text:
# Towards Quantum Mechanism of Sensory Transduction Oleg A.KHRUSTALEV N.N.Bogoliubov’s Institute of Theoretical Microphysics, Moscow State University, Moscow, 119899, Russia e-mail: khrust@bog.msu.ru and Olga D.TIMOFEEVSKAYA Physics Deparment, Moscow State University, Moscow, 119899, Russia e-mail: olga@goa.bog.msu.ru

( )

ABSTRACT

In this communication we consider wave equations describing the classical excitations in microtubules. We found that there exists double-periodic solution for these equations. Classical solutions form background of quantum excitations. Quantum excitations are considered by Bogoliubov’s group variables method. As a result these contain no zero-modes.

Keywords: Microtubules, Quantum computation, Bogoliubov’s transformation, Conditional density matrix, Polaron.

1. INTRODUCTION

Among the various structures of cytoskeleton microtubules appear to be prominent ones (and almost unknown for nonbiologists). Microtubules represent hollow cylinders formed by protofilamets aligned along their axes. The cylindrical walls of microtubules usually are assemblies of 13 longitudinal protofilaments, each of which is the series of subunit proteins — tubulin dimers. Each dimer has an electric dipole. Thus from the physical point of view microtubules may be described as oriented assemblies of dipoles.

The hypothesis that microtubules are actively involved in reception and transduction of sensory information was been proposed in the twenties of the past century .

Frohlich  developed the general theory of biological structures which allows nonlinear dipole excitations among substructures. Frohlich theory asserts that the coherent oscillations and the long-range order arise in biological structures.

The dimers form the hexagonal structures on the outer well of microtubules. Hameroff  connected their properties with possibility of the cellular automat. The states of this automat are changed as a result of Frohlich dipole oscillations. This array was the smallest classical computer.

Recently it was assumed  that the kink-like excitations may propagate along the microtubules(with velocity about 1 m/s) and that creation and detection of these excitations develop into the communication system of living organisms.

However there was serious objection against this model. It was connected with charge transport along microtubules. In particular Tegmark  has showed that this mechanism could not lead to the spread of excitations.

In this communication we study nonlinear wave equations describing microtubule excitations. We found that there exists double -periodic solutions for these nonlinear wave equations.

These solutions are connected with charge transport along the microtubules and define the structure of quantum excitations arising on classical background. There is no problem with coherence in this case.

The problem of quatization of nonlinear wave equations in the neighborhood of classical field, here classical double-periodic solution, is considered in this paper by Bogoliubov’s group variables method . One of very important achievement of Bogoliubov’s method is absence of so named zero modes arising in straight methods of quantization on classical background. Thus this approach gives us possibility to avoid false conclusion about long-range interactions in biological systems. The symmetry of the system connected with oscillating motion of dimers is taking into account precisely. The introduction of the new dynamical variables which play the role of symmetry group parameters gives us possibilities to calculate the quantum corrections as perturbation to classical solution and to take account the conservation laws.

We propose the scheme of quantization and receive the quantum excitations in the neighborhood classical solutions. These results leads to the assumption that quantum communication can play the important role in sensory and cognition process. In particular it is possible to separate the structure inside the mucrotubules such that their function is similarly to quantum automats. The operating speed for quantum automats as usual is higher than the operating speed for corresponding classical automats. In addition the acceleration of operation is connected with higher organization of microtubule states but not with new physical mechanisms.

The analyze of that possibilities demands the higher than usual precision in definition of notions for divisions quantum systems into subsystems and reunification of subsystems into a joint system. This problem always arises in investigation of quantum scheme communications. The consideration of these processes is carried out with the help of conception of conditional density matrix . This approach could solve all problems well known as ”quantum paradoxes”. Consideration in the terms of conditional density matrix gives adequate to physical process description.

2. CLASSICAL FIELD

IN MICROTUBULES

To considerable extend the physical foundation of Penrose’s and Hammeroff’s cognition , theory is based on the hypothesis that there exist solitons in microtubules such that ”quantum computation” processes are connected with them. It is very essential to the understanding of similar processes that although the generation of solitons is absolutely quantum effect the superposition of an abundance of quantum modes hides most of pure quantum soliton properties. As a result in the first place the soliton should be considered as classical object connected with the process of a quantum cognition.

In this paper we want to show that there is a possibility of generation a different state in microtubules on the classical level. This state could forms a background for an important ”quantum cognition” processes.

The description of quantum cognition processes is based on the conception the nature of biological order after Frohlich . Frohlich argued that an ensemble of strongly interacting electrical dipoles that are capable of high-frequency oscillations under the influences of the external electric field may form the a metastable state characterized by long-range correlations.

Let the field $`\varphi (x)`$ be a vector projection on the microtubule axis for microtubule dimer deflection from equilibrium. Here $`x`$ is a coordinate along the microtubule axis. Moreover we suppose that the time evolution of the field is described by nonlinear Klein-Gordon equation.

$$\frac{^2\varphi (x,t)}{t^2}\frac{^2\varphi (x,t)}{x^2}+$$

$$m^2\varphi (x,t)+ϵ\varphi ^3(x,t)=0,$$

$$0x2\pi .$$
$`(1)`$
Here the electrical dimers field  influence on the orientation of the field $`\varphi `$ is not taken into account. Nevertheless these effects arise during successive description for micrortubules processes on the basis of nonstationary polaron theory .

It is known two classes of double periodic solutions for this equation. The first one is traveling wave:

$$\varphi (x,t)=\varphi (xvt).$$
$`(2)`$
In this case the wave equation is Duffing equation. The periodic solutions are elliptic Jacobi functions.

The second class of doubly periodic solutions consists of function in the standing wave form:

$$\varphi (x,t)=$$

$$\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{l=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}C_{kl}\mathrm{sin}(k(xx_0))\mathrm{sin}(l\omega (tt_0)),$$
$`(3)`$
where $`x_0`$ and $`t_0`$ are constants determined by boundary and initial conditions. The wave equation is a translation-invariant, so we can restrict our consideration to zero $`x_0`$ and $`t_0`$.

In this case the solutions were under study in the paper  provided that $`ϵ`$ is small.

The possibility to obtain an uniform expansion, using standard asymptotic methods, depends on value of the frequencies in the zero approximation.

If $`ϵ=0`$, then wave equation is linear and has periodic solutions with frequencies in time $`\mathrm{\Omega }_l=\sqrt{l^2+m^2}`$. There are two fundamentally different cases. If the ratio $`\mathrm{\Omega }_j/\mathrm{\Omega }_k`$ is irrational for all $`j`$ and $`k`$ then it is a non-resonant case. The periodic asymptotic in non-resonant case are well-known.

The resonance case, when there exist two frequencies $`\mathrm{\Omega }_j`$, whose relation is rational, is more difficult. The Krylov-Bogoliubov method can be used to find periodic solutions only to a few leading orders in $`ϵ`$.

Without loss of generality it can be assumed that under resonance conditions $`m=0`$. We introduce the new time $`\stackrel{~}{t}=\omega t`$ and look for a doubly-periodic solution in the form:

$$\varphi (x,\stackrel{~}{t},ϵ)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}ϵ^n\varphi _n(x,\stackrel{~}{t}),$$
$`(4)`$
$$\omega =\omega (ϵ)=1+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}ϵ^n\omega _n.$$
$`(5)`$
Expanding the wave equation in power series in $`ϵ`$ gives a sequence of equations for $`\varphi _n`$. Two leading equations are:

$$\frac{^2\varphi _0(x,\stackrel{~}{t})}{\stackrel{~}{t}^2}\frac{^2\varphi _0(x,\stackrel{~}{t})}{x^2}=0,$$
$`(6)`$
$$\frac{^2\varphi _1(x,\stackrel{~}{t})}{\stackrel{~}{t}^2}\frac{^2\varphi _1(x,\stackrel{~}{t})}{x^2}=$$

$$2\omega _1\frac{^2\varphi _0(x,\stackrel{~}{t})}{\stackrel{~}{t}^2}+\varphi _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{3}(x,\stackrel{~}{t}).$$
$`(7)`$
The general solution of the zero approximation is

$$\varphi _0(x,\stackrel{~}{t})=\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}a_n\mathrm{sin}(nx)\mathrm{sin}(n\stackrel{~}{t})$$
$`(8)`$
with arbitrary $`a_n`$. We have to find coefficients $`a_n`$ so that the function $`\varphi _1(x,\stackrel{~}{t})`$ is a double-periodic:

$$\varphi _1(x,\stackrel{~}{t})=\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{l=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}b_{kl}\mathrm{sin}(kx)\mathrm{sin}(l\stackrel{~}{t}).$$
$`(9)`$
Whenever quantum phenomena for system with essentially nonlinear interaction are investigated it must be borne in mind that quantization develops on the classical field background. In other words the ground state of the system is no longer vacuum, i.e. the state without any quantum excitation, but another state. New ”dressed vacuum” contains so many quantum excitations that it is easier to describe its properties on classical language. Namely this property of the ground state is principal for Frolich approach. The fundamentals for general theory of similar phenomena were found by Bogoliubov in 1950 .

We present the model of quantum information transport inside microtubules in terms of representation about nonstationary polaron . Let $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x)`$ be the field connected with dimer distribution for microtubules; then it is possible to present the action of the system in the form

$$S=\frac{1}{2}𝑑\tau (\varphi _t^2\varphi _x^2m^2\varphi ^2)+$$

$$g^2𝑑\tau (\mathrm{\Psi }_t^{}\mathrm{\Psi }_t\mathrm{\Psi }_x^{}\mathrm{\Psi }_xM^2\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\mathrm{\Psi })$$

$$g𝑑\tau \mathrm{\Psi }^{}\mathrm{\Psi }\varphi ^2,$$
$`(10)`$
The translation invariance of the action results in two integrals of motion, the energy and the momentum. We obtain the expressions for the integrals of motion

$$H=\frac{1}{2}𝑑\lambda (\widehat{p}^2+\widehat{q}_\lambda ^2+m^2\widehat{q}^2)+$$

$$g^2𝑑\lambda (\mathrm{\Psi }_t^{}\mathrm{\Psi }_t\mathrm{\Psi }_\lambda ^{}\mathrm{\Psi }_xM^2\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\mathrm{\Psi })$$

$$g𝑑\lambda \mathrm{\Psi }^{}\mathrm{\Psi }\widehat{q}^2,$$
$`(11)`$
$$P=𝑑\lambda \widehat{p}\widehat{q}_\lambda +g^2𝑑\lambda (\mathrm{\Psi }_n^{}\mathrm{\Psi }_\lambda +\mathrm{\Psi }_\lambda ^{}\mathrm{\Psi }_n).$$
$`(12)`$
Inequality $`g>>1`$ clearly shows the energy relation between different subsystems: if the interaction is neglected; then monomers energy is rather more than the energy associated with the field $`\varphi `$.

To define quantized field $`\varphi `$ it is necessary to define the operators $`\widehat{q}`$, $`\widehat{p}`$ such that the canonical commutation relation satisfies

$$[\widehat{q}(x,t),\widehat{p}(x^{^{}},t)]=i\delta (xx^{^{}}).$$
$`(13)`$
For our purposes the next representation is best suitable

$$\widehat{q}(x)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\varphi (x)+i\frac{\delta }{\delta \varphi _n(x)}),$$
$`(14)`$
$$\widehat{p}(x)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\varphi _n(x)i\frac{\delta }{\delta \varphi (x)}),$$
$`(15)`$
It is supposed that the functions $`\varphi (x)`$, $`\varphi _n(x)`$ are independent here.

3. PERTURBATION THEORY

After separating large components from these functions

$$\varphi (x)=gv(x^{^{}})+u(x^{^{}}),$$
$`(16)`$
$$\varphi _n(x)=gv_n(x^{^{}})+u_n(x^{^{}}),$$
$`(17)`$
one gets that the operators $`\widehat{q}`$, $`\widehat{p}`$ are transformed analogously. The terms have different powers of $`g`$:

$$\widehat{q}=gF(x^{^{}})+\widehat{Q}(x^{^{}})+\frac{1}{g}\widehat{A}(x^{^{}}),$$
$`(18)`$
$$\widehat{p}=gF_n(x^{^{}})+\widehat{P}(x^{^{}})+\frac{1}{g}\widehat{A}_n(x^{^{}}).$$
$`(19)`$
Hamiltonian has a similar structure:

$$\widehat{H}=g^2H_2+g\widehat{H}_1+\widehat{H}_0+\frac{1}{g}H_1.$$
$`(20)`$
The first term is c – number.The operator $`\widehat{H}_1`$ is linear form of $`\widehat{Q}`$ $`\widehat{P}`$ and the operator $`\widehat{H}_0`$ is bilinear form of $`\widehat{q}`$, $`\widehat{p}`$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_n`$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_n^{}`$. The linear powers of $`\widehat{Q}`$ and $`\widehat{P}`$ arise before quadratic ones. This circumstance inhibits the realization of regular perturbation theory. For elimination of these difficulties we put $`\widehat{H}_1`$ equal zero. It is possible only in the case when function $`v(x,t)`$ satisfies the equation

$$v_{tt}(x,t)v_{xx}(x,t)+$$

$$m^2v(x,t)+W(x,t)=0,$$
$`(21)`$
where $`W(x,t)`$ is functional of the third order according to $`v(x,t)`$.

Degree of nonlocality is defined by effective dimension of microtubule dimer. To a first approximation when dimer is considered as point particle the equation for $`v`$ becomes nonlinear Klein-Gordon equation which was analyzed earlier.

4. CONDITIONAL DENSITY MATRIX

After transformations made above we are close to construction of realistic model of quantum excitations in microtubules. Nevertheless the description how these excitations work needs the additional efforts. The famous Penrose and Hammeroff theory tries to overcome the arising difficulties. The proposed theory is very ingenious. However we want to note that in our opinion the authors are not completely right.

Really quantum description of quantum brain function is a problem of quantum communication theory. Its solution needs creation of systematic methods for description of subsystem unification and system separation into subsystems. Although this problem was resolved in 1927 by von Neumann the present researchers as rule do not use the advantages of his approach and commonly methods used for system and subsystems description are not quite clear. The density matrix method could be developed by conditional density matrix introducing. We suppose that conditional density matrix utilization helps to resolve the problems of quantum problem description in microtubules.

The possibility to separate the system $`S_{12}`$ into subsystems $`S_1`$ and $`S_2`$ naturally leads to following definition.

Let an operator $`\widehat{F}=\widehat{f}(x)\widehat{P}_2(y)`$, where $`\widehat{P}_2`$ is a projector on the $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$,correspond to the physical variable $`F(x,y)`$ then

$$<\widehat{F}>_\rho =Tr_{1,2}(\widehat{f}\widehat{\rho }\widehat{P}_2)=Tr_1(\widehat{f}Tr_2(\widehat{\rho }\widehat{P}_2)).$$

The operator $`P_2`$ may be connected with the state of subsystem II such that some observable $`F_2`$ has an exact value $`f_2`$. The operator $`Tr_2(\widehat{\rho }\widehat{P}_2)`$ is proportional to some density matrix of the first system – $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_I`$. The $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_I`$ defines state of system I under condition that $`F_2`$ has the exact value $`f_2`$. After normalization we get an operator

$$\widehat{\rho }_{1/2}=\frac{Tr_2(\widehat{P}_2\widehat{\rho })}{Tr(\widehat{P}_2\widehat{\rho })}$$

It is Conditional Density Matrix for the subsystem 1 when the subsystem 2 is selected in the pure state $`\widehat{\rho }_2=\widehat{P}_2=\widehat{\rho }_2^2`$. It is the most important case for quantum communications.

5. CONCLUSION

In present communication for the first time the successive description of interaction of the field $`\varphi (x)`$ with tubulin dimers is proposed. The field $`\varphi (x)`$ is deflection vector projection of dimers on the axis of microtubule with finite length.

In the proposed formalism the new type of space- time microtubule organization is found out. This organization is connected with double-periodic solution $`\varphi (x)`$

Quantum description for microtubules processes is made with utilization of Bogoliubov’s method. This method givesq us possibility to take into account the existence of classical component and translation invariant quantum excitations simultaneously.

The processes of unification and separation composite system into subsystems are basic for information theory. It is proposed to use conditional density matrix method for construction information quantum transport mechanism in microtubules.

REFERENCES

$`[1]`$ A.E.Hopkins, J. comp. Neurol., Vol. 41, 1926, pp. 253.

 H.Frohlich, ”Evidence of bose condensation-like excitation of coherent modes in biological systems”, Physics Letters, Vol.51A, No.1,1975, pp,21-22.

 S.P.Hameroff, R.C.Watt, ”Information processing in microtubules”, J.Theor.Biol., Vol.98, 1982, pp.549-561.

 M.V.Satarich, J.A.Tuszyński, R.B.Zakula, ”Kinklike excitations as an energy-transfer mechanism in microtubules”, Physical Review E, Vol.48, No.4, 1993, pp.589-597.

 M.Tegmark, ”Importance of quantum decoherence in brain processes”, Phys.Rev., Vol.E 61, No.4, 2000, pp.4194-4206.

 N.N.Bogoliubov, Ukranian Math.Journal, Vol.2, 1950, pp.2-34.

 V.V.Belokurov, O.A.Khrustalev, V.A.Sadovnichy, O.D.Timofeevskaya,”Systems and subsystems in quantum communication”, Preprint, Moscow State University, Moscow, 2001; arXiv:quant-ph/0111164.

 S.P.Hameroff, ”Quantum computation in brain microtubules? The Penrose-Hamerof ”Orh Or” model of consciousness”, Philosophical Transactions Royal Society London (A), Vol.356, 1998, pp.1869-1896.

 R.Penrose, The Emperer’s New Mind, Oxford Press, Oxford, U.K., 1989.

 O.Khrustalev, S.Vernov, Construction of doubly periodic solutions via the Poincare-Lindstedt method in the case of massless $`\varphi ^4`$ theory, Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, Vol. 57, 2000, pp. 239-252.

 E.Yu.Spirina, O.A.Khrustalev, M.V.Tchichikina, ”Nonstationary polaron”, Theor.and Math.Physycs, Vol.122, No.3, 2000, pp.347-354.

 S.R. Hameroff, R. Penrose, Orchestrated reduction of quantum coherence in brain microtubules: A model for consciousness, Neural Network World”, Vol. 5, No. 5, 1995, pp.793-804.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The evidence for neutrino masses and mixings now appears to be quite solid from the positive results for neutrino oscillations from solar neutrino data in seven different experiments, Chlorine, Kamiokande, Super-Kamiokande, SAGE, GALLEX, GNO, SNO and atmospheric neutrino data from Super-Kamiokande, IMB, Soudan and MACRO experiments. The third piece of evidence is from the Los Alamos LSND experiment that shows an oscillation from the muon neutrino to the electron neutrino (from $`\overline{\nu _\mu }`$ to $`\overline{\nu _e}`$). The KARMEN experiment which looked for $`\overline{\nu _\mu }`$ to $`\overline{\nu _e}`$ oscillation did not find any evidence for it and eliminated a large fraction of the parameter space allowed by LSND. It is hoped that the Mini-BOONE experiment at FERMILAB will settle the issue in near future.

Theoretical analyses have made it clear that a simultaneous explanation of all the neutrino oscillation observations requires the existence of an ultralight sterile neutrino in addition to the three known active neutrinos $`(\nu _e,\nu _\mu ,\nu _\tau )`$. There are two mass patterns that are currently under active discussion; the 2+2 scheme and 3+1 scheme. The 2+2 scheme has two mass eigenstate neutrinos with mass around an eV and a lighter pair with mass near $`10^3`$ eV, with the latter pair explaining the solar neutrino data, the former explaining the atmospheric neutrino data and the gap between the two pairs explaining the LSND results. Recent SNO data disfavors the original version of the 2+2 model where all the missing solar $`\nu _e`$’s are converted via a small angle MSW mechanism only to the sterile neutrinos. The situation where only a fraction of the missing $`\nu _e`$s convert to $`\nu _s`$s and the rest to active ones has been studied in detail and shown to be quite viable at the moment. The 3+1 picture on the other hand is severely constrained by the known accelerator data but is also viable for certain values for $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ .

If indeed the sterile neutrino turns out to be required, an important theoretical challenge is to seek an understanding of such tiny mass of a particle which is neutral under the standard model forces. This is in clear distinction from the case for the active neutrinos for whom the small mass has a very convincing explanation in terms of the seesaw mechanism that, at the basic level requires only that three singlet right handed neutrinos be introduced with masses close to the GUT scale. The conventional seesaw mechanism makes the three right handed neutrinos superheavy, leaving the three active neutrinos with a very light mass, as seems to be case. In addition to this appealing feature, this minimal seesaw model also restores quark lepton symmetry into the fundamental fermions of nature, making this the standard paradigm of neutrino mass physics. Generic attempts to understand the ultralight sterile neutrino within the seesaw framework involve the introduction of a new singlet fermion into the theory beyond the three right handed neutrinos just discussed and use extra symmetries to protect it from being superheavy. While there exist perfectly acceptable, interesting and technically natural scenarios for the sterile neutrino with extra singlet fermions, these extra assumptions have caused skepticism regarding the existence of the sterile neutrino and in turn about the LSND results.

An interesting theoretical challenge is therefore to explore whether within the minimal quark lepton symmetric seesaw framework, one can have an ultralight sterile neutrino without the need for additional singlet neutrinos, outside the quark-lepton symmetric framework and fit all observations including LSND. Such a project is apriori not implausible in view of the fact that the right handed neutrinos already present in the quark-lepton symmetric framework have all the properties of a sterile neutrino, except the mass. In a recent paper it was shown that if there exist certain leptonic symmetries in the seesaw model, they can make one of the right handed neutrinos massless in the tree approximation of a renormalizable theory making it possible to identify it with the needed ultralight sterile neutrino. Using this idea for the case of an $`(L_eL_\mu L_\tau )\times S^{\mu \tau }`$ symmetry, (where $`S^{\mu \tau }`$ is the interchange symmetry between $`\nu _{\mu R}`$ and $`\nu _{\tau R}`$), it was shown in  that the 3+1 scenario for the LSND observations can be reproduced within the minimal seesaw picture.

In this letter, we show that when the leptonic symmetry is instead chosen to be $`(L_e+L_\mu L_\tau )\times S_2`$, the suggestion of ref. can be extended to obtain the 2+2 explanation of LSND with one of the right handed neutrinos of the seesaw picture playing the role of the sterile neutrino. The mixing of the sterile neutrino to the active neutrinos arises from Planck scale suppressed higher dimensional operators. A consistent picture with $`10^{13}`$ GeV for the seesaw scale and $`10^6`$ GeV for the breaking of the leptonic symmetries seems to emerge and leads to mass matrix ansatz for the 2+2 case recently proposed in . Experimental tests of this idea are proposed.

## 2 Seesaw with a leptonic symmetry and right handed neutrino as an ultralight sterile neutrino

In this section, we discuss how imposing $`(L_e+L_\mu L_\tau )\times S_{e\mu }`$ in a seesaw framework leads to a massless right handed neutrino which can play the role of the sterile neutrino. We will work with the gauge group $`SU(2)_L\times U(1)_{I_{3R}}\times U(1)_{BL}`$ with particle assignment as in Table I.

We call this the minimal seesaw picture since all the fermions in our model are needed in the conventional seesaw explanation of the small masses of the neutrinos. The Higgs field $`\mathrm{\Delta }^0`$ transforming as $`(1,1,+2)`$ under the gauge group couples to the right handed neutrinos ($`\nu _{eR},\nu _{\mu R},\nu _{\tau R}`$) with couplings typically of the form $`\nu _R\nu _R\mathrm{\Delta }`$. After spontaneous symmetry breaking, the field $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ acquires a vev i.e. $`<\mathrm{\Delta }^0>=v_R`$ and breaks the gauge symmetry to the standard model. This gives mass to the right handed neutrinos and is the seesaw scale. The Higgs field $`\varphi (2,1/2,0)`$, whose weak scale vev breaks the standard model gauge group, gives Dirac mass to the neutrinos. If we denote the mass matrix for the right handed neutrinos as $`M_R`$, then the complete $`6\times 6`$ mass matrix involving the Dirac mass and Majorana mass for the neutrinos can be written as

$`_{LR}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& M_D\\ M_D^T& M_R\end{array}\right).`$ (3)
When none of the eigenvalues of $`M_R`$ vanishes, one can obtain the mass matrix for the light neutrinos as

$`_\nu =M_D^TM_R^1M_D`$ (4)
This is the so-called type I seesaw formula. On the other hand when $`M_R`$ and $`M_D`$ matrices have zero eigenvalues, one must “take them out” of the matrix before using the seesaw formula. As was noted in , this turns out to be the case when there are leptonic symmetries. To obtain the 2+2 scenario, we will consider the leptonic symmetry to be $`(L_e+L_\mu L_\tau )\times S_{2R}^{e\mu }`$. At the beginning of our analysis we go to a basis where charged lepton mass matrix is diagonal where leptonic mixing matrix is simply neutrino mixing matrix. In this basis we identify the leptonic flavor indices $`e,\mu ,\tau `$. After that the renormalizable Lagrangian invariant under $`(L_e+L_\mu L_\tau )\times S_{2R}^{e\mu }`$ symmetry has the form

$`_Y^R`$ $`=`$ $`h_e\overline{L}_e\varphi e_R+h_\mu \overline{L}_\mu \varphi \mu _R+h_\tau \overline{L}_\tau \varphi \tau _R`$ (5)
$`+h_1\overline{L}_e\stackrel{~}{\varphi }(\nu _{eR}+\nu _{\mu R})+h_2\overline{L}_\mu \stackrel{~}{\varphi }(\nu _{eR}+\nu _{\mu R})+h_3\overline{L}_\tau \stackrel{~}{\varphi }\nu _{\tau R}`$
$`+f(\nu _{\mu R}+\nu _{eR})\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _{\tau R}`$
Spontaneous symmetry breaking then leads to Dirac and Majorana type mass matrices of the form,

$`M_D=\begin{array}{cccccc}& & \nu _R^e& \nu _R^\mu & \nu _R^\tau & \\ & (\mathrm{}& )\mathrm{}\\ & & & \\ \overline{\nu _L^e}& k& 0& \\ \overline{\nu _L^\mu }& k^{}& 0& \\ \overline{\nu _L^\tau }& 0& m_{33}& \end{array},M_R=\begin{array}{cccccc}& & \nu _R^e& \nu _R^\mu & \nu _R^\tau & \\ & (\mathrm{}& )\mathrm{}\\ & & & \\ \nu _R^e& 0& M& \\ \nu _R^\mu & 0& M& \\ \nu _R^\tau & M& 0& \end{array}`$ (6)
The $`6\times 6`$ mass matrix would then take the form

$`M=\begin{array}{ccccccccc}& & \nu _L^e& \nu _L^\mu & \nu _L^\tau & \nu _R^e& \nu _R^\mu & \nu _R^\tau & \\ & (\mathrm{}& )\mathrm{}\\ & & & & & & \\ \nu _L^e& 0& 0& k& k& 0& \\ \nu _L^\mu & 0& 0& k^{}& k^{}& 0& \\ \nu _L^\tau & 0& 0& 0& 0& m_{33}& \\ \nu _R^e& k^{}& 0& 0& 0& M& \\ \nu _R^\mu & k^{}& 0& 0& 0& M& \\ \nu _R^\tau & 0& m_{33}& M& M& 0& \end{array}`$ (7)
In the rotated basis it is

$`M=\begin{array}{ccccccccc}& & \nu _L^{}& \nu _L^+& \nu _L^\tau & \nu _R^{}& \nu _R^+& \nu _R^\tau & \\ & (\mathrm{}& )\mathrm{}\\ & & & & & & \\ \nu _L^{}& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& \\ \nu _L^+& 0& 0& 0& \xi & 0& \\ \nu _L^\tau & 0& 0& 0& 0& m_{33}& \\ \nu _R^{}& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& \\ \nu _R^+& \xi & 0& 0& 0& \sqrt{2}M& \\ \nu _R^\tau & 0& m_{33}& 0& \sqrt{2}M& 0& \end{array}`$ (8)
where

$`\nu _L^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k^{}\nu _L^ek\nu _L^\mu }{\sqrt{k_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+k^2}}}`$ (9)
$`\nu _L^+`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k\nu _L^e+k^{}\nu _L^\mu }{\sqrt{k_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+k^2}}}`$ (10)
$`\nu _R^\pm `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\nu _R^e\pm \nu _R^\mu }{\sqrt{2}}}`$ (11)
and $`\xi =\frac{2\sqrt{2}kk^{}}{\sqrt{k_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+k^2}}`$. We next employ the see-saw mechanism to generate the light Majorana neutrino mass matrix,

$`\begin{array}{cccccc}& & \nu _L^+& \nu _L^\tau & \nu _L^{}& \\ & (\mathrm{}& )\mathrm{}\\ & & & \\ \nu _L^+& m& 0& \\ \nu _L^\tau & 0& 0& \\ \nu _L^{}& 0& 0& \end{array}\mathrm{where}m={\displaystyle \frac{m_{33}\xi }{\sqrt{2}M}}`$ (12)
In the limit $`k=k^{}`$ we have $`\xi =2k`$ and $`m=\frac{\sqrt{2}km_{33}}{M}`$ , however because $`S_{2L}`$ symmetry is absent we have the freedom to choose $`kk^{}`$ which will help to achieve small mixing in the $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ sector compatible to LSND.

The challenge after this is to induce large left right mixing. There are higher dimensional operators in this scenario which are sufficient to induce left-right mixing after the see-saw mechanism as will be described below. We can write down following higher dimensional operators

$`{\displaystyle \frac{f_1}{M_p}}\overline{L_e}\nu _R\sigma _0\stackrel{~}{\varphi }`$ (13)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{f_2}{M_p}}\overline{L_\mu }\nu _R\sigma _0\stackrel{~}{\varphi }`$ (14)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{f_3}{M_p}}\overline{L_\tau }\nu _R\sigma _2\stackrel{~}{\varphi }`$ (15)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{f_4}{M_p^2}}\nu _R\nu _R\mathrm{\Delta }\sigma _2\sigma _0`$ (16)
Now the $`4\times 4`$ mass matrix in low energy can be written in terms of rotated low energy fields. We identify $`\nu _L^+\nu _e^{},\nu _L^{}\nu _\mu ^{},\nu _R\nu _s`$

$$M=\begin{array}{ccccccc}& & \nu _e^{}& \nu _\mu ^{}& \nu _L^\tau & \nu _s& \\ & (\mathrm{}& )\mathrm{}\\ \nu _e^{}& 0& m& m_1& \\ \nu _\mu ^{}& 0& 0& m_2& \\ \nu _L^\tau & 0& 0& m_3& \\ \nu _s& m_2& m_3& \delta & \end{array}$$
(17)
CASE 1

We notice that in the limit $`m0,\delta 0`$ the eigenvalues are

$$0,0,\pm M\mathrm{where}M=\sqrt{m_1^2+m_2^2+m_3^2}$$
(18)
Thus LSND mass splitting squared can be of order $`M^2`$. Introduction of non-zero $`m`$ and $`\delta `$ will introduce $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{atm}^2`$. To leading order the eigenvectors are,

$`\mathrm{Eigenvalue}0e_1=\left(\begin{array}{c}m_3/\sqrt{m_1^2+m_3^2}\\ 0\\ m_1/\sqrt{m_1^2+m_3^2}\\ 0\end{array}\right);e_2=\left(\begin{array}{c}m_1m_2/M\sqrt{m_1^2+m_3^2}\\ \sqrt{(m_1^2+m_3^2)}/M\\ m_2m_3/M\sqrt{m_1^2+m_3^2}\\ 0\end{array}\right)`$
$`\mathrm{Eigenvalue}\pm \mathrm{M}e_3=\left(\begin{array}{c}m_1/\sqrt{2}M\\ m_2/\sqrt{2}M\\ m_3/\sqrt{2}M\\ 1/\sqrt{2}\end{array}\right);e_4=\left(\begin{array}{c}m_1/\sqrt{2}M\\ m_2/\sqrt{2}M\\ m_3/\sqrt{2}M\\ 1/\sqrt{2}\end{array}\right)`$ (19)
Depending on the hierarchies between $`m_1,m_2,m_3,\delta `$ and $`m`$ various scenarios can emerge from general expressions given in Eqn. (19). Let us consider a simple possibility. Taking $`m_2>>m_1,m_3,m,\delta `$, and $`m_1m_3`$ we have $`M=m_2`$. Eigenvectors reduce to

$`e_1=\left(\begin{array}{c}1/\sqrt{2}\\ 0\\ 1/\sqrt{2}\\ 0\end{array}\right);e_2=\left(\begin{array}{c}1/\sqrt{2}\\ 0\\ 1/\sqrt{2}\\ 0\end{array}\right);e_3=\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1/\sqrt{2}\\ 0\\ 1/\sqrt{2}\end{array}\right);e_4=\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1/\sqrt{2}\\ 0\\ 1/\sqrt{2}\end{array}\right)`$ (20)
This means that the massive pair is constituted mainly of $`\nu _\mu ^{}`$ and $`\nu _s`$, whereas the light pair is constituted mainly of $`\nu _e^{}`$ and $`\nu _\tau `$ and each pair has large mixing among them. Now take $`k>>k^{}`$ in Eqn. (9) and Eqn. (10). Then $`\nu _e^{}\nu _L^e`$ and $`\nu _\mu ^{}\nu _L^\mu `$. We must introduce non-zero $`m`$, $`\delta `$ $`m_1`$ and $`m_2`$ in such a way that the two pairs mix among each other to explain the LSND result.

This can be done numerically for example if we take the parameter set, $`m=0.04,m_1=0.05,m_2=1,m_3=0.06,\delta =0.02`$ eVs. We get, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2=2\times 10^5,\mathrm{\Delta }m_{atm}^2=4\times 10^2,\mathrm{\Delta }m_{LSND}^2=0.98`$ eV2.

$`e_1=\left(\begin{array}{c}0.707\\ 0.007\\ 0.706\\ 0\end{array}\right)e_2=\left(\begin{array}{c}0.705\\ 0.077\\ 0.704\\ 0.003\end{array}\right)e_3=\left(\begin{array}{c}0.033\\ 0.708\\ 0.041\\ 0.703\end{array}\right)e_4=\left(\begin{array}{c}0.036\\ 0.701\\ 0.044\\ 0.710\end{array}\right)`$ (21)
We note that now we have introduced small $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ mixing even though the primary mixing pattern is governed by Eqn. (20). We can now calculate P($`\overline{\nu _e}\overline{\nu _\mu }`$) for LSND experiment to be

$$P_{\overline{\nu _e}\overline{\nu _\mu }}^{LSND}=4|(U_{e3}^{}U_{\mu 3}+U_{e4}^{}U_{\mu 4})|^2\mathrm{sin}^2(\frac{1.27\mathrm{\Delta }m_{LSND}^2L}{E})$$
(22)
On the other hand, we have,

$$P_{\overline{\nu _e}\overline{\nu _\mu }}^{LSND}=\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{LSND}\mathrm{sin}^2(\frac{1.27\mathrm{\Delta }m_{LSND}^2L}{E})$$
(23)
Combining these two equations we have

$$\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{LSND}=0.01$$
(24)
Thus we see that we get $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ as well as $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta `$ compatible with LSND experiment. Whereas we have already got large(near-maximal) $`\nu _e\nu _\tau `$ and large(near-maximal) $`\nu _\mu \nu _s`$ mixing to account for solar and atmospheric neutrino deficits. However in two-generation analysis of the atmospheric neutrino data the pure $`\nu _\mu \nu _s`$ oscillation scenario is seen to be highly disfavored, as it fails to reproduce the correct zenith angle distribution of the data, the effect being more for the higher energy neutrinos. The sterile option is also in contradiction with the neutral current sample of the SK atmspheric neutrino data . But from the four-neutrino global analysis of the solar and the atmospheric neutrino data taken together  this scenario is not ruled out, although disfavored . The other drawback of this mass texture is that it predicts near-maximal mixing for the solar $`\nu _e\nu _\tau `$ oscillations. However, after the inclusion of the SNO data, maximal mixing in the LMA region is seen to be disfavored in most analyses of the solar neutrino problem .

CASE 2

Let us apply the inverse of the rotation given in Eqn (9) and Eqn (10) on the basis vectors $`(\nu _e^{},\nu _\mu ^{})`$. Then matrix in Eqn. (17) can be expressed as,

$$M=\begin{array}{ccccccc}& & \nu _L^e& \nu _L^\mu & \nu _L^\tau & \nu _s& \\ & (\mathrm{}& )\mathrm{}\\ \nu _L^e& 0& ϵ_2& ϵ_1& \\ \nu _L^\mu & 0& 1& a& \\ \nu _L^\tau & 1& 0& b& \\ \nu _s& a& b& \delta & \end{array}m_0$$
(25)
For small b this mass matrix has been studied in Ref.  using a different symmetry than the one discussed above. It was shown in detail that it is suitable for the mixed $`2+2`$ scenario. A similar matrix was also obtained under radiative scheme. However the 44 diagonal element vanish genericaly in simple radiative schemes.

## 3 Predictions of the Model

With the range of values for the parameter set needed to explain the global solar, atmospheric and the accelerator/reactor data including LSND, our four-generation model makes definite predictions for the effective mass of the neutrinos in beta decay and neutrinoless double beta decay processes. For the neutrinoless double beta decay the “effective Majorana mass parameter” is given by

$`|<m>|`$ $`=`$ $`|{\displaystyle \underset{i=1,4}{}}m_iU_{ei}^2|`$
$`=`$ $`m_{ee}`$
the $`11`$ element of the mass matrix. Since this element is identically zero for the model under consideration, our model predicts no neutrinoless double beta decay. In a recent paper  has claimed of a positive evidence for neutrinoless double beta decay, based on the reanalysis of the data from the Heidelberg-Moscow experiment. A best-fit Majorana mass of 0.39 eV for the neutrinos at 95 % confidence level was reported. However there are proposals for new generation neutrinoless double beta decay experiments which are expected to have better sensitivities so they can resolve this issue at higher confidence levels. These include NEMO3 , CUORE  and GENIUS , which hopes to probe neutrino masses down to $`10^2`$ eV. This is a good way to falsify the scenario we are presenting here.

The beta decay experiments look for evidence of neutrino mass by observing the end point spectrum of $`{}_{}{}^{3}H`$ beta decay. The best bound available to date is

$`m_{\nu _e}<2.2\mathrm{eV}\mathrm{at}95\%\mathrm{C}.\mathrm{L}.`$ (27)
In terms of the mass and mixing angles the quantity probed by the beta decay experiments is

$`m_{\nu _e}^2={\displaystyle \underset{i=1,4}{}}m_i^2|U_{ei}|^2`$ (28)
For the CASE 2 of our model we have to linear order in $`\delta `$, $`ϵ_1`$ and $`ϵ_2`$

$`m_{\nu _e}^2{\displaystyle \frac{m_0^2}{(1+a^2)}}\left[(ϵ_1aϵ_2)^2+(aϵ_1+ϵ_2)^2\right]`$ (29)
With the range of values for the parameters $`m_0^2`$, $`a`$, $`ϵ_1`$ and $`ϵ_2`$ required to satisfy the global neutrino oscillation data  we expect the value of $`m_{\nu _e}0.03`$ for $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{LSND}^21`$ eV2. The forthcoming KATRIN experiment is expected to have a sensitivity upto $`m_{\nu _e}0.3`$ eV . Thus we expect no signal for $`m_{\nu _e}`$ in KATRIN from our model. This is another way to test our model.

The other intriguing quantity that needs precise measurements is $`|U_{e3}|^2+|U_{e4}|^2`$ which will give the fraction of $`\nu _e`$ mixed in the upper doublet. For the CASE 2 upto linear terms in $`\delta `$, $`ϵ_1`$ and $`ϵ_2`$ we have

$`|U_{e3}|^2+|U_{e4}|^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{aϵ_1+ϵ_2}{1+a^2}}\right)^2`$ (30)
while

$`4|U_{e3}^{}U_{\mu 3}+U_{e4}^{}U_{\mu 4}|^2`$ $``$ $`4\left({\displaystyle \frac{aϵ_1+ϵ_2}{1+a^2}}\right)^2`$
$``$ $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{LSND}`$
Thus for the CASE 2 of our model $`|U_{e3}|^2+|U_{e4}|^2(\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{LSND})/40.0007`$ much more stringent than the current bound from the short baseline terrestrial experiments (BUGEY) which is

$`|U_{e3}|^2+|U_{e4}|^2\stackrel{<}{}0.01`$ (32)
Values of $`|U_{e3}|^2+|U_{e4}|^2`$ as low as 0.0007 would be difficult to detect with usual laboratory beams. However with proposals of high intensity neutrino beams from neutrino factories, it would be interesting to see if one can probe to such accuracy.

## 4 Comments and conclusion

A few comments are now in order: the first theoretical comment is on the choice of the gauge group: while we have illustrated our basic idea in the context of an $`SU(2)_L\times U(1)_{I_{3R}}\times U(1)_{BL}`$ gauge group, it could easily be implemented in the context of the standard model gauge group as well. However, in this case the meaning of the seesaw scale will remain a mystery. One could also use the left-right symmetric gauge group $`SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R\times U(1)_{BL}`$. In this case since the right handed neutrino and the right handed charged leptons are in the same multiplet, $`S_{e\mu }`$ symmetry leads to electron being mass less prior to symmetry breaking. One can however extend the model to make the electron massive. Quark lepton unification of these models is nontrivial due to absence of any analog of $`L_e+L_\mu L_\tau `$ symmetry in the quark sector.

The breaking of the leptonic symmetries can be made soft by adding to the Lagrangian terms such as $`(\sigma _2^{})^2`$ so that there are no massless scalar bosons.

In conclusion, we have presented a minimal seesaw model using three active and three right handed neutrinos (as would be suggested in a quark-lepton symmetric theory), which can lead to an ultralight sterile neutrino. The sterile neutrino in this case is none other than the right handed neutrino. Spontaneous breaking of the leptonic symmetries lead to mixing of the sterile neutrino with the the active neutrinos resulting in a 2+2 hybrid scenario for LSND, which provides a viable description of neutrino oscillation data. The model predicts an effective $`U_{e3}0.025`$ and an effective end point mass in tritium beta decay $`0.03`$.

The work of RNM is supported by the National Science Foundation Grant No. PHY-0099544. B.B and S.C would like to thank the organizers of WHEPP-7 where a part of this work was done. B.B would also like to thank Amitava Raychaudhuri and Probir Roy for discussions on Ref. .


text:
# Untitled Document

Nonlinear Image Processing Based

on Optimization of Generalized

Information Methods

Anisa T. BAJKOVA

IAA RAS, Nab. Kutuzova, 10, 191187, St-Petersburg, Russia

> > Abstract. A range of nonlinear image reconstruction procedures based on extremizing the generalized Shannon entropy, Kullback-Leibler cross-entropy and Renyi information measures and proposed by the author in early papers is presented. The “generalization” assumes search for the solution over the space of real bipolar or complex functions. Such an approach allows, first, to reconstruct signals of any type and physical nature and, secondly, to decrease nonlinear intensity image distortions caused by measurement errors. All the elaborated procedures are contained in VLBI “IMAGE” program package developed in IAA RAS.

1.Introduction

The main aim of this paper is consideration of a class of image deconvolution (reconstruction) algorithms based on optimization of different information measures. The most popular among them is the well known maximum entropy method in Shannon formulation. The generalized information methods based on extremizing entropic (Shannon, Kullback-Leibler) and Renyi measures were proposed by the author in several previous publications \[1–3\] for reconstruction of real bipolar and complex images. In this paper we give a brief review of the proposed techniques.

All the proposed methods are realized in ”IMAGE” program package elaborated in IAA RAS in framework of ”QUASAR” Russian Very Long Baseline Interferometry (VLBI) project.

2.Entropic Processing

2.1.Maximum Entropy Method

Maximum entropy method (MEM) is widely used for image reconstruction from incomplete and noisy Fourier data. In Fourier space the image reconstruction problem is equivalent to one of extrapolation and interpolation. The MEM produces maximally smooth, or unbiased, estimates . If $`r_{ml}`$ is a real non-negative signal (we consider two-dimensional sampling signals) to be estimated then the maximum entropy method assumes solving the following optimization problem with linear constraints dictated by data

$$\mathrm{max}\underset{m}{}\underset{l}{}(r_{ml}\mathrm{ln}(r_{ml}))1/2\underset{n}{}\underset{k}{}(\eta _{nk}^{r2}+\eta _{nk}^{i2})/\sigma _{nk}^2,r_{ml}0,$$
(1)
$$\underset{m}{}\underset{l}{}r_{ml}a_{ml}^{nk}+\eta _{nk}^r=A_{nk},\underset{m}{}\underset{l}{}r_{ml}b_{ml}^{nk}+\eta _{nk}^i=B_{nk},$$
(2)
where $`a_{ml}^{nk},b_{ml}^{nk}`$ are constants determined by linear image formation system (Fourier transform), $`A_{nk},B_{nk}`$ are the real and imaginary parts of the Fourier data respectively, $`\eta _{nk}^r,\eta _{nk}^i`$ are noise components of data, $`\sigma _{nk}^2`$ are noise variances for each of the real and imaginary parts at sample $`nk`$. Note that the signal must be real and non-negative-definite for a real entropy functional to exist.

Using the Lagrange method it is easy to obtain a solution for $`r_{ml}`$ and noise components

$$r_{ml}=\mathrm{exp}(\underset{n}{}\underset{k}{}\alpha _{nk}a_{ml}^{nk}+\beta _{nk}b_{ml}^{nk}1),$$
(3)
$$\eta _{nk}^r=\sigma _{nk}^2\alpha _{nk},\eta _{nk}^i=\sigma _{nk}^2\beta _{nk},$$
(4)
where $`\alpha _{nk},\beta _{nk}`$ are conventional Lagrange multipliers.

2.2.Kullback-Leibler Entropy Method

Kullback-Leibler information permits insertion of a prior bias function $`a_{ml}`$ into entropy functional (1) as follows

$$\underset{m}{}\underset{l}{}r_{ml}\mathrm{ln}(r_{ml}/a_{ml}),r_{ml},a_{ml}0.$$
(5)
The aim of such insertion is improving the entropic algorithm (1) using a priori information about an unknown signal . Usually as a bias function $`a_{ml}`$ a first approximation to $`r_{ml}`$ obtained by inverse Fourier transform of input Fourier data is used. Missing data regions in Fourier space are filled out by zeros.

3.Renyi Information Processing

Another powerful method of reconstruction considered here is based on minimization of the following Renyi information measure

$$\underset{m}{}\underset{l}{}r_{ml}^\alpha a_{ml}^{1\alpha },r_{ml},a_{ml}0,\alpha 0,$$
(6)
where $`a_{ml}`$ is a reference function.

4.Generalized Methods

Originally the generalized maximum entropy method (GMEM) was proposed by Bajkova  for reconstruction of complex coherent images formed by radio holography principle. In  the GMEM idea was used by Frieden for generalization of Kullback-Leibler cross-entropy reconstruction of ISAR images. In  by Frieden the generalized form of entropy functionals was extended to minimum Renyi information method. Bajkova proposed the method of solution of corresponding generalized optimization problem .

4.1.Generalized Maximum Entropy Method

Here let us recall the basic aspects of the GMEM .

First, consider a real signal $`r_{ml}`$ which may take both positive and negative values. In this case the minimizing functional cannot be written as (1). Therefore it was proposed in  to represent entropy (1) as entropy of the absolute value of $`r_{ml}`$:

$$\underset{m}{}\underset{l}{}|r_{ml}|\mathrm{ln}(|r_{ml}|).$$
(7)
To represent the optimization problem in traditional form (1)-(2) let us represent the signal sought for $`r_{ml}`$ as a difference between two non-negative-definite functions:

$$r_{ml}=x_{ml}y_{ml},x_{ml}0,y_{ml}0.$$
(8)
Thus the positive regions are represented by $`x_{ml}`$ and the negative by $`y_{ml}`$. Curves $`x_{ml}`$ and $`y_{ml}`$ do not have overlapping support regions. Nonoverlapping condition can be written as

if $`r_{ml}>0`$ then $`y_{ml}0`$ and $`r_{ml}=x_{ml}`$,

if $`r_{ml}<0`$ then $`x_{ml}0`$ and $`r_{ml}=y_{ml}`$.

Then the problem of estimation of $`r_{ml}`$ can be replaced by one of estimation of $`x_{ml}`$ and $`y_{ml}`$ as

$$\mathrm{max}\underset{m}{}\underset{l}{}(x_{ml}\mathrm{ln}(x_{ml})+y_{ml}\mathrm{ln}(y_{ml}))1/2\underset{n}{}\underset{k}{}(\eta _{nk}^{r2}+\eta _{nk}^{i2})/\sigma _{nk}^2.$$
(9)
Jumping to a complex signal $`u_{ml}=r_{ml}+jq_{ml},j=\sqrt{}1`$, where both $`r_{ml}`$ and $`q_{ml}`$ are real bipolar signals, we can represent similarly to (8) the sought for sequences as the differences of non-negative-definite sequences as well:

$$r_{ml}=x_{ml}y_{ml},q_{ml}=z_{ml}v_{ml},$$
(10)
where $`x_{ml}0,y_{ml}0,z_{ml}0,v_{ml}0`$.

Obviously, if the sequences $`x_{ml},y_{ml}`$ and $`z_{ml},v_{ml}`$ do not overlapp, then $`x_{ml}`$ and $`z_{ml}`$ determine positive parts and $`y_{ml}`$ and $`v_{ml}`$ determine negative parts of the sequences $`r_{ml}`$ and $`q_{ml}`$ respectively.

Nonoverlapping condition mentioned above must be complemented by one for the signal $`q_{ml}`$:

if $`q_{ml}>0`$ then $`v_{ml}0`$ and $`q_{ml}=z_{ml}`$,

if $`q_{ml}<0`$ then $`z_{ml}0`$ and $`q_{ml}=v_{ml}`$.

Then the minimized entropic functional for estimation of the complex signal can be written as the following functional

$$\underset{m}{}\underset{l}{}x_{ml}\mathrm{ln}(\alpha x_{ml})+y_{ml}\mathrm{ln}(\alpha y_{ml})+z_{ml}\mathrm{ln}(\alpha z_{ml})+v_{ml}\mathrm{ln}(\alpha v_{ml})$$
(11)
with inserted a positive parameter $`\alpha `$ responsible for not overlapping positive and negative parts of the search for real bipolar sequences $`r_{ml}`$ and $`q_{ml}`$. Significance of the parameter $`\alpha `$ will be clear below from equations (15)-(17).

Linear constraints (2) derived from Fourier data must be rewritten in the way:

$$\underset{m}{}\underset{l}{}(x_{ml}y_{ml})a_{ml}^{nk}(z_{ml}v_{ml})b_{ml}^{nk}+\eta _{nk}^r=A_{nk},$$
(12)
$$\underset{m}{}\underset{l}{}(x_{ml}y_{ml})b_{ml}^{nk}+(z_{ml}v_{ml})a_{ml}^{nk}+\eta _{nk}^i=B_{nk},$$
(13)
$$x_{ml}0,y_{ml}0,z_{ml}0,v_{ml}0,$$
(14)
where $`a_{ml}^{nk},b_{ml}^{nk}`$ are constant coefficients which are determined by Fourier transform, $`A_{nk},B_{nk}`$ are measured real and imaginary parts of Fourier data respectively. The solutions of optimization problem (11)–(14) obtained using the Lagrange method for signals $`(x_{ml},y_{ml},z_{ml},v_{ml})`$ look like

$$x_{ml}=\mathrm{exp}(\underset{n}{}\underset{k}{}\alpha _{nk}a_{ml}^{nk}+\beta _{nk}b_{ml}^{nk}1\mathrm{ln}\alpha ),$$
(15)
$$v_{ml}=\mathrm{exp}(\underset{n}{}\underset{k}{}\alpha _{nk}b_{ml}^{nk}\beta _{nk}a_{ml}^{nk}1\mathrm{ln}\alpha ),$$
(16)
$$x_{ml}y_{ml}=z_{ml}v_{ml}=\mathrm{exp}(22\mathrm{ln}\alpha ).$$
(17)
Making parameter $`\alpha `$ larger we can reach not overlapping effect. Usual value of $`\alpha `$ is 1000.

Unknown Lagrange multipliers can be found from the following dual optimization problem without supplementary conditions

$`\mathrm{max}{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}(x_{ml}+y_{ml}+z_{ml}+v_{ml})1/2{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}(\eta _{nk}^{r2}+\eta _{nk}^{i2})/\sigma _{nk}^2`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}(\alpha _{nk}A_{nk}+\beta _{nk}B_{nk}){\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}(\alpha _{nk}\eta _{nk}^r+\beta _{nk}\eta _{nk}^i)`$ (18)
by substituting expressions (15)-(17) for $`x_{ml},y_{ml},z_{ml},v_{ml}`$ and (4) for $`\eta _{nk}^r,\eta _{nk}^i`$.

Equations (15)-(17) show that for any real solution $`\{\alpha _{nk}\},\{\beta _{nk}\}`$ to the problem, necessarily

$$x_{ml}0,y_{ml}0,z_{ml}0,v_{ml}0.$$
(19)
That is all the reconstructed signals are non-negative. This is important because non-negative-constrained solutions, being nonlinear in the data, can have higher bandwidth and hence higher resolution than the data. By (10) this is now true for real signals $`r_{ml}`$ and $`q_{ml}`$ and hence for complex signal $`u_{ml}`$ as well.

So, the GMEM approach allows to obtain a solution of the reconstruction problem in the space of complex functions. Because of non-negativity of the solutions (15)-(17) the method is nonlinear and possesses a super resolution effect similarly to the classical maximum entropy method.

4.2.Generalized Kullback-Leibler Method

Generalized Kullback-Leibler method assumes prior knowledge of bias non-negative functions $`a_{ml},b_{ml},c_{ml},d_{ml}`$ corresponding to the signals $`x_{ml},y_{ml},z_{ml},v_{ml}`$ respectively. Then the entropic functional (11) is modified as

$`{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}x_{ml}\mathrm{ln}(\alpha x_{ml}/a_{ml})+y_{ml}\mathrm{ln}(\alpha y_{ml}/b_{ml})`$
$`+z_{ml}\mathrm{ln}(\alpha z_{ml}/c_{ml})+v_{ml}\mathrm{ln}(\alpha v_{ml}/d_{ml}).`$ (20)
In this case, bias functions can be again the smoothed inverse Fourier transforms of Fourier data with zeros in the points where measurements are absent.

Using data constraints (12)-(13) and the Lagrange method we obtain the following solution to sought for non-negatively determined signals

$$x_{ml}=(a_{ml}/e\alpha )\mathrm{exp}(\underset{n}{}\underset{k}{}\alpha _{nk}a_{ml}^{nk}+\beta _{nk}b_{ml}^{nk}1),$$
(21)
$$v_{ml}=(d_{ml}/e\alpha )\mathrm{exp}(\underset{n}{}\underset{k}{}\alpha _{nk}b_{ml}^{nk}\beta _{nk}a_{ml}^{nk}1),$$
(22)
$$x_{ml}y_{ml}=a_{ml}b_{ml}e^2\alpha ^2,$$
(23)
$$z_{ml}v_{ml}=c_{ml}d_{ml}e^2\alpha ^2.$$
(24)
As seen, maximizing Kullback-Leibler entropy functional subject to the linear data constraints (12)-(13) produces solutions (21)-(24) that are linearly proportional to the input functions $`a_{ml},b_{ml},c_{ml},d_{ml}`$ respectively.

4.3.Generalized Minimum Renyi Information Method

Similarly to maximum entropy method for complex signal $`u_{ml}=r_{ml}+jq_{ml}`$ we suggest  to minimize the sum of two Renyi measures of absolute values of $`r_{ml}`$ and $`q_{ml}`$. Then functional (6)is modified as

$$\underset{m}{}\underset{l}{}(|r_{ml}|^\alpha a_{ml}^{1\alpha }+|q_{ml}|^\alpha b_{ml}^{1\alpha }),$$
(25)
where $`a_{ml}`$ and $`b_{ml}`$ are input modulus reference signals.

Representing the sought for sequences in the form of differences between positive and negative parts as in (10) we can rewrite previous functional (25) as follows

$$\underset{m}{}\underset{l}{}(x_{ml}^\alpha a_{ml}^{1\alpha }+y_{ml}^\alpha b_{ml}^{1\alpha }+z_{ml}^\alpha c_{ml}^{1\alpha }+v_{ml}^\alpha d_{ml}^{1\alpha }),$$
(26)
where $`a_{ml},b_{ml},c_{ml},d_{ml}`$ are corresponding reference signals.

Direct using the Lagrange method is very complicated. In order to simplify solution let us make the following substitution $`\alpha =1+1/2\mu `$ and introduce the following new variables:

$$t_{ml}(s_{ml},h_{ml},g_{ml})=(x_{ml}(s_{ml},h_{ml},g_{ml})/a_{ml}(b_{ml},c_{ml},d_{ml}))^{1/2\mu }.$$
(27)
Then the optimization problem (20), (12)-(14) can be rewritten with respect to new variables (27) as

$`\mathrm{max}{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}(a_{ml}t_{ml}^{2\mu +1}+b_{ml}s_{ml}^{2\mu +1}+c_{ml}h_{ml}^{2\mu +1}+d_{ml}g_{ml}^{2\mu +1})`$
$`1/2{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}(\eta _{nk}^{r2}+\eta _{nk}^{i2})/\sigma _{nk}^2,`$ (28)
$$\underset{m}{}\underset{l}{}(a_{ml}t_{ml}^{2\mu }b_{ml}s_{ml}^{2\mu })a_{ml}^{nk}(c_{ml}h_{ml}^{2\mu }d_{ml}g_{ml}^{2\mu })b_{ml}^{nk}+\eta _{nk}^r=A_{nk},$$
(29)
$$\underset{m}{}\underset{l}{}(a_{ml}t_{ml}^{2\mu }b_{ml}s_{ml}^{2\mu })b_{ml}^{nk}+(c_{ml}h_{ml}^{2\mu }d_{ml}g_{ml}^{2\mu })a_{ml}^{nk}+\eta _{nk}^i=B_{nk},$$
(30)
$$t_{ml}0,s_{ml}0,h_{ml}0,g_{ml}0.$$
(31)
Using the Lagrange method we find the following solution for sought for signals:

$$t_{ml}=2\mu /(2\mu +1)\underset{n}{}\underset{k}{}\alpha _{nk}a_{ml}^{nk}+\beta _{nk}b_{ml}^{nk},$$
(32)
$$h_{ml}=2\mu /(2\mu +1)\underset{n}{}\underset{k}{}\alpha _{nk}b_{ml}^{nk}\beta _{nk}a_{ml}^{nk},$$
(33)
$$t_{ml}=s_{ml};h_{ml}=g_{ml}.$$
(34)
where $`\alpha _{nk}`$ and $`\beta _{nk}`$ are Lagrange multipliers.

Remembering condition (31) and taking (34) we can say that the negative and positive parts of sought for real solutions to $`r_{ml}`$ and $`q_{ml}`$ never overlapp and no parameter (as $`\alpha `$ in the GMEM) is required. That is an advantage of the generalized minimum Renyi information method.

Sought for a complex signal $`u_{ml}`$ can be found by inverting equations (27) and using representation (10).

It is necessary to note that the quality of image reconstruction by Renyi method depends on choosing parameter $`\alpha `$ in the functional. When $`\alpha =2(\mu =0.5)`$ we have a conventional minimum intensity criterion. Experimentally established that when $`\alpha `$ approaches $`1`$ by increasing $`\mu `$ we obtain a criterion with more strong nonlinear (extrapolation) features .

5.A problem of nonlinear distortions

Let us consider real non-negative images. Because of nonlinearity nature of considered above deconvolution procedures there is a problem connected with nonlinear image distortions due to noise in spectral data . We investigated only the case of additive noise in data. As experiments show the generalized algorithms ensure much less artefacts than the classical ones. This phenomenon can be explained that noise can so degrade data that to the latter in general a real solution with both positive and negative values will correspond but not pure real non-negative one which is sought by conventional algorithms. Therefore we consider that seeking for a solution of image reconstruction problem in generalized form is more adequate.

6.The ”IMAGE” program package

”IMAGE” program package elaborated in IAA RAS  in framework of ”QUASAR” VLBI project is intended for VLBI mapping natural (incoherent) and artificial (coherent, ISAR) radio sources and investigation of new image reconstruction procedures. At present the ”IMAGE” program package contains except of the CLEAN and classical information nonlinear methods a number of generalized versions of information methods. For solution of related optimization problems both steepest descent and Newton-Raphson numerical methods are realized.

7.Conclusion

Maximum entropy, maximum Kullback-Leibler cross-entropy and minimum Renyi information methods having good extrapolation and interpolation features are generalized for reconstruction of signals of any type including complex ones. They may be used for reconstruction of real bipolar and complex signals or reconstruction of real non-negative images with minimal nonlinear distortions.

This work was supported by Russian Foundation for Basic Researches under grant N 96-02-19177.

References

 Bajkova A. The generalization of maximum entropy method for reconstruction of complex functions. Astron. & Astroph. Tr., 1 (1992), 313–320.

 Frieden R., Bajkova A. Bayesian cross-entropy reconstruction of complex images. Applied Optics, 33 (Jan. 1994), 219–226.

 Frieden R., Bajkova A. Reconstruction of complex signals using minimum Renyi information. Applied Optics, 34 (July 1995), 4086–4093.

 Frieden R. Restoring with maximum likelihood and maximum entropy. J. Opt. Soc. Am., 62 (1972), 511–518.

 Bajkova A. Renyi measure for image reconstruction in Astronomy. Communications of IAA RAS, No 59, 1994.

 Bajkova A. On the problem of nonlinear distortions of the maximum entropy method. Izvestia Vuzov. Radiofizika, 38 (1994), 1267–1277.

 Bajkova A. New version of “Image” program package in Linux for modeling and processing VLBI images. Communications of IAA RAS, No 120, 1998.


text:
# On the geometric genus of subvarieties of generic hypersurfaces

## 1. The formal setting

We will fix integers $`d,n`$ and denote by $``$ or $`_d`$ the space of homogeneous forms of degree $`d`$ on $`^n`$ and set

$$S=\{0\}.$$

An element $`F`$ is written in the form

$$F=\underset{|A|=d}{}a_AX^A.$$

We denote by

$$𝒳S\times ^n$$

the universal hypersurface, which is smooth, as is the natural map

$$s:𝒳^n,$$

whose fibre over $`x^n`$ we denote by $`X_x,`$ while the fibre over $`FS`$ is denote $`X_F.`$

We will be studying a certain kind of versal families of $`k`$ folds on $`𝒳/S`$. By this we mean the following. Let $`T`$ be an irreducible subvariety of the Chow variety (or Hilbert scheme) of $`^n`$ whose general element corresponds to an irreducible $`k`$dimensional variety. Suppose that

$$\psi :TS$$

be a dominant morphism with the property that if we denote the universal cycle (or subscheme) over $`T`$ by $`𝒵_T,`$ then

$$𝒵_T𝒳_T:=𝒳\times _ST.$$
$`1.1`$
Clearly there is no loss of generality by assuming $`T`$ is saturated with respect to projective equivalence, i.e. is stable under the natural action of GL$`(n+1)`$. Note that GL$`(n+1)`$ acts on (1.1) and choose a GL$`(n+1)`$-stable subvariety $`T^{}T`$ so that the map $`T^{}S`$ is étale. Then choose a GL$`(n+1)`$-equivariant resolution of

$$𝒵_T^{}T^{}$$

and denote this by $`𝒴/S^{}.`$ Replacing $`S^{}`$ by a GL$`(n+1)`$-stable open subset, we may assume $`𝒴/S^{}`$ is a smooth projective relatively $`k`$dimensional family endowed with an $`S^{}`$morphism

$$f:𝒴𝒳\times _SS^{}.$$

We will call this a versal family of $`k`$folds.

## 2. Positivity results

(2.0) A useful remark is the following. Let

$$0ABC0$$

be a short exact sequence of vector bundles of respective ranks $`a,b,c.`$ Then for any $`k>0,`$ the exterior power

$$\stackrel{k}{}B$$

is endowed with a descending filtration $`F^.`$ with

$$F^i/F^{i+1}\stackrel{ki}{}C\stackrel{i}{}A,i=0,\mathrm{},k.$$

In particular, there is a surjection

$$\stackrel{c+1}{}BAdet(C)0,$$

so that, e.g., $`Adet(C)`$ is globally generated if $`B`$ is.

Let $`M_^n^d`$ be the vector bundle on $`^n`$ defined by the natural exact sequence

$$0M_^n^d_d𝒪_^n𝒪_^n(d)0.$$

Then it is well known that $`M_^n^1=\mathrm{\Omega }_^n(1)`$ and that $`M_^n^1(1)`$ is globally generated. This can be proved by taking 2nd exterior power of the Euler sequence. Similarly, taking $`(i+1)`$st exterior powers in the above sequence, we see that

$$(\stackrel{i}{}M_^n^d)(d)isgloballygeneratedd,i>0.$$
$`2.1`$
By surjectivity of the multiplication map $`_{d1}M_^n^1M_^n^d,`$ it follows that $`(\stackrel{i}{}M_^n^d)(i)`$ is globally generated, hence

$$(\stackrel{i}{}M_^n^d)(\mathrm{min}(d,i))isgloballygeneratedd,i>0.$$
$`2.2`$
More generally, for any Grassmannian

$$G=𝔾(r,^n),$$

we define a bundle $`M_G^d`$ by the natural exact sequence

$$0M_G^d_d𝒪_G\text{Sym}^d(Q)0,$$

where $`Q`$ is the tautological quotient bundle on $`G`$. Thus $`M_G^1`$ is just the tautological subbundle, which fits in an exact sequence

$$0M_G^1(n+1)𝒪_GQ0.$$

Taking $`(nr+1)`$st exterior power of this sequence and using the fact that $`\stackrel{nr}{}Q=detQ=𝒪_G(1),`$ we conclude that $`M_G^1(1)`$ is globally generated, hence it follows as above that

$$M_G^d(1)isgloballygenerated,d1.$$
$`2.3`$
## 3. Local linear systems

Fix $`x^n`$ and $`d`$ and set

$$M=M_x^d,$$

i.e. the vector space of homogeneous polynomials of degree $`d`$ zero at $`x`$. We will sometimes denote the same vector space by $`_d(x)`$, and we similarly have $`_d(Z)`$ for any subset $`Z^n`$. A local linear system at $`x`$ is simply a subspace $`TM`$, whose codimension we denote by $`h`$. We define the integer $`s=s(T)`$ as the smallest with the property that, for generic choice of $`P_1,\mathrm{},P_s_{d1},`$ the natural map

$$\mu _s=\mu _{s,T}:\underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}P_iM_x^1M/T$$
$`3.1`$
is surjective. More generally, suppose $`Z`$ is an irreducible variety,

$$g:Z^n$$

a morphism and $`Tg^{}(M_^n^d)`$ a subhseaf. Then we define $`s=s(T)`$ to be smallest so that the map

$$\mu _s:\underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}P_ig^{}(M_^n^1)g^{}(M_^n^d)/T$$
$`3.2`$
defined as above is generically surjective for general choice of $`P_i^{}`$s.

The interest in studying this integer comes from the following elementary observation.

###### Lemma 3.1

In the above situation, we have that

$$H^0(det(g^{}(M_^n^d)/T)g^{}(𝒪(s)))0.$$

###### Demonstration proof

The above sheaf is generically a quotient of a sum of tensor products of sheaves of the form $`g^{}((\stackrel{i}{}M_^n^1)(1)).`$

Returning to the above situation, set

$$\gamma (i)=\text{rk}(\mu _i)$$

and note that this is a strictly increasing function for $`0is,`$ which is ’concave’ in the sense that $`\gamma (i+1)\gamma (i)`$ is non-increasing. Let $`s^{}=s_T^{}`$ be the smallest $`i`$ such that

$$\gamma (i+1)\gamma (i)1.$$

Note that

$$s^{}=ssh/2$$
$`3.3`$
while if $`s^{}<s`$ we have for generic $`P_{d1}`$

$$dim(PM_x^1\text{im}(\mu _s^{}))=n1.$$
$`3.4`$
Of course by definition, we have

$$\text{rk}(\mu _s^{})+ss^{}=h.$$
$`3.5`$
Some interesting things happen when $`ss^{}>1`$:

###### Lemma 3.2

Suppose that $`ss^{}>1.`$ Then

(i) There is a line $`\mathrm{}=\mathrm{}_T`$ through $`x`$ such that

$$_d(\mathrm{})=M_{\mathrm{}}^dT+\text{im}(\mu _s^{}).$$

(ii) $`\mathrm{}`$ is uniquely determined independent of $`P_1,\mathrm{},P_s^{}.`$

(iii) We have

$$dim(T/(T_d(\mathrm{})))=ds,$$
$`3.6`$
$$dim(_d(\mathrm{})/(T_d(\mathrm{})))=\text{rk}(\mu _s^{})s^{}.$$
$`3.7`$
###### Demonstration proof

(i) Let $`\mathrm{}`$ be the unique line through $`x`$ so that $`M_{\mathrm{}}^1M_x^1`$ is the codimension-1 subspace in (3.4).

(ii) By assumption, we have for $`P,P_1,\mathrm{},P_{s^{}+1}`$ generic

$$dim(PM_x^1(T+\underset{1}{\overset{s^{}+1}{}}P_iM_x^1))=dim(PM_x^1(T+\underset{1}{\overset{s^{}}{}}P_iM_x^1))=n1,$$

hence the two intersections are equal and hence they are independent of $`P_{s^{}+1}`$; by symmetry, they are also independent of any $`P_i`$, hence so is $`\mathrm{}.`$

(iii) Let

$$r=dim(\frac{M_x^d}{T+M_{\mathrm{}}^d}).$$

Note that the image of $`PM_x^1`$ in this vector space is 1-dimensional, so if $`rs^{}`$ we have that $`\mu _s^{}`$ is surjective, while if $`s^{}r<s`$ we have that $`\mu _r`$ is surjective, both of which are impossible. Since in any case $`rs`$ we have $`r=s`$, which easily implies our first assertion. The second assertion follows easily by dimension counting.

## 4. Reduction

We are now ready to apply the results of the last section to our versal family. So let

$$f:𝒴/S^{}𝒳^{}=𝒳\times _SS^{}$$

be as in §1. Then we have the normal sheaf $`N_f`$ which fits in an exact sequence

$$0T_𝒴f^{}T_𝒳^{}N_f0.$$

By GL$`(n+1)`$-equivariance, clearly $`𝒴`$ and $`𝒳^{}`$ are smooth over $`^n`$, so we have another exact

$$0T_{𝒴/^n}f^{}T_{𝒳^{}/^n}N_f0.$$

Now we have

$$f^{}T_{𝒳^{}/^n}f^{}M_^n^d,$$

therefore we may apply Lemma 3.1 with $`T=T_{𝒴/^n}`$ to conclude that

$$H^0(det(N_f)f^{}𝒪(s))0.$$

Now use the generic smoothness of $`𝒴`$ and $`𝒳^{}`$ over $`S^{}`$ to conclude that for generic $`FS^{}`$ we have

$$det(N_f)|_{Y_F}=\omega _{Y_F}f^{}\omega _{X_F}^1=\omega _{Y_F}f^{}𝒪(d+n+1).$$

Therefore by Lemma 3.1 we have

$$H^0(\omega _{Y_F}(d+n+1+s)):=H^0(\omega _{Y_F}f^{}𝒪(d+n+1+s))0.$$
$`4.1`$
The case where $`ss^{}>1`$ will be analyzed at length below; for now we just note that, in that case, the uniquely determined line $`\mathrm{}`$ going through $`f(y)`$ for general $`y𝒴`$ gives rise to a rational mapping

$$g:YG=G(1,^n).$$

Putting things together we get a lifting of $`f`$ to a map

$$𝒴\mathrm{\Delta }:=\{(\mathrm{},x,F):x\mathrm{}X_F\}G\times ^n\times S^{}.$$

Viewing $`T_{𝒴/^n}`$ as a subsheaf of $`_d𝒪_𝒴,`$ we have another subsheaf of $`_d𝒪_𝒴,`$ which we denote by

$$_d(\mathrm{}),$$

whose fibre at $`y`$ is the $`d`$-forms vanishing on $`\mathrm{}(y)`$; we set

$$T^{}=T_{𝒴/^n}_d(\mathrm{}).$$

By Lemma 3.1, we have

$$\text{rk}(T_{𝒴/^n}/T^{})=ds$$
$`4.2`$
$$\text{rk}(_d(\mathrm{})/T^{})=\text{rk}(\mu _s^{})s^{}.$$
$`4.3`$
Now suppose that

$$ss^{}1.$$

Recall that

$$nk1=\text{rk}(\mu _s^{})+ss^{}s+s^{}.$$

Going through the various possibilities we see easily that in all cases where $`ss^{}1`$ we have

$$s[\frac{nk}{2}].$$
$`4.4`$
Therefore we conclude, using (4.1),

###### Alternative 4.1

In the situation of the main theorem, we have either

$$H^0(\omega _{Y_F}(d+n+1+[\frac{nk}{2}]))0$$
$`4.5`$
or

$$ss^{}>1.$$
$`4.6`$
Note that when $`n1k=2,`$ the only possibilities are $`s^{}=0,s=2`$ and $`s=s^{}=1`$. Let us now analyze generally the case $`s=1`$. Let $`Y`$ be a general fibre $`Y=Y_F`$ and $`N`$ the normal sheaf for the map $`Y^n,`$ so we have an exact sequence

$$0N_fN𝒪_Y(d)0.$$

Then choosing a general polynomial $`P_{d1},`$ we get a diagram with exact rows

$$\begin{array}{ccccccccc}0& & f^{}M_^n^1& & _1𝒪_Y& & 𝒪_Y(1)& & 0\\ & & & & P& & & & \\ 0& & f^{}M_^n^d& & ^d𝒪_Y& & 𝒪_Y(d)& & 0\\ & & & & & & & & \\ 0& & N_f& & N& & 𝒪_Y(d)& & 0\end{array}$$

Now the assumption that $`s=1`$ means that the left column composite is generically surjective, hence the same is true for the middle column. Thus we get a generically surjective map

$$\psi :_1𝒪_YN$$

which drops rank on Zeroes$`(P)`$ and also clearly factors through $`H^0(𝒪_Y(1))𝒪_Y`$ whose rank we write as $`p+1`$. Set

$$N^{}=\text{im}(\psi )/\text{(torsion)}.$$

From the bottom row in the above display we conclude

$$c_1(N^{})K_Y+(n+2d)H$$

where $`AB`$ means $`BA`$ is effective and $`H`$ is a hyperplane. Now the torsion-free quotient $`N^{}`$ of the trivial bundle corresponds to a rational map to a Grassmannian, which by blowing up we may assume is a morphism

$$\gamma :YG:=G(k+1,p+1),$$

such that

$$\underset{yY}{}\gamma (y)\text{ spans}^{p+1}$$

(because $`\gamma (y)f(y)`$) and that

$$c_1(N^{})=\gamma ^{}(𝒪_G(1)).$$

Thus clearly $`c_1(N^{})`$ is effective and if $`p>k`$ (i.e. $`Y`$ itself is not a $`^k`$), then $`\gamma `$ is nonconstant, so

$$h^0(c_1(N^{}))2.$$

It is elementary and well known that any linear $`^1`$ in $`G`$ consists of the pencil subspaces contained in a fixed $`k+2`$-dimensional subspace $`A^{p+1}`$ and containing a fixed $`k`$dimensional one $`BA`$. Now if $`k<p1`$ then $`A^{p+1}`$ and since $`\underset{yY}{}\gamma (y)`$ spans $`^{p+1}`$ it follows that $`\gamma (Y)`$ cannot be contained in such a pencil, so

$$h^0(c_1(N^{}))3.$$

Thus we conclude

###### Lemma 4.2

Assuming $`s=1`$ and that the general $`f(Y)`$ spans a $`^p`$, we have

$$h^0(\omega _Y(n+2d))\mathrm{min}(p1,3).$$
$`4.7`$
Now suppose moreover that $`n=4,d=6,k=1`$ (still assuming $`s=1`$ ). We claim that if $`Y`$ is planar, i.e. $`p=2`$, then $`g(Y)2`$ (in fact, we will show $`g(Y)4`$). Let

$$I_6\times G(2,^4)$$

denote the (open) set of pairs $`(X,B)`$ where $`X`$ is a smooth sextic hypersurface in $`^4`$ and $`B`$ is a plane in $`^4,`$ and let $`J`$ denote the set of pairs $`(D,B)`$ where $`B`$ is a plane in $`^4`$ and $`D`$ is a sextic curve in $`B`$, not necessarily reduced or irreducible. Since a smooth sextic cannot contain a plane, there is a natural morphism

$$\pi :IJ,$$

$$(X,B)(XB,B).$$

Clearly $`\pi `$ is a fibre bundle. Now a fundamental fact of plane geometry \[AC\] is that the family of reduced irreducible plane curves of geometric genus $`g`$ and degree $`d`$ is of dimension $`3d+g1.`$ It follows easily from this that the locus $`J_0J`$ consisting of pairs $`(D,B)`$ such that $`D`$ is the target of a nonconstant map from a curve of genus $`3`$ is of codimension $`>6`$, hence $`I_0:=\pi ^1(J_0)I`$ is also of codimension $`>6`$. Since $`G(2,^4)`$ is 6-dimensional, $`I_0`$ cannot dominate $`_6`$. Thus we conclude

###### Lemma 4.3

If $`s=1,n=4,d=6,k=1,`$ then $`Y`$ is a curve of genus at least 3, except possibly if $`Y`$ is genus-2 curve spanning a hyperplane.

## 5. Line osculation hierarchy

Before continuing with the proof of the main theorem, we digress to discuss canonical bundles of ’line osculation’ varieties, i.e. the varieties

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_r:=\{(\mathrm{},x,F):\mathrm{}.X_Fr.x\}G\times ^n\times S$$

where $`G=G(1,^n).`$ We begin with a formal definition. Let $`Q`$ be the tautological quotient bundle on $`G`$ and

$$𝒪_S(1)_d𝒪_S$$

the tautological subbundle on $`S`$ (whose fibre at $`F`$ is $`F`$); of course, this bundle admits a canonical nowhere vanishing section, so it is canonically trivial. Then $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_1`$ is the common zero-locus on $`G\times ^n\times S`$ of the two natural maps

$$𝒪_^n(1)Q$$
$`5.1`$
$$𝒪_S(1)𝒪_^n(d)$$
$`5.2`$
where to save notation we have suppressed the various pullbacks. From this it is easy to see by the adjunction formula that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, which is obviously smooth, has canonical bundle

$$\omega _\mathrm{\Delta }=\omega _{G\times ^n\times S}det(Q)𝒪_^n(n1+d)=𝒪_G(n)𝒪_^n(dn+1).$$
$``$
Let $`𝒮`$ denote the tautological subbundle on $`G`$. Then because (5.1) vanishes on $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, we have on $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ a natural injection

$$𝒪_^n(1)𝒮$$

whose (rank-1) quotient we denote by $`R^\text{v}`$. Thus we have an exact sequence on $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$

$$0R𝒮^\text{v}𝒪_^n(1)0$$
$`5.3`$
which yields

$$R=det(𝒮^\text{v})𝒪_^n(1)=𝒪_G(1)𝒪_^n(1).$$
$`5.4`$
The sequence (5.3) induces a descending filtration $`F^.`$ on $`\text{Sym}^d(𝒮^\text{v})`$ with quotients

$$F^i/F^{i+1}=𝒪_^n(di)R^i=𝒪_G(i)𝒪_^n(d2i),0id,$$

$$F^{d+1}=0.$$

Note that the vanishing of 5.2 implies that the natural map

$$_d\text{Sym}^d(𝒮^\text{v})$$

induces a map

$$𝒪_S(1)F^1.$$

We define $`\mathrm{\Delta }_r`$ as the zero scheme of the induced map

$$𝒪_S(1)F^1/F^r.$$

In particular, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{d+1}`$, the zero-scheme of the natural map

$$𝒪_S(1)F^1,$$

parametrizes the triples

$$(\mathrm{},x,F)$$

such that

$$x\mathrm{}X_F.$$

By considering the projection to (the incidence subvariety of) $`G\times ^n`$, it is easy to see that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_r`$ is smooth for $`rd+1`$. Using the adjunction formula again, we see that

$$\omega _{\mathrm{\Delta }_r}=\omega _\mathrm{\Delta }det(F^1/F^r)=\omega _\mathrm{\Delta }\underset{i=1}{\overset{r1}{}}(𝒪_^n(d2i)𝒪_G(i)).$$

By (\*) we get the formula

$$\omega _{\mathrm{\Delta }_r}=𝒪_G(\frac{r(r1)}{2}n)𝒪_^n(r(dr+1)n+1)$$
$`5.5`$
## 6. The case $`ss^{}>1`$

We will assume from now on, for the remainder of this paper, that

$$s^{}+1<s$$

and that

$$H^0(\omega _{Y_F})=0$$
$`6.1`$
for generic $`FS`$. With no loss of generality we may also assume that

$$s>[\frac{nk}{2}],$$
$`6.2`$
and

$$d+n+1+s>0,$$
$`6.3`$
else the Main Theorem’s assertion follows from (4.1). This means

$$2s>nk,dns1<0.$$
$`6.4`$
Our aim is to show in this case that

$$Y=Y_F$$

is contained in the locus ruled by lines in $`X_F`$. We fix a point $`x_0^n`$ which we assume has coordinates $`[1,0,\mathrm{},0]`$, and let

$$G_1<GL(n+1)$$

be the stabilizer of $`x_0`$, that is, the parabolic subgroup

$$\left\{\left[\begin{array}{cccc}& & \mathrm{}& \\ 0& & \mathrm{}& \\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ 0& & \mathrm{}& \end{array}\right]\right\}$$

and let

$$G_0GL(n)<G_1$$

be the subgroup fixing $`X_0`$, i.e.

$$G_0=\left\{\left[\begin{array}{cccc}1& 0& \mathrm{}& 0\\ 0& & \mathrm{}& \\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ 0& & \mathrm{}& \end{array}\right]\right\}.$$

Note that the fibre $`Y_0`$ of $`𝒴`$ over $`x_0`$ is invariant under the natural action of $`G_1`$ on the space of polynomials.

Now a homogeneous polynomial of degree $`d`$ in $`X_0,\mathrm{},X_n`$ may be written in the form

$$F=\underset{|A|d}{}a_AX_0^{d|A|}X^A$$
$`6.5`$
where

$$A=(A(1),\mathrm{},A(n))$$

is a multi-index referring to the variables $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_n.`$ Thus the $`X_0^{d|A|}X^A`$ form a basis of the space $`_d`$ of such polynomials and the $`a_A`$ is the associated coordinate system or dual basis and give rise to differentiation operators

$$_A=/a_A.$$
$`6.6`$
Note that the action of GL$`(n+1)`$ on $`𝒴`$ induces an action of $`G_1`$ on the fibre $`Y_0`$ of $`𝒴`$ over

$$x_0=[1,0,\mathrm{},0]^n.$$

Working in an analytic neighborhood $`Y_{00}`$ of a general point

$$y_0Y_0$$

we may identify it via the map $`f`$ with an open subset of $`S`$. Of course, $`S`$ being an open subset of $`_d,`$ we have trivializations

$$T_S_d𝒪_S,T_S𝒪_{Y_0}_d𝒪_{Y_0},$$
$`6.7`$
with a frame being provided by the commuting vector fields $`_A`$ for $`|A|d,`$ which correspond to the respective monomials $`X_0^{d|A|}X^A.`$ Then we get an embedding

$$T_{Y_0}_d𝒪_{Y_0}.$$

Recall the subbundle

$$T^{}=T_{Y_0}_d(\mathrm{}).$$

Let

$$_{d,m}(\mathrm{})_d(l)$$

denote the subsheaf of elements of degree $`m`$ in $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_n`$. We assume that for $`yY_{00}`$, the line $`\mathrm{}(y)`$ is given by

$$X_r=b_r(y)X_1,r=2,\mathrm{},n,$$

and that at our ’initial’ (general) point $`y_0Y_0`$ we have

$$b_2(y_0)=\mathrm{}=b_n(y_0)=0.$$

Note that generators for $`_d(\mathrm{})`$ are given under the identification (6.7) by the vector fields

$$_{Ar}b_r_{A1}T_S𝒪_{Y_{00}},|A|d1,r=2,\mathrm{}n,$$
$`6.8`$
corresponding to the polynomials

$$X_0^{d1|A|}X^A(X_rb_rX_1).$$

###### Lemma 6.1

$`T^{}`$ annihilates $`b_r`$ for all $`r2.`$

###### Demonstration proof

It suffices to show this at the point $`y_0.`$ Set

$$T^{\prime \prime }=T^{}_d(2\mathrm{}).$$

We begin by showing that $`T^{\prime \prime }`$ annihilates the $`b_r.`$ Note that sections of $`T^{\prime \prime }`$ can be written as linear combinations of the vector fields

$$_{Ars}b_r_{A1s}b_s_{A1r}+b_rb_s_{A11},|A|d2,r,s2,$$

from which it follows that

$$[T^{\prime \prime },T^{\prime \prime }]T^{}.$$

We thus have a well-defined bracket pairing

$$T^{\prime \prime }\times (T^{}/T^{\prime \prime })T/T^{}$$
$`6.9`$
and we are claiming this vanishes. $`T^{}/T^{\prime \prime }`$ is generated by sections the form

$$\tau ^{}=\underset{r=2}{\overset{n}{}}\underset{\alpha =0}{\overset{d1}{}}c_{r\alpha }(\tau ^{})(_{r1^\alpha }b_r_{1^{\alpha +1}})$$

and the assignment

$$\tau ^{}(c_{r\alpha }(\tau ^{}))$$

identifies $`T^{}/T^{\prime \prime }`$ with a subsheaf, which we may assume is locally free,

$$T^{}/T^{\prime \prime }M_{(n1)\times d}(𝒪)$$

of $`𝒪_{Y_{00}}`$ valued $`(n1)\times d`$ matrices, and the corank of this subsheaf is at most the corank of $`T^{}`$ in $`_d(\mathrm{})`$. Hence by (4.3) this corank is at most $`nk1s`$. On the other hand a section

$$\tau T/T^{}$$

can be written in the form

$$\tau =\underset{\beta =1}{\overset{d}{}}c_\beta (\tau )_{1^\beta }$$

and this identifies $`T/T^{}`$ with a subsheaf

$$T/T^{}d𝒪_{Y_{00}}$$

whose corank by (4.2) is exactly $`s`$. Now for $`\tau ^{}T^{}/T^{\prime \prime },\tau ^{\prime \prime }T^{\prime \prime },`$ the pairing (6.9) is given by

$$[\tau ^{},\tau ^{\prime \prime }]=c_{r\alpha }\tau ^{\prime \prime }(b_r)_{1^{\alpha +1}}.$$

Now suppose $`\tau ^{\prime \prime }(b_r)0`$ for some $`r`$. Then the map

$$M_{(n1)\times d}(𝒪)d𝒪$$

given by multiplication by the vector

$$\beta (\tau ^{\prime \prime }):=(\tau ^{\prime \prime }(b_2),\mathrm{},\tau ^{\prime \prime }(b_r))$$

is surjective, hence its restriction

$$T^{}/T^{\prime \prime }T/T^{}$$

can only lower corank, i.e. has image of corank at most

$$nk1s$$

in $`d𝒪`$. But this contradicts the fact that $`T/T^{}`$ has corank $`s`$ in $`d𝒪`$, while by (6.2) we have $`s>nk1s`$.

This proves that $`T^{\prime \prime }`$ annihilates all the $`b_r,`$ which in turn implies that we have a well-defined bracket pairing

$$T^{}/T^{\prime \prime }\times T^{}/T^{\prime \prime }T/T^{},$$

which has the form

$$[\tau _1,\tau _2]=\underset{s\beta }{}\tau _1(b_s)c_{s\beta }(\tau _2)_{1^{\beta +1}}\underset{r\alpha }{}\tau _2(b_s)c_{r\alpha }(\tau _1)_{1^{\alpha +1}}.$$
$`6.10`$
Now suppose that

$$\tau _1(b_s)0$$

for some

$$\tau _1T^{}/T^{\prime \prime },s2.$$

Then the following linear algebra observation (copmare with \[P\]) shows that the set of elements

$$[\tau _1,\tau _2]$$

ranges over a subspace of $`T/T^{}`$ of codimension at most

$$1+nk1s,$$

which by (6.2) is $`>s`$, so we have a contradiction as above. ∎

###### Sublemma 6.1.1

Let

$$U,V$$

be finite-dimensional vector spaces,

$$H<\text{Hom}(U,V)$$

a subspace of codimension $`c`$, and

$$\beta :HU$$

a nonzero homomorphism. Define a pairing

$$I(\beta ):\stackrel{2}{}HV$$

by

$$ABA\varphi (B)B\varphi (A).$$
$`6.11`$
Then the image of $`I(\beta )`$ is of codimension at most $`c+1`$ in $`V`$.

###### Demonstration proof

Pick $`c`$ rank-1 elements in Hom$`(U,V)`$ that are linearly independent modulo $`H`$, and extend $`\beta `$ linearly to be zero on these. It is clear that this extension increases the rank of $`I(\beta )`$ by at most $`c`$. Therefore it suffices to prove the Sublemma in case $`c=0`$. In this case, pick any $`A`$ of rank 1 with $`\beta (A)0`$. Then as $`B`$ ranges over $`H=\text{Hom(U,V)},`$ the first term in (6.11) ranges over a 1-dimensional subspace while the second ranges over all of $`V`$, hence the difference ranges at least over a codimension-1 subspace. ∎

As an immediate consequence of Lemma 6.1, we conclude

###### Lemma 6.2

The distribution $`T^{}`$ is integrable

###### Demonstration proof

For $`\tau _1,\tau _2T^{}`$, write

$$\tau _i=c_{Ar}(\tau _i)(_{Ar}b_r_{A1}),i=1,2.$$

Then we calculate

$$[\tau _1,\tau _2](c_{r1^\alpha }(\tau _1)\tau _2(b_r)c_{r1^\alpha }(\tau _2)\tau _1(b_r))_{1^{\alpha +1}}modT^{}$$

and by Lemma 6.1 the latter vanishes.∎

###### Lemma 6.3

For general $`yY,`$ the line $`\mathrm{}(y)`$ is either contained in the hypersurface $`X_{F(y)}`$ or meets it set-theoretically in at most 2 points.

###### Demonstration proof

emoproof The natural map

$$\mathrm{}:Y_0G$$

is clearly $`G_1`$equivariant, hence generically onto the locus of lines through $`x_0`$. Let $`Z`$ be its fibre over

$$\mathrm{}_0=\{X_2=\mathrm{}=X_n=0\},$$

which we may assume is a general fibre, hence of codimension $`n1`$ in $`Y_0`$. There is a natural map

$$R:ZH^0(𝒪_\mathrm{}_0(d)(x_0)),$$

$$R(F)=F|_\mathrm{}_0.$$

Clearly $`R`$ is equivariant with respect to the stabilizer $`G_{11}`$ of $`(x_0,\mathrm{}_0)`$ in GL$`(n)`$, so its image is a cone invariant under the stabilizer $`H`$ of $`x_0`$ in GL$`(\mathrm{}_0)`$. Note that our distribution $`T^{}`$ is none other than the vertical tangent space for the map $`R`$. From (4.2) it follows that

$$dimR(Z)=dsn+1$$

and by our assumptions (6.3) this is $`1`$. As $`H`$ acts doubly transitively on $`\mathrm{}x_0`$, it follows easily that $`R(Z)`$ is contained in the set of multiples of $`X_1^d`$. Therefore the lemma holds.∎

###### Remark Remark 6.3.1

Note that if we assume instead of (6.3) the stronger condition that

$$d+n+1+s>1,$$

then we conclude in the same way that

$$\mathrm{}(y)X_{F(y)}.$$

In the next Lemma we will see that this holds anyway, without the extra hypothesis.

On the other hand if we assume the weaker condition that

$$d+n+1+s>1,$$
$``$
then the same argument, using double transitivity of $`H`$ shows that $`\mathrm{}(y)`$ meets $`X_{F(y)}`$ in at most 2 points set-theoretically, hence is either contained in $`X_{F(y)}`$, or is $`d`$fold tangent to it at $`x(y)`$, or has contact of order $`r`$ with it at $`x(y)`$ and of order $`dr`$ at another point $`x^{}`$, for some $`1rd1.`$ Note that, as above, the inequality (\*) may be assumed to hold if

$$h^0(Y_F(1))=0.$$

###### Lemma 6.4

For general $`yY,`$ the line $`\mathrm{}(y)`$ is contained in the hypersurface $`X_{F(y)}.`$

###### Demonstration proof

Denote by

$$\pi :YI$$

the natural map of $`Y`$ to the incidence variety of pairs (point on line), which is clearly generically submersive (e.g. by $`GL(n+1)`$ equivariance) and let $`T_\pi `$ denote the vertical tangent space for this map. Note that

$$FT_\pi $$

(at $`(x,l,F)`$): indeed this is immediate from the fact that our universal hypersurface $`X/S`$ together, we may assume, with its subvariety $`Y/S`$ come from analogous families defined over the projectivization $`(S)`$ so we may assume the map $`\pi `$ descends accordingly; on the other hand $`F`$ as tangent vector dies in the map $`S(S).`$

Now let

$$M$$

be the vector bundle on $`Y`$ whose fibre at

$$y(x,\mathrm{},F)$$

is

$$(\mathrm{}),$$

the polynomials of degree $`d`$ (on $`^n`$) vanishing on $`\mathrm{}`$, considered as a subbundle of the tangent bundle to $`S`$ (pulled back to $`Y`$). Suppose first that $`T_\pi M`$ has generic corank $`c1`$ in $`M`$, where

$$c:=2n1dk.$$

Then the rank of $`T_\pi M`$ is at least

$$N(d+c)=N+k(2n1).$$

But owing to the generic submersivity of $`\pi `$ the latter is precisely the rank of $`T_\pi `$. Hence

$$T_\pi M,$$

and therefore $`FM,`$ i.e. $`F`$ vanishes on $`\mathrm{}`$ as claimed.

Now suppose that $`T_\pi M`$ has (generic) corank $`c`$ in $`M`$, which clearly implies that the natural map

$$MN$$

of $`M`$ to the normal bundle of $`Y`$ in $`\mathrm{\Delta }_d`$ is generically surjective, hence so is

$$\stackrel{c}{}M\stackrel{c}{}N=detN.$$

Now assume that the line $`\mathrm{}`$ has $`d`$fold contact if $`X_F`$ at $`x_0`$. Since we have $`d>n,d(d1)/2nc`$, the results of §2 and §5,(5.5) imply that $`\omega _{\mathrm{\Delta }_d}\stackrel{c}{}M`$ is globally generated and it follows that

$$\omega _{\mathrm{\Delta }_d}𝒪_^n(1)detN\omega _Y(2d)$$

has a nonzero section , hence so does $`\omega _{Y_F}(1)`$ for generic $`F`$, which is a contradiction.

## 7. The case $`s^{}=0`$

Throughout this section we continue to assume the hypotheses of the previous section, and assume additionally that

$$s^{}=0.$$

As has been remarked before, the latter assumption holds automatically whenever

$$s>1,k=n3.$$

Our aim is to show, under these assumptions, that a general $`Y_F`$ is ruled by lines. This will complete the proof of the Main Theorem.

Note that the condition $`s^{}=0`$ is equivalent to

$$T^{}=_d(\mathrm{}),$$

i.e. to the assumption that

$$_d(\mathrm{})T_{𝒴/^n}.$$
$`7.1`$
###### Lemma 7.1

$`\mathrm{}(y)`$ is tangent to $`Y_F`$ for general $`yY_F.`$

###### Demonstration proof

Using notations as in the previous section, let

$$vgl(n+1)$$

be the vector field

$$v=X_0/X_1,$$

which at $`y_0`$ is nonzero and points in the direction of $`\mathrm{}_0,`$ and set

$$G=v(F).$$

Considering $`G`$ as an element of $`T_FS`$, note that by $`GL(n+1)`$equivariance, the normal field

$$\overline{v}$$

to $`Y=Y_F`$ corresponding to $`G`$ is just the natural image of $`v`$. On the other hand since

$$G|_{\mathrm{}}=0,$$

our assumption $`s^{}=0,`$ in the form (7.1), yields that $`(G,0)`$ is tangent to $`𝒴`$, hence

$$\overline{v}(y_0)=0.$$

Thus $`v`$ is tangent to $`Y_F`$ $`y_0,`$ hence so is $`\mathrm{}_0`$, as claimed.∎

###### Lemma 7.2

$`Y_F`$ is ruled by lines.

###### Demonstration proof

In the above notations, note that since the action of $`v`$ on the Grassmannian fixes $`\mathrm{}_0`$, it follows by equivariance that on $`𝒴,`$

$$\mathrm{}=\mathrm{}(y)$$

is fixed to first order as $`y`$ moves out of $`y_0`$ in the direction

$$v(y_0)T_{y_0}𝒴.$$

Viewing the latter as a subspace of $`T_FS\times T_{y_0}Y_F,`$ write

$$v(y_0)=(G,v_Y),$$

where

$$G=v(F)_d,v_YT_{y_0}Y_F.$$

As we have seen, $`G`$ is in fact in $`_d(\mathrm{})`$ which under our assumption coincides with $`T^{}(y_0)`$ (more precisely, $`(G,0)T^{}(y_0)`$). Therefore by Lemma 6.1, $`\mathrm{}`$ is constant to 1st order in the direction $`(G,0).`$ Therefore it is also constant to 1st order in the direction $`(0,v_Y)`$. Now let

$$u$$

be a vector field locally on $`Y_F`$ whose direction at any $`y`$ is the same as $`\mathrm{}(y)`$. Then along any integral arc $`U`$ of $`u`$, $`\mathrm{}`$ is infinitesimally constant, hence constant, hence $`U`$ itself in on a line. Thus $`Y_F`$ is ruled by lines.∎

Acknowledgement The first author thanks the Institute for Advanced Study for its hospitality during the period during which his contributions this work were completed. The second author’s work on these questions was begun while he was visiting Taiwan under the auspices of the National Center for Theoretical Sciences, J. Yu, Director. He would like to thank the NCTS for the invitation, and especially Prof. L.C.Wang and his colleagues at National Dong-Hwa University for their outstanding hospitailty.