text:
# The Y2 Isochrones for 𝛼-element Enhanced Mixtures

## 1 Introduction

This paper presents an extension of the $`Y^2`$ Isochrones: scaled-solar mixtures (Yi et al. 2001: Paper 1). Its purpose is to study the effect of the $`\alpha `$-element enhancement on theoretical isochrones. Already for some time, it has become clear that the abundances of some chemical elements, in particular the elements synthesized by nuclear $`\alpha `$ capture reactions (the so-called $`\alpha `$-elements; e.g., O, Ne, Mg, Si, S, Ca, and Ti etc.), are enhanced with respect to iron in Population II stars. Norris et al. (2001) is one of the latest such studies which report that metal-poor stars do not have a scaled-solar chemical composition. One popular interpretation for this is that Population II stars formed in a relatively fast collapse of the proto-galaxy, in which a rapid chemical enrichment and $`\alpha `$-enhancement through efficient feedback from massive stars took place. Similar $`\alpha `$-element enhancements have also been observed in super metal-rich (greater than solar) stellar populations. Spectrophotometric studies of giant elliptical galaxies (Peletier et al., 1990; Rich, 1992), and more recent spectroscopic studies of stars in the bulge (McWilliam & Rich, 1999) and thick disk (Prochaska et al., 2000) of the Galaxy, using the Keck I telescope, indicate that various degrees of $`\alpha `$-element enhancement are commonplace. A thorough discussion of the significance of stellar abundances in understanding the evolution of stellar populations can be found in the reviews by Wheeler et al. (1989) and McWilliam (1997). Applications to elliptical galaxies, which also appear to be $`\alpha `$-enhanced, have been performed by Weiss et al. (1995) and Salaris & Weiss (1998), using the spectral indices of Worthey et al. (1992).

Because opacity tables for $`\alpha `$-enhanced mixtures covering the complete relevant range of temperature and density became available only recently, several sets of theoretical isochrones have been constructed assuming scaled-solar abundances for the elements heavier than helium. However, the obvious limitation is that they refer to the scaled-solar compositions only. For stars with $`\alpha `$-enhanced chemical compositions, one needs then to construct stellar models and isochrones for the particular distribution of metals. Although it is possible in principle to calculate a large number of possible combinations of $`\alpha `$-enhanced ratios, it would not be practical considering the degree of the uncertainties in abundance analysis and the size of the computational effort. VandenBerg et al. (2000), and Salasnich et al. (2000) are among the latest who published sets of the $`\alpha `$-enhanced isochrones assuming a particular choice for the $`\alpha `$-enhanced chemical compositions, based on the OPAL opacities (Rogers & Iglesias 1995, Iglesias & Rogers 1996).

In this study, we construct a set of $`\alpha `$-enhanced isochrones which is fully consistent with the standard set of $`Y^2`$ Isochrones previously released for scaled-solar mixtures (Paper 1). The purpose of this research is twofold. One is to provide an extensive and consistent set of the $`Y^2`$ Isochrones for general use. And, the other is to explore the validity of the common practice of mimicking $`\alpha `$-enhanced isochrones by adopting more metal-rich non-$`\alpha `$-enhanced isochrones, utilizing a simple scaling formula in the heavy element abundance (Chieffi et al., 1991; Chaboyer et al., 1992; Salaris et al., 1993).

## 2 Stellar Evolutionary Computations

### 2.1 The solar mixture

The original Anders-Grevesse study (Anders & Grevesse, 1989) suggests a metal-to-hydrogen ratio $`Z/X`$ of 0.0267, based on meteoritic iron. The solar mixture by Grevesse & Noels (1993) contains some significant changes to the CNO abundance in comparison to the Anders-Grevesse value. There was a major effort in the early 1990’s to determine new and more accurate CNO and Fe abundance in the Sun which were reported by Grevesse & Noels (1993). Finally, the solar iron abundance agrees with the meteoritic abundance; and in 1996, Grevesse et al. (1996) quoted $`(Z/X)_{}=0.0244\pm 0.001`$ at the surface of the Sun. However, more recent estimates suggest that systematic errors much larger than the errors quoted above may still exist in the measurements. Grevesse & Sauval (1998) lately found $`(Z/X)_{}=0.0230`$, with a 10% error estimate, and Asplund (2000), using a solar model atmosphere constructed with a more realistic treatment of convection, derives $`(Z/X)_{}=0.0226`$. This uncertainty in the observed $`(Z/X)_{}`$ directly translates into the uncertainty in the theory-predicted efficiency of diffusion just below the convection zone, in the solar tachocline. In fact, helioseismic inversions (Basu & Antia, 1997) show that the tachocline region is the least well understood part of the standard solar model.

### 2.2 The $`\alpha `$-element enhanced mixture

Although the $`\alpha `$-elements are undoubtedly enhanced in some stars, the enhancement factor for each $`\alpha `$-element is not well determined. VandenBerg et al. (2000) assumed a constant enhancement for most $`\alpha `$-elements in their work, while Salasnich et al. (2000) took an empirically-guided enhancement. Considering the degree of uncertainty in the observation, however, one cannot make a simple choice between these two assumptions.

In this study, we have made the assumption of a constant enhancement, as chosen by VandenBerg et al. (2000). The scaled-solar abundance ration of metals are taken from Grevesse & Noels (1993). In the $`\alpha `$-enhanced case, we adopt a mixture in which the $`\alpha `$-elements were enhanced by a constant factor with respect to the solar abundance ratios. The twice enhanced (\[$`\alpha `$/Fe\]=+0.3)and four times enhanced (\[$`\alpha `$/Fe\]=+0.6) mixtures as well as the solar mixture are summarized in Table 1. Note that, as in VandenBerg et al. (2000), we have assumed that the abundance changes in Mn and Al are anticorrelated with those of the $`\alpha `$-elements(VandenBerg et al., 2000; Norris et al., 2001).

Figure 1 shows the relative abundances in the two $`\alpha `$-element enhanced mixtures (twice solar and four times solar, respectively), normalized to the solar mixture abundances. The legends \[$`\alpha `$/Fe\]=0.0, 0.3, and 0.6 denote solar mixture without $`\alpha `$-enhancement, two-times, and four-times $`\alpha `$-enhanced mixtures, respectively. Note that because total $`Z`$ is fixed, $`\alpha `$-enhanced mixtures are only slightly (approximately by 0.1) above the non-$`\alpha `$-enhanced mixture (top horizontal line at logN=0). When all mixtures are normalized to the $`\alpha `$-elements (e.g., O, Mg) the amount of $`\alpha `$-enhancement appears to be roughly a factor of two in the \[$`\alpha `$/Fe\]=0.3 mixture (dotted line) and four in the \[$`\alpha `$/Fe\]=0.6 mixture (dashed line), respectively. As mentioned above, Al and Mn have been assumed to be depleted. It is important to remember that our isochrones have been computed for a given total metallicity $`Z`$. In this context, more $`\alpha `$-enhanced isochrones are simply less abundant in non-$`\alpha `$-elements. Oxygen is the most important element, and it affects both energy generation and opacity in an important way. Neon is also a significant contributor to interior opacities near the main sequence.

### 2.3 Metallicity parameters and composition scaling

Departing from the solar mixture can create confusion in assigning chemical abundance parameters to the isochrones, and in making comparisons with observations. Depending on the kind of data available, it is at times useful to parameterize heavy element content in terms of \[Fe/H\], or at other times in terms of $`Z`$. Generally, \[Fe/H\] is the quantity measured observationally by spectroscopy or photometry. Relative abundances by number are also favored in theoretical stellar atmosphere models. To help clarify possible confusion, Table 2 shows the conversion from \[Fe/H\] to $`Z`$ for the solar mixture and the two $`\alpha `$-enhanced mixtures used in the calculations. Table 2 was constructed assuming that $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y/\mathrm{\Delta }Z=2`$ for the chemical enrichment.

There is another motivation for studying the relationship between $`Z`$ and \[Fe/H\] for different chemical mixtures. Until recently, interior opacity tables were only available for the solar mixture, and in studies of very metal-poor systems, such as globular clusters and dwarf spheroidal galaxies, there was interest in mimicking the effects of $`\alpha `$-enhancement by correcting the metallicity $`Z`$ used in the opacities. It was first pointed out by Chieffi et al. (1991) — see also (Chaboyer et al., 1992; Salaris et al., 1993; Salaris & Cassisi, 1996) — that one can simply write:

$$Z=Z_0(0.694f_\alpha +0.306)$$
(1)
where $`f_\alpha `$ is the $`\alpha `$-element enhancement factor and $`Z_0`$ is the heavy element abundance by mass for the solar mixture with the same \[Fe/H\]. Note that the coefficients used here are taken from Yi et al. (2001), and are slightly different from those of Salaris et al. (1993) because they apply to the Grevesse-Noels solar mixture (Grevesse & Noels, 1993). Comparing with Table 2 reveals that this formula, which yields the correct values of $`Z`$ at extremely low metallicities, becomes increasingly less exact at higher metallicities. This is due to two main reasons: at high metallicities, (1) the heavy elements contribute a larger fraction of the total mass in the mixture relative to hydrogen and helium, and (2) the helium mass fraction $`Y`$ increases steeply with increasing $`Z`$ (Table 2 assumes $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y/\mathrm{\Delta }Z`$=2).

It is now possible to calculate opacities for $`\alpha `$-enhanced mixtures and investigate the validity of such scaling formulae for a wide range of metallicity. Detailed comparisons between isochrones based on scaled-solar mixtures and isochrones constructed for the correct $`\alpha `$-enhancement are discussed in the rest of this paper. We will confirm, as previously noted by several authors (Chaboyer et al., 1992; Salaris et al., 1993; VandenBerg et al., 2000), that simple scaling formulae are adequate at low metallicities. However, not surprisingly, such scalings and even simple interpolations turn out to be very unreliable at high metallicities.

### 2.4 Input physics and opacities

In order to maintain as much homogeneity and consistency with our solar mixture isochrones as possible, the input physics, calibrations and computational details were kept the same for this set of evolutionary tracks as in Paper 1. A full description can be found in § 2 of Paper 1.

The only difference is in the opacity tables. The effect of the $`\alpha `$-element enhanced mixture on the opacities has been taken into account. The OPAL opacities for the Grevesse & Noels (1993) mixture were used for the computation, as in Paper 1. These opacities are now regarded as one of two best sets of Rosseland mean opacities available today, the Opacity Project tables being the other (Seaton et al., 1997). The fact that both sets of opacities, which were calculated independently and using different physical models, are for the most part in excellent agreement, lends support to their validity. Lately, the OPAL group released newer tables for the Grevesse & Noels (1993) solar mixture that include the effects of seven additional heavy elements as well as some physics changes (Rogers & Iglesias, 1995; Iglesias & Rogers, 1996). The OPAL interior opacities used in this paper were generated for each $`\alpha `$-element enhanced mixture from the OPAL web site (www-phys.llnl.gov/Research/OPAL/).

At low temperatures, tables were computed specifically for the $`\alpha `$-enhanced mixtures by one of us (DRA). These low temperature opacity tables were constructed using the same physics as the solar mixture low temperature opacity tables published by Alexander & Ferguson (1994).

### 2.5 Solar Calibration, Evolutionary Tracks and Isochrone Construction

For internal consistency, we used the same solar calibration as in Paper 1. In Paper 1, a model of the Sun was evolved from the zero-age main sequence (ZAMS) to the current solar age of 4.55 Gyr (Guenther, 1989). The mixing length to scale height ratio ($`l/H_p`$) and the initial helium content ($`Y_{ZAMS}`$) were adjusted in the usual way so as to match the solar luminosity, radius, and the observed solar ratio of heavy element to hydrogen abundance $`Z/X=0.0244`$ (Grevesse et al., 1996) at the solar age. The mixing length parameter $`l/H_p=1.7432`$, the initial $`X=0.7149`$, and $`Z=0.0181`$ were used to produce this match. At the solar age, the solar model has the surface hydrogen abundance $`X=0.7463`$, which satisfies $`Z/X=0.0244`$, consistently with the recent standard solar models of Guenther & Demarque (1997) and Winnick et al. (2002). The same mixing length parameter $`l/H_p`$ was used for all models.

Evolutionary tracks were constructed for the masses 0.4 to 5.0$`M_{}`$ and for the metal abundances, $`0.00001Z0.1`$. In this study, the $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y/\mathrm{\Delta }Z`$ was assumed to be 2.0, which is consistent with the initial $`(Y,Z)_0`$ = (0.23, 0.00) and the solar calibration above. Unlike many studies, which are based on evolutionary tracks with starting points on the ZAMS, all models in this grid were evolved from the pre-MS stellar birthline (Palla & Stahler, 1990, 1993) to the onset of helium burning. This enabled us to construct isochrones for younger ages. The age range of the isochrone set was 0.1 – 20 Gyr. All isochrones in this age range are suitable for population synthesis.

In addition, very young isochrones, for ages of 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 20, 40, 60, and 80 Myr have been included. However, because these isochrones reach only up to 5 $`M_{}`$, they do not cover the red giant branch (RGB). So, one must not use them by themselves for population synthesis studies. But they would be useful for color-magnitude diagram (CMD) fitting of young clusters, in particular as they begin at the pre-MS birthline. The treatment of convective core overshoot is the same as in Paper 1 (Yi et al., 2001). The overshoot parameter was chosen to be 0.2 $`H_p`$ for age$`<`$3 Gyr. The two independent color transformation tables of Green et al. (1987) and of Lejeune et al. (1998) are adopted as in Paper 1, making two separate sets of isochrones available.

## 3 Effects of Enhanced $`\alpha `$-element Abundances

### 3.1 Isochrone morphology

The overall effects of the enhanced $`\alpha `$-element abundances on the isochrone morphology are complex at all metallicities because they involve a non-linear interaction between opacities and energy generation. The effects are shown in Figures 2 and 3.

Figure 2 shows that low metallicity isochrones (panels a and b) depend primarily on the total amount of heavy elements, and not much on the mixture of heavy elements. The effects of the $`\alpha `$-element enhancement are still complicated since they affect both the energy generation and the opacity, but they are less noticeable in the HR-diagram. The location of the giant branches and the turn-offs are not a monotonic function of the degree of $`\alpha `$-enhancement. Although these effects are very small, they are visible in the figures. For example, the MS turn-off temperatures of the young (1 Gyr) isochrones are not in linear relation with the magnitude of $`\alpha `$-enhancement at extremely low metallicities (panel a). These non-linear behaviors of the isochrone morphology are the first indications that a simple scaling law cannot fully reproduce the $`\alpha `$-enhancement effects.

The complexity of $`\alpha `$-enhancement effects are magnified in metal-rich isochrones (Figure 2-(d) for example). When the total metal abundance, $`Z`$, is fixed, increased \[$`\alpha `$/Fe\] means ‘less’ iron abundance which is the main provider of free electrons. Near the turn-off, this results in the $`\alpha `$-enhanced isochrones behaving as if they have lower metal abundance in comparison to the scaled-solar ones. As shown in this figure, the $`\alpha `$-enhanced isochrones generally have their turn-offs at higher temperature. For the younger isochrones whose turn-off stars derive most of their luminosity from the CNO cycle during the main sequence (MS) phase, $`\alpha `$-enhancement also affects the MS lifetime. Thus, the turn-off masses of the $`\alpha `$-enhanced isochrones are smaller, resulting in the lower luminosity and higher temperature of the turn-offs as the $`\alpha `$-element abundance increases. While the location of the MS is mainly affected by the oxygen abundance, that of the red giant branch is mainly determined by the iron abundance and the abundance of $`\alpha `$-elements heavier than oxygen. For a given $`Z`$, more $`\alpha `$-elements means less iron, which in turn means fewer free electron, and lower $`H^{}`$ atmospheric opacity. Thus, as \[$`\alpha `$/Fe\] increases, the red giant branch of the isochrones shift toward higher temperature and luminosity.

When the isochrones are plotted for a fixed \[Fe/H\], as in Figure 3, the behavior of the isochrone morphology is easier to understand. The major factor here is the overall metal abundance $`Z`$. For a fixed \[Fe/H\], the $`\alpha `$-element enhancement means simply the increase of the overall metal abundance. The clearest linear trend is visible in Figure 3-(b) where \[Fe/H\]=$`1.3`$ (typical Galactic globular cluster metallicity) models are displayed. Here again, however, one may find a clue that simple scaling laws cannot be valid: although one notices a general trend toward lower temperature and luminosity with increasing \[$`\alpha `$/Fe\], changes in the gradient of the giant branches with increasing luminosity are recognizable even in the metal-poor cases.

At the lowest metallicities, the main source of opacity in the interior is derived from the free-free transitions of hydrogen and helium, and models on the MS are unaffected by the relative heavy element abundances. The principal effect of $`\alpha `$-enhancement is to increase the relative importance of the CNO cycle in the energy generation. As first pointed out by Simoda & Iben (1968), this results in an earlier central hydrogen exhaustion, resulting in a less luminous turn-off for a given age. This effect is important in that CNO enhancement with respect to hydrogen reduces the derived ages of globular clusters with a given \[Fe/H\] without modifying appreciably the MS position (Figure 6). At higher \[Fe/H\], the interplay between opacity effects and energy generation is more complex, as is evident in Figure 3-(d).

The complex metallicity dependence of the effects of $`\alpha `$-enhancement is illustrated in Figure 4. The four sets of 12 Gyr isochrones are for various values of \[Fe/H\] and $`\alpha `$-enhancement. Note that the most metal-rich isochrones (a group of three on the right) have been shifted by $`\mathrm{log}T_{\mathrm{eff}}=0.05`$ to the right so that they appear separated from the \[Fe/H\]=0.05 (approximately solar) isochrones.

### 3.2 Isochrone Ages

The changes in age estimates from the twice and the four times $`\alpha `$-enhanced cases with respect to that of the Revised Yale Isochrones (Green et al. 1987), are summarized in Table 3, together with that of the updated input physics (the $`Y^2`$ Isochrones–solar mixture). The ages were derived based on the turn-off luminosity defined as (1) total theoretical luminosity (denoted as ‘$`L`$’), (2) visual magnitude estimated using the Green et al. table, $`V`$(G), and (3) visual magnitude estimated using the Lejeune et al. color table, $`V`$(L).

The age changes in the \[$`\alpha `$/Fe\]=0.0 ‘$`L`$’ column are the same as those in Table 7 of Paper 1. The approximately 15% age reduction in Galactic globular cluster metallicity range comes from the update in the physical input in stellar model calculation and does not include the effect of $`\alpha `$-enhancement. Quite expectedly, the two $`\alpha `$-enhanced models (columns 5 and 8) show that there is further age reduction when $`\alpha `$-enhancement is considered. But it should be noted that here we are not comparing the models of the same total $`Z`$ any more. Instead, we have fixed \[Fe/H\], which is usually the observationally measured quantity, and inspected the effects by changing \[$`\alpha `$/Fe\], which is similar to increasing total $`Z`$. Note that the $`\alpha `$-element enhancement would not affect much age estimates if the total $`Z`$ were to be fixed. The amount of further age reduction due to $`\alpha `$-enhancement is approximately 8 and 23% for \[$`\alpha `$/Fe\]=0.3 and 0.6 cases, respectively. The total age reduction, derived from the turn-off luminosity, between RYI and $`Y^2`$ Isochrones is as much as 19–23% for moderately $`\alpha `$-enhanced populations. Figure 5 shows this effect using \[$`\alpha `$/Fe\]=0.3 isochrones.

We prefer theoretical luminosities ($`L`$) for this analysis to magnitudes ($`V`$) because $`L`$ is free from the uncertain luminosity-to-magnitude conversion scheme, which is a part of the color transformation procedure. Yet, observers depend on observed quantities; and thus we present similar comparisons using turn-off $`V`$ magnitudes in other columns of Table 3 and in Figure 6. The $`V_{TO}`$-based age reduction is by and large comparable to that from theoretical luminosity. All this illustrates the difficulty of estimating stellar ages in systems for which only \[Fe/H\], but not \[$`\alpha `$/Fe\], is known.

## 4 Scaling formulae that simulate $`\alpha `$-enhancement effects

Many studies have shown that the effects of the $`\alpha `$-enhancement on the early evolution of low mass stars may be treated by increasing the overall $`Z`$ of models computed for scaled-solar mixtures of the heavy elements (Chieffi et al., 1991; Chaboyer et al., 1992; Salaris et al., 1993; Salaris & Cassisi, 1996). Salaris et al. (1993) type formula for the Grevesse & Noels (1993) mixture has been mentioned above as Eqn. (1). The validity of such a scaling procedure should be investigated especially for the higher metallicities (Weiss et al., 1995; Salaris & Weiss, 1998).

Figures 7 and 8 represent independent confirmation of the results of VandenBerg et al. (2000). The plots show that at least at low metallicities the $`\alpha `$-enhancement effect on the overall shape of the isochrone can be mimicked by adopting more metal-rich non-$`\alpha `$-enhanced isochrones. It is important to note that our matching effort was made to fit the upper MS. Since empirical determination of the turn-off temperature is not easy, and since the turn-off luminosities of the simulated isochrones seem not so different from those of the $`\alpha `$-enhanced ones (see below), it seemed to us sensible to concentrate on the upper MS near turn-off, but not on the turn-off itself.

Figure 7 shows the 12 Gyr isochrones for \[Fe/H\]=$`2.3`$. The twice and four times $`\alpha `$-enhanced models are compared with the more metal-rich non-$`\alpha `$-enhanced models. The overall fit is good. It is clear that as metallicity increases, such scalings become less reliable. At \[Fe/H\]=$`1.3`$, the simulated models (dotted lines) produce good fits on the MS of the $`\alpha `$-enhanced models but fail to match the giant branches, as shown in Figure 8. A bit of the shift in the giant branches may be corrected by a small reduction of $`Z`$. But in this analysis, we assumed that the MS is generally the branch that is best determined empirically and thus put more weight on MS fitting. Besides, such small differences will be considered smaller than the accuracy of current stellar models anyway.

The fits become impossible when metallicity is as high as close to solar, as shown in Figure 9. Our numerous simulations showed that no single simulated isochrone can match the true $`\alpha `$-enhanced model for all of MS, MS turn-off, and red giant branch simultaneous. We conclude that it is $`not`$ recommended to use any such simulation formulae at high metallicities.

In Paper 1, we presented isochrone fits to two globular clusters, one metal-poor (M 68), the other metal-rich (47 Tuc), using non-$`\alpha `$-enhanced isochrones but corrected for $`\alpha `$-enhancement using previously available simulation formulae. We present the same fits now using true $`\alpha `$-enhanced isochrones. Figures 10 and 11 show the fits. The fits are at least as good as in Paper 1; the only difference is that we do not need such formulae any more. In general, globular cluster distances are still uncertain that one should not place too much reliance on the quality of this kind of CMD fitting. It is remarkable, however, that the distance modulus used for 47 Tuc in Figure 11, (m-M)=13.47, is within 1.0 $`\sigma `$ of the latest value based on the main sequence fitting using 43 local subdwarfs (Hipparcos) which is $`mM(V)=13.37_{0.11}^{+0.10}`$ (Percival et al., 2002). And, it is within 1.4 $`\sigma `$ of the white dwarf distance modulus, 13.27 $`\pm `$ 0.14 (Zoccali et al., 2001). This is a rather good agreement considering many uncertainties not only in distance, but also in the bolometric correction and color calibration etc.

## 5 Summary and discussion

This paper presents an extension of the $`Y^2`$ isochrones (Yi et al., 2001) including the effects of $`\alpha `$-element enhancement. Two values of $`\alpha `$-enhancement, \[$`\alpha `$/Fe\]=$`+`$0.3 and $`+`$0.6 have been considered.

As in Paper 1, pre-MS evolutionary phases are included, allowing for the construction of younger isochrones. Isochrones including the complete hydrogen burning phase, suitable for population synthesis, have been constructed for the age range 0.1 – 20 Gyr. In the case of stars with a convective core near the MS, overshoot by 0.2 pressure scale height at the edge of the convective core has been taken into account. An additional set of very young isochrones for ages 1 – 80 Myr is presented. They are unsuitable for population synthesis because their post-MS phases are not included but would be useful for comparing with the CMDs of very young stellar populations.

We confirm that the use of simple scaling formulae, such as the one introduced by Salaris et al. (1993), can approximate the effect of $`\alpha `$-enhancement on the isochrone morphology especially at low metallicities. Thus, such formulae, in the absence of appropriate models, can be useful to the studies of globular clusters and dwarf spheroidal galaxies. However, the range of validity of such scaling laws is limited. In general, because of the complex interaction between opacities, the equation of state and nuclear processes, it is not possible to derive a scaling formula that is applicable for a large range of $`Z`$.

From the point of view of stellar population chronology, this paper confirms that for a given \[Fe/H\], the updated isochrones that include the effects of $`\alpha `$-element enhancement lead to significant age reductions of up to 23% if \[$`\alpha `$/Fe\]=$`+`$0.3, as shown in Table 3. Approximately a third of this reduction is due to a factor of two increase in the $`\alpha `$-element abundances (see the difference between the second and fifth columns in Table 3). A new result, which is equally important, is the age increase at high $`Z`$, which removes the age gap that used to exist between the oldest metal-rich and metal-poor stellar populations.

Caveats of this work include the treatment of $`\alpha `$-enhancement in the temperature-color transformation. Theoretical stellar properties (temperature, gravity, etc.) are converted to observable quantities (magnitudes and colors) based on a stellar spectral library (in our case, either the Green et al. table or the Lejeune et al. table). Such a spectral library is usually calibrated empirically so that it reproduces the colors of sample stars in the Milky Way for a given set of parameters. In fact, the calibration is based on a limited and incomplete sample. For example, such Milky Way samples may imply \[$`\alpha `$/Fe\]=0.3 for \[Fe/H\]=$``$2, \[$`\alpha `$/Fe\]=0.15 for \[Fe/H\]=$``$0.7, and \[$`\alpha `$/Fe\]=0.0 for \[Fe/H\]=0. Users of these isochrones should be warned that for this reason, interpolated isochrones, even if well within our parameter range (\[$`\alpha `$/Fe\] = 0.0 – 0.6), are not necessarily based on a proper temperature-color transformation scheme. Some colors are more sensitive to \[$`\alpha `$/Fe\] than others. Thus, a full $`\alpha `$-enhancement treatment will be possible only when temperature-color transformation schemes are available for a wide range of $`\alpha `$-enhancement as well.

Similarly, the importance of $`\alpha `$-enhancement effects on the spectral line analysis for clusters and galaxies has been recognized (Vazdekis et al., 2001) as well. The effects of $`\alpha `$-enhancement occur mainly in two steps. The first is in the stellar model construction through opacities and energy generations. The next is through the convolution of the stellar models with a stellar spectral library. For this reason, one must have a properly $`\alpha `$-enhanced stellar spectral library for a wide range of $`\alpha `$-enhancement in order to generate consistent population synthesis models.

Despite the caveats, we believe that these new isochrones with $`\alpha `$-enhancement options will be useful in many studies. The full set of isochrones and a FORTRAN package that work for age, metallicity, and $`\alpha `$-enhancement interpolation are available at the following internet sites.

http://www-astro.physics.ox.ac.uk/$``$yi/yyiso.html

http://www.astro.yale.edu/demarque/yyiso.html

http://csaweb.yonsei.ac.kr/$``$kim/yyiso.html

We are indebted to A. Sarajedini for providing the CMD data for 47 Tuc. This research has been supported by Korean Research Foundation Grant KRF-2001-003-D00106 (YCK), and received partial support from NASA grant NAG5-8406 (PD).


format: text

text:
# Elliptic Flow Fluctuations

## I Introduction

A high-energy collision of heavy ions is often called the Little Bang because of its similarity to the cosmological Big Bang. Both phenomena are violent explosions and both have attracted attention of experimentalists who have gathered unprecedented amount of data, limited basically by the data processing technology. The experiments provided a lot of valuable information about the system’s evolution. In particular, small variation in the temperature of background radiation have revealed mean dipole component, caused by the motion of the Solar System relative to the Big Bang heat bath. Tiny ($`10^5`$) fluctuations on top of the dipole contribution, which have been recently decomposed into angular harmonics with $`l`$ up to about 2000, show peaks due to frozen sound exited 15 billions of years ago. A study of harmonic fluctuations in the Little Bang may possibly reveal something interesting like frozen modulations as well.

One of the most spectacular experimental results obtained by now in relativistic heavy-ion collisions at RHIC is strong elliptic flow quantified by mean value of the second angular harmonics $`v_2`$ . The phenomenon, which is sensitive to the collision early stage  when the interaction zone is of the almond shape, is naturally explained within a hydrodynamics as a result of large density gradients . Since, the hydrodynamic description is applicable for a system which is in local thermodynamic equilibrium, the large elliptic flow suggests a surprisingly short, below 1 $`\mathrm{fm}/c`$ , equilibration time which is difficult to reconcile with dynamic calculations, at least those performed within the perturbative QCD, see e.g. , where the early rapid expansion is closer to free streaming than to hydrodynamic evolution. We note here that the hydrodynamic model , which assumes the equilibration of only transverse degrees of freedom, has appeared rather unsuccessful in describing the experimental data . There have also been attempts  to explain the large elliptic flow within models which do not invoke thermodynamic equilibrium. Finally, at large transverse momentum $`p_T=210`$ GeV the magnitude of $`v_2`$ seem to be well described by the surface emission model.

In such a situation, it is certainly desirable to look for experimental observables which can shed more light on the system dynamics at a collision early stage. We propose to go beyond measuring the mean elliptic flow magnitude, and study its (and higher harmonics, if it ever be possible) fluctuations on the event-by-event basisThis is similar idea to the above mentioned measurement of the angular fluctuations of $`T`$. In cosmology, there is, of course, only one event but one can study angular fluctuations in various regions of the sky.. To be specific, we suggest to measure $`v_2`$ in every collision and then to analyze the variance of $`v_2`$. The first attempt of such an measurement has been undertaken in a very recent study by STAR Collaboration . The result is however rather inconclusive. Our aim here is to motivate the work in order to improve experimental procedures.

The elliptic flow fluctuations are shown to be sensitive even to somewhat exotic phenomena which have been argued to occur at the collision early stage. We consider here the filamentation instability  initiated due to the strong momentum anisotropy of the parton system, and the generation and subsequent explosions of the topological clusters . To detect these dynamical phenomena of interest one needs, however, a reliable estimate of the usual fluctuation. Therefore, a magnitude of the statistical noise is discussed in detail. We take into account the interference of various Fourier harmonics and finite resolution of the reaction plane reconstruction. We also study the fluctuations caused by the impact parameter and particle multiplicity variation.

## II Formulation of the problem

Two methods have been developed to quantify the ellipticity, as well as higher harmonics, in the azimuthal angle distribution. One possibility is to work directly with the correlation functions of 2, 4, 6 or even more particles . Then, only the relative emission angles of particles matter and there is no need to determine a direction of the impact parameter $`\psi _R`$. Using the cumulants, one can partially eliminate detector effects, and consequently even detectors with relatively small acceptance can be used. The resulting Fourier coefficients include, however, not only the effects associated with the ellipticity of events but are contaminated by any 2-, 4-, or, in general, $`n`$-body correlations caused by resonances, jets, quantum statistics etc. However, it is hoped that these nonflow correlations are dominated by the two-body effects and thus the genuine four-particle correlations provide rather clean information about the flow. Going to the six-particle correlations, the procedure can be further improved.

In our considerations, we will refer to another method , which was formulated earlier and is usually called a standard one. The method focuses on the angular distributions relative to direction of the impact parameter. The experimental procedure splits in two steps which should be as independent from each other as possible. In the first step, one uses all available multi-body information about an event in order to determine the impact parameter direction $`\psi _R`$. In the second step, one constructs the distribution of the azimuthal angle relative to $`\psi _R`$ of ‘selected particles’ and one computes the Fourier coefficients. The sets of particles used at these two steps are different from each other, and we will call their numbers as $`M`$ and $`N`$, respectively. In order to reduce non-flow correlations, the particles of both sets (subevents) are usually separated by a rapidity gap. They are still correlated by the flow because the direction of the impact parameter $`\psi _R`$ is a global feature of an event, like the magnitude of the impact parameter itself§§§In principle, the impact parametr magnitude can be reconstructed from 2-, 4-, 6-, …, $`n`$-particle correlators. However, it would be very difficult and presumably rather inaccurate method. Using total multiplicity or forward calorimeter signal does the job very well.. In practice, it is desired to use the cumulant and standard method simultaneously. Comparing the results, one can eventually separate the ‘flow’ (global correlation between all secondaries) from ‘local correlations’ involving a few particles only. Such a comparison made by STAR  has shown that unless one goes to high $`p_T`$ or very central collisions, the flow dominates and 2-body correlations contribute to $`v_2`$ obtained from the standard method only at the 10-15 % level.

Since the one-particle distribution in a single event can be written as

$$P(\varphi )=\frac{1}{2\pi }\left[1+2\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}v_n\mathrm{cos}\left(n(\varphi \psi _R)\right)\right]\mathrm{\Theta }(\varphi )\mathrm{\Theta }(2\pi \varphi ),$$
(1)
the $`n`$th Fourier amplitude is determined as

$$v_n=\overline{\mathrm{cos}\left(n(\varphi \psi _R)\right)},$$

with $`\overline{\mathrm{}}`$ denoting averaging over one-particle distribution in a single event.

The reaction plane is never reconstructed precisely and the real reaction plane angle $`\psi _R`$ deviates from the estimated angle $`\psi _E`$. One observes that

$$v_n=\frac{1}{R_n}\overline{\mathrm{cos}\left(n(\varphi \psi _E)\right)},$$

where $`R_n\mathrm{cos}\left(n(\psi _R\psi _E)\right)`$ is the reaction plane resolution factor.

Let us now think about the ensemble of events with every event representing a single nucleus-nucleus collision. The angular harmonics $`v_n`$ are measured for each event. It should be stressed that this is not only the angle $`\psi _R`$ (and $`\psi _E`$) which varies form event to event but the amplitudes of Fourier harmonics can also vary due to dynamical reasons. According to , the average over events of the harmonic’s amplitude is not defined as

$$v_n\stackrel{\mathrm{def}}{=}\frac{\overline{\mathrm{cos}\left(\mathrm{n}(\varphi \psi _\mathrm{E})\right)}}{\mathrm{R}_\mathrm{n}}$$
(2)
but

$$v_n\stackrel{\mathrm{def}}{=}\frac{\overline{\mathrm{cos}\left(\mathrm{n}(\varphi \psi _\mathrm{E})\right)}}{\mathrm{R}_\mathrm{n}},$$
(3)
where $`\mathrm{}`$ denotes averaging over events. Since the procedure of determining the angle $`\psi _E`$ is arranged to be maximally independent from that of computing of $`\overline{\mathrm{cos}\left(n(\varphi \psi _E)\right)}`$, it is expected that the event averaging of $`R_n`$ and of $`\overline{\mathrm{cos}\left(n(\varphi \psi _E)\right)}`$ are independent from each other. If so,

$$\frac{\overline{\mathrm{cos}\left(n(\varphi \psi _E)\right)}}{R_n}=\frac{1}{R_n}\overline{\mathrm{cos}\left(n(\varphi \psi _E)\right)}\frac{\overline{\mathrm{cos}\left(n(\varphi \psi _E)\right)}}{R_n},$$

where the approximate equality holds if the resolution factor $`\mathrm{cos}\left(n(\psi _R\psi _E)\right)`$ does not much vary from event to event. Thus, the definitions (2, 3) are approximately equivalent to each other, provided $`\psi _R`$ is reconstructed sufficiently well (which requires $`M1`$).

While the definition (2) can be uniquely extended to the second moment, there is an ambiguity how to generalize the definition (3). Therefore, we define

$$v_n^2\stackrel{\mathrm{def}}{=}\frac{1}{\mathrm{R}_\mathrm{n}^2}\overline{\mathrm{cos}\left(\mathrm{n}(\varphi \psi _\mathrm{E})\right)}^2,$$

and the fluctuations as

$$\mathrm{𝖵𝖺𝗋}(v_n)\stackrel{\mathrm{def}}{=}\mathrm{v}_\mathrm{n}^2\mathrm{v}_\mathrm{n}^2=\frac{1}{\mathrm{R}_\mathrm{n}^2}\left(\overline{\mathrm{cos}\left(\mathrm{n}(\varphi \psi _\mathrm{E})\right)}^2\overline{\mathrm{cos}\left(\mathrm{n}(\varphi \psi _\mathrm{E})\right)}^2\right),$$
(4)
where $`R_n^2`$ enters as a multiplicative factor. However, $`R_n`$ generates event-by-event fluctuations of observed $`v_n`$. To see the effect, let us consider the single-particle azimuthal distribution in a given event of the form (1) with the amplitudes $`v_n`$ being exactly the same in all events. Then, $`v_n=v_n`$ but

$$\mathrm{𝖵𝖺𝗋}(v_n)=\frac{R_n^2R_n^2}{R_n^2}v_n^2.$$

Thus, the fluctuations of $`R_n`$ contribute to $`\mathrm{𝖵𝖺𝗋}(v_n)`$. We will often use the symbol $`\delta v_n\sqrt{\mathrm{𝖵𝖺𝗋}(v_n)}`$.

In the following sections, we will focus our attention on the second harmonics and consider several sources of the $`v_2`$ fluctuations.

## III Statistical Noise

We start our discussions of the fluctuations of $`v_2`$ with those caused by the finite number $`N`$ of particles which are used at the step 2 of the standard method when the Fourier amplitudes are determined. We assume here that $`v_n`$ do not change from event to event. We also assume that the only correlations in the system are those due to the flow. Then, the azimuthal distribution of $`N`$ particles is a product of $`N`$ single particle distributions. Namely,

$$P_N(\varphi _1,\varphi _2,\mathrm{},\varphi _N)=𝒫_NP(\varphi _1)P(\varphi _2)\mathrm{}P(\varphi _N),$$

where $`𝒫_N`$ is the multiplicity distribution while all distributions $`P(\varphi _i)`$ are given by Eq. (1). The single particle distributions $`P(\varphi _i)`$ are correlated to each other because of the common angle $`\psi _R`$.

In a single event, the ellipticity is found as

$$v_2=\frac{1}{R_2}\frac{1}{N}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\mathrm{cos}\left(2(\varphi _i\psi _E)\right)$$

where $`\varphi _i`$ is the azimuthal angle of $`i`$th particle and $`N`$ is the event’s multiplicity. According to the definition (3) the ensemble average of $`v_2`$ then equals

$`v_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{R_2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\mathrm{cos}\left(2(\varphi _i\psi _E)\right)`$ (5)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{N=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝒫_N{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}𝑑\varphi _1P(\varphi _1){\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}𝑑\varphi _2P(\varphi _2)\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}𝑑\varphi _NP(\varphi _N){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\mathrm{cos}\left(2(\varphi _i\psi _E)\right)=v_2.`$ (6)
We note that the event-by-event averaging of $`R_2`$ and of $`\mathrm{cos}\left(2(\varphi _i\psi _E)\right)`$ are assumed to be independent from each other.

The second moment is

$`v_2^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{R_2^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\mathrm{cos}\left(2(\varphi _i\psi _E)\right)\right)^2`$ (7)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{R_2^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{N=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝒫_N{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N^2}}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}𝑑\varphi _1P(\varphi _1){\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}𝑑\varphi _2P(\varphi _2)\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}𝑑\varphi _NP(\varphi _N)\left({\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\mathrm{cos}\left(2(\varphi _i\psi _E)\right)\right)^2`$ (8)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{R_2^2}}\left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}v_4(2R_2^21)\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}+v_2^2R_2^2{\displaystyle \frac{N1}{N}}\right].`$ (9)
It has been found in Au-Au collisions at RHIC  that $`v_4v_2`$ while $`v_2`$ reaches the value of about 0.07 for rather peripheral collisions. Taking these numbers into account, we estimate the fluctuations of $`v_2`$ as

$$\mathrm{𝖵𝖺𝗋}(v_2)=\frac{1}{2R_2^2N}+v_2^2\frac{R_2^2R_2^2}{R_2^2},$$
(10)
where we have also assumed that $`N1`$ and that the multiplicity fluctuations are small.

The second term in r.h.s of Eq. (10) depends on the number of particles $`M`$ used to determine the impact parameter direction. Since $`M`$ is usually rather large, we assume in accord with  that $`R_2`$ does not much deviate from unity. Then, as argued in , we have

$$R_2=\mathrm{cos}\left(2(\psi _R\psi _E)\right)1(\psi _R\psi _E)^21\frac{a}{2M}$$
(11)
where the parameter $`a`$ depends on the type of weights which are applied. An actual value of $`a`$ is irrelevant for our considerations. Using the arguments which lead us to the result (11), one finds

$$R_2^2=\mathrm{cos}^2\left(2(\psi _R\psi _E)\right)12(\psi _R\psi _E)^21\frac{a}{M}.$$

Thus, $`R_2^2R_2^2M^2`$. Since the number of particles used to determine the reaction plane is larger or at least similar to that which is involved in finding $`v_2`$, we conclude that the second term in r.h.s of Eq. (10) can be neglected. Thus, we finally estimate the statistical noise as

$$\delta v_2=\frac{1}{R_2\sqrt{2N}}.$$
(12)
As an extra check, we have performed a Monte Carlo simulation of fake events with $`N`$ particles generated according to $`P(\varphi )\left(1+2v_2\mathrm{cos}(2(\varphi \psi _R))\right)`$. The obtained variation of $`v_2`$ is, of course, in full agreement with the expression given above.

In the subsequent sections, we discuss physical phenomena which lead to the fluctuations of $`v_2`$ different than those described by Eq. (12), i.e. originating from true event-by-event fluctuations of flow.

## IV Impact parameter and multiplicity fluctuations

As already noted, the observed elliptic flow is naturally described in the hydrodynamic model . Therefore, are going to discuss here how large are the fluctuations of $`v_2`$ within the hydrodynamics. One should distinguish the fluctuations due to the varying impact parameter and those due to the thermodynamic fluctuations at fixed collision geometry. We start with the former ones.

As well known, $`v_2`$ strongly depends on the collision impact parameter $`b`$. In the case of Au-Au collisions at RHIC at $`\sqrt{s_{NN}}=130`$ GeV, the dependence has been parameterized  as

$$v_2=a_1b+a_2b^2+a_3^3+a_4b^4+a_5b^5+a_6b^6,$$
(13)
where $`b`$ is measured in fm and $`a_1=3.9410^4`$, $`a_2=2.110^3`$, $`a_3=7.0610^5`$, $`a_4=3.210^5`$, $`a_5=3.5810^6`$, and $`a_6=1.1710^7`$. The parameterization assumes that $`v_2`$ vanishes for $`b=0`$ and for $`b>b_{\mathrm{max}}=14.7`$ fm.

The $`v_2`$ fluctuations due to the varying impact parameter can be estimated by the formula

$$\delta v_2=\frac{dv_2}{db}\delta b.$$

The impact parameter fluctuations are, in principle, measurable through the observation of multiplicity of participating nucleons $`N_p`$ which in turn is controlled by the collision trigger conditions. Then, $`\delta b`$ can be recalculated into $`\delta N_p`$. Adopting the linear dependence

$$N_p=2Z\left(1\frac{b}{b_{\mathrm{max}}}\right),$$

where $`Z=79`$ is the number of protons in a gold nucleus, one gets the formula

$$\delta v_2=\left(a_1+2a_2b+3a_3^2+4a_4b^3+5a_5b^4+6a_6b^5\right)\frac{b_{\mathrm{max}}}{2Z}\delta N_p,$$
(14)
We note that for $`b10`$ fm where the flow is maximal the $`v_2`$ fluctuations due to the impact parameter variation vanish because the derivative $`dv_2/db`$ is then zero. For $`b=5`$ fm where $`v_20.03`$, Eq. (14) gives $`\delta v_2810^4\delta N_p`$ which should be compared to the statistical noise (12). For $`b=5`$ fm, $`\delta N_p=30`$ and $`N=500`$, the magnitude of the $`v_2`$ fluctuations caused by the impact parameter variation is approximately equal to that of statistical noise. Thus, not only the statistical noise but also the centrality fluctuations must be subtracted from the measured $`v_2`$ fluctuations to observe the dynamical fluctuations of interest.

Let us now consider the fluctuations of $`v_2`$ due to the variation of thermodynamic parameters. The most important are presumably the multiplicity fluctuations. Here, we present some general formulas, considering an example of non-statistical fluctuations of multiplicity in the next section. (We follow a similar analysis  of the mean $`p_T`$ event-by-event fluctuations due to radial flow fluctuations.) We assume here that the multiplicity of produced particles is not directly used to determine the collision centrality. In such a case the predicted $`v_2`$ fluctuations could be significantly reduced.

The fluctuations of $`v_2`$ can be estimated as

$$\delta v_2=\frac{dv_2}{dN}\delta N,$$

which can be rewritten in the form

$$\frac{\delta v_2}{v_2}=\frac{\delta N}{N}P_h,$$
(15)
where the index $`P_h`$ (the effective power) is

$$P_h\frac{d\mathrm{ln}v_2}{d\mathrm{ln}N}=\frac{N}{v_2}\frac{dv_2}{dN},$$

with $`h`$ denoting a hadron species used to determine $`v_2`$. We note that STAR collaboration has already reported the data on $`v_2`$ for $`\pi ,K,K_s,p,\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ . The first stochastic factor in Eq. (15) is the relative multiplicity fluctuation which drives the fluctuations of $`v_2`$, while the second dynamical factor $`P_h`$ shows how a change in entropy transfers into $`v_2`$. $`P_h`$ is obviously different for various secondary hadron species which can be used to test the idea further.

Assuming the poissonian character of multiplicity fluctuations, Eq. (15) can be rewritten as

$$\delta v_2=\frac{v_2}{\sqrt{N}}P_h.$$
(16)
The value of the index $`P_h`$ can be estimated within the hydrodynamics. The calculations presented in  for EoS LH8 show that changing $`dN/dy`$ from 200 to 400 leads to the increase of $`v_2`$ for pions from 0.028 to about 0.04 in a good agreement with NA49 and STAR data, see Fig. 24 in . Reading a logarithmic slope from that figure, we find $`P_\pi 0.4`$, which will be used belowP. Kolb was kind enough to provide the results for pions and nucleons from his version of hydrodynamics, and the indices turned out to be three times smaller, $`P_\pi 0.12,P_p0.13`$. These number, however, are affected by some artifacts of the freeze-out approximations used, especially for low (SPS) energies. As a result, there is a non-monotonous dependence of $`v_2`$ vs. $`dN/dy`$ with a minimum, reducing the index. We note that a compilation of the AGS-SPS-RHIC data show a monotonous rise, as found in ..

Comparing Eqs. (12) and (16), one finds that the ratio of the hydrodynamic fluctuations to the statistical noise is $`\sqrt{2}R_2v_2P_h`$ which for $`R_2=0.6`$, $`v_2=0.07`$  and $`P_h=0.4`$ is 0.02. The effect is indeed rather small. However, as discussed in Sec. III, the magnitude of the statistical noise can be well controlled, and consequently, the hydrodynamic fluctuations seem to be detectable.

## V Fluctuations Induced by Cluster Formation

In general, cluster production induce event-by-event fluctuations of local multiplicity or $`dN/dy`$ larger than pure statistical noise, simply because the number of clusters is smaller than the number of particles. The estimates, which we will give, follow ordinary statistical arguments, assuming that the cluster production happens in statistically independent way. This is justified by the observation that they all appear at different locations in the transverse plane, and also that they depend on specific hadronic and vacuum configurations at the moment of the collision. The original presentation of the idea that clusters should lead to observable event-by-event fluctuations of flows has been made by one of us at the 2001 CERN workshop .

Experimentally, existence of strong clustering of produced secondaries in p-p collisions has been known since 2-body correlation function was measured at ISR long time ago. To our knowledge, however, precise properties of such clusters have been never really explained or well quantified. As a relatively recent example of the cluster study, we refer to Fermilab experiment  where high multiplicity $`\overline{\mathrm{p}}`$-p collisions have been analyzed with the conclusion that the average charged multiplicity per cluster is about 4. A single isolated cluster is produced in the so-called Pomeron-Pomeron process. Another example is provided by a recent analysis of the old UA8 data , showing production of clusters of 3-5 GeV mass. It was further shown that such clusters, with mass up to 5 GeV, decay isotropically in their rest frameUnfortunately, the UA2 detector, which was used to collect the data, was just a simple calorimeter, and we do not know anything about the structure of these clusters or even mean multiplicities. RHIC detectors and especially STAR can do a lot of clarification in p-p mode, provided proper triggers are implemented.. Understanding of such clusters is very important to clarify a long-standing problem of ‘soft Pomeron’ dynamics.

As a theoretical motivation, we suggest topological cluster formation in heavy-ion collisions. Inhomogeneous structure of the QCD vacuum, with relatively dilute gas of instantons, results in also dilute set of topological clusters arising at the collision early stage when the system is promptly excited, from virtual to real classical fields. For more discussion of these ideas, specific formulas and original references, see recent paper by one of us  and some subsequent works  where the cluster production and decay into gluons and quarks is discussed. For the purpose of this paper, it is enough to know that such a cluster, a QCD sphaleron, is like a heavy resonance which is expected to decay into about 3 gluons and 6 quarks and antiquarks. In p-p those should hadronize into specific final states, while in heavy ion case these partons are absorbed by the fireball and simply increase the local entropy density. This should cause event-by-event fluctuations of radial flow  as well as of elliptic flow we discuss in this note.

Let us now quantify particle number fluctuations caused by the cluster formation. As previously, $`N`$ denotes particle multiplicity in a given $`p_T`$ and $`y`$ window and $`N_{\mathrm{cl}}`$ is the number of hadrons which can be attributed to the cluster decays. With $`N_0`$ we denote the hadron multiplicity from all sources different than the topological clusters. Then, the relative fluctuation of the particle multiplicity can be written as

$$\frac{\delta N}{N}=\frac{N_0}{N}\frac{\delta N_0}{N_0}+\frac{N_{\mathrm{cl}}}{N}\frac{\delta N_{\mathrm{cl}}}{N_{\mathrm{cl}}}.$$

Now, we assume that the fluctuations of both the cluster number $`n_{\mathrm{cl}}`$ and $`N_0`$ are poissonian, i.e.

$$\frac{\delta n_{\mathrm{cl}}}{n_{\mathrm{cl}}}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{n_{\mathrm{cl}}}},\frac{\delta N_0}{N_0}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N_0}},$$

and that every cluster provides $`k`$ hadrons ($`N_{\mathrm{cl}}=kn_{\mathrm{cl}}`$). Then, the relative fluctuation of the hadron number is

$$\frac{\delta N}{N}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}\left(\sqrt{1f}+\sqrt{fk}\right),$$
(17)
where $`fN_{\mathrm{cl}}/N`$ denotes the fraction of final state hadrons produced due to the cluster formation.

Assuming that the cluster production alone is completely responsible for the p-p cross growth with the collision energy, one obtains the upper bound\**\**\**This is an upper bound because nuclear modification of the structure functions is ignored. The realistic number is presumably factor 2 or so smaller. on cluster production in Au-Au . Adopting the scaling from p-p to Au-Au with the number of hard collisions, it was estimated in  that up to roughly 70 clusters per unit rapidity, $`dn_{\mathrm{cl}}/dy70`$, can be produced around $`y=0`$ in central Au-Au collisions at RHIC. This estimate, in turn, leads to an (upper limit) on cluster-related entropy of about half of the total value, and consequently of about half of the total multiplicity ($`f0.5`$). Keeping in mind that $`dN/dy550`$, one gets $`k4`$. Inserting these numbers into Eq. (17), we find that the formation and subsequent decays of clusters can (maximally) double the multiplicity fluctuations when compared to the poissonian fluctuations.

Using Eq. (15), one immediately translates the multiplicity fluctuations into the fluctuations of $`v_2`$. Since, the clusters can even double $`\delta N/N`$, the same holds for $`\delta v_2/v_2`$. Once we have concluded Sec. IV that the hydrodynamic fluctuations seem to be measurable, we claim here that there is a chance to detect the fluctuation growth due to the cluster formation. However, it should stressed that the production and subsequent decay of the clusters can be observed directly studying the multiplicity fluctuations.

## VI Fluctuations induced by Filamentation instability

When the momentum distribution of partons is strongly elongated in one direction, say along the $`z`$ i.e. beam axis, the neutral system has a tendency to split into the filaments along $`z`$ with the current flowing in the opposite directions in neighboring filaments. The reason is as follows: once the currents in the system occur, they generate the (chromo-)magnetic field, oscillating in the direction perpendicular to the beam axis, and the Lorentz force acts back on the charges which form the currents. It appears that the currents get focused and the current magnitude grows. This is the filamentation instability  which have been studied in the context of ultrarelativistic heavy-ion collisions in .

The breakdown of the azimuthal symmetry of the system due to the instability development gives a chance to observe it experimentally. It has been argued  that the instability growth leads to the energy transport along the wave vector which coincides with the Poynting vector of the generated chromodynamic field. Consequently, one expects significant a variation of the transverse energy as a function of the azimuthal angle.

Here we point another, presumably more realistic, possibility to detect the color filamentation. When the instability grows the trajectories of charge particles are focused in the centers of the filaments. Therefore, according to the Liouville theorem the distribution of the momentum perpendicular to the filaments, say along the $`x`$axis, has to expand to conserve the phase space volume. The quantum mechanical counterpart of the argument relies on the uncertainty relation: once the particles are localized within the filaments their transverse momentum has to widen to the inverse filament thickness multiplied by $`\mathrm{}`$. Below, we quantify this quantum mechanical reasoning.

It should be clearly stated that the collective motion caused by the instability development is not correlated with the reaction plane and it has nothing to do with the hydrodynamic flow. As such it would be called a ‘non-flow’ effect. However, the filamentation generates a finite value of $`v_2`$ and it contributes to its fluctuations. So, let us consider the phenomenon in more detail.

Let the wave vector of the filamentation mode ($`k`$) be oriented along the $`x`$axis. Then, the single particle wave function describing the transverse degrees of freedom is the form

$$\psi (x,y)\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{x^2+y^2}{4R^2}\right]\mathrm{cos}(kx+\alpha ),$$
(18)
where $`R`$ is the system transverse radius. To simplify further analysis we put the phase $`\alpha `$ equal to zero. Then, as we will see, odd harmonics of the azimuthal distribution vanish due to the mirror symmetry of the wave function (18). Performing the Fourier transform of (18), one gets the momentum distribution as

$$P(p_x,p_y)=|\stackrel{~}{\psi }(p_x,p_y)|^2\mathrm{exp}\left[2R^2(p_x^2+p_y^2)\right]\left[\mathrm{exp}\left(4R^2p_xk\right)+\mathrm{exp}\left(4R^2p_xk\right)+2\right].$$
(19)
Since $`p_x=p\mathrm{cos}\varphi `$ and $`p_y=p\mathrm{sin}\varphi `$, the distribution (19) provides the azimuthal distribution of the form

$$P(\varphi )=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑ppP(p\mathrm{cos}\varphi ,p\mathrm{sin}\varphi )_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑ppe^{2R^2p^2}\left[e^{4R^2pk\mathrm{cos}\varphi }+e^{4R^2pk\mathrm{cos}\varphi }+2\right].$$
(20)
Neglecting the jacobian $`p`$ in Eq. (20), the integral over momentum can be performed analytically and the result reads

$$P(\varphi )\left[e^{2R^2k^2\mathrm{cos}^2\varphi }+1\right].$$
(21)
The distribution (21) gets a particularly simple form when the filament thickness is much smaller than the system size. Then, $`Rk1`$ and

$$P(\varphi )=\frac{1}{2(\pi 1)}\left[1\delta (\varphi \pi /2)\delta (\varphi 3\pi /2)\right].$$
(22)
Using the distribution (22), one finds

$$v_2=\frac{1}{\pi 1}.$$
(23)
The value of $`v_2`$ is rather large. A realistic value of $`v_2`$ is presumably significantly smaller because not all particles produced in a given event would participate in a collective motion caused the instability development. The collective motion should be also convoluted with the thermal one. Thus, the effect of filamentation must be diluted. An appearance of the instability in the system is not a deterministic but a random process. Therefore, we expect that there are collisions with and without the instability. Consequently, $`v_2`$ varies between zero and maximal value (23). Thus, we expect large fluctuations of $`v_2`$.

It should be also stressed here that there are specific distinctive features of the collective flow and the flow fluctuations due to the filamentation. First of all we note that in contrast to hydrodynamically generated $`v_2`$, the flow caused by the instability development does not vanish at zero impact parameter. Thus, one should look for filamentation in maximally central collisions. It is also expected that particles with small $`p_T`$ are particularly sensitive the collective motion of interest.

## VII Final remarks

The aim of this paper is to advocate usefulness of the flow fluctuation analysis in revealing of the early stage dynamics of heavy-ion collisions. We have shown that even rather exotic phenomena can be studied in this way. Those presented should be, of course, treated only as examples motivating the measurements, and simple order-of-magnitude estimates.

Since $`v_2`$ is experimentally determined on the event-by-event basis anyway, the proposed fluctuation measurement presumably does not require much additional efforts. However, an accuracy of the measurements should be improved. Studying the flow fluctuations as a function of particle multiplicity one can check whether $`\delta v_2`$ scales like $`1/\sqrt{N}`$, which is a characteristic feature of statistical noise. If not we deal with nontrivial dynamical fluctuations. However, before such a conclusion is achieved one has to properly subtract the fluctuations due to the impact parameter variation. We note that these fluctuations can be constrained by the collision trigger condition and that the fluctuations due to impact parameter vanish around the maximal flow where $`dv_2/db=0`$.

To disentangle various fluctuation sources, the data should be analyzed in a broad interval of impact parameters and varying acceptance windows. Fortunately, the mechanisms of interest contribute differently to $`\delta v_2`$. In particular, the cluster effect is expected to be the largest for most peripheral events, while that of the filamentation for the most central ones. It would be also desirable to study elliptic flow fluctuations simultaneously with fluctuations of particle multiplicity and other collision characteristics.

At the end, we mention one more supplementary method  to study the azimuthal fluctuations which seem to be particularly useful to detect non-flow correlations. The method, which uses the so-called $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$measure of fluctuations , does not require the reaction plane reconstruction and can be rather easily applied to experimental data. The measure is sensitive to various sources of dynamical correlations and the integrated information provided by $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ can be combined with that offered by the Fourier analysis . Since all Fourier harmonics contribute to $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ one can check whether the measured harmonics saturate the observed value of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$.

## VIII Acknowledgements

Our thanks go to Peter Kolb who shared with us his unpublished results of hydrodynamic calculations. We are also indebted to Jean-Yves Ollitrault and Art Poskanzer for very useful correspondence. St. M. is grateful to Department of Physics and Astronomy of State University of New York at Stony Brook, where this project was initiated, for kind hospitality. This work was partially supported by the US Department of Energy and Polish Committee of Scientific Research under grants DE-FG02-88ER40388 and 2P03B04123, respectively.


text:
# Multiplication maps of linear systems on smooth projective toric surfaces

## 1.

We refer the reader to  or  for basic facts about toric varieties.

From now on $`X=X(\mathrm{\Delta })`$ will always be a smooth projective toric surface associated to a fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ in $`N_𝐑`$, where $`M`$ (resp. $`N`$) is the lattice of characters (resp. co-characters) of a $`2`$-dimensional algebraic torus. Any divisor on $`X`$ is linearly equivalent to a divisor $`D=_{i=1}^na_iD_i`$ with $`a_i𝐙`$, and the $`D_i`$’s the divisors on $`X`$ invariant under the torus action; these are in $`1`$-$`1`$ correspondence with the rays in $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. (We assume that the indices are chosen so that $`D_i`$ and $`D_{i+1}`$ correspond to rays forming the boundary of a cone in $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Here, and in what follows, we assume that subscripts are considered modulo $`n`$.). Moreover, if $`D`$ is effective then we may assume that all $`a_i0`$ and we denote by $`P_D`$ the corresponding polygon in $`M_𝐑`$. We let $`v_i`$ be the minimal lattice vector in the ray corresponding to $`D_i`$.

The proof of Theorem 1 is easily reduced to combinatorial statements about convex polygons, using the well-known dictionary relating equivariant divisors $`D`$ with $`𝒪(D)`$ generated by sections and lattice polygons. We may assume that $``$ and $``$ are of the form $`𝒪(D)`$ and $`𝒪(E)`$ for some equivariant divisors $`D=_{i=1}^na_iD_i`$ and $`E=_{i=1}^nb_iD_i`$. Then it suffices to prove that $`(P_DM)+(P_EM)=(P_D+P_E)M`$.

For a divisor $`D`$ as above with $`𝒪(D)`$ generated by sections, let $`\sigma _i(D)=P_DL_i`$ where $`L_i=\{uM_𝐑|u,v_i=a_i\}`$. If $`D`$ is ample then $`\sigma _i(D)`$ is always an edge of $`P_D`$ but in general it could also be a vertex.

###### Lemma 1.

Let $`D`$, $`E`$ be as above and assume that $`D`$ is ample and $`𝒪(E)`$ is generated by sections. Then $`\sigma _i(D+E)=\sigma _i(D)+\sigma _i(E)`$ for all $`i[1,n]`$.

###### Proof.

This follows easily from the fact that $`P_{D+E}=P_D+P_E`$. ∎

The proof of the following lemma is also left to the reader.

###### Lemma 2.

Let $`[a_1,b_1]`$ and $`[a_2,b_2]`$ be closed intervals of $`𝐑`$. Suppose $`[a_1,b_1]𝐙\mathrm{}`$ and $`a_2,b_2𝐙`$. Then any element $`z`$ of $`[a_1+a_2,b_1+b_2]𝐙`$ is of the form $`c_1+c_2`$ for some $`c_i[a_i,b_i]𝐙`$, $`i=1,2`$.

To prove Theorem 1 we will first reduce to the case where $`P_E`$ is a triangle of a special kind, and then explicitly prove the equality in this case.

###### Proof of Theorem 1.

We first dispose off the trivial cases: If $`P_E`$ is a point then the statement is obvious and if $`P_E`$ is $`1`$-dimensional, hence a line segment, then the proof is elementary and we leave it to the reader (use Lemma 2).

Let $`s:M_𝐑\times M_𝐑M_𝐑`$ be the sum map $`(x,y)x+y`$. Then $`P_{D+E}=P_D+P_E=s(P_D\times P_E)`$. Let $`pP_{D+E}M`$ and let $`Q=s^1(p)(P_D\times P_E)`$. This is a convex polygon (possibly degenerate) in $`M_𝐑\times M_𝐑`$ and we let $`Q_i=\pi _i(Q)`$, where $`\pi _i`$, $`i=1,2`$, are the two projections. So $`Q_1P_D`$ and $`Q_2P_E`$ are also convex polygons.

Let $`(q_1,q_2)Q`$ be such that $`q_2`$ is a vertex of $`Q_2`$. If $`q_2`$ is in the interior of $`P_E`$ then $`q_1Q_1`$ must be a vertex of $`P_D`$ (sic), hence $`q_1M`$. Then $`q_2M`$ and $`p=q_1+q_2`$, so we are done. Otherwise, since $`Q_2`$ must have at least one vertex, it follows that there exists a point $`qQ_2`$ which lies on the boundary of $`P_E`$. If $`qM`$, then we are done so we may assume that $`q`$ lies in the interior of an edge $`\sigma `$ of $`P_E`$. We let $`m_1,m_2`$ be the two end points of $`\sigma `$.

Recall that $`P_E=\{uM_𝐑|u,v_ib_i\text{ for all }i\}`$. We may assume that the edge $`\sigma `$ corresponds to $`v_1`$, so $`m_i,v_1=b_1`$, $`i=1,2`$. Now for each $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$, let $`c_i=min\{c𝐙|m_j,v_1c\text{ for }j=1,2\}`$. Then $`c_1=b_1`$ and $`c_ib_i`$ for all $`i`$. Let $`P=\{uM_𝐑|u,v_ic_i\text{ for all }i\}`$; by construction $`PP_E`$ and $`m_1`$ and $`m_2`$ are vertices of $`P`$. If $`P=\sigma `$ then we are done, so we may assume that $`P`$ is $`2`$-dimensional. Without loss of generality we may assume that $`m_1,v_2>m_2,v_2`$ and we let $`k=max\{i[2,n]|m_1,v_i>m_2,v_i\}`$. So for $`i[1,k]`$, $`c_i=m_2,v_i`$ and for $`i[k+1,n]`$, $`c_i=m_1,v_i`$. By our assumption that $`P`$ is not $`1`$-dimensional it follows that $`m_1,v_im_2,v_i`$ for all $`i[2,n]`$. Then $`P=\{uM_𝐑|u,v_ic_i\text{ for }i=1,k,k+1\}`$, hence $`P`$ a triangle. Since $`X`$ is smooth it follows that the third vertex is also in $`M`$, so $`P`$ corresponds to an equivariant divisor on $`X`$ whose associated line bundle is generated by sections.

Since $`qP`$ by construction, by replacing $`P_E`$ by $`P`$ we have reduced to the case when $`P_E`$ is a triangle with the further property that there exists an $`i[1,n]`$ such that $`\sigma _i(E)`$ and $`\sigma _{i+1}(E)`$ are both (non-degenerate) edges of $`P_E`$. By using the basis of $`M`$ dual to $`\{v_i,v_{i+1}\}`$, and after possible translation by elements of $`M`$ (which does not affect the hypotheses or the conclusion), we have the following picture: $`P_E`$ is the convex span of the points $`(0,0),(a,0),(0,b)`$, for some $`a,b>0`$, $`P_D`$ is entirely contained in the first quadrant, and $`(0,0)`$ is also a vertex of $`P_D`$ (consequently $`P_D`$ must also have edges along the positive $`x`$ and $`y`$ axes).

We shall now complete the proof of the theorem by analysing this case. Decompose the region $`P_D+P_E\backslash P_D`$ as a union of the three regions, $`A,B`$ and $`C`$, as illustrated in the figure below — to see that this is correct we use Lemma 1. Note that $`A`$ or $`B`$ may be empty; this happens precisely when $`k=2`$ or $`k=n1`$.

We claim that any lattice point in the region $`A`$ is of the form $`m+(x,0)`$ where $`mP_DM`$ and $`0xa`$. This is because the trapezium, two of whose sides are the base of the triangle $`P`$ and the edge $`U`$ of $`P_D`$, is contained in $`P_D`$ and both these sides contain at least two lattice points each. Thus each horizontal line which contains a lattice element of $`A`$ also contains a lattice element of $`P_D`$, so the claim follows by Lemma 2. By a symmetric argument, any lattice point in the region $`B`$ is of the form $`m+(0,y)`$ where $`mP_DM`$ and $`0yb`$.

Any point in the region $`C`$ is contained in $`P+P_E`$. Since $`P`$ and $`P_E`$ are similar triangles (i.e. are translates of multiples of the same triangle) one easily sees that any lattice point in $`P+P_E`$ is the sum of lattice points in $`P`$ and $`P_E`$.

## 2.

The following lemma is the key to the deduction of Theorem 2 from Theorem 1.

###### Lemma 3.

Let $`D=_{i=1}^na_iD_i`$ be an effective divisor on $`X`$. Then there exists integers $`b_i`$, $`0b_ia_i`$, such that for $`D^{}=_{i=1}^nb_iD_i`$, $`𝒪(D^{})`$ is generated by its sections and the natural map $`H^0(X,𝒪(D^{}))H^0(X,𝒪(D))`$ is an isomorphism.

###### Proof.

Let $`P_D`$ be the polygon associated to $`D`$. Let $`S=P_DM`$ and let $`P`$ be the convex hull of the points in $`S`$. For each $`i`$, $`1in`$, let $`b_i=min\{c𝐙|s,v_ic\text{ for all }sS\}`$. Since $`0S`$ and $`SP_D`$, it follows that $`0b_ia_i`$. We claim that $`P`$ is equal to $`P^{}:=\{uM_𝐑|u,v_ib_i\text{ for all }i\}`$.

Consider the lines $`L_i=\{uM_𝐑|u,v_i=b_i\}`$. By construction, each of these lines contains a point $`s_i`$ of $`S`$ and all points of $`S`$ are contained in the “positive” half planes $`H_i=\{uM_𝐑|u,v_ib_i\}`$. It suffices to show that the point $`m_i=L_iL_{i+1}`$ is in $`S`$ for all $`i`$. Suppose not; then there exists $`i`$ and $`j`$ such that $`m_i,v_j<b_j`$. Since $`s_i,v_jb_j`$ and $`s_{i+1},v_jb_j`$, it follows $`L_j`$ must intersect $`L_i`$ and $`L_{i+1}`$ along the segments $`[s_i,m_i]`$ and $`[s_{i+1},m_i]`$. But looking at the normal rays, this says that the ray along $`v_j`$ must lie between the rays along $`v_i`$ and $`v_{i+1}`$. But we have assumed that the $`v_i`$’s are cyclically ordered, so this is a contradiction.

Since $`P=P^{}`$, it follows that $`P`$ corresponds to a divisor $`D^{}`$ on $`X`$ of the required form. ∎

###### Lemma 4.

There exists a constant $`C`$ depending only on $`X`$ with the following property: Let $`D,D^{}`$ be as in Lemma 3 and let $`J=\{i[1,n]|b_i<a_i\}`$. Then the number of lattice points on all the edges of $`P_D^{}`$ whose normal ray contains $`v_j`$ for some $`jJ`$ is bounded by $`C`$.

###### Proof.

This follows because there are only finitely many rays in $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, the fan of $`X`$. If we choose a Euclidean metric on $`M_𝐑`$, then there are only finitely many possibilities for the angles at the vertices of any polygon associated to a divisor on $`X`$. Bounding the number of lattice points is also the same as bounding the lengths of edges. Suppose that the length of the edge corresponding to $`v_j`$ is not bounded. Let $`D^{\prime \prime }=_{i=1}^nc_iD_i`$ with $`c_i=b_i`$ for $`ij`$ and $`c_j=b_j+1`$. Then $`P_D^{}P_{D^{\prime \prime }}P_D`$ and if the length of is sufficiently large, $`P_{D^{\prime \prime }}`$ would contain lattice points not contained in $`P_D`$, contradicting the defining property of $`D^{}`$. ∎

The next lemma implies that even though there may be infinitely many divisors $`D`$ giving rise to the same $`D^{}`$ as in Lemma 3, upto translation by elements of $`M`$ there are only finitely many polygons occuring as connected components of $`P_D\backslash P_D^{}`$, where $`D`$ ranges over all effective divisors on $`X`$.

###### Lemma 5.

There exists a constant $`C_2`$ depending only on $`X`$ such that for $`D`$, $`D^{}`$ and $`J`$ as in Lemma 4 and $`J^{}=[j_1,j_2]`$ any subinterval of $`[1,n]`$ contained in $`J`$, exactly one of the following holds:
1) $`[1,n]\backslash J^{}`$ contains at most one element. In this case all the edges of $`P_D^{}`$ have length $`C_1`$, and there exists $`J^{\prime \prime }[1,n]`$ such that $`a_jC_2`$ for $`jJ^{\prime \prime }`$ and such that the polyhedron $`P(J^{\prime \prime })=\{uM_𝐑|u,v_ja_j\text{ for all }jJ^{\prime \prime }\}`$ is bounded.
2) $`[1,n]\backslash J^{}`$ contains at least two elements, so $`j_11`$ and $`j_2+1`$ are distinct elements of $`[1,n]`$. Consider the lines $`L_{j_11}`$ and $`L_{j_2+1}`$. Then either
2a) The lines intersect in a point $`p`$ such that any line segment joining $`p`$ and $`\sigma _j`$ for any $`jJ^{}`$ does not contain any point of $`P_D^{}`$ except for an endpoint. Or
2b) The two lines are parallel. Then there exists $`jJ^{}`$ such that $`a_jb_jC_2`$. Or
2c) There exists a subset $`J^{\prime \prime }`$ of $`J`$ such that $`a_jb_jC_2`$ for $`jJ^{\prime \prime }`$ and such that the region

$$P(J^{\prime \prime })=\{uM_𝐑|u,v_ja_j\text{ for all }jJ^{\prime \prime }\{j_11,j_2+1\}\}$$

is bounded.

###### Proof.

The lemma is esentially a consequence of Lemma 4. Since there are only finitely many possibilities for the lengths of the edges of $`P_D^{}`$ corresponding to $`jJ`$, the number of possible configurations (upto translation) of the subset of the the boundary of $`P_D^{}`$ which is the union of the edges corresponding to the $`j`$’s in $`J^{}`$ is also finite. (In case 1), even the number of possible $`D^{}`$ is finite.) So it is enough to find a constant $`C`$ which works in each case separately, since we can then let $`C_2`$ be the maximum of all these.

First assume that we are in case 1). Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(J^{})`$ be the collection of subsets $`J^{\prime \prime }`$ of $`J^{}`$ such that the rays of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(X)`$ corresponding to $`jJ^{\prime \prime }`$ give rise to a complete fan i.e. any open half-space in $`N_𝐑`$ must contain one of these rays; so these are precisely the susbsets $`J^{\prime \prime }`$ for which $`P(J^{\prime \prime })`$ is always bounded. Suppose the conclusions in case 1) do not hold. Since there are only a finite number of possible $`D^{}`$, we may consider each of them separately, so we may assume that there is no constant which works for some fixed $`D^{}`$. Since $`J^{}`$ is a finite set it follows that there exists a sequence of divisors $`D^l=_{i=1}^na_i^lD_i`$ with $`D_{}^{l}{}_{}{}^{}=D^{}`$ and a subset $`J^{\prime \prime \prime }`$ of $`J^{}`$ such that $`a_i^l\mathrm{}`$ as $`j\mathrm{}`$ for all $`iJ^{\prime \prime \prime }`$. Furthermore $`J^{\prime \prime \prime }J^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{}`$ for all $`J^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{\Sigma }(J^{})`$. It follows that $`_lP_{D^l}\{uM_𝐑|u,v_ib_i\text{ for all }iJ^{}\backslash J^{\prime \prime \prime }\}`$. But $`J^{}\backslash J^{\prime \prime \prime }`$ is not in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(J^{})`$ so $`_lP_{D^l}`$ contains an unbounded polyhedron and hence must contain infinitely many elements of $`M`$. But this contradicts the assumption that $`D_{}^{l}{}_{}{}^{}=D^{}`$ for all $`l`$.

Case 2) is handled in an analogous manner, the remarks at the beginning of the proof allowing us to consider essentially one $`D^{}`$ at a time. For 2a) there is nothing to prove and 2b) is elementary. For 2c) we let $`S(J^{})`$ be as above except that we require that $`J^{\prime \prime }\{j_1,j_2\}`$ give rise to a complete fan; it follows by assumption that $`S(J^{})\mathrm{}`$. The reason for the $`a_jb_j`$ occuring here, instead of just the $`a_j`$ in case 1), is because we only have finiteness of possible configurations upto translation. (Note that the lengths of the edges correponding to $`iJ`$ have no effect, since the claim is “local” around a given $`J^{}`$.) ∎

###### Proof of Theorem 2.

Let $`=𝒪(D)`$ and $`=𝒪(E)`$. Let $`E^{}`$ be the divisor associated to $`E`$ using Lemma 4. By Theorem 1 it follows that the map $`H^0(X,𝒪(D))H^0(X,𝒪(E^{}))H^0(X,O(D)𝒪(E^{}))`$ is surjective or equivalently the map $`(P_DM)+(P_E^{}M)(P_{D+E^{}}M)`$ is surjective. By combining the previous three lemmas, it follows that that there are only finitely many possibilities for the connected components of $`P_{D+E}\backslash P_{D+E^{}}`$, upto translation by lattice points. This is because $`D`$ is fixed, so the lengths of the edges of $`P_{D+E^{}}`$ corresponding to $`jJ`$ are bounded independently of $`E`$ (use Lemma 1). The number of lattice points in $`P_{D+E}\backslash P_{D+E^{}}`$ can thus be bounded by a constant depending only on $`D`$, whence the theorem. ∎

*Acknowledgements.* This note was written in response to a question of V. Srinivas. I thank W. Fulton for informing me about  and T. Oda for sending it to me.