text:
# Two-stream Instability in Pulsar Magnetospheres

## 1 Introduction

Current models for the generation of coherent radio emission of pulsars require the development of plasma instabilities in the pulsar magnetospheres, the most studied of which is the two-stream instability (for a review, see Arons 1981a,b; Melrose 1981, 1993, 1995; Usov 1981; Asseo 1996). The two-stream instability in the pulsar magnetospheres has been considered in many papers (e.g., Ruderman & Sutherland 1975; Benford & Buschauer 1977; Buschauer & Benford 1977; Cheng & Ruderman 1977; Arons 1981; Usov 1987; Ursov & Usov 1988; Asseo 1993; Asseo & Melikidze 1998; Melikidze, Gil & Pataraya 2000).

The two-stream instability can arise when two plasma flows travel through each other:

$$\begin{array}{c}\text{ }𝐯_1,n_1\text{ }\hfill \\ \text{ }𝐯_2,n_2\text{ }\hfill \end{array}$$

If the density of one flow is much higher than the density of the other (for example, $`n_1n_2`$), the low-density flow (component 2) calls the beam while the high-density flow (component 1) calls the plasma. In the magnetospheres of pulsars, both the plasma-beam interaction and the interaction of two plasmas with more or less equal densities may occur (see below). The two-stream instability may lead to formation of plasma bunches that generate the radio emission via curvature mechanism (Ruderman & Sutherland 1975; Cheng & Ruderman 1980; Ochelkov & Usov 1984). Besides, the radio emission of pulsars may be generated directly in the process of the instability development (Asseo, Pellat & Rosado 1980; Asseo, Pellat & Sol 1983). Before to discuss the two-stream instability in the pulsar plasma and the generation of coherent radio emission of pulsars, we review both the physical processes that are responsible for the filling of pulsar magnetospheres with plasma and the plasma parameters.

## 2 Physical processes and parameters of plasma in pulsar magnetospheres

A common point of all acceptable models of pulsars is that the spin-down power of strongly magnetized neutron stars is the energy source of non-thermal emission of pulsars. The rotational energy of the neutron star is transformed into the pulsar emission by a long sequence of processes.

### 2.1 Physical processes in pulsar magnetospheres

Strong electric fields are generated in the magnetospheres of rotating magnetized neutron stars (for a review, see Michel 1991). The component of the electric field $`𝐄_{}=(𝐄𝐁)𝐁/|𝐁|^2`$ along the magnetic field $`𝐁`$ is non-zero. Primary particles are accelerated by this electric field to ultrarelativistic energies and generate $`\gamma `$-rays. Some of these $`\gamma `$-rays are absorbed by creating secondary $`e^+e^{}`$ pairs. The created pairs screen the electric field $`𝐄_{}`$ in the pulsar magnetosphere everywhere except for compact regions. The compact regions where $`𝐄_{}`$ is unscreened are called gaps. These gaps are ”engines” that are responsible for the non-thermal radiation of pulsars. The gaps are located either near the magnetic poles of pulsars (polar gaps) or near their light cylinders (outer gaps). Outer gaps may act as a generator of non-thermal radiation of pulsars only if the period of the pulsar rotation is small enough, $`P<P_{\mathrm{cr}}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{few}\times 0.1`$ s. For typical pulsars with $`P>P_{\mathrm{cr}}`$, the polar gap model has no an alternative. In the polar gap model the sequence of processes that leads to the generation of non-thermal emission of pulsars is the following:

The density of primary particles accelerated in the polar gap is about the Goldreich-Julian density $`n_{\mathrm{GJ}}=|𝛀𝐁|/2\pi ce`$, where $`𝛀`$ is the angular velocity of the pulsar rotation. The value of $`n_{\mathrm{GJ}}`$ is determined so that the electric field $`E_{}`$ in the outflowing plasma is screened completely if the charge density is equal to $`en_{\mathrm{GJ}}`$. Therefore, the accelerating field $`E_{}`$ arises from deviations from this density. Such a deviation may be because of (1) the inertia of particles (Michel 1974), (2) the curvature of the magnetic field lines (Arons 1981), the General Relativity effects (Muslimov & Tsygan 1992, Beskin 1992), and the binding of particles within the solid surface of a strongly magnetized neutron star (Ruderman & Sutherland 1975; Cheng & Ruderman 1980; Usov & Melrose 1995, 1996). When both the neutron star surface is cold enough and the surface magnetic field is strong enough, there is no emission of particles from the neutron star surface, and the binding of particles is responsible for the $`E_{}`$ field in the polar gaps (e.g., Usov & Melrose 1996). In the case when particles flow freely from the stellar surface, the field $`E_{}`$ is mainly due to the General Relativity effects (i.g., Harding & Muslimov 1998). The second case is applicable to typical pulsars while the former case may be applied to pulsars with very strong magnetic fields at their surface, $`B__\mathrm{S}10^{13}`$ G or more.

Ultrarelativistic primary particles in the process of their outflow move practically along the magnetic field lines and generate $`\gamma `$-rays via both curvature radiation and magnetic Compton scattering. These $`\gamma `$-rays are absorbed in strong magnetic fields of pulsar magnetospheres and create $`e^+e^{}`$ pairs. Created pairs very quickly lose the momentum component transverse to the magnetic field due to synchrotron losses, and their distribution becomes one-dimensional, i.e., $`𝐯𝐁`$. Hence, to develop the theory of coherent radio emission of pulsars it is necessary to investigate both the parameters of ultrarelatistic one-dimensional plasma outflowing from the polar cap regions and instabilities of this plasma.

### 2.2 Parameters of pulsar plasma

Electrons and positrons that flow away from the neutron star vicinity with relativistic speeds may be divided into two components: a secondary $`e^+e^{}`$ plasma and an extremely high-energy beam of primary particles (see Fig. 1). Particles of the beam may be either electrons or positrons, depending on the direction of the electric field $`𝐄_{}`$ in the polar gap. For the $`e^+e^{}`$ plasma (denoted by $`p`$) and the ultrarelativistic beam (denoted by $`b`$) the typical values of the Lorentz factor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and the density $`n`$ are, respectively, (Ruderman & Sutherland 1975; Arons 1981a,b, 1984; Machabeli & Usov 1989; Michel 1991)

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_p(23)R_c/R\mathrm{a}\mathrm{few}\times (110^2),$$
(1)
$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_be\mathrm{\Delta }\phi /m_ec^2\mathrm{a}\mathrm{few}\times 10^6,$$
(2)
$$n_p(\mathrm{\Gamma }_b/2\mathrm{\Gamma }_p)n_b,$$
(3)
$$n_bn_{_{\mathrm{GJ}}}=\mathrm{\Omega }B/(2\pi ce)10^{11}(R/r)^3\mathrm{cm}^3,$$
(4)
We have adopted here the following characteristic values for the pulsar parameters: $`\mathrm{\Omega }10`$ s<sup>-1</sup>; $`B10^{12}(R/r)^3`$ G is the magnetic field in the magnetosphere; $`R_c`$ is the curvature radius of the magnetic field lines in the polar cap; $`R10^6`$ cm is the neutron star radius; and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\phi `$ is the potential drop across the polar gap.

### 2.3 Nonstationarity of the plasma outflow

It was suggested long time ago that the process of pair creation near the pulsar surface is strongly nonstationary (Sturrock 1971; Alber et al. 1975; Ruderman and Sutherland 1975). Such a nonstationarity was discussed in detail in the outstanding paper by Ruderman and Sutherland (1975) where the first self-consistent model of pulsar radiation was presented. In the Ruderman-Sutherland model, the creation of pairs occurs in narrow spark discharges, separated from one another by a distance of the order of the polar gap height $`H`$ (characteristic value of $`H`$ is $`10^4`$ cm). The secondary $`e^+e^{}`$ plasma, produced by absorption of $`\gamma `$-rays in a spark discharge, gathers into an outflowing jet that has the discharge at its base. Such a discharge is strongly nonstationary on a time scale of $`30(H/c)`$ (Ruderman & Sutherland 1975; Cheng & Ruderman 1980). The discharge nonstationarity results in a strong modulation of the outflowing pair plasma along the jet. In fact, these jets consist of plasma clouds spaced by $`L_130H0.3R`$.

However, it is not only the nonstationarity of discharges that can lead to inhomogeneity of the outflowing plasma along the fixed magnetic field lines. Another reason for such a inhomogeneity is the displacement of discharges caused by the curvature of the magnetic field lines (Ruderman & Sutherland 1975). The displacement is directed toward the magnetic axis of the pulsar. The speed with which a spark discharge moves across the polar cap is estimated (Ruderman & Sutherland 1975; Cheng & Ruderman 1980) as $`v_dcH/2R_c`$. As already noted above, the average distance between two discharges is $`H`$. During the time $`\tau _dH/v_d2R_c/c`$, a discharge is displaced by the distance of $`H`$ and takes a position close to the initial position that of a neighboring discharge, which during the same time is also displaced by $`H`$ toward the pulsar magnetic axis. As a result of these displacements of discharges, the plasma outflowing along any fixed magnetic field lines becomes modulated with a characteristic length $`L_2c\tau _d2R_c`$. Since, according to Ruderman and Sutherland (1975) and Beskin (1982), in the polar gap the discharges are separated by intervals within which the process of pair creation is suppressed, the plasma density in between the clouds falls down almost to zero. Therefore, the outflowing plasma gathers into separate clouds spaced by $`L_22R_c`$ along the direction of the plasma outflow. In turn, these large clouds consist of small clouds with the lengths and the spaces between them about $`L_10.3R`$.

The idea that the process of pair creation near the polar caps of pulsars is nonstationary has got recently the strong support (e.g., Muslimov & Harding 1997; Harding & Muslimov 1998). In these papers, the model of the polar gaps of typical pulsars which is rather close to reality is developed. In this model, it was shown that both stable acceleration of primary particles and stable creation of pairs are not possible. The characteristic length of the outflowing plasma modulation is expected more or less comparable with $`L_1`$.

## 3 Possible instabilities in pulsar plasma

Development of instabilities in a magnetized plasma when transverse electromagnetic waves ($`t`$-waves) are generated depends on the ratio $`\omega _p/\omega _B`$, where

$$\omega _p=\sqrt{\frac{4\pi e^2n_p}{m_e}}5.64\times 10^4n_p^{1/2}\mathrm{s}^1,$$
(5)
$$\omega _B=\frac{eB}{m_ec}1.76\times 10^7B\mathrm{s}^1,$$
(6)
are the Langmuir frequency of the plasma and the cyclotron frequency, respectively. At the pulsar surface for the typical parameters of both the pulsar plasma and the strength of the magnetic field ($`n_{p_0}10^{14}\mathrm{cm}^3`$ and $`B_{_{\mathrm{S}_0}}10^{12}`$ G), from equations (5) and (6) we have $`\omega _{p_0}/\omega _{_{\mathrm{B}_0}}10^7`$.

Since the difference between the phase velocity ($`v_{\mathrm{ph}}`$) of $`t`$-waves and the speed of light is extremely small at the pulsar surface (e.g., Lominadze, Machabeli & Usov 1983),

$$cv_{\mathrm{ph}}c(\omega _{p_0}/\omega _{_{\mathrm{B}_0}})^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_p10^{13}c$$
(7)
in the frame of the pair plasma, particles of both the plasma and the beam cannot be in a resonance with $`t`$-waves that propagate in the pulsar plasma, and resonance instabilities (for example, the cyclotron instability) do not develop in the neutron star vicinities.

Besides, the energy density of plasma ($`\epsilon _pm_ec^2n_p\mathrm{\Gamma }_p`$) is very small in comparison with the energy density of the magnetic field ($`\epsilon __\mathrm{B}=B^2/8\pi `$),

$$\epsilon _p/\epsilon __\mathrm{B}2(\omega _{p_0}/\omega _{_{\mathrm{B}_0}})^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_p10^{13}$$
(8)
Therefore, hydrodynamic instabilities are also suppressed near the pulsar surface by the strong magnetic field.

In the near zone of the pulsar magnetosphere ($`r<c/\mathrm{\Omega }`$), we have $`n_pBr^3`$. The ratio $`\omega _p/\omega __\mathrm{B}`$ increases with increase of the distance from the pulsar, $`\omega _p/\omega __\mathrm{B}r^{3/2}`$. Near the light cylinders of pulsars the ratio $`\omega _p/\omega __\mathrm{B}`$ is of the order of unity, and the outflowing plasma may be unstable with respect to excitation of $`t`$-waves (e.g., Machabeli & Usov 1979, 1989; Lominadze et al. 1983; Lyutikov, Machabeli & Blandford 1999 and references therein). At the distance from the pulsar in the range $`Rrc/\mathrm{\Omega }`$ only the two-stream instability may be developed.

Observations of pulsars suggest that the radio emission regions are far inside the light cylinder (e.g., Gil & Kijak 1993; Kramer et al. 1994; Kijak & Gil 1997),

$$r_{\mathrm{radio}}50R(0.020.04)c/\mathrm{\Omega }c/\mathrm{\Omega },$$
(9)
Therefore, the development of the two-stream instability in the magnetospheres of pulsars is the most plausible reason of their extremely intense radio emission.

## 4 Two-stream instability

The two-stream instability may occur only if (1) there is a ”hump” on the momentum distribution function $`f(p)`$, i.e. a region having $`f/p>0`$, and (2) in the frame where plasma is at rest the mean momentum of the ”hump” particles ($`p_\mathrm{b}`$) is large enough in comparison with the mean momentum of the plasma particles (the Penrose criteria). Particles, which are in the inside slope of the ”hump” where $`f/p>0`$, produce longitudinal ($`l`$) waves with the frequency $`\omega =(𝐤,𝐯)`$ (the Cherenkov resonance), where $`𝐤`$ is the wave vector (see Fig. 1). These particles thus lose their energy. As a result the inside slope of the ”hump” begins to move into the region of even lower velocities, and the distribution function of the ”hump” particles becomes ”plateau-shaped” (see, Fig. 1). The further generation of $`l`$-waves is cut off. The plateau formation and the cut-off in the plasma wave generation is called the quasi-linear relaxation. The energy density of $`l`$-waves generated in the process of quasi-linear relaxation is of the order of the energy density of the ”hump” particles.

A strong magnetic field has no an influence on the development of the two-stream instability in the one-dimensional plasma outflowing from the polar cap regions of pulsars, and therefore, this instability may occur everywhere in the pulsar magnetosphere if the mentioned above conditions for its development are realized. Since there are several components of particles in the pulsar plasma that move with different speeds, the idea that the two-stream instability is responsible for the coherent radio emission of pulsars is very natural.

The two-stream instability could be developed due to the following three reasons. The first one is the interaction between the beam of primary particles and the secondary $`e^+e^{}`$ plasma (Ruderman & Suthermand 1975). The second one is the interaction between electrons and positrons of the secondary plasma itself (Cheng & Ruderman 1977). At last, the two-stream instability may be triggered in the inhomogeneous pulsar plasma when the outflowing plasma clouds disperse and overlap each other (Usov 1987; Ursov & Usov 1988; Asseo & Melikidze 1998).

### 4.1 The interaction between the primary beam and the secondary plasma

The ultrarelativistic beam of primary particles has the distribution function that obeys the conditions that are necessary for the two-stream instability development (see Fig. 1). Therefore, the generation of radio emission of pulsars was initially associated with the ultrarelativistic beam of primary particles (Ruderman & Sutherland 1975). However, further more precise estimates of the instability growth rate have shown that it is impossible. Indeed, the characteristic time for development of the two-stream instability in the pulsar frame is (Benford & Buschauer 1977; Egorenkov, Lominadze & Mamradze 1983)

$$\tau _i(n_p/n_b)^{1/3}\mathrm{\Gamma }_b\mathrm{\Gamma }_p^{1/2}\omega _p^1.$$
(10)
From equations (1)-(4), (5) and (10), for typical pulsars the value of $`\tau _i`$ is about $`10^4(r/R)^{3/2}`$ s at the distance $`r`$ from the neutron star. For the instability development, it is necessary that $`\tau _i`$ is, at least, a few times less than $`\tau _0=r/c3\times 10^5(r/R)`$ s, the characteristic time of the plasma outflow from the distance $`r`$. However, the reverse relation between $`\tau _i`$ and $`\tau _0`$ holds. Hence, the two-stream instability that, in principal, could be caused by the primary beam because its distribution function forms a ”hump” with $`f/p>0`$, in fact, has not enough time to be developed in the pulsar magnetospheres. This is because both the beam density is too low and the Lorentz-factor of the beam is too high.

### 4.2 The interaction between the electrons and the positrons of the secondary plasma

The secondary $`e^+e^{}`$ plasma produced by photons initially has identical distribution functions in its components (electrons and positrons). In this case, the pair plasma is neutral, and the charge density $`\rho _e`$ is determined by the primary beam and equals to $`\rho _e^{\mathrm{GJ}}=en_{\mathrm{GJ}}`$. In the process of the plasma outflow the charge density $`\rho _e`$ is $`nB`$ while $`\rho _e^{\mathrm{GJ}}`$ is $`B\mathrm{cos}\chi `$, where $`\chi `$ is the angle between $`𝛀`$ and $`𝐁`$. The magnetic field lines are curved, and therefore, the angle $`\chi `$ varies with the distance from the pulsar. This leads to a deviation of $`\rho _e`$ from $`\rho _e^{\mathrm{GJ}}`$ and generation of the electric field along the magnetic field (see Fig. 3). This field accelerates one of the components of the secondary plasma and decelerates the other, and the distribution functions of these components shift to each other. The difference between the mean velocities of the electrons and the positrons is (Cheng & Ruderman 1977)

$$|v_+v_{}|\frac{n_b}{n_p}\left[\frac{𝛀𝐁}{(𝛀𝐁)_0}1\right]c,$$
(11)
where $`(𝛀𝐁)_0`$ is the $`𝛀`$ and $`𝐁`$ product taken at the region of pair creation.

Far the neutron star $`(rR)`$, equations (3) and (11) yield

$$\frac{|\mathrm{\Gamma }_+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}|}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_p}\frac{r\mathrm{\Omega }}{c}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_p^3}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_b}$$
(12)
where

$$|\mathrm{\Gamma }_+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}|\frac{|v_+v_{}|}{c}\mathrm{\Gamma }_p^3.$$
(13)
Using a relativistic generalization of the Penrose criteria (Buschauer & Benford 1977; Krall & Trivelpiece 1986) and equation (12), the condition for development of the two-stream instability may be written as

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_p>2\times 10^2(c/r\mathrm{\Omega })^{1/3}.$$
(14)
From equation (14) we can see that the two-stream instability, which develops because of the relative motion of the secondary plasma components, may occur only rather near the light cylinder of pulsars. Besides, the magnetic field near the pulsar surface must be close to the dipole field when the Lorentz-factor of the secondary particles is equal to its maximum (see, equation (1)).

### 4.3 The interaction between clouds of the secondary plasma

Here the nonstationarity of plasma ejection from the polar gap regions is modeled as follows. Plasma particles (electrons and positrons) are ejected along the $`z`$-axis from $`z=0`$ during the time $`T`$ with Lorentz-factors ranging from $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{min}}`$ to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{max}}`$, so that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{max}}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{min}}1`$. Then over the time $`\tau `$ no particles are ejected, after that everything is repeated. In other words, we assume that the secondary $`e^+e^{}`$ plasma is ejected in the form of separate isolated clouds with the length $`cT`$ along the $`z`$-axis, and the space between these clouds is $`c\tau `$.

At $`z=0`$, the distribution of ejected particles over Lorentz-factors is described by the function $`f_o(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ determined from the condition that the number of particles $`dn_p`$ per volume $`dV`$ with energies from $`m_ec^2\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ to $`m_ec^2(\mathrm{\Gamma }+d\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ is equal to

$$dn_p=n_pdVf_o(\mathrm{\Gamma })d\mathrm{\Gamma }.$$
(15)
The distribution function thus determined is normalized to unity, i.e.,

$$_{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{min}}}^{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{max}}}f_o(\mathrm{\Gamma })𝑑\mathrm{\Gamma }=1.$$
(16)
The pulsar plasma can be regarded as collisionless. Therefore, the spatial and energy distribution of outflowing particles at $`z>0`$ may be found from simple kinematic relations.

To study the dispersion of plasma clouds and their mutual overlapping it is sufficient to consider the outflow of two successively ejected clouds. It is expedient to draw the distribution of particles in the $`z`$\- and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-coordinates (see Fig. 4). In our case the initial time ($`t=0`$) is the moment when the ejection of particles of the second cloud is just finished.

At the time

$$t_o=\frac{v_{\mathrm{min}}(T+\tau )v_{\mathrm{max}}T}{v_{\mathrm{max}}v_{\mathrm{min}}}2\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{min}}^2\tau $$
(17)
determined from the equation

$$v_{\mathrm{min}}(T+\tau +t_o)=v_{\mathrm{max}}(T+t_o),$$
(18)
the fast particles of the second cloud catch up with the slow particles of the preceding cloud, and mutual overlapping of the clouds begins, where

$$v_{\mathrm{min}}=[1(1/\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{min}})^2]^{1/2}c,$$
(19)
$$v_{\mathrm{max}}=[1(1/\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{max}})^2]^{1/2}c.$$
(20)
The width of the overlapping region at $`t>t_o`$ is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=v_{\mathrm{max}}(T+t)v_{\mathrm{min}}(T+\tau +t).$$
(21)
The distribution function of particles in the overlapping region is (see Fig. 5)

$$f(\mathrm{\Gamma },z,t)=\{\begin{array}{cc}0,\mathrm{\Gamma }<\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,\hfill & \\ f_o(\mathrm{\Gamma }),\mathrm{\Gamma }_1<\mathrm{\Gamma }<\mathrm{\Gamma }_2,\hfill & \\ 0,\mathrm{\Gamma }_2<\mathrm{\Gamma }_3,\hfill & \\ f_o(\mathrm{\Gamma }),\mathrm{\Gamma }_3<\mathrm{\Gamma }<\mathrm{\Gamma }_4,\hfill & \\ 0,\mathrm{\Gamma }_4<\mathrm{\Gamma },\hfill & \end{array}$$
(22)
where

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_i=[1(v_i/c)^2]^{1/2},i=1,2,3,4,$$
(23)
$$v_1=v_{\mathrm{min}},v_2=\frac{z}{T+\tau +t},$$
(24)
$$v_3=\frac{z}{T+t},v_4=v_{\mathrm{max}}.$$
(25)
In the overlapping region, there are, in fact, two streams of slow and fast particles (see Fig. 5). This may lead to development of the two-stream instability. A simple approximation where plasma is one-dimensional and homogeneous may be employed for consideration of this instability in the overlapping regions of plasma clouds in the magnetospheres of pulsars (Usov & Ursov 1988). In this approximation, the dispersion equation for $`l`$-waves with $`𝐤𝐯\mathrm{B}`$ is

$$1\frac{4\pi e^2n_p}{m_e}\frac{f(\mathrm{\Gamma },z,t)d\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\mathrm{\Gamma }^3(\omega kv)^2}=0$$
(26)
At the initial stage of clouds overlapping, when the width of the overlapping region is much smaller than the width of the clouds, along the $`z`$-axis, $`\mathrm{\Delta }cT`$, the function $`f(\mathrm{\Gamma },z,t)`$ describes two groups of practically monoenergetic particles at velocities $`v_2`$ and $`v_4`$. Taking this into account, equation (26) may be written as

$$1\omega _p^2\left[\frac{\alpha }{(\omega kv_2)^2}+\frac{\beta }{(\omega kv_4)^2}\right]=0$$
(27)
where

$$\alpha =_{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1}^{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2}\frac{f_o(\mathrm{\Gamma })}{\mathrm{\Gamma }^3}𝑑\mathrm{\Gamma },\beta =_{\mathrm{\Gamma }_3}^{\mathrm{\Gamma }_4}\frac{f_o(\mathrm{\Gamma })}{\mathrm{\Gamma }^3}𝑑\mathrm{\Gamma }.$$
(28)
From equation (27), the maximum growth rate of $`l`$-waves is (Ursov & Usov 1988)

$$\mathrm{Im}\omega _{\mathrm{max}}=\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}\alpha ^{1/2}\left(\frac{\beta }{2\alpha }\right)^{1/3}\omega _p,$$
(29)
and occurs for the wave vector

$$k_{\mathrm{res}}=\frac{\alpha ^{1/2}\omega _p}{v_4v_2}$$
(30)
that corresponds to a resonance between plasma oscillations of the slow ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1<\mathrm{\Gamma }<\mathrm{\Gamma }_2`$) flow and high-energy particles of the fast ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }_3<\mathrm{\Gamma }<\mathrm{\Gamma }_4`$) flow.

Since for the slow and fast flows the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ ranges of plasma particles are narrow for slightly overlapping clouds ($`\mathrm{\Delta }c\tau `$), the function $`f_0(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ in equations (28) can be factored out the integral sigh and then to integrate:

$$\alpha \frac{f_o(\mathrm{\Gamma }_1)}{2}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_1^2}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_2^2}=\frac{v_2v_1}{c}f_o(\mathrm{\Gamma }_1)\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_1}{ct_o}f_o(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{min}})$$
(31)
$$\beta =\frac{f_0(\mathrm{\Gamma }_4)}{2}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_4^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_3^2}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_3^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_4^2}=\frac{v_2v_3}{c}f_o(\mathrm{\Gamma }_4)\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_2}{ct_o}f_0(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{max}}),$$
(32)
where (see Fig. 5)

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_1=zv_{\mathrm{min}}(T+\tau +t),\mathrm{\Delta }_2=v_{\mathrm{max}}(T+t)z$$
(33)
in the overlapping region,

$$v_{\mathrm{min}}(T+\tau +t)<z<v_{\mathrm{max}}(T+t).$$
(34)
Substituting equations (31) and (32) into equation (29), we obtain

$$\mathrm{Im}\omega _{\mathrm{max}}=\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2^{4/3}}\omega _p[f_o(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{min}})]^{1/6}[f_o(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{max}})]^{1/3}$$

$$\times \left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }_2}{ct_o}\right)^{1/6}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_2}{ct_o}\right)^{1/3}.$$
(35)
The growth rate (35) depends on the distance $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ to the leading front of the cloud overlapping and reaches the maximum

$$(\mathrm{Im}\omega _{\mathrm{max}})_{\mathrm{max}}=\frac{\omega _p}{2}[f_o(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{min}})]^{1/6}[f_o(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{max}})]^{1/3}$$

$$\times (\mathrm{\Delta }/ct_o)^{1/2}$$
(36)
at $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2=(2/3)\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

The distribution function of plasma particles in the magnetospheres of pulsars may be roughly approximated by the following law (Arons 1981)

$$f_o(\mathrm{\Gamma })=\{\begin{array}{cc}A\mathrm{\Gamma }^{3/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{min}}<\mathrm{\Gamma }<\mathrm{\Gamma }_{},\hfill & \\ A\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}^{3/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}<\mathrm{\Gamma }<\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{max}},\hfill & \end{array}$$
(37)
where $`A`$ is the constant determined from the normalization condition (16) and written as

$$A=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{min}}^{1/2}}{2}\left[1+\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{min}}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{max}}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}}3\right)\right]^1.$$
(38)
Substituting equation (37) into equation (36) and taking into account that $`ct_o2L\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{min}}^2`$, we have the characteristic time of the instability development

$$\tau _i=(\mathrm{Im}\omega _{\mathrm{max}})_{\mathrm{max}}^1=\frac{2^{3/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{min}}^{5/4}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}^{1/2}}{\omega _pA^{1/2}}\left(\frac{L}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\right)^{1/2},$$
(39)
where $`L=c\tau `$ is the space between the plasma clouds.

An instability manages to develop if the lifetime of the unstable system exceeds the characteristic time of the instability development by more than an order. In our case, the unstable system is the overlapping region, and its lifetime is $`\mathrm{\Delta }/c`$. With a similar criterion, $`10\tau _i=\mathrm{\Delta }_i/c`$, we get the value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ at which the two-stream instability is developing to be given by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_i(30c\omega _p^1A^{1/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{min}}^{5/4}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}^{1/2}L^{1/2})^{2/3}.$$
(40)
We now estimate the quantities that characterize the development of the two-stream instability in the magnetospheres of pulsars. The following parameters of the secondary $`e^+e^{}`$ plasma may be assumed: $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{min}}5`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}10^2`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{max}}10^3`$ (Arons 1981) and $`L=c\tau cTR10^6`$ cm (Usov 1987). From equations (3)-(5), (38) and (40), we have $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i0.8\times 10^5`$ cm. Hence, the development of the two-stream instability already occurs when the cloud overlapping is very small ($`\mathrm{\Delta }_iL`$). Further overlapping of the plasma clouds ($`\mathrm{\Delta }>\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$) could be considered only beyond the scheme of our linear approximation.

The distance from the neutron star to the region where the two-stream instability occurs is

$$r_i2c\tau \mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{min}}^2=2L\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{min}}^2$$
(41)
or numerically $`r_i5\times 10^7`$ cm for $`L\times 10^6`$ cm and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{min}}5`$. The value of $`r_i`$ is consistent with the distance from the neutron stars to the radio emission regions (see equation (9)).

The existence of several scales of the outflowing plasma modulation (e.g., $`L_10.3R`$ and $`L_22R_c`$ in the Ruderman-Sutherland model) may lead to the situation that in the magnetospheres of pulsars there are several regions where the two-stream instability develops and the generation of coherent radio emission occurs. From the observational data on radio emission of pulsars it follows that such a situation is possible for some pulsars (e.g., Gil 1985).

## 5 Discussion

The mechanism of coherent radio emission of pulsars is closely connected with the location of the radio emitting regions in the pulsar magnetospheres. If it is confirmed that the distances from the neutron stars to the radio emitting regions are $`c/\mathrm{\Omega }`$ (Gil & Kijak 1993; Rankin 1993; Kramer et al. 1994; Kijak & Gil 1997), i.e., these regions are far inside the light cylinder, then most probably, the two-stream instability developed in the outflowing strongly nonhomogeneous plasma (Usov 1987; Ursov & Usov 1988; Asseo & Melikidze 1998) is responsible for the generation of the pulsar radio emission. It is worth noting that if the process of pair creation near the pulsar surface in strongly nonstationary indeed, the development of this instability in the magnetospheres of pulsars is almost inevitable.

Longitudinal (nonescaping) Langmuir waves are generated in the process of development of the two-stream instability. Then, these waves may be converted into $`t`$-waves, that can escape from the pulsar magnetosphere, by means of the following nonlinear effects:

###### Acknowledgements.

I gratefully acknowledge the support by the Heraeus foundation. This work was supported by MINERVA Foundation, Munich, Germany.


format: text

text:
# Observation of periodic variable stars towards the Galactic spiral arms by EROS II This work is based on observations made with the MARLY telescope of the EROS collaboration at the European Southern Observatory, La Silla, Chile.

## 1 Introduction

In 1996, the EROS II collaboration started an observation program towards the Galactic Spiral Arms (GSA) dedicated to microlensing events. Since then, four regions of the Galactic plane located at large angles with respect to the Galactic Centre are being monitored to disentangle the disc, bar and halo contributions to the microlensing optical depth. Seven microlensing event candidates have already been published, based on three years (1996-98) of observations (Derue et al., 1999, 2001)\[hereafter papers I and II\]. The distance of the source stars used in these papers to compute the expected optical depths was deduced from a detailed study of our colour-magnitude diagrams. It was thus found that the source star population is located $``$ 7 kpc away, undergoing an interstellar extinction $`A(V)`$ of about 3 magnitudes (see Mansoux, (1997) for more details). This distance estimate is in rough agreement with the distance to the spiral arms obtained by Georgelin et al., (1994) and Russeil et al., (1998), but its uncertainty is limiting further interpretation of our microlensing optical depth estimates. It was therefore desirable to seek more information on the distance distribution of the source stars – whether these stars belong to the disc or to the spiral arms – and on the reddening along our observation line of sights. This led us to perform a dedicated variable star search between April and June 1998, on a subset of our Galactic plane fields. The analysis was restricted to the brightest stars of this subset.

Among the wide variety of variable stars, periodic ones are of particular interest. The properties of Cepheids make them well suited to trace the Galactic spiral arms. Their reddening is measurable as well as their distance via the period-luminosity (PL) relation. RR Lyræ stars are old stars, well suited to trace the disc population. One can infer their mean dereddened magnitude and their absolute magnitude (Gould and Popowski, 1998). The infrared PL(K) relation for Miras and Semi-Regular variable stars can be calibrated using a comparison of DENIS and EROS LMC giant stars (Cioni et al., 2001). Finally detached eclipsing binaries also offer the opportunity to measure their stellar parameters and their distance (Paczyński, 1996).

This paper presents the results of this particular campaign which led to a catalogue containing a large number of new variable objects in the Galactic plane. Sect. 2 gives the basic features of the observational setup, Sect. 3 gives details on a new algorithm used to search for periodic variations of the luminosity. Sect. 4 describes the catalogue and the cross-identification process. In Sect. 5 we use the selected RR Lyræ to estimate the mean reddening of our fields and we give the distance distribution of these stars.

## 2 Experimental setup and observations

The MARLY telescope and its two cameras, the way we carry out our observations, as well as our data reduction sequence are described in Paper I and references therein. The two EROS passbands are non standard. The so-called EROS-red passband $`R_E`$ is centred on $`\overline{\lambda }=762\mathrm{nm}`$, close to $`I_C`$ Cousins, with a full width at half maximum $`\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda 85\mathrm{nm}`$, and EROS-visible passband $`V_E`$ is centred on $`\overline{\lambda }=600\mathrm{nm}`$, close to $`V_J`$ Johnson, with $`\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda 78\mathrm{nm}`$. The EROS II colour magnitude system is defined as follows : a zero colour star with $`V_ER_E=0`$ (a main sequence A0 star) will have its $`R_E`$ magnitude numerically equal to its Cousins $`R_C`$ magnitude and its $`V_E`$ magnitude numerically equal to its Johnson $`V_J`$ magnitude. The colour transformation between the EROS II system ($`V_E`$,$`R_E`$) and the standard Johnson-Cousins ($`V_J`$,$`I_C`$) system is then :

$`I_C`$ $`=`$ $`R_E+0.01\times (V_ER_E)`$ (1)
$`V_J`$ $`=`$ $`V_E+0.39\times (V_ER_E).`$
The colour coefficients are obtained from the study of our passbands based on Landolt standards and on one of the EROS II LMC fields observed simultaneously in $`B`$$`V_J`$$`R_C`$$`I_C`$ with the Danish 1.54 m (at ESO-La Silla) and with the MARLY. The zero points are established with tertiary standards in $`BVRI`$ taken with the Danish 1.54 (Regnault, 2000). We have cross-checked our $`R_E`$ photometry with the $`I_C`$ one of DENIS (Fouqué et al., 2000). Furthermore, using Eqs. (1), the mean magnitudes of the LMC red-giant clump stars agree within 0.1 magnitude with determinations made by Harris & Zaritsky, (1999) and Udalski et al., (1998). We thus estimate that the precision of the zero points of the MARLY calibration is $`0.1^{\mathrm{mag}}`$.

Among the 29 fields of the EROS GSA microlensing program, the six fields considered here were monitored about once per night between April and June 1998. They represent $`2`$ square degrees towards $`\theta `$ Mus and $`4`$ towards $`\gamma `$ Nor (named after the closest bright star). Table 1 gives their coordinates, the number of images $`N_m`$ taken in each direction and the number of analysed light curves $`N_{obs}`$.

To avoid CCD saturation by the brightest stars ($`I_C9`$), by Cepheids or Miras in particular, we have reduced the exposure time to 15 s instead of the 120 s used in the microlensing survey. As a consequence the catalogue is incomplete as far as faint stars are concerned, but it could be updated later by using the total set of available GSA images. Fig. 1 shows the average time sampling. Three gaps can be seen in our data : the first two (around weeks 119 and 123) were due to bad weather conditions while the third one (around week 127) corresponds to the annual maintenance of our setup.

## 3 Search for periodic stars

### 3.1 Reconstruction of the light curves

Since the EROS photometry is described in detail in Ansari, (1996) only the main features of the PEIDA++ package are summarised below. For each field, a template image is first constructed using one exposure of very good quality. A reference star catalogue is set up with this template using the CORRFIND star finding algorithm (Palanque–Delabrouille et al., 1998). For each subsequent image, after geometrical alignment with the template, each identified star is fitted together with its neighbours, using a PSF determined on bright isolated stars and imposing the position from the reference catalogue. A relative photometric alignment is then performed, assuming that most stars do not vary. Photometric errors are computed for each measurement, assuming again that most stars are stable, and parametrised as a function of star brightness and image sequence number. Fig. 2 shows the mean point-to-point relative dispersion of the measured fluxes along the light curves as a function of $`R_E`$ and $`V_E`$. The photometric accuracy is $``$15% at $`R_E`$$``$18, and about 2% for the brightest stars.

Finally, using the PEIDA++ photometric package, we reconstruct the light curves of 1,913,576 stars.

### 3.2 Pre-selection

Each one of the light curves is subjected to a series of selection criteria in order to isolate a small sub-sample on which we will apply the time consuming period search algorithms. These analysis cuts are briefly described hereafter (see Derue, (1999) for more details) and their effect on the data is summarised in Table 2 :

* At least 30 measurements should be available in both passbands and the base flux must be positive;
* The search is restricted to stars whose magnitude is $`R_E`$$`<`$$`17`$ which corresponds to a photometric accuracy in $`R_E`$ better than $``$10%.
* A non specific pre-filter is applied which retains most variable stars. It selects light curves satisfying one or both of the following criteria :

+ the relative dispersion of the flux measurements is 25% larger than the average one for the set of stars having the same magnitude;
    + the distribution of the deviations with respect to the base flux is incompatible with the one expected from a stable source with Gaussian errors during the observation period (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test).

These cuts are tuned to select $``$10% of the light curves. We have checked that this procedure allows one to retrieve the previously known Cepheids observed by EROS in the Magellanic Clouds. We also keep a randomly selected set of light curves ($``$2%) to produce unbiased colour-magnitude diagrams, for comparison purposes;

At this stage a set of 41,545 light curves remains which is then subjected to a periodicity search.

### 3.3 Light curve selection

We use three independent methods to extract periodic light curves. The first two are classical methods already described in the literature : method 1 is based on the Lomb-Scargle periodogram (see Scargle, 1982) while method 2 makes use of the One Way Analysis of Variance algorithm (see Schwarzenberg-Czerny, 1996). Both provide the probability for false periodicity detection. In method 1 one computes the Fourier power over a set of frequencies. It is therefore well adapted to identify sinusoidal light curves. It can be improved by incorporating higher harmonics in order to detect any kind of variability such as eclipsing binaries (Grison, 1994; Grison et al., 1995).

We developed a new method, the third one, in order to extract periodic light curves in a way which is insensitive to the particular shape of the variation. This method also provides a probability for false periodicity detection.

It consists in searching for a frequency such that the corresponding phase diagram, i.e the series of fluxes $`F_i`$ versus phases $`\phi _i`$ in increasing order of $`\phi `$, displays a regular structure significantly less scattered than for other frequencies. Let $`T_{obs}`$ be the observation duration ($`100`$ days in this analysis). We span the frequency domain from $`T_{obs}^1`$ to $`(0.2\mathrm{days})^1`$ with a constant step of $`(4\times T_{obs})^1`$. The total number of test-frequencies is thus $`N_{test}2000`$. This sampling ensures that the total phase increment over $`T_{obs}`$ is $`\pi /2`$ for two adjacent test-frequencies.

For each value of the test-frequency we compute the corresponding phase diagram. We calculate a $`\chi ^2`$ from the weighted differences of $`F_i`$ and the fluxes interpolated between $`F_{i1}`$ and $`F_{i+1}`$ :

$`\chi ^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N_m}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{F_i(1R_i)\times F_{i1}R_i\times F_{i+1}}{\sigma _i}}\right)^2`$ (2)
where $`R_i=(\phi _i\phi _{i1})/(\phi _{i+1}\phi _{i1})`$ and $`N_m`$ is the number of measurements. The uncertainty $`\sigma _i`$ takes into account the errors $`ϵ_i`$ on the flux $`F_i`$ and on the interpolated flux : $`\sigma _i^2=ϵ_i^2+(1R_i)^2ϵ_{i1}^2+R_i^2ϵ_{i+1}^2`$.

Expression (2) can be interpreted as the $`\chi ^2`$ of the set of differences between the odd measurements with respect to the line joining even ones, added to the $`\chi ^2`$ of the set of differences between even measurements with respect to the line joining odd ones. If the star is measured in both colours, we add the $`\chi ^2`$ obtained in each colour ($`N_m`$ is then twice as large). For a given stable star with Gaussian errors, each phase diagram can be considered as a random realisation of the light curve. When the test-frequency spans the search domain, the distribution of the $`\chi ^2`$ parameter defined by Eq. (2) is the one of the standard $`\chi ^2`$ with $`N_m`$ degrees of freedom. Since $`N_m`$ is large enough, this distribution is close to a Gaussian with average $`N_m`$ and variance $`2N_m`$ (see upper left panel of Fig. 3). For a periodic variable star, the $`\chi ^2`$ distribution displays a main cluster, when the test-frequency results in a phase diagram with non-correlated point to point variations, and a few lower values when the test-frequency corresponds to a phase diagram with a regular structure (see lower left and middle panels of Fig. 3). In practice, instead of using the parameter defined by Eq. (2), we use the reduced variable :

$`x`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\chi ^2<\chi ^2>}{<\chi ^2>/N_m}}\times {\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2N_m}}}`$ (3)
where $`<\chi ^2>`$ is the average of the realisations of $`\chi ^2`$ for all test-frequencies. For a stable star, the distribution of this variable $`x`$ is a Gaussian centred at zero, with unit variance. If the errors are correctly determined $`<\chi ^2>/N_m`$ is close to unity; if the errors are all systematically overestimated (or underestimated), then including this term ensures a global renormalisation of the errors in Eq. (3), and the distribution of our reduced variable $`x`$ is also a normal distribution. Let $`x_{min}`$ be the smallest value of $`x`$ calculated among all test-frequencies for a given star. Under the hypothesis that the light curve is produced by a stable star, the probability to obtain at least one value $`xx_{min}`$ in a series of $`N_{test}`$ realisations is $`Prob(x<x_{min}|N_{test})=1\left[1\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}_{\mathrm{}}^{x_{min}}e^{x^2/2}𝑑x\right]^{N_{test}}`$. If this probability is small, then :

$`Prob(x<x_{min}|N_{test})`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{N_{test}}{2}}\mathrm{erfc}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_{min}}{\sqrt{2}}}\right).`$ (4)
If the light curve exhibits periodic variations, then there exist test-frequencies for which $`x`$ is significantly smaller than typical values of this variable (see middle and right panels of Fig. 3), and the probability for false detection is then extremely small. Fig. 4 displays the probability distribution obtained with the three methods for the set of filtered light curves222The third method gives a probability which is always larger than $`10^{30}`$. Indeed, the smallest value of $`x`$ which can be obtained takes place when $`\chi ^2=0`$, then $`|x|\sqrt{N_m}<10`$..

We apply the three algorithms which all give a probability for no periodicity. A star is accepted only if selected by all three methods with the following thresholds : $`P(\mathrm{method}1)<10^{15}`$, $`P(\mathrm{method}2)<10^{10}`$, $`P(\mathrm{method}3)<10^5`$, tuned in order to allow one to retrieve the previously known Cepheids observed by EROS in the Magellanic Clouds (see Derue, (1999) for more details). This procedure (cut 4) selects a sample of 2,553 stars.

Ten times more stars would have been selected if we had used method 1 or method 2 only (with the same thresholds), most of them being spurious variables.

The third method would have added far less candidates if used alone, but still a factor 2 more. Combining independent methods has thus the advantage of considerably reducing the noise background (mostly due to aliases of one day or noisy measurements) while giving redundant information about the period. To obtain individual periods we perform Fourier fits with five harmonics :

$$\mathrm{flux}=\mathrm{flux}_0+\underset{l=1}{\overset{5}{}}a_l\mathrm{cos}(\frac{2\pi }{P}l(tt_0)+\varphi _l),$$
(5)
where $`P`$ is the period, $`\varphi _l`$ the phase and $`a_l`$ the amplitude. We define the amplitude ratios $`R_{kl}=a_k/a_l`$, and the phase differences (defined modulo 2$`\pi `$) $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{kl}=\varphi _kk\varphi _l`$, with $`k>l`$. Objects with non-significant harmonic amplitudes (i.e with almost sinusoidal light curves) have $`R_{21}0`$ and their $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{21}`$ is ill defined.

The selection of periodic variable stars is complicated by aliases. Some of the stars with periods equal to a simple fraction or a low multiple of one day may be badly phased because of the nightly sequence of measurements. These aliased periods are seen in Fig. 5 as vertical groups of dots at $`2/3`$, $`2`$ and $`3`$ days. To eliminate them we demand (cut 5) that the fitted periods are not within $`\pm 1\%`$ of these values. One can also notice some vertical groups of points around $`25`$ days which correspond to data gaps in our sample (see Fig. 1). Once these objects are removed, 2,424 stars remain. The flux values of the remaining stars are folded using each period obtained with the three methods. The resulting phase diagrams are visually inspected. Some of them display an obvious spurious periodic or quasi-periodic variability due to a low photometric quality. After this final visual selection (cut 6) the list of variable stars includes 1,362 candidates which exhibit unambiguous periodic variability.

### 3.4 Type of variability

The classification of the selected stars among different types of variability cannot be based on the position of the objects in the colour-magnitude diagram since the spread in distance of these stars entails a spread in magnitude and colour. It is desirable however to classify the various light curves according to some physical parameters. In the following we mainly use criteria based on the period $`P`$ of the luminosity variations and on the amplitude ratio $`\mathrm{\Delta }V_E/\mathrm{\Delta }R_E`$. For each selected type of variable star the phase diagram of a typical candidate is displayed in Fig. 6.

Three groups are distinguished depending on their period :

* stars with a period larger than 60 days (543 objects) :
For these objects an entire period has not been observed. There is thus no warranty that these objects are periodic ones. 34 display a nearly linear light curve and are thus catalogued as Miras candidates. The other 509 objects are catalogued as Long Period Variable stars (LPVs).
* stars with a period between 30 and 60 days (387 objects) :
264 Semi-Regular variable stars are selected by requiring : $`\mathrm{\Delta }V_E`$/$`\mathrm{\Delta }R_E>`$ 1.2 to select pulsating stars (see below), $`V_J`$-$`I_C`$ $`>`$ 2.5 to discriminate from bluer variable stars and $`\mathrm{\Delta }R_E<`$ 1.0 to avoid possible Miras or LPVs wrongly phased. The long term stability of these stars is not known. Some of the reported periods may change from season to season, as a result of their semi-regular behaviour. The remaining 123 objects are catalogued as miscellaneous variable stars.
* stars with a period smaller than 30 days (432 objects) :
The colour change for a Cepheid in standard passbands is $`\mathrm{\Delta }V_J`$/$`\mathrm{\Delta }I_C>`$1.3 (Madore et al., 1991) which corresponds to $`\mathrm{\Delta }V_E`$/$`\mathrm{\Delta }R_E>`$ 1.2 in the EROS system. Two sets are thus distinguished based on this criterion :

+ The pulsating variable stars (60 objects) :
    For stars with period $`P<1`$ day, two samples of RR Lyræ are identified : the RR$`c`$ have $`R_{21}<0.4`$ (14 objects) and the RR$`ab`$ have $`R_{21}>0.4`$ (5 objects).

    We adopt the morphological classification proposed by Antonello et al., (1986) and classify as $`s`$-Cepheids the stars that lie in the lower part of the $`R_{21}P`$ plane, and as classical Cepheids the remaining stars. $`s`$-Cepheids pulsate in the first overtone and classical Cepheids in the fundamental mode (see e.g Beaulieu et al., (1995); Beaulieu & Sasselov, (1996)). We use the empirical function $`R_{21}^{\mathrm{cut}}(P)=0.4(P/30`$ days) in order to separate these pulsation modes (see Fig. 7). Among the five objects that pass the $`s`$-Cepheid cut, only three belong to the $`R_{21}P`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{21}P`$ distributions of galactic $`s`$-Cepheids and their phase parameter $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{21}`$ is poorly constrained.

    Besides most of classical Cepheids have amplitudes larger than $`\mathrm{\Delta }R_E>0.4^{\mathrm{mag}}`$ (see e.g Afonso et al., (1999)). For stars with period $`P>1`$ day, three samples are then identified : the classical Cepheids have $`R_{21}>R_{21}^{\mathrm{cut}}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }R_E>0.4^{\mathrm{mag}}`$ (6 objects); the $`s`$-Cepheids have $`R_{21}<R_{21}^{\mathrm{cut}}`$ and $`3\mathrm{rad}<\mathrm{\Phi }_{21}<6\mathrm{rad}`$ (3 objects); the remaining 32 objects are catalogued as miscellaneous pulsating stars.
    + The non-pulsating variable stars (372 objects) :
    The remaining objects have similar amplitudes in both passbands. We classify them according to the following criteria. Algol systems (130 stars, type $`EA`$) display well-defined eclipses whose secondary one has a depth lower than half the primary one, and possibly flat light curve between them. $`EB`$ type objects (35 in total) show a secondary eclipse equal to half the primary one. The $`EW`$ type (11 objects) is characterised by similar depths of the two eclipses. The members of a residual sample of 196 objects do not look like convincing eclipsing binaries and are catalogued as miscellaneous variable stars.

As emphasised by Udalski et al., 1999a  a large number of variable objects show small amplitude sinusoidal variations, such as ellipsoidal binary variable stars. A contamination of the sample of pulsating stars by eclipsing binaries is thus possible.

Figures 8 and 9 show the location of the selected variables in the colour-magnitude diagrams. Also plotted are 10,000 stars located in the central part of the two fields tm550 and gn450. Most of the Cepheids are much brighter than our magnitude threshold (cut 2); this is not so for RR Lyræ (see Fig. 9, lower panel). Our catalogue is thus not complete for this type of variable stars, as already mentionned.

## 4 The catalogue

The catalogue is composed of two tables containing objects with periods $`P`$ smaller or larger than 30 days, respectively. The identifier of each star is given according to the recommendations of the IAU Commission 5 in The Rules and Regulations for Nomenclature (see the Annual Index of A&A). The general acronym used in the catalogue is EROS2 GSA followed by J2000 equatorial coordinates in the format JHHMMSS$`\pm `$DDMMSS. The remainder of the identifier in parentheses gives some information relating to the internal organisation of the EROS database : gn$`nnn`$ or tm$`nnn`$ is the name of the field, followed by the CCD number and the location on the image following the EROS II nomenclature. The remaining number is the star identifier used in the EROS database. As an example, J132630-630945(tm5504m12359) is the name of the 12359th star observed in quarter m of CCD 4 in the field tm550. The J2000 equatorial coordinates of this star are 13:26:30.11, -63:09:45.66.

The equatorial coordinates (J2000) of individual stars have been obtained as follows. First, we have inserted the suitable WCS keywords into the header of the EROS II reference images using the WCSTools package (Mink, 1999). Whenever possible, the cross-identification of each star with previously known objects within a 10″ search radius has been done using the Simbad and Vizier databases available at the CDS, Strasbourg.

The tables contain the following information :

1. Identifier
2. Right ascension $`\alpha `$ (J2000)
3. Declination $`\delta `$ (J2000)
4. $`R_E`$ mean magnitude in EROS-red
5. $`\mathrm{\Delta }R_E`$ amplitude peak to peak in $`R_E`$
6. $`V_E`$ mean magnitude in EROS-visible
7. $`\mathrm{\Delta }V_E`$ amplitude peak to peak in $`V_E`$
8. Period in days. Note that periods longer than 30 days are given with less accuracy since the time span of the measurements does not allow a precise determination. Measured periods which are longer than 60 days (i.e 2/3 of the observation period) are flagged by writing “$`P>60`$ d” and have no warranty to be true periodic variable stars. The peak to peak amplitude of these stars could be meaningless and the mean magnitude is determined with low accuracy.

For Cepheids and RR Lyræ the results of the Fourier fit are given :

1. Fourier coefficient ratio $`R_{21}`$;
2. Fourier coefficient ratio $`R_{31}`$;
3. Phase difference $`\varphi _{21}`$ (in rad);

Also given when possible :

1. Type of variability (C=classical Cepheids, S=$`s`$-Cepheids, puls.= miscellaneous pulsating stars, EA,EB,EW=eclipsing binaries, misc=miscellaneous variable stars, SR=Semi-Regular variables, M=Miras, LPV=long period variables);
2. Name of cross-identified object(s) within a search radius of 10″.

The catalogue is planned to be installed at the CDS (see also our Web site http://eros.in2p3.fr/).

A by-product of such a survey is the possibility to update the coordinates given in older catalogues. As an example, it was found that the well known classical Cepheid OO Cen with the SIMBAD identifier V\*OO Cen was 20” away from an EROS object, namely J132630-630945(tm5504m12359), as shown in the finding chart of Fig. 10.

The period and coordinates we report are compatible with the ones given by the General Catalogue of Variable Stars (GCVS)333Queries on this catalogue are possible at http://www.sai.msu.su/cgi-bin/wdb-p95/gcvs/stars/form (Kholopov, 1985) (see Table 4). It seems that an error occurred when the coordinates of this particular star were filled in the SIMBAD. The light curve of this object is shown in Fig 6.

We have performed several cross-identifications of our catalogue with those previously available, namely the IRAS Point Source Catalog (Beichman et al., 1998), the MSX5C Infrared Astrometric Catalog (Egan et al., 1996), the Two Micron All Sky Survey (2MASS) (Skrutskie et al., 1997), the CKS91 catalogue (Caldwell et al., 1991) and the General Catalogue of Variable Stars (GCVS) (Kholopov, 1985). A total of 38 IRAS sources and 220 MSX5C objects have been thus retrieved. The overlap with the available 2MASS catalogue exists only for the EROS field gn459, representing 255 stars. A total of 233 2MASS objects have been thus retrieved among them 37 objects classified as Semi-Regular variables.

An overlap exists with the CKS91 catalogue (Caldwell et al., 1991). These authors have searched for bright Cepheids and other variable stars with $`I<14`$, towards Crux and Centaurus, during 42 days with less than 10 measurements per star. A small overlap exists between this survey and the GSA fields tm550 and tm551. Unfortunately this overlap involves our CCD #2 which was not operational at the time of the observations. Therefore the comparison can only be carried out on $`0.7`$ square degree. Furthermore, as pointed above, this comparison is restricted to stars with magnitude $`I_C<14`$. A total of 118 EROS objects, 6 GCVS and 23 CKS91 objects lie in this region. Three objects are common to the GCVS and CKS91 catalogues one. The overlap between the three catalogues represents only 19 objects. Among them one finds the most interesting ones, such as Cepheids OO Cen and V881 Cen (see Table 5). Some objects show a large difference between the two magnitude determinations. These are long period variables for which the mean magnitude is measured on only a part of the whole period, and thus ill determined in both surveys. Only 7 known variable stars are not recovered by our analysis (see Table 6). Conversely, 99 objects of our catalogue are not listed by CKS91. All of them are labelled Long Period Variable stars (LPV).

## 5 Discussion

The motivation of our search was to improve our knowledge of the distance distribution and of the extinction of the microlensing source stars used in papers I and II. In the following we use the RR Lyræ which are well-known distance indicators and have been observed in all six directions that we investigated. The GSA fields having a high non-uniform absorption, we give only an average reddening towards our fields, based on EROS data alone.

For each selected RR Lyræ we estimate the extinction $`A(V)=2.4\times E(VI)`$ using the standard extinction coefficients (Schlegel et al., 1998; Stanek, 1996). The colour excess $`E(VI)`$ is derived from the colour that we measured and their intrinsic colour : $`\left(VI\right)_0^{RRab}=0.4`$ and $`\left(VI\right)_0^{RRc}=0.2`$ (Alcok et al., 1998). The uncertainty on individual extinctions is estimated to be $`0.5^{\mathrm{mag}}`$. This error includes the $`0.2^{\mathrm{mag}}`$ uncertainty on the EROS colour measurement (see Eq. (1)) and a $`0.1^{\mathrm{mag}}`$ magnitude uncertainty on the intrinsic colour. The absolute magnitude of RR Lyræ is $`M_V^{RR}0.71`$ with a precision of $`0.07^{\mathrm{mag}}`$ (Gould and Popowski, 1998). Finally, we estimate the distance to each star simply by using the relation $`mM=5\times \left(\mathrm{log}(d)1\right)+A`$. The typical uncertainty on the distance is 20%. The left panels of Fig. 11 show the obtained extinction $`A(V)`$ versus the calculated distance. The mean extinction of the RR Lyræ is $`A(V)3.6\pm 0.2`$ magnitude towards $`\theta `$ Mus and $`3.3\pm 0.1`$ towards $`\gamma `$ Nor, with a dispersion of 1 magnitude. The mean distance of the RR Lyræ is $``$4.7$`\pm `$ 0.3 kpc towards $`\theta `$ Mus and $`5.3\pm 0.2`$ kpc towards $`\gamma `$ Nor. The dispersion of the values is 1.4 kpc which reflects the spread in distance of disc stars. The disc population contributes to the sources of the microlensing events that we observe in the Galactic plane. A model based on the distribution of matter in the disc and the luminosity function of neighbooring stars has been used in Derue, (1999) to estimate the distance of the star population from the disc. The distance of RR Lyræ is in good agreement with the one obtained with this model.

## 6 Conclusion

In the course of our program dedicated to microlensing events, we have devoted a fraction of observing time to the search for variable stars in six directions of the Galactic plane. This exploratory campaign, that lasted three months, led to the discovery of 1,362 variable stars. Among them we identified 9 Cepheids, 19 RR Lyræ, 34 Miras, 176 eclipsing binaries and 266 Semi-Regular variable stars. We have set up a catalogue of all of the 1,362 stars and cross-identified it with several other catalogues. In particular a comparison with the GCVS and the CKS91 catalogues shows that only a small fraction ($``$15%) of the objects that we have identified appear in those two. Among the stars most appropriate to be used as distance indicators, the Cepheids turned out to be too few to warrant a particular study. As far as RR Lyræ are concerned, we have determined their mean distance and found it to be $``$5 kpc. Yet the statistics being quite limited, we are considering pursuing this effort by launching a longer search for variable stars based on the results of this first campaign.

###### Acknowledgements.

The WCSTools package was made available to us thanks to the work of Doug Mink, NASA/GSFC, Harvard. The Skycat/Gaia tool is the result of a joint effort by the computer staff of ESO Garching and from the Starlink Project, UK.


text:
# The characterization of Gaussian operations and Distillation of Gaussian States

## I Introduction

Many applications in the field of quantum information require the ability of preparing general states and of performing arbitrary transformations with them. However, there are physical systems where the set of states that can be generated as well as the transformations that can be implemented are very restricted. For example, in quantum optical systems linear transformations involving beam splitters, phase plates, homodyne measurements and polarizers are readily implemented whereas more general ones can only be performed with a low efficiency. Moreover, with these tools and a squeezer one can generate only a small class of states, the so–called Gaussian states. Despite this fact, in these systems a surprising richness of quantum information protocols has been found within the realm of linear optics: entanglement generation Reid , teleportation CVQTelTh , key distribution CVQKD , quantum error correction CVQEC , cloning CVQClon , some of which have already been implemented allexperiments . For the moment it is not known how (or whether) important operations such as entanglement distillation or a (useful) depolarization of continuous variable states can be implemented with linear optics Opa99 ; Par99 ; Duan99b ; DCVS ; Thesis ; LOG . This raises the question which transformations can in general be realized by the concatenation of such operations, i.e. the tools currently available in the lab.

A partial answer to this question is contained in a mathematical paper written in the seventies DVV . There a subclass of operations that transform Gaussian states into Gaussian states have been mathematically characterized, namely those which are *trace-preserving*. The relation of these maps to some of the experimentally feasible operations has been discussed by Eisert and Plenio in LOG , and used by these authors to derive a criterion for the interconvertibility of two-mode Gaussian states under feasible local transformations. Unfortunately, the set of operations considered in Ref. DVV  does not include measurements (which are not trace-preserving). However, one of the main strengths of linear optics is the highly efficient measurement of the quadrature observables $`X`$ and $`P`$ which homodyne detection affords. Furthermore, measurements followed by classical communication have been seen to be an essential ingredient in certain basic quantum information protocols such as quantum teleportation QBQTelTh  or entanglement distillation Ben96 . Thus it is important to find a mathematical formulation of the physical actions that can be applied to Gaussian states in which also not trace-preserving operations (measurements) are included FN0 .

In this work we give a full answer to this problem by providing a simple description of all operations of this sort. As an application we discuss the question of distillation of Gaussian states by local Gaussian operations and classical communication (LOGCC). In this context, it was recently shown nogo  that the entanglement of a symmetric two-mode Gaussian state of two parties cannot be increased with the help of another copy of that state and a homodyne measurement. Here we give a proof that distillation is not possible for an arbitrary number of modes per site, general Gaussian states and general Gaussian operations.

This paper is organized as follows. In Section II we fix our notation for Gaussian states, setting the stage for the results given in the following sections. Section III contains the main results of this paper: we give a characterization of all completely positive maps that transform Gaussian states into Gaussian states (Gaussian operations). We show that they can all be implemented with the currently available means. We derive a simple, compact form of these maps. In Section IV we consider Gaussian operations on bipartite systems; we classify them with respect to their locality and separability properties. As an application of the methods introduced before, we show that Gaussian states cannot be distilled by using Gaussian LOCC. In Section V we describe positive Gaussian maps and characterize them completely. Appendix A contains some material on a new entanglement measure for Gaussian states introduced and used in Sec. IV.

## II Gaussian States

We consider the Hilbert space of $`n`$ harmonic oscillators $`=\mathrm{L}^\text{}2(^n)`$. A Gaussian state is described by a density operator $`\rho `$ whose characteristic function Petz  $`\chi _\rho (x):=\mathrm{tr}[\rho W(x)]`$ is a Gaussian function in $`x^{2n}`$ (or, equivalently, by a Gaussian Wigner function, which is related to $`\chi `$ by a symplectic Fourier transformation). The operators

$$W(x)=\mathrm{exp}\left[ix^TR\right],$$
(1)
are the *Weyl operators* (displacement operators) and $`R=(X_1,P_1,X_2,\mathrm{},P_n)`$, with $`[X_k,P_l]=i\delta _{kl}`$. Since the density operator is bounded, we can write without loss of generality Perelomov

$$\rho =\pi ^n_{^{2n}}𝑑xe^{\frac{1}{4}x^T\gamma x+id^Tx}W(x),$$
(2)
where we have used $`\mathrm{tr}[W(x)]=\pi ^n\delta (x)`$ Perelomov  to normalize $`\rho `$. Occasionally, we will denote $`\rho `$ as in Eq. (2) by $`\rho _{\gamma ,d}`$. The matrix $`\gamma =\gamma ^TiJ_n`$ is a $`2n\times 2n`$ real matrix called *correlation matrix* (CM) and $`d`$ is a $`2n`$ real vector called *displacement*. These two quantities fully characterize the Gaussian state $`\rho `$. The *symplectic matrix* $`J_n`$ is

$$J_n=\underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}J_1,J_1=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right),$$
(3)
(We will omit the index whenever there is no risk of confusion.) Note that the CM usually contains all the interesting information about the properties of the state which are useful for quantum information in general; in particular, the entanglement properties of a Gaussian state is solely determined by its CM. Thus, in some parts of this paper in order to simplify the notation we will omit the displacement from our discussions when it does not play a relevant role.

Of course, Gaussian states can be also defined for composite systems, e.g. those whose density operators are in $`()()`$. An important example of a Gaussian state is the maximally entangled state $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ footnote . The state $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is the limit $`r\mathrm{}`$ of Gaussian states ($`n`$ identical two–mode squeezed states) with CM

$$\gamma (r)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A_r& C_r\\ C_r& A_r\end{array}\right)$$
(4)
where $`A_r=\mathrm{cosh}r\mathrm{𝟙}`$ and $`C_r=\mathrm{sinh}r\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ are $`2n\times 2n`$ square matrices, and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=\text{diag}(1,1,1,1,\mathrm{},1).$$
(5)
The density operator of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is a projector on the improper state vector $`|\mathrm{\Phi }_{12}_{k0}|k_1|k_2`$.

## III Gaussian Operations

Physical actions are mathematically characterized in terms of completely positive (cp) maps acting on the corresponding density operators. The best way of characterizing them is using the isomorphism between cp maps (physical actions) and positive operators (unnormalized states) isomorphism .

### III.1 General form of Gaussian operations

Given a cp map $``$ acting on bounded operators $`()`$, we define the positive operator $`E()()`$ as follows

$$E_{12}=(\mathrm{𝟙})(|\mathrm{\Phi }_{12}\mathrm{\Phi }|).$$
(6)
This equation has a direct physical meaning. It tells us that given $``$, we can always obtain the state $`E`$ by preparing a maximally entangled state and acting with the map on the second subsystem. Conversely, given the state $`E()()`$ and a state $`\rho ()`$, if we measure the second subsystem of $`E`$ and $`\rho `$ in the “Bell basis”, i.e., an orthonormal basis of maximally entangled states containing $`|\mathrm{\Phi }`$, and obtain the result corresponding to the state $`|\mathrm{\Phi }`$, then the resulting state is $`(\rho )`$. Thus, given the state $`E`$ we can always implement (probabilistically) the map $``$ provided we can perform Bell measurements. This can be viewed as “teleporting $`\rho `$ through the gate $``$telepQC . In formulas, we have

$$(\rho )\mathrm{tr}_2[E_{12}^{T_2}\rho _2]=\mathrm{tr}_{23}(E_{12}\rho _3|\mathrm{\Phi }_{23}\mathrm{\Phi }|)$$
(7)
Thus, given a cp map we can generate the corresponding state and given the state we can physically implement $``$ (probabilistically) FN\_improper .

Now we define a Gaussian completely positive (g-cp) map, $`𝒢`$ by the properties that both $`𝒢`$ and $`\mathrm{𝟙}𝒢`$ map Gaussian states to Gaussian states. With the help of the isomorphism it is straight forward to characterize them. First, we use the fact that the state $`|\mathrm{\Phi }`$ appearing in (6) is Gaussian, so that the corresponding operator $`G`$ must be Gaussian useisomorphG . We write it as

$$G=_{^{4n}}𝑑xe^{\frac{1}{4}x^T\mathrm{\Gamma }x+iD^TxC}W(x).$$
(8)
Clearly $`G0`$ iff $`\mathrm{\Gamma },D,C`$ are real and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }iJ`$; that is, $`𝒢`$ is a g-cp map if the Gaussian operator isomorphic to $`𝒢`$ is described by a proper CM $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and, conversely, to each such operator corresponds a g-cp map $`𝒢`$. Since all Gaussian states can be generated (e.g., from the vacuum state) by unitary Gaussian operations and discarding subsystems Simo94  this shows that all Gaussian operations can be implemented by these means plus Bell measurements (homodyne detection).

Now, we determine the action of the map $`𝒢`$ on a general Gaussian state $`\rho `$ in terms of $`G`$. Apart from normalization, we have

$$𝒢:\rho _{\gamma ,d}\rho _{\gamma ^{},d^{}},$$
(9)
and we find for $`\gamma ^{},d^{}`$:

$`\gamma ^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_1\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{12}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_2+\gamma }}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{12}^T,`$ (10a)
$`d^{}`$ $`=`$ $`D_1+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{12}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_2+\gamma }}(D_2+d),`$ (10b)
where we have denoted

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }=(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Gamma }_1& \mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}\\ \mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}^T& \mathrm{\Gamma }_2\end{array}),D=\left(\begin{array}{c}D_1\\ D_2\end{array}\right),$$
(11)
and

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}=(\mathrm{𝟙}\mathrm{\Lambda })\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{𝟙}\mathrm{\Lambda }).$$
(12)
Thus, we have that all g-cp maps on $`()`$ are characterized by a correlation matrix $`\mathrm{\Gamma }iJ_{2n}`$ and a displacement vector $`D`$.

In order to derive Eqs. (10), we just use Eq. (7), replacing $`E_{12}`$ by $`G`$ and $`\rho _2`$ by a Gaussian state $`\rho _{\gamma ,d}`$ as in Eq. (2). In evaluating the trace we use the commutation relation $`W(x)W(y)=e^{i/2x^TJy}W(x+y)`$ Petz  and $`\mathrm{tr}[W(x)]\delta (x)`$ to obtain

$$\rho _{\gamma ^{},d^{}}\mathrm{tr}_2(G^{T_2}\rho _{\gamma ,d}),$$
(13)
with $`\gamma ^{},d^{}`$ as in Eqs. (10).

### III.2 Examples

How to interpret the operation described by $`(\mathrm{\Gamma },D)`$? To better understand what actions $`(\mathrm{\Gamma },D)`$ describe, we now briefly discuss how the familiar Gaussian operations are contained in our formalism. To do this, we apply these operations to the first subsystem of the maximally entangled Gaussian state $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ with CM $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=lim_r\mathrm{}\gamma (r)`$, with $`\gamma (r)`$ as in Eq. (4).

Obviously, the identity operation corresponds to the maximally entangled state $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, i.e., to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=lim_r\gamma (r),D=0`$. Now, performing a displacement operation on $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ leaves the CM unchanged, but produces a displacement $`D=(D_1,0)`$. Now we turn to the trace-preserving g-cp maps considered in DVV . These describe all actions that can be performed on $`\rho `$ by first adding ancillary systems in Gaussian states, then performing unitary Gaussian transformations on the whole system, and finally discarding the ancillas. On the level of CMs these operations were shown to be described by $`\gamma M^T\gamma M+N`$. A Weyl operator $`W(x)`$ is mapped to $`(detM)^1e^{1/4x^T(M^1)^TNM^1x}W(M^1x)`$ by these operations. It then follows that the Gaussian operator that corresponds to this operation has the CM

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }=\underset{r\mathrm{}}{lim}\left(\begin{array}{cc}M^TA_rM+N& M^TC_r\\ C_rM& A_r\end{array}\right).$$

Using formulas (10) gives $`\gamma ^{}=lim_rM^TA_rM+NM^TC_r\mathrm{\Lambda }(\mathrm{\Lambda }A_r\mathrm{\Lambda }+\gamma )^1\mathrm{\Lambda }C_rM`$. For $`r\mathrm{}`$ we have $`(\mathrm{\Lambda }A_r\mathrm{\Lambda }+\gamma )^1A_r^1A_r^1\gamma A_r^1+o(\mathrm{cosh}r)^3`$ which yields the desired result FN2 .

Finally, we consider an example of Gaussian measurements. The typical measurement is homodyne detection, which realizes the von Neumann measurement of the operator $`X`$. It has been shown before Leonhardt  that with the use of an ancillary system and a beam splitter, homodyne measurements may be used to realize the generalized measurement corresponding to the positive-operator-valued measure (POVM) $`\{|\alpha \alpha |,\alpha \}`$, where $`|\alpha `$ is a coherent state, i.e. in the language of CMs a state with CM $`\gamma =\mathrm{𝟙}`$ and displacement $`d=(\mathrm{Re}\alpha ,\mathrm{Im}\alpha )`$. Since every other pure Gaussian state can be obtained from $`|\alpha `$ by Gaussian unitaries, this implies that *all* POVMs of the form $`\{|\gamma ,d\gamma ,d|:d^{2n}\}`$ can be performed with homodyne detection and suitable pre-processing.

To see which CM $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ corresponds to the measurement of $`|\gamma ,d\gamma ,d|`$ we apply it to $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. In order to get an interesting result, we perform only a partial measurement, i.e. we consider an $`(n+m)`$-mode system and measure only the last $`m`$ modes. The corresponding operator is

$$E=\gamma ,d\left|\mathrm{\Phi }\right|\gamma ,d,$$

where $`|\gamma ,d`$ describes a pure Gaussian state of $`m`$ modes. Expressing $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ in terms of Weyl operators, replacing $`\gamma ,d\left|W(x)\right|\gamma ,d`$ by $`e^{1/4x^T\gamma xid^Tx}`$ and integrating over the modes measured we obtain a CM

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}A_r& C_r& 0\\ C_r& A_r& 0\\ 0& 0& \gamma ^1\end{array}\right)$$
(14)
and a displacement $`D=(0,0,d)^T`$. Note that the first row corresponds to system “1”, while the second and third row refer to system “2”. This represents a straight forward generalization of the situation considered in Section III to maps which decrease the number of modes present. Evaluating Eq. (7) for a $`n+m`$ mode Gaussian state with CM $`\gamma `$

$$\gamma =\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& C\\ C^T& B\end{array}\right),$$

we obtain FN2

$$\gamma ^{}=AC\frac{1}{B+\gamma _p}C^T,$$
(15a)
$$d^{}=\frac{1}{2}C\frac{1}{B+\gamma _p}d,$$
(15b)
which corresponds to the change in CM derived in nogo  for projections into pure Gaussian states. Homodyne detection itself represents the limiting case in which the CM $`\gamma _p`$ becomes infinitely squeezed. In this limit, the inverse in Eqs. (15) is to be understood as the pseudo-inverse (inverse on the range).

In general, *noise-free Gaussian operations* (unitaries and von Neumann measurements) correspond to *pure state CMs* $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and noise added to the CM describing the operation directly translates into noise added to the output state, i.e., we have that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}=\mathrm{\Gamma }+P\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ implies that $`G_\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}(\gamma )G_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\gamma )\gamma iJ`$. To see this, consider the operation $`𝒢_\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ and write $`G`$ in Eq. (13) as a mixture of states with CM $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. This shows that the state $`𝒢_\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}(\rho _{\gamma ,d})`$ is a Gaussian mixture of states $`𝒢_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\rho _{\gamma ,d+d_2})`$ displaced by $`d_1`$, where $`x=(d_1,d_2)`$ are distributed according to a probability distribution proportional to $`\mathrm{exp}(1/4x^TP^1x)`$. But since a displacement $`d_2`$ of the input state does only affect the displacement of the output state \[cf. Eqs. (10)\], it follows that $`𝒢_\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}(\rho _{\gamma ,d})`$ is nothing but a Gaussian mixture of states $`𝒢_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\rho _{\gamma ,d})`$ displaced by some value $`y`$ which is distributed according to a Gaussian distribution with covariance depending on $`P`$ and $`\gamma `$. Thus the operation $`𝒢_\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ could be realized (for known $`\gamma `$) by first performing $`𝒢_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and then performing random displacements to add the appropriate noise, which proves the assertion. Since displacements can be done locally, this becomes particularly useful in the discussion of entanglement distillation with Gaussian means below.

### III.3 Deterministic Operations

In general, the transformation Eq. (9) is not trace-preserving. This is related to the fact that we have considered only one of the possible Bell measurements in Eq. (7). The projector $`|\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Phi }|`$ can be extended to a POVM by considering all displacements $`W(x)|\mathrm{\Phi },x^{4n}`$. Using the second relation in Eq. (7) it is easy to see that if $`𝒢_{\mathrm{\Gamma },0}(\rho )=\mathrm{tr}_{23}(E_{12}\rho _3|\mathrm{\Phi }_{23}\mathrm{\Phi }|)`$ then $`𝒢_{\mathrm{\Gamma },D}(\rho )=\mathrm{tr}_{23}[E_{12}\rho _3W(D)|\mathrm{\Phi }_{23}\mathrm{\Phi }|W(D)]`$, i.e. $`D`$ can be understood as the (continuous) output of the Bell-measurement implementing $`𝒢`$.

Note that $`D`$ has no influence on the CM of the resulting state. Hence, provided $`\gamma `$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ are known, $`𝒢`$ can be turned into a trace-preserving operation by postprocessing: conditional on the measurement result $`(D_1,D_2)`$ the corresponding displacement $`D_1+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{12}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_2+\gamma )^1D_2`$ can be undone, leading to a *deterministic* transformation that maps every Gaussian state $`\rho _{\gamma ,d}`$ to $`\rho _{\gamma ^{},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{12}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_2+\gamma )^1d}`$ with certainty. Note that this is true even if $`\gamma `$ is a state on a multipartite system, since displacements can be done locally. It is a curious feature of Gaussian operations that even measurements do not change the CM non-deterministically.

## IV Bipartite systems. Applications

In this section we consider Gaussian maps $`𝒢`$ on bipartite systems. In this situation it is interesting to distinguish whether $`𝒢`$ can be implemented with *local operations* on the subsystems A and B (possibly enhanced by classical communication, LOCC) or whether interaction between the system is necessary. Our formalism yields a very convenient form for any local Gaussian operations, and allows to determine the nonlocal properties for any given Gaussian map.

As an application we use our formalism to show that entanglement distillation is not possible with Gaussian means. This extends the results of nogo  to any number of modes, all kinds of Gaussian operations, and all kinds of Gaussian states. Note that, there are other means of performing distillation which do not require Gaussian maps as long as a Kerr non–linearity or photodetection are available Duan99b ; Opa99 . However, at the moment these protocols still pose considerable experimental challenges and none has been implemented to date.

### IV.1 Local Gaussian maps assisted by classical communication

To determine whether $`𝒢`$ can be implemented with *local operations* on the subsystems A and B (possibly enhanced by classical communication, LOCC) or whether interaction between the system is necessary we can use the the ideas of Ref. paperciracetal  (which extend the Jamiołkowski isomorphism to bipartite systems). This allows to read off the answer to this question from the Gaussian state $`G`$ isomorphic to $`𝒢`$. If $`G`$ is separable, then it can be generated by local action and classical communication. Note that following the discussion at the end of the previous section this implementation can be done *deterministically* provided the CM of the state on which we act is known.

If $`G`$ is entangled, two cases can be distinguished: is $`G`$ has positive partial transpose (ppt), the corresponding map can be implemented with a so-called ppt-preserving channel, otherwise full-fledged quantum interaction between A and B is needed.

The separability criterion for Gaussian states Sim99 ; GSepCrit  allows us to decide for every given map, whether it is separable GSepCrit , ppt-preserving Sim99  or neither. Moreover, the characterization of separable CMs given in GBE , namely that $`\gamma `$ is separable iff $`\gamma _A,\gamma _BiJ`$ such that $`\gamma \gamma _A\gamma _B`$ implies that – except for added correlated noise – all Gaussian LOCC operations are of product form.

### IV.2 Gaussian states cannot be distilled with Gaussian local operations and classical communication

Entanglement distillation is a process in which two separate parties A and B transform a large number of copies of a bipartite mixed entangled state $`\rho _{AB}`$ (jointly written as $`\rho _{AB}^n`$) into a state $`\psi _{AB}^{(n)}`$, which, as $`n`$ goes to infinity approaches a pure maximally entangled state. To this end, A and B are allowed to perform arbitrary local operations (correlated by classical communication) on their respective part of $`\rho _{AB}^n`$. In the following we show that such a process is not possible when $`\rho _{AB}`$ is Gaussian and only Gaussian operations are allowed.

We consider a bipartite system composed of subsystems A and B and a partially entangled Gaussian state with CM $`\gamma _{AB}`$ and want to check if a separable Gaussian map can increase the entanglement. To this end we define a simple function $`V(\gamma )`$ to quantify the entanglement of a general bipartite CM. Let $`V(\gamma _{AB})`$ be the largest value $`p1`$ such that $`\gamma _{AB}p(\gamma _A\gamma _B)`$, for some CMs $`\gamma _A`$ and $`\gamma _B`$. Note that for a maximally entangled Gaussian state $`V=0`$ \[this and further properties of $`V(\gamma )`$ which are used in the following are proved in Appendix A\], and therefore the goal of a Gaussian distillation protocol would be to decrease $`V(\gamma _{AB})`$. In general one would allow an arbitrary number copies of the state with CM $`\gamma _{AB}`$, i.e. a state with the CM $`_{k=1}^n\gamma _{AB}`$. As shown in App. A, $`V`$ does not change when adding more copies of the same state. The question then is, whether there is a local Gaussian operation $`𝒢`$ that produces from these states an output state $`\gamma _{AB}^{}`$ with $`V(\gamma _{AB}^{})<V(\gamma _{AB})`$ or even allows to reach $`V0`$ in the limit of infinitely many copies.

In the following we show that with local Gaussian operations it is impossible to decrease $`V`$ at all. Our proof makes no assumptions on the size or type of the entangled state considered or the local Gaussian operations performed. In particular, it covers any number of copies of a $`n\times n`$-mode input state.

We consider a separable Gaussian completely positive map acting on two systems A and B. As discussed above, the action of such a map on the correlation matrix $`\gamma _{AB}`$ is completely characterized by another correlation matrix $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acting on an extended space of systems A, A’, B and B’. The fact that the map is separable implies that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{AA^{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{BB^{}}+P`$, where $`P`$ is a positive matrix. In light of the discussion at the end of Subsec. III.2 this means that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ can be implemented by first performing the (completely uncorrelated) operation corresponding to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{AA^{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{BB^{}}`$ and then performing (classically correlated) random displacements of the resulting state according to a probability distribution depending on $`P`$ and the CM $`\gamma _{AB}`$ of the input state. Since these displacements do not increase the entanglement, we can concentrate on the effect of the product transformation $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{AA^{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{BB^{}}`$.

Now let

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{AA^{}}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A_1& C_A\\ C_A^T& A_2\end{array}\right),\mathrm{\Gamma }_{BB^{}}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}B_1& C_B\\ C_B^T& B_2\end{array}\right).$$
(16)
Let us denote by $`\gamma _{AB}^{}`$ the correlation matrix of A and B after the action of the map $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{AA^{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{BB^{}}`$. Then we have $`\gamma _{AB}^{}R_AR_B`$, where

$$R_A=\stackrel{~}{A}_1\stackrel{~}{C}_A\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{A}_2+p\gamma _A}\stackrel{~}{C}_A^T\stackrel{~}{A}_1\stackrel{~}{C}_A\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{A}_2+piJ}\stackrel{~}{C}_A^T,$$
(17)
and similarly for $`R_B`$. Now, we use that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{AA^{}}0,i(JJ)`$ since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a CM and therefore $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{AA^{}}p[iJ(iJ)]`$. This implies that the RHS of Eq. (17) is $`ipJ`$ and we immediately obtain that $`\gamma _A^{}1/pR_A`$ is a correlation matrix. From this follows that $`\gamma _{AB}^{}p(\gamma _A^{}\gamma _B^{})`$ and therefore $`V(\gamma _{AB}^{})V(\gamma _{AB})`$.

What does this imply for distillation? First, it proves that the maximally entangled state cannot be approached even asymptotically (i.e., in the limit when initially infinitely many copies of $`\gamma _{AB}`$ are available). This follows directly from the fact (cf. App. A) that $`V(\gamma _{AB}\gamma _{AB})=V(\gamma _{AB})`$, i.e., $`V`$ is invariant when adding more copies of the same resource. So entanglement distillation of Gaussian states with Gaussian means is impossible. More generally, $`V(\gamma _{AB})`$ puts a bound on all state transformations that can be achieved by Gaussian LOCC \[and even Gaussian LOCC supplemented by an unlimited amount of auxiliary entangled Gaussian states of $`V(\rho _{aux})V(\gamma _{AB})`$\].

However, the result still leaves room for interesting entanglement transformations with Gaussian means. The best thing that could happen – respecting the bound set by $`V_{min}=V(\gamma _{AB})`$ – is to have the *pure* entangled state with $`V(\rho _{pure})=V_{min}`$. Our proof does not rule out the possibility of “entanglement purification”, i.e., of transforming a large number of Gaussian mixed entangled states into a (asymptotically) pure entangled state with the same value of $`V`$ with Gaussian means. First calculations indicate that this might indeed be possible. These results will be reported elsewhere.

## V Gaussian positive maps

In this Section we show how to extend the approach presented in Section III to include Gaussian *positive* but not completely positive (g-p) maps. To this end, we first define the set of Gaussian operators, generalizing Gaussian density matrices to not self-adjoint operators. Every operator $`A()`$ is completely determined by $`\chi _A(x):=\mathrm{tr}[AW(x)]`$ Petz . It follows that $`A`$ may be written in terms of $`\chi _A`$ as Perelomov

$$A=\pi ^n_^n𝑑x\chi _A(x)W(x),$$
(18)
We define the set of Gaussian operators on $``$ by

$$𝒬():=\{A:A=_{^{2n}}𝑑xe^{\frac{1}{4}x^T\gamma x+ib^Txc}W(x)\},$$
(19)
where $`\gamma ^T=\gamma M_{2n}(),b^{2n}`$, and $`c`$. It is straight forward to check that $`A`$ is (1) *bounded* iff $`\mathrm{Re}\gamma >0`$; (2) self-adjoint iff $`\mathrm{Im}\gamma =0,\mathrm{Im}b=0,\mathrm{Im}c=0`$; and (3) *positive* iff s.a. and $`\gamma iJ`$; and (4) $`\mathrm{tr}(A)=\pi ^ne^c`$, where $`\mathrm{tr}[W(x)]=\pi ^n\delta (x),x^{2n}`$ was used. To prove (3), consider one mode, $`\gamma =g\mathrm{𝟙}_2`$. The corresponding operator is $`g0`$ diagonal in the number basis (for $`g1`$ it describes the well-known thermal states of a field mode) and the eigenvalues $`n\left|A_g\right|n`$ are seen to be all positive iff $`g1`$, otherwise odd numbers correspond to negative eigenvalues. Finally, recall that all selfadjoint Gaussian operators can be transformed into (a tensor product of Gaussian operators of) that form by quasifree unitaries, performing the normal mode decomposition of $`\rho `$ or, equivalently, the symplectic diagonalization of $`\gamma `$, which concludes the proof.

Now we turn to linear maps on $`()`$. Generalizing Section III we define a *Gaussian map* as a linear map $`𝒢:()(^{})`$ that maps Gaussian operators to Gaussian operators, i.e., $`𝒢[𝒬()]𝒬(^{})`$. Again, we can use the isomorphism of isomorphism  to show that all Gaussian maps on $`()`$ correspond to Gaussian operators on $`()()`$. i.e., they may be described by a matrix $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, a vector $`D`$, and a phase/normalization constant $`C`$. Then we can use Eq. (7) to calculate how the Gaussian map $`𝒢`$ corresponding to $`(\mathrm{\Gamma },D,C)`$ acts on the Weyl operator $`W(x)`$. One finds

$$𝒢[W(x)]=𝑑ye^{\frac{1}{4}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{x}{y}\right)^T\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{x}{y}\right)+i\stackrel{~}{D}^T\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{x}{y}\right)C}W(y),$$

where $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }},\stackrel{~}{D}`$ belong to the partial transpose of the operator $`G`$ isomorphic to $`𝒢`$.

One quickly convinces oneself that the map $`𝒢`$ is selfadjoint, that is $`𝒢(A^{})^{}=𝒢(A)`$ iff $`G`$ is selfadjoint, i.e., iff $`\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Gamma }=0,\mathrm{Im}D=0,\mathrm{Im}C=0`$.

A Gaussian map $`𝒢`$ is called a *Gaussian positive map* (g-p map) iff it maps $`𝒬()_+`$ to $`𝒬()_+`$. In terms of matrices this means that $`𝒢`$ is g-positive iff $`𝒢(\gamma )iJ\gamma iJ`$. Expressing the action of $`G`$ through its matrix $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ this is equivalent to the condition

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_1\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{12}\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_2+\gamma }\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{12}^TiJ\gamma iJ.$$

Inverted this inequality it is seen to be equivalent to $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_1iJ`$ and

$$\gamma +\underset{M}{\underset{}{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_2\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{12}^T\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_1iJ}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{12}}}0\gamma iJ,$$
(20)
which can now be written in a $`\gamma `$-independent way as

$$\text{min}_{z^{2n}}\text{max}\{z^{}(M+iJ)z,z^{}(MiJ)z\}0.$$
(21)
To see that this is equivalent to Cond. (20) note that for any $`z=z_r+iz_i^{2n}`$ there exists a symplectic map $`S`$ such that $`z^{}SS^Tz=|iz^{}Jz|=2|z_r^TJz_i|=c^2`$; this can be seen immediately by extending $`\{s_1=z_r/c,s_2=z_i/c\}`$ to a symplectic basis $`\{s_k\}`$ and defining $`S`$ by $`Ss_k=e_k`$, where $`e_k`$ refers to the canonical basis. Therefore, if cond. (20) is to hold for all $`\gamma `$, it holds in particular for $`\gamma =S^TS`$.

The minimum of these maxima can for given $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be efficiently sought numerically, thus providing a practical characterization of all positive Gaussian maps. We emphasize, that such a practical characterization of positive maps is not currently available for general maps on $`d`$-level systems.

Condition (21) says that the matrix $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of a positive map can be such that neither $`\stackrel{~}{N}:=\mathrm{\Gamma }iJ0`$ nor $`N:=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}iJ0`$, but there may be no vector $`x^{2n}`$ such that both $`x^T\stackrel{~}{N}x`$ and $`x^TNx`$ are negative. Examples are (i) cp maps ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }iJ`$, cf. Section III); (ii) maps for which $`\mathrm{\Gamma }iJ`$ but $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}iJ`$. These are *decomposable* positive maps (such as transposition); (iii) Gaussian maps for which neither $`N`$ nor $`\stackrel{~}{N}`$ is positive can also be constructed; these and the case of *non-decomposable* g-p maps, i.e. those that are not derived from transposition and the relation of g-positivity to the usual notion of positivity will be discussed elsewhere GPosMaps .

## VI Conclusions

We have characterized all the physical actions that can be performed using linear optics, squeezers, and homodyne measurements. We have also characterized those that can be implemented with LOCC and those that can be implemented using ppt-preserving maps. We have used the methods developed in the preceding sections to show that Gaussian states cannot be distilled by local Gaussian operations and classical communication.

Finally we have extended the definitions given before to general linear maps that map Gaussian states to Gaussian states and provided a complete characterization of *positive* Gaussian maps. This emphasizes that Gaussian states are worth studying not only because of their experimental relevance (which will reduce as non-Gaussian states become more accessible), but also on mathematical grounds that this class of states is simple enough to derive strong results while being large enough to encompass most (if not all) aspects of entanglement.

## Appendix A Properties of $`V(\gamma )`$

In this section we collect a number of useful properties of the quantity $`V(\gamma )`$ introduced in Sec. IVb. $`V`$ is defined for bipartite CMs $`\gamma `$ (or, equivalently, for Gaussian states $`\rho _{\gamma ,d}`$) as

$$V(\gamma ):=\mathrm{max}_{\gamma _A,\gamma _BiJ}\{p1:\gamma p(\gamma _A\gamma _B)\}.$$
(22)
(1) $`V`$ for more than one state:

$$V(\gamma \gamma ^{})=\mathrm{min}\{V(\gamma ),V(\gamma ^{})\},$$
(23)
that is, $`V`$ does not decrease when several entangled states are joined together. Rather, $`V`$ of the combined state is given by the smallest $`V`$ of the individual states.

To see this, let $`v=V(\gamma ),v^{}=V(\gamma ^{})`$. Clearly, $`V(\gamma \gamma ^{})\mathrm{min}\{v,v^{}\}`$ since by definition of $`V`$ we have $`\gamma \gamma ^{}v(\gamma _A\gamma _B)v^{}(\gamma _A^{}\gamma _B^{})\mathrm{min}\{v,v^{}\}(\gamma _A\gamma _B\gamma _A^{}\gamma _B^{})`$. On the other hand $`V(\gamma \gamma ^{})\mathrm{min}\{v,v^{}\}`$ since $`\gamma \gamma ^{}V(\gamma \gamma ^{})(\gamma _{AA^{}}\gamma _{BB^{}})`$ also holds for the reduced states with subsystems $`AB`$ or $`A^{}B^{}`$ traced out. More generally, it follows that $`V(_k\gamma _k)=\mathrm{min}\{V(\gamma _k)\}`$.

(2) An upper bound for $`V`$:

$$V(\rho _\gamma )\mathrm{min}\{\lambda _{min}(\gamma ),1\},$$
(24)
where $`\lambda _{min}(\gamma )`$ is the smallest symplectic eigenvalue (smaller than 1) of the CM $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$ of the partially transposed state $`\rho _\gamma ^{T_A}`$ FN\_neg . $`\lambda _{min}<1`$ is necessary and sufficient for the corresponding state to have a non-positive partial transpose.

(3) $`V`$ for the maximally entangled state $`|\mathrm{\Phi }`$:

$$V(\mathrm{\Phi })=\underset{r\mathrm{}}{lim}V(\gamma (r))=0,$$
(25)
since $`\lambda _{min}(\gamma (r))=e^r`$.

(4) $`V`$ and negativity Vida02 :  For $`1\times N`$ systems (i.e., in systems where no ppt-entanglement exists GBE ) we also have $`V(\rho )\lambda _{min}`$ since in that case $`\gamma /\lambda _{min}`$ has positive partial transpose and therefore is separable. This shows that $`V(\rho )`$ is related to the negativity measure of entanglement Vida02 , and for $`1\times N`$ systems $`\mathrm{log}_2[V(\rho _\gamma )]`$ coincides with the log-negativity (up to a factor). In contrast, for ppt-entangled Gaussian states GBE  $`V(\gamma )`$ is strictly smaller than 1, while the negativity of such states is zero ($`\lambda _{min}1`$).

(5) $`V`$ as a Gaussian measure of entanglement:  We have seen that $`V(\gamma )`$ does not decrease under local Gaussian operations. Hence it can be considered a measure of entanglement for Gaussian states. In view of (4), we see that $`V`$ does quantify both npt and ppt Gaussian entanglement – in contrast to most other measures of entanglement calculated to date.

(6) $`V`$ is computable:  It is worth pointing out that $`V(\gamma )`$ is also *computable*, as one can use the separability criterion derived in GSepCrit  to find the largest $`p`$ for which $`\gamma /p`$ is separable.

*Note added:*  Upon completion of this work we learned that Jaromír Fiurášek Fiurasek  independently arrived at a similar description of general Gaussian operations and, in particular, of Gaussian LOCCs.

###### Acknowledgements.

We acknowledge very valuable discussions with Jens Eisert. GG also thanks Jaromír Fiurášek for interesting and useful discussions. We acknowledge support by the European Union under the project EQUIP (contract IST-1999-11053).