text:
# Threshold Disorder as a Source of Diverse and Complex Behavior in Random Nets

## 1 Introduction

Random Synchronous Asymmetric Neural Networks (RSANNs) with fixed synaptic coupling strengths and fixed neuronal thresholds/inputs tend to have access to a very limited set of different limit cycles (Amari (1974), Clark, Kürten & Rafelski (1988), Littlewort, Clark & Rafelski (1988), Hasan (1989), Rand, Cohen & Holmes (1988), Clark (1990), Schreckenberg (1992)). We will show here, however, that when we add a moderate amount of randomly quenched noise or disorder, by choosing the neural thresholds or inputs to vary within a prescribed gaussian distribution, we can gain controllable, and we believe biologically relevant, access to a wide variety of limit cycles, each displaying dynamical participation by many neurons.

The appearance of limit-cycle behavior in central pattern generators is evidence for cyclic temporal behavior in biological systems (Hasan (1989), Marder & Hooper (1985)). Previous computational models, as discussed above, do not exhibit a diverse repertoire of limit-cycle behaviors, as biological systems often demonstrate (e.g., the different gaits of a horse, or the different rhythmic steps of a good human dancer). Additonally, it is our belief that the biologically-interesting networks are those in which a significant fraction of the neurons can (and often do) participate in the local dynamics. In principle, spatially-sparse neuronal firing patterns can be constructed from a large network of strongly-participatory neurons by self-organized architectural inhibition of selected neuronal assemblies. This can leave the uninhibited neuronal assemblies able to freely participate in the neural dynamics (for some time), though these uninhibited neurons or neuronal assemblies may be isolated in space from each other, only connected to other active neurons through non-local or indirect connections (Gray & Singer (1990)). Therefore, in this paper, we explore the problem of how to produce a computational neural model which possesses a diverse repertoire of strongly-participatory limit-cycle behaviors.

A system which can access many limit cycles should always be able to access a novel mode; hence the system would have the potential to be a ‘creative’ system. Herein, we demonstrate conditions sufficient to allow a simple computational neural system to access creative dynamical behavior.

In Section 2 we introduce RSANNs along with the concept of threshold disorder, as well as a measure to distinguish different limit cycles. In our quantitative investigations we need to introduce, with some precision, concepts which intuitively are easy to grasp, but which mathematically are somewhat difficult to quantify. We define ‘eligibility’ in Section 3.1 as an entropy-like measure of the fraction of neurons which actively participate in the dynamics of a limit cycle. In order to quantify the RSANN’s accessibility to multiple limit-cycle attractors, we define ‘diversity’ in Section 3.2 as another entropy-like measure, calculated from the probabilities that the RSANN converges to each of the different limit cycles. The difference between eligibility and diversity is that the former applies to a limit cycle observed in a specific network, while the latter applies to the collection of limit cycles that the network can exhibit. To measure the creative potential of a system, we introduce the concept of ‘volatility’ as the ability to access a huge number of highly-eligible cyclic modes. We find that in terms of these diagnostic variables, as the neuronal threshold disorder $`\epsilon `$ increases, our RSANN exhibits a phase transformation at $`\epsilon =\epsilon _1`$ from a small number to a large number of different accessible limit-cycle attractors (Section 3.2), and another phase transformation at $`\epsilon =\epsilon _2>\epsilon _1`$ from high eligibility to low eligibility (Section 3.1). Our main result is that the volatility is high only in the presence of threshold disorder of suitably chosen strength between $`\epsilon _1\epsilon \epsilon _2`$, thereby allowing access to a diversity of eligible limit-cycle attractors (Section 3.3).

## 2 Random asymmetric neural networks with threshold or input noise

Symmetric neural networks (SNNs) (Hopfield (1982)) became widely used in associative memory applications due to their ability to store a large number of patterns as fixed points of their dynamics; however, their dynamical behaviour is restricted to fixed points or limit cycles of period 2. In contrast, asymmetric neural networks (RSANNs) show a complicated dynamical behaviour, including limit cycles of large periods or even chaos 999for networks of binary-valued neurons, the dynamical behavior can simulate chaos, but for networks of real-valued neurons, true chaos is observable, with the prerequisite for chaos: ‘sensitive dependence upon initial conditions’. (Amari (1974), Clark, Rafelski & Winston (1985), Clark, Kürten & Rafelski (1988), Littlewort, Clark & Rafelski (1988), Kürten (1988), Bressloff & Taylor (1989), Clark (1990, 1991), McGuire, Littlewort & Rafelski (1991), McGuire et al. (1992), Bastolla & Parisi (1997)). Moreover, they offer considerably more biological realism, since real neuronal connections tend to be unidirectional.

We investigate a network of $`N`$ threshold elements, i.e. their firing states have binary values $`x_i\{0,1\}`$. Each neuron $`i`$ is connected to $`M<N`$ presynaptic neurons by unidirectional weights $`w_{ij}`$, with $`w_{ij}w_{ji}`$ and $`w_{ii}=0`$. All weights are independent random variables, drawn from a uniform distribution within $`[1,1]`$. A neuron fires if its post-synaptic-potential (PSP) is greater than its specific threshold $`V_i`$. Therefore the network is described by the following system of equations for ‘sum-and-fire’ McCullough-Pitts neurons:

$`x_i(t+1)`$ $`=\mathrm{\Theta }\left({\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{M}{}}}w_{ij}x_j(t)V_i\right)i1,\mathrm{},N,`$ (1)
where $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is the Heaviside function. Supposing that all neurons should actively participate in the dynamics, with a mean firing rate $`x_i=\frac{1}{2}`$, the mean thresholds $`V_i^0`$ are adjusted so that the mean overall input

$`u_i={\displaystyle w_{ij}x_j}V_i^0{\displaystyle w_{ij}x}V_i^0`$ (2)
to a generic neuron $`i`$ becomes zero (so that it is poised on the boundary between firing and not firing). Thus, we have:

$`V_i^0`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}w_{ij},`$ (3)
$`V_i`$ $`=\eta _iV_i^0,`$ (4)
where the parameter $`\eta _i`$ is chosen to modulate the threshold. The case $`\eta _i1`$ for all $`i`$ corresponds to the choice known as ‘normal’ thresholds (Clark (1991)). The mean firing rate of 0.5 is quite high biologically, but computationally, it is a reasonable point to begin our research; it is not too difficult to adapt the treatment to lower mean firing rates. In order for a given amount of threshold disorder to affect all neurons more-or-less equally, we have chosen here a multiplicative scaling of the thresholds relative to the normal thresholds rather than an additive scaling. We do not consider synaptic noise or modulation; hence the weights $`w_{ij}`$ are kept fixed for a given network.

In considering the living neural networks in the brain, some researchers treat the neuronal thresholds as constant and noiseless (as in the Hodgkin-Huxley and Fitzhugh-Nagumo models; see Murray (1989) for a summary); others are convinced that neurons live in a very noisy environment, both chemically and electrically, with nontrivial consequences for neuronal and network function (see Zador (1997), Chow & White (1996), Clark (1988), Buhmann & Schulten (1987), Shaw & Vasudevan (1974), Little (1974), Taylor (1972), and Lecar & Nossal (1971)). Examining the issue more closely, we may note that Mainen & Sejnowski (1995) have presented data suggesting a low intrinsic noise level for neurons, which does not seriously affect the precision of spike timing in the case of stimuli with fluctations resembling synaptic activity. On the other hand, Pei, Wilkens & Moss (1996) have presented evidence that noise can exert beneficial effects on neural processing through the phenomenon of stochastic resonance.

Mathematically, the external inputs to a neuron from sensory organs or from other areas of the neural system can also be treated as a modulation of the threshold of that neuron. This suggests that the results obtained on threshold modulation might be easily generalized to the situation of external modulation.

Taken together, the noisiness of thresholds and the variability of inputs can be viewed as a changing environment. We simply model this complex changing environment by varying the normal thresholds using multiplicative gaussian noise $`\eta _i`$ with mean $`\mu =1`$ and standard deviation $`\epsilon `$, leading to Eq. 4. The components $`\eta _i`$ are chosen independently for all neurons $`i`$. It may be much more reasonable to consider spatially-correlated noise amplitudes, but such a study exceeds the scope of our present effort.

### 2.1 Limit-Cycle Search

Since we wish to study the diversity of different limit cycles accessible with small changes of the thresholds, we need a robust criterion for detecting limit cycles. Even in the presence of small-amplitude noise effective on a shorter time scale than the cycle length, the neural net will never stabilize into a detectable perfect cycle. Rather, it will either converge to an approximate limit cycle with occasional misfirings or never converge at all. Such approximate limit-cycle behavior is more relevant to neurobiological systems than is its perfect realization, due to the inherent destabilizing noise (from membrane-potential or synaptic noise) and additional complicating factors, notably (1) the complexity of biological neurons, (2) the continuum of signal transmission times between neurons, and (3) the apparent lack of a clock to synchronously update all neurons.

However, although approximate limit-cycle behavior might be more common in volatile systems, it is not ideal for computer simulation and computer characterization. Therefore, for the sake of the computational tractability, we restrict our search to perfect limit cycles. In order to achieve this, we fix the neural thresholds $`V_i`$ until a limit cycle is found during network evolution via Eq. 1. Since the noise is frozen-in (‘quenched’) for a long period, it is more properly considered as disorder. Before the next trial, the thresholds are varied according to Eq. 4, changing the underlying network dynamics; they are then fixed again during limit cycle search. Each trial step starts with the activity pattern $`𝒙(0)`$ with which the previous trial was terminated. To gain a qualitative understanding of our approach, see Figure 1.

Fixed points (with limit-cycle period $`L=1`$) are generally of less interest than cyclic modes in view of the spontaneous oscillatory behavior displayed by real neural systems (e.g walking or singing). Effectively chaotic or non-cycling behavior (with $`L2^N`$) is not predictable enough to be of much use for most applications in real neural systems. Limit cycles of intermediate period are consequently our paramount concern.

We update all neuron firing states in parallel, or ‘synchronously’, as opposed to either serial or random updating in which only one neuron is updated at a given time step.

In our simulations, we used $`M=N/10`$ incoming connections per neuron, where self-connections were not allowed, and we studied networks with $`N\{10,20,30,40,50,100\}`$ neurons. Self-connections tend to have a stabilizing effect on the network, often driving the behavior towards a fixed point with only very brief transients. The different behavior of networks with and without self-connections might be a worthy subject of future investigation, but we chose not to emphasize that direction here. For practical computational reasons, the network sizes investigated are primarily constrained by the existence of extremely long limit cycles and transients of large networks, occurring especially when the thresholds are near-normal, (see Clark (1990, 1991), Clark, Kürten & Rafelski (1988), and Littlewort, Clark & Rafelski (1988) for discussions of normal thresholds and the correlation between transient length and limit-cycle period). A network of $`N`$ threshold units can assume $`2^N`$ states, placing an upper limit on the length of a limit cycle. This upper limit for the cycle length is due to the facts that there are only a finite number of states and that the time development of the system is deterministic and depends only on the initial network state $`𝒙(0)`$.

Since the detection of limit cycles at the microstate level $`𝒙`$ is too time consuming (it requires $`𝒪(NL^2)`$ comparisons), we use the system-averaged firing rate $`\overline{x}(t)`$ in order to test for periodicity:

$`\overline{x}(t)`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}x_i(t),`$ (5)
$`\overline{x}(t+L)`$ $`=\overline{x}(t)t[0,4L],`$ (6)
where the limit-cycle period is is identified as $`L`$. Though satisfying Equation 6 is only a necessary condition for an exact limit cycle of period $`L`$ at the microstate-level, in practice we observed no differences between exact and average comparison methods on a small test set. We used a window of $`4L`$ time steps to ensure that the cycle does indeed repeat itself in $`\overline{x}`$ four times; without explicitly tracking the microstate $`𝒙`$, such care is necessary in order to avoid false limit-cycle detection and measurement.

### 2.2 Limit-cycle Comparison

Since diversity and volatility (which we define in sections 3.2 & 3.3) require an abundance of different limit cycles, we need to introduce a high-contrast, direct, neuron-by-neuron measure to decide whether a given limit cycle is different from or similar to another limit cycle. One could, of course, just compare the full neuron-by-neuron time-dependence of the activity patterns of the cycles themselves, but that would require a vast amount of memory to store all observed cycles. However, if as above, we choose to compare the time-dependence of the system-averaged firing rates instead of the full firing vectors, different limit cycles may be remarkably similar, possibly distinguished by only a small numerical difference, which we elucidate here with a specific example. Given that:

* a network of $`N`$ neurons has two cycles: cycle A with period $`L`$ and cycle B with period $`2L`$,
* cycle A has the same firing pattern at each time step as cycle B with the exception of two neurons at each time step in cycle A which differ from the corresponding two neurons in cycle B,
* and the total number of firing neurons at each time step in cycle A is the same at each time step in cycle B (due to the two neurons cancelling each other),

then with system-averaged firing rates, the two cycles would be deemed identical, with the same period; though a comparison of the time-dependence of full firing vectors would show the different period of the two cycles.

Reliable discrimination clearly requires a compact measure, i.e. a fingerprint of a cycle, which is:

* independent of cycle length,
* capable of discriminating between a wide array of limit cycles, and
* easily computable.

For this purpose we use the vector $`\overline{𝒙}=[\overline{x}_1,\mathrm{},\overline{x}_N]^t`$ formed by the time-averaged firing rates within $`T=4L`$ time steps,

$$\overline{x}_i=\frac{1}{T}\underset{t=1}{\overset{T}{}}x_i(t).$$
(7)
Since we base our limit-cycle detection upon a temporal quantity (the time-dependent, system-averaged firing rate), our additional reference to a ‘spatial’ quantity (the time-independent, time-averaged firing vector) serves as a good cross-check. Obviously, use of limit-cycle period alone as our measure of similarity might have commonly led to misclassified cycles.

We do not want to distinguish between very similar limit cycles, separated by only a small number of misfirings. Therefore, for two cycles to be considered similar, we allow small non-zero values of the distance

$$d(\overline{𝒙},\overline{𝒙}^{})=\frac{1}{N}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}|\overline{x}_i\overline{x}_i^{}|$$
(8)
between their fingerprints $`\overline{𝒙}`$ and $`\overline{𝒙}^{}`$.

In Figure 2, we show histograms of the distances between limit cycles with (a) equal and (b) different lengths, accumulated over a large number of different cycles and all investigated networks and thresholds. Due to their high frequency, we have excluded pairs of cycles with $`d=0.0`$ from this figure. If the two cycles have the same period $`L`$, the overall number of misfirings during $`T`$ timesteps is given by $`NTd`$. The chosen value of the threshold $`d_{\text{max}}=0.02`$ for cycles to be regarded as similar is indicated in Figure 2 as well. Evidently, this choice is low enough to prevent misclassification of most of the different limit cycles, as it avoids the large peaks for larger $`d`$, and it is sufficiently larger than zero to tolerate small deviations in similar cycles. It corresponds to one ‘misfiring’ per time step for $`N=50`$, on average.

As observed in Figure 2.a (center column), cycle pairs with equal and long periods ($`L>50`$) produce a curious clustering of distances within $`0.02<d<0.1`$. A closer inspection of this peak reveals that only three cycle pairs contribute to this clustering. Therefore, in order to be conservative, we raised the threshold for limit-cycle difference to $`d_{\text{max}}=0.1`$ in this case. Since the number of cycle pairs within this peak is only a small fraction of the total number of cycle pairs observed, this change in $`d_{\text{max}}`$ changes the ‘diversity’ and ‘volatility’ (defined later) only by a small amount.

For cycle pairs with short periods ($`L<50`$), the non-zero distances approximately follow a gaussian distribution with mean $`\overline{d}=0.45`$ and standard deviation $`\sigma _d0.15`$ (see Figure 2, left column). Cycles with larger periods display a non-gaussian distribution (see Figure 2, center column) with positive skew, mean $`\overline{d}0.18`$, and standard deviation $`\sigma _d0.12`$.

Splitting the range of compared periods into smaller intervals reveals that within these smaller intervals the distribution is gaussian as well, but with decreasing mean for increasing periods (not shown). Long-period limit cycles often tend to have a large fraction of their neurons firing very close to 50% of the time, reducing the average distance.

## 3 Performance of the random asymmetric neural network

The firing rate of random asymmetric neural networks tends to converge to a fixed point where the neural firing vector $`𝒙(t)`$ does not change in time, if the deviation from normal thresholds is large. If the mean threshold value is much greater or much less than normal, the neurons are less or more likely to fire and the RSANN will tend to have a fixed point with very few or very many neurons firing each time step. These extreme conditions are called network ‘death’ and ‘epilepsy’, respectively. By contrast, for normal thresholds $`(\mu =1)`$, limit cycles with very long periods are possible, as seen in Figs. 4, 4 (cf., Clark, Kürten & Rafelski (1988), Kürten (1988), Clark (1990,1991), McGuire, Littlewort & Rafelski (1991), McGuire et al. (1992)).

When the mean threshold value is normal ($`\mu =1)`$, but the threshold fluctuations from normality are large ($`\epsilon >\epsilon _2`$), then there also exist many different mixed death/epilepsy fixed points in which a fraction of the neurons are firing at each time step and the remaining neurons never fire. With growing $`\epsilon `$, this fraction of neurons with constant firing state ($`x_i(t)=0`$ or $`x_i(t)=1`$ for all $`t`$) grows, due to the fact that a larger fraction of the neuron thresholds differ significantly from their normal values. Therefore, as $`\epsilon `$ increases, a smaller fraction of neurons actively participate in the dynamics, making the effective network size smaller and the limit cycles shorter. As can be seen in Figure 5, the average period and the maximal period both decrease roughly exponentially with growing $`\epsilon `$.

Conversely, as $`\epsilon `$ increases, the number of different limit cycles increases as well (as observed during many different trials, each with a different random realization of thresholds $`V_i\eta _iV_i^0`$). This increase in the observed number of different cycles is caused by each network realization eventually producing a (short) limit cycle in a different portion of the network, as more and more different neurons drop out of the picture as dynamical participants (Figure 6). The saturation for some of the nets in the ensemble of 10 nets is artificial, since we limited the maximum number of trials to 1000 to constrain computational costs. 101010 In the accompanying log-log version of Figure 6, the behavior seems much more regular, with the large deviations from the ensemble-average behavior for large $`\epsilon `$ becoming less important. The general shape for $`\epsilon >10^3`$ is of a power law with exponent near $`1.0`$ and positive coefficient ($`𝒩_{\text{cycles}}A\epsilon ^\alpha `$, with $`\alpha 1.0`$), the near-unity exponent of the power law making it roughly a linear dependence as well. For particular examples from this 10-network ensemble, the dependence of the $`𝒩_{\text{cycles}}`$ curve is sometimes not a power-law; and for the cases in which the behavior is similar to that of a power law, the coefficient $`A`$ and exponent $`\alpha `$ of the power law both differ by as much as a factor of 2 from the coefficient and exponent for the average behavior. The fact that the average behavior is a power law or even a linear function (rather than irregular behavior) means that it might be worthwhile and interesting in the future to perform a theoretical analysis of cycle diversity for RSANNs as a function of threshold disorder.

In the following three sections, we limit our discussion to a small ensemble of 10 networks with different connection-strength matrices, and we compute the mean and variation of the quantities-of-interest, as a function of the disorder amplitude, $`\epsilon `$. In section 3.4, we explore a much larger ensemble of 300 networks, but for only a few values of $`\epsilon `$.

### 3.1 Eligibility

Since we are interested in complex dynamical behaviour, a large fraction of neurons should participate non-trivially in the dynamical collective activity of the network – such a network is said to have a high degree of eligibility. A limit cycle $`\alpha `$ will have a maximally eligible time-averaged firing pattern $`\overline{𝒙}^\alpha `$, if $`\overline{x}_i^\alpha =\frac{1}{2}`$ for all neurons $`i`$. There will be minimal eligibility if $`\overline{x}_i^\alpha \{0,1\}`$ for all neurons $`i`$. The Shannon information (or entropy) has these properties, so we will adopt an entropy function as our measure of the eligibility of a given limit-cycle attractor $`\alpha `$:

$$e(\alpha )\frac{1}{N}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\overline{x}_i^\alpha \mathrm{ln}\overline{x}_i^\alpha .$$
(9)
The mean eligibility $``$, averaged over all $`𝒩_{\text{trials}}`$ trials, is

$$\frac{1}{𝒩_{\text{trials}}}\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{𝒩_{\text{trials}}}{}}e(\alpha )\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}2_{\text{max}}$$
(10)
for fixed network connectivity and fixed $`\epsilon `$. Despite its utility, we do not have a rigorous dynamical motivation for quantifying eligibility by entropy. As discussed at the beginning of this section, the fraction of actively participating neurons decreases with growing $`\epsilon `$; thus eligibility is decreasing as well (Figure 9). In other words, when the thresholds become grossly ‘out-of-tune’ with the mean membrane potential, the RSANN attractors become more trivial, with each neuron tending toward its own independent fixed point $`x_i(t)=1`$ or $`x_i(t)=0`$.

### 3.2 Diversity

We measure the accessibility of a given attractor by estimating the probability $`P(\alpha )`$ that a given attractor (first observed at trial $`\alpha `$) is observed during all $`𝒩_{\text{trials}}`$ trials, identified with its relative frequency of occurence

$$P(\alpha )\frac{𝒩(\alpha )}{𝒩_{\text{trials}}},$$
(11)
where $`𝒩(\alpha )`$ is the number of observations of limit cycle $`\alpha `$. Note that if a given attractor is only observed once, then $`P(\alpha )=1/𝒩_{\text{trials}}`$, while if the same attractor is observed in every trial, then $`P(\alpha )=1`$.

Given that each different limit-cycle attractor is accessed by the network with probability $`P(\alpha )`$, we can define the diversity $`𝒟`$ as the attractor occupation entropy:

$$𝒟=\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{𝒩_{\text{cycles}}}{}}P(\alpha )\mathrm{ln}P(\alpha )\text{ , where}\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{𝒩_{\text{cycles}}}{}}P(\alpha )=1$$
(12)
and $`𝒩_{\text{cycles}}`$ is the total number of different observed cycles. It is easily seen that a large $`𝒟`$ corresponds to the ability to occupy many different cyclic modes with nearly equal probability; the diversity will reach a maximum value of $`𝒟_{\text{max}}=\mathrm{ln}𝒩_{\text{trials}}`$ when $`P(\alpha )=1/𝒩_{\text{trials}}`$ for all limit cycles $`\alpha `$, i.e. if in each trial a different cycle is observed. A small value of $`𝒟`$ corresponds to a strong stability (or inflexibility) of the system – very few different cyclic modes are available. As can be seen from Figure 9 the diversity grows rapidly with increasing disorder amplitude $`\epsilon `$, and with a relatively small disorder value of $`\epsilon =\epsilon _110^2`$, the diversity is already half of its maximal value. Since it takes into account the accessibility of all the detected cycles, this technique of quantifying diversity by an entropy function is considerably more robust and meaningful than simply counting the cycles.

### 3.3 Volatility

Volatility is defined as the ability to access a large number of highly eligible limit cycles, or a ‘mixture’ of high eligibility and high diversity. Having defined both eligibility and diversity, we can now combine them to define volatility as an entropy-weighted entropy:

$$𝒱=\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{𝒩_{\text{cycles}}}{}}e(\alpha )P(\alpha )\mathrm{ln}P(\alpha ).$$
(13)
Since the volatility curve in Figure 9 is roughly the product of the eligibility and the diversity curve in Figures 9 and 9, there exists an intermediate regime $`\epsilon _1<\epsilon <\epsilon _2`$ of high volatility. At $`\epsilon =\epsilon _110^2`$ the growing disorder amplitude causes a transformation to a condition of diversity, entailing many different limit cycles, whereas at $`\epsilon =\epsilon _20.5`$ the disorder amplitude has become so large that most limit cycles become fixed points. We accordingly identify three different regimes for the RSANN with disorder:

1. Stable Regime: $`\epsilon <10^2`$
2. Volatile Regime: $`10^2\epsilon 0.5`$
3. Trivially Random Regime: $`\epsilon >0.5`$.

### 3.4 Larger Ensemble study

The results obtained in Sections 3.1 \- 3.3 were obtained from ten RSANNs with random weight matrices drawn from the uniform distribution $`w_{ij}[1,1]`$. As can be seen from the standard deviation curves in figures 99, which are in close proximity to the average curves, all networks exhibit the same qualitative behaviour. To further confirm this finding, we have tabulated in tables 12 and Figure 10 the statistics of the number of different limit cycles, their periods, and the diversity & volatility, for 300 networks with different connection strength matrices using 500 different disorder vectors $`𝜼`$ for each network. The $`\epsilon =0.0`$ results in Table 1 and Figure 10 confirm Amari’s theoretical result (1974) and the empirical results of Clark, Kürten & Rafelski (1988), that random networks tend to possess only a small number of different cyclic modes. For larger $`\epsilon `$, the ensemble-average number of cycles, the diversity and volatility are all much larger than for $`\epsilon =0`$.

In particular, the results shown in Table 2 suggest that with increasing $`\epsilon `$, the minimum period rapidly decreases, whereas the maximum period rapidly increases, with the average period staying roughly constant and closer to the minimum than the maximum. This suggests that at least a few limit cycles having long periods exist with non-normal thresholds, and that there are many more fixed points than long-period limit cycles when the thresholds are far from normal, than when the thresholds are close to normal.

### 3.5 Stability and attractor basins of observed cycles

We have shown in Sections 3.1 \- 3.4 that when we change the threshold parameters of a network sufficiently far from their default values, then we get new, non-trivial behavior for nearly each parameter realization. Since the level of threshold disorder which is needed to obtain new and complex behavior is not too high, the ensemble of networks can exhibit diverse and complex behavior with only slight changes in the network parameters.

In order to demonstrate that this diversity originates only from ensemble diversity and is not intrinsic to the specific network realizations, we must show that each specific network of the ensemble possesses only a limited set of limit cycles. For this reason we counted the number of different observed cycles $`𝒩_{\text{cycles}}^{\text{fixed}}(w_{ij},𝜼(\epsilon ))`$ of each network $`(w_{ij},𝜼(\epsilon ))`$ in the ensemble starting with 100 randomly-chosen initial activity patterns $`𝒙(0)`$. Then we performed the ensemble average

$$𝒩_{\text{cycles}}^{\text{fixed}}(\epsilon )=𝒩_{\text{cycles}}^{\text{fixed}}(w_{ij},𝜼(\epsilon ))_{𝜼(\epsilon )}.$$
(14)
As can be seen from Figure 12, the number of different observed cycles is rather small, and does not depend upon the disorder amplitude $`\epsilon `$. Of course, the actual size of the repertoire does depend on the instantiation of $`𝜼(\epsilon )`$, as evidenced by the deviations (indicated by dashed curves), but the degree of variation in $`𝒩_{\text{cycles}}^{\text{fixed}}(\epsilon )`$ in no way matches the substantial secular increase of $`𝒩_{\text{cycles}}^{\text{fixed}}(\epsilon )`$ observed in Figure 6.

Using a similar diversity measure like in Equation 12, but now using the occurence probabilities of observed cycles with fixed network parameters, it is possible to estimate the relative sizes of the basins of attraction of these cycles. The diversity becomes maximal when all cycles are observed with equal probability, corresponding to basins of attractions of equal size. As can be seen from Figure 12, the diversity reaches only the half of its maximum, indicating basins of attraction of different sizes. The figure suggests that $`\mathrm{ln}P\frac{1}{2}`$, implying that $`P0.6`$. In other words, for fixed thresholds, as we vary the initial firing vector, we observe the same cycle in greater than $`60\%`$ of the trials; as evident in Figure 12, there is little dependence in the fixed-threshold cycle-diversity upon the frozen-disorder amplitude $`\epsilon `$.

### 3.6 Distribution of Limit-Cycle Periods and their Dependence upon Network Size

For the choice of threshold and connectivity parameters made here, the average cycle length $`L`$ grows exponentially with the network size $`N`$ (see Fig. 14). This exponential scaling of the cycle length puts it in the ‘chaotic’ regime of Kürten’s (1988) classification of dynamical phases, where the motion shows high sensitivity to initial conditions. Kürten also found a ‘frozen’ regime where the limit-cycle period scales as a power law in $`N`$, and where there is little sensitivity of the attracting limit cycle upon initial conditions. When $`\epsilon =0.02`$, which is in the volatile region, a broad, non-gaussian distribution of cycle lengths is found (see Fig. 14). Furthermore, since the cycle-length distribution shown in Fig. 14 does not exhibit peaks at regularly spaced intervals, the possibility that we have employed an errant limit-cycle comparison algorithm is unlikely. This distribution of cycle-lengths for RSANNs differs significantly from the $`\mathrm{exp}(L^2/\tau ^2)/L`$ distribution of cycle-lengths predicted for Kauffman’s Boolean nets by Bastolla and Parisi (1997). This difference in distributions implies that there may be some significant differences between these two types of nets.

### 3.7 Dependence of Attractor Count on Observation-Period Length

In Figure 6, we showed that the number of different attractors observed, $`𝒩_{\text{cycles}}`$, is a significant fraction of the total number of trials $`𝒩_{\text{trials}}`$ when $`\epsilon >0.1`$. For disorder between $`\epsilon =10^2`$ and $`\epsilon =0.1`$, the number of cycles observed is much larger than one (see Figure 9.b), but less than the total number of trials. In the stable regime ($`\epsilon <10^2`$), $`𝒩_{\text{cycles}}`$ is quite small and largely independent of $`𝒩_{\text{trials}}`$. These three results are complementary: the first result (at high $`\epsilon `$) implying a nearly inexhaustible source of different limit-cycle attractors accompanied by a steady decrease of eligibility with increasing $`\epsilon `$; the second result (at moderate $`\epsilon `$) implying a large, but limited repertoire of limit cycles of high eligibility; and the third result (at very low $`\epsilon `$) implying that we can exhaustively access a small group of high-eligibility limit-cycle attractors with a high degree of robustness.

In the stable regime, $`𝒩_{\text{cycles}}`$ is often greater than $`1`$ (though small), which means that the stable phase cannot be used to access a particular attractor upon demand, but we can demand reliable access to one of a small number of different attractors. Frequently, however, there is a single dominant attractor, as indicated by the low entropy seen in Fig. 12. We conclude that, in practice, for a given set of network parameters or external inputs to the network, but starting with different initial conditions, the network will converge to the same attractor most of the time.

## 4 Discussion

### 4.1 Ensemble-scanner, Multistability, ‘Creativity/Madness’, and Control Algorithms

In the ‘noisy’ runs at $`\epsilon >0`$, epitomized by Fig. 1, we are actually sampling a significant fraction of an entire ensemble of closely-related networks over the course of time, as the noise or disorder or an external input slowly varies. Based upon the results for our RSANN model, quenched noise (disorder) can give a dynamical system access to a whole ensemble of different behaviors at different times during the lifetime of the dynamical system. In other words, slowly-varying threshold noise or disorder or external input can act as a ‘scanner’ for a host of dynamic modes.

The posed existence (Skarda & Freeman (1987), Yao & Freeman (1990), Freeman et al. (1997)) of a chaotic ground-state attractor for the olfactory system and the existence of ‘multistable’ limit-cycle excited-state attractor lobes provides a striking exemplification of our volatility concept, and potentially an in vivo demonstration of this phenomenon.

The RSANN networks studied here have a small repertoire of behaviors when there is no noise or disorder in the thresholds ($`\epsilon =0`$); hence, there is little multistability. The size of the repertoire becomes tremendously large (as does the extent of multistability) for ‘small’ changes in the threshold parameters ($`\epsilon >10^2`$). One is therefore tempted to call this behavior ‘chaotic’ with respect to the parameter changes, since it has one of the hallmarks of chaos (sensitive dependence upon small changes of the parameters). However, for smaller changes in the threshold parameters ($`0<\epsilon <10^3`$), the repertoire of $`\epsilon =0`$ behaviors is ‘stable’ – no new cycles are observed. For the purpose of discussion , we refer to this delimited sensitivity to parameter changes, as ‘quasi-chaos’ or ‘quasi-multistability’. Additionally, the stability is augmented by the fact that very frequently, the repertoire of a network in the stable regime is dominated by a single cycle (for fixed connections and fixed disorder), a phenomenon known as ‘canalization’ (Kauffman (1993)). Hence, for the sake of argument, we will also assume that in the stable regime only one cycle is accessible. By taking advantage of the quasi-chaotic/quasi-multistable threshold parameters (noting that the connection strength parameters are probably also quasi-chaotic), we can access a large number of different RSANN attractors, each with a small neighborhood of stability in threshold-parameter space. With a suitable feedback algorithm, one might be able to control this quasi-chaos (cf. Ott, Grebogi & Yorke (1990)) and access and stabilize a given attractor upon demand. Due to the proximity of other limit cycles just beyond the local neighborhood of stability of the given attractor, novel attractors are always within a stone’s throw of the given attractor, while maintaining a respectable distance so as not to be destabilizing. Such an approach to controlled creativity has been developed into the adaptive resonance formalism (Carpenter & Grossberg (1987)).

The volatile regime within $`\epsilon =0.0010.5`$ can be subdivided into two sub-regimes. The lower end of the range, $`\epsilon =0.0010.1`$, which corresponds to the upward-sloping part of the volatility curve in Figure 9.b, could suggestively be named the ‘creative’ regime, wherein new cycles are observed with some rarity, so as to provide truly new behavioral modes for the RSANN. These new cycles can be taken together with the more commonly-observed cycles in the net’s repertoire, perhaps to produce new and ‘interesting’ sequences of behavior (if these cyclic modes can be logically sequenced). The upper end of the range, $`\epsilon =0.10.5`$, might be regarded as the ‘overly-creative’ or ‘slightly-mad’ regime of the RSANN. New, rather complex modes are being found with almost every trial, which could overwhelm the ‘bookkeeping’ resources necessary for the RSANN to implement or utilize the new mode to its full potential. Clearly, this abstract and simple RSANN model is insufficent to be a true neurobiological model of creativity/madness, but it could be a good starting point for a more detailed model.

### 4.2 Generalization to other Complex Systems

It may well be a common feature of a broad class of complex, non-linear systems without adaptability or noise that the diversity of non-trivial behaviors is limited. We have confirmed the lack of diverse behavior for a non-linear system with truly simple elements (McCullough-Pitts neurons); we have also seen similar non-volatile behavior for a slightly more general, discretized integrate-and-fire neuron model. This canalization result may be generalizable to other complex systems of either simple or complex units. Indeed, one of the first observations of canalization was in Kauffman’s Boolean immunological networks, which have some significant differences from RSANNs. The canalization property might have been more difficult to generalize if we had started with more complex units like Hodgkin-Huxley neurons. Furthermore, it is plausible that the introduction of a moderate amount of noise or disorder will generally increase the diversity of complex behaviors, as we have seen in RSANNs.

Our volatility-producing model might be applicable in more abstract situations. One might imagine that the states of our simple Boolean neuron reflect in some manner the ‘on or off’ state of complex subunits of a modular system. Such modular complex systems could be probed to determine whether dynamical diversity can or cannot be enhanced by small changes in network parameters. Examples might include:

1. A random neural network composed of subnetworks;
2. A network of complex, real neurons;
3. The brain of an organism with its different subsystems;
4. The geoeconomic or political structure of a large country composed of smaller states, regions, or cities; and
5. The ecological network of the world composed of different regions or of different subcommunities of animals or plants.

In models with subunits that are composed of many sub-subunits, the stability or canalizing ability of the system itself may be significantly enhanced either by a law-of-large-numbers decrease in the noise/disorder susceptibility of an individual subunit, or by self-stabilizing internal feedback loops which may be present by design within the subunits.

### 4.3 Conclusions & Prospects

Based on combinatorics and statistical arguments, one expects to find many limit cycles in a random synchronous asymmetric neural network (RSANN). Experience has shown otherwise. After much of this paper was completed, we found an analytical argument by Amari (1974, 1989) to the effect that RSANNs have only one attractor, in the thermodynamic limit of a large number of neurons, thus explaining our $`\epsilon =0`$ results.

The main objective of our study has been to construct a volatile neural network which exhibits a large set of easily-accessible highly-eligible limit-cycle attractors, as has been achieved already in a non-neural system (Poon & Grebogi (1995)). First, we have demonstrated that in the absence of noise and in the absence of random, long-term imposition of threshold disorder, a random asymmetric neural network can reach only a small number of different limit-cycle attractors. Second, by imposing and freezing neuronal threshold disorder within a well-defined range ($`\epsilon _1<\epsilon <\epsilon _2`$), we show that RSANNs can access a diversity of highly-eligible limit-cycle attractors. RSANNs exhibit a phase transformation from a small number of distinct limit-cycle attractors to a large number at a disorder amplitude of $`\epsilon =\epsilon _110^2`$. Likewise, RSANNs exhibit an eligibility phase transformation at a threshold disorder amplitude of $`\epsilon =\epsilon _20.5`$.

Potentially, Amari’s argument can be extended to gain an understanding of how slight changes of threshold parameters beyond some minimal level can substantially increase the diversity of accessible cyclic modes. This extension is beyond the scope of the current work. Another very interesting question is how the diversity and volatility curves scale with the size of the network.

While the addition of threshold disorder seems to be a trivial mechanism for enhancing the volatility or diversity by constantly changing the parameters of the RSANN, we believe that since some biological systems (Neiman et al. (1999)) may use threshold, synapse and/or externally-generated noise or disorder to enhance their abilities, we have discovered a simple feature which could have some importance in modeling biological systems. We fully expect that other volatility-enhancing mechanisms are available beyond the particular one proposed here.

In summary, our key result is that a random neural network can be driven easily from one to another stable recurrent mode. While such behavior can be always accomplished by radical modifications of some of the network properties, the interesting result we have here presented is that plausibly small (e.g., RMS in the neighborhood of 0.1-1%) and random changes imposed simultaneously upon all of the neural threshold parameters suffices to access new dynamical behavior. Indeed, due to the combinatorics of changing many parameters simultaneously, an immense number of interesting modes become available to the system. We are aware that this does not yet create a network that can self-sequence a series of modes, though some authors have already made considerable progress in this direction (e.g. Daucé and Quoy (2000), Tani (1998)). The development of autonomous control algorithms that provide access to mode sequences is a natural but challenging objective that can potentially lead to a deeper understanding of information processing in recurrent neural networks.

### Acknowledgements

H. Bohr would like to acknowledge the hospitality of P. Carruthers (now deceased), J. Rafelski, and the U. Arizona Department of Physics during several visits when much of this work was carried out. During his graduate studies, P. McGuire was partially supported by an NSF/U.S. Department of Education/State of Arizona doctoral fellowship. J.W. Clark acknowledges research support from the U.S. National Science Foundation under Grant No. PHY-9900713. McGuire, Bohr and Clark were participants in the Research Year on the “The Sciences of Complexity: From Mathematics to Technology to a Sustainable World” at the Center for Interdisciplinary Studies (ZiF) at the University of Bielefeld, in Germany. We all thank many individuals who have provided different perspectives to our work, including the following: G. Sonnenberg, D. Harley, Z. Hasan, H. Ritter, R. Vilela-Mendes, and G. Littlewort.


format: text

text:
# Spin polarization of strongly interacting 2D electrons: the role of disorder.

## Abstract

In high-mobility silicon MOSFET’s, the $`g^{}m^{}`$ inferred indirectly from magnetoconductance and magnetoresistance measurements with the assumption that $`g^{}\mu _BH_s=2E_F`$ are in surprisingly good agreement with $`g^{}m^{}`$ obtained by direct measurement of Shubnikov-de Haas oscillations. The enhanced susceptibility $`\chi ^{}(g^{}m^{})`$ exhibits critical behavior of the form $`\chi ^{}(nn_0)^\alpha `$. We examine the significance of the field scale $`H_s`$ derived from transport measurements, and show that this field signals the onset of full spin polarization only in the absence of disorder. Our results suggest that disorder becomes increasingly important as the electron density is reduced toward the transition.

Two dimensional systems of electrons  and holes  have been the focus of a great deal of attention during the last few years. In contrast with expectations for noninteracting  or weakly interacting  electrons in two dimensions, these strongly interacting systems exhibit metallic behavior in the absence of a magnetic field: above some characteristic electron (hole) density, $`n_c`$, their resistivities decrease with decreasing temperature. Whether there is a genuine metallic phase and a true metal-insulator transition in these materials continues to be the subject of lively debate .

Experimental results have been obtained in the 2D system of electrons in silicon MOSFET’s that indicate that the response to a magnetic field applied in the plane of the electrons increases dramatically as the electron density is decreased toward $`n_c`$. Based on a study of the scaled magnetoconductance as a function of temperature and electron density, Vitkalov et al.  have identified an energy scale $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ that decreases with decreasing density and extrapolates to zero in the limit $`T0`$ at a density $`n_0`$ in the vicinity of $`n_c`$; this was interpreted as evidence of a quantum phase transition at $`n_0`$. From studies at very low temperatures of the magnetoresistance as a function of electron density, Shashkin et al.  inferred that the two-dimensional system of electrons in silicon inversion layers approaches a ferromagnetic instability at the critical density $`n_c`$ for the zero-field metal-insulator transition. From a determination of the enhanced spin susceptibility derived from Shubnikov-de Haas measurements down to low densities, Pudalov et al.  have claimed there is no spontaneous spin polarization for electron densities above $`n=8.34\times 10^{10}`$ cm$`{}_{}{}^{2}n_c`$, although they could not exclude this for lower densities. The possibility that a magnetically ordered phase exists in the limit $`T0`$ in dilute two-dimensional silicon inversion layers is intriguing and bears further investigation.

In this paper we show that there is very good agreement between values reported for $`g^{}m^{}`$ as a function of electron density in high-mobility silicon MOSFET’s obtained directly from measurements of the Shubnikov-de Haas oscillations  and those inferred indirectly from magnetoconductance and magnetoresistance measurements by two different groups using different methods of analysis and the assumption that $`g^{}\mu _BH_s=2E_F`$ . Here $`g^{}`$ is the enhanced $`g`$-factor, $`m^{}`$ is the enhanced electron mass, $`\mu _B`$ is Boltzmann’s factor, $`E_F`$ is the Fermi energy, and $`H_s`$ is a characteristic field scale determined by different methods from in-plane magnetoconductance  and magnetoresistance  experiments. The enhanced susceptibility $`\chi ^{}(g^{}m^{})`$ exhibits critical behavior of the form $`\chi ^{}(nn_0)^\alpha `$. Data from the three experimental groups yield exponents $`\alpha `$ of $`0.23,0.24`$ and $`0.27`$, and critical densities between $`0.88`$ and $`1.04\times 10^{11}`$ cm-2. We examine the significance of the field scale $`H_s`$, and show that this field signals the onset of full spin polarization only in the absence of disorder. Our results suggest that disorder becomes increasingly important as the electron density is reduced toward the transition.

Measurements of Shubnikov-de Haas oscillations in high-mobility silicon MOSFET’s with high electron densities have shown that the magnetic field required to achieve complete polarization of the electron spins is approximately the same as that required to saturate the magnetoresistance to a constant value . For the relatively high densities used in these experiments, the field $`H_\rho `$ correponding to saturation of the magnetoresistance is approximately the same as the field $`H_\sigma `$ above which there is apparent saturation of the magnetoconductance. As we show below, this equivalence breaks down at lower densities. A clear example is illustrated in Fig. Spin polarization of strongly interacting 2D electrons: the role of disorder., where the resistivity and conductivity are shown as a function of in-plane magnetic field for a silicon MOSFET with electron density near the critical density, $`n_c`$, for the metal-insulator transition. The saturation field $`H_\rho `$ derived from the resistivity is considerably larger than the field $`H_\sigma `$ above which the conductivity saturates. This can be understood with reference to the band diagrams shown as insets to Fig. Spin polarization of strongly interacting 2D electrons: the role of disorder.. In the absence of disorder,      FIG. 1. For a silicon MOSFET with electron density $`0.94\times 10^{11}`$ cm-2, the conductivity (left curve) and resistivity (right curve) are shown as a function of in-plane magnetic field at temperature $`T=0.26`$ K; the saturation fields deduced from the resistivity and the conductivity are labeled $`H_\rho `$ and $`H_\sigma `$, respectively. The insets show schematic diagrams of the electron bands (see text for discussion).

all electron states are extended, band-tailing plays a negligible role, and full spin polarization is achieved when the Zeeman energy is sufficient to completely depopulate the minority spin band:

$$g^{}\mu _BH_{band}=2E_F;$$
(1)
here $`g^{}`$ is the enhanced $`g`$-factor, $`\mu _B`$ is Boltzmann’s factor, $`H_{band}`$ is the magnetic field required to fully polarize the system in the absence of disorder, and $`E_F`$ is the Fermi energy. Disorder is weak at high electron densities and one expects $`H_{band}H_\rho H_\sigma `$.

As the density is decreased and disorder and the band-tails become more important, complete spin alignment requires the application of a larger magnetic field to fully polarize the tail states as well as the extended states:

$$g^{}\mu _BH_{tail+band}=2E_F+\delta $$
(2)
where we’ve assumed the band tail has an effective energy width $`\delta `$ .

Except very near the transition, the number of states in the band tails in the case of samples of reasonably high mobility is much smaller than the number of extended states; at the same time, the energy width $`\delta `$ becomes appreciable as the density decreases and the disorder increases. The field required to align the electrons in the higher mobility band states can thus differ substantially from the magnetic field needed to polarize $`all`$ the electrons . While the (small number) of tail states make a minor contribution to the conductivity, the resistivity is considerably more sensitive to the low-mobility states in the tail of the distribution, and consequently $`H_\rho >H_\sigma `$ as is evident in Fig.Spin polarization of strongly interacting 2D electrons: the role of disorder.. We suggest that $`H_\sigma H_{band}`$ and $`H_\rho H_{tail+band}`$.

FIG. 2. The fractional difference $`(H_\rho H_\sigma )/H_\sigma `$ (open symbols) and $`2/\sigma `$ (closed symbols) versus electron density; $`H_\rho `$ and $`H_\sigma `$ are the saturation fields deduced from resistivity and conductivity curves, respectively. The open circles and closed symbols refer to data taken at $`0.26`$ K. The open squares are data obtained at $`0.1`$ K on a different MOSFET.

The fractional difference between $`H_\rho `$ and $`H_\sigma `$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }H/H=(H_\rho H_\sigma )/H_\sigma `$, is shown as a function of electron density in Fig. Spin polarization of strongly interacting 2D electrons: the role of disorder.; $`\mathrm{\Delta }H/H`$ increases rapidly with decreasing electron density when disorder becomes more dominant. The quantity $`2/\sigma `$ is plotted for comparison through the following argument. For weak scattering, the parameter $`\delta `$ is on the order of the scattering rate: $`\delta \mathrm{}/\tau `$. With Eqs. 1 and 2, this gives $`\mathrm{\Delta }H/H=\delta /2E_F=\mathrm{}/2(E_F\tau )`$. Using the expression for the Drude conductivity $`\sigma =ne^2\tau /m^{}`$, and the Fermi energy $`E_F/\mathrm{}=(nh)/g_vg_sm^{}`$ with a valley degeneracy $`g_v=2`$ and spin degeneracy $`g_s=2`$, one obtains $`\mathrm{\Delta }H/H=(e^2/h)(2/\sigma )`$. The correlation between $`\mathrm{\Delta }H/H`$ and $`2/\sigma `$ is evident in Fig. Spin polarization of strongly interacting 2D electrons: the role of disorder..

In an earlier paper , we showed that the magnetoconductance of silicon MOSFET’s can be scaled onto a single curve by plotting $`[\sigma (H)\sigma (0)]/[\sigma (H=\mathrm{})\sigma (0)]`$ as a function of $`H/H_s`$. The parameter $`H_s`$ obtained by this method is proportional to $`H_\sigma `$ discussed above. For high densities where disorder plays a small role, the magnetic field $`H_\sigma `$ needed to saturate the conductivity is very nearly equal to the field required to obtain full spin polarization. At lower densities, the saturation fields deduced from the resistivity and the conductivity are not the same, and we have argued that the difference is associated with the effect of electrons in the states in the band tails. We’ve suggested that $`H_\sigma `$ is the magnetic field required to polarize the band states; the Zeeman energy and $`g^{}m^{}`$ are then given by Eq. 1 with $`H_{band}=H_\sigma `$. The tail states remain unpolarized in $`H=H_\sigma `$. However, except perhaps very near the transition (or in samples of very low mobility), they represent a small fraction of the electrons, so that the system is close to full spin polarization.

FIG. 3. The inverse of the enhanced susceptibility $`\chi _0/\chi ^{}`$ versus electron density obtained by Vitkalov et al. , Shashkin et al. , and Pudalov et al. . Data are normalized to the Shubnikov-de Haas values at high densities. The curve is a fit to the critical form $`\chi _0/\chi ^{}=A(nn_0)^\alpha `$ for the data of ref.  (excluding the point shown at $`\chi _0/\chi ^{}=0`$).

Fig. Spin polarization of strongly interacting 2D electrons: the role of disorder. shows $`2m_0/m^{}g^{}=\chi _0/\chi ^{}`$ as a function of electron density $`n_s`$ obtained from our data , by Sashkin et al. , and Pudalov et al. . Here $`\chi ^{}/\chi _0`$ is the enhanced susceptibility normalized to its free electron value, and $`\chi _0/\chi ^{}`$ is its inverse. The closed circles denote values obtained from scaling our data for the in-plane magnetoconductance and the assumption that $`g^{}\mu _BH_\sigma =2E_F`$; the open circles were obtained by Shashkin et al. from magnetoresistance measurements using a different data-fitting procedure and the same assumption as above; the squares are from direct Shubnikov-de Haas measurements of Pudalov et al.. The data of Shashkin et al. decrease somewhat more rapidly at low densities than the others. However, the three sets obtained by different groups using different measurements and different methods of analysis agree surprisingly well. Again, this indicates that the small number of states in the band tails in high-mobility MOSFET’s play a neglibible role. A fit to the critical form

$$\chi _0/\chi ^{}(nn_0)^\alpha ,$$
(3)
yields the following values for the three data sets considered: for the Shubnikov-de Haas data of Pudalov et al.  $`\alpha =0.23`$, $`n_0=0.96\times 10^{11}`$ cm-2; for the magnetoconductance data of Shashkin et al.  $`\alpha =0.27`$, $`n_0=1.04\times 10^{11}`$ cm-2; and for our data  $`\alpha =0.24`$, $`n_0=0.88\times 10^{11}`$ cm-2.

We have argued above that for high-mobility samples, the difference $`(H_\rho H_\sigma )`$ is associated with the effect of a small fraction of the electrons in the band tails. The characteristic field $`H_s`$ obtained in our earlier work was determined from scaling the magnetoconductance, which is a measure of the field required to align the band states while leaving a few electrons in the tail states unpolarized. Shashkin et al. determined a field scale by matching magnetoresistance data at $`low`$ magnetic fields; close examination shows that this procedure does not produce a match at high fields (note that their data is shown on a logarithmic scale, which deemphasizes differences between the curves at high values of magnetic field). Both methods are sensitive to the contribution of the extended state and minimize the effect of the states in the band tails. These procedures yield reliable measures for the behavior of the system at high electron densities where disorder does not play an important role. This accounts for the surprisingly good agreement between the $`g^{}m^{}`$ obtained from transport experiments and those found by direct measurement of the Shubnikov-de Haas oscillations. At densities very near the transition (and for very low mobility MOSFET’s) one should expect this correspondence to break down as disorder becomes more dominant. We suggest that an understanding of any phase transition that occurs in this regime must incorporate the effect of disorder in a central way.

We thank M. Gershenson and S. V. Kravchenko for providing data for Fig. Spin polarization of strongly interacting 2D electrons: the role of disorder.. This work was supported by the US Department of Energy under Grant No. DE-FG02-84ER45153.


text:
# Invariants of solvable rigid Lie algebras up to dimension 8

## 1 Introduction

The importance of Casimir invariants of Lie algebras has increased its importance in representation theory and physics since the classical results due to Casimir and Racah . They allow for example a labelling of irreducible representations of Lie algebras, and in physical applications, the eigenvalues of invariant functions of the symmetry group provide characterizations of a physical system, such as energy spectra. Casimir invariants of Lie algebras, which are elements of the centre of the universal enveloping algebra $`𝔄`$ of a Lie algebra, are commonly computed by using coadjoint orbits . For semi-simple Lie algebras the question has been solved long ago , but for solvable Lie algebras the question remains open. Here we obtain invariants which are not more Casimir invariants in the classical sense, since they may be transcendental functions. Their number and precise structure is also unknown, up to certain special classes which have been treated in recent literature .

In this paper we determine explicitely all invariant functions of complex solvable rigid Lie algebras up to dimension $`8`$. The interest of rigid structures is justified, for example, by the fact that the Lie algebra of the homogeneous Galilei group deforms onto the Lorentz algebra, which is rigid for being semi-simple . The classification of eight dimensional solvable rigid Lie algebras is a consequence of the root theory for solvable algebras developed in , and it allows theoretically the full determination of solvable rigid Lie algebras in any fixed dimension. Analyzing the structure of the toral subalgebras of such Lie algebras, we will be able to isolate properties that are valid in any dimension. For example, we will find sufficiency criteria to ensure the non-existence of nontrivial invariants for certain classes of rank one Lie algebras, or conditions to obtain the invariants of a solvable rigid Lie algebra as rational functions of the invariants of its nilradical. This points out that, for decomposable solvable Lie algebras, the key to the determination of invariants depends more on the way a torus acts on the nilradical than on the structure of the latter. This will also enable us to find explicitly the invariants of solvable rigid Lie algebras by extrapolation of the solutions in lower dimensional cases. This procedure is of interest, since it indicates the existence of certain rigid structures that depend heavily on their dimension. On the other side, nilradicals of rigid solvable Lie algebras are non-abelian, and their study enlarges the efforts made for these algebras in the last years . The rigid case allows us to show that for solvable Lie algebras the results will not be so harmonious as in the semi-simple case, since there are Lie algebras whose number of functionally independent invariants depends not on the dimension of a Cartan subalgebra, but on the dimension of the algebra. This is a succint indication that the non-decomposable case is, without doubt, the most difficult to solve. Probably the study of specific classes of Lie algebras is the only manner to approach the general solvable case, as classifications of these algebras only exist up to dimension six, and more advances seem not to be very probable ( among other reasons, because they imply the classification of nilpotent Lie algebras, classified only up to dimension seven). Resuming, the rigid case should be a first step to obtain interesting results on decomposable solvable Lie algebras, by studying the subtori of a maximal torus of derivations.

Any Lie algebra considered in this work is finite dimensional over the field $``$. Moreover, any $`n`$-dimensional Lie algebra $`𝔤=(^n,\mu )`$ is identified with its law $`\mu `$ in the variety $`^n`$ . Moreover, we convene that nonwritten brackets are either zero or obtained by antisymmetry.

## 2 Decomposability of rigid Lie algebras

A Lie algebra $`𝔤`$ is a vector space $`V`$ endowed with an alternating bilinear product which satisfies the Jacobi identity. If $``$ denotes the algebraic set consisting of all Lie algebra laws on $`V`$, then the linear group $`GL\left(V\right)`$ acts on the space of all alternating bilinear forms over $`V`$ by

$`\left(f\mu \right)=f^1\left(\mu (f,f)\right),fGL(V),\mu 𝒪(V)`$ (1)
showing that $``$ is stable under this action. Therefore, the orbits $`𝒪(\mu )`$ of the linear group $`GL\left(V\right)`$ on $``$ correspond to the isomorphism classes of Lie algebra laws on $`V`$. This allows to identify a Lie algebra $`𝔤`$ with the pair $`(V,\mu )`$, where $`\mu `$ is an element of the orbit $`𝒪(\mu )`$. We say that a Lie algebra $`𝔤=(V,\mu )`$ is rigid if the orbit $`𝒪(\mu )`$ is open in $``$. Thus, roughly speaking, a Lie algebra $`𝔤`$ is rigid if any Lie algebra $`𝔤^{}`$ close to $`𝔤`$ is isomorhic to $`𝔤`$. This led to the famous rigidity theorem of Nijenhuis and Richardson , though, as pointed out by Richardson in , there are rigid Lie algebras whose second adjoint cohomology group is non-zero. As known, semi-simple Lie algebras have vanishing second adjoint cohomology groups, as a consequence of the Whitehead lemmas, and by the Levi decomposition theorem, the study of rigid Lie algebras reduces mainly to analyze solvable Lie algebras. Now rigidity imposes strong structural conditions in the solvable case, which simplify its description. The most important property in this sense is their decomposability.

###### Definition 1

A Lie algebra $`𝔤`$ is called decomposable if it can be written as

$$𝔤=𝔰𝔱𝔫$$

where $`𝔰`$ is a Levi subalgebra, $`𝔫`$ the nilradical and $`𝔱`$ an abelian subalgebra whose elements are $`ad`$-semisimple and which satisfies $`[𝔰+𝔱,𝔱]=0`$.

The abelian subalgebra $`𝔱`$ of $`Der𝔤`$ defined by

$$𝔱=\{adX,X𝔱\}$$

is called, following Malcev , an exterior torus on $`𝔤`$. It is called maximal torus, if it is maximal for the inclusion. As proven by Malcev, all maximal tori are pairwise conjugated, thus their dimension constitutes an invariant of the algebra, called the rank of $`𝔤`$ and noted by $`r(𝔤).`$

By the Levi decomposition theorem, we can restrict ourselves to analyze the solvable Lie algebras. Now semi-simple Lie algebras are rigid by the Nijenhuis-Richardson theorem , so that it seems reasonable to begin with the study of solvable rigid Lie algebras in order to obtain criteria that are not dependent on the dimension. Now the structure of solvable rigid Lie algebras is known, and it simplifies the question is some manner. The central result is due to Carles :

###### Theorem 1

A rigid Lie algebra $`𝔤`$ is algebraic. In particular, it is decomposable.

In particular, if the Levi subalgebra $`𝔰`$ is zero, then $`𝔤`$ is a solvable Lie algebra. In order to study such algebras, Ancochea and Goze developed a root theory  for rigid solvable algebras. We recall this theory briefly:

Let $`𝔯`$ be a complex solvable decomposable Lie algebra, and $`𝔱`$ be a maximal torus. Let $`X`$ be a non-zero vector such that $`ad_{\mu _0}X`$ belongs to $`𝔱`$ .

###### Definition 2

We say that $`X𝔱`$ is regular if the dimension of

$$V_0\left(X\right)=\{Y𝔤|[X,Y]=0\}$$

is minimal that is, $`dimV_0\left(X\right)dimV_0\left(Z\right)`$ for all $`Z`$ such that $`adZ`$ belongs to $`𝔱`$.

Choose a regular vector $`X`$ and let be $`p=dimV_0\left(X\right)`$. Consider a basis ($`X,Y_1,\mathrm{},Y_{np},`$ $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_{p1})`$ of eigenvectors of $`adX`$ such that $`(X,X_1,\mathrm{},X_{p1})`$ is a basis of $`V_0\left(X\right)`$, $`(Y_1,\mathrm{},Y_{np},X_1,\mathrm{},X_{k_0})`$ is a basis of the maximal nilpotent ideal $`𝔫`$ of $`𝔤`$, and $`(X_{k_0+1},\mathrm{},X_{p1})`$ are vectors such that $`adX_i`$ $`T`$.

###### Definition 3

Suppose that $`𝔤`$ is not nilpotent. The root system of $`𝔤`$ associated to $`(X,Y_1,\mathrm{},Y_{np},X_1,\mathrm{},X_{p1})`$ is the linear system (S) defined by the following equations :

$`x_i+x_j=x_k`$ if the $`X_k`$-component of $`[X_i,X_j]`$ is non-zero.

$`y_i+y_j=y_k`$ if the $`Y_k`$-component of $`[Y_i,Y_j]`$ is non-zero.

$`x_i+y_j=y_k`$ if the $`Y_k`$-component of $`[X_i,Y_j]`$ is non-zero.

$`y_i+y_j=x_k`$ if the $`X_k`$component of $`[Y_i,Y_j]`$ is non-zero.

###### Theorem 2

If $`rank\left(S\right)dim\left(𝔫\right)1`$, then $`𝔤`$ is not rigid.

See  for a proof. There are two important corollaries which will be of importance for understanding the structure of solvable rigid laws.

###### Corollary 1

If $`𝔯=𝔫𝔱`$ is rigid, then $`𝔱`$ is a maximal torus over $`𝔫`$.

###### Corollary 2

If $`𝔤`$ is rigid then there is regular vector $`X`$ such that $`ad_𝔤X`$ is diagonal and its eigenvalues are integers.

These properties determine if a given Lie algebra is rigid or not. For example, let us suppose that all elements of $`V_0\left(X\right)`$ are semi-simple. If

$$rank\left(S\right)dimD^1\left(𝔤\right)1$$

where $`D^1\left(𝔤\right)`$ is the derived subalgebra of $`𝔤`$, then $`𝔤`$ is not rigid.

###### Remark 1

Even if the roots can be choosen in $``$, this does not in general imply that the Lie algebra is rational. In  various examples of this have been worked out.

## 3 Basic results on invariants. Notation

As known, the dual representation $`ad^{}`$ to the adjoint representation $`ad`$ of a Lie algebra $`𝔤`$ is called the coadjoint representation . The problem of finding its invariants is indeed reduced to that of solving a system of linear first order partial differential equations. If $`B=\{X_1,..,X_n\}`$ is a basis of the $`n`$-dimensional Lie algebra $`𝔤`$ and $`\{x_1,..,x_n\}`$ a coordinate system on the dual space, then the infinitesimal generators of the action are denoted by $`\stackrel{~}{X}_i`$. If moreover the structure constants of $`𝔤`$ are given by $`[X_i,X_j]=C_{i,j}^kX_k`$ over the basis $`B`$, the it follows that a function $`FC^{\mathrm{}}\left(𝔤^{}\right)`$ is an invariant of the coadjoint representation if and only if the two following conditions are satisfied:

1. $`\stackrel{~}{X}_i=_j(C_{i,j}^k)x_k\frac{}{x_j}`$ and $`[\stackrel{~}{X}_i,\stackrel{~}{X}_j]=C_{i,j}^k\stackrel{~}{X}_k`$,
2. $`F`$ satisfies the system of linear first order PDE $`\stackrel{~}{X}_iF=0,1in`$

Solutions to this system are usually found by integration of the corresponding system of characteristic equations or other standard integration procedures .A maximal set of functionally independent solutions will be called a fundamental set of invariants. The determination of the invariants as solutions of the associated system of linear first order PDEs is the most common method to determine the invariants of Lie algebras , and the one we will apply here. The cardinal of a fundamental set of invariants is $`N=dim\left(𝔤\right)r`$, where $`r`$ is the rank of the commutator table considered as a matrix . Since a Lie algebra law is an alternated tensor of type $`(2,1)`$, this rank does not depend on the basis chosen. Moreover, by antisymmetry, this rank is even, and we obtain that $`Ndim\left(𝔤\right)(mod2)`$. In particular, an odd dimensional Lie algebras has nontrivial invariants. From a result due to Dixmier , it is known that if the Lie algebra is algebraic, then we can find a maximal set of functionally independent solutions formed by rational functions. In view of Carles’ algebraicity theorem, we in particular obtain the following result.

###### Proposition 1

A rigid Lie algebra $`𝔫𝔱`$ having non-trivial invariants admits a fundamental set of invariants formed by rational functions.

The converse is easily seen to be false. For example, take the non-nilpotent Lie algebra $`N_{6,1}^{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }`$ of  with brackets $`[X_1,N_1]=\alpha N_1,[X_1,N_2]=\gamma N_2,[X_1,N_4]=N_4,[X_2,N_1]=\beta N_1,[X_2,N_2]=\delta N_2,[X_2,N_3]=N_3`$. It is easy to verify that it is non-rigid, as the torus generated by $`X_1,X_2`$ is non-maximal, since the nilradical of $`N_{6,1}^{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }`$ is abelian of rank four, and has a fundamental set of invariants formed by the rational functions $`\{\frac{n_3^\beta n_4^\alpha }{n_1},\frac{n_3^{(\beta \gamma \alpha \delta )}}{n_1^\gamma }\}`$.

## 4 Some sufficiency criteria

In this paragraph we analyze some results which allow to deduce the inexistence of nontrivial invariants of a solvable rigid law $`𝔯=𝔫𝔱`$ by analyzing the structure of the torus $`𝔱`$.

###### Proposition 2

Let $`dim\left(𝔫𝔱\right)=2n`$. Suppose that the rank of $`𝔫`$ is one and that the nilradical $`𝔫`$ has a one dimensional center. If there exists a basis $`\{Y_1,..,Y_{2n}\}`$ such that

1. $`𝔱`$ is generated by $`Y_n`$,
2. $`Y_{2n}Z\left(𝔫\right)`$, and
3. $`[Y_j,Y_{2nj}]=Y_{2n},2jn1`$

then $`𝔯=𝔫𝔱`$ has no nontrivial invariants.

###### Corollary 3

For $`n3`$, any solvable Lie algebra $`𝔯=𝔫𝔱`$ whose torus $`𝔱`$ has the eigenvalues $`(1,2,..,n1,n+1,..,2n)`$ has only trivial invariant functions.

In  the author points out the importance of finding characterizations of those solvable Lie algebras with non-abelian nilradical non admitting non-trivial invariant functions. Even in the decomposable case such a characterization seems not to be realizable, as the following example shows: Consider the nilpotent Lie algebra $`𝔫`$ of dimension seven given by the brackets $`[X_1,X_2]=X_4,[X_1,X_3]=X_5,[X_1,X_6]=X_7,[X_2,X_3]=X_6,[X_2,X_5]=X_7,[X_3,X_4]=X_7`$. This algebra is of rank three. Take the one dimensional tori $`𝔱_1`$ and $`𝔱_2`$ whose action over the basis $`\{X_1,..,X_7\}`$ is, respectively, given by the sequences $`(1,0,0,1,1,0,1)`$ and $`(1,1,0,0,1,1,0)`$. Both solvable non-nilpotent Lie algebras $`𝔫+𝔱_\mathfrak{1}`$ and $`𝔫+𝔱_\mathfrak{2}`$ have the same non-abelian nilradical, but the first algebra has no non-trivial invariants, while the second admits the polynomial invariant $`y_7`$, since its center is nonzero. This shows that, even if characterizations of solvable Lie algebras having only trivial solutions exist, they cannot be based on the structure of the nilradical, but on the way the torus (in the decomposable case) acts on this nilradical.
This example also provides an obvious criterion to guarantee the existence of polynomial solutions of a solvable Lie algebra:

###### Proposition 3

Let $`𝔫`$ be a nilpotent Lie algebra of rank $`r1`$ and $`𝔱`$ a maximal torus over $`𝔫`$. If there exists a toral subalgebra $`𝔱^{}𝔱`$ such that the action of $`𝔱^{}`$ on a central ideal $`I`$ is zero, then the solvable Lie algebra $`𝔫𝔱^{}`$ has at least $`dim\left(I\right)`$ polynomial solutions. Moreover, if the ideal $`I`$ is generated by $`\{Y_1,..,Y_t\}`$, these solution can be chosen as $`\{y_1,..,y_t\}`$.

## 5 Solvable rigid Lie algebras up to dimension six

The determination of solvable rigid laws in dimensions up to six does not provide much information about the variety, since the number of these laws is very reduced. In dimension $`2`$ and $`4`$ ( there are no solvable rigid laws in dimension $`3`$ ) the solvable rigid algebras are simply the semidirect product of abelian Lie algebras with a maximal torus, and, by the results of , have no nontrivial invariants. For dimension $`5`$ we have only the law $`𝔯=𝔥_1𝔱`$, where $`𝔥_1`$ is the $`3`$-dimensional Heisenberg Lie algebra. Here we find a rational invariant, which also follows from the analysis undertaken in . Finally, there are three solvable rigid laws in dimension $`6`$. As known, invariants of solvable Lie algebras up to this dimension have been determined in .

## 6 Solvable rigid Lie algebras in dimension $`7`$

As follows from the parity of the dimension, seven dimensional rigid solvable Lie algebras have at least one nontrivial invariant function. It can easily be seen that any such algebra has at most rank three, and that their nilradical is non-abelian. Their classification follows easily from the classification of low dimensional Lie algebras .
In keeping the notation used in previous sections, we illustrate the determination of the invariants of a solvable Lie algebra considering the rank one Lie algebra $`𝔯_7^3`$ given by the brackets $`[V_1,Y_i]=iY_i,i=1,3,4,5,6,7;[Y_1,Y_i]=Y_{i+1},i=3,4,5,6;[Y_3,Y_4]=Y_7`$ over the basis $`\{Y_1,Y_3,Y_4,Y_5,Y_6,Y_7,V_1\}`$. It is trivial to see that the system $`\left\{\stackrel{~}{Y}_i.F=0,i=1,3,4,5,6,7;\stackrel{~}{V}_1.F=0\right\}`$ reduces to the two following equations:

$`\stackrel{~}{X_1^{}}.F=(y_6_{y_5}+y_7_{y_6}).F=0`$ (2)
$`\stackrel{~}{V_1^{}}.F=(5y_5_{y_5}+6y_6_{y_6}+7y_7_{y_7}).F=0`$ (3)
From the characteristic equations of $`(6.1)`$ we easily obtain the set of invariants $`\{y_7,y_6^22y_5y_7\}`$. Since the reduced system is complete, it suffices to apply the usual procedures of systems of two equations in three variables : taking $`u=y_7`$ and $`v=y_6^22y_5y_7`$ we obtain $`\stackrel{~}{V_1^{}}\left(u\right)=7u`$, $`\stackrel{~}{V_1^{}}\left(v\right)=12v`$ and the equation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{F(u,v)}{u}}+{\displaystyle \frac{12v}{7u}}{\displaystyle \frac{F(u,v)}{v}}=0`$ (4)
which provides the solution $`\left\{\frac{v^7}{u^{12}}=\frac{(2y_5y_7y_6^2)^7}{y_7^{12}}\right\}`$. As the rank of the commutator table ( interpreted as matrix ) is six, the preceding solution constitutes a fundamental set of invariants for $`𝔯_7^3`$.

###### Proposition 4

Any solvable rigid Lie algebra $`𝔯`$ of dimension $`7`$ and rank one has a fundamental set of invariants formed by a quotients of invariant polynomials of the nilradical.

The proof is straightforward, as follows from table 2. Now this result can be generalized to arbitrary dimension, under an additional assumption. From the analysis of the existing lists of rigid Lie algebras, it has been conjectured in the middle 80’s that any solvable rigid Lie algebra $`𝔯`$ has necessarily a trivial center . For rank $`r2`$ this fact is easily proven by deforming the torus, while for rank one the question remains a conjecture. The difficulty of this case is deeply related with the classification of complete Lie algebras and cohomological problems .
In any case, if $`𝔯=𝔫𝔱`$ is a solvable rigid Lie algebra of rank one and $`X`$ a central element of the nilradical $`𝔫`$, the infinitesimal generator $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ is of the form $`\stackrel{~}{X}=[T,X]\frac{}{t}`$, and therefore an invariant function $`F`$ does not depend on $`t`$. The following proposition is an easy provable consequence of the structure of the remaining system $`\stackrel{~}{X}_iF=0`$, since this system is formed by the linear system of PDE which gives the invariants of the nilradical, to which the equation which describes the action of the torus over $`𝔫`$ must be added:

###### Proposition 5

Let $`𝔯=𝔫𝔱`$ be a solvable rigid Lie algebra of rank one and trivial center. Then $`𝔯`$ admits a fundamental set of invariants formed by quotients of invariant polynomials of the nilradical $`𝔫`$.

## 7 Solvable rigid Lie algebras in dimension $`8`$

The first classification of eight dimensional solvable rigid Lie algebras appeared in 1986, though the corrected complete list has recently been published in . It is based on the study of the eigenvalues of a regular operator $`ad(X)`$, and is also related with the classification of seven dimensional nilpotent Lie algebras . The rank theorem allowed to complete the list and to detect the absence of two laws. The list we present here is basically the one given in , up to minor changes relative to the choice of regular vectors. This is also the first dimension where even dimensional solvable rigid laws admit nontrivial invariants. It is convenient to separate these algebras by rank.

As follows from table 3., any solvable rigid algebra of rank one, up to the algebras $`𝔯_8^1,𝔯_8^6`$ and $`𝔯_8^9`$, has two invariants. For the first two ones this follows at once from proposition 5., while for the third the reasoning is similar.

The tables for rigid Lie algebras of rank at least two show a rather interesting fact, namely, that the algebra has nontrivial invariants if and only if it is isomorphic to either $`𝔯_8^{19}`$ or $`𝔯_8^{32}`$. If we analyze the nilradicals of these algebras, we see that the one corresponding to $`𝔯_8^{19}`$ is isomorphic to the filiform Lie algebra $`L_6`$ , while the second is isomorphic to the five dimensional Heisenberg Lie algebra $`𝔥_2`$. The interest of this is that these nilpotent Lie algebras are ”extreme”, in the sense that $`L_6`$ corresponds to the simplest algebra of maximal nipotence index, while the Heisenberg algebra is the most simple metabelian Lie algebra, which are the ”most nilpotent”. There is another important observation: while the rank of $`𝔥_p`$ increases with $`p`$, the rank of $`L_n`$ does not depend on the dimension, and equals $`2`$ .

## 8 Higher dimensions

Although the root theory introduced in  allows a complete classification of solvable rigid laws in dimension nine, this has not been established due to the great number of isomorphism classes, but only for particular cases . In contrast to other solvable Lie algebras, for the rigid case we know that the torus, which is maximal, in fact determines the law on the nilradical. This information can be used to derive formulae of the invariants for arbitrary dimension, when the structure of the torus and its influence on the structure of the solutions in low dimension is known. We will illustrate this method with the following example: for $`m2`$ let $`𝔡_{2m+1}=𝔤_{2m+1}𝔱`$ be the solvable Lie algebra whose brackets over the basis $`\{X_0,..,X_3,Y_1,..,Y_{2m3},V_1,..V_{m1}\}`$ are

$$\begin{array}{c}[X_0,X_i]=X_{i+1},i=1,2;[X_1,Y_{2m3}]=X_3\hfill \\ [Y_{2i1},Y_{2i}]=X_3,i=1,..,m2;[V_1,X_i]=X_i,i=0,2\hfill \\ [V_1,X_3]=2X_3;[V_1,Y_{2m3}]=2Y_{2m3}\hfill \\ [V_1,Y_{2i}]=2Y_{2i},i=1,..,m2\hfill \\ [V_2,X_i]=X_i,i=1,2,3;[V_2,Y_{2i}]=Y_{2i},1im2\hfill \\ [V_{i+2},Y_{2i1}]=Y_{2i1},i=1,..,m2,[V_{i+2},Y_{2i}]=Y_{2i},i=1,..,m2\hfill \end{array}$$

Using the root system associated to this algebra, it is easily seen that it is rigid. For $`m=2`$ it is isomorphic to $`𝔯_7^7`$, and expressed in the basis above, a fundamental set of invariants of this algebra is given by $`\left\{\frac{2x_3^2v_2+x_3^2v_1+x_0x_1x_32x_1x_3y_1+y_1x_2^2}{x_3^2}\right\}`$. Now observe that, for $`m3`$, the nilradical of $`𝔡_{2m+1}`$ consists of a ”germ subalgebra” generated by $`\{X_0,..,X_3,Y_1\}`$, to which three dimensional Heisenberg Lie algebras whose derived subalgebra is the center $`\left(X_3\right)`$ are ”glued”. We claim

###### Proposition 6

For any $`m3`$ the solvable Lie algebra $`𝔡_{2m+1}`$ has a fundamental set of invariants formed by the $`(m1)`$ rational invariants given by

$$\{\frac{2x_3^2v_2+x_3^2v_1+x_0x_1x_32x_1x_3y_{2m3}+y_{2m3}x_2^2}{x_3^2},\frac{x_3v_{k+2}+y_{2k1}y_{2k}}{x_3}\}$$

for $`1km2`$.

Proof. Over the coordinate system $`\{x_0,..,x_3,y_1,..,y_{2m3},v_1,..,v_m\}`$ the system is the following:

$`\stackrel{~}{X}_0.F=\left(x_2_{x_1}x_3_{x_2}+x_0_{v_1}\right).F=0`$ (5)
$`\stackrel{~}{X}_1.F=\left(x_2_{x_0}x_3_{y_{2m3}}+x_1_{v_2}\right).F=0`$ (6)
$`\stackrel{~}{X}_2.F=\left(x_3_{x_0}+x_2_{v_1}+x_2_{v_2}\right).F=0`$ (7)
$`\stackrel{~}{X}_3.F=\left(2x_3_{x_0}+x_3_{v_2}\right).F=0`$ (8)
$`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2i1}.F=\left(x_3_{y_{2i}}+y_{2i1}_{v_{i+1}}\right).F=0,1im2`$ (9)
$`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2m}.F=\left(x_3_{y_{2i1}}+y_{2i}\left(2_{v_1}+_{v_2}_{v_{i+2}}\right)\right).F=0,1im2`$ (10)
$`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2m3}.F=\left(x_3_{x_1}+2y_{2m3}_{v_1}\right).F=0`$ (11)
Equations $`(8.1),(8.2),(8.3),(8.4)`$ and $`(8.7)`$ correspond to the system of partial differential equations associated to the seven dimensional Lie algebra $`𝔯_7^7`$, with solution $`\frac{2x_3^2v_2+x_3^2v_1+x_0x_1x_32x_1x_3y_{2m3}+y_{2m3}x_2^2}{x_3^2}`$. Now this function is easily seen to be a solution of the system above. Equations $`(8.5)`$ and $`(8.6)`$ have, for fixed $`i`$, the solution $`\frac{x_3v_{k+2}+y_{2k1}y_{2k}}{x_3}`$, which is also a solution of the whole system. Observe that these solution have all the same structure, since they correspond to the infinitesimal generators $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2i1},\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2i}`$ of the Heisenberg subalgebras generated by them, jointly with the element $`\stackrel{~}{X}_3`$. The rank of the commutator table is easily seen to be $`m1`$.

## 9 Conclusions

We have computed the invariants of complex solvable rigid Lie algebras up to dimension eight. This is indeed the maximal dimension for which these algebras have been classified, although certain partial classifications exist. Most of the general results obtained for arbitrary dimension also remain valid in the real case. However, there is a reason for studying complex rigid Lie algebras rather than real ones. It is known that that any complex simple Lie algebra is in fact defined over the rational $``$, and from the tables above it also follows that any solvable complex rigid Lie algebra is also rational. Since we have seen that the eigenvalues for the action of a maximal torus of derivations can be chosen in $``$, Carles  conjectured that any rigid Lie algebra is rational. This would justify in an elegant manner why simple Lie algebras are rational, since they are rigid by cohomological reasons. Unfortunately this conjecture is false, as pointed out by Goze and Ancochea in . They gave examples of rigid Lie algebras being not only non-rational, but even non-real. That these algebras remained unknown relies on the fact that this pathology begins to appear from dimension eleven on.
We have pointed out that, in the rigid case, useful information on the existence or not of non-trivial invariants can be deduced from the action of the torus on its nilradical, without paying closer attention to the structure of the latter. This works since this structure is perfectly determined by the torus. The example in section 8. also shows that we can determine a fundamental set of invariants starting from solutions in low dimensional cases. This will be of particular importance when we consider semidirect products of nilpotent Lie algebras and non-maximal tori. Although in this case the algebras are not rigid, probably we can deduce information about the invariants by analyzing the action of these tori. This approach should provide at least sufficiency criteria for the non-existence of non-trivial invariants, since the obtention of characterizations for these algebras probably do not exist. Such sufficiency conditions will be of extreme importance for the non-decomposable case.
The study of invariants of solvable rigid Lie algebras also seems to answer another important question: it is well known that for semisimple Lie algebras the cardinal of a fundamental set of invariants coincides with the rank of the algebra, i.e., the dimension of a Cartan subalgebra . It is therefore natural to ask wheter there exists a link between the cardinal of a fundamental set and the rank for the solvable case. If we consider the $`n+3`$ dimensional solvable Lie algebra $`L_n𝔱`$ given by

$`[X_1,X_i]=X_{i+1},i=2,..,n`$
$`[V_1,X_i]=i.X_i,i=1,..,n+1`$
$`[V_2,X_i]=X_i,i=2,..,n+1`$
we see that the rank is always two, and a Cartan subalgebra is generated by $`V_1`$ and $`V_2`$. Now the number of functionally independent invariants for this algebra is $`𝒩=n3`$, and therefore depends on the dimension of the nilradical, and not on the dimension of a Cartan subalgebra. We may expect that for more complicated examples, such as non-decomposable solvable Lie algebras, such a formula will generally be not inferable.
Finally, we have seen by examples that a solvable Lie algebra having a fundamental set of invariants formed by rational functions needs not to be rigid. However, there is a wide class of algebras having this property, namely those satisfying $`dim𝔤=dimDer\left(𝔤\right)`$, where $`Der\left(𝔤\right)`$ denotes the Lie algebra of derivations. Specifically, this is of interest for complete Lie algebras , i.e., centerless Lie algebras whose derivations are all inner. This class is of great importance for structure theory, and its invariants will surely provide interesting information about their representations.