text:
# The Valuative Theory of Foliations

## 0. Introduction

The purpose of this paper is to characterize valuations which follow the infinitely near points given by a singularity of a holomorphic vector field on a surface or, what is the same, a germ of a singular first order differential equation in the complex plane. Conceptually, a germ of vector field is nothing but a way of measuring infinitesimal approximations to a local family of curves (the leaves of the associated foliation). Finding a solution through a point is the same as obtaining a subvariety which has infinite contact with the field. Likewise, valuations are the generalization of contact along a local object. Quoting Seidenberg , “(…) derivations are related to contact, and so are valuations, so one may ask for a study connecting derivations and valuations”.

To that end, we use the concept of L’Hôpital valuation, which we define in Section $`2`$. It is a generalization of what Rosenlicht calls *differential valuations* in the context of Hardy fields . A valuation $`\nu `$ is L’Hôpital for a vector field $``$ if it satisfies the following generalization of classical L’Hôpital’s condition:

$$\nu \left(\frac{a}{b}\frac{a}{b}\right)>0$$

whenever $`\nu (a)\nu (b)>0`$ and $`b0`$. The key result of the paper is Theorem $`1`$ of Section $`3`$, which states, essentially, that a L’Hôpital valuation of a vector field follows (after a finite number of blowing-ups) infinitely near singular points of the field. From this it follows that valuations associated to curves which are not leaves of the foliation are not L’Hôpital for the field. Section $`3`$ is devoted to the statement and proof of the main results. We single out two: the equivalence between the existence of an infinite number of invariant analytic curves through the origin (dicriticalness) and L’Hôpital’s condition for divisorial valuations (Theorem 5), and the intrinsic characterization of simple singularities with rational quotient of eigenvalues in terms of valuations of rank $`1`$ and rational rank $`2`$ (Theorem 8). In the last section, we study the relation of rank $`1`$ valuations with the existence of transcendental solutions, and a *weak L’Hôpital condition*, which allows one to find *all* the solutions of a vector field, whether singular or not.

In the first section we recall, for the sake of both completeness and fixing of notation, the classification of valuations centered in $`\{x,y\}`$ done by Spivakovsky  for $`2`$dimensional regular local rings.

Let us remark also that the present work introduces a new algebraic perspective in the study of singularities of plane and higher dimensional foliations (see ), which up to now have been studied mainly with complex analytic tools -either complex analysis or resolution of singularities.

This paper contains the research of the author’s Ph. D. Thesis concerning complex plane foliations. Results in higher dimension will appear in a forthcoming work.

## 1. Valuations centered in $`\{x,y\}`$ and blowing-ups

We are mainly interested in valuations centered in a point of the complex plane. Thus, we shall work over the ring $`𝒪=𝒪_2`$ of germs of holomorphic functions at a point $`P^2`$, near which we fix local analytic coordinates $`(x,y)`$, so that $`𝒪\{x,y\}`$. More precisely, if $`=𝒪_{(0)}`$ denotes the field of meromorphic functions at $`P`$, we are going to study valuations $`\nu `$ of $``$, centered in the local ring $`(𝒪,𝔪)`$, that is, such that $`\nu (𝒪)0`$ and $`\nu (𝔪)>0`$. In this section we fix some notation and terminology concerning these objects. All the results are well-known since (at least) Zariski , although our main reference will be Spivakovsky’s work , where one can find a general study of valuations centered in noetherian rings of dimension $`2`$, without restrictions on the characteristic. Let $`\nu :^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a valuation of $``$ centered in $`𝒪`$ and consider the blowing-up $`\pi :𝒴(^2,0)`$ with center $`(0,0)`$. As $`\pi `$ is a birational morphism, the field of fractions of $`𝒴`$ is $``$, so that it makes sense to speak of $`\nu `$ as being centered at a point $`Q𝒴`$. The following result links valuations in $``$ centered in $`𝒪`$ with valuations centered at points of $`E𝒴`$. The proof is an easy exercise:

###### Lemma.

One and only one of the following statements holds:

1. $`\nu `$ is the $`𝔪`$adic valuation at $`(^2,0)`$. That is, if $`f𝒪=\{x,y\}`$, then $`\nu (f)=\mathrm{ord}_{(x,y)}(f)`$.
2. There is one and only one closed point $`QE`$ such that $`\nu `$ is centered in $`Q`$. Moreover, $`\nu `$ can be extended to a valuation of $`\stackrel{~}{}`$, the field of fractions of $`\stackrel{~}{𝒪}_Q`$, which is centered in $`\stackrel{~}{𝒪}_Q`$.

(The extended valuation of $`2`$ will be denoted by $`\nu `$, for the sake of simplicity). This lemma is the basis of the classification of valuations made by Zariski  and Spivakovsky , as it allows a grouping in terms of co-final behaviour under blowing-ups. The first step is to distinguish between divisorial and non-divisorial valuations:

###### Corollary.

Let $`\nu `$ be a valuation of $``$ centered in $`𝒪`$. One and only one of the following statements holds:

1. There is a finite sequence of blowing-ups

$$𝒳_{n+1}\stackrel{\pi _n}{}𝒳_n\mathrm{}\stackrel{\pi _1}{}𝒳_1\stackrel{\pi _0}{}𝒳_0=(^2,0)$$

(where $`n1`$) such that if $`E_{i+1}`$ is the exceptional line of $`\pi _i`$ and $`Q_{i+1}E_{i+1}`$ is the center of the blowing-up $`\pi _{i+1}`$, then $`\nu `$ is centered in $`Q_{i+1}`$ for any $`i=1,\mathrm{},n1`$, and if $`(u,v)`$ are local coordinates at $`Q_{n+1}𝒳_{n+1}`$, then $`\nu `$ is the $`(u,v)`$adic valuation. In this case, $`\nu `$ is called the divisorial valuation with strict center $`Q_{n+1}`$.
2. There is an infinite sequence of blowing-ups

$$\mathrm{}𝒳_{n+1}\stackrel{\pi _n}{}𝒳_n\mathrm{}\stackrel{\pi _1}{}𝒳_1\stackrel{\pi _0}{}𝒳$$

such that if $`E_{i+1}`$ is the exceptional line of $`\pi _i`$ and $`Q_{i+1}E_{i+1}`$ is the center of the blowing-up $`\pi _{i+1}`$, then $`\nu `$ is centered in $`Q_{i+1}`$ for any $`i1`$.

In both cases, the chain of blowing-ups is said to be associated to $`\nu `$.

In order to classify non-divisorial valuations, we introduce some terminology. Suppose $`\nu `$ is non-divisorial and let $`𝒳_{n+1}\stackrel{\pi }{}𝒳_0=(^2,0)`$ be the composition of the first $`n`$ blowing-ups of the sequence $`(\pi _i)_{i0}`$ associated to $`\nu `$. The fiber $`F_{n+1}`$ of $`0`$ is the union of $`n+1`$ irreducible components

$$F_{n+1}=E_1\mathrm{}E_{n+1},$$

where $`E_{i+1}`$ is the exceptional line of the blowing-up $`\pi _i`$.

###### Definition.

The line $`E_{i+1}`$ is called the $`(i+1)`$st irreducible component of $`F_{n+1}`$, for $`i=0,\mathrm{},n`$.

###### Definition.

We say that $`Q_{n+1}`$ is a corner if it belongs to two different irreducible components of $`F_{n+1}`$. Otherwise, we say that it is a regular point of $`F_{n+1}`$.

These notions allow one to group non-divisorial valuations of $``$ centered in $`𝒪`$ into four different families. Recall that any valuation $`\nu `$ of $``$ can be naturally extended to one and only one valuation $`\widehat{\nu }`$ of $`\widehat{}=((x,y))`$.

###### Definition.

Fix a valuation $`\nu `$ centered in $`𝒪`$. We say that

1. $`\nu `$ is associated to a curve, or is of contact with a curve if there is an $`n_0`$ such that for any $`mn_0`$, the point $`Q_m`$ is a regular point of $`F_m`$. In this case, there exists an irreducible principal ideal $`(\widehat{f})\widehat{𝒪}=[[x,y]]`$ such that the valuation $`\widehat{\nu }`$ has value group $`^2`$, with the lexicographic order, and is given by the condition

$$\nu (\widehat{g})=(i,j)\widehat{g}(\widehat{f})^i(\widehat{f})^{i+1}\text{ and }\mathrm{\#}(\frac{\widehat{g}}{\widehat{f}},\widehat{f})=j,$$

where $`\mathrm{\#}`$ indicates the ordinary intersection multiplicity. There are two subcases: either $`(\widehat{f})𝒪=(0)`$, in which case $`\nu `$ is said to be associated to a formal curve, or $`(\widehat{f})𝒪(0)=(f)`$, where $`f`$ is irreducible. In this case, $`\nu `$ is associated to a convergent curve. If no adjective is present, a valuation associated to a curve is assumed to be associated to a convergent one. Notice that in the non-convergent case, if $`(t^\alpha ,\phi (t))`$ is a Puiseux parametrization of $`(\widehat{f}=0)`$, then the value of any $`g𝒪`$, is exactly

$$\nu (g)=\mathrm{ord}_t(g(t^\alpha ,\phi (t))).$$
2. $`\nu `$ is of contact with a divisor if there is $`n_0`$ such that $`mn_0`$ implies $`\pi _{m+1}`$ is centered in the intersection of $`E_m`$ and $`E_{n_0}`$. In fact, these valuations can be understood as associated to the curve $`E_{n_0}`$ at the point $`E_mE_{n_0}`$ in the birational model $`𝒳_m`$ of $``$. The points $`Q_m=E_{n_0}E_m`$ will be called the *fixed corners of $`\nu `$*.
3. $`\nu `$ has an irrational Puiseux exponent if for $`m>>0`$, the point $`Q_m`$ is a corner of $`F_m`$, but these corners do not share a common divisor (which is case 2): $`\nu `$ “jumps” from divisor to divisor, but is always centered in corners. For $`m>>0`$, there is a local system of coordinates $`(u,v)`$ at $`Q_m`$ and $`\lambda _{>0}_{>0}`$ such that if $`f(u,v)=a_{ij}u^iv^j\widehat{𝒪}_{Q_m}\widehat{}`$, then

$$\nu (f)=\nu \left(\underset{i,j>0}{}a_{ij}u^iv^j\right)=\underset{a_{ij}0}{\mathrm{min}}\lambda i+j.$$

This $`\lambda `$ depends on $`m`$, and can be constructed by a Bezout-type algorithm (see ).
4. $`\nu `$ has an infinite number of Puiseux exponents if in the sequence of centers of $`\nu `$ there is an infinite number of both corners and regular points. In  one can see the proof of the following fact: there is a minimal generating sequence $`(Q_i)_{i_0}`$ (see ) for $`\nu `$, such that each $`Q_i`$ defines an analytically irreducible curve $`C_i`$ with $`i1`$ Puiseux exponents, and such that, for $`0<i<j`$, the curve $`C_i`$ has maximal contact with $`C_j`$, which explains the expression “infinite Puiseux exponents”.

Valuations of contact with a divisor (type $`2`$) are to be considered a subclass of those of contact with a curve, for up to birational morphisms, there is no difference between them. Thus, we shall only mention them explicitly in Corollary 9.

## 2. L’Hôpital Valuations

Let $`𝒟_𝒪=𝒟er_{}^𝔪(𝒪)`$ denote the $`𝒪`$module of inner derivations of $`\{x,y\}=𝒪`$ trivial over $``$ and continuous for the $`𝔪`$adic topology. In fact, $`𝒟`$ is the $`𝒪`$module of germs of analytic vector fields at $`(^2,0)`$, which is free of rank $`2`$. We shall denote by $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒪`$ the module of germs of holomorphic $`1`$forms over $`(^2,0)`$, and by $`𝒟_{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{}`$ the $``$vector spaces of meromorphic derivations and forms, respectively. For reasons that will become apparent later, we are interested in the projectivization of these vector spaces, namely $`𝓓=𝒟\{0\}/^{}`$ and $`𝛀=\mathrm{\Omega }\{0\}/^{}`$, which can be regarded (via the usual pairing) as the same set, called the set of germs of foliations in $`(^2,0)`$. A (germ of) holomorphic foliation will be an element $`\mathbf{}𝓓`$ (or equivalently, its dual $`𝝎𝛀`$).

Let $`\nu `$ be a valuation of $``$ and $`\mathbf{}𝓓`$ a foliation. Recall that one defines $`\nu (0)=\mathrm{}`$, where $`\mathrm{}`$ is included in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, with the usual order and addition rules. The relation between foliations and valuations is given by the following definition, which is a generalization of what Rosenlicht calls, in a more restrictive context, differential valuations :

###### Definition 1.

We say that $`\nu `$ is a L’Hôpital valuation for $`\mathbf{}`$ if for any representative $``$ of $`\mathbf{}`$, the following four equivalent conditions hold:

1. For any $`a,b^{}`$ with $`\nu (a)\nu (b)>0`$ and $`b0`$,

$$\nu \left(\frac{a}{b}\frac{a}{b}\right)>0.$$
2. For any $`a,b^{}`$ with $`0>\nu (a)\nu (b)`$ and $`b0`$,

$$\nu \left(\frac{a}{b}\frac{a}{b}\right)>0.$$
3. For any $`a,b^{}`$ with $`\nu (a)0`$, $`\nu (b)>0`$ and $`b0`$,

$$\nu \left(\frac{ab}{b}\right)>0.$$
4. For any $`a,b^{}`$ with $`\nu (a)0`$, $`\nu (b)<0`$ and $`b0`$,

$$\nu \left(\frac{ab}{b}\right)>0.$$

###### Remark.

Notice that the definition is independent of the representative of $`\mathbf{}`$, as the derivation appears both in the numerator and the denominator of the left-hand member of each equation.

The above notion is the natural translation of classical L’Hôpital’s rule to germs of holomorphic vector fields in the plane: the main difference lying, grosso modo, in the fact that in the one-variable case, there are only one foliation and one valuation (compatible with the local structure of $`\{t\}`$), whereas in higher dimensions one needs to fix the foliation and impose conditions on the valuation to relate both concepts.

###### Example.

See  and  Consider the differential equation

$$\frac{dy}{dx}=\frac{y}{x^2},$$

having the fundamental solution $`y=e^{1/x}`$, which is holomorphic in a punctured neighbourhood of $`0`$. Let $`𝒦=(z,e^{1/z})`$ be the field of rational functions in $`z,e^{1/z}`$. Fix two analytic paths $`\gamma _0,\gamma _1`$, with $`\gamma _0\{\text{Re}(z)>0\}`$, $`\gamma _1\{\text{Re}(z)<0\}`$ and $`\gamma _0(1)=\gamma _1(1)=0`$. Define $`𝒪^i=\{f𝒦:lim_{t1}|f(\gamma _i(t))|<\mathrm{}\}`$, for $`i=0,1`$. Both $`𝒪^i`$ are valuation rings. Call $`\nu _i`$ to the valuation associated to $`𝒪^i`$, and let $`\text{Der}_{}𝒦`$ be the derivation of $`𝒦`$ induced by the differential equation: $`z=1,e^{1/z}=1/z^2e^{1/z}`$. It is easy to check (see ) that each $`\nu _i`$ is a L’Hôpital valuation for $``$. We remark that these rings depend only on “the side of $``$ where $`\gamma `$ is in”, that is, paths included in $`\text{Re}(z)>0`$ give the same ring $`𝒪^0`$ and paths in $`\text{Re(z)}<0`$ give $`𝒪^1`$. This leads us to think that L’Hôpital valuations are also a means to find Stokes lines for ordinary differential equations, although this remains, up to date, a conjecture.

## 3. Valuations and vector fields in dimension $`2`$

We have presented the necessary background to study the links between germs of foliations in $`(^2,0)`$ and valuations centered in $`𝒪`$. As we have remarked, we are going to use both the languages of $`1`$forms and of vector fields (distributions), as they are the same thing in this dimension.

Take a holomorphic $`1`$form $`\omega `$ and fix a regular system of parameters $`(x,y)`$ in $`(^2,0)`$. As $`𝒪\{x,y\}`$, $`\omega `$ can be written

$$\omega =adx+bdy,$$

with $`a,b`$ holomorphic functions in $`(^2,0)`$. Given such a form, we have its line of dual vector fields $`[]`$ generated by

$$\{\begin{array}{c}x=b\hfill \\ y=a\hfill \end{array}$$

We might get any non-zero vector field in $`[]`$, by the remark following Definition 1. From now on, $`\omega `$ and the above $``$ are fixed. We say that $`(0,0)`$ is a *singular point* for a foliation $`𝝎𝛀`$ if there is a coordinate system $`(x,y)`$ such that for any representative $`\omega =a(x,y)dx+b(x.y)dy`$ of $`𝝎`$, $`a(0,0)=b(0,0)=0`$.

By a separatrix of $`\omega `$ we shall mean a formal irreducible curve tangent to $`\omega `$. That is, a separatrix is a principal irreducible ideal $`(\widehat{f})[[x,y]]`$ such that $`d\widehat{f}\omega =\widehat{f}\eta `$, with $`\eta `$ a formal $`2`$form. From the point of view of vector fields, a separatrix can be defined as a local non-zero $``$morphism

$$\phi :[[x,y]][[t]],$$

such that

$$\{\begin{array}{c}\phi (x)/t=b(\phi (x),\phi (y))\hfill \\ \phi (y)/t=a(\phi (x),\phi (y))\hfill \end{array}$$

### 3.1. The key results

Fix a valuation $`\nu `$ of $`=\{\{x,y\}\}`$, $`\nu `$ centered in $`𝒪`$. Let $`𝒴\stackrel{\pi }{}𝒳`$ be the blowing-up of $`𝒳=(^2,0)`$ at $`0`$ and call $`E=\pi ^1(0)`$, the exceptional divisor. Suppose there is a point $`QE`$ such that $`\nu `$ is centered in $`Q`$ (that is, $`\nu `$ is not the $`𝔪`$adic valuation). Let $`𝒪_Q`$ be the local ring at $`Q`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }`$ (respectively $`\stackrel{~}{}`$) be the strict transform of $`\omega `$ at $`Q`$ (resp. the strict transform of $``$). The following result is the cornerstone of this work:

###### Theorem 1.

If $`\nu `$ is a L’Hôpital valuation for $``$ and $`E`$ is invariant for $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }`$ (that is to say, $`(0,0)`$ is not dicritical for $`\omega `$), then $`Q`$ is a singular point for $`\stackrel{~}{}`$.

###### Proof.

Suppose, in order to get a contradiction, that $`Q`$ is not singular for $`\stackrel{~}{}`$. After a linear change of coordinates at $`(^2,0)`$, we may assume that $`Q`$ is the origin of the following chart of $`\pi `$:

$$\pi :\{\begin{array}{c}x=x_2\hfill \\ y=x_2y_2\hfill \end{array}$$

Let $`\omega `$ be the dual form of $``$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }`$ its strict transform. As $`(0,0)`$ is non-dicritical for $`\omega `$ and $`Q`$ is not singular for $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }`$, the starting form can be written as

$$\omega =x_2^\alpha u(dx_2+x_2\psi dy_2),$$

where $`\psi 𝒪_Q`$ (in fact, it is in $`𝒪𝒪_Q`$) and $`u`$ is an element of $`𝒪`$ not zero at $`(x_2=0,y_2=0)`$. The factor $`x_2`$ appears because $`E`$ is invariant ($`\omega `$ is non-dicritical at $`(0,0)`$). As $`\nu (x_2),\nu (y_2)>0`$, it is clear that $`\nu (y)>\nu (x)>0`$. The vector field $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ is then

$$\{\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{}x_2=x_2^{\alpha +1}u\psi \hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{}y_2=x_2^\alpha u\hfill \end{array}$$

whence

$$\nu \left(\frac{y}{x}\frac{y}{x}\right)=\nu \left(y_2\frac{x_2\stackrel{~}{}y_2+y_2\stackrel{~}{}x_2}{\stackrel{~}{}x_2}\right)=$$

$$=\nu \left(\frac{x_2^{\alpha +1}u}{x_2^{\alpha +1}u\psi }\right),$$

but $`\nu (u)=0`$, $`\nu (1)=0`$, $`\nu (\psi )0`$ and $`\nu `$ cannot be a L’Hôpital valuation for $``$. ∎

From Theorem 1 and Seidenberg’s reduction of singularities for plane vector fields , we infer immediately the following

###### Corollary 2.

Valuations with an infinite number of Puiseux exponents are never L’Hôpital valuations for any holomorphic vector field $``$.

###### Proof.

After a finite number of blowing-ups, we may assume that $``$ is non-dicritical. Suppose, in order to get a contradiction, that $`\nu `$ is a L’Hôpital valuation following both regular points and corners of the exceptional divisor in the long run. Seidenberg’s result implies  that from some $`Q_0`$ onwards, all these points are *simple* for the strict transform of $``$. Assume, without loss of generality, that $`Q_0`$ is corner and both irreducible components $`E`$ and $`E^{}`$ of the divisor passing through it are separatrices. From this, we deduce that the only infinitely near singular points of $``$ at $`Q_0`$ after the blowing-up $`\pi `$ with center $`Q_0`$ are the two corners of $`\pi ^1(Q_0)`$ corresponding to $`E`$ and $`E^{}`$. Theorem 1 implies that, from $`Q_0`$ onwards, all the infinitely near points of $`\nu `$ are corners, whence $`\nu `$ cannot have an infinite number of Puiseux exponents. ∎

###### Lemma 3.

Let $``$ be a holomorphic vector field and $`\widehat{f}[[x,y]]`$ a strictly formal (which means $`(\widehat{f})𝒪=(0)`$) separatrix of $``$ not tangent to $`(x=0)`$. Write $`=h/x+g/y`$ with $`(g,h)=1`$ and take $`u=a/b`$. Suppose $`(t^\alpha ,\phi (t))`$ is a Puiseux parametrization of $`\widehat{f}=0`$, with $`\mathrm{ord}_t\phi (t)>\alpha `$. Then

(1)
$$u(t^\alpha ,\phi (t))=\frac{1}{\alpha t^{\alpha 1}}h(t)\frac{d}{dt}(u(t^\alpha ,\phi (t))).$$

###### Proof.

We have, by the chain-rule

$$u=u_xx+u_yy=u_xh+u_yg=h(u_x+\frac{g}{h}u_y).$$

As $`\widehat{f}=0`$ is strictly formal, $`h(t^\alpha ,\phi (t))0`$ and, from the definition of separatrix, we get:

$$\frac{g}{h}(t^\alpha ,\phi (t))=\frac{\phi ^{}(t)}{\alpha t^{\alpha 1}},$$

so that, substituting this expression in the previous one:

$$(u)(t^\alpha ,\phi (t))=\frac{1}{\alpha t^{\alpha 1}}h(t)\frac{d}{dt}(u(t^\alpha ,\phi (t))),$$

as desired. ∎

### 3.2. The dicritical case

The link between valuations and dicritical centers is founded on the following

###### Lemma 4.

Let $``$ be a holomorphic vector field in $`(^2,0)`$ and let $`\nu `$ be the $`𝔪`$adic valuation centered at $`𝒪`$ (that is, $`\nu (a)=n`$ if and only if $`a𝔪^n𝔪^{n+1}`$). Put $`r=\mathrm{min}\{\nu (x),\nu (y)\}`$. Then

1. $`\nu (abba)\nu (a)+\nu (b)+r1`$, for any $`a,b𝒪`$.
2. $``$ is dicritical in $`(0,0)`$ if and only if there are $`a,b𝒪`$ for which the strict inequality holds. Moreover, in this case, $`\nu (a)=\nu (b)`$.

###### Proof.

Take $`a,b𝒪[[x,y]]`$ with $`\nu (a)=m`$, $`\nu (b)=n`$. Call $`\theta =x`$ and $`\eta =y`$ and write $`a,b,\theta `$ and $`\eta `$ as power series expansions:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\{\begin{array}{c}a=a_m+a_{m+1}+\mathrm{}\hfill \\ b=b_n+b_{n+1}\mathrm{}\hfill \end{array}\hfill & \{\begin{array}{c}\theta =\theta _l+\theta _{l+1}+\mathrm{}\hfill \\ \eta =\eta _k+\eta _{k+1}\mathrm{}\hfill \end{array}\hfill \end{array}$$

Applying $``$ to $`a`$ and $`b`$, we get

$$\{\begin{array}{c}a=a_{mx}\theta _l+a_{my}\eta _k+\mathrm{}\hfill \\ b=b_{nx}\theta _l+b_{my}\eta _k+\mathrm{}\hfill \end{array}$$

where subindices $`x`$ and $`y`$ mean “ordinary partial derivation”. From this last expression, it follows that

$$\nu (abba)m+n1+r,$$

which is the general inequality.

To prove the second assertion, notice that when applying $``$ to a monomial $`a_{ij}x^iy^j`$, one gets

$$(a_{ij}x^iy^j)=ia_{ij}x^{i1}y^j\theta +ja_{ij}x^iy^{j1}\eta $$

and, looking at the terms of least degree in $`\theta `$ and $`\eta `$, we have

$$(a_{ij}x^iy^j)=ia_{ij}x^{i1}y^j\theta _r+ja_{ij}x^iy^{j1}\eta _r+\text{ h.o.t. }$$

hence

$`(a_{ij}x^iy^j)b_{pq}x^py^q`$ $`(b_{pq}x^py^q)a_{ij}x^iy^j=`$
$`=(ia_{ij}x^{i1}y^j\theta _r+ja_{ij}x^iy^{j1}\eta _r)b_{pq}x^py^q`$
$`(pb_{pq}x^{p1}y^q\theta _r+qb_{pq}x^py^{q1}\eta _r)a_{ij}x^iy^j+\text{ h.o.t }=`$
$`=((ip)a_{ij}b_{pq}\theta _r)`$ $`x^{i+p1}y^{j+q}+((jq)a_{ij}b_{pq}\eta _r)x^{i+p}y^{j+q1}+\text{ h.o.t.}`$
which is zero if and only if $`i+j=p+q`$ (that is, $`\nu (a)=\nu (b)`$) and $`x\theta _r+y\eta _r=0`$ (i. e. $``$ is dicritical at $`(0,0)`$), and the conclusion follows. ∎

Lemma 4 allows us to classify dicritical vector fields in terms of L’Hôpital valuations:

###### Theorem 5.

Let $`\nu `$ be a divisorial valuation of $``$, centered at $`𝒪`$. Let $`Q`$ be the strict center of $`\nu `$ and $``$ a foliation by curves on $`(^2,0)`$. Then

$`\nu `$ is a L’Hôpital valuation for $``$ $``$ $``$ is dicritical at $`Q`$.

###### Proof.

Fix a local system of parameters $`(u,v)`$ at $`Q`$, $`u,v𝒪_Q`$. There are $`\sigma ,\theta ,\eta 𝒪_Q`$ with coefficients in $`𝒪_Q`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ can be written as

$$\stackrel{~}{}=\frac{\theta (u,v)}{\sigma (u,v)}\frac{}{u}+\frac{\eta (u,v)}{\sigma (u,v)}\frac{}{v}.$$

Moreover, in those coordinates, $`\nu =\mathrm{ord}_{(u,v)}`$ is “the order in $`(u,v)`$”. We can forget the denominators and suppose $`\theta `$ and $`\eta `$ are relatively prime in $`𝒪_Q`$. Let $`m`$ be the smallest among $`\mathrm{ord}_{(u,v)}(\theta )`$, $`\mathrm{ord}_{(u,v)}(\eta )`$. For any two meromorphic functions $`a=\overline{a}(u,v)/\mathrm{\Delta }(u,v)`$, $`b=\overline{b}(u,v)/\mathrm{\Delta }(u,v)`$ with $`\overline{a},\overline{b},\mathrm{\Delta }𝒪_Q`$, one has

$$\frac{a}{b}\frac{a}{b}=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(\overline{a}\overline{b}\overline{b}\overline{a})}{\overline{b}(\mathrm{\Delta }\overline{b}\overline{b}\mathrm{\Delta })}.$$

Let $`d=\mathrm{ord}(\mathrm{\Delta })`$, $`s=\mathrm{ord}(\overline{b})`$, $`t=\mathrm{ord}(\overline{a})`$ and suppose, in order to study L’Hôpital’s condition, that $`\nu (a)\nu (b)>0`$, which means that $`0d<st`$. Lemma 4 asserts that

$$\nu (\mathrm{\Delta }(\overline{a}\overline{b}\overline{a}\overline{b}))\overline{b}(\mathrm{\Delta }\overline{b}\overline{b}\mathrm{\Delta })=2s+d+m1.$$

The last equality hols because $`\mathrm{ord}(\overline{b})>\mathrm{ord}(\mathrm{\Delta })`$. L’Hôpital’s condition means that the order of the numerator is greater that the order of the denominator. This follows easily if $`t>s`$. When $`t=s`$, the condition follows if and only if (cf. Lemma 4) $``$ is dicritical at $`Q`$, which finishes the proof. ∎

### 3.3. Separatrices

The first result relating solutions of differential equations with L’Hôpital valuations deals with strictly formal separatrices:

###### Theorem 6.

Let $``$ be a foliation by curves in $`(^2,0)`$ and $`\nu _{\widehat{f}}`$ the valuation associated to a formal curve $`(\widehat{f}=0)`$. Then

$`\widehat{f}=0`$ is a separatrix of $``$ $``$ $`\nu `$ is a L’Hôpital valuation for $``$.

###### Proof.

$`)`$ This is an easy consequence of Theorem 1 and the fact that a (formal) curve following singular points of the strict transforms of $``$ by blowing-ups is a separatrix.

$`)`$ $`\nu `$ has rank $`1`$ and, in fact, is the intersection multiplicity with $`\widehat{f}`$, which means that if $`(x=t^\alpha ,y=\phi (t))`$ is a Puiseux parametrization of $`\widehat{f}=0`$ with $`\mathrm{ord}_t(\phi (t))>\alpha `$ then, for $`a=a(x,y)𝒪`$, we have $`\nu (a)=\mathrm{ord}_t(a(t^\alpha ,\phi (t)))`$. Let us prove that, in fact, it is a L’Hôpital valuation with respect to $``$. Write $`=h\frac{}{x}+g\frac{}{y}`$ with $`h,g𝒪`$ and relatively prime in $`𝒪`$. By Lemma 3, if $`p,q`$, then

$$\nu \left(\frac{p}{q}\frac{p}{q}\right)=ord_t\left(\frac{p}{q}(t)\frac{p}{q}(t)\right)=ord_t\left(\frac{p(t)}{q(t)}\frac{p^{}(t)}{q^{}(t)}\right)>0,$$

the last equality holding as a consequence of L’Hôpital’s rule for one complex variable. ∎

It appears that in order to study valuations associated to convergent separatrices, one needs to distinguish them according to the quotient of eigenvalues of the linear part of the vector field at a point. To be more precise, let $`\widehat{f}`$ be a separatrix, convergent or not, of a holomorphic vector field $``$ and let $`\rho `$ be a resolution of singularities of $`\widehat{f}`$. Put $`E=\rho ^1(0,0)`$. We may assume that the last exceptional line appearing in $`E`$ is invariant for $`\rho ^{}`$, that the strict transform of $`\widehat{f}`$ meets $`E`$ in a regular point of $`E`$ and, finally, that $`Q`$ is a simple point for $`\rho ^{}`$ (cf. ). Let $`(u,v)`$ be a local regular system of parameters of $`𝒪_Q`$ such that $`u=0`$ is the equation of $`E`$ and $`v=0`$ is tangent to the strict transform of $`\widehat{f}`$. In these coordinates, the equation of $`\rho ^{}`$ has non-zero linear part of the form $`\mu u/u\lambda v/v`$.

###### Definition 2.

We say that $`\widehat{f}`$ has

* Generic character if $`\lambda \mu 0`$ and $`\lambda /\mu `$.
* Infinite character if $`\mu =0`$.
* Zero character if $`\lambda =0`$.
* Rational character if $`\lambda \mu 0`$ and $`\lambda /\mu `$.

###### Remark 7.

The transformation rule for of the coefficients of the linear part of $``$ by blowing-up shows that the character is well defined: it does not depend either on $`\rho `$ or on the coordinates $`(u,v)`$.

###### Theorem 8.

If $`\nu `$ is of contact with the convergent curve defined by the ideal $`(f)𝒪`$, then

$`\nu `$ is a L’Hôpital valuation $``$ $`f`$ is a separatrix with $`\left\{\begin{array}{c}\text{ generic }\hfill \\ \text{ or }\hfill \\ \text{ infinite }\hfill \end{array}\right\}`$ character.

###### Proof.

For $`a𝒪`$, $`\nu `$ is given by

$$\nu (a)=(i,j)a(f)^i(f)^{i+1},\mathrm{\#}(\frac{a}{f^i},f)=j,$$

where $`\mathrm{\#}(a,b)`$ is, as usual, the intersection multiplicity of the curves $`(a=0)`$ and $`(b=0)`$.

$``$) From Theorem 1, we infer that $`(f=0)`$ must be a separatrix of $``$. As for the character, we divide the proof in two parts:

a) Assume, first, that $`(f=0)`$ has rational character. After reducing the singularities of $``$ (and hence of $`f`$), we may assume that the eigenvalues of its linear part are $`1`$ and $`m/n`$, with $`m,n`$. We may also assume that the irreducible component $`F`$ of the exceptional divisor $`E`$ meeting $`(f=0)`$ is both invariant for $``$ and transversal to $`(f=0)`$ at a regular point of $`E`$. Take a local system of parameters at $`Q`$, say $`(u,v)`$, such that the strict transform of $`f`$ follows the same infinitely near points as $`(u=0)`$ and such that $`F`$ is given by $`(v=0)`$. Things being so, the vector field can be written, at $`Q`$, as follows:

$$\{\begin{array}{c}u=u(1+f_1)\hfill \\ v=\frac{m}{n}v(1+f_2)\hfill \end{array}\text{ with }\nu (f_1),\nu (f_2)>0,$$

as $`f=0`$ and $`v=0`$ are invariant and $``$ is simple at $`Q`$. Take

$$\{\begin{array}{c}a=u^mv^{n+1}\hfill \\ b=u^mv^n\hfill \end{array}$$

By construction, $`\nu (a)\nu (b)>0`$. Let us see if they satisfy L’Hôpital’s criterion:

$$\frac{a}{b}\frac{a}{b}=\frac{v^{2n+1}(m/n+g_1)}{v^{2n}g_2}=\frac{\alpha }{\beta }$$

with $`\nu (g_1),\nu (g_2)>0`$. As $`(n+1)m/n0`$, we have $`\nu (\alpha )=(0,2n+1)`$ and $`\nu (\beta )>(0,2n)`$, so that the pair $`a,b`$ does not satisfy the criterion and $`\nu `$ is not L’Hôpital for $``$.

b) Suppose that $`f=0`$ has character zero. The same argument as in a) shows that we can take a local system of coordinates $`(u,v)`$ at $`Q`$ with

$$\{\begin{array}{c}u=u^{q+1}+uf_1\hfill \\ v=v(1+f_2)\hfill \end{array}\text{ with }\nu (f_1),\nu (f_2)>0,q1.$$

In this situation, take

$$\{\begin{array}{c}a=uv\hfill \\ b=u(u+v)/v\hfill \end{array}$$

which satisfy $`\nu (a)\nu (b)>0`$. An easy computation shows that

$$\frac{a}{b}\frac{a}{b}=\frac{v^2}{u+v}\frac{v^2v^2f_2+v^2f_1+u^qv^2}{vf_1+ug},$$

where $`g𝒪_Q`$. As $`\nu (u+v)=\nu (v)=(0,1)`$ and $`\nu (f_1)>0`$, the valuation does not satisfy L’Hôpital’s criterion, q.e.d.

$``$) Fix, as before, $`Q`$ in the exceptional divisor of a reduction of singularities of $``$ and $`(f=0)`$, which is not a corner and take coordinates $`(u,v)`$ at $`Q`$ such that $``$ is given by

$$\{\begin{array}{c}u=u(1+f_1)\hfill \\ v=\lambda vvf_2\hfill \end{array}\text{ with }\nu (f_1),\nu (f_2)>0.$$

Let $`a=u^i\overline{a}`$, $`b=u^j\overline{b}`$ with $`\nu (a)\nu (b)>0`$ and $`\nu (\overline{a})=(0,k)`$, $`\nu (b)=(0,l)`$. We have

(2)
$$\frac{a}{b}\frac{a}{b}=\frac{u^{i+j}}{u^{2j}}\left(\frac{j\overline{a}\overline{b}+j\overline{a}\overline{b}f_1+\overline{a}\overline{b}i\overline{a}\overline{b}i\overline{a}\overline{b}f_1\overline{a}\overline{b}}{\overline{b}((j\overline{b}+\overline{b})+j\overline{b}f_1)}\right)=u^{ij}\frac{\alpha }{\beta }.$$

Let us make a brief digression in order to calculate $`\nu (\beta )`$.

$$\begin{array}{c}p=v^n+uh_1+v^{n+1}h_2\hfill \\ q=v^m+ug_1+v^{m+1}g_2\hfill \end{array}$$

where the functions $`h_i`$ and $`g_j`$ are formal power series in $`[[u,v]]`$. Their derivatives are

(3)
$$\begin{array}{c}p=n\lambda v^n+u\delta _1\lambda v^{n+1}\delta _2+v^nf_2\delta _3\hfill \\ q=m\lambda v^m+uϵ_1\lambda v^{m+1}ϵ_2+v^mf_2ϵ_3\hfill \end{array}$$

where, again, $`\delta _i,\epsilon _j`$ are in $`𝒪_Q`$. From (3), we have that $`\nu (qppq)2\nu (q)`$ and, hence, $`\nu (\overline{b})\nu (\overline{b})`$. In fact, equality holds if and only if $`nm`$ and $`\lambda 0`$. If $`\nu (\overline{b})>\nu (\overline{b})`$, then $`\nu (\beta )=2\nu (\overline{b})`$. If not, then

$$j\overline{b}+\overline{b}=j\frac{v^n+\mathrm{}}{v^m+\mathrm{}}+\frac{\lambda (nm)v^{n+m}+\mathrm{}}{v^{2m}+\mathrm{}}=,$$

(dots indicating terms of greater value). But

$$=\frac{jv^{m+n}+\lambda (mn)v^{n+m}+\mathrm{}}{v^{2m}+\mathrm{}}$$

and as, by hypothesis, $`\lambda `$ is neither zero nor rational, then $`j+\lambda (mn)0`$ when $`j0`$, and in this case we get $`\nu (j\overline{b}+\overline{b})=\nu (\overline{b})`$. If $`j=0`$, then $`n>m`$ and hence $`\nu (\overline{b})=\nu (\overline{b})`$.

Thus, in any case, $`\nu (\beta )=2\nu (\overline{b})`$.

Continuing with the proof, if $`i>j`$, then L’Hôpital’s condition is satisfied because of the factor $`u^{ij}`$. If $`i=j`$, then $`\nu (\overline{a})\nu (\overline{b})>0`$, and from the expression of $`\alpha `$ in (2), we infer that

$$\nu (\alpha )\nu \left(\overline{b}^2\left(\frac{\overline{a}}{\overline{b}}\right)\right),$$

from what follows, by a reasoning similar to the previous one, that $`\nu (\alpha )>\nu (\beta )`$, and we are done. ∎

A straightforward consequence is the following

###### Corollary 9.

Let $`\nu `$ be a valuation of contact with a divisor $`E_k`$, and let $``$ be a vector field. Let $`Q`$ be a fixed corner of $`\nu `$, simple for $``$ and such that both components of the exceptional divisor passing through $`Q`$ are invariant. Then $`\nu `$ is a L’Hôpital valuation for $``$ if and only if one of the following conditions holds:

* The two irreducible components of the exceptional divisor passing through $`Q`$ have generic character (understood as separatrices in $`𝒪_Q`$).
* $`E_k`$ has infinite character (and hence, the other component has character zero).

### 3.4. Valuations with an irrational Puiseux exponent

As in the previous case, we have to distinguish between rational and non-rational quotients of eigenvalues, although in a slightly different way.

###### Lemma 10.

Let $`Q`$ be a simple singularity of a plane vector field $`=b_1/xa_1/y`$, where $`a_1,b_1`$ are of order $`1`$ in $`(x,y)`$. Assume that the eigenvalues of the linear part of $``$ are both non-zero and have non-rational quotient. Then any valuation $`\nu `$ with an irrational Puiseux exponent following singular infinitely near points of $``$ is a L’Hôpital valuation for $``$.

###### Proof.

Up to a linear change of coordinates, we can write

$$\{\begin{array}{c}u=\lambda u+\mathrm{}\hfill \\ v=v+\mathrm{}\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`(u,v)`$ is the new coordinate system. Also we may assume that the associated valuation is $`\nu (u)=1`$, $`\nu (v)=\kappa 𝕀_+`$, so that if $`\alpha =a_{ij}u^iv^j[[u,v]]`$, then $`\nu (\alpha )=\mathrm{min}_{a_{ij}0}(i+\kappa j)=\mathrm{ord}_t(a_{ij}t^{i+\kappa j})`$. Given $`\alpha ,\beta 𝒪_Q`$, we have

(4)
$$\left(\frac{\alpha }{\beta }\right)=\frac{(\lambda u\alpha _u+v\alpha _v)\beta (\lambda u\beta _u+v\beta _v)\alpha }{\beta ^2}+\mathrm{}$$

The set of monomials in $`(\lambda u\alpha _u+v\alpha _v)`$ whose coefficient is non-zero is the same as that of $`\alpha `$, as $`\lambda `$ is irrational. The same happens with $`(\lambda u\beta _u+v\beta _v)`$ and $`\beta `$. Let $`(i_0,j_0)`$ and $`(m_0,n_0)`$ be the leading coefficients of $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$, respectively. The numerator in (4) is

$$(\lambda i_0+j_0)\alpha _{i_0j_0}\beta _{m_0n_0}(\lambda m_0+n_0)\alpha _{i_0j_0}\beta _{m_0n_0}=$$

$$=\alpha _{i_0j_0}\beta _{m_0n_0}(\lambda (i_0m_0)+(j_0n_0)),$$

which is non-zero. If $`(i_0,j_0)(m_0,n_0)`$, then the value of the numerator is the sum of the values of $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$. If, on the contrary, $`(i_0,j_0)=(m_0,n_0)`$, then the value of the numerator is strictly greater than the sum of the values of $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$.

Take now $`\alpha /\beta ,\gamma /\beta `$. We need to study

(5)
$$\nu \left(\frac{\alpha /\beta }{\gamma /\beta }\frac{(\alpha /\beta )}{(\gamma /\beta )}\right)=\nu \left(\frac{\beta (\alpha \gamma \gamma \alpha )}{\gamma (\beta \gamma \gamma \beta )}\right).$$

Suppose $`\nu (\alpha )\nu (\gamma )>\nu (\beta )0`$. From the second inequality and the previous considerations, it follows that $`\nu (\gamma (\beta \gamma \gamma \beta ))=\nu (\gamma )+\nu (\gamma )+\nu (\beta )`$. There are two possibilities: either $`\nu (\alpha )>\nu (\beta )`$ or $`\nu (\alpha )=\nu (\beta )`$. In the first case, the value of the numerator in (5) is, at least, $`\nu (\alpha )+\nu (\beta )+\nu (\gamma )`$, which is greater than the value of the denominator. To see that the same holds for the second case one only needs to use the above argument on the initial components of $`\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma `$ and their derivatives. ∎

###### Remark.

Obviously, a valuation with an irrational Puiseux exponent which does not follow singular infinitely near points of a vector field is not a L’Hôpital valuation, in view of Seidenberg’s reduction of singularities and Theorem 1.

###### Lemma 11.

Under the same conditions as in Lemma 10, but with rational quotient of eigenvalues (including the case in which one of them is $`0`$), no valuation with an irrational Puiseux exponent is L’Hôpital for $``$.

###### Proof.

By the previous remark, we only need to consider valuations following singular infinitely near points of $``$. We divide the proof in two cases: both eigenvalues are non-zero (resonant case) and one of them is zero (saddle-node).

a) Resonant singularities. We can write $``$ as

$$\{\begin{array}{c}u=mu+\mathrm{}\hfill \\ v=nv+\mathrm{}\hfill \end{array}$$

After a polynomial change of coordinates (see ), we may assume that

$$=(mu+s_1(u,v))\frac{}{u}+(nv+s_2(u,v))\frac{}{v},$$

with $`\nu (s_1),\nu (s_2)\nu (u)+\nu (v)`$ and that the valuation is $`\nu (u)=1,\nu (v)=\eta 𝕀_{>0}`$ with $`\eta >1`$<sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1Here we are using the fact that $`m,n0`$.. Take $`(i_0,j_0)(0,0)`$ such that $`(mi_0+nj_0)=0`$. For $`cu^{i_0}v^{j_0}`$, we have

$`\nu ((cu^{i_0}`$ $`v^{j_0}))=\nu (i_0cu^{i_01}v^{j_0}s_1(u,v)+j_0cu^{i_0}v^{j_01}s_2)`$
$`\mathrm{min}\{i_0+j_0\eta +\eta ,i_0+j_0\eta +1\}=i_0+j_0+1,`$
by definition. Let $`r=[i_0+j_0\eta +1]`$ (integral part). As $`j_00`$ and $`\eta 𝕀`$, we have $`r<i_0+j_0\eta +1`$. To verify that L’Hôpital’s condition is not satisfied, take $`\alpha =u^r,\gamma =u^{i_0}v^{j_0}`$, for which $`\nu (\alpha )>\nu (\gamma )>0`$, but $`\nu (\gamma )>\nu (\alpha )=\nu (\alpha )`$, so that

$$\nu \left(\frac{\alpha }{\beta }\frac{\alpha }{\beta }\right)=\nu (\alpha )+\nu (\gamma )\nu (\gamma )\nu (\gamma )<0,$$

which finishes the proof in this case.

b) Saddle-node. The vector field has a representative of the form

$$=a(u,v)\frac{}{u}+(v+b(u,v))\frac{}{v},$$

with $`\mathrm{ord}_{(u,v)}(a),\mathrm{ord}_{(u,v)}(b)2`$. The valuation is defined by $`\nu (u)=1,\nu (v)=\eta 𝕀_{>0}`$, but we may not assume $`\eta >1`$. One can prove  that, up to a holomorphic change of coordinates, $``$ can be written

$$=(u(1+\lambda v^p)+vR(u,v))\frac{}{u}+v^{p+1}\frac{}{v}$$

for suitable $`\lambda `$ and $`p_1`$. Truncating, we deduce that there is $`p1`$ and a polynomial change of coordinates such that we may assume $`\nu (a(u,v))2`$, (taking $`a(u,v)=u^{p+1}+\mathrm{}`$). Thus, for any $`m`$, we have

$$\nu ((u^m))m+1.$$

Here we have to distinguish between $`\eta <1`$ and $`\eta >1`$. In the first case, let $`\alpha =uv`$ and $`\gamma =u`$. A direct computation shows that

$$\nu \left(\frac{\alpha }{\gamma }\frac{\alpha }{\gamma }\right)=\nu (\alpha )+\nu (\gamma )\nu (\gamma )\nu (\gamma )0.$$

In the second case, taking $`r=[\eta ]`$ and $`\alpha =v,\gamma =u^r`$, the same argument finishes the proof. ∎

From these two lemmas, we infer the result concerning all the valuations with an irrational Puiseux exponent:

###### Theorem 12.

Let $``$ be a holomorphic vector field and $`\nu `$ a valuation centered in $`𝒪`$, with an irrational Puiseux exponent. Let $`(P_i)_{i0}`$ be the sequence of infinitely near points of $`\nu `$. The following conditions are equivalent

* $`\nu `$ is a L’Hôpital valuation for $``$.
* $`P_i`$ is a singular point for the strict transform $`_i`$ of $``$, for all $`i`$, and if $`P_k`$ is simple for $`_k`$, then both eigenvalues of its linear part are non-zero and their quotient is not in $`_0`$.

A consequence of the results of this section is the following characterization of valuations with an infinite number of Puiseux exponents as those which are *never* L’Hôpital valuations for any vector field:

###### Corollary 13.

A valuation $`\nu `$ of $``$ has an infinite number of Puiseux exponents if and only if there is no vector field for which it is L’Hôpital.

Sufficiency is Corollary 2. The converse is derived from the following lemma, whose prove is done by induction on the number of blowing-ups:

###### Lemma 14.

Let $`P`$ denote an infinitely near point of $`(0,0)^2`$ appearing after a finite sequence of blowing-ups $`\pi `$. Then

1. If $`P`$ is a corner, then there exists a singular holomorphic foliation $`\omega `$ in $`(^2,0)`$ such that the quotient of eigenvalues of the strict transform $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }`$ at $`P`$ is not a rational number.
2. If $`P`$ is not a corner then, given any (formal or convergent) curve $`\gamma `$ passing through $`P`$ and transversal to the exceptional divisor, there exists a singular holomorphic foliation $`\omega `$ such that: $`\gamma `$ is a separatrix of $`\omega `$, $`P`$ is a simple singularity of the strict transform $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }`$ of $`\omega `$, and the quotient of eigenvalues of $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }`$ at $`P`$ is not in $`_{<0}`$.

## 4. Rank $`1`$ valuations and transcendence of separatrices

As valuations of $``$ of rank one and rational rank one are exactly the divisorial ones, those of contact with a non-convergent curve and those having an infinite number of Puiseux pairs, we have the following corollary, concerning the algebraic independence of solutions of differential equations:

###### Corollary 15.

Keep the notation of the previous sections.

* There is a valuation $`\nu `$ of $``$, of rank $`1`$ and rational rank $`1`$ which is a L’Hôpital valuation for a vector field $``$ if and only if the foliation defined by $``$ is either dicritical or admits a separatrix $`\widehat{f}\widehat{𝒪}`$ which is transcendental over $`𝒪`$: that is, $`(\widehat{f})𝒪=(0)`$.
* If $``$ is non-dicritical, the existence of a rank $`1`$ and rational rank $`1`$ L’Hôpital valuation for $``$ is equivalent to $``$ having a transcendental (that is, non-convergent) separatrix.

More specifically, for vector fields with polynomial coefficients, by imitating the same arguments as in Theorem 6 and Corollary 15, one can prove:

###### Corollary 16.

Let $`=a(x,y)/x+b(x,y)/y`$ be a polynomial vector field. Then

* There is a valuation $`\nu `$ of $`(x,y)`$, of rank $`1`$ and rational rank $`1`$ which is a L’Hôpital valuation for $``$ if and only if the foliation defined by $``$ is either dicritical or admits a separatrix $`\widehat{f}[[x,y]]`$ which is algebraically transcendental over $`(x,y)`$.
* If $``$ is non-dicritical, the existence of a rank $`1`$ and rational rank $`1`$ L’Hôpital valuation for $``$ is equivalent to $``$ having an algebraically transcendental separatrix.
* Moreover, if $``$ is regular, the (unique analytic) solution of $``$ passing through $`(0,0)`$ is transcendental over $`(x,y)`$ if and only if there is a L’Hôpital valuation for $``$ in $`(x,y)`$ with rank $`1`$ and rational rank $`1`$.

## 5. The “missing” separatrices

In the previous sections, we have characterized *some* of the separatrices of a germ of analytic vector field in terms of their associated valuations: those having generic or infinite character. The remaining cases include the solution of regular analytic vector fields —which have always rational character. Recall that in the proof of Theorem 8, in order to show that separatrices passing through singularities with rational quotient of eigenvalues did not give rise to L’Hôpital valuations, we chose the functions:

$$a=u^mv^{n+1},\text{ and }b=u^mv^n,$$

$`(u=0)`$ being the equation of the separatrix. In fact, any counterexample to L’Hôpital’s property must be of that kind: it has to include as a factor, the equation of the separatrix under study. This led us to give the following

###### Definition 3.

Keep the notation of the previous sections. We say that a valuation $`\nu :^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a weakly L’Hôpital valuation for a vector field $``$ if

$$\nu \left(\frac{a}{b}\frac{a}{b}\right)>0$$

for any $`a,b`$ with $`\nu (a)\nu (b)>0`$ and such that if $`\nu (c)>0`$ then there is $`n`$ with $`n\nu (c)>\nu (a)`$.

This property can be expressed using the notion of isolated subgroups:

###### Definition.

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be an ordered group. An isolated subgroup of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a subgroup $`(0)\text{B}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ which is a segment: this means that, if $`a,b\text{B}`$ and $`acb`$, then $`c\text{B}`$.

Isolated subgroups are ordered by inclusion, and, its number coincides with the rational rank of the valuation, in our context. The first isolated subgroup is the smallest one. One can see that the first isolated subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ of a group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is always $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ archimedian, which means that given $`a\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ and $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ with $`0<\gamma <a`$, there is $`n`$ such that $`n\gamma >a`$. In other words, the first isolated subgroup is the biggest subgroup “not having infinitely great elements”. Thus, Definition 3 becomes

###### Proposition.

A valuation $`\nu `$ is *weakly L’Hôpital*  for $``$ if and only if

$$\nu \left(\frac{a}{b}\frac{a}{b}\right)>0,$$

for any $`a,b`$ such that $`\nu (a),\nu (b)`$ are in the first isolated subgroup of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and with $`\nu (a)\nu (b)>0`$.

The proof of the following theorem is straightforward

###### Theorem 17.

Let $`\nu `$ be a valuation centered in $`𝒪`$ associated to a curve $`f𝒪`$ and let $``$ be a (germ of) vector field at $`(^2,0)`$. Then the following conditions are equivalent

1. $`(f=0)`$ is a separatrix of $``$.
2. $`\nu `$ is a weakly L’Hôpital valuation for $``$.

From Theorem 17 we infer the “valuative Cauchy Theorem”:

###### Theorem 18.

Let $``$ be a regular (germ of) vector field at $`(^2,0)`$. There is one and only one irreducible (principal) ideal $`(f)𝒪`$ such that its associated valuation $`\nu _f`$ is a L’Hôpital valuation for $``$.


format: text

text:
# Magnetoroton scattering by phonons in the fractional quantum Hall régime

## 1 Introduction

Phonon spectroscopy is a technique that has been used with much success in the study of semiconductor systems and in particular the properties of two-dimensional electron systems (2des) formed at heterojunctions and quantum wells. One of the most important recent applications of the technique has been to the study of the incompressible quantum liquid of electrons formed at a semiconductor heterojunction which gives rise to the fractional quantum Hall effect. The essential points of the experiments are that a pulse of phonons with an approximately black body spectrum of energies is injected into the substrate of a semiconductor device. The phonons propagate ballistically across the substrate until they encounter the electrons at the heterojunction where some of them may be absorbed. In the fractional quantum Hall states the electrons have a true energy gap as a consequence of incompressibility, so that if the electrons are initially at zero temperature, only the phonons in the high energy part of the black body distribution can be absorbed. It is a great virtue of the technique that these phonons may also have wave vectors comparable with the interesting structure in the dispersion relation predicted for the low lying collective modes or *magnetorotons*  of the electron liquid. The basic theoretical picture of what happens in these experiments has been outlined recently . This work concentrated on processes in which the absorption of a high energy phonon leads to the creation of a magnetoroton excitation close to the minimum in the dispersion curve. In the experiments, the effect of the phonon absorption is detected by measuring changes in the two-terminal resistance of the device. It was speculated  that in some way the elementary excitations created by the absorption of phonons contributed more or less directly to the increased dissipation observed in the two-terminal measurements. Dissipation due to mutual friction between the magnetoroton gas and the Laughlin liquid has been discussed by Platzman . A more concrete mechanism for dissipation due to magnetoroton creation was proposed by one of us . The essential idea of this was that, once created by absorption of a high-energy phonon, a magnetoroton excitation would rapidly absorb many low-energy phonons from the bulk of the Planck distribution in the pulse. For wave vectors larger than $`q^{}`$ the magnetorotons can be viewed as excitons formed from Laughlin quasiparticles and quasiholes , the separation of the two quasiparticles in an exciton with wave vector $`q`$ being $`l_c^2q`$. Once an exciton has absorbed sufficient low energy phonons that the separation of its constituents exceeds some effective screening length, the fractionally charged quasiparticles are effectively unbound and contribute directly to the two-terminal resistance. A crude analysis presented in  indicated that this process might not be particularly rapid. One purpose of this paper is to analyse this idea more carefully and in fact to show that the process described will not actually happen at all. The shape of the magnetoroton dispersion curve is such that the processes in which magnetorotons absorb energy from the low-energy rump of the Planck distribution will always reduce the wave vector of the magnetoroton. Hence we conclude, as discussed in , that the energy absorbed from the phonon pulse by the electrons is shared among all the electrons leading to an overall increase in the electron temperature, which then leads to an increased two-terminal resistance for the device. The processes described above in which magnetorotons are heated with a corresponding decrease in wave vector will, of course, occur in real experiments and will provide the leading correction to the expressions described in  at finite electron temperature. These corrections are of particular importance for recent experiments  in which the time dependence of the two-terminal resistance, and therefore the electron temperature, over the duration of the phonon pulse is well resolved. The layout of this paper is as follows. In section two a brief review of the properties of electrons in the fractional quantum Hall state and the phonons in the substrate is given, more details can be found in  and . In section 3 expressions for the rate of energy transfer between a phonon pulse and the electron system will be given and the forms of the relevant matrix elements discussed. In sections four a simple analytical treatment of these rate expressions will be given which shows that magnetoroton dissociation due to heating by low energy phonons cannot occur. In section 5 the contribution of the magnetoroton scattering processes to the rate of energy transfer from the pulse to the 2des will be considered and it will be shown that there is a (low) cross-over temperature at which the dependence of the transfer rate on heater temperature changes from exponential to a power law. Section 6 will contain a brief summary and discussion.

## 2 Electrons and Phonons in Fractional Quantum Hall Systems

Our basic picture of the physics of electrons in the fractional quantum Hall states emerges from the ideas of Laughlin  and Girvin, MacDonald and Platzman . Laughlin constructed the wave function for a state with exceptionally low energy at the primary quantum Hall filling factor $`\nu =1/\left(2m+1\right)`$. He also constructed low energy quasiparticle excitations which carry fractional charge and have an energy gap even in the thermodynamic limit. Hence the description of the quantum Hall state as an incompressible quantum liquid. Girvin, MacDonald and Platzman  proposed wave functions for a branch of neutral collective excitations whose energy lies below that of the quasiparticle continuum. This situation is analogous to the phonon-roton branch in superfluid helium. GMP made this analogy more explicit by adapting the theoretical approach of Feynman  to the case of magnetically quantized 2d electrons. They found a branch of low energy excitations whose dispersion relation, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\left(q\right)`$, has a deep minimum at a finite wave vector, $`q^{}`$. By analogy with liquid helium they dubbed these magnetorotons. Unlike helium, the fractional quantum Hall liquid does not have a gapless phonon mode at long wavelengths, the incompressibility of the underlying state causes the energy of the collective mode to increase for wavelengths longer than the magnetoroton minimum and to always be gapped. One expects the single mode approximation of GMP to give a good quantitative account of the physics of this collective mode for wavelengths close to and longer than the magnetoroton minimum. However, for shorter wavelengths one expects the mode to be better described as an exciton composed of a pair of oppositely charged Laughlin quasiparticles. The separation of the pair in a state of wave vector $`q`$ being $`l_c^2q/\nu `$. The form of the dispersion relation which we assume here is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\left(q\right)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Delta }_{\text{SMA}}\left(q\right)& q<q_m\\ \mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{}}E_c\frac{\nu ^3}{q}& q>q_m\end{array}$$
(1)
where $`E_c=e^2/4\pi \epsilon _0\kappa l_c`$ is the Coulomb energy scale, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\text{SMA}}`$ is the dispersion relation obtained from the single mode approximation of GMP  and $`q_m`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{}}`$ are chosen so that $`\mathrm{\Delta }\left(q\right)`$ and its first derivative are continuous for all $`q`$. This is shown in figure 1 below. As can be seen the “exciton” part of this dispersion relation is very flat: a fact that will have considerable significance for the proposed dissociation mechanism.

Phonons in a GaAs substrate travel ballistically for frequencies up to about a terahertz. Hence a pulse of phonons injected into a GaAs substrate will move across the substrate of a heterostructure until it encounters the heterojunction where it will interact with the vertically confined electrons. The Hamiltonian for the electron phonon interaction can be written in the form

$$H_{e\varphi }=\underset{s,\underset{¯}{Q}}{}M_s\left(\underset{¯}{Q}\right)Z\left(q_z\right)\widehat{\rho }_𝐪\left(\widehat{a}_s\left(\underset{¯}{Q}\right)+\widehat{a}_s^{}\left(\underset{¯}{Q}\right)\right)$$
(2)
where $`\widehat{\rho }_𝐪`$ is the Fourier transform of the local (2d) electron density, $`\widehat{a}_s\left(\underset{¯}{Q}\right)`$ is the second quantized operator for phonons of polarization $`s`$ and (3d) wave vector $`\underset{¯}{Q}`$, $`Z\left(q_z\right)`$ is a form factor to account for the finite thickness of the electron layer and $`M_s\left(\underset{¯}{Q}\right)`$ is the matrix element for the coupling of phonons in the given mode to electrons close to the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ point of the GaAs conduction band. This hamiltonian incorporates both piezoelectric and deformation potential coupling which differ in their anisotropy and in the index of the power law dependence on phonon energy.

The trial wave function used by GMP for a magnetoroton of wave vector $`𝐪`$ is of the form

$$|𝐪=\frac{\overline{\rho }_𝐪|\mathrm{\Psi }_L}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Psi }_L\left|\overline{\rho }_𝐪\overline{\rho }_𝐪\right|\mathrm{\Psi }_L}}$$
(3)
where $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_L`$ is the Laughlin ground state and $`\overline{\rho }_𝐪`$ is the projection of the electron density operator onto the lowest Landau level: $`\overline{\rho }_𝐪=𝒫_0\rho _𝐪𝒫_0`$ (see  for details of the projection). If we consider a pulse of phonons characterized by a distribution function $`n_s\left(\underset{¯}{Q}\right)`$ in contact with a 2des in the fractional quantum Hall state at zero temperature, then the rate of energy transfer to the electrons should be, using Fermi’s golden rule

$`P`$ $`=2\pi {\displaystyle \underset{s,Q,𝐤}{}}\left|M_s\left(\underset{¯}{Q}\right)Z\left(q_z\right)𝐪\left|\widehat{\rho }_𝐪\right|\mathrm{\Psi }_L\right|^2\delta \left(\omega _s\left(\underset{¯}{Q}\right)\mathrm{\Delta }\left(𝐤\right)\right)n_s\left(\underset{¯}{Q}\right)`$ (4)
$`=2\pi N{\displaystyle \underset{s,\underset{¯}{Q},𝐤}{}}\left|M_s\left(\underset{¯}{Q}\right)Z\left(q_z\right)\right|^2\overline{s}\left(q\right)\delta \left(\omega _s\left(\underset{¯}{Q}\right)\mathrm{\Delta }\left(𝐤\right)\right)n_s\left(\underset{¯}{Q}\right)`$ (5)
where

$$\overline{s}\left(q\right)=\frac{1}{N}\mathrm{\Psi }_L\left|\overline{\rho }_𝐪\overline{\rho }_𝐪\right|\mathrm{\Psi }_L$$
(6)
is the projected static structure factor of the electron liquid and we set $`\mathrm{}=l_c=1`$ from now on. The projected structure factor is related, as shown by GMP, to the full structure factor, $`s\left(q\right)`$ by

$$\overline{s}\left(q\right)e^{q^2/2}=s\left(q\right)1.$$
(7)
GMP extracted $`s\left(q\right)`$ from Laughlin’s wave function and used it in the calculation of the magnetoroton dispersion $`\mathrm{\Delta }\left(q\right)`$. The expression in equation 5 forms the basis for the work in .

## 3 Magnetoroton-Phonon Scattering

Let us now consider the probability per unit time that a magnetoroton of wave vector $`𝐤`$ will absorb a phonon with wave vector $`\underset{¯}{Q}=(𝐪,q_z)`$ and be scattered into the state with wave vector $`𝐤+𝐪`$. Fermi’s golden rule tells us that this will be

$$\tau _{𝐤,\underset{¯}{Q}}^1=2\pi \left|M_s\left(\underset{¯}{Q}\right)Z\left(q_z\right)\right|^2\left|𝐤+𝐪\left|\rho _𝐪\right|𝐤\right|^2\delta \left(\mathrm{\Delta }\left(k\right)+\omega _s\left(\underset{¯}{Q}\right)\mathrm{\Delta }\left(\left|𝐤+𝐪\right|\right)\right)$$
(8)
which we can express, using the ansatz of GMP, as

$$2\pi \frac{\left|M_s\left(\underset{¯}{Q}\right)Z\left(q_z\right)\right|^2}{\overline{s}\left(k\right)\overline{s}\left(\left|𝐤+𝐪\right|\right)}\left|P^{\left(3\right)}(𝐤,𝐪)\right|^2\delta \left(\mathrm{\Delta }\left(k\right)+\omega _s\left(\underset{¯}{Q}\right)\mathrm{\Delta }\left(\left|𝐤+𝐪\right|\right)\right),$$
(9)
where we define the projected three-point correlation function

$$P^{\left(3\right)}(𝐤,𝐪)=\frac{1}{N}\mathrm{\Psi }_L\left|\overline{\rho }_{𝐤𝐪}\overline{\rho }_𝐪\overline{\rho }_𝐤\right|\mathrm{\Psi }_L.$$
(10)
The projected three-point correlation function has been discussed by MacDonald et al.  in the context of magnetoroton scattering by quenched impurities. As outlined there, this quantity can be related to its unprojected counterpart via

$`P^{\left(3\right)}(𝐤,𝐪)`$ $`=e^{\frac{1}{2}q^2\frac{1}{2}(𝐤,𝐪)}\left\{e^{\frac{1}{2}k^2}+s\left(k\right)1\right\}+e^{\frac{1}{2}(\left(𝐤+𝐪\right),𝐤)}\left(s\left(q\right)1\right)`$ (11)
$`+e^{\frac{1}{2}(𝐪,𝐤)}\left(s\left(\left|𝐤+𝐪\right|\right)1\right)+n^{(3)}(𝐤,𝐪)`$
where

$`(𝐤,𝐪)`$ $`=𝐤𝐪+i𝐤𝐪`$ (12)
$`=\left(k_xik_y\right)\left(q_x+iq_y\right)`$
and

$$n^{(3)}(𝐤,𝐪)=\frac{1}{N}\mathrm{\Psi }_L\left|\rho _{𝐤𝐪}\rho _𝐪\rho _𝐤\right|\mathrm{\Psi }_L.$$
(13)
MacDonald et al. used the convolution approximation  developed for the study of corresponding processes in superfluid helium to estimate this latter quantity in terms of the static structure factor and obtained an expression for $`n^{\left(3\right)}(𝐤,𝐪)`$ of the form

$`n^{\left(3\right)}(𝐤,𝐪)`$ $`=N^2\delta _{𝐤,\mathrm{𝟎}}\delta _{𝐪,\mathrm{𝟎}}+N\delta _{𝐤,\mathrm{𝟎}}h\left(q\right)+N\delta _{𝐪,\mathrm{𝟎}}h\left(k\right)+N\delta _{𝐤+𝐪,\mathrm{𝟎}}h\left(k\right)`$ (14)
$`+h\left(k\right)h\left(q\right)+\left[h\left(k\right)+h\left(q\right)+h\left(k\right)h\left(q\right)\right]h\left(\left|𝐤+𝐪\right|\right)`$
where

$$h\left(k\right)=s\left(k\right)1N\delta _{𝐤,\mathrm{𝟎}}.$$
(15)
Beyond this, very little is known about this function, although a useful sum-rule for testing approximation schemes for it was recently derived in . Although more detailed knowledge of this quantity would be desirable for truly quantitative work on the phonon experiments, here we will restrict ourselves to the more modest objective of qualitative understanding.

## 4 Analytic Estimates

We will begin by deriving a simple criterion for small momentum transfer magnetoroton scattering processes. Energy and momentum conservation require that a magnetoroton with initial wave vector $`𝐤`$ can absorb a phonon with in-plane momentum $`𝐪`$ incident at angle $`\theta `$ to the normal to the 2des only when

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\left(\left|𝐤+𝐪\right|\right)=\mathrm{\Delta }\left(k\right)+\frac{c_sq}{\mathrm{sin}\theta }.$$
(16)
For small $`q`$ we set

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\left(\left|𝐤+𝐪\right|\right)\mathrm{\Delta }\left(k\right)+\frac{𝐪𝐤}{k}\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\left(k\right)$$
(17)
so that

$$\frac{𝐪𝐤}{kq}=\mathrm{cos}\varphi =\frac{c_s}{\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\left(k\right)\mathrm{sin}\theta }$$
(18)
where $`\mathrm{cos}\varphi =𝐤𝐪/kq`$. This can only be satisfied when

$$\left|\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\left(k\right)\right|>\frac{c_s}{\mathrm{sin}\theta }$$
(19)
This result simply means that phonon absorption can only occur when the slope of the magnetoroton dispersion is greater than the slope of the dispersion curve for phonons with an angle of incidence $`\theta `$. By happy accident in our system of units ($`\mathrm{}=l_c=_c=1`$) the unit of velocity, $`l_c_0/\mathrm{}`$, is independent of magnetic field and, for GaAs, has the value $`1.68\times 10^5\mathrm{m}\mathrm{s}^1`$. In these units the speeds of sound are $`c_10.0305`$ for LA phonons and $`c_2=c_30.0196`$ for TA phonons. Hence we expect that these scattering processes will be suppressed at large $`k`$ and sufficiently close to the magnetoroton minimum where the magnetoroton dispersion is very flat and $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\left(k\right)`$ small.

Let us estimate where this suppression occurs for large $`k`$ to assess the viability of the magnetoroton dissociation idea. At large $`k`$ we assume

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\left(k\right)=\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{}}\frac{\nu ^3}{k}$$
(20)
so that

$$\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\left(k\right)=\frac{\nu ^3}{k^2}$$
(21)
and scattering will be cut-off beyond

$$k_s=\sqrt{\frac{\nu ^3\mathrm{sin}\theta }{c_s}}.$$
(22)
Hence we have, for $`\nu =1/3`$, $`l_ck_1=1.102`$, $`l_ck_2=1.375`$, assuming that phonons with $`\theta =\pi /2`$ (i.e. in plane phonons) exist in the pulse. The latter cut-off is only just beyond the magnetoroton minimum while the former is so small that the whole analysis is entirely meaningless. In fact, in the experiments, phonons with $`\theta =\pi /2`$ are strongly focussed away from the device: only phonons with $`\theta <\pi /4`$ are likely to couple with the electrons ensuring that there will be no coupling to very low energy phonons at all in the “exciton” regime. The corrections to this result arising from finite values of the phonon wave vector only strengthen it: the curvature of the magneto-exciton dispersion curve makes it even harder for energy and momentum to be conserved.

Let us now consider processes in which magnetorotons with wave vectors close to the minimum gap are scattered to longer wave lengths by absorbing phonons. In this case we have

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\left(k\right)\mathrm{\Delta }^{}+\frac{\left(kq^{}\right)^2}{2\mu }$$
(23)
where $`\mu `$ is an effective magnetoroton mass. In this case the absorption of a small phonon with in-plane wave vector $`q`$ will be allowed provided

$$\left|kq^{}\right|>\frac{\mu c_s}{\mathrm{sin}\theta }$$
(24)
this gives, for $`\nu =1/3`$ (assuming the ideal magnetoroton dispersion) $`\left|kq^{}\right|>0.19/l_c`$ for LA phonons and $`\left|kq^{}\right|>0.12/l_c`$ for TA phonons.

## 5 Magnetoroton Scattering Contribution to Phonon Absorption

The leading correction to the energy transfer rate due to magnetoroton creation at finite electron temperature will be due to the processes discussed above in which a magnetoroton is scattered from one mode to another with the absorption of a phonon. This contribution to the energy transfer rate will be given by

$$\delta P=\underset{s,\underset{¯}{Q},𝐤^{}}{}\omega _s\left(\underset{¯}{Q}\right)\tau _{𝐤^{},𝐬,\underset{¯}{Q}}^1n_B\left(\omega _s\left(\underset{¯}{Q}\right)/T_\varphi \right)n_B\left(\mathrm{\Delta }\left(k^{}\right)/T_e\right)$$
(25)
where $`T_\varphi `$ is the characteristic temperature of the phonon pulse and $`n_B\left(x\right)=\left(e^x1\right)^1`$ is the Bose distribution function and we assume that $`T_eT_\varphi \mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ so that $`n_B\left(\mathrm{\Delta }\left(k\right)/T_e\right)1`$ $`k`$. In order to simplify matters we will neglect the finite thickness of the 2d layer (i.e. we set $`Z\left(q_z\right)=1`$) and neglect the anisotropy in the electron phonon interaction (which at long wavelengths will be dominated by the piezoelectric coupling) and set

$$M_s\left(\underset{¯}{Q}\right)=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_s}{\sqrt{Q}}$$
(26)
(strictly this bare piezoelectric coupling will be screened by the equilibrium population of excitations but we will not attempt to estimate such effects here). Finally we will use the isotropic Debye approximation (and hence neglect phonon-focussing effects) setting

$$\omega _s\left(\underset{¯}{Q}\right)=c_sQ.$$
(27)
In the regime $`T_eT_\varphi \mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ the transfer of energy will be dominated by absorption by magnetorotons initially at the minimum, $`k=q^{}1.34/l_c`$, hence we will have

$`\delta P`$ $`\sqrt{2\pi \mu T_e}e^{\mathrm{\Delta }^{}/T_e}{\displaystyle \underset{s}{}}c_s\mathrm{\Lambda }_s^2{\displaystyle \frac{d^3\underset{¯}{Q}}{8\pi ^3}\frac{\left|P^{\left(3\right)}(q^{}\widehat{𝐧},𝐪)\right|^2}{\overline{s}\left(q^{}\right)\overline{s}\left(\left|q^{}\widehat{𝐧}+𝐪\right|\right)}\delta \left(\mathrm{\Delta }\left(\left|q^{}\widehat{𝐧}+𝐪\right|\right)\mathrm{\Delta }^{}c_sQ\right)}`$ (28)
$`\times n_B\left(c_sQ/T_\varphi \right)`$ (29)
where $`\widehat{𝐧}`$ is an arbitrary vector in the plane. Following  we transform to new variables to integrate out the delta-function and arrive at

$`\delta P`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\mu T_e}{2\pi }}}e^{\mathrm{\Delta }^{}/T_e}{\displaystyle \underset{s}{}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_s^2{\displaystyle \frac{d^2𝐤}{4\pi ^2}\frac{\omega _k\vartheta \left(\omega _kc_s\left|𝐤q^{}\widehat{𝐧}\right|\right)}{\sqrt{\omega _k^2c_s^2\left|𝐤q^{}\widehat{𝐧}\right|^2}}}`$ (30)
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{\left|P^{\left(3\right)}(q^{}\widehat{𝐧},𝐤q^{}\widehat{𝐧})\right|^2}{\overline{s}\left(q^{}\right)\overline{s}\left(k\right)}}n_B\left(\omega _k/T_\varphi \right)`$ (31)
where the integration is now over all allowed transitions from the initial state $`|q^{}\widehat{𝐧}`$ to a final state $`|𝐤`$ and

$$\omega _k=\mathrm{\Delta }\left(k\right)\mathrm{\Delta }^{}$$
(32)
is the corresponding energy change. The effective transition rate is simply understood by using a polar representation for the $`𝐤`$-plane, with $`\widehat{𝐧}`$ as the polar axis. The scatering rate is then

$`\tau _𝐤^1`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\vartheta \left(\omega _k^2c_s^2\left(k^2+q^22q^{}k\mathrm{cos}\varphi \right)\right)}{\sqrt{\omega _k^2c_s^2\left(k^2+q^22q^{}k\mathrm{cos}\varphi \right)}}}\mathrm{\Phi }(k,\varphi )`$ (33)
$`\mathrm{\Phi }(k,\varphi )`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\left|P^{\left(3\right)}(q^{}\widehat{𝐧},𝐤q^{}\widehat{𝐧})\right|^2}{\overline{s}\left(q^{}\right)\overline{s}\left(k\right)}}.`$ (34)
Numerical study, using the form given above for $`\mathrm{\Delta }\left(k\right)`$ (equation 1) and the speed of sound, $`c_s`$, appropriate for TA phonons, shows that the condition imposed by the theta-function is only satisfied for final states within a contour $`k_c\left(\varphi \right)`$ (shown in figure 2) in the $`𝐤`$-plane, confirming the simple analysis presented in the previous section. Only the states inside this contour are accessible from the initial state $`|q^{}\widehat{𝐧}`$. Along any direction in the $`𝐤`$-plane, there is a square root singularity as $`kk_c\left(\varphi \right)`$ which will dominate the rate of energy transfer. The form of $`\tau ^1`$ along several representative directions in the $`𝐤`$-plane are shown in figure 3. In this case we have used the simple ansatz for $`P^{\left(3\right)}`$ proposed by MacDonald et al.

$$P^{\left(3\right)}(𝐤,𝐪)2i\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{1}{2}\left|𝐤\times 𝐪\right|\right)$$
(35)
although results obtained from the convolution approximation (equations 11 and 14) are qualitatively similar. In the appendix below, the behaviour of $`\delta P`$ is considered further and it is shown that for a given $`\varphi `$ there is a characteristic temperature $`T_X\left(\varphi \right)=\mathrm{\Delta }\left(k\left(\varphi \right)\right)\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ above which the dependence on heater temperature, $`T_\varphi `$, develops a non-activated component.

It is clear then, that a non-activated component will appear in $`\delta P`$ when $`T_\varphi >inf_\varphi \left(T_X\left(\varphi \right)\right)=T_X\left(0\right)`$. To give an idea of the physical orders of magnitude involved, consider a 2des with sheet density $`n_s=10^{15}\mathrm{m}^2`$. The $`\nu =1/3`$ fractional quantum Hall state will occur at a field $`B=12.4`$T. The cyclotron length is then $`l_c=\sqrt{\mathrm{}/eB}=7.3\mathrm{nm}`$ and the Coulomb energy scale is $`_c=e^2/4\pi ϵ_0\kappa l_c=15.2`$m$`\mathrm{eV}`$ (assuming $`\kappa =13`$ appropriate for GaAs). Using the form of the magnetoroton dispersion derived by GMP  gives $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}0.075_c=1.14`$m$`\mathrm{eV}`$ which corresponds to a temperature of $`13`$K and $`q^{}1.3l_c^1=`$ $`1.8\times 10^8\mathrm{m}^1`$. Using this dispersion relation we find, for TA phonons, $`k\left(0\right)=1.08/l_c`$ which gives $`T_X\left(0\right)=\mathrm{\Delta }\left(k\left(0\right)\right)\mathrm{\Delta }^{}=0.005_c=0.067\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ corresponding to a temperature of $`870`$mK. Given that the value of the gap extracted from the phonon experiments (which is reduced from the ideal value by the combined effects of disorder, finite thickness of the 2des and Landau level mixing) is more like $`4`$K we might expect $`T_X\left(0\right)`$$`<`$$`200`$mK: well below the heater temperature used in any of the experiments (and close to the base temperature of the dilution refrigerator) . Hence we deduce that there will always be a contribution to the energy transfer rate which is non-exponential in the heater temperature (although its dependence of the electron temperature is still of the form $`e^{\mathrm{\Delta }^{}/T_e}`$.

## 6 Conclusions

In this paper we have considered processes in which magnetorotons existing at finite electron temperature $`T_e`$ are scattered by absorbing phonons from a pulse characterized by a phonon temperature $`T_\varphi `$. We have shown that, contrary to our earlier supposition , such processes will not heat the magnetorotons to sufficiently large wave vectors that they dissociate into separate charged quasiparticles and so directly contribute to the longitudinal conductivity. This negative result is important in that the phonon absorption experiments  measure the change in longitudinal conductivity as a ballistic phonon pulse hits the 2des. The absence of any direct dissociation mechanisms means that the energy transferred to the 2des is thermalized within the 2des, raising its effective temperature and hence leading to an increase in the thermal population of charged quasiparticles. Consequently, the changes in $`\sigma _{xx}`$ can be calibrated against equilibrium magneto-transport experiments to give a direct measure of the non-equilibrium electron temperature.

Although the processes discussed can not dissociate the magnetorotons into charged quasiparticles, scattering to longer wavelengths is possible and will give a contribution to the energy transfer rate which is exponential in the electron temperature but will have an non-exponential form except at the very lowest heater temperatures. Such a power law dependence (on $`TT_X\left(0\right)`$) might well be observable in current phonon absorption experiments performed over a range of base electron temperatures. It has recently been shown  that the lowest lying neutral excitation at long wavelengths is not the small $`q`$ magnetoroton but a bound state of two magnetorotons. It is then possible that the absorption of energy from a higher temperature phonon pulse may involve a cascade process in which magnetorotons are scattered to long wavelengths by absorption of low energy phonons and then decay into two roton bound states which are thermally dissociated, leading to an enhanced population of magnetorotons at the minimum.

###### Acknowledgement 1

This work was supported by the EPSRC (UK). We would like to acknowledge many useful discussions on this topic with CJ Mellor, U Zeitler, S. Roshko, A. Devitt and J. Digby.

## Appendix A Analysis of energy transfer rate

We have the following form for the scattering contribution to the energy transfer rate

$$\delta P\frac{1}{4\pi ^2}\sqrt{\frac{\mu T_e}{2\pi }}e^{\mathrm{\Delta }^{}/T_e}\underset{s}{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_s^2_0^{2\pi }𝑑\varphi Y\left(\varphi \right)_0^{k\left(\varphi \right)}𝑑k\frac{\vartheta \left(\omega _𝐤c_s\left|𝐤q^{}\widehat{𝐧}\right|\right)}{\sqrt{\omega _k^2c_s^2\left|𝐤q^{}\widehat{𝐧}\right|^2}}n_B\left(\omega _k/T_\varphi \right)$$
(36)
where

$$Y\left(\varphi \right)=k\left(\varphi \right)\omega \left(k\left(\varphi \right)\right)\frac{\left|P^{\left(3\right)}(q^{}\widehat{𝐧},𝐤\left(\varphi \right)q^{}\widehat{𝐧})\right|^2}{\overline{s}\left(q^{}\right)\overline{s}\left(k\left(\varphi \right)\right)}$$
(37)
and

$$𝐤\left(\varphi \right)=k\left(\varphi \right)\left(\mathrm{cos}\varphi \widehat{𝐧}+\mathrm{sin}\varphi \widehat{\varphi }\right)$$
(38)
so that

$`\delta P`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi ^2}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\mu T_e}{2\pi }}}e^{\mathrm{\Delta }^{}/T_e}{\displaystyle \underset{s}{}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_s^2{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}𝑑\varphi {\displaystyle \frac{Y\left(\varphi \right)}{\sqrt{\left|Q\left(\varphi \right)\right|}}}`$ (39)
$`\times {\displaystyle _0^{k\left(\varphi \right)}}{\displaystyle \frac{dk}{\sqrt{k\left(\varphi \right)k}}}n_B\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\left(k\left(\varphi \right)\right)\mathrm{\Delta }^{}+\left(k\left(\varphi \right)k\right)\left|\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\left(k\left(\varphi \right)\right)\right|}{T_\varphi }}\right)`$ (40)
where

$$Q\left(\varphi \right)=2\left[c_s^2\left(k\left(\varphi \right)q^{}\mathrm{cos}\varphi \right)\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\left(k\left(\varphi \right)\right)\left(\mathrm{\Delta }\left(k\left(\varphi \right)\right)\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\right)\right].$$
(41)
Now we define

$`a\left(\varphi \right)`$ $`=\mathrm{\Delta }\left(k\left(\varphi \right)\right)\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$
$`b\left(\varphi \right)`$ $`=\left|\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\left(k\left(\varphi \right)\right)\right|`$
$`\tau `$ $`=T_\varphi /a\left(\varphi \right)`$
so that we need to consider the integral

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{d\eta }{\sqrt{\eta }}\frac{1}{e^{\left(a+b\eta \right)/a\tau }1}=\frac{T_\varphi }{\sqrt{ab}}_{1/\tau }^{\mathrm{}}\frac{dx}{\sqrt{\tau x1}\left(e^x1\right)}.$$
(42)
We will use the an interpolation formula for the Bose function

$$n_B\left(x\right)=\{\begin{array}{cc}1/x& x<1\\ e^x& x>1\end{array}$$

and consider two cases. Firstly, in the case that $`\tau <1`$ we have that

$`{\displaystyle _{1/\tau }^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dx}{\sqrt{\tau x1}\left(e^x1\right)}}`$ $`{\displaystyle _{1/\tau }^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^xdx}{\sqrt{\tau x1}}}`$
$`=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{\tau }}}e^{1/\tau }.`$ (43)
In the other case, we have

$`{\displaystyle _{1/\tau }^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dx}{\sqrt{\tau x1}\left(e^x1\right)}}`$ $`{\displaystyle _{1/\tau }^1}{\displaystyle \frac{dx}{x\sqrt{\tau x1}}}+{\displaystyle _1^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^xdx}{\sqrt{\tau x1}}}`$
$`=2\mathrm{arctan}\left(\sqrt{\tau 1}\right)+\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{\tau }}}e^{1/\tau }\left(1\mathrm{erf}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\tau 1}}{\sqrt{\tau }}}\right)\right)`$ (44)
Hence, for $`\tau >1`$ there is a contribution that is non-activated in the phonon temperature. The angular ($`\varphi `$) integration is non-trivial and its numerical evaluation is rather pointless given our neglect of anisotropy in phonon propagation and the electron-phonon coupling. It would however be expected, for $`T_\varphi T_X\left(0\right)`$ to have a power law dependence on $`T_\varphi T_X\left(0\right)`$.

Figure Captions

Figure 1: A plot of form of the magnetoroton dispersion $`\mathrm{\Delta }\left(𝐪\right)`$ used here.

Figure 2: A plot of the contour $`k_c\left(\varphi \right)`$ in $`𝐤`$-space. Only magnetoroton states in the shaded region inside the contour are accessible from the initial state $`|q^{}\widehat{𝐧}`$ via a single phonon scattering process.

Figure 3: Representative plots of the scattering rate into states with wavenumber $`k`$ for a sample set of directions, $`\varphi `$. The square root singularities in each trace occur at the critical value $`k_c\left(\varphi \right)`$.