text:
# Motivic measures and stable birational geometry

## 1. Introduction

### 1.1. Grothendieck ring of varieties

Fix a field $`k`$. Let $`𝒱_k`$ denote the category of $`k`$-varieties. By a $`k`$-variety we mean a reduced separated scheme of finite type over $`k`$. Consider the Grothendieck ring $`K_0[𝒱_k]`$: this is the abelian group generated by isomorphism classes of $`k`$-varieties, subject to the relations $`[XY]=[X][Y]`$, where $`Y`$ is a closed in $`X`$. The product over $`k`$ turns it into a commutative ring with 1. It appears that very little is known about this interesting ring. For example, one would like to know the answer to the following basic question.

###### Question 1.2.

Let $`X`$,$`Y`$ be $`k`$-varieties such that $`[X]=[Y]`$. Is it possible to partition $`X`$ and $`Y`$ by a finite number of locally closed subvarieties which are pairwise isomorphic?

### 1.3. Motivic measures

Let $`A`$ be a commutative ring. An $`A`$-valued motivic measure on $`𝒱_k`$ is a ring homomorphism

$$\mu :K_0[𝒱_k]A.$$

The case $`A=K_0[𝒱_k]`$, $`\mu =id`$ is the universal motivic measure.

### 1.4. Motivic zeta-function

For a $`k`$-variety $`X`$ denote by $`X^{(n)}`$ the $`n`$-fold symmetric product of $`X`$. Given a motivic measure $`\mu :K_0[𝒱_k]A`$ we define (following \[Ka\]) the motivic zeta-function of $`X`$ as the formal power series

$$\zeta _\mu (X,t)=1+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\mu ([X^{(n)}])t^nA[[t]].$$

For example,

$$\zeta _{id}(^1,t)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}[^n]t^n=\frac{1}{(1t)(1[𝔸^1]t)},$$

$$\zeta _{id}(E,t)=1+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}[E][^{n1}]t^n=\frac{1+([E][^1])t+[𝔸^1]t^2}{(1t)(1[𝔸^1]t)}$$

for any elliptic curve $`E`$, and

$$\zeta _{id}(^2,t)=\frac{1}{(1t)(1[𝔸^1]t)(1[𝔸^2]t)}.$$

Checking these formulas requires a certain amount of cutting and pasting, using the relation $`[X]=[XY]+[Y]`$ systematically.

Kapranov proves the following theorem in \[Ka\]:

###### Theorem 1.5.

Let $`A`$ be a field and $`\mu :K_0[𝒱_k]A`$ be a motivic measure. Let $`X𝒱_k`$ be a curve. Then $`\zeta _\mu (X,t)`$ is a rational function.

In the same paper Kapranov remarks that it is natural to expect a similar rationality result for varieties of higher dimension. We give a negative solution to this problem.

###### Theorem 1.6.

Assume that $`k=`$. There exists a field $``$ and a motivic measure $`\mu :K_0[𝒱_{}]`$ with the following property: if $`X`$ is a smooth complex projective surface such that $`P_g(X)=h^{2,0}(X)2`$, then the zeta-function $`\zeta _\mu (X,t)`$ is not rational.

We expect that a similar result holds for any smooth projective variety of even dimension and positive Kodaira dimension.

### 1.7. Stable birational geometry

The above theorem on the irrationality of the zeta-function follows easily from our analysis of the Grothendieck ring $`K_0[𝒱_{}]`$ from the point of view of stable birational equivalence of varieties. Namely, recall that (irreducible) varieties $`X`$,$`Y`$ are stably birational if $`X\times ^k`$ is birational to $`Y\times ^l`$ for some $`k,l0`$. Let $`SB`$ denote the multiplicative monoid of classes of stable birational equivalence of varieties; let $`[SB]`$ be the corresponding monoid ring. Consider the principal ideal $`IK_0[𝒱_{}]`$ generated by the class of the affine line $`𝔸^1`$. The main result of the next section is the following isomorphism of rings.

$$K_0[𝒱_{}]/I[SB].$$

This isomorphism is interesting in its own right. It implies, in particular, that classes of stable birational equivalence from a $``$-basis of the group $`K_0[𝒱_{}]/I`$. The hard part in establishing this isomorphism is to show that the map from the LHS to the RHS is well defined. This is essentially the content of Theorem 2.3.

We also show that for a ring homomorphism $`\varphi :K_0[𝒱_{}]B`$ the following conditions are equivalent

i) $`I\mathrm{Ker}(\varphi )`$,

ii) if $`X`$, $`Y`$ are smooth complete varieties which are birational, then $`\varphi ([X])=\varphi ([Y])`$.

## 2. Grothendieck ring of varieties and stable birational equivalence

### 2.1. The Grothendieck ring of varieties revisited

We make a few remarks about the Grothendieck ring $`K_0[𝒱_k]`$ which will be used later.

A. If a variety $`X`$ is partitioned by locally closed subvarieties $`X_1,\mathrm{}X_n`$, then

$$[X]=[X_i].$$

B. Every variety can be partitioned by a finite number of smooth varieties. Hence classes of smooth varieties generate the group $`K_0[𝒱_k]`$.

C. Let $`EX`$ be a vector bundle of dimension $`d`$. Then it is locally trivial in the Zariski topology. Hence the same is true about its projectivization $`\overline{E}X`$. Thus $`[\overline{E}]=[X][^{d1}]`$ in the ring $`K_0[𝒱_k]`$.

D. Let $`f:XY`$ be a proper morphism of smooth varieties, which is a blowup with a smooth center $`ZY`$ of codimension $`d`$. Then the projective bundle $`f^1(Z)Z`$ is the projectivization of the normal bundle of $`Z`$ in $`Y`$. Hence, by the previous remark $`[f^1(Z)]=[Z][^{d1}]`$ in the ring $`K_0[𝒱_k]`$.

E. Assume that $`char(k)=0`$. By Hironaka’s theorem every smooth variety $`X`$ is isomorphic to a dense open subset of a smooth complete variety. Hence the group $`K_0[𝒱_k]`$ is generated by smooth complete varieties.

Let $`k=`$. We will be using the following theorem of Wlodarczyk (see \[W\], \[AKMW\]).

###### Theorem 2.2.

Let $`\varphi :X_1X_2`$ be a rational birational map of smooth complete varieties. Let $`UX_1`$ be an open subset where $`\varphi `$ is an isomorphism. Then $`\varphi =\varphi _l\mathrm{}\varphi _1`$, where each $`\varphi _i`$ is a rational birational map of smooth complete varieties and either $`\varphi _i`$ or $`\varphi _i^1`$ is a regular map which is a blowup with a smooth center disjoint from $`U`$.

The basic result of this paper is the following:

###### Theorem 2.3.

Put $`k=`$. Let $`G`$ be an abelian commutative monoid and $`[G]`$ be the corresponding monoid ring. Denote by $``$ the multiplicative monoid of isomorphism classes of smooth complete irreducible varieties. Let

$$\mathrm{\Psi }:G$$

be a homomorphism of monoids such that

(i) $`\mathrm{\Psi }([X])=\mathrm{\Psi }([Y])`$ if $`X`$ and $`Y`$ are birational;

(ii) $`\mathrm{\Psi }([^n])=1`$ for all $`n0`$.

Then there exists a unique ring homomorphism

$$\mathrm{\Phi }:K_0[𝒱_{}][G]$$

such that $`\mathrm{\Phi }([X])=\mathrm{\Psi }([X])`$ for $`[X]`$.

*Proof.*  To simplify notation we will write $`\mathrm{\Psi }(X)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }(X)`$ for $`\mathrm{\Psi }([X])`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }([X])`$ respectively.

We will define the elements $`\mathrm{\Phi }(X)[G]`$ by induction on the dimension of the variety $`X`$. The induction step will require checking that

i) $`\mathrm{\Phi }(X)`$ is well defined for each variety $`X`$;

ii) $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ preserves the defining relations of the abelian group $`K_0[𝒱_{}]`$;

iii) $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is multiplicative.

Let us formulate a series of constructions and assertions which depend on $`n`$.

Construction $`A_n`$. If $`X`$ is an irreducible smooth complete variety of dimension $`n`$ then $`\mathrm{\Phi }(X):=\mathrm{\Psi }(X)`$.

Construction $`B_n`$. Let $`X`$ be a smooth variety of dimension $`n`$ with connected components $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_k`$. For each $`i`$ choose an open embedding $`X_i\overline{X_i}`$ where $`\overline{X_i}`$ is smooth, complete, and irreducible. Then put

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(X):=\mathrm{\Phi }(\overline{X_i})\mathrm{\Phi }(\overline{X_i}X_i).$$

Construction $`C_n`$. Let $`X`$ be an arbitrary variety of dimension $`n`$. Then put

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(X):=\mathrm{\Phi }(XX^{sing})+\mathrm{\Phi }(X^{sing}).$$

Assertion $`D_n`$. Let $`X`$, $`Y`$ be varieties of dimension $`n`$, and $`f:XY`$ be a morphism with the following property: there exists a stratification of $`Y`$ by locally closed subvarieties $`Y_i`$, so that $`f^1(Y_i)^{n_i}\times Y_i`$ for some $`n_i0`$ and $`f:f^1(Y_i)Y_i`$ is the projection. Then

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(X)=\mathrm{\Phi }(Y).$$

Assertion $`E_n`$. Let $`X`$ be a variety of dimension $`n`$ and $`YX`$ a closed subvariety. Then

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(X)=\mathrm{\Phi }(Y)+\mathrm{\Phi }(XY).$$

Assertion $`F_n`$. Let $`X`$,$`Y`$ be varieties such that $`\text{dim}X+\text{dim}Yn`$, then

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(X\times Y)=\mathrm{\Phi }(X)\mathrm{\Phi }(Y).$$

We will use the following logic in proving the theorem. Assume that $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is constructed according to Constructions $`A_{n1}`$, $`B_{n1}`$, $`C_{n1}`$, Construction $`B_{n1}`$ is unambiguous, and Assertions $`D_{n1}`$, $`E_{n1}`$, $`F_{n1}`$ are proved. Then, in particular, $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is defined on all classes $`[X]`$ of varieties $`X`$ of dimension $`n1`$ in such a way that

1) $`\mathrm{\Phi }(X)=\mathrm{\Psi }(X)`$ if $`X`$ is irreducible, smooth, and complete.

2) $`\mathrm{\Phi }(X)=\mathrm{\Phi }(Y)+\mathrm{\Phi }(XY)`$ if $`YX`$ is a closed.

3) $`\mathrm{\Phi }(X\times Y)=\mathrm{\Phi }(X)\mathrm{\Phi }(Y)`$ if $`\text{dim}X+\text{dim}Yn1`$.

We extend $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ by linearity to linear combinations of such classes. Then we use Definitions $`A_n`$, $`B_n`$, $`C_n`$ to extend $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ to classes of varieties of dimension $`n`$ and prove Assertions $`D_n`$, $`E_n`$, $`F_n`$ which are needed to ensure that Definition $`B_n`$ is unambiguous and that this extension of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ satisfies the properties 1),2),3) above. This will prove the existence statement of the theorem. The uniqueness is clear since classes of smooth complete irreducible varieties generate the group $`K_0[𝒱_{}]`$.

Base case. We can use Definitions $`A_0`$, $`B_0`$, $`C_0`$ without ambiguity, and Assertions $`D_0`$, $`E_0`$, $`F_0`$ obviously hold.

Induction step $`(n1)n`$. Assume that the map $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ has been defined using Constructions $`A_{n1}`$, $`B_{n1}`$, $`C_{n1}`$, Construction $`B_{n1}`$ is unambiguous, and Assertions $`D_{n1}`$, $`E_{n1}`$, $`F_{n1}`$ are true.

Let $`X`$ be an irreducible smooth complete variety of dimension $`n`$. Then define $`\mathrm{\Phi }(X)`$ according to $`A_n`$.

Let $`X`$ be a smooth $`n`$-dimensional variety. Use $`B_n`$ to define $`\mathrm{\Phi }(X)`$. We prove that it is independent of the choice of smooth compactifications (such compactifications exist by Hironaka’s theorem). We may assume that $`X`$ is irreducible. Let $`X\overline{X}`$, $`X\overline{X}^{}`$ be two open embeddings with $`\overline{X}`$, $`\overline{X}^{}`$ smooth and complete. Put $`Y:=\overline{X}X`$, $`Y^{}:=\overline{X}^{}`$. We need to show that $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\overline{X})\mathrm{\Phi }(Y)=\mathrm{\Phi }(\overline{X}^{})\mathrm{\Phi }(Y^{})`$. Since $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is a birational invariant, Construction $`A_n`$ implies $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\overline{X})=\mathrm{\Phi }(\overline{X}^{})`$. So it remains to show that $`\mathrm{\Phi }(Y)=\mathrm{\Phi }(Y^{})`$. By the Theorem 2.2 we may reduce to the case that there exists a morphism $`f:\overline{X}^{}\overline{X}`$ which is a blowup with a smooth center $`ZY`$. Then by Remark C above the map $`f:f^1(Z)Z`$ is a Zariski locally trivial fibration with fibre $`^k`$. So by $`D_{n1}`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }(Y)=\mathrm{\Phi }(Y^{})`$. This justifies the definition $`B_n`$.

Now for a general $`n`$-dimensional variety $`X`$ we define $`\mathrm{\Phi }(X)`$ according to $`C_n`$.

It remains to prove the Assertions $`D_n`$, $`E_n`$, $`F_n`$. For a variety $`W`$ put $`W^{ns}:=WW^{sing}`$.

Proof of $`E_n`$. Let $`X`$ be a variety of dimension $`n`$ and $`YX`$ be a closed subvariety. Put $`U:=XY`$. We need to prove that $`\mathrm{\Phi }(X)=\mathrm{\Phi }(U)+\mathrm{\Phi }(Y)`$.

Assume first that $`X`$ is smooth. If $`W`$ is any variety and $`W_1,\mathrm{},W_s`$ are the connected components of $`W`$, then by Constructions $`B_n`$ and $`C_n`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }(W)=\mathrm{\Phi }(W_i)`$. So we may assume that X is connected. If $`\text{dim}Y=n`$, then $`U=\mathrm{}`$ and we are done. So assume that $`\text{dim}Y<n`$. Let $`X\overline{X}`$ be a smooth compactification of $`X`$, $`Z:=\overline{X}X`$, $`S:=\overline{X}U=ZY`$. Then by Construction $`B_n`$,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(X)=\mathrm{\Phi }(\overline{X})\mathrm{\Phi }(Z),\mathrm{\Phi }(U)=\mathrm{\Phi }(\overline{X})\mathrm{\Phi }(S).$$

By $`E_{n1}`$ $`\mathrm{\Phi }(S)=\mathrm{\Phi }(Z)+\mathrm{\Phi }(Y)`$. So

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(X)=\mathrm{\Phi }(U)+\mathrm{\Phi }(Y).$$

Now let $`X`$ be any variety. We have

$$U^{sing}=X^{sing}U,U^{ns}=X^{ns}U.$$

By $`C_n`$,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(X)=\mathrm{\Phi }(X^{ns})+\mathrm{\Phi }(X^{sing}),$$

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(U)=\mathrm{\Phi }(U^{ns})+\mathrm{\Phi }(U^{sing}).$$

By the argument above,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(X^{ns})=\mathrm{\Phi }(U^{ns})+\mathrm{\Phi }(YX^{ns}),$$

and therefore

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(X)=\mathrm{\Phi }(U)\mathrm{\Phi }(U^{sing})+\mathrm{\Phi }(YX^{ns})+\mathrm{\Phi }(X^{sing}).$$

So it remains to prove that

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(Y)=\mathrm{\Phi }(X^{sing})+\mathrm{\Phi }(YX^{ns})\mathrm{\Phi }(U^{sing}).$$

Since $`X^{sing}=U^{sing}(YX^{sing})`$, by $`E_{n1}`$,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(X^{sing})=\mathrm{\Phi }(U^{sing})+\mathrm{\Phi }(YX^{sing}).$$

So it suffices to prove that $`\mathrm{\Phi }(Y)=\mathrm{\Phi }(YX^{ns})+\mathrm{\Phi }(YX^{sing})`$. The last equality is $`E_n`$ with $`X,Y,U`$ replaced by $`Y,YX^{sing},YX^{ns}`$. Since we may assume that $`Y`$ is a proper subset of $`X`$ the proof is finished by Noetherian induction on $`X`$.

Proof of $`F_n`$. Let $`X,Y`$ be varieties such that $`\text{dim}X+\text{dim}Y=n`$. We need to prove that $`\mathrm{\Phi }(X\times Y)=\mathrm{\Phi }(X)\mathrm{\Phi }(Y)`$. If $`\text{dim}Y=0`$, then we are done. So may assume that $`\text{dim}X,\text{dim}Y1`$. By $`E_n`$ we have

$`\mathrm{\Phi }(X\times Y)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Phi }(X^{ns}\times Y^{ns})+\mathrm{\Phi }(X^{ns}\times Y^{sing})`$
$`+\mathrm{\Phi }(X^{sing}\times Y^{ns})+\mathrm{\Phi }(X^{sing}\times Y^{sing}),`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }(X)\mathrm{\Phi }(Y)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Phi }(X^{ns})\mathrm{\Phi }(Y^{ns})+\mathrm{\Phi }(X^{ns})\mathrm{\Phi }(Y^{sing})`$
$`+\mathrm{\Phi }(X^{sing})\mathrm{\Phi }(Y^{ns})+\mathrm{\Phi }(X^{sing})\mathrm{\Phi }(Y^{sing}).`$
Hence by $`F_{n1}`$ we may assume that $`X,Y`$ are smooth (and connected). Let $`X\overline{X}`$, $`Y\overline{Y}`$ be smooth compactifications of $`X,Y`$, $`X^{}:=\overline{X}X`$, $`Y^{}:=\overline{Y}Y`$. Again by $`E_n`$,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\overline{X})\mathrm{\Phi }(\overline{Y})=\mathrm{\Phi }(X)\mathrm{\Phi }(Y)+\mathrm{\Phi }(X)\mathrm{\Phi }(Y^{})+\mathrm{\Phi }(X^{})\mathrm{\Phi }(Y)+\mathrm{\Phi }(X^{})\mathrm{\Phi }(Y^{}),$$

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\overline{X}\times \overline{Y})=\mathrm{\Phi }(X\times Y)+\mathrm{\Phi }(X\times Y^{})+\mathrm{\Phi }(X^{}\times Y)+\mathrm{\Phi }(X^{}\times Y^{}).$$

We have $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\overline{X}\times \overline{Y})=\mathrm{\Phi }(\overline{X})\mathrm{\Phi }(\overline{Y})`$, since $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is multiplicative. Now using $`F_{n1}`$ we conclude that $`\mathrm{\Phi }(X\times Y)=\mathrm{\Phi }(X)\mathrm{\Phi }(Y).`$

Proof of $`D_n`$. Using $`E_n`$ repeatedly we may assume that $`X=Y\times ^k`$ and $`f:XY`$ is the projection. Then by $`F_n`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }(X)=\mathrm{\Phi }(Y)\mathrm{\Phi }(^k)`$, and $`\mathrm{\Phi }(^k)=\mathrm{\Psi }(^k)=1`$. ∎

###### Remark 2.4.

The Grothendieck group $`K_0[𝒱_{}]`$ is generated by classes of smooth complete varieties. In \[L\] Looijenga asserts that it suffices to consider the following relations: let $`X,Y`$ be smooth complete and $`f:XY`$ be a morphism which is a blowup with a smooth center $`ZY`$; then

$$[X][f^1(Z)]=[Y][Z].$$

This is a strong result, which immediately implies our Theorem 2.3. Indeed, $`f^1(Z)`$ is birational to $`Z\times ^k`$. So by the hypotheses of Theorem 2.3, $`\mathrm{\Psi }(X)=\mathrm{\Psi }(Y)`$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }(f^1(Z))=\mathrm{\Psi }(Z\times ^k)=\mathrm{\Psi }(Z)`$. Therefore the desired ring homomorphism $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ exists. However, since we could not produce a proof of Looijenga’s result, we chose to give an argument that does not depend on it. (Looijenga informs us that a proof is being written up by one of his students.)

### 2.5. The universal homomorphism $`\mathrm{\Psi }:G`$

There exists a universal homomorphism of monoids $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ which satisfies the hypotheses of Theorem 2.3. Namely, recall that varieties $`X,Y`$ are stably birational if $`X\times ^k`$ and $`Y\times ^l`$ are birational for some $`k,l0`$. Denote by $`SB`$ the multiplicative monoid of stable birational equivalence classes of varieties. We have a tautological (surjective) homomorphism $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{SB}:SB`$ which satisfies the hypotheses (i),(ii) of Theorem 2.3 (with $`\mathrm{\Psi }=\mathrm{\Psi }_{SB}`$, $`G=SB`$). By definition any homomorphism $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ as in the theorem factors through $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{SB}`$. Denote by $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{SB}:K_0[𝒱_{}][SB]`$ the ring homomophism corresponding to $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{SB}`$ by the theorem. We obtain the following immediate corollary.

###### Corollary 2.6.

Let $`X_1,\mathrm{}X_k`$, $`Y_1,\mathrm{}Y_m`$ be smooth complete varieties. Let $`m_i,n_j`$ be such that

$$m_i[X_i]=n_j[Y_j]$$

in $`K_0[𝒱_{}]`$. Then $`k=m`$ and after renumbering the varieties $`X_i`$ and $`Y_i`$ are stably birational and $`m_i=n_i`$.

*Proof.*  Applying the ring homomorphism $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{SB}`$ to the above equality we obtain the equality in the monoid ring $`[SB]`$:

$$m_i\mathrm{\Psi }_{SB}(X_i)=n_j\mathrm{\Psi }_{SB}(Y_j)$$

and the proposition follows. ∎

The above corollary means that any variety is a unique (up to a stable birational equivalence) linear combination (in $`K_0[𝒱_{}]`$) of smooth complete varieties. This is in the spirit of the basic Question formulated in the introduction. The difference is, of course, that instead of cutting varieties in pieces we complete and resolve singularities.

The next proposition clarifies the relation between the Grothendieck ring $`K_0[𝒱_{}]`$ and the monoid ring $`[SB]`$.

###### Proposition 2.7.

The kernel of the (surjective) homomorphism $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{SB}:K_0[𝒱_{}][SB]`$ is the principal ideal generated by the class $`[𝔸^1]`$ of the affine line $`𝔸^1`$.

*Proof.*  Since $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{SB}([^1])=\mathrm{\Phi }_{SB}([1]+[𝔸^1])=1`$, we have $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{SB}([𝔸^1])=0`$.

Let $`a\mathrm{Ker}(\mathrm{\Phi }_{SB})`$. Express $`a`$ as a linear combination

$$a=[X_1]+\mathrm{}+[X_k][Y_1]\mathrm{}[Y_l],$$

where $`X_i`$, $`Y_j`$ are smooth and complete. Since

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{SB}(a)=\mathrm{\Psi }_{SB}(X_i)\mathrm{\Psi }_{SB}(Y_j)=0,$$

we get $`k=l`$ and, after renumbering, $`X_i`$ is stably birational to $`Y_i`$. Thus it suffices to show that if $`X`$, $`Y`$ are smooth, complete, and stably birational, then $`[X][Y]K_0[𝒱_{}][𝔸^1]`$. Note that

$$[X\times ^k][X]=[X][𝔸^1+𝔸^2+\mathrm{}+𝔸^k],$$

so we may assume that $`[X]`$ and $`[Y]`$ are birational. Moreover by Theorem 2.2 we may assume that $`X`$ is a blowup of $`Y`$ with a smooth center $`ZY`$ and exceptional divisor $`EX`$. Then $`[E]=[^t][Z]`$ for some $`t`$ and

$$[X][Y]=[E][Z]=([𝔸^1]+[𝔸^2]+\mathrm{}+[𝔸^t])[Z].$$

The next proposition “explains” the role of $`𝔸^1`$ in birational geometry.

###### Proposition 2.8.

Let $`\alpha :K_0[𝒱_{}]B`$ be a ring homomorphism (i.e. $`\alpha `$ is a motivic measure). The following conditions are equivalent:

i) $`\alpha ([𝔸^1])=0`$,

ii) if smooth complete varieties $`X`$, $`Y`$ are birational, then $`\alpha ([X])=\alpha ([Y])`$.

If these conditions hold, then $`\alpha ([Z])=\alpha ([W])`$ for any smooth complete varieties $`Z`$, $`W`$ which are stably birationally equivalent

*Proof.*  Assume i). Then $`\alpha `$ factors through the homomorphism $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{SB}`$ and ii) follows. Assume ii). Let $`\stackrel{~}{X}X`$ be a blowup of a smooth complete surface at a point. Then $`[\stackrel{~}{X}]=[X]+[𝔸^1]`$ and hence $`\alpha ([𝔸^1])=0`$.

To prove the last assertion note that $`\alpha ([𝔸^1])=0`$ implies that $`\alpha ([^n])=1`$. ∎

The last assertion of the proposition means that birational motivic measures are automatically stably birational.

## 3. Irrationality of the zeta-function

### 3.1. The motivic measure $`\mu _h:K_0[𝒱_{}]`$

Let $`C[t]`$ be the multiplicative monoid of polymonials with a positive leading coefficient. Consider the corresponding monoid ring $`[C]`$.

###### Lemma 3.2.

The ring $`[C]`$ is an integral domain.

*Proof.*  The ring $`[t]`$ is factorial and any element of $`C`$ is a unique product of elements of $`C`$, which are prime in $`[t]`$ (the only unit in $`C`$ is 1). Thus $`C`$ is isomorphic to the group $``$, where the summation is over all prime elements of $`[t]`$. Hence $`[C]`$ is a polynomial ring, so it is an integral domain. ∎

###### Definition 3.3.

Let $``$ be the field of fractions of $`[C]`$.

###### Definition 3.4.

For a smooth projective irreducible complex variety $`X`$ of dimension $`d`$ define

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_h(X):=1+h^{1,0}(X)t+\mathrm{}+h^{d,0}(X)t^dC.$$

For any smooth complete complex irreducible variety $`Z`$ put $`\mathrm{\Psi }_h(Z)=\mathrm{\Psi }_h(X)`$, where $`X`$ is a smooth projective variety which is birational to $`Z`$. It is well known that if smooth projective varieties $`X`$ and $`Y`$ are birational then $`\mathrm{\Psi }_h(X)=\mathrm{\Psi }_h(Y)`$ (\[Ha\], Ch. 2, Exercise 8.8). Therefore $`\mathrm{\Psi }_h`$ is well defined. The Künneth formula implies that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_h`$ is a homomorphism from the multiplicative monoid $``$ of isomorphism classes of smooth complete irreducible varieties to $`C`$. It satisfies the hypotheses of Theorem 2.3. Thus it extends to a motivic measure

$$\mu _h:K_0[𝒱_{}].$$

###### Definition 3.5.

For a smooth projective irreducible variety $`X`$ of dimension $`d`$ denote as usual

$$P_g(X)=h^{d,0}(X)=h^0(X,\omega _X),$$

where $`\omega _X`$ is the canonical line bundle on $`X`$. For an arbitrary irreducible variety $`Z`$ of dimension $`d`$ put

$$P_g(Z):=P_g(X),$$

where $`X`$ is any smooth projective variety in the birational class of $`Z`$. Thus $`P_g`$ becomes a multiplicative function from the collection of isomorphism classes of irreducible varieties to natural numbers.

###### Lemma 3.6.

Let $`Y_1,\mathrm{}Y_s,Z`$ be irreducible varieties of dimension $`d`$. Assume that $`\mu _h([Z])=n_i\mu _h([Y_i])`$ for some $`n_i`$. If $`P_g(Z)0`$, then $`P_g(Z)=P_g(Y_i)`$ for some $`i`$.

*Proof.*  Note that for any irreducible variety $`W`$ of dimension $`d`$ we have the equality in $`K_0[𝒱_{}]`$

$$[W]=[\overline{W}]+m_j[W_j],$$

where $`\overline{W}`$ is a smooth projective variety in the birational class of $`W`$ and $`W_j`$’s are smooth projective varieties of dimension $`<d`$. Thus replacing $`Y_1,\mathrm{},Y_s,Z`$ by smooth projective varieties $`\overline{Y}_1,\mathrm{},\overline{Y}_s,\overline{Z}`$ from the same birational class we obtain an equality

$$\mu _h([\overline{Z}])=n_i\mu _h([\overline{Y}_i])+l_\beta \mu _h([X_\beta ])$$

for some $`l_\beta `$ and some smooth projective irreducible varieties $`X_\beta `$ of dimension $`<d`$. By definition this means

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_h(\overline{Z})=n_i\mathrm{\Psi }_h(\overline{Y}_i)+l_\beta \mathrm{\Psi }_h(X_\beta ),$$

and the lemma follows. ∎

###### Theorem 3.7.

Consider the motivic measure $`\mu _h:K_0[𝒱_{}]`$. Let $`X`$ be a smooth complex projective surface. Assume that $`P_g(X)2`$. Then the zeta function $`\zeta _{\mu _h}(X,t)`$ is not rational.

*Proof.*  For a variety $`Y`$ we will write for short $`\mu (Y)=\mu _h([Y])`$. Let $`X`$ be as in the theorem and assume that the zeta-function

$$\zeta _{\mu _h}(X,t)=1+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\mu (X^{(n)})[[t]]$$

is rational. Recall the following characterization of rational power series (with coefficients in a field). A power series $`a_it^i`$ is a rational function if and only if there exist $`n>0`$, $`n_0>0`$ such that for each $`m>n_0`$ the determinant of the matrix

$$\left(\begin{array}{cccc}a_m& a_{m+1}& \mathrm{}& a_{m+n}\\ a_{m+1}& a_{m+2}& \mathrm{}& a_{m+n+1}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ a_{m+n}& a_{m+n+1}& \mathrm{}& a_{m+2n}\end{array}\right)$$

is zero.

In case $`a_it^i=\zeta _{\mu _h}(X,t)`$ this equality implies

($``$)
$$\underset{\sigma S_{n+1}}{}\mathrm{sign}(\sigma )\mu \left(X^{(m1+\sigma (1))}\times X^{(m+\sigma (2))}\times \mathrm{}\times X^{(m+n1+\sigma (n+1))}\right)=0.$$

Note that the summand $`\mu \left(X^{(m)}\times X^{(m+2)}\times \mathrm{}\times X^{(m+2n)}\right)`$ appears exactly once.

Claim. There exists $`m>0`$ such that

$$P_g\left(X^{(m)}\times \mathrm{}\times X^{(m+2n)}\right)=P_g\left(X^{(m1+\sigma (1))}\times \mathrm{}\times X^{(m+n1+\sigma (n+1))}\right)$$

implies that $`\sigma `$ is the identity permutation.

Assuming the claim we apply Lemma 3.6 with $`Z=X^{(m)}\times X^{(m+2)}\times \mathrm{}\times X^{(m+2n)}`$ and $`Y_j`$’s being the other summands in ($``$). We get a contradiction and the theorem follows. So it remains to prove the claim.

###### Lemma 3.8.

Let $`r=P_g(X)`$. Then

$$P_g(X^{(n)})=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{r+n1}{r1}\right).$$

Assume the lemma and let us prove the claim. By our assumption $`r=P_g(X)2`$, so

$`P_g\left(X^{(m1+\sigma (1))}\times X^{(m+\sigma (2))}\times \mathrm{}\times X^{(m+n1+\sigma (n+1))}\right)`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{n}{}}}P_g\left(X^{(m+j1+\sigma (j+1))}\right)`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(r1)!^{n+1}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{n}{}}}(m+r+j2+\sigma (j+1))\mathrm{}(m+j+\sigma (j+1)).`$
Therefore the multiset $`\{i+\sigma (i)i=1,\mathrm{},n+1\}`$ is determined by the expression for geometric genus, regarded as a polynomial in $`m`$. This proves the claim and the theorem. ∎

Proof of the lemma. Consider the quotient morphism $`\pi :X^nX^{(n)}`$. Then $`H^i(X^{(n)},)=H^i(X^n,)^{S_n}`$, where the action of $`S_n`$ on $`H^i(X^n,)`$ is twisted by the sign if $`i`$ is odd. Clearly, the $`S_n`$-action preserves the subspaces $`H^{p,q}(X,)`$. The embedding $`H^{}(X^{(n)},)H^{}(X^n,)`$ is a morphism of mixed Hodge structures; thus the Hodge structure on $`H^{}(X^{(n)},)`$ is, in fact, pure and

$$H^{p,q}(X^{(n)},)=H^{p,q}(X^n,)^{S_n}.$$

In particular,

$$H^{2n,0}(X^{(n)},)=Sym^nH^{2,0}(X,),$$

and

$$h^{2n,0}(X^{(n)})=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{r+n1}{r1}\right).$$

It remains to prove that $`P_g(X^{(n)})=h^{2n,0}(X^{(n)})`$, i.e. $`h^{2n,0}(\stackrel{~}{X})=h^{2n,0}(X^{(n)})`$ for a resolution of singularities $`\stackrel{~}{X}X`$.

Denote by $`X^{[n]}`$ the $`n`$th Hilbert scheme parametrizing closed zero-dimensional subschemes of length $`n`$ of $`X`$. It is known that $`X^{[n]}`$ is a smooth projective variety of dimension $`2n`$ and there exists a natural map $`\pi :X^{[n]}X^{(n)}`$ which is a resolution of singularities (\[Na\]). Let us show that $`h^{2n,0}(X^{[n]})=h^{2n,0}(X^{(n)})`$. This follows immediately from the result of L. Gottsche and W. Soergel which computes the Hodge structure on the cohomology $`H^{}(X^{[n]},)`$. Let $`P(n)`$ be the set of partitions of $`n`$. We can write $`\alpha P(n)`$ as $`n=\alpha _11+\mathrm{}+\alpha _rr`$. Put $`|\alpha |=\alpha _i`$, $`X^{(\alpha )}=X^{(\alpha _1)}\times \mathrm{}\times X^{(\alpha _r)}`$.

###### Theorem 3.9.

(\[GS\]). There exists a canonical isomorphism of mixed Hodge structures

$$H^{i+2n}(X^{[n]},)(n)=\underset{\alpha P(n)}{}H^{i+2|\alpha |}(X^{(\alpha )},)(|\alpha |).$$

Here $`(1)`$ is the one-dimensional Hodge structure of weight $`2`$ and bidegree $`(1,1)`$. The proof of this theorem is based on the decomposition theorem for mixed Hodge modules.

Note that $`\text{dim}X^{(\alpha )}=2|\alpha |`$. Since the Hodge structure $`H^{}(X^{(\alpha )},)`$ is a substructure of $`H^{}(X^{\alpha _1}\times \mathrm{}\times X^{\alpha _r},)`$, it does not contain a summand $`H^{p,q}`$, unless $`|pq|2|\alpha |`$. The same remains true after a twist by a tensor power of $`(1)`$. Therefore the only summand on the RHS which contributes to $`H^{2n,0}(X^{[n]},)(n)`$ is $`H^{0+2n}(X^{(n)},)(n)`$. This proves the lemma.


format: text

text:
# Carbon Nanotube - Substrate Interface Interactions

\[

## Abstract

By utilizing the current transients in scanning tunneling spectroscopy, the local interfacial electronics between multiwalled carbon nanotubes and several supporting substrates has been investigated. Voltage offsets in the tunneling spectra are directly correlated with the formation of a dipole layer at the nanotube-substrate interface strongly suggesting the formation of interface states. Further, a systematic variation in this local potential, as a function of tube diameter, is observed for both metallic substrates (Au) and semi-metallic substrates (graphite). In both cases, tubes with diameters between $``$ 5 nm and 30 nm, the interfacial potential is nearly constant as a function of tube diameter. However, for tube diameters $`<`$ 5 nm, a dramatic change in the local potential is observed. Using ab initio techniques, this diameter dependent electronic interaction is shown to derive from changes in the tube-substrate hybridization that results from the curvature of the nanotubes.

\]

Over the last several years, an astonishing number of experimental determinations of the electronic transport properties of single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWNTs) and multiwalled carbon nanotubes (MWNTs) have been made  and correlated with a number of theoretical predictions. With only a few exceptions, the experimental focus has been on nanotubes supported on a substrate of some type, and in all cases a system of contacts has been employed using traditional interconnect materials such as Cu, Au, Pt, and Ag. Thus, all the experimental information we currently have on the electronics of carbon nanotubes involves experimental designs that use metal/semiconductor-nanotube interfaces and in most cases these interfaces include the length of the tube through the support. Clearly an important part of any interpretation of transport results must include interactions that may exist between the nanotube and the support substrate / contacts. Recent theoretical studies have addressed Fermi-level alignment in Au-SWNT systems and suggested that a charge transfer should exist at the interface.  Similarly, some tunneling spectroscopy experiments have hinted at the existence of charge transfer between the gold and nanotube systems.  However, despite the importance of local interface interactions in transport measurements, no direct determinations of its variation with tube diameter, tube chirality, etc. is yet available. In this letter we present an investigation of the interfacial electronic structure between MWNTs and a number of support substrates using current transients in scanning tunneling spectroscopy (STS). These studies strongly suggest that charge transfer at the metal/MWNT interface results from the formation of interface states in analogy to bulk Schottky barriers. Further, the variation of local interface potentials with tube diameter is nearly constant as expected for large diameter tubes. However, a surprisingly large variation in interface potentials occurs at tube diameters smaller than approximately 5 nm. These variations results from differences in local hybridization at the metal-nanotube interface caused by the different curvatures of the nanotube walls.

Measurements of the contact potential of three support substrates will be described and compared here; NiO, Au, and HOPG (highly oriented pyrolytic graphite). In the first case, the NiO substrates are thin oxide films (5.0 nm) thermally grown on single crystal (111) Ni. In the second case, Au was sputter deposited on annealed Mica and then “flamed” leaving a terraced (111) surface for contact with the tubes. STM imaging of these substrates yielded atomic resolution. After substrate preparation, arc grown MWNTs, ultrasonically dispersed in ethanol for 5 minutes, were deposited. The sample was transferred into UHV (ultra high vacuum, $`<`$ 10 <sup>-10</sup> torr) and out-gassed at 300 C while adsorbate desorption was monitored to insure that the substrate was clean. Tunneling conditions used for STM imaging were 20 pA and between 200 to 500 mV. In the case of HOPG substrates, HOPG was cleaved in air and an ultrasonicated solution of nanotubes in ethanol was deposited as above. STM imaging at 20 pA and 300 mV allowed atomic resolution of the substrate and of the supported tubes. Transmission electron microscopy images were correlated to STM micrographs to insure the same distribution of diameters of the MWNTs was observed (approximately 2 nm to 30 nm). Z-scale calibration of the STM was carried out using known step heights of the Au (111) surface. Finally, work function determinations were compared to the reported values over the clean substrates as a check of Z calibration.

To investigate the nanotube-substrate interface, tunneling spectra (IV) were acquired both on the clean support substrate and at points on the tube, simultaneously with imaging. In our case, the spectra are acquired by turning off the feed back over the point of interest, ramping the voltage very rapidly, and collecting the current. The rapid ramp rate of the voltage results in current transients that offset the tunneling spectra as shown in Fig. 1a. The RC time constants associated with capacitances, contact potentials, filter, etc. in the tunneling microscope are very short compared to those of the tunneling junction. Therefore, the transient-induced shift in the IV spectra can be associated only with capacitances and potentials within the tunneling junction. The current-axis intercept point (V=0) is well known to be related to the capacitance of the junction from the equation q= VC, giving dq/dt = CdV/dt + VdC/dt = CdV/dt. The point at which the spectrum crosses the V axis (I=0) is the related to the local potentials across the junction and corresponds to the bias offset for which the microscope must compensate to prevent the “discharge” of the junction. This includes the voltage drop across the tip-sample capacitor, as well as any local potentials such as the contact potentials. The spectra and intercepts for a 22.0 nm diameter tube supported on Au are shown in Fig. 1a.

Naturally, we would expect that the comparatively large potentials associated with the capacitive junction and the work function mismatch of the substrate and the Pt tip would dominate the IV shift. That is, when a nanotube is placed in the tunneling junction it would have little effect outside of changing the junction capacitance through geometry (which would be negligible). This is illustrated in the energy diagram of Fig. 2. Clearly, the contact potentials within the junction-nanotube system will cancel the nanotube component as: ($`\varphi _{substrate}`$ \- $`\varphi _{tube}`$) + ($`\varphi _{tube}`$ \- $`\varphi _{tip}`$) = $`\varphi _{substrate}`$ \- $`\varphi _{tip}`$. However, notice that the intercepts in Fig. 1a for the clean Au surface and the nanotube-Au system are significantly different. In fact, the same is true for the NiO-MWNT system using 20 nm diameter nanotubes. Specifically, in the Au-nanotube system, with a 10 ms voltage step time (the step width during the voltage ramp) and a 3 ms sample delay time (see reference 11), a 20 nm nanotube will exhibit a difference in V-intercept shift of 0.075 from that measured on the clean substrate (just subtracting the two intercepts). In the NiO system, using the same ramping conditions, the shift difference is 0.170 V! For HOPG substrates, large diameter nanotubes give the same value of the voltage offset as the clean substrate. This suggests that there exists local trapped charge at the Au and NiO - nanotube interfaces while at the HOPG - nanotube interface there are no extra potentials. Using an analogy to bulk contacts, these interfaces then behave as though there are interface states formed between the nanotubes and the substrates (the rapidly ramped IV is somewhat analogous to capacitance voltage (CV) curves). No such interface states appear in the HOPG-nanotube system for large diameter tubes as would be expected since this looks very much like graphite on graphite.

Twenty tubes supported by Au were studied in this way with diameters that ranged from approximately 3 nm to 30 nm. The step width used in the voltage ramp was 100 ms and the delay time was 5 ms. The difference in voltage shifts from the support substrate was determined for these tubes by the method above (subtracting the voltage intercept with the tip over the clean substrate from the intercept with the tip over the tube) and is shown in Fig. 1b as a function of tube diameter. Notice that from approximately 10 nm to 30 nm diameter, this difference is practically constant. Between 5 and 10 nm diameters, there is a strong variation in the difference in voltage intercepts. Below 5 nm the differences in the intercepts actually reverses sign! Again, we note that this measurement gives the relative variation in the local potential at the nanotube - substrate interface. Clearly, as the nanotube diameter changes, the local potential varies sharply and actually reverses sign at 5 nm. Fig. 1b also shows similar measurements performed on HOPG substrates. While the overall difference in the voltage intercepts is 0 V for large nanotubes as expected, a sharp variation in the local potential is observed at around 5 nm also. On HOPG, fewer tubes were studied (six), and we note that the values for the larger tubes are not exactly 0 eV as would be expected (graphite on graphite) due to the slight difference in the capacitance between the tip-substrate and the tip-nanotube-substrate junctions.

To understand this behavior, there are two geometrical factors that must be estimated. The first is the variation in the contact area of the tube to the substrate. This changes with tube diameter and will alter the total charge at the interface in direct proportion to the diameter. A simple estimate of the change in contact area requires a guess as to how close the tube wall must be to be considered in contact. We label this parameter “h”. From simple geometrical arguments we get: area of contact/(unit length) = (2R)cos-1 ((R-h)/R). “h” must be of the order of the pz orbitals (0.1 nm). The second geometrical factor to consider is the effect of the tube diameter on junction capacitance. The capacitance change for the tip-tube-substrate geometry was calculated using classical electrostatics. The total variation in junction capacitance was smoothly varying for tubes of the diameter used in our measurements and also quite small. Thus, we assume in this measurement that this effect is nearly constant. While these geometrical factors could clearly account for the smoothly varying potential associated with large tube diameters, they fail to explain the drastic changes observed below 5 nm. Further, these can not account for the observed sign changes in the potential. This suggests that the local charge at the nanotube-substrate interface varies strongly with tube diameter. Further, it is likely that these variations result from changes in the interface electronic structure such as hybridization shifts, shifts in local orbital occupancy, or interlayer interactions and not geometric factors.

The results in Fig. 1b point to the existence of trapped charge at the nanotube-substrate interface. This charge is beyond what would normally be found in the Schottky compensation for workfunction mismatch and must be related to a state that exists at that interface but not found at the tunneling junction (nanotube - Pt). In the regime of large tube diameters, it seems that such states form in the case of NiO and Au - nanotube contacts, but not in the case of HOPG - nanotube interfaces. However, to address the transition from large-diameter limit to small-diameter limit, we have performed first-principles pseudopotential density-functional calculations of a perfect SWNT (5,5) supported on a Au (111) surface and on a graphite surface and compared this to the electronic structure of a single graphene sheet on top of both substrates (Our model for the large diameter limit). For the case of a graphene sheet on gold, we clearly observe the formation of a simple Schottky barrier dipole Fig. 3a. This result is independent of the relative orientation of the graphene sheet with respect to the gold substrate. The computed graphene work function of 4.42 eV is very close to the HOPG values and it is smaller than the computed work function of Au, 5.3 eV. We have also checked that as we increase the number of graphene layers, the work function increases with a small (few meV) dependence on stacking (AB versus AA or random) sequence. (A small, negative, contact potential for large diameter MWNTs on HOPG will result from this difference in work functions due to the random nature of the tube-layer stacking). This is compared to the formation of an interface potential at the small diameter nanotube - Au contact shown in Fig. 3b. Because the contact “distance” is not well determined, the graphs compare the corresponding one-electron effective potential for two distances of the tube with respect to the substrate (0.22 and 0.34 nm). In both cases we see that the small diameter nanotube on Au develops the opposite barrier height in the vacuum region as that of the graphene sheet on Au. Between these two extremes, as the nanotube’s radii are increased, there should be a transition from one polarity to the other. This distinct behavior could explain the observed change of sign in the local interface potential. Physically, there is a charge distribution at the interface that leads to either covalent-like or ionic-like bonding states. The redistribution of charge density is still observable in the effective potential even for a tube far from the Au (111) surface (dashed line in Fig. 3b). This electronic charge distribution and effective electronic screening is controlled by the overlap between gold d-states and the outer (interlayer and surface) tube states. These results assume perfect tubes and that the outer layer is the only important one as suggested by other studies on electronic transport in MWNTs. Contributing to this interface charge redistribution is the opening of small pseudogaps at the Fermi level as a consequence of breaking the tube-mirror symmetry. Recently, charge density redistribution has been shown theoretically to align the Fermi-level at the metal-carbon nanotube interface and its influences on STM spectroscopy have been explored. We note that these authors work in the limit of large tube diameter where the difference in work functions is the key component determining the contact potential. Further, as argued above, to first order the overall effect of the nanotube in the tunneling junction cancels (aside from capacitive effects) unless state-induced Fermi-level pinning occurs at the interface.

In the case of the HOPG substrate, the bonding is weaker as seen from the effective potential plotted in Fig. 3c for small diameter tubes. No Schottky-like dipole is observed for the particular set of relative orientations chosen. However, the vacuum plateau is a little above the zero of energy that we have taken as the graphitic vacuum level. This indicates the possible change of sign in the contact potential with respect to the case where a single graphene sheet is deposited on graphite. Moreover, we can speculate that tube-substrate interactions might play a significantly different role in formation of interface states when the tube lies in registry with the substrate. However, this is still an open question to be resolved in further studies.

In summary, we have related local potentials at the interfaces between MWNTs and Au, HOPG, and NiO substrates to the formation of interface states using current transients in rapidly ramped tunneling spectroscopy. Sharp variations in these potentials are observed on Au and HOPG substrates for tube diameters of around 5 nm. These measurements indicate that the contact electronic structure is strongly influenced by variations in the electronic structure of the nanotube as a function of tube diameter. From first principles calculations, we demonstrate changes in s-p hybridization as a function of tube diameter will lead to differences in the charge distribution at the nano-tube-substrate interface. In turn, this results in modifications to the occupation of interfaces states and leads to the trends observed in the interface potentials.

The authors would like to acknowledge funding from the following agencies: DLC (NSF), PMA (SIA/DARPA through the focus center research program established at RPI). A.R. (support from the European RTN network contract HPRN-CT-2000-00128 (COMELCAN), RTD-FET program (SATUNET) and JCyL (VA28/99)).


text:
# Massive Star Birth in the Inner Galaxy: Obscured Massive Star Clusters

## 1. Introduction

Near infrared (1–2.5 $`\mu `$m) spectroscopic classification techniques have recently been developed for OB stars (Hanson, Conti, & Rieke 1996; Blum et al. 1997, Hanson, Rieke, & Luhman 1998) and Wolf–Rayet (WR) stars (e.g., Eenens, Williams, & Wade 1991; Figer, McLean, & Morris 1997). Coupled with infrared spectrometers on large telescopes, these classification schemes are now pushing forward the exploration of optically obscured, young stellar populations throughout the inner Galaxy. Propelled by the pioneering work of Hanson, Howarth, & Conti (1997) who presented a detailed investigation of the ionizing O and B stars in M17, we have carried out a survey of Galactic giant H II (GHII) regions (Blum, Conti, & Damineli 1999, Blum, Damineli, & Conti 2000, Blum, Conti, & Damineli 2001, Figuerêdo 2001, Figuerêdo et al. 2002, Conti & Blum 2002$`a,b`$). As summarized below, these near infrared studies are producing a wealth of new information on the embedded stellar content in GHII regions including the discovery of young stellar objects (YSO), massive star formation processes, and new distance determinations through spectroscopic parallaxes. For the purposes of this review, we take the term YSO to include hydrogen burning objects buried in ultra–compact H II (UCHII) regions.

While this work has concentrated on GHII regions, great progress is also being made on investigating the central stars of compact and ultra–compact H II regions (Watson & Hanson 1997, Henning et al. 2001, Kaper 2002) using similar techniques. As shown in the next sections, the GHII region sample is aimed at investigating star formation in the most massive clusters where the presence of multiple O stars may affect both the process and resultant mass function. The nearby Orion star forming region is then seen as a transition object between regions of lower mass star formation and higher mass star formation. We can expect the great body of work established in Orion (e.g. Zinnecker et al. 1993, McCaughrean et al. 1994, Hillenbrand 1997, Hillenbrand & Carpenter 2000) on the mass function there to provide an important reference point to the GHII region investigations.

The young stellar content in the Galactic center (GC) has also been intensely studied at near infrared wavelengths. It has been revealed that the stellar cluster in the central parsec, as well as two other nearby clusters, are rich in OB and Wolf–Rayet stars (see Morris & Serabyn 1996 for a recent review). We will discuss below several aspects of massive stars in the GC which have been the subject of recent large telescope studies.

## 2. Giant H II Regions

Our sample of GHII regions includes all objects in the list of Smith, Mezger, & Biermann (1978) for which the Lyman continuum output indicates multiple O stars are present ($`>`$ 10$`\times `$1049 sec-1). The target GHII Regions are shown in Table 1. Where available, literature references are given for each region.

Near infrared imaging has revealed dense, rich clusters of new born stars in nearly all of the GHII regions listed in Table 1. Figure 1 shows a representative subset of the clusters imaged to date. The majority show a combination of complex nebular emission, regions of high and variable extinction, and centrally concentrated clusters of stars. A notable exception is W49. Only ultra–compact H II regions are seen toward the core of W49, with several near infrared counterparts. W49 is discussed at length by Conti & Blum 2002$`a,b`$. Figure 1 may be thought of as a rough “evolutionary” sequence in the sense that the GHII regions to the upper left (W33, G333.6-0.2) are still very much embedded and so probably younger. The near infrared point sources are still highly veiled by the hot dust from their birth cocoons that no photospheric features have been detected in the candidate O stars. To the lower right (e.g. W43) the clusters have become more revealed and individual stars have well determined spectral types. The brightest object in W43 is a Wolf–Rayet type star (WN7) which suggests an age $`>`$ 2 Myr (Blum et al. 1999). Intermediate clusters such as W42 and W31 have main sequence O stars (Blum et al. 2000, 2001) which are very young. It is clear that selecting GHII regions by their Lyman continuum output generally biases the survey to the youngest emergent clusters since the associated nebulosity has not yet been dispersed by the energetic winds and radiation pressure from the hot stars. This means that somewhat older, even luminous clusters could go undetected.

A typical color magnitude diagram (CMD) and color–color plot are shown in Figure 2. These particular diagrams are for W31, but the basic features are common to the GHII region clusters in general. The main features are a foreground sequence at bluer $`HK`$, a cluster sequence to the red, strong differential reddening which produces a larger scatter in $`HK`$ than the typical photometric uncertainty, and a sequence of stars with an indicated excess of emission in $`HK`$ in the color–color plot. These objects lie to the red in this diagram compared to stars whose colors are consistent with “normal” stellar colors seen through a column of dust (some combination of interstellar and local).

The presence of these “excess” objects is particularly exciting because it allows us to investigate aspects of the massive star birth process; their presence also strongly suggests that revealed O stars are on, or nearly on the zero age main–sequence (ZAMS, Hanson et al. 1997, Blum et al. 2000, 2001). For all the clusters associated with GHII regions in Table 1 for which a $`JH`$ vs. $`HK`$ diagram exists and for which some massive stars are conclusively identified by spectroscopic means, there exist young (e.g. UCHII) or pre main sequence objects, or both. It appears that the hottest O stars in M17 (Hanson et al. 1997) have blown away their natal material, while the less massive later O and B stars show clear disk signatures. These two groups are spatially segregated in M 17. Are the early O stars more efficient at removing their circumstellar material, or do the two groups represent sequential star formation? W31 has a YSO which is brighter than the early O stars. Its spectrum exhibits permitted Fe II emission which Blum et al. (2001) take as evidence of a dense circumstellar flow or disk. Accounting for the larger circumstellar extinction and excess emission for this star, Blum et al. show (assuming the excess arises in a disk geometry) that it is most likely consistent with a late type O or early B star. This object is also associated with an UCHII radio source (Ghosh et al. 1989). The Lyman continuum output derived from the radio emission is consistent with the late O early B classification. Thus there is very strong evidence that some massive stars do form by processes which include a disk accretion phase.

However, no mid to early O star (i.e. one of the most massive type) has been found in any of the youngest clusters which shows evidence of a circumstellar disk. All such stars have formed recently in the presence of somewhat lower mass OB stars, some of which show unmistakable signs of disks. It is possible that the earliest stars are simply more efficient in removing their circumstellar material, and the disk phase is thus shorter. On the other hand, if the timescale for formation of the massive stars is similar to that for the lower mass stars as has been recently suggested (within 10$`\%`$, Behrend & Maeder 2001) and these stars have formed at the same time, then the observations might suggest that the most massive stars do not form with associated disks.

The hot star spectra obtained in these young clusters are not just useful for studying the star birth process. With suitable calibrations, they can be used to determine spectrophotometric distances to the GHII regions effectively probing Galactic structure. The details of our technique are given in Blum et al. (2001). Briefly, the infrared spectra are used to determine an associated spectral type and absolute magnitude. The apparent brightness and extinction are known from the $`JHK`$ photometry and a distance is determined from the intrinsic and observed brightness. The largest uncertainty is due to the intrinsic scatter in the known brightnesses of the O stars (Vacca, Shull, & Garmany 1996) and the unknown age of the O stars. The former can be improved upon by maximizing the number of stars in a cluster with individual distances determined, the latter by observing fainter B stars which can’t have evolved off the main sequence appreciably.

## 3. The Galactic Center

Forrest et al. (1987) and Allen et al. (1990) discovered that a very young stellar component ($`<`$ 10 Myr) exists in the Galactic center (GC) by associating near infrared emission lines which arise in the energetic winds of massive stars with compact (stellar) sources in the central pc. Later, Krabbe et al. (1991) established that a cluster of such evolved stars was located in the GC which represented the most recent episode of star formation there. Since then, a host of additional studies have refined the observed properties of the emission–line stars (Najarro et al. 1994, Libonate et al. 1995, Blum et al. 1995$`a,b`$, Krabbe et al. 1995, Tamblyn et al. 1996, Najarro et al. 1997, Paumard et al. 2001). However, questions still remain about whether the emission–line stars represent normal stellar evolution or the result of environmental effects in the extreme GC environment (e.g. collisional mergers). See Tamblyn et al. (1996) and Najarro et al. (1997) for differing points of view.

For many years, GC investigators have sought evidence of the lower–mass stars (main–sequence and giants) which must have accompanied the emission–line stars at the time of formation if the latter indeed sprang from normal stellar progenitors. However, the combined effects of crowding and differential extinction have rendered searches for this component fruitless, until recently. Progress has been made on this issue by combining the Gemini adaptive optics image quality with a set of very closely spaced narrow filters. Using data from filters centered on the CO band head at 2.3 $`\mu `$m and a nearby continuum position (2.26 $`\mu `$m), taken as part of the Gemini demo science program, we have identified the lower–mass sequence of stars associated with the cluster of massive emission-line stars. Figure 3 shows the CO index (Kcont flux $``$ CO flux / Kcont flux) for the central 20′′, which includes the emission-line star cluster (IRS 16, Krabbe et al. 1991). Two sequences are present. The older population has steadily increasing CO index (more positive index in the Figure for stars with brighter Kcont magnitudes; e.g, Kleinmann & Hall 1986, Blum et al. 1996, Ramírez et al. 1998) which is expected for AGB stars and M supergiants, while the young sequence has CO indices which reflect the (essentially constant) continuum slope of the reddened (AK $``$ 3) Rayleigh–Jeans tail for hot stars. Figure 4 shows the same index, but for stars in a field 20′′ N of the central field, clearly indicating the young sequence is highly concentrated in the central region. The brightest members of the young sequence include the IRS 16 stars.

By using observations in an offset field such as shown in Figure 4, a statistical estimate of the total number of stars associated with the young sequence can be made in the central pc. However, spectroscopy is still required to pin down the true nature of the young stars. Detection of normal photospheric features in the $`K`$band would unambiguously show the young emission–line stars in the GC to be derived from more or less normal stellar progenitors. An independent estimate of the overall mass scale for the young stars would also follow. Models have been computed for several of the emission–line stars (Najarro et al. 1997) allowing them to be placed in the HR diagram, but the results may depend on the specific physics included (e.g, so far no line–blanketed models have been computed). In any case, estimating masses from the spectral types of stars based on photospheric features is more straightforward than interpreting the spectra of evolved emission–line objects. The young stellar sequence indicated in Figure 4 is not confined to the so–called SgrA\*(IR) cluster immediately surrounding the black hole at the GC (Ghez et al. 1998, Genzel et al. 2000), but includes at least some of those stars. The SgrA\*(IR) cluster stars observed spectroscopically do not show strong CO absorption (Eckart et al. 1999, Figer et al. 2000).

## 4. The Arches Cluster and the IMF

The Arches star cluster was discovered recently in limited near infrared surveys (Nagata et al. 1995; Cotera et al. 1996) 30 pc in projection from the Galactic center (GC). Soon after, it was recognized that the Arches is one of the most massive young star clusters in the Milky Way and Magellanic Clouds (Serabyn et al. 1998). Serabyn et al. estimated that the Arches contains some 100+ OB stars in a projected area of about 0.5 pc. The Arches had lain hidden for so long only because it was obscured by 30 magnitudes of intervening visual extinction. The Arches is one of the three nearest young, massive star clusters which can be studied at high angular resolution (along with NGC3603 in the Galaxy, and R136 in the Large Magellanic Cloud-LMC). It is the only nearby cluster which is also found in a dense circumnuclear environment. Detailed studies of such nearby mini-starbursts are essential to establish the stellar mass function which is produced by this prolific mode of star formation.

Following the work of Serabyn et al., Figer et al. (1999) used HST/NICMOS images to show that the Arches is similar in total mass to the mini-starburst cluster R136 in the LMC ($`>`$ 104 M$`_{}`$) and perhaps 10 times as dense (3$`\times 10^5`$ M$`_{}`$ pc-3). More importantly, Figer et al. (1999) estimated the mass function in the Arches to be significantly flatter than a normal Salpeter (1955) power-law. Figer et al. find the power–law slope for the Arches to be $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=`$0.7 compared to $`1.35`$ for Salpeter. This is in stark contrast to R136 (Massey & Hunter 1998) and the OB associations in the Milky Way (Massey et al. 1995) which exhibit Salpeter–like slopes, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=`$ $`1.0`$ to $`1.4`$.

Figer et al. (1999) argued that the flat mass function in the Arches was to be expected because the preconditions (namely high turbulent velocity and magnetic field strength) in GC star–forming clouds would naturally tend to produce more massive stars $``$ a higher Jeans mass would be required to overcome these forces which oppose gravitational collapse (see Morris and Serabyn 1996). But Portegies Zwart et al. (2001) have computed dynamical evolution models of the Arches against the background potential of the GC. They claim the Arches mass function may only appear flat because dynamical segregation has removed lower mass stars to larger radii than were observed by Figer et al. (1999). The models can produce a flat mass function in the core of the Arches cluster, similar to the observed mass function, but a mass function for the entire cluster that is normal. It is only the observational constraint of having excluded the outer regions of the cluster which leads to the observed mass function being anomalously flat.

We have used the Gemini Demo science observations to explore the mass function in the core of the Arches. These Gemini adaptive optics observations have better image quality and thus go deeper in the core of the Arches than previous HST data. Like the HST data, the Gemini data indicate a flatter mass function than the Salpeter (1955) case and that in R136 (Massey & Hunter 1998). However it is intermediate, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ $``$ $`0.9`$, and not too different from the OB associations in the Milky Way (Massey et al. 1995), but see Eisenhauer et al. (1998) for the case of NGC3603 (who give an upper limit to the slope, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ $``$ $``$0.73). Figure 5 shows the mass function derived from these $`K^{}`$ images. The slope can change by $``$ $`\pm `$ 5–10 $`\%`$ for different isochrones used to transfer the $`K`$ magnitudes to mass (Schaller et al. 1992, Meynet et al. 1994). The result is preliminary; there are still significant areas of uncertainty. For example, the background stellar population (here estimated from the HST/NICMOS data of Figer et al. 1999) is rather uncertain. Binary fraction has not been included, and the stellar models do not include the effects of rotation which are probably significant (Maeder & Meynet 2000, Meynet & Maeder 2000). Cotera et al. (2001) will explore these issues in more depth. Furthermore, additional observations are needed to explore the issue of dynamical segregation.

In the meantime, a comparison to preliminary measurements of the mass function in the GHII region clusters places the Arches firmly at the flat end of the distribution. The values of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ for W31, NGC3576, and W42 are $`1.3`$, $`1.4`$, and $`1.5`$, respectively. These are the youngest clusters in our sample with identified young stellar objects or UCHII regions. The young age and fact that these clusters are far from the powerful influence of the inner Galactic potential suggests they are ideal for measuring the initial mass function in massive star, star clusters.

## 5. Summary

The observational basis for the emergent star birth properties of massive stars in clusters is growing rapidly through the application of near infrared techniques to individual clusters in the Galaxy. Clusters with a few to more than 100 OB stars have been identified and detailed spectra obtained for the brighter members. Progress is being made on measuring the mass function produced by these “mini-starburst” episodes. The clusters located in the more extreme region of the Galactic center maybe the most massive and dense clusters in the Galaxy. However, the clusters seen toward the GHII regions may be the most ideal for establishing the mass function since they are younger and less affected by the Galactic center potential.

Young stellar objects (YSO) are found in essentially all these young massive star forming regions. The analogous high mass objects to the lower mass YSOs are ultra-compact H II regions: OB stars which are burning hydrogen, unlike low mass YSOs, but which have not yet revealed their photospheres. A number of these, as well as more revealed OB stars, show evidence for circumstellar disks. Thus, at least some massive stars appear to form through a process which includes a disk accretion phase. However, the most massive O stars revealed in the young clusters do not show evidence for disks. The disk phase may be too short to observe in the most massive stars, or perhaps it does not occur.

For the first time, a clear sequence of lower mass stars has been associated with the Galactic center He I emission–line stars. This sequence is evident in high angular resolution adaptive optics narrow–band images of the central pc. The sequence is spatially extended ($``$ 20′′) compared to the SgrA\*(IR) cluster of stars immediately surrounding the nuclear black hole.

## References

Allen, D. A., Hyland, A. R., & Hillier, D. J., 1990, MNRAS, 244, 706

Behrend, R. & Maeder, A. 2001, A&A, 373, 190

Blum, R. D., Sellgren, K., & Depoy, D. L. 1995$`a`$, ApJ, 440, L17

Blum, R. D., Depoy, D. L., & Sellgren, K. 1995$`b`$, ApJ, 441, 603

Blum, R. D., Sellgren, K., & Depoy, D. L. 1996, AJ, 112, 1988

Blum, R. D., Damineli, A., & Conti, P. S. 1999, AJ, 117, 1392.

Blum, R. D., Conti, P.S., & Damineli, A. 2000, AJ, 119, 1860

Blum, R. D., Conti, P. S., & Damineli, A. 2001$`b`$, AJ, 121, 3149.

Brandl, B., Brandner, W., Eisenhauer, F., Moffat, A. F. J., Palla, F., & Zinnecker, H. 1999, A&A, 352, L69

Carr, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 522

Conti, P. S. & Blum, R. D. 2002$`a`$, ApJ, in press.

Conti, P. S. & Blum, R. D. 2002$`b`$, these proceedings.

Cotera, A. S., Erickson, E. F., Colgan, S. W. J., Simpson, J. P., Allen, D. A., & Burton, M. G. 1996, ApJ, 461, 750

Cotera, A., Blum, R. D., et al. 2001, in progress

Eckart, A., Ott, T., & Genzel, R. 1999, A&A, 352, L22

Eenens, P. R. J., Williams, P. M., & Wade, R. 1991, MNRAS, 252, 300

Eisenhauer, F., Quirrenbach, A., Zinnecker, H., & Genzel, R. 1998, ApJ, 498, 278

Figer, D. F., McLean, I. S., & Najarro, F. 1997, ApJ, 486, 420

Figer, D. F., Kim, S. S., Morris, M., Serabyn, E., Rich, R. M., & McLean, I. S. 1999, ApJ, 525, 750

Figer, D. F. et al. 2000, ApJ, 533, L49

Figuerêdo, E. 2001, MSc Thesis, IAG, University of Sãn Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

Figuerêdo, L. et al. 2002, these proceedings

Forrest, W. J., Shure, M. A., Pipher, J. L., & Woodward, C. E. 1987, AIP Conf Proc. 155, The Galactic Center, p 153

Genzel, R., Pichon, C., Eckart, A., Gerhard, O. E., & Ott, T. 2000, MNRAS, 317, 348

Ghez, A. M., Klein, B. L., Morris, M., & Becklin, E. E. 1998, ApJ, 509, 678

Ghosh, S. K., Iyengar, K. V. K., Rengarajan, Tandon, S. N., Verma, R. P., Daniel, R. R., & Ho, P. T. P. 1989, ApJ347, 338

Goldader, J. D. & Wynn-Williams, C. G. 1994, ApJ, 433, 164

Hanson, M. M.,, Conti, P.S., & Rieke, M.J. 1996, ApJS, 107, 281

Hanson, M. M., Howarth, I.D., & Conti, P.S. 1997, ApJ, 489, 698

Hanson, M. M., Rieke, G. H., & Luhman, K. L. 1998, AJ, 116, 1915

Henning, T., Feldt, M., Stecklum, B., & Klein, R. 2001, A&A, 370, 100

Hillenbrand, L. A. 1997, AJ, 113, 1733

Hillenbrand, L. A. & Carpenter, J. M. 2000, ApJ, 540, 236

Kaper, L. 2002, these proceedings

Kleinmann, S. G. & Hall, D. N. B. 1986, ApJS, 62, 501

Krabbe, A. et al. 1995, ApJ, 447, L95

Krabbe, A., Genzel, R., Drapatz, S., & Rotaciuc, V. 1991, ApJ, 382, L19

Libonate, S., Pipher, J. L., Forrest, W. J., & Ashby, M. L. N. 1995, ApJ, 439, 202

Maeder, A. & Meynet, G. 2000, ARA&A, 38, 143

Massey, P., Johnson, K., & DeGioia-Eastwood, K. 1995, ApJ, 454, 151

Massey, P. & Hunter, D. A. 1998, ApJ, 493, 180

McCaughrean, M. J. & Stauffer, J. R. 1994, AJ, 108, 1382

Meynet, G., Maeder, A., Schaller, G., Schaerer, D., & Charbonnel, C. 1994, A&AS, 103, 97

Meynet, G. & Maeder, A. 2000, A&A, 361, 101

Morris, M. & Serabyn, E. 1996, ARA&A, 34, 645

Najarro, F., Hillier, D. J., Kudritzki, R. P., Krabbe, A., Genzel, R., Lutz, D., Drapatz, S., & Geballe, T. R. 1994, A&A, 285, 573

Nagata, T., Woodward, C. E., Shure, M., & Kobayashi, N. 1995, AJ, 109, 1676

Najarro, F., Krabbe, A., Genzel, R., Lutz, D., Kudritzki, R. P., & Hillier, D. J. 1997, A&A, 325, 700

Paumard, T., Maillard, J. P., Morris, M., & Rigaut, F. 2001, A&A, 366, 466

Portegies Zwart, S. F., Makino, J., McMillan, S. L. W., & Hut, P. 2001, astro-ph/0102259

Ramírez, S. V., Depoy, D. L., Frogel, J. A., Sellgren, K., & Blum, R. D. 1997, AJ, 113, 1411

Reid, M. J. 1993, ARA&A, 31, 345

Salpeter, E. E. 1955, ApJ, 121, 161

Serabyn, E., Shupe, D., & Figer, D. F. 1998, Nature, 394, 448

Schaller G., Schaerer D., Meynet G., Maeder A., 1992, A&AS, 96, 269

Smith, L. F., Mezger, P. G., & Biermann, P., 1978, A&A, 66, 65

Tamblyn, P., Rieke, G. H., Hanson, M. M., Close, L. M., McCarthy, D. W., JR., & Rieke, M. J. 1996, ApJ, 456, 206

Vacca, W. D., Garmany, C. D., & Shull, J. M. 1996, ApJ, 460, 914

Watson, A. M. & Hanson, M. M. 1997, ApJ, 490, L165

Zinnecker, H., McCaughrean, M. J., & Wilking, B. A. 1993, in Protostars and Planets III, eds E. Levy & J. Lunine, (Tucson: University of Arizona Press), p429


text:
# A Dynamical Origin for Brown Dwarfs

## 1. Introduction

It is commonly assumed that brown dwarfs are formed the same way as stars, except under conditions that lead to stellar objects with very small masses, i.e. from clouds that are very small, very dense, and very cold. However, with the growing realization that brown dwarfs may be as common as stars, it is becoming disturbing that such special physical conditions are not readily found in the molecular clouds of our Galaxy (although they may exist elsewhere, see Elmegreen 1999).

Alternatively, Lin et al. (1998) suggested that the encounter between two protostars with massive disks could fling out tidal filaments with lengths of about 1000 AU, out of which a brown dwarf might form. However, the fact that brown dwarfs are increasingly discovered also in loose T Tauri associations like Taurus, where such encounters should be extremely rare, suggests that this mechanism is unlikely to be a major source of brown dwarfs.

Taking another approach, we have recently proposed that brown dwarfs have such extremely low masses because they were ejected from small clusters of nascent stellar embryos (Reipurth & Clarke 2001). This can occur because the timescale for dynamical interactions and ejection is comparable to the timescale for collapse and build-up of a star. In the following, we outline the basic aspects of this model, and summarize the status of current efforts to numerically model such ejections.

## 2. Multiplicity of Newborn Stars

Observations over the last decade have established that young T Tauri stars have the same or a slightly higher binary frequency than at the main sequence (e.g. Reipurth & Zinnecker 1993; Ghez et al. 1993; Köhler & Leinert 1998). A small, although not very well determined, fraction of both young and more evolved stars are also triple or higher-order multiple systems. The situation is much less clear among the very youngest, still embedded stars, due to the difficulties of probing into the heavily shrouded environment of such objects. However, new high resolution infrared techniques from the ground and space, as well as centimeter interferometry with e.g. the VLA, are beginning to yield results. In a detailed study of 14 driving sources of giant Herbig-Haro (HH) flows, Reipurth (2000) found that more than 80% are binaries, and of these half are higher order systems. It should be noted that these are the actually observed frequencies, without corrections for the considerable incompleteness of the observations, and so the results are in fact consistent with the possibility that all giant HH flow sources may be binary or multiple systems. These embedded outflow sources are of the order of 105 yr old or less, and it follows that some of these systems must decay to reach the lower observed frequencies at later evolutionary stages. It is well established that non-hierarchical triple systems undergo rapid dynamical evolution and evolve into either a binary with a distant companion, i.e. a hierarchical triple system, or into a binary and an unbound, escaping third member (see Section 3). The binary system that is formed in this dynamical process is highly eccentric, and given that the triple disintegration is likely to take place while the stars are still actively accreting gas from an infalling envelope, it follows that the circumstellar disks will interact on an orbital timescale, which will lead to shrinkage of the orbit (e.g. Artymowicz & Lubow 1996). These interactions are again likely to cause cyclic variations in the accretion rate, with consequent pulses in the outflow production, and the giant HH flows may therefore represent a fossil record of the birth and early evolution of binary systems (Reipurth 2000). Altogether, it appears that the generation of giant HH flows, the birth of a binary, and the formation of brown dwarfs may all be different aspects of a single event, namely the dissolution of a small multiple system.

## 3. Dynamical Interactions in Multiple Systems

If the dominant mode of star formation involves the splitting of a core in to $`N=3`$ or more fragments then important new ingredients enter the dynamics which are not encountered in the cases $`N=1`$ or $`N=2`$. The reason for this is simply that most $`N>2`$ body configurations are dynamically unstable; over several dynamical timescales the components exchange energy through the action of gravitational forces until they attain a stable equilibrium. In practice, this generally means that the mini-cluster disintegrates, the energy for this process being derived from the formation of at least one binary system. After a number of dynamical timescales, therefore, the core no longer consists of a bound stellar system, but of a mixture of binary and single stars that drift apart so as to mingle with the ambient stellar field.

Below we summarise the progress that has been made to date in quantifying such behaviour. We would like to know what is the mass spectrum of the stars (and brown dwarfs) that are produced in this way, what are their binary statistics, how much circumstellar material young stars can bring with them as they emerge from such a core? We would also like to know what are the kinematic properties of the resulting stars and brown dwarfs. Unfortunately, the answers to these questions can be most readily obtained in the case of simulations that omit a vital ingredient (i.e. gas); and it is only recently that it has been possible to address these issues in hydrodynamical simulations. Even so, the twin demands of simulations that are both well resolved and can be performed a large number of times (in order to obtain statistically meaningful results) takes us close to the limits of what is computationally viable at the present time. Here we describe the results of simulations that are progressively more realistic, starting with pure N-body experiments and ending with what represents the current state of the art - gas dynamical simulations starting from turbulent initial conditions. Although these results will give a flavour of the physical processes involved, it should be stressed that we are not yet at a stage where statistical results can be derived from the most realistic experiments. This inevitably means that the observational predictions (described in Section 4) remain somewhat provisional.

The simplest possibility conceptually (which is however not likely to be even approximately true in practice) is if all the gas is instantly accreted on to each protostar so that the ensemble evolves thereafter as a system of point masses. This situation is straightforward to model as an Nbody system and has been analysed by many authors (e.g. van Albada 1968; Sterzik & Durisen 1998). The usual outcome of such simulations is that the two most massive members of the system form a binary, whereas the remainder are ejected as single stars. The ejection velocity of stars is related to their orbital velocity during a close three body encounter. For example, in Sterzik and Durisen’s simulations, the typical separation between stars is initially around $`100`$ AU, and typical ejection velocities of single stars are 3-4 km s-1. If the same system of point masses had been set up with separations a factor $`10`$ greater (say), the resulting ejection velocities would be a factor $`10^{1/2}`$ smaller. Sterzik and Durisen also quantified the dependence of ejection velocity on stellar mass, and found that for $`N>3`$, such a dependence is very weak; they however found a significant difference in the final velocities of single stars and binaries, with the centre of mass velocity of binaries being typically a factor $`36`$ less than that of singles.

The above simulations have all the advantages of computational simplicity and yield well defined predictions for the fraction of stars of various masses that end up in binaries (McDonald & Clarke 1993). They however take no account of the fact that the fragments will not interact as point masses but will instead have their interactions mediated by the presence of circumstellar disks. This situation is less straightforward to model numerically, since there are well known numerical difficulties in maintaining disks for many internal orbital timescales against the dispersive action of viscosity. Some insight into the expected role of disks can be obtained from the calculations of McDonald & Clarke (1995), who included the effect of star-disk interactions in a parameterised form (see also Clarke & Pringle 1991). The main role of disks is to harden temporary binaries so as to protect them against disruptive encounters with other cluster members. As a result, more than one binary can be formed in each cluster; although the most massive cluster member is always in a binary, its companion is now picked at random from the cluster members. Thus the net effect of star-disk interactions is to boost the numbers of lower mass stars that end up in binaries (either as primaries or secondaries) relative to the dissipationless (Nbody) case.

However, neither of the sorts of simulations described above can say anything about the stellar initial mass function, since stellar masses are assigned at the outset of the simulation. Such instantaneous mass assignment is of course a very poor approximation to the behaviour of real fragmenting cores: the interactions that lead to the formation of binaries and break up of the cluster occur over a few dynamical times, but the infall of mass onto each of the stars happens on a comparable timescale. Thus realistic simulations need to address the whole process as a hydrodynamic one and follow through the evolution of a core that is initially $`100\%`$ gas.

To date, some progress has been made on this issue by setting up cores in which ‘seeds’ of collapsed gas have been planted (Bonnell et al 1997; Bonnell et al. 2001). These seeds grow in mass due to gas accretion in an inequitable manner - their orbital histories determine whether they spend much time in the densest central regions of the core and hence how much mass they acquire. Such simulations vividly demonstrate how ‘competitive accretion’ works: seeds that get an early headstart in the race for mass tend to settle into the cluster core and thereby acquire more mass, whereas seeds that do not grow much initially are more likely to be flung out of the core and hence be prevented from further growth. Thus competitive accretion provides a ready mechanism for obtaining a large dynamic range of final stellar masses from arbitrary initial conditions.

Recent simulations by Delgado-Donate (in preparation) have begun to quantify the IMF produced by competitive accretion during the break up of small clusters (Figure 1) and find that it is broadly compatible with the observed IMF. (Note that in these simulations no disks are formed around the protostars due to the absence of small scale turbulence in the initial core. Thus although these simulations model the accretion of gas on to the stars as they form, and the consequent shrinkage of the protostellar separations, they do not model the effects of star-disk interactions). The dynamical outcome of such disintegrations shares many qualitative similarities with the dissipationless (Nbody) results of Sterzik and Durisen. As in their simulations, there is no appreciable dependence of final velocity on resulting stellar mass (see Figure 2), but the binaries attain speeds that are a factor $`5`$ less than the typical ejection speeds of the single stars. One notable difference, however, is the relationship between the typical ejection speeds and the initial parameters of the core. In the dissipationless simulations, the final velocities of ejected stars are of the same order as the virial velocity of the initial core. In the gas dynamical simulations, there are also many objects that are ejected early on with such velocities, as shown in Figure 2, where the initial virial velocity of the parent core is around $`0.2`$ km s-1. However, Figure 2 also shows that many stars are ejected with velocities much greater than this: about half the stars attain velocities greater than $`3`$ times the initial virial velocity (the corresponding number for Sterzik and Durisen’s simulations is less than $`1\%`$) and there is also a significant minority that attain velocities more than a factor $`10`$ greater than the initial virial value. This may be readily understood inasmuch as in the gas dynamical simulations, the systems shrink as the gas is accreted, so that later interactions are much closer and produce correspondingly larger velocity kicks. Thus in these gas dynamical simulations (where the typical initial separations of protostars are $`10^4`$ AU) , the ejection velocities are similar to Sterzik and Durisen’s dissipationless calculations in which the stars are initially separated by only of order $`100`$ AU.

These simulations also give some insight into the binary pairing characteristics of the resulting stars. The outcome of each five star simulation is the production of a binary (sometimes a triple). (Note that these simulations do not give reliable results for the separations of the resultant binaries, since they do not include star-disk interactions, which will tend to harden the binaries considerably). It is notable that these simulations produce extreme mass ratio pairs (e.g. $`10:1`$) quite readily, which contrasts strongly with pure Nbody results, where such an outcome is almost unknown.

A further step towards reality can be obtained by abandoning the artificial distinction between seeds and smoothly distributed background gas in the above simulations. A more physical approach is to start with gas that is subject to a supersonic turbulent velocity field which rapidly generates a richly non-linear density structure in the gas (Klessen et al. 2000; Klessen 2001). Such simulations follow not only the competitive accretion between contending ‘stars’ and their dynamical interactions, but also the very formation of the stars from pockets of Jeans unstable gas. The most ambitious simulation to date is that of Bate (see Bate et al. 2001) which models a system that will form of the order of a hundred stars, with the capacity to resolve structures forming down to mass limits of a few Jupiter masses. This system readily demonstrates the formation of small N ensembles in which the sort of behaviour described above (binary formation, competitive accretion, ejection of low mass members) is observed to occur. Such a one-off simulation cannot be used to generate statistical results however, and so follow up simulations, tracing the evolution of large numbers of small N ensembles are required.

## 4. Observational Tests

Brown Dwarfs and Early Stellar Evolution

Small N-body systems still in the process of accumulating mass from an infalling envelope would observationally be seen as a Class 0 or perhaps a Class I source with strong outflow activity. If brown dwarfs are formed by the disintegration of small N-body systems, it follows that the very youngest, indeed newborn, brown dwarfs should be found in the immediate vicinity of such sources. As a small triple or multiple system breaks up, its members start to drift out of the nascent envelope, and may on relatively short time scales (of order a couple of thousand years) emerge from being deeply embedded infrared sources with ample far-infrared and sub-mm emission to being optically visible T Tauri like stars. In this radically different picture of early stellar evolution, the gradual and smooth transition between Class 0 and Class II sources can be replaced by a rather abrupt transition, and the main accretion phase for the members of a multiple system is terminated not by the infalling envelope running out of gas, or outflow blowing away the last parts of the envelope, but by the newborn members “leaving the nest” (Reipurth 2000). Considering the rapidly increasing evidence for multiplicity among the youngest stars, it is interesting to review the early idea by Larson (1972) that all single low mass stars may have formed in dynamical interactions among newly born multiple systems.

One observational test of the dynamical formation model of brown dwarfs would be to study carefully the statistics of brown dwarfs in the vicinity of Class 0 sources. To get a practical sense of the observed separation between a nascent brown dwarf and its siblings, assume that it is observed at a time $`t`$ \[yr\] after ejection and moving with the space velocity $`v`$ \[km s-1\] at an angle $`\alpha `$ to the line-of-sight in a star forming region at a distance $`d`$ \[pc\]. Then the projected separation $`s`$ in arcsec is $`s=0.21vtd^1sin\alpha .`$ For a velocity of 1 km s-1, a brown dwarf moving out of a nearby ($`d`$ $``$ 130 pc) cloud at an angle of 60o to the line-of-sight will already be 5 arcmin away after 2 $`\times `$ 105 yr. Also, half of all ejected brown dwarfs will move into the cloud from which they formed. Such objects will be detectable only as highly extincted and weak infrared sources.

Brown Dwarfs with Stellar Companions

It has been known for some time that brown dwarfs are only rarely found as close (less than 3 AU) companions to low mass stars (the “brown dwarf desert”). But recent work by Gizis et al. (2001) has demonstrated that brown dwarfs are commonly companions to normal stars at large separations (greater than 1000 AU). The separation distribution function of brown dwarfs in binary systems contains important information about their formation, and establishing its form more precisely will form a crucial test for any theory of brown dwarf formation. The ejection hypothesis readily explains the currently available observations: brown dwarfs should rarely be found as close companions to stars, as in this environment they would, except for special circumstances, have continued to accrete mass at almost the same rate as their stellar companions, thus pushing through the substellar/stellar boundary at almost the same time. On the other hand, distant brown dwarf companions are readily expected, because not all ejections will lead to unbound systems.

A further test of the ejection scenario comes from studies of the binarity of brown dwarfs. A number of brown dwarfs have been found to be binaries (e.g. Martín, Brandner, & Basri 1999), but, intriguingly, they appear to be rather close binaries, whereas wide pairs (many hundreds of AU) have so far not been found. In the ejection scenario, if two stellar embryos are ejected as a pair, they have to be relatively close in order to survive as a binary. Obviously, the precise limit for survival depends not only on the mass of the pair, but also on whether the ejection occurs from a compact or a wider configuration of embryos. Numerical simulations will help to quantify this.

Kinematics of Brown Dwarfs

When a small N-body cluster dissolves, its members drift apart and blend with the other young stars in the general star forming environment, whether it is an association or a rich cluster. The velocities of young stars are generally assumed to be similar to the turbulent velocity of the gas out of which they formed, i.e. of the order of a km per second. If all stars are formed in small multiple systems (Larson 1972), then to this we must add the mean velocity of the dispersing members.

If brown dwarfs are ejected stellar embryos, they must carry kinematic evidence reflecting their origin in small multiple systems. To first order, the ejected member from such a system acquires a velocity comparable to the velocity attained at pericenter in the close triple encounter. An observational test of the ejection scenario would therefore be to compare observed velocities of brown dwarfs with velocities derived in realistic numerical simulations. However, the brown dwarfs studied must be young and belong to loose associations. In denser clusters, two body relaxation will soon dominate the kinematics of its members, and field brown dwarfs will be dominated by objects that have evaporated from clusters and thus are similarly affected.

As discussed in Section 3, and illustrated in Figure 2, the most recent, realistic simulations show that the majority of brown dwarfs are ejected with space velocities of less than 1 km s-1, and only a small fraction have velocities larger than 2 km s-1. One-dimensional velocities (radial or tangential) are correspondingly smaller.

It follows that a kinematical test of the ejection scenario will be very difficult to carry out. In the first kinematical study of brown dwarfs, Joergens & Guenther (2001) found that the radial velocity dispersion of nine brown dwarfs in Cha I is 2.0 km s-1, whereas for T Tauri stars in the same region it is 3.6 km s-1. These numbers should be compared to the velocity dispersion of the gas, which is 1.2 km s-1 in the region. As illustrated in Figure 2, there is virtually no dependence of the ejection velocity on mass, i.e. if most or all single stars have been ejected, then there should be little if any kinematic difference between brown dwarfs and surrounding young stars. The existing, limited observations are thus consistent with our current understanding of the kinematics of ejected brown dwarfs and low mass stars.

One possible kinematic signature which may be unique to the ejection scenario is that the binaries that recoil from a dissolving small N cluster will have significantly smaller velocities than the ejected single objects. Once a young stellar association has been carefully studied to identify all binaries, this could be an interesting test.

Signatures of Youth in Brown Dwarfs

The expulsion of an “unfinished” hydrostatic core from an infalling envelope may place limits on the amount of circumstellar material that can be brought with it. Freefloating brown dwarfs will therefore have finite reservoirs from which they can accrete and form planets. However, it is only the outermost regions of a circumstellar disk that will be truncated, the precise values depending on the impact parameters in the close triple encounter that triggers the expulsion. The innermost disk regions will be unaffected, and it is these regions that are responsible for the near-infrared excesses and T Tauri like characteristics that are observed in very young brown dwarfs (e.g. Muench et al. 2001). Brown dwarfs are therefore expected to show mostly the same characteristics of youth as T Tauri stars, and may even be able to form planets, but because of the limited amount of gas they carry with them, the period during which they display T Tauri like characteristics may be more short-lived than for their heavier stellar siblings.

## 5. Brown Dwarfs and Extrasolar Planets

The discovery in recent years of numerous giant extrasolar planets orbiting other stars (e.g. Marcy, Cochran & Mayor 2000), as well as a large number of low-luminosity objects that have been suggested to be freefloating giant planets (e.g. Lucas et al. 2001) suggests that a continuum may exist between such giant planets and brown dwarfs. By its definition as an object that cannot attain hydrogen burning, a brown dwarf must have a mass of less than about 0.08 M, or 80 MJupiter, weakly dependent on metallicity (Chabrier & Baraffe 2000). Most of the extrasolar planets found around other stars have masses of order Msini $``$ 10 MJupiter. The difference between the masses of giant extrasolar planets and brown dwarfs is therefore about an order of magnitude, much less than the three orders of magnitude spanned by stellar masses. With no clear dividing line between brown dwarfs and giant extrasolar planets, it is thus of considerable interest to ask which, if any, differences exist between these two classes of objects, and whether they perhaps could have a common origin.

It is indeed a possibility that freefloating giant planets are formed the same way as brown dwarfs, i.e. as ejectae from unstable multiple systems of forming stars. Boss (2001) has advocated precisely such a scenario, suggesting that magnetic field tension in the collapse process has the effect of splitting the infalling material into very closely spaced fragments, from which objects as small as a Jupiter-mass can be immediately ejected by dynamical interactions. Another possibility is that freefloating giant planets are formed like the giant planets in our own solar system, i.e. by later condensing out of material in a circumstellar disk. Subsequently, dynamical relaxation may ultimately kick one or more of the giant planets out of their nascent planetary system (e.g. Papaloizou & Terquem 2001). Obviously both mechanisms, despite their very different nature, may create freefloating planetary sized objects, which observationally do not appear to be easily distinguishable. Because ejected objects lose most traces of their pre-history by their expulsion, attempts to compare brown dwarfs and giant extrasolar planets should not be done on the basis of freefloating objects.

On the other hand, bound systems, in which giant planets or brown dwarfs are orbiting a star, may retain critically important memories of their formation processes. And for such objects major differences exist between the two classes of objects. As discussed earlier, brown dwarfs are commonly found bound to stars only at very large separations. Their formation history clearly do not commonly permit them to exist closely bound to a star, as expected and readily explained by the ejection scenario. This is in marked contrast to the increasingly well determined statistics for giant extrasolar planets orbiting other stars, which show that such objects are often located at extremely small separations, in regions that are off-limits to brown dwarfs in the ejection scenario. If the observed separations were a smooth function of mass between the two categories of objects, one could possibly have argued that orbital evolution had led the smallest mass objects to migrate to locations close to their stars. But given that the two populations are strictly separated in the way they orbit their stars, we conclude that brown dwarfs and giant extrasolar planets, although both arguably having sizable freefloating populations, are likely to be formed in very different manners. In this interpretation, giant planets are formed at later times out of circumstellar disks and their growth is limited by how much disk material is available, whereas brown dwarfs are failed stars, which due to their expulsion could not take full advantage of their rich supply of inflowing gas to grow beyond the hydrogen burning limit.

### Acknowledgments.

BR thanks Observatoire de Bordeaux, where part of this review was written, for hospitality.

## References

Artymowicz, P., Lubow, S.H. 1996, ApJ, 467, L77

Bate, M.R, Bonnell, I., & Bromm, V. 2001, The Origins of Stars and Planets: The VLT View’ ESO Astrophysics Symposia, Eds. J. Alves, M.J. McCaughrean (Springer), in press

Bonnell, I.A., Bate, M.R., Clarke, C.J. & Pringle, J.E. 1997, MNRAS 323,785

Boss, A.P. 2001, ApJ, 551, L167

Chabrier, G., Baraffe, I. 2000, ARAA, 38, 337

Clarke, C. & Pringle, J.E. 1991, MNRAS 249, 588

Elmegreen, B.C. 1999, ApJ, 522, 915

Ghez, A.M., Neugebauer, G., Matthews, K. 1993, AJ, 106, 2005

Gizis, J.E., Kirkpatrick, J.D., Burgasser, A., Reid, I.N., Monet, D.G., Liebert, J., Wilson, J.C. 2001, ApJ, 551, L163

Joergens, V., Guenther, E. 2001, A&A, in press

Klessen, R. 2001, ApJ 556, 837

Klessen, R., Heitsch, F., Mac Low, M. 2000, ApJ 535, 887

Köhler, R., Leinert, C. 1998, A&A, 331, 977

Larson, R.B. 1972, MNRAS, 156, 437

Lin, D.N.C., Laughlin, G., Bodenheimer, P., Rozyczka, M. 1998, Science, 281, 2025

Lucas, P.W., Roche, P.F., Allard, F., Hauschildt, P.H. 2001, MNRAS, 326, 695

Marcy, G.W., Cochran, W.D., Mayor, M. 2000, Protostars and Planets IV, Eds. V. Mannings, A.P. Boss, S.S. Russell, (Univ. of Arizona Press), p.1285

Martín, E.L., Brandner, W., Basri, G. 1999, Science, 283, 1718

McDonald, J. & Clarke, C.J. 1993, MNRAS 262, 800

McDonald, J. & Clarke, C.J. 1995, MNRAS 275, 671

Muench, A.A, Alves, J.A., Lada, C.J., Lada, E.A. 2001, ApJ, 558, L51

Papaloizou, J.C.B. & Terquem, C. 2001, MNRAS, 325, 221

Reipurth, B. 2000, AJ, 120, 3177

Reipurth, B., Zinnecker, H. 1993, A&A, 331, 977

Reipurth, B. & Clarke, C.J. 2001, AJ, 122, 432

Sterzik, M. & Durisen, R. 1998, A&A 339, 95

van Albada, T.S. 1968, Bull. Astron. Inst. Netherlands, 19, 479

Woitas, J., Leinert, Ch., Köhler, R. 2001, A&A, 376, 982