then $\Theta_{X/S}$ consists of the usual derivations of $X$ which preserve the ideal of $D$.
\end{example}
There exists a universal log derivation $(d:\shO_X\ra\Omega_{X/S}, \dlog:\shM^\gp_X\ra\Omega_{X/S})$ together with the $\shO_X$-module of log differentials defined by
$$\Omega_{X/S}=(\Omega_{\underline X/\underline S}\oplus (\mathcal{O}_X\otimes_{\ZZ} \mathcal{M}_X^{\gp}))/\mathcal{K},$$
where $\Omega_{\underline X/\underline S}$ are the ordinary differentials and $\mathcal{K}$ is the $\mathcal{O}_X$-module generated by
$$(d\alpha_X(m),\alpha_X(m)\otimes m), ~(0,1\otimes f^*(n)),$$
for all $m\in \mathcal{M}_X$ and $n\in \mathcal{M}_S$.
The universal property implies $\shD er_{X/S}(\shE)=\shH om(\Omega_{X/S},\shE)$.
If the log structures on $X,S$ are coherent, then $\shD er_{X/S}(\shE)$ and $\Omega_{\underline X/\underline S}$ are coherent sheaves.
If $X\ra S$ is log smooth, then $\Omega_{X/S}$ is locally free by \cite[(3.10)]{Kato1996}.
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
\subsection{Toric geometry} \todo{do we still need this subsection?}
Let $X$ be a toric variety with character lattice $M$.
A Cartier divisor $Z$ on $X$ is linearly equivalent to a torus invariant Cartier divisor $D$.
We can associate to $D$ its support function $\psi_D$ which is piecewise linear on the fan of $X$ (see \cite{cox}).
If $D$ is generated by global section, then $\psi_D$ is convex and vise versa. It holds that
$$\Gamma(X,\mathcal{O}_X(D))=\bigoplus_{m\in \Delta\cap M}k\cdot z^m,$$
where $\Delta\subset M\otimes_\ZZ\RR$ is a polytope whose normal fan can be refined to the fan of $X$. Moreover, $\Delta$ is uniquely associated to $Z$ up to translation by lattice vectors.
\red{
\begin{definition}
We call a divisor $D$ in $X$ {\bf sch\"on} if $D$ doesn't contain any torus orbits and $D$ has regular intersection with every torus orbit. Note that the second property is equivalent to saying that the triple $(X,\partial X, D)$ is etale locally along $D$ isomorphic to $(Y\times \AA^1,\partial Y\times \AA^1,Y\times\{0\})$ for $Y$ an affine toric variety.
\end{definition}
}
\end{comment}
\section{Generically Log Smooth Families}\label{Pretoroid}
A \emph{log toroidal family} will be a generalization of a saturated log smooth morphism.
We first introduce the weaker notion of a \emph{generically log smooth family} that already enjoys some useful properties.
Log structures in the entire article are assumed to be in the \'etale (or analytic) topology.
If $f: X \to S$ is a finite type morphism of Noetherian schemes, we say a Zariski open $U \subset X$ satisfies the \emph{codimension condition} \eqref{CC} if
the relative codimension of $Z := X \setminus U$ is $\geq 2$, i.e., for every point $s\in S$ with $X_s,U_s$ the fibers,
\begin{equation}
\tag{CC}\label{CC} \codim{X_s \setminus U_s}{X_s} \geq 2.
\end{equation}
A Cohen--Macaulay morphism is a flat morphism with Cohen--Macaulay fibers.
\begin{definition}
A \emph{generically log smooth family} consists of:
\begin{itemize}
\item a finite type Cohen--Macaulay morphism $f: X \to S$ of Noetherian schemes,
\item a Zariski open $j: U \subset X$ satisfying \eqref{CC},
\item a saturated and log smooth morphism $f: (U, \M_U) \to (S, \M_S)$ of fine saturated log schemes.
\end{itemize}
The complement $Z := X \setminus U$ we refer to as the \emph{log singular locus} even though $f$ might extend log smoothly to it.
We say two generically log smooth families $f,f': X \to S$ with the same underlying morphism of schemes are \emph{equivalent}, if there is some $\tilde U \subset U \cap U'$ satisfying $(CC)$ with $\M_U|_{\tilde U} \cong \M'_{U'}|_{\tilde U}$
compatibly with all data.
\end{definition}
If $T \to S$ is a morphism of fine saturated log schemes, then the base change $X_T \to T$ as a generically log smooth family is defined in the obvious way, taking fiber products in the category of \emph{all} log schemes.
Note that we need $f: U \to S$ saturated to ensure that $U_T$ is again a fine saturated log scheme.
The notion of equivalence is due to the fact that we do not care about the precise $U$. However, for technical simplicity we assume some $U$ fixed.
The name \emph{log singular locus} is in analogy with \cite{GrossSiebertI}.
\begin{definition}
For a generically log smooth family $f: X \to S$, the \emph{de Rham complex} is defined as $W^\bullet_{X/S} := j_*\Omega^\bullet_{U/S}$ where $\Omega^\bullet_{U/S}$ denotes the log de Rham complex.
We also define the $\shO_X$-module of degree $m$ log polyvector fields $\Theta^m_{X/S}:=j_*\bigwedge^m\shD er_{U/S}(\shO_U)$.
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma}\label{relaNormal}
Let $f: X \to S$ be a Cohen--Macaulay morphism of Noetherian schemes, and let $j: U \subset X$ satisfy \eqref{CC}.
Then $j_*\mathcal{O}_U \cong \mathcal{O}_X$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
This is a special case of \cite[3.5]{Hassett2004}. Note that our \eqref{CC} is a stronger assumption than the condition on the codimension in \cite[3.5]{Hassett2004}.
\end{proof}
Let $X\ra S$ be a generically log smooth family.
Using the language of \cite[Definition~5.9.9]{Grothendieck1965}, a sheaf $\shF$ we call \emph{$Z$-closed} if the natural map $\shF\ra j_*(\shF|_U)$ is an isomorphism.
Most notably, two $Z$-closed sheaves that agree on $U$ are entirely equal. By their definition, $W^m_{X/S}$ as well as $\Theta^m_{X/S}$ are $Z$-closed.
Furthermore, every reflexive sheaf is $Z$-closed.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem-W-reflexive}
The $\shO_X$-modules $W^m_{X/S}$ and $\Theta^m_{X/S}$ are coherent and reflexive and these depend only on the equivalence class of $f:X\ra S$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\tilde U \subset U$ also satisfy $(CC)$.
We have by Lemma~\ref{relaNormal} that $j_*\Omega^\bullet_{\tilde U/S} = j_*\Omega^\bullet_{U/S}$ since $\Omega^m_{U/S}$ is finite locally free.
Thus $W^\bullet_{X/S}$ depends only on the equivalence class of $f$.
It is clear that it is quasi-coherent.
For every sheaf $\shG$ on $U$, $j_*\shG$ is $Z$-closed, so in particular $W^m_{X/S}$ is $Z$-closed.
Set $\shF^\vee:=\Hom_{\shO_X}(\shF,\shO_X)$. By Lemma~\ref{relaNormal}, $\shF^\vee$ is $Z$-closed for all $\shF$, so in particular
$(W^m_{X/S})^{\vee\vee}$ is a $Z$-closed sheaf and it coincides with $W^m_{X/S}$ on $U$, hence
$(W^m_{X/S})^{\vee\vee}=W^m_{X/S}$ and $W^m_{X/S}$ is reflexive.
By the extension theorem \cite[9.4.8]{Grothendieck1960a}, there is a coherent $\shG$ that restricts to $W^m_{X/S}$ on $U$.
Now $\shG^{\vee\vee}=W^m_{X/S}$ since both are $Z$-closed and agree on $U$, hence $W^m_{X/S}$ is also coherent.
The argument for $\Theta^m_{X/S}$ is similar.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{lem-W-theta-duals}
$W^m_{X/S}=\shHom(\Theta^m_{X/S},\shO_X)$ and $\Theta^m_{X/S}=\shHom(W^m_{X/S},\shO_X)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The statement is clear on $U$ where all sheaves are locally free and then it follows since all sheaves are $Z$-closed.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \label{lem-canonical-log-ext}
The pushforward $j_*\shM_U\ra j_*\shO_U=\shO_X$ to $X$ yields a log structure which is compatible with $S$, so every generically log smooth family is canonically a log morphism $X\ra S$. We do not know whether this pushforward is compatible with base change (and we do not care).
\end{remark}
\begin{remark} \label{remark-log-structure-on-X}
In view of Remark~\ref{lem-canonical-log-ext}, neither the so defined log structure $\shM_X$ nor the associated sheaf of log differentials $\Omega_{X/S}$ will be coherent in general, see Example~\ref{ex-standard-example}.
On the the other hand, $W^m_{X/S}$ and $\Theta^m_{X/S}$ are coherent and have further good properties in the case of log toroidal families as we will see.
\end{remark}
Let $X\ra S$ be a generically log smooth family.
One defines for the log smooth morphism $U\ra S$ the \emph{horizontal divisor} $D_U\subset U$ (see e.g. \cite[Definition~2.4]{Tsu}, also Remark~\ref{rem-horizontal-div} below). This is only a Weil divisor in general. We denote by $D$ its closure in $X$ and by $I_D$ the corresponding ideal sheaf. We define $W^m_{X/S}(-D):=j_*((I_D W^m_{X/S})|_U)$. (This does not need to agree with $I_D W^m_{X/S}$.)
\begin{proposition} \label{prop-top-trivial}
Let $S=\Spec(\NN\ra \kk)$ for $\kk$ a field where $1\mapsto 0$.
Let $f:X\ra S$ be a generically log smooth family of relative dimension $d$ and let $\omega_f=f^!\shO_S$ denote the (globally normalized) relative dualizing sheaf, then $$W^d_{X/S}(-D)= \omega_f.$$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
On $U$, this is \cite[Theorem~2.21,\,(ii)]{Tsu} and since both sheaves are $Z$-closed, the statement follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{example}\label{logsmoothsatLisse}
Let $f: X \to S$ be a log smooth and saturated morphism of Noetherian fine saturated log schemes.
Then $f$ is flat by \cite[4.5]{kkatoFI} and has Cohen--Macaulay fibers by \cite[II.4.1]{Tsuji1997}.
We see that $f: X \to S$ gives a generically log smooth family for $U=X$ and $W^\bullet_{X/S}$ is the ordinary log de Rham complex.
\end{example}
Not every log smooth morphism is saturated, e.g.~see \cite[Remark\,9.1]{Kato1996} for a log smooth morphism that is not even integral.
\begin{example} \label{ex-Danilov}
Let $X/\Spec R$ be a toric variety over a Noetherian base ring $R$.
The fibers over points in $\Spec R$ are normal (and Cohen--Macaulay), so there is a regular open $U \subset X$ whose
complement has relative codimension $\geq 2$ over $\Spec R$.
For every divisorial log structure on $X$ coming from a torus invariant divisor $D$ on $X$, the map $U\ra \Spec R$ is log smooth and saturated when using the trivial log structure on $\Spec R$.
Hence $X\ra \Spec R$ is a generically log smooth family.
The differentials $W^\bullet_{X/S}$ coincide with what is called \emph{reflexive} or \emph{Danilov} or \emph{Zariski--Steenbrink differentials} with log poles in $D$.
This example extends to toroidal pairs $(X,D)$ over $\Spec R$.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
\label{ex-standard-example}
The $\ZZ[t]$-algebra $A=\ZZ[x,y,t,w]/(xy-tw)$ defines a map $f:\Spec A\ra \AA^1$ that is log smooth and saturated away from the origin when using the divisorial log structure given by $t=0$
on source and target, hence a generically log smooth family. The log structure on $\Spec A$ is not coherent at the origin, so $f$ is not log smooth.
Even worse, $\Omega_f$ is not a coherent sheaf at the origin, see \cite[Example~1.11]{GrossSiebertII}.
\end{example}
Another type of generically log smooth families with application to Gromov--Witten theory can be found in \cite{BN}.
\subsection{Analytification}\label{analytification}
Given a generically log smooth family $f: X \to S$ of finite type over $\CC$, we denote the associated family of complex analytic spaces by $f^{an}: X^{an} \to S^{an}$.
Induced by $f$, the open $U^{an} \subset X^{an}$ carries an fs log structure so that $U^{an} \to S^{an}$ is a log smooth and saturated morphism of fs log analytic spaces.
The analog of Lemma~\ref{relaNormal} holds if $X^{an},S^{an}$ are Cohen--Macaulay by \cite[Theorem~3.6]{BanicaStanasila1976}. For $S = \Spec (Q \to A)$ with $A$ an Artinian ring and
$$W^{\bullet,an}_{X/S} := j^{an}_*\Omega^\bullet_{U^{an}/S^{an}},$$
we have $W^{m,an}_{X/S} \cong (W^m_{X/S})^{an}$ since
both are reflexive coherent $\mathcal{O}_{X^{an}}$-modules that
coincide on $U^{an}$. If $f$ is proper then GAGA gives
$H^q(X^{an},W^{p,an}_{X/S}) \cong H^q(X,W^p_{X/S})$ and
also
$$\HH^{p + q}(X^{an},W^{\bullet,an}_{X/S}) \cong \HH^{p + q}(X,W^\bullet_{X/S}),$$
e.g. via the comparison of the Hodge--de Rham spectral sequences.
\section{Elementary Log Toroidal Families}\label{ElemPretoroid}
For basic notions and constructions of monoids, see \cite{LoAG18}.
\begin{definition} \label{def-ETD}
An \emph{elementary (log) toroidal datum} $(Q\subset P,\mathcal{F})$ (ETD for short) consists of an injection $Q \hra P$ of sharp toric monoids that turns $P$ into a free $Q$-set whose canonical basis is a union of faces of $P$. We furthermore record a set $\mathcal{F}$ of facets of $P$ with the property that it contains all facets that do not contain $Q$. In other words, if we define
$$\shF_{\min}:= \underbrace{\{F\subset P\hbox{ a facet}\,|\, Q\not\subset F \}}_{\hbox{\tiny vertical facets}},$$
then
$\shF_{\min}\ \subset\ \shF\ \subset\ \shF_{\max}$ where $\shF_{\max}$ is the set of all facets.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark} \label{rem-horizontal-div}
The facets in $\shF\setminus\shF_{\min}$ will give the \emph{horizontal divisor} that we referred to as $D$ before.
\end{remark}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=.9\textwidth]{verticalfacets.pdf}
\caption{Three examples of a saturated injection $Q\subset P$ and the projection $\bar P$, the outer two are log smooth, the middle one gives Example~\ref{ex-standard-example}.}
\label{example-ETDs}
\end{figure}
\begin{lemma}(\cite[Corollary~I.4.6.11, Theorem~I.4.8.14, Corollary~I.1.4.3]{LoAG18}) \label{lemma-eq-to-saturated}
The requirement on the injection $Q\hra P$ in Definition~\ref{def-ETD} is equivalent to saying this map is saturated.
\end{lemma}
See Figure~\ref{example-ETDs} for examples. Even the case $Q=0$ can be interesting since then $\shF_{\min}=\emptyset$.
We denote the union of faces of $P$ that gives the generating set of the free $Q$-action by $E$.
A face $F$ of $P$ contained in $E$ we call an \emph{essential face}.
Every $p \in P$ has a unique decomposition $p = e + q$ with $e \in E, q \in Q$, hence
\begin{equation} \label{eq-decomp}
E \times Q \to P, \quad (e, q) \mapsto e + q,
\end{equation}
is bijective (\cite[Theorem~I.4.8.14]{LoAG18},\,cf.\,\cite[Lemma~1.1]{Kato2000}).
Furthermore, we see that $E = P \setminus (Q^+ + P)$ where $Q^+ = Q \setminus 0$ is the maximal ideal.
Moreover, projecting $E$ to $P^\gp/Q^\gp$ is injective and the set of essential faces gives a fan in $P^\gp/Q^\gp$ whose support $\bar P$ is convex in $(P^\gp/Q^\gp)\otimes_\ZZ\RR$ since it is the convex hull of the projection of $P$. Note that $\bar P^\gp=P^\gp/Q^\gp$.
A choice of splitting $P^\gp\cong\bar P^\gp\oplus Q^\gp$ yields a unique map of sets
$\varphi:\bar P\ra Q^\gp$ so that $\id\times\varphi: \bar P\ra \bar P\oplus Q^\gp$ is a section of the projection $P\ra\bar P$
with the property that its image is $E$, so
\begin{equation}\label{eq-rep-varphi}
P=\{(\bar p,q)\in \bar P\oplus Q^\gp\,|\, \exists \tilde{q}\in Q: q=\varphi(\bar p)+ \tilde{q}\}.
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma-flat-CM}
The morphism $\underline f:\Spec\ZZ[P]\ra\Spec\ZZ[Q]$ induced by the injection $Q \subset P$ is a Cohen--Macaulay morphism of fiber dimension $d=\rk (P^\gp/Q^\gp)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $P$ is free as a $Q$-set (generated by $E$), $\Spec\ZZ[P]$ is a flat $\Spec\ZZ[Q]$-module.
By \cite[Corollary~6.3.5]{Grothendieck1965} the total space of a faithfully flat morphism of Noetherian schemes is Cohen--Macaulay if and only if the base and all fibers are. By Hoechster's theorem, the fibers of $\Spec\ZZ[P]\ra\Spec\ZZ$ are Cohen--Macaulay, hence $\Spec\ZZ[P]$ and $\Spec\ZZ[Q]$ are Cohen--Macaulay. Now flatness of $\underline f$ implies it is Cohen--Macaulay.
\end{proof}
We next want to define an open set $U$ in the domain of $\underline f$ that satisfies \eqref{CC}.
We will actually define its complement and for this we need a good understanding of the faces of $P$.
\begin{lemma} \label{face-form}
Let $F\subset P$ be a face. Set $\bar F:=F\cap E$, $Q':=Q\cap F$, then
$$F=\bar F+Q' :=\{\bar f+q'|\bar f\in \bar{F},q'\in Q'\}.$$
Since $E$ is a union of faces of $P$, so is $\bar F$. Note also that $Q'$ is a face of $Q$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By the decomposition \eqref{eq-decomp}, any element in $F$ has the form $\bar f+q$ with $\bar f \in E, q\in Q$. Since $F$ is a face, $\bar f,q$ are both in $F$, hence $F\subset\bar F+Q'$. The reverse inclusion is clear.
\end{proof}
Consider the set of \emph{bad faces} of $P$ defined as
$$\shB=\left\{ \bar F+Q' \,\left|\, {\bar F\hbox{ is a union of essential faces of rank at most }d-2}\atop{Q'\hbox{ is a face of }Q,\, \bar F+Q'\hbox{ is a face of }P}\right.\right\}.$$
Recall that there is a 1-1 correspondence between faces $F$ of $P$ and torus orbits closures $V_F:=\Spec \ZZ[F]$ in $\Spec \ZZ[P]$.
Similarly, for $Q'$ a face of $Q$, we have a torus orbit closure $V_{Q'}:=\Spec \ZZ[Q']\subset\Spec \ZZ[Q]$.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma-U}
Given $\bar F+Q'\in\shB$, we find that $V_{\bar F+Q'}$ is flat over $V_{Q'}\subset\Spec\ZZ[Q]$.
Furthermore, if $X$ is a fiber of $\underline f$, then $\codim{X\cap V_{\bar F+Q'}}{X}\ge 2$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $\bar F+Q'$ is free as a $Q'$-set, $\ZZ[\bar F+Q']$ is a free $\ZZ[Q']$-module, so the flatness statement follows.
The origin $0$ given by the prime ideal $(z^q|q\in Q^+)$ is contained in $V_{Q'}$, let $X_0$ be the fiber over it.
It suffices to check the codimension condition for this particular fiber.
But note that $X_0\cap V_{\bar F+Q'}= \bigcup_{F\subset \bar F}V_F$ where the union runs over faces $F$ of $P$ contained in $\bar F$ and we have $\dim V_F\le d-2$ by the assumption on $\bar F$.
\end{proof}
Set
\begin{equation} \label{eq-def-U}
U_P := \Spec\ZZ[P]\setminus \left(\bigcup_{B\in\shB} V_B\right).
\end{equation}
For every face $F$ of $P$, we have an open subset $\Spec\ZZ[P_F]$ of $\Spec\ZZ[P]$ where $P_F$ is the localization of $P$ in $F$, i.e.,~$P_F$ is the submonoid of $P^\gp$ generated by $P$ and $-F$.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem-cover-U}
We find $U_P =\bigcup_{F} U_F$ where the union is over the essential faces $F$ of rank $d-1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $U_P$ is a union of torus orbits, it suffices to check that any torus orbit contained in $U_P$ is contained in some $U_F$ for $F$ essential of rank $d-1$. Every torus orbit is given by $O_G:=\Spec\ZZ[G^\gp]$ for $G$ a face of $P$.
Assume $O_G\subset U$.
We use Lemma~\ref{face-form} to write $G=\bar G+Q'$. If $\rk\bar G\le d-2$, then $G\in\shB$, so $O_G\not\subset U$.
Hence, $\dim\bar G\ge d-1$ and $\bar G$ contains some essential face $F$ of rank $d-1$. Then $F$ is also contained in $G$ and thus $O_G$ is contained in $U_F$. Conversely, since $O_F$ is not in any $V_B$, the assertion follows.
\end{proof}
Let $A_Q:=\Spec(Q\ra \ZZ[Q])$ denote the log scheme with standard toric log structure and let
$A_{P,\shF}$ be the log scheme with underlying scheme $\Spec\ZZ[Q]$ and divisorial log structure given by the divisor $\bigcup_{F\in\shF} \Spec\ZZ[F]$.
The map $f:A_{P,\shF}\ra A_Q$ induced by $\theta$ is naturally a log morphism by the condition on $\shF$ to contain the vertical faces.
We work here with Zariski log structures which however coincide with the pushforward of the corresponding \'etale log structures by \cite[Proposition~III.1.6.5]{LoAG18}.
\begin{lemma}[Theorem~3.5 in \cite{kkatoFI} or Theorem~4.1 in \cite{Kato1996}]
\label{lemma-log-smooth}
If $\shF=\shF_{\max}$, then $f$ is log smooth.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proposition} \label{ETD-is-pretoroidal}
The map $f:A_{P,\shF}\ra A_Q$ is a generically log smooth family with $U_P$ serving as the specified dense open of log smoothness.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
If $\shF=\shF_\max$ then $f$ is saturated since $\theta$ is saturated.
More generally, since $A_{P,\shF_\max}\ra A_{P,\shF}$ is locally given by embedding a face, it is exact. Now by \cite[I.4.8.5(2)]{LoAG18}, $f$ is saturated.
The assertion is clear if $d=0 \iff P=Q$, so assume $d>0$.
Given Lemma~\ref{lemma-flat-CM}, we still need to verify that $U$ satisfies \eqref{CC} and that $f$ is log smooth on $U_P$.
Note that Lemma~\ref{lemma-U} implies that $U_P$ satisfies \eqref{CC} since the complement of $U_P$ is the union of closed sets each of which has codimension at least two in each fiber.
To see that $f$ is log smooth on $U_P$, by Lemma~\ref{lem-cover-U}, it suffices to check that $f$ is log smooth on $U_F$ for $F$ essential of rank $d-1$. Let $F$ be such a face.
Set $\bar P_F:=P_F/F^\gp$ and note that the projection of $Q$ to $\bar P_F$ is injective because $F^\gp\cap Q=\{0\}$.
There is an isomorphism $P_F\cong F^\gp\times \bar P_F$ commuting with the injection of $Q$ that is $\{0\}\times Q$ on the right.
The log structure on $U_F$ is a divisorial log structure given by a set of divisors each of which pulls back from $\Spec\ZZ[\bar P_F]$, so we may consider the corresponding divisorial log structure on $\Spec\ZZ[\bar P_F]$ to upgrade this to a log scheme $\bar U_F$.
We have a factorization $U_F\ra \bar U_F\ra A_Q$ with the first map a smooth projection from a product that is therefore strict, hence log smooth. It thus suffices to show that
$\bar U_F\ra A_Q$ is log smooth. Note that $\bar U_F\ra A_Q$ is the log morphism of an ETD with $d=1$. The following lemma finishes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma-d1}
Assume that $f:A_{P,\shF}\ra A_Q$ has one-dimensional fibers (i.e., $d=1$), then $f$ is log smooth. (The third situation of Figure~\ref{example-ETDs} is an example.)
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We are done by Lemma~\ref{lemma-log-smooth} if $\shF=\shF_{\max}$ and this always holds if $Q$ meets the interior of $P$. So assume $Q$ is contained in a proper face of $P$, then by Lemma~\ref{face-form} it is in fact a facet of $P$ and then $\bar P=\NN$ and consequently $P=\NN\times Q$.
A facet of $P$ that is not $Q$ is in
$\shF_{\min}= \{\NN\times F\,|\, F\hbox{ is a facet of Q}\}$.
Hence $\shF\subsetneq\shF_{\max}$ implies $\shF=\shF_{\min}$ and thus $f$ is strict.
Since $\underline f$ is smooth, we find $f$ is log smooth.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{smooth-type-decompo}
It is possible to find open subsets $U_1$ and $U_2$ so that $U_P = U_1 \cup U_2$ and $A_P|_{U_1} = A_{P,\mathcal{F}}|_{U_1}$ and
$f: U_2 \subset A_{P,\mathcal{F}} \to A_Q$ is strict and smooth.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mathcal{E}_1$ be the set of essential faces of rank $d - 1$ such that when applying the proof of Lemma
\ref{lemma-d1} to $\bar U_F \to A_Q$ from the proof of the proposition, we are in the case
$\mathcal{F} = \mathcal{F}_{max}$, and let $\mathcal{E}_2$ be the set of faces where we are in case $\mathcal{F} = \mathcal{F}_{min}$.
Then for $F \in \mathcal{E}_1$ we have $A_P|_{U_F} = A_{P,\mathcal{F}}|_{U_F}$, and for $F \in \mathcal{E}_2$, the morphism
$U_F \to A_Q$ is strict and smooth. Now we define $U_1 = \bigcup_{F \in \mathcal{E}_1} U_F$ and
$U_2 = \bigcup_{F \in \mathcal{E}_2} U_F$.
\end{proof}
\begin{example}\label{ex etd}
If $(Q\subset P,\mathcal{F})$ is an ETD and $r\ge 0$, then we obtain another ETD $(Q\times\{0\}\subset P\times\NN^r,\shF')$ where $\shF'=\{F\times \NN^r\,|\,F\in\shF\}$.
\end{example}
\section{Log Toroidal Families}\label{Toroidal}
We define log toroidal families and investigate their basic properties.
\begin{definition}\label{toroidDef}
We say that a generically log smooth family $f: X \to S$ is \emph{log toroidal} if for every geometric point $\bar x \to X$, we have a commutative diagram
\begin{equation}
\tag{LM}\label{LM}
\quad \begin{aligned}
\xymatrix@R-2pc{
& (V,g^{-1}(U)) \ar[ldd]_g \ar@{.>}[ddr]^h \ar[dddd] & & \\
\\
(X,U) \ar[dddd]_f & & (L, U_L) \ar[ddl] \ar[ddr]^c & \\
\\
& \tilde S \ar[ldd] \ar[ddr]^a & & (A_{P,\mathcal{F}}, U_P) \ar[ddl] \\
\\
S & & A_Q & \\
}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $g: V \to X$ is an \'etale neighborhood of $\bar x$, $\tilde S \to S$ is a strict \'etale neighborhood of $f(\bar x)$ and $a$ is given by a chart
$Q\ra \M_{\tilde S}$ of $\tilde S$. The bottom right diagonal map is required to be given by an ETD $(Q\subset P,\mathcal{F})$ and $U_{P}\subset A_{P,\mathcal{F}}$ denotes the open set from \eqref{eq-def-U}.
The solid arrows are morphisms of schemes and log morphisms on the specified opens, whereas $h: V \to L$
is an \'etale morphism only of underlying schemes. The bottom right diamond is Cartesian, in particular $U_L=c^{-1}(U_{P})$. Moreover, we have an open $\tilde U \subset V$
satisfying \eqref{CC}, such that $\tilde U \subset g^{-1}(U) \cap h^{-1}(U_L)$ and there is an isomorphism $g^*\M_X \cong h^*\M_L$ of the two log structures on $\tilde U$ compatible with the maps to $S$.
The diagram \eqref{LM} is called a \emph{local model} for $f: X \to S$ at $\bar x$.
If $S \cong \Spec (Q \to B)$, every point has a local model with $\tilde S=S$ and $a$ is given by the chart $Q \to B$ then we say $f: X \to S$ is \emph{log toroidal with respect to $a: S \to A_Q$}.
\end{definition}
Log toroidal families are stable under strict base change.
\begin{remark}\label{local-model-localize}
Note that Definition~\ref{toroidDef} only requires a covering of $X$ by \eqref{LM} but does not say that an arbitrary geometric point $\bar x\in X$ permits a diagram \eqref{LM} that identifies $\bar x$ with the origin in $A_P$.
However, if $\kk$ is algebraically closed, one can show that by localizing the ETD in \eqref{LM} and using Example~\ref{ex etd} one can assume that $\bar x\in X$ becomes the origin in $A_P$. We will make use of this fact in the proof of Theorem~\ref{rel-degen}.
\end{remark}
\begin{example} \label{ex-ETD}
Every elementary log toroidal family $f: A_{P,\mathcal{F}} \to A_Q$ is log toroidal.
\end{example}
\begin{example} \label{example-toroidal}
The generically log smooth families given in Example~\ref{ex-Danilov} are log toroidal families with $Q=0$ in every ETD.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
A saturated log smooth morphism $f: X \to S$ is log toroidal with $U = X$. Indeed, locally starting from a neat chart of $f$, set $\shF=\shF_\max$ and then apply Example~\ref{ex etd} to have local models.
That this works is \emph{not} a trivial consequence of Theorem 3.5 in \cite{kkatoFI}. Instead, use \cite[Theorem~VI.3.3.3]{LoAG18}.
\end{example}
\begin{example}\label{example-GS}
In the setting and notation of the Gross--Siebert program, \cite[Theorem~2.6]{GrossSiebertII} shows that if $(B,\mathcal{P})$ is positive and simple, and $s$ is lifted open gluing data, then $X_0^\dagger(B,\mathcal{P},s) \to \Spec( \NN\ra k)$ is log toroidal.
More generally, it was shown in \cite[Proposition~2.8]{rud} that c.i.t.~log Calabi--Yau spaces are log toroidal over $\Spec (\NN\ra k)$.
The divisorial deformations defined in \cite{GrossSiebertII} are also log toroidal families.
\end{example}
\section{Log Structures and Infinitesimal Deformations}
\label{sec-log-infini}
Let $X$ be a toroidal crossing space over a field $\kk$.
As mentioned in the introduction, $X$ can be equipped with a sheaf of sets $\shL\shS_X$ which we recall next.
An alternative categorical approach to study log smooth morphisms for a fixed underlying morphism has been developed in \cite{Olsson2003} though we follow the sheaf approach.
Let $S=\Spec(\NN\stackrel{1\mapsto 0}\ra \kk)$ be the standard log point.
The pair $(\shP,\one)$ gives a \emph{ghost structure} in the sense of \cite[Definition~3.16]{GrossSiebertI}.
Indeed, the \emph{type} of the ghost structure is fixed by requiring it to be the one given by the local chart that comes with the definition of a toroidal crossing space. We will refer to this type as the \emph{given type} below.
By \cite[Definition~3.19 and Proposition~3.20]{GrossSiebertI}, there is a sheaf $\shL\shS_{X}$ (denoted $\shL\shS_{X^g}$ in loc.cit.)~with the property that for every \'etale open $U\subset X$, there is a natural bijection
$$
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
$
\Gamma(U,\shL\shS_X) = \left\{
\begin{array}{c}
\shM_U\ra\shO_U\hbox{ a log structure of}\\
\hbox{the given type},\tilde\one\in\Gamma(U,\shM_U),\\ \ol\shM_U\stackrel{\sim}\ra\shP\hbox{ an isomorphism}
\end{array}
\left|
\begin{array}{c}
{(U,\shM_U)\ra S \hbox{ via } 1\mapsto\tilde\one\hbox{ is a}}\\
{\hbox{log smooth morphism and}}\\
{\shM_U\ra\ol\shM_U\ra\shP\hbox{ sends }\tilde\one\hbox{ to }\one}
\end{array}
\right.\right\}
$
}
$$
where the set on the right is to be taken modulo isomorphisms.
The support of $\shP/\one$ agrees with $X_\sing$, so the sheaf $\shL\shS_{X}$ is supported on $X_\sing$.
Set $S_\eps:=\Spec(\NN\stackrel{1\mapsto \eps}\ra \kk[\eps]/(\eps^2))$.
If $V\ra S$ is a log smooth morphism with $V$ affine, then there is a unique log smooth lifting $V_\eps\ra S_\eps$ up to isomorphism.
For $(\M,\tilde\one) \in \mathcal{L}\mathcal{S}_X(U)$ and an affine $V \subset U$, the deformation $i:V\ra V_\eps$ yields an extension
\begin{equation} \label{log-smooth-extension-sequence}
0 \to \mathcal{O}_V \to i^*\Omega^1_{\underline {V_\eps}} \to \Omega^1_{\underline V} \to 0
\end{equation}
where on the left $1 \mapsto i^*d\eps$.
The classes of such local extensions glue to a well-defined class in
$\mathcal{E} xt^1(\Omega^1_U,\mathcal{O}_U)$ (though neither the extensions nor the deformations need to glue).
We have thus defined a map of sheaves of sets
\begin{equation}\label{define-eta}
\eta: \mathcal{L}\mathcal{S}_X \to \mathcal{E} xt^1(\Omega^1_X, \mathcal{O}_X)=\shT^1_X.
\end{equation}
\begin{remark}
In this form, the map $\eta$ seems to be new. However, a close relationship between log structures and $\shT^1_X$ has been observed before in \cite[Proposition\,1.1]{KawamataNamikawa1994}, \cite[Remark~(3.11)]{Steenbrink1995}, \cite[Theorem\,11.7]{Kato1996}, \cite[Example~3.30]{GrossSiebertI}, \cite[Theorem~3.18]{Olsson2003}, \cite[Theorem~7.5]{sch-sie}.
\end{remark}
Both sheaves in \eqref{define-eta} have a natural action of $\mathcal{O}^\times_X$: indeed, $\shT^1_X$ because it is coherent and $\mathcal{L}\mathcal{S}_X$ for we let a section $\lambda$ of $\mathcal{O}^\times_X$ act by $\tilde\one\mapsto \lambda^{-1}\tilde\one$.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop-eta-equiv}
The map $\eta$ is $\mathcal{O}^\times_X$-equivariant.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
At a geometric point $\bar x\in X$ with $M=(\shM,\tilde\one)\in\shL\shS_{X,\bar x}$ for $\shM$ defined on some \'etale $U\ra X$ that contains $\bar x$, let $\mu_M:\shO_{X,\bar x}\ra \shT^1_{X,\bar x}$ denote the connecting
\\[1mm]
\begin{minipage}{.56\linewidth}
homomorphism at $\bar x$ in the long exact sequence obtained from applying $\mathcal{H} om(-,\mathcal{O}_X)$ to \eqref{log-smooth-extension-sequence}.
By a general fact for extensions, we have $\mu_M(1)=\eta(M)$. For $\lambda\in\shO_{X,\bar x}^\times$, let $M_\lambda\in\shL\shS_{X,\bar x}$ denote the element $(\shM,\lambda^{-1}\tilde\one)$.
The statement of the lemma comes down to the following claim.
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.44\linewidth}
\centering
$$
\xymatrix@R-1pc@C-.7pc{
&U_1\ar@{.>}[ddl] \ar^{i_1}[r] \ar|\hole[ddr]
& (U_1)_\eps\ar[ddr]\\
&U_\lambd
\ar@{}|(.46){\phantom{xi}\chi}[u]^(.1){}="a"^(.95){}="b" \ar@{.>} "a";"b"
\ar@{.>}[dl] \ar^(.55){i_\lambda}[r]\ar[dr]& (U_\lambda)_\eps\ar[dr]\\
\underline S&&\ar[ll]S\ar[r]& S_\eps \ar@{.>}@/^{1pc}/[lll]
}
$$
\end{minipage}
\begin{claim}
$\mu_M(\lambda)=\eta(M_\lambda)$.
\end{claim}
To prove the claim, let $U_1,U_\lambda$ denote the log smooth schemes over $S$ respectively obtained from the log scheme $U$ and the map to $S$ given by $1\mapsto \one$ and $1\mapsto \lambda^{-1}\one$ respectively.
Let $(U_1)_\eps$ and $(U_\lambda)_\eps$ be the unique deformations of $U_1,U_\lambda$ over $S_\eps$ respectively.
Let $\chi:U_\lambda\ra U_1$ be the canonical isomorphism over $\underline S=\Spec\big(0\ra \kk)$.
We are now going to use facts about idealized log schemes, see \cite[III.1.3 \& Variant 3.1.21]{LoAG18} for an introduction.
We give $S_\eps$ the ideal $\langle 2\rangle$ generated by $2\in\NN$ and $(U_1)_\eps$ and $(U_\lambda)_\eps$ the pullback ideals $K_1,K_\lambda$ respectively so that $((U_1)_\eps,K_1)$ and $((U_\lambda)_\eps,K_\lambda)$ are ideally log smooth over $(S_\eps,\langle 2\rangle)$.
The map $(S_\eps,\langle 2\rangle)\ra (A_\NN,\emptyset)$ is an \'etale map of idealized log schemes and $A_\NN\ra\underline S$ is log smooth, hence the composition $\pi:((U_1)_\eps,K_1)\ra(S_\eps,\langle 2\rangle)\ra\underline S$ is log smooth.
We apply the infinitesimal lifting property to the diagram
\[
\xymatrix@R-1pc@C-.7pc{
(U,K)\ar^{i_1}[r]\ar^{i_\lambda}[d]& ((U_1)_\eps,K_1)\ar^{\pi}[d]\\
((U_\lambda)_\eps,K_\lambda) \ar[r]& \underline S
}
\]
where $(U,K)$ is the idealized log scheme $U=U_1\stackrel{\chi}{=}U_\lambda$ with ideal given by $(\tilde\one)^2$ or equivalently $(\lambda^{-1}\tilde\one)^2$.
The left vertical map $i_\lambda$ is strict for the log structure and ideal and given by a square-zero ideal.
We obtain a morphism $\tilde\chi: (U_\lambda)_\eps\ra (U_1)_\eps$ of log schemes that preserves the ideals and is an isomorphism on ghost sheaves.
Consequently, with $\rho_\lambda\in \shM_{(U_\lambda)_\eps,\bar x}$ and $\rho_1\in \shM_{(U_1)_\eps,\bar x}$ the images of the generator $1\in\shM_{S_\eps}$ respectively, we have
$\tilde\chi^*\rho_1=\tilde\lambda\cdot\rho_\lambda$ for some $\tilde\lambda\in\shO_{(U_\lambda)^\times_\eps,\bar x}$ that restricts to $\lambda\in\shO^\times_{U,\bar x}$.
This implies that $\tilde\chi$ becomes an isomorphism after shrinking $(U_\lambda)_\eps$, $(U_1)_\eps$ if needed.
Using $i_1 \circ \chi = \tilde \chi \circ i_\lambda$, we obtain the commutative diagram
\[
\begin{CD}
\eta(M_\lambda): \qquad @. 0 @>>> \mathcal{O}_U @>1 \mapsto i_\lambda^*d\alpha(\rho_\lambda)>> i_\lambda^*\Omega^1_{\underline{(U_\lambda)_\eps}} @>>> \Omega^1_{\underline U} @>>> 0 \\
@. @. @VV\lambda^{-1} \cdot V @| @| @. \\
\eta(M_1): \qquad @. 0 @>>> \mathcal{O}_U @>1 \mapsto i_\lambda^*d(\tilde \lambda\alpha(\rho_\lambda))>> i_\lambda^*\Omega^1_{\underline{(U_\lambda)_\eps}} @>>> \Omega^1_{\underline U} @>>> 0, \\
\end{CD}
\]
and we conclude $\eta(M_\lambda) = \mu_M(\lambda)$ via standard homological algebra.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma-injective}
Let $\bar x\in X$ be a geometric point with $\kk[\shP_{\bar x}]$ smooth, then
\begin{enumerate}
\item for $M\in\shL\shS_{X,\bar x}$, the map $\mu_{M,\bar x}:\shO_{X,\bar x}\ra\shT_{X,\bar x}$ is surjective,
\item $\shO^\times_{X,\bar x}$ acts transitively on $\shL\shS_{X,\bar x}$,
\item $\eta_{\bar x}:\shL\shS_{X,\bar x} \ra \shT_{X,\bar x}$ is injective.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Set $P:=\shP_{\bar x}$. For (1), let $U\ra X$ be an \'etale affine neighborhood of $\bar x$ where $M=(\shM_U,\one_U)$ is defined and $h:(U,\shM_U)\ra\Spec\big(P\ra\kk[P]/(z^{\one_{\bar x}})\big)$ the strict $S$-morphism whose underlying map is smooth.
Possibly after shrinking $U$, via $\eps\mapsto \one_{\bar x}$, we obtain a strict map of extensions over $S_\eps$,
$$h_\eps:(U_\eps,\shM_{U_\eps})\ra\Spec\big(P\ra\kk[P]/(z^{(\one_{\bar x}+\one_{\bar x})})\big)$$
whose underlying morphism is also smooth and hence $\Omega_{\underline{U_\eps}}$ is locally free.
This implies that the corresponding term $\mathcal{E} xt^1(\Omega_{\underline{U_\eps}},\shO_X)_{\bar x}$ in the long exact sequence for \eqref{log-smooth-extension-sequence} vanishes and thus $\mu_{M,\bar x}$ is surjective.
To show (2), note that it suffices to show that any two elements in $\shL\shS_{X,\bar x}$ are isomorphic over $\underline{S}$.
Equivalently by \cite[Definition~3.19 \& Corollary~3.12]{GrossSiebertI}, the composition
$$\shL\shS_{X,\bar x}\subset \shE xt^1(\shP^\gp_{\bar x}/\ZZ\one_{\bar x},\shO^\times_{X,\bar x})\ra \shE xt^1(\shP^\gp_{\bar x},\shO^\times_{X,\bar x})$$
needs to be the constant map.
By assumption, $P$ is free and then (2) follows from the description of $\shE xt^1(\shP^\gp_{\bar x},\shO^\times_{X,\bar x})$ in \cite[Proposition~3.14]{GrossSiebertI}.
For (3), if $\bar x\not\in X_\sing$ both stalks are trivial and there is noting to show, so assume $\bar x\in X_\sing$.
By \cite[Proposition~1.10]{fri}, we have $\shT^1_{X,\bar x}\cong \shO_{X_\sing,\bar x}$, so the kernel of the action of $\shO^\times_{X,\bar x}$ on $\shT^1_{X,\bar x}$ is $K:=\ker\big(\shO^\times_{X,\bar x}\ra \shO^\times_{X_\sing,\bar x}\big)$.
If we show that $K$ is contained in the kernel of the action of $\shO^\times_{X,\bar x}$ on $\shL\shS_{X,\bar x}$, then (3) follows from (2) and Proposition~\ref{prop-eta-equiv}.
By assumption, $X$ is normal crossings at $\bar x$. Let $X_1,...,X_r$ be the local components of $X$ at $\bar x$, $r\ge 2$.
Let $\lambda\in K$ be given and write $\lambda=1+\sum_{i=1}^r f_i$ where $f_i|_{X_j}=0$ for $i\neq j$.
We observe that $\lambda=\prod_i (1+f_i)$ because $f_if_j=0$ for $i\neq j$.
If $\NN^r\ra\shO_{X,\bar x},\,e_i\mapsto h_i$ is a chart of $X$ at $\bar x$ representing an element of $\shL\shS_{X,\bar x}$ with $\one=\sum_i e_i$ and $V(h_i)=X_i$, then
$e_i\mapsto (1+f_i) e_i$ defines an automorphism of $\shM_{X,\bar x}$ compatible with the map to $\shO_{X,\bar x}$ because $(1+f_i)h_i=h_i$.
It takes $\one$ to $\lambda\one$, so $\lambda$ acts trivially on $\shL\shS_{X,\bar x}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \label{remark-eta-may-be-zero}
For $\kappa\ge 2$, consider the monoid $P_\kappa=\langle e_1,e_2,\one| e_1+e_2=\kappa\one \rangle$ and the toroidal crossing space $X=\Spec\big(P_\kappa\ra\kk[P_\kappa]/(z^\one)\big)$.
The map $\eta:\shL\shS_X\ra\shT^1_X$ is the zero map $\kk^\times\ra\kk$, so the smoothness assumption in Lemma~\ref{lemma-injective} is necessary.
\end{remark}
\begin{theorem} \label{thm-LS-T1}
Let $X$ be a toroidal crossing space with $P_{\bar x}\cong \NN^2$ whenever $\bar x$ is the generic point of a component of $X_\sing$ then $\eta:\shL\shS_X\ra\shT^1_X$ is injective.
On the open set $V\subset X$ of points $\bar x$ with $\shP_{\bar x}\cong \NN^r$ for some $r$, we have $\eta(\shL\shS_V)=(\shT_V^1)^\times$ where
$(\shT_X^1)^\times\subset \shT_X^1$ denotes the subsheaf of those elements that generate $\shT_X^1$ as an $\shO_X$-module.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The second statement is Lemma~\ref{lemma-injective}.
For the first statement also follows from the Lemma combined with the fact that for every open $U\subset X$, the restriction map\\[1mm]
\begin{minipage}{0.56\textwidth}
$\shL\shS_X(U)\ra \shL\shS_X(U\cap V)$ is injective which is a consequence of Corollary~\ref{injection-into-stalks-at-components} below.
Indeed, in view of the diagram on the right, that the composition of the left vertical and bottom horizontal arrow is injective implies the injectivity
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.44\linewidth}
$$
\xymatrix@R-0pc@C-.7pc{
\shL\shS_X(U)\ar[d]\ar^{\eta}[r]& \shT^1_X(U)\ar[d]\\
\shL\shS_X(U\cap V)\ar^{\eta}[r]& \shT^1_X(U\cap V).
}$$
\
\end{minipage}\\[.7mm]
of the top horizontal arrow.
\end{proof}
\section{Toroidal Crossing Spaces as Log Toroidal Families} \label{sec-log-TC}
Let $X$ be a toroidal crossing space.
Let $\bar x$ be geometric point and $V_{\bar x}$ the \'etale neighborhood with a smooth map $V_{\bar x}\ra\Spec \kk[\shP_{\bar x}]/z^\one$ that exists by the definition of $X$.
Set $N=\shP^\gp_{\bar x}$ and $M_\RR=\Hom(N,\RR)$.
We obtain a lattice polytope
$\sigma_{\bar x}=\{m\in M_\RR\,|\, m|_{\shP_{\bar x}}\ge 0,\one(m)=1\}$ (we use that $X$ is reduced here).
For a face $\tau\subset\sigma_{\bar x}$, we denote by $V_\tau$ the inverse image of the closed subset $\Spec \kk[\tau^\perp\cap \shP_{\bar x}]$ of $\Spec \kk[\shP_{\bar x}]/z^\one$ in $V_{\bar x}$.
Theorem 3.22 in \cite{GrossSiebertI} says the following.
\begin{theorem}[Gross--Siebert] \label{thm-grosie-LS}
$\shLS_X|_{V_{\bar x}}$ is isomorphic to a subsheaf of
$\oplus_{\omega}\mathcal{O}^\times_{V_\omega}$ where the sum is over the edges of $\sigma_{\bar x}$.
The sections of the subsheaf on an open $V\subset V_{\bar x}$ are given as the tuples $(f_\omega)_\omega$ so that, for every two-face $\tau$ of $\sigma_{\bar x}$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq log}
\prod_{\omega\subset\tau}d_\omega \otimes f_\omega^{\epsilon_\tau(\omega)}|_{V_\tau}=1
\end{equation}
as an equality in $M\otimes_\ZZ\Gamma(V,\mathcal{O}^\times_{V_\tau})$ where $d_\omega$ is a primitive generator of the tangent space to $\omega$ and
$\epsilon_\tau(\omega)\in\{-1,+1\}$ is such that $(\epsilon_\tau(\omega)d_\omega)_{\omega\subset\tau}$ gives an oriented boundary of $\tau$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{corollary} \label{injection-into-stalks-at-components}
Given an \'etale open $U\ra X$, the natural map $\shL\shS_X(U)\ra\prod_{\bar x}\shL\shS_{X,\bar x}$, for the product running over the generic points $\bar x$ of the components of $U_\sing$, is injective.
\end{corollary}
The isomorphism in the theorem naturally depends on the morphism $V_{\bar x}\ra\Spec \kk[\shP_{\bar x}]/z^\one$ in a way that enables the following result.
\begin{corollary}
For each irreducible component $X_{\omega}$ of $X_\sing$ there is an $\shO_{\tilde X_{\omega}}^\times$-torsor $\shN_{{\omega}}^\times$ on its normalization $\tilde X_{\omega}$ so that
$$\shLS_X\subset \bigoplus_{X_{\omega}} q_{\omega,*}\shN_{{\omega}}^\times$$
for $q_{\omega}:\tilde X_{\omega}\ra X_{\omega}$ the normalization, and the subsheaf is locally characterized by
Theorem~\ref{thm-grosie-LS} when using suitable local trivializations of the torsors.
\end{corollary}
Let $\shN_{{\omega}}$ denote the associated line bundle so that $\shN_{{\omega}}^\times$ is its $\shO_{\tilde X_{\omega}}^\times$-torsor of generating sections.
We therefore obtain an injection of $\shLS_X$ in the coherent sheaf $\bigoplus_{X_{\omega}} q_{\omega,*}\shN_{{\omega}}$.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma-LS-equivariant}
Under the hypothesis of Theorem~\ref{thm-LS-T1}, the injection $\shL\shS_X\hra\bigoplus_{X_{\omega}} q_{\omega,*}\shN_{{\omega}}$ is $\shO^\times_X$-equivariant.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We borrow the notation $P_{\kappa}$ from Remark~\ref{remark-eta-may-be-zero}.
From a careful analysis of the proof of \cite[Theorem~3.22]{GrossSiebertI} one finds that the action $\one\mapsto \lambda^{-1}\one$ becomes $f_\omega\mapsto \lambda^{\kappa_\omega}f_\omega$ where $\kappa_\omega$ is such that $\shP_{\bar x}\cong P_{\kappa_\omega}$ at the generic point $\bar x$ of $X_\omega$.
Indeed, if a local model at $\bar x$ is given by $xy=f_\omega (z^\one)^{\kappa_\omega}$, this is equivalent to $xy=\lambda^{\kappa_\omega} f_\omega (\lambda^{-1}z^\one)^{\kappa_\omega}$ which explains the action.
The hypothesis of Theorem~\ref{thm-LS-T1} says that $\kappa_\omega=1$ for all $\omega$, so indeed the action of $\shO^\times_X$ on $\shL\shS_X$ is compatible with the ordinary action on the coherent sheaf $\bigoplus_{X_{\omega}} q_{\omega,*}\shN_{{\omega}}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem} \label{thm-inject-T1}
If $X$ is a normal crossing space, then the injection in Lemma~\ref{lemma-LS-equivariant} factors as the composition of $\eta:\shL\shS_X\ra\shT^1_X$ and a uniquely determined injection of coherent sheaves
$\shT^1_X\hra \bigoplus_{X_{\omega}} q_{\omega,*}\shN_{{\omega}}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Given Lemma~\ref{lemma-LS-equivariant} and Theorem~\ref{thm-LS-T1} and noting that $V=X$ for a normal crossing space and that the annihilator of $\shT^1_X$ is contained in the annihilator of $\bigoplus_{X_{\omega}} q_{\omega,*}\shN_{{\omega}}$, the statement becomes an elementary lemma about a cyclic module whose proof we omit.
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}
For a point $\bar x\in X$, let $X^\circ_{\bar x}\subset X$ denote the Zariski locally closed subset where $\shP$ is locally constant with stalk $\shP_{\bar x}$, so that $X$ is the disjoint union of $X^\circ_{\bar y}$ for suitable points ${\bar y}$. We call the closure $X_{\bar x}$ of $X^\circ_{\bar x}$ the \emph{stratum} of ${\bar x}$ which again decomposes into $X^\circ_{\bar y}$. We infer the notion of strata to the normalization of $X$.
A section of $s\in\Gamma(U,\shL\shS_X)$ for a Zariski open $U\subset X$ is called \emph{sch\"on} if it extends to a section $(s_\omega)_\omega\in \Gamma(X,\bigoplus_{X_{\omega}} q_{\omega,*}\shN_{{\omega}})$ so that, for each $\omega$, the vanishing locus $\tilde Z_\omega$ of $s_\omega$ in $\tilde X_\omega$ is reduced, does not contain any strata and has regular intersection with each stratum inside $\tilde X_\omega$ (in particular $\tilde Z_\omega\cap X_{\omega}^\circ$ is smooth).
We also assume that $Z=\bigcup_\omega q_{\omega}(\tilde Z_\omega)$ is the complement of $U$ (otherwise $U$ can be enlarged).
\end{definition}
\begin{definition} \label{def-simple}
A sch\"on section is called \emph{simple} if for every closed point $\bar x\in X$ with $V_{\bar x}\ra\Spec \kk[\shP_{\bar x}]/z^\one$ the smooth map from a neighborhood, we have the following situation.
Let $Z\cap V_{\bar x}=\bigcup_{\omega\in \Omega} Z_\omega$ be the local decomposition of $Z$ into irreducible components where we may assume each $Z_\omega$ contains $\bar x$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item There is a disjoint union $\Omega=\Omega_1\sqcup...\sqcup \Omega_q$ with $q<\rk \shP_{\bar x}$ such that $Z_i:=Z_\omega\cap X_{\bar x}=Z_{\omega'}\cap X_{\bar x}$ whenever $\omega,\omega'$ are in the same $\Omega_i$.
\item $Z_1,...,Z_q$ form a collection of normal crossing divisors in $X_{\bar x}$ at ${\bar x}$.
\item for each $i$, the primitive vectors $d_\omega$ for $\omega\in \Omega_i$ are the set of edge vectors of an elementary simplex $\Delta_i\subset N_\RR$. (A lattice simplex is \emph{elementary} if its vertices are the only lattice points contained in it.)
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
We remark that if $q_\omega:\tilde X_\omega\ra X_\omega$ is not an embedding, the zero set $\tilde Z_\omega$ of $s_\omega$ may locally contribute two or more components of $Z$ at a point $\bar x$ which may or may not lie in different $\Omega_i$.
\begin{theorem}[Gross--Siebert]
A toroidal crossing space $X$ over an algebraically closed field $\kk$ together with simple~section $s\in\Gamma(U,\shL\shS_X)$ gives $X$ the structure of a log toroidal family over $S=\Spec\big(\NN\ra\kk\big)$ with $U$ the locus of log smoothness.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Using assumptions in Definition~\ref{def-simple}, the proof is the same as the one of \cite[Theorem~2.6]{GrossSiebertII}. See also Example \ref{example-GS}.
\end{proof}
We remark that the $\Delta_i$ give the local structure of the singularities in the nearby fiber, cf.~\cite[Proposition~2.2]{GrossSiebertII}.
We also remark that all ETDs have $\shF=\shF_{\min}$, i.e.,~there is no horizontal divisor. Proposition~\ref{prop-top-trivial} implies $W^{\dim X}_{X/S}=\omega_{X/S}$.
\begin{proposition} \label{nc-to-log-toroidal}
A normal crossing space $X$ with $X_\sing$ projective and $\shT_X^1$ generated by global sections permits a dense open $U$ and a simple section $s\in\Gamma(U,\shL\shS_X)$.
In view of \ref{def-simple}, we have $q=1$ at every point in $Z$ and $\Delta_1$ in each ETD is a standard simplex which means all ETDs have smooth nearby fibers.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Applying Bertini's theorem to the line bundle $\shT_X^1$ on $X_\sing$, we obtain a section $\hat s\in\Gamma(X_\sing,\shT_X^1)$ that gives a simple section $s\in\Gamma(X\setminus V(\hat s),\shL\shS_X)$ by Theorem~\ref{thm-inject-T1}.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition} \label{prop-tc-implies-nc}
Theorem~\ref{maintheorem-nc} follows from Theorem~\ref{maintheorem-tc}.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We are given $E$ that is transverse to the strata of $X$.
We apply a slight variant of Proposition~\ref{nc-to-log-toroidal} by making sure the zero locus $Z$ of the section $\hat s$ generated by Bertini is transverse also to $E$.
Theorem~\ref{maintheorem-tc} gives an orbifold smoothing but we know it is an actual smoothing from the fact that each $\Delta_1$ is standard.
\end{proof}
The next two lemmata reduce Theorem~\ref{maintheorem-tc} to the log Calabi--Yau case, i.e., to the case $W^d_{X/S} \cong \mathcal{O}_X$. We achieve this by modifying the log structure so that the new family is log Calabi--Yau.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma-add-E}
Let $f:X\ra S$ be a log toroidal family with empty horizontal divisor.
Let $E\subset \underline X$ be a Cartier divisor that meets all strata and $Z$ transversely,
i.e., locally along $E$ the triple $(X,Z,E)$ is \'etale equivalent to $(E\times \AA^1,(E\cap Z)\times\AA^1,E\times\{0\})$.
There is a new log toroidal family $X(\log E)\ra S$ that has $E$ as its horizontal divisor and factors through $f$ (by forgetting $E$), so in particular $W^{\dim X}_{X(\log E)/S}(-E)=\omega_{X/S}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
On $U$ the result is straightforward and along $Z$ we use the product description to make $E$ the horizontal divisor in the ETDs by adding a summand $\NN$ to $P$ and the unique new facet gets included in $\shF$. That these give local models follows the same proof as \cite[Theorem~2.6]{GrossSiebertII} noting that we may treat the local equation for $E$ as one of the $f_i$ in the notation of loc.cit..
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{W-dim-trivial}
Let $f:X\ra S$ be a projective log toroidal family with empty horizontal divisor and assume that $\omega^{-1}_{X/S}$ is generated by global sections, then $\omega^{-1}_{X/S}\cong \shO_X(E)$ for a divisor $E$ that satisfies the assumption of Lemma~\ref{lemma-add-E}.
In particular, $W^{\dim X}_{X(\log E)/S}\cong \shO_X$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
This follows via an application of Bertini's theorem.
\end{proof}
In general we do not know if deformations of log toroidal families are locally unique. The following theorem shows local uniqueness for the families obtained from toroidal crossing spaces whenever a simple section gives the log structure.
\begin{theorem}[Gross--Siebert, Theorem~2.11 in \cite{GrossSiebertII}]\label{locally-unique-defos}
Let $Y:=X(\log E)\ra S$ be a log toroidal family obtained from a toroidal crossing space $\underline X$ via a simple section $s\in\Gamma(U,\shL\shS_{\underline X})$ and a divisor $E$ as in Lemma~\ref{lemma-add-E}. Let $Y_k$ be a log toroidal deformation over $S_k = \Spec (\NN \to \kk[t]/(t^{k + 1}))$. Then the automorphisms of, isomorphisms of, and obstructions to the existence of a lifting $Y_{k + 1}$ to $S_{k + 1}$ are controlled by $H^0(Y,\Theta^1_{Y/S} \otimes_\kk I)$, $H^1(Y,\Theta^1_{Y/S} \otimes_\kk I)$, and $H^2(Y,\Theta^1_{Y/S} \otimes_\kk I)$ respectively where $I = (t^{k + 1}) \subset \kk[t]/(t^{k + 2})$. In particular, if $V\subset Y$ is affine open, then any two infinitesimal deformations of $V/S$ are isomorphic.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The proof works precisely as in loc.cit.
We remark that in Lemma~2.14, the exact sequence in (2) becomes $0\ra \Theta_{Y/S}\ra \Theta_{\underline X/\kk}(\log E)\ra\shB\ra 0$ where $\Theta_{\underline X/\kk}(\log E)$ denotes ordinary derivations that preserve the ideal of $E$. In other words, for the ordinary deformations, we consider the ones of the pair $(\underline X, E)$ rather than just $\underline X$.
\end{proof}
\section{Differentials for Elementary Log Toroidal Families}
We fix a principal ideal domain $R$ as base ring. The constructions in \S\ref{ElemPretoroid} carry through when replacing $\ZZ$ by $R$.
We will use the following elementary lemma.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem-intersection-and-wedge}
Let $n,m\ge 0$ and $G_1,...,G_r\subset R^n$ be submodules each of which is a direct summand, then the natural map
$\bigwedge^m_R(\bigcap_i G_i)\ra \bigcap_i\bigwedge^m_R G_i$ is an isomorphism.
\end{lemma}
First consider the absolute case, i.e.,~an ETD $(Q\subset P,\mathcal{F})$ with $Q=0$ and let $f:A_{P,\shF}\ra \Spec R$ be the associated log morphism.
One checks that $U$ from \eqref{eq-def-U} is simply the complement of codimension two strata.
Recall from Example~\ref{ex-Danilov} that $W^m:=W^m_{A_{P,\shF}/\Spec R}$ are just the Danilov differentials with log poles in the divisor given by the facets in $\shF$.
Danilov already computed these in \cite[Proposition~15.5]{Danilov1978} over a field and because of Lemma~\ref{lem-intersection-and-wedge} the same calculation works over $R$ and we obtain the following.
\begin{proposition}[absolute case] \label{prop-W-abs-case}
We have a grading
$\Gamma(A_P,W^m)=\bigoplus_{p\in P} (W^m)_p$ with
$$(W^m)_p= \bigwedge^m_R\left(\bigcap_{{F \in \mathcal{F}_{max} \setminus \mathcal{F}}\atop{p \in F}} F^{gp} \otimes_\ZZ R\right)$$
where the intersection is $P^{gp}\otimes_\ZZ R$ if the index set is empty.
\end{proposition}
Let us next assume we have a general ETD $(Q\subset P,\mathcal{F})$ and let again $f$ denote the associated log toroidal family and $W^m_f:=W^m_{A_{P,\shF}/\Spec A_Q}$ the differentials.
Note that since $\shF$ contains all vertical facets, every facet in $\mathcal{F}_{\max} \setminus \mathcal{F}$ contains $Q$.
We obtain the following generalization.
\begin{proposition}[general case]
\label{prop-W-gen-case}
We have a grading
$\Gamma(A_P,W^m_f)=\bigoplus_{p\in P} (W^m_f)_p$ with
$$(W^m_f)_p= \bigwedge^m_R\left(\left.\left(\bigcap_{{F \in \mathcal{F}_{\max} \setminus \mathcal{F}}\atop{p \in F}} F^{gp} \otimes_\ZZ R\right)\right/ (Q^{gp} \otimes_\ZZ R)\right)$$
where the intersection is $P^{gp}\otimes_\ZZ R$ if the index set is empty. Since $Q^\gp\subset P^\gp$ splits, we can equivalently take the quotient before the intersection.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We can compose $f$ with the projection to $\Spec R$ to relate the current situation to that of Proposition~\ref{prop-W-abs-case}.
The open set $U^{\op{abs}}$ in the absolute case is the complement of $Z^{\op{abs}}$, the union of all codimension two strata.
Hence, $U^{\op{abs}}$ is covered by $U_F$ where $F$ runs over the facets of $P$.
On the other hand, the open set $U$ for $f$ as given in \eqref{eq-def-U} has a cover $U_F$ where $F$ runs over the essential faces of rank $d-1$ by Lemma~\ref{lem-cover-U}. Obviously, $U^{\op{abs}}\subset U$.
Note that since $W^m_f$ is locally free on $U$ and $\shO_U$ is $Z^{\op{abs}}$-closed, we find that $W^m_f$ is not only $Z$-closed but also $Z^{\op{abs}}$-closed. Consider the commutative diagram of solid arrows
\begin{equation}
\label{eq-split-exact-abs-to-rel}
\begin{aligned}
\xymatrix{
0\ar[r] & f^*\Omega_{A_Q/\Spec R} \ar^\iota[r]\ar@{=}[d] & W^1_{A_{P,\shF}/\Spec R}\ar[r]\ar[d] & W^1_{f} \ar[d] \ar[r] & 0 \\
0\ar[r] & f^*\Omega_{A_Q/\Spec R} \ar[r] & W^1_{A_{P}/\Spec R}\ar[r]\ar@{.>}[ul] & W^1_{A_{P}/A_Q} \ar[r] & 0
}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where the top row is obtained by pushing it forward from $U^{\op{abs}}$.
The bottom sequence is obtained from tensoring the sequence $0\ra Q^\gp\ra P^\gp\ra P^\gp/Q^\gp\ra 0$ with $\shO_{A_P}$, in particular, it is exact and splits. Hence the dotted diagonal arrow exists and commutes with the other maps.
Therefore, $\coker(\iota)$ is a direct summand of $W^1_{A_{P,\shF}/\Spec R}$, in particular $Z^{\op{abs}}$-closed.
Moreover, $\coker(\iota)\ra W^1_{f}$ is an isomorphism on $U^{\op{abs}}$ and since both sheaves are $Z^{\op{abs}}$-closed, we have $\coker(\iota)=W^1_{f}$ and thus the top row is exact and splits.
Let $\langle f^*\Omega_{A_Q/\Spec R}\rangle$ denote the homogeneous ideal in the sheaf of exterior algebras $W^{\bullet}_{A_{P,\shF}/\Spec R}$ generated by $f^*\Omega_{A_Q/\Spec R}$. The split exactness above gives the split exactness of the following sequence
$$0\ra \langle f^*\Omega_{A_Q/\Spec R}\rangle_m \ra W^m_{A_{P,\shF}/\Spec R} \ra W^m_{f}\ra 0.$$
Since $A_P$ is affine and $\langle f^*\Omega_{A_Q/\Spec R}\rangle$ coherent, applying $\Gamma(A_P,\cdot)$ to this sequence yields another exact sequence which already gives that $\Gamma(A_P,W^m_f)$ is $P$-graded.
We have
$\Gamma(A_P,f^*\Omega_{A_Q/\Spec R})= Q^\gp\otimes_\ZZ R[P]$.
Set ${\bf F}_p:=\left(\bigcap_{{F \in \mathcal{F}_{max} \setminus \mathcal{F}}\atop{p \in F}} F^{gp} \otimes_\ZZ R\right)$ and
let $\langle Q^\gp\otimes R\rangle\subset \bigwedge^\bullet_R {\bf F}_p $ be the homogeneous ideal generated by $Q^\gp\otimes R$.
One computes $\Gamma(A_P,\langle f^*\Omega_{A_Q/\Spec R}\rangle_m)_p=\langle Q^\gp\otimes R\rangle_m$.
Using Proposition~\ref{prop-W-abs-case}, in degree $p\in P$, we obtain the exact sequence
$$0
\ra \langle Q^\gp\otimes R\rangle_m
\ra \bigwedge^m_R {\bf F}_p
\ra (W^m_f)_p
\ra 0.$$
Using a splitting of the injection $(Q^\gp\otimes R)\subset {\bf F}_p$ and comparing leads to the assertion.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor-genRelFlatW-local}
For all $m$, $W^m_{f}$ is flat over $A_Q$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Inspecting the result in Proposition \ref{prop-W-gen-case}, we find $\Gamma(A_P,W^m_f)$ is a free $R[Q]$-module.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Change of Base}\label{ChangeBaseSec}
Let $(Q\subset P,\mathcal{F})$ be an ETD, $\mathcal{T}$ be a Noetherian ring and $T = \Spec \mathcal{T} \to \Spec R[Q]$ be any morphism. Denote by $\sigma$ the composition $Q\ra R[Q]\ra \mathcal{T}$ which turns $T$ into a coherent log scheme.
Define $Y$ by the fiber diagram
\begin{equation}
\label{diagram-define-Y}
\begin{aligned}
\xymatrix{
Y\ar^c[r]\ar[d] & A_{P,\shF}\ar^f[d]\\
T\ar[r] & A_{Q}
}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
of log toroidal families. We want to study when the natural map $c^*W^m_f\ra W^m_{Y/T}$ is an isomorphism.
This holds if $f$ is log smooth since then $W^m_f=\Omega^m_f$ are the ordinary log differentials which satisfy this isomorphism property by their universal property.
In particular, $c^*W^m_f\ra W^m_{Y/T}$ is always an isomorphism on the open set $V:=c^{-1}(U)$.
The following example shows that it is not an isomorphism in general.
For a subset $I\subset P$, let $\langle I\rangle$ be the smallest face of $P$ containing $I$.
\begin{example}\label{baChaViolation}
Let $P$ be the submonoid of $\ZZ^2$ generated by $(1,0),(1,1),(1,2)$ and let $Q = 0$.
The monoid $P$ has two facets $H_1 = \langle(1,0)\rangle$ and
$H_2 = \langle(1,2)\rangle$ and setting $\mathcal{F} = \emptyset$ yields an ETD. Let $f:A_{P,\shF}\ra A_Q=\Spec\ZZ$ be the corresponding map.
Now set $\mathcal{T}=\ZZ/2\ZZ$ inducing the natural map $T=\Spec\mathcal{T}\ra\Spec\ZZ$ and a fiber diagram as above.
One checks that $c^*W^1_f\ra W^1_{Y/T}$ is not an isomorphism by computing both terms via Proposition~\ref{prop-W-abs-case}.
It suffices to check the degree $p=0$, indeed, $(W^1_f)_0=H_1^\gp\cap H_2^\gp=0$ but
$$(W^1_{Y/T})_0=(H_1^\gp\otimes \ZZ/2\ZZ)\cap (H_2^\gp\otimes \ZZ/2\ZZ)=\ZZ/2\ZZ\cdot (1,0)\subset (\ZZ/2\ZZ)^2.$$
Hence, $((W^1_f)\otimes_\ZZ \ZZ/2\ZZ)_0=0$ but $(W^1_{Y/T})_0\neq 0$.
\end{example}
The example teaches that base change is related to the (non-)commuting of intersection and tensor product.
The following lemma (that is an elementary exercise in $\Tor$ groups) will help us.
We say a ring $\mathcal{T}$ is of \emph{characteristic} $\geq p_0$ if for the residue field $\kappa_{\mathfrak{p}}$ of every point $\mathfrak{p}$ holds
$\op{char} \kappa_{\mathfrak{p}}\ge p_0$ or $\op{char} \kappa_{\mathfrak{p}}=0$.
\begin{lemma}\label{intBaChaCom}
Let $G$ be a finitely generated $\ZZ$-module and $H, H' \subset G$ be two submodules.
Then there is $p_0$ such that for every ring $\mathcal{T}$ of characteristic $\geq p_0$ we have
$$(H \cap H') \otimes \mathcal{T} = (H \otimes \mathcal{T}) \cap (H' \otimes \mathcal{T})$$
and each term here is a submodule of $G \otimes \mathcal{T}$.
\end{lemma}
In the general situation, observe we have
$\Gamma(Y, \mathcal{O}_Y) = \bigoplus_{e \in E} z^e \cdot \mathcal{T}$ with multiplication
$$z^{e_1} \cdot z^{e_2} = z^{e} \cdot \sigma( q) \quad \mathrm{whenever} \quad e_1 + e_2 = e + q$$
with $e\in E,q\in Q$ under the canonical decomposition from \eqref{eq-decomp}.
Similarly, Proposition~\ref{prop-W-gen-case} gives
\begin{equation} \label{eq-describe-cW}
\Gamma(Y, c^*W^m_f) = \bigoplus_{e \in E} z^e \cdot ((W^m_f)_e \otimes_R \mathcal{T}).
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma}
Recall $V=c^{-1}(U)$. Equivalent are
\begin{enumerate}
\item the map $c^*W^m_f\ra W^m_{Y/T}$ is an isomorphism,
\item $c^*W^m_f$ is reflexive,
\item the restriction map $\rho: \Gamma(Y, c^*W^m_f) \to \Gamma(V, c^*W^m_f)$ is surjective.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\emph{(1)}$\Rightarrow$\emph{(2)}: $W^m_{Y/T}$ is reflexive;
\emph{(2)}$\Rightarrow$\emph{(3)}: $c^*W^m_f$ is $(Y\setminus V)$-closed;
\emph{(3)}$\Rightarrow$\emph{(1)}: Consider the commutative square
\[
\xymatrix{
\Gamma(Y, c^*W^m_f) \ar^\rho[d]\ar[r] & \Gamma(Y, W^m_{Y/T}) \ar[d]\\
\Gamma(V, c^*W^m_f)\ar[r] & \Gamma(V, W^m_{Y/T})\\
}
\]
where the right vertical map is an isomorphism since $W^m_{Y/T}$ is reflexive by Lemma~\ref{lem-W-reflexive}.
The bottom horizontal map is an isomorphism by what we said just before Example~\ref{baChaViolation}.
Now \emph{(1)} holds if the top horizontal map is an isomorphism which follows from \emph{(3)} if $\rho$ is additionally injective. This injectivity is a general fact that we prove next.
Recall that $A_{P,\shF_\max}=A_P$ and we have a map $A_P\ra A_{P,\shF}$ that gives us another commutative square
\begin{equation}
\label{diagram-rho2}
\begin{aligned}
\xymatrix{
\Gamma(Y, c^*W^m_f) \ar^\rho[d]\ar[r] & \Gamma(Y, c^*W^m_{A_P/A_Q}) \ar[d]\\
\Gamma(V, c^*W^m_f)\ar[r] & \Gamma(V, c^*W^m_{A_P/A_Q}).\\
}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Since $A_P\ra A_Q$ is log smooth and $W^m_{A_P/A_Q}=\Omega^m_{A_P/A_Q}$ a free sheaf, the right vertical map is an isomorphism.
We get that $\rho$ is injective if the top horizontal map is injective.
The latter can be computed from Proposition~\ref{prop-W-gen-case}.
Indeed, this follows from \eqref{eq-describe-cW} since for every $e\in E$, the cokernel of
$(W^m_f)_e\ra (W^m_{A_P/A_Q})_e$ is a free $R$-module.
\end{proof}
We next provide a useful criterion for the surjectivity of $\rho$.
Let $\shE$ be the set of essential faces of $P$ of rank $d-1$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem-cover-U}, $U$ is covered by $\{U_F|F\in \shE\}$. Set $V_F=c^{-1}(U_F)$ so these cover $V$.
For each $F\in \shE$, choose $e_F\in F$ in the relative interior, i.e., $\langle e_F\rangle =F$.
\begin{theorem}\label{isoCondi}
Write $M_p := (W^m_f)_p$ for short, and assume that for every subset $\shE'\subset \shE$ and every $e \in E$ the natural map
$$\left(\bigcap_{F \in \shE'} M_{e + e_F}\right) \otimes_R \mathcal{T} \to \bigcap_{F \in \shE'} (M_{e + e_F} \otimes_R \mathcal{T})$$
is an isomorphism. Then $\rho$ is surjective.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We write $M = \Gamma(A_{P}, W^m_f)$, $N = \Gamma(A_{P}, W^m_{A_{P}/A_Q})$ and $N_p$ for the degree $p$ part of $N$.
By proposition~\ref{prop-W-gen-case}, $M_p$ and $N_p$ only depend on $\langle p \rangle$. We are going to use that for $p_1,p_2\in P$ holds
\begin{equation} \label{eq-face-of-sum}
\langle p_1+p_2 \rangle=\langle \langle p_1\rangle \cup \langle p_2\rangle \rangle.
\end{equation}
We have a natural injection $M\subset N$ by Proposition~\ref{prop-W-gen-case}.
Given $\mu \in \Gamma(V, c^*W^m_f)$, we want to show it has a preimage under $\rho$.
We do have a unique preimage $\nu$ under the right vertical map of \eqref{diagram-rho2}, so in $N\otimes_{R[Q]} \mathcal{T}$ and we are going to show that this preimage lies in $M\otimes_{R[Q]} \mathcal{T}$.
Say $\nu = \sum_e z^{e} \cdot n_e $ with $n_e \in N_e \otimes \mathcal{T}$ is such that $\nu|_V=\mu$.
In particular $\nu|_{V_F}=\mu|_{V_F}$ for all $F\in\shE$.
There is some large $a\ge 1$ so that for each $F\in\shE$
there are $m_{F,e}\in M_e\otimes\mathcal{T}$ such that
$$\mu|_{V_F} = z^{-a e_F} \sum_e z^e \cdot m_{F,e}$$
and therefore $\nu|_{V_F}=\mu|_{V_F}$ implies
$$z^{a e_F} \sum_e z^e \cdot n_e\ \in\ \bigoplus_{e \in E} z^e \cdot (M_e \otimes_R \mathcal{T}) \ \subset\ \bigoplus_{e \in E} z^e \cdot (N_e \otimes_R \mathcal{T}).$$
If $e + ae_F = \tilde e + q$ is the decomposition $P=E\times Q$, then
$n_e \cdot \sigma(q) \in M_{\tilde e} \otimes_R \mathcal{T}$.
By \eqref{eq-face-of-sum},
$$e + a e_F \in E \iff \langle e + e_F\rangle\subset E \iff e + e_F \in E,$$
and if this holds, then $\sigma(q) = 1$, so setting
$$\shE_e := \{F \in \shE \ | \ e + e_F \in E\}, $$
we obtain $n_e \in \bigcap_{F \in \shE_e} (M_{e + ae_F} \otimes_R \mathcal{T})$ and $M_{e + ae_F}=M_{e + e_F}$.
Note that $\shE_e$ does not depend on the chosen $e_F$.
Using the assumption, we get
$$n_e \in \bigcap_{F \in \shE_e} (M_{e+e_F} \otimes_R \mathcal{T}) = \left(\bigcap_{F \in \shE_e} M_{e + e_F}\right) \otimes_R \mathcal{T}.$$
For the next step, define
$\mathcal{F}_e = \{H \in \mathcal{F}_{max} \setminus \mathcal{F} \ | \ \exists F \in \shE_e : e + e_F \in H\}$.
We use Lemma~\ref{lem-intersection-and-wedge} to compute
$$
\bigcap_{F \in \shE_e} M_{e + e_F} =
\bigwedge^m_R\left( \bigcap_{H \in \mathcal{F}_e} \frac{H^{gp} \otimes_\ZZ R}{Q^{gp} \otimes_\ZZ R} \right).
$$
We finally claim that $\mathcal{F}_e = \{H \in \mathcal{F}_{max} \setminus \mathcal{F} \ | \ e \in H\}$, indeed given an $H$ in the latter, we just need to exhibit an $F\in\shE$ that is also contained in $H$ with $\langle e,F\rangle \subset E$ which can be done since $H\cap E$ is a union of faces in $\shE$.
Thus, $n_e \in M_e \otimes_R \mathcal{T}$, so indeed $\nu \in M \otimes_{R[Q]} \mathcal{T}$ and we are done.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{locBaChaField}
Let $(Q\subset P,\mathcal{F})$ be an ETD, $\mathcal{T}$ a Noetherian ring and $T = \Spec \mathcal{T} \to A_Q$ a strict morphism of log schemes.
Then $c^*W^m_f$ is reflexive and $c^*W^m_f \to W^m_{Y/T}$ is an isomorphism provided that the composition
$$R\ra R[Q]\ra \mathcal{T}$$
is flat, e.g. when $R$ is a field.
\end{corollary}
As Example~\ref{baChaViolation} shows, the conditions of Theorem~\ref{isoCondi} are not always satisfied in case $R = \ZZ$.
However, we do get close:
\begin{corollary}\label{locBaChaInteger}
Let $(Q\subset P,\mathcal{F})$ be an ETD, and assume $f:A_{P,\mathcal{F}} \to A_Q$ to be defined over $R = \ZZ$.
Then there is a $p_0 = p_0(Q\subset P,\mathcal{F})$ such that for every $m$ and every
$T = \Spec \mathcal{T} \to A_Q$ with a Noetherian ring $\mathcal{T}$ of characteristic $\geq p_0$, the sheaf $c^*W^m_f$ is reflexive, and
$c^*W^m_f \to W^m_{Y/T}$ is an isomorphism.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Applying Lemma~\ref{intBaChaCom} repeatedly, we find for every triple $(m,e,\mathcal{E}')$ as in Theorem~\ref{isoCondi} a $p_0(m,e,\mathcal{E}')$ such that the isomorphism in the theorem holds if $\mathcal{T}$ is of characteristic $\geq p_0(m,e,\mathcal{E}')$. Since there are only finitely many different sets of modules $\{M_{e + e_F} \ | \ F \in \mathcal{E}'\}$, we obtain one $p_0(Q \subset P,\mathcal{F})$ that works for all triples.
\end{proof}
For a field $\kk$, consider a monoid ideal $K\subset Q$, let $(K)\subset\kk[Q]$ denote the corresponding monomial ideal of $\kk[Q]$ and set $\mathcal{T}=\kk[Q]/(K)$.
The map $T=\Spec\mathcal{T}\ra\kk[Q]$ is the natural one and $Y\ra T$ is defined by \eqref{diagram-define-Y} as before.
We set $E_K := P \setminus (P + K)$ and note this generalizes the union of essential faces $E$ from \S\ref{ElemPretoroid}, indeed $E=E_{Q\setminus\{0\}}$.
Combining Proposition~\ref{prop-W-gen-case} with Corollary~\ref{locBaChaField} (for $R=\kk$) gives the following which also generalizes \cite[Corollary~1.13]{GrossSiebertII}.
\begin{corollary}\label{relative-on-Y}
$\Gamma(Y, W^m_{Y/T}) \cong \bigoplus_{e \in E_K} z^e \cdot \bigwedge^m \left( \bigcap_{H \in \mathcal{F}_{\max} \setminus \mathcal{F} : e \in H} (H^{gp} \otimes \kk)/(Q^{gp} \otimes \kk) \right)$
with differential $d(z^e \cdot n) = z^e \cdot [e] \wedge n$.
\end{corollary}
With $c: Y \to A_{P,\mathcal{F}}$ the notation from before, we apply $c^*$ to the split exact sequence given by the top row of \eqref{eq-split-exact-abs-to-rel} and obtain another split exact sequence.
The left term is free and $c^*W^m_f$ is reflexive by Corollary~\ref{locBaChaField}. Hence, $c^*W^m_{A_{P,\mathcal{F}}/\kk}$ is also reflexive. With $V=c^{-1}(U)$, we find the natural surjection $c^*\Omega^\bullet_{U/\kk}\sra\Omega^\bullet_{V/\kk}$ to be an isomorphism (e.g. by local freeness of both).
For $j:V\hra Y$ the inclusion and $W^\bullet_Y := j_*\Omega^\bullet_{V/\kk}$ we thus have $c^*W^m_{A_{P,\mathcal{F}}/\kk} \cong W^m_Y$. Plugging this into Proposition~\ref{prop-W-abs-case} yields the following.
\begin{corollary}\label{absolute-on-Y}
$\Gamma(Y, W^m_{Y}) \cong \bigoplus_{e \in E_K} z^e \cdot \bigwedge^m \left( \bigcap_{H \in \mathcal{F}_{\max} \setminus \mathcal{F} : e \in H} H^{gp} \otimes \kk \right)$
with differential $d(z^e \cdot n) = z^e \cdot e \wedge n$.
\end{corollary}
\subsection{Local Analytic Theory} \label{subsec-local-analytic}
We keep the setup and notation from before (with $\kk = \CC$), so $(Q\subset P,\mathcal{F})$ is an ETD and $K\subset Q$ a monoid ideal. We additionally assume that $Q \setminus K$ is finite, so $\mathcal{T}=\CC[Q]/(K)$ is an Artinian local ring.
For $P^+=P\setminus\{0\}$, let $\CC\llbracket P\rrbracket$ be the completion of $\CC[P]$ in $(P^+)$.
\begin{lemma}(\cite[Proposition\,V.1.1.3]{LoAG18}) \label{lem-ogus-analytic}
For every local homomorphism $h: P \to \NN$, i.e., $h^{-1}(0)=\{0\}$ and we may view $h$ as a grading, it holds
$$\mathcal{O}_{A_P^{an},0} = \left\{\left.\sum_{p \in P} \alpha_p z^p \ \right|\ \alpha_p\in\CC,\,\mathrm{sup}_{p \in P^+} \left\{ \frac{\mathrm{log}\ |\alpha_p|}{h(p)} \right\} < \infty \right\} \subset \CC\llbracket P\rrbracket.$$
\end{lemma}
We have $\Gamma(Y,\mathcal{O}_Y) \cong \CC[E_K] := \bigoplus_{e \in E_K}\CC \cdot z^e$ with $z^{e} \cdot z^{e'} = z^{e + e'}$ if $e + e' \in E_K$ and $z^e \cdot z^{e'} = 0$ otherwise.
By \cite[Corollary~3.2]{SC_fiberproduct_61} and Lemma~\ref{lem-ogus-analytic}, the complete local ring at the origin in $Y^{an}$ is
$$
\hat \mathcal{O}_{Y,0} \cong (\CC[Q]/(K)) \otimes_{\CC\llbracket Q\rrbracket} \CC\llbracket P\rrbracket \cong \left \{\sum_{e \in E_K} \alpha_e z^e\right\}=:\CC\llbracket E_K\rrbracket.
$$
Lemma~\ref{lem-ogus-analytic} together with the surjectivity of $\mathcal{O}_{A_P^{an},0} \to \mathcal{O}_{Y^{an},0}$ and Krull's intersection theorem yields
\begin{equation}\label{eq-stalk-Y-analytic}
\mathcal{O}_{Y^{an},0} = \left\{\left.\sum_{e \in E_K} \alpha_e z^e \in \CC\lfor E_K\rfor \ \right|\ \mathrm{sup}_{e \in E_K \setminus 0} \left\{ \frac{\mathrm{log} |\alpha_e|}{h(e)} \right\} < \infty \right\}.
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma}\label{ana-stalk}
Let $(V,\langle \cdot , \cdot \rangle)$ be a finite-dimensional $\CC$-vector space with a Hermitian inner product.
For every $e \in E_K$, let $V_e \subset V$ be vector subspaces so that $$\tilde V := \bigoplus_{e \in E_K} z^e \cdot V_e \subset V[E_K]$$
is a $\CC[E_K]$-module. Assume moreover that $V_e \subset V$ depends only on the set $F(e) := \{H \subset P \ \mathrm{a \ facet} \ | \ Q \subset H, e \in H\}$.
Set $V\lfor E_K \rfor := \prod_{e \in E_K} z^e \cdot V_e$ and $\shV^{an}:=\tilde V\otimes_{\CC[E_K]} \mathcal{O}_{Y^{an}}$.
We find its stalk at the origin to be
$$\shV^{an}_0 \cong \left\{\left. \sum_{e \in E_K} z^e \cdot v_e \in V\lfor E_K \rfor \ \right|\ \mathrm{sup}_{e \in E_K \setminus 0} \left\{ \frac{\mathrm{log}\ \| v_e\| }{h(e)} \right\} < \infty \right\}.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} The set of possible $F(e)$ is finite, so there is only a finite set of different $V_e$. Choosing orthonormal bases for all $V_e$ allows to reduce the assertion to \eqref{eq-stalk-Y-analytic}. We leave the technical details to the reader.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \label{rem-compute-anal-stalk}
We can use Lemma~\ref{ana-stalk} to compute the stalk at $0$ of the analytification of $W^m_{Y/T}$ and $W^m_{Y}$ by using Corollary~\ref{relative-on-Y} and Corollary~\ref{absolute-on-Y} respectively.
\end{remark}
\section{Base Change of Differentials for Log Toroidal Families}\label{TorBaCha}
\begin{definition}[BC]
We say that a generically log smooth morphism $f:X\ra S$ satisfies the \emph{basechange property} if for every strict
morphism $T\ra S$ of Noetherian fs log schemes, $m\in\ZZ$ and $c$ the map given by the Cartesian diagram
\[
\begin{CD}
Y @>c>> X \\
@VgVV @VfVV \\
T @>b>> S, \\
\end{CD}
\tag{BC}\label{BC}
\]
the sheaf $c^*W^m_{X/S}$ is reflexive or equivalently, the natural map $c^*W^m_{X/S} \to W^m_{Y/T}$ is an isomorphism.
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}[Base Change over Fields] \label{baseChangeField}
Let $f: X \to S$ be a log toroidal family over a field $\kk$, then $f$ satisfies \eqref{BC}.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
This follows directly from the local statement Corollary~\ref{locBaChaField}.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}[Generic Base Change]\label{baseChangeGeneric}
Let $f: X \to S$ be a log toroidal family.
Then there is a finite set of prime numbers $p_1, ..., p_N \in \ZZ$ so that if
$f^\circ: X^\circ \to S^\circ$ is obtained from $f$ by inverting $p_1,...,p_N$ (i.e., base change to $\Spec\ZZ_{p_1...p_N}$), then
$f^\circ$ satisfies \eqref{BC}.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Again, this follows directly from the local statement Corollary \ref{locBaChaInteger} combined with the fact that we can use a finite cover by local models.
\end{proof}
An application of the above theorems is the following lemma which is crucial for the degeneration of the Hodge--de Rham spectral sequence.
\begin{lemma}\label{deriBaCha}
(cf.~\cite[Proposition~6.6]{Illusie2002a}) Let $f: X \to S$ be a proper log toroidal family with $S$ affine, and let $b: T \to S$ with $T$ affine. Assume $c^*W^m_{X/S} = W^m_{Y/T}$ holds for all $m$. Then we have isomorphisms
\begin{align}
Lb^*Rf_*W^p_{X/S} &\to Rg_*W^p_{Y/T} \label{BC-iso1} \\
Lb^*Rf_*W^\bullet_{X/S} &\to Rg_*W^\bullet_{Y/T} \label{BC-iso2}
\end{align}
in $D^b(T)$. If, for fixed $p$, all $R^qf_*W^p_{X/S}$ are locally free of constant rank, then \eqref{BC-iso1} induces an isomorphism
$$b^*R^qf_*W^p_{X/S} \xrightarrow{\cong} R^qg_*W^p_{Y/T}.$$
If, for all $n$, the sheaf $R^nf_*W^\bullet_{X/S}$ is locally free of constant rank, then \eqref{BC-iso2} induces an isomorphism
$$b^*R^nf_*W^\bullet_{X/S} \xrightarrow{\cong} R^ng_*W^\bullet_{X/S}.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $W^m_{X/S}$ is flat over $S$--- this is Corollary~\ref{cor-genRelFlatW-local}---, the proof becomes identical to that in \cite[Proposition~6.6]{Illusie2002a}.
\end{proof}
\section{Spreading Out Log Toroidal Families}\label{TorSpreadOut}
We fix a sharp toric monoid $Q$, a field $\kk \supset \QQ$ and set $S = \Spec (Q \to \kk)$ where the map $Q \to \kk$ is $q\mapsto 0$ except $0\mapsto 1$.
We choose distinct subrings $B_\lambda\subset \kk$ for all $\lambda$ in some index set $\Lambda$ so that any two
$B_{\lambda_1}, B_{\lambda_2}$ are both contained in a third $B_{\lambda}$.
We say $\lambda_1\le\lambda_2$ if $B_{\lambda_1}\subset B_{\lambda_2}$.
Furthermore, we require $\varinjlim_\lambda B_\lambda = \kk$ and that each $B_\lambda$ is of finite type over $\ZZ$.
We get log schemes $S_\lambda = \Spec (Q \to B_\lambda)$ each with a strict map $S\ra S_\lambda$ and in fact $S=\liminv_\lambda S_\lambda$.
\begin{proposition}\label{spreadToroidal}
Let $f: X \to S$ be a log toroidal family of relative dimension $d=\rk{\Omega^1_{U/S}}$.
Then there is $\lambda \in \Lambda$ and a log toroidal family $f_\lambda: X_\lambda \to S_\lambda$, so that $f$ is obtained by base change from $f_\lambda$, i.e., there is a Cartesian square
\[
\begin{CD}
X @>>> X_\lambda \\
@VfVV @VV{f_\lambda}V \\
S @>>> S_\lambda. \\
\end{CD}
\]
If $f$ is separated and/or proper, we can assume $f_\lambda$ to be so, too.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
By \cite[Theorem~8.8.2 (ii)]{Grothendieck1966}, \cite[Theorem~8.10.5]{Grothendieck1966} and \cite[Theorem~11.2.6 (ii)]{Grothendieck1966} we can find a $\lambda \in \Lambda$ and a morphism $f_\lambda: X_\lambda \to S_\lambda$ that is finitely presented and flat, and an isomorphism $S \times_{S_\lambda} X_\lambda \cong X$ over $S$.
If $f: X \to S$ is separated respective proper, we can choose $f_\lambda$ moreover separated respective proper.
Using \cite[Corollaire~12.1.7(iii)]{Grothendieck1966} and \cite[Theorem~8.10.5]{Grothendieck1966}, we can choose $\lambda$
such that $f_\lambda$ is a Cohen--Macaulay morphism. Since these decompose disjointly over the relative codimension, again by increasing $\lambda$ if needed, we may assume that $f_\lambda$ has relative dimension $d$.
We next spread out $U$ such that $U_\lambda \subset X_\lambda$ satisfies \eqref{CC}.
We do this by spreading out its complement $Z$. Indeed, by \cite[05M5, Lemma~31.16.1]{stacks}, we can increase $\lambda$ so that every fiber of $Z_\lambda \to S_\lambda$ has dimension $\leq d - 2$ and then define $U_\lambda:=X_\lambda\setminus Z_\lambda$.
Now a straightforward generalization of the method of \cite[Lemma~4.11.1]{Tsuji1999} yields that, for appropriate $\lambda$, we can find a log structure on $U_\lambda$ and upgrade $f_\lambda$ to a log morphism such that $U_\lambda$ is fs and $f_\lambda$ is log smooth and saturated. More precisely, we choose an affine \'etale cover $\{U_i\}_i$ of $U$ such that $U_i \to S$ admits a local model by a saturated morphism $\theta_i: Q \to P_i$ of monoids; the local model remains a local model for an appropriate spread-out $U_{i,\lambda} \to S_\lambda$ (for appropriate $\lambda$), which thus carries the structure of a saturated log smooth morphism to $S_{\lambda}$. At this point, the $U_{i,\lambda}$ might not cover $U_\lambda$, the log structures on $U_{i,\lambda}$ might not coincide on overlaps, and even if this was the case, we might not have a log morphism to $S_\lambda$. We achieve all this by increasing $\lambda$.
Finally---again by possibly increasing $\lambda$---we show that the family $f_\lambda: X_\lambda \to S_\lambda$ is log toroidal.
We fix a finite covering $\{V_i \to X\}$ with local models $(Q\subset P_i, \mathcal{F}_i)$ as in Definition \ref{toroidDef}, and
for each of them, we construct a diagram as in Figure~\ref{toroidal-figure} below.
Namely we first spread out $V_i \to S$ to $V_{i,\lambda} \to S_\lambda$. Then $L_{i,\lambda}$ is defined
by base change, and we construct the \'etale morphisms of schemes
$g_\lambda: V_{i,\lambda} \to X_\lambda$ and $h_\lambda: V_{i,\lambda} \to L_{i,\lambda}$ also by spreading out. We can assume that $X_\lambda$ is covered by $\{V_{i,\lambda} \to X_\lambda\}$
and that $\tilde U_i \subset V_i$ spreads out to an open $\tilde U_{i,\lambda} \subset V_{i,\lambda}$ satisfying \eqref{CC}. We get two log structures $(g_\lambda)^*_{log}\M_{X_\lambda}$ and
$(h_\lambda)^*_{log}\M_{L_{i,\lambda}}$ on $\tilde U_{i,\lambda}$ which we identify by
\cite[Sublemma~4.11.3]{Tsuji1999}. By the same sublemma, the two morphisms
$(g \circ f)^*_{log}\M_{S_\lambda} \to \M_{\tilde U_{i,\lambda}}$ coming from
$f_\lambda \circ g_\lambda$ respective $r_\lambda \circ h_\lambda$ coincide. Since $\{V_i \to X\}$ is a
finite covering, we can find $\lambda$ that admits the above construction
for all $V_i$ simultaneously.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}
\[
\xymatrix@R-1pc@C-1pc{
& V_i \ar[dl]^<<{\!\!\!\!g} \ar[rr] \ar@{.>}[dd]^<<<<{\!h} & & V_{i,\lambda} \ar@{.>}[dd]^<<<<{\!h_\lambda}
\ar[dl]^<{\!\!\!\!g_\lambda} & & \\
X \ar[dd]^<<<<{\!f} \ar[rr]_<<<<{p_\lambda} & & X_\lambda \ar[dd]^<<<<{\!f_\lambda} & & & \\
& L_i \ar[dl]^<<{\!\!\!\!r} \ar[rr] & & L_{i,\lambda} \ar[dl]^<{\!\!\!\!r_\lambda} \ar[rr] & &
A_{P_i,\mathcal{F}_i} \ar[dl] \\
S \ar[rr]_<<<<{q_\lambda} & & S_\lambda \ar[rr]_<<<<{a_\lambda} & & A_Q. & \\
}
\]
\caption{The diagram constructed in the text.}
\label{toroidal-figure}
\end{figure}
\section{The Cartier Isomorphism}\label{TorCarIso}
In this section, we define the Cartier homomorphism for a generically log smooth family $f: X \to S$ in characteristic $p>0$.
We then prove that it is an isomorphism if $f$ is log toroidal.
Similar to \cite{Blickle2001}, we first study the situation on $U$ and then examine its extension to all of $X$.
Let $F_S: S \to S$ be the absolute log Frobenius on the base, i.e., given by taking $p$th power in $\shM_S$ and $\shO_S$ respectively, we similarly define $F_X:X\ra X$. We define $f':X'\ra S$ and the relative Frobenius $F$ by the Cartesian square
\[
\xymatrix{
X\ar_f[dr]\ar^(.6)F[r]\ar@/^{1.5pc}/^{F_X}[rr]&X' \ar^{f'}[d]\ar^(.45)s[r] & X\ar^f[d]\\
&S \ar^{F_S}[r] & S.
}
\]
Set $U':=s^{-1}(U)$ and $Z'=X'\setminus U'$.
\begin{theorem}[\cite{kkatoFI}] \label{thm-kato-Cartier}
We have a canonical (Cartier) isomorphism of $\shO_{U'}$-modules
$$C^{-1}_{U} : \Omega^m_{U'/S} \to \mathcal{H}^m(F_{*}\Omega^\bullet_{U/S})$$
which is compatible with $\wedge$ and satisfies $C^{-1}(a) = F^*(a)$ for $a \in \mathcal{O}_{X'}$ and\newline $C^{-1}(\dlog(s^*q)) = \dlog(q)$ for $q \in \M_U$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
This is \cite[Theorem~4.12(1)]{kkatoFI} once we identify $U''=U'$: Kato considers the factorization $U\stackrel{g}\ra U''\stackrel{h}\ra (U')^{\op{int}}\stackrel{i}\ra U'$ of $F|_U$ where $i$ is the integralization of $U'$ and $g\circ h$ is the unique factorization of this weakly purely inseparable morphism where $h$ is \'etale and $g$ purely inseparable, using \cite[Proposition~4.10(2)]{kkatoFI}.
Now $i$ is an isomorphism because $f$ is integral.
By \cite[Corollary~III.2.5.4]{LoAG18}, since $f: U \to S$ is saturated, $F:U\ra U'$ is exact.
The uniqueness of the factorization $g\circ h$ now implies that $h$ is an isomorphism.
\end{proof}
Since $W^m_{X'/S}$ is $Z'$-closed, pushing forward the inverse of $C^{-1}_{U}$ to $X'$, we obtain a homomorphism
$$C: \mathcal{H}^m(F_{*}W^\bullet_{X/S}) \to W^m_{X'/S}$$
which is an isomorphism on $U'$. We obtain the following lemma.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem-C-iso-iff-Zclosed}
The map $C$ is an isomorphism if and only if $\mathcal{H}^m(F_{*}W^\bullet_{X/S})$ is $Z'$-closed.
\end{lemma}
\begin{definition} \label{def-cartier-iso}
We say that a generically log smooth family $f:X\ra S$ in positive characteristic has the \emph{Cartier isomorphism property} if
$C$ is an isomorphism for all $m\ge 0$.
\end{definition}
By Theorem~\ref{thm-kato-Cartier}, $\mathcal{H}^m(F_{*}W^\bullet_{X/S})$ is locally free on $U'$, hence it is $Z'$-closed if and only if it is reflexive. Reflexivity can be checked \'etale locally.
\begin{lemma}\label{explCarIso}
Let $(Q\subset P,\mathcal{F})$ be an ETD, let $b: T \to A_Q$ be strict with $\underline T = \Spec \mathcal{T}$ and consider the Cartesian diagram
\[
\xymatrix{
Y\ar^c[r]\ar_g[d] & A_{P,\shF}\ar^f[d]\\
T\ar^b[r] & A_Q.
}
\]
Then $\mathcal{H}^m(F_*W^\bullet_{Y/T})$ is reflexive.
\end{lemma}
\begin{corollary}\label{torCartierIso}
Every log toroidal family $f: X \to S$ over $\FF_p$ has the Cartier isomorphism property.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{explCarIso}]
Set $V := c^{-1}(U_{P})$ and let $Y', V'$ be the base changes by the absolute Frobenius $F_T$. Let $F: Y \to Y'$ be the relative Frobenius.
Inspired by the Frobenius decomposition \cite[Theorem~2.1]{Deligne1987}, we construct a homomorphism
$\phi^\bullet : \bigoplus_{m} W^m_{Y'/T}[-m] \to F_*W^\bullet_{Y/T}$
of \emph{complexes of $\mathcal{O}_{Y'}$-modules} which induces an isomorphism in cohomology.
Since the left hand side has zero differentials, the assertion then follows from the reflexivity of $W^m_{Y'/T}$ given by Lemma~\ref{lem-W-reflexive}.
Similar to \S\ref{ChangeBaseSec}, we find explicitly that
$R' := \Gamma(Y',\mathcal{O}_{Y'}) = \bigoplus_{e \in E} z^e \cdot \mathcal{T}$ with
$$z^{e_1} \cdot z^{e_2} = z^e \cdot \sigma(q)^p \quad \mathrm{whenever} \quad e_1 + e_2 = e + q$$
with $e \in E, q \in Q$. We have $s^*(z^e \cdot t) = z^e \cdot t^p$ and $F^*(z^e \cdot t) = z^{p \cdot e} \cdot t$. After writing $W^m_e := (W^m_f)_e \otimes_{\FF_p} \mathcal{T}$,
the module $\Gamma(Y', W^m_{Y'/T})$ is given by the $\mathcal{T}$-module $\bigoplus_{e \in E} z^e \cdot W^m_e$
on which $R'$ acts as
$$(z^{e_1} \cdot t_1) \cdot [z^{e_2} \cdot (w \otimes t_2)] = z^{e} \cdot (w \otimes \sigma( q)^pt_1t_2) \quad \mathrm{whenever} \quad e_1 + e_2 = e + q$$
with $e \in E, q \in Q$.
Similarly, $\Gamma(Y',F_*W^m_{Y/T})$ is given by the same $\mathcal{T}$-module, however now $R'$ acting via $F^*$ as
$$(z^{e_1} \cdot t_1) \cdot [z^{e_2} \cdot (w \otimes t_2)] = z^{e} \cdot (w \otimes \sigma(q)t_1t_2) \quad \mathrm{whenever} \quad p \cdot e_1 + e_2 = e + q.$$
Note the subtle difference. The differential on $F_*W^\bullet_{Y/T}$ is given by $d(z^e \cdot (w \otimes t)) = z^e \cdot ([e] \wedge w \otimes t)$. We define
$$\phi^\bullet : \bigoplus_{m} W^m_{Y'/T}[-m] \to F_*W^\bullet_{Y/T}, \quad z^e \cdot (w \otimes t) \mapsto z^{p \cdot e} \cdot (w \otimes t),$$
and claim $\mathcal{H}^m(\phi^\bullet)$ is an isomorphism.
Indeed, first note that $\phi^\bullet$ itself is injective.
Then set $E_p = \{p \cdot e | e \in E\}$.
We have
$\mathrm{im}(\phi^m) = \bigoplus_{e \in E_p} z^e \cdot W^m_e$ because $W^m_e=W^{m}_{e/p}$ for $e\in E_p$ by Proposition~\ref{prop-W-gen-case}.
Denoting the coboundaries of
$F_*W^m_{Y/T}$ by $B^m$, we have $\mathrm{im}(\phi^m) \cap B^m = 0$ since
$0 = [e] \in W^1_e$ for $e \in E_p$ because $e=pe'$ and $p$ is zero in $\shT$. This readily gives that $\mathcal{H}^m(\phi^\bullet)$ is injective.
For surjectivity, if $e \notin E_p$, observe that $[e] \not= 0$, so if $w \in W^m_e$, then
$[e] \wedge w = 0$ if and only if there is some $w' \in W^{m - 1}_e$ with $[e] \wedge w' = w$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
We believe that $\mathcal{H}^m(\phi^\bullet)$ is the log Cartier isomorphism on $V'$.
\end{remark}
\section{The Decomposition of $F_*W^\bullet_{X_0/S_0}$}\label{TorDecompo}
We prove a log version of the decomposition theorem \cite[Theorem~2.1]{Deligne1987} in the setting of generically log smooth families. (We noticed that \cite[Corollary~3.7]{Deligne1987} alias \cite{Illusie2002a} does not generalize well to the generically log smooth setting.)
The assumption for $f: X \to S$ to be saturated on the log smooth locus allows a simpler approach than \cite[Theorem~4.12]{kkatoFI}.
Our setting is as
follows: let $k$ be a perfect field with $\mathrm{char} \ k = p$ (thus $\ZZ/p^2\ZZ\ra W_2(k)$ is flat), and let $Q$ be a sharp toric monoid.
Set $S_0 = \Spec (Q \to k)$ and $S = \Spec (Q \to W_2(k))$ where in both cases $Q \ni q \mapsto 0$ except $0\mapsto 1$.
The Frobenius endomorphism on $k$ becomes an endomorphism $F_0$ of $S_0$ via $Q\ni q\mapsto pq$.
Similarly, its lift to $W_2(k)$ defined via $(a_1, a_2) \mapsto (a_1^p, a_2^p)$ becomes\footnote{Warning: This is \emph{not} the $p$th power map on $W_2(k)$ and thus depends on the chosen chart.} an endomorphism $F_S$ of $S$ that restricts to $F_0$ on $S_0$.
Let $f: X \to S$ be a generically log smooth family and let $f_0: X_0 \to S_0$ be its restriction to $S_0$. We consider the commutative diagram of generically log smooth families as in Figure~\ref{Frobenius-diagram},
where $X'_0, X'$ are defined by requiring the front and back square to be Cartesian and $F$ is the relative Frobenius, i.e., $F$ is induced by the back square's Cartesianness using the Frobenius endomorphisms on $X_0$ and $S_0$.
Since $X$ does not have a Frobenius, we do \emph{not} easily obtain the dotted arrow $G$ in a similar way and in general it does not exist globally. We call a locally defined morphism $G$ that fits into the
diagram a \emph{local Frobenius lifting}. Because the (Zariski or \'etale) topologies are identified
along $F$ and $i$, we can define Frobenius liftings simply at the level of sheaves:
\begin{definition}
Let $Y' \to X'$ be an \'etale open. Then a Frobenius lifting $G: Y \to Y'$ on $Y'$ consists of a ring homomorphism $G^*: \mathcal{O}_{Y'} \to G_*\mathcal{O}_Y$ yielding a morphism of schemes and a monoid homomorphism
$G^*: \M_{Y'}|_{V'} \to G_*\M_Y|_{V'}$ defined on some $V' \subset Y'$ satisfying $(CC)$, yielding a log morphism. Two Frobenius liftings are considered equal if they are equal on some smaller (Zariski) open satisfying $(CC)$.
The Frobenius liftings form an \'etale sheaf of sets $\mathcal{F} rob(X,X')$.
\end{definition}
\begin{figure}
\[
\xymatrix{
& X_0 \ar[rr]^{F} \ar@/_1pc/[ddrr]_{f_0}|(.59)\hole \ar[ld]_i & & X'_0 \ar[dd]|\hole^(.3){f_0'} \ar[rr]^{s} \ar[ld]_{i'} & & X_0 \ar[dd]^{f_0} \ar[ld] & & \\
X \ar@/_1pc/[ddrr]_f \ar@{.>}[rr]^G & & X' \ar[rr] \ar[dd]^{f'} & & X \ar[dd]^(.3)f & & & \\
& & & S_0 \ar_(.3){F_0}|\hole[rr] \ar[ld] & & S_0 \ar@{}[r]^(.08){}="a"^(.94){}="b"^(1.26){}="A" \ar "a";"b" \ar[ld] & \hspace{1cm} {\Spec\FF_p} \\
& & S \ar[rr]^{F_S} & & S \ar@{}[rr]^(.02){}="a"^(.63){}="b"^(.82){}="B" \ar "a";"b" & & \hspace{-1cm}{\Spec\ZZ/p^2\ZZ}
\ar "A"-<10pt,10pt>;"B"+<10pt,10pt>{}
}
\]
\caption{The diagram.}
\label{Frobenius-diagram}
\end{figure}
\begin{remark}
We need the flexibility of $V'$ in the definition of $\mathcal{F} rob(X,X')$ to construct Frobenius liftings from local models as they occur for log toroidal families. We will see below that we could have as well required the log
part to be defined on $Y' \cap U'$, see the proof of Proposition \ref{frobLiftToQuiso}.
\end{remark}
Let $j:U'\hra X'$ denote the pullback of $U\subset X$ and $Z'=X'\setminus U'$.
By Lemma~\ref{relaNormal}, $\mathcal{F} rob(X,X') = j_*(\mathcal{F} rob(X,X')|_{U'})$.
Let $\mathcal{I} \subset \mathcal{O}_X$ be the ideal sheaf defining $X_0 \subset X$, flatness gives
$\mathcal{I} = p \cdot \mathcal{O}_X \cong \mathcal{O}_{X_0}$. Using $\mathcal{I}^2=0$, one checks that $F_*\mathcal{I}$ is an $\shO_{X'}$-module.
Considering derivations on $U'$ with values in $F_*\mathcal{I}$, we obtain a sheaf of groups $\mathcal{G} := j_*\shD er_{U'/S}(F_*\mathcal{I})=j_*\shH om(\Omega^1_{U'/S},F_*\mathcal{I})$ which agrees with $\shH om(W^1_{X'/S},F_*\mathcal{I})$ because $F_*\mathcal{I}$ is $Z'$-closed by Lemma~\ref{relaNormal}.
\begin{lemma}
The restriction $\mathcal{F} rob(X,X')|_{U'}$ is a $\mathcal{G}|_{U'}$-torsor; hence $\mathcal{F} rob(X,X')$ is a $\mathcal{G}$-pseudo-torsor.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\shD$ be the sheaf of sets on $U'$ given by \'etale local deformations of the diagram
\[
\begin{CD}
U_0 @>i'\circ F>> U' \\
@ViVV @Vf'VV \\
U @>f>> S \\
\end{CD}
\]
in the sense of \cite[Definition~IV.2.2.1]{LoAG18}, i.e., $\shD$ is the sheaf of morphisms $U \to U'$ making the diagram commute. The sheaf $\shD$ is a $\mathcal{G}|_{U'}$-pseudo-torsor by \cite[Theorem~IV.2.2.2]{LoAG18}
and because $f': U' \to S$ is smooth,
it is a torsor. Because $\Omega^1_{U'/S}$ is locally free, $\shD$ is locally isomorphic to $(F_*\mathcal{I})^{\oplus d}$.
By Lemma~\ref{relaNormal}, $\shD$ is $\tilde Z$-closed for every $\tilde Z \subset X'$ satisfying $\codim{\tilde Z}{X'}\ge 2$.
By this property, the obvious homomorphism $\shD \to \mathcal{F} rob(X,X')|_{U'}$ is an isomorphism of sheaves of sets making $\mathcal{F} rob(X,X')|_{U'}$ a $\mathcal{G}|_{U'}$-torsor.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{frobLiftToQuiso}
Let $Y' \to X'$ be an \'etale open and $G: Y \to Y'$ a local Frobenius lifting.
Then there is a canonical homomorphism of complexes
$$\phi_G: W^1_{Y_0'/S_0}[-1] \to F_*W^\bullet_{Y_0/S_0}$$
inducing the Cartier isomorphism in first cohomology on $U_0' \cap Y_0'$. If $h \in \mathcal{G}(Y')$, then
$\phi_G$ and $\phi_{h \cdot G}$ are related by
$$\phi_{h \cdot G} = \phi_G + (F_*d) \circ \tilde h$$
where $\tilde h: W^1_{Y_0'/S_0} \to F_*\mathcal{I} \cong F_*W^0_{Y_0/S_0}$ is the induced homomorphism.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We choose $V'=U'\cap Y'$ for the representative of $G$.
The straightforward log version of the construction of \cite[Proposition~3.8]{Illusie2002a} yields a homomorphism
$\Omega^1_{V'_0/S_0} \to F_*\Omega^1_{V_0/S_0}$ and this has also been used implicitly by Kato in
\cite[Theorem~4.12]{kkatoFI}. Applying $j_*$ yields $(\phi_G)^1$, and we define the other $(\phi_G)^m$
to be $0$. The resulting $\phi_G$ does not depend on $V'$ since the involved sheaves
are $\tilde Z$-closed for every $\tilde Z \subset Y_0'$ satisfying $\codim{\tilde Z}{Y_0'}\ge 2$, so $\phi_G$ is well-defined.
The construction yields that $\mathcal{H}^1(\phi_G)$ is the
Cartier isomorphism of Theorem~\ref{thm-kato-Cartier} on $V'_0=U_0' \cap Y_0'$.
The second statement is similar to \cite[Lemma~5.4,(5.4.1)]{Illusie2002a} except that we use the more elegant language of torsors (as already remarked in \cite[Remark\,2.2\,(iii)]{Deligne1987}) which renders the analog of \cite[Lemma~5.4,(5.4.2)]{Illusie2002a} trivial.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{genDecompThm}
Let $f: X \to S$ be a generically log smooth family, assume that $f_0: X_0 \to S_0$ has the Cartier isomorphism property (Definition~\ref{def-cartier-iso}), and assume that $\mathcal{F} rob(X,X')$ is a $\mathcal{G}$-torsor.
Then we have a quasi-isomorphism
$$\bigoplus_{m < p} W^m_{X_0'/S_0}[-m] \to \tau_{<p}F_*W^\bullet_{X_0/S_0}$$
in $D^b(X_0')$ where $\tau_{<p}$ means the truncation of a complex.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Because $\mathcal{F} rob(X,X')$ is a torsor, we can find an \'etale cover $\Y = \{Y_{\alpha}'\}$ of $X'$ such that we have a local Frobenius lifting $G_{\alpha}: Y_{\alpha} \to Y_{\alpha}'$. We obtain an induced cover $\Y_0$ of $X_0'$.
On the log smooth locus $U_0' \subset X_0'$, we can apply an argument as implicitly used in \cite[Theorem~4.12]{kkatoFI}:
using Proposition \ref{frobLiftToQuiso}, the gluing method of Step \textbf{B} in the proof of \cite[Theorem~5.1]{Illusie2002a} yields a
homomorphism
$$\varphi: \Omega^1_{U_0'/S_0}[-1] \to \check \mathcal{C}^\bullet(\Y_0 \cap U_0', F_*\Omega^\bullet_{U_0/S_0}) =: \check \mathcal{C}^\bullet_{U}$$
of complexes of sheaves where $\check\mathcal{C}^\bullet(\mathfrak{U},\shF^\bullet)$ refers to the total sheaf \v{C}ech complex for a cover $\mathfrak U$ and a complex of sheaves $\shF^\bullet$.
We also have the natural quasi-isomorphism $$\psi: F_*W^\bullet_{X_0/S_0} \to \check \mathcal{C}^\bullet(\Y_0,F_*W^\bullet_{X_0/S_0}).$$
Using $\psi$ and that the question is local, Proposition~\ref{frobLiftToQuiso} gives that $\varphi$ induces the Cartier isomorphism on $U_0'$ for $\shH^1$.
Now let $0 \leq m < p$. With the antisymmetrization map $a_m: \Omega^m_{U_0'/S_0}[-m] \to (\Omega^1_{U_0'/S_0}[-1])^{\otimes m}$
defined by $a_m(\omega_1\wedge...\wedge\omega_m)=\frac1{m!}\sum_{\sigma\in S_m} \op{sgn}(\sigma)\omega_{\sigma(1)}\otimes...\otimes\omega_{\sigma(m)}$, we obtain a morphism
$$\varphi^m: \Omega^m_{U_0'/S_0}[-m] \xrightarrow{a_m} (\Omega^1_{U_0'/S_0}[-1])^{\otimes m} \xrightarrow{\varphi^{\otimes m}} (\check \mathcal{C}^\bullet_U)^{\otimes m} \to \check\mathcal{C}^\bullet_U$$
where the last map is induced by the wedge product on $F_*\Omega^\bullet_{U_0/S_0}$. Note that the various $\varphi^m$ are compatible with the wedge product of $\Omega^\bullet_{U_0'/S_0}$ and of the cohomology of
$F_*\Omega^\bullet_{U_0/S_0}$ hence $\varphi^m$ induces the Cartier isomorphism in cohomology. Taking the sum, we obtain a quasi-isomorphism
$$\varphi^\bullet: \bigoplus_{m < p} \Omega^m_{U_0'/S_0}[-m] \to \tau_{<p}\check\mathcal{C}^\bullet_U.$$
Since $j_*\check\mathcal{C}^\bullet_U = \check\mathcal{C}^\bullet(\Y_0,F_*W^\bullet_{X_0/S_0})$, we obtain the desired homomorphism in $D^b(X_0')$ as $\psi^{-1} \circ j_*\varphi^\bullet$. It is a quasi-isomorphism because
$f_0: X_0 \to S_0$ has the Cartier isomorphism property by assumption.
\end{proof}
We like to apply this theorem to the case of a log toroidal family. It remains only to show that $\mathcal{F} rob(X,X')$ is a torsor:
\begin{proposition} \label{posCharSplit}
In the above situation assume $f:X \to S$ log toroidal with respect to $S \to A_Q$. Then $\mathcal{F} rob(X,X')$ is a
$\mathcal{G}$-torsor, i.e., Frobenius liftings exist locally.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $(Q\subset P,\mathcal{F})$ be an ETD from a local model of $f: X \to S$, as given in \eqref{LM} with $S=\tilde S$. Consider the diagram
\[
\xymatrixcolsep{3.8em}
\xymatrix{
\, L \, \ar[d] \ar@{.>}[r]^{F} & \, L \, \ar[d] \ar[r]^c & A_{P,\mathcal{F}} \ar[d] \\
\, S \, \ar[r]^{F_S} & \, S \, \ar[r]^a & \, A_Q. \\
}
\]
We claim that for the local existence of a Frobenius lifting, it suffices to show that there is a scheme morphism $F: \underline L \to \underline L$ that is the underlying morphism of a log morphism on $c^{-1}(U_{P})$ such that the diagram commutes and the induced map
$F \times_S S_0$ on $L_0 = L \times_S S_0$ is the absolute Frobenius.
Indeed, then $F$ plays the role of an absolute
Frobenius on $L$, and its induced relative Frobenius gives rise to a local Frobenius lifting on $X'$ via the local model.
The scheme $\underline L$ is affine with $\mathcal{O}(L) = \bigoplus_{e \in E} z^e \cdot W_2(k)$
allowing us to define
$F: \underline L \to \underline L$ via $F^*(z^e \cdot w) := z^{pe} \cdot F_S^*(w)$.
It remains to extend $F$ to the log structure on $c^{-1}(U_{P})$.
Consider the maps of log schemes
$$M := \Spec (P \to \mathcal{O}(L)) \to L \to \Spec(Q \to \mathcal{O}(L)) =: N.$$
With the notation of Corollary \ref{smooth-type-decompo}, we define $W_i := c^{-1}(U_i)$.
Observe that
$M|_{W_1} = L|_{W_1}$ and $L|_{W_2} = N|_{W_2}$.
On $N$ and $M$, we get morphisms $F_N: N \to N$ and $F_M: M \to M$ by mapping $q \mapsto p\cdot q$ on the monoids and using $F^*$ on the rings. They are compatible with each other and with the maps to $S$,
and moreover $F_N \times_S S_0$ and $F_M \times_S S_0$ are the absolute Frobenii on $N_0, M_0$.
We define partially $F|_{W_1} := F_M|_{W_1}$ and $F|_{W_2} := F_N|_{W_2}$.
Because $N|_{W_1 \cap W_2} = L|_{W_1 \cap W_2} = M|_{W_1 \cap W_2}$ these definitions agree
on $W_1 \cap W_2$
and we obtain a log morphism defined on $c^{-1}(U_{P}) = W_1 \cup W_2$ which gives the desired map.
\end{proof}
\section{The Hodge--de Rham Spectral Sequence}\label{TorAbsDeg}
We put the pieces together to prove Theorem \ref{absDegen} from the introduction. Let $S = \Spec (Q \to \kk)$ for a field $\kk \supset \QQ$ with $Q \ni q \mapsto \delta_{q0}$, and let $f: X \to S$
be a proper log toroidal family of relative dimension $d$ with respect to $S \to A_Q$. Setting $h^{pq} = \mathrm{dim}_\kk R^qf_*W^p_{X/S}$ and $h^n = \mathrm{dim}_\kk R^{n}f_*W^\bullet_{X/S}$, it suffices to prove $\sum_{p + q = n} h^{pq} = h^n$.
By Proposition \ref{spreadToroidal}, we can find an $S_\lambda = \Spec (Q \to B_\lambda)$ and a proper log toroidal family with respect to $S_\lambda \to A_Q$. Since $B_\lambda$ is integral, by shrinking $S_\lambda$,
we can find a spreading out $\phi: \X \to \mathcal{S}$ such that $R^q\phi_*W^p_{\X/\mathcal{S}}$ and $R^n\phi_*W^\bullet_{\X/\mathcal{S}}$ are locally free of constant rank $r^{pq}$ respective $r^n$ and such that $\mathcal{S}/\ZZ$ is smooth as schemes. By Theorem
\ref{baseChangeGeneric} we can furthermore assume that $W^m_{\X/\mathcal{S}}$ is compatible with any base change, and we can assume that $\mathrm{char}\,\kappa(s) > d$ for the residue field $\kappa(s)$ of every closed point $s \in \mathcal{S}$. Now let $\Spec k \to \mathcal{S}$ be
a closed point. Since $\mathcal{S}/\ZZ$ is smooth, we can find a factorization
$$\Spec k \to \Spec W_2(k) \to \mathcal{S}$$
which induces diagram \eqref{SO} from the introduction by strict base change. Setting $g^{pq} := \mathrm{dim}_k R^q(\phi_k)_*W^p_{\X_k/k}$ and $g^{pq} := \mathrm{dim}_k R^n(\phi_k)_*W^\bullet_{\X_k/k}$, Lemma \ref{deriBaCha} yields
$h^{pq} = r^{pq} = g^{pq}$ and $h^n = r^n = g^n$ hence it suffices to show $\sum_{p + q = n} g^{pq} = g^n$. Note that in diagram \eqref{SO} on the right, we are in the situation of Proposition \ref{posCharSplit}, so by Theorem~\ref{genDecompThm} we have a quasi-isomorphism
$$\bigoplus_{m} W^m_{\X_k'/k}[-m] \simeq (F_0)_*W^\bullet_{\X_k/k}.$$
Now a computation as in \cite[Corollary~2.4]{Deligne1987} yields $\sum_{p + q = n} g^{pq} = g^n$ concluding the proof of Theorem \ref{absDegen}.
\subsection{The Relative Spectral Sequence}\label{sec-relative-degen} \emph{Proof of Theorem~\ref{rel-degen}}.
By Corollary~\ref{locBaChaField}, the formation of $W^p_{X/S}$ commutes with base change which is an ingredient for the classical base change theorem, e.g. \cite[\S3]{Deligne1968}, \cite[Theorem~(8.0)]{Katz70}.
It thereby suffices to show the surjectivity of
$$\HH^k(X,W^\bullet_{X/S}) \to \HH^k(X_0,W^\bullet_{X_0/S_0}).$$
We prove this with the idea of \cite[Section (2.6)]{Steenbrink1976}, cf.~\cite[Lemma~4.1]{KawamataNamikawa1994} and \cite[Theorem~4.1]{GrossSiebertII}.
We define a complex
$$\mathcal{L}^\bullet := W^{\bullet,an}_{X}[u] =\bigoplus_{s = 0}^\infty W^{\bullet,an}_{X} \cdot u^s,
\qquad d(\alpha_su^s) = d\alpha_s \cdot u^s + s\delta(\rho) \wedge \alpha_s \cdot u^{s - 1}$$
of analytic sheaves where $\rho = f^*(1) \in \M_{X^{an}}$ and
$\delta: \M_{X^{an}} \to W^{1,an}_{X}$ is the log part of the universal
derivation. Here $W^{\bullet,an}_{X}$ denotes (the analytification of) absolute differentials as in Corollary \ref{absolute-on-Y}.
Projection to the $u^0$-summand composed with $W^{\bullet,an}_{X} \to W^{\bullet,an}_{X/S}$ yields a map
$\mathcal{L}^\bullet \to W^{\bullet,an}_{X/S}$ whose composition with
$W^{\bullet,an}_{X/S} \to W^{\bullet,an}_{X_0/S_0}$ fits into
an exact sequence
$$ 0 \to \mathcal{K}^\bullet \to \mathcal{L}^\bullet \xrightarrow{\phi^\bullet} W^{\bullet,an}_{X_0/S_0} \to 0$$
of complexes that defines $\mathcal{K}^\bullet$.
Since $f: X \to S$ has ETD local models, we may use Corollaries~\ref{relative-on-Y}, \ref{absolute-on-Y} and Remark~\ref{rem-compute-anal-stalk} to have a local description of this sequence.
Lemma~\ref{lem-K-acyclic} below shows that $\mathcal{K}^\bullet$ is acyclic for all ETDs with one-dimensional base, so $\phi^\bullet$
is a quasi-isomorphism and Theorem \ref{rel-degen} follows by the discussion in \S\ref{analytification}.
\hfill\qedsymbol
\begin{lemma} \label{lem-K-acyclic}
Let $(\NN \subset P,\mathcal{F})$ be an ETD, and let $f: X \to S = S_m$ be the base
change of $A_{P,\mathcal{F}} \to A_\NN$ along $S_m \to A_\NN$. With $0\in A_{P,\mathcal{F}}$ denoting the origin, we have
$\mathcal{H}^k(\mathcal{K}^\bullet)_0 = 0$ for all $k$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We choose Hermitian inner products on the vector spaces $L := P^{gp} \otimes \CC$ and $W := (P^{gp} \otimes \CC)/(\NN^{gp} \otimes \CC)$.
With $K=(m+1)+\NN\subset\NN$, we recall $E_K$ from \S\ref{subsec-local-analytic}.
For $e\in E_K$, we define
$$L_e := \bigcap_{H \in \mathcal{F}_{\max} \setminus \mathcal{F} : e \in H} \hspace{-0.4cm} H^{gp} \otimes \CC \qquad \mathrm{and} \qquad
W_e := \bigcap_{H \in \mathcal{F}_{\max} \setminus \mathcal{F} : e \in H} \hspace{-0.4cm}
(H^{gp} \otimes \CC)/(\NN^{gp} \otimes \CC).$$
By Remark~\ref{rem-compute-anal-stalk} and Lemma~\ref{ana-stalk}, elements of $\mathcal{L}^k_0$ are formal sums
$$(\ell_{e,s}) := \sum_{s = 0}^N\sum_{e \in E_K} u^sz^e\ell_{e,s} \ , \quad
\ell_{e,s} \in \bigwedge^kL_e \ , \quad
\mathrm{sup}_{\substack{e \in E_K \setminus 0\\ 1\le s\le N}} \left\{ \mathrm{log} \| \ell_{e,s}\| / h(e) \right\} < \infty ,$$ and elements of
$W^{k,an}_{X_0/S_0,0}$ are formal sums
$$(w_e) := \sum_{e \in E} z^e \cdot w_e, \quad
w_e \in \bigwedge^kW_e \ , \quad
\mathrm{sup}_{e \in E \setminus 0} \left\{ \mathrm{log} \| w_e \| / h(e) \right\} < \infty .$$
Note that $(\ell_{e,s})$ is summed over $E_K$ whereas $(w_e)$ is summed
over $E$.
We denote the kernel of $\pi: \bigwedge^kL_e \to \bigwedge^kW_e$ by $K^k_e$
and observe $\phi((\ell_{e,s})) = (\pi(\ell_{e,0}))$, so
$(\ell_{e,s}) \in \mathcal{K}^k_0$ if and only if $\ell_{e,0} \in K^k_e$ for all $e \in E$.
With $\bar\rho := 1 \otimes 1 \in \NN^{gp} \otimes \CC$ we have
$\delta(\rho) = z^0 \cdot \bar\rho \in W^1_{X}$ and thus
\begin{equation} \label{K-differential-explicit}
d((\ell_{e,s})) = (e \wedge \ell_{e,s} + (s + 1)\bar\rho \wedge \ell_{e,s + 1}).
\end{equation}
Let $(\ell_{e,s}) \in \mathcal{K}^0_0$ and assume $d((\ell_{e,s})) = 0$.
Since $\ell_{e,s} \in \CC$, for $e \not = 0$ by descending induction in $s$ starting
from $\ell_{e,N}$ we find $\ell_{e,s} = 0$. We have $\ell_{0,0} = 0$
and ascending induction yields $\ell_{0,s} = 0$. Thus $\mathcal{H}^0(\mathcal{K}^\bullet)_0 = 0$.
Next, let $(\ell_{e,s}) \in \mathcal{K}^{k + 1}_0$ for $k \geq 0$ with $d((\ell_{e,s})) = 0$.
Starting with $e = 0$, we construct $(\tau_{e,s}) \in \mathcal{K}^k_0$ with $d((\tau_{e,s})) = (\ell_{e,s})$ using the following claim.
\begin{claim} \label{claim1}
Let $(L, \langle \cdot, \cdot\rangle)$ be a $\CC$-vector space of finite dimension with a Hermitian inner product. Let $0 \not= p \in L$ and $k \geq 0$, and assume $\ell \in \bigwedge^{k + 1}L$ with
$p \wedge \ell = 0$. Then there is a $\tilde \ell \in \bigwedge^k L$ with $p \wedge \tilde \ell = \ell$ and $\| p \| \cdot \| \tilde \ell \| = \| \ell \|$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
Let $\ell_1 := \frac{p}{\| p \|}, \ell_2, ..., \ell_n$ be an orthonormal basis of $L$, and $\{\ell_{i_1...i_k}\}$ the induced basis of $\bigwedge^k L$.
If $\ell = \sum \alpha_{i_1...i_{k + 1}} \ell_{i_1...i_{k + 1}}$ satisfies the assumption, then
$\tilde \ell = \frac{1}{\| p\|}\sum \alpha_{1i_2...i_{k + 1}}\ell_{i_2...i_{k + 1}}$ is a solution.
\end{proof}
We set $\tau_{0,0} = 0$. Writing out \eqref{K-differential-explicit} for $e=0$ yields
$$ d\big(\ell_{0,0}+\ell_{0,1}u+ \ell_{0,2}u^2+...\big)= \bar\rho \wedge \ell_{0,1}\ +\ 2\bar\rho \wedge \ell_{0,2}u\ +\ 3\bar\rho \wedge \ell_{0,3}u^2\ +\ ...$$
and therefore $\bar\rho \wedge \ell_{0,i} = 0$ for $i>0$. Since $\ell_{0,0} \in K^0_0$, we also have $\bar\rho \wedge \ell_{0,0} = 0$.
By Claim~\ref{claim1}, there is
$\tau_{0,s+1} \in \bigwedge^kL_0$
with $\bar\rho\wedge \tau_{0,s + 1} = \ell_{0,s}$ and we are done with the case $e=0$.
For $e \neq 0$ we need to care about convergence.
Without loss of generality, $N \geq 1$. Since
$e \wedge \ell_{e,N} = 0$, we can find by Claim~\ref{claim1}
$\tau_{e,N} \in \bigwedge^kL_e$ with $e \wedge \tau_{e,N} = \ell_{e,N}$ and
$\|\tau_{e,N}\| \cdot \|e\| = \|\ell_{e,N}\|$. For $s \geq 1$, we construct
$\tau_{e,s} \in \bigwedge^kL_e$ by descending induction. Because of
$e \wedge (\ell_{e,s} - (s + 1)\bar\rho \wedge \tau_{e,s + 1}) = 0$, there is
$\tau_{e,s}$ with
$e \wedge \tau_{e,s} = \ell_{e,s} - (s + 1)\bar\rho \wedge \tau_{e,s + 1}$
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq-norm-equality}
\|\tau_{e,s}\| \cdot \|e\| = \|\ell_{e,s} - (s + 1)\bar\rho \wedge \tau_{e,s + 1}\|.
\end{equation}
For $e \notin E$, we go one step further and construct
$\tau_{e,0} \in \bigwedge^kL_e$ with the same method, but for $e \in E$, the construction of
$\tau_{e,0}\in K^k_e$ is more intricate.
We need another claim:
\begin{claim}\label{claim2}
Let $(L,\langle \cdot, \cdot\rangle)$ be a $\CC$-vector space of finite dimension with a Hermitian inner product.
Let $0 \not= V, Y \subset L$ be subspaces with $V \cap Y = 0$. Then there is a
constant $\gamma>0$ with the following property: for every subspace $H$ with $V \subset H \subset L$ and $k \geq 0$, let $K^k_H$ be the kernel of $\bigwedge^k H \to \bigwedge^k(H/V)$.
Then for every $0 \not= p \in Y \cap H$ and every $\ell \in K^{k + 1}_H$ with $p \wedge \ell = 0$, there is a $\tilde \ell \in K^k_H$ with $p \wedge \tilde \ell = \ell$ and $\gamma \cdot \| p \| \cdot \|\tilde \ell\| \leq \| \ell \|$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
Let $p=(p_1,p_2)$ be the decomposition of $p$ under $L=V\oplus V^\perp$, so $\|p\|^2=\|p_1\|^2+\|p_2\|^2$. Since $V\cap Y=0$, we have for
$\gamma^2 := \inf_{0 \not= p \in Y} \|p_2\|^2/\|p\|^2$ that $0<\gamma\le 1$.
Let $\ell_0 := \frac{p_2}{\|p_2\|}, \ell_1,\ell_2...$ be an orthonormal basis of $H$ and then $\bar\ell_0=\frac{p}{\|p\|}$, $\bar\ell_i:=\ell_i$ for $i>0$ is an ordinary basis of $H$.
For $\ell = \sum \alpha_{i_0...i_k} \bar\ell_{i_0...i_k} \in K^{k + 1}_H$ with
$p \wedge \ell = 0$, we define
$\tilde \ell := \frac{1}{\|p\|}\sum \alpha_{0i_1...i_k} \bar\ell_{i_1...i_k} \in K^k_H$
to have $p \wedge \tilde \ell = \ell$. We also find
\begin{align}
\|\ell\|^2 &= \left\|\sum \alpha_{0i_1...i_k}\frac{p}{\|p\|} \wedge \ell_{i_1...i_k} \right\|^2 \geq \left\|\sum \alpha_{0i_1...i_k}\frac{p_2}{\|p\|} \wedge \ell_{i_1...i_k} \right\|^2
\geq \gamma^2 \cdot \|p\|^2 \cdot \|\tilde \ell\|^2 .\nonumber
\end{align}
\end{proof}
We apply Claim~\ref{claim2} to $L = P^{gp} \otimes \CC$. Let $F_e \subset P$ be the face generated by $e$ and $Y = F_e^{gp} \otimes \CC$. Let
$V = \NN^{gp} \otimes \CC$ and $H = L_e$, so $K^k_H = K^k_e$.
Then $e \wedge (\ell_{e,0} - \bar\rho \wedge \tau_{e,1}) = 0$, so we find
$\tau_{e,0} \in K^k_e$ with
$e \wedge \tau_{e,0} = \ell_{e,0} - \bar\rho \wedge \tau_{e,1}$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq-ind-start-triang-ineq}
\gamma\cdot\|\tau_{e,0}\|\cdot\|e\| \leq \|\ell_{e,0} - \bar\rho \wedge \tau_{e,1}\|.
\end{equation}
The factor $\gamma$ depends on $Y$, but there are only finitely
many faces generated by elements $e \in E$, so we take for $\gamma$ the minimum over them and furthermore $\gamma<1$.
Applying the triangle inequality to the right hand side of \eqref{eq-ind-start-triang-ineq} and using induction and \eqref{eq-norm-equality} yields
$$\|\tau_{e,s}\| \leq \frac{1}{\gamma} \cdot \frac{1}{\|e\|} \sum_{k = s}^N
\left(\frac{\|\bar\rho\|}{\|e\|}\right)^{k - s} \cdot \frac{k!}{s!} \cdot \|\ell_{e,k}\|$$
for all $e \not= 0$. Because $\inf_{e \not= 0}\{\|e\|\} > 0$, there is a bound
$M > 1$ independent of $e$ such that $\|\tau_{e,s}\| \leq M \cdot \max_k\{\|\ell_{e,k}\|\}$ which proves
$$\mathrm{sup}_{e \in E_K \setminus 0} \left\{ \mathrm{log} \| \tau_{e,s}\| / h(e) \right\} < \infty$$
and thus $(\tau_{e,s}) \in \mathcal{K}^k_0$. By construction, $d((\tau_{e,s})) = (\ell_{e,s})$, so $\mathcal{H}^k(\mathcal{K}^\bullet)_0 = 0$.
\end{proof}
\section{Smoothings via Maurer--Cartan Solutions} \label{section-smoothing}
In the upcoming sections \S\ref{defo-from-MC} and \S\ref{MC-from-BV}, we adapt the methods of \cite{CLM} to the setup given in the statement of Theorem~\ref{maintheorem-tc}.
We then argue how to obtain an analytic smoothing from a formal one in \S\ref{formal-to-analytic}.
The combination of all these sections gives a proof of Theorem~\ref{maintheorem-tc}.
The main ingredients are Theorem~\ref{locally-unique-defos}, Theorem~\ref{absDegen} and Theorem~\ref{rel-degen}.
A key ingredient is also Lemma~\ref{lemma-add-E} to know that $W_{X/S}^d$ is trivial for $d={\dim X}$.
\subsection{Constructing a Formal Deformation from a Solution to the Maurer--Cartan Equation} \label{sec-maurer-Cartan}\label{defo-from-MC}
We define ${{}^k\!S} = \Spec(\NN \stackrel{1\mapsto t}{\longrightarrow} \CC[t]/t^{k + 1})$ and assume to be given a proper log toroidal family ${{{}^0\!X}}\ra {{{}^0\!S}}$.
Let $\{{{}^0V_\alpha}\}_\alpha$ be an affine cover of ${{{}^0\!X}}$.
For fixed $\alpha$, let $\{{{}^k\!V}\!_\alpha\ra {{}^k\!S}\}_k$ be a system of deformations, compatible with restriction from $k$ to $k-1$ as obtained from Theorem~\ref{locally-unique-defos}.
Note that $V_{\alpha\beta}:={}^0V_{\alpha}\cap {}^0V_{\beta}$ is affine because ${{{}^0\!X}}$ is separated.
We give names to the restrictions of thickenings via ${{}^k\!V}\!_{\alpha;\alpha\beta}:={{{}^k\!V}\!_\alpha}|_{V\!_{\alpha\beta}}$.
Again by Theorem~\ref{locally-unique-defos}, we find isomorphisms
$${}^k\phi_{\alpha\beta}: {{}^k\!V}\!_{\alpha;\alpha\beta} \to {{}^k\!V}\!_{\beta;\alpha\beta}$$
of generically log smooth families over ${{{}^k\!S}}$ which are compatible with the restrictions to the base changes via ${{}^{k-1}\!S}\ra {{{}^k\!S}}$ but do not necessarily satisfy a cocycle condition.
We now analytify ${{}^k\!X}\ra{{}^k\!S}$ as well as ${{}^k\!V}\!_{\alpha},{{}^k\!V}\!_{\alpha;\alpha\beta}$. We keep using the same symbols though now refer to the analytifications respectively.
Let $\{U_i\}_{i\in I}$ be a cover of ${{{}^0\!X}}$ by Stein open sets that is also a basis for the analytic topology of ${{{}^0\!X}}$ with $I$ countable and totally ordered. Set $U_{i_0\dots i_l}:=\bigcap_{k=0}^l U_{i_k}$.
We obtain the sheaves of Gerstenhaber algebras
$${}^k\shG^p_\alpha:=\Theta^{-p}_{({{}^k\!V}\!_{\alpha})/{{}^k\!S}}$$
concentrated in non-positive degrees
via the negative Schouten--Nijenhuis bracket $-[\cdot,\cdot]$ and $\wedge$.
Set $\blacktriangle_l=\Spec(\CC[x_0,\dots,x_n]/(x_0+\dots+x_n-1))$ and $\shA^q(\blacktriangle_l)=\Omega^q_{\blacktriangle_l}$ and let $d_{j,l}:\blacktriangle_{l-1}\ra \blacktriangle_l$ be given by $x_j\mapsto 0$.
One constructs the Thom--Whitney bicomplex
\begin{equation}
\label{TW-def-eq}\tag{TW}
{^k}\!TW^{p,q}_{\alpha;\alpha_0\dots\alpha_l}=\left\{ (\varphi_{i_0\dots i_l})_{i_0<\dots<i_l}\,\left|\,
\begin{array}{c}
U_{i_j}\subset V_{\alpha_0}\cap...\cap V_{\alpha_l} \hbox{ for }0\le j\le l,\\
\varphi_{i_0\dots i_l}\in\shA^q(\blacktriangle_l)\otimes_\CC{}^k\!\shG^p_\alpha(U_{i_0\dots i_l}), \\
d^*_{j,l}(\varphi_{i_0\dots i_l})=\varphi_{i_0\dots\hat i_j\dots i_l}|_{U_{i_0\dots i_l}}
\end{array}
\right.\right\}.
\end{equation}
The differential for the index $p$ is trivial and the differential $\bar\partial_\alpha$ for the index $q$ is induced by the de Rham differential on $\shA^q(\blacktriangle_l)$.
Furthermore, $-[\cdot,\cdot]$ and $\wedge$ turn $TW$ into a Gerstenhaber algebra.
For $W\subset V_\alpha$, let ${^k}\!TW^{p,q}_{\alpha;\alpha}|_W$ be given by \eqref{TW-def-eq} but with the additional requirement to have $U_{i_j}\subset W$.
The presheaf $W\mapsto {^k}\!TW^{p,\bullet}_{\alpha;\alpha}|_W$ gives a resolution of the sheaf ${}^k\shG^p_\alpha$ on $V_\alpha$, so ${}^k\shG^p_\alpha(W)=H^0_{\bar\partial_\alpha}({^k}\!TW^{p,\bullet}_{\alpha;\alpha}|_W)$.
The isomorphisms ${}^k\phi_{\alpha\beta}$ induce isomorphisms ${}^k\psi_{\alpha\beta}:{}^k\shG^\bullet_\alpha|_{V_{\alpha\beta}}\ra {}^k\shG^\bullet_\beta|_{V_{\alpha\beta}}$
of sheaves of Gerstenhaber algebras which can be used (\cite[Key Lemma~3.21]{CLM}) to construct isomorphisms
$$ {}^kg_{\alpha\beta}:{^k}\!TW^{p,q}_{\alpha;\alpha\beta}\ra {^k}\!TW^{p,q}_{\beta;\alpha\beta}$$
that satisfy the cocycle condition ${}^kg_{\gamma\alpha}{}^kg_{\beta\gamma}{}^kg_{\alpha\beta}=\id$ and are compatible with restriction from $k$ to $k-1$ and with $-[\cdot,\cdot]$ and $\wedge$.
The cocycle condition allows one to glue $\{{^k}\!TW^{p,q}_{\alpha}\}_\alpha$ to a presheaf ${^k}\!\operatorname{PV}^{p,q}$ on ${{{}^0\!X}}$ compatible with restricting from $k$ to $k-1$.
We set
${^k}\!\operatorname{PV}^{n}:=\bigoplus_{p+q=n} {^k}\!\operatorname{PV}^{p,q}$.
While ${}^kg_{\alpha\beta}$ are not necessarily compatible with the differentials $\bar\partial_\alpha,\bar\partial_\beta$, there exist ${^k}\mathfrak{d}_\alpha\in {^k}\!TW^{-1,1}_{\alpha}$ such that
$(\bar\partial_\alpha+[{^k}\mathfrak{d}_\alpha,\cdot])_\alpha$ gives a system of maps compatible with ${}^kg_{\alpha\beta}$ (\cite[Theorem~3.34]{CLM}). This system glues to an operator $\bar\partial$ on ${^k}\!\operatorname{PV}^{p,q}$ compatible with restriction from $k$ to $k-1$.
However, $\bar\partial$ is not a differential because
$$\bar\partial^2 = \left[{^k}\mathfrak{l}_\alpha,\,\cdot\,\right]\quad\hbox{ for }\quad {^k}\mathfrak{l}_\alpha:=\bar\partial_\alpha({^k}\mathfrak{d}_\alpha)+\frac12[{^k}\mathfrak{d}_\alpha,{^k}\mathfrak{d}_\alpha]\in{^k}\!TW_\alpha^{-1,2}.$$
The $\{{^k}\mathfrak{l}_\alpha\}_\alpha$ glue to a global element ${^k}\mathfrak{l}\in {^k}\!\operatorname{PV}^{-1,2}$ that is compatible with restricting from $k$ to $k-1$. If ${^k}\phi\in {^k}\!\operatorname{PV}^{-1,1}$ solves the Maurer--Cartan equation
\begin{equation}\label{MC1}\tag{MC1}
\bar\partial({^k}\phi)+\frac12[{^k}\phi,{^k}\phi]+{^k}\mathfrak{l}=0,
\end{equation}
then $(\bar\partial+[{^k}\phi,\cdot])^2=0$.
In this case the cohomology $H^\bullet_{(\bar\partial+[{^k}\phi,\cdot])}({^k}\!\operatorname{PV}^\bullet)$ is a presheaf of Gerstenhaber algebras on ${{}^0\!X}$ that is locally isomorphic to ${}^k\shG^\bullet_\alpha$.
The sheafification of its degree zero part gives a sheaf $\shO_{X_k}$ of $\CC[t]/t^{k+1}$-algebras on ${{}^0\!X}$ which we take as the $k$th order deformation of ${{}^0\!X}$. Taking the limit $\shO_{\mathfrak{X}}:=\liminv_{k}\shO_{X_k}$ yields a flat and proper morphism $\mathfrak{X}\ra \mathfrak{S}$ with $\mathfrak{S}:=\operatorname{Spf}(\CC\lfor t\rfor)$.
\subsection{Constructing a Solution to the Maurer--Cartan Equation using the Batalin--Vilkovisky Operator}\label{MC-from-BV}
We assume that $W^d_{{{}^0\!X}/{{}^0\!S}} \cong \mathcal{O}_{{}^0\!X}$.
We fix a global generator ${}^0\omega\in\Gamma({{}^0\!X},W^d_{{{}^0\!X}/{{}^k\!S}})$.
Let ${}^k\omega_\alpha\in \Gamma({}^0V_\alpha,W^d_{{{}^k\!V}\!_\alpha/{{}^k\!S}})$ be a choice of generator that is a lift to $k$ of ${}^0\omega|_{{}^0V_\alpha}$.
The Batalin--Vilkovisky operator ${}^k\Delta_\alpha$ is the transfer of the de Rham differential $\texttt{d}$ to the polyvector fields, i.e., ${}^k\Delta_\alpha$ is the composition
$$ \Theta^{p}_{({{}^k\!V}\!_{\alpha})/{{}^k\!S}}\stackrel{\invneg({}^k\omega_\alpha)}{\lra} W^{d-p}_{({{}^k\!V}\!_{\alpha})/{{}^k\!S}}\stackrel{\texttt{d}}{\lra} W^{d-p+1}_{({{}^k\!V}\!_{\alpha})/{{}^k\!S}}\stackrel{\invneg({}^k\omega_\alpha)^{-1}}{\lra} \Theta^{p-1}_{({{}^k\!V}\!_{\alpha})/{{}^k\!S}}$$
and thus a differential ${}^k\shG^p_\alpha\ra {}^k\shG^{p+1}_\alpha$. Choosing ${}^k\omega_\alpha$ compatible with restricting from $k$ to $k-1$, also the ${}^k\Delta_\alpha$ share this property.
For $W\subset {}^0V_\alpha\cap {}^0V_\beta$ there is $\lambda_{\alpha\beta}\in \Gamma(W,{}^k\shG^0_\alpha)$ with ${}^k\omega_\alpha|_W=\lambda_{\alpha\beta}\cdot{}^k\omega_\beta|_W$.
Setting ${^k}\mathfrak{w_{\alpha\beta}}:=\log(\lambda_{\alpha\beta})$ yields
$$ {}^k\psi_{\beta\alpha}\circ {}^k\Delta_\beta\circ {}^k\psi_{\alpha\beta} - {}^k\Delta_\alpha=[{^k}\mathfrak{w}_{\alpha\beta},\,\cdot\,],$$
and then $\{{^k}\mathfrak{w_{\alpha\beta}}\}_{\alpha\beta}$ can be upgraded (\cite[Theorem~3.34]{CLM}) to a \v{C}ech cocycle for ${^k}\!TW^{0,0}_{\alpha;\alpha\beta}$ which by exactness lifts to a collection ${^k}\mathfrak{f}_\alpha\in TW^{0,0}_{\alpha}$. The collection is compatible with restricting from $k$ to $k-1$ and satisfies
$$ {}^kg_{\beta\alpha}\circ ({}^k\Delta_\beta+[{}^k\mathfrak{f}_\beta,\cdot])\circ {}^kg_{\alpha\beta} =({}^k\Delta_\alpha+[{}^k\mathfrak{f}_\alpha,\cdot]).$$
Since ${}^k\mathfrak{f}_\alpha$ lives in degree $(0,0)$, one has $({}^k\Delta_\alpha+[{}^k\mathfrak{f}_\alpha,\cdot])^2=0$, so we can glue the collection $\{{}^k\Delta_\alpha+[{}^k\mathfrak{f}_\alpha,\cdot]\}_\alpha$ to an operator
$\Delta:{}^k\operatorname{PV}^{p,q}\ra{}^k\operatorname{PV}^{p+1,q}$ with $\Delta^2=0$. Now,
$$ \Delta \bar\partial + \bar\partial\Delta = [{}^k\mathfrak{y},\cdot]\quad \hbox{ for } \quad {}^k\mathfrak{y}_\alpha:={}^k\Delta_\alpha({}^k\mathfrak{d}_\alpha)+{}^k\bar\partial_\alpha({}^k\mathfrak{f}_\alpha)+[{}^k\mathfrak{d}_\alpha,{}^k\mathfrak{f}_\alpha]$$
and ${}^k\mathfrak{y}\in {}^k\!\operatorname{PV}^{0,1}$ is glued from the collection ${}^k\mathfrak{y}_\alpha$.
By construction,
$$\breve{d}:=\bar\partial+\Delta+(\mathfrak{l}+\mathfrak{y})\wedge$$
satisfies $\breve{d}^2=0$ and furthermore $(\mathfrak{l}+\mathfrak{y})\equiv 0\mod (t)$.
\begin{theorem} \label{surjective-PV}
The natural maps $H^i_{\!\breve{d}}({}^k\!\operatorname{PV}^\bullet)\ra H^i_{\!\breve{d}}({}^{k-1}\!\operatorname{PV}^\bullet)$ are surjective for all $i$ and $k$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
As in \cite[Proposition~4.8]{CLM}, the elements $\exp({^k}\mathfrak{f}_\alpha\invneg){^k}\omega_\alpha$ glue to a global element ${^k}\omega$ in the Thom--Whitney de Rham complex $({}^k_\parallel\!\shA^{\bullet},d)$ (constructed from $W^\bullet_{{{}^k\!V}\!_\alpha/{{}^k\!S}}$ in our case) compatible with restricting from $k$ to $k-1$.
Contracting ${^k}\omega$ gives an isomorphism of complexes ${}^k\!\operatorname{PV}^\bullet\ra {}^k_\parallel\!\shA^{\bullet}$, so it suffices to prove surjectivity of $H^i_{\!{d}}({}^k_\parallel\!\shA^{\bullet})\ra H^i_{\!{d}}({}^{k-1}_{\ \ \,\,\parallel}\!\shA^{\bullet})$. This follows from Theorem~\ref{rel-degen}, cf.~\cite[Lemma~4.17]{CLM}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
For a formal variable $u^{\frac12}$, consider on $\operatorname{PV}^\bullet\lfor u^{\frac12}\rfor$ the differential $\breve{d}_u:=\bar\partial+u\Delta+u^{-1}(\mathfrak{l}+u\mathfrak{y})\wedge$. A direct computation gives
$\breve{d}_u=u^{\frac12} I_u^{-1} \circ\breve{d} \circ I_u$ where $I_u$ is defined by $I_u(\varphi) = u^{\frac{p-q-2}2}\varphi$ for $\varphi\in \operatorname{PV}^{p,q}\lfor u^{\frac12}\rfor[u^{-\frac12}]$ (cf.~\cite[Notation~5.1]{CLM}).
Theorem~\ref{surjective-PV} thus implies that
\begin{equation}\label{surjectiveu12}
H^i_{\!\breve{d}_u}({}^k\!\operatorname{PV}^\bullet\lfor u^{\frac12}\rfor[u^{-\frac12}])\ra H^i_{\!\breve{d}_u}({}^{k-1}\!\operatorname{PV}^\bullet\lfor u^{\frac12}\rfor[u^{-\frac12}])
\end{equation}
is surjective for all $i,k$.
\end{remark}
\begin{theorem} \label{freeness-PV} For all $i$,
$H^i_{\bar\partial+u\Delta}({}^0\!\operatorname{PV}^\bullet\lfor u\rfor)$ is a free $\CC\lfor u\rfor$-module of finite rank.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} Note that $k=0$.
With $\bar\partial$ the \v{C}ech differential for the cover $\{V_\alpha\}_\alpha$,
the degeneration of the Hodge--de Rham spectral sequence for $(W^\bullet_{{{}^0\!X}/{{}^0\!S}},d)$ at $E_1$ by Theorem~\ref{absDegen} is equivalent to
$H^i_{\bar\partial+ud}(\{V_\alpha\}_\alpha,W^\bullet_{{{}^0\!X}/{{}^0\!S}}\lfor u\rfor)$ being a free $\CC\lfor u\rfor$-module of finite rank.
The quasi-isomorphisms $W^\bullet_{{{}^0\!X}/{{}^0\!S}}\lfor u\rfor\ra {}^0_\parallel\!\shA^{\bullet}\lfor u\rfor$ and ${}^0\!\operatorname{PV}^\bullet\lfor u\rfor\ra {}^0_\parallel\!\shA^{\bullet}\lfor u\rfor$ yield the assertion.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem} \label{main-theorem-MC}
There exist ${}^k\varphi\in {}^k\!\operatorname{PV}^0\lfor u\rfor$ for all $k\ge 0$ with ${}^k\varphi\equiv {}^{k+1}\varphi \mod t^{k+1}$ and ${}^0\varphi=0$ solving
\begin{equation}
\label{MC2}\tag{MC2}
(\bar\partial+u\Delta)({^k}\varphi)+\frac12[{^k}\varphi,{^k}\varphi]+({^k}\mathfrak{l}+u\,{^k}\mathfrak{y})=0.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, setting ${^k}\phi:=({^k}\varphi \mod u)$ with ${^k}\phi=\sum_j {^k}\phi_j$ and ${^k}\phi_j\in {}^k\!\operatorname{PV}^{-j,j}$, it holds ${^k}\phi_0=0$ and thus ${^k}\phi_1\in {}^k\!\operatorname{PV}^{-1,1}$ solves \eqref{MC1}.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The first assertion becomes \cite[Theorem~5.5]{CLM} if we set $\mathbf{I}=(t)$ and $\psi=0$ and check that we have the ingredients for its proof available. The proof goes by induction over $k$ and uses
(i) the surjectivity in Theorem~\ref{surjective-PV} for $k=0$, (ii) the surjectivity in Equation~\eqref{surjectiveu12} for all $k$ and (iii) Theorem~\ref{freeness-PV} in each step to get rid of negative powers of $u$ in ${^k}\varphi$.
The second statement is \cite[Lemma~5.11]{CLM}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{From a Formal Deformation to an Analytic Deformation} \label{formal-to-analytic}
Let $\mathfrak{S}$ be the completion of an analytic variety $S$ in a non-zero divisor $t\in \Gamma(S,\shO_S)$.
Let $S_k$ be the closed analytic subvariety defined by $t^k$. If $X\ra S$ is flat, we denote by $X_k\ra S_k$ the base change to $S_k$, similarly for a flat map $\mathfrak{X}\ra \mathfrak{S}$.
\begin{theorem}[\cite{RS19}, Theorem B.1]
\label{thm-approx-main}
Given a proper and flat formal analytic morphism $\hat\varphi:\mathfrak{X}\ra \mathfrak{S}$, for every $k>0$ there is a proper flat analytic morphism
$\varphi:X\ra S$ together with an $S_k$-isomorphism $\mathfrak{X}_k\ra X_k$ of the base changes of $\hat\varphi$ and $\varphi$ to $S_k$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem}[\cite{Ru18}, Theorem~5.5\,(1)]
\label{thm-approx-nbd}
In the situation of Theorem~\ref{thm-approx-main}, given $s\in S_0$ and $X_s=\varphi^{-1}(s)$, there exists an integer $K>0$ such that whenever $\varphi:X\ra S$ is obtained for $k>K$ then every point $x\in X_s$ has a neighborhood in $X$ whose $t$-completion is formally isomorphic to a neighborhood of $x$ in $\mathfrak{X}$, in particular if $\mathfrak{X}$ is a smoothing of a fiber $X_s$ for $t\neq 0$ then so is $X$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem}[\cite{Ru18}, Theorem~5.5\,(3)]
\label{thm-approx-log}
In the situation of Theorem~\ref{thm-approx-nbd}, for $X_0$ the base change to $S_0$, the maps of pairs $(X,X_0)\ra (S,S_0)$ and $(\mathfrak{X},\mathfrak{X}_0)\ra (\mathfrak{S},S_0)$ turn $\hat\varphi$ and $\varphi$ into log morphisms via the divisorial log structures. There is an isomorphism of the log fibers over $s\in S$ whose underlying morphism is the restriction to the fiber $X_s$ of the $S_k$-isomorphism $\mathfrak{X}_k\ra X_k$.
\end{theorem}
{\footnotesize
|
\section{Introduction}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
Let $n\geq 1$, $s\in(0,1)$ such that $n/s \geq 2$ and $\Om\subset \mb R^n$ be a bounded domain with Lipschitz boundary then we intend to study the existence of a non negative solutions of following fractional Kirchhoff type problem with Trudinger-Moser type Choquard nonlinearity
$$ \mc{( M)}\quad \left\{
\begin{array}{lr}
\quad - M\left(\displaystyle\int_{\mb R^n}\int_{\mb R^{n}} \frac{|u(x)-u(y)|^{\frac{n}{s}}}{|x-y|^{2n}}~dxdy\right) (-\De)^{s}_{n/s} u=\left(\displaystyle\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}~dy\right)g(x,u) \; \text{in}\;
\Om,\\
\quad \quad u =0\quad\text{in} \quad \mb R^n \setminus \Om,
\end{array}
\right.
$$
where $(-\De)^{s}_{n/s}$ is the $n/s$-fractional Laplace operator which, up to a normalizing constant, is defined as
\begin{align*}
(-\De)^{s}_{n/s} u(x) = 2 \lim_{\e \ra 0^+} \int_{\mb R^n\setminus B_{\e}(x)} \frac{|u(x)-u(y)|^{\frac{n}{s}-2}(u(x)-u(y))}{|x-y|^{2n}} dy, \quad x\in \mb R^n, \; u\in C_{0}^{\infty}(\mb R^n).
\end{align*}
The functions $M:\mb R^+\rightarrow \mb R^+$ and $g:\Omega\times\mb R\rightarrow \mb R$ are continuous satisfying some appropriate conditions which will be stated later on.\\
Our problem $(\mc M)$ is basically driven by the Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev inequality and the Trudinger-Moser inequality. Let us first recall the following well known Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev inequality [Theorem 4.3, p.106] \cite{lieb}.
\begin{Proposition}\label{HLS}
(\textbf {Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev inequality}) Let $t$, $r>1$ and $0<\mu<n $ with $1/t+\mu/n+1/r=2$, $g \in L^t(\mathbb R^n)$ and $h \in L^r(\mathbb R^n)$. Then there exists a sharp constant $C(t,n,\mu,r)$, independent of $g,$ $h$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{HLSineq}
\int_{\mb R^n}\int_{\mb R^n} \frac{g(x)h(y)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}\mathrm{d}x\mathrm{d}y \leq C(t,n,\mu,r)\|g\|_{L^t(\mb R^n)}\|h\|_{L^r(\mb R^n)}.
\end{equation}
{ If $t =r = \textstyle\frac{2n}{2n-\mu}$ then
\[C(t,n,\mu,r)= C(n,\mu)= \pi^{\frac{\mu}{2}} \frac{\Gamma\left(\frac{n}{2}-\frac{\mu}{2}\right)}{\Gamma\left(n-\frac{\mu}{2}\right)} \left\{ \frac{\Gamma\left(\frac{n}{2}\right)}{\Gamma(n)} \right\}^{-1+\frac{\mu}{n}}. \]
In this case there is equality in \eqref{HLSineq} if and only if $g\equiv (constant)h$ and
\[h(x)= A(\gamma^2+ |x-a|^2)^{\frac{-(2n-\mu)}{2}}\]
for some $A \in \mathbb C$, $0 \neq \gamma \in \mathbb R$ and $a \in \mathbb R^n$.}
\end{Proposition}
The study of Choquard equations originates from the work of S. Pekar \cite{pekar} and P. Choquard \cite{choquard} where they used elliptic equations with Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev type nonlinearity to describe the quantum theory of a polaron at rest and to model an electron trapped in its own hole in the Hartree-Fock theory, respectively. For more details on the application of Choquard equations, we refer \cite{survey}. On the other hand, the boundary value problems involving Kirchhoff equations arise in several physical and
biological systems. These type of non-local problems were initially observed by Kirchhoff in 1883
in the study of string or membrane vibrations to describe the transversal oscillations of a stretched string, particularly, taking into account the subsequent change in string length caused by oscillations.
L\"{u} \cite{Lu} in $2015$ studied the following Kirchhoff problem with Choquard nonlinearity
\[-\left( a+ b \int_{\mb R^3}|\nabla u|^2~dx\right)\Delta u +(1+\mu g(x))u = (|x|^{-\alpha}\ast |u|^p)u|^{p-2}u\; \text{in}\; \mb R^3 \]
for $a>0,\; b\geq 0,\; \alpha \in (0,3),\; p \in (2,6-\alpha)$, $\mu>0$ is a parameter and $g$ is a nonnegative continuous potential with some growth assumptions. He proved the existence of solution to the above problem for $\mu$ sufficiently large and also {showed} their concentration behavior when $\mu$ approaches $+\infty$. In \cite{FCX}, authors discuss the existence and concentration of sign-changing solutions to a class of Kirchhoff-type systems with Hartree-type nonlinearity in $\mb R^3$ by the minimization argument on the sign-changing Nehari manifold and a quantitative deformation lemma. In the nonlocal case {that is problems involving the fractional Laplace operator}, Kirchhoff problem with Choquard nonlinearity has been studied by Pucci et al. in \cite{pucci} via variational techniques.\\
The study of elliptic equations involving nonlinearity with exponential growth are motivated by
the following Trudinger-Moser inequality in \cite{martinazi}, namely
\begin{Theorem} \label{moser}
let $\Om$ be a open bounded domain then we define $\tilde{W}^{s,n/s}_{0}(\Om)$ as the completion of $C_{c}^{\infty}(\Om)$ with respect to the norm $\|u\|^{\frac{n}{s}}= \displaystyle\int_{\mb R^{n}}\int_{\mb R^n} \frac{|u(x)-u(y)|^{\frac{n}{s}}}{|x-y|^{2n}} dx dy$. Then there exists a positive constant $\alpha_{n,s}$ given by
\[\alpha_{n,s}= \frac{n}{\omega_{n-1}}\left( \frac{\Gamma(\frac{n-s}{2})}{\Gamma(s/2)2^s \pi^{n/2}}\right)^{-\frac{n}{n-s}},\]
where $\omega_{n-1}$ be the surface area of the unit sphere in $\mb R^n$ and $C_{n,s}$ depending only on $n$ and $s$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{TM-ineq}
\sup_{u \in \tilde{W}^{s,n/s}_{0}(\Om),\; \|u\|\leq 1}\int_\Om \exp\left( \alpha |u|^{\frac{n}{n-s}}\right)~dx\leq C_{n,s}|\Om|
\end{equation}
for each $\alpha \in [0,\alpha_{n,s}]$.
Moreover there exists a $ \alpha_{n,s}^* \geq \alpha_{n,s}$ such that {the right hand side of\eqref{TM-ineq} is $+\infty$} for $\alpha>\alpha_{n,s}^*$.
\end{Theorem}
It is proved in \cite{ruf} (see Proposition 5.2) that
\[\alpha_{n,s}^*= n \left(\frac{2(n\mc W_n)^2 \Gamma(\frac{n}{s}+1)}{n!}\sum_{i=0}^{\infty} \frac{(n+i-1)!}{i! (n+2i)^{\frac{n}{s}}}\right)^{\frac{s}{n-s}},\]
where $\mc W_n= \frac{w_{n-1}}{n}$ {is} the volume of the unit sphere in $\mb R^n$. It {is still} unknown whether $ \alpha_{n,s}^* = \alpha_{n,s}$ {or not}.
The $p$-fractional Kirchhoff problems involving the Trudinger-Moser type nonlinearity has been recently addressed in \cite{MRZ1, MRZ2}. We also refer \cite{pawan1, pawan2} to the readers, in the linear case i.e. when $p=2$. The Choquard equations with exponential type nonlinearities has been comparatively less attended. In this regard, we cite \cite{YangJDE} where authors studied a singularly perturbed nonlocal Schr\"odinger equation via variational techniques. We also refer \cite{JCA} for reference. On a similar note, there is no literature available on Kirchhoff problems involving the Choquard exponential nonlinearity except the very recent article \cite{AGMS} where authors studied the existence of positive solutions to the following problem
\[-m\left(\int_\Om |\nabla u|^n ~dx \right)\Delta_nu = \left(\int_\Om \frac{F(y,u)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy\right)f(x,u), \; u>0\;\text{in}\; \Om,\; u=0\;\text{in}\; \partial\Om\]
where $-\Delta_n = \nabla. (|\nabla u|^{n-2}\nabla u)$, $\mu\in (0,n)$, $n\geq 2$, $m$ and $f$ are continuous functions satisfying some additional assumptions, using the concentration compactness arguments. They also {established} multiplicity result corresponding to a perturbed problem via minimization over suitable subsets of Nehari manifold. Whereas in the {$p$-fractional laplacian} case, motivated by above research, our paper represents the first article to consider the Kirchhoff problem with Choquard exponential nonlinearity. \\
The problem of the type $(\mc M)$ are categorized under doubly nonlocal problems because of the presence of the term $M\left(\displaystyle \int_{\mb R^{n}}\int_{\mb R^n} \frac{|u(x)-u(y)|^{\frac{n}{s}}}{|x-y|^{2n}} dx dy\right)$ and {$\displaystyle\left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}~dy\right)g(x,u)$}
which does not allow the problem $(\mc M)$ to be a pointwise identity. Additionally, we also deal with the degenerate case of Kirchhoff problem which is a new result even in the case of $s=1$. This phenomenon arises mathematical difficulties which makes the study of such a class of problem interesting. Generally, the main difficulty encountered in Kirchhoff problems is the competition between the growths of $M$ and $g$.
Precisely, mere weak limit of a Palais Smale (PS) sequence is not enough to claim that it is a weak solution to $(\mc M)$ because of presence of the function $M$, which holds in the case of $M \equiv 1$. Next technical hardship emerge while proving convergence of the Choquard term with respect to (PS) sequence. We use delicate ideas in Lemma \ref{wk-sol} and Lemma \ref{PS-ws} to establish it. Following a variational approach, we prove that the corresponding energy functional to $(\mc M)$ satisfies the Mountain pass geometry and the Mountain pass critical level stays below a threshold (see Lemma \ref{lem7.2}) using the Moser type functions established by Parini and Ruf in \cite{ruf}. Then we perform a convergence analysis of the Choquard term with respect to the (PS)-sequences in Lemma \ref{wk-sol}. This along with the higher integrability Lemma \ref{plc} benefited us to get the weak limit of (PS)-sequence as a weak solution of $(\mc M)$ leading to build the proof of our main result. The approach although may not be completely new but the problem is comprehensively afresh. \\
Our article is divided into 3 sections- Section $2$ illustrates the functional set up to study $(\mc M)$ and contains the main result that we intend to establish. Section $3$ contains the proof of our main result.
\section{Functional Setting and Main result}
Let us consider the usual fractional Sobolev space
\[W^{s,p}(\Om):= \left\{u\in L^{p}(\Om); \frac{(u(x)-u(y))}{|x-y|^{\frac{n}{p}+s}}\in L^{p}(\Om\times\Om)\right\}\]
endowed with the norm
\begin{align*}
\|u\|_{W^{s,p}(\Om)}=\|u\|_{L^p(\Om)}+ \left(\int_{\Om}\int_{\Om}
\frac{|u(x)-u(y)|^{p}}{|x-y|^{n+ps}}dxdy \right)^{\frac 1p}
\end{align*}
where $\Om \subset \mb R^n$ is an open set. {We denote $W^{s,p}_0(\Omega)$ as the completion of the space $C_c^\infty(\Omega)$ with respect to the norm $\|\cdot\|_{W^{s,p}(\Omega)}$.} To study fractional Sobolev spaces in details we refer to \cite{hitchker}.
Now we define
\[ X_0 = \{u\in W^{s,n/s}(\mb R^n) : u = 0 \;\text{in}\; \mb R^n\setminus \Om\}\]
with respect to the norm
\[\|u\|_{X _0}=\left( \int_{\mb R^{n}}\int_{\mb R^n}\frac{|u(x)- u(y)|^{\frac{n}{s}}}{|x-y|^{2n}}dx
dy\right)^{\frac sn}= \left(\int_{Q}\frac{|u(x)- u(y)|^{\frac{n}{s}}}{|x-y|^{2n}}dx
dy\right)^{\frac sn},\]
where $Q=\mb R^{2n}\setminus(\mc C\Om\times \mc C\Om)$ and
$\mc C\Om := \mb R^n\setminus\Om$. Then $X_0$ is a reflexive Banach space and continuously embedded in $W^{s,p}_0(\Om)$. Also $X_0 \hookrightarrow \hookrightarrow L^q(\Om)$ compactly for each $q \in [1,\infty)$. Note that the norm
$\|.\|_{X_0}$ involves the interaction between $\Om$ and $\mb
R^n\setminus\Om$. We denote $\|.\|_{X_0}$ by $\|.\|$ in future, for notational convenience. This type of functional setting was introduced by Servadei and Valdinoci for $p=2$ in \cite{mp} and for $p\ne 2$ in \cite{ssi}.
\noi Moreover, we define the space
\[\tilde{W}_{0}^{s,p}(\Om)= \overline{C_{0}(\Om)}^{\|\cdot\|_{W^{s,p}(\mb R^n)}}.\]
The space $\tilde{W}_{0}^{s,p}(\Om)$ is equivalent to the completion of $C_{0}^{\infty}(\Om)$ with respect to the semi norm {$\int_{\mb R^{n}}\int_{\mb R^{n}}\frac{|u(x)- u(y)|^{\frac{n}{s}}}{|x-y|^{2n}}dxdy$} (see for example [\cite{BLP}, Remark 2.5]). If $\partial \Om$ is Lipschitz, then $\tilde{W}_{0}^{s,p}(\Om) =X_0$, (see[\cite{BPS}, Proposition B.1]).
The embedding $W_{0}^{s,\frac{n}{s}}(\Om) \ni u\longmapsto \exp({|u|^{\ba}}) \in L^{1}(\Om)$ is compact for all $\ba\in\left(1,\frac{n}{n-s}\right)$
and is continuous when $\ba=\frac{n}{n-s}$.
\noi We now state our assumptions on $M$ and $g$. The function $M:\mb R^+\rightarrow \mb R^+$ is a continuous function which satisfies the following assumptions:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[$(M1)$] For all $t$, $s\geq 0$, it holds
\[ \hat M(t+s)\geq \hat M(t)+\hat M(s),\]
where $\hat M(t)= \int_{0}^{t} M(s)ds$, the primitive of $M$.
\item[$(M2)$] There exists a $\gamma >1$ such that $t\mapsto \frac{M(t)}{t^{\gamma-1}}$ is non increasing for each $t>0$.
\item[$(M3)$] For each $b>0$, there exists a $\kappa:= \kappa(b)>0$ such that $M(t)\geq \kappa$ whenever $t \geq b$.
\end{enumerate}
The condition $(M3)$ asserts that the function $M$ has possibly a zero only when $t=0$.
\begin{Remark}\label{rem-M}
From $(M2)$, we can easily deduce that $\gamma \hat M(t)-M(t)t$ is non decreasing for $t>0$ and
\begin{equation}\label{cnd-M}
\gamma \hat M(t)-M(t)t \geq 0\;\;\; \forall \; t \geq 0.
\end{equation}
\end{Remark}
We also have the following remark as a consequence of \eqref{cnd-M}.
\begin{Remark}
For each $t \geq 0$, by using \eqref{cnd-M} we have
\[\frac{d}{dt}\left(\frac{\hat M(t)}{t^\gamma}\right)= \frac{M(t)}{t^\gamma}-\frac{\gamma \hat M(t)}{t^{\gamma +1}}\leq 0.\]
So the map $t \mapsto \frac{\hat M(t)}{t^\gamma}$ is non increasing for $t> 0$. Hence
\begin{equation}\label{cnd-M1}
\hat M(t)\geq \hat M(1)t^\gamma\; \text{for all}\; t \in[ 0,1],
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{cnd-M2}
\hat M(t)\leq \hat M(1)t^\gamma\; \text{for all}\; t \geq 1.
\end{equation}
\end{Remark}
\noi We note that the condition $(M1)$ is valid whenever $M$ is
non decreasing.
\begin{Example}
Let $M(t)=m_0+at^{\gamma-1}$, where $m_0,a\geq 0$ and $\gamma>1$ such that $m_0+a>0$ then $M$ satisfies the
conditions $(M1)-(M3)$. If $m_0=0$, this forms an example of the degenerate case whereas of the non degenerate case if $m_0>0$.
\end{Example}
\noi The nonlinearity $g:\Omega\times\mb R\rightarrow \mb R$ is {a continuous function} such that $g(x,t)=h(x,t) \exp({|t|^{\frac{n}{n-s}}})$, where $h(x,t)$ satisfies the following assumptions:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[$(g1)$] $h\in C^1(\overline{\Om}\times \mb R)$, $h(x,t)=0,$ for all $t\le 0$, $h(x,t)>0,$ \text{for all}
$t>0$.
\item[$(g2)$] For any $\e>0,$ $\ds \lim_{t\ra \infty}\sup_{x\in \overline{\Om}} h(x,t) \exp(-\e |t|^{\frac{n}{n-s}} )=0$, $\ds\lim_{t\ra \infty}\inf_{x\in \overline{\Om}} h(x,t) \exp(\e|t|^{\frac{n}{n-s}})=\infty.$
\item[$(g3)$] There exist positive constants $T$, $T_0$ and $\gamma_0$ such that
\[ 0<t^{\gamma_0} G(x,t)\le T_0 g(x,t)\;\mbox{for all}\; (x,t)\in \Om\times[t_0,+\infty).\]
\item[$(g4)$] For $\gamma >1$ (defined in (M2)), there exists a $l>\frac{\gamma n}{2s}-1$ such that the map $t \mapsto \frac{g(x,t)}{t^{l}}$ is increasing on $\mb R^{+} \setminus \{0\}$, uniformly in $x\in \Om$.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{Remark}\label{rem2}Condition $(g4)$ implies that for each $\ds x\in \Omega$,
$$\; t\mapsto \frac{g(x,t)}{t^{\frac{\gamma n}{2s}-1}} \;\text{is increasing for}\; t>0 \; \text{and}\; \ds\lim_{t\rightarrow 0^+} \frac{g(x,t)}{t^{\frac{\gamma n}{2 s}-1}}=0,$$ uniformly in $x\in \Om$. Also, for each $(x,t)\in \Om \times \mb R$ we have
\[(l+1)G(x,t)\leq tg(x,t).\]
\end{Remark}
\begin{Example}
Let $g(x,t)= h(x,t)e^{|t|^{\frac{n}{n-s}}}$, where $h(x,t)=\left\{\begin{array}{lr}
0 \; \mbox{if} \; t\leq 0 \\
{t^{\al+ \left(\frac{\gamma n}{2s}-1\right)} \exp(dt^{\ba})}\; \mbox{if} \; t> 0.
\end{array}\right.$
for some $\al>0$, $0<d\leq \alpha_{n,s}$ and $1\leq \beta <\frac{n}{n-s}$. Then $g$ satisfies all the conditions from $(g1)-(g4)$.
\end{Example}
\begin{Definition}
We say that $u\in X_0$ is a weak solution of $(\mc{M})$ if, for all $\phi \in X_0$, it satisfies
\begin{align*}M(\|u\|^{\frac{n}{s}})\int_{\mb R^{2n}}\frac{|u(x)-u(y)|^{\frac{n}{s}-2}(u(x)-u(y))(\phi(x)-\phi(y))}{|x-y|^{2n}}dxdy =\int_\Om \left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u)}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) g(x,u)\phi~ dx.
\end{align*}
\end{Definition}
\noi Before stating our main Theorem, we recall a result of \cite{ruf} which will be used to find an upper bound for the Mountain Pass critical level.
Assume that $0\in \Omega$ and $B_1(0)\subset \Om$. Then we consider the following Moser type functions which is given by equation $(5.2)$ of \cite{ruf}.
For each $x \in \mb R^n$ and $k \in \mb N$,
\begin{equation}\label{5.2}
\tilde{w_k}(x)=\left\{
\begin{split}
&|\log k|^{\frac{n-s}{n}}, \;\;\mbox{if}\; 0\leq |x|\leq \frac{1}{k},\\
& \frac{|\log (|x|)|}{|\log(1/k)|^{s/n}},\;\;\mbox{if}\; \frac{1}{k} \leq |x|\leq 1,\\
& 0,\; \;\mbox{if}\; |x|\geq 1,
\end{split}
\right.
\end{equation}
then supp$(\tilde{w}_k) \subset B_1(0)\subset \Omega$ and $\tilde{w}_k|_{B_1(0)}\in W^{s,\frac{n}{s}}_{0}(B_1(0))$.\\
\noi Now by Proposition $5.1$ of \cite{ruf} we know that
\begin{equation}\label{mf}
\lim_{k \to \infty}\|\tilde{w}_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}}= \lim_{k \to \infty} \int_{\mb R^n}\int_{\mb R^n}\frac{|\tilde{w}_k(x)-\tilde{w}_k(y)|^{\frac{n}{s}}}{|x-y|^{2n}}dx dy = \gamma_{n,s},
\end{equation}
where
\[\gamma_{n,s}:= \frac{2(n\mc W_n)^2 \Gamma(\frac{n}{s}+1)}{n!}\sum_{i=0}^{\infty} \frac{(n+i-1)!}{i! (n+2i)^{\frac{n}{s}}}.\]
\noi where $\mc W_n$ denotes the volume of $n$-dimensional unit {sphere}.
\noi We also recall the following result of Lions known as higher integrability Lemma in case of fractional Laplacian, proved in \cite{perara}.
\begin{Lemma}\label{plc}
Let $\{v_k : \|v_k\|=1\}$ be a sequence in $W^{s,n/s}_{0}(\Om)$
converging weakly to a non-zero function $v$. Then for every $p$ such that
$p<\alpha_{n,s}(1-\|v\|^{\frac{n}{s}})^{\frac{-s}{n-s}}$,\[\sup_{k}\int_{\Om} \exp({p
|v_k|^{\frac{n}{n-s}}})< +\infty.\]
\end{Lemma}
Now we state our main result:
\begin{Theorem}\label{thm711}
Suppose $(M1)-(M3)$ and $(g1)-(g4)$ hold. Assume in addition that for {$\ba> \frac{2\al_{n,s}^{*}}{\al_{n,s}}$,}
\begin{align}\label{h-growth}
\lim_{t\ra +\infty} \frac{t g(x,t) G(x,t)}{\exp\left(\ba t^{\frac{n}{n-s}}\right)}=\infty \;\mbox{uniformly in}\; x\in \overline{\Om}.
\end{align}
Then, problem $(\mc {M})$ admit a non negative non trivial solution.
\end{Theorem}
\section{Proof of Main result}
We begin this section with the study of mountain pass structure and Palais-Smale sequences corresponding to the energy functional $J: X_{0}\rightarrow \mb R$ associated to the problem $(\mc M)$ {which} is defined as
\[ J(u)=\frac{s}{n}\hat M(\|u\|^{\frac{n}{s}})-\frac{1}{2}\int_\Om \left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy\right) G(x,u)~ dx.\]
From the assumptions, $(g1)-(g4)$, we obtain that for any $\e>0$, $r\geq 1$, $1\leq \alpha <l+1$ there exists $C(\e)>0$ such that
\begin{align}\label{k1}
|G(x,t)| \le \e |t|^{\alpha} + C(\e) |t|^r \exp((1+\e)|t|^{\frac{n}{n-s}}),\;\; \text{for all}\; (x,t)\in \Omega \times \mb R.
\end{align}
Now by Proposition \ref{HLS}, for any $u \in X_0$ we obtain
\begin{align}\label{k2}
\int_{\Om}\left(\int_\Om \frac{G(y,u)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy\right)G(x,u)~dx \leq C(n,\mu){\|G(\cdot,u)\|_{L^\frac{2n}{2n-\mu}(\Om)}^2}.
\end{align}
This implies that $J$ is well defined {using Theorem \ref{moser}}. Also one can easily see that $J$ is Fr$\acute{e}$chet differentiable and the critical points of $J$ are the weak solutions of $(\mc M)$.
\begin{Lemma}\label{lem7.1}
Assume that the conditions $(M1)$ and $(g1)-(g4)$ hold. Then $J$ satisfies the Mountain Pass geometry around $0$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
From \eqref{k1}, \eqref{k2}, H\"{o}lder inequality and Sobolev embedding, we have
{\small\begin{align}\label{kc-MP1}
&\int_{\Om}\left(\int_\Om \frac{G(y,u)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy\right)G(x,u)~dx \notag\\
&\leq C(n,\mu)2^{2}\left(\e^{\frac{2n}{2n-\mu}} \int_\Om |u|^{\frac{2n\alpha}{2n-\mu}} + (C(\e))^{\frac{2n}{2n-\mu}} \int_\Om |u|^{\frac{2rn}{2n-\mu}}\exp\left(\frac{2n(1+\e)}{2n-\mu}|u|^{\frac{n}{n-s}} \right) \right)^{\frac{2n-\mu}{n}} \notag\\
&\leq C \left({\e^{\frac{2n}{2n-\mu}} } \int_\Om |u|^{\frac{2n\alpha}{2n-\mu}} + C_1(\e) \|u\|^{\frac{2r n}{2n-\mu}} \left( \int_\Om\exp\left(\frac{4n(1+\e)\|u\|^{\frac{n}{n-s}}}{2n-\mu}\left(\frac{|u|}{\|u\|}\right)^{\frac{n}{n-s}}\right)\right)^{\frac12} \right)^{\frac{2n-\mu}{n}}.
\end{align}}
So if we choose $\e>0$ small enough and $u$ such that $\displaystyle\frac{4n(1+\e)\|u\|^{\frac{n}{n-s}}}{2n-\mu} \leq \alpha_{n,s}$ then using the fractional Trudinger-Moser inequality \eqref{TM-ineq} in \eqref{kc-MP1}, we obtain
\begin{align*}
\int_{\Om}\left(\int_\Om \frac{G(y,u)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy\right)G(x,u)~dx &\leq C_2(\e) \left( \|u\|^{\frac{2n\alpha}{2n-\mu}} + \|u\|^{\frac{2rn}{2n-\mu}}
\right)^{\frac{2n-\mu}{n}}\\
& \leq C_3(\e) \left( \|u\|^{2\alpha} + \|u\|^{2r} \right).
\end{align*}
Using \eqref{cnd-M1} and above estimate, we have
\begin{align*}
J(u) &\geq \frac{s}{n}\hat M(1) \|u\|^{\frac{\gamma n}{s}}- C_3(\e) \left( \|u\|^{2 \alpha} + \|u\|^{2r}
\right),
\end{align*}
when $\|u\|\leq 1$. Choosing $\alpha>\frac {\gamma n}{2s}$, $r>\frac{\gamma n}{2s}$ and $\rho>0$ such that $\rho<\min\left\{1,\left(\frac{\alpha_{n,s}(2n-\mu)}{4n(1+\e)}\right)^{\frac{n-s}{n}}\right\}$ we obtain $J(u) \geq \sigma >0$ for all $u\in X_0$ with $\|u\|=\rho$ and for some $\sigma>0$ depending on $\rho$.\\
\noi The condition $(g4)$ implies that there exist some positive constants $C_1$ and $C_2$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{new2}G(x,t) \geq C_1t^{l+1}-C_2\;\text{ for all}\; (x,t) \in \Om \times [0,\infty).
\end{equation}
Let $\phi \in X_0$ such that $\phi\geq 0$ and $\|\phi\|=1$ then by \eqref{new2} we obtain
\begin{align*}
\int_\Om \left(\int_\Om \frac{G(y,t \phi)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy\right)G(x,t \phi)~dx &\geq \int_\Om \int_\Om \frac{(C_1(t \phi)^{l+1}(y)-C_2)(C_1(t \phi)^{l+1}(x)-C_2)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}~dxdy\\
& = C_1^2 t^{2(l+1)} \int_\Om \int_\Om \frac{\phi^{l+1}(y)\phi^{l+1}(x)}{|x-y|^\mu}~dxdy \\
& \quad -2C_1C_2t^{l+1}\int_\Om \int_\Om\frac{\phi^{l+1}(y)}{|x-y|^\mu}~dxdy + C_2^2 \int_\Om \int_\Om \frac{1}{|x-y|^{\mu}}~dxdy.
\end{align*}
This together with \eqref{cnd-M2}, we obtain
\begin{align*}
J(t \phi) & \leq \frac{s}{n}{M}(1)\|t \phi\|^{\frac{\gamma n}{s}}- \frac{1}{2}\int_{\Om}\left( \int_\Om\frac{G(y, t \phi)}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy\right)G(x, t \phi)~dx\\
&\leq C_3+ C_4t^{\frac{\gamma n}{s}} - C_5t^{2(l+1)}+C_6t^{l+1},
\end{align*}
where $C_i's$ are positive constants for $i=3,4,5,6$. This implies that $J(t\phi) \to -\infty$ as $t \to \infty$, since $l+1>\frac{\ga n}{2s}$. Thus there exists a $v_0\in X_0$ with $\|v_0\|> \rho$ such that $J(v_0)<0$. Therefore, $J$ satisfies Mountain Pass geometry near $0$. \QED
\end{proof}
\noi Let $\ds \Gamma=\{\gamma\in C([0,1],X_0):\gamma(0)=0,J(\gamma(1))<0\}$ and define the Mountain Pass critical level
$\ds c_*=\inf_{\gamma\in \Gamma}\max_{t\in[0,1]}J(\gamma(t))$. Then by Lemma \ref{lem7.1} and the Mountain pass theorem we know that there exists a Palais Smale sequence $\{u_k\}\subset X_0$ for $J$ at $c_*$ that is
\[J(u_k) \to c_* \; \text{and}\; J^\prime(u_k) \to 0\;\text{as}\; k \to \infty.\]
\begin{Lemma}\label{lem712}
Every Palais-Smale sequence of $J$ is bounded in $X_0$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\{u_k\} \subset X_0$ denotes a $(PS)_c$ sequence of $J$ that is
\begin{equation*}
J(u_k) \to c \; \text{and}\; J^{\prime}(u_k) \to 0\;\text{as}\; k \to \infty
\end{equation*}
for some $c \in \mathbb{R}.$ This implies
\begin{align}\label{kc-PS-bdd1}
&\frac{s\hat M(\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}})}{n} - \frac12 \int_\Om \left(\int_\Om \frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right)G(x,u_k)~dx \to c \; \text{as}\; k \to \infty,\notag\\
&\left| M(\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}})\int_{\mb R^{n}}\int_{\mb R^n}\frac{|u_k(x)- u_k(y)|^{\frac{n}{s}-2}(u_k(x)- u_k(y))(\phi(x)-\phi(y))}{|x-y|^{2n}}{dxdy}\right.\notag\\
&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\left. -\int_\Om \left(\int_\Om \frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right)g(x,u_k)\phi ~dx \right|\leq \e_k\|\phi\|
\end{align}
where $\e_k \to 0$ as $k\to \infty$. In particular, taking $\phi=u_k$ we get
\begin{equation}\label{kc-PS-bdd2}
\left| M(\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}}) \|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}}-\int_\Om \left(\int_\Om \frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right)g(x,u_k)u_k ~dx \right|\leq \e_k\|u_k\|.
\end{equation}
Now Remark \eqref{rem2} gives us that
\begin{equation}\label{kc-PS-bdd3}
(l+1) \int_\Om \left(\int_\Om \frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right)G(x,u_k)~dx \leq \int_\Om \left(\int_\Om \frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right)g(x,u_k)u_k ~dx.
\end{equation}
Then using \eqref{kc-PS-bdd1}, \eqref{kc-PS-bdd2} along with \eqref{kc-PS-bdd3} and \eqref{cnd-M}, we get
\begin{align}\label{kc-PS-bdd4}
& J(u_k)- \frac{1}{2(l+1)}\langle J^\prime(u_k),u_k\rangle
=\frac{s}{n}\hat M(\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}})- \frac{1}{2 (l+1)}M(\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}})\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}}\notag \\
& \quad \quad-\frac12 \left[ \int_\Om \left(\int_\Om \frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right)G(x,u_k)~dx - \frac{1}{(l+1)}\int_\Om \left(\int_\Om \frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right)g(x,u_k)u_k ~dx\right]\notag\\
&{\geq \frac{s\hat M(\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}})}{n}- \frac{M(\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}})\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}}}{2(l+1)}}\notag \\
& {\geq \left( \frac{s}{n \gamma }- \frac{1}{2(l+1)}\right) M(\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}})\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}}}.
\end{align}
To prove the Lemma, we assume by contradiction that $\{\|u_k\|\}$ is an unbounded sequence. Then without loss of generality, we can assume that, up to a subsequence, $\|u_k\| \to \infty$ and $\|u_k\|\geq \alpha >0$ for some $\alpha$ and for all $k$.
This along with \eqref{kc-PS-bdd4} and $(M3)$ gives us
\begin{equation}\label{kc-PS-bdd6}
J(u_k)- \frac{1}{2(l+1)}\langle J^\prime(u_k),u_k\rangle\geq \left( \frac{s}{n \gamma}- \frac{1}{2 (l+1)}\right) \kappa\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}}
\end{equation}
where $\kappa$ depends on $\alpha$. Also from \eqref{kc-PS-bdd1} and \eqref{kc-PS-bdd2} it follows that
\begin{equation}\label{kc-PS-bdd5}
J(u_k)- \frac{1}{2(l+1)}\langle J^\prime(u_k),u_k\rangle \leq C \left( 1+ \e_k \frac{\|u_k\|}{2{(l+1)}}\right)
\end{equation}
for some constant $C>0$. Therefore from \eqref{kc-PS-bdd6} and \eqref{kc-PS-bdd5} we get that
\[ \left( \frac{s}{n \gamma }- \frac{1}{2 (l+1)}\right)\kappa \|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}} \leq C \left( 1+ \e_k \frac{\|u_k\|}{2{(l+1)}}\right)\]
which gives a contradiction because $l+1>\frac{\gamma n}{2s}$ and $\frac{n}{s}>1$. This implies that $\{u_k\}$ must be bounded in $X_0$. \hfill{\QED}
\end{proof}
Assume that $0\in \Omega$ and $\rho>0$ be such that $B_\rho(0)\subset \Om$. Then for $x \in \mb R^n$, we define $w_k(x):= \tilde{w}_{k}\left(\frac{x}{\rho}\right)$, where $\tilde w_k$ is same as \eqref{5.2} then supp$(w_k) \in B_\rho(0)\subset \Omega$. We note that $w_k\in W_{0}^{s,\frac{n}{s}}(\mb R^n)$ and by \eqref{mf}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{MF-limit}
\lim_{k \to \infty}\|w_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}}= \lim_{k \to \infty} \int_{\mb R^{n}}\int_{\mb R^n}\frac{|\tilde w_k(x)-\tilde w_k(y)|^{\frac{n}{s}}}{|x-y|^{2n}}dx dy = \gamma_{n,s}.
\end{equation}
Next, we use $w_k$'s efficiently to obtain the following bound on $c_*$.
\begin{Lemma}\label{lem7.2}
It holds that
\[\ds 0<c_*<\frac{s}{n}\hat M\left(\left(\frac{2n-\mu}{2n}\alpha_{n,s}\right)^{\frac{n-s}{s}}\right).\]
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof} Using Lemma \ref{lem7.1}, we deduce that $c_*>0$ and $J(t\phi) \ra -\infty$ as $t\ra \infty$ if $0\leq \phi \in X_0\setminus\{0\}$ with $\|\phi\|=1$. Also by definition of $c_*$, we have $c_* \leq \max\limits_{t\in [0,1]}J(t\phi)$ for each non negative $\phi \in X_0\setminus \{0\}$ with $J(\phi)<0$ {which} assures that it is enough to prove that there exists a non negative $w \in X_0\setminus \{0\}$ such that
\[\max_{t\in[0,\infty)} J(tw) < \frac{s}{n}\hat M\left(\left( \frac{2n-\mu}{2n}\alpha_{n,s}\right)^{\frac{n-s}{s}}\right).\]
To prove this, we consider the sequence of non negative functions $\{w_k\}$(defined before this Lemma) and claim that there exists a $k \in \mb N$ such that
\[\max_{t\in[0,\infty)} J(tw_k) < \frac{s}{n}\hat M\left(\left( \frac{2n-\mu}{2n}\alpha_{n,s}\right)^{\frac{n-s}{s}}\right).\]
Suppose this is not true, then for all $k \in \mb N$ there exists a $t_k>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{kc-PScond0}
\begin{split}
&\max_{t\in[0,\infty)} J(tw_k) = J(t_kw_k) \geq \frac{s}{n} \hat M\left(\left( \frac{2n-\mu}{2n}\alpha_{n,s}\right)^{\frac{n-s}{s}}\right)\\
& \text{and}\; \frac{d}{dt}(J(tw_k))|_{t=t_k}=0.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
From the proof of {Lemma \ref{lem7.1}}, $J(t w_k)\to -\infty$ as $t\to \infty$ for each $k$. Then we infer that $\{t_k\}$ must be a bounded sequence in $\mb R$ which implies that there exists a $t_0$ such that, up to a subsequence which we still denote by $\{t_k\}$, $t_k \to t_0$ as $k \to \infty$. From \eqref{kc-PScond0} and definition of $J(t_kw_k)$ we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{kc-PScond1}
\frac{s}{n} \hat M\left(\left( \frac{2n-\mu}{2n}\alpha_{n,s}\right)^{\frac{n-s}{s}}\right) < \frac{s}{n}\hat M(\|t_kw_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}}).
\end{equation}
Since $\hat M$ is monotone increasing, from \eqref{kc-PScond1} we get that
\begin{equation}\label{kc-PScond2}
\|t_kw_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}} \geq \left( \frac{2n-\mu}{2n}\alpha_{n,s}\right)^{\frac{n-s}{s}}.
\end{equation}
From \eqref{kc-PScond2} and since \eqref{MF-limit} holds, we infer that
\begin{equation}\label{kc-PScond3}
t_k(\log k)^{\frac{n-s}{n}} \to \infty \;\text{as}\; k \to \infty.
\end{equation}
Furthermore from \eqref{kc-PScond0}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{kc-PS-cond3}
\begin{split}
M(\|t_kw_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}})\|t_kw_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}} &= \int_\Om \left(\int_\Om \frac{G(y,t_kw_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy\right)g(x,t_kw_k)t_kw_k ~dx\\
& \geq \int_{B_{\rho/k}}g(x,t_kw_k)t_kw_k \int_{B_{\rho/k}}\frac{G(y,t_kw_k)}{|x-y|^\mu}~dy~dx.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
In addition, as in equation $(2.11)$ p. 1943 in \cite{YangJDE}, it is easy to get that
\[\int_{B_{\rho/k}}\int_{B_{\rho/k}} \frac{~dxdy}{|x-y|^\mu} \geq C_{\mu, n} \left(\frac{\rho}{k}\right)^{2n-\mu},\]
where $C_{\mu, n}$ is a positive constant depending on $\mu$ and $n$. From \eqref{h-growth}, {it is easy to deduce that for $\ba>\frac{2 \alpha_{n,s}^*}{\al_{n,s}}$ and for each $d>0$ there exists a $r_d\in \mb N$ }such that
\[rg(x,r)G(x,r) \geq d \exp\left( \beta|r|^{\frac{n}{n-s}}\right)\; \text{whenever}\; r \geq r_d.\]
Since \eqref{kc-PScond3} holds, we can choose a $N_d \in \mb N$ such that
\[t_k(\log k)^{\frac{n-s}{n}} \geq r_d\; \text{for all}\; k\geq N_d.\]
Using these estimates in \eqref{kc-PS-cond3} and from \eqref{kc-PScond2}, for $d$ large enough
we get that
\begin{align}\label{PS-con}
M(\|t_kw_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}})\|t_kw_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}}
& \geq d \exp \left(\beta t_k^{\frac{n}{n-s}}|\log k|\right)C_{\mu,n}\left(\frac{\rho}{k}\right)^{2n-\mu}\nonumber\\
& = d C_{\mu,n}\rho^{2n-\mu} \exp\left(\left(\beta t_k^{\frac{n}{n-s}}-(2n-\mu)\right)\log k\right)\\
& \geq d C_{\mu,n}\rho^{2n-\mu} \exp \left( \log k \left( \frac{(2n-\mu)\beta \alpha_{n,s}}{2n\|w_k\|^{\frac{n}{n-s}}} - (2n-\mu)\right)\right)\nonumber
\end{align}
Since $\beta > \frac{2\alpha_{n,s}^*}{\alpha_{n,s}}=\frac{2n \gamma_{n,s}^{\frac{s}{n-s}}}{\alpha_{n,s}}$ and \eqref{MF-limit} hold, the R.H.S. of \eqref{PS-con} tends to $+\infty$ as $k \to \infty$. Whereas from continuity of $M$ it follows that
\[\lim_{k \to \infty} M\left(\|t_kw_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}}\right)\|t_kw_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}} = M\left(t_0^{\frac{n}{s}}\gamma_{n,s}\right)(t_0^{\frac{n}{s}}\gamma_{n,s}),\]
which is a contradiction. This establishes our claim and {we} conclude the proof of Lemma.
\QED
\end{proof}
\noi In order to prove that a Palais-Smale sequence converges to a weak solution of problem ($\mc M$), we need the following convergence Lemma. The idea of proof is borrowed from Lemma 2.4 in \cite{YangJDE}.
\begin{Lemma}\label{wk-sol}
If $\{u_k\}$ is a Palais Smale sequence for $J$ at $c$ then there exists a $u \in X_0$ such that, up to a subsequence.
\begin{equation}\label{wk-sol1}
\left(\int_\Om \frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}~dy\right)G(x,u_k) \to \left(\int_\Om \frac{G(y,u)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}~dy\right)G(x,u) \; \text{in}\; L^1(\Om)
\end{equation}
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
From Lemma \ref{lem712}, we know that the sequence $\{u_k\}$ must be bounded in $X_0$. Consequently, up to a subsequence, there exists a $u\in X_0$ such that $u_k \rightharpoonup u$ weakly in $X_0$ and strongly in $L^q(\Om)$ for any $q \in [1,\infty)$ as $k \to \infty$. Also, still up to a subsequence, we can assume that $u_k(x) \to u(x)$ pointwise a.e. for $ x \in \Om$.
From \eqref{kc-PS-bdd1}, \eqref{kc-PS-bdd2} and \eqref{kc-PS-bdd3} we get that there exists a constant $C>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{wk-sol10}
\begin{split}
\int_\Om \left(\int_\Om\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^\mu}dy\right)G(x,u_k)~dx &\leq C,\\
\int_\Om \left(\int_\Om\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^\mu}dy\right)g(x,u_k)u_k~dx & \leq C.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Now, it is well known that if $f\in L^1(\Om)$ then for any $\e>0$ there exists a $\delta>0$ such that
\[\left| \int_{U} f(x)~dx\right| <\e,\]
for any measurable set $U\subset \Om$ with $|U|\leq \delta$.
Also $f\in L^{1}(\Om)$ implies that for any fixed $\delta>0$ there exists $M>0$ such that
\[|\{x\in \Om : |f(x)|\geq M\}|\leq \delta.\]
Now using \eqref{wk-sol10}, we have
$$\left(\displaystyle\int_\Om\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^\mu}dy\right)G(\cdot,u_k) \in L^{1}(\Om)$$
and also by \eqref{k2}
$$\left(\displaystyle\int_\Om\frac{G(y,u)}{|x-y|^\mu}dy\right)G(\cdot,u) \in L^{1}(\Om).$$
Now we fix $\de>0$ and choose $M> \max\left\{\left(\frac{C T_0}{\de}\right)^{\frac{1}{\ga_0+1}}, t_0\right\}$. Then we use $(g3)$ to obtain
\begin{align*}
\int_{\Om \cap\{u_k \geq M\}} &\left(\int_{\Omega} \frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right)G(x,u_k) ~dx \leq T_0 \int_{\Om \cap\{u_k \geq M\}} \left(\int_{\Omega} \frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy\right) \frac{g(x,u_k)}{u_{k}^{\gamma_0}} ~dx\\
&\leq \frac{T_0}{ M^{\gamma_0+1}}\int_{\Om \cap\{u_k \geq M\}} \left(\int_{\Omega} \frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy\right) g(x,u_k)u_{k} ~dx<\de.
\end{align*}
Next we consider
\begin{align*}
&\left| \int_{\Omega} \left(\int_{\Omega}\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u_k) ~dx- \int_{\Omega} \left(\int_{\Omega}\frac{G(y,u )}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u) ~dx\right|\\
&\leq 2\de+ \left|\int_{\Om \cap \{u_k \leq M\}} \left(\int_{\Omega}\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u_k) ~dx- \int_{\Omega\cap \{u \leq M\}} \left(\int_{\Omega}\frac{G(y,u )}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u) ~dx\right|
\end{align*}
To prove the result, it is enough to establish that as $k \to \infty$
\begin{align}
\int_{\Om \cap \{u_k \leq M\}} \left(\int_{\Omega}\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u_k)~dx \to \int_{\Om \cap \{u \leq M\}} \left(\int_{\Omega}\frac{G(y,u )}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u) ~dx.
\end{align}
Since $\left(\displaystyle\int_\Om\frac{G(y,u)}{|x-y|^\mu}dy\right)G(\cdot,u) \in L^{1}(\Om)$, so by Fubini's theorem we get
\begin{align*}
&\lim_{K \to \infty} \int_{\Om \cap\{u\leq M\}}\left(\int_{\Om\cap\{u\geq K\}}\frac{G(y,u)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy\right)G(x,u)~dx\\
&= \lim_{K \to \infty} \int_{\Om \cap\{u\geq K\}}\left(\int_{\Om \cap\{u\leq M\}}\frac{G(y,u)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy\right)G(x,u)~dx=0.
\end{align*}
Thus we can fix a $K> \max\left\{\left(\frac{C T_0}{\de}\right)^{\frac{1}{\ga_0+1}}, t_0\right\}$ such that
\[\int_{\Om \cap\{u \leq M\}} \left(\int_{\Om \cap\{u\geq K\} }\frac{G(y,u )}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u) ~dx \leq \delta.\]
From $(g3)$, we get
\begin{align*}
&\int_{\Om \cap\{u_k \leq M\}} \left(\int_{\Om \cap\{u_k\geq K\}}\frac{G(y,u_k )}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u_k) ~dx\\
& \leq\frac{1}{K^{\gamma_0+1}}\int_{\Om \cap \{u_k \leq M\}} \left(\int_{\Om \cap\{u_k\geq K\}}\frac{u_k^{\gamma_0+1}(y)G(y,u_k )}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u_k) ~dx\\
&\leq \frac{T_0}{K^{\ga_{0}+1}} \int_{\Om \cap\{u_k \leq M\}} \left(\int_{\Om \cap\{u_k\geq K\} }\frac{ u_k(y) g(y,u_k )}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u_k) ~dx\\
&\leq \frac{T_0}{K^{\ga_{0}+1}} \int_{\Om} \left(\int_{\Om }\frac{G(y,u_k )}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) g(x,u_k) u_k ~dx\leq \de.
\end{align*}
Thus we have proved that
\begin{align*}
&\left|\int_{\Om \cap\{u \leq M\}} \left(\int_{\Om \cap\{u\geq K\} }\frac{G(y,u )}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u) ~dx\right.\\
&\quad \quad \left.- \int_{\Om \cap\{u_k \leq M\}} \left(\int_{\Om \cap\{u_k\geq K\} }\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u_k) ~dx\right|\leq 2\de
\end{align*}
Finally, { to complete the proof of Lemma, we need to verify that as $k\ra \infty$}
\begin{equation}\label{choq-new}
\begin{split}
&\left|\int_{\Om\cap\{u_k \leq M\}} \left(\int_{\Om \cap\{u_k\leq K\}}\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u_k) ~dx-\right.\\
&\quad \left.\int_{\Om \cap\{u \leq M\}} \left(\int_{\Om \cap\{u\leq K\}}\frac{G(y,u )}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u) ~dx \right|\ra 0
\end{split}
\end{equation}
for fixed positive $K$ and $M$. It is easy to see that
\begin{align*}
\left(\int_{\Om \cap\{u_k\leq K\} }\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u_k)\chi_{ \Om \cap \{u_k\leq M\}} &\ra \left(\int_{\Om \cap \{u\leq K\} }\frac{G(y,u)}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u)\chi_{\Om \cap \{u \leq M\}}
\end{align*}
pointwise a.e. as $k \to \infty$. Now choose $r=\alpha$ in \eqref{k1}, which gives us that there exist a constant $C_{M,K}>0$ depending on $M$ and $K$ such that
\begin{align*}
&\int_{\Om \cap \{u_k\leq M\}}\left( \int_{\Om \cap \{u_k\leq K\} }\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u_k)dx \\
&\leq C_{M,K}\int_{\Om \cap \{u_k\leq M\}}\left( \int_{\{u_k\leq K\} }\frac{|u_k(y)|^{r}}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) |u_k(x)|^{r} dx \\
& \leq C_{M,K} \int_\Om\int_{\Om }\left(\frac{|u_k(y)|^{r}}{|x-y|^{\mu}}~dy \right) |u_k(x)|^{r} ~dx\\
& \leq { {C_{M,K}C(n,\mu)\|u_k\|_{L^{\frac{2nr}{2n-\mu}}(\Om)}^{2r} \to C_{M,K}C(n,\mu)\|u\|_{L^{\frac{2nr}{2n-\mu}}(\Om)}^{2r}}} \; \text{as}\; k \to \infty,
\end{align*}
where we used the Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev inequality in the last inequality and then used the fact that $u_k \to u$ strongly in $L^q(\Om)$ for each $q \in [1,\infty)$. This implies that, using Theorem $4.9$ of \cite{Brezis-book}, there exists a constant $h \in L^1(\Om)$ such that, up to a subsequence, for each $k$
\[\left|\left( \int_{\Om \cap\{u_k\leq K\} }\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u_k)\chi_{ \Om \cap \{u_k\leq M\}} \right| \leq |h(x)|\]
This helps us to employ the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem and conclude \eqref{choq-new}. \hfill{\QED}
\end{proof}
\begin{Lemma}\label{PS-ws}
Let $\{u_k\}\subset X_{0}$ be a Palais Smale sequence of $J$. Then there exists a $u \in X_0$ such that, up to a subsequence, for all $\phi\in X_0 $
\begin{equation}\label{PS-wk0}
\int_{\Om}\left(\int_\Om \frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy\right)g(x,u_k)\phi~ dx \to \int_{\Om}\left(\int_\Om \frac{G(y,u)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy\right)g(x,u)\phi~dx \; \text{as}\; k \to \infty\;.
\end{equation}
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
{As we argued} in previous Lemma, we have that {there exists a $u\in X_0$ such that,} up to a subsequence, $u_k \rightharpoonup u$ weakly in $X_0$, $u_k \to u$ pointwise a.e. in $\mb R^n$, $\|u_k\| \to \tau$ as $k \to \infty$, for some $\tau \geq 0$ and $u_k \to u$ strongly in $L^q(\Om)$, $q \in [1,\infty)$ as $k \to \infty$.
Let $\Om' \subset\subset \Om$ and $\varphi \in C_c^\infty(\Om)$ such that $0\leq \varphi \leq 1$ and $\varphi \equiv 1$ in $\Om' $. Then by taking $\varphi$ as a test function in \eqref{kc-PS-bdd1}, we obtain the following estimate
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&\int_{\Om^{'}}\left( \int_\Om \frac{G(y,u_k)}{ |x-y|^\mu}dy\right)g(x,u_k)~dx \leq \int_\Om \left( \int_\Om \frac{G(y,u_k)}{ |x-y|^\mu}dy\right)g(x,u_k)\varphi~dx\\
&\leq \e_k \left\|\varphi\right\| + M(\|u_k\|^{\frac {n}{s}}) \int_{\mb R^{2n}} \frac{|u_{k}(x)-u_k(y)|^{\frac{n}{s}-2}(u_k(x)-u_k(y))(\varphi(x)-\varphi(y))}{|x-y|^{2n}}~dxdy\\
& \leq \e_k \|\varphi\|+ C \|u_k\| \|\varphi\| {\leq C},
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
since $\|u_k\|\leq C_0$ for all $k$. This implies that the sequence $\{\mu_k\}:=\left\{\left( \int_\Om\frac{G(y,u_k)}{ |x-y|^\mu}dy\right)g(x,u_k)\right\}$ is bounded in $L^1_{\text{loc}}(\Om)$ which implies that up to a subsequence, $\mu_k \to \mu$ in the ${weak}^*$-topology as $k \to \infty$, where $\mu$ denotes a Radon measure. So for any $\phi \in C_c^\infty(\Om)$ we get
\[\lim_{k \to \infty}\int_\Om \left( \int_\Om\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^\mu}dy\right)g(x,u_k)\phi ~dx = \int_\Om \phi ~d\mu,\; \forall \;\phi \in C_c^\infty(\Om). \]
Since $u_k$ satisfies \eqref{kc-PS-bdd1}, for any measurable set $E \subset \Om$, {taking $\phi \in C_c^\infty(\Om)$ such that supp$\phi \subset E$, we get that
\begin{align*}
\mu(E)&=\int_E \phi~ d\mu= \lim_{k \to \infty} \int_E\int_\Om \left( \frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^\mu}dy\right)g(x,u_k)\phi(x) ~dx \\
&= \lim_{k \to \infty} \int_\Omega\int_\Om \left( \frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^\mu}dy\right)g(x,u_k)\phi(x) ~dx\\
&= \lim_{k \to \infty} M(\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}})\int_{\mb R^{n}}\int_{\mb R^{n}} \frac{|u_{k}(x)-u_k(y)|^{\frac{n}{s}-2}(u_k(x)-u_k(y))(\phi(x)-\phi(y))}{|x-y|^{2n}}~dx dy\\
& {= M(\tau^{\frac{n}{s}}) \int_{\mb R^{n}}\int_{\mb R^{n}} \frac{|u(x)-u(y)|^{\frac{n}{s}-2}(u(x)-u(y))(\phi(x)-\phi(y))}{|x-y|^{2n}}~dx dy,}
\end{align*}
where we used the continuity of $M$} and weak convergence of $u_k$ to $u$ in $X_0$. This implies that $\mu$ is absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure. Thus, Radon-Nikodym theorem establishes that there exists a function $h \in L^1_{\text{loc}}(\Om)$ such that for any $\phi\in C^\infty_c(\Omega)$, $\int_\Om \phi~ d\mu = \int_\Om \phi h~dx$.
Therefore for any $\phi\in C^\infty_c(\Omega)$ we get
\[\lim_{k \to \infty}\int_\Om\left( \int_\Om \frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^\mu}dy\right)g(x,u_k)\phi~ ~dx = \int_\Om \phi h~dx = \int_\Om \left( \int_\Om \frac{G(y,u)}{|x-y|^\mu}dy\right)g(x,u)\phi~ ~dx \]
and the above holds for any $\phi \in X_0$ using the density argument. This completes the proof.\hfill{\QED}
\end{proof}
\noi Now we define the Nehari manifold associated to the functional $J$, as
\[ \ds \mc{N}:=\{0\not\equiv u\in X_0:\langle J^{\prime}(u),u \rangle=0\}\]
and let $\ds b:=\inf_{u\in \mc{N}} J(u)$. Then we need the following Lemma to compare $c_*$ and $b$.
\begin{Lemma}\label{lem7.3}
If condition $(g4)$ holds, then for each $x\in\Omega$, $ tg(x,t)-\frac{\gamma n}{2 s} G(x,t)$ is increasing for $t\ge0$. In particular $tg(x,t)-\frac{\gamma n}{2s} G(x,t)\geq 0$ for all $(x,t)\in \Omega\times [0,\infty)$ which implies $\frac{G(x,t)}{t^{\frac{\gamma n}{2 s}}}$ is non-decreasing for $t>0$.
\end{Lemma}
\proof Suppose $0<t<r$. Then for each $x\in\Om$, we obtain
\begin{align*}
tg(x,t)-\frac{\gamma n}{2 s}G(x,t)&=\frac{g(x,t)}{t^{l}}t^{l+1}-\frac{\gamma n}{2s}G(x,r)+\frac{\gamma n}{2s}\int_{t}^{r} g(x,\tau)d\tau\\
&< \frac{g(x,t)}{t^{l}}t^{l+1} - \frac{\gamma n}{2s} G(x,r)+\frac{\gamma n }{2s(l+1)}\frac{g(x,r)}{r^{l}}(r^{l+1}-t^{l+1})\\
&\leq rg(x,r)- \frac{\gamma n}{2s} G(x,r),
\end{align*}
using $(g4)$. This completes the proof.\QED
\begin{Lemma}\label{3.7}
Under the assumptions $(M2)$ and $(g4)$, it holds $c_*\leq b $.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof} Let $u\in \mc{N}$ { be non negative} and we define $h:{(0,\infty)}\rightarrow \mb R$ by $ h(t)=J(tu)$. Then for all $t>0$
\[h^{\prime}(t)=\langle J^{\prime}(tu),u\rangle= {M}(t^{\frac{n}{s}}\|u\|^{\frac{n}{s}})t^{\frac{n}{s}-1}\|u\|^{\frac{n}{s}}-\int_\Om \left(\int_\Om \frac{G(y,tu)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right)g(x,tu)u~dx .\]
Since $\langle J^{\prime}(u),u\rangle=0$ and $t\mapsto \frac{g(x,t)}{t^{\frac{\gamma n}{2s}-1}}$ is increasing for $t>0$, we have
{\small
\begin{align*}
h^{\prime}(t)=&\|u\|^{\frac{\gamma n}{s}} t^{\frac{\gamma n}{s}-1}\left(\frac{M(t^{\frac{n}{s}}\|u\|^{\frac{n}{s}})}{t^{(\gamma -1)\frac{n}{s}}\|u\|^{(\gamma-1)\frac{n}{s}}}-\frac{M(\|u\|^{\frac{n}{s}})}{\|u\|^{(\gamma -1)\frac{n}{s}}}\right)\\
&\quad +t^{\frac{\gamma n}{s}-1}\int_{\Om}\left(\int_\Om \frac{\frac{G(y,u)g(x,u)}{u^{\frac{\gamma n}{2s}-1}(x)}}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy-\int_\Om \frac{\frac{G(y,tu)g(x,tu)}{(tu)^{\frac{\gamma n}{2s}-1}(x)t^{\frac {\gamma n}{2s}}}}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right)u^{\frac{\gamma n}{2s}}(x)dx\\
&\geq \|u\|^{\frac{\gamma n}{s}} t^{\frac{\gamma n}{s}-1}\left(\frac{M(t^{\frac{n}{s}}\|u\|^{\frac{n}{s}})}{t^{\frac{(\gamma -1)n}{s}}\|u\|^{\frac{(\gamma-1)n}{s}}}-\frac{M(\|u\|^{\frac{n}{s}})}{\|u\|^{\frac{(\gamma -1)n}{s}}}\right)\\
&\quad +t^{\frac{\gamma n}{s}-1}\int_{\Om}\left(\int_\Om \left( G(y,u)- \frac{G(y,tu)}{t^{\frac{\gamma n}{2s}}}\right)\frac{1}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right) \frac{g(x,tu)}{(tu)^{\frac{\gamma n}{2s}-1}(x)}u^{\frac{\gamma n}{2s}}(x)dx.\end{align*} }
when $0<t<1$. So using Lemma \ref{lem7.3} and $(M2)$ we have $h^{\prime}(1)=0$, $h^{\prime}(t)\geq 0$ for $0<t<1$ and $h^{\prime}(t)<0$ for $t>1$. Hence $J(u)=\ds \max_{t\geq0}J(tu)$. Now define $f:[0,1]\rightarrow X_0$ as $f(t)=(t_0 u)t$, where $t_0>1$ is such that $J(t_0 u)<0$. Then we have $f\in \Gamma$ and therefore
\[ c_*\leq\max_{t\in[0,1]}J(f(t))\leq \max_{t\geq 0}J(tu)=J(u)\leq \inf_{u \in \mc N}J(u)= b.\]
Hence the proof is complete.\QED
\end{proof}
\begin{Definition} A solution $u_0$ of $(\mc M)$ is a ground state if $u_0$ is a weak solution of $(\mc M)$ and satisfies $J(u_0)=\ds \inf _{u\in \mc N} J(u)$.
\end{Definition}
Since $c_*\leq b$ in order to obtain a ground state solution $u_0$ for $(\mc M)$, it is enough to show that there exists a weak solution of $(\mc M)$ such that $J(u_0)=c_*$.
\begin{Lemma}\label{pos-sol}
Any nontrivial solution of problem $(\mc M)$ is nonnegative.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $u\in X_0\setminus \{0\}$ be a critical point of functional $J$. Clearly $u^{-}={\max\{-u,0\}}\in X_0$. Then $\langle J^{\prime}(u),u^{-}\rangle=0$, i.e.
\begin{align*}
&{M}(\|u\|^{\frac{n}{s}})\int_{\mb R^{2n}}\frac{|u(x)-u(y)|^{\frac{n}{s}-2}(u(x)-u(y))(u^-(x)-u^-(y))}{|x-y|^{2n}}dxdy\\
&\quad \quad= \int_{\Om}\left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right) g(x,u)u^- dx.
\end{align*}
For a.e. $x,y\in \mb R^n$, using $|u^-(x)-u^-(y)|\leq |u(x)-u(y)|$, we have
\begin{align*}
&|u(x)-u(y)|^{\frac{n}{s}-2} (u(x)-u(y))(u^-(x)-u^-(y))\\
&= -|u(x)-u(y)|^{\frac{n}{s}-2} (u^{+}(x) u^{-}(y) + u^{-}(x)u^{+}(y) +|u^-(x)-u^-(y)|^{2})\\
&\leq - |u^-(x)-u^-(y)|^{\frac{n}{s}}
\end{align*}
and $g(x,u) u^-=0$ a.e. $x\in \Om$ by assumption. Hence,
\begin{align*}
0\leq - {M}(\|u\|^{\frac{n}{s}})\|u^{-}\|^{\frac{n}{s}}\leq 0.
\end{align*}
So, $u^- \equiv 0$ since $\|u\|>0$ and $(M3)$ holds. Hence $u\geq 0$ a.e. in $\Om$.\QED
\end{proof}
\noi {\textbf{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm711}:} Since $J$ satisfies the Mountain Pass geometry (refer Lemma \ref{lem7.1}), by Mountain Pass Lemma we know that there exists a Palais Smale $\{u_k\}$ sequence for $J$ at $c_*$. Then by Lemma \ref{lem712}, $\{u_k\}$ must be bounded in $X_0$ so that, up to a subsequence, $u_k \rightharpoonup u_0$ weakly in $X_0$, strongly in $L^q(\Om)$ for $ q\in [1, \infty)$, pointwise a.e. in $\Om$, {for some $u_0\in X_0$} and $\|u_k\| \to \rho_0\geq 0$ as $k \to \infty$.}\\
\noi \textbf{Claim 1:} $u_0\not\equiv 0$ in $\Omega$.\\
\proof
We argue by contradiction. Suppose that $u_0\equiv 0$. Then using Lemma \ref{wk-sol}, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{mt-nw1}
\int_\Om \left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u_k)~dx\ra 0 \;\mbox{as}\; k\ra\infty.
\end{equation}
This together with $\ds\lim_{k\to\infty}J(u_k)= c_*$ gives that
\[\lim_{k \to \infty}\frac{s}{n} \hat{M}(\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}}) = c_*< \frac{s}{n} \hat{M}\left(\left(\frac{2n-\mu}{2n} \al_{n,s}\right)^{\frac{n-s}{s}}\right).\]
Thus $\hat M$ being increasing function gives that there exists a $k_0\in \mb N$ such that $\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}}\leq \left(\frac{2n-\mu}{2n} \al_{n,s}\right)^{\frac{n-s}{s}}$ for all $k \geq k_0$.
{We fix $k \geq k_0$ and choose $p>1$ close to $1$ and $\e>0$ small enough such that
\[\frac{2np(1+\e)}{2n-\mu}\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{n-s}} < \alpha_{n,s}.\]
Using the growth assumptions on $g$ and Theorem \ref{moser} we have
\begin{align*}
\|g(\cdot,u_k)u_k\|^{\frac{2n-\mu}{2n}}_{L^{\frac{2n}{2n-\mu}}(\Om)}&\leq C(\e)\left(\int_\Om |u_k|^{\frac{2n\alpha}{2n-\mu}}dx + \int_\Om|u_k|^{\frac{2nr}{2n-\mu}}\exp\left(\frac{2n(1+\e)}{2n-\mu}|u_k|^{\frac{n}{n-s}}\right)dx \right)\\
&\leq C(\e)\left(\int_\Om |u_k|^{\frac{2n\alpha}{2n-\mu}}dx + \left(\int_\Om|u_k|^{\frac{2nrp^\prime}{2n-\mu}} dx\right)^{\frac{1}{p^\prime}}\right.\\
&\quad \quad \quad\left.\left(\int_\Om\exp\left(\frac{2np(1+\e)}{2n-\mu}\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{n-s}}\left(\frac{|u_k|}{\|u_k\|}\right)^{\frac{n}{n-s}}\right)dx\right)^{\frac{1}{p}} \right)
\end{align*}
{where $1<\alpha<l+1$ and $1<r$.} Thus,
\begin{align}\label{grwth}
\|g(\cdot,u_k)u_k\|_{L^{\frac{2n}{2n-\mu}}(\Om)} & \leq C(\e)\left( \|u_k\|_{L^{\frac{2n\alpha}{2n-\mu}}(\Om)}^{\frac{2n-\mu}{2n\alpha}}+ \|u_k\|_{L^{\frac{2nrp^\prime}{2n-\mu}}(\Om)}^{\frac{2n-\mu}{2nr}} \right)\to 0 \;\text{as}\; k \to \infty,
\end{align}
where $p^\prime$ denotes the H\"{o}lder conjugate of $p$ and $C(\e)>0$ is a constant depending on $\e$ which may change value at each step.
From the semigroup property of the Riesz potential and Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev inequality we get that
\begin{align*}
&\left| \int_\Om \left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) g(x,u_k)u_kdx\right|\\
&\leq \left(\int_\Om \left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u_k)~dx\right)^{\frac12} \left(\int_\Om \left(\int_\Om\frac{g(y,u_k)u_k}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) g(x,u_k)u_k~dx\right)^{\frac12}\\
& \leq \left(\int_\Om \left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) G(x,u_k)~dx\right)^{\frac12}C_{n,\mu}\|g(\cdot,u_k)u_k\|_{L^{\frac{2n}{2n-\mu}}(\Om)}\to 0
\end{align*}
as $k \to \infty$ using \eqref{mt-nw1} and \eqref{grwth}.}
This together with $\langle J^{\prime}(u_k),u_k\rangle =0$ implies that $M(\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}})\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}} \ra 0$. From $(M3)$, we deduce that $\|u_k\|\ra 0$. Furthermore, we obtain $\lim_{k\ra \infty} J(u_k)=0=c_*$, which is a contradiction to the fact that $c_*>0$. Hence, we must have $u_0\not\equiv 0$.
\noi \textbf{Claim 2:} $\ds M(\|u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}})\|u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}}\geq \int_\Om \left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u_0)}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy \right) g(x,u_0)u_0 dx$.\\
\proof Suppose by contradiction that $M(\|u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}})\|u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}}< \int_\Om\left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u_0)}{|x-y|^{\mu}} dy\right) g(x,u_0)u_0 ~dx$. That is, $\langle J^{\prime}(u_0),u_0\rangle<0.$
\noi It is easy to see, using $(M2)$, that $M(t)t \geq M(1)t^\gamma$ when $t\in [0,1]$. So for $0<t< \frac{1}{\|u_0\|}$, using Lemma \ref{lem7.3} and Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev inequality we have that
\begin{align*}
\langle J^\prime(t u_0),u_0 \rangle &\geq M(t^{\frac{n}{s}}\|u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}})t^{\frac{n}{s}-1}\|u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}} - { \frac{2s}{\gamma n}}\int_\Om \left(\int_\Om \frac{g(y,tu_0)tu_0(y)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}~dy \right)g(x,tu_0)u_0(x)~dx\\
&\geq M(1)t^{\frac{\gamma n}{s}-1}\|u_0\|^{\frac{\gamma n}{s}} - \frac{C}{t}\left(\int_\Om |g(x,tu_0)tu_0|^{\frac{2n}{2n-\mu}}~dx\right)^{\frac{2n-\mu}{n}}.
\end{align*}
But from the growth assumptions on $g$ we already know that for $\e>0$, $ \alpha >\frac{\gamma n}{2s}$ and $r > \frac{\gamma n}{2s}$,
\begin{align*}
&\left(\int_\Om |g(x,tu_0)tu_0|^{\frac{2n}{2n-\mu}}~dx\right)^{\frac{2n-\mu}{n}}\\
&\leq C(\e) \left( \int_\Om |tu_0|^{\frac{2n\alpha}{2n-\mu}} + \|tu_0\|^{\frac{2r n}{2n-\mu}} \left( \int_\Om\exp\left(\frac{4n(1+\e)\|tu_0\|^{\frac{n}{n-s}}}{2n-\mu}\left(\frac{|tu_0|}{\|tu_0\|}\right)^{\frac{n}{n-s}}\right)\right)^{\frac12} \right)^{\frac{2n-\mu}{n}}\\
& \leq C(\e) \left(\|tu_0\|^{2\alpha}+ \|tu_0\|^{2r} \right)
\end{align*}
by choosing $t< \displaystyle\left(\frac{(2n-\mu)\alpha_{n,s}}{4n(1+\e)\|u_0\|^{\frac{n}{n-s}}}\right)^{\frac{n-s}{n}}$ and using Trudinger-Moser inequality. Therefore for $t>0$ small enough as above, we obtain
\[\langle J^\prime(t u_0),u_0 \rangle \geq M(1)t^{\frac{\gamma n}{s}-1}\|u_0\|^{\frac{\gamma n}{s}} - C(\e) \left(t^{2\alpha-1}\|u_0\|^{2\alpha}+ t^{2r-1}\|u_0\|^{2r} \right) \]
which suggests that $\langle J^\prime(tu_0),u_0 \rangle>0$ when $t$ is sufficiently small. Thus there exists a $\sigma\in(0,1)$ such that $\langle J^{\prime}(\sigma u_0),u_0\rangle=0$ that is, $\sigma u_0\in \mc N$. Thus from Lemmas \ref{lem7.3}, \ref{3.7} and {Remark \ref{rem-M}}, it follows that
{\small\begin{align*}
&c_*\leq b \leq J(\sigma u_0)=J(\sigma u_0)-\frac{s}{n \gamma }\langle J^{\prime}(\sigma u_0),\sigma u_0\rangle\\
&=\frac{s}{n} \hat M(\|\sigma u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}})-\frac{s M(\|\sigma u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}})\|\sigma u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}}}{n\gamma}+ \frac{s}{n\gamma}\int_\Om \left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,\sigma u_0)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy\right)\left(g(x,\sigma u_0)\sigma u_0- \frac{n\gamma}{2s} G(x, \sigma u_0)\right)\\
&<\frac{s}{n}\hat M(\| u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}})-\frac{s}{n\gamma}M(\|u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}})\| u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}}+\frac{s}{n \gamma}\int_\Om \left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y, u_0)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy\right)\left(g(x, u_0)u_0- \frac{n\gamma}{2s} G(x,u_0)\right)dx.
\end{align*}}
\noi Also by lower semicontinuity of norm and Fatou's Lemma, we obtain
\begin{align*}
c_*\leq b&< \liminf_{k\rightarrow\infty}\left(\frac{s}{n}\hat M(\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}})-\frac{s}{n \gamma}M(\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}})\| u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}}\right)\\
&\quad+\liminf_{k\rightarrow\infty}\frac{s}{n\gamma}\int_\Om \left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy\right)\left[g(x, u_k)u_k-\frac{n\gamma}{2s} G(x,u_k)\right]dx\\
&\leq \lim_{k\rightarrow\infty}\left[J(u_k)-\frac{s}{n\gamma}\langle J^{\prime}(u_k),u_k\rangle\right]=c_*,
\end{align*}
which is a contradiction. Hence Claim 2 is proved.\\
\noi \textbf{Claim 3:} $J(u_0)=c_*$.\\
\proof Using $\displaystyle \int_\Om \left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy\right) G(x,u_k)dx \to \int_\Om \left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u_0)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy\right) G(x,u_0)dx$ and lower semicontinuity of norm we have $J(u_0)\leq c_*$.
Now we are going to show that the case $J(u_0)<c_*$ can not occur.
Indeed, if $J(u_0)<c_*$ then $\|u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}}<\rho_0^{\frac{n}{s}}.$ Moreover,
\begin{equation}\label{7a3}
\frac{s}{n}\hat M(\rho_0^{\frac{n}{s}})=\lim_{k\rightarrow\infty}\frac{s}{n}\hat M(\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}})=c_*+\frac{1}{2}\int_\Om\left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u_0)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right) G(x,u_0)dx,
\end{equation}
This gives that
\[\ds \rho_0^{\frac{n}{s}} = \hat{M}^{-1}\left( {\frac{n}{s}} c_*+ {\frac{n}{2s}}\int_\Om \left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u_0)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right) G(x,u_0)dx\right).\]
Next defining $v_k=\frac{u_k}{\|u_k\|}$ and $v_0=\frac{u_0}{\rho_0}$, we have $v_k\rightharpoonup v_0$ in $X_0$ and $\|v_0\|<1$. Thus by Lemma \ref{plc},
\begin{equation}\label{7a4}
\sup_{k\in \mb N}\int_\Omega \exp({p|v_k|^{\frac{n}{n-s}}})~dx<\infty\;\; \text{for all}\; 1<p<\frac{\alpha_{n,s}}{(1-\|v_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}})^\frac{s}{n-s}}.
\end{equation}
\noi On the other hand, by Claim 2, \eqref{cnd-M} and Lemma \ref{lem7.3}, we have
\begin{align*}
J(u_0) &\ge \frac{s}{n}\hat M(\|u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}})-\frac{s}{n \gamma}M(\|u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}})\|u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}} \\
&\quad \quad+\frac{s}{n\gamma}\int_\Om \left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u_0)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right) \left(g(x,u_0)u_0- \frac{n\gamma}{2s} G(x,u_0)\right)dx \geq 0.
\end{align*}
Using this together with Lemma \ref{lem7.2} and the equality,
$\frac ns\left(c_*-J(u_0)\right)=\hat M\left(\rho_{0}^{\frac{n}{s}}\right)-\hat M\left(\|u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}}\right)$
we obtain
\[\hat M\left(\rho_{0}^{\frac{n}{s}}\right) \le \frac ns c_*+\hat M(\|u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}})<\hat M\left(\left(\frac{2n-\mu}{2n}\al_{n,s}\right)^{\frac{n-s}{s}}\right)+\hat M(\|u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}})\]
and therefore by $(M1)$
\begin{equation}\label{7a6}
\rho_{0}^{\frac{n}{s}}< \hat M^{-1}\left(\hat M\left(\left(\frac{2n-\mu}{2n}\al_{n,s}\right)^{\frac{n-s}{s}}\right)+\hat M(\|u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}})\right)\le \left(\frac{2n-\mu}{2n}\al_{n,s}\right)^{\frac{n-s}{s}}+\|u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}}.
\end{equation}
Since $\rho_{0}^{\frac{n}{s}}(1-\|v_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}})=\rho_{0}^{\frac{n}{s}}-\|u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}}$, from \eqref{7a6} it follows that
\[ \rho_{0}^{\frac{n}{s}}< \frac{\left(\frac{2n-\mu}{2n}\al_{n,s}\right)^{\frac{n-s}{s}}}{1-\|v_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}}}.\]
Thus, there exists $\ba>0$ such that $ \|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{n-s}} < \ba < \frac{\al_{n,s}(2n-\mu)}
{2n(1-\|v_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}})^{\frac{s}{n-s}}}$ for $k$ large. We can choose $q>1$ close to $1$ such that $q \|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{n-s}} \le \ba < \frac{(2n-\mu)\al_{n,s}}{2n(1-\|v_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}})^{\frac{s}{n-s}}}$ and using \eqref{7a4}, we conclude that for $k$ large
\[ \int_\Om \exp\left(\frac{2nq |u_k|^{n/n-s}}{2n-\mu}\right) dx \le \int_\Om \exp\left(\frac{2n\beta |v_k|^{n/n-s}}{2n-\mu}\right)dx \le C.\]
Let us recall \eqref{rem2} and \eqref{grwth} to get that
\begin{align*}\left|\int_\Om \left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right) g(x,u_k)u_k~dx\right| &\leq C\left( \|u_k\|_{L^{\frac{2n\alpha}{2n-\mu}}(\Om)}^{\frac{2n-\mu}{2n\alpha}}+ \|u_k\|_{L^{\frac{2nrq^\prime}{2n-\mu}}(\Om)}^{\frac{2n-\mu}{2nr}} \right)\\
& \to C\left( \|u_0\|_{L^{\frac{2n\alpha}{2n-\mu}}(\Om)}^{\frac{2n-\mu}{2n\alpha}}+ \|u_0\|_{L^{\frac{2nrq^\prime}{2n-\mu}}(\Om)}^{\frac{2n-\mu}{2nr}} \right)
\end{align*}
as $k \to \infty$. Then the pointwise convergence of $\left(\displaystyle\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right) g(x,u_k)u_k$ to\\ $\left(\displaystyle\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u_0)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right) g(x,u_0)u_0$ as $k \to \infty$ asserts that
\[\lim_{k\to \infty}\int_\Om \left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right) g(x,u_k)u_k~dx = \int_\Om \left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u_0)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right) g(x,u_0)u_0~dx\]
while using the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem. Now Lemma \ref{PS-ws}, we get
\[\displaystyle\int_\Om \left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right) g(x,u_k) (u_k-u_0)dx \rightarrow 0\;\mbox{as}\; k\rightarrow \infty.\]
Since $\langle J^\prime (u_k), u_k-u_0\rangle \rightarrow 0$, it follows that
{\small \begin{equation} \label{na7new}
M(\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}}) \int_{\mb R^{2n}} \frac{|u_k(x)-u_k(y)|^{\frac{n}{s}-2}(u_k(x)-u_k(y))((u_k-u_0)(x)-(u_k-u_0)(y))}{|x-y|^{2n}}dxdy \rightarrow 0.
\end{equation}}
\noi We define $U_{k}(x,y)=u_{k}(x)-u_{k}(y)$ and $U_{0}(x,y)=u_{0}(x)-u_{0}(y)$ then using $u_k\rightharpoonup u_0$ weakly in $X_0$ and boundedness of $M(\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}})$, we have
{\small\begin{equation}\label{na8new}
M(\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}}) \int_{\mb R^{2n}} \frac{|U_0(x,y)|^{\frac{n}{s}-2} U_0(x,y) (U_k(x,y) -U_0(x,y))}{|x-y|^{2n}}dxdy\ra 0\; \mbox{as}\; k\ra\infty.
\end{equation}}
Subtracting \eqref{na8new} from \eqref{na7new}, we get
\[M(\|u_k\|^{\frac{n}{s}}) \int_{\mb R^{2n}} \frac{(|U_{k}(x,y)|^{\frac{n}{s}-2} U_{k}(x,y) - |U_{0}(x,y)|^{\frac{n}{s}-2} U_{0}(x,y)) (U_{k}(x,y)-U_{0}(x,y))}{|x-y|^{2n}}dxdy \rightarrow 0 \]
as $k\rightarrow \infty$. Now using this and the following
inequality
\begin{align}\label{11e2}
|a-b|^p\leq 2^{p-2}(|a|^{p-2}a-|b|^{p-2}b)(a-b)\;\mbox{for all}\; a,b\in \mb R\;\mbox{and}\; p\geq 2,
\end{align}
with $a=u_k(x)-u_k(y)$ and $b=u_0(x)-u_0(y)$, we obtain
\[M(\rho_0^{\frac{n}{s}})\int_{\mb R^{2n}}\frac{|U_k(x)- U_0(x)|^{\frac{n}{s}}}{|x-y|^{2n}} dxdy \ra 0\;\mbox{as}\; k\ra\infty.\]
This implies that $u_k\ra u$ strongly in $X_0$ and hence $J(u)=c_*$ which is a contradiction.
Therefore, claim $3$ holds true.
Hence $J(u)=c_*= \lim\limits_{k\to \infty}J(u_k)$ and $\|u_k\| \to \rho_0$ gives that $\rho_0= \|u_0\|$. Finally we have
\begin{align*}
&M(\|u_0\|^{\frac{n}{s}}) \int_\Om \frac{|u_0(x)-u_0(y)|^{\frac{n}{s}-2}(u_0(x)-u_0(y))(\phi(x)-\phi(y))}{|x-y|^{2n}} dx dy\\
&\quad \quad=\int_\Om \left(\int_{\Om}\frac{G(y,u_k)}{|x-y|^{\mu}}dy \right)g(x,u_0) \phi ~dx,
\end{align*}
for all $\phi\in X_0$. Thus, $u_0$ is a non trivial solution of $(\mc M)$. By Lemma \ref{pos-sol} we obtain that $u_0$ is the required nonnegative solution of $(\mc M)$ which completes the proof. \QED
\noindent{\bf Acknowledgements:} This research is supported by Science and Engineering Research Board, Department of Science and Technology, Government of India, Grant number:\\
ECR/2017/002651. The second author wants to thank Bennett University for its hospitality during her visit there.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro}
Soon after the discovery of neutrons, the existence of neutron stars (NS), which are mainly
made up of neutrons, was predicted. In 1960's, pulsars were discovered. As extremely compact
objects with a typical mass of $\sim 1.4M_\odot $ and a typical radius of only about $ 10\rm\, km $,
they were soon identified as neutron stars. However, it has also been argued that the true ground
state of the matter at extreme densities may actually be quarks \citep{Itoh1970,Bodmer1971} rather than the hadronic form.
The internal composition of these extremely compact stars thus is still largely unclear.
For instance, under such an extreme condition, some particles like hyperons, baryons, and even
bosons may appear; quark deconfinement may also happen. In particular, it has long been suggested
that even more exotic states such as strange quark matter (SQM) may exist in the core \citep{Itoh1970,Bodmer1971,Witten1984,Farhi1984}.
Recently, the discovery of several $ 2M_\odot $ pulsars \citep{Demorest2010,Antoniadis2013,Cromartie2019} attracts the attention
of scientists. Pulsars with such a high mass and a small radius imply that the density at the center
can reach several times of nuclear saturation density, which further complicates the internal composition
of these compact stars.
Following the SQM hypothesis, the existence of a whole sequence of SQM objects, such as strange quark
stars (SSs) \citep{Witten1984,Farhi1984,Alcock1986}, strange quark dwarfs \citep{Glendenning1995,Glendenning1995+}, and strange quark
planets \citep{Glendenning1995,Glendenning1995+,Xu2003,Horvath2012,Huang2017} are predicted. For example, \citet{Jiang2018} argued that
the double white dwarf binary J125733.63+542850.5 may actually contains two strange dwarfs.
SQM objects may be covered by a thin
crust of normal hadronic matter, or may even simply be bare SQM cores \citep{Glendenning1995,Glendenning1995+}. The common
compact nature of SSs and NSs makes it difficult to discriminate these two kinds of internally different
stars observationally \citep{Alcock1986}. A few efforts have been made to reveal the difference between them.
For example, they may have different $ M-R $ relations \citep{Witten1984,Krivoruchenko1991,Glendenning1995,Li1995,Avellar2010,Drago2014},
and SSs may rotate much faster (with spin period $ P_{\rm spin}<1\rm ms $) than
NSs \citep{Friedman1989,Frieman1989,Glendenning1989,Kristian1989,Madsen1998,Dai1995,Dai1995+,Sawyer1989,Bhattacharyya2016}. They may also have different cooling
rates \citep{Pizzochero1991,Page1992,Ma2002}, different gravitational wave (GW)
features \citep{Jaranowski1998,Madsen1998,Lindblom2000,Andersson2002,Jones2002,Bauswein2010,Moraes2014,Geng2015,Mannarelli2015},
different maximum masses \citep{Lai2009,Li2010,Weissenborn2011,Mallick2013,Zhu2013,Zhou2018,Shibata2019}, and so on.
Nevertheless, due to the impracticability of the above methods at the current stage, the
problem still remains unsolved.
Encouragingly, several new methods were recently proposed to distinguish SSs from NSs.
The basic idea involves the tremendous difference between SQM planets and normal matter ones.
Because of the extreme compactness, an SQM planet can be very close to its host SS star,
without being tidally disrupted. It can even emit strong GW signals when it finally spirals-in and merges
with the host star\citep{Geng2015}. GW emission from these merging SQM planets within our Galaxy can be
detected by GW detectors such as advanced LIGO and the future Einstein Telescope.
It is thus suggested that we could identify SQM objects by searching for very
close-in planets around pulsars \citep{Huang2017}, or by detecting GW bursts from merging SQM planet
systems \citep{Geng2015}.
It is interesting to note that nearly ten GW events from merging double black holes (and even one
from merging double neutron stars) have been detected by advance LIGO and Virgo since
2016 \citep{Abbott2016,Abbott2017}.
Recently, advanced LIGO has just begun a new observational run, which will surely come up with much more
GW events. The great breakthrough in GW astronomy hopefully sheds light on possible detection
of GW emission from merging SQM planet systems in the near future.
At the same time, rapid progress in observational technology also leads to a drastic increase
in the number of extrasolar planets being detected in the past decades. Interestingly, a good number
of exoplanets are found to be orbiting around pulsars. In this study, we examine these pulsar
planets systematically to search for very close-in ones that could be ideal candidates for SQM
objects. The possibility of detecting GW emission from these candidates will also be explored.
The structure of our paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{sec:Theories}, the background
relevant to SQM planet systems is briefly introduced. In Section \ref{sec:data}, we describe the data
source of our sample. In Section \ref{sec:close-in}, SQM candidates are selected and evaluated by
considering the criteria of close-in introduced in Section \ref{sec:Theories}. GW emission from
the candidate SQM planet systems is calculated and compared with the limiting sensitivities of
current and future GW experiments in Section \ref{sec:GW}. Finally, Section \ref{sec:conclusion}
presents our conclusions and discussion.
\section{Theories relevant to SQM planet systems} \label{sec:Theories}
\subsection{Criteria for identifying SQM planets} \label{subsec:criteria}
\begin{deluxetable*}{lccclccc}[t!]
\tablecaption{Candidate pulsar planets and their host pulsars. \label{tab:table1}}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Planet name} & \colhead{Mass} & \colhead{$ P_{\rm orb} $} &\colhead{Host name} & \colhead{Distance} & \colhead{Mass} & \colhead{$ Ref.$}\\
\colhead{} & \colhead{$ m $ ($ M_{\rm jup} $)} & \colhead{(day)} & \colhead{} & \colhead{$ d $ ($\rm pc $)} & \colhead{$ M $ ($ M_\odot $)} &
}
\startdata
\multicolumn{7}{c}{Gold sample}\\
\cline{1-7}
PSR 0636 b & 8 & 0.067 & PSR J0636 & 210 & 1.4 & 1, 2, 3 \\
PSR J1807-2459A b & 9.4 & 0.07 & PSR J1807-2459A & 2790 & 1.4 & 4, 5, 6, 7 \\
PSR 1719-14 b & 1 & 0.090706293 & PSR 1719-14 & 1200 & 1.4 & 3, 8, 9 \\
PSR J2322-2650 b & 0.7949 & 0.322963997 & PSR J2322-2650 & 230 & 1.4 & 3 \\
PSR 1257+12 b & 0.00007 & 25.262 & PSR 1257+12 & 710 & 1.4 & 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 \\
PSR 1257+12 c & 0.013 & 66.5419 & PSR 1257+12 & 710 & 1.4 & 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 \\
PSR 1257+12 d & 0.012 & 98.2114 & PSR 1257+12 & 710 & 1.4 & 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 \\
PSR B0943+10 b & 2.8 & 730 & PSR B0943+10 & 890 & 1.5 & 15 \\
PSR B0943+10 c & 2.6 & 1460 & PSR B0943+10 & 890 & 1.5 & 15 \\
PSR B0329+54 b & 0.0062 & 10139.34 & PSR B0329+54 & 1000 & 1.4 & 16, 17, 18 \\
PSR B1620-26(AB) b & 2.5 & 36525 & PSR B1620-26(AB) & 3800 & 1.35 & 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 \\
\cline{1-7}
\multicolumn{7}{c}{Silver sample}\\
\cline{1-7}
PSR J2051-0827 b & 28.3 & 0.099110266 & PSR J2051-0827 & 1280 & 1.4 & 7, 24 \\
PSR J2241-5236 b & 12 & 0.14567224 & PSR J2241-5236 & 500 & 1.35 & 7, 25 \\
PSR B1957+20 b & 22 & 0.38 & PSR B1957+20 & 1530 & 1.4 & 7, 26 \\
\cline{1-7}
\multicolumn{7}{c}{Copper sample}\\
\cline{1-7}
XTE J1807-294 b & 14.5 & 0.0278292 & XTE J1807-294 & 5500 & 1.5 & 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 \\
XTE J1751-305 b & 27 & 0.02945997 & XTE J1751-305 & 11000 & 1.7 & 33, 34, 35 \\
PSR J1544+4937 b & 18 & 0.12077299 & PSR J1544+4937 & 3500 & 1.7 & 36, 37 \\
PSR J1446-4701 b & 23 & 0.277666077 & PSR J1446-4701 & 1500 & 1.4 & 38, 39, 40 \\
PSR J1502-6752 b & 26 & 2.48445723 & PSR J1502-6752 & 4200 & 1.4 & 38, 39 \\
\enddata
\tablecomments{$ Ref.\, $:
(1) \citet{Stovall2014};
(2) \citet{Spiewak2016};
(3) \citet{Spiewak2018};
(4) \citet{Amico2001};
(5) \citet{Ransom2001};
(6) \citet{Lynch2012};
(7) \citet{Ray2017};
(8) \citet{Bailes2011};
(9) \citet{Martin2016};
(10) \citet{Wolszczan1992};
(11) \citet{Wolszczan1994};
(12) \citet{Wolszczan2012};
(13) \citet{Patruno2017};
(14) \citet{Wolszczan2018};
(15) \citet{Suleymanova2014};
(16) \citet{Demianski1979};
(17) \citet{Shabanova1995};
(18) \citet{Starovoit2017};
(19) \citet{Thorsett1993};
(20) \citet{Lewis2008};
(21) \citet{Mottez2011};
(22) \citet{Schneider2011};
(23) \citet{Veras2016};
(24) \citet{STAPPERS1996};
(25) \citet{Keith2011};
(26) \citet{Reynolds2007};
(27) \citet{Markwardt2003a,Markwardt2003b};
(28) \citet{Campana2003};
(29) \citet{Kirsch2004};
(30) \citet{Falanga2005};
(31) \citet{Riggio2007};
(32) \citet{Patruno2010};
(33) \citet{Markwardt2002};
(34) \citet{Gierli2005};
(35) \citet{Andersson2014};
(36) \citet{Bhattacharyya2013};
(37) \citet{Tang2014};
(38) \citet{Keith2012};
(39) \citet{Ng2014};
(40) \citet{Arumugasamy2015}.
}
\end{deluxetable*}
\begin{deluxetable*}{lccclccc}[t!]
\tablecaption{White dwarf planets with $ P_{\rm orb}<0.1 $ days and
their host stars. \label{tab:table2}}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Planet name} & \colhead{Mass} & \colhead{$ P_{\rm orb} $} &\colhead{Host name} & \colhead{Distance} & \colhead{Mass} & \colhead{$ Ref.$}\\
\colhead{} & \colhead{$ m $ ($ M_{\rm jup} $)} & \colhead{(day)} & \colhead{} & \colhead{$ d $ ($\rm pc $)} & \colhead{$ M $ ($ M_\odot $)} &
}
\startdata
GP Com b & 26.2 & 0.032 & GP Com & 75 & 0.33 & 1, 2, 3, 4 \\
V396 Hya b & 18.3 & 0.045 & V396 Hya & 77 & 0.32 & 2, 3, 4, 5 \\
J1433 b & 57.1 & 0.054 & J1433 & 226 & 0.8 & 3, 4, 6, 7 \\
WD 0137-349 b & 56 & 0.07943002 & WD 0137-349 & 102.26 & 0.39 & 8, 9, 10, 11 \\
SDSS J1411+2009 b & 50 & 0.0854 & SDSS J1411+2009 & 177 & 0.53 & 12, 13, 14 \\
\enddata
\tablecomments{$ Ref.\, $:
(1) \citet{Nather1981};
(2) \citet{Kupfer2016};
(3) \citet{Wong2018};
(4) \citet{Cunha2018};
(5) \citet{RUIZ2001};
(6) \citet{Littlefair2006};
(7) \citet{Santisteban2016};
(8) \citet{Maxted2006};
(9) \citet{Burleigh2006};
(10) \citet{Casewell2015};
(11) \citet{Longstaff2017};
(12) \citet{DRAKE2010};
(13) \citet{Beuermann2013};
(14) \citet{Littlefair2014}.
}
\end{deluxetable*}
The tidal disruption radius of a planet by its host star is mainly dependent on the density ($ \rho $)
of the planet and the mass of the central host star ($ M $). It can be expressed
as $r_{\rm td}\approx\left(\frac{6M}{\pi\rho}\right)^{1/3}$ \citep{Hills1975}.
If the planet is an SQM one, which typically has an extremely high density
of $\sim \rm 4\times10^{14}\,g\,cm^{-3}$, then the tidal disruption radius can be
estimated as
\begin{eqnarray}
r_{\rm td} \approx2.37\times10^6\left(\frac{M}{1.4M^{\odot}}\right)^{1/3}
\nonumber \\\times\left( \frac{\rho}{4\times10^{14}\rm \,g\,cm^{-3}}\right) ^{-1/3}\rm cm .
\end{eqnarray}
Taking the host star mass as $ 1.4M_\odot $, the above equation tells us that an SQM planet
with a density of $\rm 4\times10^{14}\,g\,cm^{-3}$ will be disrupted only when its orbital radius
is less than $ 2.37\times10^6 $ cm, i.e. when it almost comes to the surface of the host pulsar.
On the contrary, normal planets typically have a density of 1~---~10 $\rm g\,cm^{-3} $.
If we take $\rm 30\,g\,cm^{-3}$ as an upper limit for the density of normal planets, then the
limiting disruption radius is $ 5.6\times10^{10} $ cm \citep{Huang2017}. In this study, we take
this value as a criteria to discriminate normal planets and SQM ones. If a planet is observed to
have an orbital radius ($a$) smaller than $5.6\times10^{10}\rm\, cm$, then it is most likely an
exotic strange quark object, but not a normal matter planet. According to the Kepler's law,
such a close-in planet should also have a very small orbital
period, $ P_{\rm orb}\lesssim 6100\rm\,s $ \citep{Huang2017}. Therefore, we could identify candidates of
SQM planets by using the criteria of $P_{\rm orb} \lesssim 6100\rm \,s $
and/or $a \lesssim 5.6\times10^{10} $cm.
\subsection{GWs from SQM planet systems}
According to general relativity, orbital motion of a binary system can lead to
GW emission and spiral-in of the system. The GW emission power of a system with known
masses and orbital parameters is,
\begin{equation}
L_{\rm GW}=\frac{32G^{4}}{5c^5}\frac{M^{2}m^{2}\left( M+m\right) }{a^{5}}f\left( e\right),
\end{equation}
where $c$ is the speed of light, $ G $ is the gravitational constant, and $ m $ is the mass
of the planet. The factor $F\left( e\right) =\left(1+\frac{73}{24}e^{2}+\frac{37}{96}e^{4}\right)/\left( 1-e^{2}\right)^{7/2}$
is a function of the orbital eccentricity ($e$). Here we take $F\left( e\right) = 1$ for circular orbits
considered in our modeling.
In a binary system, the orbit will evolve with time due to continuous GW emission. During
this process, the GW strain will increase with time. If the distance of the binary system with
respect to us is $d$, then the strain amplitude of the GW can be expressed as \citep{Peters1963,Postnov2014,Geng2015},
\begin{equation}
h=5.1\times10^{-23}\left( \frac{M_{C}}{1\,M_\odot}\right)^{5/3}
\left( \frac{P_{\rm orb}}{1 {\rm\, hr}}\right)^{ -2/3}\left( \frac{d}{10 {\rm \,kpc}}\right) ^{-1},
\end{equation}
where $ M_{C}=\left( Mm\right)^{3/5}/\left( M+m\right)^{1/5} $ is the chirp mass.
Directly observable quantity of GW is the strain spectral amplitude.
For a binary system, it is given as \citep{Finn1993,Nissanke2010,Postnov2014,Geng2015},
\begin{eqnarray}
h_{f}=6.4\times10^{-21}\left(\frac{M_{C}}{1M_\odot}\right)^{5/6}\left( \frac{f}{300Hz}\right) ^{-7/6}\nonumber \\
\times\left( \frac{d}{10\rm\,kpc}\right)^{-1} Hz^{-1/2},
\end{eqnarray}
where $f$ is the GW frequency that may evolve with time, $f={2}/{P_{\rm orb}}$.
Because of the continuous energy loss through GW emission, the system will coalesce at the
final stage of the inspiraling process. The coalescence time scale \citep{Peters1963, Peters1964, Lorimer2008}
of the system is expressed as
\begin{equation}
{t_{\rm co}}=9.88\times10^{6}{\rm yr}\left(\frac{P_{\rm orb}}{\rm 1\, hr}
\right)^{8/3}\left(\frac{\mu}{1\, M_{\odot}} \right)^{-1}
\left(\frac{\mathcal{M}}{1\,M_{\odot}} \right)^{-2/3},
\end{equation}
where $ \mu={Mm}/\left( M+m\right)$ is the reduced mass,
$ \mathcal{M}=M+m $ is the total mass of the system.
\section{Data collection}\label{sec:data}
In this study, we will systematically examine all the available short period exoplanets
to search for possible candidate SQM planets. For this purpose, we have searched through various
exoplanet data bases. Currently, popular exoplanet data bases that are widely used in the field
include: the Extrasolar Planets Encyclopaedia (hereafter, EU\footnote{\url{http://www.exoplanet.eu/}}),
the NASA Exoplanet Archive (ARCHIVE\footnote{\url{https://exoplanetarchive.ipac.caltech.edu/}}),
the Open Exoplanet Catalogue
(OPEN\footnote{\url{http://www.openexoplanetcatalogue.com/}}), the Exoplanet Data Explorer
(ORG\footnote{\url{http://www.exoplanets.org/}}),
and Extrasolar planet's catalogue produced by Kyoto University
(EXOKyoto\footnote{\url{http://www.exoplanetkyoto.org/catalog/?lang=en}}).
The numbers of planets in these databases are very different from each other. Interestingly,
note that a detailed comparison of these databases has been carried out by \citet{Bashi2018}.
Generally speaking, EU seems to provide the most complete sample for exoplanets.
There are totally 6699 planets listed on the EU web site, among which 4011 are confirmed and 2688 are candidates.
Since SQM planets are most likely to be found orbiting around pulsars (in this case, the pulsars
themselves should also be strange stars, but not normal neutron stars), we will mainly concentrate
on pulsar planets. So, as the initial step, we first select all the candidates of pulsar planets.
In this aspect, the EU data base contributes most of the objects. There are 18 pulsar planets listed in EU, 6
listed in ARCHIVE, and 3 listed in ORG. The total number of pulsar planet candidates is 19 after
considering the overlapping in different databases. In Table~1, we have listed some key parameters
of these 19 candidates as well as their host pulsars. Among these objects, 6 planets interestingly
have an orbital period less than 0.1 day (i.e., 8640 seconds). Note that our exact period criteria for
SQM objects is 6100 s, but we believe that all the planets with $P_{\rm orb} < 0.1$ days deserve being
paid special attention to.
The nature of companions around pulsars is actually not easy to be well defined. A companion
of several Jupiter mass could be a massive planet, but it could also be a small white dwarfs.
The key problem is that its radius usually could not be accurately measured. As a result, we should bear in
mind that the 19 objects listed in Table~1 are only candidates, not confirmed pulsar planets.
According to the confidence level, we have divided these 19 objects into three classes, the gold sample,
the silver sample, and the copper sample. In the gold sample, there are strong clues supporting the
objects as planets. In the silver sample, there are some clues hinting the objects as
planets \citep{Ray2017}. In the copper sample, the objects might be planets, but the evidence supporting the idea
is highly lacking. Interestingly, we find that three objects in the gold sample and one object in the
silver sample have periods less than 0.1 days. We will describe the details of these objects in the next
section.
SQM planets may also exist around white dwarfs, because these so called white dwarfs might actually
be strange quark dwarfs. So, we also select all the WD planets that have an orbital period less
than 0.1 day from EU. The total number of WD planets met such a requirement is 5, as listed in Table~2.
To get an overall picture on how these short period planets differ from others, we have plot all the planets
with available masses and orbital periods on the $m$ -- $P_{\rm orb}$ plane in Figure~\ref{fig:fig1}.
It clearly shows that all the planets with a period smaller than 0.1 day are orbiting around
pulsars or white dwarfs. This kind of ultra-short period objects form a distinct group and
take a special place in the lower right region of Figure~\ref{fig:fig1}.
It strongly hints that they may have an exotic nature as compared with other planets.
\section{Candidates of SQM planets} \label{sec:close-in}
As explained in Section \ref{subsec:criteria}, because of the extreme compactness,
an SQM object could be very close to its host strange star, without being tidally disrupted.
So, closeness is a unique feature of SQM planets.
To search for SQM objects, we have selected all the close-in exoplanets around pulsars and WDs.
These ultra-short period (period less than 0.1 day) objects are listed in Table~\ref{tab:table3}.
To resist tidal disruption, they should have a relatively high mean density.
To see how exotic these objects are, we have calculated the minimum mean densities of these objects
by using the period-density relation of $ \rho_{\rm min}\approx{3\pi}/\left( {0.462^{3}G P_{\rm orb}^{2}}\right)
$ \citep{Frank1985,Bailes2011}. The results are also presented in Table~\ref{tab:table3}.
We can see that the minimum densities of these objects are
all significantly larger than that of normal rocky or iron material (typically with a density
of $\rm 1-10\,g\,cm^{-3} $). If these objects are planets but not small white dwarfs, then the
possibility that they are SQM objects is very high. Below, we will examine these close-in objects
one by one in detail and try to clarify their true nature.
\begin{deluxetable}{lccc}
\tablecaption{Orbital parameters and minimum mean densities of ultra-short period objects \label{tab:table3}}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Planet name} & \colhead{$ P_{\rm orb} $} & \colhead{Orb. radius} & \colhead{$ \rho_{\rm min} $}\\
\colhead{} & \colhead{(s)} & \colhead{$ a $ ($ 10^{10}\rm \,cm $)} & \colhead{($\rm g \,cm^{-3} $)}
}
\startdata
XTE J1807-294 b & 2404 & 3.1 & 247.9 \\
XTE J1751-305 b & 2545 & 3.4 & 221.2 \\
PSR 0636 b & 5789 & 5.4 & 42.8\\
PSR J1807-2459A b & 6048 & 5.6 & 39.2 \\
PSR 1719-14 b & 7837 & 6.6 & 23.3 \\
PSR J2051-0827 b & 8563 & 7.1 & 19.5 \\
GP Com b & 2765 & 2.1 & 187.5 \\
V396 Hya b & 3888 & 2.6 & 94.8 \\
J1433 b & 4666 & 4.0 & 65.8 \\
WD 0137-349 b & 6863 & 4.1 & 30.4 \\
SDSS J1411+2009 b & 7379 & 4.7 & 26.3 \\
\enddata
\end{deluxetable}
\begin{figure}
\plotone{Fig1.pdf}
\caption{Orbital periods versus masses for all the 1638 exoplanets with data available from the EU
web site (\url{http://www.exoplanet.eu/catalog/}). The red stars represent candidate pulsar planets.
The blue points correspond to the five close-in WD planets with $ P_{\rm orb}<0.1 $ days, and
the black dots represent other 1616 exoplanets.} \label{fig:fig1}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Close-in objects around pulsars}\label{subsec:identify}
The mass of planets can distribute in a very wide range. Some planets
can be very massive. In fact, the upper mass limit of planets has been
derived by many authors, which could be $ 43^{+14}_{-23}M_{\rm jup} $
\citep{Grether2006}, $ 42.5M_{\rm jup} $ \citep{Ma2014} and/or $ 60M_{\rm jup}$
\citep{Hatzes2015}. On the other hand, white dwarf cannot be too small and they
should have a lower mass limit. Recently, two low-mass white dwarf were reported, i.e.
SDSS J184037.78+642312.3 ($ 0.17M_\odot $) \citep{Hermes2012} and
SDSS J222859.93+362359.6 ($ 0.16M_\odot $) \citep{Hermes2013}. They hint that
white dwarfs maybe are unlikely to be less than 100 $M_{\rm jup}$.
In our Table~1, all the objects are significantly less massive
than the planetary mass limits, thus are reasonable candidates for planets.
Among all the close-in candidates in Table~\ref{tab:table3}, three are gold sample objects, one
is a silver sample object, and two are copper sample objects. The other five are WD planet candidates.
Here, we describe these objects one by one.
\subsubsection{Gold sample objects} \label{subsec:golden}
PSR J0636 b is a companion of the millisecond pulsar PSR J0636+5129 (spin period 2.87 ms) \citep{Stovall2014}.
It has a mass of $ 8 M_{\rm\,jup} $. Its orbital period is $ \sim 5789\rm \,s $, and
the orbital radius is correspondingly $\sim5.4\times10^{10} \rm \,cm $.
PSR J0636+5129 does not exhibit any eclipses caused by excess material in the system \citep{Stovall2014, Spiewak2016, Kaplan2018}.
PSR J0636 b is clearly identified as a planet by many authors \citep{Stovall2014, Spiewak2016, Spiewak2018}.
It is also explicitly listed as a planet by several planet databases, such as by EU, EXOKyoto,
PHLUPR (short for: Planetary Habitability Laboratory of the University of Puerto Rico at Arecibo\footnote{\url{http://phl.upr.edu/projects/habitable-exoplanets-catalog/top10}}),
GCEXO (short for: a General Catalogue of EXOplanets\footnote{\url{http://www.exoplaneet.info/index.html}}).
\smallskip
PSR J1807-2459A b is a companion of the millisecond pulsar PSR J1807-2459A (spin period
3.06 ms) \citep{Amico2001, Ransom2001,Lynch2012}.
This object has a mass of $ 9.4 M_{\rm\,jup} $, with an orbital period of $ \sim 6048\rm \,s $,
and correspondingly an orbital radius of $\sim5.6\times10^{10} \rm \,cm $. PSR J1807-2459A shows
no eclipses, but one can not rule out the possibility of eclipses at longer wavelengths \citep{Ransom2001, Lynch2012}.
PSR J1807-2459A b is identified as a planet by several authors\citep{Amico2001, Ray2017}.
Websites including this object in their planet catalogues are
EU, EXOKyoto, PHLUPR, and GCEXO.
PSR 1719-14 b is a companion of the millisecond pulsar PSR J1719-1438 (spin period 5.7 ms) \citep{Bailes2011,Martin2016}.
It has a mass of $ 1 M_{\rm\,jup} $, with an orbital period of $ \sim 7837\rm \,s $,
and an orbital radius of $\sim6.6\times10^{10} \rm \,cm $.
It is identified as a planet by many researchers \citep{Bailes2011, Martin2016, Spiewak2018}.
Websites listing this object in their planet catalogues are EU, ARCHIVE, EXOKyoto, PHLUPR, and GCEXO.
PSR J1719-14 b was once considered to be a C/O dwarf in an ultra-compact low-mass
X-ray binary (UCLMXB) by \citet{Bailes2011}. However, since its mass is very low ($ 1 M_{\rm\,jup} $),
it is more likely to be a planetary object. \citet{Horvath2012} explicitly argued that PSR J1719-14 b should be
an exotic strange object rather than a C/O dwarf. Very recently, \citet{Huang2017} also
identified PSR J1719-14 b as an ideal candidate of SQM planet.
\subsubsection{Silver sample objects}\label{subsec:silver}
PSR J2051-0827 b is a companion of the millisecond pulsar PSR J2051-0827 (spin period 4.5 ms) \citep{STAPPERS1996,Ray2017}.
It has a mass of $ 28.3 M_{\rm\,jup} $, with an orbital period of $ \sim 8563\rm \,s $,
and an orbital radius of $\sim7.1\times10^{10} \rm \,cm $. Its mass is within the planetary mass range.
While \cite{Ray2017} suggested this object as a planet, it has also been argued that it might be
a brown dwarf \citep{STAPPERS1996}. Websites including this object as a planet in catalogues
are EU, ARCHIVE, EXOKyoto, PHLUPR, and GCEXO. The orbital period and orbital radius of this object
are slightly larger than our strange planet criteria, but we suggest that it might be a good candidate
for SQM object and deserves paying special attention to.
\subsubsection{Copper sample objects}\label{subsec:copper}
XTE J1807-294 b is a companion of the millisecond X-ray pulsar XTE J1807-294 (spin period 5.25 ms) \citep{Markwardt2003a,Markwardt2003b,Campana2003,Kirsch2004,Falanga2005,Riggio2007,Patruno2010}.
It has a mass of $ 14.5\pm 8.5 M_{\rm\,jup} $, with an orbital period of $ \sim 2404\rm \,s $,
and an orbital radius of $\sim3.1\times10^{10} \rm \,cm $.
No X-ray eclipse was observed from this system \citep{Falanga2005}.
According to the mass-radius relation, the companion may be the core of a
previously crystallized C/O dwarf \citep{Deloye2003}.
However, there are no emission or absorption lines found from this companion \citep{Campana2003}.
This object is listed as a planet in EU and EXOKyoto, but its true nature is still highly unclear.
XTE J1751-305 b is a companion of the millisecond X-ray pulsar XTE J1751-305 (spin period 2.3 ms)
\citep{Markwardt2002,Gierli2005, Andersson2014}.
It has a mass of $ 27\pm 10 M_{\rm\,jup} $, with an orbital period of
$ \sim 2545\rm \,s $, and an orbital radius of $\sim3.4\times10^{10} \rm \,cm $.
The pulsar show no X-ray eclipses during observations \citep{Markwardt2002,Gierli2005}.
This object is listed as a planet in EU and EXOKyoto, but several authors have also
argued that it may be the core of a previously crystallized C/O dwarf \citep{Deloye2003}.
The orbital parameters of both XTE J1807-294 b and XTE J1751-305 b well satisfy
our SQM criteria. Also, it is obvious that the masses of both objects are within the planet mass range.
Although their true nature is still uncertain, we interestingly notice that \citet{Horvath2012} have
argued that an exotic strange object interpretation is the best alternative to a C/O dwarf
interpretation for these two objects. We believe that the likelihood of these two objects
being SQM planets is high. They need to be studied in more detail in the future.
\subsection{Close-in objects around white dwarfs}\label{subsec:close-in WD}
GP Com b is a companion of the white dwarf GP Com \citep{Nather1981,Kupfer2016}.
Its mass is $ 26.2\pm16.6 M_{\rm\,jup}$, with an orbital period of
$ \sim 2765\rm \,s $, and an orbital radius of $\sim2.1\times10^{10} \rm \,cm $ \citep{Kupfer2016}.
There are suggestions that this object may be a degenerated He dwarf \citep{Nather1981}.
But the observed abundances of Ne line from this object could be affected by crystallization processes in the core,
and this excludes the highly evolved He donor nature for it \citep{Kupfer2016}.
Alternatively, it was argued to be a planet by many authors \citep{Cunha2018, Wong2018}. Websites listing this
object as a planet are EU, EXOKyoto, PHLUPR, and GCEXO.
V396 Hya b is a companion of the white dwarf V396 Hya \citep{RUIZ2001,Kupfer2016}.
The orbital period of the planet is $ \sim 3888\rm \,s $, and the orbital radius
is $\sim 2.6\times10^{10}\rm\, cm $. Its mass is measured as $ 18.3\pm12.2 M_{\rm\,jup} $ \citep{Kupfer2016}.
It was suggested to be a degenerated He dwarf \citep{RUIZ2001}, or a crystallized Ne core \citep{Kupfer2016}.
However, other authors \citep{Cunha2018, Wong2018} have argued that it could be a planet.
Websites listing this object as a planet are EU, EXOKyoto, and PHLUPR.
J1433 b is a companion of the white dwarf SDSS J143317.78+101123.3 (WD J1433)
\citep{Littlefair2006, Santisteban2016}. It has an orbital period of
$ \sim 4666\rm \,s $, and an orbital radius of $\sim 4.0\times10^{10} \rm \,cm $.
Its mass is $ 57\pm0.7 M_{\rm\,jup} $. It was argued to be a planet by several
research groups \citep{Cunha2018, Wong2018}. Websites listing this object as a planet
are EU, EXOKyoto, and PHLUPR. However, note that a few other authors suggested that
this object may be an irradiated brown dwarf \citep{Santisteban2016}.
WD 0137-349 b is a companion of the white dwarf 0137-349
\citep{Maxted2006, Burleigh2006, Littlefair2014, Casewell2015, Longstaff2017}.
It has a mass of $ 56\pm6 M_{\rm\,jup} $, with an orbital period of $ \sim 6863\rm \,s $,
and an orbital radius of $\sim 4.1\times10^{10} \rm \,cm $. This object is listed as
a planet in EU and EXOKyoto databases. But again note that it was suggested to
be an irradiated brown dwarf by several authors \citep{Maxted2006, Burleigh2006}.
SDSS J1411+2009 b is a companion of the white dwarf SDSS J141126.20+200911.1 (WD J1411).
It has a mass of $ 50\pm2.0 M_{\rm\,jup}$, with an orbital period of $ \sim 7379\rm \,s $ and
an orbital radius of $ \sim 4.7\times10^{10} \rm \,cm $ \citep{DRAKE2010,Beuermann2013,Littlefair2014}.
It is listed as a planet in EU and EXOKyoto databases, but several authors have also
suggested it as an irradiated brown dwarf \citep{Beuermann2013}.
Orbital parameters of the above five close-in objects around white dwarfs satisfy the
criteria of $P_{\rm orb}<0.1 $ day. Their masses are also within the planetary mass range.
However, the planetary nature of these objects is still debatable. Especially,
they may actually be brown dwarfs. Here, we give some more discussion on this point.
In fact, there is no clear boundary between the masses of planets and brown dwarfs.
It is well known that the mass of brown dwarfs can range from the
Deuterium-burning limit ($ 0.013M_\odot (\sim 13 M_{\rm jup})$) to the
Hydrogen-burning limit ($ 0.072M_\odot (\sim 75 M_{\rm jup})$).
The property of a close-in companion is usually seriously affected by the
irradiation from its host since it is generally tidally
locked \citep{Demory2011, Laughlin2011, Burgasser2019}. This effect is
quite similar for both brown dwarfs and giant planets, thus could not be
easily used to discriminate them \citep{Faherty2013}.
However, we notice that three of the five objects have extremely small orbital periods.
They are GP Com b, V396 Hya b, and J1433 b, and their orbital periods are 2765 s,
3888 s, and 4666 s. As a result, their minimal possible mean density is 187.5 $\rm g/cm^3$,
94.8 $\rm g/cm^3$, and 65.8 $\rm g/cm^3$, respectively. The density is so high that they can
hardly be normal brown dwarfs. We argue that at least these three objects are very good
candidates for SQM planets.
\section{GW from SQM planetary systems} \label{sec:GW}
According to general relativity, a binary system continuously emits GW signals due to
the orbital motion of the companion. It will lead to an evolution of the orbit,
and make the GW emission power increase gradually.
At some stage of this gradual process, GW detectors such as LISA
(Laser Interferometer Space Antenna) will be able to detect
the GW signals from these systems \citep{Cunha2018, Wong2018}.
For close-in companions orbiting around their hosts, GW emission may be a powerful tool
to probe their nature. In this section, we first calculate the persistent GW emissions
from the candidate SQM systems in our sample and evaluate the possibility of being detected by
the LISA observatory. Then, we also calculate the
strength of the catastrophic GW bursts when the candidate SQM systems
finally merge due to continuous GW emissions, and compare the results with relevant
GW detectors.
\subsection{Persistent GWs from SQM planet systems}
\begin{figure}
\plotone{Fig2.pdf}
\caption{Power of gravitational wave emission versus orbital radius for the planetary systems
of our sample. The red stars are pulsar planets and the blue points are WD planets
with $ P_{\rm orb}<0.1 $ day. The vertical green dashed line markes the critical
tidal disruption radius of $ a=5.6\times10^{10}\rm\,cm $ for normal matter planets. \label{fig:fig3}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\plotone{Fig3.pdf}
\caption{GW strain amplitude versus frequency for the planetary systems of our sample.
The blue points represent WD planets with $ P_{\rm orb}<0.1 $
day and the red stars represent pulsar planets.
The black dashed line represents the sensitivity curve of LISA with an one year integration time.
For a similar plot, please also see \citet{Cunha2018} and \citet{Wong2018}. \label{fig:fig4}}
\end{figure}
For all the planetary systems of our sample, we have calculated their persistent
GW luminosity and GW strain amplitude. The results are presented in Table~\ref{tab:table4}.
In Figure~\ref{fig:fig3}, we plot the GW luminosity versus the orbital radius
for them. The red stars and blue points represent pulsar planets and WD planets,
respectively. Generally speaking, the orbital radius is a key parameter determining
the GW power. For those systems with the orbital radius being less than the critical
tidal disruption radius of $5.6\times10^{10}\rm\,cm$, the GW power is much stronger.
Thus there is a hope that GW emission from these systems could be detected by our GW
detectors.
In Figure~\ref{fig:fig4}, we plot the GW strain amplitude against GW frequency
for the planetary systems of our sample. In this plot, the red stars represent pulsar planets
and the blue points represent WD planets. The black line is the one-year integration
sensitivity curve of LISA \footnote{\url{http://www.srl.caltech.edu/~shane/sensitivity/index.html}}.
Figure~\ref{fig:fig4} shows clearly that three ultra-short period systems
(GP Com b, V396 Hya b and J1433 b) are lying above the sensitivity curve of LISA, thus
may hopefully be detected by this powerful GW observatory. The two very close-in systems
containing XTE J1807-294 b and XTE J1751-305 b are below the sensitivity curve, since their distances
are still too large. If these two systems were located within a distance of $ 400\rm\,pc $,
then they would be detectable to LISA.
For close-in planetary systems, GW observation can provide key information
on the planet mass, the orbital period, and the orbital radius. We argue that
GW observation would be a unique tool to search for SQM candidates. In the future,
if a very close-in planet-like object (with the mass being in the planet range, and the
orbital period significantly less than 6100 s) could be found orbiting around a stellar
object through GW observations, then it must be an SQM planetary system.
\begin{deluxetable}{lccc}
\tablecaption{GW Luminosity, strain amplitude, and coalescence time scale for the
planetary systems of our sample. \label{tab:table4}}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Planet name} & \colhead{$ L_{\rm GW} $} & \colhead{$\rm h $} & \colhead{$ t_{\rm co} $}\\
\colhead{} & \colhead{($ \rm egr\,s^{-1} $)} & \colhead{} & \colhead{(yr)}
}
\startdata
XTE J1807-294 b & $ 3.8\times10^{30} $ & $ 2.2\times10^{-24} $ & $ 1.9\times10^{8} $ \\
XTE J1751-305 b & $ 1.3\times10^{31} $ & $ 2.1\times10^{-24} $ & $ 1.1\times10^{8} $ \\
PSR 0636 b & $ 5.7\times10^{28} $ & $ 1.7\times10^{-23} $ & $ 3.7\times10^{9} $ \\
PSR J1807-2459A b & $ 6.7\times10^{28} $ & $ 1.5\times10^{-24} $ & $ 3.5\times10^{9} $ \\
PSR 1719-14 b & $ 3.2\times10^{26} $ & $ 3.0\times10^{-25} $ & $ 6.6\times10^{10} $ \\
PSR J2051-0827 b & $ 1.9\times10^{29} $ & $ 7.5\times10^{-24} $ & $ 3.0\times10^{9} $ \\
PSR J1544+4937 b & $ 5.2\times10^{28} $ & $ 1.7\times10^{-24} $ & $ 6.9\times10^{9} $ \\
PSR J2241-5236 b & $ 9.1\times10^{27} $ & $ 6.2\times10^{-24} $ & $ 2.0\times10^{10} $ \\
PSR J1446-4701 b & $ 4.1\times10^{27} $ & $ 2.6\times10^{-24} $ & $ 5.7\times10^{10} $ \\
PSR J2322-2650 b & $ 3.0\times10^{24} $ & $ 5.4\times10^{-25} $ & $ 2.4\times10^{12} $ \\
PSR B1957+20 b & $ 1.3\times10^{27} $ & $ 2.0\times10^{-24} $ & $ 1.4\times10^{11} $ \\
PSR J1502-6752 b & $ 3.5\times10^{24} $ & $ 2.5\times10^{-25} $ & $ 1.7\times10^{13} $ \\
PSR 1257 12 b & $ 1.1\times10^{10} $ & $ 8.4\times10^{-31} $ & $ 3.1\times10^{21} $ \\
PSR 1257 12 c & $ 1.5\times10^{13} $ & $ 8.2\times10^{-29} $ & $ 2.2\times10^{20} $ \\
PSR 1257 12 d & $ 3.6\times10^{12} $ & $ 5.8\times10^{-29} $ & $ 6.7\times10^{20} $ \\
PSR B0943+10 b & $ 2.7\times10^{14} $ & $ 3.0\times10^{-27} $ & $ 5.8\times10^{20} $ \\
PSR B0943+10 c & $ 2.3\times10^{13} $ & $ 1.7\times10^{-27} $ & $ 4.0\times10^{21} $ \\
PSR B0329+54 b & $ 1.8\times10^{5} $ & $ 9.7\times10^{-31} $ & $ 3.1\times10^{26} $ \\
PSR B1620-26(AB) b & $ 4.0\times10^{8} $ & $ 4.3\times10^{-29} $ & $ 2.4\times10^{25} $ \\
GP Com b & $ 9.9\times10^{29} $ & $ 9.5\times10^{-23} $ & $ 4.2\times10^{8} $ \\
V396 Hya b & $ 1.5\times10^{29} $ & $ 5.1\times10^{-23} $ & $ 1.5\times10^{9} $ \\
J1433 b & $ 2.7\times10^{30} $ & $ 8.7\times10^{-23} $ & $ 4.3\times10^{8} $ \\
WD 0137-349 b & $ 2.6\times10^{29} $ & $ 8.9\times10^{-23} $ & $ 2.0\times10^{9} $ \\
SDSS J1411+2009 b & $ 2.6\times10^{29} $ & $ 5.4\times10^{-23} $ & $ 2.2\times10^{9} $ \\
\enddata
\end{deluxetable}
\subsection{GW bursts from merging SQM planet systems}
Due to the self-gravity and strong self-bound force of strange quark matter,
an SQM planet can get very close to its host without being tidally disrupted by tidal force.
During the spiral-in process, the separation between the two objects decreases with
time until they merge with each other. At the final merging stage,
the system will give birth to a strong GW burst \citep{Geng2015}. In Figure~\ref{fig:fig5},
we have plot the strain spectral amplitudes of the GW bursts that will be produced
by several candidate SQM planetary systems. Note that these systems are at different
distances, and the planets have different masses. For each system, we have used the
actually observed parameters in the calculation. We see that the GW amplitudes are all well
above the sensitivity curves of both the advanced LIGO and the Einstein Telescope, thus
can potentially be detected by these instruments.
\begin{figure}
\plotone{Fig4.pdf}
\caption{Strain spectral amplitude of the GW bursts for
coalescing SS and SQM planet systems. The sensitivity curves of
the advanced LIGO and Einstein Telescope are also plotted. \label{fig:fig5}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\plotone{Fig5.pdf}
\caption{Coalescence timescale versus the initial orbital period for the candidate SQM
planetary systems in our sample. Red stars correspond to pulsar planets and blue
points correspond to white dwarf planets. The three straight lines illustrate the
coalescence timescale for three different planet masses, with the host mass being
set as $1.4 M_\odot$. \label{fig:fig6}}
\end{figure}
The energy loss rate due to GW emission is generally small as compared with the
total kinetic energy of the planet. It may take a long time for a planetary system
to finally merge. The merger timescale is mainly determined by the orbital radius
and the planet mass. In Table~\ref{tab:table4}, we have also calculated the coalescence
timescales of the planetary systems in our sample. The results are illustrated in
Figure~\ref{fig:fig6}. While most systems essentially will not be able to merge
even in the lifetime of the Universe, there are about 10 close-in systems that
would interestingly merge on a timescale of $10^8$ --- $10^9$ yr.
For example, the merger timescale is $ \sim10^{8} $yr for the planetary systems
of XTE J1807-294, XTE J1751-305, GP Com b, and J1433 b.
Additionally, other factors may be involved and may lead to a much rapid merging
process. For example, a pulsar may have multiple planets and the complicate
interaction between these companions may speedup the merging processes of some
objects \citep{Huang2014}.
In short, merging of an SQM planet with its host pulsar can essentially happen on an
expectable timescale in our Galaxy. GW emission from these events can be well detected
by our current and future detectors.
We suggest that searching for GW signals from merging planetary systems could be
set as an important goal for advanced LIGO and Einstein Telescope. It deserves extensive
efforts since it can provide a unique test for the SQM hypothesis.
\section{Conclusions} \label{sec:conclusion}
In this study, we have tried to search for SQM planet candidates among extra-solar planetary systems.
The criteria for SQM planets is set as $a <5.6\times10^{10} \rm \, cm $ and/or $P_{\rm orb} < \rm 6100\, s $.
A planet lying closer than this limit with respect to its host will need to have a density significantly
larger than 30~g~cm$^{-3}$ to resist the tidal force, thus is unlikely a normal matter planet,
but should be an SQM object. As a result, we find that 11 objects are good candidates for SQM planets,
including 3 gold sample objects, 1 silver sample object, 2 cooper sample objects, and 5 white dwarf
companions. The three gold sample objects are PSR 0636 b, PSR J1807-2459A b, and PSR J1719-14 b. Their
masses are all less than 10 $M_{jup}$ and their possibility of being a planetary object is very high.
Among them, although PSR 1719-14 b has a period (7837 s) slightly larger than 6100 s, we still list it
as a good candidate since it is essentially in a very close-in orbit. The silver sample object
(PSR J2051-0827 b), the two cooper sample objects (XTE J1807-294 b, XTE J1751-305b), and the five
white dwarf companions (GP Com b, V396 Hya b, J1433 b, WD 0137-349 b, SDSS J1411+2009 b) are all interesting
candidates, but whether they are planetary objects or white dwarfs is still highly uncertain and
need further clarification.
We have also calculated the GW emissions from these systems. It is found that persistent GW emissions
from at least three of them are detectable to LIGO even on a one-year integration. More encouragingly,
GW bursts produced at the final merging stage by these candidate SQM planets are well above the
sensitivity curves of advanced LIGO and Einstein Telescope. GW observations thus could
be a promising strategy for testing the SQM hypothesis.
It is striking to note that our SQM candidates are mainly found around millisecond pulsars.
It leads to the interesting conjecture that there might be some intrinsic connection between SQM objects and
low mass X-ray binaries (LMXBs).
Indeed, some authors \citep{Li1995,Xu2002,Xu1998,Poutanen2003,Zhu2013} have tried to identify
SSs in LMXBs. For example, the famous LMXBs of Her X-1 \citep{Li1995} and
SAX J1808.4-3658 have been argued as SS candidates \citep{Li1999,Poutanen2003,Gangopadhyay2012}.
\citet{Poutanen2003} and \citet{Gangopadhyay2012} also noticed the similarity of
XTE J1807-294 and XTE J1751-305 with respect to SAX J1808.4-3658 when they argued that
SAX J1808.4-3658 should be a strange star.
Furthermore, \citet{Gangopadhyay2013} listed 12 stars in binary systems as SSs, again
including Her X-1 and SAX 1808.4-3658.
Recently, \citet{Chen2016} pointed out that the binary systems of SAX 1808.4-3658 and PSR J1719-1438
may have similar evolutionary history.
In fact, the link between strange stars and LXMBs is not difficult to understand theoretically.
Continuous accretion and significant mass transfer widely exists in LXMBs. Increase of the mass
can easily lead to an ultra-high density at the center of the pulsar, leading to a phase transition
and turn the pulsar into a strange quark star even it is originally born as a neutron star.
Pulsars in these close-in binary systems generally show no eclipsing in high-frequency range.
There are two possible reasons for this. First, the inclination angle of the orbit should be
relatively large. Second, the density of the companion may be high and its radius is correspondingly
very small. This will further support the SQM nature of the object. In several cases, possible eclipse
is reported to be observed at low-frequency range. The small amount of eclipsing plasma
in these cases may come from the ablation of the outer crust of the SQM planet.
\section{Acknowledgments}
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant
Nos. 11873030, 11475085, 11535005, 11690030, and 11703041), by Nation Major State Basic Research and
Development of China (2016YFE0129300), and by the Strategic Priority Research Program of
the Chinese Academy of Sciences (``multi-waveband Gravitational Wave Universe'', Grant
No. XDB23040000).
\nocite{*}
\bibliographystyle{aasjournal
|
\section{Introduction}
With the expanding amount of text data generated on different social media platforms, current filters are insufficient to prevent the spread of hate speech. Most internet users involved in a study conducted by the Pew Research Center report having been subjected to offensive name calling online or witnessed someone being physically threatened or harassed online.\footnote{http://www.pewinternet.org/2017/07/11/online-harassment-2017/} Additionally, Amnesty International within Element AI have lately reported that many women politicians and journalists are assaulted every 30 seconds on Twitter.\footnote{https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/women-abused-twitter-every-30-seconds-new-study} This is despite the Twitter policy condemning the promotion of violence against people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or serious disease.\footnote{https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/hateful-conduct-policy}
Hate speech may not represent the general opinion, yet it promotes the dehumanization of people who are typically from minority groups ~\cite{soral2017,Martin2013} and can incite hate crime \cite{RossRCCKW17}.
Moreover, although people of various linguistic backgrounds are exposed to hate speech~\cite{W17-3012,RossRCCKW17}, English is still at the center of existing work on toxic language analysis.
Recently, some research studies have been conducted on languages such as German~\cite{Kra2017b}, Arabic~\cite{DBLP:conf/asunam/AlbadiKM18}, and Italian~\cite{DBLP:conf/lrec/SanguinettiPBPS18}.
However, such studies usually use monolingual corpora and do not contrast, or examine the correlations between online hate speech in different languages. On the other hand, tasks involving more than one language such as the hatEval task\footnote{https://competitions.codalab.org/competitions/19935}, which covers English and Spanish, include only separate classification tasks, namely (a) women and immigrants as target groups, (b) individual or generic hate and, (c) aggressive or non-aggressive hate speech.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\subfigure[English.]{\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{english_example_new.png} \label{fig:en-annotate-example}
}
\subfigure[French.]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{french_example_new.png} \label{fig:fr-annotate-example}
}
\subfigure[Arabic.]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{arabic_example_new.png} \label{fig:ar-annotate-example}
}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\caption{Annotation examples in our dataset.}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\label{fig:annotation-example}
\end{figure*}
Treating hate speech classification as a binary task may not be enough to inspect the motivation and the behavior of the users promoting it and, how people would react to it.
For instance, the hateful tweets presented in Figure~\ref{fig:annotation-example} show toxicity directed towards different targets, with or without using slurs, and generating several types of reactions.
We believe that, in order to balance between truth and subjectivity, there are at least five important aspects in hate speech analysis. Hence, our annotations indicate (a) whether the text is direct or indirect; (b) if it is offensive, disrespectful, hateful, fearful out of ignorance, abusive, or normal; (c) the attribute based on which it discriminates against an individual or a group of people; (d) the name of this group; and (e) how the annotators feel about its content within a range of negative to neutral sentiments.
To the best of our knowledge there are no other hate speech datasets that attempt to capture fear out of ignorance in hateful tweets or examine how people react to hate speech. We claim that our multi-aspect annotation schema would provide a valuable insight into several linguistic and cultural differences and bias in hate speech.
We use Amazon Mechanical Turk to label around 13,000 potentially derogatory tweets in English, French, and Arabic based on the above mentioned aspects and, regard each aspect as a prediction task.
Since in natural language processing, there is a peculiar interest in multitask learning, where different tasks can be used to help each other~\cite{DBLP:journals/jmlr/CollobertWBKKK11,ruder2017sluice,Joint_Multitask_D17-1206}, we use a unified model to handle the annotated data in all three languages and five tasks. We adopt~\cite{ruder2017sluice} as a learning algorithm adapted to loosely related tasks such as our five annotated aspects and, use the Babylon cross-lingual embeddings~\cite{babylon_Smith17} to align the three languages.
We compare the multilingual multitask learning settings with monolingual multitask, multilingual single-task, and monolingual single-task learning settings respectively. Then, we report the performance results of the different settings and discuss how each task affects the remaining ones.
We release our dataset and code to the community to extend research work on multilingual hate speech detection and classification.\footnote{our code is available on: \url{https://github.com/HKUST-KnowComp/MLMA_hate_speech} }
\begin{table*}[t]
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c|r}
\toprule
Dataset & \# Tweets & Labels & Annotators/Tweet \\ \midrule
\citet{Chatzakou:2017:MBD:3091478.3091487} & 9,484 &aggressive, bullying, spam, normal & 5 \\\hline
\citet{DBLP:conf/naacl/WaseemH16} & 16, 914 & racist, sexist, normal & 1 \\ \hline
\citet{DavidsonWMW17} & 24, 802 & hateful, offensive (but not hateful), neither & 3 or more \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{\citet{Golbeck2017}} & \multirow{2}{*}{35,000} & the worst, threats, hate speech, direct & \multirow{2}{*}{2 to 3} \\ & & harassment, potentially offensive, non-harassment & \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{\citet{FountaDCLBSVSK18}} & \multirow{2}{*}{80, 000} & offensive, abusive, hateful speech, & \multirow{2}{*}{5 to 20} \\ & & aggressive, cyberbullying, spam, normal & \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{\citet{hatelingo}} & \multirow{2}{*}{28,608} & directed, generalized + target = archaic, class, disability, & \multirow{2}{*}{3} \\ & & ethnicity, gender, nationality, religion, sexual orientation & \\ \midrule
Ours & 13,000 & Labels for five different aspects & 5
\\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Comparative table of some of the available hate speech and abusive language corpora in terms of labels and sizes.}
\label{comparative_tablel}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\end{table*}
\section{Related Work}
There is little consensus on the difference between profanity and hate speech and, how to define the latter \cite{W17-1101}. As shown in Figure~\ref{fig:en_hate_speech_example}, slurs are not an unequivocal indicator of hate speech and can be part of a non-aggressive conversation, while some of the most offensive comments may come in the form of subtle metaphors or sarcasm~\cite{MalmasiZ18}. Consequently, there is no existing human annotated vocabulary that explicitly reveals the presence of hate speech, which makes the available hate speech corpora sparse and noisy \cite{Nobata:2016:ALD:2872427.2883062}.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{en_twitter_3_examples.png}
\caption{Three tweets in which (1) the first one accuses immigrants of harming society without using any direct insult; (2) the second insults a Hispanic person using a slur; and (3) the third one uses slurs to give a personal account. This shows that profanity is not a clear indicator of the presence of hate speech.}
\label{fig:en_hate_speech_example}
\end{figure}
Given the subjectivity and the complexity of such data, annotation schemes have rarely been made fine-grained. Table~\ref{comparative_tablel} compares different labelsets that exist in the literature. For instance, ~\citet{DBLP:conf/naacl/WaseemH16} use racist, sexist, and normal as labels; ~\citet{DavidsonWMW17} label their data as hateful, offensive (but not hateful), and neither, while~\citet{hatelingo} present an English dataset that records the target category based on which hate speech discriminates against people, such as ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation and ask human annotators to classify the tweets as hate and non hate. \citet{FountaDCLBSVSK18} label their data as offensive, abusive, hateful, aggressive, cyberbullying, spam, and normal. On the other hand, \citet{D18-1391} have chosen to detect ideologies of hate speech counting 40 different hate ideologies among 13 extremist hate groups.
The detection of hate speech targets is yet another challenging aspect of the annotation. \citet{park2018_genderbias} report the bias that exists in the current datasets towards identity words, such as \textit{women}, which may later cause false predictions. They propose to debias gender identity word embeddings with additional data for training and tuning their binary classifier. We address this false positive bias problem and the common ambiguity of target detection by asking the annotators to label target attributes such as origin, gender, or religious affiliation within 16 named target groups such as refugees, or immigrants.
Furthermore,~\citet{KLUBICKA18.2} have reproduced the experiment of~\citet{DBLP:conf/naacl/WaseemH16} in order to study how hate speech affects the popularity of a tweet, but discovered that some tweets have been deleted. For replication purposes, we provide the community with anonymized\footnote{In conformity with Twitter terms and conditions.} tweet texts rather than IDs.
Non-English hate speech datasets include Italian, German, Dutch, and Arabic corpora.~\citet{DBLP:conf/lrec/SanguinettiPBPS18}~present a dataset of Italian tweets, in which the annotations capture the degree of intensity of offensive and aggressive tweets, in addition to whether the tweets are ironic and contain stereotypes or not. \citet{RossRCCKW17}~have collected more than 500 German tweets against refugees, and annotated them as hateful and not hateful. \citet{DBLP:conf/ranlp/HeeLVMDPDH15}~detect bullies and victims among youngsters in Dutch comments on AskFM, and classify cyberbullying comments as insults or threats. Moreover, \citet{DBLP:conf/asunam/AlbadiKM18}~provide a corpus of Arabic sectarian speech.
Another predominant phenomenon in hate speech corpora is code switching. \citet{hindi_english_hatespeech2018} present a dataset of code mixed Hindi-English tweets, while \citet{galery2018}~report the presence of Hindi tokens in English data and use multilingual word embeddings to deal with this issue when detecting toxicity. Similarly, we use such embeddings to take advantage of the multilinguality and comparability of our corpora during the classification.
Our dataset is the first trilingual dataset comprising English, French, and Arabic tweets that encompasses various targets and hostility types. Additionally, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first work that examines how annotators react to hate speech comments.
To fully exploit the collected annotations, we tested multitask learning on our dataset. Multitask learning~\cite{DBLP:journals/jmlr/CollobertWBKKK11} allows neural networks to share parameters with one another and, thus, learn from related tasks. It has been used in different NLP tasks such as parsing \cite{Joint_Multitask_D17-1206}, dependency parsing \cite{peng2017mtl_dependency}, neural machine translation \cite{mtl_mt2016}, sentiment analysis \cite{augenstein2018mtl}, and other tasks. Multitask learning architectures tackle challenges that include sharing the label space and the question of private and shared space for loosely related tasks \cite{ruder2017sluice}, for which techniques may involve a massive space of potential parameter sharing architectures.
\section{Dataset}
In this section, we present our data collection methodology and annotation process.
\subsection{Data Collection}
Considering the cultural differences and commonly debated topics in the main geographic regions where English, French, and Arabic are spoken, searching for equivalent terms in the three languages led to different results at first. Therefore, after looking for 1,000 tweets per 15 more or less equivalent phrases in the three languages, we revised our search words three times by questioning the results, adding phrases, and taking off unlikely ones in each of the languages.
In fact, we started our data collection by searching for common slurs and demeaning expressions such as \textit{``go back to where you come from''}. Then, we observed that discussions about controversial topics, such as \textit{feminism} in general, \textit{illegal immigrants} in English, \textit{Islamo-gauchisme} (``Islamic leftism") in French, or \textit{Iran} in Arabic were more likely to provoke disputes, comments filled with toxicity and thus, notable insult patterns that we looked for in subsequent search rounds.
\subsection{Linguistic Challenges}
All of the annotated tweets include original tweets only, whose content has been processed by (1) deleting unarguably detectable spam tweets, (2) removing unreadable characters and emojis, and (3) masking the names of mentioned users using \textit{@user} and potentially enclosed URLs using \textit{@url}. As a result, annotators had to face the lack of context generated by this normalization process.
Furthermore, we perceived code-switching in English where Hindi, Spanish, and French tokens appear in the tweets. Some French tweets also contain Romanized dialectal Arabic tokens generated by, most likely, bilingual North African Twitter users. Hence, although we eliminated most of these tweets in order to avoid misleading the annotators, the possibly remaining ones still added noise to the data.
One more challenge that the annotators and ourselves had to tackle, consisted of Arabic diglossia and switching between different Arabic dialects and Modern Standard Arabic (MSA). While MSA represents the standardized and literary variety of Arabic, there are several Arabic dialects spoken in North Africa and the Middle East in use on Twitter. Therefore, we searched for derogatory terms adapted to different circumstances, and acquired an Arabic corpus that combines tweets written in MSA and Arabic dialects. For instance, the tweet shown in Figure~\ref{fig:annotation-example} contains a dialectal slur that means ``maiden.''
\subsection{Annotation Process}
We rely on the general public opinion and common linguistic knowledge to assess how people view and react to hate speech.\footnote{We have also provided the annotators with the Urban Dictionary definitions of some slang English words they may not be aware of.} Given the subjectivity and difficulty of the task, we reminded the annotators not to let their personal opinions about the topics being discussed in the tweets influence their annotation decisions.
Our annotation guidelines explained the fact that offensive comments and hate do not necessarily come in the form of profanity. Since different degrees of discrimination work on the dehumanization of individuals or groups of people in distinct ways, we chose not to annotate the tweets within two or three classes. For instance, a sexist comment can be disrespectful, hateful, or offensive towards women. Our initial labelset was established in conformity with the prevalent anti-social behaviors people tend to deal with. We also chose to address the problem of false positives caused by the misleading use of identity words by asking the annotators to label both the target attributes and groups.
\paragraph{Avoiding scams}
To prevent scams, we also prepared three annotation guideline forms and three aligned labelsets written in English, French, and Modern Standard Arabic with respect to the language of the tweets to be annotated.
We requested native speakers to annotate the data and chose annotators with good reputation scores (more than 0.90). We informed the annotator in the guidelines, that in case of noticeable patterns of random labeling on a substantial number of tweets, their work will be rejected and we may have to block them. Since the rejection affects the reputation of the annotators and their chances to get new tasks on Amazon Mechanical Turk, well-reputed annotators are usually reliable. We have divided our corpora into smaller batches on Amazon Mechanical Turk in order to facilitate the analysis of the annotations of the workers and, fairly identify any incoherence patterns possibly caused by the use of an automatic translation system on the tweets, or the repetition of the same annotation schema. If we reject the work of a scam, we notify them, then reassign the tasks to other annotators.
\subsection{Pilot Dataset}
We initially put samples of 100 tweets in each of the three languages on Amazon Mechanical Turk. We showed the annotators the tweet along with lists of labels describing (a) whether it is direct or indirect hate speech; (b) if the tweet is dangerous, offensive, hateful, disrespectful, confident or supported by some URL, fearful out of ignorance, or other; (c) the target attribute based on which it discriminates against people, specifically, race, ethnicity, nationality, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, religious affiliation, disability, and other (``other'' could refer to political ideologies or social classes.); (d) the name of its target group, and (e) whether the annotators feel anger, sadness, fear or nothing about the tweets.
Each tweet has been labeled by three annotators. We have provided them with additional text fields to fill in with labels or adjectives that would (1) better describe the tweet, (2) describe how they feel about it more accurately, and (3) name the group of people the tweet shows bias against. We kept the most commonly used labels from our initial labelset, took off some of the initial class names and added frequently introduced labels, especially the emotions of the annotators when reading the tweets and the names of the target groups. For instance, after this step, we have ended up merging \textit{race, ethnicity, nationality} into one label \textit{origin} given common confusions we noticed and; added \textit{disgust} and \textit{shock} to the emotion labelset; and introduced \textit{socialists} as a target group label since many annotators have suggested these labels.
\subsection{Final Dataset}
The final dataset is composed of a pilot corpus of 100 tweets per language, and comparable corpora of 5,647 English tweets, 4,014 French tweets, and 3,353 Arabic tweets. Each of the annotated aspects represents a classification task of its own, that could either be evaluated independently, or, as intended in this paper, tested on how it impacts other tasks. The different labels are designed to facilitate the study of the correlations between the explicitness of the tweet, the type of hostility it conveys, its target attribute, the group it dehumanizes, how different people react to it, and the performance of multitask learning on the five tasks.
We assigned each tweet to five annotators, then applied majority voting to each of the labeling tasks. Given the numbers of annotators and labels in each annotation sub-task, we allowed multilabel annotations in the most subjective classification tasks, namely the hostility type and the annotator's sentiment labels, in order to keep the right human-like approximations. If there are two annotators agreeing on two labels respectively, we add both labels to the annotation.
The average Krippendorff scores for inter-annotator agreement (IAA) are 0.153, 0.244, and 0.202 for English, French, and Arabic respectively, which are comparable to existing complex annotations~\cite{DBLP:conf/lrec/SanguinettiPBPS18} given the nature of the labeling tasks and the number of labels.
We present the labelset the annotators refer to, and statistics of our annotated data in the following.
\begin{table}[t!]
\centering
{\small
\begin{tabular}{l|l|l|l|l}
\toprule
Attribute & Label & En & Fr & Ar \\ \midrule
\multirow{2}{*}{Directness} & Direct & 530 & 2,198 & 1,684 \\
& Indirect & 4,456 & 997 & 754 \\ \midrule
\multirow{6}{*}{Hostility} & Abusive & 671 & 1,056 & 610 \\
& Hateful & 1,278 & 399 & 755 \\
& Offensive & 4,020 & 1,690 & 1,151 \\
& Disrespectful & 782 & 396 & 615 \\
& Fearful & 562 & 388 & 41 \\
& Normal & 1,359 & 1,124 & 1,197 \\ \midrule
\multirow{6}{*}{Target} & Origin & 2,448 & 2,266 & 877 \\
& Gender & 638 & 27 & 548 \\
& Sexual Orientation & 514 & 12 & 0 \\
& Religion & 68 & 146 & 145 \\
& Disability & 1,089 & 177 & 1 \\
& Other & 890 & 1,386 & 1,782 \\ \midrule
\multirow{5}{*}{Group} & Individual & 497 & 918 & 915 \\
& Other & 1,590 & 1,085 & 1,470 \\
& Women & 878 & 62 & 722 \\
& Special needs & 1,571 & 174 & 2 \\
& African descent & 86 & 311 & 51 \\ \midrule
\multirow{7}{*}{Annotator} & Disgust & 3,469 & 602 & 778 \\
& Shock & 2,151 & 1,179 & 917 \\
& Anger & 2,955 & 531 & 356 \\
& Sadness & 2,775 & 1,457 & 388 \\
& Fear & 1,304 & 378 & 35 \\
& Confusion & 1,747 & 446 & 115 \\
& Indifference & 2,878 & 2,035 & 1,825 \\ \midrule
\multicolumn{2}{l|}{Total number of tweets} & 5,647 & 4,014 & 3,353 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{The label distributions of each task. The counts of direct and indirect hate speech include all tweets except those that are single labeled as ``normal". Tweet and annotator's sentiment (Annotator) are multilabel classification tasks, while target attribute (Target) and target group (Group) are not.}
\label{tab:statistics_table}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\end{table}
\paragraph{Directness label}
Annotators determine the explicitness of the tweet by labeling it as \textit{direct} or \textit{indirect} speech. This should be based on whether the target is explicitly named, or less easily discernible, especially if the tweet contains humor, metaphor, or figurative speech. Table~\ref{tab:statistics_table} shows that even when partly using equivalent keywords to search for candidate tweets, there are still significant differences in the resulting data.
\paragraph{Hostility type}
To identify the hostility type of the tweet, we stick to the following conventions: (1) if the tweet sounds dangerous, it should be labeled as \textit{abusive}; (2) according to the degree to which it spreads hate and the tone its author uses, it can be \textit{hateful}, \textit{offensive} or \textit{disrespectful}; (3) if the tweet expresses or spreads fear out of ignorance against a group of individuals, it should be labeled as \textit{fearful}; (4) otherwise it should be annotated as \textit{normal}. We define this task to be multilabel. Table~\ref{tab:statistics_table} shows that hostility types are relatively consistent across different languages and offensive is the most frequent label.
\paragraph{Target attribute}
After annotating the pilot dataset, we noticed common misconceptions regarding race, ethnicity, and nationality, therefore we merged these attributes into one label \textit{origin}. Then, we asked the annotators to determine whether the tweet insults or discriminates against people based on their (1) \textit{origin}, (2) \textit{religious affiliation}, (3) \textit{gender}, (4) \textit{sexual orientation}, (5) \textit{special needs} or (6) \textit{other}. Table~\ref{tab:statistics_table} shows there are fewer tweets targeting disability in Arabic compared to English and French and no tweets insulting people based on their sexual orientation which may be due to the fact that the labels of gender, gender identity, and sexual orientation use almost the same wording. On the other hand, French contains a small number of tweets targeting people based on their \textit{gender} in comparison to English and Arabic. We have observed significant differences in terms of target attributes in the three languages. More data may help us examine the problems affecting targets of different linguistic backgrounds.
\paragraph{Target group}
We determined 16 common target groups tagged by the annotators after the first annotation step. The annotators had to decide on whether the tweet is aimed at \textit{women, people of African descent, Hispanics, gay people, Asians, Arabs, immigrants in general, refugees}; people of different religious affiliations such as \textit{Hindu, Christian, Jewish people, and Muslims}; or from political ideologies \textit{socialists, and others}. We also provided the annotators with a category to cover hate directed towards one \textit{individual}, which cannot be generalized.
In case the tweet targets more than one group of people, the annotators should choose the group which would be the most affected by it according to them.
Table~\ref{comparative_tablel} shows the counts of the five categories out of 16 that commonly occur in the three languages. In fact, most of the tweets target individuals or fall into the ``other'' category. In the latter case, they may target people with different political views such as liberals or conservatives in English and French, or specific ethnic groups such as Kurdish people in Arabic.
English tweets tend to have more tweets targeting people with special needs, due to common language-specific demeaning terms used in conversations where people insult one another. Arabic tweets contain more hateful comments towards women for the same reason. On the other hand, the French corpus contains more tweets that are offensive towards African people, due to hateful comments generated by debates about immigrants.
\paragraph{Sentiment of the annotator}
We claim that the choice of a suitable emotion representation model is key to this sub-task, given the subjective nature and social ground of the annotator's sentiment analysis. After collecting the annotation results of the pilot dataset regarding how people feel about the tweets, and observing the added categories, we adopted a range of sentiments that are in the negative and neutral scales of the hourglass of emotions introduced by~\citet{CambriaHourglassEmotions}. This model includes sentiments that are connected to objectively assessed natural language opinions, and excludes what is known as self-conscious or moral emotions such as shame and guilt. Our labels include \textit{shock}, \textit{sadness}, \textit{disgust}, \textit{anger}, \textit{fear}, \textit{confusion} in case of ambivalence, and \textit{indifference}. This is the second multilabel task of our model.
Table~\ref{tab:statistics_table} shows more tweets making the annotators feel disgusted and angry in English, while annotators show more indifference in both French and Arabic. A relatively more frequent label in both French and Arabic is shock, therefore reflecting what some of the annotators were feeling during the labeling process.
\section{Experiments}
We report and discuss the results of five classification tasks: (1) the directness of the speech, (2) the hostility type of the tweet, (3) the discriminating target attribute, (4) the target group, and (5) the annotator's sentiment.
\subsection{Models}
We compare both traditional baselines using bag-of-words (BOW) as features on Logistic regression (LR), and deep learning based methods.
For deep learning based models, we run bidirectional LSTM (biLSTM) models with one hidden layer on each of the classification tasks. Deeper BiLSTM models performed poorly due to the size of the tweets.
We chose to use Sluice networks~\cite{ruder2017sluice} since they are suitable for loosely related tasks such as the annotated aspects of our corpora.
We test different models, namely single task single language (STSL), single task multilingual (STML), and multitask multilingual models (MTML) on our dataset.
In multilingual settings, we tested Babylon multilingual word embeddings~\cite{babylon_Smith17} and MUSE~\cite{lample2017unsupervised} on the different tasks. We use Babylon embeddings since they appear to outperform MUSE on our data.
Sluice networks \cite{ruder2017sluice} learn the weights
of the neural networks sharing parameters (sluices) jointly with the rest of the model and share an embedding layer, Babylon embeddings in our case, that associates the elements of an input sequence.
We use a standard 1-layer BiLSTM partitioned into two subspaces, a shared subspace and a private one, forced to be orthogonal through a regularization penalty term in the loss function in order to enable the multitask network to learn both task-specific and shared representations.
The hidden layer has a dimension of 200, the learning rate is initially set to 0.1 with a learning rate decay, and we use the DyNet \cite{dynet} automatic minibatch function to speed-up the computation.
We initialize the cross-stitch unit to imbalanced, set the standard deviation of the Gaussian noise to 2, and use simple stochastic gradient descent (SGD) as the optimizer.
All compared methods use the same split as train:dev:test=8:1:1 and the reported results are based on the test set.
We use the dev set to tune the threshold for each binary classification problem in the multilabel classification settings of each task.
\begin{table*}[t!]
\centering
{\small
\begin{tabular}{l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l}
\toprule
\multirow{2}{*}{Attribute} & \multirow{2}{*}{Model} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Macro-F1} & \multicolumn{4}{|l}{Micro-F1} \\ \cline{3-10}
& & EN & FR & AR & Avg & EN & FR & AR & Avg \\ \midrule
\multirow{7}{*}{Directness}
& Majority & 0.50 & 0.11 & 0.50 & 0.47 & 0.79 & 0.41 & 0.54 & 0.58 \\
& LR & 0.52 & 0.50 & 0.53 & 0.52 & 0.79 & 0.50 & 0.56 & 0.62 \\
& STSL & \textbf{0.94} & \textbf{0.80} & \textbf{0.84} & \textbf{0.86} & \textbf{0.89} & \textbf{0.69} & \textbf{0.72} & \textbf{0.76} \\
& MTSL & \textbf{0.94} & 0.65 & 0.76 & 0.78 & \textbf{0.89} & 0.58 & 0.65 & 0.70 \\
& STML & \textbf{0.94} & 0.79 & 0.83 & 0.85 & 0.88 & 0.66 & \textbf{0.72} & 0.75 \\
& MTML & \textbf{0.94} & 0.78 & 0.74 & 0.82 & 0.88 & 0.66 & 0.65 & 0.73 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Full evaluation scores of the only binary classification task where the single task single language model consistently outperforms multilingual multitask models. }
\label{tab:directness_evaluation_table}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[t!]
\centering
{\small
\begin{tabular}{l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l}
\toprule
\multirow{2}{*}{Attribute} & \multirow{2}{*}{Model} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Macro-F1} & \multicolumn{4}{|l}{Micro-F1} \\ \cline{3-10}
& & EN & FR & AR & Avg & EN & FR & AR & Avg \\ \midrule
\multirow{7}{*}{Tweet}
& Majority & 0.24 & 0.19 & 0.20 & 0.21 & 0.41 & 0.27 & 0.27 & 0.32 \\
& LR & 0.14 & 0.20 & 0.25 & 0.20 & 0.54 & 0.56 & \textbf{0.48} & 0.53 \\
& STSL & 0.24 & 0.12 & 0.31 & 0.23 & 0.49 & 0.51 & 0.47 & 0.49 \\
& MTSL & 0.09 & 0.20 & 0.33 & 0.21 & \textbf{0.55} & \textbf{0.59} & 0.46 & \textbf{0.54} \\
& STML & 0.04 & 0.07 & \textbf{0.35} & 0.16 & 0.54 & 0.47 & 0.37 & 0.46 \\
& MTML &\textbf{0.30} &\textbf{0.28} &\textbf{0.35} &\textbf{0.31} &0.45 &0.48 &0.44 &0.46 \\ \midrule
\multirow{7}{*}{Target Attribute}
& Majority & 0.15 & 0.13 & 0.28 & 0.19 & 0.25 & 0.32 & 0.40 & 0.32 \\
& LR & 0.41 & 0.35 & 0.47 & 0.41 & 0.52 & 0.55 & 0.53 & 0.53 \\
& STSL & 0.42 & 0.18 & \textbf{0.63} & 0.41 & \textbf{0.68} & 0.71 & 0.50 & 0.63 \\
& MTSL & 0.41 & \textbf{0.43} & 0.41 & \textbf{0.42} & \textbf{0.68} & 0.67 & \textbf{0.56} & \textbf{0.64} \\
& STML & 0.39 & 0.09 & 0.24 & 0.24 & 0.67 & 0.62 & 0.53 & 0.61 \\
& MTML & \textbf{0.43} & 0.24 & 0.16 & 0.28 & 0.66 & \textbf{0.72} & 0.51 & 0.63 \\ \midrule
\multirow{7}{*}{Target Group}
& Majority & 0.07 & 0.06 & 0.08 & 0.07 & 0.18 & 0.14 & 0.35 & 0.22 \\
& LR & \textbf{0.18} & 0.33 & \textbf{0.40} & \textbf{0.30} & 0.34 & 0.40 & 0.62 & 0.46 \\
& STSL & 0.04 & 0.21 & 0.04 & 0.10 & 0.48 & \textbf{0.59} & 0.58 & 0.55 \\
& MTSL & 0.04 & 0.27 & 0.15 & 0.15 & \textbf{0.50} & 0.54 & 0.55 & 0.53 \\
& STML & 0.11 & \textbf{0.37} & 0.13 & 0.20 & 0.49 & 0.57 & \textbf{0.64} & \textbf{0.56} \\
& MTML & 0.06 & 0.19 & 0.10 & 0.11 & \textbf{0.50} & 0.54 & 0.56 & 0.53 \\ \midrule
\multirow{7}{*}{Annotator's Sentiment}
& Majority & 0.42 & 0.21 & 0.17 & 0.27 & 0.46 & 0.31 & 0.32 & 0.39 \\
& LR & 0.29 & 0.15 & 0.14 & 0.19 & 0.45 & 0.30 & 0.46 & 0.40 \\
& STSL & \textbf{0.57} & \textbf{0.30} & 0.12 & \textbf{0.33} & 0.57 & 0.39 & \textbf{0.48} & 0.48 \\
& MTSL & \textbf{0.57} & 0.17 & 0.17 & 0.30 & 0.57 & \textbf{0.50} & 0.45 & 0.51 \\
& STML & 0.47 & 0.22 & 0.13 & 0.27 & \textbf{0.59} & 0.49 & \textbf{0.48} & \textbf{0.52} \\
& MTML & 0.55 & 0.20 & \textbf{0.21} & 0.32 & 0.58 & 0.45 & 0.45 & 0.49 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Full evaluation of tasks where multilingual and multitask models outperform on average single task single language model on four different tasks.}
\label{tab:evaluation_table}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Results and Analysis}
We report both the micro and macro-F1 scores of the different classification tasks in Tables \ref{tab:directness_evaluation_table} and \ref{tab:evaluation_table}. \textit{Majority} refers to labeling based on the majority label, \textit{LR} to logistic regression, \textit{STSL} to single task single language models, \textit{STML} to single task multilingual models, and \textit{MTML} to multitask multilingual models.
\paragraph{STSL}
STSL performs the best among all models on the directness classification, and it is also consistent in both micro and macro-F1 scores.
This is due to the fact that the directness has only two labels and multilabeling is not allowed in this task.
Tasks involving imbalanced data, multiclass and multilabel annotations harm the performance of the directness in multitask settings.
Since macro-F1 is the average of all F1 scores of individual labels, all deep learning models have high macro-F1 scores in English which indicates that they are particularly good at classifying the \textit{direct} class.
STSL is also comparable or better than traditional BOW feature-based classifiers when performed on other tasks in terms of micro-F1 and for most of the macro-F1 scores. This shows the power of the deep learning approach.
\paragraph{MTSL}
Except for the directness, MTSL usually outperforms STSL or is comparable to it. When we jointly train each task on the three languages, the performance decreases in most cases, other than the target group classification tasks. This may be due to the difference in label distributions across languages.
Yet, multilingual training of the target group classification task improves in all languages. Since the target group classification task involves 16 labels, the amount of data annotated for each label is lower than in other tasks.
Hence, when aggregating annotated data in different languages, the size of the training data also increases, due to the relative regularity of identification words of different groups in all three languages in comparison to other tasks.
\paragraph{MTML}
MTML settings do not lead to a big improvement which may be due to the class imbalance, multilabel tasks, and the difference in the nature of the tasks. In order to inspect which tasks hurt or help one another, we trained multilingual models for pairwise tasks such as (group, target), (hostility, annotator's sentiment), (hostility, target), (hostility, group), (annotator's sentiment, target) and (annotator's sentiment, group). We noticed that when trained jointly, the target attribute slightly improves the performance of the tweet's hostility type classification by 0.03,0.05 and 0.01 better than the best reported scores in English, French, and Arabic, respectively. When target groups and attributes are trained jointly, the macro F-score of the target group classification in Arabic improves by 0.25 and when we train the tweet's hostility type within the annotator's sentiment, we improve the macro F-score of Arabic by 0.02. We believe that we can take advantage of the correlations between target attributes and groups along with other tasks, to set logic rules and develop better multilingual and multitask settings.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we presented a multilingual hate speech dataset of English, French, and Arabic tweets.
We analyzed in details the difficulties related to the collection and annotation of this dataset.
We performed multilingual and multitask learning on our corpora and showed that deep learning models perform better than traditional BOW-based models in most of the multilabel classification tasks. Multilingual multitask learning also helped tasks where each label had less annotated data associated with it.
Better tuned deep learning settings in our multilingual and multitask models would be expected to outperform the existing state-of-the-art embeddings and algorithms applied to our data.
The different annotation labels and comparable corpora would help us perform transfer learning and investigate how multimodal information on the tweets, additional unlabeled data, label transformation, and label information sharing may boost the classification performance in the future.
\section*{Acknowledgement}
This paper was supported by the Early Career Scheme (ECS, No. 26206717) from Research Grants Council in Hong Kong, and by postgraduate studentships from the Computer Science and Engineering department of the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{section1}
Unsupervised learning (USL) has been used to generate pre-trained models for improving the performance of various computer vision tasks \cite{krizhevsky2012imagenet,simonyan2014very,he2016deep}. USL not only consumes less human resources because it does not need label information in learning, but also it has a merit that overfitting phenomenon is relatively less than supervised learning. In \cite{erhan2010does}, Erhan et al. analyzed in detail how the pre-trained models affect the performance of the target tasks. Their finding has recently inspired the study of deep neural networks (DNNs) based on pre-trained models.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7.0cm, height=8.0cm]{Figure1}
\end{center}
\caption{The main concept of the proposed method. Unbalanced multi-task learning (a) can be learned evenly by using the proposed technique (b). Here, the vertical axis of the graphs indicates the degree to which task $k$ affects CNNs in epoch $t$.}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\label{Figure1}
\end{figure}
On the other hand, self-supervised learning (SSL) refers to learning a feature without data annotation by introducing a pretext task \cite{zhang2016colorful,noroozi2016unsupervised,mundhenk2018improvements,noroozi2018boosting}. SSL can be included in the USL category in a wide sense because it inherently learns without label information. Note that SSL has been also used to obtain pre-trained models for various target tasks such as classification and object detection \cite{doersch2017multi,noroozi2016unsupervised,mundhenk2018improvements}.
Recently, multi-task learning (MTL), which learns a generalized feature representation using several different tasks, has been attracting attention \cite{zhang2017survey}. A lot of studies have reported that learning various supervised tasks for a source dataset outperforms learning a single task \cite{long2015learning,misra2016cross,gkioxari2015contextual,kendall2018multi}. However, supervised tasks fundamentally require labeled datasets, and as the size of the dataset increases, the labeling cost becomes significantly burdensome. To solve this problem, some MTLs composed of unsupervised tasks have been developed \cite{pinto2017learning,zamir2016generic}, but they have a limitation in obtaining synergy between different tasks because the unsupervised tasks have similar characteristics. Recently, Doersch and Zisserman proposed a new MTL using heterogeneous unsupervised tasks \cite{doersch2017multi}. However, since this method employs a simple ensemble based on a linear combination at the end of the network, it rarely derives a synergy between heterogeneous tasks either.
In order to learn more generalized feature representation than \cite{doersch2017multi}, this paper proposes a metric-based regularization term and a temporal task ensemble (TTE) for MTL using heterogeneous unsupervised tasks. The proposed regularization term is defined based on Kullback-Leibler divergence (KLD) \cite{mackay2003information} and plays a role in stabilizing latent feature maps during the learning process of heterogeneous tasks. TTE defines the difference in the degree of learning of tasks as $L_1$ norm and adaptively ensembles them.
If the two techniques are applied to MTL, each task can be learned to affect the whole network uniformly as shown in Fig. \ref{Figure1} (b). The proposed MTL framework consists of three stages as in Fig. \ref{Figure2}. 1) MTL using an encoder-header network, 2) transferring the knowledge of an encoder network to a target network, 3) performing the target task based on the transferred knowledge.
This paper adopts four types of un-supervised tasks suitable for USL purposes: reconstruction, image segmentation, image colorization, and context-based methods. We experimentally selected the above tasks that demonstrate synergy during the TTE process \cite{ng2011sparse,xia2017w,zhang2016colorful,noroozi2016unsupervised,mundhenk2018improvements,noroozi2018boosting}.
Note that the purpose of this paper is not to suggest a new un/self-supervised task but to propose a new MTL framework to improve the performance of target tasks such as classification and object detection as in \cite{doersch2017multi}. So, this paper chooses multi-task self-supervised visual learning (MSVL) \cite{doersch2017multi}, which is the most recent MTL framework developed for the same purpose, as SOTA. Based on MSVL and the proposed framework, we derived an optimal combination of un-supervised tasks to produce an effective pre-trained network, and verified the performance of the proposed MTL for various target tasks. Our contributions are as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item To learn multiple heterogeneous tasks without biasing, a distribution metric-based regularization loss and TTE are proposed. This enables to learn a generalized feature representation without labeled dataset.
\item This study is valuable in that it analyzes the relationships and synergies among various un-supervised tasks. This paper is the first to analyze the synergy between latest un/self-supervised tasks to our knowledge.
\item This paper proposes a framework to improve the performance of a target task based on unlabeled dataset as in \cite{doersch2017multi}. It is expected to play an important role in the future works such as meta-learning and online learning.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=16.0cm, height=5.4cm]{Figure2}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\caption{Overall framework of the proposed method. The target network solves the target tasks by transferring the knowledge of the source encoder learned without a label.}
\label{Figure2}
\end{figure*}
\section{Previous Works}\label{section2}
\subsection{Unsupervised Taks}
\textbf{Reconstruction} \cite{ng2011sparse}: The reconstruction task is the most basic unsupervised task and is the key method used in the recent studies \cite{goodfellow2014generative,kingma2013auto}. Basically, the reconstruction task is used to obtain pre-trained models for learning a target task. In addition, the reconstruction task uses images of the same size as the input and output of the network, and sometimes uses noise and inputs synthetic images \cite{vincent2008extracting}.
\textbf{Image segmentation} \cite{xia2017w}: Image segmentation is a task that separates objects into meaningful regions by performing pixel-based prediction. Segmentation tasks are used for applications such as retinal and brain image analysis \cite{maninis2016deep,litjens2017survey}. Basically, we need a mask label for segmentation task. However, we can utilize existing studies that perform segmentation without labels \cite{xia2017w,kanezaki2018unsupervised}. In this paper, the basic network structure used for the segmentation task is U-Net \cite{ronneberger2015u}.
\textbf{Colorization} \cite{zhang2016colorful}: Image colorization is a task of predicting ab channels using L channel on Lab color space. Like the reconstruction and segmentation tasks, the colorization task also forms the network based on the encoder-decoder manner. Colorization task is used in various vision applications such as automatic colorization \cite{qu2006manga,larsson2016learning}.
\textbf{Context-based} \cite{noroozi2016unsupervised,mundhenk2018improvements,noroozi2018boosting}: Jigsaw puzzle \cite{noroozi2016unsupervised} is a task to divide an image into patches and to predict the position of each patch after random mixing. Jigsaw puzzle does not use encoder-decoder structure unlike the previous three tasks. Instead, it obtains the relative position information of the image patches as output values through softmax function. The jigsaw puzzle task is characterized by its superior performance as an unsupervised task despite the absence of label information. Recently, context-based learning methods based on jigsaw puzzle have been developed. Jigsaw++ \cite{noroozi2018boosting} improved learning performance by replacing up to two patches in the original puzzle with patches in a completely different image. Rotation with classification (RWC) \cite{mundhenk2018improvements} task used 2x2 patch as well as 3x3 patch and also employed patch overlapping to maximize the context information of an image. It is noteworthy that the image’s chroma blurring and yoked jitter were adopted before patch generation for improving the context learning. As a result, we construct a MTL network based on the four types of unsupervised tasks described above.
\subsection{Multi-task Learning}
MTL studies for computer vision are divided into two categories: fusion of loss functions of several tasks \cite{kendall2018multi,zamir2016generic} and fusion of information derived from CNN layers \cite{long2015learning,misra2016cross,pinto2017learning,doersch2017multi}. First, we take a look at some approaches to integrate loss functions. In \cite{zamir2016generic}, a joint framework, where the loss function of a supervised 3D task such as pose estimation and that of an unsupervised 3D task tightly coupled to the supervised 3D task are merged, was presented. And a synergy among two heterogeneous tasks was demonstrated to some extent. In \cite{kendall2018multi}, the loss function that maximizes the Gaussian probability based on task-dependent uncertainty was defined, and the weighting of each task was adjusted based on the defined loss function.
Second, a few ways to fuse information from CNN layers are described as follows. In \cite{long2015learning}, the learning ability of task-specific layers improved by designing the fully-connected (FC) layers of the network as the prior matrix. In \cite{misra2016cross}, information of convolutional layers was fused based on so-called cross-stitch units which were learned to find an optimal task combination using the activation function values of several tasks.
On the other hand, information of CNN layers was fused based on unsupervised tasks \cite{pinto2017learning,doersch2017multi}. In \cite{pinto2017learning}, a simple multi-task framework for fusing the information of CNN layers was proposed for robot grasping control purpose. In \cite{doersch2017multi}, Doersch and Zisserman presented the most successful example of combining heterogeneous unsupervised tasks. They designed the last block of the network as task-specific layers and made each layer in the block learn an unsupervised task based on the lasso ($L_1$) penalty. Also, they proposed a so-called “harmonizing” method for consistency of single feature representation. However, the above-mentioned method is limited to learning a generalized feature representation that uniformly reflects the multiple tasks. In order to overcome such a limitation, we propose a novel method which gets the effect of each task evenly.
\section{Approach}\label{section3}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=16.0cm, height=5.4cm]{Figure3}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\caption{The operation of TTE at epoch $t$. The order of the tasks used in this TTE process can be changed at every epoch.}
\label{Figure3}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Overall Architecture}\label{section3.1}
The overall architecture of the proposed method consists of two networks based on the source and target parts as shown in Fig. \ref{Figure2}. The source dataset is one for learning the pre-trained model in the source part, and the target dataset is the other for learning the target task in the target part. The source network is composed of various unsupervised tasks and has an encoder-task header structure. Each task header has an independent loss function, and the task is learned based on this loss function. The multi-task knowledge is produced by the weights of all the tasks trained in the encoder network. Finally, the multi-task knowledge is transferred to the target network. Here a target task can be classification, object detection, and embedding clustering.
Next, take a look at the learning process of the source network in detail. Let $\left\{ (\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}_{k}) \right\}_{i=1}^{N}$ denote a dataset consisting of $N$ samples pairs. $\mathbf{x}$ and $\mathbf{y}_k$ in a sample pair indicate an input image and the corresponding pretext of unsupervised task $k$, i.e., $k\in \left\{r, s, c, j \right\}$. '$r$', '$s$', '$c$', and '$j$' stand for reconstruction, semantic segmentation, colorization, and jigsaw puzzle, respectively. The entire operation of the proposed MTL is defined as follows.
\begin{align}\label{Eq1}
\min_{\mathbf{W}} \sum_{k \in \left\{ r,s,c,j \right\}} \sum_{i=1}^{N} [\mathcal{L}_k \left\{ f_k(\mathbf{x}_{i};\boldsymbol{\phi},\boldsymbol{\theta}_k),\mathbf{y}_{i,k} \right\} + \Omega(\mathbf{x}_{i}; \boldsymbol{\phi})]
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}\label{Eq2}
f_{k}(\mathbf{y}|\mathbf{x};{{\boldsymbol{\phi},\boldsymbol{\theta}_k}}) = f_{enc}(\mathbf{z}|\mathbf{x};\boldsymbol{\phi}) + f_{{h}_k}(\mathbf{y}|\mathbf{z};{\boldsymbol{\theta}_k})
\end{align}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\begin{align}\label{Eq3}
\Omega(\mathbf{x}; \boldsymbol{\phi}) = D_{KL}(\mathbf{v}||\mathbf{v}_{p}) = \sum_{i} \mathbf{v}(i)log {\mathbf{v}(i) \over \mathbf{v}_p(i)}
\end{align}
$f_k$ indicates the network corresponding to task $k$, and consists of a common encoder network ($f_{enc}$) and a header network ($f_{{h}_k}$) as in Eq. (\ref{Eq2}). $f_k$ is learned based on $\textbf{x}$ and weights set $\mathbf{W} = \left\{ \boldsymbol{\phi}, \boldsymbol{\theta}_1, ..., \boldsymbol{\theta}_k \right\}$. $\boldsymbol{\phi}$ in $\mathbf{W}$ stands for trainable weights of the encoder network, e.g., AlexNet, VGG, and ResNet \cite{krizhevsky2012imagenet, simonyan2014very, he2016deep}. $\boldsymbol{\theta}_k$ is the trainable weights of $f_{{h}_k}$, and is configured in a manner suitable for task $k$. Also, $\mathcal{L}_k$ of Eq. (\ref{Eq1}) indicates the loss function of task $k$, which depends on $f_k$ and the corresponding pretext $\mathbf{y}_k$.
The overall operation process is as follows. First, when $\mathbf{x}$ is input, the feed-forward process is performed to calculate $f_k$. Task $k$ is learned based on $\mathcal{L}_k$. Then, an additional constraint $\Omega$ is given to the learning process of $\mathcal{L}_k$. Because the dimension of $\mathbf{z}$ is not same as that of $\mathbf{v}_p$, distribution metric cannot be calculated directly (see Fig. \ref{Figure2}). So a transformation filter $F$, i.e., the weighted average is applied to convert a two-dimensional feature maps $\mathbf{z}$ into a one-dimensional feature vectors $\mathbf{v}$. Finally, learning proceeds towards reducing the metric distance between $\mathbf{v}$ and $\mathbf{v}_p$. Here, $\mathbf{v} \sim F(\mathbf{v}|f_{enc}(\mathbf{z}|\mathbf{x}; \boldsymbol{\phi}))$. \\
\textbf{Regularization term using distribution metric}: A regularization term for the encoder network can be one of distribution metrics such as \textit{f}-divergence family \cite{gibbs2002choosing}. The purpose of the regularization term is to stabilize latent feature maps z during the learning process of heterogeneous tasks. We used KLD \cite{mackay2003information} as a metric for the regularization term as in Eq. (\ref{Eq3}). Verification experiments and ablation studies regarding the regularization term can be found in Section \ref{section4}.
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\caption{The properties of the benchmark datasets. In the domain row, S and T indicate source and target, respectively.}
\scalebox{0.9}{\begin{tabular}{|c|c c c c c c|c|}
\hline
& C10 \cite{krizhevsky2009learning} & C100 \cite{krizhevsky2009learning} & C10s & STL10 \cite{coates2011analysis} & ILSVRC2012 \cite{russakovsky2015imagenet} & Places365 \cite{zhou2014learning} & VOC0712 \cite{everingham2010pascal} \\
\hline\hline
No. of classes & 10 & 100 & 10 & 10 & 1000 & 365 & 20 \\
Task & \multicolumn{6}{c|}{image classification} & object detection \\
Domain & S/T & S/T & T & T & S & S & T \\
Samples & 60000 & 60000 & 12000 & 13000 & 1.3M & 1.8M & $\sim$20000 \\
Image size & 32$\times$32 & 32$\times$32 & 32$\times$32 & 96$\times$96 & 224$\times$224 & 224$\times$224 & (various) \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}\label{Table1}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Multi-task Headers}\label{section3.2}
This section provides a detailed look at the tasks used in learning. The total loss function consists of four independent loss functions, as in Eq. (\ref{Eq4}).
\begin{align}\label{Eq4}
\mathcal{L} := \mathcal{L}_{r} + \mathcal{L}_{s} + \mathcal{L}_{c} + \mathcal{L}_{j}
\end{align}
Here, all the loss functions except the reconstruction loss $\mathcal{L}_{r}$ are used as in \cite{xia2017w}, \cite{zhang2016colorful}, and \cite{noroozi2016unsupervised}, respectively. So we describe only $\mathcal{L}_{r}$ as follows. The first term of $\mathcal{L}_{r}$, i.e., $\mathcal{L}_{recon}$ comes from \cite{ng2011sparse}. Since the reconstruction task generally uses weak supervision than other tasks, it seldom influences the learning of the encoder network. So, in order to amplify the influence of the reconstruction task on the encoder network, a regularization term $\mathcal{L}_{reg}$ is added to $\mathcal{L}_{recon}$ as in Eq. (\ref{Eq5}).
\begin{align}\label{Eq5}
\mathcal{L}_{r} = \mathcal{L}_{recon} + \mathcal{L}_{reg}
\end{align}
$\mathcal{L}_{reg}$ is defined as follows.
\begin{align}\label{Eq6}
\mathcal{L}_{reg} = D_{KL}{(f_{h_{r}}{(\mathbf{y}|\mathbf{z})||\mathbf{y}_r)}} - \lambda{f_{h_{r}}{(\mathbf{y}|\mathbf{z})}\ \mathrm{log}{f_{h_{r}}{(\mathbf{y}|\mathbf{z})}}}
\end{align}
where $\mathbf{y}_r$ and $f_{{h}_r}$ indicate the label image and header of the reconstruction task, respectively. A balance factor $\lambda$ is set to $10^{-3}$. The first term of Eq. (\ref{Eq6}) is the KLD between the label image and the reconstructed image for the basic regularization effect. To design the reconstruction task to facilitate more influence on the learning of the encoder network, we employ the conditional entropy loss introduced in \cite{grandvalet2005semi} as the second term in Eq. (\ref{Eq6}). On the other hand, independent learning of the four tasks may have a limitation in causing the synergy between heterogeneous tasks, so the entire network can be learned to be biased to a specific task. Therefore, the following section provides a solution to this critical problem.
\subsection{Temporal Task Ensemble}\label{section3.3}
The core concept of TTE is to fuse the weights so that all unsupervised tasks affect evenly. In other words, TTE is targeting to suppress the entire network from being biased towards a specific task. Note that TTE does not apply to all layers of the encoder network but only to the convolution layer prior to the pooling layer. Figure \ref{Figure3} describes the detailed operation of the proposed TTE. Assume that the current training epoch is $t$. First, prepare for a set of $T$-1 encoder weights ($\Phi$) which are previously learned (see in Fig. \ref{Figure3}). Second, extract the $f_{enc}$ weights of task $k$, i.e., $\boldsymbol{\phi}_k^t$ (see black arrows in Fig. \ref{Figure3}). Next, calculate the temporal gradient $\Delta \boldsymbol{\phi}_k^t$ between $\boldsymbol{\phi}_k^t$ and $\boldsymbol{\phi}^{t-1}$ that are the encoder weights at epoch $t$-1 (see blue arrows in Fig. \ref{Figure3}).
\begin{equation}\label{Eq7}
\Delta{\boldsymbol{\phi}_k^t} = ||\boldsymbol{\phi}_k^t - \boldsymbol{\phi}^{t-1}||_{1}
\end{equation}
where $||\cdot||_{1}$ stands for the element-wise $L_1$ distance. Note that $\Delta \boldsymbol{\phi}_k^t$ can be interpreted as the impact of task $k$ on the encoder network at epoch $t$. Also, we used the average of temporal gradients $\mu_{\Delta \boldsymbol{\phi}_k^t}$ as a measure of the impact of task $k$ (see Fig. \ref{Figure1}). Then, calculate the task gradient $\Delta \boldsymbol{\phi}_o^t$ between the encoder weights of the first task ($\boldsymbol{\phi}_r^t$ in Fig. \ref{Figure3}) and the encoder weights of the last task at epoch $t$ ($\boldsymbol{\phi}_j^t$ in Fig. \ref{Figure3}). This corresponds to a green arrow in Fig. \ref{Figure3}.
\begin{equation}\label{Eq8}
\Delta{\boldsymbol{\phi}_o^t} = ||\boldsymbol{\phi}_r^t - \boldsymbol{\phi}_j^t||_{CAD}
\end{equation}
where $||\cdot||_{CAD}$ stands for the element-wise Canberra distance. The reason why Canberra distance is adopted here is to limit $\Delta \boldsymbol{\phi}_o^t$ to a certain range. As a result, $\Delta \boldsymbol{\phi}_o^t$ can be interpreted as a dynamic range of the weights of all tasks. Note that because the tasks are learned in an asynchronous manner during the training process, two tasks used to compute $\Delta \boldsymbol{\phi}_o^t$ in Eq. (\ref{Eq8}) may change at every training epoch. Next, based on Eqs. (\ref{Eq7}) to (\ref{Eq8}), the temporal ensemble is performed as in Eq. (\ref{Eq9}) (see a yellow arrow in Fig. \ref{Figure3}).
\begin{align}\label{Eq9}
\boldsymbol{\phi}^t = \boldsymbol{\phi}^{t-1} + \sum_{k \in \left\{ r,s,c,j \right\}} \alpha_k^t \Delta{\boldsymbol{\phi}_k^t} + \beta^t \Delta \boldsymbol{\phi}_{o}^t
\end{align}
where $\alpha_k^t$ and $\beta^t$ indicate the adaptive coefficients at epoch $t$. The coefficients are determined adaptively by using the loss values of the current and previous epochs. Refer to \textbf{supplementary material} for the detailed calculation procedure of the coefficients. Through the ensemble process of Eq. (\ref{Eq9}), a single feature representation in which total information of all tasks is reflected can be obtained. In this process, the temporal gradient and the task gradient are tuned so that the influence of a particular task becomes not too large due to the coefficients adjusted adaptively to the loss value. In particular, the task gradient represents the dynamic range of different tasks, so coordinating this value has the same effect as allowing all tasks to be learned evenly. Finally, by taking the moving average during T time units as in Eq. (\ref{Eq10}) to prevent outliers on the time axis, we obtain the final encoder weights.
\begin{align}\label{Eq10}
\boldsymbol{\phi} = {1 \over T} \sum_{i=0}^{T-1} \boldsymbol{\phi}^{t-i}
\end{align}
$T$ is set to 5 in this paper. Thus, the encoder weights of Eq. (\ref{Eq10}) become the multi-task knowledge for transfer to the target network. Here, we employ conventional knowledge transfer methods \cite{hinton2015distilling,yim2017gift} as mentioned in Section \ref{section3.4}.
\subsection{Knowledge Transfer Methods}\label{section3.4}
There are various studies related to transfer learning \cite{chen2018coupled,hinton2015distilling,yim2017gift,zhang2019transfer}. We make use of two conventional methods for delivering source knowledge to the target network. The first method is soft-targets \cite{hinton2015distilling} to transfer knowledge of the network output distribution. Second, we use FSP DNN \cite{yim2017gift} to transfer the flow information of the network. Note that because soft-targets do not consider the middle layer information of the network, FSP DNN may provide better performance than soft-targets. Please refer to \textbf{supplementary material} for a more detailed description of those knowledge transfer methods.
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\caption{The result of classification task [$\%$]. The experimental setting of the green performance was used in the ablation study in Section \ref{section4.5}. Here, Rcn, Seg, Col, jig, jig++, and RWC refer to reconstruction, segmentation, colorization, jigsaw puzzle, jigsaw++, and rotation with classification, respectively. In case of MSVL, we implemented ourselves.}
\vspace{0.1cm}
\scalebox{0.9}{\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Source dataset & Source task & Transfer method & TTE (C10s/STL10) & MSVL \cite{doersch2017multi} (C10s/STL10) \\
\hline\hline
\multicolumn{3}{|c|}{Target only} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{61.05 / 61.19} \\
\hline
\multirow{10}{*}{ILSVRC 2012} & Jig+Col & \multirow{5}{*}{Soft-targets} & 65.43/63.83 & 61.05/56.20 \\
& Jig+Col+Seg+Rcn & & 65.47/64.08 & 61.21/56.43 \\
& (Jig++)+Col+Seg+Rcn & & 65.72/64.19 & \textbf{64.18}/56.79 \\
& RWC+Col+Seg+Rcn & & \textbf{66.00}/\textbf{64.78} & 63.11/56.03 \\
& (Jig++)+RWC+Col+Seg+Rcn & & 65.26/64.07 &63.51/\textbf{57.30} \\\cline{2-5}
& Jig+Col & \multirow{5}{*}{FSP DNN} & 69.86/66.46 & 68.97/66.23 \\
& Jig+Col+Seg+Rcn & & \textcolor{green}{71.38}/\textcolor{green}{68.06} & 70.78/66.42 \\
& (Jig++)+Col+Seg+Rcn & & 70.45/66.11 & 70.65/\textbf{67.75} \\
& RWC+Col+Seg+Rcn & & \textbf{71.61}/\textbf{68.21} & \textbf{70.98}/67.43 \\
& (Jig++)+RWC+Col+Seg+Rcn & & 71.31/67.42 & 71.08/67.40 \\[0.5ex]
\hline
\multirow{10}{*}{Places 365} & Jig+Col & \multirow{5}{*}{Soft-targets} & 62.87/63.12 & 61.01/62.78 \\
& Jig+Col+Seg+Rcn & & 63.47/63.53 & 61.41/62.91 \\
& (Jig++)+Col+Seg+Rcn & & 66.00/64.22 & 65.21/\textbf{63.98} \\
& RWC+Col+Seg+Rcn & & \textbf{67.41}/\textbf{64.52} & \textbf{66.74}/63.74 \\
& (Jig++)+RWC+Col+Seg+Rcn & & 65.20/64.03 &65.53/63.38\\\cline{2-5}
& Jig+Col & \multirow{5}{*}{FSP DNN} & 67.04/63.10 & 65.38/65.21 \\
& Jig+Col+Seg+Rcn & & 67.72/63.68 & 65.60/65.53 \\
& (Jig++)+Col+Seg+Rcn & & 67.85/64.22 & 68.67/64.57 \\
& RWC+Col+Seg+Rcn & & \textbf{69.15}/\textbf{66.46} & \textbf{68.83}/\textbf{66.40}\\
& (Jig++)+RWC+Col+Seg+Rcn & & 69.02/65.30 & 68.52/64.32 \\[0.5ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}}\label{Table2}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\caption{The result of object detection task [mAP]. In case of MSVL, we implemented ourselves.}
\vspace{0.1cm}
\scalebox{0.9}{\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Source dataset & Source task & Transfer method & TTE (VOC0712) & MSVL \cite{doersch2017multi} (VOC0712) \\
\hline\hline
\multirow{5}{*}{ILSVRC 2012} & Jig+Col & \multirow{5}{*}{Fine-tune} & 61.38 & 60.41 \\
& Jig+Col+Seg+Rcn & & 65.83 & 63.79 \\
& (Jig++)+Col+Seg+Rcn & & 66.80 & 66.78 \\
& RWC+Col+Seg+Rcn & & 68.71 & 67.40 \\
& (Jig++)+RWC+Col+Seg+Rcn & & \textbf{69.35} & \textbf{68.75} \\
\hline\hline
\multicolumn{3}{|c|}{Supervised} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{74.7} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}\label{Table3}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\caption{Experimental result based on various source tasks.}
\vspace{0.1cm}
\scalebox{0.95}{\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Source dataset & Source task & Transfer method & Target accuracy (C10/C100) \\
\hline\hline
\multirow{9}{*}{C10 / C100} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Source only} & 91.55/65.37 \\\cline{2-4}
& \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Target only (baseline)} & 87.77/60.77 \\\cline{2-4}
& \multirow{3}{*}{Classification (supervised)} & Soft-targets \cite{hinton2015distilling} & 88.45/61.03 \\
& & FSP DNN \cite{yim2017gift} & 88.70/63.33 \\
& & CETL \cite{chen2018coupled} & 89.11/64.83 \\\cline{2-4}
& \multirow{2}{*}{Jig+Col+Seg+Rcn (MSVL \cite{doersch2017multi})} & Soft-targets & 88.45/62.56 \\
& & FSP DNN & 90.12/66.23 \\\cline{2-4}
& \multirow{2}{*}{Jig+Col+Seg+Rcn (TTE)} & Soft-targets & 88.73/63.07 \\
& & FSP DNN & \textbf{90.43}/\textbf{66.83} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}\label{Table4}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Performance comparison for different metrics and task difference.}
\vspace{0.1cm}
\scalebox{0.85}{\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
Metric \cite{gibbs2002choosing} & \makecell{Task gradient} & \makecell{TTE (C10s/STL10)} \\
\hline\hline
(not used) & \Checkmark & 65.40/64.33 \\
KLD & & 68.79/65.98 \\
KLD & \Checkmark & 71.38/68.06 \\
\hline
Reverse KLD & \Checkmark & 69.90/66.90 \\
JSD & \Checkmark & 68.40/65.11 \\
Hellinger & \Checkmark & \textbf{71.48}/66.78 \\
Jeffrey & \Checkmark & 64.48/66.22 \\
$\chi^{2}$ & \Checkmark & 67.60/63.34 \\
Wasserstein & \Checkmark & 70.39/\textbf{68.74} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}\label{Table5}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Performance analysis according to encoder network type.}
\vspace{0.1cm}
\scalebox{0.85}{\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
\makecell{Source dataset} & \makecell{Encoder network} & \makecell{Target accuracy (C10/C100)} \\
\hline\hline
\multirow{3}{*}{\makecell{ILSVRC 2012}} & AlexNet \cite{krizhevsky2012imagenet} & 67.18/64.62 \\
& VGG16 \cite{simonyan2014very} & 69.37/66.85 \\
& ResNet50 \cite{he2016deep} & \textbf{71.38}/\textbf{68.06} \\
\hline
\multirow{3}{*}{Places 365} & AlexNet & 66.63/63.79 \\
& VGG16 & \textbf{68.70}/\textbf{65.87} \\
& ResNet50 & 67.72/63.68 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}\label{Table6}
\end{table}
\section{Experiments}\label{section4}
\subsection{Training Configurations}\label{section4.1}
This section describes the dataset, source/target network, and learning details used in each experiment. \\
\textbf{Dataset}: Table \ref{Table1} summarizes the datasets used in all experiments. Here, C10s represents a dataset where only 20$\%$ of the CIFAR10 dataset is randomly sampled. The purpose of C10s is to verify the differentiated performance of a network by increasing the difficulty of the CIFAR10 dataset. For the evaluation of the multi-task ensemble in Section 4.2, we used ILSVRC2012 and Places365 datasets as source datasets, and C10s and STL10 as target datasets. Each image in the C10s and STL10 datasets is resized to 224$\times$224 and then input to the target task. In the knowledge distillation experiment in Section 4.3, CIFAR10/100 datasets are used as source and target datasets without any modification. \\
\textbf{Encoder/target network}: In the classification experiment in Section \ref{section4.2}, ResNet50 was used as an encoder network and the reduced AlexNet was used as a target network. The reduced AlexNet which consists of five convolutional layers and three FC layers, but the number of kernels in each layer are all reduced to about 1/2 to 1/4 of the ones in AlexNet \cite{krizhevsky2012imagenet}. Here the size of convolutional kernels is set to 3$\times$3. Then, in the object detection experiment, VGG16 was used as an encoder network and SSD300 \cite{liu2016ssd} was used as a target network. In the knowledge distillation experiment in Section \ref{section4.3}, ResNet26 was used as an encoder network and the reduced AlexNet was used as a target network. \\
\textbf{Training details}: Each numerical value in all experimental results is the average value of three trials. Each iteration is 2,000 based on the batch size of 64, and it performs up to 50 epochs. Especially, in the case of the object detection, 120 epochs. We employ stochastic gradient descent (SGD) \cite{robbins1951stochastic} with momentum 0.9 as an optimizer. Also we used the TensorFlow library for model construction as well as training.
\subsection{Evaluation of Multi-task Methods}\label{section4.2}
This section examines how the pre-trained models generated by the proposed TTE and multi-task self-supervised visual learning (MSVL) \cite{doersch2017multi} affect the performance of the target task, respectively.
First, the experimental result for the classification task is given in Table \ref{Table2}. As the number of tasks increases, the target task performance improves. Above all, TTE showed overall higher performance than MSVL. For example, using the FSP DNN method with four tasks such as RWC, Col, Seg, and Rcn, TTE improved 0.6$\%$ at C10s and 0.8$\%$ at STL10 over MSVL (see the 9-th row of Table \ref{Table2}). However, the performance improvement was relatively small when using five tasks. This implies that the source encoder is biased towards context-based tasks as Jig++ and RWC are learning together. On the other hand, the results for Places 365 show overall lower target accuracy than the results for ILSVRC2012. We are interpreting that the performance gap according to the source dataset can be due to the correlation of the dataset. Places365 consists of background/object-oriented images, while ILSVRC2012 is composed of animal/plant-oriented images. However, the target datasets CIFAR and STL10 have data characteristics more similar to ILSVRC2012 than Places365.
Second, the experimental result for the object detection task is described in Table \ref{Table3}. We started with two tasks of jigsaw puzzle and colorization, which are the most representative tasks, and increased the number of tasks to five. Table \ref{Table3} shows that the performance of both TTE and MSVL increases with the number of tasks. On average, we can observe the performance improvement of up to 8$\%$ for TTE and up to 8.3$\%$ for MSVL.
\subsection{Performance Analysis via Knowledge Distillation}\label{section4.3}
This section analyzes the performance of a target task through knowledge distillation where source and target datasets are equivalent. We experimented not only with unsupervised learning but also with supervised learning such as classification as a source task. The classification task was learned while adding the three FC layers (512-256-class dim.) after the encoder network. Soft-targets, FSP DNN, and CETL \cite{chen2018coupled} were used as transfer methods.
The first two rows of Table \ref{Table4} are the results obtained from a single network without knowledge transfer. From the third row, we show the performance of the target tasks when transferring knowledge acquired from various source tasks to the target networks.
For the transfer method of FSP DNN and the target dataset of C10, the target accuracies of the supervised task, MSVL, and TTE are 88.7$\%$, 90.1$\%$, and 90.4$\%$, respectively. The proposed method shows 0.3$\%$ better performance than MSVL. It is notable that seeing the fifth row of the last column of Table \ref{Table4}, CETL, which is known to outperform FSP DNN, shows lower performance than unsupervised methods such as MSVL and TTE. Although TTE takes about twice as long learning time and requires additional network resources than the supervised task, the fact that TTE is an unsupervised task without labeling cost and is able to provide higher performance than the supervised task can be enough to overcome the shortcomings. In addition, through this experiment, we were able to obtain an insight that the \textit{learning method of knowledge has a greater impact on performance than the transfer way of domain knowledge}.
\subsection{Deep Embedding Clustering}\label{section4.4}
This section qualitatively compares the performance of TTE and MSVL through a well-known deep embedding clustering (DEC) \cite{xie2016unsupervised} to evaluate the learning ability of the generalized feature representation. In DEC, a pre-trained encoder network and a latent distribution corresponding to the next layer, i.e., $\mathbf{z}$ in Fig. \ref{Figure2}, were used.
The overall procedure is as follows. First, we constructed a cluster layer after encoder network. The cluster layer converted the output features of the encoder network into cluster label probabilities, in which a student's t-distribution was used. Next, we adjusted the cluster center based on conventional $k$-means clustering. Finally, the same learning process as \cite{xie2016unsupervised} was performed using STL10 as the target dataset.
We performed this experiment based on the encoder network of TTE and MSVL. The results are shown in Fig. \ref{Figure4} in the form of query and retrieval. TTE showed higher recall rate, normalized mutual information (NMI), and adjusted rand score (ARI) than MSVL \cite{manning2010introduction}. In addition, we can observe that more meaningful retrieval result was obtained by the proposed method.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=6.0cm, height=12.0cm]{Figure4-5_low}
\end{center}
\caption{Example retrieval results on STL10 dataset. (Upper) using encoder network trained TTE. (Below) using encoder network trained MSVL.}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\label{Figure4}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Ablation Study}\label{section4.5}
This section deals with the ablation study on the proposed method. All of the experiments in this section were based on the experimental setting of the green performance of Table \ref{Table2}. We analyzed the proposed method in terms of the distribution metric $\Omega$ in Section \ref{section3.1}, the application of task gradient $\Delta \boldsymbol{\phi}_o^t$ in Section \ref{section3.3}, and source encoder type, respectively.
First, we analyzed performance when replacing existing KLD with other metrics \cite{gibbs2002choosing}. As shown in Table \ref{Table5}, Hellinger and Wasserstein showed higher target task performance than KLD, which we used basically. This implies that other distribution metrics with similar constraint characteristics to KLD can be candidates. However, in case of Jeffrey and $\chi^{2}$ which are known as learning methods based on stronger constraints than KLD, their strong constraints adversely affect learning performance.
Second, Table \ref{Table5} shows the performance change according to the task gradient of Fig. \ref{Figure3}. Obviously, when the task gradient was excluded from the TTE process, the performance decreased, but this was less than when the distribution metric was not used at all.
Third, we analyze the target accuracy according to the type of encoder network. Seeing Table \ref{Table6}, ResNet50 has the highest target accuracy in the ILSVRC2012 and VGG16 has the best in the Places365. Unlike our expectation that more complex encoder network would be more beneficial for MTL, we can observe that performance were not significantly affected by the type of encoder network. As a result, all options used in the experiment are directly related to the performance of the target task, and the distribution metric has the greatest effect on performance.
\section{Conclusion}\label{section5}
In this paper, we proposed two methods that are metric-based regularization and TTE for obtaining generalized feature representation using unsupervised tasks. As a result, metric-based regularization loss and TTE make it possible to learn a pre-trained model that accurately reflects data characteristics even for large datasets such as ILSVRC2012. However, the proposed method uses the basic weighted sum form to fuse task information. Therefore, our future study will suggest a new type of task ensemble technique that can show better synergy between tasks.
\subsection*{\textbf{\fontsize{12}{12}\selectfont Acknowledgements}}
This work was supported by National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korean Government (2016R1A2B4007353) and the Industrial Technology Innovation Program funded By the Ministry of Trade, industry $\&$ Energy (MI, Korea) [10073154, Development of human-friendly human-robot interaction technologies using human internal emotional states].
{\small
\bibliographystyle{ieee}
|
\section{Introduction}
Quantum metrology aims to enhance the sensitivity of measurements by making efficient use of the properties of quantum mechanical states and measurements \cite{Helstrom,Paris,GiovannettiNATPHOT2011,Varenna,RMP}. Most of the theoretical efforts so far have focused on the identification and generation of highly sensitive quantum states \cite{RMP}, implicitly assuming that an optimal measurement can be realized. The usage of such states in metrology experiments is often challenged by their fragility under unavoidable noise processes \cite{HuelgaPRL1997,Davidovich2011,RafalNATCOMMUN2012,Acin,SmirnePRL2016}. However, even in situations where the initial state cannot be controlled, the identification of more sensitive measurement observables can be a beneficial strategy towards an improvement of the measurement precision \cite{BraunsteinPRL1994,GiovannettiPRL2006,Pezze2017,GessnerPRL2019}. For example, optimizing the measurement observable for an estimation of the separation of two incoherent light sources can overcome classical resolution limits, without the need for nonclassical sources \cite{TsangPRX2016}. Energy measurements in a fixed basis can further improve the precision for an estimation of Hamiltonian parameters \cite{SevesoPRA2018}.
Besides precision measurements, metrological sensitivity can be used as an entanglement witness by comparing to suitable sensitivity bounds for different classes of separable states \cite{PezzePRL2009,Varenna,HyllusPRA2012,GessnerPRA2016,GessnerPRA2017,GessnerPRL2018,GuehneToth,Appelaniz}. The sensitivity thus provides information about the number of entangled atoms \cite{HyllusPRA2012} and the microscopic entanglement structure in the case of individually addressable subsystems in multi-mode systems \cite{GessnerPRA2016,GessnerQuantum2017}. Metrological entanglement witnesses have been implemented successfully with Gaussian and non-Gaussian states of cold atoms \cite{RMP} and multi-mode squeezed states of light \cite{QinNPJQI2019}.
For the estimation of the phase parameter $\theta$ from any quantum state $\hat{\rho}(\theta)=e^{-i\hat{H}\theta}\hat{\rho}e^{i\hat{H}\theta}$, the optimal measurement is theoretically known and can yield a sensitivity as large as the quantum Fisher information $F_Q[\hat{\rho},\hat{H}]$ \cite{BraunsteinPRL1994}. Since the implementation of the optimal measurement may not always be feasible, it is important to identify measurement strategies that maximize the sensitivity under experimentally motivated constraints \cite{GessnerPRL2019}. Generally, to reach high sensitivities, we need observables with small variance and strong dependence on the parameter. For instance, if measurements are limited to a single, suboptimal basis, specified by the complete set of projectors $\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}=(\hat{\Pi}_1,\hat{\Pi}_2,\dots,\hat{\Pi}_r)$, the maximal achievable sensitivity is given by the classical Fisher information $F[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}]$.
In this article, we show that the achievable sensitivity is further enhanced if in addition to arbitrary measurements in the basis $\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}$, the energy expectation value $\langle\hat{H}\rangle_{\hat{\rho}}$ is available, e.g., from knowledge of the initial state and the interferometer device or by calibration measurements. The enhancement occurs in spite of the fact that $\langle\hat{H}\rangle_{\hat{\rho}}$ does not depend on the parameter $\theta$ at all and is by itself an unsuitable observable for phase estimation. The scheme is equivalent to a direct measurement of an optimal observable that can be expressed as a linear combination of the elements of $\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}$ and $\hat{H}$. We provide an analytical expression for the sensitivity gain that is obtained from the contribution of $\hat{H}$ to this optimal measurement observable. By applying this technique to the example of an atomic clock, we find that the sensitivity can be enhanced by a factor proportional to the number of atoms $N$. Surprisingly, this enhancement is achieved by a seemingly (but not actually) negligible contribution of $\hat{H}$ to the optimal observable. Our results further illustrate that tiny changes of the measurement observable can have dramatic effects on the sensitivity.
\section{Sensitivity gain from Hamiltonian measurements}
The method of moments, a widely used protocol for phase estimation, uses only the average value of some observable $\hat{X}$ to estimate the true value of $\theta$ \cite{RMP}. After many repeated measurements, $\mu\gg 1$, it yields an estimator variance of $(\Delta\theta_{\mathrm{est}})^2= \chi^2[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{H},\hat{X}]/\mu$, where
\begin{align}\label{eq:chi}
\chi^2[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{H},\hat{X}]=\frac{(\Delta\hat{X})^2_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}}{\vert \langle [\hat{X},\hat{H}] \rangle_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)} \vert^2}.
\end{align}
It was recently shown how the observable $\hat{X}$ can be chosen in an optimal way out of some family of accessible operators \cite{GessnerPRL2019}. Consider, for example, the case of an experimental setup that provides access to measurements in one particular basis. Assuming that arbitrary observables that are diagonal in that basis, i.e., $\hat{X}=\sum_{x=1}^rc_x\hat{\Pi}_x$, can be measured, the maximal sensitivity is given by \cite{GessnerPRL2019}
\begin{align}\label{eq:ChiclassicalF}
\chi^{-2}_{\rm max}[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{H},\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}]:\!&=
\max_{\hat{X}\in\mathrm{span}(\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}})}\chi^{-2}[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{H},\hat{X}]\notag\\&=F[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}],
\end{align}
where $F[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}]=\sum_{x=1}^rp(x|\theta)[\frac{\partial}{\partial\theta} \log p(x|\theta)]^2$ is the Fisher information with $p(x|\theta)=\mathrm{Tr}\{\hat{\rho}(\theta)\hat{\Pi}_x\}$. This maximal sensitivity is achieved by measurements of an optimally chosen linear combination of the $\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}$. Equivalently, the same sensitivity can be achieved asymptotically by a maximum-likelihood estimation if the full counting statistics of individual measurement results in the basis $\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}$ is available \cite{Varenna}. These measurement strategies thus saturate the Cram\'{e}r-Rao bound, which expresses that any phase estimation protocol with measurements in the basis $\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}$ is limited to estimator variances of $(\Delta\theta_{\rm est})^2\geq (\Delta\theta_{\rm CR, \hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}})^2=\{\mu F[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}]\}^{-1}$~\cite{Helstrom}.
By adding the generating Hamiltonian $\hat{H}$ to the set $\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}$ of accessible operators, the sensitivity is further enhanced. Specifically, for $\hat{\mathbf{H}}=(\hat{H},\hat{\Pi}_1,\dots,\hat{\Pi}_r)$ we obtain the maximal sensitivity
\begin{align}\label{eq:chiQPiH}
\chi^{-2}_{\rm max}[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{H},\hat{\mathbf{H}}]&=
\max_{\hat{X}\in\mathrm{span}(\hat{\mathbf{H}})}\chi^{-2}[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{H},\hat{X}]\notag\\&=F[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}]+E[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{H},\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}],
\end{align}
which is the central result of this article. The sensitivity enhancement $E[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{H},\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}]=ab^2$, with
\begin{align}
a=\left[(\Delta\hat{H})^2_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}-\sum_{x=1}^r\frac{1}{p(x|\theta)}\mathrm{Cov}(\hat{H},\hat{\Pi}_x)^2_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}\right]^{-1}
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
b=\sum_{x=1}^r\mathrm{Cov}(\hat{H},\hat{\Pi}_x)_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta} \log p(x|\theta)\right),
\end{align}
is always nonnegative.
Necessary conditions to obtain a sensitivity beyond the classical Fisher information~(\ref{eq:ChiclassicalF}) are that at least one covariance $\mathrm{Cov}(\hat{H},\hat{\Pi}_x)_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}$ is nonzero and that $\hat{H}$ is not diagonal in $\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}$. Even though a sensitivity above the classical Fisher information (for the projectors $\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}$) can be achieved this way, the quantum Fisher information $F_Q[\hat{\rho},\hat{H}]$ always provides an upper sensitivity limit and we find the hierarchy
\begin{align}\label{eq:hierarchy}
\chi^{-2}_{\rm max}[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{H},\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}]\leq \chi^{-2}_{\rm max}[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{H},\hat{\mathbf{H}}]\leq F_Q[\hat{\rho},\hat{H}],
\end{align}
where $F_Q[\hat{\rho},\hat{H}]=\max_{\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}}F[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}]$ is independent of $\theta$ \cite{BraunsteinPRL1994}. In other words, access to $\hat{H}$ permits us to overcome the classical Cram\'{e}r-Rao bound for the basis $\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}$ but the sensitivity is of course always limited by the quantum Cram\'{e}r-Rao bound $(\Delta\theta_{\rm est})^2\geq (\Delta\theta_{\rm QCR})^2$ with $(\Delta\theta_{\rm QCR})^2=\min_{\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}}(\Delta\theta_{\rm CR, \hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}})^2=(\mu F_Q[\hat{\rho},\hat{H}])^{-1}$. The proofs for Eqs.~(\ref{eq:chiQPiH})--(\ref{eq:hierarchy}) are given in Appendix~\ref{app:proofs}.
These results confirm our intuition that access to a larger family of measurement observables can only enhance the sensitivity. However, to provide high sensitivity, the measurement result should depend strongly on changes of the parameter $\theta$, whereas the generating Hamiltonian $\hat{H}$ is entirely insensitive [the commutator in Eq.~(\ref{eq:chi}) is zero if we measure $\hat{X}=\hat{H}$]. Therefore, the fact that the enhancement $E[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{H},\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}]$ is nonzero is not entirely evident. The example of an atomic clock in Sec.~\ref{sec:atomic} shows that this enhancement can indeed be significant and scale linearly with the total number of atoms.
\section{Optimal observable and implementation}
The maximum sensitivity~(\ref{eq:chiQPiH}) is achieved by the optimal observable (up to arbitrary constants that can be used to normalize the coefficients)
\begin{align}\label{eq:xopt}
\hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt}}=\hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt},0}+ab\left(\sum_{x=1}^{r}\frac{1}{p(x|\theta)}\mathrm{Cov}(\hat{H},\hat{\Pi}_x)_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}\hat{\Pi}_x-\hat{H}\right).
\end{align}
A proof is provided in Appendix~\ref{app:Xopt}. The observable
\begin{align}\label{eq:xopt0}
\hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt},0}=\sum_{x=1}^r\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta} \log p(x|\theta)\right)\hat{\Pi}_x
\end{align}
is optimal if only linear combinations of the $\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}$ can be measured but $\hat{H}$ remains inaccessible \cite{GessnerPRL2019} as it achieves the maximum in Eq.~(\ref{eq:ChiclassicalF}) \cite{Kholevo,Frowis2015}. The observable $\hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt},0}$ is still optimal even if $\hat{H}$ could be measured when $\mathrm{Cov}(\hat{H},\hat{\Pi}_x)_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}=0$ for all $x$, since in this case all other contributions to $\hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt}}$ vanish due to $b=0$. Both $\hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt}}$ and $\hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt},0}$ are defined at a fixed value of $\theta$.
We may wonder how the variance and the commutator part of the inverse parameter $\chi^{-2}$, Eq.~(\ref{eq:chi}), are affected by measuring contributions proportional to $\hat{H}$. Interestingly, it turns out that both observables~(\ref{eq:xopt}) and~(\ref{eq:xopt0}) have the property that numerator and the square root of the denominator of the squeezing coefficient~(\ref{eq:chi}) coincide and yield the maximum sensitivity~(\ref{eq:ChiclassicalF}). Specifically, if we use the definition~(\ref{eq:xopt}), it is straightforward to see that
\begin{align}
(\Delta \hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt}})^2_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}=F[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}]+E[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{H},\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}]
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
-i\langle[\hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt}},\hat{H}]\rangle_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}=F[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}]+E[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{H},\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}].
\end{align}
The former follows from $\langle(\hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt}})^2\rangle_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}=F[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}]+(ab)^2\left(\langle\hat{H}^2\rangle_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}-\sum_{x=1}^r\frac{1}{p(x|\theta)}\mathrm{Cov}(\hat{H},\hat{\Pi}_x)^2_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}\right)$
and $\langle\hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt}}\rangle_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}^2=(ab)^2\langle\hat{H}\rangle_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}^2$. Analogously, with Eq.~(\ref{eq:xopt0}) we obtain
\begin{align}
(\Delta \hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt},0})^2_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}=F[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}],
\end{align}
with $\langle\hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt},0}\rangle_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}=0$, and
\begin{align}
-i\langle[\hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt},0},\hat{H}]\rangle_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}=F[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}].
\end{align}
Hence, both the commutator and the variance grow by the same amount $E[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{H},\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}]$ when measuring $\hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt}}$ instead of $\hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt},0}$. Because the metrological sensitivity~(\ref{eq:chi}) scales with the square of the commutator, the enhancement $E[\hat{\rho}(\theta),\hat{H},\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}]$ is directly added to the sensitivity.
The implementation of the improved scheme is based on the estimation of $\theta$ from measurements of the average value of $\hat{X}_{\rm opt}$, which in turn is a linear combination of the type
\begin{align}\label{eq:obsX}
\hat{X}=\sum_{x=1}^rc_x\hat{\Pi}_x+c_H\hat{H}
\end{align}
with real coefficients $c_1,\dots,c_r$ and $c_H$. The expectation value is given by $\langle\hat{X}\rangle_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}=\sum_{x=1}^rc_xp(x|\theta)+c_H\langle\hat{H}\rangle_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}$. Notice that $\langle \hat{H}\rangle_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}= \langle \hat{H}\rangle_{\hat{\rho}}$ is independent of $\theta$, and therefore a property of the initial state. Assuming that this additional piece of \textit{a priori} information about the initial state is available before the experiment, the expectation value of any observable $\hat{X}$ of the type~(\ref{eq:obsX}) can be obtained with access to the basis $\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}$, which provides the part of $\langle\hat{X}\rangle_{\hat{\rho}(\theta)}$ that depends on the $p(x|\theta)$. It is reasonable to assume knowledge of $\langle\hat{H}\rangle_{\hat{\rho}}$ in experimentally relevant cases, since the initial state $\hat{\rho}$ and the phase-imprinting generator are usually well known in phase-estimation experiments. The considered scenario of a single unknown parameter of fixed value assumes that all other parameters with influence on the measurement outcomes are known \cite{Yan2018}.
The method suggested above reconstructs the average value of $\hat{X}$ by combining the \textit{a priori} information on energy with the measurement results in $\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}$. Knowledge of the energy thus avoids the need for a direct measurement in the basis of $\hat{X}$. However, the obtained measurement results are equivalent only on average, while their statistics are completely different. It is therefore important to notice that the proposed scheme is based on the method of moments and requires only knowledge of the average value of $\hat{X}$. If access to the full counting statistics was available, an equally optimal estimation strategy would be given by a maximum likelihood estimation. To obtain the counting statistics of $\hat{X}$, however, the projectors onto its eigenvalues must be measured. This would in general constitute a challenging task since the proposed scheme only provides an advantage when $\hat{H}$, and consequently $\hat{X}$, is not diagonal in $\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}$.
Let us finally remark that the exact coefficients of the optimal observable [Eqs.~(\ref{eq:xopt}) and~(\ref{eq:xopt0})] depend on the value of the phase $\theta$, which is not known in realistic settings. Even though an implementation of the optimal observable may not be practical in an experiment, it is important to identify the ultimate precision limit of the proposed strategy. Moreover, the method discussed above is not limited to the optimal observable and can be implemented with arbitrary coefficients. Any realistic implementation gives rise to a lower bound for the optimal sensitivity that is studied here. More generally, our results show that whenever the additional information about energy is taken explicitly into consideration, the Cram\'{e}r-Rao bound associated with the measurement basis no longer poses a limit to the achievable sensitivity.
\section{Atomic clock with oversqueezed spin states}\label{sec:atomic}
\begin{figure*}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.98\textwidth]{Fig1V3.pdf}
\caption{(a) The clock measurement consists in free evolution with the Hamiltonian $\hat{H}=\hat{J}_z$, followed by a $\pi/2$-rotation around the $x$ axis and a measurement of the number of atoms in the two internal states. (b) Sensitivity limits rescaled by the shot noise $N=2j$ for the state $|\Psi(t)\rangle$ with $j=25$. We compare the maximal measurement sensitivity~(\ref{eq:ChiclassicalF}) obtained by the eigenstates of $\hat{J}_y$ (blue line) to the sensitivity~(\ref{eq:chiQPiH}) enhanced by additional Hamiltonian measurements (red line). The enhancement is shown as the green dashed line. The upper sensitivity bound is given by the quantum Fisher information [gray line, see Eq.~(\ref{eq:hierarchy})], which reaches the value $j(2j+1)$ (gray dashed line). For comparison, we show the spin squeezing coefficient (orange dot-dashed line). The maximal enhancement is found in oversqueezed states around $\tau_{\rm opt}\simeq 0.94/\sqrt{j}$. (c) Normalized coefficient $c_{\hat{H}}$, expressing the contribution $\hat{H}$ as a function of $j$ at the point $\tau_{\rm opt}$ of maximal enhancement. (d) Despite the near-vanishing contribution of $\hat{H}$, the relative gain at $\tau_{\rm opt}$, expressed by the ratio of Eqs.~(\ref{eq:ChiclassicalF}) and~(\ref{eq:chiQPiH}), increases linearly with $j=N/2$. (e) Coefficients $c_{m_y}$ of the optimal measurement observables with ($\hat{X}_{\rm opt}$, red dots) and without ($\hat{X}_{\rm opt}^{(0)}$, blue dots) measurement access to $\hat{H}$ for $j=100$. We have $c_{m_y}=0$ for all $|m_y|\geq 30$ for both $\hat{X}_{\rm opt}$ and $\hat{X}_{\rm opt,0}$. The normalized contribution of $\hat{H}$ to $\hat{X}_{\rm opt}$ is $c_{\hat{H}}\lesssim 2\times 10^{-3}$.}
\label{fig:1}
\end{figure*}
We now apply these results to the example of an atomic clock, composed of $N$ spin-$1/2$ particles, described by collective spin operators $\hat{J}_{\alpha}=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^N\hat{\sigma}_{\alpha,i}$, where $\alpha=x,y,z$ and $\hat{\sigma}_{\alpha,i}$ are local Pauli matrices for the $i$th spin. The basic clock operation consists in a precise estimation of the atomic resonance frequency between ground- and excited state by Ramsey spectroscopy~\cite{SchmidtRMP}. The time evolution generated by the Hamiltonian $\hat{J}_z$ imprints the phase parameter $\theta$ that is directly proportional to this resonance frequency. Let us further assume that after the phase imprinting, the statistics of the observable $\hat{J}_y$ can be measured by realizing a $\pi/2$ rotation of the spins around the $x$ axis followed by a measurement of the number of atoms in the ground- or excited states [see Fig.~\ref{fig:1}(a)].
Quantum-enhanced sensitivities can be achieved with spin states generated by the nonlinear one-axis-twisting evolution \cite{KitagawaUeda,RMP}. By subjecting a spin-coherent state $|j,j\rangle_z$ with all spins polarized along the $z$ axis~\cite{MandelWolf} to a nonlinear evolution generated by $\hat{J}_y^2$, we obtain the states $|\Psi(\tau)\rangle=e^{-i\hat{J}_y^2\tau}|j,j\rangle_z$ and $j=N/2$ is the total spin length. After short times $\tau$, these states are still well characterized by Gaussian measurements, i.e., mean values and variances of collective spin observables, and their sensitivity as well as their entanglement is captured by the spin squeezing parameter~\cite{Wineland,Sorensen,SMPRL01,Toth,Ma,Appelaniz,Sinatra,RMP}. As $\tau$ increases, these states become more sensitive for the atomic clock measurement considered above, until reaching a maximally sensitive NOON state at $\tau=\pi/2$. We focus on non-Gaussian quantum states that are generated at longer time scales than spin-squeezed states but shorter than those required to reach the NOON state. Several techniques can lead to a precision enhancement in this scenario. Standard methods consist in shifting the value of $\theta$ to an optimal value or implementing additional spin rotations to change the directions of the collective spin operators that determine the generator or the measurement~\cite{RMP}. Here, we do not make use of these methods and instead focus on the sensitivity gain, Eq.~(\ref{eq:chiQPiH}), that can be provided by additional measurements of the generating Hamiltonian $\hat{J}_z$ in the scenario where both $\theta$ and the original observable $\hat{J}_y$ are fixed.
The sensitivity limits, rescaled by the shot-noise level $N=2j$, are represented in Fig.~\ref{fig:1}(b) for the states $|\Psi(\tau)\rangle$. The blue line shows the optimal sensitivity~(\ref{eq:ChiclassicalF}) for measurements that are limited to observables which are diagonal in the basis spanned by the eigenstates $|j,-j\rangle_y,|j,-j+1\rangle_y,\dots,|j,j-1\rangle_y,|j,j\rangle_y$ of $\hat{J}_y$. Here, the $N+1$ projectors $\hat{\Pi}_{m_y}=|j,m_y\rangle_y\langle j,m_y|_y$ with $m_y=-j,\dots,j$ represent the family of accessible operators $\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}_{m_y}$. If in addition to $\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}_{m_y}$ also the phase-imprinting generator $\hat{J}_z$ can be measured, we obtain the maximally achievable sensitivity~(\ref{eq:chiQPiH}) displayed by the red line. The green dashed line represents the enhancement $E[|\Psi(\tau)\rangle,\hat{J}_z,\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}_{m_y}]$. The upper bound, provided by the quantum Fisher information $F_Q[|\Psi(\tau)\rangle,\hat{J}_z]$, is displayed by the gray line and we observe the hierarchy of bounds~(\ref{eq:hierarchy}). As lower bounds on $F_Q[|\Psi(\tau)\rangle,\hat{J}_z]$, the sensitivities in this plot can be compared to separability bounds on the quantum Fisher information (without restricting to pure states). For instance, any indication of $\chi^{-2}/(2j)>k$ indicates at least $k$ entangled particles \cite{HyllusPRA2012}. Hence, the sensitivity enhancement directly provides an improved entanglement witnesses.
For comparison, we show the spin squeezing coefficient \cite{Wineland,RMP}, which can be obtained by maximizing Eq.~(\ref{eq:chi}) over all measurement observables and Hamiltonians $\hat{J}_{\mathbf{n}}=\mathbf{n}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{J}}$ that can be written as linear combinations of $\hat{\mathbf{J}}=(\hat{J}_x,\hat{J}_y,\hat{J}_z)$ as $\chi^{-2}_{\rm SQZ}[|\Psi(\tau)\rangle]=\max_{\mathbf{n}}\chi^{-2}_{\max}[|\Psi(\tau)\rangle,\hat{J}_{\mathbf{n}},\hat{\mathbf{J}}]$ \cite{GessnerPRL2019}. The decay of $\chi^{-2}_{\rm SQZ}[|\Psi(\tau)\rangle]$ indicates the loss of Gaussianity as the state becomes oversqueezed and is no longer well characterized by the covariances of $\hat{\mathbf{J}}$ \cite{RMP}. We observe the maximal enhancement $E[|\Psi(\tau)\rangle,\hat{J}_z,\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}_{m_y}]$ at $\tau_{\mathrm{opt}}\simeq 0.94/\sqrt{j}$ when spin squeezing is almost entirely lost.
We introduce the coefficients $c_{\hat{H}}$ and $c_{m_y}$ to represent measurement observables as $\hat{X}=c_{\hat{H}}\hat{H}+\sum_{m_y=-j}^jc_{m_y}\hat{\Pi}_{m_y}$ with the normalization $|c_{\hat{H}}|^2+\sum_{m_y=-j}^j|c_{m_y}|^2=1$. The contribution $c_{\hat{H}}$ is always zero for $\hat{X}_{\rm opt,0}$. For $\hat{X}_{\rm opt}$, we find that the coefficient $c_{\hat{H}}$ tends toward zero at $\tau_{\rm opt}$ as $j$ increases; see Fig.~\ref{fig:1}(c). Nevertheless, the relative sensitivity gain obtained by measuring $\hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt}}$ instead of $\hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt},0}$ can be quite significant as is shown by the linear scaling with the number of particles in Fig.~\ref{fig:1}(d). This shows that the metrological sensitivity may depend strongly on tiny changes of the measurement observable.
Being able to measure $\hat{H}$ can have dramatic influence on the weight of different projectors [cf. Eqs.~(\ref{eq:xopt}) and~(\ref{eq:xopt0})], as is shown for $j=100$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:1}(e). The contribution of $\hat{H}$ to $\hat{X}_{\rm opt}$ is very small, $|c_{\hat{H}}|\lesssim 2\times 10^{-3}$, in this case. As negligibly small as it may seem, the contribution of $\hat{H}$ cannot be ignored. By removing the Hamiltonian part from Eq.~(\ref{eq:xopt}), we obtain the observable $\hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt}}+ab\hat{H}$, which can be implemented without access to $\hat{H}$. However, according to Eqs.~(\ref{eq:ChiclassicalF}) and~(\ref{eq:xopt0}) this yields a suboptimal measurement and a sensitivity below $F[|\Psi(\tau)\rangle,\hat{\boldsymbol{\Pi}}_{m_y}]$. In other words, if $c_{\hat{H}}$ is set to zero in $\hat{X}_{\rm opt}$, the sensitivity in Fig.~\ref{fig:1}(b) drops from the red line to a value below the blue line. It can be easily verified that even though the observable $\hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt}}+ab\hat{H}$ has the same gradient [denominator in Eq.~(\ref{eq:chi})] as $\hat{X}_{\mathrm{opt}}$, its variance [the numerator in Eq.~(\ref{eq:chi})] is much larger, which leads to a drastic reduction in sensitivity.
\section{Conclusions}
In conclusion, we have shown how the precision of a phase measurement in a suboptimal basis can be improved by knowledge of the initial state's expectation value for the Hamiltonian $\hat{H}$ that generates the phase shift. This is despite the fact that $\langle\hat{H}\rangle_{\hat{\rho}}$ itself is entirely insensitive of the phase. If the \textit{a priori} information on energy is utilized in an optimal way, the proposed method is equivalent to the measurement of an optimal linear combination [Eq.~(\ref{eq:xopt})] of the basis projectors and $\hat{H}$. The classical Cram\'er-Rao bound associated with the accessible basis no longer poses a limit on the achievable sensitivity [Eq.~(\ref{eq:chiQPiH})].
For the example of an atomic clock we found a sensitivity gain that scales linearly with the number of atoms. Concerning the optimal observable, access to $\hat{H}$ mostly entails a significant shift of the contribution of the projectors that were already accessible without access to $\hat{H}$, while the contribution of $\hat{H}$ itself is tiny. Nevertheless, the contribution of $\hat{H}$ to the optimal observable cannot be neglected, as it would lead to a drastic reduction of the sensitivity. This hints at a discontinuity of the achievable sensitivity when a part of the available information disappears. Discontinuous behavior of the Fisher information was recently studied in Refs.~\cite{Safranek17,Seveso19} but a possible relation to these observations remains open for future investigations. More generally, this shows that the sensitivity of phase estimation experiments based on the widely used method of moments can depend strongly on the precise implementation of the measurement observable.
\section*{Acknowledgments} I would like to thank A. Smerzi and L. Pezz\`{e} for countless enlightening discussions on quantum metrology over the past years. This work was funded by the ENS-ICFP LabEx Grant No. ANR-10-LABX-0010/ANR-10-IDEX-0001-02 PSL*.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.