format: text

text:
# Measurement of the Branching Fraction and 𝐶𝑃 Content for the Decay 𝐵⁰→𝐷^{∗+}𝐷^{∗-}

BABAR-PUB-01/24

SLAC-PUB-9152

The BABAR Collaboration

## Abstract

We report a measurement of the branching fraction of the decay $`B^0D^+D^{}`$ and of the $`CP`$-odd component of its final state using the BABAR detector. With data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of $`20.4\mathrm{fb}^1`$ collected at the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ resonance during 1999-2000, we have reconstructed 38 candidate signal events in the mode $`B^0D^+D^{}`$ with an estimated background of $`6.2\pm 0.5`$ events. From these events, we determine the branching fraction to be $`(B^0D^+D^{})=(8.3\pm 1.6(stat)\pm 1.2(syst))\times 10^4`$. The measured $`CP`$-odd fraction of the final state is $`0.22\pm 0.18(stat)\pm 0.03(syst)`$.

preprint: BABAR-PUB-01/24preprint: SLAC-PUB-9152

After the observation of time-dependent $`CP`$-violating asymmetries in the decays of neutral $`B`$ mesons to $`CP`$ eigenstates containing charmonium ref:babars2b ; ref:belles2b , it is interesting to extend the search for $`CP`$-violating effects to Cabibbo-suppressed double charm modes, such as $`B^0D^{()+}D^{()}`$ ref:cc . The interference of the dominant tree amplitude with the mixing diagram is sensitive to the angle $`\beta `$ of the Unitarity Triangle in this case as well; however, the theoretically uncertain contribution of penguin amplitudes with different weak phases is potentially significant and may shift the observed asymmetry by an amount that depends on the ratio of the penguin and tree contributions and their relative weak phases. The $`B^0D^+D^{}`$ vector-vector final state has very clear experimental signatures that make it an interesting candidate for $`CP`$-violation measurements. However, it is not a pure $`CP`$ eigenstate and a dilution of the measured asymmetry can be produced by a $`P`$-wave, $`CP`$-odd, component. A time-dependent angular analysis of the decay products ref:dunietz  can remove the dilution by resolving the $`CP`$-even and $`CP`$-odd components. As a precursor to measuring time-dependent $`CP`$-violating asymmetries using the decay $`B^0D^+D^{}`$, we report in this letter a measurement of the $`B^0D^+D^{}`$ branching fraction and a measurement of the $`CP`$-odd component, $`R_{}`$, of the final state. These measurements represent significant improvements over the previous measurements $`(B^0D^+D^{})=(9.9_{3.3}^{+4.2}(stat)\pm 1.2(syst))\times 10^4`$ and $`(1R_{})<0.11`$ at 90% C.L. ref:cleoprd62 .

The data used in this analysis were collected with the BABAR detector ref:babar  at the PEP-II storage ring ref:pepii  located at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center. This data sample represents an integrated luminosity of 20.4$`\text{ fb}^1`$ collected on the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ resonance. Assuming 50% of the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ decays give $`B^0\overline{B}^0`$, the number of neutral $`B`$ mesons in this sample is $`(22.8\pm 0.4)\times 10^6`$.

Charged particles are detected and their momenta measured with the combination of a 40-layer drift chamber (DCH) and a five-layer silicon vertex tracker (SVT), both operating in a 1.5 T solenoidal magnetic field. The charged particle tracking system allows particles with low momentum in the laboratory frame to be reconstructed efficiently, a property that is very important for this analysis. This efficiency begins to turn on at a momentum of $``$60$`\mathrm{MeV}/c`$ and reaches its maximum value at around 200$`\mathrm{MeV}/c`$. Photons are detected by a CsI(Tl) electromagnetic calorimeter (EMC) that provides high detection for energies above 20$`\mathrm{MeV}`$, with typical energy and angular resolutions of 3% and 4 mrad, respectively, for 1$`\mathrm{GeV}`$ photons. Charged particle identification is provided by the ionization loss measurements in the SVT and DCH, and by an internally reflecting ring-imaging Cherenkov detector (DIRC) covering the central region of the detector.

Events are selected by requiring three or more charged tracks and that the normalized second Fox-Wolfram moment ref:fox  of the event be less than 0.6. We also require that the cosine of the angle between the reconstructed $`B`$ direction and the thrust axis of the rest of the event, calculated in the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ rest frame, be less than 0.9. These criteria discriminate $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ events from non-resonant background events.

$`B^0`$ mesons are exclusively reconstructed by combining two charged $`D^{}`$ candidates, using a number of $`D^+`$ and $`D`$ decay modes. The $`D^+`$ mesons are reconstructed in their decays $`D^+D^0\pi ^+`$ and $`D^+D^+\pi ^0`$. We include in this analysis the decay combinations $`D^+D^{}`$decaying to ($`D^0\pi ^+`$, $`\overline{D}^0`$ $`\pi ^{}`$) or ($`D^0\pi ^+`$, $`D^{}\pi ^0`$), but not ($`D^+\pi ^0`$,$`D^{}\pi ^0`$) due to the smaller branching fraction and larger expected backgrounds. $`D^0`$ and $`D^+`$ candidates are subjected to a mass-constrained fit to provide an improved measurement of the $`D`$ meson’s momentum. They are combined with pion candidates, referred to as “soft” pions due to their low ($`<200\mathrm{MeV}/c`$) transverse momentum, to form $`D^+`$ candidates. A topological vertex fit is performed that includes the mean position of the $`e^+e^{}`$ interaction point to improve the angular resolution of the soft pion.

The decay modes of the $`D^0`$ and $`D^+`$ are selected by an optimization of $`S^2/(S+B)`$ based on Monte Carlo simulations, where $`S`$ and $`B`$ are the expected number of signal and background events, repsectively. We first determine, based on Monte Carlo simulations, the expected $`SB`$ for each of the decay mode combinations individually. Then, we successively add modes in order of decreasing $`SB`$ to compute an overall $`S^2/(S+B)`$ value until $`S^2/(S+B)`$ no longer increases. The decay modes used are $`D^0K^{}\pi ^+`$, $`D^0K^{}\pi ^+\pi ^0`$, $`D^0K^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^+`$, $`D^0K_S^0\pi ^{}\pi ^+`$, $`D^+K^{}\pi ^+\pi ^+`$, $`D^+K_S^0\pi ^+`$, and $`D^+K^{}K^+\pi ^+`$. $`D^0`$ ($`D^+`$) meson candidates are required to have a reconstructed invariant mass within 20$`\mathrm{MeV}/c^2`$ of the nominal $`D^0`$ ($`D^+`$) mass pdg .

Charged kaon candidates are required to be inconsistent with the pion hypothesis, as inferred from the Cherenkov angle measured by the DIRC and the ionizations measured by the SVT and DCH. No particle identification is required for the kaon from the decay $`D^0K^{}\pi ^+`$.

$`K_S^0\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ candidates are required to have an invariant mass within 15$`\mathrm{MeV}/c^2`$ of the nominal $`K_S^0`$ mass. The angle between the flight direction and the momentum vector of the $`K_S^0`$ candidate is required to be less than 200$`\mathrm{mrad}`$, and the transverse flight distance from the primary event vertex, obtained from the remaining charged tracks in the event, must be greater than 2 mm.

Neutral pion candidates are formed from pairs of photons in the EMC with energy above 30$`\mathrm{MeV}`$, an invariant mass within 35$`\mathrm{MeV}/c^2`$ of the nominal $`\pi ^0`$ mass, and a summed energy greater than 200$`\mathrm{MeV}`$. A mass-constrained fit is applied to these $`\pi ^0`$ candidates. In the case of the soft $`\pi ^0`$ from $`D^+D^+\pi ^0`$ decays, the energy cut is replaced by a momentum cut, in the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ frame, of $`70<p^{}<450\mathrm{MeV}/c`$.

To select $`B^0`$ candidates with well reconstructed $`D^+`$ and $`D`$ mesons, we form a $`\chi ^2`$ that includes all measured $`D^+`$ and $`D`$ masses:

$`\chi _{Mass}^2=\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_D\widehat{m}_D}{\sigma _{m_D}}}\right)^2+\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_{\overline{D}}\widehat{m}_{\overline{D}}}{\sigma _{m_{\overline{D}}}}}\right)^2`$
$`+\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_D^{}\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{m}_D^{}}{\sigma _{\mathrm{\Delta }m_D^{}}}}\right)^2+\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\overline{D}^{}}\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{m}_{\overline{D}^{}}}{\sigma _{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\overline{D}^{}}}}}\right)^2,`$ (1)
where the caret over a value refers to the nominal value, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_D^{}`$ is the $`D^+D`$ mass difference. For $`\sigma _{m_D}`$ we use values computed for each $`D`$ candidate, while for $`\sigma _{\mathrm{\Delta }m_D^{}}`$ we use fixed values of 0.83$`\mathrm{MeV}/c^2`$ for $`D^+D^0\pi ^+`$ and 1.18$`\mathrm{MeV}/c^2`$ for $`D^+D^+\pi ^0`$. A requirement that $`\chi _{Mass}^2<20`$ is applied to all $`B^0`$ candidates. In events with more than one $`B^0`$ candidate, we choose the candidate with the lowest value of $`\chi _{Mass}^2`$.

A $`B`$ meson candidate is characterized by two kinematic variables: the energy-substituted mass,

$$m_{\mathrm{ES}}\sqrt{E_{Beam}^2p_{B}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}},$$
(2)
and the difference of the $`B`$ candidate’s energy from the beam energy,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }EE_B^{}E_{Beam}^{}.$$
(3)
$`E_B^{}`$ ($`p_B^{}`$) are the energy (momentum) of the $`B`$ candidate in the center-of-mass frame and $`E_{Beam}^{}`$ is one-half of the total center-of-mass energy. The signal region in the $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ vs. $`m_{\mathrm{ES}}`$ plane is defined to be $`|\mathrm{\Delta }E|<25\mathrm{MeV}`$ and $`5.273<m_{\mathrm{ES}}<5.285\mathrm{GeV}/c^2`$. Based on Monte Carlo simulations, the width of this region corresponds to approximately $`\pm 2.5\sigma `$ in both $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ and $`m_{\mathrm{ES}}`$.

To determine the expected contribution from background in the signal region, we scale the number of events seen in a sideband in the $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ vs. $`m_{\mathrm{ES}}`$ plane defined as $`|\mathrm{\Delta }E|<200\mathrm{MeV}`$, $`5.20\mathrm{GeV}/c^2<m_{\mathrm{ES}}<5.26\mathrm{GeV}/c^2`$ and $`50\mathrm{MeV}<|\mathrm{\Delta }E|<200\mathrm{MeV}`$, $`5.26<m_{\mathrm{ES}}<5.29\mathrm{GeV}/c^2`$. The scaling factor is calculated by parameterizing the shape of the background in the $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ vs. $`m_{\mathrm{ES}}`$ plane as the product of an ARGUS function ref:argus  in $`m_{\mathrm{ES}}`$ and a first-order polynomial in $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ . Based on this parameterization we estimate that the ratio of the number of background events in the signal region to the number of events in the sideband region is $`(1.72\pm 0.10)\times 10^2`$. The uncertainty is derived from the observed variation of this ratio under alternative assumptions for the background shape in $`m_{\mathrm{ES}}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ using Monte Carlo simulations. The simulations also indicate that there are no significant sources of background appearing in the signal region beyond that indicated by the sideband extrapolation.

After all selection criteria, 38 events are located in the signal region, with 363 events in the sideband region. The latter, together with the scaling factor determined above, implies an expected number of background events in the signal region of $`6.24\pm 0.33(stat)\pm 0.36(syst)`$. The systematic uncertainty comes from the background shape variation mentioned previously. Figure 1 shows a projection of the data on the $`m_{\mathrm{ES}}`$ axis after requiring $`|\mathrm{\Delta }E|<25\mathrm{MeV}`$.

We use a Monte Carlo simulation of the BABAR detector to determine the efficiency for reconstructing the signal. The efficiencies range from 17.4% to 2.7%, depending on the $`D`$ decay modes. This, together with the total number of neutral $`B`$ mesons produced during data collection, allows us to determine the branching fraction for $`B^0D^+D^{}`$ to be

$$(B^0D^+D^{})=(8.3\pm 1.6(stat)\pm 1.2(syst))\times 10^4.$$

The high charged particle multiplicity makes this measurement particularly sensitive to the tracking system. Therefore the dominant systematic uncertainty comes from our level of understanding of the charged particle tracking efficiency. Systematic errors are assigned on a per track basis for $`\pi `$, $`K`$, and soft $`\pi `$, and are added linearly (9.9%). The effect on acceptance due to the imprecisely known partial-wave content of the $`B^0D^+D^{}`$ final state is another source of potential systematic bias (6.6%). Other significant potential systematic biases arise due to the uncertainties on the branching fractions pdg  of the $`D_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}`$, $`D^0`$, and $`D^+`$ (5.6%) and the uncertainties in mass resolutions of reconstructed mesons (4.1%). The total systematic uncertainty from all considered sources is 15%.

In addition to the branching fraction quoted above, we have also measured the $`CP`$-odd fraction of the final state. This fraction, $`R_{}`$, is determined from the angular distribution of the soft pions in the decay, analyzed in the transversity basis ref:dunietz . In this reference frame, three decay amplitudes determine the distribution of three decay angles. Integrating over time, $`B`$ flavor, and two of these three angles yields the following expression:

$$\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\frac{\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\mathrm{d}\mathrm{cos}\theta _{\mathrm{tr}}}=\frac{3}{4}(1R_{})\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{tr}+\frac{3}{2}R_{}\mathrm{cos}^2\theta _{tr}.$$
(4)
Here $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the decay rate and $`\theta _{tr}`$ is the angle between the normal to the $`D_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}`$ decay plane and the line of flight of the soft pion from the $`D_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}`$ evaluated in the $`D_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}`$ rest frame.

We perform an unbinned maximum likelihood (ML) fit to the 38 events in the signal region described previously. The fit takes into account the presence of background, whose properties are derived from the sideband sample, and the angular resolution $`\sigma _\theta `$ estimated from Monte Carlo simulations. We define the likelihood function to be

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill =\underset{i=1,n}{}_i=\underset{i=1,n}{}[p\text{}& \times & (\theta _{tr,i},\sigma _{\theta ,i},R_{}^{sig})+\hfill \\ \hfill (1p)& \times & (\theta _{tr,i},\sigma _{\theta ,i},R_{}^{bkg})\text{}],\hfill \end{array}$$
(5)
where $`n`$ is the number of selected events. The contribution to the total likelihood from the $`i`$-th event, $`_i`$, is defined in terms of the purity, $`p`$, of the sample and the probability density functions $`(\theta _{tr,i},\sigma _{\theta ,i},R_{})`$ for the signal and background. $`R_{}^{sig}`$ and $`R_{}^{bkg}`$ are the parameters describing the shapes of the signal and background angular distributions, respectively, and $`\theta _{tr,i}`$ is the measured transversity angle in event $`i`$. The probability density functions $``$ are obtained from the convolution of the angular distribution (Eq. 4) with Gaussian resolution functions describing the measurement uncertainties $`\sigma _{\theta ,i}`$. From studies of simulated data, $`\sigma _\theta `$ was measured to be 0.11 (0.12) radians for charged (neutral) slow pions. A 10% uncertainty on these values is considered when estimating the corresponding systematic error.

The value of $`R_{}^{bkg}`$ is evaluated by fitting the 363 events in the sideband region and setting $`p=0`$ in Eq. 5. The result of this fit is $`R_{}^{bkg}=0.29\pm 0.04`$, compatible with the value expected for a uniform distribution ($`R_{}=1/3`$). To determine $`R_{}^{sig}`$, we fit the 38 events in the signal region with $`R_{}^{bkg}`$ fixed to 0.29 and $`p`$ fixed at 83.6%. The result of the fit to the signal region, without the correction for angular acceptance bias described below, is $`R_{}^{sig}=0.25\pm 0.18(stat)`$, and is shown in Fig. 2. The probability of obtaining a lower likelihood, evaluated using a Monte Carlo technique, is 66%.

It should be noted that Eq. 4 is the differential decay rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ integrated over the full ranges of the other two decay angles in the transversity basis, neglecting any bias in the projected $`\theta _{tr}`$ distribution introduced by detector acceptance effects. A detailed study of the kinematics of the decay shows that the incomplete detector coverage of the polar angle with respect to the beam axis does not introduce any bias in the distributions of the decay angles in the transversity basis. However, an inefficiency in detecting soft pions below a threshold in transverse momentum may indeed introduce such a bias due to the correlations between the decay angles and particle momenta in the laboratory frame. The amount of these acceptance losses depends on the population of phase space, determined by the values of the decay amplitudes.

An accurate correction for these acceptance effects requires the complete determination of the decay amplitudes using a full angular analysis on a sufficiently large data sample. To estimate the size of the acceptance bias on $`R_{}`$ without knowing the decay amplitudes, the fit procedure was tested on several samples of $`B^0D^+D^{}`$ simulated events generated with different sets of decay amplitudes. The different amplitudes affect to varying extents the correlated soft pions’ transverse momenta and angular distributions. The fitted $`R_{}`$ values were found to be consistent with the generated values in the limit of negligible soft pion inefficiency. Depending on the mix of decay amplitudes, they did reveal a bias once the pion-detection threshold was taken into account. Considering the full possible range of decay amplitudes, the calculated bias on $`R_{}`$ ranged from $`0.048`$ to $`+0.004`$. The central value of this interval is taken as a correction to the fitted $`R_{}^{sig}`$, while its half width is taken as an estimate of the corresponding systematic uncertainty (0.026). Additional, smaller systematic uncertainties affecting the $`R_{}`$ measurement arise from the imperfect knowledge of the resolution in the transversity angle $`\theta _{tr}`$ (0.006), the angular distribution of the background (0.008), and the purity of the signal sample (0.0003). The total systematic uncertainty on $`R_{}`$ is determined to be 0.028, giving the final corrected result:

$$R_{}=0.22\pm 0.18(stat)\pm 0.03(syst).$$

In summary, we have observed a signal of $`31.8\pm 6.2(stat)\pm 0.4(syst)`$ events in the decay $`B^0D^+D^{}`$. Our measurement of the branching ratio is

$$(B^0D^+D^{})=(8.3\pm 1.6(stat)\pm 1.2(syst))\times 10^4.$$

From the transversity angular distribution of these events, we have also measured the $`CP`$-odd fraction, $`R_{}`$, of the final state. These measurements provide a starting point for measuring time-dependent $`CP`$-violating asymmetries in these decays when more data become available.

We are grateful for the excellent luminosity and machine conditions provided by our PEP-II colleagues, and for the substantial dedicated effort from the computing organizations that support BABAR. The collaborating institutions wish to thank SLAC for its support and kind hospitality. This work is supported by DOE and NSF (USA), NSERC (Canada), IHEP (China), CEA and CNRS-IN2P3 (France), BMBF (Germany), INFN (Italy), NFR (Norway), MIST (Russia), and PPARC (United Kingdom). Individuals have received support from the A. P. Sloan Foundation, Research Corporation, and Alexander von Humboldt Foundation.


text:
# Exponentially hard problems are sometimes polynomial, a large deviation analysis of search algorithms for the random Satisfiability problem, and its application to stop-and-restart resolutions.

## Abstract

A large deviation analysis of the solving complexity of random 3-Satisfiability instances slightly below threshold is presented. While finding a solution for such instances demands an exponential effort with high probability, we show that an exponentially small fraction of resolutions require a computation scaling linearly in the size of the instance only. This exponentially small probability of easy resolutions is analytically calculated, and the corresponding exponent shown to be smaller (in absolute value) than the growth exponent of the typical resolution time. Our study therefore gives some theoretical basis to heuristic stop-and-restart solving procedures, and suggests a natural cut-off (the size of the instance) for the restart.

Computational problems are usually divided into two classes. They are easy if there exists a solving procedure whose running time grows at most polynomially with the size of the problem, or hard if no such algorithm is believed to exist, and the best avalaible procedures may require an exponentially growing time. The polynomial vs. exponential classification was enriched in the last decades through the derivation of quantitative bounds on resolution complexity, and the study of average performances of various resolution algorithms for computational tasks with model input distributions.

In this letter, we show that, though the polynomial/exponential dichotomy certainly applies to the typical resolution complexity of computational problem, it may not be so for large deviations from typical behavior. Typically exponentially hard problems may sometimes be solved in polynomial time, a phenomenon we take advantage of to accelerate resolution drastically.

We concentrate here on random 3-Satisfiability (3-SAT), a paradigm of hard combinatorial problems recently studied using statistical physics tools and concepts  as e.g. number partitioning, vertex cover, … to which computer scientists have devoted a great attention over the past years. An instance of random 3-SAT is defined by a set of $`M`$ constraints (clauses) on $`N`$ boolean (i.e. True or False) variables. Each clause is the logical OR of three randomly chosen variables, or of their negations. The question is to decide whether there exists a logical assignment of the variables satisfying all the clauses (called solution). The best currently known algorithm to solve 3-SAT is the Davis–Putnam–Loveland–Logemann (DPLL) procedure (Fig. 1). The sequence of assignments of variables made by DPLL in the course of instance solving can be represented as a search tree (Fig 2), whose size $`Q`$ (number of nodes) is a convenient measure of the complexity. For very large sizes ($`M,N\mathrm{}`$ at fixed ratio $`\alpha =M/N`$), some static and dynamical phase transitions arise. Instances with a ratio of clauses per variable $`\alpha >\alpha _C4.3`$ are almost surely (a.s.) unsatisfiable and obtaining proofs of refutation require an exponential effort. Below the static threshold $`\alpha _C`$, instances are a.s. satisfiable, but finding a solution may be easy or hard, depending on the value of $`\alpha `$. A dynamical transition  takes place at $`\alpha _L3.003`$ (for the heuristic used by DPLL shown in Fig. 1) separating a polynomial regime ($`\alpha <\alpha _L:QN`$, search tree A on Fig. 2)  from an exponential regime ($`\alpha >\alpha _L:Q2^{N\omega }`$, search tree B). This pattern of complexity, and the value of $`\omega (\alpha )`$ were obtained through an analysis of DPLL dynamics, reminiscent of real-space renormalization in statistical physics. DPLL generates some dynamical flow of the instance, whose trajectory lies in the phase diagram of the 2+p-SAT model, an extension of 3-SAT, where $`p1`$ is the fraction of 3-clauses (Fig. 2).

We focus hereafter on the large deviations of complexity in the upper sat phase $`\alpha _L<\alpha <\alpha _C`$. Using numerical experiments and analytical calculations, we show that, though complexity $`Q`$ a.s. grows as $`2^{N\omega }`$, there is a finite, but exponentially small, probability $`2^{N\zeta }`$ that $`Q`$ is bounded from above by $`N`$ only. In other words, while finding solutions to these sat instances is almost always exponentially hard, it is very rarely easy (polynomial time). Taking advantage of the fact that $`\zeta `$ is smaller than $`\omega `$, we show how systematic restarts of the heuristic may decrease substantially the overall search cost. Our study therefore gives some theoretical basis to stop–and–restart solving procedures empirically known to be efficient, and suggests a natural cut-off for the stop.

Distributions of resolution times $`Q`$ for $`\alpha =3.5`$ are reported on Fig. 3. The histogram of $`\omega =(\mathrm{log}_2Q)/N`$ essentially exhibits a narrow peak (left side) followed by a wider bump (right side). As $`N`$ grows, the right peak acquires more and more weight, while the left peak progressively disappears. The center of the right peak gets slightly shifted to the left, but reaches a finite value $`\omega ^{}0.035`$ as $`N\mathrm{}`$. This right peaks thus corresponds to the core of exponentially hard resolutions: resolutions of instances a.s. require a time scaling as $`2^{N\omega ^{}}`$ as the size $`N`$ gets large, in agreement with the above discussion.

On the contrary, the abscissa of the maximum of the left peak vanishes as $`\mathrm{log}_2N/N`$ when the size $`N`$ increases, indicating that the left peak accounts for polynomial (linear) resolutions. Its maximum is located at $`Q/N0.20.25`$, with weak dependence upon $`N`$. The cumulative probability $`P_{lin}`$ to have a complexity $`Q`$ less than, or equal to $`N`$, decreases exponentially: $`P_{lin}=2^{N\zeta }`$ with $`\zeta 0.011\pm 0.001`$ (Inset of Fig. 4). In the following we will concentrate on linear resolutions only (an analysis of the distribution of exponential resolutions for the problem of the vertex covering of random graphs can be found in ).

Further numerical investigations show that, in easy resolutions, the solution is essentially found at the end of the first branch, with a search tree of type $`A`$, and not $`B`$, in Fig. 2. Easy resolution trajectories are able to cross the ’dangerous’ region extending beyond point $`D`$ in Fig. 2, contrary to most trajectories which backtrack earlier. Beyond $`D`$, unit-clauses (UC) indeed accumulate. Their number $`C_1`$ becomes of the order of $`N`$ ($`C_1/N0.022`$ for $`\alpha =3.5`$), and the probability that the branch survives, i.e. that no two contradictory UC are present, is exponentially small in $`N`$, in agreement with the scaling of the left peak weight in Fig. 3.

Calculation of $`\zeta `$ requires the analysis of the first descent in the search tree (Fig. 2). Each time DPLL assigns a variable some clauses are eliminated, other are reduced or left unchanged (Fig. 1). We thus characterize an instance by its state $`𝐂=(C_1,C_2,C_3)`$, where $`C_j`$ is the number of $`j`$-clauses it includes ($`j=1,2,3`$). Initially, $`𝐂=(0,0,\alpha _0N)`$. Let us call $`\stackrel{~}{P}(𝐂;T)`$ the probability that the assignment of $`T`$ variables has produced no contradiction and an instance with state $`𝐂`$. $`\stackrel{~}{P}`$ obeys a Markovian evolution $`\stackrel{~}{P}(𝐂;T+1)=_𝐂^{}K(𝐂,𝐂^{};T)\stackrel{~}{P}(𝐂^{};T)`$ where the entries of the transition matrix $`K`$ read

$`K(𝐂,𝐂^{};T)`$ $`=`$ $`B_{p_3}^{C_3^{},\mathrm{\Delta }_3}{\displaystyle \underset{w_3=0}{\overset{\mathrm{\Delta }_3}{}}}B_{1/2}^{\mathrm{\Delta }_3,w_3}{\displaystyle \underset{z_2=0}{\overset{C_2^{}v}{}}}B_{p_2}^{C_2^{}v,z_2}{\displaystyle \underset{w_2=0}{\overset{z_2}{}}}B_{1/2}^{z_2,w_2}`$ (2)
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{z_1=0}{\overset{C_1^{}1+v}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2^{z_1}}}B_{p_1}^{C_1^{}1+v,z_1}\delta _{z_2\mathrm{\Delta }_2w_3+v}\delta _{z_1\mathrm{\Delta }_1w_2+1v}`$
where $`\delta _C`$ denotes the Kronecker function: $`\delta _C=1`$ if $`C=0`$, $`0`$ otherwise. Variables appearing in (2) are as follows. $`\mathrm{\Delta }_jC_j^{}C_j`$, $`v\delta _{C_1^{}}`$, $`z_j`$ (respectively $`w_j`$) is the number of $`j`$-clauses which are satisfied (resp. reduced to $`j1`$ clauses) when the $`(T+1)^{th}`$ variable is assigned. These are stochastic variables drawn from several binomial distributions $`B_p^{L,K}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{L}{K}\right)p^K(1p)^{LK}`$. Parameter $`p_j=j/(NT)`$ equals the probability that a $`j`$-clause contains the variable just assigned by DPLL.

The introduction of the generating function $`P(𝐲;T)=_𝐂e^{𝐲𝐂}\stackrel{~}{P}(𝐂,T)`$, allows us to express the evolution equation for the state probabilities in a compact manner,

$$P(𝐲;T+1)=e^{g_1(𝐲)}P(𝐠(𝐲);T)+\left(e^{g_2(𝐲)}e^{g_1(𝐲)}\right)P(\mathrm{},g_2(𝐲),g_3(𝐲);T)$$
(3)
where $`g_j(𝐲)=y_j+\mathrm{ln}(1+\gamma _j(𝐲)/N)`$, $`\gamma _j(𝐲)\gamma _j(y_j,y_{j1})=j(e^{y_j}(1+e^{y_{i1}})/21)/(1t)`$ for $`j=1,2,3`$ ($`y_0\mathrm{}`$).

From (2),the $`C_j`$s undergo $`O(1)`$ changes each time a variable is fixed. After $`T=tN`$ assignments, the densities $`c_j=C_j/N`$ of clauses have been modified by $`O(1)`$. This translates into large $`N`$ Ansätze for the state probability, $`\stackrel{~}{P}(𝐂;T)=e^{N\phi (𝐜;t)}`$, and for the generating function, $`P(𝐲;T)=e^{N\phi (𝐲;t)}`$, up to non exponential in $`N`$ terms. $`\phi `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }`$ are simply related to each other through a Legendre transform. In particular, $`\phi (\mathrm{𝟎};t)`$ is the logarithm of the probability (divided by $`N`$) that the first branch has not been hit by any contradiction after a fraction $`t`$ of variables have been assigned. The most probable values of the densities $`c_j(t)`$ of $`j`$-clauses are equal to the partial derivatives of $`\phi `$ in $`𝐲=\mathrm{𝟎}`$.

When DPLL starts running on a 3-SAT instance, clauses are reduced and some UC generated. Next they are eliminated through UC propagation, and splits occur frequently (Fig. 1). The number $`C_1`$ of UC remains bounded with respect to the instance size $`N`$, and the density $`c_1(t)=\phi /y_1`$ identically vanishes. $`\phi `$ does not depend on $`y_1`$, and $`\phi (y_2,y_3;t)`$ obeys the following partial differential equation (PDE)

$$\frac{\phi }{t}=y_2+\gamma _2(y_2,y_2;t)\frac{\phi }{y_2}+\gamma _3(y_2,y_3;t)\frac{\phi }{y_3}$$
(4)
We have solved analytically PDE (4) with initial condition $`\phi (𝐲;0)=\alpha _0y_3`$. The high probability scenario is obtained for $`y_2=y_3=0`$: $`\phi (0,0;t)=0`$ indicates that the probability of survival of the branch is not exponentially small in $`N`$, and the partial derivatives $`c_2(t),c_3(t)`$ give the typical densities of 2- and 3-clauses, in full agreement with Chao and Franco’s result. We plot in Fig. 2 the corresponding resolution trajectories for various initial ratios $`\alpha _0`$, using the change of variables $`p=c_3/(c_2+c_3)`$, $`\alpha =(c_2+c_3)/(1t)`$. Our calculation provides furthermore a complete description of rare deviations of the resolution trajectory from its highly probable locus, giving acces to the exponentially small probabilities that $`p,\alpha `$ differ from their most probable values at ‘time’ $`t`$.

The assumption $`C_1=O(1)`$ breaks down for the most probable trajectory at some fraction $`t_D`$ e.g. $`t_D0.308`$ for $`\alpha _0=3.5`$ at which the trajectory hits point $`D`$ on Fig. 2. Beyond $`D`$, UC accumulate, and the probability of survival of the first branch becomes exponentially small in $`N`$. Variables are almost always assigned through unit-propagation: $`c_1>0`$. $`\phi `$ now depends on $`y_1`$ and, from (2), obeys the following PDE

$$\frac{\phi }{t}=y_1+\underset{j=1}{\overset{3}{}}\gamma _j(𝐲;t)\frac{\phi }{y_j}$$
(5)
We have solved PDE (5) through an expansion of $`\phi `$ in powers of $`𝐲`$, whose coefficients obey, from (5), a set of coupled linear ODEs. The initial conditions for the ODEs are chosen to match the expansion of the exact solution of (4), that is, the typical trajectory and its large deviations, at time $`t_D`$. The quality of the approximation improves rapidly with the order $`k`$ of the expansion, and no difference was found between $`k=3`$ and $`k=4`$ results. $`c_1`$ first increases, reaches its top value $`(c_1)^{max}`$, then decreases and vanishes at $`t_D^{}`$ when the trajectory comes out from the ”dangerous” region where contradictions a.s. occurs (Fig. 2). The probability of survival scales as $`2^{N\zeta }`$ for large $`N`$, with $`\zeta =\phi (\mathrm{𝟎};t_D^{})/\mathrm{ln}2`$. The calculated values of $`\zeta 0.01,(c_1)^{max}0.022`$ and $`Q/N0.21`$ for $`\alpha =3.5`$ are in very good agreement with numerics. Fig. 4 shows the agreement between theory and simulations over the whole range $`\alpha _L<\alpha <\alpha _C`$.

The existence of rare but easy resolutions suggests the use of a systematic stop-and-restart (S&R) procedure to speed up resolution: if a solution is not found before $`N`$ splits, DPLL is stopped and rerun after some random permutations of the variables and clauses. The expected number $`N_{rest}`$ of restarts necessary to find a solution being equal to the inverse probability $`1/P_{lin}`$ of linear resolutions, the resulting complexity should scale as $`N\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.011}N}`$ for $`\alpha =3.5`$, with an exponential gain with respect to DPLL one-run complexity, $`2^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.035}N}`$. Results of S&R experiments are reported on Fig 4. The typical number $`N_{rest}=2^{N\overline{\zeta }}`$ of restarts grows indeed exponentially with the size $`N`$, with a rate $`\overline{\zeta }=0.0115\pm 0.001`$ equal to $`\zeta `$ . Performances are greatly enhanced by the use of S&R (see Fig. 4 for comparison between $`\zeta `$ and $`\omega `$). While with usual DPLL, we were able to solve instances with 500 variables in about one day of CPU for $`\alpha =3.5`$, instances with 1000 variables were solved with S&R in 15 minutes on the same computer.

Our work therefore provides some theoretical support to the use of S&R, and in addition suggests a natural cut-off at which the search is halted and restarted, the determination of which is usually widely empirical and problem dependent. If a combinatorial problem is efficiently solved (polynomial time) by a search heuristic for some values of the control parameter of the input distribution, there might be an exponentially small probability that the heuristic is still successfull (in polynomial time) in the range of parameters where resolution almost surely requires massive backtracking and exponential effort. When the decay rate of the polynomial time resolution probability $`\zeta `$ is smaller than the growth rate $`\omega `$ of the typical exponential resolution time, S&R with a cut-off in the search equal to a polynomial of the instance size will lead to an exponential speed up of resolutions.

Acknowledgments. We thank A. Montanari and R. Zecchina for discussions and communication of their results prior to publication, and the French Ministry of Research for a partial financial support through the ACI Jeunes Chercheurs “Algorithmes d’optimisation et systèmes désordonnés quantiques”.


text:
# Amenability for dual Banach algebras

## 1 Introduction

Amenable Banach algebras were introduced by B. E. Johnson in \[Joh 2\], and have since then turned out to be extremely interesting objects of research. The definition of an amenable Banach algebra is strong enough to allow for the development of a rich general theory, but still weak enough to include a variety of interesting examples. Very often, for a class of Banach algebras, the amenability condition singles out an important subclass: For a locally compact group $`G`$, the convolution algebra $`L^1(G)`$ is amenable if and only if $`G`$ is amenable in the classical sense (\[Joh 2\]); a $`C^{}`$-algebra is amenable if and only if it is nuclear (\[Con 2\], \[B–P\], \[Haa\]); and a uniform algebra with character space $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is amenable if and only if it is $`𝒞_0(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ (\[She\]). To determine, for a given class of Banach algebras, which algebras in it are the amenable ones is an active area of research: For instance, it is still open for which Banach spaces $`E`$ the Banach algebra $`𝒦(E)`$ of all compact operators on $`E`$ is amenable (see \[G–J–W\] for partial results), and only recently, examples of radical amenable Banach algebras were given (\[Run 1\], \[Rea\]).

In this paper, we consider the following class of Banach algebras:

###### Definition 1.1

A Banach algebra $`𝔄`$ is said to be dual if there is a closed submodule $`𝔄_{}`$ of $`𝔄^{}`$ such that $`𝔄=(𝔄_{})^{}`$.

If $`𝔄`$ is a dual Banach algebra, the predual module $`𝔄_{}`$ need not be unique. In this paper, however, it is always clear, for a dual Banach algebra $`𝔄`$, to which $`𝔄_{}`$ we are referring. In particular, we may speak of the $`w^{}`$-topology on $`𝔄`$ without ambiguity.

The notion of a dual Banach algebra as defined in Definition 1.1 is by no means universally accepted. The name “dual Banach algebra” occurs in the literature in several contexts — often quite far apart from Definition 1.1. On the other hand, Banach algebras satisfying Definition 1.1 may appear with a different name tag; for instance, dual Banach algebras in our sense are called Banach algebras with $`(DM)`$ in \[C–G 1\] and \[C–G 2\].

We note a few elementary properties of dual Banach algebras:

###### Proposition 1.2

Let $`𝔄`$ be a dual Banach algebra. Then:

1. Multiplication in $`𝔄`$ is separately $`w^{}`$-continuous.
2. $`𝔄`$ has an identity if and only if it has a bounded approximate identity.
3. The Dixmier projection $`\pi :𝔄^{}𝔄_{}^{}𝔄_{}^{}𝔄`$ is an algebra homomorphism with respect to either Arens multiplication on $`𝔄^{}`$.

* (i) and (ii) are obvious, and (iii) follows from (i) and \[Pal 1, Theorem 1\]. $``$

The main reason for us to consider dual Banach algebras is that this class covers a wide range of examples:

* 1. Any $`W^{}`$-algebra is dual.
    2. If $`G`$ is a locally compact group, then $`M(G)`$ is dual (with $`M(G)_{}=𝒞_0(G)`$).
    3. If $`E`$ is a reflexive Banach space, then $`(E)`$ is dual (with $`(E)_{}=E\widehat{}E^{}`$).
    4. If $`𝔄`$ is an Arens regular Banach algebra, then $`𝔄^{}`$ is dual; in particular, every reflexive Banach algebra is dual.

Comparing this list of dual Banach algebras with our stock of amenable Banach algebras, the overlap is surprisingly small. But although there are few examples of dual Banach algebras which are known to be amenable, there are equally few dual Banach algebras for which we positively know that they are not amenable:

* A $`W^{}`$-algebra is amenable if and only if it is subhomogeneous (this follows from \[Was, (1.9) Corollary\] and \[Con 2\]; see also \[L–L–W\]). Even for such a “simple” object as $`𝕄_{\mathrm{}}:=\mathrm{}^{\mathrm{}}\text{-}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}𝕄_n`$, the proof of non-amenability requires that amenability implies nuclearity.
* If $`G`$ is a locally compact group, then $`M(G)`$ is amenable if and only if $`G`$ is discrete and amenable (\[D–G–H\]).
* The only Banach spaces $`E`$ for which $`(E)`$ is known to be amenable are the finite-dimensional ones, and they may well be the only ones. For a Hilbert space $``$, the results on amenable von Neumann algebras imply that $`()`$ is not amenable unless $``$ is finite-dimensional. It seems to be unknown, however, if $`(\mathrm{}^p)`$ is non-amenable for $`p(1,\mathrm{})\{2\}`$.
* The only known Arens regular Banach algebras $`𝔄`$ for which $`𝔄^{}`$ is amenable are the subhomogeneous $`C^{}`$-algebras; in particular, no infinite-dimensional, reflexive, amenable Banach algebra is known. (It seems that the demand that $`𝔄^{}`$ be amenable is very strong: It necessitates $`𝔄`$ to be amenable (\[G–L–W\], \[Gou\]) and, for many classes of Banach algebras, forces $`𝔄`$ to be finite dimensional (\[G–R–W\], \[G–L–W\], \[Run 1\]).)

The general impression thus is that amenability in the sense of \[Joh 2\] is too strong to allow for the development of a rich theory for dual Banach algebras, and that some notion of amenability taking the $`w^{}`$-topology on dual Banach algebras into account is more appropriate (\[Grø, Question 10\]). Nevertheless, although amenability seems to be a condition which is in conflict with Definition 1.1, this impression is supported by surprisingly few proofs, and even where such proofs exist — in the $`W^{}`$-case, for instance —, they often seem inappropriately deep.

This paper therfore aims into two directions: First, we want to substantiate our impression that dual Banach algebras are rarely amenable with theorems, and secondly, we want to develop a suitable notion of amenability — which we shall call Connes-amenability — for dual Banach algebras.

## 2 Amenability preliminaries

Let $`𝔄`$ be a Banach algebra, and let $`E`$ be a Banach $`𝔄`$-bimodule. A derivation from $`𝔄`$ into $`E`$ is a bounded linear map satisfying

$$D(ab)=aDb+(Da)b(a,b𝔄).$$

As is customary, we write $`𝒵^1(𝔄,E)`$ for the Banach space of all derivations from $`𝔄`$ into $`E`$. For $`xE`$, the linear map

$$\mathrm{ad}_x:𝔄E,aaxxa$$

is a derivation. Derivations of this form are called inner derivations; the normed space of all inner derivations from $`𝔄`$ to $`E`$ is denoted by $`^1(𝔄,E)`$. The quotient space $`^1(𝔄,E):=𝒵^1(𝔄,E)/^1(𝔄,E)`$ is called the first cohomology group (or rather: space) of $`𝔄`$ with coeffiecients in $`E`$.

The dual space of a Banach $`𝔄`$-bimodule can be made into a Banach $`𝔄`$-bimodule as well via

$$x,a\varphi :=xa,\varphi \text{and}x,\varphi a:=ax,\varphi (a𝔄,\varphi E^{},xE).$$

A Banach algebra $`𝔄`$ is defined to be amenable if $`^1(𝔄,E^{})=\{0\}`$ for every Banach $`𝔄`$-bimodule $`E`$ (\[Joh 2\]). References for amenable Banach algebras are \[Joh 2\] as well as \[Hel 1\], where a different, but equivalent approach, based on the notion of flatness in topological homology is given.

We shall also require a characterization of amenable Banach algebras in terms of approximate diagonals as given in \[Joh 3\]. Let $`𝔄\widehat{}𝔄`$ denote the projective tensor product of $`𝔄`$ with itself. Then $`𝔄\widehat{}𝔄`$ is a Banach $`𝔄`$-bimodule through

$$a(xy):=axy\text{and}\text{(}xy)a:=xya(a,x,y𝔄).$$

Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }:𝔄\widehat{}𝔄𝔄`$ be the multiplication operator, i.e. $`\mathrm{\Delta }(ab):=ab`$ for $`a,b𝔄`$ (sometimes, when we wish to emphasize the algebra $`𝔄`$, we also write $`\mathrm{\Delta }_𝔄`$). An approximate diagonal for $`𝔄`$ is a bounded net $`(m_\alpha )_\alpha `$ in $`𝔄\widehat{}𝔄`$ such that

$$am_\alpha m_\alpha a0\text{and}a\mathrm{\Delta }m_\alpha a(a𝔄).$$

The algebra $`𝔄`$ is amenable if and only if it has an approximate diagonal (\[Joh 3\]).

There are several variants of amenability, two of which we will discuss here: super-amenbility, and Connes-amenability.

A Banach algebra $`𝔄`$ is said to be super-amenable (or contractible) if $`^1(𝔄,E)=\{0\}`$ for every Banach $`𝔄`$-bimodule $`E`$. Equivalently, $`𝔄`$ is super-amenable if it has a diagonal, i.e. a constant approximate diagonal (\[C–L, Theorem 6.1\]). All algebras $`𝕄_n`$ with $`n`$ and all finite direct sums of such algebras are super-amenable; no other examples are known. Conversely, it is known that every super-amenable Banach algebra $`𝔄`$ which satisfies some rather mild hypotheses in terms of Banach space geometry must be a finite direct sum of full matrix algebras (\[Sel\], for example; see \[Run 1\] for a survey and some refinements). In particular, every super-amenable Banach algebra $`𝔄`$ with the approximation property is of the form

$$𝔄𝕄_{n_1}\mathrm{}𝕄_{n_k}$$

with $`n_1,\mathrm{},n_k`$.

In \[J–K–R\], B. E. Johnson, R. V. Kadison, and J. Ringrose introduced a notion of amenability for von Neumann algebras which takes the ultraweak topology into account. The basic concepts, however, make sense for arbitrary dual Banach algebras. Let $`𝔄`$ be a dual Banach algebra, and let $`E`$ be a Banach $`𝔄`$-bimodule. Then we call $`E^{}`$ a $`w^{}`$-Banach $`𝔄`$-bimodule if, for each $`\varphi E^{}`$, the maps

$$𝔄E^{},a\{\begin{array}{c}a\varphi \\ \varphi a\end{array}$$
(1)
are $`w^{}`$-continuous. We write $`𝒵_w^{}^1(𝔄,E^{})`$ for the $`w^{}`$-continuous derivations from $`𝔄`$ into $`E^{}`$. The $`w^{}`$-continuity of the maps (1) implies that $`^1(𝔄,E^{})𝒵_w^{}^1(𝔄,E^{})`$, so that $`_w^{}^1(𝔄,E^{}):=𝒵_w^{}^1(𝔄,E^{})/^1(𝔄,E^{})`$ is a meaningful definition.

###### Definition 2.1

A dual Banach algebra $`𝔄`$ is Connes-amenable if $`_w^{}^1(𝔄,E^{})=\{0\}`$ for every $`w^{}`$-Banach $`𝔄`$-bimodule $`E^{}`$.

* 1. Although the notion of Connes-amenability was introduced in \[J–K–R\] (for $`W^{}`$-algebras), it is most commonly associated with A. Connes’ paper \[Con 1\]: This motivates our choice of terminology (compare also \[Hel 2\]).
    2. Definition 2.1 is a special case of a notion of amenability introduced in \[C–G 1\]. There, for an arbitrary Banach algebra $`𝔄`$ and a submodule $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ of $`𝔄^{}`$ satisfying certain properties, $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$-amenability is defined. If $`𝔄`$ is a dual Banach algebra, then $`𝔄_{}`$ satisfies all the requirements for $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ in \[C–G 1\], and $`𝔄`$ is Connes-amenable if and only if it is $`𝔄_{}`$-amenable in the sense of \[C–G 1\].

## 3 The rôle of the Radon–Nikodým property

Let $`𝔄`$ be a dual Banach algebra, and let $`𝔄_{}`$ be its predual as in Definition 1.1. Let $`𝔄_{}\stackrel{ˇ}{}𝔄_{}`$ be the injective tensor product of $`𝔄_{}`$ with itself. Then we have a canonical map from $`𝔄\widehat{}𝔄`$ into $`(𝔄_{}\stackrel{ˇ}{}𝔄_{})^{}`$, which has closed range if $`𝔄`$ has the bounded approximation property (\[D–F, 16.3, Corollary 2\]).

If $`𝔄`$ is amenable, a naive approach to show that $`𝔄`$ is super-amenable would be as follows:

Let $`(m_\alpha )_\alpha `$ be an approximate diagonal for $`𝔄`$, and choose an accumulation point $`m`$ of $`(m_\alpha )_\alpha `$ in the topology induced by $`𝔄_{}\stackrel{ˇ}{}𝔄_{}`$.

Show that $`m`$ is a diagonal for $`𝔄`$.

There are problems in both steps (and since there are amenable, dual Banach algebras which are not super-amenable this is no surprise). In Step 1, the main problem is that the accumulation point $`m(𝔄_{}\stackrel{ˇ}{}𝔄_{})^{}`$ need not lie in $`𝔄\widehat{}𝔄`$. In view of \[D–F, 16.6, Theorem\], it is clear that in order to make Step 1 work, we have to require the Radon–Nikodým property for $`𝔄`$.

We have the following theorem:

###### Theorem 3.1

Let $`𝔄`$ be an amenable, dual Banach algebra having both the approximation property and the Radon–Nikodým property. Suppose further, that there is a family $`(I_\lambda )_\lambda `$ of $`w^{}`$-closed ideals of $`𝔄`$, each with finite codimension, such that $`_\lambda I_\lambda =\{0\}`$. Then there are $`n_1,\mathrm{},n_k`$ such that

$$𝔄𝕄_{n_1}\mathrm{}𝕄_{n_k}.$$

* Let $`𝔄_{}`$ denote the predual of $`𝔄`$. Since $`𝔄`$ has both the approximation property and the Radon–Nikodým property, we have

$$𝔄\widehat{}𝔄(𝔄_{}\stackrel{ˇ}{}𝔄_{})^{}$$

by \[D–F, 16.6, Theorem\]. We thus have a natural $`w^{}`$-topology on $`𝔄\widehat{}𝔄`$. Let $`(m_\alpha )_\alpha `$ be an approximate diagonal for $`𝔄`$, and let $`m𝔄\widehat{}𝔄`$ be a $`w^{}`$-accumulation point of $`(m_\alpha )_\alpha `$; passing to a subnet we can assume that $`m=w^{}\text{-}lim_\alpha m_\alpha `$.

We claim that $`m`$ is a diagonal for $`𝔄`$. It is clear that $`m𝒵^0(𝔄,𝔄\widehat{}𝔄)`$, so that all we have to show is that $`\mathrm{\Delta }m=e_𝔄`$. Let $`\pi _\lambda :𝔄𝔄/I_\lambda `$ be the canonical epimorphism. Since $`I_\lambda `$ is $`w^{}`$-closed, each quotient algebra $`𝔄/I_\lambda `$ is again dual with the predual

$${}_{}{}^{}I_{\lambda }^{}=\{\varphi 𝔄_{}:\varphi ,a=0\text{ for all }aI_\lambda \}.$$

Let $`\iota _\lambda :{}_{}{}^{}I_{\lambda }^{}𝔄_{}`$ be the inclusion map. Then $`\pi _\lambda \pi _\lambda :𝔄\widehat{}𝔄𝔄/I_\lambda \widehat{}𝔄/I_\lambda `$ is the tranpose of $`\iota _\lambda \iota _\lambda :{}_{}{}^{}I_{\lambda }^{}\stackrel{ˇ}{}{}_{}{}^{}I_{\lambda }^{}𝔄_{}\stackrel{ˇ}{}𝔄_{}`$ (since $`I_\lambda `$ has finite codimension, we have clearly $`𝔄/I_\lambda \widehat{}𝔄/I_\lambda ({}_{}{}^{}I_{\lambda }^{}\stackrel{ˇ}{}{}_{}{}^{}I_{\lambda }^{})^{}`$). Thus, $`\pi _\lambda \pi _\lambda `$ is $`w^{}`$-continuous, so that

$$(\pi _\lambda \pi _\lambda )m=w^{}\text{-}\underset{\alpha }{lim}(\pi _\lambda \pi _\lambda )m_\alpha .$$

Since $`𝔄/I_\lambda \widehat{}𝔄/I_\lambda `$ is finite-dimensional, there is only one vector space topology on it; in particular, $`(\pi _\lambda \pi _\lambda )d`$ is the norm limit of $`((\pi _\lambda \pi _\lambda )d_\alpha )_\alpha `$. Since

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{𝔄/I_\lambda }(\pi _\lambda \pi _\lambda )=\pi _\lambda \mathrm{\Delta }_𝔄,$$

we obtain

$$(\pi _\lambda \mathrm{\Delta }_𝔄)m=\underset{\alpha }{lim}(\mathrm{\Delta }_{𝔄/I_\lambda }(\pi _\lambda \pi _\lambda ))m_\alpha =e_{𝔄/I_\lambda }.$$

Since $`(\pi _\lambda )_\lambda `$ separates the points of $`𝔄`$, it follows that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_𝔄m=e_𝔄`$. Hence, $`m`$ is a diagonal for $`𝔄`$. $``$

* It is essential for Theorem 3.1 to hold that $`𝔄`$ has the Radon–Nikodým property. For example, the algebra $`\mathrm{}^{\mathrm{}}`$ is an amenable, dual Banach algebra which has a family $`(I_\lambda )_\lambda `$ of $`w^{}`$-closed ideals as in Theorem 3.1, but is infinite-dimensional.

Since separable dual spaces as well as reflexive Banach spaces automatically have the Radon–Nikodým property (\[D–F, D3\]), we obtain the following corollaries, the first of which is a nice dichotomy and the second of which improves \[G–R–W, Corollary 2.3\] and is related to \[Run 1, Proposition 2.3\]:

###### Corollary 3.2

Let $`𝔄`$ be an amenable dual Banach algebra having the approximation property. Suppose further, that there is a family $`(I_\lambda )_\lambda `$ of $`w^{}`$-closed ideals of $`𝔄`$, each with finite codimension, such that $`_\lambda I_\lambda =\{0\}`$. Then one of the following holds:

1. $`𝔄`$ is not separable;
2. there are $`n_1,\mathrm{},n_k`$ such that

$$𝔄𝕄_{n_1}\mathrm{}𝕄_{n_k}.$$

###### Corollary 3.3

Let $`𝔄`$ be an amenable, reflexive Banach algebra having the approximation property. Suppose further, that there is a family $`(I_\lambda )_\lambda `$ of closed ideals of $`𝔄`$, each with finite codimension, such that $`_\lambda I_\lambda =\{0\}`$. Then there are $`n_1,\mathrm{},n_k`$ such that

$$𝔄𝕄_{n_1}\mathrm{}𝕄_{n_k}.$$

* In Corollary 3.3 we can replace the hypothesis that there is a family $`(I_\lambda )_\lambda `$ of closed ideals of $`𝔄`$, each with finite codimension, such that $`_\lambda I_\lambda =\{0\}`$ by a weaker one. If we assume that the almost periodic functionals on $`𝔄`$ separate points, we still get the same conclusion (this is proved in the same way as \[Run 1, Proposition 3.1\]). For examples of almost periodic functionals that do not arise from finite-dimensional quotients, see \[D–Ü\].

## 4 Connes-amenability of biduals

In this section, we investigate how, for an Arens regular Banach algebra $`𝔄`$, the amenability of $`𝔄`$ and the Connes-amenability of $`𝔄^{}`$ are related.

We begin our discussion with some elementary propositions:

###### Proposition 4.1

Let $`𝔄`$ be a Connes-amenable, dual Banach algebra. Then $`𝔄`$ has an identity.

* Let $`A`$ be the Banach $`𝔄`$-bimodule whose underlying linear space is $`𝔄`$ equipped with the following module operations:

$$ax:=ax\text{and}xa:=0(a,x𝔄).$$

Obviously, $`A`$ is a $`w^{}`$-Banach $`𝔄`$-bimodule the identity on $`𝔄`$ into a $`w^{}`$-continuous derivation. Since $`_w^{}^1(𝔄,A)=\{0\}`$, this means that $`𝔄`$ has a right identity. Analoguously, one sees that $`𝔄`$ has also a left identity. $``$

###### Proposition 4.2

Let $`𝔄`$ be a Banach algebra, let $`𝔅`$ be a dual Banach algebra, and let $`\theta :𝔄𝔅`$ be a continuous homomorphism with $`w^{}`$-dense range. Then:

1. If $`𝔄`$ is amenable, then $`𝔅`$ is Connes-amenable.
2. If $`𝔄`$ is dual and Connes-amenable, and if $`\theta `$ is $`w^{}`$-continuous, then $`𝔅`$ is Connes-amenable.

* Immediate from the definitions. $``$

###### Corollary 4.3

Let $`𝔄`$ be an Arens regular Banach algebra. Then, if $`𝔄`$ is amenable, $`𝔄^{}`$ is Connes-amenable.

If $`𝔄`$ is a $`C^{}`$-algebra, then the converse of Corollary 4.3 holds: If $`𝔄^{}`$ is Connes-amenable, then $`𝔄`$ is amenable (\[Con 1\], \[B–P\], \[Haa\], \[Eff\], \[E–K\]). This is a deep, specifically $`C^{}`$-algebraic result, for which no analogue in the general Banach algebra setting is available (yet). Under certain circumstances, however, a converse of Corollary 4.3 holds for general Banach algebras:

###### Theorem 4.4

Let $`𝔄`$ be an Arens regular Banach algebra which is an ideal in $`𝔄^{}`$. Then the following are equivalent:

1. $`𝔄`$ is amenable.
2. $`𝔄^{}`$ is Connes-amenable.

* Since $`𝔄^{}`$ is Connes-amenable, it has an identity by Proposition 4.1. By \[Pal 2, Proposition 5.1.8\], this means that $`𝔄`$ has a bounded approximate identity, $`(e_\alpha )_\alpha `$ say. By \[Joh 2\], it is therefore sufficient for $`𝔄`$ to be amenable that $`^1(𝔄,E^{})=\{0\}`$ for each essential Banach $`𝔄`$-bimodule.

Let $`E`$ be an essential Banach $`𝔄`$-bimodule, and let $`D:AE^{}`$ be a derivation. The following construction is carried out in \[Joh 2\] with the double centralizer algebra instead of $`𝔄^{}`$, but an inspection of the argument there shows that it carries over to our situation. Since $`E`$ is essential, there are, for each $`xE`$, elements $`b,c𝔄`$ and $`y,zE`$ with $`x=by=zc`$. Define an $`𝔄`$-bimodule action of $`𝔄^{}`$ on $`E`$, by letting

$$a(by):=aby\text{and}(zc)a:=zca(a𝔄^{},b,c𝔄,y,zE).$$

It can be shown that this module action is well-defined and turns $`E`$ into a Banach $`𝔄^{}`$-bimodule. Consequently, $`E^{}`$ equipped with the corresponding dual module action is a Banach $`𝔄^{}`$-bimodule as well.

We claim that $`E^{}`$ is even a $`w^{}`$-Banach $`𝔄^{}`$-bimodule. Let $`(a_\beta )_\beta `$ be a net in $`𝔄^{}`$ such that $`a_\beta \stackrel{w^{}}{}0`$, let $`\varphi E^{}`$, and let $`xE`$. Let $`b𝔄`$ and $`yE`$ such that $`x=yb`$. Since the $`w^{}`$-topology of $`𝔄^{}`$ restricted to $`𝔄`$ is the weak topology, we $`ba_\beta \stackrel{w}{}0`$, so that

$$xa_\beta =yba_\beta \stackrel{w}{}0$$

and consequently

$$x,a_\beta \varphi =xa_\beta ,\varphi 0.$$

Since $`xE`$ was arbitrary, this means that $`a_\beta \varphi \stackrel{w^{}}{}0`$. Analoguously, one shows that $`\varphi a_\beta \stackrel{w^{}}{}0`$.

Following again \[Joh 2\], we define a derivation $`\stackrel{~}{D}:𝔄^{}E^{}`$ by letting

$$\stackrel{~}{D}a=w^{}\text{-}\underset{\alpha }{lim}[D(ae_\alpha )aDe_\alpha ].$$

We claim that $`\stackrel{~}{D}𝒵_w^{}^1(𝔄^{},E^{})`$. Let again $`(a_\beta )_\beta `$ be a net in $`𝔄^{}`$ such that $`a_\beta \stackrel{w^{}}{}0`$, let $`xE`$, and let $`b𝔄`$ and $`yE`$ such that $`x=by`$. Then we have:

$`x,\stackrel{~}{D}a_\beta `$ $`=`$ $`by,\stackrel{~}{D}a_\beta `$
$`=`$ $`y,(\stackrel{~}{D}a_\beta )b`$
$`=`$ $`y,D(a_\beta b)a_\beta Db`$
$``$ $`0,`$
since $`D`$ is weakly continuous and $`E^{}`$ is a $`w^{}`$-Banach $`𝔄^{}`$-bimodule.

From the Connes-amenability of $`𝔄^{}`$ we conclude that $`\stackrel{~}{D}`$, and hence $`D`$, is inner. $``$

* In \[Gou\], F. Gourdeau showed that, whenever $`𝔄`$ is a Banach algebra, $`E`$ is a Banach $`𝔄`$-bimodule, and $`D:𝔄E`$ is a derivation, there is an $`𝔄^{}`$-bimodule action on $`E^{}`$, turning $`D^{}:𝔄^{}E^{}`$ into a (necessarily $`w^{}`$-continuous) derivation. However, even if $`E`$ is a dual Banach $`𝔄`$-bimodule, there is no need for $`E^{}`$ to be a $`w^{}`$-Banach $`𝔄`$-bimodule, so that, in general, we cannot draw any conclusion on the amenability of $`𝔄`$ from the Connes-amenability of $`𝔄^{}`$.

By \[G–J–W, Theorem 6.9\], the space $`\mathrm{}^p\mathrm{}^q`$ with $`p,q(1,\mathrm{})\{2\}`$ and $`pq`$ has the property that $`𝒦(\mathrm{}^p\mathrm{}^q)`$ is not amenable. Hence, Theorem 4.4 yields:

###### Corollary 4.5

Let $`p,q(1,\mathrm{})\{2\}`$, $`pq`$. Then $`(\mathrm{}^p\mathrm{}^q)`$ is not Connes-amenable.

* Since $`𝒦(\mathrm{}^p\mathrm{}^q)^{}(\mathrm{}^p\mathrm{}^q)`$, and since $`𝒦(\mathrm{}^p\mathrm{}^q)`$ is not amenable, $`(\mathrm{}^p\mathrm{}^q)`$ is not Connes-amenable by Theorem 4.4. $``$

Let $`𝔄`$ be a dual Banach algebra, and let $`E`$ be a Banach $`𝔄`$-bimodule. Then we call an element $`\varphi E^{}`$ a $`w^{}`$-element if the maps (1) are $`w^{}`$-continuous.

###### Definition 4.6

A dual Banach algebra with identity $`𝔄`$ is called strongly Connes-amenable if, for each each unital Banach $`𝔄`$-bimodule $`E`$, every $`w^{}`$-continuous derivation $`D:𝔄E^{}`$ whose range consists of $`w^{}`$-elements is inner.

We shall give an instrinsic characterization of strongly Connes-amenable dual Banach algebras similar to the one given in \[Joh 3\] for amenable Banach algebras. Recall a few definitions from \[C–G 1\] (with a different notation, however). Let $`𝔄`$ be a dual Banach algebra with identity, and let $`_w^{}^2(𝔄,)`$ be the space of separately $`w^{}`$-continuous bilinear functionals on $`𝔄`$. Clearly, $`_w^{}^2(𝔄,)`$ is Banach $`𝔄`$-submodule of $`^2(𝔄,)(𝔄\widehat{}𝔄)^{}`$. Define

$$(𝔄\widehat{}_w^{}𝔄)^{}:=_w^{}^2(𝔄,)^{}.$$

Note that the notation $`(𝔄\widehat{}_w^{}𝔄)^{}`$ is merely symbolic: In general, $`(𝔄\widehat{}_w^{}𝔄)^{}`$ is not a bidual space. There is a canonical embedding of the algebraic tensor product $`𝔄𝔄`$ into $`(𝔄\widehat{}_w^{}𝔄)^{}`$, so that we may identify $`𝔄𝔄`$ with a submodule of $`(𝔄\widehat{}_w^{}𝔄)^{}`$. It is immediate that $`𝔄𝔄`$ consists of $`w^{}`$-elements of $`(𝔄\widehat{}_w^{}𝔄)^{}`$. Since multiplicaton in a dual Banach algebra is separately $`w^{}`$-continuous, we have

$$\mathrm{\Delta }^{}𝔄_{}_w^{}^2(𝔄,),$$

so that the multiplication operator $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ on $`𝔄𝔄`$ extends to $`(𝔄\widehat{}_w^{}𝔄)^{}`$; we shall denote this extension by $`\mathrm{\Delta }_w^{}^{}`$. A virtual $`w^{}`$-diagonal for $`𝔄`$ (in the terminology of \[C–G 1\]: an $`𝔄_{}`$-virtual diagonal) is an element $`M(𝔄\widehat{}_w^{}𝔄)^{}`$ such that

$$aM=Ma(a𝔄)\text{and}\mathrm{\Delta }_w^{}^{}M=e_𝔄.$$

In \[C–G 1\], G. Corach and J. E. Galé showed that a dual Banach algebra with a virtual $`w^{}`$-diagonal is necessarily Connes-amenable, and wondered if the converse was also true. For strong Connes-amenability, the corresponding question is easy to answer:

###### Theorem 4.7

For a dual Banach algebra $`𝔄`$, the following are equivalent:

1. $`𝔄`$ has a virtual $`w^{}`$-diagonal.
2. $`𝔄`$ is strongly Connes-amenable.

* On \[C–G 1, p. 90\], it is shown that (i) implies the Connes-amenability of $`𝔄`$ (the argument for von Neumann algebras from \[Eff\] carries over verbatim). A closer inspection of the argument given there, however, shows that we already obtain strong Connes-amenability.

For the converse, consider the derivation $`\mathrm{ad}_{e_𝔄e_𝔄}`$. Then, clearly, $`\mathrm{ad}_{e_𝔄e_𝔄}`$ attains its values in the $`w^{}`$-elements of $`\mathrm{ker}\mathrm{\Delta }_w^{}^{}`$. By the definition of strong Connes-amenability, there is $`N\mathrm{ker}\mathrm{\Delta }_w^{}^{}`$ such that $`\mathrm{ad}_N=\mathrm{ad}_{e_𝔄e_𝔄}`$. It follows that $`D:=e_𝔄e_𝔄N`$ is a virtual $`w^{}`$-dagonal for $`𝔄`$. $``$

* In \[Eff\], E. G. Effros proves that a von Neumann algebra is Connes-amenable if and only if it has a virtual $`w^{}`$-diagonal. Hence, von Neumann algebras are Connes-amenable if and only if they are strongly Connes-amenable.

For certain Banach algebras $`𝔄`$, the strong Connes-amenability of $`𝔄^{}`$ entails the amenability of $`𝔄`$:

###### Theorem 4.8

Let $`𝔄`$ be a Banach algebra with the following properties:

1. Every bounded linear map from $`𝔄`$ to $`𝔄^{}`$ is weakly compact.
2. $`𝔄^{}`$ is strongly Connes-amenable.

Then $`𝔄`$ is amenable.

* By \[Gro, 1.29 Satz\], condition (i) implies (and is, in fact, equivalent to) that every bounded, bilinear map from $`𝔄\times 𝔄`$ into any Banach space is Arens regular; in particular, it ensures that $`𝔄^{}`$ is indeed a dual Banach algebra. It is thus an immediate consequence of (i) that

$$(𝔄\widehat{}𝔄)^{}(𝔄^{}\widehat{}_w^{}𝔄^{})^{},$$
(2)
as Banach $`𝔄`$-bimodules. Since $`𝔄^{}`$ has a virtual $`w^{}`$-diagonal by Theorem 4.7, the isomorphism (2) ensures the existence of a virtual diagonal for $`𝔄`$. Thus, $`𝔄`$ is amenable. $``$

* 1. Every $`C^{}`$-algebra satisfies Theorem 4.8(i).
    2. Let $`E`$ be a reflexive Banach space with an unconditional basis. It is implicitly proved in \[Ülg\] (although not explicitly stated) that $`𝒦(E)`$ satisfies Theorem 4.8(i).

## 5 Dual Banach algebras associated with locally compact groups

As was shown by A. Connes (\[Con 2\]), Connes-amenable von Neumann algebras (with separable predual) are injective. An alternative proof for this is given in \[B–P\]. We now give an analogue — in the spirit of \[C–G 1, Proposition 2.2\] and \[C–G 2, Proposition 2.2\] — for arbitrary Connes-amenable, dual Banach algebras.

If $`S`$ is any subset of an algebra $`𝔅`$, we use $`Z_𝔅(S)`$ to denote the centralizer of $`S`$ in $`𝔅`$, i.e.

$$Z_𝔅(S):=\{b𝔅:bs=sb\text{ for all }sS\}.$$

In case $`𝔅=(E)`$ for some Banach space $`E`$, we also write $`S^{}`$ instead of $`Z_𝔅(S)`$. Recall (from \[B–P\] or \[C–G 2\]) the definition of a quasi-expectation: If $`𝔅`$ is a Banach algebra, and if $`𝔄`$ is a closed subalgebra of $`𝔅`$, a quasi-expectation is a bounded projection $`𝒬:𝔅𝔄`$ satisfying

$$𝒬(axb)=a(𝒬x)b(a,b𝔄,x𝔅).$$

Note that we do not require $`𝒬=1`$.

###### Theorem 5.1

Let $`𝔄`$ be a Connes-amenable dual Banach algebra, let $`𝔅`$ be a dual Banach algebra with identity, and let $`\theta :𝔄𝔅`$ be a unital, $`w^{}`$-continuous homomorphism. Then there is a quasi-expectation $`𝒬:𝔅Z_𝔅(\theta (𝔄))`$.

* More or less a verbatim copy of the proof of \[B–P, Theorem 3\]. $``$

In this section, we will use Theorem 5.1 to characterize the Connes-amenability of some dual Banach algebra which arise naturally in abstract harmonic analysis.

For non-discrete, abelian $`G`$, it has long been known that there are non-zero point derivations on $`M(G)`$ (\[B–M\]), so that $`M(G)`$ cannot be amenable. In \[L–L\], A. T.-M. Lau and R. J. Loy started investigating the amenability of $`M(G)`$ for certain non-abelian $`G`$. In particular, they were able to show that, for connected $`G`$, the algebra $`M(G)`$ is amenable only if $`G=\{e\}`$ (\[L–L, Theorem 2.4\]). Ultimately, H. G. Dales, F. Gharamani, and A. Ya. Helemskiĭ (\[D–G–H\]) proved: The measure algebra $`M(G)`$ is amenable if and only if $`G`$ is discrete — so that $`M(G)=\mathrm{}^1(G)=L^1(G)`$ — and amenable.

The picture is completely different for Connes-amenability. We have, for example:

###### Proposition 5.2

Let $`G`$ be a compact group. Then $`M(G)`$ is strongly Connes-amenable.

* By Theorem 4.7, it is sufficient to construct a virtual $`w^{}`$-diagonal for $`M(G)`$.

For $`\varphi _w^{}^2(M(G),)`$, define $`\overline{\varphi }:G\times G`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }:G`$ through

$$\overline{\varphi }(x,y):=\varphi (\delta _x,\delta _y)\text{and}\stackrel{~}{\varphi }(x):=\overline{\varphi }(x,x^1)(x,yG).$$

Then $`\overline{\varphi }`$ is separately continuous on $`G\times G`$ and thus belongs to $`L^{\mathrm{}}(G\times G,\mu \times \nu )`$ for any $`\nu ,\mu M(G)`$ (\[Joh 1\]). Since (normalized) Haar measure belongs to $`M(G)`$, this implies that $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }L^{\mathrm{}}(G)L^1(G)`$.

Let $`m`$ denote normalized Haar measure on $`G`$, and define $`M(M(G)\widehat{}_w^{}M(G))^{}`$ via

$$\varphi ,M:=_G\stackrel{~}{\varphi }(x)𝑑m(x)(\varphi _w^{}^2(M(G),)).$$

It is routinely checked that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_w^{}^{}M=\delta _e`$. Let $`\mu M(G)`$, and let $`\varphi _w^{}^2(M(G),)`$. Then we have:

$`\varphi ,\mu M`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi \mu ,M`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _G}\stackrel{~}{\varphi \mu }(x)𝑑m(x)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _G}\overline{\varphi \mu }(x,x^1)𝑑m(x)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _G}{\displaystyle _G}\overline{\varphi }(yx,x^1)𝑑\mu (y)𝑑m(x)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _G}{\displaystyle _G}\overline{\varphi }(yx,x^1)𝑑m(x)𝑑\mu (y),\text{by Fubini’s theorem},`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _G}{\displaystyle _G}\overline{\varphi }(x,x^1y)𝑑m(x)𝑑\mu (y),\text{substituting }y^1x\text{ for }x,`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _G}{\displaystyle _G}\overline{\varphi }(x,x^1y)𝑑\mu (y)𝑑m(x),\text{again by Fubini’s theorem},`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _G}\stackrel{~}{\mu \varphi }(x)𝑑m(x)`$
$`=`$ $`\mu \varphi ,M`$
$`=`$ $`\varphi ,M\mu .`$
Thus, $`M`$ is virtual $`w^{}`$-diagonal for $`M(G)`$. $``$

* 1. Most of the proof of Proposition 5.2 still works for not necessarily compact, amenable $`G`$, where we replace Haar measure in the definiton of $`M`$ by a left invariant mean on $`L^{\mathrm{}}(G)`$. In this, more general situation, however, we have no substitute for the two applications (Proof ) and (Proof ) of Fubini’s theorem.
    2. The locally compact groups $`G`$ for which $`M(G)`$ is Connes-amenable are characterized in the companion paper \[Run 2\]: They are precisely the amenable groups. In the same paper, it is also shown that $`M(G)`$ has a virtual $`w^{}`$-diagonal if and only if it is Connes-amenable.

Another important dual Banach algebra associated with a locally compact group $`G`$ is the group von Neumann algebra $`VN(G)`$. Its Connes-amenability was characterized in terms of $`G`$ by A. T.-M. Lau and A. L. T. Paterson (\[L–P\]). There are analogues of $`VN(G)`$ acting on $`L^p(G)`$ for $`p(1,\mathrm{})`$, the so-called algebras of pseudo-mesures $`PM_p(G)`$ (for information on these algebras and further references, see \[Eym\]). We shall now prove an extension of \[L–P, Corollary 3.3\] for these algebras of pseudo-measures.

Recall (from \[L–P\], for example) that a locally compact group is inner amenable if there is a state $`m`$ on $`L^{\mathrm{}}(G)`$ such that

$$\delta _x\varphi \delta _{x^1},m=\varphi ,m(xG,\varphi L^{\mathrm{}}(G)).$$

Every amenable group is inner amenable, but so is evey $`[IN]`$-group.

###### Theorem 5.3

For a locally compact group $`G`$ consider the following:

1. $`G`$ is amenable.
2. $`M(G)`$ is Connes-amenable.
3. $`PM_p(G)`$ is Connes-amenable for every $`p(1,\mathrm{})`$.
4. $`VN(G)`$ is Connes-amenable.
5. $`PM_p(G)`$ is Connes-amenable for one $`p(1,\mathrm{})`$.

Then we have:

(i) $``$ (ii) $``$ (iii) $``$ (iv) $``$ (v).

If $`G`$ is inner amenable, (v) $``$ (i) holds, too.

* (i) $``$ (ii): This is is clear in view of Proposition 4.2(i).

(ii) $``$ (iii): This follows from Proposition 4.2(ii).

(iii) $``$ (iv) $``$ (v): Since $`VN(G)=PM_2(G)`$, this is obvious.

(v) $``$ (i) for $`G`$ inner amenable: For any $`r[1,\mathrm{})`$, let $`\lambda _r`$ and $`\rho _r`$ denote the regular left and right representation, respectively, of $`G`$ on $`L^r(G)`$.

By \[L–R, Proposition 1\], it follows from the inner amenability of $`G`$ that there is a net $`(f_\alpha )_\alpha `$ of positive $`L^1`$-functions with $`f_\alpha _1=1`$ such that

$$\delta _xf_\alpha \delta _{x^1}f_\alpha _10(xG),$$

or equivalently

$$\lambda _1(x^1)f_\alpha \rho _1(x)_1f_\alpha _10(xG).$$
(5)
Let $`q(1,\mathrm{})`$ be the index dual to $`p`$. Let $`\xi _\alpha :=f_\alpha ^{1/p}`$, and let $`\eta _\alpha :=f_\alpha ^{1/q}`$, so that $`\xi _\alpha L^p(G)`$ and $`\eta _\alpha L^q(G)`$. It follows from (5) and \[Pat, 4.3(1)\] that

$$\begin{array}{c}\lambda _p(x^1)\xi _\alpha \rho _p(x)\xi _\alpha _p0\\ \text{and}\\ \lambda _q(x^1)\eta _\alpha \rho _q(x)\eta _\alpha _q0\end{array}\}(xG).$$
(6)
For $`\varphi UC(G)`$, let $`M_\varphi (L^p(G))`$ be defined by pointwise multiplication with $`\varphi `$. By Theorem 5.1 — applied to $`𝔄=PM_p(G)`$, $`𝔅=(L^p(G))`$, and $`\theta `$ the canonical representation of $`PM_p(G)`$ on $`L^p(G)`$ — , there is a quasi-expectation $`𝒬:(L^p(G))PM_p(G)^{}`$. Define $`m_\alpha UC(G)^{}`$ by letting

$$\varphi ,m_\alpha :=𝒬(M_\varphi )\xi _\alpha ,\eta _\alpha (\varphi UC(G)).$$

Let $`𝒰`$ be an ultrafilter on the index set of $`(f_\alpha )_\alpha `$ that dominates the order filter, and define

$$\varphi ,m:=\underset{𝒰}{lim}\varphi ,m_\alpha (\varphi UC(G)).$$

Note that $`\rho _p(G)PM_p(G)^{}`$, and observe again that

$$\rho _p(x^1)M_\varphi \rho _p(x)=M_{\varphi \delta _x}(xG,\varphi UC(G)).$$

We then obtain for $`xG`$ and $`\varphi UC(G)`$:

$`\varphi \delta _x,m`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{𝒰}{lim}\varphi \delta _x,m_\alpha `$
$`=`$ $`\underset{𝒰}{lim}𝒬(\rho _p(x^1)M_\varphi \rho _p(x))\xi _\alpha ,\eta _\alpha `$
$`=`$ $`\underset{𝒰}{lim}\rho _p(x^1)(𝒬M_\varphi )\rho _p(x)\xi _\alpha ,\eta _\alpha `$
$`=`$ $`\underset{𝒰}{lim}(𝒬M_\varphi )\rho _p(x)\xi _\alpha ,\rho _p(x)\eta _\alpha `$
$`=`$ $`\underset{𝒰}{lim}(𝒬M_\varphi )\lambda _p(x^1)\xi _\alpha ,\lambda _p(x^1)\eta _\alpha ,\text{by (}\text{6}\text{)},`$
$`=`$ $`\underset{𝒰}{lim}\lambda _p(x)𝒬M_\varphi )\lambda _p(x^1)\xi _\alpha ,\eta _\alpha `$
$`=`$ $`\underset{𝒰}{lim}(𝒬M_\varphi )\xi _\alpha ,\eta _\alpha `$
$`=`$ $`\varphi ,m.`$
Hence, $`m`$ is right invariant. Clearly, $`1,m=1`$. Taking the positive part of $`m`$ and normalizing it, we obtain a right invariant mean on $`UC(G)`$. $``$

* 1. The hypothesis that $`G`$ be inner amenable cannot be dropped: As pointed out on \[Pat, p. 84\], $`SL(2,)`$ is not amenable, but of type I, so that $`VN(SL(2,))`$ is Connes-amenable.
    2. In \[L–P\], Lau and Paterson show that an inner amenable, locally compact group $`G`$ such that $`VN(G)`$ has Schwartz’ property $`(P)`$ is already amenable. Schwartz’ property $`(P)`$ and Connes-amenability are equivalent (see \[Pat, (2.35)\]), but the implication from Connes-amenability to Schwartz’ property $`(P)`$ is a deep result by itself. The proof of Theorem 5.3 is thus much simpler, even in the particular case $`p=2`$.

## 6 A nuclear-free characterization of amenable $`W^{}`$-algebras

As we have mentioned in the introduction, the following characterization of the amenable $`W^{}`$-algebras is known:

###### Theorem 6.1

For a $`W^{}`$-algebra $`𝔄`$, the following are equivalent:

1. $`𝔄`$ is amenable.
2. There are hyperstonean, compact spaces $`\mathrm{\Omega }_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Omega }_n`$ and $`n_1,\mathrm{},n_k`$ such that

$$𝔄\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}𝕄_{n_j}𝒞(\mathrm{\Omega }_j).$$

The implication (ii) $``$ (i) is obvious, and the converse is a consequence of \[Con 2\], \[Was, (1.9) Corollary\], and the structure theory of $`W^{}`$-algebras.

In this section, we give a proof of Theorem 6.1 which avoids the amenability-nuclearity nexus and only relies on standard facts about $`W^{}`$-algebras, where we define a standard fact as one that can be found in one of the standard books on the subject such as \[Dix\], \[K–R\], \[Sak\], and \[Tak\].

In analogy with \[Was\], we define:

###### Definition 6.2

Let $`𝔄`$ be a Banach -algebra. We say that $`𝔄`$ is of type $`(QE)`$ if, for each -representation $`(\pi ,)`$, there is a quasi-expectation $`𝒬:()\pi (𝔄)^{\prime \prime }`$.

* It follows from \[B–P\] that every $`C^{}`$-algebra which is of type $`(QE)`$ is already of type $`(E)`$ in the sense of \[Was\]. However, since we strive to keep the $`W^{}`$-theory required for the proof of Theorem 6.1 to a minimum, we shall not use this fact.

The next two results are essentially already contained in \[Tom\]. We give proofs here requiring a minimum of $`W^{}`$-theory:

###### Lemma 6.3

Let $`𝔄`$ be a von Neumann algebra acting on a Hilbert space $``$. Then the following are equivalent:

1. There is a quasi-expectation $`𝒬:()𝔄`$.
2. For every faithful, normal representation $`(\pi ,𝔎)`$ of $`𝔄`$, there is a quasi-expectation $`𝒬:(𝔎)\pi (𝔄)^{\prime \prime }`$.

* Let $`\pi `$ be a faithful $`W^{}`$-representation of $`𝔐`$ on a Hilbert space $`𝔎`$, and let $`𝔑:=\pi (𝔐)`$. Using the idea of the proof of \[Dix, Théorème 3, §I. 4\], we can choose a third Hilbert space $`𝔏`$ such that $`𝔐\mathrm{id}_𝔏`$, i.e. the algebra $`\{x\mathrm{id}_𝔏:x𝔐\}`$, on $`\overline{}𝔏`$ and $`𝔑\mathrm{id}_𝔏`$ on $`𝔎\overline{}𝔏`$ are spatially isomorphic. Fix $`\xi _0,\eta _0𝔏`$ such that $`\xi _0,\eta _0=1`$, and define $`𝒫_0:(\overline{}𝔏)()`$ through

$$(𝒫_0T)\xi ,\eta :=T(\xi \xi _0),\eta \eta _0(T(),\xi ,\eta ).$$
(7)
Identifying $`()`$ with $`()\mathrm{id}_𝔏`$, we see that $`𝒫_0`$ is a projection onto $`()`$. Furthermore, for $`T(\overline{}𝔏)`$ and $`R,S()`$, we have

$`𝒫_0((R\mathrm{id}_𝔏)T(S\mathrm{id}_𝔏))\xi ,\eta `$ $`=`$ $`(R\mathrm{id}_𝔏)T(S\mathrm{id}_𝔏)(\xi \xi _0),\eta \eta _0`$
$`=`$ $`T(S\xi \xi _0),R^{}\eta \eta _0`$
$`=`$ $`(𝒫_0T)S\xi ,R^{}\eta `$
$`=`$ $`R(𝒫_0T)S\xi ,\eta (\xi ,\eta ),`$
so that $`𝒫_0`$ is a quasi-expectation. Let $`𝒫:()𝔐`$ be a quasi-expectation, and define

$$\stackrel{~}{𝒫}:(\overline{}𝔏)𝔐\mathrm{id}_𝔏,T(𝒫𝒫_0)T\mathrm{id}_𝔏;$$

it is clear that $`\stackrel{~}{𝒫}`$ is also a quasi-expectation. Since $`𝔐\mathrm{id}_𝔏`$ and $`𝔑\mathrm{id}_𝔏`$ are spatially isomorphic, there is a quasi-expecation $`\stackrel{~}{𝒬}:(𝔎\overline{}𝔏)𝔑\mathrm{id}_𝔏`$. Fix again $`\xi _0,\eta _0𝔏`$ such that $`\xi _0,\eta _0=1`$, and define $`𝒬_0:(𝔎\overline{}𝔏)(𝔎)`$ as in (7). Then

$$𝒬:(𝔎)𝔑,T(𝒬_0\stackrel{~}{𝒬})(T\mathrm{id}_𝔏)$$

is the desired quasi-expectation. $``$

###### Proposition 6.4

Every amenable Banach -algebra is of type $`(QE)`$.

* Let $`(\pi ,)`$ be a -representation of $`𝔄`$. Then, by \[K–R, Exercise 7.6.46\], there is faithful, normal, semifinite weight on the von Neumann algebra $`\pi (𝔄)^{\prime \prime }`$. Let $`(\rho ,𝔎)`$ be the faithful, normal representation of $`\pi (𝔄)^{\prime \prime }`$ constructed from this weight (\[K–R, Theorem 7.5.3\]). By \[C–G 2, Proposition 2.2\] — applied to the representation $`(\rho \pi ,𝔎)`$ of $`𝔄`$ —, there is a quasi-expectation $`𝒫:(𝔎)(\rho \pi )(𝔄)^{}`$. Let $`J:𝔎𝔎`$ be the conjugate linear isometry from \[K–R, Theorem 9.2.37\], i.e.

$$J^2=\mathrm{id}_𝔎\text{and}J(\rho \pi )(𝔄)^{}J=(\rho \pi )(𝔄)^{\prime \prime }.$$

Define

$$\stackrel{~}{𝒬}:(𝔎)(\rho \pi )(𝔄)^{\prime \prime },aJ𝒫(JaJ)J.$$

It is immediate that $`\stackrel{~}{𝒬}`$ is a quasi-expectation. Since $`\rho `$ is normal and faithful, it follows from Lemma 6.3 that there is a quasi-expectation $`𝒬:()\pi (𝔄)^{\prime \prime }`$. $``$

Our next lemma is an analogue of \[Was, (1.2) Proposition\], whose proof carries over almost verbatim:

###### Lemma 6.5

Let $`𝔄`$ be a $`C^{}`$-algebra of type $`(QE)`$, and let $`𝔅`$ be a $`C^{}`$-algebra such that there is a quasi-expectation $`𝒬:𝔄𝔅`$. Then $`𝔅`$ is of type $`(QE)`$.

Also, the following proposition is well known: It is an immediate consequence of \[L–P, Corollary 3.3\], \[Tom, Theorem 7.2\], amd \[B–P, Theorem 2\]. We prefer, however, to indicate a proof that completely avoids $`W^{}`$-theoretical arguments and uses ideas from \[C–G 2\] instead:

###### Proposition 6.6

For an inner amenable group $`G`$, the following are equivalent:

1. $`G`$ is amenable.
2. There is a quasi-expectation $`𝒬:(L^2(G))VN(G)`$.

* For the proof of (i) $``$ (ii) note that $`VN(G)=\rho _2(G)^{}`$. An application of \[C–G 2, Proposition 2.2\] then yields the claim.

For the converse implication, we proceed as in the proof of Theorem 5.3, with the rôles of $`\lambda _2`$ and $`\rho _2`$ interchanged, and obtain a left-invariant $`mUC(G)^{}`$ with $`1,m=1`$. $``$

As in \[Was\], we obtain:

###### Corollary 6.7

The $`W^{}`$-algebras $`VN(𝔽_2)`$ and $`𝕄_{\mathrm{}}`$ are not of type $`(QE)`$ and thus, in particular, are not amenable.

* Since $`𝔽_2`$ is well known (and easily seen) to be non-amenable (\[Pat, (0.6) Example\]), there is no quasi-expectation $`𝒬:(\mathrm{}^2(𝔽_2))VN(𝔽_2)`$ by Proposition 6.6.

The case of $`𝕄_{\mathrm{}}`$ is reduced to $`VN(𝔽_2)`$ as in \[Was\]: We can find a maximal ideal $`M`$ of $`𝕄_{\mathrm{}}`$ corresponding to a point in $`\beta `$ such that $`𝔄:=𝕄_{\mathrm{}}/M`$ contains a $`W^{}`$-subalgebra $`𝔅`$ which is isomorphic to $`VN(𝔽_2)`$. As pointed out in \[Tak, pp. 358–359\], $`𝔄`$ is a type $`\mathrm{II}_1`$ factor, which by \[Sak, 4.4.23 Proposition\] means that there is a (norm one) quasi-expectation $`𝒬:𝔄𝔅`$. Hence, if $`𝕄_{\mathrm{}}`$ were of type $`(QE)`$, the same would be true for $`𝔄`$ and, by Lemma 6.5, for $`𝔅VN(𝔽_2)`$. However, as we have just seen, $`VN(𝔽_2)`$ fails to be of type $`(QE)`$. $``$

* Although the proof for the non-amenability of $`𝕄_{\mathrm{}}`$ given here is more elementary than the one from \[L–L–W\], it is not yet as satisfying as we would like it to be: The proof of Proposition 6.4 relies on Tomita–Takesaki theory, which still seems to be far too deep in order to prove a result on an algebra as plain as $`𝕄_{\mathrm{}}`$. We could have avoided the use of Tomita–Takesaki theory in the proof of Proposition 6.4 by defining type $`(QE)`$ via $`\pi (𝔄)^{}`$ instead of $`\pi (𝔄)^{\prime \prime }`$: Proposition 6.4 would then have been a straightforward application of \[C–G 2, Proposition 2.2\]. Then, however, we would have required Tomita–Takesaki theory in the proof of Lemma 6.5.

* Suppose that $`𝔄`$ is not of the form in Theorem 6.1(ii). Then, just as in \[Was\], it follows from the general structure theory of $`W^{}`$-algebras that $`𝔄`$ contains $`𝕄_{\mathrm{}}`$ as a closed subalgebra. As in the proof of \[Was, (1.8) Corollary\], a norm one projection $`𝒬:𝔄𝕄_{\mathrm{}}`$ can be constructed, which is easily, i.e. directly and without \[Tom, Theorem 3.1\], seen to be a quasi-expectation. $``$

The proof Theorem 6.1 would be considerably easier if we could show by elementary means that that, for an amenable $`C^{}`$-algebra $`𝔄`$, a $`C^{}`$-subalgebra $`𝔅`$, and a quasi-expectation $`𝒬:𝔄𝔅`$, the algebra $`𝔅`$ is amenable as well. This is indeed true, but in order to prove it we need the deep connections between amenability, nuclearity and injectivity.

The corresponding claim for general Banach algebras is false:

* Let $`G`$ be a compact group. Then $`L^1(G)`$ is amenable, so that $`L^1(G)`$ has an approximate diagonal $`(m_\alpha )_\alpha `$. Let $`𝒰`$ be an ultrafilter on the index set of $`(d_\alpha )_\alpha `$ which dominates the order filter, and define

$$𝒬:L^1(G)Z(L^1(G)),f\underset{𝒰}{lim}m_\alpha f,$$

where

$$(gh)f:=gfh(f,g,hL^1(G))$$

and the limit is taken in the norm topology; since multiplication by any element of $`L^1(G)`$ is compact, this limit does indeed exist. It is clear that $`𝒬`$ is a quasi-expectation. However, there are compact groups $`G`$ such that $`Z(L^1(G))`$ is not amenable (\[Ste\]).

\[\]

| Address: | Department of Mathematical Sciences |
| --- | --- |
|  | University of Alberta |
|  | Edmonton |
|  | Alberta, T6G 2G1 |
|  | Canada |
| E-mail: | runde@math.ualberta.ca |
|  | vrunde@ualberta.ca |
| URL: | http://www.math.ualberta.ca/runde/runde.html |


text:
# A PERSPECTIVE ON THE CMB ACOUSTIC PEAK

## 1 INTRODUCTION

It has long been recognized that the first peak in the CMB angular spectrum provides information about the curvature of the universe (Doroshkevich, Zel’dovich, & Syunyaev, 1978; Bond et al., 1994; Kamionkowski, Spergel, & Sugiyama, 1994; Efstathiou & Bond, 1999; Cornish, 2000; Weinberg, 2000). The data are now in. TOCO, BOOMERanG, MAXIMA, and DASI have measured the peak position (Miller et al., 1999; Netterfield et al., 2001; Lee et al., 2001; Halverson et al., 2001). Analyses of the data strongly suggest a flat universe (Hu et al., 2001; Jaffe et al., 2000; Stompor et al., 2001; Pryke et al., 2001; Dodelson & Knox, 2000). The MAP satellite, cosmic variance limited through $`\mathrm{}600`$, should make the definitive measurement in the near future (Page, 2000).

As new data resolve higher order peaks, attention shifts to the physics at angular scales beyond that of the first maximum. The object of the present analysis is to clarify the physics derived from the position of the first peak, hereafter called “the peak index” or $`\mathrm{}_{peak}`$. The size of the sound horizon $`r_s`$ at an angular diameter distance $`D_a`$ to decoupling determines the peak index.111An expression subscripted by ‘\*’ or ‘eq’ is evaluated at decoupling or matter-radiation equality respectively. This is widely recognized and serves as a starting point. In Sections 2, 3, and 4, numerical and analytic calculations yield the peak index as a function of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_K`$. All results are checked with CMBFAST (Seljak & Zaldarriaga, 1996). In Section 5, a simple formula for $`\mathrm{}_{peak}`$, applicable to low $`\mathrm{\Omega }_K/\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ universes, is developed alongside geometric and classical interpretations of the formal results. It is found that the peak index approximates a function of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_K/\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$. Although our analysis grounds itself in the familiar concepts of $`D_a`$ and $`r_s`$, the results are not widely recognized. While the physical effects responsible for $`\mathrm{}_{peak}`$ are understood, the interplay that gives the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_K/\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ dependence is not intuitive and holds a number of surprises. We end the investigation by using the functional form of $`\mathrm{}_{peak}`$ and current angular spectrum data to obtain parameter constraints resembling those of more sophisticated treatments.

Throughout this work, the ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$,$`\mathrm{\Omega }_K`$) plane serves as the parameter space. Other quantities enter, though the relation between $`\mathrm{}_{peak}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_K/\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ is relatively independent of them. To be concrete, we take $`\mathrm{\Omega }_Bh^2=0.02`$, consistent with nucleosynthesis (Burles, Nollett, & Turner, 2001). The redshift of decoupling, $`z_{}`$, is taken as 1400 from the Saha equation. The Hubble constant assumes 72 km/s/Mpc in accord with the HST Key Project results (Freedman et al., 2001).

## 2 ANGULAR DIAMETER DISTANCE

The comoving Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) metric for a closed universe ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_K<0`$) may be written as

$$ds^2=d\eta ^2R^2\left(d\chi ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\chi d\mathrm{\Sigma }^2\right)$$
(1)
where $`\eta `$ denotes conformal time, $`R^2=1/\mathrm{\Omega }_K`$, and $`d\mathrm{\Sigma }^2`$ is the line element of a unit two-sphere. All spacetime intervals are given in units of $`H_0^1`$. The angular diameter distance $`D_a`$ to an object of proper length $`ds`$ at comoving distance $`R\chi `$ ($`d\eta =d\chi =0`$) is defined so that $`d\mathrm{\Sigma }=ds/D_a`$.

$$D_a=R\mathrm{sin}\chi (a)$$
(2)
where $`\chi ^2`$ is the solution to the Friedmann equation:

$$d\chi ^2=\frac{da^2}{\mathrm{\Omega }_M(a/\mathrm{\Omega }_K+a_{eq}/\mathrm{\Omega }_K)+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }a^4/\mathrm{\Omega }_K+a^2}.$$
(3)
Flat and open geometries are treated analogously.

Numerical Result $`D_a`$ can be evaluated numerically. The distance to redshift 1400 is computed for models across the $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_M,\mathrm{\Omega }_K)`$ plane using cosmography routines from David Hogg (Hogg, 1999).

Analytic Result To complement the numerical result, $`D_a`$ can be estimated analytically by setting $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda },a_{eq},a_{}`$ to zero in equation (3), and then using Mattig’s solution (cf. (Peebles, 1993)).

$$D_a=\frac{2}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Omega }_M}}\times S(\gamma )$$
(4)
where $`\gamma =2\mathrm{\Omega }_K/\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$, and S=1 for a flat universe. If $`\mathrm{\Omega }_K`$ is non-zero, then S takes the form

$$\begin{array}{ccc}S(\gamma )& =& \sqrt{1/2\gamma }\times \{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1}{2}(\beta 1/\beta ):\hfill & \hfill \mathrm{\Omega }_K>0\\ \sqrt{1(\gamma 1)^2}:\hfill & \hfill \mathrm{\Omega }_M<\mathrm{\Omega }_K<0\end{array}\hfill \\ & & \\ \beta & =& \gamma +1+\sqrt{(\gamma +1)^21}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(5)
## 3 THE SOUND HORIZON

Sound travels through a tightly coupled photon-baryon system with speed $`c_s`$

$$c_s=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3(1+Q)}}$$
(6)
where Q is 3$`\rho _B`$/4$`\rho _\gamma `$, and $`\rho _B`$ and $`\rho _\gamma `$ are the energy densities of baryons and radiation, respectively. The sound horizon at decoupling $`r_s`$ in comoving coordinates is then

$`r_s`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{a=0}^a_{}}c_s{\displaystyle \frac{d\eta }{da}}𝑑a`$ (7)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Omega }_M}}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{a_{eq}}{Q_{eq}}}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{1+Q_{}}+\sqrt{Q_{}+Q_{eq}}}{1+\sqrt{Q_{eq}}}}`$
(Hu & Sugiyama, 1996). Note that curvature does not affect sound dynamics before decoupling. In any geometry, $`r_s`$ will be the same.

## 4 THE HORIZON ANGLE AND THE PEAK INDEX

$`D_a`$ and $`r_s`$ give the angular size of the horizon:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Theta }_s=\frac{r_s}{D_a}.$$
(8)
Values for $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Theta }_s`$ corresponding to the numerical and analytic results for $`D_a`$ (see Section 2) are plotted in Figure 1. Curves of constant $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Theta }_s`$ approximate straight lines, which intersect the origin of the ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_M,\mathrm{\Omega }_K`$) plane. *The angle subtended by the sound horizon, and so the position of the first peak, approximates a function of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_K/\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$.* A well known corollary to this general statement is that a peak corresponding to $`\mathrm{\Omega }_K=0`$ should be insensitive to variations in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ (Bond et al., 1994; Hu et al., 2001).

To check whether this simple analysis agrees with the standard model, we compare the above results to those from CMBFAST (Seljak & Zaldarriaga, 1996). CMBFAST calculates the CMB angular spectrum.222CMBFAST inputs are $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_B=0.04,\mathrm{\Omega }_\nu =0,H_0=72,T_{cmb}=2.726,Y_{He}=0.24,N_\nu (massless)=3.04,N_\nu (massive)=0`$,recfast,no reion, scalar only,primordial index 1,adiabatic). Then, $`\mathrm{}_{peak}`$ from the spectrum multiplies $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Theta }_s`$ from Figure 1 to give the constant of proportionality $`\alpha =\mathrm{}_{peak}\times \mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Theta }_s`$. As shown in Figure 2, the numerically derived $`\alpha `$ increases from 110 ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.14`$) to 125 ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.74`$) and has weak if any dependence on curvature. The near constant graphs of $`\alpha `$ suggests a well-defined agreement between the peak indices from CMBFAST and those derived from this work’s numerical and analytic calculations (see middle frame of Figure 2).

## 5 DISCUSSION

To gain intuition about $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Theta }_s`$, consider the closed comoving universe (eq. ) illustrated in Figure 1, where time and azimuthal angular coordinates have been supressed to produce the familiar two-sphere geometry. In this picture, CMB photons follow great circles, and, assuming a small angle, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Theta }_s`$ derives from inspection: $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Theta }_s=r_s/R\mathrm{sin}\chi _{},`$ which is exactly equation (8).

To better understand the parameter dependence of $`r_s`$, take the sound speed $`c_s`$ (eq. ) to be constant at $`9/10\sqrt{3}`$. (With $`\mathrm{\Omega }_Bh^2=0.02`$ and radiation density derived from the COBE FIRAS measurement, the sound speed decreases at a near constant rate ($`dc_s/daconstant`$) from $`c/\sqrt{3}`$ at a=0 to four-fifths that value at decoupling (Fixen et al., 1997).) The sound horizon is then

$$r_s=c_s_0^a_{}\frac{d\eta }{da}𝑑a=\frac{9}{5\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Omega }_M}}(\sqrt{a_{}+a_{eq}}\sqrt{a_{eq}})$$
(9)
where the final equality follows from the Friedmann equation (3) with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_K=\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$.

To obtain a simple formula for $`\mathrm{}_{peak}`$, expand $`D_a`$ to first order in $`\gamma =2\mathrm{\Omega }_K/\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$:

$$D_a=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Omega }_M}}\left(2+\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_K}{\mathrm{\Omega }_M}\right).$$
(10)
The expansion applies to models with a low curvature-to-matter ratio. Coincidentally, such models are favored by experiment, so that the resulting formula for $`\mathrm{}_{peak}`$ is useful. Given equations (9) and (10) and a value of $`\alpha `$ from Figure 2,

$$\mathrm{}_{peak}=\frac{\alpha D_a}{r_s}\frac{11\sqrt{3}}{9(\sqrt{a_{}+a_{eq}}\sqrt{a_{eq}})}\left(2+\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_K}{\mathrm{\Omega }_M}\right).$$
(11)
This near-flat approximation is plotted in Figure 2 where $`a_{eq}2.4\times 10^5(\mathrm{\Omega }_Mh^2)^1`$. For flat models, the distance to last scatter (eq. ) scales as $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M^{1/2}`$. One may intuit that self-gravitation leads to smaller cosmological separations. This same “gravitational” effect decreases the distance between the big bang and last scatter, and therefore $`r_s`$ (eq. ) also scales with an overall factor of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M^{1/2}`$. In equation (11), the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M^{1/2}`$ dependence of $`D_a`$ cancels that of $`r_s`$. This cancellation helps explain the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$-$`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ degeneracy of flat cosmogonies. Furthermore, the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_K/\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ term in equation (11) is proportional to the curvature times the area between light rays in a two-dimensional representation of an $`\mathrm{\Omega }_K0`$ universe (e.g. Figure 1). This suggests that one may think of ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$,$`\mathrm{\Omega }_K`$) dependence of $`\mathrm{}_{peak}`$ in near-flat spacetimes as resulting from light curving like the geodesics of a two-dimensional space of constant curvature. Finally, the effect of radiation on early universe dynamics and, in particular, on $`r_s`$ is made explicit by the appearance of $`a_{eq}`$ in equation (9). Radiation-dominated cosmological growth per expansion scale ($`d\eta /da`$) is less than that of matter-dominated dynamics. In low $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ universes, radiation brings last scattering even closer to the big bang and so shortens $`r_s`$. Thus, the effect of radiation in the early universe is to spoil the pure $`\mathrm{\Omega }_K/\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ dependence of $`\mathrm{}_{peak}`$ as manifest by the curved contours in the plot of equation (11) in Figure 2. The straightness of the $`\mathrm{}_{peak}`$ contours is restored in the numerical result shown in Figure 1. This suggests that explicit inclusion of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in the computation of $`D_a`$ balances the $`a_{eq}`$ dependence of $`r_s`$.

## 6 CONCLUSION

The peak index has long been recognized as an indicator of geometry. It is hoped that the present analysis sheds new light on $`\mathrm{}_{peak}`$. The peak index does not determine the magnitude of curvature, but rather the ratio of curvature to matter. A measurement of the peak’s angular scale gives the precise geometry only if $`\mathrm{\Omega }_K0`$, otherwise $`\mathrm{}_{peak}`$ is a function of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_K/\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$. Furthermore, in deriving the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_K/\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ dependence of $`\mathrm{}_{peak}`$, unexpected cosmological cancellings were discovered. Particularly useful is the balance of overall matter dependencies in $`r_s`$ and $`D_a`$ which helps account for the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$-$`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ degeneracy in flat models. At the same time, however, it is remarkable that the admittedly simple arguments of this work yield such a decisive cosmological indicator. Within the next few years, NASA’s MAP satellite data should give $`\mathrm{}_{peak}`$ to cosmic-variance levels. This measurement will burn a sharp line of possible worlds across the ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_M,\mathrm{\Omega }_K`$) plane.

This letter was begun at Cambridge as part of DAMTP’s tripos. TM thanks Ofer Lahav and Daniel Wesley for early guidance, David Hogg for cosmography computer code, and Lyman Page and James Peebles for suggestions regarding the final draft. TM is an NSF Graduate Research Fellow and is supported by NSF grant PHY-0099493.