text:
# On the localization formula in equivariant cohomology

## 1. Borel-type localization formula for a conjugacy class

Suppose a compact connected Lie group $`G`$ acts on a manifold $`M`$. For $`gG`$, define $`M^g`$ to be the fixed point set of $`g`$:

$$M^g=\{xMgx=x\}.$$

The set $`M^g`$ is not $`G`$-invariant. The $`G`$-invariant subset it generates is

$$_{hG}h(M^g)=_{hG}M^{hgh^1}=_{kC(g)}M^k$$

where $`C(g)`$ is the conjugacy class of $`g`$. This suggests that for every conjugacy class $`C`$ in $`G`$, we consider the set $`M^C`$ of elements of $`M`$ that are fixed by at least one element of the conjugacy class $`C`$:

$$M^C=_{kC}M^k.$$

Then $`M^C`$ is a closed $`G`$-subset of $`M`$ (, footnote 1, p. 532); however it may not be always smooth. From now on we make the assumption that $`M^C`$ is smooth.

Suppose $`C=C(g)`$ is the conjugacy class of an element $`g`$ in $`G`$. Let $`T`$ be a maximal torus of $`T`$ containing $`g`$. Then we have the following inclusions of fixed-point sets:

(1)
$$M^GM^TM^gM^C.$$

###### Remark 1.1.

If $`T`$ is a maximal torus in the compact connected Lie group $`G`$ and $`dimT=\mathrm{}`$, then

$$H^{}(BG)=H^{}(BT)^{W_G}=[u_1,\mathrm{},u_{\mathrm{}}]^{W_G},$$

where $`W_G`$ is the Weyl group of $`T`$ in $`G`$. Thus, $`H^{}(BG)`$ is an integral domain. Let $`Q`$ be its field of fractions. For any $`H^{}(BG)`$-module $`V`$, we define the localization of $`V`$ with respect to the zero ideal in $`H^{}(BG)`$ to be

$$\widehat{V}:=V_{H^{}(BG)}Q.$$

It is easily verified that $`V`$ is $`H^{}(BG)`$-torsion if and only if $`\widehat{V}=0`$. For a $`G`$-manifold $`M`$, we call $`\widehat{H}_G^{}(M)`$ the *localized equivariant cohomology* of $`M`$.

###### Lemma 1.2.

Let $`M`$ be a $`G`$-manifold and $`T`$ a maximal torus of $`G`$. If $`H_T^{}(M)`$ is $`H^{}(BT)`$-torsion, then $`H_G^{}(M)`$ is $`H^{}(BG)`$-torsion.

###### Proof.

Recall that $`H_G^{}(M)`$ is the subring of $`H_T^{}(M)`$ consisting of the $`W_G`$-invariant elements. Since $`H_T^{}(M)`$ is $`H^{}(BT)`$-torsion, there is $`aH^{}(BT)`$ such that $`a1_{H_T^{}(M)}=0`$. Consider the average of $`a`$ over the Weyl group $`W_G`$ of $`T`$ in $`G`$,

$$\stackrel{~}{a}=\frac{1}{|W_G|}(a+\omega _1a+\mathrm{}+\omega _ra)H^{}(BG).$$

Under $`\psi `$, the element $`\stackrel{~}{a}1_{H_G^{}(M)}`$ goes to

$$\frac{1}{|W_G|}(\omega _1a+\mathrm{}+\omega _ra)1_{H_T^{}(M)}.$$

But $`(\omega _ja)1_{H_T^{}(M)}=\omega _j(a1_{H_T^{}(M)})=0`$ for any $`j`$. Thus $`\stackrel{~}{a}1_{H_G^{}(M)}=0`$ in $`H_G^{}(M)`$. ∎

###### Proposition 1.3.

Let $`G`$ be a compact connected Lie group acting on a compact manifold $`M`$, and let $`C`$ be a conjugacy class in $`G`$. If $`UMM^C`$ is an open G-subset, then the equivariant cohomology $`H_G^{}(U)`$ is $`H^{}(BG)`$-torsion.

###### Proof.

It follows from ((1)) that $`UMM^CMM^T`$. Since the inclusion map $`UMM^T`$ is $`T`$-equivariant, and $`H_T^{}(MM^T)`$ is $`H^{}(BT)`$-torsion by (, Th. 11.4.1), $`H_T^{}(U)`$ is also $`H^{}(BT)`$-torsion. By Lemma 1.2, $`H_G^{}(U)`$ is $`H^{}(BG)`$-torsion. ∎

In the rest of this section, “torsion” will mean $`H^{}(BG)`$-torsion.

###### Theorem 1.4 (Borel-type localization formula for a conjugacy class).

Let $`G`$ be a compact connected Lie group acting on a compact manifold $`M`$, and $`C`$ a conjugacy class in $`G`$. Then the inclusion $`i:M^CM`$ induces an isomorphism in localized equivariant cohomology

$$i^{}:\widehat{H}_G^{}(M)\widehat{H}_G^{}(M^C).$$

###### Proof.

Let $`U`$ be a $`G`$-invariant tubular neighborhood of $`M^C`$. Then $`\{U,MM^C\}`$ is a $`G`$-invariant open cover of $`M`$. Moreover, $`H_G^{}(U)H_G^{}(M^C)`$ because $`U`$ has the $`G`$-homotopy type of $`M^C`$.

By Prop. 1.3, $`H_G^{}(MM^C)`$ and $`H_G^{}(U(MM^C))`$ are torsion. Then in the localized equivariant Mayer-Vietoris sequence

$`\mathrm{}`$ $`\widehat{H}_G^1(U(MM^C))`$
$`\widehat{H}_G^{}(M)\widehat{H}_G^{}(MM^C)\widehat{H}_G^{}(U)`$ $`\widehat{H}_G^{}(U(MM^C))\mathrm{},`$
all the terms except $`\widehat{H}_G^{}(M)`$ and $`\widehat{H}_G^{}(U)`$ are zero. It follows that

$$\widehat{H}_G^{}(M)\widehat{H}_G^{}(U)\widehat{H}_G^{}(M^C)$$

is an isomorphism of $`H^{}(BG)`$-modules. ∎

When the group is a torus $`T`$, a conjugacy class $`C`$ consist of a single element $`tT`$. If $`t`$ is generator, then the fixed point set of $`t`$ is the same as the fixed point set of the whole group $`T`$: $`M^C=M^t=M^T`$. In this case $`M^C`$ is smooth. Thus Borel’s localization theorem follows from Theorem 1.4 by taking the conjugacy class $`C=\{t\}`$ in $`T`$.

## 2. The equivariant Euler class

Suppose a compact connected Lie group $`G`$ acts on a smooth compact manifold $`M`$. Let $`C`$ be a conjugacy class in $`G`$, and $`M^C`$ as before. From now on we assume that $`M^C`$ is smooth with oriented normal bundle. Denote by $`i:M^CM`$ the inclusion map and by $`e_MH_G^{}(M^C)`$ the equivariant Euler class of the normal bundle of $`M^C`$ in $`M`$.

###### Proposition 2.1.

Let $`M`$ be a compact connected oriented $`G`$-manifold. Then the equivariant Euler class $`e_M`$ of the normal bundle of $`M^C`$ in $`M`$ is invertible in $`\widehat{H}_G^{}(M^C)`$.

###### Proof.

Fix a $`G`$-invariant Riemannian metric on $`M`$. Then the normal bundle $`\nu M^C`$ is a $`G`$-equivariant vector bundle. Let $`\nu _0`$ be the normal bundle minus the zero section. Since $`\nu _0`$ is equivariantly diffeomorphic to an open set in $`MM^C`$, $`\widehat{H}_G^{}(\nu _0)`$ vanishes by Prop. 1.3. From the Gysin long exact sequence in localized equivariant cohomology

$$\mathrm{}\widehat{H}_G^{}(\nu _0)\widehat{H}_G^{}(M^C)\stackrel{\times e_M}{}\widehat{H}_G^{}(M^C)\widehat{H}_G^{}(\nu _0)\mathrm{}$$

it follows that multiplication by the equivariant Euler class gives an automorphism of $`\widehat{H}_G^{}(M^C)`$. Thus $`e_M`$ has an inverse in the ring $`\widehat{H}_G^{}(M^C)`$. ∎

Recall that the inclusion map $`i:M^CM`$ satisfies the identity

$$i^{}i_{}(x)=xe_M,xH_G^{}(M).$$

in equivariant cohomology. In the localized equivariant cohomology $`\widehat{H}_G^{}(M^C)`$,

$$i^{}i_{}\frac{i^{}x}{e_M}=\frac{i^{}x}{e_M}e_M=i^{}x.$$

By Theorem 1.4, $`i^{}`$ is an isomorphism. Hence,

(2) $`i_{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{i^{}a}{e_M}}\right)=a.`$
for $`a\widehat{H}_G^{}(M)`$.

## 3. Relative localization formula

Let $`N`$ be a $`G`$-manifold, $`e_N`$ the equivariant Euler class of the normal bundle of $`N^C`$, and $`f:MN`$ a $`G`$-equivariant map. There is a commutative diagram of maps

(3)
where $`i_M`$ and $`i_N`$ are inclusion maps and $`f^C`$ is the restriction of $`f`$ to $`M^C`$. Let

$$(f_G)_{}:\widehat{H}_G^{}(M)\widehat{H}_G^{}(N),f_{}^C:\widehat{H}_G^{}(M^C)\widehat{H}_G^{}(N^C)$$

be the push-forward maps in localized equivariant cohomology.

###### Theorem 3.1 (Relative localization formula).

Let $`M`$ and $`N`$ be compact oriented manifolds on which a compact connected Lie group $`G`$ acts, and $`f:MN`$ a $`G`$-equivariant map. For $`aH_G^{}(M)`$,

$$(f_G)_{}a=(i_N^{})^1f_{}^C\left(\frac{(f^C)^{}e_N}{e_M}i_M^{}a\right)$$

where the push-forward and restriction maps are in localized equivariant cohomology.

###### Proof.

The commutative diagram (3), induces a commutative diagram in localized equivariant cohomology

(4)
By eq. (2) and the commutativity of the diagram (4),

$`(f_G)_{}a`$ $`=(f_G)_{}i_M\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{e_M}}i_M^{}a\right)`$
$`=i_Nf_{}^C\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{e_M}}i_M^{}a\right).`$
Hence,

$`i_N^{}(f_G)_{}a`$ $`=i_N^{}i_Nf_{}^C\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{e_M}}i_M^{}a\right)`$
$`=e_Nf_{}^C\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{e_M}}i_M^{}a\right)`$
$`=(f^C)_{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(f^C)^{}e_N}{e_M}}i_M^{}a\right)`$ $`\text{(projection formula)}.`$
By Theorem 1.4, $`i_N^{}`$ is an isomorphism in localized equivariant cohomology,

$$(f_G)_{}a=(i_N^{})^1(f^C)_{}\left(\frac{(f^C)^{}e_N}{e_M}i_M^{}a\right).$$

If in Theorem 3.1 we take the group $`G`$ to be a torus $`T`$ and the conjugacy class $`C`$ to be the conjugacy class of a generator $`t`$ for $`T`$, then $`M^C=M^t=M^T`$ and Theorem 3.1 specializes to the following formula of Lian, Liu, and Yau .

###### Corollary 3.2 (Relative localization formula for a torus action).

Let $`M`$ and $`N`$ be manifolds on which a torus $`T`$ acts, and $`f:MN`$ a $`T`$-equivariant map with compact oriented fibers. For $`a\widehat{H}_T^{}(M)`$,

$$(f_T)_{}a=(i_N^{})^1(f^T)_{}\left(\frac{(f^T)^{}e_N}{e_M}i_M^{}a\right),$$

where the push-forward and restriction maps are in localized equivariant cohomology.

When $`N`$ is a single point, Cor. 3.2 reduces to the Atiyah-Bott-Berline-Vergne localization formula.

## 4. Applications to the Gysin homomorphism in ordinary cohomology

Let $`G`$ be a compact connected Lie group acting on a manifold $`M`$. Denote by $`M_G`$ the homotopy quotient of $`M`$ by $`G`$, and by $`M^G`$ the fixed point set of the action of $`G`$ on $`M`$. Let $`h_M:MM_G`$ be the inclusion of $`M`$ as a fiber of the bundle $`M_GBG`$ and $`i_M:M^GM`$ the inclusion of the fixed point set $`M^G`$ in $`M`$. The map $`h_M`$ induces a homomorphism in cohomology

$$h_M^{}:H_G^{}(M)H^{}(M).$$

The inclusion $`i_M`$ induces a homomorphism in equivariant cohomology

$$i_M^{}:H_G^{}(M)H_G^{}(M^G).$$

A cohomology class $`aH^{}(M)`$ is said to have an *equivariant extension* $`\stackrel{~}{a}H_G^{}(M)`$ under the $`G`$ action if under the restriction map $`h_M^{}:H_G^{}(M)H^{}(M)`$, the equivariant class $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$ restricts to $`a`$.

Suppose $`f:MN`$ is a $`G`$-equivariant map of compact oriented $`G`$-manifolds. In this section we show that if a class in $`H^{}(M)`$ has an equivariant extension, then its image under the Gysin map $`f_{}:H^{}(M)H^{}(N)`$ in ordinary cohomology can be computed from the relative localization formulas (Cor. 3.2 or Th. 3.1).

We consider first the case of an action by a torus $`T`$. Let $`f_T:M_TN_T`$ be the induced map of homotopy quotients and $`f^T:M^TN^T`$ the induced map of fixed point sets. As before, $`e_M`$ denotes the equivariant Euler class of the normal bundle of the fixed point set $`M^T`$ in $`M`$.

###### Proposition 4.1.

Let $`f:MN`$ be a $`T`$-equivariant map of compact oriented $`T`$-manifolds. If a cohomology class $`aH^{}(M)`$ has an equivariant extension $`\stackrel{~}{a}H_T^{}(M)`$, then its image under the Gysin map $`f_{}:H^{}(M)H^{}(N)`$ is,

1. in terms of equivariant integration over $`M`$:

$$f_{}a=h_N^{}f_T\stackrel{~}{a},$$
2. in terms of equivariant integration over the fixed point set $`M^T`$:

$$f_{}a=h_N^{}(i_N^{})^1(f^T)_{}\left(\frac{(f^T)^{}e_N}{e_M}i_M^{}\stackrel{~}{a}\right).$$

###### Proof.

The inclusions $`h_M:MM_T`$ and $`h_N:NN_T`$ fit into a commutative diagram

This diagram is Cartesian in the sense that $`M`$ is the inverse image of $`N`$ under $`f_T`$. Hence, the push-pull formula $`f_{}h_M^{}=h_N^{}f_T`$ holds. Then

$$f_{}a=f_{}h_M^{}\stackrel{~}{a}=h_N^{}f_T\stackrel{~}{a}.$$

2) follows from 1) and the relative localization formula for a torus action (Cor. 3.2). ∎

Using the relative localization formula for a conjugacy class, one obtains analogously a push-forward formula in terms of the fixed point sets of a conjugacy class. Now $`h_M`$ and $`i_M`$ are the inclusion maps

$$h_M:MM_G,i_M:M^CM,$$

$`e_M`$ is the equivariant Euler class of the normal bundle of $`M^C`$ in $`M`$, and $`f^C:M^CN^C`$ is the induced map on the fixed point sets of the conjugacy class $`C`$.

###### Proposition 4.2.

Let $`f:MN`$ be a $`G`$-equivariant map of compact oriented $`G`$-manifolds. Assume that the fixed point sets $`M^C`$ and $`N^C`$ are smooth with oriented normal bundle. For a class $`aH^{}(M)`$ that has an equivariant extension $`\stackrel{~}{a}H_G^{}(M)`$,

$$f_{}a=h_N^{}(i_N^{})^1(f^C)_{}\left(\frac{(f^C)^{}e_N}{e_M}i_M^{}\stackrel{~}{a}\right).$$

## 5. Example: the Gysin homomorphism of flag manifolds

Let $`G`$ be a compact connected Lie group with maximal torus $`T`$, and $`H`$ a closed subgroup of $`G`$ containing $`T`$. In  Akyildiz and Carrell compute the Gysin homomorphism for the canonical projection $`f:G/TG/H`$. In this section we deduce the formula of Akyildiz and Carrell from the relative localization formula in equivariant cohomology.

Let $`N_G(T)`$ be the normalizer of the torus $`T`$ in the group $`G`$. The Weyl group $`W_G`$ of $`T`$ in $`G`$ is $`W_G=N_G(T)/T`$. We use the same letter $`w`$ to denote an element of the Weyl group $`W_G`$ and a lift of the element to the normalizer $`N_G(T)`$. The Weyl group $`W_G`$ acts on $`G/T`$ by

$$(gT)w=gwT\text{for }gTG/T\text{ and }wW_G.$$

This induces an action of $`W_G`$ on the cohomology ring $`H^{}(G/T)`$.

We may also consider the Weyl group $`W_H`$ of $`T`$ in $`H`$. By restriction the Weyl group $`W_H`$ acts on $`G/T`$ and on $`H^{}(G/T)`$.

To each character $`\gamma `$ of $`T`$ with representation space $`_\gamma `$, one associates a complex line bundle

$$L_\gamma :=G\times _T_\gamma $$

over $`G/T`$. Fix a set $`^+(H)`$ of positive roots for $`T`$ in $`H`$, and extend $`^+(H)`$ to a set $`^+`$ of positive roots for $`T`$ in $`G`$.

###### Theorem 5.1 ().

The Gysin homomorphism $`f_{}:H^{}(G/T)H^{}(G/H)`$ is given by, for $`aH^{}(G/T)`$,

$$f_{}a=\frac{_{wW_H}(1)^wwa}{_{\alpha ^+(H)}c_1(L_\alpha )}.$$

###### Remark 5.2.

There are two other ways to obtain this formula. First, using representation theory, Brion  proves a push-forward formula for flag bundles that includes Th. 5.1 as a special case. Secondly, since $`G/TG/H`$ is a fiber bundle with equivariantly formal fibers, the method of  using the ABBV localization theorem also applies.

To deduce Th. 5.1 from Prop. 4.1 we need to recall a few facts about the cohomology and equivariant cohomology of $`G/T`$ and $`G/H`$ (see ).

### Cohomology ring of $`BT`$

Let $`ETBT`$ be the universal principal $`T`$-bundle. To each character $`\gamma `$ of $`T`$, one associates a complex line bundle $`S_\gamma `$ over $`BT`$ and a complex line bundle $`L_\gamma `$ over $`G/T`$:

$$S_\gamma :=ET\times _T_\gamma ,L_\gamma :=G\times _T_\gamma .$$

For definiteness, fix a basis $`\chi _1,\mathrm{},\chi _{\mathrm{}}`$ for the character group $`\widehat{T}`$, where we write the characters additively, and set

$$u_i=c_1(S_{\chi _i})H^2(BT),z_i=c_1(L_{\chi _i})H^2(G/T).$$

Let $`R=\mathrm{Sym}(\widehat{T})`$ be the symmetric algebra over $``$ generated by $`\widehat{T}`$. The map $`\gamma c_1(S_\gamma )`$ induces an isomorphism

$$R=\mathrm{Sym}(\widehat{T})\stackrel{}{}H^{}(BT)=[u_1,\mathrm{},u_{\mathrm{}}].$$

The map $`\gamma c_1(L_\gamma )`$ induces an isomorphism

$$R=\mathrm{Sym}(\widehat{T})\stackrel{}{}[z_1,\mathrm{},z_{\mathrm{}}].$$

The Weyl groups $`W_G`$ and $`W_H`$ act on the characters of $`T`$ and hence on $`R`$: for $`wW_G`$ and $`\gamma \widehat{T}`$,

$$(w\gamma )(t)=\gamma (w^1tw).$$

### Cohomology rings of flag manifolds

The cohomology rings of $`G/T`$ and $`G/H`$ are described in :

$`H^{}(G/T)`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{R}{(R_+^{W_G})}}{\displaystyle \frac{[z_1,\mathrm{},z_{\mathrm{}}]}{(R_+^{W_G})}},`$
$`H^{}(G/H)`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{R^{W_H}}{(R_+^{W_G})}}{\displaystyle \frac{[z_1,\mathrm{},z_{\mathrm{}}]^{W_H}}{(R_+^{W_G})}},`$
where $`(R_+^{W_G})`$ denotes the ideal generated by the $`W_G`$-invariant homogeneous polynomials of positive degree.

The torus $`T`$ acts on $`G/T`$ and $`G/H`$ by left multiplication. For each character $`\chi `$ of $`T`$, let $`K_\chi :=(L_\chi )_T`$ be the homotopy quotient of the bundle $`L_\chi `$ by the torus $`T`$. Then $`K_\chi `$ is a complex line bundle over $`(G/T)_T`$. Their equivariant cohomology rings are (see )

$`H_T^{}(G/T)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{[u_1,\mathrm{},u_{\mathrm{}},y_1,\mathrm{},y_{\mathrm{}}]}{J}},`$
$`H_T^{}(G/H)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{[u_1,\mathrm{},u_{\mathrm{}}]([y_1,\mathrm{},y_{\mathrm{}}]^{W_H})}{J}},`$
where $`y_i=c_1(K_{\chi _i})H_T^{}(G/T)`$ and $`J`$ denotes the ideal generated by $`q(y)q(u)`$ for $`qR_+^{W_G}`$.

### Fixed point sets

The fixed point sets of the $`T`$-action on $`G/T`$ and on $`G/H`$ are the Weyl group $`W_G`$ and the coset space $`W_G/W_H`$ respectively. Since these are finite sets of points,

$$H_T^{}(W_G)=_{wW_G}H_T^{}(\{w\})_{wW_G}R,$$

$$H_T^{}(W_G/W_H)=_{wW_HW_G/W_H}R.$$

Thus, we may view an element of $`H_T^{}(W_G)`$ as a function from $`W_G`$ to $`R`$, and an element of $`H_T^{}(W_G/W_H)`$ as a function from $`W_G/W_H`$ to $`R`$.

Let $`h_M:MM_T`$ be the inclusion of $`M`$ as a fiber in the fiber bundle $`M_TBT`$ and $`i_M:M^TM`$ the inclusion of the fixed point set $`M^T`$ in $`M`$. Note that $`i_M`$ is $`T`$-equivariant and induces a homomorphism in $`T`$-equivariant cohomology, $`i_M^{}:H_T^{}(M)H_T^{}(M^T)`$. In order to apply Prop. 4.1, we need to know how to calculate the restriction maps

$$h_M^{}:H_T^{}(M)H^{}(M)\text{and}i_M^{}:H_T^{}(M)H_T^{}(M^T)$$

as well as the equivariant Euler class $`e_M`$ of the normal bundle to the fixed point set $`M^T`$, for $`M=G/T`$ and $`G/H`$. This is done in .

### Restriction and equivariant Euler class formulas for $`G/T`$

Since $`h_M^{}:H_T^{}(M)H^{}(M)`$ is the restriction to a fiber of the bundle $`M_TBT`$, and the bundle $`K_{\chi _i}=(L_{\chi _i})_T`$ on $`M_T`$ pulls back to $`L_{\chi _i}`$ on $`M`$,

(5)
$$h_M^{}(u_i)=0,h_M^{}(y_i)=h_M^{}(c_1(K_{\chi _i}))=c_1(L_{\chi _i})=z_i.$$

Let $`i_w:\{w\}G/T`$ be the inclusion of the fixed point $`wW_G`$ and

$$i_w^{}:H_T^{}(G/T)H_T^{}(\{w\})=R$$

the induced map in equivariant cohomology. By (), for $`p(y)H_T^{}(G/T)`$,

(6)
$$i_w^{}u_i=u_i,i_w^{}p(y)=wp(u),i_w^{}c_1(K_\gamma )=wc_1(S_\gamma ).$$

Thus, the restriction of $`p(y)`$ to the fixed point set $`W_G`$ is the function $`i_M^{}p(y):W_GR`$ whose value at $`wW_G`$ is

(7)
$$(i_M^{}p(y))(w)=wp(u).$$

The equivariant Euler class of the normal bundle to the fixed point set $`W_G`$ assigns to each $`wW_G`$ the equivariant Euler class of the normal bundle $`\nu _w`$ at $`w`$; thus, it is also a function $`e_M:W_GR`$. By (),

(8)
$$e_M(w)=e^T(\nu _w)=w\left(\underset{\alpha ^+}{}c_1(S_\alpha )\right)=(1)^w\underset{\alpha ^+}{}c_1(S_\alpha ).$$

### Restriction and equivariant Euler class formulas for $`G/H`$

For the manifold $`M=G/H`$, the formulas for the restriction maps $`h_N^{}`$ and $`i_N^{}`$ are the same as in (5) and (6), except that now the polynomial $`p(y)`$ must be $`W_H`$-invariant. In particular,

(9)
$$h_N^{}(u_i)=0,h_N^{}p(y)=p(z),h_N^{}(c_1(K_\gamma ))=c_1(L_\gamma ),$$

and

(10)
$$(i_N^{}p(y))(wW_H)=wp(u).$$

If $`\gamma _1,\mathrm{},\gamma _m`$ are characters of $`T`$ such that $`p(c_1(K_{\gamma _1}),\mathrm{},c_1(K_{\gamma _m}))`$ is invariant under the Weyl group $`W_H`$, then

(11)
$$(i_N^{}p(c_1(K_{\gamma _1}),\mathrm{},c_1(K_{\gamma _m})))(wW_H)=wp(c_1(S_{\gamma _1}),\mathrm{},c_1(S_{\gamma _m})).$$

The equivariant Euler class of the normal bundle of the fixed point set $`W_G/W_H`$ is the function $`e_N:W_G/W_HR`$ given by

(12)
$$e_N(wW_H)=w\left(\underset{\alpha ^+^+(H)}{}c_1(S_\alpha )\right).$$

###### Proof of Th. 5.1.

With $`M=G/T`$ and $`N=G/H`$ in Prop. 4.1, let

$$p(z)H^{}(G/T)=[z_1,\mathrm{},z_{\mathrm{}}]/(R_+^{W_G}).$$

It is the image of $`p(y)H_T^{}(G/T)`$ under the restriction map $`h_M^{}:H_T^{}(G/T)H^{}(G/T)`$. By Prop. 4.1,

(13)
$$f_{}p(z)=f_{}h_M^{}p(y)=h_N^{}f_Tp(y)$$

and

$$f_Tp(y)=(i_N^{})^1(f^T)_{}\left(\frac{(f^T)^{}e_N}{e_M}i_M^{}p(y)\right).$$

By Eq. (7), (8), and (12), for $`wW_G`$,

$$(i_M^{}p(y))(w)=i_w^{}p(y)=wp(u),$$

and

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{(f^T)^{}e_N}{e_M}}\right)(w)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{e_N(wW_H)}{e_M(w)}}=w\left({\displaystyle \frac{_{\alpha ^+^+(H)}c_1(S_\alpha )}{_{\alpha ^+}c_1(S_\alpha )}}\right)`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{w\left(_{\alpha ^+(H)}c_1(S_\alpha )\right)}}.`$
To simplify the notation, define temporarily the function $`k:W_GR`$ by

$$k(w)=w\left(\frac{p(u)}{_{\alpha ^+(H)}c_1(S_\alpha )}\right).$$

Then

(14)
$$f_Tp(y)=(i_N^{})^1(f^T)_{}(k).$$

Now $`(f^T)_{}(k)H_T^{}(W_G/W_H)`$ is the function$`:W_G/W_HR`$ whose value at the point $`wW_H`$ is obtained by summing $`k`$ over the fiber of $`f^T:W_GW_G/W_H`$ above $`wW_H`$. Hence,

$`((f^T)_{}k)(wW_H)`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{wvwW_H}{}}wv\left({\displaystyle \frac{p(u)}{_{\alpha ^+(H)}c_1(S_\alpha )}}\right)`$
$`=w{\displaystyle \underset{vW_H}{}}v\left({\displaystyle \frac{p(u)}{_{\alpha ^+(H)}c_1(S_\alpha )}}\right).`$
By (11), the inverse image of this expression under $`i_N^{}`$ is

(15)
$$(i_N^{})^1(f^T)_{}k=\underset{vW_H}{}v\left(\frac{p(y)}{_{\alpha ^+(H)}c_1(K_\alpha )}\right).$$

Finally, combining (13), (14), (15) and (9),

$$f_{}p(z)=h_N^{}(f_T)_{}p(y)=\underset{vW_H}{}v\left(\frac{p(z)}{_{\alpha ^+(H)}c_1(L_\alpha )}\right).$$


format: text

text:
# Insulator-Metal transition in the Doped 3𝑑¹ Transition Metal Oxide 𝐿𝑎𝑇𝑖𝑂₃

\[

## Abstract

The doping induced insulator-metal transition in $`La_{1x}Sr_xTiO_3`$ is studied using the ab-initio LDA+DMFT method. Combining the LDA bandstructure for the actual, distorted structure found recently with multi-orbital DMFT to treat electronic correlations, we find: $`(i)`$ ferro-orbital order in the Mott insulating state without orbital degeneracy, $`(ii)`$ a continuous filling induced transition to the paramagnetic metal (PM) with $`x`$, and $`(iii)`$ excellent quantitative agreement with published photoemission data for the case of $`6\%`$ doping. Our results imply that this system can be described as a Mott-Hubbard system without orbital (liquid) degeneracy.

\]

The early TMO $`LaTiO_3`$ is an interesting case of a system exhibiting filling-driven insulator-metal transition. Long thought of as a text-book example of a Mott insulator with antiferromagnetic order, current interest in orbital correlations in TMOs has reopened the subject of the physics of $`LaTiO_3`$ .

According to  this material with $`Ti^{3+}(3d^1)`$ configuration is an electron analog of the cuprates, with $`G`$-type AF spin order below $`T_N150K`$, and with a reduced spin moment in the AF state. Recent neutron scattering measurements reveal an isotropic magnon dispersion, with a small spin gap, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_s=3.3meV`$, putting strong constraints on an acceptable mechanism for the observed antiferromagnetism . The fact that the single electron in $`LaTiO_3`$ resides in the $`t_{2g}`$ orbitals (less prone to Jahn-Teller distortions) suggested that the orbital moment might not be fully quenched in this case. Attempts to explain the strongly reduced spin moment of $`\mu =0.46\mu _B`$  assuming an unquenched orbital moment aligned antiparallel to the spin moment (spin-orbit coupling in the $`t_{2g}`$ shell of $`Ti^{3+}`$) led to a spin gap much larger than that of $`3.3meV`$ observed in INS , excluding an orbital contribution to the ordered moment. Moreover, ferro-orbital order (FOO) has recently been suggested , in complete accord with the $`G`$-type AF spin order below $`T_N`$, implying lifting of the $`t_{2g}`$ orbital degeneracy.

The metallic phase in $`La_{1x}Sr_xTiO_3`$  has been shown to be a canonical strongly correlated Fermi liquid , putting additional constraints on an acceptable model for this system. In particular, this implies a non-degenerate ground state in the paramagnetic metal (PM) phase, since any remnant of orbital degeneracy (if it was hypothesized to exist) would lead to violation of Landau’s Fermi liquid hypothesis, and lead to a non-FL metallic state, in contradiction with observations. AF LRO is rapidly suppressed upon $`Sr`$ doping, and classic signatures of the Brinkman-Rice (BR) correlated FL are seen close to the MIT, suggesting that the AFI state is a Mott-Hubbard insulator and that the AFI-PM transition is a Mott-Hubbard transition. Given the incomplete understanding of the AFI, the mechanism of the MIT still constitutes an open problem for theory, in spite of much recent activity .

Two alternatives were proposed to account for the puzzling observations in the AFI phase. Mochizuki et al.  presented a model for the AF in $`LaTiO_3`$ using a $`GdFeO_3`$ distortion, which, however, was not observed. Khaliullin et al  proposed a novel theoretical idea based on an orbital liquid, but the short-ranged orbital RVB-like fluctuations were not observed either . Moreover, it has been shown recently that long range AF order is theoretically incompatible with an orbital liquid state , deepening the controversy regarding the origin of $`G`$-type AF order in $`LaTiO_3`$.

Here, following new work  pinpointing the real crystal structure (RCS) of $`LaTiO_3`$, we propose a detailed theoretical scenario unifying the various experimentally observed features in the insulating (I) as well as the correlated metallic (M) states. Employing the state-of-the-art technique LDA+DMFT (IPT) (combining the real bandstructure of $`LaTiO_3`$ with dynamical correlation effects of local Coulomb interactions), we show how a consistent description of the doping-induced insulator-metal (I-M) transition, as well as very good quantitative agreement with photoemission results is obtained.

The RCS of $`LaTiO_3`$ (i.e, $`Pbnm`$ space group) involves a structural distortion arising from the tilting of the $`TiO_6`$ octahedra around the $`[110]_c`$ axis followed by their rotation around $`c`$, beginning from the cubic perovskite structure. The specific distortion of the $`TiO_6`$ octahedra in $`LaTiO_3`$ is characterized by a large splitting in the $`O2O2`$ edge lengths of the octahedral basal plane, giving rise to elongation along $`a`$ and shrinking along $`b`$. This implies FOO and a lifting of $`t_{2g}`$ orbitaldegeneracy. Starting from a local picture in the $`d^1`$ configuration, the occupied orbital is constructed as: $`|a=0.77(\frac{|xz+yz}{\sqrt{2}})\pm 0.636|xy`$, which is non-degenerate . We have carried out a local density approximation (LDA) study based on the RCS described above.

To obtain the band DOS, the one-electron scalar relativistic Schrödinger equation was solved self-consistently within the LDA, using the linear muffin-tin orbitals (LMTO) scheme in the atomic sphere approximation, with combined correction terms . The exchange-correlation potential was parametrized according to the von Barth-Hedin scheme . Self-consistency was reached on performing calculations on a k-mesh of dimension $`16\times 16\times 16`$. The radii of the atoms in the real RCS were chosen to minimize their overlap. Values of $`r=3.7(La)`$, $`r=2.12(O)`$ and $`r=2.75(Ti)`$ a.u. were found to be useful.

The total LDA density of states, $`\rho (\omega )=_{𝐤,\alpha }\delta (\omega ϵ_\alpha (𝐤))`$, with the LDA (one-electron) Hamiltonian given by

$`H_0={\displaystyle \underset{𝐤,\alpha }{}}ϵ_\alpha (𝐤)c_{𝐤\alpha }^{}c_{𝐤\alpha }.`$ (1)
Several interesting points are apparent from the LDA results. First, the $`t_{2g}`$ splitting is not negligible, and the character of the occupied ground state orbital $`|\alpha `$ (not shown) is in accord with the result of Ref. . The LDA bandwidth of the $`t_{2g}`$ bands is about $`2eV`$, and the charge transfer energy (LDA) is large, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{LDA}7.0eV`$, while the onsite Hubbard $`U6.0eV`$, putting $`LaTiO_3`$ in the Mott-Hubbard category, as expected . Further, the Hund coupling, $`J_H1eV`$ (relevant in the excited $`d^2`$ configuration, with the two $`d`$ electrons on different orbitals, realized upon $`dd`$ hopping), and the inter-orbital coupling, $`U^{}=(U2J_H)4.0eV`$. These results (see Fig. 1) do not represent an insulating state, this requiring a proper treatment of correlation effects in the RCS. Given the FOO found in $`LaTiO_3`$, a description in terms of a single-band model for the $`|\alpha `$ band is untenable, and requires a full multi-orbital dynamical mean field calculation. To avoid double counting of interactions already treated on the average by LDA, we follow  to write,

$`H_0^{}=H_0+{\displaystyle \underset{i\alpha \sigma }{}}ϵ_{i\alpha \sigma }^0n_{i\alpha \sigma },`$ (2)
with $`ϵ_{i\alpha \sigma }^0=ϵ_{i\alpha }U(n_{\alpha \sigma }\frac{1}{2})+\frac{J_H}{2}(n_{\alpha \sigma }1)`$.

The full many-body Hamiltonian is now given by,

$`H`$ $`=`$ $`H_0^{^{}}+U{\displaystyle \underset{i,\alpha }{}}n_{i\alpha }n_{i\alpha }+U^{}{\displaystyle \underset{i\alpha \beta }{}}n_{i\alpha }n_{i\beta }`$ (3)
$``$ $`J_H{\displaystyle \underset{i\alpha \beta }{}}𝐒_{i\alpha }𝐒_{i\beta }.`$ (4)
We solve this multiband model in $`d=\mathrm{}`$ using multi-orbital iterated perturbation theory (IPT) . Assuming no symmetry breaking in the spin/orbital sectors, we have $`G_{\alpha \beta \sigma \sigma ^{}}(\omega )=\delta _{\alpha \beta }\delta _{\sigma \sigma ^{}}G_{\alpha \sigma }(\omega )`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\alpha \beta \sigma \sigma ^{}}(\omega )=\delta _{\alpha \beta }\delta _{\sigma \sigma ^{}}\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\alpha \sigma }(\omega )`$. Further, from the LDA results, the DOS for the $`e_g`$ bands is small near $`E_F`$. Taking this together with the fact that the $`O2p`$ bands lie $`6eV`$ away from $`E_F`$, we keep only the $`t_{2g}`$ bands in what follows.

The DMFT solution involves  $`(i)`$ replacing the lattice model by a self-consistently embedded multi-orbital, asymmetric Anderson impurity model, and, $`(ii)`$ the selfconsistency condition requiring the local impurity Green function to be equal to the local GF for the lattice. In $`LaTiO_3`$, in the $`3d^2`$ configuration reached by hopping, $`U^{},J_H`$ scatter electrons between different $`t_{2g}`$ orbitals, so only the total number, $`n_{t_{2g}}^d=_\alpha n_{t_{2g},\alpha }^d`$ is conserved in a way consistent with Luttinger’s theorem. The calculation follows the philosophy of the one-orbital IPT, with the GFs and the self-energies being matrices in the orbital indices. The full set of equations for the multi-orbital case are the same as those appearing elsewhere , and we do not reproduce them here. Local self-energies computed from this generalized IPT formulation exactly satisfy the Friedel-Luttinger constraint for arbitrary band-fillings, guaranteeing the correct low-energy form of the spectral function. The correct form of the spectrum at high energy is ensured by the (exact) selfconsistent determination of the first few moments of the spectral function. These equations are solved selfconsistently with the LDA DOS as input, until convergence is achieved.

We now present our results. Figure 2 shows the total spectral function for the paramagnetic insulating (PI) state of $`LaTiO_3`$. This does not correspond to the true ground state, which is a $`G`$-type AFI, but to the PI (Mott) state above $`T_N`$. The Mott-Hubbard gap is read off directly from the DOS as $`\mathrm{\Delta }_G^I0.4eV`$. Further, the renormalized value of the $`t_{2g}`$ splitting is computed to

be $`0.15eV`$, implying a reduction in the charge transfer energy, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{ct}=(ϵ_pϵ_d)`$ from $`7.0eV`$ in the LDA to $`6.64eV`$ in the correlated solution. This is likely to be an overestimate, since further downward renormalization of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{ct}`$ will result from additional Hartree shifts arising from inclusion of Madelung ($`pd`$ interaction) terms. These results constitute a concrete resolution of the questions posed recently , namely, the mechanism for the generation of a small-gap Mott-Hubbard insulator in a situation where the Coulomb interactions are comparable to the LDA bandwidth. In view of our results, dynamical effects of coupled spin/orbital correlations in the real structure of $`LaTiO_3`$ are of crucial importance for a consistent resolution of this issue. We also find the occupation of the lowest $`t_{2g}`$ orbital, $`n_{|\alpha }=0.17`$, slightly higher than that of the other two higher-lying (by $`0.15eV`$) orbitals in the $`t_{2g}`$ sector.

These results are consistent with having ferro-orbital order (FOO) in $`LaTiO_3`$ . Further, since the ground state occupied orbital, $`|\alpha =a_1|xz+yz+a_2|xy`$ (consistent with Ref. ) is not oriented along one of the bonds, the resulting AF exchange is not expected to be very anisotropic. A detailed calculation of the Heisenberg superexchange based on the LDA+DMFT results, along with proper incorporation of spin anisotropies, is in progress and will be reported elsewhere.

To model the paramagnetic metallic (PM) state, reached (continuously from the PI in our approach) upon doping $`LaTiO_3`$ with $`Sr`$, we extended our calculation for the PI to: $`(i)`$ incorporate the change in band-filling along the same lines as for generalized IPT for the single band case. This implies computing the chemical potential shift, as required by Luttinger’s theorem, and, $`(ii)`$ considering the effects of $`Sr`$ doping induced static disorder (the difference of the on-site potentials on $`Sr`$ substitution is $`\mathrm{\Delta }v4.0eV`$ ) using the coherent-potential approximation (CPA) combined selfconsistently  with the multi-orbital IPT described above. Furthermore, to obtain quantitative consistency with spectroscopic results, we found it necessary to include the (small near $`E_F`$) DOS of the $`e_g`$ bands found in the LDA (Fig. 1), as well (see below).

Generically, hole doping the (Mott) PI creates a very sharp, quasicoherent Fermi liquid peak at the renormalized $`E_F`$, with dynamical spectral weight transfer over a large energy scale from high to low energy (caused by $`U,U^{},J_H`$ within DMFT), driving a first-order Mott transition in the generic case. In this situation, static, potential disorder is expected to lead to a moderate broadening of the sharp FL peak, with spectral weight transfer from low to high energy , and, more importantly, to convert the first-order Mott transition into a continuous one. Thus, the character of the MIT, as well as details of the actual one-particle spectrum depend sensitively on how the competition between Mott-Hubbard localization and itinerance in a multi-band system is affected by doping induced static disorder.

With this in mind, we show the photoemission (PES) and inverse-PES (IPES) spectra for the lightly ($`\delta x+y=0.06`$) doped, PM state of $`La_xSr_{1x}TiO_{3+y/2}`$ , along with the experimental result for $`I_{PES}(\omega )`$ in Fig. 3. Clearly, excellent quantitative agreement between theory and experiment is found over the entire range $`2\omega E_F`$. In particular, the lower Hubbard band, the quasicoherent FL feature, as well as the details of the lineshape are all in excellent agreement with experiment. In the IPES spectrum, we are able to resolve the $`\alpha ,\beta `$ peaks

alongwith the much greater signal intensity and the correct detailed form of the lineshape . Thus, our results represent a quantitatively accurate representation of the complete one-electron spectral function in the PM phase of $`La_{1x}Sr_xTiO_{3+y/2}`$. Lastly, from the Fermi liquid self-energies (not shown), the effective mass renormalization is estimated to be $`m^{}/m_b=1.5`$ for $`\delta =0.06`$ in good quantitative agreement with the frequency-dependent renormalization estimated from PES . Actually, the total renormalization includes additional renormalization (factor of $`2`$) coming from the $`𝐤`$-dependence of the self-energies. On general grounds, we do expect such renormalization in a case of proximity to the AF transition; theoretically, an extension to include non-local correlations is required to address this issue. We have not done this here.

We stress essential differences between our work and earlier works. In Ref. , an incorrect crystal structure was used for the LDA calculation. Moreover, the strong $`J_H1.0eV`$ along with the inter-orbital $`U^{}`$ seem to have been completely ignored in their correlation (DMFT) calculations. Turning to Ref. , we believe, given the fact that a multitude of experiments reveal correlated (Brinkman-Rice) FL responses (PM), that the basic Landau hypotheses force one to abandon a picture based on orbital degeneracy in the PM phase as well. We re-emphasize that AF-LRO has recently been shown to be impossible  for a $`3d^1`$ system with triple orbital ($`t_{2g}`$) degeneracy. Very recently, Pavarini et al.  have studied a host of $`3d^1`$ systems within LDA+DMFT, obtaining similar conclusions for the Mott insulating state in $`LaTiO_3`$. However, the $`Sr`$-doping induced I-M transition has not been studied there. Additionally, using QMC to solve the DMFT equations forces a restriction to high-$`T=770K`$ . Given the strong $`T`$ dependence of the correlated Fermi liquid scale within DMFT, as well as the much lower FL coherence scale observed experimentally in doped $`LaTiO_3`$ , (in contrast to QMC results), we believe that a quantitative comparison with experiment at low $`T`$ requires the solution of the DMFT equations at lower $`T150K`$, as we have done. Finally, we draw attention to the excellent quantitative agreement between theory and experiment for the one-electron spectral function, obtained using LDA+ (multi-orbital) DMFT. To our knowledge, this is the first calculation achieving such unprecedented agreement between experiment and theory for this system.

To conclude, we have studied the doping induced Mott transition in the $`3d^1`$ system $`La_{1x}Sr_xTiO_3`$ using the ab-initio LDA+DMFT method. Starting from the real crystal structure (with lifting of $`t_{2g}`$ orbital degeneracy), we have explicitly demonstrated the nature of the carrier driven MIT in this system. Our results support ferro-orbital order in the insulating state, consistent with recent suggestions , and with the observed $`G`$-type AF order. In conjunction with , these results favor a description of the physics of $`LaTiO_3`$ in a picture of non-degenerate $`t_{2g}`$ orbitals. Within this picture, in the PM state, excellent quantitative agreement with published PES and IPES results is obtained, providing a complete description of the evolution of one-particle excitations across the MIT. Similar ideas can be fruitfully applied to study the doping-driven MI transitions in other TMO-based systems  with coupled spin-orbital correlations.

###### Acknowledgements.

MSL and LC acknowledge fruitful discussions with D. I. Khomskii in course of this work. SL wishes to aknowledge A. Yaresko for his help with the LMTO program and for valuable discussions. Work carried out under the auspices of the Sonderforschungsbereich 608 of the DFG (Köln), and the MPI-CPfS (Dresden).


text:
# Entanglement Echoes in Quantum Computation

(September 19, 2003)

## Abstract

We study the stability of entanglement in a quantum computer implementing an efficient quantum algorithm, which simulates a quantum chaotic dynamics. For this purpose, we perform a forward-backward evolution of an initial state in which two qubits are in a maximally entangled Bell state. If the dynamics is reversed after an evolution time $`t_r`$, there is an echo of the entanglement between these two qubits at time $`t_e=2t_r`$. Perturbations attenuate the pairwise entanglement echo and generate entanglement between these two qubits and the other qubits of the quantum computer.

The development of new techniques which could enhance the reliability of quantum computation is intrinsically connected with the study of its stability. Every physical implementation of a quantum computer will have to deal with errors, due to the coupling with the environment or to an imperfect control of the computer hardware. Therefore an accurate study of the stability of a quantum computer, while it is running quantum algorithms, is demanded pazzurek .

Entanglement is arguably the most peculiar feature of quantum systems, with no analog in classical mechanics. Furthermore, it is an important physical resource, which is at the basis of many quantum information protocols, including quantum cryptography cryptography  and teleportation teleportation . For any quantum algorithm operating on pure states, the presence of multipartite (many-qubit) entanglement is necessary to achieve an exponential speedup over classical computation jozsa . Therefore the ability to control entangled states is one of the basic requirements for constructing quantum computers.

In this paper, we introduce a suitable method to characterize the stability of pairwise entanglement in quantum computation, by considering the echo of an initially maximally entangled pair of qubits. Namely, we assume that our quantum computer is initially in the state $`|\psi _0=|\mathrm{\Phi }_B|\chi `$. Here, the first two qubits are prepared in a maximally entangled Bell state ($`|\mathrm{\Phi }_B`$), while the other $`n_q2`$ qubits are set in a pure state ($`|\chi `$), and they are completely disentangled from the Bell pair ($`n_q`$ denotes the total number of qubits in the quantum computer). The state $`|\psi _0`$ first evolves according to the given quantum algorithm, described by the unitary evolution operator $`\widehat{𝒰}`$. Then we invert the sequence of quantum gates that implement this algorithm, that is we apply $`\widehat{𝒰}^{}`$. In the ideal case we would reconstruct the initial state, since $`\widehat{𝒰}^{}\widehat{𝒰}|\psi _0=|\psi _0`$. However, due to noise and imperfections, the initial state $`|\psi _0`$ is not exactly recovered. In particular, the first two qubits are no longer in a Bell state, and therefore their pairwise entanglement echo is reduced. Conversely, this pair of qubits becomes entangled with the other qubits, thus generating multipartite entanglement. In this paper, we study numerically the attenuation of the pairwise entanglement echo in a quantum computer implementing an efficient quantum algorithm which simulates quantum chaotic dynamics. We point out that the entanglement echo simulations discussed in the following are close in spirit to the spin echo experiments in many-body quantum systems in the presence of perturbations spinecho .

We study the entanglement echo for the quantum algorithm simulating the sawtooth map dynamics bcms01 . The sawtooth map is a periodically driven dynamical system, described by the Hamiltonian

$$H(\theta ,n,\tau )=\frac{n^2}{2}\frac{k(\theta \pi )^2}{2}\underset{j=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\delta (\tau jT),$$
(1)
where $`(n,\theta )`$ are conjugated action-angle variables ($`0\theta <2\pi `$). The time evolution $`\tau \tau +T`$ of this system is classically described by the map $`\overline{n}=n+k(\theta \pi )`$, and $`\overline{\theta }=\theta +T\overline{n}`$, where the bars denote the variables after one map iteration. By rescaling $`np=Tn`$, one can see that classical dynamics depends only on the parameter $`K=kT`$. The classical motion is stable for $`4K0`$ and completely chaotic for $`K<4`$ and $`K>0`$. The quantum evolution in one map iteration is described by the unitary operator $`\widehat{U}`$:

$$|\overline{\psi }=\widehat{U}|\psi =e^{iT\widehat{n}^2/2}e^{ik(\widehat{\theta }\pi )^2/2}|\psi ,$$
(2)
where $`\widehat{n}=i/\theta `$ (we set $`\mathrm{}=1`$). The classical limit is obtained by taking $`k\mathrm{}`$ and $`T0`$, keeping $`K=kT`$ constant. We study map (2) on the torus $`0\theta <2\pi `$, $`\pi p<\pi `$. With a $`n_q`$ qubits quantum computer, we can simulate the quantum dynamics of the sawtooth map with $`N=2^{n_q}`$ levels, and we set $`T=2\pi /N`$. The effective Planck’s constant of the quantum system is $`\mathrm{}_{\mathrm{eff}}1/N`$ and the classical limit corresponds to $`n_q\mathrm{}`$ ($`\mathrm{}_{\mathrm{eff}}0`$) bcms01 . We focus on the case $`K=5`$, which corresponds to the chaotic regime.

It is convenient to simulate map (2) by means of the forward-backward Fourier transform between $`\theta `$ and $`n`$ representations. While the classical fast Fourier transform requires $`O(N\mathrm{log}_2N)`$ operations, an efficient quantum algorithm has been found bcms01 , which uses the quantum Fourier transform and simulates (2) in $`O(n_q^2=(\mathrm{log}_2N)^2)`$ elementary quantum gates per map iteration. Moreover, all $`n_q`$ qubits are used in an optimal way, that is no extra work space qubits are required. In this way interesting physical phenomena, like dynamical localization bcms03 , cantori localization, and anomalous diffusion could be simulated already with less than $`10`$ qubits. Therefore the quantum sawtooth map represents an interesting testing ground for quantum computation, and it is important to understand the limits to the quantum computation of this model due to noise and imperfections.

To compute the entanglement echo, we start from the initial state

$$|\psi _0=|\mathrm{\Phi }_B|\chi =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|00+|11\right)|00\mathrm{}0$$
(3)
and we perform a forward evolution of the quantum sawtooth map (2) up to time $`t=t_r`$, that is $`\widehat{𝒰}=\widehat{U}^{t_r}`$ (the discrete time $`t=\tau /T`$ denotes the number of map iterations). Then we compute the time reversal evolution up to the echo time $`t_e=2t_r`$ (namely, $`\widehat{𝒰}^{}=(\widehat{U}^{})^{t_r}`$). Our algorithm can be decomposed into single-qubit Hadamard gates and two-qubit controlled-phase shift gates bcms01 . In particular, the Hadamard gate can be written as $`\widehat{𝐧}_H𝝈`$, where $`\widehat{𝐧}_H=(1/\sqrt{2},0,1/\sqrt{2})`$, and $`𝝈=(\sigma _x,\sigma _y,\sigma _z)`$, the $`\sigma _i`$’s being the Pauli matrices. Due to the imperfect control of the quantum system during the quantum computation, the initial state is not perfectly recovered. In this paper, we only deal with unitary errors, modeled by noisy gates. We assume that errors tilt the rotation axis $`\widehat{𝐧}_H`$ by an angle randomly fluctuating in the interval $`[ϵ,ϵ]`$. In the noisy controlled-phase shift gates, random phases of amplitude inside the interval $`[ϵ,ϵ]`$ are added. We assume that the errors affecting two consecutive quantum gates are completely uncorrelated.

Since we consider unitary errors, the state $`|\psi (t)`$ of the quantum computer at any time $`t`$ is still a pure state. By tracing $`|\psi (t)`$ over all the qubits, except those initially prepared in a Bell state, we obtain the reduced density matrix $`\rho _{12}(t)=\mathrm{Tr}_{3,\mathrm{},n_q}\left(|\psi (t)\psi (t)|\right)`$. Note that, in general, qubits $`1`$ and $`2`$ are no longer disentangled from the other qubits of the quantum computer, and therefore $`\rho _{12}`$ is a mixed state. We evaluate the entanglement of formation $`E(t)`$ of the state $`\rho _{12}`$ following Ref. wootters . First of all we compute the concurrence, defined as $`C=\mathrm{max}(\lambda _1\lambda _2\lambda _3\lambda _4,0)`$, where the $`\lambda _i`$’s are the square roots of the eigenvalues of the matrix $`R=\rho _{12}\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{12}`$, in decreasing order. Here $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{12}`$ is the spin flipped matrix of $`\rho _{12}`$, and it is defined by $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{12}=(\sigma _y\sigma _y)\rho _{12}^{}(\sigma _y\sigma _y)`$ (note that the complex conjugate is taken in the computational basis $`\{|00,|01,|10,|11\}`$). Once the concurrence has been computed, entanglement is obtained as $`E=h((1+\sqrt{1C^2})/2)`$, where $`h`$ is the binary entropy function: $`h(x)=x\mathrm{log}_2x(1x)\mathrm{log}_2(1x)`$. We also compute the Von Neumann entropy $`S(t)=\mathrm{Tr}[\rho _{12}(t)\mathrm{log}_2\rho _{12}(t)]`$ of the reduced density matrix $`\rho _{12}`$. This quantity measures the entanglement between the qubits $`1`$ and $`2`$ and the other $`n_q2`$ qubits of the quantum computer. In particular, we compute the entanglement echo $`E(t_e)`$ and the Von Neumann entropy $`S(t_e)`$ at the echo time $`t_e`$.

A typical numerical simulation of the entanglement echo is shown in Fig. 1. The upper part shows the behavior of the pairwise entanglement of the two qubits initially prepared in a Bell state; in the lower part we plot the Von Neumann entropy of this two-qubit subsystem. The dynamics completely destroys the initial pairwise entanglement, which is partially recovered only at the echo time $`t_e`$ notechaos . Instead, the Von Neumann entropy quickly reaches the saturation value. These results can be understood as follows: in few map iterations ($`t1`$), the chaotic dynamics transforms the initial state $`|\psi _0`$ into an ergodic state. We can expand the state $`|\psi (t)`$ at time $`t`$ over the computational basis: $`|\psi (t)=_{\alpha _1\mathrm{}\alpha _{n_q}}c_{\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _{n_q}}(t)|\alpha _1\mathrm{}\alpha _{n_q}`$, where $`\alpha _i=0,1`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},n_q`$. Since $`|\psi (t)`$ is ergodic, the coefficients $`c_{\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _{n_q}}(t)`$ have random phases and amplitudes $`|c_{\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _{n_q}}|1/\sqrt{N}`$ (to assure wave function normalization). For an ergodic system, the reduced density matrix of a two-qubit subsystem is essentially diagonal. Indeed, the diagonal matrix elements are given by $`(\rho _{12})_{\alpha _1,\alpha _2;\alpha _1,\alpha _2}=_{\alpha _3,\mathrm{},\alpha _{n_q}}|c_{\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _{n_q}}|^2`$, and their value is $`1/4`$, since they are given by the sum of $`N/4`$ positive terms, whose value is $`1/N`$. The off-diagonal matrix elements of $`\rho _{12}(t)`$ are instead given by the sum of $`N/4`$ terms of amplitude $`1/N`$ and random phases. Hence their value is $`O(1/\sqrt{N})`$. For such a nearly diagonal density matrix $`\rho _{12}(t)`$, the entanglement of formation can be analytically computed and we find that $`E=0`$. This means that chaotic dynamics quickly destroys the entanglement of any two-qubit subsystem, as shown in Fig. 1. Under the hypothesis that the wave function is ergodic, it is also possible to compute analytically the Von Neumann entropy $`S`$ of the qubits $`1`$ and $`2`$. After averaging over noise realizations, one has $`S28/(N\mathrm{ln}2)`$ page ; lakshminarayan , in good agreement with our numerical data. This value is close to the maximum possible entropy of the two-qubit subsystem, $`S_{\mathrm{max}}=2`$. It is interesting to note that it is possible to invert the quantum dynamics after long times (much longer than the times for relaxation to statistical equilibrium) and recover the initial out of equilibrium state. This is a clear demonstration of the stability of the quantum motion in contrast to the high instability of the classical chaotic motion casati .

We now focus on the stability of the entanglement echo at time $`t_e`$. The numerically computed entanglement echo and Von Neumann entropy at the echo time $`t_e`$ are shown, for different noise strengths, in Figs. 2 and 3, respectively. Fig. 2 shows that noisy gates attenuate the entanglement echo, and, if the time $`t_e`$ is long enough, completely destroy it. This can be explained by noticing that unitary errors transform the echo state into a state which becomes closer to an ergodic state, as $`t_e`$ increases. As we have seen above, an ergodic state of the whole quantum computer implies a pairwise entanglement $`E=0`$ lewenstein .

The decay of the entanglement echo can be understood by considering that each noisy gate transfers a probability of order $`ϵ^2`$ from the ideal state to all other states. Since there are no correlations between consecutive noisy gates, the population of the initial state decays exponentially, and we can write the echo state as follows:

$$|\psi (t_e)e^{Cϵ^2n_gt_e/2}|\psi _0+\underset{𝜶𝜶_A,𝜶_B}{}a_𝜶(t_e)|𝜶,$$
(4)
where $`C`$ is a constant to be determined numerically, $`n_gt_e`$ is the total number of gates required to perform the echo experiment ($`n_g=3n_q^2+n_q`$ being the number of gates per map iteration), and the sum runs over all the states $`|𝜶=|\alpha _1\mathrm{}\alpha _{n_q}`$ of the computational basis, except for the two states involved in the initial wave vector $`|\psi _0`$ ($`|𝜶_A=|000\mathrm{}0`$ and $`|𝜶_B=|110\mathrm{}0`$). Given the complexity of the dynamics simulated by the quantum algorithm for the sawtooth map, it is reasonable to assume that the coefficients $`a_𝜶`$ have random signs and amplitudes of the order of $`\sqrt{(1e^{Cϵ^2n_gt_e})/(N2)}`$ (to assure that $`|\psi (t_e)`$ has unit norm). We can compute the entanglement echo $`E(t_e)`$ from the expression (4) for the echo wave function. For $`ϵ^2n_gt_e1`$, it turns out that $`E(t_e)1(3/2\mathrm{ln}2)Cϵ^2n_gt_e`$. Therefore the entanglement echo is stable up to time $`t_e1/(ϵ^2n_g)1/(ϵ^2n_q^2)`$. This theoretical estimate is confirmed by Fig. 4, in which we plot the characteristic time scale $`t_e^{}`$ for the decay of the entanglement echo, defined by the condition $`E(t_e^{})=c`$ (we take $`c=0.9`$). It is clearly seen that $`t_e^{}n_q^2ϵ^2`$. Therefore noisy gates degrade the entanglement echo after a number $`n_e^{}`$ of elementary gates which is independent of the number of qubits ($`n_e^{}=n_gt_e^{}ϵ^2`$).

The Von Neumann entropy $`S(t_e)`$ of the reduced two-qubit subsystem at the echo time is shown in Fig. 3. It saturates, for sufficiently long echo times, to the value $`S_{\mathrm{}}28/(N\mathrm{ln}2)`$, as expected for an ergodic state of the quantum computer. We can compute the approach to equilibrium from Eq. (4), that gives $`S_{\mathrm{}}S(t_e)\mathrm{exp}(2Cϵ^2n_gt)`$. This theoretical prediction is borne out by our numerical data shown in Figs. 3-4. The inset of Fig. 3 shows that the approach to the asymptotic value is exponential. Indeed, we have $`S(t_e)S_{\mathrm{}}(1e^{\mathrm{\Gamma }t_e})`$. In Fig. 4 (inset) we plot the rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ for different number of qubits and perturbation strengths. We see that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }ϵ^2n_q^2`$.

It is interesting to compare the entanglement echo decay with the decay of the fidelity, which is the usual tool used to characterize the stability of quantum computation pazzurek ; bcms01 . The fidelity $`f`$ at time $`t_e`$ is defined as $`f(t_e)=|\psi (t_e)|\psi _0|^2`$, and Eq. (4) implies that $`f(t_e)\mathrm{exp}(Cϵ^2n_gt_e)`$. This is in agreement with our numerical data (not shown here). Therefore the decay of the fidelity, the entanglement echo and the approach to equilibrium for the reduced Von Neumann entropy take place in the same time scale $`1/(ϵ^2n_g)`$ footnote .

In summary, we have proposed a suitable method, the entanglement echo, to study the stability of entanglement under perturbations. We have shown that noise destroys the entanglement of a pair of qubits and produces entanglement between these two qubits and the other qubits of the quantum computer. We point out that, since the entanglement can be measured experimentally in an efficient way horodecki , entanglement echo experiments analogous to the numerical simulations discussed in this paper could be implemented in quantum processors with a small number of qubits (4-10) and a few hundreds of gates. These experiments are close to present capabilities NMR1 ; NMR2 ; ions  and would bring new insights in our understanding of the limits to quantum computation due to decoherence and imperfections.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work was supported in part by the EC contracts IST-FET EDIQIP and RTN QTRANS, the NSA and ARDA under ARO contract No. DAAD19-02-1-0086, and the PRIN 2002 “Fault tolerance, control and stability in quantum information processing”.


text:
# Direct Measurement of the 𝑔-Factor of Composite Fermions

(July 25, 2003)

## Abstract

The activation gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of the fractional quantum Hall states at constant fillings $`\nu =2/3`$ and $`2/5`$ has been measured as a function of the perpendicular magnetic field $`B`$. A linear dependence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ on $`B`$ is observed while approaching the spin polarization transition. This feature allows a direct measurement of the $`g`$-factor of composite fermions which appears to be heavily renormalized by interactions and strongly sensitive to the electronic filling factor.

In recent years the role of spin in the fractional quantum Hall (FQH) regime has been the subject of increasing interest. The ever improving mobility of the samples allows the observation of the FQH effect in the low magnetic field regime, where the typical energy scale associated to the electronic interactions competes with the Zeeman splitting and thereby mixes different spin channels. The early observations of a reentrant FQHE at various fillings Eisenstein89 ; Engel92 ; Du95  in a tilted field configuration were the first signs of spin polarization transitions in the ground state. Finally, FQH states with partial (or vanishing) spin polarization have been directly observed Kukushkin99 ; SmetNature , in contrast to the fully polarized nature of the states in the high field regime.

From a theoretical point of view our understanding of the FQHE has been deepened by the introduction of Composite Fermions (CF) Jain89 , quasiparticles made of one electron bound to an even number of magnetic flux quanta. Many experiments have confirmed the extreme versatility of CF in treating the collective nature of the FQH states in terms of almost-free quasiparticles. The issue of the effective mass of CF has attracted a lot of interest and several theoretical predictions have been made on it HLR93 ; JainKamilla ; Stern95 .

Much less has been said about the spin-related properties of CF. CF theory was extended at first time in 1993 to states which are not fully polarized Wu93 . The spin-polarization transitions of the FQH ground state have been the subject of numerical investigations Chak84 ; ParkJain98  prior to their experimental observations Kukushkin99 . However, a simultaneous direct measurement of the parameters entering the CF mass and $`g`$-factor is still essentially lacking.

A simple model of CF Landau levels with interaction-dependent cyclotron gap ($`\sqrt{B}`$) and Zeeman spin-splitting ($`B`$) is suitable to describe the main structure of the ground state spin-polarization transitions. The activation gap approaching the transition is essentially linear in $`B`$ with a slope depending *uniquely* on the CF $`g`$-factor (see Fig. 1 and the following text). Previous experimental analysis of the magnetic fields, where the spin-transition occurs, produced the filling factor-scaling of the product $`m^{}g`$ Du95 ; ErosAnn , with $`m^{}`$ the CF mass to be extracted from the high field activation gap. The information on the CF $`g`$-factor was therefore indirect.

In this paper we present an experimental analysis of the activation gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ at *constant* filling $`\nu =2/3`$ and $`\nu =2/5`$ in the *purely perpendicular field* configuration. In the CF picture, these two fractions are equivalent, and correspond to occupying the *two* lowest CF Landau levels. The sharp linear magnetic field scaling of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ while approaching the spin-polarization transition yields a *direct* measurement of the CF $`g`$-factor alone.

Composite Fermions Jain89  are introduced via the Chern-Simons gauge transformation on the many-electron wavefunction Books . The transformation depends only on the positions of the electrons and is equivalent to attaching an *even* number $`\varphi `$ of flux quanta $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0=h/e`$ to each particle, corresponding to an additional magnetic field $`b(\text{r})=\varphi \mathrm{\Phi }_0n_e(\text{r})`$ ($`n_e(\text{r})`$ the local electron density) opposite to the external one. CFs are then subject to an effective magnetic field $`B^{}(\text{r})=Bb(\text{r})`$ that vanishes for $`\nu n_e\varphi _0/B=1/\varphi `$, on the spatial average (mean field approximation). Near this filling factor the cancellation is not exact. The residual $`B^{}=B(1\varphi \nu )`$ yields CF Landau levels with an effective cyclotron energy $`\mathrm{}eB^{}/m_\mathrm{b}`$ ($`m_\mathrm{b}`$ the electron band mass) and with a CF filling factor $`p=n_e\varphi _0/B^{}`$. The electronic and CF fillings are related by $`\nu =p/(\varphi p\pm 1)`$ which allows the mean-field mapping of the principal sequence of the electronic FQH states into integer QHE of CF. In the following we will consider states around half filling of the lowest Landau level, thereby choosing $`\varphi =2`$.

In the non-fully spin-polarized case it has been shown that an independent flux-attachment for the two spin channels produces the correct principal sequence of FQH states at $`\nu =(p_{}+p_{})/2[(p_{}+p_{})\pm 1]`$ ($`p_/`$ the numbers of filled spin-up/down CF Landau levels and $`p=p_{}+p_{}`$) Lopez95 ; Mandal96 . At mean field we have equal cyclotron gaps for the two spin channels.

The mean field assumption has the problem of generating the energy gaps scaling incorrectly. The dimensional analysis of the spinless case by Halperin, Lee and Read HLR93  yields an activation cyclotron gap at fixed $`p`$,

$$\mathrm{}\omega _\mathrm{c}^{}\frac{1}{2p\pm 1}\frac{e^2}{\epsilon l},$$
(1)
since the Coulomb term $`e^2/\epsilon l`$ ($`51\sqrt{B[\mathrm{T}]}\mathrm{K}`$) is the only relevant energy scale for electrons in the lowest Landau level, with the dielectric constant $`\epsilon `$ ($`12.8`$ for GaAs) and $`l=\left(\mathrm{}/eB\right)^{1/2}`$ the magnetic length. The scaling law (1) has been confirmed analytically in the large-$`p`$ limit Stern95  and by numerical diagonalization of small 2D systems on a sphere Morf89 . Equation (1) can be obtained by assuming an effective CF mass $`m^{}\sqrt{B}`$ HLR93 ; JainKamilla  with the activation gap as the smallest energy needed to excite a CF from the ground state into the first unoccupied CF Landau level.

Estimates for the magnitudes of the resulting energy gaps have been obtained without taking into account disorder, finite thickness of the sample and Landau level-mixing. Thus, in experiments typically smaller gaps than the theoretically predicted ones are observed Boebinger85 ; Du93 . In order to discuss the results of our experiments, we introduce the dimensionless parameter $`\alpha `$ via $`m^{}/m_0=\alpha \sqrt{B/\mathrm{Tesla}}`$ ($`m_0`$ the electron mass in vacuum). The considerations above suggest the following form of the effective cyclotron gap at CF-filling $`p`$

$$\mathrm{}\omega _\mathrm{c}^{}(p,B)=\frac{\mathrm{}eB^{}}{m^{}}=\frac{\mathrm{}eB}{m^{}(2p\pm 1)},$$
(2)
consistent with recent numerical investigations mj01 .

The Chern-Simons transformation does not couple to the electronic spin degree of freedom. Therefore the Zeeman term can easily be included and it depends only on $`B`$. Thus,

$$E_{nps}(B)=\left(n+\frac{1}{2}\right)\mathrm{}\omega _\mathrm{c}^{}(p,B)+sg\mu _\mathrm{B}B$$
(3)
are the energies of spin-up/down ($`s=\pm 1/2`$) CF Landau levels with $`\mu _\mathrm{B}=\mathrm{}e/2m_0=0.67\mathrm{K}/\mathrm{T}`$ (see Fig. 1).

The zero-temperature ground state at a given $`B`$ is obtained by occupying the lowest $`p`$ CF Landau levels. The corresponding spin polarization is $`\gamma (B)=[p_{}(B)p_{}(B)]/p`$. Due to the different $`B`$-scaling of the cyclotron and Zeeman terms in (3), CF Landau levels with opposite spins cross. The transitions between differently polarized ground states are then given by the crossings between CF Landau levels at the Fermi energy. For example, the critical magnetic field $`B_\mathrm{c}`$ at which the transition to the completely spin-polarized ground state takes place is obtained as the crossing point between the $`(n=0,s=)`$ and the $`(n=p1,s=)`$ CF Landau levels. It can be expressed in terms of the parameter $`\alpha `$ as

$$B_\mathrm{c}(p)=\left[\frac{2(p1)}{|g|\alpha (2p\pm 1)}\right]^2$$
(4)
in Tesla. From the measurement of $`B_\mathrm{c}`$ we can therefore extract the product $`|g|\alpha `$. If we linearize the $`B`$ dependence of $`E_{nps}(B)`$ near the crossing we can define the ”slope” $`S_{nps}(B)=_BE_{nps}(B)`$. It is then easy to check that

$$\left|S_{np}(B_{nn^{}})S_{n^{}p}(B_{nn^{}})\right|_B\mathrm{\Delta }|_{B_{nn^{}}}=\frac{1}{2}\left|g\right|\mu _\mathrm{B},$$
(5)
with $`B_{nn^{}}`$ the magnetic field where the two levels $`E_{np}`$ and $`E_{n^{}p}`$ cross. The energy gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ approaching the transition is therefore linear and its slope (5) *uniquely* depends on the CF $`g`$-factor. Moreover, the relative slopes of the two CF Landau levels at the crossing is the same for all the possible crossings at a given filling factor. Thus, a measurement of the linear gap while approaching the spin-transition *directly* yields the CF $`g`$-factor and the value of the critical field $`B_\mathrm{c}`$ finally determines the effective mass parameter $`\alpha `$.

The model above neglects CF-CF interactions which become relevant *very close* to the spin-polarization transition. They are responsible for the fascinating partly-polarized state occurring in the middle of the transition Kukushkin99 ; Murthy00 . The typical energy scale involved in the formation of this state is $`\delta 0.2\mathrm{K}`$, so that the gap-linearization is suitable for energies typically larger than $`\delta `$, as we have in our measurements.

In what follows we will concentrate on the activation gap measurement for fixed $`\nu =2/3`$ and $`2/5`$ (i.e. $`p=2`$) and deduce the CF $`g`$-factor in consistence with the depicted model.

Many activation measurements around the spin-polarization transitions were made in a tilted field geometry Eisenstein89 ; Engel92 ; Du95 . The consequent in-plane field couples to the finite thickness of the 2DES, modifying the effective 2D Coulomb interaction Haug87  and thereby affecting the mass parameter $`\alpha `$. In our measurement the magnetic field is *purely perpendicular*. We believe this geometry allows a cleaner determination of the CF parameters.

The two-dimensional electron system used in our experiments was realized in an AlGaAs/GaAs-heterostructure and the carrier density was modulated by illumination. The base carrier density and mobility are $`n_e=0.8910^{15}\mathrm{m}^2`$ and $`\mu _e=102\mathrm{m}^2/\mathrm{Vs}`$. With maximal illumination $`n_e=1.5010^{15}\mathrm{m}^2`$ and $`\mu _e=193\mathrm{m}^2/\mathrm{Vs}`$ are achieved. The sample was patterned into a long meandering bar with length $`l=10`$ mm and width $`w=90\mu `$m. The large aspect ratio $`l/w=111`$ allows to measure small resistance changes at the resistance minima. Contacts to the bar were realized by standard Au/Ge/Ni alloy annealing, yielding negligible contact resistances $`R_\mathrm{c}<10\mathrm{\Omega }`$.

The sample is mounted onto the cold finger of a He3/He4 dilution refrigerator and is placed at the center of a superconducting solenoid capable of producing fields up to $`B=13`$T. An infrared LED allows to change the carrier density $`n_e`$ using the persistent photoconductivity. From the two-point resistance $`R_{2\mathrm{p}}`$ we calculate the longitudinal resistivity $`\rho _{\mathrm{xx}}=\left(R_{2\mathrm{p}}R_\mathrm{H}\right)w/l`$ with $`1/R_\mathrm{H}=\nu e^2/h`$ at integer and fractional filling factors $`\nu `$. Starting with the unilluminated sample with lowest carrier density, we change $`n_e`$ stepwise by illumination at zero magnetic field. Monitoring the resistance during the illumination allows a good control of the increase in $`n_e`$. For different $`n_e`$ we measure the resistivity $`\rho _{\mathrm{xx}}`$ as function of the magnetic field $`B`$, which allows to determine carrier density and mobility. Figure 2 shows $`\rho _{\mathrm{xx}}`$ for the smallest and largest density.

For each density we measured the temperature dependence of the resistivity $`\rho _{\mathrm{xx}}(T)`$ while fixing the magnetic field corresponding to filling factors $`\nu =2/3`$ and $`2/5`$. The result is shown in Fig. 3. As expected for these fractional filling factors we observe activated transport $`\rho _{\mathrm{xx}}\mathrm{exp}\left(\mathrm{\Delta }/2T\right)`$ with $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ the activation gap. From the fits to this equation, shown as solid lines in Fig. 3, we extract $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ at $`\nu =2/3`$ and $`\nu =2/5`$ for different densities resp. magnetic fields.

The dependence of the activation gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }(B)`$ on the magnetic field is shown in Fig. 4.

A remarkably linear behaviour is observed over a large magnetic field range, in agreement with the theoretical expectation. Here we want to point out that activation gaps measured by transport are typically reduced by disorder. However, as this effect is expected to be only weakly depending on $`B`$ the measured $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{transport}}`$ (see Fig. 1) differs from $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ only by a constant. Therefore the *slope* $`_B\mathrm{\Delta }(B)`$ is essentially *the same*. From the slope $`_B\mathrm{\Delta }(B)`$ in formula (5) we extract the CF $`g`$-factor. Our measurement yields $`|g_{2/5}|=0.92`$ and $`|g_{2/3}|=2.80`$.

Two important considerations come out. First, the value of $`g`$ indicates a strong renormalization due to interactions (the bulk $`g`$-factor for GaAs being $`0.44`$). Second, the CF $`g`$-factor depends *strongly* on the *electronic* filling factor. In fact, although both the two fractions $`\nu =2/3`$ and $`2/5`$ are mapped into the same CF-filling $`p=2`$ (symmetrically with respect to $`\nu =1/2`$) their $`g`$-factors differ by more than a factor 3.

The determination of the slope $`_B\mathrm{\Delta }(B)`$ yields a precious experimental information since it is essentially unaffected by disorder-broadening of the CF Landau levels. On the contrary, the activation measurement is not extremely accurate for the determination of the critical field $`B_\mathrm{c}`$, since disorder tends to ”close the gap” before the spin-polarization transition occurs.

Since our CF form around $`\nu =1/2`$ it is interesting to estimate $`g_{1/2}`$. From a linear interpolation of our measurement depicted in the inset of Fig. 4 we obtain $`|g_{1/2}|=1.65`$, in excellent agreement with the data by Kukushkin Kukushkin99  which yield $`|g_{1/2}|=1.6`$ when using their $`\alpha 0.2`$ (see ErosAnn  for details). In contrast, NMR experiments in *tilted fields* found $`|g_{1/2}|0.39`$ Freytag02 . The $`g`$-factor measured in the NMR experiments seems to be roughly consistent with the bare $`g`$-factor of 2D electrons in GaAs, whereas our measured $`g`$-value seem to be related to the exchange enhanced electronic $`g`$-factor. For the exchange enhanced electronic $`g`$-factor a linear scaling with filling factor is expected from theory AFS .

Using this linearization of the $`g`$ vs. $`\nu `$ dependence, we could extrapolate to get $`|g_{\nu =1}|=5.2`$, which would be roughly consistent with the experimental results of the exchange enhanced electronic $`g`$-factor at $`\nu `$ =1 Nicholas88 . In the small $`\nu `$ regime ($`\nu <1/3`$) we should be more careful since the range of the four-flux CF ($`\varphi =4`$) would be explored with the relative (probably different) $`g`$-factor.

In conclusion, we performed a *direct* measurement of the CF $`g`$-factor for $`\nu =2/5`$ and $`2/3`$. Although the two fractions are *equivalent* in the CF picture, their $`g`$-factor is significantly different, showing interaction-renormalization and a strong dependence on the *electronic* filling factor $`\nu `$.

We acknowledge discussions with Bernhard Kramer. The sample was grown by D. Reuter and A. D. Wieck at the University of Bochum. We acknowledge financial support by BMBF, TMR and DFG.


text:
# Possibilities for Measurement and Compensation of Stray DC Electric Fields Acting on Drag-Free Test Masses

## 1 INTRODUCTION

In the envisioned design of the gravitational wave mission LISA, capacitive sensors will provide the readout of the relative position of the satellites with respect to the freely flying test masses, which serve both as interferometry end mirrors and drag-free orbit references (Bender, 2000). A drawback of electrostatic sensors is that the combined needs of high precision ($``$ nm$`/\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}}`$) and low electrostatic force gradients require a small distance (or gap, $`d`$) between the test mass and sensing electrodes. This need for proximity, introduces a number of less easily characterized short range force effects, electrostatic and otherwise, which grow with decreasing gap and can dominate the low frequency test mass acceleration noise. An important example is DC electric fields, which produce both force gradients (or “stiffness”) increasing as $`d^3`$ and, coupled with charging and dielectric noise, force noise proportional to, respectively, $`d^1`$ and $`d^{3/2}`$. Though the current sensor design for the European LISA demonstrator flight experiment LTP (Vitale, 2002), calls for relatively large 4 mm gaps along the sensitive x axis111The test masses in both LISA and LTP have a single preferred measurement axis, referred to here as x, in which it is essential to minimize the stray force disturbance. in order to limit these short range effects (Weber, 2002), DC fields are still expected to be a significant noise source.

Stray DC fields, related to spatially varying DC surface potentials known as patch fields, can arise from the different work function of domains exposing different crystalline facets. These fields statistically average over the small grains, which for gold surfaces can be micron size and produce RMS surface potential variations of order 1 mV on mm length scales (Camp, 1992). These are not likely to be a significant problem for the designed sensor, shown schematically in Fig. 1, where 4 mm x axis gaps provide distance for the fields and gradients to fall off, as well as an effective dilution of the smaller length scale variations (Speake, 1996). Potentially more dangerous are patch fields with relatively large coherence lengths, caused by surface contamination from the assembly and from material outgassing over a long mission. Noise models have assumed typical average whole electrode DC biases $`\delta V`$ of order 100 mV (Weber, 2002).

Electrostatic actuation circuitry, to be integrated with the sensor for application of forces using audio frequency modulated voltages, will also allow direct application of DC voltages to the sensing electrodes. We analyze here, as a way to reduce the total acceleration noise caused by stray DC biases, the use of applied actuation voltages to first measure the average biases and then compensate to make the average DC potential zero. The electrostatic model considered here considers each electrode electrode at a single potential, without spatial variation. This much simplified analysis addresses what we can actually change with a single applied voltage per electrode, the average DC potential. This approach is still relevant, as the likely dominant effect, the interaction of DC fields with the noisy test mass charge, is realistically parametrized, and thus curable, by the average DC potential on the electrodes. We start with a description of the noise sources related to stray DC biases, then turn to the techniques for measuring and balancing them, both in flight and on the ground.

## 2 NATURE OF THE PROBLEM: NOISY FORCES ARISING FROM DC FIELDS

We analyze here the simplified model of the sensor in Fig. 2. Four x sensing electrodes, opposing pairs 1A/1B and 2A/2B, face the test mass along the x axis. Functionally, differential measurements of the two capacitor pairs are combined to yield the test mass x translational and $`\varphi `$ rotational displacements (Weber, 2002). Assigning electrode potentials $`V_j`$ and an accumulated test mass charge $`q`$, the instantaneous x force component $`F_x`$ and test mass potential $`V_M`$ can be expressed

$`F_x`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{C_i}{x}}\left(V_iV_M\right)^2`$ (1)
$`V_M`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{q}{C_T}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{C_T}}{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}C_jV_j`$ (2)
$`C_T`$ is the total capacitance of the test mass to all other surfaces. We sum here over all sensor conducting surfaces, $`i`$, but also note that $`\frac{C_i}{x}`$ will have non-zero contributions only from the 4 x sensing electrodes and, when the mass is translated off center in x, from grounded guard ring surfaces (see Fig. 1).

While the x electrodes will nominally be held at DC ground by the sensing / actuation circuitry (Weber, 2002), we consider here for each a non-zero $`V_i`$ caused by the sum of a stray DC bias $`\delta V_i`$ and a thermal noise voltage $`v_{ni}`$ (later, we will consider the possibility of compensating $`\delta V_i`$ with an added applied DC bias, $`V_{ai}`$). Noisy low frequency forces along x arise in the interaction between $`\delta V_i`$ and low frequency fluctuations in $`q`$ and $`v_{ni}`$. The charge $`q`$ accumulated from cosmic ray events evolves in a random walk process, with an estimated effective step rate of $`\lambda _{eff}260`$ $`e`$/s (Araújo, 2002), producing a “red” charge spectral density $`S_Q^{1/2}=\frac{e}{\omega }\sqrt{2\lambda _{eff}}`$. The thermal noise $`v_{ni}`$, originating in lossy dielectric layers on the electrode and test mass surfaces, is characterized by loss angle, $`\delta `$, assumed here to be of order 10-5 for Au coated surfaces (Speake, 1999), with spectral density $`S_{v_n}^{1/2}=\sqrt{4k_BT\frac{\delta }{\omega C_x}}`$.

In evaluating Eqns. 1 and 2 for the force disturbance, we define the nominal (test mass centered) capacitances and first derivatives, $`C_x`$ and $`\pm \frac{C_x}{d_x}`$ (neglecting edge effects, $`d_x`$ is the electrode - test mass gap). Substituting $`\delta V_i`$, $`q`$, and $`v_{ni}`$ into Eq. 1, we evaluate the leading order force, and resulting acceleration noise spectral density $`S_a^{1/2}`$, caused by the charge noise:

$`F_x`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{q}{C_T}}{\displaystyle \frac{C_x}{d_x}}\mathrm{\Delta }_x`$ (3)
$`S_{a_{charge}}^{1/2}`$ $``$ $`7\times 10^{15}\mathrm{m}/\mathrm{s}^2/\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}}\times \left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_x}{\sqrt{4}\times 100\mathrm{mV}}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _{eff}}{260/\mathrm{s}}}\right)^{1/2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{0.1\mathrm{mHz}}{f}}\right),`$ (4)
where we define $`\mathrm{\Delta }_x\left(\delta V_{1B}+\delta V_{2B}\delta V_{1A}\delta V_{2A}\right)`$. For the dielectric loss noise:

$`F_x`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{C_i}{x}}v_{ni}\left(\delta V_i{\displaystyle \frac{q}{C_T}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{C_T}}{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}\delta V_jC_j\right)`$ (5)
$`S_{a_{diel}}^{1/2}`$ $``$ $`5\times 10^{16}\mathrm{m}/\mathrm{s}^2/\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}}\times \left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta V}{100\mathrm{mV}}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{10^5}}\right)^{1/2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{0.1\mathrm{mHz}}{f}}\right)^{1/2}`$ (6)
To estimate a number for $`S_{a_{diel}}^{1/2}`$, we use $`q=_jC_j\delta V_j=0`$.

The random charging produces a coherent disturbance multiplied by the average difference of DC potential seen on either side of the test mass, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_x`$. This is true, neglecting edge effects, independently of the details of the surface potential distribution. On the other hand, no such averaging occurs in the “beating” of the DC voltages against the dielectric loss thermal noise, which will be uncorrelated between electrodes.

The acceleration noise target for LISA is $`3\times 10^{15}`$ m/s2$`/\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}}`$, so the random charge noise in Eq. 4 is potentially performance-spoiling at .1 mHz, the nominal low end of the LISA measurement band and has an increasingly dominant effect with decreasing frequency, where there is growing scientific interest to extend the gravitational wave measurement band (Bender, 2002). The dielectric loss effect looks less threatening, but is difficult to estimate of the contamination dependence of the loss angle $`\delta `$. With DC voltages thus problematic at the 100 mV level, the effects described in Eqns. 4 and 6 illustrate the importance of AC carrier voltages, rather than DC, in applying the necessary DC and low frequency actuation forces, which demand RMS levels of several volts (Weber, 2002).

## 3 MEASUREMENT OF DC BIASES

There are a number of ways to measure the stray DC electrode biases. Here we present one measurement in detail, illustrated in Fig. 2 and (a) in Fig. 3, and mention several other, (b)-(e) in Fig. 3. In configuration (a), a sinusoidal signal $`V_\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{sin}\omega _0t`$ applied to the four z sensing electrodes makes the test mass potential oscillate with amplitude $`\frac{4C_z}{C_T}V_\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha V_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ ($`\alpha .1`$ for the sensor design in Fig. 1). The modulating test mass bias simulates, from the standpoint of forces in the $`xy`$-plane, an oscillating test mass charge.

In expanding Eqns. 1 and 2 to first order in displacement for the force $`F_x`$ (and an analogous equation for the torque $`N_\varphi `$), we make use of the second derivative $`\frac{^2C_x}{x^2}+\frac{2C_x}{d_x^2}`$, as well as the derivatives involving the mass rotation $`\varphi `$, $`\frac{C_x}{\varphi }\pm C_x\frac{R_\varphi }{d_x}`$, $`\frac{^2C_x}{\varphi ^2}+\frac{2C_xR_{2\varphi }^2}{d_x^2}`$, and $`\frac{^2C_x}{x\varphi }\pm \frac{2C_xR_\varphi }{d_x^2}`$ ($`R_\varphi `$ is half the on-center electrode separation, neglecting edge effects, and $`R_{2\varphi }`$ has roughly the same magnitude). The force and torque 222For simplicity, in the torque formulae (Eqs. 9 and 10), we omit the role of the y electrodes, which in this model would affect only the $`\varphi `$ stiffness. produced at the first and second harmonic of the voltage modulation frequency $`\omega _0`$ are given by

$`F_{1\omega _0}`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha V_\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{sin}\omega _0t\left\{\mathrm{\Delta }_x{\displaystyle \frac{C_x}{d_x}}+\left[\left(4V_{M0}\mathrm{\Sigma }_x\right){\displaystyle \frac{2C_x}{d_x^2}}+V_{M0}{\displaystyle \frac{^2C_g}{x^2}}\right]x{\displaystyle \frac{2C_xR_\varphi }{d_x^2}}\mathrm{\Delta }_{12}\varphi \right\}`$ (7)
$`F_{2\omega _0}`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha ^2V_\mathrm{\Delta }^2\mathrm{cos}2\omega _0t\left({\displaystyle \frac{2C_x}{d_x^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{^2C_g}{x^2}}\right)x`$ (8)
$`N_{1\omega _0}`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha V_\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{sin}\omega _0t\left\{\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi {\displaystyle \frac{C_xR_\varphi }{d_x}}+\left[\left(4V_{M0}\mathrm{\Sigma }_x\right){\displaystyle \frac{2C_xR_{2\varphi }^2}{d_x^2}}+V_{M0}{\displaystyle \frac{^2C_g}{\varphi ^2}}\right]\varphi \mathrm{\Delta }_{12}{\displaystyle \frac{2C_x}{d_x}}x\right\}`$ (9)
$`N_{2\omega _0}`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha ^2V_\mathrm{\Delta }^2\mathrm{cos}2\omega _0t\left({\displaystyle \frac{2C_xR_{2\varphi }^2}{d_x^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{^2C_g}{\varphi ^2}}\right)\varphi `$ (10)
For convenience we have defined the combined stray DC biases $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi \left(\delta V_{1A}+\delta V_{2B}\delta V_{2A}\delta V_{1B}\right)`$,$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{12}\left(\delta V_{2A}+\delta V_{2B}\delta V_{1A}\delta V_{1B}\right)`$, and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_x\left(\delta V_{1A}+\delta V_{1B}+\delta V_{2A}+\delta V_{2B}\right)`$. We also make use of the test mass potential when centered in the absence of any applied fields, $`V_{M0}\frac{q}{C_T}+\frac{_j\delta V_jC_{j0}}{C_T}`$.

The 2$`\omega _0`$ terms, in Eqns. 8 and 10 are pure “stiffness,” or position dependent, terms related only to the applied bias. The test mass can be positioned to make the 2$`\omega _0`$ force signal disappear, which centers the mass to then eliminate the stiffness terms in the 1$`\omega _0`$ force and torque terms, making the measurement independent of $`V_{M0}`$ (and charge). The self-calibrating location of the “force zero” with the 2$`\omega _0`$ force signals is useful because the force zero (roughly speaking, where the *capacitance derivatives* are equal) will not, due to machining imperfections and asymmetries, coincide exactly with the sensor readout zero, where the *capacitances* themselves are equal. With the test mass centered, the remaining x force is thus a 1$`\omega _0`$ signal cleanly proportional to the differential bias $`\mathrm{\Delta }_x`$ of relevance to the random charging force noise. Likewise, a null measurement test is possible after compensation voltages are applied.

In principle, the forces and torques detectable in Eqns. 7 \- 10 offer all the information measurable for the average electrode DC biases and test mass charge. $`\mathrm{\Delta }_x`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi `$ are the main 1$`\omega _0`$ signals in force and torque, with $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{12}`$ and $`\left(\mathrm{\Sigma }_x4V_{M0}\right)`$ entering in the stiffness and thus measurable in the position dependence of the signals. These quantities can, however, be measured better individually, with the test mass centered, using opportune modulation of the channel 1 and 2 actuation voltages. Four symmetric schemes, which permit the 2$`\omega _0`$ centering procedure and together give a complete average DC bias characterization by measurement of the 1$`\omega _0`$ force terms, are illustrated schematically in Fig. 3 (b) - (e).

It is worthwhile commenting here on the applicability of this simplified model, given the realistic spatial fluctuations present in electrode surface potentials. If we considered x electrodes divided into many surface domains, each with a different bias $`\delta V_i`$ but all still a distance $`d_x`$ from the test mass, and apply the configuration (a) $`V_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ bias, the centering process with the 2$`\omega _0`$ signal would be unchanged and, neglecting edge effects, the resulting 1$`\omega _0`$ force would still give the average potential difference $`\mathrm{\Delta }_x`$. If we also included variations in the “grounded” guard ring potential, the effective average potential $`\mathrm{\Delta }_x`$ relevant to the detected force would then also average over the guard rings stray bias distribution. Importantly, however, the applied biases $`V_{ai}`$ that null the force signal in this measurement will also null the effect of random charge on the test mass, including all stray DC fields biases generated inside (and even outside) the sensor.

The torques do not generalize as easily from the simple “one voltage per electrode” picture to spatially variable potentials, because the average potential of relevance to the torques is weighted by an effective arm length, or distance from the rotation axis. Thus, to balance the average electrode potentials relevant to the x force noise, the additional differential bias potentials are best measured by the x forces excited by the bias configurations in Fig. 3. The configurations using the x electrodes themselves for biasing are sensitive to the biases on those electrodes, much less so to any guard ring patch effects. Combining the measured $`\mathrm{\Delta }_x`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi `$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{12}`$, and $`\left(4V_{M0}\mathrm{\Sigma }_x\right)`$ allows calculation of the potentials $`V_{ai}`$ needed to null the detected forces and thus to bring all four sensing electrodes near to the test mass potential.

This procedure can be repeated for electrodes on the y and z faces. We finally note that the charge measurement configurations, such as (c) in Fig. 3, measure not just the charge but $`\left(4V_{M0}\mathrm{\Sigma }_x\right)`$ and thus will depend quantitatively on how well the surrounding DC biases are balanced.

## 4 IN-FLIGHT DETECTION AND BALANCING

In flight, the forces and torques described above can be detected by the position sensor signal itself. Both on LISA and LTP, a low frequency electrostatic suspension mode will be used to control the test mass non-drag-free degrees of freedom, and can also be applied on the sensitive x axis to make this measurement (Bortoluzzi, 2002). The suspension will have high gain at low frequencies to counteract DC forces and very low gain in the measurement band, such that, for forces applied at mHz frequencies, the test mass dynamics is roughly that of a free particle, with displacement $`x\frac{f}{m\omega ^2}`$. For a 1 mHz modulation of $`V_\mathrm{\Delta }=1V`$ (and thus roughly 100 mV test mass bias amplitude), the displacement would be of order 40 nm if $`\mathrm{\Delta }_x`$ $``$ 100 mV.

The measurement resolution will likely be dominated by sensor noise and residual spacecraft motion, rather than the force noise acting on the test mass. For the LTP experiment, the goal for this total position noise is 5 nm$`/\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}}`$(Bortoluzzi, 2002). The resulting resolution of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_x`$ in integration time $`T`$ is then

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_x\right)\frac{1}{\left|\frac{F}{\mathrm{\Delta }_x}\right|}\frac{\sqrt{2}m\omega _0^2S_{x_n}^{1/2}}{\sqrt{T}}350\mu \mathrm{V}\times \left(\frac{1\mathrm{hr}}{T}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{1\mathrm{V}}{V_\mathrm{\Delta }}\right)\left(\frac{S_{x_n}^{1/2}}{5\mathrm{nm}/\mathrm{Hz}^{1/2}}\right)\left(\frac{\omega _0}{2\pi \times 1\mathrm{mHz}}\right)^2$$
(11)
A one hour experiment could thus allow sub-mV resolution of the stray DC bias difference $`\mathrm{\Delta }_x`$. The resolution limit in the balancing of the applied biases will be limited, for LTP, to the 1 mV level by the envisioned 16 bit, $`\pm `$ 40 V full scale actuation DA converter and amplifier (Vitale, 2002). Any instability in the balancing voltage will multiply this residual mV level voltage to produce a noisy force, but the projected actuation voltage stability, of order $`10^6`$$`/\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}}`$, makes this a neglible source of force noise (Vitale, 2002). Note that balancing of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_x`$ to the mV level would reduce the acceleration noise caused by random charging below the .1 fm/s2$`/\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}}`$ level at .1 mHz, and thus well below the LISA target acceleration noise.

## 5 TORSION PENDULUM GROUND TESTING

Current ground based measurement programs will use torsion pendulums to characterize weak forces and force gradients of relevance to drag-free control (Hueller, 2002). Suspending a test mass as the pendulum inertial member, surrounded by a LISA or LTP prototype sensor, permits sensitive, high isolation, low restoring force measurements for a single torsional degree of freedom. A pendulum comprised of a single test mass suspended on axis with the torsion fiber is sensitive to torques, while a pendulum with a test mass held off the rotation axis will convert translational forces into measurable pendulum angular deflections.

With the single mass configuration, the rotational DC bias imbalance $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi `$ can be measured using a z electrode bias $`V_\mathrm{\Delta }`$, with the torque (see Eq. 9) detected in the pendulum deflection. The measurement resolution will likely be limited by the mechanical torque noise acting on the pendulum, $`S_N^{1/2}`$,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi \right)\frac{1}{\left|\frac{N}{\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi }\right|}\frac{\sqrt{2}S_N^{1/2}}{\sqrt{T}}400\mu \mathrm{V}\times \left(\frac{1\mathrm{hr}}{T}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{1\mathrm{V}}{V_\mathrm{\Delta }}\right)\left(\frac{S_{N_n}^{1/2}}{5\mathrm{fN}\mathrm{m}/\mathrm{Hz}^{1/2}}\right)$$
(12)
Here, 5 fN m$`/\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}}`$ refers to the expected 1 mHz thermal torque noise limit for the designed one mass pendulum (Hueller, 2002). Higher torque noise would necessitate an increased $`V_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ to maintain this resolution.

The torsion pendulum measurement has several possible systematic errors. Because the pendulum is relatively insensitive to purely translational forces, there will not be a 2$`\omega _0`$ force signal to center in x. Centering in x will thus depend on the sensor translational readout zero, which could differ from the force zero by order 10 $`\mu `$m, set by the sensor machining tolerances (Vitale, 2002). The offset in x means the x stiffness term in Eq. 9 will not vanish, producing, for $`\left|\mathrm{\Delta }_{12}\right|`$ 200 mV, a systematic error of roughly 1 mV in the measurement of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi `$. Another error enters in the finite “twist-tilt” feedthrough (Smith, 1999) that can couple the electrostatic force, proportional to $`\mathrm{\Delta }_x`$, into the measured torsional rotation. However, assuming that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi `$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_x`$ are of the same order of magnitude, the ratio between the excited pendulum swing angle and the torsional twist angle will be of order 10-6, giving an immeasurably small effect for typical values of twist-tilt coupling. Thus, measurement and balancing of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\varphi `$ looks feasible at the mV level with the torsion pendulum and could provide a valuable ground test of the compensation technique suggested here.

## 6 CONCLUSION

The true magnitude and long term stability of the stray DC potentials for LISA will not be known until the actual flight experiment begins. However, the average fields are measurable and can be balanced. Compensating the average stray electrode biases should be quite effective in cancelling a potentially large random charging noise source, where balancing the average potential seen on either side of the test mass should null the force from a deposited charge. For the lossy dielectric noise, however, which itself could be spatially dependent, the average potential alone may not adequately characterize the phenomena, and the success of the compensation in reducing this source of acceleration noise will depend on the extent to which the thermal noise causes the “patches” across an entire electrode to fluctuate in unison.

## 7 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to acknowledge Peter Bender for bringing the the random charging problem, and its possible compensation, to our attention.

## 8

Corresponding author: W. J. Weber, *weber@science.unitn.it*