text:
# Introduction

## Introduction

Derived categories of coherent sheaves entered the mirror symmetry scene with the paper . The mirror relationship as envisaged by Kontsevich is an equivalence of $`A_{\mathrm{}}`$-categories built out of two manifolds $`X`$ and $`Y`$, both equipped with (complexified) symplectic forms and complex Calabi–Yau structures. One of these categories is $`D^b(X_t)`$, the bounded derived category of coherent sheaves on the complex manifold $`X_t`$, or a twisted version thereof. The other category is the derived Fukaya category $`D^b\mathrm{Fuk}(Y,\omega _0)`$ of the symplectic manifold $`(Y,\omega _0)`$, a category constructed from Lagrangian submanifolds and local systems on them, with morphism spaces given by Floer homology.

The origin of the equivalence of the two categories was not specified by Kontsevich. The picture was filled in by a proposal of Strominger– Yau–Zaslow , based on arguments coming from non-perturbative string theory. According to , mirror manifolds should be fibered into middle-dimensional real special Lagrangian tori over a common base space; moreover, the two fibrations should in a suitable sense be dual to each other. As it was subsequently realized, this should supply the equivalence of categories proposed by Kontsevich by an analytic form of the Fourier–Mukai transform, converting Lagrangian submanifolds equipped with a local system on one manifold into holomorphic bundles or more generally sheaves on the mirror; see e.g. .

The next question that arises is the origin of the torus fibrations; recently, some proposals have been put forward by Gross–Wilson  and Kontsevich–Soibelman  to the effect that these should arise from certain degenerations of the complex structure on the Calabi–Yau manifolds. These degenerations, to so-called maximally degenerate boundary points or complex cusps in the Calabi–Yau moduli space, have been known to play a major role in mirror symmetry since the heroic age ; the ideas of  and  show their significance in the new order of things.

Many of the details of the torus fibrations, the definitions of the categories and their equivalence, and the relation to more traditional notions such as curve-counting generation functions and variations of Hodge structures are missing or at best conjectural. However, this should not necessarily prevent one from investigating some further issues such as symmetries on the two sides of the mirror map. The study of these issues was also initiated by Kontsevich. He pointed out that the categorical equivalence implies a correspondence between symplectomorphisms on a Calabi–Yau manifold and self-equivalences of the derived category of coherent sheaves of its mirror, and gave some explicit examples of this relationship. In particular, he related symplectomorphisms arising from certain monodromy transformations to certain relatively simple self-equivalences on the mirror side in the case of the quintic, and proposed some more general constructions of self-equivalences. These ideas were carried further by Seidel and Thomas  and in a different direction by Horja . Aspinwall  and Björn, Curio, Hernández Ruipérez and Yau  studied the relation between monodromies and self-equivalences in certain concrete cases.

A common feature of these works is that they present a static picture: the symplectic form and complex structure are frozen, and symmetries compared. The main contribution of the present work is that by investigating these notions in families, some additional insight can be gained.

The language of kernels (derived correspondences) is used to define a group that I term the categorical mapping group of a family of complex manifolds. The main conjecture of the paper states that for a pair $`(X,Y)`$ of mirror Calabi–Yau manifolds, there should be a homomorphism from the diffeomorphism group of $`Y`$ to the categorical mapping group of the total space of the complex moduli space of $`X`$. A weaker version of the conjecture concerns cohomology actions on the two sides of the mirror map.

I investigate the proposed conjecture for families of Calabi–Yau manifolds of dimension at most three. After a brief look at the elliptic curve case, where the relevant group action was already known to Mukai111The reader will excuse me for a short historical digression. Mukai remarks in the introduction of  that the result that the derived category of an elliptic curve carries an action of $`SL(2,)`$ modulo the shift ‘seems to be significant’. This must be one of the first explicit hints to mirror symmetry in the mathematics literature. Another early hint is discussed in \[22, Section 8\]: a picture of Mori about the cone of curves of an abelian surface closely resembles a picture of Mumford about the compactification of a Hilbert modular surface; these cones become duals under mirror symmetry. It is a curious fact that Mori drew his picture during the fall of 1979 which is exactly the time when  was submitted., I consider the case of K3 surfaces. Derived categories of sheaves on K3s have only been studied in the projective case, to which I restrict; this can be done elegantly in families by considering lattice-polarized K3 surfaces, a notion due to Nikulin. The diffeomorphism group has to be restricted also; in effect, the lattice polarization partitions $`H^2`$ (generically) into algebraic and transcendental parts a priori, and the allowable diffeomorphisms are supposed to respect this choice. One further issue that arises is an analogue of a theorem of Donaldson on the complex side, regarding orientation on the cohomology of K3 surfaces. Unfortunately, I cannot prove the required statement at present; it is formulated as Conjecture 5.4. Assuming this, Theorem 5.5 confirms that for any allowable diffeomorphism, there is a family of categorical equivalences with the correct cohomology action. As an illustration I investigate this correspondence in some detail for toric families.

In the threefold case, I only discuss examples of elements of the categorical mapping group, mostly coming from birational contractions on the threefolds. A typical case of Horja’s work emerges in a novel fashion, showing that indeed, the present version of the conjecture is needed to get a full picture. To conclude, I point out a relation to (counterexamples to) the global Torelli problem.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the proposed framework. Detailed proofs of the assertions, together with some further examples and applications, will be given elsewhere.

### Acknowledgments

Conversations and correspondence with Tom Bridgeland, Andrei Căldăraru, Mark Gross, Paul Seidel and Richard Thomas during the course of this work were very helpful indeed. I thank the MPI for hospitality during a brief stay in September 2000, where some of these ideas took shape. I especially thank Yuri Manin for the warm welcome and stimulating conversations; he also provided the starting point for these ideas with questions in .

## 1 Basic definitions

For the purposes of the paper, a Calabi–Yau manifold is complex manifold $`X_0`$ with holonomy exactly $`SU(n)`$, in particular trivial canonical bundle. I assume everywhere below that $`n=dim_{}(X_0)3`$. The subscript means that a particular complex structure is chosen on the differentiable manifold $`X`$; sometimes I write $`X_0`$ as a pair $`(X,I_0)`$ to make the complex structure explicit in notation. $`D^b(X_0)`$ or $`D^b(X,I_0)`$ denote the bounded derived category of coherent sheaves on $`X_0`$. The Mukai map

$$v:D^b(X_0)H^{}(X_0,)$$

is defined for $`UD^b(X_0)`$ by

$$v(U)=\mathrm{ch}(U)\sqrt{\mathrm{td}(X_0)}.$$

The Mukai pairing on cohomology

$$H^{}(X,)\times H^{}(X,)+i$$

is defined by

$$(\alpha _0+\mathrm{}+\alpha _{2n})(\beta _0+\mathrm{}+\beta _{2n})=(1)^{n1}\underset{j=0}{\overset{2n}{}}i^j_Y\alpha _j\beta _{2nj}$$

where $`\alpha _i,\beta _iH^i(X,)`$; this pairing extends linearly to rational and complex cohomology. Let $`\stackrel{~}{L}=H^{}(X,)`$ be the $``$-module equipped with the Mukai pairing; a marked family is a smooth family $`\pi :𝒳S`$ with topological fibre $`X`$ and with a fixed isomorphism $`\varphi `$ of the local system $`\mathrm{R}^{}\pi _{}`$ with the constant local system $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$ on $`S`$ respecting pairings.

A kernel (derived correspondence) between smooth projective varieties $`X_i`$, $`i=1,2`$ is by definition an object $`UD^b(X_1\times X_2)`$. There is a composition product on kernels given for $`UD^b(X_1\times X_2)`$ and $`VD^b(X_2\times X_3)`$ by the standard formula

$$UV=𝐑p_{13}\left(𝐋p_{12}^{}(U)\stackrel{𝐋}{}𝐋p_{23}^{}(V)\right)D^b(X_1\times X_3);$$

here $`p_{ij}:X_1\times X_2\times X_3X_i\times X_j`$ are the projection maps. A kernel $`UD^b(X_1\times X_2)`$ is invertible, if there is a kernel $`VD^b(X_2\times X_1)`$ such that the products $`UV`$ and $`VU`$ are isomorphic in $`D^b(X_i\times X_i)`$ to $`𝒪_{\mathrm{\Delta }_{X_i}}`$, the (complexes consisting of) the structure sheaves of the diagonals.

A kernel $`UD^b(X_1\times X_2)`$ defines a functor

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^U:D^b(X_2)D^b(X_1)$$

by

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^U()=𝐑p_1(U\stackrel{𝐋}{}p_2^{}()),$$

If $`U`$ is invertible then $`\mathrm{\Psi }^U`$ is a Fourier–Mukai functor, an equivalence of triangulated categories. An invertible kernel also induces an isomorphism

$$\psi ^U:H^{}(X_2,)H^{}(X_1,)$$

on cohomology, defined by

$$\psi ^U()=p_1(v(U)p_2^{}()).$$

$`\mathrm{\Psi }^U`$ and $`\psi ^U`$ are compatible via the Mukai map $`v`$. For Calabi–Yau manifolds of dimension at most four, $`\psi ^U`$ is an isometry with respect to the Mukai pairing.

Finally if $`X_0`$ is a complex manifold and $`\alpha H^2(X_0,𝒪_{X_0}^{})`$, then there is a notion of an $`\alpha `$-twisted sheaf on $`X_0`$. This can either be thought of as a sheaf living on the gerbe over $`X_0`$ defined by $`\alpha `$, or more explicitly as a collection of sheaves on an open cover where the gluing conditions are twisted by a Cech representative of $`\alpha `$.

## 2 Mirror symmetry and diffeomorphisms

The mirror symmetry story begins with the data $`(Y,I_0,\omega _0)`$, where $`Y`$ is a differentiable manifold, $`I_0`$ is a Calabi–Yau complex structure on $`Y`$, and $`\omega _0`$ is a Kähler form in this complex structure giving rise to a unique Ricci-flat metric222The $`B`$-field is discussed in Remark 2.4 below.. The mirror of $`(Y,I_0,\omega _0)`$ is conjecturally found using the following procedure.

###### Procedure 2.1

Step 1 Choose a degeneration $`𝒴\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ of $`Y_0`$ over a punctured multi-disc $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ with mid-point $`P\mathrm{\Delta }`$, which is a complex cusp (large complex structure limit point), an intersection of boundary divisors of the complex moduli space with prescribed Hodge theoretic behaviour .

Step 2 The choice of complex cusp $`P`$ induces a torus fibration on $`Y_0`$ via a degeneration process . Arrange this fibration so that its fibres are (special) Lagrangian with respect to the complex structure $`I_0`$ and the symplectic form $`\omega _0`$.

Step 3 Dualizing this fibration (Strominger–Yau–Zaslow ) should yield, after an appropriate compactification, a compact differentiable manifold $`X`$, together with an isomorphism

$$\mathrm{mir}_P:H^{}(Y,)H^{}(X,),$$

relating algebraic cohomology to transcendental cohomology, and compatible with filtrations coming from the Leray spectral sequence of the torus fibration on the transcendental part and degree on the algebraic part.

Step 4 The symplectic form $`\omega _0`$ and complex structure $`I_0`$ on $`Y`$ induce a Calabi–Yau structure $`(X,I_0^{})`$ and a symplectic form $`\omega _0^{}`$ on the manifold $`X`$.

Step 5 According to Kontsevich’ homological mirror symmetry conjecture  (cf. also Manin ), the statement that $`(Y,I_0,\omega _0)`$ and $`(X,I_0^{},\omega _0^{})`$ are mirror symmetric is expressed by a equivalence of categories determined by the torus fibration,

$$Mir_P:D^b\mathrm{Fuk}(Y,\omega _0)D^b(X_0).$$

On the left hand side, $`D^b\mathrm{Fuk}(Y,\omega _0)`$ is the derived Fukaya category, which is (conjecturally) constructed from Lagrangian submanifolds and flat bundles on them. This equivalence is compatible with the cohomology isomorphism $`\mathrm{mir}_P`$ of Step 3.

My main interest in this paper lies in an understanding of the action of the diffeomorphism group $`Diff^+(Y)`$ of $`Y`$ on the above data. A diffeomorphism $`\gamma Diff^+(Y)`$ maps a triple $`(Y,I_0,\omega _0)`$ to a new triple $`(Y,\gamma ^{}I_0,\gamma ^{}\omega _0)`$ and in particular it defines a symplectomorphism $`(Y,\gamma ^{}\omega _0)(Y,\omega _0)`$. Lifting $`\gamma `$ to a graded symplectomorphism  induces an equivalence

$$\stackrel{~}{\gamma }:D^b\mathrm{Fuk}(Y,\gamma ^{}\omega _0)\stackrel{}{}D^b\mathrm{Fuk}(Y,\omega _0)\mathrm{mod}[1]$$

i.e. well-defined up to translation; this comes from the fact that the lifting of $`\gamma `$ to a graded symplectomorphism is only well-defined up to shift.

Perform Procedure 2.1 on the pair of Calabi–Yau triples $`(Y,I_0,\omega _0)`$ and $`(Y,\gamma ^{}I_0,\gamma ^{}\omega _0)`$ with respect to the same complex cusp $`P`$ to obtain mirrors $`(X,I_0^{},\omega _0^{})`$ and $`(X,I_0^{\prime \prime },\omega _0^{\prime \prime })`$. Then there is a diagram of categorical equivalences up to translation, where the bottom arrow is defined by the others:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}D^b\mathrm{Fuk}(Y,\gamma ^{}\omega _0)& \stackrel{\stackrel{~}{\gamma }}{}& D^b\mathrm{Fuk}(Y,\omega _0)\\ Mir_P& & Mir_P\\ D^b(X,I_0^{\prime \prime })& \stackrel{\mathrm{\Psi }_0}{}& D^b(X,I_0^{})\end{array}$$

Further, the categorical equivalence $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ induces a cohomology isomorphism $`\psi _0`$ which must be compatible via the isomorphism $`\mathrm{mir}_P`$ with the action of $`\gamma ^{}`$ on $`H^{}(Y,)`$.

To push this further, assume that $`(I_t,\omega _t)`$ is a family of complex structures and compatible symplectic forms on $`Y`$ deforming $`(I_0,\omega _0)`$. The diffeomorphism $`\gamma `$ induces a family of equivalences

$$\stackrel{~}{\gamma }:D^b\mathrm{Fuk}(Y,\gamma ^{}\omega _t)\stackrel{}{}D^b\mathrm{Fuk}(Y,\omega _t)\mathrm{mod}[1].$$

The mirrors of $`(Y,I_t,\omega _t)`$ and $`(Y,\gamma ^{}I_t,\gamma ^{}\omega _t)`$ with respect to the cusp $`P`$ are deformations $`(X,I_t^{},\omega _t^{})`$ and $`(X,I_t^{\prime \prime },\omega _t^{\prime \prime })`$ of the original $`(X,I_0^{},\omega _t^{})`$ and $`(X,I_0^{\prime \prime },\omega _t^{\prime \prime })`$. Consequently, there are induced equivalences

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_t:D^b(X,I_t^{\prime \prime })\stackrel{}{}D^b(X,I_t^{})\mathrm{mod}[1].$$

###### Slogan 2.2

Diffeomorphisms of the manifold $`Y`$ induce families of equivalences of derived categories up to translation over the complex moduli space of the mirror manifold $`X`$.

In the next Section, this slogan will be translated into a precise conjecture. The rest of the paper is providing evidence and examples. Before that however, there are two important points to clear up.

###### Remark 2.3

In order to be able to compare cohomology actions, it is necessary to work with marked moduli spaces of Calabi–Yau varieties in the procedure described above. This implies that the moduli spaces arising will typically be non-connected; this issue already arises for K3 surfaces. The procedure outlined above tacitly assumed that for $`\gamma Diff^+(Y)`$, the complex structures $`I_0`$ and $`\gamma ^{}I_0`$ will be in the same connected component of the (marked) moduli space of complex structures on $`Y`$, and thus the same complex cusp $`P`$ may be used to form the mirror. In general, several components of the marked moduli space will contain complex structures related by diffeomorphisms. The way out is to pick a full set of components of the complex structure moduli space of $`Y`$ containing structures related by diffeomorphisms, and fix a complex cusp $`P_i`$ in each one of them in a compatible way so that the topological mirror $`X`$ and the cohomology map $`\mathrm{mir}_P`$ are the same for all cusps. Then the procedure described above is accurate. I tacitly assume this extension of the setup everywhere below.

###### Remark 2.4

The above discussion ignores one crucial piece of data present in mirror symmetry, namely the $`B`$-field. In this remark I want to argue that, possibly under an extra assumption in the case of threefolds, I can consistently restrict to the case of vanishing $`B`$-field on the holomorphic side of mirror symmetry. The generalization of the present ideas to the case of arbitrary $`B`$-fields is left for future work.

Physical mirror symmetry deals with quadruples $`(Y,I_0,\omega _0,B_0)`$; here $`B_0H^2(Y,/)`$ is the $`B`$-field on the Calabi–Yau manifold $`(Y,I_0)`$. The mirror of $`(Y,I_0,\omega _0,B_0)`$ is a quadruple $`(X,I_0^{},\omega _0^{},B_0^{})`$. According to a physics proposal originally formulated in the context of K-theory, for nonzero $`B`$-fields Kontsevich’ homological mirror symmetry conjecture should take a form of an equivalence of categories

$$Mir_P:D^b\mathrm{Fuk}(Y,\omega _0,B_0)D^b(X,I_0^{},B_0^{});$$

see for example Kapustin–Orlov . The category $`D^b\mathrm{Fuk}(Y,\omega _0,B_0)`$ on the left hand side should be a derived Fukaya-type category where the bundles on Lagrangian submanifolds are equipped with connections whose curvature is given by the restriction of $`B`$. For the current picture this is not a serious issue as diffeomorphisms should still give equivalences between these generalized derived Fukaya categories.

More importantly, the category on the right hand side should be a version of the derived category of coherent sheaves on $`(X,I_0^{})`$. More precisely, consider the natural map

$$\delta :H^2(X_0,/)H^2(X_0,𝒪_{X_0}^{}).$$

Suppose first that the class $`B`$ has torsion image in $`H^2(X_0,𝒪_{X_0}^{})`$. In this case $`D^b(X_0,B_0^{})`$ should be the derived category of $`\delta (B_0^{})`$-twisted coherent sheaves $`D^b(X_0,\delta (B_0^{}))`$. If $`\delta (B)`$ is non-torsion, then $`D^b(X_0,B_0^{})`$ should be a suitable subcategory of a category of sheaves over a gerbe; for more discussion see \[14, Remark 2.6\].

Note that for elliptic curves, $`H^2(X,𝒪_X^{})=0`$ from the exponential sequence, so the derived category is not affected. However in higher dimensions, there are nontrivial twists.

Consider the case of K3 surfaces. The induced action of $`Diff^+(Y)`$ on the space parameterizing quadruples $`(X,I^{},\omega ^{},B^{})`$ is compatible via the cohomology isomorphism $`\mathrm{mir}_P`$ with the action on the rational cohomology $`H^{}(Y,)`$. Moreover, by Proposition 5.2, the cohomology isomorphism $`\mathrm{mir}_P`$ is defined over $``$. So the induced action of $`Diff^+(Y)`$ maps a zero $`B^{}`$-field to a zero $`B^{}`$-field.

In the case of Calabi–Yau threefolds, the isomorphism $`\mathrm{mir}_P`$ is not expected to be defined over $``$ but it is still defined over $``$ so it preserves torsion $`B^{}`$-fields. On the other hand, in this case the torsion subgroup of $`H^2(X,𝒪_X^{})`$ is isomorphic to the torsion subgroup of $`H^3(X,)`$. Assuming $`H^3(X,)_{\mathrm{tors}}=0`$, there are no possible torsion twists at all. As there is no known example of a smooth Calabi–Yau threefold with torsion in $`H^3`$, this restriction does not appear to be very serious.

I conclude therefore that for elliptic curves, K3 surfaces and Calabi–Yau threefolds under the assumption $`H^3(X,)_{\mathrm{tors}}=0`$, it is legitimate to set $`B^{}=0`$, as was effectively done in the above discussion.

## 3 The categorical mapping group

To translate Slogan 2.2 into a conjecture, I formalize the notion of a family of equivalences for complex structures on $`X`$. Assume that $`\pi :𝒳𝒟`$ is a family of complex projective varieties over a smooth complex base $`𝒟`$. Consider triples $`(\varphi ,\alpha ,U)`$ where

* $`S`$ is an open subset of $`𝒟`$, the complement of a countable number of closed analytic submanifolds,
* $`\varphi :S𝒟`$ is an analytic injection (not necessarily the identity), giving rise to the fibre product diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}𝒳_\varphi & & 𝒳_S\\ & & \pi \\ 𝒳_S& \stackrel{\varphi \pi }{}& S\end{array}$$

where $`\pi :𝒳_SS`$ is the restriction of the original family to $`S`$;
* $`\alpha H^2(S,𝒪_S^{})`$ is a twisting class on the base;
* $`U`$ is an object of the bounded derived category of quasi-coherent $`p^{}\alpha `$-twisted sheaves on $`𝒳_\varphi `$, whose derived restriction to the fibres of $`p`$ is isomorphic to a bounded complex of coherent sheaves on $`X_s\times X_{\varphi (s)}`$; here $`p:𝒳_\varphi S`$ is the natural map.

Let $`M(𝒳,𝒟)`$ be the set of triples under obvious identifications, namely extension of $`\varphi `$, and tensoring by a line bundle pulled back from the base $`S`$. $`M(𝒳,𝒟)`$ can be given a monoid structure by a standard procedure generalizing the composition structure on kernels; the maps $`\varphi `$ simply compose under the multiplication rule. The multiplication has a two-sided unit $`(\mathrm{id}_S,0,𝒪_{\mathrm{\Delta }_𝒳})`$ where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_𝒳𝒳\times _S𝒳`$ is the relative diagonal.

Suppose further that $`𝒳𝒟`$ is a marked family with topological fibre $`X`$, and let $`\stackrel{~}{L}_{}=H^{}(X,)`$ be the rational cohomology of the fibres.

###### Definition 3.1

The categorical mapping group $`G(𝒳,𝒟)`$ of the marked family $`\pi :𝒳𝒟`$ is the group of invertible elements $`g=(\varphi ,\alpha ,U)`$ of the monoid $`M(𝒳,𝒟)`$ satisfying the following cohomological condition333Note that the cohomology condition is vacuous if $`𝒟`$ is connected.: there should exist an isometry $`\psi _gAut(\stackrel{~}{L}_{})`$ and a commutative diagram of local systems on $`S`$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}R^{}(\varphi \pi )_{}_𝒳& & R^{}\pi _{}_𝒳\\ & & \\ \stackrel{~}{L}_{}& \stackrel{\psi _g}{}& \stackrel{~}{L}_{}.\end{array}$$

Here the vertical arrows come from the markings, and the top horizontal arrow is the isomorphism of local systems induced by the invertible relative kernel $`U`$.

The image $`G^{coh}(𝒳,𝒟)`$ of the resulting homomorphism

$$\stackrel{~}{\psi }:G(𝒳,𝒟)Aut(\stackrel{~}{L}_{}).$$

is the cohomological mapping group of the family $`𝒳𝒟`$.

For an element $`g=(\varphi ,\alpha ,U)G(𝒳,𝒟)`$, derived restriction of $`U`$ to the fibre over $`sS`$ gives a well-defined untwisted object $`U_s`$ in $`D^b(X_s\times X_{\varphi (s)})`$. An easy base change argument shows that as $`(\varphi ,\alpha ,U)`$ is invertible, $`U_s`$ is also invertible, and hence there is a Fourier–Mukai transform

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{U_s}:D^b(X_{\varphi (s)})D^b(X_s)$$

for every $`sS`$, with a well-defined cohomology action $`\psi _g`$ independent of $`sS`$.

The following main conjecture summarizes the discussion of the preceding sections.

###### Conjecture 3.2

Let $`(𝒴T,P)`$ be a family of Calabi–Yau manifolds together with a choice of complex cusp $`PT`$. Let $`X`$ be the topological mirror of $`Y`$ with respect to $`P`$; assume that $`H^3(X,)_{\mathrm{tors}}=0`$. Let $`𝒳_X`$ be the marked Calabi–Yau moduli space (Teichmüller space) of $`X`$. Then there exists a homomorphism $`\xi `$ fitting into a commutative diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}Diff^+(Y)& \stackrel{\xi }{}& G(𝒳,_X)/(\mathrm{translations})\\ \beta & & \psi \\ Aut(H^{}(Y,))& & Aut(H^{}(X,))/(\pm 1),\end{array}$$

where

* translations mean relative translations over connected components on the base $`_X`$; moreover,
* $`\beta `$ is the natural action,
* $`\psi `$ is the map associating to an element $`g`$ of the categorical mapping group its cohomology action $`\psi _g`$ and
* the bottom horizontal arrow is the canonical map induced by the isomorphism $`\mathrm{mir}_P`$ of Procedure 2.1.

The diagram gives rise to an isomorphism of groups

$$\overline{\xi }:Diff^{\mathrm{coh}}(Y),(1)/(\pm 1)G^{\mathrm{coh},\mathrm{filtr}}(𝒳,_X)/(\pm 1)$$

where

* $`Diff^{\mathrm{coh}}(Y)`$ is the image of $`Diff^+(Y)`$ in $`Aut(H^{}(Y,))`$, and
* $`G^{\mathrm{coh},\mathrm{filtr}}(𝒳,_X)`$ is the subgroup of $`G^{\mathrm{coh}}(𝒳,_X)`$ consisting of elements whose associated cohomology action preserves the Leray filtration on the transcendental cohomology of $`X`$.

###### Remark 3.3

As discussed before, a diffeomorphism only acts on the derived Fukaya category up to translation. Hence in going from diffeomorphisms to their cohomology action, I have to take account of the cohomology action of translation $`[1]`$ on the derived Fukaya category which is simply multiplication by $`(1)`$. This is reflected on the left hand side of the cohomological form of the conjecture. On the right hand side, the cohomology actions of relevant families of Fourier–Mukai transforms must preserve the Leray filtration on the transcendental part of the cohomology of $`X`$; this is mirror to the statement that diffeomorphisms preserve the degree filtration on the algebraic cohomology of $`Y`$.

## 4 Elliptic curves

The diffeomorphism group $`Diff^+(T^2)`$ of the two-torus acts via the standard $`SL(2,)`$-action on $`H^1(T^2,)`$ and trivially on $`H^2(T^2,)`$. Thus, recalling the discussion of Section 2, $`Diff^+(T^2)`$ should be realized by self-equivalences in the mirror family.

The elliptic curve is self-mirror. Choose cohomology classes dual to a collapsing circle fibre and a section of a circle fibration corresponding to the decomposition $`T^2=(/)^2`$ to fix an isomorphism

$$\mathrm{mir}_P:H^{}(T^2,)H^{}(T^2,)$$
(1)
interchanging even and odd cohomology. Let

$$𝒳=\times /[(z,\tau )(z+n+m\tau ,\tau )],m,n$$

be the universal family of marked elliptic curves together with the map

$$\pi :𝒳$$

to the marked moduli space, the upper half plane $``$.

###### Theorem 4.1

There exists a group homomorphism

$$\xi :Diff^+(T^2)G(𝒳,)/(\mathrm{translations})$$

compatible with the isomorphism $`\mathrm{mir}_P`$ and descending to an isomorphism

$$\overline{\xi }:PSL(2,)\stackrel{}{}G^{\mathrm{coh},\mathrm{filtr}}(𝒳,)/(\pm 1).$$

Sketch Proof One only has to relativize the discussion of \[26, Section 3d\]; the $`PSL(2,)`$-action on the derived category of an elliptic curve was of course already known to Mukai . There are no nontrivial twists over the base $``$ and for all elements $`(\varphi ,U)G(𝒳,)`$ in the image of $`\xi `$, the map $`\varphi `$ is the identity. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 5 K3 surfaces

### 5.1 Lattice polarized mirror symmetry

Let $`M`$ be an even non-degenerate sublattice of signature $`(1,t)`$ of the K3 lattice $`L=H^2(X,)`$. A marked ample $`M`$-polarized K3 surface is a marked $`K3`$ surface $`(Y_t,\psi )`$, which satisfies $`\psi ^1(M)Pic(Y)`$ and moreover $`\psi ^1(𝒞)`$ contains an ample class for $`𝒞`$ a chosen chamber of $`M_{}`$; for the precise definition see . For a pair $`(Y_t,\psi )`$, Hodge decomposition on the second cohomology gives the period point in

$$𝒟_M=\{z(M_{}^{}):z^2=0,z\overline{z}>0\}\underset{\delta \mathrm{\Delta }(M^{})}{}\delta ^{}$$

where $`\mathrm{\Delta }(M^{})`$ is the set of vectors in $`M^{}`$ of length $`2`$. The period domain $`𝒟_M`$ has two connected components.

###### Proposition 5.1

(\[8, Corollary 3.2\]) The period map realizes $`𝒟_M`$ as the marked moduli space of marked ample $`M`$-polarized K3 surfaces; in particular, there exists a universal marked family $`\pi :𝒴𝒟_M`$.

The mirror construction works best for a sublattice $`M`$ of $`L`$ with $`M^{}`$ containing hyperbolic planes; I assume this from now on. The choice of a pair of vectors $`\{f,f^{}\}M^{}`$ spanning a hyperbolic plane amounts to choosing a complex cusp444The choice in fact specifies a complex cusp in both components of $`𝒟_M`$; c.f. Remark 2.3. $`P𝒟_M`$. The choice of $`\{f,f^{}\}`$ in $`M^{}`$ also induces a splitting $`M^{}=\stackrel{ˇ}{M}f,f^{}`$. This defines a new sublattice $`\stackrel{ˇ}{M}`$ of $`L`$ of signature $`(1,20t)`$ and gives rise to a family $`𝒳𝒟_{\stackrel{ˇ}{M}}`$. This is the mirror family of $`𝒴𝒟_M`$. The mirror construction, under the assumption on $`M`$, is an involution: starting with the pair $`\{f,f^{}\}`$ thought of as defining a complex cusp in the boundary of $`𝒟_{\stackrel{ˇ}{M}}`$, one recovers the original $`M`$-polarized family $`𝒴𝒟_M`$. Monodromy and filtration considerations show

###### Proposition 5.2

The cohomology isometry

$$\mathrm{mir}_P:H^{}(Y,)H^{}(X,),$$

where $`Y`$, $`X`$ are thought of as fibres in $`M`$-, respectively $`\stackrel{ˇ}{M}`$-polarized families, is given by

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{mir}_P(h_0)=f^{},\mathrm{mir}_P(h_4)=f,\mathrm{mir}_P(f)=h_4,\mathrm{mir}_P(f^{})=h_0,\\ \mathrm{mir}_P(m)=m\text{ for }mh_i,f_i^{}.\end{array}$$

In particular $`\mathrm{mir}_P`$ is defined over $``$.

In the framework of Procedure 2.1, I want to start with a general ample $`M`$-polarized K3 $`(Y,I_0,\omega _0)`$ and I want to use the degeneration to the complex cusp $`P𝒟_M`$ defined by $`\{f,f^{}\}`$ in the $`M`$-polarized family $`𝒴𝒟_M`$. The cohomology class of the the Kähler form has to be orthogonal to the period, so $`\omega _0`$ is restricted to live in the subspace $`M_{}H^2(Y,)`$. This condition has to be preserved throughout the whole procedure, hence the set of diffeomorphisms has to be restricted as well. Call $`\gamma Diff^+(Y)`$ $`M`$-allowable, if $`\gamma ^{}O(L)`$ satisfies $`\gamma ^{}(M)=M`$. Let $`Diff_M^+(Y)`$ be the group of $`M`$-allowable diffeomorphisms of $`Y`$ and $`Diff_M^{\mathrm{coh}}(Y)`$ the image of $`Diff_M^+(Y)`$ in the isometry group of $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$. Note that monodromy transformations around various rational boundary components of the marked moduli space $`𝒟_M`$ are certainly $`M`$-allowable.

### 5.2 Action on cohomology

Before I proceed further, let me recall

###### Theorem 5.3

(Donaldson ) Let $`\gamma Diff^+(Y)`$ be an orientation-preserving diffeomorphism of a K3 surface. Then the induced action on cohomology preserves the orientation of positive definite three-planes in $`H^2(Y,)`$.

Comparing this theorem and the cohomology isomorphism $`\mathrm{mir}_P`$ given above leads to an important observation. Fix once and for all an orientation for the positive part of $`H^0(X)H^4(X)`$. Then for an algebraic K3 surface $`X_0`$ this, together with the real and imaginary parts of the period of $`X_0`$ and an ample class, gives an orientation to positive definite four-planes in the inner product space $`H^{}(X_0,)`$, that I call for want of a better expression the canonical orientation. If the diffeomorphism group maps, at least on the level of cohomology, surjectively onto the cohomological mapping group, then Donaldson’s theorem must have an analogue for Fourier–Mukai functors. I formulate this as555A weaker form of this conjecture was proposed independently by Markman .

###### Conjecture 5.4

Let $`\mathrm{\Psi }:D^b(Z_0)D^b(X_0)`$ be a Fourier–Mukai equivalence between derived categories of smooth projective K3 surfaces. Then the induced cohomology action $`\psi :H^{}(Z_0,)H^{}(X_0,)`$ preserves the canonical orientation of positive definite four-planes in cohomology.

### 5.3 Cohomological realization of the main conjecture

All the pieces are together; the following theorem confirms that Conjecture 3.2 can be realized on a cohomological level for mirror families of polarized K3 surfaces.

###### Theorem 5.5

Assume Conjecture 5.4. Let $`P`$ be a complex cusp in the boundary $`𝒟_M`$ of the marked moduli space of the family of ample $`M`$-polarized K3 surfaces. Let $`𝒳𝒟_{\stackrel{ˇ}{M}}`$ be the mirror family. Then there exists an isomorphism

$$\overline{\xi }:Diff_M^{\mathrm{coh}}(Y),(1)/(\pm 1)\stackrel{}{}G^{\mathrm{coh},\mathrm{filtr}}(𝒳,𝒟_{\stackrel{ˇ}{M}})/(\pm 1)$$

compatible with the isometry $`\mathrm{mir}_P`$.

Sketch Proof Let

$$\sigma \mathrm{mir}_PDiff_M^{\mathrm{coh}}(Y),(1)\mathrm{mir}_P^1O(\stackrel{~}{L})$$

be an isometry of the Mukai lattice $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$. The task is to find an element $`(\varphi ,\alpha ,U)G(𝒳,𝒟_{\stackrel{ˇ}{M}})`$ with cohomology action $`\sigma `$.

Proposition 5.2 shows that $`\sigma `$ fixes $`\stackrel{ˇ}{M}^{}=Mf,f^{}`$. Therefore the map $`\sigma ^1`$ induces an automorphism

$$\varphi :𝒟_{\stackrel{ˇ}{M}}𝒟_{\stackrel{ˇ}{M}}$$

mapping $`[z]𝒟_{\stackrel{ˇ}{M}}`$ to $`[\sigma _{}^1(z)]`$. The point about this map is that for $`s𝒟_{\stackrel{ˇ}{M}}`$, $`\sigma `$ induces a Hodge isometry from $`H^{}(X_{\varphi (s)},)`$ to $`H^{}(X_s,)`$ that by Donaldson’s Theorem 5.3 preserves the canonical orientation.

Work of Mukai  and global Torelli identifies $`X_{\varphi (s)}`$ with a moduli space of sheaves on $`X_t`$ and this can be done in a relative way over an open subset $`S𝒟_{\stackrel{ˇ}{M}}`$ in the family $`𝒳𝒟_{\stackrel{ˇ}{M}}`$. Some further arguments show that there exists a (suitably twisted) universal sheaf $`U`$ which defines an element of $`G(𝒳,𝒟_{\stackrel{ˇ}{M}})`$ with cohomology action $`\sigma `$. $`\mathrm{}`$

### 5.4 Toric families

I want to give some examples of the correspondence between diffeomorphisms and families of Fourier–Mukai transformations in toric families. Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }^3`$ be a three-dimensional reflexive lattice polyhedron . It gives rise to a toric threefold $`_\mathrm{\Delta }`$, which has a crepant toric resolution $`\stackrel{~}{}_\mathrm{\Delta }_\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

Let $`𝒳_\mathrm{\Delta }_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ be the family of anticanonical hypersurfaces $`X_t\stackrel{~}{}_\mathrm{\Delta }`$. For $`t_\mathrm{\Delta }`$, $`X_t`$ is a smooth K3 surface and there is a restriction map $`Pic(\stackrel{~}{}_\mathrm{\Delta })Pic(X_t)`$ with image $`M_\mathrm{\Delta }Pic(X_t)`$, the space of toric divisors on $`X_t`$. The equality $`M_\mathrm{\Delta }=Pic(X_t)`$ for general $`t`$ holds only under an extra condition, namely if for all one-dimensional faces $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, neither $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ nor its dual $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ contain extra lattice points in their interior. If this condition fails, and it frequently does, then the Picard lattice of $`X_t`$ is not spanned by toric divisors.

Associated to the lattice $`M_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is a family of ample $`M_\mathrm{\Delta }`$-polarized surfaces $`𝒳𝒟_{M_\mathrm{\Delta }}`$; $`𝒳_\mathrm{\Delta }_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is a subfamily of this family. However, if the above condition fails, then the general ample $`M_\mathrm{\Delta }`$-polarized K3 is not toric and $`𝒳_\mathrm{\Delta }_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is a proper subfamily of $`𝒳𝒟_{M_\mathrm{\Delta }}`$.

Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ be the dual polyhedron of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, and let $`M_\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ be the lattice of toric divisors of the Batyrev mirror family $`𝒴_\mathrm{\Delta }^{}_\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$. According to a conjecture of Dolgachev , there should exist a decomposition $`M_\mathrm{\Delta }^{}=f,f^{}\stackrel{ˇ}{M}_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ as before, together with a primitive embedding

$$i:M_\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\stackrel{ˇ}{M}_\mathrm{\Delta }.$$

This conjecture is supported by numerical evidence and can be checked in several concrete cases \[8, Section 8\]; I assume that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is chosen so that the embedding exists. The embedding $`i`$ realizes inside the period domain

$$𝒟_{M_\mathrm{\Delta }}(M_\mathrm{\Delta }^{})_{}=(\stackrel{ˇ}{M}_\mathrm{\Delta }f,f^{})_{}$$

the toric deformation space $`_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ as an explicit subdomain

$$_\mathrm{\Delta }=𝒟_{M_\mathrm{\Delta }}(M_\mathrm{\Delta }^{}f,f^{})_{}$$

(cf. \[15, Section 4.3\]).

The decomposition $`M_\mathrm{\Delta }^{}=f,f^{}\stackrel{ˇ}{M}_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ gives the family $`𝒴𝒟_{\stackrel{ˇ}{M}}`$ of marked ample $`\stackrel{ˇ}{M}_\mathrm{\Delta }`$-polarized surfaces as the mirror family of $`𝒳𝒟_{M_\mathrm{\Delta }}`$.

Turning to the specific issue of diffeomorphisms, Theorem 5.5 realizes, on the level of cohomology, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{M}_\mathrm{\Delta }`$-allowable diffeomorphisms on the family $`𝒳𝒟_{M_\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ by Fourier–Mukai functors666A word of warning: the notation used here is related to that used in Theorem 5.5 by $`M=\stackrel{ˇ}{M}_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and consequently $`\stackrel{ˇ}{M}=M_\mathrm{\Delta }`$.. The first examples are $`\stackrel{ˇ}{M}_\mathrm{\Delta }`$-allowable diffeomorphisms arising as monodromy transformations around boundary components meeting at the large complex structure limit point in the boundary of $`𝒟_{\stackrel{ˇ}{M}_\mathrm{\Delta }}`$.

###### Lemma 5.6

(\[8, 6.2\]) The monodromy transformations in boundary components meeting at the complex cusp $`P𝒟_{\stackrel{ˇ}{M}_\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ generate a group isomorphic to $`M_\mathrm{\Delta }`$. The transformation corresponding to $`dM_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ acts on the K3 lattice $`L=H^2(Y,)`$ by

$$\begin{array}{ccc}T_d(f)\hfill & =& f\hfill \\ T_d(f^{})\hfill & =& f^{}+d\frac{d^2}{2}f\hfill \\ T_d(m)\hfill & =& m(dm)f\text{ for }mf,f^{}^{}.\hfill \end{array}$$

This action fixes the lattice $`\stackrel{ˇ}{M}_\mathrm{\Delta }h_0,h_4`$ pointwise, so a glance at the definition the map $`\varphi `$ in the sketch proof of Theorem 5.5 shows that $`\varphi `$ acts trivially on $`𝒟_{M_\mathrm{\Delta }}`$. Indeed, by common wisdom, the monodromy transformation $`T_d`$ is mirrored by tensoring by the line bundle $`𝒪_{X_t}(d)`$ for $`dM_\mathrm{\Delta }Pic(X_t)`$ and $`t𝒟_{M_\mathrm{\Delta }}`$. In the relative framework, this is simply tensoring by a relative line bundle (twisted over the base if necessary).

However, as one moves away from these boundary components, diffeomorphisms with more complicated cohomology action crop up. In particular, there are diffeomorphisms $`\gamma Diff_{\stackrel{ˇ}{M}_\mathrm{\Delta }}^+(Y)`$ whose associated cohomology action $`\gamma ^{}O(L)`$ fixes every element of $`M_\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ but does not fix the whole of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{M}_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ pointwise. Hence these diffeomorphisms have mirrors with a nontrivial map $`\varphi :𝒟_{M_\mathrm{\Delta }}𝒟_{M_\mathrm{\Delta }}`$. This nontrivial map has a fixed locus which includes the toric locus $`_\mathrm{\Delta }𝒟_{M_\mathrm{\Delta }}`$. The interpretation is that these diffeomorphisms are mirrored by families of Fourier–Mukai transforms acting as self-equivalences over the toric locus $`_\mathrm{\Delta }`$, but acting by equivalences between derived categories of different K3s away from the toric locus. Compare Example 6.7.

## 6 Threefolds

### 6.1 Examples of families of self-equivalences

###### Example 6.1

Suppose that $`𝒳_X`$ is a marked family of Calabi–Yau threefolds. As in the previous section, some immediate examples of elements of $`G(𝒳,_X)`$ come from line bundles. Let $`dH^2(X,)`$; in the threefold case $`d`$ is automatically the first Chern class of a line bundle $`𝒪_{X_s}(d)Pic(X_s)`$ on the fibres $`X_s`$ for $`s_X`$. There is a relative line bundle $`𝒪_𝒳(d)`$, possibly twisted over the base, which when thought of as a sheaf on the diagonal $`\mathrm{\Delta }_𝒳𝒳\times __X𝒳`$ gives an invertible relative kernel and so an element of $`G(𝒳,_X)`$ with $`\varphi `$ the identity on $`_X`$. The fibrewise Fourier–Mukai transform is tensoring by $`𝒪_{X_s}(d)`$ in the derived category of $`X_s`$. These elements of $`G(𝒳,_X)`$ should again mirror monodromy transformations around components of the boundary of $`_X`$ meeting at the large structure limit point $`P^{}\delta _X`$.

###### Example 6.2

A more interesting case where families of Fourier–Mukai self-equivalences arise is that of families of twist functors coming from contractions. Consider a Calabi–Yau threefold $`X_0`$ together with a flopping (or Type I) contraction $`X_0\overline{X}_0`$, a birational contraction with exceptional locus of dimension one. There is a diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}𝒞& & 𝒳& & \overline{X}\\ & & & & \\ & & S& & \end{array}$$

where $`S_X`$ is a dense open subset in a connected component of the marked Calabi–Yau moduli space of $`X_0`$, and $`𝒞`$ is flat over $`S`$ intersecting every fibre in a chain of rational curves. The structure sheaf $`𝒪_𝒞`$ restricts to the fibre $`X_s`$ as $`𝒪_{𝒞_s}`$, a spherical sheaf in the sense of Seidel–Thomas . This sheaf gives rise to a twist functor, a Fourier–Mukai self-equivalence of $`D^b(X_s)`$. There is an invertible relative kernel $`U`$, giving rise to an element $`(\varphi ,0,U)`$ of $`G(𝒳,_X)`$ with $`\varphi `$ the identical embedding of $`S`$ in $`_X`$ and restricting to the twisting kernel on $`X_s\times X_s`$ for $`sS`$.

###### Example 6.3

Suppose that a Calabi–Yau threefold $`X_0`$ has a Type II contraction, a birational morphism $`X_0\overline{X}_0`$ contracting an irreducible divisor $`E_0`$ to a point. $`E_0`$ is possibly non-normal but in any case it is a del Pezzo surface i.e. $`\omega _{E_0}`$ is ample. In this case, there is a diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}& & 𝒳& & \overline{X}\\ & & & & \\ & & S& & \end{array}$$

where $`S_X`$ is dense in a connected component of the marked moduli space and the exceptional locus $``$ is a flat family of surfaces over $`S`$ intersecting $`X_t`$ in a del Pezzo $`E_s`$.

The structure sheaf $`𝒪_{E_s}`$ of a del Pezzo surface is exceptional in the sense that there are no higher Ext’s, so by \[26, Proposition 3.15\], its pushforward to $`X_s`$ is spherical. It defines a twist functor, a self-equivalence of the derived category of $`X_s`$. The construction works again over $`S`$; there is an invertible relative kernel defined by the family of surfaces $``$ over $`S`$ which gives an element of $`G(𝒳,_X)`$ with $`\varphi `$ still being the identity.

The elements of $`G(𝒳,_X)`$ given in Examples 6.26.3 should mirror monodromies around various other components of the boundary of moduli as discussed by Horja  and more recently by Aspinwall . In particular, some of these transformations should mirror Dehn twists in Lagrangian three-spheres in the mirror, which are known to arise in degenerations to threefolds with double points; this was one of the starting points for Seidel and Thomas .

### 6.2 An example with a nontrivial action on moduli

In this section, I give an example of an element of the categorical mapping group with a nontrivial map $`\varphi `$ on the base of moduli. The example comes from birational contractions on Calabi–Yau threefolds of Type III.

###### Example 6.4

Let $`f_0:X_0\overline{X}_0`$ be a birational contraction contracting a $`^1`$-bundle $`E_0`$ to a curve $`C_0`$ of genus at least two. On a dense open subset $`S`$ of the marked moduli space of $`X`$, the contraction extends to a diagram

$$\begin{array}{cccc}f:& 𝒳& & \overline{𝒳}\\ & & & \\ & S.& & \end{array}$$

The main new feature is that $`f_s`$ remains divisorial only for $`s`$ in a proper submanifold $`S^{\mathrm{div}}S`$. At a general point $`sS`$, the contraction $`f_s:X_s\overline{X}_s`$ is of flopping type, i.e. it contracts a codimension two locus; I assume for simplicity that it contracts disjoint $`^1`$s to nodes.

By \[16, Theorem 11.10\], there is a flop in the family

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}𝒳& & & & 𝒳^+\\ & & & & \\ & & S& & \end{array}$$

For $`sSS^{\mathrm{div}}`$ where $`f_s`$ is of flopping type, $`X_sX_s^+`$ is a classical flop. For $`sS^{\mathrm{div}}`$, the map $`X_sX_s^+`$ is the identity morphism.

The crucial point is that $`𝒳^+S`$ is the pullback of the original family $`𝒳S`$ under a nontrivial map $`\varphi :SS`$. The fixed locus of $`\varphi `$ is exactly $`S^{\mathrm{div}}`$. There is an embedding

$$𝒳\times _{\overline{X}}𝒳^+𝒳\times _S𝒳^+$$

and by definition, the latter space is isomorphic to $`𝒳\times _\varphi 𝒳`$. Thus the structure sheaf of $`𝒳\times _{\overline{X}}𝒳^+`$ gives an element $`UD^b(𝒳\times _\varphi 𝒳)`$.

###### Theorem 6.5

The triple $`(\varphi ,0,U)`$ gives an element of $`G(𝒳,_X)`$.

Sketch Proof An easy argument shows that to prove that $`(\varphi ,0,U)`$ is invertible, it is enough to show that the restriction is invertible on fibres. For $`sSS^{\mathrm{div}}`$, $`U`$ restricts to $`X_s\times X_s^+`$ as the structure sheaf of $`X_s\times _{\overline{X}_s}X_s^+`$. This is the well-known kernel of Bondal and Orlov \[4, Theorem 3.6\], giving the isomorphism of derived categories under a classical flop.

For points $`sS^{\mathrm{div}}`$, the restriction of $`U`$ to $`X_s\times X_s`$ is the kernel $`𝒪_{X_s\times _{\overline{X}_s}X_s}`$. The method of Bridgeland  can be used to show that this sheaf is a universal sheaf for a certain moduli problem on $`X_s`$ with fine moduli space $`X_s`$, and hence is an invertible kernel on $`X_s\times X_s`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 6.6

The existence of the above kernel arising from Type III contractions was conjectured by Horja in , although he used a different expression \[12, (4.35)\]. In  he proves independently and by a different method that it is invertible. However, he does not discuss the relation to flops.

I illustrate the above discussion by a well-studied toric family.

###### Example 6.7

Start with a general degree eight hypersurface

$$\overline{X}_0^4[1^2,2^3]$$

in weighted projective four-space. Standard toric technology or a simple blowup give a crepant resolution $`f_0:X_0\overline{X}_0`$, which is a Type III contraction contracting a $`^1`$-bundle $`E_0`$ in $`X_0`$ to a genus $`3`$ curve $`C_0`$ in $`\overline{X}_0`$. All toric deformations are resolutions of degree eight hypersurfaces in the weighted projective space; however, $`h^{2,1}(X_0)=86`$ whereas the octic has only 83 deformations, so some deformations of $`X_0`$ are missing.

To find the other deformations, embed $`^4[1^2,2^3]`$ into $`^5`$ using $`𝒪(2)`$ as a hypersurface given by the equation $`\{z_1z_2=z_3^2\}`$. The variety $`\overline{X}_0`$ becomes a complete intersection

$$\overline{X}_0\left\{\begin{array}{ccc}z_1z_2\hfill & =& z_3^2\hfill \\ f_4(z_i)\hfill & =& 0\hfill \end{array}\right\}^5,$$

of a general quartic and a quadric of rank three in $`^5`$. The curve of singularities is along $`\{z_1=z_2=z_3=0\}`$. Here more deformations of $`X_0`$ are visible: I can deform either the quadric or the quartic. Deformations of $`f_4`$ contribute 83 moduli, which are exactly the toric deformations; there are 3 further deformation directions deforming the quadric to a quadric of rank four777Deformations of $`\overline{X}_0`$ to non-singular complete intersections do not lift to deformations of the crepant resolution $`X_0`$.. The generic such deformation

$$\overline{X}_t=\left\{\begin{array}{ccc}z_1z_2\hfill & =& z_3^2t^2z_4^2\hfill \\ f_4(z_i)\hfill & =& 0\hfill \end{array}\right\}^5$$

has four nodes at $`\{z_1=z_2=z_3=z_4=0\}`$ and a pair of small resolutions $`X_t^\pm `$, which are deformations of $`X_0`$:

$$X_t^\pm =\left\{\begin{array}{ccc}z_1u_1\hfill & =& (z_3\pm tz_4)u_2\hfill \\ (z_3tz_4)u_1\hfill & =& z_2u_2\hfill \\ f_4(z_i)\hfill & =& 0\hfill \end{array}\right\}^1\times ^5.$$

For $`t0`$, the birational map

$$\psi _t:X_t^+X_t^{}$$

is a simple flop, flopping four copies of $`^1`$ over the four nodes of $`\overline{X}_t`$. By the main result of , for general $`t`$ the varieties $`X_t^\pm `$ are not isomorphic; what is more important from the point of view of the present discussion is that the flopped family explicitly appears as the original family under the base change $`\varphi :tt`$.

In the connected component $`𝒳_X`$ of the Calabi–Yau moduli space of $`X_0`$, there is a sublocus $`_X^{\mathrm{div}}_X`$ where the contraction $`f_0`$ deforms as a divisorial contraction; this is also the fixed locus of the base change map $`\varphi `$. On the other hand, as discussed above, $`_X^{\mathrm{div}}`$ also equals $`_X^{\mathrm{toric}}`$, the toric deformation space of $`X_0`$. The element $`(\varphi ,0,U)`$ of $`G(𝒳,_X)`$ guaranteed by Theorem 6.5 acts as a self-equivalence on the toric deformations of $`X_0`$, but acts by Fourier–Mukai transforms between different (generically non-isomorphic) deformations away from the toric locus. This is the same behaviour as that found at the end of Section 5.4.

### 6.3 Relation to the global Torelli problem

The global Torelli theorem for K3 surfaces is an important tool in the proof of the cohomological form of Conjecture 3.2 for K3 surfaces. For Calabi–Yau threefolds, the situation appears to be exactly the opposite. As an invertible kernel induces a Hodge isometry on $`H^3`$, the following holds:

###### Proposition 6.8

Suppose that $`𝒳_X`$ is a component of the marked moduli space of a Calabi–Yau threefold. Assume that there is an element $`(\varphi ,\alpha ,U)G(𝒳,_X)`$ such that for general $`s_X`$, the varieties $`X_s`$ and $`X_{\varphi (s)}`$ are not isomorphic. (In particular, $`\varphi `$ is not the identity.) Then the global Torelli theorem fails for the family: the polarized (rational) Hodge structure on middle cohomology does not determine the general variety in the family up to isomorphism.

The counterexample to global Torelli given in  indeed comes from the nontrivial element of $`G(𝒳,_X)`$ of Theorem 6.5. Some conjectural examples of Calabi–Yau threefold families with a family of Fourier–Mukai transforms with nontrivial $`\varphi `$ have been constructed by Andrei Căldăraru \[6, Chapter 6\]. These examples are of a very different flavour; they are elliptic fibrations without a section, the Fourier–Mukai transform coming from changing to a different elliptic fibration with the same Jacobian. The framework presented here suggests that counterexamples to global Torelli arising from families of Fourier–Mukai transforms should be rather more common than hitherto suspected. However, one may speculate that the isomorphism of the transcendental part of Hodge structures (in this case simply $`H^3`$) may imply the isomorphism of derived categories; this would be at the end of the day in complete agreement with the K3 case. At least for cohomology with integral coefficients, there appears to be no known counterexample to this speculation.

Current address: Math. Inst., University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK

Email: balazs@maths.warwick.ac.uk


format: text

text:
# Classical mechanism for negative magnetoresistance in two dimensions

## Abstract

The classical two-dimensional problem of non-interacting electrons scattered by a static impurity potential in the presence of magnetic field is investigated both analytically and numerically. A strong negative magnetoresistance exists in such a system, due to freely circling electrons, which are not taken into account by the Boltzmann-Drude approach. A parabolic magnetoresistance is found at low fields.

PACS numbers: 05.60.+w, 73.40.-c, 73.50.Jt

——————————————————————

The negative magnetoresistance, i.e. decrease of resistance in magnetic field, frequently observed in semiconductors, as well as in metals, remained a mystery for a long time, until Altshuler et al  explained this phenomenon by quantum interference effects (weak localization). Extensive experimental studies of magnetoresistance, mostly in 2D semiconductor structures, have revealed that, apparently, there are two distinct types of negative magnetoresistance: (i) a small drop of resistivity observed at low fields, such that the classical parameter $`\beta =\omega _c\tau `$ is small and (ii) a relatively large (up to 50%) decrease of resistivity at $`\beta `$$`\stackrel{>}{}`$$`1`$ or even at $`\beta >>1`$. Negative magnetoresistance of type (ii) is observed before the onset of Shubnikov-De Haas oscillations and may continue as a background trend after the oscillations set in (see, for example, Refs. \[2-5\]. In some instances, the small low-field dip of type (i) is superimposed on a smooth overall decrease of resistivity. Most of the studies were devoted to the low-field magnetoresistance of type (i), which is very well explained by the weak localization correction for non-interacting electrons . As to the high-field effect (ii), it is not so well understood, and is either attributed to the effect of electron-electron interaction , which was considered theoretically in Refs. , , or left without any explanation.

We recall that the simple Drude approach yealds zero magnetoresistance. The Drude conductivity tensor is given by:

$$\sigma _{xx}=\frac{\sigma _0}{1+\beta ^2},\sigma _{xy}=\frac{\sigma _0\beta }{1+\beta ^2},$$
$`(1)`$
where $`\sigma _0=ne^2\tau /m`$ is the zero-field conductivity, $`n`$ is the electron concentration, $`e`$ and $`m`$ are the electron charge and effective mass respectively, $`\tau `$ is the momentum relaxation time, $`\beta =\omega _c\tau `$, and $`\omega _c=eB/mc`$ is the electron cyclotron frequency. For the resistivity tensor it follows: $`\rho _{xx}=\rho _0=1/\sigma _0`$, $`\rho _{xy}=\beta /\sigma _0=B/nec`$, and therefore the longitudinal resistivity is independent of the magnetic field. This result applies to degenerate electrons for which the time $`\tau `$, entering Eq. (1) should be taken at the Fermi energy (for nondegenerate electrons one should take into account the dependence of the scattering time $`\tau `$ on the electron energy, which, after averaging Eqs. (1) over the Boltzmann energy distribution, results in a positive magnetoresistance).

In this report, we draw attention to a simple classical mechanism for negative magnetoresistance. We consider non-interacting 2D electrons with a given energy (the Fermi energy) scattered by short-range impurity centers in the presence of a magnetic field perpendicular to the 2D plane, and we show that for any type of scattering a strong negative magnetoresistance should exist for $`\beta >>1`$. We perform computer simulations of the electron dynamics in such a system and find an excellent agreement between the numerical results and a very simple theory which is based on previously known results. Moreover we show for the first time that the magnetoresistance is parabolic at low fields.

The problem was first studied in the pioneering work of Baskin et al, and more recently by Bobylev et al , who considered specifically the 2D Lorentz model (scattering by hard disks) and derived the main results relevant for the further discussion.

The main idea put forward in Refs.,  is that, except for the case of small $`\beta `$, the Boltzmann-Drude approach does not work, even as a first approximation, because of the existence of ”circling” electrons, which never collide with the short-range scattering centers, the fraction of such electrons being

$$P=\mathrm{exp}(2\pi R/\mathrm{})=\mathrm{exp}(2\pi /\beta ),$$
$`(2)`$
where $`R=v/\omega _c`$ is the cyclotron radius, $`v`$ is the electron (Fermi) velocity, and $`\mathrm{}=v\tau `$ is the electron mean free path. Contrary to the assumption intrinsic to the Boltzmann-Drude approach, an electron which happens to make one collisionless cycle will stay on its cyclotron orbit forever. The behavior of the rest of electrons (the ”wandering” electrons, in terms of Ref. ), whose fraction is $`1P`$, is controlled by the parameter $`NR^2`$, the number of scatterers within the cyclotron orbit, $`N`$ being the impurity concentration. For $`NR^2>>1`$ they behave basically as predicted by the Drude theory, with an important modification: after a collision with a given scatterer there is a probability $`P`$ that the electron will recollide with the same scatterer without experiencing any other collisions. As a result, for $`\beta >>1`$ the electron will recollide with the same impurity center many times, and its trajectory will have a form of a rosette, sweeping a circular area of radius $`2R`$ around the impurity center . Since the number of impurities inside this area, $`4\pi NR^2`$, is large, eventually the electron will collide with one of them, and thus continue its diffusion in the 2D plane. As it follows from the results of Ref. , frequent recollisons with the same center lead to the isotropization of scattering, so that the effective $`\tau `$ in Eq. (1) becomes field-dependent. This effect is absent if the scattering is isotropic.

At strong fields, when the parameter $`NR^2`$ becomes small enough, the rosettes around different scatterers do not overlap anymore, the colliding electrons become localized and give zero contribution to both $`\sigma _{xx}`$ and $`\sigma _{xy}`$. This means that a percolation transition should occur . The calculated threshold is $`(NR^2)_c=0.36`$ .

Thus, there are two characteristic values of the magnetic field, $`B_1`$ defined by $`\omega _c=1/\tau `$ ($`\beta =1`$), and $`B_2`$ defined by $`\omega _c=v\sqrt{N}`$ ($`NR^2=1`$). The ratio $`B_1/B_2=(Nd^2)^{1/2}<<1`$, where $`d`$ is the scattering cross-section, is the small parameter of the theory.

For the simpler case of isotropic scattering and $`B<<B_2`$ ($`NR^2>>1`$), it follows from the results of Ref.  that the conductivity tensor for wandering electrons is given simply by the conventional Drude expressions, Eq. (1), with an additional factor $`(1P)`$ in both $`\sigma _{xx}`$ and $`\sigma _{xy}`$. The circling electrons behave like free electrons with an effective concentration $`nP`$, giving a zero contribution to $`\sigma _{xx}`$, but contributing a term $`P\sigma _0/\beta =Pnec/B`$ to $`\sigma _{xy}`$, and this is the reason why the magnetoresistance is negative. This role of circling electrons was overlooked in Ref. , but was recognized later  (see also Refs. ,).

Thus, the conductivity tensor is given by:

$$\sigma _{xx}=\sigma _0\frac{1P}{1+\beta ^2},$$
$`(3a)`$
$$\sigma _{xy}=\sigma _0\left((1P)\frac{\beta }{1+\beta ^2}+P\frac{1}{\beta }\right),$$
$`(3b)`$
As a consequence, for the resistivity tensor we obtain

$$\rho _{xx}=\rho _0\frac{1P}{1+P^2/\beta ^2},\rho _{xy}=\rho _0\beta \frac{1+P/\beta ^2}{1+P^2/\beta ^2}.$$
$`(4)`$
Formulas equivalent to Eqs. (3,4) were previously obtained by Baskin and Entin  for scattering by randomly positioned antidots. The expression for $`\rho _{xx}`$ clearly exhibits negative magnetoresistance. Since the terms $`P/\beta ^2`$ and $`P^2/\beta ^2`$ are small for any $`\beta `$, Eqs. (4) are very similar to

$$\rho _{xx}=\rho _0(1P),\rho _{xy}=\rho _0\beta =\frac{B}{nec},$$
$`(5)`$
with an accuracy better than than 2% for $`\rho _{xx}`$, and better than 4% for $`\rho _{xy}`$. Note, that at low fields Eqs. (4,5) predict an exponentially small magnetoresistance.

Before further discussion, let us present the results of our numerical simulations. In our model a point particle (electron) with a given absolute value of its velocity, v, is scattered by disks of diameter $`d`$ randomly positioned on a plane inside a square box of edge length $`L`$ (we take $`L/d=1000`$ to be sure that $`L`$ stays more than an order of magnitude larger than the electronic mean-free path). Periodic boundary conditions are imposed at the edges of the square box. Both the hard-disk (Lorentz) model, which exhibits anisotropic scattering, and a modified model with isotropic scattering are studied. To characterize the coverage, we introduce a dimensionless concentration of scatterers $`c=\pi Nd^2/4`$, which was changed from $`c=0.025`$ to $`c=0.2`$. Studies of the percolation phenomena are beyond the scope of the present study.

In the simulation, we first choose an initial electron position at random with an initial velocity along the $`x`$-direction. In a magnetic field perpendicular to the plane the electron trajectory is made of successive circular arcs of radius $`R`$. For each collision, we determine the intersections of the trajectory with the disk periphery (the impact point), which gives us the impact parameter, $`b`$, and calculate the scattering angle, $`\varphi `$, accordingly. We follow the electron velocities $`v_x(t)`$ and $`v_y(t)`$ during a time $`t=20\tau `$ sufficient to get reliable results for the integral below, and calculate the components of the diffusion tensor by the standard formula:

$$D_{ij}=\frac{1}{2}_0^{\mathrm{}}<v_i(0)v_j(t)>𝑑t.$$
$`(6)`$
For each value of field and disk concentration we take the average over $`10^2`$ independent disk configurations, and, for each configuration, over $`10^6`$ independent trials for the initial electron position. Of course, at $`B=0`$, the trajectories are straight-line segments and $`D_{xy}`$ should vanish (this provides a nice test for the numerical precision). The conductivity tensor being proportional to the diffusion tensor, the components of the resistivity $`\rho _{ij}`$ are calculated as $`D_{ij}/(D_{xx}^2+D_{xy}^2)`$, with an appropriate normalization. For the Lorentz model numerical calculations of this type were previously performed  with an emphasis on the percolation phenomenon.

Fig. 1 shows examples of simulated circling and wandering trajectories for two values of magnetic field. The circling electrons give undamped oscillating contributions to the velocity correlation functions in Eq. (6), accordingly, the integral in Eq. (6), strictly speaking, does not converge at $`t=\mathrm{}`$, but is an oscillating function of the upper limit. An average over these oscillations is performed. The same result could be obtained if a small damping of these oscillations were introduced (due, for example, to weak phonon scattering).

The numerical results for $`\rho _{xx}`$ as a function of $`\beta `$ for the model with isotropic scattering are presented in Fig. 2 (top). The resistivity is normalized to the Boltzmann-Drude zero-field value, $`\rho _0`$. The thick line is the theoretical curve predicted by Eq. (4). One can see that the theoretical and numerical curves are qualitatively similar and the quantitative agreement becomes better as $`c`$ decreases. In the limit $`c0`$ the numerical results converge to the theoretical curve, as they should .

Note that for finite $`c`$ the value of the zero-field resistivity is higher than the Boltzmann value $`\rho _0`$. The relative correction for small $`c`$ is proportional to $`c\mathrm{ln}(1/c)`$ and is due to recollisions with the same impurity, which are not accounted for by the Boltzmann equation . Note also, that the numerical results for finite $`c`$ approach the limiting theoretical curve from above for $`\beta <2`$, and from below for $`\beta >2`$. This may be qualitatively explained as follows. On the one hand, at small $`\beta `$ the resistivity for finite $`c`$ is higher than the $`c0`$ Boltzmann value due to the $`c\mathrm{ln}(1/c)`$ correction. We have found analytically that in magnetic field this correction decreases quadratically in $`\beta `$, thus giving a parabolic magnetoresistance proportional to $`c\beta ^21/NR^2`$. On the other hand, at large $`\beta `$ we are on the way to the percolation threshold, where $`\rho _{xx}`$ (but not $`\rho _{xy}`$!) becomes zero. So, obviously, for large $`\beta `$ and finite $`c`$ the resistivity should be lower than the limiting value given by Eq. (4) .

Fig. 2 (bottom) displays quite similar results obtained for the hard disk Lorentz model (anisotropic scattering). The theoretical curve (thick dashed line) was calculated using the results of Ref.  for the wandering electrons and adding the contribution of circling electrons, as explained above. In both cases all the numerical curves for different $`c`$ cross the limiting theoretical curve at the same point $`\beta =2`$ (within our numerical precision). We have no explanation for this surprising finding so far.

One of the reasons, why the finite $`c`$ corrections are of interest, is that Eq. (4) predicts exponentially small magnetoresistance for small values of $`\beta `$. Corrections to this formula make the magnetic field dependence parabolic and thus define the magnetoresistance at low fields. In order to isolate the $`1/NR^2`$ terms in magnetoresistance, we look at the difference

$$\delta =\left(\frac{\rho _{xx}(B)\rho _{xx}(0)}{\rho _{xx}(0)}\right)_{num}\left(\frac{\rho _{xx}(B)\rho _{xx}(0)}{\rho _{xx}(0)}\right)_{th}.$$
$`(7)`$
Here the second term in the right hand side is the normalized magnetoresistance, given by Eq. (4) for isotropic scattering, or by a similar formula taking care of the magnetic field dependence of $`\tau `$ for the anisotropic case. This term represents the limit $`NR^20`$. The first term is the normalized magnetoresistance found numerically.

This difference, as a function of $`1/NR^2`$ is presented in Fig. 3 for both the isotropic and anisotropic scattering and for different values of $`c`$. One can see that all the calculated points reasonably fit a universal linear dependence, which corresponds to a quadratic dependence on magnetic field. While such a dependence for small $`\beta `$ could be anticipated, it is surprising that it persists for quite large values of $`\beta `$. Thus at low magnetic field ($`\beta <1`$) the normalized resistivity behaves like $`10.15/NR^2`$, the slope being deduced from Fig. 3. For $`\beta `$$`\stackrel{>}{}`$$`1`$ the magnetoresistance is well described by Eqs. (4,5) or, for anisotropic scattering, by similar formulas, which take care of the magnetic field dependence of $`\tau `$.

The classical approach is justified if the number of Landau levels below the Fermi energy is large. However, it is irrelevant whether one can describe the individual scattering events classically (when the electron wave length is small compared to the size of the scatterer) or one needs a quantum-mechanical description (in the opposite case). So long as weak localisation corrections may be neglected, the differential scattering cross-section, even though calculated quantum-mechanically, may be used in the framework of a classical transport theory. We also remark that an infinite lifetime of the circling electrons is certainly an idealization. In reality, even an electron whose orbit initialy avoids the scattering centers, experiences forces which will gradually change its trajectory. However, it is clear that, if the impurity potential decreases fast enough compared to the average distance between impurities, the basic features of the model will remain valid. The situation is quite different for scattering by a long-range random potential, which is typical for high-mobility 2D semiconductor structures. Classical magnetotransport in this case was thoroughly studied in Refs. , .

In summary, for short-range impurity scattering in two dimensions a strong negative magnetoresistance exists, the main features of which are accounted for by a remarkably simple classical picture. There are two species of electrons, wandering electrons which are described by the conventional Drude theory, and circling electrons which are collisionless and contribute only to the transverse conductivity. With increasing magnetic field the fraction of circling electrons increases at the expense of the wandering ones, leading to negative magnetoresistance. However, as we have shown, at low fields the magnetoresistance is entirely determined by small corrections to this picture, which give a parabolic, rather than an exponentially small negative magnetoresistance. This mechanism may provide a purely classical explanation of, at least, some part of the experimental data on negative magnetoresistance in two-dimensional structures.

We thank W. Knap for useful discussions and for communicating his experimental results prior to publication. We appreciate usefull discussions with B. Shklovskii and D. Polyakov. We thank I. Gornyi for bringing to our attention Refs. , , .


text:
# Stabilizing distinguishable qubits against spontaneous decay by detected-jump correcting quantum codes

## Abstract

A new class of error-correcting quantum codes is introduced capable of stabilizing qubits against spontaneous decay arising from couplings to statistically independent reservoirs. These quantum codes are based on the idea of using an embedded quantum code and exploiting the classical information available about which qubit has been affected by the environment. They are immediately relevant for quantum computation and information processing using arrays of trapped ions or nuclear spins. Interesting relations between these quantum codes and basic notions of design theory are established.

Much of the newly emerging field of quantum information processing is driven by the desire to push the characteristic quantum effects into the macroscopic domain as far as possible. For this purpose it is of vital interest to develop efficient methods for stabilizing the coherence of quantum systems against destructive environmental influences. Prominent examples of such environmentally-induced dissipative phenomena are spontaneous decay processes originating from couplings of a quantum system to uncontrollable photonic  or phononic  degrees of freedom. So far, various efficient quantum error-correcting strategies have been developed. All of them rely on redundancy as far as the encoding of information in quantum states is concerned.

In principle, any quantum system can be stabilized against environmental influences by active quantum error-correcting codes (QECCs) with the help of repeated control measurements and appropriately conditioned recovery operations  and by exploiting the quantum Zeno effect . But, typically these QECCs require a large number of measurement and recovery operations. In physical systems governed by collective spontaneous decay processes originating from couplings to a single reservoir it is more advantageous to use quantum error avoiding codes (QEACs)  for efficient stabilization. These QEACs rely on the existence of a sufficiently high dimensional decoherence free subsystem (DFS) which stabilizes the dynamics passively without measurements and recovery operations. However, in the opposite dynamical regime of interest in which the spacings between physical qubits are much larger than the wave lengths of spontaneously emitted photons or phonons, these qubits decay into statistically independent reservoirs . Efficient error-correcting strategies have also been proposed for these situations. Typically they use a QECC constructed within a DFS . Errors arising from the conditional time evolution between two quantum jumps are corrected passively by the QEAC while quantum jumps are corrected actively by the QECC. In this way the total number of control measurements and recovery operations required is decreased significantly in comparison with purely active QECCs. However, so far the redundancy of these embedded codes is not satisfactory. Plenio et al.  have constructed an embedded code capable of stabilizing one logical qubit which uses eight physical ones, but had not found a shorter code. Thus, in view of present day experimental possibilities  it is desirable to develop alternative error-correcting strategies for these cases by which it is possible to reduce redundancy even further without loosing the advantage of passive error correction between successive quantum jumps.

Motivated by this need, in this letter a new class of embedded quantum error-correcting codes is introduced which are capable of stabilizing distinguishable qubits against spontaneous decay processes. These codes are based on the idea of embedding an active QECC within a passive QEAC and simultaneously exploiting the classical information available about which qubit has been affected by an environment. Optimal one detected-jump correcting quantum codes of even length are constructed which minimize redundancy. It turns out that their redundancy is significantly smaller than that of previously proposed embedded error correction schemes . This latter property makes these new quantum codes particularly attractive for quantum computation and information processing based on arrays of trapped ions or nuclear spins. A link to basic notions of design theory  is established which is expected to be useful for further explorations of this basic idea.

Let us consider $`n`$ distinguishable qubits which are perturbed by statistically independent reservoirs inducing spontaneous decay processes. Within the Markov approximation the time evolution of the density operator $`\rho `$ of these $`n`$ qubits can be described by a master equation

$`\dot{\rho }(t)={\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{}}}[H,\rho (t)]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{n}{}}}\{[L_\alpha ,\rho (t)L_\alpha ^{}]+[L_\alpha \rho (t),L_\alpha ^{}]\}.`$ (1)
Thereby the Lindblad operator $`L_\alpha =\sqrt{\kappa _\alpha }|0_\alpha 1|_\alpha `$ characterizes spontaneous decay of qubit $`\alpha `$ from its excited state $`|1_\alpha `$ into its stable state $`|0_\alpha `$ with rate $`\kappa _\alpha `$ . The coherent part of the $`n`$-qubit dynamics is described by the Hamiltonian $`H`$. In the case of radiative damping of quantum optical systems the derivation of Eq. (1) involves the Born and the Markov approximations which are typically very good. These approximations rest on the assumption of weak couplings between resonantly excited two-level systems and the vacuum modes of the electromagnetic field and a sufficiently short correlation time of these vacuum modes . However, in solid state devices where spontaneous decay processes typically originate from couplings to phononic reservoirs this Markov approximation is usually only applicable for sufficiently high temperatures of the reservoirs . Within the quantum trajectory approach  the solution of Eq. (1) can be unravelled into a statistical ensemble of pure states. Each element of this ensemble defines a quantum trajectory which describes the $`n`$-qubit system conditioned on the observation of $`N`$ quantum jumps of qubits $`\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _N`$ which take place at times $`t_1\mathrm{}t_N`$. The action of these quantum jumps is represented by a sequence of Lindblad operators $`L_{\alpha _1},\mathrm{},L_{\alpha _N}`$. In this quantum trajectory representation the conditional time evolution between two successive quantum jumps is determined by the non-hermitian effective Hamiltonian $`\stackrel{~}{H}=Hi(\mathrm{}/2)_{\alpha =1}^nL_\alpha ^{}L_\alpha `$.

The dynamics described by Eq. (1) can be stabilized against these dissipative influences in an effective way by embedded quantum codes. For this purpose one constructs first of all a DFS which stabilizes the conditional time evolution between two successive quantum jumps passively. In a second step one inverts the occurring quantum jumps with the help of an active QECC which is constructed within this DFS . Thus, for this stabilization it is necessary to observe the $`n`$-qubit system continuously. Whenever a quantum jump occurs the appropriate unitary recovery operation is applied within a time interval short in comparison with the decay times and with the coherent evolution time of the system . The mean number of required recovery operations is determined by the spontaneous decay rates $`\kappa _\alpha `$ of the qubits. For the simplest case possible of encoding only one logical qubit Plenio et al.  have presented a one-error correcting embedded quantum code which applies to the important special case of equal decay rates of all the qubits. Their active QECC constructed within the DFS fulfills the conditions

$`c_i|L_\alpha ^{}L_\beta |c_j=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\alpha \beta }\delta _{ij}`$ (2)
for any qubits $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$ and any logical states $`|c_i`$, $`|c_j`$ with $`c_i|c_j=\delta _{ij}`$. These conditions are necessary and sufficient for the existence of appropriate recovery operations  in all cases where an unknown qubit has been affected by a quantum jump at a known jump time. Being consistent with conditions (2) Plenio et al. were not able to reduce the redundancy of their code any further.

In the subsequent treatment, however, it is demonstrated that the redundancy of embedded quantum codes can be reduced significantly by also taking into account the available information about which qubit has been affected by a quantum jump. If the qubits of a quantum computer couple to independent reservoirs then information about the jump time, say $`t`$, and about the jump ‘position’, say $`\alpha `$, is available. Therefore, it is natural to exploit this additional information about the ‘position’ of a quantum jump for a more efficient encoding. If one can determine not only the jump time $`t`$ but also the jump position $`\alpha `$ by continuously monitoring the $`n`$-qubit quantum system, one has to correct the error operator $`L_\alpha `$ only for this particular value of $`\alpha `$. As a consequence the corresponding active QECC has to fulfill Eqs. (2) only for $`\alpha =\beta `$. The violation of conditions (2) for $`\alpha \beta `$ offers the possibility to construct embedded codes with a significantly smaller degree of redundancy. It should be mentioned that a similar violation of conditions (2) has also been realized previously in the treatment of the quantum erasure channel .

Let us concentrate on the important special case of equal spontaneous decay rates of all the qubits, i.e. $`\kappa _\alpha =\kappa _\beta \kappa `$. If the number of physical qubits $`n`$ is even, the DFS of maximal dimension with respect to the conditional time evolution between successive quantum jumps is formed by all $`n`$-particle quantum states with $`(n/2)`$ excited and $`(n/2)`$ unexcited qubits. This DFS is the eigenspace of the operator $`_{\alpha =1}^nL_\alpha ^{}L_\alpha `$ with eigenvalue $`\kappa (n/2)`$ and with dimension $`d=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{n/2}\right)n!/[(n/2)!]^2`$. Thus, the conditional time evolution between successive quantum jumps is not perturbed by the reservoirs. Furthermore, for a given number of physical qubits $`n`$ the dimension of this DFS is maximal so that the degree of redundancy is minimal. For the correction of quantum jumps we have to develop an active QECC within this DFS. Thereby we want to exploit the fact that we have to correct quantum jumps only which take place at a known ‘position’, say $`\alpha `$. Let us start with the simplest case possible, namely the encoding of a single logical qubit. We propose the following four-qubit encoding (omitting normalization)

$`|c_0=|1100+|0011,|c_1=|0110+|1001`$ (3)
formed by complementary pairs within this DFS. Thereby $`|c_0`$ and $`|c_1`$ encode the logical states $`|0_L`$ and $`|1_L`$. The complementary pairs appearing in Eq. (3) involve an excited state at any ‘position’. Provided the error ‘position’ $`\alpha `$ is known this encoding represents an active QECC correcting $`t=1`$ detected-jump error and is formed by superpositions of basis states of the DFS with dimension $`d=6`$. This encoding violates Eqs. (2) for $`\alpha \beta `$ as $`c_0|L_4^{}L_2|c_1=c_0|L_3^{}L_1|c_10`$, for example. Provided a quantum jump $`L_\alpha `$ has occurred at ‘position’ $`\alpha `$ the immediate application of the unitary recovery operator $`R_\alpha =\pi _\alpha (_{\alpha \beta }C_{\alpha \beta })\pi _\alpha H_\alpha `$ restores the unperturbed quantum state again. Here $`\pi _\alpha `$, $`H_\alpha `$, and $`C_{\alpha \beta }`$ represent a $`\pi `$-rotation, a Hadamard transformation of qubit $`\alpha `$, and a conditional $`CNOT`$ operation with control and target qubits $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$. On the code space formed by all linear combinations of the logical states of Eq. (3) $`R_\alpha `$ is the left-inverse of the quantum jump operator $`L_\alpha `$. For the construction of such a left-inverse unitary recovery operator $`R_\alpha `$  the codewords have to fulfill the necessary and sufficient conditions

$`c_i|L_\alpha ^{}L_\alpha |c_j=\mathrm{\Lambda }_\alpha \delta _{ij}.`$ (4)
These conditions reflect the fact that the invertibility conditions of Eq. (2) have to be fulfilled only for $`\alpha =\beta `$. It should also be mentioned that it is also possible to encode a third logical quantum state $`|2_L`$ within the above mentioned DFS by the state $`|c_2=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|1010+|0101)`$. Thus, the three logical quantum states $`|c_0,|c_1,|c_2`$ represent a three-dimensional one detected-jump correcting quantum code formed by four physical qubits two of which are excited. Correspondingly we denote this code by $`1`$-JC$`(4,2,3)`$.

It is straightforward to generalize this construction to arbitrary large numbers of logical states. In analogy to Eq. (3) one starts from an even number $`n`$ of physical qubits and from the corresponding DFS of dimension $`d=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{n/2}\right)`$. A basis of this DFS consists of all $`n`$-qubit states with $`(n/2)`$ excited and $`(n/2)`$ unexcited qubits. Within this DFS one forms the logical states of the active QECC from all equally weighted complementary pairs of states. The resulting embedded quantum code can correct $`t=1`$ detected-jump error. It is optimal in the sense that for a given number $`n`$ of physical qubits the number of logical states $`l=\frac{1}{2}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{n/2}\right)`$ is maximal. Thus, for a large number of physical qubits $`n`$ the associated number of logical qubits that can be encoded is given by $`\mathrm{log}_2l=n\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}_2n+O(1)`$.

The optimality of this encoding can be shown by the following estimate of dimension. For a given number $`n`$ of physical qubits with $`k`$ excited states and a given number $`t`$ of errors at known ‘positions’ $`\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _t`$ the number of logical states $`l`$ is bounded by the inequality $`l\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{nt}{kt}\right)`$. This upper bound originates from the fact that after $`t`$ quantum jumps $`t`$ qubits are in state $`|0`$ at known ‘positions’. As the logical states have to be recovered from these latter states by a unitary transformation the dimension of this latter Hilbert space also determines the maximum possible number of orthogonal logical states. By the basic symmetry property of the binomial coefficients the maximum number of logical states is achieved for $`k=[n/2]`$. ($`[x]`$ denotes the largest integer smaller or equal to $`x`$.) Thus we arrive at the final result that for $`t=1`$ the maximum number of logical quantum states is given by $`l=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n1}{n/21}\right)\frac{1}{2}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{n/2}\right)`$.

These one detected-jump correcting quantum codes can be generalized so that they are capable of correcting an arbitrary number $`t`$ of errors of an arbitrary number of qubits. Correspondingly, we define a $`t`$ detected-jump correcting quantum code, denoted by $`t`$-JC$`(n,k,l)`$, by a set of $`l`$ codewords $`\{|c_i,i=1,\mathrm{},l\}`$ formed by the linear superpositions of $`n`$-qubit states each of which involves $`k`$ excited and $`nk`$ unexcited states. Analogous to Eqs. (4) these codewords have to fulfill the conditions

$`c_i|L_𝐞^{}L_𝐞|c_j=\mathrm{\Lambda }_𝐞\delta _{ij}`$ (5)
which are necessary and sufficient for the existence of a unitary recovery operation. Thereby the error operator $`L_𝐞`$ denotes an arbitrary product of Lindblad operators, say $`L_{\alpha _m}\mathrm{}L_{\alpha _1}`$, corresponding to a jump pattern $`𝐞(\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _m)`$ of length $`m`$. Eqs. (5) have to be fulfilled for all jump patterns $`𝐞`$ of lengths $`m`$ not greater than $`t`$. According to this terminology the previously constructed optimal one detected-jump correcting quantum codes are of the type $`1`$-JC$`(n,n/2,\frac{1}{2}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{n/2}\right))`$ with $`n`$ being even. Furthermore, the above dimension estimate implies that $`t`$-detected-jump correcting quantum codes of the type $`t`$-JC$`(n,n/2,\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{nt}{n/2t}\right))`$ would be optimal.

The constructed one detected-jump correcting quantum codes are particularly well suited for stabilizing quantum algorithms against spontaneous decay of the qubits into statistically independent reservoirs. Thus, for example, they may be applied for stabilizing trapped-ion systems  against radiative or for stabilizing nuclear spin arrays  against phononic damping provided the mean distance between the ions or spins representing the qubits is larger than the wave lengths of the spontaneously emitted photons or phonons. For this purpose one has to determine which qubit has been affected by the spontaneous decay process. For spontaneously emitted photons, for example, this may be achieved by photodetection techniques or by measuring the recoil of the affected particle. This latter method may also be used in phononic decay processes. Furthermore, one has to ensure that in the absence of errors the quantum system remains within the appropriate DFS throughout the entire computation. Recent investigations by Bacon et al.  demonstrate that this latter requirement may be achieved with the help of suitably chosen universal quantum gates which do not leave this DFS during their application. In solid state implementations such gates may be realized by appropriately tuning the coefficients of the Heisenberg-type exchange terms  by externally applied electric or magnetic fields. Similarly, such a tuning appears also feasible for ions in arrays of microtraps  by applying appropriate laser pulses which push the ions out of their equilibrium positions in a state dependent way. At the time of writing this letter the controlled manipulation of four qubits in ion traps seems to be in reach . Therefore, already the most simple example of the presented optimal one detected-jump correcting codes, namely the $`1`$-JC$`(4,2,3)`$-code, might give rise to interesting experimental settings. We also want to point out that strictly speaking all the presented detected-jump correcting quantum codes stabilize qubit systems only with identical spontaneous decay rates for all qubits. However, recent investigations on stability properties of concatenated quantum codes indicate  that these codes are expected to stabilize also other qubit systems to a satisfactory degree as long as all relative differences between spontaneous decay rates remain small.

For codewords consisting of linear superpositions of quantum states with identical amplitudes we can establish a surprising and far reaching connection with the area of combinatorial design theory . This link seems to be particularly fruitful for further explorations of general $`t`$-JC$`(n,k,l)`$-codes. In order to exhibit basic ideas of this connection let us finally reconsider the previously introduced optimal $`1`$-JC$`(4,2,3)`$-code. Its three codewords $`|c_0,|c_1,|c_2`$ can be represented graphically by the connected diagram depicted in Fig. 1. Each point of this diagram is associated with a qubit. Two connected points, i.e. a block, indicate that these two qubits are in the excited state $`|1`$. Within the framework of finite geometry  this connected diagram forms an affine finite plane over the binary field. In this context the six blocks of Fig. 1 represent lines, i.e. one-dimensional subspaces of this geometry. The three codewords $`|c_0,|c_1,|c_2`$ correspond to the three disjoint pairs of lines. We call this combinatorial structure given by the partition of the set of lines of Fig. 1 a $`t=1`$ spontaneous-emission-error design, $`1`$-SEED$`(4,2,3)`$, on $`n=4`$ points of blocksize $`k=2`$ with $`l=3`$ disjoint classes. Generalizing this notion to arbitrary values of $`(t,n,k,l)`$ we arrive at the notion of a $`t`$-SEED$`(n,k,l)`$. As an example, let us consider the $`2`$-SEED$`(9,3,3)`$ depicted in Fig. 2. Here the lines connecting 3 points indicate states of 9 qubits in which 3 are excited. The sets of these points are called blocks. Superposition of the 9 blocks of size 3 contained in the 3 parallel classes depicted by any of the 3 rows of diagrams in Fig. 2 gives the three codewords $`|c_0`$, $`|c_1`$, $`|c_2`$ of a $`2`$-JC$`(9,3,3)`$, e.g., $`|c_0=|111000000+|000111000+|000000111+|100001010+|010100001+|001010100+|100010001+|010001100+|001100010`$. For the construction of an arbitrary $`t`$-SEED$`(n,k,l)`$ design theory  offers powerful combinatorial methods which will be described in a subsequent article.

In summary, a new class or error-correcting quantum codes has been introduced for stabilizing qubits against spontaneous decay into independent reservoirs. It is based on the idea of using embedded quantum codes and simultaneously exploiting classical information about the error position. Thus, redundancy can be reduced significantly. The systematic construction and classification of $`t`$-JC$`(n,k,l)`$-codes with $`t2`$ which minimize redundancy is still a challenging task which is currently under active investigation. Here the newly discovered relation to design theory seems to play a key role, especially for the construction of $`t`$-SEEDs with large $`t`$.

This work is supported by the DFG (SPP 1078) and by the EC (IST-1999-10596). The work of A.D. is also supported by the DAAD.