text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Thermal effective actions are in general non-local in coordinate space because the temperature-dependent Green functions contain parts which are non-analytic at the origin of the momentum-frequency space. In a theory with two interacting scalar fields, one integrates out one of them to find the effective action for the other. At finite temperature, provided the coupling is weak, one usually proceeds by applying perturbation theory, and then making an expansion in powers of frequency and momentum in order to obtain a local effective Lagrangian. It is this latter expansion which leads to results which are not uniquely defined but depend on the path on the frequency-momentum plane through which the origin is approached. For example, when the perturbation is truncated at the self-energy level, the self-energy is non-analytic at the origin. The reason is that the expansion is around a singularity .

This effect was noticed for the first time by Abrahams and Tsuneto in the 60’s, in the context of BCS theory, while they were studying time-dependent Ginzburg-Landau theory near zero temperature and near the critical temperature . Later it became clear that it is the origin of Debye screening and of plasma oscillations in QED . These two different physical phenomena correspond to two different ways of approaching the origin of the momentum-frequency plane. The effects of the non-analyticity have also been studied in QED3  and in QCD . The non-analyticity is also present in the graviton self-energy  and in higher-order graviton diagrams . Even in the much simpler case of interacting scalars the non-analyticity of the self-energy persists . In the case of interacting scalars, an interesting remark is that, whenever the internal propagators in a loop have different masses, the self-energy is analytic at the origin . The reason is that the singularity is not at the origin anymore, allowing thus a uniquely defined expansion around the origin.

This paper is based on the simple observation that an essential step of the renormalization group method (RG) applied to a theory with a self-interacting field, is to split the field in slow and fast components, and integrate out the fast field obtaining thus an effective action for the slow field . Therefore, according to the above discussion about thermal effective actions, when RG techniques are applied in the context of thermal field theory, we anticipate that effects originating in the non-analyticity will arise.

We choose to examine this aspect of RG in the context of a 3-dimensional homogeneous self-interacting bosonic gas with weak repulsive interactions and discuss its possible physical significance in this case. However our analysis and conclusions should hold whenever RG is used at finite temperature. This choice of system was motivated by the renewed interest in the Bose-Einstein condensation due to its recent experimental realization. For the interacting gas, the approach which is most often used is that of Bogoliubov. However, this is just a mean-field type method and, in principle, one can improve upon it by using more sophisticated techniques. One possibility near the critical region is the renormalization group .

In the case of the homogeneous gas, there is an extra, more important reason for looking for alternatives to the Bogoliubov approach. In the critical region, the Bogoliubov theory simply does not work because there are fluctuations around the mean-field that cannot be treated perturbatively. This happens because, as the temperature approaches the critical temperature $`T_c`$, the thermal cloud density develops an infrared singularity and thus diverges as the momentum tends to zero .

In section 2, we introduce the basics of the BEC formalism above the critical region. We then apply Wilsonian renormalization and derive the flow equations for the parameters of the Lagrangian. We point out the non-analytic structure of the RG correction to the interaction term (vertex) and follow this non-analyticity as it propagates to the flow equation for the interaction.

In section 3, we calculate the non-trivial fixed pont of the system of the flow equations and find the critical exponent for the correlation length. We examine the way the non-analyticity affects the fixed point. We note that taking the non-analyticity into account shifts the value of the critical exponent closer to the experimental result.

In section 4, we compare our work with  where the issue of non-analyticity in the context of renormalization is also discussed. We point out that the conclusions of  hold only at $`T=0`$ whereas the non-analytic behaviour which we are investigating in this paper is purely thermal and vanishes at zero temperature, thus being completely independent of the non-analyticity discussed in .

In section 5, we present our conclusions.

## 2 Non-analyticity in the uncondensed phase

When the two-body collisions between bosons are taken to be low-momentum or s-wave, the path integral representation of the partition function of the homogeneous interacting Bose-gas is given by

$$Z(\mu ,\beta ,V,g)\mathrm{Tr}e^{\beta (\widehat{H}\mu \widehat{N})}=\delta [\varphi ,\varphi ^{}]e^{S[\varphi ,\varphi ^{}]}$$
(1)
with the action

$$S[\varphi ,\varphi ^{}]=\frac{1}{\mathrm{}}_0^\mathrm{}\beta 𝑑\tau _Vd^D𝐱\left[\varphi ^{}(\tau ,𝐱)[\mathrm{}\frac{}{\tau }\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}^2\mu ]\varphi (\tau ,𝐱)+\frac{1}{2}g|\varphi (\tau ,𝐱)|^4\right].$$
(2)
In the low-momentum approximation the interparticle interaction can be described by the zero-momentum component of the Fourier transform of the two-body interaction potential. Thus, within this approximation, a repulsive, short-range potential can be characterized by a positive interaction strength $`g`$. In three spatial dimensions this interaction strength is related to the positive scattering length $`a`$ of the interparticle interaction by the familiar relation $`g=4\pi \mathrm{}^2a/m`$. The chemical potential is denoted by $`\mu `$. The case $`\mu <0`$ holds for $`T>T_c`$ and corresponds to the uncondensed phase whereas $`\mu >0`$ describes the condensate which is formed when $`T<T_c`$ . In this paper we will deal only with the uncondensed phase. Starting from (2) we can derive the renormalization group equations for $`g`$ and $`\mu `$. This set of coupled differential equations can then be used for the study of universal as well as non-universal properties of the gas . In the following we will set $`\mathrm{}=1`$.

In order to implement the first step of the RG procedure (Kadanoff transformation), we split the field $`\varphi (x)`$ into a long-wavelength component $`\varphi _<(x)`$ and into a short-wavelength component $`\delta \varphi _>(x)`$. The short-wavelength field involves Fourier components which are contained only in an infinitesimally thin shell in momentum space of thickness $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1dl)|𝐩|\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ near the cutoff $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, whereas the long-wavelength field has all its Fourier components in the sphere whose center is at the origin of the momentum space and its radius is $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1dl)`$. We impose no cutoff on the frequency and apply the Wilsonian technique of consecutive infinitesimal shell integration only to the momentum and not to the frequency .

We denote the volume of the shell by $`\delta V_𝐩`$, the volume of the sphere by $`V_𝐩`$. The coordinate space volume is denoted by $`V`$. For simplicity we will be referring to $`\varphi _<(x)`$ as the lower or slow field and to $`\delta \varphi _>(x)`$ as the upper or fast field. Whenever more compact notation is required we will be making use of the following:

$$x=(\tau ,𝐱),p=(p_0^n,𝐩)\mathrm{with}p_0^n=2\pi n/\beta ,$$

$$𝑑x=_0^\beta 𝑑\tau _Vd^3𝐱,𝑑p=\frac{1}{\beta }\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{d^3𝐩}{(2\pi )^3}.$$

We integrate out the upper field and are left with an effective action for the lower field

$$S_{\mathrm{eff}}[\varphi _<,\varphi _<^{}]=S[\varphi _<,\varphi _<^{}]+\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{TrLn}[1\widehat{G}^>\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}].$$
(3)
For details on the derivation of this result and the approximations involved see . The $`\mathrm{Tr}`$ denotes the trace in both the functional and the internal space of $`\widehat{G}^>\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}`$ whereas the $`\mathrm{tr}`$ denotes the trace only in the internal space (see below). The hat denotes that the corresponding quantity is a Schwinger-Fock operator ,

$$\widehat{G}^>(\widehat{p})=\left(\begin{array}{cc}B(\widehat{p})& 0\\ 0& B^{}(\widehat{p})\end{array}\right)$$

and

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(\widehat{x})=\frac{g}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}4\varphi _<^{}(\widehat{x})\varphi _<(\widehat{x})& 2\varphi _<(\widehat{x})\varphi _<(\widehat{x})\\ 2\varphi _<^{}(\widehat{x})\varphi _<^{}(\widehat{x})& 4\varphi _<^{}(\widehat{x})\varphi _<(\widehat{x})\end{array}\right)$$

with

$$B(\widehat{p})=B(\widehat{p}_0,\widehat{𝐩})=\frac{1}{i\widehat{p}_0+E(\widehat{𝐩})},E(\widehat{𝐩})=\frac{\widehat{𝐩}^2}{2m}\mu .$$
(4)
Note that the expression for $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}`$ contains the coupling $`g`$. This enables us to perform a perturbative expansion over $`g`$ in (3) in order to calculate it explicitly. We truncate this expansion to second order in $`g`$

$$\mathrm{TrLn}[1\widehat{G}^>\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}]\mathrm{Tr}[\widehat{G}^>\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}\frac{1}{2}(\widehat{G}^>\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }})^2].$$

The first trace is:

$`\mathrm{Tr}[\widehat{G}^>\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}]`$ $`={\displaystyle 𝑑x𝑑p\mathrm{tr}[G^>(p)\mathrm{\Sigma }(x)]}`$ (5)
$`={\displaystyle 𝑑x|\varphi _<(x)|^22g_{\delta V_𝐩}\frac{d^3𝐩}{(2\pi )^3}[1+2N[E(𝐩)]]}`$
where $`N[E(𝐩)]=[e^{\beta [E(𝐩)]}1]^1`$ is the Bose-Einstein distribution. We note that the first trace is quadratic in the modulus of the lower field and can therefore be interpreted as a correction to the chemical potential

$$d\mu =g_{\delta V_𝐩}\frac{d^3𝐩}{(2\pi )^3}[1+2N[E(𝐩)]].$$
(6)
The second trace is:

$`\mathrm{Tr}[\widehat{G}^>\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}\widehat{G}^>\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}]={\displaystyle 𝑑p𝑑k𝑑x𝑑ye^{i(pk)(yx)}\mathrm{tr}[G^>(p)\mathrm{\Sigma }(x)G^>(k)\mathrm{\Sigma }(y)]}=`$
$`{\displaystyle 𝑑p𝑑k𝑑x𝑑ye^{i(pk)(yx)}\frac{g^2}{4}}`$
$`[16B(p)B(k)\varphi _<^{}(x)\varphi _<(x)\varphi _<^{}(y)\varphi _<(y)+4B(p)B^{}(k)\varphi _<(x)\varphi _<(x)\varphi _<^{}(y)\varphi _<^{}(y)+`$
$`4B^{}(p)B(k)\varphi _<^{}(x)\varphi _<^{}(x)\varphi _<(y)\varphi _<(y)+16B^{}(p)B^{}(k)\varphi _<^{}(x)\varphi _<(x)\varphi _<^{}(y)\varphi _<(y)].`$
In order to simplify the above expression we change variables as follows:

1. In the second and fourth terms in the square brackets, $`pp`$ and $`kk`$.
2. In the second term, $`xy`$ and $`yx`$.

The second trace now becomes:

$`\mathrm{Tr}[\widehat{G}^>\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}\widehat{G}^>\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}]={\displaystyle 𝑑p𝑑k𝑑x𝑑y\frac{g^2}{4}}`$
$`\{[e^{i(pk)(yx)}+e^{i(kp)(yx)}]B(p)B(k)\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}16}\varphi _<^{}(x)\varphi _<(x)\varphi _<^{}(y)\varphi _<(y)`$
$`+2e^{i(pk)(yx)}B^{}(p)B(k)\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}4}\varphi _<^{}(x)\varphi _<^{}(x)\varphi _<(y)\varphi _<(y)\}.`$ (8)
Changing variables again, $`kq=kp`$, yields:

$`\mathrm{Tr}[\widehat{G}^>\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}\widehat{G}^>\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}]={\displaystyle 𝑑q𝑑x𝑑y\frac{g^2}{4}}`$
$`\{2e^{iq(yx)}J_1(q)\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}4}\varphi _<^{}(x)\varphi _<^{}(x)\varphi _<(y)\varphi _<(y)`$
$`+[e^{iq(yx)}+e^{iq(yx)}]J_2(q)\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}16}\varphi _<^{}(x)\varphi _<(x)\varphi _<^{}(y)\varphi _<(y)\}`$ (9)
where

$$J_1(q_0^m,𝐪)=𝑑pB^{}(p)B(p+q)\mathrm{and}J_2(q_0^m,𝐪)=𝑑pB(p)B(p+q).$$
(10)
We note that $`𝐩`$ is the momentum of the upper field (integrated over the infinitesimal shell around the cutoff) whereas $`𝐪`$ is the momentum of the lower field, Fig.1.

It is essential in the RG procedure, and in particular in the Kadanoff transformation, to recast the effective action obtained after integrating out the upper field in the form of the original action (2). The first trace is in a form that can be interpreted as a correction to the chemical potential. This is not the case however for the second trace; there are quartic products of fields but, unlike the four-field coupling term in the original action (2), these are non-local in coordinate space, thus not allowing the effective action to be recast in the form of the original action. In other words, though we start from an action containing interactions which are local in coordinate space, the RG procedure generates more general, non-local interactions.

This is a well-known feature of RG, namely to generate extra terms that do not appear in the original action and have a more general form in comparison to what we started with . Provided that these extra terms are not relevant they can, in most cases, for the purpose of calculating universal properties, be discarded.

In our case we can Taylor expand $`\varphi _<(y)`$ around $`\varphi _<(x)`$. If we truncate this expansion at leading order, $`\varphi _<(y)\varphi _<(x)`$, we remain within the family of local interactions we started with. This procedure is usually called derivative expansion and is physically relevant only when the lower field is slowly varying both in space and in time.

Wilsonian renormalization is compatible with the derivative expansion. The reason is that in Wilsonian renormalization we are interested in constructing an effective action for the slow field. This compatibility can also be seen from a more technical point of view; the derivative expansion of the lower field is equivalent to an expansion of $`J_1`$ and $`J_2`$ in powers of $`q_0`$ and $`𝐪`$ (this is easily seen from (9) doing integration by parts). This means that truncating the derivative expansion at higher than the leading order would give momentum and frequency dependent corrections to the interaction. However such terms are known to be irrelevant (see for example , page 128) and can therefore be omitted.

The second trace becomes:

$`\mathrm{Tr}[\widehat{G}^>\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}\widehat{G}^>\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}]={\displaystyle 𝑑x\frac{g^2}{4}}`$
$`\left\{\underset{q0}{lim}[2e^{iqx}J_1(q)]4\varphi _<^{}(x)\varphi _<^{}(x)\varphi _<(x)\varphi _<(x)+\underset{q0}{lim}[(e^{iqx}+e^{iqx})J_2(q)]16\varphi _<^{}(x)\varphi _<(x)\varphi _<^{}(x)\varphi _<(x)\right\}`$
which is a local expression that can be interpreted as a correction to the coupling term of the original action

$$dg=g^2\left\{\underset{(q_0^m,|𝐪|)(0,0)}{lim}[J_1(q_0^m,𝐪)]+4\underset{(q_0^m,|𝐪|)(0,0)}{lim}[J_2(q_0^m,𝐪)]\right\}.$$
(12)
It is at this point that the non-analyticity enters our discussion. Because we are at finite temperature, the integrals over frequencies in $`J_1`$ and $`J_2`$, $`I_1`$ and $`I_2`$ respectively, become sums which can be easily calculated when we turn them into integrals on the complex plane through Poisson summation

$$J_1(q_0^m,𝐪)=_{\delta V_𝐩}\frac{d^3𝐩}{(2\pi )^3}I_1(q_0^m,𝐪,𝐩)\mathrm{and}J_2(q_0^m,𝐪)=_{\delta V_𝐩}\frac{d^3𝐩}{(2\pi )^3}I_2(q_0^m,𝐪,𝐩)$$
(13)
where

$$I_1(q_0^m,𝐪,𝐩)=\frac{1}{\beta }\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}B^{}(p_0^n,𝐩)B(p_0^n+q_0^m,𝐩+𝐪))=\frac{1+N[E(𝐩)]+N[E(𝐩+𝐪)]}{E(𝐩+𝐪)+E(𝐩)iq_0^m},$$
(14)
$$I_2(q_0^m,𝐪,𝐩)=\frac{1}{\beta }\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}B(p_0^n,𝐩)B(p_0^n+q_0^m,𝐩+𝐪))=\frac{N[E(𝐩)]N[E(𝐩+𝐪)]}{E(𝐩+𝐪)E(𝐩)+iq_0^m}.$$
(15)
We have set $`\mathrm{exp}i\beta q_0^m=1`$ because $`q_0^m=2\pi m/\beta `$. In the following, we will suppress the superscript of $`q_0^m`$ for simplicity.

The first sum, $`I_1`$, is non-vanishing at $`T=0`$ and is known as the regular term. The second sum, $`I_2`$, is purely thermal and is usually called Landau term in the context of thermal field theory . We observe that the successive limits of $`J_1(q_0,𝐪)`$ coincide, i.e.

$$\underset{q_00}{lim}\underset{|𝐪|0}{lim}J_1(q_0,𝐪)=_{\delta V_𝐩}\frac{d^3𝐩}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{1}{2E(𝐩)}\left[1+2N[E(𝐩)]\right]=\underset{|𝐪|0}{lim}\underset{q_00}{lim}J_1(q_0,𝐪)$$
(16)
whereas the successive limits of $`J_2(q_0,𝐪)`$ do not

$$\underset{q_00}{lim}\underset{|𝐪|0}{lim}J_2(q_0,𝐪)=0\underset{|𝐪|0}{lim}\underset{q_00}{lim}J_2(q_0,𝐪)=_{\delta V_𝐩}\frac{d^3𝐩}{(2\pi )^3}\beta e^{\beta E(𝐩)}N^2[E(𝐩)].$$
(17)
The reason these two limits do not commute is that $`J_2`$ has a singularity at the origin of the momentum-frequency space . Of course, in the evaluation of the above limits, we interchanged the limits with both the integration over the momentum $`|𝐩|`$ and with the angular integration over $`\theta `$, so our conclusion is not entirely reliable so far. In principle, one should perform the integrations over $`|𝐩|`$ and $`\theta `$ first, and then take the limit. Unfortunately, in our case, the integration over $`|𝐩|`$ cannot be done analytically. However, we can perform the angular integration over $`\theta `$ analytically before evaluating the limits, provided that we split the integral as follows

$$J_2(q_0,𝐪)=_{\delta V_𝐩}\frac{d^3𝐩}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{N[E(𝐩)]}{E(𝐩+𝐪)E(𝐩)+iq_0}_{\delta V_𝐩}\frac{d^3𝐩}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{N[E(𝐩+𝐪)]}{E(𝐩+𝐪)E(𝐩)+iq_0}$$
(18)
and perform the change of variables $`𝐩𝐩𝐪`$ in the second term, eliminating thus the dependence of the Bose-Einstein distribution on the angle $`\theta `$ and making the angular integration possible. This procedure yields the result

$$J_2(q_0,𝐪)=_{\delta V_𝐩}\frac{d^3𝐩}{(2\pi )^3}\left[\frac{1}{E(𝐩+𝐪)E(𝐩)+iq_0}+\frac{1}{E(𝐩+𝐪)E(𝐩)iq_0}\right]N[E(𝐩)].$$
(19)
It is crucial to note that this change of variables is not permissible in case we interchange the limit $`lim_{|𝐪|0}lim_{q_00}`$ with the integrations, because this causes both the terms in (18) to diverge. These two divergencies canceled each other before the change of variables $`𝐩𝐩𝐪`$ . Keeping this remark in mind we now perform the angular integration and find

$$J_2(q_0,𝐪)=\frac{m}{4\pi ^2}_{\mathrm{\Lambda }d\mathrm{\Lambda }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }d|𝐩|\frac{|𝐩|N[E(𝐩)]}{|𝐪|}\mathrm{ln}\left[\frac{(E_+E(𝐩))^2+q_0^2}{(E_{}E(𝐩))^2+q_0^2}\right]$$
(20)
where $`E_+=E(|𝐩|+|𝐪|)`$ and $`E_{}=E(|𝐩||𝐪|)`$. Instead of just taking the two successive limits in $`J_2`$ as we did before, which in the momentum-frequency plane corresponds to approaching the origin in the direction of the one or the other axis, we could approach the origin through any other curve, for example in the direction of any straight line $`q_0=a|𝐪|`$. Here, of course, we should not forget that the frequency is discrete whereas the momentum is continuous. However, for the purpose of better illuminating the structure of $`J_2`$ around the origin, we shall make the approximation that the frequency is continuous so that $`q_0=a|𝐪|`$ can hold for any real $`a`$. Applying this parameterization to (20) and then taking the limit $`|𝐪|0`$ yields

$$\underset{|𝐪|0}{lim}J_2(a|𝐪|,|𝐪|)=\frac{m}{4\pi ^2}_{\mathrm{\Lambda }d\mathrm{\Lambda }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }d|𝐩|N[E(𝐩)]\frac{2|𝐩|^2}{|𝐩|^2+m^2a^2}$$
(21)
which reproduces the first limit of (17) for $`a\mathrm{}`$. This result was derived from (20) and therefore is also not valid when the limit $`a0`$ is interchanged with the integration over $`|𝐩|`$. However, if we do an integration by parts, we find

$`\underset{|𝐪|0}{lim}J_2(a|𝐪|,|𝐪|)={\displaystyle \frac{m}{2\pi ^2}}\left[N[E(𝐩)]{\displaystyle \frac{|𝐩|^3}{|𝐩|^2+m^2a^2}}\right]_{\mathrm{\Lambda }d\mathrm{\Lambda }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Lambda }d\mathrm{\Lambda }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }}d|𝐩||𝐩|^2\left[{\displaystyle \frac{|𝐩|^2}{|𝐩|^2+m^2a^2}}\beta e^{\beta E(𝐩)}N^2[E(𝐩)]{\displaystyle \frac{2m^3a^2}{[|𝐩|^2+m^2a^2]^2}}N[E(𝐩)]\right].`$ (22)
We note that the surface term vanishes, as it is evaluated at the cutoff. This result not only reproduces the first limit of (17) for $`a\mathrm{}`$ but also agrees with the second limit of (17) for $`a0`$. If we perform the angular integration and apply the same parameterization to $`J_1`$, at the limit $`|𝐪|0`$, $`J_1`$ is independent of $`a`$ and given by (16). Expressions (16) and (22) are to be substituted in the correction for the coupling constant (12).

Before we proceed to the second step of the RG formalism, we parameterize the momentum according to $`|𝐩(l)|=\mathrm{\Lambda }e^l`$. The purpose this change of variables serves is simply to make the flow equations more elegant.

So far, the flow equation for the chemical potential is:

$$\frac{d\mu }{dl}=g\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^3e^{3l}}{2\pi ^2}[1+2N[ϵ_\mathrm{\Lambda }e^{2l}\mu ]]$$
(23)
and the flow equation for the coupling is:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dg}{dl}}=g^2\{{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^3e^{3l}}{2\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2[ϵ_\mathrm{\Lambda }e^{2l}\mu ]}}[1+2N[ϵ_\mathrm{\Lambda }e^{2l}\mu ]]+`$
$`4{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^3e^{3l}}{2\pi ^2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2e^{2l}}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2e^{2l}+m^2a^2}}\beta N[ϵ_\mathrm{\Lambda }e^{2l}\mu ][1+N[ϵ_\mathrm{\Lambda }e^{2l}\mu ]]{\displaystyle \frac{2m^3a^2}{[\mathrm{\Lambda }^2e^{2l}+m^2a^2]^2}}N[ϵ_\mathrm{\Lambda }e^{2l}\mu ]]\}`$
(24)
where $`ϵ_\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Lambda }^2/2m`$.

At this point we apply the second step of the RG procedure, namely the trivial rescaling, whose purpose is to bring the effective action in the form of the original one. There are two stages, first, we rescale the momentum according to $`|𝐪||𝐪(l)|=|𝐪|e^l`$ in order to re-establish the original cutoff $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Then we require that the effective Lagrangian has the same form as the original Lagrangian. This induces the trivial rescaling of the parameters of the effective Lagrangian.

$`V`$ $``$ $`V(l)=Ve^{3l},`$
$`\beta `$ $``$ $`\beta (l)=\beta e^{2l},`$
$`\varphi `$ $``$ $`\varphi (l)=\varphi e^{3l/2},`$
$`\mu `$ $``$ $`\mu (l)=(\mu +\mathrm{\Delta }\mu )e^{2l},`$
$`g`$ $``$ $`g(l)=(g+\mathrm{\Delta }g)e^l.`$ (25)
The trivial rescaling of $`\beta `$ implies that the frequency is rescaled as $`q_0q_0(l)e^{2l}`$ and therefore

$$a=q_0/|𝐪|a(l)e^l.$$
(26)
Recasting (23) and (24) in terms of rescaled variables yields the flow equations for the corresponding running quantities

$$\frac{d\mu (l)}{dl}=2\mu (l)g(l)\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^3}{2\pi ^2}[1+2N_l]$$
(27)
and

$$\frac{dg(l)}{dl}=g(l)g^2(l)\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^3}{2\pi ^2}\left\{\frac{1+2N_l}{2[ϵ_\mathrm{\Lambda }\mu (l)]}+4\left[\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2+m^2a^2(l)}\beta (l)N_l[1+N_l]\frac{2m^3a^2(l)}{[\mathrm{\Lambda }^2+m^2a^2(l)]^2}N_l\right]\right\}$$
(28)
where $`N_l=[e^{\beta (l)[ϵ_\mathrm{\Lambda }\mu (l)]}1]^1`$ is the Bose-Einstein distribution in terms of the rescaled variables.

## 3 Fixed Point

It is important to investigate whether the path-dependence of the flow equation for the coupling has any consequences on quantities of physical interest.

We look at a universal property, the critical exponent for the correlation length. This is calculated from the coupled system of (27) and (28). In fact, in order to have an autonomous system, we should also take into account the flow equation for the inverse temperature,

$$\frac{d\beta (l)}{dl}=2\beta (l)$$
(29)
which is just a differential expression of the trivial scaling of $`\beta `$ (25). We observe that, although $`\beta `$ appears in the equations for $`\mu `$ and $`g`$, these do not couple back to the equation for $`\beta `$. We also note that the fixed point for $`\beta `$ is zero, $`\beta _{}=0`$. The fact that $`\beta _{}=0`$ complicates things because $`\beta (l)`$ appears in the flow equations not only explicitly but also through $`N_l`$. This means that, when we evaluate the fixed point for the system of the flow equations, the right-hand side of (27) and (28) will diverge, because $`N_l`$ diverges for $`\beta _{}=0`$. This problem is circumvented when we define a scaled running chemical potential $`M(l)`$ and a scaled running coupling constant $`\stackrel{~}{G}(l)`$ such that the set of equations for these new parameters decouples from the equation for $`\beta `$;

$$M(l)=\beta _\mathrm{\Lambda }\mu (l)\mathrm{and}\stackrel{~}{G}(l)=\mathrm{\Lambda }^3\beta _\mathrm{\Lambda }g(l)/b(l)$$
(30)
where $`\beta _\mathrm{\Lambda }=m/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$, $`ϵ_>=1/2`$ and $`b(l)=\beta (l)/\beta _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the scaled inverse temperature. In terms of these new, dimensionless parameters

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dM(l)}{dl}}=2M(l){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi ^2}}\stackrel{~}{G}(l)b(l)[1+2N_l],`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{~}{G}(l)}{dl}}=\stackrel{~}{G}(l){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi ^2}}\stackrel{~}{G}^2(l)b(l)\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{1+2N_l}{2[ϵ_>M(l)]}}+4\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2+m^2a^2(l)}}b(l)N_l[1+N_l]{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta _\mathrm{\Lambda }}}{\displaystyle \frac{2m^3a^2(l)}{[\mathrm{\Lambda }^2+m^2a^2(l)]^2}}N_l\right]\right\},`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{db(l)}{dl}}=2b(l).`$ (31)
In the neighbourhood of the fixed point, the rescaled temperature is high and the approximation $`N_l[\beta (l)[ϵ_\mathrm{\Lambda }\mu (l)]]^1=[b(l)[ϵ_>M(l)]]^1`$ holds . This yields the equations

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dM(l)}{dl}}=2M(l){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi ^2}}\stackrel{~}{G}(l)b(l)[1+2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{b(l)[ϵ_>M(l)]}}],`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{~}{G}(l)}{dl}}=\stackrel{~}{G}(l){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi ^2}}\stackrel{~}{G}^2(l)\{{\displaystyle \frac{b(l)}{2[ϵ_>M(l)]}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{[ϵ_>M(l)]^2}}+4{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2+m^2a^2(l)}}{\displaystyle \frac{b(l)}{ϵ_>M(l)}}`$
$`+4{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2+m^2a^2(l)}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{[ϵ_>M(l)]^2}}4{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{\Lambda }^2m^2a^2(l)}{[\mathrm{\Lambda }^2+m^2a^2(l)]^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ_>M(l)}}\},`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{db(l)}{dl}}=2b(l).`$ (32)
At the fixed point $`(M_{},\stackrel{~}{G}_{},b_{}=0)`$ the left hand side of (32) is zero by definition. The form of the right hand side depends subtly on whether $`a`$ is zero or not as we will see. Near the fixed point, the second term is dominant in the square brackets of the flow equation for the chemical potential in (32),

$$\frac{dM(l)}{dl}=2M(l)\frac{1}{\pi ^2}\stackrel{~}{G}(l)\frac{1}{ϵ_>M(l)}.$$
(33)
For $`a=0`$, we recall (26), which means that $`a(l)=0`$ for any $`l`$. Consequently, the equation for the coupling reduces to

$$\frac{d\stackrel{~}{G}(l)}{dl}=\stackrel{~}{G}(l)\frac{1}{2\pi ^2}\stackrel{~}{G}^2(l)\left\{\frac{b(l)}{2[ϵ_>M(l)]}+\frac{1}{[ϵ_>M(l)]^2}+4\frac{b(l)}{ϵ_>M(l)}+4\frac{1}{[ϵ_>M(l)]^2}\right\}.$$
(34)
Recalling the trivial scaling of $`b`$ (25), we see that the second and fourth terms in the curly brackets above are dominant near the fixed point,

$$\frac{d\stackrel{~}{G}(l)}{dl}=\stackrel{~}{G}(l)\frac{1}{2\pi ^2}\stackrel{~}{G}^2(l)\frac{5}{[ϵ_>M(l)]^2}$$
(35)
and calculate the non-trivial fixed point

$$(M_{},\stackrel{~}{G}_{},b_{})=(\frac{1}{12},\frac{5}{4}\frac{\pi ^2}{18},0).$$

We linearize the system of (32) around the fixed point and find the largest eigenvalue $`\lambda _+=1.878`$. Therefore the critical exponent for the correlation length is $`\nu =0.532`$, which agrees with the one found in .

For $`a0`$, according to the trivial scaling of $`a`$ (26), $`a_{}=\mathrm{}`$ and therefore the first and the third terms in the curly brackets of (32) vanish near the fixed point, as in the case of $`a=0`$. From the remaining terms the fifth vanishes and, significantly, the fourth is also vanishing near the fixed point, leaving as dominant contribution only the second term. Consequently the flow equation for the coupling reduces to

$$\frac{d\stackrel{~}{G}(l)}{dl}=\stackrel{~}{G}(l)\frac{1}{2\pi ^2}\stackrel{~}{G}^2(l)\frac{1}{[ϵ_>M(l)]^2}$$
(36)
and the non-trivial fixed point is

$$(M_{},\stackrel{~}{G}_{},b_{})=(\frac{1}{4},\frac{\pi ^2}{8},0).$$

Linearizing around the fixed point we find that $`\lambda _+=1.561`$ and therefore $`\nu =0.640`$. It is interesting to note that we could have found the same fixed point and critical exponent directly from (32), had we set $`a=\mathrm{}`$ and therefore $`a(l)=\mathrm{}`$ for any $`l`$.

This situation is similar to what happens, for example, in the case of thermal QED for the photon propagator. Because the photon self-energy is non-analytic at the origin, different ways of approaching the origin lead to different dispersion relations and give rise to different types of excitations . For short wavelengths, the dispersion relation is $`q_0^2=𝐪^2+m_P^2`$, where $`m_P^2=(e^2/2)(T^2/3+\mu ^2/\pi ^2)`$ is the thermal mass for the transverse photons whereas the longitudinal photons do not propagate. However, for long wavelengths, the transverse photons have the dispersion $`q_0^2=\omega _P^2+\frac{6}{5}𝐪^2`$ and the longitudinal photons have the dispersion $`q_0^2=\omega _P^2+\frac{3}{5}𝐪^2`$, where $`\omega _P^2=\frac{2}{3}m_P^2`$ is the plasma frequency at order $`e^2`$. The phenomenon which we are describing here is of the same mathematical nature, the difference being that it is occurring not in the propagator but in the vertex between four bosons. To be more precise it is the vertex graph corresponding to $`J_2`$, Fig.1, that exhibits the same singular behaviour as the photon self-energy in QED.

Comparing the two critical exponents derived above with the known experimental value $`\nu =0.670`$ , it becomes clear that the second procedure gives an improved estimate. In fact, our estimate is better even than the value $`\nu =0.613`$ calculated in  with the inclusion of the marginal three-body scattering term in the action.

## 4 Flow equations and non-analyticity at zero and finite temperature

Non-analyticity in the context of RG has been discussed before by Shankar in . In this work, the author gives a detailed overview of the RG approach to interacting, non-relativistic fermions in one, two and three dimensions and in certain instances (pages 161, 166, 170, 178) refers to the non-analyticity (or lack thereof) which appears in the one-loop RG corrections to the quartic interaction among fermions. This is highly reminiscent of the case we are studying, the essential difference being that we are dealing with bosons instead of fermions. This would render the main point of this paper - the study of a non-analyticity in the flow equation for the interaction - rather trivial and expected by extending  to bosons.

This is not the case however, the non-analyticity we are studying is of completely different nature from the one studied in . The RG calculations in  are at $`T=0`$ whereas ours at $`T0`$ and the non-analyticity we are referring to is essentially thermal and vanishes at $`T=0`$. To further clarify this point, let us consider the ”zero sound” (ZS) graph which is studied in Eq.(315), page 161 of .

### 4.1 Zero Temperature Non-Analyticity

#### 4.1.1 Zero Sound Integral

In the zero-sound calculation of , the following integral appears:

$$S_1[\mathrm{\Omega },q]=_\mathrm{\Lambda }^\mathrm{\Lambda }\frac{dk}{2\pi }_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{d\omega }{2\pi }\frac{1}{[i\omega k][i(\omega +\mathrm{\Omega })kq]}$$
(37)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, $`q`$ are the external frequency and momentum and $`\omega `$, $`k`$ are the internal frequency and momentum respectively. The external momentum is constrained by the same cutoff as the internal momentum, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }q\mathrm{\Lambda }.`$

We focus on the integral over $`\omega `$. When the external momentum and frequency are zero, the integrand has a double pole and therefore $`S_1[0,0]=0`$, Fig.2.

For non-zero external frequency and momentum, the integrand has two single poles. Let us assume that $`k>0`$. If $`k+q>0`$, both poles are in the lower half-plane and closing the contour from above yields $`S_1[\mathrm{\Omega },q]=0`$. However, if $`k+q<0`$, the two single poles are in different half-planes and closing the contour either from above or below yields

$$S_1[\mathrm{\Omega },q]=_\mathrm{\Lambda }^\mathrm{\Lambda }\frac{dk}{2\pi }\frac{i}{\mathrm{\Omega }+iq}.$$

Assuming $`k<0`$ we can argue the same way, so, only when $`k`$ and $`k+q`$ have different signs, the $`\omega `$-integral is non-zero, Fig.3.

Because of the $`k`$-integration, there is always a range of $`k`$ values for which $`k`$ and $`k+q`$ have different signs. Therefore any non-zero $`q`$ results in a non-vanishing

$$S_1[\mathrm{\Omega },q]=_\mathrm{\Lambda }^\mathrm{\Lambda }\frac{dk}{2\pi }\frac{i}{\mathrm{\Omega }+iq}[\theta (k)\theta (k+q)]$$

which depends sensitively on how the limit $`\{\mathrm{\Omega },q\}\{0,0\}`$ is taken ,

$$\underset{\mathrm{\Omega }0}{lim}\underset{q0}{lim}S_1[\mathrm{\Omega },q]=0\underset{q0}{lim}\underset{\mathrm{\Omega }0}{lim}S_1[\mathrm{\Omega },q]=1.$$

#### 4.1.2 Renormalization Integral

In the RG calculation of , a one-loop correction to the interaction is of the form:

$$S_2[\mathrm{\Omega },q]=\left[_\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\mathrm{\Lambda }+d\mathrm{\Lambda }}+_{\mathrm{\Lambda }d\mathrm{\Lambda }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }\right]\frac{dk}{2\pi }_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{d\omega }{2\pi }\frac{1}{[i\omega k][i(\omega +\mathrm{\Omega })kq]}.$$
(38)
As before, for zero external frequency and momentum, $`S_2[0,0]=0`$.

For non-zero external frequency and momentum, we note that $`S_2`$ differs from $`S_1`$ only in the range of integration of the momenta, $`k[\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Lambda }+d\mathrm{\Lambda }][\mathrm{\Lambda }d\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Lambda }]`$ and $`q[\mathrm{\Lambda }+d\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Lambda }d\mathrm{\Lambda }]`$. This means that $`|k|>|q|`$ and consequently $`k,k+q`$ have always the same sign throughout the integration over $`k`$. Therefore $`S_2[\mathrm{\Omega },q]=0`$ which has no dependence on how the limits of the external frequency and momentum are taken .

The conclusion is that, when performing RG calculations, non-analyticities at the origin of external frequency and momentum space vanish, even when they are present in the corresponding zero-sound calculations.

### 4.2 Thermal Non-Analyticity

#### 4.2.1 Zero Sound Integral

Now consider what happens at $`T0`$. In zero-sound calculations one has to perform the integral

$$S_1^\mathrm{T}[\mathrm{\Omega }_m,q]=_\mathrm{\Lambda }^\mathrm{\Lambda }\frac{dk}{2\pi }\frac{1}{\beta }\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{n=\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{[i\omega _nk][i(\omega _n+\mathrm{\Omega }_m)kq]}$$
(39)
where $`\omega _n=(2n+1)\pi /\beta `$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=(2m+1)\pi /\beta `$ are the discretized internal and external frequencies respectively.

When the external frequency and momentum are zero, we find

$$S_1^\mathrm{T}[0,0]=_\mathrm{\Lambda }^\mathrm{\Lambda }\frac{dk}{2\pi }\frac{\beta }{4}\mathrm{cosh}^2[\frac{k\beta }{2}]\stackrel{\mathrm{T}0}{}1.$$
(40)
For non-zero external frequency and momentum, we obtain

$$S_1^\mathrm{T}[\mathrm{\Omega }_m,q]=_\mathrm{\Lambda }^\mathrm{\Lambda }\frac{dk}{2\pi }\frac{i}{\mathrm{\Omega }_m+iq}\frac{1}{2}\left\{\mathrm{tanh}[\frac{k\beta }{2}]\mathrm{tanh}[\frac{(k+q)\beta }{2}]\right\}$$
(41)
which gives the correct zero temperature limit $`S_1^{\mathrm{T}0}[\mathrm{\Omega }_m,q]=S_1[\mathrm{\Omega },q]`$. At $`T0`$,

$$\underset{\mathrm{\Omega }_m0}{lim}\underset{q0}{lim}S_1^\mathrm{T}[\mathrm{\Omega }_m,q]=0\stackrel{\mathrm{T}0}{}0,$$
(42)
$$\underset{q0}{lim}\underset{\mathrm{\Omega }_m0}{lim}S_1^\mathrm{T}[\mathrm{\Omega }_m,q]=_\mathrm{\Lambda }^\mathrm{\Lambda }\frac{dk}{2\pi }\frac{\beta }{4}\mathrm{cosh}^2[\frac{k\beta }{2}]\stackrel{\mathrm{T}0}{}1$$
(43)
and therefore the non-analyticity of the zero-temperature zero-sound calculation persists at finite temperatures, Fig.4.

#### 4.2.2 Renormalization Integral

As at $`T=0`$, the integral appearing in RG calculations, differs from $`S_1^\mathrm{T}`$ only in the range over which the internal and external momentum are integrated.

When the external frequency and momentum are zero, we find

$$S_2^\mathrm{T}[0,0]=\left[_\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\mathrm{\Lambda }+d\mathrm{\Lambda }}+_{\mathrm{\Lambda }d\mathrm{\Lambda }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }\right]\frac{dk}{2\pi }\frac{\beta }{4}\mathrm{cosh}^2[\frac{k\beta }{2}]\stackrel{\mathrm{T}0}{}0.$$
(44)
For non-zero external frequency and momentum, we obtain

$$S_2^\mathrm{T}[\mathrm{\Omega }_m,q]=\left[_\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\mathrm{\Lambda }+d\mathrm{\Lambda }}+_{\mathrm{\Lambda }d\mathrm{\Lambda }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }\right]\frac{dk}{2\pi }\frac{1}{\beta }\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{[i\omega _nk][i(\omega _n+\mathrm{\Omega }_m)kq]}.$$
(45)
Poisson summation yields, Fig.4,

$$S_2^\mathrm{T}[\mathrm{\Omega }_m,q]=\left[_\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\mathrm{\Lambda }+d\mathrm{\Lambda }}+_{\mathrm{\Lambda }d\mathrm{\Lambda }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }\right]\frac{dk}{2\pi }\frac{i}{\mathrm{\Omega }_m+iq}\frac{1}{2}\left\{\mathrm{tanh}[\frac{k\beta }{2}]\mathrm{tanh}[\frac{(k+q)\beta }{2}]\right\}$$
(46)
which gives the correct zero-temperature limit

$$S_2^{\mathrm{T}0}[\mathrm{\Omega }_m,q]=0.$$

However, unlike the zero temperature renormalization integral, the finite temperature renormalization integral is non-analytic, because

$$\underset{\mathrm{\Omega }_m0}{lim}\underset{q0}{lim}S_2^\mathrm{T}[\mathrm{\Omega }_m,q]=0\stackrel{\mathrm{T}0}{}0,$$
(47)
$$\underset{q0}{lim}\underset{\mathrm{\Omega }_m0}{lim}S_2^\mathrm{T}[\mathrm{\Omega }_m,q]=\left[_\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\mathrm{\Lambda }+d\mathrm{\Lambda }}+_{\mathrm{\Lambda }d\mathrm{\Lambda }}^\mathrm{\Lambda }\right]\frac{dk}{2\pi }\frac{\beta }{4}\mathrm{cosh}^2[\frac{k\beta }{2}]\stackrel{\mathrm{T}0}{}0.$$
(48)
Therefore, at finite temperature, the non-analyticity of the zero-sound one-loop graph persists but there is also an extra, purely thermal non-analyticity appearing in the finite temperature renormalization one-loop graph.

The zero temperature non-analyticities are due to the splitting of a double pole into two single poles residing in different half-planes. The finite temperature non-analyticities are due only to the splitting of a double pole and appear even if the resulting two single poles reside in the same half-plane. Therefore it is only natural that extra non-analyticities appear at finite temperature in addition to those existing at zero-temperature.

## 5 Conclusions

We have investigated thermal non-analyticities at the origin of the momentum-frequency space in the context of Wilsonian renormalization. We have shown that taking them into account leads to an improved estimate for the critical exponent of the correlation length, when approaching the critical region from the symmetry unbroken phase. It is well-known that the $`ϵ`$-expansion gives values closer to the experiment than ours, however one should remember that the $`ϵ`$-expansion is asymptotic . It is therefore crucial to find safer ways of calculating the critical exponent, such as the improved momentum-shell method which was used here.

When approaching the critical region from the symmetry-broken phase there is an excellent estimate $`\nu =0.685`$ . It may be possible to improve this value by taking into account the non-analyticity as we did for the approach from the symmetry unbroken phase. Work on this issue is currently under progress.

Finally, we have pointed out that when one applies Wilsonian renormalization at finite temperature, one may encounter non-analytic behaviour which is different in nature from the non-analyticity (or lack thereof) discussed in .

## Acknowledgement

The authors wish to thank W. Wonneberger for bringing reference  to our attention. G.M. wishes to thank I.J.R. Aitchison for many discussions on the subtleties of thermal field theory as well as V. Yudson for a useful discussion on renormalization and statistical physics. This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft within the Forschergruppe “Quantengase”.


format: text

text:
# Electromagnetic nonlinear X-waves

## Abstract

Nonlinear optical media that are normally dispersive, support a new type of localized (nondiffractive and nondispersive) wavepackets that are X-shaped in space and time and have slower than exponential decay. High-intensity X-waves, unlike linear ones, can be formed spontaneously through a trigger mechanism of conical emission, thus playing an important role in experiments.

The nonlinear response of condensed matter can compensate for the diffractive spreading of optical beams, or the dispersive broadening of pulses due to group-velocity dispersion (GVD), forming spatial spatbook  or temporal solitons agrawal , respectively. Recent experimental results concerning the self-focusing behavior of intense ultrashort pulses ran96 ; zoz99 ; liu99 ; kopr00 ; eis01 ; tzo01  indicate, however, that the spatial and temporal degrees of freedom cannot be treated separately. When the three length scales naturally associated with diffraction, GVD, and nonlinearity become comparable, the most intriguing consequence of space-time coupling is the possibility to form a nondiffractive and nondispersive localized wavepacket (LWP), namely a spatio-temporal soliton or light bullet silb90  characterized by exponentially decaying tails. A strict constraint for the formation of light bullets is that the nonlinear phase changes counteract both the linear wavefront curvature and the GVD-induced chirp, leading to space-time focusing, as occuring in Kerr-like focusing media with anomalous GVD liu99 ; eis01 .
Viceversa, a normal GVD rules out the possibility to achieve bullet-type LWPs. In this regime, the field evolution is known to be qualitatively different, and involves complex phenomena such as temporal splitting and spectral breaking ran96 ; zoz99 ; eis01 . This is the reason why no attempts have been made to answer the fundamental question as to whether any form of nonlinearity-induced localization could still take place in normally dispersive media. In this letter, we show that LWPs do exist also with normal GVD in the form of nonlinear X-waves (NLXWs) or X-wave solitons. To date X-shaped waves are known only in the context of linear acoustic acoutheory , or electromagnetic opttheory  propagation, and constitute the polichromatic generalization of diffraction-free Bessel (or Durnin durnin87 ) beams. They have been observed in both acoustical lg92  and optical saari97  experiments, both requiring beam-shaping techniques. Here, we find propagation-invariant NLXWs that can be naturally regarded as the continuation of linear X-waves into the nonlinear regime. Yet, we find one fundamental difference between linear and NLXWs. At high intensity, the formation of X-shaped LWPs occurs spontaneously from conventional bell-shaped (in space and time) beams throughself-induced spectral reshaping triggered by a mechanism of conic al emission. Thus, NLXWs are expected to have stronger impact on experiments than linear X waves.
To support the generality of NLXW concept, we choose two different phenomena, whose spatio-temporal dynamics have been widely investigated experimentally. Specifically, we consider self-action of a scalar wavepacket $`u_1`$ (carrier $`\omega _0`$) due to a pure (cubic) focusing Kerr effect, or generation of a $`u_2`$ wavepacket at second-harmonic (SH, $`2\omega _0`$) in non-centrosymmetric (quadratic) media. In the paraxial regime, the evolution in Kerr media is ruled by the scalar 1+3 nonlinear Schrödinger (NLS) equation,

$$i_\zeta u_1+_{}^2u_1d_1_{\tau \tau }u_1+\mathrm{\Gamma }|u_1|^2u_1=0,$$
(1)
whereas SH generation is ruled by the vector NLS model

$$\begin{array}{c}(i_\zeta +\sigma _1_{}^2d_1_{\tau \tau })u_1+\mathrm{\Gamma }u_2u_1^{}e^{i\delta k\zeta }=0,\hfill \\ (i_\zeta +\sigma _2_{}^2+iv_\tau d_2_{\tau \tau })u_2+\mathrm{\Gamma }\frac{u_1^2}{2}e^{i\delta k\zeta }=0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(2)
In Eqs. (1-2) the link with real-world variables $`X,Y,Z,T`$ is as follows: $`\zeta Z/Z_{df}`$ is the propagation distance in units of diffraction length $`Z_{df}=2k_1W_0^2`$ associated with the beam waist $`W_0`$, $`_{}^2_\xi ^2+_\eta ^2`$ is the transverse Laplacian where $`(X,Y)=W_0(\xi ,\eta )`$, and $`t=(TZ/V_{g1})/T_0`$ is time in a frame traveling at group-velocity $`V_{g1}`$ (of $`u_1`$) in units of $`T_0=(|k_1^{\prime \prime }|Z_{df}/2)^{1/2}`$, $`k_m^{\prime \prime }`$ ($`m=1,2`$) being the GVD at $`m\omega _0`$. The coefficients are $`d_m=k_m^{\prime \prime }/|k_1^{\prime \prime }|`$, $`\sigma _m=k_1/k_m`$ ($`\sigma _21/2`$), the wavevector mismatch $`\delta k=(k_22k_1)Z_{df}`$, and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=Z_{df}/Z_{nl}`$ (not rescaled out to quantify the impact of nonlinearities). Here $`Z_{nl}=(\chi _3I_p)^1`$ in Eq. (1) and $`Z_{nl}=(\chi _2\sqrt{I_p})^1`$ in Eqs. (2) are nonlinear length scales associated with the input peak intensity $`I_p`$ at $`\omega _0`$ ($`|u_1|_{max}^2=1`$), and $`\chi _3`$ \[m/W\] and $`\chi _2`$ \[W-1/2\] are standard nonlinear coefficients. Finally $`v=Z_{df}\delta V/T_0`$ accounts for the walk-off due to group-velocity mismatch (GVM) $`\delta V=V_{g2}^1V_{g1}^1`$, though we analyse (where not stated otherwise) the GVM-matched case $`v=0`$.
We seek for propagation-invariant, radially-symmetric LWPs of the form $`u_1=f_1(r,t)\mathrm{exp}(i\beta \zeta )`$, accompanied in Eqs. (2) by a symbiotic SH $`u_2=f_2(r,t)\mathrm{exp}[i(2\beta +\delta k)\zeta ]`$. Here $`f_{1,2}`$ are real, and $`\beta `$ is a nonlinear phase-shift (in Eqs. (2) it makes the two waves nonlinearly phase-matched). In the cubic case, $`f_1`$ obeys the equation

$$\ddot{f_1}+r^1\dot{f_1}D_1_{tt}f_1+bf_1+\gamma f_1^3=0,$$
(3)
while Eqs. (2) yield (after setting $`f_1/\sqrt{\sigma _2}f_1`$),

$$\begin{array}{c}\ddot{f_1}+r^1\dot{f_1}D_1_{tt}f_1+bf_1+\gamma f_2f_1=0,\hfill \\ \ddot{f_2}+r^1\dot{f_2}D_2_{tt}f_2+\alpha f_2+\gamma \frac{f_1^2}{2}=0,\hfill \end{array}$$

where we have set $`D_m=d_m/\sigma _m`$, $`\dot{f}=f/r`$, and $`r=|\beta |\rho (x^2+y^2)^{1/2}`$ ($`\rho ^2\xi ^2+\eta ^2`$), $`t=|\beta |\tau `$, $`\gamma =\mathrm{\Gamma }/|\beta |`$, $`b=\beta /|\beta |`$ and $`\alpha =(2b+\delta k/|\beta |)/\sigma _2`$ in the nondegenerate case ($`\beta 0`$), while $`(r,t)=(\rho ,\tau )`$, $`\alpha =\delta k/\sigma _2`$, $`\gamma =\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, and $`b=0`$ in the degenerate case ($`\beta =0`$). Eqs. (3-Electromagnetic nonlinear X-waves) must be integrated along with the boundary conditions $`f_{1,2}(r,\pm \mathrm{})=f_{1,2}(\mathrm{},t)=0`$, and $`\dot{f}_{1,2}(0,t)=0`$. While the anomalous GVD regime ($`D_m<0`$) guarantees that, for $`\beta <0`$ ($`b,\alpha <0`$), nearly separable LWPs (light bullets) exist with exponentially decaying tails, in the normal GVD regime ($`D_m>0`$) the nature of the LWP solutions (if any) must change dramatically, because the low-intensity exponential damping no longer takes place. Pseudo-spectral numerical techniques (i.e., solve Eqs. (3-Electromagnetic nonlinear X-waves) as a dynamical evolution problem in $`r`$ with appropriate discretization in $`t`$ chqz ) are well suited to search for strongly nonseparable objects with slow spatio-temporal decay. We have implemented such methods (using two different algorithms), and found LWPs when $`\beta 0`$ ($`b,\alpha 0`$). Efficient convergence occurs by employing as a trial function (of time, at $`r=0`$) the real part of the waveform,

$$u_m=\frac{1}{\sqrt{(\mathrm{\Delta }i(\tau /d_m))^2+\xi ^2+\eta ^2}};m=1,2,$$
(4)
which represent X-shaped LWP solutions of Eqs. (1-2) in the linear limit ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }=0`$). Here $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is a free parameter: the smaller $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, the stronger the localization. The LWP solutions, obtained from Eq. (3) with $`\mathrm{\Delta }=1`$ in Eq. (4) are shown in Fig. 1. For $`b=0`$ and moderate nonlinearities \[$`\gamma =1`$, Fig. 1(a)\], the ”ground-state” LWP mode has a clear X-shape (in $`xt`$, or V-shape in $`rt`$ variables), encompassing a space-time tightly confined structure, with slow axisymmetric spatial decay ($`1/r`$) accompanied by (radially increasing) temporal pulse-splitting. In the case $`b=1`$, while the field maintains its basic X-shape, it develops radial (damped) oscillations as shown in Fig. 1(b), e.g. for the strong nonlinear case ($`\gamma =10`$).

From Eqs. (Electromagnetic nonlinear X-waves) we obtain similar NLXWs, where the two symbiotic LWPs $`f_1`$-$`f_2`$ can be both of ground-state type ($`b=\alpha =0`$), ground-oscillatory type ($`b=0,\alpha 0`$), or both of oscillatory type ($`b=1,\alpha 0`$, with out-of-phase coherent oscillation), an example of the latter case being shown in Fig. 2.
In both nonlinear processes the oscillations stem from the fact that the spatial behavior of the low-intensity portion of the LWPs is governed by a zero-th order Bessel equation, which can be easily obtained by Fourier-transforming the linear ($`\gamma =0`$) limit of Eq. (3) or (decoupled) Eqs. (Electromagnetic nonlinear X-waves). Therefore NLXWs exhibit the characteristic damped spatial oscillations of $`J_0`$ Bessel functions, and can be regarded as the natural generalization of monochromatic nondiffractive conical $`J_0`$ beams, whose physical realization was demonstrated both in the linear durnin87  and nonlinear bessel  regimes. More precisely, once the NLXW solutions $`f_m=f_m(r,t)`$ are obtained, they can be represented in the spectral domain of transverse wavevector $`K=(K_x^2+K_y^2)^{1/2}`$ and frequency detuning $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, through the Fourier-Bessel transform $`S_m=S_m(K,\mathrm{\Omega })`$, as

$$f_m=_0^+\mathrm{}_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}S_m(\mathrm{\Omega },K)J_0(Kr)e^{i\mathrm{\Omega }t}K𝑑K𝑑\mathrm{\Omega },$$
(5)
showing their nature of a weighted superposition of conical $`J_0`$ beams with different frequency.
Compared with their counterpart in the anomalous GVD regime (i.e., 1+3D bullet LWP), NLXWs possess important differences: (i) NLXWs experience weaker localization, i.e. $`1/r`$ instead of exponential decay. As a consequence the energy of X-waves (4) and likely also of our NLXW solutions, is infinite, viz $`E_1=_0^ar𝑑r\left[_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑t|u_1|^2\right]`$ in Eq. (1) tends to infinity as the computational window $`a\mathrm{}`$; (ii) unlike bullets that vanish in the linear limit, NLXWs have a finite limit for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=0`$; (iii) NLXWs are not unique, in the sense that inifinitely many solutions can be found for fixed $`\beta `$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. This follows also from (ii) since also linear paraxial X-waves are a continuous family, e.g. parametrized by $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ in Eq. (4); (iv) NLXWs and bullets exist for different sign of $`\beta `$, entailing opposite phase shifts in Kerr media, and different constraints ($`\beta \delta k/2`$ for NLXWs, $`\beta <\delta k/2`$ for bullets) in Eqs. (2).
Once the existence of nonlinear LWPs supported by normal GVD is established, one might wonder about their importance and observability. In the linear regime, both Durnin $`J_0`$ beams durnin87  and nonmonochromatic X-shaped LWPs saari97  can be observed only by means of experimental arrangements that adapt the input to the LWP (e.g., by means of lensacons or axicons). Viceversa, we have found that the interplay of the nonlinearity and normal GVD is responsible for a universal mechanism, namely colored conical emission (CE), that allows for the self-induced spectral (in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$-$`K`$) reshaping necessary to turn conventional, e.g. gaussian, pulsed beams into X-waves. In fact, it is known that in Kerr media liou92  the (modulational) stability analysis of the cw plane-wave solution $`u=e^{i\mathrm{\Gamma }\zeta }`$ of Eq. (1) yields exponential amplification of conical plane-wave (or Bessel) perturbations with wavevector $`K`$ and frequency detuning $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, such to yield real values of gain $`g=\{[(D_1\mathrm{\Omega }^2K^2)^2+\mathrm{\Gamma }]^2\mathrm{\Gamma }^2\}^{1/2}`$. This analysis can be readily generalized for the cw plane-wave eigensolutions $`u_1=u_{10}\mathrm{exp}(i\beta \zeta )`$ $`u_2=u_{20}\mathrm{exp}[i(\beta +\delta k)\zeta ]`$ of Eqs. (2-3) trillo95  to obtain the gain $`g=[b\pm (b^2c)^{1/2}]^{1/2}`$, where $`2b=\mathrm{\Gamma }(u_{20}^22u_{10}^2)\mathrm{\Omega }_1\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$, $`c=(\mathrm{\Omega }_1\mathrm{\Omega }_2\mathrm{\Gamma }u_{10}^2)^2\mathrm{\Gamma }u_{20}^2\mathrm{\Omega }_2^2`$, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m\sigma _mK^2d_m\mathrm{\Omega }^2+m\beta (m1)\delta k`$, $`m=1,2`$. In the normal GVD regime ($`d_m>0`$) these expressions entail CE, i.e. preferential amplification of waves at $`K`$ (angles) linearly increasing with frequency detuning. By comparing (see Fig. 3) the CE gain with the NLXW spectrum, obtained by inverting Eq. (5), it is clear that the instability provides amplification at $`K\mathrm{\Omega }`$ pairs that favour the formation of NLXWs. Although the stability analysis is carried out for cw plane-wave pumping beams, CE occurs also from tightly-focused short-pulse input beams liou92 . In this case, we expect CE to amplify frequencies $`K\mathrm{\Omega }`$ contained in the broad input spectrum, while preserving the phase coherence between different spectral components necessary for the formation of a NLXW.

In order to support this conjecture and prove that NLXWs are the key to understand the dynamics of experiments carried out with narrow beams and short pulses in the normal GVD regime, we have conducted numerical simulations of the propagation. This is crucial also to assess the observability of such type of LWPs with finite-energy, which are the nonlinear counterpart of monochromatic finite-aperture $`J_0`$ durnin87  or Bessel-Gauss beams, and nonmonochromatic finite-energy linear X-waves lg92 ; saari97 , observable in the real world. While extensive results will be reported elsewhere, we focus specifically on quadratic media \[Eqs. (2)\] in the large negative mismatch limit, where the field $`u_1`$ plays a leading role, and experiences an effective focusing Kerr effect spatbook ; liu99 . This case has twofold relevance: (i) higher-order effects not included in our models (Raman, self-steepening, space-time coupling, saturation, etc.) have lesser impact on the propagation as compared with true Kerr media; (ii) experimental results in Lithium Triborate (LBO) indicates the occurence of pulse compression in spite of the fact that the medium is normally dispersive cleo01 . We model the latter case assuming $`\chi _27\times 10^5\mathrm{W}^{1/2}`$, $`k_1^{\prime \prime }=0.015`$ ps2/m, $`k_2^{\prime \prime }=0.07`$ ps2/m, a mismatch $`\mathrm{\Delta }k=30\mathrm{cm}^1`$ ($`\delta k=180`$), and a spatio-temporal input gaussian beam $`u_1(Z=0)`$ with FWHM $`170`$ fsec duration and $`65\mu `$m beam width. Figure 4 (top panel) shows the output intensity in a 4 cm crystal, in the GVM-matched case ($`\lambda =1.3\mu `$m, $`T=35`$ C in LBO) for an intensity $`I_p=50\mathrm{GW}/\mathrm{cm}^2`$ ($`Z_{nl}=0.6`$ mm). As shown, while a moderate fraction of the energy lags behind and in front in the form of pulse satellites, the main portion of the beam develops the characteristic structure of a NLXW. Importantly, we observe that the formation of NLXW-type of LWPs in Fig. 4 is accompanied by strong pulse compression. In fact, it can be shown that the peculiar spatio-temporal structure of a NLXW leads to an effective GVD, which we obtain in the form $`k_{eff}^{\prime \prime }\frac{d^2k_z}{d\omega ^2}\frac{d^2}{d\omega ^2}[k(\omega )\frac{k_t^2}{2k_0}]k^{\prime \prime }k_0(\frac{d\theta }{d\omega })^2`$, where the angle $`\theta \mathrm{sin}\theta =k_t/k_0`$, and $`k_t=(k_0^2k_z^2)^{1/2}=K/(|\beta |W_0)`$. Therefore the dispersive contribution which stems from the angular dispersion $`\theta =\theta (\omega )`$ counteracts the material (normal) GVD, leading to an effective anomalous GVD, which in turn explains the compression.

NLXWs are robust also against strong GVM. First, when $`v0`$ in Eqs. (2), we find CE as well as NLXW solutions of Eqs. (2) characterized by an additional complex phase profile (details will be given elsewhere). On the other hand, our simulations show that, at sufficiently high intensity, after a short distance, the launched ($`u_1`$) and generated ($`u_2`$) fields tend to develop spontaneously NLXW shapes, meanwhile leading to nonlinear walk-off compensation ($`u_{1,2}`$ travel locked together). For instance in Fig. 4 (bottom panel) we show the profile $`|u_1|^2`$ obtained for an input intensity $`I_p=70`$ GW/cm2 after $`1.5`$ mm propagation in LBO at $`\lambda =1.06\mu `$m, where a GVM as large as $`\delta V=45`$ ps/m ($`v=75`$) is compensated.
Our results show that, contrary to common belief, nonlinear space-time localization takes place also in normally dispersive media. NLXWs are the eigenmodes of 1+3D paraxial wave propagation models, and will be central to interpret correctly numerical and experimental results. Having restricted ourselves to NLXWs that travel at the natural group-velocity of light, further work will be devoted to search for NLXW solutions with finite energy (of which we have given numerical evidence), and/or sub- or super-luminal nature, as well as the role played by nonparaxiality and higher-order nonlinear terms.
Funds from MIUR (PRIN project) and INFM (PAIS project) are gratefully acknowledged. G.V. thanks Lithuanian Science and Studies Foundation (grant T-491). J.T. thanks Secretaria de Estado y Universidades, Spain. C.C. thanks Fondazione Tronchetti Provera.


text:
# Higher cotangent cohomology of rational surface singularities

## 1. Cotangent cohomology

(1.1) The definition of $`T_X^i`$ is most conveniently given in the context of a more general theory and we set therefore $`T_X^i:=T^i(X/\mathrm{pt};𝒪_X)`$. Let $`XS`$ be a map of analytic germs and $`M`$ an $`𝒪_X`$-module. One gets the cotangent cohomology groups as

$$T^i(X/S;M):=H^i\left(\text{Hom}_{𝒪_X}(𝕃_{}^{X/S},M)\right)$$

with $`𝕃_{}^{X/S}`$ being the so-called cotangent complex. What we need to know about it is summarised in , . A good reference, also for the next subsection, is . We actually work with the analytic version of the cotangent complex, which can be constructed from a Tyurina resolvent of the analytic $`𝒪_S`$-algebra $`𝒪_X`$, see Palamodov’s survey  and for more details his papers ,  and .

(1.2) The higher cotangent cohomology can also be computed as Harrison cohomology. To give the definition we first recall Hochschild cohomology. Let $`A`$ be a commutative algebra of essentially finite type over a base ring $`k`$. For an $`A`$-module $`M`$, the Hochschild cohomology $`HH^i(A/k;M)`$ is the cohomology of the complex

$$C^i(A/k;M):=\text{Hom}_k(A^i,M)$$

with differential

$$\begin{array}{c}\text{ }(\delta f)(a_0,\mathrm{},a_i):=\text{ }\hfill \\ \text{ }a_0f(a_1,\mathrm{},a_i)+\underset{j=1}{\overset{i}{}}(1)^jf(a_0,\mathrm{},a_{j1}a_j,\mathrm{},a_i)+(1)^{i+1}a_if(a_0,\mathrm{},a_{i1}).\text{ }\hfill \end{array}$$

The same cohomology can also be obtained from the so-called reduced subcomplex $`\overline{C}^{}(A/k;M)`$ consisting only of those maps $`f:A^iM`$ that vanish whenever at least one of the arguments equals 1.

Definition. A permutation $`\sigma `$ is called a $`(p,q)`$-shuffle if $`\sigma (1)<\mathrm{}<\sigma (p)`$ and $`\sigma (p+1)<\mathrm{}<\sigma (p+q)`$. Moreover, in the group algebra $`[S_{p+q}]`$ we define the elements

$$\text{sh}_{p,q}:=\underset{(p,q)\mathrm{shuffles}}{}\text{sgn}(\sigma )\sigma .$$

These elements give rise to the so-called shuffle invariant subcomplexes

$$C_{\mathrm{sh}}^i(A/k;M):=\{f\text{Hom}_k(A^i,M)f\mathrm{sh}_{p,ip}=0\text{ for }0<p<i\}$$

and $`\overline{C}_{\mathrm{sh}}^i(A/k;M)\overline{C}^i(A/k;M)`$ defined in the same manner. Both complexes yield the same cohomology, which is called Harrison cohomology $`Harr^i(A/k;M)`$.

Proposition.If $`k`$, then Harrison cohomology is a direct summand of Hochschild cohomology.

In the analytic case one has to use the analytic tensor product; precise definitions are given by Palamodov . We can now state the relation with cotangent cohomology.

Theorem.If the map $`XS`$ is flat, then

$$T^i(X/S;M)Harr^{i+1}(𝒪_X/𝒪_S;M).$$

(1.3) Let $`X`$ be a Cohen-Macaulay singularity of dimension $`n`$ and multiplicity $`d`$. We can choose as Noether normalisation $`X^n`$ a flat map of degree $`d`$. In fact, this is only a map of germs of analytic spaces, but we are abusing notation here. The exact sequence relating absolute and relative cotangent cohomology gives for an $`𝒪_X`$-module $`M`$

$$\mathrm{}T^i(X/^n;M)T^i(X;M)T^i(^n;M)T^{i+1}(X/^n;M)\mathrm{}$$

As $`^n`$ is smooth, $`T^i(^n;M)=0`$ for $`i1`$. We obtain therefore

Lemma.For any $`𝒪_X`$-module $`M`$ one has $`T^i(X;M)T^i(X/^n;M)`$ for $`i2`$.

In particular, if $`X`$ has minimal multiplicity $`d`$ (e.g., a rational surface singularity), so $`\text{embdim}X=d+n1`$, we may choose coordinates $`(z_1,\mathrm{},z_{d+n1})`$ such that the projection on the space spanned by the last $`n`$ coordinates is a Noether normalisation.

In terms of rings we have a regular local ring $`P=\{z_d,\mathrm{},z_{d+n1}\}`$ and a homomorphism $`PA`$ making the local ring $`A`$ of $`X`$ into a free $`P`$-module of rank $`d`$, with basis $`\{1,z_1,\mathrm{},z_{d1}\}`$. The equations for $`X`$ are of the form

$$z_iz_j=\underset{\nu =1}{\overset{d1}{}}p_\nu z_\nu +p_0,1i,jd1,$$

where $`p_\nu P`$ for $`\nu =0`$, …, $`d1`$.

(1.4) Let $`X`$ be a rational surface singularity of multiplicity $`d3`$ with local ring $`A`$ and Noether normalisation $`X^2`$, or in terms of rings $`PA`$. We can obtain the higher cotangent cohomology as Harrison cohomology $`Harr^{i+1}(A/P;M)`$ computed from the reduced complex. As illustration of this technique we repeat here the proof of the following lemma, shown in . We shall need the argument later on.

Lemma.The natural map $`Harr^{i+1}(A/P;A)Harr^{i+1}(A/P;)`$ is the zero map.

Proof. As $`\{1,z_1,\mathrm{},z_{d1}\}`$ forms a basis of $`A`$ as $`P`$-module, a reduced Harrison $`(i+1)`$-cocycle $`f`$ is, by $`P`$-linearity, determined by its values on the $`(i+1)`$-tuples of the coordinates $`z_1`$, …, $`z_{d1}`$. Suppose $`f(z_{j_0},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})𝔪_A`$. Since $`d3`$, we may choose a $`z_k`$ with $`k\{1,\mathrm{},d1\}`$ and $`kj_0`$. Hence,

$$\begin{array}{c}\text{ }0=(\delta f)(z_{j_0},\mathrm{},z_{j_i},z_k)=z_{j_0}f(z_{j_1},\mathrm{},z_k)\pm f(z_{j_0},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})z_k\text{ }\hfill \\ \text{ }+\text{ terms containing products }z_iz_j\text{ as arguments}.\text{ }\hfill \end{array}$$

Using the equations for $`X`$ as in (1.) we may again apply $`P`$-linearity to see that the latter terms are contained in $`𝔪_PA`$. Hence, modulo $`𝔪_P`$, these terms vanish, but the resulting equation inside $`V=𝔪_A/𝔪_PA`$ contradicts the fact that $`z_{j_0}`$ and $`z_k`$ are linearly independent.  $`\mathrm{}`$

(1.5) Another powerful tool is the comparison between the cotangent cohomology of a singularity and its hyperplane section . Let $`f:X`$ be a flat map such that both $`X`$ and the special fibre $`H`$ have isolated singularities.

Main Lemma (, (1.3.2)).There is a long exact sequence

$$T^1(X/;𝒪_X)T_H^1T_X^2\stackrel{f}{}T_X^2T_H^2T_X^3\stackrel{f}{}T_X^3\mathrm{}.$$

Moreover, $`dimT_X^2/fT_X^2=\tau _He_f`$ with $`\tau _H:=dimT_H^1`$ and $`e_f`$ the dimension of the smoothing on which $`f`$ lies in the versal base space of $`H`$.

(1.6) The Main Lemma becomes particularly useful if the maximal ideal of $`X`$ annihilates the $`T_X^i`$ for $`i2`$. In  it is shown that the cone over the rational normal curve of degree $`d`$ has this property. Moreover a formula is given for the dimension of all $`T^i`$.

To formulate it we first consider the fat point $`Z_m`$ of minimal multiplicity $`d=m+1`$, which is the iterated hyperplane section of the cone over the rational normal curve. We define the number $`c_{m,k}`$ as the dimension of $`T^{k1}(Z_m;)`$. The dimension of $`T_{Z_m}^i`$ is then $`mc_{m,i+1}c_{m,i}`$. By e.g. \[2, 2.4\]

$$c_{m,k}=\frac{1}{k}\underset{q|k}{}(1)^{k+\frac{k}{q}}\mu (q)m^{\frac{k}{q}}.$$

The first few values are $`c_{m,1}=m`$, $`c_{m,2}=(m^2+m)/2`$, $`c_{m,3}=(m^3m)/3`$, $`c_{m,4}=(m^4m^2)/4`$, $`c_{m,5}=(m^5m)/5`$, $`c_{m,6}=(m^6+m^3m^2m)/6`$. We combine them in the power series

$$Q_d(t)=\underset{i1}{}c_{d1,i}t^i.$$

Proposition \[2, 4.7\].The Poincaré series

$$P_d(t)=\underset{i1}{}f_i(d)t^i:=\underset{i1}{}dimT_{X_d}^it^i$$

of the cone $`X_d`$ over the rational normal curve is given by

$$P_d(t)=\left(Q_d(t)+2t+2\right)\frac{(d1)tt^2}{(t+1)^2}\frac{2t}{t+1}.$$

For low values of $`i`$ we get as dimensions of $`T_{X_d}^i`$:

$`f_1(d)`$ $`=`$ $`2d4`$
$`f_2(d)`$ $`=`$ $`(d1)(d3)`$
$`f_3(d)`$ $`=`$ $`(d1)(d2)(d3)/2`$
$`f_4(d)`$ $`=`$ $`(d1)(d2)(2d^28d+9)/6`$
$`f_5(d)`$ $`=`$ $`(d1)(d2)^2(3d^28d+9)/12`$
$`f_6(d)`$ $`=`$ $`(d1)(d2)(12d^466d^3+153d^2179d+90)/60.`$
For the cone $`X_d`$ the dimension of the $`T^i`$ equals the number of generators as $`𝒪_X`$-module. For an $`𝒪_X`$-module $`M`$ we denote the minimal number of generators, which is $`dimM/𝔪M`$, by $`cgM`$. Feeding the above results in the Main Lemma and using the arguments of \[4, 5.1\], one obtains (see ):

Theorem.For all rational surface singularities of multiplicity $`d`$ one has that $`cgT^i=f_i(d)`$ for $`i2`$.

## 2. The tangent complex with values in a sheaf

(2.1) To describe the relation between cotangent cohomology of a singularity and its first blow-up one has to globalise local constructions. We use the analytic cotangent complex of Palamodov; for a general overview see , while some technical details are to be found in .

Let $`f:XS`$ be a map of complex spaces. An analytic sheaf over $`X`$ is a morphism of complex spaces $`\pi :YX`$ together with an $`𝒪_Y`$-sheaf $``$. On $`Y`$ we have the sheaf $`𝒯^i(X/S;)`$ whose stalk at a point $`yY`$ is the cotangent cohomology $`T^i(𝒪_{X,\pi (y)}/𝒪_{S,f\pi (y)};_y)`$. This sheaf occurs in a local to global spectral sequence

$$E_2^{pq}=R^p(f\pi )_{}\left(𝒯^q(X/S;)\right)T^i(X/S;).$$

In our application, where we will calculate the left hand side, also the right hand side reduces to a familiar object. Under the condition that $`R^qf_{}()=0`$ for $`q>0`$ Christophersen and Gustavsen  obtain from Prop. 56 of the Appendix in  that $`T^i(X/S;)T^i(X/S;f_{})`$, where $`f_{}`$ is a sheaf on $`X`$. For lack of reference we give here a proof using Palamodov’s theory in the case that $`f:XS`$ is a finite map of germs.

(2.2) A polyhedron $`P`$ in a complex space $`X`$ is a relatively compact subset $`PUX`$ together with a proper embedding $`\phi :UV^N`$, where $`V`$ is an open neighbourhood of the unit polydisc $`D_N`$, such that $`P=\phi ^1(D_N)`$. A polyhedral covering $`𝒫=\{P_\alpha ,\alpha 𝒜\}`$ should satisfy $`\overline{P}_\beta U_\alpha `$, if $`\overline{P}_\beta \overline{P}_\alpha \mathrm{}`$. A simplex of the nerve $`𝒩(𝒫)`$ is a map $`A:[n]𝒜`$, written $`A=(\alpha _0,\mathrm{},\alpha _n)`$, such that $`\overline{P}_{\alpha _i}\mathrm{}`$. The set $`P_A=P_{\alpha _i}`$ is again a polyhedron with $`\phi _A=\phi _{\alpha _i}:U_{\alpha _i}V_{\alpha _i}^{N_A}`$, where $`N_A=N_{\alpha _i}`$.

Given a map $`f:XS`$ and a polyhedron $`QS`$ a relative polyhedron over $`Q`$ is a subset $`P`$ with $`\phi :UVD_N`$ such that $`\phi \times f:UV\times S`$ is a proper embedding and $`P=\phi ^1(D_N)f^1(Q)`$. A polyhedral covering $`𝒫`$ of $`X/S`$ over a covering $`𝒬`$ of $`S`$ is a covering by relative polyhedra such that each $`P_\alpha `$ lies over some $`Q_{\nu (\alpha )}`$. The mapping $`\nu `$ between index sets induces a morphism $`\nu :𝒩(𝒫)𝒩(𝒬)`$.

A resolving sheaf for $`X/S`$ is a functor $``$ defined on $`𝒩(𝒫)`$ with values in the category of sheaves of graded differential algebras, such that each $`_A`$ is a free graded commutative algebra with a distinguished system of generators $`e(A)`$ of negative grading with differential $`s`$ such that the complex $`(_A,s)`$ is a resolution of the sheaf

$$𝒪_A:=(\phi _A\times f)_{}𝒪(X)|_{\overline{D}_A\times \overline{Q}_{\nu (A)}}.$$

Furthermore, for $`BA`$ each generator of $`_B`$ is mapped to a generator of $`_A`$ under the morphism $`(p_B^A)^{}_B_A`$, where $`p_B^A:^{N_A}^{N_B}`$ is the canonical projection, and the map $`e(B)e(A)`$ is injective. The elements in $`e(A)`$ which are not in the image of any of the maps $`e(B)e(A)`$ with $`B`$ a proper subsimplex, are called proper generators. The functor $``$ is completely determined by giving all the proper generators $`e_{A,j}`$ and the values $`s(e_{A,j})`$. The proof of the existence of a resolving sheaf for $`X/S`$ for any polyhedral covering $`𝒫`$ of $`X`$ over a covering $`𝒬`$ of $`Y`$ in \[11, Thm. 1.1\] follows closely the absolute case in .

Let $`\rho _A:D_A\times Q_{\nu (A)}Y`$. The functor $`R`$ from $`𝒩(𝒫)`$ into the category of graded $`𝒪_Y`$ algebras, whose value on $`A`$ is $`R_A:=(\rho _A)_{}(_A|_{D_A\times Q_{\nu (A)}})`$ is called the resolution of $`X/S`$ on $`𝒫`$.

Let now $`Y\stackrel{\pi }{}X\stackrel{f}{}S`$ and $``$ a sheaf on $`Y`$. Let $`R`$ be a resolution of $`X/S`$ on some polyhedral covering $`𝒫`$, $``$ a polyhedral covering of $`\pi `$ over $`𝒫`$ and $`\kappa :𝒩()𝒩(𝒫)`$ the induced map between the nerves of the coverings. The functor $`F=\pi _{}()`$ has value $`\pi _{}(M_A)`$ on $`A𝒩()`$. Finally $`f_{}F`$ is a functor from $`𝒩()`$ to the category of $`𝒪_S`$-sheaves.

Definition \[11, Def. 2.2\]. The tangent complex $`T^{}(R,F)=_0^{\mathrm{}}T^n(R,F)`$ of the resolution $`R`$ with values in $``$ has as term of degree $`n`$ the $`𝒪_S`$-sheaf of $`𝒪_S`$-derivations of functors $`\kappa ^{}Rf_{}F`$ of degree $`n`$. In other words, an element $`vT^n(R,F)_s`$ is a collection of compatible $`𝒪_{S,s}`$-derivations $`v_A:R_{\kappa (A),s}(f\pi )_{}(|_A)_s`$ for $`A𝒩()`$. The differential in the tangent complex is given by $`dv=(1)^{\mathrm{deg}v}vs`$ with $`s`$ the differential in $`R`$. The cohomology of this complex is $`T^n(X/S;)`$.

(2.3) Let now $`f:(X,x)(S,s)`$ be a finite map of germs. We can choose the coverings $`𝒫`$ of $`X`$ and $`𝒬`$ of $`S`$ to consist of one element each.

Proposition.There exists a spectral sequence

$$E_2^{p,q}=T^p(X/S;R^q\pi _{})T^n(X/S;).$$

Proof. To compute the tangent complex $`T^{}(R,F)`$ we describe the resolving sheaf $``$ in more detail. Let $`P_a`$ be the polyhedron covering $`X`$. Let $`_a`$ be a resolution of $`𝒪_a`$ with generators $`e_{a,j}`$. This is basically the Tyurina resolvent of $`𝒪_{X,x}`$. The only simplices occurring in $`𝒩(𝒫)`$ are of the form $`A=(a,\mathrm{},a)`$. The proper generators of $`_A`$ are divided into a basic group, consisting of $`e_{A,j}`$ with $`\mathrm{deg}e_{A,j}=\mathrm{deg}e_{a,j}dimA`$, and a complementary group of elements of degree $`dimA`$, corresponding to the coordinate functions $`z_j`$ on $`^{n_a}`$. By considering the $`z_j`$ as complementary generators of $`_a`$ of degree 0 we have the relation $`\mathrm{deg}e_{A,j}=\mathrm{deg}e_{a,j}dimA`$ for all proper generators. The improper generators of $`_A`$ are of the form $`e_{B,j}`$ with $`BA`$ a proper subsimplex.

We introduce a filtration $`\psi `$ on $`e(A)`$ by setting $`\psi (e_{B,j})=\mathrm{deg}e_{B,j}+dimB`$, which is the degree of the corresponding generator of $`_a`$. This is the same filtration as in the proof of \[11, Thm. 1.1\], but this special case is simpler because there are no elements with filtration 1. We denote for all $`k0`$ by $`𝒮_A^k`$ the subalgebra of $`_A`$ generated by the identity and the generators of filtration at least $`k`$. We define a derivation $`_A`$ by

$$_A(e_{B,j})=(1)^me_{B\beta _0,j}+(1)^{m1}e_{B\beta _1,j}+\mathrm{}+e_{B\beta _m,j},$$

where $`B=(\beta _0,\mathrm{},\beta _m)`$. The proof of \[11, Thm. 1.1\] yields that the differential in $`_A`$ can be written as $`s_A=_A+g_A`$ with $`g_A`$ a derivation such that $`g_A(e_{A,j})`$ is a section of $`𝒮_A^{k+1}`$ if $`\psi (e_{A,j})=k`$.

Note that our $`_A`$ differs from that in , in that it extends to the last index. We indicate the first few terms of the resolution. Let $`A=(a,a)`$. To distinguish between the indices we write $`A=(\alpha ,\beta )`$. On $`^{N_a}`$ we have coordinates $`z_j`$. The map $`\phi _A`$ embeds $`U_A=U_a`$ in the diagonal of $`^{N_a}\times ^{N_a}`$, so if we take coordinates $`z_j^{(\alpha )}`$ and $`z_j^{(\beta )}`$, we get the $`N_a`$ equations $`z_j^{(\alpha )}z_j^{(\beta )}`$, which equals $`_A(z_j^{(A)})`$. To each generator $`f`$ of the ideal of $`X`$ correspond a generator $`e_{A,f}`$. One has $`s_A(e_{\alpha ,f})=f(z^{(\alpha )})`$, $`s_A(e_{\beta ,f})=f(z^{(\beta )})`$ and $`f(z^{(\beta )})f(z^{(\alpha )})`$ lies in the ideal of the diagonal, so equals $`_j(z_j^{(\alpha )}z_j^{(\beta )})h_j^{(A)}`$ for some functions $`h_j^{(A)}`$. Therefore $`s_A(e_{A,f})=e_{\beta ,f}+e_{\alpha ,f}+_jh_j^{(A)}z_j^{(A)}`$.

The filtration $`\psi `$ induces a decreasing filtration on $`T^{}(R,F)`$, of derivations $`\kappa ^{}Rf_{}F`$ vanishing on the functor $`\kappa ^{}S^k`$. In its spectral sequence the differential $`d_0`$ is the differential of the Čech complex of the covering $``$ of $`Y`$. The $`E_2`$ term is therefore $`T^p(X/S;R^q\pi _{})`$.  $`\mathrm{}`$

## 3. The formula

(3.1) We apply the results of the preceding section in the case that $`X`$ is a rational surface singularity of multiplicity $`d`$ and $`\pi :\widehat{X}X`$ is the first blow-up. Then $`\pi _{}𝒪_{\widehat{X}}=𝒪_X`$ and $`R^q\pi _{}(𝒪_{\widehat{X}})=0`$ for $`q>0`$. We choose a Noether normalisation $`XS^2`$. Note that the induced map $`\widehat{X}\widehat{S}`$ to the blow-up of the plane is again a finite map of degree $`d`$, so we can compute the higher cotangent cohomology sheaves of $`\widehat{X}`$ also as relative Harrison cohomology: $`𝒯_{\widehat{X}}^i𝒯^i(\widehat{X}/\widehat{S};𝒪_{\widehat{X}})`$ for $`i2`$.

By Prop. 2. we obtain $`T^i(X/S;𝒪_{\widehat{X}})=T^i(X/S;𝒪_X)`$, which equals $`T_X^i`$ if $`i2`$. The local-to-global spectral sequence becomes

$$E_2^{p,q}=H^p(\widehat{X},𝒯^q(X/S;𝒪_{\widehat{X}}))T^n(X/S;𝒪_X).$$

The sheaves on $`\widehat{X}`$ occurring here are the basic objects of study. To shorten notation we write

$$^i=𝒯^i(X/S;𝒪_{\widehat{X}}).$$

As only $`H^0`$ and $`H^1`$ contribute to the spectral sequence, we obtain (cf. \[5, Cor. 1.7\]):

Proposition.If $`\pi :\widehat{X}X`$ is the first blow-up of a rational surface singularity then one has short exact sequences

$$0H^1(\widehat{X},^{i1})T^i(X/S;𝒪_X)H^0(\widehat{X},^i)0$$

for all $`i0`$.

Remark. Christophersen and Gustavsen  consider the absolute case. For $`i2`$ one has that $`^i𝒯^i(X;𝒪_{\widehat{X}})`$. Comparison of the exact sequences for $`T_X^2`$ and $`T^2(X/S;𝒪_X)`$ shows that even $`H^1(\widehat{X},^1)H^1(\widehat{X},𝒯^1(X;𝒪_{\widehat{X}}))`$. This can be seen directly as follows: we have the exact sequence

$$𝒯^0(S;𝒪_{\widehat{X}})^1𝒯^1(X;𝒪_{\widehat{X}})0.$$

As $`S`$ is smooth 2-dimensional the sheaf $`𝒯^0(S;𝒪_{\widehat{X}})`$ is isomorphic to $`𝒪_{\widehat{X}}𝒪_{\widehat{X}}`$ and therefore its $`H^1`$ vanishes, implying the isomorphism in question.

(3.2) Let $`C`$ be the exceptional curve with its scheme structure, i.e., defined by $`𝔪𝒪_{\widehat{X}}`$. We study the sheaves $`^i`$ with the exact sequence

$$0𝔪^i^i_{|C}^i0.$$

Proposition.For all $`i`$ one has

$$𝔪^i𝒯^i(\widehat{X}/\widehat{S};𝒪_{\widehat{X}})𝒪_{\widehat{X}}(iC).$$

Proof. We describe $`X`$ with coordinates $`(x,y;z_1,\mathrm{},z_m)`$, where $`m=d1`$, and project onto the $`(x,y)`$-plane. The blow-up of the plane can be covered by two charts. By genericity of the projection we may assume that the two charts also suffice to cover $`\widehat{X}`$. One chart (which is a germ along the exceptional divisor, for which we take a Stein representative) has coordinates $`(x,\eta ;t_1,\mathrm{},t_m)`$ with $`y=x\eta `$, $`z_i=xt_i`$. On the second chart we have coordinates $`(\xi ,y;t_1^{},\mathrm{},t_m^{})`$ with $`x=\xi y`$, $`z_i=yt_i^{}`$ so on the intersection $`t_i=\xi t_i^{}`$.

We first look at the $`x`$-chart. We compute the stalk $`_y^i`$ from the Harrison complex $`C_{\mathrm{sh}}^{}(𝒪_{X,0}/𝒪_{S,0};𝒪_{\widehat{X},y})`$. As abbreviation we write $`C_{\mathrm{sh}}^{}(A/P;B)`$. An $`(i+1)`$-cochain $`\phi `$ is determined by its values on $`(i+1)`$-tuples of coordinates $`z_j`$. For $`𝒯^i(\widehat{X}/\widehat{S};𝒪_{\widehat{X}})`$ we have the complex $`C_{\mathrm{sh}}^{}(𝒪_{\widehat{X},y}/𝒪_{\widehat{S},\stackrel{~}{\pi }(y)};𝒪_{\widehat{X},y})`$ (we write shortly $`C_{\mathrm{sh}}^{}(B/Q;B)`$) with cochains determined by their values on $`(i+1)`$-tuples of coordinates $`t_j`$.

We define maps $`s:C_{\mathrm{sh}}^{i+1}(A/P,B)C_{\mathrm{sh}}^{i+1}(B/Q,B)`$ simply by

$$(s\phi )(t_{j_0},\mathrm{},t_{j_i})=\phi (z_{j_0},\mathrm{},z_{j_i}).$$

This does not give a map of complexes, but the following holds:

$$sd=xds,$$

where $`x`$ stands for the map ‘multiplication by $`x`$’. We check:

$$\begin{array}{c}\text{ }(sd\phi )(t_{j_0},\mathrm{},t_{j_i})=(d\phi )(z_{j_0},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})\text{ }\hfill \\ \text{ }=z_{j_0}\phi (z_{j_1},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})\phi (z_{j_0}z_{j_1},z_{j_2},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})+\mathrm{}\text{ }\hfill \\ \text{ }=z_{j_0}\phi (z_{j_1},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})p_{j_0j_1}^\nu (x,y)\phi (z_\nu ,z_{j_2},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})+\mathrm{}\text{ }\hfill \\ \text{ }=xt_{j_0}(s\phi )(t_{j_1},\mathrm{},t_{j_i})x\widehat{p}_{j_0j_1}^\nu (x,\eta )(s\phi )(t_\nu ,t_{j_2},\mathrm{},t_{j_i})+\mathrm{}\text{ }\hfill \\ \text{ }=xt_{j_0}(s\phi )(t_{j_1},\mathrm{},t_{j_i})x(s\phi )(t_{j_0}t_{j_1},t_{j_2},\mathrm{},t_{j_i})+\mathrm{}\text{ }\hfill \\ \text{ }=(xsd\phi )(t_{j_0},\mathrm{},t_{j_i}).\text{ }\hfill \end{array}$$

The maps $`s`$ induce a map $`s_{}`$ on cohomology: if $`d\phi =0`$, then $`xds\phi =0`$ and therefore $`ds\phi =0`$ as $`x`$ is not a zero-divisor; furthermore, if $`\phi =d\psi `$ then $`s\phi =dxs\psi `$. As the maps $`s`$ are surjective, $`s_{}`$ is also surjective.

The kernel of $`s_{}`$ is the kernel of multiplication by $`x`$ on $`Harr^{i+1}(A/P,B)`$: if $`s_{}[\phi ]=0`$, then $`s\phi =ds\psi `$ for some $`\psi `$ and therefore $`x\phi =d\psi `$ and conversely if $`x\phi =d\psi `$ then $`xs\phi =xds\psi `$, so $`s_{}[\phi ]=0`$. This makes $`Harr^{i+1}(B/Q,B)`$ isomorphic to the image $`xHarr^{i+1}(A/P,B)`$, giving the claimed isomorphism locally.

To see what happens globally we also look at the $`y`$-chart, where we have the map $`s^{}`$. If $`\phi 𝔪^i`$ we can write $`\phi (z_{j_0},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})=x\psi (z_{j_0},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})`$ and under the isomorphism it is mapped unto $`(s\psi )(t_{j_0},\mathrm{},t_{j_i})=\psi (z_{j_0},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})`$. On the intersection we can write $`\phi (z_{j_0},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})=y\xi \psi (z_{j_0},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})`$ so the other isomorphism maps to a cocycle homologous to $`(\xi s^{}\psi )(t_{j_0}^{},\mathrm{},t_{j_i}^{})=\xi \psi (z_{j_0},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})`$. By $`\xi `$-linearity we have that $`(s\psi )(t_{j_0}^{},\mathrm{},t_{j_i}^{})=\xi ^{i+1}(s\psi )(t_{j_0},\mathrm{},t_{j_i})=\xi ^i(\xi s^{}\psi )(t_{j_0}^{},\mathrm{},t_{j_i}^{})`$.  $`\mathrm{}`$

Remark. If $`i2`$ then $`𝒯^i(\widehat{X}/\widehat{S};𝒪_{\widehat{X}})𝒯_{\widehat{X}}^i`$ is concentrated in points, but in general $`𝒯^1(\widehat{X}/\widehat{S};𝒪_{\widehat{X}})`$ is not. Its support is the critical locus of the map $`\widehat{X}\widehat{S}`$. This follows from a local computation in smooth points of $`\widehat{X}`$ using the exact sequence

$$𝒯_{\widehat{X}}^0𝒯^0(\widehat{S};𝒪_{\widehat{X}})𝒯^1(\widehat{X}/\widehat{S};𝒪_{\widehat{X}})𝒯_{\widehat{X}}^10.$$

In particular, if $`C`$ is reduced (i.e., $`X`$ has reduced fundamental cycle), then the support has no one-dimensional compact components and the $`H^1`$ of the sheaf vanishes.

(3.3) Proposition.$`H^0(\widehat{X},_{|C}^i)=0`$.

Proof. A global section of the sheaf $`_{|C}^i`$ consists of a collection of local sections $`\phi C_{\mathrm{sh}}^{i+1}(A/P,B)`$ with $`d\phi =0`$ such that the difference between two of them lies in the ideal of $`C`$. So each $`\phi (z_{j_0},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})`$ gives rise to a global section of $`𝒪_C`$, which therefore is a constant. To prove the proposition we have to show that this constant is zero.

We now argue as in the proof of Lemma 1.. In the ring $`B`$ we have the equality

$$\begin{array}{c}\text{ }0=(\delta f)(z_{j_0},\mathrm{},z_{j_i},z_k)=z_{j_0}\phi (z_{j_1},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})\pm z_kf(z_{j_0},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})\text{ }\hfill \\ \text{ }p_{j_0j_1}^\nu (x,y)\phi (z_\nu ,z_{j_2},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})+\mathrm{}\text{ }\hfill \end{array}$$

and we may divide by $`x`$ to obtain

$$\begin{array}{c}\text{ }0=t_{j_0}\phi (z_{j_1},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})\pm t_kf(z_{j_0},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})\text{ }\hfill \\ \text{ }\widehat{p}_{j_0j_1}^\nu (x,\eta )\phi (z_\nu ,z_{j_2},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})+\mathrm{}.\text{ }\hfill \end{array}$$

We note that $`C`$ is a principal divisor, defined by $`x`$. As $`1`$, $`t_1`$, …, $`t_{d1}`$ are linearly independent modulo $`(x,\eta )`$ we find that $`\phi (z_{j_1},\mathrm{},z_{j_i})=0H^0(𝒪_C)`$.  $`\mathrm{}`$

Corollary.For $`i2`$ one has $`H^0(^i)H^0(𝒯_{\widehat{X}}^i)`$.

(3.4) In order to compute $`H^1(^{i1})`$ we identify this group with the kernel of the map $`T^i(X/S;𝒪_X)H^0(^i)`$. From now on we fix an element $`x`$, which is supposed to be chosen generically.

Lemma.The kernel of multiplication by $`x`$ on $`T^i(X/S;𝒪_X)`$ is contained in the kernel of the map $`T^i(X/S;𝒪_X)H^0(^i)`$.

Proof. Suppose $`\phi T^i(X/S;𝒪_X)`$ is annihilated by $`x`$, i.e. $`x\phi =d\psi `$. As $`d\psi 0`$ modulo $`P`$, the argument of Lemma 1. shows that $`\psi `$ takes values in the maximal ideal.

Consider $`\phi `$ as global section of $`^i`$. We may assume by genericity of $`x`$ that a global section vanishes if and only if it vanishes in the chart $`x0`$ (the special points of $`^i`$ on the exceptional divisor lie in this chart). The values of $`\psi `$ lie in $`𝔪`$ and are therefore in $`B`$ divisible by $`x`$. We obtain that $`\phi =d(\psi /x)`$.  $`\mathrm{}`$

Lemma.Let $`K`$ be a submodule of $`T_X^i`$, $`i2`$ containing the kernel of multiplication by $`x`$. Then $`dimK/xK=cgT^i`$.

Proof. Consider the multiplication $`K\stackrel{x}{}K`$. As $`KT^i`$ the kernel is always contained in $`Ker\{T^i\stackrel{x}{}T^i\}`$ so under the assumption of the Lemma both kernels are equal. As $`K`$ is finite-dimensional, kernel and cokernel have the same dimension, and the same holds for $`T^i`$. Therefore $`dimK/xK=dimT^i/xT^i`$. For a general hyperplane section this dimension is $`cgT^i`$.  $`\mathrm{}`$

The previous two lemmas show that $`dimH^1(^{i1})/xH^1(^{i1})`$ has dimension $`f_i(d)`$. We have to determine $`xH^1(^{i1})`$. Since $`x`$ is generic the cokernel of $`^{i1}\stackrel{x}{}𝔪^{i1}`$ has support at the strict transform of the divisor of $`x`$. In particular its $`H^1`$ vanishes and therefore the map $`H^1(^{i1})\stackrel{x}{}H^1(𝔪^{i1})`$ is surjective. The image of the composed map $`H^1(^{i1})\stackrel{x}{}H^1(𝔪^{i1})H^1(^{i1})`$ is $`xH^1(^{i1})`$. As $`H^1(𝔪^{i1})H^1(^{i1})`$ is injective we obtain $`xH^1(^{i1})=H^1(𝔪^{i1})`$. For $`i>2`$ this group vanishes.

(3.5) To collect our results in formulas for the dimension of $`T^i`$ we introduce a name for the remaining unknown term.

Definition. For a rational surface singularity $`X`$ we define the invariant

$$c(X)=dimH^1(𝔪^1).$$

Remarks.
1) By Remark 3. the correction term $`H^1(𝔪^1)=H^1(\widehat{X},𝒯^1(\widehat{X}/\widehat{S};𝒪_{\widehat{X}})(C))`$ vanishes if $`X`$ has reduced fundamental cycle.
2) Our invariant is the same as the one Christophersen–Gustavsen  define using their absolute version $`_{CG}^1`$ of the sheaf $`^1`$. This follows from the formula for $`T^2`$. A direct proof can be obtained as in Remark 3.. One tensors the exact sequence occurring there with the invertible sheaf $`𝒪_{\widehat{X}}(C)`$ and uses that $`H^1(\widehat{X},𝔪_{CG}^1)=H^1(\widehat{X},_{CG}^1(C))`$ \[5, Prop. 4.1\].

Theorem.If $`X`$ is a rational surface singularity of multiplicity $`d`$ and $`\widehat{X}X`$ the first blow up, then for $`i>2`$

$$dimT_X^i=cgT_X^i+dimT_{\widehat{X}}^i$$

with $`cgT_X^i=f_i(d)`$ as given in (1.), and

$$dimT_X^2=(d1)(d3)+dimT_{\widehat{X}}^2+c(X).$$

## 4. Good maximal deformations

(4.1) The dimension formula above is an inductive formula. To make it more explicit we first define the multiplicity sequence of a rational singularity in the obvious way as the sequence of multiplicities of the singularities on successive blow ups (this are the infinitely near singularities, including the singularity itself). We denote by $`X_P`$ the singularity at an infinitely near point $`P`$ and by $`d(P)`$ its multiplicity.

The $`T^1`$-formula of  can be best stated as a formula for the codimension of the (smooth) Artin component in the Zariski tangent space of the versal base space. We denote this by invariant by $`\mathrm{cod}_{\mathrm{AC}}(X)`$. For the cone over the rational normal curve of degree $`d3`$ it has value $`d3`$.

By induction we obtain from \[5, Thms. 3.8 and 3.13\] with Thm. 3. the following formulas.

Theorem.For a rational surface singularity $`X`$ of multiplicity $`d`$

$`dimT_X^i`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{P}{}}f_i(d),i3,`$
$`dimT_X^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{P}{}}(d(P)1)(d(P)3)+{\displaystyle \underset{P}{}}c(X_P),`$
$`\mathrm{cod}_{\mathrm{AC}}(X)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{P}{}}(d(P)3)+{\displaystyle \underset{P}{}}c(X_P),`$
where the sum ranges over all infinitely near singular points $`P`$ of multiplicity at least three.

(4.2)De Jong and Van Straten  derived their dimension formulas for $`T^1`$ and $`T^2`$ using a special deformation to the cone over the rational normal curve of degree $`d`$ and all singularities on the first blow up. The same deformation also yields the surjectivity of the obstruction map.

The important ingredient in our dimension formulas is the multiplicity sequence. With this in mind we define a more general class of special deformations.

Definition. A good maximal deformation of a rational surface singularity $`X`$ of multiplicity $`d`$ is a one-parameter deformation $`X_TT`$ such that the general fibre $`X_t`$ has as singularities cones over rational normal curves of multiplicity $`d(P)`$, one for each infinitely near singularity of multiplicity at least 3.

Proposition.If a rational surface singularity $`X`$ has a good maximal deformation, then the number of equations of the versal base space equals the dimension of $`T_X^2`$.

Proof. Let $`X_TT`$ be a good maximal deformation of $`X`$. Versality induces a map $`b:TB_X`$, to the base space of the miniversal deformation. In a general point $`b(t)`$ the Zariski tangent space to $`B_X`$ has codimension $`_Pc(X_P)`$ in the Zariski tangent space at the origin, so one needs so many linear equations. To describe the base space at the point $`b(t)`$ one needs in addition $`_P(d(P)1)(d(P)3)`$ quadratic equations. Therefore one needs at the origin at least $`_P(d(P)1)(d(P)3)+_Pc(X_P)`$ equations. As this number is the dimension of $`T_X^2`$, they also suffice.  $`\mathrm{}`$

Remark. The $`T^1`$-formula above follows easily from the existence of a good maximal deformation. Consider the long exact sequence

$$T_{X_T/T}^1\stackrel{\alpha }{}T_X^1T_{X_T/T}^2\stackrel{t}{}T_{X_T/T}^2\stackrel{\beta }{}T_X^2T_{X_T/T}^3\stackrel{t}{}T_{X_T/T}^3\stackrel{\gamma }{}T_X^3$$

The dimension of $`T^3`$ is constant in this deformation, so the rank of the $`\{t\}`$-module $`T_{X_T/T}^3`$ is equal to $`dimT_X^3`$. Therefore $`\gamma `$ is surjective, and as the rank is equal to $`dimCoker(t)dimKer(t)`$, we obtain that multiplication by $`t`$ is injective, and therefore the map $`\beta `$ is also surjective. By assumption on the deformation we have $`dimT_X^2RankT_{X_T/T}^2=_Pc(X_P)`$. The dimension of $`Ker(t:T_{X_T/T}^2T_{X_T/T}^2)`$ equals therefore also $`_Pc(X_P)`$ and we obtain $`dimT_X^1=dim\mathrm{Im}\alpha +_Pc(X_P)`$. But we know the dimension of the image of $`\alpha `$: by  it equals the dimension of the Zariski tangent space to $`B_X`$ in the general point $`b(t)`$. The codimension of the Artin component is there $`_P(d(P)3)`$.

(4.3) The existence of a good maximal deformation is established by De Jong and Van Straten for rational singularities with reduced fundamental cycle and by De Jong in the determinantal case .

In the first case one can deform to the singularities on the first blow up plus a cone of degree $`d`$, but for determinantal singularities this is in general impossible. Specifically, if $`X`$ contains one configuration of type $`D_{2d+1}^{\mathrm{II}}`$ (in the notation of ), then the dimension of $`T^1`$ will be too small to allow a deformation to a determinantal with $`A_{2d}^1`$-configuration and a cone (I checked this by computing $`T^1`$ in the case $`d=3`$). But the singularity does deform into two cones.

In the definition of a good maximal deformation we ignore all occurring rational double points, for a good reason: the singularities on the first blow-up of $`D_4`$ are three $`A_1`$’s, and the cone over the rational normal curve of degree two is also $`A_1`$ but there is no deformation $`D_44A_1`$.

I hoped to prove that every rational singularity has a good maximal deformation but unfortunately this is not true. First we note that the dimension of the Artin component equals $`h^1(\stackrel{~}{X},\mathrm{\Theta }_{\stackrel{~}{X}})`$, where $`\stackrel{~}{X}X`$ is the minimal resolution, with exceptional set $`E=E_1\mathrm{}E_r`$. As usual we denote by $`b_i`$ the self-intersection of the irreducible component $`E_i`$. By \[14, Prop. 2.2 and 2.5\],

$$h^1(\stackrel{~}{X},\mathrm{\Theta }_{\stackrel{~}{X}})=\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}(b_i1)+h^1(\stackrel{~}{X},\mathrm{\Theta }_{\stackrel{~}{X}}(\mathrm{log}E)).$$

The second summand gives the dimension of the equisingular stratum. The stratum in the Artin component of fibres with a cone over the rational normal curve of multiplicity $`d`$ as singularity has codimension $`d1`$. By openess of versality these strata intersect transversally in the base of a good maximal deformation.

Lemma.The general rational singularity with a given resolution graph does not have a good maximal deformation, if $`_P(d(P)1)(b_i1)`$.

An example where this condition is satisfied, is obtained by generalising the $`D_4`$-singularity to higher multiplicity: consider a singularity with fundamental cycle reduced everywhere except at one $`(2)`$-curve, such that the first blow up has three singularities of multiplicity $`k`$. The simplest way to do this gives the following graph, where as usual a dot stands for a $`(2)`$-curve.

The singularity has multiplicity $`3k4`$; for $`k=2`$ it is indeed $`D_4`$. Here we have $`_P(d(P)1)=(b_i1)=6k8`$.

Address of the author:
Matematik
Göteborgs universitet
Chalmers tekniska högskola
SE 412 96 Göteborg, Sweden
email: stevens@math.chalmers.se