text:
# Autocorrelation of Random Matrix Polynomials

## 1 Introduction

The conjectured connection between random matrices and number theory dates back to an exchange between H. L. Montgomery and F. J. Dyson  in which they discovered that the two-point correlation function of the zeros of the Riemann zeta function, studied by the former, is the same, in the appropriate limit, as the two-point correlation function of the eigenvalues of random matrices, calculated by the latter. Since then calculations of the three-point zero correlation function by Hejhal , the general $`n`$-point zero correlation functions by Rudnick and Sarnak  and Bogomolny and Keating , the study of the low-lying zeros of families of $`L`$-functions by Katz and Sarnak , and extensive numerical computations  have strengthened the connection.

In the past few years, following the work of Keating and Snaith , Conrey and Farmer  and Hughes, Keating and O’Connell , it has become clear that the leading order asymptotics of the mean values (or moments) of the Riemann zeta function and families of $`L`$-functions can be understood, again conjecturally, in terms of the corresponding value distribution of the characteristic polynomials of random matrices. In the random matrix case, the average is performed with respect to Haar measure for either the group of unitary ($`U(N)`$), orthogonal ($`O(2N)`$) or unitary symplectic ($`USp(2N)`$) matrices, depending on the symmetries of the family in question.

Our purpose here is to calculate the autocorrelation functions (sometimes called the shifted moments) for the characteristic polynomials of random matrices from the groups just listed. Specifically, let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s)`$ represent the characteristic polynomial of a matrix $`M`$ associated with an element of a compact group $`G`$, and let $`dM`$ denote Haar measure on $`G`$. We calculate

$$_G\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s_1^1)\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s_m^1)\mathrm{\Lambda }_M^{}(s_{m+1})\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_M^{}(s_n)𝑑M$$
(1.1)
when $`G=U(N)`$ (here $`M^{}`$ is the Hermitian conjugate of $`M`$), and

$$_G\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s_1^1)\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s_k^1)𝑑M$$
(1.2)
when $`G=O(2N)`$ and $`G=USp(2N)`$. (The reason for having a different definition in the first case is related to symmetries in the eigenvalue spectra.) In each case the result will be presented in three equivalent forms: as a determinant sum, in the style of Basor and Forrester  (and hence in terms of symmetric polynomials); as a combinatorial sum; and as a contour integral, in the style of Brézin and Hikami .

Conjectures based on these random matrix results for the autocorrelation functions of $`L`$-functions are presented in a companion paper to this one . We here prove the results stated there. The combination of the random matrix results derived here and the numerical evidence in favour of the conjectures for $`L`$-functions put forward in  add considerable weight to the idea that there are fundamental connections between the two subjects. In addition, the random matrix calculations carry an interest of their own in connection with work on Toeplitz matrices  in the unitary case, and with the elegant dual pair method of Zirnbauer and Nonnenmacher  for all three of the above mentioned compact groups.

Similar calculations to those described here have been performed on ensembles of Hermitian matrices, first by Andreev and Simons  and then by Brézin and Hikami . In those cases the analogous formulae are asymptotic approximations in the large-matrix limit. The expressions we obtain here are exact. Several stages of our work were inspired by  and . We note that Fyodorov and Strahov  have recently extended the results of  and  for products as well as for ratios of shifted characteristic polynomials of Hermitian matrices.

This paper is divided into three main sections, one devoted to each of the three compact groups: $`U(N)`$, $`O(2N)`$ and $`USp(2N)`$. In each we briefly present a related conjecture for the autocorrelation functions for families of $`L`$-functions having the same unitary, orthogonal or symplectic symmetry. For more details on the number theoretical side, see .

## 2 Unitary group: $`U(N)`$

As mentioned in the introduction, we will calculate the autocorrelation function

$$_{U(N)}\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s_1^1)\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s_m^1)\mathrm{\Lambda }_M^{}(s_{m+1})\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_M^{}(s_n)𝑑M,$$
(2.1)
where $`dM`$ denotes Haar measure. The characteristic polynomial, which in this case we will define as

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s)=det(IMs)=\underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}(1e^{i\theta _n}s),$$
(2.2)
where $`e^{i\theta _n}`$ are the eigenvalues of $`M`$, obeys the functional equation

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s)=(1)^NdetMs^N\mathrm{\Lambda }_M^{}(1/s),$$
(2.3)
where $`MM^{}=I`$.

We will actually examine

$`I_{m,n}(U(N),w)`$ $``$ $`I_{m,n}(U(N);w_1,\mathrm{},w_m;w_{m+1},\mathrm{},w_n)`$ (2.4)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=m+1}{\overset{n}{}}}w_k^N{\displaystyle _{U(N)}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=m+1}{\overset{n}{}}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(w_i^1){\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_M^{}(w_j)dM,`$
for which it transpires that the result is simply interpreted through the work of Nonnenmacher and Zirnbauer  as a character of the group $`U(n)`$. This is related to the correlation function (2.1) via

$`{\displaystyle _{U(N)}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s_1^1)\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s_m^1)\mathrm{\Lambda }_M^{}(s_{m+1})\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_M^{}(s_n)𝑑M`$
$`=\left({\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}}s_i^N\right)I_{nm,n}(U(N);s_{m+1},\mathrm{},s_n;s_1,\mathrm{},s_m).`$ (2.5)
Our initial approach in this case (up to (2.15)) is identical to . We present this part of the calculation in full, because it will be generalized in the subsequent sections to the cases of $`O(2N)`$ and $`USp(2N)`$.

Using the expression for Haar measure in terms of the eigenvalues of $`M`$ ,

$`I_{m,n}(U(N),w)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N!(2\pi )^N}}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\left[\left({\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{m}{}}}(1e^{i\theta _p}w_r)\right)\left({\displaystyle \underset{j=m+1}{\overset{n}{}}}(w_je^{i\theta _p})\right)\right]\right]`$ (2.6)
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{1\mathrm{}<qN}{}}|e^{i\theta _q}e^{i\theta _{\mathrm{}}}|^2d\theta _1\mathrm{}d\theta _N.`$
Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ denote the Vandermonde determinant

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)\underset{1j<kn}{}(x_kx_j)=det[x_j^{k1}]_{1j,kn}.$$
(2.7)
The object is to create in the integrand in (2.6) a Vandermonde determinant in the variables $`w_1,\mathrm{},w_n,e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _N}`$. To this end we introduce an extra factor $`_{1\mathrm{}<mk}(w_mw_{\mathrm{}})`$, and, making use of the symmetry of the rest of the integrand, replace $`_{1\mathrm{}<qN}|e^{i\theta _q}e^{i\theta _{\mathrm{}}}|^2`$ by $`(N!_{j=1}^Ne^{i(j1)\theta _j})_{1\mathrm{}<qN}(e^{i\theta _q}e^{i\theta _{\mathrm{}}})`$ in the integral. This gives

$`I_{m,n}(U(N),w)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{(nm)N}}{(2\pi )^N_{1\mathrm{}<qn}(w_qw_{\mathrm{}})}}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}e^{im\theta _p}\right]`$ (2.14)
$`\times \left[{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{m}{}}}(e^{i\theta _p}w_r)\right)\left({\displaystyle \underset{j=m+1}{\overset{n}{}}}(e^{i\theta _p}w_j)\right)\right]\left({\displaystyle \underset{1\mathrm{}<qn}{}}(w_qw_{\mathrm{}})\right)`$
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \underset{1\mathrm{}<qN}{}}(e^{i\theta _q}e^{i\theta _{\mathrm{}}})\right)\left({\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}e^{i(j1)\theta _j}\right)d\theta _1\mathrm{}d\theta _N`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{(nm)N}}{(2\pi )^N_{1\mathrm{}<qn}(w_qw_{\mathrm{}})}}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}e^{i(m+j1)\theta _j}\right]`$
$`\times \left|\begin{array}{ccccc}1& w_1& w_1^2& \mathrm{}& w_1^{N+n1}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ 1& w_n& w_n^2& \mathrm{}& w_n^{N+n1}\\ 1& e^{i\theta _1}& e^{2i\theta _1}& \mathrm{}& e^{i(N+n1)\theta _1}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ 1& e^{i\theta _N}& e^{2i\theta _N}& \mathrm{}& e^{i(N+n1)\theta _N}\end{array}\right|d\theta _1\mathrm{}d\theta _N.`$
If the factor $`e^{i(m+j1)\theta _j}`$ and the integration over $`\theta _j`$ are pulled into the row of the determinant which contains only $`\theta _j`$, then the integration in the final $`N`$ rows of the determinant results in zeros throughout these rows, with the exception of a diagonal line of ones running from column $`m+1`$ in row $`n+1`$ to column $`m+N`$ in row $`n+N`$. Thus we are left with the representation of $`I`$ as a determinant:

$`I_{m,n}(U(N),w)`$ (2.15)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{_{1\mathrm{}<qn}(w_qw_{\mathrm{}})}}\left|\begin{array}{ccccccccc}1& w_1& w_1^2& \mathrm{}& w_1^{m1}& w_1^{N+m}& w_1^{N+m+1}& \mathrm{}& w_1^{N+n1}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ 1& w_n& w_n^2& \mathrm{}& w_n^{m1}& w_n^{N+m}& w_n^{N+m+1}& \mathrm{}& w_n^{N+n1}\end{array}\right|.`$ (2.19)
This result first appears in the work of Basor and Forrester .

The notation can be simplified by recalling that the general form of a Schur polynomial associated with the partition $`\mu =(\mu _1,\mu _2,\mathrm{},\mu _n)`$ (where the $`\mu _j`$ are integers and $`\mu _1\mu _2\mathrm{}\mu _n0`$) is

$$S_\mu (x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)=\frac{\left|\begin{array}{ccccc}x_1^{\mu _1+n1}& x_1^{\mu _2+n2}& x_1^{\mu _3+n3}& \mathrm{}& x_1^{\mu _n}\\ x_2^{\mu _1+n1}& x_2^{\mu _2+n2}& x_2^{\mu _3+n3}& \mathrm{}& x_2^{\mu _n}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ x_n^{\mu _1+n1}& x_n^{\mu _2+n2}& x_n^{\mu _3+n3}& \mathrm{}& x_n^{\mu _n}\end{array}\right|}{\left|\begin{array}{ccccc}x_1^{n1}& x_1^{n2}& x_1^{n3}& \mathrm{}& 1\\ x_2^{n1}& x_2^{n2}& x_2^{n3}& \mathrm{}& 1\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ x_n^{n1}& x_n^{n2}& x_n^{n3}& \mathrm{}& 1\end{array}\right|}.$$
(2.20)
Thus,

$$I_{m,n}(U(N),w)=S_{\lambda ^{(nm)}}(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n),$$
(2.21)
where $`\lambda ^{(nm)}=(N,N,\mathrm{},N)`$, with $`(nm)`$ $`N`$’s. This is, as predicted from the approach of Zirnbauer and Nonnenmacher  using Lie theory and dual pairs, a character of an irreducible representation of the group $`U(n)`$ when $`w_1,\mathrm{},w_n`$ lie on the unit circle.

We concentrate now on the determinant

$`D_{N,m,n}(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n)`$
$`\left|\begin{array}{cccccccc}1& w_1& w_1^2& \mathrm{}& w_1^{m1}& w_1^{N+m}& \mathrm{}& w_1^{N+n1}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ 1& w_n& w_n^2& \mathrm{}& w_n^{m1}& w_n^{N+m}& \mathrm{}& w_n^{N+n1}\end{array}\right|`$ (2.25)
$`={\displaystyle \underset{\sigma S_n}{}}\mathrm{sgn}(\sigma )w_{\sigma (1)}^0w_{\sigma (2)}^1w_{\sigma (3)}^2\mathrm{}w_{\sigma (m)}^{m1}w_{\sigma (m+1)}^{N+m}w_{\sigma (m+2)}^{N+m+1}\mathrm{}w_{\sigma (n)}^{N+n1},`$ (2.26)
where the sum is over $`S_n`$, all permutations of $`\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}`$. We break up the sum over all permutations into subsets. Let $`\mathrm{\Xi }_m`$ be the set of the $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{m}\right)`$ permutations $`\sigma S_n`$ such that $`\sigma (1)<\sigma (2)<\mathrm{}<\sigma (m)`$ and $`\sigma (m+1)<\mathrm{}<\sigma (n)`$.

$`D_{N,m,n}(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n)`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{\sigma \mathrm{\Xi }_m}{}}\mathrm{sgn}(\sigma )\left({\displaystyle \underset{\rho }{}}\mathrm{sgn}(\rho )w_{\rho (1)}^0w_{\rho (2)}^1\mathrm{}w_{\rho (m)}^{m1}\right)\left({\displaystyle \underset{\delta }{}}\mathrm{sgn}(\delta )w_{\delta (1)}^0w_{\delta (2)}^1\mathrm{}w_{\delta (nm)}^{nm1}\right)`$
$`\times (w_{\sigma (m+1)}w_{\sigma (m+2)}\mathrm{}w_{\sigma (n)})^{N+m},`$ (2.27)
where $`\rho `$ is a permutation taking $`\sigma (1),\sigma (2),\mathrm{},\sigma (m)`$ to $`\rho (1),\rho (2),\mathrm{},\rho (m)`$ and $`\delta `$ is a permutation taking $`\sigma (m+1),\sigma (m+2),\mathrm{},\sigma (n)`$ to $`\delta (1),\delta (2),\mathrm{},\delta (nm)`$.

Finally, using the definition of the Vandermonde determinant from (2.7),

$`D_{N,m,n}(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\sigma \mathrm{\Xi }_m}{}}\mathrm{sgn}(\sigma )\left[{\displaystyle \underset{1\mathrm{}<jm}{}}(w_{\sigma (j)}w_{\sigma (\mathrm{})})\right]\left[{\displaystyle \underset{m+1p<qn}{}}(w_{\sigma (q)}w_{\sigma (p)})\right]`$ (2.28)
$`\times (w_{\sigma (m+1)}w_{\sigma (m+2)}\mathrm{}w_{\sigma (n)})^{N+m}.`$
So,

$`I_{m,n}(U(N),w)={\displaystyle \underset{\sigma \mathrm{\Xi }_m}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{(w_{\sigma (m+1)}w_{\sigma (m+2)}\mathrm{}w_{\sigma (n)})^{N+m}}{_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1\mathrm{}m}{m+1qn}}(w_{\sigma (q)}w_{\sigma (\mathrm{})})}}.`$ (2.29)
In (2.28) each factor $`(w_iw_j)`$ is ordered such that $`i>j`$. In the denominator of (2.29) we wish the ordering to be such that the first $`w`$ in each pair is chosen from $`w_{\sigma (m+1)},\mathrm{},w_{\sigma (n)}`$. The sign required to accomplish this reordering cancels exactly with $`\mathrm{sgn}(\sigma )`$ in the numerator of (2.28). Thus we obtain an expression for $`I`$ as a combinatorial sum:

$`I_{m,n}(U(N),w)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\sigma \mathrm{\Xi }_m}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{(w_{\sigma (m+1)}w_{\sigma (m+2)}\mathrm{}w_{\sigma (n)})^N}{_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1\mathrm{}m}{m+1qn}}(1w_{\sigma (\mathrm{})}w_{\sigma (q)}^1)}}.`$ (2.30)
We now use

###### Lemma 2.1

If

$$G(a_1,\mathrm{},a_m;b_1,\mathrm{},b_{nm})=F(a_1,\mathrm{},a_m;b_1,\mathrm{},b_{nm})\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}\underset{j=1}{\overset{nm}{}}f(a_ib_j),$$

where $`F`$ is regular near $`(0,\mathrm{},0)`$ and $`f(x)=\frac{1}{x}+c_0+c_1x+\mathrm{}`$, then

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\sigma \mathrm{\Xi }_m}{}}G(u_{\sigma (1)},\mathrm{},u_{\sigma (m)};u_{\sigma (m+1)},\mathrm{},u_{\sigma (n)})`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{n(n1)/2}}{(2\pi i)^nm!(nm)!}}{\displaystyle \mathrm{}G(z_1,\mathrm{},z_m;z_{m+1},\mathrm{},z_n)}`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(z_1,\mathrm{},z_m,z_{m+1},\mathrm{},z_n)^2}{_{i=1}^n_{j=1}^n(z_iu_j)}}dz_1\mathrm{}dz_n,`$
where $`\mathrm{\Xi }_m`$ is the set of the $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{m}\right)`$ permutations $`\sigma S_n`$ such that $`\sigma (1)<\sigma (2)<\mathrm{}<\sigma (m)`$ and $`\sigma (m+1)<\mathrm{}<\sigma (n)`$ and the contour integrals enclose the variables $`u_j`$,

which allows us to write the sum (2.30) as a contour integral:

$`I_{m,n}(U(N);e^{\alpha _1},e^{\alpha _2},\mathrm{},e^{\alpha _m};e^{\alpha _{m+1}},\mathrm{},e^{\alpha _n})`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{n(n1)/2}}{(2\pi i)^nm!(nm)!}}{\displaystyle \mathrm{}e^{N(z_{m+1}+z_{m+2}+\mathrm{}+z_n)}\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1\mathrm{}m}{m+1qn}}{}(1e^{z_qz_{\mathrm{}}})^1}`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(z_1,\mathrm{},z_m,z_{m+1},\mathrm{},z_n)^2}{_{i=1}^n_{j=1}^n(z_i\alpha _j)}}dz_1\mathrm{}dz_n.`$ (2.31)
Brézin and Hikami arrive at an integral of a very similar form for the autocorrelation functions of characteristic polynomials of random Hermitean matrices in the limit of large matrix size $`N`$ . Note that in our case the result is an identity for any $`N`$.

### 2.1 Comparison with the Riemann Zeta Function

The main motivation for the calculations presented above is to understand the autocorrelation function and moments of the Riemann zeta function. The Riemann zeta function is defined for $`\mathrm{Re}s>1`$ by $`\zeta (s)=_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}n^s`$ and has a continuation to a meromorphic function on the complex plane with a single, simple pole at $`s=1`$. As described in detail in , for the autocorrelation functions of $`\zeta (s)`$ we have the following:

###### Conjecture 2.2

$`{\displaystyle _0^T}\zeta (\frac{1}{2}+\alpha _1+it)\mathrm{}\zeta (\frac{1}{2}+\alpha _k+it)\zeta (\frac{1}{2}\alpha _{k+1}it)\mathrm{}\zeta (\frac{1}{2}\alpha _{2k}it)𝑑t`$
$`={\displaystyle _0^T}W_k(t;\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _k;\alpha _{k+1},\mathrm{},\alpha _{2k})(1+O(t^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}+ϵ}))𝑑t,`$
where

$`W_k(t;\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _k;\alpha _{k+1},\mathrm{},\alpha _{2k})=e^{\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}\frac{t}{2\pi }(\alpha _1\alpha _2\mathrm{}\alpha _k+\alpha _{k+1}+\mathrm{}+\alpha _{2k})}`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{\sigma \mathrm{\Xi }}{}}e^{\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}\frac{t}{2\pi }(\alpha _{\sigma (1)}+\alpha _{\sigma (2)}+\mathrm{}+\alpha _{\sigma (k)}\alpha _{\sigma (k+1)}\mathrm{}\alpha _{\sigma (2k)})}`$
$`\times A_k(\alpha _{\sigma (1)},\mathrm{},\alpha _{\sigma (2k)}){\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1\mathrm{}k}{k+1m2k}}{}}\zeta (1+\alpha _{\sigma (\mathrm{})}\alpha _{\sigma (m)}),`$ (2.32)
and $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ is the set of the $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2k}{k}\right)`$ permutations $`\sigma S_{2k}`$ such that $`\sigma (1)<\sigma (2)<\mathrm{}<\sigma (k)`$ and $`\sigma (k+1)<\mathrm{}<\sigma (2k)`$. Here $`A_k(u_1,\mathrm{},u_{2k})A_k(u)`$ is an Euler product containing arithmetic information:

$$A_k(u)=\underset{p}{}\underset{i=1}{\overset{k}{}}\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}\left(1\frac{1}{p^{1+u_iu_{j+k}}}\right)_0^1\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}\left(1\frac{e(\theta )}{p^{1/2+u_j}}\right)^1\left(1\frac{e(\theta )}{p^{1/2u_{j+k}}}\right)^1d\theta .$$

Note that by Lemma 2.1 we can also write

$`W_k(t;\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _k;\alpha _{k+1},\mathrm{},\alpha _{2k})`$
$`=e^{\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}\frac{t}{2\pi }(\alpha _1\alpha _2\mathrm{}\alpha _k+\alpha _{k+1}+\mathrm{}+\alpha _{2k})}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^k}{k!^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi i)^{2k}}}`$
$`\times {\displaystyle }\mathrm{}{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{A_k(z_1,\mathrm{},z_{2k})_{i=1}^k_{j=1}^k\zeta (1+z_iz_{j+k})\mathrm{\Delta }(z_1,\mathrm{},z_{2k})^2}{_{i=1}^{2k}_{j=1}^{2k}(z_i\alpha _j)}}`$
$`\times e^{\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}\frac{t}{2\pi }_{j=1}^kz_jz_{j+k}}dz_1\mathrm{}dz_{2k}.`$ (2.33)
The Riemann zeta function satisfies a functional equation

$$\zeta (s)=\pi ^{s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{2}s)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1}{2}s)}\zeta (1s).$$
(2.34)
The Riemann Hypothesis is that the complex zeros of $`\zeta (s)`$ lie on the line $`\mathrm{Re}s=1/2`$. The characteristic polynomial, on the other hand, obeys the functional equation (2.3) and its zeros lie on the unit circle, so in analogy with the autocorrelation functions of $`\zeta (s)`$, we let $`s_j=\mathrm{exp}(\alpha _j)`$ in (2). Now when $`\alpha _i`$ is purely imaginary, $`e^{\alpha _i}`$ sits on the unit circle, in analogy with $`1/2+it+\alpha _i`$ lying on the critical line when $`\alpha _i`$ is purely imaginary in the Riemann zeta case. We compare (2.2) with

$`{\displaystyle _{U(N)}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(e^{\alpha _1})\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(e^{\alpha _k})\mathrm{\Lambda }_M^{}(e^{\alpha _{k+1}})\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_M^{}(e^{\alpha _{2k}})𝑑M`$
$`=e^{\frac{N}{2}(\alpha _1\alpha _2\mathrm{}\alpha _k+\alpha _{k+1}+\mathrm{}\alpha _{2k})}`$ (2.35)
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \underset{\sigma \mathrm{\Xi }}{}}e^{\frac{N}{2}(\alpha _{\sigma (1)}+\alpha _{\sigma (2)}+\mathrm{}+\alpha _{\sigma (k)}\alpha _{\sigma (k+1)}\mathrm{}\alpha _{\sigma (2k)})}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1\mathrm{}k}{k+1m2k}}{}}(1e^{\alpha _{\sigma (m)}\alpha _{\sigma (\mathrm{})}})^1\right),`$
which follows from (2). These two formulae clearly have a similar structure if we equate the density of the Riemann zeros and the density of the eigenvalues of $`M`$ on the unit circle to obtain the relation $`N=\mathrm{log}\frac{t}{2\pi }`$. The random matrix expression is, not surprisingly, missing the arithmetical factor $`A(\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _{2k})`$; also, the function which provides the simple poles in each term of the sum is $`\zeta (1+z)`$ in the Riemann zeta case and $`(1e^z)^1`$ in the random matrix case.

## 3 Unitary symplectic group: $`USp(2N)`$

Now we turn to the group of symplectic unitary matrices, $`USp(2N)`$. These are $`2N\times 2N`$ matrices, $`M`$, with $`MM^{}=1`$ and $`M^tJM=J`$, where $`J=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& I_N\\ I_N& 0\end{array}\right)`$ and $`I_N`$ is the $`N\times N`$ identity matrix. For these matrices, the eigenvalues lie on the unit circle and come in complex conjugate pairs $`e^{i\theta _1},e^{i\theta _1},e^{i\theta _2},e^{i\theta _2},\mathrm{}`$ $`e^{i\theta _N},e^{i\theta _N}`$. Thus we let the characteristic polynomial related to such a matrix take the form

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s)`$ $`=`$ $`det(IMs)={\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(1e^{i\theta _n}s)(1e^{i\theta _n}s).`$ (3.1)
The weighting in the average over $`USp(2N)`$ of the matrix with eigenphases $`\pm \theta _1,\mathrm{},`$ $`\pm \theta _N`$ is derived from Haar measure on the group, and can be manipulated into the form

$`N_{Sp}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{N(N1)/2}}{4^{N^2}}}\mathrm{\Delta }(e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _N},e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _N}){\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(e^{i\theta _k}e^{i\theta _k}),`$ (3.2)
where $`N_{Sp}=\frac{2^{2N^22N}}{\pi ^NN!}`$.

We define the autocorrelation function in this case to be

$`I(USp(2N),w_1,\mathrm{},w_k){\displaystyle _{USp(2N)}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(w_1)\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(w_k)𝑑M`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{N_{Sp}(1)^{N(N1)/2}}{4^{N^2}}}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}\mathrm{\Delta }(e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _N},e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _N})`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{k}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(e^{i\theta _n}w_m)(e^{i\theta _n}w_m){\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(e^{i\theta _j}e^{i\theta _j})d\theta _1\mathrm{}d\theta _N`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{N_{Sp}}{4^{N^2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{N(N1)/2}}{_{1i<jk}(w_jw_i)}}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}`$
$`\times \mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,w_2,\mathrm{},w_k,e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _N},e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _N}){\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(e^{i\theta _j}e^{i\theta _j})d\theta _1\mathrm{}d\theta _N`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{N_{Sp}}{4^{N^2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{N(N1)/2}}{_{1i<jk}(w_jw_i)}}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{\sigma S_{k+2N}}{}}\mathrm{sgn}(\sigma )w_1^{\sigma (1)1}w_2^{\sigma (2)1}\mathrm{}w_k^{\sigma (k)1}(e^{i\sigma (k+1)\theta _1}e^{i(\sigma (k+1)2)\theta _1})`$
$`\times (e^{i\sigma (k+2)\theta _2}e^{i(\sigma (k+2)2)\theta _2})\mathrm{}(e^{i\sigma (k+N)\theta _N}e^{i(\sigma (k+N)2)\theta _N})`$
$`\times e^{i(\sigma (k+N+1)1)\theta _1}\mathrm{}e^{i(\sigma (k+2N)1)\theta _N}d\theta _1\mathrm{}d\theta _N.`$ (3.3)
As we are integrating each $`\theta _j`$ from 0 to $`2\pi `$, the term in the sum belonging to a given permutation $`\sigma `$ is zero unless for every $`j`$, $`\sigma (k+j)=\sigma (k+N+j)1`$ or $`\sigma (k+j)=\sigma (k+N+j)+1`$. Upon integration this places the condition $`i_1<i_2<\mathrm{}<i_k\{0,1,2,\mathrm{},2N+k1\}`$, $`i_j`$ is even if $`j`$ is odd and $`i_j`$ is odd if $`j`$ is even, on the resulting sum over $`k\times k`$ determinants:

$`I(USp(2N),w_1,\mathrm{},w_k)`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{_{1i<jk}(w_jw_i)}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{0i_1<i_2<\mathrm{}<i_k2N+k1}{i_jj1mod2}}{}}\left|\begin{array}{cccc}w_1^{i_1}& w_1^{i_2}& \mathrm{}& w_1^{i_k}\\ w_2^{i_1}& w_2^{i_2}& \mathrm{}& w_2^{i_k}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ w_k^{i_1}& w_k^{i_2}& \mathrm{}& w_k^{i_k}\end{array}\right|.`$ (3.8)
Note that this can also be written in terms of Schur functions (see (2.20)),

$`I(USp(2N),w_1,\mathrm{},w_k)={\displaystyle \underset{\lambda \mathrm{even}}{}}S_\lambda (w_1,\mathrm{},w_k),`$ (3.9)
where the sum is over partitions $`\lambda =(\lambda _1,\mathrm{},\lambda _k)`$ with all parts $`\lambda _j`$ even and $`2N\lambda _1\lambda _2\mathrm{}\lambda _k0`$.

Examination of examples when $`k`$ is small leads to the guess that in general,

$`I(USp(2N),w_1,\mathrm{},w_k)`$
$`=w_1^N\mathrm{}w_k^N\left[{\displaystyle \underset{ϵ_j\{1,1\}}{}}({\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}}w_j^{ϵ_jN}){\displaystyle \underset{1ijk}{}}(1w_i^{ϵ_i}w_j^{ϵ_j})^1\right],`$ (3.10)
and we will now prove this to be true.

Before embarking on the proof of (3) we note that letting $`w_j^N=e^{b_j}`$ and taking $`N`$ large,

$`I(USp(2N),e^{b_1/N},\mathrm{},e^{b_k/N})`$
$`e^{b_1}\mathrm{}e^{b_k}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{ϵ_j\{1,1\}}{}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}}e^{ϵ_jb_j}\right){\displaystyle \underset{1ijk}{}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_ib_i}{N}}+{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_jb_j}{N}}\right)^1\right]`$
$`=N^{\frac{k^2+k}{2}}e^{b_1}\mathrm{}e^{b_k}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{ϵ_j\{1,1\}}{}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}}e^{ϵ_jb_j}\right){\displaystyle \underset{1ijk}{}}(ϵ_ib_i+ϵ_jb_j)^1\right].`$ (3.11)
The sum here has just the same structure as Brézin and Hikami’s results for the large $`N`$ asymptotics of Hermitian ensembles , showing that when distances are measured in terms of the mean level spacing of the eigenvalues then, as expected, in the large $`N`$ limit averages over the compact groups and the Hermitian ensembles are equivalent.

To prove (3), we need two indentities. The first is

###### Identity 3.1

$`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n)|_{w_j=0}{\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{n}{}}}(1w_jw_m)=(1w_1^2\mathrm{}w_n^2)\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n).`$
This is a special case, with $`f(w)=_{m=1}^n(1w_mw)`$, of the following lemma:

###### Lemma 3.2

Given a polynomial function of order $`n`$, $`f(w)=c_0+c_1w+\mathrm{}+c_nw^n`$, we have the relation

$`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n)|_{w_j=0}f(w_j)`$
$`=(c_0+(1)^{n1}c_nw_1\mathrm{}w_n)\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n).`$
To prove Lemma 3.2 we notice first of all that we can write the left side of the relation as a determinant.

$$\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n)|_{w_j=0}f(w_j)=\left|\begin{array}{ccccc}f(w_1)& w_1& w_1^2& \mathrm{}& w_1^{n1}\\ f(w_2)& w_2& w_2^2& \mathrm{}& w_2^{n1}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ f(w_n)& w_n& w_n^2& \mathrm{}& w_n^{n1}\end{array}\right|.$$
(3.12)
However, since $`f(w)`$ is a polynomial of order $`n`$, in the first column of the above determinant, all the terms in $`f`$ with coefficients $`c_1,\mathrm{},c_{n1}`$ can be cancelled by column manipulations, leaving just

$`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n)|_{w_j=0}f(w_j)`$ $`=`$ $`\left|\begin{array}{cccc}c_0+c_nw_1^n& w_1& \mathrm{}& w_1^{n1}\\ c_0+c_nw_2^n& w_2& \mathrm{}& w_2^{n1}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ c_0+c_nw_n^n& w_n& \mathrm{}& w_n^{n1}\end{array}\right|`$ (3.17)
$`=`$ $`(c_0+(1)^{n1}c_nw_1\mathrm{}w_n)\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n).`$ (3.18)
The second identity is

###### Identity 3.3

$`{\displaystyle \underset{CD=[n],CD=\mathrm{}}{}}(1)^{S(C,D)}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha C}{}}w_\alpha ^{n1}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i,jC}{i<j}}{}}(w_jw_i){\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i,jD}{i<j}}{}}(w_jw_i){\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\alpha C}{\beta D}}{}}(1w_\alpha w_\beta )=0,`$
where the left hand side is a polynomial in the variables $`w_1,\mathrm{},w_n`$ and the notation is $`[n]=\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}`$, $`|C|`$ is the number of elements in $`C`$, $`W(C,D)=_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{mC,nD}{m>n}}1`$ and $`S(C,D)=|C||D|+|C|(|C|+1)/2+W(C,D)`$.

We prove this by showing that when $`r=n1`$, with the same notation as above,

$`F_n(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n;x;r)`$ (3.19)
$`={\displaystyle \underset{CD=[n],CD=\mathrm{}}{}}(1)^{S(C,D)}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha C}{}}w_\alpha ^r\mathrm{\Delta }(C)\mathrm{\Delta }(D){\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\alpha C}{\beta D}}{}}(x^2w_\alpha w_\beta )x^{|D|^2+(rn)|D|}`$
is identically zero. Here $`\mathrm{\Delta }(C)=_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i,jC}{i<j}}(w_jw_i)`$. We proceed by showing that the polynomial $`F_n(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n;x;n1)`$, which is of order $`n(n1)`$ in $`x`$, has at least $`n(n1)+1`$ roots, implying that it is identically zero. Since the left hand side of the equation in Identity 3.3 is merely the instance of $`F_n(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n;x;n1)`$ when $`x=1`$, this proves Identity 3.3.

First of all we note that $`F_n(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n;x;n1)`$ is zero when $`x`$ is zero. Only the terms with $`|D|=0,1`$ contribute in this case, due to the factor $`x^{|D|^2|D|}`$. Thus we are looking at

$`(1)^{n(n+1)/2}\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}}w_i^{n1}+(1)^{n(n+1)/21}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n)|_{w_j=0}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}}w_i^{n1},`$ (3.20)
which we can see is zero by a simple application of Lemma 3.2 (with $`f(w)=(1)^{n(n+1)/2}`$ $`\times _{i=1}^nw_i^{n1}`$).

Next we prove that (3.19) is zero for certain values of the integer $`rn1`$ when $`x^2=w_aw_b`$, with $`ab=1,2,\mathrm{},n`$. This yields $`n(n1)`$ other zeros (assuming none of the $`w_j`$ are zero) and proves that (3.19) is identically zero for $`r=n1`$. We start with $`F_n(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n;\sqrt{w_aw_b};r)`$. We note immediately that in the sum over $`C`$ and $`D`$, any term in which $`a`$ and $`b`$ do not occur both in $`C`$ or both in $`D`$ is zero. Thus,

$`F_n(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n;\sqrt{w_aw_b};r)`$ (3.21)
$`={\displaystyle \underset{AB=[n]_{a,b},AB=\mathrm{}}{}}(1)^{S(A,B\{a,b\})}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha A}{}}w_\alpha ^r\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\mathrm{\Delta }(B\{a,b\})`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\alpha A}{\beta B\{a,b\}}}{}}(w_aw_bw_\alpha w_\beta )(\sqrt{w_aw_b})^{|B\{a,b\}|^2+(rn)|B\{a,b\}|}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{AB=[n]_{a,b},AB=\mathrm{}}{}}(1)^{S(A\{a,b\},B)}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha A\{a,b\}}{}}w_\alpha ^r\mathrm{\Delta }(A\{a,b\})\mathrm{\Delta }(B)`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\alpha A\{a,b\}}{\beta B}}{}}(w_aw_bw_\alpha w_\beta )(\sqrt{w_aw_b})^{|B|^2+(rn)|B|},`$
where $`[n]_{a,b}`$ is the set of elements $`\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}`$ with $`a`$ and $`b`$ removed. However, after some manipulations we can write both the sum in (3.21) containing $`A`$ and $`B\{a,b\}`$ and the sum containing $`A\{a,b\}`$ and $`B`$ in terms of just $`A`$ and $`B`$. To this end, we note that $`|B\{a,b\}|=|B|+2`$, $`S(A\{a,b\},B)=(S(A,B)+s_b+1)mod2`$ and $`S(A,B\{a,b\})=(S(A,B)+s_a)mod2`$, where (assuming $`a>b`$) $`s_A`$ is $`_{iA,a>i>b}1`$ and $`s_B`$ is $`_{iB,a>i>b}1`$. Hence

$`F_n(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n;\sqrt{w_aw_b};r)`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{AB=[n]_{a,b},AB=\mathrm{}}{}}(1)^{S(A,B)+s_A+s_B}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha A}{}}w_\alpha ^r\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\mathrm{\Delta }(B)`$
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \underset{\beta B}{}}(w_aw_\beta )(w_bw_\beta )\right)(w_aw_b){\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\alpha A}{\beta B}}{}}(w_aw_bw_\alpha w_\beta )`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{\alpha A}{}}(w_bw_\alpha )(w_aw_\alpha )(\sqrt{w_aw_b})^{|B|^2+(rn)|B|}(w_aw_b)^{|A|}(w_aw_b)^{2|B|+(rn)+2}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{AB=[n]_{a,b},AB=\mathrm{}}{}}(1)^{S(A,B)+s_A+s_B+1}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha A}{}}w_\alpha ^r\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\mathrm{\Delta }(B)`$
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \underset{\alpha A}{}}(w_aw_\alpha )(w_bw_\alpha )\right)(w_aw_b){\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\alpha A}{\beta B}}{}}(w_aw_bw_\alpha w_\beta )`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{\beta B}{}}(w_bw_\beta )(w_aw_\beta )(\sqrt{w_aw_b})^{|B|^2+(rn)|B|}(w_aw_b)^r(w_aw_b)^{|B|}.`$ (3.22)
Since $`|A|+|B|+2=n`$, we see that the two sums above cancel each other exactly, term by term. Thus we have that

$$F_n(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n;\sqrt{w_aw_b};r)=0.$$
(3.23)
If $`nr`$ is odd, it immediately follows that $`F_n(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n;\sqrt{w_aw_b};r)=0`$ also, as (3.19) will be even in $`x`$. This proves Identity 3.3.

Since the proof of $`F_n(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n;\sqrt{w_aw_b};r)=0`$ involved cancellation in (3.19) only amongst terms in which $`|C|`$ has the same parity, we can restrict the sum over $`C`$ to sets of even cardinality or sets of odd cardinality. Note then that if $`r=n2`$, we can write a further identity (which will be of use in Section 4.2)

###### Identity 3.4

$$\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{CD=[n],CD=\mathrm{}}{|C|\mathrm{even}}}{}(1)^{S(C,D)}\underset{\alpha C}{}w_\alpha ^{n2}\mathrm{\Delta }(C)\mathrm{\Delta }(D)\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\alpha C}{\beta D}}{}(x^2w_\alpha w_\beta )x^{|D|^22|D|+1}=0,$$

because in the same manner as above, we would see that the left side of the expression is zero when $`x=+\sqrt{w_aw_b}`$, $`ab=1,2,\mathrm{},n`$. Note that an extra factor of $`x`$ has been included in each term to ensure that the expression on the left of Identity 3.4 is a polynomial in $`x`$; that is, there are no terms with negative exponents on $`x`$. To deal with $`x=\sqrt{w_aw_b}`$, we note that if $`n`$ is odd, the expression is an even polynomial in $`x`$, and if $`n`$ is even, then $`x^{|D|^2+2|D|+1}`$ is always an odd power of $`x`$. Thus the expression is zero when $`x=\pm \sqrt{w_aw_b}`$, $`ab=1,2,\mathrm{},n`$ (this means we have $`n(n1)`$ zeros), and the polynomial in $`x`$ is of order $`n(n1)n+1`$. Thus if $`n2`$, it is everywhere zero and Identity 3.4 is true.

We are now in a position to return to the proof of (3). We need to prove that this is identical to (3). We will now prove that

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_k)}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{0i_1<i_2<\mathrm{}<i_kn}{i_jj1mod2}}{}}\left|\begin{array}{cccc}w_1^{i_1}& w_1^{i_2}& \mathrm{}& w_1^{i_k}\\ w_2^{i_1}& w_2^{i_2}& \mathrm{}& w_2^{i_k}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ w_k^{i_1}& w_k^{i_2}& \mathrm{}& w_k^{i_k}\end{array}\right|`$ (3.28)
$`=w_1^{(nk+1)/2}\mathrm{}w_k^{(nk+1)/2}{\displaystyle \underset{ϵ_j\{1,1\}}{}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{k}{}}}w_m^{ϵ_m(nk+1)/2}\right)\left({\displaystyle \underset{1mqk}{}}(1w_m^{ϵ_m}w_q^{ϵ_q})^1\right).`$
As a first step it is convenient to add to the notation already introduced to help simplify the equations. If $`A`$ and $`B`$ are sets of positive integers, then we let $`w_A=_{mA}w_m`$. Further, we define

$$E(A)=\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{mn}{m,nA}}{}(1w_mw_n)$$
(3.29)
as well as

$$E(A,B)=\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{mA}{nB}}{}(1w_mw_n),$$
(3.30)
and, as previously,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(A)=\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m<n}{m,nA}}{}(w_nw_m)$$
(3.31)
and

$$D(A,B)=\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{mA}{nB}}{}(w_nw_m).$$
(3.32)
Armed with this notation, the right side of (3.28) can be written, where $`A`$ is the set of indices $`j`$ for which $`ϵ_j=+1`$, as

$`w_1^{(nk+1)/2}\mathrm{}w_k^{(nk+1)/2}{\displaystyle \underset{AB=[k],AB=\mathrm{}}{}}w_A^{(nk+1)/2}w_B^{(nk+1)/2}`$
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m,qA}{mq}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\frac{1}{w_mw_q}}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m,qB}{mq}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1w_mw_q}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{mA}{qB}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1w_q/w_m}}\right)`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{AB=[k],AB=\mathrm{}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{w_A^{nk+1}}{E(A)E(B)D(A,B)}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m,qA}{mq}}{}}w_mw_q\right)\left({\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{mA}{qB}}{}}w_m\right).`$ (3.33)
A straightforward manipulation gives

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m,nA}{mn}}{}}w_mw_n`$ $`=`$ $`w_A^{|A|+1}(1)^{|A|(|A|+1)/2},`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{mA}{nB}}{}}w_m`$ $`=`$ $`w_A^{|B|}(1)^{|A||B|}\mathrm{and}`$
$`E(AB)`$ $`=`$ $`E(A)E(B)E(A,B)\mathrm{and}\mathrm{similarly}`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }(AB)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\mathrm{\Delta }(B)D(A,B)(1)^{W(A,B)},`$ (3.34)
so we arrive at a re-expression of (3.28):

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{0i_1<i_2<\mathrm{}<i_kn}{i_jj1mod2}}{}}\left|\begin{array}{cccc}w_1^{i_1}& w_1^{i_2}& \mathrm{}& w_1^{i_k}\\ w_2^{i_1}& w_2^{i_2}& \mathrm{}& w_2^{i_k}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ w_k^{i_1}& w_k^{i_2}& \mathrm{}& w_k^{i_k}\end{array}\right|`$ (3.39)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{E([k])}}{\displaystyle \underset{AB=[k],AB=\mathrm{}}{}}(1)^{S(A,B)}w_A^{n+2}E(A,B)\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\mathrm{\Delta }(B).`$ (3.40)
We prove this by induction on $`k`$. We see that when $`k=1`$

$$\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{0i_1n}{i_1\mathrm{even}}}{}w_1^{i_1}=\frac{1w_1^{n+2}}{1w_1^2},$$
(3.41)
which clearly satisfies (3.39). We now show that if (3.39) holds with $`k`$ replaced by $`k1`$, then it holds for $`k`$ as well. We start by expanding the determinant in (3.39) with respect to the last column so that the left side becomes

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k1i_kn}{i_kk1\mathrm{mod}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}}}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}}w_j^{i_k}(1)^{kj}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{0i_1<i_2<\mathrm{}<i_{k1}i_k1}{i_rr1\mathrm{mod}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}}}{}}det\left(w_m^{i_q}\right)_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1mk,mj}{1qk1}}.`$ (3.42)
By the induction hypothesis, this is

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k1i_kn}{i_kk1\mathrm{mod}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}}}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}}w_j^{i_k}(1)^{kj}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{E([k]_j)}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{AB=[k]_j}{AB=\mathrm{}}}{}}(1)^{S(A,B)}w_A^{i_k+1}E(A,B)\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\mathrm{\Delta }(B),`$ (3.43)
where $`A_j=A\{j\}`$.

If we redefine $`A`$ to include $`j`$, and switch the order of the sum over $`j`$ and the sum over the sets $`A`$ and $`B`$ in (3.43), we obtain

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k1i_kn}{i_kk1\mathrm{mod}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}}}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{AB=[k]}{AB=\mathrm{}}}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{jA}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{kj}w_j^{i_k}}{E([k]_j)}}(1)^{S(A_j,B)}w_{A_j}^{i_k+1}E(A_j,B)\mathrm{\Delta }(A_j)\mathrm{\Delta }(B).`$ (3.44)
Applying the definition of $`E`$, it is straightforward to show that for $`AB=[k]`$, $`AB=\mathrm{}`$ and $`jA`$, then $`E(A_j,B)/E([k]_j)=E(A,B)E(\{j\},A)/E([k])`$. This leads us to

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k1i_kn}{i_kk1\mathrm{mod}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{E([k])}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{AB=[k]}{AB=\mathrm{}}}{}}w_A^{i_k}E(A,B)\mathrm{\Delta }(B)`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{jA}{}}(1)^{kj}(1)^{S(A_j,B)}w_{A_j}E(\{j\},A)\mathrm{\Delta }(A_j).`$ (3.45)
In this notation, a simple generalization of Identity 3.1 can be written as

$$\underset{jA}{}(1)^{W(\{j\},A)}w_{A_j}E(\{j\},A)\mathrm{\Delta }(A_j)=\mathrm{\Delta }(A)(1w_A^2),$$
(3.46)
and this combined with $`(1)^{S(A_j,B)+kj}=(1)^{W(\{j\},A)}(1)^{S(A,B)+1}`$, where $`AB=[k]`$, $`AB=\mathrm{}`$ and $`jA`$, gives us

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k1i_kn}{i_kk1\mathrm{mod}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{E([k])}}{\displaystyle \underset{AB=[k],AB=\mathrm{}}{}}(1)^{S(A,B)+1}\mathrm{\Delta }(B)E(A,B)w_A^{i_k}\mathrm{\Delta }(A)(1w_A^2).`$ (3.47)
Summing over $`i_k`$, this yields

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{E([k])}}{\displaystyle \underset{AB=[k],AB=\mathrm{}}{}}(1)^{S(A,B)}\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\mathrm{\Delta }(B)E(A,B)\left[w_A^{n+2}w_A^{k1}\right].`$ (3.48)
Applying Identity 3.3, we see that the terms resulting from $`w_A^{k1}`$ in the square brackets above all cancel out, leaving us with

$$\frac{1}{E([k])}\underset{AB=[k],AB=\mathrm{}}{}\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\mathrm{\Delta }(B)E(A,B)w_A^{n+2}(1)^{S(A,B)},$$
(3.49)
which proves (3.39) and so proves (3).

We also have the following lemma

###### Lemma 3.5

If $`F`$ is a symmetric function of $`k`$ variables, regular near $`(0,\mathrm{},0)`$, and $`f(x)`$ has a simple pole of residue 1 at $`x=0`$ and is otherwise analytic in a neighbourhood of $`x=0`$, and either

$$G(a_1,\mathrm{},a_k)=F(a_1,\mathrm{},a_k)\underset{1ijk}{}f(a_i+a_j)$$
(3.50)
or

$$G(a_1,\mathrm{},a_k)=F(a_1,\mathrm{},a_k)\underset{1i<jk}{}f(a_i+a_j),$$
(3.51)
then when $`\pm \alpha _i\pm \alpha _j`$ are contained in the region of analyticity of $`f(x)`$

$`{\displaystyle \underset{ϵ_j\{1,1\}}{}}G(ϵ_1\alpha _1,\mathrm{},ϵ_k\alpha _k)`$ (3.52)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{k(k1)/2}}{(2\pi i)^k}}{\displaystyle \frac{2^k}{k!}}{\displaystyle \mathrm{}G(z_1,\mathrm{},z_k)\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(z_1^2,\mathrm{},z_k^2)^2_{j=1}^kz_j}{_{i=1}^k_{j=1}^k(z_i\alpha _j)(z_i+\alpha _j)}𝑑z_1\mathrm{}𝑑z_k}`$
and

$`{\displaystyle \underset{ϵ_j\{1,1\}}{}}({\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}}ϵ_j)G(ϵ_1\alpha _1,\mathrm{},ϵ_k\alpha _k)`$ (3.53)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{k(k1)/2}}{(2\pi i)^k}}{\displaystyle \frac{2^k}{k!}}{\displaystyle \mathrm{}G(z_1,\mathrm{},z_k)\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(z_1^2,\mathrm{},z_k^2)^2_{j=1}^k\alpha _j}{_{i=1}^k_{j=1}^k(z_i\alpha _j)(z_i+\alpha _j)}𝑑z_1\mathrm{}𝑑z_k},`$
where the contour of integration encircles the $`\pm \alpha `$’s.

With the help of Lemma 3.5 we can write

$`I(USp(2N),e^{\alpha _1},\mathrm{},e^{\alpha _k})`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{k(k1)/2}2^k}{(2\pi i)^kk!}}e^{N_{j=1}^k\alpha _j}{\displaystyle \mathrm{}\underset{1\mathrm{}mk}{}(1e^{z_mz_{\mathrm{}}})^1}`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(z_1^2,\mathrm{},z_k^2)^2_{j=1}^kz_j}{_{i=1}^k_{j=1}^k(z_j\alpha _i)(z_j+\alpha _i)}}e^{N_{j=1}^kz_j}dz_1\mathrm{}dz_k.`$ (3.54)
### 3.1 Comparison with $`L`$-functions

Note that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s)=_{n=1}^N(1e^{i\theta _n}s)(1e^{i\theta _n}s)`$ satisfies the functional equation $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s)=s^{2N}\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }_M}(1/s)`$. However, we can instead define

$`𝒵_M(s)`$ $`=`$ $`s^N\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s),`$ (3.55)
which satisfies $`𝒵_M(s)=\overline{𝒵_M}(1/s)`$, where $`\overline{𝒵_M}(z)=\overline{𝒵_M(\overline{z})}`$ and $`\overline{z}`$ denotes the complex conjugate of $`z`$ .

In  we conjecture the form of autocorrelation functions of $`L`$-functions averaged over the family comprised of $`L(s,\chi _d)`$, with $`d`$ a fundamental discriminant and $`\chi _d(n)=(\frac{d}{n})`$, where here the family is ordered by the conductor $`d`$. In that paper the conjecture is formulated in terms of a “$`Z`$-function” closely related to the $`L`$-function but satisfying the functional equation

$$Z_L(s)=\overline{Z_L}(1s).$$
(3.56)
This is analogous to the random matrix function $`𝒵_M(s)`$ and its functional equation, because the transformation from $`s`$ to $`1s`$ in the number theory case reflects round the symmetry point of the zeros of the $`L`$-function in the same manner as the transformation from $`s`$ to $`1/s`$ in the random matrix theory case reflects around the symmetry point of the eigenvalues.

The family of $`L`$-functions just defined is said to show symplectic symmetry  in as much as the statistics of the zeros around the symmetry point are those of the eigenvalues of random matrices from $`USp(2N)`$.

The conjecture stated in  is then

###### Conjecture 3.6

Suppose $`g(u)`$ is a suitable weight function. Then, if $``$ is the family of real Dirichlet $`L`$-functions with fundamental discriminants $`d<0`$ (the sum over these fundamental discriminants is indicated by $`^{}`$) we have

$`{\displaystyle \underset{L}{}}Z_L(\frac{1}{2}+\alpha _1)\mathrm{}Z_L(\frac{1}{2}+\alpha _k)g(|d|)={\displaystyle \underset{d<0}{\overset{}{}}}Q_k(\alpha ,\mathrm{log}\frac{|d|}{2\pi })g(|d|)(1+O(|d|^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}+ϵ})),`$ (3.57)
in which

$`Q_k(\alpha ,x)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{k(k1)/2}2^k}{k!}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi i)^k}}`$
$`\times {\displaystyle }\mathrm{}{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{G_{}(z_1,\mathrm{},z_k)\mathrm{\Delta }(z_1^2,\mathrm{},z_k^2)^2_{j=1}^kz_j}{{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{k}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}}(z_j\alpha _{\mathrm{}})(z_j+\alpha _{\mathrm{}})}}e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{x}{2}}_{j=1}^kz_j}dz_1\mathrm{}dz_k,`$
where the path of integration encloses the $`\pm \alpha `$’s. Here

$$G_{}(z_1,\mathrm{},z_k)=A_k(z_1,\mathrm{},z_k)\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{3}{4}+\frac{z_j}{2})2^{z_j}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{3}{4}\frac{z_j}{2})}\right)^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}\underset{1ijk}{}\zeta (1+z_i+z_j),$$
(3.59)
and $`A_k`$ is the Euler product, which is absolutely convergent for $`|\mathrm{}z_j|<1/2`$, for $`j=1,\mathrm{},k`$, defined by

$`A_k(z_1,\mathrm{},z_k)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{p}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{1ijk}{}}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p^{1+z_i+z_j}}}\right)`$
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}+z_j}}}\right)^1+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}+z_j}}}\right)^1\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p}}\right)\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p}}\right)^1.`$
There is a similar conjecture for the analogous sum over positive fundamental discriminants. For this conjecture $`G_{}`$ is replaced by $`G_+`$, where

$$G_+(z_1,\mathrm{},z_k)=A_k(z_1,\mathrm{},z_k)\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1}{4}+\frac{z_j}{2})2^{z_j}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1}{4}\frac{z_j}{2})}\right)^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}\underset{1ijk}{}\zeta (1+z_i+z_j),$$
(3.61)
and $`A_k`$ is as before.

When comparing $`_{USp(2N)}𝒵_M(e^{\alpha _1})\mathrm{}𝒵_M(e^{\alpha _k})𝑑M`$, which is very closely related to (3), with the autocorrelation function (3.6) in Conjecture 3.6, we note that equating the density of zeros gives an equivalence $`N=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}\frac{|d|}{2\pi }`$. Then we see immediately that the structure of the $`k`$-fold integrals is very similar. The role of $`_{1\mathrm{}mk}(1e^{z_mz_{\mathrm{}}})^1`$ in (3) is played by $`G_\pm (z_1,\mathrm{},z_k)`$ in the $`L`$-function case. Note that in both cases this factor produces poles when $`z_m=z_{\mathrm{}}`$, for $`1\mathrm{}mk`$. Extra arithmetic information is in evidence in the $`A_k`$ factor in $`G_\pm `$ which, of course, does not feature in the random matrix result. Again, the underlying similarity between the two formulae lends support to the number theoretical conjecture and illustrates the strong connection between $`L`$-functions and random matrix theory.

## 4 Orthogonal Group: $`O(2N)`$

We now turn our attention to the group $`O(2N)`$ of $`2N\times 2N`$ orthogonal matrices. This group divides into two halves: the group $`SO(2N)`$ of matrices from $`O(2N)`$ with determinant +1, and $`O^{}(2N)`$ which is comprised of the matrices with determinant -1. We will examine these two components separately.

### 4.1 $`O^{}(2N)`$

We are considering orthogonal $`2N\times 2N`$ matrices with determinant $`1`$. These matrices have eigenvalues at $`1,1,e^{i\theta _1},e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _{N1}},e^{i\theta _{N1}}`$. The measure may be expressed in the form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{((N1)^2(N1))/2}}{(N1)!\pi ^{N1}2^{2(N1)}}}\mathrm{\Delta }(e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _N},e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _N}){\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}(e^{i\theta _j}e^{i\theta _j})d\theta _1\mathrm{}d\theta _{N1}.`$ (4.1)
The characteristic polynomial for one of these matrices can be defined as

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s)=det(IMs)=(1s)(1+s)\underset{n=1}{\overset{N1}{}}(1e^{i\theta _n}s)(1e^{i\theta _n}s).$$
(4.2)
The autocorrelation function is then

$`I(O^{}(2N),w_1,\mathrm{},w_k){\displaystyle _{O^{}(2N)}}(1)^k\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(w_1)\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(w_k)𝑑M`$ (4.3)
$`=({\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{((N1)^2(N1))/2}}{(N1)!\pi ^{N1}2^{2(N1)}}}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}d\theta _1\mathrm{}d\theta _{N1}\mathrm{\Delta }(e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _N},e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _N})`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{k}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}(e^{i\theta _n}w_m)(e^{i\theta _n}w_m){\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}(e^{i\theta _j}e^{i\theta _j}))\times {\displaystyle }_{m=1}^k(w_m^21).`$
Following exactly the calculation in the previous section for the group $`USp(2N)`$,

$`I(O^{}(2N),w_1,\mathrm{},w_k)`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{_{m=1}^k(w_m^21)}{_{1i<jk}(w_jw_i)}}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{0i_1<i_2<\mathrm{}<i_k2N+k1}{i_jj1mod2}}{}}\left|\begin{array}{ccc}w_1^{i_1}& \mathrm{}& w_1^{i_k}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ w_k^{i_1}& \mathrm{}& w_k^{i_k}\end{array}\right|\right].`$ (4.7)
This then leads to

$`I(O^{}(2N),w_1,\mathrm{},w_k)`$ (4.8)
$`=\left({\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{k}{}}}(w_m^21)\right)\times w_1^{N1}\mathrm{}w_k^{N1}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{ϵ_j\{1,1\}}{}}({\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}}w_j^{ϵ_j(N1)}){\displaystyle \underset{1ijk}{}}(1w_i^{ϵ_i}w_j^{ϵ_j})^1\right].`$
However, in terms where $`ϵ_m=1`$, we have a factor

$$\frac{w_m^21}{1w_m^{2ϵ_m}}=\frac{w_m^21}{1w_m^2}=w_m^2=ϵ_mw_m\times w_m^{ϵ_m},$$
(4.9)
and if $`ϵ_m=1`$, then

$$\frac{w_m^21}{1w_m^{2ϵ_m}}=\frac{w_m^21}{1w_m^2}=1=ϵ_mw_m\times w_m^{ϵ_m}.$$
(4.10)
Therefore,

$`I(O^{}(2N),w_1,\mathrm{},w_k)`$
$`=w_1^N\mathrm{}w_k^N\left[{\displaystyle \underset{ϵ_j\{1,1\}}{}}({\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}}ϵ_jw_j^{ϵ_jN}){\displaystyle \underset{1i<jk}{}}(1w_i^{ϵ_i}w_j^{ϵ_j})^1\right],`$ (4.11)
and

$`I(O^{}(2N),e^{\alpha _1},\mathrm{},e^{\alpha _k})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{k(k1)/2}2^k}{(2\pi i)^kk!}}e^{N_{j=1}^k\alpha _j}{\displaystyle \mathrm{}\underset{1\mathrm{}mk}{}(1e^{z_mz_{\mathrm{}}})^1}`$ (4.12)
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(z_1^2,\mathrm{},z_k^2)^2_{j=1}^k\alpha _j}{_{i=1}^k_{j=1}^k(z_j\alpha _i)(z_j+\alpha _i)}}e^{N_{j=1}^kz_j}dz_1\mathrm{}dz_k,`$
using Lemma 3.5.

### 4.2 $`SO(2N)`$

We now consider the group of $`2N\times 2N`$ orthogonal matrices which have positive determinant. The eigenvalues of such matrices come in complex conjugate pairs $`e^{i\theta _1},e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _N},e^{i\theta _N}`$. The measure is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{N(N1)/2}2^{2N+1}}{\pi ^NN!}}\mathrm{\Delta }(e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _N},e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _N}){\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(e^{i\theta _k}e^{i\theta _k})^1d\theta _1\mathrm{}d\theta _N.`$ (4.13)
The characteristic polynomial for these matrices is

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s)=det(IMs)=\underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}(1e^{i\theta _n}s)(1e^{i\theta _n}s),$$
(4.14)
so the autocorrelation function which we wish to evaluate is

$`I(SO(2N),w_1,\mathrm{},w_k){\displaystyle _{SO(2N)}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(w_1)\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(w_k)𝑑M`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{N(N1)/2}2^{2N+1}}{\pi ^NN!}}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}\mathrm{\Delta }(e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _N},e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _N})`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{k}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(e^{i\theta _n}w_m)(e^{i\theta _n}w_m)\left[{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(e^{i\theta _n}e^{i\theta _n})\right]^1d\theta _1\mathrm{}d\theta _N`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{N(N1)/2}2^{2N+1}}{\pi ^NN!}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{_{1i<jk}(w_jw_i)}}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(e^{i\theta _n}e^{i\theta _n})\right]^1`$
$`\times \mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_k,e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _N},e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _N})d\theta _1\mathrm{}d\theta _N`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{2^{2N+1}}{\pi ^NN!}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{_{1i<jk}(w_jw_i)}}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(e^{i\theta _n}e^{i\theta _n})\right]^1`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{\sigma S_{2N+k}}{}}\mathrm{sgn}\sigma w_1^{\sigma (1)1}w_2^{\sigma (2)1}\mathrm{}w_k^{\sigma (k)1}e^{i[\sigma (k+1)1]\theta _1}e^{i[\sigma (k+2)1]\theta _1}\mathrm{}`$ (4.15)
$`e^{i[\sigma (k+2N1)1]\theta _N}e^{i[\sigma (k+2N)1]\theta _N}d\theta _1\mathrm{}d\theta _N,`$
where in the final line we have the determinant expansion of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_k,e^{i\theta _1},e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},`$ $`e^{i\theta _N},e^{i\theta _N})=(1)^{N(N1)/2}\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_k,e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _N},e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _N})`$ expressed in terms of the permutations of $`\{1,2,\mathrm{},2N+k\}`$ .

The sum over $`\sigma S_{2N+k}`$ in (4.15) can be broken up and written as follows

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\delta D}{}}\mathrm{sgn}(\delta )\left({\displaystyle \underset{\alpha A}{}}\mathrm{sgn}(\alpha )w_1^{\alpha (1)1}\mathrm{}w_k^{\alpha (k)1}\right)`$
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \underset{\beta B}{}}\mathrm{sgn}(\beta ){\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(e^{i\theta _j(\beta (2j1)\beta (2j))}e^{i\theta _j(\beta (2j1)\beta (2j))})\right),`$ (4.16)
where $`DS_{2N+k}`$ is the set of permutations such that $`\delta (1)<\mathrm{}<\delta (k)`$ and $`\delta (k+1)<\mathrm{}<\delta (k+2N)`$, $`A`$ is the set of all permutations of $`\delta (1),\mathrm{},\delta (k)`$, and $`B`$ is the set of permutations of $`\delta (k+1),\mathrm{},\delta (k+2N)`$ such that $`\beta (1)<\beta (2)`$,$`\beta (3)<\beta (4)`$,$`\mathrm{}`$,$`\beta (2N1)<\beta (2N)`$.

Using $`x^Ny^N=(xy)(x^{N1}+x^{N2}y+\mathrm{}+xy^{N2}+y^{N1})`$, we see that the product over $`j`$ in (4.16) contains a factor $`_{n=1}^N(e^{i\theta _n}e^{i\theta _n})`$ which cancels with the identical factor in (4.15). Since the integral in (4.15) integrates to zero unless the integrand is independent of all $`\theta _j`$, and since in our case $`x=e^{i\theta }`$ and $`y=e^{i\theta }`$, we obtain zero for any term in the sum over $`\beta `$ unless $`\beta (2j)\beta (2j1)`$ is an odd number for all $`j=1,2,\mathrm{},N`$, in which case (4.15) reduces to

$`{\displaystyle \frac{2^{N+1}}{N!}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{_{1i<jk}(w_jw_i)}}{\displaystyle \underset{\delta D}{}}\mathrm{sgn}(\delta )\left({\displaystyle \underset{\alpha A}{}}\mathrm{sgn}(\alpha )w_1^{\alpha (1)1}\mathrm{}w_k^{\alpha (k)1}\right)`$
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\beta B}{\beta (2j)\beta (2j1)=\mathrm{odd}}}{}}\mathrm{sgn}(\beta )\right).`$ (4.17)
To perform the remaining sum over $`\beta `$, recall that the permutation $`\beta `$ rearranges $`\delta (k+1),\mathrm{},\delta (2N+k)`$ (which are arranged in ascending order), and note that the sum over $`\beta `$ in (4.17) will contain zero terms unless $`N`$ of $`\delta (k+1),\mathrm{},\delta (2N+k)`$ are even and $`N`$ are odd. In particular, one of $`\beta (2j1)`$ and $`\beta (2j)`$ must be even and one must be odd for each $`j=1,\mathrm{},N`$. To perform the $`\beta `$ sum, we essentially need to count (with signs) all the ways to pair up each even number with an odd number. It can be seen that if in the original ascending order $`\delta (k+1),\mathrm{},\delta (2N+k)`$ even and odd numbers alternate, then the sum over $`\beta `$ is given by $`N!`$ times the $`N\times N`$ determinant

$$\left|\begin{array}{ccccc}1& 1& 1& \mathrm{}& 1\\ 1& 1& 1& \mathrm{}& 1\\ 1& 1& 1& \mathrm{}& 1\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ 1& 1& 1& \mathrm{}& 1\end{array}\right|=2^{N1},$$
(4.18)
where the determinant accounts (with sign) for the pairing of each even number with an odd number, while the $`N!`$ accounts for the further permutation of the $`N`$ pairs. The same reasoning produces an $`N\times N`$ determinant which is zero when the arrangement $`\delta (k+1),\mathrm{},\delta (2N+k)`$ contains two consecutive even or two consecutive odd numbers. Noting that $`\mathrm{sgn}\delta `$ in (4.16) is always +1 for $`\delta `$ such that even and odd numbers alternate in $`\delta (k+1),\mathrm{},\delta (2N+k)`$, we arrive at

$`I(SO(2N),w_1,\mathrm{},w_k)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{_{1i<jk}(w_jw_i)}}{\displaystyle \underset{i_1,\mathrm{},i_k}{}}\left|\begin{array}{ccc}w_1^{i_1}& \mathrm{}& w_1^{i_k}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ w_k^{i_1}& \mathrm{}& w_k^{i_k}\end{array}\right|,`$ (4.22)
where the conditions on $`i_1,\mathrm{},i_k`$ are that $`i_j\{0,1,\mathrm{},2N+k1\}`$, $`i_1<i_2<\mathrm{}<i_k`$ and

$`k\mathrm{even}`$ $`\{\begin{array}{c}i_1=0,i_2=i_31,i_4=i_51,\mathrm{},i_{k2}=i_{k1}1,i_k=2N+k1\\ \mathrm{or}\\ i_1=i_21,i_3=i_41,\mathrm{},i_{k1}=i_k1\end{array}`$ (4.26)
$`k\mathrm{odd}`$ $`\{\begin{array}{c}i_1=0,i_2=i_31,i_4=i_51,\mathrm{},i_{k1}=i_k1\\ \mathrm{or}\\ i_1=i_21,i_3=i_41,\mathrm{},i_{k2}=i_{k1}1,i_k=2N+k1.\end{array}`$ (4.30)
Once more, this is a sum over Schur functions,

$`I(SO(2N),w_1,\mathrm{},w_k)`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\lambda ^{}\mathrm{odd}}{k\lambda _1^{}\mathrm{}\lambda _{2N}^{}>0}}{}}S_\lambda (w_1,\mathrm{},w_k)+{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\lambda ^{}\mathrm{even}}{k\lambda _1^{}\mathrm{}\lambda _{2N}^{}0}}{}}S_\lambda (w_1,\mathrm{},w_k)`$ (4.31)
where the sum is over partitions $`\lambda ^{}=(\lambda _1^{},\mathrm{},\lambda _{2N}^{})`$, with no part greater than $`k`$, and $`\lambda ^{}`$ is the conjugate partition to $`\lambda `$. Note that the condition on the odd $`\lambda ^{}`$ implies that the partition has exactly $`2N`$ non-zero parts, whereas the sum over even partitions only requires that $`\lambda ^{}`$ has no more than $`2N`$ non-zero parts.

We now show that (4.22) may be expressed in the form

$`I(SO(2N),w_1,\mathrm{},w_k)`$
$`=w_1^N\mathrm{}w_k^N\left[{\displaystyle \underset{ϵ_j\{1,1\}}{}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}}w_j^{Nϵ_j}\right){\displaystyle \underset{1i<jk}{}}(1w_i^{ϵ_i}w_j^{ϵ_j})^1\right].`$ (4.32)
In order to prove (4.2) we must first prove an identity very similar in form to Identity 3.1 in the symplectic symmetry section. This is

###### Identity 4.1

$`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}w_j^2\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n)|_{w_j=0}{\displaystyle \underset{mj}{}}(1w_mw_j)`$
$`=\{\begin{array}{cc}w_1^2\mathrm{}w_n^2\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n)& \mathrm{if}n\mathrm{odd}\\ (w_1^2\mathrm{}w_n^2w_1\mathrm{}w_n)\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n)& \mathrm{if}n\mathrm{even}\end{array}.`$ (4.35)
To prove this we rewrite the factor $`w_j^2`$ as $`1(1w_j^2)`$. The contribution to Identity 4.1 from the $`(1w_j^2)`$ term, is just the right side of Identity 3.1; that is, $`\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n)(1w_1^2\mathrm{}w_n^2)`$. The remainder of the left side of Identity 4.1 we write as in (3.12), where $`f(w_j)=_{mj}(1w_mw_j)`$. Note that we cannot immediately apply Lemma 3.2 because $`f(x)`$ is not symmetric amongst the $`w`$’s. However, if we write $`f(w_j)=_{mj}(1w_mw_j)=_{i=0}^{n1}a_iw_j^i`$ and $`g(w)=_{m=1}^n(1w_mw)=_{i=0}^nb_iw^i`$, then the identity $`g(w_j)=f(w_j)(1w_j^2)`$ produces the recurrence relation $`b_0=a_0=1`$, $`b_i=a_iw_ja_{i1}`$ (for $`i=1,\mathrm{},n1`$) and $`b_n=w_ja_{n1}`$. This allows us to write

$`{\displaystyle \underset{i=0}{\overset{n1}{}}}a_iw_j^i`$ $`=`$ $`\{\begin{array}{cc}_{i=0}^{(n1)/2}_{q=0}^iw_j^{2iq}b_q+_{i=(n+1)/2}^{n1}_{q=0}^{ni1}w_j^{2in+q}b_{nq}& n\mathrm{odd}\\ _{i=0}^{n/2}_{q=0}^iw_j^{2iq}b_q+_{i=(n+2)/2}^{n1}_{q=0}^{ni1}w_j^{2in+q}b_{nq}& n\mathrm{even}\end{array}.`$ (4.38)
Since the $`b`$’s are symmetric functions of the $`w`$’s and in (3.12) we have columns containing powers of the $`w`$’s from 1 to $`n1`$, the only terms in the expression for $`f(w_j)=_{i=0}^{n1}a_iw_j^i`$ on the right side of (4.38) above which cannot be cancelled by adding or subtracting one of these columns multiplied by a symmetric function of the $`w`$’s are $`a_0=1`$ and, in the case that $`n`$ is even, $`w_j^n`$. The determinant is then easily evaluated as $`\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n)`$ if $`n`$ is odd, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n)w_1\mathrm{}w_n\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n)`$ if $`n`$ is even. This proves Identity 4.1.

Now we move on to determining the form of the autocorrelation functions in (4.2). When $`k`$ is even in (4.2) we will write

$`I(SO(2N),w_1,\mathrm{},w_{2k})=I_{2N+2k1}^M(w_1,\mathrm{},w_{2k})+I_{2N+2k1}^E(w_1,\mathrm{},w_{2k}),`$ (4.39)
where

$$I_n^M(w_1,\mathrm{},w_{2k})\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_{2k})}\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i_1<\mathrm{}<i_{2k}\{0,\mathrm{},n\}}{i_{2j1}=i_{2j}1,j=1,\mathrm{},k}}{}\left|\begin{array}{ccc}w_1^{i_1}& \mathrm{}& w_1^{i_{2k}}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ w_{2k}^{i_1}& \mathrm{}& w_{2k}^{i_{2k}}\end{array}\right|$$
(4.40)
and

$$I_n^E(w_1,\mathrm{},w_{2k})\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_{2k})}\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i_1<\mathrm{}<i_{2k}\{0,\mathrm{},n\}}{i_1=0,i_{2j}=i_{2j+1}1,j=1,\mathrm{},k1,i_{2k}=n}}{}\left|\begin{array}{ccc}w_1^{i_1}& \mathrm{}& w_1^{i_{2k}}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ w_{2k}^{i_1}& \mathrm{}& w_{2k}^{i_{2k}}\end{array}\right|.$$
(4.41)
Similarly, when $`k`$ is odd in (4.2) we will write

$$I(SO(2N),w_1,\mathrm{},w_{2k+1})=I_{2N+2k}^R(w_1,\mathrm{},w_{2k+1})+I_{2N+2k}^L(w_1,\mathrm{},w_{2k+1}),$$
(4.42)
where

$$I_n^R(w_1,\mathrm{},w_{2k+1})\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_{2k+1})}\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i_1<\mathrm{}<i_{2k+1}\{0,\mathrm{},n\}}{i_{2j1}=i_{2j}1,j=1,\mathrm{},k,i_{2k+1}=n}}{}\left|\begin{array}{ccc}w_1^{i_1}& \mathrm{}& w_1^{i_{2k+1}}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ w_{2k+1}^{i_1}& \mathrm{}& w_{2k+1}^{i_{2k+1}}\end{array}\right|$$
(4.43)
and

$$I_n^L(w_1,\mathrm{},w_{2k+1})\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,\mathrm{},w_{2k+1})}\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i_1<\mathrm{}<i_{2k+1}\{0,\mathrm{},n\}}{i_1=0,i_{2j}=i_{2j+1}1,j=1,\mathrm{},k}}{}\left|\begin{array}{ccc}w_1^{i_1}& \mathrm{}& w_1^{i_{2k+1}}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ w_{2k+1}^{i_1}& \mathrm{}& w_{2k+1}^{i_{2k+1}}\end{array}\right|.$$
(4.44)
We now prove the following identities

$`I_n^M(w_1,\mathrm{},w_{2k})`$ (4.45a)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{([2k])\mathrm{\Delta }([2k])}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{AB=[2k],AB=\mathrm{}}{|B|\mathrm{even}}}{}}w_A^nE(A,B)\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\mathrm{\Delta }(B)(1)^{S(A,B)|A|},`$
$`I_n^E(w_1,\mathrm{},w_{2k})`$ (4.45b)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{([2k])\mathrm{\Delta }([2k])}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{AB=[2k],AB=\mathrm{}}{|B|\mathrm{odd}}}{}}w_A^nE(A,B)\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\mathrm{\Delta }(B)(1)^{S(A,B)|A|},`$
$`I_n^R(w_1,\mathrm{},w_{2k+1})`$ (4.45c)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{([2k+1])\mathrm{\Delta }([2k+1])}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{AB=[2k+1],AB=\mathrm{}}{|B|\mathrm{even}}}{}}w_A^nE(A,B)\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\mathrm{\Delta }(B)(1)^{S(A,B)|A|},`$
and
$`I_n^L(w_1,\mathrm{},w_{2k+1})`$ (4.45d)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{([2k+1])\mathrm{\Delta }([2k+1])}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{AB=[2k+1],AB=\mathrm{}}{|B|\mathrm{odd}}}{}}w_A^nE(A,B)\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\mathrm{\Delta }(B)(1)^{S(A,B)|A|}.`$
Here the only notation not already defined in Section 3 is

$`(A)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m<n}{m,nA}}{}}(1w_mw_n).`$ (4.46)
For the case $`k=1`$ it is easy to show that (4.45) holds. We now prove (4.45) for any $`k`$ by induction. First we note that Identity 4.1 can be written as

$`{\displaystyle \underset{jA}{}}w_j\mathrm{\Delta }(A_j)E(\{j\},A_j)(1)^{W(A_j,\{j\})}=(1)^{|A|1}\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\{\begin{array}{cc}(w_A1)& \mathrm{if}|A|\mathrm{even}\\ w_A& \mathrm{if}|A|\mathrm{odd}\end{array},`$ (4.49)
where $`A\{1,2,\mathrm{},m\}[m]`$, $`A_j`$ is the set of elements of $`A`$ with $`j`$ removed, and $`|A|`$ is the number of elements in the set $`A`$. Also, $`w_A=_{mA}w_m`$ and $`W(A,B)=_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{mA,nB}{m>n}}1`$.

If we make use of Identity 3.4 with $`x=1`$, then in the current notation this appears as

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{AB=[m],AB=\mathrm{}}{|A|\mathrm{even}}}{}}(1)^{S(A,B)}E(A,B)\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\mathrm{\Delta }(B)w_A^{m2}=0.`$ (4.50)
To prove the form of $`I^R`$ in (4.45c), we need to show that

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i_1<\mathrm{}<i_{2k+1}\{0,\mathrm{},n\}}{i_{2j1}=i_{2j}1,j=1,\mathrm{},k,i_{2k+1}=n}}{}}\left|\begin{array}{ccc}w_1^{i_1}& \mathrm{}& w_1^{i_{2k+1}}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ w_{2k+1}^{i_1}& \mathrm{}& w_{2k+1}^{i_{2k+1}}\end{array}\right|`$ (4.54)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{([2k+1])}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{AB=[2k+1],AB=\mathrm{}}{|B|\mathrm{even}}}{}}w_A^nE(A,B)\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\mathrm{\Delta }(B)(1)^{S(A,B)|A|}.`$ (4.55)
Using the definition of $`I^M`$ (4.40), we see that the left side of the above is

$`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{2k+1}{}}}(1)^{j1}w_j^n\mathrm{\Delta }([2k+1]_j)I_{n1}^M([2k+1]_j),`$ (4.56)
and then by induction using (4.45a), the line above equals

$`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{2k+1}{}}}(1)^{j1}w_j^n{\displaystyle \frac{1}{([2k+1]_j)}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{FB=[2k+1]_j,FB=\mathrm{}}{|B|\mathrm{even}}}{}}w_F^{n1}E(F,B)\mathrm{\Delta }(F)\mathrm{\Delta }(B)(1)^{S(F,B)|F|}.`$ (4.57)
Now we define $`A=F\{j\}`$ and then exchange the order of the two sums, to obtain

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{AB=[2k+1],AB=\mathrm{}}{|B|\mathrm{even}}}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{jA}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{j1}w_j^n}{([2k+1]_j)}}(1)^{S(A_j,B)|A_j|}w_{A_j}^{n1}E(A_j,B)\mathrm{\Delta }(A_j)\mathrm{\Delta }(B).`$ (4.58)
We note that $`\frac{E(A_j,B)}{(A_jB)}=\frac{E(A,B)E(\{j\},A_j)}{(AB)}`$ and that if $`AB=[m]`$, then $`(1)^{j+S(A_j,B)|A_j|}=(1)^{S(A,B)W(A_j,\{j\})}`$ if $`m`$ is odd, and $`(1)^{j+S(A_j,B)|A_j|}`$ $`=(1)^{S(A,B)W(A_j,\{j\})1}`$ if $`m`$ is even. So we have

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{AB=[2k+1],AB=\mathrm{}}{|B|\mathrm{even}}}{}}w_A^{n1}{\displaystyle \frac{E(A,B)}{([2k+1])}}(1)^{S(A,B)}\mathrm{\Delta }(B){\displaystyle \underset{jA}{}}(1)^{W(A_j,\{j\})1}w_jE(\{j\},A_j)\mathrm{\Delta }(A_j).`$ (4.59)
Using (4.49), we then find

$$\frac{1}{([2k+1])}\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{AB=[2k+1],AB=\mathrm{}}{|B|\mathrm{even}}}{}w_A^nE(A,B)\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\mathrm{\Delta }(B)(1)^{S(A,B)|A|},$$
(4.60)
which proves (4.54) and so confirms the form of $`I^R`$ in (4.45c).

The expression for $`I^M`$ is proved similarly, using induction and the form of $`I^R`$ found in (4.45c). We need to show that

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i_1<\mathrm{}<i_{2k}\{0,\mathrm{},n\}}{i_{2j1}=i_{2j}1,j=1,\mathrm{},k}}{}}\left|\begin{array}{ccc}w_1^{i_1}& \mathrm{}& w_1^{i_{2k}}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ w_{2k}^{i_1}& \mathrm{}& w_{2k}^{i_{2k}}\end{array}\right|`$ (4.64)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{([2k])}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{AB=[2k],AB=\mathrm{}}{|B|\mathrm{even}}}{}}w_A^nE(A,B)\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\mathrm{\Delta }(B)(1)^{S(A,B)|A|}.`$ (4.65)
The left side of this expression, written in terms of $`I^R`$, is

$`{\displaystyle \underset{i_{2k}=2k1}{\overset{n}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{2k}{}}}(1)^jw_j^{i_{2k}}\mathrm{\Delta }([2k]_j)I_{i_{2k}1}^R([2k]_j).`$ (4.66)
Now we proceed by induction and use (4.45c). Continuing exactly as we did in the case of $`I^R`$ above, we find that (4.66) reduces to

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{AB=[2k],AB=\mathrm{}}{|B|\mathrm{even}}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{E(A,B)}{([2k])}}(1)^{S(A,B)}(w_A^nw_A^{2k2})\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\mathrm{\Delta }(B).`$ (4.67)
Finally, by identity (4.50), we see that all the terms in which $`w_A`$ appears with exponent $`2k2`$ disappear, leaving us with

$$\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{AB=[2k],AB=\mathrm{}}{|B|\mathrm{even}}}{}\frac{E(A,B)}{([2k])}(1)^{S(A,B)}w_A^n\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\mathrm{\Delta }(B),$$
(4.68)
which proves (4.64) and so also (4.45a).

To prove (4.45b) for $`I^E`$ and (4.45d) for $`I_L`$, we follow exactly the same procedure as above.

Finally, we show that the form of the expressions in (4.45) can be written as sums over $`ϵ_j\{1,1\}`$ and so complete the proof of (4.2). Note that, using $`D(A,B)=(1)^{W(A,B)}\mathrm{\Delta }([m])/(\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\mathrm{\Delta }(B))`$ and $`(A)(B)=([m])/E(A,B)`$ (with $`AB=[m]\{1,\mathrm{},m\}`$, $`AB=\mathrm{}`$) and letting “parity” stand for either “even” or “odd”,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{([m])\mathrm{\Delta }([m])}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{AB=[m],AB=\mathrm{}}{|B|\mathrm{parity}}}{}}w_A^nE(A,B)\mathrm{\Delta }(A)\mathrm{\Delta }(B)(1)^{S(A,B)|A|}`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{AB=[m],AB=\mathrm{}}{|B|\mathrm{parity}}}{}}w_A^{nm+1}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{|A|(|A|1)/2}w_A^{|A|1}}{(A)}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(B)}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{|A||B|}w_A^{|B|}}{D(A,B)}}`$
$`=w^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{nm+1}{2}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{AB=[m],AB=\mathrm{}}{|B|\mathrm{parity}}}{}}w_A^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{nm+1}{2}}}w_B^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{nm+1}{2}}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{p,qA}{p<q}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\frac{1}{w_pw_q}}}\right)`$
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{p,qB}{p<q}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1w_pw_q}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{pA}{qB}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\frac{w_q}{w_p}}}\right)`$
$`=w^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{nm+1}{2}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{ϵ_j\{1,1\}}{_jϵ_j=(1)^{\mathrm{parity}}}}{}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{m}{}}}w_{\mathrm{}}^{ϵ_{\mathrm{}}({\scriptscriptstyle \frac{nm+1}{2}})}\right)\left({\displaystyle \underset{1q<\mathrm{}m}{}}(1w_q^{ϵ_q}w_{\mathrm{}}^ϵ_{\mathrm{}})^1\right).`$ (4.69)
Thus we end up with

$$I(SO(2N),w_1,\mathrm{},w_k)=w_1^N\mathrm{}w_k^N\left[\underset{ϵ_j\{1,1\}}{}\left(\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}w_j^{Nϵ_j}\right)\underset{1i<jk}{}(1w_i^{ϵ_i}w_j^{ϵ_j})^1\right],$$
(4.70)
which is exactly (4.2).

Using Lemma 3.5 we can express this as a multiple integral:

$`I(SO(2N),e^{\alpha _1},\mathrm{},e^{\alpha _k})`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{k(k1)/2}2^k}{(2\pi i)^kk!}}e^{N_{j=1}^k\alpha _j}{\displaystyle \mathrm{}\underset{1\mathrm{}<mk}{}(1e^{z_mz_{\mathrm{}}})^1}`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(z_1^2,\mathrm{},z_k^2)^2_{j=1}^kz_j}{_{i=1}^k_{j=1}^k(z_j\alpha _i)(z_j+\alpha _i)}}e^{N_{j=1}^kz_j}dz_1\mathrm{}dz_k.`$ (4.71)
### 4.3 Comparison with $`L`$-functions

In  we give a conjecture for the autocorrelation functions of

$$L_f(s)=\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\lambda _f(n)n^s,$$
(4.72)
near the critical point $`s=1/2`$ averaged over $`fH_k(N)`$. Here we denote by $`H_k(N)`$ the set of primitive newforms $`fS_k(\lambda _0(N))`$ and the $`\lambda _f`$ are the Fourier coefficients of the newform. For simplicity, we restrict attention to $`k=2`$ and $`N=q`$, a prime. The zeros of this family near the critical point display orthogonal symmetry.

The $`L`$-function satisfies the functional equation

$$L_f(s)=\epsilon _fX(s)L_f(1s),$$
(4.73)
with $`\epsilon _f=\sqrt{q}\lambda _f(q)=\pm 1`$. If instead we define

$$Z_f(s)=X(s)^{1/2}L_f(s),$$
(4.74)
then $`Z_f(s)`$ obeys the functional equation

$$Z_f(s)=\epsilon _fZ_f(1s).$$
(4.75)
After defining the “harmonic average”

$$\underset{fH_2(q)}{\overset{h}{}}Z_f(1/2+\alpha _1)\mathrm{}Z_f(1/2+\alpha _k)\underset{fH_2(q)}{}Z_f(1/2+\alpha _1)\mathrm{}Z_f(1/2+\alpha _k)/<f,f>,$$
(4.76)
we have the following three conjectures:

###### Conjecture 4.2

$`{\displaystyle \underset{fH_2^{}(q)}{\overset{h}{}}}Z_f(1/2+\alpha _1)\mathrm{}Z_f(1/2+\alpha _k)`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{\begin{array}{c}ϵ_j\{1,+1\}\\ _{j=1}^kϵ_j=1\end{array}}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}}X(1/2+ϵ_j\alpha _j)^{1/2}{\displaystyle \underset{1i<jk}{}}\zeta (1+ϵ_i\alpha _i+ϵ_j\alpha _j)A(ϵ_1\alpha _1,\mathrm{},ϵ_k\alpha _k)`$
$`\times (1+O(q^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}+ϵ})),`$
###### Conjecture 4.3

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\begin{array}{c}fH_2^{}(q)\\ f\mathrm{even}\end{array}}{\overset{h}{}}}Z_f(1/2+\alpha _1)\mathrm{}Z_f(1/2+\alpha _k)`$ (4.80)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{ϵ_j\{1,+1\}}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}}X(1/2+ϵ_j\alpha _j)^{1/2}{\displaystyle \underset{1i<jk}{}}\zeta (1+ϵ_i\alpha _i+ϵ_j\alpha _j)A(ϵ_1\alpha _1,\mathrm{},ϵ_k\alpha _k)`$
$`\times (1+O(q^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}+ϵ}))`$
and

###### Conjecture 4.4

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\begin{array}{c}fH_2^{}(q)\\ f\mathrm{odd}\end{array}}{\overset{h}{}}}Z_f(1/2+\alpha _1)\mathrm{}Z_f(1/2+\alpha _k)`$ (4.83)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{ϵ_j\{1,+1\}}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}}ϵ_jX(1/2+ϵ_j\alpha _j)^{1/2}{\displaystyle \underset{1i<jk}{}}\zeta (1+ϵ_i\alpha _i+ϵ_j\alpha _j)A(ϵ_1\alpha _1,\mathrm{},ϵ_k\alpha _k)`$
$`\times (1+O(q^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}+ϵ})),`$
where in all of the above

$`A(ϵ_1\alpha _1,\mathrm{},ϵ_k\alpha _k)={\displaystyle \underset{p}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{1i<jk}{}}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p^{1+ϵ_i\alpha _i+ϵ_j\alpha _j}}}\right)`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^\pi }\mathrm{sin}^2\theta {\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{i\theta }\left(1\frac{e^{i\theta }}{p^{\frac{1}{2}+ϵ_j\alpha _j}}\right)^1e^{i\theta }\left(1\frac{e^{i\theta }}{p^{\frac{1}{2}+ϵ_j\alpha _j}}\right)^1}{e^{i\theta }e^{i\theta }}}d\theta .`$ (4.84)
In the case of odd orthogonal symmetry, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s)=(1s)(1+s)_{n=1}^{N1}(1e^{i\theta _n}s)(1e^{i\theta _n}s)`$ satisfies the functional equation

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s)=s^{2N}\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }_M}(\frac{1}{s})$$
(4.85)
while

$$𝒵_M(s)=s^N\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s)$$
(4.86)
satisfies

$$𝒵_M(s)=\overline{𝒵_M}(\frac{1}{s}),$$
(4.87)
(the equivalent of (4.75)). The structure of

$`{\displaystyle _{O^{}(2N)}}𝒵_M(e^{\alpha _1})\mathrm{}𝒵_M(e^{\alpha _k})𝑑M`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{ϵ_j\{1,1\}}{}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}}ϵ_je^{ϵ_jN\alpha _j}\right){\displaystyle \underset{1i<jk}{}}(1e^{ϵ_i\alpha _iϵ_j\alpha _j})^1.`$ (4.88)
parallels (in the manner described in Section 2.1) that of Conjecture 4.4.

Similarly, for even orthogonal symmetry, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s)=_{n=1}^N(1e^{i\theta _n}s)(1e^{i\theta _n}s)`$ satisfies the functional equation

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s)=s^{2N}\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }_M}(\frac{1}{s})$$
(4.89)
while

$$𝒵_M(s)=s^N\mathrm{\Lambda }_M(s)$$
(4.90)
satisfies

$$𝒵_M(s)=\overline{𝒵_M}(1/s),$$
(4.91)
and

$`{\displaystyle _{SO(2N)}}𝒵_M(e^{\alpha _1})\mathrm{}𝒵_M(e^{\alpha _k})𝑑M`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{ϵ_j\{1,1\}}{}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}}e^{ϵ_jN\alpha _j}\right){\displaystyle \underset{1i<jk}{}}(1e^{ϵ_i\alpha _iϵ_j\alpha _j})^1`$ (4.92)
has the same structure of Conjecture 4.3. Clearly, due to the cancellation caused by the extra $`ϵ_j`$ factors in (4.3), the sum of (4.3) and (4.3) agrees with the Conjecture 4.2 in the usual way.

## Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Peter Forrester for introducing NCS to the method which was the starting point for this work. The research was partially supported by the American Institute of Mathematics and a Focused Research Group grant from the National Science Foundation. The last author was also supported by a Royal Society Dorothy Hodgkin Fellowship.


format: text

text:
# Relations between Electromagnetic Form Factors of Baryons

## 1 Neutron and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ charge form factors

In Ref.  we have shown that the Sachs charge form factor $`G_E^n(q^2)`$ and charge radius $`r_n^2=6(d/d𝐪^2)G_E^n(𝐪^2)_{𝐪^2=0}`$ of the neutron are dominated by quark-antiquark pair exchange currents shown in Fig.1(b-c). The latter describe the gluon and pion degrees of freedom, while the one-body currents in Fig.1(a) describe the valence quark degrees of freedom in the nucleon. The two-body exchange charge operator contains a spin-dependence of the schematic form $`\rho _{[2]}\sigma \sigma \text{ }\sigma \sigma \text{ }_i\sigma \sigma \text{ }\sigma \sigma \text{ }_jY^0(𝐪)\frac{\sqrt{6}}{2}[[\sigma \sigma \text{ }\sigma \sigma \text{ }_i\times \sigma \sigma \text{ }\sigma \sigma \text{ }_j]^2\times Y^2(𝐪)]^0`$. This gives different matrix elements for quark pairs in spin 0 and spin 1 states. Because a down-down pair in the neutron is always in a spin 1 state, while an up-down pair can be in spin 0 or spin 1 states, an asymmetry in the charge distribution of up and down quarks arises. Consequently, a nonvanishing neutron charge form factor (see Fig.2) and radius is obtained :

$$r_n^2=\frac{b^2}{3m_q}\left(\delta _g(b)+\delta _\pi (b)\right)=b^2\frac{M_\mathrm{\Delta }M_N}{M_N}.$$
(1)
Here, $`b`$ is the quark core (matter) radius of the nucleon, $`m_q`$ is the constituent quark mass, and the functions $`\delta _g(b)`$ and $`\delta _\pi (b)`$ are the gluon and pion contributions to the $`N`$-$`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ mass splitting, which satisfy $`M_\mathrm{\Delta }M_N=\delta _g(b)+\delta _\pi (b)`$.

The spin-spin term in the charge operator is also responsible for the following relation between the charge form factors of the nucleon and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$:

$$G_E^p(𝐪^2)G_E^{\mathrm{\Delta }^+}(𝐪^2)=G_E^n(𝐪^2),r_p^2r_{\mathrm{\Delta }^+}^2=r_n^2,$$
(2)
where $`r_{\mathrm{\Delta }^+}^2`$ is the charge radius of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }^+`$ and $`𝐪`$ is the three-momentum transfer of the photon. An analogous result holds for the difference of neutron and $`\mathrm{\Delta }^0`$ form factors. The charge form factor of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }^0`$ and the corresponding charge radius are zero in the present model as it should be on general grounds . From its derivation  it is evident that the charge radius relation is independent of whether gluon or pion exchange is the dominating residual interaction between constituent quarks. Using a general parametrization method, Dillon and Morpurgo  have recently shown that, if three-quark currents and strange quark loops are neglected, $`r_p^2r_{\mathrm{\Delta }^+}^2=r_n^2`$ is a consequence of the symmetries and dynamics of QCD that is model-independently valid. They have also shown that three-body currents slightly modify, but do not invalidate the general relation between the proton, neutron, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ charge radii.

We repeat that Eq.(2) is a consequence of the spin-spin $`\sigma \sigma \text{ }\sigma \sigma \text{ }_i\sigma \sigma \text{ }\sigma \sigma \text{ }_j/(m_im_j)`$ term in $`\rho _{[2]}`$, which leads to a $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ charge radius that is larger than the proton charge radius. This effect is of the same generality as, and closely connected with the $`N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ mass splitting due to the spin-spin interaction in the Hamiltonian. The latter is repulsive in quark pairs with spin 1 and makes the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ heavier than the nucleon.111Combining Eq.(1) and Eq.(2) yields $`r_{\mathrm{\Delta }^+}^2r_p^2=[b^2/(3m_q)](M_{\mathrm{\Delta }^+}M_p)`$, i.e., a relation between the mass difference between $`\mathrm{\Delta }^+`$ and proton and a corresponding charge radius difference.

## 2 Electromagnetic $`N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ transition form factors

In the constituent quark model with exchange currents a connection between the neutron charge form factor $`G_E^n(𝐪^2)`$  and the $`N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ quadrupole transition form factor $`F_Q^{p\mathrm{\Delta }^+}(𝐪^2)`$  emerges:

$$F_Q^{p\mathrm{\Delta }^+}(𝐪^2)=\frac{3\sqrt{2}}{𝐪^2}G_E^n(𝐪^2),Q_{p\mathrm{\Delta }}=\frac{r_n^2}{\sqrt{2}},r_{Q,p\mathrm{\Delta }^+}^2=\frac{11}{20}b^2+r_{\gamma q}^2.$$
(3)
The $`N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ quadrupole transition form factor is a measure of the intrinsic deformation of the nucleon and the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. The above results for the $`N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ transition quadrupole moment, $`Q_{p\mathrm{\Delta }^+}`$, and the transition quadrupole radius222The term $`\frac{1}{4}b^2`$ in Eq.(53) of Ref. should be replaced by $`\frac{11}{20}b^2`$, $`r_{Q,p\mathrm{\Delta }^+}^2`$, were derived before. They are seen here to be the 0th and 1st moment of the more general relation between $`G_E^n`$ and $`F_Q^{p\mathrm{\Delta }^+}`$, plotted as the lower curve in Fig.2. The quark model with exchange currents explains $`Q_{p\mathrm{\Delta }^+}`$ as a double spin flip of two quarks, with all valence quarks remaining in the dominant, spherically symmetric $`L=0`$ state. The double spin-flip comes from the tensor term in $`\rho _{[2]}`$. The latter is closely related to the tensor term in the Hamiltonian. The quark core ($`D`$ waves in the nucleon) also contributes to $`Q_{p\mathrm{\Delta }^+}`$. This valence quark contribution amounts to about 20$`\%`$ (due to the smallness of the $`D`$ wave amplitudes) of the double spin flip amplitude . We conclude that the collective gluon and pion degrees of freedom are mainly responsible for the deformation of the $`N`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

Due to the first relation in Eq.(3), the quadrupole transition radius can also be expressed as the 2nd moment of $`G_E^n(𝐪^2)`$, namely, $`r_{Q,p\mathrm{\Delta }^+}^2=(18/r_n^2)(d/d𝐪^2)^2G_E^n(𝐪^2)|_{𝐪^2=0}`$. Because the quark core radius $`b`$ is fixed by Eq.(1), one could extract the charge radius of the light constituent quarks, $`r_{\gamma q}^2`$, from both the $`G_E^n(𝐪^2)`$ data, and from the slope of $`F_Q^{p\mathrm{\Delta }^+}(𝐪^2)`$ at $`𝐪^2=0`$. Both determinations of $`r_{\gamma q}^2`$ should agree.

It is interesting that the additive quark model relation between the magnetic $`N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ transition and the neutron magnetic moments $`\mu _{p\mathrm{\Delta }^+}=\sqrt{2}\mu _n`$ remains unchanged after including the gauge-invariant two-body exchange currents of Fig.1(b-d); and that it continues to hold even at finite momentum transfers

$$F_M^{p\mathrm{\Delta }^+}(𝐪^2)=\sqrt{2}G_M^n(𝐪^2),\mu _{p\mathrm{\Delta }^+}=\sqrt{2}\mu _n,r_{M,p\mathrm{\Delta }^+}^2=\sqrt{2}\frac{\mu _n}{\mu _{p\mathrm{\Delta }^+}}r_{M,n}^2,$$
(4)
where $`r_{M,p\mathrm{\Delta }^+}^2`$ is the magnetic $`N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ transition radius, and $`r_{M,n}^2`$ the magnetic radius of the neutron. The transition magnetic moment predicted by Eq.(4) underestimates the empirical value by 30$`\%`$. This discrepancy between theory and experiment can presumably be explained by including spatial three-body currents in the theoretical description .

Combining Eq.(3) and Eq.(4) we find that the ratio of the charge quadrupole and magnetic dipole $`N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ transition form factors can be expressed in terms of the experimentally better known elastic neutron form factors

$$\frac{F_Q^{p\mathrm{\Delta }^+}(𝐪^2)}{F_M^{p\mathrm{\Delta }^+}(𝐪^2)}=\frac{3}{𝐪^2}\frac{G_E^n(𝐪^2)}{G_M^n(𝐪^2)},\frac{C2}{M1}=\frac{M_N\omega _{cm}}{2𝐪^2}\frac{G_E^n(𝐪^2)}{G_M^n(𝐪^2)},$$
(5)
where $`\omega _{cm}=258`$ MeV is the center of mass energy of the photon-nucleon system at the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ resonance. For example, this yields $`\frac{C2}{M1}(𝐪^2=0)=1.04r_n^2/(2\mu _n)=0.030`$ and $`\frac{C2}{M1}(𝐪^2=4.2\mathrm{fm}^2)=0.042`$. Sign and magnitude of these theoretical predictions are in agreement with recent experimental data $`\frac{C2}{M1}(𝐪^2=4.2\mathrm{fm}^2)_{exp}=0.046(8)`$ .

## 3 Relations between octet and decuplet hyperon charge radii

Using the general parametrization method of Refs., we find the following relations between octet and decuplet charge radii for strange hyperons:

$$r_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}^2r_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}^2=r_\mathrm{\Xi }^{}^2r_\mathrm{\Xi }^{}^2=r_n^2\left(x+x^2\right),r_{\mathrm{\Sigma }^+}^2r_{\mathrm{\Sigma }^+}^2=r_{\mathrm{\Xi }^0}^2r_{\mathrm{\Xi }^0}^2=r_n^2\left(2xx^2\right),$$
(6)
where $`x=m_u/m_s`$ is the ratio of nonstrange to strange quark masses. Again, it is the $`\sigma \sigma \text{ }\sigma \sigma \text{ }_i\sigma \sigma \text{ }\sigma \sigma \text{ }_j/(m_im_j)`$ term in the charge operator that leads to Eq.(6).

In summary, by including two-body currents in the constituent quark model we have found hitherto unknown relations between the electromagnetic form factors of octet and decuplet baryons. In particular, the $`C2/M1`$ ratio in the electromagnetic $`N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ transition can be expressed in terms of the elastic form factors of the neutron.