text:
# Algebraically Constructible Functions: Real Algebra and Topology

## 1. Akbulut-King Numbers

Let $`X`$ be a real semialgebraic set in $`^n`$, and let $`xX`$. Let $`S(x,\epsilon )`$ be the sphere of radius $`\epsilon >0`$ in $`^n`$ centered at $`x`$. By the local conic structure lemma  (9.3.6), for $`\epsilon `$ sufficiently small the topological type of the space $`S(x,\epsilon )X`$ is independent of $`\epsilon `$. This space is called the *link* of $`x`$ in $`X`$, and it is denoted by $`\mathrm{lk}(x,X)`$.

Our starting point is Sullivan’s theorem :

###### Theorem 1.1.

If $`X`$ is a real algebraic set in $`^n`$ and $`xX`$ then the Euler characteristic $`\chi (\mathrm{lk}(x,X))`$ is even.

For example, the “theta space” $`X^2`$,

$$X=\{(x,y)|x^2+y^2=1\}\{(x,y)|1x1,y=0\},$$

is not homeomorphic to an algebraic set, for the link of the point $`(1,0)`$ (or the point $`(1,0)`$) in $`X`$ is three points, which has odd Euler characteristic.

Many proofs of Sullivan’s theorem have been published; see , ,  (3.10.4),  (11.2.2),  (4.4). Sullivan’s original idea was to use complexification. First he proved that the link of $`x`$ in the complexification $`X_{}`$ has Euler characteristic 0, and then he used that $`\mathrm{lk}(x,X)`$ is the fixed point set of complex conjugation on $`\mathrm{lk}(x,X_{})`$ to deduce that

$$\chi (\mathrm{lk}(x,X))\chi (\mathrm{lk}(x,X_{}))(mod2).$$

Mather  (p. 221) gave a proof that the link $`L`$ of a point in a complex algebraic set has Euler characteristic 0 by constructing a tangent vector field on $`L`$ which integrates to a nontrivial flow of $`L`$.

The following result puts Sullivan’s theorem in a more general context (*cf.*  (2.3.2)).

###### Theorem 1.2.

If $`X`$ and $`Y`$ are real algebraic sets with $`Y`$ irreducible and $`f:XY`$ is a regular map, there is an algebraic subset $`Z`$ of $`Y`$ with $`dimZ<dimY`$ such that the Euler characteristic $`\chi (f^1(y))`$ is constant mod 2 for $`yYZ`$.

In other words, the Euler characteristic is generically constant mod 2 in every family of real algebraic sets. To deduce Sullivan’s theorem as a corollary let $`Y=`$, $`x_0X`$, and $`f(x)=(xx_0)^2`$. For $`y<0`$ the fiber $`f^1(y)`$ is empty, and for $`y>0`$ sufficiently small, the fiber $`f^1(y)`$ is $`\mathrm{lk}(x_0,X)`$.

Benedetti-Dedò  and Akbulut-King  proved that Sullivan’s condition is not only necessary but also sufficent in low dimensions: If $`X`$ is a compact triangulable space of dimension less than or equal to 2, and the link of every point has even Euler characteristic, then $`X`$ is homeomorphic to a real algebraic set. (The link of a point in a triangulable space is the boundary of a simplicial neighborhood.) A triangulable space such that the link of every point has even Euler characteristic is called an *Euler space*.

Akbulut and King  showed that the situation in dimension 3 is more complicated. They defined four non-trivial topological invariants of a compact Euler space $`Y`$ of dimension at most 2, $`a_i(Y)/2`$, $`i=0,1,2,3`$ (with $`a_i(Y)=0`$ when $`dimY<2`$). Let $`\chi _2(Y)`$ be the Euler characteristic mod 2. It is easy to see that if $`X`$ is an Euler space then the link of every point of $`X`$ is an Euler space.

###### Theorem 1.3.

A compact 3-dimensional triangulable topological space $`X`$ is homeomorphic to a real algebraic set if and only if, for all $`xX`$, $`\chi _2(\mathrm{lk}(x,X))=0`$ and $`a_i(\mathrm{lk}(x,X))=0`$, $`i=0,1,2,3.`$

Akbulut and King’s invariants arise from a combinatorial analysis of the resolution of singularities of an algebraic set. The elementary definition of these *Akbulut-King numbers* and computations of examples can be found in Akbulut and King’s monograph , chapter VII, pages 190–197. (In the terminology of  (7.1.1), $`a_i(\mathrm{lk}(x,X))`$ is the mod 2 Euler characteristic of the link of $`x`$ in the characteristic subspace $`𝒵_i(X)`$.) The depth of the method of *resolution towers* is shown by the remarkable result that the vanishing of the Akbulut-King numbers gives a sufficient condition for a triangulable 3-dimensional space to be homeomorphic to an algebraic set. Chapter I of  is an introduction to their methods, with informative examples.

Another descendant of Sullivan’s theorem is due to Coste and Kurdyka :

###### Theorem 1.4.

Let $`X`$ be an algebraic set and let $`V`$ be an irreducible algebraic subset. For $`xV`$ the Euler characteristic of the link of $`x`$ in $`X`$ is generically constant mod 4: There is an algebraic subset $`W`$ of $`V`$ with $`dimW<dimV`$ such that $`\chi (\mathrm{lk}(x,X))`$ is constant mod 4 for $`xVW`$.

This theorem was first proved by Coste  when $`dimXdimV2`$ using chains of specializations of points in the real spectrum. The general case was proved topologically using stratifying families of polynomials. It can also be proved using Akbulut and King’s topological resolution towers (, exercise on p. 192).

Using the same techniques Coste and Kurdyka defined invariants mod $`2^k`$ associated to chains $`X_1X_2\mathrm{}X_k`$ of algebraic subsets of $`X`$ (, Theorem 4). Furthermore they used their mod 4 and mod 8 invariants to recover the Akbulut-King numbers. Using a relation between complex conjugation and the monodromy of the complex Milnor fibre of an ordered family of functions, the authors  reinterpreted and generalized the Coste-Kurdyka invariants as Euler characteristics of iterated links.

## 2. Constructible Functions

Algebraically constructible functions were introduced by the authors  as a vehicle for using the ideas of Coste and Kurdyka to generate new Akbulut-King numbers.

Let $`X`$ be a real semialgebraic set. A *constructible function* on $`X`$ is an integer-valued function

$$\phi :X$$

which can be written as a finite sum

(2.1)
$$\phi =m_i\mathrm{𝟏}_{X_i},$$

where for each $`i`$, $`X_i`$ is a semialgebraic subset of $`X`$, $`\mathrm{𝟏}_{X_i}`$ is the characteristic function of $`X_i`$, and $`m_i`$ is an integer.

The set of constructible functions on $`X`$ is a ring under pointwise *sum* and *product*. If $`f:XY`$ is a semialgebraic map and $`\phi `$ is a constructible function on $`Y`$, the *pullback* $`f^{}\phi `$ is the constructible function defined by

(2.2)
$$f^{}\phi (x)=\phi (f(x)).$$

The operations of pushforward and duality are defined using the Euler characteristic. If $`\phi `$ has compact support one may assume that the sets $`X_i`$ in (2.1) are compact, and the *Euler integral* is defined by

(2.3)
$$_X\phi 𝑑\chi =m_i\chi (X_i).$$

The Euler integral is additive, and it does not depend on the choice of representation (2.1) of $`\phi `$.

If $`f:XY`$ is a proper semialgebraic map and $`\phi `$ is a constructible function on $`X`$, the *pushforward*, $`f_{}\phi `$ is the constructible function on $`Y`$ given by

(2.4)
$$f_{}\phi (y)=_{f^1(y)}\phi 𝑑\chi .$$

Suppose that $`X`$ is a semialgebraic set in $`^n`$. If $`\phi `$ is a constructible function on $`X`$, the *link* $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\phi `$ is the constructible function on $`X`$ defined by

(2.5)
$$\mathrm{\Lambda }\phi (x)=_{S(x,\epsilon )X}\phi 𝑑\chi ,$$

for $`\epsilon >0`$ sufficiently small.

The *dual* $`D\phi `$ is defined by

(2.6)
$$D\phi =\phi \mathrm{\Lambda }\phi .$$

The operations sum, product, pullback, pushforward, and dual come from sheaf theory. Operations on constructible functions have been studied by Kashiwara and Schapira   and by Viro .

Now suppose that $`X`$ is a real algebraic set. A provisional definition of algebraically constructible functions would be to require the sets $`X_i`$ in (2.1) to be algebraic subsets of $`X`$. But the image of an algebraic set by a proper regular map is not necessarily algebraic, so this class of functions—which we call *strongly algebraically constructible*—is not preserved by the pushforward operation. To remedy this defect we make the following definition.

Let $`X`$ be a real algebraic set. An *algebraically constructible function* on $`X`$ is an integer-valued function which can be written as a finite sum

(2.7)
$$\phi =m_if_i\mathrm{𝟏}_{Z_i},$$

where for each $`i`$, $`Z_i`$ is an algebraic set, $`\mathrm{𝟏}_{Z_i}`$ is the characteristic function of $`X_i`$, $`f_i:Z_iX`$ is a proper regular map, and $`m_i`$ is an integer.

Clearly the sum of algebraically constructible functions is algebraically constructible. The product of algebraically constructible functions is algebraically constructible because the fiber product of algebraic sets over $`X`$ is an algebraic set over $`X`$: If $`f_1:Z_1X`$ and $`f_2:Z_2X`$ are proper regular maps, then so is the fiber product $`f:Z_1\times _XZ_2X`$,

$$\begin{array}{ccc}Z_1\times _XZ_2& & Z_2\\ & & f_2& & \\ Z_1& \underset{f_1}{}& X\end{array}$$

where $`Z_1\times _XZ_2=\{(z_1,z_2)|f_1(z_1)=f_2(z_2)\}`$ and $`f(z_1,z_2)=f_1(z_1)=f_2(z_2)`$. Furthermore, for all $`xX`$, $`f^1(x)=f_1^1(x)\times f_2^1(x)`$. Therefore $`(f_1\mathrm{𝟏}_{Z_1})(f_2\mathrm{𝟏}_{Z_2})=f_{}\mathrm{𝟏}_Z`$.

Similarly, the pullback (2.2) of an algebraically constructible function by a regular map is algebraically constructible. The pushforward (2.4) of an algebraically constructible function by a proper regular map is algebraically constructible, by the functoriality of pushforward ($`(gf)_{}=g_{}f_{}`$).

The fact that the link (2.5) of an algebraically constructible function is algebraically constructible follows from resolution of singularities and the fact that the link operator commutes with pushforward ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }f_{}=f_{}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$). Resolution of singularities implies that all the algebraic sets $`Z_i`$ in (2.7) may be taken to be smooth and irreducible. If $`Z`$ is a smooth algebraic set of dimension $`d`$, then

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{𝟏}_Z=\{\begin{array}{cc}2\mathrm{𝟏}_Z\hfill & d\text{ odd}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & d\text{ even}\hfill \end{array}$$

Thus if $`\phi =m_if_i\mathrm{𝟏}_{Z_i}`$ as in (2.7),

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }\phi `$ $`=\mathrm{\Lambda }{\displaystyle m_if_i\mathrm{𝟏}_{Z_i}}`$
$`={\displaystyle m_if_i\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{𝟏}_{Z_i}}`$
$`=2{\displaystyle m_if_i\mathrm{𝟏}_{Z_i}},`$
where the last sum is over all $`i`$ such that $`dimZ_i`$ is odd. This argument actually gives the following stronger result .

###### Theorem 2.1.

If $`\phi `$ is an algebraically constructible function on the algebraic set $`X`$, then the values of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\phi `$ are even, and $`\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Lambda }\phi `$ is an algebraically constructible function.

This theorem is the key to defining Akbulut-King numbers using constructible functions (section 4 below). We call $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ the *half-link* operator.

The constructible function $`\phi `$ is *Euler* if all the values of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\phi `$ are even. The following examples show that the sets of constructible functions, Euler constructible functions, algebraically constructible functions, and strongly algebraically constructible functions are all different. (More examples can be found in .)

Let $`X=^2`$, and let $`Q`$ be the closed first quadrant,

$$Q=\{(x,y)|x0,y0\}.$$

The constructible function $`\mathrm{𝟏}_Q`$ is not Euler, for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{𝟏}_Q=\mathrm{𝟏}_O+\mathrm{𝟏}_A+\mathrm{𝟏}_B`$, where $`O`$ is the origin, $`A`$ is the positive $`x`$-axis, and $`B`$ is the positive $`y`$-axis.

The constructible function $`2\mathrm{𝟏}_Q`$ is Euler, since it is even, but it is not algebraically constructible. If it were algebraically constructible, then by Theorem 2.1 the half-link $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(2\mathrm{𝟏}_Q)=\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{𝟏}_Q`$ would be algebraically constructible. But if $`C`$ is the $`x`$-axis, then $`(\mathrm{𝟏}_C)(\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{𝟏}_Q)=\mathrm{𝟏}_O+\mathrm{𝟏}_A`$, which is not Euler and hence not algebraically constructible.

The constructible function $`4\mathrm{𝟏}_Q`$ is not strongly algebraically constructible, since the algebraic closure of the first quadrant is the plane. But $`4\mathrm{𝟏}_Q`$ is algebraically constructible,

$$4\mathrm{𝟏}_Q=f_{}\mathrm{𝟏}_^2+g_{}\mathrm{𝟏}_{}+h_{}\mathrm{𝟏}_{}+\mathrm{𝟏}_O,$$

where $`f(x,y)=(x^2,y^2)`$, $`g(x)=(x^2,0)`$, and $`h(x)=(0,x^2)`$.

## 3. Real Algebra

The bridge between the topological and algebraic properties of algebraically constructible functions is given by the following theorem , , .

###### Theorem 3.1.

Let $`X`$ be an algebraic subset of $`^n`$ and let $`f:ZX`$ be a regular map. Then there are real polynomials $`g_1,\mathrm{},g_s[x_1,\mathrm{},x_n]`$ such that for all $`xX`$,

(3.1)
$$\chi (f^1(x))=\underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}\mathrm{sgn}g_i(x).$$

For a polynomial, or more generally for a regular function $`g`$ on $`X`$, the projection $`\pi :ZX`$ from the double cover $`Z=\{(x,t)X\times |t^2=g(x)\}`$ to $`X`$ satisfies $`\mathrm{sgn}g=\pi _{}\mathrm{𝟏}_Z\mathrm{𝟏}_X`$. Thus the sign of $`g`$ and hence any finite sum of signs of polynomials on $`X`$ is algebraically constructible. This gives the following characterization of algebraically constructible functions.

###### Corollary 3.2.

Let $`X`$ be an algebraic set. Then $`\phi :X`$ is algebraically constructible if and only if $`\phi `$ equals a finite sum of signs of polynomials on $`X`$.

Usually we suppose in the presentation (3.1) that none of polynomials $`g_i`$ vanishes identically on $`X`$. Suppose, moreover, that $`X`$ is irreducible. Then the product $`g=g_i`$ does not vanish identically on $`X`$ and hence the zero set $`W`$ of $`g`$ is a proper algebraic subset of $`X`$. Since $`X`$ is irreducible, $`dimW<dimX`$. By (3.1), for $`xXW`$, the Euler characteristic $`\chi (f^1(x))`$ is congruent mod 2 to $`s`$, the number of polynomials $`g_i`$. This gives an alternative proof of Theorem 1.2. We can go further and describe the Euler characteristic of fibres of $`f`$ mod $`4`$: For $`xXW`$,

(3.2)
$$\chi (f^1(x))(s1)+\mathrm{sgn}g(x)(mod4).$$

The existence of such $`g`$, called a *discriminant* of $`f`$, was proved by Coste and Kurdyka in . Although the existence of a discriminant follows from (3.1), historically (3.2) was a prototype for Theorem 3.1. In general, a polynomial or a rational function $`g`$ on $`X`$ satisfying (3.2) is not unique. It is uniquely defined as an element of the multiplicative group of non-zero rational functions $`(X)\{0\}`$ on $`X`$ divided by the subgroup of those functions which are generically of constant sign on $`X`$, that is to say (by Hilbert’s seventeenth problem), by $`\pm `$ sums of squares of rational functions (*cf*).

Theorem 3.1 and Corollary 3.2 provide an abstract link to the theory of quadratic forms. Let us consider a more concrete example. Consider a finite regular map $`f:Z^n`$, where $`Z^n\times `$ is the zero set of a polynomial without multiple factors,

$$P(x,z)=z^s+\underset{i=0}{\overset{s1}{}}a_i(x)z^i,$$

$`x^n,z`$, and $`f`$ is induced by the projection on the first factor. Since $`f`$ is finite, $`\chi (f^1(x))`$ equals the number of distinct real roots of the polynomial $`P_x(z)=P(x,z)`$ of one real variable. By a classical theorem of Hermite-Sylvester (see *e.g.*  Proposition 6.2.6), the number of distinct real roots of $`P_x`$ equals the signature of a symmetric matrix $`Q`$ of size $`s`$ with entries polynomials in the $`a_i`$. The determinant of $`Q`$ equals the discriminant $`\mathrm{\Delta }(x)`$ of $`P_x`$. It is elementary to show that, if $`\mathrm{\Delta }(x)`$ is non-zero, then the number of distinct real roots of $`P_x`$ is congruent to $`s1+\mathrm{sgn}\mathrm{\Delta }(x)`$ mod $`4`$. This justifies the name “discriminant” for $`g`$ satisfying (3.2). If we want to compute the signature of $`Q`$ we diagonalize it over the field of rational functions $`(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$. The signature of the matrix obtained, and hence the signature of $`Q`$, equals the sum of signs of the elements on the diagonal, which are rational functions. The sign of the rational function $`p/q`$ equals the sign of the polynomial $`pq`$, in the complement of the zero set of the denominator. Thus we have shown the existence of polynomials $`g_i`$ that satisfy (3.1) generically; that is, for $`x`$ in the complement of a proper algebraic subset of $`^n`$.

In general, if $`X`$ is irreducible then we say that a function is defined or a property holds *generically* on $`X`$ if this is so in the complement of a proper algebraic subset of $`X`$. For instance we call an integer-valued function on $`X`$ *generically algebraically constructible* if it coincides with an algebraically constructible function in the complement of a proper algebraic subset of $`X`$. By Corollary 3.2, $`\phi `$ is generically algebraically constructible on $`X`$ if and only if it is generically equal to the signature of a quadratic form over the field of rational functions $`(X)`$. Thus for any regular map $`f:ZX`$ there is a quadratic form $`Q`$ over $`(X)`$ such that $`\chi (f^1(x))`$ generically equals the signature of $`Q`$. There are, of course, many quadratic forms with this property and we do not know whether, for arbitrary $`f`$, there is a natural choice of such a quadratic form. The proofs of Theorem 3.1 are all based on the construction of quadratic forms. In  the forms are constructed by means of Morse Theory, in  they are given by the Eisenbud-Levine Theorem, and in  by a modern version of the Hermite-Sylvester theorem.

Corollary 3.2 shows immediately that the sum and the product of algebraically constructible functions are algebraically constructible. This corollary was used in  to give another proof that the family of algebraically constructible functions is preserved by the half-link operator (Theorem 2.1), and by related topological operators such as specialisation (*cf*, ). In general, Corollary 3.2 allows us to use algebraic methods to study algebraically constructible functions.

Recall that a *basic* open semialgebraic subset of a real algebraic set $`X^n`$ is a subset of the form

$$𝒰(g_1,\mathrm{},g_s)=\{xX|g_1(x)>0,\mathrm{},g_s(x)>0\},$$

where $`g_i`$ are polynomials on $`X`$. For a polynomial $`g`$, the function $`2\mathrm{𝟏}_{𝒰(g)}=\mathrm{sgn}g+\mathrm{𝟏}_X\mathrm{𝟏}_{g^1(0)}`$ is algebraically constructible, and hence so is $`2^s\mathrm{𝟏}_{𝒰(g_1,\mathrm{},g_s)}=2\mathrm{𝟏}_{𝒰(g_i)}`$. By a theorem of Bröcker and Scheiderer (*cf* section 6.5), every basic open semialgebraic subset of a real algebraic set of dimension $`d`$ can be defined by at most $`d`$ simultaneous strict polynomial inequalities; that is, we may always choose $`sd`$. This gives, as shown in , the following result.

###### Theorem 3.3.

Let $`X`$ be a real algebraic set of dimension $`d`$. Then any constructible function on $`X`$ divisible by $`2^d`$ is algebraically constructible.

For instance any constructible function on the plane $`^2`$ divisible by $`4`$ is algebraically constructible. We do not know an elementary proof of this fact.

As we have mentioned before, the first version of Theorem 1.4 was proved by Coste  using the real spectrum. This approach was later developed by Bonnard, who introduced a fan criterion for algebraically constructible functions . Fans, which are subsets of the real spectrum, were introduced by Bröcker in order to study quadratic forms.

The fan criterion has proved to be a very powerful tool. It gives (*cf*) the following “wall” criterion. Suppose that $`X`$ is nonsingular and compact, $`\phi :X`$, and $`W`$ is an algebraic subset of $`X`$ with normal crossings such that $`\phi `$ is constant on the connected components of $`XW`$. For a smooth point $`wW`$ we define $`_W\phi (w)`$ as the average of the values of $`\phi `$ on $`XW`$ computed on both sides of $`W`$ at $`w`$. We may extend $`_W\phi (w)`$ arbitrarily to the singular part of $`W`$. Then $`\phi `$ is generically algebraically constructible on $`X`$ if and only if $`_W\phi (w)`$ is generically algebraically constructible on $`W`$. This allows one to use induction on dimension in working with generically algebraically constructible functions.

One may ask how many polynomials are necessary in order to describe a given algebraically constructible function as a sum of signs of polynomials. In  Bonnard gives two bounds: for a complete presentation and for a generic presentation.

###### Theorem 3.4.

Let $`X`$ be a real algebraic set of dimension $`d`$ and let $`\phi :X`$ be an algebraically constructible function such that $`\phi (X)[\delta k,\delta +k]`$, $`\delta `$, $`k`$.

* Then $`\phi `$ can be written as the sum of signs of at most $`N^{}(d,k,\delta )`$ polynomials, where $`N^{}(d,k,\delta )`$ equals $`2^{d1}3k+|\delta |`$ for $`k`$ even and $`2^{d1}3(k1)+2d+|\delta |`$ for $`k`$ odd.
* Suppose, moreover, that $`X`$ is irreducible. Then $`\phi `$ can be written generically as the sum if signs of at most $`N(d,k,\delta )`$ polynomials, where $`N(d,k,\delta )`$ equals $`2^{d1}k+|\delta |`$ for $`k`$ even and $`2^{d1}(k1)+1+|\delta |`$ for $`k`$ odd.

These bounds are sharp in the following sense. Given $`d,k,`$ and $`\delta `$ as above, there is an algebraic set $`X`$ of dimension $`d`$ and an algebraically constructible function $`\phi ^{}`$, resp. $`\phi `$, on $`X`$ such that $`N^{}(d,k,\delta )`$, resp. $`N(d,k,\delta )`$, is the minimal number of polynomials necessary to present $`\phi ^{}`$, resp. to present $`\phi `$ generically, as a sum of signs of polynomials. Moreover, we may take $`X=^d`$. Theorem 3.4 is proved using spaces of orderings.

For a fixed algebraically constructible function the bound given by Theorem 3.4 may not be sharp. Let $`X`$ be irreducible and compact, and let $`\phi `$ be an algebraically constructible function on $`X`$ constant on the connected components of $`XW`$, where $`WX`$ is an algebraic subset with normal crossings. In  Bonnard gives a recursive method for effectively calculating the minimal number of polynomials representing $`\phi `$.

Using the real spectrum Pennaneac’h has defined *algebraically constructible chains*  and algebraically constructible homology of real algebraic varieties. An algebraically constructible $`k`$-chain of a real algebraic variety $`X`$ is an oriented semialgebraic chain supported by a $`k`$-dimensional irreducible algebraic subset $`VX`$, and “weighted” by a generically algebraically constructible function on $`V`$. The boundary operator is given by half of the standard boundary. Pennaneac’h has proved that a constructible function is algebraically constructible if and only if its characteristic Lagrangian cycle is algebraically constructible.

## 4. Topological Invariants

Using algebraically constructible functions and the link operator we define local topological invariants which generalize the Akbulut-King numbers. The vanishing of these invariants gives necessary conditions for a topological space to be homeomorphic to an algebraic set.

Algebraic sets are necessarily triangulable (*cf.* , 9.3.2), and by definition a triangulable space is homeomorphic to a Euclidean simplicial complex, which is a semialgebraic set. So without loss of generality we assume that the spaces we consider are semialgebraic sets in Euclidean space.

If $`X`$ is a semialgebraic set, let $`\mathrm{F}(X)`$ be the set of constructible functions on $`X`$ (2.1). The set $`\mathrm{F}(X)`$ is a commutative ring with identity $`\mathrm{𝟏}_X`$, and it is equipped with a linear operator $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, the link operator, and a linear integer-valued function $`\phi \phi 𝑑\chi `$, the Euler integral.

Of course $`\mathrm{F}(X)`$ is not a topological invariant of $`X`$, but the identity element, the link operator, and the Euler integral are topological invariants in the following sense. Let $`h:X^{}X`$ be a homeomorphism of semialgebraic sets. Then $`\mathrm{𝟏}_X^{}=\mathrm{𝟏}_Xh`$. Let $`\phi \mathrm{F}(Y)`$ be such that $`\phi ^{}=\phi h\mathrm{F}(X^{})`$. Let $`YX`$ be a compact semialgebraic subset such that $`Y^{}=h^1(Y)`$ is also semialgebraic. Then

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }(\phi ^{})`$ $`=(\mathrm{\Lambda }\phi )h,`$
$`{\displaystyle _Y^{}}\phi ^{}𝑑\chi `$ $`={\displaystyle _Y}\phi 𝑑\chi .`$
For the elementary proof see , appendix A.7. It follows that the subring of $`\mathrm{F}(X)`$ generated by $`\mathrm{𝟏}_X`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is a topological invariant of $`X`$.

For a semialgebraic set $`X`$ let $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(X)`$ be the subring of $`\mathrm{F}(X)`$ generated by $`\mathrm{𝟏}_X`$ and the half-link operator $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. The ring $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(X)`$ is a topological invariant of $`X`$. Theorem 2.1 says that if $`X`$ is an algebraic set then $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(X)\mathrm{F}(X)`$. In other words, all of the functions obtained from $`\mathrm{𝟏}_X`$ by the arithmetic operations of sum, difference, and product, together with the half-link operator, are *integer-valued*.

So we have a method to produce topological obstructions for a semialgebraic set $`X`$ to be homeomorphic to an algebraic set: Find expressions $`\phi `$ built from $`\mathrm{𝟏}_X`$ using the operations $`+`$, $``$, $`\times `$, and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ such that $`\phi `$ is not integer-valued. In  (see also ) this method is explicitly illustrated for Akbulut and King’s original example of a compact 3-dimensional Euler space which is not homeomorphic to an algebraic set. In  the authors show that this method reproduces the Akbulut-King invariants for sets of dimension at most 3.

In  we find all invariants produced by this method for sets of dimension at most 4. The number of independent invariants is enormous: $`2^{29}29`$. But there is another surprise. It follows from Corollary 3.2 that for all algebraically constructible functions $`\phi `$, the function $`\frac{1}{2}(\phi ^4\phi ^2)`$ is algebraically constructible (, Lemma 4.1). So a necessary condition for $`X`$ to be algebraic is that all of the functions obtained from $`\mathrm{𝟏}_X`$ by the arithmetic operations of sum, difference, and product, together with the half-link operator *and* the operator $`\mathrm{P}(\phi )=\frac{1}{2}(\phi ^4\phi ^2)`$ are integer-valued. The total number of independent invariants produced by our method taking all of these operators into account is $`2^{43}43`$.

The classification of these invariants is simplified by studying them locally. The function $`\phi \mathrm{F}(X)`$ is Euler if and only if, for every $`xX`$ and every $`\epsilon =\epsilon (x)`$ sufficiently small, the restriction of $`\phi `$ to $`L_\epsilon (x)=S(x,\epsilon )X`$ has even Euler integral. Now $`\mathrm{𝟏}_X|L_\epsilon (x)=\mathrm{𝟏}_{L_\epsilon (x)}`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(\phi )|L_\epsilon (x)=\phi |L_\epsilon (x)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(\phi L_\epsilon (x))`$, by  1.3(d). Thus all functions obtained from $`\mathrm{𝟏}_X`$ by the operations $`+`$, $``$, $`\times `$, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$, and $`\mathrm{P}`$ are integer-valued if and only if, for all $`xX`$, all functions obtained from $`\mathrm{𝟏}_{L_\epsilon (x)}`$ by these operations are integer-valued and have even Euler integral.

Akbulut and King obtain their numbers from cobordism invariants of resolution towers. Here we give a cobordism-style description of the Akbulut-King numbers which does not involve resolution towers.

Let $`n`$ be a nonnegative integer, and let $`𝒜_n`$ be the set of homeomorphism classes of compact real algebraic sets of dimension at most $`n`$. If $`X`$ is a compact real algebraic set, we say that $`X`$ is a *boundary* if there exists a real algebraic set $`W`$ and a point $`wW`$ such that $`X`$ is homeomorphic to the link of $`w`$ in $`W`$. Let $`_n`$ be the subset of $`𝒜_n`$ consisting of homeomorphism classes of boundaries.

###### Proposition 4.1.

For all compact algebraic sets $`X`$, the disjoint union $`XX`$ is a boundary.

###### Proof.

Suppose $`X^n`$ is given by the polynomial equation $`f(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)=0`$ of degree $`d`$. Consider the homogeneous polynomial $`g(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n,x_{n+1})`$ of degree $`d`$ such that $`g(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n,1)=f(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$. Let $`W^{n+1}`$ be given by $`g(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n,x_{n+1})=0`$. Then $`XX`$ is homeomorphic to the link of the origin in $`W`$.∎

Let $`𝒜_n^{}`$ be the free abelian group on the set $`𝒜_n`$ modulo the subgroup generated by elements of the form $`[X]+[Y][XY]`$, and let $`_n^{}`$ be the subgroup of $`𝒜_n^{}`$ generated by $`_n`$. Let $`𝒱_n=𝒜_n^{}/_n^{}`$. By Proposition 4.1, $`𝒱_n`$ is a vector space over $`/2`$.

The Akbulut-King numbers are additive under disjoint union, so they define a linear map $`a:𝒜_2^{}(/2)^5`$, $`a([X])=(\chi _2(X),a_0(X),a_1(X),a_2(X),a_3(X))`$. By Theorem 1.3, if $`dimX2`$ then $`X`$ is a boundary if and only if $`a([X])=0`$. (If $`a([X])=0`$ then by Theorem 1.3 the cone on $`X`$ is homeomorphic to an algebraic set.) Thus $`a`$ induces an injective linear map

$$𝐚:𝒱_2(/2)^5.$$

Akbulut and King show that $`𝐚`$ is an isomorphism by constructing $`2`$-dimensional algebraic sets $`Y_0`$, $`Y_1`$, $`Y_2`$, and $`Y_3`$ such that $`a(^2)`$, $`a(Y_0)`$, $`a(Y_1)`$, $`a(Y_2)`$, and $`a(Y_3)`$ are linearly independent (, p. 195–197). Thus $`(^2,Y_0,Y_1,Y_2,Y_3)`$ is a basis for $`𝒱_2`$.

On the other hand, the authors’ constructible function invariants  define a linear map $`b:𝒜_2^{}(/2)^5`$, $`b([X])=(\chi _2(X),b_1(X),b_2(X),b_3(X),b_4(X))`$, where the $`b_i`$ are the mod 2 reductions of the following Euler integrals. Let $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ be the operator defined by $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}(\phi )=\phi \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(\phi )`$. Let $`\alpha =\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\mathrm{𝟏}_X`$, $`\beta =\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}(\alpha ^2)`$, and $`\gamma =\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}(\alpha ^3)`$. Then $`b_1(X)=\alpha \beta 𝑑\chi `$, $`b_2(X)=\alpha \gamma 𝑑\chi `$, $`b_3(X)=\beta \gamma 𝑑\chi `$, and $`b_4(X)=\alpha \beta \gamma 𝑑\chi `$. The map $`b`$ induces a linear isomorphism

$$𝐛:𝒱_2(/2)^5.$$

The reader may verify that $`𝐛`$ is an isomorphism by computing $`b(Y_i)`$, $`i=0,1,2,3`$. (The computation of $`b_1(Y_2)`$ is given in .)

From this viewpoint the authors’ results for $`4`$-dimensional sets can be summarized as follows. The invariants of  (Theorem 4.7) are additive under disjoint union, so they define a linear map $`c:𝒜_3^{}(/2)^N`$, $`N=2^{43}43`$. If $`X`$ is a boundary of dimension at most 3, then $`c([X])=0`$. Thus $`c`$ induces a linear map

$$𝐜:𝒱_3(/2)^N.$$

We show that $`𝐜`$ is surjective by constructing a large set $`𝒮`$ of compact $`3`$-dimensional Euler spaces with vanishing local Akbulut-King numbers. By Theorem 1.3 every space in $`𝒮`$ is homeomorphic to a real algebraic set. We make $`𝒮`$ so big that $`\{c([X])|X𝒮\}`$ spans $`(/2)^N`$. Thus the dimension of $`𝒱_3`$ is at least $`2^{43}43`$. But we do not know whether $`𝐜`$ is an isomorphism, because we do not know if $`c([X])=0`$ implies that $`X`$ is a boundary.

###### Remark 4.2.

The one-point compactification of a real algebraic set is homeomorphic to a real algebraic set (*cf*,  Proposition 3.5.3). Hence a locally compact topological space $`X`$ is homeomorphic to a real algebraic set if and only if its one-point compactification $`\overline{X}=X\{\mathrm{}\}`$ is homeomorphic to a real algebraic set. Suppose $`X`$ is a closed semialgebraic subset of $`^n`$ and the local invariants constructed above vanish at every $`xX`$. Then they have to vanish at $`\mathrm{}\overline{X}`$. Indeed, suppose that $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(X)\mathrm{F}(X)`$. Of the operations that define $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(\overline{X})`$, that is $`+`$, $``$, $`\times `$, and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$, all but $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ preserve $`\mathrm{F}(\overline{X})`$. Hence if, contrary to our claim, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(\overline{X})\mathrm{F}(\overline{X})`$ then there is $`\phi \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(\overline{X})`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\phi `$ is not integer-valued. By our assumption the restriction of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\phi `$ to $`X`$ has to be integer-valued, and we may write $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\phi =\psi +\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{𝟏}_{\mathrm{}}`$ with $`\psi \mathrm{F}(\overline{X})`$. Consequently the Euler integral $`_{\overline{X}}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\phi d\chi `$. This contradicts the identity

$$_{\overline{X}}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}d\chi =0,$$

which holds for any constructible function with compact support ( Corollary 1.3). The same argument can be applied to the extended invariants since the operator $`P(\phi )=\frac{1}{2}(\phi ^4\phi ^2)`$ preserves integer-valued functions.

This remark can be also applied to Sullivan’s invariant and Akbulut and King’s numbers. This means that the one-point compactification of a semialgebraic Euler set is Euler, and that in Theorem 1.3 it suffices to suppose that $`X`$ is homeomorphic to a closed, not necessarily compact, semialgebraic subset of $`^n`$ or, equivalently, that $`\overline{X}`$ is triangulable.

## 5. Generalizations and open questions

The method of algebraically constructible functions may be extended to more general classes of sets. Fairly complete results have already been obtained for arc-symmetric semialgebraic sets. Much less is known for real analytic sets.

Arc-symmetric sets were introduced by Kurdyka in  and applied in  to show that any injective regular self-map of a real algebraic variety is surjective. A semialgebraic subset $`A`$ of a real algebraic set $`X`$ is called *arc-symmetric* if for each real analytic arc $`\gamma :(\epsilon ,\epsilon )X`$ such that $`\gamma ((\epsilon ,0))A`$, the entire image $`\gamma ((\epsilon ,\epsilon ))`$ is contained in $`A`$. Then, by the curve selection lemma, $`A`$ is closed in $`X`$. For instance a connected component of a real algebraic subset of $`X`$ is arc-symmetric. For more examples see .

Let $`X`$ be a real algebraic set. A *Nash constructible function* on $`X`$ is an integer-valued function which can be written as a finite sum

$$\phi =m_if_i\mathrm{𝟏}_{Z_i^{}},$$

where for each $`i`$, $`Z_i^{}`$ is a connected component of an algebraic set $`Z_i`$, $`f_i:Z_iX`$ is a proper regular map, and $`m_i`$ is an integer. By , $`AX`$ is arc-symmetric if and only if $`A`$ is closed in $`X`$ and the characteristic function of $`A`$ is Nash constructible. The half-link of a Nash constructible function is Nash constructible and hence for $`A`$ arc-symmetric $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(A)\mathrm{F}(A)`$. This shows that every arc-symmetric set is Euler and Akbulut and King’s invariants vanish at each point of a $`3`$-dimensional arc-symmetric set. Thus, by Theorem 1.3 and Remark 4.2, every 3-dimensional arc-symmetric semialgebraic set is homeomorphic to a real algebraic set.

Suppose, moreover, that $`X`$ is compact. Then, as shown by Bonnard in , most of the algebraic results presented in section 3 above have their analogs for Nash constructible functions. For instance, a function on $`X`$ is Nash constructible if and only if it is a finite sum of signs of blow-Nash functions. An analytic function on $`X`$ is called *Nash* if its graph is semialgebraic. It is called *blow-Nash* if it can be made Nash after composing with a finite sequence of blowings-up. There is a fan criterion for Nash constructible functions, and the minimum number of blow-Nash functions required to represent a Nash constructible function admits the same bounds as in Theorem 3.4. These bounds are again sharp.

If $`X`$ is compact then for every arc-symmetric semialgebraic subset $`AX`$ of dimension $`4`$, all $`2^{43}43`$ local invariants constructed in section 4 vanish at each $`xA`$. Without the assumption of compactness of $`X`$ we do not know whether the operator $`P(\phi )=\frac{1}{2}(\phi ^4\phi ^2)`$ preserves Nash constructible functions on $`X`$, since we do not have a similar representation as finite sums of signs. We may conclude only that the $`2^{29}29`$ invariants constructed with the help of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(A)`$ vanish.

So far there has not been a similar study for real analytic sets. One natural possibility would be to define analytically constructible functions on a real analytic set $`X`$ as in (2.7) with the $`f_i`$ proper real analytic maps. The set of such functions forms a ring. By resolution of singularities this ring is preserved by the half-link operator $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$. Hence we conclude that real analytic sets are Euler, a result due to Sullivan . Akbulut and King’s local invariants vanish on real analytic sets, as well as the $`2^{29}29`$ invariants constructed in section 4. Again, we do not know whether the operator $`P(\phi )=\frac{1}{2}(\phi ^4\phi ^2)`$ preserves this family of constructible functions.

###### Question 1.

Does there exist a topological proof that the operator $`P(\phi )=\frac{1}{2}(\phi ^4\phi ^2)`$ preserves algebraically constructible functions? Does this follow from the resolution of singularities, for instance by the method of resolution towers?

All of the constraints on the topology of real algebraic, arc-symmetric, or real analytic sets obtained by our constructions are local, and we do not know whether any constraints of a global character exist.

###### Question 2.

Let $`X`$ be a compact triangulable topological space and suppose that for each $`xX`$ the link $`\mathrm{lk}(x,X)`$ is homeomorphic to a link of a real algebraic set. Is $`X`$ homeomorphic to a real algebraic set?

If $`X`$ is of dimension $`3`$ then the answer is positive by the results of Benedetti-Dedò and Akbulut-King (see section 1).

###### Question 3.

Let $`X`$ be a compact triangulable topological space of dimension $`4`$ such that for each $`xX`$ the topological invariants of $`\mathrm{lk}(x,X)`$ constructed in section 4 vanish. Is $`X`$ homeomorphic to a real algebraic set?

In other words we ask whether the vanishing of our invariants is sufficient for a set to be homeomorphic to a real algebraic set.

###### Question 4.

Let $`X`$ be a compact real algebraic set of dimension $`3`$ and suppose that all the topological invariants of $`X`$ constructed in section 4 vanish, *i.e.* $`c([X])=0`$. Is then $`X`$ homeomorphic to a link of a real algebraic set?

Equivalently, we ask whether the linear map $`c:𝒜_3^{}(/2)^N`$, introduced section 4, is injective. A positive answer to Question 3 answers positively Question 4. These two questions are equivalent if we suppose a positive answer to Question 2 for sets of dimension $`4`$.

One possible way to aproach these questions is to reinterpret our invariants in terms of Akbulut and King’s resolution towers .

###### Question 5.

Let $`X`$ be a compact triangulable topological space of dimension $`4`$ such that for each $`xX`$ the topological invariants of $`\mathrm{lk}(x,X)`$ constructed in section 4 vanish. Does $`X`$ admit a topological resolution tower in the sense of Akbulut and King ? What extra properties does such a resolution tower satisfy?

Akbulut and King  show that a resolution tower can be made algebraic if it satisfies some additional properties. These properties are stronger that those given by the resolution of singularities of real algebraic sets. Thus a positive answer to Question 5 would not necessarily guarantee a solution to Question 3. Previte  has done interesting work on obstructions for a 4-dimensional space to have an algebraic resolution tower.

Following the original idea of Sullivan one may study the links of real algebraic sets using complexification. The vanishing of Akbulut and King’s numbers on real algebraic sets can be proved using a relation between complex conjugation and the monodromy of the complex Milnor fibre of an ordered family of functions .

###### Question 6.

Can one construct our $`2^{43}43`$ topological invariants in dimension $`4`$ by means of complexification?


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The thermal dilepton spectrum is accessible in heavy ion collisions and provides a key observable to study thermal properties of the medium at high density and temperature . Thermally induced changes of the dilepton spectrum at low energies  are expected to be influenced by non-perturbative in-medium modifications of the quark anti-quark interactions. Furthermore such effects are directly related to changes of the spectral shape in the vector meson channel. In two-flavor QCD the differential dilepton rate is connected to vector spectral function $`\sigma _V(\omega ,\stackrel{}{p},T)`$ through the relation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dN_{l\overline{l}}}{d^4xd^4p}}{\displaystyle \frac{dW}{d\omega d^3p}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{5\alpha ^2}{27\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\omega ^2\left(e^{\omega /T}1\right)}}\sigma _V(\omega ,\stackrel{}{p},T).`$ (1)
At the same time the spectral densities are related to the Euclidean correlation functions of hadronic currents $`J_H(\tau ,\stackrel{}{x})=\overline{\psi }(\tau ,\stackrel{}{x})\mathrm{\Gamma }_H\psi (\tau ,\stackrel{}{x})`$ with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_H[1,\gamma _5,\gamma _\mu ,\mathrm{}]`$ through the integral equation

$`G_H(\tau ,\stackrel{}{p},T)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \mathrm{d}^3xe^{i\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{x}}J_H(\tau ,\stackrel{}{x})J_H^{}(0,\stackrel{}{0})}`$ (2)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}d\omega \sigma _H(\omega ,\stackrel{}{p},T){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ch}(\omega (\tau 1/2T))}{\mathrm{sh}(\omega /2T)}}.`$
Although hadronic correlators can be calculated numerically in the framework of lattice regularized QCD for discrete Euclidean times $`\tau [0,1/T]`$, the inversion of the integral equation still remains an ill-posed problem. This situation improved considerably after the implementation of the Maximum Entropy Method (MEM) for lattice QCD , which allows to obtain the most probable spectral function without a priori assumptions on the spectral shape.

Most of the previous applications of MEM concentrated on the analysis of hadronic properties like masses and decay width at zero temperature, where the pole masses of the ground  and even excited states  could be obtained with quite satisfactory precision. The great challenge, however, is to apply the method at non-zero temperature, where very little about the spectral shape is known so far.

## 2 Thermal Meson Spectral Functions

At finite temperature excited states and continuum-like contributions are expected to gain in influence on the spectral shape. Thus it is mandatory to verify that the method allows to reconstruct such spectral functions correctly. A first step in this direction was the reconstruction of the spectral shape for free massless quarks in the (pseudo-)scalar channel $`\sigma _{PS}^{free}=3/8\pi ^2\omega ^2\mathrm{tanh}(\omega /4T)`$, known from leading order perturbation theory. In this case the relation (2) was used to obtain discrete values of the correlator in Euclidean time . On the other hand such a correlator is directly calculable on the lattice , which is shown in figure 1(a) for three different lattice sizes. At small time separations the finite lattice cut-off effects are visible compared to the free continuum correlation function indicated as solid line. Nevertheless, the spectral shape could be reconstructed almost perfectly already for temporal extents $`N_\tau =8\mathrm{}16`$ (see fig. 1(b)) by introducing a lattice version of the integration kernel in equation (2) for vanishing momentum

$`G_H(\tau ,T)={\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}d\omega \sigma _V(\omega ,T)K_L(\tau ,\omega ,N_\tau ),`$ (3)
where $`K_L(\tau ,\omega ,N_\tau )`$ is the finite lattice approximation of the continuum kernel

$`K_L(\tau ,\omega ,N_\tau )={\displaystyle \frac{2\omega }{T}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{N_\tau 1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{exp}(i2\pi n\tau T)}{(2N_\tau \mathrm{sin}(n\pi /N_\tau ))^2+(\omega /T)^2}}.`$ (4)
Since the applicability of MEM at finite temperature has been verified, one can proceed to analyze meson spectral functions below and above the critical temperature of the deconfinement transition. We have calculated pseudo-scalar and vector meson correlation functions on large isotropic lattices of sizes $`(2464)^3\times 16`$ in a temperature range 0.4 to 3.0 $`T_c`$ using $`𝒪(a)`$ improved Wilson fermions  in quenched lattice QCD. Below $`T_c`$ up to five quark mass values were chosen in order to obtain a reliable extrapolation to the chiral limit ($`m_q0`$). Above the critical temperature the simulations could be performed directly at approximately zero quark mass, since there are no longer massless Goldstone modes present .

Compared to the sharp $`\delta `$-function like peaks observed in the spectral functions at $`T=0`$  a broadening of the peaks corresponding to particle poles and a reduction in height can be observed at finite temperature. Figure 2 shows an example at 0.4 $`T_c`$, where the error bars indicate the uncertainty in the given energy region calculated from the covariance matrix of the spectral

function . The ground state masses extracted from the spectral functions at 0.4 $`T_c`$ agree very well with zero temperature data . Increasing the temperature towards $`T_c`$ the vector meson spectral function is investigated at fixed pion mass. The ground state peak experiences a further broadening and is slightly shifted towards higher energies. It remains to be clarified to what extent this effect is induced by the restricted temporal dimension and limited statistics.

Above the critical temperature only a gradual approach towards the free correlation function is observed in the (pseudo-)scalar channel, while the vector meson correlator is much closer to the free quark behavior already at 1.5 $`T_c`$ (see fig. 3(a)). Analyzing directly the ratio of the correlation function in the vector channel to the corresponding free curve calculated for the same lattice size yields a deviation of about 10 %. The free correlator is approached from above, while simple quasi-particle pictures lead to a reduction of $`G_V(\tau ,T)`$ relative to $`G_V^{free}(\tau ,T)`$ . The deviations from the free quark behavior are also evident from the reconstructed spectral functions in figure 3(b). While the second enhancement over the free curve visible in fig. 2 and 3(b) at energies larger than $`\omega /T=16`$ is presumably a lattice artifact due to the heavy fermion doublers of the Wilson fermion formulation , the peak at about $`\omega /T=6`$ shows the actual physical effect of persisting interactions between quarks and gluons in both channels up to 3 $`T_c`$. Compared to the zero temperature results  the peaks are rather broad and less pronounced in height, but might sharpen by increasing the statistics and the lattice size .

## 3 Thermal Dilepton Rates

Once the most probable vector meson spectral function is reconstructed from the correlation function in Euclidean times by means of the Maximum Entropy Method, the remaining step to obtain the differential dilepton rate is straight forward. The spectral functions shown in figure 4(a) were obtained from correlators on the largest lattice ($`64^3\times 16`$) with approximately zero quark mass at temperatures 1.5 and 3.0 $`T_c`$ . In addition to the purely statistical error-band obtained from a Jackknife analysis, the uncertainty of the uniqueness of the result incorporated in MEM is shown in the insertion as error bars for four energy intervals. This leads to the conclusion that the data sample is large enough to yield statistically significant results.

The differential dilepton rate can now be calculated in employing relation (1) projected onto zero momentum. Figure 4(b) illustrates the corresponding dilepton rates for both temperatures. In the high temperature limit the leading order perturbative result can be obtained by using free massless quark propagators in the calculation of the current-current correlation functions. For vanishing momentum the spectral function in the vector channel is given by $`\sigma _V^{free}=3/4\pi ^2\omega ^2\mathrm{tanh}(\omega /4T)`$ , which leads to the reduction of the differential dilepton rate to the Born rate

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}W^{\mathrm{Born}}}{\mathrm{d}\omega \mathrm{d}^3p}}(\stackrel{}{p}=0)={\displaystyle \frac{5\alpha ^2}{36\pi ^4}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(\mathrm{e}^{\omega /2T}+1)^2}}.`$ (5)
The broad peak visible in the spectral functions at around $`\omega /T=56`$ results in an enhancement of the respective dilepton rates in the region $`\omega /T=48`$ compared to the Born rate, which seems to scale with the temperature. For even larger energies the close agreement of the differential dilepton spectrum with the Born rate is evident.

The most striking feature of the observed dilepton rate is certainly the sharp drop at energies below $`\omega /T=23`$. This effect is in contrast to hard thermal loop resummed perturbation theory  as well as to 2-loop perturbative calculations , which lead to a divergent vector spectral function in the limit $`\omega 0`$. If this suppressions persists in future investigations closer to the critical temperature, there would be no thermal contribution the dilepton rate at small energies during the expansion of the hot medium created in heavy ion collisions. This is consistent with the present results at SPS energies  and might be observable in the dilepton spectra at RHIC or LHC energies.

## Acknowledgements

The work summarized in this talk is part of a very lively collaboration with F. Karsch, E. Laermann, P. Petreczky and S. Stickan. Furthermore, I want to thank the organizers of the Hirschegg Workshop on Ultrarelativistic Heavy-Ion Collisions for the opportunity to present this contribution and many of the participants for fruitful discussions.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Although the quantum field theory made a great success, there is no consistent scenario in which the quantum gravity is included. The most promising scenario in this direction would be the string theory, where the consistency is maintained by the requirement of additional dimensions. At first the sizes of extra dimensions had been assumed to be as small as $`M_p^1`$, however it has been observed later that there is no reason to expect such a tiny compactification radius. Denoting the volume of the $`n`$-dimensional compact space by $`V_n`$, the observed Planck mass is obtained by the relation $`M_p^2=M_{}^{n+2}V_n`$, where $`M_{}`$ denotes the fundamental scale of gravity. If we assume more than two extra dimensions, $`M_{}`$ can be assumed to be close to the electroweak scale without conflicting any observable bounds. Although such a low fundamental scale considerably improves the standard situation of the hierarchy problem, the scenario requires some degrees of fine-tuning. The largeness of the quantity $`V_n`$ is perhaps the most obvious example of such fine-tuning. There are of course other aspects of fine-tuning, which are common to conventional scenarios of grand unified theories(GUT). In particular, the compatibility between the stability of proton and baryogenesis may be the most problematic in models of such a low fundamental mass scale. In theories with low fundamental scale, the suppression can not be achieved by merely increasing the mass scale, and some non-trivial mechanism is needed. There is an interesting mechanism suggested in ref., where a dynamical mechanism for localization of fermions on the thick wall is adopted to solve the problem of the proton stability. In this scenario leptons and baryons are localized at displaced positions in the extra space, where the smallness of their interaction is insured by the smallness of the overlap of their wavefunctions along the extra dimension. On the other hand, the observed baryon number asymmetry of the Universe requires baryon number violating interactions to have been effective but non-equilibrium in the early Universe. In general the production of net baryon asymmetry requires baryon number violating interactions, C and CP violation and a departure from the thermal equilibrium. In the case that the fundamental mass scale is sufficiently high, the first two of these ingredients are naturally contained in conventional GUTs or other string-motivated scenarios, and the third can be realized in an expanding universe where it is not uncommon that interactions come in and out of equilibrium, producing the stable heavy particles or cosmological defects. In the original and simplest model of baryogenesis, a heavy GUT gauge or Higgs boson decays out of equilibrium producing a net baryon asymmetry. In our case, however, the situation is rather involved because of the low fundamental mass and the resulting low reheat temperature, which makes it much more difficult to produce the baryon asymmetry while achieving the proton stability in the present Universe. In this respect, it is very important to propose ideas to enhance the baryon number violating interactions that can appear even if the reheating temperature is low. In this letter we propose a mechanism where the enhancement of the baryon number violating interaction is realized by the several types of the cosmological defects that can survive well below the TeV scale. Our key idea is that the five-dimensional mass of the fermions, which determines the position of the wavefunctions of the fermions, can depend on the vacuum expectation value of some five-dimensional scalar field. We also assume that there are cosmological defect configurations of such scalar fields. In this case, depending on their effective couplings to the inflaton, cosmological defects can be formed at the (non-equilibrium) reheating period of the inflaton. The positions of the localized fermions vary in the defect configurations such as strings or monopoles, or in the quasi-degenerated false vacuum of the corresponding domain wall. Such a shift of the center of the wavefunction along the extra dimension can make the tiny baryon number violating interactions enhanced to produce the sufficient baryon number asymmetry. We consider the case where the fermionic mass in the five-dimensional theory, which had been assumed to be a constant in the original model, depends on the vacuum expectation value of the five-dimensional scalar field that is different from the one constitutes the fat kink configuration along the extra dimension. As we have discussed above, the most attractive effect is the enhancement of the baryon number violating interactions that can be a promising candidate to explain the baryogenesis with large extra dimensions.

## 2 Defects and domains

Localizing fields in the extra dimension necessitates breaking of higher dimensional translation invariance, which is accomplished by a spatially varying expectation value of the five-dimensional scalar field $`\varphi _A`$ of the thick wall along the extra dimension.222Here we limit ourselves to constructions with fermions localized within only one extra dimension. Generalizations to higher dimensions are straightforward, which is already discussed in ref.. If the scalar field $`\varphi _A`$ couples to the five-dimensional fermionic field $`\psi `$ through the five-dimensional Yukawa interaction $`g\varphi _A\overline{\psi }\psi `$, whose expectation value $`<\varphi _A>`$ varies along the extra dimension but is constant on four-dimensional world, it is possible to show that the fermionic field localizes at the place where the total mass in the five-dimensional theory vanishes. For definiteness, we consider the Lagrangian

$``$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\psi _i}\left(i/_5+g_i\varphi _A(y)+m_{5,i}\right)\psi _i`$ (2.1)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_\nu \varphi _A^\nu \varphi _A`$
$`V(\varphi _A),`$
where $`y`$ is the fifth coordinate of the extra dimension. For the special choice $`\varphi _A(y)=2\mu ^2y`$, which corresponds to approximating the kink with a straight line interpolating two vacua, the wave function in the fifth coordinate becomes gaussian centered around the zeros of $`g_i\varphi _A(y)+m_{5,i}`$. It is also shown that a left handed chiral fermionic field in the four-dimensional representation can result from the localization mechanism. The right handed part remains instead delocalized in the fifth dimension. The above idea can be utilized to certificate the proton stability. When leptons and baryons have the five-dimensional masses $`m_{5,l}`$ and $`m_{5,q}`$, the corresponding localizations are at $`y_l=\frac{m_{5,l}}{2g_l\mu ^2}`$ and $`y_q=\frac{m_{5,q}}{2g_q\mu ^2}`$, respectively. Even if the five-dimensional theory violates both baryon and lepton number maximally, the dangerous operator in the effective four-dimensional theory is safely suppressed. For example, we can expect the following dangerous operator in the five-dimensional theory,

$$𝒪_5d^5x\frac{QQQL}{M_{}^3}$$
(2.2)
where $`M_{}`$ denotes the fundamental mass scale and $`Q,L`$ are the five-dimensional representation of the fermionic field. The corresponding four-dimensional proton decay operator is obtained by simply replacing the five-dimensional fields by the zero mode fields and calculating the wave function overlap along the fifth dimension $`y`$. The result is

$$𝒪_4ϵ\times d^4x\frac{qqql}{M_{}^2},$$
(2.3)
where $`q,l`$ denotes the four-dimensional representation of the chiral fermionic field. The overlap of the fermionic wavefunction along the fifth dimension is included in $`ϵ`$. For a separation $`r=|y_by_l|`$ of $`\mu r=10`$, one can obtain $`ϵ10^{33}`$ which makes this operator safe even for $`M_{}`$TeV.

Let us extend the above idea to include another scalar field $`\varphi _B`$ that determines the five-dimensional mass $`m_5`$ as well as the position of the center of the fermionic wavefunction along the fifth dimension.333 We can utilize the idea of the orbifold boundary conditions that produce chiral fermion zero modes in compactified higher dimensional theories and provides a simple and explicit realization of the separation of quarks and leptons in the fifth dimension. As is discussed in ref., one can obtain the localized fermions at the fixed points at $`y=0`$ or $`y=L`$. In this case one can obtain two degenerated solutions, one is the positive configuration for $`0<y<L`$, and the other is the negative one. If the sign is positive, the zero-mode is concentrated at $`y=0`$. If it is negative, the zero mode is concentrated at $`y=L`$. In general, two degenerated vacua generates the domain configuration, separated by the domain wall interpolating between them. If the splittings of the baryons and the leptons are induced by the above-mentioned mechanism of the orbifold, and if one of the scalar field develops domain wall structure, splitting can be dissolved in the quasi-degenerated false vacuum. Then the baryon number violation is maximally enhanced in the false vacuum, which helps the scenario of baryogenesis by the decaying heavy X bosons. We assume that the additional scalar field does not make kink configuration along the fifth dimension, but does make a defect configuration in the conventional four-dimensional space. For definiteness, we consider the $`\varphi _B`$-dependent five-dimensional mass $`m(\varphi _B)_{5,i}`$. $`\varphi _A`$ makes the kink configuration along the fifth dimension while $`\varphi _B`$ develops defect configuration in the four-dimensional spacetime. Here we consider the simplest case where $`m_{5,i}`$ are given by $`m(\varphi _B)_{5,i}=k_i\varphi _B`$, and the potential for $`\varphi _B`$ is given by the double-well potential of the form; $`V_B=m_B\varphi _B^2+\lambda _B\varphi _B^4`$. In our simplest example, because of the effective $`Z_2`$ symmetry of the scalar field $`\varphi _B`$, the resultant defect is the cosmological domain wall. Of course the effective $`Z_2`$ symmetry can be explicitly broken by the gravitational effect or the higher-dimensional operators suppressed by the cut-off scale. One can easily extend the model to include the string or monopole configuration in four-dimensional spacetime, if the appropriate symmetry is imposed on the scalar field $`\varphi _B`$. The most obvious example is the choices of the form,

$$m(\varphi _B)_{5,i}=k_i\frac{|\varphi _B|^2}{M_{}}$$
(2.4)
where $`\varphi _B`$ is charged with $`U(1)`$. In any case, the position of the fermionic wavefunction along the fifth dimension can be modified by the defect configuration in the four-dimensional spacetime. The largest contribution is expected in the quasi-degenerated vacuum of the cosmological domain-wall that interpolates between $`\varphi _B=\pm v`$. Let us assume that the wavefunctions of the quarks and the leptons are localized at the opposite side of the $`\varphi _A`$ kink along the fifth dimension so that their wavefunctions are well separated. We also assume for simplicity that the five-dimensional masses $`m_5`$ for the leptons are constant. In the false vacuum domain of the $`\varphi _B`$ wall, the centers of the quark wavefunctions move toward the opposite side of the $`\varphi _A`$ wall. In this case the distances between quarks and leptons are changed by O(1), which drastically modifies the magnitude of the baryon number violating interactions in the false vacuum.

Although it seems rather difficult to produce these defects merely by the thermal effect after inflation, nonthermal effect may create such defects during reheating period of inflation. Nonthermal creation of matter and defects has raised a remarkable interest in the last years. In particular, efficient production of such products during the period of coherent oscillations of the inflaton has been studied by many authors. In this letter, however, we will not go into the details of such processes but simply assume the situation that the defects are efficiently produced after inflation by thermal or nonthermal effects.444 There is a possibility that the defects are generated after the first brane inflation, while the reheat temperature after the second thermal brane inflation is kept much lower than the electroweak scale. The cosmological constraint on the domain wall that is produced before thermal inflation is already discussed in ref.. Thermal effects may become more important when one considers the supersymmetric models where the positions of the localized matter fields may be parameterized by flat directions. In such cases, one can expect thermal symmetry restoration at the temperature much lower than the cut-off scale, which is accessible in realistic scenarios. During thermal symmetry restoration, if the five-dimensional mass terms $`m_{5,i}`$ are all determined by a field $`\varphi _B`$ that parameterizes the flat direction, both leptons and baryons may be localized at $`y=0`$. During this period the baryon number violation becomes maximal and the baryogenesis by the decaying heavy $`X`$ bosons can be promising. We will discuss this issue for supersymmetric grand unified theories in the forthcoming paper.

## 3 Enhanced baryon number violation and baryogenesis

In this section we explore the possibility of obtaining sufficient baryon number asymmetry of the Universe in models with localized fermions. Here we focus our attention to the baryogenesis by the decaying heavy particles.

First we consider a simplest model of baryogenesis with two species of heavy bosons $`X_i`$ which can decay into quarks and leptons, through the effective four-dimensional interactions of the form;

$`_{Xqq}`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _1X\overline{q}\overline{q}`$
$`_{Xlq}`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _2Xlq,`$ (3.1)
where $`\lambda _2`$ contains the tiny suppression factor $`ϵ_2`$ of the form $`ϵ_2e^{\mu ^2r^2}`$. The baryogenesis with the enhanced baryon number violating interactions is already discussed in ref., where they have expected that the thermal effect modifies the suppression factor, and concluded that the baryogenesis mediated by the heavy bosons becomes successful if the suppression factor $`ϵ_2`$ is enhanced to be larger than $`e^{40}`$. Unfortunately, the thermal effect is so weak in generic situations that the enhancement is not enough to produce the realistic baryon number of the Universe.

Now we consider the case that the five-dimensional mass depends on an another scalar field $`\varphi _B`$ and the vacuum expectation value of $`\varphi _B`$ is determined by the effective $`Z_2`$-symmetric potential.555 In general the effective $`Z_2`$ symmetry of the effective theory can be broken explicitly by the ultraviolet interactions. The explicit-breaking operators can appear in the effective Lagrangian suppressed by the cut-off scale, and destabilize the domain wall configuration. The condition for the safe decay is discussed in ref. Expecting the generic double-well potential for $`\varphi _B`$, there should be quasi-degenerated vacua where $`\varphi _B`$ changes its sign. Let us imagine the situation that the quarks and leptons are placed at the opposite side of the $`\varphi _A`$ kink, and their large distance certificates the proton stability in the true vacuum. On the other hand, when one of the five-dimensional mass changes its sign in the false vacuum, the distance can be modified by the factor of O(1). For example, if the distance $`r`$ becomes $`\frac{1}{2}r`$ in the false vacuum, the suppression factor $`10^{16}`$ becomes $`10^4`$, which is about $`10^{12}`$ times larger than the conventional value. This effect is obviously enough to explain the baryon number asymmetry in the scenario of ref.. Although it seems easy to reduce the amount of the baryon number asymmetry in this scenario, it depends on the details of the reheating process of the inflation, which is beyond the scope of this letter.

Of course one can consider other cosmological defects, such as strings or monopoles. In generic situations, monopoles are not effective for baryogenesis, because of their small volume factor. However, in some realistic cases, strings can become effective source of baryon number violation that may either washout or produce the baryon asymmetry of the Universe. It is easy to introduce string configurations in our model. The most promising way would be to consider the vortex solution along the extra dimensions in place of the wall-like kink configuration. However, one can include the string configuration without modifying the simplest situation of the original idea. For example, we can consider the mass term: $`m(\varphi _B)_{5,i}=\lambda _i\frac{|\varphi _B|^2}{M_{}}`$. In this case, the most interesting situation is that the position of both leptons and baryons are all determined by $`\varphi _B`$, and their distance depends on their coupling constants. In the core of the string where $`\varphi _B`$ vanishes, leptons and baryons are centered at the same point along the fifth dimension. The suppression disappears in the string, which is similar to the scenarios of the string-mediated baryon number violation in the conventional GUTs. In our model, however, we are not assuming the GUT-like symmetry restoration inside the string. Around the string, both the scattering and their decay by the loop can become the effective source of the baryon number violation. Although the idea of string-mediated baryogenesis is very attractive, it contains many kinds of models to be discussed. Detailed studies in this direction are given in the forthcoming paper to avoid comlexities.

## 4 Conclusions and Discussions

In this letter we have proposed a new scenario of baryon number violation in theories with localized fermion wavefunctions along the extra dimension. The baryon number can be almost conserved in the true vacuum by the localization mechanism, while it is well enhanced in the background of cosmological defect configurations. The baryon number violating interactions are most effective for the cosmological domain walls, where the domain of the false vacuum appears. It is convincing that this interesting idea opens new possibilities for baryogenesis with extra dimensions, which is not discussed in the past.

## 5 Acknowledgment

We wish to thank K.Shima for encouragement, and our colleagues in Tokyo University for their kind hospitality.