text:
# A nonsingular solution of the edge dislocation in the gauge theory of dislocations

## 1 Introduction

The gauge theory of dislocations  is a very attractive field of research. The theory of dislocations is in these theories considered as a translational gauge theory ($`T(3)`$-gauge theory). An important goal is to find modified solutions of the stress and strain field of screw and edge dislocations in this framework because the “classical” elasticity of dislocations contains singularities at the dislocation line. Therefore, the classical solutions cannot be applied within the dislocation core region. This is unfortunate since the core region is the most important from the point of dislocation and failure mechanics. The difference in these gauge models is the form of the $`T(3)`$-gauge Lagrangian. Edelen et al.  used the simplest form quadratic in the $`T(3)`$-gauge field strength. In  the gauge Lagrangian was proposed in the three-dimensional Hilbert-Einstein form. The most general dislocation gauge Lagrangian for an isotropic and anisotropic material was proposed in .

A correct gauge theoretical solution of the stress field of a screw dislocation is given in . This solution has no singularity at the dislocation line and the far field stress is that of a classical screw dislocation.

Up to now, the situation is less satisfactory for the edge dislocation. In the Edelen model  the far field of the stress $`\sigma _{zz}`$ is different from the standard one. In fact, the far field stress $`\sigma _{zz}`$ is equal to $`\nu ^1(\sigma _{xx}+\sigma _{yy})`$ instead of $`\nu (\sigma _{xx}+\sigma _{yy})`$ (see also ). Unfortunately, no explicit gauge solution for the edge dislocation was given in . Moreover, the structure of the gauge Lagrangian used by Edelen et al. requires, in principle, an asymmetric force stress . Malyshev  used the Hilbert-Einstein Lagrangian as a gauge Lagrangian and found the stress field of a straight edge dislocation with a modified asymptotic behaviour which differs from the classical edge dislocation. In fact, the stress field has no singularity at the dislocation line and has an oscillatory behaviour with slowly decreasing amplitude far from the dislocation core. His solution can be considered as a complicated gauge defect with modified asymptotics instead of an elementary defect .

On the other hand, there are other non-standard continuum models of defects, e.g., the Peierls-Nabarro model , the nonlocal continuum model  and the strain gradient elasticity . The force stresses calculated in these theories are symmetric even in the core. In the case of a screw dislocation, the solution of the force stresses in nonlocal elasticity  and in gradient elasticity  agrees with the gauge theoretical one . Additionally, the strain fields calculated in gradient theory  and in gauge theory  coincide. In the case of an edge dislocation, the solution in nonlocal elasticity was given in an integral form by means of a special two-dimensional nonlocal kernel . Using another two-dimensional nonlocal kernel Eringen  gave a different solution of the straight edge dislocation. The dislocation stress field in gradient elasticity  was obtained in a closed analytical form by using the Fourier transform method, it is equal to zero at the dislocation line and beyond the dislocation core the classical and the gradient solutions coincide. In a quasi-continuum model  a modified stress field of an edge and a screw dislocation was obtained, also. In this approach the stress field has no divergence at the dislocation line and at large distances it contains a decreasing oscillatory contribution. Dislocations have also been considered in a Cosserat media (see, e.g., ). The force stresses of dislocations calculated within the Cosserat theory are, in general, asymmetric. The solutions of edge and screw dislocations  found for the elastic strain and stress fields differ from the classical solutions but still posses singularities at the dislocation line.

A common feature of gauge theory, nonlocal elasticity, strain gradient theory and theory of Cosserat media of defects is that a characteristic length scale enters the constitutive laws. In the gauge theory of defects and in the theory of Cosserat and multipolar media this length is a material property which carries with it all of the difference between solutions with or without moment stresses. Its influence might be become important as dimensions of the body or wavelengths diminish to the order of the characteristic inner length. By means of this characteristic length scale it is possible to define the dislocation core radius in a straightforward manner .

The question arises: Can we find a gauge theoretical solution for the edge dislocation which has the correct far field stress and is related to any solution of another framework? The aim of this paper is to find an answer to this question, that means to construct a correct gauge theoretical solution of a straight edge dislocation. Additionally, the relation to the nonlocal theory and strain gradient elasticity of an edge dislocation will be given. Here we restrict our considerations to the case of linear dislocation theory.

## 2 The translational gauge invariant formulation of dislocation theory

For the undeformed reference state of the body the indices $`i=1,2,3`$ are used. The final coordinates of the deformed state are labelled by the indices $`a=1,2,3`$. In presence of defects the deformed state of the material is characterized by nonholonomic coordinates. In linear theory we may use $`\delta _a^i`$, $`\delta _{ij}`$ and $`\delta _{ab}`$ to raise and lower the indices.

In elasticity theory the state of an elastic body is not changed under a rigid translation and rotation (global gauge transformations). In elasticity the (compatible) distortion is given as a proper gradient

$`\beta _i^a=_iu^a.`$ (2.1)
The distortion tensor is dimensionless. The basic idea of gauge theory of defects is now that the distortion has to be invariant not only under the global gauge transformation but also under if the gauge group is applied locally. In this way, one obtains the incompatible distortion in the framework of translational gauge theory of dislocations as follows

$`\beta _i^a=_iu^a+\varphi _i^a.`$ (2.2)
It is locally translational invariant (gauge invariant) due to

$`u^au^a+\tau ^a(x),\varphi _i^a\varphi _i^a_i\tau ^a(x),`$ (2.3)
where $`\tau ^a(x)`$ are local translations . Here $`u^a`$ is the displacement field from the undeformed to the deformed configuration and $`\varphi _i^a`$ is the proper incompatible part of the distortion. The incompatible distortion (2.2) can be understood as the (minimal) replacement of the compatible distortion (2.1) in the $`T(3)`$-gauge theory

$`_iu^a_iu^a+\varphi _i^a.`$ (2.4)
Then, the (incompatible) strain tensor turns out to be111We will be using the notations $`A_{(ij)}\frac{1}{2}(A_{ij}+A_{ji})`$ and $`A_{[ij]}\frac{1}{2}(A_{ij}A_{ji})`$.

$`E_{ij}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\delta _{ai}\beta _j^a+\delta _{aj}\beta _i^a\right)\beta _{(ij)}.`$ (2.5)
The skew-symmetric part of the distortion defines the elastic rotation tensor

$`\omega _{ij}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\delta _{ai}\beta _j^a\delta _{aj}\beta _i^a\right)\beta _{[ij]},`$ (2.6)
and the elastic rotation vector

$`\omega _i{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}ϵ_i^{jk}\delta _{aj}\beta _k^a.`$ (2.7)
The elastic strain energy of an isotropic media is defined by

$`W={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mu \left(\delta ^{ik}\delta ^{jl}+\delta ^{il}\delta ^{jk}+{\displaystyle \frac{2\nu }{12\nu }}\delta ^{ij}\delta ^{kl}\right)E_{ij}E_{kl},`$ (2.8)
where $`\mu `$ is the shear modulus and $`\nu `$ is Poisson’s ratio. It is now invariant under local translations. Obviously, no elastic rotation enters the relation (2.8) and, therefore, the elastic rotation has no elastic response quantity. The force stress can be derived from the strain energy

$`\sigma ^{ij}={\displaystyle \frac{W}{E_{ij}}}=2\mu \left(E^{ij}+{\displaystyle \frac{\nu }{12\nu }}\delta ^{ij}E_k^k\right).`$ (2.9)
It is the elastic response quantity to the strain tensor. Formula (2.9) expresses the (incompatible) stress-strain relation (generalized Hooke’s law).

It is well known that nontrivial traction boundary problems in the variational formulation of the gauge theory of defects can be formulated by means of a so-called null Lagrangian . When the null Lagrangian is added to the Lagrangian of elasticity, it does not change the Euler-Lagrange equation (force equilibrium) because the associated Euler-Lagrange equation, $`_j\stackrel{}{\sigma }{}_{a}{}^{j}=0`$, is identically satisfied. After minimal replacement, $`_iu^a\beta _i^a`$, the null Lagrangian

$`W_{\mathrm{bg}}=_j\left(\stackrel{}{\sigma }{}_{a}{}^{j}u_{}^{a}\right)=(_j\stackrel{}{\sigma }{}_{a}{}^{j})u^a+\stackrel{}{\sigma }{}_{a}{}^{j}_{j}^{}u^a\stackrel{}{\sigma }{}_{a}{}^{j}\beta _{j}^{a},`$ (2.10)
give rise to a background stress tensor $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }_a^j`$ which can be considered as the nucleation field in the gauge theory of defects .

As usual we use the translational field strength (torsion) to define the dislocation density tensor

$`T_{ij}^a=_i\beta _j^a_j\beta _i^a,`$ (2.11)
which has the dimension of an inverse length. The dislocation density is a fundamental quantity in plasticity because the dislocation is the elementary carrier of plasticity. This field is a physical state quantity which, at least in principle, can be measured without knowing anything about the history of the body. It is possible with the help of high resolution transmission electron microscopes (HRTEM) to see single dislocations with their core configuration in crystals. Since dislocations change the energy of the body (crystal), they should appear in the total Lagrangian. The dislocation Lagrangian, which we use, contains only the translational gauge field strength and is given by

$`_{\mathrm{disl}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}T_{ij}^aH_a^{ij},`$ (2.12)
where the moment stress $`H_a^{ij}`$ is the response quantity to dislocation density. This means, that at all positions where the dislocation density is non zero, also localized moment stresses are present. It is convenient to perform an irreducible decomposition of the torsion, from which we can construct the most general isotropic constitutive law between the dislocation density and the moment stress in the following way

$`H_{aij}={\displaystyle \underset{I=1}{\overset{3}{}}}a_I^{(I)}T_{aij}.`$ (2.13)
Here $`a_1`$, $`a_2`$ and $`a_3`$ are new material coefficients. They have the dimension of a force. The irreducible decomposition of the torsion under the rotation group $`SO(3)`$ reads

$`T_{aij}=^{(1)}T_{aij}+^{(2)}T_{aij}+^{(3)}T_{aij}.`$ (2.14)
The tensor, the trace and the axial tensor pieces are defined by (see also )

$`^{(1)}T_{aij}`$ $`=T_{aij}^{(2)}T_{aij}^{(3)}T_{aij}`$ $`\text{(tentor)},`$ (2.15)
$`^{(2)}T_{aij}`$ $`:={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\delta _{ai}T_{lj}^l+\delta _{aj}T_{il}^l\right)`$ $`\text{(trator)},`$ (2.16)
$`^{(3)}T_{aij}`$ $`:={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\left(T_{aij}+T_{ija}+T_{jai}\right)`$ (axitor). (2.17)
Then, the moment stress tensor reads

$`H_{aij}=2{\displaystyle \frac{_{\mathrm{disl}}}{T^{aij}}}=c_1T_{aij}+c_2\left(T_{ija}+T_{jai}\right)+c_3\left(\delta _{ai}T_{lj}^l+\delta _{aj}T_{il}^l\right),`$ (2.18)
with the abbreviations

$`c_1:={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\left(2a_1+a_3\right),c_2:={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\left(a_3a_1\right),c_3:={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(a_2a_1\right).`$ (2.19)
The Euler-Lagrange equations for the Lagrangian $`=_{\mathrm{disl}}W+W_{\mathrm{bg}}`$ turn out to be

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta u^a}}`$ $`_j\sigma _a^j=0`$ $`\text{(force equilibrium)},`$ (2.20)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta \varphi _j^a}}`$ $`_iH_a^{ij}=\widehat{\sigma }_a^j`$ $`\text{(moment equilibrium)},`$ (2.21)
with the so-called effective stress tensor

$`\widehat{\sigma }_a^j:=\sigma _a^j\stackrel{}{\sigma }{}_{a}{}^{j},`$ (2.22)
which drives the dislocation fields. The field equations (2.20) and (2.21) determine the fields $`\beta _j^a`$ and $`T_{ij}^a`$ which represent the geometric (or kinematic) degrees of freedom. Note that in our approach the dislocation density is not given, a priori, as delta function. In this field theoretical context, we are able to calculate even the dislocation core. The static responses are the fields $`\sigma _a^j`$ and $`H_a^{ij}`$.

The L.H.S. of (2.21) can be written in terms of the distortion tensor

$`^iH_{aij}=c_1\left(\mathrm{\Delta }\beta _{aj}^i_j\beta _{ai}\right)`$ $`+c_2\left(^i_j\beta _{ia}_a^i\beta _{ij}+_a^i\beta _{ji}\mathrm{\Delta }\beta _{ja}\right)`$ (2.23)
$`+c_3\left(_a^i\beta _{ij}_a_j\beta _i^i+\delta _{aj}\mathrm{\Delta }\beta _i^i\delta _{aj}^i^k\beta _{ik}\right).`$
In the general case the gauge theory of dislocations for isotropic materials contains three new material coefficients which can be used to define three internal characteristic lengths. In order to obtain only one coefficient from the three ones we need a suitable choice for the moment stress tensor $`H_{aij}`$ and the coefficients $`a_1`$, $`a_2`$ and $`a_3`$, respectively. By means of such a choice we want to find a gauge theoretical solution of symmetric force stresses for the edge dislocation. If we use the choice222Note that Malyshev  used the so-called Einstein choice $`a_2=a_1`$ and $`a_3=\frac{a_1}{2}`$ for an (modified) edge dislocation. By applying the stress function method he found a gauge theoretical solution for the edge dislocation in terms of the Bessel and Neumann functions and the modified Bessel functions. His solution of an (modified) edge dislocation has no singularity at $`r=0`$ but differs asymptotically from the classical edge dislocation. In detail the symmetric stress field, the closure failure and the dislocation density show a decaying behaviour with oscillations. Additionally, his solution violates in the dislocation core region the plane-strain condition $`E_{zz}=0`$.

$`a_2={\displaystyle \frac{1+\nu }{1\nu }}a_1,a_3={\displaystyle \frac{a_1}{2}},c_1={\displaystyle \frac{a_1}{2}},c_2={\displaystyle \frac{a_1}{2}},c_3={\displaystyle \frac{\nu }{1\nu }}a_1,`$ (2.24)
the localized moment stress tensor reads

$`H_{aij}={\displaystyle \frac{a_1}{2}}\left(T_{aij}T_{ija}T_{jai}+{\displaystyle \frac{2\nu }{1\nu }}\left(\delta _{ai}T_{lj}^l+\delta _{aj}T_{il}^l\right)\right).`$ (2.25)
With the relations $`H_{ak}=\frac{1}{2}ϵ_{ijk}H_a^{ij}`$ and $`T_{ij}^a=ϵ_{ijk}\alpha ^{ak}`$, and by using the conventional (microscopic) dislocation density tensor $`\alpha ^{ai}=ϵ^{ijk}_j\beta _k^a`$ and the Nye  tensor333Here the tensor $`\kappa _{aj}`$ is a microscopic quantity. $`\kappa _{aj}`$

$`\kappa _{aj}=\alpha _{ja}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta _{aj}\alpha _k^k,\alpha _{aj}=\kappa _{ja}\delta _{aj}\kappa _k^k,`$ (2.26)
we obtain from (2.18) the relation

$`H_{aj}=a_1\left(\alpha _{aj}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta _{aj}\alpha _k^k+{\displaystyle \frac{2\nu }{1\nu }}\alpha _{[aj]}\right)=a_1\left(\kappa _{ja}+{\displaystyle \frac{2\nu }{1\nu }}\kappa _{[ja]}\right).`$ (2.27)
Alternatively, the dislocation Lagrangian (2.12) can be written in the form

$`_{\mathrm{disl}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\alpha ^{ai}H_{ai}.`$ (2.28)
By using (2.27) the L.H.S. of (2.21) reads

$`^iH_{aij}=a_1`$ $`\{\mathrm{\Delta }\beta _{(aj)}^i_j\beta _{(ai)}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\nu }}_a^i\beta _{[ij]}`$ (2.29)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\nu }{1\nu }}((_a_j\delta _{aj}\mathrm{\Delta })\beta _i^i+\delta _{aj}^i^k\beta _{ik}_a^i\beta _{(ij)})\}.`$
Obviously, the strain and the rotation tensor appear in (2.29) because the distortion is not symmetric. It is reminded that in the so-called Hilbert-Einstein choice only the strain tensor enters the moment equilibrium (see ).

We now define the rotation gradient444DeWit  called such a rotation gradient elastic bend-twist.

$`k_{ij}^a=^a\beta _{[ij]}.`$ (2.30)
It has the dimension of reciprocal of length. The rotation gradient describes a “lattice-curvature”. It contains two pieces. To see this we rewrite (2.30)

$`k_{ijk}=\left(_kE_{ij}_jE_{ik}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(T_{ijk}T_{jki}T_{kij}\right).`$ (2.31)
The first one is caused by local (incompatible) elastic strain and the other one by dislocations (contortion) . The second piece may be identified with the plastic “lattice-curvature” which cannot be realized without dislocations. We add the following gauge invariant Lagrangian which looks like a rotation gradient Lagrangian of a Cosserat medium (see, e.g., )

$`_{\mathrm{grad}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}k_{ij}^a\mu _a^{ij}.`$ (2.32)
The response quantity to the rotation gradient is a so-called “Cosserat” couple stress for an isotropic material555The relations between the constants in (2.33) and those in  are: $`d_1=2\alpha _2`$, $`d_2=\alpha _3`$, $`d_3=\alpha _1`$. (see, e.g., )

$`\mu _{a[ij]}={\displaystyle \frac{_{\mathrm{grad}}}{k^{a[ij]}}}=d_1k_{a[ij]}+d_2\left(k_{i[ja]}+k_{j[ai]}\right)+d_3\left(\delta _{ai}k_{[lj]}^l+\delta _{aj}k_{[il]}^l\right).`$ (2.33)
This constitutive relation uses the three rotation gradients, which are invariant under the $`SO(3)`$, and is analogous to the invariant constitutive relation for the torsion (2.18). We find

$`^i\mu _{i[aj]}=d_1\mathrm{\Delta }\beta _{[aj]}+(d_2d_3)\left(^i_j\beta _{[ia]}^i_a\beta _{[ij]}\right).`$ (2.34)
Another gauge invariant Lagrangian, which we add, is given in terms of the torsion and the rotation gradient

$`_{\mathrm{grad}\mathrm{disl}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}d_0k_{ij}^aT_a^{ij}.`$ (2.35)
Equation (2.35) may be considered as a kind of an interaction Lagrangian between dislocations and the “lattice-curvature”. We define the response quantity

$`\lambda _{aij}={\displaystyle \frac{_{\mathrm{grad}\mathrm{disl}}}{(^i\beta ^{aj})}}=d_0\left(k_{aij}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}T_{iaj}\right),`$ (2.36)
with

$`^i\lambda _{aij}=d_0^i\left(_a\beta _{[ij]}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(_a\beta _{ij}_j\beta _{ia}\right)\right).`$ (2.37)
The coefficients $`d_0`$, $`d_1`$, $`d_2`$ and $`d_3`$ have the dimensions of forces.

If we use the Lagrangian $`=_{\mathrm{disl}}+_{\mathrm{grad}}+_{\mathrm{grad}\mathrm{disl}}W+W_{\mathrm{bg}}`$, the moment equilibrium reads

$`^i\left(H_{aij}+\lambda _{aij}+\mu _{i[aj]}\right)=\widehat{\sigma }_{aj},`$ (2.38)
which can be decomposed into its symmetric and antisymmetric part. For the symmetric part of the moment equilibrium we obtain the equation

$`^i\left(H_{(aj)i}+\lambda _{(aj)i}\right)+\widehat{\sigma }_{(aj)}=0.`$ (2.39)
By using the choice of the coefficient

$`d_0={\displaystyle \frac{a_1}{(1\nu )}},`$ (2.40)
formula (2.39) can be rewritten in terms of the strain tensor, only, according to

$`a_1\left\{\mathrm{\Delta }E_{ij}^k_{(i}E_{j)k}{\displaystyle \frac{\nu }{1\nu }}\left(\left(_i_j\delta _{ij}\mathrm{\Delta }\right)E_k^k+\delta _{ij}^k^lE_{kl}^k_{(i}E_{j)k}\right)\right\}=\widehat{\sigma }_{ij}.`$ (2.41)
This equation can be interpreted as the (static) field equation in the elastoplastic theory of dislocations. It is derived from the combination of several Lagrangians – Eqs. (2.12), (2.32), (2.35) – and the consideration of the null Lagrangian (2.10) and the strain energy (2.8) in combination with the special choices of material constants (2.24) and (2.40). The antisymmetric part of the moment equilibrium666Indices which are exempt from antisymmetrisation are enclosed by vertical bars.

$`^i\left(H_{[aj]i}\lambda _{[a|i|j]}\mu _{i[aj]}\right)=0,`$ (2.42)
can be satisfied by the help of the choice of the coefficients

$`d_1=0,d_2d_3={\displaystyle \frac{d_0}{2}}.`$ (2.43)
The physical interpretation of Eq. (2.42) is the following. Because we have required that the force stress should be symmetric, $`\sigma _{[ij]}=0`$, we have had to introduce the couple stresses $`\lambda _{[a|i|j]}`$ and $`\mu _{i[aj]}`$ in order to fulfill the antisymmetric moment equilibrium (2.42). Consequently, (2.42) expresses the moment equilibrium between the antisymmetric moment stresses $`H_{[aj]i}`$, $`\lambda _{[a|i|j]}`$ and $`\mu _{i[aj]}`$. The fact that the moment stress is the specific response to the presence of dislocations and that the field equation (2.38) expresses the moment equilibrium is a hint that the gauge theory of dislocations may be connected with the theory of a constrained, anholonomic Cosserat media with symmetric force stress. The dislocations bring the anholonomity into the picture. A similar remark in this direction was given by Kluge . It should be also possible to extend this theory to a more general dislocation theory in a general Cosserat continuum with antisymmetric force stress and 10 material constants which is not the aim of the present paper. However, for antisymmetric force stress and vanishing dislocation density the moment equilibrium equation recovers the form of the Cosserat equilibrium equation under zero external moments.

Finally, we may define the hyperstress

$`M_a^{ij}{\displaystyle \frac{}{(_i\beta _j^a)}}=H_a^{ij}+\lambda _a^{ij}+\mu _a^{ij}.`$ (2.44)
This hyperstress tensor is close to Maugin’s so-called “Piola-Kirchhoff” hyperstress . Such a hyperstress tensor was also used by Toupin for the theory of nonsimple elastic materials . Thus, the dislocation theory given in this paper can be considered as an anholonomic higher-order gradient theory in nonsimple materials. If $`a_1=0`$, there are no effects of hyperstresses and couple stresses.

By the help of the inverse of Hooke’s law

$`E_{ij}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\mu }}\left(\sigma _{ij}{\displaystyle \frac{\nu }{1+\nu }}\delta _{ij}\sigma _k^k\right)`$ (2.45)
and using the equilibrium condition $`^j\sigma _{ij}=0`$, we obtain from Eq. (2.41) the inhomogeneous Helmholtz equation as field equation for every component of the stress tensor

$`(1\kappa ^2\mathrm{\Delta })\sigma _{ij}=\stackrel{}{\sigma }{}_{ij}{}^{},\kappa ^2={\displaystyle \frac{2\mu }{a_1}}.`$ (2.46)
It is important to note that (2.46) agrees with the field equation for the stress field in nonlocal elasticity  and in gradient elasticity . The factor $`\kappa ^1`$ has the physical dimension of a length and therefore it defines an internal characteristic length (dislocation length scale). By using (2.45) and (2.46) we obtain an inhomogeneous Helmholtz equation for the strain fields

$`(1\kappa ^2\mathrm{\Delta })E_{ij}=\stackrel{}{E}{}_{ij}{}^{},`$ (2.47)
where $`\stackrel{}{E}_{ij}`$ is the background strain tensor. Equation (2.47) is similar to the equation for strain of the gradient theory used by Gutkin and Aifantis , if we identify $`\kappa ^2`$ with their corresponding gradient coefficient (see, e.g., equation (4) in ). Note that only for compatible strain, $`\varphi _{ij}=0`$, one can deduce an inhomogeneous Helmholtz equation for the displacement from (2.47) which is analogous to the equation for the displacement in gradient elasticity (see equation (3) in ).

The conditions on a gauge theoretical solution of dislocations in this framework are: (i) the stress field should have no singularity at $`r=0`$, (ii) the far field stress ought to be the classical stress field. We use the condition (ii) because the classical stress fields are well-established and in good agreement with physical observations, e.g. the investigation of stresses around dislocations by means of the photoelasticity method (see, e.g., ).

## 3 The gauge theoretical solution of the straight edge dislocation

### 3.1 The stress, strain and displacement field in an infinitely extended body

Let us now derive the correct dislocation fields within the translational gauge theory. We take Cartesian coordinates, so that the $`z`$-axis is along the dislocation line and the $`x`$-axis is along the Burgers vector: $`b^x=b`$, $`b^y=b^z=0`$. The extra half plane lies in the plane $`x=0`$. In order to satisfy the equilibrium condition, we use the second order stress function $`f`$ and specialize to the plane problem of an edge dislocation by setting $`_z0`$. We are using the so-called stress function ansatz

$`\sigma _{ij}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}_{yy}^2f& _{xy}^2f& 0\\ _{xy}^2f& _{xx}^2f& 0\\ 0& 0& p\end{array}\right),`$ (3.4)
with

$`p=\nu \mathrm{\Delta }f,`$ (3.5)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ denotes the two-dimensional Laplacian $`_{xx}^2+_{yy}^2`$. The relation (3.5) comes from the requirement: $`E_{zz}=0`$ (plane strain). Additionally, the strain is given in terms of the stress function as

$`E_{ij}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\mu }}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}_{yy}^2f\nu \mathrm{\Delta }f& _{xy}^2f& 0\\ _{xy}^2f& _{xx}^2f\nu \mathrm{\Delta }f& 0\\ 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right).`$ (3.9)
We use the classical stress field of a straight edge dislocation in terms of the Airy stress function as the background stress

$`\stackrel{}{\sigma }{}_{ij}{}^{}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}_{yy}^2\chi & _{xy}^2\chi & 0\\ _{xy}^2\chi & _{xx}^2\chi & 0\\ 0& 0& \nu \mathrm{\Delta }\chi \end{array}\right).`$ (3.13)
The Airy stress function

$`\chi =Ay\mathrm{ln}r,A={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b}{2\pi (1\nu )}},`$ (3.14)
fulfills the following inhomogeneous bipotential (or biharmonic) equation

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }\chi =4\pi A_y\delta (r),`$ (3.15)
where $`\delta (r)`$ is the two-dimensional Dirac delta function and $`r^2=x^2+y^2`$. Substituting (3.4) and (3.13) into (2.46) we get

$`\left(\mathrm{\Delta }\kappa ^2\right)f=\kappa ^2Ay\mathrm{ln}r.`$ (3.16)
We make the ansatz

$`f=Ay\mathrm{ln}r+f_{(1)}`$ (3.17)
and obtain

$`\left(\mathrm{\Delta }\kappa ^2\right)f_{(1)}=2A_y\mathrm{ln}r.`$ (3.18)
Now we set

$`f_{(1)}=2A_yf_{(2)}`$ (3.19)
with

$`\left(\mathrm{\Delta }\kappa ^2\right)f_{(2)}=\mathrm{ln}r`$ (3.20)
and we get the solution

$`f_{(2)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\kappa ^2}}\left(\mathrm{ln}r+K_0(\kappa r)\right).`$ (3.21)
Finally, we obtain the solution of (3.16)

$`f=A\left(y\mathrm{ln}r+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\kappa ^2}}_y\left(\mathrm{ln}r+K_0(\kappa r)\right)\right).`$ (3.22)
Then the solution of the modified stress function of an edge dislocation with Burgers vector $`bx`$ reads777For an edge dislocation with the Burgers vector $`by`$ the modified stress function is given by:    $`f={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b}{2\pi (1\nu )}}x\left\{\mathrm{ln}r+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\kappa ^2r^2}}\left(1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right)\right\}.`$

$`f={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b}{2\pi (1\nu )}}y\left\{\mathrm{ln}r+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\kappa ^2r^2}}\left(1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right)\right\},`$ (3.23)
where the first piece is the Airy stress function and $`K_n`$ is the modified Bessel function of the second kind and $`n=0,1,\mathrm{}`$ denotes the order of this function.

By means of Eqs. (3.4) and (3.23), the modified stress of a straight edge dislocation is given by

$`\sigma _{xx}={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b}{2\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{y}{r^4}}\{(y^2+3x^2)+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}(y^23x^2)`$ (3.24)
$`2y^2\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)2(y^23x^2)K_2(\kappa r)\}`$
$`\sigma _{yy}={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b}{2\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{y}{r^4}}\{(y^2x^2){\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}(y^23x^2)`$ (3.25)
$`2x^2\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)+2(y^23x^2)K_2(\kappa r)\},`$
$`\sigma _{xy}={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b}{2\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{x}{r^4}}\{(x^2y^2){\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}(x^23y^2)`$ (3.26)
$`2y^2\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)+2(x^23y^2)K_2(\kappa r)\},`$
$`\sigma _{zz}={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b\nu }{\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{y}{r^2}}\left\{1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right\}.`$ (3.27)
The stress $`\sigma _{zz}`$ satisfies the condition $`\sigma _{zz}=\nu (\sigma _{xx}+\sigma _{yy})`$. The trace of the stress tensor $`\sigma _k^k`$ produced by the edge dislocation in an isotropic medium is

$`\sigma _k^k={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b(1+\nu )}{\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{y}{r^2}}\left\{1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right\}.`$ (3.28)
The spatial distribution of stresses of an edge dislocation near the dislocation line are presented in Fig. 1.

Let us now discuss some details of the core modification of the stress fields. The stress fields have no artificial singularities at the core and the maximum stress occurs at a short distance away from the dislocation line (see Fig. 2). In fact, when $`r0`$, we have

$`K_1(\kappa r){\displaystyle \frac{1}{\kappa r}},K_2(\kappa r){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{(\kappa r)^2}},`$ (3.29)
and thus $`\sigma _{ij}0`$. It can be seen that the stresses have the following extreme values: $`|\sigma _{xx}(0,y)|0.546\kappa \frac{\mu b}{2\pi (1\nu )}`$ at $`|y|0.996\kappa ^1`$, $`|\sigma _{yy}(0,y)|0.260\kappa \frac{\mu b}{2\pi (1\nu )}`$ at $`|y|1.494\kappa ^1`$, $`|\sigma _{xy}(x,0)|0.260\kappa \frac{\mu b}{2\pi (1\nu )}`$ at $`|x|1.494\kappa ^1`$, and $`|\sigma _{zz}(0,y)|0.399\kappa \frac{\mu b\nu }{\pi (1\nu )}`$ at $`|y|1.114\kappa ^1`$. The stresses $`\sigma _{xx}`$, $`\sigma _{yy}`$ and $`\sigma _{xy}`$ are modified near the dislocation core ($`0r12\kappa ^1`$). Note that $`|\sigma _{xy}(x,0)|0.260\kappa \frac{\mu b}{2\pi (1\nu )}`$ can be identified as the theoretical shear strength. The stress $`\sigma _{zz}`$ and the trace $`\sigma _k^k`$ are modified in the region: $`0r6\kappa ^1`$. Far from the dislocation line ($`r12\kappa ^1`$) the gauge theoretical and the classical solutions of the stress of an edge dislocation coincide. Thus, the characteristic internal length $`\kappa ^1`$ determines the position and the magnitude of the stress maxima. It is interesting and important to note that the gauge-theoretical solutions (3.24)-(3.27) agree precisely with the gradient solutions given by Gutkin and Aifantis  (with $`\kappa ^2=c`$, $`c`$ is the gradient coefficient).

For the elastic strain of an edge dislocation we find

$`E_{xx}={\displaystyle \frac{b}{4\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{y}{r^2}}\{(12\nu )+{\displaystyle \frac{2x^2}{r^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^4}}(y^23x^2)`$ (3.30)
$`2({\displaystyle \frac{y^2}{r^2}}\nu )\kappa rK_1(\kappa r){\displaystyle \frac{2}{r^2}}(y^23x^2)K_2(\kappa r)\},`$
$`E_{yy}={\displaystyle \frac{b}{4\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{y}{r^2}}\{(12\nu ){\displaystyle \frac{2x^2}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^4}}(y^23x^2)`$ (3.31)
$`2({\displaystyle \frac{x^2}{r^2}}\nu )\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{r^2}}(y^23x^2)K_2(\kappa r)\},`$
$`E_{xy}={\displaystyle \frac{b}{4\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{x}{r^2}}\{1{\displaystyle \frac{2y^2}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^4}}(x^23y^2)`$ (3.32)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2y^2}{r^2}}\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{r^2}}(x^23y^2)K_2(\kappa r)\},`$
which is in agreement with the solution given by Gutkin and Aifantis  in the framework of strain gradient elasticity. The plane-strain condition $`E_{zz}=0`$ of the classical dislocation theory is also valid in the dislocation core region. The components of the strain tensor have the following extreme values ($`\nu =0.3`$): $`|E_{xx}(0,y)|0.308\kappa \frac{b}{4\pi (1\nu )}`$ at $`|y|0.922\kappa ^1`$, $`|E_{yy}(0,y)|0.010\kappa \frac{b}{4\pi (1\nu )}`$ at $`|y|0.218\kappa ^1`$, $`|E_{yy}(0,y)|0.054\kappa \frac{b}{4\pi (1\nu )}`$ at $`|y|4.130\kappa ^1`$, and $`|E_{xy}(x,0)|0.260\kappa \frac{b}{4\pi (1\nu )}`$ at $`|x|1.494\kappa ^1`$. It is interesting to note that $`E_{yy}(0,y)`$ is much smaller than $`E_{xx}(0,y)`$ within the core region (see also ). The dilatation $`E_k^k`$ reads

$`E_k^k={\displaystyle \frac{b(12\nu )}{2\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{y}{r^2}}\left\{1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right\}.`$ (3.33)
It is convenient to rewrite the stress and strain fields in cylindrical coordinates. The stress function reads in cylindrical coordinates:

$`f={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b}{2\pi (1\nu )}}\mathrm{sin}\phi \left\{r\mathrm{ln}r+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\kappa ^2r}}\left(1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right)\right\}.`$ (3.34)
Here the stress function is related to the stresses by the equations

$`\sigma _{rr}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}}_rf+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}_{\phi \phi }^2f,\sigma _{\phi \phi }=_{rr}^2f,\sigma _{r\phi }=_r\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}}_\phi f\right),\sigma _{zz}=\nu (\sigma _{rr}+\sigma _{\phi \phi }).`$ (3.35)
In this way we find the stress of a straight edge dislocation in cylindrical coordinates

$`\sigma _{rr}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b}{2\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\phi }{r}}\left\{1{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}+2K_2(\kappa r)\right\},`$ (3.36)
$`\sigma _{r\phi }`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b}{2\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}\phi }{r}}\left\{1{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}+2K_2(\kappa r)\right\},`$ (3.37)
$`\sigma _{\phi \phi }`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b}{2\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\phi }{r}}\left\{1+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}2K_2(\kappa r)2\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right\},`$ (3.38)
$`\sigma _{zz}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b\nu }{\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\phi }{r}}\left\{1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right\},`$ (3.39)
and the trace of the stress tensor reads

$`\sigma _k^k={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b(1+\nu )}{\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\phi }{r}}\left\{1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right\}.`$ (3.40)
Eventually, the elastic strain of a straight edge dislocation is given in cylindrical coordinates as follows

$`E_{rr}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{b}{4\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\phi }{r}}\left\{(12\nu ){\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}+2K_2(\kappa r)+2\nu \kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right\},`$ (3.41)
$`E_{r\phi }`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{b}{4\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}\phi }{r}}\left\{1{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}+2K_2(\kappa r)\right\},`$ (3.42)
$`E_{\phi \phi }`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{b}{4\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\phi }{r}}\left\{(12\nu )+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}2K_2(\kappa r)2(1\nu )\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right\}.`$ (3.43)
The dilatation reads

$`E_k^k={\displaystyle \frac{b(12\nu )}{2\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\phi }{r}}\left\{1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right\}.`$ (3.44)
Let us now calculate the distortion of an edge dislocation. The distortion $`\beta _i^a`$ is given in terms of the stress function (3.23):

$`\beta _i^a={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\mu }}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}_{yy}^2f\nu \mathrm{\Delta }f& _{xy}^2f+2\mu \omega & 0\\ _{xy}^2f2\mu \omega & _{xx}^2f\nu \mathrm{\Delta }f& 0\\ 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right),`$ (3.48)
where $`\omega `$ is used to express the antisymmetric part of the distortion, $`\omega \beta _{[xy]}`$. Eventually, $`\omega `$ is determined from the conditions:

$`T_{xy}^x`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\mu }}\left(2\mu _x\omega (1\nu )_y\mathrm{\Delta }f\right),`$ (3.49)
$`T_{xy}^y`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\mu }}\left(2\mu _y\omega +(1\nu )_x\mathrm{\Delta }f\right)0.`$ (3.50)
We find for the elastic distortion of the straight dislocation

$`\beta _x^x={\displaystyle \frac{b}{4\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{y}{r^2}}\{(12\nu )+{\displaystyle \frac{2x^2}{r^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^4}}(y^23x^2)`$ (3.51)
$`2({\displaystyle \frac{y^2}{r^2}}\nu )\kappa rK_1(\kappa r){\displaystyle \frac{2}{r^2}}(y^23x^2)K_2(\kappa r)\},`$
$`\beta _y^x={\displaystyle \frac{b}{4\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{x}{r^2}}\{(32\nu ){\displaystyle \frac{2y^2}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^4}}(x^23y^2)`$ (3.52)
$`2((1\nu )+{\displaystyle \frac{y^2}{r^2}})\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{r^2}}(x^23y^2)K_2(\kappa r)\},`$
$`\beta _x^y={\displaystyle \frac{b}{4\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{x}{r^2}}\{(12\nu )+{\displaystyle \frac{2y^2}{r^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^4}}(x^23y^2)`$ (3.53)
$`2((1\nu ){\displaystyle \frac{y^2}{r^2}})\kappa rK_1(\kappa r){\displaystyle \frac{2}{r^2}}(x^23y^2)K_2(\kappa r)\},`$
$`\beta _y^y={\displaystyle \frac{b}{4\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{y}{r^2}}\{(12\nu ){\displaystyle \frac{2x^2}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^4}}(y^23x^2)`$ (3.54)
$`2({\displaystyle \frac{x^2}{r^2}}\nu )\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{r^2}}(y^23x^2)K_2(\kappa r)\},`$
and for the rotation

$`\omega _z\omega ={\displaystyle \frac{b}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{x}{r^2}}\left\{1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right\}.`$ (3.55)
Eq. (3.55) is in agreement with the rotation vector calculated in the linear theory of dislocations in the Cosserat continuum . The far fields of (3.51)–(3.55) are identical to the classical ones given in .

We now rewrite the distortions (3.51)–(3.54) as follows

$`\beta ^x`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{b}{2\pi }}\{((1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r))+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2(1\nu )}}\mathrm{cos}2\phi (1{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}+2K_2(\kappa r)))\mathrm{d}\phi `$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2(1\nu )}}\mathrm{sin}2\phi ({\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^3}}\kappa K_1(\kappa r){\displaystyle \frac{2}{r}}K_2(\kappa r))\mathrm{d}r\}`$
$`\mathrm{d}u^x+\varphi ^x.`$ (3.56)
We may interpret the field

$`\varphi ^x={\displaystyle \frac{b\kappa ^2}{2\pi }}\phi rK_0(\kappa r)\mathrm{d}r`$ (3.57)
as the proper incompatible part (negative plastic distortion). This proper incompatible distortion is exactly the same as $`\varphi ^z`$ of a screw dislocation (see ). In components it reads

$`\varphi _x^x={\displaystyle \frac{b\kappa ^2}{2\pi }}x\phi K_0(\kappa r),\varphi _y^x={\displaystyle \frac{b\kappa ^2}{2\pi }}y\phi K_0(\kappa r).`$ (3.58)
The appearance of such proper incompatible distortion is a typical result of the gauge theory of dislocations. When $`\kappa ^10`$, the incompatible distortion (3.58) converts to $`\varphi _x^x=bx\phi \delta (r)`$ and $`\varphi _y^x=by\phi \delta (r)`$. The compatible part of Eq. (3.1) is given in terms of the displacement field

$`u^x={\displaystyle \frac{b}{2\pi }}\left\{\left(1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right)\phi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4(1\nu )}}\mathrm{sin}2\phi \left(1{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}+2K_2(\kappa r)\right)\right\}.`$ (3.59)
It is a modified displacement field (see Fig. 3a). We used $`\phi =\mathrm{arctan}(y/x)`$ as a multi-valued field. Note that the first part in (3.59) is different from the corresponding one given in gradient elasticity by Gutkin and Aifantis . One reason is that they used a compatible elastic distortion.

It is important to bear in mind that $`u^x`$ is not a simple $`\mathrm{arctan}`$ function as in the Volterra model of a dislocation. Additionally, we find from the distortion

$`\beta ^y`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{b}{4\pi (1\nu )}}\{\mathrm{sin}2\phi (1{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}+2K_2(\kappa r))\mathrm{d}\phi `$
$`((12\nu )({\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}}\kappa K_1(\kappa r))+\mathrm{cos}2\phi ({\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^3}}\kappa K_1(\kappa r){\displaystyle \frac{2}{r}}K_2(\kappa r)))\mathrm{d}r\}`$
$`\mathrm{d}u^y+\varphi ^y,`$ (3.60)
the incompatible part

$`\varphi ^y=0,`$ (3.61)
and a single-valued displacement field

$`u^y={\displaystyle \frac{b}{8\pi (1\nu )}}\left\{2(12\nu )\left(\mathrm{ln}r+K_0(\kappa r)\right)+\mathrm{cos}2\phi \left(1{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}+2K_2(\kappa r)\right)\right\}`$ (3.62)
which has no singularity (see Fig. 3b). This means that $`\beta ^y`$ is a proper compatible distortion. That is the reason why the field $`u^y`$ agrees precisely with the corresponding formula in gradient elasticity (see ). The displacement field $`u^y`$ differs from the classical one in the region $`0r12\kappa ^1`$. In this framework the displacement fields (3.59) and (3.62) have no singularity.

The far fields of the displacements (3.59) and (3.62) are identical to the classical ones given in . It can be seen that the solution (3.59) leads to an asymmetric smoothing of the displacement profile (see Fig. 3a). In fact, it is asymmetric around the dislocation line. Note that the incompatible distortion (3.58) also has an asymmetric form. These asymmetries would lead to an unexpected asymmetry of the dislocation core. From the mathematical point of view, the asymmetry is induced by the decomposition of the elastic distortion (2.2) into compatible and incompatible parts. Keep in mind that such a decomposition is gauge invariant (see Eq. (2.3)) and we have a local translation as an additional degree of freedom. This gauge invariance can be used to improve the situation. So far we have considered $`\phi `$ as a multi-valued field. On the other hand, in the defect theory  $`\phi `$ is usually used as single-valued and discontinuous function. It is made unique by cutting the half-plane $`y=0`$ at $`x<0`$ and assuming $`\phi `$ to jump from $`\pi `$ to $`\pi `$ when crossing the cut. If we use the single-valued discontinuous form for $`\phi `$ and the local gauge transformation (2.3) with the gauge function

$`\tau ^x={\displaystyle \frac{b}{2\pi }}\mathrm{sign}(y){\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}\kappa rK_1(\kappa r),`$ (3.63)
we obtain for the improved displacement field

$`u^x`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{b}{2\pi }}\{\phi (1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r))+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}\mathrm{sign}(y)\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2(1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{xy}{r^2}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}+2K_2(\kappa r))\},`$ (3.64)
and for the proper incompatible distortion

$`\varphi _x^x={\displaystyle \frac{b}{2\pi }}\kappa ^2xK_0(\kappa r)\left(\phi {\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}\mathrm{sign}(y)\right),`$ (3.65)
$`\varphi _y^x={\displaystyle \frac{b}{2\pi }}\left\{\kappa ^2yK_0(\kappa r)\left(\phi {\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}\mathrm{sign}(y)\right)+\pi \delta (y)\left(1\mathrm{sign}(x)\left[1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right]\right)\right\}.`$ (3.66)
Now the displacements and the incompatible distortions are symmetric in the core region around the dislocation line888 Note that in the case of a screw dislocation the symmetrical displacement and the corresponding incompatible distortion read, respectively,    $`u^z={\displaystyle \frac{b}{2\pi }}\left\{\phi \left(1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}\mathrm{sign}(y)\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right\},`$   and    $`\varphi _x^z={\displaystyle \frac{b}{2\pi }}\kappa ^2xK_0(\kappa r)\left(\phi {\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}\mathrm{sign}(y)\right),`$    $`\varphi _y^z={\displaystyle \frac{b}{2\pi }}\left\{\kappa ^2yK_0(\kappa r)\left(\phi {\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}\mathrm{sign}(y)\right)+\pi \delta (y)\left(1\mathrm{sign}(x)\left[1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right]\right)\right\}.`$   . It is interesting to compare the displacement field (3.1) with the displacement calculated by Gutkin and Aifantis. When $`y0`$, the Bessel function terms in (3.1) lead to the symmetric smoothing of the displacement profile in contrast to the abrupt jump occuring in the profile of the classical solution (see Fig. 4). When $`y0`$, the displacement $`u^x(x,y)`$ calculated by Gutkin and Aifantis  within the gradient model has the explicit form

$`u^x(x,y0)={\displaystyle \frac{b}{2\pi }}\mathrm{sign}(y){\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}\left\{1\mathrm{sign}(x)\left(1\mathrm{e}^{|x|/\sqrt{c}}\right)\right\}.`$ (3.67)
The exponential term which appears in the gradient solution (3.67) leads to the smoothing of the displacement profile (see Fig. 4). The size of the transition zone is approximately $`12\kappa ^1`$ which gives the value $`r_c6\kappa ^1`$ for the core radius. Consequently, in the gauge theory of dislocations and in gradient elasticity the dislocation core appears naturally. Therefore, these displacement fields may be used to model the dislocation core. In this way, one can compare the calculated dislocation core with HRTEM micrographs and related computer simulations of the core region. It would be very interesting to check a possible material dependence of $`\kappa ^1`$.

Finally, the effective Burgers vector can be calculated as

$`b^x(r)={\displaystyle _\gamma }\beta ^x=b\left\{1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right\}.`$ (3.68)
This effective Burgers vector $`b^x(r)`$ differs from the constant Burgers vector $`b`$ in the region $`0r6\kappa ^1`$ (see Fig. 5). For the value of $`\kappa ^1=0.25a`$ the core radius is $`r_c=1.5a`$ and for the value of $`\kappa ^1=0.399a`$ the core radius is $`r_c=2.4a`$. Note that the effective Burgers vector $`b^x(r)`$ of an edge dislocation has the same form as the effective Burgers vector $`b^z(r)`$ of a screw dislocation which is obtained in .

### 3.2 The dislocation density, moment stress and core energy

The proper incompatible part of the elastic distortion gives rise to a localized torsion and moment stress tensor. We find for the torsion

$`T_{xy}^x=T_{yx}^x={\displaystyle \frac{b\kappa ^2}{2\pi }}K_0(\kappa r)`$ (3.69)
and the dislocation density of an edge dislocation

$`\alpha ^{xz}={\displaystyle \frac{b\kappa ^2}{2\pi }}K_0(\kappa r),`$ (3.70)
which satisfies the translational Bianchi identity: $`_i\alpha ^{ai}=0`$. On can see that the dislocation density is short-reaching. It is interesting to note that the torsion $`T_{xy}^x`$ of an edge dislocation has the same form as the torsion $`T_{xy}^z`$ of a screw dislocation which is given in . In the limit as $`\kappa ^10`$, the gauge theoretical result (3.70) converts to the classical dislocation density $`\alpha ^{xz}=b\delta (r)`$. Additionally, the dislocation density (3.70) agrees with Eringen’s two-dimensional nonlocal modulus (nonlocal kernel) used in . Consequently, the dislocation density tensor is Green’s function of the Helmholtz equation:

$`\left(1\kappa ^2\mathrm{\Delta }\right)\alpha ^{xz}(r)=b\delta (r).`$ (3.71)
This torsion gives rise to a localized moment stress. The localized moment stress of bending type is given by the help of (2.27) as

$`H_{xz}={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b}{\pi (1\nu )}}K_0(\kappa r),H_{zx}={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b\nu }{\pi (1\nu )}}K_0(\kappa r).`$ (3.72)
This expression is very close to the moment stress of an edge dislocation given in . By means of the dislocation density and the moments stress we are able to calculate the core energy of an edge dislocation. The dislocation core energy density is given by

$`V_{\text{core}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\alpha ^{ai}H_{ai}={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b^2\kappa ^2}{4\pi ^2(1\nu )}}K_0(\kappa r)^2.`$ (3.73)
Obviously, the moment stress $`H_{zx}`$ gives no contribution to the dislocation core energy. We obtain for the dislocation core energy per unit length of the straight edge dislocation

$`E_{\text{core}}`$ $`={\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}d\phi {\displaystyle _0^R}rV_{\text{core}}dr`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b^2\kappa ^2}{4\pi (1\nu )}}r^2\left\{K_0(\kappa r)^2K_1(\kappa r)^2\right\}|_0^R`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b^2}{4\pi (1\nu )}}\left\{1+\kappa ^2R^2\left(K_0(\kappa R)^2K_1(\kappa R)^2\right)\right\},`$ (3.74)
where $`R`$ denotes the size of the solid body. In the limit $`R\mathrm{}`$, the core energy of the straight edge dislocation,

$`E_{\text{core}}={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b^2}{4\pi (1\nu )}},`$ (3.75)
coincides with the core energy that is calculated for the edge dislocation in the Peierls-Nabarro model . The core energy is different from the constant value in the region $`0\kappa R3`$.

The far-reaching rotation gradients read

$`k_{xy}^x=k_{yx}^x={\displaystyle \frac{b}{2\pi r^4}}\left\{\left(x^2y^2\right)\left(1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right)\kappa ^2x^2r^2K_0(\kappa r)\right\},`$
$`k_{xy}^y=k_{yx}^y={\displaystyle \frac{b}{2\pi r^4}}xy\left\{2\left(1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)\right)\kappa ^2r^2K_0(\kappa r)\right\}.`$ (3.76)
The form of these rotation gradients is in agreement with the expressions calculated within the theory of Cosserat media (see ).

### 3.3 The straight edge dislocation in a cylinder

Now we consider a straight edge dislocation in a cylinder of finite outer radius $`R`$ with an outer boundary free from external forces. An advantage in our framework is that we do not need an inner radius because the stress and strain fields are zero at $`r=0`$ in quite natural way. If the outer boundary is to be free, it is necessary to add to the stress function (3.14) an additional stress function $`\chi ^{}=ACyr^2`$. Then the modified stress function is of the form

$`f={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b}{2\pi (1\nu )}}\mathrm{sin}\phi \left\{r\mathrm{ln}r+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\kappa ^2r}}\left(1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)4Cr^2\right)Cr^3\right\},`$ (3.77)
where the constant $`C`$ is determined by the semi-classical boundary condition that the stresses $`\sigma _{rr}`$ and $`\sigma _{r\phi }`$ should be zero at $`r=R`$. In this way we find the stress of the edge dislocation in cylindrical coordinates

$`\sigma _{rr}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b}{2\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\phi }{r}}\left\{1{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}+2K_2(\kappa r)2Cr^2\right\},`$ (3.78)
$`\sigma _{r\phi }`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b}{2\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}\phi }{r}}\left\{1{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}+2K_2(\kappa r)2Cr^2\right\},`$ (3.79)
$`\sigma _{\phi \phi }`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b}{2\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\phi }{r}}\left\{1+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}2K_2(\kappa r)2\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)6Cr^2\right\},`$ (3.80)
$`\sigma _{zz}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b\nu }{\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\phi }{r}}\left\{1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)4Cr^2\right\},`$ (3.81)
with

$`C={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2R^2}}\left\{1{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2R^2}}+2K_2(\kappa R)\right\}.`$ (3.82)
The corresponding trace is given by

$`\sigma _k^k={\displaystyle \frac{\mu b(1+\nu )}{\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\phi }{r}}\left\{1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)4Cr^2\right\}.`$ (3.83)
The elastic strain of this edge dislocation in a cylinder is

$`E_{rr}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{b}{4\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\phi }{r}}\left\{(12\nu ){\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}+2K_2(\kappa r)+2\nu \kappa rK_1(\kappa r)(28\nu )Cr^2\right\},`$ (3.84)
$`E_{r\phi }`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{b}{4\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}\phi }{r}}\left\{1{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}+2K_2(\kappa r)2Cr^2\right\},`$ (3.85)
$`E_{\phi \phi }`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{b}{4\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\phi }{r}}\{(12\nu )+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}2K_2(\kappa r)2(1\nu )\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)`$
$`(68\nu )Cr^2\}.`$ (3.86)
The corresponding dilatation field reads

$`E_k^k={\displaystyle \frac{b(12\nu )}{2\pi (1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}\phi }{r}}\left\{1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)4Cr^2\right\}.`$ (3.87)
From the condition (3.50) we find for the rotation of an edge dislocation in a cylinder

$`\omega _z\omega ={\displaystyle \frac{b}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}\phi }{r}}\left\{1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)+4Cr^2\right\},`$ (3.88)
which gives an additional constant contribution to the bend-twist tensor $`k_{xy}^x`$ in Eq. (3.2). The dislocation density of the edge dislocation in a cylinder is determined by the condition (3.49) and it has the same form as the dislocation in an infinitely extended body (3.70).

For convenience we give the displacement components in Cartesian coordinates

$`u^x`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{b}{2\pi }}\{\phi (1\kappa rK_1(\kappa r))+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}\mathrm{sign}(y)\kappa rK_1(\kappa r)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2(1\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{xy}{r^2}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}+2K_2(\kappa r))+{\displaystyle \frac{C(34\nu )}{(1\nu )}}xy\},`$ (3.89)
$`u^y`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{b}{4\pi (1\nu )}}\{(12\nu )(\mathrm{ln}r+K_0(\kappa r))+{\displaystyle \frac{x^2y^2}{2r^2}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\kappa ^2r^2}}+2K_2(\kappa r))`$
$`+C(x^2(54\nu )y^2(14\nu ))\}.`$ (3.90)
Note that this boundary-value problem of the edge dislocation may be applied to describe dislocation behaviour in nanoparticles and nanowires.

## 4 The relation to the nonlocal theory of dislocations

Let me now give the relation to Eringen’s so-called nonlocal theory of dislocations . It includes the effect of long range interatomic forces so that it can be used as a continuum model of the atomic lattice dynamics. Using Green’s function of the Helmholtz equation (3.71) we may solve the field equation for every component of the stress field (2.46) by the help of the convolution integral:

$`\sigma _{ij}(r)={\displaystyle _V}G(rr^{})\stackrel{}{\sigma }{}_{ij}{}^{}(r^{})\mathrm{d}v(r^{})`$ (4.1)
with

$`G(rr^{})`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{b}}\alpha ^{xz}(rr^{})={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{2\pi }}K_0(\kappa (rr^{})).`$ (4.2)
In this way we deduce Eringen’s so-called nonlocal constitutive relation for a linear homogeneous, isotropic solid. Therefore, the gauge theoretical description of dislocations in this paper is close to the nonlocal elasticity of dislocations , if one uses the special two-dimensional Green’s function (4.2). The form of the nonlocal kernel (dislocation density) is fixed by the incompatible distortion. Finally, we may conclude that the gauge theory of dislocation contains a weak nonlocality due to the moment stresses in the dislocation core region. This observation is in agreement with Kröner’s opinion that the introduction of moment stresses represents the first step in a transition from local to a nonlocal elasticity theory .

The characteristic internal length in these theories is $`\kappa ^1`$. This length may be selected to be proportional to the lattice parameter $`a`$ for a single crystal, i.e.

$`\kappa ^1=e_0a,`$ (4.3)
where $`e_0`$ is a non-dimensional constant or material function which can be determined by one experiment . For $`e_0=0`$ we have classical elasticity and there are no effects of moment stresses. In this limit the nonlocal kernel must revert to the Dirac delta measure. In  the choice $`e_0=0.399`$ and in  the choice $`e_0=0.25`$ are proposed (see also ).

Consequently, we can conclude that the gauge theoretical solution of the stress field for an edge dislocation given in this paper is also a solution in nonlocal elasticity. However, a difference to our approach is that Eringen’s nonlocal theory works with compatible strain instead of incompatible strain and the strains and displacements have the classical form with singularities at the dislocation line.

## 5 Discussion and Conclusion

The translational gauge theory of dislocations has been employed to consider the straight edge dislocation in an infinitely extended body and in a cylinder. This translational gauge theory unifies elasticity and plasticity to elastoplasticity in field theoretical way. In this framework, elastoplasticity is a theory with force stresses and moment stresses. The size of this moment stress can be calculated even from linearized elastoplasticity theory. Using the stress function method, exact analytical solutions for the displacements, strain and stress fields have been derived which have not any artificial divergency at the dislocation core and the corresponding far fields agree with the classical ones for the edge dislocation. The strain and stress fields of an edge dislocation in an infinitely extended body are in exact agreement with those obtained by Gutkin and Aifantis  through an analysis of the edge dislocation in the theory of gradient elasticity. Nevertheless, the gauge theoretical and the gradient theoretical approaches are different and they give slightly different results, e.g. the displacement field $`u^x`$ due to the incompatible distortion in the gauge theory of dislocations. On the other hand, the strain gradient elasticity used a purely compatible distortion. However, the difference cannot be too big and the numerical values should be of the same order. The dislocation density of an edge dislocation obtained in the gauge theoretical framework is in agreement with the nonlocal kernel given by Ari and Eringen . From that point of view the nonlocal elasticity theory approach is close to ours. But, on the other hand, Eringen’s nonlocal elasticity contains compatible strains only and the strain and displacement fields have the same form as in a classical elasticity. In the gauge theoretical analysis the dislocation core arises naturally. We have calculated the localized moment stress which is the response to dislocation density and the far-reaching rotation gradient (bend-twist tensor).

The dislocation model used in this paper contains, in general, 10 material constants. The total Lagrangian of this model is given in terms of the distortion, the dislocation density (torsion tensor) and deWit’s bend-twist tensor. By the help of some special choices (2.24), (2.40) and (2.43) we reduced the number of constants to 3 material constants, namely 2 elastic constants and 1 internal length. As a result we obtain a dislocation theory with symmetric force stresses. The special choice (2.24) for the three coefficients $`a_1`$, $`a_2`$ and $`a_3`$ in the dislocation gauge Lagrangian gives the core energy of the edge dislocation in an infinite medium which is in agreement with the expression obtained in the Peierls-Nabarro model. It is important to note that one can also use the total Lagrangian of this dislocation model for the gauge theoretical description of screw dislocations. In this turn, one reproduces all quantities of the screw dislocation calculated in . Therefore, by using the Lagrangian proposed in this paper, one is able to obtain gauge theoretical solutions for the edge and screw dislocation which have no singularities and agree with the classical solutions in the far field. The (linear) gauge equation formulated in terms of the stress field is an inhomogeneous Helmholtz equation for the screw and the edge dislocation.

It will be interesting to apply the nonsingular solutions of the edge and screw dislocation to dislocation modelling. One can use the gauge theoretical displacement fields to simulate the core region for HRTEM micrographs. Another interesting application could be the x-ray diffraction profile analysis. One should use the materials tungsten, diamond or aluminium because they are nearly isotropic. In this way the coefficient $`\kappa ^1`$ should be experimentally verified. Additionally, it would be of interest to compare experimental results with the values from different theoretical approaches (gauge theory, strain gradient elasticity and/or nonlocal elasticity). Another possibility to determine the coefficient $`\kappa ^1`$ should be a lattice-theoretical approach. The coefficient $`\kappa ^1`$ expresses the interactions and the properties in the core which are different from those in the undeformed crystal. Consequently, the elastic moduli say nothing about the interactions in the core of dislocations. It should be possible to calculate $`\kappa ^1`$ from the coupling parameters of the lattice at the dislocation core.

### Acknowledgement

The author wishes to thank Professors Friedrich W. Hehl, Stefan Müller and Alfred Seeger and Dr. Gerald Wagner for stimulating discussions, furthermore to Drs. Mikhail Yu. Gutkin and Cyril Malyshev for correspondence and useful remarks. He would like to express his gratitude to the Max-Planck-Institut für Mathematik in den Naturwissenschaften for the fine conditions of work and for financial support.


format: text

text:
# Time evolution of the extremely diluted Blume-Emery-Griffiths neural network

## I Introduction

There has been much interest in understanding the properties and predicting the behavior of large attractor neural networks. Of primary concern are the storage capacity, the ability and quality of retrieval, and the information transmitted by the network . The study of attractor neural networks has often been guided by the search for networks of optimal performance.

It has been argued recently that mutual information is the most appropriate concept to measure the performance quality, especially in sparsely coded networks . An attempt has been made to infer the Hamiltonian, or energy function, of an optimally performing three-state network from the structure of the initial mutual information and a disordered Blume-Emery-Griffiths (BEG) ( and references therein) network model has been obtained. This has been used to derive the specific properties that characterize the performance of an extremely diluted network . The arguments leading to the BEG Hamiltonian and the dynamical behavior in networks of other architecture have been studied recently .

A characteristic feature of the model is to store and retrieve patterns and some of their fluctuations giving rise, in the thermodynamic limit, to two independent local random fields. In contrast to the usual three-state network , both fields are self-adjusting functions and the network does not need an externally adjustable threshold parameter to activate the neuron states.

One of the further interesting aspects of the model is the presence of an independent order parameter macroscopically characterizing these fluctuations that could yield a new information carrying phase. However, neither the time evolution of this order parameter nor the stability of such a phase have been studied before. The purpose of the present paper is precisely to investigate these points in the extremely diluted network, which has an exactly solvable dynamics. This also allows one to figure out the size of the basins of attraction, a point that has not been emphasized before, and that can only be studied to some extent in the diluted network due to the complexity of the interactions in the underlying model.

The motivation for our work is the discovery of moderately and, eventually, very long transients in the dynamic evolution of some of the states of the network and the recognition that these states often drive the network into a retrieval phase. It also turned out that these states are not stable in the absence of synaptic noise (temperature $`T`$), in contrast to an earlier claim , but that a finite, activity dependent, threshold value for $`T`$ is required for these states to stabilize. We also produce a further comparison of the performance of the network with other three-state networks. Preliminary results of this work have been presented recently .

The outline of the paper is the following. In Sec. II we summarize briefly the model and refer the interested reader to previous works for further discussion . In Sec. III we state the macrodynamics and we present our results in Sec. IV, ending with our conclusions in Sec. V.

## II The Model

We consider a three-state network with symmetrically distributed neuron states $`\sigma _{i,t}=0,\pm 1`$ on sites $`i=1,\mathrm{},N`$, at time step $`t`$, where $`\sigma _{i,t}=\pm 1`$ denote the active states. A set of $`p`$ ternary patterns, $`\{\xi _i^\mu =0,\pm 1\}`$, $`\mu =1,\mathrm{},p`$, where $`\xi _i^\mu =\pm 1`$ are the active ones, are assumed to be independent random variables following the probability distribution

$$p(\xi _i^\mu )=a\delta (|\xi _i^\mu |^21)+(1a)\delta (\xi _i^\mu ),$$
(1)
where the average $`a=(\xi _i^\mu )^2`$ is the activity of the patterns. These patterns are embedded in the network by means of a generalized learning rule together with a set $`\{\eta _i^\mu \}`$ of normalized fluctuations, $`\eta _i^\mu =((\xi _i^\mu )^2a)/a(1a)`$, of the binary patterns $`(\xi _i^\mu )^2`$ about their average.

The learning rule consists of two Hebbian-like parts

$$J_{ij}=\frac{1}{a^2N}\underset{\mu =1}{\overset{p}{}}\xi _i^\mu \xi _j^\mu ,K_{ij}=\frac{1}{N}\underset{\mu =1}{\overset{p}{}}\eta _i^\mu \eta _j^\mu ,$$
(2)
which are the random interactions in the bilinear BEG network with the dynamic variables $`\sigma _{i,t}`$ and $`\sigma _{i,t}^2`$, respectively . These are then used to construct the random local fields

$$h_{i,t}=\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}J_{ij}\sigma _{j,t},\theta _{i,t}=\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}K_{ij}\sigma _{j,t}^2,$$
(3)
where the first one is the usual local field for a three-state network. This enables one to obtain an effective single-site energy function for neuron $`i`$, in mean-field theory,

$$ϵ_{i,t}=[h_{i,t}\sigma _{i,t}+\theta _{i,t}\sigma _{i,t}^2]$$
(4)
which rules the state-flip probability

$$p(\sigma _{i,t+1}|\{\sigma _{i,t}\})=\mathrm{exp}(\beta ϵ_{i,t})/Z_t,$$
(5)
that specifies the parallel stochastic dynamics for the model, where $`Z_t=1+2e^{\beta \theta _t}\mathrm{cosh}(\beta h_t)`$ and $`\beta =a/T`$ is the inverse temperature (noise) parameter.

In the sequel we do not indicate the explicit $`t`$-dependence. In distinction to the usual three-state model , where the coefficient of the quadratic part in $`ϵ_i`$ is an externally adjustable threshold parameter, we have here a self-adjusting, state and pattern dependent function $`\theta _i(\{\sigma _j\},\{\eta _k^\mu \})`$. In this sense, the present model belongs to a wider class of “self-control” networks, a case of which has been discussed before . We remark, however, that the threshold $`\theta `$ used in the latter is a macroscopic parameter, thus, no average had to be done over the microscopic random variables at each time step $`t`$.

Next, we consider the relevant quantities that describe the performance of the network. We need the conditional probability distribution of a neuron state given the distribution of the patterns, $`p(\sigma _i|\xi _i^\mu )`$. As a consequence of the mean-field theory character of the model it is enough to consider the distribution of a single typical neuron, so we can omit the index $`i`$. We can then derive

$$p(\sigma |\xi ^\mu )=(s_\xi +m^\mu \xi ^\mu \sigma )\delta (\sigma ^21)+(1s_\xi )\delta (\sigma ),$$
(6)
where

$$s_\xi =s^\mu +l^\mu (\xi ^\mu )^2,s^\mu =\frac{qan^\mu }{1a},l^\mu =\frac{n^\mu q}{1a}.$$
(7)
Here, $`m^\mu =\sigma _{\sigma |\xi }\xi ^\mu /a_\xi `$ is the thermodynamic limit $`N\mathrm{}`$ of the retrieval overlap

$$m_N^\mu =\frac{1}{aN}\underset{i}{}\sigma _i\xi _i^\mu $$
(8)
between the state of the network and pattern $`\{\xi _i^\mu \}`$, and the internal average is over the conditional probability. The other parameters are the thermodynamic limits $`q=\sigma ^2_{\sigma |\xi }_\xi `$ and $`n^\mu =\sigma ^2_{\sigma |\xi }(\xi ^\mu )^2/a_\xi `$, of the neural activity

$$q_N=\frac{1}{N}\underset{i}{}\sigma _i^2$$
(9)
and the activity overlap

$$n_N^\mu =\frac{1}{aN}\underset{i}{}\sigma _i^2(\xi _i^\mu )^2,$$
(10)
respectively. Finally, $`l^\mu =\sigma ^2_{\sigma |\xi }\eta ^\mu _\xi `$, is the thermodynamic limit of the $`fluctuation`$ $`overlap`$ between the binary state variable $`\sigma _i^2`$ and $`\eta _i^\mu `$ defined as,

$$l_N^\mu =\frac{1}{N}\underset{i}{}\sigma _i^2\eta _i^\mu .$$
(11)
As is clear from its definition, the fluctuation overlap is connected with the activity overlap.

An underlying assumption that leads to the BEG model and that should be preserved in the implementation for any network architecture is that the dynamic activity $`qa`$, as far as the order of magnitude is concerned. The necessity of such an activity control system has been emphasized before (cf.  and references therein).

The fluctuation overlap $`l^\mu `$ can be viewed as the retrieval overlap between the binary patterns $`\{\eta _i^\mu \}`$ and states $`\{\sigma _i^2\}`$. A priori, this will be independent of the retrieval overlap $`m^\mu `$ between the three-state patterns and states. As will be seen below, a finite non-zero retrieval overlap induces a finite fluctuation overlap, and in this case the parameter $`l^\mu `$ should not add anything essentially new to the three-state network. It will turn out, however, that the inverse is in general not true. Indeed, $`l^\mu `$ can be finite in a state of dynamic activity without necessarily a finite retrieval overlap $`m^\mu `$. Thus, there can be a phase in which $`m^\mu =0`$ but where, nevertheless, there is a finite information carried by the fluctuation overlap $`l^\mu 0`$. Whether the new phase is actually stable, interesting and how long it takes for the network to reach the corresponding states is the main issue that we address below.

Finally, we consider the mutual information between patterns and neurons, regarding the patterns as the inputs and the neuron states as the output of the network channel at each time step . This is given by, recalling that we do not indicate the explicit time dependence,

$$I^\mu (\sigma ,\xi ^\mu )=S(\sigma )S(\sigma |\xi ^\mu )_{\xi ^\mu },$$
(12)
where

$$S(\sigma )=q\mathrm{ln}(q/2)(1q)\mathrm{ln}(1q)$$
(13)
is the entropy and $`S(\sigma |\xi ^\mu )_{\xi ^\mu }=aS_a+(1a)S_{1a}`$ is the equivocation term with

$`S_a=c_+^\mu \mathrm{ln}c_+^\mu c_{}^\mu \mathrm{ln}c_{}^\mu (1n^\mu )\mathrm{ln}(1n^\mu )`$ (14)
$`S_{1a}=s^\mu \mathrm{ln}(s^\mu /2)(1s^\mu )\mathrm{ln}(1s^\mu ).`$ (15)
Here, $`c_\pm ^\mu =(n^\mu \pm m^\mu )/2`$ and $`s^\mu `$ is the parameter in the conditional probability $`p(\sigma |\xi ^\mu )`$. The mutual information can then be used to obtain the information $`i^\mu =I^\mu \alpha `$, where $`\alpha =p/N`$ is the storage ratio of the network.

## III Macrodynamics

The local fields in terms of the retrieval and the fluctuation overlaps

$$h_i=\frac{1}{a}\underset{\mu }{}\xi _i^\mu m^\mu ,\theta _i=\underset{\mu }{}\eta _i^\mu l^\mu ,$$
(16)
are the suitable starting point for the macrodynamics . The actual overlaps

$$m^\mu =\overline{\sigma _i}\frac{\xi _i^\mu }{a}_\xi ,l^\mu =\overline{\sigma _i^2}\eta _i^\mu _\xi ,$$
(17)
depend on the thermal averages $`\overline{\sigma _i}`$ and $`\overline{\sigma _i^2}`$ given by $`F_\beta (h,\theta )=2e^{\beta \theta }\mathrm{sinh}(\beta h)/Z`$ and $`G_\beta (h,\theta )=2e^{\beta \theta }\mathrm{cosh}(\beta h)/Z`$, respectively. In the zero temperature limit

$$F_{\mathrm{}}=sgn(h)\mathrm{\Theta }(|h|+\theta ),G_{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{\Theta }(|h|+\theta ).$$
(18)
We assume that a single pattern $`\xi ^\mu `$ and fluctuation $`\eta ^\mu `$ are condensed, that is, $`m^\mu `$ and $`l^\mu `$ are of order $`O(1)`$ for a given $`\mu =\nu `$ (and for $`\mu \nu `$ they are of order $`O(1/\sqrt{N})`$), and we call these $`m`$ and $`l`$, respectively. These yield a finite signal term for each local field and related Gaussian noise terms. In accordance with this, we also assume that $`n=n^\nu =O(1)`$ and $`s=s^\nu =O(1)`$ and we denote $`i=i^\nu `$.

The asymptotic macrodynamics for the extremely diluted network follows then the single-step evolution equations for the order parameters, exact in the large-N limit, for each time step $`t`$ ,

$`m_{t+1}={\displaystyle DyDzF_\beta (\frac{m_t}{a}+y\mathrm{\Delta }_t;\frac{l_t}{a}+z\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_t}{1a})},`$ (19)
$`n_{t+1}={\displaystyle DyDzG_\beta (\frac{m_t}{a}+y\mathrm{\Delta }_t;\frac{l_t}{a}+z\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_t}{1a})},`$ (20)
$`s_{t+1}={\displaystyle DyDzG_\beta (y\mathrm{\Delta }_t;\frac{l_t}{1a}+z\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_t}{1a})},`$ (21)
together with the dynamic activity $`q_t=an_t+(1a)s_t`$. The equation for $`l_t`$ is obtained using the relation $`l_t=(n_tq_t)/(1a)`$. Here, as usual, $`Dx=\mathrm{exp}(x^2/2)dx/\sqrt{2\pi }`$ whereas $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{t}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}=\alpha q_t/a^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{t}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}/(1a)^2`$ are the variances in the Gaussian local fields $`h_i`$ and $`\theta _i`$, respectively. With these equations we also get the time evolution of the information $`i`$ by means of Eqs. (12) to (14).

The equations for the dynamics of the macroscopic order parameters can now be used to study both the time evolution of the network and to determine the properties of the stable stationary states.

## IV Results

We recognize, essentially, three phases given by stable stationary states of the network dynamics Eqs. (18)-(20), as shown in Fig.1, for a typical activity of $`a=0.8`$. There is a retrieval phase $`R`$ $`(m0,l0)`$, a fluctuation phase $`Q`$ $`(m=0,l0)`$ and a self-sustained activity phase $`S`$ $`(m=0,l=0)`$, referred to as the zero phase, $`Z`$, in previous works , all for $`qa`$. The stationary states in these phases are indicated as attractors (a) in the side table of the phase diagram. There are also saddle-point solutions (s) either with $`m=0`$, $`l0`$, $`qa`$ or with $`m=0`$, $`l=0`$, $`qa`$, denoted also by $`Q`$ and $`S`$, respectively. Both the saddle-points in $`Q`$ and $`S`$ have attractor directions along $`l`$, towards $`l^{}0`$ and $`l^{}=0`$, respectively, and repeller directions along $`m`$ away from $`m=0`$. Hence, they have strictly one-dimensional basins of attraction in the two-dimensional order parameter subspace of $`m`$ and $`l`$, and then only if the precise initial condition $`m_0=0`$ is met.

There is a retrieval phase in regions I to V. It is the only stable phase in regions I to III and it coexists with the self-sustained activity phase in regions IV and V. The latter implies that in these two regions the basin of attraction of the retrieval states is always limited by the attracting self-sustained activity states. On the other hand, the fluctuation phase exists only in regions VI and VII, coexisting in the latter with the self-sustained activity phase which, in turn, exists only in that region and in region VIII. Dotted lines in the phase diagram denote continuous phase boundaries while full lines indicate discontinuous transitions. The phase boundaries denoted by thick lines mark the boundary of the retrieval phase, the ones further to the right yield the critical storage capacity $`\alpha _c`$, where both overlaps disappear. Extensive calculations of the $`\alpha `$ dependence of the order parameters were performed to obtain the phase diagram, with particular emphasis in the search for possible stable $`Q`$ states. Clearly, it can be seen that, for a given activity $`a`$, these states appear only above a certain threshold in $`T`$.

A similar behavior appears for other big values of $`a`$ above a minimum, whereas a different behavior sets in for smaller $`a`$, as shown in Fig. 2 for $`T=T(a)`$ and $`\alpha =0`$. Indeed, when $`a`$ is less than $`1/2`$ there is a continuous phase boundary at $`T=2/3`$ between the retrieval phase at low $`T`$ and the self-sustained activity phase at high $`T`$. At $`a=1/2`$ the transition becomes discontinuous and, up to $`a=0.698`$, the only phases present are still $`R`$ and $`S`$. The transition remains discontinuous for small $`\alpha `$ and it becomes continuous for bigger values of $`\alpha `$. For $`\alpha =0`$, the $`Q`$ phase starts to appear with increasing $`a`$ at a triple point with $`a=0.698`$ and $`T=0.767`$. Beyond $`a=0.698`$ the transition between the $`R`$ and the $`Q`$ phase remains discontinuous up to the tricritical point with $`a=0.711`$ and $`T=0.785`$. For bigger values of $`a`$, the transition between the $`R`$ and the $`Q`$ phase remains continuous and ends at $`T=1/2`$ for $`a=1`$. It also turns out that there is a critical $`\alpha =1/\pi 0.318`$, for $`a=1`$.

We discuss next the typical $`\alpha `$ dependence of the order parameters that yield the phase diagram of Fig. 1 and we also show the information content of the network below and above the threshold where the $`Q`$ phase starts to appear. For $`a=0.8`$ where the threshold is given by $`T0.45`$ for $`\alpha =0.221`$, we obtain the results shown in Fig. 3. Clearly, for $`T`$ below that threshold (left figure) the two overlaps m and l remain finite together, in a behavior characteristic of retrieval, up to the critical $`\alpha _c`$. Thus, in this regime the fluctuation overlap does not yield anything essentially new that is not contained in the retrieval overlap. In contrast, above the threshold (right figure) the retrieval overlap disappears first with increasing $`\alpha `$ leaving a finite $`l0`$ that describes a fluctuation overlap up to a bigger critical value $`\alpha _c`$. Hence, it is necessary that first $`T`$ and then $`\alpha `$ become large enough for the $`Q`$ states to become stable. It is also worth noting that the fluctuation overlap carries a finite information even with zero pattern retrieval overlap. Thus, although the information transmitted by the network is mainly in the retrieval phase, there is also some information due to the $`Q`$ phase. This information is provided by the fact that the active neurons coincide with the active patterns but the signs are not correlated. One might imagine an example in pattern recognition where, looking at a black and white picture on a grey background, this phase would tell us the exact location of the picture with respect to the background without finding the details of the picture itself.

We also show in Fig. 3 the comparison of the performance with two other three-state networks. One is the usual network with an externally adjustable optimal threshold parameter  that appears in the quadratic part of the single-site energy function, formally the same as Eq.(4) but with a uniform $`\theta =\theta _i`$. The parameter is restricted to be positive and chosen to yield the largest mutual information. Allowing the threshold to become negative would essentially mimick a binary model and this is not the subject of the present work. The second network is a phenomenological extension to finite $`T`$ of a recent three-state self-control model (SCT)  in which the self-control threshold $`\theta _t`$ at $`T=0`$ is replaced by a linearly shifted threshold $`\overline{\theta _t}=\theta _tT`$, where $`\theta _t=\sqrt{2\mathrm{ln}a}D_t`$ with $`D_t^2=\alpha q_t/a`$ being the variance of the noise. The results of Fig. 3 clearly show that the BEG network has a better performance for high $`T`$, at least as far as the information content is concerned, than the optimal threshold network, and a worse performance for lower $`T`$.

To understand the typical behavior of the dynamics of the network we show in Fig.4 the time evolution of the order parameters and the information content, for $`a=0.8`$ and $`T=0.6`$, in both the BEG and the SCT network. In support of the phase diagram shown in Fig. 1, it can be seen that in the case of the BEG network with increasing $`\alpha `$, one has first the asymptotic states of an $`R`$ phase, then the states of a $`Q`$ phase and, finally, the states of the $`S`$ phase. In all cases where one would expect a $`Q`$ state, we start with the most favorable initial overlaps for that state, that is $`m_0=0`$ and a small but finite $`l`$. In contrast, for the SCT network and the indicated values of $`\alpha `$ one has only an R phase.

A closer examination of the curves for the BEG network reveals that the fluctuation overlap may “drive” a vanishingly small initial retrieval overlap, meaning almost no recognition of a given pattern by the state of the network, into an asymptotic state with finite recognition. This is in contrast with the expectation for other three-state networks, as in the case of the SCT network, where first the overlap $`m_t`$ becomes non-zero. It is also worth noting that, with a very small initial $`m_0`$, the states of the network are expected to pass through the vicinity of a saddle point, with a finite fluctuation overlap $`l`$ and still a vanishing retrieval overlap at small or intermediate times. This situation is described by the first plateaus in $`q`$, $`l`$ and $`i`$. It is only in passing beyond those plateaus, which may take a rather long time, that the states attain the asymptotic behavior of the retrieval phase. It also turned out that with the initial conditions used for the BEG network, in the left part of the figure, there is no retrieval in the SCT network, meaning that the basins of attraction for retrieval are larger in the BEG network.

Finally, the results for the stationary states are confirmed by a set of flow diagrams, a particular one is shown in Fig. 5 for $`a=0.8`$ and $`T=0.6`$, first below the $`R`$-$`Q`$ phase boundary, where the retrieval state $`R`$ is stable, and then above, where the $`Q`$ phase is stable. Clearly, in the first case, for a small initial retrieval overlap and a finite fluctuation overlap, the states evolve first in the attractor direction of the saddle point and only then they start to flow towards the true (retrieval) attractor. Similar flow diagrams were obtained for other sets of parameters and in all cases we found that the attractors have fairly large basins of attraction.

## V Conclusions

We discussed the dynamic evolution and the stationary states of the recently introduced BEG neural network model for an extremely diluted architecture. We made particular emphasis on the stability of the stationary states, which had not been explored before, and found that the new phase $`Q`$ (called previously, the “dipolar” or “quadrupolar” phase), characterized by a zero retrieval overlap and a finite fluctuation overlap, is a true stable phase only for moderately to large pattern activity $`a`$. We found that an activity dependent synaptic noise has a relevant role in deciding whether the new phase can be reached or not. In particular, that phase is not a stable one at $`T=0`$ for any activity smaller than one. It is also not stable, in general, for somewhat higher values of $`T`$.

We also found that the dynamics may be slowed down due to the presence of saddle-point solutions in the equations that appear in large regions of the phase diagram, in particular in the retrieval phase and close to the critical phase boundary. Although the specific results obtained here are for the extremely diluted network, some of the features found may also appear in other architectures, for instance, in a layered network, and there is work in progress for that case . It would be interesting to study the time evolution of the BEG network also in other non-trivial dynamics.

## Acknowledgments

One of the authors (DB) wants to thank T. Verbeiren and J. Busquets Blanco for critical discussions and the Fund for Scientific Research-Flanders, Belgium, for financial support. DRDC acknowledges a Ramón y Cajal grant from the Spanish Ministry of Science (MCyT), and thanks the K.U.Leuven, Belgium, for a visiting grant. EK warmly thanks for hospitality the Abdus Salam International Center, for Theoretical Physics, Trieste, and is financially supported by a grant DGI (MCyT) BFM 2001-291-C02-01. The work of WKT is partially supported by the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq), Brazil, and the same author thanks the Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Rio Grande do Sul (FAPERGS), Brazil, for a Visitor Scientist grant to the IF-UFRGS.

I II III IV V VI VII VIII    R a a a a a - - -  Q s s - - s a a -  S - s s a a - a a