format: text

text:
# Analysis of nonperturbative fluctuations in a triple-well potential

## Abstract

We consider the quantum tunneling phenomenon in a well-behaved triple-well potential. As required by the semiclassical approximation we take into account the quadratic fluctuations over the instanton which represents as usual the localised finite-action solution of the euclidean equation of motion. The determinants of the quadratic differential operators at issue are evaluated by means of the Gelfang-Yaglom method. In doing so the explicit computation of the conventional ratio of determinants takes as reference the harmonic oscillator whose frequency is the average of the individual frequencies derived from the non-equivalent minima of the potential. Eventually the physical effects of the multi-instanton configurations are included in this approach. As a matter of fact we obtain information about the energies of the ground-state and the two first excited levels of the discrete spectrum at issue.

The semiclassical analysis of the tunneling phenomenon, ranging from periodic-potentials in quantum mechanics to Yang-Mills models in field theories, has been performed in a systematic way by means of the instanton method. To be precise, the instanton represents itself a localised finite-action solution of the euclidean equation of motion. In principle one finds the classical configuration and subsequently evaluate the quadratic fluctuations. The functional integration at issue is solved in terms of the gaussian scheme except for the zero-modes which appear by virtue of the translational invariance of the model. Once the collective coordinates technique is incorporated the gaussian integration takes into account the directions orthogonal to the zero-modes. As a functional determinant includes an infinite product of eigenvalues, the result should be a highly divergent expression. However we can regularize the fluctuation factors by means of the ratio of determinants.

Let us describe in brief the instanton calculus for the one-dimensional particle as can be found for instance in . Unless otherwise noted we assume that our particle moves under the action of a confining potential $`V(x)`$ which yields a pure discrete spectrum of energy eigenvalues. In addition we choose the origin of the energy so that the minima of the potential satisfy $`V(x)=0`$. If the particle is located at the initial time $`t_i=T/2`$ at the point $`x_i`$ while one finds it when $`t_f=T/2`$ at the point $`x_f`$, the functional version of the non-relativistic quantum mechanics allows us to express the transition amplitude in terms of a sum over all paths joining the world points with coordinates $`(T/2,x_i)`$ and $`(T/2,x_f)`$. Making the change $`ti\tau `$, known in the literature as the Wick rotation, the euclidean formulation of the path-integral reads

$$<x_f|\mathrm{exp}(HT)|x_i>=N(T)[dx]\mathrm{exp}S_e[x(\tau )]$$
(1)
where $`H`$ represents the hamiltonian of the model, the factor $`N(T)`$ serves to normalize the amplitude conveniently while $`[dx]`$ indicates the integration over all functions which fulfil the boundary conditions at issue. In addition we resort to the euclidean action $`S_e`$, i.e.

$$S_e=_{T/2}^{T/2}\left[\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{dx}{d\tau }\right)^2+V(x)\right]𝑑\tau $$
(2)
whenever the mass of the particle is set equal to unity for notational simplicity. This semiclassical approximation takes for granted the existence of a $`x_c(\tau )`$ configuration which represents a stationary point of the euclidean action. Next we perform the expansion of a generic $`x(\tau )`$ according to

$$x(\tau )=x_c(\tau )+\underset{j}{}c_jx_j(\tau )$$
(3)
where $`x_j(\tau )`$ stand for a complete set of orthonormal functions

$$_{T/2}^{T/2}x_j(\tau )x_k(\tau )𝑑\tau =\delta _{jk}$$
(4)
vanishing at our boundary, i.e. $`x_j(\pm T/2)=0`$. As a matter of fact the eigenfunctions $`x_j(\tau )`$ (with eigenvalues $`ϵ_j`$) appear associated with the so-called stability equation given by

$$\frac{d^2x_j(\tau )}{d\tau ^2}+V^{\prime \prime }[x_c(\tau )]x_j(\tau )=ϵ_jx_j(\tau )$$
(5)
In doing so the euclidean transition amplitude reduces itself to

$$<x_f|\mathrm{exp}(HT)|x_i>=N(T)\mathrm{exp}(S_{eo})\underset{j}{}ϵ_j^{1/2}$$
(6)
where $`S_{eo}`$ represents the classical action associated with the configuration $`x_c(\tau )`$ while the product of eigenvalues is usually written as

$$\underset{j}{}ϵ_j^{1/2}=\left\{Det\left[\frac{d^2}{d\tau ^2}+V^{\prime \prime }[x_c(\tau )]\right]\right\}^{1/2}$$
(7)
according to a notation which obviously has its origin in the finite-dimensional case. To fix the factor $`N(T)`$ we resort to a well-known problem where

$$V(x)=\frac{\nu ^2}{2}x^2$$
(8)
so that $`V^{\prime \prime }(x=0)=\nu ^2`$. As corresponds to the harmonic oscillator the relevant amplitude is given by

$$<x_f=0|\mathrm{exp}(H_{ho}T)|x_i=0>=N(T)\left\{Det\left[\frac{d^2}{d\tau ^2}+\nu ^2\right]\right\}^{1/2}$$
(9)
Next the evaluation of (9) is possible according to the general method exposed in . To sum up

$$<x_f=0|\mathrm{exp}(H_{ho}T)|x_i=0>=\left(\frac{\nu }{\pi }\right)^{1/2}\left(2\mathrm{sinh}\nu T\right)^{1/2}$$
(10)
In the following we consider the triple-well potential $`V(x)`$ given by

$$V(x)=\frac{\omega ^2}{8}x^2(x^21)^2$$
(11)
From a classical point of view we find three minima located at $`x_{}=1`$, $`x_+=1`$ and $`x_o=0`$. Two of them, namely $`x_{}`$ and $`x_+`$, are equivalent since can be connected by means of the discrete symmetry $`xx`$ at issue. However the third minimum $`x_o`$ is invariant under the action of such a symmetry. In other words, the central vacuum is not identical with the others located at both sides. When considering the limit $`\omega ^21`$ the energy barriers are high enough to decompose the system into a sum of independent harmonic oscillators. However the existence of finite barriers between the different wells of the potential yields a relevant tunneling phenomenon so that ultimately the symmetry $`xx`$ is not spontaneously broken at quantum level and the expectation value of the coordinate $`x`$ computed for the ground-state is zero as corresponds to the even character of the potential $`V(x)`$. The question we wish to address now is the explicit description of the tunneling in the euclidean version of the path-integral. As regards the one-instanton amplitude we evaluate the transition amplitude between $`x_o=0`$ and $`x_+=1`$. In doing so we need a classical configuration with $`x_i=0`$ at $`t_i=T/2`$ while $`x_f=1`$ when $`t_f=T/2`$. It is customarily assumed that $`T\mathrm{}`$ mainly because the explicit solution of the problem is much more complicated for finite $`T`$ (more on this point later).

As a matter of fact we can find the explicit form of the instanton $`x_c(\tau )`$ just by integration of a first-order differential equation, i.e.

$$\frac{dx_c}{d\tau }=\pm \sqrt{2V(x_c)}$$
(12)
where we recognize the quantum mechanical version of the Bogomol’nyi condition . Now we solve (12) by a simple quadrature so that

$$x_c(\tau )=\sqrt{[1+\mathrm{tanh}\omega (\tau \tau _c)]/2}$$
(13)
where the parameter $`\tau _c`$ indicates the point at which the instanton makes the jump. As expected equivalent solutions are obtained by means of the transformation $`\tau \tau `$ and $`x_c(\tau )x_c(\tau )`$ so that adjoint minima of the potential can be connected by means of a topological solution. In addition we have that $`S_{eo}=\omega /4`$. On the other hand we need classical configurations for which $`x_{}=0`$ and $`x_+=1`$ at large but finite values $`\tau =\pm T/2`$. However the explicit form of the instantons that appear in the literature corresponds to infinite euclidean time. Fortunately the difference is so small that can be ignored mainly because we are interested in the limit $`T\mathrm{}`$. In any case our description of the one-instanton amplitude between $`x_{}=0`$ and $`x_+=1`$ takes over

$`<x_f=1|\mathrm{exp}(HT)|x_i=0>=N(T)\left\{Det\left[{\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{d\tau ^2}}+\nu ^2\right]\right\}^{1/2}`$
$$\left\{\frac{Det\left[(d^2/d\tau ^2)+V^{\prime \prime }[x_c(\tau )]\right]}{Det\left[(d^2/d\tau ^2)+\nu ^2\right]}\right\}^{1/2}\mathrm{exp}(S_{eo})$$
(14)
where we have multiplied and divided by the determinant associated with the harmonic oscillator of frequency $`\nu `$. As regards the determinant built over the instanton itself we find a zero-mode $`x_o(\tau )`$ which could jeopardize the computation process. However this eigenvalue $`ϵ_o=0`$ comes by no surprise since it reflects the translational invariance of the system. As a matter of fact one can discover the existence of a zero-mode starting from (13). Including the adequate normalization one can check that

$$x_o(\tau )=\frac{1}{\sqrt{S_{eo}}}\frac{dx_c}{d\tau }$$
(15)
is just the solution of (5) with $`ϵ_o=0`$. The way out of this apparent cul-de-sac is simple. The integration over $`c_o`$ (see (3)) becomes equivalent to the integration over the center of the instanton $`\tau _c`$. To fix the jacobian of the transformation involved we take a first change such that

$$\mathrm{\Delta }x(\tau )=x_o(\tau )\mathrm{\Delta }c_o$$
(16)
According to the general expression written in (3) we find that under a shift $`\mathrm{\Delta }\tau _c`$ the effect should be

$$\mathrm{\Delta }x(\tau )=\sqrt{S_{eo}}x_o(\tau )\mathrm{\Delta }\tau _c$$
(17)
Now the identification between (16) and (17) yields

$$dc_o=\sqrt{S_{eo}}d\tau _c$$
(18)
where the minus sign disappears since what matters is the modulus of the jacobian at issue. In doing so we have that

$`\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{Det\left[(d^2/d\tau ^2)+V^{\prime \prime }[x_c(\tau )]\right]}{Det\left[(d^2/d\tau ^2)+\nu ^2\right]}}\right\}^{1/2}=`$
$$\left\{\frac{Det^{}\left[(d^2/d\tau ^2)+V^{\prime \prime }[x_c(\tau )]\right]}{Det\left[(d^2/d\tau ^2)+\nu ^2\right]}\right\}^{1/2}\sqrt{\frac{S_{eo}}{2\pi }}d\tau _c$$
(19)
where $`Det^{}`$ stands for the so-called reduced determinant once the zero-mode has been removed. In order to make an explicit computation of the quotient of determinants we resort to the well-grounded Gelfand-Yaglom method so that only the knowledge of the large-$`\tau `$ behaviour of the classical solution $`x_c(\tau )`$ is necessary . Being $`\widehat{O}`$ and $`\widehat{P}`$ a couple of second order differential operators, whose eigenfunctions vanish at the boundary, the quotient of determinants is given in terms of the respective zero-energy solutions $`f_o(\tau )`$ and $`g_o(\tau )`$ according to

$$\frac{Det\widehat{O}}{Det\widehat{P}}=\frac{f_o(T/2)}{g_o(T/2)}$$
(20)
whenever the eigenfunctions at issue satisfy the initial conditions

$$f_o(T/2)=g_o(T/2)=0,\frac{df_o}{d\tau }(T/2)=\frac{dg_o}{d\tau }(T/2)=1$$
(21)
As regards the zero-mode $`g_o(\tau )`$ associated with the harmonic oscillator of frequency $`\nu `$ we find

$$g_o(\tau )=\frac{1}{\nu }\mathrm{sinh}[\nu (\tau +T/2)]$$
(22)
so that now we need the explicit form of the solution $`f_o(\tau )`$ which corresponds to the topological configuration written in (13). Starting from the $`x_o(\tau )`$ zero-mode we can construct a second solution $`y_o(\tau )`$ given by

$$y_o(\tau )=x_o(\tau )_0^\tau \frac{ds}{x_o^2(s)}$$
(23)
Accordingly we may summarize the asymptotic behaviour of $`x_o(\tau )`$ and $`y_o(\tau )`$ as follows

$$x_o(\tau )\{\begin{array}{c}C\mathrm{exp}(2\omega \tau )if\tau \mathrm{}\\ D\mathrm{exp}(\omega \tau )if\tau \mathrm{}\end{array}$$
(24)
$$y_o(\tau )\{\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{exp}(2\omega \tau )/4\omega Cif\tau \mathrm{}\\ \mathrm{exp}(\omega \tau )/2\omega Dif\tau \mathrm{}\end{array}$$
(25)
where the constants $`C`$ and $`D`$ derive from the explicit form of the derivative of (13). We proceed to investigate the particular solution $`f_o(\tau )`$ which is the one we are really interested in. Starting from the linear combination of $`x_o(\tau )`$ and $`y_o(\tau )`$ given by

$$f_o(\tau )=Ax_o(\tau )+By_o(\tau )$$
(26)
the incorporation of the initial conditions at issue leads us to

$$f_o(\tau )=x_o(T/2)y_o(\tau )y_o(T/2)x_o(\tau )$$
(27)
From this expression, which is exact, we can extract the asymptotic behaviour of $`f_o(\tau )`$, i.e.

$$f_o(T/2)\frac{D}{4\omega C}exp(\omega T/2)ifT\mathrm{}$$
(28)
Next we need to take into account the lowest eigenvalue of the stability equation to obtain the right value of the quotient of determinants. From a physical point of view we can explain the situation as follows: the derivative of the topological solution does not quite satisfy the boundary conditions for the interval $`(T/2,T/2)`$. When enforcing such a behaviour, the eigenstate is compressed and the energy shifted slightly upwards. In doing so the zero-mode $`x_o(\tau )`$ is substituted for the $`f_\lambda (\tau )`$ which corresponds to

$$\frac{d^2f_\lambda (\tau )}{d\tau ^2}+V^{\prime \prime }[x_c(\tau )]f_\lambda (\tau )=\lambda f_\lambda (\tau )$$
(29)
whenever

$$f_\lambda (T/2)=f_\lambda (T/2)=0$$
(30)
To lowest order in perturbation theory we get

$$f_\lambda (\tau )f_o(\tau )+\lambda \frac{df_\lambda }{d\lambda }|_{\lambda =0}$$
(31)
so that ultimately

$$f_\lambda (\tau )=f_o(\tau )+\lambda _{T/2}^\tau [x_o(\tau )y_o(s)y_o(\tau )x_o(s)]f_o(s)𝑑s$$
(32)
The asymptotic behaviour of $`f^o(\tau )`$, $`x_o(\tau )`$ and $`y_o(\tau )`$, together with the condition $`f_\lambda (T/2)=0`$ allows us to find the lowest eigenvalue $`\lambda `$, i.e.

$$\lambda =2\omega D\mathrm{exp}(\omega T)$$
(33)
In such a case the Gelfand-Yaglom method provides us with the final expression of the quotient of determinants whenever we choose for the frequency $`\nu `$ of the harmonic oscillator of reference the average of the frequencies of the central and lateral wells. In other words $`\nu =3\omega /2`$. Notice the difference with the well-grounded double-well model where the two minima of the potential are equivalent so that the aforementioned average is not necessary. Going back to the explicit form of $`x_c(\tau )`$ (see (13)) we find $`C=D=\omega /\sqrt{S_{eo}}`$. Armed with this information we can write the one-instanton amplitude between the points $`x_i=0`$ and $`x_f=1`$ in terms of

$`<x_f=1|\mathrm{exp}(HT)|x_i=0>=`$
$$\left(\frac{3\omega }{2\pi }\right)^{1/2}\left(2\mathrm{sinh}3\omega T/2\right)^{1/2}\sqrt{S_{eo}}\sqrt{\frac{4}{3\pi }}\mathrm{exp}(S_{eo})\omega d\tau _c$$
(34)
Apart from the first factor, which represents the contribution of the harmonic oscillator of reference, we get a transition amplitude just depending on the point $`\tau _c`$ at which the instanton makes precisely the jump.

Although all the above calculations were carried out over a single instanton, it remains to identify the contributions which take into account the effect of a string of widely separated instantons and antiinstantons along the $`\tau `$ axis. It is customarily assumed that these combinations of topological solutions represent no strong deviations of the trajectories just derived from the euclidean equation of motion without any kind of approximation. We shall compute the functional integral by summing over all such configurations, with $`k`$ instantons and antiinstantons centered at points $`\tau _1,\mathrm{},\tau _k`$ whenever

$$\frac{T}{2}<\tau _1<\mathrm{}<\tau _k<\frac{T}{2}$$
(35)
Being narrow enough the regions where the instantons (antiinstantons) make the jump, the action of the proposed path is almost extremal. We can carry things further and assume that the action of the string of instantons and antiinstantons is given by the sum of the $`k`$ individual actions. This scheme is well-known in the literature where it appears with the name of dilute gas approximation . In addition the translational degrees of freedom of the separated $`k`$ instantons and antiinstantons yield an integral of the form

$$_{T/2}^{T/2}\omega 𝑑\tau _j_{T/2}^{\tau _k}\omega 𝑑\tau _{k1}\mathrm{}_{T/2}^{\tau _2}\omega 𝑑\tau _1=\frac{(\omega T)^k}{k!}$$
(36)
As regards the quadratic fluctuations around the $`k`$ topological solutions we have now that the single ratio of determinants transforms into

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{3\omega }{2\pi }}\right)^{1/2}\left(2\mathrm{sinh}3\omega T/2\right)^{1/2}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{Det^{}\left[(d^2/d\tau ^2)+V^{\prime \prime }[x_c(\tau )]\right]}{Det\left[(d^2/d\tau ^2)+9\omega ^2/4\right]}}\right\}^{1/2}`$
$$\left(\frac{3\omega }{2\pi }\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{exp}(3\omega T/4)\left[\left\{\frac{Det^{}\left[(d^2/d\tau ^2)+V^{\prime \prime }[x_c(\tau )]\right]}{Det\left[(d^2/d\tau ^2)+9\omega ^2/4\right]}\right\}^{1/2}\right]^k$$
(37)
according to the limit of the factor associated with the harmonic oscillator when $`T`$ is large. In addition, when going to the dilute-gas approximation we must consider a set of instantons and anti-instantons so that each topological configuration starts where its predecessor ends. For the amplitude at issue the total number $`k`$ of instantons plus anti-instantons must be odd. On the other hand, the combinatorial factor $`F`$ associated with the number of possible configurations corresponds to $`F=2^{(k1)/2}`$ since the closed paths starting and coming back to the point $`x_o=0`$ require in a systematic way instanton-anti-instanton pairs. Notice the difference with the double-well potential where the instantons strictly alternate with the anti-instantons since the problem has only two minima so that the combinatorial factor is not necessary at all. Next we can write the complete transition amplitudes for the triple-well potential so that

$$<x_f=1|\mathrm{exp}(HT)|x_i=0>=\left(\frac{3\omega }{4\pi }\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{exp}(3\omega T/4)\underset{j=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(\omega Td)^{2j+1}}{(2j+1)!}$$
(38)
where $`d`$ stands for the so-called instanton density, i.e.

$$d=\sqrt{\frac{8}{3\pi }}\sqrt{S_{eo}}\mathrm{exp}(S_{eo})$$
(39)
In summary

$$<x_f=1|\mathrm{exp}(HT)|x_i=0>=\left(\frac{3\omega }{4\pi }\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{exp}(3\omega T/4)\mathrm{sinh}(\omega Td)$$
(40)
Going back to the formal euclidean transition amplitude written in(1), the insertion of the pure discrete spectrum of energy eigenfunctions, namely

$$H|n>=E_n|n>$$
(41)
allows us to write that

$$<x_f=1|\mathrm{exp}(HT)|x_i=0>=\underset{n}{}\mathrm{exp}(E_nT)<x_f=1|n><n|x_i=0>$$
(42)
Let us denote by $`E_o`$, $`E_1`$ and $`E_2`$ the energies of the ground-state and the two first excited levels of our problem. As the triple-well potential we are dealing with is even we know that $`<1|x_i=0>`$ vanishes so that the limit $`T\mathrm{}`$ in (40) provides us with the following energy eigenvalues

$$E_o=\frac{3\omega }{4}\omega d,E_1=\frac{3\omega }{4},E_2=\frac{3\omega }{4}+\omega d$$
(43)
In other words, the tunneling phenomenon transfers along the whole real axis the gaussian wave functions constructed on the points $`x_{}=1`$, $`x_+=1`$ and $`x_o=0`$. As expected the splitting term results proportional to the barrier-penetration factor. The average of the harmonic frequencies over the non-equivalent minima of the potential serves as the central position for the splitting.


text:
# The mean surface density of companions in a stellar-dynamical context

## 1 Introduction

Studying the clustering properties of stars in star-forming regions is a necessary input towards understanding the formation and evolution of young stellar clusters (Elmegreen & Efremov 1997). Using two-point angular correlation functions to analyse the spatial distribution of stars, Gomez et al. (1993) showed that young stars in the Taurus-Auriga molecular cloud form in small associations containing of the order of ten stellar systems. Larson (1995) extended this investigation by taking into account the results from different searches for binary companions to the pre-main sequence stars in the Taurus-Auriga region. He computed the mean surface density of companions, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(\theta )`$, per star as a function of angular separation $`\theta `$. This statistical measure is closely related to the two-point correlation function but does not require normalisation. As two different power laws are necessary to fit the data, with a slope $`2`$ for separations below $`0.04`$pc and with a slope $`0.6`$ above, Larson concluded that there are two distinct clustering regimes. At small separations, the derived companion density is determined by binaries and higher-order multiple systems, whereas at large separations the overall spatial structure of the stellar cluster is observed. Larson interpreted the observed non-integer slope in the clustering regime as evidence for fractal structure of the cluster. In addition, Larson noted that the break of the distribution occurs in Taurus-Auriga at length scales which are equivalent to the typical Jeans length in molecular clouds, corresponding to a Jeans mass of $`1`$M. He speculated that stellar systems with smaller separations form from the fragmentation of single collapsing proto-stellar cores, whereas the spatial distribution on larger scales is due to the hierarchical structure of the parent molecular cloud.

These results prompted the reanalysis of the Taurus-Auriga data by other authors (Simon 1997, Bate, Clarke & McCaughrean 1998, Gladwin et al. 1999), as well as the subsequent investigation of additional star-forming regions. Mean surface densities of companions as a function of angular separation have been derived for Orion (Simon 1997, Bate et al. 1998, Nakajima et al. 1998), for the $`\rho `$-Ophiuchus cloud (Simon 1997, Bate et al. 1998, Nakajima et al. 1998, Gladwin et al. 1999), and for the star-forming regions in Chamaeleon, Vela and Lupus (Nakajima et al. 1998). Common to all studies is that the companion surface density is best described as a double power-law, with slopes of $`2`$ in the binary branch and slopes between $`0.9`$ and $`0.1`$ in the large-scale clustering regime. However, the length scales where the break of the distribution is found to vary considerably, from $`400`$AU in the Trapezium cluster in Orion, over $`5000`$AU in Ophiuchus and $`8\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}000}`$AU in Taurus, to $`30000`$AU for the Orion OB region. This fact raises considerable doubts about the interpretation of the break location as being determined by the Jeans conditions in the cloud. This would imply quite different Jeans masses which in turn should lead to deviations of the initial mass function, which have not been observed.

A thorough theoretical evaluation of the mean surface density of companions, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(\theta )`$, and a discussion of viable interpretations can be found in Bate et al. (1998). Altogether the following picture emerges: At small separations, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(\theta )`$ traces the separations of binary stars and higher-order multiple stellar systems. The slope $`2`$ results from the frequency distribution of binary separations being roughly uniform in logarithm (Duquennoy & Mayor 1991, for main sequence stars). The break occurs at the ‘crowding’ limit, i.e. at separations where wide binaries blend into the ‘background’ density of the cluster. At larger separations, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(\theta )`$ simply reflects the large-scale spatial structure of the stellar cluster. Bate et al. (1998) pointed out that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(\theta )`$ can be strongly affected by boundary effects and that a non-integer power-law slope in the cluster branch does not necessarily imply fractal structure. They showed that a simple core-halo structure, as is typical for evolved stellar clusters, will result in a non-integer slope for separations larger than the core radius. They also speculated about possible effects of dynamical cluster evolution on the properties of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(\theta )`$.

It is the aim of the present paper to investigate, for the first time, evolutionary effects on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(\theta )`$ as derived from realistic $`N`$-body computations. We use models studied by Kroupa (1995a,b,c, 1998, hereinafter K1-K4) for a comparison with a ‘standard’ dynamical analysis, where the binary population is analysed separately from the bulk cluster properties. For comparison, the mean surface density of companions for models of protostellar clusters that form and evolve through turbulent molecular cloud fragmentation is discussed in Klessen & Burkert (2000, 2001).

The structure of the paper is as follows. In the next section (§2) we mathematically define the mean surface density of companions, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$, and briefly discuss its limitations. In §3 we describe the star cluster models and their properties. In §4, we investigate the influence of cluster evolution on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ and in particular discuss wide-binary depletion. The effects of averaging and projection are analysed in §5, and a possible observational bias is discussed in §6. §7 discusses features in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(\theta )`$ and their relation to cluster morphology. Finally, our results are summarised in §8

## 2 Mean Surface Density of Companions

The mean surface density of companions, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(\theta )`$, specifies the average number of neighbours per square degree on the sky at an angular separation $`\theta `$ for each cluster star. Knowing the distance of the cluster, the angular separation $`\theta `$ between two stars in the cluster translates into an absolute distance $`r`$. In the numerical models we have full access to all phase space coordinates and we define, in what follows, the mean surface density of companions $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ as the number of stars per pc2 as a function of the projected distance $`r`$ (in pc). In Section 5.2 we show that the results are invariant to which plane is used for projection. We calculate for each star $`i`$ in the system the projected distance $`r_{ij}`$ to all other stars $`ji`$. The separations $`r_{ij}`$ are sorted into annuli with radii $`r`$ and width $`\delta r`$, where we use logarithmic binning such that each decade in separation is partitioned into 10 logarithmically equidistant bins ($`\mathrm{log}_{10}\delta r=0.1`$). To obtain the function $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$, we divide the number $`\delta N(r)`$ of stellar pairs per annulus $`r`$ by the surface area $`2\pi r\delta r`$ and average by dividing by the total number $`N`$ of stars in the cluster. The mean surface density of companions as a function of separation $`r`$ then follows as

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)\frac{\delta N(r)}{2\pi Nr\delta r}.$$
(1)
The function $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ is related to the two-point correlation function, $`\xi (r)`$, by $`\xi (r)=\left(\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)/\mathrm{\Sigma }\right)1`$, where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is the mean stellar surface density in the considered area (Peebles 1993). Because the normalisation $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is often difficult to determine, it is preferable to use the function $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$.

Stellar surveys have finite area and boundary effects may occur. For stars closer than a distance $`r_b`$ to the boundary all annuli with $`r>r_b`$ extend beyond the limits of the survey and companion stars may be missed. This has little effect when considering small separations $`r`$ as only a small fraction of all stars is affected, however, when $`r`$ becomes close to the survey size the missing companions result in a steep decline of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$. Several methods have been proposed to correct for that effect (Bate et al. 1998, and references therein), where either the accepted range of $`r`$ is reduced to separations much smaller than the survey size, or additional assumptions about the background density of stars are made. Neither approach is completely satisfactory.

In the present study we do not attempt to adopt any of the correction methods for the following reasons. First, in the numerical simulations all information about the system is accessible. There are no observational constraints and we always consider all stars in the cluster. The survey area can be arbitrary large and is chosen such that it includes the complete cluster. Second, although the considered clusters are subject to the tidal field of the Galaxy we do not include Galactic-field stars in consideration. Hence, there is no confusion limit, where contamination with foreground or background stars becomes important.

## 3 Star Cluster Models

A range of star-cluster models are constructed, and their dynamical evolution is calculated using Nbody5 (Aarseth 1999), which includes a standard Galactic tidal field (Terlevich 1987). The cluster models have been discussed extensively in K1–K4, so that only a short outline is provided here.

The stellar systems initially follow a Plummer density distribution (Aarseth, Hénon & Wielen 1974) with half-mass radius $`r_\mathrm{h}`$, and the average stellar mass is independent of the radial distance, $`r`$, from the cluster centre.

Stellar masses are distributed according to the solar-neighbourhood IMF (Kroupa, Tout & Gilmore 1993) with $`0.1m1.1`$M. Larger masses are omitted so as to avoid complications arising from stellar evolution. Binaries are created by pairing the stars randomly, giving a birth binary proportion $`f=N_{\mathrm{bin}}/(N_{\mathrm{sing}}+N_{\mathrm{bin}})`$, where $`N_{\mathrm{sing}}`$ and $`N_{\mathrm{bin}}`$ are the number of single-star and binary systems, respectively. The initial mean system mass is $`2m`$, with $`m=0.32`$M being the average stellar mass. This results in an approximately flat mass-ratio distribution at birth (figure 12 in K2). Periods and eccentricities are distributed following K1. The initial periods range from $`10^3`$ to $`10^{7.5}`$ days, and the eccentricity distribution is thermal, i.e. the relative number of binaries increases linearly with eccentricity being consistent with observational constraints.

The parameters are listed in Table 1. Four clusters with $`f=1`$ are constructed spanning a wide range of central densities, from log$`{}_{10}{}^{}\rho _{0}^{}=1.1`$ to 5.6 \[stars/pc3\]. Each model contains $`N=400`$ stars and has a mass $`M_{\mathrm{cl}}=128`$M. The initial tidal radius in all cases is $`r_\mathrm{t}8`$ pc. All stars are kept in the calculation to facilitate binary-star analysis, but those with $`rr_\mathrm{t}`$ experience unphysical accelerations in the linearised local tidal field and rotating coordinate system (Terlevich 1987), so that the density distribution of stellar systems at large radii does not reflect the true distribution in the moving group. Five different renditions are calculated for each model to increase the statistical significance of our results. In addition, two clusters with $`f=0`$ are constructed for comparison with the binary-rich cases. The evolution of these models is calculated for three cluster realisations each. The computations cover $`1\times 10^9`$years, but we consider only a sub-set of all possible snap-shots in the current analysis.

## 4 Evolutionary Effects

In this section, we discuss the influence of the dynamical cluster evolution on the resulting mean surface density of companions $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$. For each star cluster, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ is calculated as an average over the set of $`n`$ individual model realisations, and we restrict ourselves to discussing the projection into the $`xy`$-plane. The influence of averaging and projection is discussed in §5.

### 4.1 The Global Evolution of Stellar Clusters

The evolutionary sequence of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ for models $`𝒜`$ to $`𝒟`$ is illustrated in figure 1. Its first column denotes the initial state of each system at $`t=0`$, the second and third columns depict the function $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ taken at $`t=12.5\tau _\mathrm{h}`$ and $`t=125\tau _\mathrm{h}`$, where $`\tau _\mathrm{h}`$ is the initial half-mass diameter crossing time (table 1). As $`\tau _\mathrm{h}`$ increases with increasing $`r_\mathrm{h}`$, these equivalent stages of cluster evolution correspond to different absolute times as indicated in the figure. The final state of the systems, at roughly $`t3\times 10^8`$yr, is given in the last column. For models $`𝒞`$ and $`𝒟`$, $`125\tau _\mathrm{h}>t_{\mathrm{end}}`$, so that the third column in figure 1 contains no entry.

At any time and for all models, the mean surface density of companions exhibits, at low separations $`r`$, a well defined power-law behaviour $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)1/r^2`$. It implies an approximate uniform distribution of binary separations in $`\mathrm{log}r`$ (Bate et al. 1998). For larger $`r`$, the binary branch blends into the plateau of constant companion density corresponding to the core of the star cluster. This first break of the distribution occurs at separations $`r_1`$ where the number of chance projections of cluster members becomes equal to the number of binaries in that separation bin. At larger $`r`$ chance projections completely dominate $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$, and wide binaries, if in fact present, can no longer be identified as such. The location of the first break therefore depends on the binary fraction and on the central density of the cluster. On larger scales the stellar clusters follow a Plummer radial density profile with half-mass radius $`r_\mathrm{h}`$. Therefore, a second break occurs at $`r_2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ declines sharply for separations $`r\stackrel{>}{}r_\mathrm{h}r_2`$ (see Section 7).

As the dynamical evolution progresses, the clusters expand and the density declines. Hence, the projected mean surface density of companions decreases as well. While many of the binaries with separations comparable to the mean distance of stellar systems in the cluster core become disrupted, some new binaries may form by capture. Usually these are higher-order multiples (K2) with separations close to the first break or smaller. As the cluster expands, the binary branch becomes less affected by crowding and the first break in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ shifts to greater separations. This behaviour is clearly visible in figure 1. For all models the core plateau in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ ‘decreases in height’ and ‘moves’ to larger separations as time progresses. At late stages of the evolution the entire binary branch is uncovered and a few long-period orbits appear through capture. This is also documented in figs. 3 and 4 in K4.

The clusters develop core-halo structures through energy equipartition. Low-mass stars gain kinetic energy through encounters with more massive stars. The low-mass stars move away from the cluster centre, forming the halo, whereas the more massive stars sink towards the centre. The trajectories of halo stars that trespass beyond the tidal radius of the cluster are dominated by the Galactic tidal field, and most become unbound. Hence, the clusters expand until they fill their tidal radii. When this stage is reached (roughly after $`t>1\times 10^8`$years), the different clusters evolve identically (see also figure 1 in K3), mostly loosing stars through their first and second Lagrange points (Terlevich 1987; Portegies Zwart et al. 2001). As a result, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ extends beyond the second break to increasingly larger separations with an increasingly shallower slope, which we identify as the halo branch in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$. Near the tidal radius $`r_\mathrm{t}`$, a third break occurs, as stars with $`r>r_\mathrm{t}`$ become unbound. The trajectories of stars belonging to these unbound moving groups are not followed with sufficient resolution (see Section 3). Also, these stars are likely to be severely contaminated by field stars in the Galaxy, and we refrain from a further discussion of this outermost branch in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$.

As can be seen from figure 1, knowledge of the initial global properties of the system is effectively erased through the dynamical evolution. The cluster and halo branches in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ look quite indistinguishable in the final frames. The situation changes, however, when considering the binary branch, as discussed in Section 4.2. The $`f=1`$ versus $`f=0`$ experiments demonstrate that there is no significant difference in bulk cluster evolution between clusters containing a large primordial binary proportion and no binaries (K3). This is also evident by studying $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$; concentrating only on the cluster and halo branches, the upper two final panels in figures 1 and 2 are indistinguishable.

### 4.2 Binary Stars

Binary systems and wide hierarchical systems form through capture during the evolution of the clusters, as seen in figure 2. These systems result from triple or higher-order stellar encounters, and are consequently very rare. The periods of these systems range from $`10^7`$ to $`10^{11}`$days (figure 10 in K2), and a well distinguished binary branch with slope $`2`$ develops, extending to radii well beyond the initial position of the first break.

However, as the clusters evolve, binaries are not only created but also destroyed. Due to their smaller binding energies, wide binaries are more vulnerable to dynamical processes than close ones. If the initial binary fraction is high, then the destruction processes dominate over binary formation, and cluster evolution leads to a depletion of wide binaries. As a result, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ steepens on the large-separation side of the binary branch. In extreme cases, some annuli $`r`$ of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ may become completely depopulated, and consequently a gap between the binary and the cluster branches opens up, as is noticeable in figure 1.

The efficiency of binary disruption depends strongly on the initial density of the cluster. For high stellar densities, the typical impact parameters of stellar encounters are small. Hence, there is a relatively high frequency of encounters for which the energy exchange exceeds the binding energy of typical binary systems, which subsequently dissolve. In our suite of models, the effect of binary depletion is largest in $`𝒜`$, which has the highest central density $`\rho _0`$, and decreases with increasing half-mass radius $`r_\mathrm{h}`$ as $`\rho _0`$ becomes smaller.

This is demonstrated in figure 3. Unlike the previous figures it shows a reduced range of separations, concentrating on the binary branch, and it plots $`r^2\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ to make it easier to determine the power-law slope and deviations from it. At $`t=0.0`$, for all models $`r^2\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ is constant in the binary branch. This reflects the initial distribution of the binary separations, which is uniform in the logarithm within the range $`10^5`$pc to $`10^2`$pc. Values $`r<10^5`$pc come from the projection of the 3-dimensional distribution into the $`xy`$-plane. For model $`𝒟`$ the complete binary branch is visible and fully segregated from the cluster branch (which corresponds to the rising part of the plot). This is because the half-mass radius of the cluster is large enough that the projected mean separation between cluster members exceeds the separation of the widest binary system. As both branches are clearly separated initially, dynamical evolution does not alter the binary distribution significantly. There is little sign of wide binary depletion, even at $`t=t_{\mathrm{end}}`$.

In the other models, the typical separations in the cluster core are smaller than $`10^2`$pc, and binary and cluster branches overlap in the beginning. This is most significant for model $`𝒜`$, where the initial central density is highest. Consequently a large number of wide binaries are disrupted during the dynamical evolution of the system, and $`r^2\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ drops considerably below its initial value (indicated by the dashed line) in the range $`10^4`$pc$`<r<\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}10}^1`$pc. Because the size of this gap depends on the age and the initial central concentration of the cluster, analysing the signatures in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ could be used to constrain the initial state of observed stellar clusters. This fact, namely that the binary population retains a memory of its past dynamical environment, is also used in K1 to infer the typical structures in which most Galactic-field stars form, by studying the shape of the binary period distribution (“inverse dynamical population synthesis”).

## 5 Statistical Effects

In the previous section we analysed the mean surface density of companions averaged over several model realisations seen in one projection (into the $`xy`$-plane). Both, the effect of averaging and the effect of projection shall be discussed here.

### 5.1 Cluster to Cluster variations

To estimate the effect of statistical variations between different model realisations, figure 4 plots $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_i(r)`$ constructed for each of the $`n=5`$ individual cluster rendition of model $`𝒜`$ at $`t=125\tau _\mathrm{h}`$. This model is chosen, because it has the smallest initial crossing time, hence, our simulations span the largest evolutionary interval. After the system has evolved for $`125\tau _\mathrm{h}`$, differences become noticeable at separations where the number of neighbours is small. This is the case at very large separations, where the stellar density rapidly decreases, and deviations may also occur at the extreme ends of the binary branch. At the smallest separations, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ is determined by only one or two very close binary systems, and near the first break of the distribution, the depletion of wide binary systems becomes noticeable and a gap may open up. As can be seen in figure 4, the exact location and number of depleted separation bins slightly varies between different model realizations. Therefore, the wide binary gap appears wider and more noticeable for individual realisations compared to the ensemble average.

### 5.2 Different Projections

Clusters of young stars are seen on the sky in only one projection. Inferring the full 3-dimensional structure of the cluster is therefore in principle impossible without additional information or assumptions. In the previous sections, we concentrated on the projection into the $`xy`$-plane when plotting $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$. For the spherical clusters considered in the current analysis the different projections are equivalent, and each gives a fair representation of the complete system. Only at distances comparable to the tidal radius does the flattening through the Galactic tidal field of the cluster become significant (Terlevich 1987).

The invariance to changes in projection is demonstrated in figure 5, which shows cluster $`𝒜1`$ again at $`t=125\tau _\mathrm{h}`$. The function $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ is essentially independent of the projection, and slight differences occur only where there are smaller numbers of stars. Analogue to the variations between different model realisations discussed above, this is the case at very large and very small $`r`$, and at separations where wide-binary depletion occurs. At large separations, the tidal field breaks the symmetry. For small $`r`$ and at the binary gap, it depends on the projection which separation bin stays populated and which may become empty. However, besides these details the overall structure of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ is projection invariant.

## 6 Observational Bias

The most likely observational bias in surveys of stellar clusters results from the unavoidable detection flux limit, which corresponds to a stellar mass limit $`m_{\mathrm{min}}`$ such that stars with $`m<m_{\mathrm{min}}`$ are not detected simply because they are too faint. This effect influences the derived mean surface density of companions, as illustrated in figure 6, where we again concentrate on cluster model $`𝒜`$. As in the previous figures, we plot $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ at four different stages of the cluster evolution, however, we now ‘observe’ the cluster at various distances, i.e. we introduce different detection limits $`m_{\mathrm{min}}`$ for the mass. We consider $`m_{\mathrm{min}}`$ in the range $`0.25`$M to $`1`$M.

With increasing $`m_{\mathrm{min}}`$, the total number of detected stars decreases, and as a result $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ is reduced. Also the shape of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ changes. This effect is small for low detection thresholds ($`m\begin{array}{c}<\hfill \\ \hfill \end{array}0.5`$M), as the overall star distribution in the cluster is still well sampled. However, it becomes significant at large cluster distances when only the brightest stars can be detected. The binary branch becomes severely under-sampled, and wide gaps open up. For $`m_{\mathrm{min}}=1`$M the binary branch disappears in all models.

The inferred cluster core radius also depends quite sensitively on the completeness of the stellar sample. As the clusters evolve dynamically, high-mass stars sink towards the cluster centre due to mass segregation, whereas low-mass stars move outwards, building up the extended halo (figure 2 in K3). Sub-populations of higher-mass stars therefore exhibit smaller core radii as time progresses relative to the low-mass population.

This trend is clearly seen in figure 6, where the second break moves to smaller separations as $`m_{\mathrm{min}}`$ increases. At very late stages of the dynamical evolution and for very large cut-off masses, the core radius may become too small, so that the second break is no longer noticeable. For example, the function $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ follows an almost perfect $`r^2`$-power-law for $`m_{\mathrm{min}}=0.75`$M at $`t_{\mathrm{end}}`$, exhibiting a smooth transition from the binary regime to the halo regime without any sign of the cluster core, which is present when taking all stars into account. When considering only stars with $`m>1`$M, then the signature of the cluster core disappears at all times. This bias needs be taken into account when interpreting observational data on star clusters.

## 7 Cluster Morphology

As has been elucidated above, the mean surface density of companions shows distinct branches, the extend of which appear to couple with the dynamical state of the cluster. In this section we consider this in more detail.

Simple bulk cluster properties that can be used to describe the dynamical state of a cluster are the core radius, $`r_\mathrm{c}`$, the half-mass radius, $`r_\mathrm{h}`$, and the tidal radius, $`r_\mathrm{t}`$. The core radius is approximated by calculating the density-weighted radius $`r_\mathrm{c}`$ (Heggie & Aarseth 1992),

$$r_\mathrm{c}^2=\frac{\underset{i=1}{\overset{N_{20}}{}}r_\mathrm{i}^2\rho _\mathrm{i}^2}{_{\mathrm{i}=1}^{N_{20}}\rho _\mathrm{i}^2},$$
(2)
where $`\rho _\mathrm{i}=3m_{\mathrm{i},5}/(4\pi d_{\mathrm{i},5}^3)`$ is the density around star i estimated within the closest distance $`d_{\mathrm{i},5}`$ from star i containing $`n=5`$ additional stars with combined mass $`m_{\mathrm{i},5}`$, and $`r_\mathrm{i}`$ is the distance of star i from the density centre of the cluster. The summation extends only over the innermost 20 % of all stars in the cluster, $`N_{20}`$, since this is sufficient to ensure convergence. The approximate tidal radius (Binney & Tremaine 1987),

$$r_t(t)=\left(\frac{M_{\mathrm{st}}(t)}{3M_{\mathrm{gal}}}\right)^{\frac{1}{3}}r_{\mathrm{GC}},$$
(3)
with $`M_{\mathrm{gal}}=5\times 10^{10}M_{}`$ being approximately the Galactic mass enclosed within the distance of the Sun to the Galactic centre, $`r_{\mathrm{GC}}=8.5`$ kpc. To estimate $`r_\mathrm{t}(t)`$, $`M_{\mathrm{st}}(t)`$ is calculated by summing only those stars which have $`r(t)2r_\mathrm{t}(t\delta t_{\mathrm{op}})`$, where the data output time interval $`\delta t_{\mathrm{op}}t_{\mathrm{relax}}(t)`$. The quantities $`r_\mathrm{c}`$, $`r_\mathrm{h}`$ and $`r_\mathrm{t}`$ are averages of $`n`$ models per time-snap (Table 1).

We define two breaks in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$, $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$, by fitting power laws to the three distinct branches of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ (the binary branch, the flat central plateau, and the cluster halo out to the tidal radius $`r_\mathrm{t}`$) and determining the separation at the intersection of the fits. These values are listed in Table 2, and plots of $`r_\mathrm{c}`$ vs $`r_1`$ and $`r_\mathrm{h}`$ vs $`r_2`$ are presented in figure 7.

The figure shows that the quantities are well correlated. Specifically, we find (the uncertainties are mean absolute deviations)

$$r_\mathrm{c}/r_1=20.5\pm 9.7$$
(4)
and

$$r_\mathrm{h}/r_2=1.14\pm 0.29.$$
(5)
This suggests that the break points in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ can be used to infer the core radius and half-mass radius of a cluster. We also find good correlations between $`r_\mathrm{h}`$ and $`r_\mathrm{c}`$ ($`r_\mathrm{h}/r_\mathrm{c}=3.86\pm 1.04`$) and between the break points in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ ($`r_2/r_1=74.3\pm 44.4`$).

The above scaling relations apply for the specific low-mass cluster models that we investigate. These models do not suffer significant core collapse, which is partly given by the relatively fast evaporation time ($`0.51`$ Gyr, K3), and the ubiquitous binary stars which oppose core collapse. More massive clusters are likely to show different correlations, notably between $`r_\mathrm{h}`$ and $`r_\mathrm{c}`$, and between $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$, since core collapse leads to the contraction of $`r_\mathrm{c}`$ but an expansion of $`r_\mathrm{h}`$ (Giersz & Spurzem 2000). Analysis of more massive clusters using $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ is a future goal, and it will be interesting to see if correlations 4 and 5 remain valid.

## 8 Summary

In this paper, we investigate how dynamical cluster evolution is manifest in the mean surface density of companions, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$, as a function of separation $`r`$. We find that throughout all evolutionary phases, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ can be subdivided into four distinct branches, each following approximately a power-law behaviour:

1. At small separations, and throughout all evolutionary phases of the star cluster, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ traces binary stars and higher-order multiple systems. In the binary branch the slope of the companion density is approximately $`2`$.

The binary population keeps a memory of the dynamical evolution of star clusters. The depletion of the binary population at large separations leads to a steepening of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ in the wide-binary branch. In extreme cases, it may become completely depopulated and a gap between binaries and the cluster branch opens up. The gap increases with cluster age and with increasing initial density. For the binary branch, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ is sensitive to the initial properties of the system, so that analysing $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ for a cluster can constrain its birth configuration.
2. The well-defined binary branch blends into a plateau of constant companion density which corresponds to the main body of the stellar cluster, and which we refer to as the cluster branch in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$. The transition occurs at separations when chance projections of cluster members begin to outnumber the contribution of binary stars in that separation bin. The location of this first break at $`r_1`$ depends on the binary fraction and the central stellar density of the cluster, and thus on $`r_\mathrm{c}`$. As the cluster expands, the density decreases and the core radius increases with $`r_\mathrm{c}21r_1`$ for the set of models studied here. As a consequence, the binary branch becomes less affected by crowding and the first break in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ shifts to greater separations. Generally, as the cluster evolves the plateau ‘decreases in height’ and ‘moves’ to larger separations. Larger parts of the binary branch are ‘uncovered’ as a result of the expansion and the formation of wide hierarchical systems through capture.
3. Relaxed Galactic clusters exhibit a core/halo structure. This becomes apparent in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ through the existence of a second break at $`r_2`$, which is approximately located at the half-mass radius, $`r_\mathrm{h}r_2`$, beyond which $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ decreases again. The slope of this halo branch depends sensitively on the evolutionary state of the cluster. If the cluster is still sufficiently young so that most of it is confined well inside it’s tidal radius, then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ decreases rapidly. However, relaxed clusters that fill their tidal radii have a halo branch with a slope of approximately $`2`$.
4. Beyond the tidal radius, the density of unbound stars decreases gradually, which is reflected in a fourth branch in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$. It is a measure of the density distribution of the moving group relative to the centre of its origin, which is the star cluster. The decay of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ is steeper here because the stars are finally removed from the vicinity of the cluster within an orbital period about the Galaxy (Terlevich 1987).
5. The mean surface density of companions closely reflects morphological properties of stellar clusters. The break points in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$, $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$, therefore can be used to infer the core radius $`r_\mathrm{c}`$ and half-mass radius $`r_\mathrm{h}`$ of a cluster. These quantities are well correlated, and we find $`r_\mathrm{c}/r_1=20.5\pm 9.7`$ and $`r_\mathrm{h}/r_2=1.14\pm 0.29`$, respectively.

Altogether, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ contains valuable information on the dynamical state of a star cluster, and allows an assessment of cluster properties such as the core and half-mass radii. As the location of the first break in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ (or the possible occurrence of a gap between binary and cluster branch) depends on the binary fraction and on the initial central density, these parameters can in principle be inferred from analysing $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$.

Our study confirms that different projections of the same data do not change $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ significantly during the evolution of initially spherical clusters in the Galactic tidal field. Also, different numerical renditions of the same models lead to indistinguishable results. Hence, they can be combined to improve the statistical significance of the ensemble average $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$.

To allow for a proper assessment of stellar cluster properties using $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$, it is important to consider as complete a census of cluster stars as possible. Observational bias (i.e. non-detection of faint stars) may complicate the interpretation of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ and limit its applicability for inferring the initial stage of the cluster under study (see also Bate et al. 1998). Our tests show, however, that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ remains a useful quantity even when stars with $`m\begin{array}{c}<\hfill \\ \hfill \end{array}0.5`$M are not detected. We also find that mass segregation is evident in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ through the location of the second break in dependence of the mass-range used to construct $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$.

Future analysis of numerical models of rich clusters, for which mass segregation and possibly core collapse play important roles in the late phases of the dynamical evolution, will be performed to deepen the issues raised in this pilot study.

###### Acknowledgements.

We thank Sverre Aarseth for distributing Nbody5 freely. RSK acknowledges support by a Otto-Hahn-Stipendium from the Max-Planck-Gesellschaft and partial support through a NASA astrophysics theory program at the joint Center for Star Formation Studies at NASA-Ames Research Center, UC Berkeley, and UC Santa Cruz. PK acknowledges support from DFG grant KR1635.


text:
# The Chow ring of the symmetric space 𝐺𝑙(2𝑛,ℂ)/𝑆𝑂(2𝑛,ℂ)

## 1 Introduction

This paper is devoted to the following result.

###### Theorem 1.

$`CH^{}(Gl(2n)/SO(2n))y,`$ where y is a codimension $`n`$ cycle.

Throughout this paper $`Gl(n)`$, $`O(n)`$, $`SO(n)`$, etc. denote the complex algebraic groups of these types.

Theorem 1 should be contrasted with the following result which will used in its proof.

###### Lemma 1.

$`CH^0(Gl(2n)/O(2n))`$ and $`CH^i(Gl(2n)/O(2n))=0`$ for $`i1`$.

###### Proof.

$`Gl(2n)/O(2n)Symm_{2n}()`$, where $`Symm_{2n}()`$ is the space of symmetric, non-degenerate $`2n\times 2n`$ matrices over $``$. $`Symm_{2n}()`$ is an open subset of the vector space of all $`2n\times 2n`$ symmetric matrices over $``$. By the fundamental exact sequence for Chow groups (Lemma 2 below), the Chow groups of any Zariski open subset of affine space vanish in codimensions higher than zero and are $``$ in codimension zero. ∎

There is much work in the literature on the geometry of symmetric spaces of the form $`G/K`$ for $`G`$ an adjoint group and $`K`$ the fixed point set of an involution of $`G`$, see for example \[DP\]. However, these results do not include a computation of the Chow ring. Moreover, the Chow ring of such a $`G/K`$ does not determine the Chow ring of the symmetric space $`G/K^0`$ where $`K^0`$ is the connected component of the identity in $`K`$. This can be significantly more complicated as Theorem 1 and Lemma 1 show.

In fact, there is currently no general theorem that computes the Chow ring of a reductive symmetric space $`G/K`$ in terms of Lie theoretic data. The most general result I know of is when $`G/K`$ is a group; the Chow ring $`modp`$ is computed in Kac \[K\]. For a history of similar problems and extensive references to previous results, see the survey article \[M\].

In a subsequent paper, we will use Theorem 1 as the key step in the computation of the Chow ring of the classifying space $`BSO(2n)`$. The method of computing the Chow ring of $`Gl(2n)/SO(2n)`$ given in this paper can be extended to a computation of the cohomology of this symmetric space for all other cohomology theories.

Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Brendan Hassett, J. Peter May, Burt Totaro, Madhav Nori, and especially Ian Grojnowski, without whom this paper would be impossible to read if it ever appeared at all.

## 2 Basic results

For notation and conventions on Chow rings, we will refer to Fulton’s Intersection theory \[F\] with one minor difference. The Chow ring that we will be using is the ring of algebraic cycles mod rational equivalence (denoted $`CH^{}(X)`$) rather than the ring of cycles mod algebraic equivalence (denoted $`A^{}(X)`$) as used by Fulton.

The basic result about Chow rings that we will need is the following.

###### Lemma 2.

Let $`YX`$ be a closed subvariety. Then

$$CH_{}YCH_{}XCH_{}(XY)0$$

is exact.

Recall that $`CH^iX=CH_{dimXi}X.`$

As in \[FMSS\], given an action of an algebraic group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on a variety $`X`$, one forms $`CH_k^\mathrm{\Gamma }X=Z_k^\mathrm{\Gamma }X/R_k^\mathrm{\Gamma }X`$. Here $`Z_k^\mathrm{\Gamma }X`$ is the free Abelian group generated by the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ stable closed subvarieties of $`X`$ and $`R_k^\mathrm{\Gamma }X`$ is the subgroup generated by all divisors of eigenfunctions on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. A rational function $`f`$ on $`X`$ is an eigenfunction if $`gf=\chi (g)f`$ for all $`g\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and for some one dimensional character $`\chi `$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

###### Theorem 2.

(Fulton, MacPherson, Sotille, Sturmfels)\[FMSS\] If a connected solvable linear algebraic group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acts on a scheme $`X`$, then the canonical homorphism $`A_k^\mathrm{\Gamma }XA_kX`$ is an isomorphism.

These results allow us to restrict attention to $`B`$-stable cycles in our proof of Theorem 1. In fact the decomposition of $`Gl(2n)/SO(2n)`$ into $`B`$-orbits is not used essentially in the proof of the theorem, but it does provide a convenient notation for cycles.

We now recall some results about $`Gl(2n)/SO(2n)`$ and its partition into $`B`$-orbits. All of these statements are well known and their proofs are easy linear algebra. We let $`Symm_k()`$ denote the subset of $`Gl(k)`$ consisting of symmetric matrices, and define the map

$$f:Gl(k)Symm_k()$$

by $`f(g)=gg^t`$. This map induces an isomorphism

$$Gl(k)/O(k)Symm_k(),$$

and allows us to make the identification

$$Gl(k)/SO(k)\{(q,ϵ)|qGl(k)/O(k)\text{ and }ϵ^2=det(q)\}.$$

With this identification, the obvious double cover

$$\pi :Gl(2n)/SO(2n)Gl(2n)/O(2n)$$

takes a pair $`(q,ϵ)`$ to $`q.`$ We will identify $`Symm_k()`$ with the space of symmetric non-degenerate bilinear forms on $`^{2n}`$ by setting $`q_A(v,w)=v^tAw`$, so that $`Gl(2n)`$ acts on bilinear forms by $`(gq)(v,w)=q(g^tv,g^tw)`$.

Define the Borel subgroup $`B`$ to be the subgroup of upper triangular matrices, i.e. the stabilizer of the standard flag $`F_1F_2\mathrm{}F_{2n},`$ where $`F_i=`$$`<e_1,e_2,\mathrm{},e_i>`$. We have an isomorphism between $`B`$-orbits in $`Gl(2n)/O(2n)`$ and involutions in the Weyl group $`S_{2n}`$:

$$B\backslash Gl(2n)/O(2n)\{\omega S_{2n}\omega ^2=1\},$$

defined by sending a quadratic form $`q`$ to the relative position between the standard flag $`F`$ and the flag $`F^_q`$ of orthogonal complements with respect to $`q`$. It is well known and easy to see that this map is an isomorphism (this is a consequence of Gram-Schmidt orthonormalization).

To describe the $`B`$-orbits on $`Gl(2n)/SO(2n)`$, it is enough to describe the pullback of the orbits on $`Gl(2n)/O(2n)`$ through the double cover $`\pi `$. An inverse image $`\pi ^1(O)`$ is either a single orbit or a union of two disjoint orbits in the double cover $`Gl(2n)/SO(2n)`$.

###### Lemma 3.

The pullback of a $`B`$-orbit is the union of two disjoint orbits if and only if the permutation indexing the orbit is fixed point free.

Let $`O`$ be an orbit in $`Gl(2n)/SO(2n)`$ and $`qO`$. Then $`\pi ^1(O)`$ is a single $`B`$-orbit if and only if the stabilizer of $`q`$ in $`B`$ is disconnected; i.e. if and only if the stabilizer of $`q`$ in the set of diagonal matrices $`T`$ is disconnected. Choose $`q`$ such that $`q(x,y)=x^t\omega y`$ where $`\omega S_{2n}`$ is the permutation indexing $`O`$. Then $`q(e_i,e_j)=\delta _{\omega (i),j}`$. The component group of the stabilizer of $`q`$ in $`T`$ is $`(/2)^l`$, where $`l`$ is the number of fixed points of $`\omega `$ on $`\{1,2,\mathrm{},2n\}`$.

###### Definition 1.

A $`B`$-orbit $`O`$ on $`Gl(2n)/O(2n)`$ is fixed point free if $`\pi ^1(O)`$ consists of two disjoint $`B`$-orbits.

###### Proposition 1.

The Chow ring of $`Gl(2n)/SO(2n)`$ is generated by elements corresponding to closures of fixed point free orbits in $`Gl(2n)/O(2n)`$ along with the codimension zero cycle.

The point of this paper is to prove that all but one of these codimension non-zero generators are rationally equivalent to zero.

###### Proof.

As Lemma 1 states, the Chow ring of $`Gl(2n)/O(2n)`$ is trivial. Therefore, if $`O`$ is a $`B`$-orbit in $`Gl(2n)/O(2n)`$ whose codimension is larger than zero, then $`\pi ^1(O)0`$ in $`CH^{}(Gl(2n)/SO(2n))`$.

By Definition 1, any orbit in $`Gl(2n)/O(2n)`$ which is not fixed point free lifts to a single orbit in $`Gl(2n)/SO(2n)`$ and is therefore rationally equivalent to zero.

On the other hand, if an orbit $`O`$ is fixed point free, then $`\pi ^1(O)=O_+O_{}`$ where $`O_+`$ and $`O_{}`$ are two disjoint copies of $`O`$ distinguished by the sign of $`ϵ`$. Again, since the Chow ring of the base space is trivial, $`0\pi ^1(O)O_++O_{}`$, so $`O_+O_{}`$. Therefore, $`CH^{}(Gl(2n)/SO(2n))`$ is generated by elements corresponding to closures of fixed point free orbits in $`Gl(2n)/O(2n)`$, along with the codimension zero cycle. ∎

## 3 Proof of Theorem 1

Define the graph of $`B`$-orbits to be a graph whose vertices are $`B`$-orbits and whose edges are codimension $`1`$ inclusion relations between orbit closures. This graph of $`B`$-orbits contains the full subgraph of fixed point free $`B`$-orbits. The proof of Theorem 1 was arrived at through a careful examination of the fixed point free graphs of $`Gl(2n)/O(2n),`$ for $`n4`$. These examples are reproduced in the appendix to make the proof easier to visualize.

The proof is by induction. We start by decomposing $`Gl(2n)/SO(2n)`$ into $`2n`$ disjoint subvarieties, each of which may be compared with $`Gl(2n2)/SO(2n2)`$. Our induction hypothesis will be $`CH^{}(Gl(2n2)/SO(2n2))x_0y`$, where $`x_0`$ is the codimension zero cycle and $`y`$ is in codimension $`n1`$. We will then construct a map from all but one of the $`2n`$ disjoint subvarieties to $`Gl(2n2)/SO(2n2)`$. This map will be a trivial fibration. The remaining subvariety is easily dealt with using Proposition 1. This map will take fixed point free orbits of $`Gl(2n)/SO(2n)`$ to fixed point free orbits of $`Gl(2n2)/SO(2n2)`$, hence the relevance of the examples in the appendix. We will use this map and the induction step to show that each of the $`2n`$ subsets contributes at most $``$ to $`CH^{}(Gl(2n)/SO(2n))`$. From there, a second and third induction and the results of the previous section will show that only two of these disjoint subsets actually contribute to the Chow ring.

We will start the induction with the case $`n=1`$. Since there is only one fixed point free permutation in two letters, namely $`(12)`$, the Chow ring $`CH^{}(Gl(2)/SO(2))`$ has a single generator in addition to the trivial codimension zero cycle. Since this single fixed point free orbit is the largest fixed point free orbit, it cannot be the zero of any $`B`$-semi-invariant function. Therefore, $`CH^{}(Gl(2)/SO(2))x_0y`$, where $`x_0`$ is the codimension zero cycle and $`y`$ is this codimension $`1`$ cycle.

We now define a decomposition of $`Gl(2n)/SO(2n)`$ into $`2n`$ disjoint subspaces.

Define $`X_i`$ to be the subvariety of $`Gl(2n)/SO(2n)`$ consisting of pairs $`(q,ϵ)`$ where $`q(e_{2n},e_{2n})=q(e_{2n1},e_{2n})=\mathrm{}=q(e_{i+1},e_{2n})=0`$ and $`q(e_i,e_{2n})0`$. The following properties of the varieties $`X_i`$ are immediate.

###### Lemma 4.

$$Gl(2n)/SO(2n)=X_1X_2\mathrm{}X_{2n}.$$

Also,

$$\overline{X_i}=\underset{ji}{}X_j.$$

The $`X_i`$ and the $`\overline{X_i}`$ are all quasi-projective varieties, and each $`X_i`$ is $`B`$-stable.

Notice that if $`(q,ϵ)X_{2n}`$, then the $`B`$-orbit through $`q`$ is not fixed point free, and hence by Proposition 1, the only $`B`$-orbit in $`X_{2n}`$ that contributes to the Chow ring is the codimension zero open orbit.

For $`i<2n`$, we define a map

$$f_i:X_iGl(2n2)/SO(2n2)$$

as follows. For $`(q,ϵ)X_i`$, we know that $`q(e_{i+1},e_{2n})=q(e_{i+2},e_{2n})=\mathrm{}=q(e_{2n},e_{2n})=0`$, while $`q(e_i,e_{2n})0`$. Therefore, the quadratic form $`q`$ is nondegenerate on $`<e_i,e_{2n}>`$, the subspace of $`^{2n}`$ generated by $`e_i`$ and $`e_{2n}`$. The orthogonal compliment $`<e_i,e_{2n}>^{}`$ with respect to $`q`$ of this subspace is isomorphic to $`^{2n2}`$.

Let $`q^{}`$ be the quadratic form on $`^{2n2}`$ defined by restricting $`q`$ to $`<e_i,e_{2n}>^{}`$ and let $`ϵ^{}=ϵ/q(e_i,e_{2n})\sqrt{1}`$. As $`det(q)=q(e_i,e_{2n})^2det(q^{})`$, we know $`(ϵ^{})^2=det(q^{}).`$ Define $`f_i(q,ϵ)=(q^{},ϵ^{}).`$

This map takes $`B`$-orbits to $`\overline{B}`$-orbits, where $`\overline{B}`$ is the stabilizer in $`Gl(2n2)`$ of the standard flag associated to the basis

$$\overline{e_1},\mathrm{},\overline{e_{i1}},\overline{e_{i+1}},\mathrm{},\overline{e_{2n1}},$$

where $`\overline{e_j}`$ is equal to the orthogonal projection of $`e_j`$ onto $`<e_i,e_{2n}>^{}`$.

###### Lemma 5.

$`f_i`$ is a trivial fibration with fibers isomorphic to $`^{}\times ^{2n+i2}.`$

###### Proof.

Fix a quadratic form $`q^{}`$ in $`Gl(2n2)/SO(2n2)`$. An element $`qf^1(q^{})`$ is determined by the numbers

$$\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{q(e_j,e_{2n})\text{ for }j<i,\text{ and }}{q(e_j,e_i)\text{ for }ji.}$$

These numbers may be chosen freely subject only to the constraint that $`q(e_i,e_{2n})0.`$

###### Lemma 6.

$`CH^{}(X_i)`$ is a quotient of $``$.

###### Proof.

Since the map $`f_i`$ is a fibration with fibers isomorphic to an open subset of affine space, it induces a surjection of Chow rings (\[F\] example 1.9.2). By our induction hypothesis $`CH^{}(Gl(2n2)/SO(2n2))`$.

More specifically, the Chow ring of $`Gl(2n2)/SO(2n2)`$ is generated by cycles $`x_0`$ and $`y`$, where $`x_0`$ is the codimension zero cycle and $`y`$ is in codimension $`n1`$. Therefore, $`CH^{}(X_i)`$ is generated by the pullbacks of these cycles. ∎

###### Remark.

In fact $`CH^{}(X_i)`$ as follows from the proof of Theorem 1 below. This can also easily be seen directly.

###### Proposition 2.

If $`n>1`$, then $`CH^{}(Gl(2n)/SO(2n))=CH^{}(\overline{X_{2n}})`$ is a quotient of $`\stackrel{~}{x_0}f_{2n1}^{}(y)f_{2n2}^{}(y)\mathrm{}f_1^{}(y)`$, where $`\stackrel{~}{x_0}`$ is the codimension zero cycle in $`\overline{X_{2n}}`$.

###### Proof.

We will show by induction on $`i`$ that $`CH^{}(\overline{X_i})`$ is a quotient of $`f_i^{}(y)f_{i1}^{}(y)\mathrm{}f_1^{}(y).`$

For the case $`i=1`$, since $`\overline{X_1}=X_1`$, Lemma 6 tells us that $`CH^{}(\overline{X_1})`$ is a quotient of $`f_1^{}(x_0)f_1^{}(y)`$. The pullback of the codimension zero orbit $`f_1^{}(x_0)`$ is indexed by the permutation $`(12n)`$ so since $`n>1`$ it is not a fixed point free orbit in $`Gl(2n)/SO(2n)`$. Therefore, by Proposition 1, $`f_1^{}(x_0)`$ is rationally equivalent to zero in $`CH^{}(Gl(2n)/SO(2n))`$, and the subvariety $`\overline{X_1}`$ contributes at most $`f_1^{}(y)`$ to the Chow ring of the whole symmetric space. This completes the $`i=1`$ case.

As stated in Lemma 2, we know that

$$CH^{}(\overline{X_{i1}})CH^{}(\overline{X_i})CH^{}(X_i)0$$

is exact. Therefore, by induction, $`CH^{}(\overline{X_i})`$ is a quotient of $`f_i^{}(x_0)f_i^{}(y)f_{i1}^{}(y)\mathrm{}f_1^{}(y)`$. Again, we note that $`f_i^{}(x_0)`$ is indexed by the permutation $`(i2n)`$ so is not fixed point free. For $`i<2n`$, this orbit has codimension larger than zero, so by Proposition 1, this orbit is rationally equivalent to zero in $`CH^{}(Gl(2n)/SO(2n))`$. Finally, if $`i=2n`$, as we noticed previously (immediately following Lemma 4), the subvariety $`X_{2n}`$ contributes only the codimension zero cycle $`\stackrel{~}{x_0}`$. ∎

Note that we have reduced the generators down to the largest fixed point free $`B`$-orbit in each of the $`X_i`$. These $`2n1`$ $`B`$-orbits are visible in the appendix along the bottom right hand side of each graph.

We claim that $`f_j^{}(y)`$ is rationally equivalent to zero in $`CH^{}(Gl(2n)/SO(2n))`$ for $`j<2n`$. To this end, we inductively show that $`CH^{}(\overline{X_j})`$ is a quotient of $`f_j^{}(y)`$ for $`j<2n`$.

Define the function $`g_j:\overline{X_j}`$ by $`g_j(q)=q(e_j,e_{2n})`$. This function is clearly non-zero on $`X_j`$ and is clearly zero on all of $`\overline{X_{j1}}`$. To see that this zero is a simple one, we look at the function restricted to a line in $`Gl(2n)/SO(2n)`$. Let $`qX_j,q^{}X_{j1}`$ and consider the line of quadratic forms $`\{q^{}+aqa\}`$. Clearly the function $`g_j`$ has a simple zero along this line. This line meets $`X_{j1}`$ only when $`a=0`$ and is otherwise completely contained in $`X_j`$. It is clear that the line intersects $`\overline{X_{j1}}`$ transversally since $`\overline{X_{j1}}`$ is an open subvariety of the vector space of quadratic forms for which $`q(e_j,e_{2n})=0`$. Therefore, the intersection is transversal and the zero is simple.

By our induction step, $`CH^{}(\overline{X_{j1}})`$ is a quotient of $`f_{j1}^{}(y)`$, so $`CH^{}(\overline{X_j})`$ is a quotient of $`f_{j1}^{}(y)f_j^{}(y)`$. Let $`\gamma `$ be the $`B`$-orbit in $`Gl(2n2)/SO(2n2)`$ representing the cycle $`y`$. Restricting $`g_j`$ to the closure of $`f_j^1(\gamma )`$ in $`\overline{X_j}`$, this argument shows that $`f_{j1}^{}(y)0`$ in $`CH^{}(\overline{X_j})`$.

We have shown $`f_j^{}(y)0`$ for $`j<2n1`$. Consider $`f_{2n1}^{}(y)`$. This cycle is the closure of the largest fixed point free orbit, so any $`B`$-semi-invariant function vanishing along it must be defined on the closure of a non-fixed point free orbit. Therefore, any such function will produce a relation involving both copies of the orbit pulled back from $`Gl(2n)/O(2n)`$. Since we already know that the sum of these copies is rationally equivalent to zero, such a function can produce no new relations. The same argument shows that no multiple of $`f_{2n1}^{}(y)`$ is rationally equivalent to zero.

We have shown that $`f_j^{}(y)0`$ for $`1<j<2n1`$ and that no multiple of $`f_{2n1}^{}(y)`$ is rationally equivalent to zero. This combined with Proposition 2 proves Theorem 1.

## 4 Appendix

As mentioned in the proof, the graph of fixed point free $`B`$-orbits for $`Gl(2)/SO(2)`$ is a single point corresponding to the orbit $`O_{(12)}`$.

The graph of fixed point free $`B`$-orbits for $`Gl(4)/SO(4)`$ is:

where the codimensions of the orbits are (counting from the bottom) 2, 3, and 4 and the arrows represent inclusion of an orbit in the closure of the larger orbit. Since the graph for $`Gl(2)/SO(2)`$ is a single point, this is also its decomposition into subgraphs.

This leads to the induction step for the graph of fixed point free $`B`$-orbits for $`Gl(6)/SO(6)`$, namely:

where the solid diagonal lines that are more or less parallel to each other represent inclusion relations within the $`X_i`$ and the dotted lines represent other inclusion relations that are not relevant to our proof Furthermore, orbits that appear on the same row have the same codimension.

The following is the graph of fixed point free $`B`$-orbits in $`Gl(8)/O(8)`$. Notice its seven subgraphs.

DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS, UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN, 480 LINCOLN DRIVE, MADISON, WI 53706-1388 USA

E-mail address: `field@math.wisc.edu`