text:
# Probability distribution of the sizes of largest erased-loops in loop-erased random walks

## I INTRODUCTION

The classical theory of statistics of extremals deals with the distribution of the largest of many independent identically distributed random variables . After some rescaling, this distribution tends to one of the three universal distribution functions, the so-called Gumbel distributions, independent of the details of the starting distribution of random variables . The independence of random variables is, however, not a good approximation in many physical problems. The statistics of extremes of many random variables is relevant in many different physical contexts. In many of these it is important to take account of correlations, for example, in the study of earthquakes , weather records , slow relaxation in glassy systems , and persistence in random walks . In some special cases extremal statistics of strongly correlated variables can be determined exactly . In general, however, the study of extremal distributions of correlated and strongly correlated random variables poses a rather non-trivial problem even in the simplest cases.

This paper deals with the extremal statistics of variables with long-range power law correlations in the loop-erased random walks (LERW’s) in two dimensions. Our interest in the LERW problem comes from the fact that it provides one of the simplest examples of self-organized critical systems. In the LERW problem, the length of the walk is first increased by one at each step, and then decreases by a random amount due to possible loop erasures. The size of erased loops has a power-law tail . This is, thus, similar to the sandpile model where one grain is added at each time step but the number of grains leaving the pile has a power-law tail. Clearly, there are correlations in the sizes of erased loops at different times. These correlations are more pronounced for larger loops. Erasure of a large loop leads to significant decrease in the length of the erased walk, and hence a significant decrease in the probability of erasure of another large loop within a short time. We propose that the expected ratios of sizes of $`k`$th largest loop with the largest loop is a good variable to quantify these strong correlations, and propose a one-dimensional Levy walk model which is then tested by simulations.

The LERW problem was introduced by Lawler  as a more tractable variant of the self-avoiding walk problem. This problem is related to many well-studied problems in statistical physics: the classical graph-theoretical problem of spanning trees, the $`q`$-state Potts model in the limit $`q0`$ , and the Laplacian self-avoiding walk problem . Connection to the spanning trees also relates this problem to the abelian sandpile model of self-organized criticality . Recently simulation of LERW has been used as a computationally efficient way to determine the dynamical exponent of the abelian sandpile model in three-dimensions . The upper critical dimension of LERWs is known to be 4 . In two dimensions, the fractal dimension of LERWs is known to be $`5/4`$ , and the exponent characterizing the probability distribution of the area of erased-loops is known to be superuniversal . Several other results on LERWs can be found in  and a good review of earlier results on the LERW problem can be found in .

In this paper, we show that the asymptotic behavior of the probability distribution function $`\text{Prob}(\mathrm{}^{(k)}|N)`$ that the $`k`$th largest erased-loop perimeter in the first $`N`$ steps has value $`\mathrm{}^{(k)}`$ is described by a $`k`$-dependent scaling function with argument $`\mathrm{}^{(k)}/N^{z/2}`$. We determine the behavior of the scaling function for the largest loop for very large and very small values of its argument. A similar behavior is found for the loops ranked by the enclosed area, rather than by their perimeter. The probability that there is no erased loop of length greater than a fixed value $`r`$ varies exponentially with $`N`$ for large $`N`$. Enumerating all walks satisfying this property (for a fixed $`r`$) is a generalization of the self-avoiding walk problem. We have used exact enumeration techniques to determine the behavior of this probability for $`r=0`$, $`2`$, and $`4`$ by enumerating all random walks with $`N20`$. We have proposed a simple Levy walk model which captures correlations in the LERW and agrees well with its extremal statistics as determined from large-scale Monte Carlo simulations.

The plan of this paper is as follows: In Sec. II, after defining the LERW model precisely, we recall relevant points from scaling theory for distribution of sizes of erased-loops. These are used to get the scaling form for the probability distribution of the perimeter and the area of largest erased-loop in a walk of $`N`$ steps. In Sec. III, we outline our results about the connectivity constants $`\mu _2`$ and $`\mu _4`$ and determine their numerical value using series expansions. The simulation technique and results obtained thereof are described in Sec. IV. In Sec. V, we describe the Levy walk model and compare the results of numerical simulations of this model with that of the LERW. Finally, some concluding remarks follow in Sec. VI.

## II Scaling Theory of loop-size Distributions

A loop-erased random walk is defined recursively as follows: For a one step random walk, the corresponding loop-erased random walk is the same as the random walk. To form the LERW $`^{}`$ corresponding to a given random walk of $`(N+1)`$ steps, we first form the LERW $``$ corresponding to the first $`N`$ steps of the random walk. Let us say this LERW $``$ has $`n`$ steps. We now add the $`(N+1)`$th step of the random walk to $``$. If no loop is formed, the resulting $`n+1`$ stepped walk is $`^{}`$. If this results in forming a loop of perimeter $`\mathrm{}`$, this loop is erased, and the resulting $`n+1\mathrm{}`$ stepped walk is $`^{}`$. A simple example is depicted in Fig. 1.

Let $``$ be a LERW of $`n`$ steps obtained from a random walk of $`N`$ steps. For a fixed $`N`$, $`n`$ is a random variable. The critical exponent $`z`$ of the LERW is defined by the relation that

$$nN^{z/2}$$
(1)
for large $`N`$, where the angular brackets denote ensemble averaging over all random walks of $`N`$ steps. Since the root-mean-square end to end distance $`R`$ for LERWs is the same as that for random walks, we have $`RN^{1/2}`$, and $`nR^z`$. Thus, $`z`$ is the fractal dimension of the LERW.

Let $`F(\mathrm{}|N)`$ be the cumulative probability that a loop of perimeter greater than $`\mathrm{}`$ will be erased at the $`N`$th step of the loop-erased walk. We define

$$F(\mathrm{})=\underset{N\mathrm{}}{lim}F(\mathrm{}|N).$$
(2)
It was shown in  that large $`N\mathrm{}1`$, $`F(\mathrm{}|N)`$ satisfies the scaling form

$$F(\mathrm{}|N)\mathrm{}^{2/z}f\left(\mathrm{}/N^{z/2}\right).$$
(3)
The scaling function $`f(x)`$ tends to a non-zero constant as $`x`$ tends to zero, and decreases to zero exponentially fast for $`x1`$. Note that the exponents appearing in this scaling form depend only on the fractal dimension $`z`$.

Let $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{}^{(1)}\mathrm{}|N)`$ be the cumulative probability that the perimeter $`\mathrm{}^{(1)}`$ of the largest erased-loop in an $`N`$-step walk will be less than or equal to $`\mathrm{}`$. We shall study the behavior of this function for large $`N`$. The probability that the largest erased-loop at the $`k`$th step of an $`N`$-step walk has perimeter less than or equal to $`\mathrm{}`$ is given by $`1F(\mathrm{}|k)`$. A simple approximate formula for $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{}^{(1)}\mathrm{}|N)`$ is obtained by neglecting correlations among sizes of erased-loops, and treating the generation of loops at different time steps as independent events. In the following, we will denote by $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\text{uc}}`$ the value of $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{}^{(1)}\mathrm{}|N)`$ in this uncorrelated approximation. This gives

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{}^{(1)}\mathrm{}|N)\mathrm{\Phi }_{\text{uc}}(\mathrm{}^{(1)}\mathrm{}|N)=\underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}[1F(\mathrm{}|k)].$$
(4)
Let $`x=\mathrm{}/N^{z/2}`$, $`x^{(1)}=\mathrm{}^{(1)}/N^{z/2}`$ and $`y=k/N`$ be new scaling variables. In terms of these new variables, substitution of $`F(\mathrm{}|k)`$ from Eq. (3) in Eq. (4), gives

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{\text{uc}}(x^{(1)}x|N)=\underset{y}{}\left[1\frac{1}{N}x^{2/z}f\left(\frac{x}{y^{z/2}}\right)\right].$$
(5)
For fixed $`x`$ and large, we can evaluate this expression by taking logs, expanding in powers of $`(1/N)`$, and keeping only the lowest order terms in $`(1/N)`$. With this we get

$$\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Phi }_{\text{uc}}(x^{(1)}x|N)=x^{2/z}\stackrel{~}{f}(x),$$
(6)
where $`\stackrel{~}{f}(x)=_0^1f\left(x/y^{z/2}\right)𝑑y`$. It is easy to see that $`\stackrel{~}{f}(x)`$ has the same qualitative behavior as $`f(x)`$. In terms of $`F(\mathrm{}|k)`$, this equation can be written as

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{\text{uc}}(\mathrm{}^{(1)}\mathrm{}|N)\mathrm{exp}\left[N\stackrel{~}{F}(\mathrm{}|N)\right],$$
(7)
where

$$\stackrel{~}{F}(\mathrm{}|N)=\frac{1}{N}\underset{k=0}{\overset{N}{}}F(\mathrm{}|k).$$
(8)
For small $`x`$, $`\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Phi }_{\text{uc}}(x^{(1)}x|N)`$ should vary as $`x^{2/z}`$. For large $`x`$, $`\stackrel{~}{f}(x)`$ is small, and $`1\mathrm{\Phi }_{\text{uc}}(x^{(1)}x|N)`$ should vary as $`x^{2/z}\stackrel{~}{f}(x)`$.

Eq. (7) is a good approximation to Eq. (4) so long as the higher order terms in $`(1/N)`$ can be neglected. It is easily seen that the neglected term is of order $`N\stackrel{~}{F}^2(\mathrm{}|N)`$, and hence the approximation is valid so long as $`\mathrm{}N^{z/4}`$. It will be seen from simulation results (see Sec. IV) that our assumption about correlations being small is not too bad and that Eq. (4), and consequently also Eqs. (6) and (7), are reasonable approximations to the largest loop size distribution for all $`\mathrm{}`$. The deviation of the correct value from Eq. (4) is largest if $`\mathrm{}`$ is very small, say equal to $`0`$, $`2`$, $`4`$, …. It is important to understand the behavior of $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{}^{(1)}\mathrm{}|N)`$ in this case. This we do in the next section.

Let $`m`$ be the expected number of loops of perimeter greater than or equal to $`\mathrm{}`$ generated from a random walk of $`N`$ steps. If there are no correlations between different loops, for $`mN`$, the number of such loops generated in particular realization is a random variable, distributed according to the Poisson distribution: The probability that exactly $`k`$ such loops are generated is $`\text{e}^mm^k/k!`$. This implies that the probability that less than $`k`$ loops of size greater than $`\mathrm{}`$ are generated can be expressed in terms of the probability that no loop of size greater than $`\mathrm{}`$ is generated. Simple algebra gives

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{\text{uc}}(\mathrm{}^{(k)}\mathrm{},N)=\mathrm{exp}(m)\underset{i=0}{\overset{k1}{}}\frac{m^i}{i!},$$
(9)
where

$$m=\mathrm{log}(\mathrm{\Phi }_{\text{uc}}(\mathrm{}^{(1)}\mathrm{}|N)).$$
(10)
## III DETERMINATION OF CONNECTIVITY CONSTANTS

Let $`C_r(N)`$ be the number of $`N`$-step random walks in which no loop of size greater than $`r`$ is formed. The case $`r=0`$ corresponds to self-avoiding walks. As the total number of random walks of $`N`$-steps is $`4^N`$ on square lattice, we have

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{}^{(1)}r|N)=\frac{C_r(N)}{4^N}.$$
(11)
For large $`N`$ it is expected that

$$C_r(N)\mu _r^N.$$
(12)
For large $`N`$, $`\mu _r`$ tends to a constant independent of $`N`$, which may be called the $`r`$-th connectivity constant”. From Jensen and Guttmann  the value of $`\mu _0`$ is known very precisely and we have estimated $`\mu _2`$ and $`\mu _4`$ using series expansion and exact enumeration (details follow).

Now consider the case $`k=2`$. In this case, the walk cannot form loops, except that it can go back along the path it has taken. The connectivity constant $`\mu _0`$ can be interpreted as the average number of forward directions available for the next step in an $`N`$-step self-avoiding walk for large $`N`$. As return along the direction of last step is now allowed, in the first approximation, we should have

$$\mu _2\mu _0+1$$
(13)
We also have the trivial inequality $`\mu _r<\mu _{r+2}`$ for all $`r`$. As $`r`$ tends to infinity, $`\mu _r`$ tends to $`4`$.

We determined the numbers $`C_r(N)`$ for $`N20`$ and for all $`r`$ by exact enumeration. The enumeration results for $`r=2`$ and $`4`$ are tabulated in Table I. We analyzed this data by fitting it to the extrapolation form

$`C_r(N)`$ $`=`$ $`K_0\mu _r^N(N)N^{\gamma 1}`$ (15)
$`\times \left[1+{\displaystyle \frac{K_1}{N}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^N}{N^{\gamma +1/2}}}\left\{K_2+{\displaystyle \frac{K_3}{N}}\right\}\right],`$
where the critical exponent $`\gamma `$ is expected to be independent of $`r`$ and takes the self-avoiding walk value of $`43/32`$ in two dimensions  and $`K_i`$ are constants which depend on $`r`$. This form is similar to that used by Conway and Guttmann  for analyzing $`51`$-term series of self-avoiding walks. We have reduced the number of parameters in Eq. (15) because our series is shorter. Our estimates of $`\mu _2`$ and $`\mu _4`$, by fitting the form given by Eq. (15) term-by-term to the $`20`$-term series tabulated in Table I, are $`3.7083(2)`$ and $`3.8818(4)`$, respectively. These values are not very sensitive to variation in the fitting values of the parameters $`K_i`$.

It is interesting to compare the numerical values of $`\mu _0`$, $`\mu _2`$, and $`\mu _4`$ with the estimates obtained using the uncorrelated approximation. From Eqs. (11) and (12) we see that $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{}^{(1)}\mathrm{}|N)`$ varies as $`(\mu _{\mathrm{}}/4)^N`$ for large $`N`$. Thus the approximation Eq. (7) gives $`\mu _k/41F(k)`$. Using the values of $`\mu _k`$ determined above, this would imply that $`F(0)`$, $`F(2)`$, and $`F(4)`$ have the values $`0.3404`$, $`0.0729`$, and $`0.0295`$, respectively. The values of these quantities obtained from simulations are $`0.3125`$, $`0.0625`$, and $`0.0257`$, respectively. We see that the approximation fares rather well in relating the properties of the self-avoiding and loop-erased walks, which have quite different large-scale properties.

## IV COMPUTER SIMULATION RESULTS

We generated two-dimensional loop-erased random walks using the algorithm outlined in . For each walk we collected statistics about the perimeter and the area of the erased-loop at each step. The statistics were collected for $`N`$-step walks with $`N=2^r`$, $`r=15`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`20`$. We averaged over $`4.7\times 10^5`$ different realizations of the random walk. We were able to simulate the entire ensemble in about $`93`$ hours on a Pentium-III 700 MHz machine using about $`2.6`$ Mb RAM.

### A Largest loop perimeter

During the simulations we collected statistics for $`\stackrel{~}{F}(\mathrm{}|N)`$, the average number of loops of perimeter $`\mathrm{}`$ formed from a random walk of $`N`$ steps. For each walk we also determined the perimeter and area of the five largest loops formed. this is used to obtain the measured cumulative distribution $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\text{o}(\mathrm{}^{(k)}\mathrm{}|N)`$, of size of loops of rank $`k`$, with $`k=1`$ to $`5`$. The subscript “o” here refers to “observed”. To reduce noise, nearby $`\mathrm{}`$ values were binned together. We used $`30`$ bins per decade of data.

In Fig. 2 we have shown the plot for $`\text{Prob}_\text{o}(\mathrm{}^{(k)}|N)`$ versus $`\mathrm{}`$ the observed probability distributions for $`k=1`$, $`2`$, and $`3`$ for $`N=2^{20}`$. In Fig. 3 we have plotted $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{}^{(k)}\mathrm{}|N)`$ versus $`\mathrm{}/\mathrm{}^{}`$ for various values of $`N`$ as found in the simulations, and compared it to the theoretical curve given by Eq. (9) ignoring correlations between loops. An excellent collapse is seen among curves for all the values of $`N`$ when plotted against the scaling variable $`x=\mathrm{}/\mathrm{}^{}`$. From these figures it is clearly seen that for $`x>1`$ the prediction of the uncorrelated theory is quite good and indeed asymptotically exact. However, considerable departure is seen for smaller values of $`x`$, for $`x1`$.

We see that the prediction of the cumulative distribution function by the uncorrelated theory is consistently higher compared to the observed distribution throughout the range of variation of the scaling variable $`x`$. This shows the expected anti-correlation between occurrences of large loops.

For small values of the scaling parameter $`x`$, the observed cumulative distribution function seems to behave like

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_\text{o}(x^{(1)}x)a\mathrm{exp}(bx^{2/z})$$
(16)
with $`a=2.2\pm 0.3`$ and $`b=0.39\pm 0.02`$. The fit is shown in Fig. 4. For large $`x`$, $`1\mathrm{\Phi }_\text{o}(x^{(1)}x)`$ is very nearly $`N\stackrel{~}{F}(\mathrm{}|N)`$ which varies as

$$1\mathrm{\Phi }_\text{o}(x^{(1)}x)a\mathrm{exp}(bx^{2/z})$$
(17)
with the numerical value of the parameters obtained by curve-fitting being $`a=0.32\pm 0.03`$ and $`b=1.7\pm 0.1`$, same as that obtained by analysis of the all-loops data. This fit is shown in Fig. 5.

### B Largest loop area

During simulations we collected statistics for the area of the erased-loops also. This was sampled exactly as the perimeter data in the previous subsection.

In Figs. 6 and 7 we have shown the plots for $`\text{Prob}_\text{o}(A^{(k)}|N)`$ versus $`A`$ for $`N=2^{20}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }(A^{(k)}A|N)`$ versus $`A/N`$ for various values of $`N`$, for $`k=1`$ to $`3`$. The format of presentation is as in the previous subsection. An excellent collapse is seen among the curves for various values of $`N`$ when plotted against the scaling variable $`y=A/N`$.

The departure between the observed behavior and prediction of the uncorrelated theory is also similar to that seen for the perimeter data in the previous subsection. It is clearly seen from these figures that for $`y>0.1`$ the prediction of the uncorrelated theory is quite good and seems to be asymptotically exact for large $`y`$. For $`y<0.1`$ considerable departure is seen between observed behavior and uncorrelated prediction. As in the perimeter data, there is a systematic over-prediction by the uncorrelated theory.

For small values of the scaling parameter $`y`$, the observed cumulative distribution function $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\text{o}(y^{(1)}y)`$ seems to behave like $`\mathrm{exp}(a/y)`$ with $`a=0.049\pm 0.002`$. For large $`y`$, $`1\mathrm{\Phi }_\text{o}(y^{(1)}y)`$ varies as $`\mathrm{exp}(by)`$ with $`b=14\pm 1`$.

### C Variation of loop sizes with rank

It is clearly seen in Fig. 2 that the probability distribution of $`\mathrm{}^{(k)}`$ becomes sharper as $`k`$ increases. In fact, if $`k`$ is of order $`N`$ (say $`k=N/1000`$), it is easy to see that the distribution tends to a delta function for large $`N`$. A more careful argument shows that if $`kN^{z/(z+1)}`$, then the distribution would tend to a delta function. We note that $`\mathrm{}^{(k)}`$ varies as $`(N/k)^{z/2}`$ and the average number of erased loops with this perimeter varies as $`N/(\mathrm{}^{(k)})^{1+2/z}`$. For the distribution to have sharp peak at $`\mathrm{}^{(k)}`$, this number should be much greater than fluctuations in the expected number of loops with perimeter greater than $`\mathrm{}^{(k)}`$. The latter varies as $`k^{1/2}`$. Simple algebra then gives the required result.

A similar argument for the area distributions shows that the positions of the peak for the $`k`$-th rank varies roughly as $`N/k`$ and their width varies as $`N/k^{3/2}`$. Furthermore, when $`kN^{2/3}`$ the width of the distribution becomes exponentially small in $`N`$.

### D Affect of correlations on the probability distribution functions for $`k`$th largest erased-loop size

In Fig. 8, we have plotted $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{}^{(2)}\mathrm{}|N)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{}^{(3)}\mathrm{}|N)`$ versus $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{}^{(1)}\mathrm{}|N)`$ for $`N=2^{20}`$ from the observed distributions. This is compared with what would be expected on the basis of uncorrelated approximation. Similar plots using area (instead of perimeter) data show similar trends, and are omitted here. From this figure, it is clearly seen that the predicted and the observed distributions are quite close. The actual curve always lies above the value calculated by neglecting anti-correlations present.

## V MODELING CORRELATIONS

Consider the time series $`\{n_i\}`$ with $`i=1`$, $`2`$, …, generated in a LERW simulation, where $`n_i`$ is number of steps in the LERW at time step $`i`$. This process can be modeled by a stochastic motion of point on a one dimensional lattice. As $`n_i`$ is always positive, the motion occurs in the half space $`x0`$. In a single time step, this point can move one step to the right (if no loop erasure occurs in the corresponding random walk), or several spaces to the left. Now suppose that the random walk is not accessible to observation, and only the time series $`\{n_i\}`$ is observed. While the original LERW, treated as a stochastic process is a Markov process, the projected process is clearly not Markovian. However, it may be approximated as a Markov process.

### A One-dimensional Levy walk model

The transition probabilities for this Markov process are easily defined. We think of $`n_i`$ as the position of a random walker at time $`i`$ on a one dimensional lattice. The walk begins at $`t=0`$ with the walker positioned at $`x=0`$. At each subsequent time step, the walker takes one step to the right and then draws a non-negative integer random number $`\mathrm{}`$ with the probability $`\text{Prob}(\mathrm{})`$, $`\mathrm{}=0`$, $`1`$, $`2`$, …. We will assume that for large $`\mathrm{}`$, $`\text{Prob}(\mathrm{})`$ decreases as $`\mathrm{}^\tau `$ with $`\tau >1`$. If $`\mathrm{}`$ is less than or equal to the current position $`x`$ of the walker, then the walker takes $`\mathrm{}`$ steps to the left; otherwise it stays put. This completes one step. Clearly, we have

$$\underset{\mathrm{}=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\text{Prob}(\mathrm{})=1.$$
(18)
To ensure that there is no overall drift in the model, we also assume that

$$\underset{\mathrm{}=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\mathrm{}\text{Prob}(\mathrm{})=1.$$
(19)
Note that the $`\mathrm{}`$ here corresponds to the erased-loop size in LERWs. In general, one can expect to improve comparison with the original LERW model by making the probability of backward $`\mathrm{}`$ steps when the walker is at $`n`$ equal to the conditional probability in the LERW problem that the next step leads to erasure of a loop of length $`\mathrm{}`$ when the current length of walk is $`n`$. This is expected to be of the form

$$\text{Prob}(\mathrm{}|n)=\text{Prob}(\mathrm{}|\mathrm{})f_{\text{cutoff}}(\mathrm{}/n),$$
(20)
where $`f_{\text{cutoff}}`$ is a cutoff function which is strictly zero if its argument is greater than $`1`$. We make the simple choice that $`f_{\text{cutoff}}`$ is $`1`$ if the argument is less than $`1`$.

For our simulations, we made a particular choice of $`\text{Prob}(\mathrm{})`$. We assumed that it is given by

$$\text{Prob}(\mathrm{})=\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1}{\mathrm{}}\left[\frac{1}{\mathrm{}^\alpha }\frac{1}{(\mathrm{}+1)^\alpha }\right],\hfill & \text{for }1\mathrm{}\mathrm{}\hfill \\ & \\ 1\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\text{Prob}(k),\hfill & \text{for }\mathrm{}=0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(21)
Note that with this choice, the no-drift condition given by Eq. (19) is automatically guaranteed for any choice of $`\alpha `$. Furthermore, one can generate this distribution numerically by using only two calls to the random number generator. We take a random number $`u`$ with uniform distribution between $`[0,1]`$, define $`m=u^{1/\alpha }`$, and then put $`\mathrm{}=m`$ with probability $`1/m`$ and $`\mathrm{}=0`$ with probability $`11/m`$. In our simulations, we used $`\alpha =0.6`$, which corresponds to the value $`\tau =2.6`$ of the exponent of the two-dimensional LERWs.

The Master equation for the above process describing the evolution of the probability $`P(x,t)`$ of the walker being at position $`x`$ at time $`t`$ is written as

$$P(x,t+1)=\underset{\mathrm{}=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\text{Prob}(\mathrm{})P(x1+\mathrm{},t).$$
(22)
For large times $`t`$, the width of the probability distribution $`P(x,t)`$ increases to infinity. It is easy to see that the width must increase as $`t^{1/(1+\alpha )}`$. We note that if the particle it at $`x`$, its expected displacement in the next time-step is positive, as jumps with displacement greater than $`x`$ to the left are disallowed. The contribution of such terms to Eq. (18) varies as $`x^{2\tau }`$. This equation may schematically be written in the form

$$\frac{P}{t}\frac{}{x}(Px^{2\tau })+𝒟P,$$
(23)
where $`𝒟`$ denotes diffusion operator which, presumably, involves fractional derivatives. The resulting equation for the scaling function is nonlocal, and its analytical solution seems difficult. Simple dimensional analysis shows that $`t`$ scales as $`x^{\tau 1}`$. Hence the width of this distribution should scale as $`t^{1/(\tau 1)}`$. Furthermore, for large $`t`$, $`P(x,t)`$ tends to the scaling form

$$P(x,t)\frac{1}{t^{1/(\tau 1)}}p\left(\frac{x}{t^{1/(\tau 1)}}\right).$$
(24)
### B Results from the Levy walk model

We numerically integrated the Master equation Eq. (22) in $`x0`$ half space using the probability distribution for erased-loop sizes given by Eq. (21) and computed $`P(x,t)`$. The integration for walks having up to $`N=2^{17}`$ steps required about $`80`$ hours of CPU time on a Pentium II 350 MHz machine using about $`7`$ Mb RAM. We also simulated the Levy walk process for time steps up to $`N=2^{20}`$ for obtaining the statistics on erased-loop sizes and the $`k`$th largest erased-loop size. The quantities were sampled along the same lines as for the LERWs discussed in Sec. IV. To reduce noise in the statistics, we averaged over a large ensemble consisting of $`2\times 10^5`$ different runs. The simulation of the entire ensemble required about $`141`$ hrs of CPU time on a Pentium II 350 MHz machine using about $`1.5`$ Mb RAM.

Scaling plots for the computed probability of finding the Levy walker at location $`x`$ at time step $`N`$, $`P(x,N)`$, are shown in Fig. 9. In this figures we have plotted $`N^{z/2}P(x,N)`$ versus $`x/N^{z/2}`$, for $`z=5/4`$. The figure clearly shows that the observed behavior agrees well with the conjectured scaling form given by Eq. (24).

We also analyzed the distribution of $`k`$th largest loop sizes in simulation of this Levy walk model, and compared them with the corresponding distributions for the two-dimensional LERW model. We found that the deviations from the predictions of the uncorrelated theory are much smaller in the case of the Levy walk model than in the original LERW. The plots are very similar to the Figs. 2, 3, and 8, and are being omitted here.

In Fig. 10, we have compared the probability distributions for the $`k`$th largest erased-loop sizes from the Levy walk model with those from LERW. The figure clearly shows that the probability distributions obtained from the Levy walk model match very well with those from the LERW.

A better quantitative estimate can be obtained by comparing the ratio $`R_k`$, defined as

$$R_k=\mathrm{}^{(k)}/\mathrm{}^{(1)},$$
(25)
where $``$ denotes expectation value.

The value of $`R_k`$ as found in the simulations of the LERW was found to be $`0.605`$, $`0.463`$, $`0.386`$, and $`0.335`$ for $`k=2`$ to $`5`$, respectively. The corresponding values in the simulation of the Levy walk model were $`0.614`$, $`0.474`$, $`0.397`$, and $`0.347`$, respectively. The corresponding values from the uncorrelated approximation would be $`k^{z/2}`$, i.e., $`0.648,0.503,0.420`$, and $`0.365`$, respectively. It is clear that the Levy walk model gives a much better estimate of these ratios than the uncorrelated approximation.

## VI CONCLUDING REMARKS

Our analysis above shows that the probability distribution of the largest erased-loops in LERWs is fairly well described by the simple approximation ignoring correlations between the sizes of different loops. However, the average values of ratios of $`\mathrm{}^{(k)}`$ are not well described in this approximation. A simple model which takes care of a large part of these correlations is the Levy walk model introduced in this paper. In this model, one keeps information about the length of the LERW, but throws out all information about its shape. We have seen that this model reproduces the extremal statistics of the LERWs quite well.

Secondly, we have exactly enumerated $`C_r(N)`$ the number of $`N`$ step LERWs in which loops of size less than or equal to $`r`$ are erased. Using these we have determined $`\mu _r`$ the $`r`$th connectivity constant. The determination of $`\mu _0`$ for various lattices has been a long-standing problem in lattice statistics. Higher $`r`$-values present interesting geometrical questions, and may be helpful in understanding the crossover from random walk to self-avoiding walk.


format: text

text:
# Vela, its X-ray nebula, and the polarization of pulsar radiation

## 1 Introduction

Unlike in the case of most other non-thermal radio sources, the polarization of the radiation from pulsars played an early and fundamental role in attempts to understand and model the operative emission mechanism. The high percentage of linear polarization, well over the maximum theoretical limit for synchrotron radiation, together with a special type of systematic sweep of the P.A. observed in the Vela Pulsar led to the “magnetic pole model” (Radhakrishnan & Cooke 1969). The sweep of the P.A. across the pulse was interpreted in terms of the line of sight tangentially encountering different field lines close to the magnetic pole as the pulsar rotated; and the parameters of the so called ’S’ curve of the P.A. sweep have ever since been interpreted in terms of $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$, the angles made by the magnetic axis to the rotational axis and to the line of sight (at minimum impact angle) respectively. An important point is that while the geometry of the ’S’ curve is intimately related, through $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$, to the locus of the sight line, the actual angle between the plane of polarization and the operative magnetic field line can have any value, as long as it remains fixed. In the case of synchrotron radiation, the most widespread emission mechanism invoked for non-thermal sources before the discovery of pulsars, the electric vector of the radiation would be perpendicular to the projected magnetic field, as the acceleration of the charged particles was due to their gyration around the field lines.

In the case of pulsars, the systematics of the polarization sweep, and its independence of observing frequency, indicated clearly that the radiation emanated from close to the polar cap in a region that had no internal Faraday rotation. The strength of the fields associated with these regions was so high that any transverse momentum and energy would be radiated away “instantly”, and the charged particles would be in their lowest Landau levels and constrained to move along the magnetic field lines, like beads on a string. An appreciation of this constraint led to the suggestion (Radhakrishnan 1969) that the radiation could be due to the acceleration in the plane of the curved field lines, and has been known since then as “curvature radiation”. As the motion of the particles, whether electrons or positrons, could be only along the field lines, the polarization of the emitted radiation should have the electric vector parallel to the projected field lines. A consequence of this was the identification of the intrinsic plane of polarization at the centre of the pulse (or more correctly the inflexion point of the S curve), with the projection of the rotation axis of the pulsar on the sky. This has had important implications for a variety of studies over the years relating to the space velocities of pulsars.

According to the above picture, the PA of the polarization can have one and only one value at any pulse longitude since the angle of the projected field line is fixed. But as early as 1975 (Manchester et al. 1975; Backer et al. 1976) it was discovered that the PA could have more than one value at a given longitude! Closer investigation revealed that the PA switched between two modes, taking any one of two values which were orthogonal to each other (Backer & Rankin 1980). The polarization sweep pattern in any one mode appeared identical to that in the other, barring the 90o shift in P.A. There has been no shortage of attempted models for the radiation mechanism, but in the absence of any other that could be meaningfully compared with observations, the simple picture of the magnetic pole model, with its rules for deriving $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$, has survived for over three decades, despite the blatant sweeping under the rug of the observed freedom of the polarization vector to take one of two orthogonal values, neither of which was ever shown to have a definite orientation with respect to the field direction!!

## 2 THE X-RAY VELA STORY

We turn now to a discussion of some observations which appear to offer for the first time the possibility of establishing a clear relationship between the directions of polarization and the magnetic field of the pulsar.

Recent observations of the Vela pulsar, and its immediate surroundings, with the Chandra X-ray Observatory show a two-sided jet at a position angle coinciding with that of the proper motion of the pulsar (Pavlov et al. 2000; Helfand et al. 2001). Lai et al. (2001) have argued that the symmetric morphology of the X-ray emission about the jet direction suggests strongly that the jet is along the spin axis of the pulsar. As corroborating this interpretation, they cite polarization observations using data from Deshpande et al. (1999) which have been corrected for Faraday rotation both in the interstellar medium and in the ionosphere. As the radio P.A. is at right angles to the direction of the X-ray jet, Lai et al. (2001) conclude that the polarization mode dominant in the Vela pulsar is one where the electric field in radio emission is orthogonal to the magnetospheric field.

Further support for this picture comes from recent radio observations of the region that have revealed a double lobe structure, with well separated lobes of comparable intensity (Dodson et al. 2001; private communication). These radio lobes are symmetrically placed on either side of the X-ray jet with their diffuse inner edges very close to the boundaries of the X-ray nebula, and independently suggest that the projection of the star’s spin axis must match the observed direction of the jet in the sky plane.

From what has been discussed above, it must be concluded that the electric vector of the Vela pulsar’s radiation is perpendicular to the plane containing the magnetic field-line, and not parallel to it as one has generally assumed. This was also noted by Helfand et al. (2001) although their major concern was with the morphology of the X-ray nebula and its interpretation. We shall also discuss the X-ray nebula shortly, but first the implications of the polarization P.A.

## 3  IMPLICATIONS FOR THE EMISSION/AMPLIFICATION MECHANISM

There is no question that the charged particles in the polar cap regions of any pulsar will be constrained to move essentially along the field lines as already mentioned earlier. There is also no question that there will be radiation from these relativistic particles due to the acceleration associated with the curvature of the field lines, and that the polarization of this radiation will be linear and parallel to the projection of the field lines, assumed planar for the moment. But the brightness temperature of such radiation cannot exceed the kinetic temperature of the electrons (and positrons), which for even extreme values of the magnetic field and spin period are unlikely to be within orders of magnitude of the inferred brightness temperatures, as has been well known since the earliest observations. The absolute need for maser-like amplification, whatever the mechanism of the input radiation, has thus always been recognised, and has motivated numerous attempts over the decades to propose models for the radiation mechanism of pulsars.

As noted at the beginning, one of the striking characteristics of pulsar radiation, which must be accounted for in any theoretical model, is its polarization behaviour. Another, as just seen, is the extremely high brightness temperature. We find it remarkable that both these characteristics seem to be well accounted for in the model put forward by Luo & Melrose (1995). They assume that the input signal is curvature radiation, which as discussed in detail above, seems eminently reasonable to us. The amplification process requires a certain non-planarity of the field lines, for which there has long been evidence from many different lines of investigation on pulsars (Radhakrishnan 1992) The surprising aspect is that while the spontaneous curvature radiation is polarized parallel to the field lines, the amplified output is perpendicular to it, in agreement with the observations discussed in the last section. It would appear therefore that the “normal” polarization mode is really “orthogonal” (to the field lines) for reasons associated with the physics of the amplification process, without which pulsars would not be detectable.

It should be pointed out that the above is not a violation of the fundamental requirement that in any amplifier the stimulated emission should be indistinguishable from the stimulating input signal. Because of the torsion in the field geometry, the spontaneous emission has a small component in the direction perpendicular to the field in the amplifying region, and it is this component that, according to Luo & Melrose (1995), is preferentially amplified and dominates the output.

The pattern of switching to orthogonal modes of polarization varies from pulsar to pulsar and can happen in different parts of the pulse profile for different pulsars. For Vela, the existance of both modes was noticed as early as 1983 by Krishnamohan & Downs. Although the radiation in the other mode is on the average much weaker, it is important to appreciate that detectable radiation in any mode, in any pulsar, always corresponds to brightness temperatures that require enormous amplification. We are thus forced to conclude that there must be more than one mode of amplification if the input signal is the spontaneous “curvature radiation”, as is manifest by the “S” curve outputs of the amplifier, in whichever mode it is operating. This implies that there must be conditions when the parallel mode develops more negative absorption than the perpendicular one favoured by Luo & Melrose, and results in a polarization flip. The probability of this happening could be influenced by the particular field distortions present over the longitude range in question. But the fact that either mode can occur is very reminiscent of maser processes in general, where different allowable modes typically compete with each other resulting in one of them rapidly taking over all of the available power.

The observation in many pulsars, of elliptically polarized radiation of detectable strength, is further evidence of the existence of amplification in both modes, but now simultaneously with some phase difference and different gains. A major obstacle in the understanding of pulsar polarization until now has been the difficulty of seeing how electric fields could be generated perpendicular to the ultrastrong magnetic field lines, only along which the charges were constrained to move. The mechanism of Luo & Melrose (1995) - thanks to torsion - allows and predicts radiation perpendicular to the field lines, and now reduces the explanation of any type of polarization in pulsars to a matter of detail, as opposed to a difficulty of principle.

## 4 THE X-RAY ARCS: TRACERS OF THE RADIATION BEAMS?

We turn now to the spectacular X-ray image provided by Chandra with two remarkably symmetrical arcs bisected by the jet like feature mentioned earlier. Helfand et al. (2001) have put forward a detailed model where they “assume that the two arc-like features lie along circular rings highlighting shocks in which the energy of an outflowing equatorial wind is dissipated to become the source of synchrotron emission for the compact nebula” and attribute the incompleteness of the rings to preferential Doppler boosting of the emission in the forward direction. They also “assume that the two rings straddle the equator symmetrically and suppose that the deficit of emission exactly in the equatorial plane is related to the fact that this is where the direction of a toroidally wrapped magnetic field changes sign i.e. the field may vanish there”. They go on to derive the half opening angle of the wind $`\theta `$ as 23o.3, and the radius of the shock $`r_s`$ as a/dCos$`\theta 1\times 10^{17}`$ cm for d = 250 pc.

We would like to propose a somewhat different model for the X-ray arcs, starting from the magnetic pole model for pulsar radiation discussed at length earlier, and that is invariably miscalled the “rotating vector model111This term was introduced by proponents of light cylinder emission models. A rotating vector is what is observed; the essence of the R.C. model was the location of the emission in the magnetic polar vicinity where the observed rotation would occur naturally. Ironically, the term would be perfectly appropriate for what we are proposing in this section and the next.”. In that model, the radiation (and also its amplification as just seen) are produced by highly relativistic particles streaming out along the open field lines from both magnetic poles. We now examine the X-ray data for the possibility that the two arcs reflect the traces of these two particle beams as they encounter the “walls” surrounding the central cavity created by the pulsar. Such a cavity was elaborated in the classic paper by Rees & Gunn (1974) for the Crab, and has since formed a part of most, if not all, subsequent discussions and models of pulsar created nebulae.

We assume that the particles leave the weakening field lines at some point well before sweep-back effects set in close to the light cylinder, and proceed “ballistically” outwards. If this picture is valid, one of the two arcs should pass close to our sight line to the pulsar, as indeed it does. To assess this further, we have modelled the arcs as the near-side portions of two rings (seen in projection) traced by sweeps of the (magnetic) polar cones. The rotating magnetic-axis vector is as described in Deshpande et al. (1999). The model parameters are the pair of radial distances ($`r_1`$ & $`r_2`$ as measured from the star location and expressed in arcseconds) associated with the two ring traces, the inclination ($`\alpha `$) of the magnetic axis of the star to its rotation axis, the angle of closest approach (the impact angle $`\beta `$) of the magnetic axis to our sight-line, and the position angle (PAo) of the rotation axis projection on the sky-plane. The angle ($`\zeta `$) between the rotation axis and our sight-line is simply $`(\alpha +\beta )`$. Desired consistency with radio polarization observations would allow only certain combinations of the viewing geometry; that is $`sin\alpha /sin\beta `$ should be equal to the steepest sweep rate ($`d\chi /d\varphi `$) of the polarization position angle with respect to the rotational longitude. When we constrain the $`\alpha \&\beta `$ combinations using $`(d\chi /d\varphi )_{max}`$ of -9 degree/degree (as listed by Lyne & Manchester 1988), the best fit PA0 is found to be 129 degrees (measured from North through East), the radial distances $`r_1`$ & $`r_2`$ are unequal (about 22 & 29 arcsec for the near and the opposite polar cones respectively) and $`\alpha `$ 71 degrees ( $`\beta `$-6 degrees correspondingly). Note that this implies a value of $`\zeta `$ of about 65 degrees, significantly larger than the 53 degrees estimated by Helfand et al. (2001) based on their model of an equatorial torus. The above model is illustrated in Fig. 1.

The changing direction of the magnetic axis viewed in projection on the sky plane as the star rotates is described in exactly the same way as that for the position angle of the radio polarization (Deshpande et al. 1999) whatever their relative difference. The proposed association of the arcs with the traces of the polar emission beams thus provides a new and independent means to probe the viewing geometry. They can sample (as they do in the present case) a much larger fraction of the rotation cycle and can provide additional constraints on the viewing geometry. One crucial such constraint becomes available via the trace of the polar emission from the other pole that is generally not available unless interpulses are observable. Also, interestingly, the “sign” of the impact angle $`\beta `$ would become readily apparent from the beam traces even if they do not sample large fractions of the rotation cycle, and without needing to know the sense of rotation of the star.

A simple calculation shows that the visible extent of the arcs is consistent with an X-radiation spread confined to about 70 degrees around the respective directions to which the magnetic axis points as the star rotates. We consider this as explained simply in terms of the initial dispersion of the motions as the particle beam ploughs into the region of compressed toroidal field - the shocked region as usually described - and the consequent spread of the pitch angle distribution. By just assuming that we will see radiation as long as there is some component of the motion towards our line of sight (i.e. $`90^o`$) our simulation reproduces remarkably well the Chandra observations of the arcs.

## 5 THE “AXIAL” JET !

We now turn to the jet like feature whose symmetric bisection of the arcs discussed above has prompted immediate identification with its rotation axis. The fact that the projection on the sky-plane of the rotational axis as derived from the polarization data (with a 90o shift) is also in agreement has been interpreted as further and strong evidence of the above supposition. In fact, Lai et al. (2001) go so far as to say “………… If the jet originates from the pulsar magnetosphere, as seems likely, it is most natural to associate the jet axis with the pulsar spin axis.” The alignment of the jet with the observed proper motion for Vela seems also to have prompted an association with, and raised hopes of an explanation for the space velocity of the neutron star. The fact that a similar jet was already seen in the Crab, also aligned with the derived P.A. of the spin axis, and its proper motion, heralds an incipient industry as more X-ray images of radio pulsar nebulae become available.

A radio pulsar is not an accreting object like an x-ray pulsar, a black hole binary, or an AGN. In our view, it is not only unlikely, but unphysical to expect an actual jet along the rotation axis of a radio pulsar. There is an immense amount we don’t know about the magnetospheres of radio pulsars, but one thing we have known for over three decades is that the particle emission is along the magnetic axis (Goldreich & Julian 1969), that is often at large angles to the rotation axis. The only connection that there can possibly be between the X-ray jet and the rotation axis is one of projection on the sky-plane as we shall argue below.

In our picture of the relativistic particle beams leaving the magnetic poles and proceeding ballistically outwards to the cavity walls, we can ask what if any deviations they are likely to suffer. The only field along their trajectory through the cavity is the toroidal field (that they are carrying out) and that later gets compressed and strengthened at the wall. This toroidal field will, over most or all of the trajectory, be perpendicular to the path of the particles, and, of course, the rotation axis. Depending on the spread of their energies, it should not be surprising if a small fraction of the particles acquired a spread of velocities in the latitudinal direction making their synchrotron radiation visible to an observer when their motion is tangential to the sight line.

One should, as a consequence, expect to receive radiation from these particles when the projection of the magnetic axis coincides with that of the rotation axis, precisely as in the case of the radio pulse, but now over a larger range of angles in latitude. Wherever the observer, the apparent jet will appear along the minor axis of the projected ellipses of the arcs but the extent over which it is visible will depend on the spread of particle velocities, and the angles the beams from the two poles make to the line of sight. These particles must also reach the cavity walls and will then create a diffuse glow around the arc regions but with a greater spread, exactly as seen in the Chandra image. We have assessed the spread of this weak fan beam from the size of the diffuse glow, and from the poor or non-visibility of the corresponding radiation from the beam of the other magnetic pole. We estimate a spread of about $`\pm `$70o from the observed extent of the jet and have used this value in our simulation (fig. 2) of the jet and the associated diffuse components.

If this interpretation of the “jet” is correct, it has a major implication for the picture of particle flow from the pulsar to the nebula. In section 4 when attempting to explain the formation of the X-ray arcs, we made the assumption that the particle beam separated from the polar field lines well within the light cylinder and before the effect of any sweep-back. The justification for this assumption is now seen as the absence of any misalignment between the apparent jet (defined by the trajectory of particles radiating towards us) and the projected rotation axis, the very observation that prompted the physical misinterpretation of the jet referred to earlier.

The total picture that emerges is as follows. There is a cavity of radius of order $`10^{17}`$ cms, which we can presume was created by the dipole radiation originally of much higher frequency than the present 11 Hz. Inside is a double cone of half angle $`\alpha `$70o, along which there is a relativistic particle flow in straight lines with a drift time of $``$0.1 year before they encounter the “shock”. In addition, there is a low density of particles separating from the cones but whose trajectories are in planes containing the rotation axis. Any observer will see radiation only from those particles in the plane containing the observer and the rotation axis and we predict that this radiation should be highly linearly polarized with the electric vector parallel to the rotation axis.

## 6  DISCUSSION

In the long march towards the elucidation of the mysterious ways of pulsars, now numbering around a thousand, a few special ones have taught us more than most of the rest put together. The Vela Pulsar is one such, and played an important role in several ways within months of its discovery in 1968. The superb capabilities of the Chandra telescope have put this pulsar in the limelight again by providing a spectacular image in X-rays of the surrounding nebula. Its form and proportions, reminiscent of pre-Columbian pectoral ornaments are loaded richly with information about many aspects. To begin with, the symmetry of the nebula has provided compelling evidence for the identification of the P.A. of the rotational axis of the pulsar. The near precise orthogonality of this P.A. to that inferred with certain assumptions from polarization measurements, has had important implications. We support the finding of Lai et al. (2001) and Helfand et al. (2001) that the dominant polarization mode in the Vela Pulsar has the electric field orthogonal to the magnetospheric field. We find this is in accordance with the mechanism of Luo & Melrose (1995) that appears to explain three important characteristics of the radio radiation. They are the high brightness temperatures, the dominant polarization mode, and the observed sweep of the P.A. across the pulse, the last clearly identifying the input signal to the maser as curvature radiation from the field lines in the polar neighbourhood. Since the first and third characteristics also apply to the parallel polarization mode to which the radiation occasionally flips, as seen in many pulsars, we propose that the same amplification mechanism must also be operative at times in the other mode. If the Luo & Melrose mechanism can in fact operate in both modes, the explanation of any type of elliptic polarization becomes a matter of detail, a topic which we shall address later.

Noting the clear separation of the X-ray nebular emission into two elliptic arcs symmetrically located with respect to the inferred rotation axis, we propose that they are the traces of the two particle-beams from the magnetic poles on the walls of the cavity $``$ the shocked region. We explain the visible extent of the arcs as arising simply from the spread of the pitch angles at the shock front. We also explain the alignment with the rotational axis of the jet like feature bisecting the arcs as simply a projection effect on the sky plane. We attribute its visibility to a latitudinal spread of the velocities of a small fraction of the particles in the beam, an explanation strongly supported by the presence of diffuse emission around the arcs. We present a simulation of the expected X-radiation around the pulsar based on the above model for the arcs, the jet, and the diffuse glow around both (see fig. 3), and find gratifying agreement with the Chandra observations222 Image available at
http://chandra.harvard.edu/photo/cycle1/vela. We predict that the polarization of the jet feature will be linear and parallel to it, and claim that there can be no physical jet along the rotational axis of the pulsar.

Note that the ‘jet’ is really an apparent one. There are at least 3$`\times `$107 input bunches of particles along any line from the pulsar to the cavity wall, and even the slightest dispersion in velocity would smooth this out to a uniform flow at a very short distance from the pulsar. Even in the absence of velocity dispersion, the finite gamma of the bunch combined with the distance over which it is radiating will result in smearing. The radiation will thus appear continuous and be a part of the unpulsed fraction in X-rays, the fraction depending on the extent of the jet/nebula from which radiation is collected.

In our modelling of the pair of arcs as traces of the two polar beams on a cavity wall (e.g. as illustrated in Fig 1), we find that an assumption of equatorial symmetry does not fit the observations well. As already mentioned in an earlier section, the best fit $`r_1`$ is significantly different from $`r_2`$ (i.e. $`(r_2/r_1)`$1.35). Note that, in our model, $`r_1`$ & $`r_2`$ represent the implied distances to the “wall” from the star along the ‘rotating vectors’ associated with the near and the opposite poles respectively. The arcs provide us important information including about the otherwise ‘unseen’ pole. Significantly improved fits are obtained when unequal values of $`\alpha _1`$ & $`\alpha _2`$ (the half angles of the polar cones associated with the two poles) are allowed in the model. The corresponding $`r_1`$,$`r_2`$ are unequal again. Even better fits are obtained if $`\beta `$ is not constrained by the radio observations. But interestingly, the implied value of $`\zeta `$ (=$`\alpha _1+\beta `$), the angle between the rotation axis and our line of sight, is about the same as in the other cases. Further detailed modelling, than has been possible presently, may provide better estimates of the above parameters and clues about the size as well as the shape of the ‘cavity’.

Inequality between $`\alpha _1`$ & $`\alpha _2`$ has implications, particularly for certain acceleration mechanisms for the origin of pulsar velocities. For example, the ‘rocket’ mechanism of Harrison & Tademaru (1975) does necessarily require such an inequality amounting to a tilted and offset dipole.

Other possible/plausible implications are the following.

i) If the dominant radio polarization mode is indeed the ‘orthogonal’ mode, then any analysis based on the assumption that the observed central polarization P.A. is the same as the P.A. of the rotation axis needs to be reviewed. This applies, for example, to the comparisons of the proper motion directions of pulsars with the orientations of their rotation axis. In the work of Deshpande et al. (1999), they allowed for mode ambiguity in cases where emission of both modes is observed, and have assessed the distribution of the proper motion direction (relative to the rotation axis P.A.) as shown in their Fig 1b. We argue that the required revision will amount to simply replacing the relative angle by its complement. Since no particular preference was found for any relative angle value, the conclusions of Deshpande et al. remain unaltered.

ii) Given the similarities observed between the morphologies of the surrounding nebulae as well as other properties of the Vela & Crab pulsars, it would not surprise us if a similar arc structure is revealed around the Crab pulsar by observations with improved spatial resolution.

###### Acknowledgements.

We would like to thank Don Melrose, Qinghuan Luo and Mark Walker for many useful discussions, and Richard Dodson for kindly providing information prior to publication.