text:
# From the Toda Lattice to the Volterra Lattice and back

## 1. Introduction

The Volterra lattice is the system of o.d.e.’s

(1)
$$\dot{a}_i=a_i(a_{i1}a_{i+1})(i=1,\mathrm{},n),$$

where $`a_{n+1}=a_0=0`$. This system was first studied by Kac, van-Moerbeke and Moser in two foundational papers () for the modern theory of integrable systems. They showed, for example, that this system arises as a finite dimensional approximation of the famous KdV equation. In this paper we shall refer to system (1) as the *$`A_n`$-Volterra system*.

Another well known discretization of the KdV equation is the Toda lattice . The Toda system can be written in the form:

(2)
$$\{\begin{array}{cc}\dot{a}_i=a_i(b_ib_{i+1}),\hfill & \\ & (i=1,\mathrm{},n)\hfill \\ \dot{b}_i=a_{i1}a_i,\hfill & \end{array}$$

with $`a_0=b_{n+1}=0`$. We shall refer to this system as the *$`A_{n1}`$-Toda lattice*. Generalizations of both equations to root systems other than $`A_n`$ were obtained by Bogoyavlenskij in .

For the $`A_n`$-Toda lattice, quadratic and cubic brackets were constructed, respectively, by Adler in  and by Kupershmidt in . Multiple Hamiltonian structures for these systems were introduced by the first author () in Flaschka coordinates and by the second author () in natural $`(q,p)`$ coordinates. The analogous results for $`B_n`$-Toda were computed in  in Flaschka coordinates, and in  in $`(q,p)`$ coordinates. The $`C_n`$ case is in  in Flaschka coordinates, and in  in natural $`(q,p)`$ coordinates. Finally, the $`D_n`$ case can be found in . The construction of these multiple Hamiltonian structures for the exceptional root systems is an open problem.

For the Volterra system, multiple Hamiltonian structures were constructed recently by Kouzaris () for $`B_n`$, $`C_n`$ and $`D_n`$ systems, which generalize the $`A_n`$-case. For the $`A_n`$ case, it was proved in  that the (periodic) Volterra lattice is an algebraic completely integrable (a.c.i.) system. In , the hyperelliptic systems were introduced similar to the even and odd Mumford systems (see ), and the following link was established: there is a commutative diagram

in which $`,𝒫,𝒯,𝒦`$ are (in that order) the phase spaces of the (even) Mumford system, the hyperelliptic Prym system (odd or even), the periodic $`A_n`$-Toda lattice and the periodic $`A_n`$-Volterra system. The vertical arrows are natural inclusion maps exhibiting for both spaces the subspace as fixed points varieties and the horizontal arrows are injective maps that map every fiber of the momentum map on the left injectively into (but not onto) a fiber of the momentum map on the right. In addition, Poisson structures were constructed so that this diagram has a meaning in the Poisson category. These give a precise geometric description, in the $`A_n`$ case, of the well known connection between the Toda and Volterra systems (see also ).

In this paper we initiate the study of the relationship between the Toda and Volterra systems, for root systems other than $`A_n`$. Here we shall restrict our attention mainly to the $`B_n`$ case, for which we give a complete description. The analysis for this case is simplified since we can view this system as a subsystem of the $`A_{2n}`$-system. We exhibit the phase space of the $`B_n`$-system as a fixed point set of a finite group action by Poisson automorphisms. We prove a general result which allow us to reduce the Poisson structures in such situations, and hence we can relate the multiple Hamiltonian structures of the Volterra and Toda systems.

The plan of this paper is as follows: In Section 2, we discuss several conditions under which the fixed point set of a Poisson action inherits a Poisson bracket, generalizing the Poisson involution theorem (see ). In Section 3, we recall the definition of the Toda systems, and give the multiple Hamiltonian structure for the $`B_n`$ system. These were discovered in  (see also ) and we use here a new approach based on the Poisson involution theorem to deduce them. In Section 4, we first recall the construction of the Volterra system and its generalizations for any root system associated with a simple Lie algebra. Then, we give the multiple Hamiltonian structure for the $`B_n`$ (and $`C_n`$) cases and, by applying a symmetry approach, we explain the relation between the Poisson structures for Volterra and Toda lattices. In the final section, we describe the connections we have been able to find between the two systems, including a generalization of Moser’s recipe (see ) to pass from the Volterra to the Toda lattices.

## 2. Fixed point sets of Poisson actions

We shall see that the relation between the Toda and Volterra systems relies on special symmetries of the phase spaces. In this section, we study conditions under which the fixed point set of a Poisson action inherits a Poisson bracket.

Although we will be interested mainly in finite symmetries, we give the following general result:

###### Theorem 2.1.

Suppose that $`(M,\{,\})`$ is a Poisson manifold, and $`G`$ a compact group acting on $`M`$ by Poisson automorphisms. Let $`N=M^G`$ be the submanifold of $`M`$ consisting of the fixed points of the action and let $`\iota :NM`$ be the inclusion. Then $`N`$ carries a (unique) Poisson structure $`\{,\}_N`$ such that

(3)
$$ı^{}\{F_1,F_2\}=\{ı^{}F_1,ı^{}F_2\}_N$$

for all $`G`$-invariant functions $`F_1,F_2C^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$.

###### Proof.

For $`f_1,f_2C^{\mathrm{}}(N)`$ we choose $`F_1,F_2C^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$ such that $`f_i=ı^{}F_i`$. We may assume that $`F_1`$ and $`F_2`$ are $`G`$-invariant by replacing $`F_i`$ by

$$\stackrel{~}{F_i}=_GF_i𝑑\mu ,$$

where $`\mu `$ is the Haar measure on $`G`$, so that $`_G1𝑑\mu =1`$. We set

$$\{f_1,f_2\}_Nı^{}\{F_1,F_2\}$$

and show that this definition is independent of the choice of $`F_i`$. For this we observe that, since the action of $`G`$ is Poisson, the Hamiltonian vector field $`X_F`$ associated with a $`G`$-invariant function $`F:M`$ is tangent to $`N`$. It follows that the Poisson bracket $`\{F_1,F_2\}|_N`$, where $`F_1`$ and $`F_2`$ are $`G`$-invariant functions, depends only on the restrictions $`F_i|_N`$.

It is obvious from its definition that $`\{,\}_N`$ is bilinear, and satisfies the Jacobi and Leibniz identities, for these identities hold for $`\{,\}`$. Hence, we obtain a Poisson bracket on $`N`$, and it is the only Poisson bracket satisfying (3). ∎

###### Remark 2.2.

The previous result can be seen as a particular case of Dirac reduction (for the general theorem on Dirac reduction, see Weinstein (, Prop. 1.4) and Courant (, Thm. 3.2.1). The case where $`G`$ is a reductive algebraic group is discussed in  using a different method.

Since this result applies in particular when $`G`$ is a finite group, we have:

###### Corollary 2.3.

Suppose that $`(M,\{,\})`$ is a Poisson manifold, and $`G`$ is a finite group acting on $`M`$ by Poisson automorphisms. Then the fixed point set $`N=M^G`$ carries a (unique) Poisson structure $`\{,\}_N`$ satisfying equation (3).

Let us consider the special case $`G=_2`$. Then $`G=\{I,\varphi \}`$, where $`\varphi :MM`$ is a Poisson involution. We conclude that $`N=M^G=\{x:\varphi (x)=x\}`$ has a unique Poisson bracket satisfying equation (3). So we see that Theorem 2.1 contains as a special case the following result, which is known as the *Poisson involution theorem* (see ).

###### Corollary 2.4.

Suppose that $`(M,\{,\})`$ is a Poisson manifold, and $`\varphi :MM`$ is a Poisson involution. Then the fixed point set $`N=\{xM:\varphi (x)=x\}`$ carries a (unique) Poisson structure $`\{,\}_N`$ such that

$$ı^{}\{F_1,F_2\}=\{ı^{}F_1,ı^{}F_2\}_N$$

for all functions $`F_1,F_2C^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$ invariant under $`\varphi `$.

One should note that, in general, the fixed point set $`M^G`$ is not a Poisson submanifold of $`M`$, since it is not a union of symplectic leaves of $`M`$. In other words, underlying Theorem 2.1 there is a true Dirac type reduction, rather than a restriction or Poisson reduction.

## 3. The Toda lattices

### 3.1. The $`A_n`$-Toda system

The phase space $`𝒯_n`$ of the (non-periodic) $`A_{n1}`$-Toda lattice is the affine variety of all Lax operators in $`\text{s}\text{l}_n`$ of the form

(4)
$$L=\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}b_1& a_1& 0& \mathrm{}& 0& 0\\ 1& b_2& a_2& & & 0\\ 0& 1& & & & \mathrm{}\\ \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}\\ 0& & & & b_{n1}& a_{n1}\\ 0& 0& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& 1& b_n\end{array}\right).$$

The reader will notice that we adopt a set of variables (due to Kostant) that differ slightly from the usual Flaschka variables (see , Chp. V). This Lax pair has an obvious Lie algebraic interpretation which leads to the generalized Toda Lattices (see next paragraph).

The Hamiltonians $`H_k`$, $`(k=1,\mathrm{},n)`$, defined by

$$H_k=\frac{1}{k}\text{tr}(L^k).$$

are in involution with respect to the linear Poisson bracket $`\{,\}_𝒯^1`$, defined by

(5) $`\{a_i,a_j\}_𝒯^1`$ $`=\{b_i,b_j\}_𝒯^1=0`$
$`\{a_i,b_j\}_𝒯^1`$ $`=a_i(\delta _{ij}\delta _{i+1,j}).`$
The commuting vector fields $`X_k=\{,H_k\}_𝒯^1`$ admit the Lax representation

(6)
$$X_k(L)=[L,(L^{k+1})_+],$$

where the subscript $`+`$ denotes projection into the Lie subalgebra of $`\text{s}\text{l}_n`$ generated by the positive roots. In , it was proved that the non-periodic Toda lattice is a completely integrable system, by applying a finite dimensional analogue of the inverse scattering method. For the periodic case, the flows are linear on the generic fibers of the momentum map $`K:𝒯_n[x]`$, and since these fibers are affine parts of hyperelliptic Jacobians, the periodic Toda lattice is an a.c.i. system (see  for details).

The Toda lattice is also Hamiltonian with respect to a quadratic Poisson bracket $`\{,\}_𝒯^2`$, defined by

(7) $`\{a_i,a_j\}_𝒯^2`$ $`=a_ia_j(\delta _{i,j+1}\delta _{i+1,j}),\{a_i,b_j\}_𝒯^2=a_ib_j(\delta _{i,j}\delta _{i+1,j}),`$
$`\{b_i,b_j\}_𝒯^2`$ $`=a_i(\delta _{i,j+1}\delta _{i+1,j}).`$
The quadratic Toda bracket appeared in a paper of Adler  in 1979. The brackets $`\{,\}_𝒯^1`$ and $`\{,\}_𝒯^2`$ are compatible, and are in fact part of a full hierarchy of higher order Poisson brackets . Denote by $`\pi _1`$ and $`\pi _2`$ the Poisson tensors associated with the linear and quadratic brackets. Also, let $`Z_0`$ be the Euler vector field

(8)
$$Z_0=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}a_i\frac{}{a_i}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}b_i\frac{}{b_i}.$$

The following result is proved in :

###### Proposition 3.1.

There exists a sequence of Poisson tensors $`\pi _k`$ and master symmetries $`Z_k`$, $`k=0,1,2,`$ such that

1. The $`\pi _k`$ are compatible Poisson tensors and the functions $`H_k`$ are in involution with respect to all of the $`\pi _k`$;
2. The vector fields $`X_k`$ admit the multiple Hamiltonian formulation

$$X_{k+l1}=\pi _kdH_l=\pi _{k1}dH_{l+1};$$
3. The Poisson tensors, the integrals and the Hamiltonian vector fields, satisfy the deformation relations:

(9) $`_{Z_k}\pi _l`$ $`=(lk2)\pi _{k+l},`$ $`Z_k(H_l)`$ $`=(k+l)H_{k+l},`$
$`_{Z_k}X_l`$ $`=(l1)X_{k+l},`$ $`[Z_k,Z_l]`$ $`=(kl)Z_{k+l}.`$

These relations will be important later to deduce some properties of the Volterra lattices. Using these relations we can find explicit formulas for the higher order Poisson brackets. For example, we have that

(10)
$$\begin{array}{c}Z_1=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n1}{}}a_i\left(b_i(12i)+b_{i+1}(1+2i)\right)\frac{}{a_i}\hfill \\ \hfill +\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}\left(a_{i1}(22i)+a_i(2+2i)+b_i^2\right)\frac{}{b_i}\end{array}$$

so we find that the cubic bracket $`\pi _3=_{Z_1}\pi _2`$ is given by (see ):

$`\{a_i,a_{i+1}\}_𝒯^3`$ $`=2a_ia_{i+1}b_{i+1},`$ $`\{a_i,b_i\}_𝒯^3`$ $`=a_ib_i^2a_i^2,`$
(11) $`\{a_i,b_{i+1}\}_𝒯^3`$ $`=a_ib_{i+1}^2+a_i^2,`$ $`\{a_i,b_{i+2}\}_𝒯^3`$ $`=a_ia_{i+1},`$
$`\{a_{i+1},b_i\}_𝒯^3`$ $`=a_ia_{i+1},`$ $`\{b_i,b_{i+1}\}_𝒯^3`$ $`=a_i(b_i+b_{i+1}).`$
Similarly, one can compute any higher order Poisson bracket.

The cubic bracket $`\pi _3`$ was found by Kupershmidt  via the infinite Toda lattice.

### 3.2. The $`B_n`$-Toda system

Generalizations of the Toda lattice for other root systems are well known and were first given in . We consider here only the case of $`B_n`$.

The phase space for the $`B_n`$-Toda lattice is the affine variety of all Lax operators in $`\text{s}\text{l}_{2n+1}`$ of the form:

(12)
$$L=\left(\begin{array}{cccccccccccc}b_1& a_1& 0& \mathrm{}& & & & & \mathrm{}& 0& 0& \\ 1& b_2& a_2& & & & & & & & 0& \\ \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& & & & & & & \mathrm{}& \\ & & & b_{n1}& a_{n1}& & & & & & & \\ & & & 1& b_n& a_n& & & & & & \\ & & & & 1& 0& a_n& & & & & \\ & & & & & 1& b_n& a_{n1}& & & & \\ & & & & & & 1& b_{n1}& & & & \\ \mathrm{}& & & & & & & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}& \\ 0& & & & & & & & 1& b_2& a_1& \\ 0& 0& \mathrm{}& & & & & & 0& 1& b_1& \end{array}\right)$$

This matrix actually lies in the real simple Lie algebra $`𝔤=𝔰𝔬(n,n+1)`$. We would like to have a multiple Hamiltonian formulation for the $`B_n`$-Toda systems

(13)
$$\frac{dL}{dt}=[L,(L^{k+1})_+].$$

Note that, in this case, only the even powers of $`L`$ give non-trivial integrals

$$H_{2k}=\frac{1}{2k}\text{tr}(L^{2k}),(k=1,2,\mathrm{}).$$

In order to write down a Hamiltonian formulation for these systems we recall that the $`B_n`$-Toda is a subsystem of the $`A_{2n}`$-system. This is well known and in fact, more is true: we can find a symmetry such that the $`B_n`$-Toda is obtained through a symmetry reduction from the $`A_{2n}`$-Toda. To see this, observe that conjugation by a diagonal matrix takes the Lax matrix (12) to the Lax matrix:

(14)
$$L=\left(\begin{array}{cccccccccccc}b_1& a_1& 0& \mathrm{}& & & & & \mathrm{}& 0& 0& \\ 1& b_2& a_2& & & & & & & & 0& \\ \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& & & & & & & \mathrm{}& \\ & & & b_{n1}& a_{n1}& & & & & & & \\ & & & 1& b_n& a_n& & & & & & \\ & & & & 1& 0& a_n& & & & & \\ & & & & & 1& b_n& a_{n1}& & & & \\ & & & & & & 1& b_{n1}& & & & \\ \mathrm{}& & & & & & & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}& \\ 0& & & & & & & & 1& b_2& a_1& \\ 0& 0& \mathrm{}& & & & & & 0& 1& b_1& \end{array}\right)$$

and this is just a matrix in $`𝒯_{2n+1}`$ satisfying $`a_{2n+1i}=a_i`$ and $`b_{2n+2i}=b_i`$. Therefore, if we consider the involution $`\varphi :𝒯_{2n+1}𝒯_{2n+1}`$ defined by

$$\varphi (a_i,b_i)=(a_{2n+1i},b_{2n+2i}),$$

then the phase space of the $`B_n`$-Toda can be identified with the fixed point set of this involution. On the other hand the $`_2`$-action generated by this involution is a Poisson action for the odd Poisson brackets. More precisely, we have:

###### Proposition 3.2.

The map $`\varphi :𝒯_{2n+1}𝒯_{2n+1}`$ satisfies

$$\varphi _{}\pi _k=(1)^{k+1}\pi _k.$$

###### Proof.

For lower order Poisson brackets one can check this relation by direct computation. For higher Poisson brackets, we note that expression (10) for the master symmetry $`Z_1`$, shows after some tedious computation that

$$\varphi _{}Z_1=Z_1+X,$$

where $`X`$ is a multiple of the first Hamiltonian vector field $`X_1`$. Now relation (9) gives

$$_{Z_1}\pi _k=(k3)\pi _{k+1},$$

so it follows by induction that

$`\varphi _{}\pi _{k+1}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{k3}}\varphi _{}_{Z_1}\pi _k`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{k3}}_{\varphi _{}Z_1}\varphi _{}\pi _k`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{k3}}_{Z_1}(1)^{k+1}\pi _k=(1)^{k+2}\pi _{k+1}.`$
Using Corollary 2.4, we conclude that the odd Poisson brackets for the $`A_{2n}`$-Toda induce Poisson brackets for the $`B_n`$-Toda lattices, which therefore possesses a multiple Hamiltonian formulation. In this way we have deduced the following result of :

###### Corollary 3.3.

There exists a sequence of Poisson tensors $`\pi _1,\pi _3,\pi _5,`$ such that the $`B_n`$-Toda lattices (13) possess a multiple Hamiltonian formulation:

$$\pi _{k+2}dH_{2l}=\pi _kdH_{2l+2}.$$

It should be noted that Theorem 2.1 gives an effective procedure to compute the Poisson brackets, as is illustrated by the following example.

###### Example 3.4.

In this example we compute the cubic $`B_n`$-bracket. We denote by $`(a_i,b_j)`$, where $`i,j=1,\mathrm{},n`$, the coordinates on the phase space of the $`B_n`$-Toda lattice, and by $`(\stackrel{~}{a}_i,\stackrel{~}{b}_j)`$, where $`i=1,\mathrm{},2n`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},2n+1`$, the coordinates on the phase space of the $`A_{2n}`$-Toda lattice.

Suppose we would like to compute the cubic $`B_n`$-bracket $`\{a_i,b_i\}_𝒯^3`$. First we extend the function $`a_i`$ and $`b_i`$ to invariant functions $`\widehat{a}_i`$ and $`\widehat{b}_i`$ on the phase space of the $`A_{2n}`$-Toda lattice. For example, we can take the functions

$$\widehat{a}_i=\frac{\stackrel{~}{a}_i+\stackrel{~}{a}_{2n+1i}}{2},\widehat{b}_i=\frac{\stackrel{~}{b}_i\stackrel{~}{b}_{2n+2i}}{2}.$$

Then we compute the $`A_{2n}`$-cubic bracket of these functions: we find using (3.1) that for $`i<n`$, we have

$$\{\widehat{a}_i,\widehat{b}_i\}_𝒯^3=\frac{1}{4}\left(\stackrel{~}{a}_i\stackrel{~}{b}_i^2+\stackrel{~}{a}_i^2+\stackrel{~}{a}_{2n+1i}\stackrel{~}{b}_{2n+2i}^2+\stackrel{~}{a}_{2n+1i}^2\right),$$

while for $`i=n`$ we obtain

$$\{\widehat{a}_n,\widehat{b}_n\}_𝒯^3=\frac{1}{4}\left(\stackrel{~}{a}_n\stackrel{~}{b}_n^2+\stackrel{~}{a}_n^2+\stackrel{~}{a}_{n+1}\stackrel{~}{b}_{n+2}^2+\stackrel{~}{a}_{n+1}^2+2\stackrel{~}{a}_n\stackrel{~}{a}_{n+1}\right).$$

Finally, we restrict the brackets to the $`B_n`$-phase space, to obtain the cubic $`B_n`$-bracket

(15) $`\{a_i,b_i\}_𝒯^3`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(a_ib_i^2+a_i^2\right),(i<n)`$
(16) $`\{a_n,b_n\}_𝒯^3`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(a_nb_n^2+2a_n^2\right).`$
The other brackets are computed in a similar fashion and they give the following expressions

$`\{a_i,a_{i+1}\}_𝒯^3`$ $`=a_ia_{i+1}b_{i+1},`$ $`\{b_i,b_{i+1}\}_𝒯^3`$ $`=a_i(b_i+b_{i+1}),`$
(17) $`\{a_i,b_{i+1}\}_𝒯^3`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(a_ib_{i+1}^2+a_i^2\right),`$ $`\{a_i,b_{i+2}\}_𝒯^3`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}a_ia_{i+1},`$
$`\{a_{i+1},b_i\}_𝒯^3`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}a_ia_{i+1}.`$
###### Remark 3.5.

It is not hard to check that the (non-periodic) $`C_n`$-Toda system is a subsystem of the $`A_{2n1}`$-Toda system. The reader can check that the multiple Hamiltonian structure for the $`C_n`$-Toda lattices found in ,  can be obtained from the multiple Hamiltonian structure for the $`A_{2n1}`$-Toda systems, as in the $`B_n`$-case. In fact, the involution $`\varphi :𝒯_{2n}𝒯_{2n}`$ defined by

$$\varphi (a_i,b_i)=(a_{2n+1i},b_{2n+2i}).$$

satisfies $`\varphi _{}\pi _k=(1)^k\pi _k`$, so the same method applies.

## 4. The Volterra Lattices

### 4.1. The $`A_n`$-Volterra system

We now turn to the (non-periodic) $`A_n`$-Volterra system. Its phase space $`𝒦_n`$ is the subspace of $`𝒯_n`$ consisting of all Lax operators (4) with zeros on the diagonal:

(18)
$$L=\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}0& a_1& 0& \mathrm{}& 0& 0\\ 1& 0& a_2& & & 0\\ 0& 1& & & & \mathrm{}\\ \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}\\ 0& & & & 0& a_{n1}\\ 0& 0& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& 1& 0\end{array}\right).$$

Note that $`𝒦_n`$ is not a Poisson subspace of $`𝒯_n`$. However, $`𝒦_n`$ is the fixed manifold of the involution $`\psi :𝒯_n𝒯_n`$ defined by

$$((a_1,a_2\mathrm{},a_n),(b_1,b_2\mathrm{},b_n))((a_1,a_2\mathrm{},a_n),(b_1,b_2\mathrm{},b_n)),$$

and we have (see ):

###### Proposition 4.1.

$`\psi :𝒯_n𝒯_n`$ is a Poisson automorphism of $`(𝒯_n,\{,\}_𝒯^k)`$, if $`k`$ even.

###### Proof.

Again, one checks by direct computation for $`k<4`$ that

$$\psi _{}\pi _k=(1)^k\pi _k.$$

On the other hand, we have that $`\psi _{}Z_1=Z_1`$, so by induction we see that

$`\psi _{}\pi _{k+1}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{k3}}\psi _{}_{Z_1}\pi _k`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{k3}}_{\psi _{}Z_1}\psi _{}\pi _k`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{k3}}_{Z_1}(1)^k\pi _k=(1)^{k+1}\pi _{k+1}.`$
and the result follows. ∎

Therefore, by Corollary 2.4, $`𝒦_n`$ inherits a family of Poisson brackets $`\pi _2,\pi _4,\mathrm{}`$. For example, the quadratic bracket can be computed from formulas (7), in a form entirely analogous to Example 3.4, and is given by

(19)
$$\{a_i,a_j\}_𝒦^2=a_ia_j(\delta _{i,j+1}\delta _{i+1,j}),$$

while the Poisson bracket $`\pi _4`$ is found to be given by the formulas

(20) $`\{a_i,a_{i+1}\}_𝒦^4`$ $`=a_ia_{i+1}(a_i+a_{i+1}),`$ $`(i`$ $`=1,\mathrm{},n1)`$
$`\{a_i,a_{i+2}\}_𝒦^4`$ $`=a_ia_{i+1}a_{i+2},`$ $`(i`$ $`=1,\mathrm{},n2).`$
The formulas for the brackets $`\pi _2`$ and $`\pi _4`$ appeared in , and the existence of this hierarchy of Poisson brackets is proved in . The first three Poisson structures of this system appeared first in  where the Volterra lattice is treated in detail, however the quadratic and cubic brackets do not coincide with the brackets in .

It follows that the restriction of the integrals $`H_{2k}`$ to $`𝒦_n`$ gives a set of commuting integrals, with respect to these Poisson brackets. Also, for $`i`$ odd, the Lax equations (6) lead to Lax equations for the corresponding flows, merely by putting all $`b_i`$ equal to zero. Taking $`i=1`$, we recover the system

(21)
$$\dot{a}_i=a_i(a_{i1}a_{i+1}),i=1,\mathrm{},n,$$

which we called the $`A_n`$-Volterra lattice in the introduction. More generally, taking $`i`$ odd we find a family of commuting Hamiltonian vector fields on $`𝒦_n`$ which are restrictions of the Toda vector fields, while for $`i`$ even the Toda vector fields $`X_i`$ are not tangent to $`𝒦_n`$. Hence, we obtain a family of integrable systems admitting a multiple Hamiltonian formulation:

$$X_{2(k+l)1}=\pi _{2k+2}dH_{2l}=\pi _{2k}dH_{2l+2},(k=1,2,\mathrm{}).$$

This system was shown to be a completely integrable system in , while the periodic version of this system was proved to be an a.c.i. system in .

### 4.2. Generalized Volterra systems

We now describe the construction of the generalized Volterra systems of Bogoyavlensky (see ).

Let g be a simple Lie algebra, with $`\text{rank}\text{g}=n`$, and let $`\mathrm{\Pi }=\{\omega _1,\omega _2,\mathrm{},\omega _n\}`$ be a Cartan-Weyl basis for the simple roots in g. There exist unique positive integers $`k_i`$ such that

$$k_0\omega _0+k_1\omega _1+\mathrm{}+k_n\omega _n=0,$$

where $`k_0=1`$ and $`\omega _0`$ is the minimal negative root. We consider the Lax pair:

$$\dot{L}=[B,L],$$

where

$`L(t)=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}}b_i(t)e_{\omega _i}+e_{\omega _0}+{\displaystyle \underset{1i<jn}{}}[e_{\omega _i},e_{\omega _j}],`$
$`B(t)=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{k_i}{b_i(t)}}e_{\omega _i}+e_{\omega _0}.`$
Let $`\text{h}\text{g}`$ be the Cartan subalgebra. For every root $`\omega _a\text{h}^{}`$ there is a unique $`H_{\omega _a}\text{h}`$ such that $`\omega (h)=\beta (H_{\omega _a},h)`$, for all $`h\text{h}`$, where $`\beta `$ denotes the Killing form. Also, $`\beta `$ induces an inner product on $`\text{h}^{}`$ by setting $`\omega _a,\omega _b=\beta (H_{\omega _a},H_{\omega _b})`$, and we define

$$c_{ij}=\{\begin{array}{cc}1& \text{if }\omega _i,\omega _j0\text{ and }i<j\\ 0& \text{if }\omega _i,\omega _j=0\text{ or }i=j\text{ }\\ 1\text{ }& \text{if }\omega _i,\omega _j0\text{ and }i>j\end{array}$$

With these choices, the Lax pair above is equivalent to the system of o.d.e.’s

(22)
$$\dot{b}_i=\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}\frac{k_jc_{ij}}{b_j}.$$

To obtain a Lotka-Volterra type system one introduces a new set of variables by

$`x_{ij}`$ $`=c_{ij}b_i^1b_j^1,`$
$`x_{ji}`$ $`=x_{ij},`$
$`x_{jj}`$ $`=0.`$
Note that $`x_{ij}0`$ iff there exists an edge in the Dynkin diagram for the Lie algebra g connecting the vertices $`\omega _i`$ and $`\omega _j`$. System (22), in the variables $`x_{ij}`$, takes the form

(23)
$$\dot{x}_{ij}=x_{ij}\underset{s=1}{\overset{n}{}}k_s\left(x_{is}+x_{js}\right),$$

which is a Lotka-Volterra type system. We call (23) the Bogoyavlensky-Volterra system associated with g (or the g-Volterra system for short).

###### Example 4.2.

Let us take $`\text{g}=A_n`$. Then we have the Dynkin diagram

with $`k_i=1`$, $`i=0,\mathrm{},n`$. If we label the edges of this diagram by $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_n`$, then system (23) takes precisely the form of the $`A_n`$-Volterra lattice.

We now turn our attention to the $`B_n`$-case.

### 4.3. The $`B_n`$-Volterra system

For $`\text{g}=B_n`$, the Dynkin diagram has the form

and for the obvious labeling (and after a linear change of variables) we obtain the $`B_n`$-Volterra system

(24)
$$\{\begin{array}{c}\dot{a}_1=a_1a_2\hfill \\ \dot{a}_i=a_i(a_{i1}a_{i+1}),(i=2,\mathrm{},n1)\hfill \\ \dot{a}_n=a_n\left(a_{n1}+a_n\right).\hfill \end{array}$$

The multiple Hamiltonian structure for the $`B_n`$-Volterra system can be obtained from the $`A_{2n}`$-Volterra system in the same fashion as the multiple Hamiltonian formulation for the $`B_n`$-Toda system was obtained from the $`A_{2n}`$-Toda system (cf. Section 3.2). In fact, we notice that equations (24) for the $`B_n`$-Volterra system can be obtained from equations (21) for the $`A_{2n}`$-Volterra system by setting $`a_{2n+ii}=a_i`$ (this defines an invariant submanifold). Hence, we take as phase space of the $`B_n`$-Volterra system the Lax operators of the form (18) satisfying these additional restrictions:

(25)
$$L=\left(\begin{array}{cccccccccccc}0& a_1& 0& \mathrm{}& & & & & \mathrm{}& 0& 0& \\ 1& 0& a_2& & & & & & & & 0& \\ \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& & & & & & & \mathrm{}& \\ & & & 0& a_{n1}& & & & & & & \\ & & & 1& 0& a_n& & & & & & \\ & & & & 1& 0& a_n& & & & & \\ & & & & & 1& 0& a_{n1}& & & & \\ & & & & & & 1& 0& & & & \\ \mathrm{}& & & & & & & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}& \\ 0& & & & & & & & 1& 0& a_1& \\ 0& 0& \mathrm{}& & & & & & 0& 1& 0& \end{array}\right),$$

Notice that this subspace appears as the fixed point set of the involution $`\phi :𝒦_{2n}𝒦_{2n}`$ defined by

$$\phi (a_i)=a_{2n+1i}.$$

We will see below that this involution can be used to obtain the multiple Hamiltonian structure of the $`B_n`$-Volterra system.

###### Remark 4.3.

There is a diagonal matrix $`D`$ which conjugates the Lax matrix given above for the $`B_n`$ system, to the following Lax matrix

(26)
$$L=\left(\begin{array}{cccccccccccc}0& a_1& 0& \mathrm{}& & & & & \mathrm{}& 0& 0& \\ 1& 0& a_2& & & & & & & & 0& \\ \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& & & & & & & \mathrm{}& \\ & & & 0& a_{n1}& & & & & & & \\ & & & 1& 0& a_n& & & & & & \\ & & & & 1& 0& a_n& & & & & \\ & & & & & 1& 0& a_{n1}& & & & \\ & & & & & & 1& 0& & & & \\ \mathrm{}& & & & & & & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}& \\ 0& & & & & & & & 1& 0& a_1& \\ 0& 0& \mathrm{}& & & & & & 0& 1& 0& \end{array}\right).$$

Notice that these Lax matrices *are not* obtained as Lax matrices for the $`B_n`$-Volterra system (matrices of the form (12)) with zeros on the diagonal.

We now have the following proposition analogous to Propositions 3.2 and 4.1. The proof is similar and will be omitted.

###### Proposition 4.4.

Let $`\pi _k`$ ($`k=2,4,`$) be the Poisson tensors of the $`A_{2n}`$-Volterra system. Then

$$\phi _{}\pi _k=(1)^{k/2}\pi _k.$$

In this way, by Corollary 2.4, the phase space of the $`B_n`$-Volterra system carries Poisson brackets $`\pi _4,\pi _8,\mathrm{}`$. For example, from (20) we can compute, using the same technique as in Example 3.4, the following explicit formulas for the bracket $`\pi _4`$:

$`\{a_i,a_{i+1}\}_𝒦^4`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}a_ia_{i+1}(a_i+a_{i+1}),`$
(27) $`\{a_{n1},a_n\}_𝒦^4`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}a_{n1}a_n(a_{n1}+2a_n),(i=1,\mathrm{},n2)`$
$`\{a_i,a_{i+2}\}_𝒦^4`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}a_ia_{i+1}a_{i+2}.`$
The restriction of the invariant functions

$$H_{4k}=\frac{1}{4k}\text{tr}(L^{4k})$$

to this space, defines a hierarchy of systems, possessing a multiple Hamiltonian formulation:

$$X_{4(k+l)1}=\pi _{4k+4}dH_{4l}=\pi _{4k}dH_{4l+4},(k=1,2,\mathrm{}).$$

The function $`I_4=\frac{1}{4}_{i=1}^{n1}(2a_i^2+a_ia_{i+1})`$ gives the $`B_n`$-Volterra system (24). The brackets above, as well as the master symmetries for these systems (including the $`C_n`$ and $`D_n`$ cases) appear in a recent preprint of Kouzaris (). However, the Lax matrices above lead to Lax pairs which are *different* from the Lax pairs given by Kouzaris.

Finally we remark that the $`C_n`$-Volterra system can be identified with the $`B_n`$-Volterra systems (see ), and hence admits the same description.

## 5. Epilogue: From Toda to Volterra and back

In this concluding section we would like to explain what we know so far about the connection between the Toda and Volterra systems, including the results obtained above. The relation between the two systems relies on special symmetries of the phase spaces.

We have shown above that the phase space of the $`A_n`$-Volterra system appears as the fixed point set of a Poisson involution of the $`A_n`$-Toda phase space. On the other hand, we have also shown that the multiple Hamiltonian structure of the $`B_n`$-Toda system can be obtained from the $`A_{2n}`$-Toda system. Hence, to get to the $`B_n`$-Volterra system, there are *a priori* two distinct ways to proceed, as explained by the following diagram:

We have seen that the correct way to proceed is to choose the *left* side of this diagram. In fact, we saw above that we can get from $`A_{2n}`$-Toda to $`A_{2n}`$-Volterra by a Poisson involution $`\psi :𝒯_{2n}𝒯_{2n}`$ (i.e., a $`_2`$-symmetry). Also, we can get from $`A_{2n}`$-Volterra to $`B_n`$-Volterra using another Poisson involution $`\phi :𝒦_{2n}𝒦_{2n}`$ (and, hence, again a $`_2`$-symmetry). Note also that we can go straight from $`A_{2n}`$-Toda to $`B_n`$-Volterra using a $`_4`$-symmetry: if one defines the map $`\phi :𝒯_{2n}𝒯_{2n}`$ by

$$\stackrel{~}{\phi }(a_i,b_i)=(a_{2n+1i},\sqrt{1}b_{2n+2i}),$$

then one checks that the group

$$G=\{I,\stackrel{~}{\phi },\stackrel{~}{\phi }^2,\stackrel{~}{\phi }^3\}$$

acts by Poisson automorphisms on $`(𝒯_{2n},\pi _{4k})`$, $`k=1,2,\mathrm{}`$. The fixed point set (i.e., the phase space for $`B_n`$-Volterra) inherits Poisson structures $`\pi _{4k}`$ and the even flows reduce to this space. Notice also that $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }|_{𝒦_{2n}}=\phi `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }^2=\psi `$, so this reduction in one stage (the middle line in the diagram) coincides with the reduction in two stages (the left part of the diagram).

On the other hand, there seems to be no such symmetry reduction from the $`B_n`$-Toda lattice to the $`B_n`$-Volterra lattice: the various Poisson structures and Hamiltonian functions we have for the $`B_n`$-Toda systems *do not* restrict to the phase space of the $`B_n`$-Volterra systems. We could however still find a connection between these two systems, which goes in the opposite direction.

To explain this connection, we perform the change of variable, $`a_i=2x_i^2`$, and we consider the following equivalent (i.e., conjugate) form of the Lax matrix (25) (or, equivalently, (26)):

$$L=\left(\begin{array}{ccccccccccc}0& x_1& 0& \mathrm{}& & & \mathrm{}& 0& 0& & \\ x1& 0& x_2& & & & & & 0& & \\ \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& & & & & \mathrm{}& & \\ & & & 0& x_n& & & & & & \\ & & & x_n& 0& \sqrt{1}x_n& & & & & \\ & & & & \sqrt{1}x_n& 0& & & & & \\ \mathrm{}& & & & & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}& & \\ 0& & & & & & & 0& \sqrt{1}x_1& & \\ 0& 0& \mathrm{}& & & & 0& \sqrt{1}x_1& 0& & \end{array}\right).$$

In these new variables the equations for the $`B_n`$-Volterra lattice (24) become:

$$\{\begin{array}{c}\dot{x_1}=x_1x_2^2,\hfill \\ \dot{x_i}=x_i(x_{i1}^2x_{i+1}^2),\hfill \\ \dot{x_n}=x_n(x_n^2+x_{n1}^2),\hfill \end{array}(i=2,\mathrm{},n1).$$

The relation between the $`B_n`$-Volterra system and the corresponding Toda system of types $`B_n`$ and $`C_n`$ is similar to the relation observed by Moser (see ) between the $`A_n`$-Volterra and the $`A_n`$-Toda lattices. One starts by taking the square of the Lax matrix above and notices that $`L^2`$ leaves certain subspaces invariant. Moreover, $`L^2`$ reduces on each of these invariant spaces to a symmetric Jacobi matrix. More precisely, assume that $`L^2`$ is a $`N\times N`$ matrix. Then there are two distinct cases:

* $`N=4n+1:`$ Removing all odd columns and all odd rows we end–up with an $`2n\times 2n`$ matrix and a Toda system of type $`C_n`$. On the other hand, removing all even columns and all even rows we end–up with an $`2n+1\times 2n+1`$ matrix and a Toda system of type $`B_n`$.
* $`N=4n+3:`$ Removing all odd columns and all odd rows we end–up with an $`2n+1\times 2n+1`$ matrix and a Toda system of type $`B_n`$. On the other hand, removing all even columns and all even rows we end–up with an $`2(n+1)\times 2(n+1)`$ matrix and a Toda system of type $`C_{n+1}`$.

In this way, we have a procedure which takes us from a Volterra systems of type $`B_n`$ (or $`C_n`$) to either a Toda system of type $`B_n`$ or a Toda system of type $`C_n`$.

###### Example 5.1.

Take $`N=9`$ and $`n=2`$. Omitting all even rows and all even columns of $`L^2`$ we obtain the $`5\times 5`$ matrix

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}x_1^2& x_1x_2& 0& 0& 0\\ x_1x_2& x_2^2+x_3^2& x_3x_4& 0& 0\\ 0& x_3x_4& 0& x_3x_4& 0\\ 0& 0& x_3x_4& x_2^2x_3^2& x_1x_2\\ 0& 0& 0& x_1x_2& x_1^2\end{array}\right).$$

We identify this matrix with a symmetric Jacobi matrix of type $`B_2`$, i.e. we let

$$B_1=x_1^2,B_2=x_2^2+x_3^2,A_1=x_1x_2,A_2=x_3x_4,$$

and the equations satisfied by $`A_1`$, $`A_2`$, $`B_1`$, and $`B_2`$ are

$$\{\begin{array}{c}\dot{A}_1=A_1\left(B_2B_1\right),\hfill \\ \dot{A}_2=A_2B_2,\hfill \\ \dot{B}_1=2A_1^2,\hfill \\ \dot{B}_2=2A_2^22A_1^2.\hfill \end{array}$$

These are precisely the Toda equations of type $`B_2`$.


format: text

text:
# Universality class of the restricted solid-on-solid model with hopping

## I Introduction

In recent years, the field of nonequilibrium surface growth has been investigated using various discrete models and continuous equations. The comprehension of nonequilibrium surface growth plays an important role in understanding and controlling many interesting interface processes, such as vapor deposition, crystal growth, molecular beam epitaxy (MBE), and so on. During the MBE growth process, the conserved growth condition is applied without defects, such as overhangs and vacancies. Various discrete conserved models for MBE, describing the kinetic properties of this type of surface growth, have been proposed and studied by intensive numerical simulations.

The main purpose of studying discrete models is to measure scaling exponents for the kinetic roughening, which determines the asymptotic behavior of surface growth on a large length scale in a long time limit. The important result of the kinetic roughening studies is that a large variety of different discrete growth models can be divided into only a few universality classes. The surface width $`W`$, which measures the root-mean-square fluctuation of the surface height, scales as

$$W(L,t)L^\alpha f(t/L^z),$$
(1)
where the asymptotic behavior of the scaling function $`f(x)`$ is constant for $`x1`$ and $`x^\beta `$ for $`x1`$ with $`\beta =\alpha /z`$. The scaling behavior of the growth is characterized by three exponents: the roughness exponent $`\alpha `$, the growth exponent $`\beta `$, and the dynamical exponent $`z`$. These exponents determine the universality class.

In the coarse-grained picture, evolution of the growing surface is usually described by a stochastic differential equation (SDE) for the height variable $`h(𝐱,t)`$ as a function of the surface coordinate and time. For discrete models of MBE growth, several SDEs were suggested and it was generally believed that there is a correspondence between discrete growth models and continuum SDEs. The common way of establishing the link between discrete models and continuous equations is a simple comparison of critical exponents determined from computer simulations of the discrete model with exponents for the continuous equation.

There have also been attempts to establish the correspondence in an explicit way. The systematic procedure for establishing a continuous equation corresponding to discrete models, starting from the master equation in discrete space was proposed by Vvedensky et al. and has been successfully applied to the derivation of growth equations for some discrete models, including the solid-on-solid (SOS) model, the restricted solid-on-solid (RSOS) model, as well as the Wolf-Villain and Das Sarma-Tamborenea models. However, there are several difficulties with this procedure; in particular, in converting from the equation system for a discrete set of heights to an equation for a continuous function $`h(𝐱,t)`$, the procedure requires the regularization step, in which the nonanalytic quantities are expanded and replaced with analytic quantities, i.e., the step function is approximated by an analytic shifted hyperbolic tangent function expanded in a Taylor series. However, the form of the regularized function is uncertain, and different choices of this function lead to different results. Some forms of the regularized function have been suggested, but the problem of a proper choice of a regularization scheme has not been discussed.

To overcome this kind of uncertainty, the authors proposed a new schematic formalism, deriving the continuous equations, such as the Edwards-Wlikinson (EW) and Kardar-Parisi-Zhang (KPZ) equations, from the body centered solid-on-solid model and the RSOS model. In this paper, we apply our formalism to a new kind of MBE growth model proposed by Kim, Park, and Kim. This model allows the deposited particle to relax to the nearest site where the RSOS condition on neighboring heights is satisfied and has the conserved growth condition constraint, which means the deposited particles are possible to hop for an infinite distance until they eventually find the site with the RSOS condition satisfied. Applying our formalism to the above conserved RSOS (CRSOS) model, we not only derive the Villain-Lai-Das Sarma (VLD) equation for the model which belongs to a different universality class from the EW and KPZ equations, but also we are able to predict the coefficients in the VLD equation, which was not possible by other methods.

Observing that the RSOS model belongs to the KPZ class and the CRSOS model belongs to the VLD class, we went one step further to study the RSOS model with the finite range hopping (RSOS/H). In this RSOS/H model, it is possible for the deposited particles to hop a finite distance $`l_0`$ until they find the site with the RSOS condition satisfied. If they fail to find the site with the RSOS condition satisfied within the distance $`l_0`$ in both directions, the deposition process is rejected. The RSOS model corresponds to the RSOS/H model with $`l_0=0`$ and to the CRSOS model with $`l_0=\mathrm{}`$. We apply our formalism to the RSOS/H model with $`l_0`$ finite and find that this model belongs to the KPZ class, contrary to the previous report by Kim and Yook, who concluded that there is a phase transition between the KPZ class to the VLD class along the parameter $`l_0`$.

In Sec. II our formalism to derive the continuous equation from the discrete model is briefly explained and the procedure of derivation is described. The detailed calculations are attached in the appendices. Extensive numerical simulations are presented in Sec. III and the summary and discussion are given in Sec. IV.

## II Derivation of the stochastic equation

In this section, we derive continuous equations for the one-dimensional RSOS/H model with a hopping distance $`l_0`$ and for the CRSOS model corresponding to $`l_0=\mathrm{}`$. We restrict ourselves to the case wherein the height difference between two nearest neighbors is not larger than 1. For a succinct description of the dynamics, we introduce the nomenclature that if a site $`m`$ satisfies the condition $`|h_m+1h_{m\pm 1}|1`$, this site is called “stable.” Following this nomenclature, the growth algorithm of the one-dimensional RSOS/H model is as follows: (i) We choose a site $`m`$ randomly. (ii) Sites from $`ml_0`$ to $`m+l_0`$ are examined to determine if they are stable sites. (iii) If a stable site is found within the interval from $`ml_0`$ to $`m+l_0`$, a new particle is deposited to the nearest stable site from $`m`$ ($`m`$ itself can be a candidate for deposition). However, if stable sites are nonexistent in the examined interval, the particle drop is rejected and the system remains unchanged. After this try, the time is increased by $`1/L`$, where $`L`$ is the system size. We assume periodic boundary conditions.

Since the height difference between two nearest neighbors is restricted not to be larger than 1, the RSOS/H model is mapped onto the reaction-diffusion system of hard-core particles with two species. The step-up (-down) is mapped to an $`A`$ ($`B`$) particle. If two nearest neighbor sites have equal height, a particle vacuum is located between these two sites. The site where the particles reside is labeled by an integer, and the site for height by a half-integer. This mapping is depicted in Fig.1. According to this mapping, the dynamics of the RSOS/H model can be described by the (imaginary time) Schördinger equation $`(/t)|\mathrm{\Psi };t=\widehat{H}|\mathrm{\Psi };t`$ for the state vector $`|\mathrm{\Psi };t_CP(C;t)|C`$, where $`P(C;t)`$ is the probability with which the system is in state $`C`$ at time $`t`$, and $`\widehat{H}`$, called a Hamiltonian, is an evolution operator

$`\widehat{H}={\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}\left(\widehat{I}\widehat{R}_n\widehat{A}_n\right)\widehat{L}_n,`$ (2)
where

$`\widehat{L}_n=\widehat{I}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{2l_0}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{j}{}}}\widehat{R}_{n+k}+{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{j}{}}}\widehat{R}_{nk}\right),`$ (3)
and

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\widehat{R}_n& =& \widehat{a}_n^{}\widehat{a}_n+\widehat{b}_{n+1}^{}\widehat{b}_{n+1}\widehat{a}_n^{}\widehat{a}_n\widehat{b}_{n+1}^{}\widehat{b}_{n+1},\hfill \\ & & \\ \widehat{A}_n& =& \left(\widehat{a}_n^{}+\widehat{b}_n\right)\left(\widehat{a}_{n+1}+\widehat{b}_{n+1}^{}\right).\hfill \end{array}$$
(4)
The role of the rejection operator $`\widehat{R}_n`$ is to check the stability of site $`n+\frac{1}{2}`$ , that is, if a configuration $`|C`$ has a stable site at $`n+\frac{1}{2}`$, $`\widehat{R}_n|C=0`$ and otherwise $`\widehat{R}_n|C=|C`$. The adsorption operator $`\widehat{A}_n`$ describes the configuration change after a successful deposition. $`\widehat{a}_n`$ ($`\widehat{b}_n`$) is the annihilation operator of an $`A`$ ($`B`$) particle at site $`n`$ and $`\widehat{a}_n^{}`$ ($`\widehat{b}_n^{}`$) is the corresponding creation operator, satisfying the mixed commutation relations presented in Ref.,

$`\widehat{a}_n\widehat{a}_n^{}=\widehat{b}_n\widehat{b}_n^{}=\widehat{I}\widehat{a}_n^{}\widehat{a}_n\widehat{b}_n^{}\widehat{b}_n,\widehat{a}_n\widehat{b}_n=\widehat{a}_n^{}\widehat{b}_n^{}=0.`$ (5)
All operators at different sites commute with each other.

To find the SDE for the RSOS/H model, we apply the method recently introduced by the authors. First we assume the existence of the lattice version of the SDEs in terms of density. Those equations are supposed to take the forms

$`_ta_n`$ $`=`$ $`C_n^A(\{a\},\{b\})+{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}\left[g_{nm}^{AA}\xi _m^A(t)+g_{nm}^{AB}\xi _m^B(t)\right],`$ (6)
$`_tb_n`$ $`=`$ $`C_n^B(\{a\},\{b\})+{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}\left[g_{nm}^{BA}\xi _m^A(t)+g_{nm}^{BB}\xi _m^B(t)\right],`$ (7)
where $`_t/t`$ and $`\xi _n^A`$, $`\xi _n^B`$ are white noises with correlation

$`\xi _n^X(t)\xi _m^X^{}(t^{})=\delta _{nm}\delta _{X,X^{}}\delta (tt^{})`$ (8)
$`(X,X^{}=\mathrm{either}A\mathrm{or}B),`$ (9)
where $`\delta _{nm}`$ and $`\delta _{X,X^{}}`$ are Kronecker deltas and $`\delta (tt^{})`$ is the Dirac delta function. The matrix $`g`$ is related to the Kramers-Moyal coefficient in such a way that

$`{\displaystyle \underset{r,X^{\prime \prime }}{}}g_{nr}^{XX^{\prime \prime }}g_{mr}^{X^{}X^{\prime \prime }}=C_{nm}^{XX^{}}(\{a\},\{b\})`$ (10)
$`(X,X^{},X^{\prime \prime }=\mathrm{either}A\mathrm{or}B).`$ (11)
Here we are using the Itô interpretation. The field $`a`$ ($`b`$) in the curly bracket represents the density of species $`A`$ ($`B`$) at all sites. From here on, without a hat above itself a mathematical symbol is a pure number as opposed to an operator. $`a_n`$ should not be confused with $`\widehat{a}_n`$. The former is a density at site $`n`$ that runs over real numbers, while the latter is an annihilation operator. By requiring that the noise average of observables in Eqs. (6) and (7) has the same behavior with the ensemble average of the number operator, we find

$`C_n^A_t`$ $`=`$ $`[H,\widehat{a}_n^{}\widehat{a}_n]_t,`$ (12)
$`C_n^B_t`$ $`=`$ $`[H,\widehat{b}_n^{}\widehat{b}_n]_t,`$ (13)
$`C_{nm}^{AA}_t`$ $`=`$ $`[\widehat{a}_n^{}\widehat{a}_n,[H,\widehat{a}_m^{}\widehat{a}_m]]_t,`$ (14)
$`C_{nm}^{AB}_t`$ $`=`$ $`C_{mn}^{BA}_t=[\widehat{a}_n^{}\widehat{a}_n,[H,\widehat{b}_m^{}\widehat{b}_m]]_t,`$ (15)
$`C_{nm}^{BB}_t`$ $`=`$ $`[\widehat{b}_n^{}\widehat{b}_n,[H,\widehat{b}_m^{}\widehat{b}_m]]_t,`$ (16)
where the $`\mathrm{}_t`$ on the left hand side represents the average over noise at time $`t`$ and that on the right hand side stands for the ensemble average. The arguments of the Kramers-Moyal coefficients are dropped for brevity.

As presented in Ref., the ensemble average of any operator can be interpreted as an average of number operators due to the property of the projection state $`|`$, which is defined as a sum over all possible microscopic configurations and is itself a left eigenstate of $`\widehat{H}`$ with eigenvalue $`0`$, and in turn, the ensemble average of a number operator is mapped to the noise average of density. This procedure leads us to find the Kramers-Moyal coefficients $`C_n^X`$, $`C_{nm}^{XY}`$, in terms of the density fields. We call this procedure figurization, which means “expression in number.” To represent the figurization, we use the symbol $``$ to the left of which is an operator (or a product of operators) and to the right of which is the corresponding density representation.

To complete the derivation, we perform the commutation relations between the Hamiltonian and the density operators and so forth:

$`[\widehat{H},\widehat{a}_n^{}\widehat{a}_n]`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{a}_n^{}\left(\widehat{a}_{n+1}+\widehat{b}_{n+1}^{}\right)\widehat{L}_n\widehat{a}_n\left(\widehat{a}_{n1}^{}+\widehat{b}_{n1}\right)\widehat{L}_{n1},`$ (17)
$`[\widehat{H},\widehat{b}_n^{}\widehat{b}_n]`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{b}_n\left(\widehat{a}_{n+1}+\widehat{b}_{n+1}^{}\right)\widehat{L}_n+\widehat{b}_n^{}\left(\widehat{a}_{n1}^{}+\widehat{b}_{n1}\right)\widehat{L}_{n1},`$ (18)
$`[\widehat{a}_l^{}\widehat{a}_l,[\widehat{H},\widehat{a}_n^{}\widehat{a}_n]]`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _{ln}\left(\widehat{a}_n^{}\left(\widehat{a}_{n+1}+\widehat{b}_{n+1}^{}\right)\widehat{L}_n+\widehat{a}_n\left(\widehat{a}_{n1}^{}+\widehat{b}_{n1}\right)\widehat{L}_{n1}\right)`$ (20)
$`\delta _{l,n+1}\widehat{a}_n^{}\widehat{a}_{n+1}\widehat{L}_n\delta _{l,n1}\widehat{a}_n\widehat{a}_{n1}^{}\widehat{L}_{n1},`$
$`[\widehat{b}_l^{}\widehat{b}_l,[\widehat{H},\widehat{b}_n^{}\widehat{b}_n]]`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _{ln}\left(\widehat{b}_n\left(\widehat{a}_{n+1}+\widehat{b}_{n+1}^{}\right)\widehat{L}_n+\widehat{b}_n^{}\left(\widehat{a}_{n1}^{}+\widehat{b}_{n1}\right)\widehat{L}_{n1}\right)`$ (22)
$`\delta _{l,n+1}\widehat{b}_n\widehat{b}_{n+1}^{}\widehat{L}_n\delta _{l,n1}\widehat{b}_n^{}\widehat{b}_{n1}\widehat{L}_{n1},`$
$`[\widehat{a}_l^{}\widehat{a}_l,[\widehat{H},\widehat{b}_n^{}\widehat{b}_n]]`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _{l,n+1}\widehat{b}_n\widehat{a}_{n+1}\widehat{L}_n+\delta _{l,n1}\widehat{b}_n^{}\widehat{a}_{n1}^{}\widehat{L}_{n1},`$ (23)
where $`\delta _{nl}`$ is a Kronecker delta. Following the figurization, we find the Kramers-Moyal coefficients. For a later purpose, we give some examples of the figurization. The figurization of $`\widehat{R}_n`$ is $`\widehat{R}_nR_na_n+b_{n+1}a_nb_{n+1}`$, and the symbolic representation of the figurization of the product of $`\widehat{R}`$’s is

$`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{j}{}}}\widehat{R}_{n+k}R_n^j,`$ (24)
where the superscript $`j`$ should not be confused with the power. When $`j=1`$, $`R_n^1`$ is denoted as $`R_{n+1}`$. $`R_n^j`$ are given by the following recursion relations:

$`R_n^j`$ $`=`$ $`a_{n+1}R_{n+1}^{j1}+(1a_{n+1}){\displaystyle \underset{k=2}{\overset{j+1}{}}}b_{n+k},`$ (25)
$`R_{nj2}^j`$ $`=`$ $`b_{n1}R_{nj2}^{j1}+(1b_{n1}){\displaystyle \underset{k=2}{\overset{j+1}{}}}a_{nk},`$ (26)
where $`j1`$ and we define $`R_n^01`$. The physical meaning of Eqs. (25) and (26) is as follows: We divide the situation that prohibits the height increase at sites $`n+\frac{3}{2},n+\frac{5}{2},\mathrm{},n+j+\frac{1}{2}`$ by the condition at site $`n+1`$. If there is an $`A`$ particle at site $`n+1`$, the height increase is suppressed at site $`n+\frac{3}{2}`$ irrespective of the condition at site $`n+2`$. Hence the first term of Eq. (25) follows. If there is no $`A`$ particle at site $`n+1`$, to suppress the deposition at site $`n+\frac{3}{2}`$, there must exist a $`B`$ particle at site $`n+2`$ and this should be continued until the site $`n+j+1`$, because at site $`n+k`$ ($`2kj`$) no $`A`$ particle is present; this condition is represented by the second term. To comprehend Eq. (26), we only have to perform the mirror transformation relative to site $`n`$. By the mirror transformation relative to a site $`n`$, we mean the exchange of $`a`$ and $`b`$ ($`ab`$), followed by $`n+knk`$. Under this transformation, $`R_{n+k}^j`$ changes into $`R_{nkj2}^j`$ for an arbitrary $`k`$. The mirror transformation of Eq. (25) is Eq. (26).

With these notions, we will find the SDE of the RSOS/H model. At first, the deterministic part of SDE is found. Since the main concern is not the respective dynamics of the $`A`$ and $`B`$ particles, but it is $`D_na_nb_n`$ (the local slope) and $`S_n=a_n+b_n`$ (the slope density), we will write the SDE for $`D`$ and $`S`$ rather than for the $`A`$, $`B`$ particles. The Kramers-Moyal coefficient $`C_n^D`$ is obtained by subtracting Eq. (18) from Eq. (17) and $`C_n^S`$ by adding Eq. (18) and (17) followed by the figurization.

$`C_n^D`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{2l_0}{}}}\left[R_{n2}^j2R_{n1}^j+R_n^j\left(R_{nj2}^j2R_{nj1}^j+R_{nj}^j\right)\right]`$ (27)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(R_{n2}^{2l_0+1}R_{n1}^{2l_0+1}+R_{n2l_02}^{2l_0+1}R_{n2l_01}^{2l_0+1}\right),`$ (28)
$`C_n^S`$ $`=`$ $`23(a_n+b_n)(b_na_{n+1}+a_nb_{n1}3b_nb_{n+1}3a_na_{n1})`$ (29)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{2l_0}{}}}\left(R_n^jR_{n2}^jR_{nj}^j+R_{nj2}^j\right)b_n(1S_{n+1})b_{n+2}a_n(1S_{n1})a_{n2}`$ (30)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(R_{n1}^{2l_0+1}+R_{n2l_01}^{2l_0+1}+R_{n2}^{2l_0+1}+R_{n2l_02}^{2l_0+1})`$ (31)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{2l_01}{}}}\left[b_na_{n+1}R_{n+1}^j+b_n(1S_{n+1}){\displaystyle \underset{k=2}{\overset{j+2}{}}}b_{n+k}+b_n(1b_{n+1})R_{nj2}^j\right]`$ (32)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{2l_01}{}}}\left[a_nb_{n1}R_{nj3}^j+a_n(1S_{n1}){\displaystyle \underset{k=2}{\overset{j+2}{}}}a_{nk}+a_n(1a_{n1})R_n^j\right].`$ (33)
As pointed out in Ref., the mass term in Eq. (33) makes the step density saturate fast. As a result, the step density $`S`$ becomes a slave field of the slope $`D`$ and takes the form

$$S=2\rho (l_0)+\mu _0(l_0)D+\theta _0(l_0)D^2+\mathrm{},$$
(34)
where $`2\rho (l_0)`$ is the (mean-field) stationary step density and $`\mu _0`$ and $`\theta _0`$ may depend on $`l_0`$. Here $`(/x)`$. Since this system has the mirror symmetry whose continuum version is invariant under the transformations $`DD`$ and $``$, we do not expect the occurrence of $`D`$ in Eq. (34). The parameters $`\rho (l_0)`$, $`\mu _0(l_0)`$, and $`\theta _0(l_0)`$ are determined by the stationarity of Eq. (33). In Appendix A, we obtain $`\rho `$, $`\theta _0`$, and $`\mu _0`$ as functions of $`l_0`$ and show the approximate solutions of these parameters. We can now rewrite Eq. (28) in terms of the height field $`h`$ using Eq. (34) and

$$D=h.$$
(35)
The last task is to determine the noise strength. This is accomplished using Eqs. (6) and (7). After eliminating $`S`$ in favor of $`D`$, there is only one kind of noise with strength

$$C_{nm}=C_{nm}^{AA}+C_{nm}^{BB}C_{nm}^{AB}C_{nm}^{BA}.$$
(36)
Using figurization of Eq. (14) and keeping the most relevant term, we find

$$C_{nm}=(1\rho )^2L(\delta _{n,m+1}2\delta _{nm}+\delta _{n,m1})+\mathrm{},$$
(37)
where

$$L=\underset{l=0}{\overset{2l_0}{}}\rho ^l(1+l\rho l).$$
(38)
For finite $`l_0`$ we found

$`_th=v_{\mathrm{}}+\nu ^2h+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{2}}(h)^2+\xi (x,t),`$ (39)
$`\xi (x,t)\xi (x^{},t^{})=D_{\xi \xi }\delta (xx^{})\delta (tt^{}),`$ (40)
where

$`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ $`=`$ $`1R(2l_0+1)1\rho _{\mathrm{}}^{2l_0}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}+\left(\sqrt{2}1\right)l_0\right]+O\left(\rho _{\mathrm{}}^{4l_0}\right),`$ (41)
$`\nu `$ $`=`$ $`\mu (2l_0+1)\rho _{\mathrm{}}^{2l_0}(l_0+1)(2l_0+1)\left({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{6}}l_0+{\displaystyle \frac{3\sqrt{2}}{4}}\right)+O\left(\rho _{\mathrm{}}^{4l_0}\right),`$ (42)
$`\lambda `$ $`=`$ $`2\theta (2l_0+1)\rho _{\mathrm{}}^{2l_0}(1+l_0)(1+2l_0)\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}+1}{3}}l_0\right)+O\left(\rho _{\mathrm{}}^{4l_0}\right),`$ (43)
$`D_{\xi \xi }`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\sqrt{2}1}{2}}\left[1\rho _{\mathrm{}}^{2l_0}\left({\displaystyle \frac{6+5\sqrt{2}}{28}}+{\displaystyle \frac{19\sqrt{2}22}{14}}l_0\right)\right]+O\left(\rho _{\mathrm{}}^{4l_0}\right),`$ (44)
with $`\rho _{\mathrm{}}=(2\sqrt{2})/2`$. The numerical values of $`\rho (l_0)`$, $`\nu (l_0)`$, and $`\lambda (l_0)`$ are given for several values of $`l_0`$ in Table I. For infinite $`l_0`$

$`_th=\stackrel{~}{v}_{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{~}{\nu }^4h+\stackrel{~}{\lambda }^2(h)^2+\stackrel{~}{\xi }(x,t),`$ (45)
$`\stackrel{~}{\xi }(x,t)\stackrel{~}{\xi }(x^{},t^{})=\stackrel{~}{D}_{\xi \xi }\delta (xx^{})\delta (tt^{}),`$ (46)
where

$`\stackrel{~}{v}_{\mathrm{}}`$ $`=`$ $`1,`$ (47)
$`\stackrel{~}{\nu }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2112\sqrt{2}}{2}},`$ (48)
$`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{103\sqrt{2}}{2}},`$ (49)
$`\stackrel{~}{D}_{\xi \xi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\sqrt{2}1}{2}}.`$ (50)
Equation (39) directly shows that the RSOS/H model, for any finite $`l_0`$, belongs to the KPZ class, and Eq. (45) suggests that the CRSOS model is described by the VLD equation. However, the first line of Eq. (28) has the form

$$\underset{j=1}{\overset{2l_0}{}}[R_{n2}^j2R_{n1}^j+R_n^j\{\mathrm{mirror}\mathrm{terms}\mathrm{of}(R_{n2}^j2R_{n1}^j+R_n^j)\}].$$
(51)
which has the following implications: If the continuum version of $`R_{n2}^j2R_{n1}^j+R_n^j`$ has a nonvanishing coefficient of $`^2(D^{2r+1})`$ with a non-negative integer $`r`$, it is not certain that Eq. (51) is a lattice version of $`^3`$; consider the mirror transformation in the continuum limit. The occurrence of $`^2(D^{2r+1})`$ in Eq. (51) is directly related to the appearance of $`(h)^{2r+1}`$ in Eq. (45), which generates an EW term by the dynamic renormalization group. Appendix B shows that this is not the case. The vanishing of $`D^{2r+1}`$ in the continuum limit of $`R_{n+k}^j`$ guarantees the vanishing of $`^2(D^{2r+1})`$ in $`R_{n2}^j2R_{n1}^j+R_n^j`$. In view of this, we conclude that the continuum equation of the CRSOS model is the VLD equation.

To confirm this conclusion, we have performed Monte Carlo simulations as outlined in Sec. III.

## III Numerical study

Although the RSOS/H model was studied numerically by Kim and Yook, their results are contradictory to our derivation. As a result, we need to perform extensive numerical simulations to verify our results. In the derivation, we found that the coefficients of the EW terms and the KPZ terms are vanishingly small, though finite, for large $`l_0`$. Hence, we may find a crossover of roughness exponents from VLD ($`\alpha _{\mathrm{vld}}0.95`$) to KPZ ($`\alpha _{\mathrm{kpz}}=0.5`$). We are preoccupied with the numerical observation of this crossover.

In Fig. 2, we draw the saturated width $`W_{\mathrm{sat}}`$ as function of the system size $`L`$ for some $`l_0`$’s. The system sizes are 64, 90, 128, 180, 256, 360, 512, 720, and 1024. For relatively small system sizes, the roughness exponents are near to the values reported in Ref. . As expected from our derivation, we see a crossover for large system sizes.

To clarify the crossover behavior, a scaling plot is given in Fig. 3. The anticipated scaling form of the saturated width is

$$W_{\mathrm{sat}}(l_0,L)=L^{\alpha _{\mathrm{vld}}}g(l_0^\gamma /L),$$
(52)
where $`\gamma `$ is the crossover exponent. The asymptotic behavior of the scaling function $`g`$ is expected to be

$$g(x)\{\begin{array}{cccccc}\mathrm{const}\hfill & & \mathrm{when}& x& & \mathrm{}\\ x^{\alpha _{\mathrm{vld}}\alpha _{\mathrm{kpz}}}\hfill & & \mathrm{when}& x& & 0\end{array}.$$
(53)
The best fit for the data set shown in Fig. 2 corresponds to $`\alpha _{\mathrm{vld}}=0.9`$ and $`\gamma =2.0`$. The fitting parameter $`\alpha _{\mathrm{vld}}`$ obtained is somewhat smaller than the known value of the roughness exponent of the CRSOS model. This is most likely due to the smallness of $`l_0`$. For example, the data for $`l_0=10`$ in Fig. 2 yield 0.86 rather than 0.95. The meaning of $`\gamma `$ is as follows: When the system size is sufficiently large, we expect the width of the characteristic mountain to be $`L^{\alpha _{\mathrm{kpz}}}`$. Due to the RSOS condition, the linear size of the mountain is also expected to be $`L^{\alpha _{\mathrm{kpz}}}`$. The smaller the system size, the less the rejection events occur due to the shrinking of the characteristic mountain. If $`l_0`$ is comparable with the linear size of the characteristic mountain ($`L^{\alpha _{\mathrm{kpz}}}`$), the system starts to behave differently. Eventually, the system with small size, $`L^{\alpha _{\mathrm{kpz}}}l_0`$, cannot feel the existence of $`l_0`$. Thus the crossover length $`L^{}`$ is expected to be $`l_0^{1/\alpha _{\mathrm{kpz}}}`$, that is, $`\gamma =1/\alpha _{\mathrm{kpz}}=2`$.

## IV Summary and Discussion

We studied the RSOS/H model using both analytical and numerical methods. We derived the continuum equation for the microscopic discrete model analytically, and found coefficients of the EW term $`^2h`$, the KPZ term $`(h)^2`$, as well as the VLD term $`^2(h)^2`$. We observed that the coefficients of the EW and KPZ terms behave as $`a_0^{2l_0}l_0^3`$ for sufficiently large $`l_0`$, which is consistent with the previous numerical study. Accordingly, we concluded that the RSOS/H model for any finite $`l_0`$ eventually belongs to the KPZ class and the CRSOS model belongs to the VLD class. Numerically, we reported the crossover from the VLD class to the KPZ one, which confirms our derivation. Moreover, we found a crossover exponent $`\gamma `$, which is argued to be 2.

Besides these studies, we can offer an (nonrigorous plausible) argument to anticipate the universality class of the RSOS/H model by employing the block spin concept of Kadanoff’s. Consider a system with linear size $`L`$ and hopping distance $`l_0`$. Similar to the block spin in the Ising model, we introduce a coarse-graining parameter $`b`$ which blocks the $`b`$ sites by one. Although the exact transformation of coarse-graining cannot be determined, we expect that if it exists, $`l_0`$ may be renormalized as $`l_0/b^\gamma ^{}`$. Hence, we expect that the stable fixed point corresponds to $`l_0=0`$, which is the KK model and the unstable fixed point corresponds to $`l_0=\mathrm{}`$, which is the CRSOS model.

## Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Byungnam Kahng for helpful discussions. This work was supported by Grant No.2000-2-11200-002-3 from the BRP program of the KOSEF.

## A  Continuum limit and determination of $`\theta _0`$ and $`\mu _0`$

In this appendix, we derive the continuum limit of $`R_{n+k}^l`$ where $`n`$ is the reference point. One may obtain the continuum limit directly from Eq. (25), but we do not follow this route. Rather, we make recursion relation about the parameters that appear in front of the field (see below). The use of Eq. (34) makes it possible to represent the continuum limit in terms of $`D`$, which is directly related to the height by Eq. (35). We can find the correct coefficient that appears in Eq. (34) after we find the continuum limit of $`R_{n+k}^l`$.

The continuum limit of $`R_{n+k}^l`$ takes the form

$$R_{n+k}^lR(l)+\gamma (l,k)D+\theta (l,k)D^2+\mu (l,k)D+\mathrm{},$$
(A1)
where the implicit dependence on $`l_0`$ is assumed and the argument of D is dropped for simplicity. The symbol “$``$” represents the continuum limit of a quantity. Equation (25) allows us to find the recursion relations. Before going further, the explicit form of $`R(l)`$ in the case of no tilt boundary condition is found. The recursion relation becomes

$`R(l)`$ $`=`$ $`\rho R(l1)+(1\rho )\rho ^l,`$ (A2)
$`\rho ^lR(l)`$ $`=`$ $`\rho ^{(l1)}R(l1)+1\rho `$ (A3)
with an (sort of) initial condition $`R(1)=2\rho \rho ^2`$. $`\rho `$ is the abbreviation of $`\rho (l_0)`$ in Eq. (34). It is trivial to find the solution that reads

$$R(l)=\rho ^l+\rho ^l(1\rho )l.$$
(A4)
To find the recursion relations, we need a continuum limit of $`P_l^k`$, which is defined as

$$P_l^k\left(1a_{n+k+1}\right)\underset{m=2}{\overset{l+1}{}}b_{n+k+m}=P_{l1}^kb_{n+k+l+1}.$$
(A5)
One may directly calculate the continuum limit of $`P_l^k`$, but we follow another path. Let the continuum limit of $`P_l^k`$ be

$$P_l^k(1\rho )\rho ^l+\gamma _1(l,k)D+\theta _1(l,k)D^2+\mu _1(l,k)D+\mathrm{}.$$
(A6)
From Eq. (A5), we find the recursion relations ($`l2`$)

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _1(l,k)}{\rho ^l}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _1(l1,k)}{\rho ^{l1}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1\rho }{2\rho }},`$ (A7)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\theta _1(l,k)}{\rho ^l}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\theta _1(l1,k)}{\rho ^{l1}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _1(l1,k)}{2\rho ^l}}+\theta _0{\displaystyle \frac{1\rho }{2\rho }},`$ (A8)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mu _1(l,k)}{\rho ^l}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mu _1(l1,k)}{\rho ^{l1}}}+(\mu _0kl1){\displaystyle \frac{1\rho }{2\rho }},`$ (A9)
with initial conditions

$`\gamma _1(1,k)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},`$ (A10)
$`\theta _1(1,k)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}(1+2\theta _04\rho \theta _0),`$ (A11)
$`\mu _1(1,k)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\mu _0k22\rho \mu _0+\rho ),`$ (A12)
$`\theta _0`$ and $`\mu _0`$ are functions of $`l_0`$ as shown in Eq. (34), which are to be determined by Eq. (33). The solutions of Eq. (A8) under the condition (A11) are ($`l1`$)

$`\gamma _1(l,k)`$ $`=`$ $`\rho ^{l1}\left[\gamma _1(1,k){\displaystyle \frac{1\rho }{2}}(l1)\right],`$ (A13)
$`\theta _1(l,k)`$ $`=`$ $`\rho ^{l1}\left[\theta _1(1,k)+\left(\theta _0\rho \theta _0+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\rho }}\right){\displaystyle \frac{l1}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1\rho }{8\rho }}(l1)(l2)\right],`$ (A14)
$`\mu _1(l,k)`$ $`=`$ $`\rho ^{l1}\left[\mu _1(1,k)+{\displaystyle \frac{1\rho }{2}}(\mu _0k2)(l1){\displaystyle \frac{1\rho }{4}}l(l1)\right].`$ (A15)
Now we can obtain the continuum limit of $`R_{n+k}^l`$. Using Eqs. (25), (A6), and (A14), we find the recursion relations of parameters given in Eq. (A1)

$`\gamma (l,k)`$ $`=`$ $`\rho \gamma (l1,k+1),`$ (A16)
$`\theta (l,k)`$ $`=`$ $`\rho \theta (l1,k+1)+\theta _1(l,k)+{\displaystyle \frac{\theta _0}{2}}\rho ^{l1}\left[l\rho (l1)\right],`$ (A17)
$`\mu (l,k)`$ $`=`$ $`\rho \mu (l1,k+1)+\mu _1(l,k)+{\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^{l1}}{2}}(1+k+\mu _0)\left[l\rho (l1)\right],`$ (A18)
with conditions

$`\gamma (1,k)`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (A19)
$`\theta (1,k)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}+\theta _0(1\rho ),`$ (A20)
$`\mu (1,k)`$ $`=`$ $`(1\rho )\left(\mu _0{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right).`$ (A21)
We solve Eq. (A17) step by step. It is trivial to find that $`\gamma (l,k)=0`$. As shown in Appendix B, the vanishing of $`\gamma `$ is not a coincidence. Since $`\theta _1(l,k)`$ has no $`k`$ dependence, we expect that $`\theta (l,k)`$ also has no $`k`$ dependence. We find

$`\theta (l)=l\rho ^{l1}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}+\theta _0(1\rho )+\left(2\theta _02\rho \theta _0+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\rho }}\right){\displaystyle \frac{l1}{4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1\rho }{24\rho }}(l1)(l2)\right],`$ (A22)
where $`k`$ is removed from the argument of $`\theta `$ due to the independence. $`\mu (l,k)`$ seems to have an explicit $`k`$ dependence, but by inserting $`\mu _1(l,k)`$ directly, we find the independence of $`\mu (l,k)`$ on $`k`$. The result reads (we drop $`k`$ by the same reason as $`\theta `$)

$$\mu (l)=(1\rho )\rho ^{l1}\frac{l(l+1)}{4}\left(2\mu _0\frac{l}{3}\frac{2}{3}\right),$$
(A23)
By requiring $`C_n^S=0`$ at the stationary state, we can determine $`\rho `$, $`\theta _0`$, and $`\mu _0`$ as a function of $`l_0`$. To find $`\rho `$, $`\theta _0`$, and $`\mu _0`$, we need the continuum limit of

$$\underset{k=0}{\overset{l}{}}b_{n+k}\rho ^{l+1}\frac{1}{2}\rho ^l(l+1)D+\rho ^{l1}\frac{l+1}{8}(l+4\rho \theta _0)D^2+\rho ^l\frac{l+1}{4}(2\mu _0l)D.$$
(A24)
We determine $`\rho (l_0)`$ from Eq. (33). $`\rho `$ is the solution of the equation

$$2x^24x+1x^{2l_0+1}\left[1x(5+2l_0)+x^2(3+2l_0)\right]=0,$$
(A25)
whose approximate solution is

$$\rho (l_0)\rho _{\mathrm{}}\left(1+\frac{1}{4}\rho _{\mathrm{}}^{2l_0+1}(2l_0+1)\right)+O(\rho _{\mathrm{}}^{4l_0}),$$
(A26)
with $`\rho _{\mathrm{}}=(2\sqrt{2})/2`$, which is the solution for infinite $`l_0`$. By the same reasoning, we can find $`\theta _0`$ and $`\mu _0`$, whose approximate solutions read

$`\theta _0(l_0)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{4}}\left[1+\rho _{\mathrm{}}^{2l_0}\left({\displaystyle \frac{65\sqrt{2}}{4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2117\sqrt{2}}{6}}l_0+{\displaystyle \frac{2\sqrt{2}}{2}}l_0^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{3}}l_0^3\right)\right]+O(\rho _{\mathrm{}}^{4l_0}),`$ (A27)
$`\mu _0(l_0)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{43\sqrt{2}}{4}}\left[1+\rho _{\mathrm{}}^{2l_0}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3\sqrt{2}}{4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{417\sqrt{2}}{12}}l_0+{\displaystyle \frac{2+\sqrt{2}}{2}}l_0^2+{\displaystyle \frac{2+2\sqrt{2}}{3}}l_0^3\right)\right]+O(\rho _{\mathrm{}}^{4l_0}).`$ (A28)
For finite $`l_0`$, the most relevant terms arise from the second line of Eq. (28) and the resulting equation is the KPZ one, with coefficients

$`\nu =\mu (2l_0+1),\lambda =2\theta (2l_0+1).`$ (A29)
We give the numerical values of $`\rho `$, $`\nu `$, and $`\lambda `$ in the table. These numbers are determined from the direct calculation of $`\rho `$, $`\theta _0`$ and $`\mu _0`$ using Eq. (28). These $`\lambda `$’s should be compared with the previous numerical results. Note that $`\lambda `$ in Ref. is one half of $`\lambda `$ here.

For infinite $`l_0`$, the second line of Eq. (28) vanishes, of which the physical meaning is that a dropped particle eventually find a stable site. Hence the continuum equation becomes the VLD equation with coefficients

$`\stackrel{~}{\nu }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}j\mu (j),\stackrel{~}{\lambda }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}j\theta (j).`$ (A30)
## B  disappearance of odd powers of $`D`$ in $`R`$

This appendix proves that the first line of Eq. (28) does not generate terms $`^2(h)^{2i+1}`$, where $`i`$ is a non-negative integer. To this end, consider a Taylor expansion of $`R_{n+k}^l`$ and set the lattice constant to be $`0`$. We call this quantity $`T_l^{l_0}(D)`$, and the corresponding quantity for $`S`$ $`S_{l_0}(D)`$. One should not confuse this procedure with the continuum limit. It is enough to prove that $`T_l^{l_0}(D)=T_l^{l_0}(D)`$. It is clear that $`T_l^{l_0}(D)`$ has no $`k`$ dependence because the lattice constant is set to $`0`$. This fact enables us to write the recursion relation of $`T_l^{l_0}(D)`$ in the symmetric form

$`2T_l^{l_0}(D)=S_{l_0}(D)T_{l1}^{l_0}(D)`$ $`+\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{S_{l_0}(D)+D}{2}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{S_{l_0}(D)D}{2}}\right)^l`$ (B2)
$`+\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{S_{l_0}(D)D}{2}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{S_{l_0}(D)+D}{2}}\right)^l.`$
Hence we see that

$$2(T_l^{l_0}(D)T_l^{l_0}(D))=S_{l_0}(D)(T_{l1}^{l_0}(D)T_{l1}^{l_0}(D))$$
(B3)
The mirror symmetry of this system restricts the form of $`S_{l_0}`$ to be even in $`D`$, so $`T_{l1}^{l_0}(D)=T_{l1}^{l_0}(D)`$ implies $`T_l^{l_0}(D)=T_l^{l_0}(D)`$. Indeed $`T_1^{l_0}(D)=S_{l_0}+(S_{l_0}^2D^2)/4`$ and the logic of the mathematical induction proves the disappearance of the odd powers of $`D`$ in $`T_l^{l_0}(D)`$. The vanishing $`\gamma (l,k)`$ in appendix A is a consequence of this property. As a result, we can safely affirm that CRSOS model is described by the VLD equation.