text:
# Random polynomials with prescribed Newton polytope, I

## Introduction

It is well known that the Newton polytope $`P_f`$ of a holomorphic polynomial $`f(z_1,\mathrm{},z_m)`$ of degree $`p`$ has a crucial influence on its value distribution and in particular on its zero set. Even the number of simultaneous zeros in $`^m:=(\{0\})^m`$ of $`m`$ generic polynomials $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_m`$ depends on their Newton polytopes $`P_{f_j}`$ \[Be, Ko1, Ko2\]. Our purpose in this paper is to demonstrate that the Newton polytope of a polynomial $`f`$ also has a crucial influence on its mass density $`|f(z)|^2dV`$ and on the spatial distribution of zeros $`\{f=0\}`$. We will show that there is a classically allowed region region where the mass almost surely concentrates and a classically forbidden region where it almost surely is exponentially decaying. The classically allowed region is the inverse image $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }^1(\frac{1}{p}P)`$ of the (scaled) polytope $`\frac{1}{p}P`$ under the standard moment map $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ of $`^m`$. The simultaneous zeros of $`m`$ generic polynomials $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_m`$ in $`^m`$ almost surely concentrates (in the limit of high degrees) in the classically allowed region, giving a kind of quantitative version of the Bernstein-Kouchnirenko theorem. The Newton polytope has an equally strong (though different) impact for $`k<m`$ polynomials $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_k`$. The image of the zero set of $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_k`$ under the moment map is (up to a logarithmic re-parametrization) known as an amoeba in the sense of \[GKZ, Mi2\]. Results on the expected distribution of amoebas can be obtained from our results on the expected zero current; for example, as a consequence of Corollary 6, for polytopes $`\frac{1}{p}P`$ with vertices in the interior of the standard simplex $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^m`$, there is also a very forbidden region which the amoeba almost surely avoids. These patterns in zeros are statistical—they hold for random polynomials with prescribed Newton polytope—and are asymptotic as the degree of the polynomials tends to infinity.

To state our problems and results precisely, let us recall some definitions. Let

$$f(z_1,\mathrm{},z_m)=\underset{\alpha ^m:|\alpha |p}{}c_\alpha \chi _\alpha (z_1,\mathrm{},z_m),\chi _\alpha (z)=z_1^{\alpha _1}\mathrm{}z_m^{\alpha _m}$$

be a polynomial of degree $`p`$ in $`m`$ complex variables. By the support of $`f`$ we mean the set

$$S_f=\{\alpha ^m:c_\alpha 0\},$$
(1)
and by its Newton polytope $`P_f`$ we mean the integral polytope

$$P_f:=\widehat{S}_f=\text{the convex hull in }^m\text{ of }S_f.$$
(2)
Throughout this paper we will make the simplifying assumption that $`P`$ is a Delzant polytope \[De, Gu1\]. Non-Delzant polytopes are equally important in the study of polynomials, and we plan to extend our results to more general convex integral polytopes in the sequel \[SZ2\]. We also plan to study a parallel tunneling phenomenon for critical points.

Our aim is to study the statistical patterns in polynomials with a fixed Newton polytope. We therefore define a natural Gaussian measure $`d\gamma _P`$ on the space of polynomials with support contained in a fixed Newton polytope $`P`$. Since our purpose is to compare zero sets and masses as the polytope $`P`$ varies, we view the polytope as placing a condition on the Gaussian ensemble of all polynomials of degree $`p`$ equal to that of $`P`$, i.e. we define the measures $`d\gamma _P`$ as conditional probability measures of one fixed Gaussian measure. To define this ensemble, we homogenize the polynomial $`f`$ to obtain a homogeneous polynomial $`F`$ of degree $`p`$ in $`m+1`$ complex variables. Such polynomials may be identified with holomorphic sections $`FH^0(^m,𝒪(p))`$ of the $`p^{\mathrm{th}}`$ power of the hyperplane section bundle $`𝒪_^m(1)`$. We denote by

$$H^0(^m,𝒪(p),P)=\{FH^0(^m,𝒪(p)):P_fP\}$$
(3)
the space of homogeneous polynomials $`F`$ of degree $`d`$ whose associated inhomogeneous form $`f(z_1,\mathrm{},z_m)=F(1,z_1,\mathrm{},z_m)`$ has Newton polytope $`P_f`$ contained in $`P`$.

Let us recall that $`H^0(^m,𝒪(p))`$ carries the standard $`\mathrm{SU}(m+1)`$-invariant inner product

$$F_1,\overline{F}_2=_{S^{2m+1}}F_1\overline{F}_2𝑑\sigma ,$$

where $`d\sigma `$ is Haar measure on the $`(2m+1)`$-sphere $`S^{2m+1}`$. (See (28) for an alternate description in terms of the Fubini-Study form on $`^m`$ and the Fubini-Study metric on $`𝒪(1)`$.) An orthonormal basis of $`H^0(^m,𝒪(p))`$ is given by $`\left\{\chi _\alpha ^1\chi _\alpha \right\}_{|\alpha |p}`$, where $``$ denotes the norm in $`H^0(^m,𝒪(p))`$. (Note that $`\chi _\alpha `$ depends on $`p`$.) The corresponding $`\mathrm{SU}(m+1)`$-invariant Gaussian measure $`\gamma _p`$ is defined by

$$d\gamma _p(s)=\frac{1}{\pi ^{k_p}}e^{|\lambda |^2}d\lambda ,s=\underset{|\alpha |p}{}\lambda _\alpha \frac{\chi _\alpha }{\chi _\alpha },$$
(4)
where $`k_p=\mathrm{\#}\{\alpha :|\alpha |p\}=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m+p}{p}\right)`$. Thus, the coefficients $`\lambda _\alpha `$ are independent complex Gaussian random variables with mean zero and variance one. We then endow the space $`H^0(^m,𝒪(p),P)`$ with the associated conditional probability measure $`\gamma _p|_P`$:

$$d\gamma _{p|P}(s)=\frac{1}{\pi ^{\mathrm{\#}P}}e^{|\lambda |^2}d\lambda ,s=\underset{\alpha P}{}\lambda _\alpha \frac{\chi _\alpha }{\chi _\alpha },$$
(5)
where the coefficients $`\lambda _\alpha `$ are again independent complex Gaussian random variables with mean zero and variance one. (By a slight abuse of notation, we let $`_{\alpha P}`$ denote the sum over the lattice points $`\alpha P^m`$; $`\mathrm{\#}P`$ denotes the cardinality of $`P^m`$.) We observe that, as a subspace of $`H^0(^m,𝒪(p))`$, $`H^0(^m,𝒪(p),P)`$ inherits the inner product $`s_1,s_2`$ and that $`\gamma _{|P}`$ is the induced Gaussian measure. Probabilities relative to $`\gamma |_P`$ can be considered as conditional probabilities; i.e. for any event $`E`$,

$$\text{Prob}_\gamma \{fE|P_f=P\}=\text{Prob}_{\gamma |_P}(E).$$

We now wish to consider the expected distribution of mass and zeros of polynomials with fixed Newton polytope. It turns out to involve the moment map $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ of projective space. We use a notation for this moment map which reflects its dependence on the standard unit simplex $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ in $`^m`$ with vertices at $`(0,\mathrm{},0),(1,0,\mathrm{},0),(0,1,\mathrm{},0),\mathrm{},(0,\mathrm{},0,1)`$. The ‘projective moment map’ is then given by

$$\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(z)=(\frac{|z_1|^2}{1+z^2},\mathrm{},\frac{|z_m|^2}{1+z^2}).$$

Via this moment map we define:

Definition: Let $`P_+^m`$ be an integral polytope. The classically allowed region for polynomials in $`H^0(^m,𝒪(p),P)`$ is the set

$$𝒜_P:=\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }^1\left(\frac{1}{p}P^{}\right)^m$$

(where $`P^{}`$ denotes the interior of $`P`$), and the classically forbidden region is its complement $`^m𝒜_P`$.

Our first result concerns the simultaneous zero set of $`m`$ independent polynomials in $`m`$ variables. Bézout’s theorem tells us that $`m`$ generic homogeneous polynomials $`F_1,\mathrm{},F_m`$ of degree $`p`$ have exactly $`p^m`$ simultaneous zeros; these zeros all lie in $`^m`$, for generic $`F_j`$. In fact, one immediately sees (by uniqueness of Haar probability measure) that the expected distribution of zeros is uniform with respect to the Fubini-Study projective volume form, when the ensemble is given the $`\mathrm{SU}(m+1)`$-invariant measure $`d\gamma _p`$.

According to Kouchnirenko’s theorem \[Ko1, Ko2, At, Au\], the number of joint zeros in $`^m`$ of $`m`$ generic polynomials $`\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_m\}`$ with given Newton polytope $`P`$ equals $`m!\mathrm{Vol}(P)`$, where $`\mathrm{Vol}(P)`$ is the Euclidean volume of $`P`$. For example, if $`P=p\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is the standard unit simplex in $`^m`$, then $`\mathrm{Vol}(p\mathrm{\Sigma })=p^m\mathrm{Vol}(\mathrm{\Sigma })=\frac{p^m}{m!}`$, and we get Bézout’s theorem. (More generally, the $`f_j`$ may have different Newton polytopes, in which case the number of zeros is given by the Bernstein-Kouchnirenko formula as a ‘mixed volume.’)

Now consider $`m`$ independent random polynomials with Newton polytope $`P`$, using the conditional probability (5). We let $`𝐄_{|P}(Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_m})`$ denote the expected density of their simultaneous zeros. It is the measure on $`^m`$ given by

$$𝐄_{|P}(Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_m})(U)=𝑑\gamma _{p|P}(f_1)\mathrm{}𝑑\gamma _{p|P}(f_m)\left[\mathrm{\#}\{zU:f_1(z)=\mathrm{}=f_m(z)=0\}\right],$$
(6)
for $`U^m`$, where the integrals are over $`H^0(^m,𝒪(p),P)`$. In fact, $`𝐄_{|P}(Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_m})`$ is an absolutely continuous measure given by a $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}`$ density (see Prop. 4.2). Our first result is the surprising fact that as the polytope $`P`$ expands, these zeros are expected to concentrate in the classically allowed region and are (asymptotically) uniform there:

###### Theorem 1.

Suppose that $`P`$ is a Delzant polytope in $`^m`$. Then

$$\frac{1}{(Np)^m}𝐄_{|NP}(Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_m})\{\begin{array}{cc}\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^m\hfill & \text{on }𝒜_P\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{on }^m𝒜_P\hfill \end{array},$$

in the distribution sense; i.e., for any open $`U^m`$, we have

$$\frac{1}{(Np)^m}𝐄_{|NP}\left(\mathrm{\#}\{zU:f_1(z)=\mathrm{}=f_m(z)=0\}\right)m!\mathrm{Vol}_^m(U𝒜_P).$$

In fact, our methods imply that the convergence of the zero current on the classically allowed region is exponentially fast in the sense that

$$𝐄_{|NP}(Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_m})=(Np)^m\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^m+O\left(e^{\lambda N}\right)\text{on }𝒜_P,$$

for some positive continuous function $`\lambda `$ on $`𝒜_P`$.

Theorem 1 is a special case of a general result stated below (Theorem 4) on the expected distribution of simultaneous zeros of $`k`$ random polynomials with given Newton polytopes $`P_1,\mathrm{},P_k`$. Although we only discuss expected behavior of zeros here, it is possible to show (using methods similar to those of \[SZ1\]) that distribution of zeros is self-averaging: i.e., almost all polynomials exhibit the expected behavior in an asymptotic sense. For the sake of brevity, we concentrate here on only the essentially new aspects of our problem, namely the dependence of the expected behavior on $`P`$.

The following illustration111We would like to thank Aaron Carass for providing the illustrations in Figures 1, 3, 4, 6 and 7. shows the classically allowed region (shaded) and the classically forbidden region (unshaded) when $`P`$ is the unit square in $`^2`$ (and $`p=2`$):

The terminology is taken from the semiclassical analysis of ground states of Schroedinger operators $`H_h=\mathrm{}^2\mathrm{\Delta }+V`$ on $`^n`$. The well-known ‘Agmon estimates’ of ground states (cf. \[Ag\]) show that $`^2`$-normalized ground states or low-lying eigenfunctions $`H_{\mathrm{}}\phi =E\phi `$ of $`H`$ are concentrated as $`\mathrm{}0`$ in the classically allowed region $`C_E=\{x^n:V(x)E\}`$ and have exponential decay $`|\phi (x)|^2=O(e^{d(x,C_E)/\mathrm{}})`$ as $`\mathrm{}0`$ in the complement. Here, $`d(x,C_E)`$ is the ‘Agmon distance’ to the classically allowed region, i.e. the distance in the metric $`\sqrt{V(x)E}dx`$. In our setting, the Hamiltonian is $`\overline{}^{}\overline{}`$ on $`^2`$-sections of powers $`𝒪(Np)`$ of the hyperplane section bundle, $`\mathrm{}=1/N`$, and the ground states are the holomorphic sections $`H^0(^m,𝒪(p),P)`$. Replacing $`|\phi (x)|^2`$ is the expected ‘mass density’ of the polynomials in this subspace. By definition, the mass density of a polynomial $`f`$ at a point $`z^m`$ is the Fubini-Study norm

$$|f(z)|_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}:=\frac{|f(z)|}{(1+z^2)^{\delta /2}}(\delta =\mathrm{deg}f).$$
(7)
Our next result describes the asymptotics of the expected mass density of $`^2`$-normalized polynomials with Newton polytope $`NP`$, i.e. the expected density $`𝐄_{\nu _{NP}}(|f(z)|_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^2)`$ with respect to the Haar probability measure, denoted by $`\nu _{NP}`$, on the unit sphere in $`H^0(^m,𝒪(Np),NP)`$. One easily shows (see §3) that

$$𝐄_{\nu _{NP}}(|f(z)|_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^2)=\frac{1}{\mathrm{\#}(NP)}𝐄_{|NP}\left(|f(z)|_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^2\right)=\frac{1}{\mathrm{\#}(NP)}\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z),$$
(8)
where $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}`$ is the Szegö kernel of $`H^0(^m,𝒪(Np),NP)`$. Here, the term ‘Szegö kernel’ of a space $`𝒮`$ of holomorphic sections of a line bundle refers to the kernel for the orthogonal projection to $`𝒮`$ from the space $`^2(D)`$ of square-integrable functions on the boundary of the associated unit disk bundle $`D`$; i.e., it is of the form $`\mathrm{\Pi }(x,y)=_js_j(x)\overline{s_j(y)}`$, where $`\{s_j\}`$ is an orthonormal basis of $`𝒮`$. Precise definitions and the relationship to the classical Szegö kernel for a strictly pseudoconvex domain are described in §1.2. Note that

$$\mathrm{\#}(NP)=dimH^0(^m,𝒪(Np),NP)=\mathrm{Vol}(P)N^m+\mathrm{},$$

which is a polynomial given by the Riemann-Roch formula (see §3).

We shall show that the expected mass density $`𝐄_{\nu _{NP}}(|f(z)|_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^2)`$ is asymptotically uniform with respect to Fubini-Study measure in the classically allowed region (as if there were no constraint at all); while in the forbidden region the mass decays exponentially. Thus in the semiclassical limit $`N\mathrm{}`$, all the mass concentrates in the classically allowed region. To describe the behavior in the forbidden region, we subdivide it into regions corresponding to the faces of the polytope $`\frac{1}{p}P`$ that lie in the interior $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$ of the simplex. To describe these regions, we recall that the fan associated to $`\frac{1}{p}P`$ (or $`P`$) is the collection of polyhedral cones $`C_F^m`$ normal to the faces $`F`$ of $`\frac{1}{p}P`$ (see §1.1.1). For each face $`F\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$, we let

$$_F=\{e^\tau z:\tau C_F,\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(z)F\}.$$
(9)
Note that if $`F`$ is the open face $`\frac{1}{p}P^{}`$, then $`_F`$ is the classically allowed region $`𝒜_P`$. We show in §3.2.1 that the classically forbidden region decomposes into the (disjoint) forbidden subregions

$$\{_F:F\text{ is a face of}\frac{1}{p}P,F\mathrm{\Sigma }^{},F\frac{1}{p}P^{}\}.$$

We call $`_F`$ the flow-out of the face $`F`$. Boundary points of the $`_F`$ are called transition points. Points of $`𝒜_P`$ are always transition points, but there may be others.

For the case where $`P`$ is the unit square, then there are two interior faces whose flow-outs are the connected components of the classically forbidden region (see Figure 1 above). In this case, the set of transition points equals $`𝒜_P`$. We shall give an example with an interior vertex, where the forbidden region is connected but decomposes into flow-outs of 3 faces (see Figure 7 in §5.2.1); in this case there are transition points not in $`𝒜_P`$.

###### Theorem 2.

Suppose that $`P`$ is a Delzant polytope in $`^m`$. Then the expected mass density of random $`^2`$ normalized polynomials with Newton polytope $`NP`$ has $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}`$ asymptotic expansions of the form:

$$𝐄_{\nu _{NP}}\left(|f(z)|_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^2\right)\{\begin{array}{c}\frac{_{j=1}^m(pN+j)}{\mathrm{\#}(NP)}=c_0+c_1N^1+c_2N^2+\mathrm{},\text{for }z𝒜_P=\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }^1(\frac{1}{p}P^{})\hfill \\ N^{s/2}e^{Nb(z)}\left[c_0^F(z)+c_1^F(z)N^1+c_2^F(z)N^2+\mathrm{}\right],\text{for }z_F^{}\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`c_0^F`$ and $`b|__F^{}`$ are positive $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}`$ functions on $`_F^{}`$, and $`s=\mathrm{codim}F`$ (for each face $`F\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$). Furthermore, the remainder estimates in the expansions are uniform on compact subsets of the open regions $`_F^{}`$ and of $`𝒜_P`$.

We shall use (8) to restate Theorem 2 in terms of asymptotic formulae for the conditional Szegö kernel on the diagonal for which we give more precise asymptotics in Proposition 3.1. In \[SZ2\] we will extend the result to the non-Delzant case as well. Heuristically, the mass concentration in $`𝒜_P`$ can be understood as follows: the mass of a monomial $`m_\alpha `$ concentrates (exponentially) on the torus $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }^1(\alpha )`$. The constraint $`\alpha NP`$ thus concentrates all the mass of polynomials with fixed Newton polytope $`NP`$ in $`𝒜_P`$, with exponentially small errors, and the mass there is uniformly distributed with small errors.

In particular,

$$𝐄_{\nu _{NP}}\left(|f(z)|_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^2\right)\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{p^m}{\mathrm{Vol}(P)},\hfill & \text{for }z𝒜_P\hfill \\ 0,\hfill & \text{for }z^m\overline{𝒜_P}\hfill \end{array},$$

as illustrated by the following graphs, plotted using Maple, for the case where $`P`$ is the unit square. (Recall Figure 1 for the depiction of $`𝒜_P`$ for this case.)

The decay function $`b`$ in Theorem 2 is analogous to the Agmon action to the allowed region. We shall show in Proposition 3.1 that $`b`$ is $`𝒞^1`$ (but not $`𝒞^2`$) on all of $`^m`$, and we derive several formulas for $`b(z)`$ ((10), (11), (116)). To describe our first formula, we associate with each point $`z^m𝒜_P`$ a unique point $`\xi 𝒜_P`$ of the form $`\xi =e^{\tau /2}z`$, where $`\tau `$ is in the (real) normal cone to the convex set $`P`$ at the point $`p\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(\xi )P`$. Here $`rz=(r_1z_1,\mathrm{},r_mz_m)`$ denotes the $`_+^m`$ action on $`^m`$. (The normal cone to a point $`qP`$, described in §1.1.1, is the element of the fan associated to the face of $`P`$ containing $`q`$.) We write $`\tau _z=\tau `$, $`q(z)=p\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(\xi )`$; these vectors are then given by the conditions:

* $`p\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(e^{\tau _z/2}z)=q(z)P`$;
* $`\tau _z`$ is in the normal cone to $`P`$ at $`q(z)`$.

The existence and uniqueness of $`q(z)`$ and $`\tau _z`$ are stated in Lemma 3.8.

Our first formula for $`b`$ is :

$$b(z)=q(z),\tau _z+p\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{1+z^2}{1+e^{\tau _z/2}z^2}\right)\text{for }z^m𝒜_P.$$
(10)
We will obtain (10) from the integral formula,

$$b(z)=_0^{\tau _z}\left[q(e^{\sigma /2}z)p\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(e^{\sigma /2}z)\right]𝑑\sigma $$
(11)
(where $`_0^{\tau _z}`$ denotes the integral over any path in $`^m`$ from $`0`$ to $`\tau _z`$), which could be interpreted as an action, thereby bringing the results closer to classical Agmon estimates.

We also show that $`\frac{1}{N}\mathrm{log}𝐄_{|NP}\left(|f(z)|_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^2\right)b(z)`$ uniformly on compact subsets of $`^m`$ (Proposition 3.2).

Our final results concern the zero set of one or more random polynomials. We shall consider not only the expected volume density of the zero set, but also the more precise description involving the expected zero current. The zero current $`Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k}`$ of $`k`$ polynomials (or more generally, $`k`$ holomorphic functions) $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_k`$ is the current of integration over the zero set

$$|Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k}|:=\{z^m:f_1(z)=\mathrm{}=f_m(z)=0\}.$$

This current is given by

$$(Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k},\phi ):=_{|Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k}|}\phi ,\text{for a test form }\phi 𝒟^{mk,mk}(^m),$$

where integration is over the set of regular points of $`|Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k}|`$ (provided that it is of codimension $`k`$ and without multiplicity, which is almost surely the case).

We denote by $`𝐄_{|P}(Z_f)=𝐄_{\gamma _p|P}(Z_f)`$ the conditional expectation of the zero current of a random polynomial $`fH^0(^m,𝒪(p),P)`$ with Newton polytope $`P`$. In fact, $`𝐄_{|P}(Z_f)`$ is actually a smooth $`(1,1)`$-form on $`^m`$ (Proposition 4.1).

Let us recall what happens when $`P=p\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ (cf. \[SZ1\]). By the uniqueness of Haar measure, the expected zero current $`𝐄(Z_f)`$ taken over all polynomials of degree $`p`$ is given by $`p\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}`$, where $`\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}=\frac{i}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}z^2`$ is the Fubini-Study Kähler form on $`^m`$. Thus the expected distribution of zeros, as well as the tangent to the zero varieties, is uniform over $`^m`$. We now consider how the expectation changes if we add the condition that $`P_f=P`$.

###### Theorem 3.

Let $`P`$ be a Delzant polytope. Then there exists a closed semipositive $`(1,1)`$-form $`\psi _P`$ on $`^m`$ with piecewise $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}`$ coefficients such that:

1. $`N^1𝐄_{|NP}(Z_f)\psi _P`$ in $`_{\mathrm{loc}}^1(^m)`$.
2. $`\psi _P=p\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}`$ on the classically allowed region $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }^1(\frac{1}{p}P^{})`$.
3. On each region $`_F^{}`$, the $`(1,1)`$-form $`\psi _P`$ is $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}`$ and has constant rank equal to $`dimF`$; in particular, if $`v\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$ is a vertex of $`\frac{1}{p}P`$, then $`\psi _P|__v^{}=0`$.

As a corollary, we obtain some statistical results on the so-called ‘tentacles’ of amoebas in dimension $`2`$ (see §4.3). Roughly speaking, the (compact) amoeba of a polynomial $`f(z_1,z_2)`$ is the image of the Riemann surface $`Z_f`$ under the moment map $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ on $`(^{})^2`$, and the tentacles are the ends of the amoeba. Certain tentacles must end at vertices of the triangle $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ while others are ‘free’ to end anywhere along the boundary of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. In Corollary 4.7, we will prove that (in the limit $`N\mathrm{}`$) almost all of the free tentacles of typical amoebas tend to end in the classically allowed portion of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$.

We call the form $`\psi _P`$ in Theorem 3 the limit expected zero current. By $`_{\mathrm{loc}}^1`$ convergence in (i), we mean $`_{\mathrm{loc}}^1`$ convergence of the coefficients. (Recall that $`𝐄_{|NP}(Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k})`$ is a $`(k,k)`$-form with smooth coefficients.) If we write $`\psi _P=\sqrt{1}\psi _{jk}(z)dz_jd\overline{z}_k`$, then $`\left(\psi _{jk}(z)\right)`$ is a semi-positive Hermitian matrix, for non-transition points $`z`$. By the rank of $`\psi _P`$ at $`z`$, we mean the rank of the matrix $`\left(\psi _{jk}(z)\right)`$. Note that if $`_F`$ and $`_F^{}`$ are adjoining regions (i.e., have a common codimension 1 interface), then $`F`$ and $`F^{}`$ are of different dimensions, so $`\psi _P`$ must be discontinuous along the interface. We remark that as an element of $`𝒟^{}{}_{}{}^{1,1}(^m)`$, the current $`\psi _P`$ is closed and positive.

The form $`\psi _P`$ not only encodes the expected (normalized) density of the zero set, but also the expected density of tangent directions to the zero set. In the course of the proof of Theorem 3, we will show that in the forbidden region, the limit tangent directions are restricted. In particular, as the polytope expands, the tangent spaces to typical zero sets through a point $`z^0_F^{}`$ approach spaces containing the tangent space (at $`z^0`$) of the ‘normal flow’ $`\{e^{\tau +i\theta }z^0:\tau ,\theta T_F^{}^m\}`$. Precise formulations of this fact are given in Theorem 4.5 and (162). Thus, while the expected distribution of zero densities is absolutely continuous, the expected distribution of zero tangents is singular.

We can also consider $`k`$ independently chosen random polynomials

$$f_jH^0(^m,𝒪(p_j),P_j),1jk$$

($`km`$), and we let $`𝐄_{|P_1,\mathrm{},P_k}(Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k})`$ denote the expected zero current with respect to the probability measure $`\gamma _{p_1|P_1}\times \mathrm{}\times \gamma _{p_k|P_k}`$ on the product space. If $`P_1=\mathrm{}=P_k=P`$, then we also write $`E_{|P,\mathrm{},P}(Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k})=E_{|P}(Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k})`$.

###### Theorem 4.

Let $`P_1,\mathrm{},P_k`$ be Delzant polytopes. Then

$$N^k𝐄_{|NP_1,\mathrm{},NP_k}(Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k})\psi _{P_1}\mathrm{}\psi _{P_k}\text{in }_{\mathrm{loc}}^1(^m),\text{as }N\mathrm{}.$$

We see from Theorem 3(iii) that the zero set $`|Z_f|`$ of a polynomial with polytope $`NP`$ almost surely creeps into the classically forbidden region $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }^1(\mathrm{\Sigma }\frac{1}{p}P)`$ in the semiclassical limit $`N\mathrm{}`$. Indeed the expected volume of the zero set, or more generally the simultaneous zero set of $`k`$ polynomials, has the following exotic distribution law:

###### Corollary 5.

Let $`P_1,\mathrm{},P_k`$ be Delzant polytopes. Then for any open set $`U^m`$,

$$\frac{1}{N^k}𝐄_{|NP_1,\mathrm{},NP_k}\mathrm{Vol}(|Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k}|U)\frac{1}{(mk)!}_U\psi _{P_1}\mathrm{}\psi _{P_k}\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^{mk}.$$

By the volume of $`|Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k}|U`$, we mean the $`(2m2k)`$-dimensional volume in $`^m`$, which is given by

$$\mathrm{Vol}(|Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k}|U)=_{|Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k}|U}\frac{1}{(mk)!}\omega ^{mk}=(Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k},\frac{1}{(mk)!}\omega ^{mk}).$$
(12)
Corollary 5 follows immediately from Theorem 4 and (12).

In addition, the following consequence of Corollary 5 and part (iii) of Theorem 3 says that there are subtler ‘very forbidden regions’ in the case where the polytope has faces of codimension $`2`$ in the interior of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, namely the regions comprising the normal flow-out of these faces:

###### Corollary 6.

The expected zero current $`N^k𝐄_{|NP}(Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k})`$ tends to $`0`$ at all points of each forbidden subregion $`_F`$ with $`dimF<k`$. In particular, $`N^1𝐄_{|NP}(Z_f)`$ tends to zero at all points of the flow-out $`_v`$ of a vertex $`v\frac{1}{p}P\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$.

We now say a few words about the proofs. The key result is Theorem 2 on the mass of polynomials with Newton polytope $`P`$, which we formulate more precisely in Proposition 3.1 using the conditional Szegö kernel. As will be shown in §4, we can derive the expected distribution of zeros from our asymptotic formula for the conditional Szegö kernel $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|PN}(z,z)`$.

As in the proof in \[At, Au\] of Kouchnirenko’s theorem, a natural approach to our results on polynomials with prescribed Newton polytope is through the Kähler toric variety $`(M_P,\omega _P)`$ associated to $`P`$. We recall that $`M_P`$ carries a natural line bundle $`L_P`$ with $`c_1(L_P)=\omega _P`$. The main connection is that there exists a natural identification

$$H^0(^m,𝒪(Np),P)H^0(M_P,L_P^N)$$
(13)
between polynomials with prescribed Newton polytope and holomorphic sections of powers $`L_P^N`$ of $`L_P`$. The torus $`𝐓^m=\{(e^{i\phi _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\phi _m})\}`$ acts on $`H^0(M_P,L_P^N)`$ with character

$$\chi _{NP}(e^{i\phi })=\underset{\alpha NP}{}e^{i\alpha ,\phi },e^{i\phi }=(e^{i\phi _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\phi _m}).$$
(14)
We then have the simple expression

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)=_{𝐓^m}\mathrm{\Pi }_{Np}^^m(tz,z)\overline{\chi _{NP}(t)}𝑑t.$$
(15)
To obtain asymptotics as $`N\mathrm{}`$, we derive an oscillatory integral formula. First we combine (15) with the formula

$$\chi _{NP}(e^{i\phi })=_{M_P}\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}(e^{i\phi }w,w)d\mathrm{Vol}_{M_P}(w),$$
(16)
where $`\mathrm{\Pi }^{M_P}`$ is the Szegö kernel of $`M_P`$, i.e. the orthogonal projection onto $`H^0(M_P,L_P^N)`$ with respect to the volume form determined by $`\omega _P`$. In order to obtain an exponential decay rate $`e^{Nb(z)}`$ of Theorem 2, we will need a very precise understanding of $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}`$. This we obtain in §2 by making a special construction of the Szegö kernel of a toric variety which is perhaps of independent interest. Our formula for $`\mathrm{\Pi }^{M_P}`$ involves the application of a certain Toeplitz Fourier multiplier to the classical Szegö kernel for the sphere, pulled back by a monomial embedding. After showing in Proposition 2.2 that this Toeplitz-Fourier multiplier is a Toeplitz operator in the sense of \[BG\], we obtain an oscillatory integral formula for $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}`$ (see (69) and (72)) in terms of an integral over $`𝐓^m\times M_P`$ with complex phase of positive type.

After that, the proof of Theorem 2 follows from the method of stationary phase for complex oscillatory integrals. For the case where $`z`$ is in the classically allowed region, we easily find that the critical manifold is given by $`\phi =0`$ and $`\mu _P(w)=p\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(z)`$, where $`\mu _P`$ is the moment map of $`M_P`$. Since the phase vanishes and has nondegenerate normal Hessian along the critical manifold, we immediately obtain an asymptotic expansion. The case where $`z`$ is in the classically forbidden region is more subtle. Since $`p\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(z)`$ lies outside of $`P`$ for this case, the phase has no critical points. To complete the analysis, we must deform the contour to pick up critical points. The main part of the proof of Theorem 2 involves finding a contour for which there is a nondegenerate critical manifold where the phase has maximum real part. In particular, we consider the complexification $`^m`$ of $`𝐓^m`$ and deform $`𝐓^m`$ to a contour of the form $`(\mathrm{log}|\zeta _1|,\mathrm{},\mathrm{log}|\zeta _m|)=\tau ^m`$. We then show that the phase takes its maximal real part on a critical manifold if and only if $`\tau `$ is the unique vector $`\tau _z`$ used in formula (10) for the decay rate $`b(z)`$; indeed the maximal real part of the phase is $`b(z)`$. Finally we prove that nondegeneracy of the normal Hessian holds if (and only if) $`z`$ is not a transition point, so that we obtain the asymptotic expansion of Theorem 2.

We would like to remark here that other formulae for the lattice sums $`\chi _P(t)`$ are well known from the work of Khovanskii-Pukhlikov \[KP\], Brion-Vergne \[BV\] and others. An alternative approach is to replace (16) with the formula from \[BV, Theorem 3.12\]:

$$\chi _P(e^{i\phi })=\text{Todd}(/h)\left(_{P(h)}e^{ix,\phi }𝑑x\right)|_{h=0},$$
(17)
where $`P(h)=\{x:u_j,x+a_j+h_j0,1jn\}`$, and Todd$`(/h)`$ is a certain infinite order differential operator known as a Todd operator. Upon dilating the polytope, one obtains

$$\chi _{NP}(e^{i\phi })=N^m\text{Todd}(N/h)\left(_{P(h)}e^{iNx,\phi }𝑑x\right)|_{h=0}.$$
(18)
The asymptotics of mass and zeros in the classically allowed region follow very easily from this expression for $`\chi _{NP}`$, and with further effort one can prove the result in the forbidden region. Both approaches seem to us quite interesting and to have their own advantages. In the sequel \[SZ2\], we will use the approach based on (18), which seems more efficient when the toric varieties have singularities.

We end the introduction with some comments on the relation of our results to other work on polynomials with a fixed Newton polytope. Such polynomials are called sparse in the literature, and methods of algebraic (including toric) geometry have recently been applied to the computational problem of locating zeros of systems of such sparse polynomials (e.g., see \[HS, MR, St, Ro, Ve\]). Our results give information on the expected location of zeros when the polynomials are given the conditional measure $`\gamma _{|NP}`$ on $`H^0(^m,𝒪(N),P)`$. To our knowledge, the asymptotic concentration of zeros of sparse systems in the classically allowed region has not been observed before. It obviously pays most to search for zeros of systems of $`m`$ polynomials in $`m`$ variables in the allowed region.

It should be noted that this asymptotic pattern reflects the choice of the conditional measures $`\gamma _{|NP}`$ on $`H^0(^m,𝒪(N),P)`$. In previous work \[SZ1\], we obtained the expected and almost everywhere distribution of zeros of several holomorphic sections of positive line bundles $`LM`$ over general Kähler manifolds. Those results specialize to our current setting where $`M=M_P,L=L_P`$ and also give results on the distribution of zeros of polynomials in $`H^0(^m,𝒪(N),P)`$. However, in that paper we defined different Gaussian probability measures $`\gamma _N^{M_P}`$ on $`H^0(M_P,L_P^N)`$, namely those induced by the $`^2`$ inner product induced by a hermitian metric on $`L_P`$ and its curvature form $`\omega _P`$. In Proposition 4.6 of \[SZ1\], we showed that the expected distribution of zeros relative to the $`\gamma _N^{M_P}`$ satisfies $`\frac{1}{N^k}𝐄_{\gamma _N^{M_P}}(Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k})=\omega _P^k+O(\frac{1}{N})`$. The measures $`\gamma _N^{M_P}`$ have more recently been studied by \[MR\], who also obtain (among other things) the formula for the expected distribution. Our present measures $`\gamma _N^{M_P}`$ are quite singular relative to $`\gamma _{|NP}`$ in the limit as $`N\mathrm{}`$. Our point of view is that the conditional measures $`\gamma _{|NP}`$ on $`H^0(^m,𝒪(N),P)`$ are the natural ones when comparing polynomials in $`H^0(^m,𝒪(N),P)`$ as $`P`$ varies. The toric variety $`M_P`$ is a technical device for studying $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}`$ but does not figure into the statements of our main results. The difference in the two measures is that in the conditional case, we fix the $`^2`$ norms of the monomials $`z^\alpha `$ in advance (as their $`^m`$ norms), while in the $`\gamma _N^{M_P}`$ case the norms vary as $`P`$ and $`M_P`$ vary. The latter would seem to create complicated biases towards some monomials and away from others as $`P`$ varies and make it difficult to understand what such a comparison is measuring.

## 1. Background on toric varieties and moment polytopes

### 1.1. Newton polytopes and toric varieties

The space $`H^0(^m,𝒪(p),P)`$ of polynomials with Newton polytope $`P`$ may be identified with the space $`H^0(M_P,L_P)`$ of holomorphic sections of a line bundle $`L_PM_P`$ over a toric variety $`M_P`$. Under our running assumption that $`P`$ is Delzant (see below), the variety $`M_P`$ is smooth. Recall that a toric variety is a complex algebraic variety $`M`$ containing the complex torus

$$^m=(\{0\})\times \mathrm{}\times (\{0\})$$

as a Zariski-dense open set such that the group action of $`^m`$ on itself extends to a $`^m`$ action on $`M`$. In the Delzant case, $`M_P`$ can be given the structure of a symplectic manifold such that the restriction of the action to the underlying real torus

$$𝐓^m=\{(\zeta _1,\mathrm{}\zeta _m)^m:|\zeta _j|=1,1jm\}$$

is a Hamiltonian action (see §1.3).

We now review two (well-known) constructions of $`M_P`$, by fans, resp. monomial embeddings, to establish notation and clarify the properties we will be needing. For further details, see \[Da, Fu, Oda\]. We point out here that there is also a geometric approach due to Delzant \[De\] through symplectic reduction; see \[De, Au, Gu1\].

#### 1.1.1. Fans

By a convex integral polytope, we mean the convex hull in $`^n`$ of a finite set in the lattice $`^m`$. A convex integral polytope $`P`$ with $`n`$ facets (i.e. codimension-one faces) can be defined by linear equations

$$\mathrm{}_i(x):=x,u_i+a_i0,(i=1,\mathrm{},n),$$

where $`u_i^m`$ is the primitive interior normal to the $`i`$-th facet. The polytope $`P`$ is called Delzant if each vertex is the intersection of exactly $`m`$ facets whose primitive normal vectors generate the lattice $`^m`$.

For each point $`xP`$, we consider the normal cone to $`P`$ at $`x`$,

$$C_x:=\{u^m:u,x=\underset{yP}{sup}u,y\},$$

which is a closed convex polyhedral cone. We decompose $`P`$ into a finite union of faces, each face being an equivalence class under the equivalence relation $`xyC_x=C_y`$. For each face $`F`$, we let $`C_F`$ denote the normal cone of the points of $`F`$. Note that by our convention, the faces are disjoint sets. We shall use the term closed face to refer to the closure of a face of $`P`$.

Each face of dimension $`r`$ ($`0rm`$) is an open polytope in an $`r`$-plane in $`^m`$; i.e., the $`0`$-dimensional faces are the vertices of $`P`$, the 1-dimensional faces are the edges with their end points removed, and so forth. The facets $`F_i`$ and their normal cones are given by:

$$\overline{F}_i=\{xP:\mathrm{}_i(x)=0\},C_{F_i}=\{tu_i:t0\}.$$

The $`m`$-dimensional face is the interior $`P^{}`$ of the polytope with normal cone $`C_P^{}=\{0\}`$.

A convex integral polytope $`P`$ determines the fan $`_P:=\{C_F:F\text{is a face of}P\}`$. A fan $``$ in $`^m`$ is a collection of closed convex rational polyhedral cones such that a closed face of a cone in $``$ is an element of $``$ and the intersection of two cones in $``$ is a closed face of each of them. An example of an integral polytope and its fan is given in the illustration below.

There is a natural way to construct a toric variety from a fan by gluing together the affine varieties arising from the cones in the fan. As we will not use this construction here, we refer the reader to \[Fu\] for the details. We note that a fan whose union is all of $`^m`$ defines a complete toric variety, which is projective if and only if $``$ is the fan of a convex polytope $`P`$. If $`P`$ is Delzant, then the toric variety of the fan $`_P`$ is a smooth projective manifold. The polytope in Figure 3 is Delzant if $`w_3=(0,1)`$, and the corresponding toric variety $`M_P`$ is a Hirzebruch surface (see \[Fu\]). We shall study this example in §5.2.1.

#### 1.1.2. Monomial embeddings

An alternative definition of $`M_P`$ is through $`𝐓^m`$-equivariant monomial embeddings. We let $`P=\{\alpha (1),\alpha (2),\mathrm{}\alpha (\mathrm{\#}P)\}`$. If we fix $`c=(c_1,\mathrm{},c_{\mathrm{\#}P})(^{})^{\mathrm{\#}P}`$, we get a map

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_P^c=[c_{\alpha (1)}\chi _{\alpha (1)},\mathrm{},c_{\alpha (\mathrm{\#}P)}\chi _{\alpha (\mathrm{\#}P)}]:^m^{\mathrm{\#}P1};$$

i.e.,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_P^c(z)=[c_{\alpha (1)}z^{\alpha (1)},\mathrm{},c_{\alpha (\mathrm{\#}P)}z^{\alpha (\mathrm{\#}P)}].$$

The closure of the image is a toric variety $`M_P^c^{\mathrm{\#}P1}`$. If $`P`$ is Delzant, then $`\mathrm{\Phi }_P^c`$ is injective and we identify $`^m`$ with its image (the ‘open orbit’) in $`M_P^c`$.

We refer to the resulting embedding

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_P^c:M_P^c^{\mathrm{\#}P1}$$
(19)
as a monomial embedding, and we define the line bundle

$$L_P:=\mathrm{\Phi }_P^c𝒪(1).$$
(20)
Furthermore, $`H^0(M_P^c,L_P^c)=\mathrm{\Phi }_P^cH^0(^{\mathrm{\#}P1},𝒪(1))`$; i.e., the sections are spanned by the monomials $`\chi _\alpha `$. It follows that

$$H^0(M_P^c,L_P)H^0(^m,𝒪(p),P).$$
(21)
We further have (see \[Fu\]):

$$H^0(M_P^c,L_P^N)\mathrm{\Phi }_P^cH^0(^{\mathrm{\#}P1},𝒪(N))=H^0(^m,𝒪(Np),NP).$$
(22)
Recall that $`H^0(^{\mathrm{\#}P1},𝒪(1))`$ has as a basis the linear coordinate functions $`\lambda _j:^{\mathrm{\#}P}`$, $`1j\mathrm{\#}P`$. The Fubini-study metric $`h_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}`$ on $`𝒪(1)`$ is given by

$$|\lambda _j|_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}([\zeta ])=\frac{|\zeta _j|}{\zeta }(\zeta ^{\mathrm{\#}P}),$$

which has curvature form $`\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}=\frac{i}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}\zeta ^2`$. We endow $`L_P^c`$ with the Hermitian metric $`h_P^c:=\mathrm{\Phi }_P^ch_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}`$ of curvature $`\omega _P^c`$ given on $`^m`$ by

$$\omega _P^c=\mathrm{\Phi }_P^c\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}=\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}\underset{\alpha P}{}|c_\alpha |^2|z^\alpha |^2.$$
(23)
Each monomial $`\chi _\alpha `$ with $`\alpha P`$ corresponds to a section of $`H^0(M_P^c,L_P^c)`$ and vice versa. To explicitly define this correspondence, we make the identifications (recalling (20)):

$$\chi _{\alpha (j)}c_{\alpha (j)}^1\mathrm{\Phi }_P^c{}_{}{}^{}\zeta _{j}^{}H^0(M_P^c,L_P^c),1j\mathrm{\#}P.$$
(24)
So far, we have not specified the constants $`c_\alpha `$. For studying our phenomena, the choice of constants defining the toric variety $`M_P`$ is not important. However, when our polytope $`P`$ is the full simplex $`p\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, we shall use the special choice $`c_\alpha =\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{p}{\alpha }\right)^{1/2}`$, where $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{p}{\alpha }\right)`$ is the multinomial coefficient defined in the next section. (We use $`c_\alpha =1`$ in §2, but except for Proposition 2.1, which is not used in our proof, any choice of $`c`$ will work.)

Remark: For a fixed polytope $`P`$, the symplectic manifolds $`(M_P^c,\omega _P^c)`$ are equivariantly symplectically equivalent, by Delzant’s theorem \[De, Gu1, Au\]. The $`M_P^c`$ are also equivariantly holomorphically equivalent. However, in general the maps defining the equivalences are not simultaneously holomorphic and symplectic (see \[Gu1\]).

### 1.2. Szegö kernels

We first describe a general Szegö kernel for a positive Hermitian line bundle $`(L,h)`$ on a compact complex manifold $`M`$. Let $`𝒮_NH^0(M,L^N)`$ denote a subspace of the (finite dimensional) vector space of holomorphic sections of the $`N^{\mathrm{th}}`$ power of $`L`$. We give $`𝒮_N`$ an inner product. An important example is the ‘induced inner product’:

$$s_1,\overline{s}_2_{𝒮_N}=_Ms_1(z),\overline{s_2(z)}_{h_N}d\mathrm{Vol}_M(z),s_1,s_2𝒮_N.$$
(25)
By the ‘Szegö projector’ $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{𝒮_N}`$, we mean the orthogonal projection onto $`𝒮_N`$. As in \[Ze, SZ1, BSZ\], we lift our Szegö kernels on the associated principal $`S^1`$ bundle $`XM`$, defined via a Hermitian metric $`h`$ as follows: Let $`L^{}M`$ denote the dual line bundle to $`L`$ with dual metric $`h^{}`$, and put $`X=\{vL^{}:v_h^{}=1\}`$. We let $`r_\theta x=e^{i\theta }x`$ ($`xX`$) denote the $`S^1`$ action on $`X`$. We then identify sections $`s_N`$ of $`L^N`$ with equivariant functions $`\widehat{s}_N`$ on $`X`$ by the rule

$$\widehat{s}_N(\lambda )=(\lambda ^N,s_N(z)),\lambda X_z,$$
(26)
where $`\lambda ^N=\lambda \mathrm{}\lambda `$; then $`\widehat{s}_N(r_\theta x)=e^{iN\theta }\widehat{s}_N(x)`$, and we regard elements of $`𝒮_N`$ as equivariant functions on $`X`$.

If $`\{S_j^N\}`$ denotes an orthonormal basis of $`𝒮_N`$, then the projector $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{𝒮_N}`$ is given by the kernel

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{𝒮_N}(x,y)=\underset{j=1}{\overset{k_N}{}}\widehat{S}_j^N(z)\overline{\widehat{S}_j^N(y)}.$$
(27)
(Note that the usual Szegö kernel for the strictly pseudoconvex boundary $`X`$ is given by $`_{N=1}^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Pi }_{𝒮_N}`$, where $`𝒮_N=H^0(M,L^N)`$.)

We now describe three different sequences of Szegö kernels on toric varieties, which play a crucial role in our main results:

#### 1.2.1. The projective Szegö kernels

As a first example, we let $`L`$ be the hyperplane section bundle $`𝒪(1)`$ on $`^m`$. Recall that the space $`H^0(^m,𝒪(p))`$ of holomorphic sections of $`L^p=𝒪(p)`$ consists of homogeneous polynomials

$$F(\zeta _0,\mathrm{},\zeta _m)=\underset{|\lambda |=p}{}C_\lambda \zeta ^\lambda (\zeta ^\lambda =\zeta _0^{\lambda _0}\mathrm{}\zeta _m^{\lambda _m})$$

in $`m+1`$ variables. We can identify $`F`$ with the (non-homogeneous) polynomial in $`m`$ variables,

$$f(z_1,\mathrm{},z_m)=F(1,z_1,\mathrm{},z_m)=\underset{|\alpha |p}{}c_\alpha z^\alpha (z^\alpha =z_1^{\alpha _1}\mathrm{}z_m^{\alpha _m}),$$

where $`c_\alpha =C_{\widehat{\alpha }^p}`$, $`\widehat{\alpha }^p=(p|\alpha |,\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _m)`$. Inversely, a polynomial $`f(z)`$ of degree $`p`$ can be identified with an element of $`H^0(^m,𝒪(p))`$.

We give $`^m`$ the Fubini-Study Kähler form given in homogeneous coordinates $`(\zeta _0,\mathrm{},\zeta _m)`$ by $`\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}=\frac{i}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}\zeta ^2`$, and we give $`𝒪(p)`$ the Fubini-Study metric:

$$|F(\zeta )|_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}=|F(\zeta )|/\zeta ^p,\text{for }FH^0(^m,𝒪(p)).$$

Identifying $`F`$ with the polynomial $`f(z)=F(1,z_1,\mathrm{},z_m)`$, the Fubini-Study norm can be written

$$|f(z)|_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}=|f(z)|/(1+z^2)^{p/2}(z^m).$$

We equip the space $`𝒮_p=H^0(^m,𝒪(p))`$ of all homogeneous polynomials of degree $`p`$ with the inner product:

$$f,\overline{g}=_^mF,\overline{G}_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}d\mathrm{Vol}_^m=\frac{1}{m!}_^m\frac{f(z),\overline{g(z)}}{(1+z^2)^p}\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^m(z),f,gH^0(^m,𝒪(p)).$$
(28)
(We use here the Riemannian volume $`d\mathrm{Vol}_^m=\frac{1}{m!}\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^m`$; note that the total volume of $`^m`$ is $`\frac{1}{m!}`$, using our conventions.)

Under the $`𝐓^m`$ action, we have the weight space decomposition

$$H^0(^m,𝒪(p))=\underset{|\alpha |p}{}\chi _\alpha ,$$

where we recall that $`\chi _\alpha (z)=z_1^{\alpha _1}\mathrm{}z_m^{\alpha _m}`$. The monomials $`\{\chi _\alpha \}`$ are orthogonal but not normalized. Any choice of norming constants $`\{r_\alpha \}`$ will give a monomial basis $`\{r_\alpha \chi _\alpha \}`$ for $`H^0(^m,𝒪(p))`$. We shall choose $`r_\alpha =\frac{1}{\chi _\alpha }`$, where

$$\chi _\alpha =\sqrt{\chi _\alpha ,\chi _\alpha }=\left[\frac{p!}{(p+m)!\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{p}{\alpha }\right)}\right]^{\frac{1}{2}},\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{p}{\alpha }\right):=\frac{p!}{(p|\alpha |)!\alpha _1!\mathrm{}\alpha _m!},$$

is the Fubini-Study $`^2`$ norm of $`\chi _\alpha `$ given by (28). (See \[SZ1, §4.2\]; the extra factor $`m!`$ in \[SZ1\] is due to the use of $`\omega ^m`$ instead of $`\frac{\omega ^m}{m!}`$ for the volume form.) This choice provides an orthonormal basis for $`H^0(^m,𝒪(p))`$ given by the monomials

$$\frac{1}{\chi _\alpha }\chi _\alpha =\sqrt{\frac{(p+m)!}{p!}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{p}{\alpha }\right)}\chi _\alpha ,|\alpha |p.$$

We can identify $`L^{}=𝒪_^m(1)`$ with $`^{m+1}`$ with the origin blown up, and the circle bundle $`XL^{}`$ is unit sphere $`S^{2m+1}^{m+1}`$. We let $`\widehat{\chi }_\alpha :S^{2m+1}`$ denote the equivariant lift of $`\chi _\alpha H^0(^m,𝒪(p))`$. We note that

$$\widehat{\chi }_\alpha (x)=x^{\widehat{\alpha }^p},$$

and hence the Szegö kernel $`\mathrm{\Pi }_p^^m`$ for the orthogonal projection is given by:

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_p^^m(x,y)=\underset{|\alpha |p}{}\frac{1}{\chi _\alpha }\widehat{\chi }_\alpha (x)\overline{\widehat{\chi }_\alpha (y)}=\frac{(p+m)!}{p!}\underset{|\alpha |p}{}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{p}{\alpha }\right)x^{\widehat{\alpha }^p}\overline{y}^{\widehat{\beta }^p}=\frac{(p+m)!}{p!}x,\overline{y}^p,$$
(29)
for $`x,yS^{2m+1}`$. (The sum $`_{p=0}^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Pi }_p^^m`$ is the usual Szegö kernel for the sphere.)

#### 1.2.2. The conditional Szegö kernels associated to a polytope $`P`$

In this case, the relevant space of polynomials is the subspace $`H^0(^m,𝒪(p),P)H^0(^m,𝒪(p))`$ of polynomials with Newton polytope $`P`$. Here, we may choose any $`p\mathrm{deg}P:=\mathrm{max}\{|\alpha |:\alpha P\}`$, but we normally choose $`p=\mathrm{deg}P`$. In the conditional Szegö kernel, we retain the Fubini-Study inner product, denoted $`,_{|P}`$, on this subspace. Hence this example is very similar to the previous one. The main difference is that under the $`𝐓^m`$ action, we have the weight space decomposition

$$H^0(^m,𝒪(p),P)=\underset{\alpha P}{}\chi _\alpha .$$

Definition: The conditional Szegö kernel $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|P}`$ is the kernel for the orthogonal projection to $`H^0(^m,𝒪(p),P)`$ with respect to the induced Fubini-Study inner product:

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{|P}(x,y)=\underset{\alpha P}{}\frac{1}{\chi _\alpha ^2}\widehat{\chi }_\alpha (x)\overline{\widehat{\chi }_\alpha (y)}.$$
(30)
When defining the term ‘random polynomial with fixed Newton polytope $`P`$’, we wish to use an $`^2`$-norm on monomials which is defined independently of $`P`$. This explains why the conditional Szegö kernel is the essential one in our problem. The conditional Szegö kernel can be written explicitly as

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{|P}(z,\theta ;w,\phi )=\frac{e^{ip(\theta \phi )}_{\alpha P}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{p}{\alpha }\right)z^\alpha \overline{w}^\alpha }{(1+z^2)^{p/2}(1+w^2)^{p/2}},$$
(31)
where $`(z,\theta )`$, resp. $`(w,\phi )`$, are local coordinates for $`x`$, resp. $`y`$, in $`X`$; i.e.,

$$x=e^{i\theta }(1+z^2)^{1/2}(1,z_1,\mathrm{},z_m).$$

#### 1.2.3. The intrinsic Szegö kernels of a toric variety

We now consider Szegö kernels which are defined by intrinsic inner products associated to the toric variety $`M_P=M_P^c`$. (To simplify notation, we now drop the $`c`$.) We regard them as a technical device for obtaining properties of the conditional Szegö kernels.

We thus put $`𝒮_N=H^0(M_P,L_P^N)`$, equipped with the inner product $`,_{M_P}`$ derived from a Hermitian inner product $`h_P`$ on $`L_P`$. As on all $`S^1`$ bundles associated to line bundles, the $`S^1`$ action on $`X_P`$ gives the decompositions

$$\begin{array}{c}^2(X_P)=_{N=1}^{\mathrm{}}_N^2(X_P),f_N^2f(e^{i\theta }x)=e^{iN\theta }f(x).\end{array}$$

Restricting to the Hardy space, we obtain

$$^2(X_P)=\underset{N=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}_N^2(X_P),_N^2=_N^2^2.$$

Recall that we have the canonical identifications $`_N^2(X_P)H^0(M_P,L_P^N)`$ given by identifying a section $`s_N`$ with the equivariant function $`\widehat{s}_N`$ on $`X_P`$. We let $`,_{X_P}`$ denote the corresponding inner product on $`_N^2(X_P)`$, and we consider the orthogonal projectors $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}(x,y)`$ relative to this inner product.

We let $`\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P`$ denote the equivariant lift of $`\chi _\alpha `$ to $`X_P`$. Since $`,_{X_P}`$ is invariant under the $`𝐓^m`$ action on $`X_P`$, the $`\{\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P\}`$ are orthogonal: indeed,

$$\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P,\overline{\widehat{\chi }_\beta ^P}_{X_P}=t^{}\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P,\overline{t^{}\widehat{\chi }_\beta ^P}_{X_P}=t^\alpha \overline{t}^\beta \widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P,\overline{\widehat{\chi }_\beta ^P}_{X_P},\text{for all }t𝐓^m,$$

and hence $`\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P,\overline{\widehat{\chi }_\beta ^P}_{X_P}=0`$ unless $`\alpha =\beta `$. We then have:

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}(x,y)=\underset{\alpha NP}{}\frac{1}{\widehat{\chi }_\alpha _{X_P}^2}\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P(x)\overline{\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P(y)},$$
(32)
where $`\widehat{\chi }_\alpha _{X_P}`$ is the $`^2`$ norm of $`\widehat{\chi }_\alpha `$ with respect to the inner product $`,_{X_P}`$.

In particular, we note that $`M_\mathrm{\Sigma }=M_{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}=^m`$, and we have the circle bundles $`X_{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}^m`$, for $`p1`$. When $`p=1`$, $`X_\mathrm{\Sigma }=S^{2m+1}`$ while for $`p>1`$, it is the lens space $`X_{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}=S^{2m+1}/\{e^{2\pi i/p}\}`$. The latter statement follows from the fact that homogeneous polynomials of degree $`p`$ are well defined on (and separate points of) the quotient by the cyclic group of $`p^{\mathrm{th}}`$ roots of unity.

#### 1.2.4. Powers of a line bundle

Our main results are asymptotics results in powers of a line bundle or (equivalently) dilates of the polytope $`P`$. We therefore take powers of the line bundles in the previous three examples obtaining the spaces $`H^0(^m,𝒪(Np),NP)`$ and $`H^0(M_P,L_P^N)H^0(M_{NP},L_{NP})`$. Hermitian metrics on the original bundles induce inner products on these spaces.

To summarize, we have the following three sequences of Szegö kernels:

* $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{Np}^^m=`$ the orthogonal projection to $`H^0(^m,𝒪(Np))`$;
* $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}=`$ the orthogonal projection to $`H^0(^m,𝒪(Np),NP)`$;
* $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}=`$ the orthogonal projection to $`H^0(M_P,L_P^N)`$.

We note that for the case $`P=p\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, the three sequences coincide. However, if $`P\stackrel{}{}p\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, then the second and third sequences are quite different.

### 1.3. Moment maps and torus actions

The group $`^m`$ acts on $`M_P^c`$ and the subgroup $`𝐓^m`$ acts in a Hamiltonian fashion. Let us recall the formula for its moment map $`\mu _P^c:M_P^c^m`$, restricted to the open orbit $`^m`$. This moment map is the composition

$$\mu _P^c:M_P^c^{\mathrm{\#}P1}\stackrel{\mu _0}{}^{\mathrm{\#}P}\stackrel{A}{}^m,$$

where

$$\mu _0([z_1,\mathrm{},z_{\mathrm{\#}P}])=\frac{1}{z^2}(|z_1|^2,\mathrm{},|z_{\mathrm{\#}P}|^2),$$

and $`A`$ is the linear projection is given by the column vectors $`(\alpha ^1,\mathrm{},\alpha ^{\mathrm{\#}P})`$. Hence we have

$$\mu _P^c=\frac{1}{_{\alpha P}|c_\alpha |^2|\chi _\alpha |^2}\underset{\alpha P}{}|c_\alpha |^2|\chi _\alpha |^2\alpha .$$
(33)
For any $`c`$, the image of $`M_P^c`$ under $`\mu _P^c`$ equals $`P`$.

For $`\alpha P`$, we again lift $`\chi _\alpha H^0(M_P^c,L_P^c)`$ to an equivariant function $`\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P`$ on the circle bundle $`X_P^cM_P^c`$, and we write

$$\widehat{m}_{\alpha (j)}^P:=c_{\alpha (j)}\widehat{\chi }_{\alpha (j)}^P=\zeta _j\iota _P$$
(34)
where $`\iota _P:X_P^cS^{2d+1}`$ is the lift of the embedding $`M_P^c^{\mathrm{\#}P1}`$. (Of course, $`\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P`$ depends on $`c`$, which we omit to simplify notation.) We also consider the monomials

$$m_\alpha :=c_\alpha \chi _\alpha $$

so that $`\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P`$ is the equivariant lift of $`m_\alpha `$ to $`X_P^c`$. In terms of local coordinates $`(z,\theta )`$ on $`\pi ^1(^m)X_P^c`$, we have

$$\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(z,\theta )=\frac{e^{i\theta }c_\alpha z^\alpha }{\left(_{\beta P}|c_\beta |^2|z^\beta |^2\right)^{1/2}}.$$
(35)
Noting that

$$\underset{\alpha P}{}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P|^2=\underset{j=1}{\overset{\mathrm{\#}P}{}}|\zeta _j\iota _P|^21,$$
(36)
we obtain the formula:

$$\mu _P^c(z)=\underset{\alpha P}{}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(z)|^2\alpha .$$
(37)
(We write $`|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(z)|=|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(z,\theta )|`$, since the absolute value is independent of $`\theta `$.)

In the case where the polytope is the full simplex $`p\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, we shall use the special choice

$$c_\alpha ^{}=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{p}{\alpha }\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}=\left(\frac{p!}{(p+m)!}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\chi _\alpha ^1,$$

so that

$$\mu _{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z):=\mu _{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}^c^{}(z)=\frac{1}{_{|\alpha |p}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{p}{\alpha }\right)|z^\alpha |^2}\underset{|\alpha |p}{}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{p}{\alpha }\right)|z^\alpha |^2\alpha =\frac{p}{1+|z_j|^2}(|z_1|^2,\mathrm{},|z_m|^2),$$
(38)
where the last equality follows by differentiating the identity $`(1+x_j)^p=_{|\alpha |p}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{p}{\alpha }\right)x^\alpha `$. Note that this choice gives us the scaling formula

$$\mu _{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}=p\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }.$$

Furthermore,

$$|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z)|=\left[\frac{p!}{(m+p)!}\right]^{\frac{1}{2}}\frac{|\widehat{\chi }_\alpha (z)|}{\chi _\alpha },$$
(39)
where, by abuse of notation, we regard $`|\widehat{\chi }_\alpha |`$ and $`|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}|`$ as functions on $`^m`$, since they are invariant under the circle action. Recalling that $`M_{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}S^{2m+1}/_p`$, we have the more precise formula

$$\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(x^{})=\left[\frac{p!}{(m+p)!}\right]^{\frac{1}{2}}\frac{\widehat{\chi }_\alpha (x)}{\chi _\alpha },$$

where $`x^{}M_{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}`$ is the equivalence class of $`xS^{2m+1}`$, and therefore by (29),

$$\underset{|\alpha |p}{}\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(x^{})\overline{\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(y^{})}=x,\overline{y}^p.$$
(40)
We now recall a fact on zeros of eigensections which will be useful later on.

###### Proposition 1.1.

Let $`\alpha P`$. Then for all $`zM_P`$, we have

$$\chi _\alpha (z)=0\mu _P(z)\{\overline{F}:F\text{is a facet},\alpha \overline{F}\},$$

###### Proof.

We first verify the implication ($``$): Let $`z\mu _P^1(F)`$, $`\alpha \overline{F}`$. The moment map (37) exhibits $`\mu _P(z)`$ as a convex combination of $`\alpha P`$. Points on $`F`$ can however only be convex combinations of lattice points $`\alpha \overline{F}`$. Hence the coefficients of $`\alpha \overline{F}`$ must vanish. Therefore $`\chi _\alpha (z)=0`$.

Since the image under the moment map of the support of $`\text{Div}\chi _\alpha `$ is a union of facets of $`P`$, to prove the reverse implication, it suffices to show that for if $`F`$ is a facet of $`P`$, then $`\chi _\alpha 0`$ on $`\mu _P^1(F)`$ whenever $`\alpha \overline{F}`$. But since $`\mu _P`$ is surjective, we see from (37) that this is true whenever $`\alpha `$ is a vertex of $`\overline{F}`$. (Otherwise, points of $`F`$ near $`\alpha `$ would not be in the image.) Now suppose that $`\alpha \overline{F}`$ is arbitrary. We can write $`n_0\alpha =_1^mn_jv_j`$, where the $`v_j`$ are the vertices of $`\overline{F}`$, $`n_j`$ and $`n_j=n_01`$. Then $`\chi _\alpha ^{n_0}=\chi _{v_1}^{n_1}\mathrm{}\chi _{v_m}^{n_m}0`$ on $`\mu _P^1(F)`$. ∎

Remark: Recall that the polytope $`P`$ is defined by the equations $`\mathrm{}_j0`$, where $`\mathrm{}_j(x)=u_j,x+a_j`$, with $`u_j`$ the primitive inward normal to the closed facet $`\overline{F}_j=\{\mathrm{}_j=0\}`$. A more precise statement of Proposition 1.1 is

$$\text{Div}\chi _\alpha =\underset{j}{}\mathrm{}_j(\alpha )D_j,\text{where }D_j=\mu _P^1(\overline{F_j}),$$

for all $`\alpha ^m`$. In particular, letting $`\alpha =0`$, we see that $`L_P`$ is the line bundle of the divisor $`D_P=a_jD_j`$.

We now review how the action of the real torus $`𝐓^m`$ lifts from $`M_P^c`$ to $`X_P^c`$ and combines with the $`S^1`$ action to define a $`𝐓^{m+1}`$ action on $`X_P^c`$. We use the monomial embedding approach of §1.1.2: Recall that under the monomial embedding

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_P^c:^mM_P^c^{\mathrm{\#}P1},z[c_{\alpha (1)}z^{\alpha (1)},\mathrm{},c_{\alpha (\mathrm{\#}P)}z^{\alpha (\mathrm{\#}P)}],$$

the $`𝐓^m`$ action on $`M_P^c^{\mathrm{\#}P1}`$ is given by

$$e^{i\phi }[\zeta _1,\mathrm{},\zeta _{\mathrm{\#}P}]=[e^{i\alpha (1),\phi }\zeta _1,\mathrm{},e^{i\alpha (\mathrm{\#}P),\phi }\zeta _{\mathrm{\#}P}].$$
(41)
The action (41) lifts to an action on $`L_P^1`$:

$$e^{i\phi }\zeta =(e^{i\alpha (1),\phi }\zeta _1,\mathrm{},e^{i\alpha (\mathrm{\#}P),\phi }\zeta _{\mathrm{\#}P}).$$
(42)
Since the circle bundle $`X_P^cS^{2\mathrm{\#}P1}`$ is invariant under this action, (42) also gives a lift of the action (41) to $`X_P^c`$.

We also have the standard circle action on $`X_P^c`$:

$$e^{i\theta }\zeta =e^{i\theta }\zeta ,$$
(43)
which commutes with the $`𝐓^m`$-action (42). Combining (42) and (43), we then obtain a $`𝐓^{m+1}`$-action on $`X_P^c`$:

$$(e^{i\theta },e^{i\phi _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\phi _m})\zeta =e^{i\theta }(e^{i\phi }\zeta ).$$
(44)
The torus action on $`X_P^c`$ can be quantized to define an action of the torus as unitary operators on $`^2(X_P^c)=_{N=0}^{\mathrm{}}_N^2(X_P^c)`$. Specifically, we let $`\mathrm{\Xi }_1,\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Xi }_m`$ denote the differential operators on $`X_P^c`$ generated by the $`𝐓^m`$ action:

$$(\mathrm{\Xi }_j\widehat{S})(\zeta )=\frac{1}{i}\frac{}{\phi _j}\widehat{S}(e^{i\phi }\zeta )|_{\phi =0},\widehat{S}𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(X_P^c).$$
(45)
###### Proposition 1.2.

For $`1jm`$,

* $`\mathrm{\Xi }_j:_N^2(X_P^c)_N^2(X_P^c)`$;
* The lifted monomials $`\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P_N^2(X_P^c)`$ satisfy $`\mathrm{\Xi }_j\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P=\alpha _j\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P`$ ($`\alpha NP`$).

###### Proof.

Item (i) follows from the fact that the $`𝐓^m`$ action is holomorphic and commutes with $`\frac{}{\theta }`$. For the case $`N=1`$, (ii) follows immediately from (34) and (42). For $`\alpha NP`$, $`N>1`$, we write $`\alpha =\beta ^1\mathrm{}\beta ^N`$ with $`\beta ^kP`$, and the conclusion then follows from the first case and the product rule.∎

Furthermore, we recall that

$$\frac{}{\theta }:_N^2(X_P^c)_N^2(X_P^c),\frac{1}{i}\frac{}{\theta }\widehat{s}_N=N\widehat{s}_N\text{for }\widehat{s}_N_N^2(X_P^c).$$
(46)
Remark: The vector fields $`\mathrm{\Xi }_j`$ can be constructed geometrically as follows (see \[Gu1\]): Let $`\xi _j=\frac{}{\phi _j}`$ ($`1jm`$) denote the Hamiltonian vector fields generating the $`𝐓^m`$ action on $`M_P^c`$. There is a natural contact 1-form $`\alpha `$ on $`X_P^c`$ determined by the Hermitian connection; a key property of $`\alpha `$ is that $`d\alpha =\pi ^{}\omega `$ (see \[Ze, SZ1\]). We use $`\alpha `$ to define the horizontal lifts of the Hamilton vector fields $`\xi _j`$:

$$\pi _{}\xi _j^h=\xi _j,\alpha (\xi _j^h)=0.$$

The vector fields $`\mathrm{\Xi }_j`$ are then given by:

$$\mathrm{\Xi }_j=\xi _j^h+2\pi i\mu _P^c\pi ,\xi _j^{}\frac{}{\theta }=\xi _j^h+2\pi i(\mu _P^c\pi )_j\frac{}{\theta }.$$

(Here, $`\xi _j^{}^m`$ is the element of the Lie algebra of $`𝐓^m`$ which acts as $`\xi _j`$ on $`M_P`$.)

## 2.  Szegö kernels on toric varieties

As mentioned in the introduction, our analysis of the conditional Szegö kernel is by means of the integral formula (16) relating it to the intrinsic Szegö kernels $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}`$ of $`M_P.`$ The purpose of this section is to give a special construction of the Szegö kernels of a toric variety which is sufficiently precise for our applications.

Our first step, Proposition 2.1, is to give an exact formula for $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}`$ as the composition of a certain Toeplitz-Fourier multiplier denoted $`(𝒫𝒬)^1`$ and the pull back of the Fubini-Study kernel under a monomial embedding. The pulled-back Fubini-Study kernel is very simple to analyze and is the raison d’etre of our method. The Toeplitz-Fourier multiplier requires more work. In Proposition 2.2, we prove that this operator is a $`𝐓^{m+1}`$-invariant Toeplitz operator of order $`m`$ on $`X_P`$ (modulo a smoothing operator). We apply Proposition 2.2 to obtain the goal of this section, Lemma 2.3, which allows us to use the method of stationary phase to obtain the mass asymptotics of Theorem 2.

### 2.1. The exact formula

Our exact formula for the Szegö kernel of a toric variety involves two ingredients: the first is the kernel

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_1^{M_P}(x,y):=\frac{1}{\delta +1}\mathrm{\Pi }_1^^\delta (\iota _P(x),\iota _P(y))=\iota _P(x),\overline{\iota _P(y)}=\underset{\alpha P}{}\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(x)\overline{\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(y)},$$
(47)
where $`\delta =\mathrm{\#}P1`$ and $`\iota _P:X_PS^{2\delta +1}`$ is the lift of the monomial embedding $`M_P^\delta `$, as described in §1.3.We shall choose the constants $`c_\alpha =1`$ for all $`\alpha P`$, so that $`\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P=\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P`$. (Except for Proposition 2.1, all our results hold without change for arbitrary $`\{c_\alpha \}`$.) For simplicity of notation, we shall write

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N(x,y)=\left[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_1^{M_P}(x,y)\right]^N.$$

We note that $`\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N(x,x)=1.`$

Second, we introduce two sequences of functions $`𝒫_N`$ and $`𝒬_N`$ on $`NP`$ for each $`N=1,2,\mathrm{}:`$

1. The ‘partition function’ $`𝒫_N(\alpha )=\mathrm{\#}\{(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _N):\beta _jP,\beta _1+\mathrm{}+\beta _N=\alpha \},`$ where $`\alpha NP.`$ It counts the number of ways of writing a lattice point in $`NP`$ as a sum of $`N`$ lattice points each in $`P`$.
2. The norming function: $`𝒬_N(\alpha ):=_{X_P}|\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P(x)|^2d\mathrm{Vol}_{X_P}(x).`$

In our application, we only consider the product

$$𝒫_N𝒬_N(\alpha )=_{M_P}_𝐓\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N(z,e^{i\phi }z)e^{i\alpha ,\phi }𝑑\phi 𝑑V(z).$$

We observe that each sequence of functions can be re-defined as a single function on the homogenized lattice cone $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_P=_{N=1}^{\mathrm{}}\widehat{NP}`$. By definition, $`\widehat{NP}^{m+1}`$ is obtained by homogenizing $`\alpha NP`$ to $`\widehat{\alpha }^{Np}:=(Np|\alpha |,\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _m)`$. We then define $`𝒫,𝒬:\mathrm{\Lambda }_P_+`$ by:

$$𝒫(\widehat{\alpha }^N):=𝒫_N(\alpha ),𝒬(\widehat{\alpha }^N)=𝒬_N(\alpha ).$$

Since the monomials $`𝒬_N(\alpha )^{\frac{1}{2}}\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P`$ form a complete orthonormal basis of $`^2(X_P)`$, they define the eigenvalues of a special kind of operator on $`^2(X_P)`$.

Definition: An operator $`\mathrm{\Pi }F\mathrm{\Pi }`$ on $`^2(X_P)`$ will be called a Toeplitz-Fourier multiplier if it satisfies the following (equivalent) conditions:

* $`F`$ may be expressed as a function $`F(D)`$ of the commuting system of operators $`D=(\mathrm{\Xi }_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Xi }_m,\frac{}{\theta })`$.
* Its eigenfunctions are the monomials $`\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P`$.

Thus, we put:

$$𝒫(D)\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P=𝒫(\widehat{\alpha }^N)\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P,𝒬(D)\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P=𝒬(\widehat{\alpha }^N)\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P,\alpha NP.$$
(48)
The following explicit factorization formula exhibits the Szegö kernels $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}`$ as the composition of two simple operators. It is the basis for our analysis of the analytic continuation $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}`$.

###### Proposition 2.1.

We have:

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}=(𝒫𝒬)^1\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N.$$

###### Proof.

First, we have by definition,

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}(x,y)=\underset{\alpha NP}{}\frac{1}{𝒬_N(\alpha )}\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P(x)\overline{\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P(y)}.$$

On the other hand, by definition of the partition function, we also have

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N(x,y)=\underset{\alpha NP}{}𝒫_N(\alpha )\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P(x)\overline{\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P(y)}.$$

We note that the $`N^{\mathrm{th}}`$ power of $`\mathrm{\Pi }_1^{M_P}`$ gives the sum over the correct set of exponents but does not have the correct normalizing coefficients. We need to divide each term by $`𝒫_N(\alpha )𝒬_N(\alpha )`$ to adjust the coefficients. That is just what the Proposition claims. ∎

Since

$$(𝒫𝒬)^1\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N=\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}(𝒫𝒬)^1\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N,$$

we see that $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}`$ is the composition of the Toeplitz-Fourier multiplier $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}(𝒫𝒬)^1\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}`$ with the simple kernel $`\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N`$.

### 2.2. Toeplitz operator approach to $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}`$

Our next step is to prove that the Toeplitz-Fourier multiplier $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}(𝒫𝒬)^1\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}`$ is a more familiar kind of operator, namely a Toeplitz operator.

We begin with some background on symbols. We consider symbols $`\sigma `$ of the form $`\sigma (z,D_\theta )`$, where $`\sigma (z,N)`$ is a semiclassical symbol. Here, we say $`\sigma S^k(M\times )`$ is a semiclassical symbol of order $`k`$ if

$$\sigma _N(z)=\sigma (z,N)=N^k\underset{j=0}{\overset{l1}{}}a_j(z)N^j+r_N^l(z),\text{with}D_z^nr_N^l(z)C_{nl}N^{kl}(l1),$$

where $`a_j𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$. It is a smoothing symbol if $`D_z^n\sigma _N(z)C_nN^l`$ for all $`n,l`$. The Toeplitz operator associated to a symbol $`\sigma `$ is the operator $`\mathrm{\Pi }\sigma (z,D_\theta )\mathrm{\Pi }`$, where $`D_\theta `$ denotes the symbol of $`\frac{}{\theta }`$ (the $`S^1`$ generator). Its symbol is the polyhomogeneous function on the symplectic cone $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=\{(x,r\alpha _x):r>0\}T^{}X`$ given by

$$\sigma (z,p_\theta )\underset{j=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}a_j(z)D_\theta ^{kj}.$$

Since $`\sigma `$ commutes with the $`S^1`$ action, we have $`\mathrm{\Pi }\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }=_N\mathrm{\Pi }_N\sigma _N\mathrm{\Pi }_N`$.

To simplify notation, we shall write $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N=\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}`$. The goal of this section is to prove that $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N(𝒫𝒬)^1\mathrm{\Pi }_N`$ is a semi-classical Toeplitz operator in the following sense:

###### Proposition 2.2.

There exists a symbol $`\sigma _N`$ of order $`m`$ with principal symbol equal to $`1`$ and a smoothing operator $`R_N`$ so that

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_N(𝒫𝒬)^1\mathrm{\Pi }_N=\mathrm{\Pi }_N\sigma _N\mathrm{\Pi }_N+R_N.$$

As a corollary of Proposition 2.2, we obtain the following lemma, which is the motivation for our approach to $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}`$ through $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}`$. It provides an essential ingredient in our derivation of the mass asymptotics.

###### Lemma 2.3.

There exists a symbol $`\sigma _NS^m(M,)`$ with principal symbol equal to $`1`$ and a smoothing operator $`R_N`$ such that for $`t𝐓^m`$, we have

$`{\displaystyle _{X_P}}\mathrm{\Pi }_N(x,tx)d\mathrm{Vol}_{X_P}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{X_P}}\sigma _N(x)\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N(x,tx)d\mathrm{Vol}_{X_P}(x)`$
$`+{\displaystyle _{X_P}}{\displaystyle _{X_P}}R_N(y,x)\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N(x,ty)d\mathrm{Vol}_{X_P}(x)d\mathrm{Vol}_{X_P}(y).`$
Proof (assuming Proposition 2.2): Applying $`\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N=\mathrm{\Pi }_N(𝒫𝒬)\mathrm{\Pi }_N`$ to the identity of Proposition 2.2, we obtain

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_N=(\mathrm{\Pi }_N\sigma _N\mathrm{\Pi }_N+R_N)\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N.$$

Now let $`T_t`$ denote the translation operator $`f(x)f(t^1x)`$ on $`^2(X_P)`$. Since $`[T_t,\mathrm{\Pi }_N]=0`$, we then have

$$T_t\mathrm{\Pi }_N=T_t\mathrm{\Pi }_N(\sigma _N+R_N)\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N=\mathrm{\Pi }_NT_t(\sigma _N+R_N)\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N.$$

Therefore,

$`{\displaystyle _{X_P}}\mathrm{\Pi }_N(t^1x,x)d\mathrm{Vol}_{X_P}(x)=\text{Trace }T_t\mathrm{\Pi }_N=\text{Trace }\mathrm{\Pi }_NT_t(\sigma _N+R_N)\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N`$
$`=\text{Trace }T_t\sigma _N\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N+\text{Trace }T_tR_N\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N`$
$`={\displaystyle _{X_P}}\sigma _N(t^1x)\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N(t^1x,x)d\mathrm{Vol}_{X_P}(x)`$
$`+{\displaystyle _{X_P}}{\displaystyle _{X_P}}R_N(t^1x,y)\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N(y,x)d\mathrm{Vol}_{X_P}(x)d\mathrm{Vol}_{X_P}(y).`$
The conclusion follows by the change of variables $`xtx`$.∎

#### 2.2.1. Boutet de Monvel-Sjöstrand parametrix

In proving Proposition 2.2 and other statements about Toeplitz operators, we need some a priori facts about $`\mathrm{\Pi }^{M_P}`$ which follow from the Boutet de Monvel-Sjöstrand parametrix construction. In this section, we provide the relevant background.

The Boutet de Monvel-Sjöstrand parametrix is a complex oscillatory integral formula for the Szegö kernels of a strictly convex CR manifold modulo smoothing kernels \[BS\]. It can be used to obtain asymptotics of projection kernels onto holomorphic sections of powers of a positive line bundle over a Kähler manifold (see \[Ze, BSZ\]). We recall here the basic properties of the Szegö kernel for $`(M_P,L_P)`$. Unfortunately, the remainder term is not sufficiently precise for the tunneling theory we have in mind. In the next section, we give a special construction of the Szegö kernels of toric varieties which is sufficiently precise. The construction uses the general properties established in this section.

Now consider any polarized algebraic manifold $`(M,L)`$, and assume $`L`$ is very ample. Choose a basis $`\{S_0,\mathrm{},S_d\}`$ with $`d=dimH^0(M,L)`$ and let $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ denote the associated embedding into projective space. That is, we write $`S_j=f_je_L`$ relative to a local frame $`e_L`$ and put $`\mathrm{\Phi }(z)=[f_0(z),\mathrm{},f_d(z)]`$. Recalling that $`L=\mathrm{\Phi }^{}𝒪(1)`$, we can equip $`L`$ with the metric $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{}h_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}`$. We also give $`M`$ the metric $`\omega =\mathrm{\Phi }^{}\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}`$, and we let $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N`$ denote the orthogonal projection onto $`H^0(M,L^N)`$ with respect to these metrics. Also, let $`\mathrm{\Pi }=_{N=1}^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Pi }_N`$ denote the Szegö kernel.

It was proved by Boutet de Monvel and Sjöstrand \[BS\] (see also the Appendix to \[BG\]) that $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ is a complex Fourier integral operator of positive type,

$$\mathrm{\Pi }I_c^0(X\times X,𝒞)$$
(49)
associated to a positive canonical relation $`𝒞`$. For definitions and notation concerning complex FIO’s we refer to \[MS, BS, BG\]. The real points of $`𝒞`$ form the diagonal $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{\Sigma }\times \mathrm{\Sigma }}`$ in the square of the symplectic cone

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }=\{r\alpha _x:r>0,xX\},$$
(50)
where $`\alpha `$ is the connection form. We refer to \[BG\] (see Lemma 4.5 of the Appendix). Moreover, in \[BS\] a parametrix is constructed for $`\mathrm{\Pi },`$ from which it follows (see \[Ze, BSZ\]) that

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_N(x,y)N_0^{\mathrm{}}_0^{2\pi }e^{N(i\theta +t\psi (r_\theta x,y))}s(r_\theta x,y,Nt)𝑑\theta 𝑑t,$$
(51)
where $`s(x,y,t)_{k=0}^{\mathrm{}}t^{mk}s_k(x,y)S^m(X\times X\times _+)`$ is a classical symbol of order $`m`$. Here, ‘$``$’ means modulo a rapidly decaying term (i.e., a term whose $`𝒞^j`$ norms are $`O(N^k)`$ for all $`j,k`$).

To describe the phase in (51), we let $`e_L`$ be a nonvanishing holomorphic section of $`L`$ over an open $`UM`$, and consider the analytic extension’ $`a(z,w)`$ of $`a(z,z):=a(z)=e_L(z)_h^2`$ in $`U\times U`$ such that $`a(w,z)=\overline{a(z,w)}`$ on $`U\times U`$. Using coordinates $`(z,\theta )`$ for the point $`x=e^{i\theta }a(z)^{\frac{1}{2}}e_L(z)X`$, we have

$$\psi (x_1,x_2)=1+e^{i(\theta _1\theta _2)}\frac{a(z_1,z_2)}{\sqrt{a(z_1)}\sqrt{a(z_2)}}.$$
(52)
Again assuming that the metric $`\omega `$ on $`M`$ is the pull-back of $`\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}`$, we claim that the phase equals:

$$\psi _(x,y)=1+\iota (x),\overline{\iota (y)},$$
(53)
where $`\iota :X^{2d+1}`$ is the lift of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ given by

$$\iota (z,\theta )=e^{i\theta }\left(|f_j(z)|^2\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}(f_0(z),\mathrm{},f_d(z)).$$

To see this, let us recall the Szegö kernel of the hyperplane section bundle $`𝒪(1)^d`$ over projective space with the Fubini-Study metric. We take $`U=\{z_00\}^d`$, and we consider the local frame $`e=z_0`$. Using the local coordinates $`[1,z_1,\mathrm{},z_m](z_1,\mathrm{},z_m)^d`$, we then have $`a^^d(z)=e(z)^2=1+_{j=1}^d|z_j|^2`$. Hence $`a^^d`$ has the real-analytic extension

$$a^^d(z,w)=1+\underset{j=1}{\overset{d}{}}z_j\overline{w}_j,$$
(54)
and (53) follows. In the case of a toric variety $`M_P^c`$, (53) becomes

$$\psi (x,y)=1+\underset{\alpha P}{}\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(x)\overline{\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(y)}.$$

#### 2.2.2. Complex Fourier integral operators

We now use the theory of complex Fourier integral operators \[MS\] (or alternatively, Toeplitz operators \[BG\]) to prove that the Toeplitz Fourier multiplier $`\mathrm{\Pi }(𝒫𝒬)^1\mathrm{\Pi }`$ is a Toeplitz operator of order $`m`$ modulo a smoothing operator (Proposition 2.2). Recall that a Toeplitz operator in the sense of \[BG\] is an operator of the form $`\mathrm{\Pi }A\mathrm{\Pi }`$ where $`A\mathrm{\Psi }^m(X)`$ for some $`m`$. Here and in the following, $`\mathrm{\Psi }^m(X)`$ denotes the space of pseudodifferential operators of order $`m`$ on $`X`$. A smoothing Toeplitz operator is a smoothing operator of the form $`\mathrm{\Pi }R\mathrm{\Pi }`$.

It follows then that $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N=T_N\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N`$ where $`T_N`$ is a Toeplitz operator. Since it is of some independent interest and requires no extra work, we prove this as a corollary of a general result valid for any polarized algebraic manifold $`(M,L)`$. We assume $`L`$ is very ample, and let $`\iota :M^d`$ denote the holomorphic embedding induced by $`H^0(M,L)`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota (x,y)=\mathrm{\Pi }(\iota (x),\iota (y))`$ denote the pullback to $`X`$ of the Fubini-Study Szegö kernel of $`^d.`$ Also, let $`\mathrm{\Pi }^M`$ or more simply $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ denote the Szegö kernel for $`M`$ with respect to $`\iota ^{}\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}.`$

About complex Fourier integral operators $`A`$ (or Toeplitz operators), all we need to know are the following basic facts:

* $`AI_c^m(X\times X,𝒞)`$ possesses a principal symbol $`\sigma _A`$ which is a half-density (times a Maslov factor) along the underlying canonical relation $`𝒞`$. (In the Toeplitz case, it is a symplectic spinor.)
* We can compose operators in $`I_c^m(X\times X,𝒞)`$ on the left and right by elements $`B\mathrm{\Psi }^k(X)`$ and $`\sigma _{AB}=\sigma _A\sigma _B=\sigma _{BA}`$. (The same is true of Toeplitz operators.)
* If $`AI_c^m(X\times X,𝒞)`$ and if $`\sigma _A=0`$, then $`AI_c^{m1}(X\times X,𝒞)`$ (and also for Toeplitz operators).
* $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota `$ are elliptic in that their symbols are nowhere vanishing. See \[BS\] for the symbol in the complex FIO sense and \[BG, §11\] for the symbol in the Toeplitz sense.

###### Lemma 2.4.

Let $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ denote the Szegö projector associated to the metric $`\iota ^{}\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}`$. Then, there exist $`A\mathrm{\Psi }^m(X)`$ with $`[A,D_\theta ]=0`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Pi }\mathrm{\Pi }A\mathrm{\Pi }\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota =\mathrm{\Pi }A\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota `$ modulo smoothing operators $`\mathrm{\Pi }R\mathrm{\Pi }.`$

###### Proof.

As mentioned above (49), $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ is a complex Fourier integral operator associated to a positive canonical relation $`C`$, whose real points form the isotropic relation $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{\Sigma }\times \mathrm{\Sigma }}T^{}X\times T^{}X`$ (the diagonal). We observe that also $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota I^{}(X\times X,𝒞)`$. This follows immediately from the fact, show by (53), that $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota `$ are complex Fourier integral distributions with precisely the same phase functions. Since the underlying canonical relation is parametrized by the phase, they both belong to the same class of Fourier integral distributions.

Now, the principal symbol $`\sigma _\mathrm{\Pi }`$ of $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$, viewed as a complex Fourier integral distribution, is a nowhere vanishing 1/2-density on $`𝒞`$ which is computed in \[BS, Prop. 4.8\]. Alternatively, viewed as a Toeplitz operator in the sense of \[BG\] (see Chapter 11), its symbol is an idempotent symplectic spinor . Similarly, the principal symbol $`\sigma _{\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota }`$ of $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota `$ is the pull back under $`\iota `$ of the nowhere vanishing symbol of $`\mathrm{\Pi }^^d`$.

By our normalization, $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota `$ has order $`m`$ (since its amplitude is a constant independent of $`N`$). We therefore begin by seeking $`A_0\mathrm{\Psi }^m(X)`$ such that $`[A_0,D_\theta ]=0`$ and such that $`\mathrm{\Pi }\mathrm{\Pi }A_0\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota `$ is of order $`1`$. We first find $`a_0C^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$ such that $`\sigma _\mathrm{\Pi }=a_0\sigma _{\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota }`$ and choose $`A_0`$ so that $`[A_0,D_\theta ]=0`$ and so that $`\sigma _{A_0}=a_0.`$ Existence of such an $`A_0`$ follows by ellipticity of $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota `$ and by averaging; see also \[BG, Prop. 2.13\]. Thus, the principal symbol of order $`0`$ of $`\mathrm{\Pi }\mathrm{\Pi }A_0\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota `$ equals zero, i.e. $`\mathrm{\Pi }\mathrm{\Pi }A_0\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota I^1(X\times X,𝒞).`$ We denote its principal symbol by $`\sigma _1.`$ We then seek $`A_1\mathrm{\Psi }^m(X)`$ so that $`[A_1,D_\theta ]=0,`$ and so that $`\mathrm{\Pi }\mathrm{\Pi }A_0\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota \mathrm{\Pi }A_1D_\theta ^1\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota I^2(X\times X,𝒞).`$ Here, we note that $`\mathrm{\Pi }D_\theta \mathrm{\Pi }`$ is an elliptic Toeplitz operator; since $`\mathrm{\Pi }\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota =\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota `$, the expressions $`D_\theta ^1\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota `$ are well-defined. It suffices to choose $`a_1=\sigma _{A_1}C^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$ so that $`a_1\sigma _{\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota }=\sigma _1.`$ We continue in this way to obtain $`a_jC^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$ always using that $`\sigma _{\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota }`$ is nowhere vanishing. By a Borel summation argument, we can find $`A\mathrm{\Psi }^m(X)`$ with the above commutation properties so that $`\mathrm{\Pi }A\mathrm{\Pi }_{j=0}^M\mathrm{\Pi }A_jD_\theta ^j\mathrm{\Pi }`$ is a Toeplitz operator of order $`M1.`$ Then

$$\mathrm{\Pi }\mathrm{\Pi }A\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota I^{\mathrm{}}(X\times X,𝒞).$$

We remark that an alternative to the observation that the two complex FIO’s have the same phase function is that, by the choice of the Kähler form $`\iota ^{}\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}`$, $`\iota `$ is a symplectic (as well as holomorphic) embedding $`M^d`$. Hence, the pull back operator $`\iota ^{}`$ carries the class of FIO’s in the class of $`\mathrm{\Pi }^^d`$ to those in the class of $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$.

#### 2.2.3. Semi-classical Toeplitz operators

To complete the proof of Proposition 2.2, we need to relate the complex FIO $`\mathrm{\Pi }A\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota `$ to semi-classical Toeplitz operators. The relevant analysis already exists in \[Gu2\].

We will need the following asymptotic formula for symbols. In the language of Berezin-Toeplitz operators, we are essentially computing the Berezin transform between covariant and contravariant symbols of a Toeplitz operator (see \[RT\] for background).

###### Lemma 2.5.

Let $`\sigma _NN^k_{j=0}^{\mathrm{}}s_jN^j`$ be a semiclassical symbol of order $`k`$. Then there exists a complete asymptotic expansion

$$N^m(\mathrm{\Pi }_N\sigma _N\mathrm{\Pi }_N)(z,z)=\underset{j=0}{\overset{l1}{}}b_j(z)N^{kj}+r_N^l(z)(l1),$$

where $`b_0=s_0,b_1=\mathrm{\Delta }s_0+s_1,`$, and in general where $`b_j`$ is a sum of differential operators applied to $`s_0,s_1,\mathrm{},s_j.`$ Also, $`D_z^nr_N^l(z)C_{nl}N^{kl}`$.

###### Proof.

Apply the method of stationary phase using (51)–(52) exactly as in the proof of \[Ze, Theorem 1\] (which is the case $`\sigma =1`$).∎

We then have:

###### Lemma 2.6.

Let $`(M,L)`$ be a polarized algebraic manifold as above. Then there exists a symbol $`a_NS^m(M,)`$ with principal symbol equal to $`1`$ so that

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N=\mathrm{\Pi }_Na_N\mathrm{\Pi }_N+R_N\text{where }R_N_{\mathrm{HS}}=O(N^k)k.$$

Here, $`R_N_{\mathrm{HS}}^2=\text{Trace}R_N^{}R_N.`$

###### Proof.

By Lemma 2.4, there exists $`A\mathrm{\Psi }^m(X)`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota =\mathrm{\Pi }A\mathrm{\Pi }.`$ Since $`[A,D_\theta ]=0`$, it follows by \[Gu2\] that there exists a symbol $`a_N`$ with $`\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N\mathrm{\Pi }_Na_N\mathrm{\Pi }_N_{\mathrm{HS}}=O(N^{\mathrm{}})`$. We may determine $`a_N`$ by using Lemma 2.5. Indeed, we have

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N(z,z)=1\mathrm{\Pi }_Na_N\mathrm{\Pi }_N(z,z)$$
(55)
modulo functions $`r_N`$ which tend to zero rapidly in $`𝒞^k(M)`$. It follows that $`a_0=1`$ (and then the rest of the coefficients may be determined recursively, e.g. $`a_1=0,a_2=D_2a_0`$, and so on). ∎

#### 2.2.4. Completion of the proof of Proposition 2.2

In the toric case, $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N(𝒫𝒬)^1\mathrm{\Pi }_N`$ is the inverse of$`\mathrm{\Pi }_N(𝒫𝒬)\mathrm{\Pi }_N=\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N`$ on $`^2(X_P)`$. From Lemma 2.6 we may write $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N(𝒫𝒬)\mathrm{\Pi }_N\mathrm{\Pi }_Na_N\mathrm{\Pi }_N`$ modulo smoothing operators.

We note that we may invert $`\mathrm{\Pi }a\mathrm{\Pi }`$ in the class of Toeplitz operators; i.e., there exists a symbol $`\sigma _N`$ such that

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_N\sigma _N\mathrm{\Pi }_N\mathrm{\Pi }_Na_N\mathrm{\Pi }_N\mathrm{\Pi }_N$$
(56)
modulo smoothing operators. Such an inverse symbol exists since $`a_0=1`$. The algebraic formalism in which the inverse is calculated is that of $``$-products of semiclassical symbols. We recall that composition of Toeplitz operators defines a $``$-product on semiclassical symbols by the formula

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_Na_N\mathrm{\Pi }_N\mathrm{\Pi }_Nb_N\mathrm{\Pi }_N\mathrm{\Pi }_Na_Nb_N\mathrm{\Pi }_N.$$
(57)
The formula for $``$ may be worked out directly from the parametrix (51) and the inverse can be computed from this formula (see \[Gu2, St\]).

By (56) we obtain a symbol $`\sigma _N`$ (with principal symbol equal to $`1`$) such that

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_N\sigma _N\mathrm{\Pi }_N\mathrm{\Pi }_N(𝒫𝒬)\mathrm{\Pi }_N\mathrm{\Pi }_N.$$

Multiplying both sides by $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N(𝒫𝒬)^1\mathrm{\Pi }_N`$, we conclude the proof. ∎

Remark: We emphasize that the distinguishing features of the toric case in Proposition 2.2 and Lemma 2.6 are the exact factorization and the fact that the operator $`\mathrm{\Pi }(𝒫𝒬)\mathrm{\Pi }`$ mediating between $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota `$ is invertible. This is due to the fact that sections of $`L`$ generate the ring $`_{N=1}^{\mathrm{}}H^0(M,L^N)`$ in the toric case. In general they do not and the exact representation $`\mathrm{\Pi }=B\mathrm{\Pi }_\iota `$ in the toric case is only valid modulo smoothing operators.

#### 2.2.5. Alternate proof of Lemma 2.6

One could avoid using the calculus of complex Fourier integral operators or Toeplitz operators in the proof of Proposition 2.2 by further developing the calculus of semi-classical Toeplitz operators directly from the Boutet de Monvel- Sjöstrand parametrix as follows:

We first simplify the expression (51) by using the complex method of stationary phase to eliminate the integrals in the parametrix. The critical point set of the phase $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\theta ,\lambda ;x,y):=i\theta +\lambda \psi (r_\theta x,y)`$ is given by

$$\{\begin{array}{c}d_\lambda \mathrm{\Phi }(\theta ,\lambda ;x,y)=\psi (r_\theta x,y)=0e^{i\theta }\iota (x),\iota (y)=1,\hfill \\ \\ d_\theta \mathrm{\Phi }(\theta ,\lambda ;x,y)=i+d_\theta \lambda \psi (r_\theta x,y)=0\lambda e^{i\theta }\iota (x),\iota (y)=1.\hfill \end{array}$$
(58)
It is easy to see by the Schwartz inequality that a real critical point exists if and only if $`x=y,`$ in which case $`\theta =0,\lambda =1`$ and we obtain the familiar expansion along the diagonal. When $`xy`$ we deform the contour to $`|\zeta |=e^\tau `$ ($`\zeta =e^{i\theta +\tau }`$) so that $`e^{i\theta +\tau }\iota (x),\iota (y)=1`$. This is possible as long as $`\iota (x),\iota (y)0`$, as happens near the diagonal, where the parametrix is valid. Because the phase is linear in $`\lambda `$ it is clear that the critical point is non-degenerate if and only if $`\iota (x),\iota (y)0`$ and that the Hessian determinant equals $`|\iota (x),\iota (y)|^2.`$ On the critical set the phase equals $`i\theta +\tau =\mathrm{log}\iota (x),\iota (y),`$ hence we have

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_N(x,y)=e^{N\mathrm{log}\iota (x),\iota (y)}S_N(x,y)+W_N(x,y),$$
(59)
where $`S_N(x,y)_{k=0}^{\mathrm{}}N^{mk}S_k(x,y),`$ and where $`W_N(x,y)`$ is a smooth uniformly rapidly decaying function. Here, we have absorbed the remainder in the parametrix construction as well as the remainder in the stationary phase expansion of the parametrix in $`W_N`$. Note that the first term may be smaller than the second outside a tubular neighborhood of radius $`N^{1/2}`$ of the diagonal.

As above, we use Lemma 2.5 to find a symbol $`a_N`$ so that (55) holds and hence the kernels $`\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }_Na_N\mathrm{\Pi }_N`$ agree on the diagonal modulo smoothing symbols. Next, we note that both $`\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N(x,y)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }_Na_N\mathrm{\Pi }_N(x,y)`$ are complex oscillatory functions with common phase

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(z,w)=\mathrm{log}\iota (x),\iota (y).$$
(60)
In the case of $`\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N`$, this follows from (47). Indeed, we simply have:

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N(x,y)=e^{N\mathrm{log}\iota (x),\iota (y)}.$$
(61)
In the case of $`\mathrm{\Pi }_Na_N\mathrm{\Pi }_N`$, we apply the method of complex stationary phase to the integral formula

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_Na_N\mathrm{\Pi }_N(x,y)_{M_P}e^{N\mathrm{\Psi }(u;x,y)}S_N(x,u)a_N(u)S_N(u,y)𝑑V(u),$$
(62)
coming from (59), with

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(u;x,y)=\iota (x),\iota (u)+\iota (u),\iota (y).$$

It follows that there exists an amplitude $`A_N`$ defined near the diagonal such that

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_Na_N\mathrm{\Pi }_N(x,y)=A_N(x,y)e^{N\mathrm{log}\iota (x),\iota (u)}+V_N(x,y),$$
(63)
where $`V_N`$ is a new smoothing operator.

Recalling that $`XL^{}`$, we extend $`A_N`$ to $`L^{}\times L^{}`$ so that it is of the form

$$A_N(z,\lambda ;w,\lambda ^{})=(\lambda \overline{\lambda }^{})^N\stackrel{~}{A}_N(z,w),$$

where we use a local holomorphic frame to write $`x=(z,\lambda ),y=(w,\lambda ^{})L^{}`$. We note that $`\stackrel{~}{A}_N(z,w)`$ is holomorphic in $`z`$ and anti-holomorphic in $`w`$ near the diagonal. To see this, we first conclude from the construction in \[BS\] using the $``$-product that the symbol $`s(x,y,t)_{k=0}^{\mathrm{}}t^{mk}s_k(x,y)`$ in (51) extends to a symbol on $`L^{}\times L^{}`$ that is holomorphic in $`x`$ and anti-holomorphic in $`y`$. It follows by the stationary phase method described above that the same is true for the symbol $`S_N(x,y)`$ in (59), and then by (63) that the same is also true for $`A_N`$ as claimed. (Note that in terms of coordinates $`(z,\theta )`$ on $`X`$, the function $`zA_N(z,\theta ;w,\theta ^{})=e^{iN(\theta \theta ^{})}\sqrt{a(z)a(w)}\stackrel{~}{A}_N(z,w)`$ is not holomorphic in $`z`$.)

The amplitude of $`\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N\mathrm{\Pi }_Na_N\mathrm{\Pi }_N`$ becomes $`(\lambda \overline{\lambda }^{})^N(1\stackrel{~}{A}_N(z,w))`$, where we can write $`1\stackrel{~}{A}_NB_0+B_1N^1+B_2N^2+\mathrm{}`$. Since $`\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N\mathrm{\Pi }_Na_N\mathrm{\Pi }_N(z,z)=O(N^{\mathrm{}})`$ by our choice of $`a_N`$ above, it follows that $`B_j(z,z)=0`$ (for all $`j`$). Since $`B_j(z,w)`$ vanishes on the diagonal and is holomorphic in $`z`$ and anti-holomorphic in $`w`$, it must be identically 0. Hence, $`\mathrm{\Pi }_1^N\mathrm{\Pi }_Na_N\mathrm{\Pi }_N(x,y)`$ is a smoothing operator.∎

## 3. Mass asymptotics

In this section, we prove a precise asymptotic formula for the conditional Szegö kernel on the diagonal (Proposition 3.1), which yields the mass asymptotics of Theorem 2.

First, we discuss formula (8) for the expected mass density. Let $`P`$ denote a Delzant polytope in $`^m`$. Recalling the definition (5) of the conditional probability measure $`\gamma _{p|P}`$ on the space $`H^0(^m,𝒪(p),P)`$ of polynomials with Newton polytope $`P`$, we see that the expected value of the mass density with respect to $`\gamma _{p|P}`$ is given by:

$$𝐄_{|P}\left(|f(z)|_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^2\right)=\underset{\alpha ,\beta P}{}\frac{𝐄(\lambda _\alpha \overline{\lambda }_\beta )\chi _\alpha (z)\overline{\chi _\beta (z)}}{\chi _\alpha \chi _\beta (1+z^2)^{p/2}}.$$

Since the $`\lambda _\alpha `$ are independent complex random variables with variance 1 (i.e., $`𝐄_{|P}(\lambda _\alpha \overline{\lambda }_\beta )=\delta _\alpha ^\beta `$), we have:

$$𝐄_{|P}\left(|f(z)|_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^2\right)=\underset{\alpha P}{}\frac{|\chi _\alpha (z)|_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^2}{\chi _\alpha ^2}=\mathrm{\Pi }_{|P}(z,z).$$
(64)
It then follows by expressing the Gaussian in spherical coordinates that

$$𝐄_{\nu _P}(|f(z)|_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^2)=\frac{1}{\mathrm{\#}P}𝐄_{|P}\left(|f(z)|_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^2\right)=\frac{1}{\mathrm{\#}P}\mathrm{\Pi }_{|P}(z,z).$$

Replacing $`P`$ with $`NP`$, we obtain formula (8).

The number of lattice points in the polytope $`NP`$ is given by the Riemann-Roch formula (see \[Fu\]):

$`\mathrm{\#}(NP)`$ $`=`$ $`dimH^0(^m,𝒪(Np),NP)=dimH^0(M_P,L_P^N)`$
$`=`$ $`\chi (M_P,L_P^N)={\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{m}{}}}\mathrm{deg}\left[c_1(L_P)^k\text{Todd}_{mk}(M_P)\right]{\displaystyle \frac{N^k}{k!}}`$
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{Vol}(P)N^m+\mathrm{}+\mathrm{deg}\text{Todd}_m(M_P).`$
Here, we used the Kodaira vanishing theorem and the fact that

$$\mathrm{Vol}(P)=\mathrm{Vol}(M_P)=_{M_P}\frac{1}{m!}\omega _P=\frac{1}{m!}\mathrm{deg}[c_1(L_P)^m].$$

(This immediately yields Kouchnirenko’s Theorem, since $`\mathrm{deg}[c_1(L)^m]`$ equals the number of points in the intersection of $`m`$ generic divisors of a very ample line bundle $`L`$; see \[At\].) The holomorphic Euler characteristic $`\chi (M_P,L_P^N)`$ is also known as the Hilbert polynomial of the polarized manifold $`(M_P,L_P)`$. Combining (8) and the Riemann-Roch formula, we obtain

$$𝐄_{\nu _{NP}}(|f(z)|_{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^2)=\frac{1}{\chi (M_P,L_P^N)}\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z).$$
(65)
The mass asymptotics of Theorem 2 is an immediate consequence of (65) and the following asymptotic expansion of the conditional Szegö kernel on the diagonal:

###### Proposition 3.1.

Suppose that $`P`$ is a Delzant polytope in $`^m`$. Then:

1. For $`z`$ in the classically allowed region $`𝒜_P`$, we have

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)=\underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}(Np+j)+R_N(z),R_N_{𝒞^k(K)}=O(e^{\lambda _KN})k,$$

for all compact $`K𝒜_P`$, where $`\lambda _K>0`$.
2. On each open forbidden region $`_F^{}`$,

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)=N^{\frac{m+r}{2}}e^{Nb(z)}\left[c_0^F(z)+c_1^F(z)N^1+\mathrm{}+c_k^F(z)N^k+R_k^F(z)\right],$$

where $`r=dimF`$ and

1. $`c_j^F𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(_F^{})`$ and $`c_0^F>0`$ on $`_F^{}`$;
    2. $`R_k^F_{𝒞^j(K)}=O(N^{k1})`$, for all compact $`K_F^{}`$ and for all $`j,k`$;
    3. $`b>0`$ on $`^m\overline{𝒜_P}`$;
    4. $`b`$ is given by formula (10);
    5. $`b𝒞_{}^1(^m)`$ (with $`b=0`$ on $`𝒜_P`$), and $`b`$ is $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}`$ on each closed region $`\overline{_F}`$.

We remark that the asymptotics of Theorem 3.1 are uniform away from the transition points only. To take care of the transition points, we shall also prove the following local uniform convergence result on all of $`^m`$:

###### Proposition 3.2.

Let $`P`$ be a Delzant polytope. Then

$$\frac{1}{N}\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)b(z)$$

uniformly on all compact subsets of $`^m`$.

This section is devoted to the proofs of Propositions 3.1 and 3.2. We begin with part (ii) of the former, which is the major part of the section. The proof begins by using Lemma 2.3 to obtain an oscillatory integral formula for the conditional Szegö kernel $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)`$. We then observe that the integral is rapidly decaying when $`z`$ is in the classically forbidden region, while for $`z`$ in the allowed region, the phase is of positive type with a nondegenerate critical manifold, and hence $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)`$ has an asymptotic expansion. In §3.2, we consider $`z`$ in the forbidden region and we seek deformations of the contour of integration so that the (analytic continuation of) the phase picks up critical points. In §3.2.1, we formulate necessary geometric conditions for the existence of critical points where the phase has maximal real part and we show that there is a contour for which these conditions are satisfied. In §§3.2.23.2.3, we show that the conditions are sufficient and, with the added assumption that $`z`$ is not a transition point, the resulting critical points are nondegenerate (Lemma 3.9). We complete the proof of Proposition 3.1(ii) in §§3.2.43.2.5. In §3.2.5, we use 3.1(ii) to prove Proposition 3.2, which we then use to prove 3.1(i) in §3.2.6.

We start with a simple integral formula for the conditional Szegö kernel:

###### Lemma 3.3.

For $`y_1,y_2^m`$, we have

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(y_1,y_2)=_{X_P}_{𝐓^m}\mathrm{\Pi }_{Np}^^m(ty_1,y_2)\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}(x,tx)d\mathrm{Vol}_{𝐓^m}(t)d\mathrm{Vol}_{X_P}(x).$$

###### Proof.

We consider the lattice sums

$$\chi _{NP}(t):=\underset{\alpha NP}{}t^\alpha ,t𝐓^m.$$
(66)
We easily see that

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(y_1,y_2)=_{𝐓^m}\mathrm{\Pi }_{Np}^^m(ty_1,y_2)\chi _{NP}(\overline{t})d\mathrm{Vol}_{𝐓^m}(t).$$
(67)
Recalling (32), we also have

$$_{X_P}\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}(x,tx)d\mathrm{Vol}_{X_P}(x)=_{X_P}\underset{\alpha NP}{}\frac{\overline{t}^\alpha }{\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P_{X_P}^2}|\widehat{\chi }_\alpha ^P(x)|^2d\mathrm{Vol}_{X_P}(x)=\chi _{NP}(\overline{t}).$$
(68)
The conclusion follows immediately from (67)–(68). ∎

By Lemmas 2.3 and 3.3, we have for $`z^m`$,

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi )^m}}{\displaystyle _{M_P}}{\displaystyle _{𝐓^m}}\mathrm{\Pi }_{Np}^^m(e^{i\phi }z,z)\mathrm{\Pi }_N^{M_P}(w,e^{i\phi }w)𝑑\phi d\mathrm{Vol}_{M_P}(w)`$ (69)
$`=`$ $`K_N(z)+S_N(z),`$
where

$`K_N(z)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi )^m}}{\displaystyle _{M_P}}{\displaystyle _{𝐓^m}}\mathrm{\Pi }_{Np}^^m(e^{i\phi }z,z)\sigma _N(w)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_1^{M_N}(w,e^{i\phi }w)𝑑\phi 𝑑w,`$ (70)
$`S_N(z)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi )^m}}{\displaystyle _{M_P}}{\displaystyle _{M_P}}{\displaystyle _{𝐓^m}}\mathrm{\Pi }_{Np}^^m(e^{i\phi }z,z)R_N(w,\eta )\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_1^{M_N}(\eta ,e^{i\phi }w)𝑑\phi 𝑑w𝑑\eta ,`$ (71)
where $`\sigma _N,R_N`$ are as in Lemma 2.3, and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_1^{M_N}`$ is given by (47). (The above are really functions of $`x=(z,\theta )`$, but since they depend only on $`z`$, we dropped the variable $`\theta `$. In (71), we replaced integrals over $`X_P`$ with integrals over $`M_P`$ by setting $`R_N(w,\eta )=_0^{2\pi }_0^{2\pi }R_N((w,\theta _1),(\eta ,\theta _2))e^{iN(\theta _1\theta _2)}\frac{d\theta _1}{2\pi }\frac{d\theta _2}{2\pi }`$.)

By (40), we have

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{Np}^^m(x,y)=\frac{(Np+m)!}{(Np)!}x,y^{pN}=\frac{(Np+m)!}{(Np)!}\left(\underset{|\alpha |p}{}\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(x)\overline{\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(y)}\right)^N.$$

Recalling (47), we can then rewrite (70):

$$K_N(z)=\frac{1}{(2\pi )^m}_{M_P}_{𝐓^m}e^{N\mathrm{\Psi }(\phi ,w;z)}a_N(w)𝑑\phi d\mathrm{Vol}_{M_P}(w),$$
(72)
where the phase is given by

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(\phi ,w;z)=\mathrm{log}\underset{\alpha P}{}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2+\mathrm{log}\underset{|\alpha |p}{}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z)|^2,$$
(73)
and $`a_N(w)=\frac{(Np+m)!}{(Np)!}\sigma _N(w)`$ is a symbol of order $`2m`$.

We fix $`z^m`$. It follows from the triangle inequality and (36) that

$`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Psi }(\phi ,w;z)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{log}\left|_{\alpha P}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2\left|+\mathrm{log}\right|_{|\alpha |p}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\stackrel{~}{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z)|^2\right|`$ (74)
$``$ $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Psi }(0,w;z)=0,`$
with equality if and only if $`\alpha ,\phi =0,\phi =0`$ for all $`\alpha p\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, or equivalently, if $`\phi =0`$. This says that $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is a phase function of positive type, and $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Psi }(\phi ,w)=0`$ if and only if $`\phi =0`$. Hence we need consider only critical points with $`\phi =0`$.

Suppose that $`w=e^{i\theta }e^\rho ^m`$. We note that $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is independent of $`\theta `$; hence the critical set is $`𝐓^m`$-invariant. So we must find the set of $`w`$ where

$$D_\phi \mathrm{\Psi }(0,w)=0,D_\rho \mathrm{\Psi }(0,w)=0.$$

We have

$$iD_\phi \mathrm{\Psi }=\frac{_{\alpha P}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2\alpha }{_{\alpha P}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2}\frac{_{\alpha p\mathrm{\Sigma }}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z)|^2\alpha }{_{\alpha p\mathrm{\Sigma }}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z)|^2}.$$
(75)
Hence the $`D_\phi `$ equation gives

$$\frac{1}{p}\mu _P(w)=\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(z).$$
(76)
Note that

$$D_\rho \mathrm{\Psi }(0,w)=D_\rho 00$$

automatically by (60). However, we will need to compute $`D_\rho \mathrm{\Psi }`$. To do this, we note that

$$\underset{\alpha P}{}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2=\frac{_{\alpha P}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|m_\alpha (w)|^2}{_{\alpha P}|m_\alpha (w)|^2}.$$

Recalling that $`w=e^{i\theta }e^\rho `$, we then obtain

$$\frac{1}{2}D_\rho \mathrm{\Psi }=\frac{_{\alpha P}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2\alpha }{_{\alpha P}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2}\mu _P(w).$$
(77)
Let $`𝒞_\mathrm{\Psi }^0𝐓^m\times M_P`$ denote the set of critical points of $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ where $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Psi }=0`$. By (74) and (76), we have:

$$𝒞_\mathrm{\Psi }^0=\{\phi =0,w\mu _P^1(\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(z))\}𝐓^m.$$
(78)
Equation (78) leads to the important conclusion:

There are no critical points with real part equal to 0 unless $`z(\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma })^1(\frac{1}{p}P)`$.

As we stated in the introduction, we refer to the region $`𝒜_P=(\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma })^1(\frac{1}{p}P^{})`$ as the classically allowed region, and its complement in $`^m`$ as the classically forbidden region. We now break up our problem into these two regions.

### 3.1. The classically allowed region

In this section, we illustrate our approach by showing that

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)N^m\left[c_0(z)+c_1(z)N^1+c_2(z)N^2+\mathrm{}\right],\text{for }z𝒜_P.$$
(79)
In §3.2, we will derive our exponentially decaying, asymptotic expansion of $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)`$ on the forbidden region, which we will use to obtain the precise formula of Proposition 3.1(i) on the allowed region. (Although we do not need (79) in the derivation of our precise formula in §3.2, we shall use the methods and Lemma 3.4 from this section in our proof.)

Suppose that $`z𝒜_P=(\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma })^1(\frac{1}{p}P^{})`$ is in the classically allowed region. Since the phase function is of positive type and equals zero on the critical set, in order to apply the method of stationary phase it suffices to show that the Hessian of $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\phi ,\rho )`$ is nondegenerate on the critical set. We write the Hessian as a block matrix:

$$D^2\mathrm{\Psi }|_{(0,\rho )}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ B^t& C\end{array}\right),$$

where

$$A_{jk}=\frac{^2\mathrm{\Psi }}{\phi _j\phi _k}(0,\rho ),B_{jk}=\frac{^2\mathrm{\Psi }}{\phi _j\rho _k}(0,\rho ),C_{jk}=\frac{^2\mathrm{\Psi }}{\rho _j\rho _k}(0,\rho ).$$

Differentiating (75) and recalling that $`\mu _P(w)=_{\alpha P}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2\alpha `$, we obtain

$$A=\mu _P(w)\mu _P(w)\underset{\alpha P}{}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2\alpha \alpha +\mu _{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z)\mu _{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z)\underset{|\alpha |p}{}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z)|^2\alpha \alpha .$$

(For a vector $`v=(v_1,\mathrm{},v_m)^m`$, we identify $`vv`$ with the symmetric matrix $`(v_jv_k)_{1j,km}`$.)

Thus on $`𝒞_\mathrm{\Psi }^0`$, we have by (76),

$$A=2p^2\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(z)\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(z)\underset{\alpha P}{}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2\alpha \alpha \underset{|\alpha |p}{}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z)|^2\alpha \alpha .$$
(80)
On the other hand, differentiating (77), we obtain

$$B=2i\left(\underset{\alpha P}{}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2\alpha \alpha \mu _P(w)\mu _P(w)\right).$$
(81)
Finally, since $`\mathrm{\Psi }(0,\rho )0`$, we have

$$C=0.$$

Therefore

$$detD^2\mathrm{\Psi }|_{(0,\rho )}=(detB)^2.$$
(82)
In order to apply the method of stationary phase to conclude that the integral (72) admits a complete asymptotic expansion in powers of $`N^1`$, we must show that $`detD^2\mathrm{\Psi }|_{(0,\rho )}0`$. This follows from (82) and the following fact:

###### Lemma 3.4.

The real symmetric matrix

$$S_w:=\underset{\alpha P}{}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2\alpha \alpha \mu _P(w)\mu _P(w)$$

is strictly positive definite for all $`w^m`$. Furthermore, if $`\mu _P(w)`$ lies in a face $`F`$ of $`P`$, then $`S_w`$ is semi-positive and its $`0`$ eigenspace is $`T_F^{}`$; in particular, $`S_w`$ is positive definite on $`T_F`$.

###### Proof.

We must show that $`(\lambda \lambda ,S_w)>0`$ for $`\lambda (^m)^{}\{0\}`$. Consider the vectors $`u,v^{\mathrm{\#}P}`$ given by $`u_\alpha =|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|`$, $`v_\alpha =|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|\lambda (\alpha )`$. Since $`u^2=_{\alpha P}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2=1`$ and $`\mu _P(w)=_{\alpha P}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2\alpha `$, we have

$`(\lambda \lambda ,S_w)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha P}{}}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2\lambda (\alpha )^2\left({\displaystyle \underset{\alpha P}{}}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2\lambda (\alpha )\right)^2`$ (83)
$`=`$ $`v^2u,v^2=u^2v^2u,v^20.`$
If $`w^m`$, then the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality in (83) is strict since $`|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|0`$ for all $`\alpha P`$ and $`\lambda (\alpha )`$ is not constant on $`P`$. On the other hand, if $`\mu _P(w)`$ lies in a face $`F`$, then by Proposition 1.1, $`|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|0\alpha \overline{F}`$, and hence

$$(\lambda \lambda ,S_w)=0\lambda |_F\text{const.}\lambda T_F.$$

The asymptotic expansion (79) for $`z`$ in the classically allowed region $`𝒜_P`$ now follows from the method of stationary phase (\[Hö, Theorem 7.7.5\]) applied to the complex oscillatory integral (72) and the fact that $`S_N(z)`$ is rapidly decaying. To be precise, the asymptotics of (72) are determined by the component of the critical point set of the phase on which $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is maximal. Note that $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Psi }`$ and $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Psi }`$ are constant on components of the critical set, and that on its maximal component our phase satisfies $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Psi }=0`$. The critical point set is a manifold and we have just shown that the phase is non-degenerate in the normal directions. Although (\[Hö, Theorem 7.7.5\]) assumes the critical point with $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Psi }=0`$ is isolated, the proof in \[Hö\] can be modified, precisely as in the real case, to apply to phases with non-degenerate critical manifolds.

Hence the expansion follows from the complex stationary phase method for phases of positive type with non-degenerate critical manifolds. Since the critical manifold is of (real) codimension $`2m`$ and the amplitude $`a_N`$ in (72) is or order $`2m`$, it follows that the leading term of the expansion contains $`N^{2mm}=N^m`$, as claimed.

### 3.2. The classically forbidden region

For $`z`$ in this region of $`^m`$, there are no critical points of the phase with real part 0, and the integral is rapidly decaying by (74). Perhaps surprisingly, this implies that $`\overline{}\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)`$ will contribute here to the distribution of zeros.

To determine the exponential decay rate of the integral (72), we shall deform the contour of integration to pick up critical points with maximal real part along the contour. To accomplish this, we first complexify the real torus $`𝐓^m`$ to $`^m`$ with variables $`\zeta _j=e^{\tau _j+i\phi _j}`$. The integral (72) may be written in terms of these variables as

$`K_N(z)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi i)^m}}{\displaystyle _{M_P}}{\displaystyle _{𝐓^m}}e^{N\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\zeta ,w;z)}\sigma _N(w){\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\zeta _j}{\zeta _j}}d\mathrm{Vol}_{M_P}(w),`$ (84)
where

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\zeta ,w;z)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha P}{}}\zeta ^\alpha |\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2+\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \underset{|\alpha |p}{}}\zeta ^\alpha |\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z)|^2`$ (85)
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha P}{}}e^{\alpha ,\tau +i\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2+\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \underset{|\alpha |p}{}}e^{\alpha ,\tau +i\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z)|^2.`$
Since the integrand is holomorphic in $`\zeta ^m`$, we can deform the contours in (84) and instead integrate over

$$_{M_P}_{|\zeta _1|=\tau _1,\mathrm{},|\zeta _m|=\tau _m}.$$
(86)
We therefore look for complex critical points of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{}`$. We note that as before,

$$\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(e^{\tau +i\phi },w)<\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(e^\tau ,w),\text{for }\phi 0.$$
(87)
Thus the critical points $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ with maximal real values on the contour (86) are those with $`\phi =0`$.

We now write $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\tau ,\phi ,w)=\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(e^{\tau +i\phi },w;z)`$. The complexification of (75) becomes

$`iD_\phi \mathrm{\Psi }_{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{\alpha P}e^{\alpha ,\tau +i\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2\alpha }{_{\alpha P}e^{\alpha ,\tau +i\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{_{\alpha p\mathrm{\Sigma }}e^{\alpha ,\tau +i\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z)|^2\alpha }{_{\alpha p\mathrm{\Sigma }}e^{\alpha ,\tau +i\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z)|^2}}`$ (88)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{\alpha P}e^{\alpha ,\tau +i\phi }|m_\alpha (w)|^2\alpha }{_{\alpha P}e^{\alpha ,\tau +i\phi }|m_\alpha (w)|^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{_{\alpha p\mathrm{\Sigma }}e^{\alpha ,\tau +i\phi }|m_\alpha (z)|^2\alpha }{_{\alpha p\mathrm{\Sigma }}e^{\alpha ,\tau +i\phi }|m_\alpha (z)|^2}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{\alpha P}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(e^{\tau /2}w)|^2\alpha }{_{\alpha P}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(e^{\tau /2}w)|^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{_{\alpha p\mathrm{\Sigma }}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(e^{\tau /2}z)|^2\alpha }{_{\alpha p\mathrm{\Sigma }}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(e^{\tau /2}z)|^2}},`$
for $`w^m`$. Hence by continuity, we see that

$$iD_\phi \mathrm{\Psi }_{}=\frac{_{\alpha P}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(e^{\tau /2}w)|^2\alpha }{_{\alpha P}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(e^{\tau /2}w)|^2}\frac{_{\alpha p\mathrm{\Sigma }}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(e^{\tau /2}z)|^2\alpha }{_{\alpha p\mathrm{\Sigma }}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(e^{\tau /2}z)|^2},$$
(89)
for all $`wM_P`$. In particular,

$$iD_\phi \mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\tau ,0,w)=\mu _P(e^{\tau /2}w)\mu _{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(e^{\tau /2}z).$$
(90)
Hence the equation $`D_\phi \mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\tau ,0,w)=0`$ is equivalent to

$$\frac{1}{p}\mu _P(e^{\tau /2}w)=\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(e^{\tau /2}z).$$
(91)
To compute the $`w`$ derivative, we first consider the case where $`w=e^{\rho +i\theta }^m`$. Recalling that

$$\underset{\alpha P}{}e^{\alpha ,\tau +i\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2=\frac{_{\alpha P}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|m_\alpha (e^{\tau /2}w)|^2}{_{\alpha P}|m_\alpha (w)|^2}=\frac{_{\alpha P}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|m_\alpha (e^{\tau /2+\rho })|^2}{_{\alpha P}|m_\alpha (e^\rho )|^2},$$

we obtain

$$\frac{1}{2}D_\rho \mathrm{\Psi }_{}=\frac{_{\alpha P}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(e^{\tau /2}w)|^2\alpha }{_{\alpha P}e^{i\alpha ,\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(e^{\tau /2}w)|^2}\mu _P(w).$$
(92)
Setting $`\phi =0`$,

$$D_\rho \mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\tau ,0,w)=\mu _P(e^{\tau /2}w)\mu _P(w).$$
(93)
Hence the equation $`D_\rho \mathrm{\Psi }_{}|_{\phi =0}=0`$ gives

$$\mu _P(e^{\tau /2}w)=\mu _P(w).$$
(94)
We must show that (94) also holds for critical points $`w^m`$. (These are points with $`\mu _P(w)P`$.) To do this we introduce the function

$$H_P(\tau ,w):=\frac{_{\alpha P}e^{\alpha ,\tau }|m_\alpha (w)|^2}{_{\alpha P}|m_\alpha (w)|^2}=\underset{\alpha P}{}e^{\alpha ,\tau }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2.$$
(95)
Note that $`H_P(\tau ,)`$ is a well-defined function on $`M_P`$ that factors through the moment map $`\mu _P`$. We also have

$$H_{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(\tau ,z)=H_\mathrm{\Sigma }(\tau ,z)^p=\left[\frac{1+e^{\tau /2}z^2}{1+z^2}\right]^p.$$
(96)
We have

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\tau ,0,w;z)=\mathrm{log}H_P(\tau ,w)+\mathrm{log}H_{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(\tau ,z),$$
(97)
and hence

$$D_w\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\tau ,0,w;z)=D_w\mathrm{log}H_P(\tau ,w).$$

Furthermore the vector fields

$$X_j:=\frac{}{\rho _j}=\mathrm{}(w_j\frac{}{w_j})$$
(98)
extend to $`M_P`$ as the generators of the $`_+^m`$ action (induced by the $`^m`$ action). Hence (93) is equivalent to the equation

$$(X_1,\mathrm{},X_m)\mathrm{log}H_P(\tau ,w)=\mu _P(e^{\tau /2}w)\mu _P(w),$$
(99)
which is invariantly defined on all of $`M_P`$.

Thus we have seen that critical points of $`H_P(\tau ,)`$ must satisfy (94). We shall show later that (94) is also a sufficient condition for $`w`$ to be a critical point of $`H_P(\tau ,)`$, and hence (91) and (94) give necessary and sufficient conditions for $`(0,w)`$ to be a critical point of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\tau ,,)`$.

The following fact is useful in describing the critical set.

###### Lemma 3.5.

Let $`\tau ^m`$, $`wM_P`$. Then the following are equivalent:

1. $`\mu _P(e^\tau w)=\mu _P(w)`$;
2. $`e^{r\tau }w=w`$, for all $`r`$;
3. $`\tau `$ is perpendicular to $`T_{F^w}`$, where $`F^w`$ is the face of $`P`$ containing $`\mu _P(w)`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`w=(w_\alpha )_{\alpha P}M_P^{\mathrm{\#}P1}`$. By Proposition 1.1, we see that $`w_\alpha =0`$ if and only if $`\alpha \overline{F^w}`$, and thus for any $`t^m`$,

$$tw=wc\text{ such that }t^\alpha w_\alpha =cw_\alpha \alpha Pt^\alpha =c\alpha \overline{F^w}^m.$$
(100)
Suppose (a) holds. Then there exists $`e^{i\phi }𝐓^m`$ such that $`e^{\tau +i\phi }w=w`$. Hence by (100), $`e^{\tau +i\phi ,\alpha }=c`$ and thus $`e^{r\tau ,\alpha }=|c|^r`$, for all $`\alpha \overline{F^w}^m`$. Therefore (b) holds.

Furthermore, it follows from (100) that (b) is equivalent to

$$\tau ,\alpha \alpha ^{}=0\alpha ,\alpha ^{}\overline{F^w}^m,$$
(101)
which is a restatement of (c). ∎

Remark: Let $`\tau ^m`$. It follows from Lemma 3.5 that the set $`A_\tau `$ of points in $`M_P`$ satisfying (94) consists of the inverse image under $`\mu _P`$ of the union of faces of P that are orthogonal to $`\tau `$. The set $`A_\tau `$ is a (possibly empty) smooth algebraic subvariety of $`M_P`$. It then follows from (95) and (101) that $`H_P(\tau ,)`$ is constant on each connected component of $`A_\tau `$. Indeed, on a component $`A^0`$ of $`A_\tau `$, we have $`H_P(\tau ,)e^{\alpha ^0,\tau }`$, where $`\alpha ^0`$ is a lattice point in $`\mu _P(A^0)`$.

#### 3.2.1. The normal bundle

Although equations (91) and (94) are necessary and sufficient conditions for $`(0,w)`$ to be a critical point of the phase on the $`\tau `$-contour (as we shall show), they do not guarantee that the real part of the phase is maximal at that point. To obtain maximality, we need to strengthen condition (94) to require that $`\tau `$ lies in the ‘normal bundle’ of $`P`$ at $`w_z`$.

Recall that the normal cone $`C_F`$ of a face $`F`$ of $`P`$ is given by

$$C_F=\{u^m:u,x=\underset{yP}{sup}u,y,xF\}.$$
(102)
We now consider compact polytopes in $`^m`$ with arbitrary vertices that are not necessarily integral or even rational. We define the faces of such polytopes as in the integral case, and we use (102) to define the normal cones.

Definition: The normal bundle $`𝒩(Q)`$ of a (not necessarily integral) convex polytope $`Q^m`$ is the subset of $`T_^m=^m\times ^m`$ consisting of pairs $`(x,v)`$, where $`xQ`$ and $`v`$ is in the normal cone $`C_F`$ of the face $`F`$ of $`Q`$ that contains $`x`$. (Note that $`𝒩(Q)`$ is not a fiber bundle over $`Q`$.)

The normal bundle $`𝒩(Q)`$ is a piecewise smooth submanifold of $`T_^m`$; it is homeomorphic to $`^m`$ via the ‘exponential map’

$$_Q:𝒩(Q)^m,_Q(x,v)=x+v,xF,cC_F(F\text{a face of}Q).$$

It is easily seen that $`_Q`$ is a homeomorphism and is a $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}`$ (in fact, linear) diffeomorphism on each of the ‘pieces’ $`\overline{F}\times C_F𝒩(Q)`$.

We shall use the following elementary, but not so well known, fact about the invertibility of Lipschitz maps. We let $`B_\epsilon (x_0)=\{x^m:|xx_0|<\epsilon \}`$ denote the $`\epsilon `$-ball about $`x_0^m`$.

###### Lemma 3.6.

\[Fan\] Let $`f:U^m`$ be a Lipschitz map, where $`U`$ is open in $`^m`$. Then $`f`$ has a local orientation-preserving Lipschitz inverse with Lipschitz constant $`L`$ at a point $`x_0U`$ if and only if there exists $`\epsilon >0`$ such that

1. $`lim\; inf_{v0}|f(x+v)f(x)|/|v|1/L`$ for all $`xB_\epsilon (x_0)`$,
2. $`detf^{}(x)>0`$ for all $`xB_\epsilon (x_0)`$ such that $`f`$ is differentiable at $`x`$,
3. $`f(x_0)f(B_\epsilon (x_0))`$ and $`\mathrm{deg}\left[f:B_\epsilon (x_0)^m\{f(x_0)\}\right]=1`$.

By the degree in (iii), we mean the degree of $`f_{}(B_\epsilon (x_0))H_{m1}(^m\{f(x_0)\},)`$. The hypotheses (i) and (iii) in \[Fan\] differ slightly from those above, but Fan’s proof of sufficiency uses only (i)–(iii). (Necessity is obvious.) Hypothesis (i) is given as a lemma in \[Fan\]. Hypothesis (iii) above is replaced in \[Fan\] by the condition that the index of $`f`$ at $`x_0`$ is 1, which is easily seen to be equivalent to (iii) under the assumptions (i) and (ii).

We now let

$$𝒩^{}=𝒩(\frac{1}{p}P)(\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}\times ^m).$$

###### Lemma 3.7.

For each point $`z^m`$, there exists a unique $`(x,v)𝒩^{}`$ such that

$$\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(e^{v/2}z)=x.$$

###### Proof.

We note that the $`_+^m`$ action on $`^m`$ descends via the moment map $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ to an $`_+^m`$ action on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$, and we consider the map

$$\mathrm{\Phi }:𝒩^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{},\mathrm{\Phi }(x,v)=\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(e^{v/2}x).$$

It suffices to show that $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is a bijection.

Let $`:\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}^m`$ be the diffeomorphism given by

$$(x)=(\mathrm{log}\frac{x_1}{1x_j},\mathrm{},\mathrm{log}\frac{x_n}{1x_j}),$$
(103)
so that

$$\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(z)=(\mathrm{log}|z_1|^2,\mathrm{},\mathrm{log}|z_m|^2).$$

Thus, writing $`x=\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(z)`$ we have

$`\mathrm{\Phi }(x,v)`$ $`=`$ $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(e^{v/2}z)`$ (104)
$`=`$ $`(v_1+\mathrm{log}|z_1|^2,\mathrm{},v_m+\mathrm{log}|z_m|^2)`$
$`=`$ $`v+(x).`$
We first observe that $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is proper: suppose on the contrary that the sequence $`\{(x^n,v^n)\}`$ is unbounded in $`𝒩^{}`$, but $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x^n,v^n)a^m`$. By passing to a subsequence, we can assume that $`x^nx^0\frac{1}{p}P`$. Then $`x^0\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, since otherwise $`v^na(x^0)`$. Write $`v^n=r^nu^n`$, where $`r^n>0`$, $`|u^n|=1`$. We can assume without loss of generality that $`u^nu^0`$. We consider the case where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }x_j^0<1`$, i.e., $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }^1(x^0)`$ is not in the hyperplane at infinity. If $`x^0=0`$, then $`u_j^00`$ $`(1jm)`$, since otherwise $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x^n,v^n)`$ would diverge. But $`u^0C_{\{0\}}`$; hence $`\frac{1}{p}P\{x:u^0,x0\}^m\backslash \mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$, a contradiction. Now suppose that $`x_1^0=\mathrm{}=x_k^0=0`$, $`x_l>0`$ for $`k<lm`$. Then we conclude as before that $`u_j^00`$ for $`1jk`$, and $`u_l^0=0`$ for $`k<lm`$, and we again obtain a contradiction. Finally, if $`\mathrm{\Sigma }x_j^0=1`$, we can change coordinates (permute the homogeneous coordinates in $`^m`$) to reduce to the previous case.

Let $`=_{\frac{1}{p}P}:𝒩(\frac{1}{p}P)\stackrel{}{}^m`$, and let $`U=(𝒩^{})^m`$. We consider the map $`f:U^m`$ given by $`f|_𝒩^{}=\mathrm{\Phi }`$, i.e. by the commutative diagram:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}𝒩^{}& \stackrel{\mathrm{\Phi }}{}& \mathrm{\Sigma }^{}\\ & & \\ U& \stackrel{f}{}& ^m\end{array}$$

Since $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is a proper map, $`f`$ is also proper. Hence to show that $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is a bijection, it suffices to show that $`f`$ is a local homeomorphism and is therefore a (global) homeomorphism.

To describe the map $`f`$, for each $`x\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$, we let $`q_x`$ denote the closest point in $`\frac{1}{p}P`$ to $`x`$. We note that $`q_x\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$; if $`x\frac{1}{p}P`$, then $`q_x(\frac{1}{p}P)`$; if $`x\frac{1}{p}P`$, then $`q_x=x`$. Furthermore, $`^1(x)=(q_x,xq_x)`$ and hence

$$f(x)=xq_x+(q_x).$$

We shall show that $`f`$ satisfies the hypotheses of Lemma 3.6. Let $`F`$ be an arbitrary face of $`\frac{1}{p}P\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$. To verify (i) and (ii), it suffices to show that $`detDf>0`$ on the (noncompact) polyhedron

$$U_F:=(\overline{F}\times C_F)U=[(\overline{F}\mathrm{\Sigma }^{})\times C_F].$$

To compute the determinant, we let $`T_F^m`$, $`N_F=T_F^{}^m`$ denote the tangent and normal spaces, respectively, of $`F`$. Let $`x^0F`$ be fixed. For $`yU_F`$, we have

$$y=x+v\stackrel{f}{}(x)+v,xx^0T_F,vN_F.$$

Choose orthonormal bases $`\{Y_1,\mathrm{},Y_r\}`$, $`\{Y_{r+1},\mathrm{},Y_m\}`$ of $`T_F,N_F`$, respectively. We let $`Df`$ denote the matrix of the derivative $`(f|_{U_F})^{}`$ with respect to the basis $`\{Y_1,\mathrm{},Y_m\}`$ of $`^m`$. We have:

$$Df=\left(\begin{array}{cc}T^t^{}(x)T& 0\\ & I\end{array}\right),$$
(105)
where $`T`$ is the $`m\times r`$ matrix $`[Y_1\mathrm{}Y_r]`$. We have by (103),

$$\left(^{}(x)\right)_{jk}=\frac{1}{x_0}+\delta _j^k\frac{1}{x_j},x_0=1\underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}x_j>0,$$
(106)
for $`x\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$. Hence $`^{}(x)`$ is a positive definite symmetric matrix, it being the sum of a semipositive matrix (all of whose entries are $`\frac{1}{x_0}`$) and a positive definite diagonal matrix. Therefore, $`T^t^{}(x)T`$ is positive definite, and hence $`detDf(x)=det(T^t^{}(x)T)>0`$, completing the proof that hypotheses (i) and (ii) of Lemma 3.6 are satisfied.

Note that (106) implies that the eigenvalues of $`^{}(x)`$ are $`>1`$ for $`x\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$ and hence by (105), $`Df(x)`$ is a diagonalizable matrix whose eigenvalues are real and $`1`$.

We verify (iii) by a homotopy argument: Choose a point $`q^0(\frac{1}{p}P)^{}`$. We contract $`\frac{1}{p}P`$ to $`q^0`$; i.e., for $`0t1`$, we let

$$Q_t=(1t)\{q^0\}+\frac{t}{p}P,$$

so that $`Q_0=\{q^0\},Q_1=\frac{1}{p}P`$. For $`0t<1`$, $`Q_t\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$, and hence we have a map

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_t:𝒩(Q_t)\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}.$$

For $`0t<1`$, we define $`f_t:^m^m`$ by the commutative diagram:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}𝒩(Q_t)& \stackrel{\mathrm{\Phi }_t}{}& \mathrm{\Sigma }^{}\\ _{Q_t}& & \\ ^m& \stackrel{f_t}{}& ^m\end{array}$$

As before we have

$$f_t(x)=xq_x^t+(q_x^t),$$
(107)
where $`q_x^t`$ is the (unique) point of $`Q_t`$ closest to $`x`$. The above argument shows that the maps $`f_t`$ also satisfy (i) and (ii) of Lemma 3.6

We write

$$F:\left(^m\times [0,1)\right)(U\times \{1\})^m,(x,t)f_t(x),$$

where $`f_1=f:U^m`$. One easily sees that

$$\left|q_x^tq_x^{}^t^{}\right||xx^{}|+|tt^{}|,$$

and hence $`F`$ is continuous. Furthermore, $`F`$ is uniformly continuous on $`^m\times [0,t]`$, for each $`t<1`$.

Let $`H`$ denote the set of $`t[0,1)`$ such that $`f_t:^m^m`$ is an orientation preserving homeomorphism. We note that $`0H`$ since

$$f_0(x)=xq+(q)=x+\text{constant}.$$

Note that (105) also holds for the maps $`f_t`$ and hence as above, the eigenvalues of $`Df_t`$ are real and $`1`$. Hence $`f_t`$ satisfies conditions (i) and (ii) of Lemma 3.6 with $`L=1`$, for all $`t[0,1]`$.

First we show that $`H`$ is open in $`[0,1)`$. Suppose $`t_0H`$. Then by Lemma 3.6, Lip$`(f_{t_0}^1)1`$ and hence

$$|xx_0|=1|f_{t_0}(x)f_{t_0}(x_0)|1.$$

By the uniform continuity of $`F`$ on $`^m\times [0,\frac{t_0+1}{2}]`$, we can choose $`\epsilon >0`$ such that for all $`x_0^m`$, we have

$$|f_t(x)f_t(x_0)|\frac{1}{2},\text{for}xB_1(x_0),|tt_0|<\epsilon .$$
(108)
To simplify notation, we shall write

$$\mathrm{deg}(f,x_0,r):=\mathrm{deg}\left[f:B_r(x_0)^m\{f(x_0)\}\right].$$

We conclude from (108) that for $`|tt_0|<\epsilon `$,

$$\mathrm{deg}(f_t,x_0,1)=\mathrm{deg}(f_{t_0},x_0,1))=1,$$

and hence $`f_t`$ is a local homeomorphism at $`x_0`$, by Lemma 3.6. By the very first part of the argument that $`f:U^m`$ is proper, we easily see that $`f_t`$ is proper. Since $`x_0^m`$ is arbitrary, it follows that $`f_t:^m^m`$ is a covering map and therefore is a homeomorphism.

Next we show that $`H`$ is closed in $`[0,1)`$ and hence $`H=[0,1)`$. Let $`t_nH`$ such that $`t_nt_0[0,1)`$. Since $`f_{t_0}`$ satisfies condition (i) of Lemma 3.6, we can choose $`\epsilon >0`$ so that $`f_{t_0}(x_0)f_{t_0}(B_\epsilon (x_0))`$. Then for $`n`$ sufficiently large,

$$\mathrm{deg}(f_{t_0},x_0,\epsilon )=\mathrm{deg}(f_{t_n},x_0,\epsilon )=1.$$

It follows as above that $`f_{t_0}:^m^m`$ is a homeomorphism.

We have shown that $`f_t`$ is a homeomorphism for $`0t<1`$. To complete the proof of the lemma, we must show that $`f=f_1`$ is a local homeomorphism. So we let $`x_0U`$ be arbitrary, and we choose $`\epsilon >0`$ such that $`\overline{B_\epsilon (x_0)}U`$ and $`f(x_0)f(B_\epsilon (x_0))`$. Then for $`t<1`$ sufficiently close to 1, we have as before

$$\mathrm{deg}(f,x_0,\epsilon )=\mathrm{deg}(f_t,x_0,\epsilon )=1.$$

Thus by Lemma 3.6, $`f`$ is a local homeomorphism.∎

As a consequence of Lemmas 3.5 and 3.7, we immediately obtain:

###### Lemma 3.8.

For each $`z^m`$, there exists $`\tau _z^m,w_zM_P`$ so that

* $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(e^{\tau _z/2}z)=\frac{1}{p}\mu _P(w_z)`$;
* $`(\frac{1}{p}\mu _P(w_z),\tau _z)𝒩^{}`$.

Furthermore, $`\tau _z,w_z`$ are unique (modulo the $`𝐓^m`$ action on $`M_P`$) and also satisfy (91) and (94).

We shall show in §§3.2.23.2.3 that along the contour given by $`\tau =\tau _z`$, the phase $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{}`$ has critical points and maximal real part at $`(0,w_z)`$.

We recall the concept of transition points mentioned in the introduction:

Definition: A point $`z^m`$ is said to be a transition point if $`\tau _z`$ is in the boundary of the normal cone of $`P`$ at $`\mu _P(w_z)`$, or equivalently if $`z`$ is in the boundary of one of the regions $`_F`$ described in the introduction.

Remark: It follows from (104) that $`2\mathrm{Log}(_F)=(F)+C_F`$, where $`\mathrm{Log}(z)=(\mathrm{log}|z_1|,\mathrm{},\mathrm{log}|z_m|)`$. Hence we can decompose $`^m`$ as the disjoint union of the sets $`(F)+C_F`$. If $`z`$ is a transition point, then $`2\mathrm{Log}(z)`$ must lie in the common boundary of at least two of the sets $`(F)+C_F`$. Figure 4 below shows the transition points in log coordinates (as solid lines) for the case where $`P`$ is the polytope of Figure 3.

Note that although $`C_F^{}`$ is orthogonal to $`F^{}`$ in Figure 3, $`C_F^{}`$ is not orthogonal to $`(F^{})`$. Similarly, in Lemma 3.8, if $`\mu _P(w_z)F^{}`$, then the orbit $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(e^{r\tau _z}z)`$ is not orthogonal to $`F^{}`$.

#### 3.2.2. Computation of the Hessian

We consider

$$𝒞_z:=\{e^{i\theta }w_z:e^{i\theta }𝐓^m\}=\{e^{i\theta }w_z:\theta T_F\}M_P,$$

which is a (totally real) submanifold of $`M_P`$ of dimension $`r`$. We are going to show that $`\{0\}\times 𝒞_z𝐓^m\times M_P`$ is the set of critical points of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{}`$ with maximal real part along the $`\tau _z`$ contour. In order to apply the method of stationary phase as in the case where $`z`$ is in the classically allowable region, one would also like to show that $`\{0\}\times 𝒞_z`$ is a nondegenerate critical submanifold; i.e., the normal Hessian of the phase is nondegenerate along $`\{0\}\times 𝒞_z`$. But the normal Hessian turns out to be degenerate whenever $`z`$ is a transition point. For example, if $`z\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }^1(F)`$, where $`F`$ is a codimension $`r`$ face of $`\frac{1}{p}P`$, then the corresponding normal Hessian has an $`r`$-dimensional nullspace (as our computations will show) and hence the normal Hessian is degenerate whenever $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(z)(\frac{1}{p}P)`$. However, we shall show:

###### Lemma 3.9.

Let $`z^m`$. Then $`\{0\}\times 𝒞_z`$ is the (unique) component of the critical set of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\tau _z,,)`$ where $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Psi }_{}`$ attains its maximum on $`𝐓^m\times M_P`$. If $`z`$ is not a transition point, then $`\{0\}\times 𝒞_z`$ is a nondegenerate critical submanifold.

Recall that in the previous section, we verified the proposition for the case where $`z`$ is in the classically allowed region. So we now fix a point $`z`$ in the classically forbidden region. Let $`F_z`$ be the face of $`P`$ containing $`q_z:=\mu _P(w_z)`$, and let $`r`$ denote the dimension of $`F_z`$. Note that $`Fq_z`$ an open subset of the tangent space $`T_F`$ of $`F^m`$.

Let $`Y=\mu _P^1(F_z)`$, which is an $`r`$-dimensional complex submanifold, and thus has real dimension $`2r`$. We let $`VT_{M_P,w_z}`$ be the tangent space to the $`_+^m`$ orbit of $`w_z`$. Recalling (98), we see that

$$V=\text{span}\{X_1(w_z),\mathrm{},X_m(w_z)\}=\{a_jX_j(w_z):(a_1,\mathrm{},a_m)T_F\},$$

and hence $`dimV=r`$. (Note that $`V=JT^v`$, where $`T^v`$ is the tangent space to the fiber of $`\mu _P`$.)

The normal bundle $`𝐍`$ to $`\{0\}\times 𝒞_z`$ can be decomposed as follows:

$$𝐍=T_{𝐓^m,0}VN_Y.$$
(109)
To prove Lemma 3.9, we need the following:

###### Lemma 3.10.

The normal Hessian of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\tau _z,,)`$ to $`\{0\}\times 𝒞_z`$ with respect to a basis for $`𝐍`$ giving the decomposition (109) is of the form

$$D_𝐍^2\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\tau _z,0,w_z)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}A& B& 0\\ B^t& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& C\end{array}\right),$$

where

1. $`A`$ is an $`m\times m`$ negative-definite, real symmetric matrix;
2. $`B`$ is an $`m\times r`$ pure imaginary matrix of rank $`r`$;
3. $`C`$ is a $`(2m2r)\times (2m2r)`$ real symmetric matrix, which is negative definite if $`z`$ is not a transition point.

###### Proof.

Let

$$D_𝐍^2\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\tau _z,0,w_z)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}A& B& \\ B^t& ^{\prime \prime }& ^{}\\ ^t& ^{}^t& C\end{array}\right).$$

To simplify notation, we now write $`\tau =\tau _z`$.

(i) To compute $`A`$, we see from (89) that

$$iD_\phi \mathrm{\Psi }_{}|_{\phi =0}=\underset{\alpha P}{}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(e^{\tau /2}w)|^2\alpha +\text{ a function of }z,$$
(110)
As in our previous computation, we then obtain

$`A`$ $`=`$ $`\mu _P(e^{\tau /2}w)\mu _P(e^{\tau /2}w){\displaystyle \underset{\alpha P}{}}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(e^{\tau /2}w)|^2\alpha \alpha `$
$`+\mu _{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(e^{\tau /2}z)\mu _{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(e^{\tau /2}z){\displaystyle \underset{\alpha p}{}}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(e^{\tau /2}z)|^2\alpha \alpha .`$
By Lemma 3.4, $`A`$ is the sum of a negative semi-definite term and a strictly negative term, and hence is negative definite.

(ii) To compute $`B`$, we similarly obtain

$$iD_\rho D_\phi \mathrm{\Psi }_{}|_{\phi =0}=\mu _P(e^{\tau /2}w)\mu _P(e^{\tau /2}w)\underset{\alpha P}{}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(e^{\tau /2}w)|^2\alpha \alpha ,$$
(111)
where $`D_\rho =(/\rho _1,\mathrm{},/\rho _m)=(X_1,\mathrm{},X_m)`$. By Lemma 3.4,

$$(iD_\rho D_\phi \mathrm{\Psi }_{}|_{\phi =0},\lambda \lambda )>0,\text{for}\lambda T_F\{0\},$$

and hence $`B`$ has rank $`r`$.

(iii) To determine $`C`$, we need to change variables. Let us recall that $`M_P`$ is covered by affine coordinate charts centered at the vertices of $`P`$ described as follows: Let $`v=\alpha ^0`$ be a vertex of $`P`$. Since $`P`$ is simplicial, there are exactly $`m`$ edges (1-dimensional faces) incident to $`v`$. Choose $`\alpha ^1,\mathrm{},\alpha ^m`$ on the respective edges. Let $`\beta ^j=\alpha ^j\alpha ^0`$; then $`\{\beta ^1,\mathrm{},\beta ^m\}`$ form a basis for $`^m`$. Since we are assuming that $`P`$ is Delzant, we can choose the $`\alpha ^j`$ such that $`\{\beta ^1,\mathrm{},\beta ^m\}`$ generate $`^m`$. We consider the $`m\times m`$ matrix of integers

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_{jk}\right)=\left(\beta _k^j\right).$$

Then $`det\mathrm{\Delta }=\pm 1`$ and the matrix $`\mathrm{\Gamma }:=\mathrm{\Delta }^1`$ has integer entries. Consider the (Zariski) neighborhood of $`v`$:

$$U_v:=\{wM_P:\chi _v(w)0\}=\{F:F\text{is a face of}P,v\overline{F}\}.$$

(The $`U_v`$ cover $`M_P`$.) Let $`\eta _j=w^{\beta ^j}`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},m`$. We note that the monomial mapping

$$\eta =(\eta _1,\mathrm{},\eta _m):^m^m$$

is bijective, its inverse given by

$$w_j=\eta _1^{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{j1}}\mathrm{}\eta _m^{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{jm}}.$$

Let $`F^1,\mathrm{},F^m`$ denote the facets of $`P`$ incident to $`v`$, indexed so that $`\alpha _jF^j`$. Let $`xF^j`$ be arbitrary. We then have

$$\eta _j=\frac{\chi _{\alpha ^j}(w)}{\chi _{\alpha ^0}(w)}\frac{\chi _{\alpha ^j}(x)}{\chi _{\alpha ^0}(x)}=0\text{as}\mu _P(w)xF^j.$$

(Since $`\alpha ^0\overline{F^j}`$, $`\widehat{\chi }_{\alpha ^0}(x)0`$.) Therefore $`\eta `$ extends to an isomorphism $`\eta :(U_V,v)\stackrel{}{}(^m,0)`$. Furthermore, the facets incident to $`v`$ are the images of the divisors $`\{\eta _j=0\}`$ under the moment map. (This shows that $`M_P`$ is nonsingular if the Delzant condition is satisfied.)

We note that the standard unit vectors $`e^j=\mathrm{\Gamma }\beta ^j=\mathrm{\Gamma }\alpha ^j\mathrm{\Gamma }v`$. Consider the nonhomogeneous linear map

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}:^m^m,u\mathrm{\Gamma }u\mathrm{\Gamma }v.$$

Then $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}(\alpha ^0)=0,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}(\alpha ^j)=e^j`$ ($`1jm`$). Consider the polytope $`Q=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}(P)`$. Under the map $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}`$, the closed facets $`\overline{F^j}`$ correspond to polytopes in the coordinate hyperplanes $`\{x_j=0\}`$. Hence the polytope $`Q`$ lies in the upper quadrant $`\{x_j0,1jm\}`$. We also let

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}^1:^m^m,u\mathrm{\Delta }u+v.$$

Now let us rewrite the phase in terms of the $`\eta `$ coordinates. We first note that

$$\chi _\alpha (w)=\chi _{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}(\alpha )}(\eta ),w^m,\eta _j=w^{\beta ^j}.$$

Hence,

$$H_P(\tau ,w)=\frac{_{\alpha P}e^{\alpha ,\tau }|c_\alpha \chi _{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}(\alpha )}(\eta )|^2}{_{\alpha P}|c_\alpha \chi _{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}(\alpha )}(\eta )|^2}=\frac{_{\gamma Q}e^{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(\gamma ),\tau }|c_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(\gamma )}\chi _\gamma (\eta )|^2}{_{\gamma Q}|c_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(\gamma )}\chi _\gamma (\eta )|^2}.$$
(112)
We first consider the case where $`w_z=v`$; i.e., $`r=0`$. Expanding (112) in powers of $`\eta _j`$, we have

$`H_P(\tau ,w)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{|c_v|^2e^{v,\tau }+_{j=1}^m|c_{\alpha ^j}|^2e^{\alpha ^j,\tau }|\eta _j|^2+\mathrm{}}{|c_v|^2+_{j=1}^m|c_{\alpha ^j}|^2|\eta _j|^2+\mathrm{}}}`$
$`=`$ $`e^{v,\tau }\left[1+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}}c_j^{}\left(e^{\beta ^j,\tau }1\right)|\eta _j|^2+\mathrm{}\right],`$
where $`c_j^{}=|c_{\alpha ^j}/c_{\alpha ^0}|^2>0`$. Since $`\tau `$ is in the normal cone at $`v`$,we have $`\tau ,v\tau ,\alpha _j`$ and hence $`\beta _j,\tau 0`$, for $`1jm`$. Now suppose that $`z`$ is not a transition point; i.e., $`\tau `$ is not in the boundary of the normal cone at $`\{v\}`$. Then $`\tau `$ is not perpendicular to any of the rays along the edges incident to $`v`$; so $`\beta _j,\tau 0`$, and therefore $`\beta _j,\tau >0`$. Hence

$$\mathrm{log}H_P(\tau ,w)=v,\tau +\underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}b_j|\eta _j|^2+\mathrm{},b_j=c_j^{}\left(e^{\beta ^j,\tau }1\right)<0.$$

This leads to two conclusions: (i) $`d\mathrm{log}H_P|_{w=w_z}=0`$ and hence $`(0,w_z)`$ is a critical point of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\tau ,,)`$; (ii) $`C=D_w^2\mathrm{log}H_P|_{w=w_z}`$ is a diagonal matrix with negative eigenvalues $`b_1,b_1,\mathrm{},b_m,b_m`$. Note that $`C`$ is singular whenever $`z`$ is in the boundary of the normal polyhedron of $`v`$.

Now consider the case $`1rm1`$. (If $`r=m`$, then $`z`$ is in the allowable region.) We can assume without loss of generality that $`Y=\mu _P^1(F_z)`$ is given by

$$\eta _1=\mathrm{}=\eta _{mr}=0,\eta _{mr+1}0,\mathrm{},\eta _m0.$$
(113)
In order to decompose the sum in (112), we consider the sets of lattice points

$$E_j:=\{\gamma Q:\gamma _k=\delta _k^j\text{for}1kmr\}=Q\left\{e^j+_{l=mr+1}^ms_le^l\right\},$$

for $`1jmr`$. (These are the indices of the only terms that contribute to the normal Hessian at $`w_z`$.) We also let $`E_0=Q(\{0_{mr}\}\times ^r)`$. Since $`\beta ^l,\tau =0`$ for $`l>mr`$, it follows that

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(\gamma ),\tau =\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(e^j),\tau =\alpha ^j,\tau \gamma E_j,$$

and similarly

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(\gamma ),\tau =\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(0),\tau =v,\tau \gamma E_0.$$

We write

$$\eta =(\eta ^{},\eta ^{\prime \prime }),\eta ^{}=(\eta _1,\mathrm{},\eta _{mr}),\eta ^{\prime \prime }=(\eta _{mr+1},\mathrm{},\eta _m).$$

Let $`E_j^{\prime \prime }^m`$, for $`j=0,1,\mathrm{},mr`$, be given by

$$\{0_{mr}\}\times E_0^{\prime \prime }=E_0,\{0_{mr}\}\times E_j^{\prime \prime }=E_je^j(1jmr).$$

Thus we rewrite (112):

$`H_P(\tau ,w)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^{v,\tau }_{\gamma E_0}|c_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(\gamma )}\chi _\gamma (\eta )|^2+_{j=1}^{mr}\left[e^{\alpha ^j,\tau }_{\gamma E_j}|c_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(\gamma )}\chi _\gamma (\eta )|^2\right]+\mathrm{}}{_{\gamma E_0}|c_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(\gamma )}\chi _\gamma (\eta )|^2+_{j=1}^{mr}\left[_{\gamma E_j}|c_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(\gamma )}\chi _\gamma (\eta )|^2\right]+\mathrm{}}}`$ (114)
$`=`$ $`e^{v,\tau }{\displaystyle \frac{_{\nu E_0^{\prime \prime }}c_{0\nu }^{}|\chi _\nu (\eta ^{\prime \prime })|^2+_{j=1}^{mr}\left[_{\nu E_j^{\prime \prime }}c_{j\nu }^{}|\chi _\nu (\eta ^{\prime \prime })|^2\right]e^{\beta ^j,\tau }|\eta _j|^2+\mathrm{}}{_{\nu E_0^{\prime \prime }}c_{0\nu }^{}|\chi _\nu (\eta ^{\prime \prime })|^2+_{j=1}^{mr}\left[_{\nu E_j^{\prime \prime }}c_{j\nu }^{}|\chi _\nu (\eta ^{\prime \prime })|^2\right]|\eta _j|^2+\mathrm{}}}`$
$`=`$ $`e^{v,\tau }\left[1+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{mr}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _j(\eta ^{\prime \prime })}{\lambda _0(\eta ^{\prime \prime })}}\left(e^{\beta ^j,\tau }1\right)|\eta _j|^2+O(\eta ^{}^4)\right],`$
where $`c_{j\nu }^{}_+`$ and

$$\lambda _j(\eta ^{\prime \prime })=\underset{\nu E_j^{\prime \prime }}{}c_{j\nu }^{}|\chi _\nu (\eta ^{\prime \prime })|^2=c_{j0}^{}+\underset{\nu E_j^{\prime \prime }\{0\}}{}c_{j\nu }^{}|\chi _\nu (\eta ^{\prime \prime })|^2>0(0jmr).$$

(Note that (114) implies that $`H_P(\tau ,w)=e^{v,\tau }`$ for $`wF_z`$, as we observed earlier, and that $`(0,w_z)`$ is a critical point of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{}`$.) Suppose as before that $`z`$ is not a transition point; i.e., $`\tau `$ is not in the boundary of the normal cone at $`F_z`$. Then $`\beta _j,\tau 0`$ and in fact $`\beta _j,\tau >0`$, for $`1jmr`$, since $`\tau `$ is in the cone at $`F_z`$. It now follows from (114) that $`C=D_\eta ^{}^2\mathrm{log}H_P|_{\{\eta ^{}=0\}}`$ is diagonal (with respect to the $`\eta ^{}`$ coordinates) with negative eigenvalues.

(iv) To complete the proof of the lemma, we now show that the other blocks of the normal Hessian $`D_𝐍^2\mathrm{\Psi }_{}`$ vanish. We first note that since $`H_P(\tau _z,)`$ is constant on $`Y`$, the matrix $`^{\prime \prime }`$ vanishes. We also immediately conclude from (114) that

$$^{}=D_{\rho ^{\prime \prime }}D_\eta ^{}\mathrm{log}H_P|_{\{\eta ^{}=0\}}=0,$$

where $`\rho ^{\prime \prime }=(\mathrm{}\eta _{mr+1},\mathrm{},\mathrm{}\eta _m)`$.

It remains to show that $`=0`$. Assuming (113), we expand (110) as before:

$`iD_\phi \mathrm{\Psi }_{}|_{\phi =0}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{\gamma Q}e^{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(\gamma ),\tau }|c_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(\gamma )}\chi _\gamma (\eta )|^2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(\gamma )}{_{\gamma Q}|c_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(\gamma )}\chi _\gamma (\eta )|^2}}+f(z)`$
$`=`$ $`e^{v,\tau }\left[\stackrel{}{g}_0(\eta ^{\prime \prime })+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{mr}{}}}|\eta _j|^2\stackrel{}{g}_j(\eta ^{\prime \prime })+O(\eta ^{}^4)\right]+f(z).`$
Hence

$$=D_\eta ^{}D_\phi \mathrm{\Psi }_{}|_{\phi =0,\eta ^{}=0}=0.$$

#### 3.2.3. Proof of Lemma 3.9

It follows from (114) that $`(0,w_z)`$ is a critical point of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\tau ,,)`$ and hence $`\{0\}\times 𝒞_z`$ is contained in the critical set. We conclude from Lemma 3.10 that the real $`r\times r`$ matrix $`B^tA^1B=(iB)^t(A^1)(iB)`$ is positive definite, and hence

$$detD_𝐍^2\mathrm{\Psi }_{}=detAdet(B^tA^1B)detC0,$$
(115)
if $`z`$ is not a transition point. Therefore $`\{0\}\times 𝒞_z`$ is a nondegenerate critical manifold of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{}`$ whenever $`z`$ is not a transition point.

Recalling (97), we set

$$b(z):=\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\tau _z,0,w_z)=p\mathrm{log}H_\mathrm{\Sigma }(\tau _z,z)\mathrm{log}H_P(\tau _z,w_z).$$
(116)
We now show that the maximum of $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Psi }_{}`$ on the $`\tau `$-contour is attained on $`\{0\}\times 𝒞_z`$ and hence the maximum equals $`b(z)`$. We recall that by (87), it suffices to show that $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Psi }(\tau ,0,w)`$ attains its maximum at $`w=w_z`$, and by (97), this is equivalent to establishing that $`\mathrm{log}H(\tau ,)`$, whose Hessian is $`C`$, takes its maximum at $`w_z`$. We first suppose that $`z`$ is not a transition point. Note that by the above, $`H(\tau ,)`$ is constant and has a local maximum along $`Y=\mu _P^1(F_z)`$. Suppose on the contrary that there is a point $`\stackrel{~}{w}M_P`$ such that

$$H(\tau ,\stackrel{~}{w})=\underset{wM_P}{sup}H(\tau ,w)>H(\tau ,w_z).$$
(117)
Let $`\stackrel{~}{F}`$ denote the face that contains $`\mu _P(\stackrel{~}{w})`$. Since $`H(\tau ,)`$ is constant on $`F_z`$, by (117) the face $`\stackrel{~}{F}`$ is not contained in $`\overline{F_z}`$, and hence $`C_{\stackrel{~}{F}}C_{F_z}^{}=\mathrm{}`$, where $`C_F^{}`$ denotes the nonboundary points of the cone $`C_F`$. Since $`\tau C_{F_z}^{}`$ (by the assumption that $`z`$ is not a transition point), it follows that $`\tau C_{\stackrel{~}{F}}`$. Then we conclude from (114) that at least one of the eigenvalues of $`C(\stackrel{~}{w})`$ is positive, contradicting (117). On the other hand, if $`z`$ is a transition point, then $`\tau C_F^{}^{}`$, where $`F^{}`$ is a face whose closure contains $`F_z`$. Then $`H(\tau ,w_z)=H(\tau ,w^{})`$ for $`w^{}F^{}`$ and $`H(\tau ,)`$ attains a local maximum along $`F^{}`$. Then by the above argument, $`H(\tau ,w^{})`$ is a global maximum. Recalling (116), we then have

$$b(z)=\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\tau _z,0,w_z)=\underset{wM_P}{sup}\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\tau _z,0,w_z)=\underset{\phi 𝐓^m,wM_P}{sup}\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\tau _z,\phi ,w_z).$$
(118)
This completes the proof of Lemma 3.9.∎

#### 3.2.4. Asymptotic expansions on the classically forbidden region.

We continue the proof of Proposition 3.1(ii). Equation (118) says that $`\mathrm{\Psi }+b(z)`$ is a phase function of positive type that takes the value 0 on the critical set $`\{0\}\times 𝒞_z`$. If $`z`$ is not a transition point, the points of $`\{0\}\times 𝒞_z`$ are nondegenerate critical points. As before, we obtain by the method of stationary phase an asymptotic expansion

$$K(z)=N^{\frac{m+r}{2}}e^{Nb(z)}[c_0^F(z)+c_1^F(z)N^1+c_2^F(z)N^2+\mathrm{}]$$
(119)
valid over each open region $`_F^{}`$. (Since the critical submanifold $`\{0\}\times 𝒞_z`$ has codimension $`3mr`$, the leading term of the expansion of $`e^{Nb(z)}K(z)`$ contains $`N^{2m\frac{1}{2}(3mr)}=N^{\frac{m+r}{2}}`$.) To show that $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)`$ also has the asymptotic expansion (119), we must show that

$$S_N(z)=O(N^ke^{Nb(z)})k,$$
(120)
where the bound is locally uniform in $`𝒞^j`$ for all $`j`$. We deform the $`𝐓^m`$ integral in (71) to an integral over $`\{|\zeta |=\tau _z\}`$ as before, so that we have

$`S_N(z)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi )^m}}{\displaystyle _{M_P}}{\displaystyle _{M_P}}{\displaystyle _{𝐓^m}}\stackrel{~}{R}_N(w,\eta )\left({\displaystyle \underset{|\alpha |p}{}}e^{\alpha ,\tau _z+i\phi }|\stackrel{~}{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z)|^2\right)^N`$ (121)
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \underset{\alpha P}{}}e^{\alpha ,\tau _z+i\phi }\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(\eta )\overline{\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)}\right)^Nd\phi dwd\eta ,`$
where $`\stackrel{~}{R}_N=\frac{(Np+m)!}{(Np)!}R_N`$ is rapidly decaying. We first note that

$$\left|\underset{|\alpha |p}{}e^{\alpha ,\tau _z+i\phi }|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z)|^2\right|\underset{|\alpha |p}{}e^{\alpha ,\tau _z}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z)|^2=H_{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(\tau _z,z).$$

By the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality and the fact established above that $`H_P(\tau _z,w)`$ takes its maximum at $`w=w_z`$, we have

$`\left|{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha P}{}}e^{\alpha ,\tau _z+i\phi }\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(\eta )\overline{\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)}\right|`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha P}{}}e^{\alpha ,\tau _z/2}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(\eta )|e^{\alpha ,\tau _z/2}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|`$
$``$ $`\left({\displaystyle \underset{\alpha P}{}}e^{\alpha ,\tau _z}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(\eta )|^2\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{\alpha P}{}}e^{\alpha ,\tau _z}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^P(w)|^2\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}`$
$`=`$ $`H_P(\tau _z,\eta )^{\frac{1}{2}}H_P(\tau _z,w)^{\frac{1}{2}}H_P(\tau _z,w_z).`$
Therefore, we can write

$$S_N(z)=\frac{1}{(2\pi )^m}_{M_P}_{M_P}_{𝐓^m}\stackrel{~}{R}_N(w,\eta )e^{N\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}(\phi ,w,\eta ;z)}𝑑\phi 𝑑w𝑑\eta ,$$

where the phase satisfies

$$\mathrm{}\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{log}\left[H_{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(\tau _z,z)H_P(\tau _z,w_z)\right]=e^{b(z)}.$$

The estimate (120) now follows from the fact that $`\stackrel{~}{R}_N`$ is rapidly decaying.

Thus, we have verified the asymptotic formula (ii) of Proposition 3.1, together with (a) and (b), and we have shown that $`b(z)`$ is given by (116).

Remark: It follows from (72), (87), and (118) that in a neighborhood $`U^m`$ of a transition point $`z^0`$, we have uniform bounds of the form

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)C_UN^{2m}e^{Nb(z)}.$$
(122)
But a sharper inequality should hold; for example, we know that if $`z^0𝒜_P`$, then $`b(z^0)=0`$ and

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z^0,z^0)\mathrm{\Pi }_{Np}^^m(z^0,z^0)=[p^m+o(1)]N^m.$$

It is an open question whether we have asymptotic expansions of the form (119) at transition points. See §5.3 for a discussion of the issues involved in studying the asymptotics at transition points.

#### 3.2.5. The decay function

In this section we verify (c)–(e) of Proposition 3.1(ii) and then prove Proposition 3.2. We first note that when $`z𝒜_P`$, we have $`\tau _z=z`$ and hence by (116), $`b=0`$ on $`𝒜_P`$. Furthermore, since $`z\tau _z`$ is easily seen to be continuous on $`^m`$ and $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}`$ on each $`\overline{_F}`$, the same holds for $`b(z)`$.

We now show that $`b`$ is $`𝒞^1`$ by computing its derivative. Recalling that $`b(z)=\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\tau _z,0,w_z;z)`$, we have

$$D_zb=D_\tau \mathrm{\Psi }_{}|_{(\tau _z,0,w_z,z)}D_z\tau _z+D_w\mathrm{\Psi }_{}|_{(\tau _z,0,w_z,z)}D_zw_z+D_z\mathrm{\Psi }_{}|_{(\tau _z,0,w_z,z)}.$$

Here, $`D_z\tau _z`$ and $`D_zw_z`$ are only piecewise continuous, being discontinuous at transition points. By (88)–(91) and the fact that $`(0,w_z)`$ is a critical point of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\tau _z,,)`$, we have

$$D_\tau \mathrm{\Psi }_{}|_{(\tau _z,0,w_z,z)}=iD_\phi \mathrm{\Psi }_{}|_{(\tau _z,0,w_z,z)}=0.$$

The critical point condition also says that $`D_w\mathrm{\Psi }_{}|_{(\tau _z,0,w_z,z)}=0`$. Recalling (97), we thus have

$$D_zb=D_z\mathrm{\Psi }_{}(\tau ,0,w;z)|_{\tau =\tau _z,w=w_z}=pD_z\mathrm{log}H_\mathrm{\Sigma }(\tau ,z)|_{\tau =\tau _z}𝒞^0(^m).$$
(123)
Therefore, $`b𝒞^1(^m)`$, verifying (e).

To verify (c), we need to find a more explicit formula for the derivative, using the log coordinates $`\zeta _j=\rho _j+i\theta _j=\mathrm{log}z_j`$. We consider the map $`\xi =(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m):^m^m`$ given by

$$\xi (z)=e^{\tau _z/2}z=e^{\tau _z/2+\rho +i\theta },$$
(124)
so that $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }\xi (z)=\frac{1}{p}\mu _P(w_z)`$. By (123),

$`D_\rho b`$ $`=`$ $`pD_\rho \mathrm{log}H_\mathrm{\Sigma }(\tau ,e^\rho )|_{\tau =\tau _z}`$ (125)
$`=`$ $`pD_\rho \mathrm{log}\left(1+{\displaystyle e^{\tau _j+2\rho _j}}\right)|_{\tau =\tau _z}+pD_\rho \mathrm{log}\left(1+{\displaystyle e^{2\rho _j}}\right).`$
We have

$`D_\rho \mathrm{log}\left(1+{\displaystyle e^{\tau _j+2\rho _j}}\right)|_{\tau =\tau _z}`$ $`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{2e^{\tau _1+2\rho _1}}{1+e^{\tau _j+2\rho _j}}},\mathrm{},{\displaystyle \frac{2e^{\tau _m+2\rho _m}}{1+e^{\tau _j+2\rho _j}}})`$ (126)
$`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{2|\xi _1|^2}{1+\xi ^2}},\mathrm{}{\displaystyle \frac{2|\xi _m|^2}{1+\xi ^2}})=2\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }\xi ,`$
and similarly, $`D_\rho \mathrm{log}\left(1+e^{2\rho _j}\right)=2\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. Hence

$$D_\rho b=2p(\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }\xi ).$$
(127)
Let $`z^m\overline{𝒜_P}`$. If $`z`$ is not a transition point, then the asymptotic expansion holds at $`z`$, and as we observed at the beginning of §3.2, $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)`$ is rapidly decaying; hence $`b(z)>0`$. Now suppose on the contrary that $`z`$ is a transition point and $`b(z)=0`$. Then $`z`$ would be a critical point for $`b`$, which is impossible since $`Db|_z0`$ whenever $`z\overline{𝒜_P}`$ by (127). This completes the proof of (c).

It remains to verify formula (10). First we establish (11): Fix a point $`z`$ in the classically forbidden region, and make the change of variables $`\rho _j=\sigma _j/2+\mathrm{log}|z_j|`$. Then by (127),

$$b(e^{\tau _z/2}z))b(z)=_0^{\tau _z}D_\sigma b(e^{\sigma /2}z)d\sigma =p_0^{\tau _z}[\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(e^{\sigma /2}z)\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }\xi (e^{\sigma /2}z)]d\sigma .$$
(128)
By definition, $`q(z)=\mu _P(w_z)=p\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }\xi (z)`$, and hence $`p\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }\xi (e^{\sigma /2}z)=q(e^{\sigma /2}z)`$. Furthermore $`b(e^{\tau _z/2}z))=0`$ since $`e^{\tau _z/2}z=\xi (z)𝒜_P`$, and formula (11) follows from (128).

Note that the integral in (11) is independent of the path from $`0`$ to $`\tau _z`$. Choosing the path $`\sigma (r)=r\tau _z`$, $`0r1`$, we have

$$_0^{\tau _z}q(e^{\sigma /2}z)𝑑\sigma =_0^{\tau _z}q(z)𝑑\sigma =q(z),\tau _z.$$
(129)
On the other hand, since $`D_\sigma \mathrm{log}(1+e^{\sigma /2}z^2)=\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(e^{\sigma /2}z)`$, we have

$$_0^{\tau _z}\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(e^{\sigma /2}z)𝑑\sigma =\mathrm{log}(1+e^{\tau _z/2}z^2)\mathrm{log}(1+z^2).$$
(130)
Substituting (129)–(130) in (11), we obtain formula (10). This completes the proof of part (ii) of Proposition 3.1.

We note that $`b`$ fails to be $`𝒞^2`$ at transition points. This follows from (127), (124), and the fact that $`z\tau _z`$ is piecewise $`𝒞^1`$ with discontinuous derivative at the interfaces between the regions $`_F`$.

Remark: An alternate derivation of (10) is as follows: By an argument similar to the above, we obtain

$$\mathrm{log}H_P(\tau ,w)=_0^\tau \mu _P(e^{\sigma /2}w)𝑑\sigma ,$$
(131)
and therefore

$$\mathrm{log}H_P(\tau _z,w_z)=\mu _P(w_z),\tau _z.$$
(132)
Formula (10) is an immediate consequence of (116) and (132).

We now prove Proposition 3.2: By Proposition 3.1(ii) and (116),

$$\frac{1}{N}\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)b(z)=p\mathrm{log}H_\mathrm{\Sigma }(\tau _z,z)+\mathrm{log}H_P(\tau _z,w_z),$$
(133)
for all non-transition points $`z`$. Let

$$u_N(z)=\frac{1}{N}\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)+p\mathrm{log}(1+z^2)=\frac{1}{N}\mathrm{log}\underset{\alpha NP}{}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{Np}{\alpha }\right)e^{2\alpha ,\rho },z^m.$$
(134)
Thus for all non-transition points $`z`$, we have

$$u_N(z)u_{\mathrm{}}(z):=p\mathrm{log}(1+z^2)b(z)=p\mathrm{log}(1+e^{\tau _z/2}z^2)+\mathrm{log}H_P(\tau _z,w_z),$$
(135)
We must show that convergence of (135) also holds at the transition points and is uniform on compact subsets of $`^m`$. We again use the log coordinates $`\zeta _j=\rho _j+i\theta _j=\mathrm{log}z_j`$, so that

$$D_\rho u_N=\frac{1}{N}D_\rho \mathrm{log}\underset{\alpha NP}{}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{Np}{\alpha }\right)e^{2\alpha ,\rho }=\frac{_{\alpha NP}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{Np}{\alpha }\right)e^{2\alpha ,\rho }2\alpha }{N_{\alpha NP}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{Np}{\alpha }\right)e^{2\alpha ,\rho }}=\frac{2}{N}\mu _{NP},$$
(136)
and therefore $`D_\rho u_N2p`$. Since $`\{u_N(z^0)\}`$ converges for any non-transition point $`z^0`$, it follows that $`\{u_N\}`$ is uniformly bounded and uniformly equicontinuous on compact sets. Therefore it converges uniformly on compact sets in $`^m`$.∎

#### 3.2.6. Precise asymptotics on the classically allowed region.

In this section, we prove part (i) of Proposition 3.1. Since

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{Np\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z,z)\frac{dimH^0(^m,𝒪(Np))}{\mathrm{Vol}(^m)}=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{Np+m}{m}\right)m!=\underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}(Np+j),$$

we have by (29) and (39),

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)=\underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}(Np+j)+R_N(z),$$

where

$$R_N(z)=\underset{\alpha Np\mathrm{\Sigma }NP}{}\frac{1}{\chi _\alpha ^2}|\widehat{\chi }_\alpha (z)|^2=\left[\underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}(Np+j)\right]\underset{\alpha Np\mathrm{\Sigma }NP}{}|\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{Np\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z)|^2.$$
(137)
Since $`\mathrm{\#}(Np\mathrm{\Sigma }NP)=O(N^m)`$, Proposition 3.1(i) is an immediate consequence of (137) and the following uniform asymptotic decay estimate for monomials.

###### Lemma 3.11.

Suppose that $`K^m`$ is compact, and let $`U\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ be an open neighborhood of $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(K)`$. Then there exist positive constants $`C_l=C_{l,K,U},\lambda =\lambda _{K,U}`$ such that

$$\widehat{m}_\alpha ^{N\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{𝒞^l(K)}C_le^{\lambda N}\text{whenever }\frac{\alpha }{N}\mathrm{\Sigma }U,N1,l0.$$

###### Proof.

We first prove the $`𝒞^0`$ estimate. Choose a positive integer $`k>2m^2/\text{dist}(\mathrm{\Sigma }U,\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(K))`$. We consider the finite collection of polytopes

$$Q_\beta :=2m\mathrm{\Sigma }+\beta k\mathrm{\Sigma },\beta ^m(k2m)\mathrm{\Sigma }.$$

For each $`\beta `$ as above, we let $`b_\beta (z)`$ be the function on $`^m`$ given by formula (10) with $`P`$ replaced by $`Q_\beta `$ and with $`p`$ replaced by $`k`$. We claim that the $`𝒞^0`$ estimate holds with

$$\lambda =\frac{1}{k+\epsilon }inf\{b_\beta (z):zK,\beta ^m(k2m)\mathrm{\Sigma },\frac{1}{k}Q_\beta \mathrm{\Sigma }U\}>0.$$

Suppose on the contrary that the estimate does not hold with this value of $`\lambda `$. Then we can choose an increasing sequence of integers $`\{N_j\}`$ and a sequence $`\alpha ^jN(\mathrm{\Sigma }U)^m`$ such that

$$e^{\lambda N_j}\underset{K}{sup}\left|\widehat{m}_{\alpha ^j}^{N_j\mathrm{\Sigma }}\right|^2+\mathrm{}.$$
(138)
By passing to a subsequence, we can assume that $`\frac{\alpha ^j}{N_j}x\mathrm{\Sigma }U`$. Choose $`\beta ^m(k2m)\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ such that

$$x\text{interior}_\mathrm{\Sigma }\left(\frac{1}{k}Q_\beta \right),$$

and hence $`k\alpha ^jN_jQ_\beta `$ for $`j1`$. Since dist$`(x,K)\frac{2m^2}{k}\text{diam}(\frac{1}{k}Q_\beta )`$, it follows that $`(\frac{1}{k}Q_\beta )K=\mathrm{}`$. Hence by Proposition 3.2 applied to the polytope $`Q_\beta `$, there is a positive constant $`A`$ such that

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NQ_\beta }(z,z)A\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{k}{k+\epsilon }b_\beta (z)N\right)Ae^{\lambda kN}zK,N1.$$
(139)
We shall use the multinomial inequality:

$$\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{N}{\alpha }\right)^k\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{kN}{k\alpha }\right).$$
(140)
One way to verify (140) is to regard $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{N}{\alpha }\right)`$ as the partition function $`𝒫_N(\alpha )`$ for the polytope $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$; i.e., the number of ways to write $`\alpha =\beta ^1+\mathrm{}+\beta ^N`$, where $`\beta \mathrm{\Sigma }`$ (see §2.1). Now, given $`k\alpha kN\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ we first write $`k\alpha =\alpha +\mathrm{}+\alpha `$ ($`k`$ times) and then decompose each $`\alpha `$ as above, resulting in $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{N}{\alpha }\right)^k`$ different decompositions of $`k\alpha `$ as a sum of $`kN`$ elements of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. This gives us the lower bound for $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{kN}{k\alpha }\right)`$ in (140).

We thus have

$$|\widehat{m}_{\alpha ^j}^{N_j\mathrm{\Sigma }}|^{2k}=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{N_j}{\alpha ^j}\right)^k|\widehat{\chi }_{\alpha ^j}|^{2k}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{kN_j}{k\alpha ^j}\right)|\widehat{\chi }_{k\alpha ^j}|^2=|\widehat{m}_{k\alpha ^j}^{kN_j\mathrm{\Sigma }}|^2.$$

Since $`k\alpha ^jN_jQ_\beta `$, it then follows from (139) that

$$|\widehat{m}_{\alpha ^j}^{N_j\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z)|^2|\widehat{m}_{k\alpha ^j}^{kN_j\mathrm{\Sigma }}|^{2/k}\mathrm{\Pi }_{|N_jQ_\beta }(z,z)^{1/k}A^{1/k}e^{\lambda N_j},$$

for all $`zK`$, which contradicts (138). Hence the $`𝒞^0`$ estimate holds.

We now verify the $`𝒞^1`$ estimate: We have

$$|\widehat{m}_\alpha (z)|=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{N}{\alpha }\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}h(z)^{\frac{N}{2}}|z^\alpha |,h(z)=\frac{1}{1+z^2}.$$

Differentiating, we obtain

$$D_\rho |\widehat{m}_\alpha (z)|=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{N}{\alpha }\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}h(z)^{\frac{N}{2}}|z^\alpha |\left[\alpha +\frac{N}{2}D_\rho \mathrm{log}h\right]=|\widehat{m}_\alpha (z)|\left[\alpha +\frac{N}{2}D_\rho \mathrm{log}h\right],$$

and hence the $`𝒞^1`$ estimate follows from the $`𝒞^0`$ estimate. Differentiating repeatedly, we obtain all the $`𝒞^l`$ estimates. ∎

The proof of Proposition 3.1 is now complete.

## 4. Distribution of Zeros

In order to deduce Theorem 3 from Proposition 3.1, we need to relate $`𝐄_{|NP}(Z_s)`$ to the Szegö kernel $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}`$. The idea is essentially the same as in \[SZ1, Prop. 3.1\], but neither the statement nor the proof there cover the application we need. Hence we provide a more general statement for the zeros of general linear systems on compact Kähler manifolds (Proposition 4.1).

### 4.1. Expected distribution of zeros and Szegö kernels

As in §1.2, we let $`LM`$ be a holomorphic line bundle over a compact Kähler manifold, and we consider a linear subspace $`𝒮H^0(M,L^N)`$, which we endow with a Hermitian inner product. (The set of zero divisors $`\{Z_s:s𝒮\}𝒮`$ is called a linear system on $`M`$.) We let $`e_L`$ be a local holomorphic frame over a trivializing chart $`U`$. We choose an orthonormal basis $`\{S_j:1jk\}`$ for $`𝒮`$ and we write $`S_j=f_je_L`$ over $`U`$. Any section $`s𝒮`$ may then be written as

$$s=c,Fe_L^N,\text{where }F=(f_1,\mathrm{},f_k),c,F=\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}c_jf_j.$$

The Kodaira map is given by:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_𝒮:M^{k1},\mathrm{\Phi }_𝒮(z)=[f_1(z),\mathrm{},f_k(z)].$$
(141)
(We use the symbol ‘$``$’ in (141) to indicate that the map $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝒮`$ is a rational map; it is holomorphic if and only if $`𝒮`$ has no basepoints other than fixed components.) Under a change of orthonormal basis, one gets a unitarily equivalent map. The current of integration over the zeros of $`s=c,Fe_L^N`$ is then given locally by the Poincar’e-Lelong formula:

$$Z_s=\frac{\sqrt{1}}{\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}|c,F|.$$
(142)
It is of course independent of the choice of local frame $`e_L`$ and basis $`\{S_j\}`$.

We write a section locally as $`s=fe_L`$ and we write its Hermitian norm as $`s(z)_h=a(z)^{\frac{1}{2}}|f(z)|`$ where $`a(z)=e_L(z)_h^2`$. The curvature form $`c_1(L,h)`$ of $`L`$ is given locally by

$$c_1(L,h)=\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}a.$$

###### Proposition 4.1.

Let $`(L,h)`$ be a Hermitian line bundle on a compact complex manifold $`M`$. Let $`𝒮`$ be a subspace of $`H^0(M,L)`$ of dimension $`2`$. We give $`𝒮`$ an inner product and we let $`\gamma `$ be the associated Gaussian probability measure. Then the expected zero current of a random section $`s𝒮`$ is given by

$`𝐄_\gamma (Z_s)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }}\overline{}\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Pi }_𝒮(z,z)+c_1(L,h)`$
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝒮^{}\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}+D_0,`$
where $`D_0`$ is the fixed component of the linear system $`𝒮`$.

###### Proof.

The Gaussian measure $`\gamma `$ is the standard Gaussian for an inner product on $`𝒮`$. Let $`\{S_j\}`$ be an orthonormal basis for this inner product. As above, we choose a local nonvanishing section $`e_L`$ of $`L`$ over $`UM`$, and we write

$$s=\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}c_jS_j=c,Fe_L,$$

where $`S_j=f_je_L,F=(f_1,\mathrm{},f_k)`$. As in the proof of \[SZ1\], Proposition 3.1, we then write $`F(x)=|F(x)|u(x)`$ so that $`|u|1`$ and

$$\mathrm{log}|c,F|=\mathrm{log}|F|+\mathrm{log}|c,u|.$$
(143)
By (142), we have

$`(𝐄_\gamma (Z_s),\phi )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{1}}{\pi }}{\displaystyle _^k}(\overline{}\mathrm{log}|c,F|,\phi )𝑑\gamma (c)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{1}}{\pi }}{\displaystyle _^k}(\overline{}\mathrm{log}|F|,\phi )𝑑\gamma (c)+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{1}}{\pi }}({\displaystyle _^k}\overline{}\mathrm{log}|c,u|d\gamma (c),\phi ),`$
for all test forms $`\phi 𝒟^{m1,m1}(U)`$. Upon integration in $`c`$, the second term of (143) becomes constant in $`z`$ and the derivatives kill it. The first term is independent of $`c`$ so we may remove the Gaussian integral. Thus

$$𝐄_\gamma (Z_s)=\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}|F|^2=\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\left(\mathrm{log}S_j^2+\mathrm{log}a\right).$$
(144)
Recalling that $`\mathrm{\Pi }_𝒮(z,z)=S_j(z)^2`$ and that $`c_1(L,h)=\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}a`$, the first identity of the proposition follows.

Before completing the proof of the second identity, we recall the definition of the pull-back of a form by a rational map $`X\stackrel{g}{}Y`$: we let $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}`$ be the desingularization of the graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }X\times Y`$ of $`g`$ so that we have $`g\pi _1=\pi _2`$, where $`\pi _1,\pi _2`$ are the projections from $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}`$ to $`X,Y`$ respectively. Then for any smooth form $`\eta `$ on $`Y`$ we define the pull-back current $`g^{}\eta :=\pi _1\pi _2^{}\eta `$, which is easily seen to have $`^1`$ coefficients with singularities on the indeterminacy locus $`I_g`$ of $`g`$.

We can suppose that $`U`$ is chosen so that there is a $`\psi 𝒪(U)`$ with $`\text{Div}(\psi )=D_0`$ on $`U`$. Write $`f_j=\psi g_j`$. Then by (144) we have

$$𝐄_\gamma (Z_s)=\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}|F|^2=\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}|\psi |^2+\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}|g_j|^2.$$

The first term equals $`D_0`$. By definition, the second term equals $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝒮^{}\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}`$ outside the indeterminacy locus $`I_{\mathrm{\Phi }_𝒮}`$. Since $`I_{\mathrm{\Phi }_𝒮}`$ has real codimension $`4`$ and $`\mathrm{log}|g_j|^2`$ is (pluri-)subharmonic, the coefficients of $`\frac{i}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}|g_j|^2`$ are measures that do not give mass to $`I_{\mathrm{\Phi }_𝒮}`$; i.e., the coefficients are in $`^1(U)`$. Since the same is true for the coefficients of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝒮^{}\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}`$, the current equality extends to all of $`U`$. ∎

We note that the expected zero current $`𝐄_\gamma (Z_s)`$ is a smooth form outside the base point set of $`𝒮`$. We shall use the following result on simultaneous expected zeros (away from base points).

###### Proposition 4.2.

Let $`M`$ be a compact complex manifold, and let $`(L_1,h_1),\mathrm{},(L_k,h_k)`$ be Hermitian line bundles on $`M`$ ($`1kdimM`$). Suppose we are given subspaces $`𝒮_jH^0(M,L_j)`$ with inner products $`,_j`$ and let $`\gamma _j`$ denote the associated Gaussian probability measures on the $`𝒮_j`$ ($`1jk`$). Let $`U`$ be an open subset of $`M`$ on which $`𝒮_j`$ has no base points for all $`j`$. Then the expected simultaneous-zero current of random sections $`s_1𝒮_1,\mathrm{},s_k𝒮_k`$ is given over $`U`$ by

$$𝐄_{\gamma _1\times \mathrm{}\times \gamma _k}(Z_{s_1,\mathrm{},s_k})=\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}𝐄_{\gamma _j}(Z_{s_j})=\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}\left[\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Pi }_{𝒮_j}(z,z)+c_1(L_j,h_j)\right]=\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒮_j}^{}\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}.$$

###### Proof.

We first note that the expect current is well defined, since for all choices of the $`s_j`$ the total mass of the zero current $`Z_{s_1,\mathrm{},s_k}`$ equals the Chern number $`c_1(L_1)\mathrm{}c_1(L_k)`$, and hence for each test form $`\phi 𝒟^{mk,mk}(U)`$, the function $`(Z_{s_1,\mathrm{},s_k},\phi )`$ is in $`^{\mathrm{}}(𝒮_1\times \mathrm{}\times 𝒮_k)`$.

Next we note the following functorial property of the expected zero current: Suppose that $`\rho :YM`$ is a holomorphic mapping of complex manifolds and let $`\rho ^{}\gamma _j`$ be the pulled-back Gaussian measure on $`\rho ^{}𝒮_jH^0(Y,\rho ^{}L)`$. Then

$$𝐄_{\rho ^{}\gamma _j}(Z_{t_j})=\rho ^{}𝐄_{\gamma _j}(Z_{s_j})\text{on }\rho ^1(U)(t_j\rho ^{}𝒮_j).$$
(145)
Indeed, (145) follows immediately from Proposition 4.1 and its proof. As a special case, suppose that $`Y`$ is a submanifold of $`M`$ and $`\rho `$ is the inclusion. Then (145) becomes

$$𝐄_{\gamma _j}([Y]Z_{s_j})=[Y]𝐄_{\gamma _j}(Z_{s_j})\text{on }U.$$
(146)
(In fact, (146) holds for any subvariety $`Y`$, but we don’t need this fact here.)

We now verify the current identity by induction on $`k`$. For $`k=1`$, this is Proposition 4.1, so assume that $`k>1`$ and the proposition has been verified for $`k1`$. Consider $`Y=|Z_{s_1,\mathrm{},s_{k1}}|`$. By Bertini’s Theorem, we know that $`Y`$ is smooth (and of codimension $`k1`$) for almost all $`s_1,\mathrm{},s_{k1}`$. Therefore by (146),

$$Z_{s_1,\mathrm{},s_k}𝑑\gamma _k(s_k)=Z_{s_1,\mathrm{},s_{k1}}Z_{s_k}d\gamma _k(s_k)=Z_{s_1,\mathrm{},s_{k1}}𝐄_{\gamma _k}(Z_{s_k})\text{for a.a. }s_1,\mathrm{},s_{k1}.$$

Integrating over $`s_1,\mathrm{},s_{k1}`$ and using the inductive hypothesis, we obtain

$$𝐄_{\gamma _1\times \mathrm{}\times \gamma _k}(Z_{s_1,\mathrm{},s_k})=𝐄_{\gamma _1\times \mathrm{}\times \gamma _{k1}}(Z_{s_1,\mathrm{},s_{k1}})𝐄_{\gamma _k}(Z_{s_k})=𝐄_{\gamma _1}(Z_{s_1})\mathrm{}𝐄_{\gamma _k}(Z_{s_k}).$$

The other equalities follow from Proposition 4.1. ∎

If we consider the case where $`M=^m`$, we obtain a formula for the expected simultaneous zero current for random polynomials with given Newton polytopes:

###### Corollary 4.3.

The expected zero current of $`k`$ independent random polynomials $`f_jH^0(^m,𝒪(p_j),P_j)`$, $`1jk`$, is given over $`^m`$ by

$$𝐄_{|P_1,\mathrm{},P_k}(Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k})=\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}\left(\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Pi }_{|P_j}(z,z)+p_j\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^^m\right)\text{on}^m.$$

###### Proof.

Since $`H^0(^m,𝒪(p_j),P_j)`$ has no base points in $`^m`$, the conclusion follows from Proposition 4.2 and the fact that $`c_1(𝒪(p_j),h_{_{\mathrm{FS}}})=p_j\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}`$. ∎

Remark: By Proposition 4.1, the identity of currents

$$𝐄_{|P}(Z_f)=\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Pi }_{|P}(z,z)+p\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^^m$$
(147)
holds on all of $`^m`$.

We say that $`p`$ is minimal for $`P`$ if

$$\underset{\alpha P}{\mathrm{min}}\alpha _j=0(1jn),\underset{\alpha P}{\mathrm{max}}|\alpha |=p.$$
(148)
(Otherwise, we can choose $`p`$ to be smaller, after translating the polytope if necessary.) The hypothesis that $`p`$ is minimal for $`P`$ guarantees that $`H^0(^m,𝒪(p),P)`$ has no fixed divisors. In this case, (147) holds as an identity of $`(1,1)`$-forms with $`_{\mathrm{loc}}^1`$ coefficients.

### 4.2. Asymptotics of zeros

In this section, we prove Theorems 3 and 4 and give some additional asymptotic formulas for zeros. Theorem 1 is a special case of Corollaries 5 and 6 of Theorem 4.

To prove Theorem 3, we let $`u_N,u_{\mathrm{}}`$ be as in the proof of Proposition 3.2. By Corollary 4.3 (recalling that $`\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}=\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}(1+z^2)`$), we have

$$\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}u_N=\frac{1}{N}𝐄_{|NP}(Z_f)\text{on }^m,$$
(149)
and hence $`u_N`$ is plurisubharmonic. By (135) and (149), we conclude that

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}𝐄_{|NP}(Z_f){\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }}\overline{}u_{\mathrm{}}=p\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }}\overline{}b,`$ (150)
where differentiation is in the distribution sense.

We now show that the current $`\overline{}b𝒟^{}{}_{}{}^{1,1}(^m)`$ is given by a $`(1,1)`$-form with piecewise smooth coefficients; in fact $`\overline{}b`$ is $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}`$ on each of the regions $`_F`$ given by (9). (Equivalently, the Radon measure $`\overline{}b\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}`$ does not charge the set of transition points, and hence formula (150) can be interpreted as differentiation in the ordinary sense on the regions $`_F`$.) By Proposition 3.1, $`b𝒞^1(^m)`$; i.e., if $`z^0_F_F^{}`$, then the values of $`db(z^0)`$ computed in the two regions $`\overline{_F}`$ and $`\overline{_F^{}}`$ agree. Then for a test form $`\phi 𝒟^{m1,m1}(^m)`$, we have

$$(\overline{}b,\phi )=\underset{F}{}__Fb\overline{}\phi =\underset{F}{}__F^{}\overline{}b\phi \underset{F}{}__F(\overline{}b\phi +b\phi ).$$
(151)
Note that $`_F`$ consists of $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}`$ real hypersurfaces (consisting of those points of $`_F`$ that are contained in the boundary of only one other region $`_F^{}`$) together with submanifolds of real codimension $`2`$, and hence Stokes’ Theorem applies (see e.g. \[Fe, 4.2.14\]). Since $`b`$ and $`\overline{}b`$ are continuous on $`^m`$, the boundary integral terms in (151) cancel out and we obtain

$$(\overline{}b,\phi )=\underset{F}{}__F^{}\overline{}b\phi =_{^mE}\overline{}b\phi ,$$
(152)
where $`E:=_F_F`$ is the set of transition points. Formula (152) says that the current $`\overline{}b`$ is a $`(1,1)`$-form with piecewise smooth coefficients obtained by differentiating $`b`$ on the regions $`_F^{}`$.

We now let

$$\psi _P=\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}u_{\mathrm{}}=p\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}b$$
(153)
on each of the regions $`_F`$. By (152), the current $`\psi _P`$ is also a piecewise smooth $`(1,1)`$-form; by (150)

$$N^1𝐄_{|NP}(Z_f)\psi _P\text{(weakly)}.$$
(154)
We shall show $`_{\mathrm{loc}}^1`$ convergence of (154) when we prove Theorem 4 below. Continuing with the proof of Theorem 3, we observe that (ii) is an immediate consequence of (153), since $`b=0`$ on the classically allowed region.

To verify (iii), we again use the log coordinates $`\rho _j+i\theta _j=\mathrm{log}z_j`$, so that

$$u_{\mathrm{}}=p\mathrm{log}\left(1+e^{2\rho _j}\right)b(e^\rho ).$$
(155)
Since $`u_{\mathrm{}}`$ depends only on $`(\rho _1,\mathrm{},\rho _m)`$, we have

$$\psi _P=\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}u_{\mathrm{}}=\frac{\sqrt{1}}{8\pi }\underset{jk}{}\frac{^2u_{\mathrm{}}}{\rho _j\rho _k}d\zeta _jd\overline{\zeta }_k0.$$
(156)
Thus we must show that the Hessian of $`u_{\mathrm{}}(\rho )`$ has rank $`r`$ at points $`z^0_F^{}`$, where $`r=dimF`$. From (125)–(126) and (155), we obtain

$`D_\rho u_{\mathrm{}}`$ $`=`$ $`2p\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }\xi ,`$ (157)
where $`\xi (z)=e^{\tau _z/2}z`$ as before. Hence $`\frac{1}{2p}D_\rho ^2u_{\mathrm{}}`$ equals the Jacobian of $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }\xi `$. Since $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }\xi (z)=\frac{1}{p}\mu _P(w_z)`$, we easily see that

$$\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }\xi :_F^{}F,$$
(158)
so rank$`D(\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }\xi )r`$. In fact, (158) is a submersion, so that the rank equals $`r`$. To see that it is a submersion, we recall from the proof of Lemma 3.7 that the ‘lipeomorphism’ $`\mathrm{\Phi }^1:\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}𝒩^{}`$ restricts to a diffeomorphism

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(_F^{})\stackrel{}{}F\times C_F𝒩^{},\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(z)(\frac{1}{p}\mu _P(w_z),\tau _z)=(\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }\xi (z),\tau _z),$$

and hence (158) is a submersion, completing the proof of (iii).

We now prove Theorem 4; the case $`k=1`$ of the theorem will then yield part (i) of Theorem 3.

Let $`P_1,\mathrm{},P_k`$ be Delzant polytopes, as in Theorem 4. We first show that

$$N^k𝐄_{|NP}(Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k})\psi _k:=\psi _{P_1}\mathrm{}\psi _{P_k}\text{(weakly)}.$$
(159)
For $`1jk`$, we let

$$u_N^j=\frac{1}{N}\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP_j}(z,z)+p_j\mathrm{log}(1+z^2),$$

so that, recalling (135),

$$u_N^j(z)u_{\mathrm{}}^j(z):=p_j\mathrm{log}(1+z^2)b(z)=p_j\mathrm{log}(1+e^{\tau _z^j/2}z^2)+\mathrm{log}H_{P_j}(\tau _z^j,w_z^j),$$

where $`\tau _z^j,w_z^j`$ are as in Lemma 3.8 with $`P=P_j`$. By (153),

$$\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}u_{\mathrm{}}^j=\psi _{P_j}.$$

Recalling Corollary 4.3, we introduce the $`(k,k)`$-forms

$$\kappa _N:=\left(\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}u_N^1\right)\mathrm{}\left(\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}u_N^k\right)=N^k𝐄_{|NP_1,\mathrm{},NP_k}(Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k}).$$
(160)
Since $`u_N^ju_{\mathrm{}}^j`$ locally uniformly, it follows from the Bedford-Taylor Theorem \[BT, Kl\] that

$$\kappa _N\left(\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}u_{\mathrm{}}^1\right)\mathrm{}\left(\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}u_{\mathrm{}}^k\right)\text{(weakly)}.$$
(161)
In fact, the limit current in (161) is absolutely continuous, and hence is equal to the locally bounded (piecewise smooth) $`(k,k)`$-form $`\psi _k`$. To see this, we note that by the Bedford-Taylor Theorem,

$$\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}(\psi _{P_j}\phi _ϵ)=\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}\left[\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}(u_{\mathrm{}}^j\phi _ϵ)\right]\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}\left(\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}u_{\mathrm{}}^j\right),$$

where $`\phi _ϵ`$ denotes an approximate identity. Since the currents $`\psi _{P_j}`$ have coefficients in $`_{\mathrm{loc}}^{\mathrm{}}`$, the forms $`_{j=1}^k(\psi _P\rho _ϵ)`$ have locally uniformly bounded coefficients; absolute continuity of the limit current follows. The weak limit (159) now follows from (160)–(161).

To complete the proof of Theorem 4, we must show that $`\kappa _N\psi _k`$ in $`^1(K)`$ for all compact $`K^m`$. Let $`\epsilon >0`$ be arbitrary, and choose a nonnegative function $`\eta 𝒟(^m)`$ such that $`\eta 1`$ on a neighborhood of $`(E_1\mathrm{}E_k)K`$, where $`E_j`$ is the set of transition points for $`P_j`$, and

$$_^m\psi _k\eta \omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^{mk}<\epsilon .$$

By (159)–(160),

$$_^m\kappa _N\eta \omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^{mk}<2\epsilon \text{for }N0.$$

(Note that the above integrands are nonnegative.) Therefore,

$$\kappa _N\psi _k_{^1(K)}(1\eta )(\kappa _N\psi _k)_{^1(K)}+\eta \kappa _N_{^1(K)}+\eta \psi _k_{^1(K)}.$$

Since $`\kappa _N`$ is a positive $`(k,k)`$-form,

$$\eta \kappa _N_{^1(K)}=_K\kappa _N\eta \omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^{mk}<2\epsilon .$$

Similarly, $`\eta \psi _k_{^1(K)}=_K\psi _k\eta \omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^{mk}<\epsilon `$. Since

$$(1\eta )(\kappa _N\psi _k)0\text{uniformly on }K,$$

it follows that

$$\kappa _N\psi _k_{^1(K)}0,$$

completing the proof of Theorems 3 and 4.∎

We note that the conclusion of Theorem 4 can be replaced with an asymptotic expansion away from transition points:

###### Theorem 4.4.

Let $`P_1,\mathrm{},P_k`$ be Delzant polytopes. Let $`U`$ be a relatively compact domain in $`^m`$ such that $`\overline{U}`$ does not contain transition points for any of the $`P_j`$. Then we have a complete asymptotic expansion of the form

$$\frac{1}{N^k}𝐄_{|NP_1,\mathrm{},NP_k}(Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k})\psi _{P_1}\mathrm{}\psi _{P_k}+\frac{\phi _1}{N}+\mathrm{}+\frac{\phi _n}{N^n}+\mathrm{}\text{on }U,$$

with uniform $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}`$ remainder estimates, where the $`\phi _j`$ are smooth $`(k,k)`$-forms on $`U`$.

###### Proof.

By (134) and (160) we have

$$\frac{1}{N^k}𝐄_{|NP_1,\mathrm{},NP_k}(Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k})=\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\left[\frac{1}{N}\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP_j}(z,z)+p_j\mathrm{log}(1+z^2)\right].$$

The conclusion now follows from the asymptotic expansion of Proposition 3.1.∎

The proof of Theorem 3(iii) gives us some more information about the expected zero current in the classically forbidden region, which we state in the theorem below. We first define the complexified normal cones

$$\stackrel{~}{C}_F=\{\tau +i\theta :\tau C_F,\theta T_F^{}\}.$$

(Recall that $`C_FT_F^{}`$.) We note that $`\stackrel{~}{C}_F`$ is a semi-group, which acts on $`_F`$ by the rule $`\eta (z)=e^\eta z`$; we call this action the ‘(joint) normal flow.’ The (maximal) orbits of the normal flow are of the form $`\stackrel{~}{C}_Fz^0=\{e^\eta z^0:\eta \stackrel{~}{C}_F\}`$, where $`z^0\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }^1(F)`$. We note that the orbit $`\stackrel{~}{C}_Fz^0`$ is a complex $`(mr)`$-dimensional submanifold (with boundary) of $`^m`$. (Indeed, $`(\stackrel{~}{C}_Fz^0)_F^{}`$ is a submanifold without boundary in $`_F^{}`$.)

###### Theorem 4.5.

Let $`P`$ be a Delzant polytope and let $`\psi _P`$ be the limit expected zero current of Theorem 3. Then $`\psi _P`$ vanishes along the orbits of the normal flow.

###### Proof.

Let

$$O:=\stackrel{~}{C}_Fz^0=\{e^{\tau +i\theta }z^0:\tau C_F,\theta T_F^{}\}$$

be a maximal orbit of the normal flow, where $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(z^0)F`$. For $`z=e^{\tau +i\theta }z^0O`$, we have

$$\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }\xi (z)=\frac{1}{p}\mu _P(w_z)=\frac{1}{p}\mu _P(w_{e^\tau z^0})=\frac{1}{p}\mu _P(w_{z^0})=\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(z^0)$$

and hence $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }\xi `$ is constant on $`O`$. It then follows from (156)–(157) that $`\psi _P|_O=0`$. ∎

Remark: Theorem 4.5 tells us about the behavior of tangent directions to typical zero sets $`\left|Z_f\right|`$ of polynomials $`fH^0(^m,𝒪(Np),NP)`$ as $`N\mathrm{}`$. Roughly speaking, the tangent spaces of $`\left|Z_f\right|`$ are highly likely to be close to containing the tangent spaces of the orbits of the normal flow, for large $`N`$. E.g., let us consider a region $`_F^{}`$, where $`F`$ is an edge (i.e., $`dimF=1`$). Let $`T_z^{\mathrm{flow}}`$ denote the holomorphic tangent space to the normal flow through a point $`z_F^{}`$. Then $`dim_{}T_z^{\mathrm{flow}}=dim_{}Z_f=m1`$, and for any compact set $`K_F^{}`$, we have

$$\frac{1}{N}𝐄_{|NP}\left(_{Z_fK}\text{dist}(T_{Z_f,z}^{1,0},T_z^{\mathrm{flow}})^2d\mathrm{Vol}_{Z_f}(z)\right)0,$$
(162)
where ‘dist’ means the distance in the projective space of complex $`(m1)`$-dimensional subspaces of $`T_{CP^m,z}^{1,0}`$.

To verify (162), we let $`V`$ be a compactly supported vector field on $`_F^{}`$ such that for all $`z_F^{}`$, $`V_z`$ is a $`(1,0)`$-vector tangent to the normal flow through $`z`$. Let $`\phi =(iV\overline{V})𝒟^{m1,m1}(_F^{})`$ be given by

$$\lambda \phi _z=(\lambda ,iV_z\overline{V}_z)\frac{1}{m!}\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^m,\lambda T_z^{1,1}^m,z_F^{}.$$

By Theorem 4.5, we have

$$(\psi _P,\phi )=\psi _P\phi =(\psi _P,iV_z\overline{V}_z)\frac{1}{m!}\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^m=0.$$

We let $`𝒯_f𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(Z_f^{\mathrm{reg}},T_{Z_f}^{m1,m1})`$ denote the dual to the volume form on $`Z_f^{\mathrm{reg}}`$, so that

$$_{Z_f}𝒯_fV\overline{V}d\mathrm{Vol}_{Z_f}=_{Z_f}(𝒯_f,\phi )d\mathrm{Vol}_{Z_f}=(Z_f,\phi ).$$
(163)
Hence by Theorem 3(i),

$$\frac{1}{NP}𝐄_{|NP}\left(_{Z_f}𝒯_fV\overline{V}d\mathrm{Vol}_{Z_f}\right)=\frac{1}{N}𝐄_{|NP}(Z_f,\phi )(\psi _P,\phi )=0,$$
(164)
which yields (162).

As mentioned in the introduction, we can apply Proposition 4.2 (as in \[SZ1\] for the case $`k=1`$) to the asymptotic expansion of the Szegö kernel in \[Ze\] to immediately obtain the following asymptotics using toric norms:

###### Proposition 4.6.

Let $`(M_P,L_P)`$ be as above, and let $`I_j,\theta _j`$ be the action-angle variables of the moment map $`\mu _P:M_P^m`$ of the $`𝐓^m`$-action on $`M_P`$. Then we have:

$$\frac{1}{N^k}E_{\gamma _N^{M_P}}(Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k})=\omega _P^k+O\left(\frac{1}{N}\right)=\left(\underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}dI_jd\theta _j\right)^k+O\left(\frac{1}{N}\right).$$

###### Proof.

Let $`\omega _P=_{j=1}^mdI_jd\theta _j`$ be the natural Kähler form on $`M_P`$. We recall the asymptotic formula for the Szegö kernel in \[Ze\]:

$$\frac{1}{N}\mathrm{\Phi }_{L_P^N}^{}\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}=\omega _P+O(1/N).$$

By Proposition 4.2 with $`M=M_P,L=L_P^N`$, we then have

$$𝐄_{M_P}(Z_{s_1,\mathrm{},s_k})=(𝐄_{M_P}(Z_s))^k=\mathrm{\Phi }_{L_P^N}^{}\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}^k=N^k\left[\omega _P^k+O(1/N)\right].$$

### 4.3. Amoebas in the plane

The term ‘amoeba’ was introduced by Gelfand, Kapranov and Zelevinsky \[GKZ\] to refer to the image under the moment map of a zero set $`Z_{f_1,\mathrm{},f_k}`$ of polynomials, and have been studied in various contexts (see \[FPT, GKZ, Mi1, PR\] and the references in the survey article by Mikhalkin \[Mi2\]). The image of a zero set under the moment map $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is called a compact amoeba, while the image under the map

$$\mathrm{Log}:^m^m,(z_1,\mathrm{},z_m)(\mathrm{log}|z_1|,\mathrm{},\mathrm{log}|z_m|)$$

is a noncompact amoeba, or simply an amoeba. Note that $`\mathrm{Log}`$ is the moment map for the $`𝐓^m`$ action with respect to the Euclidean symplectic form $`dx_jdy_j`$, and $`\mathrm{Log}=\frac{1}{2}\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, where $`:\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}^m`$ is the diffeomorphism given by (103).

To illustrate what our statistical results can say about amoebas, we consider zero sets in $`^2`$. An amoeba in $`^2`$ is the image of a plane algebraic curve under the Euclidean moment map Log. An example of an amoeba of the form $`\mathrm{Log}(Z_f)`$, where $`f`$ is a quartic polynomial in two variables with (full) Newton polytope $`4\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, is given in the illustration from \[Th\] reproduced in Figure 5 below.222The authors would like to thank T. Theobald for giving us permission to use this figure from his paper.

One notices that this amoeba contains 12 ‘tentacles’. By definition, a tentacle on a compact amoeba $`A`$ is a connected component of a small neighborhood in $`A`$ of $`A\mathrm{\Sigma }`$; the tentacles of a noncompact amoeba correspond to those of the compact amoeba under the diffeomorphism $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}^m`$.

There is a natural injective map from the set of connected components (which are convex sets) of the complement of a noncompact amoeba $`A`$ to the set $`P^2`$ of lattice points of the polytope, and that there are amoebas for which each lattice point is assigned to a component of the complement. (This fact is also valid in higher dimensions; see \[FPT, Mi1\].) For a generic 2-dimensional noncompact amoeba with polytope $`P`$, each lattice point in $`P`$ corresponds to a distinct unbounded component of $`^2A`$, and adjacent lattice points correspond to adjacent unbounded components. (The correspondence is given by \[Mi1, §3.1\] or \[FPT\].) Hence the number of tentacles of $`A`$ equals the number of points of $`P`$; this number is called the length of $`P`$. (For example, the 12 tentacles in Figure 5 correspond to the 12 lattice points of $`(4\mathrm{\Sigma })`$.) Each tentacle corresponds to a segment connecting 2 adjacent lattice points on $`P`$.

We can decompose $`P`$ into two pieces: $`^{}P=Pp\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$ and $`^eP=P(p\mathrm{\Sigma })`$. Tentacles corresponding to segments of $`^{}P`$ end (in the compact picture $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$) at a vertex of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, and tentacles corresponding to segments of $`^eP`$ are free to end anywhere on the face of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ containing the segment. We call the latter free tentacles, and we say that a free tentacle is a classically allowed tentacle if its end is in the classically allowed region $`𝒜_P`$. For an amoeba $`A`$, we let $`\nu _{\mathrm{AT}}(A)`$ denote the number of classically allowed tentacles of $`A`$. It is clear from the above that

$$\nu _{\mathrm{AT}}(A)\mathrm{\#}\{\text{free tentacles}\}=\text{Length}(^eP)$$

and that this bound can be attained for any polytope $`P`$. Here, ‘Length’ means the length in the above sense; i.e., the diagonal face of $`p\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is scaled to have length $`p`$. As a consequence of Theorem 3 (for $`m=1`$), we conclude that this maximum is asymptotically the average:

###### Corollary 4.7.

For a Delzant polytope $`P`$, we have

$$\frac{1}{N}𝐄_{|NP}\left(\nu _{\mathrm{AT}}\left(\mathrm{Log}(Z_f)\right)\right)\text{Length}(^eP).$$

###### Proof.

Let $`F_1,F_2,F_3`$ denote the facets of $`p\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and apply Theorem 3(ii) to the 1-dimensional polytopes $`P\overline{F}_j`$, $`j=1,2,3`$.∎

## 5. Examples

We now compute $`b(z)`$ and $`\psi _P`$ for some examples of toric surfaces ($`m=2`$). Recalling (10) and (135),

$$b(z)=q(z)\tau _z+p\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{1+z^2}{1+e^{\tau _z/2}z^2}\right),q(z)=p\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(e^{\tau _z/2}z)P,$$

$$u_{\mathrm{}}=b(z)+p\mathrm{log}(1+z^2)=p\mathrm{log}(1+e^{\tau _z/2}z^2)q(z),\tau _z.$$

Hence by (153),

$$\psi _P=\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}u_{\mathrm{}}=\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\left[p\mathrm{log}(1+e^{\tau _z/2}z^2)q(z),\tau _z\right].$$
(165)
### 5.1. The square

For our first example, we let $`P`$ be the unit square with vertices $`\{(0,0),(1,0),(0,1),(1,1)\}`$ so that $`p=2`$ and $`M_P=^1\times ^1`$. Recalling that

$$\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(z_1,z_2)=(\frac{|z_1|^2}{1+|z_1|^2+|z_2|^2},\frac{|z_2|^2}{1+|z_1|^2+|z_2|^2}),$$

we see that the classically allowed region is given by

$$|z_1|^21<|z_2|^2<|z_1|^2+1,$$

as illustrated in Figure 1 in the introduction. The forbidden region consists of two subregions:

$$\begin{array}{cc}_F=\{(z_1,z_2):|z_2|^2|z_1|^2+1\},\hfill & F=\{(x_1,\frac{1}{2}):0x_1\frac{1}{2}\},\hfill \\ _F^{}=\{(z_1,z_2):|z_2|^2|z_1|^21\},\hfill & F^{}=\{(\frac{1}{2},x_2):0x_2\frac{1}{2}\}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Suppose that $`z`$ is a point in the upper forbidden region $`_F`$. Write $`\tau _z=(\tau _1,\tau _2)`$; then $`\tau _1=0`$ since $`\tau T_F`$. Let

$$q(z)=2\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(e^{\tau _z/2}z)=(a,1)2FP.$$

Writing

$$|z_1|^2=s_1,|z_2|^2=s_2,|e^{\tau _2/2}z_2|^2=e^{\tau _2}s_2=\stackrel{~}{s}_2,$$

we have

$$\frac{s_1}{1+s_1+\stackrel{~}{s}_2}=\frac{a}{2},\frac{\stackrel{~}{s}_2}{1+s_1+\stackrel{~}{s}_2}=\frac{1}{2}.$$

Therefore

$$\begin{array}{c}s_1=\frac{a}{1a},\stackrel{~}{s}_2=\frac{1}{1a}=\frac{s_1}{a},a=\frac{s_1}{1+s_1}=\frac{|z_1|^2}{1+|z_1|^2},\\ e^{\tau _2}=\stackrel{~}{s}_2/s_2=\frac{s_1}{as_2}=\frac{1+|z_1|^2}{|z_2|^2}.\end{array}$$

We have

$$\mathrm{log}(1+e^{\tau _z/2}z^2)=\mathrm{log}\left(1+|z_1|^2+\frac{1+|z_1|^2}{|z_2|^2}|z_2|^2\right)=\mathrm{log}(1+|z_1|^2)+\mathrm{log}2,$$

$$q(z),\tau _z=(\frac{|z_1|^2}{1+|z_1|^2},1),(0,\mathrm{log}\frac{1+|z_1|^2}{|z_2|^2})=\mathrm{log}(1+|z_1|^2)\mathrm{log}|z_2|^2.$$

Therefore

$$u_{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{log}|z_2|^2+\mathrm{log}(1+|z_1|^2)+\mathrm{log}4.$$

We conclude that

$$\psi _P=\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}(1+|z_1|^2)\hfill & \text{for }|z_1|^2+1|z_2|^2\hfill \\ 2\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}=\frac{\sqrt{1}}{\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}(1+|z_1|^2+|z_2|^2)\hfill & \text{for }|z_1|^21|z_2|^2|z_1|^2+1\hfill \\ \frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}(1+|z_2|^2)\hfill & \text{for }|z_2|^2|z_1|^21\hfill \end{array}$$

(where the third case is by symmetry). Note that $`\psi _P`$ has constant rank 1 in both of the forbidden regions $`_F,_F^{}`$, as indicated in Theorem 3(iii).

By the above, we also obtain

$$e^{b(z)}=\frac{4|z_2|^2(1+|z_1|^2)}{(1+|z_1|^2+|z_2|^2)^2}\text{for }|z_1|^2+1|z_2|^2,$$

and similarly for $`|z_2|^2|z_1|^21`$.

Remark: On the boundary $`\{|z_1|^2=|z_2|^21`$}, we have $`e^{b(z)}=1`$ as expected. On $`\{|z_1|=c\}`$, we have the growth rate $`e^{b(z)}1/|z_2|^2`$ as $`z_2\mathrm{}`$.

### 5.2. The Hirzebruch surfaces

We now consider the trapezoidal polytope of Figure 6 below.

Again $`p=2`$, but this time $`M_P\stackrel{\pi }{}^2`$ is the blow up of $`(0,0,1)`$, i.e., $`M_P`$ is the Hirzebruch surface $`F_1`$ (see \[Fu\]). Comparing with the case of the square, we see that the classically allowed region is given by $`|z_2|^2<|z_1|^2+1`$, and the forbidden region coincides with the upper forbidden region $`_F=\{|z_2|^2|z_1|^2+1\}`$ from §5.1. Thus, the map $`z(\tau _z,w_z)`$ is the same as before when $`z`$ is in the forbidden region $`_F`$. Hence, $`e^{b(z)}`$ and $`\psi _P`$ are also the same as in §5.1 on $`_F`$. On the classically allowable region, $`e^{b(z)}=1`$ and $`\psi _P=2\omega _{_{\mathrm{FS}}}`$.

#### 5.2.1. The Hirzebruch surfaces $`F_n`$ ($`n2`$)

Let $`n2`$ and consider the polytope

$$P=\{(0,0),(1,0),\mathrm{},(n+1,0),(0,1),(1,1)\},$$

so that $`M_P=F_n`$ (see \[Fu\]). Here $`p=n+1`$ and $`\frac{1}{p}P`$ has an interior vertex $`v=(\frac{1}{n+1},\frac{1}{n+1})\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$.

We see that the classically allowed region $`\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }^1(\frac{1}{p}P^{})`$ is given by

$$|z_2|^2<\mathrm{min}\{\frac{|z_1|^2+1}{n},\frac{1}{n1}\}.$$

This time, the forbidden region consists of three subregions: $`_F,_v,_F^{}`$, where

$$F=\{(x_1,\frac{1}{n+1}):0x_1<\frac{1}{n+1}\},F^{}=\{(x_1,x_2):x_2=\frac{1}{n}(1x_1),\frac{1}{n+1}<x_11\}.$$

(See Figure 7 below.)

Suppose that $`z`$ is a point in the region $`_F`$. Then $`\tau _z=(0,\tau _2)`$, as before. Let

$$q(z)=(n+1)\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(e^{\tau _z/2}z)=(a,1)(n+1)FP(0<a<1).$$

Again writing

$$|z_1|^2=s_1,|z_2|^2=s_2,|e^{\tau _2/2}z_2|^2=e^{\tau _2}s_2=\stackrel{~}{s}_2,$$

we have

$$\frac{s_1}{1+s_1+\stackrel{~}{s}_2}=\frac{a}{n+1},\frac{\stackrel{~}{s}_2}{1+s_1+\stackrel{~}{s}_2}=\frac{1}{n+1}.$$

Therefore

$$\begin{array}{c}s_1=\frac{a}{na},\stackrel{~}{s}_2=\frac{1}{na}=\frac{s_1}{a},a=\frac{ns_1}{1+s_1}=\frac{n|z_1|^2}{1+|z_1|^2},\\ e^{\tau _2}=\stackrel{~}{s}_2/s_2=\frac{s_1}{as_2}=\frac{1+|z_1|^2}{n|z_2|^2}.\end{array}$$

In particular,

$$a<1|z_1|^2<\frac{1}{n1}$$

and therefore

$$_F=\{(z_1,z_2):|z_2|^2\frac{|z_1|^2+1}{n},|z_1|^2<\frac{1}{n1}\}.$$

We have

$$\mathrm{log}(1+e^{\tau _z/2}z^2)=\mathrm{log}\left(1+|z_1|^2+\frac{1+|z_1|^2}{n|z_2|^2}|z_2|^2\right)=\mathrm{log}(1+|z_1|^2)+\mathrm{log}\frac{n+1}{n},$$

$$q(z),\tau _z=(\frac{n|z_1|^2}{1+|z_1|^2},1),(0,\mathrm{log}\frac{1+|z_1|^2}{n|z_2|^2})=\mathrm{log}(1+|z_1|^2)\mathrm{log}|z_2|^2\mathrm{log}n.$$

Therefore

$$u_{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{log}|z_2|^2+n\mathrm{log}(1+|z_1|^2)+(n+1)\mathrm{log}(n+1)n\mathrm{log}n.$$

Hence,

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \psi _P& =& n\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}(1+|z_1|^2)\hfill \\ \hfill e^{b(z)}& =& \frac{(n+1)^{n+1}}{n^n}\frac{|z_2|^2(1+|z_1|^2)^n}{(1+|z_1|^2+|z_2|^2)^{n+1}}\hfill \end{array}\}\text{for }z_F.$$

Now suppose that $`z`$ is a point in $`_F^{}`$. Since $`\tau _zT_F^{}`$, we can write $`\tau _z=(\tau _1,n\tau _1)`$. Let

$$\frac{1}{n+1}q(z)=\mu _\mathrm{\Sigma }(e^{\tau _z/2}z)=(x_1,\frac{1}{n}(1x_1))F^{}.$$
(166)
As before, we write

$$s_1=|z_1|^2,s_2=|z_2|^2,\stackrel{~}{s}_1=|e^{\tau _1/2}z_1|^2=e^{\tau _1}s_1,\stackrel{~}{s}_2=|e^{n\tau _1/2}z_2|^2=e^{n\tau _1}s_2.$$

By (166), we have

$$\frac{\stackrel{~}{s}_1}{1+\stackrel{~}{s}_1+\stackrel{~}{s}_2}=x_1,\frac{\stackrel{~}{s}_2}{1+\stackrel{~}{s}_1+\stackrel{~}{s}_2}=\frac{1}{n}(1x_1).$$

Solving for $`\stackrel{~}{s}_1,\stackrel{~}{s}_2`$, we obtain

$$\stackrel{~}{s}_1=\frac{n}{n1}\frac{x_1}{1x_1},\stackrel{~}{s}_2=\frac{1}{n1}.$$
(167)
Therefore, $`e^{n\tau _1}=\stackrel{~}{s}_2/s_2=|z_2|^2/(n1)`$, so we have

$$\tau _1=\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{log}(n1)|z_2|^2,\stackrel{~}{s}_1=\frac{|z_1|^2}{(n1)^{1/n}|z_2|^{2/n}}.$$

Thus,

$$\mathrm{log}(1+e^{\tau _z/2}z^2)=\mathrm{log}(1+\stackrel{~}{s}_1+\stackrel{~}{s}_2)=\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{n}{n1}+\frac{|z_1|^2}{(n1)^{1/n}|z_2|^{2/n}}\right).$$

By (166),

$$q(z),\tau _z=(n+1)(x_1,\frac{1}{n}(1x_1)),(\tau _1,n\tau _1)=(n+1)\tau _1=\frac{n+1}{n}\mathrm{log}(n1)|z_2|^2.$$

Hence by (165),

$$\psi _P=(n+1)\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{n}{n1}+\frac{|z_1|^2}{(n1)^{1/n}|z_2|^{2/n}}\right)\text{for }z_F^{}.$$

(Note that $`\psi _P`$ has constant rank 1 on $`_F^{}`$ as indicated by Theorem 3(iii), since $`\psi _P=(n+1)g^{}\omega _^1`$ on $`_F^{}`$, where $`g`$ is the multi-valued holomorphic map to $`^1`$ given by $`g(z_1,z_2)=(c_nz_1,z_2^{1/n})`$.)

By Theorem 3(iii), we know that $`\psi _P=0`$ on $`_v`$. To complete the description of $`\psi _P`$, it remains to describe the regions $`_F^{}`$ and $`_v`$. We note that a forbidden point $`z`$ lies in $`_F^{}`$ if and only if $`x_1>\frac{1}{n+1}`$. By (167), this is equivalent to $`\stackrel{~}{s}_1>\frac{1}{n1}`$, or

$$|z_2|^2<(n1)^{n1}|z_1|^{2n}.$$

Therefore

$$_F^{}=\{(z_1,z_2):\frac{1}{n1}|z_2|^2<(n1)^{n1}|z_1|^{2n},|z_1|^2>\frac{1}{n1}\}.$$

This leaves us with

$$_v=\{(z_1,z_2):|z_2|^2(n1)^{n1}|z_1|^{2n},|z_1|^2\frac{1}{n1}\}.$$

To summarize:

$$\psi _P=\{\begin{array}{cc}(n+1)\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}(1+|z_1|^2+|z_2|^2)\hfill & \text{for }|z_2|^2<\mathrm{min}\{\frac{|z_1|^2+1}{n},\frac{1}{n1}\}\hfill \\ n\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}(1+|z_1|^2)\hfill & \text{for }|z_2|^2\frac{|z_1|^2+1}{n},|z_1|^2<\frac{1}{n1}\hfill \\ (n+1)\frac{\sqrt{1}}{2\pi }\overline{}\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{n}{n1}+\frac{|z_1|^2}{(n1)^{1/n}|z_2|^{2/n}}\right)\hfill & \text{for }\frac{1}{n1}|z_2|^2<(n1)^{n1}|z_1|^{2n}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{for }|z_2|^2(n1)^{n1}|z_1|^{2n},|z_1|^2\frac{1}{n1}\hfill \end{array}$$

### 5.3. Remarks on the behavior at transition points

So far, we have studied the uniform asymptotics of $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)`$ on compact subsets of the classically allowed region and on compact sets without transition points in the forbidden region. We now address a few words to the asymptotics at the boundary of the classically allowed region, which is its caustic set. For background on oscillatory integrals and caustics, we refer to \[AGV\].

We thus consider $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)`$ as an oscillatory integral (denoted $`K_N(z)`$ in (72)) on $`(^{})^m`$. Since it is $`𝐓^m`$ invariant we may regard it more simply as an oscillatory integral in $`z=e^\rho `$ on $`_+^m`$ or on $`p\mathrm{\Sigma },`$ with the phase $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ of (73) regarded as a function on $`𝐓^m\times M_P\times _+^m`$. The asymptotics of $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)`$ are determined by the component

$$C^0=\{(0,w;e^\rho )_+^m\times M_P:\mu _{p\mathrm{\Sigma }}(e^\rho )=\mu _P(w)\},$$
(168)
of the critical set on which $`\phi =0`$, so we may (and will) ignore other critical points which may occur. The map $`(0,w;e^\rho )w`$ gives a natural identification of $`C^0`$ with $`M_P`$.

As is standard in the theory of oscillatory integrals depending on parameters, we define the map

$$\iota _\mathrm{\Psi }:C^0T^{}_+^m,\iota _\mathrm{\Psi }(0,w;e^\rho )=(e^\rho ,d_\rho \mathrm{\Psi }),$$
(169)
and we denote the image by $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^0=\iota _\mathrm{\Psi }(C^0)`$. Over the set of parameters $`z`$ for which the critical point set $`C_z^0`$ is a non-degenerate critical manifold, $`\iota _\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is a fibration and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^0`$ is a Lagrangean manifold. The set of $`z=e^\rho `$ for which the phase is degenerate is known as the caustic set. Under the identification of $`C^0M_P`$, we have $`\frac{1}{2}d_z\mathrm{\Psi }(w;e^\rho )0\text{on}C^0`$, hence $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^0`$ is the zero section of $`T^{}P`$. Identifying $`\iota _\mathrm{\Psi }`$ with the map $`\mu _P\times 0,`$ we find that the caustic set is the boundary of the classically allowed region.

Uniform asymptotic expansions of $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)`$ in the vicinity of the caustic could be obtained with a careful study of the singularities of the moment map $`\mu _P`$. The uniform expansion would give a smooth transition in a boundary layer from the $`N^m`$ mass density in the interior of $`P`$ (the illuminated or allowed region) to the $`e^{Nb(z)}`$ mass density in the exterior (the shadow or forbidden region). The order of the asymptotics along the caustic depends on two competing effects: on the one hand, oscillatory integrals whose (analytic) phase has a degenerate critical point decay more slowly than in the non-degenerate case (by the index of the singularity at the critical point, see \[AGV\]). On the other hand, the principal term of the amplitude may vanish on the caustic, causing more rapid decay. We will be content to illustrate this in the simplest example.

#### 5.3.1. Example: $`P=[0,1],p=2`$

We put $`m=1`$, $`P=[0,1],p=2,p\mathrm{\Sigma }=[0,2].`$ Thus, $`M_P=^1`$. The only interior facet is $`F=\{1\}`$; recalling (73), our phase is:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(w,\phi ;z)=\mathrm{log}\frac{1+e^{i\phi }|w|^2}{1+|w|^2}+2\mathrm{log}\frac{1+e^{i\phi }|z|^2}{1+|z|^2}.$$
(170)
We are interested in the asymptotics of $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)`$ when

$$\mu _{2\mathrm{\Sigma }}(z)=\frac{2|z|^2}{1+|z|^2}=1|z|=1.$$

We claim that $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)CN^1`$ when $`|z|=1.`$

Since $`\mu _P(w)=\frac{|w|^2}{1+2|w|^2},`$ we have $`\mu _P(w)=\{1\}w=\mathrm{}.`$ To determine the asymptotics of $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)`$ at $`|z|=1`$ , we put $`\eta =\frac{1}{w}`$ and consider the Taylor expansion of the phase at $`\eta =0,\phi =0`$. We change to polar coordinates $`\eta =re^{i\theta }`$ around the fixed point of the toric $`S^1`$ action. The phase and amplitude are independent of $`\theta `$ and the principal part of the Taylor series (at $`|z|=1`$) has the form:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(w,\phi ;1)i\phi r^2\frac{1}{4}\phi ^2+O(|\phi |^3+|\phi |^2|r|^2+|\phi ||r|^4).$$

By a general result \[AGV\], the asymptotics of (generic) oscillatory integrals are determined by the principal part of the Taylor expansion of the phase at the critical point, which gives the model integral

$$I_N=_\pi ^\pi _0^{\mathrm{}}e^{N(i\phi r^2\frac{1}{4}\phi ^2)}A(r,\phi )r𝑑r𝑑\phi ,$$

where $`A`$ is an amplitude decaying sufficiently rapidly at infinity. Here, we also used that the amplitude of $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(z,z)`$ is simply the volume density in our local coordinates $`(\phi ,r,\theta ).`$ We observe that the phase $`f(r,\phi )=i\phi r^2\frac{1}{4}\phi ^2`$ is weighted homogeneous in the sense that

$$f(N^{1/4}r,N^{1/2}\phi )=Nf(r,\phi ).$$

We also observe that the amplitude vanishes to order one as $`r0`$. We change variables as indicated to obtain that

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{|NP}(1,1)N^2I_N=N^2_{}_{}N^1e^{(i\phi r^2+C(z)\phi ^2)}\rho (N^{1/4}r,N^{1/2}\phi )r𝑑r𝑑\phi CN,$$

as claimed.

Alternatively, we observe that the index of oscillation of the phase with $`|z|=1`$ equals $`3/4`$. This agrees with the general result (under assumptions satisfied here) that the index of oscillation equals the ‘remoteness’ of the Newton polygon of the phase (\[AGV\], §II.6, Theorem 4), i.e. the reciprocal of the value of $`t`$ such that the ray $`(t,t),t>0`$ intersects the boundary of the Newton polygon. The index of the singularity is therefore $`\delta =1/4`$, and therefore $`I_NCN^1`$.