text:
# New approach to the superconductivity problem

## I Introduction

A considerable number of fundamental works have been devoted to tackling the superconductivity (SC) problem and, in particular, a high temperature SC one (HTSC). The opinion on the present state of the problem may be formed considering the works . Most relevant publication are to some extent associated with the BCS theory . Now, for metals enumerated in the Periodic System of elements (PSE), the SC theory is considered to be more or less completed and the validity of the BCS theory leaves no room for doubt on the part of the majority of authors. At the same time in  a conclusion was drawn that the BCS theory may be not the only possible way to explain the phenomenon of SC.

Outstanding results  obtained by Bednortz J.G. and Müller K.A. in 1986 for YBa2Cu3O7-δ caused the great sensation among chemists, physisists and material researchers. Since that time the highest value for $`T_s`$ at about 164K was observed in HgCa2Ba2Cu3O8+δ ceramics.

There are grounds available highlighting a possibility of observing high $`T_s`$ in intercalates and nanotubes . In our opinion, an increase in the value of $`T_s`$ and the observation of HTSC are very plausible in high-pressure (HP) phases. Almost twenty-five years ago, SC was reported to have been observed in AuGa2 . Comparatively high values of $`T_s`$ were observed in fullerenes, HP phases with respect to graphite, and their derivatives fullerides C60M , where M stands for K, Rb, Cs. The idea of obtaining HTSC in HP phases of Li3P or Li3N is at present at the stage of being accepted . In the last publications on this topic, SC is investigated in a HP phase of MgB2 . In conjunction with the problem under consideration, we also can’t help mentioning a hypothetical phase of metallic hydrogen  and nitrogen (a private communication).

The obtained results, especially the identification of HTSC with the values of $`T_s>100K`$, are rather inconsistent with both the predictions of the BCS theory proper , which had been made before discovering HTSC, and any of its complimentary modifications, among which the theory of bipolarons has to be singled out . In connection with this, we note that most HTSC materials in stoichiometic phase are, strictly speaking, dielectrics, whose conductivity is fully determined by low concentrations of electroactive defects, whereas the theory of bipolarons gives low values of $`T_s`$ as the Fermi level approaches the edges of zones. Thus, it does not explain HTSC for the aforementioned class of compounds.

In Russia, one usually considers the results of microscopic calculations are in good agreement with the predictions of the BCS theory, including the case of HTSC  as well. There is also another viewpoint which is doubtful about the reliability of any fine calculation performed by and large within the scope of the zone theory .

The problem is that a lot of poorly substantiated approximations did appear for the years of the existence of the zone theory. Among these, for instance, the procedure of accounting for the screening effects seems to be quite harmless. These approximations were introduced by virtue of quite relevant reasons associated with an insufficient quick operation of computer equipment to perform strict calculations of the zone structure of metals, including that of the Periodic System. The application of these procedures, however, renders the calculation of the electron-phonon interaction (EPI) constants quite an unpredictable operation, depending only on theoretical preferences of a specialist in the field of zone computations.

From our viewpoint, the main source of difficulties consists in that all the calculations associated with EPI pursue the goal of reducing the Hamiltonian of the system to the Fröhlich form. It has been known for a long time  that the Fröhlich model does not allow a consistent accounting for the electron-electron interaction (EEI), because the Coulomb interaction cannot still be reasonably separated into that already accounted for in the initial values of Fröhlich Hamiltonian constants, and that which will thereafter show up in the renormalization of the initial phonons owing to EPI. Accordingly, all the microscopic calculations of the EPI constants are, strictly speaking, inconsistent.

Just these considerations underlied the need of a revision of the fundamentals of the SC theory, which was undertaken in studies . It was shown the attraction between electrons exists in a long-wave range due to an exchange of virtual phonons. This question was not discussed in earlier works (for example, ) devoted to the problem being tackled. We believe this was due to the following two basic causes.

First, in the framework of ”procedure to account for the screening effects” the function of the permittivity of electronic plasma was incorrectly used for the removal of ”undesirable” singularities from the matrix elements of EPI in the long-wave limit. Second, the simplified form of the effective EEI used in study  did not suppose substantial differences in the electron interaction both in the vicinity of the Fermi surface and far off it.

The authors of  well understood the disadvantages of the aforementioned approaches. Remind that in  serious forebodings were caused just by these approximations, which gave rise to a detailed discussion. Moreover, an idea was put forward that in a further development of the ”jelly” model one should have refrained from the use of ion-plasma oscillations as initiating phonons.

The accounting for just these remarks underlied the investigation in the long-wave range of EEI, which had been undertaken in our studies , where the elastic oscillations of the ion system serve as initiating phonons. It was shown the adequate inclusion of the phonon–phonon interaction in the examination process enables one to avoid the application of poorly substantiated procedures to ”account for the screening effects”. And finally, the EEI potential was calculated without any limitations as to its form.

It was shown that the unitary transformation effected in the framework of the model suggested in  can reduce the Hamiltonian of the electronic system of an indefinite monoatomic metal to the following form ($`\mathrm{}=1`$):

$`\stackrel{~}{H}_{\mathrm{t}ot}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}{\displaystyle E_𝐩C_{\mu 𝐩}^{}C_{\mu 𝐩}^{}𝑑𝐩}+\stackrel{~}{H}_{ee}`$ (1)
$`\stackrel{~}{H}_{ee}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}{\displaystyle \underset{\nu }{}}{\displaystyle \stackrel{~}{U}(𝐩,𝐤,𝐪)C_{\mu 𝐩+𝐪}^{}C_{\nu 𝐤𝐪}^{}C_{\nu 𝐤}^{}C_{\mu 𝐩}^{}𝑑𝐩𝑑𝐤𝑑𝐪},`$ (2)
and for $`\stackrel{~}{U}(𝐩,𝐤,𝐪)`$ at $`p,kK_F`$ we have

$$\stackrel{~}{U}(𝐩,𝐤,𝐪)=4\left(\frac{zm}{3M}\right)^2\frac{G_{ee}}{q^2}\frac{K_F^2}{q^2\chi _1}\frac{K_F^2}{q^2\chi }$$
(3)
where $`E_𝐩=\frac{p^2}{2m}`$, $`G_{ee}=\frac{e^2}{4\pi ^2ϵ}`$, $`e`$ is the electron charge, $`C_{\mu 𝐩}^{}`$ and $`C_{\mu 𝐩}^{}`$ are operators of the creation and annihilation of electrons with a momentum $`𝐩`$, respectively; $`\mu `$, $`\nu `$ are spin indices, $`ϵ`$ is the permittivity of the ion system, $`M`$ is the mass of ion, $`m`$ is the zone mass of electron, $`z`$ is the number of conductivity electrons per elementary cell; $`\chi =4\left(m^2\stackrel{~}{S}^2\frac{zm}{3M}K_F^2\right)`$, $`\chi _1=\left(1+\frac{zm}{3M}K_F^2/\lambda ^2\right)\chi `$, $`\lambda ^2=(4e^2/\pi ϵ)mK_F`$, $`K_F`$ is the value of Fermi vector, and $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ is the observable sound velocity in the system.

The potential of the form (3) leads to an instability relative to the formation of electron pairs. In distinction from the BCS theory, the momenta of electron pairs are different from zero, while the pairs bonding energy $`E_b`$ if a typical relationship $`\frac{\chi }{2m}E_b`$ for SC systems is fulfilled, may be estimated as follows:

$$E_b\left(\frac{zm}{M}\right)^2\frac{G_{ee}K_F^4}{Q^3}$$
(4)
where $`Q=\chi ^{1/2}`$.

It is obvious that $`E_bM^{1/2}`$, and this is consistent with the observations of an isotopic effect in a series of metals . We also note that the coherence length $`l_{coh}Q^1`$.

## II SC condensate in the model of elastic jelly

The further discussion will be carried out for the final system - a cubic crystal $`L\times L\times L`$ with periodic boundary conditions.

Consider in the framework of Eqs. (1)- (3) a wave function of the bound state of an electron pair with maximum bonding energy (MBE). This state will obviously be the state with zero spin. With increasing $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$, its wave function will first become hydrogen-like, and then delta-like, so that at $`\stackrel{~}{S}\mathrm{}`$ it proves to be possible to derive for the state $`|𝐑`$ of an electron pair with a momentum $`𝐑`$ at an accuracy of up to the normalizing factor the following expression:

$$|𝐑=\underset{𝐩+𝐤=𝐑}{}\stackrel{~}{\delta }(𝐤𝐩)C_𝐩^{}C_𝐤^{}|0$$
(5)
where $`\stackrel{~}{\delta }(𝐤𝐩)`$ is a discrete delta-shaped function, which is determined as follows:

$$\stackrel{~}{\delta }(𝐫)=\{\begin{array}{c}1,\text{if}|𝐫_\alpha |\frac{2\pi }{L},\alpha =x,y,z\hfill \\ 0\text{ in the rest cases.}\hfill \end{array}$$
(6)
Hence, it follows that in finite crystal, at least in the limit under consideration $`\stackrel{~}{S}\mathrm{}`$, the following Hamiltonian (7) well describes the statistics and energy spectrum of MBE-states:

$$H=\underset{\mu ,𝐩}{}E_p\stackrel{~}{n}_{\mu 𝐩}E_b\underset{𝐩}{}\stackrel{~}{n}_𝐩\stackrel{~}{n}_𝐩\frac{E_b}{4}\underset{\mu +\nu =0}{}\underset{𝐩𝐤}{}\stackrel{~}{\delta }(𝐩𝐤)\stackrel{~}{n}_{\mu 𝐩}\stackrel{~}{n}_{\nu 𝐤}+\frac{E_b}{4}\underset{𝐩𝐤}{}\stackrel{~}{\delta }(𝐩𝐤)\stackrel{~}{C}_𝐩^{}\stackrel{~}{C}_𝐤^{}\stackrel{~}{C}_𝐤^{}\stackrel{~}{C}_𝐩^{}$$
(7)
where $`\stackrel{~}{n}_{\mu 𝐩}=\stackrel{~}{C}_{\mu 𝐩}^{}\stackrel{~}{C}_{\mu 𝐩}^{}`$ and the operators $`\stackrel{~}{C}_{}^{}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{C}_{}^{}`$ are suggested to be linked with operators $`C_{}^{}`$ and $`C_{}^{}`$ from Eq. (1) by the unitary transformation, whose derivation is postponed for further publication. Obviously the wave function of the ground state of the Hamiltonian (7) $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ expressed in terms of operators $`\stackrel{~}{C}_{}^{}`$ does not differ from the analogous one in the case of normal metal: $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_0=_{k<K_F}\stackrel{~}{C}_𝐤^{}\stackrel{~}{C}_𝐤^{}`$.

The quasi-particle energy $`\stackrel{~}{E}_{\mu 𝐤}`$ may be determined in random phase approximation from the equation $`[H,\stackrel{~}{C}_{\mu 𝐤}^{}]=\stackrel{~}{E}_{\mu 𝐤}\stackrel{~}{C}_{\mu 𝐤}^{}`$ and thus one can get:

$$\stackrel{~}{E}_{\mu 𝐤}=E_𝐤2\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{\mu 𝐤}\mathrm{\Delta }_0$$
(8)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0=7E_b`$ and

$$\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{\mu 𝐤}=\frac{1}{14}\left(\stackrel{~}{n}_{\mu 𝐤}+\frac{1}{2}\underset{𝐩}{}\stackrel{~}{\delta }(𝐩𝐤)\stackrel{~}{n}_{\mu 𝐩}\right)$$
(9)
For the large systems $`(L\mathrm{})`$ in the absence of any spin order in the electron system we have $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{\mu 𝐤}=\stackrel{~}{n}_{\mu 𝐤}`$. The averaged occupation number $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{\mu 𝐤}`$ may be expressed through the quasi-particle energy $`\stackrel{~}{E}_{\mu 𝐤}`$ by means of Fermi-Dirac distribution function ($`k_B=1`$, $`\xi `$ is the chemical potential of electron system):

$$\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{\mu 𝐤}=\left[1+exp\left(\frac{\stackrel{~}{E}_{\mu 𝐤}\xi }{T}\right)\right]^1$$
(10)
The evolution of a one-electron spectrum of the system with its temperature varying becomes obvious from Fig. 1. At high temperatures, this spectrum is described by an ordinary parabola; and at $`T=T_s`$ the spectrum exhibits a peculiar feature which, at $`T<T_s`$, transforms into a gap. So, the SC condensate is formed by electrons with the energy $`\stackrel{~}{E}_{\mu 𝐤}<\xi `$ at $`T<T_s`$.

Taking into account the Pauli principle, two versions of scatter are possible in the system at lowest temperatures. In the first version, the state of electron with momentum $`k>K_F`$ or hole with $`k<K_F`$ changes (electron and hole concentrations in this case $`exp(\mathrm{\Delta }_0/T)`$). In the second version, an electron is removed from SC condensate with the formation of an electron-hole pair, or vice versa an electron-hole pair annihilates. The contributions of both channels to collision integral are ”frozen out” as temperature lowers according to the exponential law. This circumstance combined with that a shift of SC condensate as a whole in the momenta space leads to the formation of a state with nonzero current is convincing in that a SC transition is actually observed in the system under investigation.

The transition temperature $`T_s`$ may be estimated by the equation $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }/E|_{\stackrel{~}{E}=\xi }=\mathrm{}`$. Then we derive for $`T_s`$

$$T_s=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_0}{2}$$
(11)
This estimation well agrees with the well known relationship $`T_s=2\mathrm{\Delta }_0/3.5`$, coming from the BCS theory in the case of weak coupling. We suppose the deviations from the relationship (11) are due to correlation and many-particle effects.

The remaining bound, but not MBE pair states may be accounted for by inserting additional terms in the Hamiltonian (7). Yet this does not substantially distort the microscopic picture of the phenomenon by virtue of two interrelated causes. Firstly, these terms are small in their absolute values, compared with the bound energy of MBE-state, which has already been accounted for. Secondly, the state of the SC condensate is separated by an energy gap from the other states. Therefore, in considering the state of SC condensate the arisen terms may be accounted for in the framework of the perturbation theory without any substantial changes in its wave function.

The behaviour of SC condensate in the electromagnetic field may be described by the set of wave functions of MBE pair states due to the fact, that the unitary transformation, linking operators $`\stackrel{~}{C}_{}^{}`$ and $`C_{}^{}`$ involves these wave functions as transformation parameters. This circumstance is helpful for the explanation of flux quantization and Josephson effects in SC systems. The latter fact needs a detailed consideration and is postponed for further publication.

Finally, let consider the aforesaid limit $`\stackrel{~}{S}\mathrm{}`$. The energies of the bound states of the starting Hamiltonian (1) are of an analytical character in relation to the parameter $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ throughout the whole range of its admissible values. This is why the analyticity of the energy parameters of the Hamiltonian (7) relative to the same parameter $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ cannot raise doubts. Then the presence of the delta-shaped terms in the Hamiltonian (7) for all the admissible values of $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ seems to be obvious.

## III The condition for the onset of HTSC

A particular interest is spurred by the divergence of the bonding energy $`E_b`$ at $`Q0`$, following from Eq. (4). In real systems, this divergence should not reveal itself in the observed $`T_s`$ by virtue of symmetry reasons put forward in . Simultaneously, with varying parameters of specimens, there should be observed a maximum of the transition temperatures if the following condition were fulfilled:

$$\stackrel{~}{S}^2\frac{zm}{3M}V_F^2$$
(12)
This condition can be with a satisfactory accuracy fulfilled in systems with variable physical parameters, in which, provided Eq. (12) is obeyed, HTSC should be observed.

Let consider a semiconductor with a rather low concentration of electroactive defects, undergoing a phase transition with a change in volume. In both phases, the material is stable, and, as a rule, $`\stackrel{~}{S}^2\frac{zm}{3M}V_F^2`$. In unstable phases $`\stackrel{~}{S}^2<0`$. It is possible to assume HTSC is observed in nonequilibrium systems, where the phase transition is decelerated $`\stackrel{~}{S}^2\frac{zm}{3M}V_F^2>0`$ (the diamond-graphite transition is not realized exclusively due to kinetic reasons).

One may expect the fulfilment of relationship (12) with good accuracy in the vicinity of the boundaries of stability of HP phases. From this standpoint, it seems to be very promising to investigate the kinetics of the phase transitions at HP with a view to searching for new HTSC materials.

## IV Conclusions

The basic qualitative differences of the BCS theory from the suggested SC model are listed below.

1. In accordance with the BCS theory, the SC condensate is formed by the pairs of electrons with zero momenta, and is therefore called Bose condensate.

In the proposed theory, the SC condensate is formed by electrons, and, accordingly, transforms into the Fermi condensate.

2. In the BCS theory, the ground state of the system is obtained through the superposition of the states with different total numbers of electrons. It is this property that underlies one of the formulations of the BCS theory  using anomalous expectation values $`\psi ^{}\psi ^{}`$, where $`\psi ^{}`$ are electron creation operators, as order parameters.

Now, in the proposed theory these expectation values are strictly equal to zero.

3. It is easy to show each of the states with a fixed total number of electrons, forming the superposition of the ground state in the BCS theory, is stationary state according to charge conservation law. The energies of all these states are the same value $`E_{min}`$ due to the fact, that the wave function of the ground state $`|\mathrm{\Psi }`$ satisfies the following equation $`H|\mathrm{\Psi }=E_{min}|\mathrm{\Psi }`$. Thus, a conclusion may be drawn that the removal of electrons from the superconductor does not change its energy. Hence, the work function of electrons in SC at lowest temperatures must be equal to zero.

Now, in the proposed model such a requirement is irrelevant.

Therefore, the investigation of the work function of electrons in SC materials seems to be main practicable method for the experimental comparison of the theories.

## V Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Dr. N.V. Klassen, Dr. V.V. Gromov, and Prof. Allan Solomon for their interest of our work and support of it.


format: text

text:
# Stable Magnetostatic Solitons in Yttrium Iron Garnet Film Waveguides for Tilted in-Plane Magnetic Fields

## I Introduction

The investigation of magnetostatic envelope solitons in yttrium-iron garnet thin magnetic films is one of the ”hot topics” in nowadays physics. The advanced instrumentation for microwave pulse generation, detection and analysis together with the solid theoretical base has led to a growing interest in studying such localized objects. The definition ”magnetostatic soliton” refers to a propagating pulse formed by large wavelength spin excitations which do not ”feel” the exchange interaction and only the dipolar interactions could be taken into account. Thus the processes are characterized by the Landau-Lifshitz and magnetostatic equations.

The linearized solutions of these equations were obtained by Damon and Eshbach damon  40 years ago for arbitrary direction between wave vector of spin excitations and in-plane magnetic field. The nature of those excitations has been also studied experimentally hurben . The weakly nonlinear limit for the mentioned equations also was considered for the particular cases when wave vector of spin excitations is either parallel (backward volume waves) or perpendicular (surface waves) to the direction of in-plane magnetic field. It was found out zvezdin  that the envelope of spin excitations in both cases satisfy 2D Nonlinear Schrödinger (NLS) equation which permits well-known 1D soliton solutions depending on the relative sign of dispersion and nonlinear terms.

In full accordance with the theoretical predictions the bright solitons have been observed for nonlinear backward volume waves case boyle  \- xia  (in-plane field is directed parallel to the carrier wave vector and propagation velocity of envelope soliton), while the dark solitons are created in case of nolinear surface waves chen2 -kalinikos  (carrier wave vector and group velocity is perpendicular to the magnetic field). It should be especially noted that all the mentioned solitons are observed in narrow strips. In such geometries the transverse instabilities do not develop and experiments show the stable propagation of 1D solitons along the waveguides. At the same time, in wide samples 1D solitons are in general unstable zakharov , kivshar  and form metastable spin wave bullets which decay either after edge reflection or mutual interaction zalit1 , zalit2 .

We emphasize that the solitons in in-plane magnetized films are studied both theoretically and experimentally only for two particular cases when the pulse propagates along or perpendicular to the magnetic field. Only very recently the general case of linear and nonlinear magnetostatic wave propagation in wide samples was investigated ref  for a wide range of angles between propagation velocity and magnetic field. In this connection the natural question arises: why one does not consider the nonlinear pulses in waveguides which are not either parallel or perpendicular to in-plane static magnetic field. As we show below for each magnitude of internal magnetic field it is possible to choose the direction (besides 0 or 90 degrees) of waveguide respect to magnetic field direction for which stable propagation of envelope solitons is allowed (see inset of Fig. 1 for a geometry of the problem). We determine the limits for magnitude of magnetic field, angle between waveguide and magnetic field vector and pulse frequency necessary for creation of dark or bright envelope solitons. We also calculate their widths and propagation velocities and claim that such solitons could be experimentally observed.

## II Basic Consideration: Linear Magnetostatic Waves

The linear consideration is based upon the Damon-Eshbach formulation damon  and its generalization by Hurben and Patton hurben  for the case of arbitrary angles between a wave vector $`\stackrel{}{k}`$ and static internal magnetic field $`\stackrel{}{H}_0`$. Further we will examine only so-called ”near-uniform” case ($`kd1`$, $`d`$ stands for a film thickness) and derive the dispersion expansion over the parameter $`kd`$ up to a second order. Therefore we present here only the steps necessary for this purpose. Consideration of the mentioned wave number range sufficiently simplifies calculations and, besides that, most of the experiments on the magnetostatic envelope solitons are made having such carrier wave numbers.

Examining an in-plane magnetized ferromagnetic film with unpinned surface spins let us make the following definitions: $`z`$ is a direction of internal static magnetic field; $`\stackrel{}{r}`$ indicates the radius vector lying in the sample plane ($`y,z`$) and $`x`$ is a coordinate along the direction perpendicular to the film plane. Then one can write down the Landau-Lifshitz and magnetostatic equations:

$$\frac{d\stackrel{}{M}}{dt}=g[\stackrel{}{M}\times \stackrel{}{H}]div(\stackrel{}{H}+4\pi \stackrel{}{M})=0rot\stackrel{}{H}=0.$$
(1)
Here $`g`$ is a modulus of the gyromagnetic ratio for electrons; $`\stackrel{}{M}`$ is a magnetization density vector and $`\stackrel{}{H}`$ is an internal total magnetic field. Introducing dynamical dimensionless quantities $`\stackrel{}{m}=(\stackrel{}{M}\stackrel{}{M}_0)/M_0`$ and $`\stackrel{}{h}=(\stackrel{}{H}\stackrel{}{H}_0)/H_0`$ the following equations are obtained in the linear limit over $`|\stackrel{}{m}|`$:

$$\frac{dm_x}{dt}=\omega _H(m_yh_y);\frac{dm_y}{dt}=\omega _H(m_xh_x);$$

$$\frac{}{x}\left(\omega _Hh_x+\omega _Mm_x\right)+\frac{}{y}\left(\omega _Hh_y+\omega _Mm_y\right)+\frac{}{z}\left(\omega _Hh_z\right)=0,$$
(2)
where $`\omega _H=gH_0`$ and $`\omega _M=4\pi gM_0`$. Defining $`\stackrel{}{h}=\stackrel{}{grad}\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and searching for the solution of Eq. (2) in periodical form over $`t`$ (i.e. $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`m_{x,y}`$ being proportional to $`exp(i\omega t)`$) we get:

$$\frac{^2}{z^2}\mathrm{\Phi }+(\chi _1+1)\left(\frac{^2}{y^2}+\frac{^2}{x^2}\right)\mathrm{\Phi }=0\text{for}|x|<\frac{d}{2},$$

$$\left(\frac{^2}{z^2}+\frac{^2}{y^2}+\frac{^2}{x^2}\right)\mathrm{\Phi }=0\text{for}|x|>\frac{d}{2}$$
(3)
and

$$m_x=\frac{\omega _H}{\omega _M}\left(i\chi _2\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{y}+\chi _1\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{x}\right),m_y=\frac{\omega _H}{\omega _M}\left(i\chi _2\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{x}\chi _1\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{y}\right),$$

where

$$\chi _1=\frac{\omega _H\omega _M}{\omega _H^2\omega ^2},\chi _2=\frac{\omega \omega _M}{\omega _H^2\omega ^2}.$$

Thus from (3) we can write down a linear solution of (1) in the form hurben :

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\left(Ae^{\kappa x}+Be^{\kappa x}\right)e^{i(\omega t\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{r})}\text{for}|x|<\frac{d}{2};$$

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=Ce^{k(xd/2)}e^{i(\omega t\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{r})}\text{for}x>\frac{d}{2};$$
(4)
$$\mathrm{\Phi }=De^{k(x+d/2)}e^{i(\omega t\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{r})}\text{for}x<\frac{d}{2},$$

where $`A`$, $`B`$, $`C`$ $`D`$ are arbitrary constants at the present stage,

$$\kappa ^2=\frac{k^2+\chi _1k_y^2}{1+\chi _1}$$

and let us remind that two dimensional vectors $`\stackrel{}{r}=(y,z)`$ and $`\stackrel{}{k}=(k_y,k_z)`$ lye in the film plane and $`k\sqrt{k_y^2+k_z^2}`$.

If $`\kappa ^2>0`$ we deal with a so-called surface mode, otherwise $`\kappa =i\sqrt{\kappa ^2}`$ and a volume mode exists. However, note that due to the condition of ”near-uniformity” $`kd1`$ the difference between these two modes is negligible.

The dispersion relation can be obtained from (4) if we remember about the boundary conditions. Particularly the functions $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`h_x+4\pi m_x`$ should be continuous on the boundaries $`d/2`$ and $`d/2`$ of the film. The dispersion relation for both modes could be written as follows:

$$2k(\chi _1+1)\kappa \frac{e^{\kappa d}+e^{\kappa d}}{e^{\kappa d}e^{\kappa d}}k_y^2\chi _2^2+k^2+\kappa ^2(\chi _1+1)^2=0.$$
(5)
Working in the limit $`kd1`$ and keeping only the terms up to the second order of this parameter the following expression is obtained:

$$\omega =\omega _0+\frac{\omega _M}{4\omega _0}\frac{d}{k}\left(\omega _Mk_y^2\omega _Hk_z^2\right)\frac{\omega _M^2}{32\omega _0^3}\frac{d^2}{k^2}\left(\omega _Mk_y^2\omega _Hk_z^2\right)^2+\frac{\omega _M}{4\omega _0}d^2\left(\omega _H\frac{k_z^2}{3}\omega _Mk_y^2\right),$$
(6)
where $`\omega _0\omega (k=0)=\sqrt{\omega _H(\omega _H+\omega _M)}`$. Then we get from (6) the following expressions for the derivatives of $`\omega `$ over $`k_y`$ and $`k_z`$:

$$v_y=\frac{\omega }{k_y}=\frac{\omega _M}{4\omega _0}d\left\{\frac{k_y}{k}\left[\omega _M\frac{k_y^2}{k^2}+(2\omega _M+\omega _H)\frac{k_z^2}{k^2}\right]+𝒪_1(kd)\right\},$$

$$v_z=\frac{\omega }{k_z}=\frac{\omega _M}{4\omega _0}d\left\{\frac{k_z}{k}\left[\omega _H\frac{k_z^2}{k^2}+(2\omega _H+\omega _M)\frac{k_y^2}{k^2}\right]+𝒪_2(kd)\right\},$$

$$\omega _{yy}^{\prime \prime }=\frac{^2\omega }{k_y^2}=\frac{\omega _M}{4\omega _0}\frac{d}{k}\left\{\frac{k_z^2}{k^2}\left[(2\omega _M+\omega _H)\frac{k_z^2}{k^2}(2\omega _H+\omega _M)\frac{k_y^2}{k^2}\right]+𝒪_1^{}(kd)\right\},$$

$$\omega _{zz}^{\prime \prime }=\frac{^2\omega }{k_z^2}=\frac{\omega _M}{4\omega _0}\frac{d}{k}\left\{\frac{k_y^2}{k^2}\left[(2\omega _M+\omega _H)\frac{k_z^2}{k^2}(2\omega _H+\omega _M)\frac{k_y^2}{k^2}\right]+𝒪_2^{}(kd)\right\},$$

$$\omega _{yz}^{\prime \prime }=\frac{^2\omega }{k_zk_y}=\frac{\omega _M}{4\omega _0}\frac{d}{k}\left\{\frac{k_yk_z}{k^2}\left[(2\omega _M+\omega _H)\frac{k_z^2}{k^2}(2\omega _H+\omega _M)\frac{k_y^2}{k^2}\right]+𝒪_3^{}(kd)\right\}.$$
(7)
The higher approximation terms $`𝒪_j(kd)`$ and $`𝒪_j^{}(kd)`$ are not presented here because of their rather cumbrous form, but we use them in the calculation as far as the leading terms in expressions (7) vanish in vicinity of some points, e.g. $`k_y=0`$ or $`k_z=0`$.

## III Weakly Nonlinear Limit: Soliton Solutions

Defining a wave envelope $`u`$

$$m_x+im_y=ue^{i(\omega t\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{r})}$$

and following the well known modulation approach karpman , zvezdin  the nonlinear equation for wave envelope $`u`$ is derived (we redirect reader for details of obtaining this equation to the recent paper Ref. boyle  where the full procedure is well described):

$$i\left(\frac{u}{t}+v_y\frac{u}{y}+v_z\frac{u}{z}\right)+\frac{\omega _{yy}^{\prime \prime }}{2}\frac{^2u}{y^2}+\frac{\omega _{zz}^{\prime \prime }}{2}\frac{^2u}{z^2}+\omega _{yz}^{\prime \prime }\frac{^2u}{yz}N|u|^2u=0.$$
(8)
All of the coefficients are defined by formulas (7) except the nonlinear coefficient $`N`$ which could be easily calculated taking into account that in nonlinear case we have a following identity:

$$\omega _M=4\pi gM_0m_z.$$

Then Substituting in (6) the expansion of $`m_z`$ in weakly nonlinear limit $`m_z=1|u|^2/2`$ and using expression for $`N`$ from Refs. karpman , zvezdin , boyle  we get in large wavelength limit ($`kd1`$)

$$N=\frac{\omega }{|u|^2}|_{k0,|u|0}=\frac{\omega _0}{|u|^2}|_{|u|0}=\frac{\omega _H\omega _M}{4\omega _0}.$$
(9)
Let us mention that if carrier wave vector is parallel or perpendicular to the static internal magnetic field the coefficients $`v_y`$ and $`w_{yz}^{\prime \prime }`$ are equal to zero zvezdin , boyle . But for arbitrary angles between $`\stackrel{}{k}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{H_0}`$ that is not the case. Therefore we should introduce a new frame of references in order to vanish the nondiagonal term with coefficient $`\omega _{yz}^{\prime \prime }`$. This could be done rotating the frame of references $`yz`$ by the angle $`\vartheta `$

$$\xi =z\mathrm{cos}\vartheta +y\mathrm{sin}\vartheta ,\eta =y\mathrm{cos}\vartheta z\mathrm{sin}\vartheta ,$$
(10)
where

$$tg2\vartheta =2\frac{\omega _{yz}^{\prime \prime }}{\omega _{zz}^{\prime \prime }\omega _{yy}^{\prime \prime }}.$$
(11)
Then from (8) - (11) we obtain the following nonlinear equation:

$$i\left(\frac{u}{t}+v_1\frac{u}{\xi }+v_2\frac{u}{\eta }\right)+\frac{1}{2}R\frac{^2u}{\xi ^2}+\frac{1}{2}S\frac{^2u}{\eta ^2}N|u|^2u=0,$$
(12)
where

$$R=\omega _{zz}^{\prime \prime }cos^2\vartheta +2\omega _{zy}^{\prime \prime }cos\vartheta \mathrm{sin}\vartheta +\omega _{yy}^{\prime \prime }sin^2\vartheta ,$$

$$S=\omega _{zz}^{\prime \prime }sin^2\vartheta 2\omega _{zy}^{\prime \prime }cos\vartheta \mathrm{sin}\vartheta +\omega _{yy}^{\prime \prime }cos^2\vartheta ,$$
(13)
$$v_1=v_zcos\vartheta +v_ysin\vartheta ,v_2=v_zsin\vartheta v_ycos\vartheta .$$
(14)
Afterwards in the moving frame of references

$$\xi _1=\xi v_1t\eta _1=\eta v_2t$$

we come to the 2D nonlinear Schrödinger equation:

$$i\frac{u}{t}+\frac{1}{2}R\frac{^2u}{\xi _1^2}+\frac{1}{2}S\frac{^2u}{\eta _1^2}N|u|^2u=0$$
(15)
and can write down its 1D bright or dark soliton solutions assuming that soliton envelope is a function only of variables $`\xi _1`$ and $`t`$ (thus soliton propagates along a spatial axis $`\xi `$ with a velocity $`v_1`$). If $`NR<0`$ we have bright soliton with envelope

$$|u|=|u|_{max}sech\left\{\frac{\xi _1}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\right\},$$
(16)
while in case $`NR>0`$ dark soliton solution is permitted:

$$|u|=|u|_{max}\left|\frac{\sqrt{1A^2}}{A}+itanh\left\{\frac{\xi _1}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\right\}\right|,$$
(17)
where $`A`$ denotes the contrast of dark soliton (if $`A=1`$ one has a black dark soliton and gray dark otherwise) and soliton width $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is defined for both cases by the same way:

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=\left|\frac{R}{N}\right|^{1/2}\frac{1}{|u|_{max}},$$
(18)
Now we shall discuss the question about the stability of these 1D solitons.

## IV Stable Solitons in Waveguides for Tilted Magnetic Fields

As well known 1D soliton solutions (16) and (17) of 2D NLS are not stable to the transverse modulations with wavenumbers $`0<\kappa <\kappa _c`$. According to the recent results (see e.g. Ref. kivshar ) $`\kappa _c1/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, thus, if the limits of transverse variable $`\eta _1`$ is less than soliton width the instabilities do not develop and 1D soliton solutions (16) and (17) would be stable. When one has fully spatial transverse variable $`\eta _1`$ the above condition means that narrow samples should be used. In our case we have the mixed variable $`\eta _1=\eta v_2t`$ and therefore also the condition for time dependent part has to be introduced: $`v_2t<\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and in case

$$v_2=0$$
(19)
the transverse instabilities do not develop even for infinite time. Thus besides the condition (11) we get from (14) and (19) additional condition on the stable soliton parameters:

$$tg\vartheta =\frac{v_y}{v_z}.$$
(20)
Afterwards, in view of both conditions (14) and (20) we finally obtain the following equality:

$$\frac{\omega _{yz}^{\prime \prime }}{\omega _{zz}^{\prime \prime }\omega _{yy}^{\prime \prime }}=\frac{v_yv_z}{v_z^2v_y^2}.$$
(21)
Solving (21) as an expansion over small parameter $`kd`$ we simply come to the following expression for the angle $`\phi `$ between carrier wavevector $`\stackrel{}{k}`$ and static magnetic field:

$$\mathrm{sin}\phi =\sqrt{\frac{\omega _H}{\omega _H+\omega _M}}\left(1+\frac{\omega _M(3\omega _H+\omega _M)}{3(\omega _H^2\omega _M^2)}kd\right).$$
(22)
Obviously there exist also trivial solutions $`\phi =0`$ and $`\phi =90^o`$ which will not be considered as long as they correspond to the well studied cases of bright backward volume wave and dark surface wave solitons, respectively. Further using the condition (20) and definitions for dispersion coefficient (13) we get the expressions for $`\vartheta `$ and $`R`$ as functions of expansion parameter $`kd`$:

$$\mathrm{sin}\vartheta =\sqrt{\frac{\omega _M}{\omega _M+\omega _H}}\left(1\frac{\omega _H}{\omega _H+\omega _M}kd\right);R=\frac{\omega _M(\omega _M\omega _H)}{2\sqrt{\omega _H(\omega _M+\omega _H)}}\frac{d}{k}.$$
(23)
As long as the nonlinear coefficient $`N`$ according to (9) is always negative the possibility of appearance of dark or bright solitons depends on the sign of dispersion coefficient $`R`$. In view of the second relation in (23) we can conclude that bright solitons appears if $`\omega _H<\omega _M`$ while dark solitons could be created for larger magnetic fields $`\omega _H>\omega _M`$. From Exps. (18) and (6) we are also able to get the expressions for soliton width and detuning of pulse frequency, respectively:

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=\frac{d}{|u|_{max}}\sqrt{\frac{2|\omega _M\omega _H|}{\omega _Hkd}};\omega \omega _0=\frac{\omega _M}{3}\sqrt{\frac{\omega _M}{\omega _H+\omega _M}}\frac{\omega _M}{\omega _H\omega _M}(kd)^2,$$
(24)
while the soliton propagation velocity could be given by simple approximate formula:

$$vv_1\frac{\omega _Md}{2}\sqrt{\frac{\omega _M}{\omega _M+\omega _H}}$$
(25)
It should be noted that our perturbative approach violates if $`\omega _H\omega _M`$. Besides that, we have a following restriction on the internal static magnetic field: $`\omega _H>0.3\omega _M`$. Otherwise the threshold for three magnon processes is reached and localized nonlinear wave will decay rapidly zvezdin .

As we see all of the quantities $`\vartheta `$, $`\omega \omega _0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ specifying the soliton are the functions of $`kd`$ and $`h=\omega _H/\omega _M`$. Thus it is possible to plot $`\omega \omega _0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ as the functions of $`\vartheta `$ for different $`h`$ (see Figs. 1 and 2).

In Fig. 1 we present how to choose the sample geometry (in other words how to choose an angle $`\vartheta `$ between waveguide and static magnetic field) and frequency of applied pulse for various $`h\omega _H/\omega _M`$ in order to create bright or dark soliton. While in Fig. 2 we show the dependence of soliton width on the geometry of the problem and static magnetic field. In both cases the curves are limited because of restriction of ”near uniformity” $`kd1`$ and the following parameters for YIG film are used: $`d=10\mu m`$ and $`\omega _M=1750`$ Oe. Note that bright solitons appear when the angle between waveguide and static magnetic field is less than 45o. Besides that, the detuning of pulse should be positive in order to create dark solitons. For the purpose to create bright solitons the angles should be larger than $`45^o`$ and detuning has to be negative.

## V Conclusions and Possible Experimental Setup

Summarizing we can declare that the possibility of stable magnetostatic soliton propagation in in-plane magnetized ferromagnetic films in presence of tilted (from waveguide direction) static in-plane magnetic fields is proved. The widths and velocities as well as the range of angles between waveguide and magnetic field is obtained for which the stable soliton propagation is allowed.

However, As it was mentioned by the anonymous referee the waveguide border (see dashed line in the inset of Fig. 1) could cause the reflection of carrier wave (wave vector $`\stackrel{}{k}`$) what will change the group velocity destructing thus the soliton. To avoid such a possibility we propose to use tube like magnetic waveguides (see Fig. 3). Then the carrier wave will not be reflected and, besides that, the condition of quasi-one dimensionality still holds. Let us make the following choice of the parameters of the problem: tube diameter $`L=0.5`$mm; film thickness $`d=10\mu m`$ and $`1/Lk1/d`$. Thus the near uniformity condition $`kd1`$ is still valid and simultaneously the consideration of the sample as locally flat is allowed proving thus approximate validity of solutions like Exp. (4).

Acknowledgements: We would like to thank Dr. David Tskhakaia for the guiding advice. R. Kh. acknowledges NSF-NATO award No DGE-0075191 providing the financial support for his stay in Oklahoma University where the paper was completed.


text:
# References

UT-02-07

IU-MSTP/46

Ginsparg-Wilson operators and a no-go theorem

Kazuo Fujikawa, Masato Ishibashi

Department of Physics,University of Tokyo

Bunkyo-ku,Tokyo 113,Japan

and

Hiroshi Suzuki

Department of Mathematical Sciences, Ibaraki University

Mito, 310-8512, Japan

## Abstract

If one uses a general class of Ginsparg-Wilson operators, it is known that CP symmetry is spoiled in chiral gauge theory for a finite lattice spacing and the Majorana fermion is not defined in the presence of chiral symmetric Yukawa couplings. We summarize these properties in the form of a theorem for the general Ginsparg-Wilson relation.

The Ginsparg-Wilson relation provides a convenient framework for the analyses of chiral symmetry in lattice theory. It has been recently pointed out by Hasenfratz that the overlap operator has a conflict with CP symmetry in chiral gauge theory for any finite lattice spacing $`a`$. We pointed out that the lattice chiral symmetry of the Ginsparg-Wilson operator has a certain conflict with the definition of the Majorana fermion in the presence of Yukawa couplings. (The breaking of CP symmetry in a different context was also mentioned in). These analyses are either based on the simple form of the Ginsparg-Wilson relation and its explicit solution, or on the generalized forms of Ginsparg-Wilson relation but still on their explicit solutions. It may be useful to formulate these properties in a more abstract and general setting to understand the general features of these complications. In this paper we provide such an analysis.

We deal with a hermitian lattice operator defined by

$$H=a\gamma _5D=H^{}=aD^{}\gamma _5$$
(1)
where $`D`$ stands for the lattice Dirac operator and $`a`$ is the lattice spacing. We analyze the general Dirac operator defined by the algebraic relation

$$\gamma _5H+H\gamma _5=2H^2f(H^2)$$
(2)
where $`f(H^2)`$ is assumed to be a regular function of $`H^2`$ and $`f(H^2)^{}=f(H^2)`$: To be definite, we assume that $`f(x)`$ is monotonous and non-decreasing for $`x0`$, and $`f(H^2)=1`$ corresponds to the conventional Ginsparg-Wilson relation. We also assume that the operator $`H`$ is local in the sense that it is analytic in the entire Brillouin zone. One can confirm the relation

$$\gamma _5H^2=(\gamma _5H+H\gamma _5)HH(\gamma _5H+H\gamma _5)+H^2\gamma _5=H^2\gamma _5$$
(3)
which implies $`H^2=\gamma _5H^2\gamma _5`$ and thus $`DH^2=H^2D`$. The above defining relation (2) is written in a variety of ways such as

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_5H+H\mathrm{\Gamma }_5=0,\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\gamma _5D+D\mathrm{\Gamma }_5=0,`$
$`\gamma _5H+H\widehat{\gamma }_5=0,\gamma _5D+D\widehat{\gamma }_5=0`$ (4)
and $`\widehat{\gamma }_5^2=1`$ where

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_5=\gamma _5Hf(H^2),`$
$`\widehat{\gamma }_5=\gamma _52Hf(H^2).`$ (5)
We also note the relation

$`\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\widehat{\gamma }_5`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma _52\mathrm{\Gamma }_5^2\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\gamma _5=\gamma _5(\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5+\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\gamma _5)\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\gamma _5`$ (6)
$`=`$ $`\gamma _5(\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5).`$
We now examine the action defined by

$$S=d^4x\overline{\psi }D\psi \underset{x,y}{}\overline{\psi }(x)D(x,y)\psi (y)$$
(7)
which is invariant under the lattice chiral transformation

$$\delta \psi =iϵ\widehat{\gamma }_5\psi ,\delta \overline{\psi }=\overline{\psi }iϵ\gamma _5.$$
(8)
If one considers the field re-definition

$$\psi ^{}=\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\psi ,\overline{\psi }^{}=\overline{\psi }$$
(9)
the above action is written as

$$S=d^4x\overline{\psi }^{}D\frac{1}{\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5}\psi ^{}$$
(10)
which is invariant under the naive chiral transformation (by using (6))

$`\delta \psi ^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\delta \psi =\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5iϵ\widehat{\gamma }_5\psi =iϵ\gamma _5\psi ^{},`$
$`\delta \overline{\psi }^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\psi }^{}iϵ\gamma _5.`$ (11)
This chiral symmetry implies the relation

$$\{\gamma _5,D\frac{1}{\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5}\}=0.$$
(12)
We here recall the conventional no-go theorem in the form of Nielsen and Ninomiya, which states in view of (10) and (12) that
(i) If the operator $`D`$ is local and if $`1/(\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5)`$ is analytic in the entire Brillouin zone, the operator $`D`$ contains the species doubling. The simplest choice $`f(H^2)=0`$ and thus $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_5=\gamma _5`$ is included in this case.
(ii)If the operator $`D`$ is local and free of species doubling, then the operator $`\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5`$ is also local by its construction. But the operator $`1/(\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5)`$ cannot be analytic in the entire Brillouin zone, which in turn suggests that

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_5^2=1H^2f^2(H^2)=0$$
(13)
has solutions inside the Brillouin zone. These properties are proved for vanishing gauge field.

Since we are interested in the local and doubler-free operator $`D`$, we can summarize the analysis so far in the form of a theorem.
Theorem: For any lattice operator $`D`$ defined by the algebraic relation (2), which is local (i.e., analytic in the entire Brillouin zone) and free of species doubling, the operator $`1/(\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5)`$ is singular inside the Brillouin zone and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_5^2=1H^2f^2(H^2)`$ has at least one zero inside the Brillouin zone.

These properties are known for the specific case $`f(H^2)=H^{2k}`$ with a non-negative integer $`k`$ by using explicit solutions. Here we learn that these properties are of more general validity and intrinsically related to the basic notions of locality and species doubling.

In the following we discuss the implications of the above theorem. We first summarize the representation of the algebra (2). See, for example, ref.. Let us consider the eigenvalue problem

$$H\phi _n(x)=\lambda _n\phi _n(x),(\phi _n,\phi _m)=\delta _{nm}.$$
(14)
We first note $`H\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\phi _n(x)=\mathrm{\Gamma }_5H\phi _n(x)=\lambda _n\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\phi _n(x)`$, and

$$(\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\phi _n,\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\phi _m)=[1\lambda _n^2f^2(\lambda _n^2)]\delta _{nm}.$$
(15)
These relations show that eigenfunctions with $`\lambda _n0`$ and $`\lambda _nf(\lambda _n^2)\pm 1`$ come in pairs as $`\lambda _n`$ and $`\lambda _n`$ (when$`\lambda _n=0`$, $`\phi _0(x)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\phi _0(x)`$ are not necessarily linearly independent).

We can thus classify eigenfunctions as follows:
(i) $`\lambda _n=0`$ ($`H\phi _0(x)=0`$). For this one may impose the chirality on $`\phi _0(x)`$ as

$$\gamma _5\phi _0^\pm (x)=\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\phi _0^\pm (x)=\pm \phi _0^\pm (x).$$
(16)
We denote the number of $`\phi _0^+(x)`$ ($`\phi _0^{}(x)`$) as $`n_+`$ ($`n_{}`$).

(ii) $`\lambda _n0`$ and $`\lambda _nf(\lambda _n^2)\pm 1`$. As shown above,

$$H\phi _n(x)=\lambda _n\phi _n(x),H\stackrel{~}{\phi }_n(x)=\lambda _n\stackrel{~}{\phi }_n(x),$$
(17)
where

$$\stackrel{~}{\phi }_n(x)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1\lambda _n^2f^2(\lambda _n^2)}}\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\phi _n(x).$$
(18)
We have

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\phi _n(x)=\sqrt{1\lambda _n^2f^2(\lambda _n^2)}\stackrel{~}{\phi }_n(x),\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\stackrel{~}{\phi }_n(x)=\sqrt{1\lambda _n^2f^2(\lambda _n^2)}\phi _n(x),$$
(19)
and

$`\gamma _5\phi _n(x)=\sqrt{1\lambda _n^2f^2(\lambda _n^2)}\stackrel{~}{\phi }_n(x)+\lambda _nf(\lambda _n^2)\phi _n(x),`$
$`\gamma _5\stackrel{~}{\phi }_n(x)=\sqrt{1\lambda _n^2f^2(\lambda _n^2)}\phi _n(x)\lambda _nf(\lambda _n^2)\stackrel{~}{\phi }_n(x).`$ (20)
(iii) $`\lambda _nf(\lambda _n^2)=\pm 1`$, or

$$H\mathrm{\Psi }_\pm (x)=\pm \mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Psi }_\pm (x),\mathrm{\Lambda }f(\mathrm{\Lambda }^2)=1.$$
(21)
We see

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\mathrm{\Psi }_\pm (x)=0,$$
(22)
and

$$\gamma _5\mathrm{\Psi }_\pm (x)=\pm \mathrm{\Lambda }f(\mathrm{\Lambda }^2)\mathrm{\Psi }_\pm (x)=\pm \mathrm{\Psi }_\pm (x).$$
(23)
We denote the number of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_+(x)`$ ($`\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(x)`$) as $`N_+`$ ($`N_{}`$). From the relation $`Tr\gamma _5=0`$ valid on the lattice, one can derive the chirality sum rule

$$n_+n_{}+N_+N_{}=0.$$
(24)
We next recall the charge conjugation properties of various operators. We employ the convention of the charge conjugation matrix $`C`$

$`C\gamma ^\mu C^1=(\gamma ^\mu )^T,`$ (25)
$`C\gamma _5C^1=\gamma _5^T,`$ (26)
$`C^{}C=1,C^T=C.`$ (27)
We then have

$`CDC^1=D^T,C\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5C^1=(\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5)^T,`$
$`C\gamma _5H\gamma _5C^1=H^T,CH^2C^1=(H^2)^T,`$
$`C(\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\gamma _5/\mathrm{\Gamma })C^1=(\mathrm{\Gamma }_5/\mathrm{\Gamma })^T`$ (28)
where

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }=\sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }_5^2}=\sqrt{(\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\gamma _5)^2}=\sqrt{1H^2f^2(H^2)}.$$
(29)
Here we imposed the relation $`CDC^1=D^T`$ or $`(CD)^T=CD`$ which is consistent with the defining algebraic relation (2): To be precise, we need to perform simultaneously a suitable charge conjugation of gauge field in gauge theory111If one defines the CP operation by $`W=C\gamma _0=\gamma _2`$ with hermitian $`\gamma _2`$ and the CP transformed gauge field by $`U^{CP}`$, one has $`WD(U^{CP})W^1=D(U)^T`$. If the parity is realized in the standard way, one has $`CD(U^C)C^1=D(U)^T`$.. In the following this charge conjugation of gauge field is implicitly assumed when we deal with theories with gauge field.

We now examine the CP symmetry in chiral gauge theory

$$=\overline{\psi }_LD\psi _L$$
(30)
where we defined the projection operators

$`D=\overline{P}_LDP_L+\overline{P}_RDP_R,`$
$`\psi _{L,R}=P_{L,R}\psi ,\overline{\psi }_{L,R}=\overline{\psi }\overline{P}_{L,R}.`$ (31)
If the algebra (2) is applicable to strong interactions it is natural that the parity operation is realized in the standard way, and we concentrate on the charge conjugation. The proper transformation property under CP is then ensured by

$`CP_LC^1=\overline{P}_R^T,C\overline{P}_LC^1=P_R^T`$ (32)
which transforms $`^c=\overline{\psi }_RD\psi _R`$ under the charge conjugation $`\overline{\psi }\psi ^TC`$ and $`\psi C^1\overline{\psi }^T`$. One can confirm that the following projection operators

$`P_{L,R}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(1\mathrm{\Gamma }_5/\mathrm{\Gamma }),`$
$`\overline{P}_{L,R}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(1\pm \gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\gamma _5/\mathrm{\Gamma }).`$ (33)
satisfy the requirement (32). One can in fact prove that these projection operators give the unique solutions by using the following statement.
Statement: If the operators $`\stackrel{~}{U}`$ and $`V`$ are regular in $`\gamma _5`$ and $`H`$ and satisfy

$$\stackrel{~}{U}H+HV=0,$$
(34)
and (with $`B=C\gamma _5`$, $`B^T=B`$)

$$B\stackrel{~}{U}B^1=V^T,BVB^1=\stackrel{~}{U}^T,$$
(35)
for a generic $`H`$, then they are of the form

$$\stackrel{~}{U}=V=\mathrm{\Gamma }_5h(H^2),$$
(36)
with a regular function $`h(H^2)`$.
Proof: Since $`\gamma _5=\mathrm{\Gamma }_5+Hf(H^2)`$, $`\stackrel{~}{U}`$ and $`V`$ are regular also in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_5`$ and $`H`$. Noting $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_5^2=1H^2f^2(H^2)`$, the most general form of $`\stackrel{~}{U}`$ reads

$$\stackrel{~}{U}=g(H)+\mathrm{\Gamma }_5h(H^2)+\mathrm{\Gamma }_5Hk(H^2).$$
(37)
This implies

$$B\stackrel{~}{U}B^1=[g(H)+\mathrm{\Gamma }_5h(H^2)\mathrm{\Gamma }_5Hk(H^2)]^T,$$
(38)
from $`BHB^1=H^T`$, $`B\mathrm{\Gamma }_5B^1=\mathrm{\Gamma }_5^T`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_5H+H\mathrm{\Gamma }_5=0`$. Eqs. (35) and (38) imply

$$V=g(H)+\mathrm{\Gamma }_5h(H^2)\mathrm{\Gamma }_5Hk(H^2),$$
(39)
and thus eq. (34) imposes

$$Hg(H)+\mathrm{\Gamma }_5H^2k(H^2)=0.$$
(40)
The matrix element of this equation between $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }_n(x)`$ and $`\phi _n(x)`$ reads

$$(\stackrel{~}{\phi }_n,[Hg(H)+\mathrm{\Gamma }_5H^2k(H^2)]\phi _n)=\sqrt{1\lambda _n^2f^2(\lambda _n^2)}\lambda _n^2k(\lambda _n^2)=0.$$
(41)
This shows that $`k(x)`$ must have zero at $`x=\lambda _n^2`$, but this is impossible for a generic $`H`$ unless $`k(x)=0`$. Similarly, we have $`g(H)=0`$ and obtain eq. (36).

On the basis of this statement, one can construct the modified chiral operators

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_5/\mathrm{\Gamma },\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\gamma _5/\mathrm{\Gamma }$$
(42)
with $`(\mathrm{\Gamma }_5/\mathrm{\Gamma })^2=1`$ and $`(\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\gamma _5/\mathrm{\Gamma })^2=1`$. In this construction, we assumed that $`h(H^2)`$ exhibits the most favorable property, namely, has no zeroes. These projection operators (33) however inevitably contain singularities in the modified chiral operators $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_5/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\gamma _5/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, as is specified by our theorem. These projection operators (33) also become singular in the presence of topologically non-trivial gauge fields, since the massive modes $`N_\pm `$ in (22) inevitably appear as is indicated by the chirality sum rule (24). This generalizes the analysis of Hasenfratz in a more abstract setting.

As for the analysis of the Majorana fermion, we start with

$``$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\psi }_RD\psi _R+\overline{\psi }_LD\psi _L+m[\overline{\psi }_R\psi _L+\overline{\psi }_L\psi _R]`$
$`+2g[\overline{\psi }_L\varphi \psi _R+\overline{\psi }_R\varphi ^{}\psi _L]`$
$`=`$ $`\overline{\psi }D\psi +m\overline{\psi }\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\psi +{\displaystyle \frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}}\overline{\psi }[A+(\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\gamma _5/\mathrm{\Gamma })A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_5/\mathrm{\Gamma })+i(\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\gamma _5/\mathrm{\Gamma })B+iB(\mathrm{\Gamma }_5/\mathrm{\Gamma })]\psi `$
where we used $`\varphi =(A+iB)/\sqrt{2}`$. We then make the substitution

$`\psi =(\chi +i\eta )/\sqrt{2},`$
$`\overline{\psi }=(\chi ^TCi\eta ^TC)/\sqrt{2}`$ (44)
and obtain222If $`(CO)^T=CO`$ for a general operator $`O`$, the cross term vanishes $`\eta ^TCO\chi \chi ^TCO\eta =0`$ by using the anti-commuting property of $`\chi `$ and $`\eta `$. In the presence of background gauge field, we assume that the representation of gauge symmetry is real.

$``$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\chi ^TCD\chi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m\chi ^TC\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\chi `$ (45)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{g}{2\sqrt{2}}}\chi ^TC[A+(\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\gamma _5/\mathrm{\Gamma })A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_5/\mathrm{\Gamma })+i(\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\gamma _5/\mathrm{\Gamma })B+iB(\mathrm{\Gamma }_5/\mathrm{\Gamma })]\chi `$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\eta ^TCD\eta +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m\eta ^TC\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\eta `$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{g}{2\sqrt{2}}}\eta ^TC[A+(\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\gamma _5/\mathrm{\Gamma })A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_5/\mathrm{\Gamma })+i(\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\gamma _5/\mathrm{\Gamma })B+iB(\mathrm{\Gamma }_5/\mathrm{\Gamma })]\eta .`$
One can then define the Majorana fermion $`\chi `$ (or $`\eta `$) and the resulting Pfaffian. But this formulation of the Majorana fermion inevitably suffers from the singularities of the modified chiral operators $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_5/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\gamma _5/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ in the Brillouin zone without gauge fields or from the singularities of these chiral operators caused by the massive modes $`N_\pm `$ (22) in the presence of topologically non-trivial gauge fields.

We note that the condition (32), which is required by the consistent $`CP`$ property in (30), is directly related to the condition of the consistent Majorana reduction for the term containing scalar field $`A(x)`$,

$$C(\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\gamma _5/\mathrm{\Gamma })A(x)(\mathrm{\Gamma }_5/\mathrm{\Gamma })=[C(\gamma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_5\gamma _5/\mathrm{\Gamma })A(x)(\mathrm{\Gamma }_5/\mathrm{\Gamma })]^T$$
(46)
in the Yukawa coupling, if one recalls that the difference operators in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_5`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ do not commute with the field $`A(x)`$. In other words, if one uses the projection operators which do not satisfy the condition (32) the consistent Majorana reduction is not realized. For the chiral symmetric Yukawa couplings such as in supersymmetry the Majorana reduction is thus directly related to the condition (32) (and consequently to the CP invariance of (43)), provided that parity properties are the standard ones333 The Yukawa coupling in the Higgs mechanism on the lattice in general is also constrained by CP invariance. In this sense, the constraint arising from CP symmetry is more universal..

It should be noted that our analysis does not show how serious the complications associated with CP symmetry and Majorana reduction are in the actual applications of lattice regularization. As for the breaking of CP symmetry, it could be similar to the breaking of Lorentz symmetry for finite lattice spacing $`a`$; it may well be restored in a suitable continuum limit. Nevertheless it must be useful to keep in mind that exact and manifest CP is not implemented for a general Ginsparg-Wilson operator. As for the absence of Majorana reduction, a reliable analysis of supersymmetry in some of supersymmetric theories is not possible; practically this could be serious since the divergence cancellation in supersymmetric theory, for example, is very sensitive to the precise implementation of supersymmetry algebra.

In conclusion, we have shown that both of the consistent definitions of CP symmetry in chiral gauge theory and the Majorana fermion in the presence of chiral symmetric Yukawa couplings are based on the same condition (32), and that the construction of projection operators (33) inevitably suffers from the singularities in the modified chiral operators for any Dirac operator $`D`$ satisfying the algebraic relation (2). Our analysis is based on several key assumptions including the algebraic relation (2) itself, though those assumptions appear to be natural in the framework of Ginsparg and Wilson. We find it quite interesting that the breaking of CP symmetry and a conflict with Majorana reduction are directly related to the basic notions of locality and species doubling in lattice theory. A detailed analysis of the possible implications of the breaking of CP symmetry and the absence of Majorana reduction will be given elsewhere.


text:
# Retrieval and Chaos in Extremely Diluted Non-Monotonic Neural Networks

## 1. Introduction

Models of neural networks have been largely studied since the pioneering work of Hopfield . Assuming symmetric interactions and monotonic units, and using classical tools of statistical mechanics, equilibrium properties were extensively investigated. For a review in this subject, see, e. g., . Nevertheless, the brain is a highly dynamical system, and equilibrium statistical mechanics should be not able to describe most of its properties. At our knowledge, the first work including the dynamical behavior as an important topic in neural networks research is due to Sompolinsky et al. . In that work, it was shown that asymmetric synaptic connections between units, a plausible feature, results in cyclic and chaotic behavior in the network dynamics. The chaotic behavior in neural tissue is, in fact supported by biological observations .

More recently, a new class of models allowing for the complex behavior in neural networks started to be explored. It consists in networks of neurons in which the output activity is a non-monotonic function of the local input field. Next, we present a quick list with some important results available in the literature.

The feed-forward perceptron is an architecture where the main task to be performed is the classification of a set of input patterns. Following first step replica symmetry breaking calculations in the space of the synaptic interactions, see  and references therein, the optimal capacity for classification of patterns is larger for the non-monotonic than for the monotonic perceptron. Still concerning this subject, non-monotonic perceptrons offer a further opportunity to study the fractal organization of the space of interactions .

In networks of recurrent architecture, the main subject concerns the associative memory property. If the dynamical evolution is governed by an hamiltonian, with the relaxation to an equilibrium distribution of states reproducing the process of memory retrieval. The question here is, if the dynamics is not governed by an hamiltonian, as in the case of non-monotonic, under which conditions it evolves to an equilibrium distribution of states keeping, in this way, the associative memory property? This problem was studied by Inoue , through the use of an equilibrium signal to noise analysis. It was found that, depending on the parameters defining the non-monotonicity, for binary patterns, and using the Hebb learning rule, the storage capacity, to be defined and discussed later, is highly improved, compared to monotonic neurons.

The dynamics of extremely diluted networks of continuous, non-monotonic neurons was studied in . The associative memory property is still present, and a non-regular, chaotic-type attractor was also noticed. The authors pointed out the emergence of chaos as a consequence of the non-monotonicity. The categorization ability of extremely diluted, three-state, non-monotonic neural network was studied in . A categorization phase, as well as a chaotic phase, was noticed. In  there is a study of the chaotic attractors of a model with non-monotonic, binary neurons, with finite connectivity and binary synapses.

Our purpose in this paper is to study some of the dynamical properties of non-monotonic neural networks. The relaxation to the retrieval state, the appearing of oscillations and chaos, and the interplay between all these behaviors are discussed. In order to make transparent the essential physical aspects, the simplest model of non-monotonic neural network was chosen, i. e., the network of binary, reverse-wedge neurons, with hebbian connections. In order to have an analytically solvable dynamics, we restrict our study to the extremely diluted architecture with parallel updates. In addition, further insight on the microscopic dynamics during the chaotic phase, as well as in the transition from the chaotic to the retrieval phase, was obtained through numerical simulations.

## 2. Diluted network dynamics

We consider a network composed by N sites, whose state is represented by a set of variables $`\{S_i\}i=1\mathrm{}N`$, with the state of the neuron in site $`i`$ being represented by a binary variable $`S_i=\pm 1`$. In the absence of retrieval noise, each neuron updates in a synchronous, deterministic way according to

$$S_i(t+1)=F_\theta \left(h_i(t)\right),$$
(1)
where

$$F_\theta (h)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill +1:& h<\theta \mathrm{and}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0}<h<\theta \hfill \\ \hfill 1:& \mathrm{otherwise}\hfill \end{array}$$
(2)
is the reverse-wedge activation function. Here, $`\theta `$ is a threshold parameter. The local field felt by the neuron at site $`i`$ is given by

$$h_i(t)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}J_{ij}S_j.$$
(3)
In the limit of extreme dilution each neuron is connected to $`C`$ other neurons, with

$$1C\mathrm{ln}N.$$
(4)
Due to this condition, the synaptic connections have a tree-like structure, and the existence of feedback-loops has a vanishing probability . In consequence, the dynamics of this network is exactly solvable . The storage capacity of the network is defined as $`\alpha =p/C`$. We assume that the synapses are given by a Hebb-like learning rule,

$$J_{ij}=\frac{C_{ij}}{C}\underset{\mu =1}{\overset{p}{}}\xi _i^\mu \xi _j^\mu ,$$
(5)
where $`C_{ij}`$ are random binary variables assuming values $`1`$, if the output of neuron $`j`$ is connected to the input of neuron $`i`$ and zero, otherwise. They are chosen according the probability distribution

$$P(C_{ij})=\frac{C}{N}\delta (C_{ij}1)+\left(1\frac{C}{N}\right)\delta (C_{ij}),$$
(6)
where $`\delta (x)`$ is the Dirac’s delta function. The memories $`\left\{\xi _i^\mu \right\},i=1\mathrm{}N,\mu =1\mathrm{}p`$ are a set of independent, identically distributed random binary variables, chosen according the probability distribution

$$P\left(\xi _i^\mu \right)=\frac{1}{2}\delta \left(\xi _i^\mu 1\right)+\frac{1}{2}\delta \left(\xi _i^\mu +1\right).$$
(7)
The only relevant order parameters describing the macroscopic state of the network is the set of overlaps

$$m_\mu =\frac{1}{N}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\xi _i^\mu S_i$$
(8)
between the system configuration the stored patterns.

In what follows, we consider that only one memory pattern, say $`\mu =1`$, has a macroscopic overlap of order $`𝒪(1)`$, and all the others $`p1`$ are of order $`𝒪(1/\sqrt{N})`$. Following the now standard derivation of , we obtain that, in the absence of retrieval noise, the retrieval overlap satisfies the recursion relation

$$m_1(t+1)=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{erf}\left(\frac{m_1(t)+\theta }{\sqrt{2\alpha }}\right)+\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{erf}\left(\frac{m_1(t)}{\sqrt{2\alpha }}\right)\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{erf}\left(\frac{m_1(t)\theta }{\sqrt{2\alpha }}\right).$$
(9)
For parallel dynamics, in the limit of extreme dilution, this equation fully describes the dynamical evolution of the network.

Before to extend the discussion for all $`\theta `$, it worths to mention what is the behavior of the system in the limits $`\theta \mathrm{}`$ and $`\theta 0`$. For $`\theta \mathrm{}`$, the deterministic neuron update reduces to the signal transfer function $`S_i(t+1)=\mathrm{sgn}[h_i(t)]`$. The macroscopic dynamical evolution is given by $`m(t+1)=\mathrm{erf}(m(t)/\sqrt{2\alpha })`$. According to , this equation has a fixed-point for $`t\mathrm{}`$ at a finite value $`m=m(\alpha )`$, provided that $`\alpha <2/\pi `$. At this value of the storage capacity, the system undergoes a continuous transition to the fixed point $`m=0`$.

In the limit $`\theta 0`$, the neurons update according to the transfer function $`S_i(t+1)=\mathrm{sgn}[h_i(t)]`$, with the macroscopic dynamics being given by $`m(t+1)=\mathrm{erf}(m(t)/\sqrt{2\alpha })`$. This equation no longer have a finite fixed-point for finite $`m`$. Now, for small $`\alpha `$, the network evolves dynamically through a cycle of length two, where the finite retrieval overlap changes from $`m`$ to $`m`$ from one time step to the other. In other words, in one time step, it retrieves one pattern, and in the next time step it retrieves the inverse of this pattern. The amplitude $`m`$ of the limit cycle decreases continuously with the increasing $`\alpha `$, arriving to $`m=0`$ at the same storage capacity $`\alpha =2/\pi `$ as in the previous case $`\theta \mathrm{}`$.

Now we start to discuss the long term behavior of the system. A complete dynamical phase diagram for general $`\theta `$ is shown in figure 1. In region I, corresponding to large $`\alpha `$, the only fixed point of Eq. (9) is $`m=0`$, known as the zero solution . The region II, for intermediate and large $`\theta `$, is the locus of the retrieval solution, with finite fixed point overlap $`m0`$. The transition between regions I and II is continuous. It worths to remark that the borderline for the retrieval region decreases monotonically from $`\alpha =2/\pi `$ for large $`\theta `$ to $`\alpha =0`$ for $`\theta =0`$. This is in contrast to that reported by Inoue  for the fully connected network. There, the Hopfield limit $`\alpha 0.138`$ is found for large $`\theta `$. Then, decreasing $`\theta `$, the borderline for the retrieval increases up to a maximum $`\alpha 0.211`$ at $`\theta 1.77`$. For smaller $`\theta `$, it decreases till to reach $`\alpha =0`$ at $`\theta =0`$.

The region III is divided in two parts, one for small $`\theta `$ and $`\alpha <2/\pi `$ and other close to the the $`\theta `$ axis, for $`\theta <1`$. In this region, the network shows the cycle two behavior, as in the $`\theta 0`$ limit. The amplitude of the cycle two decreases monotonically to zero at the transition line between regions I and III. The transition from region III to other region than I is discontinuous.

In region IV the network has a periodic behavior. Leaving the retrieval region, roughly at the right and above, in the figure, it starts a period doubling cascade that ends in the chaotic region V.

Finally, we discuss the regions that are signaled with a star in figure 1. The star means that the long term behavior depends on the initial value $`m_0`$ of the overlap. If the initial value is sufficiently small, the network evolves to the basin of attraction of the corresponding phase without the star. Otherwise, it ends in the cycle two behavior, like in phase III.

## 3. Numerical simulations

The non-monotonic network with extremely diluted connections offers an interesting opportunity to compare microscopic and macroscopic views of non-linear phenomena. As an example, the bifurcation diagram of the overlap $`m`$ for $`\alpha =0.04`$ and varying $`\theta `$ is shown in figures 2a and 2b, determined, respectively from the macroscopic map of Eq. (9) and the microscopic definition of Eq. (8). The initial condition is $`m_0=0.1`$, i. e., outside the basin of attraction of the cycle two solution. Figure 2b results from simulation over a network with $`N=10000`$ and $`C=100`$. In order to save computer memory, only nonzero elements of the synaptic matrix where stored, as in . Comparing the two diagrams, we can see that bifurcations and periodicity windows are less clearly defined in the simulation than in the macroscopic evolution. Furthermore, in the range in $`\theta `$ where states with $`m>0`$ and $`m<0`$ coexist in the same attractor, the diagram from simulation is more populated with states with small overlap. This is in contrast with the macroscopic evolution, that results in a more uniformly distributed diagram. We may ask if these discrepancies are due to the high connectivity value, since $`C/N=0.01`$ in figure 2b, while figure 2a holds in the limit $`C/N0`$. We believe that this is not the case, since simulations with $`N=1000`$ and $`C=100`$ give similar results. Instead of this, we believe that the discrepancies are due to finite size effects, since the definition $`\alpha p/C`$ holds for both $`p`$ and $`C`$ going to $`\mathrm{}`$ while, in the simulations we have $`p=4`$. Nevertheless, although the discrepancies, there is a good general agreement between the two diagrams. In particular, the figures agree in which concerns to transitions from cyclic to chaos and to retrieval regions. This means that, even if Eq. (4) is not strictly satisfied, the simulations reproduce quite well the dynamics of the diluted network. With this, we conclude that it is justified to proceed with simulations, in order to obtain additional insight about the chaotic behavior of the network. For completeness it is shown, in figure 2c, the Lyapunov exponent calculated from iterations of the macroscopic map (Eq 9). The positive values assumed confirm that the system displays a chaotic phase.

The description of the dynamical evolution through macroscopic variables leaves open some questions, mainly concerning the chaotic regime. We could ask, for instance, if the abrupt change in the overlap from step to step results from alternate flipping activity in all network sites, or if part of the sites are frozen and part are flipping. In order to have some insight about this and other questions, computational simulations were realized. Here we introduce, for each neuron $`i`$, the quantity $`w_i(t)tt_i`$, where $`t_i`$ is the time corresponding to the last flip of neuron $`i`$. Expressed in words, $`w_i(t)`$ is the number of time steps that neuron $`i`$ stays in the same state, at time step $`t`$. Suppose that the network is in the cycle of period 2 with maximal amplitude. Then, all sites flip in each time step. In this case, $`w_i=0`$ for all site $`i`$. Now suppose that, after to start, the network quickly arrives to an equilibrium state with all the neurons frozen in one state. In this case, after the time step $`t`$, all $`w_i`$ are smaller but close to $`t`$. Between these two extreme, the distribution $`P(w)`$ gives a good picture of the dynamical state of the network.

The results for $`P(w)`$ are shown in figures 3a and 3b. To understand the figures, it is sufficient to know that if a neuron had its last flip $`n`$ time steps before $`t`$, then it contributes with a count for $`w=n`$. The final time we adopted is $`t=500`$, since this is a sufficient amount of time to reach the long-term behavior. Each figure results from an average over $`50`$ runs. To take care of finite size effects, simulations were done for $`N=5000`$ and $`N=10000`$. Since the results were equivalent, they are shown only for $`N=10000`$. We also have $`C=100`$ and $`p=4`$, so $`\alpha =0.04`$. The initial condition is $`m_0=0.1`$. Different regions of the phase diagram were visited through changing $`\theta `$. In figure 3a, $`P(w)`$ is shown for $`\theta <1.0`$. The main feature to be extracted is that no freezing occurs: all neurons flip in a time interval smaller than $`50`$ time-steps. For $`\theta =0.25`$, the network in the region $`\mathrm{I}^{}`$ of the phase diagram, inside the basin of attraction of the zero phase. The condition $`\theta =0.3`$ corresponds to a network in region $`\mathrm{II}^{}`$, inside the basin of attraction of the retrieval phase, with a retrieval overlap $`m0.1`$ (see figure 2). Since the values of overlap involved are small, we could expect that part of neurons remains frozen, but this is in contrast to what actually happens. When $`\theta =0.7`$, the network shows chaotic behavior. Since the chaotic attractor wanders through states with $`m`$ going from large negative to large positive values (see figure 2b), we could expect, as it is confirmed, that all neurons have flipping activity. For these three values of $`\theta `$, $`P(w)`$ shows an exponential decaying behavior, with a similar decaying rate. Results for $`\theta =0.9`$ is also included in figure 3a. Now we observe a distinct behavior, with $`P(w)`$ decaying more slowly than in the previous cases. We guess that this is already a consequence of the dynamical transition that occurs at a slightly higher $`\theta `$ value, where the chaotic attractor splits in two, one for $`m>0`$ and other for $`m<0`$, as can be seen in figure 2b.

The plot of $`P(w)`$ for $`\theta =1.0`$, $`\theta =1.2`$ and $`\theta =1.3`$ is shown in figure 3b. For $`\theta =1.0`$, the system is in phase V, just above the $`\theta `$ value where the chaotic attractor splits in two. The decaying is slower than exponential, but there are not frozen sites. We conclude that the splitting in the chaotic attractor is not related to the freezing of a part of sites. Rather, it is related to a change in the decaying rate in $`P(w)`$ that allows for an important decrease in the flipping activity. When $`\theta =1.2`$, the network is in the periodic regime of phase IV, with positive overlap. The flipping activity decreases, as reveals the small population for $`w0`$, and an important concentration of frozen sites can be seen for large $`w`$. In view of this, we may state that the appearing of a periodic retrieval regime with positive $`m`$ is related to the freezing of part of the neurons. It worths to note that $`P(w)`$ shows a nontrivial structure for $`w>300`$. We don’t know, at this moment, how to explain this structure. Finally, for $`\theta =1.3`$ the system is in retrieval regime. The figure shows a small population for small $`w`$ corresponding to sites that are flipping. There is a range for intermediary $`w`$ with zero or very small population, and a large population for large $`w`$, corresponding to frozen sites. Since the retrieval overlap $`m0.93`$ is large, we conclude that most of sites are frozen in the direction of the pattern.

## 4. Conclusion

Following a dynamical approach, we have studied the extremely diluted non-monotonic neural network. The results show that there is no improvement in the storage capacity of the retrieval phase due to the non-monotonicity: it is always smaller than that of the network with monotonic neurons. As stated above, this is in contrast with the highly connected network . There, an optimal $`\theta `$, whose storage capacity is larger than that of the monotonic network, was observed. It would be interesting to study a network with finite connectivity, ranging from zero, that is the present model, to 1, that is the highly connected model. In this way, it would be possible to localize where is the changeover from one regime to the other.

Numerical simulations were performed in order to get additional information about the microscopic dynamical evolution. The quantity observed was the amount of time that each neuron $`i`$ is fixed without flip, $`w_i`$. Excluding the trivial cycle-two regime for $`\theta <0.2`$, where $`P(w)\delta (w)`$, the distribution $`P(w)`$ shows three distinct regimes, depending on the flipping activity of the network: high flipping activity with exponential decaying $`P(w)`$, mean flipping activity with less than exponential decay, and low flipping activity with freezing.

We conclude that the distribution $`P(w)`$ gives a good picture of the microscopic evolution of the network, in its different dynamical regimes. It was not the aim of this paper, but in a future work it could be interesting to investigate quantitatively the decaying law in the second regime.

## Acknowledgements

The authors thank Dr. W. K. Theumann, Dr. M. A. P. Idiart, Dr. F. A Tamarit and Dr. N. Lemke for fruitful discussions. M. S. M. thanks CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cient fico e Tecnol gico - Brazil) for financial support.

## Figure Captions

Figure 1: Phase diagram for the extremely diluted non-monotonic neural network. Solid (dotted) lines correspond to discontinuous (continuous) phase transitions. For the dynamical behavior in each phase, see the text.

Figure 2: Bifurcation diagram and Lyapunov exponent for the extremely diluted non-monotonic neural network, for $`\alpha =0.04`$ and varying $`\theta `$, with the initial condition $`m_0=0.1`$. (a) Bifurcation diagram obtained from iteration of Eq. (9); (b) bifurcation diagram obtained from simulation in a network with $`10000`$ neurons, computing the overlap in each time step from its definition in Eq. (8); (c) Lyapunov exponent, obtained from the iteration of Eq. (9).

Figure 3: Distribution $`P(w)`$ for the extremely diluted non-monotonic neural network, for $`\alpha =0.04`$, after simulations with $`10000`$ neurons. (a) threshold $`\theta `$ in the range $`0.25`$$`0.9`$; (b) threshold $`\theta `$ in the range $`1.0`$$`1.3`$