text:
# Axially Symmetric Black Hole Skyrmions

## I Introduction

It has been shown that the no-hair conjecture for black holes ruffini  is violated when some non-linear matter fields are considered. The first counter example was provided by Luckock and Moss luckock\_moss  who found the Schwarzschild black hole with Skyrme hair. The presence of the horizon in the core of skyrmion unwinds the skyrmion, leaving fractional baryon charge outside the horizon. The full Einstein-Skyrme system was solved later by Droz et al. to obtain spherically symmetric black holes with Skyrme hair droz . Other counter examples include static spherically symmetric black holes in the Einstein-Yang-Mills (EYM) volkov , the Einstein-Yang-Mills-Dilaton (EYMD) torii ; maison  and the Einstein-Yang-Mills-Higgs (EYMH) theory nair . More interestingly, it has been also shown that these Einstein-Yang-Mills theories have static axially symmetric black hole solutions kleihaus ; hartmann .

Motivated by the axially symmetric hairy black holes in Refs. kleihaus ; hartmann , we shall study the Einstein-Skyrme model with axial symmetry. It has been shown that a $`B=2`$ skyrmion is axially symmetric and represents a deuteron braaten . Our model, therefore, provides a convenient framework to study the interactions between a deuteron and a black hole. By examining the baryon number of the solution, the absorption of the deuteron by the black hole is observed as in the spherically symmetric case. We expect our solutions are stable as skyrmions are topologically stable objects.

Recent studies of theories with large extra dimensions indicate that a true Planck scale is of order a TeV and the production rate of black holes massive than the Planck scale become quite large hamed ; cavagria ; banks . Therefore, it may be possible to produce the deuteron black holes in the LHC in future.

## II The Model

The Skyrme model is an effective theory of QCD based on pion fields alone skyrme . At low energy, the symmetry of the strong interaction is broken spontaneously and hence the Skyrme Lagrangian retains the chiral symmetry. The Skyrme model coupled to gravity is defined by

$`=_S+_G,`$ (1)
where

$`_S`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{f_\pi ^2}{16}}g^{\mu \nu }\mathrm{tr}\left(U^1_\mu UU^1_\nu U\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{32a^2}}g^{\mu \rho }g^{\nu \sigma }\mathrm{tr}\left([U^1_\mu U,U^1_\nu U][U^1_\rho U,U^1_\sigma U]\right),`$
$`_G`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{16\pi G}}R.`$
Let us introduce an ansatz for the metric given in Ref. kleihaus

$`ds^2=fdt^2+{\displaystyle \frac{m}{f}}(dr^2+r^2d\theta ^2)+{\displaystyle \frac{l}{f}}r^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\phi ^2,`$ (2)
where $`f=f(r,\theta ),m=m(r,\theta ),\mathrm{and}l=l(r,\theta )`$.

The axially symmetric Skyrme field can be parameterized by

$`U=\mathrm{cos}F(r,\theta )+i\stackrel{}{\tau }\stackrel{}{n}_R\mathrm{sin}F(r,\theta ),`$ (3)
with $`\stackrel{}{n}_R=(\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }\mathrm{cos}n\phi ,\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }\mathrm{sin}n\phi ,\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta })`$. In terms of $`F`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, the Lagrangian (1) has the form

$`_S=_S^{(1)}+_S^{(2)},`$ (4)
where

$`_S^{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{f_\pi ^2f}{8m}}\left\{(_rF)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}(_\theta F)^2+\left[(_r\mathrm{\Theta })^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}(_\theta \mathrm{\Theta })^2\right]\mathrm{sin}^2F+{\displaystyle \frac{n^2}{r^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }}{\displaystyle \frac{m}{l}}\mathrm{sin}^2\mathrm{\Theta }\mathrm{sin}^2F\right\},`$
$`_S^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2a^2r^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{f}{m}}\right)^2\left\{(_rF_\theta \mathrm{\Theta }_\theta F_r\mathrm{\Theta })^2+{\displaystyle \frac{n^2}{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }}{\displaystyle \frac{m}{l}}\left[(_rF)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}(_\theta F)^2\right]\mathrm{sin}^2\mathrm{\Theta }\right\}\mathrm{sin}^2F`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2a^2r^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{f}{m}}\right)^2\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{n^2}{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }}{\displaystyle \frac{m}{l}}\left[(_r\mathrm{\Theta })^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}(_\theta \mathrm{\Theta })^2\right]\mathrm{sin}^2F\mathrm{sin}^2\mathrm{\Theta }\right\}\mathrm{sin}^2F.`$
Since we are interested in $`B=2`$, we shall take the winding number $`n=2`$.

The baryon current in curved spacetime is obtained by taking the spacetime covariant derivative $`_\mu `$,

$`b^\mu ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{24\pi ^2}}ϵ^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }\mathrm{tr}(U^1_\nu UU^1_\rho UU^1_\sigma U).`$ (5)
The baryon number then is given by integrating $`b^0`$ over the hypersurface $`t=0`$,

$`B`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑r𝑑\theta 𝑑\phi \sqrt{g^{(3)}}b^0}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}{\displaystyle 𝑑r𝑑\theta (_rF_\theta \mathrm{\Theta }_\theta F_r\mathrm{\Theta })\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }(1\mathrm{cos}2F)}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}{\displaystyle 𝑑F}d\mathrm{\Theta }\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }(1\mathrm{cos}2F)`$
$`=`$ $`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}(2F\mathrm{sin}2F)\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }\right]_{F_0,\mathrm{\Theta }_0}^{F_1,\mathrm{\Theta }_1},`$
where $`(F_0,\mathrm{\Theta }_0)`$ and $`(F_1,\mathrm{\Theta }_1)`$ are the values at the inner and outer boundary, respectively. In flat spacetime braaten , we have

$`(F_0,\mathrm{\Theta }_0)=(\pi ,0)\mathrm{and}(F_1,\mathrm{\Theta }_1)=(0,\pi ),`$ (6)
which gives $`B=2`$. In the presence of a black hole, the integration should be performed from the horizon to infinity, which changes the values of $`F_0`$ and allows the $`B`$ to be fractional.

The horizon mass can be derived from the first law of a black hole in the isolated horizon framework ashtekar . For this purpose, let us introduce the area element

$`dA`$ $`=`$ $`d\theta d\phi \sqrt{g_{\theta \theta }g_{\phi \phi }}`$ (7)
$`=`$ $`2\pi r^2\mathrm{sin}\theta d\theta {\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{lm}}{f}},`$
and thus

$`A(r)=2\pi r^2{\displaystyle _0^\pi }\mathrm{sin}\theta d\theta {\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{lm}}{f}}.`$ (8)
An effective horizon radius is then defined by

$`\rho _h=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{A(r_h)}{4\pi }}}`$ (9)
where $`r=r_h`$ is a horizon of the black hole. The surface gravity is given by e\_weinberg ,

$`\kappa ^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}g^{00}g^{ij}(_ig_{00})(_jg_{00})`$ (10)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4m}}\left\{(_rf)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}(_\theta f)^2\right\}.`$
According to the first law of a static black hole, one obtains the horizon mass

$`M_h`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\rho _h}}{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{8\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{dA(\rho _h^{})}{d\rho _h^{}}}𝑑\rho _h^{}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\rho _h}}\kappa \rho _h^{}𝑑\rho _h^{},`$
which can be evaluated numerically.

## III Boundary Conditions

Let us consider the boundary conditions for the chiral fields and metric functions with help of Ref. kleihaus . At the horizon $`r=r_h`$, the time-time component of the metric satisfies

$`g_{tt}=f(r_h,\theta )=0.`$ (11)
Regularity of the metric at the horizon requires

$`m(r_h,\theta )=l(r_h,\theta )=0.`$ (12)
The boundary conditions for $`F(r,\theta )`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }(r,\theta )`$ at the horizon are obtained by expanding them at the horizon and inserting into the field equations derived from $`\delta _S/\delta F=0`$ and $`\delta _S/\delta \mathrm{\Theta }=0`$ respectively,

$`_rF(r_h,\theta )=_r\mathrm{\Theta }(r_h,\theta )=0.`$ (13)
The condition that the spacetime is asymptotically flat requires

$`f(\mathrm{},\theta )=m(\mathrm{},\theta )=l(\mathrm{},\theta )=1.`$ (14)
The boundary conditions for $`F`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ at infinity remain the same as in flat spacetime

$`F(\mathrm{},\theta )=0,_r\mathrm{\Theta }(\mathrm{},\theta )=0.`$ (15)
For the solution to be axially symmetric, we have

$`_\theta f(r,0)=_\theta m(r,0)=_\theta l(r,0)=0,`$ (16)
$`_\theta f(r,{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}})=_\theta m(r,{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}})=_\theta l(r,{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}})=0.`$ (17)
Likewise for $`F`$,

$`_\theta F(r,0)=_\theta F(r,{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}})=0.`$ (18)
Regularity on the axis and axisymmetry impose the boundary conditions on $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ as

$`\mathrm{\Theta }(r,0)=0,\mathrm{\Theta }(r,{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}})={\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}.`$ (19)
## IV Numerical Results and Discussions

For the purpose of numerical computation, we shall introduce a dimensionless radial coordinate $`x`$ and coupling constant $`\alpha `$,

$`x=af_\pi r,\alpha =\pi Gf_\pi ^2.`$ (20)
Then, in this system, free parameters are only $`x_h`$ and $`\alpha `$. Fig. 2 shows metric function $`f`$ for $`\alpha =0.1,0.3`$ with $`\theta =\pi /4`$. For $`\alpha <0.1`$, the results are similar to that of $`\alpha =0.1`$. Other metric functions $`l`$ and $`m`$ exhibit similar shapes as $`f`$. The $`\theta `$ dependence of the metric functions are very small. The Skyrme function $`F`$ is shown in Fig. 2. The domain of existence of the solutions in the parameter space is shown in Fig. 4. For $`\alpha 0.37`$, there exists no solution since the chiral fields become too massive for the black hole to support outside the horizon. It is also observed that the black hole has a finite minimum size unlike the spherically symmetric case. Hence one can not recover regular solutions as the limit of zero horizon size. We show the energy density of the Skyrme fields $`(ϵ=T_0^0)`$ in Fig. 4. The density is dumbbell in shape with the highest along $`z`$-axis while in flat spacetime it is toroidal. It is interesting to see how the gravitational interaction affects the shape of the skyrmion. The dependence of the horizon mass $`M_h`$ on $`\rho _h`$ is shown in Fig. 6. As $`\alpha `$ becomes smaller, the black hole approaches to the Schwarzschild black hole with $`M_S=\rho _h/2`$. However, according to the argument in Ref. ashtekar , it does not exceed $`M_S`$ for all values of $`\rho _h`$. This figure indicates that our solutions are stable since they lie on a high-entropy branch with maximal entropy maeda . From the study of the spherically symmetric case in Ref. luckock\_moss , we suspect that there also exist unstable low-entropy branches although we could not find them by the over-relaxation numerical scheme. Fig. 6 shows the dependence of the baryon number on $`\alpha `$ and $`x_h`$. It is observed that the baryon number gets more absorbed by the black hole in increase of the size of the black hole and the coupling constant.

Finally, theories with extra dimensions bring us an interesting possibility that the deuteron black holes could be produced in the LHC by collision of two protons. The produced black holes then should be rotating and therefore it will be worth studying rotating deuteron black holes. The inclusion of gauge fields should also be necessary to study electrically charged deuteron black holes moss\_shiiki .

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to K. Maeda and T. Torii for many useful discussions.


format: text

text:
# Resonances and the thermonuclear reaction rateSupported by FAPESP.

## 1 Abstract

We present an approximate analytic expression for thermonuclear reaction rate of charged particles when the cross section contains a single narrow or wide resonance described by a Breit-Wigner shape. The resulting expression is uniformly valid as the effective energy and resonance energy coalesce. We use our expressions to calculate the reaction rate for 12C(p,$`\gamma `$)13N.

## 2 Introduction

Evaluations of thermonuclear reaction rates require the folding of nuclear cross sections with the Maxwell–Boltzmann distribution. In recent compilations of such rates for charged particles  ($`Z`$=1–14),  ($`A`$=20–40) a combination of numerical integration and analytic techniques appropriate to the energy dependence of the cross section for each reaction pair were used. A review of the analytical techniques of nuclear reaction rate theory can be found in Ref. . Ref.  has obtained results different to those obtained in Ref.  due to the inclusion of resonances in their numerical integrations. Ref.  calculated the contribution of narrow resonances in the simplest possible manner which is to approximate the Maxwell–Boltzmann distribution by its value at the resonance energy. This approximation can be expected to be good for resonances which do not overlap significantly with the Gamow peak.

In Ref.  we developed an asymptotic expansion for the thermonuclear reaction rate in terms of the effective astrophysical $`S`$-factor, $`S_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, using the method of Dingle . The method may be used in cases where $`S(E)`$ can be reliably expanded as a Taylor series. Two alternative expressions $`S_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ where obtained by expanding $`S(E)`$ about $`E`$=$`0`$ and about $`E`$=$`E_0`$, $`E_0`$ being the effective energy of the Gamow window. From these expressions, all the approximate formulae for $`S_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ commonly used  when $`S(E)`$ is slowly varying may be obtained as special cases. The validity of the expressions derived in Ref.  is limited by the radii of convergence of the Taylor series expansions of $`S(E)`$, that is, by the location of the poles of $`S(E)`$. The poles may be due bound states of the composite nucleus. Illustrative is the case of 7Be + $`p`$ $``$ 8B + $`\gamma `$  for which $`S(E)`$ has a pole at $`E`$=$`E_B`$, $`E_B`$=$`137.5`$ keV being the binding energy of 8B. (Ref.  discusses effects other than a sub-threshold pole which can produce the low energy rise seen in the $`S`$-factors of several capture reactions.) There may also be poles in $`S(E)`$ due to resonances of the reaction pair in which case the cross section may be parameterised in the region of the resonance by the Breit-Wigner form (see Eq. (2) below) which has two poles, or the Lorentzian form  which has four poles.

For a given reaction cross section $`\sigma (E)`$, the Maxwellian averaged reaction rate per particle pair is given by

$$\sigma v=\left(\frac{8}{\pi \mu }\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{1}{k_BT}\right)^{3/2}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑EE\sigma (E)e^{E/k_BT}$$
(1)
where is the reduced mass of the two collision partners, $`k_B`$ is the Boltzmann constant, and $`T`$ the environmental temperature. Here, we consider a $`(p,\gamma )`$ resonant reaction for which the cross section is given by

$$\sigma (E)=\frac{\pi \mathrm{}^2}{2\mu }\frac{1}{E}\omega \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_p(E)\mathrm{\Gamma }_\gamma }{(EE_r)^2+\mathrm{\Gamma }_r^2/4},$$
(2)
where $`\omega `$ is the statistical spin factor, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\gamma `$ is the $`\gamma `$-decay width and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_r`$ is the total width at the resonance energy. The energy dependence of the proton-decay width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_p(E)`$ is determined by the Coulomb barrier for low enough energies and may be written as $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_p(E)`$=$`\gamma _p\mathrm{exp}\left[2\pi \eta (E)\right]`$, with $`\gamma _p`$ energy independent. The Sommerfeld parameter, $`\eta (E)`$, is given by $`2\pi \eta (E)`$=$`\sqrt{E_G/E}`$, where $`E_G`$=$`b^2`$$``$$`2\mu c^2\left(\pi Z_1Z_2\alpha \right)^2`$, $`\alpha `$ being the fine structure constant. The effective energy of the Gamow window at temperature $`T`$ is found to be $`E_0`$=$`\left[E_G^{1/2}k_BT/2\right]^{2/3}`$.

Substituting Eq. (2) into Eq. (1) and introducing the dimensionless variables $`x`$=$`E/k_BT`$, $`x_r`$=$`E_r/k_BT`$ and $`x_I`$=$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_r/2/k_BT`$ one can rewrite the reaction rate as

$`\sigma v`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{8}{\pi \mu }}\right)^{1/2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{k_BT}}\right)^{5/2}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi \mathrm{}^2\omega \gamma _p\mathrm{\Gamma }_\gamma }{2\mu }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{x_I}}\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑x{\displaystyle \frac{e^{F(x)}}{xx_p}}.`$ (3)
where $`F(x)`$=$`x`$+$`\sqrt{x_G/x}`$, $`x_p`$=$`x_r`$+$`ix_I`$ and $`x_G`$=$`a^2`$$``$$`E_G/k_BT`$. The function $`F(x)`$ has a single minimum in the the interval $`[0,\mathrm{})`$ from which it increases monotonically to infinity as $`x`$ approaches zero and infinity. The position of the minimum is given by $`x_0`$=$`E_0/k_BT`$=$`\left[x_G^{1/2}/2\right]^{2/3}`$. The principal contributions come from the neighbourhood of the critical points $`x_0`$ and $`x_p`$ .

## 3 Conventional approximation

When the resonance and the Gamow window are well separated the contribution from each to the reaction rate can be estimated separately and the two contributions summed. Let us write $`\sigma v\sigma v_r+\sigma v_G`$, where $`\sigma v_r`$ is the contribution from the resonance and $`\sigma v_G`$ the contribution from the Gamow window. The resonance contribution may be estimated  by approximating the exponential in Eq. (3) by it’s value at the resonance energy, $`x_r`$, so that $`_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑xe^{F(x)}/[(xx_r)^2+x_I^2]e^{x_r\sqrt{x_G/x_r}}\left(\pi /2+\theta _r\right)/x_I`$, where $`\theta _r`$=$`\mathrm{tan}^1\left(x_r/x_I\right)`$.

Similarly, the Gamow window contribution is estimated by approximating the Breit-Wigner factor by it’s value at the location of the Gamow peak, $`x_0`$, so that $`_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑xe^{F(x)}/[(xx_r)^2+x_I^2]\frac{2}{3}\sqrt{\pi \tau }e^\tau /[(x_0x_r)^2+x_I^2]`$. We have also used the Gaussian approximation $`F(x)`$$``$$`F(x_0)`$$``$$`\left(xx_0\right)^2/\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_x/2\right)^2`$  where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_x`$=$`\sqrt{8/F^{\prime \prime }(x_0)}`$=$`4\sqrt{x_0/3}`$ is the effective width of the Gamow window in units of $`k_BT`$ and $`\tau `$=$`F(x_0)`$=$`3x_0`$.

On thus obtains

$$\sigma v\left(2/\mu \right)^{1/2}\frac{1}{(k_BT)^{3/2}}\left[\pi ^{1/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }S(E_r)e^{E_r/k_BT\sqrt{E_G/E_r}}+\mathrm{\Delta }S(E_0)e^\tau \right],$$
(4)
where we have introduced the astrophysical $`S`$-factor, $`S(E)`$=$`\sigma (E)Ee^{\sqrt{E_G/E}}`$ and the width of the Gamow window $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$=$`4(E_0k_BT/3)^{1/2}`$. The second term of Eq. (4) is the zeroth order term of an asymptotic expansion of $`I_G`$ in powers of $`1/\tau `$

## 4 Uniform approximation

We introduce a new integration variable $`t`$ implicitly through $`F(x)`$$``$$`F(x_0)`$=$`t^2`$ and rewrite the reaction rate in terms of the function $`\mathrm{\Phi }(t)`$=$`\frac{dx}{dt}\frac{tt_p}{xx_p}`$. The position of the pole in $`t`$-space is then given by $`t_p`$=$`\left[x_p+\sqrt{x_G/x_p}\tau \right]^{1/2}`$. In order to obtain an expansion which is uniform as $`x_p`$ is made to approach or coincide with $`x_0`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }(t)`$ is expanded as follows : $`\mathrm{\Phi }(t)`$=$`_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}\left[\alpha _n+(tt_p)\beta _n\right]\left[t(tt_p)\right]^n`$. This expansion has the property that it gives the value of the function $`\mathrm{\Phi }(t)`$ and all it’s derivatives exactly at both $`t=0`$ and $`t=t_p`$. Let us approximate $`\mathrm{\Phi }(t)`$ by the truncation $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0(t)`$=$`\alpha _0`$+$`(tt_p)\beta _0`$. The expansion coefficients are found to be $`\alpha _0`$=$`1`$ and $`\beta _0`$=$`1/t_p`$+$`2\sqrt{\tau }/3/(x_0x_p)`$. Introducing the complementary error function  we obtain

$$\sigma v\left(2/\mu \right)^{1/2}\frac{e^\tau }{(k_BT)^{3/2}}\left[\mathrm{\Gamma }S(E_r)\mathrm{}\left\{i\sqrt{\pi }e^{t_p^2}\mathrm{erfc}(it_p)+\frac{1}{t_p}\right\}+\mathrm{\Delta }S(E_0)\right].$$
(5)
## 5 Reaction rate for 12C(p,$`\gamma `$)13N

For the $`S`$-factor at the resonance energy we use $`S(E_r)`$=$`\frac{2\pi \mathrm{}^2}{\mu }\frac{(\omega \gamma )_r}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}e^{\sqrt{E_G/E_r}}`$ and at the effective energy $`S(E_0)`$=$`S(E_r)\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2/4}{(E_0E_r)^2+\mathrm{\Gamma }^2/4}`$, where the resonance strength is given by $`(\omega \gamma )_r`$=$`\frac{\sigma (E_r)\mu \mathrm{\Gamma }_rE_r}{2\pi \mathrm{}^2}`$. We have calculated the reaction rate for 12C(p,$`\gamma `$)13N using Eqs. (5) and (4) including only the lowest resonance and the results are displayed in Figure 1. The exact integral is not shown as it is indistinguishable from the uniform approximation for this case. It is apparent that the resonance-plus-tail approximation cannot be used at temperatures for which $`E_r`$$``$$`E_0`$. For comparison we have also shown the rates of Ref.  which used a different analytic approach and those of Ref.  which also included the contribution of the second resonance at 1698 keV.


text:
# Formation of a Quasi-Periodic Copper Thin Film

## Abstract

We have synthesised a thin film of copper with a quasi-periodic structure by the adsorption of copper atoms on the five-fold surface of the icosahedral quasicrystal Al-Pd-Mn at room temperature. The quasi-periodicity of the thin film is manifested in low energy electronic diffraction (LEED) measurements and in the existence of Fibonacci relationships between rows of copper atoms imaged using scanning tunneling microscopy (STM). These findings demonstrate the feasibility of single-element quasi-periodic thin film formation using quasicrystals as templates.

Copper is one of the oldest elements known to mankind and it crystallizes in a face-centred cubic structure. Quasicrystals are a relatively new form of matter, first reported in 1984 Shechtman84 , and are bi- and tri-metallic alloys with long-range order but no translational symmetry. In the course of investigations aimed at understanding the interactions between quasicrystal surfaces and adsorbed atomic and molecular species McGrath02 , we have discovered that the adsorption of Cu on the five-fold surface of the icosahedral quasicrystal Al-Pd-Mn at 300 K leads to the formation of a quasi-periodic Cu thin film. The quasi-periodic structure of the thin film is manifested in low energy electronic diffraction (LEED) measurements and in the existence of Fibonacci relationships between rows of Cu atoms on the surface imaged using scanning tunneling microscopy (STM). The ability to synthesise such single-element quasi-periodic thin films will facilitate the study of the relationship between quasi-periodicity and physical properties and enable the probing of the transition from two-dimensional (2D) to three-dimensional (3D) electronic properties in a quasi-periodic material.

The starting point in these investigations is the preparation of high quality clean surfaces of Al-Pd-Mn with large flat terraces (microns in size) and low surface corrugation in an ultra-high-vacuum (UHV) environment. The methodology for the preparation of these surfaces has been previously described in detail Ledieu01 ; Papadopolos02  and consists of ex-situ polishing followed by several cycles of ion sputtering ( 1 hour) and annealing to 940 K ($``$4 hours) with a cumulative anneal time of 20 hours. Surface preparation is facilitated using LEED to establish the degree of surface ordering and Auger electron spectroscopy (AES) to check for contamination (and later to monitor Cu deposition). Surfaces prepared in this manner have been shown to be essentially ideal terminations of the bulk quasicrystal structure Ledieu01 ; Barbier02 , and the 2D structure of these surfaces has been described as a Fibonacci pentagrid Schaub94a , with the five principal symmetry axes evident in the arrangement of the dominant structural motifs. This is illustrated in Fig. 1(a) which shows a high resolution STM image of a small area (10 nm x 10 nm) of such a surface. Several groupings of atoms with five-fold and ten-fold symmetry are evident. The dark five-fold stars are Bergman clusters (a basic structural entity of this type of quasicrystal) which have been truncated in the surface formation process Papadopolos02 . White lines drawn on the figure join identical positions on the dark five-fold stars; the separations between the lines are of two lengths $`L=0.74\pm 0.02`$ nm and $`S=0.46\pm 0.02`$ nm, whose ratio is within experimental error equal to the golden mean $`\tau `$; \[$`\tau `$ is the irrational number expected for the ratio of the two basic units of the Fibonacci sequence \[$`\tau =(\sqrt{5}+1)/2=1.618\mathrm{}`$\]. Furthermore the arrangement of these line separations (reading from bottom to top) $`LSLLSL`$ forms a segment of the Fibonacci sequence.

Deposition of Cu atoms on the surface was achieved using a simple evaporation source consisting of a tantalum filament which was wrapped around a sample of pure Cu. The filament was thoroughly degassed before evaporation and the evaporation flux was found to be very consistent under constant conditions of the control parameters. The experiments were conducted using a Cu flux of $`4.5\pm 0.2x10^2`$ monolayers s-1 as determined by measuring the fractional area of the surface covered with successive Cu depositions. The sample was at room temperature during deposition and measurement.

Figure 2 gives an overview of the growth of Cu on the surface at room temperature for increasing Cu coverage. Under the above deposition conditions the growth of Cu on the Al-Pd-Mn surface is observed to proceed in a layer-by-layer manner. The step height from layer to layer is $`0.19\pm 0.01`$ nm. For sub-monolayer coverages (Fig. 2(a)) Cu islands form on the surface and as adsorption continues the second layer is observed to begin growing when the first layer is $`90\pm 5`$ % complete. For layers 1 to 4 the Cu atoms within the layers are observed to self-organise into small domains within which there is a developing pattern of one-dimensional rows (Fig 2(b)). From layers 5 to 8 a very well-developed row structure is observed (Fig. 2(c)). From layer 9 the effect of layer growth before previous layer completion becomes more marked as shown in Fig. 2(d); this results in a diminishing domain size and in the simultaneous existence of many incomplete layers at the surface. The row structure persists in these layers. The results were reproduced several times and the growth was monitored up to the 25th. layer.

Fig. 3(a) is a 40nm x 40 nm image taken during the growth of the 6th layer. This image reveals several intriguing details. The islands have sharp edges where the border is a single row. A plausible explanation for the growth mechanism is the initial adsorption of Cu on top of a growing layer, followed by diffusion of the adsorbed atoms along the Cu rows and subsequent attachment at the end of each row. The rows themselves appear in five orientations, with the angles made by intersections of rows in the same layer corresponding to the internal angles of a pentagon. The intersections between rows are of two types. Two sets of rows can meet at vertex points, where the end of each row in one direction meets the end of another at an angle of 108o (the internal angle of a pentagon). Alternatively the rows in one direction intersect a single row at an angle of 72o. The rows do not form a periodic structure.

The corrugation across the rows is measured at $`0.025\pm 0.005`$ nm using STM. The atomic structure within the rows is not resolved in these experiments; this could be an indication of a large vibrational amplitude along the rows; alternatively it could reflect a low corrugation in electronic density along the rows. The fact that the LEED pattern shows discrete spots is indicative of long-range order both within and across domains and along the rows themselves. The row directions are also observed to be correlated from layer to layer, indicating that each layer acts as a template for the subsequent one in the growth process.

The inter-row distances form aperiodic sequences having long and short separations. This is illustrated in Figure 4 which shows a 10 nm x 10 nm image of the surface during formation of the 6th layer. There are some vacancy defects in the rows themselves. Nevertheless sequences of rows having S and L separations are visible. The average spacings are measured at $`0.45\pm 0.02`$ nm and $`L=0.73\pm 0.03`$ nm. The ratio of these numbers equals the golden mean $`\tau `$ within experimental error. Two such sequences ($`SLLSLSL`$, reading from bottom to top) are indicated on this figure, on rows which meet at vertex points. This indicates that the same sequencing information is common to both sets of rows. The coherence length of the row structures appears to be determined by the domain walls which arise during the growth process. The close match of these row spacings in the Cu structure with those illustrated for the clean surfaces (Figure 1) indicate that the clean surfaces acts as a template for the ordered growth of the Cu atoms.

The LEED pattern characteristic of this layered row structure is shown in Fig. 3(b). The pattern has ten-fold symmetric rings of spots whose distances from the central spot (hidden by the electron gun in the Figure) exhibit a $`\tau `$-scaling relationship. From layers 9 to 20, with the simultaneous growth of multiple layers, the LEED pattern becomes streaky and diffuse and eventually degrades and disappears by the 25th layer. This is consistent with the diminishing domain size.

Upon annealing to 570 K, STM images (not shown) reveal that the Cu thin film undergoes an irreversible transformation to a cubic structure Cu with five domains rotated from each other by 72o. The LEED pattern associated with this phase, although 10-fold symmetric, no longer has the $`\tau `$-scaling relationships in the distances of the diffraction spots. The domain boundaries of this phase are decorated with excess Cu atoms. Flashing the sample to 660 K results in thermal desorption of the Cu film and the clean surface LEED pattern is restored.

There has been a report of the use of these surfaces for the growth of five-fold symmetric nanoclusters Cai03  by the adsorption of sub-monolayer amounts of aluminum on Al-Cu-Fe. There has been a report of ordered atomic Si and Bi monolayers on quasicrystal surfaces Franke02 , and another report of the formation of a quasicrystalline bi-metallic Au-Al alloy by deposition and subsequent annealing of a Au film on an Al-Pd-Mn substrate Shimoda01 . In other work, the deposition of Ag at low temperature onto to a GaAs(110) substrate followed by annealing to room temperature was found to form a Ag (111) film with a surface quasiperiodic modulation Smith96 ; Ebert99 . However the system described in this report is unique in that it constitutes a single element quasi-periodic thin film grown using a quasicrystal surface as a template.

The quasi-periodicity of the film, together with the one-dimensionality of the row structure, suggest the possibility of unusual vibrational and electronic properties in this system. The well-documented low density of electronic states at the Fermi level in the bulk quasicrystal (the so-called pseudogap ) means features in the valence electronic structure of the Cu film should be readily distinguishable from those of the substrate. This system also offers interesting possibilities for monitoring the transition from 2D to 3D electronic properties in a quasi-periodic material as the thickness of the film is increased, and for probing the relationship between quasi-periodicity and physical properties. The surface of the film itself has the potential to act as an adsorption template for the formation of further quasi-periodic systems. Furthermore we have no reason to believe that the Cu/Al-Pd-Mn system is unique; we anticipate the discovery of further aperiodic thin film systems, with the promise of new electronic and/or magnetic properties.

Acknowledgements The UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, the US National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Energy, Basic Energy Sciences, and the EU Marie Curie Host Development Fund are acknowledged for funding. V. Humblot is thanked for experimental assistance and N. Brabner for the construction of the Cu evaporator.


text:
# Convolutional Codes with Maximum Distance Profile11footnote 1This work was supported in part by NSF grants DMS-00-72383 and CCR-02-05310.

## 1 Introduction

The concept of maximum distance profile codes was introduced in . This concept is closely related to the concept of optimum distance profile code widely studied in the convolutional code area; see e.g. . It was shown in  that maximum distance profile codes exist when the transmission rate is $`(n1)/n`$, and it was conjectured that such codes exist for every transmission rate. In systems theoretic terms, this means that the existence of maximum distance profile codes was established for multi-input, one-output systems and that it was conjectured for general multi-input, multi-output (MIMO) systems.

The main result of this paper shows the existence of maximum distance profile codes for general MIMO systems and that these codes are generic in the sense of algebraic geometry. The techniques we are using to establish this result are based on very classical results from linear systems theory. Thus, we will first explain the problem in terms of linear systems theory. For this, we follow the description as it can be found in .

Let $`𝔽`$ be a finite field. Let $`n,k`$, and $`\delta `$ be positive integers with $`k<n`$. Consider the matrices $`A𝔽^{\delta \times \delta },B𝔽^{\delta \times k},C𝔽^{(nk)\times \delta }`$, and $`D𝔽^{(nk)\times k}`$. A rate $`k/n`$ convolutional code $`𝒞`$ of degree $`\delta `$ can be described by the linear system governed by the equations:

$`x_{t+1}`$ $`=`$ $`Ax_t+Bu_t,`$
$`y_t`$ $`=`$ $`Cx_t+Du_t,`$ (1.1)
$`v_t`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{y_t}{u_t}}\right),x_0=0.`$
We call $`x_t𝔽^\delta `$ the state vector, $`u_t𝔽^k`$ the information vector, $`y_t𝔽^{nk}`$ the parity vector, and $`v_t𝔽^n`$ the code vector, each at time $`t`$. The set of all possible code vector sequences $`v_t𝔽^n`$ is called the convolutional code generated by $`(A,B,C,D)`$; its elements are called codewords. For simplicity, we will assume that $`(A,B)`$ forms a controllable pair and $`(A,C)`$ forms an observable pair. We will refer to such a code as an $`(n,k,\delta )`$-code.

By iterating the equations defining the system (1), it can be seen that a sequence $`\{v_t=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{y_t}{u_t}\right)𝔽^nt=0,1,2,\mathrm{},j\}`$ represents the beginning of a codeword if and only if the following matrix equation is satisfied:

$$\left(\begin{array}{cccccccc}& & & D& & & & \\ & & & CB& D& & & \\ & I& & CAB& CB& \mathrm{}& & \\ & & & \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \\ & & & CA^{j1}B& CA^{j2}B& \mathrm{}& CB& D\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}y_0\\ y_1\\ \mathrm{}\\ y_j\\ \\ u_0\\ u_1\\ \mathrm{}\\ u_j\end{array}\right)=0.$$
(1.2)
For the purpose of error control coding, it is important that any two codewords are far apart with respect to a suitable metric. The following definition is fundamental in coding theory:

###### Definition 1.1

Let $`x,y𝔽^n`$ be vectors. The Hamming distance Ham($`x,y`$) is defined to be the number of components in which $`x`$ and $`y`$ differ. The weight wt($`x`$) of $`x`$ is defined to be the number of nonzero components of $`x`$.

Clearly, one has that Ham($`x,y`$) = wt($`xy`$). When $`\{v_t=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{y_t}{u_t}\right)𝔽^nt=0,1,2,\mathrm{}\}`$ is a codeword, one defines its weight to be $`_t\text{wt(}v_t\text{)}`$.

In this paper, we are concerned only with finite-weight codewords. These are defined as follows:

###### Definition 1.2

A sequence $`\{v_t=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{y_t}{u_t}\right)𝔽^nt=0,1,2,\mathrm{}\}`$ represents a $`finite`$-$`weightcodeword`$ if

1. Equation (1) is satisfied for all $`t_+`$, where $`_+`$ denotes the set of positive integers;
2. There is an integer $`j`$ such that $`x_{j+1}=0`$ and $`u_t=0`$ for $`tj+1`$.

A well-studied concept in convolutional coding theory is that of column distances . We give a systems theoretic definition.

###### Definition 1.3

The weight wt($`v`$) of a vector $`v`$ is the number of nonzero components of $`v`$.

###### Definition 1.4

The $`j`$th column distance of the code $`𝒞`$ is defined as

$$d_j:=\mathrm{min}\left\{\underset{t=0}{\overset{j}{}}\mathrm{wt}(u_t)+\underset{t=0}{\overset{j}{}}\mathrm{wt}(y_t)\right\},$$

where the minimum is taken over all trajectories $`(u_t,y_t)`$ of the system $`(`$1$`)`$ with initial vector $`u_00`$.

Clearly, one has that $`d_0d_1d_2\mathrm{}`$, and hence there exists an integer $`r`$ such that $`d_r=d_{r+j}`$ for all $`j0`$. This largest possible column distance is of central importance in coding theory:

###### Definition 1.5

$$d_{\text{free}}:=\underset{j\mathrm{}}{lim}d_j$$
(1.3)
is called the free distance of the code $`𝒞`$.

Codes with a large free distance and the largest possible column distances are very desirable. The following two results give estimates for these parameters. The first one was proven in :

###### Proposition 1.6

For every $`j_0`$, we have

$$d_j(nk)(j+1)+1.$$

The proof given in  uses algebraic properties of the parity check matrix. The following systems theoretic proof is almost trivial.

###### Proof.

Take an input sequence $`u_0,\mathrm{},u_j`$, where $`\mathrm{wt}(u_0)=1`$ and $`u_s=0`$ for $`s1`$. Let $`y_0,\mathrm{},y_j𝔽^{nk}`$ be the corresponding output sequence. Then,

$$d_j\underset{t=0}{\overset{j}{}}\mathrm{wt}(u_t)+\underset{t=0}{\overset{j}{}}\mathrm{wt}(y_t)(nk)(j+1)+1.$$

The following theorem gives an upper bound for the free distance.

###### Theorem 1.7 ()

The free distance of an $`(n,k,\delta )`$-code satisfies

$$d_{\text{free}}(nk)\left(\frac{\delta }{k}+1\right)+\delta +1.$$
(1.4)
The bound on the right hand side is called the generalized Singleton bound. With these preliminaries, we can now give the following definitions:

###### Definition 1.8

Let $`𝒞`$ be an $`(n,k,\delta )`$-code with column distances $`d_j`$ and free distance $`d_{\text{free}}`$.

1. $`𝒞`$ is said to have a maximum distance profile if

$$d_j=(nk)(j+1)+1\text{ for }j=0,\mathrm{},L:=\frac{\delta }{k}+\frac{\delta }{nk}.$$
2. $`𝒞`$ is called an MDS code if $`d_{\text{free}}`$ attains the generalized Singleton bound $`(`$1.4$`)`$.
3. $`𝒞`$ is called a strongly MDS code if

$$d_M=(nk)\left(\frac{\delta }{k}+1\right)+\delta +1\text{ for }M=\frac{\delta }{k}+\frac{\delta }{nk}.$$

In , it was shown that, for any rate $`k/n`$ and degree $`\delta `$, MDS codes form a generic set in the variety parametrizing convolutional codes of rate $`k/n`$ and degree $`\delta `$. In , the existence of $`(n,n1,\delta )`$ strongly MDS codes was established. When $`nk`$ divides $`\delta `$, we have $`M=L`$. It follows that, in this situation, a convolutional code has a maximum distance profile if and only if it is strongly MDS. In Theorem 2.10 of this paper, we establish the existence of maximum distance profile convolutional codes for all parameters $`(n,k,\delta )`$ over a suitably large base field $`𝔽`$.

## 2 Existence of Maximum Distance Profile Codes

The set of all $`(n,k,\delta )`$ convolutional codes has in a natural way the structure of a quasi-projective variety. For this, note that the set of 4-tuples $`(A,B,C,D)`$, with $`A𝔽^{\delta \times \delta },B𝔽^{\delta \times k},C𝔽^{(nk)\times \delta }`$, $`D𝔽^{(nk)\times k}`$, $`(A,B)`$ a controllable pair, and $`(A,C)`$ an observable pair, describes the set of $`(nk)\times k`$ proper transfer functions of McMillan degree $`\delta `$. Hazewinkel  showed that this set is not only a quasi-projective variety but even a quasi-affine variety. We may also view this set as a Zariski open subset of the projective variety described in . In this section, we establish the existence of maximum distance profile codes for all parameters $`(n,k,\delta )`$ for sufficiently large fields. Moreover, we show that the set of maximum distance profile codes forms a generic set when viewed as a subset of the quasi-projective variety of all $`(n,k,\delta )`$ convolutional codes. More precisely, we show that the set of maximum distance profile codes is open and dense inside this quasi-projective variety.

The strategy for obtaining this result is as follows. In the first step (Theorem 2.4), we exhibit a set of polynomial equations whose zero set exactly describes the $`(n,k,\delta )`$ codes which do not have the maximum distance profile property. This shows that the codes possessing the maximum distance profile property form a Zariski open subset. In the second step, we show that this Zariski open subset is nonempty as soon as the field is sufficiently large. This part of the proof invokes some classical results from partial realization theory.

The block Toeplitz matrix appearing in $`(`$1.2$`)`$ is of central importance in what follows. Thus, we define:

$$𝒯_j:=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}F_0& & & \\ F_1& F_0& & \\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \\ F_j& F_j1& \mathrm{}& F_0\end{array}\right):=\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}D& & & & \\ CB& D& & & \\ CAB& CB& \mathrm{}& & \\ \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \\ CA^{j1}B& CA^{j2}B& \mathrm{}& CB& D\end{array}\right).$$
(2.1)
###### Notation 2.1

Let $`i_1<\mathrm{}<i_r(j+1)(nk)`$ and $`j_1<\mathrm{}<j_r(j+1)k`$ be two sets of indices. We denote by $`M_{j_1,\mathrm{},j_r}^{i_1,\mathrm{},i_r}`$ the $`r\times r`$ minor obtained from $`𝒯_j`$ by picking the rows with indices $`i_1,\mathrm{},i_r`$ and the columns with indices $`j_1,\mathrm{},j_r`$.

It will turn out that an $`(A,B,C,D)`$ code has $`j`$th column distance $`d_j=(nk)(j+1)+1`$ if and only if all minors appearing in $`(`$2.1$`)`$ which are not trivially zero are nonzero. In order to make this statement precise, we make the following definition. In this definition, we think of the nonzero entries of the block Toeplitz matrix $`𝒯_j𝔽^{(j+1)(nk)\times (j+1)k}`$ as indeterminates of the polynomial ring $`R:=𝔽[x_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_{(j+1)(nk)k}]`$. Specifically, if the entry $`(s,t)`$ of the matrix $`F_i`$ is nonzero, we set it equal to $`x_{i(nk)k+(s1)k+t}`$; otherwise, we leave it zero.

###### Definition 2.2

A minor $`M_{j_1,j_2,\mathrm{},j_r}^{i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_r}`$ of $`𝒯_j`$ is called trivially zero if $`M_{j_1,j_2,\mathrm{},j_r}^{i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_r}`$ is zero when viewed as an element of the ring $`R`$ in the manner specified in the preceding paragraph.

The following Lemma gives an algebraic criterion for a minor to be trivially zero.

###### Lemma 2.3

Let $`𝒯_j𝔽^{(j+1)(nk)\times (j+1)k}`$ be a block Toeplitz matrix as defined above. Suppose that, for all integers $`i`$ with $`0ij`$, all entries of the matrix $`F_i`$ are nonzero. Then, a minor $`M_{j_1,j_2,\mathrm{},j_r}^{i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_r}`$ of $`𝒯_j`$ is not trivially zero if and only if its indices $`i_1<\mathrm{}<i_r(j+1)(nk)`$ and $`j_1<\mathrm{}<j_r(j+1)k`$ satisfy

$$j_t\frac{i_t}{nk}k\text{ for }t=1,\mathrm{},r.$$
(2.2)
###### Proof.

In this proof, we refer to both a submatrix of $`𝒯_j`$ and its determinant as a minor. Let $`M_{j_1,j_2,\mathrm{},j_r}^{i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_r}`$ be a minor of $`𝒯_j`$. We first prove that this minor is trivially zero if and only if at least one of its diagonal entries is zero. We then prove that this minor has at least one zero on its diagonal if and only if there is a $`t\{1,\mathrm{},r\}`$ such that

$$j_t>\frac{i_t}{nk}k.$$

To prove the first equivalence, suppose first that the minor $`M_{j_1,j_2,\mathrm{},j_r}^{i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_r}`$ has at least one zero on its diagonal. We denote the entry in row $`m`$ and column $`n`$ of $`M_{j_1,j_2,\mathrm{},j_r}^{i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_r}`$ by $`(m,n)`$. Note that, if $`(m,n)=0`$, then $`(m^{},n^{})=0`$ for all entries $`(m^{},n^{})`$ with $`m^{}m`$ and $`n^{}n`$. Let $`S_r`$ denote the permutation group on r letters. From the expression

$$\underset{\sigma S_r}{}(\text{sgn}\sigma )(1,\sigma (1))(2,\sigma (2))\mathrm{}(r,\sigma (r))$$
(2.3)
giving the determinant of an $`r\times r`$ matrix over a commutative ring, we see that this minor is zero whether viewed as an element of $`𝔽^{r\times r}`$ or as an element of $`R^{r\times r}`$ in the manner defined above; in other words, it is trivially zero. We now prove the other direction. It is easy to see that every trivially zero $`1\times 1`$ and $`2\times 2`$ minor of $`𝒯_j`$ has a zero on its diagonal. Let $`n`$ be a positive integer with $`n3`$, and suppose that, for $`rn1`$, every trivially zero $`r\times r`$ minor has a zero on its diagonal. Suppose that the $`n\times n`$ minor $`M_{j_1,j_2,\mathrm{},j_n}^{i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_n}`$ is trivially zero. We use an induction argument to show that this minor has at least one zero on its diagonal. Notice that, when $`M_{j_1,j_2,\mathrm{},j_n}^{i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_n}`$ is viewed as an element of $`R^{n\times n}`$ in the manner defined above, the entry $`(n,1)`$ appears exactly once. If this entry is zero, then every entry in the minor is zero, and thus all diagonal entries are zero. Suppose this entry is not zero. Doing a cofactor expansion along the first column shows that the $`(n1)\times (n1)`$ minor $`M_{j_2,\mathrm{},j_n}^{i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_{n1}}`$ is trivially zero. By the induction hypothesis, this minor must have a zero on its diagonal. Thus, there is an entry $`(s,s+1)=0`$ in $`M_{j_1,j_2,\mathrm{},j_n}^{i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_n}`$, which means that the minor $`M_{j_{s+1},\mathrm{},j_n}^{i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_s}`$ is such that all of its entries are zero. Because we assumed $`M_{j_1,j_2,\mathrm{},j_n}^{i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_n}`$ is trivially zero, it follows that at least one of the minors $`M_{j_1,j_2,\mathrm{},j_s}^{i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_s}`$, $`M_{j_{s+1},\mathrm{},j_n}^{i_{s+1},\mathrm{},i_n}`$ is trivially zero. By the induction hypothesis, at least one of these minors has a zero on its diagonal. As the diagonals of these minors lie on the diagonal of $`M_{j_1,j_2,\mathrm{},j_n}^{i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_n}`$, we are done.

To prove the second equivalence, we simply note that the diagonal entries of this minor are the entries $`(i_1,j_1)`$, $`(i_2,j_2)`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`(i_r,j_r)`$ of $`𝒯_j`$. From the structure of $`𝒯_j`$, it is clear that the diagonal entry $`(i_t,j_t)`$ is zero if and only if

$$j_t>\frac{i_t}{nk}k.$$

###### Theorem 2.4

Let $`𝒞`$ be an $`(n,k,\delta )`$ convolutional code described by matrices $`(A,B,C,D)`$ and consider the block Toeplitz matrix $`𝒯_j`$ introduced in $`(`$2.1$`)`$. Then $`𝒞`$ has $`j`$th column distance $`d_j=(nk)(j+1)+1`$ if and only if every minor which is not trivially zero is nonzero.

###### Proof.

$`:`$ Suppose that

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccccccccc}y_0& y_1& \mathrm{}& y_j& & u_0& u_1& \mathrm{}& u_j\end{array}\right)^T$$

is a finite-weight codeword with $`u_00`$ and that the vector

$$\left(\begin{array}{cccc}u_0& u_1& \mathrm{}& u_j\end{array}\right)^T$$

has weight $`r`$. Suppose that every minor of the matrix $`(`$2.1$`)`$ which is not trivially zero is nonzero. Because $`u_00`$, this means that at most $`r1`$ rows of $`(`$2.1$`)`$ are in the left kernel of

$$\left(\begin{array}{cccc}u_0& u_1& \mathrm{}& u_j\end{array}\right)^T.$$

Thus, this codeword has weight at least $`r+(j+1)(nk)(r1)=(j+1)(nk)+1`$. We therefore have that the weight of any codeword with $`u_00`$ is at least $`(j+1)(nk)+1`$. In other words, $`d_j(j+1)(nk)+1`$. Proposition 1.6 implies that $`d_j=(j+1)(nk)+1`$.

$`:`$ We prove the contrapositive. We first note that the result follows trivially if, for some integer $`i`$ with $`0ij`$, the matrix $`F_i`$ contains a zero entry. We therefore assume that all such entries are nonzero. Suppose that the matrix $`(`$2.1$`)`$ has an $`r\times r`$ minor which is zero but not trivially zero, where $`r2`$ (in this proof, we again use ’$`r\times r`$ minor’ to refer to both the submatrix and its determinant). If the $`r`$ rows of this minor belong to the left kernel of a column vector of weight $`r`$, then, because of the structure of $`(`$2.1$`)`$, we can form a nonzero vector

$$\left(\begin{array}{cccc}u_0& u_1& \mathrm{}& u_j\end{array}\right)^T$$

of weight $`r`$ with $`u_00`$ such that the weight of

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccccccccc}y_0& y_1& \mathrm{}& y_j& & u_0& u_1& \mathrm{}& u_j\end{array}\right)^T$$

is at most $`r+(j+1)(nk)r=(j+1)(nk)`$. If not, then the $`r`$ rows of this minor belong to the kernel of a nonzero column vector of weight $`r^{}r`$. The $`r^{}`$ nonzero components of this vector pick out an $`r\times r^{}`$ submatrix. We would like to see that this submatrix contains an $`r^{}\times r^{}`$ minor which is zero but not trivially zero. To obtain this minor, we simply choose the bottom $`r^{}`$ rows. This minor is clearly zero. Because we have assumed that the entries of the matrices $`F_i`$ are all nonzero, we know from Lemma 2.3 that a minor is not trivially zero if and only if its $`i`$th column has the property that the last $`r+1i`$ entries are nonzero. The columns of the original $`r\times r`$ minor have this property. Thus, the columns of our $`r^{}\times r^{}`$ subminor have this property. Because of the structure of $`(`$2.1$`)`$, we can form a nonzero vector

$$\left(\begin{array}{cccc}u_0& u_1& \mathrm{}& u_j\end{array}\right)^T$$

of weight $`r^{}`$ with $`u_00`$ such that the weight of

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccccccccc}y_0& y_1& \mathrm{}& y_j& & u_0& u_1& \mathrm{}& u_j\end{array}\right)^T$$

is at most $`r^{}+(j+1)(nk)r^{}=(j+1)(nk)`$. ∎

Specializing Theorem 2.4 for $`j=L`$, and recalling \[3, Corollary 2.4\], we immediately get an algebraic criterion for an $`(A,B,C,D)`$ convolutional code to represent a maximum distance profile code:

###### Corollary 2.5

Let $`L=\frac{\delta }{k}+\frac{\delta }{nk}`$. Then, the matrices $`(A,B,C,D)`$ generate a maximum distance profile $`(n,k,\delta )`$ convolutional code if and only if the matrix $`𝒯_L`$ has the property that every minor which is not trivially zero is nonzero.

###### Remark 2.6

Theorem 2.4 and Corollary 2.5 give polynomial conditions in the entries of the matrices $`(A,B,C,D)`$ which guarantee that a convolutional code has the maximum distance property. These algebraic properties are invariant under state space transformations. This means that, if $`(A,B,C,D)`$ has this property, then so does $`(SAS^1,SB,CS^1,D)`$ for every matrix $`SGl_\delta (𝔽)`$. As a result, these conditions are really algebraic conditions on the quasi-projective variety  describing the set of rate $`k/n`$ convolutional codes of degree $`\delta `$. We have therefore established that the set of convolutional codes having the maximum distance property form a Zariski open set in this quasi-projective variety.

The remainder of this section is devoted to showing that this Zariski open set of maximal distance profile codes is nonempty as soon as the base field is sufficiently large. As a first step toward this result, we have the following theorem.

###### Theorem 2.7

Let $`j,k,n`$ be fixed positive integers and consider the matrix introduced in $`(`$2.1$`)`$. If the field $`𝔽`$ is sufficiently large, then one can find a sequence of matrices $`\{F_0,\mathrm{},F_j\}`$, where $`F_i𝔽^{(nk)\times k}i\{0,1,\mathrm{},j\}`$, such that every minor of the matrix $`𝒯_j`$ which is not trivially zero is nonzero.

###### Proof.

Let $`𝔽`$ be an arbitrary finite field and let $`\overline{𝔽}`$ denote the algebraic closure of $`𝔽`$. Note that $`\overline{𝔽}`$ is an infinite field. To say that a minor of $`𝒯_j`$ is zero but not trivially zero is to say that the entries of $`𝒯_j`$ satisfy a nonzero polynomial equation in $`\overline{𝔽}[x_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_{(j+1)(nk)k}]`$. As there are finitely many minors, there are finitely many such polynomial equations describing those matrix sequences $`\{F_0,\mathrm{},F_j\}`$ for which $`𝒯_j`$ has at least one minor that vanishes but does not trivially vanish. Each of these polynomials describes a proper algebraic subset of $`\overline{𝔽}^{(j+1)(nk)k}`$, the complement of which is a nonempty Zariski open set in $`\overline{𝔽}^{(j+1)(nk)k}`$. We may take the intersection of these Zariski open sets, and, as there are finitely many of them, the result is again a nonempty Zariski open set in $`\overline{𝔽}^{(j+1)(nk)k}`$. Take $`\{F_0,\mathrm{},F_j\}`$ to be an element in this intersection. There are finitely many entries in this matrix sequence. Thus, either all of the entries belong to $`𝔽`$, or there is a finite extension field of $`𝔽`$ containing all of them. In this case, we may instead take $`𝔽`$ to be the smallest such extension. ∎

In order to show the existence of maximum distance profile convolutional codes of arbitrary rate $`k/n`$, we use a result by Tether  from minimal partial realization theory. For a given rate, this result allows us to show the existence of such codes possessing only certain degrees. It will require only a small amount of additional work to obtain the existence of such codes of arbitrary degree. Readers interested in the minimal partial realization problem and its connections are referred to .

###### Theorem 2.8

Let $`j,k`$, and $`n`$ be fixed positive integers with $`k<n`$. Let $`\{F_0,F_1,\mathrm{},F_j\}`$ and $`𝒯_j`$ be as in Theorem 2.7. Let $`\delta `$ be the smallest positive integer such that

$$\frac{\delta }{k}+\frac{\delta }{nk}j.$$

Suppose that $`\{F_0,F_1,\mathrm{},F_j\}`$ is such that the corresponding $`𝒯_j`$ has the property that its minors which are not trivially zero are nonzero. Then, one can extend the sequence $`\{F_0,F_1,\mathrm{},F_j\}`$ to an infinite sequence $`\{F_0,F_1,\mathrm{}\}`$ of $`(nk)\times k`$ matrices over $`𝔽`$ such that the infinite block Hankel matrix

$$=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}F_1& F_2& F_3& \mathrm{}\\ F_2& F_3& F_4& \mathrm{}\\ F_3& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \end{array}\right)$$

has rank $`\delta `$.

###### Proof.

Let $`_{x,y}`$ denote the block Hankel matrix

$$_{x,y}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}F_1& F_2& \mathrm{}& F_y\\ F_2& F_3& \mathrm{}& F_{y+1}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ F_x& F_{x+1}& \mathrm{}& F_{x+y1}\end{array}\right)$$

As was shown in \[14, Theorem 1\], any matrix sequence $`\{F_1,\mathrm{},F_j\}`$ has a minimal partial realization of degree $`d`$, where

$$d=\underset{i=1}{\overset{j}{}}\mathrm{rank}_{i,j+1i}\underset{i=1}{\overset{j1}{}}\mathrm{rank}_{i,ji}.$$

It is easy to see that, up to a reordering of block columns, each $`_{i,j+1i}`$ appearing in the first summation in the above formula for $`d`$ is a submatrix of $`𝒯_j`$ (take the intersection of the last $`i`$ block rows and the first $`j+1i`$ block columns). As each $`_{i,ji}`$ in the second summation is a submatrix of $`_{i,j+1i}`$, the same is true for these. By assumption, the only minors of $`𝒯_j`$ that are zero are those that are trivially zero. Thus, $`\mathrm{rank}_{x,y}=\mathrm{min}((nk)x,ky)`$ for each $`_{x,y}`$ appearing in the above formula for $`d`$.

First, suppose that $`knk`$. The formula for $`d`$ then becomes

$$d=\underset{i=1}{\overset{j}{}}\mathrm{min}(i(nk),(j+1i)k)\underset{i=1}{\overset{j1}{}}\mathrm{min}(i(nk),(ji)k).$$

Suppose there exists an integer $`r,1rj1`$, with $`r(nk)(jr)k`$. Let $`i^{}`$ be the smallest such integer. Then, the formula for $`d`$ becomes

$$d=(i^{}1)(nk)+(\mathrm{min}(i^{}(nk),(ji^{}+1)k)\mathrm{min}((i^{}1)(nk),(ji^{}+1)k)).$$

By definition of $`i^{}`$, $`(i^{}1)(nk)<(ji^{}+1)k`$, so that the last term in this expression is $`(i^{}1)(nk)`$. Thus,

$$d=\mathrm{min}(i^{}(nk),(ji^{}+1)k).$$

Note that $`i^{}=j\frac{k}{n}`$. Consider the difference

$$\begin{array}{c}(ji^{}+1)k(i^{}1)(nk)=(jj\frac{k}{n}+1)k(j\frac{k}{n}1)(nk)=\hfill \\ \hfill (j+1)kj\frac{k}{n}n+(nk).\end{array}$$

We want to see that this number is at least $`nk`$, or, equivalently, that $`(j+1)kj\frac{k}{n}n0`$. This will imply that $`\mathrm{min}(i^{}(nk),(ji^{}+1)k)=i^{}(nk)`$. We have

$$(j+1)kj\frac{k}{n}n0(j+1)kj\frac{k}{n}n\frac{(j+1)k}{n}j\frac{k}{n}.$$

By assumption, $`knk`$, which means $`k\frac{n}{2}`$. It follows that $`\frac{(j+1)k}{n}j\frac{k}{n}`$. Thus, we have $`d=i^{}(nk)`$.

By assumption, $`i^{}(nk)(ji^{})k`$. We have

$$\begin{array}{c}i^{}(nk)(ji^{})ki^{}(nk)+i^{}kjk\frac{i^{}(nk)}{k}+i^{}j\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{i^{}(nk)}{k}+i^{}=\frac{i^{}(nk)}{k}+i^{}=\frac{i^{}(nk)}{k}+\frac{i^{}(nk)}{nk}j.\end{array}$$

Let $`\delta =i^{}(nk)`$. We want to see that $`\delta `$ is the smallest positive integer satisfying $`\frac{\delta }{k}+\frac{\delta }{nk}j`$. Consider $`\frac{\delta }{k}=\frac{i^{}(nk)}{k}`$. Since $`i^{}=j\frac{k}{n}`$, we may write $`i^{}=\frac{jk+s}{n}`$ where $`s_0`$ and $`0sn1`$. Then, $`\frac{\delta }{k}=\frac{znky}{nk}`$ where $`z,y_0`$ and $`0ynk1`$. Thus, we have

$$\frac{\delta }{k}+\frac{\delta }{nk}=\frac{znky}{nk}+\frac{jk+s}{n}\frac{(jk+s)(nk)}{nk}+\frac{jk+s}{n}$$

with equality precisely when $`y=0`$ or, in other words, when $`ki^{}(nk)`$. Suppose $`y=0`$. Then, since $`sn1`$ and $`k\frac{n}{2}`$, we have

$$\frac{\delta }{k}+\frac{\delta }{nk}=\frac{(jk+s)(nk)}{nk}+\frac{jk+s}{n}=\frac{jk+s}{k}=j+\frac{s}{k}<j+2$$

As $`j+\frac{s}{k}`$ must be an integer, we may write $`j+\frac{s}{k}j+1`$. For the same reason, we must have $`s=lk,l\{0,1\}`$. From this, we see that $`\frac{\delta }{k}=\frac{i^{}(nk)}{k}`$ is bounded above by $`j+1`$, and this upper bound is obtained precisely when $`ki^{}(nk)`$ and $`l=1`$. Because $`(nk)\delta `$, it follows that when $`l=1`$, $`\frac{\delta 1}{k}+\frac{\delta 1}{nk}j1`$, and when $`l=0`$, that $`\frac{\delta 1}{k}+\frac{\delta 1}{nk}j2`$. If $`y`$ is nonzero, then $`\frac{\delta }{k}+\frac{\delta }{nk}j`$, and so $`\frac{\delta 1}{k}+\frac{\delta 1}{nk}j1`$.

If no such $`r`$ exists, there are two possibilities. The first is that $`j(nk)>k`$, so that $`\mathrm{min}(j(nk),k)=k`$. Then $`d=(j1)(nk)+k(j1)(nk)=k`$. Because $`(j1)(nk)<k`$, we have the inequalities $`\frac{n}{nk}=\frac{k}{nk}+1>j>\frac{k}{nk}`$, and so we may write $`\frac{k}{nk}+1j>\frac{k}{nk}`$. Letting $`\delta =k`$, we see that $`\delta `$ is the smallest positive integer satisfying $`\frac{\delta }{k}+\frac{\delta }{nk}j`$. The second possibility is that $`j(nk)k`$, so that $`\mathrm{min}(j(nk),k)=j(nk)`$. Let $`\delta =j(nk)`$. Clearly, $`\delta `$ is the smallest positive integer satisfying $`\frac{\delta }{k}+\frac{\delta }{nk}j`$.

The proof for the case $`k<nk`$ is similar. ∎

Theorem 2.8 immediately establishes the existence of maximum distance profile codes for certain parameters $`(n,k,\delta )`$:

###### Lemma 2.9

Let $`k,n`$ and $`\delta `$ be positive integers such that $`k<n`$ and either $`k|\delta `$ or $`nk|\delta `$. Then, an $`(n,k,\delta )`$ maximum distance profile convolutional code exists over a sufficiently large base field.

###### Proof.

Let $`\frac{\delta }{k}+\frac{\delta }{nk}=L`$. Note that if $`\delta `$ decreases, then $`L`$ must decrease. From the proof of Theorem 2.7, we know that there exists a finite extension field of $`𝔽`$ and a sequence $`\{F_0,F_1,\mathrm{},F_L\}`$ of $`(nk)\times k`$ matrices with entries in this extension field such that the only minors of the corresponding $`𝒯_L`$ which are zero are those which are trivially zero. From the proof of Theorem 2.8, we know that there exist matrices $`A𝔽^{\delta \times \delta },B𝔽^{\delta \times k}`$, and $`C𝔽^{(nk)\times \delta }`$ which give a minimal partial realization of the sequence $`\{F_1,\mathrm{},F_L\}`$. Let $`D=F_0`$. Then, the matrices $`A,B,C`$, and $`D`$ describe an $`(n,k,\delta )`$ convolutional code via $`(`$1$`)`$. By Corollary 2.5, this code has a maximum distance profile. ∎

We now state and prove the main Theorem.

###### Theorem 2.10

Let $`k`$ and $`n`$ be positive integers such that $`k<n`$. Let $`\delta `$ be a positive integer. Then, there exists a maximum distance profile $`(n,k,\delta )`$ convolutional code over some finite extension field of $`𝔽`$. Moreover, the set of maximum distance profile $`(n,k,\delta )`$ convolutional codes forms a generic set in $`\overline{𝔽}^{(\delta +nk)(\delta k)}`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`L=\frac{\delta }{k}+\frac{\delta }{nk}`$. Let $`\delta ^{}`$ be the smallest integer satisfying this equality. If $`L=0`$, the theorem is easily seen to be true. This is because the problem of proving existence is reduced to finding an $`(A,B,C,D)`$ representation of an $`(n,k,\delta )`$ convolutional code over a finite extension field of $`𝔽`$ such that $`[ID]`$ represents the parity check matrix of an MDS block code. The proof that such a $`D`$ can be found is essentially identical to the proof of Lemma 2.7. The set of such $`(A,B,C,D)`$ representations is obviously a Zariski open set in $`\overline{𝔽}^{(\delta +nk)(\delta k)}`$. This proves that the set of such codes forms a generic set in $`\overline{𝔽}^{(\delta +nk)(\delta k)}`$. Thus, we may assume $`L0`$.

Let $`S`$ denote the set of 4-tuples of matrices $`(A,B,C,D)`$ with $`A𝔽^{\delta \times \delta },B𝔽^{\delta \times k},C𝔽^{(nk)\times \delta }`$, and $`D𝔽^{(nk)\times k}`$ and having the property that every minor in $`(`$2.1$`)`$ which is not trivially zero is nonzero. We first show $`S`$ is a nonempty Zariski open set in $`\overline{𝔽}^{(\delta +nk)(\delta k)}`$. $`S`$ is obviously Zariski open. We now show it is nonempty. Let $`r=\delta \delta ^{}`$. Let $`(\stackrel{~}{A},\stackrel{~}{B},\stackrel{~}{C},\stackrel{~}{D})`$ be a representation of a maximum distance profile $`(n,k,\delta ^{})`$ convolutional code; the existence of such a code is implied by Lemma 2.9. Consider the matrices

$$A=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0_{r\times r}& 0_{r\times \delta ^{}}\\ & \\ & \\ 0_{\delta ^{}\times r}& \stackrel{~}{A}\end{array}\right),B=\left(\begin{array}{c}0_{r\times k}\\ \\ \\ \stackrel{~}{B}\end{array}\right),C=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0_{(nk)\times r}& \end{array}\begin{array}{c}\hfill \stackrel{~}{C}\end{array}\right),D=\stackrel{~}{D}.$$

Notice that $`CA^{i1}B=\stackrel{~}{C}\stackrel{~}{A}^{i1}\stackrel{~}{B}`$ for all $`i1`$. Because $`(\stackrel{~}{A},\stackrel{~}{B},\stackrel{~}{C},\stackrel{~}{D})`$ is a representation of a maximum distance profile convolutional code, we have shown that $`S`$ is nonempty.

To complete the proof, we note that the reasoning used in the proof of Lemma 2.7 implies that 4-tuples of matrices $`(A,B,C,D)`$ in $`\overline{𝔽}^{(\delta +nk)(\delta k)}`$ such that $`(A,B)`$ is a controllable pair and $`(A,C)`$ is an observable pair form a nonempty Zariski open set in $`\overline{𝔽}^{(\delta +nk)(\delta k)}`$. Intersecting this set with $`S`$ gives a nonempty Zariski open set in $`\overline{𝔽}^{(\delta +nk)(\delta k)}`$ consisting of maximum distance profile $`(n,k,\delta )`$ convolutional codes. Thus, these codes form a generic set in $`\overline{𝔽}^{(\delta +nk)(\delta k)}`$. ∎

It was pointed out above that, when $`nk|\delta `$, an $`(n,k,\delta )`$ convolutional code has a maximum distance profile if and only if it is strongly MDS. With this, we have the following Corollary:

###### Corollary 2.11

When $`nk|\delta `$, there exists an $`(n,k,\delta )`$ strongly MDS convolutional code over a finite extension field of $`𝔽`$.

## 3 Codes with Maximum Distance Profile in Terms of Polynomial Generator Matrices

In the coding literature, convolutional codes are usually studied via (polynomial) generator and parity check matrices. The relevant results presented in  were formulated in terms of such polynomial matrix descriptions. In this section, we make the connection between polynomial and state space descriptions of convolutional codes. For this, we follow , where further details may be found as well. We also state a necessary and sufficient condition for a polynomial parity check matrix to define a maximum distance profile convolutional code.

Consider the transfer function $`T(z):=C(zIA)^1B+D`$. Let $`P(z)^1Q(z)=T(z)`$ be a left coprime factorization of $`T(z)`$ and $`H(z):=[P(z)Q(z)]`$. Consider the polynomial vectors:

$$u(z)=u_0z^\gamma +u_1z^{\gamma 1}+\mathrm{}+u_\gamma ;u_t𝔽^k,t=0,\mathrm{},\gamma ,$$

and

$$y(z)=y_0z^\gamma +y_1z^{\gamma 1}+\mathrm{}+y_\gamma ;y_t𝔽^{nk},t=0,\mathrm{},\gamma .$$

Then, the following conditions are equivalent.

1. The vectors $`u_t`$ and $`y_t`$ satisfy the state space equation $`(`$1$`)`$.
2. The vectors $`u_t`$ and $`y_t`$ satisfy

$$\left(\begin{array}{cccccccc}& & & D& & & & \\ & & & CB& D& & & \\ & I& & CAB& CB& \mathrm{}& & \\ & & & \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \\ & & & CA^{\gamma 1}B& CA^{\gamma 2}B& \mathrm{}& CB& D\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}y_0\\ y_1\\ \mathrm{}\\ y_\gamma \\ \\ u_0\\ u_1\\ \mathrm{}\\ u_\gamma \end{array}\right)=0.$$
(3.4)
3. There exists a ‘state vector’

$$x(z)=x_0z^\gamma +x_1z^{\gamma 1}+\mathrm{}+x_\gamma ;x_t𝔽^\delta ,t=0,\mathrm{},\gamma ,$$

such that

$$\left[\begin{array}{ccc}zIA& 0_{\delta \times (nk)}& B\\ C& I_{nk}& D\end{array}\right]\left[\begin{array}{c}x(z)\\ y(z)\\ u(z)\end{array}\right]=0.$$
(3.5)
4. $`\left[\begin{array}{c}y(z)\\ u(z)\end{array}\right]`$ is a code word, i.e.

$$H(z)\left[\begin{array}{c}y(z)\\ u(z)\end{array}\right]=[P(z)Q(z)]\left[\begin{array}{c}y(z)\\ u(z)\end{array}\right]=0.$$
5. $`y(z)=T(z)u(z)`$

The proof of these equivalences is straightforward, and more details can be found, e.g., in .

We close with the following theorem.

###### Theorem 3.1

Let $`H(z)=_{l=0}^\mu H_lz^l`$ be the parity check matrix of an $`(n,k,\delta )`$-code.
Assume $`H_l=0`$ for $`l>\mu `$. Let

$$_j:=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}H_0& & & \\ H_1& H_0& & \\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \\ H_j& H_{j1}& \mathrm{}& H_0\end{array}\right)𝔽^{(j+1)(nk)\times (j+1)n},$$

Then $`H(z)`$ represents a code whose $`jth`$ column distance $`d_j=(nk)(j+1)+1`$ if and only if every $`(j+1)(nk)\times (j+1)(nk)`$ full-size minor formed from the columns with indices $`1i_1<\mathrm{}<i_{(j+1)(nk)}`$, where $`i_{s(nk)}sn`$ for $`s=1,\mathrm{},j`$, is nonzero.

In particular when

$$j:=L:=\frac{\delta }{k}+\frac{\delta }{nk}.$$

then $`H(z)`$ represents a maximum distance profile code if and only if every $`(L+1)(nk)\times (L+1)(nk)`$ full-size minor formed from the columns with indices $`1i_1<\mathrm{}<i_{(L+1)(nk)}`$, where $`i_{s(nk)}sn`$ for $`s=1,\mathrm{},L`$, is nonzero.

###### Proof.

This theorem is a direct consequence of \[3, Corollary 2.4\] and \[3, Theorem 5.3\]. ∎

## 4 Conclusion

In this paper, we established the existence of maximum distance profile codes for all transmission rates and all degrees. The main results are existence results. Important questions remain open as to how maximum distance profile codes may be constructed and the minimal field size required for doing so. For the construction of such codes we found that many cyclic convolutional codes  have the maximum distance profile property and this might be a promising avenue for constructing such codes.

The properties of these codes are very appealing for error control coding; the distance between two trajectories which start at a common initial state is maximal, and hence these codes have the potential to have the maximal amount of errors per time interval corrected. In applications where fault-diagnosis is important (see e.g. ), it has already been pointed out that codes with maximal free distance and hence also codes with a maximal distance profile are very important.

Acknowledgement: The authors wish to thank Heide Gluesing-Luerssen for helpful comments throughout the preparation of this paper.