text:
# Polytopal realizations of generalized associahedra

## 1. Main results

Let $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ be a rank $`n`$ finite root system with the set of simple roots $`\mathrm{\Pi }=\{\alpha _i:iI\}`$ and the set of positive roots $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{>0}`$. Let $`Q=\mathrm{\Pi }`$ denote the root lattice and $`Q_{}`$ the ambient real vector space. Let $`W`$ be the Weyl group of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. It is generated by the simple reflections $`s_i`$, $`iI`$; they act on simple roots by

$$s_i(\alpha _j)=\alpha _ja_{ij}\alpha _i,$$

where $`A=(a_{ij})_{i,jI}`$ is the Cartan matrix of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. Let $`w_{}`$ denote the longest element of $`W`$.

Without loss of generality, from this point on we assume that $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is irreducible. Then the Coxeter graph associated to $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is a tree; recall that this graph has the index set $`I`$ as the set of vertices, with $`i`$ and $`j`$ joined by an edge whenever $`a_{ij}<0`$. In particular, the Coxeter graph is bipartite; the two parts $`I_+,I_{}I`$ are determined uniquely up to renaming. The *sign function* $`\epsilon :I\{+,\}`$ is defined by

$$\epsilon (i)=\{\begin{array}{cc}+\hfill & \text{if }iI_+\text{;}\hfill \\ \hfill & \text{if }iI_{}\text{.}\hfill \end{array}$$

For $`\alpha Q_{}`$, we denote by $`[\alpha :\alpha _i]`$ the coefficient of $`\alpha _i`$ in the expansion of $`\alpha `$ in the basis $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$. Let $`\tau _+`$ and $`\tau _{}`$ denote the piecewise-linear automorphisms of $`Q_{}`$ given by

(1.1)
$$[\tau _\epsilon \alpha :\alpha _i]=\{\begin{array}{cc}[\alpha :\alpha _i]_{ji}a_{ij}\mathrm{max}([\alpha :\alpha _j],0)\hfill & \text{if }iI_\epsilon \text{;}\hfill \\ [\alpha :\alpha _i]\hfill & \text{otherwise.}\hfill \end{array}$$

Let $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1=\mathrm{\Phi }_{>0}(\mathrm{\Pi })`$. It is easy to see that each of $`\tau _+`$ and $`\tau _{}`$ is an involution that preserves the set $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$. In fact, the action of $`\tau _+`$ and $`\tau _{}`$ in $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ can be described as follows:

(1.2)
$$\tau _\epsilon (\alpha )=\{\begin{array}{cc}\alpha \hfill & \text{if }\alpha =\alpha _i,iI_\epsilon \text{;}\hfill \\ _{iI_\epsilon }s_i(\alpha )\hfill & \text{otherwise.}\hfill \end{array}$$

(The product $`_{iI_\epsilon }s_i`$ is well defined since its factors commute). To illustrate, consider the type $`A_2`$, with $`I_+=\{1\}`$ and $`I_{}=\{2\}`$. Then

(1.3)
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\alpha _1& \stackrel{\tau _+}{}\alpha _1\stackrel{\tau _{}}{}\alpha _1+\alpha _2\stackrel{\tau _+}{}\alpha _2\stackrel{\tau _{}}{}& \alpha _2.\\ & & \\ \tau _{}& & \tau _+\end{array}$$

###### Theorem 1.1.

\[5, Theorem 2.6\] Every $`\tau _{},\tau _+`$-orbit in $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ has a non-empty intersection with $`(\mathrm{\Pi })`$. Furthermore, the correspondence $`\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega }(\mathrm{\Pi })`$ is a bijection between the $`\tau _{},\tau _+`$-orbits in $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ and the $`w_{}`$-orbits in $`(\mathrm{\Pi })`$.

According to \[5, Section 3.1\], there exists a unique function $`(\alpha ,\beta )(\alpha \beta )`$ on $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1\times \mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ with nonnegative integer values, called the *compatibility degree,* such that

(1.4)
$$(\alpha _i\alpha )=\mathrm{max}([\alpha :\alpha _i],0)$$

for any $`iI`$ and $`\alpha \mathrm{\Phi }_1`$, and

(1.5)
$$(\tau _\epsilon \alpha \tau _\epsilon \beta )=(\alpha \beta )$$

for any $`\alpha ,\beta \mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ and any sign $`\epsilon `$. We say that $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ are *compatible* if $`(\alpha \beta )=0`$. (This is equivalent to $`(\beta \alpha )=0`$ by \[5, Proposition 3.3.2\].)

The simplicial complex $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ (a *generalized associahedron*) has $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ as the set of vertices; its simplices are the subsets of mutually compatible elements in $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$. The maximal simplices of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ are called *clusters*.

###### Theorem 1.2.

\[5, Theorems 1.8, 1.10\] All clusters are of the same size $`n`$, i.e., the simplicial complex $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ is pure of dimension $`n1`$. Moreover, each cluster is a $``$-basis of the root lattice $`Q`$. The simplicial cones generated by the clusters form a complete simplicial fan in $`Q_{}`$: the interiors of these cones are mutually disjoint, and they tile the entire space $`Q_{}`$.

###### Corollary 1.3.

\[5, Theorem 3.11\] Every vector $`\gamma `$ in the root lattice $`Q`$ has a unique cluster expansion, i.e., can be expressed uniquely as a nonnegative linear combination of mutually compatible roots from $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$.

An efficient algorithm for computation of cluster expansions is presented in Section 5.4.

By a common abuse of notation, we denote the simplicial fan in Theorem 1.2 by $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Phi })`$, since it provides a geometric realization for the (spherical) simplicial complex $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Phi })`$.

Our main result is the following theorem that confirms Conjecture 1.12 from .

###### Theorem 1.4.

The simplicial fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ is the normal fan of a simple $`n`$-dimensional convex polytope.

The type $`A_2`$ case of Theorem 1.4 is illustrated in Figure 1.

Theorem 1.4 implies in particular the following statement conjectured in \[5, Conjecture 1.13\]: the complex $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Phi })`$, viewed as a poset under reverse inclusion, is the face lattice of a simple $`n`$-dimensional convex polytope. As pointed out in , the type $`A`$ and type $`B`$ (or, equivalently, type $`C`$) cases of this statement were known before: the corresponding polytopes are, respectively, the Stasheff polytope, or *associahedron* (see, e.g.,  or \[6, Chapter 7\]) and the Bott-Taubes polytope, or *cyclohedron* (see ).

To make Theorem 1.4 more specific, let us recall some terminology and notation related to normal fans of convex polytopes (cf., e.g., \[15, Example 7.3\]); we shall only need the special case when a polytope is *simple*. Let $`P`$ be a full-dimensional simple convex polytope in a real vector space $`V`$ of dimension $`n`$. The *support function* of $`P`$ is a real-valued function $`F`$ on the dual vector space $`V^{}`$ given by

(1.6)
$$F(\gamma )=\underset{\phi P}{\mathrm{max}}\gamma ,\phi .$$

The *normal fan* $`𝒩(P)`$ is a complete simplicial fan in the dual space $`V^{}`$ whose maximal (i.e., full-dimensional) cones are the *domains of linearity* for $`F`$. More precisely, these cones correspond to the vertices of $`P`$ as follows: each vertex $`\phi `$ of $`P`$ gives rise to the cone

$$\{\gamma V^{}:F(\gamma )=\gamma ,\phi \}.$$

We prove Theorem 1.4 by explicitly describing a class of support functions $`F`$ whose domains of linearity are the maximal cones of the fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Phi })`$. Any such function is uniquely determined by its restriction to a set of representatives of $`1`$-dimensional cones in $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Phi })`$. A natural choice of such a set is $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$. By Theorem 1.1, $`\tau _+,\tau _{}`$-invariant functions on $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ are naturally identified with $`w_{}`$-invariant functions on $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$. With this in mind, we state the following refinement of Theorem 1.4.

###### Theorem 1.5.

Suppose that a function $`F:\mathrm{\Pi }`$ satisfies two conditions:

(1.7) $`F(w_{}(\alpha _i))=F(\alpha _i)\text{for all }iI\text{;}`$
(1.8) $`{\displaystyle \underset{iI}{}}a_{ij}F(\alpha _i)>0\text{for all }jI\text{.}`$
Then its unique $`\tau _+,\tau _{}`$-invariant extension to $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ (also denoted by $`F`$) extends by linearity to the support function of a simple convex polytope with normal fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Phi })`$.

Let the $`\alpha _i^{}`$, for $`iI`$, be the simple coroots for $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, i.e., the simple roots of the dual root system $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{}`$ in $`Q_{}^{}`$; recall that they are given by $`\alpha _i^{},\alpha _j=a_{ij}`$.

###### Remark 1.6.

For any $`w_{}`$-invariant regular dominant coweight $`\lambda ^{}Q_{}^{}`$, the function $`F(\alpha _i)=[\lambda ^{}:\alpha _i^{}]`$ satisfies conditions (1.7)–(1.8). Indeed, the left-hand side in (1.8) is then equal to $`\lambda ^{},\alpha _j`$, and the positivity of all these values is precisely what makes $`\lambda ^{}`$ regular dominant. In particular, one can take $`\lambda ^{}=\rho ^{}`$, the half-sum of all positive coroots; for this choice, the left-hand side of each inequality in (1.8) is equal to $`1`$.

###### Remark 1.7.

In view of \[7, Theorem 4.3\], condition (1.8) in Theorem 1.5 implies that $`F(\alpha _i)>0`$ for all $`iI`$.

###### Remark 1.8.

One can prove the following converse of Theorem 1.5: if a $`\tau _+,\tau _{}`$-invariant function $`F`$ on $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ extends by linearity to the support function of a simple convex polytope with normal fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Phi })`$, then its restriction to $`(\mathrm{\Pi })`$ satisfies conditions (1.7)–(1.8).

The definition (1.6) of a support function implies the following explicit geometric realizations of generalized associahedra.

###### Corollary 1.9.

Let $`F:\mathrm{\Pi }`$ be a function satisfying the conditions in Theorem 1.5. Then its unique $`\tau _+,\tau _{}`$-invariant extension to $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ (also denoted by $`F`$) defines the following simple convex polytope $`P`$ in $`Q_{}^{}`$ whose normal fan is $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ and whose support function is (the piecewise-linear extension of) $`F`$:

1. For a cluster $`C`$ in $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$, let $`\phi _CQ_{}^{}`$ be the (unique) linear form such that $`F(\alpha )=\phi _C,\alpha `$ for $`\alpha C`$. The vertices of $`P`$ are the points $`\phi _C`$ for all clusters $`C`$.
2. The minimal system of linear inequalities defining $`P`$ is

(1.9)
$$\phi ,\alpha F(\alpha ),\text{for all}\alpha \mathrm{\Phi }_1.$$

###### Remark 1.10.

Let us represent a point $`\phi Q_{}^{}`$ by an $`n`$-tuple $`(z_j=\phi ,\alpha _j)_{jI}`$. In these coordinates, Corollary 1.9.2 takes the following form: the generalized associahedron is given inside the real affine space $`^I`$ by the set of linear inequalities

(1.10)
$$\underset{j}{}[\alpha :\alpha _j]z_jF(\alpha ),\text{for all}\alpha \mathrm{\Phi }_1.$$

(cf. (1.9)). Here, as before, $`F`$ is an arbitrary $`\tau _+,\tau _{}`$-invariant function on $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ satisfying (1.8).

In the examples below, we use the numeration of simple roots from .

###### Example 1.11.

In type $`A_2`$, there is only one $`\tau _+,\tau _{}`$-orbit, so $`F`$ must be constant; say, $`F(\alpha )=c`$ for all $`\alpha `$. Condition (1.8) requires that $`c>0`$. Inequalities (1.10) then become

$$\mathrm{max}(z_1,z_2,z_1,z_2,z_1+z_2)c,$$

defining a pentagon (cf. Figure 1).

In type $`A_3`$, there are two $`\tau _+,\tau _{}`$-orbits:

$$\{\alpha _1,\alpha _3,\alpha _1,\alpha _3,\alpha _1+\alpha _2,\alpha _2+\alpha _3\}\text{and}\{\alpha _2,\alpha _2,\alpha _1+\alpha _2+\alpha _3\};$$

let $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ be the corresponding values of $`F`$. Condition (1.8) takes the form

$$0<c_1<c_2<2c_1.$$

For $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ satisfying these inequalities, the associahedron of type $`A_3`$ can be defined by the corresponding version of (1.10):

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \mathrm{max}(z_1,z_3,z_1,z_3,z_1+z_2,z_2+z_3)& & c_1\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{max}(z_2,z_2,z_1+z_2+z_3)& & c_2.\hfill \end{array}$$

In particular, choosing $`c_i=[\rho ^{}:\alpha _i^{}]`$ (see Remark 1.6), we obtain $`c_1=3/2`$ and $`c_2=2`$. The corresponding polytope is shown in Figure 2, where we marked each visible facet by the (positive) root $`\alpha `$ that defines the corresponding supporting hyperplane $`_j[\alpha :\alpha _j]z_j=F(\alpha )`$. (The hidden facets correspond in the same way to the negative simple roots.)

###### Example 1.12.

In type $`C_2`$, there are two $`\tau _+,\tau _{}`$-orbits: $`\{\alpha _1,\alpha _1,\alpha _1+\alpha _2\}`$ and $`\{\alpha _2,\alpha _2,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\alpha _1+\alpha _2\}`$; let $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ be the corresponding values of $`F`$. Condition (1.8) takes the form

$$0<c_1<c_2<2c_1.$$

The generalized associahedron of type $`C_2`$ (the rank 2 *cyclohedron*) is the hexagon

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \mathrm{max}(z_1,z_1,z_1+z_2)c_1,& & \\ \hfill \mathrm{max}(z_2,z_2,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}z_1+z_2)c_2.& & \end{array}$$

In type $`C_3`$, there are three $`\tau _+,\tau _{}`$-orbits:

$$\begin{array}{c}\{\alpha _1,\alpha _1,\alpha _1+\alpha _2,\alpha _2+\alpha _3\},\\ \{\alpha _2,\alpha _2,\alpha _1+\alpha _2+\alpha _3,\alpha _1+2\alpha _2+\alpha _3\},\\ \{\alpha _3,\alpha _3,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\alpha _2+\alpha _3,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\alpha _1+2\alpha _2+\alpha _3\}.\end{array}$$

Let $`c_1`$, $`c_2`$, and $`c_3`$ be the corresponding values of $`F`$. Condition (1.8) takes the form

$$c_2<2c_1,c_1+c_3<2c_2,c_2<c_3.$$

The generalized associahedron of type $`C_3`$ (the rank 3 cyclohedron) is then given by the inequalities

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \mathrm{max}(z_1,z_1,z_1+z_2,z_2+z_3)& & c_1\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{max}(z_2,z_2,z_1+z_2+z_3,z_1+2z_2+z_3)& & c_2.\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{max}(z_3,z_3,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}z_2+z_3,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}z_1+2z_2+z_3)& & c_3.\hfill \end{array}$$

The choice $`c_i=[\rho ^{}:\alpha _i^{}]`$ leads to $`(c_1,c_2,c_3)=(5/2,4,9/2)`$. This polytope is shown in Figure 3, where we followed the same conventions as in Figure 2.

Our proof of Theorem 1.5 relies on the following results that we find of independent interest.

###### Proposition 1.13.

Let $`𝒞=_0C`$ be the maximal cone of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ generated by a cluster $`C`$. Every piecewise-linear transformation $`\sigma \tau _+,\tau _{}`$ restricts to a linear transformation on $`𝒞`$, sending this cone bijectively to the cone $`\sigma (𝒞)=_0\sigma (C)`$. Consequently, if $`\gamma Q`$ has the cluster expansion $`\gamma =_\beta m_\beta \beta `$, then $`\sigma (\gamma )`$ has the cluster expansion $`\sigma (\gamma )=_\beta m_\beta \sigma (\beta )`$.

Proof. It suffices to prove this for the generators $`\sigma =\tau _\epsilon `$. Then the claim follows from the definition (1.1) once we notice that the components $`[\gamma :\alpha _i]`$ do not change sign when $`\gamma `$ runs over $`𝒞`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Theorem 1.14.

Suppose that $`n>1`$, and let $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$ be two elements of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ such that $`(\alpha \alpha ^{})=(\alpha ^{}\alpha )=1`$. Then the set

(1.11)
$$E(\alpha ,\alpha ^{})=\{\sigma (\sigma ^1(\alpha )+\sigma ^1(\alpha ^{})):\sigma \tau _+,\tau _{}\}$$

consists of two elements of $`Q`$, one of which is $`\alpha +\alpha ^{}`$, and another will be denoted by $`\alpha \alpha ^{}`$. In the special case where $`\alpha ^{}=\alpha _j`$, $`jI`$, we have

(1.12)
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill (\alpha _j)\alpha & =& \tau _{\epsilon (j)}(\alpha _j+\tau _{\epsilon (j)}(\alpha ))\hfill \\ & =& \alpha \alpha _j+_{ij}a_{ij}\alpha _i.\hfill \end{array}$$

###### Remark 1.15.

If $`n=1`$, i.e., $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is of type $`A_1`$ with a unique simple root $`\alpha _1`$, then $`\{\alpha ,\alpha ^{}\}=\{\alpha _1,\alpha _1\}`$, and the group $`\tau _+,\tau _{}`$ is just the Weyl group $`W=s_1`$. Thus, in this case, the set in Theorem 1.14 consists of a single element $`\alpha +\alpha ^{}=0`$. It is then natural to set $`\alpha \alpha ^{}=0`$ as well.

###### Remark 1.16.

For $`\alpha ^{}=\alpha _j\mathrm{\Pi }`$, the condition $`(\alpha \alpha ^{})=(\alpha ^{}\alpha )=1`$ is equivalent to

(1.13)
$$[\alpha :\alpha _j]=[\alpha ^{}:\alpha _j^{}]=1,$$

where $`\alpha ^{}`$ is the coroot corresponding to $`\alpha `$ under the natural bijection between $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and the dual system $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{}`$. This follows from (1.4) and the property $`(\alpha \beta )=(\beta ^{}\alpha ^{})`$ established in \[5, Proposition 3.3.1\].

###### Theorem 1.17.

Let $`\alpha ,\alpha ^{}\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ be such that $`(\alpha \alpha ^{})=(\alpha ^{}\alpha )=1`$. Assume that $`[\alpha \alpha ^{}:\alpha _i]>0`$ for some $`iI`$. Then $`[\alpha +\alpha ^{}:\alpha _i]>0`$.

## 2. Proof of Theorem 1.5 (general layout)

The proof of Theorem 1.5 presented in this section depends on Theorem 1.14, Theorem 1.17, and Lemma 2.5, which will be proved in Sections 3, 4 and 5, respectively.

### 2.1. Generalities on normal fans

As before, let $`V`$ be an $`n`$-dimensional vector space over $``$. Not every complete simplicial fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ in the dual space $`V^{}`$ is the normal fan of a simple polytope in $`V`$. The following lemma provides a useful criterion, which will be our tool in proving Theorem 1.5.

###### Lemma 2.1.

Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ be a complete simplicial fan in $`V^{}`$. Let $`F:V^{}`$ be a continuous function which is linear within each maximal cone of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$; as such, $`F`$ is uniquely determined by its values on a set $`S`$ of representatives of $`1`$-dimensional cones in $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Then the following are equivalent:

* $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the normal fan $`𝒩(P)`$ of a (unique) full-dimensional simple convex polytope $`P`$ in $`V`$ with the support function $`F`$.
* The values $`F(\alpha )`$, $`\alpha S`$ satisfy the following system of linear inequalities. For each pair of adjacent maximal cones $`𝒞`$ and $`𝒞^{}`$ in $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, denote $`\{\alpha \}=(S𝒞)𝒞^{}`$ and $`\{\alpha ^{}\}=(S𝒞^{})𝒞`$, and write the unique (up to a nonzero real multiple) linear dependence between the elements of $`S(𝒞𝒞^{})`$ in the form

(2.1)
$$m_\alpha \alpha +m_\alpha ^{}\alpha ^{}\underset{\beta S𝒞𝒞^{}}{}m_\beta \beta =0,$$

where $`m_\alpha `$ and $`m_\alpha ^{}`$ are positive real numbers. Then

(2.2)
$$m_\alpha F(\alpha )+m_\alpha ^{}F(\alpha ^{})\underset{\beta S𝒞𝒞^{}}{}m_\beta F(\beta )>0.$$

Proof. Within each maximal cone $`𝒞`$ of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, the function $`F`$ is given by $`F(\gamma )=\gamma ,\phi _𝒞`$, for some (unique) $`\phi _𝒞V`$. In view of (1.6), condition (i) is equivalent to

* $`F(\gamma )>\gamma ,\phi _𝒞`$ for all maximal cones $`𝒞`$ in $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and all $`\gamma V^{}𝒞`$.

It is clear that (i)$``$(ii): the inequality (2.2) is a special case of the inequality in (i) for $`\gamma =\alpha ^{}`$.

To show that (ii)$``$(i), take a maximal cone $`𝒞`$ in $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and a point $`\gamma V^{}𝒞`$. For dimension reasons, there exists a line segment $`L`$ joining $`\gamma `$ with some interior point of $`𝒞`$ and not crossing any cone of codimension two or more in $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Let $`𝒞_1,𝒞_2,\mathrm{},𝒞_m=𝒞`$ be all maximal cones consecutively crossed by $`L`$ (so that $`\gamma 𝒞_1`$). Condition (ii) then implies that $`\delta ,\phi _{𝒞_k}>\delta ,\phi _{𝒞_{k+1}}`$ for $`k=1,\mathrm{},m1`$ and $`\delta L(𝒞_k𝒞_{k+1})`$. Looking at the restrictions of the linear forms $`\phi _{𝒞_k}`$ onto $`L`$, we conclude that

$$F(\gamma )=\gamma ,\phi _{𝒞_1}>\gamma ,\phi _{𝒞_2}>\mathrm{}>\gamma ,\phi _𝒞,$$

implying (i). $`\mathrm{}`$

Thus a complete simplicial fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is a normal fan for some polytope $`P`$ if and only if there exists a function $`F:S_{>0}`$ defined on a given set $`S`$ of representatives of $`1`$-dimensional cones in $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ that satisfies the linear inequalities in part (ii) of Lemma 2.1.

### 2.2. Dependences (2.1) and cluster expansions

In what follows, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ will be the fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Phi })`$, with the set of representatives $`S=\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$. To deduce Theorem 1.5 from Lemma 2.1, we need to describe explicitly all linear dependences of the form (2.1).

###### Lemma 2.2.

Each of the dependences (2.1) for the simplicial fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ can be normalized (that is, multiplied by a positive constant) to have the following features: $`(\alpha \alpha ^{})=(\alpha ^{}\alpha )=1`$, $`m_\alpha =m_\alpha ^{}=1`$, and all coefficients $`m_\beta `$ are nonnegative integers, i.e., the dependence expresses the cluster expansion of $`\alpha +\alpha ^{}`$.

Proof. Let $`𝒞`$ and $`𝒞^{}`$ be two adjacent maximal cones in $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ generated by the clusters $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$, respectively. Let $`\{\alpha \}=CC^{}`$ and $`\{\alpha ^{}\}=C^{}C`$. Consider the corresponding dependence (2.1). Since all the participating vectors lie in the lattice $`Q`$, we can normalize it so that the coefficients become relatively prime integers. We claim that this normalization has all the features listed in the lemma. First, let us show that $`m_\alpha =m_\alpha ^{}=1`$. Indeed, by Theorem 1.2, the cluster $`C`$ is a $``$-basis of the root lattice $`Q`$, so all the coefficients in the expansion

$$\alpha ^{}=\frac{m_\alpha }{m_\alpha ^{}}\alpha +\underset{\beta CC^{}}{}\frac{m_\beta }{m_\alpha ^{}}\beta $$

are integers, implying that $`m_\alpha ^{}=1`$. In view of the obvious symmetry between $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$, we have $`m_\alpha =1`$ as well.

Next, let us show that $`(\alpha \alpha ^{})=1`$ (implying that $`(\alpha ^{}\alpha )=1`$, by the above-mentioned symmetry). Since every transformation in the group $`\tau _+,\tau _{}`$ preserves the compatibility degree and sends clusters to clusters, Theorem 1.1 allows us to assume without loss of generality that $`\alpha =\alpha _i\mathrm{\Pi }`$. In view of (1.4), we need to show that $`[\alpha ^{}\alpha _i:\alpha _i]=0`$. This follows from the fact that $`\alpha _i`$ does not occur in any root $`\beta CC^{}`$ appearing in (2.1); indeed, every such $`\beta `$ is compatible with $`\alpha =\alpha _i`$.

It remains to show that all coefficients $`m_\beta `$ are nonnegative (note that this property does not hold for arbitrary simplicial fans). We will deduce this from the following result.

###### Lemma 2.3.

Let $`\alpha ,\alpha ^{}\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ be such that $`(\alpha \alpha ^{})=(\alpha ^{}\alpha )=1`$. Then every root $`\beta `$ that appears with a positive coefficient in the cluster expansion of $`\alpha +\alpha ^{}`$ is compatible with both $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$, and also with any root which is itself compatible with both $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$.

Proof. Let $`\gamma \mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ be either one of $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$, or be compatible with $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$. We need to show that $`\beta `$ and $`\gamma `$ are compatible. To do this, choose $`\sigma \tau _+,\tau _{}`$ so that $`\sigma (\gamma )=\alpha _i`$ for some $`iI`$. It suffices to show that $`\sigma (\beta )`$ is compatible with $`\alpha _i`$. By Proposition 1.13, the root $`\sigma (\beta )`$ appears with positive coefficient in the cluster expansion of $`\sigma (\alpha +\alpha ^{})`$. Note that by Theorem 1.14, $`\sigma (\alpha +\alpha ^{})`$ is equal to either $`\sigma (\alpha )+\sigma (\alpha ^{})`$ or $`\sigma (\alpha )\sigma (\alpha ^{})`$. We need to consider the following two cases:

*Case 1.* $`\gamma `$ is one of $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$, say $`\gamma =\alpha `$. Then $`\sigma (\alpha )=\alpha _i`$, and $`[\sigma (\alpha ^{}):\alpha _i]=1`$. Thus $`[\sigma (\alpha )+\sigma (\alpha ^{}):\alpha _i]=0`$. By Theorem 1.17, this implies $`[\sigma (\alpha )\sigma (\alpha ^{}):\alpha _i]0`$. It follows that $`[\sigma (\beta ):\alpha _i]0`$; hence $`\sigma (\beta )`$ is compatible with $`\alpha _i`$, as desired.

*Case 2.* $`\gamma `$ is compatible with $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$. Then both $`\sigma (\alpha )`$ and $`\sigma (\alpha ^{})`$ are compatible with $`\alpha _i`$, that is, $`[\sigma (\alpha ):\alpha _i]0`$ and $`[\sigma (\alpha ^{}):\alpha _i]0`$. The same argument as in Case 1 then shows that $`\sigma (\beta )`$ is compatible with $`\alpha _i`$, and we are done. $`\mathrm{}`$

Let us finish the proof of Lemma 2.2. By Lemma 2.3, each $`\beta `$ that appears with a positive coefficient in the cluster expansion of $`\alpha +\alpha ^{}`$ is compatible with every root in $`C`$ and with every root in $`C^{}`$. Hence $`\beta CC^{}`$, so the cluster expansion of $`\alpha +\alpha ^{}`$ does indeed coincide with the dependence (2.1). Lemma 2.2 is proved. $`\mathrm{}`$

### 2.3. Completing the proof of Theorem 1.5

Combining Lemmas 2.1 and 2.2, we see that Theorem 1.5 becomes a consequence of the following statement.

###### Lemma 2.4.

Let $`F`$ be a $`\tau _+,\tau _{}`$-invariant function on $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ satisfying condition (1.8) in Theorem 1.5. Let $`\alpha ,\alpha ^{}\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ be such that $`(\alpha \alpha ^{})=(\alpha ^{}\alpha )=1`$, and let

(2.3)
$$\alpha +\alpha ^{}=\underset{\beta }{}m_\beta \beta $$

be the cluster expansion of $`\alpha +\alpha ^{}`$. Then

(2.4)
$$F(\alpha )+F(\alpha ^{})\underset{\beta }{}m_\beta F(\beta )>0.$$

Using $`\tau _+,\tau _{}`$-invariance of $`F`$, we can substantially reduce the list of linear inequalities to be checked. Namely, we claim that each inequality of the form (2.4) appears already in the special case where $`\alpha ^{}\mathrm{\Pi }`$. Indeed, take any pair $`(\alpha ,\alpha ^{})`$ as in Lemma 2.4. By Theorem 1.1, there exists $`\sigma \tau _+,\tau _{}`$ such that $`\sigma (\alpha ^{})=\alpha _j`$ for some $`jI`$. By Proposition 1.13,

$$\sigma (\alpha +\alpha ^{})=\underset{\beta }{}m_\beta \sigma (\beta )$$

is the cluster expansion of $`\sigma (\alpha +\alpha ^{})`$. On the other hand, Theorem 1.14 implies that

$`\sigma (\alpha +\alpha ^{})`$ $`\{\sigma (\alpha )+\sigma (\alpha ^{}),\sigma (\alpha )\sigma (\alpha ^{})\}`$
$`\{\sigma (\alpha )\alpha _j,\tau _{\epsilon (j)}(\tau _{\epsilon (j)}\sigma (\alpha )\alpha _j)\}.`$
We thus have the following alternative: either

$$\sigma (\alpha )\alpha _j=\underset{\beta }{}m_\beta \sigma (\beta )$$

is the cluster expansion of $`\sigma (\alpha )\alpha _j`$, or

$$\tau _{\epsilon (j)}\sigma (\alpha )\alpha _j=\underset{\beta }{}m_\beta \tau _{\epsilon (j)}\sigma (\beta )$$

is the cluster expansion of $`\tau _{\epsilon (j)}\sigma (\alpha )\alpha _j`$. Each of these cluster expansions is of the form (2.3), and each gives rise to the same inequality (2.4) as the original pair $`\{\alpha ,\alpha ^{}\}`$. Our claim follows.

Summarizing, we have reduced Theorem 1.5 (modulo Theorems 1.14 and 1.17) to the following lemma.

###### Lemma 2.5.

Let $`F:\mathrm{\Pi }`$ be a function satisfying conditions (1.7)–(1.8). Let the roots $`\alpha \mathrm{\Phi }_{>0}`$ and $`\alpha _j\mathrm{\Pi }`$ satisfy (1.13), and let

(2.5)
$$\alpha \alpha _j=\underset{\beta }{}m_\beta \beta $$

be the cluster expansion of $`\alpha \alpha _j`$. Then

(2.6)
$$F(\alpha _j)+F(\alpha )\underset{\beta \mathrm{\Phi }_{>0}}{}m_\beta F(\beta )>0.$$

###### Example 2.6.

Take any $`jI`$ and set

$$\alpha =\tau _{\epsilon (j)}\tau _{\epsilon (j)}(\alpha _j)=\alpha _j\underset{ij}{}a_{ij}\alpha _i.$$

Then (1.13) is satisfied (indeed, we have $`\alpha ^{}=\alpha _j^{}_{ij}a_{ji}\alpha _i^{}`$). The corresponding inequality (2.6) is just (1.8), so Lemma 2.5 holds in this instance.

Lemma 2.5 is proved in Section 5.

## 3. Proof of Theorem 1.14

We denote by $`h`$ the *Coxeter number,* i.e., the order in $`W`$ of the (Coxeter) element $`_{iI_{}}s_i_{iI_+}s_i`$. We shall use the following result; although not explicitly stated in , it is an immediate consequence of \[5, Theorem 1.4, Proposition 2.5\].

###### Theorem 3.1.

We have

(3.1)
$$\underset{h+2\text{ factors}}{\underset{}{\tau _{}\tau _+\tau _{}\mathrm{}\tau _{}\tau _\pm }}=\underset{h+2\text{ factors}}{\underset{}{\tau _+\tau _{}\tau _+\mathrm{}\tau _\pm \tau _{}}}=w_{}.$$

Furthermore, if $`iI_\epsilon `$ is such that $`w_{}(\alpha _i)\alpha _i`$, then the $`\tau _{},\tau _+`$-orbit of $`\alpha _i`$ contains precisely $`h`$ positive roots, and they are

$$\tau _\epsilon (\alpha _i),\tau _\epsilon \tau _\epsilon (\alpha _i),\mathrm{},\underset{h\text{ factors}}{\underset{}{\tau _\pm \mathrm{}\tau _\epsilon \tau _\epsilon }}(\alpha _i);$$

if $`w_{}(\alpha _i)=\alpha _i`$, then the $`\tau _{},\tau _+`$-orbit of $`\alpha _i`$ contains precisely $`h/2`$ positive roots, and they are

$$\tau _\epsilon (\alpha _i),\tau _\epsilon \tau _\epsilon (\alpha _i),\mathrm{},\underset{h/2\text{ factors}}{\underset{}{\tau _\pm \mathrm{}\tau _\epsilon \tau _\epsilon }}(\alpha _i).$$

For every $`\sigma \tau _+,\tau _{}`$, let us denote

(3.2)
$$\alpha +_\sigma \alpha ^{}=\sigma (\sigma ^1\alpha +\sigma ^1\alpha ^{}),$$

so that

$$E(\alpha ,\alpha ^{})=\{\alpha +_\sigma \alpha ^{}:\sigma \tau _+,\tau _{}\}$$

(cf. (1.11)). This definition implies at once that

(3.3)
$$\alpha +_{\sigma _1\sigma _2}\alpha ^{}=\sigma _1(\sigma _1^1\alpha +_{\sigma _2}\sigma _1^1\alpha ^{})$$

for any $`\sigma _1`$ and $`\sigma _2`$. Consequently,

(3.4)
$$E(\sigma \alpha ,\sigma \alpha ^{})=\sigma (E(\alpha ,\alpha ^{}))$$

for any $`\sigma \tau _+,\tau _{}`$.

The following lemma is immediate from the definitions (1.1) and (1.2).

###### Lemma 3.2.

If both $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$ are positive roots, or both $`\tau _\epsilon \alpha `$ and $`\tau _\epsilon \alpha ^{}`$ are positive roots for some sign $`\epsilon `$, then $`\alpha +_{\tau _\epsilon }\alpha ^{}=\alpha +\alpha ^{}`$.

To prove the main statement of Theorem 1.14, we need to show that the set $`E(\alpha ,\alpha ^{})`$ consists of two elements whenever $`\alpha ,\alpha ^{}\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ satisfy $`(\alpha \alpha ^{})=(\alpha ^{}\alpha )=1`$. In view of (3.4), we can assume without loss of generality that $`\alpha ^{}=\alpha _j\mathrm{\Pi }`$; then $`\alpha `$ is a positive root. We calculate

(3.5)
$$\alpha _j+_{\tau _{\epsilon (j)}}\alpha =\alpha \alpha _j+\underset{ij}{}a_{ij}\alpha _i,$$

implying $`\alpha _j+_{\tau _{\epsilon (j)}}\alpha \alpha _j+\alpha `$ (here we use the condition $`n>1`$) and proving (1.12). It remains to show that

(3.6)
$$E(\alpha _j,\alpha )=\{\alpha _j+\alpha ,\alpha _j+_{\tau _{\epsilon (j)}}\alpha \}.$$

Let us abbreviate

$$\sigma (\epsilon ;l)=\underset{l\text{ factors}}{\underset{}{\tau _\epsilon \tau _\epsilon \tau _\epsilon \mathrm{}\tau _\pm }}.$$

We need to show that for any sign $`\epsilon `$ and any $`l1`$, we have

(3.7)
$$\alpha _j+_{\sigma (\epsilon ;l)}\alpha \{\alpha _j+\alpha ,\alpha _j+_{\tau _{\epsilon (j)}}\alpha \}.$$

We prove (3.7) by induction on $`l`$. The case $`l=1`$ is clear since one checks easily that

$$\alpha _j+_{\tau _{\epsilon (j)}}\alpha =\alpha _j+\alpha .$$

So we can assume that $`l>1`$, and that our claim holds for all smaller values of $`l`$.

Let us dispose of the case $`\epsilon =\epsilon (j)`$. We have

$$\sigma (\epsilon (j);l)=\tau _{\epsilon (j)}\sigma (\epsilon (j);l1).$$

Applying (3.3) to this factorization, we obtain

(3.8)
$$\alpha _j+_{\sigma (\epsilon (j);l)}\alpha =\tau _{\epsilon (j)}(\alpha _j+_{\sigma (\epsilon (j);l1)}\tau _{\epsilon (j)}\alpha ).$$

By the induction assumption,

$$\alpha _j+_{\sigma (\epsilon (j);l1)}\tau _{\epsilon (j)}\alpha \{\alpha _j+\tau _{\epsilon (j)}\alpha ,\alpha _j+_{\tau _{\epsilon (j)}}\tau _{\epsilon (j)}\alpha \}$$

Applying $`\tau _{\epsilon (j)}`$ and using (3.8), we obtain (3.7).

Let us consider the case $`\epsilon =\epsilon (j)`$. If $`lh+2`$, then we have $`\sigma (\epsilon ;l)=\sigma _1\sigma _2`$ with $`\sigma _1=\sigma (\epsilon ;lh2)`$ and $`\sigma _2=w_{}`$ (see (3.1)). Applying (3.3), we obtain

$$\alpha _j+_{\sigma (\epsilon ;l)}\alpha =\alpha _j+_{\sigma (\epsilon ;lh2)}\alpha ;$$

here we use an obvious fact that $`\beta +_\sigma \beta ^{}=\beta +\beta ^{}`$ if $`\sigma `$ is a linear transformation. Therefore, we can assume that $`2lh+1`$. Then the same argument shows that

(3.9)
$$\alpha _j+_{\sigma (\epsilon ;l)}\alpha =\alpha _j+_{\sigma (\epsilon ;h+2l)}\alpha .$$

In particular, we have

$$\alpha _j+_{\sigma (\epsilon (j);h+1)}\alpha =\alpha _j+_{\tau _{\epsilon (j)}}\alpha ;$$

Therefore, (3.7) holds for $`l=h+1`$, and we can assume that $`2lh`$.

Now it is time to use Lemma 3.2. Applying (3.3) to the factorization $`\sigma (\epsilon ;l)=\sigma (\epsilon ;l1)\tau _\pm `$, we see that

$$\alpha _j+_{\sigma (\epsilon ;l)}\alpha =\alpha _j+_{\sigma (\epsilon ;l1)}\alpha $$

whenever both $`\sigma (\epsilon ;l1)^1(\alpha _j)`$ and $`\sigma (\epsilon ;l1)^1(\alpha )`$ are positive roots, or both $`\sigma (\epsilon ;l)^1(\alpha _j)`$ and $`\sigma (\epsilon ;l)^1(\alpha )`$ are positive roots. Thus, we can assume that each of the pairs $`\{\sigma (\epsilon ;l1)^1(\alpha _j),\sigma (\epsilon ;l1)^1(\alpha )\}`$ and $`\{\sigma (\epsilon ;l)^1(\alpha _j),\sigma (\epsilon ;l)^1(\alpha )\}`$ contains a root from $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$. Since $`2lh`$, Theorem 3.1 implies that both roots $`\sigma (\epsilon ;l1)^1(\alpha _j)`$ and $`\sigma (\epsilon ;l)^1(\alpha _j)`$ are positive. Therefore, both $`\sigma (\epsilon ;l1)^1(\alpha )`$ and $`\sigma (\epsilon ;l)^1(\alpha )`$ must belong to $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$. This is only possible when $`\alpha =\sigma (\epsilon ;l1)(\alpha _i)`$ for some $`iI`$, and the last factor in $`\sigma (\epsilon ;l1)`$ is $`\tau _{\epsilon (i)}`$. To complete the proof, it suffices to show that, in these particular circumstances, we have

(3.10)
$$\alpha _j+_{\sigma (\epsilon ;l)}\alpha =\alpha _j+_{\tau _\epsilon }\alpha $$

(remember that $`\epsilon =\epsilon (j)`$). Using (3.9) and (3.3), we obtain

$$\alpha _j+_{\sigma (\epsilon ;l)}\alpha =\tau _\epsilon (\alpha _j+_{\sigma (\epsilon ;h+1l)}\alpha ^{}),$$

where

$$\alpha ^{}=\tau _\epsilon (\alpha )=\sigma (\epsilon ;l)(\alpha _i).$$

Therefore, (3.10) can be rewritten as

$$\alpha _j+_{\sigma (\epsilon ;h+1l)}\alpha ^{}=\alpha _j+\alpha ^{}.$$

We prove this by iterating Lemma 3.2: all we need is to show that all the roots $`\sigma (\epsilon ;k)^1(\alpha _j)`$ and $`\sigma (\epsilon ;k)^1(\alpha ^{})`$ for $`1khl`$ are positive. The fact that every $`\sigma (\epsilon ;k)^1(\alpha _j)`$ is positive follows from the second part of Theorem 3.1. As for $`\sigma (\epsilon ;k)^1(\alpha ^{})`$, this root is equal to $`\sigma (\epsilon (i);k+l)^1(\alpha _i)`$, so Theorem 3.1 assures its positivity as well. This completes the proof of Theorem 1.14. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 4. Proof of Theorem 1.17

We proceed case by case. For the classical types, we use the planar geometric realizations of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ given in \[5, Section 3.5\].

### 4.1. Type $`A_n`$

We identify the set $`I`$ in a standard way with $`[1,n]=\{1,\mathrm{},n\}`$. The positive roots are

(4.1)
$$\alpha [i,j]=\alpha _i+\alpha _{i+1}+\mathrm{}+\alpha _j$$

for $`1ijn`$.

###### Lemma 4.1.

Assume that $`(\alpha _j\alpha )=1`$; say, $`\alpha =\alpha [i,k]`$ for some $`i`$ and $`k`$ with $`1ijkn`$. Then

(4.2) $`(\alpha _j)+\alpha [i,k]`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha [i,j1]+\alpha [j+1,k],`$
(4.3) $`(\alpha _j)\alpha [i,k]`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha [i,j2]+\alpha [j+2,k],`$
with the convention that $`\alpha [\mathrm{},\mathrm{}1]=0`$ and $`\alpha [\mathrm{},\mathrm{}2]=\alpha _\mathrm{}1`$ (the latter formula yields $`0`$ for $`\mathrm{}=1`$ or $`\mathrm{}=n+2`$). ∎

Proof. Formulas (4.2)–(4.3) are easily checked using (1.12) and (4.1). $`\mathrm{}`$

As in \[5, Section 3.5\], we identify $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ with the set of all diagonals of a regular $`(n+3)`$-gon. Under this identification, the roots in $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ correspond to the diagonals on the “snake” shown in Figure 4. Non-crossing diagonals represent compatible roots, while crossing diagonals correspond to roots whose compatibility degree is 1. (Here and in the sequel, two diagonals are called *crossing* if they are distinct and have a common interior point.) Thus each root $`\alpha [i,j]`$ corresponds to the unique diagonal that crosses precisely the diagonals $`\alpha _i,\alpha _{i+1},\mathrm{},\alpha _j`$ from the snake (cf. (1.4)). The group $`\tau _+,\tau _{}`$ becomes the group of all symmetries of the $`(n+3)`$-gon. See  for further details.

###### Lemma 4.2.

Suppose the roots $`\alpha ,\alpha ^{}\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ correspond to two crossing diagonals. Then one of the vectors $`\alpha +\alpha ^{}`$ and $`\alpha \alpha ^{}`$ has the cluster expansion $`\beta _1+\beta _3`$, while another has the cluster expansion $`\beta _2+\beta _4`$, where the roots $`\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _4`$ correspond to the sides of the quadrilateral with diagonals $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$, as shown in Figure 5, with the convention that $`\beta _i=0`$ if the corresponding side is not a diagonal.

Furthermore, if $`\alpha ^{}\mathrm{\Pi }`$ (say, $`\alpha ^{}=\alpha _j`$), then formulas (4.2)–(4.3) provide cluster expansions of $`\alpha +\alpha ^{}`$ and $`\alpha \alpha ^{}`$.

Proof. Applying if needed a symmetry of the $`(n+3)`$-gon (which preserves cluster expansions by Proposition 1.13), we can assume that $`\alpha ^{}=\alpha _j`$ for some $`j`$, so that Lemma 4.1 applies. By inspection, the pairs $`\{\alpha [i,j1],\alpha [j+1,k]\}`$ and $`\{\alpha [i,j2],\alpha [j+2,k]\}`$ that appear in the right hand sides of (4.2) and (4.3), are precisely the pairs $`\{\beta _1,\beta _3\}`$ and $`\{\beta _2,\beta _4\}`$ in the lemma. In particular, the elements of each pair are non-crossing, so both (4.2) and (4.3) provide cluster expansions for respective left-hand sides. $`\mathrm{}`$

To complete the proof of Theorem 1.17 for the type $`A_n`$, let $`\alpha ,\alpha ^{}`$, and $`\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _4`$ have the same meaning as in Lemma 4.2, and suppose that $`[\alpha \alpha ^{}:\alpha _i]>0`$ for some $`iI`$. Taking into account the cluster expansion $`\alpha \alpha ^{}=\beta _2+\beta _4`$, we may assume that $`[\beta _4:\alpha _i]>0`$. Thus, the diagonal corresponding to $`\alpha _i`$ crosses the one corresponding to $`\beta _4`$. Since $`\beta _4`$ corresponds to a side of the quadrilateral with diagonals $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$, it is geometrically obvious that the diagonal $`\alpha _i`$ crosses at least one of $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$. It follows that $`[\alpha +\alpha ^{}:\alpha _i]>0`$, and we are done. $`\mathrm{}`$

### 4.2. Types $`B_n`$ and $`C_n`$

Let $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ be a root system of type $`B_n`$ or $`C_n`$. We identify the set $`I`$ in a standard way with $`[1,n]`$. To treat both cases at the same time, we set $`d=1`$ for $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ of type $`B_n`$, and $`d=2`$ for $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ of type $`C_n`$. Our convention for the Cartan matrices is different from the one in  but agrees with that in : we have $`a_{n1,n}=d`$ and $`a_{n,n1}=2/d`$. The positive roots of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ can be found in : they are

(4.4) $`\alpha [i,k]`$ $`=\alpha _i+\alpha _{i+1}+\mathrm{}+\alpha _k`$ $`(1ik<n),`$
(4.5) $`\alpha [i,k]_+`$ $`=\alpha _i+\mathrm{}+\alpha _k+2(\alpha _{k+1}+\mathrm{}+\alpha _{n1})+\frac{2}{d}\alpha _n`$ $`(1ik<n),`$
(4.6) $`\alpha [i]`$ $`=d(\alpha _i+\mathrm{}+\alpha _{n1})+\alpha _n`$ $`(1in).`$
We can now formulate a type $`B_n`$/$`C_n`$ counterpart of Lemma 4.1.

###### Lemma 4.3.

Suppose that $`(\alpha _j\alpha )=(\alpha \alpha _j)=1`$. Then $`\alpha _j+\alpha `$ and $`\alpha _j\alpha `$ are given by one of the following formulas:

(4.7) $`(\alpha _j)+\alpha [i,k]`$ $`=\alpha [i,j1]+\alpha [j+1,k]`$ $`(1ijk<n),`$
(4.8) $`(\alpha _j)\alpha [i,k]`$ $`=\alpha [i,j2]+\alpha [j+2,k]`$ $`(1ijk<n),`$
(4.9) $`(\alpha _j)+\alpha [i,k]_+`$ $`=\alpha [i,j1]+\alpha [j+1,k]_+`$ $`(1ijk<n),`$
(4.10) $`(\alpha _j)\alpha [i,k]_+`$ $`=\alpha [i,j2]+\alpha [j+2,k]_+`$ $`(1ijk<n),`$
(4.11) $`(\alpha _n)+\alpha [i]`$ $`=d\alpha [i,n1]`$ $`(1in),`$
(4.12) $`(\alpha _n)\alpha [i]`$ $`=d\alpha [i,n2]`$ $`(1in),`$
where in the right-hand sides we use the following conventions:

$`\alpha [\mathrm{},\mathrm{}1]`$ $`=0`$ $`(1\mathrm{}n),`$
$`\alpha [\mathrm{},\mathrm{}2]`$ $`=\alpha _\mathrm{}1`$ $`(1<\mathrm{}n),`$
$`\alpha [1,1]`$ $`=0,`$
$`\alpha [n+1,n1]`$ $`=\frac{2}{d}\alpha _n,`$
$`\alpha [\mathrm{},\mathrm{}1]_+`$ $`=\frac{2}{d}\alpha [\mathrm{}]`$ $`(2<\mathrm{}n),`$
$`\alpha [\mathrm{},\mathrm{}2]_+`$ $`=\alpha [\mathrm{}1,\mathrm{}1]_+`$ $`(2<\mathrm{}n),`$
$`\alpha [n+1,n1]_+`$ $`=0.`$
Proof. The equalities (4.7)–(4.12) are checked using definitions (4.4)–(4.6) and formula (1.12). $`\mathrm{}`$

Let $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ denote the $`180^{}`$ rotation of a regular $`(2n+2)`$-gon. There is a natural action of $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ on the diagonals of the $`(2n+2)`$-gon. Each orbit of this action is either a diameter (i.e., a diagonal connecting antipodal vertices) or an unordered pair of centrally symmetric non-diameter diagonals of the $`(2n+2)`$-gon. Following , we identify $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ with the set of these orbits. Under this identification, each of the roots $`\alpha _i`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},n1`$ is represented by a pair of diagonals on the “snake” shown in Figure 6, whereas $`\alpha _n`$ is identified with the only diameter on the snake. Two $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$-orbits represent compatible roots if and only if the diagonals they involve do not cross each other. More generally, for $`\alpha ,\beta \mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ in type $`B_n`$ (resp., $`C_n`$), the compatibility degree $`(\alpha \beta )`$ is equal to the number of crossings of one of the diagonals representing $`\alpha `$ (resp., $`\beta `$) by the diagonals representing $`\beta `$ (resp., $`\alpha `$). Thus, each positive root $`\beta =_ib_i\alpha _i`$ in type $`B_n`$ (resp., $`C_n`$) is represented by the unique $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$-orbit such that every diagonal representing $`\alpha _i`$ (resp., $`\beta `$) crosses the diagonals representing $`\beta `$ (resp., $`\alpha _i`$) at $`b_i`$ points. In particular, the $`n+1`$ diameters of the $`(2n+2)`$-gon represent the roots $`\alpha [i]`$, $`1in`$, together with $`\alpha _n`$. The group $`\tau _+,\tau _{}`$ is isomorphic to the quotient of the group of symmetries of the $`(2n+2)`$-gon modulo its center, which is generated by the involution $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. See \[5, Section 3.5\] for a more detailed description of this construction.

We have the following type $`B_n`$/$`C_n`$ analogue of Lemma 4.2.

###### Lemma 4.4.

Suppose the roots $`\alpha ,\alpha ^{}\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ are such that $`(\alpha \alpha ^{})=(\alpha ^{}\alpha )=1`$. Then two cases are possible. (See Figure 7.)

1. Each of $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$ is represented by a pair of diagonals, and they cross at exactly two centrally symmetric points. Pick two crossing diagonals among these four, and let $`\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _4`$ be the roots that correspond to the sides of the quadrilateral whose vertices are the endpoints of these diagonals. Then one of the vectors $`\alpha +\alpha ^{}`$ and $`\alpha \alpha ^{}`$ has the cluster expansion $`b_1\beta _1+b_2\beta _3`$, while another has the cluster expansion $`b_2\beta _2+b_4\beta _4`$, where $`b_i=\frac{2}{d}`$ if the corresponding side is a diameter, $`b_i=1`$ if it is a non-diameter diagonal, and $`b_i=0`$ if it lies on the perimeter.
2. Each of $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$ is represented by a diameter. Let $`\beta _1`$ and $`\beta _2`$ be the roots that correspond to the pairs of opposite sides of the rectangle whose diagonals are these diameters. Then one of the vectors $`\alpha +\alpha ^{}`$ and $`\alpha \alpha ^{}`$ has the cluster expansion $`d\beta _1`$, while another has the cluster expansion $`d\beta _2`$.

If, in addition, $`\alpha ^{}\mathrm{\Pi }`$ (say, $`\alpha ^{}=\alpha _j`$), then formulas (4.7)–(4.12) provide the cluster expansions of $`\alpha +\alpha ^{}`$ and $`\alpha \alpha ^{}`$.

Proof. The proof is analogous to the type $`A`$ case, with Lemma 4.3 replacing Lemma 4.1. In fact, all we need is (4.7)–(4.8) and (4.11)–(4.12), since one can use the $`\tau _+,\tau _{}`$ action to transform any pair $`(\alpha ,\alpha ^{})`$ in the lemma into one of these two special positions. $`\mathrm{}`$

The proof of Theorem 1.17 for the type $`B_n`$/$`C_n`$ is exactly the same as in type $`A_n`$, with Lemma 4.4 playing the role of Lemma 4.2. ∎

### 4.3. Type $`D_n`$

Let $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ be the root system of type $`D_n`$ for some $`n4`$. We choose $`I=[1,n1]\{\overline{n1}\}`$ as an indexing set; see Figure 8.

The positive roots of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ can be found in  (replace $`\alpha _n`$ by $`\alpha _{\overline{n1}}`$); they are:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\alpha [i,k]=\alpha _i+\alpha _{i+1}+\mathrm{}+\alpha _k\hfill & (1ik<n),\hfill \\ \alpha [i,k]_+=\alpha _i+\mathrm{}+\alpha _k+2(\alpha _{k+1}+\mathrm{}+\alpha _{n2})+\alpha _{n1}+\alpha _{\overline{n1}}\hfill & (1ik<n1),\hfill \\ \alpha [i,n1]_+=(\alpha _i+\mathrm{}+\alpha _{n2})+\alpha _{\overline{n1}}\hfill & (1i<n).\hfill \end{array}$$

We next state the type $`D_n`$ analogue of Lemmas 4.1 and 4.3. The proof is omitted.

###### Lemma 4.5.

Suppose that $`(\alpha _j\alpha )=1`$. Then $`\alpha _j+\alpha `$ and $`\alpha _j\alpha `$ are given by one of the following formulas, subject to conventions (4.25)–(4.34) below.

Case 1. For $`1ijk<n`$ with $`jn2`$,

(4.13) $`(\alpha _j)+\alpha [i,k]`$ $`=\alpha [i,j1]+\alpha [j+1,k],`$
(4.14) $`(\alpha _j)\alpha [i,k]`$ $`=\alpha [i,j2]+\alpha [j+2,k],`$
(4.15) $`(\alpha _j)+\alpha [i,k]_+`$ $`=\alpha [i,j1]+\alpha [j+1,k]_+,`$
(4.16) $`(\alpha _j)\alpha [i,k]_+`$ $`=\alpha [i,j2]+\alpha [j+2,k]_+.`$
(Note that in some cases, the right-hand sides of the cluster expansions (4.14)–(4.16) may in effect involve *three* roots <sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1 In the subcase $`j=k=n2`$, the second term in the right-hand side of (4.14) is given by (4.33). Likewise, the subcase $`j=kn2`$ of (4.15) and the subcase $`j+1=kn2`$ of (4.16) invoke (4.26). .)
Case 2. For $`1i<n`$,

(4.17) $`(\alpha _{n1})+\alpha [i,n1]`$ $`=\alpha [i,n2],`$
(4.18) $`(\alpha _{n1})\alpha [i,n1]`$ $`=\alpha [i,n3],`$
(4.19) $`(\alpha _{\overline{n1}})+\alpha [i,n1]_+`$ $`=\alpha [i,n2],`$
(4.20) $`(\alpha _{\overline{n1}})\alpha [i,n1]_+`$ $`=\alpha [i,n3].`$
Case 3. For $`1ikn2`$,

(4.21) $`(\alpha _{n1})+\alpha [i,k]_+`$ $`=\{\begin{array}{cc}\alpha [i,n2]+\alpha [k+1,n1]_+\hfill & \text{if }nkmod2\text{;}\hfill \\ \alpha [i,n1]_++\alpha [k+1,n2]\hfill & \text{if }nkmod2\text{;}\hfill \end{array}`$
(4.22) $`(\alpha _{n1})\alpha [i,k]_+`$ $`=\{\begin{array}{cc}\alpha [k+1,n3]+\alpha [i,n1]_+\hfill & \text{if }nkmod2\text{;}\hfill \\ \alpha [k+1,n1]_++\alpha [i,n3]\hfill & \text{if }nkmod2\text{;}\hfill \end{array}`$
(4.23) $`(\alpha _{\overline{n1}})+\alpha [i,k]_+`$ $`=\{\begin{array}{cc}\alpha [i,n2]+\alpha [k+1,n1]\hfill & \text{if }nkmod2\text{;}\hfill \\ \alpha [i,n1]+\alpha [k+1,n2]\hfill & \text{if }nkmod2\text{;}\hfill \end{array}`$
(4.24) $`(\alpha _{\overline{n1}})\alpha [i,k]_+`$ $`=\{\begin{array}{cc}\alpha [k+1,n3]+\alpha [i,n1]\hfill & \text{if }nkmod2\text{;}\hfill \\ \alpha [k+1,n1]+\alpha [i,n3]\hfill & \text{if }nkmod2\text{.}\hfill \end{array}`$
Conventions used in formulas (4.13)–(4.24):

(4.25) $`\alpha [\mathrm{},\mathrm{}1]`$ $`=0`$ $`(1\mathrm{}<n),`$
(4.26) $`\alpha [\mathrm{},\mathrm{}1]_+`$ $`=\alpha [\mathrm{},n1]+\alpha [\mathrm{},n1]_+`$ $`(1<\mathrm{}<n),`$
(4.27) $`\alpha [n,n1]`$ $`=\alpha _{\overline{n1}}`$
(4.28) $`\alpha [n,n1]_+`$ $`=\alpha _{n1},`$
(4.29) $`\alpha [\mathrm{},\mathrm{}2]`$ $`=\alpha _\mathrm{}1`$ $`(1<\mathrm{}n),`$
(4.30) $`\alpha [\mathrm{},\mathrm{}2]_+`$ $`=\alpha [\mathrm{}1,\mathrm{}1]_+`$ $`(2<\mathrm{}<n),`$
(4.31) $`\alpha [1,1]`$ $`=0,`$
(4.32) $`\alpha [n+1,n1]`$ $`=0,`$
(4.33) $`\alpha [n,n2]`$ $`=(\alpha _{n1})+(\alpha _{\overline{n1}}),`$
(4.34) $`\alpha [n,n2]_+`$ $`=0.`$
Let us recall the geometric representation of the set $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ given in \[5, Section 3.5\]. Consider the set of diagonals in a regular $`2n`$-gon, in which each diameter can be of one of two different “colors.” The $`180^{}`$ rotation $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ naturally acts on this set. We represent each root in $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ by a $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$-orbit. The negative simple roots form a “type $`D`$ snake” shown in Figure 9. Two $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$-orbits represent compatible roots if and only if the diagonals they involve do not cross each other; here we use the following convention:

(4.35) diameters of the same color do not cross each other.
More generally, for $`\alpha ,\beta \mathrm{\Phi }_1`$, the compatibility degree $`(\alpha \beta )`$ is equal to the number of $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$-orbits in the set of crossing points between the diagonals representing $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ (again, with the convention (4.35)). Each positive root $`\beta =_ib_i\alpha _i`$ is then represented by the unique $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$-orbit such that the diagonals representing $`\beta `$ cross the diagonals representing $`\alpha _i`$ at $`b_i`$ pairs of centrally symmetric points (counting an intersection of two diameters of different color and location as one such pair). In particular, the $`2n`$ colored diameters of the $`2n`$-gon represent the roots $`\alpha [i,n1]`$ and $`\alpha [i,n1]_+`$, for $`1i<n`$, together with $`\alpha _{n1}`$ and $`\alpha _{\overline{n1}}`$. Under this identification, the element $`\tau _{}\tau _+`$ acts by rotating the $`2n`$-gon $`\frac{180^{}}{n}`$ degrees and changing the colors of all diameters. See \[5, Section 3.5\] for further details.

The type $`D_n`$ analogue of Lemmas 4.2 and 4.4 is stated below.

###### Lemma 4.6.

Suppose the roots $`\alpha ,\alpha ^{}\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ are such that $`(\alpha \alpha ^{})=1`$. Then four cases are possible. (Refer to Figure 10.)

1. Each of $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$ is represented by a pair of diagonals, and they cross at exactly two centrally symmetric points. Pick two crossing diagonals among these four, and consider the quadrilateral whose vertices are their endpoints. First assume that none of the sides of this quadrilateral is a diameter. Let $`\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _4`$ be the corresponding roots. Then one of the vectors $`\alpha +\alpha ^{}`$ and $`\alpha \alpha ^{}`$ has the cluster expansion $`\beta _1+\beta _3`$, while another has the cluster expansion $`\beta _2+\beta _4`$. (Throughout this lemma, we use the convention that $`\beta _i=0`$ if the corresponding side lies on the perimeter.)
2. Same situation as above, except one of the sides of the quadrilateral is a diameter. Let $`\beta _1,\beta _1^{}\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ be the two roots associated with this diameter, and let $`\beta _2,\beta _3,\beta _4`$ correspond to the remaining sides. Then one of the vectors $`\alpha +\alpha ^{}`$ and $`\alpha \alpha ^{}`$ has the cluster expansion $`\beta _1+\beta _1^{}+\beta _3`$, while another has the cluster expansion $`\beta _2+\beta _4`$.
3. The roots $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$ are represented by diameters of different color and location. Let $`\beta _1`$ and $`\beta _2`$ be the roots that correspond to the pairs of opposite sides of the rectangle whose diagonals are these diameters. Then one of the vectors $`\alpha +\alpha ^{}`$ and $`\alpha \alpha ^{}`$ has the cluster expansion $`\beta _1`$, while another has the cluster expansion $`\beta _2`$.
4. One of $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$ (say, $`\alpha `$) is represented by a diameter $`[T,T^{}]`$ (of any color), while another (say, $`\alpha ^{}`$) is represented by a pair of diagonals $`[P,Q]`$ and $`[P^{},Q^{}]`$, so that the counter-clockwise order of these six points is $`P,T,Q,P^{},T^{},Q^{}`$. Let $`\beta _1`$ and $`\beta _2`$ be the roots that correspond to the diameters $`[P,P^{}]`$ and $`[Q,Q^{}]`$ and have the same color as $`\alpha `$, and let $`\beta _3`$ and $`\beta _4`$ correspond to $`[T,P]`$ and $`[T,Q]`$, respectively. Then one of the vectors $`\alpha +\alpha ^{}`$ and $`\alpha \alpha ^{}`$ has the cluster expansion $`\beta _1+\beta _3`$, while another has the cluster expansion $`\beta _2+\beta _4`$.

If, in addition, $`\alpha ^{}\mathrm{\Pi }`$ (say, $`\alpha ^{}=\alpha _j`$), then formulas (4.13)–(4.24) provide the cluster expansions of $`\alpha +\alpha ^{}`$ and $`\alpha \alpha ^{}`$.

The proofs of Lemma 4.6 and the type $`D_n`$ case of Theorem 1.17 follow the lines of their counterparts in types $`ABC`$. The details are left to the reader.

### 4.4. Exceptional types

For the exceptional types $`E_6,E_7,E_8,F_4`$, and $`G_2`$, Theorem 1.17 can be verified on a computer without much difficulty; we in particular used Maple. The sets $`E(\alpha ,\alpha ^{})`$ are constructed recursively within each orbit

$$\{(\alpha ,\alpha ^{})=(\sigma (\alpha _j),\sigma (\beta )):\sigma \tau _+,\tau _{}\}$$

(for $`\beta `$ and $`\alpha _j`$ satisfying $`[\beta :\alpha _j]=[\beta ^{}:\alpha _j^{}]=1)`$), starting with

$$E(\alpha _j,\beta )=\{\alpha _j+\beta ,\alpha _j+\beta +_{ij}a_{ij}\alpha _i\}$$

(cf. (1.12)) and using (3.4). One then checks the statement of Theorem 1.17 directly for each pair $`E(\alpha ,\alpha ^{})=\{\alpha +\alpha ^{},\alpha \alpha ^{}\}`$. ∎

## 5. Proof of Lemma 2.5

We prove Lemma 2.5 case by case. For the classical types $`ABCD`$, we directly prove the (seemingly) more general Lemma 2.4.

### 5.1. Type $`A_n`$

We follow the conventions of Section 4.1. In the geometric model described there, a $`\tau _+,\tau _{}`$-invariant function $`F`$ of Lemma 2.4 becomes a function on diagonals of a regular $`(n+3)`$-gon that is invariant under the symmetries of the latter. One can view such an $`F`$ as a function $`f:\{1,\mathrm{},n\}`$ satisfying

(5.1)
$$f(n+1i)=f(i).$$

In other words, we use $`f(i)`$ as a shorthand for $`F(\alpha _i)=F(\alpha _i)`$, that is, for the value of $`F`$ at diagonals that connect vertices $`i+1`$ steps apart. Condition (1.8) takes the form

(5.2)
$$2f(j)f(j1)f(j+1)>0,$$

for $`1jn`$, with the conventions

(5.3)
$$f(0)=f(n+1)=0.$$

To rephrase, $`f`$ is a *strictly concave* function on $`\{0,1,\mathrm{},n+1\}`$ satisfying (5.1) and (5.3). Under these assumptions, we need to prove the type $`A_n`$ version of (2.4). In view of Lemma 4.2, and using its notation, it is enough to show that

(5.4)
$$F(\alpha )+F(\alpha ^{})>F(\beta _2)+F(\beta _4)$$

for any pair of crossing diagonals representing roots $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{}`$ (cf. Figure 5). Equivalently, we need to show that

(5.5)
$$f(i_1+i_2+1)+f(i_2+i_3+1)>f(i_2)+f(i_4)$$

for any positive integers $`i_1,i_2,i_3,i_4`$ satisfying

(5.6)
$$(i_1+1)+(i_2+1)+(i_3+1)+(i_4+1)=n+3.$$

The concavity condition (5.2) implies that

$$f(x)+f(y)>f(xt)+f(y+t)$$

for $`x<y`$ and $`t>0`$. Combining this with (5.1) and (5.6), we obtain

$$f(i_1+i_2+1)+f(i_2+i_3+1)>f(i_2)+f(i_1+i_2+i_3+2)=f(i_2)+f(i_4),$$

as desired.

### 5.2. Types $`B_n`$ and $`C_n`$

We follow the conventions of Section 4.2. The proof is similar to the type $`A_n`$. For a $`\tau _+,\tau _{}`$-invariant function $`F`$ on $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$, we define a function $`f:\{0,\mathrm{},2n\}`$ by

(5.7)
$$f(i)=\{\begin{array}{cc}F(\alpha _i)\hfill & \text{if }1in1\text{;}\hfill \\ \frac{2}{d}F(\alpha _n)\hfill & \text{if }i=n\text{;}\hfill \\ F(\alpha _{2ni})\hfill & \text{if }n+1i2n1\text{;}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{if }i=0\text{ or }i=2n\text{.}\hfill \end{array}$$

Condition (1.8) can then be rewritten as

(5.8)
$$2f(j)f(j1)f(j+1)>0,$$

for $`1j2n1`$. Thus, $`f`$ satisfies the same conditions (5.1)–(5.3) as before, with $`n`$ replaced by $`2n1`$.

The roots in $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ can be represented by the $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$-orbits of diagonals of a regular $`(2n+2)`$-gon. (Recall that $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is the $`180^{}`$ degree rotation.) Then $`F`$ becomes a function on diagonals of the $`(2n+2)`$-gon that is invariant under its symmetries. The type $`B_n`$ version of (2.4) can be restated, by virtue of Lemma 4.4 and using its notation, as follows: in a situation of Figure 7(1), we have the inequality

(5.9)
$$F(\alpha )+F(\alpha ^{})>b_2F(\beta _2)+b_4F(\beta _4),$$

whereas in a situation of Figure 7(2), we have

(5.10)
$$F(\alpha )+F(\alpha ^{})>dF(\beta _1).$$

One easily checks that (5.9) would follow if we show that

$$f(i_1+i_2+1)+f(i_2+i_3+1)>f(i_2)+f(i_4)$$

for any positive integers $`i_1,i_2,i_3,i_4`$ satisfying

$$(i_1+1)+(i_2+1)+(i_3+1)+(i_4+1)=2n+2;$$

this is proved in the same way as (5.5). Finally, (5.10) can be restated as $`f(n)>f(i)`$, for $`i<n`$, which follows from concavity of $`f`$ together with the symmetry condition $`f(i)=f(2ni)`$.

### 5.3. Type $`D_n`$

We follow the conventions of Section 4.3. The proof is similar to the types $`ABC`$, with (5.7) replaced by

$$f(i)=\{\begin{array}{cc}F(\alpha _i)\hfill & \text{if }1in2\text{;}\hfill \\ F(\alpha _{n1})+F(\alpha _{\overline{n1}})\hfill & \text{if }i=n1\text{;}\hfill \\ F(\alpha _{2n2i})\hfill & \text{if }ni2n3\text{;}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{if }i=0\text{ or }i=2n2\text{.}\hfill \end{array}$$

Details are left to the reader.

### 5.4. Calculation of cluster expansions

For $`\gamma Q`$, let

$$\gamma _+=\underset{[\gamma :\alpha _i]>0}{}[\gamma :\alpha _i]\alpha _i.$$

Also, let $`K(\gamma )`$ denote the set of nonzero terms $`m_\beta \beta `$ contributing to the cluster expansion $`\gamma =_\beta m_\beta \beta `$ of $`\gamma `$.

###### Lemma 5.1.

For any $`\gamma Q`$ and any sign $`\epsilon `$, we have

(5.11)
$$K(\gamma )=\{([\gamma :\alpha _i])(\alpha _i):[\gamma :\alpha _i]<0\}\tau _\epsilon (K(\tau _\epsilon (\gamma _+))).$$

Proof. Follows from Proposition 1.13 together with \[5, Lemma 3.12\] (which is in turn an easy consequence of (1.4)). $`\mathrm{}`$

Lemma 5.1 enables us to efficiently compute cluster expansions, by recursively applying (5.11) with $`\epsilon =1,1,1,1,1,\mathrm{}`$, until we hit $`K(0)=\mathrm{}`$. The fact that this computation terminates follows from Theorems 1.1 and 3.1; in fact, the depth of recursion is at most $`h`$.

### 5.5. Exceptional types

We describe the verification of Lemma 2.5 for type $`E_6`$ only; other exceptional types are treated in a similar way, and in fact are easier to handle since the involution $`\alpha w_{}(\alpha )`$ is trivial.

We use the numeration of roots shown in Figure 11. The involution $`w_{}`$ interchanges $`\alpha _1`$ with $`\alpha _6`$, and $`\alpha _3`$ with $`\alpha _5`$, and fixes $`\alpha _2`$ and $`\alpha _4`$. We denote $`F(\alpha _1)=F(\alpha _6)=f_1`$, $`F(\alpha _2)=f_2`$, $`F(\alpha _3)=F(\alpha _5)=f_3`$, and $`F(\alpha _4)=f_4`$. The inequalities (1.8) take the form

(5.12)
$$\begin{array}{c}\hfill 2f_1f_3>0,\\ \hfill 2f_2f_4>0,\\ \hfill f_1+2f_3f_4>0,\\ \hfill f_22f_3+2f_4>0.\end{array}$$

We need to show that these linear inequalities imply every inequality

(5.13)
$$c_1f_1+c_2f_2+c_3f_3+c_4f_4>0$$

on the list of the type $`E_6`$ versions of the inequalities (2.6). Equivalently, we need to show that the parameters $`c_1,c_2,c_3,c_4`$ of each inequality (5.13) satisfy

(5.14)
$$\begin{array}{c}\hfill 2c_1+2c_2+3c_3+4c_40,\\ \hfill c_1+2c_2+2c_3+3c_40,\\ \hfill 3c_1+4c_2+6c_3+8c_40,\\ \hfill 2c_1+3c_2+4c_3+6c_40.\end{array}$$

(The coefficient matrix in (5.14) is the transposed inverse of the matrix in (5.12), so the left-hand sides in (5.14) are the coefficients in the expansion of the left-hand side of (5.13) as a linear combination of the left-hand sides in (5.12).)

We find the cluster expansions (2.5) using the algorithm described in Section 5.4. We then produce the corresponding inequalities (2.6) (note that the values $`F(\beta )`$ appearing in (2.6) are obtained as a byproduct of the same algorithm), and verify the conditions (5.14) in each instance. To illustrate, consider the following example:

$$\alpha =\alpha _1+\alpha _2+\alpha _3+2\alpha _4+2\alpha _5+\alpha _6,j=3.$$

We compute the cluster expansion of $`\alpha \alpha _j`$ (cf. line 18 in Figure 12) as

$$\alpha \alpha _j=(\alpha _1)+(\alpha _4+\alpha _5)+(\alpha _2+\alpha _4+\alpha _5+\alpha _6),$$

with

$$F(\alpha _1)=F(\alpha _4+\alpha _5)=F(\alpha _2+\alpha _4+\alpha _5+\alpha _6)=f_1.$$

Since $`F(\alpha )=f_3`$, the corresponding inequality (2.6) (or (5.13)) is

$$3f_1+2f_3>0.$$

Thus, in this case, $`c_1=3`$, $`c_2=0`$, $`c_3=2`$, $`c_4=0`$, and conditions (5.14) hold.

The verifications based on the procedures described above were performed for all exceptional types using Maple and altogether took a few minutes of processor time. This completes our proof of Lemma 2.5. $`\mathrm{}`$

We conclude by providing the list of “most interesting” instances of cluster expansions (2.5) in type $`E_6`$. More precisely: note that in view of \[5, Proposition 3.3.3\], the cluster expansion of a vector $`\gamma Q`$ that belongs to a root sublattice generated by a proper subset of simple roots coincides with the cluster expansion of $`\gamma `$ with respect to the corresponding root subsystem. Thus, such cluster expansions already appear in smaller rank. Consequently, we only list the cluster expansions (2.5) for the roots $`\alpha `$ (in type $`E_6`$) that have full support. See Figure 12, where notation $`[b_1,\mathrm{},b_6]`$ is used to denote a root $`b_1\alpha _1+\mathrm{}+b_6\alpha _6`$. Similar tables in types $`E_7`$ and $`E_8`$ have 56 and 121 rows, respectively, and are omitted due to space limitations.


format: text

text:
# Green’s function approach to the magnetic properties of the kagomé antiferromagnet

## I Introduction

Antiferromagnetic spin systems on fully frustrated lattices show many unusual behaviors in magnetic and thermal propertiesLiebmann ; Ramirez . One of the main ingredients is that their unit cell allows for a continuous degree of freedom and that the connectivity (corner sharing) allows for an extensive number of these degrees of freedom in the classical ground state. More subtle phenomena appear when looking at quantum models on these lattices as quantum fluctuations may induce very unsusual ground states. In particular, wether the quantum ground state on fully frustrated lattices may not break the lattice symmetry nor the spin group symmetry is still a highly debated question. A lot of work has been done to answer this question in the framework of the proposition of Andersonanderson , looking first at Resonating Valence Bond states.

One of the most studied candidates is the quantum $`S`$=1/2 Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the kagomé lattice. Using various methodse89 ; ze95 ; ce92 ; le93 ; lblps97 ; web98 ; ey94 ; mila98 ; si00 , it has been shown that the low temperature physics should be dominated by short range RVB states which produce a continuum of singlet states between the $`S=0`$ ground state and the first excited $`S=1`$ state. A still controversial question is the presence of a very low temperature peak in the specific heat, much below the one corresponding to the onset of short range correlations, that could be ascribed to a high density of singlet states in the singlet-triplet spin gap. Associated to this low temperature peak is the missing (or not) entropy that would characterize an ordered or a disordered ground state.

The experimental relevance of the model is extremely fragile as, in real compounds, many other parameters may drive the physics to very different universality classes, described through inclusion of next nearest neighbor interactionsrei91 , disordershender93 , antisymmetric interactionselhajal01 , etc… Nevertheless, in many cases, the Heisenberg antiferromagnet is a good starting point as it is generally believed that many properties of realistic systems come from deviations from the Heisenberg limit. Examples are the layered oxide SrCr9pGa12-9pO19rec90 ; ukkll94 ; lbar96  ($`S=3/2`$) or the organic pseudo-$`S=1`$ compound m-MPYNN.BF4wkyoya97 .

In this paper, the properties of the Heisenberg $`S`$=1/2 kagomé antiferromagnet are addressed by using a spin Green’s functions technique. One of the advantages of the method is that it is well suited for magnetic systems with no long range order as it uses a decoupling scheme based on short ranged spin correlations. This method was previously introduced by Kondo and Yamagiky72  in the context of the one-dimensional Heisenberg model as a theory of spin-waves in absence of long-range order. More recently, it has been used to address different problemssh91 ; yf00  and can be extended to include magnetic phasesgp02 . Here, the formalism is used to compute thermodynamic and magnetic quantities at all temperatures, like the internal energy, specific heat, entropy, magnetic susceptibility and structure factor. Correlation functions are also computed at all temperatures and for various separation distances. In the next section, the approximation is presented and results are discussed in Sec. III.

## II Model and Approximation

The antiferromagnetic Heisenberg model is defined by the Hamiltonian

$$=\frac{1}{2}\underset{ij}{}J_{ij}𝐒_i𝐒_j.$$
(1)
where we assume $`S=1/2`$ and a nearest-neighbor exchange

$$J_{ij}=\{\begin{array}{cc}J(>0)\hfill & \text{if }i,j\text{ are nearest neighbors}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{otherwise.}\hfill \end{array}$$
(2)
The spin susceptibility

$$\chi _{ij}(\omega )S_i^{};S_j^+_\omega $$
(3)
is obtained by a Fourier transformed Green’s function

$$A;B_\omega =A;B_te^{i\omega t}dt$$
(4)
where

$$A;B_ti\theta (t)[\widehat{A}(t),\widehat{B}(0)].$$
(5)
¿From the equation of motion of the operator $`\widehat{A}(t)`$ in the Heisenberg representation, the Green’s functions above must satisfy the equation

$$\omega A;B_\omega =[A,B]+[A,];B_\omega .$$
(6)
The spin susceptibility of the present model can be obtained by

$$\omega \chi _{ij}(\omega )=2\delta _{ij}S_i^z+\underset{k}{}J_{ik}\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{kij}(\omega )\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ikj}(\omega )\right).$$
(7)
The three operator Green’s functions

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ikj}(\omega )S_i^zS_k^{};S_j^+_\omega $$
(8)
must also obey their corresponding equations

$$\begin{array}{c}\omega \mathrm{\Gamma }_{ikj}(\omega )=\left(\delta _{ij}\delta _{kj}\right)S_i^+S_k^{}_\omega \hfill \\ \hfill +1/2\underset{l}{}J_{il}(S_i^+S_l^{}S_i^{}S_l^+)S_k^{};S_j^+_\omega \\ \hfill +\underset{l}{}J_{kl}S_i^z(S_l^zS_k^{}S_k^zS_l^{});S_j^+,\end{array}$$
(9)
As higher-order Green’s functions are generated, one obtains an infinite hierarchy of equations which have to be decoupled in order to obtain $`\chi _{ij}(\omega )`$.

In a frustrated lattice, one is constrained to the non-magnetic phase, where $`S_i^z=S_i^\pm =0`$ and $`S_i^+S_j^{}=2S_i^zS_j^z`$.

Here we adopt an extension of the Kondo-Yamaji decoupling approximation for the kagomé lattice, assuming (only for different sites $`i,l,k`$)

$`S_i^{}S_l^+S_k^{};S_j^+_\omega `$ $``$ $`\alpha S_i^{}S_l^+\chi _{kj}(\omega )`$ (10)
$`+\alpha S_l^+S_k^{}\chi _{ij}(\omega ),`$
$`S_i^zS_l^zS_k^{};S_j^+_\omega `$ $``$ $`\alpha S_i^zS_l^z\chi _{kj}(\omega ).`$ (11)
The static correlation functions $`S_i^+S_j^{}`$ between spins at the lattice positions $`𝐑_i`$ and $`𝐑_j`$ depend on the distance $`d=|𝐑_i𝐑_j|`$, on the number $`n`$ of bonds between sites $`i`$ and $`j`$, and on the lattice symmetry. As a shorthand notation, we shall call the local correlation as $`c_0=S_i^+S_i^{}`$, the nearest-neighbor correlation as $`c_1`$ and the next-nearest-neighbor correlations as $`c_2`$ and $`c_2^{}`$ (the former corresponding to the shortest distance, as illustrated in figure 1). We also introduce $`\stackrel{~}{c}_n^{()}=\alpha c_n^{()}`$. The parameter $`\alpha `$ is useful to enforce the condition $`c_0=1/2`$ ky72 .

These correlation functions can be evaluated from the spin susceptibility as

$$S_j^+S_i^{}=\frac{1}{\pi }\frac{\mathrm{Im}\chi _{ij}(\omega +i\eta )}{1e^{\beta \omega }}𝑑\omega .$$
(12)
Thus, $`c_1`$, $`c_2`$, and $`c_2^{}`$ and also the parameter $`\alpha `$ appearing in Eqs. 10-11 must be evaluated selfconsistently.

Applying approximation 10-11 to the kagomé lattice yields

$$\begin{array}{c}\left[\omega ^24J^2\stackrel{~}{c}\right]\chi _{ij}(\omega )=8Jc_1\delta _{ij}+2c_1J_{ij}\hfill \\ \hfill +J\stackrel{~}{c}_1\underset{k}{}J_{ik}^{}\chi _{kj}(\omega )J\left(\stackrel{~}{c}+2\stackrel{~}{c}_1\right)\underset{k}{}J_{ik}\chi _{kj}(\omega ),\end{array}$$
(13)
where

$$\stackrel{~}{c}=1/2+\stackrel{~}{c}_1+\stackrel{~}{c}_2+\stackrel{~}{c}_2^{}$$
(14)
and

$$J_{ij}^{}=\{\begin{array}{cc}J\hfill & \text{if i, j are next-nearest neighbors,}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{otherwise.}\hfill \end{array}$$
(15)
By working directly with the $`\stackrel{~}{c}_n^{()}`$, the numerical problem is reduced to only two selfconsistent parameters, $`\stackrel{~}{c}_1`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{c}_2+\stackrel{~}{c}_2^{}`$, from which one can obtain $`\alpha =2\stackrel{~}{c}_0`$.

With reference to the underlying triangular lattice, the approximate equation 13 can be rewritten in matrix form

$$\begin{array}{c}\left[\omega ^24J^2\stackrel{~}{c}\right]𝝌_{ij}(\omega )=2c_1\left(4J\delta _{ij}\mathit{1}𝑱_{ij}\right)\hfill \\ \hfill +J\stackrel{~}{c}_1\underset{k}{}𝑱_{ik}^{}𝝌_{kj}(\omega )J\left(\stackrel{~}{c}+2\stackrel{~}{c}_1\right)\underset{k}{}𝑱_{ik}𝝌_{kj}(\omega ),\end{array}$$
(16)
where $`𝑱_{ij}`$ and $`𝑱_{ij}^{}`$ are the exchange matrices connecting neighboring triangles. As indicated in Fig. 1, each triangle is surrounded by six neighboring triangles, all of them contributing to both types of exchange matrices.

The elements of the dynamic susceptibility matrix are defined as

$$\chi ^{ab}(𝐪,\omega )=\frac{1}{N}\underset{i,j}{}\chi _{ij}^{ab}(\omega )e^{i𝐪(𝐑_i^a𝐑_j^b)}$$
(17)
where $`𝐑_i^a=𝐑_i+𝐓_a`$, $`𝐑_i`$ is the lattice position of the $`i`$-th triangle, and the vectors $`𝐓_a`$ indicate the position of site $`a`$ in the triangular unit cell ($`a=1,2,3`$).

Applying a corresponding Fourier transformation to equation 16 gives

$$𝝌(𝐪,\omega )=2c_1𝑨^1(𝐪,\omega )𝑩(𝐪)$$
(18)
where

$`𝑨(𝐪,\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\omega ^24J^2\stackrel{~}{c}\right)\mathit{1}J\stackrel{~}{c}_1𝑱^{}(𝐪)`$ (19)
$`+J\left(\stackrel{~}{c}+2\stackrel{~}{c}_1\right)𝑱(𝐪),`$
$`𝑩(𝐪)`$ $`=`$ $`4J\mathit{1}𝑱(𝐪),`$ (20)
where $`𝑱(𝐪)`$ and $`𝑱^{}(𝐪)`$ are the Fourier transform of the exchange matrices $`𝑱_{ij}`$ and $`𝑱_{ij}^{}`$,

$$𝑱(𝐪)=2J\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& \mathrm{cos}[(x\sqrt{3}y)/4]& \mathrm{cos}[(x+\sqrt{3}y)/4]\\ & & \\ \mathrm{cos}[(x\sqrt{3}y)/4]& 0& \mathrm{cos}(x/2)\\ & & \\ \mathrm{cos}[(x+\sqrt{3}y)/4]& \mathrm{cos}(x/2)& 0\end{array}\right),$$
(21)
$$𝑱^{}(𝐪)=2J\left(\begin{array}{ccc}2\mathrm{c}\mathrm{o}\mathrm{s}(x/2)\mathrm{cos}(\sqrt{3}y/2)& \mathrm{cos}[(3x+\sqrt{3}y)/4]& \mathrm{cos}[(3x\sqrt{3}y)/4]\\ & & \\ \mathrm{cos}[(3x+\sqrt{3}y)/4]& \mathrm{cos}x+\mathrm{cos}[(x\sqrt{3}y)/2]& \mathrm{cos}(\sqrt{3}y/2)\\ & & \\ \mathrm{cos}[(3x\sqrt{3}y)/4]& \mathrm{cos}(\sqrt{3}y/2)& \mathrm{cos}x+\mathrm{cos}[(x+\sqrt{3}y)/2]\end{array}\right).$$
(22)
in which $`x=q_xa`$ and $`y=q_ya`$.

It follows that

$$𝝌(𝐪,\omega )=2c_1\frac{𝑷(𝐪,\omega ^2)}{\mathrm{\Delta }(𝐪,\omega ^2)}$$
(23)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }(𝐪,\xi )`$ is a third degree polynomial in $`\xi `$ with $`𝐪`$-dependent coefficients and the elements of $`𝑷(𝐪,\xi )`$ are second degree polynomials in $`\xi `$ with $`𝐪`$-dependent coeficients. The dynamic susceptibility can be finally writen as

$$𝝌(𝐪,\omega )=2c_1\underset{l=1}{\overset{3}{}}\frac{𝑹_l(𝐪)}{\omega ^2\mathrm{\Omega }_l^2(𝐪)}$$
(24)
where

$$𝑹_l(𝐪)=\frac{𝑷(𝐪,\mathrm{\Omega }_l^2)}{\mathrm{\Delta }^{}(𝐪,\mathrm{\Omega }_l^2)}$$
(25)
and

$$\mathrm{\Delta }^{}(𝐪,\xi )=\frac{}{\xi }\mathrm{\Delta }(𝐪,\xi ).$$
(26)
The $`\mathrm{\Omega }_l(𝐪)`$ are excitation energies, obtained from the roots $`\xi _l=\mathrm{\Omega }_l^2(𝐪)`$ of the polynomial $`\mathrm{\Delta }(𝐪,\xi )`$. One of these roots, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_1^2(𝐪)=6J^2(\stackrel{~}{c}+\stackrel{~}{c_1})`$, is found to be non-dispersive over the whole Brillouin zone. Thus, the dispersion in the energy spectrum is due to the other roots ($`l=2,3`$), which are evaluated numerically.

By writing the correlation functions of eq. 12 in matrix form and performing the inverse Fourier transformation, we can show that

$$c_{ij}^{ab}=2c_1\underset{l=1}{\overset{3}{}}\underset{𝐪}{}b_l(𝐪)R_l^{ab}(𝐪)\mathrm{cos}\{𝐪(𝐑_i^a𝐑_j^b)\}$$
(27)
where

$$b_l(𝐪)=\frac{n(\mathrm{\Omega }_l)n(\mathrm{\Omega }_l)}{2\mathrm{\Omega }_l},$$
(28)
and $`n(\omega )`$ is the Bose distribution function. The sum over momenta must be performed numerically.

The dynamic structure factor matrix is related to the dynamic susceptibility by

$$𝑺(𝐪,\omega )=\frac{2\mathrm{I}\mathrm{m}𝝌(𝐪,\omega )}{1e^{\beta \omega }}.$$
(29)
After obtaining the selfconsistent parameters, the static structure factor can be evaluated by

$$𝑺(𝐪)=2c_1\underset{l=1}{\overset{3}{}}\underset{𝐪}{}b_l(𝐪)𝑹_l(𝐪).$$
(30)
## III Results

We have calculated the selfconsistent values of $`c_1`$, $`c_2`$, and $`c_2^{}`$ as a function of temperature. They are plotted in fig. 2-b. The selfconsistent parameter $`\alpha `$ is shown in fig. 2-a. From the knowledge of these selfconsistent functions all missing correlation functions can be evaluated. In figure 3 we show the correlation functions $`c_n^{()}`$ between sites separated by at most 6 lattice bonds. The distribution of the points is very similar to that obtained in Ref. cl98,  for the pyrochlore lattice, indicating an exponential decay with a correlation length of the order of the lattice parameter $`a`$.

The internal energy is given by $`E=6NJc_1`$. The ground-state value $`E=0.859NJ`$ is in good agreement with earlier calculations (see Refs. lblps97, ; yf00, ; ch90, ). In figure 4 we present the specific heat $`C=dE/dT`$. This curve has a single peak and is very similar to the result of high-temperature expansions ey94  reproducing the high-temperature limit $`CT^2`$. In the low-temperature limit, the time involved in the numerical computation increases with decreasing temperature, because the convergence of the integral in $`𝐪`$ becomes slower, and in addition one needs a higher precision in order to perform the derivative involved in the evaluation of the specific heat. Nevertheless, a careful analysis of the numerical results indicates unambiguously a $`T^2`$ dependence of the specific heat which extends to very low temperatures. Therefore, there will be no second peak in the present model. The fact that the specific heat does not vanish exponentially indicates the presence of low energy states even though the low-temperature peak found in Ref. si00,  is missing. Indeed, it should be emphasized that it is not sure that this peak will persist in the thermodynamic limitsin01  which supports the results obtained in the present work. The change in entropy $`_0^T\frac{C(T^{})}{T^{}}𝑑T^{}`$ is also shown in Fig. 4. The total change in entropy is $`0.54\mathrm{ln}2`$, corresponding to a ground-state entropy $`0.46\mathrm{ln}2`$, of the same order as found in Ref. ey94, .

The eigenvalues $`\lambda _n(𝐪)`$ of the structure factor are shown in Fig. 5. The result is remarkably similar to what is found from the high-temperature expansions of Ref. ey94 . Whithin the present approach one can easily follow the effect of temperature on the structure factor for all wavevectors even at very low $`T`$. We observe that its highest eigenvalue is degenerate over the whole Brillouin zone. For the pyroclore, the structure factor is a $`4\times 4`$ matrix, which has one additional eigenvalue. In a perturbative expansion cl98  the two highest eigenvalues are found to lie very close to each other, one of them being completely degenerate while the other one has a weakly lifted degeneracy, which is crucial to reproduce the main features of neutron scattering experiments. As a further work, it would be interesting to extend the present approach to the pyrochlore antiferromagnet.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work has been partially supported by Brazilian agencies CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico) and CAPES (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior) through the French-Brazilian cooperation agreement CAPES-COFECUB.


text:
# Extraction of the neutron charge form factor from the charge form factor of deuteron

(February 19, 2002)

## Abstract

We extract the neutron charge form factor from the charge form factor of deuteron obtained from $`T_{20}(Q^2)`$ data at $`0Q^2`$ 1.717 (GeV2). The extraction is based on the relativistic impulse approximation in the instant form of the relativistic Hamiltonian dynamics. Our results (12 new points) are compatible with existing values of the neutron charge form factor of other authors. We propose a fit for the whole set (35 points) taking into account the data for the slope of the form factor at $`Q^2=0`$.

Keywords: Relativistic model; Deuteron; Neutron charge form factor

PACS: 13.40.Gp; 14.20.Dh; 24.10.Jv

The behavior of the neutron charge form factor $`G_E^n(Q^2),(Q^2=q^2,q`$ \- the momentum transfer) is of great importance for the understanding of the electromagnetic structure of nucleons and nuclei. However, $`G_E^n(Q^2)`$ is still known rather poorly.

As there are no free neutron targets, $`G_E^n(Q^2)`$ has to be extracted from the data for composite nuclei, for example deuteron or 3He . The direct measurement of great precision ($``$ 1.5%) is possible only for the slope $`dG_E^n(Q^2)/dQ^2`$ at $`Q^2=0`$, as determined by thermal neutron scattering .

While obtaining the information about the neutron from the scattering data on composite systems one encounters two kinds of difficulties. First, the results depend crucially on the model for $`NN`$ interaction  . Second, there exists a dependence on the relativistic effects, exchange currents, nucleon isobar states, final state interaction in inelastic channels etc. . The use of polarized beams and polarized targets in recent experiments diminishes uncertainties due to those effects .

In the present paper the neutron charge form factor is extracted from the experimental data on the deuteron charge form factor obtained through polarization experiments on elastic $`ed`$ scattering . In the JLab experiments  the deuteron charge form factor is obtained up to $`Q^2`$ = 1.717 (GeV2). In this range of momentum transfer the theoretical description of the polarization tensor $`T_{20}(Q^2)`$ depends essentially on the choice of the form of $`NN`$ interaction and relativistic approach is required.

Our calculations are based on the method of relativistic Hamiltonian dynamics (RHD) which is widely used in present time. One can find the description of RHD method in the reviews  and especially the case of the deuteron in the reviews , ). We use our own variant ,  of the instant form of RHD. This variant permits to take correctly into account the relativistic effects in the elastic ed scattering in the relativistic impulse approximation . The main point of our approach is the construction of the electromagnetic–current operator for the system of interacting particles. In our approach this operator is Lorentz covariant and satisfies the conservation law.

Let us note that, as far as we know, it is for the first time that the neutron charge form factor is determined from an analysis of the deuteron charge form factor.

In our approach in the relativistic impulse approximation the following equation for the deuteron charge form factor takes place (see  for details):

$$G_C(Q^2)=G_{CC}(Q^2)\left[G_E^p(Q^2)+G_E^n(Q^2)\right]+G_{CM}(Q^2)\left[G_M^p(Q^2)+G_M^n(Q^2)\right].$$
(1)
Here $`G_{E,M}^{p,n}`$ are charge and magnetic form factors of proton and neutron. The fact that nucleons magnetic form factors enter the Eq. (1) is due to the relativistic effect.

The functions $`G_{CC},G_{CM}`$ in (1) are given by:

$$G_{CC}(Q^2)=\underset{l,l^{}}{}𝑑\sqrt{s}𝑑\sqrt{s^{}}\phi ^l(s)g_{CC}^{ll^{}}(s,Q^2,s^{})\phi ^l^{}(s^{}),$$
(2)
$$G_{CM}(Q^2)=\underset{l,l^{}}{}𝑑\sqrt{s}𝑑\sqrt{s^{}}\phi ^l(s)g_{CM}^{ll^{}}(s,Q^2,s^{})\phi ^l^{}(s^{}),$$
(3)
here $`\phi ^l(s)`$ is the wave function in the sense of RHD (see ):

$$\phi ^l(s)=\sqrt[4]{s}u_l(k)k,k=\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{s4M^2},\underset{l}{}u_l^2(k)k^2𝑑k=1,$$
(4)
$`M`$ is the nucleon mass, $`l=`$ 0,2 – the nucleon angular momentum in the deuteron, $`u_l(k)`$ – the wave function for the model $`NN`$ interaction. The functions $`g_{CC}^{ll^{}},g_{CM}^{ll^{}}`$ are given by the following equations (5)–(10) (note that the same equations were obtained independently in ):

$$g_{CC}^{ll^{}}(s,Q^2,s^{})=R(s,Q^2,s^{})(s+s^{}+Q^2)Q^2a^{ll^{}}(s,Q^2,s^{}),$$
(5)
$$g_{CM}^{ll^{}}(s,Q^2,s^{})=\frac{1}{M}R(s,Q^2,s^{})\xi (s,Q^2,s^{})Q^2b^{ll^{}}(s,Q^2,s^{}),$$
(6)
$$a^{00}=\left(\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{cos}\omega _1\mathrm{cos}\omega _2+\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{sin}\omega _1\mathrm{sin}\omega _2\right),a^{02}=\frac{1}{6\sqrt{2}}\left(P_{22}^{}+2P_{20}^{}\right)\mathrm{sin}\omega _1\mathrm{sin}\omega _2,$$

$$a^{22}=\left[\frac{1}{2}L_1\mathrm{cos}\omega _1\mathrm{cos}\omega _2+\frac{1}{24}L_2\mathrm{sin}(\omega _2\omega _1)+\frac{1}{12}L_3\mathrm{sin}\omega _1\mathrm{sin}\omega _2\right],$$

$$b^{00}=\left(\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{cos}\omega _1\mathrm{sin}\omega _2\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{sin}\omega _1\mathrm{cos}\omega _2\right),b^{02}=\frac{1}{6\sqrt{2}}\left(P_{22}^{}+2P_{20}^{}\right)\mathrm{sin}\omega _1\mathrm{cos}\omega _2,$$

$$b^{22}=\left[\frac{1}{2}L_1\mathrm{cos}\omega _1\mathrm{sin}\omega _2+\frac{1}{24}L_2\mathrm{cos}(\omega _2\omega _1)+\frac{1}{12}L_3\mathrm{sin}\omega _1\mathrm{cos}\omega _2\right].$$

$$R(s,Q^2,s^{})=\frac{(s+s^{}+Q^2)}{\sqrt{(s4M^2)(s^{}4M^2)}}\frac{\vartheta (s,Q^2,s^{})}{[\lambda (s,Q^2,s^{})]^{3/2}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+Q^2/4M^2}},$$

$$\xi (s,Q^2,s^{})=\sqrt{ss^{}Q^2M^2\lambda (s,Q^2,s^{})},\lambda (a,b,c)=a^2+b^2+c^22(ab+ac+bc),$$

$$L_1=L_1(s,Q^2,s^{})=P_{20}P_{20}^{}+\frac{1}{3}P_{21}P_{21}^{}+\frac{1}{12}P_{22}P_{22}^{},$$

$$L_2=L_2(s,Q^2,s^{})=P_{21}\left(P_{22}^{}6P_{20}^{}\right)P_{21}^{}\left(P_{22}6P_{20}\right),$$

$$L_3=L_3(s,Q^2,s^{})=2P_{21}P_{21}^{}+4P_{20}P_{20}^{}P_{20}P_{22}^{}P_{22}P_{20}^{}.$$

Here $`\omega _1`$ and $`\omega _2`$ are the Wigner spin rotation parameters:

$$\omega _1=\mathrm{arctan}\frac{\xi (s,Q^2,s^{})}{M\left[(\sqrt{s}+\sqrt{s^{}})^2+Q^2\right]+\sqrt{ss^{}}(\sqrt{s}+\sqrt{s^{}})},$$

$$\omega _2=\mathrm{arctan}\frac{\alpha (s,s^{})\xi (s,Q^2,s^{})}{M(s+s^{}+Q^2)\alpha (s,s^{})+\sqrt{ss^{}}(4M^2+Q^2)},$$
(7)
and $`\alpha (s,s^{})=2M+\sqrt{s}+\sqrt{s^{}}`$.

$`P_{2i}=P_{2i}(z),P_{2i}^{}=P_{2i}(z^{}),i=0,1,2`$ – the Legendre functions:

$$P_{20}(z)=\frac{1}{2}\left(3z^21\right),P_{21}(z)=3z\sqrt{1z^2},P_{22}(z)=3\left(1z^2\right).$$
(8)
$$z=z(s,Q^2,s^{})=\frac{\sqrt{s}(s^{}sQ^2)}{\sqrt{\lambda (s,Q^2,s^{})(s4M^2)}},z^{}=z^{}(s,Q^2,s^{})=z(s^{},Q^2,s).$$
(9)
$`\vartheta (s,Q^2,s^{})=\theta (s^{}s_1)\theta (s^{}s_2)`$, $`\theta `$ is the step function.

$$s_{1,2}=2M^2+\frac{1}{2M^2}(2M^2+Q^2)(s2M^2)\frac{1}{2M^2}\sqrt{Q^2(Q^2+4M^2)s(s4M^2)}.$$
(10)
The functions $`s_{1,2}(s,Q^2)`$ give the kinematically available region in the plane $`(s,s^{})`$ (see ).

$$g_{Ci}^{ll^{}}(s,Q^2,s^{})=g_{Ci}^{l^{}l}(s^{},Q^2,s),i=C,M.$$
(11)
Using Eq.(1) one can write the neutron charge form factor in the form:

$$G_E^n(Q^2)=\frac{G_C(Q^2)}{G_{CC}(Q^2)}\frac{G_{CM}(Q^2)}{G_{CC}(Q^2)}\left[G_M^p(Q^2)+G_M^n(Q^2)\right]G_E^p(Q^2).$$
(12)
We calculate the nucleon charge form factor in the points $`Q^2`$ where the deuteron charge form factor $`G_C(Q^2)`$ is measured. In these points the nucleon form factors $`G_E^p(Q^2)`$, $`G_M^p(Q^2)`$, $`G_M^n(Q^2)`$ are obtained through the fits of their experimental values. The functions $`G_{CC}(Q^2),`$ $`G_{CM}(Q^2)`$ can be calculated using the equations (2), (3) and some deuteron wave functions.

Let us discuss now the problem of choosing the deuteron wave functions to use for the calculation of $`G_{CC}(Q^2),G_{CM}(Q^2)`$ (12). We investigated the behavior of $`T_{20}(Q^2)`$ (our determination of $`T_{20}(Q^2)`$ is the same as in ) using different wave functions111The details will be published elsewhere.: Paris wave functions , the versions I, II and 93 of the Nijmegen model , charge–dependent version of Bonn potential , and the wave functions obtained by the relativistic dispersion variant of the inverse scattering method . As $`T_{20}(Q^2)`$ for polarized $`ed`$ scattering depends weakly on the form of nucleon form factors one can use the experimental data for $`T_{20}(Q^2)`$ to choose the most adequate deuteron wave functions. Fig.1 presents the results of our calculation of $`T_{20}(Q^2)`$ with the use of the wave functions  and nucleon form factors from  as well as the experimental points from the papers .

One can see that the best description of $`T_{20}(Q^2)`$ is given by the wave functions .

Our estimations show that other wave functions (e.g. used in ) also give poorer description of $`T_{20}(Q^2)`$ than the wave functions .

Let us emphasize that the wave functions  were obtained more than 20 years ago and so no possible fitting reasons for $`T_{20}(Q^2)`$ could influence the choose. These wave functions used in the relativistic calculation of the function $`A(Q^2)`$ give the correct behavior up to $`Q^2`$ 3 (GeV2).

It seems to us that the validity of the wave functions  is due to the fact that they are ”almost model independent”: no form of $`NN`$ interaction Hamiltonian is used. The wave functions  were obtained in the frame of the potentialless approach to the inverse scattering problem (see for the details ). They are given by the dispersion type integral directly in terms of the experimental scattering phases and the mixing parameter for $`NN`$ scattering in the $`{}_{}{}^{3}S_{1}^{}^3D_1`$ channel.

In the Eq.(12) we use for the nucleon form factors $`G_E^p(Q^2),G_M^p(Q^2),G_M^n(Q^2)`$ one (with the best $`\chi ^2`$) of the fits of the recent paper  – DRN–GK(3).

The results of our calculations of the neutron charge form factor in the points where the deuteron charge form factor is measured are given in the Table 1 (see also Fig.2).

The accuracy of our calculations are determined by the accuracy of measurements of charge deuteron form factor  and nucleon form factors which are the folowing at $`Q^2`$ 1.717 (GeV2): for $`G_E^p(Q^2)`$ 1–10% , for $`G_M^p(Q^2)`$ 1–3% , for $`G_M^n(Q^2)`$ 1–10%. .

We obtain the first three points at low momentum transfer from the data for the deuteron charge form factor given in the paper . In this range of momentum transfer the behavior of the deuteron charge form factor and so $`G_E^n(Q^2)`$ do not depend on the choose of the wave functions .

The first point at $`Q^2`$ 0.16 (GeV2) is almost the same as in , however, our errors are much smaller. The second and the third points are compatible (within the experimental errors) with the points of . Our point # 7 is in fact the same as in  but our error is larger.

Our values of $`G_E^n`$ in other points (at $`Q^2`$ 1 (GeV2) are strictly positive. This result differs from e.g. the results of the paper  consistent with $`G_E^n=0`$. Let us note that our errors at $`Q^2`$ 1 (GeV2) are sufficiently small, smaller than, e.g. in .

Our values # 4–8 are extracted from the values of charge deuteron form factor of the two different works . The results of these works are in rather poor agreement with each other in the region of the first dip. So the values of # 4–8 of $`G_E^n`$ are not well determined in the present work. One needs additional experiments in this region.

It is now interesting to fit all the existing values of neutron charge form factor ( and Table 1). We use for the fitting the following function (see  and the review ) with two parameters $`a`$ and $`b`$:

$$G_E^n(Q^2)=\mu _n\frac{a\tau }{1+b\tau }G_D(Q^2),G_D(Q^2)=\left(1+\frac{Q^2}{0.71}\right)^2,\tau =\frac{Q^2}{4M^2}.$$
(13)
The neutron magnetic moment $`\mu _n`$ = -1.91304270(5) . $`Q^2`$ in $`G_D(Q^2)`$ is given in (GeV2).

We obtain the parameter $`a`$ from the slope of the neutron charge form factor at $`Q^2=0`$ :

$$\frac{dG_E^n}{dQ^2}|_{Q^2=0}=0.0199\pm 0.0003\text{fm}^2.$$
(14)
The fitting of the slope (14) gives $`a`$=0.942 with the accuracy $``$ 1.5%.

This value of $`a`$ gives the slope of $`G_E^n(Q^2)`$ at $`Q^2=0`$ which is measured directly in the experiment.

The parameter $`b`$ is fitted using the $`\chi ^2`$ criterion. If we use all the 35 points we obtain $`b`$ = 4.61 with $`\chi ^2`$ = 69.0. Note that the fit DRN–GK(3)  of 23 points has $`\chi ^2`$ = 63.9.

If we exclude the points # 4–8 then the 30–point fitting gives $`b=`$ 4.62 with $`\chi ^2`$ = 61.5. As the errors of these points are large this fitting differs from the previous one slightly.

Let us note that our fitting for 23 points of the papers  (not taking into account our points) gives $`b`$ = 4.69 with $`\chi ^2=`$ 57.7. The two curves lie near one another (see Fig.2) so our points are consistent with the known points of other authors.

The results of fitting, the experimental points , as well as our new points are shown on the Fig.2. The points \# 5 and # 6 are out of the figure.

To summarize,

1) We extract new points for the neutron charge form factor from the experimental data for the deuteron charge form factor. The obtained values are consistent with the known values of other authors.

2) We perform the fitting for 35 values of the neutron charge form factor including our points. The fit has the form (13) with $`a`$ = 0.942, $`b`$ = 4.61.

This work was supported in part by the Program ”Russian Universities – Basic Researches” (grant # 02.01.28).

Table 1. The values of $`G_E^n(Q^2)/G_D(Q^2)`$ obtained in the present paper. The values of the deuteron charge form factor used for the extraction of $`G_E^n(Q^2)`$ are also given.

| \# of points | $`Q^2`$ (GeV2) | $`G_C(Q^2)`$ | Ref. | $`G_E^n(Q^2)/G_D(Q^2)`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | 0.160 | 0.163$`\pm `$0.017 |  | 0.076$`\pm `$0.116 |
| 2 | 0.215 | 0.100$`\pm `$0.012 |  | 0.052$`\pm `$0.129 |
| 3 | 0.303 | 0.035$`\pm `$0.020 |  | -0.234$`\pm `$0.401 |
| 4 | 0.556 | (0.127$`{}_{0.056}{}^{+0.047})`$10-1 |  | 1.23$`\pm `$0.92 |
| 5 | 0.651 | (-0.117$`\pm `$0.162)$``$10-2 |  | -2.61$`\pm `$1.65 |
| 6 | 0.693 | (0.166$`{}_{0.142}{}^{+0.161})`$10-2 |  | -4.52$`\pm `$5.10 |
| 7 | 0.775 | (-0.253$`\pm `$0.063)$``$10-2 |  | 0.677$`\pm `$0.361 |
| 8 | 0.831 | (-0.147$`{}_{0.104}{}^{+0.106})`$10-2 |  | -0.140$`\pm `$0.432 |
| 9 | 1.009 | (-0.396$`\pm `$0.028)$``$10-2 |  | 0.389$`\pm `$0.107 |
| 10 | 1.165 | (-0.348$`\pm `$0.031)$``$10-2 |  | 0.259$`\pm `$0.131 |
| 11 | 1.473 | (-0.310$`{}_{0.061}{}^{+0.053})`$10-2 |  | 0.405$`\pm `$0.263 |
| 12 | 1.717 | (-0.194$`{}_{0.052}{}^{+0.036})`$10-2 |  | 0.174$`\pm `$0.294 |

Figures capture.

Fig.1. Data and the results of calculation of the deuteron polarization tensor $`T_{20}(Q^2)`$ for the elastic $`ed`$ – scattering with the use of the nucleon form factors from the paper  and different wave functions. The experimental points are: open circles – , open squares – , open triangles – , filled circles – , filled squares – , filled diamonds – , filled triangles – . Curves: solid – Nijmegen–II , dashed – , dotted – , dash–dotted – Nijmegen–I , dash–dotted–dotted – .

Fig.2. The experimental values and the results of fitting for the neutron charge form factor. The experimental points: bold cross – , open bold diamonds – , open up triangles – , open circles – , open down triangles – , open stars – , filled circles – , filled diamonds – , filled up triangles – , filled stars – , filled squares – the present work. The points # 5 and # 6 are out of the figure. The curves : solid – the result of fitting of 35 experimental points (including our points of the Table 1) using the equation (13) ($`a`$ = 0.942, $`b`$ = 4.61 with $`\chi ^2`$ = 69.0), dashed – the result of fitting of 23 points of other authors ($`a`$ = 0.942, $`b`$ = 4.69 with $`\chi ^2`$ = 57.7).