text:
# Actively contracting bundles of polar filaments

Living cells have remarkable mechanical properties. In addition to a passive response to mechanical stresses, eucaryotic cells are able to actively change their shapes, to generate motion and forces  and to react to externally imposed mechanical conditions . The cytoskeleton, which is a complex network of elastic protein filaments such as actin filaments and microtubules, plays a key role in these processes. Filaments are rod-like structures that interact with a large number of specific proteins . Examples are cross-linking proteins which induce formation of a gel-like filament network, and bundling proteins which lead to filaments aligned in parallel. Furthermore, motor proteins of the cytoskeleton are able to use the chemical energy of the hydrolysis of Adenosinetriphosphate (ATP) to generate forces and motion along filaments . Myosins for example interact with actin filaments while kinesins and dyneins move along microtubules. The direction of motion of motor molecules is determined by the polar structure of the filaments which have two different ends, one denoted “plus”, the other “minus”: a given type of motors always moves towards the same end . Small aggregates of motors which contain two or more active domains can bind at the same time to two filaments and exert relative forces and motion between them. In contrast to passive filament solutions whose rheological properties have been studied in recent years , filament systems which interact with molecular motors represent intrinsically active materials which exhibit rich types of behavior that have recently attracted much interest. In particular, the formation of asters and spiral defects, as well as the shortening of filament bundles has been observed in vitro and in vivo . The self-organization of motor-filament systems has also been addressed theoretically .

Bundles of actin filaments interacting with myosin motors are prominent cytoskeletal structures that are involved in many active phenomena in the cell . For example, within the sarcomeres of skeletal muscle fibers, they are responsible for muscle contraction; as stress fibers they produce forces in cells; and as contractile rings they are important during the final step of cell division. The contraction of sarcomeres follows from a particular arrangement of myosin and actin filaments. In contrast, stress fibers and related structures lack an obvious spatial organization of their components. The existence of these simple contractile structures raises interesting questions: What are the minimal requirements for a bundle of filaments and active elements to contract? Do stable steady states of the bundle exist which generate tension?

In this Letter, we develop a simple phenomenological model for bundles of polar filaments containing active elements, that allows us to answer such questions and to estimate the mechanical tension generated in the bundle. Furthermore, we perform computer simulations which demonstrate that the general behaviors described by this model are indeed obtained for simple realizations of the motor-filament interactions. Finally, we relate our findings to biological systems.

Consider a linear bundle of aligned polar filaments of equal length $`\mathrm{}`$, distributed along the $`x`$-axis. The number densities of filaments with their plus-ends pointing to the right and to the left and with their center located at position $`x`$ are denoted $`c^+(x)`$ and $`c^{}(x)`$, resp. These densities satisfy the conservation laws

$`_tc^+`$ $`=`$ $`D_x^2c^+_xJ^{++}_xJ^+`$ (1)
$`_tc^{}`$ $`=`$ $`D_x^2c^{}_xJ^+_xJ^{}.`$ (2)
Here, $`D`$ is an effective coefficient for filament diffusion along the $`x`$-axis. The currents $`J^+`$ and $`J^+`$ are active filament currents that result from interactions mediated by motors between pairs of antiparallel filaments. Currents resulting from interactions between parallel filaments are denoted $`J^{++}`$ and $`J^{}`$. Here, we have assumed for simplicity that two-filament interactions dominate, which corresponds to a sufficently low density of active elements. Eq. (1) thus corresponds to a coarse-grained description where details of the dynamics of the motors have been eliminated. The direction of filament motion induced by a motor only depends on the filaments’ relative orientation, see Fig. 1. Therefore, we can use general symmetry arguments to write expressions for the active currents without referring to a specific interaction mechanism. To this end we express the currents in terms of the filament densities $`c^+`$ and $`c^{}`$. For example, we write $`J^+(x)=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\xi j^+(x,\xi )`$, where $`j^+(x,\xi )`$ is the average current of “minus”-filaments located at $`x`$ induced by the interaction with “plus”-filaments located at $`x+\xi `$. The integral arises since all filaments with centers located in the interval $`[x\mathrm{},x+\mathrm{}]`$ can interact with a filament located at $`x`$. Then, assuming that the probability for an active interaction between two filaments only depends on the probability of their encounter, we write $`j^+(x,\xi )=v^+(\xi )c^+(x)c^{}(x+\xi )`$. Here, $`v^+(\xi )`$ is the effective relative velocity between two antiparallel filaments a distance $`\xi `$ apart induced by many individual events of motor activity. For parallel filaments we get analogously, e.g., $`j^{++}=v^{++}(\xi )c^+(x)c^+(x+\xi )`$. Now, symmetry arguments restrict the possible form of the functions $`v^{\pm \pm }`$ and $`v^\pm `$: In the absence of external forces momentum conservation requires that the center of gravity must remain fixed when two filaments are displaced. This leads to $`v^{\pm \pm }(\xi )=v^{\pm \pm }(\xi )`$ and $`v^+(\xi )=v^+(\xi )`$, see Fig. 1. Furthermore, invariance of the system with respect to inversions of space

leads to the condition $`v^{++}(\xi )=v^{}(\xi )`$. Respecting these criteria, we choose for simplicity $`v^+(\xi )=v^+(\xi )=\beta `$ and $`v^{++}(\xi )=v^{}(\xi )=\alpha \text{sign}(\xi )`$. Here, $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ are constants and $`\text{sign}(\xi )=\pm 1`$, depending on the sign of $`\xi `$. We have checked that other choices do not alter the general properties of our model. The currents thus read

$`J^{\pm \pm }(x)`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha {\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\xi [c^\pm (x+\xi )c^\pm (x\xi )]c^\pm (x)`$ (3)
$`J^\pm (x)`$ $`=`$ $`\beta {\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\xi c^{}(x+\xi )c^\pm (x).`$ (4)
Equations (2) and (4) describe the dynamics of our model. We first analyze the stability of the homogeneous state with constant $`c^\pm (x)=c_0^\pm `$, which is a fixed-point of the dynamics for all values of the parameters. Using a Fourier expansion of the densities $`c^\pm (x)=c_0^\pm +_kc_k^\pm e^{ikx}`$, the filament dynamics to linear order in the amplitudes $`c_k^\pm `$ is given by

$$\frac{d}{dt}\left(\begin{array}{c}c_k^+\\ c_k^{}\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{++}& \mathrm{\Lambda }^+\\ \mathrm{\Lambda }^+& \mathrm{\Lambda }^{}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}c_k^+\\ c_k^{}\end{array}\right),$$
(5)
where the elements of the matrix $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(k)`$ are

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\pm \pm }(k)`$ $`=`$ $`Dk^22\alpha (\mathrm{cos}(k\mathrm{})1)c_0^\pm \pm 2i\beta k\mathrm{}c_0^{}`$ (6)
$`\mathrm{\Lambda }^\pm (k)`$ $`=`$ $`\pm 2i\beta \mathrm{sin}(k\mathrm{})c_0^\pm .`$ (7)
With $`\lambda (k)`$ denoting the larger of the real parts of the two eigenvalues of the matrix $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(k)`$, the homogeneous state is stable if $`\lambda (k)0`$ for all $`k`$. When an instability occurs, a band of unstable modes appears, which extends from $`k=0`$ to some positive $`k`$. For a system of size $`L`$ with periodic boundary conditions (e.g., a contractile ring), the stability of the homogeneous state is determined by the sign of $`\lambda (k_{\mathrm{min}})`$, with $`k_{\mathrm{min}}=2\pi /L`$. We find that the homogeneous state becomes linearly unstable as soon as $`\alpha >\alpha _c`$ with the critical value

$$\alpha _c=\frac{D}{\mathrm{}^2c}f(\frac{\beta \mathrm{}cL}{D},\frac{\delta c}{c},\frac{L}{\mathrm{}}).$$
(8)
Here $`cc_0^++c_0^{}`$, $`\delta cc_0^+c_0^{}`$, and $`f(u,v,w)`$ is a dimensionless scaling function. Corresponding stability diagrams are displayed in Fig. 2. For all values of the parameters we find $`\alpha _c0`$. Therefore, unstable behavior is induced by an interaction of parallel filaments with $`\alpha >0`$. Consistent with this finding $`\alpha _c`$ decreases with increasing $`\delta c`$, i.e., with an increasing fraction of filaments pointing in the same direction the system becomes less stable. The critical value $`\alpha _c`$ increases with increasing $`D`$, indicating that filament diffusion has a stabilizing effect. In many limiting cases simple analytic expressions for $`\alpha _c`$ can be obtained. In particular, we find in the limit of large $`L`$, $`f=2/(1+|\delta c|/c)`$ if $`\beta =0`$ or $`\delta c=0`$ and $`f=1`$ otherwise. In the homogeneous state, the total filament current $`J=J^{++}+J^++J^++J^{}`$ vanishes, while currents of plus and minus filaments exist in opposite

directions. As soon as the homogeneous state becomes unstable, a transient current $`J`$ occurs which redistributes filaments until an inhomogeneous stationary state is attained. This final state consists of one or several shortened filament bundles separated by empty regions. Fig. 3 displays the variance $`<x^2>=𝑑xx^2(c^++c^{})`$ of stationary filament distributions as a function of $`\alpha `$, where we have assumed without loss of generality that $`𝑑xx(c^++c^{})=0`$. For small $`\alpha `$ only the homogeneous state exists as attractor of the system. A second attractor appears for $`\alpha =\alpha _d<\alpha _c`$, which corresponds to a shortened filament bundle. A third type of attractor obtained numerically consists of two shortened filament bundles. However, we cannot distinguish numerically whether this state is a real attractor or a long-lived transient state.

The instability of the homogeneous state thus leads to bundle shortening. It is triggered by an increase of $`\alpha `$ and occurs for all values of $`\beta `$, which suggests that the interaction of parallel filaments is responsible for bundle shortening. On the other hand, the interaction of antiparallel filaments ($`\beta 0`$) induces currents which in the unstable regime lead to a separation of plus- and minus-filaments . The role of interactions between parallel filaments for bundle shortening can be demonstrated explicitly for the simple case $`D=0`$ for which the uniform state is linearly unstable for all $`\alpha >0`$. In this case, using Eqs. (1) and (2), we can show that for $`\beta =0`$ and $`\alpha >0`$ the variance decreases monotonically, i.e., $`d/dtx^2<0`$, which implies bundle shortening.

Can the active filament interactions which lead to bundle shortening generate tensile stresses that can be used to perform mechanical work during shortening? In the bundle, tension arises due to forces generated by motors and due to hydrodynamic forces exerted on the filaments by the surrounding fluid. Let us estimate this tension $`\sigma `$ which has units of force. For simplicity, we take only local friction into account and ignore interactions between different filaments by friction forces. Consider a rigid rod-like filament moving in a viscous environment in the direction of its axis with a friction coefficient per unit length $`\eta `$. If this motion is induced by a locally applied force, then the tension profile along the filament is piecewise linear, see Fig. 1(c). Tension is positive in the rear part of the filament being “pulled” and negative in the front. Using this tension profile, we calculate an average tension profile along a filament at position $`x`$ by summing over all contributions due to interactions with filaments lying in the interval $`[x\mathrm{},x+\mathrm{}]`$. We then calculate the tension in the bundle at position $`y`$, by summing the average tension of all filaments with centers within the interval $`[y\mathrm{}/2,y+\mathrm{}/2]`$. Finally, we coarse grain over one filament length and obtain $`\sigma (y)=\sigma ^{++}(y)+\sigma ^+(y)+\sigma ^+(y)+\sigma ^{}(y)`$, where

$`\sigma ^{\pm \pm }`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\eta }\mathrm{}\alpha {\displaystyle \underset{y\mathrm{}/2}{\overset{y+\mathrm{}/2}{}}}𝑑x{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑\xi c^\pm (x+\xi )c^\pm (x)`$ (9)
$`\sigma ^\pm `$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\eta }\mathrm{}\beta {\displaystyle \underset{y\mathrm{}/2}{\overset{y+\mathrm{}/2}{}}}𝑑x{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑\xi \left[c^{}(x+\xi )c^{}(x\xi )\right]c^\pm (x)`$ (10)
Here, $`\overline{\eta }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\eta }`$ are effective frictions per unit length which result from the coarse-graining and differ from $`\eta `$ by dimensionless geometric factors. Note, that the final coarse-grained tension profile is independent of microscopic details of the interaction mechanism.

As an example, consider a homogeneous ring, i.e., periodic boundary conditions. According to the above Equation it generates a tension $`\sigma =2\alpha \overline{\eta }\mathrm{}^3(c_{0}^{+}{}_{}{}^{2}+c_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})`$, which for $`\alpha >0`$ is positive and could then lead to active contraction of the ring. This tension persists only if the homogeneous state is stable. As soon as an instability occurs, i.e., for $`\alpha >\alpha _c`$, the ring ruptures and the remaining bundle subsequently shortens. The shortening of the unstable bundle generates transient inhomogeneous tension profiles. Fig. 4 displays instantaneous density and tension profiles of a filament bundle during shortening. The density profile is symmetric, vanishing at the bundle ends. The tension profile has the same qualitative shape. The inhomogeneous tension leads to a filament current $`J(x)`$ which is antisymmetric corresponding to filament motion towards the bundle center, consistent with bundle shortening.

The effective model discussed above does not specify the microscopic origin of active filament interactions characterized by $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$. In particular, the interaction between parallel filaments could seem surprising . In order to demonstrate that such interactions can emerge naturally from simple motor-filament interactions we have performed computer simulations of a more microscopic model. We consider $`N`$ rigid filaments aligned along the $`x`$-axis. During each time-step, a motor complex creates a mobile cross-link between a randomly chosen pair of filaments. The motors are displaced towards the plus ends of the filaments with velocity $`v`$, possibly leading to a relative filament displacement. This generates an interaction between antiparallel filaments. A relative displacement between parallel filaments occurs if we furthermore assume that the filament ends have different properties than the bulk of the filaments, namely, a motor which binds to or arrives at the plus end of a filament stays attached for some time, see Fig. 1(b). This effect generates an effective interaction with $`\alpha >0`$ between parallel filaments. We have added diffusion steps in the simulations with $`D0`$. Our simulations show the same qualitative behaviors discussed above for the phenomenological model: an instability of the homogeneous state which occurs below a characteristic value of $`D`$. In the unstable state we observe bundle shortening due to the interaction of parallel filaments, interaction of anti-parallel filaments leads to a separation of plus- and minus-filaments. Using piecewise linear tension profiles for moving filaments (corresponding to local friction), we determine $`\sigma (x)`$ in our simulation by averaging over many numerical steps. For the homogeneous state we find a tension which fluctuates around a constant positive value. The simulated density profile, tension profile and averaged filament current of a shortening bundle are displayed in Fig. 4.

Concluding, we have demonstrated that a bundle of aligned filaments and motors may contract and generate tension even if it is lacking a spatial organization. Using symmetry arguments, we have shown under some simplifying assumptions that the interaction of parallel filaments is important. Whether stress fibers in cells use the physical mechanism proposed here for contraction remains to be tested. In particular, experiments which focus on the interaction between parallel filaments should be performed. Stress fibers are likely to be more complex than the system studied here and might also use other mechanisms for contraction. For example, they could have some yet unknown spatial organization that allows

them to contract more efficiently, or other components in addition to motors and filaments might be involved. Furthermore, they might work close to the percolation threshold where large filament aggregates occur and which is not captured by our model. Nevertheless, we think that our model helps clarifying the role of motor-filament interactions and self-organization phenomena for force generation in biological cells.

We thank M. Bornens, S. Camalet, P. Janmey, A. Maggs, F. Nédélec, A. Ott, A. Parmeggiani, M. Piel, J. Prost and A.B. Verkhovsky for stimulating discussions.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Recent results from superKamiokande on the atmospheric neutrino experiments  has provided definite evidence for neutrino mass. It has also been established that the solution of the atmospheric neutrino anomaly requires a small mass squared difference between $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _\tau `$ with almost maximal mixing. Oscillations to sterile neutrinos is ruled out at 90% confidence level . Another independent source of information on the mass of the neutrinos are the solar neutrino oscillations . The latest results from superKamiokande (mainly the day-night spectrum, which rules out the small angle MSW solution and the vacuum oscillation solutions)  and the analysis of the solar neutrino data  have narrowed down the allowed region of the parameter space to only one small region. Although the mixing angle is very large, maximal mixing is not allowed. The oscillation of $`\nu _e`$ into a sterile neutrino is also disfavoured.

In addition to these results, there are also some bounds from the laboratory experiments. The long baseline reactor experiment, CHOOZ, has set stringent bounds on the disappeances of the $`\nu _e`$ . In the situation under consideration with no sterile neutrinos, a small mass difference between $`\nu _e`$ and one of the combinations of $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _\tau `$ can explain the solar neutrino anomaly. The other combination will then have a mass squared difference of the order of the $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _\tau `$ mass squared difference. For a mass squared difference of this amount, the CHOOZ result gives a strong bound on the mixing angle. We also assume that the neutrinos are Majorana particles, so that the lepton number violation at a large scale can also explain the baryon asymmetry of the universe . This then implies that there is constraint on the $`\nu _e`$ mass from the non-observation of the neutrinoless double beta decay . All these constraints are summarized in table 1.

There have been several attempts to obtain textures of neutrino mass matrices and to relate them with the quark sector , However, most of these studies have been based on specific models that tried to get maximal mixing for the solar neutrino solution.

We will study the structures of the neutrino and charged lepton mass matrices in a model-independent way paying attention to any symmetry or regularity, particularly, the presence of any texture zeroes. We will also take into account the recent result that there is only one solution to the solar neutrino problem, the one which does not allow maximal mixing. As it turns out there are then very few choices that are left for us.

The atmospheric neutrino anomaly is explained by a maximal mixing of $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _\tau `$. We thus assume that the mass eigenvalues $`m_2`$ and $`m_3`$ correspond to the states $`\nu _2`$ and $`\nu _3`$, which are admixtures of the states $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _\tau `$. The mass squared difference required by the atmospheric neutrino anomaly then can be written as,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{atm}=\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\mu \tau }^2=\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2=m_3^2m_2^2.$$
(1)
The corresponding mixing angle is written as, $`\mathrm{sin}\theta _{\mu \tau }`$, which is almost maximal. The solar neutrino problem has a MSW solution , in which $`\nu _1`$ oscillates into $`\nu _2`$ with a mass squared difference,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{sol}=\mathrm{\Delta }m_{e2}^2=\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2=m_2^2m_1^2.$$
(2)
The corresponding mixing angle is $`s\mathrm{sin}\theta _{e2}`$. The third mass squared difference is then determined in terms of these two mass differences. The corresponding mixing angle $`U_{e3}`$ is then constrained by the CHOOZ data.

We shall consider the mixing angle for the atmospheric neutrino anomaly to be maximal, $`\mathrm{sin}\theta _{\mu \tau }1/\sqrt{2}`$. However, we will also consider $`\mathrm{sin}\theta _{\mu \tau }<0.57`$ which is experimentally allowed. Similarly, if we assume, for simplicity, $`U_{e3}=0`$, the neutrino mixing matrix becomes,

$$U_\nu =\left(\begin{array}{ccc}c& s& 0\\ \frac{s}{\sqrt{2}}& \frac{c}{\sqrt{2}}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\\ \frac{s}{\sqrt{2}}& \frac{c}{\sqrt{2}}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\end{array}\right)$$
(3)
where $`c=\sqrt{1s^2}`$. With this restrictive mixing matrix we find that there is no neutrino mass matrix with any texture zeroes (in the basis where the charged lepton is diagonal). For exact bi-maximal solutions, i.e., with $`s=c=1/\sqrt{2}`$ there are solutions with texture zeroes, but when we consider the present bound on $`s`$, there are no solutions. So, to generalise our analysis we would also allow $`U_{e3}`$ to be non-vanishing, but constrained to be small.

In our present analysis we shall not include CP violations. The mass matrices and the mixing matrices would then be real. For mass matrices, $`M_e`$ and $`M_\nu `$ and the corresponding charged current interaction, the Lagrangian is given by,

$$=\frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}\overline{\mathrm{}}_{mL}\gamma ^\mu \nu _{mL}W_\mu ^{}\overline{\mathrm{}}_{mL}M_{emn}^{}\mathrm{}_{nR}\nu _{mL}M_{\nu mn}\nu _{nL}.$$
(4)
The charged lepton mass matrix is not symmetric, but can be diagonalised by a bi-unitary transformation

$$V_{e\alpha mR}^{}M_{emn}^{}V_{en\beta L}=M_{e\alpha }\delta _{\alpha \beta },$$

where $`\alpha ,\beta =e,\mu ,\tau `$ are the physical states. Since the right handed mixing matrix $`V_{em\alpha R}`$ does not enter into the charged current interactions, we can write $`V_{em\alpha R}=K_{emn}V_{m\alpha L}`$ and without loss of generality symmetrize the charged lepton mass matrix. The new symmetric charged lepton mass matrix, $`M_{emn}=M_{eml}^{}K_{eln}`$ can now be diagonalised by the unitary matrix,

$$V_{e\alpha mL}^{}M_{emn}V_{en\beta L}=M_{e\alpha }\delta _{\alpha \beta }.$$

The Majorana mass matrix of the neutrinos is always symmetric and hence can be diagonalised by a unitary transformation,

$$V_{\nu im}^{}M_{\nu mn}V_{\nu nj}=M_{\nu i}\delta _{ij}.$$
(5)
Since we are working with real matrices, all unitary matrices can be replaced by orthogonal matrices and we have not introduced the Majorana phase matrix.

In this flavour basis, when the charged lepton mass matrix is diagonal, the charged current interaction contains the mixing matrix $`U_{\nu \alpha i}`$ which is given in equation (3). This mixing matrix $`U_{\nu \alpha i}`$, which is measured from experiment can be written in terms of the unitary matrices which diagonalise the mass matrices $`V_{em\alpha }`$ and $`V_{\nu im}`$ as,

$$U_{\nu \alpha i}=V_{e\alpha m}^TV_{\nu mi}.$$
(6)
This enters in the charged current interactions of the physical charged lepton states with the neutrino mass eigenstates. This is analogous to the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix of the quark sector. In the basis in which the charged lepton mass matrix is diagonal, the mixing matrix is simply $`U_\nu =V_\nu `$, while in the basis in which the neutrino mass matrix is diagonal, the mixing matrix is given by, $`U_\nu =V_e^T`$.

## 2 Diagonal Charged Lepton Mass Matrix

We shall first consider the neutrino mass matrices in the basis in which the charged lepton mass matrix is diagonal. A general form of the mass matrix, which gives the mixing matrix of equation (3), may be obtained from a diagonal neutrino mass, $`M_\nu ^{diag}=\mathrm{Diag}.\{m_1,m_2,m_3\}`$ as,

$$M_e=M_e^{diag}$$
(7)
and

$$M_\nu =U_{\nu \alpha i}M_{\nu ii}^{diag}U_{\nu i\beta }^T=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}m+\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{cos}2\theta & \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{sin}2\theta & \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{sin}2\theta \\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{sin}2\theta & \frac{1}{2}\left(M\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{cos}2\theta \right)& \frac{1}{2}\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_3\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{cos}2\theta \right)\\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{sin}2\theta & \frac{1}{2}\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_3\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{cos}2\theta \right)& \frac{1}{2}\left(M\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{cos}2\theta \right)\end{array}\right),$$
(8)
where, $`m=(m_1+m_2)/2`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }=(m_1m_2)/2`$, $`M=m+m_3`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_3=mm_3`$ and $`\mathrm{cos}2\theta =c^2s^2`$.

Although this matrix does not allow any texture zeroes, it is instructive in the sense that it gives $`M_{12}=M_{13}`$ and $`M_{22}=M_{33}`$. Moreover, if we require an inverted hierarchy with a very small $`m_3`$ then we also have $`C=D`$. Using such symmetries, several forms of the neutrino mass matrix can be obtained. We list a few possible mass matrices in table 2 along with the mixing matrix and eigenvalues for a representative set of parameters.

The mass matrix

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& a& a\\ a& 0& b\\ a& b& 0\end{array}\right)$$

has been studied , that has texture zeroes along the diagonal. This is pattern (A) in table 2. For the choice, $`m_1m_2`$, we have $`\mathrm{\Delta }0`$ and $`m0`$ and, therefore, for the (11) element to vanish we must have $`\mathrm{cos}2\theta 0`$. This leads to bi-maximal mixing matrix. Although this has maximum number of texture zeroes, this mass matrix cannot give non-maximal mixing angle indicated by the solar neutrino problem.

For another simple pattern given in (B) in table 2,

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccc}a& b& b\\ b& b& b\\ b& b& b\end{array}\right),$$

the choice of $`m_1m_2`$ (therefore $`\mathrm{\Delta }0`$) and $`m_3m_1`$ leads to $`m0,Mm_3`$, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_3`$. Therefore, for (22) and (23) matrix elements to have opposite signs as above, we once again have $`\mathrm{cos}2\theta 0`$, which leads to bi-maximal mixing. A judicious choice of the parameters $`m_1,m_2`$ and $`m_3`$ can then be made to have the (12) and (22) elements the same.

Pattern (C), because of the choice of $`m_1`$, $`m_2`$, $`m_3`$, is an example which does not allow bi-maximal mixing. The simplest of the mass matrices with one and two texture zeroes are given, respectively, by

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& a& a\\ a& b& b\\ a& b& c\end{array}\right)$$

which is pattern (D), and

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& a& 0\\ a& b& b\\ 0& b& c\end{array}\right)$$

which is pattern (E). We note that in order to to fit the neutrino data (particularly, $`\theta _{\mu \tau }45^{}`$), the structure of both the matrices must be such that $`cb`$. That is, the (33) element is no longer equal to the (22) element as implied by (8). As a consequence, one finds that neither is $`U_{e3}=0`$. If $`U_{e3}`$ were to vanish then there is no solution with (non-diagonal) texture zeroes.

## 3 Diagonal neutrino mass matrix

We next consider the case where the charged lepton mass matrix is not diagonal. The simplest situation would be where the neutrino mass matrix is diagonal and the entire mixing matrix comes from the diagonalisation of the charged lepton mass matrix. This is what happens in the case of democratic mass matrix , in which case the charged lepton mass matrix is democratic with rank one. However, in that case the mixing angle for the solar neutrino case comes out to be maximal, which is now ruled out at the 95% confidence level. Since the neutrino mass matrix is diagonal, the mixing matrix is the transpose of the matrix diagonalising the charged lepton mass matrix,

$$V_e=U_\nu ^T=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}c& \frac{s}{\sqrt{2}}& \frac{s}{\sqrt{2}}\\ s& \frac{c}{\sqrt{2}}& \frac{c}{\sqrt{2}}\\ 0& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\end{array}\right).$$
(9)
Using this mixing matrix, we can now write down the most general charged lepton mass matrix (pattern 1 in table 3) in terms of the mass eigenvalues as,

$$M_\nu =M_\nu ^{diag}\mathrm{and}M_e=V_eM_e^{diag}V_e^T=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}m_+s^2+m_ec^2& (m_+m_e)sc& m_{}s\\ (m_+m_e)sc& m_+c^2+m_es^2& m_{}c\\ m_{}s& m_{}c& m_+\end{array}\right)$$
(10)
where $`M_e^{diag}=\mathrm{Diag}.\{m_e,m_\mu ,m_\tau \}`$, $`m_+=(m_\mu +m_\tau )/2`$ and $`m_{}=(m_\mu m_\tau )/2`$.

From the above expressions a few points become clear. None of the elements in $`M_e`$ could vanish and be consistent with the above mixing matrix. The smallness of the electron mass $`m_e`$ implies that the various elements of the mass matrix have to be given very precisely in order to get, simultaneously, the mass hierarchy between the charged lepton masses and the required mixing matrix. So, this form of the mass matrix is unlikely to predict any texture zeroes. In other words, it is not possible for texture zeroes to exist without invoking new parameters, which have to be fine tuned to get the required mixing matrix. A simple vanishing of any elements of the mass matrix will, therefore, not allow us to get the required mixing matrix.

## 4 Genaral textures

Let us consider the case where one of the mixing angles comes from the charged lepton mass matrix and the other from the diagonalisation of the neutrino mass matrix . If we now require that the mixing angle of the atmospheric neutrino anomaly comes from the neutrino sector and the (almost) maximal mixing angle for the solar neutrino comes from the charged lepton mixing matrix, then again we need fine tuning. For any of the elements of the charged lepton mass matrix to vanish, it is not possible to get a solution, since the maximal mixing in the neutrino sector would then make the $`U_{e3}`$ element large. The only possibility, therefore, is to get maximal mixing between $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _\tau `$ from the charged lepton sector. In this case, in the above charged lepton mass matrix we can put $`s=0`$ allowing the mixing in the $`\nu _e`$ to $`\nu _\mu `$ sector to come from the neutrino sector. The mass matrices in this case are given by,

$$M_e=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}m_e& 0& 0\\ 0& m_+& m_{}\\ 0& m_{}& m_+\end{array}\right);\mathrm{and}M_\nu =\frac{m_2}{2}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}s^2& sc& 0\\ sc& c^2& 0\\ 0& 0& \frac{2m_3}{m_2}\end{array}\right).$$
(11)
This is pattern 2 in table 3. The corresponding unitary matrices, which diagonalise these matrices are,

$$V_e=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 0& 0\\ 0& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\\ 0& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\end{array}\right)\mathrm{and}V_\nu =\left(\begin{array}{ccc}c& s& 0\\ s& c& 0\\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right)$$
(12)
which gives the required neutrino mixing matrix of equation (3) $`U_\nu =V_e^TV_\nu `$.

We shall now check which of the charged lepton mass matrices resemble the textures observed in the quark sector where two prominent patterns have been observed

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& & \\ & & \\ & & \end{array}\right)\mathrm{or}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& & 0\\ & & \\ 0& & \end{array}\right).$$
(13)
We shall not impose any condition on the neutrino mass matrices, since the origin of the neutrino mass matrix appears quite different from the up quark sector. So, we assume the same neutrino mass matrix as above and obtain the form of the charged lepton mass matrix which can give us the required mixing matrix and the mass eigenvalues. There exists two possible charged lepton mass matrices corresponding to these two textures, which are,

$$M_e^A=m_o\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& a& a\\ a& b& b\\ a& b& c\end{array}\right)\mathrm{or}M_e^B=m_o\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& a& 0\\ a& b& b\\ 0& b& c\end{array}\right).$$
(14)
.

We point out that the (33) elements above do no follow the pattern given in (8) which, therefore, allows the texture zeroes to develop in (14). These two patterns (patterns 3 and 4) are given in table 3 for some typical parameters.

## 5 Comparison with the Quark Texture

We will now take a closer look at the quark sector by comparing the individual matrix elements. From the analysis of the textures of the $`u`$ and $`d`$quark mass matrices it is known that an excellent representation for the $`d`$quark is given by ,

$$D=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& \sqrt{m_1m_2}& 0\\ \sqrt{m_1m_2}& m_2& \sqrt{m_1m_3}& \\ 0& \sqrt{m_1m_3}& m_3\end{array}\right)$$
(15)
where the masses are in hierarchical order with $`m_1=m_d`$, $`m_2=m_s`$ and $`m_3=m_b`$. This matrix correctly reproduces $`V_{us}`$ and $`V_{cb}`$ of the CKM matrix as,

$$V_{us}\sqrt{\frac{m_d}{m_s}},V_{cb}\sqrt{\frac{m_d}{m_b}}$$
(16)
If we assume that the charged-lepton mass matrix has an identical form to $`D`$, then we can write an analogous relation

$$M_e=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& \sqrt{m_em_\mu }& 0\\ \sqrt{m_em_\mu }& m_\mu & \sqrt{m_em_\tau }\\ 0& \sqrt{m_em_\tau }& m_\tau \end{array}\right)$$
(17)
Unlike the $`D`$, several different representations are possible for $`U`$. Furthermore, it is not at all clear, because of neutrino’s Majorana character and the possible presence of a see-saw mechanism, that a similarity exists between the neutrino and the $`u`$sector. Therefore we write, with (17) as the basis for $`M_e`$, the most general matrix for $`M_\nu `$

$$M_\nu =\left(\begin{array}{ccc}a& b& c\\ b& d& e\\ c& e& f\end{array}\right)$$
(18)
We will obtain $`M_\nu `$ above by comparing it to (8) after we diagonalize $`M_e`$ in (17) since (8) is actually in the basis with $`M_e`$ diagonal.

We write

$$M_e^{diag}=T^{}M_eT$$
(19)
where $`M_e`$ is given by (17) and $`T`$ is given, in the small angle approximation as

$$T=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& s_{12}& 0\\ s_{12}& 1& s_{23}\\ 0& s_{23}& 1\end{array}\right)$$
(20)
where

$$s_{12}\sqrt{\frac{m_e}{m_\mu }},s_{23}\sqrt{\frac{m_e}{m_\tau }}$$
(21)
Thus in the representation where $`M_e`$ is diagonal

$$M_e=M_e^{diag}$$
(22)
one can express $`M_\nu `$ as

$$M_\nu =T\left(\begin{array}{ccc}a& b& c\\ b& d& e\\ c& e& f\end{array}\right)T^{}$$
(23)
and obtain the elements $`a,b,..`$ etc, by comparing the above expression with (8). Since $`s_{23}s_{12}`$ from (21), we will keep only $`s_{12}`$ to obtain (with $`\theta =45^{}`$, for simplicity)

$`a`$ $`=`$ $`m\sqrt{2}\mathrm{\Delta }s_{12}`$
$`b`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{\sqrt{2}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_3}{2}}s_{12}`$
$`c`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{\sqrt{2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_3}{2}}s_{12}`$
$`d`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{M}{2}}+\sqrt{2}\mathrm{\Delta }s_{12}`$
$`e`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_3}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{\sqrt{2}}}s_{12}`$
$`f`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{M}{2}}`$ (24)
This is pattern 5 in table 3. Once again there are no texture zeroes in $`M_\nu `$ unlike the $`u`$sector where, as we mentioned previously, several representations with two or three texture zeroes are found  for the same pattern in the $`d`$\- and, therefore, in the $`M_\nu `$ structures.

What if we demand a texture zero in $`M_\nu `$ ? The only possible spots that would physically make sense are the (12) (and (21)), or (13) (and (31)) locations in the mass matrix (23) in which case we find

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\pm \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_3}{\sqrt{2}}s_{12}$$
(25)
From (8) and (21) one can express this relation as

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{12}^2=\left(\frac{2\sqrt{2}m}{m+m_3}\right)\sqrt{\frac{m_e}{m_\mu }}\mathrm{\Delta }_{23}^2$$
(26)
where $`m`$ is the average mass of $`m_1`$ and $`m_2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{12}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{23}^2`$ are defined in (1) and (2).

If we take a hierarchical structure for the neutrino masses and take $`m_1=0`$ then from (1), (2) and Table 1 we find that the above relation is, indeed, quite well satisfied. If we choose the (12) (and (21)) element to vanish then the matrix is as given by pattern 6 in table 3.

These are the only simple forms of the charged lepton masss matrices allowed which can give the mixing angles for the solar neutrino problem, when the atmospheric neutrino mixing comes from the diagonalisation of the neutrino mass matrix. This completes the possible forms of the mass matrices which are consistent with the present experiments.

In summary, we have presented different possible forms of the neutrino and charged lepton mass matrices which have simple patterns and which can give us the required mixing matrix and the mass eigenvalues. There are very few texture zero forms of the mass matrices which are still consistent. In all the cases some of the elements are required to be equal to each other. If we demand that the charged lepton mass matrix be same as the down quark mass matrix in texture, then some interesting results emerge, particularly if we also demand texture zeroes in the neutrino mass matrix. In the basis in which the charged lepton mass matrix is diagonal there are very few solutions with textures zeroes.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

One of us (US) would like to thank Ernest Ma for his hospitality at the University of California at Riverside. We acknowledge discussions with Ernest Ma and G. Rajasekaran. This work was supported in part by the U.S. Department of Energy under contract No. DE-FG03-94ER40837.


text:
# 1. INTRODUCTION

## 1. INTRODUCTION

The compositional process is based on the assumption that aural events can be ordered in time: a musical composition represents a trajectory in sound space. The composer controls the structure, if not the details, of the trajectory and thus the nature of the composition. The control takes the form of an algorithm—a set of rules governing the nature of the objects, their evolution, and their interrelations—which defines the musical composition. Composing thus means defining objects and relating those attributes that yield a desired trajectory in sound space.

The object-oriented paradigm and the software implementation we describe here reflect this point of view. They also provide a way of merging two activities which, traditionally, have been considered separate: writing music and building instruments. With the exception of Harry Partch \[Partch, 1960\], who built actual instruments responsive to his music’s structure (based on ratios), and Xenakis \[Xenakis, 1993\], who used stochastic distributions to generate the structure of computer-generated sounds as well as large scale textures, few composers have shown an interest in combining these two areas. The system presented here treats both activities in a uniform way by using similar logic, objects, and procedures. The software modules for music composition and sound design are consistently and comprehensively interconnected. The resulting code, currently referred to as DISCO (Digital Instrument for Sonification and Composition), is a work in progress. The system was used recently by one of the authors for the composition of a piece for violin and computer-generated tape \[Tipei, 2000\].

## 2. OBJECTS AND PROPERTIES

The composition modules use an abstract representation of musical data, which can easily be mapped onto different synthesis languages or, as the case may be, a traditionally notated score. This is achieved by defining “Instrument” and “Property” classes in response to the requirements of the target output.

The Instrument class is essentially a collection of properties that define all of an instrument’s control parameters. A very simple instrument might be defined by the properties “Start Time,” “Duration” and “Pitch.” Each property is stored in a table, which is indexed by a string identifier. The Instrument class includes the methods describing the manner in which the instrument’s output is to be generated. Note that the Instrument class does not necessarily correspond to any actual instrument, but serves rather as an abstraction for defining the properties of a given sound object.

The Property class enables us to easily classify the different properties of a sound object. A composition would likely contain a number of sound objects sharing certain properties, such as “Start Time.” In this case, the advantages of the polymorphic nature of the system become evident, as one can work with these properties without knowing the type of instrument. The Property class also incorporates methods to check for the correct type of input data. For example, many instruments share the property “Pitch,” which may be represented as a floating-point frequency value, as an integer that indexes a tuning table, or as a string spelling the name of a note.

## 3. TIME SCALES

The perception of aural events and their organization in larger structures points to the existence of time scales associated with particular objects. We mention, in order of increasing magnitude, the time scales of audio frequencies and of frequency and amplitude modulations, which affect partials and sounds; the time scales associated with melodic phrases, chordal aggregates and more complex textures; the time scales of larger formal units, such as sections and movements; and the time scale associated with an entire piece \[Kaper, 1999a\].

An abstract base class, “Event,” is used to derive classes on different time scales. The Event class has a relatively simple structure, which is defined by three attributes: start time, duration and name. Subclasses are derived from it in response to particular needs.

An event may contain other events and thus become a “Compound Event.” An entire piece is the most inclusive compound event. At the other extreme are the “Atomic Events,” which do not include other events. Partials in a sound or the graphic symbol of a note in a printed score are examples of atomic events. “Sections,” “Phrases,” “Motives,” “Chords” and “Aggreggates” are compound events which contain events of shorter or equal duration and may be themselves part of larger structures—of other compound events.

Besides the three inherited attributes (start time, duration and name), the derived classes have the property that they can be related to other similar classes or to classes of finer or coarser granularity. The type of a class, as well as its potential relations to other classes, are reflected in the class’s name.

Relationships or associations can act across time scales. An example is the congregation of partials into sounds, of sounds into chords or melodic gestures, and of sections into a composition. Also, more sophisticated relationships can be established between objects at different time scales and/or different locations in the piece. For example, the presence of a sound with a particular spectral envelope may trigger the assignment of a specific chord in a remote section of the piece.

Relationships between similar objects can replicate traditional music operations, such as transposition, inversion, and retrograde of a group of sounds, augmentation/diminution of durations or pitch intervals, chord inversion or other rearrangements of sounds in a chord, etc.

## 4. HIGHER LEVEL OF ABSTRACTION

“Generator” classes provide the composer with the ability to generate events based on some specific algorithm. They are designed to serve across time scales and can be of a generalized or specific type. For example, a simple random generator can create “NumberProperty” objects, which can be assigned any property of an instrument or event that is derived from the NumberProperty class. A specific generator to create only events of a certain type can be obtained by combining several simple generators into an “Event Generator.” One such utility, already in place, is designed to select the number of partials within a sound, the number of sounds in a cluster, or the number of sections in a piece according to a selected probability distribution. Another utility, the “Envelope” class, also in place, reads an envelope and interpolates values as necessary, thus giving the user control over the shape of events on various time scales. Still other classes enable the user to assign values manually from a list of possibilities or by using a script.

We intend to design a number of common algorithmic composition techniques as Generator classes to implement customized algorithmic techniques of the composer’s design. These classes will be extendible and can be used by themselves, as well as in combination.

## 5. METHODS AND APPLICATIONS

The type of classes and the methods to relate them are determined by the type of music the user wishes to compose. Objects like “Melody,” “Chord” and “Rhythm,” and methods such as “Canon” and “Chorale” anticipate a traditional composition; “Markov,” “Stochastic” and “Heterophony” show a different bend. While the initial emphasis was on less-than-traditional modes of composing, the system has acquired a much wider scope and now supports traditional, as well as nontraditional thinking. In addition, it supports sound design for scientific sonification—the faithful rendition of complex data sets in sounds \[Kaper, 1999b\]. The DISCO system is a truly open-ended work in progress, which is continuously being enriched with new classes and methods.

Among the first utilities developed for the DISCO system was the “Matrix” class. It was designed to enable the choice of a start time and a duration for each section in a Manifold Composition according to certain probability distributions. A Manifold Composition is essentially a collection of variants of one and the same piece, differing in details but with a similar overall structure \[Tipei, 1989\]. The differences between the variants are the result of stochastic choices. We briefly explain how the Matrix class was used to construct the probability matrices for the choice of start times and durations.

Suppose there are $`n+1`$ time marks in the piece (including the start time and end time). The start time of each section is supposed to coincide with one of the time marks. The end time of the piece cannot be the start time of a section, so there are $`n`$ possible start times; we label them $`t_1`$ through $`t_n`$. Each time mark $`t_j`$ has a certain weight $`q_j`$ associated with it, which measures the likelihood of the time mark becoming the start time of a section. Suppose there are $`m`$ possible sections, labeled $`s_1`$ through $`s_m`$. Each section $`s_i`$ has a certain (relative) weight $`w_i`$ associated with it; furthermore, $`s_i`$ has a certain probability $`p_{ij}`$ to become active at the time mark $`t_j`$. Using the Matrix class, a probability matrix $`P`$ is constructed with $`m`$ rows and $`n`$ columns. The elements of $`P`$ are

$$P_{ij}=\frac{_{k=1}^i_{l=1}^jw_kp_{kl}q_l}{_{k=1}^m_{l=1}^nw_kp_{kl}q_l},\begin{array}{c}i=1,\mathrm{},m,\hfill \\ j=1,\mathrm{},n.\hfill \end{array}$$

Then $`P_{ij}`$ is the probability that section $`s_i`$ will start at the time mark $`t_j`$. Once the start times have been chosen, the duration $`d_i`$ of each section $`s_i`$ is determined from a probability matrix $`Q`$, which is constructed in a similar manner.

The matrices $`P`$ and $`Q`$ are dynamically adjusted. Once a start time and a duration have been assigned to a particular section, adjustments are made to diminish the probability that any other section is selected during the same time interval or at nearby times.

The Matrix class enables the assignment of events in any order, not necessarily as they appear in the piece—a reflection of the way most human composers work. The class has the potential of correlating various rationales leading to a particular selection, and its methods can be used in connection with any parameter values and intervals of any event. Not only sections in a piece can be defined this way, but also sounds in a section, chords and motives in a section, etc. A logical step will be to combine the matrices for the selection of start times and durations into one three-dimensional matrix and, eventually, to include all parameters in a single multidimensional matrix. Any one choice will then be the result of a combination of all available criteria and will determine all aspects of an event. Finding the appropriate data representation for such a multidimensional matrix, however, is not trivial—especially in C++.

## 6. INTERFACES

All the basic classes described here have been implemented in C++. However, even for experienced programmers, C++ is a difficult language, and although some composers are excellent programmers, we cannot assume that all composers are willing to spend the time and effort to become proficient in C++. For this reason, most C++ classes have an analagous interface in Python, an interpreted high-level object-oriented language that is considerably easier to learn than C++ \[Lutz, 1996; Beazley, 1999\]. The choice of language is left to the user.

The wrapper code that allows the C++ classes to be used as Python classes is generated by SWIG \[Beazley, 1996\], which automates the process of combining C and C++ code with higher-level languages such as Python, Perl and Tcl. Although Python is currently the only language supported by the system, it is relatively simple to generate wrappers for Perl and Tcl.

## 7. CONCLUSION

In this paper we have described an object-oriented system for music composition and sound design. The object-oriented approach has the advantage that one can easily add different classes and/or methods taylored to a particular composition or aesthetic. The code is like an open-ended work in progress, which invites the creation of structures and relationships between sounds not yet employed.

## ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was supported by the Mathematical, Information, and Computational Sciences Division subprogram of the Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research, U.S. Department of Energy, under Contract W-31-109-Eng-38.

## REFERENCES

Partch, H. 1960. Genesis of a Music; An Account of a Creative Work, Its Roots and Its Fulfillments, New York, Da Capo Press, Second Edition (1974).

Xenakis, I. 1992. Formalized Music, Thought and Mathematics in Music, Revised Edition, Pendragon Press, pp. 289–293.

Tipei, S. 2000. “AntiPhan” for Violin and Computer-Generated Tape (unpublished).

Kaper, H. G. and Tipei, S. 1999a. “Formalizing the Concept of Sound,” Proc. Int’l. Computer Music Conference, Beijing, China, pp. 387–390.

Kaper, H. G., Tipei, S., and Wiebel, E. 1999b. “Data Sonification and Sound Visualization,” Computing in Science and Engineering, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 48–58.

Tipei, S. 1989. “Manifold Compositions: A (Super)Computer-Assisted Composition Experiment in Progress,” Proc. Int’l. Computer Music Conference, Columbus, Ohio, pp. 324–327.

Lutz, M. 1996. Programming Python, O’Reilly & Associates.

Beazley, D. 1999. Python Essential Reference, New Riders.

Beazley, D. 1996. “SWIG: An Easy to Use Tool for Integrating Scripting Languages with C and C++,” Presented at the 4th Annual Tcl/Tk Workshop, Monterey, Cal. (http://www.swig.org/papers/Tcl96/tcl96.html)


text:
# Thermal relaxation in charge ordered Pr0.63 Ca0.37MnO3 in presence of a magnetic field

\[

## Abstract

We report observation of substantial thermal relaxation in single crystal of charge ordered system Pr0.63Ca0.37MnO3 in an applied magnetic field of H = 8T. The relaxation is observed when the temperature is scanned in presence of a magnetic field in the temperature interval $`T_{MH}<T<T_{CO}`$ where $`T_{CO}`$ is the charge ordering temperature and $`T_{MH}`$ is charge melting temperature in a field. In this temperature range the system has coexisting charged ordered insulator (COI) and ferromagnetic metallic (FMM) phases. No such relaxation is observed in the COI state in H = 0T or in the FMM phase at $`T<T_{MH}`$ in presence of a magnetic field. We conclude that the thermal relaxation is due to two coexisting phases with nearly same free energies but separated by a potential barrier. This barrier makes the transformation from one phase to the other time-dependent in the scale of the specific heat experiment and gives rise to the thermal relaxation.

\]

Rare earth manganites with general chemical formula Re1-xAexMnO3, has attracted widespread interest because of a variety of fascinating properties like colossal magnetoresistance (CMR) and charge ordering (CO) . For certain values of x close to 0.5, these compounds undergo a first order transition at a temperature $`T_{CO}`$, where the Mn3+ and Mn4+ species arrange themselves in a commensurate order in the lattice. The charge-ordered state is an insulating state. An interesting aspect of this charge ordered insulating (COI) state (which is also accompanied by orbital ordering) is that it is unstable under a number of external perturbations like electric and magnetic fields, x-rays, optical radiation etc. In presence of an applied magnetic field, the sample undergoes an insulator- metal transition (generally termed as“melting”) from a COI state to a ferromagnetic metal (FMM) state. In presence of magnetic field, the temperature where this melting occurs is termed as $`T_{MH}`$.

In this paper our particular interest is the region between $`T_{MH}<T<T_{CO}`$ in presence of an applied magnetic field. Evidence is now gathering that in this region (which we call mixed charge ordered region, (MCO)) the two phases, namely the charge ordered insulating (COI)phase and the spin ordered ferromagnetic metallic (FMM) phase coexist. This coexistence is due to electronic phase separation between two phases of nearly the same free energy. Recent transport (including non-linear transport), noise, magnetization experiments etc. have shown that in this class of manganites electronic phase separation is a very commonly occuring phenomenon . In this communication we report an interesting observation that in the region of coexisting phases (which has been created by applying a magnetic field below $`T_{CO}`$) large thermal relaxation effects arise during the measurement of specific heat. From our experiments we concluded that though the two coexisting phases have nearly the same free energy (and nearly the same specific heat) they are separated by an energy barrier which makes the time of conversion of one phase to the other measurable in the time scale of specific heat experiments. This leads to the observation of thermal relaxation. We also correlate these measurements to observed hysteresis in the I-V curve and low energy conductance noise.

Present investigation was carried out on a single crystal of Pr0.63Ca0.37MnO3 which has been grown by float zone technique and has been used in a number of previous experiments by our group particularly in investigation of non-linear transport studies in the MCO region and electric field induced instabilities. Pr1-x CaxMnO3 is a prototypical charge-ordered system, which because of its small average cation radius $`<r_A>`$ remains insulating for all values of x. This system is unique and perhaps the most studied among all the charge-ordered systems. The resistivity ($`\rho `$) vs. T curve in zero field and in a field of H = 8T are shown in the inset (b) of figure 1. Inset (a) of the same figure shows the H-T phase diagram of our sample. We have performed our experiments along the constant H = 8T line shown by an arrow in the inset. The COI state can be melted to a FMM state by application of a magnetic field of 8T at $`T_{MH}`$ 90K. This particular composition shows both charge and orbital ordering below $`T_{CO}`$ = 235K and the antiferromagnetic (AFM) ordering occurs at $`T_N`$ = 170K.

The thermal relaxation of the sample was measured using an semi-adiabatic calorimeter  operating in the 20K $`<T<`$ 300K range in 0T and after field cooling in 8T. The temperature of the sample was monitored as a function of time after applying a known heat pulse. If the specific data are calculated after the sample has relaxed thermally (see discussion below) we can measure the equilibrium $`C_p`$. The heat capacity shown in figure 1 both for H = 0 and 8T are equilibrium specific heats. In the same graph the dotted line shows the estimated vibrational back ground. It can be seen that the two specific heats are nearly the same except near $`T_{CO}`$. The large peak near $`T_{CO}`$ is a consequence of latent heat in the first order phase transition at $`T_{CO}`$. A complete description of the equilibrium specific heats and the estimation of the vibrational background is given elsewhere . It is important to note that in the temperature range of interest (except the region $`TT_{CO}`$), the vibrational background makes up for the bulk of the observed specific heat. The closeness of the $`C_p`$ for H = 0 and 8T implies that the coexisting phases in the mixed charge ordered region at H = 8T have energy similar to the COI phase existing at H = 0T.(Note: There is a small latent heat release ($``$ 10J/mole) when the FMM phase is heated to the COI phase at $`T_{MH}`$). The focus of this paper is the thermal relaxation experiment as described below.

In a typical measurement of heat capacity using adiabatic or semi adiabatic heat-pulse technique, a measured amount of thermal energy Q is applied to the sample producing a change in temperature $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$. The sample temperature ($`T_s`$) raised above the bath temperature ($`T_o`$) relaxes to its original value as described by the following equation :

$$\mathrm{\Delta }T(t)=(T_sT_o)exp(t/\tau _B)$$
(1)
where the time constant $`\tau _B=C_p/K_w`$, $`K_w`$ being the thermal conductance of the weak link that connects the sample to the bath. By isolating the sample from the bath (to satisfy the adiabatic condition), the relaxation time $`𝝉_𝑩`$ is made as long as experimentally convenient. Equation 1 assumes that $`\tau _B>>\tau _I`$, where $`\tau _I`$ is the internal thermal equilibrium time of the sample defined as $`\tau _I=L^2/D_{th}`$, $`D_{th}`$ is the thermal diffusivity of the sample of dimension L. As long as $`\tau _B>>\tau _I`$, the thermal relaxation of the sample after the application of the heat pulse can be described by a single relaxation time as in eqn. 1. If the sample has very low $`D_{th}`$ or has internal equilibrium taking place over a long time then the ratio $`\tau _I/\tau _B`$ becomes finite and the relaxation curve ($`\mathrm{\Delta }Tt`$) cannot be described by a single exponential decay.

In absence of magnetic field , we observe (both for $`T>T_{CO}`$ and $`T<T_{CO}`$) that the sample thermally relaxes to the bath temperature with a long time constant, $`\tau _B`$, which is typically $`500secs`$. In this case the internal relaxation time, $`\tau _I<1sec`$ and a single relaxation time $`\tau _B`$ describes the thermal relaxation of the sample for all T .

In an applied field of 8T, for $`T>T_{CO}`$ and $`T<T_{MH}`$ we observe that the thermal relaxation is still governed by a single relaxation time as in the H = 0T case (see fig. 2(a) and 2(c)). However, this breaks down for the MCO state ($`T_{CO}>T>T_{MH}`$) as shown in the ($`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$ \- t) curves in figure 2(b). The curve shows two relaxation time behavior, which occurs when $`\tau _I`$ is finite compared to $`\tau _B`$. We have analyzed the observed thermal relaxation curve at a given T using the relation :

$$\mathrm{\Delta }T=Aexp(t/\tau _I)+Bexp(t/\tau _B)$$
(2)
where A and B are constants at a given T. From the analysis of the observed relaxation curves of the MCO state at different T we evaluated $`\tau _I`$ as a function of temperature and this is shown in figure 3(a). The value of $`\tau _B`$ is $``$ 500 secs to 1500 secs in the whole temperature range. In the MCO state, $`\tau _I`$ (H = 8T)is much larger than $`\tau _I`$ (H=0T) which is typically $`1sec`$. Interestingly, $`\tau _I`$ is finite and measurable only in the temperature interval $`T_{MH}<T<T_{CO}`$ in a magnetic field.

Large value of $`\tau _I`$ is a manifestation that the sample reaches internal thermal equilibrium over an extended period and this makes a part of the specific heat relaxing or time dependent over the experimental time scale. We can obtain a quantity Cinst immediately after the heat pulse is applied without waiting for complete thermal relaxation. This is the specific heat capacity in the scale $`t`$ 0 which contain contributions of only those constituents which relax faster than the experimental time scale $`\tau _I`$. This is less than the equilibrium specific heat $`C_p`$, which we measure after the sample has internally equilibrated ($`t\tau _I`$). The difference of these two $`\mathrm{\Delta }C`$ = Cp \- Cinst gives a measure of the time dependent or relaxing heat capacity. We plot $`\mathrm{\Delta }C(8T)/C_p`$ as a function of T in figure 3(b). For H = 0T, $`\mathrm{\Delta }C`$ = 0 whereas $`\mathrm{\Delta }C(8T)/C_p`$ 25 % in the range $`T_{CO}>T>T_{MH}`$. (There is a small contribution of $`\mathrm{\Delta }C`$ persisting down to 50K, a temperature close to the spin canting temperature in zero magnetic field.)

Previous experiments of non-liner transport as well as noise in this system (and related systems) have led to the conclusion that the MCO comprises of coexisting CO insulating and charge-molten FM metallic phases, as has been stated earlier. The fact that we donot see the thermal relaxation when the sample is completely in COI phase ($`T>T_{CO}`$)or completely in FMM phase ($`T<T_{MH}`$) clearly establish that the thermal relaxation arises from coexisting phases. We have analyzed the resistivity data (shown in fig. 1(b)) in the MCO region with the help of such a scenario. Using an effective medium theory  we find that a fraction ($`f_m`$) of the FMM phase grows steadily below $`T_{CO}`$, it reaches $`f_m0.2`$ at $`T/T_{CO}0.8`$ and the percolation volume $`f_m=1/3`$ at $`T=T_{MH}90K`$. We propose that the observed relaxation is arising because of the co-existing phases, whose relative volume fractions change as the temperature change on application of the heat pulse, have a finite time of conversion from one phase to the other. This has been elaborated below. In addition to this effect, close to $`T_{MH}`$ and TCO additional relaxation arises due to the release of the latent heat (see figure 3(b)).

It has been pointed out earlier that the observed equilibrium $`C_p`$ is nearly the same both for H = 0 and 8T and they are close to the vibrational background specific heat except the region close to $`T_{CO}`$. This would clearly imply that energetically the H = 0T CO phase and the H = 8T MCO phase (which a has a fair fraction of FM phase) are quite similar. If the coexisting phases in the sample would have been able to transform from one phase or to the other within a time scale $`<<`$ 1sec then our calorimetry experiment would not have distinguished between these two phases. There would not have been any thermal relaxation of the type we have observed. The situation, however, changes when there is a finite time associated with the transformation from one phase to the other coexisting phase. At any given temperature, there is an average equilibrium relative fraction ($`f_m`$) of the two coexisting phases. The noise experiments on these materials show that at a given temperature the equilibrium volume fraction is result of dynamic equilibrium and in the time scale of the noise experiments (typically $`>`$1 sec) the two phases can transform one from the other giving rise to the conductivity fluctuation. In a heat pulse experiment when we apply the pulse and the temperature changes, the equilibrium volume fraction also changes so that the volume fraction corresponds to the new temperature. The two phases though energetically similar are separated by an energy barrier which makes this change take place over a finite time. Thus the sample thermally relaxes over a longer period and the relaxation time $`\tau _I`$ becomes finite comparable to $`\tau _B`$.

Large resistive relaxation and delayed release of heat has been observed in similar Pr1-x CaxMnO3 samples at lower temperature (typically for $`T<50K`$) when the samples were cooled to low temperature and the applied field was cycled at a fixed temperature . The time scales observed at those temperature were large (in the scale of $`10^3`$ secs or more). In our experiment the temperatures are much higher ($`T_{MH}<T<T_{CO}`$) and they were carried out by keeping the field constant and varying the temperature. The thermal relaxation observed by us occurs in the scale of few tens of secs presumably because we are doing the experiments at higher T($`>100K`$). However, the underlying physics seems to be similar in these experiments.

To conclude, we have observed that when a magnetic field is applied to a CO solid in the range $`T_{MH}<T<T_{CO}`$ a large thermal relaxation sets in when a heat pulse is applied.The relaxation is not seen in the pure phases at $`T<T_{MH}`$ or $`T>T_{CO}`$ or at all T in H=0T. We explain this observation as arising from two coexisting phases (COI and FMM) of similar energy which are separated by a potential well, which imposes a finite time(measurable in the experimental time scale) of conversion of one phase to the other.

A.G. thanks the CSIR Center of Excellence in Chemistry, JNCASR, for financial support. AKR thanks DST for partial support through a sponsored scheme.

Figure captions :

figure 1: Equilibrium specific heats $`C_p`$ of Pr0.63 Ca0.37MnO3 single crystal in presence of 0 and 8T magnetic fields. (data from ref. ) Inset (a) shows the H-T phase diagram and the arrow shows the path taken for the experiment. Inset (b) shows $`\rho `$ vs. T for H = 0 and 8T.

figure 2: Thermal relaxation curves ($`\mathrm{\Delta }`$T - t) of the sample in presence of H = 8T for three temperatures $`T<T_{MH}`$, $`T_{MH}<T<T_{CO}`$ and $`T>T_{CO}`$. Note the two relaxation time behaviour for $`T_{MH}<T<T_{CO}`$.

figure 3: (a) Variation of sample thermal relaxation time $`\tau _I`$ with $`T`$. (b) Variation of relaxing $`C_p`$ with $`T`$ (see text). The peak near $`T_{CO}`$ is due to latent heat.


text:
# Local Distinguishability of Multipartite Orthogonal Quantum States

## I Introduction

Pure quantum states may only be perfectly distinguished from one another when they are orthogonal. That is, a state $`|\psi `$ may be reliably distinguished from another, $`|\varphi `$, only if $`\psi |\varphi =0`$. We will show that if $`\psi |\varphi =0`$ for given $`|\psi `$ and $`|\varphi `$, then $`|\psi `$ may always be distinguished from $`|\varphi `$ by means of local operations and classical communication (LOCC). This may be surprising, since quantum systems can encode information that may only be extracted by analyzing the system *as a whole*. This well-known phenomenon - entanglement - forms the basis of many recently proposed quantum schemes, such as cryptographycrypt1 ; crypt2 ; crypt3  computationcomp  and enhanced communicationcomm . A tempting interpretation is that “entangled information” can only be uncovered using global measurements upon the system as a whole. But this is not the case - in our very general situation local measurements, sequentially dependent upon classically communicated prior measurement results, suffice to identify orthogonal entangled quantum states.

Schemes for distinguishing between a set of quantum states, both pure and mixed have been considered by various authors helstrom ; holevo ; fuchs ; sausage ; gottesman ; koashi . Closely related to the present paper is the work of Bennett et al sausage  who showed that there exist sets of orthogonal product states that cannot be distinguished by LOCC.

Alice and Bob each hold part of a quantum system, which occupies one of two possible orthogonal quantum states $`|\psi `$ and $`|\varphi `$. Alice and Bob know the precise form of $`|\psi `$ and $`|\varphi `$, but have no idea which of these possible states they actually possess: they will have to perform some measurements to find out. A global measurement would suffice, but alas Alice and Bob cannot afford to meet up. Fortunately for them, they are on speaking terms, as one phone call is all they require. This situation, LOCC, is of primary relevance to most applications of entanglement.

The strategy Alice and Bob adopt is simple. They can always find a basis in which the two orthogonal states can be represented

$`|\psi `$ $`=`$ $`|1_A^{}|\eta _1_B+\mathrm{}+|l_A^{}|\eta _l_B`$ (1)
$`|\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`|1_A^{}|\eta _1^{}_B+\mathrm{}+|l_A^{}|\eta _l^{}_B`$
where { $`|i_A^{}`$ for $`i=1`$ to $`l`$} form some orthogonal basis set for Alice, $`\{|\eta _1_B,\mathrm{},|\eta _l_B\}`$ are not normalized, and $`|\eta _i^{}_B`$ is orthogonal to $`|\eta _i_B`$. Alice simply measures her part of the system in such a basis, and communicates the result, $`i`$, to Bob. Bob then has an easy task - he may distinguish locally between $`|\eta _i_B`$ and $`|\eta _i^{}_B`$ and thereby know which state he and Alice shared to begin with.

## II Matrix Representation of Possible States

Alice and Bob start out knowing the precise form of two states that might correspond to their shared quantum system. These two possible states, $`|\psi `$ and $`|\varphi `$, are orthogonal, so that $`\psi |\varphi =0`$. We can represent them in the following, entirely general way:

$`|\psi `$ $`=`$ $`|1_A|\eta _1_B+\mathrm{}+|n_A|\eta _n_B`$ (2)
$`|\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`|1_A|\nu _1_B+\mathrm{}+|n_A|\nu _n_B`$
where $`\{|1_A,\mathrm{},|n_A\}`$ form an orthonormal basis set for Alice, and the vectors $`\{|\eta _1_B,\mathrm{},|\eta _n_B\}`$ and $`\{|\nu _1_B,\mathrm{},|\nu _n_B\}`$ are not normalized and also not necessarily orthogonal. Alice and Bob can express the vectors $`\{|\eta _1_B,\mathrm{},|\eta _n_B\}`$ and $`\{|\nu _1_B,\mathrm{},|\nu _n_B\}`$ as a superposition of a set of arbitrary basis vectors $`\{|1_B,\mathrm{},|m_B\}`$ in Bob’s space

$$|\eta _i_B=\underset{j}{}F_{ij}|j_B,|\nu _i_B=\underset{j}{}G_{ij}|j_B$$
(3)
where the elements $`F_{ij}`$ an $`G_{ij}`$ form two $`n\times m`$ matrices $`F`$ and $`G`$. These matrices preserve all the information Alice and Bob hold about states $`|\psi `$ and $`|\varphi `$. Because of the way they are constructed, the matrix $`FG^{}`$ takes the following form:

$$FG^{}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\nu _1|\eta _1& \mathrm{}& \nu _1|\eta _n\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ \nu _n|\eta _1& \mathrm{}& \nu _n|\eta _n\end{array}\right)$$
(4)
We can see this is the case by inspection, because $`\nu _i|\eta _j=_{k=1}^nF_{jk}G_{ik}^{}`$. The matrix $`FG^{}`$ encapsulates a great deal of significant information for Alice and Bob about the relationship between the states $`|\psi `$ and $`|\varphi `$. Since we know by the conditions of the problem that $`\varphi |\psi =0`$, we know that

$$\varphi |\psi =\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}\nu _i|\eta _i=\mathrm{Trace}(FG^{})=0$$
(5)
But the $`FG^{}`$ matrix holds more information than the simple fact of the states’ orthogonality. It also encodes the key to distinguishing between these two possible states. Alice plans to distinguish $`|\psi `$ and $`|\varphi `$ by finding some basis - any basis - in which she can describe her part such that the states $`|\psi `$ and $`|\varphi `$ take the more restricted form of (1). Alice must choose her $`\{|1_A,\mathrm{},|n_A\}`$ basis carefully such that no matter what result $`|i_A`$ she obtains, Bob can surely distinguish between his possible states. This means that for all $`i`$ , $`|\nu _i`$ must be orthogonal to $`|\eta _i`$. Thus we can write down our distinguishability criterion:

$$i\nu _i|\eta _i=0$$
(6)
In other words, in our matrix representation, we require the diagonal elements of $`FG^{}`$ to be zero. Alice can alter the form of $`FG^{}`$ by changing the basis in which she describes and measures her system. She has a great deal of choice in this regard: any orthogonal basis set spanning her space will provide a description of form (2), and thus some matrix $`FG^{}`$ of form (4). When she changes her orthonormal basis set, this changes the form of the matrices $`F`$ and $`G`$, and thus changes the form of $`FG^{}`$. In fact, unitary transformations of Alice’s measurement basis map to the conjugate unitary transformations upon $`FG^{}`$.

###### Theorem 1

A unitary transformation $`U^A`$ upon Alice’s measurement basis will transform the matrix $`FG^{}`$ to $`U^A(FG^{})U^A`$.

Proof: From (2), $`|\psi =_i|i_A|\eta _i_B`$. Alice’s unitary transformation acts thus: $`|i_A=_jU_{ij}^A|j^{}_A`$. From (3) it follows that, in Alice’s new basis $`\{|0^{}_A,\mathrm{},|n^{}_A\}`$:

$$|\psi =\underset{ijk}{}U_{ij}^A|j^{}_AF_{ik}|k_B$$
(7)
For true generality, we consider Bob might assist Alice by unitarily rotating his basis by $`U^B`$. We therefore write $`|k_B=_lU_{kl}^B|l^{}_B`$, giving $`|\psi =_{ijkl}|j^{}_A|l^{}_BU_{ij}^AF_{ik}U_{kl}^B`$. Since $`U_{ij}^A=U_{ji}^A`$, we can rewrite this as

$$\psi =\underset{ijkl}{}|j^{}_A|l^{}_BU_{ji}^AF_{ik}U_{kl}^B.$$
(8)
By analogy with (2) and (3), this means that in the new basis of description, we have a new matrix $`F^{}`$ where $`F_{ik}^{}=_{jl}U_{ji}^AF_{ik}U_{kl}^B`$. Under unitary basis rotations by Alice and Bob, our matrices $`A`$ and $`B`$ undergo the curious transformations

$$F^{}=U^AFU^B,G^{}=U^AGU^B$$
(9)
This means that the object of our interest, the $`FG^{}`$ matrix encoding information about the relationship *between* the states, will transform as…

$`F^{}G^{}=(U^AFU^B)\left(U^AGU^B\right)^{}`$
$`=U^AFU^BU^BG^{}U^A`$
$`=U^A(FG^{})U^A\mathrm{}`$ (10)
Bob’s unitary rotation $`U^B`$ drops out, as rotations in his basis will not affect the overlaps $`\nu _i|\eta _j`$ that make up $`FG^{}`$.

If $`U^A`$ is unitary, then so is $`U^A`$. Alice can find a basis of form (1), and thereby satisfy our distinguishability criterion (6) , *if and only if* there exists a unitary matrix $`U=U^A`$ such that $`U(FG^{})U^{}`$ is a “zerodiagonal” matrix. (A matrix whose diagonal elements are all zero.) A proof that such a unitary matrix always exists constitutes a proof that two orthogonal quantum states can always be distinguished.

## III Matrix proof of $`|\psi ,|\varphi `$ distinguishability

Unitary transformations upon Alice’s measurement basis translate into (conjugated) unitary transformations upon her specific $`FG^{}`$ matrix. If she can find a unitary rotation that converts this matrix into zerodiagonal form, she can ensure Bob will be able to distinguish between states $`|\psi `$ and $`|\varphi `$.

We first prove such a rotation always exists in the two-dimensional case, and then show how Alice may use a finite sequence of such $`2\times 2`$ transformations to zerodiagonalize any traceless $`n\times n`$ matrix.

### III.1 Two-dimensional case

###### Theorem 2

Let $`M`$ be the wholly general $`2\times 2`$ matrix $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}x& y\\ z& t\end{array}\right)`$. There exists a $`2\times 2`$ unitary matrix $`U`$ such that the diagonal elements of $`UMU^{}`$ are equal.

Proof: Let $`U=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}\theta & \mathrm{sin}\theta e^{i\omega }\\ \mathrm{sin}\theta e^{i\omega }& \mathrm{cos}\theta \end{array}\right)`$.

We need the diagonal elements of $`UMU^{}`$ to be equal. This gives us the condition:

$$(xt)\mathrm{cos}2\theta +\mathrm{sin}2\theta (ye^{i\omega }+ze^{i\omega })=0$$
(11)
The real and imaginary parts of this equation, can be solved for the angles $`\omega `$ and $`\theta `$:

$$\mathrm{tan}\omega =\frac{\mathrm{Im}(xt)\mathrm{Re}(z+y)\mathrm{Re}(xt)\mathrm{Im}(z+y)}{\mathrm{Re}(xt)\mathrm{Re}(zy)+\mathrm{Im}(xt)\mathrm{Im}(zy)}$$
(12)
$$\mathrm{tan}2\theta =\frac{\mathrm{Re}(xt)}{\mathrm{Re}(z+y)\mathrm{cos}\omega \mathrm{Im}(zy)\mathrm{sin}\omega }$$
(13)
The RHS of (12) is always real, and thus there will always be an angle $`\omega `$ that satisfies the equation. Given a definite $`\omega `$, we can always solve (13) for a definite $`\theta `$ for the same reason. Thus for any $`2\times 2`$ matrix $`M`$, there exists a $`2\times 2`$ unitary matrix that “equidiagonalizes” it. (Equalizes all its diagonal elements.) This completes the proof $`\mathrm{}`$.

This mathematical result can be applied to the $`2\times 2`$ dimensional case. Since the $`|\psi `$ and $`|\varphi `$ states are orthogonal, the corresponding $`FG^{}`$ matrix is traceless, in which case equidiagonalization constitutes zerodiagonalization. Equations (12) and (13) therefore always pick out a specific unitary transformation that will zerodiagonalize $`FG^{}`$. By measuring in that basis, Alice and Bob can always distinguish between the two possible orthogonal states of their system.

### III.2 $`2^k`$ dimensional case

We want to consider all situations of greater dimensionality than 2, but we first concentrate on situations where Alice’s Hilbert space has $`2^k`$ dimensions (where $`k`$ is some positive integer). The $`AB^{}`$ matrix has the same dimensionality, and will have $`2^k\times 2^k`$ elements. Note that while this particular class of $`FG^{}`$ matrices \- those of dimension $`2^k`$ \- may seem limited, it includes all quantum states comprising sets of qubits. In such cases, Alice can adopt a simple strategy to equidiagonalize this potentially huge matrix in a relatively small number of steps. We know from theorem 2 above that Alice may unitarily rotate any two diagonal elements in her $`FG^{}`$ matrix so that they become equal. By grouping the diagonal elements into $`2^{k1}`$ pairs, and equidiagonalizing each pair, she can create $`2^{k1}`$ equal pairs.

Both elements of an equal pair can then be individually made equal to the elements of another equal pair, using only two $`2\times 2`$ unitary transformations. Thereby, Alice can create $`2^{k2}`$ “quartets” of equal diagonal elements with just $`2^{k1}`$ further $`2\times 2`$ unitary transformations. By repeating this process $`k`$ times, Alice will set all the diagonal elements exactly equal. If her $`FG^{}`$ matrix has $`2^k`$ diagonal elements, then $`k2^{k1}`$ elementary operations will serve to equidiagonalize it. This satisfies Alice’s requirements: since she knows that her physical $`FG^{}`$ matrix is traceless, she knows that all the diagonal elements $`\nu _i|\eta _i`$ will be thereby set to zero. Therefore Alice and Bob can distinguish the two orthogonal states. Of course, Alice need not physically enact each and every separate $`2\times 2`$ unitary transformation. A single $`2^k\times 2^k`$ unitary transformation will represent the product of all these rotations, and finding this one transformation that equidiagonalizes $`FG^{}`$ in one shot is a perfectly tractable problem for Alice to solve.

### III.3 General case

The matrix $`FG^{}`$ will not, in general, be of size $`2^k\times 2^k`$. Alice may nevertheless devise an approach that is guaranteed to yield state equations of form (1). She needs to be inventive. Her favored tactic so far - a sequence of pair-wise equalizations - will converge upon the desired unitary matrix only in the infinite limit. She can find a more elegant method, however. The $`2^k`$ dimensional case is unproblematic, so if Alice can *enlarge* $`FG^{}`$ such that it achieves a dimensionality of a power of two, she can solve her problem.

Such an enlargement represents an expansion of Alice’s quantum system into a Hilbert space of greater dimension. She must perform a SWAP operation to transfer the state of her original quantum system $`_n^A`$ described by (2) to an $`n`$-dimensional subspace of a larger space, $`_l^A^{}`$, where $`ln`$ and $`l=2^k`$ for some integer $`k`$:

$`|i_A|j_A^{}`$ $``$ $`|j_A|i_A^{}\text{when}i,j=1\text{to}n`$ (14)
$`|i_A|j_A^{}`$ $``$ $`|i_A|j_A^{}\text{otherwise}`$
Since the size of $`FG^{}`$ is simply equal to the number of orthonormal vectors in Alice’s measurement basis, this operation expands it to size $`l\times l`$. In her new basis, $`\{|1_A^{},\mathrm{},|l_A^{}\}_A`$, Alice describes the two possible states (2) thus:

$`|\psi `$ $`=`$ $`|1_A^{}|\eta _1^{}_B+\mathrm{}+|l_A^{}|\eta _l^{}_B`$ (15)
$`|\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`|1_A^{}|\nu _1^{}_B+\mathrm{}+|l_A^{}|\nu _l^{}_B`$
Here, $`|\eta _i^{}_B`$ and $`|\nu _i^{}_B`$ are new unnormalized vectors, but remain describable in Bob’s original basis $`\{|1_B,\mathrm{},|m_B\}`$. Now her system has a convenient number of dimensions, Alice proceeds as in Sec. III.2. She will obtain and perform a measurement guaranteeing Bob possesses one of two orthogonal states.

SWAP operations like these are physically unproblematic, and do not in any way derogate the entangled information Alice shares with Bob. One physical realization of this procedure requires just one ancilliary qubit. Alice introduces this qubit “$`Z`$”, known to be in state $`|0_Z`$ to her system, giving her state equations of form:

$`|\psi =|10_{AZ}|\eta _1_B+\mathrm{}+|n0_{AZ}|\eta _n_B`$ (16)
$`+|11_{AZ}|\eta _{n+1}_B+\mathrm{}+|n1_{AZ}|\eta _{2n}_B`$
Since qubit $`Z`$ is in state $`|0_Z`$, we know all the unnormalized vectors $`|\eta _{n+i}_B`$ have zero amplitude. This gives rise to the rather lop-sided $`FG^{}`$ matrix, wherein $`\{FG^{}\}_{ij}=0`$ everywhere that either $`i>n`$ or $`j>n`$. With this $`FG^{}`$ matrix, Alice’s problems are over. Between the numbers $`n`$ and $`2n`$ there lies a power of two. Thus there is a sub-matrix of $`FG^{}`$ that includes all $`n`$ non-zero terms, and just enough zero-valued terms to round things out to the most convenient dimensionality. Alice can find unitary manipulations on this sub-matrix that transform it, (and thereby simultaneously transform the $`FG^{}`$ matrix as a whole) into zero-diagonal form. She simply follows the procedure outlined in Sec. III.2, obtaining a finite sequence of unitary transformations that, taken together, represent a single rotation of her measurement basis.

This unlikely procedure is surprisingly efficient for distinguishing $`|\psi `$ and $`|\varphi `$. No matter what the dimensionality of the problem, there is a solution after a finite number of steps: a number of steps equal to $`\frac{1}{2}l\mathrm{log}_2l`$, where $`l`$ is the expanded dimensionality. Through the use of this SWAP operation Alice can always accomplish perfect distinguishability with minimal effort.

## IV Further Generalizations

### IV.1 Multipartite states

We have considered only the bipartite case thusfar, but the strategy used by Alice and Bob can also be deployed by any number of people. States of tripartite form, for instance:

$`|\psi `$ $`=`$ $`|\alpha _0_A|\beta _0_B|\gamma _0_C+\mathrm{}+|\alpha _n_A|\beta _n_B|\gamma _n_C`$ (17)
$`|\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`|\alpha _0^{}_A|\beta _0^{}_B|\gamma _0^{}_C+\mathrm{}+|\alpha _n^{}_A|\beta _n^{}_B|\gamma _n^{}_C`$
can, when Alice swaps into a larger Hilbert space, easily be represented thus:

$`|\psi `$ $`=`$ $`|0_A^{}|\mathrm{\Gamma }_0_{BC}+\mathrm{}+|l_A^{}|\mathrm{\Gamma }_l_{BC}`$ (18)
$`|\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`|0_A^{}|\mathrm{\Gamma }_0^{}_{BC}+\mathrm{}+|l_A^{}|\mathrm{\Gamma }_l^{}_{BC}`$
Alice simply behaves as before, and leaves Bob and Claire to distinguish between the resulting bipartite orthogonal states. The problem collapses to its original formulation, which we have already solved. If $`n`$ people share the quantum system, performing a series of $`n2`$ such measurements will cascade their problem down to the bipartite case. We can conclude that two orthogonal states of any quantum system, shared in any proportion between any number of separated parties can be perfectly distinguished.

### IV.2 Multiple possible states

Our procedure distinguishes perfectly between two orthogonal states, $`|\psi `$ and $`|\varphi `$. What if Alice and Bob must distinguish between more than two orthogonal states? In general, this will not be possible so long as Alice and Bob share only one copy of their state. Whichever bases they perform sequential measurements in, their binary outcomes may not perfectly distinguish between more than two possibilities.

It is natural to quantify Alice and Bob’s situation by asking *how many* copies of their state they require to perfectly distinguish between it and the other possibilities. A detailed analysis of this problem is beyond the scope of this paper. Nevertheless, our basic procedure places an upper bound on the number of copies required. $`n`$ possible orthogonal states can be distinguished perfectly with $`n1`$ copies.

Let us denote the possible states $`|\psi _i`$. Alice and Bob simply act on their first copy as if they were distinguishing $`|\psi _0`$ and $`|\psi _1`$. If the state they share happens to be either $`|\psi _0`$ or $`|\psi _1`$, then their measurement result will be a definite verdict in favour of one or the other possibility. If they share instead some other $`|\psi _i`$, since $`\psi _i|\psi _j=\delta _{ij}`$, Alice and Bob’s measurement will randomly decide upon $`|\psi _0`$ some of the time, and will seem to measure $`|\psi _1`$ otherwise. A positive measurement for $`|\psi _0`$ is no guarantee of Alice and Bob sharing that state, for all the other states (barring $`|\psi _1`$) sometimes produce that result. What a verdict for $`|\psi _0`$ does show is that Alice and Bob definitely do not share $`|\psi _1`$, which they would have detected with certainty.

Proceeding in this way, Alice and Bob can always use a single copy of their state to exclude one possibility. After $`n1`$ such operations, they can have excluded $`n1`$ states, and can thus distinguish between $`n`$ possibilities. This represents an upper bound upon the number of copies required for state distinction. Note that there are certainly sets of orthogonal states that can be distinguished using less than $`n1`$ copies. An example are the four Bell-states, where only two copies will suffice.

## V Conclusion

We have proved that any two orthogonal quantum states shared between any number of parties may be perfectly distinguished by local operations and classical communication. Since orthogonal states are the only perfectly distinguishable states, this means that all pairs of distinguishable states are distinguishable with LOCC - global measurements are never required. Whether non-orthogonal states may also be optimally distinguished in this way remains an open question.

We would like to acknowledge the support of Hewlett-Pacard. JW and AJS thank the UK EPSRC (Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council), and LH thanks the Royal Society for funding this research.