text:
# Singularities and Topology of Meromorphic Functions

## 1. Introduction

Milnor  defined the basic ingredients for studying the topology of holomorphic germs of functions $`f:(^n,0)`$. One of the main motivations for Milnor’s book concerns the link $`K`$ of an isolated singularity and its complement $`S^{2n1}K`$: links which are exotic speres have been discovered by Hirzebruch  and Brieskorn ; in case $`n=2`$, the components of $`K`$ are iterated toric knots. The study of isolated singularities ever since revealed striking phenomena and established bridges between several branches of mathematics.

In another stream of research, there has been an increasing interest in the last decade for the study of the global topology of polynomial functions, especially in connection with the behaviour at infinity. This topic is closely related to the affine geometry and to dynamical systems on non-compact spaces.

This paper reports on how to extend the study from holomorphic germs to the class of meromorphic functions, local or global. In the same time, polynomial functions $`^n`$ can be viewed as a special case of global meromorphic functions, as we explain futher on. A global meromorphic function defines a pencil of hypersurfaces, therefore our approach moreover yields a generalization of the theory of Lefschetz pencils.

Another motivation for the study of meromorphic functions is Arnold’s approach to the classification of simple germs of meromorphic functions under certain equivalence relations .

Let us introduce the first definitions. A meromorphic function, or pencil of hypersurfaces, on a compact complex analytic space $`Y`$, is a function $`F:Y^1`$ defined as the ratio of two sections $`P`$ and $`Q`$ of a holomorphic line bundle over $`Y`$. Then $`F=P/Q`$ is a holomorphic function on $`YA`$, where $`A:=\{P=Q=0\}`$ is the base locus of the pencil (also called axis, or indeterminacy locus). A germ of meromorphic function on a space germ is just the ratio of two holomorphic germs $`f=p/q:(𝒴,y)^1`$. By definition, $`f`$ is equal to $`f^{}=p^{}/q^{}`$, as germs at $`y`$, if and only if there exists a holomorphic germ $`u`$ such that $`u(y)0`$ and that $`p=up^{}`$, $`q=uq^{}`$. Then $`f`$ is holomorphic on the germ at $`y`$ of the complement $`𝒴𝒜`$ of the axis $`𝒜=\{p=q=0\}`$.

Meromorphic functions give rise to a new type of singularities, those occuring along the indeterminacy locus. To define them, we need to introduce some more objects attached to a meromorphic function.

###### Definition 1.1.

Let $`G:=\{(x,\tau )(YA)\times ^1F(x)=\tau \}`$ and let $`𝕐`$ denote the analytic closure of $`G`$ in $`Y\times ^1`$, namely:

$$𝕐=\{(x,[s:t])Y\times ^1tP(x)sQ(x)=0\}.$$

In case of a germ of meromorphic function at $`(𝒴,y)`$, one similarly defines space germs, which we denote by $`(G,(y,\tau ))`$, resp. $`(𝕐,(y,\tau ))`$. See also Definition 2.5.

First note that $`G`$ is the graph of the restriction $`F_{|YA}`$. Therefore $`YAG`$ embeds into $`𝕐`$ and the projection $`\pi :𝕐^1`$ is an extension of the function $`F_{|YA}`$. One may also say that $`𝕐\stackrel{\sigma }{}Y`$ is a blow-up of $`Y`$ along the axis $`A`$, such that the meromorphic function $`F:Y^1`$ pulls back to a well defined holomorphic function $`\pi :𝕐^1`$.

$$\begin{array}{ccc}𝕐& & \\ \sigma & \pi & \\ Y& \stackrel{F}{}& ^1\end{array}$$
(1)
We shall also consider the restriction of $`F`$ (or of a germ $`f`$), to $`X:=YV`$, where $`V`$ is some compact analytic subspace of $`Y`$. The case $`V=\{Q=0\}`$ is of particular interest for the following reason. Let $`P:^n`$ be a polynomial of degree $`d`$, let $`\stackrel{~}{P}`$ be the homogenized of $`P`$ by the new variable $`x_0`$ and let $`H^{\mathrm{}}=\{x_0=0\}`$ be the hyperplane at infinity. Then $`\stackrel{~}{P}/x_0^d:^n^1`$ is a meromorphic function on $`Y:=^n`$ which coincides with $`P`$ over $`^nH^{\mathrm{}}`$. We shall briefly outline in §8 some results and literature on polynomials.

Our meromorphic function (as a global one or as a germ) defines a family (=pencil) of hypersurfaces on each of the spaces defined above: $`𝕐`$, $`Y`$, $`YA`$, or $`X=YV`$. The map to $`^1`$, whenever defined, yields the pencil, as the family of its fibres. In other cases, we take the closures of fibres in the considered space. For instance, in case of $`Y`$, we take the closure of each hypersurface $`F_{|YA}^1(\tau )`$ within $`Y`$, for $`\tau ^1`$; each such closure contains $`A`$ and we actually have $`\overline{F_{|YA}^1(\tau )}=\pi ^1(\tau )`$. The role of the “completed space” $`𝕐`$ is that it contains all these pencils: we just restrict the fibres of $`\pi `$ to the particular subspace of $`Y`$ and we get the pencil we are looking for.

With this approach, one covers a large field. For instance, the class of holomorphic functions (or germs) represents the case when $`A=\mathrm{}`$.

Now, for any pencil on $`Y`$ or on $`X`$, there is only a finite number of atypical values, or atypical fibres. This finiteness result comes from ideas of Thom  and is based on the fact that we can stratify the space $`Y`$ (such that $`V`$ is union of strata, in case $`V\mathrm{}`$), restrict to $`YA𝕐(A\times ^1)`$ and extend this to some Whitney stratification of $`𝕐`$.

In case of a germ at $`(𝒴,y)`$ of a meromorphic function, one considers the germ of such a Whitney stratification at $`\{y\}\times ^1𝕐`$. Local finiteness of the strata implies that non-transversality of the projection $`\pi `$ happens at discrete values only.

###### Proposition 1.2.

There exists a finite set $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^1`$ such that the map $`\pi :𝕐\pi ^1(\mathrm{\Lambda })^1\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is a stratified locally trivial C0 fibration.

In particular, the restrictions $`\pi _|:𝕐((V\times ^1)\pi ^1(\mathrm{\Lambda }))^1\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`F_|:Y(VAF^1(\mathrm{\Lambda }))^1\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ are stratified locally trivial fibrations. $`\mathrm{}`$

In our approach, the singularities of the meromorphic function $`F`$ along the indeterminacy locus $`A`$ are the stratified singularities of $`\pi `$ at $`(A\times ^1)𝕐`$. Usually, singularities of functions on singular spaces are defined with respect to some Whitney stratification. Here we use instead a partial Thom stratification, denoted $`𝒢`$, as we already used in particular cases (cf. , ). This is a more general type of stratification since Whitney (b) condition is not required. Nevertheless, it allows one to study topological aspects, including homotopy type, at least for isolated singularities, in both local or global context.

Instead of endowing $`𝕐`$ with a stratified structure, another strategy for studying the topology of the meromorphic function $`F`$ would be to further blow up $`𝕐`$ in diagram (1), such that the pull-back of $`\{P=0\}\{Q=0\}`$ becomes a divisor with normal crossings. One may then use the data provided by this divisor in order to get informations. In this spirit, some results were found in the polynomial case, in two variables, by Fourrier  and Lê-Weber ; computation of the zeta functions of the monodromy has been done for polynomials and particular meromorphic germs (namely for $`Y`$ nonsingular and $`X=YA`$) by Gusein-Zade, Melle and Luengo .

This paper revisits the techniques and results of ,  and extends them to the more general context introduced above. The main scope is to show how to study vanishing cycles of meromorphic functions in both local and global context.

## 2. Vanishing homology and singularities

Let us first define vanishing homology attached to a global meromorphic function and relate it to the singularities along the indeterminacy locus. The vanishing homology is important in detecting and controlling (whenever possible) the change of topology of the fibres.

We shall use the following notations. For any subset $`W^1`$, $`𝕐_W:=\pi ^1(W)`$, $`Y_W:=AF^1(W)`$, $`X_W:=XY_W`$. The special case $`X=YA`$ and this is the object of study, explicitly, in , and implicitly, in . Our presentation follows the one of , adapting it to our more general situation; in particular our notations are different from those in .

Let $`a_i\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ be an atypical value of $`\pi `$ and take a small enough disc $`D_i`$ at $`a_i`$ such that $`D_i\mathrm{\Lambda }=\{a_i\}`$. Let’s fix some point $`s_iD_i`$. Let $`s^1\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ be a general value, situated on the boundary of some big closed disc $`D^1`$, such that $`DD_i`$, $`a_iD\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, and that $`DD_i=\mathrm{}`$, $`a_iD\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

The vanishing homology of meromorphic functions should be a natural extension of the vanishing homology of local holomorphic functions. In the latter case, the total space of the Milnor fibration  is contractible, by the local conical structure of analytic sets . For global meromorphic functions, the total space one may take cannot be contractible anymore and the general fibre $`X_s`$ inherits part of its homology.

###### Definition 2.1.

The vanishing homology of $`F_{|X}`$ at $`a_i`$ is the relative homology
$`H_{}(X_{D_i},X_{s_i})`$.

In the case $`X=YA`$, this corresponds to the definition used by Siersma and the author in .

We identify $`X_s`$ to $`X_{s_i}`$, in the following explicit manner. For each $`i`$, take a path $`\gamma _iD`$ from $`s`$ to $`s_i`$, with the usual conditions: the path $`\gamma _i`$ has no self intersections and does not intersect any other path $`\gamma _j`$, except at the point $`s`$. Then Proposition 1.2 allows identifying $`X_s`$ to $`X_{s_i}`$, by parallel transport along $`\gamma _i`$.

A general result tells that vanishing homologies can be “patched” together. This type of result was observed before in different particular situations, see e.g. \[10, §5\], . More precisely, we have the following result, extending the context of \[56, Proposition 2.1\] to any $`X=YV`$:

###### Proposition 2.2.

1. $`H_{}(X_D,X_s)=_{a_i\mathrm{\Lambda }}H_{}(X_{D_i},X_{s_i}).`$
2. The long exact sequence of the triple $`(X_D,X_{D_i},X_s)`$ decomposes into short exact sequences which split:

$$0H_{}(X_{D_i},X_{s_i})H_{}(X_D,X_s)H_{}(X_D,X_{D_i})0.$$
(2)
3. There is a natural identification $`H_{}(X_D,X_{D_i})=_{a_j\mathrm{\Lambda },ji}H_{}(X_{D_j},X_s)`$.

Proof. By Proposition 1.2, the fibration $`F_|:𝕐((v\times ^1)\pi ^1(\mathrm{\Lambda })^1\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is locally trivial. Its fibre over some $`b`$ is, by definition, $`X_b`$. We then get a sequence of excisions:

$$_{a_i\mathrm{\Lambda }}H_{}(X_{D_i},X_{s_i})\stackrel{}{}H_{}(\pi ^1(_{a_i\mathrm{\Lambda }}D_i\gamma _i),X_s)\stackrel{}{}H_{}(X_D,X_s).$$

This also shows that each inclusion $`(X_{D_i},X_{s_i})(X_D,X_{s_i})`$ induces an injection in homology $`H_{}(X_{D_i},X_{s_i})H_{}(X_D,X_s)`$. The points (a), (b), (c) all follow from this.  $`\mathrm{}`$

Vanishing homology of $`F`$ has its local counterpart and is closely related to singularities of $`F`$. One would like to say that vanishing homology is supported at the singular points of $`F`$. The typical problem for a meromorphic function is that it has singularities also outside the ground space, $`Y`$ or $`X`$. Therefore we need a larger space, such as $`𝕐`$, to define singularities. Then the support of vanishing cycles is included into the singular locus of $`\pi `$ on $`𝕐`$. (In cohomology, the sheaf of vanishing cycles of a function $`h`$ on a nonsingular space is indeed supported by the singular locus of $`h`$, see .)

Let now give the precise definition of what we consider as singularities of $`F`$ (resp. of $`f`$). We relax the stratification conditions at $`A\times ^1𝕐`$ and use only the Thom condition. Let us first recall the latter, following .

Let $`𝒢=\{𝒢_\alpha \}_{\alpha S}`$ be a locally finite stratification such that $`𝕐X`$ is union of strata. Let $`\xi :=(y,a)`$ be a point on a stratum $`𝒢_\alpha `$. We assume, without loss of generality, that $`a[1:0]`$. Let $`f=p/q`$ be our meromorphic germ on $`(𝒴,y)`$ or a local representative of the germ of $`F`$ at $`(Y,y)`$. Then $`q=0`$ is a local equation for $`A\times ^1`$ at $`\xi `$. The Thom regularity condition (aq) at $`\xi 𝒢_\alpha `$ is satisfied (see e.g. \[25, ch. I\]) if for any stratum $`𝒢_\beta `$ such that $`𝒢_\alpha \overline{𝒢}_\beta `$, the relative conormal space (see ,  for a definition) of $`q`$ on $`\overline{𝒢}_\beta `$ is included into the conormal of $`𝒢_\alpha `$, locally at $`\xi `$, i.e., $`(T_{𝒢_\alpha }^{})_\xi (T_{q|\overline{𝒢_\beta }}^{})_\xi `$. This condition is known to be independent on $`q`$, up to multiplication by a unit \[63, Prop. 3.2\].

###### Definition 2.3.

Let $`𝒢`$ be a stratification on $`𝕐`$ as above such that it restricts to a Whitney stratification on $`YA`$, where $`VA`$ is union of strata. We say that $`𝒢`$ is a partial Thom stratification ($`\tau `$-stratification) if Thom’s condition (aq) is satisfied at any point $`\xi A\times ^1𝕐`$.

One may extend a Whitney stratification on $`YA`$ to a locally finite $`\tau `$-stratification of $`𝕐`$, by usual stratification theory arguments (see e.g. ). For instance, the Whitney stratification $`𝒲`$ of $`𝕏`$ that we have considered before is an example of $`\tau `$-stratification. This follows from \[7, Théorème 4.2.1\] or \[63, Theorem 3.9\]. One can also construct a canonical (minimal) $`\tau `$-stratification; we send to  for further details.

###### Definition 2.4.

Let $`𝒢`$ be a $`\tau `$-stratification on $`𝕐`$. We say that the following closed subset of $`𝕐`$:

$$\mathrm{Sing}_𝒢F:=_{𝒢_\alpha 𝒢}\mathrm{closure}(\mathrm{Sing}\pi _{|𝒢_\alpha })$$

is the singular locus of $`F`$ with respect to $`𝒢`$. We say that $`F`$ has isolated singularities with respect to $`𝒢`$ if $`dim\mathrm{Sing}_𝒢F0`$.

For the singular locus of a germ $`f`$, one modifies this definition accordingly. The singularities of the new type are those along the indeterminacy locus, namely on $`A\times ^1`$. We shall further investigate the relation between singularities and vanishing homology, in case of isolated singularities. Let us define the local fibration of a meromorphic germ, already used in particular cases in , , ), and which relates to the fibration of a holomorphic germ on a singular space defined by Lê D.T. .

###### Definition 2.5.

Let $`f:(𝒴,y)^1`$ be a germ of a meromorphic function. For every $`a^1`$, one associates the germ $`\pi _{(y,a)}:(𝕐,(y,a))^1`$. Abusing language, by restricting this map to $`X𝕐`$, we have a germ $`f:(X,(y,a))`$, where the point $`(y,a)`$ might be in the closure of the set $`X`$.

When the point $`y`$ does not belong to the axis $`𝒜`$, then we have the classical situation of a holomorphic germ; the point $`(y,a)`$ is uniquely determined by $`y`$. However, when $`x𝒜`$, then for each $`a^1`$ we get a different germ. Proposition 1.2 together with Thom’s Second Isotopy Lemma show that, in this family, all germs are isomorphic except of finitely many of them.

There is a well defined local fibration at $`(y,a)`$, as follows. Let $`𝒲`$ be a Whitney stratification of $`𝕐`$ such that $`𝕐X`$ is union of strata. For all small enough radii $`\epsilon `$, the sphere $`S_\epsilon =\overline{B}_\epsilon (y,a)`$ centered at $`(y,a)`$ intersects transversally all the (finitely many strata) in some neighbourhood of $`(y,a)`$. By , the projection $`\pi :𝕐_DB_\epsilon (y,a)D`$ is stratified locally trivial over $`D^{}`$, if the radius of $`D`$ is small enough. It follows that the restriction:

$$\pi :X_D^{}B_\epsilon (y,a)D^{}.$$
(3)
is also locally trivial. If $`y`$ is fixed, this fibration varies with the parametre $`a`$; the radius $`\epsilon `$ of the ball depends also on the point $`a`$. From Proposition 1.2 and Thom’s Isotopy Lemma it follows that, since $`\pi `$ is stratified-transversal to $`𝕐`$ over $`^1\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, the fibration $`\pi :X_DB_\epsilon (y,a)D`$ is trivial, for all but a finite number of values of $`a^1`$.

###### Definition 2.6.

We call the locally trivial fibration (3) the Milnor-Lê fibration of the meromorphic function germ $`f`$ at the point $`(y,a)𝕏`$.

## 3. Isolated singularities and their vanishing cycles

We show that, if the singularities along the indeterminacy locus are isolated, then one can localize the variation of topology of fibres. The same type of phenomenon exists in the previously known cases: holomorphic germs  and of polynomial functions (e.g. \[63, 4.3\]). This has consequences on the problem of detecting variation of topology, especially when the underlying space $`Y`$ has maximal rectified homotopical depth111This notion was introduced by Hamm and Lê  in order to realize Grothendieck’s predictions that homotopical depth was the cornerstone for the Lefschetz type theorems on singular spaces . We shall come back to Lefschetz theory in §6.. Before stating the localization result, let us give the definition here, for further use: Let $`Z`$ be a complex space endowed with some Whitney stratification $`𝒲`$; denote by $`𝒲_i`$ the union of strata of dimension $`i`$. After , one says that $`\mathrm{rhd}_𝒲Zm`$ if for any $`i`$ and any point $`x𝒲_i𝒲_{i1}`$, the homotopy groups of $`(U_\alpha ,U_\alpha 𝒲_i)`$ are trivial up to the order $`m1i`$, where $`\{U_\alpha \}`$ is some fundamental system of neighbourhoods of $`x`$. It is shown in loc.cit. that this doest not depend on the chosen Whitney stratification. A similar definition holds in homology instead of homotopy, giving rise to the rectified homological depth, denoted $`\mathrm{rHd}`$. Let us mention that $`\mathrm{rhd}Yn`$ when $`Y`$ is locally a complete intersection of dimension $`n`$ at all its points (see ).

###### Proposition 3.1.

Let $`F`$ have isolated singularities with respect to some $`\tau `$-stratifi-
cation $`𝒢`$ at $`a^1`$ (i.e. $`dim𝕐_a\mathrm{Sing}_𝒢F0`$). Then the variation of topology of the fibres of $`F`$ at $`X_a`$ is localizable at those points. $`\mathrm{}`$

What we mean by “localizable” is that there exist small enough balls in $`𝕐`$ centered at the isolated singularities such that, outside these balls, the projection $`\pi `$ is trivial over a small enough disc centered at $`a^1`$. The proof in the general case of meromorphic functions has the same structure as the proof presented in \[63, Theorem 4.3\], inspite the fact that in loc.cit. we consider a particular situation; we may safely skip it. The localization result implies, as in the particular cases , , that the vanishing cycles are concentrated at the isolated singularities.

###### Corollary 3.2.

Let $`F`$ have isolated singularities with respect to $`𝒢`$ at $`a^1`$ and let $`𝕐_a\mathrm{Sing}_𝒢F=\{p_1,\mathrm{},p_k\}`$. For any small enough balls $`B_i𝕐`$ centered at $`p_i`$, and for small enough closed disc centered at $`a`$, $`sD`$, we have:

$$H_{}(X_D,X_s)_{i=1}^kH_{}(X_DB_i,X_sB_i).$$
(4)
$`\mathrm{}`$

One show, following , that an isolated $`𝒢`$-singularity at a point of $`A\times ^1𝕐`$ is detectable by the presence of a certain local polar locus. If the space $`Y`$ is “nice enough”, then the local vanishing homology (second term of the isomorphism (4)) is concentrated in one dimension only. Then the polar locus defines a numerical invariant which measures the number of “vanishing cycles at this point”.

###### Definition 3.3.

Let $`\xi =(y,a)A\times ^1`$ and let $`f=p/q`$ a local representation of $`F`$ at $`y`$. Then the polar locus $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\xi (\pi ,q)`$ is the germ at $`\xi `$ of the space:

$$\mathrm{closure}\{\mathrm{Sing}_𝒢(\pi ,q)(\mathrm{Sing}_𝒢\pi A\times ^1)\}𝕐.$$

As in \[56, §4\], we have the isomorphisms:

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_\xi (\pi ,q)\mathrm{\Gamma }_\xi (f,q)\mathrm{\Gamma }_\xi (p,q).$$

The multiplication by a unit $`u`$ may change the polar locus: $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\xi (\pi ,qu)`$ is in general different from $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\xi (\pi ,q)`$. Nevertheless, we have the following.

###### Proposition 3.4.

Let $`\xi =(y,a)A\times ^1`$ be an isolated $`𝒢`$-singularity of $`F`$ and let $`f_y=p/q`$ a local representation of $`F`$. Then, for any multiplicative unit $`u`$, the polar locus $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\xi (\pi ,qu)`$ is either void or $`dim\mathrm{\Gamma }_\xi (\pi ,qu)=1`$. If moreover $`Y`$ is of pure dimension $`m`$ and $`\mathrm{rhd}(Y\{q=0\})m`$ in the neighbourhood of $`\xi `$, then the intersection multiplicity $`\mathrm{int}_\xi (\mathrm{\Gamma }_\xi (\pi ,qu),𝕐_a)`$ is independent on the unit $`u`$. We call this multiplicity the polar number at $`\xi `$.

Proof. We follow essentially the proof of \[56, 4.2\]. The key argument to use is the independence of $`T_{qu}^{}`$ from the multiplicative unit $`u`$, proven in \[63, Prop. 3.2\], where $`T_q^{}`$ denotes the projectivized relative conormal of $`q`$.

Since $`dimT_q^{}=m+1`$, it follows that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\xi (\pi ,q)`$ is either void or of dimension at least $`1`$. On the other hand, since $`\xi `$ is a point belonging to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\xi (\pi ,q)`$, it follows that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\xi (\pi ,q)`$ has dimension at most $`1`$. The same argumentation holds for $`qu`$ instead of $`q`$. This proves the first claim.

To prove the second statement, let’s suppose that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\xi (\pi ,q)`$ has dimension $`1`$. Consider the Milnor-Lê fibration of the function $`\pi `$ at $`\xi `$:

$$\pi _|:𝕐_D^{}B_\epsilon (\xi )D^{},$$
(5)
as explained at the end of §2. We compute the homology $`H_{}(𝕐_sB)`$ of the Milnor fibre of this fibration. Inside $`B`$, the restriction of the function $`q`$ to $`𝕐_sB`$ has a finite number of stratified isolated singularities, which are precisely the points of intersection $`𝕐_sB\mathrm{\Gamma }(\pi ,q)`$. By the result due to Goresky-MacPherson that cylindrical neighbourhoods are conical \[24, pag. 165\], it follows that $`𝕐_sB`$ is homotopy equivalent to $`𝕐_sBq^1(\delta )`$, where $`\delta `$ is a small disc at $`0`$ such that $`𝕐_sB\mathrm{\Gamma }(\pi ,q)=q^1(\delta )𝕐_sB\mathrm{\Gamma }(\pi ,q)`$.

Let now take a small enough disc $`\widehat{\delta }`$ centered at $`0`$ such that $`q^1(\widehat{\delta })𝕐_sB\mathrm{\Gamma }(\pi ,q)=\mathrm{}`$. By using the properties of the partial Thom stratification $`𝒢`$ and by retraction, it follows that $`q^1(\widehat{\delta })𝕐_sB`$ is homotopy equivalent to the central fibre $`q^1(0)𝕐_sB`$.

Since the subspace $`q^1(0)`$ at $`\xi `$ is the product $`A\times ^1`$, the central fibre $`q^1(0)𝕐_sB`$ is contractible; hence $`q^1(\widehat{\delta })𝕐_sB`$ is contractible too.

The total space $`𝕐_sB\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}q^1(\delta )𝕐_sB`$ is built by attaching to the space $`q^1(\widehat{\delta })𝕐_sB`$ finitely many cells, which come from the isolated singularities of the function $`q`$ on $`q^1(\delta \widehat{\delta })𝕐_sB`$. Since $`\mathrm{rhd}(Y_s\{q=0\})m1`$ in some neighbourhood of $`\xi `$ (by our assumption and Hamm-Lê’s \[33, Theorem 3.2.1\]), it follows that each singularity contributes with cells of dimension exactly $`m1`$ and the number of cells is equal to the corresponding local Milnor number of the function $`q`$ (see  and  for more details). The sum of these numbers is, by definition, the intersection multiplicity $`\mathrm{int}_\xi (\mathrm{\Gamma }(\pi ,q),𝕐_a)`$.

By this we have proven that $`dimH_{m1}(𝕐_sB)=\mathrm{int}(\mathrm{\Gamma }_\xi (\pi ,q),𝕐_a)`$ and that $`\stackrel{~}{H}_i(𝕐_sB)=0`$ for $`in1`$. Replacing $`q`$ by $`qu`$ in our proof yields the same equalities; this proves our statement.  $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 3.5.

The last part of the above proof shows in fact more, that the fibre $`𝕐_sB`$ of the local fibration (5) is homotopy equivalent to a ball to which one attaches a certain number of $`(m1)`$-cells. Therefore $`𝕐_sB`$ is homotopy equivalent to a bouquet of spheres $`S^{m1}`$ of dimension $`m1`$.

One can get more precise results when lowering the generality. The situations we consider in the following are more general that “polynomial functions”, which we consider in §8. Let then assume:

$`()`$ $`X:=YA`$ has at most isolated singularities.

In this case we have $`\mathrm{Sing}_𝒢FA\times ^1\mathrm{Sing}𝕐A\times ^1`$. In the notations of Cor. 3.2, the following duality result holds (integral coefficients):

$$H_{}(X_DB_i,X_sB_i)H^{2m}(𝕐_DB_i,𝕐_sB_i),$$

where $`m=dim_{p_i}𝕐`$. This follows from Lefschetz duality for polyhedra, see Dold \[17, p. 296\].

Since $`𝕐_DB_i`$ is contractible, we get:

$$H_{}(X_DB_i,X_sB_i)\stackrel{~}{H}^{2m1}(𝕐_sB_i).$$
(6)
When comparing this to Remark 3.5 and to Definition 2.1, Corollary 3.2 and Proposition 3.4, the following statement comes out:

###### Theorem 3.6.

 Let $`F`$ have isolated singularities with respect to $`𝒢`$ at $`a^1`$ and let $`\xi A\times \{a\}\mathrm{Sing}_𝒢F`$. Then $`F_{|YA}`$ has vanishing cycles at $`\xi `$ if and only if $`\mathrm{int}(\mathrm{\Gamma }_\xi (\pi ,q),𝕐_a)0`$. The number of vanishing cycles at $`\xi `$ is $`\lambda _\xi :=dimH_{m1}(𝕐_sB)=\mathrm{int}(\mathrm{\Gamma }_\xi (\pi ,q),𝕐_a)`$, where $`m=dim_\xi 𝕐_a`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Let us assume now that $`𝕐_a`$ has an isolated singularity at $`\xi A\times \{a\}`$. This happens for instance when $`Y`$ has at most isolated singularities on $`A`$. Since $`(𝕐_a,\xi )`$ is a hypersurface germ in $`Y`$, it has a well defined Milnor fibration, and in particular a Milnor number, which we denote by $`\mu (a)`$.

It also follows that $`dim_\xi \mathrm{Sing}_𝒢F0`$ and that $`𝕐`$ has singularities of dimension at most 1 at $`\xi `$. If $`\mathrm{Sing}𝕐`$ is a curve at $`\xi `$, this curve intersects $`𝕐_s`$, for $`s`$ close enough to $`a`$, at some points $`\xi _i(s)`$, $`1ik`$. There is a well defined Milnor $`\mu _i(s)`$ at each hypersurface germ $`(𝕐_s,\xi _i(s))`$. (In case $`\mathrm{Sing}𝕐`$ is just the point $`\xi `$, we consider that $`\mu _i(s)=0`$, $`i`$.) We have the following computation of the number of vanishing cycles at $`\xi `$:

###### Theorem 3.7.

 Let $`dim_\xi \mathrm{Sing}𝕐_a=0`$. Then:

$$\lambda _\xi =\mu (a)\underset{i=1}{\overset{k}{}}\mu _i(s).$$

Proof. We only sketch the proof and send to  for details. Consider the function:

$$G=psq:(Y\times ,\xi _i(s))(,0).$$

For fixed $`s`$, this function is a smoothing of the germ $`(𝕐_s,\xi _i(s))`$. Since $`\xi `$ is an isolated singularity, the polar locus at $`\xi `$ of the map $`(G,\pi ):Y\times ^2`$, defined as $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\xi (G,\pi )=\mathrm{closure}\{\mathrm{Sing}(G,\pi )\mathrm{Sing}G\}`$, is a curve. By using polydisc neighbourhoods222 polydisc neighbourhoods were first used by Lê D.T.. $`(P_\alpha \times D_\alpha )`$ at $`\xi `$ in $`Y\times `$, one may show that $`(G,\pi )^1(\eta ,s)(P_\alpha \times D_\alpha )`$ is homotopy equivalent to the Milnor fibre of the germ $`(𝕐_a,\xi )`$. To obtain from this the space $`\pi ^1(s)(P_\alpha \times D_\alpha )`$, one has to attach a number of $`m`$ cells, where $`m`$ denotes $`dim_\xi Y`$. Part of these cells come from the singular points $`\xi _i(s)\mathrm{Sing}G\pi ^1(s)`$: by definition, their total number is $`_{i=1}^k\mu _i(s)`$. The other part of the cells come from the intersection with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\xi (G,\pi )`$ and their number is $`r=\mathrm{int}(\mathrm{\Gamma }_\xi (G,\pi ),\pi 1(0))`$. The key observation is that $`r`$ turns out to be equal to $`dimH_{m1}(𝕐_sB)`$, which is the number of vanishing cycles at $`\xi `$. Finally, since $`\pi ^1(s)(P_\alpha \times D_\alpha )`$ is contractible (since being the Milnor fibre of a linear function $`t`$ on a smooth space), we have the following equality:

$$\mu (a)=r+\underset{i=1}{\overset{k}{}}\mu _i(s).$$

Notice that, in case $`dim_\xi \mathrm{Sing}𝕐=0`$, we get just $`\lambda _\xi =\mu (a)`$.  $`\mathrm{}`$

We send to Corollary 4.3 for the counting of the total number of vanishing cycles. Let us give two examples of meromorphic functions, one on $`^2()`$ and another on a nonsingular quadratic surface in $`^3()`$.

###### Example 3.8.

() Let $`F:Y=^2^1`$, $`F={\displaystyle \frac{x(z^{a+b}+x^ay^b)}{y^pz^q}}`$, where $`a+b+1=p+q`$ and $`a,b,p,q1`$. For some $`s=^1[1:0]`$, the space $`𝕐_s`$ is given by:

$$x(z^{a+b}+x^ay^b)=sy^pz^q$$
(7)
$`\mathrm{Sing}𝕐(Y\times )`$ consists of three lines: $`\{[1:0:0],[0:1:0],[0:0:1]\}\times `$. We are under the assumptions of Theorem 3.7 and we inspect each of these 3 families of germs with isolated singularity to see where the Milnor number jumps.

Along $`[1:0:0]\times `$, in chart $`x=1`$, there are no jumps, since the germs have uniform Brieskorn type $`(b,a+b)`$. Along $`[0:0:1]`$, in chart $`z=1`$, there are no jumps, since the type is constant $`A_0`$, for all $`s`$. Along $`[0:1:0]`$, in chart $`y=1`$: For $`s0`$, the Brieskorn type is $`(a+1,q)`$, with $`\mu (s)=a(q1)`$. If $`s=0`$, then we have $`x^{a+1}+xz^{a+b}=0`$ with $`\mu (0)=a^2+ab+b`$.

There is only one jump, at $`\xi =([0:1:0],0)`$; according to the preceding theorem, $`\lambda _\xi =a^2+ab+ba(q1)=b+ap`$.

## 4. Homotopy type of fibres

In case of isolated singularities, we have the following result on the relative homotopy type.

###### Theorem 4.1.

Let $`\{a_i\}_{i=1}^p`$ be the set of atypical values of $`F`$ within some open disc $`D^1`$. Let $`sD`$ be some typical value of $`F`$. For all $`1ip`$, let $`F`$ have an isolated $`𝒢`$-singularity at $`a_i`$, $`Y`$ be of pure dimension $`m`$ at $`a_i`$ and $`\mathrm{rHd}(Y(VA))m`$ in some neighbourhood of $`a_i`$. If either of the two following conditons is fulfilled:

1. $`X`$ is a Stein space,
2. $`X=YA`$ and $`X`$ has at most isolated singularities,

then $`X_D`$ is obtained from $`X_s`$ by attaching cells of real dimension $`m`$. In particular, the topological space $`X_D/X_s`$ is homotopy equivalent to a bouquet of speres $`S^m`$.

Proof. We prove that the reduced integral homology of $`X_D/X_s`$ is concentrated in dimension $`m`$. By Proposition 3.1, the variation of topology of the fibres of $`F_{|X_D}`$ is localizable at the points $`\mathrm{Sing}_𝒢F𝕐_D`$. We have to take into account all the possible positions of such a singular point $`\xi =(y,a)`$, namely: on $`X`$, on $`VA`$ or on $`A\times ^1𝕐`$.

In all the cases, it turns out that the pair $`(X_{D_a}B_\xi ,X_sB_\xi )`$ is ($`m1`$)-connected, where $`B_\xi 𝕐`$ is a small enough ball at $`\xi `$, $`D_a`$ is a small enough closed disc at $`a`$ and $`sD_a`$.

For a point $`\xi `$ in the first case, this is just Milnor’s classical result for holomorphic functions with isolated singularity . In the two remaining cases, this follows by a result due to Hamm and Lê \[33, Corollary 4.2.2\], in a slightly improved version for partial Thom stratifications (see \[63, 2.7\]). This result needs the condition on the rectified homological depth.

By the above proven connectivity of the pair $`(X_{D_a}B_\xi ,X_sB_\xi )`$ and the splitting of vanishing homology into local contributions Corollary 3.2, we get that the homology of $`(X_D,X_s)`$ is zero below dimension $`m`$. Above dimension $`m`$, we also have the annulation, due to the following reasons. In case (a) the space $`X_D`$, respectively $`X_s`$, is Stein of dimension $`m`$, resp. $`m1`$. In case (b), we may apply the duality (6) and we have that the cohomology $`\stackrel{~}{H}^{}(𝕐_sB_\xi )`$ is concentrated in dimension $`m1`$, by Remark 3.5.

Then one can map a bouquet of $`m`$ spheres into $`X_D/X_s`$ such that this map is an isomorphism in homology. This implies, by Whitehead’s theorem (see \[57, 7.5.9\]), that the map induces an isomorphism of homotopy groups. (Remark that $`X_D/X_s`$ is simply connected whenever $`m2`$). Since we work with analytic objects, therefore triangulable, the space $`X_D/X_s`$ is a CW-complex. We may now conclude our proof, since for CW-complexes, weak homotopy equivalence coincides with homotopy equivalence.  $`\mathrm{}`$

In case (b), this result has been proved by Siersma and the author . Let us point out that, in this case (b), we also have the local bouquet result: $`(X_{D_a}B_\xi )/(X_sB_\xi )\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}S^m`$.

When assuming high connectivity of the space $`X`$, we get the following immediate consequence (proved in lower generality in ).

###### Corollary 4.2.

Under the hypotheses of Theorem 4.1, if in addition the space $`X`$ is Stein and $`(m1)`$-connected, then $`X_s\stackrel{\mathrm{ht}}{}S^{m1}`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Particular cases of this corollary appeared previously in several circumstances: Milnor’s bouquet result  on holomorphic germs with isolated singularity; bouquet results for generic fibres of polynomial maps with isolated singularities in the affine  and with isolated singularities at infinity , .

As another consequence, we shall draw a formula for the total number of vanishing cycles in case of isolated $`𝒢`$-singularities. Let us denote by $`\lambda _a`$ the sum of the polar numbers at the singularities on $`(A\times )𝕐_a`$ and by $`\mu _a`$ the sum of the Milnor numbers of the singularities on $`𝕐_a(A\times \{a\})`$. One needs to note that the Milnor fiber (in our case $`𝕐_sB`$) of a holomorphic function with isolated singularity on a Whitney stratified space is homotopically a bouquet of spheres of dimension $`=dim𝕐_sB`$, see .

###### Corollary 4.3.

Under the hypotheses of Theorem 4.1, we have:

$$dimH_{m1}(X_{D_a},X_s)=\mu _a+\lambda _a,$$

$$dimH_{m1}(X_D,X_s)=\underset{aD}{}\mu _a+\underset{aD}{}\lambda _a.$$

$`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 4.4.

In Example 3.8, let us consider $`X=^2\{yz=0\}`$. Let $`s`$. It is easy to see that the fiber $`X_0`$ is a disjoint union of $`c+1`$ disjoint copies of $`^{}`$, where $`c=\mathrm{gcd}(a,b)`$, therefore $`\chi (X_0)=0`$. For $`s0`$, by a branched covering argument, one shows $`\chi (X_s)=(b+ap)`$. The vanishing homology is concentrated in dimension 2, by Theorem 4.1. When taking $`D=`$, we get the Betti number $`b_2(X,X_s)=\chi (X,X_s)=\chi (X)\chi (X_s)=(b+ap)`$. We have seen at 3.8 that the sum $`_a\lambda _a`$ consists of a single term $`\lambda _\xi =b+ap`$. One can also see easily that there is no other singularity, in particular that $`_a\mu _a=0`$. Hence the second equality in Corollary 4.3 is verified.

## 5. Monodromy

Let $`F:Y^1`$ be a meromorphic function and let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^1`$ denote the set of atypical values of the associated map $`\pi :𝕐^1`$. There is a well defined monodromy $`h_i`$ around an atypical value $`a_i\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. This is induced by a counterclockwise loop around the small circle $`D_i`$. Let $`D`$ denote some large disc, like in §2, such that $`D\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{}`$. We have a geometric monodromy representation:

$$\rho _i:\pi _1(\overline{D}_i,s_i)\mathrm{Iso}(X_D,X_{\overline{D}_i},X_{s_i}),$$

where $`\mathrm{Iso}(.,.,.)`$ denotes the group of relative isotopy classes of stratified homeomorphisms (which are C along each stratum). Note that the retriction of this action to $`X_D`$, $`X_{D_i}`$ or to $`X_{D_i}`$, is trivial. Let $`T_i`$ denote the action induced by $`\rho _i`$ in homology (with integral coefficients).

Let us identify $`H_{}(X_D,X_s)`$ to $`_{a_iD\mathrm{\Lambda }}H_{}(X_{D_i},X_{s_i})`$ as in Proposition 2.2. This identification depends on the chosen system of paths $`\gamma _iD`$ from $`sD`$ to $`s_iD_i`$, as explained in §2. There is the following general result, showing that the action of the monodromy $`T_i`$ on a vanishing cycle $`\omega H_{}(X_D,X_s)`$ changes $`\omega `$ by adding to it only contributions from the homology vanishing at $`a_i`$.

###### Proposition 5.1.

For every $`\omega H_{}(X_D,X_s)`$, there is $`\psi _i(\omega )H_{}(X_{D_i},X_{s_i})`$ such that $`T_i(\omega )=\omega +\psi _i(\omega )`$.

Proof. The proof goes exactly as in the more particular that we consider in \[56, Prop. 6.1\]. One may identify the map: $`T_i\mathrm{id}:H_{q+1}(X_D,X_s)H_{q+1}(X_D,X_s)`$ to the composed map:

$$H_{q+1}(X_D,X_s)\stackrel{}{}H_q(X_s)\stackrel{w}{}H_{q+1}(X_{D_i},X_s)\stackrel{i_{}}{}H_{q+1}(X_D,X_s),$$
(8)
where $`w`$ denotes the Wang map, which $`w`$ is an isomorphism, by Künneth formula. The last morphism in (8) factors as follows:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill H_{q+1}(X_{D_i},X_{s_i})& \stackrel{i_{}}{}& H_{q+1}(X_D,X_s)\hfill \\ \hfill & & \hfill \\ & H_{q+1}(X_{D_i},X_s)& \end{array}$$

where all three arrows are induced by inclusion. It follows that the submodule of “anti-invariant cycles” $`\mathrm{Im}(T_i\mathrm{id}:H_{}(X_D,X_s)H_{}(X_D,X_s))`$ is contained in the direct summand $`H_{}(X_{D_i},X_{s_i})`$ of $`H_{}(X_D,X_s))`$.  $`\mathrm{}`$

One has the following easy consequence, in full generality. Assume that the paths in $`D`$, say $`\gamma _1,\mathrm{}\gamma _l`$ are counterclockwise ordered. The chosen paths define a decomposition of $`H_{}(X_D,X_s)`$ into the direct sum $`_{a_iD\mathrm{\Lambda }}H_{}(X_{D_i},X_{s_i})`$. Denote by $`T_D`$ the monodromy around the circle $`D`$. One has the following imediate consequence, remarked in  for polynomial functions and in  for the particular case $`Y`$ nonsingular and $`X=YA`$.

###### Corollary 5.2.

Assume that the direct sum decomposition of $`H_{}(X_D,X_s)`$ is fixed. Then $`T_D`$ determines $`T_i`$, $`i\{1,\mathrm{},l\}`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Note 5.3.

One may say that Proposition 5.1 is a Picard type formula, since Picard showed it at the end of the XIX-th century, for algebraic functions of two variables with simple singularities. Lefschetz proved later the well known formula for a loop around a quadratic singularity, in which case $`\psi _i(\omega )`$ is, up to sign, equal to $`c\mathrm{\Delta }`$, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the quadratic vanishing cycle and $`c`$ is the intersection number $`(\omega ,\mathrm{\Delta })`$. This became the basis of what one calls now Picard-Lefschetz theory (which is the conterpart of the Morse theory, in case of complex spaces), see e.g. , , . In case of polynomial functions, the Picard formula was singled out in , .

###### Remarks 5.4.

The statement and proof of Proposition 5.1 dualize easily from homology to cohomology. One obtains in this way statements about invariant cocycles $`\mathrm{ker}(T^i\mathrm{id}:H^{}(X,F)H^{}(X,F))`$ instead of anti-invariant cycles.

A special case is that of a polynomial function $`F:^n`$, for which $`X=^n`$. Results on invariant cocycles were obtained in ; they can be proved also in our more general setting.

In the rest of this section we review some results on the zeta function of the monodromy. We shall only discuss global meromorphic functions $`F`$; following the general remark in the Introduction, all results translate easily in case of meromorphic germs. For the particular case of polynomial functions, we send the reader to §8, where we present more specific results.

###### Definition 5.5.

Let $`T_D`$ be the monodromy around some disk $`D`$ as above. One calls zeta function of $`T_D`$ the following rational function in variable $`t`$:

$$\zeta _{(X_D,X_s)}(t)=\underset{i0}{}det[\mathrm{id}tT_D:H_i(X_D,X_s)H_i(X_D,X_s)]^{(1)^{i+1}}.$$

We are interested here in the zeta function of the monodromy around a value $`a\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Let us first assume that $`F`$ has isolated $`𝒢`$-singularities. By the direct sum splitting (Corollary 3.2) and since the monodromy acts on each local Milnor fibration, we get:

$$\zeta _{(X_{D_a},X_s)}(t)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{k}{}}\zeta _{(X_{D_a}B_i,X_sB_i)}(t),$$

where $`\{p_1,\mathrm{},p_k\}=𝕐_a\mathrm{Sing}_𝒢F`$ and $`B_i`$ is a small Milnor ball centered at $`p_i`$.

For the zeta function of the monodromy $`T_{D_a}`$ acting on the homology of the general fibre $`X_s`$ we also get:

$$\zeta _{X_s}(t)=(1t)^{\chi (X_a)}\underset{i=1}{\overset{k}{}}\zeta _{(X_{D_a}B_i,X_sB_i)}^1(t),$$

since the monodromy acts on $`X_{D_a}`$ as the identity and since $`\chi (X_{D_a})=\chi (X_a)`$.

Let us now suppose that $`Y`$ is nonsingular and consider $`X=YA`$, but not assume anything about the singularities of the meromorphic function $`F`$. One may follow the method of A’Campo  to produce a formula for the zeta function, as follows. There exists a proper holomorphic modification $`\varphi :\stackrel{~}{Y}Y`$, which is bi-holomorphic over $`X_{a\lambda }X_a`$. The pull-back $`\stackrel{~}{F}=F\varphi `$ has a general fibre $`\stackrel{~}{X}_s`$ which is isomorphic to $`F`$. The action of the monodromy is also the same, therefore $`\zeta _{\stackrel{~}{X}_s}(t)=\zeta _{X_s}(t)`$. Then one can write down a formula for the zeta function around the value $`a^1`$ in terms of the exceptional divisor and the axis $`A`$. By expressing the result as an integral with respect to the Euler characteristic (see e.g. Viro’s paper  for this technique), one can get rid of the resolution.

###### Proposition 5.6.

 Let $`X=YA`$ and let $`Y`$ be nonsingular. Then:

$$\zeta _{X_s}(t)=_{A\times \{a\}X_a}\zeta _p(t)𝑑\chi ,$$

where $`\zeta _p`$ denotes the local zeta function at the point $`p𝕐`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Further formulae for the zeta function and some consequences can be found in the papers by Gusein-Zade, Luengo and Melle .

From $`\zeta _{X_s}`$ one easily gets $`\zeta _{(X_D,X_s)}`$, since $`\zeta _{X_s}=\zeta _{X_D}\zeta _{(X_D,X_s)}^1`$ and $`\zeta _{X_D}=(1t)^{\chi (X_a)}`$.

## 6. Nongeneric pencils and Zariski-Lefschetz type results

Exploring a space $`Y`$ by pencils of complex hyperplanes is an old idea in mathematics. It appeared in Lefschetz’s work , which became the fundation of the so-called Lefschetz Theory. Almost in the same time the Morse Theory was born . Each of the two theories provide a method for studying the topology of the space; both use scanning with levels of a function.333for hystorical notes and new developments until about 1987, see Goresky and MacPherson’s book  The analogous of Morse function for the Lefschetz Theory is “Lefschetz pencil”.

One usually means by Lefschetz pencil a pencil having singularities of simplest type (i.e. A1) and transversal axis. In the usual projective space, such pencils are generic, but on certain spaces they might not even exist. A more general point of view is to allow pencils with isolated singularities, alias meromorphic functions $`F:Y^1`$ with isolated singularities in the sense of this paper. We call them “nongeneric pencils” and point out that they can have singularities also within the axis $`A`$ of the pencil. The case of isolated singularities outside the axis has been considered before by Hamm and Lê (e.g. ) and by Goresky and MacPherson (see ).

The following connectivity result of Zariski-Lefschetz type holds.

###### Theorem 6.1.

 Let the pencil $`F=P/Q:Y^1`$ have isolated $`𝒢`$-singularities (Definition 2.4). Assume that $`AV`$ and let $`X_s`$ denote a generic member of the pencil.

If $`\mathrm{rhd}Xm`$, $`m2`$, and if the pair $`(X_s,AX_s)`$ is $`(m2)`$-connected then the morphism induced by inclusion:

$$\pi _i(X_s)\pi _i(X)$$

is an isomorphism for $`im2`$ and an epimorphism for $`i=m1`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

This represents a far-reaching extension of the classical Lefschetz theorem on hyperplane sections. The latter says that, if $`X`$ is a projective variety and $`H`$ is a hyperplane such that $`XH`$ is nonsingular of dimension $`m`$, then $`\pi _i(X,XH)=0`$, for all $`im1`$. This can be viewed as a statement about pencils with transversal axis (i.e. there are no singularities on $`A`$), since, even if $`H`$ is not a generic hyperplane, it is a member of some generic pencil in the projective space. Indeed, one may define such a pencil by choosing a generic axis inside the hyperplane $`H`$. Then our claim follows by the conjunction of the following 2 observations: 1). Theorem 6.1 is true when replacing $`X_s`$ by the tube $`X_{D_a}`$, where one allows singularities of any type on $`Y_a`$; 2). $`X_{D_a}`$ is contractible to $`X_a`$ when $`X`$ is compact (i.e. $`V=\mathrm{}`$).

One may draw the following consequence on the homotopy type of the pair space-section, which actually represents an extension of Theorem 4.1:

###### Corollary 6.2.

 Under the hypotheses of Theorem 6.1, up to homotopy type, the space $`X`$ is built from $`X_s`$ by attaching cells of dimension $`m`$. If $`X`$ is in addition a Stein space of dimension $`m`$, then the attaching cells are of dimension precisely $`m`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 6.3.

What happens when $`AV`$? We prove in  that if $`\{Q=0\}V`$ (which is a special case of $`AV`$, since $`A\{Q=0\}`$), then the conclusion of Theorem 6.1 holds, with the single assumption $`\mathrm{rhd}Xm`$.

This result concerns in particular the polynomial functions $`P:^n`$. Such a function defines a nongeneric pencil on $`X=^n`$, since it can be regarded as a meromorphic function $`\stackrel{~}{P}/Q`$ on the (weighted) projective space $`Y=_w^n`$, where $`\{Q=0\}`$ is the hyperplane at infinity. Notice that in this case the condition $`\mathrm{rhd}Xn`$ holds since $`X`$ is nonsingular. We refer to §8 for some consequences.

## 7. Equisingularity at the indeterminacy locus

Equisingularity conditions are considered beginning with Zariski’s work on families of algebraic (hyper)surfaces, see . There are more recent contributions to local equisingularity theory, especially by Teissier  and Gaffney ( and several other papers of the same author).

The case of families on non-compact spaces, like our family $`\{X_a\}_{a^1}`$, where $`X=YV`$ and $`AV\mathrm{}`$, is special. We have seen that the singularities at the indeterminacy locus play an important role. The problem would be to find the weakest equisingularity condition at $`A`$ such that to imply topological triviality in the neighbourhood of $`A`$. If we stratify everything by Whitney conditions, then we may invoke Whitney equisingularity, which implies topological triviality; but Whitney equisingularity is too strong. The search for a weaker alternative has itself some history behind; maybe the first result in this sense is Lê-Ramanujam’s theorem for families of holomorphic germs with isolated singularity: “$`\mu `$ constancy implies topological triviality”, see . It had been found that $`\mu `$ constancy is really weaker than Whitney equisingularity  (i.e. that $`\mu `$ constancy is weaker than $`\mu ^{}`$ constancy444see Teissier’s paper  for $`\mu ^{}`$ constancy).

In the same spirit, the problem was formulated (and solved) in case of a family of affine hypersurfaces in , where the equisingularity at infinity, respectively C-triviality at infinity, comes into the picture (see next section for details). In loc.cit., these two notions are related to the partial Thom stratification $`𝒢`$. For a family defined by a meromorphic function $`F:Y^1`$, one may follow the ideas of  up to some extent, as we pointed out in . Let us give the main lines.

###### Definition 7.1.

We say that $`F_{|X}`$ is topologically trivial at $`\xi A\times ^1𝕐`$, resp. at $`a^1`$, if there is a neighbourhood $`𝒩`$ of $`\xi `$, resp. of $`𝕐_a(A\times ^1)`$, and a small enough disc $`D`$ at $`a`$ such that the map $`\pi _|:𝒩X_DD`$ is a trivial fibration.

The points $`\xi A\times ^1`$ which pose problems are those in $`\mathrm{Sing}_𝒢F`$, since for the others we have the topological triviality. This claim follows by attentive re-reading of \[65, Theorems 2.7, 4.6, 1.2\], \[56, Theorem 7.2\]; we actually get the following:

###### Theorem 7.2.

Let $`F=P/Q`$ have isolated $`𝒢`$-singularities at $`\xi `$, resp. at $`a^1`$. Assume that $`Y`$ is of pure dimension $`m`$, that $`X=Y\{Q=0\}`$ and that $`\mathrm{rhd}Xm`$.

Then $`F_{|X}`$ is topologically trivial at $`\xi `$, resp. at $`a^1`$ if and only if $`\lambda _\xi =0`$, resp. $`\lambda _a=0`$.

In particular, if $`X`$ has isolated singularities and $`F`$ has isolated $`𝒢`$-singularities at $`a^1`$, then $`X_a`$ is a general fibre of $`F_{|X}`$ if and only if $`X_a`$ is nonsingular and $`\lambda _a=0`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Combining Theorem 7.2 with Corollary 4.3, we get the following consequence:

###### Corollary 7.3.

Under the hypotheses of Theorem 4.1, a fibre $`X_a`$ of $`F_{|X}`$ is general if and only if it has the same Euler characteristic of a general fibre. $`\mathrm{}`$

Both results above have been stated, in slightly lower generality, in . Corollary 7.3 extends the criteria for atypical fibres in case of polynomial functions in 2 variables , and in $`n`$ variables , . See also Proposition 8.1.

## 8. More on polynomial functions

In the last years there has been developed a flourishing activity in the topology of polynomial maps, partly due to the links with affine geometry (see e.g. Kraft’s Bourbaki talk ). We give here a brief overview, throughout some of the multitude of the contributions.

We have explained in the Introduction that a complex polynomial function $`P:^n`$, $`\mathrm{deg}P=d`$, can be extended to a meromorphic function $`\frac{\stackrel{~}{P}}{x_0^d}:^n`$. Here $`X=^n`$ and $`Y=^n`$, are nonsingular spaces. This is not the only way of extending $`P`$ and the space $`^n`$; one may consider555see  for a general treatment for instance an embedding of $`^n`$ into some toric variety, such as a weighted projective space $`_w^n`$.

Maybe the first author who studied the topology of polynomial functions was Broughton . In the same time Pham  was interested in regularity conditions under which a polynomial has good behaviour at infinity. Some of the challenging problems that have been under research ever since are:

1. Determine the smallest set $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ of atypical values of $`P`$.
2. Describe the topology of the general fibre and of the atypical fibres.
3. Describe the variation of topology in the family of fibres; monodromy.

In problem 1., there are only partial answers. One has to decide which are the atypical values among a finite set of values singled out by Proposition 1.2. For instance, our general result Corollary 7.3 applies here (see also the comment following it). It is easy to show that singular values of $`P`$ are atypical. Then, fixing a nonsingular fibre $`X_a`$ of $`P`$, one may try to prove topological triviality at infinity by constructing a controlled vector field and “pushing” $`X_a`$ along it. This is an idea due to Thom . There are mainly two strategies: to work in the Euclidean space or to compactify $`^n`$ into some $`Y`$ and use the stratification $`𝒢`$.

The first one leads to regularity conditions, in more and more generality: tameness , quasi-tameness , M-tameness , $`\rho `$-regularity . There are also the Malgrange condition (see \[50, 2.1\])—which is a condition on the Łojasiewicz number at infinity—and its generalization by Parusiński .

The second strategy leads to the t-regularity , or more generally, equisingularity at infinity (which has been discussed for meromorphic functions in §7).

There are of course relations between all these conditions; one may consult  and its references. Under certain circumstances, several of these conditions are equivalent. We may quote the following result:

###### Proposition 8.1.

(after \[54, 5.8\] and \[64, 2.15\])
Let $`P:^n`$ have isolated $`𝒢`$-singularities at infinity, at $`a`$. Then the following are equivalent:

1. $`P`$ is M-tame at $`X_a`$.
2. $`P`$ satisfies Malgrange condition at infinity at $`X_a`$.
3. $`P`$ is t-regular at infinity at $`X_a`$.
4. $`\lambda _a=0`$.

It follows that, for a polynomial with isolated $`𝒢`$-singularities at infinity, a fibre $`X_a`$ is general if and only if $`\mu _a=0`$ and one of the above conditions are satisfied.

In case of 2 variables, the hypothesis of the above statement 8.1 is fulfilled and therefore the conclusions are valid. Indeed, in 2 variables, any reduced fibre $`X_a`$ has at most isolated $`𝒢`$-singularities at infinity. Moreover, there are several other criteria expressing non singularity at infinity, equivalent to the ones above; we send the reader to , .

Still in 2 variables, one may derive the following equivalent formulation of the well known Jacobian Conjecture, in terms of singularities at infinity : Let $`P:^2`$ be a polynomial without critical point. If there exists a value $`a`$ such that $`\lambda _a0`$, then for any other polynomial $`g`$, the zero locus of their jacobian ideal $`\mathrm{Jac}(P,g)`$ is not void.

Revisiting equisingularity at §7, one gets more specific results in case of polynomials. By taking hyperplane sections with respect to $`P`$ in $`^n`$, one may define global polar curves  and use them in order to define an intersection number with some fibre $`X_a`$. By restricting $`P`$ to a general hyperplane and repeating generical cutting, we get a sequence of intersection numbers666they are invariant under linear change of coordinates but not under affine automorphisms. $`\gamma _a^{n1},\mathrm{},\gamma _a^0`$. We show in \[65, Theorem 1.1\] that the constancy of $`\gamma _s^{}`$, for $`s`$ in some neighbourhood of $`a`$, is equivalent to the equisingularity at infinity of $`p`$ at $`X_a`$.

Secondly, the slicing processus just described gives a model of a fibre $`X_a`$ as CW-complex. Let $`\lambda _a^i:=\gamma _s^i\gamma _a^i`$, where $`s`$ is a typical value of $`P`$.

###### Theorem 8.2.

 Let $`P:^n`$ be a polynomial function. Suppose that the fibre $`X_a=P^1(a)`$ has at most isolated singularities. Then $`X_a`$ is homotopy equivalent to a generic hyperplane section $`X_aH`$ to which one attaches $`\gamma _a^{n1}\mu (X_a)`$ cells of dimension $`n1`$.

Moreover, $`X_a`$ is homotopy equivalent to the CW-complex obtained by successively attaching to $`\gamma _a^0=\mathrm{deg}P`$ points a number of $`\gamma _a^1`$ cells of dimension 1, then $`\gamma _a^2`$ cells of dimension 2, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`\gamma _a^{n2}`$ cells of dimension $`n2`$ and finally $`\gamma _a^{n1}\mu (X_a)`$ cells of dimension $`n1`$. In particular, $`\chi (X_a)=(1)^n\mu (X_a)+_{i=0}^{n1}(1)^i\gamma _a^i`$ and
$`\chi (X_s)\chi (X_a)=(1)^{n1}\mu (X_a)+_{i=0}^{n1}(1)^i\lambda _a^i`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

One may compare this result to Corollary 4.3 and notice that the sequence $`\lambda _a^{}`$ is a refinement of the number of vanishing cycles at infinity $`\lambda _a`$, in case of isolated $`𝒢`$-singularities. Nevertheless, the numbers $`\lambda _a^i`$ are defined without any hypothesis on singularities at infinity.

The vanishing cycles at infinity were described for the first time in . It was shown in loc.cit. that, for $`P`$ with isolated $`𝒢`$-singularities at infinity, the vanishing homology is concentrated in dimension $`n`$; this implies that the general fibre is homotopically a bouquet of $`(n1)`$-spheres. Further progress in describing the general fibre, the special fibres and the vanishing cycles was made by Neumann-Norbury , Dimca-Némethi , the author . The cohomology of fibres is investigated by Hamm .

The above construction of the model for the general fibre can be pushed further; one may construct a global geometric monodromy group, acting on this model. This yields localization results and formulae for the zeta-function . The more geometric point of view on monodromy at a singularity at infinity gives two types of singularities with local $`\lambda `$ equal to 1, see \[55, §6\]. This may be contrasted with $`\mu =1`$ in case of holomorphic germs, when the singularity can only be of one type, A1.

One of the monodromies in case of a polynomial $`P`$ is the one around a big disc containing all the atypical values, denoted $`T_{\mathrm{}}`$. In two variables, Dimca  shows that $`T_{\mathrm{}}`$ acting on the cohomology of the fibre is the identity if and only if the monodromy group of $`P`$ is trivial; the eigenvalue 1 occurs only in size one Jordan blocks. We send the reader to loc.cit. for further results and their discution in contrast to the holomorphic germs case.

Further aspects, such as mixed Hodge structure on fibres and algebraic Gauss-Manin systems, have been studied by several authors: García-López and Némethi , respectively Dimca-Saito , Sabbah .


format: text

text:
# Finite-size investigation of scaling corrections in the square-lattice three-state Potts antiferromagnet

## I INTRODUCTION

The three-state Potts antiferromagnet on a square lattice exhibits a second-order phase transition at $`T=0`$, with distinctive properties. Among these is the exponential divergence of quantities such as the correlation length and staggered susceptibility.

While earlier studies agreed in pointing to a temperature dependence of the bulk correlation length in the form

$$\xi _{\mathrm{}}(\beta )\beta ^p\mathrm{exp}(v\beta ^x),\beta \frac{1}{k_BT},$$
(1)
different conjectures were advanced for the values of $`p`$, $`v`$ and $`x`$, mostly on the basis of numerical work. In particular, the value of $`x`$ was variously estimated as 1.3 (transfer-matrix results Night82  analysed by the Roomany-Wyld approximant rw , and Monte Carlo work Wang90 ); 3/4 (conformal invariance arguments coupled with an analysis of the eigenvalue spectrum of the transfer matrix saleur91 ); and 1 (further Monte Carlo work Ferreira95 ). Later studies gof4 , applying crossover arguments to transfer-matrix data taken with an external field $`H`$, near the critical point $`T=H=0`$, gave $`x=1.08\pm 0.13`$. Additional evidence compatible with $`x=1`$, and $`v=2`$, was found via extensive Monte Carlo simulations feso99 . In this latter reference it was argued that, although $`p1`$ gave the best fits to numerical data, such a logarithmic correction to the dominant behaviour was difficult to justify on theoretical grounds; also, a value of $`p=0`$ could be made to fit the data, albeit with poorer quality than for $`p=1`$.

A substantial step towards fuller understanding of the critical properties of the model was given in Ref. cjs01, . Through a mapping to the six-vertex model, where the most relevant excitations are vortices, the authors were able to find that the bulk correlation length diverges as above, with the following exact values for the corresponding parameters: $`x=1`$, $`v=2`$, $`p=0`$. Further, they established the form of the leading corrections to scaling, so that

$$\xi _{\mathrm{}}(\beta )=Ae^{2\beta }\left(1+b\beta e^\beta +\mathrm{}\right).$$
(2)
The value $`b=6.65\pm 0.11`$ was calculated, upon consideration of the stiffness constant of a related model where non-vortex defects are the main excitations. Similar results were derived for the bulk staggered susceptibility. Finally, it was shown that the data of Ref. feso99,  are compatible with the predictions just quoted. The effects previously ascribed to logarithmic corrections could be explained once the corrections to scaling, in the form and sign predicted, were taken into account. The constant in Eq. (2) was fitted to $`A=0.121(3)`$ cjs01 , close to the earlier estimate $`A0.110.12`$ for $`p=0`$ in Ref. feso99, .

Data in Ref. feso99,  were taken for $`2.0\beta 6.0`$ (corresponding to $`5\xi _{\mathrm{}}(\beta )20,000`$), on $`L\times L`$ lattices with $`32L1536`$. Thus, in most cases extrapolation procedures were used to estimate the $`L\mathrm{}`$ limiting values of the quantities of interest.

On account of the exponential divergences, the error bars associated to extrapolated quantities turned out to increase steeply for lower temperatures. For example (see Table 4 of Ref. feso99, ), the estimate of $`\xi _{\mathrm{}}`$ starts with a relative error of $`1\%`$ at $`\beta =2.5`$, which slowly grows to $`3\%`$ at $`\beta =5.2`$ but then reaches $`16\%`$ at $`\beta =5.9`$, and $`33\%`$ at $`\beta =6.0`$. Therefore, the picture at the high-$`\beta `$ end of the fits to theory in Ref. cjs01,  is less than entirely clear.

Our main purpose here is to complement the test of Ref. cjs01, , by means of transfer-matrix data generated on $`L\times \mathrm{}`$ strips of the square lattice. Being essentially exact results of numerical diagonalization, our data do not suffer from the fluctuations intrinsic to Monte-Carlo studies, allowing one to reach arbitrarily large $`\beta `$, in principle; instead, owing to limitations in the largest strip width accessible (we used $`4L14`$, $`L`$ even, with periodic boundary conditions across), the most important potential source of uncertainties is the $`L\mathrm{}`$ extrapolation. This drawback is somewhat mitigated by the rather smooth behaviour of finite-$`L`$ data sequences, as shown below.

## II Strip scaling and finite-size corrections

The choice of quantities to investigate is, in part, dictated by specific features of the strip geometry; here we have chosen to calculate the first and second scaled gaps:

$$\eta _i=\underset{L\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{L}{\pi \xi _i},\xi _i^1=\mathrm{\Lambda }_0\mathrm{\Lambda }_i,i=1,2$$
(3)
where $`e^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_j}`$ are the ($`L`$–dependent) largest eigenvalues of the transfer matrix. At the critical point $`\beta =\mathrm{}`$, conformal invariance cardy  states that these quantities give the respective decay-of-correlation exponents; in the present case, the lowest gap $`i=1`$ is related to the staggered magnetization, with associated exponent $`\eta _{\mathrm{stagg}}=1/3`$, while $`i=2`$ gives the uniform magnetization decay, $`\eta _\mathrm{u}=4/3`$ dN82 ; saso98 . The next relevant operator is related to the staggered polarization dN82 ; saso98 , and will be briefly discussed in connection with scaling of the third gap ($`i=3`$), in Section IV.

For finite $`\beta `$ one is off criticality, thus the $`\eta _i`$ above are not to be interpreted as exponents; nevertheless, they are quantities whose difference from the bona fide $`\beta =\mathrm{}`$ exponents is expected to depend on powers of the (suitably defined) distance to the critical point.

According to finite-size scaling barber  one must have, with $`\xi _{\mathrm{}}(\beta )\xi _1(\beta ,L=\mathrm{})`$ given by Eq. (2):

$$\frac{L}{\pi \xi _i(\beta ,L)}=f_i\left(\frac{L}{\xi _{\mathrm{}}(\beta )}\right).$$
(4)
Since the finite–size corrections here usually are of larger magnitude than the finite–temperature ones, we shall only take into account the dominant temperature dependence of $`\xi _{\mathrm{}}(\beta )`$, that is, we shall write

$$\frac{L}{\pi \xi _i(\beta ,L)}=f_i(x),xLe^{2\beta }.$$
(5)
On the other hand, the incorporation of the finite–$`L`$ effects will be done phenomenologically, as explained in the following.

At $`T=0`$ (that is, $`x0`$), very good convergence of finite-width estimates ($`\eta _i(L)`$) of $`\eta _{\mathrm{stagg},\mathrm{u}}`$ towards the exact results ($`\eta _i`$) is attained by assuming corrections of the form:

$$\eta _i(L)=\eta _i+\frac{a_{i\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}}{L^2}+\frac{b_{i\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}}{L^4}+\mathrm{}.$$
(6)
These so-called ‘analytical’ corrections, in powers of $`L^2`$, are expected to occur for any theory on a strip geometry, as they are related to the conformal block of the identity operator car86 . They will be the main corrections, provided that no other irrelevant operator with a low power arises (as is the case for the three-state Potts ferromagnet nien82 ; sldq00  where an $`L^{4/5}`$ term is present). In order to illustrate how Eq. (6) works, and to give readers the opportunity to try their own extrapolation procedures, Table 1 gives our finite–$`L`$ estimates of $`\eta _{\mathrm{stagg}}`$ and $`\eta _\mathrm{u}`$, together with their respective extrapolations via equal-weight least-squares fits of data (we systematically discard $`L=4`$ data). Error bars quoted are the standard deviations of the estimated intercepts at $`L^1=0`$, as given by standard least-squares fitting procedures.

Before going further, it must be stressed that this structure of corrections to scaling is, in principle, specific to strip geometries car86 ; thus it is not surprising that different results (namely, corrections to $`\xi /L`$ given by $`BL^1+CL^{5/3}`$) have been found for this same model, also at $`T=0`$, on fully finite $`L\times L`$ lattices saso98 .

In order to disentangle the finite–temperature corrections (to bulk behaviour) which are of interest here, we shall assume that, for fixed $`x=Le^{2\beta }`$ one can still write

$$\eta _i(L,x)=\eta _i(x)+\frac{a_i(x)}{L^2}+\frac{b_i(x)}{L^4}+\mathrm{}.$$
(7)
where $`lim_{x0}a_i(x)=a_{i\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}`$ and similarly for the other $`x`$–dependent quantities. In this way we expect to account for the explicit $`L`$–dependence of our finite-width results, being left only with that given through the argument of Eq. (4), which is intrinsic to scaled gaps.

We illustrate the validity of the smoothness assumption just made, by displaying in Table 2 our data for the largest value of $`x`$ used (see below), $`x_{\mathrm{max}}=0.04096`$.

Comparison with Table 1 shows that, although standard deviations have increased by roughly two orders of magnitude, they still keep within quite reasonable bounds, giving credence to the smoothness assumption underlying Eq. (7) for all intermediate–$`x`$ values used here.

## III Finite-temperature corrections

In the analysis of the extrapolated (bulk) quantities, we shall check for corrections to scaling in the $`x`$ variable, that is,

$$\eta _i(x)=\eta _i(0)+C_i\sqrt{x}+D_i(\sqrt{x})^2+\mathrm{}.$$
(8)
Note that a literal translation of Eq. (2) would suggest that the corrections in Eq. (8) should depend on $`\sqrt{x}\mathrm{ln}x`$ rather than $`\sqrt{x}`$ alone; however, consistently with the argument used in establishing Eq. (5), here we shall deal only with the dominant terms.

We have taken $`x`$–values decreasing by powers of two, from $`x_{\mathrm{max}}=0.04096`$ to $`x_{\mathrm{min}}=x_{\mathrm{max}}/2^{27}=3.05176\times 10^{10}`$. Using, as a first-order approximation, $`\xi _{\mathrm{}}(\beta )=Ae^{2\beta }`$ with $`A=0.121(3)`$ cjs01 , the above values of $`x`$ correspond to the range $`\beta =2.29`$, $`\xi _{\mathrm{}}10`$ ($`x=x_{\mathrm{max}}`$, $`L=4`$) to $`\beta =12.27`$, $`\xi _{\mathrm{}}5.4\times 10^6`$ ($`x=x_{\mathrm{min}}`$, $`L=14`$). The lower limit was set by determining when the difference between the central estimates $`\eta _i^{\mathrm{ext}}(x_{\mathrm{min}})\eta _i^{\mathrm{ext}}(0)`$ became of the same order as the standard deviation of either extrapolated quantity (see Table 3 below, where one sees that, although this criterion has been followed strictly for $`\eta _2`$, the three smallest–$`x`$ entries for $`\eta _1`$ are in fact below the threshold; however, by performing analyses with and without the corresponding data, we have checked that this is of no great import to our conclusions).

Table 3 also shows that, although our extrapolations are very precise, owing to the remarkably smooth variation of data against $`L`$, they seem to suffer from a slight lack of accuracy. Indeed, for $`x=0`$ our central estimates $`\eta _i^{\mathrm{ext}}`$ stand respectively 6 and 8 standard deviations away from the known exact values for $`\eta _1`$ and $`\eta _2`$. We ascribe this effect to systematic errors coming from: (i) the shortness (in $`L`$) of our data series, and (ii) higher-order corrections, ignored in Eq. (7). Since, at least for $`x=0`$, such errors amount to small differences in the central estimates (respectively $`0.01\%`$ and $`+0.001\%`$ for $`\eta _1`$ and $`\eta _2`$) relative to exact values, and assuming this scenario to carry over, continuously and smoothly, to $`x0`$, we shall do as follows. In Eq. (8), for instance, we shall use $`\eta _i^{\mathrm{ext}}(0)`$ instead of the exact $`\eta _i(0)`$; this way we expect systematic errors to cancel to a large extent, when considering the difference $`\eta _i^{\mathrm{ext}}(x)\eta _i^{\mathrm{ext}}(0)`$.

Our first test is a single-power fit to scaling corrections: we assume

$$\eta _i(x)\eta _i(0)=C_ix^u,$$
(9)
and vary $`u`$ within a reasonably broad range, checking the behaviour of the $`\chi ^2`$ of the corresponding least-squares fit. Our results, using as input the upper half of Table 3 (14 data plus the $`x=0`$ line, for each fit) are displayed in Figure 1, where very sharp minima can be seen slightly above $`x=0.5`$ (to three decimal places, they are located respectively at $`x=0.508`$ for $`\eta _1`$, $`x=0.503`$ for $`\eta _2`$). This signals that (i) corrections depending on $`\sqrt{x}`$ are definitely present, thus supporting the assumption made in Eq. (8); and (ii) higher-order terms are not negligible. Indeed, inclusion of data for larger $`x`$ causes the $`\chi ^2`$ to increase steeply, while the sharpness of the dips deteriorates, and their position shifts towards larger $`u`$.

Having ensured that square-root corrections to scaling are an essential element of the picture, we attempt to include higher-order terms, in the manner of Eq. (8). We plot $`(\eta _i(x)\eta _i(0))/\sqrt{x}`$ against $`\sqrt{x}`$, thus one expects:

$$\frac{\eta _i(x)\eta _i(0)}{\sqrt{x}}=C_i+D_i\sqrt{x}+𝒪(x)$$
(10)
and attempts straight-line fits. Results are in Figure 2.

The subset of data considered now is complementary to that used in the earlier single-power fits, as higher-order terms become more important for $`x`$ not very small. We noticed that inclusion of data from the last 3–4 lines of Table 3 caused a quick deterioration of the quality of linear fits (the resulting curvature can be seen by naked eye); this is probalbly the effect of third- and higher-order terms in $`\sqrt{x}`$. An alternative source of errors would be the multiplicative logarithmic terms, mentioned in connection with Eq. (8) above, and not considered in the present approach. Therefore, we decided to keep to the range of $`x`$ for which good linear plots were obtainable, while using as many data as possible (in order to reduce the spread in the estimates of $`C_i`$ and $`D_i`$ of Eq. (8)). The best compromise was found by taking data for $`5.E06<x<0.00256`$, shown in Figure 2 together with the corresponding least-squares fits.

Our estimates of the amplitudes $`C_i`$ and $`D_i`$ are shown in Table 4, where for single-power fits of Eq. (9) we quote only results for $`u=0.5`$. Although, as explained above, these do not correspond to the respective absolute minima of $`\chi ^2`$, they exhibit a very good quality of fit, and it seems more appropriate to compare them (instead of those obtained at minimal $`\chi ^2`$) to the estimates of $`C_i`$ from Eq. (10), where the power $`1/2`$ is fixed from the start.

## IV Scaling of third gap

Finally, we have investigated the scaling of the third gap at $`T=0`$. According to theory dN82 ; saso98 , at the critical point there are only three relevant operators, corresponding (in decreasing order of relevance) to staggered magnetization, uniform magnetization and staggered polarization. Although, as recalled above, there is widespread agreement between theory and numerical work as regards the first two, the prediction of Ref. saso98, , namely that the corresponding decay-of-correlations exponent is $`\eta _{𝐏_{\mathrm{stagg}}}=3`$, appears not to have been numerically tested so far. ( In Ref. saso98, , Monte Carlo simulations were performed for the respective susceptibility, which according to the scaling law $`\gamma /\nu =2\eta `$ is expected to approach a constant, with corrections $`L^\mathrm{\Delta }`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }=1`$, if $`\eta =3`$; the approach to a constant was indeed verified, while the best fit was for $`\mathrm{\Delta }0.75`$ instead of unity).

We have calculated descending eigenvalues of the transfer matrix; it would seem plausible to associate the third scaled gap to the staggered polarization, especially since only three relevant operators are expected to come up, and the relationship of the other two to the first two gaps is well-established. In order to check self-consistency of our results, we used both a standard power-method algorithm, coupled with Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization, and a Lanczos scheme. While for small $`L`$ and shallow levels (corresponding to eigenvalues $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_i`$, $`i3`$) both methods gave the same estimates, the Lanczos results displayed instabilities for deeper levels and $`L8`$. At present we are not able to explain such discrepancies. Therefore, we restrict ourselves to the analysis of the third gap.

Our results, again displayed in the form $`\eta _3=L(\mathrm{\Lambda }_0\mathrm{\Lambda }_3)/\pi `$, are shown in Table 5. In order to gain an unbiased perspective both of the limiting bulk value of $`\eta _3`$ and of the scaling corrections, we attempted a single-power extrapolation, $`\eta _3(L)=\eta _3+a_{30}/L^u`$ with a variable power $`u`$, and monitored the variations of the $`\chi ^2`$ of the corresponding fits against $`u`$. The result was qualitatively very similar to that displayed for the fits of Eq. (9) in Fig. 1: a rather sharp minimum, located at $`u=1.8`$ in this case, which gave an extrapolated $`\eta _3=2.00(1)`$ (see Table 5; the error bar was calculated by considering the estimates on either side of $`u_{\mathrm{min}}=1.8`$, for which the $`\chi ^2`$ becomes one order of magnitude larger than at the minimum). Fixing $`u=1`$, inspired by the prediction of Ref. saso98,  for the susceptibility, gave $`\eta _32.11`$. Two-power fits à la Eq. (6), using either $`L^2`$ and $`L^4`$ or $`L^1`$ and $`L^2`$ also gave values between $`1.99`$ and $`2.01`$. There seems to be no straightforward way to extrapolate the data of Table 5 to include $`\eta _3=3`$ . At this point we do not know how to reconcile our results to the predictions of Ref. saso98, .

## V Conclusions

In summary, we have undertaken a finite-size approach to investigate the corrections to scaling in the three-state square-lattice Potts antiferromagnet. Owing to the characteristics of the quantities under study, we argued that the natural variable to consider is $`xLe^{2\beta }`$. We showed that the less-relevant finite-size corrections could be accounted for in a phenomenological scheme, based on the zero-temperature picture; for the extrapolated scaled gaps we supplied convincing evidence that square-root corrections, in the variable $`x`$, are present, and provided estimates for the numerical values of the amplitudes of the first– and second–order correction terms, for both the first and second scaled gaps. It would be interesting if predictions based on theory could be derived, to be compared with the numerical values of amplitudes obtained in this work.

We have also investigated the behaviour of the third scaled gap of the transfer matrix spectrum, and found an extrapolated value for the decay-of-correlations exponent $`\eta _3=2.00(1)`$. This seems incompatible with earlier predictions, to the effect that the third relevant operator in the problem would give $`\eta _{𝐏_{\mathrm{stagg}}}=3`$, corresponding to the staggered polarization.

###### Acknowledgements.

The author thanks Alan Sokal for many interesting discussions and suggestions, and for a critical reading of an early version of the manuscript; thanks are also due to the Department of Theoretical Physics at Oxford, where this work was initiated, for the hospitality, and to the cooperation agreement between CNPq and the Royal Society for funding the author’s visit. Research of S.L.A.d.Q. is partially supported by the Brazilian agencies CNPq (grant No. 30.1692/81.5), FAPERJ (grants Nos. E26–171.447/97 and E26–151.869/2000) and FUJB-UFRJ.


text:
# Galerkin Method in the Gravitational Collapse: a Dynamical System Approach

## Abstract

We study the general dynamics of the spherically symmetric gravitational collapse of a massless scalar field. We apply the Galerkin projection method to transform a system of partial differential equations into a set of ordinary differential equations for modal coefficients, after a convenient truncation procedure, largely applied to problems of turbulence. In the present case, we have generated a finite dynamical system that reproduces the essential features of the dynamics of the gravitational collapse, even for a lower order of truncation. Each initial condition in the space of modal coefficients corresponds to a well definite spatial distribution of scalar field. Numerical experiments with the dynamical system show that depending on the strength of the scalar field packet, the formation of black-holes or the dispersion of the scalar field leaving behind flat spacetime are the two main outcomes. We also found numerical evidence that between both asymptotic states, there is a critical solution represented by a limit cycle in the modal space with period $`\mathrm{\Delta }u3.55`$.

Gravitational collapse is one of the most fascinating problems studied in General Relativity. Remarkable works helped the understanding of the process of gravitational collapsereview , but there are still crucial open questions concerning, for instance, the Cosmic Censorship Conjecture, and more recently the existence of critical phenomena in gravitational collapse. We are going to focus our attention here to this last issue.

The pioneering analytical results of Christodoulouchris  together with numerical workgold  about the collapse of massless scalar fields basically established that, depending on the strength of the scalar field packet, two types of outcomes are expected to take place: the scalar field disperses to infinity leaving behind flat spacetime after an initial stage of collapse, or the scalar field collapses to form a black hole. Later Choptuikchop , abandoning the restriction to almost stationary initial data, performed definite numerical work establishing the idea of critical behavior in the gravitational collapse and of a threshold of black hole formation. Originally, his numerical study was realized in the collapse of spherically symmetric distributions of massless scalar fields, and later several other fields such as perfect fluidpf , Yang-Millsym , charged and complex scalar fieldsccsf , massive scalar fieldsmassive , gravitational wavesgw , etcgundlach , were taken into consideration. Critical phenomena emerge as a robust feature in gravitational collapse, and might be attributed to the nonlinear nature of the Einstein field equations.

Here we present some interesting preliminary results concerning the application, for the first time, of the Galerkin projection methodgalerkin  in the gravitational collapse of a massless scalar field. The idea is to treat the general gravitational collapse of a spherically symmetric massless scalar field without imposing any additional symmetry like some kind of self-similarity. The Galerkin method is an approximative technique that allows to transform a finite set of partial differential equations into an infinite countable set of coupled ordinary differential equations associated to the infinite modes of Fourier-type in which the solutions are decomposed. Truncation of these equations to a certain order of modes may give, under certain conditions, a finite dimensional dynamical system which approximates fairly well the exact dynamics. The application of this method in problems of fluid mechanics has brought interesting new results that has shed light in the understanding of turbulence, where the most famous application of the Galerkin method is the Lorenz system lorenz  (resulting from a truncation to third order of the Galerkin projection of Navier-Stokes equation) that describes the chaotic Rayleigh-Benard convection.

Basically the Galerkin projection method consists in expanding a set of the system variables in a series of orthogonal polynomials (chosen as basis of the projection space X), substitution in the dynamical equations and obtaining a countable infinite set of ordinary differential equations for the modal coefficients. In order to carry out the Galerkin projection, the space X must be an inner product space and the basis functions must satisfy the boundary conditions implicit in the definition of X such that any candidate to a solution automatically satisfies the boundary conditions. Truncation of the system by setting modal terms beyond a certain order equal to zero (Galerkin approximation) results in a finite dimensional system which presumably yields an adequate approximation to the infinite dimensional dynamics if the truncation is at sufficiently high order. To gain insight in the types of dynamics that are possible we will consider here a low order truncation; while our truncation is not of high enough order to model the real behavior of our system in a completely faithful way, the resulting solutions give an indication of the type of qualitative behavior of which the actual system is capable.

We consider the general spherically symmetric line element given by

$$ds^2=g\overline{g}du^22gdudr+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2,$$
(1)
where $`g=g(u,r)`$, $`\overline{g}=\overline{g}(u,r)`$ and $`d\mathrm{\Omega }^2=d\theta ^2+sin\theta ^2d\phi ^2`$; $`u`$ is the usual retarded null coordinate and $`r`$ a radial coordinate which measures the proper area of the two sphere $`d\mathrm{\Omega }^2`$. The massless scalar field $`\varphi (u,r)`$ is the only source of curvature, such that the relevant field equations that describe the dynamics are

$`(lng)_{,r}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{r}{2}}\varphi _{,r}^2`$ (2)
$`(r\overline{g})_{,r}`$ $`=`$ $`g`$ (3)
$`r\varphi _{,ur}+\varphi _{,u}\overline{g}\left(\varphi _{,r}+{\displaystyle \frac{r}{2}}\varphi _{,rr}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{r}{2}}\overline{g}_{,r}\varphi _{,r}.`$ (4)
Eqs. (2) and (3) follow directly from the Einstein field equations, and the dynamics is completely encompassed by the Klein-Gordon equation (4). Another important quantity to be introduced is the mass function, $`m(u,r)`$,

$$1\frac{2m(u,r)}{r}g^{\mu \nu }r_{,\mu }r_{,\nu }=\frac{\overline{g}}{g}.$$
(5)
This quantity is interpreted as the effective gravitational mass inside the 2-sphere of radius $`r`$, and agrees with the Bondi and ADM masses in the asymptotic flat spacetimes.

As we have discussed briefly, the boundary conditions are of fundamental importance for the Galerkin method, since they dictate the convenient set of basis functions. We then assume that the scalar field must satisfy the following boundary conditions, $`\varphi (u,0)=0`$ and $`\varphi (u,\mathrm{})=0`$. Regularity of the spacetime at the origin requires $`\overline{g}(u,0)=1`$, while the choice of $`u`$ as the proper time at the origin fixes $`g(u,0)=1`$.

After introducing the basic equations together with the appropriate boundary conditions, we are ready to apply the Galerkin method. For the sake of convenience, we introduce an alternative radial coordinate $`\xi `$ related to $`r`$ by $`\xi =lnr`$, where this new radial coordinate varies from $`\mathrm{}`$ to $`+\mathrm{}`$ corresponding, respectively, to $`r=0`$ and $`r=\mathrm{}`$. Then, the chosen orthogonal set of basis functions for the projection space $`X`$ is

$$\psi _k(\xi )=e^{\xi ^2/2}H_k(\xi ),$$
(6)
where $`H_k(\xi )`$ are the Hermite polynomials. The orthogonality is defined by the inner product

$$\psi _k(\xi ),\psi _j(\xi )_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}\psi _k(\xi )\psi _j(\xi )𝑑\xi =2^k\sqrt{\pi }k!\delta _{kj}.$$
(7)
The following decomposition for the scalar field $`\varphi (u,\xi )`$ is proposed

$$\varphi (u,\xi )=\underset{k=0}{\overset{N}{}}\varphi _k(u)\psi _k(\xi ),$$
(8)
where $`\varphi _k(u)`$ are the modal (Fourier-type) coefficients and $`N`$ indicates the order of truncation. We remark that the precision of the above decomposition, in the sense of approaching the actual solution, depends directly on $`N`$. The boundary conditions for $`\varphi `$ are automatically satisfied since $`\psi _k(\mathrm{})=\psi _k(+\mathrm{})=0`$ for any $`k`$.

The decomposition of $`\varphi (u,\xi )`$ will be considered as the fundamental piece of our strategy of applying the Galerkin method to the system of Eqs. (2)-(4). Before going through the Klein-Gordon equation, Eq. (4), we need to express the metric functions $`g(u,\xi )`$ and $`\overline{g}(u,\xi )`$ conveniently in terms of the basis functions. Thus, considering Eq. (2) with the new spatial variable $`\xi `$, and introducing the decomposition of the scalar field given by Eq. (8), we have

$$g(u,\xi )=exp\left(\frac{1}{2}_{\mathrm{}}^\xi \underset{k=0}{\overset{N}{}}\underset{j=0}{\overset{N}{}}\varphi _k(u)\varphi _j(u)\frac{d\psi _k}{d\xi ^{}}\frac{d\psi _j}{d\xi ^{}}d\xi ^{}\right).$$
(9)
The integration can be performed without difficulty for any order of the truncation; also from Eq. (9) we have that $`g(u,\xi )`$ satisfies the boundary condition $`g=1`$ at the origin $`\xi =\mathrm{}`$, for all $`u`$.

Now, the next step is to consider Eq. (3) that relates the metric functions $`\overline{g}(u,\xi )`$ and $`g(u,\xi )`$. This equation can be written as

$`\overline{g}(u,\xi )=e^\xi {\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^\xi }e^\xi ^{}g(u,\xi ^{})𝑑\xi ^{}=g(u,\xi ){\displaystyle \frac{g}{\xi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{^2g}{\xi ^2}}e^\xi {\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^\xi }e^\xi ^{}{\displaystyle \frac{^3g}{\xi ^^3}}𝑑\xi ^{},`$ (10)
where the term on the right-hand side arises from successive integration by parts. At this point, $`\overline{g}(u,\xi )`$ can be approximated in the following way

$$\overline{g}(u,\xi )g(u,\xi )+\underset{k=1}{\overset{J}{}}(1)^k\frac{^kg}{\xi ^k}.$$
(11)
Basically this approximation will be used in order to compute $`\overline{g}`$ from $`g`$, namely, as an integral of Eq. (10).

The last step of the Galerkin method is to substitute Eqs. (8), (9) and (11) into the Klein-Gordon equation that dictates the dynamics of the scalar field. The dynamical system for the modal coefficients $`\varphi _k(u)`$ is obtained after projecting the Klein-Gordon equation into the $`nth`$ mode $`\psi _n(\xi )`$, $`n=0,1,2,..,N`$, or

$`{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{N}{}}}\dot{\varphi }_k(u)e^\xi \left({\displaystyle \frac{d\psi _k}{d\xi }}+\psi _k\right),\psi _n(\xi ){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{N}{}}}\varphi _k(u)\overline{g}(u,\xi )\left({\displaystyle \frac{d\psi _k}{d\xi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{d^2\psi _k}{d\xi ^2}}\right),\psi _n(\xi )=`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{N}{}}}\varphi _k(u){\displaystyle \frac{\overline{g}}{\xi }}{\displaystyle \frac{d\psi _k}{d\xi }},\psi _n(\xi ),n=0,1,2..,N`$ (12)
where dot stands for derivative with respect to $`u`$. The result is a set of equations of the type

$$\dot{\varphi }_k(u)=F_k(\varphi _j),k=0,1,2\mathrm{}N$$
(13)
where the number of equations is defined by the order $`N`$ of truncation. The expressions on the right-hand-side of Eqs. (13) are much involved, even for low $`N`$, and will not be given here. Once the modal coefficients are known either analytically or numerically, the overall spatio-temporal behavior of the scalar field and the metric functions are determined.

Before the discussion of the qualitative aspects of the dynamical system, it will be very useful to establish a convenient way to choose the initial conditions. In our approach, a given set of initial conditions $`(\varphi _0(0),\varphi _1(0),..,\varphi _N(0))`$ corresponds to the initial spatial distribution of scalar field given by $`\varphi (0,\xi )=_{k=0}^N\varphi _k(0)\psi _k(\xi )`$. Thus, let us consider a Gaussian initial data

$$\varphi (0,\xi )=Ae^{2\xi }e^{(e^\xi 0.2)^2},$$
(14)
where $`A`$ is the amplitude of the distribution. The above expression can be decomposed with respect to the basis functions $`\psi _k(\xi )`$, determining the set of initial conditions, since

$$\varphi _k(0)=\frac{\varphi (0,\xi ),\psi _k}{\psi _k,\psi _k}=\frac{1}{2^k\sqrt{\pi }k!}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\varphi (0,\xi )\psi _k(\xi )d\xi ,k=0,1..,N,$$
(15)
such that the information about the initial strength of the scalar field is contained in the initial set $`(\varphi _0(0),\varphi _1(0),..,\varphi _N(0))`$, which depends directly on the amplitude $`A`$ of the initial distribution of the scalar field. As illustration, for the value $`A=2`$ of the amplitude of the initial distribution we obtain the initial conditions of the modal coefficients for the projections up to order $`N=3`$, $`\varphi _0(0)=0.6782306563805649,\varphi _1(0)=0.05284561865739180,\varphi _2(0)=0.09123038744236496,\varphi _3(0)=0.0007815958656455472`$. We note that the higher the order $`N`$ of truncation, the more the corresponding modal coefficients decrease; for instance, if we consider $`N=9`$, $`\varphi _9(0)10^6`$. A comparison of the original function (14) with the initial condition function constructed from the partial expansion of order $`N=3`$ with the modal coefficients given above, shows clearly that the relevant contributions actually come from the lower order modes so that, in this aspect, our truncation to order $`N=3`$ appears sufficient to grasp the essential features of initial scalar function wave packet.

Now, we are ready to present the basic qualitative aspects of the dynamics in the space of variables $`\varphi _k(u)`$. The origin is the unique critical point identified as the Minkowski or flat spacetime, because $`\varphi (u,\xi )=0`$ and $`g(u,\xi )=\overline{g}(u,\xi )=1`$. The linear analysis about the origin reveals that it is an attractor for any order $`N`$ of the truncation. The eigenvalues associated with the linearized system about the origin are in general complex, conjugated in pairs, with negative real parts. From the physical point of view, this characteristic is reasonable due to the fact that small modal coefficients $`\varphi _k(0)`$ are equivalent to a small amplitude $`A`$ of the initial data. As a matter of fact, the scalar field has not enough strength to maintain the collapse and it eventually disperses leaving behind flat spacetime. This behavior extends to a nonlinear neighborhood of the origin, generated from initial modal coefficients $`\varphi _k(0)`$ associated with a finite (but not sufficiently large) value of the amplitude $`A`$. This behavior is illustrated in Figs. 1 for $`A=2.0798`$, and is denoted subcritical. Here and in the remaining of the paper we are considering the Galerkin decomposition with $`N=3`$, meaning the presence of four modal coefficients. Fig. 1(a) shows the evolution of the modal coefficient $`\varphi _0(u)`$; it oscillates for a certain range of $`u`$ and then decays to zero. Other modes have a similar behavior. With the present initial distribution all modes tend to zero, namely, to the origin of modal space that represents flat spacetime (indeed the origin is an attractor for any order of truncation). Figs. 1(b,c) depict, respectively, the scalar field $`\varphi `$ given by (8) for $`N=3`$ and the mass function $`m(u,\xi )`$ defined from (5), as functions of $`\xi `$ for several values of increasing $`u`$. Initially $`\varphi `$ and $`m`$ may increase but as expected, for large $`u`$, both tend to zero, showing that the scalar field has not enough strength to collapse resulting in a final configuration corresponding to flat spacetime. The denomination subcritical given above is now clear, because of its analogy with similar behavior in the literature, in spite of our truncation at $`N=3`$. Our computational resources allowed us to go to a truncation of order $`N=5`$, with analogous results, suggesting that even a lower order truncation may grasp the skeleton of the full dynamics.

A second possible configuration, denoted supercritical, corresponds to initial conditions connected to a distribution of scalar field with enough strength to hold the collapse until the formation of a black hole. The scalar field distribution in this case has amplitude $`A`$ large than a critical value $`A^{}`$ to be discussed later. The final outcome is the infinity region of the modal space characterized by $`_{k=0}^N\varphi _k^2=\mathrm{}`$. In approaching this region the scalar field increases as well the metric functions $`g`$ and $`\overline{g}`$. Figs. 2 illustrate this behavior. Fig. 2(a) shows the modal coefficient $`\varphi _0(u)`$ for the supercritical solution with $`A=2.0799`$. After oscillating this mode increases in a very fast way. All remaining modes $`\varphi _1(u)`$, $`\varphi _2(u)`$ and $`\varphi _3(u)`$ present an identical behavior. It can happen that at some point $`\overline{g}/g0`$, signalizing the formation of an apparent horizon. At this point the mass function is given by $`m_{ah}=e^{\xi _{ah}}/2=r_{ah}/2`$, with the subscript ah denoting the apparent horizon. Fig. 2(b) shows the expression $`2m/r`$ plotted as a function of $`\xi `$ for several values of increasing $`u`$. For $`u_{ah}28.34`$, $`2m/r1`$ at $`\xi _{ah}0.54`$. This indicates the formation of a black hole. We remark that these numerical values are an approximation of those of the full dynamics due to the $`N=3`$ truncation.

So far the results are in agreement with previous numerical workschop ; massive . Following the terminology introduced by Choptuik, we called subcritical the first class of solutions, whereas the second class is known by supercritical. Between the two classes of solutions, there is the critical solution. The critical solution has an interesting symmetry known as discrete self-similarity, which is manifested by the periodicity of the metric and scalar field with respect to spatio-temporal scales. Gundlach and Koike et algundlach ; pf ; gund2  engendered a very interesting picture in phase space for which the critical solution is represented by a limit cycle. In our dynamical system approach derived from the Galerkin method, we obtained evidence of a limit cycle in the space of modal coefficients, which corresponds to the critical solution constituting a limiting configuration between the subcritical and supercritical classes, according to the results of Choptuik. We proceed now to discuss our result. Consider $`A^{}`$ the amplitude of the scalar field distribution associated with the critical solution. We have found that as $`AA^{}`$ the modal coefficients oscillate for some time before escaping to infinity (black hole formation) or tending to the origin (flat spacetime). Numerically we can successively adjust $`A`$ such that we approach $`A^{}`$ from the region of initial data corresponding to black hole final state, or from the region corresponding to a flat spacetime final state. The more precise $`A`$ is adjusted to approach the actual critical value $`A^{}`$, the longer is the time the modal coefficients oscillate periodically. Fig. 3(a) illustrates this behavior. The modal coefficients correspond to the choice $`A=2.079856788846789`$, and it can be noted that after $`u50`$ the oscillations are performed steadily with a definite period $`\mathrm{\Delta }u3.55`$. The Figure shows modes up to $`N=3`$ but we have checked that all other modes, up to $`N=5`$, exhibit a similar behavior also with $`\mathrm{\Delta }u3.55`$, indicating that we are approaching a periodic orbit in the complete modal space, or a limit cycle, which is a representation in the modal space of the critical solution. Fig. 4 shows the projection of the previous solution in the 3-dim subspace spanned by the modes ($`\varphi _0,\varphi _1,\varphi _2`$). It is a remarkable fact that the presence of the limit cycle in the modal dynamical space manifests itself in any order of the truncation. This gives a strong indication that our dynamical system approach to the gravitational collapse, via the Galerkin projection method, exhibits the basic skeleton of the dynamics, as that which was found in numerical simulation of Einstein-Klein-Gordon system. We are presently making a careful evaluation of the order of the error between a truncation of order $`N`$ and orders $`N+1`$, $`N+2`$, and so on. The indication is that the error tends to decrease fast as $`N`$ increases, suggesting a faithful approach of the dynamics of the system.

We must finally remark the potentiality of the Galerkin method applied in the treatment of the dynamics of the gravitational collapse, as a reduction of the dynamics to a dynamical system problem, which may avoid extremely elaborated numerical techniques and, in its simplicity, guarantees that the resulting dynamics is a skeleton of the underlying physics and not a consequence of numerical artifacts. We are also presently applying the same method to the case of massive scalar field.

The authors acknowledge the financial support of CNPq.