text:
# Nondestructive readout for a superconducting flux qubit

## Abstract

We present a new readout method for a superconducting flux qubit, based on the measurement of the Josephson inductance of a superconducting quantum interference device that is inductively coupled to the qubit. The intrinsic flux detection efficiency and back-action are suitable for a fast and nondestructive determination of the quantum state of the qubit, as needed for readout of multiple qubits in a quantum computer. We performed spectroscopy of a flux qubit and we measured relaxation times of the order of 80 $`\mu s`$.

Suitably designed superconducting circuits, based on Josephson junctions, behave as quantum two level systems. Due to scalability and flexibility in their design parameters, they are promising candidates for quantum bits (or qubits), which are the basic units in a quantum information processor Nielsen and Chuang (2000). In such circuits, coherent evolution for single qubits was observed Nakamura et al. (1999); Vion et al. (2002); Yu et al. (2002); Martinis et al. (2002); Chiorescu et al. (2003); Duty et al. (2004), and a conditional gate for two qubits was demonstrated Yamamoto et al. (2003).

Flux qubits consist of a superconducting loop interrupted by one or more Josephson junctions. The basis states have opposite persistent current. The quantum state can be read out by measuring the generated magnetic flux, using a DC superconducting quantum interference device (DC-SQUID). The critical current of the SQUID depends on this flux and is usually measured by determining the maximum supercurrent, where the device switches to a finite voltage. When the SQUID is in this voltage state it generates quasiparticles that later recombine with a burst of energy. It also radiates strong high frequency signals into the whole circuit with, in future, multiple qubits and readout devices. Inevitably, significant quantum information is destroyed apart from the consequence of reading out one qubit. In contrast, we now measured the SQUID critical current by determining the Josephson inductance, without dissipation in the SQUID system. In this Letter, we discuss the intrinsic properties of this inductive readout and we present the first results of measurements on a flux qubit.

In the experiments, we use a persistent current qubit (PCQ) Mooij et al. (1999). The PCQ is a flux qubit consisting of a small inductance superconducting loop interrupted by three Josephson junctions. Two of the three junctions are equal, characterized by the Josephson coupling energy $`E_J`$ and the charging energy $`E_C`$, and the third one is smaller by a factor $`\alpha `$. At low temperatures and appropriate values of $`E_J>E_C`$ and $`\alpha `$, and with an external magnetic flux $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{qb}`$ close to $`(2n+1)\mathrm{\Phi }_0/2`$ (n=integer) in the loop, the circuit behaves as a two level system. In the basis of two circulating current or flux states, the Hamiltonian reads

$$H=\frac{1}{2}(ϵ\sigma _z+\mathrm{\Delta }\sigma _x),$$
(1)
in which $`\sigma _i(i=x,y,z)`$ are the Pauli matrices and $`ϵ=2I_p(\mathrm{\Phi }_{qb}(2n+1)\mathrm{\Phi }_0/2)`$. The minimum energy level splitting $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and the maximum qubit persistent current $`I_p`$ are determined by $`E_J`$, $`E_C`$ and $`\alpha `$. The two energy eigenstates (which are linear superpositions of the current states) each have an expectation value of the circulating current given by the derivative of the corresponding energy eigenvalue with respect to $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{qb}`$ (see Fig. 1a and b).

A DC-SQUID magnetometer contains a loop interrupted by two Josephson junctions. The SQUID critical current is $`I_c=2I_{c0}|\mathrm{cos}(\pi \mathrm{\Phi }_{SQ}/\mathrm{\Phi }_0)|`$, where $`I_{c0}`$ is the critical current of a single junction and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{SQ}`$ is the flux in the SQUID loop, which contains a contribution due to the coupled flux qubit. The voltage V and the supercurrent I of the SQUID are related to the difference in superconducting phase across the terminals of the DC-SQUID, $`\gamma `$, through the Josephson relations: $`V=\varphi _0\dot{\gamma }`$ and $`I=I_c\mathrm{sin}(\gamma )`$, in which $`\varphi _0=\mathrm{\Phi }_0/2\pi `$. For small variations of the current around an average value $`I_0<I_c`$, the DC-SQUID can be described as an inductor, with the Josephson inductance $`L_J=\varphi _0/\sqrt{I_c^2I_0^2}`$.

The Josephson inductance is measured by injecting an AC current $`I_{AC}`$ of frequency $`\nu `$, generating a voltage $`(I_{AC}/I_c)\mathrm{\Phi }_0\nu `$. The injected current leads to a small magnetic flux in the qubit loop with significant frequency components at 0, $`\nu `$ and $`2\nu `$. To avoid qubit excitation $`\nu `$ is taken well below the qubit level splitting. The qubit induced change in the inductance is small ($`1\%`$ in our experiment). To enhance the measurement sensitivity, a resonant circuit is formed by adding a shunt capacitor to the SQUID. If the frequency $`\nu `$ is close to the resonance frequency of this circuit, a small change in the Josephson inductance leads to a large change in the AC voltage, resulting in efficient state detection. Our method is similar to the RF - single electron transistor, used to measure charge qubits Duty et al. (2004), but avoids the measurement of a dissipative circuit element. A readout scheme similar to ours was proposed for charge qubits Zorin (2001), and a detection scheme exploiting the non-linearity of $`I(\gamma )`$ was shown in Siddiqi et al. (2003). A PCQ was studied in Grajcar et al. (2004) by measuring the qubit loop susceptibility using a coupled linear resonant circuit, with response time on microsecond time scales.

Figure 1c shows the schematic diagram of the circuit comprising the qubit, DC-SQUID and microwave excitation line. The combined PCQ and SQUID system is fabricated on a single oxidized silicon substrate using electron beam lithography and double-angle shadow evaporation of aluminum films. The design values for the qubit Josephson junctions are $`E_c/h=4.6`$ GHz, $`E_J/E_C=110`$ and $`\alpha =0.75`$, which yields $`I_p=660`$ nA. The areas of the PCQ and SQUID are, respectively, $`A_{qb}=100`$ $`\mu `$m2 and $`A_{SQ}=128`$ $`\mu `$m2. The chip containing the qubit and SQUID is attached to a printed circuit board on which the capacitor $`C`$ and the resistors $`R_l`$, $`R_b`$ and $`R_m`$ are mounted. Capacitor $`C`$ is positioned close to the SQUID to reduce the stray inductance $`L_s`$. Resistor $`R_b`$ determines the (AC and DC) driving current to the SQUID resonator. Applying a DC current and measuring the SQUID DC voltage via resistor $`R_m`$ allows to determine the switching current. Applying an AC current to the SQUID resonator generates an AC voltage, which is coupled via the resistor $`R_l=820`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ to the $`50`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ input impedance of the low noise 0.5-1 GHz amplifier. With $`R_m,R_b>>R_l>>50`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, the quality factor $`Q40`$ is mostly determined by the coupling resistor $`R_l`$. An external superconducting coil generates the magnetic fluxes $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{qb,ext}`$, in the qubit loop and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{SQ,ext}`$, in the SQUID loop. Qubit excitation is performed by a microwave magnetic flux, using a line with mutual inductance $`M_{mw}`$=0.12 pH to the qubit. Appropriate noise filtering is employed in all signal lines. The printed circuit board is mounted inside a Cu box, anchored at the mixing chamber of a dilution refrigerator operating at $`T<30`$ mK.

We now discuss the requirements necessary for the readout of the flux qubit. The measurement process disturbs the qubit state, resulting in energy relaxation with a rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_r`$ and randomization of the phase of the state wavefunction or dephasing with a rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\varphi `$. For a meaningful measurement the relaxation time $`T_r=1/\mathrm{\Gamma }_r`$ needs to be much larger than the discrimination time $`T_{discr}`$, which is the time required to obtain enough information to infer the qubit state. It is defined as

$$T_{discr}=S_V/(V_1V_0)^2,$$
(2)
where $`S_V`$ is the spectral density of the detector output voltage noise and $`V_0`$ and $`V_1`$ are the voltage values corresponding to the qubit in the ground and in the excited state, respectively. We have calculated the decoherence rates for the case of moderate AC current driving. With the details due to be presented separately, the energy relaxation and the dephasing rate are given by

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_r=\frac{1}{2\mathrm{}^2}\mathrm{sin}^2\theta k^2(\gamma _0)[S_\gamma ^+(\omega _{01}+2\pi \nu )+S_\gamma ^+(\omega _{01}2\pi \nu )]$$
(3)
and

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_\varphi =\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_r}{2}+\frac{1}{\mathrm{}^2}\mathrm{cos}^2\theta k^2(\gamma _0)[S_\gamma ^+(2\pi \nu )].$$
(4)
Here $`\mathrm{tan}\theta =\mathrm{\Delta }/\epsilon `$, $`\omega _{01}=\sqrt{ϵ^2+\mathrm{\Delta }^2}/\mathrm{}`$ and $`S_\gamma ^+`$ is the Fourier transform of the symmetrized correlation function of the SQUID phase operator $`\gamma `$. The coupling of the qubit to the SQUID $`k(\gamma _0)`$ is given by

$$k(\gamma _0)=MI_pI_{circ,SQ}\gamma _0$$
(5)
where $`M`$ is the qubit-SQUID mutual inductance and $`I_{circ,SQ}`$ is the SQUID circulating current, given by $`I_{c0}\mathrm{sin}(\pi \mathrm{\Phi }_{SQ}/\mathrm{\Phi }_0)`$. The amplitude of the SQUID phase oscillations $`\gamma _0`$ is proportional to $`I_{AC}`$ and thus the coupling between the detector and the qubit can be changed in-situ. The discrimination time, the relaxation time and the dephasing time $`T_\varphi =1/\mathrm{\Gamma }_\varphi `$ are inversely proportional to $`\gamma _0^2`$. This fact illustrates the tradeoff between obtaining information about the state of a quantum system and the disturbance introduced by the measurement process. In practice, the discrimination time is limited by the noise of the first amplification stage. An analysis of the circuit shown in Fig. 1c shows that efficient readout is possible if an optimized cryogenic amplifier Bradley (1999) is used for readout. A second requirement for the detector is that there is no significant influence on the qubit during state preparation and manipulation, when no measurement is performed. This case has been discussed in van der Wal et al. (2003), and for our circuit this influence is found to be negligible on the time scales necessary for qubit manipulation.

An initial characterization of the SQUID and qubit was done by measuring the switching current of the DC-SQUID van der Wal et al. (2000). The dependence of the average SQUID switching current on the magnetic field, shown in Fig. 2a, had a period $`\mathrm{\Delta }B_{SQ}=16.1`$ $`\mu `$T. At a few equidistant positions separated by $`\mathrm{\Delta }B=21`$ $`\mu `$T the SQUID modulation curve shows an increased slope. We attribute these features to the qubit generated flux, which changes sign when $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{qb}=(2n+1)\mathrm{\Phi }_0/2`$. This is confirmed by the fact that $`\mathrm{\Delta }B/\mathrm{\Delta }B_{SQ}A_{SQ}/A_{qb}`$, indicating a period of 1 $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ in the PCQ loop, and the variation of the average switching current is in the direction of increasing flux (see Fig. 1b). The average switching current of the SQUID around $`B=63.7`$ $`\mu `$T is plotted versus $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{qb,ext}`$ in Fig. 2b. For the inductive measurements we concentrate on the qubit steps at $`B=0.6`$ $`\mu `$T and at $`B=63.7`$ $`\mu `$T, separated by $`3\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ (indicated as steps 1 and 2).

Now, turning to the inductive method, we measured the amplitude of the SQUID AC voltage versus the frequency of the injected AC current. A resonance peak was found at a frequency $`\nu _0`$, dependent on $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{SQ,ext}`$. The width of this peak and the magnetic field dependence are consistent with the expected properties of the LC resonance for the circuit shown in Fig. 1c. From a fit of the dependence $`\nu _0(\mathrm{\Phi }_{SQ,ext})`$ using the relation $`\nu _0(\mathrm{\Phi }_{SQ,ext})=1/(2\pi \sqrt{(L_s+L_J(\mathrm{\Phi }_{SQ,ext}))C})`$, we find $`L_s2.35`$ nH and the minimum value of the Josephson inductance $`L_{J,min}0.31`$ nH. The obtained $`L_{J,min}`$ is in agreement with the value of the maximum critical current of 1.0 $`\mu `$A, as calculated using the value of the SQUID normal state resistance.

Figure 2c shows the circuit resonance peak at a magnetic field corresponding to the qubit step 2. Here, the circuit resonance frequency $`\nu _0`$ increases with increasing magnetic field. After fixing a SQUID driving frequency either smaller or larger than the resonance frequency, we vary the external magnetic field (see Fig. 2d). Superimposed on the smooth slope, the qubit step is clearly visible, similar to the data presented in Fig. 2b.

As a next step we performed spectroscopy and measured the qubit relaxation time. For this purpose we first apply a microwave burst of frequency $`f_{mw}`$ and duration $`T_{mw}`$ to excite the qubit. After a delay time $`T_d`$ the SQUID detector is switched on by injecting the current $`I_{AC}`$ and the output voltage is measured for a time $`T_m`$. The time $`T_m`$ is taken larger than the SQUID response time, $`Q/(2\pi \nu _0)8`$ ns. To improve statistics, we average over typically 1000 of these measurement sequences.

Figure 3 shows the spectroscopy measurement results. In Fig. 3a, $`V_{out}`$ is plotted against magnetic flux at step 1, after substraction of the linear background. If microwaves are applied, a peak and a dip are observed at positions symmetrically around the center of the step, with a height equal to almost half the step size. The peak and the dip correspond to the condition that the frequency of the applied MW burst matches the qubit energy level separation, which results in an incoherent mixture of the ground and excited states. The amplitude of the peaks and dips decreases with decreasing microwave power (data not shown) and the position of the peaks depends on $`f_{mw}`$, as shown in Fig. 3b. We did not reliably identify peaks and dips for $`f_{mw}<8.5`$ GHz and therefore we could not determine $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. A linear fit of the peak positions gives a value of the maximum persistent current $`I_p=870\pm 30`$ nA; this agrees well with the value estimated from the amplitude of the qubit step, and is in reasonable agreement with the design value of 660 nA. We have performed the same measurements at qubit step 2 and we obtained similar results.

Both the spectroscopy peaks and dips display a weak variation, periodic with the applied magnetic flux (see Fig.4a). This period is the same in the peak and the dip and independent of microwave frequency and power. The position of the individual subpeaks changes linearly with $`f_{mw}`$, following the peaks and dips in which they are contained. In terms of qubit energies, the sub-peaks splitting $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_s`$ corresponds to $`I_p\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_s/h=880\pm 130`$ MHz,which matches the SQUID resonance frequency $`\nu `$ within the experimental uncertainty. This suggests that the observed substructure originates from transitions between the energy levels of the coupled qubit-SQUID system. The coherence time of the qubit, estimated from the width of the spectroscopy subpeaks, is $`T_21`$ ns. This short decoherence time is not due to the measurement, as the SQUID AC driving is switched off during qubit excitation. The curves in Fig. 3a show a region, in the center of the step, characterized by a smaller slope. The width of this region decreases with decreasing amplitude of the SQUID AC driving. We attribute it to the influence of the AC magnetic field generated by the measuring SQUID on the qubit.

In order to determine the relaxation time, we have measured the spectroscopy peak using different time delays $`T_d`$. Figure 4 shows the results obtained at qubit step 1 for a level separation of 17 GHz. The area of the Lorentzian curves fitting the peaks is plotted versus $`T_d`$ in Fig. 4b. A fit with an exponential decay gives the value of the relaxation time $`T_1=77\pm 12`$ $`\mu `$s. The obtained value was the same for peak or dip and independent of the applied microwave power.

From the measurements we estimate the parameters characterizing the readout efficiency, referred to the end of the amplification chain: $`\sqrt{S_V}4`$ $`\mu V/\sqrt{Hz}`$ and $`V_1V_0800`$ $`\mu V`$, which implies $`T_r/T_{discr}3.1`$. The measurement fidelity, defined as the probability to infer the qubit state correctly, based on the detector output voltage, is $``$70%. Further improvement of the efficiency is possible by optimizing the SQUID circuitry. Using an on-chip circuit with small stray inductances and optimized power transfer to the amplifier can reduce the measurement time by a factor of 100. Also, the present temperature $`T_n20`$ K of our amplifier, can be reduced to $`T_n3`$ K by using an optimized cryogenic amplifier or to $`T_n<100`$ mK by using a SQUID amplifier Mück et al. (2001), with proportional decrease in the measurement time.

The preliminary experiment of this paper, spectroscopy measurements on a flux qubit, yielded the proof of principle for this method. The decoherence time was short, but feasible changes of the circuit can remedy this. The absence of the spurious back-action effects associated with switching of Josephson junctions, the continuous nature of the detection and the in-situ tunability of the qubit-detector coupling allow for fundamental experimental studies of the quantum measurement process and for correlation measurements on two qubits.

We thank Alexander ter Haar and Hannes Majer for discussions. This work was supported by the Dutch Organization for Fundamental Research on Matter (FOM), the European Union SQUBIT project, and the U.S. Army Research Office (grant DAAD 19-00-1-0548).


format: text

text:
# Disks in trivial braid diagrams

## 1. Introduction

Let us say that a braid diagram is trivial if it represents the unit braid, i.e., if it is isotopic to an unbraided diagram. Consider the following simple trivial diagrams:

We see that these digrams contain a disk, defined as an embedded ribbon ending in crossings with opposite orientations (the striped areas). Below is another trivial braid diagram containing a disk: here the shape is more complicated, but we still have the property that the third strand does not pierce the disk.

Finally, let us display a more intricate example involving a disk: here the third strand pierces the ribbon, but it does it so as to make a topologically trivial handle through the disk, so, up to an isotopy, we still have an unpierced disk.

A few tries should convince the reader that most trivial braid diagrams seem to contain at least one disk in the sense above—a precise definition will be given below—and make the following question natural:

###### Question 1.1.

Does every trivial braid diagram (with at least one crossing) contain a disk?

Our aim is to anwser the question by proving

###### Proposition 1.2.

The answer to Question 1.1 is positive in the case of $`3`$-strand braids, i.e., every trivial $`3`$-strand braid diagram with at least one crossing contains a disk. It is negative in the case of $`4`$ strands and more.

As for the negative part, it is sufficient to exhibit a counter-example, what will be done at the end of Section 2 (see Figure 2).

As for the positive part, the argument consists in going to the Cayley graph of the braid group and using a continuity result, which itself relies on the properties of division in the braid monoid $`B_n^+`$. The argument works in every Artin–Tits group of spherical type, and we actually prove the counterpart of (the positive part of) Proposition 1.2 in all Artin–Tits groups of type $`I_2(m)`$.

One should keep in mind that we are interested in braid diagrams, not in braids: up to an isotopy, all braid diagrams we consider can be unbraided. What makes the question nontrivial is that isotopy may change the possible disks of a braid diagram completely, so that it is hopeless to trace the disks along an isotopy. For instance, the reader can check that applying one type III Reidemeister move in the braid diagram of Figure 2 suffices to let one disk appear.

## 2. Disks and removable pairs of letters

###### Definition.

(Figure 1) Assume that $`D`$ is an $`n`$-strand braid diagram, which is the projection of a 3-dimensional geometric braid $`\beta `$ consisting of $`n`$ disjoint curves connecting $`n`$ points $`P_1,\mathrm{}P_n`$ in the plane $`z=0`$ to $`n`$ points $`P_1^{},\mathrm{},P_n^{}`$ in the plane $`z=1`$. For $`1i,j<n`$, we say that $`D`$ is an $`(i,j)`$-disk if $`D`$ begins with a crossing of the strands starting at $`P_i`$ and $`P_{i+1}`$, it finishes with a crossing of opposite orientation of the strands ending at $`P_j^{}`$ and $`P_{j+1}^{}`$, and the figure obtained from $`\beta `$ by connecting $`P_i`$ to $`P_{i+1}`$ and $`P_j^{}`$ to $`P_{j+1}^{}`$ is isotopic to the union of $`n2`$ curves and the boundary of a disk disjoint from these curves.

This definition is directly reminiscent of the notion of a life disk in a singular braid introduced in : another way to state that $`D`$ is a disk is to say that, when one makes the initial and the final crossings in $`D`$ singular—with the convention that the first crossing is replaced with a “birth” singular crossing, while the last one, which is supposed to have the opposite orientation, is replaced with a “death” singular crossing—then the resulting figure is a life disk.

We shall address Question 1.1 using the braid group $`B_n`$ and the geometry of its Cayley graph. As is standard, braid diagrams will be encoded by finite words over the alphabet $`\{\sigma _1^{\pm 1},\mathrm{},\sigma _{n1}^{\pm 1}\}`$, using $`\sigma _i`$ to encode the elementary diagram where the $`(i+1)`$th strand crosses over the $`i`$th strand. For instance, the first three diagrams above are coded by $`\sigma _1^{}\sigma _1^1`$, $`\sigma _1^{}\sigma _2^{}\sigma _1^{}\sigma _2^1\sigma _1^1\sigma _2^1`$, and $`\sigma _1^{}\sigma _2^2\sigma _1^{}\sigma _2^2\sigma _1^2\sigma _2^1\sigma _1^2\sigma _2^1`$, respectively.

We denote by $``$ the equivalence relation on braid words that corresponds to braid isotopy. As is well known, $``$ is the congruence generated by the pairs $`(\sigma _i^{}\sigma _j^{},\sigma _j^{}\sigma _i^{})`$ with $`|ij|2`$ and $`(\sigma _i^{}\sigma _j^{}\sigma _i^{},\sigma _j^{}\sigma _i^{}\sigma _j^{})`$ with $`|ij|=1`$, together with $`(\sigma _i^{}\sigma _i^1,\epsilon )`$ and $`(\sigma _i^1\sigma _i^{},\epsilon )`$, where $`\epsilon `$ denotes the empty word.

###### Proposition 2.1.

A braid diagram is an $`(i,j)`$-disk if and only if it is encoded in a word of the form $`\sigma _i^ew\sigma _j^e`$ with $`e=\pm 1`$ and $`\sigma _i^ew\sigma _j^ew`$.

###### Proof.

Assume that $`D`$ is an $`(i,j)`$-disk. By definition, $`D`$ is encoded in some braid word of the form $`\sigma _i^ew\sigma _j^e`$ with $`e=\pm 1`$. Moreover, we can assume that, after an isotopy, the strands of $`D`$ starting at positions $`i`$ and $`i+1`$ make an unpierced ribbon. Then, the initial $`\sigma _i^e`$ crossing may be pushed along that ribbon, so as to eventually cancel the final $`\sigma _j^e`$ crossing. Hence $`D`$ is isotopic to the diagram obtained by deleting its first and last crossings,, i.e., we have $`\sigma _i^ew\sigma _j^ew`$.

Conversely, assume that $`D`$ is encoded in $`\sigma _i^ew\sigma _j^e`$ and $`\sigma _i^ew\sigma _j^ew`$ holds. Then we have $`\sigma _i^eww\sigma _j^e`$. By Theorem 2.2 of , this implies that $`D`$ contains a ribbon connecting $`[i,i+1]\times 0`$ to $`[j,j+1]\times 1`$ that is, up to an isotopy, disjoint from the other strands. Hence, with our current definition, $`D`$ is an $`(i,j)`$-disk. ∎

We thus are led to introduce:

###### Definition.

A braid word of the form $`\sigma _i^ew\sigma _j^e`$ with $`e=\pm 1`$ is said to be a removable pair of letters if $`\sigma _i^ew\sigma _j^ew`$ holds.

With this notion, Question 1.1 is equivalent to

###### Question 2.2.

Does every nonempty trivial braid word contain a removable pair of letters?

Speaking of “removable pair” is natural here: indeed, saying that a braid word $`w^{}`$ contains a removable pair $`\sigma _i^ew\sigma _j^e`$ implies that $`w^{}`$ is equivalent to the word obtained from $`w^{}`$ by replacing the subword $`\sigma _i^ew\sigma _j^e`$ with $`w`$, i.e., by deleting the end letters $`\sigma _i^e`$ and $`\sigma _j^e`$. Observe that the notion of a removable pair of letters actually makes sense for any group presentation: we shall use it in a more general context in Section 5 below.

As there exist efficient algorithms for deciding braid word equivalence, it is easy to systematically search the possible removable pairs in a braid word, and an experimental approach of Question 2.2 is possible. Random tries would suggest a positive answer, but this is misleading: for instance, the 4 strand braid word

$$\sigma _1^1\sigma _2^2\sigma _3^1\sigma _1^1\sigma _2^2\sigma _1^1\sigma _3^1\sigma _2^2\sigma _3^1\sigma _2^3\sigma _1^2\sigma _3^2\sigma _2^3\sigma _1^{}\sigma _2^2\sigma _1^{}\sigma _3^{}\sigma _2^2\sigma _3^{}\sigma _1^{}\sigma _2^2\sigma _3^{}$$

contains no removable pair of letters, and, therefore, the associated braid diagram, which is diplayed in Figure 2, contains no disk. This establishes the negative part of Proposition 1.2.

## 3. The valuation of a pure simple element

The proof of (the positive part of) Proposition 1.2 relies on partitioning the Cayley graph of $`B_3`$ using integer parameters connected with division in the braid monoid $`B_3^+`$. The construction is not specific to the braid group $`B_3`$, nor is it either specific to braid groups: actually, it is relevant for all spherical type Artin–Tits groups, and, more generally, for all Garside groups in the sense of .

A monoid $`G^+`$ is said to be a Garside monoid if it is cancellative, $`1`$ is the only invertible element, any two elements admit a left and a right least common multiple, and $`G^+`$ contains a Garside element, defined as an element whose left and right divisors coincide, they generate the monoid, and they are finite in number. If $`G^+`$ is a Garside monoid, it embeds in a group of fractions. A group $`G`$ is said to be a Garside group if $`G`$ can be expressed in at least one way as the group of fractions of a Garside monoid.

Typical examples of Garside monoids are the braid monoids $`B_n^+`$, and, more generally, the Artin–Tits monoids $`A^+`$ of spherical type, i.e., those Artin–Tits monoids such that the associated Coxeter group $`W`$ is finite. In this case, the image of the longest element of $`W`$ under the canonical section of the projection of $`A^+`$ onto $`W`$ is a Garside element in $`A^+`$. In the particular case of $`B_n^+`$, one obtains the half-twist braid $`\mathrm{\Delta }_n`$. So, the braid groups $`B_n`$, and, more generally, the Artin–Tits groups of sperical type, are Garside groups. Let us mention that a given group may be the group of fractions of several Garside monoids: for instance, the braid groups $`B_n`$ admit a second Garside structure, associated with the Birman–Ko–Lee monoid of —see  for similar results involving other Artin–Tits groups. Still another Garside structure for $`B_3`$ involves the submonoid generated by $`\sigma _1^{}`$ and $`\sigma _1^{}\sigma _2^{}`$, a Garside monoid with presentation $`a,b;aba=b^2`$, hence not of Artin–Tits type.

Assume that $`G^+`$ is a Garside monoid. Then every element $`x`$ in $`G^+`$ admits finitely many expressions as a product of atoms (indecomposable elements), and the supremum $`x`$ of the length of these decompositions, called the norm of $`x`$, satisfies $`xyx+y`$ and $`x1`$ for $`x1`$. Then there exists in $`G^+`$ a unique Garside element of minimal norm; this element is traditionally denoted $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, and its (left and right) divisors are called the simple elements of $`G^+`$.

We shall start from two technical results about division in Garside monoids—as shown in , these results also happen to be crucial in the construction of an automatic structure . For $`x,y`$ in a Garside monoid $`G^+`$, we denote by $`x\mathrm{\backslash }y`$ the unique element $`z`$ such that $`xz`$ is the right lcm of $`x`$ and $`y`$, and we write $`yz`$ (resp. $`zy`$) to express that $`y`$ is a left (resp. right) divisor of $`z`$.

###### Lemma 3.1.

Assume that $`G^+`$ is a Garside monoid, that $`y,z`$ are elements of $`G^+`$ and that every simple right divisor of $`yz`$ is a right divisor of $`z`$. Let $`x`$ be an arbitrary element of $`G^+`$, and let $`y^{}=x\mathrm{\backslash }y`$ and $`z^{}=(y\mathrm{\backslash }x)\mathrm{\backslash }z`$. Then every simple right divisor of $`y^{}z^{}`$ is a right divisor of $`z^{}`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`x^{}=y\mathrm{\backslash }x`$ and $`x^{\prime \prime }=z\mathrm{\backslash }(y\mathrm{\backslash }x)`$. By definition of a right lcm, we have $`xy^{}=yx^{}`$, and $`x^{}z^{}=zx^{\prime \prime }`$. Moreover $`1`$ is the only common right divisor of $`y^{}`$ and $`x^{}`$. Assume that $`s`$ is a simple right divisor of $`y^{}z^{}`$. Then we have $`xy^{}z^{}s`$, hence $`yzx^{\prime \prime }s`$. Let $`s^{}x^{\prime \prime }`$ be the left lcm of $`s`$ and $`x^{\prime \prime }`$. Then $`yzx^{\prime \prime }s`$ implies $`yzx^{\prime \prime }s^{}x^{\prime \prime }`$, hence $`yzs^{}`$. Moreover, $`s`$ being simple implies that $`s^{}`$ is simple as well, as shows an induction on the minimal number $`p`$ such that $`x^{\prime \prime }`$ can be decomposed into the product of $`p`$ simple elements. Then, the hypothesis of the lemma implies $`zs^{}`$, and, therefore, $`zx^{\prime \prime }s`$, i.e., $`x^{}z^{}s`$. It follows that $`s`$ is a right divisor of the right lcm of $`y^{}z^{}`$ and $`x^{}z^{}`$, which is $`z^{}`$ since $`1`$ is the only common right divisor of $`y^{}`$ and $`x^{}`$. ∎

###### Lemma 3.2.

Assume that $`G^+`$ is a Garside monoid, that $`y,z,x`$ are elements of $`G^+`$, and that every simple right divisor of $`yz`$ is a right divisor of $`z`$. Then $`y\preccurlyeq ̸x`$ implies $`yz\preccurlyeq ̸xt`$ for every simple element $`t`$ of $`G^+`$.

###### Proof.

We assume $`yzxt`$, and aim at proving $`yx`$. Let $`y^{}=x\mathrm{\backslash }y`$, and $`z^{}=(y\mathrm{\backslash }x)\mathrm{\backslash }z`$. By construction, we have $`y^{}z^{}=x\mathrm{\backslash }(yz)`$, and $`yzxt`$ implies $`y^{}z^{}t`$, so, in particular, $`y^{}z^{}`$ must be simple. By Lemma 3.1, every simple right divisor of $`y^{}z^{}`$ is a right divisor of $`z^{}`$, so we deduce $`z^{}y^{}z^{}`$, which is possible for $`y^{}=1`$ only, i.e., for $`yx`$. ∎

Now, the idea is to consider, for each element of a Garside group $`G`$ and each simple element $`s`$ of $`G^+`$, the maximal power of $`s`$ that divides a given element. We begin with the monoid.

###### Definition.

Assume that $`G^+`$ is a Garside monoid. We say that a simple element $`s`$ of $`G^+`$ is pure if $`s`$ is the maximal simple right divisor of $`s^k`$, for every $`k`$. If $`s`$ is a pure simple element of $`G^+`$, we define the (left) valuation $`\nu _s(x)`$ of $`s`$ in $`x`$ to be the maximal $`k`$ satisfying $`s^kx`$.

In the braid monoid $`B_n^+`$, each generator $`\sigma _i^{}`$, as well as the Garside element $`\mathrm{\Delta }_n`$—and, more generally, each simple braid which is an lcm of generators $`\sigma _i^{}`$—is a pure simple element. If $`G^+`$ is an arbitrary Garside monoid, the Garside element $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is always pure by definition, but the atoms or their lcms need not be pure in general: for instance, in the monoid $`a,b;aba=b^2^+`$, the atom $`b`$ is not pure, as $`b^2`$ is simple.

###### Lemma 3.3.

Assume that $`G^+`$ is a Garside monoid and that $`s`$ is a pure simple element of $`G^+`$. Then, for every $`x`$ in $`G^+`$, we have

(3.1)
$$\nu _s(x)\nu _s(xt)\nu _s(x)+1$$

whenever $`t`$ is a simple element of $`G^+`$; more specifically, for $`t=\mathrm{\Delta }`$, we have

(3.2)
$$\nu _s(x\mathrm{\Delta })=\nu _s(x)+1.$$

###### Proof.

First $`s^kx`$ implies $`s^kxt`$ for every $`t`$, hence $`\nu _s(x)\nu _s(xt)`$. On the other hand, assume $`s^{k+1}\preccurlyeq ̸x`$. By hypothesis, every right divisor of $`s^{k+2}`$ is a right divisor of $`s`$. Applying Lemma 3.2 with $`y=s^{k+1}`$ and $`z=s`$, we deduce $`s^{k+2}\preccurlyeq ̸xt`$, hence $`\nu _s(xt)\nu _s(x)+1`$, and (3.1) follows.

As $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is simple, (3.1) implies $`\nu _s(x\mathrm{\Delta })\nu _s(x)+1`$. On the other hand, let $`\varphi `$ be the automorphism of $`G^+`$ defined for $`z`$ a simple element by $`\varphi (z)=(z\mathrm{\backslash }\mathrm{\Delta })\mathrm{\backslash }\mathrm{\Delta }`$ (see ). Then $`z\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi (z)`$ holds for every $`z`$. Now assume $`s^kx`$. We find

$$x\mathrm{\Delta }=s^kx^{}\mathrm{\Delta }=s^k\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi (x^{})=s^{k+1}(s\mathrm{\backslash }\mathrm{\Delta })\varphi (x^{}),$$

hence $`s^{k+1}x\mathrm{\Delta }`$, and, therefore, $`\nu _s(x\mathrm{\Delta })>\nu _s(x)`$, hence (3.2). ∎

We now extend the maps $`\nu _s`$ from a Garside monoid $`G^+`$ to its group of fractions $`G`$. As $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is a common multiple of all atoms in $`G^+`$, every element of $`G`$ can be expressed as $`x\mathrm{\Delta }^k`$ with $`xG^+`$ and $`k`$. Unless we require that $`k`$ be maximal, the decomposition need not be unique. However, we have the following result:

###### Lemma 3.4.

Assume that $`G^+`$ is a Garside monoid, $`x,x^{}`$ are elements of $`G^+`$, and we have $`x\mathrm{\Delta }^k=x^{}\mathrm{\Delta }^k^{}`$ in the group of fractions $`G`$ of $`G^+`$. Then, for each pure simple element $`s`$ of $`G^+`$, we have $`\nu _s(x)+k=\nu _s(x^{})+k^{}`$.

###### Proof.

Assume for instance $`kk^{}`$, say $`k^{}=k+m`$. Then we have $`x\mathrm{\Delta }^k=x^{}\mathrm{\Delta }^m\mathrm{\Delta }^k`$ in $`G`$, hence $`x=x^{}\mathrm{\Delta }^m`$ in $`G^+`$ (we recall that $`G^+`$ embeds in $`G`$). Using Lemma 3.3 $`m`$ times, we obtain $`\nu _s(x^{}\mathrm{\Delta }^m)=\nu _s(x^{})+m`$ for every $`s`$, hence $`\nu _s(x)=\nu _s(x^{})+m`$, i.e., $`\nu _s(x)+k=\nu _s(x^{})+k^{}`$. ∎

Then the following definition is natural:

###### Definition.

Assume that $`G^+`$ is a Garside monoid, $`G`$ is the group of fractions of $`G^+`$, and $`s`$ is a pure simple element of $`G^+`$. Then, for $`x`$ in $`G`$, the (left) valuation $`\nu _s(x)`$ of $`s`$ in $`x`$ is defined to be $`\nu _s(z)+k`$, where $`x=z\mathrm{\Delta }^k`$ is an arbitrary decomposition of $`x`$ with $`zG^+`$ and $`k`$.

###### Example 3.5.

Let $`G=B_3`$, and $`x=\sigma _1^1\sigma _2^{}`$. We can also write $`x=\sigma _2^{}\sigma _1^2\mathrm{\Delta }_3^1`$. We have $`\nu _{\sigma _1^{}}(\sigma _2^{}\sigma _1^2)=0`$ and $`\nu _{\sigma _2^{}}(\sigma _2^{}\sigma _1^2)=1`$, so we find $`\nu _{\sigma _1^{}}(x)=01=1`$, and $`\nu _{\sigma _2^{}}(x)=11=0`$.

It is now easy to see that the inequalities of Lemma 3.3 remain valid in the group:

###### Proposition 3.6.

Assume that $`G`$ is the Garside group associated with a Garside monoid $`G^+`$, and that $`s`$ is a pure simple element of $`G^+`$. Then, for every element $`x`$ in $`G`$, and every simple element $`t`$ in $`G^+`$, we have

(3.3)
$$\nu _s(x)\nu _s(xt)\nu _s(x)+1;$$

for $`t=\mathrm{\Delta }`$, we have $`\nu _s(x\mathrm{\Delta })=\nu _s(x)+1`$.

###### Proof.

Assume $`x=y\mathrm{\Delta }^k`$ with $`yG^+`$. We have $`xt=y\mathrm{\Delta }^kt=y\varphi ^k(t)\mathrm{\Delta }^k`$. Then $`y\varphi ^k(t)`$ belongs to $`G^+`$, hence we have $`\nu _s(x)=\nu _s(y)+k`$, and $`\nu _s(xt)=\nu _s(y\varphi ^k(t))+k`$. As $`\varphi ^k(t)`$ is a simple element of $`G^+`$, Lemma 3.3 gives

$$\nu _s(y)\nu _s(y\varphi ^k(t))\nu _s(y)+1,$$

so (3.3) follows. The result for $`t=\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is obvious, since we obtain $`x\mathrm{\Delta }=y\mathrm{\Delta }^{k+1}`$, hence $`\nu _s(x\mathrm{\Delta })=\nu _s(y)+k+1=\nu _s(x)+1`$ directly. ∎

Inequality (3.3) is the algebraic socle on which we shall build in the sequel.

## 4. Partitions of the Cayley graph

From now on, we restrict to Artin–Tits groups, i.e., we consider presentations of the form

(4.1)
$$S;\text{prod}(\sigma ,\tau ,m_{\sigma ,\tau })=\text{prod}(\tau ,\sigma ,m_{\sigma ,\tau })\text{ for }\sigma \tau \text{ in }S\text{ },$$

where $`\text{prod}(\sigma ,\tau ,m)`$ denotes the alternated product $`\sigma \tau \sigma \tau \mathrm{}`$ with $`m`$ factors, and $`m_{\sigma ,\tau }2`$ holds. Moreover, we restrict to the spherical type, i.e., we assume that the Coxeter group obtained by adding to (4.1) the relation $`\sigma ^2=1`$ for each $`\sigma `$ in $`S`$ is finite. Then the monoid $`A^+`$ defined by (4.1) is a Garside monoid, and the group $`A`$ defined by (4.1) is the group of fractions of $`A^+`$.

In this case, each generator $`\sigma `$ in $`S`$ is pure, since $`\sigma ^2`$ is not simple and $`\sigma `$ is the right gcd of $`\sigma ^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Hence, each element $`x`$ of the group $`A`$ has a well-defined valuation $`\nu _\sigma (x)`$ for each $`\sigma `$ in $`S`$, and we can associate to $`x`$ the valuation sequence $`(\nu _\sigma (x);\sigma \mathrm{SS})`$.

###### Example 4.1.

Consider the case of $`B_3`$. There are two atoms, namely $`\sigma _1^{}`$ and $`\sigma _2^{}`$. The valuation sequence associated with $`\sigma _1^{}`$ is $`(1,0)`$, while the one associated with $`\sigma _1^1\sigma _2^{}`$ is $`(1,1)`$, as was seen above. Observe that the influence of right multiplication on the valuation sequence may be anything that is compatible with the constraints of (3.3). For instance, $`\sigma _1^{}`$, $`\sigma _1^{}\sigma _2^{}`$, and $`\sigma _1^{}\sigma _2^2\sigma _1^{}`$ all admit the valuation sequence $`(1,0)`$, while the valuation sequences of $`\sigma _1^{}\sigma _2^{}`$, $`\sigma _1^{}\sigma _1^{}`$, $`\sigma _1^{}\sigma _2^{}\sigma _1^{}`$, and $`\sigma _1^{}\sigma _2^2\sigma _1^{}\sigma _2^{}`$ are $`(1,0)`$, $`(2,0)`$, $`(1,1)`$, and $`(2,1)`$, respectively.

Using the valuation sequence, we can partition the group $`A`$, hence, equivalently, its Cayley graph, into disjoint regions according to the values of the valuations. For our current purpose, we shall consider a coarser partition, namely the one obtained by taking into account not the values of the valuations, but their relative positions only. Let us say that two $`n`$-tuples of integers $`(k_1,\mathrm{},k_n)`$ and $`(k_1^{},\mathrm{},k_n^{})`$ are order-equivalent if $`k_i=k_j`$ and $`k_i^{}=k_j^{}`$ (resp. $`k_i<k_j`$ and $`k_i^{}<k_j^{}`$) hold for the same pairs $`(i,j)`$. The equivalence class of a tuple $`(k_1,\mathrm{},k_n)`$ will be called its order-type. For instance, there are 3 order-types of pairs, corresponding to pairs $`(k_1,k_2)`$ with $`k_1<k_2`$, $`k_1=k_2`$, and $`k_1>k_2`$, respectively. Similarly, there are 13 order-types of triples, and, in the general case of $`n`$-tuples, the number of order-types is the $`n`$th ordered Bell number $`_{p=1}^na_pp^n`$ with $`a_p=_{q=0}^{np}(1)^q\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{p+q}{q}\right)`$.

###### Definition.

Assume that $`A`$ is an Artin–Tits group of spherical type with presentation (4.1). For $`x`$ in $`A`$, the type of $`x`$ is defined to be the order-type of the sequence $`(\nu _\sigma (x);\sigma \mathrm{SS})`$.

So, there are 3 types of braids in $`B_3`$, according to whether the value of $`\nu _{\sigma _1}`$ is smaller than, equal to, or bigger than the value of $`\nu _{\sigma _2}`$. These types will be denoted $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}<\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$, $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}=\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$, and $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}>\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$. Thus, saying that a braid $`\beta `$ in $`B_3`$ is of type $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}>\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$ means that there are “more $`\sigma _1^{}`$’s than $`\sigma _2^{}`$’s at the left of $`\beta `$”. For instance, the type of $`\sigma _1^{}`$ is $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}>\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$, while that of $`\sigma _2^{}`$ and of $`\sigma _1^1`$ is $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}<\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$, and that of $`1`$ or $`\mathrm{\Delta }_3^k`$ is $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}=\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$.

Proposition 3.6 immediately leads to constraints on how the type may change under right multiplication by a simple element:

###### Proposition 4.2.

Assume that $`A`$ is an Artin–Tits group of spherical type. Say that two types $`T,T^{}`$ are neighbours if there exist $`(k_1,\mathrm{},k_n)`$ in $`T`$ and $`(k_1^{},\mathrm{},k_n^{})`$ in $`T^{}`$ such that $`k_i^{}k_i`$ is either $`0`$ or $`1`$ for every $`i`$, or is either $`0`$ or $`1`$ for every $`i`$. Then, for every $`x`$ in $`A`$ and every simple element $`t`$ of $`A^+`$, the type of $`xt^{\pm 1}`$ is a neighbour of the type of $`x`$.

We display in Figures 3 and 4 the graph of the neighbour relation for order-types of pairs and of triples—as well as examples of $`3`$\- and $`4`$-strand braids of the corresponding types. We see in Figure 3 that the types $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}>\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$ and $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}<\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$ are not neighbours, since, starting with a pair $`(k_1,k_2)`$ with $`k_1>k_2`$ and adding $`1`$ to $`k_1`$ or $`k_2`$, we can obtain $`(k_1^{},k_2^{})`$ with $`k_1^{}k_2^{}`$, but not with $`k_1^{}<k_2^{}`$. As a consequence, we cannot obtain a braid of type $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}<\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$ by multiplying a braid of type $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}>\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$ by a single simple braid or its inverse: crossing the intermediate type $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}=\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$ is necessary. Similarly, we can see on Figure 4 that, for instance, going from type $`[\nu _{\sigma _1^{}}>\nu _{\sigma _2^{}}=\nu _{\sigma _3^{}}]`$ to type $`[\nu _{\sigma _1^{}}<\nu _{\sigma _2^{}}=\nu _{\sigma _3^{}}]`$ necessitates that one goes through at least one of the intermediate types $`[\nu _{\sigma _1^{}}=\nu _{\sigma _2^{}}<\nu _{\sigma _3^{}}]`$, $`[\nu _{\sigma _1^{}}=\nu _{\sigma _2^{}}=\nu _{\sigma _3^{}}]`$, or $`[\nu _{\sigma _1^{}}=\nu _{\sigma _3^{}}<\nu _{\sigma _2^{}}]`$.

## 5. Loops in the Cayley graph

We are now ready to establish that every nonempty trivial $`3`$-strand braid word contains at least one removable pair of letters. The geometric idea of the proof is as follows: a trivial word corresponds to a loop in the Cayley graph of $`B_3`$, and we can choose the origin of that loop so that it contains vertices of types $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}<\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$ and $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}>\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$. But then Proposition 4.2 tells us that one cannot jump from the region $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}<\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$ to the region $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}>\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$ without crossing the separating region, i.e.$`[\nu _{\sigma _1}=\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$. This means that some subword of $`w`$ must represent a power of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_3`$, and it is easy to deduce a removable pair of letters.

Actually, we shall prove a more general statement valid for every Artin–Tits group with two generators, i.e., for every Artin–Tits group of type $`I_2(m)`$—the case of $`B_3`$ corresponding to $`m=3`$:

###### Proposition 5.1.

Assume that $`A`$ is an Artin–Tits group of type $`I_2(m)`$, i.e., $`A`$ admits the presentation $`\sigma _1,\sigma _2;\sigma _1\sigma _2\sigma _1\sigma _2\mathrm{}=\sigma _2\sigma _1\sigma _2\sigma _1\mathrm{}`$ where both sides of the equality have length $`m`$. Then every nonempty word on the letters $`\sigma _1^{\pm 1},\sigma _2^{\pm 1}`$ representing $`1`$ in $`A`$ contains a removable pair of letters.

We begin with two auxiliary results.

###### Lemma 5.2.

Assume that $`G`$ is a group generated by a set $`\mathrm{SS}`$, that $`w`$ is a trivial word on $`\mathrm{SS}\mathrm{SS}^1`$ (i.e., $`w`$ represents $`1`$ in $`G`$), and some cyclic conjugate of $`w`$ contains a removable pair of letters. Then $`w`$ contains a removable pair of letters.

###### Proof.

Assume that we have $`w=uv`$ and $`\sigma ^ew^{}\tau ^e`$ is a removable pair of letters in $`vu`$, with $`\sigma ,\tau \mathrm{SS}`$, and $`e=\pm 1`$. Let us write $`vu=w_1\sigma ^ew^{}\tau ^ew_2`$. If $`w_1\sigma ^ew^{}\tau ^e`$ is a prefix of $`v`$, or if $`\sigma ^ew^{}\tau ^ew_2`$ is a suffix of $`u`$, then $`\sigma ^ew^{}\tau ^e`$ is a subword of $`w`$, and the result is obvious. Otherwise, we have $`w^{}=v^{}u^{}`$ with $`\sigma ^ev^{}`$ a suffix of $`v`$ and $`u^{}\tau ^e`$ a prefix of $`u`$, hence $`v=w_1\sigma ^ev^{}`$ and $`u=u^{}\tau ^ew_2`$. By construction, $`\tau ^ew_2w_1\sigma ^e`$ is a subword of $`uv`$, i.e., of $`w`$. Let us use $``$ for the congruence that defines $`G`$. By hypothesis, we have $`uv\epsilon `$ and $`\sigma ^ev^{}u^{}\tau ^ev^{}u^{}`$, hence $`\tau ^eu_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}\sigma ^eu_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}`$. We deduce

$`w_2w_1\tau ^eu_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}uvv_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}\sigma ^e`$ $`\tau ^eu_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}\sigma ^e`$
$`u_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}u_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}uvv_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}\tau ^ew_2w_1\sigma ^e,`$
which shows that $`\tau ^ew_2w_1\sigma ^e`$ is a removable pair of letters in $`w`$. ∎

###### Lemma 5.3.

Let $`A`$ be an Artin–Tits group with presentation (4.1). Assume that $`\sigma ,\tau `$ belong to $`\mathrm{SS}`$, $`s`$ belongs to $`\mathrm{SS}\mathrm{SS}^1`$, and $`w`$ is a word on $`\mathrm{SS}\mathrm{SS}^1`$ such that $`\tau ws\text{prod}(\sigma ,\tau ,m_{\sigma ,\tau })^k`$ holds and $`\tau w`$ represents an element of the region $`[\nu _\sigma <\nu _\tau ]`$. Then either $`\sigma ^1\tau ws`$ or $`\tau ws`$ is a removable pair of letters.

###### Proof.

For $`u`$ a word on $`\mathrm{SS}\mathrm{SS}^1`$, let $`\overline{u}`$ denote the element of $`A`$ represented by $`u`$. Let us write $`m`$ for $`m_{\sigma ,\tau }`$. By hypothesis, we have $`\nu _\sigma (\overline{\tau ws})=\nu _\tau (\overline{\tau ws})=k`$. Assume first that $`mk`$ is even. Then there are two possibilities for $`s`$ only, namely $`s=\sigma `$, and $`s=\tau ^1`$. Indeed, $`\overline{\tau ws}`$ is $`\text{prod}(\sigma ,\tau ,m)^k`$, so $`s=\rho ^{\pm 1}`$ with $`\rho \sigma ,\tau `$ would imply

$$\nu _\sigma (\overline{\tau w})=\nu _\sigma (\overline{\tau ws})=\nu _\tau (\overline{\tau ws})=\nu _\tau (\overline{\tau w}),$$

while $`s=\sigma ^1`$ and $`s=\tau `$ would imply

$$\nu _\sigma (\overline{\tau w})\nu _\sigma (\overline{\tau ws})=\nu _\tau (\overline{\tau ws})\nu _\tau (\overline{\tau w}),$$

all contradicting the hypothesis $`\nu _\sigma (\overline{\tau w})<\nu _\tau (\overline{\tau w})`$.

Now, for $`s=\sigma `$, we find

$$\sigma ^1\tau w\sigma \sigma ^1\text{prod}(\sigma ,\tau ,m)^k\text{prod}(\sigma ,\tau ,m)^k\sigma ^1\tau w\sigma \sigma ^1\tau w,$$

i.e., $`\sigma ^1\tau ws`$ is a removable pair. Similarly, for $`s=\tau ^1`$, we find

$$\tau w\tau ^1\text{prod}(\sigma ,\tau ,m)^k\tau ^1\text{prod}(\sigma ,\tau ,m)^k\tau \tau ^1\tau w\tau ^1\tau w,$$

i.e., $`\tau ws`$ is a removable pair. The argument is similar when $`mk`$ is odd, the possible values of $`s`$ now being $`\sigma ^1`$ and $`\tau `$ instead of $`\sigma `$ and $`\tau ^1`$. ∎

###### Proof of Proposition 5.1.

(Figure 5) Assume that $`w`$ is a nonempty word on the letters $`\sigma _1^{\pm 1}`$, $`\sigma _2^{\pm 1}`$ representing $`1`$. Necessarily $`w`$ contains the same number of letters with exponent $`+1`$ and with exponent $`1`$, so it must contain a subword of the form $`s^1t`$ or $`st^1`$ with $`s,t\{\sigma _1,\sigma _2\}`$. Assume for instance that $`w`$ contains a subword of the form $`s^1t`$; the argument in the case of $`st^1`$ would be similar. The case $`s=t`$ is trivial (then $`s^1s`$ is a removable pair of letters of $`w`$, and we are done), so, up to a symmetry, we can assume that $`s^1t`$ is $`\sigma _1^1\sigma _2`$.

The word $`w`$ specifies a path $`\gamma `$ in the Cayley graph of $`G`$, and, by hypothesis, $`\gamma `$ is a loop. Let $`P`$ be the point of $`\gamma `$ corresponding to the middle vertex in the subword $`\sigma _1^1\sigma _2`$ considered above. By Lemma 5.2, we can assume that $`P`$ is the origin of $`\gamma `$ without loss of generality.

Now, let us follow $`\gamma `$ starting from $`P`$: as the first letter is $`\sigma _2`$, the path $`\gamma `$ enters the region $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}<\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$. At the other end, the last letter of $`\gamma `$ is $`\sigma _1^1`$, which means that, before ending at $`P`$, the path $`\gamma `$ comes from the region $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}>\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$. So $`\gamma `$ goes from the region $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}<\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$ to the region $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}>\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$. By Proposition 4.2, $`\gamma `$ must cross the separating region $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}=\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$ at least once. This means that there must exist at least one second point $`Q`$ in $`\gamma `$ with type $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}=\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$. Now—and this is where we use the hypothesis that $`A`$ is of Coxeter type $`I_2(m)`$—the only elements of $`A`$ of this type are the powers of the element $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, i.e., of $`\text{prod}(\sigma _1,\sigma _2,m)`$. So we deduce that (a cyclic conjugate of) $`w`$ must contain a subword $`\sigma _1^1\sigma _2w^{}s`$ such that $`\sigma _2w^{}s`$ is equivalent to a power of $`\text{prod}(\sigma _1,\sigma _2,m)`$ and $`\sigma _2w^{}`$ represents an element of the region $`[\nu _{\sigma _1}<\nu _{\sigma _2}]`$. Then Lemma 5.3 implies that either $`\sigma _1^1\sigma _2w^{}s`$ or $`\sigma _2w^{}s`$ is a removable pair of letters. ∎

###### Remark 5.4.

It is known  that the Cayley graph of any Garside group is traced on some flag complex of the form $`𝒳\times `$, where the $``$-component corresponds to powers of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. In the case of an Artin–Tits group of type $`I_2(m)`$, the space $`𝒳`$ is an $`m`$-valent tree. A loop $`\gamma `$ in the Cayley graph projects onto a loop in the tree, so the projection necessarily goes twice through the same vertex, which means that $`\gamma `$ contains vertices that are separated by a power of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, and we can deduce the existence of a removable pair of letters as above.

## 6. Special cases

As the counter-example of Figure 2 shows, a trivial $`4`$-strand braid word need not contain any removable pair of letters. However, partial positive results exist, in particular when we consider words of the form $`u^1v`$, with $`u,v`$ positive words representing a divisor of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

The following result is an easy consequence of the classical Exchange Lemma for Coxeter groups (, Lemma IV.1.4.3) rephrased for Artin–Tits monoids.

###### Lemma 6.1.

Assume that $`A^+`$ is an Artin–Tits monoid of spherical type, $`\sigma ,\tau `$ are atoms of $`A^+`$, and we have $`\sigma \preccurlyeq ̸x`$ and $`\sigma x\tau \mathrm{\Delta }`$. Then we have $`x\tau =\sigma x`$.

Indeed, let $`\pi `$ denote the bijection of the divisors of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ in $`A^+`$ to the corresponding Coxeter group $`W`$ and $`\mathrm{}`$ denote the length in $`W`$. Then $`\sigma x\tau `$ implies $`\mathrm{}(\pi (\sigma x\tau ))<\mathrm{}(\pi (x\tau ))`$. Hence the minimal decomposition of $`\pi (\sigma x\tau )`$ is obtained from that of $`\pi (x\tau )`$ by removing one generator, which cannot come from $`x`$ for, otherwise, we would obtain $`\mathrm{}(\pi (\sigma x))<\mathrm{}(\pi (x))`$ by cancelling $`\tau `$ and contradict $`\sigma \preccurlyeq ̸x`$. So we must have $`\pi (\sigma x\tau )=\pi (x)`$, hence $`\pi (\sigma x)=\pi (x\tau )`$, in $`W`$, and $`\sigma x=x\tau `$ in $`A^+`$.

###### Proposition 6.2.

Assume that $`A^+`$ is an Artin–Tits monoid of spherical type, and $`w`$ is a nonempty trivial word of the form $`u^1v`$ with $`u,v`$ positive simple words. Then $`w`$ contains at least one removable pair of letters.

###### Proof.

For $`w`$ a positive word, let $`\overline{w}`$ denote the element of $`A^+`$ represented by $`w`$. Now, let $`\sigma `$ be the first letter in $`u`$. By hypothesis, we have $`\sigma \overline{v}`$. Let $`v^{}\tau `$ be the shortest prefix of $`v`$ such that $`\sigma \overline{v^{}\tau }`$ is true. Then, by definition, we have $`\sigma \preccurlyeq ̸\overline{v^{}}`$, and, as $`\overline{v}`$ is supposed to be simple, so is $`\overline{v^{}\tau }`$. We can therefore apply Lemma 6.1, and we obtain $`\sigma v^{}v^{}\tau `$, hence $`\sigma ^1v^{}\tau v^{}`$. Thus $`\sigma ^1v^{}\tau `$ is a removable pair of letters in $`w`$. ∎

###### Remark 6.3.

In the case of braids, a direct geometric argument also gives Proposition 6.2. Indeed, if $`u`$ and $`v`$ are positive braid words representing simple braids, then the braid diagrams coded by $`u`$ and $`v`$ can be realised as the projections of three-dimensional figures where the $`i`$-th strand entirely lives in the plane $`y=i`$: the simplicity hypothesis guarantees that no altitude contradiction can occur, as any two strands cross at most once . So the same is true for the braid coded by $`u^1v`$, provided we require that the strand living in the plane $`y=i`$ is the one at position $`i`$ after $`u^1`$. Now, let $`i`$ be the least index such that the $`i`$th strand is not a straight line, and let $`j`$ be the least index such that the $`j`$th strand crosses the $`i`$th strand. Then, necessarily, the $`i`$th and the $`j`$th strands make a disk, as they must return to their initial position if $`u^1v`$ represents $`1`$ (Figure 6).

Proposition 6.2 does not extend to arbitrary trivial negative–positive words, i.e., of the form $`u^1v`$ with $`u,v`$ positive: the hypothesis that $`u`$ and $`v`$ represent a simple braid is essential.

An easy method for producing equivalent positive braid words is as follows: starting with a seed consisting of two positive words $`u,v`$, we can complete them into equivalent words—i.e., we can find a common right multiple for $`\overline{u}`$ and $`\overline{v}`$—by using the word reversing technique of , which gives two positive words $`u^{},v^{}`$ so that both $`uv^{}`$ and $`vu^{}`$ represent the right lcm of $`\overline{u}`$ and $`\overline{v}`$. Then, by construction, $`v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}u^1vu^{}`$ represents $`1`$. By systematically enumerating all possible seeds $`(u,v)`$, we obtain a large number of negative–positive trivial braid words in which possible removable pair of letters can be investigated.

One obtains in this way very few counter-examples, i.e., trivial braid words with no removable pair of letters. In the case of $`B_4`$, there exists no counter-example with seeds of length at most $`4`$, and there exists only one counter-example among the $`29,403`$ pairs of length $`5`$ words, namely the one of Figure 2, which is associated with the seed $`(\sigma _1^2\sigma _2^3,\sigma _3^2\sigma _2^3)`$. The situation is similar with longer seeds, and for $`B_n`$ with $`n5`$. This explains why random tries have little chance to lead to counter-examples, and raises the question of understanding why there seems to almost always exist disks in trivial braid diagrams.

Finally, let us mention a connection with the (open) question of unbraiding every trivial braid diagram in such a way that all intermediate diagrams have at most as many crossings as the initial diagram—as is well known, there is no solution in the case of knots when the number of crossings is considered, but there is now a solution when the complexity is defined in a more subtle way . Assume that a method for detecting removable pairs of letters has been choosen. Then one obtains an unbraiding algorithm by starting with an arbitrary braid word and iteratively removing removable pairs of letters until no one is left. If the answer to Question 1.1 were positive, this algorithm would always succeed, in the sense that it would end with the empty word if and only if the initial word is trivial. Note that the number of iteration steps is always bounded by half the length of the initial word. In the case of $`4`$ strands and more, the answer to Question 1.1 is negative, so the above algorithm is not correct. In addition, it must be kept in mind that, in any case, the algorithm requires a subroutine detecting removable pairs: we can appeal to any solution of the braid word problem, but, then, the algorithm gives no new solution to that word problem, nor does it either answer the question of length-decreasing unbraiding as long as there is no length-preserving method for proving an equivalence of the form $`\sigma _i^ew\sigma _j^ew`$.

As trivial diagrams without disk seem to be rare, it might happen that, in some sense to be made precise, the above method almost always works. It can be observed on Figure 7 that the braid diagram of Figure 2, which contains no disk, contains an actual ribbon, in the sense that no isotopy is needed to let this ribbon appear. By merging the two strands bordering this ribbon, one obtains a $`3`$-strand diagram—namely the last example in Section 1—which contains a disk. Improving the unbraiding method so as to include such a strand merging procedure might make it work for still more cases.