text:
# Properties of parallelotopes equivalent to Voronoi’s conjecture

## 1 Introduction

Let us have a partition of $`𝐑^n`$ into equal convex polytopes (tiles) such that the partition is simultaneously a covering and a packing and the intersection of any two polytopes is empty or a common face of each. Such a partition is called tiling. Let this tiling be invariant under a group $`𝒯`$ of translations, and the group $`𝒯`$ is transitive on polytopes of the tiling. Then each tile of such a partition is called parallelotope. Here the prefix parallelo emphasizes that each tile is a parallel translation of a prototile. (Following to \[MRS95\] we use the word parallelotope rather than parallelohedron which was used by Voronoi in \[Vo08\]. Recall also that a polyhedron is a 3-dimensional polytope.)

G.Voronoi in §8 of \[Vo08\] defines a parallelohedron as follows. A polytope $`P`$ with a group of translations $`𝒯`$ is called a parallelohedron if the space $`𝐑^n`$ can be filled by non-overlapping congruent copies of $`P`$ using translations taken from $`𝒯`$.

Each parallelotope necessarily satisfies the following three conditions:

(i) a parallelotope is centrally symmetric;

(ii) each facet of a parallelotope is centrally symmetric;

(iii) for $`n>1`$, the projection of a parallelotope along any $`(n2)`$-dimensional face is either a parallelogram or a centrally symmetric hexagon.

The edges of the polygon of item (iii) above are projections of four or six facets of the projected parallelotope $`P`$. These facets form a belt of the parallelotope $`P`$. Hence the property (iii) of a parallelotope $`P`$ has another formulation. Namely,

(iii)’ for $`n>1`$, each belt of a parallelotope contains four or six facets.

B.Venkov \[Ve54\] (and independently P.McMullen \[McMu80\]) proved that the above three conditions are sufficient for a polytope to be a parallelotope. A.Aleksandrov \[Al54\], knowing the Venkov’s result, simplified the proof of B.Venkov.

There is a special well known case of a parallelotope, namely, the Voronoi polytope related to a point of a lattice $`L`$. The Voronoi polytope $`P_V(t_0)`$ related to a point $`t_0L`$ is the set of points of $`𝐑^n`$ which are at least as close to $`t_0`$ as to any other point of $`L`$.

The main conjecture of Voronoi is that any parallelotope $`P`$ can be mapped into a Voronoi polytope $`P_V`$ under an affine transformation $`xAx`$ of the space containing $`P`$. Here $`A`$ is a non-degenerate $`n\times n`$ matrix, where $`n`$ is dimension of the space.

Call a $`k`$-face (=$`k`$-dimensional face) of a parallelotope primitive if it belongs to minimal possible number $`nk+1`$ of parallelotopes of its tiling. Obviously any facet of a parallelotope is primitive. According to Zhitomorskii \[Zh29\], a parallelotope is called k-primitive if each its $`k`$-face is primitive. Besides, the $`k`$-primitivity implies the $`(k+1)`$-primitivity. A 0-primitive parallelotope is simply called primitive. Obviously, any parallelotope is $`(n1)`$-primitive.

Voronoi proved his conjecture for primitive parallelotopes. If a parallelotope is primitive, then each its belt contains 6 facets, but not conversely. On the other hand, if each belt consists of 6 facets, then the parallelotope is $`(n2)`$-primitive. This implies that each $`(n2)`$-face belongs to three parallelotopes. Zhitomirskii \[Zh29\] extend the result of Voronoi over $`(n2)`$-primitive parallelotopes.

P.McMullen \[McMu75\] proved Voronoi’s conjecture for parallelotopes which are zonotopes. Later R.Erdahl \[Er99\] repeated the result of McMullen. B.Delaunay \[De29\] proved Voronoi’s conjecture in complete generality for the dimensions $`n4`$.

We give here several conditions on a parallelotope $`P`$ each of which is equivalent to the Voronoi’s conjecture is true for $`P`$.

## 2 Parallelotopes

Now we consider a description of a parallelotope $`P=P(0)`$ with the center in origin by a system of linear inequalities. We denote by $`A^T`$ the transpose of a matrix $`A`$ and by $`x^Ty=y^Tx`$ the scalar product of two column vectors $`x,y𝐑^n`$, and set $`x^Tx=x^2`$.

Being a convex polytope a parallelotope is described by a system of linear inequalities $`\{q_i^Tx\alpha _i\}`$. Since, by (i) of Introduction, $`P`$ is centrally symmetric, each facet $`F_i`$ of $`P`$ has the opposite facet $`F_i`$. If $`F_i`$ lies in the affine hyperplane given by the equality $`q_i^Tx=\alpha _i`$, then the opposite facet $`F_i`$ lies in an affine hyperplane $`q_i^Tx=\alpha _i`$. The parallelotope $`P`$ is adjacent by the facet $`F_i`$ to a parallelotope $`P(t_i)`$ which is a parallel shift of $`P`$ by the translation vector $`t_i𝒯`$.

Let $`_P`$ be the set of indices of pairs of opposite facets of $`P`$. Then the set $`\{t_i:i_P\}`$ of translation vectors generates the translation group $`𝒯`$ and a lattice $`L`$. The points of $`L`$, i.e. the centers of parallelotopes of the tiling, are the end-points of lattice vectors. We can identify each lattice vector with an element $`t𝒯`$. By this identification origin is the zero point and simultaneously the zero lattice vector 0 of $`L`$.

Obviously, the point $`\frac{1}{2}t_i`$ is the center of the facet $`F_i`$. Hence $`\frac{1}{2}q_i^Tt_i=\alpha _i`$. We have

$$P(0)=\{x𝐑^n:\frac{1}{2}q_i^Tt_iq_i^Tx\frac{1}{2}q_i^Tt_i,\text{ }i_P\}.$$
(1)
Here the facet vectors $`q_i`$ are determined only up to a non-zero multiple $`\beta _i`$. We say that the facet vectors $`q_i`$ and the lattice vectors $`t_i`$, $`i_P`$, giving the description (1) of a parallelotope $`P`$, are associated.

The parallelotope $`P(t)`$ with the center in the point $`tL`$ is a translation of $`P(0)`$ by the vector $`t`$, and therefore it is described as follows:

$$P(t)=\{x𝐑^n:\frac{1}{2}q_i^Tt_iq_i^T(xt)\frac{1}{2}q_i^Tt_i,\text{ }i_P\}.$$
(2)
Note that, by definition of a Voronoi polytope, a facet $`F_i`$ of the Voronoi polytope $`P_V(0)`$ is orthogonal to the lattice vector $`t_i`$ and bisects it. The lattice vector $`t_i`$ connects the centers of $`P_V(0)`$ and $`P_V(t_i)`$, where $`P_V(t_i)`$ is the Voronoi polytope adjacent to $`P_V(0)`$ by the facet $`F_i`$. In other words, we can set $`q_i=t_i`$ in the descriptions (1) and (2) of parallelotopes $`P(0)`$ and $`P(t)`$ in the case they are Voronoi polytopes.

## 3 Linear transforms of parallelotopes

Note that the usual Euclidean norm $`x^2`$ is used in the definition of the Voronoi polytope $`P_V(0)`$. But we can use an arbitrary positive quadratic form $`f(x)=x^TDx`$ as a norm of $`x`$. Here $`D`$ is a symmetric positive definite $`n\times n`$ matrix. Then the above definition gives a parallelotope $`P_f`$. Call such a parallelotope the Voronoi polytope with respect to the quadratic form $`f(x)`$. Such a parallelotope relates to a lattice $`L`$ (or to a translation group $`𝒯`$). Consider the Voronoi polytope $`P_f`$ with respect to the quadratic form $`x^TDx`$ in detail. By definition, we have

$$P_f(0)=\{x𝐑^n:x^TDx(xt)^TD(xt)\text{ for all }t𝒯\}.$$

It is well known, that a finite set $`\{\pm t_i:i_f\}`$ of vectors $`t_i𝒯`$ is sufficient for the description of $`P_f(0)`$.

Using the symmetricity of $`D`$ and joining the inequalities for $`t_i`$ and $`t_i`$, we simplify this as follows

$$P_f(0)=\{x𝐑^n:\frac{1}{2}t_i^TDt_it_i^TDx\frac{1}{2}t_i^TDt_i,\text{ }i_f\}.$$
(3)
For $`D=I_n`$, where $`I_n`$ is the identity matrix, we have $`f(x)=x^2`$ and $`P_f(0)=P_V(0)`$.

###### Lemma 1

Let $`P`$ be a parallelotope given by (1). Let $`A`$ be an $`n\times n`$ non-degenerate matrix, and $`D=A^TA`$. The following assertions are equivalent:

(i) the affine transformation $`xAx`$ transforms $`P`$ into a Voronoi polytope;

(ii) $`P`$ is the Voronoi polytope with respect to the quadratic form $`f(x)=x^TDx`$;

(iii) the facet vectors $`q_i`$ satisfy the equality $`q_i=Dt_i`$, $`i_P`$.

Proof. (i)$``$(iii). Consider the affine transformation $`xAx`$. The new facet vector has the form $`(A^T)^1q`$. In fact, for $`xF`$, the point $`Ax`$ belongs to a facet of $`AP`$. Hence

$$((A^T)^1q)^TAx=q^T((A^T)^1)^TAx=q^TA^1Ax=q^Tx=0.$$

The new center of the transformed facet is $`\frac{1}{2}At_i`$. For $`AP`$ to be a Voronoi polytope, we have to have

$$(A^T)^1q_i=At_i,\text{ i.e. }q_i=A^TAt_i,\text{ i.e. }q_i=Dt_i.$$

(ii)$``$(i) The positive definite matrix $`D`$ can be represented as the product $`D=A^TA`$, where the matrix $`A`$ is non-degenerate. Hence the form $`x^TDx=x^TA^TAx=(Ax)^T(Ax)`$ is the quadratic form $`(Ax)^2`$ in the transformed space, i.e. $`P=P_f=P_{(Ax)^2}`$. Let $`y=Ax`$. Then $`x=A^1y`$ and $`P=P_{(Ax)^2}=A^1P_{y^2}=A^1P_V`$. Hence $`AP=P_V`$.

(iii)$``$(ii) If we set in (1) $`q_i=Dt_i`$, we obtain description (3) of a parallelotope. Hence the Voronoi polytope with respect to a quadratic form is also a special case of a parallelotope, when $`q_i=Dt_i`$. In other words, in this case, the parallelotope $`P(0)`$ of (1) is $`P_f(0)`$ for $`f(x)=x^TDx`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 4 A canonical representation of a parallelotope

Consider a vertex $`v`$ of a facet $`F_i`$. Let $`v`$ be the intersection of facets $`F_j`$, $`j(v)`$. Then $`i(v)`$ and

$$q_j^Tv=\frac{1}{2}q_j^Tt_j,\text{ }j(v).$$

Since each facet of $`P`$ is centrally symmetric, there is a symmetric to $`v`$ vertex $`v^sF_i`$. We have

$$q_k^Tv^s=\frac{1}{2}q_k^Tt_k,\text{ }k(v^s).$$

Note that the point $`\frac{1}{2}(v+v^s)`$ is the center $`\frac{1}{2}t_i`$ of the facet $`F_i`$. Hence

$$v+v^s=t_i,\text{ i.e. }v^s=t_iv.$$

Recall that there are the following two types of belts in the parallelotope $`P`$:

1) 3-belts containing 6 facets $`\pm F_i`$, $`\pm F_j`$, $`\pm F_k`$;

2) 2-belts containing 4 facets $`\pm F_i`$, $`\pm F_j`$.

We denote each belt by the set of indices of its generating facets. So, we have the following two types of belts: $`\{i,j,k\}`$ and $`\{i,j\}`$.

Therefore some facet vectors of the set $`\{q_j:j(v)\}`$ and $`\{q_k:k(v^s)\}`$ are joined into pairs of two types such that

1) either the facets $`F_i,F_j,F_k`$ belong to the 3-belt $`\{i,j,k\}`$;

2) or the facets $`F_j`$ and $`F_k`$ are opposite, i.e. $`F_k=F_j`$, and belong to the 2-belt $`\{i,j\}`$.

Let $``$ be the set of all 3-belts. Consider a belt $`\{i,j,k\}`$. The facets vectors $`q_i,q_j,q_k`$ lie in a two-dimensional plane, where they are linearly dependent. Obviously, the associated lattice vectors $`t_i,t_j,t_k`$ are also linearly dependent. Moreover, this dependence has the following form

$$t_i\epsilon _jt_j\epsilon _kt_k=0,\text{ }\{i,j,k\},$$
(4)
where $`\epsilon _j,\epsilon _k\{\pm 1\}`$. Since each facet vector $`q_i`$ is defined up to a scalar multiple $`\beta _i`$, we can choose lengths of the associated facet vectors such that the new facet vector $`\beta _iq_i`$ satisfy the equality similar to (4)

$$\beta _iq_i\epsilon _j\beta _jq_j\epsilon _k\beta _kq_k=0,\text{ }\{i,j,k\}.$$
(5)
Following to \[Vo08\] and \[RR97\], we say that, for the belt $`\{i,j,k\}`$, the facet vectors $`q_i,q_j,q_k`$ are defined canonically with respect to the 3-belt $`\{i,j,k\}`$ if they satisfy the same equality as the associated lattice vectors $`t_i,t_j,t_k`$.

Definition A parallelotope $`P`$ is defined canonically by (1) if the facet vectors $`q_i`$, $`i_P`$, are defined canonically simultaneously with respect to all belts of $`P`$.

In other words, a parallelotope $`P`$ is defined canonically if the system of equations (5) determining multiples $`\beta _i`$, $`i_P`$, has a non-zero solution.

Voronoi proves in the first §§44 of \[Vo08\] that a primitive parallelotope can be defined canonically.

## 5 Relations between lattice and facet vectors

We suppose that the facet vectors $`q_i`$, $`q_j`$ and $`q_k`$ determine the facets $`F_i`$, $`F_j`$ and $`F_k`$, respectively. Hence the vector $`\epsilon _jq_j`$ defines the facet $`\epsilon _jF_j`$.

In Proposition 1 below, for simplicity sake, we suppose that $`\epsilon _j=\epsilon _k=1`$. For to apply the results below to the general dependences (4) and (5), it is sufficient to change $`q_j`$ and $`q_k`$ by $`\epsilon _jq_j`$ and $`\epsilon _kq_k`$, respectively.

So the lattice vecors, corresponding to the belt $`\{i,j,k\}`$, satisfy the equality

$$t_i=t_j+t_k.$$
(6)
Hence the defined canonically facet vectors satisfy the equality

$$q_i=q_j+q_k$$
(7)
and the intersections $`F_iF_j`$ and $`F_iF_k`$ are non-empty and define two opposite facets of $`F_i`$.

For $`i_P`$, let $`_i=\{j_P:F_jF_i=F^{n2}\}`$, where $`F^{n2}`$ is an $`(n2)`$-face of $`P`$ (which is a facet of $`F_i`$). Let $`_i`$ be the set of 3-belts containing the facet $`F_i`$. Now, using the property (ii) of parallelotopes, we prove an important fact.

###### Proposition 1

For all $`j_i`$, the vectors $`q_j`$ can be defined canonically with respect to all 3-belts of $`_i`$. For these canonical facet vectors we have

1) for a 3-belt $`\{i,j,k\}_i`$ the following equalities hold:

$$q_i^Tt_j=q_j^Tt_i,\text{ }q_i^Tt_k=q_k^Tt_i,\text{ }q_j^Tt_k=q_k^Tt_j;$$

2) for a 2-belt $`\{i,j\}`$, $`j_i`$ the following equalities hold:

$$q_j^Tt_i=q_i^Tt_j=0.$$

Proof. Obviously, the vectors $`q_j`$, $`j_i`$, can be defined canonically with respect to all 3-belts of $`_i`$, since the belts of $`_i`$ have only one common vector $`q_i`$.

Recall that opposite vertices $`v`$ and $`v^s`$ of the facet $`F_i`$ are determined by facet vectors some of which form belts with $`q_i`$. Consider the equations

$$q_j^Tv=\frac{1}{2}q_j^Tt_j,\text{ }q_k^Tv^s=\frac{1}{2}q_k^Tt_k,$$

related either to a 3-belt $`\{i,j,k\}`$ or to a 2-belt $`\{i,j\}`$, and then $`q_k=q_j`$.

For the case 1), substituting the expressions $`q_k=q_iq_j`$, $`t_k=t_it_j`$, $`v^s=t_iv`$, in the second equation, and using the equalities $`q_i^Tv=\frac{1}{2}q_i^Tt_i`$, $`q_j^Tv=\frac{1}{2}q_j^Tt_j`$, we obtain

$$q_k^Tv^s=\frac{1}{2}q_k^Tt_k(q_iq_j)^T(t_iv)=\frac{1}{2}(q_iq_j)^T(t_it_j)$$

$$q_i^T(t_iv\frac{1}{2}t_i+\frac{1}{2}t_j)=q_j^T(t_iv\frac{1}{2}t_i+\frac{1}{2}t_j)q_i^Tt_j=q_j^Tt_i.$$

Similarly, beginning with $`q_j^Tv=\frac{1}{2}q_j^Tt_j`$ and using the equality $`v=t_iv^s`$, we obtain the equality $`q_i^Tt_k=q_k^Tt_i`$. Now, this equality implies

$$(q_j+q_k)^Tt_k=q_k^T(t_j+t_k)q_j^Tt_k=q_k^Tt_j.$$

In the case 2) we have $`q_k=q_j`$, $`t_k=t_j`$. Hence we obtain

$$q_k^Tv^s=\frac{1}{2}q_k^Tt_kq_j^T(vt_i)=\frac{1}{2}q_j^Tt_jq_j^T(\frac{1}{2}t_jt_i)=\frac{1}{2}q_j^Tt_jq_j^Tt_i=0.$$

Using the facet $`F_j`$ instead of $`F_i`$, we obtain the equality $`q_i^Tt_j=0`$. Note that the equalities $`q_j^Tt_i=0=q_i^Tt_j`$ do not depend on whether $`q_i`$ and $`q_j`$ are canonical or not. $`\mathrm{}`$

Let $`|_P|=m`$ and let $`Q`$ and $`T`$ be $`n\times m`$ matrices whose columns are the vectors $`q_i`$ and $`t_i`$ for $`i_P`$, respectively. Then the product $`q_i^Tt_j`$ is the $`(ij)`$-th element of the matrix product $`Q^TT`$. If the equalities

$$q_i^Tt_j=t_i^Tq_j\text{ hold for all pairs }i,j_P,$$
(8)
then the $`m\times m`$ matrix $`Q^TT`$ is symmetric, i.e. $`Q^TT=(Q^TT)^T=T^TQ`$.

###### Lemma 2

The following assertions are equivalent:

(i) the equalities $`q_i^Tt_j=t_i^Tq_j`$ hold for all pairs $`i,j_P`$;

(ii) there is a unique symmetric non-degenerate $`n\times n`$ matrix $`D`$ such that $`q_i=Dt_i`$ for all $`i_P`$.

Proof. (i) $``$ (ii) Let $`_b_P`$ be an $`n`$-subset of $`_P`$ such that the set $`\{t_i:i_b\}`$ is linearly independent. Let $`T_b`$ and $`Q_b`$ be the submatrices of $`T`$ and $`Q`$ composed by column vectors $`t_i`$ and $`q_i`$ for $`i_b`$, respectively. Then $`T_b`$ is an $`n\times n`$ nondegenerate matrix. If (8) is true, then it implies the equality $`T_b^TQ=Q_b^TT`$. This equality is equivalent to the equality

$$Q=DT,$$

where $`D=(T_b^T)^1Q_b^T=(Q_bT_b^1)^T`$. The matrix $`D`$ is symmetric. In fact, take a restriction of the equality $`Q=DT`$ onto the columns $`t_i,q_i`$ for $`i_b`$. The restriction is $`Q_b=DT_b`$, i.e. $`Q_bT_b^1=D=(Q_bT_b^1)^T`$. The matrix $`D`$ does not depend on a chose of $`T_b`$. In fact, if there is another symmetric matrix $`D^{}`$ such that $`Q=D^{}T`$, then $`D=Q_bT_b^1=D^{}T_bT_b^1=D^{}`$.

(ii) $``$ (i) Conversely, let $`q_i=Dt_i`$. Then $`q_i^Tt_j=(Dt_i)^Tt_j=t_i^TDt_j=t_i^Tq_j`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 6 Graphs related to tilings

Recall that the centers of parallelotopes $`P(t)`$ form a lattice $`L`$. Consider the points of $`L`$ (i.e. the endpoints of lattice vectors) as vertices of a graph $`G_L`$. Two vertices $`t,t^{}L`$ are adjacent in $`G_L`$ if and only if $`tt^{}\{\pm t_i:i_P\}`$. We can consider $`G_L`$ as an oriented graph, where the orientation of the edge $`t_i`$ is the orientation of the vector $`t_i`$. Hence edges of $`G_L`$ are the vectors $`\pm t_i`$, $`i_P`$. Therefore the set of all edges of $`G_L`$ is partitioned into $`m=|_P|`$ classes $`E_i`$. We suppose that all edges of $`E_i`$ are vectors $`t_i`$ (with the same sign, say +). In other words, all edges of $`E_i`$ are obtained from one by translations. For each $`i_P`$, a vertex of $`G_L`$ is incident to two edges $`t_i`$, one of which go out and another come in the vertex.

For any collection of integers $`\{z_i:i_P\}`$, we set $`t(z)=_{i_P}z_it_i`$ and $`q(z)=_{i_P}z_iq_i`$. Let $`(z)=\{i_P:z_i0\}`$ be the support of $`z=\{z_i:i_P\}`$.

Any two vertices $`t^0`$ and $`t`$ are connected in $`G_L`$ by an oriented path $`𝒫`$ directed from $`t^0`$ to $`t`$. We denote such a path as a sequence $`𝒫=(t_1,t_2,\mathrm{},t_s)`$ of vectors $`t_k\{\pm t_i:i_P\}`$ corresponding to edges of the path in the natural order. Here $`t_k=t_i`$ or $`t_k=t_i`$ according to the directions of the path and the corresponding edge coincide or not, respectively. Then, obviously, $`t=t^0+_{k=1}^st_k`$. In particular, if the path is closed, i.e. it is a circuit and $`t=t^0`$, then $`_{k=1}^st_k=0`$. We rewrite the sum $`_{k=1}^st_k`$ as $`_{i_P}z_i(𝒫)t_i=t(z(𝒫))=t(𝒫)`$. So, $`t=t^0+t(𝒫)`$. We set $`(𝒫)=(z(𝒫))`$. Note that there are many paths with the same collection $`z(𝒫)`$. All of them are obtained from $`𝒫`$ by permutations the edges $`t_k`$.

Since the set $`\{\pm t_i:i_P\}`$ generates the lattice $`L`$, any lattice vector $`t`$ has a (non-unique) representation $`t=t(𝒫)`$, where $`𝒫`$ is a path in $`G_L`$ connecting 0 with $`t`$. We associate the vector $`q(𝒫)=_{t_k𝒫}q_k`$ to the vector $`t(𝒫)`$. We call the vector $`q(𝒫)`$ the vector associated to the vector $`t(𝒫)`$. If the equalities $`q_i^Tt_j=q_j^Tt_i`$ hold for all $`i,j_P`$, then using Lemma 2 we see that $`q(𝒫)=Dt(𝒫)`$ does not depend on $`𝒫`$. The uniqueness of $`q`$ in this case follows from the fact that the equality $`_kt_k=0`$ implies the equality $`_kq_k=0`$.

Consider some important subgraphs of the graph $`G_L`$. Let $`tL`$ and let $`G(t)`$ be the graph induced by all vertices $`t^{}L`$ adjacent to $`t`$. The union of $`t`$ and $`G(t)`$ is the suspension $`G(t)`$. In the graph $`G(t)`$, the vertex $`t`$ is adjacent to all vertices of $`G(t)`$.

For $`t=0`$, the vertices of $`G(0)`$ are endpoints of the vectors $`\pm t_i`$, $`i_P`$. In other words, the graph $`G(0)`$ is determined on two copies of the set $`_P`$. In fact, any edge $`t_i`$ of $`G(0)`$ belongs to a triangle $`\mathrm{}=(t_i,t_j,t_k)`$ of $`G(0)`$ such that $`t_i\epsilon _jt_j\epsilon _kt_k=0`$. This triangle corresponds to the belt $`\{i,j,k\}`$ of $`P(0)`$. Moreover, there are six such triangles in $`G(0)`$. These 6 triangles form a hexagon spanning a 2-dimensional plane.

Let $`G(F^k)`$ be the graph induced by the centers of all parallelotopes having a common $`k`$-face $`F^k`$ with $`P(0)`$. So, the graph $`G(F^{n1})`$ is an edge $`t_i`$ with end-vertices corresponding to adjacent parallelotopes $`P(0)`$ and $`P(t_i)`$. There are only two types of graphs $`G(F^{n2})`$, namely, triangles and quadrangles, according to two types of belts with 6 and 4 facets, respectively.

If $`P`$ is $`m`$-primitive, then, for $`mkn`$, $`G(F^k)=K_{nk+1}`$, where $`K_s`$ is the complete graph on $`s`$ vertices.

The following reformulation of canonical definity of a parallelotope $`P`$ is obvious.

###### Lemma 3

For a parallelotope $`P`$, the following assertions are equivalent:

(i) $`P`$ is defined canonically;

(ii) $`q(\mathrm{})=0`$ for all triangles $`\mathrm{}G_L`$ such that $`\mathrm{}=G(F^{n2})`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Call a 4-circuit $`(t_i,t_j,t_i,t_j)`$ by a quadrangle $`𝒬_{ij}`$. It is a parallelogram and spans a 2-dimensional plane. Among quadrangles of $`G_L`$ there are quadrangles $`G(F^{n2})`$, where $`F^{n2}`$ is an $`(n2)`$-face which is common to four parallelotopes. Obviously, for each quadrangle, we have trivially $`q(𝒬_{ij})=q_i+q_jq_iq_j=0`$.

The technique used in \[Ve54\] can be applied for a proof of Proposition 2 below (see also Theorem 1 of \[RR97\]).

###### Proposition 2

Any circuit of $`G_L`$ can be represented as a sum modulo 2 of circuits of type $`G(F^{n2})`$.

Hence Lemma 3 and Proposition 2 imply the following

###### Lemma 4

For a parallelotope $`P`$, the following assertions are equivalent:

(i) $`P`$ is defined canonically;

(ii) $`q(𝒞)=0`$ for all circuits $`𝒞G_L`$.

But we give here an explicit proof of a more weak result which we’ll use later.

###### Lemma 5

Any quadrangle $`𝒬_{ij}`$ can be represented as a sum modulo 2 of triangles and quadrangles, both of type $`G(F^{n2})`$.

Proof. We span a 2-dimensional surface $`S`$ on the quadrangle $`𝒬_{ij}`$ as follows. The four edges $`t_i`$, $`t_j`$, $`t_i`$ and $`t_j`$ form the boundary of $`S`$. Recall that the vertices of the quadrangle $`𝒬_{ij}`$ are centers of four parallelotopes, say $`P(0)`$, $`P(t_i)`$, $`P(t_j)`$ and $`P(t_i+t_j)`$. Hence the surface $`S`$ intersects a number of parallelotopes. We choose $`S`$ such that it intersects boundaries of these parallelotopes only by facets and $`(n2)`$-faces, and these intersections are transversal. Hence if the intersection $`SF`$ is not empty, then it is a segment or a point depending on $`F`$ is a facet or an $`(n2)`$-face, respectively.

These segements and points form a planar graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ drawn on $`S`$. This graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ has 4 half-edges corresponding to the 4 facets intersected by the 4 edges of $`𝒬_{ij}`$. Vertices of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ have degrees 3 and 4 only. The dual of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a planar subgraph $`G(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ of the graph $`G_L`$. Minimal circuits of $`G(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ are just triangles and quadrangles of type $`G(F^{n2})`$. Since $`G(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ is planar, each edge of it (excluding the four boundary edges) belongs to two minimal circuits. So we obtain the wanted representation of the quadrangle $`𝒬_{ij}`$ as a sum of graphs $`G(F^{n2})`$ modulo 2. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 7 Pegged tilings and their duals

McMullen in \[McMu94\] defines a pegged tiling as follows:

A tiling $`\{Q(t):t𝒯\}`$ is called pegged if with each tile $`Q(t)`$, $`t𝒯`$, is associated a point $`v^{}(t)𝐑^n`$, the peg of $`Q(t)`$, such that if the tile $`Q(t^{})`$ is adjacent to $`Q(t)`$, and so meets it on a facet $`F`$, then $`v^{}(t^{})v^{}(t)`$ is an outer normal vector to $`Q(t)`$ at the facet $`F`$. The equation $`x^T(v^{}(t^{})v^{}(t))=\alpha (t,t^{})`$ defines the hyperplane supporting $`F`$.

Note that the pegs are defined up to a shift on an arbitrary vector. Hence we can suppose that $`v^{}(t^0)=0`$ for some $`t^0𝒯`$.

Recall that parallelotopes form a tiling $`\{P(t):tL\}`$. Suppose that this tiling is pegged. Then the peg $`v^{}(t)`$ relates to the vertex $`t`$ of the graph $`G_L`$. In particular, the pegs $`v^{}(0)=0`$, $`v^{}(\pm t_i)`$ relate to the vertices 0, $`\pm t_i`$, $`i_P`$, of the graph $`G(0)`$. Since, by definition of pegs, $`v^{}(t_i)v^{}(0)=v^{}(t_i)`$ are proportional to $`q_i`$, and since the vectors $`q_i`$ are defined up to a scalar multiple, we set $`q_i=v^{}(t_i)`$ if the tiling $`\{P(t):tL\}`$ is pegged.

By definition of the lattice vector $`t_i`$, the tiles $`P(t)`$ and $`P(t+t_i)`$ are adjacent be the facet $`F_i`$ which is orthogonal to the facet vector $`q_i`$. Hence $`v^{}(t+t_i)v^{}(t)=\beta _i(t)q_i`$ for some scalar $`\beta _i(t)>0`$, where $`\beta _i(0)=1`$.

In Lemma 6 below, we show that such defined facet vectors give a canonical representation of the parallelotope $`P(0)`$.

###### Lemma 6

The following assertions are equivalent

(i) the tiling $`\{P(t);tL\}`$ is pegged;

(ii) the parallelotope $`P=P(0)`$ is defined canonically.

Proof. (i)$``$(ii) Let $`\{t_i,t_j,t_k\}`$ be a 3-belt such that $`t_i=t_j+t_k`$. We show that $`q_i=q_j+q_k`$. Consider the hexagon of $`G(0)`$ corresponding to this belt. The vertices of the hexagon are 0, $`\pm t_i`$, $`\pm t_j`$ and $`\pm t_k`$. The corresponding pegs are 0, $`v^{}(t_r)=q_r`$ and $`v^{}(t_r)`$, $`r\{i,j,k\}`$. All these pegs lie in the 2-plane spanned by the facet vectors $`q_i,q_j,q_k`$.

Consider the quadrangle with vertices $`0=v^{}(0)`$, $`v^{}(t_j)`$, $`v^{}(t_k)`$ and $`v^{}(t_j+t_k)=v^{}(t_i)`$. The pairs of opposite edges of this quadrangle are $`(v^{}(t_j)v^{}(0),v^{}(t_i)v^{}(t_k))`$ and $`(v^{}(t_k)v^{}(0),v^{}(t_i)v^{}(t_j))`$. They are parallel to the vectors $`q_j`$ and $`q_k`$, respectively. Hence this quadrangle is a parallelogram. We have

$$q_iq_k=v^{}(t_i)v^{}(t_k)=v^{}(t_j+t_k)v^{}(t_k)=v^{}(t_j)v^{}(0)=v^{}(t_j)=q_j.$$

So, we obtain the wanted equality $`q_i=q_j+q_k`$. Since a similar reasoning is true for every 3-belt, we see that the parallelotope $`P(0)`$ is defined canonically.

(ii)$``$(i) Let $`𝒫=\{t_0,t_1,\mathrm{},t_s\}`$ be a path connecting the point $`t=t_s`$ with origin $`t_0=0`$. Lemma 4 implies that $`q(𝒫)`$ does not depend on the path $`𝒫`$, i.e. $`q(𝒫)=q(t)`$. It is easy to verify that the points $`q(t)`$ are pegs of the tiling $`\{P(t):tL\}`$, i.e. $`v^{}(t)=q(t)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

For a pegged tiling $`𝒬=\{Q(t):t𝒯\}`$, it is natural to determine a tiling $`𝒬^{}=\{Q^{}(t):t𝒯^{}\}`$ which is combinatorially and topologically dual to the tiling $`𝒬^{}`$ (see \[McMu94\], \[RR97\]). The combinatorial duality means that, for $`0kn`$, there is a one-to-one correspondence between $`k`$-faces of $`𝒬`$ and $`(nk)`$-faces of $`𝒬^{}`$. The topological duality means that the affine spaces spanning the corresponding $`k`$-face of $`𝒬`$ and $`(nk)`$-face of $`𝒬^{}`$ are orthogonal.

So, the peg $`v^{}(t)`$ is a vertex of the tiling $`𝒬^{}`$. The convex hull of all pegs $`v^{}(t)`$ corresponding to tiles $`Q(t)𝒬`$ having a fixed common vertex $`v`$ is a tile $`Q^{}(v)`$ of $`𝒬^{}`$, and each tile of $`𝒬^{}`$ is obtained by this way. It is proved in \[McMu94\] (see Theorem 3.1) that $`𝒬^{}`$ is a tiling. Obviously, the dual tiling $`𝒬^{}`$ is pegged with pegs which are vertices of the tiling $`𝒬`$. Moreover, we have $`(𝒬^{})^{}=𝒬`$.

If $`𝒬`$ is a pegged tiling by parallelotopes then the tiles of the dual tiling $`𝒬^{}`$ are called Delaunay polytopes. In \[RR97\], a $`k`$-face of the dual tiling is called the dual convex polytope $`D^k(st)`$.

Since the mutual dual tilings $`𝒬`$ and $`𝒬^{}`$ are equivalent, we have the following obvious assertion.

###### Lemma 7

The following assertions are equivalent

(i) a tiling $`𝒬`$ is pegged;

(ii) a tiling $`𝒬`$ has the dual tiling $`𝒬^{}`$.

## 8 Generatrissa of a tiling

For a tiling $`\{P(t):tL\}`$, whose tiles are parallelotopes, Voronoi \[Vo08\] defines on the space $`𝐑^nL`$ a function $`l(x;t)`$. He calls this function generatrissa and defines it as follows:

(i) $`l(x;0)=0`$;

(ii) if $`P(t^{})`$ is adgacent to $`P(t)`$ by the facet $`F_i`$ defined by the equation $`q_i^Tx=\alpha _i`$, then

$$l(x;t^{})=l(x;t)+q_i^Tx\alpha _i.$$
(9)
(Recall that, by (2), $`q_i^Tx\alpha _i=q_i^T(t+\frac{1}{2}t_i)`$ for $`xP(t)`$.) In fact, Voronoi uses vectors $`q_i`$, $`i_P`$, and therefore defines $`l(x;t)`$. Voronoi proves that for primitive canonically defined parallelotopes the conditions (i) and (ii) above determine uniquely $`l(x;t)`$ for each $`tL`$. The obtained generatrissa has the following property

$$l(x;t^0)l(x;t)\text{ for all }xP(t^0)\text{ and all }t^0,tL,$$
(10)
with strict inequality if $`x\mathrm{int}P(t^0)`$.

This property implies that the function

$$l(x)=\mathrm{max}_{tL}l(x;t)$$

is a convex piecewise affine function on $`𝐑^n`$.

Consider in $`(n+1)`$-dimensional space $`𝐑^n𝐑`$ a convex surface defined as $`\{(x,z):x𝐑^n,z=l(x)\}`$. The main property of this surface is that its projection in the space containing the tiling $`\{P(t):tL\}`$ is this tiling.

But the above definition of generatrissa works for any pegged locally finite tiling (see, for example, \[McMu94\]).

For $`t𝒯`$, define $`\phi ^{}(t)`$ as follows:

(1) $`\phi ^{}(t^0)=0`$;

(2) $`\phi ^{}(t)=_{i=0}^{s1}\alpha (t^i,t^{i+1})`$, where $`t^s=t`$, and $`P(t^0),P(t^1),\mathrm{},P(t^s)=P(t)`$ is a chain such that $`P(t^i)`$ and $`P(t^{i+1})`$, $`0is1`$, are adjacent by a facet.

Here $`P(t^i)`$ lies but $`P(t^{i+1})`$ does not lie in the halfspace $`\{x𝐑^n:x^T(v^{}(t^{i+1})v^{}(t^i))\alpha (t^i,t^{i+1})\}`$.

It is proved in \[McMu94\] that the function $`\phi ^{}(t)`$ is well defined. In fact, it is sufficient to prove that if the chain $`P(t^0),P(t^1),\mathrm{},P(t^s)=P(t^0)`$ is closed, then the sum in (2) is equal to 0. It is so if $`P(t^i)`$, $`0is1`$, have a common face $`F`$, since, for $`x_0F`$, we have

$$\alpha (t^i,t^{i+1})=x_0^T(v^{}(t^{i+1})v^{}(t^i)),\text{ }0is1.$$

Now, any closed chain can be contracted to a point avoiding $`(n3)`$-faces, and in contracting over an $`(n2)`$-face we can appeal to the above reasoning.

So, the function

$$f(x;t)=x^Tv^{}(t)\phi ^{}(t)$$
(11)
is a generatrissa such that

$$f(x;t)>f(x;t^{})\text{ for all }xintP(t)\text{ and all }t,t^{}𝒯.$$

Obviously if a tiling has a generatrissa of the form (11), then this tiling is pegged. The essential part of the papers \[Da59\] and \[Au87\] is devoted to a proof of the following proposition.

###### Proposition 3

The following assertions are equivalent for a tiling $`\{Q(t):t𝒯\}`$

(i) the tiling is pegged with pegs $`v^{}(t)`$, $`t𝒯`$;

(ii) the tiling has the generatrissa $`f(x;t)=x^Tv^{}(t)\phi ^{}(t)`$.

The following general result is proved in \[Da59\] and \[Au87\].

###### Theorem 1

If a tiling is primitive then it is pegged and has a generatrissa.

This theorem implies the main result of Voronoi \[Vo08\] asserting that Voronoi’s conjecture is true for primitive parallelotopes. The proof of Theorem 1 in \[Da59\] is similar to the proof of Voronoi: both the authors construct explicitly a generatrissa. The author of \[Au87\] constructs explicitly pegs.

## 9 The case of parallelotopes

If $`P(0)`$ is defined canonically, then by Lemma 6 the tiling $`\{P(t):tL\}`$ is pegged with pegs $`v^{}(t)=q(t)`$. Now, by Proposition 3, the tiling $`\{P(t):tL\}`$ by parallelotopes has the following generatrissa

$$f(x;t)=x^Tq(t)\phi ^{}(t).$$

But for to obtain another equivalence and an explicit form of $`f(x;t)`$, we use the recursion (9) not supposing that $`P`$ is defined canonically. We want to know, when the recursion (9) determines uniquely the generatrissa $`l(x;t)`$.

For parallelotopes, we know an explicit form of $`\alpha _i`$ in the recursion (9). In fact, since the point $`t+\frac{1}{2}t_i`$ belongs to the facet $`F_i`$, we have $`\alpha _i=q_i^T(t+\frac{1}{2}t_i)`$. Hence the recursion (9) takes the following form

$$l(x;t+t_i)=l(x;t)+q_i^T(x(t+\frac{1}{2}t_i)).$$
(12)
Let we have an arbitrary parallelotope $`P=P(t_0)`$, and let a linear on $`x`$ function $`l_{t^0}(x)`$ be given. Then, using the recursive expression (12) and going out from $`l(x;t)=l_{t^0}(x)`$ by a path connecting $`t^0`$ and $`t^1=t^0+tL`$ we can, for all $`t^1L`$, find a function $`l(x;t^1)`$ related to $`L`$.

Let $`t=t(𝒫)=_{k=1}^st_k`$, where $`(t_1,t_2,\mathrm{},t_s)`$ is an arbitrary path $`𝒫`$ in $`G_L`$ connecting $`t^0`$ with $`t^1`$. Let $`q(𝒫)=_{k=1}^sq_k`$, where each $`q_k`$ is associated to $`t_k`$. Obviously, $`t(𝒫)=t^1t^0`$ does not depend on the path $`𝒫`$.

Using (12) with $`l(x;t)=l_{t^0}(x)`$, and going along the path $`𝒫`$ from $`t^0`$ we obtain

$$l(x;t^1)=l_{t^0}(x)+x^Tq(𝒫)\varphi (t^0,𝒫),$$

where

$$\varphi (t^0,𝒫)=\underset{k=1}{\overset{s}{}}q_k^T(t^0+\underset{r=1}{\overset{k1}{}}t_r+\frac{1}{2}t_k),$$
(13)
and the sum $`_{r=1}^{k1}t_r`$ is empty for $`k=1`$. (Cf., $`l(x;t^1)`$ with $`f(x;t)`$ in (11)).

Obviously, $`q(𝒫)`$ is additive on $`𝒫`$. It is easy to verify that the function $`\varphi (t^0,𝒫)`$ is additive on the variable $`𝒫`$, too. In fact, let $`𝒫=(t_1,\mathrm{},t_s)`$, $`𝒫^{}=(t_{s+1},\mathrm{},t_w)`$. We set $`𝒫+𝒫^{}=(t_1,\mathrm{},t_s,t_{s+1},\mathrm{},t_w)`$. Hence the sum of two paths is its join. Let $`t=t(𝒫)`$, $`t^{}=t(𝒫^{})`$, $`t^1=t^0+t=t^0+_{r=1}^st_r`$. Let $`𝒫=(t_s,t_{s1},\mathrm{},t_1)`$ be the path from $`t^1`$ to $`t^0`$ opposite to $`𝒫`$. Then

$$\varphi (t^0,𝒫+𝒫^{})=\varphi (t^0,𝒫)+\varphi (t^1,𝒫^{}),$$
(14)
since

$$\varphi (t^0,𝒫+𝒫^{})=(\underset{k=1}{\overset{s}{}}+\underset{k=s+1}{\overset{w}{}})q_k^T(t^0+\underset{r=1}{\overset{k1}{}}t_r+\frac{1}{2}t_k)=$$

$$\varphi (t^0,𝒫)+\underset{k=s+1}{\overset{w}{}}q_k^T(t^0+\underset{r=1}{\overset{s}{}}t_r+\underset{r=s+1}{\overset{k1}{}}t_r+\frac{1}{2}t_k)=\varphi (t^0,𝒫)+\varphi (t^1,𝒫^{}).$$

Now,

$$\varphi (t^1,𝒫)=\underset{k=1}{\overset{s}{}}(q_{s+1k}^T)(t^1\underset{r=1}{\overset{k1}{}}t_{s+1r}\frac{1}{2}t_{s+1k}).$$

Since $`t^1=t^0+_{r=1}^st_{s+1r}`$, for $`ks`$, we have

$$t^1\underset{r=1}{\overset{k1}{}}t_{s+1r}=t^0+\underset{r=1}{\overset{s}{}}t_{s+1r}\underset{r=1}{\overset{k1}{}}t_{s+1r}=t^0+\underset{r=k}{\overset{s}{}}t_{s+1r}=t^0+\underset{r=1}{\overset{s+1k}{}}t_r.$$

If we do the substitution $`s+1kk`$ here and in $`\varphi (t^1,𝒫;x)`$, we obtain

$$\varphi (t^1,𝒫)=\varphi (t^0,𝒫).$$
(15)
Let $`𝒞_1=𝒫_1+𝒫^{}`$, $`𝒞_2=𝒫^{}+𝒫_2`$, where $`𝒫_1𝒫_2=\mathrm{}`$. Let $`𝒫_1`$ goes from $`t^0`$ to $`t^1`$, and the paths $`𝒫^{}`$, $`𝒫_2`$ go from $`t^1`$ to $`t^0`$. Then $`𝒞_1𝒞_2=𝒫_1+𝒫_2`$ is the sum modulo 2.

###### Lemma 8

$$\varphi (t^0,𝒞_1𝒞_2)=\varphi (t^0,𝒞_1)+\varphi (t^0,𝒞_2).$$

Proof. Using (14) and (15), we have $`\varphi (t^0,𝒞_1)=\varphi (t^0,𝒫_1+𝒫^{})=\varphi (t^0,𝒫_1)+\varphi (t^1,𝒫^{})`$ and $`\varphi (t^0,𝒞_2)=\varphi (t^0,𝒫^{}+𝒫_2)=\varphi (t^0,𝒫^{})+\varphi (t^1,𝒫_2)=\varphi (t^1,𝒫^{})+\varphi (t^1,𝒫_2)`$. Hence

$$\varphi (t^0,𝒞_1)+\varphi (t^0,𝒞_2)=\varphi (t^0,𝒫_1)+\varphi (t^1,𝒫_2)=\varphi (t^0,𝒫_1+𝒫_2)=\varphi (t^0,𝒞_1𝒞_2).\mathrm{}$$

Using Lemmas 8 and 5, for any quadrangle $`𝒬_{ij}`$, we can represent $`\varphi (t^0,𝒬_{ij})`$ as a sum of functions $`\varphi (t,G(F^{n2}))`$.

###### Lemma 9

Let $`\varphi (t^0,𝒫)`$ be given by (13). Then, for $`i,j_P`$ and $`𝒫=𝒬_{ij}`$,

$$\varphi (t^0,𝒬_{ij})=q_j^Tt_iq_i^Tt_j.$$

Proof. Using the equality (13) for $`𝒫=𝒬_{ij}=(t_i,t_j,t_i,t_j)`$, we obtain

$$\varphi (t^0,𝒬_{ij})=q_i^T(t^0+\frac{1}{2}t_i)+q_j^T(t^0+t_i+\frac{1}{2}t_j)$$

$$q_i^T(t^0+t_i+t_j\frac{1}{2}t_i)q_j^T(t^0+t_i+t_jt_i\frac{1}{2}t_j)=q_j^Tt_iq_i^Tt_j.\mathrm{}$$

Lemma 9 implies the following result.

###### Lemma 10

Let $`i,j_P`$, and let $`\varphi (t^0,𝒫)`$ be given by (13). The following assertions are equivalent:

(i) $`\varphi (t^0,𝒬_{ij})=0`$;

(ii) $`q_i^Tt_j=q_j^Tt_i`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Let $`𝒫=(t_1,t_2,\mathrm{},t_s)`$ be a path. Recall that $`t(𝒫)=_{k=1}^st_k`$, $`q(𝒫)=_{k=1}^sq_k`$, and $`(𝒫)`$ is the set of all indices $`i_P`$ of $`t_i`$ in the path $`𝒫`$.

###### Lemma 11

Let the equalities $`q_i^Tt_j=q_j^Tt_i`$ hold for all pairs $`i,j(𝒫)`$. Then the function $`\varphi (t^0,𝒫)`$ is given by the expression

$$\varphi (t^0,𝒫)=q^T(𝒫)(t^0+\frac{1}{2}t(𝒫)).$$
(16)
Proof. Using the equalities $`q_i^Tt_j=t_i^Tq_j`$ for $`i,j(𝒫)`$, we obtain the equality

$$q_k^T\underset{r=1}{\overset{k1}{}}t_r=t_k^T\underset{r=1}{\overset{k1}{}}q_r.$$

Using this equality and setting $`_{k=1}^sq_k=q(𝒫)`$, we rewrite $`\varphi (t^0,𝒫)`$ from (13) as follows

$$\varphi (t^0,𝒫)=\underset{k=1}{\overset{s}{}}q_k^Tt^0+\frac{1}{2}\underset{k=1}{\overset{s}{}}q_k^T\underset{r=1}{\overset{k1}{}}t_r+\frac{1}{2}\underset{k=1}{\overset{s}{}}q_k^T(\underset{r=1}{\overset{k1}{}}t_r+t_k)=$$

$$=q^T(𝒫)t^0+\frac{1}{2}\underset{k=1}{\overset{s}{}}t_k^T\underset{r=1}{\overset{k1}{}}q_r+\frac{1}{2}\underset{k=1}{\overset{s}{}}q_k^T\underset{r=1}{\overset{k}{}}t_r.$$

A permutation of the summation in the first double sum, gives

$$\frac{1}{2}\underset{k=1}{\overset{s}{}}t_k^T\underset{r=1}{\overset{k1}{}}q_r=\frac{1}{2}\underset{k=1}{\overset{s1}{}}q_k^T\underset{r=k+1}{\overset{s}{}}t_r.$$

Recall that $`_{k=1}^st_k=t(𝒫)`$. Hence $`\varphi (t^0,𝒫)`$ takes the form

$$\varphi (t^0,𝒫)=q^T(𝒫)t^0+\frac{1}{2}\underset{k=1}{\overset{s}{}}q_k^T\underset{r=1}{\overset{s}{}}t_r=q^T(𝒫)(t^0+\frac{1}{2}t(𝒫)).$$

So, we obtain the wanted expression. $`\mathrm{}`$

Using Lemma 11, we can prove the following important result.

###### Lemma 12

The following assertions are equivalent:

(i) a parallelotope $`P`$ is defined canonically;

(ii) $`q_i^Tt_j=q_j^Tt_i`$ for all $`i,j_P`$.

Proof. (i)$``$(ii). If $`P`$ is defined canonically, then Proposition 1 assert that $`q_i^Tt_j=q_j^Tt_i`$ for $`i,j(G(F^{n2}))`$. Obviously, $`q(𝒬_{ij})=0`$, and by Lemma 3, $`q(\mathrm{})=0`$ if $`\mathrm{}=G(F^{n2})`$. Hence $`q(G(F^{n2}))=0`$ and Lemma 11 implies that $`\varphi (t^0,G(F^{n2}))=0`$. Lemma 5 asserts that each quadrangle $`𝒬_{ij}`$ is a sum modulo 2 of circuits $`G(F^{n2})`$. By Lemma 8 we obtain that $`\varphi (t^0,𝒬_{ij})=0`$. Now, Lemma 10 gives the wanted equality for all pairs $`i,j`$.

(ii)$``$(i) By Lemma 2, $`q_i=Dt_i`$ for all $`i_P`$. Hence any linear equality between lattice vectors implies the corresponding equality between the associated facet vectors. This implies that the facet vectors are defined canonically with respect to each belt of $`P`$, i.e., $`P`$ is defined canonically. $`\mathrm{}`$

The obtained function $`\varphi (t^0,𝒫)`$ depends on the chosen path $`𝒫`$. Since $`\varphi (t^0,𝒫)`$ satisfies the condition (15), it does not depend on $`𝒫`$ if and only if $`\varphi (t^0,𝒞)=0`$ for every circuit $`𝒞`$. In Lemma 13 below we give conditions when this property is true.

###### Lemma 13

Let $`𝒞`$ be a circuit and $`t^0𝒞`$. The following assertions are equivalent:

(i) for all $`t^0`$ and all circuits $`𝒞t^0`$, the function $`\varphi (t^0,𝒞)=0`$;

(ii) the equalities $`q_i^Tt_j=q_j^Tt_i`$ hold for all pairs $`i,j_P`$.

Proof. (i)$``$(ii) The item (i) implies that $`\varphi (t^0,𝒬_{ij})=0`$ for any quadrangle $`𝒬_{ij}`$. Now Lemmas 10 gives wanted implication.

(ii)$``$(i) Recall that if $`q_i^Tt_j=q_j^Tt_i`$ for all $`i,j_P`$, then $`q_i=Dt_i`$. Since the sum $`_{k=1}^st_k=t(𝒞)=0`$ for any circuit $`𝒞`$, the associated vector $`q(𝒞)=_{k=1}^sq_k=_{k=1}^sDt_k=Dt(𝒞)`$ is also equal to zero. Hence $`\varphi (t^0,𝒞)=q^T(𝒞)(t^0+\frac{1}{2}t(𝒞))=0`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 10 Generatrissa for parallelotopes

By Lemma 13 the generatrissa $`l(x;t)=q^T(t)(x\frac{1}{2}t)`$ is uniquely determined for all $`x𝐑^n`$ and $`tL`$. This is the function $`q^T(𝒫)x\varphi (0,𝒫)`$, where $`q(𝒫)=q(t)`$ and $`\varphi (0,𝒫)=\frac{1}{2}q^T(t)t`$, both do not depend on $`𝒫`$. In other words, we have the following assertion

###### Lemma 14

The following assertions are equivalent:

(i) the function $`q^T(t)(x\frac{1}{2}t)`$, $`tL`$, is the generatrissa of the tiling obtained by translations of a parallelotope $`P`$;

(ii) the equalities $`q_i^Tt_j=q_j^Tt_i`$ hold for all $`i,j_P`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Recall that the facet vector $`q(t)`$ is associated to the lattice vector $`t`$, when (8) is true. Hence, by Lemma 2, $`q(t)=Dt`$ and we see that $`l(x;t)`$ is given by

$$l(x;t)=t^TD(x\frac{1}{2}t).$$

We see that $`l(x;0)=0`$. Using standard arguments of \[Vo08\] and \[Zh29\], one can prove that $`l(x;t)0`$ for all $`xP(0)`$ and all $`tL`$, with strict inequality for $`x\mathrm{int}P(0)`$. Hence (10) (with $`t^0=0`$) is true. But Lemma 2 does not asserts that the matrix $`D`$ is positive definite. The next lemma proves that $`D`$ is positive definite if the vectors $`q_i`$ and $`t_i`$ are related to a parallelotope.

###### Lemma 15

Let $`P(0)`$ be a parallelotope with center in origin, and let (8) is true. Let $`D`$ be a non-singular matrix. The following assertions are equivalent:

(i) the inequality $`l(x;t)=t^TD(x\frac{1}{2}t)<0`$ holds for all $`x\mathrm{int}P(0)`$ and all $`tL`$, $`t0`$;

(ii) the matrix $`D`$ is positive definite.

Proof. (i)$``$(ii) For $`x=0`$ and $`t0`$, we have $`l(0;t)=\frac{1}{2}t^TDt>0`$. This inequality holds for all vectors $`tL\{0\}`$. Any rational combination of basic vectors of $`L`$ is equal to $`\frac{1}{p}t`$ for some $`tL`$ and an integer $`p`$. We obtain that the above inequality holds also for rational vectors. By continuity, this inequality holds for all $`t𝐑^n`$. This implies, that the matrix $`D`$ is positive definite.

(ii)$``$(i) Let $`D`$ be positive definite. Consider the quadratic function $`x^TDx2l(x;t)=(xt)^TD(xt)=f(xt)`$. Using the quadratic form $`f(x)`$ we can define the parallelotope

$$P_f(t^0)=\{x𝐑^n:l(x;t^0)l(x;t)0,\text{ }tL\}.$$

We show that $`P_f(t^0)=P(t^0)`$. Then for $`t^0=0`$ we will have $`l(x;t)0`$, $`tL\{0\}`$, and $`l(x;t)<0`$ for interior points of $`P(t^0)`$. The infinite system inequalities

$$l(x;t^0)l(x;t)0,\text{ }tL,$$

contains the subsystem for $`t=t^0\pm t_i`$, $`i_P`$, describing the parallelotope $`P(t^0)`$ of type (2). Hence $`P_f(t^0)P(t^0)`$ for every $`t^0L`$. But we have here an equality. In fact, if there is $`tL`$ such that $`P_f(t)P(t)`$ strictly, then there is an adjacent to $`P_f(t)`$ parallelotope $`P_f(t^{})`$ such that $`P_f(t^{})`$ and $`P(t)`$ have a common interior point. Since $`P(t^{})`$ contains $`P_f(t^{})`$, the parallelotopes $`P(t)`$ and $`P(t^{})`$ have a common interior point. This is a contradiction. $`\mathrm{}`$

The above proof of Lemma 15 is also a proof of the following

###### Lemma 16

The following assertions are equivalent

(i) the parallelotope $`P`$ is a Voronoi polytope with respect to the positive quadratic form $`f(x)=x^TDx`$;

(ii) the function $`l(x;t)=t^TD(x\frac{1}{2}t)`$ is a generatrissa of the tiling $`\{P(t):tL\}`$.

## 11 Main Theorem

If we collect Lemmas 1, 2, 6, 7, Proposition 3 and Lemmas 12, 14, 16 together, we obtain

###### Theorem 2

Let $`P`$ be a parallelotope defined by facet vectors $`q_i`$, and defining lattice vectors $`t_i`$, $`i_P`$. Let $`A`$ be a non-degenerate $`n\times n`$ matrix, and $`D=A^TA`$. Then the following assertions are equivalent:

(i) Voronoi’s conjecture holds for $`P`$, i.e. the affine transformation $`xAx`$ transforms the parallelotope $`P`$ into a Voronoi polytope;

(ii) the parallelotope $`P`$ is a Voronoi polytope with respect to the positive quadratic form $`f(x)=x^TDx`$;

(iii) the parallelotope $`P`$ is defined canonically;

(iv) the equality $`q_i=Dt_i`$ holds for all $`i_P`$;

(v) for all pairs $`i,j_P`$, the equalities $`t_i^Tq_j=q_i^Tt_j`$ hold;

(vi) the tiling $`\{P(t):tL\}`$ is pegged with pegs $`v^{}(t)=Dt`$;

(vii) the function $`l(x;t)=t^TD(x\frac{1}{2}t)`$ is a generatrissa of the tiling $`\{P(t):tL\}`$;

(viii) the tiling $`\{P(t):tL\}`$ has a dual tiling.

Theorem 2 implies a result of \[MRS95\] that there is a unique (up to isomorphism of $`P`$) map which transforms a primitive parallelorope $`P`$ into a Voronoi polytope. Our Theorem 2 gives an explicit matrix $`A`$ of the corresponding affine map. Therefore we have the following

###### Proposition 4

If a parallelotope $`P`$ is affinely equivalent to a Voronoi polytope, then this affinity is uniquely (up to the aftomorphism of $`P`$) determined by the parallelotope $`P`$.

M.Deza V.Grishukhin,
Ecole Normale Supérieure CEMI Russian Academy of Sciences
r.Ulm 45 Nakhimovskii prosp.47
Paris, France Moscow, Russia
e-mail: deza@ens.fr e-mail: grishuhn@cemi.rssi.ru


format: text

text:
# The Mesoscopic Chiral Metal–Insulator Transition

\[

## Abstract

Sharp localization transitions of chiral edge states in disordered quantum wires, subject to strong magnetic field, are shown to be driven by crossovers from two- to one-dimensional localization of bulk states. As a result, the two-terminal conductance is found to exhibit at zero temperature discontinuous transitions between exactly integer plateau values and zero, reminiscent of first order phase transitions. We discuss the corresponding phase diagram. The spin of the electrons is shown to result in a multitude of phases, when the spin degeneracy is lifted by the Zeeman energy. The width of conductance plateaus is found to depend sensitively on the spin flip rate $`1/\tau _s`$.

\]

The high precision of the quantization of the Hall conductance of a two dimensional (2D) electron system (2DES) in a strong magnetic field  is known to be due to the binding of electrons to localized states in the bulk of the 2DES. Thereby, a change of electron density does not change the Hall conductance . The localization length in tails of Landau bands is very small, of the order of the cyclotron length $`l_{\mathrm{cyc}}=v_F/\omega _B=\sqrt{2n+1}l_B`$. It increases towards the centers of the Landau bands, $`E_{n0}=\mathrm{}\omega _B(n+1/2)`$ ($`n=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$), with $`\omega _B=eB/m^{}`$ the cyclotron frequency ($`e`$ elementary charge, $`m^{}`$ effective mass), $`v_F`$ the Fermi velocity, and $`l_B^2=\mathrm{}/eB`$ defines the magnetic length. In an infinite 2DES in perpendicular magnetic field, the localization length at energy $`E`$ diverges as $`\xi |EE_{n0}|^\nu `$, reminiscent of 2nd order phase transitions. The critical exponent $`\nu `$ is found numerically for the lowest two Landau bands, $`n=0,1`$, to be $`\nu =2.33\pm 0.04`$ for spin-split Landau levels . Analytical  and experimental studies  are consistent with this value. In a finite 2DES, a region of extended states should exist in the centers of disorder broadened Landau-bands. These states extend beyond the system size $`L`$. The width of these regions is given by $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=(l_{\mathrm{cyc}}/L)^{1/\nu }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\mathrm{}(2\omega _B/\pi \tau )^{1/2}`$ is the band width, with elastic scattering time $`\tau `$.

In quantum Hall bars of finite width, there exist in addition edge states with energies lifted by the confinement potential above the energies of centers of bulk Landau bands, $`E_{n0}`$ . Previously, there has been a considerable interest in the study of mesoscopically narrow quantum Hall bars, with emphasis on conductance fluctuations, edge state mixing , breakdown of the quantum Hall effect, and quenching of the Hall effect due to classical commensurability effects . It is known that in the presence of white noise disorder the edge states do mix with the bulk states when the Fermi energy is moved into the center of a Landau band. It had been suggested that this might result in localization of edge states . In this paper, we show that this is indeed the case. In particular, at zero temperature the two-terminal conductance of a quantum wire in a magnetic field exhibit for uncorrelated disorder and hard wall confinement discontinuous transitions between integer plateau values and zero, Fig 1.

The localization length $`\xi `$ in a 2DES with broken time reversal symmetry is expected from scaling theory and numerical scaling studies  to be

$$\xi _{2\mathrm{D}}=l_0e^{\pi ^2g^2}.$$
(1)
depending exponentially on $`g`$, the 2D conductance parameter per spin channel. $`l_0`$ is the short distance cutoff, which is the elastic mean free path $`l=2g(B=0)/k_\mathrm{F}`$ ($`k_\mathrm{F}`$ Fermi wave number) at moderate magnetic fields, $`b\omega _B\tau <1`$. For stronger magnetic fields, $`b>1`$, $`l_0`$ crosses over to the cyclotron length $`l_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$. $`g`$ exhibits Shubnikov-de-Haas oscillations as function of magnetic field for $`b>1`$. Maxima occur when the Fermi energy is in the center of Landau bands. Thus, the localization length increases strongly from band tails to band centers, even when the wire width $`L_y`$ is too narrow to allow delocalisation of bulk states. For uncorrelated impurities, within self consistent Born approximation , the maxima are given by $`g(E=E_{n0})=(2n+1)/\pi =g_n`$. Thus, $`\xi _{2\mathrm{D}}(E_{n0})=l_{\mathrm{cyc}}\mathrm{exp}(\pi ^2g_n^2)`$ are macroscopically large in centers of higher Landau bands, $`n>1`$ . However, when the width of the system $`L_y`$ is smaller than $`\xi _{2\mathrm{D}}`$, localization is expected to behave quasi-1D. In other words, electrons in centers of Landau bands can diffuse between the edges of the system, but are localized parallel to the edges if $`L_y<\xi _{2\mathrm{D}}`$. The quasi-1D localization length is known to depend only linearly on $`g`$. In a magnetic field, when time reversal symmetry is broken, it is

$$\xi _{1\mathrm{D}}=2g(B)L_y.$$
(2)
There is a crossover from 2D to 1D localization as the Fermi energy is moved from tails to centers of Landau bands. Performing a renormalization of the wire conductance, one obtains for the localization length ,

$$\xi ^2=4L_y^2g^2\frac{2L_y^2}{\pi ^2}\mathrm{ln}\left[\frac{1+(L_y/l_0)^2}{1+(L_y/\xi )^2}\right].$$
(3)
Its solution shows a crossover between the quasi-1-D– and the 2D–behaviour, Eq. (2) and Eq. (1), respectively.

The conductance per spin channel, $`g(b)=\sigma _{xx}(B)/\sigma _0`$, is given by the Drude formula $`g(b)=g_0/(1+b^2)`$, ($`g_0=E\tau /\mathrm{}`$, $`b=\omega _B\tau `$) for weak magnetic field, $`b<1`$. For $`b>1`$, when the cyclotron length $`l_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$ is smaller than the mean free path $`l`$, disregarding the overlap between Landau bands, $`g`$ is obtained in SCBA ,

$$g(B)=\frac{1}{\pi }\left(2n+1\right)\left(1\frac{(E_\mathrm{F}E_n)^2}{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2}\right),$$
(4)
for $`EE_n<\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. One obtains the localization length for $`b>1`$ and $`ϵ/bn1/2<1`$ by inserting $`g`$, Eq. (4) into Eq. (3). It oscillates between maximal values in centers of Landau bands, and minimal values in band tails (Fig. 2). For $`n>1`$, one finds in band centers,

$$\xi _n=\frac{2}{\pi }\left(2n+1\right)L_y\left[1\frac{\mathrm{ln}\sqrt{1+\left(L_y/l_{\mathrm{cyc}}\right)^2}}{(n+1/2)^2}\right]^{1/2}.$$
(5)
In the center of the lowest Landau band ($`n=0`$), Eq. (2) gives a value $`\xi _0(B)(2/\pi )L_y`$, smaller than $`L_y`$. There, the localization is 2D and the topological term  is effective, leading to criticality, and diverging localization lengths. In a wire of finite width, $`L_y`$ the localization length $`\xi `$ saturates to the critical value $`\xi _{\mathrm{crit}}1.2L_y`$  larger than $`L_y`$. Comparison with $`\xi _n`$, Eq. (5), shows that the noncritical quasi-1D localization length exceeds $`\xi _{\mathrm{crit}}`$ in all but the lowest Landau bands.

If all states in centers of higher Landau bands are localized along the wire, the question arises if there exist extended states in the quantum Hall wire at all. Consider an annulus, with a circumference larger than the localization length in the center of a Landau band. When a magnetic flux pierces the annulus, localized states are unaffected. Guiding centers of states which extend around the annulus do shift in position and energy, however. In a confined wire there exist chiral edge states , which extend around the annulus. A magnetic flux change moves these states down and up inner and outer edges, respectively. As shown above, in the middle of the Landau band, the electrons can diffuse freely from edge to edge, but are localized along the annulus with $`\xi >L_y`$. As a consequence, when adiabatically changing the magnetic flux, an “edge state” has to move from the inner to the outer edge, since it cannot enter the band of localized states. This fact has been interpreted as proof for the existence of an extended bulk state, extending around the annulus and between edges, at the energy $`E_m`$, with $`\xi (E_m)=L_y`$ . In the following, we show that rather a transition from extended chiral edge states to localised states occurs at these energies, $`E_m`$.

Using the transfer matrix method , we have calculated the localization length as function of energy $`E`$ in a tight binding model of a disordered quantum wire in perpendicular magnetic field, with periodic boundary conditions, Fig. 1 (dashed curve, right axis). Indeed, its maxima are seen to increase linearly with energy $`E`$ in agreement with Eq. (5). The transfer matrix result for the 2-terminal conductance $`G`$  is shown in Fig. 1 (solid curve, left axis) for a wire of identical properties, but hard wall boundary conditions and finite length $`L`$.

We verify that the condition $`\xi (E_{m,p})=L_y`$, yields the energies $`E_{m,p}`$, $`p=\pm `$, at which $`m`$ edge states mix, and transitions from the quasi-1D chiral metal to an insulator occur, as signaled by sharp jumps of $`G`$ in Fig. 1. Here, $`m=n`$ when this energy is above the bulk energy of the $`n`$-th Landau band, $`p=+`$, and $`m=n1`$ when it is below it, $`p=`$. For $`\xi <L_y`$, backscattering between edges is exponentially suppressed and the localisation length of edge states increases exponentially as $`\xi _{\mathrm{edge}}=\xi \mathrm{exp}(L_y/\xi )`$. These results are summarised in the phase diagram, Fig. 3 a, where the value of $`G`$, in units of $`e^2/h`$, is given as function of wire width $`L_y`$ and energy $`E`$ in units of $`\mathrm{}\omega _B`$. We find that $`G=m`$, where $`m`$ is the number of extended edge states. When $`L_yl_{cyc}\sqrt{2n+1}`$, all edge states are localised, and all conductance plateaus collapse, $`G=0`$, as seen in Fig. 1, close to the middle of the band, $`E=0`$.

Taking into account the spin, the Zeeman splitting $`E_n^+E_n^{}=g_Z\mu _BB`$, lifts the spin degeneracy, where $`g_Z`$ is the material dependent Zeeman-g-factor, and $`\mu _B`$ Bohr’s magneton. Without spin flip scattering edge states of different spins are not mixed. The phase diagram, Fig. 3 b, is then a superposition of two phase diagrams, Fig. 3 a, for each spin. There are phases where the conductance is equal to the total number of edge channels, $`G=m^++m^{}`$, when the bulk localisation length of electrons $`\xi ^\sigma `$, does not exceed the wire width, $`\xi ^\sigma <L_y`$, for either spin $`\sigma =\pm `$. When, $`\xi ^\sigma >L_y`$ for one spin $`\sigma `$ only, the conductance is carried by the number of edge states with opposite spin, $`G=m^\sigma `$, only. If $`\xi ^\sigma >L_y`$ for both $`\sigma =\pm `$, the conductance vanishes, $`G=0`$. With strong spin flip scattering, all edge state mix with bulk states for $`\xi ^\sigma >L_y`$, yielding $`G=0`$. There are conductance plateaus equal to the total number of edge states, $`G=m^++m^{}`$, only if $`\xi ^\sigma <L_y`$ is fullfilled for both spins, $`\sigma =\pm `$ (Fig. 3 c). Thus, both the sequence and width of conductance plateaus are sensitive measures of the spin flip scattering rate $`1/\tau _s`$, due to electron-electron interaction, spin-orbit interaction, or scattering from nuclear spins. Furthermore, the enhancement of the $`g_Z`$–factor above its bulk value due to the exchange interaction depends on the Fermi energy. Accordingly, the width of the conductance plateaus changes with energy. In a real sample there exists a slowly varying potential disorder which can stabilize edge states against mixing with bulk states . When the confinement potential is varying slowly on the magnetic length scale $`l_B`$, the energies $`E_{m,p}`$ are expected to split into $`m`$ energies, at which edge states mix one by one with bulk states, accompanied by steps of heights $`1`$ in conductance $`G`$. Both potentials can be effectively modified by the Coulomb interaction as obtained by a selfconsistent solution of the Poisson equation.

In the presence of long range interactions, interacting edge states form a correlated Luttinger liquid. Renormalisation due to edge plasmon excitations enhances the interedge scattering amplitude. This results in a decrease of the localisation length of the edge states. Accordingly, the width of the plateaus of lower Landau bands is ecpected to be reduced due to the Luttinger liquid correlations. Similarly, in the fractional quantum Hall regime, where the edge state excitations are strongly correlated even without long range interactions, a reduction of the localisation length of edge states is expetced as function of the filling factor $`\nu `$.

In 3–D layered systems in perpendicular magnetic field, surface states form 2D chiral metals in plateau regions where bulk states are localised. There are transitions between these 2D chiral metals and insulating states in long quasi-1D wires of layered electron systems.

We conclude, that in quantum Hall bars of finite width $`L_y\xi _n`$ at low temperatures quantum phase transitions occur between extended chiral edge states and a quasi-1D insulator. These are driven by the crossover from 2D to 1D localization of bulk states. These metal-insulator transitions resemble  first-order phase transitions in the sense that the localization length abruptly jumps between exponentially large and finite values. In the thermodynamic limit, fixing the aspect ratio $`c=L/L_y`$, when sending $`L\mathrm{}`$, then $`c\mathrm{}`$, the two–terminal conductance jumps between exactly integer values and zero. The transitions occur at energies where the localization length of bulk states is equal to the geometrical wire width. Then, $`m`$ edge states mix and electrons are free to diffuse between the wire boundaries but become Anderson localized along the wire. At finite temperature, this phenomenon can be observed, when the phase coherence length exceeds the quasi-1D localization length in centers of Landau bands, $`L_\phi >\xi _n`$. It may accordingly be called mesoscopic Chiral Metal–Insulator Transition. In Hall bars of large aspect ratios at low temperatures one should observe transitions of the two-terminal resistance from integer quantized plateaus, $`R_n=h/ne^2`$ to a Mott variable-range hopping regime of exponentially diverging resistance. Such experiments would yield new information about edge states in quantum Hall bars. At higher temperature, when $`L_\phi <\xi _n`$, the conventional form of the integer quantum Hall effect is recovered .

Acknowledgments The authors gratefully acknowledge useful discussions with Bodo Huckestein, Mikhail Raikh, Isa Zarekeshev, and Grzegorz Michalek. This research was supported by German Research Council (DFG), Grant No. Kr 627/10, Schwerpunkt ”Quanten-Hall-Effekt”, and by EU TMR-network Grant. No. HPRN-CT2000-0144.


text:
# Electronic Structure of B-2𝑝𝜎 and 𝑝𝜋 States in MgB2, AlB2 and ZrB2 Single Crystals

##

The effect of electron correlation (EC) on the electronic structure in MgB2, AlB2 and ZrB2, is studied by examining the partial density of states (PDOS) of B-2$`p\sigma `$ and $`p\pi `$ orbitals using the polarization dependence of x-ray emission and absorption spectra. The discrepancies between observed and calculated PDOSs cannot be attributed to EC effects. The present results suggest that the EC effect is less than the experimental error ($``$ 0.2 eV), which indirectly supports a scenario that electron-phonon interaction plays an essential role in the occurrence of superconductivity.
74.70.Ad, 74.25.Jb, 78.70.Dm, 78.70.En

Since the discovery of superconductivity in MgB2 with $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ of 39 K, a large number of researches from experimental  and theoretical  point of view have been performed on MgB2 and on a series of isostructural diborides. Most of these studies suggest that MgB2 is a phonon-mediated BCS type superconductor. Bud’ko et al. reported a boron isotope effect with $`\alpha `$=0.26. The temperature dependence of 11B-nuclear spin relaxation rate, $`1/T_1`$, shows an exponential decay in the superconducting state revealing a tiny coherence peak just below $`T_\mathrm{c}`$, which means that MgB2 is an $`s`$-wave superconductor with a large band gap. On the other hand, high resolution photoemission spectroscopy and specific heat measurement of MgB2 suggest the two superconducting gaps. The tunneling experiment also suggest that two gaps of about 2-3 and 7 meV. Recent Raman study on the single crystalline MgB2 assigned the two gaps to a large one (6.5 meV) of the $`\sigma `$ band and a small one (1.5 meV) of the $`\pi `$ bands. These results are in contradiction with a scenario that MgB2 is a simple $`s`$-wave superconductor. Theoretical band calculations, in the early stage, have suggested that the dimensionless electron-phonon coupling (EPC) constant $`\lambda `$0.7, which can give a high $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ of $``$40 K if the Coulomb potential $`\mu ^{}`$ is very small. On the other hand, two-band mechanisms based on inter-band electron-correlation (EC) have been proposed. In these mechanisms, inter-band EC ($`\sigma `$ and $`\pi `$ bands considered by Imada, and bonding and antibonding $`\pi `$-bands by Yamaji) enhances $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ from a conventional BCS (EPC based) value, and the mechanisms have relationship with the experimental results that suggest the two superconducting gaps. In order to understand the high $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ of MgB2, therefore, it is necessary to get information on the EC effects in the superconducting MgB2 and non-superconducting other diborides. The density of state gives important information on the EC effects. The partial density of states (PDOS) of boron have been measured by x-ray absorption (XAS) and x-ray emission (XES) spectroscopy near B-$`K`$ edge of polycrystalline MgB2 and other AlB2-type compounds, in which the observed PDOS agrees well with the band calculations. Furthermore, angle resolved photoemission spectroscopic (ARPES) and de Haas van Alphen (dHvA) effect studies were performed on the single crystalline MgB2 sample. The ARPES spectra along the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-$`K`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-$`M`$ directions show three dispersive curves that can be assigned to theoretically predicted $`\sigma `$ and $`\pi `$ bands. However, some predicted bands were not observed. In addition, a small parabolic-like band is observed around the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ point, which can not be explained by band calculations. Because this technique is quite surface sensitive, the results may not represent the bulk-electronic structure. On the other hand, dHvA technique is useful to probe the bulk-electronic structure. Yelland et al. reported that only three dHvA frequencies were resolved among four Fermi surfaces predicted theoretically. The derived three dHvA frequencies and the large effective mass are, however, explained by precise band calculation, the calculation insists that the bands near $`E_\mathrm{F}`$ should shift with decreasing number of holes near $`E_\mathrm{F}`$. They pointed out that the discrepancies between the experimental results and the band calculations may be caused by EC effects or beyond-LDA effect. Furthermore, several authors have proposed a model based on a weak electron-phonon coupling that is consistent with the optical conductivity and DC resistivity studies of $`c`$-axis oriented MgB2 films. Thus, it is necessary to investigate the significance of the EC effects, which can play an important role on the appearance of high $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ in MgB2. XAS and XES measurements of single crystal are quiet useful for this purpose because these techniques give PDOS which can reflect the existence of strong EC. XAS and XES of single crystalline AlB2 and XAS of single crystalline MgxAl1-xB2 were already performed, in which a good agreement between the observation and the band calculation was reported. In this paper, we report a direct observation of PDOS of B-2$`p\sigma `$ and 2$`p\pi `$ by polarization dependent XES and XAS near B-$`K`$ edge using single crystalline MgB2, AlB2 and ZrB2 samples. Comparing the observed PDOS with the first principle band calculation results, we examine the significance of EC effects in MgB2.

The single crystalline MgB2 samples were grown in BN container under high pressure.  AlB2 and ZrB2 crystals were prepared by Al-flux and FZ methods, respectively. The XES measurement was performed at BL-2C in KEK-PF, in which the energy of the incident photons is about 400 eV. The energy resolution of XES spectrometer is about 0.2 eV. The XAS spectra were measured at BL-8.0.1 of Advanced Light Source (ALS) in LBNL by the partial fluorescence yield (PFY) method. The energy resolution of the incident photons is about 0.1 eV. PDOSs of each B-2$`p\sigma `$ and 2$`p\pi `$ orbitals are derived from polarization dependence of XES and XAS spectra.

Figure 1 shows the observed partial density of states (PDOS) of B-2$`p\sigma `$ \[Fig. 1(b)\] and $`p\pi `$ states \[Fig. 1(c)\] from observed polarization-dependent XES and XAS spectra with the results of band calculation. Solid and dotted lines in Fig.1 are the results of the first principle band calculations (FLAPW method) by Oguchi, which are convoluted by gaussian function with FWHM of the experimental resolution. Solid and open circles (or squares) represent occupied and empty states of $`p\sigma `$ (or $`p\pi `$), respectively. It is clearly seen that the Fermi energy $`E_\mathrm{F}`$ \[A in Figs. 1(b) and (c)\] measured from B-1$`s`$ core level of MgB2 is 186.4 eV, which agrees well with the previous reports. In the Figs. 1(b) and (c), the theoretical $`E_\mathrm{F}`$ value is set to the experimental $`E_\mathrm{F}`$ value, 186.4 eV. A sharp peak B in XES spectrum \[Fig.1(b)\] is observed at around $`EE_\mathrm{F}=2.4`$ eV. Observed PDOS of $`p\sigma `$ in XES spectrum steeply decreases at $`E_\mathrm{F}`$ and a considerable amount of PDOS just above $`E_\mathrm{F}`$ is observed in XAS spectrum. The $`p\sigma `$-PDOS near $`E_\mathrm{F}`$ disappears above 0.6 eV (C), and there is almost no $`p\sigma `$-PDOS in the energy region D (0.6 eV$`<EE_\mathrm{F}<`$3.6 eV). Figure 1(c) shows XES $`(\text{ })`$ and XAS $`(\mathrm{})`$ of B-2$`p\pi `$ of MgB2. Observed PDOS of $`p\pi `$ shows a broad metallic state except a large sharp peak G at 5.6 eV. The overall features of observed XAS near $`E_\mathrm{F}`$ and XES are well reproduced by the band calculation. However, in whole energy region, some discrepancies are observed as follows. Observed peak B is lower than the theoretical prediction by 0.3 eV. The value of observed pseudo-gap is about 3 eV in contrast to the prediction of about 4 eV. Peaks, E1 and E2 in $`p\sigma `$-XAS and G in $`p\pi `$-XAS, are not reproduced by the band calculation. Before going into detailed comparison between the theory and the experiment, let us show the results AlB2.

Figure 2 shows PDOS of AlB2 with the same symbols of MgB2 in Fig.1. The observed $`E_\mathrm{F}`$ is estimated to be 187.5 eV which agrees well with the previous report. The value of $`E_\mathrm{F}`$ is slightly lower than the theoretical prediction by 0.6 eV, but the small shift is explained by the lack of Al atoms by 0.07 from the stoichiometric AlB2. As in MgB2, overall shapes of experimental $`p\sigma `$\- and $`p\pi `$-PDOS are in good agreement with the band calculation results. Especially, in AlB2, it is found that a detailed shape of PDOS including a pseudo-gap in the empty state is in good agreement with the theoretical prediction within the experimental resolution. This is in contrast with the case of MgB2.

Figure 3 shows $`p\sigma ()`$\- and $`p\pi ()`$-PDOS of ZrB2 derived from XES spectra. In sharp contrast to the PDOSs of MgB2 and AlB2, the $`p\pi `$-PDOS of ZrB2 shows clearly-resolved two-large peaks at about 184.3 eV and 185.4 eV, respectively. The $`p\sigma `$-PDOS also shows two peaks at about 183.0 eV and 184.3 eV. Both PDOSs decrease with increasing energy, but the small Fermi edge is observed in both PDOSs. The $`E_\mathrm{F}`$ is estimated to be 188.1 eV. The solid and dotted lines are the theoretical ones with the experimental $`E_\mathrm{F}`$ value. As in MgB2 and AlB2, even though the PDOS shapes are different, the observed PDOSs of ZrB2 are well reproduced by the first principle band calculation. The detailed comparison between observed PDOS and theoretical ones is as follows.

As mentioned before, overall shapes of the observed PDOSs of these compounds are roughly reproduced by the band calculations, but some discrepancies are pointed out in MgB2 and AlB2. A sharp peak B in MgB2, which is due to van Hove singularity (VHS) of $`p\sigma `$ band at $`M`$\- and $`L`$-points, slightly shifts from the theoretical prediction by about $`0.3`$ eV. An energy, measured from $`E_\mathrm{F}`$, of bonding $`p\sigma `$-top at $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-point \[C in Fig. 1(b)\] is about 0.6 eV in MgB2 and $`1.0`$ eV in AlB2, respectively. It agrees with the theoretical prediction in MgB2, and agrees with the prediction in AlB2 assuming the $`E_\mathrm{F}`$ shifting. However, in MgB2, observed anti-bonding $`p\sigma ^{}`$ PDOSs E1 and E2 are higher than the theoretical ones F1 and F2. This means the observed pseudo-gap located at region D is smaller than the theoretical prediction in MgB2 by about 1 eV. On the other hand, in AlB2, one can see an excellent agreement between observed and theoretical PDOS around the pseudo-gap of about 3 eV. The values of observed pseudo-gap of both compounds are the same (3 eV). In AlB2, there is no characteristic structure in PDOS above $`E_\mathrm{F}`$\+ 5 eV. Therefore, it seems that there is no discrepancy between experimental and theoretical PDOS in AlB2 compound even in the high energy region.

The large sharp peak G is due to $`p\pi ^{}`$ resonant state of the sample surface or of some oxides of the surface. And it does not appear in a polished-large single-crystal of AlB2. For AlB2 single crystal, in order to remove the Al-flux on the surface, the crystals were polished. Therefore the fluorescence spectrum will be free from the surface oxidation. But the size of MgB2 single crystals is too small to remove surface oxides by polishing. Then the small amount of oxides leads to the resonant peak G in MgB2 spectrum. The present observation of PDOS of $`p\pi `$ band also agrees with the theoretical one except for the surface states mentioned above. The present results indicate that the experimental PDOSs are reproduced by the band calculation in the energy region of $`E<E_\mathrm{F}`$+5 eV in both diborides.

One might consider that the discrepancy between experiment and the theory in the XAS regime of MgB2 may be due to EC effects that is not properly taken into account in LDA band calculations. However, the EC effects generally tend to widen the gap, while in the present case, the experimental band gap is narrower than the theoretical one. Then, this discrepancy between the experiment and the theory may be attributed to the fact that the band calculation deals with the ground state of the system. A possible reason for the gap narrowing might be due to an excitonic effect that arises in the excited states of the XAS process, which is not taken into account in the band calculation.

In a previous paper, we insisted that a rigid band picture is valid for the relation between MgB2 and AlB2. The present detailed PDOSs of both compounds do not deny the rigid band picture, but suggest a small discrepancy between both compounds, i.e., anti-bonding $`p\sigma ^{}`$ states is lower than the theoretical prediction in MgB2 but that in AlB2 is in agreement with the theoretical one. In ZrB2, the observed $`p\pi `$-PDOS structure is similar to the theoretical PDOS of Zr-4$`d`$. The high energy peak at 184.3 eV of $`p\sigma `$-PDOS is also similar to the Zr-4$`d_{yz,zx}`$ PDOS, but the low energy PDOS at 183.0 eV is considered to be based on the covalent character of B-B bonding in basal plane. As mentioned in the introductory part, there are two types of theoretical two-bands model based on electron-phonon and inter-band EC mechanisms in MgB2 superconductivity. The present result indicates that the EC is smaller than the value of the present energy resolution ($``$0.2 eV) in MgB2, AlB2 and ZrB2 compounds. The inter-band EC has a possibility to enhance the phonon-mediated $`T_\mathrm{c}`$. If a small inter-band EC effect that can not be detected in our experiment enhances the high $`T_\mathrm{c}`$, the present result does not contradict with these propositions.

To summarize, in order to examine the electron correlation (EC) effect in the diborides, we have performed direct measurement of PDOS of B-$`2p`$ in single-crystalline MgB2, AlB2 and ZrB2 using polarization-dependent XES and XAS measurements. Although there are some discrepancies between observed PDOSs and theoretical ones, the first principle band calculation reproduces well the overall features of observed $`p\sigma `$\- and $`p\pi `$-PDOSs. In superconducting MgB2, a considerable amounts of $`p\sigma `$-hole state near the Fermi energy is clearly observed. The pseudo-gap of $`p\sigma `$ band is observed in MgB2 and AlB2 compounds in sharp contrast to the broad metallic state of the B-2$`p\pi `$ bands. The observed gap values of about 3 eV are same in both compounds, which is smaller than the theoretically predicted value for MgB2 and is consistent with it for AlB2. Because the band calculation describes the ground state, it may be plausible that the calculation reproduces the experimental PDOS only for $`E<E_\mathrm{F}`$+5 eV in both compounds. In ZrB2, the observed PDOSs reproduced well by the calculation, suggest strong hybridization between B-2$`p`$ and Zr-4$`d`$ orbitals. The observed discrepancies are contrary to the EC effects. The present results suggest that the EC effect is less than the experimental error ($``$ 0.2 eV), which indirectly supports a scenario that electron-phonon interaction plays an essential role in the occurrence of superconductivity in MgB2. However, a possibility of a small inter-band electron-correlation effect which supports the phonon mediated superconductivity, still remains.

J.N. and S.N. thank to Dr. Y. Kobayashi of RIKEN for the support with the synthesis of AlB2 single crystals. K.K. acknowledges Dr. J. Yamauchi of Toshiba Corporate R&D Center for valuable discussions. This work was supported by Office of Basic Energy Science of the Department of Energy under contract Nos. DE-AC03-76SF00098 and W-7405-Eng-48, National Science Foundation (NSF) Grant No. DMR-9017996 to the University of Tennessee and a Grant-in-Aid No. 14540330 and No.13CE2002 (for COE Research) of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan. This work was performed under the approval of the KEK-PF Advisory Committee (Proposal No. 2001U004). D.L.E. and T.A.C. also wish to acknowledge support from NSF Grant DMR-9801804.


text:
# Simulation of the weighted spatio-structured three cornered game and its satatistical properties

## 1 Introduction

The descrete dynamics is useful to understand various phenomena in the natural and artificial world which includes biological, social, ecological phenomena and so on. The game theory among many approaches give one of interesting view of them. Most of one shot games can be analyzed analytically . Many researchs have been made to study the Dilemma, pareto optimal, Nash equilibrium, and how can we obtain cooperation in the Dilemma games rationally. Based on Prisoner’s Dilemma (PD), iterated games have been intensively studied and Axelrod  has shown that cooperation can emerge as a norm in a society comprised of individuals with selfish motives. Moreover spatial version of PG is discussed so that a defection is to be only evolutionary stable strategy (ESS)  if each agent interacts with any other agents. This aspect drastically changes if a spatial structure of the population is considered. If the interaction between agents is locally restricted to their neighbors, a stable coexistence between cooperators and defectors become possible under certain conditions. In the case, one agent plays PD with their neighbors and in next step the agent take the same strategy of the agent that acquired highest payoff among the neighbors, which reflects to Dawin’s theory. It is assumed that all agents play at same time and follow the same way. Recently they are systematically have been disucussed .

In this current of research, we discuss a spatio evolutionary game with three strategies, which has not been explored so heavily . Now assume there are two persons (countries and so on). One person A is postulated to be stronger than another person B in a game. In the game A necessarily wins over B. That is trivial. If an outsiders participates in the game, the situation, however, would become dificult. Especially when the outsider C is stronger in the game than A but weeker than B, the situation becomes a three cornered game. When a super country bullys a puny country, some outsider with which the super country does not like to fight and which want to obtain some kind of interests from the puny country, intrade on them. Such a situation often may arise. The situation which we consider is that there are many countries in such relation and they often repeat the interactions. This primafacie symmetric setup brings some drastic results. The aim of this article is to uncover such aspects by excuting a computer simulation.

The plan of this article is as follows; The next section 2, we describe qualitative aspect of simulation results for eight cases. The quantitative analyses are obtained. The last section is devoted to summary.

## 2 Weighted Three Cornerd Game

We consider the paper-rock-scissors as a metaphor of the three cornered game. Since the game is completely symmetric, any outcome will express symmetric ones. So we introduce asymmetric payoff for each strategy which is called ”Glico Game” (G-game) in Japan. Let prepare three strategies, R, G and B. We assume that

R wins G and get the payoff $`P_R`$,

G wins B and get the payoff $`P_G`$,

B wins R and get the payoff $`P_B`$.

We explore the evolution of the population of the strategirs, changing the parameters, $`P_R,P_G,P_B`$. Essentially there are following eight patterns in the parameter space, considering symmetry in the strategies;
(1)$`P_R>P_G>P_B`$ and the differences of the payoffs are all small.
(2)$`P_R>P_B>P_G`$ and the differences of the payoffs are all small.
(3)$`P_R>>P_G>P_B`$ and the differences of $`P_RP_B`$ only is small.
(4)$`P_R>>P_B>P_G`$ and the differences of $`P_RP_G`$ only is small.
(5)$`P_R>P_G>>P_B`$ and the differences of $`P_GP_R`$ only is small.
(6)$`P_R>P_B>>P_G`$ and the differences of $`P_BP_G`$ only is small.
(7)$`P_R>>P_G>>P_B`$ and the differences of the payoff are all large.
(8)$`P_R>>P_B>>P_G`$ and the differences of the payoff are all large.
Without losing generality we can choose $`P_R`$ as the largest payoff. In the cases with odd number in the above the order of strength of the strategies is consistent with the order of the payoff and the cases with even nunber are not so. We call this weighted three cornered game with general payoffs G-game. Then the payoffs are obtained in the table 1.

We make this setting a spatio-evolutionary game. We consider $`n\times n=N`$ lattice-like cells on which agents are lying with the strategies. The agents play the G-game with the Moor neightborhood and theirself with a fixed strategy. In next round the agents take the same strategy as that of the player who has gotten highest payoff among the neighborhood and theirself in the present round. We simulate it by $`t`$ rounds to investigate the evolution patterns of this game.

## 3 Clussification and Simulation Results

### 3.1 Qualitative characters

In the simulation we take $`n=51`$ and the iteration number $`t`$ up to convergence (maximal 1000 rounds). Black cells show the Red strategy, the gray cells show the Green strategy and the white cells show the Blue strategy in figures. The periodic boundary condation is taken on the latice and an random initial configuration with equi-probabilities for the strategies R, G and B are taken in the all simulations.

(1)Case with $`P_R=1.03>P_G=1.02>P_B=1.01`$
First R is dominant and then temporally B is dominant, because B can exploit R that is strongest strategy in the payoff. After that, the configuration traces some complicate histries to mainly reach three patterns. They are square spiral patterns (Fig. 4), the patterns with multiple square and intricate patterns (Fig.1) and we call them complex patterns, generically. Up to 400 rounds, they show periodic behabiors (Fig.1 and Fig.2) or irregular pattern with equi-probability. However, the formers appears twice as often as the latters up to 1000 rounds. This means that though many cases do not converge at 400 rounds, they would finally converge to some patterns. Globally G has the largest population and occupies nearly 40 percent of the whole, and the remainders are occupied by R and B with nearly equal ratio (Fig.1).

R (or B or G) dominant configurations with some B-G poles (or R-G or R-B poles) sometimes appear. Their total frequency is about a quater of all simulations. While R dominant configuration appears after a few dozen, B and G dominant confiruration appear through long complex patterns, eventually. The poles circulates through whole lattice world to return again (refer to Fig.5).

(2)$`P_R=1.03>P_B=1.02>P_G=1.01`$
First B is dominant and then temporally G is dominant, because G can exploit B. In these cases the result is similar to (1) except that there are no R (or B or G) dominant configurations with some pole like objects. While the periodic complex patterns appears with a frequency quadruple to that of the irregularly intricate pattern (Fig.3), the 1000 round simulations reverse the frequency rate between both patterns. In general the cases in (2) converge more slowly than the cases (1). R, G and B occur with nearly equal possibility.

(3)$`P_R=2>>P_G=1.02>P_B=1.01`$
The initial histories of configurations are mainly R$``$B, and sometimes R$``$B$``$R($``$G). The periodic complex patterns appear with about 2/3 of the possibility (Fig.4).

The remnants of them are the complete R dominant configuration and the complete B one with about 1/6 of the probability, respectively. In this case the second strong strategy G in the payoff never becomes a dominant strategy. The distribution ratios of R, G and B are approximately 4:3:1.

(4)$`P_R=2>>P_B=1.02>P_G=1.01`$
These cases converge with a short time, comparatively. There are no cases with irregularly intricate patterns. They almost converge to the complex patterns with 80 percent of the probability through R$``$B (sometimes $``$G), and most of others finish at the complete B configuration, which is the second strong strategy in the payoff, through R$``$B. For the case corresponding to that through R$``$B $``$G, a complete G configulation appears, ralely. The strongest strategy R in the payoff never appears. The distribution ratios of R, G and B are approximately same as (3), 4:3:1.

(5)$`P_R=2.01>P_G=2>>P_B=1.0`$
Depending on initial configurations, the various patterns (almost all patterns in the present simulations) appear in these cases. The complete B configuration (sometimes with R-G fractions or poles) and the complete R configuration (sometimes with G-B fractions or poles) appear with about 25 percent and about 70 percent, respectively (see Fig. 5 and 6). In the cases with the thick (G-B) poles, the patterns look like striped patterns, which occupy a few percent of the whole. The second strong strategy G in the payoff never becomes dominant like (3). The complex patterns sometimes appears, too.

(6)$`P_R=2.01>P_B=2>>P_G=1`$
In these cases the weakest strategy G in the payoff almost comes to be dominant. The complete G appears with about 25 percent of the probability and G dominant with some R-B poles or fractions configuration appear with about 60 percent, and their total is about 85 percent. They go through B $``$G at early period. The patterns with thick poles aresed with a few percent look like striped object. Ralely hightly irregular patterns appear.

(7)$`P_R=3>>P_G=2>>P_B=1`$
The strongest strategy R in the payoff completely cover the world. This aspect is stable against the variance of initial states. As an extreme rare case, a complete B configuration appears.

(8)$`P_R=3>>P_B=2>>P_G=1`$
The history of dominant strategy is such as $`RBG`$. In maked contrast with the case (7) the weakest strategy G in the payoff completely cover the world with about 60 percent or becomes dominant with a periodic pole with about 15 percent. The histories are sometimes cut off to be the complete B or sometimes with R-G poles which lead to B dominant configurations. These are summarized in the table 2.

First dominated strategy is almost the strongest one in the payoff. (The exception happens in the cases (2) and (6) where the highest payoff $`P_R`$ nearly equal to the second high one, $`P_B`$.) This is a reasonable result but does not necessarily express the fact that it is the final dominant strategy. Usually the strategy is soon replaced by the predator strategy.

The prey of the final dominant strategy does not carry the weakest strategy in the payoff but there are even the cases that the weakest one or the strategy that has nearly equal payoff of the weakest strategy become the winner. This is an adventure and an interesting phenomenon.

Generally speaking, when three payoffs take nearly equal values such as in (1) and (2), the final population of each strategy takes nearly equal values. In fact the complex pattern mainly appear in only (1) $``$ (4). As the difference of them are enlarged, the difference of final populations increases so that the dominance of a specific strategy comes to be peculiar.

### 3.2 Statistical Futures

The complex patterns arised often in the cases (1) $``$ (5) have periodical structure. We observed it in the fig. 2. On the other hand the sequence of the populations often shows chaotic behabior in the irregularly intricate patterns. Fig. 7 corresponds to the data of Fig. 3. These non-periodic patterns arised in (1) and (2) may be presumed not to converge on some specific patterns. Though the periods of various cases are considerably long and about $`500\pm 400`$ in the cases (1) and (2), the period runs from a few rounds to 200 rounds in (3) and (4).

Almost cases with some poles and/or fractions are also periodic except the part of (6), where the sizes and the constituent ratios of poles or fractions are invariant under the time transition but only the position of them moves on the latice (Fig.5, Fig.6, Fig. 8, Fig. 9 and Fig. 10). So we conjecture that except the cases with non-cyclic poles and fraction in (6) all cases are periodic or converge to one strategy. Of course all cases are in principle periodic on a finite latice. In the present cases the dimension of the configuration space is $`3^{51\times 51}`$ and so the fact that the period is $`O(100)`$ is highly nontrivial.

The Haming distance show the same behabior as the corresponding population sequence in essentials (Fig.10). The correlation functions monotonically decrease to zero with respect to the round number $`t`$ in the periodic complex patterns. The function decrease, showing complicated behabior but to non zero values in the irregularly intricate cases, generally. When a specfic strategy is dominant, the correlation function linearly decrease to large negative value. These are diagnostic features of correlation function (Fig.11, Fig. 12 and Fig 13). They seem to be different from chaotic features.

## 4 Concluding Remarks

We have studied the evolution of the strategies in a sort of weighted three cornered game, Glico Game. Then we divide the parameter region with respect to the payoff into 8 areas and explore its qualitative and quantitative properties. When the three payoff parameters take nearly values each other, the complex patterns mainly appear and as the difference of parameter values are enlarged, some peculiar strategy trends to be dominant gradually. An interesting fact is that the strongest strategy in the payoff do not necessarily dominate the latice world. There are even the cases where the weakest strategy in the payof dominate. Generally many cases have some period much shoter than the dimension of the configuration space.

Some irregular patterns maight converge to some specific patterns. One of our sequent studies is to uncover the character (chaotic, periodic, …) of the irregular patterns. It can be also expected that there are some critical points and further detail investigations in each parameter region would are also needed.