text:
# Clustering and preferential attachment in growing networks

## I Introduction

Many systems take the form of networks—sets of nodes, or vertices, joined together by links, or edges. The Internet, the power grid, social networks, food webs, distribution networks, and metabolic networks are commonly cited examples. Investigations of networks within the physics community fall loosely into two categories: (1) studies of static network structure  and dynamical processes taking place on fixed networks ; (2) studies of the dynamics of networks themselves—how and why their topology changes over time . It is this second category that we address here, focusing on two properties which have received a large amount of attention in the literature—clustering and preferential attachment.

Sociologists have long known that social networks—networks of personal acquaintances, for example—display a high degree of transitivity, meaning that there is a heightened probability of two people being acquainted if they have one or more other acquaintances in common. In the physics literature this phenomenon is called “clustering.” Watts and Strogatz  measured clustering in a number of real-world networks, including both social and physical networks, by calculating a clustering coefficient, equal to the probability that two vertices that are both neighbors of the same third vertex will be neighbors of one another. They found that in many networks the clustering coefficient is much higher than its expected baseline value, which is set by comparison with a random graph.

It has also been pointed out by a number of authors , particularly in studies of the Internet and the World-Wide Web, that real-world networks have highly skewed distributions of vertex degree. (The degree of a vertex is the number of other vertices to which it is connected.) In many cases, the degree distribution is found to follow a power law, a particularly telling functional form which often signifies an underlying process worthy of study.

Explanations have been put forward for both of these observations. In the case of clustering, it is conjectured that pairs of individuals with a common acquaintance (or several) are likely to become acquainted themselves through introduction by their mutual friend(s) . In the case of degree distributions, it is conjectured that, for a variety of reasons, vertices accumulate new edges in proportion to the number they have already, leading to a multiplicative process which is known to give power-law distributions . This process is often called “preferential attachment.” While both of these explanations are, in some contexts at least, perfectly plausible, there has been little if any empirical evidence in their favor—a glaring problem for two conjectures which have formed the foundation of a substantial body of research. The principal reason for this has been the lack of good time-resolved data on how networks grow.

In order to test a conjecture such as “people with many common friends are more likely to become acquainted than those with few or none,” one needs to watch a network grow and see if the process described by the conjecture does indeed happen with significantly heightened frequency. Although data on the structure of networks are quite plentiful, data on how they grow have proved harder to come by. Recently, however, the author conducted some empirical studies of collaboration networks of scientists: networks in which pairs of scientists are linked together if they have coauthored one or more papers . These collaboration networks are true social networks, since two scientists who have coauthored a paper will normally be acquainted with one another. (There are occasional exceptions—see Ref. .) They are also well documented, since there exist extensive machine-readable bibliographies of the scientific literature. What’s more, as Barabási and co-workers have recently pointed out , these networks have excellent time resolution as well, because each paper comes with a publication or receipt date. As we now show, this allows us to test directly the clustering and preferential attachment conjectures.

In this study we look at collaboration networks derived from two bibliographic sources:

1. The Los Alamos E-print Archive, a database of preprints in physics, self-submitted by their authors;
2. Medline, a database of published papers in biology and medicine, whose entries are professionally maintained by the National Institutes of Health.

While neither of these databases records the exact publication date of the papers they contain, both include a record of the sequence in which papers were added to the database. This is enough for our purposes: all that we need for our calculations is the order of the collaborations undertaken by each author in the database, and the order of the papers is a reasonable proxy for this—probably not correct in every case, but assumed to be correct in most. Two other databases that we studied previously  do not contain enough information to establish order of collaborations, recording publication or database entry of papers to the nearest year only. This creates ambiguity since many authors produce more than one paper a year, and so we did not use these databases for the current study.

Authors are identified by their full surname and all initials. As discussed previously , an author who gives their name differently on different papers may be confused for two people by this measure, while two people with identical surnames and initials may be confused for one. The error in the number of vertices in the network as a result of these problems was found to be on the order of 5%.

We study a six-year interval of time for both databases. (For the Los Alamos Archive we use 1995 to 2000 inclusive, for Medline 1994 to 1999.) Over this period the Los Alamos Archive records $`\mathrm{58\hspace{0.17em}342}`$ distinct names, and Medline $`\mathrm{1\hspace{0.17em}648\hspace{0.17em}660}`$. In each of the calculations presented here, we use the first five of the six years to construct a collaboration network, and then examine how that network further changes in the remaining one year. Our assumption is that any scientist who is currently active will produce at least one paper during the initial five year period, as will any currently active collaboration between a pair of scientists, so that the network we have at the end of that period will be essentially complete. New vertices added in the sixth year represent, it is assumed, new individuals entering the field, and new edges represent genuine new collaborations. Of course there are some exceptions, such as established scientists who for one reason or another fail to publish anything for five years and then produce a paper in the sixth, and these will be misrepresented in our calculations. We assume these are a small fraction of the total. There will also be some scientists who leave the field during the six years, to go into different fields or professions, or because they retire. We make no attempt to guess which individuals leave in this way: everyone whose name appears even once is considered a member of the network for the entire period of study thereafter. This will introduce some error into our calculations. However, it is straightforward to convince oneself that the correlations we are looking for in the present study will only be weakened by this error, not strengthened, so there is no danger of false positive results.

## II Clustering

Let us consider first the question of clustering in the network. We already know that the clustering coefficient is high in our collaboration networks—$`0.45`$ for the Los Alamos Archive and $`0.088`$ for Medline over a five-year period . The calculation presented here improves on these results in two ways. First, the simple clustering coefficient includes contributions from collaborations between authors which preceded their collaborations with any mutual acquaintances. By using time-resolved data we can exclude these collaborations from our measure of clustering. Second, we can determine whether the probability of two individuals collaborating increases as the number $`m`$ of their previous mutual acquaintances goes up. If this is the case, then it suggests that the standard explanation of clustering—introduction of future collaborators to one another by common previous acquaintances—is correct, the probability of such an introduction presumably increasing with $`m`$. Other explanations, such as the institutional explanation proposed in Ref. , would be harder to justify.

Measuring the probability of collaboration between authors as a function of their number of mutual acquaintances is complicated by the fact that both the size of the graph and the numbers of mutual acquaintances themselves are changing over time. We consider the probability $`P_m(t)`$ that the two scientists connected by a link added at time $`t`$ have $`m`$ mutual acquaintances. (Time is somewhat arbitrary here. It can be real time, but it can also be any other function which increases monotonically as papers are added to the database—only the order of the papers matters, not their precise timing. The links created by a paper with three or more authors are all considered to be added at the same instant.) We have

$$P_m(t)=\frac{n_m(t)}{\frac{1}{2}N(t)[N(t)1]}R_m,$$
(1)
where $`n_m(t)`$ is the number of pairs with $`m`$ mutual acquaintances immediately before the addition of the paper at time $`t`$, $`N(t)`$ is the current number of authors in the network, and $`R_m`$ is the relative probability of collaboration between the two scientists connected by this link, i.e., the ratio between the actual probability of their collaborating and the probability of their collaborating in a network in which presence of mutual acquaintances makes no difference. We assume that the probability that two scientists with a given value of $`m`$ collaborate at a particular time does not depend on the number of other scientists with that value of $`m`$, or on the size of the database in which the paper they write is archived, and hence that $`R_m`$ is independent of $`t`$ . This makes it a suitable quantity to measure to test our clustering hypothesis. In a world with no clustering, we would have $`R_m=1`$ for all $`m`$; in a world in which clustering arises through introductions, as above, it should increase with increasing $`m`$.

To measure $`R_m`$, one simply constructs a histogram of the value of $`m`$ for each link added to the graph in which each sample is weighted by a factor of $`\frac{1}{2}N(t)[N(t)1]/n_m(t)`$. In Fig. II we do this for the network of the Los Alamos Archive. As discussed above, we evaluate $`R_m`$ for the last of our six years only, the previous five being used to establish the initial network for the calculation. As the figure shows, $`R_m`$ does indeed increase with $`m`$, and is much greater than 1 for all $`m>0`$. A pair of scientists who have five mutual previous collaborators, for instance, are about twice as likely to collaborate as a pair with only two, and about 200 times as likely as a pair with none. $`R_m`$ increases roughly linearly for small $`m`$, perhaps indicating that each common collaborator of a pair of scientists is equally likely to introduce them. The curve appears to flatten off for higher $`m`$, although the data become poor for $`m8`$, since the number of pairs of authors with this many common collaborators who have not already collaborated themselves is very small.

As well as supporting the standard explanation of clustering in social networks, our data for $`R_m`$ might prove useful for modeling purposes. For example, in some models of the growth of social networks , a particular form is assumed for the probability of individuals becoming acquainted, as a function of their number of mutual friends. Fig. II provides a rough empirical guide for what that functional form should be. In the figure we give a fit to the data of the form

$$R_m=AB\mathrm{e}^{m/m_0},$$
(2)
where $`A`$, $`B`$, and $`m_0`$ are constants. This form appears to fit reasonably well and might be suitable for use in the models.

## III Repeat collaborations

In the calculation described above, we included only newly appearing edges in the network. Repeat collaborations between authors who had collaborated before were excluded; we assume that such collaborations are more likely to be a result of previous acquaintance than the result of network structure. This however raises another interesting question: does probability of collaboration also increase with the number of times one has collaborated before? The answer is yes, as shown in the inset of Fig. II, which measures the relative probability $`R_n`$ (defined similarly to $`R_m`$ above) of two coauthors collaborating if they have collaborated $`n`$ times previously within the period covered by our study. If collaboration probability were independent of previous collaboration, we would have $`R_n=1`$ for all $`n`$, but as the figure shows, $`R_n`$ increases roughly linearly with $`n`$, indicating that number of past collaborations is a good indicator of the probability of future collaboration. However, one must bear in mind that this calculation may be influenced by varying frequencies of collaboration: regular collaborators who publish often will have more publications in the database as well as greater likelihood of publishing again in the last of our six years, producing a correlation just as seen in the figure. To eliminate this effect one would have to look at data for a longer period of time and compare collaborators with similar numbers of publications but different publication rates. Unfortunately, this is not practical with the data available to us at present.

## IV Preferential attachment

We can also use our data to test for preferential attachment in the collaboration network. Barabási et al.  have previously looked for preferential attachment in two collaboration networks derived from data for publications in mathematics and neuroscience. Papers in their databases were dated only to the nearest year, making the order in which collaborations occur uncertain, as discussed above. To get around this, they restricted themselves to measuring the number of new papers each author in the network published in a single year, as a function of number of previous papers. This should be an increasing function if there is preferential attachment, or constant otherwise. Their results show a clear increase and hence favor preferential attachment.

Using our data we can measure preferential attachment in our networks directly by a method similar to the one we used to measure clustering above. We define a relative probability $`R_k`$ that a link added at time $`t`$ connects to a vertex representing a scientist who has collaborated previously with $`k`$ others. By analogy with Eq. (1), the corresponding absolute probability $`P_k(t)`$ that this link connects to a vertex with degree $`k`$ is $`P_k(t)=R_kn_k(t)/N(t)`$, where $`n_k(t)`$ is the number of vertices with degree $`k`$ immediately before addition of this link. Then $`R_k`$ can be estimated by making a histogram of the degrees $`k`$ of the vertices to which each link is added in which each sample is weighted by a factor of $`N(t)/n_k(t)`$. If there is no preferential attachment, $`R_k`$ should equal 1 for all $`k`$. If there is preferential attachment, it should be an increasing function of $`k`$, and the widely held belief is that it should in fact increase linearly with $`k`$. If it increases linearly, then the resulting degree distribution of the network will be a power law .

In Fig. IV and its inset we show empirical results for $`R_k`$ for the databases studied here. As the figure shows, the relative probability is in both cases close to linear in the initial part of the curve, but falls off once $`k`$ becomes large. This is understandable: no one can collaborate with an infinite number of people in a finite period of time, so at some point $`R(k)`$ must start to decrease. This point appears to be around 150 collaborators in physics and 600 in biomedicine. Interestingly, these figures coincide roughly with the points at which the observed degree distribution in these networks starts to deviate from the power-law form , lending support to the theory that preferential attachment is the origin of the power law.

Our results differ somewhat from those of Barabási et al. , who found preferential attachment for their networks, but did not find linear behavior. In the language used here, their finding was that $`R(k)k^\nu `$, with $`\nu 0.8`$. This form does not fit our data very well. A power-law fit to the increasing part of $`R(k)`$ for our data gives $`\nu =1.04\pm 0.04`$ for Medline and $`\nu =0.89\pm 0.98`$ for the Los Alamos Archive, both of which are compatible with the conjecture of linear preferential attachment, while only the latter is compatible with $`\nu =0.8`$. In practice however, this difference may have little effect. As Krapivsky et al.  have shown, sub-linear preferential attachment gives rise to a stretched exponential cutoff in the resulting degree distribution, but we already have a similar cutoff in our distribution as a result of the deviation of $`R(k)`$ from linear behavior for large enough $`k`$.

## V Conclusions

To conclude, we have measured the probability of collaboration between scientists in two collaboration networks as a function of their number of mutual acquaintances in the network, their number of previous collaborations, and their number of previous collaborators. We find that the probability of collaboration is strongly positively correlated with each of these, and for the latter two that the relationship is close to linear over a large part of its range. These results lend strong support to previously conjectured theories about the way in which networks grow.

## Acknowledgements

The author thanks László Barabási and Duncan Watts for helpful conversations, and Erzsébet Ravasz for providing an early preprint of Ref. . This work was funded in part by the National Science Foundation and by Intel Corporation.


format: text

text:
# Effects of transition metal doping in MgB2 superconductor

## Abstract

Effects of chemical substitution of the divalent transition metals has been systematically investigated in Mg$`{}_{1x}{}^{}M_{x}^{}`$B2 ($`x`$ = 0.03; $`M`$ = Mn, Fe, Co, Ni and Zn). Substitution of magnetic ions, i.e., Mn2+, Fe2+, Co2+ and Ni2+, for the Mg2+ ion suppresses $`T_\mathrm{c}`$: d$`T_\mathrm{c}`$/d$`x`$ is the largest (= - 159 K) in the Mn-doped sample. We have found Zn-substitution increases $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ ($`\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{c}`$ 0.2 K at $`x`$ = 0.03), perhaps due to the enhanced density of state near the Fermi level.

The recent discovery of the superconductivity in MgB2 at $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ = 39 K has stimulated world wide excitement. This is not only due to the simplicity in the chemical composition, the crystal structure and electronic structure, but also due to its potentiality for application. Many researches are accumulating detailed information on the physical properties of the parent MgB2. On the other hand, the chemical substitution is one of the powerful approach not only to reveal the nature of the parent material, but also to enhance the material potentiality by elevating the transition temperature $`T_\mathrm{c}`$. The parent MgB2 has a hexagonal structure (AlB2-type; space group $`P6/mmm`$) with alternating B- and Mg-sheets. The hexagonal network of the two-dimensional boron sheet governs the electronic structure near the Fermi level, and hence is believed to be responsible for the superconductivity. Band structural calculations showed that the electronic structure is rather three-dimensional, making a sharp contrast with the two-dimensional electronic structure of the graphite intercalation compounds. Another structural feature of MgB2 is that a large number of isostructural compounds, such as, AlB2, CrB2 and MnB2, exist. These structural features have motivated attempts to substitute Mg with Li, Al, Zn, and Mn and B with C.

In this Communication, we report substitution effects of the divalent transition metal ($`M`$ = Mn, Fe, Co, Ni and Zn) for the Mg2+ ions on the superconductivity of MgB2. We have found substitution of the magnetic ions, i.e., Mn2+, Fe2+, Co2+ and Ni2+, for the Mg2+ ion suppresses $`T_\mathrm{c}`$, due to the interaction between the local spin $`\stackrel{}{S}`$ and the constituent electron $`\stackrel{}{s}`$ in the Cooper pair. We have found the Zn-substitution increases $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ ($`\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{c}`$ 0.2 K at $`x`$ = 0.03), perhaps due to the enhanced density of state near the Fermi level.

The Mg$`{}_{1x}{}^{}M_{x}^{}`$B2 ($`x`$ = 0.03; $`M`$ = Mn, Fe, Co, Ni and Zn) samples were synthesized by heating a stoichometric mixture of amorphous boron (98 %), magnesium powder (99.9 %), Mn powder (99.9 %), Fe powder (99.9 %), Co powder (99 %), Ni powder (99.9 %), and Zn powder (99.9 %) at 900 C for 2 hour. The powders are place in a Ta foil and heated in a flow of Ar/H25% gas. The room temperature x-ray powder patterns are obtained in the 2 $`\theta `$ range of 10 - 100 degree with use of the Rigaku RINT2000/PC diffractometer. The temperature dependence of magnetization $`M`$ was measured in a Quantum Design PPMS magnetometer under an applied field of 10 Oe. The data were taken on heating after cooling down to the lowest temperature in zero field (ZFC).

First of all, let us show in Fig.1 the x-ray powder patterns of Mg$`{}_{0.97}{}^{}M_{0.03}^{}`$B2 ($`M`$ = Mn, Fe, Co, Ni and Zn) at 300 K in the 2 $`\theta `$ range of 20 - 60 degree. In all the compounds, sharp reflections from the AlB2 structure are observed. Small reflections indicated by open triangles (closed triangles) are due to MgB4 (MgO) impurities. In the case of the Ni-substituted sample, the powder patterns contain recognizable impurity peaks. These peaks can be assigned to Ni-related impurities, such as, Ni4B3, MgNi2 and so on, indicating that some part of the Ni atoms is wasted. This situation is apparently similar to the case of Cu- and Ca-substitutions. We tried to substitute Cu (Ca) for Mg, but the powder pattern contains considerable MgCu2 (CaB6) impurity peaks and $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ does not shift, indicating that non of the elements are substituted for Mg (not shown). Nevertheless, not only the lattice constants but $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ shift in the Ni-doped sample, suggesting that a portion of the Ni atoms is substituted (vide infra).

The upper panels of Fig.2 show the magnified x-ray powder patterns around (a) (110) and (b) (002) reflections, whose peak positions reflect the in-plane and out-of-plane B-B lengths, respectively. The lowest curve is the pattern for the non-doped MgB2. The (011) reflection shifts toward the low-angle side in the Co-, Ni- and Zn-substituted samples (see open triangles in Fig.2(a)). This indicates increase of the inter-plane B-B distance with chemical substitution. Similarly, the (002) reflection shifts toward the low-angle side in the Fe-, Ni- and Zn-substituted samples (Fig.2(b)), indicating increase of the inter-B-sheet distance. In the Mn-substituted sample, the inter-B-sheet distance, rather, decreases. To accurately determine the lattice constants, i.e., $`a`$ and $`c`$, we have analyzed the powder pattern with the RIETAN-2000 program with AlB2 structure ($`P6/mmm`$, No 191). The impurity peaks were removed in the Rietveld refinement procedure. The determined lattice constants, $`a`$ and $`c`$, are listed in Table I. We plotted in the bottom panel (Fig.2(c)) variation of the lattice constants, i.e., $`a`$ and $`c`$ (see also Table I). The Mn-doping effect on the lattice structure, that is decrease of $`c`$ and nearly constant $`a`$, is analogous to Mg1-xAlxB2, while the Co-doping effect, that is, increase of $`c`$ and nearly constant $`c`$, is similar to the Li-doped and C-doped MgB2. The Zn-doping effects on the lattice structure, i.e., elongation of both the lattice constant, is consistent with the work done by Kazakov et al..

Figure 3 shows the temperature dependence of susceptibility $`\chi `$ for Mg$`{}_{1x}{}^{}M_{x}^{}`$B2 ($`x`$ = 0.03; $`M`$ = Mn, Fe, Co, Ni and Zn) together with the $`\chi T`$ curve for the parent MgB2. The data were taken under applied filed of 10 Oe on heating after cooling in zero field (ZFC). All the samples show well-defined one-step transitions as well as large shielding fraction before correction of demagnetization, indicating that the superconductivity is of bulk nature. The transition temperature $`T_\mathrm{c}`$, defined by the intersection of the extrapolated lines below and above the transition, was listed in Table I. In Fig.4 are plotted the relative change of $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ due to the 3 % doping of the divalent transition metals. Here, note that the actual doping level of the Ni-substituted sample is less than 3 %, since the Ni-related impurities are observed in the x-ray powder pattern (see Fig.1). Inset shows a detailed doping dependence of $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ for Mg1-xMnxB2 (cited from Ref.). $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ decreases linearly with Mn concentration $`x`$ at a rate of d$`T_\mathrm{c}`$/d$`x`$ = - 159 K. If we assume a similar linear relation between $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ and $`x`$, d$`T_\mathrm{c}`$/d$`x`$ becomes - 83 K for the Co-substitution and - 13 K for the Fe-substitution.

The absolute magnitude of d$`T_\mathrm{c}`$/d$`x`$ of the Mn- and Co-doped samples are much larger as compared with the substitution of non-magnetic elements, such as Zn2+ (present work) and Al3+. Therefore, we ascribed the suppression of $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ to the interaction between the local spin $`\stackrel{}{S}`$ and the constituent electron $`\stackrel{}{s}`$ of the Cooper pair ($``$ \- 2 $`J\stackrel{}{S}\stackrel{}{s}`$), not to the structural effect nor the electron doping effect. Because the local spin - electron interaction tends to break the Cooper pairs, and to lower $`T_\mathrm{c}`$. Within this scenario, it is reasonable that the Mn2+ ion, which has the largest local spin $`S`$ (= 5/2), shows the largest d$`T_\mathrm{c}`$/d$`x`$ (= - 169 K; see also Fig.4). Strangely enough, absolute magnitude of d$`T_\mathrm{c}`$/d$`x`$ (= - 13 K) for the Fe2+ ion ($`d^6`$; $`S`$ = 2) is much smaller than the case of Mn2+ ion ($`d^5`$; $`S`$ = 5/2) and Co2+ ion ($`d^7`$; $`S`$ = 3/2). We think degree of the mixing between the $`M`$3$`d`$ level and the B2$`p`$ band is the key to solve this unexpected behavior, and hence elaborated band calculations are indispensable.

Finally, let us discuss on the Zn-substitution effect on $`T_\mathrm{c}`$. Looking at Fig.3, one may notice that $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ increases by $``$ 0.2 K by substitution of 3 % Zn for the Mg. Kazakov et al.. reported that $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ rather decreases by $``$ 0.5 K at $`x`$ =0.05 and by $``$ 0.2 K at 0.10. These experimental observations suggest that there exists some optimal Zn concentration ($``$ 4 %), beyond which $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ rather decreases. Here, recall that the characteristic Zn-doping effect on the lattice structure is elongation of both the lattice constants (see Fig.2). The resultant increase of the in-plane and out-of-plane B-B distances reduces the one-electron bandwidth, and hence enhances the density of state (DOS) near the Fermi level $`E_\mathrm{F}`$. This structural effect well explains increase of $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ in the Zn-doped sample.

In summary, chemical substitution effects on the superconductivity has been investigated in Mg$`{}_{1x}{}^{}M_{x}^{}`$B2 ($`x`$ = 0.03; $`M`$ = Mn, Fe, Co, Ni and Zn). We have found suppression of $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ with substitution of magnetic ions, i.e., Mn2+, Fe2+, Co2+ and Ni2+, for the Mg2+ ion, even though these magnetic impurities occupy the Mg sites outside of the boron sheets. This observation perhaps reflects three-dimensional electronic band structure of MgB2. A more elaborated and systematic investigation on the chemical substitution effects on $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ is necessary to reveal the nature of the MgB2 superconductor.

This work was supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research from the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture.


text:
# An Investigation of Orientational Symmetry-Breaking Mechanisms in High Landau Levels

## Abstract

The principal axes of the recently discovered anisotropic phases of 2D electron systems at high Landau level occupancy are consistently oriented relative to the crystal axes of the host semiconductor. The nature of the native rotational symmetry breaking field responsible for this preferential orientation remains unknown. Here we report on experiments designed to investigate the origin and magnitude of this symmetry breaking field. Our results suggest that neither micron-scale surface roughness features nor the precise symmetry of the quantum well potential confining the 2D system are important factors. By combining tilted field transport measurements with detailed self-consistent calculations we estimate that the native anisotropy energy, whatever its origin, is typically $``$ 1 mK per electron.

A fundamental goal of contemporary condensed matter physics is to understand the ground state of the two-dimensional electron system (2DES) and to explore its experimental signatures. In the presence of a large perpendicular magnetic field $`B`$, the kinetic energy of 2D electrons becomes quantized into discrete massively degenerate Landau levels (LLs). At high $`B`$ only the lowest ($`N`$ = 0) LL is occupied, and the 2DES exhibits its most spectacular phenomenon: the fractional quantized Hall effect (FQHE). At lower magnetic fields the higher LLs become occupied, and in the third or higher ($`N`$ $``$ 2) LL no FQHE states have been observed. Recent experiments have nevertheless uncovered extraordinary transport signatures unique to the high LL regime, pointing to the existence of a new class of many-body states distinct from the incompressible quantum fluids responsible for the FQHE . The most striking of these signatures is the rapid development, at very low temperatures, of strong anisotropies in the longitudinal resistance of the 2D electron system.

Observed only in very high mobility samples and at temperatures below about 100 mK, the anisotropies in the longitudinal resistance are strongest near half-filling of the $`N`$ = 2 and several higher Landau levels. This corresponds to Landau level filling fractions $`\nu `$, defined as the ratio of the electron density $`N_s`$ to the degeneracy $`eB/h`$ of a single spin-resolved LL, of $`\nu `$ = 9/2, 11/2, 13/2, etc. For 2D electron systems in GaAs/AlGaAs heterostructures grown on $`[001]`$-oriented GaAs substrates, the anisotropies are consistently disposed so that the “hard” transport direction is parallel to the $`[1\overline{1}0]`$ crystallographic direction while the “easy” direction is parallel to $`[110]`$. Although a persuasive picture of how anisotropic electronic ground states develop at high Landau level occupancy now exists, there is still no understanding of why they are consistently oriented relative to the host crystal axes. The origin and magnitude of the necessary native symmetry breaking field is the focus of this paper.

The resistance anisotropy near half-filling of high LLs has been widely interpreted as evidence for charge-density-wave (CDW) ground states. Hartree-Fock (HF) calculations have suggested that 2D electrons in half-filled high LLs form a unidirectional CDW, or “stripe” phase. At $`\nu `$ = 9/2, for example, the system is expected to phase separate into alternating regions of $`\nu `$ = 4 and $`\nu `$ = 5 with a period of about three times the cyclotron radius $`R_c`$ = $`\mathrm{}k_F/eB`$, or about 100 nm in typical samples. If these stripes are somehow preferentially oriented, anisotropy in the longitudinal resistance of the sample would likely result. Transport currents flowing perpendicular to such stripes would presumably encounter greater resistance than currents flowing parallel to them.

More recent theoretical work has generally supported the early HF predictions, albeit with some significant modifications. Numerical exact diagonalizations of small systems of electrons have uncovered sharp features in the susceptibility and structure factor of the 2DES in high LLs consistent with stripe formation at half filling. Refinements to the HF approach suggest that the stripes are themselves unstable against modulations along their length. The resulting “smectic crystal” would presumably be pinned and therefore insulating at very low temperatures. Quantum and/or thermal fluctuations are expected to melt the system and render it analogous to a nematic liquid crystal. A nematic has translational but not rotational symmetry and might therefore exhibit anisotropic transport if a preferred direction exists. At still higher temperatures a nematic to isotropic transition is predicted to restore rotational symmetry.

The consistency of the orientation of the transport anisotropy in high LLs has been established through experiments on a large number of GaAs/AlGaAs heterostructure samples. Grown by molecular beam epitaxy (MBE), these modulation-doped 2D electron systems have low temperature mobilities typically around $`10^7\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{V}\mathrm{s}`$ and densities ranging from $`1.52.7\times 10^{11}\mathrm{cm}^2`$. The samples are usually illuminated briefly at low temperature with a red light emitting diode to enhance their transport characteristics but, as explained below, the existence and orientation of the high Landau level resistance anisotropy does not depend upon this. Although most measurements have been made using square samples whose sides are parallel to the $`[1\overline{1}0]`$ and $`[110]`$ directions, specific additional experiments have shown that the orientation of the transport anisotropy is insensitive to the geometry of the conducting region, at least in mm-sized samples.

In this paper we report new results which narrow down the list of possible native symmetry breaking effects that might orient the high LL anisotropy. Specifically, we show that neither the micron-scale morphology of the sample surface, as revealed by atomic force microscopy (AFM), nor the shape of the heterojunction potential confining the electron gas to two dimensions appear to be significant factors. In addition, by combining experimental results obtained using tilted magnetic fields with detailed numerical calculations, we estimate the strength of the still unknown symmetry breaking field.

Data from three samples (A, B, and C) will be presented here. Sample A consists of a single 30 nm GaAs quantum well embedded in thick layers of AlGaAs. Doping is provided by Si layers positioned symmetrically above and below the quantum well. Before illumination the 2DES in this sample has a density of $`2.74\times 10^{11}\mathrm{cm}^2`$ and a low temperature mobility of $`1.8\times 10^7\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{V}\mathrm{s}`$. Brief illumination at 1.6 K changes these values to $`2.54\times 10^{11}\mathrm{cm}^2`$ and $`2.1\times 10^7\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{V}\mathrm{s}`$, respectively. Samples B and C are conventional single heterointerfaces. After illumination these samples respectively have densities of 2.67 and $`1.48\times 10^{11}\mathrm{cm}^2`$ and mobilities of 0.9 and $`1.1\times 10^7\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{V}\mathrm{s}`$. Each sample was cleaved from its parent MBE wafer into a square, 3 or 5 mm on a side, and eight diffused In contacts were positioned at the corners and midpoints of the sides. Transport measurements were made with an excitation current of $`I`$ $``$ 20 nA at 13 Hz driven between midpoint contacts on opposite sides of the sample. Longitudinal resistance data were obtained by measuring the resulting voltage drop between corner contacts. Each of these samples clearly exhibits the characteristic low temperature resistance anisotropies near half-filling of the $`N`$ $``$ 2 LLs first reported by Lilly, et al..

The inevitable imperfections which arise during crystal growth are natural candidates for an extrinsic mechanism capable of orienting the anisotropic electronic phases in high LLs. Since the kinetics of MBE growth is known to be anisotropic, it is easy to imagine that these imperfections might be preferentially oriented. This would break the rotational symmetry of the local environment of the 2DES and possibly influence its transport properties. As it is obviously difficult to directly observe the local environment of the 2DES, which is buried inside the sample, we have resorted instead to an examination of the exposed top surface of the heterostructure via AFM. Although this surface is typically 150 nm above the plane of the 2DES, the predicted wavelength of the CDW in high LLs is of comparable magnitude.

Nine high mobility GaAs heterostructure wafers (including those of samples A, B, and C) were examined in search of anisotropic surface morphologies. Each contained a 2DES with mobility exceeding $`0.8\times 10^7\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{V}\mathrm{s}`$ and density in the range of $`1.52.7\times 10^{11}\mathrm{cm}^2`$. Unambiguous determinations of the $`[1\overline{1}0]`$ and $`[110]`$ directions were made using one or more techniques. Samples from all nine wafers showed strong resistance anisotropies at $`\nu `$ = 9/2, 11/2, etc. with the high resistance direction along $`[1\overline{1}0]`$.

Figure 1 shows the results of transport and AFM studies of samples A and B. The top two panels show longitudinal resistance data, taken at $`T`$ = 50 mK, from the filling factor range 3 $`<`$ $`\nu `$ $`<`$ 5. Near $`\nu `$ = 9/2 the strong resistance anisotropy characteristic of half-filled high Landau levels is clearly evident. As the data show, the “hard” transport direction is along $`[1\overline{1}0]`$. In contrast, the resistance near $`\nu `$ = 7/2 is nearly isotropic. This filling factor, which lies in the $`N`$ = 1 LL, supports a weak fractional quantized Hall state which gives way to an anisotropic state only when a large magnetic field component parallel to the 2D plane is applied. It is worth noting that the data from sample A shown here was obtained without illumination, verifying that the anisotropy effect does not depend upon this. Data from sample A after illumination will be discussed below.

The lower panels of Fig. 1 display $`16\times 16\mu `$m AFM images of the $`[001]`$-oriented surfaces of the wafers from which samples A and B were cleaved, and the $`[1\overline{1}0]`$ and $`[110]`$ directions are indicated by arrows. The images were obtained at room temperature using the “tapping mode” technique. In tapping mode, the microscope’s cantilever tip oscillates at its resonant frequency as it is scanned across a surface. A feedback loop attempts to maintain the tip oscillation at a fixed amplitude by adjusting the average height of the tip above the sample surface; this average tip displacement is recorded as “height data.” Transient changes in the oscillation amplitude, roughly a measure of the height derivative in the scan direction, are monitored as “amplitude data.” The middle panels of Fig. 1 display height data, while the bottom panels display the corresponding amplitude data.

The inevitable slow drifts of the cantilever tip during image acquisition, while leaving the amplitude data unaffected, can obscure shallow surface features in the height data. To compensate for these drifts, the height images in the middle panels of Fig. 1 were subjected to a high-pass filter in the scan direction. Because this filtering risks a loss of information of surface height variations perpendicular to the scan direction, four independent scans parallel to $`[1\overline{1}0]`$, $`[110]`$, $`[010]`$, and $`[100]`$ were performed for each surface. These results (not shown here) confirm that the images of Fig. 1 faithfully represent all relevant morphology and that no spurious features related to the scan direction are present. Furthermore, the characteristic surface features revealed in Fig. 1 were found to cover each wafer’s entire surface, indicating that their occurrence is a generic property of the MBE growth process.

Both surfaces in Fig. 1 exhibit shallow ($`10`$ nm), anisotropic surface features on the micron length scale. However, two important differences should be noted: first, the orientation of the surface features of the two samples are *orthogonal* to each other, and second, the general shapes of the surface features differ for the two samples. The surface of sample A, for example, is covered by long and straight cigar-shaped mounds oriented with their major axes along $`[1\overline{1}0]`$. Sample B’s surface, on the other hand, exhibits more irregularly-shaped mounds clearly elongated along $`[110]`$ and separated by narrow, meandering valleys.

These results are typical of the variety of surface features seen on seven other wafers examined, where AFM images revealed varying degrees of mounding. Three of the seven showed mounds elongated along $`[110]`$, two showed rounded mounds with virtually no preferred direction, and two showed mounds elongated along $`[1\overline{1}0]`$. We emphasize, however, that in all the heterostructures the hard and easy axes of the resistance anisotropy in high LLs are along $`[1\overline{1}0]`$ and $`[110]`$, respectively. Although the “quality” of the transport data does vary among the samples, it is sensibly correlated with the mobility of the 2DES and shows no evident dependence on the surface morphology.

The presence of anisotropic mounding, or roughness, on thin GaAs epilayers grown by MBE on $`[001]`$-oriented GaAs substrates has been noted previously by Orme, et al.. The competition between step-flow growth and island nucleation, in conjunction with anisotropic surface diffusion, was found to result in micron-sized mounds elongated along $`[1\overline{1}0]`$. Although Orme, et al. did not observe mounding oriented along $`[110]`$, as we find in 4 of 9 samples studied, we note that our heterostructures are much thicker and more complex (consisting of hundreds of layers of GaAs and AlGaAs) than simple GaAs epilayers. As Orme, et al. found the tendency to mound to be very sensitive to growth temperature, substrate miscut angle, and epilayer thickness, the greater diversity of our results seems less surprising.

The lack of a consistent crystallographic orientation of the micron-scale surface roughness features on our samples contrasts sharply with the highly consistent alignment of the transport anisotropy axes exhibited by the 2DES at $`\nu `$ = 9/2, 11/2, etc., in the same samples. From this we conclude that micron-scale surface roughness does not reflect the symmetry breaking field responsible for the alignment of the anisotropic electronic phases in high LLs. Whether finer scale surface features or unseen subsurface defects are involved remains to be determined. While we agree with Willett, et al., that sufficiently severe surface roughness (whether as-grown or externally imposed) can influence 2DES transport, we do not find that the orientation of micron-scale surface features is always correlated with transport anisotropies in high LLs.

Another effect which might break the symmetry between the $`[1\overline{1}0]`$ and $`[110]`$ directions in a 2DES on a $`[001]`$-oriented surface is related to the shape of the potential well confining the electrons. Kroemer has noted that while transport in bulk GaAs is invariant under $`\pi `$/2 rotations about the $`[001]`$ axis, this may not be the case in a 2DES. If the potential confining the electrons to the $`[001]`$ plane lacks inversion symmetry the transport coefficients need only be invariant under $`\pi `$ rotations. While it seems unlikely that the band structure effects resulting from this lack of inversion symmetry could explain the large magnitude and sharp temperature and filling factor dependences of the high LL transport anisotropy, they may be sufficient to orient an otherwise spontaneously generated anisotropic ground state. Rosenow, et al. and Takhtamirov, et al. have stressed this point and have estimated that the reduced symmetry of typical single-interface heterojunctions leads to small ($``$ 0.1%) anisotropies in the 2D electron effective mass.

The transport measurements of samples A and B in Fig. 1 allow for examination of this idea. Sample A consists of a single 30 nm GaAs quantum well embedded within $`\mathrm{Al}_{0.24}\mathrm{Ga}_{0.76}\mathrm{As}`$. Silicon doping layers positioned 98 nm above and below the quantum well produce a symmetrically confined 2DES. Sample B, on the other hand, contains a single GaAs/AlGaAs interface doped from one side only. The 2DES in this sample is therefore confined by an asymmetric, roughly triangular, potential. In spite of this structural difference the two samples show qualitatively identical high LL transport features. In particular, the orientation of the anisotropy axes relative to the crystal axes is the same in the two samples. While one might argue that uncontrolled microscopic irregularities would destroy the symmetry of square quantum wells, it has been convincingly demonstrated, in 2D hole systems, that the symmetry of the confinement potential can have readily measurable transport consequences under appropriate circumstances. Therefore, the lack of any significant differences in the high LL transport in samples A and B suggests that the symmetry of the confinement potential is also not a major factor in determining the orientation of the underlying anisotropic electronic states.

The transport data from sample A displayed in Fig. 1, which were obtained without prior low temperature illumination, demonstrate that such illumination is not required to observe anisotropic transport in high Landau levels. Illumination is usually employed because it has been found empirically to often improve the quality of high field transport data. The precise way in which this occurs is not well understood, but in addition to typically increasing the 2D density and mobility, illumination also seems to improve the homogeneity of the electron gas. In any case, Fig. 2 demonstrates this improvement in sample A. The minima in the resistance measured along $`[110]`$ at $`\nu `$ = 9/2 and 11/2 are much deeper, the isotropic re-entrant integer quantized Hall states in the flanks of the Landau levels are much better developed, and additional structure is evident. Nonetheless, these data show clearly that illumination is not an important factor in the origin or orientation of the anisotropic phases of 2D electrons in high Landau levels.

A magnetic field component $`B_{}`$ applied parallel to the plane of the 2DES provides an important tool for investigating the magnitude of the native symmetry breaking mechanism. Such an in-plane field allows the controlled introduction of an additional symmetry breaker which is known to be capable of altering the high Landau level transport anisotropy axes . For example, only a relatively small $`B_{}`$ pointed along $`[110]`$ is required to *interchange* the original principal axes of anisotropy, with the new easy and hard directions along $`[1\overline{1}0]`$ and $`[110]`$ respectively. Prior to this interchange, there is a special value of the in-plane field, $`B_{}^{}`$, where the transport in the sample becomes approximately isotropic. Remarkably, if the in-plane field is instead directed along $`[1\overline{1}0]`$, the principal axes of anisotropic transport do not reverse.

Hartree-Fock calculations within the undirectional CDW model can account for these observations: the coupling between $`B_{}`$ and the finite thickness of the 2D layer favors stripes aligned perpendicular to $`B_{}`$ under typical circumstances. Assuming that the high resistance direction is perpendicular to the stripes, this conclusion is in agreement with experiment. Similar calculations have also been successful in explaining the more complex anisotropic transport behavior exhibited at high $`B_{}`$ by quasi-2D systems in wide quantum wells having two occupied subbands. These theoretical analyses also yield quantitative estimates of the field-induced anisotropy energy, $`E_A`$, defined as the difference in energy (per electron) of undirectional CDWs aligned parallel and perpendicular to the in-plane magnetic field. By evaluating the anisotropy energy at $`B_{}^{}`$, these calculations provide an estimate of the magnitude of the native symmetry breaking field which orients the transport anisotropy in the absense of an in-plane field.

Figure 3 shows the effect of an in-plane magnetic field directed along $`[110]`$ on transport in the vicinity of $`\nu =9/2`$ in samples A and C (data from sample B has been published previously). These data, which are obtained by tilting the sample relative to the axis of a single superconducting solenoid, clearly reveal the interchange of the anisotropy axes. For sample A a tilt of only $`\theta `$ = $`6^{}`$ is sufficient to render the transport roughly isotropic. This corresponds to $`B_{}^{}`$ $``$ 0.24 T at $`\nu `$ = 9/2. By $`\theta `$ = $`10^{}`$ the transport anisotropy is fully restored, albeit with interchanged axes. Samples B and C exhibit switching fields of approximately $`B_{}^{}`$ $``$ 0.50 and 0.55 T respectively.

Theoretical field-induced anisotropy energies are plotted in Figure 4. The many-body RPA/Hartree-Fock calculations are combined with a self-consistent local-density-approximation description of one-particle states, obtained numerically for the specific structural parameters of samples A, B, and C. In agreement with the experimental observations, the unidirectional CDWs prefer being aligned perpendicular to the in-plane magnetic field direction ($`E_A0`$). The agreement between experiment and theory on this point offers strong support to the overall CDW picture of the anisotropic phases in high Landau levels. After all, this theoretical result is not obvious *a priori*, as the interaction between a parallel magnetic field and the 2DES depends sensitively on the detailed finite-width profile of the 2DES and the nature of screening in high magnetic fields. Indeed, previous calculations have shown that unlike strongly confined 2D electron systems where the CDW orients perpendicular to $`B_{}`$, in two-subband quantum wells the preferred CDW orientation is *parallel* to the in-plane field. This observation helps explain the remarkable difference in the dependence of $`E_A`$ on $`B_{}`$ in samples A and B despite the samples having nearly identical 2D electron densities. In sample B, the unoccupied second subband is much closer to the chemical potential than in sample A. Thus, being more similar to a system with two subbands occupied, a CDW in sample B should gain a smaller energy advantage by aligning perpendicular to a given in-plane field.

The calculated field-induced anisotropy energies at the measured $`\nu `$ = 9/2 switching fields $`B_{}^{}`$ are 0.5, 0.2, and 2.4 mK per electron in samples A, B, and C respectively. These energies are far smaller than the $``$ 100 mK temperature scale that apparently governs the formation of the anisotropic electronic phase (i.e. the temperature at which transport becomes anisotropic). This disparity supports the model of a robust CDW oriented by a relatively weak native symmetry breaking field. Although the origin of the native symmetry breaking field remains unknown, these estimates of the anisotropy energy should offer useful constraints on proposed mechanisms.

The experimental results reported here suggest that two possible symmetry breaking effects, anisotropic surface roughness and confinement potential geometry, are not important factors in determining the orientation of the newly discovered anisotropic phases of 2D electrons in high Landau levels. Nevertheless, other possibilities remain. For example, Fil has argued that the piezoelectricity of GaAs leads to lower energy for CDW’s approximately aligned along either $`[1\overline{1}0]`$ or $`[110]`$. Although this does not explain what further distinguishes between these two directions, it does establish a mechanism which breaks rotational symmetry and favors directions which do have relevance to experiment.

In conclusion, we have addressed the still unresolved issue of how the anisotropic electronic states in high LLs become oriented relative to the crystallographic directions of the host semiconductor lattice. We have found that neither micron-scale surface roughness nor the symmetry of the confinement potential are major factors. In conjunction with detailed theoretical calculations, tilted-field experiments support the overall charge density wave picture of the ground state of 2D electrons in high Landau levels and yield quantitative estimates of the native anisotropy energy for three different samples.

We thank M. Roukes for his generous loan of the atomic force microscope used in this work, E. Rashba for pointing out ref. 26 to us, R. Willett for showing us his data prior to publication, and S. Das Sarma and A.C. Gossard for helpful discussions. This work is supported by the NSF under grant DMR-0070890, the DOE under grant DE-FG03-99ER45766, and the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic under grant 202/01/0754.


text:
# Mutually unbiased binary observable sets on 𝑁 qubits

## I Introduction

A pure quantum state of an $`N`$-qubit system is specified by the eigenvalues of $`N`$ independent commuting binary observables (“$`N`$ qubits carry $`N`$ bits of information” ). In fact, a complete set of $`2^N`$ such states are so specified, each being associated with a binary number consisting of the $`N`$ eigenvalues. Of the many alternative choices of observable sets that define $`N`$-qubit basis sets, we are interested in those that are maximally incompatible in the sense that a state producing precise measurement results in one set produces maximally random results in the other.

The Pauli operators  provide an explicit realization of points raised above. First, they illustrate that although a greater number $`2^N1`$ of observables simultaneously take definite values, only $`N`$ of these are required to define a pure state, and in fact these $`N`$ generate all of the remaining compatible observables through multiplication. On the other hand, all $`4^N1`$ Pauli operators are required in order to determine an arbitrary mixed state. In this connection, we shall show that the full set of these operators is exhausted in forming $`2^N+1`$ distinct subsets, each consisting of $`2^N1`$ internally commuting observables, and each defining its own unique eigenbasis. Both the observable sets and the corresponding basis sets are called mutually unbiased  (and in previous works the observable sets have also been called mutually complementary ) because of the following physical property: If an $`N`$ qubit system is prepared in a joint eigenstate of one such observable set, then it has a uniform probability distribution over the joint eigenstates of any of the other sets. It follows that all $`2^N(2^N1)`$ observables outside the original (maximal) set of $`2^N1`$ compatible observables will produce measurement results that are uniformly distributed over all possibilities. Since the Pauli operators have binary spectra, it also follows that their dispersion is maximized.

The equivalence of unbiasedness of basis sets and operator sets may be understood from the formal definition as applied to basis sets, which may be summarized in general terms as follows: Let us denote basis sets by $`A=1,2,\mathrm{}`$, and states within a basis by $`|A,\alpha `$, with $`\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},d`$ (for the moment, we consider a Hilbert space with general dimension $`d`$, although our interest here is in $`d=2^N`$). Two bases $`A`$ and $`B`$ are said to be mutually unbiased  if a system prepared in any element of $`A`$ (such as $`|A,\alpha `$) has a uniform probability distribution of being found in any element of $`B`$

$$|A,\alpha |B,\beta |^2=d^1,(AB),$$
(1)
where individual bases are understood to be orthonormal,

$$A,\alpha |A,\beta =\delta _{\alpha \beta }.$$
(2)
Certainty of measurement outcomes for the operator set defining the $`|A,\alpha `$’s implies a uniform probability distribution over states $`|B,\beta `$, and this in turn implies a uniform probability distribution over all eigenvalue sets (and distinct measurement outcomes) of operators defining the $`|B,\beta `$’s.

A particular motivation for considering unbiased basis sets is that they provide for the most efficient determination, using measurements alone, of a general (pure or impure) quantum state . In a $`d`$-dimensional Hilbert space, one needs $`d^21`$ real parameters to specify a general density matrix $`\rho `$, which must be hermitean and have $`Tr(\rho )=1`$. Since measurements within a particular basis set can yield only $`d1`$ independent probabilities, one needs $`d+1`$ distinct basis sets to provide the required total number of $`d^21`$ independent probabilities. Ivanović  showed that the required number $`d+1`$ of unbiased basis sets indeed exists if $`d`$ is a prime number, and Wootters and Fields  showed that it exists if $`d`$ is any power of a prime number. Our proof is based upon this theorem of Wootters and Fields.

The question of the existence and construction of unbiased basis sets is interesting not only from a fundamental point of view (e.g., in the formulation of “quantum mechanics without probability amplitudes” , and in the information-theoretic formulation of quantum mechanics ), but also as an important ingredient in quantum-information protocols (e.g., in the solution of “the mean king’s problem”  and in quantum cryptography ). In particular, it was found recently that key distributions based on higher-dimensional quantum systems with larger numbers of unbiased basis sets can have certain advantages over those based on qubits .

The present paper illustrates how the study of operator relationships can provide a useful approach to the construction of unbiased basis sets of entangled as well as product character. The $`N`$-qubit Hilbert space has dimension $`d=2^N`$, and operators on this space (which include the density matrix) live in their own vector space of dimension $`4^N`$. The complete basis consisting of the Pauli operators  may be written as follows: Starting with the usual $`2\times 2`$ Pauli matrices and the identity $`I`$ that act on the spaces of individual qubits,

$$\sigma _\mu =(\sigma _x,\sigma _y,\sigma _z,I),\mu =(1,2,3,4),$$
(3)
we write the $`4^N`$ tensor products (the Pauli operators and identity $``$) that act on the $`N`$-qubit Hilbert space as

$$O_i=\sigma _{\mu (1,i)}^1\sigma _{\mu (2,i)}^2\mathrm{}\sigma _{\mu (N,i)}^N=\underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}\sigma _{\mu (k,i)}^k,$$
(4)
where $`k`$ is the particle label and $`i`$ distinguishes among the $`4^N`$ choices of the $`N`$ subscripts $`\mu (k,i)`$. This basis is $`orthonormal`$ ; the inner product of two operators is defined as the trace of their product,

$`\text{Tr}(O_iO_j)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\text{Tr}\left(\sigma _{\mu (k,i)}^k\sigma _{\mu (k,j)}^k\right)`$ (5)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}}2\delta _{\mu (k,i)\mu (k,j)}=2^N\delta _{ij},`$ (6)
where $`i=j`$ means that $`\mu (k,i)=\mu (k,j)`$ for every particle $`k`$. Like the individual Pauli matrices, each tensor product is self-inverse, $`O_i^2=`$, and apart from the identity (for which we reserve $`i=4^N`$ so that $`O_{4^N}=I^1I^2\mathrm{}I^N`$) they are all traceless and have eigenvalues $`\pm 1`$.

The binary spectrum for each observable $`O_i`$ permits its expression as a binary proposition: The two eigenvalues $`\pm 1`$ of the observable $`O_i`$ correspond to the values “true” or “false” of the proposition “The product of the spin projections $`\sigma _{\mu (1,i)}^1\sigma _{\mu (2,i)}^2\mathrm{}\sigma _{\mu (N,i)}^N`$ is +1.” (If a particular $`\sigma _\mu ^k`$ happens to be the identity, then no statement is made about the $`k`$th qubit.)

## II General results for $`N`$ qubits

We may now proceed to demonstrate the main formal points of the paper: First, that the set of $`4^N1`$ Pauli operators (excluding the identity) may be partitioned into $`2^N+1`$ subsets, each consisting of $`2^N1`$ internally commuting members, and second, that every such partitioning defines a unique choice of unbiased basis sets (i.e., there is a one-to-one mapping from partitionings to choices of unbiased basis sets).

The first part makes use of the proven existence of $`2^N+1`$ unbiased basis sets . The projectors onto the unbiased basis states,

$$P_\alpha ^A=|A,\alpha A,\alpha |,$$
(7)
may be used to re-express the unbiasedness of bases $`AB`$ (Eq. 1) as

$$\text{Tr}(P_\alpha ^AP_\beta ^B)=2^N.$$
(8)
and to define a set of operators $`O_a^A`$ by their spectral decompositions

$$O_a^A=\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{2^N}{}}\epsilon _{a\alpha }P_\alpha ^A.$$
(9)
We define $`\epsilon _{a\alpha }`$ as a $`2^N\times 2^N`$ matrix consisting of orthogonal row vectors, one of whose entries are all +1’s, and the remaining of whose entries are equal numbers of $`+1`$’s and $`1`$’s. There are exactly $`2^N`$ such orthogonal vectors, the components of each vector $`a`$ being the eigenvalues of $`O_a^A`$. One of these operators (say the $`a=2^N`$th) is proportional to the identity, $`O_{2^N}^A=`$. We include this to make Eq. (8) invertible, which will be useful later. The columns $`\alpha `$ label the joint eigenstates of the $`O_a^A`$ ($`a=1,2,\mathrm{},2^N1`$), and comprise the truth tables associated with the $`2^N1`$ corresponding propositions. This labeling is redundant; clearly an appropriate subset of just $`N`$ rows may be used to construct $`N`$-component column vectors that define all $`2^N`$ joint eigenstates unambiguously as binary numbers. This reflects a property of the Pauli operators mentioned earlier.

The above definition provides $`2^N+1`$ distinct sets (indexed by $`A`$), each set containing $`2^N1`$ operators (fixed $`A`$ and running index $`a=1,\mathrm{},2^N1`$), after discarding the identity. Each of these operators has the spectrum $`\pm 1`$ and is traceless, by construction. To show that they are unitarily equivalent to the Pauli operators, we need only demonstrate that they form an orthonormal set. For the case $`AB`$,

$$\text{Tr}(O_a^AO_b^B)=\underset{\alpha ,\beta }{}\epsilon _{a\alpha }\epsilon _{b\beta }\text{Tr}(P_\alpha ^AP_\beta ^B)=0,$$
(10)
where Eq. (8) and the property $`_\alpha \epsilon _{a\alpha }=0`$ were used; then for the case $`A=B`$, using Eqs. (7) and (2),

$`\text{Tr}(O_a^AO_b^A)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha ,\beta }{}}\epsilon _{a\alpha }\epsilon _{b\beta }\text{Tr}(P_\alpha ^AP_\beta ^A)`$ (11)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}\epsilon _{a\alpha }\epsilon _{b\alpha }=2^N\delta _{ab}.`$ (12)
Finally, this orthonormal set of $`4^N1`$ traceless operators is completed by adding the identity, so indeed they have a representation in the form given by Eq. (4). This shows that the Pauli operators may be partitioned accordingly.

We now show the second part, namely, that any such partitioning of Pauli operators defines a unique choice of unbiased basis sets. Assuming such a partitioning, each subset ($`A`$) of Pauli operators $`\{O_1^A,O_2^A,\mathrm{},O_{2^N1}^A\}`$ defines a unique basis of $`2^N`$ joint eigenstates $`|A,\alpha `$, $`\alpha =1,\mathrm{}2^N`$. Thus, each $`O_a^A`$ operator may be expanded as in Eq. (9), with $`\epsilon _{a\alpha }`$ now defined as the eigenvalue of $`O_a^A`$ on the state $`|A,\alpha `$, the lower index taking the values $`a=1,\mathrm{},2^N1`$. The known spectrum of the $`O_a^A`$’s dictates that each row of the $`\epsilon _{a\alpha }`$ matrix must consist of an equal number of $`+1`$’s and $`1`$’s, and the identity Tr$`(O_a^AO_b^A)=2^N\delta _{ab}`$ shows (note Eq. 10) that any two rows $`a`$ and $`b`$ are orthogonal. Thus, by appending an additional row ($`a=2^N`$) to the $`\epsilon _{a\alpha }`$ matrix, we recover its previous form. The scaled matrix $`\epsilon _{a\alpha }/\sqrt{2^N}`$ is orthogonal, and, therefore, we may invert Eq. (9) to yield the projection operators

$$P_\alpha ^A=2^N\underset{a}{}\epsilon _{\alpha a}O_a^A=2^N\left(+\underset{a}{\overset{^{}}{}}\epsilon _{\alpha a}O_a^A\right).$$
(13)
In the second equality we write the identity contribution explicitly and delete the $`a=2^N`$ term from the sum, as denoted by the prime.

We may now show that all of the basis sets are mutually unbiased: Substituting Eq. (13) into Eq. (8) yields

$`\text{Tr}(P_\alpha ^AP_\beta ^B)`$ $`=`$ (14)
$`2^N`$ $`+`$ $`4^N{\displaystyle \underset{a}{\overset{^{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{b}{\overset{^{}}{}}}\epsilon _{\alpha a}\epsilon _{\beta b}\text{Tr}(O_a^AO_b^B),`$ (15)
since terms linear in $`O_a^A`$ have vanishing trace. It follows immediately that if $`A`$ and $`B`$ refer to different basis sets, then Eq. (8) is satisfied. If $`A=B`$, then only the $`a=b`$ term in the sum survives and

$`\text{Tr}(P_\alpha ^AP_\beta ^A)`$ $`=`$ $`2^N\left(1+{\displaystyle \underset{a}{\overset{^{}}{}}}\epsilon _{\alpha a}\epsilon _{\beta a}\right)`$ (16)
$`=`$ $`2^N{\displaystyle \underset{a}{}}\epsilon _{\alpha a}\epsilon _{\beta a}=\delta _{\alpha \beta },`$ (17)
where the orthogonality of $`\epsilon _{a\alpha }/\sqrt{2^N}`$ was used. This establishes that the $`2^N1`$ basis sets generated (uniquely) by the commuting subsets of Pauli operators are in fact unbiased. So there is a one-to-one correspondence between partitionings of Pauli operators and choices of unbiased basis sets.

## III Examples for two and three qubits

We now illustrate this correspondence for systems of two and three qubits. To develop notation, the operator subsets for the one qubit case consist of single elements, $`\sigma _x`$, $`\sigma _y`$, and $`\sigma _z`$. Corresponding basis sets are denoted by (x), (y), and (z), where each basis set consists of the two states “up” and “down” along the indicated axis. The individual basis states are denoted by $`|n_x`$, $`|n_y`$, and $`|n_z`$, where $`n_x=1`$ or 0 for spin “up” and “down” respectively. The inner products between any two states appearing in these basis sets obey Eqs. (1) and (2). Obviously, measurements by any of the above operators on an eigenstate of any other will produce perfectly random results (i.e., an average spin projection of zero).

In the case of two qubits, the dimension of the Hilbert space is $`d=4`$, so that five unbiased basis sets exist. Fig. 1 shows these together with the five corresponding operator sets, each consisting of three compatible operators. Subscripts indicate three product bases, $`(zz)_\pi `$, $`(xy)_\pi `$, and $`(yx)_\pi `$, whose individual states are denoted in the (zz)π case, for example, by $`|n_z^1,n_z^2`$. There are two Bell bases, $`(zx)_B`$ and $`(yz)_{Bi}`$, and the states belonging to each of these may be written, respectively, as

$$|n_z^1,n_x^2;\pm =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|n_z^1,n_x^2\pm |\overline{n}_z^1,\overline{n}_x^2\right),$$
(18)
$$|n_y^1,n_z^2;\pm i=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|n_y^1,n_z^2\pm i|\overline{n}_y^1,\overline{n}_z^2\right),$$
(19)
where bars denote spin flips; ie, if $`n_x=1`$ or 0, then $`\overline{n}_x=0`$ or 1, respectively. Thus, the four individual basis states are explicitly enumerated \[in Eq. (19), for example\] by $`|1_y,1_z;\pm i`$ and $`|1_y,0_z;\pm i`$. The factor of $`i`$ \[as denoted by the subscript in the basis label $`(yz)_{Bi}`$\] is not arbitrary; its presence is dictated by the operators that define the basis, or equivalently by the requirement that the two Bell bases be mutually unbiased. It is a property of Bell bases that they can appear equally simple if other quantization axes are chosen in appropriate combinations. For example, the Bell bases 4 and 5 in Fig. 1 may be written as $`(yy)_B`$ and $`(xx)_B`$, respectively. While these are simply different ways of writing the same basis sets, truely different alternatives involving all five basis sets exist for two qubits (see Refs.  and ). These alternatives also consist of three product bases and two Bell bases.

The three-qubit Hilbert space has $`d=8`$, and thus nine unbiased basis sets. One choice contains three product bases, $`(xyz)_\pi `$, $`(yzx)_\pi `$, and $`(zxy)_\pi `$; and six bases consisting of maximally entangled states, $`(xxx)_{Gi}`$, $`(yyy)_G`$, $`(zzz)_G`$, $`(xzy)_G`$, $`(yxz)_G`$, and $`(zyx)_G`$. The nine basis sets are listed in Fig. 2 and represented graphically in Fig. 3. The entangled basis sets are labeled by coordinate axes in which the states reduce to the familiar Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger  (GHZ) form. For example, all of the states belonging to the basis set $`(zyx)_G`$ may be written as

$$|n_z^1,n_y^2,n_x^3;\pm =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|n_z^1,n_y^2,n_x^3\pm |\overline{n}_z^1,\overline{n}_y^2,\overline{n}_x^3\right);$$
(20)
these would require more complicated expressions if referred to other coordinate axes. Fig. 2 lists the seven-member operator sets that correspond uniquely to each basis set. As in the two-qubit case, the operators involving only a single Pauli matrix are exhausted within the product basis sets.

It is striking that in the progression from one to two to three qubits, the number of totally entangled bases can grow from none to two to six, while the number of product bases remains fixed at three. It is easy to convince onesself that the maximum number of product bases remains fixed at three for all numbers $`N`$ of qubits.

To show that the structure is more flexible with three qubits than with two, we describe now a different choice of unbiased basis sets for three qubits, one that cannot be obtained from the previous choice by local unitary transformations. In this choice (Fig. 4), there are no product states, and no states with three-particle entanglement. Every basis consists of states that are products of one-particle states with Bell states; one particle is unentangled while the other two are totally entangled, as depicted in Fig. 5. The basis sets form groupings of three: $`(x^1)(yz)_{Bi}`$, $`(y^1)(zx)_B`$, $`(z^1)(xy)_B`$, then $`(x^2)(xy)_B`$, $`(y^2)(yz)_{Bi}`$, $`(z^2)(zx)_B`$, and finally $`(x^3)(zx)_B`$, $`(y^3)(xy)_B`$, $`(z^3)(yz)_{Bi}`$, in which a different particle is factored out within each group. Coordinate axes are permuted within each group, but not from group to group. Factors of $`i`$ appear once within each group.

Note that within each grouping, we find three unbiased Bell-type bases - a feature that was not seen in the two-qubit system. Indeed, if one were to begin with three unbiased Bell bases in a two-qubit system, one could then not find two additional basis sets. This can be understood in terms of the operator decomposition: The nine operators exhausted by three Bell bases do not leave six operators that are decomposable into two commuting subsets.

We also note that the choices of unbiased basis sets given for the three-qubit case are not obtained from the algorithmic construction given in Ref. . Wootters has pointed out  that this construction produces another choice which consists of two product, four GHZ, and three “product-Bell” bases. In the case of two qubits, not surprisingly, the same construction produces three product and two Bell bases .

## IV Conclusions

The two- and three-qubit cases illustrate general points made at the beginning. First, with regard to state preparation, one can see that $`N`$ observables suffice to define any of the listed basis states completely, representing these states as binary numbers. In the two-qubit case, any two of the three compatible observables within a subset may be chosen. In the three-qubit case, there are many choices of three observables that suffice - for example, the first three listed within each subset. In the $`N`$-qubit case, we introduced an $`\epsilon _{a\alpha }`$ matrix in which an appropriate choice of $`N`$ rows (representing $`N`$ operators) describe all $`2^N`$ basis states as binary nunbers.

Second, with regard to the determination of a general, possibly mixed state, recall that $`4^N1`$ real parameters (15 for two qubits and 63 for three qubits) are required to specify the $`N`$-qubit density matrix completely . And exactly this number is provided, either by the expectation values of the operators themselves, or by all the independent probabilities associated with the unbiased basis states. As we have proven for the general case, the $`4^N1`$ Pauli operators can be partitioned into $`2^N+1`$ subsets, each consisting of $`2^N1`$ internally commuting observables. The set of all such partitionings has a one-to-one correspondence with choices of $`2^N+1`$ unbiased basis sets in the $`N`$-qubit Hilbert space. There are many such choices, and for $`N>2`$ the entanglement may be distributed over basis sets in many different ways. The maximum number of product bases is fixed at three for any $`N`$.

The correspondence between basis sets and observables makes it possible to regard all Pauli operator subsets within a given partitioning as being mutually unbiased: If the system is prepared in a joint eigenstate of one observable set, then it has a uniform probability distribution over the joint eigenstates of any other observable set in the partitioning. As a result, all observables outside the original maximal commuting subset yield minimal information - measurement outcomes are uniformly distributed over all possibilities.

The concept of unbiasedness between observable sets extends the idea of complementarity of two individual observables that fail to commute. Clearly two such observables must always belong to different mutually unbiased subsets within any partitioning. However, as the two- and three-qubit examples show, two commuting observables may belong to the same or to different unbiased subsets. Their compatibility is dependent upon the partitioning.

Note added. After this work was completed, an e-print  appeared reporting work which is related to this work, but complementary in several respects. Ref.  obtained a general relationship between complete bases of unitary operators (beloning to the general Pauli group) and unbiased basis sets, for any power-of-prime dimension. In this paper, we considered the many-qubit case. We expanded upon the physical interpretation of the concept of complementarity. We showed that many alternative paritionings are possible and, most importantly, entanglement is distributed among unbiased basis sets in a partition-dependent manner for $`N>2`$.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank W. K. Wootters for insightful and informative discussions. Č.B. has been supported by the Austrian Science Foundation (FWF), Project No. F1506, and by the QIPC Program of the European Union. J.L. thanks the Erwin Schrödinger Institute for its hospitality during the period when this work was carried out.


text:
# Small-Scale Interstellar Na I Structure Toward M92

## 1 Introduction

A significant number of studies within the last decade have served to reinforce the case for sub-parsec structure within the diffuse interstellar medium (ISM). A longstanding method for investigating this phenomenon has been H I 21 cm interferometric observations toward extragalactic sources (Diamond et al., 1989; Faison et al., 1998). Another technique uses multiepoch observations toward pulsars as they travel a few tens of AU each year through the ISM (Frail et al., 1991, 1994). These observations have repeatedly shown variations down to scales of $``$ 10 - 100 AU. In the optical, studies have focused on individual stars in globular clusters (Bates et al., 1995) and binary star systems (Meyer & Blades, 1996; Watson & Meyer, 1996; Lauroesch et al., 1998; Lauroesch & Meyer, 1999), typically using the Na I D and K I lines. These observations have shown structure on scales of $``$ 102 \- 104 AU for binary stars and $``$ 104 \- 106 AU for globular clusters. Additionally, several recent studies have uncovered evidence for temporal variations in Na I, K I, and Ca II column densities toward individual and binary stars, suggesting structure at scales down to $``$ 10 - 100 AU (Crawford et al., 2000; Lauroesch, Meyer & Blades, 2000; Price, Crawford, & Barlow, 2000).

These H I, Na I, Ca II, and K I observations infer apparently dense concentrations of atomic gas ($`n_\mathrm{H}`$ $``$ 103 cm-3) appearing in diffuse sightlines. The standard McKee & Ostriker (1977) three-phase ISM theory does not sufficiently support the pervasiveness of this structure because the large overpressures it would exert on the ambient medium violates the assumption of pressure equilibrium. In one effort to remedy the situation, Heiles (1997) has hypothesized a solution involving sheets and filaments of gas that maintain pressure equilibrium, yet could produce significant differences in column density measurements and the illusion of rather high volume densities. Elmegreen (1997) offers another interpretation which eliminates the necessity of pressure equilibrium by suggesting that a fractal ISM results from turbulence, allowing self-similar structure to exist down to AU scales. Other theories propose that self-gravitating, dense, AU-sized cloudlets may be a common neutral component of the Galactic ISM (Walker & Wardle, 1998; Draine, 1998).

Integral field spectroscopy can be used to gain a two-dimensional perspective of this small-scale structure. A recent study used this technique to map the ISM structure toward the globular cluster M15 (Meyer & Lauroesch, 1999). Just as H I observations toward extragalactic sources offer two-dimensional views of similar structure observed in one dimension toward pulsars, these integral field spectroscopic observations toward globular clusters provide two-dimensional maps of similar structure observed in one dimension toward binary stars. The globular cluster M92 ($`d`$ = 8.6 kpc; $`v_{\mathrm{LSR}}`$ = -103 km s-1) was selected to continue this study. Past observations of individual stars in M92 show interstellar Na I absorption with strengths varying by a factor of 4 on scales down to 4′ (Langer, Prosser, & Sneden, 1990; Pilachowski et al., 1998). In this Letter, we present two-dimensional maps of the Na I absorption toward the central 27″ $`\times `$ 43″ of M92 in an effort to probe the small-scale ISM structure in another Galactic halo sightline.

## 2 Observations and Data Reduction

We used the DensePak fiber-optic array and the Bench spectrograph on the 3.5 m WIYN111The WIYN Observatory is a joint facility of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Indiana University, Yale University, and the National Optical Astronomy Observatories. telescope at Kitt Peak National Observatory to obtain observations of M92 in 2000 April. DensePak is an integral field spectroscopy unit, consisting of 91 fibers arranged to give a sky coverage of 27″ $`\times `$ 43″ with a fiber (3″ diameter) center-to-center separation of 4″ at the WIYN f/6.4 Nasmyth focus (Barden, Sawyer, & Honeycutt, 1998). The DensePak array was oriented in a north-south direction across the core of the globular cluster, with the central fiber set at the center of M92 \[R.A. = 17h17m07$`\stackrel{\mathrm{s}}{\mathrm{.}}`$3, decl. = +43°08′11$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$5 (J2000.0)\]. The configuration of the spectrograph was the same as described by Meyer & Lauroesch (1999), providing spectral coverage from 5725 to 5975 Å at a resolution of 14 km s-1 ($`R`$ $``$ 20,000).

Three 1200 s exposures were taken of M92 with sky conditions characterized by $``$ 1″ seeing. The raw CCD frames were bias-corrected, flat-fielded, sky-subtracted (in two separate stages, the continuum and the terrestrial emission lines, using a 1200 s exposure of adjacent blank sky), combined, and wavelength-calibrated using the NOAO IRAF data reduction software. Previous observations enabled us to assume that the uncertainty in these spectra caused by scattered-light effects should be negligible (Meyer & Lauroesch, 1999). Five broken fibers and eight more with low counts were not used, leaving 78 of the 91 fibers providing spectra with signal-to-noise ratios ranging from 30 in some edge fibers to over 80 near the center. The very weak telluric absorption near the Na I D2 $`\lambda `$5889.951 and D1 $`\lambda `$5895.924 lines was removed by dividing the spectra by an atmospheric template based on observations of several rapidly rotating early-type stars with little intervening interstellar matter.

Figure 1 exhibits a detailed view of the final Na I spectra corresponding to the center of M92 and three other positions in the array.

Three Na I doublets appear, with the interstellar lines strongly blended: the bluemost is due to stellar Na I absorption in M92, the middle component (Cloud 2) is due to interstellar gas at vLSR = -19 km s-1, and the redmost component (Cloud 1), is due to gas at vLSR = 0 km s-1. Figure 1 also shows evidence that both absorption components vary on scales much less than 1′. Over the entire DensePak array, the Na I D1 line equivalent widths vary from 30 to 100 mÅ for Cloud 1 and 15 to 115 mÅ for Cloud 2. Column density measurements were determined using the profile-fitting software XVOIGT (Mar & Bailey, 1995) by fitting the D2 and D1 lines simultaneously in each fiber, assuming single-component Voigt profiles for both of the clouds’ Na I doublets. The line widths ($`b`$-values) were typically around 2 km s-1 and 1.5 km s-1 for Cloud 1 and Cloud 2, respectively. The column density fits have formal profile-fitting uncertainties of about 10% - 20%.

The assumption that Cloud 1 and Cloud 2 each consist of a single ISM component is a simplification. Although we cannot rule out multiple component structure, the overall effect on the small-scale structure analysis should be insignificant because the Na I lines are weak enough so that the equivalent width measurement errors should dominate the uncertainties. Furthermore, there are no systematic velocity variations in Cloud 1 and Cloud 2 across the DensePak array, which reinforces the simplifying assumption of single ISM components. Based on the F2 composite spectral type and extremely low metallicity (\[Fe/H\] = -2.29) of M92, the only possible stellar absorption (besides the stellar Na I lines) in the vicinity of the interstellar Na I features are the Ni I $`\lambda `$5892.883 and Ti I $`\lambda `$5899.304 lines (Montes, Ramsey, & Welty, 1999). Since these lines would lie about 1 Å from the Cloud 1 and Cloud 2 Na I features and are not apparent in the spectra in any case, any stellar contamination of our measured Na I column densities should be minimal.

## 3 Discussion

Lilienthal et al. (1991) have measured interstellar Na I absorption at vLSR = 0 km s-1 toward HD 155639 ($`d`$ $``$ 200 pc; 2$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$75 separation from M92) and somewhat stronger absorption toward HD 157908 ($`d`$ $``$ 400 pc; 3$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$75 separation from M92). From these observations, we can place an upper limit of 400 pc on the distance to Cloud 1. In the case of Cloud 2, we first note that Münch & Zirin (1962) observed interstellar Ca II at LSR velocities of 0 km s-1 and -19 km s-1 toward HD 156110 ($`d`$ $``$ 800 pc; 2$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$4 separation from M92). For confirmation, we used STIS UV echelle spectra of this star from the HST archive. The C I and C I lines in these spectra, as well as the H I 21 cm emission lines from the Dwingeloo Survey (Hartmann & Burton, 1997), exhibit interstellar components with similar velocities. We also obtained Ca II and Na I data from the Kitt Peak coudé feed telescope, which again showed the same interstellar velocity components toward HD 156110. From this data we can place a distance upper limit of 800 pc on this cloud.

Using these distance estimates, the 27″ $`\times `$ 43″ DensePak array coverage corresponds to a 10,800 $`\times `$ 17,200 AU (0.05 $`\times `$ 0.08 pc) section of Cloud 1 and a 21,600 $`\times `$ 34,400 AU (0.10 $`\times `$ 0.17 pc) section of Cloud 2. The 4″ fiber-to-fiber spacing then translates to 1600 and 3200 AU in Cloud 1 and Cloud 2, respectively. The derived Cloud 1 Na I column densities extend from 3.3 $`\times `$ 1011 to 1.2 $`\times `$ 1012 cm -2. The maximum $`N`$(Na I) variation observed across the 1600 AU scale is 6.5 $`\times `$ 1011 cm-2, and the median $`|`$$`\mathrm{\Delta }`$$`N`$(Na I)$`|`$ is 1.2 $`\times `$ 1011 cm-2. Cloud 2 generally has higher Na I column densities, with individual fiber values ranging from 4.9 $`\times `$ 1011 to 3.6 $`\times `$ 1012 cm-2. Over the 3200 AU scale, the maximum $`N`$(Na I) variation in this cloud is 2.9 $`\times `$ 1012 cm-2, and the median $`|`$$`\mathrm{\Delta }`$$`N`$(Na I)$`|`$ is 3.3 $`\times `$ 1011 cm-2.

The M92 data presented here introduces some interesting differences and similarities with M15, the only other globular cluster studied in this way to date (Meyer & Lauroesch, 1999). First, the observations were performed slightly differently, with the fainter M92 receiving only 70% of the exposure time of M15 due to poor weather, resulting in lower signal-to-noise ratios for M92. The interstellar components toward M92 are only somewhat resolved, whereas the M15 clouds are well separated in velocity. Aside from these issues, the final maps are directly comparable. The M92 and M15 absorption maps presented in Figure 2 show a striking difference, but also an important similarity.

Unlike the M92 maps, the M15 maps show large, high column density features. However, the low column density regions of the M15 maps are virtually identical to the M92 maps. Regardless of the contrasts between the maps, the variations toward M92 are appreciably larger than the column density measurement errors, thus ruling out the possibility that they are merely random noise fluctuations. For example, the NW feature in the Cloud 2 component toward M92 (lower right map of Figure 2) has a column density enhancement relative to the local Na I baseline that is approximately 4.5 times the measurement uncertainty. The similarities between the maps suggest that the M92 variations are typical in low Na I column density components. Even though the M15 columns are generally higher than those of M92, and have a greater dynamic range in $`N`$(Na I), the median fiber-to-fiber column density differences are comparable, statistically reaffirming that we have measured similar variations in lower column density gas.

The physical interpretation of these variations is uncertain. The possibilities are that the observed Na I structures are caused by real H I structures or fluctuations in the physical conditions of the gas. The former interpretation is speculative as Na I is not a dominant ion in H I clouds, and therefore does not necessarily trace H I structure. While it has been shown that empirical estimates of $`N`$(H I) from $`N`$(Na I) can be made when diffuse Galactic clouds have $`N`$(Na I) $``$ 1012 cm-2 (Hobbs, 1974; Welty, Hobbs, & Kulkarni, 1994), the use of this relationship in the case of any structures in the M92 maps would be somewhat dubious because the column densities measured are typically below or comparable to this limit. The latter interpretation relies on fluctuations in the Na ionization equilibrium, or equivalently the $`N`$(Na I)/$`N`$(H) ratio. Lauroesch et al. (1998) discovered that $`N`$(Na I) and other neutral species vary toward the binary $`\mu `$ Cru, whereas Zn II, a dominant ion, does not. This suggests that interstellar $`N`$(Na I) variations could be the result of small-scale perturbations in the Na ionization equilibrium, caused by density and/or $`n_\mathrm{e}/n_\mathrm{H}`$ fluctuations.

The comparison between the M92 and M15 maps provides a new perspective on the Na I structure. Namely, the variations toward M92 and the low column density regions of M15 may be small-scale undulations in the gas structure due to turbulence or other variations in physical conditions, whereas the larger features in the high column density regions of the M15 maps may be representative of actual H I structures. Utilizing integral field spectroscopy to continue to map ISM structure in both low and high Na I column density components toward other extended background sources will help to test this idea.

To summarize, our observations show that two components of the ISM toward M92 exhibit significant structure down to scales of a few arc seconds, which could be indicative of variations in H I column densities, and/or turbulent fluctuations in the physical conditions of low column density interstellar components. The complimentary low column density features among the M92 and M15 maps uncovers an interesting possible interpretation of these structures and the relationships between the larger variations toward M15 and H I structures. With continued absorption-line mapping of interstellar components toward these and other globular clusters using instruments like DensePak, it is possible to further examine the spatial structure of diffuse Galactic clouds over a wide range of physical scales. Additionally, as recently shown by Roth, Meyer, & Lauroesch (2000), this same technique can probe similar structure using galaxies as background sources, perhaps providing interesting new information about high-velocity clouds or the ISM in other galaxies.

We are grateful to the referee for his/her valuable comments, and also to Dan Welty, Stefan Cartledge, and Matt Haffner for providing Ca II, Na I, and H I spectra of HD 156110, respectively. S. M. A. would also like to thank Dan Welty and Bruce Draine for useful conversations, and Caty Pilachowski for providing additional Na I spectra of M92.