text:
# Evidence for Spinodal Decomposition in Nuclear Multifragmentation

## Abstract

Multifragmentation of a “fused system” was observed for central collisions between 32 MeV/nucleon 129Xe and natSn. Most of the resulting charged products were well identified thanks to the high performances of the INDRA 4$`\pi `$ array. Experimental higher-order charge correlations for fragments show a weak but non ambiguous enhancement of events with nearly equal-sized fragments. Supported by dynamical calculations in which spinodal decomposition is simulated, this observed enhancement is interpreted as a “fossil” signal of spinodal instabilities in finite nuclear systems.

The decay of highly excited nuclear systems through multifragmentation is, at present time, a subject of great interest in nucleus-nucleus collisions, and many efforts are made to understand the underlying physics. While this process has been observed for many years, its experimental knowledge was strongly improved only recently with the advent of powerful $`4\pi `$ devices which authorize careful selections of well defined fused systems undergoing multifragmentation. Many theories have been developed to explain multifragmentation (see for example ref.  for a general review of models). One theory, in particular, is the concept of multifragmentation which considers volume instabilities of the spinodal type. Indeed, during a collision, a wide zone of the nuclear matter phase diagram may be explored and the nuclear system may enter the liquid-gas phase coexistence region (at low density) and even more precisely the unstable spinodal region (domain of negative incompressibility) . Thus, a possible origin of multifragmentation may be found through the growth of density fluctuations in this unstable region. Within this theoretical scenario a breakup into nearly equal-sized “primitive” fragments should be favored in relation with the wave-lengths of the most unstable modes present in the spinodal region . However this simple picture is expected to be strongly blurred by several effects: the beating of different modes, eventual coalescence of nascent fragments, secondary decay of excited fragments and mainly the finite size of the system . Therefore only a weak proportion of multifragmentation events with nearly equal-sized fragments is expected. Note that surface instabilities developed from peculiar multifragmenting geometrical structures (bubbles, disk-like), can also produce such events . In this letter we investigate, using a very sensitive method of charge correlations, the occurrence of equal-sized fragment partitions in a selected sample of experimental events, corresponding to a fused system undergoing multifragmentation. A comparison is made with predictions of 3D stochastic mean-field simulations of collisions which take into account the dynamics of the most unstable modes in the spinodal region.

We have experimentally studied the reaction $`{}_{}{}^{129}Xe+^{nat}Sn`$ at 32 MeV/nucleon. The measurements were performed at the GANIL accelerator using the 4$`\pi `$ multidetector for charged reaction products INDRA . Detailed information on the experiment and on the selection of fused events can be found in Ref. . Let us just recall that the selection was performed by requiring the detection of a significant fraction ($``$ 80%) of the charge of the system; these selected events are called complete events. Reaction products with charge Z $``$ 5 were defined as fragments. Finally the preferred direction of emission of matter in the center of mass of the reaction (flow angle) was determined from the calculation of the energy tensor of fragments, and the requirement was made that this angle be larger than 60o . The main argument underlying the chosen selection is that while a fused system should be present at all flow angles, binary dissipative collisions should vanish when this angle is large, giving way to an almost pure “fusion” phenomenon .The present selection corresponds to $``$25 mb, and the total cross-section for multifragmentation of compact shape systems is estimated to 100 mb. Figure 1 exhibits how complete events populate the flow angle domain as a function of their measured total kinetic energy (i.e. c.m. kinetic energy of all detected fragments and light charged particles).

An unambiguous charge identification is essential for building unbiased charge correlation functions: in this experiment all fragments with charge Z$``$20 are identified with a resolution of one charge unit. The correlation method used, called “higher order correlations” was proposed a few years ago in ref . It is appropriate to search for weak signals and its originality consists of the fact that all information on fragments of one event is condensed in two variables to construct the charge correlation. This quantity is defined by the expression:

$$\frac{Y(\mathrm{\Delta }Z,<Z>)}{Y^{}(\mathrm{\Delta }Z,<Z>)}|_M$$
(1)
Here, $`Y(\mathrm{\Delta }Z,<Z>)`$ is the yield of selected events with $`<Z>`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }Z`$ values; $`M`$ is the fragment multiplicity, $`<Z>`$ denotes the average fragment charge of the event:

$$<Z>=\frac{1}{M}\underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{}}Z_i$$
(2)
and $`\mathrm{\Delta }Z`$ is the standard deviation, defined by:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }Z=\sqrt{\frac{1}{M1}\underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{}}(Z_i<Z>)^2}$$
(3)
The denominator $`Y^{}(\mathrm{\Delta }Z,<Z>)`$ which represents the uncorrelated yield is built, for each fragment multiplicity, by taking fragments in different events of the selected sample. The number of uncorrelated events is chosen large enough (103 per true event) to strongly reduce their contribution to statistical error. With such a correlation method, if events with nearly equal-sized fragments are produced, we expect to see peaks appearing in the first $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$Z bin (0-1).

Higher order correlation functions for selected experimental events are shown in fig. 2. We observe peaks in the bin $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$Z = 0-1 for each fragment multiplicity. From M=3 to M=6 the maximum is moving from $`<Z>`$=19 to $`<Z>`$=10. When multiplied by the multiplicity these lead to a roughly constant value close to the most probable total fragment charge for all fused events. It was moreover verified that the kinetic energy of fragments in these events does not differ (within statistical error) from average kinetic energies of fragments for other selected events.

We can now estimate whether the enhancement of events with equal-sized fragments is statistically significant and quantify their occurrence. In this aim we built charge correlations for all events, whatever their multiplicity, by replacing the variable $`<Z>`$ by $`Z_{tot}`$ = M$`\times <Z>`$. For this compact presentation uncorrelated events are built and weighted in proportion to real events of each multiplicity. For each bin in $`Z_{tot}`$, fixed at six atomic number units, an exponential evolution of the correlation function is observed from $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$Z=7-8 down to $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$Z=2-3. This exponential evolution is thus taken as “background” to extrapolate down to the first $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$Z bin. Higher order correlation functions for the first bin in $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$Z are displayed in Fig. 3 with their statistical errors; the solid line corresponds to the extrapolated “background”. All events corresponding to the three points whose error bar is fully located above this line correspond to a statistically significant enhancement of equal-sized fragment partitions. The probabilities that these values which are higher than the background simply arise from statistical fluctuations are 0.048 ($`Z_{tot}`$=45), 0.038 ($`Z_{tot}`$=51) and 0.022 ($`Z_{tot}`$=57). The number of significant events amounts to 0.1% of selected fusion events.

To test if these equal-sized fragment partitions were specific \- or not - of the selected fused events, we have studied a data sample dominated by very dissipative collisions of binary type. This is done by selecting in the Wilczynsky diagram for complete events (see fig. 1) total c.m. energy lower than 1200 MeV with a flow angle $`\theta _{flow}`$$``$ $`30^o`$. Within this new selection we estimate that about 9$`\times `$103 fused events are mixed with about 3.6$`\times `$105 binary (or eventually strongly deformed, or both) events. The correlation functions are presented in fig. 4. No statistically significant signals are observed. The small peak for M=6 corresponds to 0.0008% of selected events. This is an indication that only fused events are characterized by an enhanced production of nearly equal-sized fragments.

In ref. , it was experimentally observed that charge distributions for fusion/multifragmentation events were independent of the total mass of the incident nuclei (248 or 393 u), while fragment multiplicities scaled as their total charge. These properties were the first hint of a bulk effect for producing fragments.

Dynamical stochastic mean-field simulations  were performed for head-on collisions only, thus neglecting shape effects. Spinodal decomposition is simulated using the Brownian one-Body (BoB) dynamics , which consists in employing a Brownian force in the kinetic equations. The ingredients of the simulations are as follows. The self-consistent mean field potential  chosen gives a soft equation of state (K= 200 MeV) and the finite range of the nuclear interaction is taken into account using a convolution with a gaussian function with a width of 0.9 fm . The addition of a term proportional to $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho `$ in the mean-field potential allows to well-reproduce the surface energy of ground-state nuclei . This is essential in order to correctly describe the expansion dynamics of the fused system. In the collision term a constant $`\sigma _{nn}`$ value of 41 mb, without in-medium, energy, isospin or angle dependence is used . In the following step the spatial configuration of the primary fragments, with their excitation energies as produced by BoB, was taken as input in the SIMON code  to follow the fragment deexcitation while preserving space-time correlations. Finally the events were filtered to account for the experimental device. These complete simulations well reproduce multiplicity and charge distributions of fragments and their average kinetic energies . To refine the comparison, higher-order charge correlations are calculated for the simulated events. Although all events in the simulation arise from spinodal decomposition, only a very small fraction, as suspected for finite systems , exhibits final partitions with equal-sized fragments. This fraction is not strongly modified by the de-excitation of fragments; as an example Z=15 primary fragments produced in BoB simulations (with their mass and excitation energy distributions) lead to a secondary Z distribution centered at Z=14 with a standard deviation of 0.6. Finally the proportion of statistically significant equal-sized fragment partitions is similar (0.15%) to the experimental one. A detailed quantitative comparison is displayed in fig. 3. The similarities between experimental and calculated events allow to attribute all fusion-multifragmentation events to spinodal decomposition. The peaks observed near $`\mathrm{\Delta }Z`$=0 in the higher-order charge correlations are thus fossil fingerprints of the partitions expected from spinodal decomposition. It was previously observed that multiplicity and Z distributions, and the average kinetic energy of fragments were also well reproduced with the statistical model SMM . It is interesting to underline that in this sample of SMM events no partition with $`\mathrm{\Delta }Z<`$2 exists. Note also that fragment velocity correlations  are perfectly reproduced either in BoB simulations, or in the breakup of systems with elongated shapes. As none of these configurations is strongly necked or close to a bubble, we can exclude surface instabilities as a possible source of equal-sized fragments, in favor of bulk instabilities .

In conclusion, we have investigated charge correlation functions for fusion events which undergo multifragmentation. We have found a weak but unambiguously enhanced production of events with equal-sized fragments. Supported by theoretical simulations we interpret this enhancement as a signature of spinodal instabilities as the origin of multifragmentation in the Fermi energy domain. Spinodal instabilities are thus shown for the first time in a finite system. Moreover the occurrence of spinodal decomposition shows the presence of a liquid-gas coexistence region and gives a strong argument in favor of the existence of a first order liquid-gas phase transition in finite nuclear systems.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The first sizeable sets of Calabi–Yau manifolds were constructed as complete intersections (CICY) in products of projective spaces . These manifolds have many complex structure deformations but only few K hler moduli, which are inherited from the ambient space. With the discovery of mirror symmetry  the main interest therefore turned to weighted projective ($`W`$) spaces, where the resolution of singularities contributes additional K hler moduli and thus provides a much more symmetric picture . It turned out, however, that mirror symmetry is only approximately realized in this class of models .

It was then discovered by Batyrev  that toric geometry (TG), which generalizes (products of) $`W`$ spaces, provides the appropriate framework for mirror symmetry: In TG the monomial deformations of the hypersurface equations and the gluing data defining the ambient space are given in terms of lattice polytopes that live in a dual pair of lattices. The Calabi–Yau condition for the generic hypersurface requires that these polytopes are dual to one another. This implies, by definition, that the ambient space and the hypersurface are given in terms of a dual pair of reflexive polyhedra, with $`\mathrm{\Delta }M`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}N=\mathrm{Hom}(M,)`$ being exchanged under the mirror involution. Mirror symmetry thus derives from an elementary combinatorial duality.

Because of the large number of hypersurfaces that exist in these spaces  only little work was directed towards complete intersections: A list of transversal configurations for codimension two Calabi–Yau manifolds in $`W`$ spaces was produced by Klemm . As in the case of hypersurfaces, there is, however, in general no mirror construction available in that context . In the toric setup, the mirror construction for hypersurfaces could be extended to general complete intersections by Batyrev and Borisov . In addition to a reflexive polyhedron $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ that describes the ambient space this involves a decomposition of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ into a Minkowski sum of polytopes $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$ that are related to the equations defining the complete intersection. The Calabi–Yau condition implies that these $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$ are dual to a partition of the vertices of $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$, which is called nef because the corresponding divisors are numerically effective. Nef partitions of refelexive polyhedra again feature a beautiful combinatorial duality that implements the mirror involution, as has been proven on the level of Hodge data in .

In the present paper we work out a number of examples of toric complete intersection Calabi–Yau manifolds and discuss the relation of this construction to $`W`$ spaces. Identifying CICYs in $`W`$ spaces as a special case of the toric construction will provide, among other benefits, the mirrors for these manifolds. In the case of hypersurfaces in $`W^4`$, the Newton polytope of a transversal quasihomogeneous polynomial  can be identified with the polyhedron $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, whose dual provides the toric resolution of the ambient space. It is thus clear that, for codimensions $`r>1`$, we should look for the identification by trying to relate the Newton polytopes of the defining polynomial equations of degrees $`d_i`$ to a nef partition $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$ of some reflexive polyhedron $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

This indeed works for many cases, but the situation is not so straightforward. Already in the case of hypersurfaces reflexivity of the Newton polytope is only guaranteed for dimensions $`n4`$  and indeed breaks down for the case of Calabi–Yau 4-folds . The most relevant situation from the string theory point of view is that of 3-folds, where already for codimension 2 the Newton polyhedra have dimension 5. Indeed, already in the second example in the list of ref. , namely degree (3,4) equations in $`_{1,1,1,1,1,2}`$, the Newton polyhedron $`\mathrm{\Delta }(7)`$ for a degree $`7`$ equation, is not reflexive. It is, however, possible to reduce $`\mathrm{\Delta }(7)`$ to a reflexive polyhedron $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ by omitting 5 points, so that its dual provides a toric resolution of singularities of the weighted projective space. Moreover, in this example, for one of the nef partitions of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ the Hodge data agree with the $`W`$ result of .

In general, $`\mathrm{\Delta }(d_1+d_2)`$ may differ from the Minkowski sum $`\mathrm{\Delta }(d_1)+\mathrm{\Delta }(d_2)`$ and neither of the two polytopes has to be reflexive. In many, but not all cases, we can nevertheless find a simple modification of these polytopes that makes the Hodge data agree, and with some more work one can check the identification in more detail. In the present note we analyze a number of examples from the list in  and discuss the different situations that can occur. Apart from our interest in this specific class of examples, we wrote a program that generates all nef partitions with codimension two for arbitrary reflexive polyhedra and that computes the Hodge data for the resulting Calabi–Yau manifolds. Using the list of 4-fold polyhedra that were obtained in  we produce a sizeable list of Hodge numbers and compare them with the complete lists for toric hypersurface. Most of the new Hodge numbers lie near the lower “boundary region” at $`h^{11}=1`$ and appear from a starting polyhedron in the $`N`$lattice with less than 20 points. In particular, we doubled the number of known spectra with $`h^{11}=1`$. Altogether we found 87 pairs of new Hodge numbers not contained in the complete list of toric hypersurfaces . They are listed in table 2 and discussed in section 6.2.

The paper is organized as follows: In section 2 we recall some facts about toric geometry, mainly to set up our notation. We will use the approach of the homogeneous coordinate ring, as introduced by Cox . Some basic facts on the combinatorial data of nef partitions  and a new criterion for the nef property (proposition 3.2), which was used in the computations, can be found in section 3. In section 4 we recall how to compute a Gorenstein cone from a nef partition  and secton 5 summarizes the polynomials defined in  to calculate the Hodge data for a Gorenstein cone arising from a nef partition. The formula used in our program can be found in remark 5.8. In section 6 we discuss a number of examples of complete intersections in $`W^5`$. We conclude with a discussion of our results, which will be posted at our web site  and some of which are listed in the appendix. A reader who is only interested in new results can take a look at proposition 3.2 for a new criterion of a nef partition, section 6.1 for comparing our results with codimension two Calabi–Yau manifolds in $`W^5`$ spaces , and section 6.2 for new Hodge numbers.

## 2 Toric geometry and complete intersections

Toric geometry is a generalization of projective geometry where the gluing data of an algebraic variety are encoded in a fan $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ of convex rational cones. Often, the fan is given in terms of (the cones over the faces of) a polytope $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ whose vertices lie on some lattice $`N`$ . A very useful way of defining these spaces is to introduce homogeneous coordinates $`z_i`$ for all generators $`v_iN`$ $`(i=1,\mathrm{},n)`$ of the one-dimensional cones in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ (e.g. the vertices of $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$) and to consider the quotient of $`^nZ`$ by identifications

$$(z_1,\mathrm{},z_n)(\lambda ^{q_1^{(I)}}z_1,\mathrm{},\lambda ^{q_n^{(I)}}z_n),q_i^{(I)}v_i=0,I=1,\mathrm{},nd,$$

where the scaling weights $`q_i^{(I)}`$ describe all linear relations among the generators $`v_i`$ and $`d=dim(N)`$ is the dimension of the resulting toric variety $`_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ . In the special case $`n=d+1`$ of a weighted projective space the exceptional set $`Z`$, which is determined in terms of the fan, only consists of the origin $`z_i=0`$.

Ample line bundles on $`_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ correspond to polytopes $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ in the dual space $`M=Hom(,N)`$ . Toric varieties found their way into string theory when Batyrev  showed that the generic section of the line bundle corresponding to $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ defines a Calabi–Yau hypersurface in $`_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ if $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ is equal to the dual

$$\mathrm{\Delta }^{}=\{xN_{}|y,x1y\mathrm{\Delta }M_{}\}$$

of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, where $`N_{}`$ is the real extension of the lattice $`N`$. A lattice polytope $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ whose dual $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ is also a lattice polytope is called reflexive. A necessary condition for this is that the origin is the unique interior lattice point of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Moreover, it turned out that the family of CY hypersurfaces in $`_{\mathrm{\Sigma }(\mathrm{\Delta })}`$ that is defined by $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ provides the mirror family to the family of CY varieties that are based on $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}=\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ in the sense that the Hodge numbers $`h^{p,q}`$ and $`h^{dp,q}`$ are exchanged . At that time it had just become clear that hypersurfaces in weighted projective spaces are close to but not exactly mirror symmetric . This is true even if orbifolds and discrete torsion are included , which do help in the situation where the Berglund-H bsch  construction applies . Beyond the construction of the missing mirror manifolds, however, Batyrev’s results introduced to the physicist’s community beautiful and extremely useful new techniques, which later turned out also to apply to the analysis of fibration structures that are important in string dualities : In toric geometry CY fibrations manifest themselves as reflexive sections or projections of the polytopes $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, respectively .

## 3 Nef partitions

In the case of a hypersurface, the supporting polyhedron of the generic section of an ample line bundle on $`_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ must be reflexive in order to get a Calabi–Yau hypersurface in $`_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. To generalize this condition to the case of codimension $`r1`$, i.e. to ensure that the intersection of $`r`$ hypersurfaces is a Calabi–Yau manifold, the reflexive polytope $`\mathrm{\Delta }M_{}`$ must fulfil the so called nef condition . In this section, we will shortly discuss the combinatorial properties of nef partitions and give a new criterion for a reflexive polytope to decompose into a nef partition, proposition 3.2, which can be used to calculate these partitions in a simple way, as described in remark 3.4.

Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }M_{}`$ be a reflexive polytope and $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}N_{}`$ it’s dual. From now on we denote by $`\mathrm{\Delta }^v`$ the set of vertices of a polytope $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Let $`E:=\mathrm{\Delta }_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{v}`$ be the set of vertices of $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$. We define the $`d`$dimensional complete fan $`\mathrm{\Sigma }[\mathrm{\Delta }^{}]`$ as the union of the zero-dimensional cone $`\{0\}`$ together with the set of all cones

$$C[F]=\{0\}\{zN_{}:\lambda zF\mathrm{for}\mathrm{some}\lambda _>\}$$

that support faces $`F`$ of $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$. Assume that there exists a representation of $`E=E_1\mathrm{}E_r`$ as the union of disjoint subsets $`E_1,\mathrm{},E_r`$ and integral convex $`\mathrm{\Sigma }[\mathrm{\Delta }^{}]`$ piecewise linear support functions $`\phi _i:N_{}(i=1,\mathrm{},r)`$ such that

$$\phi _i(e)=\{\begin{array}{cc}1\hfill & \text{if }eE_i\text{,}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{otherwise.}\hfill \end{array}$$

Each $`\phi _i`$ corresponds to a line bundle $`L_i`$ that defines a supporting polyhedron $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$ for the global sections:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_i=\{\widehat{z}M_{}:\widehat{z},z\phi _i(z)zN_{}\}.$$

$`\phi _i`$ defines $`L_i`$ in the following way: For each cone of maximal dimension $`C`$ there is a $`m_CM`$ such that $`\phi _i_C=m_C_C`$, where the $`m_C`$ have to coincide on the intersection of two cones. Since the fan is complete, $`\phi _i`$ is determined uniquely by the set $`\{m_C\}`$. The line bundle $`L_i`$ is then given by the data $`(U_C,\chi (m_C))`$, where $`\{U_C\}`$ is an open covering of the toric variety with open sets corresponding to the cones of maximal dimension and $`\chi (m_C)`$ can be regarded as a monomial $`x^{m_C}`$. The important point is that the transition functions $`\chi (m_{\stackrel{~}{C}}m_C)`$ arising from this construction are regular on the intersection of the corresponding open sets (for details see  or ).

Conversely, each function $`\phi _i`$ is uniquely defined by the polyhedron $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$. A Calabi–Yau complete intersection is then determined by the intersection of the closure of $`r`$ hypersurfaces, each corresponding to a global section of a line bundle $`L_i`$ .

###### Definition 3.1

If there exists a reflexive polytope $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`r`$ functions $`\phi _1,\mathrm{},\phi _r`$ as defined above, we call the data

$$\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{\Delta })=\{\mathrm{\Delta }_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Delta }_r\}$$

a nef partition.

Equivalent to $`\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{\Delta }):=\{\mathrm{\Delta }_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Delta }_r\}`$ being a nef partition is that any two $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$ only have $`\{0\}`$ as a common point and that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ can be written as the Minkowski sum $`\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{}+\mathrm{\Delta }_r=\mathrm{\Delta }`$, as is shown by the following proposition:

###### Proposition 3.2

$`\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{\Delta })=\{\mathrm{\Delta }_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Delta }_r\}`$ is a nef partition if and only if $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the Minkowski sum of $`r`$ rational polyhedra $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{}+\mathrm{\Delta }_r`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i\mathrm{\Delta }_j=\{0\}ij`$

Proof:
$``$: Assume that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ can be written as the Minkowski sum of $`r`$ rational polyhedra $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{}+\mathrm{\Delta }_r`$ with $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i\mathrm{\Delta }_j=\{0\}ij`$. Define $`r`$ functions $`\phi _i:N_{}`$ as

$$\phi _i(z)=\underset{\widehat{z}\mathrm{\Delta }_i}{\mathrm{min}}\widehat{z},zzN_{}.$$

* The $`\phi _i`$ are linear on cones of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }[\mathrm{\Delta }^{}]`$: It is sufficient to consider restrictions of the $`\phi _i`$ to cones of maximal dimension $`C[F]`$, where

$$F=\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\{zN_{}:\widehat{e},z=1\}$$

is a facet of $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ corresponding to a vertex $`\widehat{e}\mathrm{\Delta }^v`$. Now let $`\widehat{e}=\widehat{e}_1+\mathrm{}+\widehat{e}_i+\mathrm{}+\widehat{e}_r`$, where $`\widehat{e}_i\mathrm{\Delta }_i^v`$ denotes a vertex of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i(i=1,\mathrm{},r)`$. If we take another vertex $`\widehat{e}_{i}^{}{}_{}{}^{}\widehat{e}_i\mathrm{\Delta }_i^v`$, then the sum $`\widehat{e}^{}=\widehat{e}_1+\mathrm{}+\widehat{e}_{i}^{}{}_{}{}^{}+\mathrm{}+\widehat{e}_r`$ denotes another vertex of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Clearly, $`\widehat{e},z\widehat{e}^{},zzC[F]`$, i.e. $`\widehat{e}_i,z\widehat{e}_{i}^{}{}_{}{}^{},zzC[F]`$. Hence $`\phi _i(z)=\widehat{e}_i,zzC[F]`$.
* Convexity of all $`\phi _i`$ follows immediately from their definition.
* $`\phi _i(e)\{0,1\}eE,i=1,\mathrm{},r`$: For every function $`\phi _i`$ we observe that $`0\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$ implies $`\phi _i0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i\mathrm{\Delta }`$ implies $`\phi _i(e)1eE`$.
* $`\phi _i(e)=1\phi _j(e)=0ji`$: Assume $`\phi _i(e)=\phi _j(e)=1`$ for $`ij`$ $`\widehat{z}_i\mathrm{\Delta }_i,\widehat{z}_j\mathrm{\Delta }_j:\widehat{z}_i,e=\widehat{z}_j,e=1\widehat{z}=\widehat{z}_i+\widehat{z}_j\mathrm{\Delta }`$ with $`\widehat{z},e=2`$. This contradicts $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ being dual to $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$.
* $`eEi\{1,\mathrm{},r\}`$ with $`\phi _i(e)=1:`$ Assume $`eE:\phi _i(e)=0i=1,\mathrm{},r.`$ By duality of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\widehat{z}\mathrm{\Delta }:\widehat{z},e=1`$, where $`\widehat{z}`$ is contained in the facet dual to $`e`$. Now $`\widehat{z}=\widehat{z}_1+\mathrm{}+\widehat{z}_r`$ with $`\widehat{z}_i\mathrm{\Delta }_ii=1,\mathrm{},r`$. $`\widehat{z}_k\mathrm{\Delta }_k`$ with $`\widehat{z}_k,e<0.`$ This contradicts $`\phi _i(e)=0i=1,\mathrm{},r.`$

$``$: Follows from

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\{\widehat{z}M_{}:\widehat{z},z\phi (z)zN_{}\},$$

where $`\phi =_i\phi _i(i=1,\mathrm{},r)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

It can be shown that every nef partiton of a reflexive polytope $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ gives a dual nef partition of a reflexive polytope $``$, which turns out to be an involution on the set of reflexive polytopes with nef partitions:

###### Remark 3.3

 Let $`\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{\Delta })=\{\mathrm{\Delta }_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Delta }_r\}`$ be a nef partition and denote by $`E=E_1\mathrm{}E_r`$ the set of vertices $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{v}`$. Define $`r`$ rational polyhedra $`_iN_{}(i=1,\mathrm{},r)`$ as

$$_i=\mathrm{Conv}(E_i\{0\}).$$

Then there is the following relation between $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$ and $`_j(i,j=1,\mathrm{},r)`$:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_i,_j=\{\begin{array}{cc}1\hfill & \text{if}i=j\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{otherwise,}\hfill \end{array}$$

and the $`_i`$ are maximal with that property. In particular $`=_1+\mathrm{}+_r`$ is a reflexive polyhedron with a nef partition $`\mathrm{\Pi }()=\{_1,\mathrm{},_r\}`$, and there is a natural involution on the set of reflexive polyhedra with nef partitions:

$$\iota :\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{\Delta })=\{\mathrm{\Delta }_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Delta }_r\}\mathrm{\Pi }()=\{_1,\mathrm{},_r\}.$$

###### Remark 3.4

The following procedure can be used to find all nef partions of a reflexive polyhedron $`\mathrm{\Delta }M_{}`$:

* First calculate $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}N_{}`$.
* Take disjoint unions $`E=E_1\mathrm{}E_r`$ of vertices of $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$.
* Check if $`=_1+\mathrm{}+_r`$ with $`_i=\mathrm{Conv}(E_i\{0\})`$ is reflexive and $`_i_j=\{0\}ij`$.

## 4 Gorenstein cones

The (string theoretic) Hodge numbers of a Calabi–Yau manifold corresponding to a nef partition are the coefficients of the $`E`$polynomial

$$E_{st}(V;u,v)=(1)^{p+q}h_{st}^{p,q}u^pv^q,$$

which can be computed from a higher-dimensional Gorenstein cone  that is constructed using the data of a nef partition . In this section we will give the definition of a Gorenstein cone and recall its construction starting with a nef partition.

A rational cone $`CM_{}`$ is called Gorenstein if there exists a point $`nN`$ in the dual lattice such that $`v,n=1`$ for all generators of the semigroup $`CM`$. Given a nef partition $`\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{\Delta })=\{\mathrm{\Delta }_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Delta }_r\}`$, we can construct such a cone. First we go to a larger space and extend the canonical pairing: Let $`^r`$ be the standard $`r`$dimensional lattice and $`^r`$ its real scalar extension. We put $`\overline{N}=^rN,\overline{d}=d+r`$ and $`\overline{M}=\mathrm{Hom}(\overline{N},)`$. We extend the canonical $``$bilinear pairing $`,:M\times N`$ to a pairing between $`\overline{M}`$ and $`\overline{N}=^rN`$ by the formula

$$(a_1,\mathrm{},a_r,m),(b_1,\mathrm{},b_r,n)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}a_ib_i+m,n.$$

The real scalar extensions of $`\overline{N}`$ and $`\overline{M}`$ are denoted by $`\overline{N}_{}`$ and $`\overline{M}_{}`$, respectively, with the corresponding $``$bilinear pairing $`,:\overline{M}_{}\times \overline{N}_{}`$.

###### Definition 4.1

For a nef partiton $`\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{\Delta })=\{\mathrm{\Delta }_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Delta }_r\}`$ we construct a $`\overline{d}`$dimensional Gorenstein cone $`C_\mathrm{\Delta }\overline{M}_{}`$

$$C_\mathrm{\Delta }=\{(\lambda _1,\mathrm{},\lambda _r,\lambda _1\widehat{z}_1+\mathrm{}+\lambda _r\widehat{z}_r)\overline{M}_{}:\lambda _i_{},\widehat{z}_i\mathrm{\Delta }_i,i=1,\mathrm{}r\},$$

with $`n_\mathrm{\Delta }\overline{N}`$ uniquely defined by the conditions

$`\widehat{z},n_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ $`=`$ $`0\widehat{z}M_{}\overline{M}_{}`$
$`\widehat{e}_i,n_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ $`=`$ $`1\mathrm{for}i=1,\mathrm{},r,`$
where $`\{\widehat{e}_1,\mathrm{},\widehat{e}_r\}`$ is the standard basis of $`^r\overline{M}`$.

Note that all generators of $`C_\mathrm{\Delta }\overline{M}`$ lie on the hyperplane $`\widehat{z},n_\mathrm{\Delta }=1`$. They span the $`\overline{d}1`$dimensional supporting polyhedron

$$K_\mathrm{\Delta }=\{\widehat{z}C_\mathrm{\Delta }:\widehat{z},n_\mathrm{\Delta }=1\}$$

of $`C`$. Since $`K_\mathrm{\Delta }\overline{M}`$ has no interior point, we get

$$K_\mathrm{\Delta }\overline{M}=\underset{i=1,\mathrm{},r}{}(\widehat{e}_i\times \mathrm{\Delta }_i)\overline{M}.$$

###### Remark 4.2

 Let $`\mathrm{\Pi }()=\{_1,\mathrm{},_r\}`$ be the dual nef partition. Then the Gorenstein cone

$$C_{}=\{(\mu _1,\mathrm{},\mu _r,\mu _1z_1+\mathrm{}+\mu _rz_r)\overline{N}_{}:\mu _i_{},z_i_i,i=1,\mathrm{}r\}$$

is dual to $`C_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ defined in 4.1. Note, however, that $`K_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is not dual to $`K_{}`$!

## 5 Combinatorical polynomials of Eulerian posets

Batyrev and Borisov gave an explicit formula for the string-theoretic $`E`$polynomial for a Calabi–Yau complete intersection $`V`$ in a Gorenstein toric Fano variety . This polynomial depends only on the combinatorial data of the corresponding Gorenstein cone. We will give some basic definitions of combinatorial polynomials on Eulerian Posets, which are used to compute the $`E`$polynomial, and formulate it in a way which can be used for the explicit calculation of the Hodge numbers.

Let $`P`$ be an Eulerian Poset, i.e. a finite partially ordered set with unique minimal element $`\widehat{0}`$, maximal element $`\widehat{1}`$ and the same length $`d`$ of every maximal chain of $`P`$. For any $`xyP`$, define the interval $`I=[x,y]`$ as

$$[x,y]=\{zP:xzy\}.$$

In particular, we have $`P=[\widehat{0},\widehat{1}]`$. Define the rank function $`\rho :P\{0,\mathrm{},d\}`$ on $`P`$ by setting $`\rho (x)`$ equal to the length of the interval $`[\widehat{0},x]`$. Note that for any Eulerian Poset $`P`$, every interval $`I=[x,y]`$ is again an Eulerian Poset with rank function $`\rho (z)\rho (x)zI`$. If an Eulerian Poset has rank $`d`$, then the dual Poset $`P^{}`$ is also an Eulerian Poset with rank function $`\rho ^{}=d\rho `$.

###### Example 5.1

Let $`CN_{}`$ be a $`d`$dimensional cone with its dual $`C^{}M_{}`$. There is a canonical bijective correspondence $`FF^{}`$ between faces $`FC`$ and $`F^{}C^{}`$ with $`\mathrm{dim}F+\mathrm{dim}F^{}=d`$ ,

$$FF^{}=\{zC^{}:\widehat{z},z=0zF\},$$

which reverses the inclusion relation between faces. We denote the faces of $`C`$ by indices $`x`$ and define the poset $`P=[\widehat{0},\widehat{1}]`$ as the poset of all faces $`C_xC`$ with maximal element $`C`$ and minimal element $`\{0\}`$ and rank function $`\rho (x)=\mathrm{dim}(C_x)xP`$. The dual poset $`P^{}`$ can be identified with the poset of faces $`C_x^{}C^{}`$ of the dual cone $`C^{}`$ with rank function $`\rho ^{}(x^{})=\mathrm{dim}(C_x^{})x^{}P^{}`$.

###### Definition 5.2

Let $`P`$ be an Eulerian Poset of rank $`d`$ as above. Define the polynomial $`B(P;u,v)[u,v]`$ by the following rules :

* $`B(P;u,v)=1`$ if $`d=0`$;
* the degree of $`B(P;u,v)`$ with respect to $`v`$ is less than $`d/2`$;
* $`\underset{\widehat{0}x\widehat{1}}{}B([\widehat{0},x];u^1,v^1)(uv)^{\rho (x)}(vu)^{d\rho (x)}=\underset{\widehat{0}x\widehat{1}}{}B([x,\widehat{1}];u,v)(uv1)^{\rho (x)}.`$

Let us consider how we can construct the $`B`$polynomial for an interval $`I=[x,y]P`$ with $`d=\rho (y)\rho (x)`$: Suppose we know the $`B`$polynomials $`B(\stackrel{~}{I};u,v)`$ for all sub-intervals $`\stackrel{~}{I}=[\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{y}]I`$. Then we know all terms of the relation formula for the $`B`$polynomials in 5.2 except for $`B(I;u,v)`$ on the right hand side and $`B(I;u^1,v^1)(uv)^d`$ on the left hand side. Because the $`v`$degree of $`B(I;u,v)`$ is less than $`d/2`$, the possible degrees of monomials with respect to $`v`$ in $`B(I;u,v)`$ and $`B(I;u^1,v^1)(uv)^d`$ do not coincide and we can calculate $`B(I;u,v)`$. So if we have to compute $`B(P;u,v)`$, we first have to calculate the $`B`$polynomials for all intervals with rank $`0`$ (which are per definition 1), then those intervals with rank $`1`$, and so on.

###### Remark 5.3

Let $`P`$ be an Eulerian Poset of rank $`d`$, $`P^{}`$ be the dual. Then the polynomial defined in (5.2) satisfies

$$B(P;u,v)=(u)^dB(P^{};u^1,v).$$

###### Definition 5.4

Let $`P`$ be the Eulerian Poset corresponding to the Gorenstein cone $`C=C_\mathrm{\Delta }\overline{M}_{}`$ from definition 4.1. Define two functions on the set of faces of $`C`$ by

$`S(C_x,t)`$ $`=`$ $`(1t)^{\rho (x)}{\displaystyle \underset{mC_x\overline{M}}{}}t^{\mathrm{deg}(m)}`$
$`T(C_x,t)`$ $`=`$ $`(1t)^{\rho (x)}{\displaystyle \underset{m\mathrm{Int}(C_x)\overline{M}}{}}t^{\mathrm{deg}(m)},`$
where $`\mathrm{Int}(C_x)`$ denotes the relative interior of $`C_xC`$ and $`\mathrm{deg}(m)=m,n_\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

The following statement is a consequence of the Serre duality :

###### Proposition 5.5

For the Gorenstein cone $`C=C_\mathrm{\Delta }\overline{M}_{}`$ the functons $`S`$ and $`T`$ are polynomials: $`S(C_x,t),T(C_x,t)[t]`$, and they satisfy the relation

$$S(C_x,t)=t^{\rho (x)}T(C_x,t^1).$$

###### Remark 5.6

For $`S=_ia_it^i`$ and $`T=_ib_it^i`$ as defined above 5.5 implies that

$$a_0+a_1t+\mathrm{}+a_nt^n=b_0t^n+b_1t^{n1}+\mathrm{}+b_{n1}t+b_n,$$

where $`n=\mathrm{dim}C_x`$ and we get the relations

$$a_i=b_{ni}(i=1,\mathrm{},n)$$

for the coefficients of $`S`$ and $`T`$. Since $`a_0=1`$ and $`b_0=0`$, the leading coefficients are determined to be $`a_n=0`$ and $`b_n=1`$. So it is sufficient to calculate $`C_xmK_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\mathrm{Int}(C_xmK_\mathrm{\Delta })`$ for $`m=0,\mathrm{},[dim(C_x)/2]`$ and to use the fact that $`a_i=b_{ni}`$ for $`i>dim(C_x)/2`$.

Batyrev and Borisov showed in their paper  that the string-theoretic E-polynomial of a nef partition can be calculated from the data of the corresponding Gorenstein cone:

###### Proposition 5.7

 Let $`\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{\Delta })=\{\mathrm{\Delta }_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Delta }_r\}`$ be a nef partition and $`C=C_\mathrm{\Delta }\overline{M}_{}`$ be the $`\overline{d}`$dimensional reflexive Gorenstein cone defined in 4.1 (with dual cone $`C^{}=C_{}\overline{N}_{}`$). Denote by $`P`$ the poset of faces $`C_xC`$ (see example 5.1). Then the string-theoretic $`E`$polynomial is given by

$$E_{st}(V;u,v)=\underset{I=[x,y]P}{}\frac{(1)^{\rho (y)}}{(uv)^r}(vu)^{\rho (x)}B(I^{};u,v)(uv1)^{\overline{d}\rho (y)}A_{(x,y)}(u,v),$$

with

$$A_{(x,y)}(u,v)=\underset{(m,n)\mathrm{Int}(C_x)\overline{M}\times \mathrm{Int}(C_y^{})\overline{N}}{}\left(\frac{u}{v}\right)^{\mathrm{deg}(m)}\left(\frac{1}{uv}\right)^{\mathrm{deg}(n)}.$$

The dual partition $`\mathrm{\Pi }()=\{_1,\mathrm{},_r\}`$ corresponds to the Calabi–Yau complete intersection $`W`$ and $`(V,W)`$ is a mirror pair of (singular) Calabi–Yau varieties, at least in the sense that

$$E_{st}(V;u,v)=(u)^{dr}E_{st}(W;\frac{1}{u},v),$$

or equivalently, $`h_{st}^{p,q}(V)=h_{st}^{np,q}(W)`$ for $`0p,qn=dim(V)=dim(W)`$.

###### Remark 5.8

Using the duality 5.3 for the $`B`$polynomials and definition 5.4 with relation 5.5 between the $`S`$ and $`T`$polynomials, we can write the $`E`$polynomial as

$$E_{st}(V;u,v)=\underset{I=[x,y]P}{}\frac{(1)^{\rho (x)}u^{\rho (y)}}{(uv)^r}S(C_x,\frac{v}{u})S(C_y^{},uv)B(I;u^1,v).$$

This equation can be used for explicit calculations.

## 6 Results

Using the formula for the $`E`$-polynomial 5.8 we are now able to construct Calabi–Yau complete intersections starting with a reflexive polytope $`\mathrm{\Delta }M_{}`$ (or $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}N_{}`$). Our first task is to compare the toric construction to a list of complete intersections in weighted projective spaces, which was produced by Klemm . Then we construct a large number of nef partitions for different classes of five-dimensional reflexive polytopes and compare the Hodge data with the complete restults that are available for toric hypersurfaces .

### 6.1 Comparison with Weighted Projective Space

In order to identify complete intersections in $`W^5`$ as special cases of the toric construction it is natural to start with the Newton polyhedron and to compare the Hodge data for various nef partitions. In what follows we will analyze some examples from Klemm’s list  and discuss the different situations that can occur.

In the simplest case the Newton polyhedron $`\mathrm{\Delta }(d)`$ corresponding to degree $`(d_1,d_2)`$ equations with $`d=d_1+d_2`$ is reflexive and the Hodge numbers of a nef partition $`\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{\Delta }(d))=\{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_2\}`$ agree with those given in . This works already for the first example of degree $`(4,2)`$ equations in $`_{1,1,1,1,1,1}`$. In general, $`\mathrm{\Delta }(d_1+d_2)`$ may differ from the Minkowski sum $`\mathrm{\Delta }(d_1)+\mathrm{\Delta }(d_2)`$ and none of the two polytopes has to be reflexive. In many cases we find a simple modification of these polytopes that makes the Hodge data agree:

* Already in the second example of this list the Newton polyhedron $`\mathrm{\Delta }(7)`$ for the weight system of $`W_{1,1,1,1,1,2}`$ is not reflexive. It is, however, possible to reduce $`\mathrm{\Delta }(7)`$ to a reflexive polyhedron $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ by omitting 5 points, so that its dual provides a toric resolution of singularities of the weighted projective space. Indeed, the Hodge data for $`(d_1,d_2)=(3,4)`$ matches for one nef partition of the resulting polytope.
* Another possibility is that the Newton polyhedron is reflexive, but the Hodge numbers do not agree. In such a case we can compute the Minkowski sum $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}=\mathrm{\Delta }(d_1)+\mathrm{\Delta }(d_2)`$ and check if it is reflexive and gives the right Hodge numbers. This works, for example, for degrees $`(d_1,d_2)=(5,3)`$ in case of the weight system for $`W_{1,1,1,1,2,2}`$.

There are still some examples where we were not able to reproduce the Hodge data. For example, in case of the weight system for $`W_{1,1,1,1,2,3}`$ and degrees $`(d_1,d_2)=(5,4)`$, neither $`\mathrm{\Delta }(9)`$ (which has 575 points) nor the Minkowski sum $`\mathrm{\Delta }(5)+\mathrm{\Delta }(4)`$ (with only 211 points) is reflexive. The largest reflexive subpolytope of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(9)`$ has 570 points, but it’s nef partitions do not yield the right Hodge numbers. Omitting up to 30 points we find another 21 reflexive polyhedra, but non of their nef partitions yields $`h^{11}=2`$ and $`h^{12}=84`$. We thus found no candidate for a toric description and a more detailed analysis of the geometry would be required to check if a toric description exists.

### 6.2 New Hodge numbers

Of course, one of our main interests is to find new Hodge data. In  the complete set of 30108 pairs of Hodge numbers corresponding to hypersurfaces in toric varieties has been constructed (the number is 15122 if we count those with $`h^{11}h^{12}`$ because 136 are selfdual). Picking out only the new Hodge data from the list of 2387 pairs arising from weighted $`^5`$ , i.e. those not contained in , there remain only 15 new data, which we list in table 1. (Note that this class is not mirror symmetric.)

Using the toric construction, we started with reflexive polyhedra that are described by single or combined weight systems, as they were constructed systematically for Calabi–Yau fourfolds , and from Minkowski sums of Newton polytopes that arise in the context of weighted projective spaces. In this way we found 16 (with mirror duality 32) pairs of new Hodge numbers. They are listed in appendix A, tables 3-5, together with a detailed information about the starting polyhedron. Most of them lie in the lower boundary region $`h^{11}6`$, which is less covered by the “background” of toric hypersufaces. It is remarkable that almost every pair of new Hodge numbers corresponds to a starting polyhedron $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}N`$ in the $`N`$-lattice with less than $`20`$ points. Thus, to get a more complete result for new spectra in that range, we used the program package that was written for the classification of reflexive polyhedra  to construct a fairly complete set of reflexive polyhedra with up to 10 points (they were all found as subpolytopes of some 10000 polyhedra with up to 40 points originating from transveral weight systems ). Indeed, using these polytopes for $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}N`$, we found $`87`$ pairs of Hodge numbers not contained in . They are listed in table $`2`$ and are shown in figure 1 in the background of toric hypersurfaces and CICYs in $`W^5`$ in the range of $`1h^{11}10`$ and $`1h^{21}170`$.

| $`h^{11}`$ | $`h^{21}`$ | $`h^{11}`$ | $`h^{21}`$ | $`h^{11}`$ | $`h^{21}`$ | $`h^{11}`$ | $`h^{21}`$ | $`h^{11}`$ | $`h^{21}`$ | $`h^{11}`$ | $`h^{21}`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | 25 | 2 | 60 | 3 | 24 | 3 | 52 | 4 | 16 | 4 | 53 |
| 1 | 37 | 2 | 62 | 3 | 27 | 3 | 53 | 4 | 22 | 4 | 75 |
| 1 | 61 | 2 | 64 | 3 | 29 | 3 | 54 | 4 | 24 | 4 | 83 |
| 1 | 73 | 2 | 66 | 3 | 31 | 3 | 55 | 4 | 26 | 5 | 25 |
| 1 | 79 | 2 | 68 | 3 | 33 | 3 | 56 | 4 | 30 | 5 | 27 |
| 1 | 89 | 2 | 70 | 3 | 35 | 3 | 58 | 4 | 31 | 5 | 102 |
| 1 | 129 | 2 | 72 | 3 | 37 | 3 | 60 | 4 | 32 | 6 | 20 |
| 2 | 30 | 2 | 76 | 3 | 39 | 3 | 61 | 4 | 33 | 6 | 24 |
| 2 | 36 | 2 | 77 | 3 | 41 | 3 | 62 | 4 | 38 | 7 | 22 |
| 2 | 44 | 2 | 78 | 3 | 42 | 3 | 64 | 4 | 39 | 8 | 14 |
| 2 | 50 | 2 | 80 | 3 | 44 | 3 | 68 | 4 | 41 | 13 | 13 |
| 2 | 54 | 2 | 82 | 3 | 47 | 3 | 70 | 4 | 43 | 13 | 15 |
| 2 | 56 | 2 | 100 | 3 | 48 | 3 | 80 | 4 | 45 |  |  |
| 2 | 58 | 2 | 112 | 3 | 49 | 3 | 101 | 4 | 47 |  |  |
| 2 | 59 | 3 | 23 | 3 | 50 | 3 | 113 | 4 | 51 |  |  |

Table 2. New Hodge numbers with toric CICYs.

The advantage of this strategy is that it is easy to get a rather complete list of reflexive polytopes with a small number of points, which at the same time have a high probability for the existence of nef partitions and whose Hodge data are outside the range that is already completely covered by hypersurfaces. Moreover, this class dissipates less time in computing the nef partitions because of their small number of vertices. Pursuing this strategy, a further step will be to increase the codimension by one and to construct complete intersections using six-dimensional starting polytopes with a small number of points.

Acknowledgements. This work was supported in part by the Austrian Research Funds FWF under grant Nr. P14639-TPH.

## Appendix A Hodge data

| $`\mathrm{d}_1`$ | $`\mathrm{w}_{1_1},\mathrm{},\mathrm{w}_{\mathrm{n}_1}`$ | $`\mathrm{d}_2`$ | $`\mathrm{w}_{1_2},\mathrm{},\mathrm{w}_{\mathrm{n}_2}`$ | $`h^{11}`$ | $`h^{21}`$ | $`\chi `$ | $`\mathrm{\#}\mathrm{\Delta }M`$ | $`\mathrm{\#}\mathrm{\Delta }^v`$ | $`\mathrm{\#}\mathrm{\Delta }^{}N`$ | $`\mathrm{\#}\mathrm{\Delta }_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{v}`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 3 | 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 | 4 | 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 | 2 | 59 | 114 | 350 | 12 | 8 | 7 |
| 3 | 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 | 5 | 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 | 2 | 60 | 116 | 379 | 12 | 8 | 7 |
| 3 | 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 | 4 | 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 | 2 | 62 | 120 | 350 | 12 | 8 | 7 |
| 3 | 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 | 6 | 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 | 2 | 62 | 120 | 381 | 12 | 8 | 7 |
| 3 | 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 | 5 | 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 | 2 | 70 | 136 | 379 | 12 | 8 | 7 |
| 3 | 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 | 6 | 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 | 2 | 76 | 148 | 381 | 12 | 8 | 7 |
| 3 | 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 | 4 | 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 | 2 | 77 | 150 | 350 | 12 | 8 | 7 |
| 3 | 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 | 8 | 3 0 0 1 1 2 1 | 2 | 100 | 196 | 496 | 16 | 9 | 8 |
| 4 | 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 | 5 | 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 | 3 | 55 | 104 | 292 | 12 | 9 | 7 |
| 4 | 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 | 6 | 1 0 0 1 1 1 2 | 3 | 55 | 104 | 282 | 12 | 9 | 7 |
| 4 | 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 | 8 | 0 1 2 1 1 1 2 | 3 | 55 | 104 | 247 | 9 | 9 | 7 |
| 4 | 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 | 12 | 0 1 3 2 2 2 2 | 3 | 55 | 104 | 265 | 9 | 9 | 7 |
| 4 | 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 | 4 | 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 | 3 | 55 | 104 | 315 | 12 | 9 | 7 |
| 3 | 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 | 5 | 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 | 3 | 56 | 106 | 340 | 18 | 9 | 8 |
| 4 | 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 | 16 | 1 0 0 2 3 4 6 | 13 | 15 | 4 | 117 | 20 | 15 | 10 |

Table 3. New Hodge numbers of toric CICYs using combined weight systems.

| $`\mathrm{d}`$ | $`\mathrm{w}_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{w}_\mathrm{n}`$ | $`h^{11}`$ | $`h^{21}`$ | $`\chi `$ | $`\mathrm{\#}\mathrm{\Delta }M`$ | $`\mathrm{\#}\mathrm{\Delta }^v`$ | $`\mathrm{\#}\mathrm{\Delta }^{}N`$ | $`\mathrm{\#}\mathrm{\Delta }_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{v}`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 12 | 1 1 2 2 3 3 | 1 | 61 | 120 | 407 | 6 | 7 | 6 |
| 6 | 1 1 1 1 1 1 | 1 | 73 | 144 | 462 | 6 | 7 | 6 |
| 8 | 1 1 1 1 2 2 | 1 | 73 | 144 | 483 | 6 | 7 | 6 |
| 6 | 1 1 1 1 1 1 | 1 | 89 | 176 | 462 | 6 | 7 | 6 |
| 12 | 1 2 2 2 2 3 | 2 | 62 | 120 | 321 | 6 | 8 | 6 |
| 9 | 1 1 1 2 2 2 | 2 | 68 | 132 | 434 | 12 | 8 | 7 |
| 10 | 1 1 2 2 2 2 | 2 | 68 | 132 | 378 | 6 | 8 | 6 |

Table 4. New Hodge numbers of toric CICYs using one weight system.

| $`\mathrm{d}`$ | $`\mathrm{w}_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{w}_\mathrm{n}`$ | $`\mathrm{d}_1`$ | $`\mathrm{d}_2`$ | $`h^{11}`$ | $`h^{21}`$ | $`\chi `$ | $`\mathrm{\#}\mathrm{\Delta }M`$ | $`\mathrm{\#}\mathrm{\Delta }^v`$ | $`\mathrm{\#}\mathrm{\Delta }^{}N`$ | $`\mathrm{\#}\mathrm{\Delta }_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{v}`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 12 | 1 1 2 2 3 3 | 6 | 6 | 1 | 61 | 120 | 407 | 6 | 7 | 6 |
| 6 | 1 1 1 1 1 1 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 73 | 144 | 462 | 6 | 7 | 6 |
| 8 | 1 1 1 1 2 2 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 73 | 144 | 483 | 6 | 7 | 6 |
| 6 | 1 1 1 1 1 1 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 89 | 176 | 462 | 6 | 7 | 6 |
| 8 | 1 1 1 1 1 3 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 129 | 256 | 636 | 10 | 8 | 7 |
| 12 | 1 2 2 2 2 3 | 6 | 6 | 2 | 62 | 120 | 321 | 6 | 8 | 6 |
| 9 | 1 1 1 2 2 2 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 68 | 132 | 434 | 12 | 8 | 7 |
| 10 | 1 1 2 2 2 2 | 4 | 6 | 2 | 68 | 132 | 378 | 6 | 8 | 6 |
| 14 | 1 2 2 3 3 3 | 8 | 6 | 3 | 47 | 88 | 294 | 12 | 9 | 7 |
| 16 | 1 2 2 3 4 4 | 8 | 8 | 3 | 55 | 104 | 327 | 8 | 9 | 7 |

Table 5. New Hodge numbers of toric CICYs using Minkowski sums.


text:
# CRL at NTCIR2

## 1 Introduction

We have developed two systems for the second NTCIR Workshop’s information retrieval (IR) tasks.

One is an enhanced version of the system that was used for the first NTCIR Workshop’s IR tasks  and the IREX Workshop’s IR tasks . We call this System A. The other is a newly developed system in which free parameters are avoided as much as possible. We call this System B.111System A was developed mainly by the first author, and System B was developed mainly by the second author.

System A participated in tasks set in Japanese and Chinese (JJ and CC). It achieved high average precisions on both tasks. System B participated in tasks set in Japanese, English, and Chinese (JJ, JE, EE, EJ, and CC). It achieved high average precisions on the JJ, EE, JE, and EJ tasks.

Although the two systems participated in some of the same tasks, the details of the system implementations are rather different. Thus, we describe the two systems separately, focusing on particular tasks; i.e., we describe System-A in the context of CC tasks and describe System-B in the context of JJ, EE, JE, and EJ tasks.

## 2 Chinese IR Tasks

In this section, we describe System A in the context of CC tasks. System A participated in JJ tasks222System A particpated in the long-query and short-query JJ tasks. The best average precisions of the two tasks in terms of A judgement were 0.4082 (CRL20) and 0.3730 (CRL16), and the best average R-precisions were 0.4210 (CRL20) and 0.3866 (CRL27). These results are also good. Strings in parentheses indicate system ids in the NTCIR contest. Examination of System A’s performance on JJ tasks is the subject of a forthcoming publication. and CC tasks, and achieved particularly good results on the CC tasks. This reason is that the types of documents used in the CC tasks were very different from those used in the JJ tasks. While the JJ tasks involved retrieval from a database of academic conference papers, the CC tasks involved retrieval from a database of newspaper articles. System A333System A is based on the system we entered in the IREX contest. In the IREX contest, articles in a database of newspapers database were used as the test collection. System A achieved good results in the IREX contest, too . takes advantage of such characteristics of newspapers as the title or the first sentence of the body of an article in a newspaper often indicating the article’s subject. We thus expected System A to be effective on the CC tasks. In the following sections, we give a detailed description of System A and report on the experimental results of System A’s application to the CC tasks.

### 2.1 Outline of System A

System A uses Robertson’s 2-poisson model  which is one kind of probabilistic approach. In Robertson’s method, each document’s score is calculated by using the following equation.444This equation is BM11, which corresponds to BM25 in the case of $`b=1`$ . The documents that obtain high scores are then output as retrieval results. ($`Score(d,q)`$ below is the score of a document $`d`$ against a query $`q`$.)

Score(d,q)=

term t
in q
𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑑𝑞subscript

term t
in q
\displaystyle Score(d,q)=\displaystyle\sum_{\begin{minipage}[h]{22.76228pt}
term $t$
\par in $q$
\end{minipage}} $`({\displaystyle \frac{tf(d,t)}{tf(d,t)+k_t{\displaystyle \frac{length\left(d\right)}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}}}\times log{\displaystyle \frac{N}{df\left(t\right)}}`$ (1)
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{tf_q(q,t)}{tf_q(q,t)+kq}})`$
where $`t`$ indicates a term that appears in a query. $`tf(d,t)`$ is the frequency of $`t`$ in a document $`d`$, $`tf_q(q,t)`$ is the frequency of $`t`$ in a query $`q`$, $`df(t)`$ is the number of the documents in which $`t`$ appears, $`N`$ is the total number of documents, $`length(d)`$ is the length of a document $`d`$, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the average length of the documents. $`k_t`$ and $`k_q`$ are constants which are set according to the results of experiments.

In this equation, we call $`{\displaystyle \frac{tf(d,t)}{tf(d,t)+k_t{\displaystyle \frac{length\left(d\right)}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}}}`$ the TF term, (abbr. $`TF(d,t)`$), $`log\frac{N}{df\left(t\right)}`$ the IDF term, (abbr. $`IDF(t)`$), and $`\frac{tf_q(q,t)}{tf_q(q,t)+kq}`$ the TFq term (abbr. $`TF_q(q,t)`$).

In System A, several terms are added to extend this equation, and its method is expressed by the following equation.

Score(d.q)=Kcategory(d){

term t
in q
(TF(d,t)×IDF(t)\displaystyle Score(d.q)=\displaystyle K_{\tiny category}(d)\left\{\displaystyle\sum_{\begin{minipage}[h]{22.76228pt}
term $t$
\par in $q$
\end{minipage}}\left(TF(d,t)\times IDF(t)\right.\right.
$`\times TF_q(q,t)\times K_{location}(d,t)\times \left(log{\displaystyle \frac{Nq}{qf\left(t\right)}}\right)^{k_{Nq}})`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{length\left(d\right)}{length\left(d\right)+\mathrm{\Delta }}}\}`$ (2)
The TF, IDF and TFq terms in this equation are identical to those in Eq. (1). The value of the term $`\frac{length}{length+\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ increases with the length of the document. This term is introduced because if all of the other information is exactly the same, the longer document is more likely to include content that is a relevant response to the query. $`Nq`$ is the total number of queries and $`qf(t)`$ is the number of queries in which $`t`$ occurs. Those terms which occur more frequently in queries are more likely to be stop words such as “documents” and “thing.” We decrease the scores of stop words by using $`log\frac{Nq}{qf(t)}`$. $`K_{category}`$ and $`K_{location}`$ are extended numerical terms that are introduced to improve precision of results. $`K_{category}`$ uses the category information of the document found in newspapers, such as the economic or political pages. $`K_{location}`$ uses the location of the term within the document. If the term is in the title or at the beginning of the body of the document, it is given a higher weighting. In the next section, we explain these extended numerical terms in detail.

### 2.2 Extended numerical terms

We use the two extended numerical terms $`K_{location}`$ and $`K_{category}`$ as shown in Eq. (2). In this section, they are explained in detail.

1. Location information ($`K_{location}`$)

In general, the title or the first sentence of the body of a document in a newspaper indicates its subject. Therefore, the precision of information retrieval can be improved by assigning more weight to the terms from these two locations. This is achieved by $`K_{location}`$ which adjusts the weight on a term the basis of whether or not it appears at the beginning of the document. If a term is in the title or at the beginning of the body, it is given a high weighting. Otherwise, it is given a low weighting. $`K_{location}`$ is expressed as follows:

$`K_{location}(d,t)=\{\begin{array}{c}k_{location,1}\hfill \\ \text{(when a term }t\text{ occurs in the title of}\hfill \\ \text{a document }d\text{),}\hfill \\ 1+k_{location,2}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(length\left(d\right)2P(d,t)\right)}{length\left(d\right)}}\hfill \\ \text{(otherwise)}\hfill \end{array}`$ (8)
$`P(d,t)`$ is the location of a term $`t`$ in the document $`d`$. When a term appears more than once in a document, its first appearence is used. $`k_{location,1}`$ and $`k_{location,2}`$ are constants which are set according to the results of experiments.
2. Categorical information ($`K_{category}`$)

$`K_{category}`$ uses category information such as whether or not the document appears on the economic or political pages. This operates by applying the technique called relevance feedback . Firstly, we specify the categories which occur in the top 15 documents of the first retrieval when $`K_{category}=1`$. Then, we increase the scores of documents that are in majority or most-frequent categories. For example, the top 15 documents of the first retrieval were most often from the economic pages, we increase the scores of a documents from economic pages and decrease the scores of all documents from other sections of the newspaper. $`K_{category}`$ is expressed as follows;

$$K_{category}\left(d\right)=1+k_{category}\frac{\left(RatioA\left(d\right)RatioB\left(d\right)\right)}{\left(RatioA\left(d\right)+RatioB\left(d\right)\right)}$$
(9)
where $`RatioA`$ is the proportion of the top 100 documents in a given category on the first retrieval. $`RatioB`$ is the proportion of that category in all the documents. The value of $`K_{category}(d)`$ is large when $`RatioA`$ is large (the top 100 documents of the first retrieval frequently appear on the same pages as a document $`d`$.) and $`RatioB`$ is small (few of the documents appear on the same pages as $`d`$). $`k_{category}`$ is a constant which is set according to the results of experiments.

### 2.3 How terms are extracted

Before being able to use Eq. (2) in information retrieval, we must extract terms from a query. This section describes how this is done. With regard to term extraction, we considered the several methods listed below.

1. Method of using only the shortest terms

This is the simplest method. In the method, the query sentence is divided into short terms by using a morphological analyzer or a similar tool. All of the short terms are used in the retrieval process. The method used to divide the query sentence into short terms is described in Section 2.4.
2. Method of using all term patterns

In the first method the terms are too short. For example, “enterprise” and “amalgamation” would be used instead of “enterprise amalgamation.”555Although this part of the paper deals only with retrieval from Chinese-language texts, and not English, we have used English examples for the benefit of this English-lanugae journal’s readers. This method handles compound nouns and can be applied not only to Chinese but also to English.  We felt that “enterprise amalgamation” should be used along with the two short terms. Therefore, we decided to use both short and long terms. We call this the “all term-patterns method.” For example, when “enterprise amalgamation materialization” was input, we used “enterprise”, “amalgamation”, “materialization”, “enterprise amalgamation”, “amalgamation materialization”, and “enterprise amalgamation materialization” as terms for information retrieval. We felt that this method would be effective because it makes use of all term patterns. We also felt, however, that it is inequitable that only the three terms “enterprise,” “amalgamation,” “materialization,” are derived from “… enterprise … amalgamation … materialization …”, while six terms are derived from “enterprise amalgamation materialization.” We examined several methods of normalization in preliminary experiments, then decided to divide the weight of each term by $`\sqrt{\frac{n(n+1)}{2}}`$, where $`n`$ is the number of successive words. For example, in the case of “enterprise amalgamation materialization”, $`n=3`$.
3. Method using a lattice

Although the method of using all-term patterns effectively uses all patterns of terms, it needs to be normalized by using the adhoc equation $`\sqrt{\frac{n(n+1)}{2}}`$. We thus considered a method in which all term patterns are stored in a lattice. We used the patterns in the path with the highest score on Eq. (2). (This method is almost the same as Ozawa’s . The differences are the fundamental equation for information retrieval, and whether or not a morphological analyzer is used.)

For example, in the case of “enterprise amalgamation materialization” the lattice shown in Fig. 1 is obtained. As shown in this figure, the score is calculated for each of the four paths by using Eq. (2), and the terms in the highest-scoring path are used. This method does not require the adhoc normalization required by the method of using all term patterns.
4. Method of using down-weighting

This is the method that Fujita proposed at the IREX contest . It is similar to the all-term patterns method. It uses all term patterns but the method of normalization is different from that used in the all-term patterns method. The weights of the shortest terms are kept constant while the weights of the longer terms are decreased. We decided to apply the weight $`k_{down}`$x-1 to such terms, where $`x`$ is the number of shortest terms and $`k_{down}`$ was set according to the results of experiments.

### 2.4 The method dividing the query sentence into short terms

We used the following three methods to divide the query sentence into short terms.666System A only segments sentences of documents are not segmented except for automatic feedback.

1. Using a morphological analyzer

In this method, the query sentence is segmented by using the CSeg&Tag 1.0 Chinese-language morphological analyzer .
2. Segmentation by using mutual information

This method is based on the method  proposed by Sproat et al. It calculates the mutual information of two adjacent characters and divides them when their mutual information. The details of our method are as follows.

Almost all Chinese words consist of one Chinese character or two Chinese characters.777According to the paper , the occurrence rate of words which consist of three Chinese characters is under 1%. So we assumed that all terms consist of one Chinese character or two Chinese characters. Thus, our method firstly divides Chinese sentences into fragments which consist of one Chinese character or two Chinese characters by using mutual information. This is done by repeatly applying the following procedure.

* Divide up pairs of adjacent characters with the lowest amount of mutual information, where each pair is part of a fragment which consist of more than two Chinese character.

Next, we use the statistics of the Chinese corpus. In this case, we assume that the ratio of one-character words and two-characters words in a Chinese text is a:b.888For example, Spraot stated that this ratio is about 7:3 . We take this statistic then re-divide those fragments that consist of pairs of characters having little mutual information into two separate one-character words in such a way that our process of division produces a text broken up into one- and two-character words in the approximate proportion a:b. This is done by repeating the following procedure until the text will be divided up to produce the approximate proportion a:b.

* Divide those fragments consisting of pairs of characters having the lowest mutual information

The result of this procedure is equivalent to that of the following procedure.

* Divide up those fragments consisting of pairs of characters having a level of mutual information which is equal to or lower than $`k_{cmi}`$, where $`k_{cmi}`$ is the amount of mutual information that will divide up the text to produce the approximate proportion a:b.
3. Using both of the above two methods

This method firstly divides up the Chinese sentences by using the morphological analyzer and then further divides up the fragments by using mutual information and the statistics on the Chinese corpus.

### 2.5 Automatic feedback in System A

Automatic feedback is also used in System A. In System A, an element of automatic feedback is inclued via the IDF term of the equation (2). When performing automatic feedback, we substitute the following equation for the original IDF term.

$`IDF\left(t\right)`$ $`=`$ $`\left\{E\left(t\right)+k_{af}\times \left(RatioC\left(t\right)RatioD\left(t\right)\right)\right\}`$ (10)
$`\times IDF_{orig}\left(t\right)`$
$`E\left(t\right)`$ $`=`$ $`1\text{ (when a term t is in a query)}`$ (11)
$`0\text{ (otherwise)}`$
where $`RatioC(t)`$ is the proportion of the top $`k_r`$ documents of the first retrieval in which a term $`t`$ appears. $`RatioD(t)`$ is the proportion of all of the documents in which a term $`t`$ appears. $`IDF_{orig}(t)`$ is the original IDF term. This formula is based on Rocchio’s formula . $`k_{af}`$ and $`k_r`$ are constants set according to the results of experiments.

Term expansion is also used in System A. The terms ‘Terms’ as defined below are added.

$`Terms=\left\{t\right|P\left(t\right)k_p\}`$ (12)
where $`P(t)`$ is the probability that a term $`t`$ appears in no less than $`n`$ documents of the top $`k_r`$ documents. $`P(t)`$ is approximately calculated by assuming that the appearance of the term $`t`$ follows a binominal distribution with a probability of the occurrence rate of the term $`t`$ in all the documents. $`k_p`$ is a constant set according to the results of experiments.

### 2.6 Weighting counting in automatic feedback

We considered that a term which occurs in a document which has a higher rank on the first retrieval is more important. So, when counting the frequency of a term $`t`$ in a document d with a rank of $`Rank(d)`$, System A applied the following factor $`AFW(t,d)`$ to the frequency.

$`AFW(t,d)=\left(k_{afw}+1\right)2\times k_{afw}{\displaystyle \frac{Rank\left(d\right)1}{k_r1}}`$ (13)
where $`k_{afw}`$ is a constant set according to the results of experiments. Equations (10) and (12) are calculated by using the frequency calculated by Equation 13.

### 2.7 Experiments

The experimental results of System A are shown in Table 1. “LO”, “SO”, “VS”, and “TI” indicate a long-query task, a short-query task, a very short query task, and a title-query task. The column “ID” indicates the system id in the NTCIR 2 contest. “–” in “ID” indicates a system which was not submitted for the formal run of the NTCIR 2 contest. The column “Term” indicates the method used to divide the query sentence up into short terms. “TAG”, “MI”, and “T+M” respectively indicate the use of the Chinese morphological analyzer, mutual information, and both the morphological analyzer and mutual information. $`k_{cmi}`$,999In the CHIR newspapers database, using $`k_{cmi}`$ = 5.33, 4.96, 4.56, 4.10, and 3.53 divides up the text to produce the approximate proportions of 7:3, 6.5:3.5, 6:4, 5.5:4.5, and 5:5.  $`k_{Nq}`$, $`k_r`$, and $`k_{af}`$ are set as in Table 1. “dw”, “af”, “L” and “C” indicate the down-weighting method, automatic feedback method, locational information, and categorical information. “y” in a column indicates the use of the method, and “n” indicates that the method was not used. When we do not use the down-weighting method, we use the shortest-terms method as the method of extracting terms.101010Our previous work  had confirmed that the use of all term patterns is not a good method, and that even the simple method of using only the shortest terms can achieve good results. The other parameters are set as follows: $`k_{location,1}=1.2`$, $`k_{location,2}=0.1`$, $`k_{category}=0.1`$, $`k_t=1`$, $`k_q=\mathrm{}`$, $`k_p=0.9`$, and $`k_{afw}=0.5`$. “s” in “L” and “C” means the strong setting where $`k_{location,1}=1.3`$, $`k_{location,2}=0.15`$, $`k_{category}=0.15`$. “t” in “$`k_{Nq}`$” means using $`log\frac{Nq}{qf(t)}`$ in a more complex way such that $`qf(t)`$ means the number of queries whose titles contain a term $`t`$.

The following were the findings produced by the experimental results.

* The precisions of “T+M” or “TAG” are slightly higher than that of “MI.” We thus found that using the morphological analyzer produced better results than using mutual information.
* By comparing S12 with S13 or S30 with S31, we found that locational information achieved an improvement of about 0.02 or 0.03. We can see that locational information is very effective.
* By comparing S12 with S14 or S30 with S32, we found that the precisions when categorical information not used were higher than the precisions when it was used. So, at least for these data, using category information was not a good thing.
* The automatic feedback method was always effective.
* The down-weighting method sometimes produced better results and sometimes produced poorer results.

### 2.8 Summary

System A uses such characteristics of newspapers as locational information and obtained good results in the CC Tasks. By performing comparative experiments, we confirmed that locational information was effective. The other kinds of information were, however, not so effective.

System A has many parameters and many methods. In the future, we would like to conduct much more extensive experiments in order to examine the effects of parameters and methods in System A.

## 3 Japanese and English IR Tasks

### 3.1 Overview of the results

The average precisions for System-B against relevant documents on JJ, EJ, EE, and JE tasks are presented in Table 2. In Table 2, ‘very short’ means that the system used the ‘TITLE’ part of the queries for retrieval, ‘short’ means that it used the ‘DESCRIPTION’ part of the queries, and ‘long’ means that it used all parts of the queries except the ‘FIELD’ part. For each task, ‘feedback’ means the precisions that were obtained by automatic-feedback retrieval, while ‘initial’ means the precisions that were obtained by using the raw initial queries. The symbol ‘$``$’ means that the corresponding search results from System-B were submitted to the NTCIR 2 workshop committee as formal runs.111111On JJ short, System-A outperformed System-B. Its best average precision was 0.3730 For the JJ and EE tasks, only ‘feedback’ results from System-B were submitted, while for the EJ and JE tasks, both ‘initial’ and ‘feedback’ results were submitted. These average precisions place the system in the highest-scoring group among those for which results were submitted.

We describe System-B in detail below. We start by describing the scoring function used to rank documents. Next, we describe the design issues involved in selecting possible free parameters and then compare results for various parameter values through experimented results. Finally, we conclude this section with a brief summary.

### 3.2 Scoring function

Our scoring function is based on BM11 . Let $`D`$ be a document and $`Q`$ be a query, where $`D`$ and $`Q`$ have been tokenized into words. $`D`$ and $`Q`$ are bags of words. We define $`|X|`$ as the number of words in $`X`$ and define $`tf(w|X)`$ as the number of a word $`w`$ in $`X`$. We also define $`W(X)`$ as the set of different words in $`X`$.

The score of $`D`$ given $`Q`$, $`\mathrm{𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒}(D|Q)`$, is defined as:

$$\mathrm{𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒}(D|Q)=\underset{wW(D)W(Q)}{}d(w|D)q(w|Q),$$
(14)
where $`d(w|D)`$ is the weight of $`w`$ given $`D`$ and $`q(w|Q)`$ is the weight of $`w`$ given $`Q`$. $`d(w|D)`$ is defined as:

$$d(w|D)=\frac{\mathrm{𝑡𝑓}(w|D)}{\mathrm{𝑡𝑓}(w|D)+|D|/\mathrm{\Delta }},$$
(15)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the average of $`|D|`$ over the document collection $`𝒟`$ that contains $`D`$,i.e.,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\underset{D𝒟}{}|D|/|𝒟|,$$
(16)
where $`|𝒟|`$ is the number of documents in $`𝒟`$. $`q(w|Q)`$ is defined as:

$$q(w|Q)=\frac{(k_q+1)\mathrm{𝑡𝑓}(w|Q)}{k_q+\mathrm{𝑡𝑓}(w|Q)}\mathrm{𝑖𝑑𝑓}(w),$$
(17)
where $`k_q=1000`$ and

$$\mathrm{𝑖𝑑𝑓}(w)=\mathrm{log}\frac{|𝒟|}{|𝒟(w)|},$$
(18)
where $`|𝒟(w)|`$ is the number of documents that contain $`w`$. $`𝒟(w)`$ is , of course, a subset of $`𝒟`$.

$`\mathrm{𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒}(D|Q)`$ is used for the initial search. For an automatic feedback search, we use $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒}(D|Q)`$:

$$\mathrm{𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒}(D|Q)=\underset{wW(D)W(Q^{})}{}d(w|D)q^{}(w|Q),$$
(19)
where

$$q^{}(w|Q)=\alpha q(w|Q)+\frac{_{i=1}^Rq(w|F(D_i))}{R},$$
(20)
where $`\alpha `$ is a number , $`D_i`$ is the top $`i`$-th document retrieved by initial search, $`R`$ is the number of top-scoring documents used in the automatic-feedback search, and $`F`$ is the function used to select appropriate terms from a document. $`Q^{}`$ in Equation (19) is defined as:

$$Q^{}=QF(D_1)\mathrm{}F(D_R).$$
(21)
### 3.3 Design Issues

The free parameters we consider in this paper are $`\alpha `$, $`F`$, and $`R`$ in Equation (20). We tried to have these parameters defined automatically. Before, however, we describe our attempts at determining these parameters, we will discuss how we preprocessed documents and queries for the JJ, EE, JE, and EJ tasks.121212The method used to preprocess documents and queries for CC tasks is similar to, but more primitive than, a method described in section 2. We, thus, omit a description here.

#### 3.3.1 Tokenization

Tokenization is, to a large degree, language dependent.

We tokenized Japanese texts (documents or queries) by using ChaSen version 2.02131313http://chasen.aist-nara.ac.jp/  and then extracted lemmas of content words as $`D`$ or $`Q`$. We postprocessed the output of ChaSen to eliminate some erroneous patterns of tokenization.

In a similar way, we used LimaTK141414http://cl.aist-nara.ac.jp/~tatuo-y/ma/ to morphologically analyze English texts and then used a stemmer that built around a library available in the WordNet1.6 package151515http://www.cogsci.princeton.edu/~wn/ to lemmatize content words. Stop words were removed according to the list in the Nice stemmer package.161616http://www.ils.unc.edu/iris/irisnstem.htm

The documents and queries thus processed were used for the JJ and EE tasks.

#### 3.3.2 Query translation

For the JE and EJ tasks, we translated queries. Once we translate queries, cross-lingual IR (CLIR, i.e., JE or EJ) is performed by the same method as used for mono-lingual IR (JJ or EE). We describe the method below as applied to the translation of a Japanese query into English. English to Japanese translation is performed in a similar way.

We perform document expansion  to augment the original queries; i.e., for a Japanese query, we first search the Japanese database to get documents that are relevant to the query. Next, we extract the words contained in the top-5 documents and combine them to the original query. We thus obtain an expanded Japanese query.171717Local context analysis has been used to expand queries in CLIR . The comparison is a future work.

The expanded Japanese query is then translated into English. For the translation, we first made a Japanese-to-English bilingual dictionary from the Japanese-English abstract pairs provided for the first NTCIR Workshop. From those pairs, we extracted Japanese-English keyword pairs contained in the abstract pairs. It was possible for these keywords to be phrases or words. If a Japanese keyword co-occurred with multiple English keywords, then we selected the most frequently co-occurring English keyword as the translation of the Japanese keyword . Texts were translated in the following two steps; we used ChaSen to morphologically analyze the text, then translated the sequence of morphemes into English. The translation was on a word-to-word or phrase-to-phrase basis. Disambiguation by contexts was not used. The translation was based on longest matches. For example, if a query ‘a b c’ is given, where ‘a’ is translated into ‘A’ and ‘a b c’ is translated into ‘D E’, then ‘a b c’ is translated into ‘D E’.181818 also used a longest-match algorithm, but they did not use a morphological analyzer, which might degrade the system performance. This belief is supported by Table 3 which shows the performance of our method in no document expansion. The average precision of  on the same task was 0.3216, while that of our approach is 0.3364.

Translated queries were used for the JE and EJ tasks. The retrieval algorithm was the same as that used for the JJ and EE tasks.

As is shown in Table 2, our approach to the JE and EJ tasks worked quite well. It is evident, however, that the degree of success of our approach depends on the degree of similarity between the Japanese database and the English database used for CLIR. We thus conducted another experiment which used the databases and JE-queries provided for the first NTCIR Workshop. The type of query used for the experiment was ‘long’ except that we did not use English concepts.

In Table 3, the column ‘Source’ lists the databases used to expand the original queries. ‘$`\varphi `$’ indicates no document expansion. ‘ntc2-j’ means that the Japanese database which was freshly added for the second NTCIR Workshop was used for document expansion, and ‘ntc1-j’ means that the Japanese database provided for the NTCIR workshop 1 was used for document expansion. ‘ntc1-e’, which is listed in ‘Target’ column for all entries, is the English database that was the target of the searches for documents. Average precision was evaluated against relevant documents in ‘ntc1-e’.

‘ntc1-j’ and ‘ntc1-e’ are nearly parallel. Naturally, it achieved the best performance of these three cases. ‘ntc2-j’ and ‘ntc1-e’ are comparable. The average precision is still better than with no document expansion. Document expansion is thus worthwhile for CLIR.

We have briefly described the language-dependent parts of System-B. Next, we describe its language-independent parts, describing $`F`$, $`R`$, and $`\alpha `$ in Equation (20), in that order.

#### 3.3.3 Definition of $`F`$

We define a relevance of word $`w`$ for the top-scoring $`R`$ documents in terms of probability.191919 also uses a probabilistic metric to select relevant terms.

Given a bag of words $`X`$, then the probability of $`w`$, $`\mathrm{Pr}(w|X)`$, and its variance $`\text{Var}(w|X)`$ are estimated as

$$\mathrm{Pr}(w|X)=\frac{\mathrm{𝑡𝑓}(w|X)+1}{|X|+2},$$
(22)
$$\text{Var}(w|X)=\frac{\mathrm{Pr}(w|X)(1\mathrm{Pr}(w|X))}{|X|+3}.$$
(23)
We then define $`D_R^1`$ as the bag of words that contains all the words in $`D_1,D_2,\mathrm{},D_R`$ and define $`\overline{D_R^1}`$ as the complement of $`D_R^1`$ with a universal set that is defined by all of the words in the document collection $`𝒟`$.

The relevance of word $`w`$, $`\mathrm{𝑟𝑒𝑙}(w|D_R^1)`$, is defined as

$$\mathrm{𝑟𝑒𝑙}(w|D_R^1)=\frac{\mathrm{Pr}(w|D_R^1)\mathrm{Pr}(w|\overline{D_R^1})}{\sqrt{\text{Var}(w|D_R^1)+\text{Var}(w|\overline{D_R^1})}}.$$
(24)
Finally we define $`F(D_i)`$ as

$$F(D_i)=\{w|\mathrm{𝑟𝑒𝑙}(w|D_R^1)>=\theta wD_i\},$$
(25)
where $`\theta `$ is a predefined threshold.

$`\mathrm{𝑟𝑒𝑙}(w|D_R^1)`$ approximately follows the standard normal distribution. Possible candidates for $`\theta `$ are 1.28, 1.65 and 2.33, which correspond to significance levels of 0.10, 0.05 and 0.01, respectively. Hereafter, significance levels are represented by $`p`$.

We used $`p=0.10(\theta =1.28)`$ for all of the submitted runs.202020We used a more precise value for $`\theta `$ actually. This choice was based on previous experiments conducted on the database provided for the first NTCIR Workshop. $`p=0.10`$ is a robust parameter value for term selection as is shown in section 3.4.

#### 3.3.4 Definition of $`R`$

We used the method explained below to set $`R`$ automatically. We found, however, that the method was not efficient, and this is shown in section 3.4.

Our method is based on the degree of increase in the number of different words in top-scoring documents. If the content of successive documents is similar, the documents should share keywords. This degree of increase is thus low when similar documents continue. Our algorithm is depicted in Figure 2. In the experiments described in section 3.4, the average numbers of documents selected by the algorithm were 3.81, 4.01, and 3.95, for ‘very short’, ‘short’, and ‘long’ queries, respectively.

As is shown in section 3.4, the performance of IR is quite sensitive to $`R`$. We will therefore investigate methods for the automatic-determination of $`R`$ in future work, though our initial attempts have not been too successful.

#### 3.3.5 Definition of $`\alpha `$

$`\alpha `$ is defined heuristically as follows:

$$\alpha =|W(F(D_R^1))|^{\frac{1}{|W(Q)|}},$$
(26)
where

$$F(D_R^1)=F(D_1)F(D_2)\mathrm{}F(D_R).$$
(27)
$`\alpha 1`$ holds because $`|W(F(D_R^1))|1`$. $`\alpha `$ approaches 1 when $`|W(Q)|`$ is large. $`\alpha `$ takes a large value when the number of different words in $`Q`$ is small and the number of different words in $`D_R^1`$ is large. $`\alpha `$ is defined so that $`Q`$ is more important than $`D_R^1`$. In the experiments described in section 3.4, the average value of $`\alpha `$ were 13.44, 3.89, and 1.14, for ‘very short’, ‘short’, and ‘long’ queries, respectively.

This heuristic approach worked reasonably well as is shown in section 3.4.

In summary, for the formal runs, we used $`p=0.10`$ for term selection and used automatic methods to set $`R`$ and $`\alpha `$. $`p=0.10`$ was the only parameter that we had to set by hand.

### 3.4 Comparison of parameter values

We varied the values of $`p`$, $`R`$, and $`\alpha `$ to observe the effects of parameter values on performance. Performance was measured by the average precision against relevant documents. We used the queries and documents provided for the second NTCIR workshop. Experiments were conducted on JJ and EE tasks. We only report on the results for JJ tasks, here, because both sets of results displayed the same tendency.

The parameter values for $`p`$ were

$$p=0.10,0.05,0.01.$$
(28)
The parameter values for $`R`$ were

$$R=1,3,5,7,10,15.$$
(29)
The parameter values for $`\alpha `$ were

$$\alpha =0.5,1.0,1.5.$$
(30)
For $`R`$ and $`\alpha `$, we also tried the heuristic methods described in Figure 2 and Equation (26). We tried all combinations of these parameter values. Thus, we conducted $`3\times 7\times 4=84`$ runs to make our comparison for each of the ‘long’, ‘short’, and ‘very short’ queries.

To evaluate the effectiveness of a parameter, we fixed its value and then calculated the average of the average precisions of the 84 runs. The results are shown in Figures 3, 4, and 5. In these figures, horizontal axes represent the query types and vertical axes represent the average precisions. The title of each line indicates the parameter value. ‘var’ means that values are determinbe by our methods proposed above. ‘initial’ means the results for the initial search. The titles are in order of decreasing average precision for short queries.

Figure 3 shows the results for various settings of $`p`$. Note that $`p=0.1`$ and $`p=0.05`$ performed equally well. This suggests that the value of $`p`$ is robust over this range.212121Additional experiments showed that average precisions for $`p=0.9`$ to $`0.05`$ performs equally well. (The results of $`p=0.1`$ were slightly better than those of other values.)

Figure 4 shows the results for various settings of $`R`$. It is difficult to detect any clear tendency in Figure 4, but it seems that when queries are long, small $`R`$ values perform well, and when queries are short, large $`R`$ performs well. This suggests that the length of queries could be used to set $`R`$ automatically.

Figure 5 shows the results for various settings of $`\alpha `$. The average of $`\alpha `$ were 13.44, 3.89, and 1.14 for ‘very short’, ‘short’, and ‘long’ queries, respectively. $`\alpha `$ takes large values for ‘very short’ and ‘short’ queries. It takes small values for ‘long’ queries. $`\alpha `$ worked reasonably well. This is because for ‘very short’ and ‘short’ queries, the results of the initial search are not very reliable, so we had to weight $`Q`$ heavily, while for ‘long’ queries, the results of the initial search are reliable, so we don’t have to weight $`Q`$ so heavily.

### 3.5 Summary

System-B was designed as a portable IR system that avoids free parameters as much as possible. It will be possible to improve the sysmtem’s performance by providing a proper method for determining the number of top-ranked documents to be used in automatic-feedback.

## 4 Conclusion

We have developed two systems for the second NTCIR Workshop IR tasks. One was an improved version of the system that was used for the first NTCIR Workshop IR tasks and the IREX Workshop IR tasks. The other was a freshly developed system that avoids free parameters as much as possible. The former system participated in the JJ and CC tasks and the latter system participated in the JJ, EE, JE, EJ and CC tasks. Both systems achieved good results. We have not yet compared the two systems thoroughly. In the future, we will conduct a more detailed examination of our systems and will determine what kinds of information are effective.


text:
# Dynamic critical exponents of the Ising model with multispin interactions

## Abstract

We revisit the short-time dynamics of 2D Ising model with three spin interactions in one direction and estimate the critical exponents $`z,`$ $`\theta ,`$ $`\beta `$ and $`\nu `$. Taking properly into account the symmetry of the Hamiltonian we obtain results completely different from those obtained by Wang et al.. For the dynamic exponent $`z`$ our result coincides with that of the 4-state Potts model in two dimensions. In addition, results for the static exponents $`\nu `$ and $`\beta `$ agree with previous estimates obtained from finite size scaling combined with conformal invariance. Finally, for the new dynamic exponent $`\theta `$ we find a negative and close to zero value, a result also expected for the 4-state Potts model according to Okano et al..

Since the work by Janssen et al  and Huse  pointing out the existence of another universal stage at an early time critical dynamic, several statistical models have been investigated to confirm the analytical predictions about the ”critical initial slip” and to enlarge the knowledge of critical phenomena , , , , , . The investigation of the universal behavior in short-time dynamics avoids the critical slowing down effects of the equilibrium and provides an alternate way  to calculate the new exponent $`\theta `$ which governs the behavior of the magnetization, the dynamic critical exponent $`z`$ as well as the static exponents $`\beta `$ and $`\nu `$.

In this letter we adopt this approach to study the two-dimensional (2D) Ising model with three-spin interactions in one direction and calculate its set of exponents. Motivation came from the fact that in a recent paper by Wang et al  estimates obtained were in complete disagreement with pertinent results. Here we show that, when the symmetry of the model is taken properly into account, good agreement is obtained with expected results.

The Hamiltonian of the 2D Ising model with three spin interactions ($`m=3`$) in one direction is

$$\beta H=\underset{<i,j>}{}\left\{K_yS_{i,j}S_{i+1,j}+K_x\underset{l=0}{\overset{m1}{}}S_{i,j+l}\right\}$$
(1)
where $`S_{i,j}=\pm 1`$ is the Ising spin variable. The model is known to be self-dual , its critical line being

$$\mathrm{sinh}2K_x\mathrm{sinh}2K_y=1$$
(2)
for all $`m`$. For the particular isotropic case ($`K_x=K_y`$) the critical coupling is

$$K_c=J/k_BT_c=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}(\sqrt{2}+1)=0.4406867,$$
(3)
which is the same of the standard 2D Ising model.

Symmetry analysis and ground state degeneracy considerations suggest that the model is in the same universality class as the $`q`$-state Potts model, whenever $`q=2^{m1}`$ , . This result is supported by finite-size scaling studies , , , weak and strong coupling expansions , conformal invariance , , , standard Monte Carlo simulations ,  and mapping of the $`m=3`$ model in the extreme anisotropic limit of the $`4`$-state Potts model . In most of those papers the argument to include the Ising model with three-spin interaction and the 4-state Potts model in the same universality class is based on the value of the exponents $`\nu `$ and $`\alpha `$($`2/3`$) . All of them respect the symmetry of the Hamiltonian. Very little is known about the exponents $`\beta `$  and $`z`$ .

The ground state for the general $`m`$-spin interaction is $`2^{m1}`$degenerated , which implies that the 2D Ising model with $`m=3`$ spin interaction is four-fold degenerated. The relevant symmetry of this model is semi-global  and the Hamiltonian is symmetric under the reversal of all the spins in any two sublattices, which leads to the existence of three independent interpenetrating sublattices in the system. At $`T=0`$, the possible states consist of repetitions of the patterns $`+++,`$ $`+,`$ $``$ $`+,`$ $`+`$ in the horizontal direction, copied along the lines. According to preceding statement, it is important to take lattice sizes that are multiple of three - in order to respect the symmetry of the Hamiltonian \- and to work with the appropriate order parameter - the sublattice magnetization - in order to avoid the effect of staggered magnetization. We suspected that Wang et al  didn’t consider the $`m`$-spin symmetry in their simulations neither worked with the magnetization of sublattice, since they just presented results for square lattices which do not obey that previous condition (multiple of three). In this sense, it seemed to us relevant to repeat simulations, paying attention to the above mentioned points, to check the apparent failure of the short-time approach in this case.

We began by repeating the analysis made by Wang et al  for the Binder cummulant

$$U(t,L)=\frac{M^2(t)}{M(t)^2}1$$
(4)
where $`<`$ $`>`$ means average on samples, $`t`$ is the time, $`M(t)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{L}{}}\underset{j=1}{\overset{L}{}}S_{i,j}`$ is the magnetization at time $`t`$ and $`L`$ the size of the square lattice. They argue that this expression obeys the power law form:

$$U(t,L)t^{d/z}\text{,}$$
(5)
when the dynamical process starts from an ordered state ($`m_0=1`$), which is a fixed point under renormalization group transformation. Fig. 1 shows explicitly the different results obtained when we use the magnetization of the sublattice. The average is taken over 50000 independent initial configurations and the error bars (smaller than the size of the points) are obtained by repeating five times each simulation. When the simulation is performed without the sublattice considerations the slope of the curve agrees with that presented by Wang et al and confirmed our suspicions. From our point of view , though, this cummulant should obey the power law form (5) only when different initial conditions were used in the study of the magnetization and its second moment. Scaling arguments  assert that the second moment of magnetization behaves as

$$M^2(t)t^{(d2\beta /\nu )/z}\text{,}$$
(6)
only when the samples are taken with zero initial magnetization ($`m_0=0)`$. On the other hand, short-time scaling behavior implies

$$M(t)t^{\beta /\nu z}$$
(7)
for samples starting from the ordered state ($`m_0=1`$) . Thus, performing two different simulations under those mentioned conditions, we obtain the time evolution of the ratio $`M^2(t)/M(t)^2`$ which furnishes the exponent $`d/z`$ in a log-log plot (Fig. 2). From the slope of that curve we estimate $`z=2.380\pm 0.004`$.

To confirm our result we used two other approaches: the generalized fourth order Binder’s cumulant  and the parameters Q and R introduced by de Oliveira. In both cases, the collapse of the curves for different lattice sizes, at critical temperature, are used to determine the dynamical critical exponent $`z`$ from short-time simulations. The Binder’s cummulant,

$$U_4(t,L)=1\frac{M^{(4)}}{3M^{(2)}^2}$$
(8)
satisfies, at $`T=T_c`$ the scaling relation

$$U_4(t,L)=U_4(b^zt,b^1L)$$
(9)
where $`b=L/L^{}`$ since $`U_4`$ scales as $`L^0`$. This technique has proved to be useful in determining the exponent $`z`$ and was applied to the 2D and 3D Ising models , , the 3-state Potts model , the majority vote model  and cellular automata . The initial magnetization of samples, in this case, is zero as well as the correlation length. The results are good enough. Error bars, however, are bigger than those obtained by damage spreading technique . In Fig. 3, we show the collapse of the cumulant $`U_4`$ for lattice pairs ($`L,2L`$) with $`z=2.3`$. In fact, the range of $`z`$ for which the collapse is still observed is given by $`z=2.3\pm 0.1`$. This result supports our previous estimate for $`z`$ ($`2.383\pm 0.004`$) and can be related to the 4-state Potts model exponent . In order to stress the importance of considering the symmetry of Hamiltonian, we exhibit in Fig. 4 the deformation of the Binder cumulant when there is no sharp preparation of the initial magnetization on the sublattices and the magnetization evolution is calculated without restrictions.

When we use the parameters $`Q(t,L)=sign\left(\frac{1}{L^2}M(t)\right)`$ and $`R(t,L)=\left(sign\frac{1}{L}\underset{bottom}{}S_i\right)\left(sign\frac{1}{L}\underset{top}{}S_i\right)`$ of de Oliveira and scaling relations for $`T=T_c`$

$$Q(t,L)=Q(b^zt,b^1L)$$

and

$$R(t,L)=R(b^zt,b^1L)$$

we obtain the collapse among curves (see Fig. 5 and Fig. 6) for different lattices when time is scaled with $`z=2.3`$. Samples in these cases were initialized with all spins up ($`m_0=1`$).

In order to calculate the exponent $`\nu `$, we studied the derivative of the magnetization, which presents the following scaling form:

$$_\tau \mathrm{ln}M(t,\tau )|_{\tau =0}=t^{1/\nu z}_\tau ^{}\mathrm{ln}F(\tau ^{})|_{\tau ^{}=0}.$$
(10)
Fig. 7 shows the power law behavior of the $`_\tau \mathrm{ln}M(t,\tau )`$ when $`\mathrm{\Delta }\tau =0.0002.`$ The measured slope of the curve gives $`1/\nu z=0.624\pm 0.005`$. Thus, taking $`z=2.383\pm 0.004`$ we find $`\nu =0.67\pm 0.01`$, to be compared with the conjectured value $`\nu =2/3.`$

Since the values of the exponents $`\nu `$ and $`z`$ are already known, the exponent $`\beta `$ of the magnetization can be obtained from the power law increase of the second moment of magnetization, Eq.(6). Fig. 8 presents, in a double-log scale, the polynomial behavior of $`M^{(2)}(t)`$. From the slope of these lines we estimate $`\beta =0.11\pm 0.02`$. This result is in agreement with the expected value $`\beta =0.125`$ , , .

In order to extend the picture of universality we investigate the exponent $`\theta `$ by a recent technique proposed by Tomé and de Oliveira . In their paper they show that the exponent $`\theta `$ can also be independently calculated in despite of the sharp preparation of the samples, since the time correlation of the total magnetization in samples with a random initial configuration also exhibits polynomial behavior

$$M(t)M(0)=\frac{1}{N}\underset{i}{}\underset{j}{}S_i(t)S_j(0)t^\theta .$$
(11)
This procedure avoids the use of an initial state with a nonzero (but small) magnetization as well as the numerical extrapolation $`m_00`$ to calculate the dynamic exponent $`\theta `$. Fig. 9 shows, in a log-log scale, the $`M(t)M(0)`$ behavior for different lattice sizes. The slope of those curves give us $`\theta =0.03\pm 0.01`$ which is compatible with the conjecture by Okano et al for the 4-state Potts model .

In summary, we have obtained static and dynamic critical exponents for the Ising model with multispin interactions using short-time Monte Carlo simulations. Our results show that this model and the 4-state Potts one share the same set of critical exponents even at dynamic level. When compared to the paper by Whang et al this letter shows the importance of taking properly into account the symmetry of the Hamiltonian to deal with magnetization and boundary conditions. We stress that the present result for the exponent $`\nu `$ is better than previous estimates obtained by finite size scaling and Monte Carlo approach .