text:
# Principally specialized characters of (𝔰𝔩)̂(𝑚|1)-modules

## 0. Introduction

Character formulas of basic representation of $`\widehat{𝔰𝔩}(m|n)`$ are given in \[KW2\], based on their explicit construction in terms of bosonic and fermionic fields.

In this paper, we calculate the principally specialized characters of some $`\widehat{𝔰𝔩}(m|1)`$-modules. In §1, we describe that the principally specialized characters of the basic $`\widehat{𝔰𝔩}(m|1)`$-modules $`L(\mathrm{\Lambda }_0)`$ is expressed as an infinite product. In §2, we deduce the specialized character formula of “quasiparticle” type.

We follow notation and terminologies from \[KW2\] without repeating their explanation.

## 1. Specialized character formula for some series of $`\widehat{𝔰𝔩}(m|1)`$-modules

Throughout this paper, we assume that $`m2`$ and let $`\alpha _0,\mathrm{},\alpha _m`$ denote the set of simple roots for $`\widehat{𝔰𝔩}(m|1)`$ where $`\alpha _0`$ and $`\alpha _m`$ are odd and $`\alpha _i(i=1,\mathrm{},m1)`$ are even. Provided that all $`s_i`$ are positive integers, the sequence $`s=(s_0,\mathrm{},s_m)`$ defines a homomorphism $`_s:[[e^{\alpha _0},\mathrm{},e^{\alpha _m}]][[q]]`$ by $`_s(e^{\alpha _i})=q^{s_i}(i=0,\mathrm{},m)`$, called the *specialization of type* $`s`$. In this paper, we consider the specialization of type $`s=(1,\mathrm{},1,0)`$ which makes sense for the characters of integrable representations, and we write simply $``$ for this specialization $`_s`$ when no confusion can arise.

Since the set of simple roots for the even part of $`\widehat{𝔤𝔩}(m|1)`$ is

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}^{}=\{\alpha _0^{}=\alpha _0+\alpha _m,\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _{m1}\},$$

this specialization is the principal specialization with respect to the even part of $`\widehat{𝔤𝔩}(m|1)`$; namely

$$(e^{\alpha _0^{}})=(e^{\alpha _1})=\mathrm{}=(e^{\alpha _{m1}})=q.$$

We recall the Fock space and its charge decomposition:

$$F=_sF_s$$

from §3 of \[KW2\].

###### Lemma 1.1.

Let $`m2,s`$. Then we have:

1. $`q^{\frac{sm}{2}}(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chF_s)+q^{\frac{sm}{2}}(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chF_s)={\displaystyle \frac{2_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1+q^i)^2}{\phi (q^m)^2}}`$.
2. $`(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chF_s)=(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chF_{m1s})`$.

Here and further $`\phi (q)=_{j=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1q^j)`$.

###### Proof.

In the case $`\widehat{𝔤𝔩}(m|1)`$, the formula (3.15) in \[KW2\] gives the following:

$$chF=e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{_{i=1}^m(1+ze^{ϵ_i(k\frac{1}{2})\delta })(1+z^1e^{ϵ_i(k\frac{1}{2})\delta })}{(1ze^{ϵ_{m+1}(k\frac{1}{2})\delta })(1z^1e^{ϵ_{m+1}(k\frac{1}{2})\delta })},$$
(1.1)
where $`z`$ is the “charge” variable.

Since $`\alpha _0=\delta ϵ_1+ϵ_{m+1}`$ and $`\alpha _i=ϵ_iϵ_{i+1},(i=1,\mathrm{},m)`$, our principal specialization $`=_s`$ is written in terms of $`e^{ϵ_i}`$ as follows:

$$(e^{ϵ_i})=q^{mi}(i=1,\mathrm{},m),(e^{ϵ_{m+1}})=1.$$
(1.2)
Thus, we obtain

$`(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chF)`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{_{i=1}^m(1+zq^{im}q^{m(k\frac{1}{2})})(1+z^1q^{mi}q^{m(k\frac{1}{2})})}{(1zq^{m(k\frac{1}{2})})(1z^1q^{m(k\frac{1}{2})})}}`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1+zq^{k\frac{m}{2}})(1+z^1q^{k1+\frac{m}{2}})}{(1zq^{m(k\frac{1}{2})})(1z^1q^{m(k\frac{1}{2})})}}`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1+(zq^{\frac{1m}{2}})q^{k\frac{1}{2}})(1+(z^1q^{\frac{m1}{2}})q^{k\frac{1}{2}})}{(1+(z^1)q^{m(k\frac{1}{2})})(1+(z)q^{m(k\frac{1}{2})})}}.`$ (1.3)
In order to compute the coefficient of $`z^s`$, we use the Jacobi triple product identity:

$$\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(1+zq^{n\frac{1}{2}})(1+z^1q^{n\frac{1}{2}})=\frac{1}{\phi (q)}\underset{j}{}z^jq^{\frac{1}{2}j^2},$$
(1.4)
and also the following well-known identity (see (5.26) in \[KP\] and §5.8 in \[K4\]):

$`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}(1+zq^{k\frac{1}{2}})^1(1+z^1q^{k\frac{1}{2}})^1={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\phi (q)^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}(1)^m{\displaystyle \frac{q^{\frac{1}{2}m(m+1)}}{1+zq^{m+\frac{1}{2}}}}`$ (1.5)
$`=`$ $`\phi (q)^2\left({\displaystyle \underset{m,k0}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{m,k<0}{}}\right)((1)^{m+k}z^kq^{\frac{1}{2}m(m+1)+(m+\frac{1}{2})k}).`$
Replacing $`z`$ by $`zq^{\frac{1m}{2}}`$ in (1.4), $`z`$ by $`z^1`$ and $`q`$ by $`q^m`$ in (1.5), we rewrite the right side of (1.3) by

$$(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chF)=\frac{1}{\phi (q)\phi (q^m)^2}\underset{k}{}(\underset{a,p0}{}\underset{a,p<0}{})(1)^az^{kp}q^{\frac{1}{2}k(k+1)\frac{km}{2}+\frac{m}{2}a(a+1)+m(a+\frac{1}{2})p}$$

and thus we have

$`(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chF_s)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\phi (q)\phi (q^m)^2}}({\displaystyle \underset{a,p0}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{a,p<0}{}})(1)^aq^{\frac{1}{2}(p+s)(p+s+1)\frac{sm}{2}+\frac{m}{2}a(a+1)+map}.`$ (1.6)
For convenience, we introduce the following functions:

$`f_s(a,p)`$ $`=(1)^aq^{\frac{1}{2}(p+s)(p+s+1)\frac{sm}{2}+\frac{m}{2}a(a+1)+map},`$
$`h_s`$ $`=({\displaystyle \underset{a,p0}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{a,p<0}{}})f_s(a,p).`$ (1.7)
To prove this lemma, it is sufficient to prove the following two equations:

1. $`q^{\frac{sm}{2}}h_s+q^{\frac{sm}{2}}h_s=2\phi (q)_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1+q^i)^2`$.
2. $`h_s=h_{m1s}`$.

First we shall prove (a’).
Since $`f_s(a,p1)=q^{sm}f_s(a,p)`$, we have

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{a>0}{p0}}{}}f_s(a,p)`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{a,p<0}{}}f_s(a,p1)=q^{sm}{\displaystyle \underset{a,p<0}{}}f_s(a,p).`$
Hence we obtain

$`h_s`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{a>0}{p0}}{}}f_s(a,p)+{\displaystyle \underset{p0}{}}f_s(0,p){\displaystyle \underset{a,p<0}{}}f_s(a,p)`$
$`=q^{sm}{\displaystyle \underset{a,p<0}{}}f_s(a,p)+{\displaystyle \underset{p0}{}}f_s(0,p){\displaystyle \underset{a,p<0}{}}f_s(a,p).`$
We then have

$$q^{\frac{1}{2}sm}h_s=q^{\frac{1}{2}sm}\underset{a,p<0}{}f_s(a,p)+q^{\frac{1}{2}sm}\underset{p0}{}f_s(0,p)q^{\frac{1}{2}sm}\underset{a,p<0}{}f_s(a,p).$$
(1.8)
A straightforward computation replacing $`s`$ by $`s`$ yields

$$q^{\frac{1}{2}sm}h_s=q^{\frac{1}{2}sm}\underset{a,p<0}{}f_s(a,p)+q^{\frac{1}{2}sm}\underset{p0}{}f_s(0,p)q^{\frac{1}{2}sm}\underset{a,p<0}{}f_s(a,p).$$
(1.9)
By (1.8) and (1.9), we obtain

$`q^{\frac{1}{2}sm}h_s+q^{\frac{1}{2}sm}h_s`$ $`=2{\displaystyle \underset{p0}{}}q^{\frac{1}{2}p(p+1)}.`$ (1.10)
It is known (see e.g. §5 in \[KW1\]) that the right side of (1.10) has the following product expansion:

$$\underset{p0}{}q^{\frac{1}{2}p(p+1)}=\underset{k1}{}\frac{1q^{2k}}{1q^{2k1}}=\phi (q)\underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(1+q^i)^2,$$

and hence (a’) follows.

Next we shall prove (b’).
Since $`f_s(a1,0)=f_s(a,0)`$, we have

$$\underset{a0}{}f_s(a,0)=\underset{a<0}{}f_s(a1,0)=\underset{a<0}{}f_s(a,0).$$

Hence we obtain

$`h_s`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{a0}{p>0}}{}}f_s(a,p)+{\displaystyle \underset{a0}{}}f_s(a,0){\displaystyle \underset{a,p<0}{}}f_s(a,p)`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{a0}{p>0}}{}}f_s(a,p){\displaystyle \underset{a<0}{}}f_s(a,0){\displaystyle \underset{a,p<0}{}}f_s(a,p)`$
$`=({\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{a0}{p>0}}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{a<0}{p0}}{}})f_s(a,p).`$
Replacing $`a`$ by $`(a+1)`$ and $`p`$ by $`p`$, we have

$`h_s`$ $`=({\displaystyle \underset{a,p<0}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{a,p0}{}})f_s(a1,p)`$
$`=({\displaystyle \underset{a,p<0}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{a,p0}{}})(1)^{a+1}q^{(p+s)(p+s+1)\frac{sm}{2}+\frac{m}{2}a(a+1)+m(a+1)p}`$
$`=({\displaystyle \underset{a,p0}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{a,p<0}{}})(1)^aq^{\frac{1}{2}(ps)(ps1)\frac{sm}{2}+\frac{m}{2}a(a+1)+m(a+1)p}.`$ (1.11)
Replacing $`s`$ by $`m1s`$ in (1.11) and comparing it with (1.7), we get (b’). ∎

Using Lemma 1.1 inductively, we have the following.

###### Proposition 1.2.

Let $`m2`$ and $`k_+`$. Then we have

$`(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chF_{(k+1)(m1)})`$ $`=(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chF_{k(m1)})`$
$`=q^{k\frac{m(m1)}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{|j|k}{}}(1)^{kj}q^{(k^2j^2)\frac{m(m1)}{2}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1+q^i)^2}{\phi (q^m)^2}}.`$
###### Proof.

By Lemma 1.1, we get the recurrence formula

$$(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chF_{s+m1})=q^{\frac{sm}{2}}\left(\frac{2_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1+q^i)^2}{\phi (q^m)^2}q^{\frac{sm}{2}}(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chF_s)\right).$$
(1.12)
We now set for $`k`$, $`s=k(m1)`$ , $`x=q^{\frac{m(m1)}{2}}`$ and

$$H_k=(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chF_{k(m1)})\left(\frac{_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1+q^i)^2}{\phi (q^m)^2}\right)^1.$$

For the proof of this proposition, it is sufficient to show that

$$H_{k+1}=x^k\left(\underset{|j|k}{}(1)^{kj}x^{k^2j^2}\right),k_+.$$
(1.13)
We shall show (1.13) by induction on $`k`$. Using these notation, (1.12) is rewritten as

$$H_{k+1}=x^k(2x^kH_k).$$

Assume that (1.13) is true for $`k1`$. Then we obtain

$`H_{k+1}`$ $`=x^k\left\{2x^kx^{k1}\left({\displaystyle \underset{|j|k1}{}}(1)^{k1j}x^{(k1)^2j^2}\right)\right\}`$
$`=x^k\left(2+{\displaystyle \underset{|j|k1}{}}(1)^{kj}x^{k^2j^2}\right)`$
$`=x^k\left({\displaystyle \underset{|j|k}{}}(1)^{kj}x^{k^2j^2}\right),`$
proving the proposition. ∎

We consider principally specialized characters of $`\widehat{𝔰𝔩}(m|1)`$-modules $`L(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{(s)})`$ where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{(s)}`$ are defined in Remark 3.2 of \[KW2\], given by

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_{(s)}=\{\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Lambda }_s\hfill & \text{if }0sm\hfill \\ (sm)\mathrm{\Lambda }_0+(1+sm)\mathrm{\Lambda }_m\hfill & \text{if }sm\hfill \\ (1s)\mathrm{\Lambda }_0+s\mathrm{\Lambda }_m+s\delta \hfill & \text{if }s0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(1.14)
###### Theorem 1.3.

Let $`m2`$. Then we have the following:

1. For $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Lambda }_0`$ or $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{m1}`$, we have

$$(e^\mathrm{\Lambda }chL(\mathrm{\Lambda }))=\frac{_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1+q^i)^2}{\phi (q^m)}.$$
(1.15)
2. For $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\{k(m1)+1\}\mathrm{\Lambda }_0k(m1)\mathrm{\Lambda }_m`$ $`(k)`$, we have

$$(e^\mathrm{\Lambda }chL(\mathrm{\Lambda }))=\left(\underset{|j||k|}{}(1)^{kj}q^{(k^2j^2)\frac{m(m1)}{2}}\right)\frac{_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1+q^i)^2}{\phi (q^m)}.$$
(1.16)

###### Proof.

To prove (a), we let $`k=0`$ in Proposition 1.2. Then, since $`chF_s=\phi (e^\delta )^1chL(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{(s)})`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{(0)}=\mathrm{\Lambda }_0`$, we get

$$(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chL(\mathrm{\Lambda }_0))=\frac{_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1+q^i)^2}{\phi (q^m)}.$$

Since $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{(m1)}=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{m1}=\mathrm{\Lambda }_0\alpha _m`$, we have

$$(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{(m1)}})=(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0})(e^{\alpha _m})=(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}),$$

and hence

$`(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{m1}}chL(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{m1}))`$ $`=(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chL(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{(m1)}))`$
$`=(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chF_{m1})\phi (q^m)`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1+q^i)^2}{\phi (q^m)}}`$
which is (a).

To prove (b), we let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\{k(m1)+1\}\mathrm{\Lambda }_0k(m1)\mathrm{\Lambda }_m`$ for $`k`$. First we consider in the case $`k_+`$, since $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_m=\mathrm{\Lambda }_0\frac{1}{m1}\alpha _1\mathrm{}\frac{m}{m1}\alpha _m`$ and by (1.14), it follows that

$$(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{(k(m1))}})=(e^\mathrm{\Lambda })q^{km(m1)}=(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0})q^{\frac{km(m1)}{2}},$$

and hence we obtain

$`(e^\mathrm{\Lambda }chL(\mathrm{\Lambda }))`$ $`=(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{(k(m1))}}chL(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{(k(m1))}))`$
$`=q^{\frac{km(m1)}{2}}(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chL(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{(k(m1))}))`$
$`=\left({\displaystyle \underset{|j|k}{}}(1)^{kj}q^{(k^2j^2)\frac{m(m1)}{2}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1+q^i)^2}{\phi (q^m)}}.`$
In the case $`k<0`$, the same discussion as above yields

$$(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{((k+1)(m1))}})=(e^\mathrm{\Lambda })=(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0})q^{\frac{km(m1)}{2}},$$

and hence we obtain

$`(e^\mathrm{\Lambda }chL(\mathrm{\Lambda }))`$ $`=(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{((k+1)(m1))}}chL(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{((k+1)(m1))}))`$
$`=q^{\frac{km(m1)}{2}}(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chL(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{((k+1)(m1))}))`$
$`=\left({\displaystyle \underset{|j|k}{}}(1)^{kj}q^{(k^2j^2)\frac{m(m1)}{2}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1+q^i)^2}{\phi (q^m)}}`$
which is (b). ∎

###### Remark 1.4.

This is an additional remark to Theorem 1.3.
We consider an asymptotic behavior of principally specialized characters $`(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chL(\mathrm{\Lambda }_0))`$.

We shall write $`f(\tau )\underset{\tau 0}{}g(\tau )`$ if $`\mathrm{lim}_{\tau 0}f(\tau )/g(\tau )=1`$, where $`\tau 0`$ means that $`\tau =iT(T>0)`$ and $`T0.`$

It is known (see e.g. (13.13.5) in \[K3\]) that the asymptotic behavior of the Dedekind $`\eta `$-function

$$\eta (\tau )=q^{\frac{1}{24}}\phi (q)=q^{\frac{1}{24}}\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(1q^n)(q=e^{2\pi i\tau })$$

is given by

$$\eta (\tau )\underset{\tau 0}{}(i\tau )^{\frac{1}{2}}e^{\frac{\pi i}{12\tau }},$$

and so

$$\phi (q)=q^{\frac{1}{24}}\eta (\tau )\underset{\tau 0}{}(i\tau )^{\frac{1}{2}}e^{\frac{\pi i}{12\tau }}.$$

¿From this assertion, we have

$$\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(1+q^n)=\frac{\phi (q^2)}{\phi (q)}\underset{\tau 0}{}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}e^{\frac{\pi i}{24\tau }}$$

and hence

$`(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chL(\mathrm{\Lambda }_0))`$ $`\underset{\tau 0}{}`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\frac{1}{2}e^{\frac{\pi i}{12\tau }}}{(im\tau )^{\frac{1}{2}}e^{\frac{\pi i}{12m\tau }}}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{m}}{2}}(i\tau )^{\frac{1}{2}}e^{\frac{2\pi i}{\tau }\frac{m+1}{24m}}.`$
By applying the Tauberian theorem(see \[I\] and Proposition 4.22 in \[KP\]), we have

$$a_n\underset{n\mathrm{}}{}\frac{1}{8\sqrt{3}n}(m+1)^{\frac{1}{2}}e^{\pi \sqrt{\frac{2}{3}\frac{m+1}{m}n}}$$

where $`(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chL(\mathrm{\Lambda }_0))=_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}a_nq^n`$.

Next, we consider for principally specialized characters of some series of level 1 integrable modules. By Theorem 1.3, we have for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{m1}`$ or $`\{k(m1)+1\}\mathrm{\Lambda }_0k(m1)\mathrm{\Lambda }_m`$ $`(k)`$,

$`(e^\mathrm{\Lambda }chL(\mathrm{\Lambda }))`$ $`\underset{\tau 0}{}(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chL(\mathrm{\Lambda }_0))`$
$`\underset{\tau 0}{}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{m}}{2}}(i\tau )^{\frac{1}{2}}e^{\frac{2\pi i}{\tau }\frac{m+1}{24m}}.`$ (1.17)
The formula (4.12) in \[KW2\] is the asymptotics of the basic specialization (the specialization of type $`(1,0,\mathrm{},0)`$) of $`\widehat{𝔰𝔩}(m|1)`$-module $`L(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{(s)})`$. The formula which is obtained by replaced $`\tau `$ by $`m\tau `$ in (4.12) of \[KW2\] coincides with (1.17).

## 2. Specialized character formula of “quasiparticle” type

###### Proposition 2.1.

For $`m2`$ and $`s`$, we have

$$(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chF_s)=q^{\frac{sm}{2}}\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{a,b,c,d_+}{ab+cd=s}}{}\frac{q^{\frac{a(a+1)}{2}}q^{\frac{b(b1)}{2}}q^{cm}}{(q)_a(q)_b(q^m)_c(q^m)_d}.$$

Here and further $`(q)_n=_{j=1}^n(1q^j)`$.

###### Proof.

This formula is shown just by the same argument as that in the proof of the formula (3.14) in \[KW2\], by making use of a basis of $`F_s`$:

$$\begin{array}{c}(\psi _{(j_{1,1}\frac{1}{2})}^{(1)}\mathrm{}\psi _{(j_{1,a_1}\frac{1}{2})}^{(1)})\mathrm{}(\psi _{(j_{m,1}\frac{1}{2})}^{(m)}\mathrm{}\psi _{(j_{m,a_m}\frac{1}{2})}^{(m)})\hfill \\ \times (\psi _{(j_{1,1}^{}\frac{1}{2})}^{(1)}\mathrm{}\psi _{(j_{1,b_1}^{}\frac{1}{2})}^{(1)})\mathrm{}(\psi _{(j_{m,1}^{}\frac{1}{2})}^{(m)}\mathrm{}\psi _{(j_{m,b_m}^{}\frac{1}{2})}^{(m)})\hfill \\ \times (\phi _{(k_1\frac{1}{2})}^{(1)}\mathrm{}\phi _{(k_c\frac{1}{2})}^{(1)})(\phi _{(k_1^{}\frac{1}{2})}^{(1)}\mathrm{}\phi _{(k_d^{}\frac{1}{2})}^{(1)})|0\hfill \end{array}$$

satisfying

$$\begin{array}{c}0<j_{i,1}<\mathrm{}<j_{i,a_i},0<j_{i,1}^{}<\mathrm{}<j_{i,b_i}^{}(i=1,\mathrm{},m),\hfill \\ 0<k_1\mathrm{}k_c,0<k_1^{}\mathrm{}k_d^{}\hfill \end{array}$$

and

$$ab+cd=s$$

where $`a=_ia_i,b=_ib_i`$.

Since

$`\mathrm{weight}(\psi _k^{(i)})`$ $`=ϵ_i+k\delta ,\mathrm{weight}(\psi _k^{(i)})=ϵ_i+k\delta ,`$
$`\mathrm{weight}(\phi _k^{(1)})`$ $`=ϵ_{m+1}+k\delta ,\mathrm{weight}(\phi _k^{(1)})=ϵ_{m+1}+k\delta ,`$
and (1.2), we have

$$\begin{array}{cc}\left(e^{\mathrm{weight}(\psi _{(j\frac{1}{2})}^{(i)})}\right)=q^{i+m(j\frac{3}{2})},\hfill & \left(e^{\mathrm{weight}(\psi _{(j\frac{1}{2})}^{(i)})}\right)=q^{i+m(j+\frac{1}{2})},\hfill \\ \left(e^{\mathrm{weight}(\phi _{(j\frac{1}{2})}^{(1)})}\right)=q^{m(j\frac{1}{2})},\hfill & \left(e^{\mathrm{weight}(\phi _{(j\frac{1}{2})}^{(1)})}\right)=q^{m(j\frac{1}{2})},\hfill \end{array}$$

for $`i=1,\mathrm{},m`$ and $`j`$.

Hence we have

$`(e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_0}chF_s)=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{a,b,c,d_+}{ab+cd=s}}{}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{0<i_1<\mathrm{}<i_a}{}}q^{(i_1\frac{m}{2})+\mathrm{}+(i_a\frac{m}{2})}\right)\left({\displaystyle \underset{0<j_1<\mathrm{}<j_b}{}}q^{(j_1+\frac{m}{2}1)+\mathrm{}+(j_b+\frac{m}{2}1)}\right)`$
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \underset{0<k_1\mathrm{}k_c}{}}q^{(mk_1\frac{m}{2})+\mathrm{}+(mk_c\frac{m}{2})}\right)\left({\displaystyle \underset{0<l_1\mathrm{}l_d}{}}q^{(ml_1\frac{m}{2})+\mathrm{}+(ml_d\frac{m}{2})}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`q^{\frac{sm}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{a,b,c,d_+}{ab+cd=s}}{}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{0<i_1<\mathrm{}<i_a}{}}q^{i_1+\mathrm{}+i_a}\right)\left(q^b{\displaystyle \underset{0<j_1<\mathrm{}<j_b}{}}q^{j_1+\mathrm{}+j_b}\right)`$
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \underset{0<k_1\mathrm{}k_c}{}}q^{m(k_1+\mathrm{}+k_c)}\right)\left(q^{dm}{\displaystyle \underset{0<l_1\mathrm{}l_d}{}}q^{m(l_1+\mathrm{}+l_d)}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`q^{\frac{sm}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{a,b,c,d_+}{ab+cd=s}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{q^{\frac{1}{2}a(a+1)}}{(q)_a}}{\displaystyle \frac{q^{\frac{1}{2}b(b1)}}{(q)_b}}{\displaystyle \frac{q^{cm}}{(q^m)_c}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(q^m)_d}},`$
proving the proposition. ∎

By Theorem 1.3 and Proposition 2.1, we also have shown

###### Corollary 2.2.

For $`m2`$, the following formula holds

$$\frac{_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1+q^i)^2}{\phi (q^m)^2}=\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{a,b,c,d_+}{ab+cd=0}}{}\frac{q^{\frac{a(a+1)}{2}}q^{\frac{b(b1)}{2}}q^{cm}}{(q)_a(q)_b(q^m)_c(q^m)_d}.$$


format: text

text:
# Patterns of Striped Order in the Classical Lattice Coulomb Gas

\[

## Abstract

We obtain via Monte Carlo simulations the low temperature charge configurations in the lattice Coulomb gas on square lattices for charge filling ratio $`f`$ in the range $`1/3<f<1/2`$. We find a simple regularity in the low temperature charge configurations which consist of a suitable periodic combination of a few basic striped patterns characterized by the existence of partially filled diagonal channels. In general there exist two separate transitions where the lower temperature transition ($`T_p`$) corresponds to the freezing of charges within the partially filled channels. $`T_p`$ is found to be sensitively dependent on $`f`$ through the charge number density $`\nu =p_1/q_1`$ within the channels.

\]

Competition between periodic pinning potential and repulsive inter-particle interactions often generate interesting frustration effects on the equilibrium properties of particle systems resulting in diverse commensurate or incommensurate phases . In the simplest case of one dimensional system on a lattice, there exists a well known prescription of obtaining the ground state configuration  for a given particle density provided that the inter-particle potential is convex and vanishing at infinity. In two dimensions, systematic or analytic results are scarce .

One of the extensively studied model systems in two dimensions is the classical lattice Coulomb gas (LCG), where a fraction $`f=p/q`$ ($`p`$ and $`q`$ are relative primes) of the lattice sites are occupied by unit charges upon uniform neutralizing background . LCG appears in the vortex representation of the two dimensional Josephson junction arrays under uniform external magnetic field via Villain approximation  of the uniformly frustrated XY (UFXY) model, where the parameter $`f`$ corresponds to the ratio of the magnetic flux per unit plaquette and the superconducting flux quantum $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0=hc/2e`$. In these systems, physical properties such as transition temperatures or critical currents can depend sensitively on (the rationality of) the value of the frustration parameter $`f`$ due to the commensuration effect .

In spite of many years of research effort, there still remains wide range of $`f`$ parameter (notably for $`1/3<f<1/2`$) for which not much is known in terms of equilibrium properties. Even the ground state configurations are known only for some limited cases of values of $`f`$, especially for low order rationals . In this paper, we report simulation results on the low temperature ordered structures of LCG on square lattices for $`1/3<f<1/2`$.

In the case of UFXY model on square lattices, Halsey proposed staircase states  as the low temperature ordered configurations with periodicity $`q\times q`$. However, the staircase state turns out to be the true ground state configuration only for some limited values of $`f`$ such as $`f=1/2`$, $`1/3`$, $`2/5`$, $`3/8`$, etc. More recent works on UFXY model  and LCG  shows that for $`f=p/q`$ near $`1g`$ ($`g=(\sqrt{5}1)/2`$) with $`q`$ large, the low temperature vortex configuration in the UFXY model can be different from the ordered charge configurations in LCG. Especially, in the case of LCG on square lattices, it was shown  that there appear diagonal striped configurations with partially filled diagonals. However, the exact patterns of low temperature charge configurations for general $`f`$ of dense charge filling have not been enumerated yet.

In this paper, we find numerically for LCG on square lattices with $`f`$ in a large part of the range $`1/3<f<1/2`$, that, below a first order transition temperature $`T_c`$, the charge configuration consists of periodic arrangements of a few basic striped patterns. Four regimes of values of $`f`$ are identified, each of which represents a specific class of striped patterns characterized by the existence of partially filled diagonals. $`T_c`$ is found to be only weakly dependent on $`f`$. Below $`T_c`$, there exist in general a temperature range where the charges within partially filled diagonal channels are disordered (thus mobile along channels). We found that there exist another transition at a lower temperature $`T_p`$ at which freezing of charges within partially filled channels occur. An interesting result is that this lower transition temperature depends sensitively on the rationality of the charge number density within channels $`\nu =p_1/q_1`$, decreasing monotonically in $`q_1`$.

General 2D LCG  is described by the following Hamiltonian,

$$_{CG}=\frac{1}{2}\underset{ij}{}Q_iG(r_{ij})Q_j$$
(1)
where $`r_{ij}`$ is the distance between the sites $`i`$ and $`j`$, and the magnitude of charge $`Q_i`$ at site $`i`$ can take either $`1f`$ or $`f`$. Charge neutrality condition $`_iQ_i=0`$ implies that the number density of the positive charges is equal to $`f`$. We can thus view the system as a lattice gas of $`Nf`$ charges of unit magnitude upon uniform negative background charges of charge density $`f`$ ($`N=L^2`$ is the total size of the system with the linear dimension $`L`$). The lattice Green’s function $`G(r_{ij})`$ solves the equation $`(\mathrm{\Delta }^2\lambda ^2)G(r_{ij})=2\pi \delta _{r_{ij},0}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2`$ is the discrete lattice Laplacian and $`\lambda `$ is the screening length. For the case of usual Villain transformation of UFXY model, we have $`\lambda =\mathrm{}`$. But the screening term is included in this equation for generality. On a square lattice with periodic boundary conditions, $`G(\stackrel{}{r})`$ is given by

$$G(\stackrel{}{r})=\frac{\pi }{N}\underset{\stackrel{}{k}0}{}\frac{e^{i𝐤𝐫}1}{2\mathrm{cos}k_x\mathrm{cos}k_y+1/\lambda ^2},$$
(2)
where $`𝐤`$ are the allowed wave vectors with $`k_\mu =2\pi n_\mu /L`$ ($`\mu =x,y`$), with $`n_\mu =0,1,\mathrm{},L1`$. In the case of infinite screening length, for large separation $`r`$, one gets $`G(\stackrel{}{r})\mathrm{ln}r`$ . In this work, the presented results are all obtained for the case of $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$ .

In our MC simulations, the initial disordered random configuration is updated according to the standard Metropolis algorithm by selecting a positive charge at random and moving it over to one of the nearest neighbor (NN) or next nearest neighbor (NNN) sites . An important aspect of our simulations is that one has to choose the lattice size appropriately in order to match the periodicity of the low temperature configuration (see below). If, otherwise, one chooses a lattice size that is incommensurate with the periodicity of striped patterns, then one ends up with defective charge configurations.

To begin with, let us present the four basic component patterns (Fig. 1) before going into the full description of the striped configurations. First component pattern (I) is a sequence of three diagonals which are empty, filled, and empty respectively (that may be denoted by (010) in our notation where 1 refers to a filled diagonal and 0 refers to an empty diagonal). In other words, it is a pattern with single isolated diagonal filled with charges, that is neighbored by empty diagonals on both sides. Repetition of this pattern produces the ground state configuration for $`f=1/3`$ with spatial periodicity three.

Second component pattern (II) consists of a sequence of five diagonals that can be written as (01010). This forms the basis of the ground state configuration for $`f=2/5`$ with lattice periodicity five. The third component pattern (III) consists of a sequence of seven diagonals that can be denoted by (010p010) where p refers to a partially filled diagonal where only part of the diagonal sites are occupied by positive charges. This is essentially a partially filled diagonal enveloped by one filled diagonal on both sides at second neighbor diagonal position, which may be termed as a channel structure. This can form a basis of a periodic configuration with spatial lattice periodicity seven. Lastly, the fourth component pattern (IV) can be denoted by (01010p01010). This is component pattern consisting of a partially filled diagonal bounded by two type II stripe patterns on both sides. This can form a basis of a periodic configuration with spatial lattice periodicity eleven.

We are now in a position to be able to give a detailed description of the low temperature charge patterns. We may identify four regimes for the striped charge configuration. We may call these by regime $`A`$, $`B`$, $`C`$, and $`D`$ respectively. Fig. 2 shows typical representative configuration in each of the four regimes.

In regime $`A`$ that is bounded by $`1/3<f<f_{c1}`$ ($`f_{c1}0.357`$), the low temperature charge configuration consists of combinations of type I and III patterns, where $`l`$ ( $`l=1,2,3\mathrm{}`$ ) copies of type I patterns in sequence followed by a single type III pattern ($`\mathrm{I}^l\mathrm{III}`$) forms a basic unit, repetition of which forms the whole charge configuration. We can easily see that the lattice periodicity of the ordered stripe configuration is equal to $`p_A=3l+7`$. As $`l`$ approaches infinity, we recover the case of $`f=1/3`$. As the value of $`f`$ increases within regime $`A`$, the value of $`l`$ decreases monotonically in step-like manner. Therefore, regime $`A`$ is further divided into sub-regimes each of which is characterized by a positive integer $`l`$.

Regime $`B`$ covers the region $`f_{c1}<f<f_{c2}`$ ($`f_{c2}0.381`$), where the ordered charge configuration simply consists of repetitions of type III stripe patterns with the resulting lattice periodicity $`p_B=7`$. In regime $`C`$ which is bounded by $`f_{c2}<f<2/5`$, the low temperature charge configuration consists of combinations of type II and III patterns, with $`m`$ ($`m=1,2,3\mathrm{}`$) copies of type II stripe patterns in sequence followed by a single type III pattern ($`\mathrm{II}^m\mathrm{III}`$) forms a basic unit. Here, we can see that the lattice periodicity of the ordered stripe configuration is equal to $`p_C=5m+7`$. As the value of $`f`$ increases within regime $`C`$, the value of $`m`$ increases monotonically in step-like manner. The case of $`f=2/5`$ corresponds to the limit of $`m\mathrm{}`$.

Regime $`D`$ corresponds to $`2/5<f<f_{c3}`$ ($`f_{c3}0.425`$), where the unit period of ordered configuration consists of combinations of a type IV pattern plus $`n`$ ($`n=0,1,2,3,\mathrm{}`$) repetitions of type II stripe patterns that may be denoted by $`\mathrm{II}^n\mathrm{IV}`$. We see that the lattice periodicity of the ordered stripe configuration in regime IV is equal to $`p_D=5n+11`$. As the value of $`f`$ increases within regime $`D`$, the value of $`n`$ decreases monotonically in step-like manner.

Note that the periodicity in the above refers to the periodicity of the filled diagonals only, neglecting the true periodicity including the charge configurations within the partially filled diagonals. The true spatial periodicity of the charge configurations can be many times larger than the stripe periodicity since we also have to take into account the correlation of charge configurations between different partially filled channels.

For any given value of $`f`$, we can easily obtain the filling density $`\nu `$ inside the partially filled channel using the relations $`f=(l+2+\nu )/(3l+7)`$ (for regime $`A`$ and $`B`$), $`f=(2m+2+\nu )/(5m+7)`$ (regime $`C`$) and $`f=(2n+4+\nu )/(5n+11)`$ (regime $`D`$) respectively where $`l`$, $`m`$, $`n`$ and $`\nu `$ are as defined above. As the value of $`f`$ continuously increases within one sub-regime, the system in the low temperature stable configuration simply adjusts itself by accomodating the extra number of charges into the partially filled diagonal channels and thereby changing the charge filling $`\nu `$ within the channels.

We find that there exists in general another transition at lower temperature $`T_p`$ corresponding to charge freezing inside partially filled channels. In order to check that, we calculated the inverse dielectric constant along two perpendicular diagonals to identify the transition temperatures. The wave-vector dependent inverse dielectric constant is defined as follows ,

$$ϵ^1(\stackrel{}{k})=\left(1\frac{2\pi }{T\mathrm{\Omega }k^2}<\rho _k\rho _k>\right),$$
(3)
where $`\rho _k_{r_i}Q(r_i)\mathrm{exp}(i\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{r_i})`$ is the Fourier component at wave-vector $`\stackrel{}{k}`$ of the charge density and $`\mathrm{\Omega }L^2`$ is the total area of the system. By letting $`k0`$ for a given direction of the wave-vector, one can obtain the long wavelength limit of the inverse dielectric constant along a specific direction.

Figure 3 shows the dependence of the inverse dielectric constant along parallel and perpendicular to the stripes respectively for $`f=13/35`$. We can clearly see that there exists, in addition to the transition at $`T_c0.32`$ corresponding to the onset of striped order, intermediate regime of temperature where the dielectric constant exhibits asymmetry due to the channel-striped structures. Also, the system is seen to undergo another transition at lower temperature $`T_p0.014`$ (determined rather arbitrarily as the temperature where the inverse dielectric constant is equal to $`0.4`$). Figure 4 shows the dependence of the inverse dielectric constant along parallel to the stripes for various values of $`f`$ in regime $`B`$, where a wide variation is seen in the temperature dependence of the inverse dielectric constant parallel to the channels.

Shown in Fig. 5 is the dependence of the two transition temperatures on $`f=p/q`$ in regime $`B`$ where the higher transition $`T_c`$ is seen to depend on the values of $`f`$ smoothly, while the lower transition temperature $`T_p`$ exhibits sensitive dependence on $`f`$. From the inset of Fig. 5 where a plot of $`T_p`$ versus the integer denominator $`q_1`$ of the charge number density $`\nu p_1/q_1`$ within channels, one can recognize that $`T_p`$ decreases monotonically as $`q_1`$ increases. This is another commensuration effect coming from the rationality of the particle number density within channels each of which forms effectively a one-dimensional lattice gas system if we neglect the interaction between different channels. The arrangement of charges within each channel was found to follow the pattern given in ref.  and  at least for the values of $`f`$ considered in this work.

One can ask what determines the boundary value of $`f`$ and $`\nu `$ for each of the sub-regimes, in other words, what is the stability criterion for each pattern of the striped configuration. Even though an analytic formula cannot be given, our simulations suggest that the criterion of determining the crossover point between two neighboring subregimes is related to the electrostatic stability which is determined by the filling density inside the partially filled channel. We found numerically that for any given value of $`f`$ the filling density $`\nu `$ in the channel approximately satisfies the inequality $`0.4<\nu <0.7`$. For a given sub-regime, possible values of $`\nu `$ were always within this bound. Beyond some threshold value $`\nu _c`$ of $`\nu `$ that is within the above bound, electrostatic instability begins to set in, and rearrangement of the whole charge configuration occurs in order to form a new stable ordered patterns.

Now we are left with the region of $`f_{c3}<f<1/2`$. Even though we have not investigated the ordered configurations extensively for all values of $`f`$ in this regime, we could see, from some of our annealing simulations for rational values of $`f`$ in this regime, that the low temperature configuration no longer shows striped patterns but rather consists of regular arrays of hole defects upon $`f=1/2`$ checkerboard configurations. If we suppose that $`f1/2\alpha (1p_2/q_2)/2`$ with $`p_2`$ and $`q_2`$ relative primes, then we can easily see that $`f^{}p_2/q_22\alpha `$ represents the density of hole defects upon the $`f=1/2`$ checkerboard configuration. Therefore, we can suspect that the low temperature defect configuration in this regime will be equivalent to the charge configuration of lattice Coulomb gas with $`f=f^{}`$. We could confirm this expectation for a few cases of $`f`$ .

In summary, we have shown numerically that the 2D LCG on a square lattice exhibits a simple regularity in its striped charge configuration at low temperatures for filling factor $`f`$ in a large part of the range $`1/3<f<1/2`$ which is characterized by the existence of partially filled diagonals. The low temperature ordered configuration consists of a simple combinations of four basic striped patterns. In general, there exists another transition at a lower temperature $`T_p`$ corresponding to the freezing within partially filled channels. It would be interesting to observe these striped charge patterns experimentally, e.g., in regular square arrays of ultrasmall tunnel junctions. It may also be possible to observe similar patterns in the macroscopic systems of dielectric charged spheres  under periodic pinning potentials.

This work was supported by the Korea Research Foundation Grant (KRF-1999-015-DP0098) (SJL, BK) and (KRF-1998-15-D00089) (JRL).

FIGURE CAPTIONS

1. Regimes of charge patterns for the range of value of $`f`$ between $`1/3`$ and $`0.425`$. Filled squares and empty squares represent positive ($`Q=1f`$) and negative ($`Q=f`$) charges respectively, while gray squares denote lattice sites forming partially filled diagonal channels, where only finite fraction $`\nu `$ of the sites are filled with positive charges.

1. Low temperature charge configurations for (a) regime $`A`$ with $`f=7/20`$ ($`l=1`$), (b) regime $`B`$ with $`f=13/35`$, (c) regime $`C`$ with $`f=0.384`$ ($`m=1`$) and (d) regime $`D`$ with $`f=0.41`$ ($`n=1`$), respectively.

1. Inverse dielectric constants along parallel and perpendicular to the stripes for $`f=13/35`$ and $`L=35`$ versus temperature. We can clearly see an anisotropy of the inverse dielectric constant.

1. Inverse dielectric constant along parallel to the stripes for various vaues of charge number density $`\nu `$ within channels. All of the systems shown are chosen from regime $`B`$.

1. Transition temperatures (both $`T_c`$ and $`T_p`$) versus the charge filling ratio $`f`$. Inset shows the dependence of $`T_p`$ on the denominator $`q_1`$ of $`\nu =p_1/q_1`$.


text:
# Semiclassical Quantization by Harmonic Inversion: Comparison of Algorithms

## I Introduction

Semiclassical trace formulae relate the spectra of quantum systems to the periodic orbits of the pertinent classical systems . They yield expansions of the quantum response function of the form

$$g(E)=\underset{k}{}\frac{d_k}{EE_k+\text{i}ϵ}=\underset{\text{po}}{}𝒜_{\text{po}}\text{e}^{\text{i}S_{\text{po}}/\mathrm{}}.$$
(1)
Here, $`E_k`$ are the energy eigenvalues of the quantum system, $`d_k`$ their multiplicities, $`S_{\text{po}}`$ is the action of a classical periodic orbit, $`𝒜_{\text{po}}`$ an amplitude that can be calculated from classical mechanics (including phase information given by the Maslov index), and the sum on the right-hand side extends over all periodic orbits and usually diverges for real energies $`E`$. Thus, the quantal information cannot be extracted directly from the semiclassical expansion.

One particular and widely applicable method to overcome the convergence problems of the periodic orbit sum is semiclassical quantization by harmonic inversion . By a Fourier transform of Eq. (1) the problem of semiclassical quantization can be recast as a harmonic inversion problem, viz. the extraction of the frequencies $`\omega _k=E_k/\mathrm{}`$ and amplitudes $`d_k`$ from a given time signal

$$C(t)=\underset{k}{}d_k\text{e}^{\text{i}\omega _kt}.$$
(2)
Especially intriguing, and important, are systems possessing a classical scaling property, i.e., the classical dynamics does not depend on an external scaling parameter $`w`$ and the action $`S_{\text{po}}=ws_{\text{po}}`$ of periodic orbits varies linearly with $`w`$, with $`s_{\text{po}}`$ the scaled action. This is not a severe restriction since it covers a variety of systems, such as systems with homogeneous potentials, billiard systems, or the hydrogen atom in static external fields. For scaling systems the semiclassical signal which has to be harmonically inverted has the special form of a sum of $`\delta `$ functions with peaks at positions given by the scaled actions $`s_{\text{po}}`$ of the periodic orbits,

$$C(s)=\underset{\mathrm{po}}{}𝒜_{\mathrm{po}}\delta \left(ss_{\mathrm{po}}\right).$$
(3)
The frequencies of the signal (3) are the semiclassical approximations to the quantum eigenvalues $`w_k`$ of the scaling parameter. By the same token, harmonic inversion of signals with the functional form (3) also plays a key rôle in the high resolution analysis of the density of states $`\varrho (E)=_n\delta (EE_n)`$ of quantum spectra, in an effort to extract information about the underlying classical dynamics .

In practical applications, the signal (3) is always known in a finite range $`0sS_{\text{max}}`$ only. The signal length $`S_{\text{max}}`$ is often fixed or at least hard to increase, e.g., for periodic orbit quantization of classically chaotic systems where the number of periodic orbits proliferates exponentially with the signal length. To obtain the optimum results from the harmonic inversion procedure, it is essential to choose an algorithm which allows one to extract the most precise estimates for the spectral parameters $`\{\omega _k,d_k\}`$ from the signal of a given length $`S_{\text{max}}`$.

Various computational procedures have been proposed for the harmonic inversion of signals of the type (3). However, a systematic study of the relative merits and demerits of the methods and a quantitative study of their efficiencies is still lacking. To remedy this situation, we summarize and discuss different techniques of harmonic inversion and compare their accuracies in the application to two simple albeit typical example systems for which exact trace formulae are known. The aim is to pin down the numerically most efficient method for harmonic inversion.

## II Harmonic inversion of delta function signals

Due to the finite signal length $`S_{\text{max}}`$, the analysis of the signal by conventional Fourier transform is limited by the “uncertainty principle”, which states that in a signal of finite length $`S_{\text{max}}`$ two frequencies can only be resolved if their difference is larger than $`2\pi /S_{\text{max}}`$. The uncertainty principle can be circumvented by the application of high-resolution methods  which extract a discrete set of frequencies and amplitudes without imposing any a priori restrictions on the frequencies $`\omega _k`$. However, an uncertainty remains in the weaker form of the “informational uncertainty principle” , which states that the signal length $`S_{\text{max}}`$ required to resolve the frequencies is given by

$$S_{\text{max}}4\pi \overline{\varrho }(\omega )$$
(4)
in terms of the local average density of frequencies $`\overline{\varrho }(\omega )`$. Since this relation involves the average instead of the minimum spacing between frequencies, the signals can usually be significantly shorter than required by the Fourier transform.

Harmonic inversion of the signal (3) is a nontrivial task for the following two reasons. Firstly, the number of frequencies contained in the signal is usually large, which implies that simple methods for solving the harmonic inversion problem may be numerically unstable. Secondly, the special functional form of a signal as a sum of $`\delta `$ functions does not fulfill the prerequisites of several established algorithms that $`C(s)`$ should be known on an equidistant grid, $`s=n\tau `$, with $`n=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$ . We briefly review the four numerical methods which so far have been successfully applied to the harmonic inversion of signals $`C(s)`$ given as a sum of $`\delta `$ functions.

#### Method 1: Discrete FD —

A powerful tool for the harmonic inversion of signals given on an equidistant grid is the filter-diagonalization (FD) method of Wall and Neuhauser  in the version of Mandelshtam and Taylor . The basic idea is to introduce a set of basis functions localized in frequency space and to recast the harmonic inversion problem as a generalized eigenvalue problem. For a suitable choice of the frequency window the subset of frequencies located in that window can be obtained by solving a generalized eigenvalue equation with small matrices.

To evaluate the signal (3) on an equidistant grid, the $`\delta `$ functions must be given an artificial width $`\sigma `$ which spans several grid points, i.e., $`\sigma >\tau `$. This regularization can be achieved by convoluting the signal with a narrow, e.g., Gaussian function. In this form the FD method has been applied in Refs.  as a tool for semiclassical periodic orbit quantization.

The convolution of the signal $`C(s)`$ results in a damping of the amplitudes $`d_kd_k^{(\sigma )}=d_k\mathrm{exp}(w_k^2\sigma ^2/2)`$. The width $`\sigma `$ of the Gaussian function should be chosen sufficiently small to avoid an overly strong damping, e.g., by setting $`\sigma |w_{\text{max}}|^1`$ where $`w_{\text{max}}`$ is the largest frequency of interest. To properly sample each Gaussian a dense grid with sufficiently small step size ($`\tau \sigma /3`$) is required. Therefore, the convoluted signal to be processed by FD usually consists of a large number of data points, in particular when high frequency regions of the signal are to be analyzed. The numerical treatment of such large data sets may suffer from rounding errors and loss of accuracy.

#### Method 2: $`\delta `$-function FD —

The artificial smoothing of the signal can be circumvented when following a different approach suggested by Grémaud and Delande . In contrast to Ref.  where the signal is assumed to be known on an equidistant grid, Grémaud and Delande start from a continuous-time formulation of the FD algorithm close to the original ansatz in . Integrals involving the $`\delta `$ function signal (3) can then easily be calculated and expressed in terms of periodic orbit sums.

#### Method 3: Discrete DSD —

An alternative method to FD for high-resolution signal processing is decimated signal diagonalization (DSD), which was introduced by Belkić et al. . DSD is a two-step process for harmonic inversion. In the first step a low-resolution frequency filter is applied by subjecting the signal to a discrete Fourier transform, selecting the Fourier components in the frequency interval of interest, and applying an inverse Fourier transform to them. The resulting band-limited signal contains only a small number of frequencies in the chosen interval and can therefore be further processed, in the second step, by conventional high-resolution methods such as, e.g., Linear Prediction or Padé Approximants . DSD effectively uses, in this processing stage, the operational part of the discrete version of FD , which constructs small matrices of a generalized eigenvalue problem directly from digitized points of the band-limited decimated signal. The DSD technique is designed for signals given on an equidistant grid but can be applied to the $`\delta `$ function signal (3) after convolution with a narrow, e.g., Gaussian function in the same way as explained above (see Method 1).

The DSD method of Ref.  is easy to implement as it basically resorts to standard algorithms for discrete Fourier transform and matrix diagonalization. However, the application of the low-resolution Fourier filter in the first step of the method implicitly assumes periodicity of the signal (with period equal to the signal length), in which case the DSD filter is exact. In general, of course, this condition is not met, so that only approximate filtering can be achieved. Therefore, DSD must be expected to be less accurate than FD (Method 1) for frequencies close to the borders of the window, or when very short frequency windows are chosen (see the discussion in Sec. III).

#### Method 4: $`\delta `$-function DSD —

The DSD technique (Method 3) can be modified for a more direct application to the $`\delta `$ function signal (3) without the necessity of convoluting the signal with a narrow, e.g., Gaussian function. Because the signal $`C(s)`$ is given as a periodic orbit sum of $`\delta `$ functions the ‘filtering’ step can be performed analytically by replacing the discrete Fourier transform of Method 3 with the continuous form of the Fourier transform and expressing the integrals in terms of periodic orbit sums. This technique was proposed in Ref. . The application of the analytical filter for a rectangular frequency window $`[w_0\mathrm{\Delta }w,w_0+\mathrm{\Delta }w]`$ results in a band-limited (bl) signal

$$C_{\mathrm{bl}}(s)=\underset{\mathrm{po}}{}𝒜_{\mathrm{po}}\frac{\mathrm{sin}[(ss_{\mathrm{po}})\mathrm{\Delta }w]}{\pi (ss_{\mathrm{po}})}\text{e}^{\text{i}s_{\mathrm{po}}w_0},$$
(5)
where the $`\delta `$ functions are basically replaced with sinc functions \[$`\mathrm{sinc}x=(\mathrm{sin}x)/x`$\]. The band-limited signal (5) can be discretized with a small number of points and further processed, in the second step, by conventional harmonic inversion methods as described above (see Method 3).

In practice, the band-limited signal can only be evaluated approximately because the signal is only known up to a finite length. Since the sinc functions decay slowly at infinity, peaks well beyond the end of the known signal may have an influence on the band-limited signal points. Omitting contributions from the (unknown) peaks beyond the limit of the given signal amounts to the assumption that the signal be zero outside the given range. Note that this filter differs from the low-resolution filter of Method 3 where the signal is implicitly assumed to be periodic.

In summary, the four methods can be classified according to whether they are discrete-time algorithms (Methods 1 and 3), which require a regularization of $`\delta `$ function signals to be discretized, or continuous-time algorithms adapted to $`\delta `$ function signals (Methods 2 and 4). Alternatively, they can be classified into filter-diagonalization (FD) methods (Methods 1 and 2) and decimated signal diagonalization (DSD) methods (Methods 3 and 4) where the low-resolution ‘filtering’ and high-resolution signal processing is performed in two separate steps.

## III Numerical examples and discussion

To quantitatively assess the relative performances of the different algorithms, we present a comparison of the numerical accuracy achieved by all of these methods for two simple but archetypal examples, viz. firstly, the high-resolution analysis of the spectrum of the harmonic oscillator and, secondly, the search for the zeros of Riemann’s zeta function as a mathematical model for periodic orbit quantization in chaotic systems. We choose these systems because they possess exact trace formulae, so that the decomposition of the semiclassical signal in a sum of exponentials is known to be exact.

### A Harmonic oscillator

The one-dimensional harmonic oscillator (with $`\mathrm{}\omega =1`$) has energy eigenvalues $`E_n=n+\frac{1}{2}`$, $`n=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$. Its density of states can be written as an exact trace formula :

$$g(E)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\delta (EE_n)=\underset{k=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(1)^k\text{e}^{2\pi \text{i}kE}.$$
(6)
The right-hand side of Eq. (6) can be interpreted as a periodic orbit sum \[in analogy to Eq. (1)\] where $`S_k=2\pi kE`$ is the action of the ($`k`$ times traversed) periodic orbit and $`d_k=(1)^k`$ is the periodic orbit amplitude. \[The interpretation of the $`k=0`$ Thomas-Fermi term is special, see Ref.  for more details.\] The high-resolution analysis of the quantum spectrum $`g(E)=_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}\delta (EE_n)`$ should yield equally spaced real frequencies $`\omega _k=2\pi k`$ and amplitudes $`d_k=(1)^k`$ of equal magnitude. Thus, this simple application of harmonic inversion to the extraction of classical periodic orbit parameters from a quantum spectrum  is ideally suited to compare the efficiencies of the different methods for the harmonic inversion of $`\delta `$ function signals.

Since the signal is periodic with period $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=1`$, an integer signal length would render the low-resolution Fourier filter of Method 3 exact. To avoid this atypical situation, we choose signal lengths as rational multiples of $`\pi `$. According to the informational uncertainty principle (4) a signal length of $`E_{\text{max}}2`$ should suffice to resolve the frequencies. Typically, Eq. (4) slightly underestimates the required signal length. We therefore present results calculated with a signal of length $`E_{\text{max}}=\pi `$, which means that only three energy levels contribute to the signal. To assess the accuracy of the results, we use the absolute values of the imaginary parts of the calculated frequencies and amplitudes as error indicators. If the analysis of the signal were exact, all imaginary parts should vanish. Therefore, an inspection of the sizes of the imaginary parts allows us to check the accuracy of the calculation. We note that this sort of accuracy test can be applied to all bound systems. If the exact frequencies are known, as is the case in our example systems, the real parts can also be compared. The errors of the real and imaginary parts typically are of the same order of magnitude and exhibit, at least qualitatively, the same behavior.

Results for the harmonic inversion of the quantum spectrum $`g(E)`$ obtained with the four methods introduced in Sec. II are presented in Figs. 1 and 2 for the imaginary parts of the frequencies $`\omega _k`$ and amplitudes $`d_k`$, respectively. For frequencies which appear to be missing, imaginary parts of zero have been obtained by the pertinent method. From figure parts (a) to (f) the width $`\mathrm{\Delta }\omega `$ of the frequency filter is increased. For the application of Methods 1 and 3 the signal has been discretized with step width $`\tau =0.002`$ after convolution of the signal with a Gaussian function with width $`\sigma =0.006`$. In all cases it can be seen that the precision achieved decreases to the boundaries of the frequency window. The reason is that none of the filtering methods is exact and can neither completely remove the influence of frequencies outside the window of interest nor exactly preserve the contributions of frequencies inside the window. For narrow windows, the FD methods 1 and 2 outperform the DSD algorithms 3 and 4, for wide windows the situation is reversed. The frequencies obtained by Methods 1 and 2 are equally precise for small windows, whereas for wide windows Method 2 gains superiority and even competes with the DSD methods. In general, the distance from the

window boundaries where a method acquires its full precision is smaller for the FD than for the DSD methods. Calculations were carried out with double precision. For the widest window shown, frequencies have practically been obtained to machine precision.

For all methods, the precision of the amplitudes in Fig. 2 is somewhat lower than that of the frequencies in Fig. 1 because the amplitudes are calculated from the eigenvectors of a generalized eigenvalue problem, which in general are less accurate than the eigenvalues. In particular, the difference in precision between the frequencies and amplitudes is considerably larger for Method 1 than for any other method, so that even for small windows the amplitudes obtained by this technique are the least accurate (see the $`\times `$ symbols in Fig. 2).

### B Zeros of Riemann’s zeta function

It is a peculiar feature of the harmonic oscillator signal that the density of frequencies is constant, i.e., the precision of frequencies obtained from a signal of a given length is the same throughout the whole frequency domain. However, in typical systems the density of states grows rapidly with the frequency, which means that a longer signal is required to extract higher frequencies. As an example of a system exhibiting this typical behavior, we discuss the Riemann zeta function which has served

as a mathematical model for periodic orbit quantization . It is well known that, if the zeros of $`\zeta (z)`$ on the critical line $`\text{Re }z=\frac{1}{2}`$ are written as $`z=\frac{1}{2}\text{i}w`$, the density of zeros on the critical line can be expressed as

$$g(w)=\frac{1}{\pi }\underset{p}{}\underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{\mathrm{ln}p}{p^{m/2}}\mathrm{cos}(wm\mathrm{ln}p),$$
(7)
where $`p`$ runs over all prime numbers. Eq. (7) is formally identical to a semiclassical trace formula with $`S_{pm}=wm\mathrm{ln}p`$ corresponding to classical actions and $`𝒜_{pm}=(\mathrm{ln}p)/p^{m/2}`$ corresponding to classical amplitudes. With this interpretation, the Riemann zeta function can be used as a mathematical model for chaotic dynamical systems, and the Riemann zeros are obtained by harmonic inversion of the $`\delta `$ function signal

$$C(s)=\underset{p}{}\underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{\mathrm{ln}p}{p^{m/2}}\delta (sm\mathrm{ln}p).$$
(8)
Unlike typical semiclassical trace formulae, Eq. (7) is exact. As the zeta function has only simple zeros, the amplitudes $`d_k`$ obtained from the harmonic inversion of the signal (8) must all be equal to 1.

In Fig. 3 we present our numerical results obtained by application of Methods 1 to 4 to extract the (numerically complex valued) Riemann zeros with $`\text{Re}w_k<100`$. Ideally, all values $`w_k`$ should be real. Therefore, the absolute values of the imaginary parts of the $`w_k`$ can again serve

as a measure for the accuracy of the harmonic inversion process. For the application of Methods 1 and 3 the signal has been discretized with step width $`\tau =0.002`$ after convolution of the signal with a Gaussian function with width $`\sigma =0.006`$.

It is no problem to construct the signal (8) for the Riemann zeros up to quite large maximum values $`S_{\text{max}}`$ because only prime numbers are used as input. However, the periodic orbit quantization of physical systems usually requires a numerical periodic orbit search which becomes more and more expensive for longer orbits, especially in chaotic systems, where the number of orbits proliferates exponentially with increasing signal length. Therefore, in practical periodic orbit quantizations the given signal length is often rather short. In Fig. 3 we present the results for the accuracy of the methods for harmonic inversion for various signal lengths, increasing from $`S_{\text{max}}=4.5`$ in Fig. 3a to $`S_{\text{max}}=7.0`$ in Fig. 3f. The frequency window $`w[10,100]`$ is kept fixed.

For a fixed signal length, the zeros up to a certain critical value can be obtained to a constant precision. Above the critical frequency, the precision decreases rapidly due to the higher density of states. As was to be expected, for all methods the critical frequency increases with growing signal length, which means that frequencies in regions of higher spectral density can be resolved. Roughly, the critical frequency is determined by the informational uncertainty principle (4). In fact, it is slightly higher for

the FD methods 1 and 2 than for the DSD methods 3 and 4. As before, the maximum accuracy below the critical frequency is obtained by the DSD methods. However, above the critical frequency the precision yielded by the FD methods is higher.

The lowest zero of the zeta function is located at $`w=14.1347`$, not far above the lower boundary of the frequency window at $`w=10`$. For the first zeros a decrease in accuracy due to the proximity of the boundary can be seen. Evidently, the influence of the boundary diminishes with increasing signal length. Again, it is considerably more pronounced for the DSD than for the FD methods. For the latter, it can only be seen in the shortest signals. With any of the four methods, the boundary effects on the lowest zeros can be removed if the lower boundary of the frequency window is decreased to $`w=0`$.

Fig. 4 presents results similar to those shown in Fig. 3, but for the imaginary parts of the multiplicities $`d_k`$. The accuracy of the results achieved with the different methods resemble those obtained for the imaginary parts of the frequencies $`w_k`$, with the exception of Method 1 (see the $`\times `$ symbols) which provides amplitudes with significantly lower precision.

## IV Conclusion

In this paper we have quantitatively determined the accuracies of four different algorithms for the high-resolution harmonic inversion of $`\delta `$ function signals, by applying all algorithms to two, physically motivated, example signals. For sufficiently long signals and broad frequency windows the four methods provide excellent results of very high accuracy, in the case of the examples selected even close to machine precision. However, when either the width of the frequency filter or the signal length is considerably reduced, the accuracy of the results obtained by the four methods can vary by several orders of magnitude.

Our calculations show that no general clear-cut answer to the question “Which method is best in all physical situations?” is possible. In practice, the window width can be regarded as a free parameter, i.e., it can usually be chosen sufficiently large to achieve good results before increasing computational effort or numerical instabilities become a restriction. The signal length, on the contrary, is often fixed or at least hard to increase. In such a case the choice of the algorithm for harmonic inversion of the signal will be essential to achieve the optimum results. When the signal length is quite at the limit for convergence of the frequencies and amplitudes, the filter-diagonalization (FD) methods 1 and 2 provide superior accuracy compared to the decimated signal diagonalization (DSD) methods 3 and 4. For signals given as the sum of $`\delta `$ functions Method 2 will often prove to be the method of choice.

We conclude by noting that harmonic inversion techniques can be generalized so as to cope with the analysis also of multidimensional signals, with important applications in other areas of physics . The knowledge gained from the comparison of methods for one-dimensional harmonic inversion in this paper should also serve as a useful guide in future developments and applications of accurate and efficient algorithms for multidimensional high-resolution signal processing.

###### Acknowledgements.

We thank P. A. Dando and H. S. Taylor for fruitful discussions. This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft and Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst.


text:
# Semicausal operations are semilocalizable

## I Introduction

In a recent paper  Preskill et al. focus on the constraints that quantum operations must fulfill in order to be compatible with relativistic quantum theory. They introduce the notions of causal, localizable, semicausal and semilocalizable quantum operations for bipartite systems. The prefix semi refers to “directed” properties, which are not invariant under exchanging Alice’s and Bob’s system.

An operation on a bipartite system is called semilocalizable for Alice, if it can be decomposed into two local operations with one way quantum communication from Alice to Bob as illustrated by Figure 1: First Alice performs a local operation $`G`$ on her system and sends quantum information (via C) to Bob. Then Bob performs a local operation $`F`$ on his system, depending on the information he got from Alice.

An obvious consequence of this setup is that Bob cannot send messages to Alice: the only possible carrier of information (quantum or classical) is the system $`C`$, which goes from Alice to Bob. Operations with this property will be called “semicausal ”. In other words, if we consider only measurements on Alice’s output of a semicausal operation, expectations do not depend on Bob’s initial preparation. That is, as far as Alice is concerned, the device can be described by an operation on her system alone.

The main result of this paper is the proof of the converse of the above remark: if a device allows no signalling from Bob to Alice (semicausality) we can represent it explicitly as a device involving possibly a particle sent from Alice to Bob but none in the other direction.

Causality and localizablility are defined as the analogous symmetric properties. From this it would seem that these are also equivalent (just use the proof twice, with an exchange of the roles of Alice and Bob). However, full localizability is defined to be stronger than the two semi-localizabilities: the latter would mean only that there are two representations, each involving only one-way communication, whereas localizability means the absence of all communication. Indeed, in  an example for a causal operation which is not localizable has been given.

Thus all proven implications between causal, semicausal, localizable and semilocalizable operations (including the results of this paper) can be visualized in the following diagram:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{localizable}& & \mathrm{causal}\\ & & \\ \mathrm{semilocalizable}& & \mathrm{semicausal}\end{array}$$
(1)
As in , the concepts introduced so far only require the standard setup of quantum information theory, in which “localization” is phrased entirely in terms of the Hilbert space tensor product of Alice’s and Bob’s respective Hilbert space. This kind of localization is a priori unrelated to relativistic locality, and it turns out that for building a fully relativistic quantum theory it is too narrow. Detailed knowledge about the relativistic localization structures has been accumulated during the last three decades in a research programme known variously as “algebraic quantum field theory” or “local quantum physics” . Quantum information theoretical aspects have also been studied within this framework (See e.g.  and references cited therein). Technically, the main change is related to the fact that one has to deal with infinitely many degrees of freedom, and occurs in a similar way when discussing statistical mechanics in the thermodynamic limit : the observable algebra of a local subsystem can no longer be taken as the operators of the form $`A\mathrm{𝟏}`$ with respect to some tensor product decomposition of the underlying Hilbert space. Instead, more general von Neumann algebras must appear as observable algebras. We will briefly comment on the changes this introduces in the concepts of localized operations in the last section.

## II Definition of localization properties

As is well known, physical operations can be described either in the Schrödinger picture, by a map acting on states or density matrices or, equivalently, in the Heisenberg picture, by an operator acting on observables. In spite of this equivalence, however, some things and especially localization properties and the Stinespring dilation are stated more easily in the Heisenberg picture. Therefore we will work in the Heisenberg picture.

We recall some basic notions and notations. In the Heisenberg picture an operation  taking systems with Hilbert space $`_{\mathrm{in}}`$ to systems with Hilbert space $`_{\mathrm{out}}`$ is a completely positive operator $`E:𝔅(_{\mathrm{out}})𝔅(_{\mathrm{in}})`$ satisfying $`E(\mathrm{𝟏})\mathrm{𝟏}`$. The corresponding map $`E_{}`$ in the Schrödinger picture acts on a density matrix $`\rho `$ on $`_{\mathrm{in}}`$ such that

$$tr\left(E_{}(\rho )A\right)=tr\left(\rho E(A)\right)A𝔅(_{\mathrm{out}}).$$
(2)
The conditions on $`E`$ are equivalent to $`E_{}`$ being likewise completely positive, and satisfying the normalization condition $`tr\left(E_{}(\rho )\right)1`$ for all density operators $`\rho `$. If $`E_{}`$ is even trace preserving (equivalently: $`E(\mathrm{𝟏})=\mathrm{𝟏}`$), we call the operation non-selective, or a channel . As the name suggests, selective operations typically occur, when part of the operation is a selection of a sub-ensemble according to measuring results obtained by the device.

The four properties in diagram (1) all refer to an operation $`E`$ with $`_{\mathrm{in}}=_{\mathrm{out}}=_{AB}_A_B`$.

Definition: A completely positive map (not necessarily a channel) $`E:𝔅(_{AB})𝔅(_{AB})`$ is called

1. semicausal if it can be written as

$$E(a\mathrm{𝟏}_B)=T(a)\mathrm{𝟏}_B$$
(3)
for all $`a𝔅(_A)`$ and for some completely positive map $`T:𝔅(_A)𝔅(_A)`$.
2. causal if it semicausal in both directions, i.e. if

$`E(a\mathrm{𝟏}_B)`$ $`=`$ $`T(a)\mathrm{𝟏}_B\text{and}`$ (4)
$`E(\mathrm{𝟏}_Ab)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{𝟏}_AT^{}(b)`$ (5)
for all $`a𝔅(_A),`$ $`b𝔅(_B)`$ and for some completely positive maps $`T:𝔅(_A)𝔅(_A)`$ and $`T^{}:𝔅(_B)𝔅(_B).`$
3. localizable if it can be decomposed into

$$E=GF$$
(6)
where $`F:𝔅(_B)𝔅(_B)`$ is a channel and $`G:𝔅(_A)𝔅(_A)`$ a completely positive map.
4. semilocalizable if it can be decomposed into

$$E=(G\mathrm{id}_B)(\mathrm{id}_AF)$$
(7)
where $`F:𝔅(_B)𝔅(_{CB})`$ is a channel, $`G:𝔅(_{AC})𝔅(_A)`$ a completely positive map and $`_C`$ a finite dimensional Hilbert space.

## III Semicausal operations are semilocal

We are now prepared to give the proof of the conjecture by DiVincenzo, of which the special case of complete measurements was treated in .

Theorem: A completely positive map (not necessarily a channel) is semilocal if and only if it is semicausal.

Before going into the proof, we point out some salient facts about the Stinespring representation of a completely positive map .

### a The Stinespring representation:

The Stinespring representation theorem, as adapted to maps between finite dimensional quantum systems, states that any completely positive map $`E:𝔅(_{\mathrm{out}})𝔅(_{\mathrm{in}})`$ can be written as

$$E(a)=V^{}(a\mathrm{𝟏}_𝒦)V$$
(8)
with a linear operator $`V:_{\mathrm{in}}_{\mathrm{out}}𝒦`$, where $`𝒦`$ is a finite dimensional Hilbert space, called the dilation space. The representation (8) is called minimal if (and only if) the set of vectors

$$(a\mathrm{𝟏}_𝒦)V\phi $$
(9)
with $`a𝔅(_{\mathrm{out}})`$ and $`\phi _{\mathrm{in}}`$ spans $`_{\mathrm{out}}𝒦`$.

### b Uniqueness:

The main step of the proof will be to get a factorization of the given operation into two operations with suitable localization properties. It turns out that such a factorization is provided precisely by the uniqueness statement for the Stinespring dilation. We therefore explain this uniqueness in more detail.

Suppose that $`E`$ has a minimal Stinespring representation (8) as well as a further (not necessarily minimal) one

$$E(a)=V_1^{}(a\mathrm{𝟏}_{𝒦_1})V_1$$
(10)
with another linear map $`V_1:𝒦_1`$. Since representation (8) is taken to be minimal, we conclude $`\mathrm{dim}(𝒦)\mathrm{dim}(𝒦_1)`$ and the prescription

$$\stackrel{~}{U}(a\mathrm{𝟏}_𝒦)V\psi :=(a\mathrm{𝟏}_{𝒦_1})V_1\psi $$
(11)
yields a well defined isometry $`\stackrel{~}{U}:𝒦𝒦_1`$. This can be easily verified by observing that all scalar products between vectors such as the ones on the right hand side of (11) are fixed by the relation (10). From this definition of $`\stackrel{~}{U}`$ we find that the intertwining relation

$$\stackrel{~}{U}(a\mathrm{𝟏}_𝒦)=(a\mathrm{𝟏}_{𝒦_1})\stackrel{~}{U}$$
(12)
holds for each $`a𝔅()`$. Hence $`\stackrel{~}{U}`$ must be decomposable into

$$\stackrel{~}{U}=\mathrm{𝟏}_{}U$$
(13)
with an isometry $`U:𝒦𝒦_1`$. If both representations (8) and (10) are minimal the dimensions of the dilation spaces coincide and $`U`$ must be a unitary operator. The minimal Stinespring representation is thus unique up to a unitary transformation.

### c Kraus operators:

In most of the current literature the Stinespring dilation is used only in the form of a corollary, called the Kraus representation of a completely positive map. If we introduce an orthonormal basis $`(\epsilon _1,\mathrm{},\epsilon _k)`$ of the dilation space $`𝒦`$ and define the “Kraus operators” $`K_\alpha :_{\mathrm{in}}_{\mathrm{out}}`$ by

$$V\psi =\underset{\alpha }{}(K_\alpha \psi )\epsilon _\alpha \psi _{\mathrm{in}},$$
(14)
we can write the dilation formula (8) as $`E(a)=_{\alpha =1}^kK_\alpha ^{}aK_\alpha `$ for all $`a𝔅(_{\mathrm{out}})`$. Of course, everything we do in this paper could be formulated in terms of Kraus operators. We found this less practical, however, because the above uniqueness statement becomes more involved: The choice of the basis $`\epsilon _\alpha `$ always introduces some arbitrariness, so even in the minimal case the collection of Kraus operators is only unique up to a unitary transformation acting on the index $`\alpha `$.

Proof of Theorem: As noted in the introduction the implication “semilocalizable$``$semilocal” is trivial. In the notation of Section II it becomes

$$E(a\mathrm{𝟏}_B)=G(a\mathrm{𝟏}_C)\mathrm{𝟏}_B$$

so (3) follows with $`T(a):=G(a\mathrm{𝟏}_C)`$.

For the reverse implication, let $`E:𝔅(_{AB})𝔅(_{AB})`$ be a semicausal operation, i.e. an operation fulfilling (3) for some completely positive map $`T:𝔅(_A)𝔅(_A)`$. The Stinespring representation of $`E`$ gives us a dilation space $`_D`$ and a linear operator $`V:_{AB}_{ABD}`$, $`_{ABD}_{AB}_D`$, such that

$$E(ab)=V^{}(ab\mathrm{𝟏}_D)V$$
(15)
for each $`a𝔅(_A)`$ and $`b𝔅(_B)`$. Analogously we get a dilation space $`_C`$ and a linear operator $`W:_A_{AC}`$ from the minimal Stinespring representation of $`T:`$

$$T(a)=W^{}(a\mathrm{𝟏}_C)W$$
(16)
for all $`a𝔅(_A)`$. According to the relation (3) we obtain

$$V^{}(a\mathrm{𝟏}_{BD})V=(W^{}\mathrm{𝟏}_B)(a\mathrm{𝟏}_{CB})(W\mathrm{𝟏}_B)$$
(17)
for all $`a𝔅(_A)`$ . The uniqueness of the minimal Stinespring representation now implies the existence of an isometry $`U:_{CB}_{BD}`$ (see Eq. (13)) such that

$$(a\mathrm{𝟏}_{BD})V=(\mathrm{𝟏}_AU)(a\mathrm{𝟏}_{CB})(W\mathrm{𝟏}_B)$$
(18)
and therefore

$$V=(\mathrm{𝟏}_AU)(W\mathrm{𝟏}_B).$$
(19)
From this we obtain a completely positive unital map $`F:𝔅(_B)𝔅(_{CB})`$ by taking

$$F(b):=U^{}(b\mathrm{𝟏}_D)U$$
(20)
for every $`b𝔅(_B)`$ and a completely positive (not necessarily unital) map $`G:𝔅(_{AC})𝔅(_A)`$:

$$G(ac):=W^{}(ac)W$$
(21)
for every $`a𝔅(_A)`$ and $`c𝔅(_C)`$. Thus we conclude from (15) and (19) that the identity (7) holds. In other words, $`E`$ is semilocalizable. $`\mathrm{}`$

## IV Outlook

As already indicated in the introduction, quantum field theory requires a more general setup than the one used in this note and in . Relativistic localization is then expressed by assigning to every spacetime region the algebra of observables, which can be measured in that region, typically a von Neumann algebra. Signal causality then means that whenever two regions are spacelike separated (no causal signals can be exchanged) the corresponding algebras commute elementwise. One might try replacing this by an assignment of “local Hilbert spaces” to spacetime regions, such that the union of spacelike separated regions corresponds to the Hilbert space tensor product. This is not possible, however, because spacetime regions can be split into finer and finer pieces, and this would create difficulties for the tensor products, especially when the overall Hilbert space is required to be separable (to have a countable orthonormal basis), and relativistic invariance is imposed.

Surprisingly the von Neumann algebras of local regions are all isomorphic under mild axiomatic assumptions. More specifically they are all isomorphic to the unique hyperfinite type III1-factor (see  for an explanation of these terms, and the proof). Nevertheless the localization structure is far from trivial, and resides in the way these algebras are nested into each other. Already for the inclusion of two such algebras an amazing variety is possible.

As might be expected from the heuristic argument at the beginning of this section, the small distance localization structure in quantum field theory deviates dramatically from what would be expected from Hilbert space tensor products. Suppose Alice and Bob operate in spacelike separated regions, and $`𝔄`$ and $`𝔅`$ are the local von Neumann algebras assigned to these regions. Then when the regions are very close together, no physical  product states exist, hence there are no separable states at all. In fact, all physical states violate the CHSH-Bell inequality maximally .

On the other hand, if the regions are a finite distance apart, the so-called split property holds, which is equivalent to the existence of many separable states, or to the possibility for Bob to prepare any state of his subsystem locally without disturbing Alice’s . Algebraically this means that the von Neumann algebra generated by $`𝔄`$ and $`𝔅`$ is isomorphic to the von Neumann algebra tensor product $`𝔄\overline{}𝔅`$ .

The notion of semicausality is easy to express in this context: that $`E`$ maps operators of the form $`a\mathrm{𝟏}`$ to operators of the same form just means that Alice’s algebra is invariant in the sense that $`a𝔄E(a)𝔄`$, or briefly $`E(𝔄)𝔄`$.

It is not so clear what should be understood by semilocality. The reason is that one has to decide what degree of independence should be postulated for the intermediate system $`C`$, sent from Alice to Bob in Figure 1. If we require the kind of independence valid for widely separated regions (split property), as suggested by the image of a system being “sent”, the Theorem is probably false. Although the Stinespring decomposition for semicausal maps is well understood, it is not clear what factorizations would be meaningful interpretations of Figure 1.

## Acknowledgements

Funding by the European Union project EQUIP (contract IST-1999-11053) and financial support from the DFG (Bonn) are gratefully acknowledged.


text:
# Bianchi Type I space and the Stability of Inflationary FRW solution

## I Introduction

Inflationary theory provides an appealing resolution for the the flatness, monopole, and horizon problems of our present universe described by the standard big bang cosmology . It is known that our universe is homogeneous and isotropic to a very high degree of precision . Such a universe can be described by the well known Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) metric .

It is also known that gravitational physics should be different from the standard Einstein models near the Planck scale . For example, quantum gravity or string corrections could lead to interesting cosmological consequences . Moreover, some investigations have addressed the possibility of deriving inflation from higher order gravitational corrections .

A general analysis of the stability condition for a variety of pure higher derivative gravity theories is very useful in many respects. In fact, it was shown that a stability condition should hold for any potential candidate of inflationary universe in the flat Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) space .

In addition, the derivation of the Einstein equations in the presence of higher derivative couplings is known to be very complicate. The presence of a scalar field in induced gravity models and dilaton-gravity model makes the derivation even more tedious. In order to simplify the complications in the derivation of the field equations, an easier way has been described . We will try to generalize the work in Ref.  in order to obtain a general and model-independent formula for the non-redundant field equations in the Biachi type I (BI) anisotropic space. This equation can be applied to provide an alternative and simplified method to obtain the stability conditions in pure gravity theories. In fact, this general and model-independent formula for the non-redundant field equations is very useful in many area of interests. In particular, it will be applied to study a large class of pure gravity models with inflationary BI$`/`$FRW solutions in this paper. Any Bianchi type I solution that leads itself to an asymptotic FRW metric at time infinity will be referred to as the BI$`/`$FRW solution in this paper for convenience.

Note that there is no particular reason why our universe is initially isotropic to such a high degree of precision. Even anisotropy can be smoothed by the proposed inflationary process, it is also interesting to study the stability of the FRW space during the post-inflationary epoch. Nonetheless, it is natural to expect that our universe starts out as an anisoptropic universe. The universe is then expected to evolve from certain anisotropic universe, e.g. a Bianchi type I universe, to an isotropic universe, such as the flat FRW space. Indeed, it was shown that there exists such kind of BI$`/`$FRW solution for a NS-NS model with a metric field, a dilaton and an axion field . This inflationary solution is also shown to be stable against small field perturbations . Note also that stability analysis has been studied in various fields of interest .

A large class of models with the BI$`/`$FRW solutions will be shown to be unstable against arbitrary anisotropic perturbations in this paper. We will first derive a stability equation which turns out to be identical to the stability equation for the existence of the inflationary de Sitter solution discussed in Ref. . Note that an inflationary de Sitter solution in pure gravity models is expected to have one stable mode and one unstable mode for the system to undergo inflation with the help of the stable mode. Consequently, the inflationary era will come to an end once the unstable mode takes over after a brief period of inflationary expansion. The method developed in Ref.  was shown to be a helpful way in choosing physically acceptable model for our universe. Our result indicates, however, that the unstable mode will also tamper the stability of the isotropic space. To be more specific, if the model has an unstable mode for the de Sitter background perturbation with respect to isotropic perturbation, this unstable mode will also be unstable with respect to any anisotropic perturbations.

## II Non-redundant field equation and Bianchi identity

Note that the generalized Bianchi type I (GBI) metric can be read off directly from the following equation:

$$ds^2g_{\mu \nu }^{\mathrm{GBI}}dx^\mu dx^\nu =b^2(t)dt^2+a_1^2(t)dx^2+a_2^2(t)dy^2+a_3^2(t)dz^2,$$
(1)
with $`b(t)`$ the lapse function restored on purpose. Note also that the Bianchi type I (BI) metric can be obtained from GBI metric by setting the lapse function $`b(t)`$ equal to one, i.e. $`b=1`$, in equation (1).

Note that one can list all non-vanishing components of the curvature tensor as

$`R_{tj}^{ti}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[H_i\dot{B}+2B(\dot{H}_i+H_i^2)]\delta _j^i`$ (2)
$`R_{kl}^{ij}`$ $`=`$ $`H_iH_jBC_{kl}^{ij}.`$ (3)
Here $`C_{kl}^{ij}ϵ^{ijm}ϵ_{mkl}`$ with $`ϵ^{ijk}`$ the three space Levi-Civita tensor . Here $`\dot{}`$ denotes differentiation with respect to $`t`$ and $`H_i=\dot{a}_i/a_i`$ is the directional Hubble constant. We have also written $`B1/b^2`$ for later convenience. Note also that the indices $`i,j`$ in both sides of above equations are open indices. Moreover, $`R_{kl}^{ij}=0`$ if $`i=j`$ due to the symmetric properties of the curvature tensor.

Given a pure gravity model one can cast the action of the system as $`S=d^4x\sqrt{g}=N𝑑t(a_1a_2a_3/\sqrt{B})L(H_i,\dot{H}_i,B,\dot{B})`$ in the GBI spaces. Here $`N`$ is a time independent integration constant. We will denote the volume factor as $`Va_1a_2a_3b`$. If we take $`VL`$ as an effective Lagrangian, one can show that the variation with respect to $`b`$ gives

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}L+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}H_iL_i+\dot{H}_iL^i{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\dot{H}_i+3HH_i+H_id/dt)L^i=0`$ (4)
after setting $`B=1`$. Here the last term comes from the variation with respect to $`\delta (H_i\dot{B})`$ with the help of the identity

$$\frac{\delta L}{\delta H_i\dot{B}}\delta (H_i\dot{B})=\frac{\delta L}{\delta 2B\dot{H}_i}\delta (H_i\dot{B})\frac{\delta L}{\delta 2\dot{H}_i}H_i\delta \dot{B}$$
(5)
once we set $`B=1`$. One also needs an integration-by-part with respect to $`\delta B`$ in order to obtain the result indicated in the last term of Eq. (4). Note that the first equality in the Eq. (5) comes from the fact that the factor $`H_i\dot{B}`$ always shows up with $`2B\dot{H}_i`$ as indicated by the curvature tensor $`R_{tj}^{ti}`$ in Eq. (2). Therefore, one ends up with the $`b`$-equation as

$`LH_iL_i=(\dot{H}_i3HH_iH_id/dt)L^i`$ (6)
after setting $`B=1`$. Here $`H_iH_i/3`$, $`L_i\delta L/\delta H_i`$ and $`L^i\delta L/\delta \dot{H}_i`$ for convenience. In addition, one can also derive,

$$L+(3H+d/dt)^2L^i=(3H+d/dt)L_i,$$
(7)
as the variational equation of $`a_i`$. The derivation of this equation is tedious but straightforward. In addition, $`VL`$ is normally referred to as the effective Lagrangian. We will also call $`L`$ as effective Lagrangian unless confusion occurs. Note that the equations (7) are in fact the space-like $`ij`$ component of the Einstein equation

$$G_{\mu \nu }=t_{\mu \nu }$$
(8)
with $`t_{\mu \nu }`$ denoting the generalized energy momentum tensor associated with the system. It is known that one of these equations is in fact a redundant equation. Indeed, one can define $`H_{\mu \nu }G_{\mu \nu }t_{\mu \nu }`$ and write the field equation as $`H_{\mu \nu }=0`$.

Hence one has

$$D_\mu H^{\mu \nu }=0$$
(9)
from the energy conservation ($`D_\mu t^{\mu \nu }=0`$) and the Bianchi identity ($`D_\mu G^{\mu \nu }=0`$). Now we have three independent scale factors $`a_i`$ and four equations. Therefore, one of the four equations has to be redundant. Indeed, the extended Bianchi identity (9) can be shown to give

$$(_t+3H)H_{tt}+\underset{i}{}H_iH_{ii}=0,$$
(10)
as soon as the BI metric is substituted into equation (9). Therefore, the equation (10) indicates that: “$`H_{tt}=0`$ implies $`_iH_iH_{ii}=0`$”. Hence, two of the $`H_{ii}`$ equations vanish will imply that the third one also vanishes.

On the other hand, $`H_1=H_2=H_3=0`$ implies instead $`(_t+3H)H_{tt}=0.`$ This implies that $`VH_{tt}=\mathrm{constant}`$ with $`Va_1a_2a_3`$. Hence the $`H_{tt}`$ equation is the non-redundant equation while we are free to ignore one of the three $`H_{ii}`$ equation. Hence any conclusion derived without the $`H_{tt}`$ equation is known to be incomplete.

## III perturbation and stability

One can then apply the perturbation, $`H_i=H_{i0}+\delta H_i`$, to the field equation with $`H_{i0}`$ the background solution to the system. This perturbation will enable one to understand whether the background solution is stable or not. In particular, one would like to learn whether a BI$`/`$FRW type evolutionary solution is stable or not. It is known that our universe could start out anisotropic even evidences indicate that our universe is isotropic to a very high degree of precision in the post inflationary era. Therefore, one expects that any physical model should admit a stable BI$`/`$FRW solution.

Our result indicates that FRW inflationary solutions with a stable mode and an unstable mode is a negative result to our search for a physically acceptable model. Note that FRW inflationary solutions with a stable mode and an unstable mode will provide a natural way for the inflationary universe to exist the inflationary phase. Our result indicates, however, that such models will also be unstable against the anisotropic perturbations. Therefore, such solution will be harmful for the system to settle from BI space to FRW space once the graceful exist process is done.

First of all, one can show that the first order perturbation equation from the non-redundant field equation (6), with $`H_iH+\delta H_i`$, gives

$`L_{02}H\delta \ddot{H}_i+\left[(3H^2\dot{H})L_{02}+3H\dot{H}L_{12}+3H\ddot{H}L_{03}\right]\delta \dot{H}_i`$ (11)
$`+(6HL_{01}+3H^2L_{11}HL_{20}+\ddot{H}L_{02}+3H\ddot{H}L_{12}+3H\dot{H}L_{21})\delta H_i=0`$ (12)
where all field variables are understood to be evaluated at the background FRW space where $`H_i=H=\dot{a}/a`$ for all directions, with $`a`$ the FRW scale factor. We will write $`H`$ as the Hubble parameter for the FRW space for convenience from now on. $`L_{ab}\delta ^{a+b}L/\delta H_{i_i}\delta H_{i_2}\mathrm{}H_{i_a}\delta \dot{H}_{j_1}\delta \dot{H}_{j_2}\mathrm{}\delta \dot{H}_{j_b}|_{H_iH}`$. In deriving above equations, we have used the following identities

$`{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}H_i{\displaystyle \frac{\delta L}{\delta H_i}}`$ $``$ $`H{\displaystyle \frac{\delta L}{\delta H}},`$ (13)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta L}{\delta H_i}}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta L}{3\delta H}},`$ (14)
$`f({\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}H_iH_i)`$ $``$ $`f(3H^2)`$ (15)
when we take the limit $`H_iH`$ carrying the system from the BI space to the flat FRW space limit. Here $`f(_iH_iH_i)`$ denotes any functions of the variable $`_iH_iH_i`$. One can show that the Eq. (12) reduces to

$`L_{02}\delta \ddot{H}_i+3H_0L_{02}\delta \dot{H}_i+(6L_{01}+3H_0L_{11}L_{20})\delta H_i=0`$ (16)
once we set $`H=H_0=`$ constant which denotes the de Sitter space. This equation is identical to the stability equation for the existence of an inflationary de Sitter solution discussed in Ref. . One notes that there are two other independent $`H_{ij}`$-equation remain to be checked. These equations can be shown to be redundant after the limiting case $`H_0=`$ constant is implemented. Indeed, the anisotropic perturbation on the $`H_{ij}`$-equations are expected to reproduce the redundant isotropic perturbation equation shown in Ref. .

Note that an inflationary de Sitter solution is expected to have one stable mode and one unstable mode for the system to undergo inflation with the help of the stable mode. Indeed, one can show that the Eq. (16) can be solved to give

$$\delta H_i=c_i\mathrm{exp}[B_+t]+d_i\mathrm{exp}[B_{}t]$$
(17)
with $`B_\pm =3H_0/2\pm \sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }_0}/2L_{02}`$ and arbitrary constants $`c_i,d_i`$ to be determined by the initial perturbations. Here $`\mathrm{\Delta }_09H_0^2L_{02}^24L_{02}(6L_{01}+3H_0L_{11}L_{20})`$ is the discriminant of the characteristic equation for the Eq. (16)

$$L_{02}x^2+3H_0L_{02}x+(6L_{01}+3H_0L_{11}L_{20})=0.$$
(18)
There will be an unstable mode if $`B_+>0`$. Therefore, the inflationary era will come to an end once the unstable mode takes over. It was shown earlier to be a helpful way to select physically acceptable model for our universe. Our result shown here indicates, however, that the unstable mode will also tamper the stability of the isotropic space. Indeed, if the model has an unstable mode for the de Sitter perturbation, this unstable mode will also be unstable against the anisotropic perturbation.

For example, one can show that the model

$$=R\alpha R_{\beta \gamma }^{\mu \nu }R_{\sigma \rho }^{\beta \gamma }R_{\mu \nu }^{\sigma \rho }$$
(19)
admits an inflationary solution when $`\alpha <0`$. Note that this model is the minimal consistent effective low-energy two-loop renormalizable Lagrangian for pure gravity theory . Indeed, one can show that

$$L=\underset{i}{}\left\{2\dot{H}_i+4H_i^24\alpha \left[2(\dot{H}_i+H_i^2)^3H_i^6\right]\right\}4\alpha (\underset{i}{}H_i^3)^26(\dot{H}+2H^2)24\alpha \left[(\dot{H}+H^2)^3+H^6\right]$$
(20)
when we set $`H_iH`$. Hence one can show that the generalized Friedmann equation (6) gives

$$H_0^4=1/4\alpha .$$
(21)
In addition, the stability equation (12) for $`\delta H_i`$ can be shown to be

$$12\alpha H_0^2\delta \ddot{H}_i+36\alpha H_0^3\delta \dot{H}_i(1+12\alpha H_0^4)\delta H_i=0$$
(22)
This equation can be solved to give

$$\delta H_i=c_i\mathrm{exp}[(\sqrt{35/3}3)H_0t/2]+d_i\mathrm{exp}[(\sqrt{35/3}+3)H_0t/2]$$
(23)
with arbitrary constants $`c_i,d_i`$ to be determined by the initial perturbations. This indicates that this model admits one stable mode and one unstable mode following the stability equation (16) for the inflationary de Sitter solution. It is shown to be a positive sign for an inflationary model that is capable of resolving the graceful exist problem in a natural manner. Our result indicates however that this model also admits an unstable mode against anisotropic perturbation. Hence this model will have problem remaining isotropic for a long period of time. Therefore, pure gravity model of this sort will not solve the graceful exist problem. One will need, for example, the help of certain scalar field to end the inflation in a consistent way.

One expects any unstable mode for a model to be of the form $`\delta H_i\mathrm{exp}[lH_0t]`$, to the lowest order in $`H_0t`$, in a de Sitter background with $`l`$ some constant characterizing the stability property of the model. In such models, the inflationary phase will only remain stable for a period of the order $`\mathrm{\Delta }t1/lH_0`$. The inflationary phase will start to collapse after this period of time. This means that the de Sitter background fails to be a good approximation when $`t\mathrm{\Delta }t`$. Hence the anisotropy will also grow according to $`\delta H_i\delta H_i^0\mathrm{exp}[lH_0\mathrm{\Delta }t]`$ with $`\delta H_i^0`$ denoting the initial perturbation.

The measure of anisotropy can be estimated by computing the anisotropy parameter $`A\sqrt{_i\delta H_i^2/3H^2}\sqrt{_i(\delta H_i^0)^2/3H_0^2}\mathrm{exp}[lH_0t]`$. Hence $`A\sqrt{_i(\delta H_i^0)^2/3H_0^2}\mathrm{exp}[60l]`$ for a typical inflationary model which requires a $`60`$ $`e`$-fold expansion. This gives us a hope that small anisotropy observed today can be generated by the initial inflationary instability for models with appropriate factor $`l`$.

On the other hand, it is known that the Einstein-Hilbert model

$$=R2\mathrm{\Lambda }$$
(24)
admits only stable modes, which requires $`\delta H_i=0`$, which is bad for the natural graceful exist. This model is, however, stable against anisotropic perturbations which tends to keep the universe isotropic as long as the model is in charge.

## IV conclusion

In short, the result of this paper shows that graceful exist and stability of any de Sitter model can not work along in a naive way. The physics behind the inflationary de Sitter models appears to be much more complicate than one may expect. In another words, the phase transition during and after the inflationary phase deserves more attention and requires extraordinary care in order to resolve the problem lying ahead.

Note that the non-redundant field equation for field theories with many different sorts of fields coupled to the system can also be derived similar to the pure gravity models . Similar arguments also apply to these theories. Therefore, theories with one unstable mode under anisotropic metric perturbations with respect to the de Sitter background will not be able to hold the de Sitter space stable for a long period of time even there exist stable modes. Note that, in general, one needs to consider two different fourth derivative curvature terms when higher derivative theories are considered in four dimensions.

## V Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by the National Science Council of Taiwan under the contract number NSC89-2112-M009-043.