1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2: \usepackage{amsmath,amssymb,amsfonts,epsfig,xspace}
3: \setlength{\textwidth}{6.5 in}
4: \setlength{\textheight}{8.25in}
5: \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{0in}
6: \setlength{\topmargin}{0in}
7: \addtolength{\textheight}{.8in}
8: \addtolength{\voffset}{-.5in}
9: \newcommand{\aref}[1]{Appendix~\ref{sec:#1}}
10: \newcommand{\sref}[1]{\S~\ref{sec:#1}}
11: \newcommand{\tref}[1]{Theorem~\ref{thm:#1}}
12: \newcommand{\lref}[1]{Lemma~\ref{lem:#1}}
13: \newcommand{\pref}[1]{Proposition~\ref{prp:#1}}
14: \newcommand{\cref}[1]{Corollary~\ref{cor:#1}}
15: \newcommand{\fref}[1]{Figure~\ref{fig:#1}}
16: \newcommand{\eref}[1]{Equation~\eqref{eqn:#1}}
17: \newcommand{\old}[1]{}
18: \newcommand{\polylog}{\operatorname{polylog}}
19: \newcommand{\Li}{\operatorname{Li}}
20: \renewcommand{\L}{K} % {\kappa} % cumulant
21: \newcommand{\coef}{\gamma}
22: \newcommand{\odd}{\operatorname{odd}}
23: \newcommand{\even}{\operatorname{even}}
24: \newcommand{\Var}{\operatorname{Var}}
25: \newcommand{\lcm}{\operatorname{lcm}}
26: \newcommand{\eps}{\epsilon}
27: \newcommand{\veps}{\varepsilon}
28: \newcommand{\N}{\mathbb N}
29: \newcommand{\Z}{\mathbb Z}
30: \newcommand{\R}{\mathbb R}
31: \newcommand{\C}{\mathbb C}
32: \newcommand{\ddcl}{\overbrace{c\frac{\partial}{\partial c} \cdots c\frac{\partial}{\partial c}}^\ell}
33: \newcommand{\enc}{\langle N_c\rangle}
34: \newcommand{\vnc}{\sigma^2(N_c)}
35: \newcommand{\st}{\sigma\tau}
36: \newcommand{\sto}{\sigma_1\tau_1}
37: \newcommand{\stt}{\sigma_2\tau_2}
38: \newcommand{\stoc}{\sigma_1,\tau_1}
39: \newcommand{\sttc}{\sigma_2,\tau_2}
40: \newcommand{\Zst}{Z_{\st}}
41: \newcommand{\tqsp}{\tau q + \sigma p}
42: \newcommand{\tqspo}{\tau_1 q + \sigma_1 p}
43: \newcommand{\tqspt}{\tau_2 q + \sigma_2 p}
44: %\newcommand{\ii}{{\mathring{\imath}}}
45: % my version of latex didn't recognize \mathring
46: \newcommand{\ii}{\imath}
47: \newtheorem{thm}{Theorem}
48: \newtheorem{prop}{Proposition}
49: \newtheorem{lemma}{Lemma}
50: \newtheorem{corollary}{Corollary}
51: \newcommand{\note}[1]{\begin{center}\fbox{\parbox{5in}{\textbf{Note: #1}}}\end{center}}
52: \newcommand{\qed}{\hspace*{\fill} \ensuremath{\square}}
53: \newenvironment{proof}{\noindent{\bf Proof:}\hspace*{1em}}{\qed}
54: \newenvironment{proofm}{\noindent{\bf Proof:}\hspace*{1em}}{}
55: \newenvironment{proof_of}[1]{\noindent{\bf Proof of #1:}\hspace*{1em}}{\qed}
56:
57: \pagestyle{myheadings}
58: \markright{Critical Resonance \hfil Kenyon \& Wilson}
59: % $Revision: 1.120 $
60: \begin{document}
61: \title{\vspace*{-20pt}
62: \footnotetext{The research leading to this article was conducted in part while the first author was visiting Microsoft.}
63: \centerline{\hbox{Critical resonance in the non-intersecting lattice path model}}}
64: \author{
65: \begin{tabular}{c}
66: Richard W. Kenyon \\
67: \small CNRS UMR 8628\\
68: \small Laboratoire de Math\'ematiques\\
69: \small Universit\'e Paris-Sud\\
70: \small France\\
71: \small\texttt{richard.kenyon\char64math.u-psud.fr}
72: \end{tabular}
73: \and
74: \begin{tabular}{c}
75: David B. Wilson \\
76: \small Microsoft Research\\
77: \small One Microsoft Way\\
78: \small Redmond, Washington\\
79: \small U.S.A.\\
80: \small\texttt{dbwilson\char64microsoft.com}
81: \end{tabular}
82: }
83: \date{}
84: \maketitle
85:
86: \begin{abstract}
87: We study the phase transition in the honeycomb dimer model (equivalently,
88: monotone non-intersecting lattice path model).
89: At the critical point the system has a strong long-range dependence;
90: in particular, periodic boundary conditions give rise to a
91: ``resonance'' phenomenon, where the partition function and other
92: properties of the system depend sensitively on the shape of the domain.
93: \end{abstract}
94:
95: \section{Introduction}
96:
97: We study a model of monotone non-intersecting lattice paths in
98: $\Z^2$.
99: Applications of this model include random surfaces
100: \cite{blote-hilhorst:roughening, Spohn, kenyon:dimers}, magnetic flux lines in
101: superconductors \cite{WH, BCK}, and a number of other physical phenomena
102: \cite{Nagle, Fisher, dN}, including spin-domain boundaries
103: of the three-dimensional Ising
104: model at zero temperature \cite{cerf-kenyon:wulff}.
105: (See also \cite{popkov-kim-huang-wu:3d,huang-wu-kunz:5v}.)
106:
107: Let $R_{m,n}$ be a domain consisting of the $m\times n$ rectangle
108: in $\Z^2$ with periodic boundary conditions ($R_{m,n}$ is a graph on a torus).
109: On $R_{m,n}$ consider configurations consisting of collections of
110: vertex-disjoint, monotone
111: northeast-going lattice paths (or rather loops, since the paths
112: are required to eventually close up, possibly after winding several times around
113: the torus: there are no ``free ends''). See \fref{bij}.
114: We do not restrict the number of disjoint loops
115: but rather
116: give a configuration an energy $E_b N_b+E_c N_c$ where $N_b$ is the total
117: number
118: of ``east'' steps of the paths and $N_c$ is the total number of ``north''
119: steps of
120: the paths. The Boltzmann measure $\mu$ at temperature $T$
121: is the probability measure assigning a configuration a probability
122: proportional to $e^{-(E_b N_b+E_c N_c)/T}$. We study these Boltzmann
123: measures near the critical temperature $T$, which is the temperature at which
124: $e^{-E_b/T}+e^{-E_c/T}=1$ \cite{kasteleyn:pfaffian}.
125: Letting $b= e^{-E_b/T}$ and
126: $c=e^{-E_c/T}$, a configuration
127: has a probability proportional to $b^{N_b}c^{N_c}$.
128:
129: This process is equivalent to another well-known model,
130: the model of dimers (weighted perfect matchings) on the
131: honeycomb lattice $H$ \cite{Wu68,WH:93}.
132: Weight the edges of the honeycomb lattice
133: $a=1$, $b$, or $c$ according to their direction as in \fref{bij}.
134: See \fref{bij} for an illustration of the weight-preserving bijection
135: between dimer configurations and lattice paths.
136:
137: \begin{figure}[htbp]
138: \centerline{\epsfig{figure=grid.eps}}
139: \caption{
140: The classical bijection \cite{Wu68} between perfect matchings of the hexagonal
141: lattice and non-intersecting north-east lattice paths, shown for a
142: $m\times n = 7\times 6$ region. Edges of type `$a$' in the hexagonal
143: lattice $H_{m,n}$ are contracted to obtain $R_{m,n}$. The dimer
144: configuration has weight $a^{16} b^{14} c^{12}$, as does the lattice
145: path configuration (when $a=1$ or else one introduces a factor of $a$
146: for each vertex not in a lattice path).}
147: \label{fig:bij}
148: \end{figure}
149:
150: Let $H_{m,n}$ be a finite graph which is a quotient of $H$ by the
151: horizontal and vertical translations of length $m,n$ respectively
152: as in \fref{bij}.
153: Let $\mu_{m,n}=\mu_{m,n}(a,b,c)$ be the Boltzmann measure on
154: dimer configurations on the toroidal graph $H_{m,n}$.
155: This measure assigns a dimer configuration a probability proportional
156: to $a^{N_a}b^{N_b}c^{N_c}$, where there are $N_a$ edges of weight
157: $a$, $N_b$ edges of weight $b$, and $N_c$ edges of weight $c$.
158: The exact probability is $a^{N_a}b^{N_b}c^{N_c}/Z$, where
159: the normalizing constant $Z$ is called the partition function
160: of the system.
161:
162: As $m,n\to\infty$ the measures $\mu_{m,n}(a,b,c)$ have a unique limiting
163: Gibbs measure $\mu(a,b,c)$ \cite{Sheffield, cohn-kenyon-propp:variational}.
164: The measure $\mu(a,b,c)$ is a measure on dimer configurations on $H$,
165: and is well-understood for all $a,b,c$ \cite{cohn-kenyon-propp:variational}.
166: As $a,b,c$ vary the measure $\mu(a,b,c)$ undergoes a phase transition
167: --the ``solid-liquid'' transition-- when
168: one of $a$, $b$, or $c$ is equal to the sum of the other two,
169: for example $a=b+c$. When $a\geq b+c$ the system is frozen:
170: with probability $1$ only edges of weight $a$ are present. See \fref{melt}.
171: When $a,b,c$ satisfy the strict triangle inequality (each is less
172: than the sum of the others) dimers of all types are
173: present in a typical configuration of $\mu(a,b,c)$.
174: Likewise in the lattice path model, when $a\geq b+c$ there are no lattice paths.
175: When $a,b,c$ satisfy the strict triangle inequality,
176: the lattice paths in a configuration are dense, that is, on average they lie
177: within a constant distance of one another.
178:
179: \begin{figure}[htbp]
180: \centerline{\epsfig{figure=melt.eps}}
181: \caption{
182: The partition function is shown in the upper panels, and the expected
183: number of edges of type `$c$' is shown in the lower panels. The solid
184: and liquid phases are shown in the left panels, and the melting
185: transition between between these phases is shown in the right panels.
186: The formulas on the left are derived in
187: \cite{kasteleyn:pfaffian,Wu67,cohn-kenyon-propp:variational} and are not
188: used here. The formulas on the right follow from \tref{gaussian}.
189: The melting transition depends quite sensitively on the aspect ratio
190: of the region (see \fref{spike} and \tref{intro}).}
191: \label{fig:melt}
192: \end{figure}
193:
194: The finite-volume measures $\mu_{m,n}(a,b,c)$ are
195: less well understood near $a=b+c$. When $a=b+c$ the lattice
196: paths exist but are spread out;
197: as we shall see,
198: the average distance between strands is on the order of
199: the square root of the system size.
200: The ratio $n/m$ imposes fairly rigid entropic constraints
201: on the way these loops can join up. Surprisingly these constraints
202: become stronger with increasing system size, so that the scaling
203: limit has nontrivial structure.
204:
205: Our main result is a computation of the
206: partition function as a function of $a,b,c,m,n$, for parameters
207: near $a=b+c$.
208: The partition function $Z$ (normalized by $(\text{area})^{1/4}$)
209: is largest when $nb/(mc)$ is rational with small numerator and denominator.
210:
211: For example we have
212: \begin{thm}\label{thm:intro}
213: When $a=1,b=c=1/2$ and $n/m=p/q$ in lowest terms we have
214: $$\log Z = \frac{(mn)^{1/4}\zeta(3/2)(1-2^{-1/2})}{2\sqrt{\pi}(pq)^{3/4}}(1+o(1)).$$
215: as $m$ and $n$ tend to $\infty$ while $p$ and $q$ remain fixed
216: (here $\zeta$ is the Riemann zeta function). Furthermore
217: the number $N_c$ of `$c$'-type edges tends to a Gaussian with expectation
218: $$\enc=\frac{(mn)^{3/4}\zeta(1/2)(1-2^{1/2})}{2\sqrt{\pi}(pq)^{1/4}}(1+o(1))$$
219: and variance
220: $$\vnc=\frac{(mn)^{5/4}(pq)^{1/4}\zeta(-1/2)(1-2^{3/2})}{2\sqrt{\pi}}(1+o(1)).$$
221: \end{thm}
222: (Both $\zeta(1/2)$ and $\zeta(-1/2)$ are negative.)
223:
224: We see that the system greatly
225: prefers domains of {\it rational} modulus over those with irrational
226: modulus. Here by rational we mean, a lattice path with
227: average slope $c/b$ will close up after winding a small number of
228: times around the torus. In such a case the number of loops can be large,
229: whereas in an irrational case each loop must wind many times
230: around before closing up (unless it pays a large entropic cost).
231:
232: One can think of the partition function $Z$,
233: taken as a function of $m$ and $n$, as an indicator of
234: rationality of $n/m$.
235: See \fref{spike} which plots $\log Z / (\text{area})^{1/4}$
236: and $\enc / (\text{area})^{3/4}$ as a function
237: of $\log(n/m)$ near $\text{area}=10^7$ for $a=1$ and $b=c=\frac12$.
238:
239: \begin{figure}[htbp]
240: \centerline{\epsfig{figure=spike.eps}}
241: \caption{Resonant spikes in $\log Z$ (upper panel) and in the edge density (lower panel) for very large regions when $a=1$ and $b=c=1/2$. The aspect ratio is plotted on a log scale.}
242: \label{fig:spike}
243: \end{figure}
244:
245: This is not the only interesting phenomenon in this model.
246: For a rational domain, there is
247: a non-trivial behavior as we vary $a,b,c$ away from the critical
248: point. Letting $A=(c/(a-b))^n$, the partition function as a function of $A$
249: has an infinite number of nonanalyticities (in the large-$n$ limit)
250: which correspond to abrupt changes in the winding number of
251: curves in a typical configuration. That is, the curves ``ratchet'' at
252: well-defined values as $A$ increases:
253: see \fref{Zsig} and \sref{crossover}. We did not prove (although we believe)
254: that at a typical value of $A$ the curves are in a well-defined
255: integer homology class
256: (i.e., have well-defined winding number around the torus),
257: and this homology class changes at discrete values of $A$.
258: We prove only that the $\Z_2$ homology class (winding number modulo $2$)
259: changes at these well-defined points.
260: We also show that, away from these transition points,
261: the number of edges is a Gaussian;
262: at the transition it is a mixture of two Gaussians, coming from a Gaussian
263: for each homology class.
264:
265: It would be very interesting to study this same model on higher-genus surfaces.
266: On higher-genus surfaces (with translation structures having
267: conical singularities) it would be very useful to
268: be able to detect ``rationality'', in the form of bands of parallel
269: closed geodesics: this is an important problem in
270: billiards \cite{Tabachnikov}. Moreover the ratcheting phenomenon
271: must be significantly richer in the presence of a non-abelian
272: fundamental group.
273:
274: \section{Review of $\log Z$ and the distribution of $N_c$} \label{sec:logZ}
275:
276: The partition function $Z$ is
277: $$Z=\sum_{\text{configurations}}a^{N_a}b^{N_b}c^{N_c}.$$
278: It contains all the information about the distribution of the
279: total number of edges of each type.
280: We can view $Z$ as a polynomial in $c$, where the
281: coefficient of $c^{N_c}$ is the weighted sum of configurations which
282: contain $N_c$ edges of type `$c$'. Thus the expected number of edges of
283: type `$c$' is
284: $\enc=\frac{c}{Z}\frac{\partial Z}{\partial c}$. Similarly,
285: the $\ell$th moment of the number of edges of type `$c$' is given by
286: \newcommand{\M}[1]{\langle N_c^{#1}\rangle}
287: $$\langle N_c^\ell\rangle=\frac{1}{Z} \ddcl Z.$$
288: The $\ell$th {\it cumulant} $\L_\ell$ is defined by
289: $$\L_\ell = \ddcl \log Z,$$
290: which we will in effect estimate later.
291: Here we recall several properties of cumulants \cite{Comtet}.
292: Of course $\M{1}=\L_1$.
293: The variance in the number of edges of type `$c$' is $\L_2$:
294: \begin{align*}
295: c\frac{\partial}{\partial c}c\frac{\partial\log Z}{\partial c}
296: &= c\frac{\partial}{\partial c}\frac{c}{Z}\frac{\partial Z}{\partial c} \\
297: &= \frac{c}{Z}\frac{\partial}{\partial c}c\frac{\partial Z}{\partial c}
298: - \frac{c}{Z^2} \frac{\partial Z}{\partial c} c\frac{\partial Z}{\partial c} \\
299: &= \langle N_c^2\rangle - \enc^2 = \vnc.
300: \end{align*}
301:
302: Later we will use higher moments to show that the number of `$c$'-type edges tends to a Gaussian, and to this end we express these moments in terms of the $\L_\ell$'s.
303: Since $$\M{\ell+1} = \frac{1}{Z} \frac{c \partial}{\partial c} (Z \M{\ell}),$$
304: when $\M{\ell}$ is expressed as a polynomial
305: in the variables $\L_1,\ldots,\L_\ell$,
306: we may calculate $\M{\ell+1}$ from $\M{\ell}$ by replacing each monomial
307: $\L_{i_1} \L_{i_2} \cdots \L_{i_k}$ of $\M{\ell}$ with
308: $$\L_1 \L_{i_1} \L_{i_2} \cdots \L_{i_k} + \L_{i_1+1} \L_{i_2}
309: \cdots \L_{i_k} + \L_{i_1} \L_{i_2+1} \cdots \L_{i_k} + \cdots + \L_{i_1} \L_{i_2}
310: \cdots \L_{i_k+1}.$$ Thus for example we have
311: \begin{align}
312: \label{Bellpoly}
313: \begin{split}
314: \M{1} =& \L_1\\
315: \M{2} =& \L_2+\L_1^2\\
316: \M{3} =& \L_3 + 3 \L_2 \L_1 + \L_1^3\\
317: \M{4} =& \L_4 + 4 \L_3 \L_1 + 3 \L_2^2 + 6 \L_2 \L_1^2 + \L_1^4\\
318: \M{5} =& \L_5 + 5 \L_4 \L_1 + 10 \L_3 \L_2 + 10 \L_3 \L_1^2 + 15 \L_2^2 \L_1 + 10 \L_2 \L_1^3 + \L_1^5.
319: %\M{6} =& \L_6 + 6 \L_5 \L_1 + 15 \L_4 \L_2 + 10 \L_3^2 + 15 \L_4 \L_1^2 + 60 \L_3 \L_2 \L_1 \\&+ 15 \L_2^3 + 20 \L_3 \L_1^3 + 45 \L_2^2 \L_1^2 + 15 \L_2 \L_1^4 + \L_1^6.
320: \end{split}
321: \end{align}
322: These polynomials $\M{j}=Y_j(\L_1,\L_2,\dots)$ are the
323: {\it complete Bell polynomials} \cite{Comtet}.
324: We see that $\M{\ell}$ contains a monomial for each partition of $\ell$,
325: and the coefficient associated with partition with distinct part sizes $s_1 > s_2 >
326: \cdots > s_k$ and $r_i$ parts of size $s_i$ is
327: \begin{equation}
328: \frac{\ell!}{s_1!^{r_1} r_1! \cdots s_k!^{r_k} r_k!}. \label{partcoef}
329: \end{equation}
330:
331: It will be more useful to work with moments about the mean rather
332: than moments about the origin. Note that if we replace $Z$ with $Z^*
333: = Z c^{-\mu}$, then the above derivation shows us how to express
334: $\langle (N_c-\mu)^\ell\rangle$ in terms of the $\L^*_\ell$'s defined by
335: $$\L^*_\ell = \ddcl \log (Z c^{-\mu})
336: = \L_\ell + \ddcl \log (c^{-\mu}).$$
337: As $\L^*_1 = \L_1 -\mu$ and $\L^*_\ell = \L_\ell$ for $\ell>1$, upon
338: substituting $\mu = \enc = \L_1$ we see that the $\ell$th
339: moment of $N_c$ about the mean may be obtained from the above
340: expressions for $\M{\ell}$ by deleting all monomials that contain the
341: variable $\L_1$.
342:
343: \section{Product form of the partition function}
344:
345: We compute an expression for the partition
346: function as a function of $a,b,$ and $c$.
347: We are interested in approximating $Z$ to within
348: $1+o(1)$ multiplicative errors when $a=1$, $b,c\in(0,1)$ and $b+c$
349: is close to $a$.
350: The interesting range is when $(c/(a-b))^n$ is of constant order, that is,
351: $a-b-c=O(1/n)$. We define $A=(c/(a-b))^n$ as the natural parameter
352: measuring proximity to the critical point.
353:
354: In what follows we always set $a=1$, although we keep using $a$
355: for notational convenience.
356:
357: Recall $H_{m,n}$, the $m\times n$ hexagonal toroidal graph shown in
358: \fref{bij}. By Kasteleyn \cite{kasteleyn:pfaffian} (see also
359: \cite{tesler:pfaffian,galluccio-loebl:pfaffian,regge-zecchina:pfaffian,lu-wu:dimer1,lu-wu:dimer2}
360: for extensions and further developments), the partition function
361: $Z=Z(a,b,c)$ for dimer coverings of $H_{m,n}$
362: is a sum of four expressions,
363: \begin{equation}\label{Z4}
364: Z = \frac12(-Z_{00}+Z_{01}+Z_{10}+Z_{11}),
365: \end{equation}
366: where $\Zst$ is the determinant of a signed version of the adjacency
367: matrix of $H_{m,n}$,
368: and counts dimer coverings with a sign according to the homology class
369: (in $H_1(\text{torus},\Z_2)\cong \Z_2^2$)
370: of the corresponding system of loops, as follows.
371: \newcommand{\vepsx}{\veps_{\hat x}}
372: \newcommand{\vepsy}{\veps_{\hat y}}
373: Let $N(\vepsx,\vepsy)$ denote the total weight of dimer coverings whose corresponding
374: loops have $\vepsx\bmod 2$ crossings of the line $x=0$
375: and $\vepsy\bmod 2$ crossings of the line $y=0$.
376: Each $\Zst$ is a linear combination
377: of the $N(\vepsx,\vepsy)$ with coefficients
378: $\pm1$ as follows:
379: \begin{equation}\label{Ztable}\begin{array}{rcccc}
380: &N(0,0)&N(1,0)&N(0,1)&N(1,1)\\
381: Z_{00}&+1&-1&-1&-1\\
382: Z_{10}&+1&+1&-1&+1\\
383: Z_{01}&+1&-1&+1&+1\\
384: Z_{11}&+1&+1&+1&-1\makebox[0pt][l]{.}\\
385: \end{array}
386: \end{equation}
387: Note three important facts, which follow from this table:
388: \begin{prop}\label{prp:2Zsums}
389: The sum of any two of $-Z_{00},Z_{01},Z_{10},Z_{11}$
390: has only nonnegative coefficients.
391: The difference between any two
392: of $-Z_{00},Z_{01},Z_{10},Z_{11}$ is bounded by the sum of the other two.
393: The difference between the coefficients of $a^{\alpha} b^{\beta} c^{\gamma}$
394: in any two of $-Z_{00},Z_{01},Z_{10},Z_{11}$ is bounded by the sum of the
395: coefficients of $a^{\alpha} b^{\beta} c^{\gamma}$ in the other two.
396: \end{prop}
397:
398: Kasteleyn \cite{kasteleyn:pfaffian} evaluated the determinants $\Zst$ by
399: multiplying eigenvalues obtained through Fourier analysis, giving
400: \enlargethispage*{\baselineskip}
401: \newcommand{\ms}{(-1)^\sigma}
402: \newcommand{\mt}{(-1)^\tau}
403: \newcommand{\mst}{\veps_{\st}}
404: \newcommand{\msto}{\veps_{\sto}}
405: \newcommand{\mstt}{\veps_{\stt}}
406: \begin{align}\nonumber
407: \Zst
408: \nonumber
409: &= \prod_{\substack{(-z)^m=\ms\\(-w)^n=\mt}} [ a+b z+c w ] \\
410: \nonumber
411: &= \prod_{(-z)^m=\ms} [ (a+bz)^n -\mt c^n ]\\
412: \nonumber
413: &= \prod_{(-z)^m=\ms}(a+bz)^n
414: \prod_{(-z)^m=\ms}\left[1 -\mt \left(\frac{c}{a+bz}\right)^n\right] \\
415: \label{exact} &= (a^m -\ms b^m)^n
416: \prod_{(-z)^m=\ms}\left[1 - \mt \left(\frac{c}{a+bz}\right)^n\right].
417: \end{align}
418:
419: We can ignore the $b^m$ term which is exponentially smaller than $a^m$.
420: When $b+c$ is close to $a$, unless $z$ is close to $-1$,
421: $|a+bz|$ will be greater than $c$;
422: in particular $|a+bz|^n$
423: is exponentially larger than $c^n$.
424: So we can ignore the factors in the products for which
425: $z$ is not close to $-1$. We will expand the remaining factors near $z=-1$.
426: As $z$ is a root of unity, let $z=z_k=-e^{i\theta_k}$, where
427: $\theta_k = 2\pi k/m$ for $k \in \Z_m+\sigma/2$. Of course $k\equiv k+m$,
428: so when doing series expansions we can take $-m/2<k\leq m/2$.
429:
430: Define $r_k,\phi_k$ by
431: \begin{align*}
432: 1\pm \left(\frac{c}{a+b z_k}\right)^n &=
433: 1\pm \left(\frac{c}{a-b}\right)^n r_k e^{i\phi_k},
434: \end{align*}
435: so that
436: $$r_k=(a-b)^{n}|a+bz_k|^{-n} \ \ \ \ \text{and}\ \ \ \
437: \phi_k=\arg(a+bz_k)^{-n}.$$
438: \enlargethispage*{\baselineskip}
439: We make the simplifying assumptions $b/a=\Theta(1)$, $1-b/a=\Theta(1)$, and $n=\Theta(m)$. Then
440: $$r_k=\exp\left(-n\theta_k^2\frac{a b}{2(a-b)^2}+O(n\theta_k^4)\right)=
441: \exp(-\eps k^2+O(k^4/m^3))$$
442: where we have defined $$\eps = \frac{2\pi^2 n a b}{m^2(a-b)^2} = O(1/m),$$
443: and
444: $$\phi_k = \frac{n\theta_k b}{a-b} +n O(\theta_k^3)
445: = \phi k + O(k^3/m^2)$$
446: where we define $$\phi = \frac{2\pi n b}{m(a-b)}.$$
447: Letting $A=\left(\frac{c}{a-b}\right)^n$, we have
448: \begin{equation}\label{pf}
449: \Zst = (a^m -\ms b^m)^n \prod_{k\in\Z_m+\sigma/2} (1 -\mt A r_k e^{i \phi_k}).
450: \end{equation}
451: In logarithmic form we can write
452: \begin{equation}\label{sumform}
453: \log \Zst = - \sum_{k\in\Z_m+\sigma/2}
454: \Li_1\big((-1)^\tau A r_k e^{i \phi_k}\big)
455: + \underbrace{n\log(a^m-\ms b^m)}_{\text{negligible}}
456: % + O(nb^m)
457: \end{equation}
458: where the polylogarithm function $\Li_\nu$ is defined by
459: $\Li_\nu(z)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{z^n}{n^\nu}$ for $|z|<1$ and by
460: analytic continuation elsewhere (see
461: \aref{polylogs} for background on polylogarithms).
462: Here the second term is essentially zero,
463: and the terms in the summation become negligible when
464: $|k|$ is larger than $\Theta(\sqrt{m})$.
465:
466: In this expression for $\log \Zst$ we need only keep track of
467: its real part: from \eqref{pf} we see that (since $b<a$)
468: $\Zst$ is real and nonnegative if $A\leq1$,
469: and real and nonnegative if $A>1$ except for $Z_{00}$ which is strictly
470: negative. In particular when $A>1$ the expression \eqref{Z4}
471: is a sum of nonnegative terms.
472: When $A\leq 1$ we shall see that $Z_{00}$
473: is negligible compared to $Z$ so its sign is irrelevant.
474:
475: More generally we find, using \eqref{sumform},
476: $z\frac{d}{dz}\Li_\nu(z)=\Li_{\nu-1}(z)$, and
477: $(c\partial/\partial c)A=nA$, that
478: \begin{equation}\label{sumform2}
479: \begin{split}
480: \ddcl \log(\Zst) =
481: - n^{\ell}\sum_{k\in\Z_m+\sigma/2} &\Li_{1-\ell}\big(\mt A r_k e^{i \phi_k}\big)
482: \\&\text{($+\underbrace{n\log(a^m-\ms b^m)}_{\text{negligible}}$ if $\ell=0$).}
483: %\ \ \ \text{($+O(nb^m)$ if $\ell=0$).}
484: \end{split}
485: \end{equation}
486:
487: \section{Rational tori} \label{sec:rational}
488:
489: The expressions \eqref{sumform2}
490: are non-trivial to evaluate,
491: mostly because they are describing behavior which depends sensitively
492: on the parameters defining the system.
493: In this section we compute the asymptotics of \eqref{sumform2}
494: for ``nearly rational'' domains.
495:
496: We consider the toroidal hexagonal graph $H_{m,n}$
497: to be ``nearly rational'' when
498: $\phi/(2\pi)=\frac{nb}{m(a-b)}$ is
499: close to a simple rational $p/q$, where $p$ and $q$ are relatively
500: prime integers.
501: (Note that this depends not only on $m,n$ but also on $a,b,c$.)
502: We keep $p$ and $q$ fixed as
503: $m$ and $n$ tend to infinity, and by ``close'' we mean that
504: $nb/(mc)-p/q$ is not large compared to $1/\sqrt{qn}$.
505: We introduce the parameter $\alpha$ to measure the closeness
506: of $nb/(mc)$ to $p/q$:
507: we define $\alpha$ by
508: $$\frac{\phi}{2\pi} = \frac{p}{q} (1+\alpha W),$$
509: where $W= \sqrt{q \eps}/(\pi p)=\Theta(\frac1{\sqrt{qn}})$.
510: The interesting range is when $\alpha$ is of constant order.
511:
512: We will determine the asymptotic shape of the resonant peaks in \fref{spike}
513: as functions of $\alpha$ and $A$.
514:
515: \subsection{Spokes, spirals, and clouds}\label{sec:spirals}
516:
517: For fixed $p$ and $q$, as the area $mn$ gets large, the terms $1\pm A r_k
518: e^{i \phi_k}\approx 1\pm Ar_ke^{2\pi i(p/q)k}$ accumulate on $q$ different spokes (or radii) of a
519: circle with radius $A$ centered at $1$. If $\phi/(2\pi)$
520: is only approximately $p/q$, then each of these spokes becomes
521: a spiral, which spirals out from $1$ when $k$ is negative and
522: increasing, and then spirals back in towards $1$ when $k$ is positive
523: and increasing. If $\phi/(2\pi)$ is far from a simple rational,
524: then the terms $1\pm A r_k e^{i \phi_k}$ form a cloud within the disk
525: of radius $A$ centered at $1$. In our analysis for nearly
526: rational tori, we will assume that $\phi/(2\pi)$ is sufficiently
527: close to a simple enough rational $p/q$ that the terms $1\pm A r_k
528: e^{i \phi_k}$ form what appear to be $q$ continuous spokes or spirals
529: (in a sense we define more precisely below). See \fref{spirals}.
530:
531: It is useful to re-express \eqref{sumform2} to reflect the presence of
532: the $q$ spirals. Since $\phi\approx 2\pi\frac{p}{q}$, every $q$th
533: term lies on a given spiral, so we break the sum apart into $q$ different
534: sums, one for each spiral.
535: Of course $q$ may not evenly divide $m$.
536: The most convenient way to re-express the
537: summation is
538: $$ \sum_{k\in\Z_m+\sigma/2} f(k) =
539: \frac{1}{q} \sum_{j\in\Z_q+\sigma/2} \,\,\sum_{u\in\Z_m} f(j+qu).$$
540: \begin{figure}[t]
541: \centerline{\epsfig{figure=spirals.eps}}
542: \caption{The multiplicands for $Z_{00}$ and $Z_{11}$ for a domain whose aspect ratio is (a) simple rational (b) nearly simple rational (c) far from simple rational. The multiplicands are complex and accumulate towards $1$.}
543: \label{fig:spirals}
544: \end{figure}
545: Since spirals are continuous objects rather than discrete sets of points,
546: we wish to approximate $\sum_{u\in\Z_m}$ with $\int_0^m\,du$.
547: %But for
548: %continuous $u$, $\phi_{j+qu}$ is very rapidly varying:
549: %$\phi_{j+qu} \approx \phi (j+q u) \approx \phi j + 2\pi p u$.
550: To this end we subtract $2\pi p u$ from $\phi_{j+qu}$;
551: then the angle ($\bmod\ 2\pi$)
552: is unchanged for integer $u$, while for continuous $u$ it is slowly varying
553: so we can hope that the integral approximates the sum.
554: Thus we re-express \eqref{sumform2} as
555: (ignoring the negligible $O(n b^m)$ error term when $\ell=0$)
556: \begin{align}
557: \ddcl \log(\Zst) &\doteq
558: \begin{aligned}[t]
559: - n^{\ell} \frac{1}{q} \sum_{j\in\Z_q+\sigma/2} \,\,\sum_{u\in\Z_m}&\Li_{1-\ell}\big(\mt A r_{j+qu} e^{i (\phi_{j+qu}-2\pi p u)}\big)
560: % \\ & \ \ \ \text{($+O(n b^m)$ if $\ell=0$).}
561: \end{aligned} \nonumber\\
562: \intertext{
563: Later we will quantify the error introduced by approximating
564: these sums with integrals,
565: and show it to be insignificant
566: so long as the points appear to line up on $q$ spirals which miss the
567: singularity.
568: For now we proceed with the integral
569: approximation and simplify it:}
570: &\approx
571: - n^{\ell} \frac{1}{q} \sum_{j\in\Z_q+\sigma/2} \,\,\int_0^m \Li_{1-\ell}\big(\mt A r_{j+qu} e^{i (\phi_{j+qu}-2\pi p u)}\big) \,du \label{intapprox}\\
572: \intertext{changing variables to $k=j+qu$ and using the fact that the integrand is periodic,}
573: &=
574: - n^{\ell} \frac{1}{q^2} \int_0^{qm} \sum_{j\in\Z_q+\sigma/2} \Li_{1-\ell}\big(\mt A r_k e^{i (\phi_k-2\pi k p/q)} e^{2\pi i j p/q)}\big) \,dk \nonumber\\
575: \intertext{using the replication formula
576: $ \frac1q \sum_{\omega^q=1} \Li_\nu(\omega z) = \frac{1}{q^\nu}\Li_\nu(z^q)$
577: and the fact that $\gcd(p,q)=1$,}
578: &=
579: - (qn)^{\ell} \frac{1}{q^2} \int_0^{qm} \Li_{1-\ell}\big((-1)^{\tau q} A^q r_k^q e^{i (\phi_k -2\pi k p/q)q} e^{2\pi i (\sigma/2)p}\big) \,dk \nonumber\\
580: \intertext{and again using the periodicity of $\phi_k$ and $r_k$,}
581: &=
582: - \frac{(qn)^{\ell}}{q} \int_{-m/2}^{m/2} \Li_{1-\ell}\big((-1)^{\tau q+\sigma p} A^q r_k^q e^{i (\phi_k -2\pi k p/q)q} \big) \,dk, \label{intform}\\
583: \intertext{which, as a function of $\sigma$ and $\tau$,
584: only depends upon the parity of $\tqsp$.
585: To obtain the next formula we substitute the estimate $r_k e^{i \phi_k}
586: \approx e^{-\eps (k \bmod m)^2} e^{i \phi (k \bmod m)}$ (where we take
587: $k \bmod m$ to lie between $-m/2$ and $m/2$).
588: Doing this substitution introduces an error,
589: but we postpone the error analysis until later. Note that we can substitute
590: this approximation for $r_k e^{i\phi_k}$ either in \eqref{intform}
591: or just prior to the integral approximation \eqref{intapprox},
592: since the only property of $r_k e^{i\phi_k}$ that we used in the
593: intervening steps is that it is periodic in $k$ with period $m$.}
594: &\approx
595: - \frac{(qn)^{\ell}}{q} \int_{-m/2}^{m/2} \Li_{1-\ell}\big((-1)^{\tau q+\sigma p} A^q e^{-q\eps k^2} e^{i (\phi -2\pi p/q)q k} \big) \,dk. \label{intform2}\\
596: \intertext{We extend the range of
597: integration to all of $\R$, introducing a negligible error,}
598: &\approx
599: - \frac{(qn)^{\ell}}{q} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_{1-\ell}\big((-1)^{\tau q+\sigma p} A^q e^{-q\eps k^2} e^{i (\phi -2\pi p/q)q k} \big) \,dk. \label{intform3}\\
600: \intertext{To measure the closeness of $\phi/(2\pi)$ to $p/q$, we
601: define $\alpha$ so that $\phi/(2\pi) = p/q (1+\alpha W)$, where we define
602: $W= \sqrt{q \eps}/(\pi p)$. Then $(\phi - 2\pi p/q) q k = 2\pi p \alpha W k = 2 \alpha\sqrt{q\eps} k$. We change variables to $x=\sqrt{q\eps} k$ to obtain}
603: &= -\frac{(qn)^\ell}{\sqrt{q^3\eps}} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_{1-\ell}\big((-1)^{\tau q+\sigma p} A^q e^{2 i \alpha x - x^2}\big) \,dx. \label{ddclZ}
604: \end{align}
605:
606: The reader may wonder about the apparent asymmetry in
607: equation~\eqref{ddclZ} (when $\ell=0$), e.g.\ why
608: does $q$ appear but not $p$, while
609: $Z$ is symmetrical with respect to width and height? But when
610: $b+c\approx a\approx 1$ and $(nb)/(mc)\approx p/q$ we have
611: $$W= \frac{\sqrt{q \eps}}{\pi p} \approx \sqrt{\frac{2}{pmc}} \approx \sqrt{\frac{2}{qnb}} \approx \frac{\sqrt{2}}{(p q m n b c)^{1/4}},$$
612: \begin{equation}
613: \frac{1}{\sqrt{q^3\eps}} = \frac{1}{\pi p q W} \approx \frac{(m n b c)^{1/4}}{\pi \sqrt{2} (p q)^{3/4}}, \label{q3eps}
614: \end{equation}
615: $$ \log A^q = n q \log\frac{c}{a-b} \approx (b+c-a) \frac{n q}{c} \approx (b+c-a) \frac{m p}{b},$$
616: %and
617: $$ (qn)^\ell \approx (pqmnc/b)^{\ell/2}.$$
618: The asymmetry between $b$ and $c$ when $\ell>0$
619: should not be unexpected since we differentiated with respect to $c$
620: rather than $b$.
621:
622: Referring back to the spirals in \fref{spirals}, $q$ counts the number
623: of spirals, the parameter $A$ measures the radius of the spirals,
624: $\sqrt{\eps}$ is a measure of how far apart the points are on the
625: spiral, and $\alpha$ is a measure of the ``spirality''. $\alpha$ is the
626: right parameter against which to plot the shape of the spikes, making
627: $W$ a measure if their width. When $\alpha=0$ the spirals are spokes,
628: when $\alpha$ gets too large (for a given $\sqrt{\eps}$) the spirals
629: break up into a cloud, by which time the integral approximation
630: \eqref{intapprox} breaks down.
631:
632: \subsection{Error analysis}\label{sec:simple}
633:
634: In the interest of simplicity, we only consider the case when
635: $p$, $q$, $A$, and $\alpha$ are held fixed while $m\rightarrow\infty$
636: and $n\rightarrow\infty$. Most of the interesting behavior already
637: shows up in this case. It is also quite interesting to ask how much
638: these parameters can vary (e.g.\ can $p$ and $q$ be as large as
639: $n^{1/3}$?), but we do not pursue that in this article.
640:
641: \begin{lemma} \label{lem:ddclz}
642: When we fix $p$, $q$, $A$, and $\alpha$ while $m\rightarrow\infty$ and
643: $n\rightarrow\infty$, we have
644: $$ \frac{\sqrt{q^3\eps}}{(qn)^\ell}\ddcl \log(\Zst) =
645: -\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_{1-\ell}\big((-1)^{\tqsp} A^q
646: e^{2 i \alpha x - x^2}\big) \,dx + o(1),$$
647: provided that the curve $(-1)^{\tqsp} A^q e^{2 i \alpha x - x^2}$
648: does not contain the point $1$. If the curve does contain
649: $1$, then the convergence for $\ell=0$
650: is still valid provided that no multiplicand of $\Zst$ is closer than
651: $e^{-o(\sqrt{n})}$ to $0$, in which case the right-hand side is merely an upper bound.
652: \end{lemma}
653:
654: These integrals are explicitly evaluated in \sref{Zxint}.
655:
656: \begin{proof}
657: Much of the proof has already been given in \sref{spirals}, what we have left
658: to do is justify the approximations that we made in \eqref{intapprox} and
659: \eqref{intform2}.
660: For this error analysis we do the
661: $r_k e^{i\phi_k} \approx e^{-\eps k^2 + i\phi k}$ substitution before the
662: integral approximation. With $k=j+qu$ and $j\in\Z_q+\sigma/2$,
663: \begin{align*}
664: \Li_{1-\ell}\big(\mt A r_{j+qu} e^{i (\phi_{j+qu}-2\pi p u)}\big)
665: &=
666: \Li_{1-\ell}\big(\mt e^{2\pi i j p/q} A e^{i (\phi-2\pi p/q)k - \eps k^2+ O(k^3/m^2)}\big)\\
667: &= \Li_{1-\ell}\big(\mt e^{2\pi i j p/q} A e^{2 i \alpha\sqrt{\eps/q}\, k - \eps k^2 + O(k^3/m^2)}\big)
668: \intertext{using $\phi-2\pi p/q = 2\pi(p/q)\alpha W=2\alpha\sqrt{\eps/q}$.
669: Next we use the fact that for integer $\ell\geq0$,
670: $\frac{d}{dz}\Li_{1-\ell}(e^z)=\Li_{-\ell}(e^z)$ is a rational function of
671: $e^z$ with
672: a pole at $e^z=1$ but which is bounded outside a neighborhood of this pole,}
673: &= \Li_{1-\ell}\big(\mt e^{2\pi i j p/q} A e^{2 i \alpha\sqrt{\eps/q}\, k - \eps k^2}\big)+O(k^3/m^2)
674: \end{align*}
675: which is valid as long as
676: $\mt e^{2\pi i j p/q} A e^{2 i \alpha\sqrt{\eps/q}\, k - \eps
677: k^2}$ lies outside a neighborhood of $1$, and the $O(k^3/m^2)$ error
678: term is much smaller than the radius of this neighborhood.
679:
680: It is not hard to see that the $q$ curves
681: $\mt e^{2\pi i j p/q} A e^{2 i \alpha\sqrt{\eps/q}\, k - \eps k^2}$
682: are bounded away from $1$ if and only if the curve
683: $(-1)^{\tqsp} A^q e^{2 i \alpha x - x^2}$ avoids $1$.
684:
685: Adding up the errors $O(k^3/m^2)$ over the range
686: $|k|<\Theta(\sqrt{n})$ gives $O(1)$. When $|k|\gg\Theta(\sqrt{n})$,
687: both $r_k$ and its approximation $e^{-\eps k^2}$ are exponentially
688: decreasing in $|k|$, so using
689: $\Li_{1-\ell}(z)\approx z$ for small $z$,
690: and $r_k=e^{-\eps k^2}(1+O(k^3/m^2))$ when $k\leq n^{2/3}$,
691: we see that doing the substitution for $n^{1/2}\leq k\leq n^{2/3}$
692: also introduces $O(1)$ error, and that the substitution for $k\geq
693: n^{2/3}$ gives $o(1)$ error. Upon multiplying by
694: $\sqrt{q^3\eps}/(qn)^\ell$, all these errors become $o(1)$.
695:
696: For the integral approximation \eqref{intapprox}, the integrands in
697: \eqref{intapprox} are continuous (except at the branch cut) as long as
698: the curves
699: $\mt e^{2\pi i j p/q} A e^{2 i \alpha\sqrt{\eps/q}\, k - \eps k^2}$
700: avoid the point $1$.
701: Moreover they converge exponentially fast to $0$ when $|k|\to\infty$.
702: Therefore they are Riemann summable and the error in converting
703: the sums to integrals tends to zero.
704: The error introduced by extending the range of integration to the
705: reals is exponentially small.
706:
707: What happens when a curve passes through the singularity?
708: When $\ell=0$, the integral in expression
709: \eqref{intapprox} for $\log \Zst$ converges and is an upper bound for
710: $\log \Zst$: the Riemann sum for $\log \Zst$
711: converges to its integral
712: on the complement of a small neighborhood of the singularity, and the
713: Riemann sum near the logarithmic
714: singularity has a negligible contribution except
715: possibly for the point which is closest to the singularity.
716: If the distance of the closest point to the singularity
717: is no smaller than $e^{-o(\sqrt{n})}$, then the contribution
718: of this point is $o(\sqrt{n})$ and so can be ignored.
719: \end{proof}
720:
721: \subsection{The distribution of the number of edges of type `$c$'}
722: \label{sec:distNc}
723: \enlargethispage*{\baselineskip}
724:
725: By \lref{ddclz},
726: to first order $\log\Zst$ only depends on the parity of $\tqsp$,
727: so we define
728: $$Z_- =\frac12\!\sum_{\substack{\sigma,\tau\\ \text{$\tqsp$ odd}}}\!\!\! \Zst
729: \ \ \ \ \ \text{and}\ \ \ \ \
730: Z_+ =\frac12\!\sum_{\substack{\sigma,\tau\\ \text{$\tqsp$ even}}}\!\!\! \mst\Zst$$
731: where $\mst=-1$ if $\sigma=0$ and $\tau=0$, and $\mst=1$ otherwise.
732: We have $Z=Z_-+Z_+$, and from \pref{2Zsums}, both
733: $Z_-$ and $Z_+$ have only nonnegative coefficients, so they can
734: be interpreted as distributions.
735: \lref{ddclz} shows that typically one of $Z_-$ or $Z_+$ is
736: exponentially larger than the other one, so the distribution of the
737: number of $c$ edges is governed by whichever of $Z_-$ or $Z_+$ is dominant.
738:
739: We use the method of moments to determine the distribution of the
740: number $N_c$ of type-`$c$' edges. We saw in
741: \sref{logZ} how to express the $\ell$th moment of $N_c$
742: about its mean (call it $C_\ell$)
743: % (with respect to the distribution defined by $Z$)
744: in terms of $\L_\ell = \ddcl \log Z$, but in \lref{ddclz} we
745: evaluated $\L_{\ell,\st} = \ddcl \log \Zst$.
746: Define
747: $C_{\ell,\st}$ to be the same expression, except with the
748: $\L_{\ell,\st}$'s replacing the $\L_\ell$'s (see also \eqref{Cstdef} below),
749: and similarly define the $\L_{\ell,\pm}$'s and the $C_{\ell,\pm}$'s.
750:
751: \begin{lemma}
752: \label{lem:!!}
753: Under the assumptions of \lref{ddclz}, if the curve
754: $(-1)^{\tqsp} A^q e^{2 i \alpha x - x^2}$ does not contain the point $1$ and
755: $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_{-1}\big((-1)^{\tqsp} A^q e^{2 i
756: \alpha x - x^2}\big) \,dx \neq 0$,
757: then $C_{\ell,\st}/C_{2,\st}^{\ell/2}\rightarrow (\ell-1)!!.$
758: (Here as usual $\ell!!=\ell(\ell-2)\cdots(3)(1)$ when $\ell$ is odd and $\ell!!=0$ when $\ell$ is even.)
759: \end{lemma}
760: \begin{proof}
761: From \lref{ddclz} we have
762: $\L_{j,\st} = O((qn)^{j}/\sqrt{q^3\eps})$,
763: and since the above integral is nonzero,
764: $C_{2,\st}=\L_{2,\st} = \Theta((qn)^{2}/\sqrt{q^3\eps})$.
765: Thus each monomial in the polynomial \eqref{Bellpoly} for $C_{\ell,\st}$
766: has magnitude $O((qn)^\ell/(\sqrt{q^3\eps})^{\text{degree}})$.
767: Recall that $q^3\eps \ll 1$. The monomial degree is uniquely maximized by the
768: $\L_{2,\st}^{\ell/2}$ term ($\ell$ even) or the $\L_{3,\st}
769: \L_{2,\st}^{(\ell-3)/2}$ term ($\ell$ odd).
770: Thus when $\ell$ is odd,
771: $C_{\ell,\st}/C_{2,\st}^{\ell/2} = O((q^3\eps)^{1/4})\rightarrow 0$,
772: and when $\ell$ is even, $C_{\ell,\st}/C_{2,\st}^{\ell/2}$ tends to
773: the coefficient of the monomial $\L_{2,\st}^{\ell/2}$ in $C_{\ell,\st}$,
774: which by \eqref{partcoef} is $(\ell-1)(\ell-3)\cdots (3)(1)$.
775: \end{proof}
776: \enlargethispage*{2\baselineskip}
777:
778: \medskip
779: \newcommand{\sgn}{\varsigma}
780: Thus the $C_{\ell,\st}$'s converge to the moments of a Gaussian,
781: but recall that we cannot view $\Zst$ as a distribution since it may have
782: some negative coefficients.
783: Next we show that the moments $C_{\ell,\pm}$ of $Z_\pm$ (which are
784: genuine distributions) are close to the corresponding $C_{\ell,\st}$'s.
785: \begin{lemma}
786: \label{lem:moments}
787: Suppose $\ell\in\N$, $\sgn=(-1)^{\tqspo}=(-1)^{\tqspt}$,
788: $(\stoc)\neq(\sttc)$, and either $\sgn=-1$, or else $\sgn=+1$ but $A\geq1$.
789: Under the assumptions of Lemmas~\ref{lem:ddclz} and \ref{lem:!!},
790: if $|\L_{1,\sto} - \L_{1,\stt}|\ll n^{5/4}$
791: then $C_{\ell,\sgn}/C_{2,\sto}^{\ell/2} = (\ell-1)!!+o(1)$.
792: \end{lemma}
793: \enlargethispage*{2\baselineskip}
794: \begin{proof}
795: Viewing $\Zst$ as a polynomial in $c$,
796: $\Zst=\sum_{\ii} \coef_{\ii,\st}\, c^\ii$, we have
797: \begin{equation}\label{Cstdef}C_{\ell,\st}\Zst=
798: \sum_{\ii} \coef_{\ii,\st}\,(\ii-\L_{1,\st})^\ell c^\ii.
799: \end{equation}
800: As $Z_\sgn$ is the average of $\msto Z_{\sto}$ and $\mstt Z_{\stt}$, we have
801: \begin{align*}
802: C_{\ell,\sgn} Z_{\sgn} &=\frac12\sum_{\sigma,\tau}\mst \sum_\ii \coef_{\ii,\st}\,c^\ii(\ii-\L_{1,\sgn})^\ell\\
803: &=\frac12\sum_{\sigma,\tau}\mst\sum_\ii \coef_{\ii,\st}\,c^\ii\sum_{j=0}^\ell
804: \binom{\ell}{j}(\ii-\L_{1,\st})^j(
805: \L_{1,\st}-\L_{1,\sgn})^{\ell-j}\\
806: &=\frac12\sum_{\sigma,\tau}\mst \sum_{j=0}^\ell
807: \binom{\ell}{j}
808: C_{j,\st}\Zst(\L_{1,\st}-\L_{1,\sgn})^{\ell-j}.
809: \end{align*}
810: Since $\sgn=-1$ or else $\sgn=+1$ but $A\geq1$,
811: $\msto Z_{\sto}$ and $\mstt Z_{\stt}$ have the same sign,
812: so $\L_{1,\sgn}$ is a convex combination of $\L_{1,\sto}$ and
813: $\L_{1,\stt}$, and it too can differ by at most $\ll
814: n^{5/4} = O(C_{2,\st}^{1/2})$ from them. Substituting
815: $C_{j,\st}=((j-1)!!+o(1)) C_{2,\st}^{j/2}$ we get
816: $$C_{\ell,\sgn} Z_{\sgn} = \frac12\sum_{\sigma,\tau}\mst ((\ell-1)!!+o(1))C_{2,\st}^{\ell/2}\Zst,$$
817: so
818: $C_{\ell,\sgn}$ is a convex combination of $((\ell-1)!!+o(1))C_{2,\sto}^{\ell/2}$ and $((\ell-1)!!+o(1))C_{2,\stt}^{\ell/2}$.
819:
820: Since $C_{2,\sto}=K_{2,\sto}$ and $C_{2,\stt}=K_{2,\stt}$,
821: \lref{ddclz} and the hypothesis on the $K_2$'s
822: implies $C_{2,\sto}=C_{2,\stt}+O(n^{5/4})$.
823: Thus $C_{\ell,\sgn}=((\ell-1)!!+o(1))C_{2,\sto}^{\ell/2}.$
824: \end{proof}
825:
826: \smallskip
827: We have not computed $\L_{1,\st}$ to the precision that \lref{moments}
828: would appear to suggest that we need, but all we really need
829: is that the two relevant $\L_{1,\st}$'s are quite close.
830:
831: \begin{lemma}
832: \label{lem:close}
833: Suppose $\sgn=(-1)^{\tqspo}=(-1)^{\tqspt}$.
834: Under the assumptions of \lref{ddclz}, if
835: $$ -\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_1(-\sgn A^q e^{2 i \alpha x -x^2}) \,dx
836: < -\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_1(\sgn A^q e^{2 i \alpha x -x^2}) \,dx,
837: $$
838: then $|\L_{1,\sto} - \L_{1,\stt}| \leq \exp(-\Theta(\sqrt{n}))$.
839: \end{lemma}
840: \begin{proof}
841: For expository convenience say that the two $\st$'s for which
842: $(-1)^{\tqsp}=\sgn$ are $01$ and $10$. From \lref{ddclz}, $Z_{01}$
843: and $Z_{10}$ dominate $-Z_{00}$ and $Z_{11}$ by a factor of
844: $\exp(\Theta(\sqrt{n}))$, and then
845: from \pref{2Zsums}, $|Z_{01}/Z_{10}-1| \leq \exp(-\Theta(\sqrt{n}))$.
846: Writing $\Zst$ as a polynomial in $c$,
847: $\Zst=\sum_{\ii} \coef_{\ii,\st}\, c^\ii$, again
848: from \pref{2Zsums} we have
849: \begin{align*}
850: |\coef_{\ii,01}-\coef_{\ii,10}| &\leq -\coef_{\ii,00} + \coef_{\ii,11} \\
851: |\coef_{\ii,01}\,\ii c^\ii-\coef_{\ii,10}\,\ii c^\ii| &\leq \ii c^\ii (-\coef_{\ii,00} + \coef_{\ii,11}) \leq m n (-\coef_{\ii,00}\,c^\ii + \coef_{\ii,11}\,c^\ii) \\
852: \left|\sum_\ii \coef_{\ii,01}\, \ii c^\ii - \sum_\ii \coef_{\ii,10}\, \ii c^\ii \right| &\leq m n \left[-\sum_\ii \coef_{\ii,00}\, c^\ii + \sum_\ii \coef_{\ii,11}\, c^\ii\right] \\
853: |Z_{01} \L_{1,01} - Z_{10} \L_{1,10}| &\leq m n (-Z_{00}+Z_{11}).
854: \end{align*}
855: As $Z_{01}$ and $Z_{10}$ are exponentially close to each other and
856: exponentially dominate $-Z_{00}$ and $Z_{11}$, it must be that
857: $\L_{1,01}$ and $\L_{1,10}$ are exponentially close.
858: \end{proof}
859:
860: \begin{thm}
861: \label{thm:gaussian}
862: When we fix $p$, $q$, $A$, and $\alpha$ while $m\rightarrow\infty$ and
863: $n\rightarrow\infty$, we have
864: \begin{equation} \label{p+c}
865: \log Z = \frac{(m n b c)^{1/4}}{\pi \sqrt{2} (p q)^{3/4}}\left[\max_{\pm} -\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_{1}\big(\pm A^q e^{2 i \alpha x - x^2}\big) \,dx +o(1)\right] ,
866: \end{equation}
867: and with the exceptions noted below,
868: the number $N_c$ of edges of type `$c$' converges in distribution to a Gaussian,
869: with mean
870: \begin{equation} \label{p+c2}
871: \enc =
872: \frac{(m n c)^{3/4}}{\pi \sqrt{2} (p q b)^{1/4}}
873: \left[
874: -\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_{0}\big(\pm A^q e^{2 i \alpha x - x^2}\big) \,dx + o(1)\right],
875: \end{equation}
876: and variance
877: \begin{equation} \label{p+c3}
878: % \frac{\sqrt{\eps}}{q^{1/2}n^2}
879: \vnc =
880: \frac{(m n c)^{5/4} (p q)^{1/4}}{\pi \sqrt{2} b^{3/4}}
881: \left[
882: -\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_{-1}\big(\pm A^q e^{2 i \alpha x - x^2}\big) \,dx + o(1)\right] ,
883: \end{equation}
884: where the choice of $\pm$ in \eqref{p+c2} and \eqref{p+c3}
885: is the value that maximizes \eqref{p+c}. The exceptions are
886: \begin{enumerate}
887: \item When both $+$ and $-$ maximize \eqref{p+c},
888: the distribution of type-`$c$' edges is a mixture of the two Gaussians
889: defined above, provided that exceptions 2 and 3 do not also occur.
890: (In the interest of space we omit the proof about the mixture of Gaussians,
891: but we can supply it to the interested reader upon request.)
892: \item If for the dominant choice of $\pm$ in \eqref{p+c},
893: the curve $\pm A^q e^{2 i \alpha x - x^2}$ passes through $1$, we do
894: not say anything about the distribution of type-`$c$' edges, but the
895: formula for $\log Z$ remains valid. (We have reason to believe, but
896: have not proved, that this scenario never occurs.)
897: \item In the event that the integral in \eqref{p+c3} evaluates to $0$,
898: the formulas are still valid, but we no longer claim that the distribution
899: is a Gaussian. (We believe that this scenario never occurs, \lref{var>}
900: in \sref{>'s} rules it out when $A\leq1$.)
901: \end{enumerate}
902: \end{thm}
903: (See \aref{notation} for a review and discussion of the parameters $A$ and $\alpha$.)
904:
905: \begin{proof}
906: Immediate from \lref{ddclz}, \lref{!!},
907: \lref{moments} (with the fact that \lref{-} %eqref{IntLi1}
908: shows the dominant choice of $\pm$ to be $-$ when $A\leq 1$), \lref{close},
909: the fact that the moments are those of a
910: Gaussian random variable, the method of moments,
911: approximation~\eqref{q3eps} for $1/\sqrt{q^3\eps}$,
912: and $qn\approx \sqrt{p q m n c/b}$.
913:
914: In the event that one of the curves $\pm A^q e^{2 i \alpha x - x^2}$
915: passes through the point $1$, we still obtain \eqref{p+c} from \lref{ddclz} because each
916: such curve has two corresponding $\Zst$'s, at most one of which can have a multiplicand closer than $e^{-o(\sqrt{n})}$ to $0$.
917: \end{proof}
918:
919: \tref{intro} follows by plugging into \tref{gaussian}
920: $A=1$ and $\alpha=0$, using the explicit evaluation of the integrals in
921: \sref{Zxint}, and using $-\Li_{3/2}(-1)>-\Li_{3/2}(1)$,
922: $-\Li_{-1/2}(-1)>0$, and $\Li_\nu(-1)=(2^{1-\nu}-1)\zeta(\nu)$.
923:
924: \begin{figure}[htbp]
925: \centerline{\epsfig{figure=zsig.eps}}
926: \caption{
927: Anatomy of the resonant spikes. In the upper panel we show the curves
928: for $\log Z$, $\enc$, and $\vnc$ as a function of $\alpha$ when $A=1$.
929: (The parameters $A$ and $\alpha$ are reviewed in \aref{notation}.)
930: When $A\leq1$, $Z_-$ is dominant,
931: and all three curves are analytic and unimodal.
932: The situation is quite different when $A>1$.
933: In the next panel we show the curves for $\log Z_+$ and $\log Z_-$
934: as a function of $\alpha$ when $A^q=\exp(1)$ ($\log Z$ is the max of these
935: two curves). When $A>1$ there are singularities
936: in $\log Z_+$ and $\log Z_-$ that occur when their corresponding spirals
937: cross the singularity, that is, when $\alpha=(\pi/\sqrt{\log A^q}) \Z$ for
938: $\log Z_+$ and when $\alpha=(\pi/\sqrt{\log A^q}) (\Z+1/2)$ for $\log Z_-$.
939: In the lower two panels we show the curves for $\enc$ and $\vnc$.
940: These curves were computed using \eqref{p+c2} and \eqref{p+c3} as explicitly
941: evaluated in \eqref{IntLi}
942: with whichever of $Z_+$ or $Z_-$ is significant.
943: The ``crossover points'',
944: where $\log Z_-$ and $\log Z_+$ alternate in significance,
945: are in a sense a phase transition within a phase transition.
946: At each crossover point, the curve for $\log Z$ is continuous but nonanalytic,
947: the curve for $\enc$ is discontinuous,
948: and the curve for $\vnc$ has a delta function.
949: %(assuming the left-hand and right-hand limits of $\enc$ are distinct,
950: %as they appear to be).
951: When a spiral hits the singularity, the corresponding $Z_\pm$ appears to be
952: the insignificant one. % (see \lref{zsig} in \sref{>'s}).
953: The large-$\alpha$ asymptotics of the curves for $\log Z$, $\enc$, and $\vnc$
954: are given in \tref{Z,alpha=infinity}.}
955: \label{fig:Zsig}
956: \end{figure}
957:
958:
959: \section{Understanding the resonant spikes}
960: \label{sec:spike}
961:
962: The resonant spikes, an example of which is shown in \fref{Zsig},
963: exhibit nontrivial behavior. We saw already that this behavior is
964: determined by the integrals $$\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}
965: \Li_\nu\big(\beta e^{2 i\alpha x -x^2}\big) \,dx,$$ with $\nu=1$
966: governing $\log Z$, $\nu=0$ governing $\enc$, and
967: $\nu=-1$ governing $\vnc$. We start by explicitly evaluating
968: these integrals in \sref{Zxint}, and then investigate some of their
969: properties in \sref{>'s}, \sref{bigalpha}, and \sref{crossover}.
970: These subsections may be read in any order.
971:
972: \subsection{The integral $\displaystyle\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_\nu\big(\beta e^{2 i\alpha x -x^2}\big) \,dx$}\label{sec:Zxint}
973:
974: We assume that $\beta\in\C$, $\alpha\in\R$, and $\nu\in\C$, though later we restrict $\nu$ to integers $\leq 1$.
975: For convenience we assume $\alpha\geq0$ since the integral is an even function of $\alpha$.
976: When $|\beta|>1$ there is a branch cut ($\Li_\nu(z)$ has a branch
977: cut $\{z\in\R: z\geq 1\}$) that may be encountered when we
978: vary $x$, so we need to specify which branch of the polylogarithm we
979: are integrating over. Since the principal branch is the one for which
980: $\Li_\nu\big(\beta e^{2i\alpha x - x^2}\big)\rightarrow 0$ as
981: $x\rightarrow\pm\infty$, we specify that the integrand is the
982: principal branch of $\Li_\nu$, even though this may make the
983: integrand only piecewise analytic as a function of $x$ as it ranges
984: from $-\infty$ to $\infty$. In the event that $\alpha=0$ and $\beta$ is
985: real and $\geq 1$, so as to ensure continuity in $\alpha$, we specify that
986: $\beta e^{2i\alpha x - x^2}$ lies above the branch cut for positive $x$
987: and below the cut for negative $x$.
988:
989: We set $z=x+iy$ ($x,y\in\R$) and integrate instead within the complex plane.
990: Rather than integrate $\Li_\nu\big(\beta e^{2 i\alpha z -z^2}\big)$ along the
991: real axis $\Im z=0$, it is more convenient to the integrate along the
992: line $\Im z = \alpha$. When we deform the contour of integration and
993: set $z=x+i\alpha$ we get
994: $$ \int_{-\infty}^\infty \Li_\nu\big(\beta e^{2i\alpha x-x^2}\big) \,dx =
995: \int_{-\infty}^\infty \Li_\nu\big(\beta e^{-\alpha^2} e^{-x^2}\big) \,dx +
996: \parbox{2.25in}{terms from the singularities and branch cuts of $\Li_\nu\big(\beta e^{2i\alpha z-z^2}\big) $ in the complex $z$-plane.}$$
997:
998: In particular if $|\beta|\leq 1$ there are no singularities or branch
999: cuts encountered when deforming the contour of integration, so there
1000: are no additional terms. We shall evaluate the main term in first.
1001: For now assume that $|\beta| e^{-\alpha^2}<1$ so that the series
1002: expansion of the polylogarithm is absolutely convergent. This enables
1003: us to write
1004: \begin{align*}
1005: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_\nu\big(\beta e^{-\alpha^2} e^{-x^2}\big) \,dx
1006: &= \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}
1007: \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}
1008: \frac{(\beta e^{-\alpha^2})^n}{n^\nu}
1009: e^{-n x^2} \,dx \\
1010: &= \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}
1011: \frac{(\beta e^{-\alpha^2})^n}{n^\nu}
1012: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}
1013: e^{-n x^2} \,dx \\
1014: &= \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}
1015: \frac{(\beta e^{-\alpha^2})^n}{n^\nu}
1016: \frac{\sqrt{\pi}}{\sqrt{n}} \\
1017: &= \sqrt{\pi} \Li_{\nu+1/2}\big(\beta e^{-\alpha^2}\big).
1018: \end{align*}
1019:
1020: The singularities of $\Li_\nu\big(\beta e^{2i\alpha z-z^2}\big)$ in the complex $z$-plane occur when
1021: \begin{align*}
1022: \beta e^{2i\alpha z-z^2} &= 1\\
1023: 2i\alpha z-z^2 &= -\log\beta-2\pi i k\\
1024: z &= i\alpha\pm i\sqrt{\alpha^2-\log\beta-2\pi i k}
1025: \end{align*}
1026: where $k$ is an integer.
1027: Since we are moving the contour between $\Im z =0$ and $\Im z =
1028: \alpha$ (see \fref{branch}),
1029: \begin{figure}[htbp]
1030: \centerline{\epsfig{figure=branch.eps}}
1031: \caption{Singularities, branch cuts, and contours of integration for $\Li_\nu\big(\beta e^{2 i\alpha z -z^2}\big)$. When pushing the contour from $\Im z=\alpha$ to $\Im z=0$, the contour must deform to travel around the singularities and branch cuts, so these contribute to the integral.}
1032: \label{fig:branch}
1033: \end{figure}
1034: the relevant singularities are of the form $i\alpha -
1035: i\sqrt{\alpha^2-\log\beta-2\pi i k}$ where the principal square root
1036: is taken. (If $\arg\beta=0$, $\alpha^2<\log|\beta|$, and $k=0$ then both roots are relevant.)
1037: The branch cuts of the integrand occur where $\beta
1038: e^{2i\alpha z-z^2}$ is real and $\geq 1$.
1039: With $z=x+i y$ and $x,y\in\R$ these are
1040: \begin{align*}
1041: 2\alpha x-2x y &= -\arg\beta-2\pi k & -2\alpha y -x^2+y^2 &\geq-\log|\beta| \\
1042: x &= \frac{1}{2}\frac{2\pi k+\arg\beta}{y-\alpha} & (y-\alpha)^2-x^2&\geq\alpha^2-\log|\beta|
1043: \end{align*}
1044:
1045: To identify if and where the $k$th cut intersects the line $\Im z=0$
1046: we set $y=0$ and find that there is an intersection at
1047: $$-\frac{2\pi k+\arg\beta}{2\alpha}$$ provided
1048: $$ (2\pi k+\arg\beta)^2 \leq 4\alpha^2\log|\beta|.$$
1049:
1050: For the moment suppose that $|\beta| e^{-\alpha^2}<1$ so that there are
1051: no singularities or branch cuts of the integrand on the line $\Im
1052: z=\alpha$. Push this contour downwards toward the line $\Im z =0$,
1053: except that when a branch cut is encountered, the contour must go
1054: around the branch cut, and travels along the cut upwards on its left
1055: side in downwards on its right side (\fref{branch}).
1056: The integrand increases by
1057: $(2\pi i/\Gamma(\nu)) (\log(\beta e^{2i\alpha z-z^2}))^{\nu-1}$ when
1058: going from the left side of the cut to the right side, so the net
1059: contribution of this cut to the integral is $$\frac{2\pi i}{\Gamma(\nu)}
1060: \int_C (\log(\beta e^{2i\alpha z-z^2}))^{\nu-1} \,dz $$ (plus another
1061: term from the singularity) where the contour $C$ is a branch cut
1062: travelling from the branch point to the point where the branch cut
1063: intersects the line $\Im z = 0$. For the $k$th branch cut the
1064: endpoints of integration are $i\alpha-i\sqrt{\alpha^2-\log\beta-2\pi i
1065: k}$ and $-(2\pi k +\arg\beta)/(2\alpha)$. When $\nu=1$
1066: the singularity does not contribute and this integral
1067: is easy to evaluate and we get $$2\pi i\left[
1068: -i\alpha+i\sqrt{\alpha^2-\log\beta-2\pi i k} -\frac{2\pi k+\arg\beta}{2\alpha}
1069: \right].$$
1070: Since this term gets added to the integral over $\Im z=0$, when we evaluate the integral over $\Im z=0$ we subtract this term from the integral over $\Im z=\alpha$.
1071: Thus
1072: \begin{equation}\label{5}
1073: \begin{split}
1074: \int_{-\infty}^\infty \Li_1\big(\beta e^{2i\alpha x-x^2}\big) \,dx =
1075: \sqrt\pi &\Li_{3/2}\big(\beta e^{-\alpha^2}\big) - \\ &2\pi i
1076: \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
1077: \sum_{\substack{k\in\Z\\(2\pi k+\arg\beta)^2 \leq 4\alpha^2\log|\beta|}}
1078: \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
1079: \left[
1080: -i\alpha+i\sqrt{\alpha^2-\log\beta-2\pi i k} -\frac{2\pi
1081: k+\arg\beta}{2\alpha}\right].
1082: \end{split}
1083: \end{equation}
1084: There is a term in the summation for each time the spiral $\beta e^{2i\alpha
1085: x-x^2}$ encloses the singularity at $1$.
1086: This formula is valid when $|\beta| e^{-\alpha^2}<1$,
1087: and we would like to show that it is valid (for real $\beta$ and $\alpha$)
1088: without this restriction.
1089: We can do this via analytic continuation in (complex) $\beta$ and $\alpha$.
1090: While both sides of equation \eqref{5} are analytic in $\alpha$
1091: (except where the spiral
1092: $\beta e^{2i\alpha x-x^2}$ crosses the singularity),
1093: neither side of \eqref{5} is analytic in $\beta$.
1094: The $\arg\beta$ terms on the right-hand side are nonanalytic, and
1095: the left-hand side is nonanalytic due to the branch cut in $\Li_1(z)$ ---
1096: as $\arg\beta$ is varied, portions of the integrand cross the branch cut.
1097: To remedy this problem, we deform the branch cut as $\arg\beta$
1098: changes, so that the cut consists of the arc $\{z\in\C:\text{$|z|=1$
1099: and $0\leq\arg z\leq\arg\beta$ or $0\geq\arg z\geq\arg\beta$}\}$
1100: together with the ray $\{z\in\C:\text{$|z|\geq 1$ and $\arg
1101: z=\arg\beta$}\}$.
1102: So long as the spiral avoids the singularity, for any value of $x$,
1103: the integrand does not cross the moving branch as $\beta$ and $\alpha$
1104: are changed.
1105: This re-interpreted integral (with the moving branch cut) is then
1106: analytic except where
1107: the spiral $\beta e^{2i\alpha x-x^2}$ crosses the singularity,
1108: and the $\arg\beta$ terms on the right-hand side become constant.
1109: The $\sqrt\pi \Li_{3/2}\!\big(\beta e^{-\alpha^2}\big)\!$ term on
1110: the right-hand-side of \eqref{5} is nonanalytic when
1111: $\beta e^{-\alpha^2}=1$, but this nonanalyticity is cancelled by
1112: the nonanalyticity in the $k=0$ term in the summation
1113: (by \eqref{Li-pole} in \aref{polylogs}, which reviews polylogarithms).
1114: Thus the right-hand-side of the re-interpreted \eqref{5} is also analytic
1115: whenever the spiral $\beta e^{2i\alpha x-x^2}$ avoids the singularity.
1116: For a given $\beta$ and $\alpha$, we may continuously decrease
1117: $|\beta|$ and increase $\alpha$
1118: until $|\beta|e^{-\alpha^2}<1$ (where we already know that \eqref{5} is
1119: valid), while keeping the spiral from crossing the singularity.
1120: Thus \eqref{5} is valid for all complex $\beta$ and $\alpha$ for which
1121: the spiral avoids the singularity. As both sides of \eqref{5} are
1122: continuous, \eqref{5} is also valid when the spiral contains the singularity.
1123: We revert to the principal branch cut interpretation of the integral,
1124: restoring the $\arg\beta$ terms on the right-hand side of \eqref{5}.
1125:
1126: When $\beta$ is real, upon summing over $k$, the terms
1127: $(2\pi k+\arg\beta)/(2\alpha)$ cancel: when $\beta<0$ the $k$th term
1128: cancels the $(-1-k)$th term, and when $\beta>0$ the $k$th term cancels
1129: the $-k$th term, while the $0$th term does not contribute.
1130: For real $\beta$ we get
1131: \begin{equation}
1132: \label{IntLi1}
1133: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_1\big(\beta e^{2 i\alpha x -x^2}\big) \,dx
1134: = \sqrt{\pi} \Li_{3/2}\big(\beta e^{-\alpha^2}\big) -
1135: 2\pi
1136: \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
1137: \sum_{\substack{k\in\Z\\(2\pi k+\arg\beta)^2 \leq 4\alpha^2\log|\beta|}}
1138: \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
1139: \left(\alpha-\sqrt{\alpha^2-\log\beta-2\pi i k}\right).
1140: \end{equation}
1141: When $\beta e^{-\alpha^2}>1$ the $k=0$ ``branch-cut term'' exactly
1142: cancels the imaginary part of the $\Li_{3/2}$ term.
1143: Applying $\beta \frac{\partial}{\partial\beta}$ multiple times to
1144: \eqref{IntLi1} we find for real $\beta$ and nonpositive integer $\nu$
1145: \begin{equation}
1146: \label{IntLi}
1147: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_\nu\!\big(\beta e^{2 i\alpha x -x^2}\big)\! \,dx
1148: = \sqrt{\pi} \Li_{\nu+1/2}\!\big(\beta e^{-\alpha^2}\big)\!
1149: -\sqrt{\pi} \Gamma({\textstyle \frac12\!-\!\nu})
1150: \sum_{\substack{k\in\Z\\ \makebox[0pt]{$\scriptstyle(2\pi k+\arg\beta)^2 \leq 4\alpha^2\log|\beta|$}}}
1151: [\alpha^2-\log\beta+2\pi i k]^{-1/2+\nu}.
1152: \end{equation}
1153:
1154: %\subsection{Insignificance of the singular $Z_\pm$'s and further inequalities}
1155: \subsection{Inequalities}
1156: \label{sec:>'s}
1157:
1158: % When $A>1$ the spirals for the multiplicands of $Z_+$ or $Z_-$ may
1159: % cross $0$, giving rise to singularities in our expressions for $\log
1160: % Z_+$ or $\log Z_-$, and complicating our error analysis. In this
1161: % subsection we argue that whenever one of the spirals crosses the
1162: % singularity, the corresponding $Z_\pm$ is dominated by the other one,
1163: % so that we may essentially ignore it. More precisely we prove
1164: % \begin{lemma}
1165: % \label{lem:zsig}
1166: % If $\beta>1$ then
1167: % \begin{equation}
1168: % \label{zsig}
1169: % -\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_1(\beta e^{2 i \alpha x -x^2}) \,dx
1170: % \leq
1171: % -\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_1(-\beta e^{2 i \alpha x -x^2}) \,dx
1172: % \end{equation}
1173: % when $\alpha$ is an integer multiple of $\pi/\sqrt{\log\beta}$,
1174: % and the inequality is reversed when $\alpha$ is a half-integer
1175: % multiple of $\pi/\sqrt{\log\beta}$.
1176: % \end{lemma}
1177: % Ideally we would prefer to have a strict inequality, but we prove what
1178: % we can. Strict inequality (which appears to hold) would imply that
1179: % the singular $Z_\pm$'s are insignificant; if equality were to hold
1180: % then all we know is that the singular $Z_\pm$'s are not exponentially
1181: % dominant.
1182: %
1183: % \begin{proof}
1184: % Suppose that we are given a $\beta>1$, and $\alpha$ is an integer or
1185: % half-integer multiple of $\pi/\sqrt{\log\beta}$, so that one of the
1186: % spirals crosses $0$. Pick $a=1$, $b\approx 1/2$, $c\approx 1/2$, and $m=n$
1187: % large enough, so that $p=q=1$ and so that the above integrals are
1188: % well-approximated by the Riemann sums below.
1189: % Take $b\doteq\frac12(1+\alpha/\sqrt{n})$ and $c\doteq(1-b)(1+(\log\beta)/n)$,
1190: % so that $A=(c/(a-b))^n\doteq\beta$ and
1191: % $b/(a-b)\doteq 1+2\alpha/\sqrt{n}\doteq 1+\alpha W$. So now
1192: % \begin{equation*}
1193: % \sqrt{\eps}\log \Zst =
1194: % \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \log(1-(-1)^{\sigma+\tau}\beta e^{2 i \alpha x -x^2}) \,dx + o(1),
1195: % \end{equation*}
1196: % unless one of the multiplicands for $\Zst$ is smaller than
1197: % $\exp(-\Theta(\sqrt{n}))$, in which case the right-hand side
1198: % is merely an upper bound.
1199: % By hypothesis $\alpha$ is chosen so that either the spirals for
1200: % $Z_+$ or for $Z_-$ cross $0$, for expository convenience say that
1201: % it is the spirals for $Z_+$. The multiplicands for $\Zst$ are of the form
1202: % $1 - \mt \left(\frac{c}{a+bz}\right)^n$ where $(-z)^m=\ms$.
1203: % Pick one of the $Z_+$'s ($Z_{00}$ or $Z_{11}$),
1204: % and pick the multiplicand closest to $0$.
1205: % We claim that we can perturb $b$ and $c$ to push this multiplicand
1206: % exactly on $0$ while leaving the spirals essentially unchanged:
1207: % For the multiplicand closest to $0$, $z=-e^{2\pi i k/n}$
1208: % where $\eps k^2\approx\log\beta$ and $\eps\approx 4\pi^2/n$,
1209: % so that $z\doteq -e^{i \sqrt{\log\beta} / \sqrt{n}}$.
1210: % Thus we can perturb $b$ by $o(1/\sqrt{n})$ to make $(c/(a+bz))^n$ real,
1211: % and again set $c=(1-b)(1+(\log\beta)/n)$.
1212: % Then we perturb $c$ by $o(1/n)$ to make $\mt (c/(a+bz))^n = 1$.
1213: % So as claimed we can zero out one of the $Z_+$'s.
1214: % But recall from \pref{2Zsums} that the difference
1215: % between $-Z_{00}$ and $Z_{11}$ is
1216: % bounded by the sum of $Z_{10}$ and $Z_{01}$. This would yield a
1217: % contradiction if the desired inequality \eqref{zsig} were not true.
1218: % \end{proof}
1219:
1220: To use \tref{gaussian} we need to know which of
1221: $Z_{\pm}$ is significant.
1222: We already saw that they can alternate in significance (as $\alpha$ is
1223: varied) when $A>1$. We claim that when $A\leq 1$, or else $A>1$ but
1224: $\alpha=0$, that $Z_-$ is the significant one.
1225: \begin{lemma}
1226: \label{lem:-}
1227: If $0<\beta\leq 1$, or else $\beta>1$ but $\alpha=0$, then
1228: \begin{equation}
1229: \label{z-}
1230: -\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_1\big(\beta e^{2 i \alpha x -x^2}\big) \,dx
1231: < -\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_1\big(-\beta e^{2 i \alpha x -x^2}\big) \,dx.
1232: \end{equation}
1233: \end{lemma}
1234: \begin{proofm}
1235: Under either of the hypotheses, equation~\eqref{IntLi1} simplifies to
1236: $$
1237: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_1\big(\pm\beta e^{2 i\alpha x -x^2}\big) \,dx
1238: = \sqrt{\pi} \Li_{3/2}\big(\pm\beta e^{-\alpha^2}\big)
1239: = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_1\big(\pm\beta e^{-\alpha^2-x^2}\big) \,dx,
1240: $$
1241: but
1242: \begin{equation}
1243: -\Re\Li_1\!\big(\beta e^{-\alpha^2-x^2}\big)\!
1244: = \Re\log\!\big(1-\beta e^{-\alpha^2-x^2}\big)\!
1245: <
1246: \Re\log\!\big(1+\beta e^{-\alpha^2-x^2}\big)\!
1247: = -\Re\Li_1\!\big(\!-\beta e^{-\alpha^2-x^2}\big). \tag*{\qed}
1248: \end{equation}
1249: \end{proofm}
1250:
1251: To show that the distribution of $N_c$ is a Gaussian, we need to know
1252: that the integral expression in \eqref{p+c3} (for the dominant choice
1253: of $\pm$) is nonzero. The integral clearly cannot be negative,
1254: because it has an interpretation in terms of variance, but \textit{a
1255: priori\/} it could be zero, in which case the $o(1)$ error term would
1256: control the variance, and we would be unable to characterize the
1257: distribution of $N_c$. Ideally we would like to show that it always
1258: positive, but we only do this for $A\leq 1$, or else $A>1$ but $\alpha=0$.
1259: Recall that under these conditions $Z_-$ is dominant.
1260: \begin{lemma}
1261: \label{lem:var>}
1262: If $0<\beta\leq 1$, or else $\beta>1$ but $\alpha=0$, then
1263: $$ -\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_{-1}\big(-\beta e^{2 i \alpha x - x^2}\big) \,dx > 0.$$
1264: \end{lemma}
1265: \begin{proof}
1266: As above,
1267: under either of the hypotheses, equation~\eqref{IntLi} simplifies to
1268: $$
1269: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_{-1}\big(-\beta e^{2 i\alpha x -x^2}\big) \,dx
1270: = \sqrt{\pi} \Li_{-1/2}\big(-\beta e^{-\alpha^2}\big)
1271: = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_{-1}\big(-\beta e^{-\alpha^2-x^2}\big) \,dx,
1272: $$
1273: but
1274: $
1275: -\Li_{-1}\big(-\beta e^{-\alpha^2-x^2}\big)
1276: = {\beta e^{-\alpha^2-x^2}}/{\big(1+\beta e^{-\alpha^2-x^2}\big)^2}
1277: >0.
1278: $
1279: \end{proof}
1280:
1281: \begin{lemma}
1282: The curve for $\log Z$ attains its (unique) maximum value when $\alpha=0$.
1283: \end{lemma}
1284: \begin{proof}
1285: When $0<\beta$ we have $\log(1+\beta e^{-x^2}\big) \geq \Re \log(1\pm \beta e^{2 i \alpha x-x^2}\big)$, with strict inequality when $\pm e^{2 i \alpha x}\neq 1$, so
1286: $
1287: -\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_1\big(\mp\beta e^{2 i \alpha x -x^2}\big) \,dx
1288: \leq -\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_1\big(-\beta e^{-x^2}\big) \,dx
1289: $,
1290: with strict inequality unless both $\alpha=0$ and $\mp=-$.
1291: \end{proof}
1292: \medskip
1293:
1294: \noindent
1295: In contrast, the curve for $\enc$ does not always attain its
1296: maximum value when $\alpha=0$.
1297: %\smallskip
1298:
1299: \subsection{Asymptotics for large $\alpha$}
1300: \label{sec:bigalpha}
1301:
1302: In \fref{Zsig} the curves for $\log Z$ and $\enc$ appear
1303: to asymptote out to a positive constant, while the curve for $\vnc$
1304: decays to $0$. The following theorem gives the large-$\alpha$
1305: asymptotics of these curves which are given by the integrals in
1306: \eqref{p+c}, \eqref{p+c2}, and \eqref{p+c3} in \tref{gaussian}.
1307:
1308: \newcommand{\ab}{\beta}
1309: \begin{thm}
1310: \label{thm:Z,alpha=infinity}
1311: For positive $\beta$ and real $\alpha$,
1312: \begin{align*}
1313: \lim_{|\alpha|\rightarrow\infty}
1314: -\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_1\big(\pm\beta e^{2 i \alpha x - x^2}\big) \,dx
1315: &= \begin{cases} \frac{4}{3} (\log\ab)^{3/2} & \ab\geq 1 \\
1316: 0 & \ab\leq 1\end{cases} \\
1317: \lim_{|\alpha|\rightarrow\infty}
1318: -\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_0\big(\pm\beta e^{2 i \alpha x - x^2}\big) \,dx
1319: &= \begin{cases} 2 (\log\ab)^{1/2} & \ab\geq 1 \\
1320: 0 & \ab\leq 1\end{cases}\\
1321: \lim_{|\alpha|\rightarrow\infty}
1322: -\alpha^2 \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Li_{-1}\big(\pm\beta e^{2 i \alpha x - x^2}\big) \,dx
1323: &= \begin{cases} (\log\ab)^{1/2} & \ab\geq 1 \\
1324: 0 & \ab\leq 1\end{cases}
1325: \end{align*}
1326: \end{thm}
1327: \begin{proof}
1328: These integrals are evaluated in \eqref{IntLi1} and \eqref{IntLi}.
1329: When $|\alpha| \rightarrow\infty$, the main terms in \eqref{IntLi1}
1330: and \eqref{IntLi}, $-\sqrt{\pi} \Li_{\nu+1/2}(\pm \ab e^{-\alpha^2})$
1331: for $\nu=1,0,-1$, become negligible. Thus we only have to compute the
1332: ``branch-cut terms'' when $\beta>1$. For \eqref{IntLi1} these terms
1333: can be approximated for large $\alpha$ as follows.
1334: Let $\gamma=\log \ab - \alpha^2$. The identity
1335: $$\sqrt{x+iy}+\sqrt{x-iy}=\sqrt{2\big(x+\sqrt{x^2+y^2}\big)}$$
1336: is easily verified by squaring both sides, and allows us to rewrite
1337: the sum in \eqref{IntLi1} as
1338: $$\sum_{|k|<|\alpha|\sqrt{\log \ab}/\pi}2\pi\left(|\alpha|-\sqrt{
1339: \big(-\gamma+\sqrt{\gamma^2+4\pi^2k^2}\big)/2}\right)$$
1340: where $k$ is integer for positive $\beta$ (for $Z_+$) or
1341: half-integer for negative $\beta$ (for $Z_-$).
1342:
1343: Suppose $|\alpha| \gg \sqrt{\log \ab}$. Then $k$, which ranges up to
1344: $(|\alpha|/\pi) \sqrt{\log \ab}$, is much smaller than $|\gamma| =
1345: (1+o(1))\alpha^2$, and we have
1346: \begin{align*}
1347: \sqrt{\big(-\gamma+\sqrt{\gamma^2+4 \pi^2 k^2}\big)/2} &=
1348: \sqrt{-\gamma} \sqrt{\big(1+\sqrt{1+4 \pi^2 k^2/\gamma^2}\big)/2} \\
1349: &=
1350: \sqrt{-\gamma} \sqrt{1 + (\pi^2+o(1)) k^2/\gamma^2} \\
1351: &=
1352: \sqrt{\alpha^2-\log \ab} (1 + (\pi^2/2+o(1)) k^2/\gamma^2) \\
1353: &=
1354: |\alpha| (1-(1/2+o(1))\log \ab/\alpha^2) (1 + (\pi^2/2+o(1)) k^2/\alpha^4) \\
1355: &=
1356: |\alpha| - \frac{1+o(1)}{2 |\alpha|} (\log \ab - \pi^2 k^2/\alpha^2).
1357: \end{align*}
1358: In particular
1359: \begin{align*}
1360: 2 \pi \left(|\alpha|-\sqrt{\big(-\gamma+\sqrt{\gamma^2+4 \pi^2 k^2}\big)/2}\right) &=
1361: \frac{\pi+o(1)}{|\alpha|} (\log \ab - \pi^2 k^2/\alpha^2)
1362: \end{align*}
1363: and we sum this over $k$'s for which the quantity is positive.
1364: If $|\alpha|\gg 1/\sqrt{\log\ab}$ then we can approximate this
1365: sum with an integral, and the integral is
1366: $$\frac{\pi+o(1)}{|\alpha|} \frac{2}{3} \log \ab
1367: \times \frac{2|\alpha|}{\pi}\sqrt{\log \ab} = (1+o(1))\frac{4}{3} (\log \ab)^{3/2}.$$
1368:
1369: These are the asymptotics for $\nu=1$. For integer $\nu\leq 0$ the
1370: range of $k$ is the same as it is for $\nu=1$, i.e.\ up to about
1371: $|\alpha| \sqrt{\log \ab}/\pi$. Thus we need to evaluate
1372: $$
1373: \sqrt{\pi} \Gamma(1/2-\nu) \sum_{|k|<|\alpha| \sqrt{\log \ab}/\pi} [\alpha^2-\log \ab+2\pi i k]^{-1/2+\nu}.
1374: $$
1375: For $\alpha\gg\sqrt{\log\ab}$, $k\ll\alpha^2$ so that $$
1376: [\alpha^2-\log \ab+2\pi i k]^{-1/2+\nu} + [\alpha^2-\log \ab-2\pi i k]^{-1/2+\nu} \approx 2 |\alpha|^{2\nu-1}$$
1377: and if $\alpha\gg 1/\sqrt{\log\ab}$ the summation is approximately an integral which is asymptotically
1378: $$ \frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi}} \Gamma(1/2-\nu) \alpha^{2\nu} \sqrt{\log \ab}.$$
1379: Taking $\nu=0$ and $\nu=-1$ give the desired results for the $\enc$ and $\vnc$ integrals.
1380: \end{proof}
1381: \medskip
1382:
1383: \subsection{Crossover locations}
1384: \label{sec:crossover}
1385:
1386: If $A\leq 1$ then $Z_-$ always exceeds $Z_+$. But for
1387: larger $A$ there are crossover values for $\alpha$ at which
1388: $Z_-$ and $Z_+$ alternate in significance.
1389: Since $Z_-$ and $Z_+$ count configurations in different $\Z_2$-homology classes
1390: (see \eqref{Ztable}), we conclude that
1391: the crossover values are the places where the typical homology class
1392: of a lattice path changes. So there is a phase transition
1393: at these points: the topology of a typical configuration changes.
1394:
1395: The crossover values $\alpha$ for a fixed $\beta=A^q$
1396: satisfy an implicit (and transcendental) equation.
1397: Instead of solving these equations directly
1398: we can derive an analytic expression for
1399: the crossover $\alpha$'s as a function of $\gamma =
1400: \log \beta-\alpha^2$, and then given $\gamma$ and the crossover $\alpha$
1401: we can calculate the corresponding $\beta$. In this way we can
1402: parametrically plot these critical pairs $(\beta,\alpha)$ as a
1403: function of $\gamma$.
1404: For example, for the $0$th crossover we have
1405: \begin{align*}
1406: \eps^{1/2}q^{3/2}Z_- +o(1)&= -\sqrt{\pi}\Li_{3/2}(-\beta e^{-\alpha^2})\\
1407: \eps^{1/2}q^{3/2}Z_+ +o(1)&= -\sqrt{\pi}\Li_{3/2}( \beta e^{-\alpha^2})
1408: +2\pi(\alpha-\sqrt{\alpha^2-\log \beta})\\
1409: \intertext{from which we can solve}
1410: \alpha &= \frac{\Li_{3/2}(e^\gamma) - \Li_{3/2}(-e^\gamma)}{2\sqrt{\pi}} + \sqrt{-\gamma}.\\
1411: \intertext{Similarly, for the $r$th crossover we have}
1412: (-1)^r \alpha &= \frac{\Li_{3/2}(e^\gamma) - \Li_{3/2}(-e^\gamma)}{2\sqrt{\pi}}
1413: +\sum_{k=-r}^r (-1)^k \sqrt{-\gamma+k\pi i}.
1414: \end{align*}
1415:
1416: Next let us approximate these crossovers for $r$ fixed and $\gamma$
1417: large. For large $\gamma$ we can substitute $\nu=3/2$ into the asymptotic
1418: series expansions \eqref{Li(-x)} and \eqref{Li(x)} for $\Li_\nu(\pm
1419: e^\gamma)$ to write
1420: \begin{equation*}
1421: -\Li_{3/2}(-e^{\gamma}) \approx \frac{4}{3} /\pi^{1/2} \gamma^{3/2}
1422: +\frac{1}{6} \pi^{3/2}/\gamma^{1/2}
1423: +\frac{7}{480} \pi^{7/2}/\gamma^{5/2}
1424: +\cdots
1425: \end{equation*}
1426: %and
1427: \begin{equation*}
1428: \Li_{3/2}(e^{\gamma}) \approx -\frac{4}{3} /\pi^{1/2} \gamma^{3/2}
1429: -2 \sqrt{\pi} i \sqrt{\gamma}
1430: +\frac{1}{3} \pi^{3/2}/\gamma^{1/2}
1431: +\frac{1}{60} \pi^{7/2}/\gamma^{5/2}
1432: +\cdots
1433: \end{equation*}
1434: so that
1435: \begin{align*}
1436: (-1)^r \alpha &\approx \frac{\pi}{4}\gamma^{-1/2} +
1437: \sum_{k=1}^r (-1)^k \left[\sqrt{-\gamma+k\pi i}+\sqrt{-\gamma-k\pi i}\right] \\
1438: &= \frac{\pi}{4} \gamma^{-1/2} +
1439: \sum_{k=1}^r (-1)^k \sqrt{2\big(-\gamma+\sqrt{\gamma^2+k^2\pi^2}\big)} \\
1440: &\approx \frac{\pi}{4} \gamma^{-1/2} +
1441: \sum_{k=1}^r (-1)^k \sqrt{2(-\gamma+\gamma(1+k^2\pi^2/(2\gamma^2)))} \\
1442: &= \frac{\pi}{4} \gamma^{-1/2} +
1443: \sum_{k=1}^r (-1)^k \sqrt{k^2\pi^2/\gamma} \\
1444: &= \frac{\pi}{4} \gamma^{-1/2} +
1445: \sum_{k=1}^r (-1)^k k\pi/\gamma^{1/2} \\
1446: &= (-1)^r (r/2+1/4) \pi \gamma^{-1/2}.
1447: \end{align*}
1448: Since $\alpha$ is small, $\gamma\approx \log \beta$, and so the $r$th crossover
1449: occurs at $\alpha \approx (r/2+1/4) \pi / \sqrt{\log \beta}$.
1450:
1451: By comparison the nonanalyticities in the curve for $Z_-$ occur exactly at
1452: $\alpha=\pi/\sqrt{\log \beta} (\Z+1/2)$, and the nonanalyticities in
1453: the curve for $Z_+$ occur exactly at $\alpha=\pi/\sqrt{\log \beta} \Z$.
1454:
1455: \section{Open problems}\label{sec:open}
1456:
1457: Our analysis for of the lattice paths at the critical point is geared
1458: to regions whose aspect ratio is close to a simple rational number,
1459: % (as defined in \sref{rational}),
1460: but we do not know how to treat ``irrational domains'' which do not have
1461: a simple rational approximation. Consider for
1462: instance the case $a=1$, $b=c=1/2$ when the side lengths $m$ and $n$
1463: are successive Fibonacci numbers. Then the aspect ratio of the region
1464: is very close to the Golden ratio, which is not well approximated by
1465: simple rationals. In this case we believe that the partition function
1466: $Z$ is $\Theta(1)$ (about $2.1$), so that with $\Theta(1)$ probability
1467: there are no lattice paths. In the event that there are lattice
1468: paths, we believe that they connect up into $\Theta(1)$ loops each of
1469: length $\Theta(n^{4/3})$. We have also found empirically that as one
1470: varies the aspect ratio of large regions, the smallest value that the
1471: partition function $Z$ takes on is very close to $2$. We do not
1472: know how to prove any of these conjectures.
1473:
1474: In \fref{spike} we plotted $\log Z$ and $\enc$ versus $n/m$ when
1475: $a=1$, $b=c=1/2$. As predicted there are spikes in $\log Z$ and
1476: $\enc$ when the aspect ratio $n/m$ is near a simple rational $p/q$.
1477: But there also appear to be flanking secondary spikes in $\enc$ when
1478: $n/m \approx p/q$ but $|n/m-p/q|\gg 1/\sqrt{n}$. We do not
1479: understand this phenomenon.
1480:
1481: When $a=1$,
1482: $b=c=1/2+\Theta(1/n)$ and the aspect ratio is nearly a simple rational
1483: $p/q$, the partition function and edge density as a function of $\alpha$ are
1484: nonanalytic at certain points. We know that the homology type of the
1485: strands changes at these nonanalyticities. We conjecture that when
1486: $\alpha=0$ each loop winds around exactly $p$ times horizontally and $q$
1487: times vertically. For large enough values of $\alpha$, when one follows a
1488: loop for $m p + n q$ steps, one does not return to the starting point.
1489: We conjecture that the number of nonanalyticities between $\alpha$ and $0$
1490: determines how many strands away one ends up after following a loop
1491: for $m p + n q$ steps.
1492:
1493: Despite our explicit formulas for $\log Z_{\pm}$ and for the expected
1494: value and variance of the number of edges, there are some basic
1495: properties about these functions that we have not been able to derive.
1496: For example, we conjecture that when our formula for $\log Z_-$ is
1497: nonanalytic, our formula for $\log Z_+$ gives a \textit{strictly\/}
1498: larger value, and vice
1499: versa, and that the formula for $\vnc$ is strictly positive.
1500: We also conjecture that for $A>1$ our formula for $\log Z$ as
1501: a function of $\alpha$ always exceeds its limiting value as
1502: $\alpha\rightarrow\infty$. These conjectures seem fairly evident
1503: from the graphs in \fref{Zsig}, but it is not obvious how to
1504: prove them. One would also like to determine for fixed $A>1$ the
1505: maximum and minimum values given by our formula for $\enc$,
1506: since both of these can be different than the
1507: limiting $\alpha\rightarrow\infty$ value.
1508:
1509: \bibliography{kw}
1510: \bibliographystyle{plain}
1511:
1512: %\newpage
1513: \enlargethispage*{3\baselineskip}
1514:
1515: \appendix
1516: \section{Polylogarithms}\label{sec:polylogs}
1517:
1518: The polylogarithm function $\Li_\nu(z)$ is defined by
1519: $$\Li_\nu(z)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{z^n}{n^\nu}$$ for $|z|<1$ and by
1520: analytic continuation elsewhere. We may for instance write
1521: $\Li_1(z)=-\log(1-z)$, $\Li_0(z) = z/(1-z)$, and $\Li_{-1}(z) = z/(1-z)^2$.
1522: The polylogarithm function has the convenient property
1523: that $$z \frac{\partial \Li_\nu(z)}{\partial z} = \Li_{\nu-1}(z).$$
1524: Appell's integral expression
1525: \begin{equation}\label{Liint}
1526: \Li_\nu(z) = \frac1{\Gamma(\nu)}\int_0^\infty\frac{z s^{\nu-1}\,ds}{e^s-z}
1527: \end{equation}
1528: is valid for $\Re(\nu)>0$ and $z\not\in[1,\infty)$, and defines the
1529: principal branch of the polylogarithm. The polylogarithm has an
1530: interesting Riemann surface. When one crosses the branch cut
1531: $[1,\infty)$ in the positive direction, the polylogarithm increases by
1532: $\frac{2\pi i}{\Gamma(\nu)} (\log z)^{\nu-1}$. (Both this and the
1533: defining series expansion for $\Li_\nu$ are readily derived from Appell's
1534: integral expression.) For nonpositive integer $\nu$ this quantity is
1535: $0$, consistent with the fact that $\Li_\nu$ is a rational function
1536: for these values of $\nu$. Unless $\nu$ is an integer $\leq1$, the
1537: $\frac{2\pi i}{\Gamma(\nu)} (\log z)^{\nu-1}$ term creates a second
1538: branch point at $z=0$ off the principal branch. The function
1539: $\Li_\nu(z)$ is analytic in both $z$ and $\nu$, except for a
1540: singularity at $z=1$ (and $z=0$ off the principal branch).
1541: For further background see Bateman and Erd\'elyi \textit{et al.\/}
1542: \cite[Chapt.~1 \S11]{bateman-erdelyi:vol1},
1543: Truesdell \cite{truesdell:polylogs},
1544: Dingle \cite{dingle:fermi-dirac,dingle:bose-einstein},
1545: and Lewin \cite{lewin:polylogs}.
1546:
1547: When $z$ is on the principal branch and near $1$, the series expansion
1548: \begin{equation}
1549: \label{Li-pole}
1550: \Li_\nu(z) = \Gamma(1-\nu) (-\log z)^{\nu-1} + \sum_{n=0}^\infty \zeta(\nu-n)\frac{(\log z)^n}{n!}
1551: \end{equation}
1552: was given by Lindel\"of \cite[pp.\ 138--141]{lindelof:residus}
1553: (derivations are also given in \cite{truesdell:polylogs}
1554: and \cite{chang-peres:zeta}),
1555: and is absolutely convergent when $|\log z|<2\pi$.
1556:
1557: We also use the asymptotic series expansions for $\Li_\nu(z)$ when $|z|\rightarrow\infty$. For large positive $x$ these are
1558: \begin{equation}
1559: \label{Li(-x)}
1560: \Li_\nu(-x) = -\cos(\pi\nu) \Li_\nu(-1/x) +
1561: 2\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}
1562: \frac{\left(1/2^{2k-1}-1\right) \zeta(2 k)}{\Gamma(\nu+1-2k)} (\log x)^{\nu-2k}
1563: \end{equation}
1564: and
1565: \begin{equation}
1566: \label{Li(x)}
1567: \Li_\nu(x) = -\cos(\pi\nu) \Li_\nu(1/x)
1568: \pm \pi i \frac{(\log x)^{\nu-1}}{\Gamma(\nu)}
1569: +
1570: 2\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}
1571: \frac{\zeta(2 k)}{\Gamma(\nu+1-2k)} (\log x)^{\nu-2k}.
1572: \end{equation}
1573: Aside from the $-\cos(\pi\nu)\Li_\nu(\pm1/x)$ terms, the asymptotic
1574: series expansions \eqref{Li(-x)} and \eqref{Li(x)} were derived by
1575: Sommerfeld and Clunie respectively. Rhodes first derived \eqref{Li(-x)}
1576: for the case of integer $\nu$, and for these $\nu$ the expansions
1577: \eqref{Li(-x)} and \eqref{Li(x)} have only finitely many nonzero terms.
1578: For noninteger $\nu$ the expansions \eqref{Li(-x)} and \eqref{Li(x)} diverge,
1579: and the $-\cos(\pi\nu)\Li_\nu(\pm1/x)$ term is dominated by each term in the
1580: divergent series expansion, so one may wonder what role it plays.
1581: Dingle \cite[eqn~17]{dingle:fermi-dirac} \cite[eqn~11]{dingle:bose-einstein}
1582: showed how to make practical computational
1583: use of these series by truncating the series after finitely many terms
1584: and providing convergent series expansions for the remainder when the
1585: $-\cos(\pi\nu)\Li_\nu(\pm1/x)$ term is present. For positive $x>1$ we
1586: are evaluating $\Li_\nu(x)$ on the branch cut of the principal branch;
1587: the $\pm$ sign is positive when the branch cut is just above the real
1588: axis, which is the usual convention.
1589: See also Pickard \cite[eqn 3.5]{pickard:polylogs} for the asymptotics
1590: for large complex values of $z$.
1591:
1592: % Dingle didn't include this \pm term.
1593:
1594: % According to Pickard's equation 3.5 \cite[eqn 3.5]{pickard:polylogs},
1595: % \begin{equation}
1596: % \Li_\nu(z) \sim
1597: % -\frac{(\log|z|)^\nu}{\Gamma(\nu+1)} -
1598: % -\frac{(\log|z|)^{\nu-1}}{\Gamma(\nu)}
1599: % \sum_{m=0}^M (1-\nu)_m (\log|z|)^{-m}
1600: % \big( \Li_{m+1}(|z|/z)+
1601: % (-1)^{m+1}\Li_{m+1}(z/|z|)\big)
1602: % \end{equation}
1603: % \note{Pickard gives this for $\Re\nu>0$. He gives another formula for $\Re\nu<0$ (eqn 3.10) but I'm not sure I believe it. I didn't notice any restrictions on $\nu$ in Dingle's article.}
1604: % where $(x)_m$ denotes $x(x+1)\cdots(x+m-1)$.
1605: % This series is divergent, but according to Pickard, ``the summation in $m$ can be continued with profit until the series bottoms.''
1606:
1607: % seq(eval(subs(nu=3/2,2*Zeta(2*k)/GAMMA(nu+1-2*k))),k=0..4);
1608:
1609: \section{Notation}\label{sec:notation}
1610:
1611: $a$, $b$, $c$: weights of edges in the three different directions. $a$ is weight for vertex not being in a loop, $b$ is weight for horizontal step, and $c$ is weight for vertical step.
1612:
1613: \noindent
1614: $m$: horizontal length of torus
1615:
1616: \noindent
1617: $n$: vertical length of torus
1618:
1619: \noindent
1620: Simplifying assumptions: $b<a$, $b/a=\Theta(1)$, $1-b/a=\Theta(1)$, $n=\Theta(m)$
1621:
1622: \noindent
1623: $p/q$: rational approximation of $nb/(mc)$, $\gcd(p,q)=1$.
1624: Intuitively $p$ is the number of horizontal windings of loops,
1625: and $q$ is the number of vertical windings of loops, but this
1626: intuition is not quite accurate if ``ratcheting'' takes place.
1627:
1628: \noindent
1629: $W$ is a measure of close the rational approximation $p/q \approx nb/(mc)$
1630: needs to be. For fixed $p$ and $q$, $W=\Theta(1/\sqrt n)$. More precisely,
1631:
1632: \noindent
1633: $W = \sqrt{q \eps}/(\pi p) = \sqrt{2 q n a b}/(p m (a-b)) \approx \sqrt{2/(pmc)} \approx \sqrt{2/(qnb)}$
1634:
1635: \noindent
1636: $\alpha$ is measure of the error in the approximation $p/q \approx nb/(mc)$ on the scale of $W$:
1637:
1638: \noindent
1639: $\displaystyle \frac{n b q}{m c p} \approx \frac{n b q}{m (a-b) p} = 1+\alpha W.$
1640:
1641: \noindent
1642: $A = \left(\frac{c}{a-b}\right)^n$
1643:
1644: \noindent
1645: $A$ is a measure of how close the weights $a$, $b$, and $c$ are to the phase transition $a=b+c$. When $a=b+c$, $A=1$, and $A$ is sensitive to perturbations on the order of $\Theta(1/n)$. $A^q$ appears in many of our formulas, and is approximately symmetric in the parameters: $$ \log A^q \approx (b+c-a) \sqrt{\frac{m n p q}{b c}}$$
1646:
1647: \noindent
1648: $\phi = \frac{2\pi n b}{m(a-b)}$
1649:
1650: \noindent
1651: $\eps = \frac{2\pi^2 n a b}{m^2(a-b)^2}$
1652:
1653: \noindent
1654: $z_k=-e^{i\theta_k}$, $\theta_k = 2\pi k/m$; $k\in\Z_m+\sigma/2$ for $\Zst$
1655:
1656: \noindent
1657: $r_k=(a-b)^{n}|a+bz_k|^{-n} = e^{-\eps k^2+O(k^4/m^3)}$
1658:
1659: \noindent
1660: $\phi_k=\arg(a+bz_k)^{-n} = \phi k+O(k^3/m^2)$
1661:
1662: \end{document}
1663: